P.M. Headlines

(Fox News): "Long-awaited vote on Senate budget exposes cracks among Democrats"

(CBS News): "Biden: Republicans 'didn't get the message' from 2012"

(The Hill): "On third anniversary, Obama touts health law's benefits"

(Politico): "NRA, Joe Manchin in talks on background checks"

(New York Times): "Obama loses his edge on economy"

Listening to Now: The New Lost City Ramblers - "Battleship of Maine"

By Richard K. Barry

In February I attended the annual Folk Alliance International conference in Toronto. Mike Seeger, who passed away in 2009, was the recipient of a life-time achievement award. Seeger was a noted musician and folklorist, as well as the half-brother of American icon Pete Seeger.

In 1958, Mike Seeger, along with Tom Paley (replaced by Terry Schwarz in 1962), and John Cohen, formed the New Lost City Ramblers. The short presentation shown at the conference made known that the name meant nothing other than an attempt to signal the combined urban and country influences many associated with the folk revival in the late '50s.

According to the Wiki:

The New Lost City Ramblers directly influenced countless musicians in subsequent years. The Ramblers distinguished themselves by focusing on the traditional playing styles they heard on old 78rpm records of musicians recorded during the 1920s and 1930s. 

Read more »

Ashley Judd: Keeping the cameras rolling by other means

By Richard K. Barry

I don't have a strong opinion about actor Ashley Judd possibly taking on Republican Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in Kentucky in 2014. Though it is looking increasingly like she's going to do it.

Associated Press is reporting that Judd made cute references to the possibility in a keynote address last Friday at the American Counselling Association's 2013 conference in Cincinnati. 

In speaking about her personal experience with depression, she said when she started in counseling she didn't like to be criticized. She added that was ironic since she was, in her words, "about to get $40 million worth of it."

Judd also said her mother, Naomi Judd, can't wait to turn her garage into a campaign headquarters.

On the one hand, profile and polished presentation skills matter, and I am sure Ms. Judd has all of that. On the other hand, I tend to think experience matters and a high profile U.S. Senate race may not be the best place to get that initial experience. Try school board, or city council, or even the state legislature first, assuming the point really is to make a difference instead of simply keeping the cameras rolling by other means. 

Conservatives are not for smaller government

By Frank Moraes

David Dayen wrote a very annoying article over at The American Prospectyesterday, Banks Are Too Big to Fail Say... Conservatives? The problem is that it totally accepts that conservatives care about what they claim to care about rather than looking at what they actually do. In this case, he notes that those on the left and the right claim to be upset about banks that are too big to fail. 

There is a fundamental problem with this, of course. The main reason that the banks weren't broken up is that conservatives were hysterical in Obama's first year that he was going to destroy capitalism by nationalizing the banks. Dayen even mentions Glenn Hubbard as one of the conservative economists who want to end too big to fail banks. Yet Hubbard has been one of the biggest enablers of our corrupt banking system, and no one can serious suggest that he would ever do anything that would hurt bank profits or power.

At one point, Dayen writes, "The Tea Party's sole prescription for solving Too Big to Fail was to simply let banks collapse." This is flat out wrong. There was no Tea Party movement following the bank bailouts. It was only when the government started to look at helping out distressed homeowners that the Tea Party burst into existence. It is true that at that time they claimed that we shouldn't have bailed out the banks. But it was the bailout of ordinary homeowners that really got them going. They couldn't very well go around complaining about homeowners and maintain that that banks should have been helped.

Read more »

Great interest in Supreme Court marriage equality cases

By Richard K. Barry

Huffington Post is reporting that lines have already begun to form at the Supreme Court for those who want to attend next week's arguments in two gay marriage cases. 

The justices will hear arguments Tuesday on California's Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage and on Wednesday on the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as between one man and one woman. 

Apparently, it's not unusual for lines to form for free tickets to high-profile arguments, but five days in advance, which is what is happening here, is particularly early.  

The Proposition 8 case is Hollingsworth v. Perry and, according to SCOTUS.blog, this is what is to be decided:

Whether the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the State of California from defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman; and (2) whether petitioners have standing under Article III, § 2 of the Constitution in this case.  

Read more »

A.M. Headlines

(The Hill): "Senate passes its first budget in four years on 50 to 49 vote"

(The Hill): "Obama presses Congress to vote on assault weapons ban"

(Washington Post): "Wash., an abortion rights trailblazer, weighs passing nation's 1st abortion insurance mandate"

(Huffington Post): "North Dakota personhood measure passes state House"

(New York Times): "With Obama as broker, Israelis and Turkey end dispute"

P.M. Headlines

(USA Today): "Obama judicial nominee, opposed by GOP, withdraws"

(The Hill): "Ryan's budget rejected in Senate on 50-49 vote"

(The Hill): "Priebus slams 'idiotic statements' by Republicans as reason for losses"

(Fox News): "Fox News poll: Majorities support new gun measures"

(Washington Post): "Dominican official links Daily Caller to alleged lies about Menendez"

(Ballot Box): "Former Gov. Granholm declines run for Senate in Michigan"

Godspell on a Friday afternoon

By Richard K. Barry

I've got a thing for musical theatre. One of my favourites is Godspell. It always has been. In 2011 there was a Broadway revival of the play, which first opened off Broadway on May 17, 1971. The music is simply beautiful, at least I think so. And the vibe, if I can use that old term, is infectious. 

This clip is of the revival cast performing "Day by Day," and "Light of the World" on The View. 

Enough with the Iraq pseudo-mea culpas

By Frank Moraes

Jonathan Chait made a mistake earlier this week: heexplained why he supported the Iraq War. It was very disappointing.

The main argument he makes is exactly the one that Peter Beinart makes in The Icarus Syndrome. He documents all the fear about the Gulf War based on our experiences in Vietnam. This is very true; everyone feared a total clusterfuck. So after the Gulf War was just a raging hard-on of a success for everyone, he was "conditioned" to trust the military hawks.

Let's step back a moment and think about that. After the Gulf War, I was glad that it was brief and that the US didn't lose many people. But I certainly didn't think it was a success. The purpose of the war (to put a monarchy back in power in Kuwait) didn't seem a particularly great reason to go to war. What's more, we ended up killing about 30,000 Iraqis, almost all of whom were poor conscripts. There were also several thousand civilian deaths. And the Iraqi Republican Guard was pretty much untouched by it. So Chait's takeaway from this war is entirely based upon its effects on the Coalition.

But even if we accept Chait's take on the Gulf War that it was ripping good fun, how could he equate the very clear and careful planning done by the Bush Sr administration with the slapdash preparations of Bush Jr? This is where Chait really gets himself into trouble. He knew that the administration's rationale for the war was a pack of lies. But this didn't bother him because he came up with an alternative way to justify the war.

Read more »

Michele Bachmann: Dumb as ever

By Richard K. Barry

Three years after the passage of Obama's health care law, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) wants us to know, and said on the floor of the House on Thursday, that the Affordable Care Act will “kill” vulnerable women and children.

According to ThinkProgress:

In a long diatribe against the law, Bachmann predicted that the American people will “pay more” and get less, before suggesting that the provisions of Obamacare will “literally” kill people.

Yes, it will kill people by making sure they can actually access health care.

They just keep saying the weirdest shit, don't they?

Make room for bigots

By Mustang Bobby

The Religious Right is not happy with the GOP rebranding effort.

Some leaders of the religious right are openly worried this week after a sprawling 98-page report released by the Republican National Committee on how the party can rebuild after its 2012 implosion made no mention of the GOP’s historic alliance with grassroots Christian “value voters.”

Specifically, the word “Christian” does not appear once in the party’s 50,000-word blueprint for renewed electoral success. Nor does the word “church.” Abortion and marriage, the two issues that most animate social conservatives, are nowhere to be found. There is nothing about the need to protect religious liberty, or promote Judeo-Christian values in society. And the few fleeting suggestions that the party coordinate with “faith-based communities” — mostly in the context of minority outreach — receive roughly as much space as the need to become more “inclusive” of gays.

To many religious conservatives, the report was interpreted as a slight against their agenda and the hard work they have done for the party.

“The report didn’t mention religion much, if at all,” said Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association. “You cannot grow your party by distancing yourself from your base, and this report doesn’t reinforce the values that attracted me and many other people into the Republican Party in the first place. It just talks about reaching out to other groups.”

Read more »

The meaning of words in politics

By Richard K. Barry

Last Wednesday, Ohio Governor John Kasich told Cleveland's WEWS Channel 5 that he supports civil unions for same-sex couples. The comment was made when he was asked about Sen. Rob Portman's recent announcement that he supports gay marriage.

These were Kasich's words:

I talked to Rob and encouraged him. If people want to have civil unions and have some way to transfer their resources, I'm for that. I don't support gay marriage.

By Thursday, a spokesman for the Republican governor said that Kasich misspoke when he expressed support for civil unions. 

"The governor's position is unchanged," Kasich's spokesman Rob Nichols said Thursday in a statement. "He opposes gay marriage and opposes changing Ohio's constitution to allow for civil unions."

"He's opposed to discrimination against any Ohioan and, while he may have used the term 'civil union' loosely in this instance, he recognizes the existing rights of Ohioans to enter into private contracts to manage their personal property and health care issues," Nichols said, adding that Kasich's use of "civil unions" was a reference to powers of attorney and other legal documents that can grant same-sex partners certain rights.

Kasich knew exactly what he was saying and was pulled back by those around him concerned about the electoral implications of such a statement.  The meaning of the term civil union is well established and everyone involved in this particular charade knows it. 

A.M. Headlines

(New York Times): "Obama lays out case for Israel to revive peace talks"

(The Hill): "Reid to bring gun bill to floor with expanded background checks"

(MarketWatch): "US jobless claims remain near 5-year low"

(Reuters): "Colorado governor signs law allowing same-sex civil unions"

(CBS News): "3 Marines dead, including suspect in Quantico shooting"

P.M. Headlines

(Reuters): "House averts government shutdown, backs Ryan's plan"

(New York Times): "Biden joins mayor and Newtown families to push for gun limits"

(New York Times): "Path to citizenship for immigration draws support across party lines, survey finds"

(CNN): "Romney campaign chief to lead new GOP research group"

(Reuters): "New York man freed 23 years after wrongful murder conviction"

The Balkanization of the GOP

By Richard K. Barry

We've all been commenting on the complete disarray of the Republican Party. So, it's not like Stuart Rothenberg's comments are surprising, but they are worth noting.

He writes:

The Republican Party continues to fracture more seriously than I expected following last year’s re-election of President Barack Obama. 

Instead of uniting the GOP’s various constituencies against the president’s agenda, Obama’s re-election seems to have encouraged Republicans to spend much of their time harping on their internal disagreements and fighting over how the party should be positioned for 2016 and beyond.

I agree that the split is more serious than I thought it would be.  Though we may have seen this coming considering that there is no force strong enough to hold the party together, so various factions are battling for supremacy.

It's the nastiest kind of civil war, not that there are any pleasant kinds.

Now, Voyager

By Carl

Voyager 1 has crossed over into a medium that is not the Solar System and not quite interstellar space, NASA announced yesterday.

Launched 35 years ago, Voyager 1 and her sister craft, Voyager 2 were intended as emissaries from earth to whatever civilization it encounters over the course of millions of years.

The most interesting thing is to compare the changes to earth and to humanity since their 1977 launches:

1) The first personal computer, the Commodore PET, was introduced on January 1, 1977. It came with an 8 bit chipset, and up to 96 kB on its hard drive. By comparison, the Voyagers launced with 68 kB hard drives. The iPod nano ships with 16 GB (16,384,000kB).

2) Elvis was still alive -- well, officially alive -- and still recording. In fact, he was top of the charts in the UK with his song, “Way Down”.

3) Apple Computer, Inc. was incorporated.

4) Jimmy Carter was inaugurated. That was six presidents ago, if you’re counting.

5) Fleetwood Mac released the best selling album of all time, Rumours.

6) The first successful Atari game system, the 2600, is released.

7) The Hobbit premiered. Well, maybe we haven’t come quite that far after all. Orlando Bloom, Legolas, was born.

Long time readers of my blog know I’m a sucker for interstellar space and manned exploration of the cosmos. We have a legacy, it’s in our genes, to explore. Many may say that it’s not worth the money, but when you look back at how far we’ve come and how we’ve progressed since, it comes into sharp focus how vital exploration is to our world.

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

Not the only game in town

By Mustang Bobby

Charlie Pierce explains that while the Paul Ryan exercise in repetitive motion syndrome for budgets is getting all the attention, there’s actually another plan that makes more sense and actually works. Which means it has no chance whatsoever of getting debated, much less passed.

There’s a lot of buzz at and around the Cool Kidz table today because, glorioski, there’s actually another budget proposal out there, the one put together by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and it not only seems to make more sense to more people than, for example, Paul Ryan’s exercise in Magical Unicorn Math, or even than the principles underlying the president’s proposal, which seem to be that, before we act on it, we should carefully check the Magical Unicorn’s work before appointing the unicorn to the Council Of Economic Advisers. Moreover, that budget is certainly more consonant not only with the blog’s First Law Of Economics — Fk The Deficit. People Got No Jobs. People Got No Money — but also with the results of the latest Gallup Poll, the sub-themes of which latter is, quite clearly, “Why In Hell Are We Listening To Joe Scarborough On This Stuff Anyway?”

That’s 77 percent of the respondents who want some sort of WPA 2.0 to make sure the bridges don’t fall down while we’re driving to work. That’s 75 percent who want a federal jobs creation program. These two numbers include, respectively, 63 percent and 56 percent of Republican respondents. You could poll Paul Ryan’s immediately family and not get these numbers. Neither Mr. Simpson nor Mr. Bowles could score this well on Christmas morning with the grandkids. You could ask Americans the question, “Would you favor immediate federal action that would provide you with unlimited whiskey and the sexual favors of your favorite movie stars?” and come close. Maybe. Does the House progressive budget, which proposes programs that track these numbers, have a chance in hell of passing? Of course not. It’s barely in the conversation.

The main reason it’s barely in the conversation is because the plan bears the unfortunate label of “progressive.” That immediately dooms it among the Villagers because as we all know, progressives never win elections or the White House. The only people who are serious about reducing the deficit and not blowing all sorts of money on wasted efforts like schools, roads, and bridges in America are conservatives. After all, look at all the money we spent on stuff like that in Iraq and where did it get us?

(Cross-posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

The GOP is losing the culture war

By Richard K. Barry

It is sometimes hard to understand where the GOP thinks it stands these days. On the one hand, they put out a 100 page document explaining how they screwed up in 2012 and what needs to change. On the other hand, they seem to think they were right on the facts but were unable to press the right emotional buttons to get the electorate to come along.

This is how Reince Preibus, RNC Chair, put it:

We're not losing the issues on the math. We're not losing the issues on spending, and debt, and jobs, and the economy. Those are total winners for us.

What we found in the election is that while we're winning those arguments on spending and math, we're losing this sort of emotional, cultural vote out there in presidential elections.

What I find so richly ironic is that it was the Republicans who cared not at all for facts in 2012, but rather ran their entire campaign on emotional appeals to the darker side of human nature, whether racism, xenophobia, sexism, homophobia, fear of the less well-off, or just a generalized fear of the other.

Republicans lost because Americans saw through their sad attempt at emotional manipulation. The man with the odd name is right about one thing: The GOP is losing the emotional, cultural battle. Damn good thing, too.

 

Harry Reid can't fool me twice

By Frank Moraes

Yesterday, Talking Points Memo reported that Harry Reid is upset about the state of the filibuster. He reportedly said, "These two young, fine senators said it was time to change the rules of the Senate, and we didn't. And they were right. The rest of us were wrong—or most of us, anyway. What a shame… If there were anything that ever needed changing in this body, it's the filibuster rule, because it's been abused, abused and abused."

Oh wait! Reid said that early last year. This year, Reid is whining about the stopgap budget deal that is being delayed for no good reason by the filibuster. To this, Reid said, "It is things like that that will cause the Senate to have to reassess all the rules because right now they accomplish so little. I'm disappointed."

How can this be?! Reid and Mitch McConnell shook hands about this! Could it be that Harry Reid was fooled? You know what they say: "Fool me once with a handshake deal, shame on you; Fool me twice with a handshake deal, the Majority leader in the Senate is an idiot."

In all seriousness, I don't see what Reid gets out of his repeated threats to "reassess." Unlike Hary Reid himself, we liberals don't get fooled a second time. He should just keep repeating, "I'm not personally, at this stage, ready to get rid of the 60-vote threshold." If he says that three times, he gets a pony.

(Cross-posted at Frankly Curious.)

We are all Keynesians now

By Richard K. Barry

Conservative economist Milton Friedman said it first, though Richard Nixon, who actually said in 1971 "I am now a Keynesian in economics," is often credited with the comment.

No matter. It seem like an awful lot of Americans think the government should be more heavily involved in job creation programs as the economy struggles to get back on its feet, according to a new Gallup poll.

Americans widely support each of three job creation proposals, including offering tax breaks to businesses that create jobs in the U.S. and a program that would put people to work on urgent infrastructure repair projects. Support for these programs is only slightly lower in a variant of the question that asks respondents if they are in favor of spending government money to pay for the programs.

The key finding is that 72% support federal spending "to put people to work on urgent infrastructure repairs." And 72% support a "federal jobs creation law that would spend government money for a program designed to create more than 1 million new jobs."

A.M. Headlines

(The Hill): "House rejects budget from Senate Democrats"

(New York Times): "Resistance sealed fate of effort for assault weapons ban"

(Salon): "Michele Bachmann runs from reporter"

(Jerusalem Post): "Obama: Israel, US in agreement on Iranian issues"

(Businessweek): "Cyprus seeks new funding plan as bank closure extended"

P.M. Headlines

(Reuters): "Senate approves funding bill to avert government shutdown"

(Ezra Klein): "Mistakes, excuses and painful lessons from the Iraq war"

(Reuters): "Colorado prison chief shot dead on eve of gun law signing"

(Washington Post): "7 Democratic senators push to maintain visas for family members"

(The Hill): "Biden still pushing for assault weapons ban"

Why can't those Republicans just get along?

By Richard K. Barry

You may have noticed that there is an awful lot of sniping going on in the GOP these days. Maybe it was just more obvious last week coming out of the CPAC convention, which prompted the radical right and so-called establishment Republicans to say unpleasant things about each other at a furious clip.

Now we hear that former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele has called current RNC Chairman Reince Preibus 'numb nuts.' Really. He called him 'numb nuts.'

 And then someone decided it would be a good idea to ask Steele which of the two would prevail in a cage fight. Steele, without the sense to leave the query alone, said, "Oh, no question, I would clean his clock. Just one knock on the head. It's done."

 Someone needs a time out. In fact, I think an entire political party might need one.

Assaulted nuts

By Carl

What the hell is Harry Reid thinking?

Reid insisted yesterday that all of these measures deserved a vote -- but that including some of them in the main legislative package brought to the Senate floor would sink the entire effort. The main bill that Reid will introduce will have to get at least 60 votes to get past a GOP-led filibuster, he explained. So by starting with a pared-down bill, Reid said he could at least get a gun control measure on the Senate floor. At that point, the assault weapons ban and other less popular measures could be voted on as amendments.

Now, if you’re telling me that this is a maneuver to avoid a filibuster on gun control legislation and the intent is, once past the blockade, amendments (which only need a simple majority to be included) can be added, then hey, that’s OK. The Dems have more than a simple majority and can easily tack on any number of amendments.

But here’s the thing: this is important legislation, and Harry Reid ought to acknowledge the symbolic importance of having a comprehensive bill come to the floor for passage. He ought to challenge the Republicans, Inc. to stand up and make speeches why they support wholesale slaughter of schoolchildren. 

Read more »

Assault weapons ban banned

By Mustang Bobby

This is, to say the least, not a good thing.

After a meeting with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Monday, a frustrated Feinstein said she learned that the bill she sponsored — which bans 157 different models of assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines — wouldn’t be part of a Democratic gun bill to be offered on the Senate floor. Instead, it can be offered as an amendment. But its exclusion from the package makes what was already an uphill battle an almost certain defeat.

This is probably based on the theory that the NRA is too big to fail and that something like Newtown will never happen again anyway. Such is what passes for common sense conventional wisdom.

(Cross-posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

Polling the Florida governor's race

By Richard K. Barry

A new survey by Public Policy Polling finds that Charlie Crist (D) leads Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) by 12 points in a possible 2014 head-to-head match-up.

Rick Scott's approval numbers have seen no improvement over the last two months, even after his decision to allow Medicaid expansion in Florida. 33% of voters continue to approve of the job he's doing to 57% who disapprove. Although his overall numbers are the same he has seen a slight improvement with Democrats (from 21/71 to 23/69) and a slight downgrade with Republicans (from 49/38 to 46/42). 

Scott continues to trail Charlie Crist by double digits in a hypothetical match up, 52/40. That's just a slight improvement for him from January when he was down 53/39. Crist, who still has a 28% favorability rating with Republicans, wins over 29% of the Republican vote and also has a narrow lead with independents at 47/41. Crist still isn't as popular as he used to be- a 46/43 favorability rating- but that's good enough against the backdrop of Scott's unpopularity to give him a pretty substantial early advantage.

PPP's analysis draws attention to the obvious, which is that 2014 is a long way off, though they admit that Scott's path to reelection is still pretty dicey. 

It would be sweet to get rid of him.

Conservatives never learn

By Frank Moraes

This morning, Paul Krugman wrote another article trying to understand why conservatives and moderates who are shown to be wrong time and again never reflect that maybe "all the people they know" just don't know very much. The specific target is John Hinderaker at Powerline Blog. Yesterday, he was channeling Chicken Little over an immanent economic crisis. Krugman disagrees of course, but also points back to 2005 when Hinderaker mocked Krugman for saying there was a housing bubble.

I went over and looked at that article, That Hissing Sound Is Krugman. In the article, he doesn't argue against Krugman. He just claims that Krugman is not making an argument—or at least that he doesn't understand it. This is odd, because the argument for the housing bubble was pretty simple: home prices have always risen at the rate of inflation; at that time, home prices were rising substantially faster than inflation. There was no underlying reason for prices to rise so fast other than that there was a bubble.


Read more »

Rep. Paul Ryan flames out

By Richard K. Barry

Yeah. This goof.

What's up with Rep. Paul Ryan's popularity? A new Rasumussen poll finds that just 35% of all likely U.S. voters view Ryan favourably, which is down 15 points from his 50% favourability rating last August just after Mitt Romney picked him as his running mate.

Fifty-four percent (54%) have an unfavorable opinion of the Wisconsin congressman. These figures include 17% with a Very Favorable view of him and 23% with a Very Unfavorable one. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.

So, what happened?

Two things: The stench of defeat rarely helps anyone's popularity, and then there's this, as noted by The Week:

In his new budget outline unveiled last week, Ryan once again put forward the policies he championed in the 2012 election: Lower tax rates across the board and cuts to programs aimed at the poor. Those policies did not sit well with voters last year, and they're not getting any more popular. Even the Republican National Committee conceded that point, saying the GOP had to change its ways because voters considered the party's positions "scary" and "out of touch."

Democrats were supposed to be oh-so-scared of this very serious Republican thinker after he was chosen by Romney to share the ticket. I didn't buy it then, and I don't buy it now. Paul Ryan's ideas suck and the American people get that. 

That's what's happened. 

A.M. Headlines

(Fox News): "Obama in Israel faces daunting hurdles, from personal tensions to political shift"

(The Hill): "Reid guts Senate gun control bill"

(Politico): "Clinton courts alternative to Judd"

(Washington Post): "Fed likely to hold steady on stimulus, rates"

(Reuters): "Pope Francis makes good first impression on U.S. Catholics: Poll"

A warmongering disaster, a decade later

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Andrew Kaczynski (@BuzzFeedAndrew) tweeted at 9:34 PM on Tue, Mar 19, 2013:

Ten years ago this minute, the first airstrike hit Baghdad at 9:34 p.m. EST and the Iraq War began.

And now, a decade later, there's peace and harmony in the Middle East, and Iraq is once more a paradise of biblical proportions.

Mission fucking accomplished.

Thanks George and Dick, Colin and Condi, Donald and Paul, and the rest of you imperialistic freedom champions!

P.M. Headlines

(Washington Post): "Assault weapons ban dropped from gun bill"

(MSNBC): "A multitude of budgets, a shortage of agreement"

(Roll Call): "Is the House in play? A district-by-district assessment"

(Public Policy Polling): "Scott trials Crist by 12 points"

(Globe and Mail): "Obama looking to make friends with Israel visit"

(NBC News): "7 Marines killed in explosion during training exercise at Army depot in Nevada"

Ten years later

By Mustang Bobby

This week marks the tenth anniversary of the start of the invasion of Iraq.

We know now, as a lot of us suspected then, that it was predicated on lies, misinformation, and goading by a president and supposed allies who knew full well that there were no WMD’s in Iraq. It was all payback and playtime for the neocons who couldn’t bear the fact that even though Saddam Hussein had nothing whatsoever to do with the September 11, 2001 attacks, he was still in power: the one dictator in the world out of so many that we couldn’t leave in place.

So for that we have destroyed countless lives, changed the world’s balance of power, enabled more terrorists, and put our nation on a permanent path of fear, loathing, and exploitation. And what have we gained? Nothing.

No war has ever brought true peace. It only leads to a change in the pieces on the chessboard, which leads to the next war, and the next, and the next after that. The only way to stop the cycle is to never start it in the first place.

Peace out.

(Cross-posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

You know you need to change when Rush thinks you don't

By Richard K. Barry

You know you need to change when Rush Limbuagh thinks you shouldn't change, but continue on in the same way, only more so. Put a different way, Rush is fully contemptuous of the recent RNC report that calls for the party to modernize. Instead, he thinks the GOP is not conservative enough.

According to Limbaugh:

The Republican Party lost because it's not conservative, it didn't get it's base out. People say they need to modernize their tone. They don't.

Just after the election, he said that Republicans "didn't lose because of demographics. 3 million of their voters stayed home."

I suppose the point is that if the GOP had been more conservative, more of their base would have been motivated to turn out.

The problem with a statement like this, even if there were a smidgen of truth to it,  is that if they really had been any more conservative they might have motivated even more African-Americans, and Hispanics, and women, and younger voters to show up on Election Day to defeat them.

Good thinking, Rush.

Because you really want to know...

By Richard K. Barry

USA Today is reporting that there appear to be two finalists for the location of President Obama's library: Chicago and Hawaii. They say universities and community groups in both places are hard at work lobbying the president's people for the honour, one sure to be an economic and cultural boost for whichever is chosen.

For his part, Obama is tight-lipped about which way he is leaning, saying that 'it is a tough choice, but it's not one that I've made yet."

According to an Associated Press story:

Advocates for placing the library in Chicago speak of Obama's coming of age as a community organizer there and his service in the Illinois Senate and as the state's U.S. senator. They say a presidential library on the city's South Side could revitalize the community and be a force for economic growth. ...

The emerging consensus in Honolulu is that the state university is best prepared to house the library. But there's no such sense of agreement in Chicago, where a host of groups are publicly stumping on behalf of other sites on Chicago's South Side, where Michelle Obama grew up, voters first sent Barack Obama to public office and the Obama family has their home.

Yeah, I'm putting my money on Chicago, simply on the basis that it would be easier to visit, though Hawaii would be lovely.  

Nauseating development

By Carl

Folks outside of New York – hell, folks outside of Queens – are probably not aware of the Flushing Meadow Park, except in snippets they’ve seen on the TeeVee during the US Open or perhaps NY Mets baseball games. It is the largest park in Queens, spanning nearly 1,300 acres, and is bordered by three highways. It was the site of the 1939 and 1964-65 World’s Fairs, and is most famous for the Unisphere (featured in more movies located in New York City than you can shake a stick at), a Cold War relic that celebrated the first Mercury flight to circle the globe.

It’s also flat. And open. This is one big reason it was used for the World’s Fairs: walking (as well as running and bike riding) is really easy. Now that most of the structures have been demolished, the park serves as one gigantic playground for the working and middle classes. On a weekend in good weather, you can find marathoners and cricketers, soccer games and football games, pitch and putt golfers and cyclists. There are a few trees, many bushes, and precious little landscaping because there’s no Flushing Meadow Park Conservancy the way Central Park has. This is a park built on what F. Scott Fitzgerald called a “valley of ashes,” so its enjoyment by hoi polloi is a perfect complement to that legacy.

There’s a public aquatic and skating center, a museum, a small zoo featuring North American animals, a small farm – seriously! -- a boat rental at Meadow Lake, as well as a theatre that hosts many local and ethnic theatre organizations. In short, it’s pretty much a people’s park, right smack in the center of a working class neighborhood in a working class borough.

From the end of Meadow Lake are clear sight lines all the way to the other end of the park, including Citifeld and the Arthur Ashe Stadium in the Billie Jean Tennis Complex.

You know, rich people territory. And it’s those rich people who want to ruin the park:

Read more »

Republicans blind to racism

By Frank Moraes

There was a racist dust up at CPAC on Friday during a K. Carl Smith session sponsored by the Tea Party Patriots on how to get African Americans to vote Republican. Smith's talk was filled with divisive and irrelevant lines like, "I'm not going to join the KKK. The Democratic Party founded the KKK." During the question period, Voice of Russia radio host Kim Brown apparently asked how many black women were at CPAC and the whole session went off the rails.

She was shouted down and told she wasn't wanted there. But then a young white supremacist spoke. He said that all this outreach to blacks was just going to alienate young white males. Smith responded with what I think is a non sequitur about how Frederick Douglass forgave his slavemaster. The young man replied, "For giving him shelter? And food?" At that point the session exploded.

Benjy Sarlin reported all of this for Talking Points Memo. After the whole thing was over, he talked to a number of people who had been at the event. And they were all angry. But not at the white supremacist. They were angry at the young black woman, Kim Brown. The session speaker Smith later released a statement saying Brown "rudely interrupted" him. But all he could say of the white supremacist was that he made a "racially insensitive" comment but that they "left as friends."

Read more »

Still think Hillary Clinton isn't running in 2016?

By Richard K. Barry

On Monday,  former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton endorsed gay marriage in a video, saying that she supports it "personally, and as a matter of policy and law.”

According to Politico:

Clinton’s endorsement was expected after her husband, Bill, and daughter, Chelsea, endorsed same-sex marriage while Hillary Clinton was serving in President Barack Obama’s Cabinet. When she was campaigning for president in 2008, Clinton had opposed gay marriage and backed civil unions instead. Since then, support for gay marriage has become a cornerstone of the Democratic Party.

Given that the position is quickly becoming Democratic orthodoxy, is there any other reason to make such a public declaration other than as a necessary step in her march to the White House in 2016?

I doubt it.

Here's the nearly six minute statement.

A.M. Headlines

(Associated Press): "Immigration: Rand Paul to back path to citizenship"

(Global Post): "Florida university student had planned wider attack prior to suicide"

(Voice of America): "Attacks kill 50 in Iraq"

(Reuters): "US contractor charged with passing nuclear secrets to Chinese woman"

(New York Times): "Last-minute bailout for Cyprus shows Europe's woes"

P.M. Headlines

(NECN):  "Republicans critical of own party in report"

(Fox News Latino): Arizona's voter registration law takes heat at Supreme Court"

(ABC News): "Poll tracks dramatic rise in support for gay marriage"

(Politico): "Hillary Clinton announces her support for gay marriage"

(New York Times): "Resistance in Cyprus grows in Europe's bailout plan"

This is America. This ain't no stinkin' utopia.

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) tweeted at 5:26 PM on Mon, Mar 18, 2013:

Demand a budget that makes sure that the wealthiest Americans and most profitable corporations pay their fair share. (link to petition)

A good and noble cause, and I'm all for it, but it's also an uphill battle given the power of the plutocracy over both major political parties and the media, as well as throughout the national mythology.

You might as well demand that the country interact with the rest of the world with something other than a hegemonic bludgeon, or that the powers that be give a damn about the poor and disenfranchised, or that "the people" not be armed to the teeth in preparation for armageddon, or that the Republican Party embrace science, or that the Miami Heat lose a basketball game.

In any other advanced, civilized democracy, Bernie Sanders would be a mainstream voice of justice and reason. In America, he's a "radical." That alone should fill you with despair.

Keep them laughing, Sarah - all the way to another round of losses

By Richard K. Barry

I will admit that once upon a time I was foolish enough to take Sarah Palin's comments seriously. I shouldn't have. No one should have. But there she was getting all this press coverage and many of us were paying attention. 

We figured it out. We stopped caring. But it is somewhat embarrassing to admit to how may keystrokes were devoted to this little Alaskan twit. 

Now I just find her funny, in an extremely pathetic, headshaking kind of way. For example, in her CPAC address last week she said this:

More background checks? Dandy idea, Mr. President. Should've started with yours.

Very clever. 

She's obviously talking about President Obama's gun control proposal, which calls for background checks for gun purchasers. She might want to note that a Quinnipiac University poll conducted Feb. 27 to March 4 found that 88 percent of respondents, including 83 percent of Republicans, favor background checks for all gun buyers. But that would require living in the world of facts, a place she has never even visited. 

Her short snarky comment was no doubt what she would have considered a two-fer. Not only is it an idiotic criticism of a view held by the vast majority of Americans, but it is a continuation of the Breitbartian meme that President Obama has still not been properly vetted. Two elections latter and these fools continue on with the same nonsense.

The only thing that makes Sarah Palin interesting is the extent to which a subset of the Republican Party takes her seriously, and the extent to which this very poorly informed, breathtakingly irrational, but impassioned, subset can influence primaries and therefore candidate choice. 

It's a numbers game that the GOP insists on losing. 

Novel solutions

By Carl

Cypress, much like its neighbor Greece, is in a financial bind. Looking for a 10€ billion bailout package, it needs to show that it is taking steps necessary to balance its budget.

Now, you can go the austerity route, but indicators show that austerity is precisely the wrong message to send the markets these days: Euro Union countries who have tried that have ended up in deeper economic trouble than those who have managed to avoid trouble at all. So the alternative is to raise tax revenue somehow.

Income tax revenue raises would help, of course, but what if a country was to tax money that is taken out of the economy?

NICOSIA, Cyprus—Cyprus put off for another day a debate on a controversial bank deposit levy in the country's parliament—a precondition to receiving a €10 billion bailout—even as it proposed a new plan to ease the burden of that tax on small savers in a bid to win votes for the measure.

Read more »

Voter fraud

By Mustang Bobby

At the just-concluded CPAC festival, Rand Paul won the straw poll for president in 2016. If history is any guide, it’s not exactly a reliable barometer of what’s going to come to pass: if so, we’d have seen the last presidential election between Barack Obama and Michele Bachmann.

And besides, according to Right Wing Watch, there was active advocacy on the part of the folks at CPAC to commit voter fraud in the straw poll by using fake ID’s and casting multiple votes because “we need to make sure that people understand the conservative message and where we want to take this movement in the future.”

There’s fulsome irony in the fact that it takes cheating and fraud to get the people to understand the conservative movement and where they want to take the movement in the future.

(Cross-posted at  Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

We call them Republicans

By Frankly Curious

On Friday night's Real Time with Bill Maher, they did a segment with image confessions. It was pretty funny. You can find the segment over on WhoSay. But I thought this one was good enough to share.

I think that's pretty accurate. It isn't that I think Romney hates everyone. I think just like Rob Portman and most other conservatives, he doesn't give a shit about anyone but his intimate circle. Certainly it is true that Mitt Romney is the kind of guy who can't imagine what it's like to starve to death without actually seeing it happen.

This was also true of Ronald Reagan. If he heard about some kid dying of cancer, he'd write a check for fifty grand. But when it came to providing healthcare for poor children, he didn't really see the problem. Or you can think of the Woody Harrelson character in Seven Psychopaths who weeps over his dog but has no trouble murdering people for the smallest of indiscretions.

When they are in a movie, we call them psychopaths. When they are running for office, we call them Republicans.

(Cross-posted at Frankly Curious.)

The white party

By Mustang Bobby

One last note about the CPAC gathering this past weekend: there was a session that was labeled — I’m not making this up — “Trump The Race Card: Are You Sick And Tired Of Being Called A Racist When You Know You’re Not One?” (Answer: if people call you a racist, you probably are.)

It got a little out of hand when a couple of white guys got their tails all puffed up about conservative African-Americans calling themselves “Frederick Douglass Republicans,” condemning slavery, and blaming it on the Democrats.

Scott Terry of North Carolina, accompanied by a Confederate-flag-clad attendee, Matthew Heimbach, rose to say he took offense to the event’s take on slavery. (Heimbach founded the White Students Union at Towson University and is described as a “white nationalist” by the Southern Poverty Law Center.)

“It seems to be that you’re reaching out to voters at the expense of young white Southern males,” Terry said, adding he “came to love my people and culture” who were “being systematically disenfranchised.”

Smith responded that Douglass forgave his slavemaster.

“For giving him shelter? And food?” Terry said.

At this point the event devolved into a mess of shouting. Organizers calmed things down by asking everyone to “take the debate outside after the presentation.”

I’m shocked, shocked to see racism going on at a Tea Party panel on racism.

(Cross-posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof.)