Harry Reid has soured

By Frank Moraes 

John Nichols is angry at Harry Reid. Of course, who isn't. Let's look back at a little Harry Reid history, shall we? In January 2011, Harry Reid just said no to filibuster reform. (Note: he said no in 2009 too, when he could have changed the rules over a Republican filibuster!) But then Reid changed his mind. Last May, he went to the Senate floor and said, "If there were ever a time when Tom Udall and Jeff Merkley were prophetic, it's tonight. These two young, fine senators said it was time to change the rules of the Senate, and we didn't. They were right. The rest of us were wrong -- or most of us, anyway. What a shame."

This is what people hate about liberals. Sure, in the abstract liberals stand for something. When it is theoretical whether to reform the filibuster, Harry Reid is there to give a full-throated endorsement! But after a few months tick away and he has the ability to actually do the reform, he goes all soft: "The Democrats will someday be in the minority and we will want the filibuster!"

(As I've said ad nauseam, this shows a shocking lack of political savvy. The Republicans, for all their faults, are not a bunch of spineless assholes. What they believe in is generally all wrong, but I will grant them that they actually do believe in it. They will destroy the filibuster the moment it is to their advantage. And when they do, Harry Reid will be out of office and he'll say, "If there were ever a time when Tom Udall and Jeff Merkley were prophetic, it's tonight. These two young, fine senators said it was time to change the rules of the Senate, and we didn't. They were right. The rest of us were wrong -- or most of us, anyway. What a shame.")

Read more »

Sen. Frank Lautenberg is not running again and Hillary Clinton will be just the right age to be president

By Richard K. Barry

New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg made it official this past week, announcing that he would not seek re-election in 2014. A Democrat, Lautenberg is 89 years old. 

Newark Mayor Cory Booker has been sniffing around the seat likely after concluding that Gov. Christie would be too hard to beat. 

Even at Lautenberg's advanced age, it must be hard to get pushed aside. Even if he had no intention of seeking reelection, one has to assume that capitulating to lame-duck status a moment before it is absolutely necessary must be difficult.

In a statement, Lautenberg said this:

I am not announcing the end of anything. I am announcing the beginning of a two-year mission to pass new gun safety laws, protect children from toxic chemicals and create more opportunities for working families in New Jersey.

Speaking about Booker's ambition for the Senate seat, Lautenberg has said, "I’d encourage him to finish the job that has to be done in Newark. We still have a lot of violence, we still have a lot of inconvenience."

Read more »

A.M. Headlines

(New York Tines): "Texas Senator goes on attack and raises bipartisan hackles"

(ABC News):  "Domestic drones inch closer to a sky near you"

(New York Times): "U.S. military faces fire as it pulls out of Afghanistan"

(Reuters): "Fugitive LA ex-cop may have died from self-inflicted gunshot"

(Washington Post): "Pistorius faces premeditated murder charge"

P.M. Headlines

(USA Today): "NASA: Meteor exploded with force of 20 Hiroshima bombs"

(Financial Times): "SEC sues over trades ahead of Heinz deal"

(Washington Post): "Obama, in a hometown plagued by deadly shootings, pleads for action on gun violence"

(Politico): "Why Obama went all-in on Chuck Hagel"

(New York Times): "Jesse Jackson Jr. faces U.S. charges in $750,000 fraud"

(The Huffington Post): "Elizabeth Warren embarrasses hapless bank regulators at first meeting"

Progressive Music Classics: The Unacceptable Face of Freedom by Test Dept.

By Marc McDonald

(Ed. note: Here's another installment of Marc's ongoing series. For the full series, check out his site. Our last one was a couple of weeks ago, "Everything That Rises Must Converge" by Shriekback. -- MJWS)


Margaret Thatcher's declaration of war against labor unions in the 1980s kicked off a vicious attack on working-class people that ripped the nation's social fabric. British society never really recovered from the ravages of Thatcherism.

Like Ronald Reagan, Thatcher used the power of the state to force a radical, extreme form of bare-knuckled "Chicago School" economics on the nation. In both countries, the Top One Percent made out like bandits, but the middle class was ravaged.

Since the 1980s, Britain has come to resemble the U.S. in many ways. Like the U.S., Britain has seen the decline of its middle class. Britain has also experienced increasingly mediocre, under-funded social services and declining standards in public schools. Like the U.S. since 1980, Britain has become more and more a deeply undemocratic society that is increasingly ruled by an oligarchy and by multi-national corporations.

Read more »

Herman Cain joins Fox News

By Richard K. Barry

It's difficult to know what's going on at Fox News. I thought it was a good sign that they got rid of the idiot half-term governor Sarah Palin and the worst political prognosticator the world has ever known Dick Morris.  I thought this was perhaps a signal that they wanted to be taken a bit more seriously by those with funcitoning brains.

They then announced that Karl Rove would be staying on, but Rove isn't so much stupid as evil. Kind of, sort of the same applies for new acquistion Erick Erickson. And they've hired former Mass. Senator Scott Brown, who, say what you want, comes across well and is moderate enough to be considered a flaming communist as far as most Fox viewers are concerned.

There is also Denis Kucinich brought in as a token liberal. Still not sure what to make of that.

Now we hear that Republican moron extraordinaire Herman Cain has been hired to provide both political and business commentary. I guess we can expect to hear more references to Uzbeki-Becky-Becky-Becky-Becky-Becky-Becky-Stan. Oh, that one still breaks me up. And who can forget Nine-Nine-Nine, that wonderful line from Inglorious Bastards?

I guess if you took the average IQ of the new team versus the old team it might be maringinally higher, although Cain really screws up the bell curve.

Nightmare in a car at 125 mph

By Michael J.W. Stickings 

Simply incredible:

Frank Lecerf, from his home in Pont-de-Metz, near the French city of Amiens, was making his weekly trip to the grocery store in his Renault Laguna. He was going 60 miles an hour when the car's speed dial jammed. Lecerf tried to brake. Instead of slowing, though, the car sped up -- with each tap on the brake leading to more acceleration. Eventually, the car reached a speed of 125 mph -- and then remained stuck there. For an hour.

Lecerf, frantic, called the police from his car -- and they sent an escort that The Guardian describes as "a platoon of police cars" to help him navigate a busy highway. (Lecerf stayed, appropriately, in the fast lane.) What resulted was a small miracle of technological coordination: Responding to emergency services' advance warnings, three different toll booths raised their barriers as Lecerf approached. A police convoy ensured that roads were kept clear for the speeding car. Fellow drivers, obligingly, got out of the way. Emergency services patched Lecerf through to a Renault engineer who tried -- though failed -- to help Lecerf get the speeding car to slow down.

Finally, his car ran out of gas. In Belgium. A long way from home (see map below):

The man and his vehicle and his communal, ad hoc escort ended up traveling more than 100 miles together before they got their Hollywood ending -- an ending made possible not by individual heroics, but by collective effort.  

Ah, collective effort. In other words, collectivism, socialism, totalitarianism.

So this guy must be one of the 47%, right? (Or, as they say in France, the 100%.) Maybe Obama should invite him to next year's SOTU.

I'm just saying, this story would be a whole lot more impressive if he'd done it on his own without relying on government.

(I'm kidding, of course. Republicans can go... well, you know what they can go do with themselves.)

Don't get ready for a third party

By Frank Moraes 

Have you heard about the end of the two party political system in the United States? Let me lay it on you. In 2016, Rand Paul will run for the Republican presidential nomination. He won't win, because, you know, he's Rand Paul. Plus, all the establishment Republicans will be funneling cash and expertise to Marco Rubio. In case you didn't know, Marco Rubio is not only the Republican Savior™, he's got great policy ideas like, uh, "something like the Dream Act but not as good" and "grow the economy." And did I mention that he is a Cuban American, which technically makes him a Latino even if he is even whiter than Mitt Romney? So Rand Paul loses.

But wait! There is a cry from the Tea Party grassish rootish, "Let Rand Paul run!" And then we are off: Rand Paul runs as a third party candidate and wins because all the college kids will vote for him because just like the pretend libertarian that he is, Rand Paul is kind of sort of for maybe decriminalizing cannabis. And suddenly, we have three political parties: Democratic, Republican, and Tea. This would not just be bad for the Republicans. Democrats ought to be afraid too!

Or so say a bunch of people interviewed by Ron Fournier at the National Journal for an article entitled "Republican Leaders Worry Their Party Could Divide in Two." But this is what you need to know about it: it is total rubbish.

Read more »

The ghost of Tailgunner Joe

By Mustang Bobby

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R) is new to the job, but he's already making news for himself by being a shameless jerk. He's already gotten some notice for claiming that John Kerry and Chuck Hagel are not "ardent fans" of the U.S. military — they were both wounded in Vietnam — and now he's gone and accused Mr. Hagel of being a secret supporter of Iran. It got bad enough at the Senate confirmation hearing for Mr. Hagel that Florida Sen. Bill Nelson (D) got pissed off.

You have to realize that Mr. Nelson is not the most excitable person in the world — if he was any mellower he'd rot — so this little flash of temper on his part is the equivalent of a full-tilt rant from anyone else.


You go, Bill.

For those of us over a certain age, Mr. Cruz reminds us of another junior senator some sixty years ago who made a name for himself by accusing people of being "fellow travelers" and scattering the pigeons with character assassination. To some people, that shit never gets old, and my fellow Texans have got a fresh version of the dyspeptic demagogue on their hands.

(Cross-posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

A.M. Headlines

(Time):"With GOP filibuster, Chuck Hagel's rocky road continues"

(The Hill): "White House endorses Senate sequester plan, urges House Republicans to act"

(Reuters): "Obama: Americans deserve to know more about drone war"

(New York Times): "Mega-mergers see comeback as uncertainty of crisis fades"

(Washington Post): "Passengers, some kissing ground, express relier odyssey aboard stricken Triumph is at an end"

P.M. Headlines

(New York Times): "GOP Senators block vote on Defense post for Hagel"

(New York Times): "Lautenberg, oldest member of the Senate, won't run again"

(Reuters): "In Valentine vote, Illinois Senate approves gay marriage"

(The Hill): "Boehner challenges Senate Dems to take lead, pass Obama second-term agenda"

(The Guardian): "Oscar Pistorius to face murder charge"

Hagel! Hollaback!

By Carl

I have a modest proposal for President Obama in which he can screw around with Republican opposition to the confirmation of Chuck Hagel as Defense Secretary. I'll get to that in a minute. Let's take a look at what's going on:

On Wednesday Senate Republicans forced the Senate to a 60-vote threshold on the confirmation of Chuck Hagel. In order to move forward to a vote Democrats will have to find 60 senators to vote yes on cloture. If they do, the Democrats with a 55-45 majority are expected to confirm Hagel on a near party-line vote.

Wednesday was also a big day for Republican opponents of Hagel in two ways.

First, moderate Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who some news organizations had reported would vote for Hagel, came out to say she would oppose his confirmation, although not block a “final” vote. (It’s unclear whether she would nevertheless support a temporary delay so her GOP colleagues Sens. John McCain, Kelly Ayotte and Lindsey Graham can garner information they requested from the White House on Benghazi.)

Read more »

Raising minimum wage won't hurt employment

By Frank Moraes

Minimum Wage in San Francisco: $10.55 per hour!

So much of conservative economic analysis comes down to, "I kind of paid attention to the lectures that term and I got a C in Econ 101." It is certainly true that you can understand a lot of what is going on in the economy by understanding some simple economic theory. But you can also go very wrong with this if your understanding is too limited. This is what we get from a lot of libertarian leaning people.

Let's consider the minimum wage. A very simple understanding of it indicates that if you raise the minimum wage, it will result in fewer jobs as employers drop marginal employees. But it doesn't work this simply. First, minimum wage employees do some of the most basic (and important) work at a company. Most companies could survive for a month or two without a CEO; they can't survive without the janitorial staff.

Much more important is the issue of company profits. A common myth among conservatives is that if a company's taxes are raised, the company will simply pass on the cost to the customer. Belief in this myth belies a shocking level of ignorance about not only how companies operate but also how markets themselves work. Undoubtedly, some increased costs will be passed on. But much of the increased costs will just have to be absorbed -- profits will decrease and the company will be forced to become more efficient.

The same goes on with the minimum wage.

Read more »

All in the context

By Mustang Bobby

This tells you everything you need to know about the Republicans: 

According to a new Washington Post poll, 70 percent of Americans support a path to citizenship in comprehensive immigration reform, including 60 percent of Republicans. Those results are in line with a slew of polls showing that earned citizenship for 11 million undocumented immigrants is a popular policy.

But a funny thing happened when Republicans were asked an identical question about citizenship with Obama's name attached. Republicans hated the idea: Support dropped from 60 percent to just 39 percent.

If President Obama came out with a right-wing agenda, the GOP would go completely leftie.

Hmm...

Let Republicans try to live on $7.25 an hour

By Michael J.W. Stickings 

In his State of the Union address on Tuesday, President Obama proposed raising the federal minimum wage to $9 from the current $7.25. That's per hour. 

Not surprisingly, some Republicans -- including Ayn Rand devotee Paul Ryan -- have already stated their, and their party's, unwavering opposition.

Their arguments are simply wrong. Increases in the minimum wage do not destroy jobs (though some employers can use them as an excuse to lay people off) and are not inflationary in any significant way (and besides, inflation is not a problem at the moment).

They're also cruel, a reflection of the GOP's penchant for brutality (specifically for the brutalization of low-income Americans).

But let them try to live on $7.25 an hour. Or even $9. For that matter, let them live in a cardboard box over a heating grate with no hope at all.

As they insist on being such insensitive, uncompassionate right-wing fucks, I for one would welcome that. It might even make me think there's some justice in the world.

Behind the Ad: Will Ferrell endorses Eric Garcetti for Los Angeles Mayor

By Richard K. Barry 

(Another installment in our extensive "Behind the Ad" series.) 

Eric Garcetti

Who: The Eric Garcetti mayoral campaign

Where: Los Angeles. 

What's going on: Haven't done one of these since November, but that doesn't mean that elections of one sort or another aren't always going on somewhere. In this case, actor and comedian Will Ferrell does a hilarious spot for Eric Garcetti, who is running for mayor of Los Angeles.

I don't know much about Garcetti other than that he's a member of Los Angeles City Council; he's a Democrat and he has a lot of friends in show business. He was an early Obama supporter and he declared his intention to run for mayor of L.A. on Sept. 8, 2011.



Read more »

Marco Rubio, the stupidest savior of them all

By Michael J.W. Stickings

It's the water break that's been getting so much of the attention, because of course for the media it's all about the theatrics, but Republican wunderkind Marco Rubio's post-SOTU rebuttal the other night was nothing if not yet another recitation of the Republican Party's key points of ideological dogmatism. And among them was this gem about why nothing should be done about climate change: "our government can't control the weather."

He repeated it yesterday on Fox & Friends, where of course such ignorance is de rigueur, even more so than on Morning Joe:

The government can't change the weather. I said that in the speech. We can pass a bunch of laws that will destroy our economy, but it isn't going to change the weather.

Unsurprisingly, his statement didn't make any sense, but it seems that his point was that it doesn't matter what the U.S. does because countries like China and India that are "still growing" are "polluting in the atmosphere much greater than we are at this point" and aren't about to stop anytime soon, and besides, any attempt to address climate change would "devastate our economy."

Read more »

A.M. Headlines

(USA Today): "Obama visits Georgia to promote education"

(Politico): "General consensus: Rubio water flap shall pass"

(Politico): "Senate to vote Friday on Chuck Hagel"

(New York Times): "Details emerge on Obama's call to extend preschool"

(CNN): "Graham to Obama: Stop 'cheerleading' for gun laws"

P.M. Headlines

(Huffington Post): "Jack Lew faces Benghazi grilling at Treasury Secretary confirmation hearing"

(Houston Chronicle): "Tears, applause for pope at last public Mass"

(ABC News): "American Airlines and USAirways merger announcement likely tomorrow"

(New York Times): "Iran upgrades nuclear plant as talks resume"

(Paul Krugman): "Marco Rubio has learned nothing"

(ThinkProgress): "Top Republicans oppose Obama's call to raise the minimum wage"

A watery state

By Carl 

Thus goeth Marco Rubio's presidential aspirations. Apparently, Rubio can't stand the heat. 

But, as to the President's State of the Union address, all seems to be in order. It was populist, and took much more liberal stances on issues that Obama had in his first term, as it followed closely on the heels of his stemwinder of an inaugural address. 

He outlined a vision of a middle class that is healthy and growing that is in distinct contrast with the patrician and elitist views of the Republicans in Congress. His "ladders of opportunity" and support for increasing the minimum wage (a modest increase of less than 30%, to be sure) mirror my liberal libertarian views on government. 

Government ought to be levelling the playing field.

Let me take a moment to brief new readers on what I mean: I view society as a three-legged stool. There's the people, the government, and the business sector. 

When these are in balance, the country is stable. It can grow and everybody benefits to some degree.  

When one of these comes up short, the country is unstable and when two come up short, the country is set to topple over. 

Read more »

Unreasonable reasonable Republicans

By Frank Moraes 

(Ed. note: See also Chait's follow-up, after Scarborough threw a tantrum at him yesterday morning, "Joe Scarborough Hates Moms, PowerPoint." -- MJWS)

Do you know who is a real Reasonable Republican? Joe Scarborough. And that pretty much explains why the search for the lauded Reasonable Republican is such a foolish errand. When you find them, they simply have all the stupid policy prescriptions of other Republicans but don't think that rape victims ought to have to carry their pregnancies to term.

Of course, in Scarborough's case, since he isn't in office, his thinking has been heavily influenced the Very Serious People in Washington. This was fully on display a couple of weeks ago when Paul Krugman came on Morning Joe to discuss the economy. Scarborough just could not understand what Krugman was talking about. How could the budget deficit not be the most important issue facing the nation when everyone Joe knows thinks it is?!

You think I'm kidding? After the show, Scarborough took to Politico to write a column, "Paul Krugman Vs. the World." In it, he wrote: 

But maintaining calm was not as easy for Council on Foreign Relations president Richard Haass, who agrees with former Joint Chief chairman Michael Mullen, that longterm debt poses the greatest threat to America's national security.

In other words: "I've talked to other people who know nothing about economics and they agree with me!"

Read more »

Stick around so we can hit you

By Mustang Bobby

Via Steve Benen, more moaning from the whiny gripers:

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) complained on Fox News [Sunday], "All [President Obama] does is go out and make speeches" instead of negotiating with lawmakers like him. Around the same time, on "Meet the Press," Republican strategist Mike Murphy argued that the president should "stop the speeches" and "stop the politicization." Also on "Meet the Press," Republican pundit Michael Gerson complained about the "outside game [Obama's] been pursuing," in which the president hits the road, "beating up on the Congress."

It's not exactly subtle: Obama's GOP detractors aren't happy about the president taking his message directly to the public though outside-the-beltway events.

Then again, it appears the White House doesn't much care.

If your choice was to hang around Washington so that John McCain can yell at you or get on Air Force One and head for Vegas, what would you do?

The truth is that the Republicans really hate it that the president gets out to the people because they know he's really pretty good at it, and besides, every time he tries to sit down and negotiate with the GOP leadership, they kick him in the junk. So it's not a tough call to get the hell out of Dodge. 

(Cross-posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

Karl Rove can't change Republican voters

By Frank Moraes 

Nate Silver wrote a very interesting article that goes right along with something I've been thinking: "New Rove Group Could Backfire on G.O.P." He goes into a lot of detail, but basically his argument is that lack of money is not the reason that establishment candidates lost primaries. This ought to go without saying; by definition the establishment candidates are going to have more money. Still, it is surprising just how big the difference is. Of the 23 races he looked at, the median establishment candidate funding was $3 million compared to the median "outsider" candidate funding of a bit less than $400,000 -- a 7.5 fold advantage for the establishment candidates.

There is one overwhelming reason that this funding is a bad idea: the optics. The sad truth of the Tea Party people is that they think of themselves as anti-establishment even while all of their policy preferences are elitist. "We've got to stop those establishment politicians from being so mean to those billionaires!" So as a result, the more an "establishment" candidate is pushed via the media, the more the base will rebel.

Read more »

How Rush Limbaugh damaged the GOP brand

By Marc McDonald

When Rush Limbaugh first began spewing his daily dose of bigotry, lies and GOP propaganda back in the mid-80s, Republican leaders rejoiced. In Limbaugh, the GOP had a powerful spokesman who managed to persuade working-class white men to vote against their own interests.

In Limbaugh, the GOP also had a powerful political weapon. In the 1990s, they needed to tarnish President Clinton's reputation. And Limbaugh was on the case, sliming Clinton on everything from Vince Foster to Whitewater. No facts or truth was required, just smears.

Limbaugh's success spawned an entire industry of like-minded right-wing talk radio propagandists, each more extreme and outrageous than their predecessors. They proceeded to take over the AM radio dial. Then Fox News appeared, as well as the likes of Drudge and other right-wing Web sites.

Limbaugh, however, remained the King of GOP Propaganda. And millions of ditto-head listeners across the nation lapped up everything he dished out.

Throughout the 1990s, Limbaugh appeared to be an invaluable asset to the GOP.

But it was all a mirage. In reality, Limbaugh was a growing problem for the Republican Party. And today, he's become a serious liability that continues to damage the GOP brand.

Read more »

All the same

By Mustang Bobby

Outgoing Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has some good news for same-sex couples serving in the military:

Seventeen months ago, the United States military ended the policy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." We have implemented the repeal of that policy and made clear that discrimination based on sexual orientation has no place in the Department of Defense.

At the time of repeal, I committed to reviewing benefits that had not previously been available to same-sex partners based on existing law and policy. It is a matter of fundamental equity that we provide similar benefits to all of those men and women in uniform who serve their country. The department already provides a group of benefits that are member-designated. Today, I am pleased to announce that after a thorough and deliberate review, the department will extend additional benefits to same-sex partners of service members.

There are still some benefits that aren't available thanks to the odious Defense of Marriage Act, but for now this is yet another step towards equality. 

(Cross-posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

Be afraid of Chris Christie

By Richard K. Barry

Michael and I were playing the generally useless but fun game of "guess who the GOP presidential nominee will be in four years." Rubio, Jindal, Hunstman, and Bush were some of the names we threw around. I offered that we might have to wait and see how the Republicans fare in the midterms before we can assess how the civil war between the radical right and the moderate right shakes out.

Whatever happens, I don't see the crazy wing of the party going away, no matter what Karl Rove and his friend might try to orchestrate. As with Romney, the relatively centrist candidate will have to say some stupid things to be competitive in some of the redder states while trying not to sound too insane the rest of the time.  The same balancing act that Romney tried and failed to execute will be required by whoever is up next.

Anyway, it's a lot of fun to speculate, but there's too much that has to happen before we can say anything meaningful.

One thing that I will say is that the Democrats should fear New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

Read more »

A.M. Headlines

(Politico): "President Barack Obama's State of the Union 2013 speech (full text)"

(New York Times): "Obama pledges push to lift economy for middle class"

(Boston Globe): "Rogue ex-LAPD officer believed dead after standoff"

(Politico): "Marco Rubio opposes Violence Against Women Act"

(CBS News): "Pope resigning for 'the good of the church'"

SOTU Night in America: Live-blogging the 2013 State of the Union address

By Michael J.W. Stickings, with Richard K. Barry, Frank Moraes, and tmcbpatriot

(Updated frequently -- in real time. Scroll down.)

So the gang's back together tonight. When was the last time we live-blogged? It was the election back in November, wasn't it? And before that the debates. Oh, what a good time that was... well, except for that first debate. Remember that one?

And what are we live-blogging? It's the Papal Election 2013! Woo-hoo!

Wait, what? It's not the papal election? So why the hell are we here?

Oh, right, the State of the Union. Alas. It's strong, isn't it? So what's the point of all this? Can't we go back a century or so, back to pre-Wilsonian times, when the president just sent the damn thing up to Capitol Hill in writing?

Yes, Wilson changed things in 1913. Before that, no president had delivered it in person, as a speech, since Jefferson, who ended the tradition in its infancy.

That's the first page of Washington's notes for his 1790 address. Pretty neat, huh?

**********

But okay, here we are. Let's make the most of it. (I was on my own for it last year. Should be more enjoyable with the guys joining me tonight.)

Read more »

P.M. Headlines

(Fox News): "Fugitive ex-cop Dorner holed up in cabin, surrounded by police"

(USA Today): "Obama's State of the Union to be heavy on jobs, economy"

(New York Times): "Watching Obama for signs of change"

(Christian Science Monitor): "Domestic violence bill passes Senate: Is GOP chastened by Election 2012?"

(Washington Post): "Sarah Palin tries to stay relevant"

The SNL skit that wasn't

By Richard K. Barry

Political Wire reported yesterday that SNL planned to air a skit last weekend that ridiculed Senate Republicans' grilling of defense secretary nominee Chuck Hagel but cut it from the show at the last minute.

It was later released online and I was able to grab it from YouTube. I haven't much cared for SNL since about 1978 but this bit was funny. Can't understand why they didn't let it run as planned.

Matt Yglesias' public shame

By Frank Moraes

I can't explain why I'm writing this article. Too much caffeine? Maybe. Feeling intellectually insecure? Always. Or is it just that people as brilliant as Matt Yglesias should be spanked publicly when providing the smallest of justification? Yep! I think that's the one.

Yglesias is one of my very favorite bloggers because he writes on a lot of different topics and I find him by turns insightful and oafish. I very often disagree with him but he usually makes a pretty good argument and never has uninteresting opinions. And sometimes, very rarely, he makes a math error that allows me to pounce! Ha ha ha!

I'll bet Mr. Yglesias didn't think twice when he wrote this earlier this morning:

Maker's Mark announced in an email to distributors over the weekend that it's going to be decreasing the alcohol content of its bourbon by 3 percent. That turns out to have been a misstatement on the company's part and they're actually reducing it by three percentage points—from 45 percent by volume to 42 percent by volume—but it's still a substantial change.

This is so delicious that it is hard to even write about it. Yglesias first notes the error that Maker's Mark made: they didn't know the difference between percent and percentage points. The fools! 

Read more »

Bridal path

By Mustang Bobby

Apparently Kathryn Jean Lopez feels that is it not only her right but her duty to comment on the marital and parenting choices of complete strangers.

It’s really none of her business whatsoever, but if that’s what the National Review pays her to do, then who am I to tell her what to do?

(Cross-posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

Outlook ad for Thunderbird

By Frank Moraes

My friend Will and I discuss computers a lot. This is mostly because Will is only really interested in computers (and for the last couple of months beer brewing). And one thing we discuss a lot is privacy and the fact that after the lives that we have led, we don't worry about it all. We worry about it for our clients, of course. Some of their lives might be private. And that is why I really liked this new commercial from Microsoft:

My first wife[1] was a privacy freak. And as with most people who are really hung up on privacy, she had very little of interest to hide. Compare this to me—I have a public enough background that I can't get a regular job. Oh well. You either embrace it or embrace it. I choose to embrace it.

Anyway, I think this ad works because it is true. Google does do that. In fact, they are constantly offering me opportunities to get my MBA—probably because I write a lot about economics. And the truth is, I used to be bothered by it. And I think more people probably should be bothered by it. Of course, there a much better (And free!) alternatives to Microsoft.

Think different. Not Apple, silly! Non-corporate!

________________

[1] This is from The Girl's On Fire:

(Cross-posted at Frankly Curious.)

Benediction

By Mustang Bobby

I’m sure everyone has now heard the news that Pope Benedict XVI is hanging it up at the end of the month.

Pope Benedict XVI shocked Roman Catholics on Monday by saying that he would resign on Feb. 28, becoming the first pope to do so in six centuries.

Speaking in Latin to a small gathering of cardinals at the Vatican on Monday morning, Benedict said that after examining his conscience “before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise” of leading the world’s one billion Roman Catholics.

The statement, soon translated into seven languages, ricocheted around the globe.

He is the head of one of the largest corporate entities on the planet with branch offices all over the globe and with a brand loyalty in some places that is the envy of Disney and Coca-Cola. He and his corporation control one of the largest fortunes in the world — mostly without any tax obligation — and own more property than some small countries.

A lot of people say that the Roman Catholic church has done many good deeds. They run schools, they feed the poor, and offer spiritual support for those who believe. But the fact remains that they have a history going back thousands of years of institutionalized torture, cruelty, misogyny, genocide, oppression, rape, sexual abuse, and shady financial dealings that would shame the most amoral among us, all in the name of their brand. The departure of one leader for another means very little in the long history of this enterprise, and the new pope will likely be a relatively younger copy of the one who is leaving.

No truth to the rumor that he wanted to spend more time with his family….

(Cross-posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

Marco Rubio is as likely a GOP presidential nominee as any

By Richard K. Barry

The Week ran a short piece yesterday listing three reasons they believe Marco Rubio isn't going to be the GOP nominee in 2016.

1. Republicans almost always pick the next guy in line.

Ever since the untested Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-Ariz.) lost in a historic landslide in 1964, the Republican Party has nearly always picked a nominee who has previously run for national office. The one exception is George W. Bush — and he was the son of a former president.

2. Rubio would face a very tough field.

The 2012 Republican primaries included many candidates who had no shot at ever winning the nomination. The 2016 field is likely to be packed with plausible candidates. Seasoned politicians like Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal, Rick Perry, and Paul Ryan are already lined up and mulling possible bids.

3. Rubio is still largely unknown.
 The national spotlight usually uncovers something unflattering in a first-time presidential candidate's past. In last year's GOP primary race, we quickly found out that Newt Gingrich had been a lobbyist for Fannie Mae, Rick Perry couldn't debate, and Herman Cain had issues with women who were not his wife.

They throw in a couple of bonus reasons as suggested by Harry Enten at The Guardian who adds that  Rubio is not liked by the GOP establishment and that he's too conservative. Enten concludes by writing that, "Given the hurdles a Rubio candidacy would face, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if he never runs at all.”

Read more »

A.M. Headlines

(CBS News): "Poll: 45% approve of Obama's handling of the economy"

(New York Times): "Nuclear test poses big challenge to China's new leader"

(Stars and Stripes): "Pentagon extends new benefits to same-sex military partners"

(The Hill): "Soure: White House to issue cybersecurity order Wednesday"

(BBC News): "Ten moments that defined Pope Benedict XVI"

(AP): Soccer faces epic fight against match-fixing"

Budget cuts, lies, and Republicans

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Robert Reich (@RBReich) tweeted at 8:52 PM on Mon, Feb 11, 2013:

Biggest and most dangerous lie told by Republicans: Anemic economy due to budget deficit. Truth is deficit cuts now will make economy worse.

The truth will set you free. Unless you're a Republican.

And when Republicans have political power, even as the minority party, the truth doesn't stand a chance.

fun. and the Pogues

By Richard K. Barry

I was watching the Grammys last night - all three and a half hours. I'd heard of fun. and was aware of a few songs, but hadn't paid much attention. I'd have to say they were the find of the evening.

I might not get much agreement on this, but there was something in their song "Carry On" that really reminded me of the kind of Celtic rock I love so much. I may even hear a bit of whistle in there and could easily imagine a bodhran fitting in nicely.

Maybe that's just me.

Here's the official video for "Carry On" followed by an old Pogues thing called "Streams of Whiskey," put together for reasons I cannot begin to explain but that in my mind I hear them together.





(Cross-posted at Hogtown Hipster.)

P.M. Headlines

(Nate Silver/FiveThirtyEight): New Rove group could backfire on GOP"

(New York Times): "Pope's successor is likely to share his doctrine"

(Esquire):"The man who killed Osama bin Laden... is screwed"

(Politico): "Gabrielle Giffords stars in gun control ad"

(Washington Post): "Best moments from the 2013 Grammy Awards"

Mumford & Sons' Babel wins Grammy for Album of the Year

By Richard K. Barry

And more coverage here, in case you missed it.

Gus Van Sant's fading career

By Frank Moraes

I seem to talk a lot about once great directors losing their edges. Most recently, I mentioned David Cronenberg. Last year around this time, it was the Coen Brothers. Ridley Scott is another example. I could go on and on.

Another good example is Gus Van Sant. Like all of the directors I've mentioned, it isn't that what he does today is bad. Far from it. But all of these directors have polished their art to the point where it is dull. Van Sant's first three films were marvelous—seething with the passion that he felt for his subjects. Mala Noche is kind of hard to watch these days because of its technical problems and narrative discontinuity, but it is also about as pure a piece of art as you ever seen. Drugstore Cowboyand My Own Private Idaho are as fresh today as they were 20 years ago.

Then things started to go wrong. Even Cowgirls Get the Blues was a worthy effort. To Die For really started to define a new style for Van Sant: polished and distant. And then Good Will Hunting came along. It wasn't so much the direction. The fact that Gus Van Sant had decided to do such a trite piece of work is why it was so disappointing. Up to that point, Van Sant could be depended upon to make cheap films that performed pretty well at the box office. Good Will Hunting was a mega-hit. After that, we got bigger budgets and more of the same. Now if you go to see a Gus Van Sant film, you can bet it will be some variation onFinding Forrester.

Read more »