John King, USA

The latest political news and information on the most important stories affecting you.
December 3rd, 2010
04:12 PM ET

Be in the know: Today's political bullet points

Everyday we ask influential politicos to send us their top three bullet points that are driving the day's conversation in and outside Washington.

Saying TGIF feels odd given the new unemployment data from the government. Also have to say wish the data would give pause to those orchestrating the partisan stunts here in “lame duck” Washington and maybe, just maybe, spur some adult conversations. Also of note: an early holiday trip by President Obama to see the troops in Afghanistan. He won’t see President Karzai face to face; weather and technology to blame, the White House says, but of course will spark whispers and conspiracy theories because of the WikiLeaks tensions. To the Friday bullet points: Erick, too, begins with the glum economic news, and then offers rare praise from the right to Speaker Pelosi, for whom human rights issues in China has long been a priority. His No. 3 is one of the question marks heading into next year. Jane’s No. 1 reflects liberal angst over the tax cut debate – many call it a charade – under way at the moment in Washington. Her No. 2 is a reminder Dick Cheney is back in the news – and back in the political debate. And note No. 3 — the left backing the effort by libertarian/conservative Bob Barr to explore whether the TSA calculated a way to minimize “opt-out” day outrage. Enjoy your weekend.–John King

RedState.Com Editor Erick-Woods Erickson:

-Unemployment numbers do not look good. Earlier this week Wall Street projects were that we'd see a six figure increase. Not so much.

-Nancy Pelosi is going to let Chris Smith's resolution supporting this year's Nobel Peace Prize winner go to the floor. The winner is a Chinese dissident. China will not be pleased, yet again, with Speaker Pelosi.

– In today's Wall Street Journal, John Fund speculates that the Obama Administration is going to go full steam ahead through the executive branch advancing the union agenda. Darryl Issa is going to have fun if that happens. Blogger/Founder Jane Hamsher:

The Game is Rigged- Moment of Rare Honesty by Michael Bennet

It Starts with, "Hello. I am a Prosecutor in Nigeria..."

Did TSA Turn Off Porno Scanners to Manipulate Opt-Out Day

Filed under: Bullet Points
soundoff (3 Responses)
  1. Jim Carroll


    December 3, 2010 at 7:20 pm |
  2. Robert Mitchell

    Tom Coburn needs to be challenged on his exaggerations about the consequences of the national debt. The hopeless, hysterical hypochondriacs of history have been predicting doom and gloom for their grandchildren since the founding of this nation, when Alexander Hamilton's doctrine of assumption allowed the Federal government to assume the states' war debts, but those predictions have never come true.

    Coburn ignores (maybe because he is ignorant of?) the concept of economic externalites – costs or benefits that are not transmitted through prices. The internet is an example of an externality, free access to information raises the standard of living for all. Entitlements are another externality, because unemployed people can innovate without the formal hierarchies and high sales expenses associated with business. Especially in this age of the internet, individuals can be encouraged through challenges (from government or businesses such as Netflix or Google) to innovate and advance knowledge and contribute to the betterment of society despite not working for a company.

    As for Grover Norquist, he needs to be challenged on his assertions about the economy being worse since the stimulus – the economy has grown. Why did tax increases during the Clinton administration result in the longest post-war economic expansion in US history? Just because he sounds confident and passionate when he delivers his words do not mean they're accurate. It is simply due diligence to confront him with his misrepresentations.

    December 3, 2010 at 7:46 pm |
  3. Cecilia McCambridge

    I am not pleased with your constant questioning why the President of the U.S.A. should be visiting the troops in Afiisganistan. We are tire of hearing about the job news. We know about that. Why can not the President. The Commander in Chief visit the troops visit the troops during a very critiacl time?. There was no objection when Pres. Bush visited the troops during an employment time that we were not informed about. Even though we were not aware of it. I believe that your program is slanted and politically Right of the country and your objective is to put down the President. We should be giving more recoginization to those who have sacrificed their lives for us than the job market. I am 85 years old and do not remember this treatment of a President during the Second World War. Why is CNN?

    December 3, 2010 at 8:13 pm |