A.M. Headlines

(Toronto Star): "Supreme Court of Canada strikes down federal prostitution laws"

(National Journal): "Congress has lowest output since 1947"

(Washington Post): "Obama promises review of NSA spying program, possible reforms"

(The Salt Lake Tribune): "Federal judge strikes down Utah ban on same-sex marriage"

(Jonathan Chait): "Barack Obama is not George W. Bush"

Craziest Republican of the Day: Ian Bayne (for comparing Phil Robertson to Rosa Parks)

By Michael J.W. Stickings 

Yes, seriously.

This idiot, who's running for the Republican nomination in Illinois's 11th Congressional District, said that Duck Dynasty's bigot-patriarch Phil Robertson is just like Rosa Parks:

Today, Ian Bayne called Phil Robertson, star of the A&E series "Duck Dynasty," the 'Rosa Parks' of our generation.

"In December 1955, Rosa Parks took a stand against an unjust societal persecution of black people, and in December 2013, Robertson took a stand against persecution of Christians," said Bayne.

"What Parks did was courageous," said Bayne. "What Mr. Robertson did was courageous too."

Right, because Christians today are facing totally the same situation that blacks were in the '50s. I mean, Christians can't vote, can't drink at non-Christians' water fountains, and face discrimination pretty much in every aspect of society. Plus, there are those anti-Christian lynch mobs roaming the countryside and terrorizing everyone, setting churches on fire and basically making sure that poor Christians live in abject fear every moment of their lives.

I mean, totally.

Except that, you know, Rosa Parks was fighting against bigotry and discrimination whereas Phil Robertson was identifying Christianity with bigotry and discrimination.

And of course Robertson didn't just say bigoted things about gays, he also said incredibly ignorant things about how blacks were supposedly all happy in pre-civil rights Louisiana, because apparently institutionalized bigotry and discrimination is some sort of panacea for him.

Obviously, Ian Bayne is too fucking stupid, his head stuck firmly up his right-wing ass, to get the point. 

Read more »

Vimeo of the Day: "In New England – Fall 2013"

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Here's a beautiful and poignant video that I especially like as a former resident of the great region of New England. Here's how its director, Vincent Urban, describes it:

This October, we did a hiking and leaf peeping trip through beautiful New England (Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut) for just 12 days. It was right at the same time as the US government shutdown which turned out to be a rather odd experience. This is a collection of moments and thoughts.

It is also a reminder of the importance of the preservation of nature, and remember too that it was the Republicans who shut down the government, including national parks.

Enjoy.

In New England - Fall 2013 from Vincent Urban on Vimeo.

On the Hustings

(The Hill): "Messina rejects holding Baucus's Senate seat"

(Washington Post): "What Max Baucus’s departure means for the Montana Senate race"

(WMUR): "Statement from Scott Brown on move to NH"

(Human Events): "Mississippi toss-up: Cochran v. McDaniel tied at 40%"

(Washington Post): "The 2012 election — by pay"

The Duck Dynasty bigots and the conservatives who love them

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Bible-thumping bigot.

Hey, here's a thought, A&E, if you don't want to be associated with bigotry, stop giving reality shows to, you know, fucking redneck bigots like the Duck Dynasty clan. I mean, what the fuck did you think was going to happen?

And, really, all these bigots are doing is doubling down on their bigotry:

The family has spent much time in prayer since learning of A&E's decision. We want you to know that first and foremost we are a family rooted in our faith in God and our belief that the Bible is His word. While some of Phil's unfiltered comments to the reporter were coarse, his beliefs are grounded in the teachings of the Bible. Phil is a Godly man who follows what the Bible says are the greatest commandments: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart" and "Love your neighbor as yourself." Phil would never incite or encourage hate.We are disappointed that Phil has been placed on hiatus for expressing his faith, which is his constitutionally protected right.

It is, yes, but it's not a constitutional right to have a TV show, and A&E is under no constitutional obligation to keep these bigots on the air.

And if Phil Robertson was just "expressing his faith," then his faith teaches bigotry, which apparently his version of fundamentalist Christianity does. And if really loves his neighbor as himself, why would he then compare homosexuality to bestiality and say that gays and others who supposedly sin "won't inherit the Kingdom of God." It seems Phil likes the hateful parts of the Bible, of which there are many, not to mention of his "faith" generally, and filters the rest of it through an ideology of bigotry and hate. His family can spin it however it wants, but that spin is bullshit.

Read more »

A.M. Headlines

(Reuters): "Yellen expected to win Senate test vote on Friday to head Fed"

(Washington Post): "Officials’ defenses of NSA phone program may be unraveling"

(The Hill): "Senate hatches last-minute deal"

(USA Today): "Target confirms massive credit-card data breach"

(New York Times): "Secure in power, Putin frees rival, a jailed oil tycoon"

P.M. Headlines

(The Hollywood Reporter): "'Duck Dynasty' controversy: Conservatives leap to Phil Robertson's defense"

(Daily Beast): "The right’s ‘Duck Dynasty’ hypocrisy"

(New York Times): "New Mexico is 17th state to allow gay marriage"

(NBC News): "Radel says no plans to resign after cocaine bust"

(New York Times): "Obama commutes sentences for 8 in crack cocaine cases"

Imma guess the Olympics has claimed another victory

By Carl

Now if we can only get Putin to change his mind about teh gheys:

MOSCOW (AP) — Russia's parliament on Wednesday passed an amnesty bill that will likely apply to the 30-member crew of a Greenpeace ship detained after an Arctic protest, but it wasn't immediately clear if and when the activists would be allowed to leave the country.

The amnesty, which also would likely free the two jailed members of the Pussy Riot punk band, has been largely viewed as the Kremlin's attempt to soothe criticism of Russia's human rights records ahead of the Winter Olympics in Sochi in February. But opposition lawmakers argued it doesn't go nearly far enough and the complicated legislation appeared to leave many questions open.

The State Duma on Wednesday voted 446-0 in favor of the carefully tailored bill, which mostly applies to those who haven't committed violent crimes, first-time offenders, minors and women with small children. Lawmakers said they expect about 2,000 people to be released from jail.

I think it’s fair to speculate that Putin is trying to inoculate his administration ahead of the Winter Olympics in Sochi next year, as those tend to be a focus on the host nation’s politics, and to deflect some of the ugliness over not only the atrocious human rights record with respect to the LGBT community, but his slap in the face at America by allowing Edward Snowden asylum.

Of course, with Putin, there’s always another level to go to before you get the complete story:

Russian President Vladimir Putin's decision to provide Ukraine with more than $15 billion in aid is much more than a show of support for embattled Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. It is a political masterstroke that undermines the Ukrainian opposition and gives Russia more control over its neighbor than ever before.

And of course, all this happened ahead of the US announcement of their Sochi delegation. I like Obama’s strategy here: if he went or he sent an administration official, it would signal to the world that we don’t take Russia’s oppression seriously. By sending an undeniably world-famous pair of athletes in Billy Jean King – openly gay—and gold medal figure skater Brian Boitano – well, there are rumours… -- along with Caitlin Cahow and Janet Napolitano, we send a diverse and important team of representatives and while it’s a distinct snub, it’s hard to argue that Obama or Biden should go.

It’s sad that politics and sport have to commingle in this fashion, but it’s hard to segregate sports from politics in any circumstance but particularly when it comes to American Exceptionalism.

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

A&E downs the ducks

By Capt. Fogg 

I didn't know who Phil Robertson was until just the other day when I stumbled upon A&E's Duck Dynasty and watched a bit before moving on. I had never watched the show, despite it's immense popularity, despite my fondness for shows about people who live in swamps, tiny towns and remote places -- People who hunt alligators, catch crawfish and run bait shops in towns like Pierre Part (the end of the world as the sign says) or Bayou Pigeon -- their cuisine, their music and culture, so quickly fading in an urbanizing country that still, as it always has, is forcing people into a cash economy, into paying jobs with regular hours while their environment - our country- is cut down, paved over and polluted.

In general I'm comfortable with people who love the 'outdoors,' that odd term we call the actual environment of planet Earth -- people who own fishing gear, snake boots, snowshoes, canoes and all that and still prize the ability to use them in unspoiled country. That's partially because such people are environmentalists although most will carefully explain that "they ain't no treehuggers or hippies."

That love of nature often sets them against entities like Florida's sugar cartel which has done more damage to our formerly vast wilderness than any terrorist could dream of, so you'd think that the rapacious right would despise anyone who didn't support fracking, strip mining, clear-cutting, toxic waste dumping, smoke belching and generally destructive industry, and perhaps you'd expect to hear the voice of the Right raised against such folks, but no. The American Family Association is calling him a New American Hero. now that the network has suspended the release of next season's show.

Read more »

On the Hustings

(Wall Street Journal): "Republican Obenshain concedes virginia AG race"

(ABC News): "Hillary Clinton on 2016 presidential run: I'll 'make that decision sometime next year'"

(Politico): "Wyoming Senate race 2014: Liz Cheney husband Phil Perry on vote rolls in 2 states"

(Roll Call): "Mia Love is clear front-runner for Matheson seat"

(ABC News): "New Hampshire campaign begins without Scott Brown"

New documentary confirms Mitt Romney lost 2008 election, never became president

By Michael J.W. Stickings

I've never liked Mitt Romney. Well, he was okay back when he was a "moderate," back when he was Massachusetts governor, back before he decided he needed to give the far right a massive bear hug in his quest for the presidency, at least if you ignore the cruelty he inflicted while heading up Bain, but 2012 pretty much confirmed that he was, as I kept calling him, from as early as January, a privileged rich douchebag with a plutocratic sense of entitlement, the champion of the rich against the people -- and especially against the "47 percent."

But you know what? Through all that, and despite all that, he's always seemed like a fairly likeable guy. He's a plutocrat, to be sure, but all that right-wing nonsense on social and foreign policy made sense as a shameless appeal to the Republican Party's right-wing mainstream, to both the grassroots base and the movement conservatives whose support he would need to secure the nomination. No, I don't excuse him for embracing the far right, but it was always pretty clear that deep down he wasn't terribly comfortable contorting himself so shamelessly, whatever the political necessity of doing so.

In any event, he is what he is and he's largely gone from the political scene, and so it's both hard and pointless to keep up any level of vitriol against him. There's still a lot I don't like, and he's still -- and will always be -- a privileged rich douchebag, but... whatever. And yet... he is back, sort of. There's a new Netflix documentary, MITT, premiering on January 24, that looks at Romney's two White House runs, in 2008 and 2012 -- the filmmakers followed him on his campaigns for six years. Stunningly, it includes the very moment Romney realized he lost the 2008 election (among many other private and personal moments). Yes, he deserved to lose, and yes, he should have known it was coming, but one can't help but be touched by the intimate sadness of the moment. This was a man who had committed so much of his life to his quest for the presidency, and he had come so far, and so close (if not all that close, actually), and then it was over, just like that.

Anyway, it looks like an interesting film, an intimate portrait of a man who, whatever his privileges, almost made it to the very top but who, throughout, seemed to have traded in his soul, who stopped being human, in a do-whatever-it-takes effort to realize his ultimate political goal. Even if you don't like him, even if you object to everything he is and stands for -- and I object to a lot of it -- you have to admit that there's something tragic about that, and you can see it on his face when defeat finally hits him.

Here's the trailer:

A.M. Headlines

 

(Fox News): "Baucus to be named ambassador to China, officials say"

(New York Times): "Baucus, conflicted architect of health overhaul, is Obama’s pick for China"

(Washington Post): "Panel urges new curbs on surveillance by U.S."

(Gallup Poll): "Record high in U.S. say big government greatest threat"

(Roll Call): "Reid wants 8 more years as Senate leader"

Fox News joins Obama-led War on Christmas

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Even the home of right-wing unfairness and imbalance couldn't resist the compelling allure of liberal secularism.

Welcome to the 21st century, morons...

The Idiot O'Reilly can protest all he likes. He and his "folk" are on the wrong side of history, just like they're on the wrong side of everything else.

Remembering when Ronald Reagan embraced Apartheid South Africa

By Marc McDonald 

After many years of struggle, the evil system of apartheid in South Africa came to an end in the early 1990s, thanks to the brave efforts of Nelson Mandela.

But apartheid's end arrived with absolutely no thanks to Ronald Reagan, a man who embraced the racist apartheid regime.

In 1986, during the growing struggle against apartheid, Reagan used the words "immoral" and "utterly repugnant." 

Unfortunately, Reagan wasn't talking about apartheid. Instead, he was using those words to describe his views on the Anti-Apartheid Act, a proposed law that called for imposing sanctions against South Africa.

Reagan's position was too extreme, even for his fellow Republicans. Reagan's veto of the Anti-Apartheid Act was overridden by the GOP-controlled Senate in October 1986.

The Gipper's position really shouldn't have been surprising. After all, throughout the 1980s, the Reagan administration maintained close ties to the South African government. Reagan even demonized foes of apartheid, such as the African National Congress, as "dangerous and pro-communist."

It's no wonder that 1984 Nobel Peace Prize laureate Desmond Tutu called Reagan's policy "immoral, evil and totally un-Christian" during a visit to the United States.

Read more »

On the Hustings

(Roll Call): "Bradley Byrne wins Alabama special election for House"

(Roll Call): "Latham marks third House retirement in one day"

(The Hill): "Ryan won’t run for White House in 2016, his GOP colleagues say"

(Los Angeles Times): "Jerry Brown, urged to run for president, won't rule out 2016 bid

(Daily News): "Rangel will seek reelection, will announce plans this week"

Obamas escalate War on Christmas

Guest post by Ted Leibowitz 

Ed. note: Ted is good friends with our former associate editor and co-blogger Creature, and Ted often wrote for Creature's now-on-long-hiatus blog State of the Day. He's an occasional guest blogger here at The Reaction, and it's great to have him back after a long absence. -- MJWS 

Ted Leibowitz is an award-winning internet radio music director / DJ focused on bringing the best new and interesting indie rock to his worldwide listenership via his 10-year old station BAGeL Radio. He has been featured on panels at music/tech conferences and writes about the exciting new business of music as well as the foot-dragging, entrenched, dinosaur-like old music industry.

**********

The first thing that came to mind while watching the Christmas Tree lighting in D.C. the other night was how Fox News was going to spin the bit with Michelle and Abby Cadabby:

a) Obamas escalate their War On Christmas; or

b) Michelle Obama read her lines while the puppet had hers memorized.

Inquiring minds want to know.

David Brooks vomits up "Thought Leader" nonsense, gets ripped by Charles Pierce

By Michael J.W. Stickings

David Brooks's utterly ridiculous New York Times column from yesterday, "The Thought Leader," has justifiably been ridiculed by commentators far and wide. Consider just the opening paragraph, which sets the table for the sheer nonsense to come:

Little boys and girls in ancient Athens grew up wanting to be philosophers. In Renaissance Florence they dreamed of becoming Humanists. But now a new phrase and a new intellectual paragon has emerged to command our admiration: The Thought Leader. 

The first two sentences contain nothing in the way of truth, while the third is the sort of manufactured "straw man" sociology we've come to expect from Brooks. Like Patio Man before him, "The Thought Leader" is entirely a creation of Brooks's deformed imagination, and in fleshing out this non-existent creature who serves only as a punching bag for Brooks's supposedly brilliant observations, as he does with the rest of the column, all Brooks exposes is his ignorance and lack of self-awareness. Because, really, do American boys and girls really dream of becoming "thought leaders"? And what the fuck is a thought leader anyway? Certainly not the caricature on the receiving end of Brooks's criticism.

(By the way, the whole Patio Man thing at least was funny. There's nothing funny here. Nothing.)

Brooks fashions himself a perceptive observer of the American socio-economic landscape, which is also nonsense, and for the ultimate takedown of this atrocious piece, a work of sheer brilliance, you should turn to Charlie Pierce, who, as they say, nailed it.

Read more »

Leaving office, Mayor Bloomberg reminds that he is, in fact, a heartless billionaire douchebag

By Michael J.W. Stickings

In response to the eye-opening (and very sad and deeply troubling) New York Times series about an 11-year-old homeless girl, Dasani, "Invisible Child," Michael Bloomberg said this:

This kid was dealt a bad hand. I don't know quite why. That's just the way God works. Sometimes some of us are lucky and some of us are not.

He did say that he was proud of the work New York City has done to help the homeless (and that it's pretty much the best place on Earth if you're homeless, which is, oh, a bit of a stretch) and that "we're certainly going to continue to try to help the parents to achieve stability and independence," but his alternately back-patting and head-up-the-ass view of homelessness, and specifically of the plight of the homeless, including Dasani and her family, only reinforces the notion that he's completely out of touch with much of his city and pretty much clueless with respect to some pretty significant social and economic problems.

I suppose it's better that he attributed success and lack thereof to luck rather than, say, privilege or personal ability, but why bring "God" into it? Does his "God" really want Dasani to be homeless while he lives a life of extreme luxury?

Yeah, you're a very rich man, Mayor, but you can go fuck yourself.

A.M. Headlines

(New York Times): "Budget deal offers a reprieve from Washington paralysis"

(Politico): "The Reboot: Barack Obama’s at the lowest point of his presidency. Can John Podesta save him?"

(The American Prospect): "The year in preview: Obama's last stand"

(WisPolitics.com): "Walker says administration will evaluate eliminating income tax"

(CNN): "U.S. delegation to Russian Olympics includes gay athletes"

No, Ron Fournier, you punditocratic hack, Obama is not like Bush

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Today's primary example of punditocratic hackery comes from National Journal's odious Ron Fournier, who tries to make the case that Obama in his second term is basically Bush 2.0:

Claiming a mandate he never had, the newly reelected president foisted a bold agenda upon Congress and the public, then watched it collapse within months—a victim of scandal, cynical opponents, and his own hubris. One despairing adviser declared, "This is the end of the presidency."

That was George W. Bush in 2005. Or was it Barack Obama this past year? Reading Peter Baker's extraordinary account of the Bush-Cheney era, Days of Fire, I found a striking number of parallels between Bush's fifth year in office and the atrocious first 12 months of President Obama's second term.

My takeaway: Obama needs to shatter the cycle of dysfunction (his and history's) or risk leaving office like Bush, unpopular and relatively unaccomplished.

Fournier then proceeds to go through "nine analogues between Bush's 2005 and Obama's 2013. I'll leave you to read them on your own, if you haven't already. But be forewarned: You'll be wading into a stink-pool of bullshit.

Consider, for example, this gem:

First-term success haunted the second term. The increasingly unpopular Iraq war Was an issue in 2004, even after Saddam Hussein's capture, but Bush had managed to finesse it for reelection. Obama's white whale was the Affordable Care Act. In both cases, luck ran out after Election Day. The death toll rose in Iraq during Bush's fifth year. For Obama, the federal health insurance website didn't work, and millions of Americans lost their insurance policies despite his promises to the contrary.

Both presidents deceived the public about their signature policies, and their credibility crumbled. Insularity hurt both teams. Vice President Dick Cheney famously said the Iraq insurgency was in its "last throes." Obama and his advisers characterized catastrophic flaws with the ACA website as "glitches."

Nonsense. First, Obamacare is not, you know, the fucking Iraq War, which by Bush's second term was a full-on quagmire of bloodshed and devastation with no end in sight. The only problem with Obama's health-care reform has been the online rollout, which was indeed slowed down by glitches, which can be fixed (and have been or are being fixed), unlike, say a catastrophic and unwinnable war. Sure, some people have experienced some difficulties signing up, and some people are losing their (terrible) pre-ACA coverage. But how is that like the nightmare of chaos and death in Iraq?

Read more »

Red light, green light, 1, 2, 3...

By Carl 

So it seems that the historic bipartisan budget deal in the House last week – historic, in that it's been years since we didn't just pass a Continuing Resolution to fund the government – is falling on enough deaf ears in the Senate to be a problem:

The prospect that the budget would clear the cloture hurdle brightened Monday, when three GOP senators -- Orrin Hatch of Utah, Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss of Georgia -- announced that they would vote yes. A fourth, Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, expressed his support on Sunday. Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake of Arizona also said they would vote in favor of cloture last week.

But unlike in the House, where Speaker John Boehner aggressively battled conservative groups trying to kill the bill, GOP leaders in the Senate are signaling opposition, or at least resistance, to the package.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has not said which way he will vote Tuesday, but he is widely expected to oppose the measure. Similarly, Senate Minority Whip John Cornyn of Texas announced his opposition Monday morning on his campaign's website -- a step his Senate office was unwilling to take. It was later deleted after reporters from The Associated Press asked for confirmation of a Cornyn quote that appeared on the Internet site Breitbart.com.

"Senator Cornyn opposes this budget deal because it breaks previously set spending caps and goes in the 'wrong direction' with regards to entitlement spending," according to the post. His Senate spokeswoman, Kate Martin, would only say that Cornyn would take "a close look" at the measure and is "concerned" that it reverses some of the spending cuts won in a hard-fought 2011 budget pact.

Interesting. It appears that hard-line conservatives in the Senate have drawn a line in the sand. The political implications of this are larger than the legislative implications (the bill overcomes any filibuster and becomes law, with minor amendments).

For one thing, the Republican nominee-apparent, Paul Ryan (by dint of running as the Veep candidate with Mitt Romney), was one of the driving forces behind this deal. The thinking on his part had to include a calculation of the national political implications of being out in front of a bipartisan budget bill ahead of an election that will likely feature Chris Christie, who's main attraction is his ability to bring Democrats on board with his agenda.

Read more »

On the Hustings

(Bloomberg): "Brown’s move to New Hampshire fuels talk of Senate race"

(Philly.com): "Sources: A.G. Kane mulls U.S. Senate run"

(Stu Rothenberg): "Is Arkansas really the land of opportunity for Democrats?"

(Real Clear Politics): "Dems, GOP test pitches for 2014 in Fla. House race"

(Washington Post): "Oregon’s Kitzhaber will run for fourth term"

Behind the Ad: Pro-Rick Scott group attacks Charlie Crist on Obamacare

By Richard K. Barry

Who: Let's Get to Work (Pro-Florida Gov. Rick Scott group).

Where: Florida (web ad).

What's going on: As TPM reports, a 527 group supporting Gov. Scott launched an ad yesterday tying former Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (D) to Obamacare. Crist is running to unseat Scott.

"Obamacare isn't working but instead of standing with Florida, Charlie Crist stands with Obama," a voiceover in the ad, produced by the pro-Scott Let's Get To Work committee, said. 

According to Politico, the "Republican Party of Florida and Scott’s committee plan a combined six-figure digital buy."

TPM notes an interesting inconsistency, however:

Here's the rub though: back in February Scott endorsed a Medicaid expansion in Florida under Obamacare, but the Republicans in the state legislature refused to approve it.

"I cannot, in good conscience, deny the uninsured access to care," Scott said at the time.

Although it is easy to expect a lot of this sort of thing run against Washington Democratic pols, it looks like the Republicans intend to use it at every level. We'll see how that works. 

Right-wing hack Lara Logan returning to 60 Minutes

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Politico:

Lara Logan and Max McClellan, the '60 Minutes' journalists who were put on a leave of absence following their now-retracted report on Benghazi, are set to return to the program early next year, POLITICO has learned.

Logan and her producer, who had unfinished projects in the works when they left in November, have started booking camera crews for news packages, network sources said. Their return could come as early as next month.

*****

Logan and McClellan took leave following public pressure over an Oct. 27 report in which security contractor Dylan Davies claimed to have been present and active at the Sept. 11 raid on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi. Reports later indicated that Davies had told both his contractor and the FBI that he was not present at the compound on the night of the attack. Logan later apologized and "60 Minutes" retracted the story.

Despite public criticism and internal frustrations among some members of the "60 Minutes" team, CBS News chairman and "60 Minutes" executive producer Jeff Fager decided to stand by Logan. Earlier this month, he held a meeting with CBS News staff in which he defended the 42-year-old journalist, saying that as EP he was ultimately responsible for failing to catch the mistake.

Ah, but it wasn't really a mistake, was it? Logan gullibly (and also willfully) went with the story because it fit her political agenda, and she wasn't about to conduct even the simple checks on her source that would have exposed him as a fraud. It was the right-wing narrative that mattered, not the facts.

In any event, I'm not sure we should care. What with this bogus story and this past Sunday's shameful puff piece on the NSA, which essentially served as pro-NSA propaganda served up by the NSA itself through its gleeful CBS mouthpiece, this once-venerable news program has less than zero credibility. Having Logan back only proves the point.

A.M. Headlines

(The Hill): "Senate poised to approve budget"

(USA Today): "Snowden to Brazil: Swap you spying help for asylum"

(Politico): "Lara Logan to return to '60 Minutes'"

(Washington Post): "Obama suffers most from year of turmoil, poll finds"

(New York Times): "Budget deal heads for Senate approval as more Republicans give support"

NSA smacked down over massive data collection of Americans' phone records

By Michael J.W. Stickings

What Orwell feared.

The fight for Americans' privacy rights and civil liberties against an increasingly totalitarian surveillance state just got a major boost:

A federal district judge ruled on Monday that the National Security Agency program that is systematically keeping records of all Americans' phone calls most likely violates the Constitution, describing its technology as "almost Orwellian" and suggesting that James Madison would be "aghast" to learn that the government was encroaching on liberty in such a way. 

The judge, Richard J. Leon of Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, ordered the government to stop collecting data on the personal calls of the two plaintiffs in the case and to destroy the records of their calling history. But Judge Leon, appointed to the bench in 2002 by President George W. Bush, stayed his injunction "in light of the significant national security interests at stake in this case and the novelty of the constitutional issues," allowing the government time to appeal it, which he said could take at least six months.

"I cannot imagine a more 'indiscriminate' and 'arbitrary' invasion than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every single citizen for purposes of querying and analyzing it without prior judicial approval," Judge Leon wrote in a 68-page ruling. "Surely, such a program infringes on 'that degree of privacy' that the founders enshrined in the Fourth Amendment," which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. 

Let's keep this in perspective. This is just one judge. The government will appeal. It is likely that an appeal will be successful, more or less, and that the NSA will be authorized to continue doing most, if not all, of what it is doing now. And, regardless, given the available technology, the surveillance state is here to stay. (The question is just how vast and unregulated that surveillance state will be, and in the end whether Americans' retain anything of their essential American-ness.)

But this is nonetheless a victory -- hopefully not just a temporary one -- for the forces of liberty and privacy, and it's pretty much entirely thanks to Edward Snowden and those, like Glenn Greenwald, who have worked so hard, against the shrieking cries of the establishment and its supporters across the spectrum, to reveal the truth, as Charles Pierce explains (via Libby):

Let us be clear. No matter what you think of Snowden, or Glenn Greenwald, and no matter what you think of what they did, this ruling does not happen if the NSA doesn't let a contractor walk out of the joint with the family jewels on a flash drive. This ruling does not happen if we do not know what we now know, and we don't know any of that unless Snowden gathers the data and leaks it to the Guardian. This entire country was founded after a revolution that was touched off to a great extent by the concept of individual privacy.

Personally, I think very highly of what they did. And for this fight to have any chance at all, we need much more of it.

P.M. Headlines

(New York Times): "Federal judge rules against N.S.A. phone data program"

(Bloomberg): "Bernanke says Fed in ‘finest hours’ stood up to pressure"

(Roll Call): "Ethics Committee will investigate Trey Radel"

(Gallup): "Honesty and ethics rating of clergy slides to new low"

(BBC News): "David Miliband: 'Syria is facing an absolute catastrophe'"

Proactive patoot-smooching

By Mustang Bobby

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) tried to keep the family feud civil and suck up to his base overlords.

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), one of the budget deal negotiators, on Sunday defended conservative groups criticized by House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) for coming out against the budget agreement this week.

“I think these groups are valuable,” he said on “Fox News Sunday.”"They’re part of our conservative family. I’d prefer to keep these conversations within our family.”
Ryan did say that he was not pleased that groups opposed the deal so quickly, but still said that the Tea Party is valuable.

“John was frustrated because they came out against our agreement before we even reached an agreement,” he said. “I was frustrated as well. But I see the Tea Party as indispensable.”

Because he knows he will need to call on them when he makes his attempt to run for the presidency in 2016, following in the footsteps of all those vice presidential candidates from losing tickets that came back to win the next time around like President Dan Quayle, President Joe Lieberman, and President John Edwards.

Sycophancy only works if you don’t mean it.

(Cross-posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

On the Hustings

(The Hill): "2013: A year of living dismally"

(USA Today): "Hillary Clinton may affect campaigns far ahead of 2016"

(Politico): "Texas Senate primary race poll 2014: John Cornyn way up on Steve Stockman"

(New York Times): "G.O.P. firebrands tone down their message and run again"

(Roll Call): "The most expensive Senate race of the cycle — So far"

Behind the Ad: Gabby Gifford's super-PAC comes out with a new ad on Newtown anniversary

By Richard K. Barry

Who: Americans for Responsible Solutions

Where: Nationally

What's going on: On the one-year anniversary of the Newtown school shooting, former Rep. Gabrielle Gifford and her husband Mark Kelly have released a new ad through their super-PAC.

According to Huffington Post:

The ad, titled "Silent Night," is set to a somber instrumental of the classic Christmas song. It features a brief montage of pictures showing the mourning that followed last year's elementary school shooting in Newtown, Conn., which left 20 children and six adults dead. At the end, the commercial flashes a message: "30,000 die each year from gun violence. How long do we have to wait for Congress to act?"

It should be noted that Congress has passed no gun control laws since the Sandy Hook shooting and most lawmakers have said the tragedy has not changed their views on gun violence.

On the anniversary of Newtown, Mark Kelly issued this statement:

"In the weeks after Newtown, we heard politician after politician give eloquent speeches -- promising that they would keep our communities safe. They promised that they would honor the dead in Newtown," he said. [...]

"The Senate, it seemed, was in the grip of the gun lobby. Gabby and I were disappointed, but we were not defeated," Kelly said. "The fight is not over. And America will not forget Sandy Hook."

A.M. Headlines

(Wall Street Journal): "Ryan says GOP to make debt-ceiling demands in early ’14"

(The Hill): "In budget deal, a secret reward for Dems"

(CBS News): "On budget deal, all eyes turn to Senate Republicans"

(Politico): "Gingrich: Budget deal keeps focus on Obamacare"

(CBS News): "NSA speaks out on Snowden, spying"

Listening to Now: Thelonious Monk - "Straight, No Chaser"

By Richard K. Barry

I take a course in jazz improvisation at the Toronto Conservatory with Michael Occhipinti. He's a great player and teacher. It's one of those courses in which they take people with varying abilities and try to show them a few things.

One of the neat parts about the course is that, at the end of the term, Michael books a local club at which each of the sections struts their stuff with half a dozen tunes. My class's set included Monk's "Straight, No Chaser." Great song, and though I'm sure we sounded nothing like the master and his friends, we did our best.

Here's a clip of the original.

P.M. Headlines

(AP): "AP-GFK Poll: Health law seen as eroding coverage"

(New York Times): "Bloomberg focuses on rest (as in rest of the world)"

(Politico): "Budget splits Senate appropriators"

(AP): "Colorado governor visits school shooting victim"

(CNN): "Storms leaves piles of snow behind in Northeast"

On the Hustings

(Yahoo! News): "George P. takes baby steps away from Bush name"

(Des Moines Register): "Iowa Poll: The early favorites for 2016 presidential race"

(The Hill): "Poll: Huckabee leads GOP presidential field in South Carolina"

(Real Clear Politics): "Senate seats that could flip parties in 2014"

(Roll Call): "Pelosi fundraises for John Tierney"

Behind the Ad: Democratic super-PAC attacks leading GOP Louisiana Senate contender

By Richard K. Barry

Who: Senate Majority PAC (Democratic super-PAC)

Where: Louisiana

What's going on: Yesterday I posted a new ad from Louisiana Democratic Senate incumbent Mary Landrieu. She's in a dogfight to keep her seat and is distancing herself from Obamacare in an attempt to remain competitive.

GOP Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), considered her most serious challenger, is now the target of a new ad by a Democratic super-PAC. In the ad, the narrator says that "in Louisiana, we expect leaders to solve problems, not become part of the problem."

According to The Hill Times:

[The ad] cites his support for the Republican Study Committee's 2014 budget and Rep. Paul Ryan's (R-Wis.) proposed 2012 budget.

The former would eventually raise the Social Security eligibility age to 70, and the latter would reform Medicare in a way that would result in higher premiums for seniors, starting nearly a decade from now, according to an analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

"That's Congressman Cassidy's record in the House. He'd hurt us even more in the Senate," the narrator closes.

A few things to know about Louisiana, courtesy of Charlie Cook, is that Landrieu has never receiver higher than 52 percent of the vote. The state is trending towards the GOP since Landrieu last had to defend her seat. Republicans hold the other U.S. Senate seat, five of six congressional districts, the governorship, and majorities in both chambers of the state legislature. And Obama got just 41 percent of the vote in 2012.

In other words, this one is definitely in play.

For what it's worth,  The Times Picayune reported this, regarding a poll conducted in mid-November:

In a hypothetical Senate race held today (i.e., mid-November), Landrieu would lead Cassidy by seven points... But the data questioned whether she would be able to clinch the 50 percent necessary to win outright. With Tea Party-endorsed Republican Rob Maness receiving just under 10 percent in the poll, Cassidy could conceivably win in a runoff if he could claim all or most of Maness' support for himself.

It should be noted that this poll was also done before the worst of the Obamacare rollout debacle. 

Lots happening there. 

A.M. Headlines

(Washington Post): "White House delayed enacting rules ahead of 2012 election to avoid controversy"

(Paul Krugman): "Inequality as a defining challenge"

(USA Today): "The successful launch marks the next step in an ambitious space program that aims to send a Chinese astronaut to the moon"

(New York Times): "Boehner’s jabs at activist right show G.O.P. shift"

(Politico): "Ambassador Kennedy: A star is born"

Spring Breakers and its stunning "Everytime" scene

By Michael J.W. Stickings

So, I finally got around to watching Spring Breakers last night. I can't say I'm much of a Harmony Korine fan, whose films generally consist of frighteningly beautiful and/or haunting and/or distasteful images amounting to little more than hollow pretension -- I much prefer the song "Harmony Korine" by Steven Wilson -- but this one, his most celebrated to date (if still arousing wildly different views), is actually quite impressive.

It's monotonous and boring at times, in spite of (or perhaps because of) all the nudity and sex (at times it seems like wall-to-wall tits and asses, boobs and butts, and not always in a good way), foul language, drug use, and violence, but it's an intriguing (and shocking) presentation of postmodern American nihilism, of a dream turned dystopic, of the dark side of youth culture and so of a terribly bleak future, and while neither the story nor the characters are developed at all, it has in its depiction of this materialistic madness a potency that exceeds its various shortcomings and that sets it apart from almost the entirety of American cinema these days, at least the sort of cinema you find at your local brain-numbing, soul-crushing multiplex.

So, yes, I recommend it.

The opening scene, of boys and girls going wild on the beach, set to Skrillex's "Scary Monsters and Nice Sprites," is stunning, but so too, in much quieter fashion, is the "Everytime" scene, with James Franco (who's excellent and certainly deserving of Oscar consideration) serenading his three young, pink-masked admirers with Britney Spears's song "Everytime" (Britney's music features prominently in the movie, as if she somehow provides much of the soundtrack to American's cultural degradation, which of course she does), while a montage shows the four of them wreaking violent havoc as they embark on a crime spree that, well, can't end well.

It's a fantastic scene, with a Britney song that actually isn't awful (maybe her best?), and very much representative of the movie of which it is the centerpiece. And here it is: