Month: April 2012

Deep thought

by digby

It’s Friday and I’m tired so I’ll just leave you with this.

Amirite?

.

Celebrating dropping out

by digby

Someone sent me an email asking why I wasn’t trumpeting the lower unemployment rate. The fact is that I’d really like to. More people being unemployed would be very welcome. Unfortunately, that’s not what’s happening:

The U.S. job market slowed in March as companies hit the brakes on hiring amid uncertainty about the economy’s growth prospects. The unemployment rate dipped, but mostly because more Americans stopped looking for work. The Labor Department said Friday that the economy added 120,000 jobs in March, down from more than 200,000 in each of the previous three months. The unemployment rate fell to 8.2 percent. The rate has dropped nearly a full percentage point since August and is now at its lowest level since January 2009.”

Maybe most of them are now working in the underground economy or have suddenly won the lottery. I hope so. But until that stops being a major factor in the lower unemployment rate I’m not going to get excited about a statistic that doesn’t count them.

Update: And then, there’s this.

.

“I wouldn’t want to be hanging out at some women’s event”

by David Atkins

CNN contributor and Redstate.com honcho Erick Erickson (via ThinkProgress):

ERICKSON: Who cares? Who cares that she wasn’t invited into the club? She’s a woman — women aren’t allowed! …. It is striking to me just how political the president wants to make everything. The war on women coming home to The Masters. Who freakin’ cares? […]

I don’t care that The Masters are a male-dominated event. I don’t care that women aren’t members of The Masters. Frankly, I kind of like the idea that women aren’t members of The Masters. Good Lord, I don’t want to be hanging out at some women’s event! Can’t men go anywhere and just be men? There are plenty of places where women can be women. … You know what Mr. President, why don’t you just leave the partisanship out of golf?!

Because a major sporting event is totally the same as a “women’s event” by definition, which Erick Erickson wouldn’t be caught dead at. There’s no depth to which conservatives won’t sink to defend the egregious abuses of private power. Rand Paul’s views on segregation are widely shared among conservatives; they just don’t dare say them in public anymore. Women are just one of the few groups against which it’s still apparently OK to be openly discriminatory–which is amazing, since women are actually over half the population.

Anyway, it’s nice to see that CNN keeps Erickson in its stable of paid contributors, as opposed to some inflammatory liberal blogger out of touch with American values. Makes things all fair and balanced.

.

Your daily police state dispatch

I was out of the country only nine days, hardly a blink in time, but time enough, as it happened, for another small, airless room to be added to the American national security labyrinth. On March 22nd, Attorney General Eric Holder and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, Jr. signed off on new guidelines allowing the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), a post-9/11 creation, to hold on to information about Americans in no way known to be connected to terrorism—about you and me, that is—for up to five years. (Its previous outer limit was 180 days.) This, Clapper claimed, “will enable NCTC to accomplish its mission more practically and effectively.”

Trial, would undoubtedly have felt right at home in Clapper’s Washington. George Orwell would surely have had a few pungent words to say about those anodyne words “practically and effectively,” not to speak of “mission.”

For most Americans, though, it was just life as we’ve known it since September 11, 2001, since we scared ourselves to death and accepted that just about anything goes, as long as it supposedly involves protecting us from terrorists. Basic information or misinformation, possibly about you, is to be stored away for five years—or until some other attorney general and director of national intelligence think it’s even more practical and effective to keep you on file for 10 years, 20 years, or until death do us part—and it hardly made a ripple.

And needless to say, the difference here is consent, which Facebook users (sort of) give and the government isn’t even asking for. From anyone.

This is such dangerous stuff. There is nothing stopping the Feds — or state and local agencies, which are often even worse — from clocking your every move and communication. Aside from the clear abnegation of constitutional principle, which should be enough, when you consider the possibility for political mischief and authoritarian misuse, this becomes a little bit less abstract.

Indeed, it’s already a problem:

Seizing Thunder was opened in 2002 to target members of the “Animal Liberation front (ALF), Earth Liberation Front (ELF) and an anarchist group called the Red Cloud Thunder, all whose members are inter-related and they openly claimed several major arsons,” according to the files. The investigation involved physical and video surveillance, warrants for phone taps, and cooperation with local police departments in Portland and Eugene, Ore. But the feds quickly dropped the pretense of tracking organized groups and quickly began surveilling people simply for identifying themselves—or for being identified by informants—as anarchists. The memos read like artifacts from the Red Scare:

July 19, 2002: “On [redacted], the source observed a [redacted] Oregon license plate…parked at [redacted], a known anarchist hangout.”

August 8, 2002: “The source observed the following vehicles in the vicinity of [redacted], a major hangout for the anarchist and [redacted]”

September 19, 2002: “On [redacted] the source observed [redacted] vehicle, Oregon license plate [redacted] parked at [redacted] one of the hangout for anarchist….”

October 18, 2002: “On [redacted] the source was questioned as to the [redacted] anarchist travelling to [redacted].”

“The anarchists were dressed in black”

What sort of federal crimes were all these anarchists getting up to, aside from the thought variety? The records, which document the FBI’s extensive cooperation and intelligence-sharing with local police departments in Eugene and Oregon, show that agents collected intelligence about an anarchist march that was being planned to protest U.S. policy in the Middle East:

On [redacted] at approximately 2:30 p.m., the source visited [redacted]. The source did not observe any anarchists. The source walked [redacted] to view their bulletin board. Most of the ads on the bulletin board were for individuals looking for roommates.

On [redacted] the source attended [redacted]. The source visited [redacted] where the source met two unknown anarchists at [redacted]. The anarchists were dressed in black and were in their early 20s…. The source stated the anarchists are planning a protest to “Reclaim the Streets” on April 20, 2002, in Portland, Ore.

Here’s how the Associated Press covered that crucible of terror and violence:

About 700 people marched through downtown Saturday in a peaceful protest against U.S. support of Israel in the Middle East crisis. There were no arrests and no altercations, police said.

This was in 2002. Before they built this behemoth police apparatus known as the Department of Homeland Security. I don’t even want to think about what else we’ll find they’ve done since. And if this is any example, the FBI has been just as aggressively inept in charging right wing groups:

Two members of the Midwest militia group Hutaree pleaded guilty to charges of possessing machine guns and temporarily walked out of jail on Thursday, two days after a judge rebuked prosecutors and dismissed more serious charges that the Hutaree plotted to attack the U.S. government.

David Brian Stone Sr., the leader of the militia and his son Joshua Stone, each pleaded guilty to possession of a machine gun before Judge Victoria Roberts in federal court in Detroit.

They were the last two Hutaree members still in jail of seven arrested two years ago following an undercover operation by the FBI, and charged with plotting a violent revolt using weapons of mass destruction.

Judge Roberts on Tuesday took the unusual step of dismissing all major charges against the Hutaree, saying government prosecutors had failed to prove that they were doing anything more than talking about their hatred for authority.

I’ve been saying since 2003: if you build it, they will use it. These new surveillance powers will undoubtedly be used against average Americans, abusing due process and our right to privacy. It’s just how it works.

Update:

Republican Coup

by digby

Back in 2007 I wrote this little screed when it was revealed that the Bush Justice department had fired US Attorneys who were unwilling to rig the vote or otherwise compromise the electoral process.

Since I first started writing on-line, one of my recurring themes is that the modern Republican party has become fundamentally hostile to democracy.(And we already knew they were crooks.) This was first made obvious to me back in 1994, when Republican leader Dick Armey famously stated “your president is just not that important for us.” They went on to impeach that president against the clear will of the people.

But the biggest clue about what they were up to came in 2000 with the Florida recount. I know it seems like ancient history to go back to that but it is extremely important to remember just how outrageous their tactics were: the Gore campaign used legal tactics and the Bush campaign didn’t. There was the “bourgeois riot” and dirty trickster Roger Stone directing the street theatre from a van. (Here’s a list of what the Village Voice termed the five worst Bush recount outrages.) They used every lever of power they could to count illegally cast overseas ballots. They operated a hypocritical and situational media campaign that the press completely failed to properly analyze until it was too late. And after they did, they helpfully told those who objected to “get over it.” And I guess we did.

I’ve been writing about their vote suppression efforts for just as long and the takeover of the state legislatures in 2010 has also been a fertile ground for exploring this subject.

Excuse me?

by digby

I’m sure you’ve heard that the male only Augusta golf course has refused to give an honorary membership to the CEO of one of The Masters tournament corporate sponsors. You see, IBM has a female CEO. Apparently even huge money can’t outweigh the antediluvian practices of this stupid club.

Unfortunately, Augusta isn’t the only throwback institution:

The golf writer for the New York Times told a website Thursday she wouldn’t want to cover the Masters again until Augusta National invites a woman to be a member.

“If it were left to me, which it seldom is in the power structure of writer versus editor, I’d probably not come cover this event again until there is a woman member,” Karen Crouse told GOLF.com. “More and more, the lack of a woman member is just a blue elephant in the room.”

Contacted by The Associated Press, Times sports editor Joe Sexton said the comments were, “completely inappropriate and she has been spoken to.“

That’s appalling. Particularly in light of the controversy she’s discussing and her personal experience with it:

Questions about membership were raised at Augusta National chairman Billy Payne’s annual news conference Wednesday – the day before the Masters began. Crouse, who became the Times’ golf writer last year, attended the briefing, along with more than 100 reporters. Though he was asked repeatedly about women being admitted, Payne maintained it was a club matter and declined to discuss it.

Crouse asked Payne what he would say to his granddaughters about the club not having women as members. Payne said it was a question that deals with membership and declined to answer. She followed up by saying it was a “kitchen-table question, a personal question.” Payne responded: “Well, my conversations with my granddaughters are also private.”

In a column published Thursday in the Times, Crouse criticized Augusta National, saying the club “founded in 1933 on the bedrock of segregation is obviously not so easily rebuilt – or even touched.” Crouse wrote that she was the only woman at the news conference to ask a question and that she held her hand up for 20 minutes before she was called on.

And she’s the one who is “inappropriate” and “has been spoken to”? Bullshit.

The NY Times should say they are no longer going to cover the event. It’s golf, not the middle east. The world will not stop if they refuse to cover it. At the very least you’d think they would support their reporter rather than scolding her like a child for speaking out.

Oh, and IBM should pull out too. Do you think they would participate in an event today that excludes their CEO for being black or Jewish? For that matter, would they participate in an event that excludes anyone for being black or Jewish?

.

.

Why liberal boycotts work

Add Coca-Cola and Pepsi to the number of companies who are backing away from ALEC, the Koch-funded organization writing voter suppression laws and selling access to politicians to large corporations. Think Progress reports:

Prompted by a petition campaign by the progressive advocacy group Color of Change, Coca-Cola has pulled its support from ALEC, a right-wing corporate-funded front group which has been pushing voter restriction efforts around the country. The company released this statement moments ago:

The Coca-Cola Company has elected to discontinue its membership with the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Our involvement with ALEC was focused on efforts to oppose discriminatory food and beverage taxes, not on issues that have no direct bearing on our business. We have a long-standing policy of only taking positions on issues that impact our Company and industry.

Impressively, Coke’s retreat came just five hours after Color of Change announced its petition, which read: “ALEC has pushed voter ID laws which disenfranchise large numbers of Black voters. Along with the NRA, ALEC also pushed a bill based on Florida’s ‘shoot first’ law – which has shielded Trayvon Martin’s killer from justice – into two dozen states across the country.”

Not too dissimilar from the successful efforts against Beck and Limbaugh. Conservatives often complain and wonder why these sorts of tactics don’t work for them. After all, remember that these are corporations backing away from supporting pro-corporate entities. Why can’t they be persuaded to take similar steps against individuals and organizations on the left?

The answer is actually pretty simple: the right wing doesn’t look very good when exposed to sunlight. Corporations have an interest in making money, and they can’t make money if regular Americans think they’re associated with voter suppression of minorities, or with the sort of garbage that comes out of Limbaugh’s or Beck’s mouths. The people who come out to vote every two to four years may skew older and more conservative than the general population, but the people who buy soft drinks and other products don’t. Corporations know this, and the last thing they need is an public relations nightmare.

Why doesn’t Bill Maher receive the same treatment, the right wants to know? Well, it’s pretty simple: first off, when he made his infamous comment about the 9/11 terrorists not being cowards, he did get that treatment. But the general public also believes that Sarah Palin is a moron–and that Rush Limbaugh is also a jackass who apparently doesn’t understand how birth control works. When Limbaugh uses offensive language to describe a Georgetown law student, it doesn’t come off the same as when Maher uses similar language to describe the self-caricature that is Sarah Palin. The public understands the difference between these two situations, and corporate PR departments understand that the public understands.

Ultimately, the problem for conservatives and so-called centrists is always the same: the public doesn’t really want what they’re selling, and they have to push their agenda under secrecy, false pretenses and closed doors. They can’t come out and say that they want minorities not to vote, or that they want to put Social Security money into the Wall Street casino, or that they want local religious officials to have control of every uterus in their diocese. When their agenda is exposed, corporations get very nervous about being associated with it. Especially since corporations crave the approval of younger, more open-minded market demographic segments especially hostile to conservative social and economic approaches.

Conservatives shouldn’t wonder why boycotts of their media stars and secretive organizations work. They should thank their lucky stars that the same public that buys these corporations’ products isn’t the same public that shows up in the voting booth, or they’d all be out of power. As it turns out, ALEC is doing its best to keep it that way–and that’s precisely why the pressure and the boycotts work.

The Fox News base does a great job of marching dutifully to the polling booth. But it’s in no way reflective of the population that constitutes the American consumer base, and it’s downright hostile to the interests and values of the demographics that create the cultural trends so important to corporate marketing efforts.

.

The Republican Brain on display

by digby

Chris Mooney, author of the new book The Republican Brain is not a partisan hack, he’s a respected journalist who writes about public understanding of science:

He is a senior correspondent for The American Prospect and a contributing editor for Science Progress. Additionally, he maintains a weblog, The Intersection, with Sheril Kirshenbaum and writes an online column named Doubt and About for the magazine Skeptical Inquirer, where he serves as a contributing editor. He is the author of three books: The Republican War on Science, released in 2005; Storm World: Hurricanes, Politics, and the Battle Over Global Warming, released in 2007; and Unscientific America, co-written with Kirshenbaum, released in 2009.[The new book makes four — ed]

Recurring topics in Mooney’s writing include global warming, the evolution-creation controversy, bioethics, alternative medicine, pollution, separation of church and state, and the government funding of education, research, and environmental protection.

In 2009, he joined the Center for Collaborative History at Princeton University for the Spring semester as a visiting associate.

In 2009–10, Chris Mooney was a Knight Science Journalism Fellow at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Only 10 to 12 journalists from the U.S. and around the world are accepted for such a fellowship per year.

In February 2010, Mooney became a Templeton-Cambridge Journalism Fellow at the Templeton Foundation.

I, of all people, am not saying that credentials mean everything. But SE Cupp should be just a little bit less condescending and rude toward a journalist with Chris Mooney’s CV when her claim to fame is working as a commentator on Glenn Beck TV, a network nobody watches, run by a man so crazy even FoxTV had to let him go — and her comments are all lies or obfuscations.

I’m not sure why Alex Wagner has her on, but if it’s to expose the childish arrogance of the wingnut welfare crowd, it’s getting the job done.

.

Who has time to monitor pedophiles when women are out there using birth control?

by digby

“Disturbing pictures”:

A Catholic bishop in Kansas City must stand trial on charges that he failed to report a priest found with pornographic pictures of young girls on his Church computer to police, a judge said on Thursday.

Bishop Robert Finn, head of the Catholic Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph, faces one misdemeanor charge that he failed to tell authorities that Church officials had found disturbing pictures of unclothed little girls that appeared to have been taken by a popular local priest, Father Patrick Ratigan.

His trial is set to start September 24.

Finn’s lawyers had asked that the case against him be dismissed and argued in a hearing last week that Missouri statutes requiring clergy, school teachers and others to report suspected child sexual abuse were “vague.”

They also argued that even if the bishop suspected abuse he had no duty to report the situation to authorities, because he was not the “designated reporter” within the diocese and could rely on someone else within the diocese to notify authorities

Ok, so it was a long time ago, before the Church was fully aware of its systemic issues with child molestation.

Except it wasn’t:

In Finn’s case, Church officials discovered the photos on Ratigan’s computer in December 2010 and spent months analyzing whether or not they should turn him in.

When Church officials initially confronted Ratigan, he tried to kill himself. But he survived and was ultimately sent by Bishop Finn for psychological assessment and ordered to stay away from children.

Police were not notified until another Church official called them in May 2011. Ratigan is now in jail awaiting trial on 13 counts of child pornography.

Victims’ parents allege he continued to take pornographic pictures of young girls connected to the diocese until shortly before his arrest, and many blame Bishop Finn for not notifying parents and the police.

Well, to be fair, I’m sure they were very busy protecting their religious liberty. Adult women everywhere were trying to control their reproduction and blastocysts needed their protection so they probably didn’t have time to ensure that actual children weren’t being molested.

Keep in mind the latest position by the Catholic bishops on this issue:

Cardinal Dolan criticized a legislative proposal that would, for a year, drop the statute of limitations for filing civil claims for sexual offenses, allowing for lawsuits by people who say they were abused long ago. The cardinal said he was concerned that a flood of lawsuits over abuse by priests could drain the church of money it is using for charitable purposes.

“I think we bishops have been very contrite in admitting that the church did not handle this well at all in the past,” he said. “But we bristle sometimes in that the church doesn’t get the credit, now being in the vanguard of reform. It does bother us that the church continues to be a whipping boy.”

.

Austerity has consequences

by David Atkins

John Kass, writing in the Chicago Tribune (h/t Georgia Logothetis):

The old man, reportedly ill with cancer and exhausted by the agony devouring Greece, just couldn’t take it anymore.

His name was Dimitris. And so he walked out Wednesday morning onto the beautiful and peaceful Syntagma Square across the street from the Parliament. And with him he carried the tools of his martyrdom: He carried a piece of paper that was his suicide note, and he carried a gun.

He stood on a patch of grass near a tree in the shade. Then he pulled the trigger.

And instantly, the 77-year-old retired pharmacist became a symbol in this economically desperate nation, where one-fifth of the workforce is unemployed.

News traveled fast, and by nightfall rioters were breaking up marble steps and throwing the chunks of rock at a phalanx of police. The cops returned fire with tear gas as the so-called anarchists with their faces covered attacked the beautiful Hotel Grand Bretagne. They painted the hotel wall with this slogan: Eat the rich.

And that’s how I watched despair turn into rage.

“The politicians killed him!” said Iannis Kotaras, 82, a short man whose hands are thick with years of labor, as he stood near the spot of Dimitris’ suicide and pointed up at the Parliament…

“The occupation government… has literally wiped out my ability to survive, based on a respectable pension which I had paid for during a 35-year period,” the pensioner said in an excerpt published in Greek newspapers.

“I find no other solution for a dignified end before I start sifting through garbage to feed myself,” he allegedly wrote in red ink.

But it’s very important that wealthy bondholders be made whole on Greek debt, or there’s no telling what suffering might occur.

Go read Georgia Logothetis at DailyKos for a great encapsulation of why austerity was the wrong answer to the Greek problem, and why it’s especially stupid to be pushing the same policies here in the U.S.

Though something tells me that opinion leaders who don’t yet understand that austerity is the wrong approach given current income inequalities, aren’t ever going to change their minds.

.

.