A photo of the White House taken with an iPhone and the application ‘With Mitt’ from the campaign of Mitt Romney on May 30. The application which allows users to take photographs with one of fourteen overlays including one that says ‘A Better Amercia’. ‘Mistakes happen,’ Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul said on MSNBC.
President Obama arrives to speak to workers at the Alcoa Davenport Works Factory in Bettendorf, Iowa
Des Moines Register: Alcoa officials and business leaders dismissed an assertion from … Mitt Romney that a federal labor board’s actions could threaten jobs at the Alcoa plant in Iowa. “No, we don’t see that happening,” said Alcoa spokesman Michael Belwood…
Romney said Monday that National Labor Relations Board’s actions against aircraft manufacturer Boeing Co. could result in job losses nationally and in Iowa. Boeing is accused of trying to move its Washington-based assembly line for its 787 airliner to a new nonunion factory in South Carolina as retaliation for past strikes in Washington.
Romney has complained about the federal board before, and on Monday said its decision to file a complaint against Boeing for unfair labor practices “slanted the field toward labor bosses.”
….. but the outcome of the NLRB hearing – whether it’s in favor of Boeing or against – will have no impact on this plant, the Alcoa spokesman said. Alcoa is growing, Belwood said. It has added 240 jobs since Dec. 1 and it has 60 more to fill in July and August. “The outlook is very good for the industry and for this plant.”
…. the National Labor Relations Board is an independent board and the president doesn’t control its decisions other than to appoint new members as terms expire.
….U.S. Rep. Bruce Braley, a Democrat, said Romney made it sound like a final decision has been made to block Boeing from opening its South Carolina plant. The reality is, the hearing process is at its beginning stages, Braley said. “(Romney) obviously doesn’t understand how the National Labor Relations Board works.”
Oh dear. According to Steve Benen, Huntsman’s people forgot to register JonHuntsman.com – so when you visit the site the image above greets you, ie that glowing letter Hunstman wrote the President when he accepted the position of Ambassador to China.
ABC: Every detail of Jon Huntsman’s long-awaited campaign launch was meticulously planned, except of course for one minor detail: the misspelling of the candidate’s name. Members of the media were handed a press pass that read “John Huntsman for President” – adding an unnecessary H in the candidate’s first name. Huntsman’s staffers promptly scrambled to remove the passes from reporters before they caught the snafu.
Steve Benen: …. worse, visitors to Huntsman’s online donation page this morning saw this message alongside the contribution form:
If you prefer you can contact us by mail or by telephone.
Jon Huntsman for President
123 Main Street
Charlotte, NC 12345
All of this is wrong, and was obviously just put in as placeholder text the campaign forgot to replace. As Jamison Foser noted, “So far today, Huntsman campaign has gotten his name, phone number & address wrong. That’s a rough day in first grade.”
That’s not all. The Huntsman campaign picked a location for the kick-off speech where the Statue of Liberty would be in the background, but put the television cameras in such a place where the Statue of Liberty wasn’t seen by viewers at home. Some pundits knocked the new candidate for a “bland, uninspiring speech,” and the cable networks didn’t stick with his remarks very long.
Well, at least Huntsman had a good crowd for the campaign launch, right? Wrong. Only “about a hundred” people showed up, and roughly 60 of them were political reporters…..
(The first guy in the video is Peter Morici who wrote an article recently entitled ‘In Wisconsin, the governor is right, Obama is wrong’ – so you get the drift. The second guy, Carl Horowitz, is from the National Legal and Policy Center which, like lots of conservative groups, is funded by billionaire right-winger Richard Mellon Scaife – see here)
Detroit News: The United Auto Workers union says that by fall, General Motors Co. will recall the last 2,000 of its laid-off workers, clearing the way for new hiring at its U.S. plants.
Most of the recalls will be in southeastern Michigan, whose economy was devastated in the downturn.
GM declined to confirm the timeline, but Joe Ashton, UAW vice president in charge of GM, said Wednesday “those people will all be back at work in September. We will have full employment in September for the first time in a long time.”
The recalls are further evidence of the recovery of GM, and the auto industry as a whole….
…GM spokeswoman Kimberly Carpenter: “We have announced several actions that will help people get back to work,” she said. Among them: adding a third shift of 750 to GM’s truck plant in Flint, a second shift of 600 in Lansing to build a small Cadillac and 1,550 workers being recalled to build two small cars at the Lake Orion assembly plant.
Oh, almost forgot this:
Mlive.com: Flint Democratic lawmakers and UAW officials gathered this afternoon to celebrate a nearly $5,000 profit sharing check being given to General Motors’ employees this week.
The check, they say, is a sign of the progress GM has made since it filed for bankruptcy in June 2009.
President Barack Obama and the then-Democratic Congress made the right decision to bail out the automaker, said Norwood Jewell, Region 1-C director of the UAW.
“What would have happened to Genesee County? What would have happened to Flint,” he said of the government’s loans to the automaker.
A boy looks out as mourners pray during the funeral of a rebel killed by forces loyal to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in Benghazi, March 22
John Judis (The New Republic): ….I looked at various blogs and websites that air opinion on the left. With some notable exceptions (like Juan Cole), all I have found is opposition to the Obama administration’s decision to intervene in Libya.
So I ask myself, would these opponents of U.S. intervention (as part of U.N. Security Council approved action), have preferred:
(1) That gangs of mercenaries, financed by the country’s oil wealth, conduct a bloodbath against Muammar Qaddafi’s many opponents?
(2) That Qaddafi himself, wounded, enraged, embittered, and still in power, retain control of an important source of the world’s oil supply, particularly for Europe, and be able to spend the wealth he derives from it to sow discord in the region?
(3) And that the movement toward democratization in the Arab world – which has spread from Tunisia to Bahrain, and now includes such unlikely locales as Syria – be dealt an enormous setback through the survival of one of region’s most notorious autocrats?
If you answer “Who cares?” to each of these, I have no counter-arguments to offer, but if you worry about two or three of these prospects, then I think you have to reconsider whether Barack Obama did the right thing in lending American support to this intervention.
…Should Obama, as some critics have charged, have gone to Congress for a war powers resolution? I am not sure there was time for a full-scale debate…
…isn’t Obama repeating the same mistakes that George W. Bush did when he invaded Iraq in order to oust a despot? There’s a big difference between then and now: The United States is supporting an active revolt; it is preventing carnage; and it is encouraging real, rather than imagined, democratic movements across the region. These are all reasons why, even at this late date, and with uncertain prospects, it made sense to intervene.
CBS: Sarah Palin has turned to Facebook and Twitter to criticize President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal. Here’s what she wrote on Twitter: “Here’s how minuscule the White House’s $775 million a year cuts are: less than 1/10 of 1% of this year’s budget deficit.”
And on Facebook: “If you want to know how minuscule their proposed $775 million-a-year budget ‘cuts’ really are, please look at this chart. The proposed cuts are so insignificant – less than 1/10 of 1% of this year’s $1.65 trillion budget deficit – that they are essentially invisible on the pie chart. That speaks volumes about today’s budget.”
Palin links in both places to a chart posted on The Blaze, Glenn Beck’s website, five days ago – before the budget proposal came out. It uses an op-ed by White House Budget Director Jacob Lew to suggest that Mr. Obama was proposing to cut $775 million from the budget, and goes on to mock that amount as insignificant.
The problem? Lew wrote in his op-ed that he was only discussing “a small fraction of the scores of cuts” in the budget proposal, not the total proposed cuts … the proposed cuts, in total, add up to about $75 billion … the simple fact is that Palin using an incorrect figure as the basis of her critique.