Month: August 2011

The Hidden Rebellion

by digby

Dday has a very interesting post today with some news you have undoubtedly not heard about on CNN or any other national news network. It turns out that we have another Townhall uprising on our hands. But it doesn’t seem to be featuring people wearing tri-corner hats and carrying guns so nobody’s interested. Or rather it doesn’t have a full fledged publicity campaign financed by wealthy wingnuts and news network feeding a smooth diet of Tea flavored BS to the public:

If this organic movement were happening on the right, it would be front-page news in every national newspaper in the country. We know because the distinctly non-organic movement in 2009 was front-page news.In order to find out about this movement, you have to go to local news sites. The Dickinson Press, Dickinson, North Dakota:

(North Dakota Republican Rep. Rick) Berg said he voted for the (debt limit) package because of one provision added in the final hours of debate: a requirement that both houses of Congress vote on a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution.Berg said he believes it “is the one thing out there that can get our country back on track.”However, several residents criticized Berg’s position, saying the amendment won’t solve immediate problems — like getting unemployed Americans back to work.“The balanced budget amendment is like trying to drain a lake to save a drowning person,” West Fargo resident Darrel Lund said. “People are in trouble now.”Lund said Congress ought to have just raised the debt ceiling as they were tasked to do, instead of adding to the problem through political deadlock.“That’s what’s caused uncertainty — that Congress can’t even do one thing,” Lund said to applause. “They had to make a political statement.”

The Duluth News Tribune, Duluth, Minnesota:

(Republican Rep. Chip) Cravaack said he wanted to bring down the tax rate to 25 percent for small businesses because higher taxes are passed on to consumers or result in layoffs.Audience member Dave Garshelis of Cohasset said President George W. Bush tried that plan and it didn’t work.“Is this an experiment or a concept or do you have information from somewhere that shows this works?” he asked. “I’m wondering when the jobs are going to happen.”Cravaack said he wants reduced taxes with the addition of tax reform. He said jobs went to places like Mexico and China because of high taxes in the U.S.Kevin Kooiker of Pequot Lakes wasn’t so sure of Cravaack’s answer and said the tax rate today is lower than it’s been in years. He said major corporations are known to be sitting on sizeable amounts of money instead of creating new jobs.“People need to get more money in their pockets,” he said. “The stimulus bill was way too small.”

Silver City Sun-News, Silver City, New Mexico:

A woman stormed out of Congressman Steve Pearce’s town hall meeting Tuesday night at the Silver City Senior Center, after calling Pearce a liar and saying “You’re just (BSing) everyone and we don’t buy it.”“He got off on the wrong foot with me because he started to lie because he said the reason we got downgraded by S&P was because of our deficit,” said Anne Nitopi of Silver City. “That’s not the reason. Those very credit agencies approved junk bonds that turned out to not be worth the paper they were printed on, which created a financial collapse. The government’s inability to compromise is the reason they downgraded us. He took the debt ceiling debate and linked it to the debate about a budget and our deficit. They allowed the Tea Party extremists to threaten our country with default.” […]A person before her had said that he heard the 400 wealthiest families in the U.S. had more money than 90 percent of the population and that 80 percent of Americans support a balanced approach to balancing the budget – meaning cutting spending and raising taxes – but Pearce said he vowed that he would never raise taxes.

(More at the link)

Despite the wingnuts’ febrile imaginings, the all-powerful Move-on with it’s billions in terrorist dollars is not making this happen. This is happening because average people are spontaneously trying to make their voices heard. And these politicians should be listening. But once again, we are all obsessed with the right wing freak show (they own August apparently) this time fetishizing the Ames Cholesterol Poll and Rick Perry.

I’ll let dday have the last word:

These Americans are coming forward without a compelling, overriding narrative to draw from. They’re picking up bits and pieces of information and comparing it to their everyday lives. But the overall message is remarkably similar. It says that government has a role to play in fixing the economy, that increased revenues on the rich to reduce their political economy as much as their share of national wealth would be a positive step, that people are seeing their labor and livelihoods extracted by the top 2% and they cannot stand it. This is a message about inequality, about fairness, about the need for a priority on job creation. It’s representative of a very basic and fundamental set of values that have been endemic to America for a long time. And it’s representative of a frustration that nobody in Washington shares those values.

If only this sentiment could be concentrated, if only these people organized, if only their voices heard!

.

Deportation for tailgating

by digby

Can anyone explain the political logic of this to me?

Sen. Gustavo Rivera, a frequent critic of the federal Secure Communities program, expressed significant “disappointment” during a CapTon interview last night with the Obama administration’s reversal on allowing states to opt out.

S-Comm, as it has come to be known, compels local law enforcement officers to share information about new arrests with federal immigration authorities. The goal is to deport illegal immigrants with criminal records. Instead, critics mantain, the program has largely impacted individuals who have committed either no offenses or relatively minor crimes.

In June, Gov. Andrew Cuomo heeded the calls of immigrant advocates and law enforcement officials and suspended New York’s participation in S-Comm, although he did not completely withdraw from the program.

Two other governors – Deval Patrick, of Massachusetts; and Patrick Quinn, of Illinois – also quit S-Comm. (PAtrick’s move was particularly interesting, since he is the country’s only black governor and shares a political strategist, David Axelrod, with Obama, the country’s first black president).

Last week, the Obama administration quietly had the Homeland Security Department terminante its memorandum of agreements with the state on S-Comm, essentially forcing governors to participate in the program whether they want to or not.

What’s this about?

President Barack Obama regularly says his administration is enforcing immigration laws more wisely than his predecessor by focusing on arresting the “worst of the worst.” He promised in his 2008 presidential campaign to focus immigration enforcement on dangerous criminals. As recently as May 10, Obama said in a speech in El Paso, Texas, that his administration was focused on violent offenders and not families or “folks who are looking to scrape together an income.”

Most of the immigrants deported last year had committed drug-related crimes. They totaled 45,003, compared with 36,053 in 2008. Drug-related crime – described as the manufacture, distribution, possession or sale of drugs – has been the No. 1 crime among immigration for years. Drunken driving was third in the number of offenses last year…

But the rise in traffic offenders in the deportation statistics and in some other categories worries immigration advocates, particularly because traffic stops are largely made by police, sheriff’s deputies and state highway patrol officers. Local law enforcement has become more involved in immigration enforcement because of new programs that encourage it.

Officers “are using their new authority to remove as many unauthorized people from their jurisdictions as they can, and that frequently means going after traffic violators instead of serious criminals,” said Muzaffar Chishti, director of the Migration Policy Institute’s office at New York University Law School. The institute is a Washington-based think tank on migration

The only people closely following this ever expanding crusade against illegal immigrants are members of the Hispanic community and the white supremacist types who are fixated on the issue. Everyone else has other things to worry about right now and migration from south of the border is down, due to the bad economy. So what’s the purpose of this ongoing harassment of immigrants? It will certainly not gain the votes of any of the white supremacists (duh) and the Hispanic community is appalled. Does the administration think the vaunted Independents will reward them for this too? Or do they simply believe that harassing Hispanics is a good policy on the merits?

It’s one thing to alienate activist liberals. The worst that probably happens is they keep their money and spend their time elsewhere, which the billion dollar campaign apparently doesn’t seem to think will make a difference for them. But adding to that by also actively alienating Latinos with cruel deportation policies and harassment has to result in a statistically measurable drop in votes. At what point does this relentless pursuit of non-Democratic voters at the expense of the base become electorally self-defeating?

h/t to debcoop

Can you guess who this is?

He’s always had very well groomed hair, hasn’t he? His lovely brown shirt is very crisp and he looks mighty fine in those shiny jackboots. Nice dog sweater too. Very cute.

Note the date on the Letterman sweater proudly displayed in both pics. I was around then, a little younger, and let’s just say that this fashion wasn’t exactly in the youth mainstream at the time.

Remind you of anyone?

.

Observation ‘o the day

by digby

Krugman:

A week ago, before the S&P downgrade, the interest rate on US 10-year bonds was 2.56 percent. As I write this, it’s 2.24 percent, with the yield on inflation-protected bonds actually negative.

You would think this would amount to strong evidence that the downgrade totally failed to shake confidence in US debt.

Yet people who listen to radio and TV reporting tell me that most stories attribute the stock plunge to the downgrade, and are telling listeners that the case for immediate spending cuts has gotten even stronger.

I heard this on talk radio yesterday. Stock are volatile because of the S&P downgrade and that means “the market” is demanding more human sacrifices.

One of the things I’ve come to bank on in the last few month is the opportunism of the austerity addicts. They are brilliant at spinning each event to their own advantage.

And many members of the press, as usual, are more than willing to buy the storyline.

.

Romney Doubles Down

by David Atkins (“thereisnospoon”)

Mitt Romney knows the “people” he can really count on, and he’s determined to stand up for his best friends:

At a friendly Republican gathering here tonight, presidential candidate Mitt Romney defended his recent comment in Iowa that “corporations are people” and said Democrats fundamentally misunderstand corporations’ makeup. “Businesses are people,” he said.

“What do they think they are? Little men from Mars?” Romney said at the home of Ovide Lamontagne, a prominent New Hampshire Republican and former Senate candidate.

Romney said the Obama administration’s view of business is antiquated and stuck in the 1960s.

“At that time, there was a sentiment somehow that businesses were bad, that it was anti-people. And the Obama administration seems to think that the 60s is here again. Business is good. I am talking about repair shops and gas stations and beauty salons and restaurants. I am talking about Apple Computer and Facebook and Microsoft,” Romney said.

Ahem…uh…Mitt? You might want to rethink that line about the 1960s. Even your own propaganda organ the American Enterprise Institute has to admit that the economy of the 1960s was pretty smokin’:

The first five years of the expansion that began in February 1961 resembled the golden age of the current expansion. That golden age only emerged in 1995, four years after the expansion began. From 1961 through 1965, U.S. private investment grew strongly, more rapidly than it did from 1991 through 1995…

The first half of the 1960s expansion was also characterized by extreme optimism about the ability of the government to manage the economy.

Now, the AEI then goes on to argue, in a piece written around the Millennium, that the cutting of government regulations and increases in private sector wealth and stock prices meant that conservative policies were working much better than those benighted fools of the 1960s who figured Keynesian policies were the answer. Which only proves that anyone who pays attention to the prognostications and ideological ramblings of the AEI is an economic incompetent.

Anyway, let’s ignore the plainly laughable notion that Barack Obama is a 1960s liberal, or even anywhere to the left of Richard Nixon from a public policy standpoint (Nixon’s fascistic political tendencies and racism notwithstanding.) Remember that in the 1960s, not only could America land a man on the moon, fight a Cold War against a massive superpower, and build an entire nationwide highway system, we could also provide practically free college educations to anyone who qualified. Good thing those awful days are over, and the world is much friendlier to corporations that employ just under 2,000 people while thieving your privacy and racking up a 25% profit margin while doing it. Or corporations that somehow maintain credibility with progressives despite selling overpriced products at a 42% profit margin. Or, you know, beloved people the world over. People like his best friend Mr. John Microsoft.

Hey, you may have to go $100,000 in student loan debt, your bridges may be in disrepair, your water mains may not work, we may have to cut back your social security and get rid of your Medicare, we may not have a space program left, but look on the bright side: you can get an iPod with your McJob today! Couldn’t do that in 1965. No sirree. Ain’t life grand today now that we’re so much more business friendly?

Well, maybe not for you. But it sure is swell for the $250 million man. His best friends have made him a lot of money. They’re people, too, and you hippies should be grateful for all the money he’s made, now that your lives have been vastly improved by the privilege of being poked by his friend Mark Zuckerberg Mr. Adam Facebook. All rights reserved, of course.

Friday sand kitten blogging

by digby

Talking kittens:

A rare baby Sand Cat was born to Israel’s Safari Zoo recently. Once a common cat in the dunes of Israel, the cat has become basically extinct in the region. The newborn has given hope to conversationalists who hope one day to reintroduce the Sand Cat to the wild.

I love to converse about baby sand cats. And I love to look at them too. More adorable pics at the link.

Democratic Dolchstoßlegende

by David Atkins (“thereisnospoon”)

One of the weakest arguments made against progressives who chastise Obama is that we harm the cause and weaken the effort to undermine conservative politics and create a better future. I’ve already countered that argument from my own personal story of dedicated Democratic Party activism while being an occasionally forceful critic of the President’s policies. It’s true that simply ranting against President Obama and the entire Democratic Party is not terribly useful, particularly without a compelling alternative theory of change. And it’s clear that advocating for third parties is also far less useful than taking the Democratic Party over the inside, given the structure of our government and the history of third parties in America. But these sorts of accusations against progressives are straw man arguments made by defenders of neoliberal politics and the tactic of compromising at all costs even at the expense of any and all core principles.

Ultimately, the argument made by the Administration’s most active defenders against progressives is a version of the Dolchstoßlegende: progressives are stabbing Dems in the back by not being supportive enough of the President, and would be much more useful if they got in line and clapped louder.

Nothing could better illustrate the folly of that argument than what happened to Mitt Romney yesterday. Under pressure from an angry crowd, Mitt Romney made an enormous but telling gaffe declaring that corporations are people, too. It’s very early, of course, but it’s exactly the sort of “voted for it before I voted against it” blunder that could seriously sink Romney’s campaign, particularly since it reinforces the perception of a man who seems more of a corporate spokesperson than a real human being as it is.

Well, as it turns out, Dave Dayen reports that the group that pressured Romney into the gaffe is also vocally upset with President Obama:

It turns out that the hecklers were a group of about a dozen members of Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement (CCI). They are a grassroots community organization that is part of a broader coalition called The New Bottom Line, which seeks to challenge big bank interests on behalf of everyday communities. And they have a message for members of both parties who visit Iowa during caucus season. I spoke with Dave Goodner, an Iowa CCI organizer who was part of the exchange yesterday.

Iowa CCI has about 3,300 members all over Iowa. Three-quarters of them are over the age of 65, and about 60% live in rural Iowa. “One of our biggest issues is Social Security and Medicare and making Wall Street pay for the financial crisis,” said Goodner. “We know where the money is. Not in the back pocket of a senior on Social Security. The money’s on Wall Street. It was their crisis and they should have to pay for it…”

Goodner and his group were not pleased with Romney’s full answer, where he touted so-called “progressive price indexing” (which would have to cut benefits well into the middle class to generate any savings) and raising the retirement age. “He’s talking about benefit cuts that are going to hurt seniors, the elderly, the poor and the disabled,” said Goodner. “And ask for nothing from the wealthiest Americans, and the companies on Wall Street.”

This sounds similar to what President Obama has been saying recently in support of a balanced deficit solution. But Iowa CCI isn’t exactly enthralled with his performance of late either. “Our members are very upset and angry at Obama,” Goodner said. “He was the one who put Social Security and Medicare on the table. We delivered a letter to his campaign office in Des Moines, telling him to back off, to take this off the table.” As it turns out, Obama will be in Peosta, Iowa next week, as part of a Rural Economic Forum. Iowa CCI has members there, but it’s not a public town hall meeting, so they are still strategizing about how to reach the President with their message. In the meantime, they are speaking to their representatives in Iowa (all of whom, Democratic or Republican, voted against the debt limit bill), or any other Democratic representatives, telling them to deliver their message to the President. It turns out that DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz is at the Iowa State Fair today, so we’ll see if anything transpires.

And they are adamant on this point. “Anytime a candidate or the President comes to Iowa, we’re going to bird-dog them,” Goodner said. “We put principles above party. They’re all going to hear from us.”

These are the sorts of activists who are persistent and get things done. They’re the sorts of activists who will be there on behalf of Democratic principles come rain or shine, come Republican or Democratic Administrations. All the Democratic Party needs to do is have their back, and they can make magic happen. Iowa CCI just did more for the Obama re-election campaign than $50 million of advertising dollars could ever hope to do, against the candidate whom all the polls show would likely be Obama’s most formidable opponent in the general election.

The truth is that Iowa CCI isn’t stabbing the President or the Democratic Party in the back through their criticism of the Grand Bargain. If anything, the President and the Party are stabbing them in the back, even as they continue to do the sort of work that helps get Democrats elected–even if that work doesn’t necessarily come in the form of phonebanking or door-to-door canvassing. The Democratic Party needs both the ideological progressives and the careful team player shock troops, and it forgets that lesson at its peril.

Hardening her pretty little soul

by digby

Kyle at Right Wing watch caught Bryan Fischer accidentally spilling the beans:

Ms. Bachmann chose to get into the ring, and can’t complain if punches are thrown, nor should anyone complain on her behalf. That’s one of the reasons to question whether it’s a good idea for women to get involved in the rough and tumble of politics. I hate to see a woman attacked like Bachmann was last night, but she made herself vulnerable to it by throwing her hat into the ring…

Part of the problem here is that when a women mixes it up in the political arena, and gets punched, she must punch back. The danger to the woman here is that every time she punches back, which she must do, she hardens a little bit of her soul and sacrifices a little bit of her femininity. I’m not sure that’s a good trade. But each woman needs to make that choice for herself. No one else can or should make that decision for her.

Well, that’s big of him. But it isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement of Tea Party Christian heroine Michele Bachman, is it? I wonder how much of that thinking is common inside those circles — she may be their favorite daughter, but she’s still just a girl.

(I also guess it’s fairly clear that Fischer thinks Real Women take their punches in good grace and don’t “harden their souls” by punching back. I’m not surprised, of course. If God wanted women to defend themselves against men he would have given them big, manly muscles to do it with.)

This is the ultimate Christian Right radio host, by the way —- all the GOP candidates flock to him.

.

Oh boy:

Pornography is not a necessary cause of terrorism. The abolition of pornography would not lead to the cessation of terrorism in the world. Terrorism existed well before graphic pornography and its mass spread via the internet.

Likewise, pornography is not a sufficient cause for terrorism. There are pornography users, even addicts, who do not become terrorists. Given how widespread the viewing of pornography is today, if the direct result of each individual’s pornography use were terrorist violence, one could conceivably argue that pornography proliferation would pose a more widespread threat to human existence than nuclear proliferation.

But let’s make that case anyway, shall we, just because it’s so darned titillating:

Yet pornography now appears frequently in the possession of violent terrorists and their supporters, including Osama bin Laden. Regarding “smut” found on captured media, in 2010, a Department of Defense al-Qaeda analyst was quoted in The Atlantic: “We have terabytes of this stuff.”Terabytes. That’s a lot of “smut.”I wonder whether the pornography of today—now ubiquitous and increasingly grotesque—is one of the influences warping the mentality of those who aspire to or who actually go on to engage in ever more grotesque public violence.Would those terabytes of pornography and such more aptly be dubbed “terrorbytes”? Why, after all, would an al-Qaeda affiliate, as reported in 2009 from interrogations in Mauritania, select pornography to target new recruits? We need to know.As terrorism researchers Daniel Bynum and Christine Fair point out in an article about the modern terrorists we have been pursuing, especially since 9/11, the fact of the matter is that “they get intimate with cows and donkeys. Our terrorist enemies trade on the perception that they’re well trained and religiously devout, but in fact, many are fools and perverts who are far less organized and sophisticated than we imagine. Can being more realistic about who our foes actually are help us stop the truly dangerous ones?”

They “get intimate” with cows and donkeys? What, they share their most secret thoughts? That is shocking.