<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Joe Conason</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/writer/joe_conason/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 09:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Patriotic millionaires&#8221; call for their tax cuts to expire</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/18/millionaires/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/18/millionaires/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Nov 2010 22:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/11/18/millionaires</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[More than 40 of the nation's top taxpayers ask Obama to raise their taxes]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dozens of America's wealthiest taxpayers -- including hedge fund legend Michael Steinhardt, super trial lawyer Guy Saperstein, and Ben Cohen of Ben &amp; Jerry's fame -- have appealed to President Obama not to renew the Bush tax cuts for anyone earning more than $1 million a year. Calling themselves "Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength," the 40-plus signers today launched <a href="http://www.fiscalstrength.com/">a website and a campaign</a> that they hope will draw support from others who agree that fiscal responsibility should begin with those who can best afford it -- as their letter to Obama explains:</p><blockquote>
<p>We are writing to urge you to stand firm against those who would put politics ahead of their country.</p>
<p>For the fiscal health of our nation and the well-being of our fellow citizens, we ask that you allow tax cuts on incomes over $1,000,000 to expire at the end of this year as scheduled.</p>
<p>We make this request as loyal citizens who now or in the past earned an income of $1,000,000 per year or more.</p>
<p>We have done very well over the last several years. Now, during our nation's moment of need, we are eager to do our fair share. We don't need more tax cuts, and we understand that cutting our taxes will increase the deficit and the debt burden carried by other taxpayers. The country needs to meet its financial obligations in a just and responsible way.</p>
<p>Letting tax cuts for incomes over $1,000,000 expire, is an important step in that direction.</p>
</blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/11/18/millionaires/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/18/millionaires/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>119</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Mitch McConnell is worse than Charles Rangel</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/17/mcconnell_4/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/17/mcconnell_4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Nov 2010 00:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department of Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military contractors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tea Parties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Toyota]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. House of Representatives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/11/16/mcconnell</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Both men misused their power -- but the Senate leader gave corrupt BAE Systems $17 million in 2010 earmarks]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On the same day that the House Ethics Committee convicted Rep. Charles Rangel of nearly a dozen violations of congressional rules, Sen. Mitch McConnell announced that under pressure from fellow Republicans, he will surrender his beloved earmarks. This is a notable coincidence because, like Rangel, McConnell has rewarded corporate donors to an academic center named after him -- and used earmarks for that purpose. The top corporate recipient of earmarks from the Kentucky Republican in the 2010 budget not only happens to be a donor to the <a href="http://louisville.edu/mcconnellcenter/">McConnell Center for Political Leadership</a> at the University of Louisville, but one of the largest and most corrupt defense contractors in the world.</p><p>Topping the list of Rangel's transgressions was the misuse of his congressional clout to raise money for a vanity academic "center" named after him at the City University of New York from private donors. Yet somehow McConnell got away with the same kind of dubious dealings at the University of Louisville -- and was allowed to reward BAE Systems, donor of $500,000 to the McConnell Center, with <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/earmarks.php?cid=n00003389">$17 million worth of defense earmarks.</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/11/17/mcconnell_4/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/17/mcconnell_4/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>46</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Meet the leader of the Obama witch hunt</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/10/issa2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/10/issa2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Nov 2010 21:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama's First Year]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tea Parties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. House of Representatives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WorldNetDaily]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/11/10/issa2</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If past is prologue, Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa will aim low and cheap -- by probing stimulus road signs!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How Darrell Issa will conduct the vital business of the House Oversight Committee when he takes over as chairman isn't clear yet. When the California Republican describes his plans in the mainstream media, he <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-10-11-column11_ST1_N.htm">strives to sound reasonable, bipartisan and public-spirited</a>; but when speaking with media outlets and personalities, <a href="http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_101910/content/01125111.guest.html">such as Rush Limbaugh</a>, he sounds like a hard-line right-winger aiming to revive the paranoid partisan style of the Gingrich era -- which would be more in keeping with the reputation he has already established. He displayed the fugue state that preoccupies him when he <a href="http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/09/issa-walks-back-comment-calling-obama-corrupt/">denounced President Obama on CNN</a> as "the most corrupt" occupant of the Oval Office in modern times &#8211; and then withdrew that accusation with an apology.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/11/10/issa2/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/10/issa2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>63</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama should push back  &#8212; like Bill Clinton</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/04/clinton_97/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/04/clinton_97/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 2010 13:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democratic Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. House of Representatives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/11/04/clinton</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It's true that Clinton compromised after 1994 -- but first he fought the Gingrich GOP to a standstill]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Long before the dismal results of Tuesday&#8217;s election were complete, one especially dog-eared bit of guidance for President Obama was getting wide circulation in the mainstream: He must now emulate Bill Clinton, who "shifted to the center" after the electoral debacle of November 1994, "triangulated" his way to compromise with the Republicans, and won a second term.</p><p>Among the reasons why such advice is outdated and useless, the most obvious may be that Obama&#8217;s position today is stronger than Clinton&#8217;s after 1994. Today, unlike then, the Democrats can look forward to retaining control of the Senate. But there are two other overriding reasons why Obama shouldn&#8217;t seek to imitate Clinton by immediately seeking compromises with the Republicans.</p><p>The first is that he has tried vainly from the beginning of his presidency to engage the Republicans in negotiation over vital reforms, only to learn again and again that they aren&#8217;t really interested in anything but sabotage. The second is that compromising with the Republicans isn&#8217;t exactly what Clinton did -- or not at first, anyway. Before he could do anything else, he had to push back.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/11/04/clinton_97/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/04/clinton_97/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>70</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Inside Bill Clinton&#8217;s final midterm blitz</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/02/clinton_campaign_swing/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/02/clinton_campaign_swing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Nov 2010 12:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tea Parties]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/11/02/clinton_campaign_swing</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The American people "are starving for explanations," he tells Salon during one final five-state push]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As Bill Clinton began the last day of the midterm campaign on a chilly morning in Saratoga Springs, not far from New York's border with Canada, he confided jokingly that he had originally expected only "to do a few events this year to honor the people who had supported us," noting that his wife, as secretary of state, is prohibited by law and custom from partisan politicking.</p><p>"This is my 127th event," he recalled as the crowd of 1500 upstate Democrats laughed appreciatively. "And I&#8217;ve kept going because I am so concerned that in the fact-free environment of this election, people are going to choose exactly what they don&#8217;t want." That concern spurred him on a grueling, 18-hour series of jet hops from two stops in the northern reaches of his adopted state on to McKeesport, Pennsylvania, then Beckley, West Virginia, Louisville, Kentucky, and finally Orlando, Florida for a late-night rally.</p><p>The former president always draws enthusiastic crowds, and they listened raptly to his latest political pitch, which included point by point explanations of the student loan reform, healthcare reform and the banking bill to his argument that he and his fellow Democrats -- not the Republicans -- deserve the affections of the Tea Party.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/11/02/clinton_campaign_swing/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/11/02/clinton_campaign_swing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can&#8221;Vote Sanity&#8221; stop the madness?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/29/rally_3/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/29/rally_3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2010 21:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jon Stewart]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rally to Restore Sanity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stephen Colbert]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/10/29/rally</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Rally to Restore Sanity may not identify the candidates driving America crazy -- but there are others who will]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The secrecy surrounding the "Rally to Restore Sanity (or Fear)" leaves everything to the imagination until noon Saturday. Or almost everything besides <a href="http://www.spinner.com/2010/10/29/jeff-tweedy-sheryl-crow-roots-jon-stewart-rally/">the touted performances</a> of John Legend and the Roots, Mavis Staples and Jeff Tweedy, and Sheryl Crow -- none of whom would be likely to headline a Glenn Beck or Tea Party rally. Hosts Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert can be expected to tweak Democrats as well as Republicans and to downplay their own political leanings. But if the satirists play true to the title of their event, what will they tell the hundreds of thousands trekking to Washington and the many thousands more watching the livecast? If the nation's sanity needs to be restored, will they hint who might be most responsible for driving America over the edge?&#160;</p><p>Neither Stewart nor Colbert is likely to exacerbate the risk they have taken by addressing such touchy questions directly. But some Democrats believe the "crazy" label will stick to Republican candidates, especially those associated with the Tea Party movement -- and that sanity versus its opposite may well be the most effective meme to sway independent and undecided voters during the final days of the campaign.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/10/29/rally_3/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/29/rally_3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>26</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The predictable tsunami of sewer money</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/27/sewer/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/27/sewer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Oct 2010 18:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Campaign Finance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/10/27/sewer</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Was the Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United naively mistaken -- or cynically partisan?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason/2010/10/19/supreme_court_campaign_finance/index.html">indisputable&#160; idiocy</a> of the Supreme Court&#8217;s decision in Citizens United -- leading to a midterm tsunami of what we New Yorkers call <a href="http://www.observer.com/2010/opinion/rise-sewer-money">"sewer money"</a> -- is featured on the front page of today&#8217;s Los Angeles Times. Reporter David Savage begins with the salient quotation from the majority opinion written by Justice Anthony Kennedy and then goes on to explain why that opinion is so grossly flawed:</p><blockquote>
<p>"With the advent of the Internet, prompt disclosure of expenditures can provide shareholders and citizens with the information needed to hold corporations and elected officials accountable for their positions," Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote in January. "This transparency enables the electorate to make informed decisions and give proper weight to different speakers and messages."</p>
<p>But Kennedy and the high court majority were wrong. Because of loopholes in tax laws and a weak enforcement policy at the Federal Election Commission, corporations and wealthy donors have been able to spend huge sums on campaign ads, confident the public will not know who they are, election law experts say.</p>
</blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/10/27/sewer/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/27/sewer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>34</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why the right really hates NPR &#8211; with or without Juan Williams</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/23/npr_5/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/23/npr_5/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Oct 2010 04:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NBC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/10/22/npr</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wingers have dreamed of destroying NPR for years -- because they despise its honest news values and openness]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is it plausible that the right-wing uproar over NPR&#8217;s firing of Juan Williams is motivated by concern for &#8220;free speech&#8221; &#8211; and not by longstanding conservative animus against public broadcasting? To anyone who has been paying attention to the behavior of politicians, pundits, and media agitators on the right for the past few decades, the latest upwelling of volcanic rhetoric is drearily familiar.</p><p>These same voices have reliably exploited every chance to damage public broadcasting, not because of any supposed liberal bias, but because they disdain the straightforward, probing journalism that the public network provides every day. What the NPR haters want to see and hear on America&#8217;s airwaves is the &#8220;fair and balanced mentality&#8221; of Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and Michael Savage and nothing else. After all, they hate CNN, CBS, NBC, and ABC with almost equal passion, no matter how much those networks or NPR&#160;bend over to accomodate conservative viewpoints.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/10/23/npr_5/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/23/npr_5/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>109</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Secret memo displays corporate and media tentacles of the Kochtopus</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/21/kochtopus/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/21/kochtopus/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2010 21:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Post]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/10/21/kochtopus</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fresh evidence of the New York billionaires' midterm campaign implicates journalists as well as fat cats]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is there a vast corporate conspiracy behind the Tea Party and the midterm resurgence of the far right? The most suggestive evidence involves the well-documented role of the billionaire Koch brothers, their Americans for Prosperity front group and other Koch-funded entities &#8211; but now a <a href="http://images2.americanprogressaction.org/ThinkProgress/secretkochmeeting.pdf">secret letter</a> from Charles Koch shows that the tentacles of the &#8220;Kochtopus&#8221; include a high-level &#8220;network&#8221; of corporate, lobbying, nonprofit, and media organizations that meet regularly to plot right-wing strategy. The letter and accompanying documents first appeared on Think Progress in a <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/20/beck-koch-chamber-meeting/">post by Lee Fang</a> that is well worth reading in full.</p><p>Dated September 24, 2010 and signed by Koch himself on company stationery, the letter urges recipients to join &#8220;our network of business and philanthropic leaders, who are dedicated to defending our free society&#8221; &#8211; and specifically to attend the group&#8217;s next meeting at a Palm Springs resort in late January. Most revealing is an attached brochure about the network&#8217;s most recent meeting, which occurred in Aspen last June 27-28.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/10/21/kochtopus/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/21/kochtopus/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>41</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The public shaming of Anthony Kennedy</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/19/supreme_court_campaign_finance/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/19/supreme_court_campaign_finance/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Campaign Finance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/10/19/supreme_court_campaign_finance</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[He claimed that online technology would make corporate donations instantly transparent. Now we see how wrong he was]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Enjoying life tenure and political immunity as they do, the judges on the nation&#8217;s highest court are never held accountable for their transgressions in any meaningful way, except by history. Yet rarely if ever has a landmark opinion by a Supreme Court justice been proved wrong as quickly and as decisively -- and with such fateful effects -- as the historic decision penned by Justice Anthony Kennedy last January in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission. Wrong not only as a matter of ideology, partisanship, or constitutionality, although it is arguably all of those, but wrong in its most important assertions.</p><p>When Kennedy, along with his four conservative colleagues, overturned the century-old limitations on corporate funding of political campaigns, he justified this enormous gift to his fellow Republicans with what amounted to a false promise. Full and timely disclosure of the sources of the expected flood of corporate money, according to Kennedy, would serve the same essential purpose as the discarded restrictions, keeping voters informed by exposing politicians and their business benefactors.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/10/19/supreme_court_campaign_finance/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/19/supreme_court_campaign_finance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NPR poll: Republican midterm tide has crested</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/16/nprpoll/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/16/nprpoll/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Oct 2010 15:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/10/16/nprpoll</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new national survey of battleground districts strongly suggests that the Democrats aren't quite dead just yet]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While Democrats must still expect to lose dozens of House seats and several Senate seats on November 2, the earlier trend toward a massive Republican landslide may have been arrested, according to <a href="http://www.gqrr.com/articles/2532/6082_NPR%20October%20Battleground%20Survey%20Results%20.pdf">the latest NPR Battleground Poll</a> released Friday. Conducted jointly by Democratic pollster Greenberg Quinlan Rosner and Republican pollster Public Opinion Strategies, the NPR survey of voters in 96 most hotly contested districts indicates significant narrowing of the Republican lead since the public radio network&#8217;s last midterm survey in June.</p><p>Still warning of a likely shift in control of the House, the NPR polling team says that while the midterm is still &#8220;an ugly election&#8221; in the 86 Democratic-controlled districts that they surveyed, this election should no longer be considered a &#8220;death march&#8221; for Democrats. Their analysis <a href="http://gqrr.com/index.php?ID=2532">highlights</a> four important new developments:</p><p>First, in ten &#8220;battleground&#8221; House districts currently held by Republicans, the latest numbers suggest that the GOP will &#8220;lose a fair number&#8221; of those seats bedause their lead has been cut in half since June.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/10/16/nprpoll/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/16/nprpoll/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>75</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;No new taxes&#8221; for GOP &#8212; except a national sales tax</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/13/salestax/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/13/salestax/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rand Paul]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Economy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/10/13/salestax</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Republicans swear they won't raise taxes -- but Rand Paul and Paul Ryan want to tax everything you buy]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>[Updated below]</strong> Can you guess which tax is bad, bad, bad when suggested by Democrats but perfectly acceptable when proposed by Republicans? Listening to Rand Paul and Paul Ryan, among others, the answer is a national sales tax or value-added tax, known in Europe as a VAT. While Republicans argue ferociously to preserve the Bush tax cuts for America&#8217;s wealthiest families, the notion of a new federal tax on goods and services -- which would disproportionately penalize working consumers -- is becoming fashionable among their party&#8217;s most prominent figures.</p><p>The Kentucky Republican Senate candidate <a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/10/12/736745/rand-paul-would-replace-income.html">made headlines yesterday</a> when he proposed a national sales tax to replace the income tax, but Paul is scarcely alone in preferring a tax that falls most heavily on the middle class, workers and the poor. Rep. Ryan&#8217;s budget "roadmap," released earlier this year to much fanfare in the conservative and mainstream media, relies on an 8.5 percent "business consumption" tax -- yet another name for what Europeans call a VAT. From <a href="http://www.tucsonweekly.com/TheRange/archives/2010/09/27/cd8-republican-jesse-kelly-calls-for-new-national-sales-tax">Arizona</a> to&#160; <a href="http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/155484.html">Maine</a>, Republican candidates seem increasingly eager to impose a national sales tax -- and although they usually say this new tax would &#8220;replace&#8221; the income tax and abolish the IRS, such fantasies aren't contemplated by Ryan, the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/10/13/salestax/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/13/salestax/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>80</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Debating the &#8220;mendacity&#8221; of Barack Obama</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/06/hodge/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/06/hodge/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 16:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Healthcare Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wall Street]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[White House]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/10/06/hodge</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Roger Hodge accuses the president of deceiving his supporters. Jonathan Alter says that's naive -- and destructive]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The fairest measure of Barack Obama at midterm can probably be found somewhere between Roger Hodge's accusations and Jonathan Alter's explanations -- but the deeper issue raised by both authors in a debate last night was how progressives, from the White House to the grass roots, fecklessly ceded ground to the Republican right over the past two years.</p><p>Hodge, author of <a href="http://www.progressivebookclub.com/pbc2/viewBook.pbc?id=2391&amp;srcKey=21R1f6">"The Mendacity of Hope</a>," a scathing new critique of Obama and all his works, and Alter, author of <a href="http://books.simonandschuster.com/Promise/Jonathan-Alter/9781439101193">"The Promise</a>," a balanced but generally favorable report on Obama's first year, clashed under the auspices of <a href="http://www.agendaproject.org/">the Agenda Project</a> in New York City. Their lively, live-streamed, intelligent discussion, moderated by <a href="http://www.agendaproject.org/about.html">Erica Payne</a>, will also be televised on <a href="http://www.booktv.org/Schedule.aspx">C-Span's BookTV</a> later this month -- just in time to further dispirit (or possibly inspire) Democratic voters.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/10/06/hodge/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/06/hodge/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>485</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>In the Obama era, right-wing militias flourish</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/01/secret_plot_david_axelrod/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/01/secret_plot_david_axelrod/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Oct 2010 13:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Axelrod]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion//feature/2010/10/01/secret_plot_david_axelrod</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That much-mocked DHS study of potential right-wing violence turns out not to have been so far-fetched after all]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When exploiting public fear of Islam, as so many Republicans have chosen to do in this election cycle, a favorite tactic is to treat "American Muslim" as a synonym for "homegrown terrorist." But the threat of jihadi attack is not the only form of violent extremism that worries law enforcement officials. According to an <a href="http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,2022516,00.html">extensive investigation</a> by Barton Gellman posted Thursday on the Time magazine website, they are deeply concerned about the growing prospect of violence from the far right.</p><p>Last spring, conservatives angrily denounced a Department of Homeland Security study of the violent potential of the revived militia movement as a political abuse by the Obama administration -- and forced DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano as well as the White House to back away from the report. But Gellman's reporting shows that top officials at the FBI and other agencies are in fact deeply concerned over that possibility. While they don't expect a mass militia assault on Washington or on federal officials in the countryside, they worry about what a deranged loner, armed and trained by a militia group, might do when he becomes impatient waiting for the right-wing revolution. As they listen to the furious rhetoric emanating from organizations such as the Ohio Defense Force, they search nervously for any sign of the next Timothy McVeigh.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/10/01/secret_plot_david_axelrod/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/10/01/secret_plot_david_axelrod/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>68</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Are GOP midterm expectations oversold?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/28/doom_4/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/28/doom_4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2010 17:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Carly Fiorina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democratic Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meg Whitman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rand Paul]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rand Paul vs. Jack Conway]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/09/28/doom</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The "Democratic doom" narrative is meant to demoralize, but even Scott Rasmussen believes Dems will hold the Senate]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Creating the universal premonition of Democratic doom is always among the most useful elements of Republican strategy. A broad feeling of foreboding demoralizes the party base, repels independent voters who prefer the winning side, and strikes emotional chords that are at least as important in electoral behavior as ideologies and issues. So Republican leaders and pundits regularly issue outlandish predictions of crushing victory, echoed across the media spectrum until they become self-fulfilling.</p><p>This year's real conditions for Democrats are certainly threatening, but there are indications that the impending repudiation will not be as devastating as suggested by the current narrative. Whatever ultimately happens in the House, where a Republican takeover appears likely if not inevitable, the Senate will probably remain under Democratic control -- despite <a href="http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2010/09/wave_of_thirdpa.php#more">enormous spending by "independent" groups</a> such as the Club for Growth, the voice of Wall Street conservatives; American Crossroads, the Karl Rove outfit; and the Chamber of Commerce.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/09/28/doom_4/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/28/doom_4/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>38</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Imagining Mideast peace with Bill Clinton</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/22/mideastcgi/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/22/mideastcgi/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 2010 20:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Middle East]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/09/22/mideastcgi</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At a "special sesssion" of the Clinton Global Initiative, he and his guests conjure the vision of a brighter future]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By now the overarching themes of the <a href="http://www.clintonglobalinitiative.org/">Clinton Global Initiative</a> are familiar, from empowering women and girls to strengthening market-based answers to the problems of climate change, healthcare and poverty. Addressing those issues are hundreds of world leaders, corporate chieftains, nonprofit executives and celebrities (including appearances today by Lance Armstrong, Sanjay Gupta and Jim Carrey), with everyone required to make a formal "commitment" to action. By Thursday evening's closing ceremony, the CGI staff expects the value of new commitments to exceed $6 billion.</p><p>Apart from the ongoing conversations, speeches and announcements, this year&#8217;s CGI features a significant subplot: the revived peace negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians. With nearly 70 current and former heads of state on hand, Bill Clinton knows how to use the unique forum he has created to serve a very specific purpose, like promoting a sense of optimism and urgency about the Mideast peace negotiations currently overseen by his wife, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/09/22/mideastcgi/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/22/mideastcgi/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>22</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Coalition of fear: Tea Party, the religious right and Islamophobia</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/19/conason_values_voter/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/19/conason_values_voter/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Sep 2010 18:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/09/19/conason_values_voter</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At Values Voters summit, anti-Muslim paranoia connects evangelical right with secular Tea Party movement]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the leaders of the religious right aspire to join forces with the Tea Party movement, their hopes were surely encouraged by the <a href="http://www.valuesvoterssummit.org/">Values Voters Summit</a> in Washington -- where such Tea Party celebrities Michele Bachmann and Jim DeMint shared the podium with Delaware sensation Christine O&#8217;Donnell -- all of whom enthusiastically blessed the proposed marriage. Certainly they have much to share in their seething fury at the President and the congressional Democrats.</p><p>Bringing together the disparate elements of the right without a charismatic and credible leader like Ronald Reagan remains a challenge, however, since many Tea Party voters are libertarians and independents who have never felt called to the battlements of the culture war. What they seem to share, aside from the perennial aversion to taxes, is a powerful instinct to stigmatize Muslims and seek confrontation with Islam.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/09/19/conason_values_voter/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/19/conason_values_voter/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>128</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Clinton&#8217;s warning: Tea Party is a corporate front</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/15/clintontea/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/15/clintontea/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2010 17:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tea Parties]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/09/15/clintontea</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Stumping in Minnesota, he calls Michele Bachmann "the ultimate example of putting ideology over evidence"]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As Tea Party activists celebrated their upset triumph in Delaware, Bill Clinton showed up in Minneapolis to support the Democrat challenging the insurgent Republican movement&#8217;s favorite member of Congress:&#160; <a href="http://minnesotaindependent.com/64390/bachmann-barnstorms-dc-during-tea-party-weekend">Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.</a>, the founder of the <a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/20/bachmann-tea-party-caucus-will-provide-input-to-congress-from-real-people/">Congressional Tea Party Caucus</a>.</p><p>At a late-night fundraiser for <a href="http://tarrylclark.com/splash">state Sen. Tarryl Clark</a>, Clinton described Bachmann as the epitome of a trend he regards as profoundly dangerous to the nation&#8217;s future. "Your opponent," he told Clark, "is the ultimate example of putting ideology over evidence."</p><p>"I respect people with a conservative philosophy," he continued. "This country has been well-served by having two broad traditions within which people can operate. If you have a philosophy, it means you&#8217;re generally inclined one way or the other but you&#8217;re open to evidence. If you have an ideology, it means everything is determined by dogma and you&#8217;re impervious to evidence. Evidence is irrelevant.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/09/15/clintontea/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/15/clintontea/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>122</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why the GOP embraced Islamophobia</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/12/islamo/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/12/islamo/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Sep 2010 16:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George W. Bush]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Park51]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/09/12/islamo</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fanning fears of  Muslims has never made better -- or more cynical -- political sense]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Only a few years ago, an angry political demonstration at ground zero on September 11 would have been deemed an unthinkable offense not only to the bereaved families of victims and responders but to the nation. Yet this anniversary featured a raucous and highly partisan rally, as well over a thousand protesters gathered to show their opposition to the Park51 Islamic center &#8211; and to listen to tirades from Republican politicians and commentators against the Obama administration.</p><p>More than a flaky Florida pastor&#8217;s cancelled threat to burn the Quran (or the actual scattered torchings that took place the same day), the ground zerio rally answered the question posed repeatedly over the past few weeks: Why are millions of Americans suddenly caught up in a torrent of fear and fury over Islam so strong that both the president and the commanding general of U.S. forces in Afghanistan have warned of deadly consequences? What motivates the outpouring of rancor against Muslims, especially in the conservative media? How did they escape until now?</p><p>The answer is that until the advent of the Obama presidency, Republicans had no reason to scapegoat Muslims or demonize Islam -- and indeed, they could not have inflamed those prejudices without damaging their own leaders, especially George W. Bush.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/09/12/islamo/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/12/islamo/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>244</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New report upends &#8220;homegrown terror&#8221; assumptions</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/09/homegrown/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/09/homegrown/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 17:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[9/11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department of Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Faisal Shahzad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Park51]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason//2010/09/09/homegrown</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Contrary to intelligence warnings, American-born jihadis have been among us ever since 9/11]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A new study of terrorist attacks and plots in the United States questions whether "homegrown jihadis" are indeed a new phenomenon -- and suggests instead that they represent a very consistent element in most alleged terror conspiracies over the past nine years.</p><p>The authoritative "terrorist trial report card" &#8211; produced by New York University Law School&#8217;s <a href="http://www.lawandsecurity.org/">Center on Law and Security</a> -- finds that in the top 50 plots prosecuted by the Justice Department following 9/11, more than 80 percent of the defendants can be defined as "homegrown."</p><p>According to the report, which will be released early next week, the past year has seen a greater number of "significant terrorism plots" alleged than in any single year since 9/11 -- including the attempt to blow up a plane over Detroit; two bomb plots in New York City; two bomb plots against federal buildings; the scheme to bring dozens of young men, mostly from the Minneapolis area, to join the Al-Shabaab organization in Somalia;&#160; and the shootings at Fort Hood and at an Army recruitment center in Little Rock, which were the first killings attributed to jihadi terrorism on American soil since 9/11.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/09/09/homegrown/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/09/09/homegrown/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>23</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

