Wednesday
Sep092015
The Commentariat -- Sept. 10, 2015
Internal links removed.
Paul Singer of USA Today: "House Republicans began their effort to de-fund Planned Parenthood Wednesday with the first in a series of hearings intended to make the case that the group is illegally harvesting and selling tissue from aborted fetuses, a claim the group vehemently denies. The hearing in the House Judiciary Committee -- titled 'Examining the Horrific Abortion Practices at the Nation's Largest Abortion Provider' -- is the first of several hearings expected this fall as three House committees pursue investigations of Planned Parenthood. House Republicans also launched a website Wednesday to track their investigations into the group." ...
... ** Anna Merlan of Jezebel sums up the gist of the hearing: "The GOP-controlled House Judiciary Committee is having themselves a very reasonable and neutral-sounding hearing on Planned Parenthood today, sensitively entitled 'Planned Parenthood Exposed: Examining the Horrific Abortion Practices at the Nation's Largest Abortion Provider.' Not invited to testify: a single person who works for Planned Parenthood. The hearing's witness list, with one exception, is a veritable who's who of experts in the field of talking about abortion being evil and wrong: James Bopp Jr., a conservative attorney who serves as the general counsel of National Right to Life (and a host of other organizations, including the anti-gay Focus on the Family and the Susan B. Anthony List, another anti-abortion group), Gianna Jessen..., an anti-abortion activist who says she was born after a failed abortion, and Melissa Ohden, who also says she is an 'abortion survivor.'"
... Laura Bassett of the Huffington Post: "The same day the GOP-controlled House Judiciary Committee held a hearing to 'expose' Planned Parenthood's 'horrific abortion practices,' members of another House committee announced that their federal investigation into the family planning provider has so far turned up no evidence of wrongdoing. The Judiciary Committee brought three longtime anti-abortion activists to testify at the hearing on Wednesday, including two women who claim they 'survived' botched abortions that their mothers had attempted. The Democrats were allowed one witness, a Yale University professor who supports abortion rights. Planned Parenthood was not invited to testify at the hearing.... Just before the Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday, the ranking Democrats on the Energy and Commerce Committee announced that their investigation has found 'no evidence' to support the claims that Planned Parenthood is engaged in any illegal activities." Emphasis added. ...
... Sarah Ferris of the Hill: "In Congress's first hearing on the [supposed sting] videos, two expert witnesses sharply disagreed on whether Planned Parenthood and its donation of fetal tissue violated any laws. 'The evidence now is clear,' James Bopp, general counsel for National Right to Life, told the House Judiciary Committee. 'Current practices employed by Planned Parenthood and various tissue procurement companies, not only violate federal law when applicable, but also many ethical and moral principle.' Minutes later, lawmakers heard a rebuttal from Priscilla Smith, the director of Yale Law School's Program for the Study of Reproductive Justice. 'There is simply no evidence in these misleadingly edited videos of a violation of either of these laws,' Smith said. 'There's certainly nothing in the tapes that violates the fetal tissue law.'"
... "The Benghazi of Healthcare Hearings." Marcus Howard of the Los Angeles Times: "'These hearings are not really hearings, they are political theater oriented toward taking away the right for women to access abortion in this country,' Dawn Laguens, executive vice president of Planned Parenthood, said in an interview. 'There was no evidence of any wrongdoing by Planned Parenthood.' Michigan Democratic Rep. John Conyers Jr., the committee's ranking minority member, called the hearing one-sided. His Democratic colleague Rep. Hank Johnson of Georgia described it as a 'show trial,' while another, Rep. Steve Cohen of Tennessee, went further and labeled it the 'Benghazi of healthcare hearings.'" ...
... Charles Pierce: "The committee set itself in judgment of a sham, a lie, perpetrated on the gullible, and on the people whom the gullible send to Congress.... The majority on the House Judiciary Committee ... is the '27 Yankees of wingnut fauna. Issa! Gowdy! Gohmert! King! Even Blake Farenthold, the shebeen's incumbent Royal Regent of the Crazy People.... Nobody from the Center for Medical Progress was called to testify, of course, because some Democrat might ask them why their videos have been judged to be fudged by just about everyone who doesn't work for the Center For Medical Progress.... [Rep. Trent Franks] even brought convicted babykiller Kermit Gosnell into the mix, even though Gosnell has as much to do with Planned Parenthood as Charlie Manson does with thoracic surgery." ...
... Molly Redden of Mother Jones fact-checks a couple of claims made at the hearing. Surprise! The assertions were nonsense. ...
... ** Danielle Paquette of the Washington Post: "Three weeks before lawmakers must pass new legislation to fund the government, at least 28 Republicans, all men, have vowed to vote against any bill that contains support for Planned Parenthood, causing concern about the possibility of another shutdown. Defunding Planned Parenthood, however, would have broad ramifications, especially for low-income women who rely on subsidized services for birth control. The Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit reproductive health organization, released a report this week breaking down how often these women turn to the organization for reliable contraceptives. Many would have to leave town to find birth control if the resource were to evaporate, the data implies." ...
... Julie Rovner of Kaiser Health News, in Newsweek: "But Planned Parenthood is not the only health program the GOP is targeting. The House Appropriations Committee earlier this summer approved a proposed spending bill for the Department of Health and Human Services that would eliminate all funding for the Title X federal family planning program, which mainly funds state and local health departments but also provides some of the federal funds Planned Parenthood receives. The House bill also zeroed out the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), which conducts and funds research on how health care is delivered and paid for.... The bill also rescinded or transferred funds for the [ACA]'s implementation.... Dozens of other health programs were set for cuts as well. And a companion Senate spending bill, also approved at the committee level, included substantial, if not quite as large, cuts to many health programs, including those aimed at preventing teen pregnancy."
House of Cards. Deb Reichmann of the AP: "House GOP leaders were forced to delay plans to open debate on a resolution of disapproval [of the Iran nuclear deal] as some Republicans threatened to withhold their support. Frustrated that the disapproval resolution looked short of support in the Senate, these Republicans were demanding an alternate approach.... The outcome was uncertain as the surprise disagreement spilled into the open just moments before the House was to come into session to begin debating a procedural measure on the resolution." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... Here's Politico's story, by Jake Sherman. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... MEANWHILE, Out on the Lawn. Katie Zezima of the Washington Post: "... Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) warned of catastrophic consequences should the Iranian nuclear deal negotiated by the Obama administration pass Congress, including death and the possibility of nuclear conflict.... Hundreds of people stood in sweltering heat on the west lawn of the Capitol for the rally; many huddled under a large tree far from the stage to shade themselves from the blazing sun.... The crowd consistently yelled "Amen!" and booed any mention of [President] Obama, Democrats, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)." ...
... Nick Corasaniti of the New York Times: "Tuesday, President Obama secured the votes needed to make his negotiated deal with Iran essentially veto proof, giving this rally a less tangible, or at least achievable, objective. But, as with all great political theater, the show had to go on. So Mr. Trump, Mr. Cruz, Sarah Palin, the radio host Mark Levin and a host of other conservative luminaries headed outside to brave the swampy September humidity to air their grievances against the deal, committed votes be damned, basking in the lights, camera and attention brought by Mr. Trump." ...
... Amanda Marcotte, in TPM: President "Obama's plan looks like a done deal, but now the clowns are spilling out, honking their noses and trying to get attention by screaming about how we're all going to die now.... Two of the worst Republican traits of the past 20 years -- pointless obstructionism for the sole purpose of sticking it to the Democrats and mindless demagoguery about the nefarious Middle Eastern threat to convince voters of your manhood -- are joining together to create a massive, misshapen beast that represents everything that's gone wrong with politics in the 21st century." ...
... Dana Milbank puts the crowd at "a few thousand tea party loyalists." He says the rally showed why Trump is the GOP frontrunner: "Trump's raw anger bested Cruz's cerebral argument." CW: Shoulda invited Scott Walker, too: there is no cerebrum there. (See Presidential Race, below.)
... Charles Pierce: "The rally on Wednesday was an incredible parade of retired military bloodworms, outright grifters, washed-up geopolitical sorcerers, and mutton-witted drive-time radio cowboys. Donald Trump, whatever you may think of him, is none of those. He knows what a festival of fruitcakes he joined on Wednesday.... He knows he's not like the rest of losers whom he followed to the podium on Wednesday, but he's willing to swim in that sewer if he has to, and he will tell you that he always comes up smelling like roses, because he's Donald Trump and you're not." ...
... The Louis Gohmert Reader
... There's some good news in all this. Sara Jerde of TPM: "Conservative pundit Glenn Beck said Tuesday that he had received an email from Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) vowing to quit ... Congress if the Iran deal went through. Beck read the email on air during his radio show." ...
... Jordain Carney of the Hill (Sept. 8): "Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) said Tuesday she supports the Iran deal, becoming the last Senate Democrat to take a position on the agreement.... Cantwell is the 42nd senator to back the agreement...." ...
... Jordain Carney: "Sen. Dick Durbin, the Senate's No. 2 Democrat, suggested Wednesday that he's still trying to shore up support for a filibuster of a resolution of disapproval on the Iran nuclear deal. 'I will tell you this: We're working that question now,' he told reporters when asked whether Democrats would be able to block the resolution. 'We're down to three or four loose ends....'" ...
... Max Fisher of Vox: "Republican lawmakers, having lost the battle to block the Iran nuclear deal in Congress, appear to be considering a new strategy: turn the deal into a never-ending political circus. The old and busted GOP plan was to vote on a measure formally disapproving of the Iran nuclear deal.... So now the new hotness among Republicans is that they shouldn't bother voting to disapprove of the Iran nuclear deal, and instead should vote for a resolution that, according to Politico's Jake Sherman, 'would delay a disapproval vote because they believe Obama has not disclosed some elements of the deal.' The entire caucus is not yet on board, but it looks like they're moving in this direction." ...
... According to Mike DeBonis & Katie Zezima of the Washington Post, here's the plan, as it stood yesterday, "Members ... agree[d] on a new plan to vote on a trio of measures designed to register disapproval with the president: a resolution indicating that [President] Obama did not meet his obligations to send all relevant negotiating documents to Congress; a bill blocking Obama from lifting sanctions against Iran; and a separate measure approving of the deal, which is expected to fail." ...
... David Herszenhorn of the New York Times: "Administration officials have repeatedly said an agreement between Iran and the atomic agency over past nuclear research at a military facility called Parchin was not connected to the deal made by Iran and six world powers to contain its nuclear program. The energy agency, which has long had a role in monitoring Iran's nuclear program, is not covered by Congress's Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, and the White House does not have the documents Republicans have demanded...." (Emphasis added.) CW: The IAEA is an independent agency, & it keeps secret its monitoring agreements with all the nations whose nuclear facilities it inspects.
... CW: Both Fisher & Steve M. think the GOP strategy is smart, if totally fake. I don't. When their 60-day window to approve or disapprove the P5+1 deal with Iran is up, it's up. The deal is a fait accompli. Republicans can caterwaul about nonexistent side deals all they want; if they go this route, they've removed themselves from the picture. Only the sheeples -- and maybe the New York Times -- will be fooled.
... Thomas Erdbrink of the New York Times: "Iran's supreme leader predicted Wednesday that Israel will not exist in 25 years, and ruled out any new negotiations with the 'Satan,' the United States, beyond the recently completed nuclear accord. In remarks published Wednesday on his personal website and in posts on Twitter, the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, responded to what he said were claims that Israel would be safe for that period under the July nuclear agreement."
Shane Harris & Nancy Youssef of the Daily Beast: "More than 50 intelligence analysts working out of the U.S. military's Central Command have formally complained that their reports on ISIS and al Qaeda's branch in Syria were being inappropriately altered by senior officials.... The complaints spurred the Pentagon's inspector general to open an investigation into the alleged manipulation of intelligence. The fact that so many people complained suggests there are deep-rooted, systemic problems in how the U.S. military command charged with the war against the self-proclaimed Islamic State assesses intelligence."
Matt Apuzzo & Ben Protess of the New York Times: "... the Justice Department issued new policies on Wednesday that prioritize the prosecution of individual employees -- not just their companies -- and put pressure on corporations to turn over evidence against their executives. The new rules, issued in a memo to federal prosecutors nationwide, are the first major policy announcement by Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch since she took office in April. The memo is a tacit acknowledgment of criticism that despite securing record fines from major corporations, the Justice Department under President Obama has punished few executives involved in the housing crisis, the financial meltdown and corporate scandals. 'Corporations can only commit crimes through flesh-and-blood people,' Sally Q. Yates, the deputy attorney general and the author of the memo, said in an interview on Wednesday." CW: Over on the Street, they'll be missing Eric Holder.
Annals of "Journalism," Ctd.
Steve M. points out the epitome of all he said/she said journalism: "Peter Baker and David Sanger inform us in The New York Times that we don't have to worry about the fearmongering demagoguery of Iran-deal opponent Dick Cheney because Hillary Clinton is his precise mirror image.... One of these people is actually telling the truth ... but it doesn't matter because Both Sides Do It, 'it' in this case being the formation of 'narratives' that involve 'rewriting' of history. All narratives are equal! Or at least no Democratic narrative can ever be closer to the truth than a Republican narrative. By definition!" CW: My guess is that Baker wrote this story & Sanger contributed only his expertise on the deal. Baker is the Times' expert at he said/she said reporting. I have personally, face-to-face, called him out on this, & he pretended he had no idea what I was talking about. Oh, he knows. But it's such a facile way to feign the role of "neutral observer."
Gabriel Sherman of New York: "Yesterday, [David] Gregory sat down [with me and] ...) talked about leaving the longest-running show on television, why he doesn't think he was fired, and how George W. Bush inspired him to find God and write a book titled How's Your Faith?" CW: Should be inspiring! Sadly, I didn't bother to read Gregory's profound thoughts about things. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Presidential Race
David Sanger & Amy Chozick of the New York Times: "Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday embraced the Iran nuclear deal that she paved the way for as secretary of state, but said it would work only 'as part of a larger strategy toward Iran' that contained the power Tehran may gain as sanctions are lifted and billions of dollars flow back into the country. Mrs. Clinton's speech, at the Brookings Institution, amounted to a strong endorsement of the deal struck by President Obama and her successor, Secretary of State John Kerry, though one laced with skepticism about Iran's intentions": (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Quinnipiac University: "In a come-from-behind rally, U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont is the choice of 41 percent of Iowa likely Democratic Caucus participants, with 40 percent picking former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and 12 percent backing Vice President Joseph Biden, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. This compares to results of a July 2 survey by the independent Quinnipiac University showing Clinton at 52 percent, with 33 percent for Sanders and 7 percent for Biden." Via Greg Sargent.
Nate Silver: One of these candidates (Bernie Sanders) is not like the other (Donald Trump). ...
... Mark Barabak of the Los Angeles Times: "What's behind Republican voters' support of Trump? Anger at Republicans.... The reason for his success is simple, observers say: Trump is giving unsparing voice to the contempt many conservatives feel toward the political leadership in Washington, Democrat and Republican alike. The scorn runs so deep, it overrides whatever differences voters may have with Trump over his garish lifestyle, his patchwork philosophy or past stances on particular issues.... Collectively, the three candidates with zero experience in elective office -- real estate magnate Trump, neurosurgeon Ben Carson and businesswoman Carly Fiorina -- account for roughly half the support in surveys of Republican primary voters." ...
... Brian Beutler offers another, related explanation for the rise of the Donald: "To be acceptable to the establishment, you must seek the blessing of supply-siders and climate change deniers and diplomacy rejecters and on down the line. Trump is viable in part because genuinely serious candidates are not, and elite conservative institutions bear a lot of responsibility for that." ...
... Jennifer Agiesta of CNN: "Donald Trump has become the first Republican presidential candidate to top 30% support in the race for the Republican nomination, according to a new CNN/ORC Poll, which finds the businessman pulling well away from the rest of the GOP field. Trump gained 8 points since August to land at 32% support, and has nearly tripled his support since just after he launched his campaign in June. The new poll finds former neurosurgeon Ben Carson rising 10 points to land in second place with 19%. Together, these two non-politicians now hold the support of a majority of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, and separately, both are significantly ahead of all other competitors." ...
... Greg Sargent: "... perhaps the most notable CNN poll finding is that the percentage of Republicans who now say illegal immigration is 'extremely important' to them is way up."
... Paul Solotaroff writes Rolling Stone's cover story on Donald Trump. Most cited graf:
With his blue tie loosened and slung over his shoulder, Trump sits back to digest his meal and provide a running byplay to the news. Onscreen, they've cut away to a spot with Scott Walker, the creaky-robot governor of Wisconsin. Praised by the anchor for his 'slow but steady' style, Walker is about to respond when Trump chimes in, 'Yeah, he's slow, all right! That's what we got already: slowwww.' His staffers at the conference table howl and hoot; their man, though, is just getting warm. When the anchor throws to Carly Fiorina for her reaction to Trump's momentum, Trump's expression sours in schoolboy disgust as the camera bores in on Fiorina. 'Look at that face!' he cries. 'Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?!' The laughter grows halting and faint behind him. 'I mean, she's a woman, and I'm not s'posedta say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?'
... Steve M.: "If Trump starts rolling up delegates next year, this, increasingly, is what the coverage of him is going to be like. His boorishness is going to be depicted as shrewdness. His ignorance is going to be described as intuitive brilliance. For now, Solotaroff's lack of skepticism must have Hunter Thompson rolling over in his grave." ...
Mark Hensch of the Hill: "Donald Trump slammed fellow 2016 Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson for questioning his faith, calling the retired pediatric neurosurgeon an 'OK doctor' who was 'heavy into the world of abortion.' 'Who is he to question my faith?' Trump asked host Chris Cuomo on CNN's 'New Day.' 'He knows nothing about me. I am a man of faith,' he said. 'I hardly know Ben Carson. I'm a believer, big league in God. I will hit back on that.'... Carson questioned the sincerity of Trump's spirituality during an interview Wednesday evening."
Gail Collins is back with a handy cheat sheet to get us up to speed on the GOP presidential candidates. CW: This is one I missed, & it's so maximally weasly, I thought Collins made it up: "Scott Walker keeps showing up and it's always terrible. Asked about the Syrian refugee crisis, the governor of Wisconsin said, 'Everybody wants to talk about hypotheticals; there is no such thing as a hypothetical.'" ...
The Dimwittiest.... ** BUT Walker really said that. On national television. Jaime Fuller of New York (Sept. 8): "...Scott Walker, who has previously declined to have stances on birthright citizenship, evolution, whether being gay is a choice, and whether he would meet with Black Lives Matter organizers, discussed the philosophical underpinnings of his political apathy when announcing that he has no opinion on the migrant crisis in Europe. ABC News asked Walker how he would respond to the massive influx of refugees from Syria if he were president today. He explained that the query was flawed. As he is obviously not president, Walker argued, there is no way that he would be able to answer that question. 'I'm not president today and I can't be president today,' he said. 'Everybody wants to talk about hypotheticals; there is no such thing as a hypothetical' -- a sentence that probably would have moved Socrates to set Walker's pants on fire himself." Fuller goes to note that when Scottie has a canned hypothetical at the ready, he's willing to share it: "'I'm talking about what I would do as president, that'll be a year and a half from now.' He hypothesized that he will 'take on ISIS as president.'" ...
... CW: I apologize for missing this. It is iconic Scottie. And absolute, undeniable proof that Walker is not qualified to fill Kim Davis's job. BTW, Walker's team has since fed him an answer on the refugee crisis, & they allegedly let him type it himself: 'We shouldn't be taking in any more Syrian refugees right now. The real problem here is the Obama Admin's failure to deal with #ISIS,' Walker tweeted, adding his initials to denote a personal tweet."
Jason Zengerle of New York: This year, multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson is waiting to see which GOP candidate to buy. Most are groveling at his feet. Ain't democracy grand? (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Jeb!'s Excellent Tax Plan to Add $3.4 Trillion to the Deficit. Ed O'Keefe of the Washington Post: "... Jeb Bush on Wednesday unveiled a long-awaited tax reform plan that would add trillions of dollars to the deficit, filling in details that he says would help fulfill his promise to restore 4 percent annual economic growth.... Bush married traditional conservative thinking on taxes with some politically viable proposals that already enjoy support on Capitol Hill." ...
... Jim Tankersley of the Washington Post: Bush's "new tax plan ... includes a lot of the same ideas that Democrats hammered [Mitt] Romney for. Bush, like Romney, wants to cut the top rate to 28 percent, from the current 39.6 percent. Romney wanted to cut the corporate rate to 25 percent, and now Bush wants to cut it to 20. Romney wanted to end the estate tax and the alternative minimum tax, which almost exclusively affect higher-income earners. So does Bush.... Independent analysts found Romney's plan would have given a substantial tax cut to the wealthy. Bush's appears likely to do that, too.... In the primary, most of Bush's rivals have sketched tax plans that cut rates far deeper than Romney would have. With the encouragement of supply-side stalwarts led by economist Arthur Laffer, and to the delight of Democratic political hands, several Republican contenders have proposed flat taxes that would lower top rates dramatically. (The notable exception to that is the current GO front-runner, Donald Trump, who has indicated a willingness to raise taxes on the rich.)" ...
... Bushonomics. Matt O'Brien of the Washington Post: "The Bush tax cuts are back, just with more exclamation points.... The result would be as much a $3.4 trillion tax cut[/deficit] over 10 years that would sharply lower taxes for people at the top, eliminate taxes for more people at the bottom, and slash taxes for businesses. That's a lot of tax-cutting, but there isn't a lot of reason to think it'd help the economy that much." ...
... One of These Brothers Is Just Like the Other. Except Worse. Jonathan Chait: "George W. Bush passed a sweeping across-the-board tax cut in 2001, promising his plan would promote faster economic growth while still allowing budget surpluses. Instead, Bush's plan brought back the structural deficits that had disappeared during the 1990s, along with a mediocre recovery that was itself inflated by a housing bubble, the popping of which culminated in the deepest economic crisis since the Great Depression. You might think that the brother of that guy would go out of his way to prove that he has different ideas for fiscal policy. Instead, Jeb Bush has unveiled his tax-cut plan, and it's the same thing his brother did, only more extreme. Bush's plan, unveiled in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, would replicate his brother's program in extremis." ...
... Jonathan Chait (Sept. 8): "Jeb Bush ... finds himself trailing badly against a demagogue who has taken populist stances on taxing the rich, social insurance programs, immigration, and the donor class in general. Bush's solution? Suck up more to the Republican donor class. Robert Costa and Ed O'Keefe report that Bush is meeting with the high priests of the Voodoo Economics cult.... All of the non-Trump candidates are locked in a competition to outbid each other to propose the most lavish tax cuts for the rich. Trump is the one candidate appealing to the populist crowd within the party." ...
... CW: And you wonder why the GOP rank-and-file prefer Trump to Bush, et al. ...
... Dylan Matthews of Vox: "You can understand Jeb's proposal as an attempt to negotiate a disagreement within the Republican party about how best to cut taxes." ...
... Scott Lemieux: "Hopefully, the Republican race will be won with someone with a more serious, less ridiculously crankish agenda, like Donald Trump." ...
... BUT over at the Paper of Record, Alan Rappeport & Matt Flegenheimer see Jeb!'s tax plan as a "foray into populism" because he proposes to "to curtail valuable deductions that benefit businesses and the wealthy and eliminate a loophole that has benefited hedge fund and private equity managers for years." CW: Yeah, this is the same "foray into populism" that Dubya took when his big ole tax cuts trickled down to the point they cut a few hundred bucks off the tax bills of the upper middle class. Indeed, further down the page, after Rappeport & Flegenheimer get thru exulting over Jeb!'s "foray into populism," they cite Democrats & a number of experts who point out Jeb!'s plan is designed to help the rich & explode the deficit. ...
... CW: They Can't Deal with the Donald. Here's the problem for the Doofus & the Other 15 Dwarfs: confederates are constitutionally & intellectually incapable of breaking out of confederate orthodoxy. Not only do they eschew the very nature of change, they cannot adjust to real-world change because denying inconvenient facts is a central feature of confederacy. So when an outlier candidate like Trump runs successfully to their left on some issues, they just keep digging away at their same ole hole. Any "adjustment" they make is to sink deeper into their righty-tighty comfort zone, as they've done with immigration & with women's reproductive & economic rights. Confederates have counted for decades on voter-lemmings. Now that former lemmings are breaking away, the dwarfs' only answer is to shout, "Follow Me!" It could still work for one of them, because at this point we don't know if Trump has sufficiently radicalized the lemmings. In flirting with Trump, the lemmings too are leaving their own righty-tighty comfort zones. The could crawl back.
Andrew Shain of the (South Carolina) State: "U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham will not take part in a Republican presidential forum next week that is being held 45 minutes from his S.C. home. Graham's national poll numbers in August failed to reach the 1 percent threshold set by the forum's organizers -- Gov. Nikki Haley and Heritage Action, the lobbying arm of the conservative think tank, Heritage Action spokesman Dan Holler said Wednesday. Graham registered zero percent in five of six national polls last month compiled by Real Clear Politics."
Beyond the Beltway
Alan Blinder of the New York Times: "Kim Davis, the Rowan County clerk who was released from jail on Tuesday but would not say whether she would begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, was not at work on Wednesday. A lawyer for Ms. Davis, Mathew D. Staver, said Ms. Davis would 'return soon,' either on Friday or Monday. After spending five nights in jail, he said, Ms. Davis 'needs some rest and time with the family.'" (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... Juan Cole explains the Constitution to Huckleberry & Ted: "What if Kim Davis Refused to License Marriages of Inter-Racial Couples?... That is not a far-fetched scenario. A small Baptist church in Kentucky voted in 2011 not to allow inter-racial couples to be members.... The Founding Fathers were afraid of rabble-rousers like [Mike] Huckabee and Ted Cruz, which is why we have a senate and an electoral college. They were also afraid of Christians imposing their will on deists and non-conformists (like Quakers), which is why they put the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment. That clause has now been adopted by all the state constitutions, too.... [Davis] is trying to use her government position to impose her religious views on gay citizens of her district.... She is violating the prohibition on state officials establishing an official church. And she is discriminating against her own constituents, as surely as if she were refusing to license inter-racial marriages -- which were illegal in some states until the SCOTUS Loving ruling."
Today in Racial Profiling. Wayne Coffey, et al., of the New York Daily News: "Retired black tennis star James Blake, in an NYPD double-fault, was slammed to a Manhattan sidewalk and handcuffed by a white cop in a brutal case of mistaken identity. The 35-year-old Blake, once ranked No. 4 in the world, suffered a cut to his left elbow and bruises to his left leg as five plainclothes cops eventually held him for 15 minutes Wednesday outside the Grand Hyatt Hotel.... Blake, on his way to make a corporate appearance for Time Warner Cable at the U.S. Open, said none of white cops identified themselves, including the officer who charged straight at him and bounced him off the E. 42nd St. concrete around noon. 'Don't say a word,' snapped the officer, who Blake said was not wearing a badge. Blake -- whose right eye appeared red hours later at the Midtown hotel -- was only turned loose when a former cop recognized the man in cuffs and alerted the arresting officers, a police source said." ...
... Update: Benjamin Mueller & Al Baker of the New York Times: "A New York Police Department officer who was involved in mistakenly detaining James Blake, a retired top-10 professional tennis player, has been placed on desk duty, the police said on Thursday..... [Blake] said he was speaking out to let people know that this happens too often, and most of the time it's not to someone like me.'"
When Hate Group Meets Hate Symbol. Dan Lamothe of the Washington Post: "An Air Force pilot was assaulted with a bat in Washington state Saturday by masked 'anarchists' after they noticed he was displaying two Confederate flags on his motorcycle, police said. The incident occurred in Olympia, Wash., a few miles west of where the man is stationed at Joint Base Lewis-McChord.... 'They sprayed the victim in the face with mace, and struck him in the back with a baseball bat and a glass bottle filled with red paint,' the [police] report said. 'The victim suffered severe eye irritation and a bruised shoulder and back. One of the witnesses attempting to assist the victim was also sprayed in the face with mace.'... 'This protest group identified themselves as 'anarchists,' which is a local Hate Group,' the police statement said."
Way Beyond
Sibylla Brodzinsky of the Guardian: "Latin American countries are opening their doors to Syrians fleeing the civil war in their country, as Europe struggles with a growing refugee crisis." (Also linked yesterday.)
News Ledes
Washington Post: "Raging floodwaters broke through an embankment Thursday and swamped a city near Tokyo, washing away houses, forcing dozens of people to rooftops to await helicopter rescues and leaving one man clinging to a utility pole for his life. There were no immediate reports of casualties, but rescue officials said they were overwhelmed by pleas for help. More than 30,000 were ordered to flee their homes, and hundreds more were stranded by the water."
New York Times: "The [Orange County, N.Y.] medical examiner's conclusion is clear: Vincent Viafore, who the police say was killed by his fiancée during a kayaking trip on the Hudson River this past spring, was a victim of homicide caused by a 'kayak drain plug intentionally removed by other.' But the lawyer for the fiancée, Angelika Graswald, said the medical examiner's office had overstepped its bounds with that determination. He said it was based on police speculation, not an examination of Mr. Viafore's body.
Share Article
Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.
Reader Comments (10)
Happy days are here again! At the NYTimes that is! As Gail Collins has returned with "A Presidential Primary Cheat Sheet."
She includes such tidbits as:
"...Ted Cruz adopted a strange summer strategy of joining himself at the hip with Donald Trump, thus guaranteeing that no one would ever notice anything he said or did."
and, to add another Collins quip —(but there's more):
"...what ever happened to Marco Rubio? He’s completely vanished! The high point of his summer was when he hit a kid in the head with a football."
I hope it's not true, but in all likelihood it is. Max Fisher via Vox lays out the GOPs likely new strategy to take on the Iran Deal and it bears all the hallmarks of Confederate politics since Day 1 of Obama's election: if ever in doubt, Benghazify!
In the eternal search of the smoking gun and in complete contempt for the health and safety of their own country, the GOP is allegedly planning to cry "Foul" on the Iran Deal with completely baseless and utterly false claims of behind-the-back negotiations with Iran, complaining that the Obama administration is withholding key information to the Deal, most likely somehow connected to the destruction of Israel and our nation (we naturally come second) as we know it. Thus, we will soon see 'Committees', à la Benghazi, sprout up like poisonous mushrooms after a heavy rain, and they'll carry their false preoccupations and scare-mongering all the way up to the next Presidential election to score more cheap and cynical political points while simultaneously gearing up the war machine for more blood (of others) and treasure (for them). "We Win!"
This political strategy, born out of manipulation and cynicism of the greatest order, is largely thanks to our neutered and docile media industry, as was mentioned in yesterday's comments, where insanity and ridiculousness is covered as ho-hum normalcy, just another story to sew into our stained social fabric.
The Benghazi!!!! hearings are still covered as if something will come out of them, despite investigation after investigation proving nothing new. No end in sight, no ridicule from mainstream media, hardly even a mention of how much these hearings are costing the public at a time when so many more pressing concerns piling up on the political agenda.
Now we'll have simultaneous Fetal Assassination and Dismemberment!!! committees alongside Obama Capitulation and Treasonous Secrets!!! committees and both will be covered by 'journalists', diligently doing their jobs without an original thought in their caged-in brains.
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/9/9296551/iran-nuclear-side-deal-republicans
Der Spiegel has a good article on how the moneyed class is affecting our political system with an interesting suggestion:
"The race suits worn by Formula One drivers are littered with patches with the names and logos of sponsors covering the chest and arms as well as the helmet. If Jeb Bush, Hillary Clinton or Ted Cruz were to wear something similar in the future, at least there would be some transparency."
Concluding with:
"It may turn out that Trump is doing his country a major service with his candidacy because he is demonstrating very vividly what is rotten about this system. With all due respect, he's a useful idiot."
Good to know some Latin American countries will be opening their doors to the refugees. Just last night I said to the mister, "What about Latin America?", then added, "what about the US of A?" Yes, I know it's on the table, but for how long? The argument against this by the usual suspects will be the fear factor–-terrorists (the other usual suspects) being able to blend in among the many and then do us in.
I found the display yesterday by the anti-Iran dealers pathetic! Sarah Palin presented as a screechy Herp-derp and again her speech made little sense. And Cruz––cow tailing Trump–-letting him once again be the main attraction. I'm reminded of something Michael Tomasky said about how the Republican Party all wish Trump would go away, even while they must know that they are responsible for him because they have spent many years creating an audience that was just waiting for someone like him to come along. In a weird way, Trump signifies the American hero that sweeps in to save the day, only just like Superman, he's a figment of the imagination. But just like very young children who believe in these super heroes, we have in this country grown up people who desperately want to believe that someone will come and make things better, be the bully that the rest of the world is scared of, be the guy who makes deals––big deals–– and says, "I know and work with all the toughest operators in the world of high stakes global finance..." In essence these people want America to be what they believe it was sometime in the past –––"Make America Great Again."
These are children of a lesser god...
@PD Pepe: In fairness to Republican voters looking for a presidential superhero, don't most of us do that? I thought Obama might be that superhero, just as I thought Kennedy might be when I was a girl. In some ways, I was right both times, but both Obama & Kennedy also let me down in significant ways. Right now many Democrats are looking to Bernie Sanders to be that hero, & I think they're right to do so (I still don't know how I'll vote in the primary).
Hillary's problem is not that she isn't competent -- just compare her speech on the Iran deal with anything any Republican has said about it -- but that she doesn't seem "heroic" to a lot of people.
If it comes down to Trump & Hillary, & if Democratic messaging is marginally effective, I think more voters than not will see Hillary as more heroic than Trump, if only because he has never had any adversity to overcome & she's had plenty. Even when we vote for someone we don't especially admire, we are all still wishing for someone who can weave an heroic narrative.
Marie
Presidential Heroes
I believe Marie has a good point about our requirements for leaders and especially for the Big Cheese of Leaders, the president.
Stories, that is, narrative, serves as a way for us to order the universe, to collect and collate our disparate experiences into some kind of rational structure. This has the salutary effect of being psychologically satisfying (even for those whose invented stories entail hatred and the isolation of a mean existence--there's gotta be a reason for all that bad shit, right?) but the other side of humanity's narrative bent is a certain removal from a truly authentic life (something that's easy to talk about but damned hard to accommodate).
Heidegger once said that we all live in narrative (if I can remember where, exactly, I'll die happy. I'm pretty sure it was in "Being and Time"). What he meant was that we are always making up stories to explain to ourselves the world and each other. That guy at work who's always such a bastard, why, he must torture small animals when he goes home. That lady who just cut me off; what's her problem? I didn't get that raise because the boss is trying to move one of his favorites into my job. That sort of thing. We need it to make sense. But Heidegger goes on to point out (in "Being and Time") that by immersing ourselves in the big and small stories we tell ourselves, we lose touch with an authentic life. He then spends several hundred pages mulling that over. (It's interesting stuff but I don't think I'll be plowing through it again any time soon.)
Nonetheless, authentic or not, we want what need, especially in characters so important to our "national" narrative. And we want our president to be heroic. Part of the hagiography of St. Ronald of Reagan comes from this place. That, and the fact that Confederates are simply incapable of seeing things as they really are. That can be said of Progressives at times, but it's far less likely that those who adopt a progressive attitude toward politics and life will be so blinded by a need for a spotless, faultless, guiltless hero that all facts to the contrary will be discounted as evil tales spread by jealous liberals (more inauthentic narrative).
I think Bill Clinton was on to something when he complained that his presidency was marred in a way because he had no great problem to wrestle with. What he meant, I suppose, was no war. No depression. No major national threat that required a heroic response. It's no surprise that the presidents we look back on with pride, Washington, Lincoln, FDR, all had immense tasks before them. I believe The Decider's War of Choice had something to do with this sense that he needed to look at himself, a lifelong loser, as a great man at last. Remember how his White House always insisted he be referred to as a "wartime president"? Reagan had his own "war". Grenada wasn't much of war. I've seen street fights that were more dangerous (and lasted longer), still, Clint Eastwood made a Heroic War Movie about Grenada.
Sheesh.
Anyway, the psychological component, the voters' need for a person of stature, a real or at least potential hero, is alive and well. Which makes it all the funnier that the Republican field is so full of losers, deadheads, dry ideologues, liars, disreputable skunks, and haters. Heroic they ain't.
But then along comes Trumpy who, because he believes himself to be heroic, and because he doesn't give a shit what he says, comes off like Pericles when compared to the moral and mental midgets on stage with him. Does anyone really believe that in his heart of hearts, Scott Walker sees himself as a heroic figure?
Heroism comes in a variety of flavors though. I believe that our current president has flown his flag high and has overcome quite a lot that no other president has ever had to deal with. And he's not only survived, but thrived. This has been, and seemingly will continue to be, the most productive lame duck period perhaps in presidential history. For the life of me, I can't remember another modern presidency which demonstrated such vigorous effectiveness in its last years.
He finally got to the point where he could say "Fuck those assholes. I'm gonna do what's right and I don't give a shit about trying to be nice."
And that's plenty heroic for me.
One more thought about heroism and presidents.
I think one reason (out of many) we become so disillusioned and angry with certain presidents (Bush, eg) is not just that they aren't heroic (he wasn't) but that they don't even have the interesting mojo of being anti-heroes.
Bush is so reviled not just because of all the horrible things he foisted on the country and the world, but because he playacted at being a hero. There's nothing worse than someone insisting on his heroism, someone who is clearly an incompetent fool, demanding that he be treated like a hero.
Plenty of current GOP fools fall into this hole as well. And perhaps that's why they go out of their way to castigate people who have actually done heroic things in their lives, such as serving in combat.
Islander, the other day, linked an interesting piece by Jim Webb which examines this phenomenon. Neither Bush nor Cheney had the guts to serve in a war they both supported but their careers have been built on tearing down those who did.
Another reason for their decidedly unheroic status.
Among many.
The March to Theocracy (and End Times) Continues Apace
Religion, specifically rightwing Christian fundamentalism, controls our national agenda to an extremely unhealthy and unsafe degree.
The vogue in evangelical circles for claims of expansive religious liberty, even to the point of smugly declaring that they can refuse to obey any law they don't feel agrees with their religious beliefs, has leeched into the tiny brain pans of congressional Confederates to the extent that most of the biggest issues before the country are now warped and discolored by religion.
Let's look at two of the biggies, Planned Parenthood and the Iran nuclear deal.
Confederate positions on both are informed and controlled, almost entirely, by fundamentalist Christian beliefs. The parts not entirely affected by religion are informed by a hatred of women's right to decide their own fates and by their blind hatred of that horrible, foreign born nee-groe usurper in their White House.
The religious problem that fuels their animosity toward Planned Parenthood is pretty clear: Abortion. The thing that keeps them ginned up and keeps some of them ready to shoot and kill medical personnel who aid in a procedure that is entirely legal. Only because they don't like it, no one else can have it either. There really is no other sound argument against it. Take religion out of the picture and there would be no Benghazi style kangaroo courts for Planned Parenthood. None.
The hatred for the Iran deal is a bit more complicated and I'm betting few of the geniuses involved in the Confederate machinations to destroy it, legally or otherwise, could explain it even to themselves.
A big part has to do with a red cow, and I am not even kidding.
In the world of religious nutjobbery, the Red Heifer is (supposedly) a sign of End Times. It's also a signal that Israel, war, something, something, Muslims, something else, Anti-Christ, good and evil, angels, god, something, something, something. Seriously, it's not any more rational than that. Look it up and prepared to be baffled, completely baffled, that supposedly intelligent people are foaming at the mouth about this red cow and the world ending and all the bad people (all of us) getting their comeuppance.
The fact is that American conservatives, back in the Bill Buckley era, were no fans of Israel. Regnery Publishing, which puts out all manner of Confederate claptrap, back in the 50's, pushed numerous titles questioning the entire Zionist project even to the point of siding with Arabs and Palestinians. Imagine that today!
Now, however, Israel, because Evangelical extremists and their whacko attachment to and belief in something called "premillennial dispensationalism", has become sacrosanct in their eyes because of it's role in the destruction of Mooslims and all bad people (us, again) and the triumph of the people of god (them) over all. You can read this stuff if you want, but I'm tellin' ya kids, these fairy tales make L.Ron Hubbard's Scientology sci-fi propaganda about alien races and space battles and occult visions and sex magic read like sober non-fiction.
Anyway, this belief in the most extreme (and really fucking weird) Evangelical prophecies has given Israel and whatever they want to do a free pass. And anyone or anything who could be interpreted as doing something Israel might not like, is a traitor to god. Or something. I don't even think they really know what they're talking about. But it boils down to Israel right or wrong, even if it means going against what's best for the United States.
Again, remove the religious component, and there might be some other cases to be made in opposition to the agreement, but they would have less connection to magic and fantasy, and a better chance of arriving at some sort of understanding.
Here's what Rod Dreher, a writer for the New Republic, said in an article on the Red Heifer some years ago. I think it explains a lot about the intransigence of the Confederates when it comes to anything they consider bad for Israel:
"The unshakable belief in particular prophetic visions — Jewish, Christian, or Islamic — makes the art of political compromise impossible when it comes to Jerusalem. Says Weber*: 'There’s no way to negotiate these ideas. If you believe that this is in the prophetic cards, that this is history before it happens, that this is how God is going to manipulate events to bring about the final phase of human history, then you cannot negotiate land for peace, or anything else.'"
These people, whether they understand it or not, are finagling a way to bring about the end of the world (according the zealots who are controlling them) and they will not let the Iran deal stand in the way of that.
As I said, I bet not one in fifty congressional Confederates clamoring for the evisceration of the Iran bill could explain all of this, which makes their obstinacy even stupider and more dangerous. The fact is, a scary number of congressional lawmakers live under the sway and control of irrational religious beliefs and they make decisions not based on what is best for Americans and the United States, but what will comport most accommodatingly with this belief system.
Religion really is a pretty terrible component of any political theory.
*"Timothy Weber, dean of Northern Baptist Theological Seminary in Lombard, Ill., has written extensively about the worldview of apocalypse-minded American Protestants. He tells NRO that 'Bible teachers are foaming at the mouth over what’s happening now in Israel.'"
Just a thought about the Confederate controlled Planned Parenthood "hearings".
I'm thinking Uncle Joe Stalin would be jealous of how one-sided these "hearings" are.
It's pretty bad when a hearing called by the United States House of Representatives compares with a Stalin era show trial.
Tovarish Goodlatte did his best to ensure that women would be appropriately gulagged. A good little Confederate.
Uncle Joe would be so pleased with his Confederate followers in Authoritarian rule.
I much appreciate Marie's and Akhilleus' comments on heroes and heroism. Every culture has the myth of the heroes and their saving graces ( religion has prospered because of this need). My comment, however, was more specific geared to those who find in a man like Trump heroic qualities that he does not possess. And of course I understand their wanting this to be so, but I cringe at their choosing him.
I voted for Obama not because I thought he could be a "super hero" but because after I read his books, listened to his speeches, read what others had to say about him, I decided this man was ready to lead this country––I loved his intellect and the color of his skin. When I first heard him speak about "there are no red states or blue states, only the United States" I thought, boy, oh, boy, is he in in for a shock. And yes, he has disappointed me, but I knew he would, yet I also hoped he would be a terrific president over all and he has proved that admirably.
And yes," Even when we vote for someone we don't especially admire, we are all still wishing for someone who can weave an heroic narrative." sigh~~~~~~~~~