The Washington Post offers tips on how to keep your EV battery running in frigid temperatures. The link at the end of this graf is supposed to be a "gift link" (from me, Marie Burns, the giftor!), meaning that non-subscribers can read the article. Hope it works: https://wapo.st/3u8Z705
Sunday
Jan272013
The Commentariat -- Jan. 28, 2013
Steve Kroft of "60 Minutes" interviews President Obama & Secretary Clinton:
Jessica Pressler of New York magazine interviews Tim Geithner in a downtown Manhattan restaurant. It turns out he did everything right, which simple-minded people just can't understand: "This is a deeply complicated world, in a fog of gray and ambiguity. It's easier for people to absorb the simple narrative of the black and white. And for them the black and white is, 'Those are the people that got us in the mess; you saved them and they paid themselves billions in bonuses, and they should have gone to jail, and they are still walking around.'" Suggested musical accompaniment:
Rick Hertzberg: "... the harmonizing, conciliatory side of the President's political and personal character has been eclipsed, for the moment at least, by the side of him that is at once more insistent and more visionary.... The modern crisis of liberalism began in the nineteen-sixties with the disintegration of New Frontier/Great Society euphoria in the quagmire of Vietnam, continued through the riotous turmoils of the late sixties and seventies, and crested with the Reagan ascendancy of the eighties. Liberal politicians, especially those with Presidential ambitions, assumed a long-lasting defensive crouch."
Bob Woodward in the Washington Post: President Obama & former Sen. Chuck Hagel "share similar views and philosophies as the Obama administration attempts to define the role of the United States in the transition to a post-superpower world.... [Hagel] privately voiced reservations about Obama's decision in late 2009 to add 51,000 troops to Afghanistan. "The president has not had commander-in-chief control of the Pentagon since Bush senior was president," Hagel said privately in 2011.
Paul Krugman: "... even as Republicans look for a way to sound more sympathetic and less extreme, their actual policies are taking another sharp right turn.... It's important to understand the extent to which leading Republicans live in an intellectual bubble. They get their news from Fox and other captive media, they get their policy analysis from billionaire-financed right-wing think tanks, and they're often blissfully unaware both of contrary evidence and of how their positions sound to outsiders." ...
... E. J. Dionne: "The moment's highest priority should be speeding economic growth and ending the waste, human and economic, left by the Great Recession. But you would never know this because the conversation in our nation's capital is being held hostage by a ludicrous cycle of phony fiscal deadlines driven by a misplaced belief that the only thing we have to fear is the budget deficit." ...
... CW: This post that Dionne linked, by conservative Bruce Bartlett, writing in the Fiscal Times, is pretty informative. For instance, if Krugman, et al., have ever told us about "pure transfer," I skipped that class. Bartlett's overall point: "it is silly to obsess about near-term nominal budget deficits. What matters is the deficit as a share of GDP minus interest spending, which economists call the primary deficit. On that basis, we are much closer to fiscal sustainability than even most economists realize. Relatively small adjustments to the growth path of federal revenues and Medicare would be sufficient to eliminate the primary deficit."
Krugman explains Econ 101 to the Very Stupid People who populate (& host) "Morning Joe":
... CW: what Krugman doesn't directly explain to the VSPs -- who are too fucking stupid to get it anyway -- is that the real problem is medical costs, NOT Medicare & Medicaid. If the government cuts healthcare benefits 5 percent or 100 percent, we are all still going to have to pay for medical care. Cutting government health benefits merely transfers (and actually raises) the cost of health care to individuals. The whole panel was talking in circles around one actual problem that we all -- not just the government -- share: (probably) rising healthcare costs. Europeans do a much better job at delivering effective health care than we do; we should STFU about the percentage of those costs the government pays & -- as Krugman did say -- start figuring out better ways to provide health services.
Jared Bernstein has a good post on the right's new "welfare queens" -- all those Americans faking disability to claim SSI disability benefits. T'ain't so. Plus: "... more than 90% of entitlement dollars go to people who are either elderly, disabled, or working. In other words, the makers/takers frame is factually wrong not to mention mean-spirited and divisive." ...
... Oh, and here's a P.S. to which Bernstein links. Kathy Ruffing in Off the Charts: "About 6 percent of the nation's working-age population receive disability payments from Social Security or Supplemental Security Income (SSI), but some southern and Appalachian states have much higher rates -- over 10 percent." CW: The biggest "fakers" would appear to be your people, Republicans. However, as Ruffing points out, it makes sense that the GOP region has a higher rate of disability: the populace is less educated, so more likely to (a) have jobs that require physical labor and/or (b) are too mentally impaired to adapt to new jobs. ...
... CW: In general, studies have showed conservatives are not as good as liberals at adapting to changed circumstances. Ergo, many conservatives are unable to learn new skills or adapt to new work environments. Ergo, conservatism is a drain on the economy AND on the government. Ergo, conservatives should eschew conservatism. See, liberalism is the economically sensible political theory.
... Krugman concurs with Bernstein: "... right-wing intellectuals and politicians live in a bubble in which denunciations of those bums on disability and those greedy children getting free health care are greeted with shouts of approval -- but now have to deal with a country where the same remarks come across as greedy and heartless (because they are). And I don't think this is a problem that can be solved with a slight change in the rhetoric."
Dexter Filkins of the New Yorker on women in combat: "Notions of equality aside, the real factor that rendered the 'non-combat' distinction meaningless was the changing nature of the wars.... Who's in greater danger? A male Marine on a foot patrol in Helmand Province, or a female Marine driving a fuel truck on a highway to Kandahar? Technically speaking, the former is a combat job, and the latter is not. But the distinction, in both of our recent wars and in any we are likely to fight in the foreseeable future, is meaningless.... Who's in greater danger? A male Marine on a foot patrol in Helmand Province, or a female Marine driving a fuel truck on a highway to Kandahar? Technically speaking, the former is a combat job, and the latter is not. But the distinction, in both of our recent wars and in any we are likely to fight in the foreseeable future, is meaningless." ...
... BUT, but Dexter, what about "personal hygiene"? --
What I've raised is the issue of mixing the genders in those combat units, where there is no privacy.... Now, as a man who has been there and as a man who has some experience in those kinds of units, I certainly don't want to be in that environment with a female because it's degrading and humiliating enough to do your personal hygiene and the other normal functions among your teammates. -- Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, Ret.
War is hell. Peeing is intolerable. -- Constant Weader
So Gen. Boykin is so fastidious he feels "degraded & humiliated" when using a public urinal in a men's room. Whatever the reason for the general's phobia, it is a personal phobia & should have no bearing on normal people's accommodations to natural bodily functions. ...
... Joanna Walters of the Guardian on women who have been wounded in combat. Thanks to contributor Barbarossa for the link.
New York Times Editors: President Obama "should have his solicitor general file a brief in the Proposition 8 case being argued before the Supreme Court in March.... For the administration to be missing in action in this showdown risks conveying a message to the justices that it lacks confidence in the constitutional claims for ending gay people's exclusion from marriage or that it believes Americans are not ready for a high court ruling making marriage equality the law of the land -- impressions strikingly contradicted by legal precedent, the lessons of history and by the president's own very powerful words [in his inaugural address]."
Julia Preston of the New York Times: "A bipartisan group of senators has agreed on a set of principles for a sweeping overhaul of the immigration system, including a pathway to American citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants that would hinge on progress in securing the borders and ensuring that foreigners leave the country when their visas expire.... Their blueprint, set to be unveiled on Monday, will allow them to stake out their position one day before President Obama outlines his immigration proposals in a speech on Tuesday in Las Vegas...." The Washington Post story, by Rosalind Helderman & Sean Sullivan, is here. ...
... Update: the framework, by Senators Schumer, McCain, Durbin, Graham, Menendez, Rubio, Bennet & Flake is here.
... Jonathan Easley of The Hill: "Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin (D) on Sunday revealed key details about a bipartisan immigration-reform plan, saying the legislation would be comprehensive and would include a pathway to citizenship. Durbin said the group of six senators was working on a comprehensive approach to the issue, as opposed to moving individual elements piecemeal and was optimistic they were close to their goal." ...
... Senator John Build-the-Danged-Fence McCain agrees. Wonders never cease. ...
Right Wing World
... Speaking of Arizona, State Rep. Bob Thorpe (RTP) has introduced an unconstitutional bill requiring all students "to recite an oath supporting the U.S. Constitution" to receive a diploma. Via Igor Volsky of Think Progress. How perfect is that?
News Ledes
Drones R Us. New York Times: "The United States military command in Africa is preparing plans to establish a drone base in northwest Africa to increase unarmed surveillance missions on the local affiliate of Al Qaeda and other Islamist extremist groups that American and other Western officials say pose a growing menace to the region."
The Hill: "In a 62-36 vote, the Senate on Monday approved legislation providing $50.7 billion to help New York, New Jersey and other states hit by Hurricane Sandy. All 36 no votes came from Republicans. GOP Sens. Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), Susan Collins (Maine), Thad Cochran (Miss.), Dean Heller (Nev.), John Hoeven (N.D.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Richard Shelby (Ala.), David Vitter (La.) and Roger Wicker (Miss.) voted yes. The House had already approved the measure, so the Senate action sends the bill to President Obama, who has said he will sign it." ...
... Politico: "President Obama said Monday that while he had hoped it would happen sooner, he commends Congress on passing funding for Hurricane Sandy relief."
Al Jazeera: "Thousands of protesters have taken to the streets of Egyptian cities of Port Said, Ismailiyah and Suez in defiance of President Mohamed Morsi's declaration of a curfew and a state of emergency after days of deadly unrest. The crowds shouted 'Down down with Mohamed Morsi, down down with the state of emergency,' in Ismailiyah and similar slogans were heard in the other cities along the Suez Canal. Five days of unrest has led to 50 deaths, and police once again clashed with protesters in Suez and downtown Cairo on Monday. At least two people were killed in Monday's clashes in Port Said...."
Guardian: "Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands ... announced her abdication on Monday evening in a sudden move three days before her 75th birthday. After 33 years on the throne following her mother's abdication in 1980, Beatrix said she would relinquish the crown at the end of April, leaving the monarchy to Crown-Prince Willem-Alexander, the oldest of her three sons. The queen went on national television and radio on Monday evening to announce the departure, having recorded the broadcast earlier in the day. The prime minister, Mark Rutte, delivered a statement on television shortly afterwards, with both stressing that the crown prince had been intensively prepared for the role of monarch."
Washington Post: "The Pentagon has approved a major expansion of its cybersecurity force over the next several years, increasing its size more than fivefold to bolster the nation's ability to defend critical computer systems and conduct offensive computer operations against foreign adversaries, according to U.S. officials."
New York Times: "President Mohamed Morsi declared a state of emergency and a curfew in three major cities on Sunday, as escalating violence in the streets threatened his government and Egypt's democracy."
New York Times: "French military officials said on Monday that Malian and French troops took control of access roads and the airport at Timbuktu, the fabled desert oasis and crossroads of ancient caravan routes, after French paratroopers backed by helicopters reinforced soldiers on the ground. The French action, which started Sunday night, was designed to permit Malian forces to advance into the city...." ...
... Al Jazeera Update: "French and Malian troops have taken control of the historic Malian city of Timbuktu, after rebel occupiers fled the ancient Sahara trading town and torched several buildings, including a priceless manuscript library. The French-led coalition troops were welcomed by residents of the town, AFP news agency reported with some residents saying that the rebel fighters had left the city several days ago."
... AP: "Islamist extremists torched a library containing historic manuscripts in Timbuktu, the mayor said Monday, as French and Malian forces closed in on Mali's fabled desert city."
Share Article
Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.
Reader Comments (15)
Another take on women in combat: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/26/women-combat-us-military-firing-line
As a combat veteran, I have no problem with women in combat. As the linked article makes clear, when called upon, women can and will fight. As to LTG Boykin's phobia, The other night on MSNBC, I saw an inrerview where some male veteran brought up the same point. The female veteran also being interviewed said that it was too late, she had already had experience with that and dealt with it.
Re: Boykin: Personally, I think he has several screws loose. He's the one who said "....there is no greater threat to America than Islam." He's very popular in wing nut circles. That about sums him up.
Marie, time to celebrate! Arizona is the new Florida.
Now that Arizona seems to be surpassing both Florida and Texas (former joint Capitols of Crazy) in wingnut crackpotism (not the most mellifluous of phrases, I admit, but hey, it's Monday morning) residents of those other states can either feel relieved that they can now travel to other states without people pointing at them and laughing, or get back in the saddle and crazy up.
But this morning at least, Arizona, with their newly proposed loyalty oath is in front by several lengths.
I see that the ACLU has complained that this right-wing loyalty oath is unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds. Silly Civil Libertarians. Don't they know that conservatives wouldn't give you a burnt out match in a rainstorm for the a whole bunch'a amendments and big chunks out of other parts of the Constitution? So First Amendment whining don't cut it. Neither does moaning about the 8th or 14th or any other socialist liberal crybaby Constitutional crap.
In fact, the oath really needs to be amended to force students to pledge their troth to the right-wing agenda and nothing else; anything connected to god and shooting at things, and allowing Arizona officials to unleash raging, elemental monsters from the id and turn them into laws all while dancing naked in a lightning storm with metal rods sticking out their asses.
Oh, and about that business of saying the Pledge of Allegiance? I recall reading somewhere (and if I can recover the details I'll go to bad happy tonight) about a certain chief of a Native American tribe who was threatened with action for declining to repeat the Pledge every day along with the rest of the subdued tribes. His rationale? "I said it once. That's enough." Which makes you think about the whole concept of a pledge.
A pledge is a promise or a vow of sorts. Do we need, those of us who are married, to redo our wedding vows every day? Then again, maybe some should. Like all those cheating congressmen. So even if this anecdote is apocryphal, it raises a good point. A better way to remind students of their duty to the country would be to have them watch five minutes of any Fox broadcast followed by a "...and never say or do whacko shit like that."
So anyway, Texas and Florida will just have to get back on their crazy horse and ride east into the setting sun if they don't want Arizona to steal their thunder. Or whatever it is you steal when you're going the wrong way. All the time.
It sure as hell ain't a road map to the real world.
How to End the Wingnut Loyalty oath
@Barbarossa: ironically, Boykin would probably be happier living in a Muslim country where men & women don't mix & most people probably agree with his "philosophy" about "personal hygiene."
On a related note, I don't know anything about combat uniforms so maybe the military is way ahead of me, but it would not take a genius -- though it might take a woman -- to design outerwear & underwear that accommodated women's physiology. Flaps & Velcro are involved.
Marie
Barbarossa,
It's quite possible that the problem of personal hygiene in the field, for guys like Boykin, has to do with the magnifying glass and pair of tweezers needed to find and deploy his, er, member, in order to do his business.
Giggles from the guys were bad enough but from the women?
Now that would be intolerable.
Akhilleus: I think you have come up with a new coinage: "I go to bad happy tonight," I like that. Going to a bad happy place might just what we need right now.
During the FDR Roosevelt era the Supreme Court heard the case of the Gobitis family whose children refused to salute the flag and pledge allegiance because they were Jehovah Witnesses. The Court handed down a 1-8 decision in favor of the State––Frankfurter adding how important symbols are in generating national unity. But liberals were not happy and backlash resulted in much harangue of the JW. Years later it was said that the Court had gotten the Gobitis case wrong. They had misunderstood not only the will of the people but the true meaning of liberalism. The lone dissent in that case belonged to Harlan Fiske Stone, a Coolidge appointee had out-liberated the other liberal judges on the Court.
@P. D. Pepe: on shrinking violets. (This is in response to a comment Pepe wrote yesterday.) When I was about 10 & winning all the school foot races, my mother told me that when she was my age she was also the fastest runner in her class, but she always slowed down so the boy she had a crush on could beat her. I was shocked at the very notion that losing on purpose would somehow make me more attractive. I never did slow down, tho when I got to junior high school, I could not keep up with Linda Gollattscheck, who was 6 feet tall & had quite a stride. Linda ended my short-lived career as a star sprinter.
When I was in school, girls still considered it "good strategy" to play dumb for the boys. But I never did. I think a number of the "good strategists" were among that probably-apocryphal 10% of the girls in our high school class who were pregnant beneath their graduation gowns.
Marie
@Akhilleus. I also remember -- with no specificity -- that a Native American chief told some President or court that he had already said the pledge, so there was no need for him to say it again.
While I was trying, unsuccessfully, to find out who that was when, I came across this terrific post by Rick Hertzberg on the Texas pledge of allegiance. Well-worth a read.
Also, how come Congress didn't put a requirement for daily repetition of the marriage vow into DOMA? Don't those people care about the sanctity of marriage?
Marie
P.S. I suspect your supposition about Boykin is right, but I was too nice to say so.
PD,
You betcha, baby. I go to bad happy!
I guess I've been reveling in the (almost) tough talk from the Pres. Like him, and a certain chemistry teacher on that AMC show, I've taken to Breaking Bad (except without all the meth).
Anyway, I think it's time we all went to bad happy.
No more Mr. Niceguy.
Marie,
I think I'll be happy to take credit for the aptly coined "Boykin Supposition". But changing just last three letters gets us ( or him ), the "Boykin Suppository" and that I will have nothing to do with.
Sheesh. It IS Monday morning.
Told you I was going to bad happy.
N.
@Akhilleus. Re: "bad happy," I have been (w)racking my brain trying to think of a word or phrase -- in any language -- that describes "something that makes me happy but I know is bad for me." A noun or adjective will do, as in, "Chocolate cake is my ... " or "Chocolate cake is...." I'm not thinking here of "guilty pleasure," because, fer instance, I don't feel "guilty" about eating chocolate cake, but I know it's not a health food. Can anybody help?
Marie
I am extremely skeptical about the immigration "framework" that the reportedly bi-partisan group of Senators have promulgated. Really - Arizona duo Dementia Toddler and his side kick Snowflake have anything of importance to say on immigration? After all Arizona is the leader in this area - lets get Jan Brewer involved too. Oh wait, she can't be in the same room with someone who even looks Hispanic.
The document begins with a promise to promulgate a "tough and fair" policy. I get fair, but what does "tough" have to do with? The message - we don't want you, so we're going to require that you bend over and grab your ankles and be examined repeatedly, probably with a Virginia style probe. You will embrace the hate, racism and suspicion we heap upon you in the name of "tough and fair", if you whine, you are gone.
There is nothing in this framework that commits a damn thing to a specific policy - fair my ass. Its a lot of BS, that is designed to get some better poll numbers going for the crazy party. As example, in regard to people who were brought here as children, it allows as how it should be recognized that they have to meet "different" requirements???? OK what? Sterilization? So far, the MSM have been french kissing the participants in this document. For Christ sakes, get a room. It is designed to make Rubio's run for higher office easier and to attempt some redemption of McCain, as if there is any tiny piece of that pile of shit that is worth redemption (NOT). I am anxious to see the actual bills and/or the President's proposals. I am betting we'll be right back to the usual nasty Republican hate talk in short order. No "caution optimism" from me.
How to get information to, and through the thick heads of, people resistant to change is part art, part science. And a cudgel helps sometimes. See: "Your Brain Lies to You" -NYT 27.06.2008. "Academic ‘Dream Team’ Helped Obama’s Effort" - NYT 12.11.2012. "Don’t Blink! The Hazards of Confidence - NYT 19.10.2011. This last is written by Daniel Kahneman, I'd read anything by him to help me understand my fellow planet-mates.
Krugman and all those folks don't live their lives in the trenches with the unwashed masses; those unwashed masses do not calmly and without threat of violence discuss politics. These are the rioters and dissentient masses which constitute the backbone of democracy. Likely that is no news to the ivory tower neoconservatives who believe in top-down management dictates to their unwashed sycophants; the sycophants like being told what to do and think. Most people live a life of quiet 'decision fatigue' that is sometimes confused in appearance with overwork. And at the end we are left with 25% of the people who still liked Cheney/Bush at the end of their term; the reciprocal of which is the 25% who hated the 'draft dodging duo' at the start.
Essentially 50% of the people will never change their minds no matter the facts in the case.
Science and reason have legitimate rolls to play in the groups I'd call the "sweet 25%" who can adapt to a dynamic informationscape. Liberals would do well to embrace science and reason before the Merlin lovers perfect the alchemy of the dark ages.
@citizen625: You write, "And at the end we are left with 25% of the people who still liked Cheney/Bush at the end of their term; the reciprocal of which is the 25% who hated the 'draft dodging duo' at the start. Essentially 50% of the people will never change their minds no matter the facts in the case.
Science and reason have legitimate rolls to play in the groups I'd call the "sweet 25%" who can adapt to a dynamic informationscape."
I'm having trouble with your arithmetic. What I've got there only adds up to 75 percent. Who are the other 25 percent.
If you're suggesting that liberals & conservatives are equally unable to "embrace science & logic," I vehemently disagree, inasmuch as "science & logic" pretty much teaches us otherwise. Anyway, please elaborate, as I'm not getting it.
(I realize you're speaking generally, & don't mean your percentages to be hard-&-fast.)
Marie
Citizen625,
It's interesting that you mention the top-down strategy most appreciated by neocon Masters of the Universe. They do in fact believe that they know better than everyone, and anyone who disagrees with them is a liar, traitor, or disgruntled, evil liberal (see: Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, all of the Kristols, Rove, Libby, and on and on).
What's most ironic about this state of affairs is the way they constantly harp about how democracy is being stolen from the little people, the "average" Americans (whoever they hell they are), and all those highly moral persons living in flyover red states. Like the blatherers on Fox, they talk quite a bit about how Obama and the Democrats are stealing the Freeeedddoooommmmsss of all those good, Christian Republicans, but their schemes clearly indicate that they wouldn't trust anyone but themselves with the levers of power (don't forget Bush's deathless imprecation that he was "The Decider").
They are the most undemocratic bunch the country has ever seen.
You also mentioned cudgels. Got any left?
@Marie: Maybe the bad-happy could be connected to something like watching a stupid show like the Bachelor (like I do) and just loving its stupidity. I am fascinated with this show's inane premise and how all this is implemented, but out of my mouth comes, "Are you crazy? Oh, my god, this is so dumb!" All the while happily watching it.
And to you who once ran with the swift: For me, too, it was always the Gollattschecks who I was in competition with, never the boys who for the most part were easy-breezy and most compliant.