'Act of Parliament' / Shift//Delete from upper space on Vimeo.
UM, THE 1998 MIDTERMS REALLY WEREN'T THAT GREAT FOR THE DEMOCRATS
Today's New York Times tells us that some Republicans are worried that 2014 will be another 1998 if the GOP runs on an Obama-is-evil message:
And anyone who thinks we may see a repeat of 1998 because the GOP is railing about scandals while the economy is improving -- see "Rising Economy Shifts 2014 Election Landscape" by Politico's Ben White -- needs to be reminded that the unemployment rate in November 1998 was an astonishingly good 4.4 percent, and had been 4.7 perent or lower for he previous twelve months. (It's now 7.5 percent.)
So, yeah, Republicans are attacking Obama because there's not much risk to it, and the potential for a serious electoral reward.
Today's New York Times tells us that some Republicans are worried that 2014 will be another 1998 if the GOP runs on an Obama-is-evil message:
Not everyone in the party, however, is so sure that they can expand their ranks in Congress or improve their standing among voters by personally attacking the president....No, the Republicans did not "lose big" in 1998 -- Democrats gained a mere five seats in the House and none in the Senate. Yes, that was a shock because the party of a president in his sixth year hadn't made gains for 176 years, and the scandal-plagued Clinton didn't seemed the least likely guy to break the streak -- but Republicans held the House and the Senate. It was a wrist-slap to the GOP (and to Gingrich personally), but it wasn't a thumpin'.
"I don't think I'd personalize it," said John Linder, the former congressman from Georgia who ran the National Republican Congressional Committee during the late 1990s while Newt Gingrich and House Republicans were preparing an impeachment case against President Bill Clinton. Mr. Linder said he fought and lost a battle with Mr. Gingrich over their strategy in the 1998 midterm elections, which Mr. Gingrich thought should be focused on assailing Mr. Clinton's character....
In the fall of 1998, Republicans poured tens of millions of dollars into a television ad campaign with slogans like "Honesty does matter," a thinly veiled reference to Mr. Clinton’s duplicity about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky.
They lost big that year, and it marked the first time since 1822 that the party that held the White House gained seats in the House of Representatives during a second term.
And anyone who thinks we may see a repeat of 1998 because the GOP is railing about scandals while the economy is improving -- see "Rising Economy Shifts 2014 Election Landscape" by Politico's Ben White -- needs to be reminded that the unemployment rate in November 1998 was an astonishingly good 4.4 percent, and had been 4.7 perent or lower for he previous twelve months. (It's now 7.5 percent.)
So, yeah, Republicans are attacking Obama because there's not much risk to it, and the potential for a serious electoral reward.
YEAH, WHEN YOU CALL MY NAME I SALIVATE LIKE A PAVLOV DOG
All the GOP has to do is ring the bell persistently enough and the usual voting blocs start drooling:
So a story that even the scandal-hungry national media thinks is a nothingburger is working on independents, and on men in general, not merely on Republicans. Yes, Clinton is still in positive territory, and the poll says she'd still beat Rand Paul or Jeb Bush handily. But this is happening when the Republican noise machine isn't completely focused on turning Clinton (or whoever is the 2016 front-runner) into the Antichrist. That focus will come.
Meanwhile, yesterday's numbers from Quinnipiac show that Republicans have pulled even on the congressional generic-ballot question: "If the election for the U.S. House of Representatives were being held today, would you vote for the Republican candidate, or for the Democratic candidate in your district?" It's now 38%-38%. Two months ago, Democrats led by 8. (It's been estimated that, because of gerrymandering, Democrats would have to win the popular vote by 7 points to retake the House.)
Two months ago, the parties were tied among independents; now Republicans lead by 13. Two months ago, Republicans led among men by 2; now it's 12.
Yes, there are a lot of scandals right now, but none of them concern Democrats in Congress. So this shift isn't really logical. But it's how politics works. Electoral success was the purpose of all this scandal-mongering, not good government.
The notion that Republicans howl in outrage at every possible opportunity because demonization of Democrats is all they've got to offer has never caught on among centrist and heartland white males. Those groups still think Republicans act in good faith, just as Joe Scarborough and David Gregory endlessly insist. So they're always ready to fall for this sort of thing.
All the GOP has to do is ring the bell persistently enough and the usual voting blocs start drooling:
Hillary Clinton's favorability rating dropped significantly in a Quinnipiac University poll released Friday, as the months-long investigation into the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, have begun to drag on the former secretary of State.The poll numbers are here.
According to the survey, 52 percent said they have a favorable view of Clinton, against 40 unfavorable. That’s down from her all-time high of 61 percent favorable and 34 unfavorable in February of this year....
"The drop in favorability is substantial among men, Republicans and independent voters. One reason for her drop may be that 48 percent of voters blame her either a little or a lot for the death of the American ambassador in Benghazi." ...
So a story that even the scandal-hungry national media thinks is a nothingburger is working on independents, and on men in general, not merely on Republicans. Yes, Clinton is still in positive territory, and the poll says she'd still beat Rand Paul or Jeb Bush handily. But this is happening when the Republican noise machine isn't completely focused on turning Clinton (or whoever is the 2016 front-runner) into the Antichrist. That focus will come.
Meanwhile, yesterday's numbers from Quinnipiac show that Republicans have pulled even on the congressional generic-ballot question: "If the election for the U.S. House of Representatives were being held today, would you vote for the Republican candidate, or for the Democratic candidate in your district?" It's now 38%-38%. Two months ago, Democrats led by 8. (It's been estimated that, because of gerrymandering, Democrats would have to win the popular vote by 7 points to retake the House.)
Two months ago, the parties were tied among independents; now Republicans lead by 13. Two months ago, Republicans led among men by 2; now it's 12.
Yes, there are a lot of scandals right now, but none of them concern Democrats in Congress. So this shift isn't really logical. But it's how politics works. Electoral success was the purpose of all this scandal-mongering, not good government.
The notion that Republicans howl in outrage at every possible opportunity because demonization of Democrats is all they've got to offer has never caught on among centrist and heartland white males. Those groups still think Republicans act in good faith, just as Joe Scarborough and David Gregory endlessly insist. So they're always ready to fall for this sort of thing.
ET TU, McCLATCHY? YOU FELL FOR CATHERINE ENGELBRECHT'S SOB STORY, TOO?
Yes, I suppose there's some information worth considering in a new McClatchy story titled "IRS May Have Targeted Conservatives More Broadly" -- for instance, I may not like what the suburban Houston anti-abortion group Christian Voices for Life does, but if its picketing of Planned Parenthood clinics isn't intended to influence elections, and if it's otherwise done within the law, and if none of its other activities are intended to favor any political candidate over any other, and if analogous liberal groups get 501(c)(3) status with little fuss, then, no, the group should not have had to jump through extra hoops to get 501(c)(3) approval.
But if we're talking about Catherine Engelbrecht of True the Vote and the King Street Patriots, I have no sympathy whatsoever, and my only problem with making her jump through hoops to get tax-exempt status is that her application should have been laughed out of every office at the IRS.
From the McClatchy story:
****
The right wants Catherine Engelbrecht to be this year's Ollie North: culprit as victim. John Fund has portrayed her as a victim. So has Peggy Noonan. Selling her as a poster child is brazen, but brazen is what the right does best.
If Engelbrecht can be successfully sold that way, there are massive dividends for the right: not only are the IRS and the Obama administration discredited, but the GOP's vote suppression campaign gets a major boost going into 2014 and (especially) 2016. Whatever the Supreme Court does in its upcoming evisceration of the Voting Rights Act will dovetail with this very, very nicely.
Thanks a lot, McClatchy.
Yes, I suppose there's some information worth considering in a new McClatchy story titled "IRS May Have Targeted Conservatives More Broadly" -- for instance, I may not like what the suburban Houston anti-abortion group Christian Voices for Life does, but if its picketing of Planned Parenthood clinics isn't intended to influence elections, and if it's otherwise done within the law, and if none of its other activities are intended to favor any political candidate over any other, and if analogous liberal groups get 501(c)(3) status with little fuss, then, no, the group should not have had to jump through extra hoops to get 501(c)(3) approval.
But if we're talking about Catherine Engelbrecht of True the Vote and the King Street Patriots, I have no sympathy whatsoever, and my only problem with making her jump through hoops to get tax-exempt status is that her application should have been laughed out of every office at the IRS.
From the McClatchy story:
Catherine Engelbrecht's family and business in Texas were audited by the government after her voting-rights group sought tax-exempt status from the IRS....Gee, I wonder where liberal group would get that idea. Perhaps from ... True the Vote itself?
Concerned about government regulation of her family's manufacturing business, she became dissatisfied with the political process and particularly the 2008 presidential choices.
She discovered like-minded viewpoints and attended rallies, organizing a group called the King Street Patriots....
After witnessing what she called voter irregularities in the Houston area, Engelbrecht formed a group called True the Vote. With a paid staff of five, it aims to educate 1 million poll workers nationwide on spotting election fraud. Liberal groups view it as a conservative effort aimed at restricting minority participation, a claim that True the Vote officials deny....
In 2010, before most reporters had heard of True the Vote, the group put out a video introducing itself. As epic battle music plays, far-right activist David Horowitz comes on screen. "The voting system is under attack now," he says. "Movements that are focused on voter fraud, on the integrity of elections are crucial. This is a war." Horowitz goes on to claim: "A Democratic party consultant once told me that Republicans have to win by at least 3 percent to win any elections." ...More:
"The left has been focused on this now for decades," says Horowitz, as photographs of black voters lining up to cast ballots flash by. "Obama's very connected to ACORN, which is a voter-fraud machine. ACORN is the radical army." ...
True the Vote's website portrays voter fraud as largely a Democractic party problem. It routinely runs stories on election fraud being perpetrated by "liberals," ... or "Democrats" ... but has, to date, never run a story on Republican or Conservative instances of voter fraud....In 2010, in Texas, Engelbrecht accused Houston Votes, a group conducting a voter registration drive in poor and minority areas, of massive voter fraud -- adding the charge that the group's office was "the Texas office of the New Black Panthers."
In 2011, True the Vote posted an article on its website claiming that US attorney General Eric Holder supported a plan by the NAACP "to involve the United Nations in U.S. elections." referencing a protest the NAACP held across the street from the UN in December of 2011, and a related petition filed with the UN. Holder gave the protest and the petition no formal support, but True the Vote's press release made it seem like Holder was advocating direct UN involvement in American elections, asking ""Are you ready to have U.N. blue helmets outside your polling place?" This article earned True the Vote a "pants on fire" rating from Politifact.com....
... in 2012, True the Vote contributed $5000 to the Republican State Leadership Committee.... This overtly political statement would legally, according to tax lawyers specializing in election law, disqualify a nonprofit from 501(c)3 tax-exempt status....
The county's Republican voter registrar, Leo Vasquez, jumped on the allegations, holding a press conference on Aug. 24 and accusing Houston Votes of conducting "an organized and systemic attack" on the county's voter rolls.Also:
True The Vote ... put together a video raising the threat of voter fraud which features soaring music. "Think it can't happen in your town? Think again!" reads one message. "Our elections are being manipulated. By the RADICAL LEFT," the video says.In 2012, True the Vote was part of a project called Verify the Recall, which reviewed signatures on petitions calling for the recall of Wisconsin governor Scott Walker.
The video originally featured a doctored photo of an African-American voter holding a poorly photoshopped sign -- featuring Comic Sans font -- that read "I only got to vote once." That part of the video has since been edited out.
"Verify the Recall" is a joint project between the Houston-based nonprofit "True the Vote" (a project of the Texas Tea Party group King Street Patriots) and the Wisconsin Tea Party groups Grandsons of Liberty and We The People of the Republic.Oh, and there was that curious RV last year:
On Tuesday, February 28, Governor Walker ... request[ed] that the Government Accountability Board incorporate the "Verify the Recall" findings....
A cursory review of signatures that True the Vote considers "ineligible" strongly suggests they are not counting legitimate petitions....
* True the Vote discounts the signature of Mary Babiash (page 980) because she added the state abbreviation "WI" to her zip code. Her address is otherwise correct....
*The signature from Tyrell Luebkes (see page 983) would not be counted because he entered his city in the "street address" section, and vice versa.
* They would not count Cheryl L Koch's signature (see page 497), saying she had a "bad sign date" of 1/91/12 because of a stray pen stroke behind the "9" on the correct sign date: 1/9/12....
Driving down the Interstate in Florida, you may see an R.V. wrapped with a picture of Abraham Lincoln.
These eye-catching vehicles are mobile command centers for registering and energizing voters. They are part of a citizen effort to "defeat Obama, hold the House and win the Senate in November," Fred Solomon, a retired Alabama businessman, said in an e-mail to fellow Tea Party supporters.
Mr. Solomon is a coordinator for Code Red USA, the plan to flood swing states with conservative volunteers. "Partnering with True the Vote, a nonprofit, nonpartisan watchdog group, we will train and put election observers in polling places in the swing states to reduce voter fraud," Mr. Solomon said in his e-mail.
Code Red USA is financed by the Madison Project, a political action committee whose chairman is former Representative Jim Ryun, a Kansas Republican who was regarded as among the most conservative members of Congress. The provocative video promoting Code Red accuses Democrats of "a clear intent to commit massive voter fraud."
Despite Mr. Solomon's e-mail and the video, which identifies True the Vote as a participant, Ms. Engelbrecht said her group has no role in the effort.
****
The right wants Catherine Engelbrecht to be this year's Ollie North: culprit as victim. John Fund has portrayed her as a victim. So has Peggy Noonan. Selling her as a poster child is brazen, but brazen is what the right does best.
If Engelbrecht can be successfully sold that way, there are massive dividends for the right: not only are the IRS and the Obama administration discredited, but the GOP's vote suppression campaign gets a major boost going into 2014 and (especially) 2016. Whatever the Supreme Court does in its upcoming evisceration of the Voting Rights Act will dovetail with this very, very nicely.
Thanks a lot, McClatchy.
Ancient in Internet Time
I wonder what's become of these kids.
In other game-relatedness, pervs:
In other game-relatedness, pervs:
Other forms of pervs lose in a minority decision:I am sitting in a pink computer chair, behind a white desk. I am playing Super Hexagon. There is another woman standing behind my seat, watching me carefully. If I fail to achieve a satisfactory time, I will be physically punished in some capacity. And she is also doing her best to distract me, lithe fingers exploring my shoulders, neck, face.
A normal session of Super Hexagon, for me, is a series of near-instant failures punctuated by an occasional good run. Having this presence behind me radically alters the way in which I play the game. It's not so much the threat of punishment that raises the stakes for me, but the fear of disappointing her, of letting her down.
She's asking me questions while I'm playing now but I'm finding them hard to answer. I've heard that the best Hexagon players need something like this -- the distraction actually helps them do better. But my head is already fuzzy from the earlier blows, I feel myself slipping into subspace. She asks about how I'm experiencing things and the best I can muster is something about how much more tense I am than usual. "That's a pretty surface observation," she remarks, disappointed, and I feel completely embarrassed.Her loose grey top slips off her shoulder, her body a disheveled puzzle of skin and fabric zones.In this space we can act on otherwise dangerous instincts--for me, an exhilarating cruelty, a way to be powerful and manipulative and terrible in a way that harms no one. For her, being swallowed into this place where it’s safe to be ashamed, struggling, and vulnerable.For both of us, a way to be incredibly close to another human being, to share our darkness with each other.
The 5-4 ruling written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg concluded that there should be a "gateway," albeit narrow, though which offenders can pass if they are able to make a credible case for thier innocence regardless of the passage of a deadline. Chief Justice John G. Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia were among the dissenters. The high count sent the case back to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati for consideration on that point.Buildings as furries:
Swedish firm Belatchew Arkitekter has designed a conceptual add-on to buildings that challenge the notion of fixed structures while also providing a necessary function. Their "Strawscraper" concept involves cloaking a building -- Söder Torn, one of the tallest buildings in Stockholm -- in thin, movable plastic straws, or "hairs," that capture wind and convert it into electricity. The proposed design also includes the adding of 16 floors to the structure, restoring the vision of Söder Torn as designed by the original architects, Henning Larsen, before a disagreement between them and the client forced them to quit the project.Book review:
That's the real joy of "Moving Innovation: A History of Computer Animation." Marrying his obvious skill as a storyteller to his encyclopedic knowledge of animation history, Sito has crafted this ridiculously readable book which is just loaded with entertaining insights. Sometimes surprising ...How to write good:Director Ted Berman and Richard Rich asked to get the multiplane camera out from storage to create some shots (for The Black Cauldron ). The multiplane was a device invented at Walt Disney in 1937 to simulate the illusion of depth using 2D flat art. This was done by mounting a camera vertically to shoot down through layers of background art painted on glass, all moving to precise calibrations. The multiplane was expensive to use, and Walt had it mothballed after Lady and the Tramp (1955). When (Berman and Rich) tried to get it running again for Cauldron, they discovered hardly anyone remembered how to use it and no one had left behind any written instructions.
Other times quite melancholy ...Starting in 2003 the Walt Disney Company had begun to eliminate most of the traditional animation crew trained by the golden age masters, as simply as one would dump an old typewriter in the attic ... When master animator Frank Thomas died in 2004, there was a memorial at the El Capitan Theater in Hollywood. Many of the former Disney animators there paused to wonder if they were there to mourn Thomas or their own careers ...
"Moving Innovation" is a must-read. Not just if you're an animation fan or a film history buff. But also if you want an up-close look at some of the most powerful people working in Hollywood today.
“Want to jack off together some time?” our friend August said to my husband, Jeff, one night over the phone. He invited Jeff to masturbate with him as casually as he might ask him to lunch. “It’s not a gay thing. It’s an Indian blood brothers thing,” he added.
Jeff was speechless. August was married to Dana, also a friend (their names have been changed, of course). Did she know what her husband was doing behind her back?
After gently declining the invitation and hanging up, Jeff told me about their conversation. “August made me promise not to tell you, but I didn’t think it was right to keep it from you,” he said.
I wanted to close my eyes and pretend this was not happening.
[...]
Besides, Jeff and I were running out of friends. As a childless, married couple in our mid-30’s, it was hard to find other DINKS (double income, no kids) to spend time with.
[...]
Marilyn Friedman is the founder of Writing Pad, a creative writing school in Los Angeles.
ASKED AND ANSWERED
(updated)
The wingnuttosphere is freaking about this bit of old news regurgitated today by the Daily Caller:
Well, duh. A big, complicated new government program needs to be implemented -- and so there are many discussions of that at the White House. Imagine!
Of course, that explanation would strike the right as even more sinister, because "Obama will use Obamacare to target conservatives for death!" is the new birtherism, except that it's not a marginalized belief on the right -- it's mainstream Republican thinking. So it won't satisfy the vultures.
*****
UPDATE, FRIDAY: At The Atlantic, Garance Francke-Ruta elaborates:
(updated)
The wingnuttosphere is freaking about this bit of old news regurgitated today by the Daily Caller:
IRS's Shulman had more public White House visits than any Cabinet memberUm, yeah -- which is when the Huffington Post's Paul Blumenthal tweeted this perfectly rational explanation:
Publicly released records show that embattled former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman visited the White House at least 157 times during the Obama administration, more recorded visits than even the most trusted members of the president's Cabinet.
Shulman's extensive access to the White House first came to light during his testimony last week before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee....
More questions about Shulman WH visits. The majority of those visits were to the OEOB to talk about health care implementation.
— PaulBlumenthal (@PaulBlu) May 22, 2013
Well, duh. A big, complicated new government program needs to be implemented -- and so there are many discussions of that at the White House. Imagine!
Of course, that explanation would strike the right as even more sinister, because "Obama will use Obamacare to target conservatives for death!" is the new birtherism, except that it's not a marginalized belief on the right -- it's mainstream Republican thinking. So it won't satisfy the vultures.
*****
UPDATE, FRIDAY: At The Atlantic, Garance Francke-Ruta elaborates:
[Shulman] was cleared 40 times to meet with Obama's director of the Office of Health Reform, and a further 80 times for the biweekly health reform deputies meetings and others set up by aides involved with the health-care law implementation efforts. That's 76 percent of his planned White House visits just there, before you even add in all the meetings with Office of Management and Budget personnel also involved in health reform.End of story.
Complicating the picture is the fact that just because a meeting was scheduled and Shulman was cleared to attend it does not mean that he actually went. Routine events like the biweekly health-care deputies meeting would have had a standing list of people cleared to attend, people whose White House appointments would have been logged and forwarded to the check-in gate. But there is no time of arrival information in the records to confirm that Shulman actually signed in and went to these standing meetings.
Indeed, of the 157 events Shulman was cleared to attend, White House records only provide time of arrival information -- confirming that he actually went to them -- for 11 events over the 2009-2012 period, and time of departure information for only six appointments.
No words.
Last night, I randomly checked my Facebook in the middle of the night. The first post to come up was one from a close college friend, who recently had twin daughters. The girls were born at 26 weeks (I think...), and yesterday, one of them passed away.
My heart breaks for my friend. No one should ever have to experience losing a child after only 9 days of knowing them. Eight months ago, at our wedding, this couple was celebrating purchasing their first house and moving in the next day. And today, they are mourning the loss of a child- at 26 years old. I'm not saying its any easier if you're older. But it just hits close to home when it's someone who is my age who I met when we were just little freshman in college.
Today, my thoughts and prayers are with my friend, her husband, and their other daughter- who still has a long road ahead of her. That's all I can say...because no words can express how sorry I am for them having to experience this.
Rest in peace Madison Renee. You were so loved in those 9 days and you will never be forgotten.
My heart breaks for my friend. No one should ever have to experience losing a child after only 9 days of knowing them. Eight months ago, at our wedding, this couple was celebrating purchasing their first house and moving in the next day. And today, they are mourning the loss of a child- at 26 years old. I'm not saying its any easier if you're older. But it just hits close to home when it's someone who is my age who I met when we were just little freshman in college.
Today, my thoughts and prayers are with my friend, her husband, and their other daughter- who still has a long road ahead of her. That's all I can say...because no words can express how sorry I am for them having to experience this.
Rest in peace Madison Renee. You were so loved in those 9 days and you will never be forgotten.
I THINK I KNOW WHAT MIGHT SAVE MSNBC
There's a lot of talk about the fact that MSNBC's ratings have been way down for the past couple of months. A number of factors seem to be responsible for this: people are turning instead to CNN and HLN for real news (the Boston bombings) and fake news (the Jodi Arias trial); Chris Hayes's show isn't doing as well as Ed Schultz's show used to, and that's giving Rachel Maddow a weaker lead-in; and Fox's core audience is inspired to watch because of scandal stories involving the Obama administration, while MSNBC's core audience is disillusioned for the same reason.
Digby says she's sensed a general drop-off in her readership since the election. She quotes Salon's Alex Pareene:
You know what might turn this around? The appointment of a special prosecutor for the IRS scandal. You've got to figure that's inevitable -- a new Quinnipiac poll says Americans support the appointment of a special prosecutor by a 76%-17% margin.
This is where overreach will happen. When the White House itself is turning to non-ideologue Republicans as appointees (as I noted in my last post), what sort of prosecutor do you think we're going to get for this? It's got to be someone well to the right of, say, James Comey. Especially when you've got Bill Keller in The New York Times proposing the appointment of Kenneth Starr.
An IRS special prosecutor doesn't have to be a witch-hunter, but I think we're going to get a special prosecutor who is a witch-hunter. Republicans will howl at the mere mention of anyone who isn't a partisan hack, and so a partisan hack is what we'll get.
And that's going to be the big story of the foreseeable future. It'll be bad for Obama and America, but it'll be good for MSNBC.
There's a lot of talk about the fact that MSNBC's ratings have been way down for the past couple of months. A number of factors seem to be responsible for this: people are turning instead to CNN and HLN for real news (the Boston bombings) and fake news (the Jodi Arias trial); Chris Hayes's show isn't doing as well as Ed Schultz's show used to, and that's giving Rachel Maddow a weaker lead-in; and Fox's core audience is inspired to watch because of scandal stories involving the Obama administration, while MSNBC's core audience is disillusioned for the same reason.
Digby says she's sensed a general drop-off in her readership since the election. She quotes Salon's Alex Pareene:
Perhaps there just isn't a huge, permanent, year-round liberal audience for political news and discussion.... Young liberals tune in during election years. The rest of the time they keep up with the news online (or on "The Daily Show") and spend their evenings watching actual TV. Like, "Game of Thrones" and stuff.I think it's a mix of Obama disillusionment and what Pareene is describing -- right-wingers are revved up nearly all the time, but we aren't. (Although it was only a couple of months ago that we were reading about big ratings declines at Fox News, which have since been reversed.)
You know what might turn this around? The appointment of a special prosecutor for the IRS scandal. You've got to figure that's inevitable -- a new Quinnipiac poll says Americans support the appointment of a special prosecutor by a 76%-17% margin.
This is where overreach will happen. When the White House itself is turning to non-ideologue Republicans as appointees (as I noted in my last post), what sort of prosecutor do you think we're going to get for this? It's got to be someone well to the right of, say, James Comey. Especially when you've got Bill Keller in The New York Times proposing the appointment of Kenneth Starr.
An IRS special prosecutor doesn't have to be a witch-hunter, but I think we're going to get a special prosecutor who is a witch-hunter. Republicans will howl at the mere mention of anyone who isn't a partisan hack, and so a partisan hack is what we'll get.
And that's going to be the big story of the foreseeable future. It'll be bad for Obama and America, but it'll be good for MSNBC.
THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION'S INORDINATE FONDNESS FOR BUSH-ERA APOSTATES
You've probably heard that James Comey, the Bush-era Justice Department official who's been chosen to head the FBI by President Obama, was under serious consideration for the FBI post in 2011, before Robert Mueller was given a two-year extension. But did you know that some officials in the Obama White House were recommending Comey for the Supreme Court in 2009? So this has been a long courtship.
I understand why Comey has some appeal -- he interceded to prevent Alberto Gonzales and Andy Card from bypassing a hospitalized John Ashcroft to reauthorize warrantless wiretapping. But I'm reminded of Obama's appointment of Eric Shinseki as secretary of veterans affairs, a choice that seems to have been made largely because Shinseki publicly disputed Donald Rumsfeld's assertion that he could handle the consequences of the Iraq invasion with well under 200,000 troops. I'm also reminded of the decision to appoint Republican war critic Chuck Hagel as defense secretary. Defying the Bush administration and GOP from within counts for a lot in the Obama White House.
The Shinseki appointment has been a disappointment, of course -- his response to the backlog in processing veterans' benefit claims has been woefully inadequate. It's too soon to judge Hagel, of course.
On the surface, this has been a very bipartisan administration -- Obama's worked with Robert Gates and John Brennan and Jon Huntsman and David Petraeus and Ray LaHood. It hasn't helped Obama much -- Republicans hate "RINOs" almost as much as they hate Democrats. Appointing a Republican may make the approval process marginally easier for Obama, but it doesn't diminish the suspicions of angrier Republican officeholders or the GOP rank-and-file.
But the Obama administration clealy thinks this is a good approach. The New York Times notes that other candidates who were considered for the FBI post in 2011 were Ray Kelly (Mike Bloomberg's police commissioner), Patrick Fitzgerald (another GOP hero to liberals when he was prosecuting Plamegate), and Kenneth Wainstein (George W. Bush's last homeland security advisor).
I guess Comey will have a relatively smooth approval process (although I wonder if e'll hear about the moment when he was sent out by the Bush administration to criticize a proposed reporter shield law). But it all makes me wonder: who's going to be Obama's next Supreme Court pick? Chris Christie?
You've probably heard that James Comey, the Bush-era Justice Department official who's been chosen to head the FBI by President Obama, was under serious consideration for the FBI post in 2011, before Robert Mueller was given a two-year extension. But did you know that some officials in the Obama White House were recommending Comey for the Supreme Court in 2009? So this has been a long courtship.
I understand why Comey has some appeal -- he interceded to prevent Alberto Gonzales and Andy Card from bypassing a hospitalized John Ashcroft to reauthorize warrantless wiretapping. But I'm reminded of Obama's appointment of Eric Shinseki as secretary of veterans affairs, a choice that seems to have been made largely because Shinseki publicly disputed Donald Rumsfeld's assertion that he could handle the consequences of the Iraq invasion with well under 200,000 troops. I'm also reminded of the decision to appoint Republican war critic Chuck Hagel as defense secretary. Defying the Bush administration and GOP from within counts for a lot in the Obama White House.
The Shinseki appointment has been a disappointment, of course -- his response to the backlog in processing veterans' benefit claims has been woefully inadequate. It's too soon to judge Hagel, of course.
On the surface, this has been a very bipartisan administration -- Obama's worked with Robert Gates and John Brennan and Jon Huntsman and David Petraeus and Ray LaHood. It hasn't helped Obama much -- Republicans hate "RINOs" almost as much as they hate Democrats. Appointing a Republican may make the approval process marginally easier for Obama, but it doesn't diminish the suspicions of angrier Republican officeholders or the GOP rank-and-file.
But the Obama administration clealy thinks this is a good approach. The New York Times notes that other candidates who were considered for the FBI post in 2011 were Ray Kelly (Mike Bloomberg's police commissioner), Patrick Fitzgerald (another GOP hero to liberals when he was prosecuting Plamegate), and Kenneth Wainstein (George W. Bush's last homeland security advisor).
I guess Comey will have a relatively smooth approval process (although I wonder if e'll hear about the moment when he was sent out by the Bush administration to criticize a proposed reporter shield law). But it all makes me wonder: who's going to be Obama's next Supreme Court pick? Chris Christie?
Backfall
 |
| Doris Day, uncredited and undated. |
who should perhaps have known better (the writer blushingly refers to himself) were possibly a little more enthusiastic than he strictly deserved.
Because just as Oscar Levant used to say he remembered Doris Day back before she became a virgin, in the same way we had been aware of Weiner before he became a progressive, when he was a much less promising old Queens politicus, with a certain animus against Manhattan and not so much ability to explain where he stood beyond fluster and bluff.
It is that Anthony Weiner that is resurfacing in the mayoral campaign, especially at yesterday's education function, where he announced that he would refuse to provide special funding for public school arts instruction.
Weiner also defended his previous call to make it easier to remove disruptive students from classrooms, and refused to ban co-locations of charter schools without community approval. Weiner also said he wanted to "reward" teachers who took jobs in more challenging schools.These are all regressive policies associated with Mayor Bloomberg and the old chancellor Klein, and parents and teachers really hate them. If he can't distinguish himself from Bloomberg in education policy (all the other Democrats can, even the most cringily Bloombergian) then he should really just wave his dick around the room for old times' sake and go back home.
Ah, yes, now we remember: it was Weiner's first campaign, for City Council, in 1991:
It was at this point that Weiner’s campaign decided to blanket the district with leaflets attacking his opponents. But these were no ordinary campaign attacks: They played the race card, and at a very sensitive time. They were also anonymous.
Just weeks earlier, the Crown Heights riot — a deadly, days-long affair that brought to the surface long-standing tension between the area’s black and Jewish populations — had played out a few miles away from the 48th District. The episode had gripped all of New York and had been national news. It was just days after order had been restored that Weiner’s campaign distributed its anonymous leaflets, which linked Cohen — whose voters he was targeting in particular — to Jesse Jackson and David Dinkins, who was then New York’s mayor.... The leaflets urged voters to “just say no” to the “Jackson-Dinkins agenda” that Cohen supposedly represented. At City Hall, Dinkins held up the flier and branded it “hateful.”It was worse than hateful, as Talleyrand might have said; it was Nixonian. So that's my Weiner problem. What's yours?
 |
| From Lattaland. |
Stress and wine consumption. Direct correlation.
I graduated college (woo Bobcats!) with a degree in journalism. I love to write, and I thought I loved journalism. But it was somewhere around the end of my junior year that I realized I was planning to go into a career that just didn't float my boat. Needless to say, it was the end of my junior year and too late to switch majors. So I stuck it out and graduated from one of the top journalism schools in the country...and had no desire to look for journalism jobs.
So between now and August September? I might be a little distant. And I might be a tad bit stressed. But I'll be drinking a shit ton of wine, so that should make for some awesome blog posts.
I spent the final 6 months of my senior year applying for a wide variety of jobs- magazine, PR, marketing, etc... And nothing. My mom suggested I look into the AmeriCorps VISTA program; which is how I ended up in the non-profit industry doing grant writing and event planning. Which lead to my current position- no I won't share the specifics, but it is a non profit in Cleveland which focuses on youth in our community. I started with the grant writing, and have 100% switched to the event planning and marketing side of things. Definitely my jam...at least compared to grant writing. Which is the worst thing in the history of the world stinks just a tad.
And as life tends to go in non-profits- this has been a ROUGH year financially. Meaning it has been a pretty stressful year for me, considering I'm on the money raising side of life. And it's only getting worse. In the 2.5 years I have been there, we have only had two big events each year, with a few smaller ones to fill in. This year? Four huge events...with smaller/semi bigger ones every other month. From February through October. Two of the big ones brand spanking new. Seriously? STRESS.
The first of the brand spanking new ones....3 months. More like 2.5 months. Working with a group of other agencies that we have never worked with before. Specifically someone who looks at me- 27 years old while looking a whole 20- and doesn't seem to respect a damn thing I do. Even though, if I do say so myself, I am damn good at my job. So stressful? Yes. Fantastic experience? Yes. Do I want to come home a drink a full bottle of wine some nights? Abso-fricken-lutely.
 |
| HP and a bottle of wine? Perfect. Oh and cold fried chicken and salad for dinner. And the bottle of wine is all mine. |
Goodbye
More at this link:
Dr. Henry Morgentaler, who led the abortion movement in Canada, has died at age 90.
Carolyn Egan, with the Ontario Coalition of Abortion Clinics, said she spoke with members of Morgentaler's family, who told her he died early Wednesday morning, surrounded by family, and that it was a peaceful death at his Toronto home.
Morgentaler emerged in 1969 as one of Canada's most controversial figures when he broke the law at the time, and opened the country's first abortion clinic in Montreal.
Over the next two decades, he would be heralded as a hero by some, and called a murderer by others as he fought to change Canada's abortion laws.
Morgentaler, who was born in Lodz, Poland, and came to Canada after the Second World War, emerged in 1967 as an advocate for the right of women to have abortion on demand — a polarizing issue in Canada. His abortion clinic in Montreal was followed by more clinics across the country.
"His work changed the legal landscape in Canada, and eventually led to the 1988 landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision that gave women the right to obtain abortion care," said Vicki Saporta, president of the National Abortion Federation.
"Dr. Morgentaler was a legend, a hero, and a national treasure in both our countries, and we will miss him dearly."
WAS MICHELE BACHMANN FRAGGED?
Michele Bachmann has decided not to run for another term in the House. She was facing a tough reelection fight against Democrat Jim Graves, and she's under an ethics cloud:
Well, obviously the GOP establishment considers Bachmann a liability -- it's done no pushback on her behalf. A couple of months ago there was speculation that she might run for the Senate against Al Franken (even though polls showed that she'd be crushed) -- but whether she ran for the Senate seat or just for reelection, she was likely to be a Todd Akin, a loose cannon saying things that would rub off on other Republican candidates across the country, at a time when party establishmentarians like Karl Rove are hoping to hold the House and win back the Senate by de-Akinizing their candidate list.
(Recall that just before the Iowa straw poll in 2011, a story appeared in the Daily Caller claiming that Bachmann engages in "heavy pill use" to combat severe migraines, after which Rove called for her to release medical records. She won the straw poll anyway, driving establishment favorite Tim Pawlenty out of the race, though her campaign imploded a few months later.)
So, yeah, the GOP wanted to nudge her out of the way, and not gently. She's outlived her usefulness.
Michele Bachmann has decided not to run for another term in the House. She was facing a tough reelection fight against Democrat Jim Graves, and she's under an ethics cloud:
The most glaring problem for Bachmann, though, may be a swirl of investigations into her campaign finances. The Federal Election Commission and the Office of Congressional Ethics are investigating whether her campaign concealed payments to an Iowa state senator who did work for her 2012 presidential bid. (A state ethics law bars senators from doing paid campaign work.)Wait: a proud constitutional conservative and fervent believer in limited government is under investigation by the FBI -- part of Antichrist Eric Holder's Justice Department -- and the GOP and right-wing noise machine aren't rushing to her defense? No one's calling this a witch hunt? No one's claiming that this is part of the Obama jihad against True Patriots? No one's dismissing the other investigations as traffic-ticket stuff?
And late last week, Minnpost.com reported that the FBI would be joining the investigation and interviewing a former Bachmann chief of staff.
Well, obviously the GOP establishment considers Bachmann a liability -- it's done no pushback on her behalf. A couple of months ago there was speculation that she might run for the Senate against Al Franken (even though polls showed that she'd be crushed) -- but whether she ran for the Senate seat or just for reelection, she was likely to be a Todd Akin, a loose cannon saying things that would rub off on other Republican candidates across the country, at a time when party establishmentarians like Karl Rove are hoping to hold the House and win back the Senate by de-Akinizing their candidate list.
(Recall that just before the Iowa straw poll in 2011, a story appeared in the Daily Caller claiming that Bachmann engages in "heavy pill use" to combat severe migraines, after which Rove called for her to release medical records. She won the straw poll anyway, driving establishment favorite Tim Pawlenty out of the race, though her campaign imploded a few months later.)
So, yeah, the GOP wanted to nudge her out of the way, and not gently. She's outlived her usefulness.
A GAY CANDIDATE WHO'S MORE POPULAR WITH NON-WHITES THAN WITH WHITES?
You probably didn't dig into the numbers (PDF) of that Marist poll howing Anthony Weiner within 5 points of front-runner Christine Quinn. That headline number is somewhat shocking, and suggests that Weiner needs to be taken seriously. (Yes, if no candidate gets 40% in he primary and there's a Quinn-Weiner runoff, Quinn defeats him by 15 points -- but I think if he just gets to a runoff he might start seeming credible to people who are now wary of him, and the results could be closer.) But there's another set of numbers tht surprises me.
Quinn's approval rating among African-American voters is 64%. Among Latino voters, it's 60%. Among whites, it's only 53%. And in a runoff against Weiner, Quinn does best among Latino voters (53%-37%, as opposed to 46%-31% among whites, although it's a tighter race -- 44%-35% -- among African-Americans).
Quinn has been out as a lesbian for years. Non-white voters are supposed to be too "culturally conservative" to be comfortable with gay people, but that's not what these numbers suggest.
We'll see if this holds up. For now, though, it suggests that some of our preconceptions might need adjusting.
You probably didn't dig into the numbers (PDF) of that Marist poll howing Anthony Weiner within 5 points of front-runner Christine Quinn. That headline number is somewhat shocking, and suggests that Weiner needs to be taken seriously. (Yes, if no candidate gets 40% in he primary and there's a Quinn-Weiner runoff, Quinn defeats him by 15 points -- but I think if he just gets to a runoff he might start seeming credible to people who are now wary of him, and the results could be closer.) But there's another set of numbers tht surprises me.
Quinn's approval rating among African-American voters is 64%. Among Latino voters, it's 60%. Among whites, it's only 53%. And in a runoff against Weiner, Quinn does best among Latino voters (53%-37%, as opposed to 46%-31% among whites, although it's a tighter race -- 44%-35% -- among African-Americans).
Quinn has been out as a lesbian for years. Non-white voters are supposed to be too "culturally conservative" to be comfortable with gay people, but that's not what these numbers suggest.
We'll see if this holds up. For now, though, it suggests that some of our preconceptions might need adjusting.
WHEN THE GOING GETS PARANOID, THE PARANOID TURN PRO
The Atlantic's Philip Bump notes that Rand Paul got big laughs in a recent speech joking about the large number of diagnostic codes that will be used under Obamacare. It won't shock you to learn that there's a perfectly reasonable explanation for the new codes, but this is the right doing what it does best -- killing good ideas it doesn't like by making them seem ridiculous to the rubes -- and Senator Paul seems quite good at it:
But conservatism thrives in America by making people ignorant. Obama will be blamed for this the same way he's blamed for the "Obamaphone" program for the poor (which in reality is the current version of a program started in the Reagan years).
By the way, please note that Rand Paul -- once a regular on Alex Jones's show -- passed up the opportunity to say that these codes are a UN plot. (The World Health Organization is, of course, part of the UN.) That suggests to me that Paul is professionalizing his act, and getting his talking points from the mainstream right-wing noise machine rather than the Jones fringe. I'd say that makes Paul more dangerous -- if he's breaking with the lunatics, he's going to be a serious candidate in 2016. And please note that he made this speech in, um, Iowa. So watch out for him.
The Atlantic's Philip Bump notes that Rand Paul got big laughs in a recent speech joking about the large number of diagnostic codes that will be used under Obamacare. It won't shock you to learn that there's a perfectly reasonable explanation for the new codes, but this is the right doing what it does best -- killing good ideas it doesn't like by making them seem ridiculous to the rubes -- and Senator Paul seems quite good at it:
At a Republican Party event in Iowa earlier this month, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky did a bit about the scale of Obamacare's diagnostic coding. It killed. The only problem was that Paul's critique of the new codes are a critique of codes that aren't new and aren't Obamacare. A lot of them aren't even American.It turns out that these all come from a set of codes used worldwide, and developed by the World Health Organization. The specific codes cited by Paul have all been in the International Classification of Diseases since the 1990s. And as Bump explains, the switchover to this expanded set of codes is the result of a law that precedes the Obama presidency by more than a decade: "The new, expanded code set [ICD-10] is the intended replacement for ICD-9, as mandated by 1996's Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act."
Paul delivered the bit as a small part of a long speech, but -- given the solid punchlines -- the routine has at last been picked up by the conservative media. An article at Glenn Beck's The Blaze walks through the jokes....
An excerpt:I'm a physician, and when you come in to see me, I put down a little diagnostic code and there was 18,000 of these. But under Obamacare, they're going to keep you healthier, because now there's going to be 140,000 codes. Included among these codes will be 312 new codes for injuries from animals. 72 new codes for injuries just from birds. Nine new codes for injuries from the macaw. The macaw? I've asked physicians all over the country: Have you ever seen an injury from the macaw?
But conservatism thrives in America by making people ignorant. Obama will be blamed for this the same way he's blamed for the "Obamaphone" program for the poor (which in reality is the current version of a program started in the Reagan years).
By the way, please note that Rand Paul -- once a regular on Alex Jones's show -- passed up the opportunity to say that these codes are a UN plot. (The World Health Organization is, of course, part of the UN.) That suggests to me that Paul is professionalizing his act, and getting his talking points from the mainstream right-wing noise machine rather than the Jones fringe. I'd say that makes Paul more dangerous -- if he's breaking with the lunatics, he's going to be a serious candidate in 2016. And please note that he made this speech in, um, Iowa. So watch out for him.
Three day weekends are the best.
We went into this weekend with no set plans. And it was seriously the best feeling ever. Between weddings, and work events, and traveling for other things- we haven't had a free weekend in about two months. And to make it even better- we both had Monday off.
Doug has been working at the same place since we graduated from college. Until about three weeks ago, he has worked on Sundays that entire time (almost 4 years)...which sucked. He is finally on a regular Monday through Friday shift. He has also always had to work Thanksgiving and/or Christmas, as well as the other random holidays like Memorial Day and the 4th of July. But that's also over!
Friday:
On Friday, we went over to my brother and sister-in-laws for dinner. My parents were in town- so it was a lovely evening with the family. After dinner, we headed out for a few beers with our friend Carly, who will soon be leaving us for a new job. Needless to say, we've been soaking up our last few weeks with her as much as we can!
Saturday:
Most of my Saturday was spent at my brother and sister-in-laws house (seeing a trend here?). Niece #2 is due June 8, though we're all expecting her to come early. There was a lot to prepare around the house, as well as gardening. Which Caroline was happy to help with.
Mom and I also spent an hour or so at Jo Ann Fabrics to pick out material for a quilt we are making together. She got me a sewing machine for Christmas (which I have yet to use...) but we thought this would be a fun way to make something together. I can't wait to show you all more photos of the pattern and fabric we chose.
Dinner, s'mores, and a campfire. All perfect ways to end the day.
Sunday:
My cousin's daughter was getting baptized on Sunday, so we headed to the west side for the baptism and to spend a few hours with family. We all headed back to my brother and sister-in-laws for a little more work around the house, some cornhole, beers, hotdogs, s'mores...and another campfire.
Monday:
I woke up bright and early to head over to my brothers once again for the Memorial Day parade. I knew watching the parade with the little one would be hilarious, and it was. She loved chasing candy, the siren, the police dogs and of course the marching band.
I finally made my way home, where we watched a few episodes of the new season of Arrested Development. SO happy to have new episodes! After a little napping and a game of Quiddler with my husband, we headed over to our friends house to grill out. Venison burgers and potato salad, margaritas and beer, followed by girls vs. boys Taboo- it was a perfect end to the long weekend.
Doug has been working at the same place since we graduated from college. Until about three weeks ago, he has worked on Sundays that entire time (almost 4 years)...which sucked. He is finally on a regular Monday through Friday shift. He has also always had to work Thanksgiving and/or Christmas, as well as the other random holidays like Memorial Day and the 4th of July. But that's also over!
Friday:
On Friday, we went over to my brother and sister-in-laws for dinner. My parents were in town- so it was a lovely evening with the family. After dinner, we headed out for a few beers with our friend Carly, who will soon be leaving us for a new job. Needless to say, we've been soaking up our last few weeks with her as much as we can!
Saturday:
Most of my Saturday was spent at my brother and sister-in-laws house (seeing a trend here?). Niece #2 is due June 8, though we're all expecting her to come early. There was a lot to prepare around the house, as well as gardening. Which Caroline was happy to help with.
 |
| Helping Grandma plant flowers. Someone needs her bangs trimmed! |
Dinner, s'mores, and a campfire. All perfect ways to end the day.
 |
| Two of my favorite things :) |
My cousin's daughter was getting baptized on Sunday, so we headed to the west side for the baptism and to spend a few hours with family. We all headed back to my brother and sister-in-laws for a little more work around the house, some cornhole, beers, hotdogs, s'mores...and another campfire.
 |
| Campfire #2. |
I woke up bright and early to head over to my brothers once again for the Memorial Day parade. I knew watching the parade with the little one would be hilarious, and it was. She loved chasing candy, the siren, the police dogs and of course the marching band.
 |
| Once again, crazy hair. |
Rage Rage Against the Raging of the Machine
John Hawkins says GO GO GADGET LISTS!
We here omit the various crimes of the artists named - saying things - in order to simply list them and let you, the reader, decide how the state of popular music would be rocked if conservatives gave up on:
ALSO:
Witness the conservative power of John Hawkins.
10 Musicians Who Should Be Blacklisted By ConservativesHooray for blacklisting! Everyone looks heroic after a good blacklisting.
John Hawkins | May 28, 2013
"Always remember the first rule of power tactics: Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have." -- Saul AlinskyIf there's anything musicians love, it's having an intellectual foundation for whatever it is they do after the alcohol is delivered.
Republicans spend too much time complaining about liberals boycotting the advertisers on conservatives’ shows and not enough time doing the same thing to the Left. If movie stars trash conservatives, we should be very publicly telling people we're not going to their films and we should take credit if they bomb. If a corporate CEO embraces liberalism, don't buy that company’s products and tell the world why you're doing it. Let him explain to his board of directors why standing up for gay marriage or abortion was worth losing millions of dollars. Seventy percent of the country is Christian, roughly half the country supports the Republican Party and forty percent of Americans are conservative. There are a lot of businesses, artists and musicians who simply cannot survive without the support of people like us. The only reason they dare to trash us or publicly support people who hate our guts is because we all too often shrug our shoulders and then willingly hand over our money to people who despise us.Yes, conservatives are cringing sheep who never bother to complain. This is why they are never portrayed in the media as hypocritical blowhard party-pooping assholes and when they never are no money is made.
When it comes to musicians who attack conservatives, Christians, Republicans, America -- or alternately, embrace the Left, don't give them your money. Don't buy their albums or their T-shirts and don’t go to their shows. Even if you do like their music, don't pay for it and don't talk it up publicly. Fans are oxygen for these people -- starve them of it and let other musicians start to worry about the reaction if they go after us.I say boycott Lady Gaga! IT HASN'T BEEN TRIED.
That's not unfair; it's just restoring balance. People who rely on the goodwill of the general public shouldn't be trashing the people who pay their bills. Artists should be flattered, not outraged when Republican politicians want to use their songs. Conservatives in the music industry shouldn't be cowed into silence by threats and abuse while liberal musicians smear the conservatives, Christians, Republicans and patriots who buy their records with no repercussions.So people who rely on the "goodwill" of the general public shouldn't be trashing the people - generating "badwill" ifyouwill - who pay their bills. BOYCOTT THE CHURCHES!
Because the musicians have gotten away with doing fundraisers for the Democrats, trashing us without paying a price and generally crapping all over everything we believe in while they trumpet liberalism to the skies, it would take an entire website to catalogue everyone who deserves to be on this list, but here are 10 to start with. It's a free country and these musicians can say what they want, but consumers can also spend their money where they want, too. Let some of these musicians start to see the impact of trashing us on their bottom lines and you will be surprised at how fast attitudes will begin to change."Catalogue"? Go Royalists go!
We here omit the various crimes of the artists named - saying things - in order to simply list them and let you, the reader, decide how the state of popular music would be rocked if conservatives gave up on:
Psy*ALL ONE GAL.
Sheryl Crow
The Dixie Chicks*
Bruce Springsteen
Moby
Madonna
Bette Midler
Barbra Streisand
Tom-Morello-from-Rage-Against-The-Machine-after-Paul-Ryan-said-he-was-a-fan-of-their-band
Kanye West
ALSO:
Witness the conservative power of John Hawkins.
CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN THIS "SOCIAL WELFARE" TAX THING TO ME AGAIN?
Today the San Francisco Chronicle has an AP story (also here) about efforts by gunners to recall the president of the Colorado Senate, John Morse, because he supported gun control and, naturally, must be destroyed. We're told:
I turn to a recent Denver Post story and learn that
This is true even though the URL for the El Paso Freedom Defense Committee is gotremorse.com -- a clear reference to John Morse, the guy targeted for recall. The entire site is about recalling Morse. Yet if you want to contribute, you're sent to a group that claims to be a tax-exempt "social welfare" group.
The Basic Freedom Defense Fund used to be called Colorado Accountability. There's an old Colorado Accountability page on the Web -- and that's all about recalling Democratic officeholders. And yet the group is a "social welfare" 501(c)(4).
The main group defending John Morse is A Whole Lot of People for John Morse (no, I'm not making that up). A Whole Lot of People for John Morse, we're told, "is an issue committee and not associated with any candidate committee." That's crazy, too.
People at the IRS may have mismanaged this system, but it's an insane system -- 527s are political but they can give to 501(c)(4)'s, which can assert that they're not primarily political even though any idiot can see that their resason for existing is to win elections. So if the system is mismanaged, maybe it's because the system is an utter disaster.
Today the San Francisco Chronicle has an AP story (also here) about efforts by gunners to recall the president of the Colorado Senate, John Morse, because he supported gun control and, naturally, must be destroyed. We're told:
The recall group's main funding comes from a $14,000 contribution from a nonprofit run by a local conservative consultant, Laura Carno. She said that contribution was made possible by some out-of-state donors."Nonprofit"? What kind of nonprofit?
I turn to a recent Denver Post story and learn that
the El Paso County Freedom Defense Fund -- a group seeking a recall of Morse -- has raised about $16,400 . About $14,000 came from the local group I Am Created Equal.OK: I Am Created Equal (which is the nonprofit run by political consultant Laura Carno) is a 527, which means it has to record and report contributions -- it acknowledges that it's political. But I Am Created Equal gave to the El Paso Freedom Defense Committee, and when you click on "Donate" at that group's site, you go to the donation page for the Basic Freedom Defense Fund -- which, you're told, is a 501(c)(4), i.e., a "social welfare" nonprofit that doesn't have politicking as its primary purpose.
This is true even though the URL for the El Paso Freedom Defense Committee is gotremorse.com -- a clear reference to John Morse, the guy targeted for recall. The entire site is about recalling Morse. Yet if you want to contribute, you're sent to a group that claims to be a tax-exempt "social welfare" group.
The Basic Freedom Defense Fund used to be called Colorado Accountability. There's an old Colorado Accountability page on the Web -- and that's all about recalling Democratic officeholders. And yet the group is a "social welfare" 501(c)(4).
The main group defending John Morse is A Whole Lot of People for John Morse (no, I'm not making that up). A Whole Lot of People for John Morse, we're told, "is an issue committee and not associated with any candidate committee." That's crazy, too.
People at the IRS may have mismanaged this system, but it's an insane system -- 527s are political but they can give to 501(c)(4)'s, which can assert that they're not primarily political even though any idiot can see that their resason for existing is to win elections. So if the system is mismanaged, maybe it's because the system is an utter disaster.
BLAMING INDIVIDUALS TO AVOID BLAMING THE SYSTEM
Dear Nancy Pelosi: When Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen of Politico agree with you, that may be a sign that you're wrong:
I have no great love for Boehner, but when the Beltway media suggests that deals could be made if President Obama would lead harder!, and Boehner would lead harder!, that's a way of continuing to live in denial about the rottenness of a system that's bigger and more powerful than either of the two men. Obama and Boehner aren't the most and second most powerful people in D.C.; the most powerful people in D.C. are Rupert Murdoch, Roger Ailes, and the right-wing billionaires whose talking points they use to set the terms of every debate, billionaires whose mission in life is to repeal the twentieth century, with their right-wing militias in the House, Senate, and state legislatures doing the grunt work, all enabled by a mainstream press that won't acknowledge what's really going on. I don't know how sincere Boehner is about making deals with the president, but that can't happen, and it couldn't happen with anyone else in his job.
VandeHei and Allen briefly allude to what's really going on:
But he has no room to maneuver, if maneuvering is what he wants. It's the billionaires and the tea party mob they've hired who run Washington. VandeHei and Allen know the fish stinks, but they won't say it stinks from the head.
*****
UPDATE: Charlie Pierce has more:
Dear Nancy Pelosi: When Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen of Politico agree with you, that may be a sign that you're wrong:
House Speaker John Boehner, who by title and position should be the second most powerful person in Washington, sure doesn't seem or sound like it.A couple of weeks ago, VandeHei and Allen were telling us that President Obama is a pathetic loser and everybody in the Beltway hates him, nyah-nyah. Today it's Boehner's turn.
He has little ability to work his will with fellow House Republicans. He has quit for good his solo efforts to craft a grand bargain on taxes and spending. And he hasn't bothered to initiate a substantive conversation with President Barack Obama in this calendar year.
All of this recently prompted Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, herself a former speaker, to declare on MSNBC that if Boehner were a woman, he would be known as the weakest speaker in U.S. history....
Boehner tested the lead-from-the-top model for more than a year, working with the White House to craft the grand bargain. It was a flop....
So, he has adopted an entirely different style this year, one of deference: deference to members, deference to committees, and deference to others in leadership....
This can make him look, well, weak. Or, at best, like a bystander in the House he runs....
I have no great love for Boehner, but when the Beltway media suggests that deals could be made if President Obama would lead harder!, and Boehner would lead harder!, that's a way of continuing to live in denial about the rottenness of a system that's bigger and more powerful than either of the two men. Obama and Boehner aren't the most and second most powerful people in D.C.; the most powerful people in D.C. are Rupert Murdoch, Roger Ailes, and the right-wing billionaires whose talking points they use to set the terms of every debate, billionaires whose mission in life is to repeal the twentieth century, with their right-wing militias in the House, Senate, and state legislatures doing the grunt work, all enabled by a mainstream press that won't acknowledge what's really going on. I don't know how sincere Boehner is about making deals with the president, but that can't happen, and it couldn't happen with anyone else in his job.
VandeHei and Allen briefly allude to what's really going on:
Boehner runs a House in which many of the traditional levers of power are gone and of little use: earmarks for members' districts, important committee assignments and the backing of party leaders for reelection. Most young conservatives don’t care about any of the three -- and, in fact, see all of them as manifestations of what's wrong with and corrupt about Congress and their party. They get more mileage from snubbing their leaders.But VandeHei and Allen still think Boehner's problems are mostly of his own making: He doesn't "lead from the top," he doesn't have substantive conversations with Obama....
But he has no room to maneuver, if maneuvering is what he wants. It's the billionaires and the tea party mob they've hired who run Washington. VandeHei and Allen know the fish stinks, but they won't say it stinks from the head.
*****
UPDATE: Charlie Pierce has more:
...this was not a process that began with the 2010 midterms, let alone the election of Barack Obama in 2008. It is the logical end of the long march that began with the collapse of the Goldwater campaign and the movement of conservatism geographically to the South and West, and intellectually toward an outright philosophical resistance to the idea of a national government.Indeed.
... Right now, we have a polarization based on the fact that an uncontrollable faction of one of our two political parties -- a faction with its own sources of money and power that exist outside conventional political accountability -- has decided that the only thing that the national government should do is nothing, a faction that is perfectly situated to make that at least part of a political reality, and a faction that is growing even faster out in the states than it is in Washington. What is leadership if there's more political profit in ignoring your leaders than in being led? Who, in that case, rules? The truly terrifying answer to that is that nobody does. Or, at least, nobody who is elected does.
Exploding syntax
Senator Linsey-Woolsey Graham (R-SC):
At the end of the day, this is the most tone deaf president I've ever -- could imagine and making such a speech at a time when our homeland is trying to be -- attacked literally every day.Obviously you can't hold a man responsible for the particular meanings of his words when he's passed over into this kind of agrammatical shrapnel field, but do you think that "trying to be attacked" is trying to tell us something? Like, perpetual war is not just OK with him but something to be actively worked for?
 |
| Exploding Head Syndrome, from Modern Medical Dictionary: a type of hypnagogic auditory hallucination in which a person perceives one or more very loud noises which he or she likens to an explosion, crashing waves, screams or clanging, often accompanied by flashes of light but not pain, which seems to come from inside his /her head... The attacks typically occur shortly after falling asleep, are clustered over several days to weeks followed by months of remission and are not linked to dreams, as they may occur whilst awake. They are more common when the patient is stressed or exhausted. |
NO, AMERICA DOESN'T AGREE WITH THE GOP ON HEALTH CARE, SAYS YET ANOTHER POLL
It's easy to misread this....
Polling Report has the numbers. For instance, A CNN poll from last November showed that 42% of respondents favored the law, while 9% opposed it because they didn't think it was liberal enough. That's majority support for improving the system. Only 37% opposed the law because they think it's too liberal.
A Kaiser Family Foundation poll from November also found only a third of Americans favoring GOP-friendly approaches to the health care law:
A New York Times/CBS poll from September got more specific:
It's easy to misread this....
A majority of Americans still oppose the nation's new health care measure, three years after it became law, according to a new survey....if you read only the lead paragraph, not what follows:
But a CNN/ORC International poll released Monday also indicates that more than a quarter of those who oppose the law, known by many as Obamacare, say they don't support the measure because it doesn't go far enough.Digby says, "for once they asked the most relevant follow-up question." But a number of polls have asked similar follow-up questions -- and gotten results that make clear that health care reform is popular, and the GOP approach to health care isn't.
According to the poll, 43% of the public says it supports the health care law.... Fifty-four percent of those questioned say they oppose the law....
The survey indicates that 35% oppose the health care law because it's too liberal, with 16% saying they oppose the measure because it isn't liberal enough.
Polling Report has the numbers. For instance, A CNN poll from last November showed that 42% of respondents favored the law, while 9% opposed it because they didn't think it was liberal enough. That's majority support for improving the system. Only 37% opposed the law because they think it's too liberal.
A Kaiser Family Foundation poll from November also found only a third of Americans favoring GOP-friendly approaches to the health care law:
Expand it: 27%In a Fox News poll from January, only 30% wanted to repeal the whole law, while 65% wanted to leave at least part of it intact (25%), leave it as it (20%), or expand it (20%).
Keep it as is: 22%
Replace it with a Republican-sponsored alternative: 14%
Repeal it and not replace it: 19%
Unsure/refused: 18%
A New York Times/CBS poll from September got more specific:
Expand: 22%That last result is problematic for the administration -- yes, people think the mandate seems coercive, even though lots of people live with insurance mandates of various kinds at the state level. Still, even that poll makes clear that the GOP position (Obamacare is the worst law ever passed in the history of human civilization, and is the end of American civilization as we know it) has support well under 40% in every poll -- and majorities absolutely want our health care system improved.
Leave as is: 15%
Repeal just the mandate: 26%
Repeal the entire law: 30%
Unsure: 7%
SOME GROUPS THE IRS TARGETED REALLY WERE POLITICAL? GEE, YA THINK?
Good story in today's New York Times:
And here, at the Wetumpka Tea Party site, there's a video of chapter president Becky Gerritson talking about just having attended a FreedomWorks "boot camp":
Here's part of the description of that boot camp, from FreedomWorks (emphasis added):
In the video, at about 6:53,Gerritson tells us this:
Good story in today's New York Times:
... Representatives of [various] organizations have cried foul in recent weeks about their treatment by the I.R.S., saying they were among dozens of conservative groups unfairly targeted by the agency, harassed with inappropriate questionnaires and put off for months or years as the agency delayed decisions on their applications.The story offers a number of examples:
But a close examination of these groups and others reveals an array of election activities that tax experts and former I.R.S. officials said would provide a legitimate basis for flagging them for closer review.
When CVFC, a conservative veterans' group in California, applied for tax-exempt status with the Internal Revenue Service, its biggest expenditure that year was several thousand dollars in radio ads backing a Republican candidate for Congress.This stuff is in plain sight. Here are a couple of photos at the Ohio Liberty Coalition's site, linked to a September 2012 blog post titled "Ohio Tea Party Group Counters Obama Visit" (click to enlarge):
The Wetumpka Tea Party, from Alabama, sponsored training for a get-out-the-vote initiative dedicated to the "defeat of President Barack Obama" while the I.R.S. was weighing its application.
And the head of the Ohio Liberty Coalition, whose application languished with the I.R.S. for more than two years, sent out e-mails to members about Mitt Romney campaign events and organized members to distribute Mr. Romney's presidential campaign literature.
And here, at the Wetumpka Tea Party site, there's a video of chapter president Becky Gerritson talking about just having attended a FreedomWorks "boot camp":
Here's part of the description of that boot camp, from FreedomWorks (emphasis added):
FreedomWorks will be hosting some of the top grassroots activists from across the country for a comprehensive training boot camp from June 24-27th in the FreedomWorks Headquarters. These activists will be leading the charge on numerous state and national battles in the months leading into the 2012 elections.
Saturday will be a policy training day, with breakout sessions on the debt ceiling debate, entitlement reform, the budget, and social media training. Sunday will be tactical training, with sessions such as Campaigning 101, FreedomConnector, town hall strategy, and our 2012 campaign and PAC targets....
"We think about the Tea party movement in phases," commented Matt Kibbe, President of FreedomWorks. "First it was a protest movement, and then it morphed into a get-out-the-vote-machine, and now we see a legislative cycle where tea party activists are getting engaged in specific agenda battles at both the federal and state level. We are here this weekend to unite these fiscally conservative community leaders, and give them the tools to create their own ground game that will win elections and transform conservative ideas into lasting political change."
Monday morning's press conference will be an excellent opportunity for members of the media to meet the local activists who will be leading limited-government initiatives in key battleground states. FreedomWorks will also announce exclusive details on new campaigns that will begin in the fall.
In the video, at about 6:53,Gerritson tells us this:
While we were there in Washington, we were able to do some actual on-the-ground grassroots protesting. We went along to support the Utah contingency that was there. They have a primary coming up there very soon against Orrin Hatch, and there are some other members in the race, but the Republican National Senatorial Committee is actully getting involved in the primary, and they're picking the winner, which they are supporting Orrin Hatch because he's the incumbent. He has a horrible voting record in regards to conservatype type of values, and the Utah folks were upset that the RNSC is picking the winner. They think the people should be picking who's going to be the next Senate.I don't really care if they're defying the party establishment (with the help of deep -pocketed FreedomWorks) -- they're getting involved in campaigns, then whining that they're doing "social welfare." I'm sure they think it's OK because they're getting involved in campaigns based on abstract principles of social good, but still -- it's political campaigning. They need to stop lying to themselves that uttering "constitutional" or "conservative principles" in every other sentence puts what they're doing to get people elected on an exalted plane. It's still electoral politics.
The Wind Beneath Its Wings
Competing blogs may despoil the natural beauty and diversity of their lands in frippery-driven cherub-capturing expeditions, but here at Substance Laboratories™ more initially-environmentally-friendly solutions are at hand.
Using leftover pieces of Hitler, J. Vernon McGee, a Louisiana pancake batfish, Kathryn Jean Lopez, and three different kinds of potato chips we build the body of our subject in suitably chubby style. The potato chips work wonders here. Using patented Substance Laboratories™ Spiral Object Generation Technology™ we add a pair of wings and a discreetly hidden power generation unit and VOILA! We have available for shipping a directionally programmable* flying baby device — often meeting emissions standards demanded by certain countries — we call the Cherubstance™.
*A simple interface allows you to point it in the direction of your choice and in seconds it will usually be go in that direction.
Using leftover pieces of Hitler, J. Vernon McGee, a Louisiana pancake batfish, Kathryn Jean Lopez, and three different kinds of potato chips we build the body of our subject in suitably chubby style. The potato chips work wonders here. Using patented Substance Laboratories™ Spiral Object Generation Technology™ we add a pair of wings and a discreetly hidden power generation unit and VOILA! We have available for shipping a directionally programmable* flying baby device — often meeting emissions standards demanded by certain countries — we call the Cherubstance™.
*A simple interface allows you to point it in the direction of your choice and in seconds it will usually be go in that direction.
A TWINGE OF GUILT, BOB?
I suppose it's good that Bob Dole said this today, but it could be argued that he has some nerve complaining about GOP obstructionism:
If Dole really does have qualms about an approach to governance he once championed, and he thinks his party has gone too far, he should just quit the party. He should quit and Jon Huntsman should quit and Christie Whitman and Colin Powell and Arnold Schwarzenegger and every other Republican who's put off by the party's excesses should quit all at once, and run a full-page ad in The New York Times explaining why. If these gray eminences, respected as they are by the mainstream press, said the party had finally gone too far for them, maybe mainstream journalists would wake the hell up and recognize that both sides aren't equally responsible for the mismanagement of our government.
But that's never going to happen. Even Dole still believes both sides do it:
I suppose it's good that Bob Dole said this today, but it could be argued that he has some nerve complaining about GOP obstructionism:
Former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.) on Sunday sharply criticized both his own party and the Senate he served in for close to three decades.That would be this Bob Dole:
Asked on "Fox News Sunday" if the Senate was broken, Dole responded that "it is bent pretty badly."
"It seems almost unreal that we can't get together on a budget, or legislation," said Dole, who served in the Senate from 1969 to 1996. "We weren't perfect by a long shot, but at least we got our work done." ...
"I think they ought to put a sign on the national committee doors that says closed for repairs, until New Year's Day next year, and spend that time going over ideas and positive agendas," Dole said about the current state of his party....
It was on Election Night 1992, not very far into the evening, that the Senate minority leader, Bob Dole, hinted at the way his party planned to conduct itself in the months ahead: it would filibuster any significant legislation the new Democratic President proposed, forcing him to obtain 60 votes for Senate passage.I suppose what's upsetting Dole is that his party, which responded with obstructionism after the last four elections in which a Democrat was chosen as president, won't even allow the current Democratic president a fallback, greatly compromised version of his agenda. Bottle up the agenda of a Democrat? Sure, but not completely. Maybe 90 or 95 percent, but not the whole thing. That wouldn't be sporting!
This was a form of scorched-earth partisan warfare unprecedented in modern political life. Congress is supposed to operate by majority vote. It is true that the filibuster has a long and disreputable Senate history and that, over the years, it has been used more by Democrats than by Republicans. But only after 1992 did it become the centerpiece of opposition conduct toward an elected President. What the Republicans did in the Senate in 1993 amounted to an unreported constitutional usurpation. It should have been denounced as such at the time, but it wasn't. The punditocracy chose not to notice.
In any case, it worked. Little that the President proposed became law in the two years that he operated with Democratic majorities. There was no health care reform, no economic stimulus package.
If Dole really does have qualms about an approach to governance he once championed, and he thinks his party has gone too far, he should just quit the party. He should quit and Jon Huntsman should quit and Christie Whitman and Colin Powell and Arnold Schwarzenegger and every other Republican who's put off by the party's excesses should quit all at once, and run a full-page ad in The New York Times explaining why. If these gray eminences, respected as they are by the mainstream press, said the party had finally gone too far for them, maybe mainstream journalists would wake the hell up and recognize that both sides aren't equally responsible for the mismanagement of our government.
But that's never going to happen. Even Dole still believes both sides do it:
The former majority leader also said that President Obama had squandered an opportunity to govern better by not reaching out more to lawmakers during his first term.So nothing's going to change.
THIS IS THE GOP'S PLAN FOR THE ENTIRE COUNTRY
In the spring of 2012, some people believed that Mitt Romney might beat Barack Obama and Republicans might win both houses of Congress. What would have happened then? What will happen in 2016 if Marco Rubio wins the White House and has GOP majorities in both houses?
Well, Republicans took control of the entire state government in North Carolina in 2012, and The Washington Post tells us what's happening:
The GOP takeover In North Carolina happened in a curious way:
The Post story claims that North Carolinians have mixed feelings about what's happening in their state:
The results of a recent Public Policy Polling survey are, um, rather different:
I know a lot of you think the GOP can never win another presidential election. I think that's true if Hillary Clinton is up for the race and is in good health and is as much admired as she is now. Otherwise, it's a toss-up. I don't think I've seen a single poll in which any other Democrat beats one of the GOP's marquee names.
A GOP sweep can't be allowed to happen. If the GOP really had its way unfettered, America would become a Cayman Islands for the business community and a Bangladesh for workers. I don't think we'd fall that far in one term under an all-GOP national government. But that's the direction we'd be heading in.
In the spring of 2012, some people believed that Mitt Romney might beat Barack Obama and Republicans might win both houses of Congress. What would have happened then? What will happen in 2016 if Marco Rubio wins the White House and has GOP majorities in both houses?
Well, Republicans took control of the entire state government in North Carolina in 2012, and The Washington Post tells us what's happening:
Legislators have slashed jobless benefits. They have also repealed a tax credit that supplemented the wages of low-income people, while moving to eliminate the estate tax. They have voted against expanding Medicaid to comply with the 2010 federal health-care law. The expansion would have added 500,000 poor North Carolinians to the Medicaid rolls....Republicans have two ideas at this moment in time: massively increasing income inequality and massively decreasing the participation in democracy of Democratic-leaning groups. That's why I cut President Obama and other Democrats quite a bit of slack, even when they flat-out refuse to bring the financiers who destroyed the economy to justice, or pursue Bush-like national security policies, or otherwise let us down. To me, the #1 political issue in America is how badly the poor and middle class are going to be screwed. When Republicans have their way, their answer is: the poor and middle class are going to be screwed as much as we can get away with screwing them. They are far, far worse than Democrats.
Lawmakers are also considering proposals to reduce and flatten income tax rates while expanding the sales tax, perhaps to even include groceries and prescription drugs -- which some advocates see as a first step toward eliminating the state income tax.....
There are also measures pending to require drug testing for low-income people applying for job training and welfare benefits....
The North Carolina House has passed a law requiring voters to have a government-issued identification card, and legislators are considering bills to roll back the state’s law allowing same-day voter registration and to sharply limit early voting....
The GOP takeover In North Carolina happened in a curious way:
The victories were aided by the strong financial support of Art Pope, a multimillionaire who spent heavily in support of the state’s GOP candidates. The Institute for Southern Studies, a North Carolina-based research organization, said Pope's advocacy network spent $2.2 million on 22 legislative races, winning 18. Overall, conservative organizations largely supported by Pope accounted for three-fourths of the outside money spent in North Carolina legislative races in 2010, according to the institute.Oh, nice. And, of course, this sort of buying of elections is what the federal courts continue to ratify. (The IRS scandal will only make election-buying by rich right-wingers easier.)
One of [Pat] McCrory's first acts after being elected governor was to install Pope, a former legislator, as the state budget chief.
The Post story claims that North Carolinians have mixed feelings about what's happening in their state:
Liberals may be up in arms, but North Carolina conservatives are applauding the new direction of the General Assembly. After the state Senate unveiled its tax reform plan this month, the state chapter of Americans for Prosperity released a poll that it said showed widespread support across the state. Nearly two-thirds of respondents said the state tax code is in need of reform, and nearly half backed moving to totally eliminate the personal income tax within four years.An Americans for Prosperity poll? Seriously?
The results of a recent Public Policy Polling survey are, um, rather different:
48% of North Carolinians disapprove of the Republican government to just 41% who approve. Republican legislators score even worse at 37% approval to 49% disapproval. The General Assembly overall gets a 25% positive rating to 51% negative and 24% unsure.... Voters believe by a 45% to 31% margin that the General Assembly is causing the state national embarrassment.Oh, and here's public opinion on a the GOP's gun agenda, which isn't mentioned in the Post story:
Specific Republican proposals are extremely unpopular. Voters oppose the House and Senate tax plans by 41%-11% and 44%-14%, respectively. When told the details of these plans, opposition soars to 68%-13% for the Senate’s plan and 55%-21% for the House's. 81% of North Carolinians oppose raising the sales tax on groceries from 2% to 6.5%. Only 10% support it.
Respondents stated by a 73% to 17% margin that concealed weapons should not be allowed in bars. They oppose allowing concealed weapons in parks and on college campuses. Voters want to keep guns out of parks by a 65% to 29% margin and off of college campuses by 69% to 25%.Of course, the GOP is the honey badger party -- it doesn't give a shit what voters think once it's in power.
I know a lot of you think the GOP can never win another presidential election. I think that's true if Hillary Clinton is up for the race and is in good health and is as much admired as she is now. Otherwise, it's a toss-up. I don't think I've seen a single poll in which any other Democrat beats one of the GOP's marquee names.
A GOP sweep can't be allowed to happen. If the GOP really had its way unfettered, America would become a Cayman Islands for the business community and a Bangladesh for workers. I don't think we'd fall that far in one term under an all-GOP national government. But that's the direction we'd be heading in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
