Tuesday
Mar012016
The Commentariat -- March 2, 2016
Presidential Race
The New York Times is liveblogging the primary elections.
Democrats
Patrick Healy & Amy Chozick of the New York Times: " took full command of the Democratic presidential race on Tuesday as she rolled to major victories over in Texas, Virginia and across the South and proved for the first time that she could build a national coalition of racially diverse voters that would be crucial in the November election. Based on results from Democratic primaries and caucuses in 11 states, Mrs. Clinton succeeded in containing Mr. Sanders to states he was expected to win, like Vermont and Oklahoma, and overpowering him in predominantly black and Hispanic areas that were rich in delegates needed for the Democratic nomination." ...
Alabama: The New York Times has projected Clinton to be the winner with less than one percent of the precincts reporting.
Arkansas: The New York Times has projected Clinton to be the winner with less than one percent of the precincts reporting.
Colorado: The Times has projected Sanders to be the winner with 35 percent of the precincts reporting.
Georgia: The New York Times has projected Clinton to be the winner with 3 percent of the precincts reporting.
Massachusetts: The Times had the state leaning Clinton; now, with 5 percent of the vote counted, they have it leaning Sanders. Oops! At 9:00 pm, the Times has Massachusetts leaning Clinton. Update: With 91 percent of the votes counted, the Times has projected Clinton as the winner.
Minnesota: The Times has projected Sanders to be the winner with 43 percent of the precincts reporting.
Oklahoma: The Times has projected Sanders to be the winner with 51 percent of the precincts reporting. Sanders currently has 52 percent of the vote; Clinton has 41 percent.
Tennessee: The Times has projected Clinton to be the winner with less than one percent of the precincts reporting.
Texas: The Times has projected Clinton to be the winner with 2 percent of the precincts reporting.
Vermont: The Times has projected Sanders to be the winner with 4 percent of the precincts reporting.
Virginia: The New York Times has projected Clinton to be the winner with 44 percent of the precincts reporting.
Ed Kilgore: "On Super Tuesday Hillary Clinton took some measured steps forward towards winning the Democratic presidential nominating contest. Meanwhile Bernie Sanders took some measured steps backwards towards his original role as a protest candidate trying to 'keep Hillary honest' and carry the torch for progressives dismayed by the last two Democratic presidents."
Steve Annear of the Boston Globe: "Bill Clinton’s presence inside a polling location in Boston on Super Tuesday raised concerns about whether the former president violated state rules on election campaigning.... A video clip showing Bill Clinton shaking hands with election clerks at Holy Name [school gym], alongside Mayor Martin J. Walsh, had some people on Twitter questioning the former president’s appearance indoors.... [Massachusetts] Secretary of State William F. Galvin told the New York Times that he had to remind election workers that 'even a president can’t go inside and work a polling place.'”
Republicans
Alexander Burns & Jonathan Martin of the New York Times: " won sweeping victories across the South and in New England on Tuesday, a show of strength in the Republican primary campaign that underscored the breadth of his appeal and helped him begin to amass a wide delegate advantage despite growing resistance to his candidacy among party leaders. Mr. Trump’s political coalition — with his lopsided victories in Alabama, Georgia, Massachusetts and Tennessee, and narrower ones in Arkansas, Vermont and Virginia — appears to have transcended the regional and ideological divisions that have shaped the in recent years." ...
Alaska: Polls close at midnight ET. at 1:00 am ET, with 10 percent of the voted counted, Alaska is leaning Trump. at 2:00 am, Cruz is up by 3, & the Times has the state leaning Cruz. Update: With all precincts reports, Cruz carried Alaska, 36 percent to Trump's 34 percent.
Alabama: The Washington Post has projected Trump to be the winner with 0 percent of the precincts reporting.
Arkansas: The Washington Post has projected Trump to be the winner with 28 percent of the precincts reporting.
Georgia: The New York Times has projected Trump to be the winner with 2 percent of the precincts reporting.
Massachusetts: The Times has projected Trump to be the winner with 0 percent of the precincts reporting.
Minnesota: The Times has projected Rubio to be the winner with 53 percent of the precincts reporting.
Oklahoma: The Times has projected Cruz to be the winner with 51 percent of the precincts reporting. Cruz currently has 34 percent of the vote; Trump has 30 percent.
Tennessee: The Times has projected Trump to be the winner with less than one percent of the precincts reporting.
Texas: The Times has projected Cruz to be the winner with 2 percent of the precincts reporting.
Vermont: With 84 percent of precincts reporting, the Times says the state is leaning toward Trump, who has 33 percent of the vote. However, Kasich is close at 31 percent. Update: With 97 percent of the vote counted, the Times has declared Trump the winner.
Virginia: The New York Times has projected Trump to be the winner with 84 percent of the precincts reporting. Trump currently has 36 percent of the vote; Rubio has 31 percent.
The Party of Drumpf. New York Times Editors: "... voters ... are leaning, in unbelievable numbers, toward a man whose quest for the presidency revolves around targeting religious and racial minorities and people with disabilities, who flirts with white supremacists and the Ku Klux Klan, who ridicules and slanders those who disagree with him.... Those who could challenge Mr. Trump — Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio — are not only to the right of Mr. Trump on many issues, but are embracing the same game of exclusion, bigotry and character assassination." ...
... CW: Perhaps the Grey Lady should remove her rose-colored blinders & read Driftglass's explanation of why those voters are "leaning in unbelievable numbers" toward a fascist who would dispense with freedom of the press & "sue them and win lots of money" because the paper is "one of the most dishonest media outlets I've ever seen in my life. The worst, the worst. The absolute worst. They have an agenda that you wouldn't believe. And they're run by incompetent people. Yes, yes, I know Driftglass is not now nor will he ever be a member of the club, but the Times is aware of outsider journalism (whence their reporters often get their leads), so it wouldn't hurt if they occasionally took a peek at an outsider's POV. ...
Ha Ha. M. J. Lee of CNN: "Disaffected Republicans are discussing everything from skipping the Republican National Convention in July to running a conservative candidate as an independent or third-party candidate -- with the ultimate goal of denying Trump the presidency. One of the names frequently mentioned in this hypothetical is Mitt Romney, the 2012 GOP presidential nominee, even though he has shown no desire to run another campaign but has shown a zest for attacking Trump."
Tim Alberta of the National Review: "It’s either Donald Trump or a contested convention.... Cruz emerged from Tuesday second in the delegate race and best positioned, at least mathematically, to challenge Trump for the nomination.... [But] southern, conservative, Evangelical-heavy areas were once thought to be hostile to the bombastic, thrice-married Manhattan billionaire. Instead, Trump turned the Bible Belt into his personal political playground. Now the race shifts to friendlier terrain. Come mid-March, the primaries will award delegates in chunks from states in the midwest, the mid-Atlantic, and the sun belt, with bigger, more-diverse electorates. After that, April sees the race move to Trump’s wheelhouse: the northeast." Via Greg Sargent. ...
... Greg Sargent scans the GOP "leadership"'s evolving attitudes toward a Trump nomination. There's no consensus, but there seems to be movement toward "At least he's not Hillary." Nice bumper-sticker material. ...
... The Trumpinator. Ben Kamisar of the Hill: "Donald Trump warned Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) that he'll have to pay the price if he doesn't get along with a President Trump after Ryan repudiated him for failing to disavow backing from David Duke. 'I'm going to get along great with Congress. Paul Ryan, I don't know him well, but I'm sure I'm going to get along great with him,' the front-runner for his party's nomination said during his Super Tuesday speech. 'And if I don't, he's going to have to pay a big price.'" CW: Are you missing Obama yet, Paul? ...
... Jennifer Jacobs for USA Today: "Donald Trump lashed out again at the news media — specifically the Des Moines Register, part of the USA Today Network — for reporting on some black college students who said his campaign ejected them from his presidential rally in Georgia on the eve of the big Super Tuesday vote.... The police chief in Valdosta confirmed Tuesday that the students were correct when they said Trump aides ordered them out of the campus stadium. But Chief Brian Childress said Trump and his detail were justified in removing the students for disorderly behavior. The night before, Trump’s spokeswoman Hope Hicks had called USA Today’s article about the incident a 'false report,' saying neither Trump nor the campaign had anything to do with asking the students to leave. Trump kept up that narrative during his Super Tuesday stop in Columbus, targeting this reporter, who writes for The Des Moines Register and is a correspondent for USA Today.... The Trump campaign had earlier in the day refused to credential USA Today for the candidate's appearance in Palm Beach on Tuesday night. ...
... CW: I'd love to know what constitutes "disorderly" at a Trump rally. If you didn't watch the video I posted yesterday of snippets from Trump's rally in Virginia, you might want to take a look. Unless the black students were shooting people, they weren't "disorderly" by Trump rally standards. ...
... Olivia Nuzzi of the Daily Beast: "Donald Trump is paying himself to run for president. Between June 16, when he announced his candidacy from the lobby of Trump Tower, through the end of 2015, the Trump campaign spent $2.2 million patronizing Trump businesses. The majority — $2 million — was spent on Tag Air Inc., where Trump is CEO.... Whether or not this is legal is a tricky question. By law, candidates cannot profit from their own campaigns." ...
... CW: That's funny, because Trump doesn't care. He once bragged that "It’s very possible that I could be the first presidential candidate to run and make money on it.” I suppose President Trump will just disband the Federal Election Commission & declare the law null, void & unprosecutable.
Andrew Sprung has a very good piece titled "Trump the Incompetent." He uses the WashPo's reporting on Trump Mortgage to demonstrate the "distilled essence of Trump's art of the debacle:... 1. Ignore market signals.... 2. Fail.... 3. Blame surrogates.... 4. Stiff everyone.... 5. Lie about it when everyone's forgotten." Read the whole post. Via Paul Waldman.
Erik Wemple of the Washington Post: Sean Hannity & Bill O'Reilly of Fox "News" rescue Donald Trump from his know-nothing moments on his white supremacist supporters. ...
... Derek Thompson of the Atlantic profiles Trump supporters: white, undereducation, fearful, resentful, racist & receptive to authoritarian leadership.
Glenn Blain & Dareh Gregorian of the New York Daily News: "Super Tuesday has gotten off to a not-so-super start for Donald Trump - a state appeals court has denied his bid to toss out a lawsuit that charges his Trump University was a fraud. In a unanimous ruling, a four judge panel of the state Appellate Division said the state Attorney General's office is 'authorized to bring a cause of action for fraud' - despite the bloviating billionaire's claims to the contrary." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... Justin Wolfers of the New York Times: "It’s unsurprising that 'Donald Trump' has been the most searched-for candidate in the United States over the past 24 hours. More surprising: The runner-up is neither Marco Rubio nor Ted Cruz. Instead, that honor goes to 'Donald Drumpf.' The comedian John Oliver mocked Mr. Trump by urging the audience of his HBO show Sunday night to adopt the candidate’s real family name.
... Jonathan Chait: "The fact that Trump threatens rather than promotes conservative interests has enabled conservative intellectuals to see certain truths that they once obscured: There are deep strands of racial resentment and anti-intellectualism running through the Republican electorate. But these angry spasms of half-recognition attempt to quarantine Trump from a political tradition of which he is very much a part." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
** Sam Biddle of Gawker: Ted Cruz celebrated his wins in Texas & Oklahoma at a bar called the Redneck Country Club. "This may or may not shock you, but the Redneck Country Club is owned by an extreme, open racist by the name of Michael Berry, who hosts a racist radio program that includes a blackface 'comedian' named 'Dr. Rev. Shirley Q Liquor,' who provides a routine of vile black stereotypes for Berry’s white listeners.... And Media Matters points out, Berry, a friend of Cruz’s for decades, has referred to blacks as 'jungle animals' and 'pack animals,' and tweeted in defense of a KKK billboard promoting white purity ('nothing wrong with it'). So remember: Donald Trump is the GOP candidate with a racist affiliation problem" ...
... CW: Seriously, this shocks me. Of course I know Ted is an asshole, but I didn't know he was a flagrant, flaming racist asshole. Earlier this week, he tweeted, "Really sad," in response to Trump's refusal to disavow the KKK & David Duke. "You're better than this," he wrote to Trump. "We should all agree, racism is wrong, KKK is abhorrent." Evidently just a teensy weensy bit wrong & a widdle biddy bit abhorrent.
"Goodbye, Rubio Tuesday." Jonathan Chait: "... it was only a few days, when Marco Rubio was poised to seize back the inside lane of the Republican nomination race.... In the days since, Rubio’s plan has come to pieces.... For all its struggles at vote-garnering, Rubio’s campaign has excelled at one thing: winning the nebulous 'expectations game.'... Tuesday, reports leaked that Rubio’s campaign was telling supporters it could win four states. This turned his 1-for-11 showing from a disappointment into an absolute debacle.... He is closer to becoming a joke than the front-runner.” ...
... Nate Cohn of the New York Times: "The night could not have gone much worse for , perhaps the only Republican with a good chance to beat Mr. Trump in a one-on-one contest." ...
The Grifters. Steve M.: "What's the difference between [Rubio & Carson] right now? As far as can see, the only difference is that Carson is staying in the race so that the flow of small to medium-size checks from churchgoing heartlanders won't stop altogether, and Rubio is staying in the race so the flow of somewhat larger checks from Republican one-percenters won't dry up. They both like the money. They both like the attention. Carson's hoping to sell a million copies of a godly campaign memoir and Rubio's hoping to position himself for 2020. But it's still all about that grift. Everyone acknowledges that about Carson, but most people think Rubio operates on a higher plane. Remember, though, Rubio's the guy who charged lots of personal expenses on a GOP credit card. He's the guy who was in debt until a billionaire named Norman Braman bailed him out. They're two of a kind. Let's admit that, at least." ...
... Jonathan Easley of the Hill: "Ben Carson will not drop out of the GOP presidential race, even if he doesn’t take home any delegates on Super Tuesday, close friend and adviser Armstrong Williams told The Hill." ...
... Which is totally sensible because ... Al Weaver of the Washington Examiner: "... his campaign admits that it's not clear at all that Carson has a viable path to victory, and they don't have a plan to win." ...
... Scammer-in-Chief: CW: Of course if the main goal of your campaign is not the presidency but the jackpot, then it does make sense to stay to the bitter end. Send money, people. There's a God-fearing Christian who is pretending to run for president who needs your hard-earned cash to send on to his so-called consultants. And maybe take a kickback here & there. Who knows?
GOP Leaders Beat up on Last Nearly-Sane Guy Standing. Tarini Parti of BuzzFeed: "On Tuesday night as return after return came in and Marco Rubio failed to break through, many establishment Republicans grew angrier that John Kasich was still in the race. One of them was Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who has become increasingly frustrated with Kasich behind closed doors, three sources told BuzzFeed News. In the coming days, McConnell will be urged to more aggressively try behind the scenes to push Kasich out, sources say." ...
... CW: I believe Kasich will drop out soon, without any pressure from the Turtle & other GOP "establishment leaders." BTW, if anybody feels sorry for these "leaders" (so leaderish they typically don't have the guts to be quoted on the record), get over it. Flacking for Marco is unconscionable. ...
... Charles Pierce: John Kasich is cranky but evidently not crazy: "I know that human beings affect the climate.... I know we need to develop all of the renewables, and we need to do it in an orderly way." CW: The next thing you know, he'll be saying science is a good thing. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Charles Pierce: "As near as I can tell, there's only one elected Republican who's out there being completely principled about what's happening to his party.... [Sen. Ben] Sasse [RTP-Neb.] is every bit the soul of wingnut chewiness that Ted Cruz is. His Tea Party street cred is unassailable." Sasse called for a third-party candidate if Trump wins the GOP nomination. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Michael Barbaro of the New York Times: "Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey is awkwardly adapting to a new role: Donald J. Trump’s yes man. During Mr. Trump’s victory news conference on Tuesday night in Florida, Mr. Christie stood behind him during the business mogul’s entire speech, offering the constant nods, a gaze of admiration and unrelenting affirmation usually reserved for a political spouse." ...
If you mute this Trump speech, it looks like they're holding a bachelor auction but no one will bid on Chris Christie. -- Chris Burke, on Twitter ...
Play it with the audio, which you can mute (lower right-hand corner):
— Ronan Farrow (@RonanFarrow) March 2, 2016
... Margaret Hartmann: "Just days after Trump appeared to kick Christie off his stage in Tennessee, directing him 'get on the plane and go home,' the governor elected to stand in Trump's shot. Twitter quickly went to work, attempting to determine if the troubled look on Christie's face was a sign that he's realized his political future is now in the hands of the guy from The Apprentice, or a desperate attempt to alert the media that Trump has taken his loved ones hostage." ...
... CW: If you also watch Christie's introduction of Trump at the victory party, you'll be even more convinced Trump is holding Christie hostage. Instead of the irrepressible glee that usually accompanies a big win, Christie delivers his words in a near monotone, a sober (or pained) expression on his face -- in the manner of a hostage delivering a videotaped speech his captors wrote & forced him to make for the folks back home.
... Paul Singer of USA Today: "Six New Jersey newspapers issued a joint editorial Tuesday calling on Gov. Chris Christie to resign in the wake of his failed presidential campaign and his subsequent endorsement of rival Donald Trump. The six newspapers including the Asbury Park Press, the Cherry Hill Courier-Post and the Morristown Daily Record — all Gannett-owned papers that are part of the USA Today Network — were apparently spurred to editorial outrage by a Monday press conference in which Christie refused to answer questions about anything other than his nomination of a state Supreme Court judge. Asked why, Christie replied, 'Because I don't want to.' 'We’re fed up with Gov. Chris Christie’s arrogance,' the papers wrote. 'We’re fed up with his opportunism. We’re fed up with his hypocrisy.'"
Other News & Opinion
Adam Liptak of the New York Times: "The Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear its first major abortion case in almost a decade, one that has the potential to revise constitutional standards and to affect millions of women. Justice Antonin Scalia’s death last month may have muted the prospect of truly bold action, but even a 4-to-4 tie would have enormous consequences because it would leave in place an appeals court decision that could drive down the number of abortion clinics in Texas to about 10, from roughly 40."
Tierney Sneed of TPM: "During a Tuesday meeting at the White House with President Obama, GOP Senate leaders remained unbowed in refusing to consider his nominee to the Supreme Court, according to top Democrats present. 'They were adamant. They said no, we are not going to do this at all. We are going to do what has never been done before,' Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) told reporters at a stakeout after Tuesday's meeting...." ...
... Oliver Knox of Yahoo! News: "One aide to a vulnerable Senate Republican, who requested anonymity, jokingly suggested that there might be another, very different source of pressure as early as Tuesday night. 'I’m not sure we want to be in the business of telling voters that we’d rather risk having Donald Trump nominate the next Supreme Court justice,' he said." ...
... Paul Waldman: "So on the one hand, people like McConnell are saying Trump is a lunatic who can’t be trusted, but on the other hand they’re saying he’s the one who ought to make this appointment. Got it." ...
... Of course he can be trusted, Paul. Eric Hananoki of Media Matters: "Donald Trump ally Roger Stone said that Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano is 'probably Trump's number one pick for the U.S. Supreme Court.' Napolitano believes in 9/11 conspiracy theories, is a 'contrarian' on President Abraham Lincoln's legacy, and doesn't believe 'the right to vote' is a 'fundamental right.'" CW: Also, too, Napolitano is 65 years old, so he'll be getting wackier soon.
Zach Carter of the Huffington Post: DNC Chair & Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) has joined Republicans' efforts to gut the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's regulation of payday lenders. "She's also attempting to gin up Democratic support for the legislation" that would curb the CFPB's rules. "The misleadingly titled Consumer Protection and Choice Act would delay the CFPB's payday lending rules by two years, and nullify its rules in any state with a payday lending law like the one adopted in Florida [which is a joke].... Consumer groups are appalled by the bill." CW: Thanks, Debbie. It's always great when a Democratic leader goes out of her way to stick it to the most helpless Americans. ...
... It would be super to have your BFF Hillary Clinton weigh in. Inquiring reporters???
Beyond the Beltway
Mitch Smith of the New York Times: "The Republican governor of South Dakota on Tuesday vetoed a bill that would have restricted bathroom access for transgender students and made the state the first to adopt such a measure. Gov. Dennis Daugaard put out a statement late in the day saying that the bill did 'not address any pressing issue' facing the state, and that it would have put schools in the 'difficult position of following state law while knowing it openly invites federal litigation.' The measure was pushed by conservative legislators who said it was an effort to protect the privacy of all students. But it appeared to conflict with the Obama administration’s interpretation of federal civil rights law and seemed likely to be headed for a court challenge.” CW: Well, good on Gov. Daugaard.
Laurel Andrews of the Alaska Dispatch News: "A Superior Court judge dismissed the Alaska Legislature’s lawsuit to halt Gov. Bill Walker’s Medicaid expansion Tuesday. In his decision and order, Superior Court Judge Frank Pfiffner concluded that the state acted within the bounds of the law when it expanded Medicaid.... Whether the Legislature would appeal the ruling was still being considered Tuesday, Senate Majority spokeswoman Michaela Goertzen said, but 'I know that’s something that (the Senate majority) has said in the past that they would likely do.'"
Share Article
Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.
Reader Comments (29)
Let us not forget that the Benito did not hit the 50% number in even one state. He came close in Mass. but I think there are only 10-12 Republicans there.
The South Dakota Gov. should require that all of the Republican legislators go to Paris and take a pee in the restroom at a major department store. As I have mentioned previously, they usually have just one. All stalls and no one notices or gives a damn whether the person next to you is standing or sitting.
An oversized man from New Jersey was seized yesterday and put on the auction block for sale. He is stunned, horrified, and cannot believe that he allowed himself to be so vulnerable. When questioned, he said the auctioneer had asked for his help during the selling of precious gold artifacts which in fact were fake. He toyed with this offer, finally agreeing to participate, but midway into it decided to decline. When he refused in this ruse he was kidnapped, shackled and dragged against his will. Now he will be sold for little more than a pig in a poke along with all the phony gold baloney.
REPITITIOUS RETHORIC:
"Our leaders don't have a clue about trade deals" [but he does]
We have GREAT GREAT power–-NObody, nobody is gonna mess with us" [when he is president]
"I have expanded the Party––I bring people together––NObody else can do that. [you bet}
"I am for Planned Parenthood––they do great things for women but as long as they perform abortions I won't fund them" [alrighty then]
I will lower taxes on the middle class, on corporations...[really?}
"I am a truth teller––I always tell the truth" [ you betcha]
"I have THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of workers working for me " [ and so?]
"I have a bigger heart than anybody" [ it's bleeding on your sleeve as you speak]
"I'm gonna be GREAT!" [ A Frosted Flake tiger reference]
"I have MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of people voting for me" [ a true $$$$ man]
Jimmy Kimmel sent his inquiring reporter out to California to ask all those "everyday" people who are walking down the street whether or not they voted on Tuesday (voting in California isn't until June). Everyone––film showed us six––not only said they had voted but told the reporter whom they voted for and when asked how crowded was their polling place, they answered that too.
I reserve my comment.
And I'd like to join others who praised Akhilleus' "Whitey on the Moon" segment––bravo!!!!
@Marvin Schwalb: Consider me a libertarian when it comes to potty parity. Here's something I didn't know: separate facilities were actually a product of feminism.
From the Reason piece linked above: "... the first separate toilet facilities for men and women appeared at a ball in Paris in 1739. Until then, public restrooms, such as they existed, were generally gender neutral or marked for men only. The earliest efforts to legislate gender segregation in the United States were due to a lack of women’s facilities in workplaces. In 1887, Massachusetts was the first state to pass a law mandating women's restrooms in workplaces with female employees."
U.S. state & federal laws regarding public toilets are, not surprisingly, ridiculous. One can imagine the piss-ants' revolt that will accompany the inevitable liberalization of sex-segregated toilet-facility laws.
Marie
Here is an interesting piece criticizing Senator Grassley's assertion that a proper Justice (like Scalia) decides cases on "rule of law" rather than application of experience and judgment:
http://www.dorfonlaw.org/2016/03/the-myth-of-neutral-supreme-court.html
I have always thought that the idea of deciding SC cases strictly by "rule of law" is ludicrous. If the law can be applied to the case "as a rule," the case would be decided in lower courts. Lower courts would just have to find "the rule" and apply it, like an algorithm, and bingo, Bob's your uncle.
But the problem is, invariably, that there are contradictory "rules," or none that really fit, when a case gets to the SC. Except, in some very rare cases where a blatantly unconstitutional law does not get whacked by a lower court, and the SC needs to do the the needful.
But even in that rare case (like Plessy ), the judgment of the justices is a function of the times and the polity. One hundred years ago it seemed perfectly OK with the majority that black people should have different accommodations than white people. By 1954 is was pretty apparent to the justices that such an opinion did not square with 13, 14 and 15. The constitution had not changed in pertinent parts since "Plessy" -- but the experience and judgment of the justices had changed, along with the sensibilities of much of the national polity.
I always wonder, too, whether people like Grassley are ignorant or pernicious when dealing with this question. They have been around long enough that it is hard to think they are ignorant of the way the SC works. But sometimes I think they may have a pernicious desire to remain ignorant.
What's next?
This morning sent this to a good friend, a retired political apparatchik in Oregon:
"Following yesterday's vote I'm hoping Bernie will bow out gracefully--and soon--and throw his support to Hillary. And even after a brief hiatus to allow any mutually inflicted wounds to heal, campaign at her side. He's said many times we cannot afford a Republican President of any stripe and I hope his vision is clear enough to tell him that persisting in a campaign he cannot win will only increase the chances of that happening.
But I worry about these politician types, even the ones I vote for. They are not simply vessels of my own hopes and intentions but people with egos large enough to seek the limelight I prefer to avoid, and it's that ego thing that often gets them and my own dreams for the future into trouble. The limelight is so alluring, the rush of thousands shouting your name so appealing, they sometimes end up living in a psychological bubble that distorts reality and whether they're taking bribes, visiting prostitutes, having an affair or running a losing campaign, they don't know when to stop. Maybe Bernie will figure that out.
As for your pollster friend's sense that Trump could win the general election, I shudder to think that he might be right, but we are a divided country, where a six point differential is considered a landslide. No doubt a win this time around in Huckster Nation against the Huckster in Chief will be hard to come by. To gain one, the Democrats need a united front, which must include the youthful contingent that Sanders is reported to inspire as well as the ultra-progressives like me whose heart is with Bernie but whose head tells him it's time to let go."
BTW not-Leap, having skipped over the 29th and 1st, has now joined the human race.
Marie, the potty link was interesting. Near the end, there is this:
"Instead of focusing on adapting the behaviour of the users who may be in danger in the bathroom," Syrus Marcus Ware wrote in a 2011 Fuse magazine piece, "we need instead to change the way bathrooms are constructed and the way public toilets are understood. In short, bathrooms themselves need to be reconsidered and reimagined."
I can see a growth industry in some public and business bathrooms. Where stall size permits, when renovating, just install a modular unit like those found in airliners, with the washbasin and towel dispenser/dryer inside the unit. Make it a closed box (i.e. the door goes all the way to the floor and top of the unit).
People on airliners queuing for the loo don't seem to think twice about gender differentiation. So, clearly, people can accommodate their commode requirements.
The people who now make "Bath Fitters" should have the technical capacity to do this at a reasonable cost -- it would involve pretty much the same type of technical application.
And it would probably create some new jobs.
@Ken Winkes: Two major flaws in your premise:
(1) So far, in head-to-head match-up polls, Bernie does better than Hillary against GOP candidates. This is likely -- at least in part -- a function of both Hillary's whopping negatives & the paucity of hit pieces against Bernie.
(2) The longer Bernie stays in the race & the better he does, the harder it is for Hillary to return to her comfort zone in the Wall Street/conventional MOR environs.
If Hillary is the nominee, I want Bernie at that convention, writing the platform & endorsing Hillary's forced "revolution."
In one of the Times pieces linked above, the reporters note that Hillary is counting on Bernie's money to dry up in the wake of last night's results. As soon as I find my purse this morning, I'm sending Bernie a virtual C-note.
Marie
P.S. I misinterpreted the last line of your comment. Congratulations to the kids for a successful project completed. Now begins the never-ending labor.
Still on the Moon...
You don't have to wait very long for examples proving a thesis about Republicans and racial animosity to surface. Let's do a test. Get out my trusty stopwatch...and...GO...2...3...4...5 Bingo!
Contributing CNN Trump apologist and former political lackey for Saint Ronnie of Philadelphia, Mississippi, Jeffrey Lord, attacked former Obama Administration official Van Jones during a prolonged attempt to prove that Trump is no racist and it is instead liberals who are hooked in with the KKK, calling David Duke a "hardcore leftist".
This idiot is right up there with Ted Cruz who hilariously tried to paint the far-right Planned Parenthood murderer as a transgendered leftist. There must be some kind of secret delivery service that ferries binders of talking points (and occasionally women) to these assholes. They all imbibe the same putrid sewer dredgings.
Van Jones gave it right back in a pretty fiery exchange but Lord continued, even to the point of insulting him, in snarky tones because clearly the black guy doesn't know his history. At least not the fantasy wingnut history pushed by XXL dildo testers like Lord:
"'It is wrong to understand that these are not leftists,' Lord said of the KKK...And you don’t hide and say that’s not part of the base of the Democratic Party. They were the military arm, the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party, according to historians. For God’s sake, read your history!'" Yeah, 'cause black people don't know shit about history. This is the same party, remember that shelters members who assert that slaves were well off and treated with kindness and decency.
Jeremiah Wright's name came up (why would it not?) in reference to Lord's attempt to compare him to the KKK at which point Van Jones reminded everyone that Wright never lynched anyone.
Naturally this made no dent in Lord's fabricated fantasy view saying haughtily that "I care about American history. It counts." Lynching? Who got lynched? In Right Wing World, lynching is a thing not spoken of because, really, it probably never happened anyway. All liberal lies.
And as an aside, let us stipulate that yes, in 1866, the KKK was birthed by southern Democrats. But the point Van Jones made was that the KKK now votes Republican, exclusively. This would be like trying to win an argument by saying that the views of the Democratic Party in the late 19th century are still active today. Another way of looking at this would be to say that, because Republicans in the 1860's were abolitionists, Republicans today would find slavery anathema. Let's put in a call to Cliven Bundy, shall we? Stupidity doesn't even begin to cover it. How in the fuck do people like this get paid good money to open their mouths? Okay, sidebar over...
Finally, when all else failed, Lord tried the usual trick of blaming liberals for using race to divide Americans then bowed his head in solemn prayer by giving out the usual racist pig winger homily that Race Should Not Be Discussed.
Because race is not a problem in America anymore.
So, to sum up, Trump is not a racist, Ronald Reagan was no racist, Republicans are not racists. Democrats are the racists. David Duke is a liberal, the KKK are the military wing of the Democratic Party, and we should all be ashamed of ourselves for talking about race in the first place because race is not a problem in America anymore.
And remember....he was slinging this bullshit to a black guy, instructing him to shut his mouth about race.
Could these people get any more repulsive? Talk about obdurate, impenitent, unapologetic rusty douche clamps. And this guy is not some stogie chomping, dog siccing Bull Connor. This guy was political director of the Reagan White House. Is it any wonder that the Republican Party is such a fetid warren of vicious racists?
Still on the fucking moon and never comin' back.
Patrick,
"...[are] people like Grassley...ignorant or pernicious..."?
Answer: pernicious.
Even those who try to convince themselves that their position is entirely correct and moral (operative word: try) should not be given a pass and allowed to skate on the off chance that they are just stupid gits.
Pernicious.
But stupid always rides shotgun. Just in case.
@Ken: Congratulations on your new grandchild––though he may not leap, may he always run with the swift.
@Patrick: Your potty solution is terrific. In fact, you've even suggested a slogan to help the shy & fastidious: on every same-sex toilet door, a sign: "Pretend you're on an airplane."
Re: Supreme Court decisions: all one need do to understand the Constitution (that goes for you, too, Chuck Grassley) is to remember it is a document written by committee. Particularly with the addition of the Bill of Rights, but even without them, the Constitution outlines a governmental framework in tension with itself.
The main body of the Constitution describes three branches of government, each with specific interests, duties & limitations (especially apres the Marbury v. Madison decision), but in general it outlines the powers the federal government can exercise over the states & the people. The Bill of Rights & subsequent Amendments outline what the government cannot do. But these are outlines only; & reasonable people can & do disagree on how specific cases fit a nebulous & sometimes contradictory framework.
A neighbor of mine has a much better explanation.
Marie
Ken,
A great big hello to Not Leap. Even without the snappy moniker, may he do great things! Congrats.
@AK asks: " This guy[ Jeffrey Lord"] was political director of the Reagan White House. Is it any wonder that the Republican Party is such a fetid warren of vicious racists?"
Nope. But one does wonder whether the Lords in this country have serious brain disfunction resulting in "make up shit about history" and actually believe it or are just plain ignorant and nasty.
@Akhilleus: Re: Jeffrey Lord, eminent historian & CNN contributor -- I blame CNN. Nobody was moderating this segment; nobody stepped in to say, "Jeffrey Lord, you're full of crap." Wherefore art thou, Candy Crowley? This is both-siderism as bottom-feeding.
Marie
Patrick,
Regarding your question about the controlling presence of the rule of law, as long as human beings are judges, there will be some influences at play that have nothing to do with the "rule of law". After all, if baseball umpires were robots and not human there would be little pleasure in shouting "Kill the robot", and "Power down the robot" lacks a certain, je ne sais quoi.
It appears--and I know this will come as a shock to RC denizens--that the late Justice Antonin Scalia, may not have been the colorblind jurist of high minded impartiality he always assured us he was. In fact, those anecdotes about him being having lifetime subscriptions to Ebony and Jet magazines.....? Piffle.
Former students (not the white kind either) of Scalia's when he taught law at Chicago in the late 70's have made it known that Justice Colorblind was anything but:
"According to a Facebook post from Arnim Johnson that has since gone viral, Scalia flunked every black student who took his class. 'When I was there, Scalia was outed as a blatant racist to the extent that the Black American Law Students Association (BALSA) chapter at the law school brought it to the attention of acting Dean Norval Morris in several meetings,' Johnson said.
According to him, no students flunk courses at elite law schools. 'He flunked one brother so badly, it skewered his grade average, and he became the first, last, and only student in the history of the school to repeat first year. That man went on to become a respected military judge.'"
It seems that the favored students, the white Federalist Society kind were privy to private conversations with the Dark Teacher, elements of which would then show up in exams, leaving the non-favored students in, well, the dark.
Johnson makes an interesting point about Scalia's sense of himself that may help to explain his interest in secret circles of wealthy, WASPy elites. Being the offspring of Sicilian immigrants, Scalia may have decided that he needed, if he were to do the kind of social climbing he desired, to put as much distance as possible between himself and unsavory nee-groes.
But it could be that he was just a racist asshole too.
Before another nanosecond of Trumpific atrocities passes, let's all give a big round of applause and seriously wicked good approbation to Marie for this truly astounding round-up. Today is an especially good example of the yeomanlike work she does quotidianly (is that a word?). If the Times, the Washington Post or even that éminence grise of midwestern journalism, the Unterrified Democrat (Linn, MO--sorry, no website), did half as well, they would be able to pat themselves on the back from now 'til rapture.
T'anks a lot.
Marie,
Who knows? Early head to head polls aside, my own tea leaves won't settle into a neat pattern.
Might change my mind tomorrow but the way I see it today, if Hillary and Trump are the nominees, it will be a battle of negatives. Hillary's baggage will certainly drag her down, but outside of his own circle of mindless enthusiasts, Trump's negatives weigh large, too, and as crunch time approaches I expect they will only increase.
The other factor I'm considering is my sense of the portions of 2016 America's voting populace likely to support someone labeled a socialist, or a premier TV personality who may embody what are to me the worst parts of the American dream but whom millions obviously admire.
Maybe you have a higher, justified opinion of American voters than I do this morning, and maybe those early polls mean more than I hope they do.
Off to Seattle to meet the critter.
@Akhilleus: Yo' welcome. And t'anks for noticing.
Marie
Marie wrote: "Nobody was moderating this segment; nobody stepped in to say, 'Jeffrey Lord, you're full of crap.'"
The larger problem is that NO ONE ever does this, except on Fox when someone inexplicably gets on the air and says something truthful. Then they drop anvils on that person. On other shows, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, barking mad drooling loonies show up and talk about Jesus writing the Constitution, that poor people are lucky to be eating shoe leather, and how god wants all small children to own guns and idiots like Chuck Todd stroke their chin and say things like "Hmm...interesting. Could you expand on that a bit?"
One more thing: The GOP's romance with it's "The party of Lincoln"is laughable. After the Civil War there was a notable strengthening of the federal government–-before that the only agency that affected the average citizen was the postal service. Under Lincoln the U.S, created a national currency, federal courts, and the first federal income tax. The emphasis changed from negative liberty–-those "shall nots" to "shall haves"––positive liberty which opens the door to justice, social welfare and equality of opportunity. Lincoln would weep if he came back to see what has become of his party.
The other mythical king the GOPs are in love with is Reagan who loosened The Federal Trade Commission's antitrust regimes, permitted greater concentration of media ownership, eliminated the Fairness Doctrine, and made the renewal of broadcast licenses nearly automatic, which led to the proliferation of conservative talk radio. And that was the start of something big. I could add to this list–-silence about AIDS, the bad economic policies, etc. Obama is still trying to undo some elements of the Reagan domestic policy legacy––environmental and civil rights issues. So, yes, this is their hero, but they have gone much farther and their Father wouldn't recognize his own children.
Please, someone explain to me Debbie Wasserman Schultz. What is the deal with her? I can't recall a time in recent memory when I've read anything positive that she's done either for the American people or the Democratic Party. Confederates are always on about how Republicans who say things they don't like (usually the truth, whether inadvertently or not) are Democrats in disguise. I'm thinking Wasserman Schultz is a Mitch McConnell aide sent to fuck things up.
Someone please get this woman a train and bus schedule. She needs depart on the next available transit.
Thanks to Marie for the Souter link. Well worth a read to the end, especially the last three paragraphs, where much of Trumpomania is explained.
If you haven't heard the clip from the radio show of Ted Cruz's incredibly racist pig BFF, the guy who hosted his Super Tuesday victory party, try to get through at least a couple of minutes. Honest, kids, that was all I could manage without looking for the nearest trashcan. It is a goddam shame that the "leading lights" of the entire Republican Party are so completely at home in the company of raging racist fucksticks like this guy. But it's a regular thing with Confederates nowadays. One of Rand Paul's best friends is the White Avenger or some such stupid name, a former Reagan White House muckymuck is yelling that the KKK is a Democratic Party terror group. A former presidential candidate owns a hunting ground named Niggerhead, Jeb Bush complains that black people can be bought with "free stuff", Donald Trump...well, never mind....
And Ted Cruz....seriously, words fail. This stuff is horrific. I'm not even going to try to paraphrase the ghastly bullshit Cruz's buddy pawns off as comedy at the expense, of course, of blacks, something you wouldn't imagine is still going out over the airwaves in America in 2016. Thank you Republican Party!
Christ a'mighty this is some appalling shit.
Link above, if you can take it.
If he were still alive, I'm guessing Trump would nominate Roy Cohn, his former legal attack dog and bridge to mafia connections, to the Supreme Court.
Oh wait. Cohn was gay. And Jewish! Shit. But he was a backstabbing, corrupt, nefarious motherfucker. So maybe it would be okay after all.
Remember that movie "Back to the Future"? The Michael J. Fox character goes into the past and meets Doc Brown back in the fifties. Doc asks him who is president in 1985. "Ronald Reagan" comes the answer. "Reagan?" he responds, appalled, "The Actor?? Who's the Vice President? Jerry Lewis? Secretary of the Treasury, Jack Benny?"
Clearly a weird possible future for ol' Doc Brown, past all understanding. Our possible future is even weirder. And a lot creepier. Just imagine Trump's choices for sensitive and vital cabinet positions, not to mention Supreme Court justices.
It would be cronyism and nepotism on a scale that would make Afghan drug lord tribal councils look like the apotheosis of good government. Except, now that I think of it, the Bush administration was not much better than an Afghan drug lord tribal council. All he had to do was have his stooges pretend they gave a shit. Trump would be an upgrade. His stooges wouldn't even have to pretend. American governance as an unconstrained reality show straight from the id.
...must lie down...must lie down...
Akhilleus: I join in the applause for Marie's dedication and success in putting out RC, particularly on days like today when there is so much happening so fast. Truly impressive.
But, not "yeomanlike." I think "masterful", at the very least.
Marie, I hope you know that we are all in your debt and appreciate everything you do here. Not just your technical/editing skill, but your wit and wisdom. And I'm sure all of your gentlemen callers here appreciate your offer of marriage. But we don't need nuptials to enjoy your company, every day.
It appears that Ben Carson is taking his switchblade and his autographed selfie of him and Jesus and going home.
Time to write the memoir about how liberals and other ungodly types denied him his rightful access to the nuclear codes.
Sorry Ben, stultitia longa, vita brevis.
You'll make a million selling your bullshit on the Jesus Circuit. The rubes await. Don't forget the pyramid story. That was a howler. Also the one about the ACA being worse than slavery.
The real reason Carson is setting off into Ridiculously Remunerative Right Wing Crazy World is that Obama is still gonna squash the 2016 elections and declare himself American Ayatollah for Life.
He'll have plenty of company in his retirement from politics.
Buh-bye now.
The Souter piece was splendid. Many thanks, Marie.
Ditto: Mega-Kudos To Marie & Her (consistent) Mastery:
Well Done!
Ditto: Blessings On The Birth Of Your Grandchild, Ken.
(Hope the delivery was kind to the Mom.)
Rejoice!
Puerile Humor (Yet Free & Clear Of Penises)
I'll cherish almost anything that might even slightly evoke laughter when referencing the GOP's fascistic front runner . . .
Click On Link & Trace The "Trump-et" With Your Mouse:
http://trumpdonald.org/
Haley Simon beat me to it, but just wanted to concur. The Souter
speech should be shouted from the rooftops. Don't just take a few
words out of the Constitution, like, "the right to bear arms". It's
the whole Constitution that has to be considered. I can design a
landscape around those 5 things you want, but we have to consider
the rest of the design. Where do they fit in? You have to look at
the whole picture, not just the parts that are colorful and flashy.