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 »

How Fox News misinforms: 15 minutes with Sean Hannity

Guest post by Ted Leibowitz

Ed. note: Ted's 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. Ted also guest blogged here at The Reaction. Looking back, I found a post from December 2008 in which he was rather critical of then President-elect Obama for choosing Rick Warren, who supported California's anti-gay Prop 8, to give the inaugural invocation. (We love President Obama here, but it's not like we're completely supportive of everything he does.) Well, it's great to welcome Ted back to the fold with a post on the completely unfair and unbalanced coverage of the election by the delusional folks at Fox. -- MJWS

Ted 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. Ted mainly tends to share his political thoughts around election time as this time of year makes him an insomniac.

**********

You lost, Sean. Oops.

I turned on the TV Wednesday night. It was tuned to Fox News. Sean Hannity was on. I watched, so you don't have to. For those of you who don't live in the U.S. and don't get the pleasure of tuning into Fox News, perhaps this sampling will help you understand how nearly 58 million Americans this week voted for a guy they didn't even like: they watch Fox News.

Below is what I gleaned from watching about 15-20 minutes of the show.

Sean Hannity is disgusted by President Obama for dirty campaigning.

SH: "One tragedy of this election is that Obama's dirty tactics have now been vindicated, and we're now going to see this [sic] kind of tactics replicated for many years to come. Thanks to Barack Obama, politics is now dirtier than it was, and it will get worse as others try to now perfect this "politics of personal destruction."

Apparently Mr. Hannity was not paying attention when George W. Bush (who is rarely mentioned anymore on Fox News for some reason) mercilessly took down one of his own, Senator John McCain, in the Republican primaries prior to the 2000 presidential election. Nor Dubya's second presidential campaign, during which Karl "Dubya's Brain" Rove invented the Swift Boat campaign smear against his opponent John Kerry, a recipient of the Purple Heart medal.

"If I'm [one of the people who ran Obama's campaign], today, I'm embarrassed," Hannity said, "because they knew no boundaries when it came to lying, and demonizing, slandering, smearing, besmirching, attacking a nice guy."

Hannity referred to the Obama campaign as "dirty and ugly and mean."

Even if this were true, it would be very "pot calling the kettle black" of someone at Fox News to disparage a campaign over such deeds. Fox News has on its payroll the unchallenged modern grand master of campaign dirty tricks, Karl Rove. Karl Rove learned dirty politics in the Nixon administration and went on to run many a smear campaign on behalf of George W. Bush with highlights including hinting that Texas Governor Ann Richards (1994) was a lesbian and suggesting that Senator John McCain (2000) was psychologically unstable due to his time as a POW (and also that McCain's wife was on drugs and that McCain had fathered an African-American love child). And who can forget the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame (2003) and the aforementioned Swift Boaters (2004).

The same Karl Rove who wouldn't concede Obama's victory on election night even after CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, and his own Fox News had already called it. Perhaps he thought if he kept barking he could pull James Baker out of a hat, like in 2000. But enough about Rove.

Next, Hannity had Ann Coulter on the show.

Coulter: "Recent immigrants are more likely to be on government assistance. The Democrats lure them in, get them on government assistance... recent immigrants are for more likely to be on government assistance than native-born Americans..." (I doubt she gets the irony of her poor word choice with "native... American")... get them on welfare, and they vote Democratic."

She continued, "Teddy Kennedy's 1965 immigration act was specifically designed to change the demographics of this nation."

Suddenly, 47 years after the fact, Ann Coulter woke up and realized that the 1965 Immigration and Naturalization Act was a liberal conspiracy to change the demographics of the U.S. by luring immigrants to our shores in order to get them addicted to government assistance so that they would some day vote Democratic.

Mr. Kennedy, if Ms. Coulter is right, you were an even more incredibly forward-thinking political genius than anyone knew.

Coulter then said, "I think Mitt Romney would have won if he'd had the same demographics that Ronald Reagan had."

Yes, Ann, in an alternate reality, Mitt Romney could have won the Presidency of the United States this week. Unfortunately for Mitt, and you, and Sean, and Karl, and Fox News, we live in this reality.

Coulter went on to refer, in passing, to Bush's wars as "wars that help America." Off-handed remarks like that get bandied about without explanation all the time on Fox News, implanting unsubstantiated falsehoods in viewers' minds.

Then there was this exchange:

AC: "Simpson-Bowles [a commission set up by President Obama to address growing U.S. debt] would be better than anything Obama could come up with."

SH: "Tax reform is a sneaky way of basically raising taxes..."

AC: "...raising taxes, which produces less revenue to the government."

Wait a second... raising taxes is a way to produce less revenue for the government?!?! What?!?!

Then a favorite Fox News straw man came up: the Liberal Media, which is apparently a monolithic entity that works in concert against the interests of conservatives and America.

SH: "The Liberal Media put all it's resources behind re-electing Barack Obama."

He then had Bob Woodward of The Washington Post on to talk about how the Liberal Media worked to get Obama re-elected. Problem was, Woodward brought up three examples of how the "mainstream media" (which Fox always refers to as the Liberal Media) hammered Obama in recent months.

Hannity's response was (paraphrasing), "Well, you may have some [valid] points, but I don't think the Liberal Media covered the scandals* to my satisfaction." Before I get to just what those "scandals" were, here is what Hannity actually meant:

"Well, you may have some [valid] points, but I'm not going to let the facts which you just stated, Bob Woodward, and which I, Sean Hannity, just acknowledged the validity of, get in the way of me reiterating the false narrative we here at Fox News have created and are ramming down our viewers throats."

After that I could take no more.

*The "scandals" were "The Beghazi Cover Up" (a non-story that Media Matters thoroughly debunked); "The Fast & Furious" (which has been debunked by such liberal rags as Fortune and the NY Daily News); and something about high unemployment numbers, which Woodward had just stated had been pretty well covered by that demon, the Liberal Media.

Tribute to Ted Kennedy

By Richard K. Barry

The Democratic National Convention featured a tribute video for the late Senator Edward M. Kennedy on Tuesday night. As Mark Landler of The New York Times writes, the piece featured a section on Mitt Romney's unsuccessful bid to defeat Kennedy in a 1994 U.S. Senate race:

Mr. Kennedy was shown debating Mr. Romney over abortion rights during that campaign. Mr. Romney insisted he supported Roe vs. Wade, a position he later disavowed.

"I'm pro-choice," Mr. Kennedy declared, with a gibe that has been thrown at Mr. Romney many times in his political career. "My opponent is multiple choice."

The video portrayed President Obama as the steward of Mr. Kennedy's legislative legacy, with his passage of longtime Kennedy causes like the health care overhaul and the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Mr. Kennedy's endorsement of Mr. Obama in 2008 was a crucial imprimatur for the young senator in his battle with Hillary Rodham Clinton.

It seems that the tribute annoyed Reince Priebus, chairman of the RNC, who criticized the video as inappropriate, saying, "Classless Dems use tribute video of deceased Ted Kennedy to attack Mitt Romney."

Only in the world of today's GOP could it possibly be considered classless to draw attention to a position Mitt Romney actually once held with words he actually once said.

I can also only imagine Ted Kennedy would enjoy the fact that he is still, in some small way, in the game.

Here's the tribute:

(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)

Quote of the Day: Patrick Kennedy, to Ted Kennedy, on health-care reform

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Rep. Kennedy (D-R.I.) left a note at his father's gravesite on Monday. It read:

Dad -- The unfinished business is done.

Not to take away from the sentiment, which I tend to share (and I do wish Teddy had been around for this), but the business isn't done yet. There's a whole lot more to be done, beyond reconciliation in the Senate, and hopefully that more will come in the months and years to come, as improvements to this reform package are made. (Public option, anyone?)

Also, as Jonathan Chait wrote:

Obama's plan closely mirrors three proposals that have attracted the support of Republicans who reside within their party's mainstream: The first is the 1993 Senate Republican health plan, which is compared with Obama's plan here, with the similarity endorsed by former Republican Senator Dave Durenberger here. The second is the Bipartisan Policy Center plan, endorsed by Bob Dole, Howard baker, George Mitchell and Tom Daschle, which is compared to Obama's plan here. And the third, of course, is Mitt Romney's Massachusetts plan, which was crafted by the same economist who helped create Obama's plan, and which is rhetorically indistinguishable from Obama's.

In other words, it's a largely Republican plan -- if Republican of yesterday, not today. Republicans objected to it for partisan purposes but also because they themselves have moved far to the right in recent years. How odd it is that what is seen as a Democratic triumph is actually, in many ways, non-Democratic. But just as the Republican Party has moved to the right, so has the center generally, with media narratives following the GOP lead. It's a shame that Obama didn't push for inclusion of a public option, but it's a good start nonetheless, and it may very well be the best that could have been achieved at the present time, all things considered.

But a triumph it is, I think, and a historic one, and it's one I'll happily take. (For now.)

**********

Jonathan Cohn provides some historical context, linking the bill back to Truman and Johnson:

The compromises that went into this legislation are, by now, well-known. It won't be fully effective for several years and, even then, several million people will likely lack health insurance. People won't have the option of enrolling in a new public plan; the private plans many carry will still have substantial deductibles. Government accounts predict the plan will reduce the rate of growth in medical spending only modestly. The full realization of Harry Truman's dream, of affordable health insurance for every American, will remain elusive.

But, like Medicare, this bill represents a monumental step forward. The numbers are impossible to ignore. More than 30 million additional people will have insurance; even those with sizable deductibles will have protection from the kind of ruinous financial liabilities they face now. There is no public plan -- for now! -- but there is extensive regulation, including requirements that insurers spend more money on actual patient care. What we spend on medical care isn’t going to plummet. But it won't rise as fast as it might otherwise. And, over the long run, that can save a lot of money -- particularly if we are smart enough to learn and adapt as we go.

And, as with Medicare, this bill is every bit as important for the statement it makes. Medicare affirms the principle that the elderly have a right to affordable medical care, even if it requires government help. Medicaid does the same for the poor. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act extends the promise of affordable care to the rest of the country -- a promise that will be fulfilled, one way or another, by the government.

It will not happen today, tomorrow, or even in 2014, the first year of full implementation. And you can expect plenty of problems along the way. But history tells us that first we we agree to an obligation -- and then we spend some time, maybe a long time, meeting it. Medicare grew to cover more and more benefits; Medicaid grew to cover more and more people. The same will happen with this act, I am sure.

In the meantime, life will get a little better for most people and a lot better for a few. The sick will get some care. The fearful will know some serenity.

And somewhere LBJ will be smiling. Harry Truman, too.

And surely also Ted Kennedy.

Kirk (D-MA)

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick has tapped Paul Kirk, not Michael Dukakis, to fill Ted Kennedy's Senate seat until a special election can be held on Jan. 19.

Fine (although I would have preferred Dukakis, who deserves some respect for his significant contributions both to the Democratic Party and to Massachusetts, as well as to liberal-progressive public policy, over the years -- wouldn't it have been so fitting for a Sen. Dukakis to cast a vote in support of health-care reform?)

It's not like Kirk lacks credentials, after all. He was even chairman of the DNC once upon a time. And he may very well be a solid pick.

But did Patrick really have to fill Kennedy's seat with a long-time Kennedy friend and aide, a candidate seemingly being pushed by the entire Kennedy clan? It's like the Kennedys think they have some sort of dynastic right to the seat, and that it's in their power to bequeath the seat to whomsoever they annoint.

Sure, it's just a temporary thing, but something about the whole thing irritates me. Not because I'm anti-Kennedy, which I'm not, but because I object to anything that smacks of dynastic control. Let's hope the selection process to name a Democratic candidate for the special election is less of an insider job, that is, that the Kennedys don't control that process. (A Kennedy won't be running, but they could still wield their enormous influence to control the process.)

A stupid poll (about Ted Kennedy)

By Michael J.W. Stickings

"Poll: Ted Kennedy's Favorability Was Lower Among GOP, Independents, Southerners"

That's a headline at The Washington Independent, atop an article by David Weigel. To which I respond: And?

I suppose the numbers themselves are somewhat, if barely, interesting. A slight majority of respondents -- 51% -- had a "favorable opinion" of Ted Kennedy shortly before his death (the poll was conducted July 31 to August 3). Otherwise, though, what's the point? What do we learn?

That Kennedy was more popular among Democrats than among Republicans, with Independents in between? That Kennedy was more popular in the Northeast and West than in the Midwest and South?

Isn't all that pretty obvious?

If anything is interesting, it's that Kennedy's favorability rating in the South, a strongly Republican part of the country, was a strong 48%.

And yet, with fairly high sampling errors (+/- 5-6.5%), it's not clear how accurate the poll is when broken down into partisan and regional components.

News outlets like CNN insist that public opinion surveys are news. Many of them, though, are just a waste of time.

Argumentum ad lapidem

By Capt. Fogg

It's an argument by throwing stones and it's almost all they do these days. Anything can be dismissed by calling it "lefty" "Liberal" or "Socialist" and all the faithful will giggle and smile while swallowing the argument.

Take Andrew Sullivan, for instance: he's "a Lefty sockpuppet" according to Jules Crittenden because by talking about the hiring of wives, daughters and sons of political celebrities, like Jenna Bush and Liz Cheney as journalists or commentators in "snarky" fashion without calling attention to the media frenzy over the late Ted Kennedy is an obviously "lefty" thing.

What's "lefty" about America's obsession with celebrities? Not much, as the Michael Jackson / Princess Diana episodes would suggest and to imply that Ted Kennedy's long and influential career is of interest to the country simply and only because he was the Late President's brother is a bit more "sock-puppety" than Oscar the Grouch's opposition to everything.

Yes, Americans ( and many others) are obsessed with celebrity worship, but Ted Kennedy had a very long, very influential career while Jenna? Let's just say her future as a journalist of merit is still hypothetical and media investment in her has more to do with her father's notoriety than with a distinguished body of essays, commentaries and investigations. It's a very false equivalence Jules and it makes you look desperate. It makes you look like little more than a tube sock with some buttons sewn on and a persona that does nothing more than repeat "lefty, lefty."

It's an easy bit of Schauspiel and easy to produce. Perhaps you can get the letter H or the number 4 to sponsor it.

(Cross posted to Human Voices)

Truth in Comics

By Creature



If it's Sunday, it's Truth in Comics.

Craziest Republican of the Day: Mike Huckabee

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Again.

Last week it was for saying that "Evangelicals" (e.g., Christian Zionists like him) are more supportive of Israel than American Jews. Don't even get me started on that nonsense again.

Today it's for saying that, under Obamacare, Ted Kennedy would literally have been told to "go home to take pain pills and die."

Seriously. That's a direct quote.

Now, I'm not sure if Huckabee is just stupid, or what. Does he just not get it, or is he just a malicious liar, the sort of loose-with-the-truth ideologue who spins right-wing propaganda and advances Republican objectives? That is, does he know that he's lying or not? Maybe it's all mixed up in some hyper-partisan mental mash, with Huckabee and his ilk simply unable to tell anymore, if they ever could, what is true and what isn't -- or maybe, just maybe, they think that whatever they say, whatever they believe, is true.

Regardless, saying that Kennedy would have been left to die, and thereby trying to score political points off his death, is just repugnant.

I mean, really? Opponents of reform -- the sort of meaningful reform Kennedy fought for his whole life, reform with a robust public option -- were the ones who had Kennedy's back, whereas Kennedy's own friends would essentially have killed him off even earlier? Would Kennedy really have supported such reform if it had meant it would have left the elderly to die without adequate care?

Come on, this is fucking ridiculous, which is pretty much what Huckabee is. He calls Kennedy "heroic" and praises him for choosing to keep fighting for his life, and yet he continues to wage a campaign of lies against health-care reform?

It's crazy, yes, but it's also shameless, an appalling abuse of Kennedy's life, death, and legacy.

We won't soon see his like again

By Edward Copeland

As we get further from the news of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy's passing (I write this minutes before the wake is set to begin), I find myself getting sadder and sadder. I always liked the man, though I never met him, but when you look at the list of legislative accomplishments he had a hand in in his 47 years in the Senate, it truly is extraordinary.

He truly was what a senator should be. Sure, he had flaws in his private life, but there never was a hint of a scandal related to his work on Capitol Hill. He never chased lobbyists for cash to run campaigns and gave them favors in return. He wasn't a showhorse, especially once he gave up his quest for the presidency. He rarely appeared on the Sunday news shows. He did his job and did it well.

What makes me weep the most are the personal stories that keep popping up from all quarters. The conservative Republican father grieving for his son killed in Iraq at his son's grave at Arlington turning around and seeing Kennedy for the first time in his life and complaining about the improper armor on humvees. Kennedy had hearings within weeks and got the humvees properly protected.

The stories of how he seemed to be the first to call when someone faced a tragedy or send a surprise gift to someone he barely knew when they had a child. How when one of his children and G. Gordon Liddy's daughter were graduating from the same private school while Liddy was in prison, serving his time for Watergate. Obviously, the girl did not have an easy time of it, being the daughter of Liddy. At the ceremony, Kennedy sought her out, gave her a big hug and told her not to worry that her dad was very proud of her.

A relative of conservative pundit Pat Buchanan worked in George W. Bush's White House and was given the task of the delivering to the Senate Judiciary Committee members the name of a new appointee for an appellate court. The first senate sort of shrugged it off, saying, "Another right winger." Kennedy welcomed the young man into his office gregariously and showed him around, pointing out photos and mementos. Buchanan said when the young man returned, he was walking on air.

Kennedy came from a life of privilege, but his passion was for the little guy and those who needed help to avoid oppression.

With the ugliness of politics today, it's a double tragedy that we have not only lost this great man, but the Congress has lost a member who knew why they were there instead of getting stuck in partisan mudslinging and not crafting anything worthwhile. The wake is about to start. Time for me to weep some more for everyone's Uncle Ted.

Of course Romney won't seek to replace Kennedy

By Michael J.W. Stickings

First, he'd lose a special election.

Second, he's focusing on 2012.

A spokesman said that "Romney's focus right now is on helping other Republicans run for office, and that is how he will be spending his time." Which, while perhaps true, is seriously misleading. Romney's real focus is on trying to build up the Romney brand in the GOP, to promote his own presidential ambitions in an indirect way. And he can do that by throwing his weight, and his money, behind "other Republicans" whose support he will need when 2011/12 rolls around and he's once again eyeing the White House. Being the junior senator from Massachusetts, behind Kerry, just wouldn't help him all that much.

By the way, as TNR's Jason Zengerle is reporting, the likely short-term replacement for Kennedy, at least until a special election can be held, is none other than Michael Dukakis.

Hateful twits, hateful tweets

By Capt. Fogg

". . . and forgetting long passed mischiefs, we mercifully preserve their bones and piss not on their ashes."

- Thomas Browne -

Unless, of course, the vitriol of human meanness courses through your veins, in which case you don your rabid pit bull apparel and gnaw on what bones can be found. I've rarely seen such hate, even at a time like this where hate is the entire foundation of American conservative politics. As fast as the greasy fingers can type, the Internet begins to fill with accusations of murder, treason, and more formless forms of evil known as "liberalism." There is no restraint in Mudville now that Ted Kennedy has struck out.

Too many blogs, too many twits, too many accusations to dignify with a reply, but one thing is held in common: the tribe that represents the worst traits of our remote ancestors feels victimized and therefore free from any obligation to decency. They lost an election, their worship of feudal corporatism, equal rights, and civic responsibility is being challenged -- at last -- and their true values finally revealed. It's as ugly as it's ever been.

I recently and reluctantly signed up for Twitter. I should have stayed at home. The necessity to keep it all idiotically short has brought out more unadorned ugliness than one finds on blogs.

Kennedy was a special pile of human excrement,

rages the ridiculous Breitbart.

IF a GOP possesses 1/100 of human failings of T. Kennedy he/she is TOAST,

is another one of his staggering lies with endless examples to prove it false. Malkin laughs that he didn't go to France for his treatment, as though it were funny or actually meant something, others follow suit and Chappaquiddick references spurt like pus from the septic boil of Republic sentiment, from those who would and do accept any act of presidential treason, dishonesty, and manslaughter -- and, yes, drunk driving. How many people died because George W. Bush was president? No, Kennedy was a "villain," "a bad, bad dude," a "duplicitous bastard," and a "prick."

Pissing on Kennedy's ashes is just a small part of the psychotic rage that fills the void once filled by conservatives. A conservative by nature does not respond to disagreement by using chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. That's what a madman does, that's what Mr. Breitbart is, that's what Ms. Malkin is, and this is what the end of everything sounds like.

(Cross-posted from Human Voices.)

Healthcare for Kennedy

By Creature

Not only should the Democrats politicize Senator Kennedy's death (and funeral) they should do it as full-throated as Kennedy himself would have. If a few right-wing heads explode along the way, great. At least they'll have healthcare to cover their hospital costs.

Ted Kennedy and the day that was

By Michael J.W. Stickings

I'm currently working on a piece for The Guardian on Suaad Hagi Mohamud, the Kenyan-Canadian who was detained in Nairobi a few months ago for not looking enough like her passport photo. Canadian officials refused to come to her defence and actually pushed for her to be prosecuted, with the government back in Ottawa doing nothing to help until a DNA test proved her identity. So I won't be blogging much until tomorrow evening.

In the meantime, make sure to check out some great posts by my co-bloggers, including two from this afternoon by J. Thomas Duffy (one on the Kennedy legacy, one on the Little League World Series), two from Capt. Fogg (one on right-wing doublethink, one on Rush Limbaugh's attacks on Kennedy), and a glowing Kennedy obituary from Carl. I also had health-care-related posts up on McCain, Coburn, and Feingold.

Stay tuned for more from the Reaction team.

**********

I've been thinking a great deal about Ted Kennedy today. Needless to say, I was appalled by how some on the right took the occasion of Kennedy's death to go on the attack -- appalled, but not surprised.

For the most part, though, Kennedy received the tributes he deserved, including from some Republicans. He was one of the towering figures in American politics, a giant of decades in the political spotlight. I think Obama himself put it well (in an e-mail that his supporters, myself included, received this evening):

For nearly five decades, virtually every major piece of legislation to advance the civil rights, health and economic well-being of the American people bore his name and resulted from his efforts. His ideas and ideals are stamped on scores of laws and reflected in millions of lives -- in seniors who know new dignity; in families that know new opportunity; in children who know education's promise; and in all who can pursue their dream in an America that is more equal and more just, including me. In the United States Senate, I can think of no one who engendered greater respect or affection from members of both sides of the aisle. His seriousness of purpose was perpetually matched by humility, warmth and good cheer. He battled passionately on the Senate floor for the causes that he held dear, and yet still maintained warm friendships across party lines. And that's one reason he became not only one of the greatest senators of our time, but one of the most accomplished Americans ever to serve our democracy.

Ted Kennedy (1932-2009). America, and the world, would have been much less without him. He will be greatly missed, and never fully replaced.

Well ... There's THAT part of The Legacy, too ...

By J. Thomas Duffy

If almost right on cue.

In the waning, dull, Dog Days of August, and, somewhat ironically, in the middle of the molten hot Healthcare battle, Senator Ted Kennedy has passed away, ending his fight against brain cancer.

There'll be lots of paychecks and other perks, to interrupt the vacations of the masses of babbling heads, to rush into the nearest cable studio (or, if they are heavy-duty talking heads, they might have the weight to do a remote) and start blathering away, from the headline stories, to insider anecdotes, ending, of course, with whispers during the wall-to-wall coverage of the upcoming funeral.

Local news here in Boston will even surpass all that.

Yes, he was the "Liberal Lion", and did a lot of good things during his time in the Senate (perhaps SCHIPS, and burying Bork among the top).

But one thing won't get mentioned, or, if it does, ever so briefly, a blink, and then, used as a launching point to herald some tale of pulling himself off the floor and rising to great heights.

We speak, of, naturally, Chappaquiddick, and the unfortunate death of Mary Jo Kopechne.

And that brings us to one of the greatest satires in history, run by the National Lampoon, back in 1972.

Riffing off a Volkswagen ad of that time, they put this out there;



From Wikipedia;

The case resulted in much satire of Kennedy, including a National Lampoon page showing a floating Volkswagen Beetle with the remark that Kennedy would have been elected president had he been driving a Beetle that night; this satire resulted in legal action by Volkswagen, claiming unauthorized use of its trademark.

(You can go HERE, to see both, the original VW ad, and the satirical one)

In today's' corporate-owned media, I don't know if there is a publication out there that would have the balls to do something like that today.


Bonus Links

Senator Kennedy from Cindy Sheehan

Jack Newfield: The Senate's Fighting Liberal

Martin F. Nolan: Kennedy dead at 77 ...Liberal lion of the Senate, symbol of family dynasty succumbs to brain cancer

Joan Walsh: Ted Kennedy's last battle

And, a "Must-Read", from Dr. Clarissa Pinkola Estes, over on The Moderate Voice;

Ted Kennedy and Mary Jo Kopechne




(Cross Posted at The Garlic)

The Lion sleeps tonight

By Carl

What can be said about Ted Kennedy that you haven't read a million other places today?

The life of the last remaining true progressive authority (there are others more liberal, to be sure, like Russ Feingold or Bernie Sanders) can be summed up in one way I doubt you've read anyplace else.

For all his flaws and faults, he became the lightning rod for right wing hatred.

You don't see Rush Limbaugh making fun of Feingold. You don't see anyone making fun of Bernie Sanders. In his death, even, the right wing extremists are making fun of Ted Kennedy.

You know what that tells me? It tells me that he had them terrified.

Ted Kennedy not only represented a link to a time when liberal legislation was effected, heck, even admired (civil rights, Social Security and Medicare, clean air and water), he ultimately came to embody those core principles of liberal philosophy.

Our lives are better for Ted Kennedy's existence. Here was a wealthy man who understood that rising tides may lift all boats, but that we need not wait for a rising tide to fix those boats that are leaky and in need of repair.

Conservative muttonheads knew this, which is why they toiled so hard to keep mocking his weight or his affairs or his one moment of avoidable tragedy.

Granted, there are some mistakes you never stop paying for, and the tragic death of Mary Jo should be one of those, but that those knucklebrains couldn't find fault with his legislative savvy or his programs and policies speaks volumes about their fear of Kennedy.

Indeed, one might make the case that life's plan included having Kennedy demeaned and belittled, as it would make him a more effective legislator, able to be scrutinized for himself, and not his stances. The distraction became the illusion became the reality.

When JFK said in 1961 "Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans," I wonder if he knew the last surviving torchbearer would be his younger brother, Ted?

I raise my voice and join the chorus of those who have asked that the healthcare reform that Ted Kennedy fought so hard to enact in his lifetime be passed immediately, that President Obama call a special session of Congress, and insist that a public option be included, and that the "Senator Edward M. Kennedy Healthcare Reform Bill of 2009" be passed by unanimous voice vote, in tribute to this man, this great man, this lion of the left.

The torch has been dropped, my friends. Who among us will agree to pick it up, for Ted's sake?

(crossposted to Simply Left Behind)

RIP Senator Kennedy

By Creature

I'm was too young to know the other Kennedy brothers, but Senator Kennedy I knew, and admired. The Kennedy name was revered in my household growing up and Ted Kennedy proved, time, and time again, that such reverence was justified.

He shall be missed.

BREAKING NEWS: Kennedy collapses

By Edward Copeland

Sen. Ted Kennedy, ailing with a malignant brain tumor, collapsed in convulsions at the inauguration luncheon and was removed on a stretcher.

Sen. Robert Byrd also was stricken at the luncheon, but not as seriously.

**********

UPDATE: It is being reported that Kennedy is "feeling well." It was "simple fatigue."

From all of us at The Reaction, Senator, get well soon. Both senators.

This is the Week!

By Carol Gee

Update for The Reaction -- Memeorandum reports that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is McCain's VP pick: source.

The mornings after the Democratic National Convention (DNC) this week, I was often struck speechless. The DNC was so very big, bold and beautiful along the way. Fast paced, and yet somehow at ease, the convention moved towards the last day with ascending excitement. Media coverage of the week was available to cable and satellite TV viewers in pundit-driven or gavel to gavel style. By Thursday's the DNC had visited almost everything. The convention's conclusion did not begin until afternoon.

FRIDAY MORNING, everyone agrees the DNC was unprecedented in several respects. Barack Obama is the first African American candidate to be nominated by a major party to run for President. His acceptance speech audience was the largest ever. His candidacy was the most high-tech in history. And the United States is in a brand a new kind of governance crisis. The USA is embroiled in two very high cost (in people and money) wars. Polarized politically, in economic recession, its citizens have been routinely victimized by an out of control, inept, constitution-shredding administration. An unprecedented level of problems faces the nation; that is the reason the Democrats are willing to leave the venue mostly united. They and the whole country know what is at stake.

Is it any wonder that the "Change We Need" campaign of (dare I say it?) destiny's Obama was eventually so welcomed by Democrats? The other reason for Democratic party unity is Barack Obama himself. His skill as a the leader of his own campaign became more apparent as the week progressed. The stadium setting was the story for a while. And it was seized upon by nay-sayers as "over the top." A full stadium of flag-waving, enthusiastic people, who came early and in large numbers, affirmed the planners' decision, in my opinion. A text message exercise in voter recruitment energized a huge starry map showing supporters. Lots of good video filled in the gaps, along with food and funny hats, statement t-shirts, and Diverse Dems dancing in place. The audience was entertained by good music that seemed just right, much of it with a a modern folk feel. Stevie Wonder and Sheryl Crow sang. Republicans and Independents testified to their support. Obama's best political friends, including his mentor, Senator Dick Durbin, gave little speeches. And a set of "just folks" told us through vignettes why they had to support Obama. In contrast, a stage-filling group of military leaders and generals marched out in a line to support the candidate, some of whom had previously retired in protest against the Bush administration. Vice-President Gore did 'his thing" with sincerity and skill.

This is the week that culminated last night in Senator Obama's acceptance speech. By most accounts it was perhaps his best speech ever-- it was dynamite. At once biographical, inspirational and confrontational, it was also policy specific. It was a magnificent blue print for the next couple of months of this 2008 presidential campaign. I cannot wait for it to unfold. Unwilling to post yesterday, because I wanted to just enjoy the moments, I went back to my occasional years-ago choice of "being on vacation without my camera." The blogosphere took appropriate notice, however, as links to the other blogs where I post show. This is the rest of the week as reflected in my earlier notes:

THURSDAY MORNING, Wednesday was historic -- Senator Barack Obama was nominated by the Democrats to run for President. In a stroke of genius, Senator Joseph Biden was nominated for Vice-President. Speeches by Former President Clinton, Senator John Kerry, and Veep-to-be Senator Joe Biden were all outstanding. Many of us were relieved by Bill Clinton's endorsement. Wednesday night's theme was national security. Morning-after reflections gave the Democrats high marks for the way the theme was handled during the third night of this historic week. Bloggers gave the mainstream media less than high marks for the coverage. Because of the difficulty of Surviving the DNC on cable, too many viewers missed the best speech of the evening given by John Kerry.

WEDNESDAY MORNING, Democratic National Convention -- Tuesday night was all Hillary Clinton's, though she was not the official keynoter. The keynote speaking task fell to Governor Mark Warner, who was lack luster, by many of the next morning's accounts. To me, it was probably one of her best to date. A few questioned whether Clinton's endorsement of Obama was strong enough, but most bestowed qualified approval of her speech. Scott Paul, for instance at The Washington Note, gave: "A (Potentially Premature) Defense of Clinton." To quote:

I had two immediate reactions to Clinton's speech. First, purely from the perspective of speechcraft and delivery, I've never seen her deliver a better one. Second, she said very few positive things about Barack Obama or his candidacy. She talked at great lengths about the need to support Obama given the state of the country, the challenges we face, the alternative of John McCain, and the importance of Democratic Party unity. But aside from one line of praise for the grassroots oriented, bottom-up nature of Obama's campaign, she had precious little to say about the appeal of the candidate himself.

TUESDAY MORNING, Dateline: Democrats -- Michelle Obama was a big hit with all of us who listened to her speech Monday night (8/26/o8). She was both highly "professional," as well as very personal. On the morning after, this was a typical story: "Michelle keeps things down to earth." It was penned by Roger Simon at Politico.com. It refers to Michelle's narrative about Barack, the brand new father, driving his little family home from the hospital at a snail's pace. To quote:

. . . She was describing a simple moment, a real moment, an emotional moment and one that made only one point: Barack Obama is a human being just like you. He is not an other, he is not a celebrity. He is a father, a husband, a person.

And so, indeed, was Senator Ted Kennedy awesome, according to David Rogers at Politico.com (8/26/08). Most every listener was rooting for his success. In a way, he "had us with hello." The headline hinted at how we all still felt the next morning: "Ailing Kennedy: 'The dream lives on.'" To quote:

Most people have to fight a whole Civil War before getting a Ken Burns documentary. Not Teddy Kennedy, who staged a triumphant appearance before the Democratic National Convention Monday night complete with a Burns-crafted tribute casting him as the modern Ulysses bringing his party home to port.

Weakened by cancer, the Massachusetts senator first let the pictures do his talking but then rocked the Denver hall with an appeal for healthcare reform and party unity that brought him full circle from his famous the dream shall never die speech in New York 28 years ago.

This is also the week that Senator McCain was to have announced the identity of his running mate. I am not waiting to conclude this piece with that information. I want to savor the week before being forced to move on before I am ready. But, of course I will move on -- to Minneapolis. I predict that I will be able to post much more because I will not be savoring all those Republican moments. I give them back to the next participants in this wonderful democratic process.

ADDENDUM -- References From Tom Head, who writes about civil liberties for About.com.

1. Obama vs. McCain (on civil liberties issue differences)


2. Joe Biden on Civil Liberties


3. Joe Biden's Middle East Policy


4. Civil Liberties and November 2008 Ballot Initiatives


5. If You Make a Mistake While Voting

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

Kennedy at the Convention

By Michael J.W. Stickings

In case you missed it, here's Ted Kennedy making a surprise -- and stirring -- appearance, and speech, at the Democratic Convention.

Simply put, the man's a fighter, and, throughout his long and distinguished career, he's fought for a better America -- for health care, for women's rights, for civil rights, for the poor, for a good and decent society.

"I have come here tonight," he told the Convention, "to stand with you to change America, to restore its future, to rise to our best ideals, and to elect Barack Obama president of the United States."

Watch it: