Month: April 2012

If only they had nominated a more conservative candidate

by David Atkins

Much has been written already about the Gallup results showing President Obama up by 9 over Mitt Romney in a poll of twelve battleground states. The lead is largely due to an overwhelming 60%+ lead by Obama among women under the age of 50–a major shift since mid-February when less than half of women under 50 supported the President:

In the fifth Swing States survey taken since last fall, Obama leads Republican front-runner Mitt Romney 51%-42% among registered voters just a month after the president had trailed him by two percentage points.

The biggest change came among women under 50. In mid-February, just under half of those voters supported Obama. Now more than six in 10 do while Romney’s support among them has dropped by 14 points, to 30%. The president leads him 2-1 in this group.

Romney’s main advantage is among men 50 and older, swamping Obama 56%-38%.

Republicans’ traditional strength among men “won’t be good enough if we’re losing women by nine points or 10 points,” says Sara Taylor Fagen, a Republican strategist and former political adviser to President George W. Bush. “The focus on contraception has not been a good one for us … and Republicans have unfairly taken on water on this issue.” [ed. note: “unfairly”? Really?]

In the poll, Romney leads among all men by a single point, but the president leads among women by 18. That reflects a greater disparity between the views of men and women than the 12-point gender gap in the 2008 election.

Obama campaign manager Jim Messina says Romney’s promise to “end Planned Parenthood” — the former Massachusetts governor says he wants to eliminate federal funding for the group — and his endorsement of an amendment that would allow employers to refuse to cover contraception in health care plans have created “severe problems” for him in the general election.

The usual caveats apply, of course: it’s very early, these numbers will shift back and forth and up and down many times before November, et cetera. But let’s postulate that the numbers in November end up similar to what we’re seeing now in terms of the demographic split, and that Obama notches a moderately easy victory over Romney largely due to women.

The guaranteed conservative reaction to a Romney defeat will be to claim that they would have won with a true conservative candidate, and that nominating a “liberal” like Romney guaranteed their defeat. They would have all sorts of potential and circumstantial evidence to back that up.

But the gender disparity doesn’t lie. Women hate Santorum and Gingrich more than they hate Romney. “True” conservatives play to the FreeRepublic/Limbaugh audience, which is overwhelmingly older and especially male. There is no way a candidate can win an election if they lose 6 in 10 women and younger voters.

More importantly, a party that banks increasingly exclusively on older white men for its votes is in increasingly dire straits. Digby posted recently about how the 2006 and 2008 elections may have been a mere interregnum in an era of conservative dominance. I would suggest a potential alternative: a slowly but increasingly progressive electorate, especially if you excise the amazingly retrograde phenomenon of the Deep South. One that elected Bill Clinton twice, that elected Al Gore but for a theft by the Supreme Court, and one that only barely elected conservatives based on the historical accidents of the 9/11 attacks and a cynical Mediscare backlash against a bitterly fought healthcare overhaul during a wretched economy.

From 2000 to August 2001, the Bush presidency was something of a joke. He barely held on for dear life in 2004 just a year after marshaling the nation into the invasion of Iraq, despite near comical reliance on terror alerts. In 2006 the Republicans got creamed and then once again in 2008 through the election of an African-American named Barack Hussein Obama. The fact that we’re used to that name by now doesn’t make it any less remarkable. Yes, there was 2010, but pundits famous and obscure alike often forget that the balance of 2010 was largely tipped by angry and scared elderly folks who bought into the Republican line that Obamacare was going to kill their Medicare and institute death panels in order to subsidize free medical care for lazy layabouts. It was not the pure conservative tea party backlash as it is often described.

Republicans have gotten some unusual lucky breaks over several cycles in the last decade and a half. But the general trend under normal circumstances looks very bad for them, and the latest Gallup polling only reinforces it. A party that is getting only more, not less conservative and increasingly reliant on the votes of old white men is a party that is in serious trouble.

That won’t stop them from blaming their potential 2012 defeat on having nominated an inadequately conservative candidate, though. That’s what people in denial do.

.

Georgia, out of its mind

by digby

Another day, another abomination for women’s rights:

After an emotional 14-hour workday that included fist-fights between lobbyists and a walk-out by women Democrats, the Georgia House passed a Senate-approved bill Thursday night that criminalizes abortion after 20 weeks.
The bill, which does not contain rape or incest exemptions, is expected to receive a signature from Republican Gov. Nathan Deal.

Commonly referred to as the “fetal pain bill” by Georgian Republicans and as the “women as livestock bill” by everyone else, HB 954 garnered national attention this month when state Rep. Terry England (R-Auburn) compared pregnant women carrying stillborn fetuses to the cows and pigs on his farm. According to Rep. England and his warped thought process, if farmers have to “deliver calves, dead or alive,” then a woman carrying a dead fetus, or one not expected to survive, should have to carry it to term.

The bill as first proposed outlawed all abortions after 20 weeks under all circumstances. After negotiations with the Senate, the House passed a revised HB 954 that makes an exemption for “medically futile” pregnancies or those in which the woman’s life or health is threatened.

If this makes its seem like Rep. England and the rest of the representatives looked beyond their cows and pigs and recognized women as capable, full-thinking human beings, think again: HB 954 excludes a woman’s “emotional or mental condition,” which means women suffering from mental illness would be forced to carry a pregnancy to term. It also ignores pregnant women who are suicidal and driven to inflict harm on themselves because of their unwanted pregnancy.

In order for a pregnancy to be considered “medically futile,” the fetus must be diagnosed with an irreversible chromosomal or congenital anomaly that is “incompatible with sustaining life after birth.” The Georgia “fetal pain” bill also stipulates that the abortion must be performed in such a way that the fetus emerges alive. If doctors perform the abortion differently, they face felony charges and up to 10 years in prison. Given all this, the so-called compromise suddenly does not look like much of a bargain.

I’d say so. I don’t know what this means in terms of medical procedures, but I don’t understand it. They allowed abortion when the fetus cannot live after birth but they are requiring that the fetus be delivered alive? Is this so that these fetuses can be put on life support? What’s the logic here except to make the woman feel as terrible as it’s possible to make her and interfere again in a medical procedure they have no expertise (or business) interfering with. These laws are just ghoulish.

Oh, and in case this falls into the “who cares” side of the ledger for you, how about this?

Although not as emotional, a similarly controversial debate has been had about proposed cuts to unemployment benefits.

House Bill 347 was proposed because Georgia needs to repay more than $700 million it borrowed from the federal government to pay unemployment benefits during the Great Recession. Supporters of the bill say they are trying to do that without putting too much pressure on businesses still trying to recover.

HB 347, as a compromise, would not delay distributing the first unemployment check by a week as was originally proposed. However, unemployment payments would drop from 26 weeks to a sliding scale of 14 to 20 weeks. It also would increase the amount taxed for unemployment insurance.

Georgia’s unemployment rate stands at about 9.1 percent, above the 8.3 percent U.S. jobless rate.

The good news is that they decided not to cut people off who are already in the system. It’s just for the new lucky duckies. At 9.1 unemployment that adds up to quite a few people.

.

Choices

by David Atkins

It’s amazing the choices people make. Michele Bachmann agrees:

BACHMANN: One argument that the government was trying to make is that somehow health care is uniquely different. That government can regulate it because everyone participates. Health insurance is not uniquely different. It’s still an opportunity that some people choose to engage in, but 40 million people do not. And the premise was made that people don’t buy insurance because they can’t afford it. That’s not true. There are people who just decide they want to roll the dice and take their chances that they won’t need insurance.

You know, that’s totally true. I know a few people who can afford a Bentley but don’t drive one. They choose to go without a Bentley. Which also means that the other 300 million Americans who don’t own a Bentley simply choose not to drive one. Money’s no object: they just roll the dice on a less prestigious car. Their loss.

Choices, choices, choices…

.

“The character assassination of a dead 17 year old boy”

by digby

Chris Hayes on the backlash:

It was inevitable, I’m sorry to say.

I don’t know how many of these awful people are out there, but they’re out there. All you have to do is read the comment sections of any major news site and right wing blog to see them.

Those right wingers who are smearing the victim and tendentiously lecturing everyone about the presumption of innocence for George Zimmerman are the same ones, by the way, who say that anyone the government designates a terrorist is automatically guilty and has no rights. They always seem to rediscover due process when it suits them.

*For the record, I don’t know if George Zimmerman is a racist or if he really believes he acted in self-defense. But there is no doubt that he shot and killed an unarmed 17 year old boy and that fact alone should require that he be subjected to more than a perfunctory police interview and set free.

.

Indisputable proof

by digby

I love this:

Jose Hernandez (D), who is looking to unseat Rep. Jeff Denham (R-CA), has released a video defending his claim that he is in fact an astronaut. A Sacramento law firm asked a judge to block describing himself as such because he left NASA.

Needless to say, the judge declined the sleazy despicable Republican law firms’ request.

.

When everything is possible

by digby

This piece in today’s NY Times about fathers, sons and baseball is just wonderful.It’s written by Irish immigrant Colum McCann draws a beautiful picture of childhood, family and memory.

As the years went on, baseball surrounded me more and more. My son began listening to the radio late at night, under the covers. There was something gloriously tribal about the Yankees for him. He learned to imitate John Sterling, the radio announcer. It is high, it is far, it is gone. An A-bomb from A-Rod. He began playing the game too, and so I would walk to Central Park with him. How far was my own father on the street behind me, juggling a soccer ball at his feet? How far was my dead grandfather?

We become the children of our children, the sons of our sons. We watch our kids as if watching ourselves. We take on the burden of their victories and defeats. It is our privilege, our curse too. We get older and younger at the same time.

I never meant to fall in love with baseball, but I did. I learned to realize that it does what all good sports should do: it creates the possibility of joy.

As a child my husband did the same thing with his dad, a Brooklyn Dodgers fan and jazz musician who had followed the team out to Los Angeles and then settled in Las Vegas where he could escape the stultifying conformity of the his small town, east coast upbringing. (In those days, the Dodger games were broadcast all over the Southwest.) And even today, much older than his father was then, I can see a vestige of that little kid every spring when the first exhibition games are played and the whole world seems for a minute as if it has another chance. He even listens on a solar transistor radio rather than the sleek smartphone App. I guess it’s something about the sound of Vin Scully’s voice coming through the tinny speakers that makes it right.

Anyway, it’s a beautiful piece that’s worth reading on a Sunday spring morning even if you aren’t a baseball fan.

.

Questioning the generals

by digby

I wondered how long it would take before he backtracked on this:

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan said Sunday he misspoke earlier in the week when he accused military officials of not being honest about the Pentagon budget.

“I really misspoke,” Ryan said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “I didn’t mean to make that kind of an impression. So, I was clumsy in how I was describing the point I was trying to make.”

On Thursday, the Wisconsin congressman said senior military leaders had been misleading when they defended a decrease in Pentagon spending proposals. He argued that the generals were not “giving us their true advice” and accused them of toeing an administration line.
[…]
On Sunday, Ryan told CNN Chief Political Correspondent Candy Crowley that he called [General]Dempsey to apologize and clarify his comments.

“What I was attempting to say is, President Obama put out his budget number for the Pentagon first, $500 billion cut, and then they began the strategy review to conform the budget to meet that number,” Ryan said. “We think it should have been the other way around.”

On the same program Sunday morning, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell also commented on the stir surrounding Ryan’s remarks.

“I think we have to take the generals’ word as they give it to us,” he said. “We’re going to move in the direction of making sure that America still is No. 1 in the world in defense, and the defense sequester, which I suspect Congressman Ryan was referring to, is something that many of us are looking at as something that could put us in a position to no longer be No. 1.”

Calling Generals liars is treasonous in the Republican Party. I was fairly shocked that he went there and that he took this long to walk it back.

This is also why if anyone believes that today’s conservatives will ever stop agitating for wars and start voting for defense cuts they are cracked. Yes, they will say certain things along those lines if it suits them in the moment to trip up the other side. They are even known to do it just to create dissonance among their political opponents. But when push comes to shove they will always be on the side of authoritarian force and that means support for cops, military and wars. It’s definitional.

Ryan won’t make that mistake again.

.

More Job-Killing Regulation. Oh, wait…

by David Atkins

Remember how the EPA refused to regulate the neonicotinoid pesticides that killing all the bees?

Well, now it’s the FDA’s turn. From the OnEarth blog:

BPA is here to stay. This afternoon, federal regulators rejected a request to remove the hormone-disrupting chemical bisphenol-A from all food and drink packaging, including can linings and plastic bottles.

Officials say there’s not enough scientific evidence to justify taking action, despite the widespread health concerns of doctors and public health advocates who supported a ban. (“Ludicrous,” “bogus,” “illogical,” were some of the responses from scientists and health authorities to the decision.)

“While evidence from some studies have raised questions as to whether BPA may be associated with a variety of health effects, there remain serious questions about these studies, particularly as they relate to humans,” the Food and Drug Administration said in its response to a petition

Play it again: Casablanca and I, Claudius reissued
By Dennis Hartley
















The Germans wore gray; you wore Blu

What is the best criterion for determining a “great” film? One is likely to elicit as many differing opinions as the number of folks one might ask; if we’re talking movies, subjectivity is the name of the game, and “all the world’s a critic”. However, in the last 120 years or so that the medium has existed, a handful of films have emerged that professional critics (you know, people who actually get paid to express their opinions) and movie audiences have reached a mutual consensus on proclaiming among the greatest of all time (at least since Eadweard Muybridge set his Horse in Motion in 1878). One of them is Michael Curtiz’s 1942 treatise on love, war and character, Casablanca, which is available in Warner’s new Blu-ray 70th Anniversary Limited Collector’s Edition.
It certainly could be argued that Casablanca did not necessarily achieve its exalted status by design, but rather via a series of happy accidents. Warner Brothers bought the rights to a (then) unproduced play called Everybody Comes to Rick’s (written by Murray Burnett and Joan Alison) for $20,000, which at the time was considered an exorbitant investment for such an untested commodity. The script went through a disparate team of writers. Brothers Julius and Philip Epstein initially dropped out to work on another project, eventually returning to resume primary authorship (after much of replacement Howard Koch’s work was excised) and then they were joined by (non-credited) Casey Robinson for daily rewrites. Even producer Hal Wallis put his two cents worth in with last-minute lines (most notably, “Louis, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship.”). Despite too many cooks, a now iconic (and infinitely quotable) script somehow emerged.
And would it have been the same film without the palpable onscreen chemistry generated by Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman as the star-crossed lovers at the heart of the story? Bogart, while certainly a rising star at the time, had not been previously considered as a romantic lead in Hollywood; the studio had some initial trepidation about his casting. Also, Curtiz was in actuality the ‘second choice’ director. Wallis had originally wanted (the unavailable) William Wyler. And perhaps most significantly, the film did not exactly set the world on fire upon its initial release; certainly no one was touting it as a “classic”.
And yet, for whatever the reason(s) may be, it is now considered as such; although it’s possible that it is in reality more “beloved” than “admired” (and there is a considerable difference between those two designations). For me, it’s a true “movie movie”…the cinematic equivalent of comfort food. In other words, it doesn’t have to “make sense” on every level, in order to make sense as a perfect entertainment. Whether it is 100% believable as a World War II adventure, or whether the characters are ultimately cardboard archetypes, or whether it looks like it was all filmed on a soundstage, or whether certain elements are un-PC (nee “dated”) really become moot issues in a “movie movie”. What matters to me is the romance, exotic intrigue, Bogie, Ingrid Bergman, evil Nazis, selfless acts of quiet heroism, Paul Henreid, Peter Lorre, Sidney Greenstreet, Rick’s Café, Claude Rains rounding up the usual suspects, Dooley singing “As Time Goes By”, the beginning of a beautiful friendship, the most rousing rendition of “La Marseille” you’ve ever heard, that goodbye scene at the airfield, and a timeless message (if you love someone, set them free). What’s not to love about this movie-lover’s movie?
As for this latest home video incarnation (preceded by several SD DVD editions/upgrades and one previous Blu-ray version) it is hands-down the cleanest and most gorgeous print of the film I have ever seen, with deep, rich blacks, crisp contrast with no visible artifacts or DNR. The transfer is 4K, which is a noticeable upgrade in quality from the previous Blu-ray (if you want to geek out). The mono audio is crystal clear and well-equalized; nicely highlighting Max Steiner’s rousing score. The hours of extras (which I haven’t had the time to completely plough through yet) are boggling. All of the features from the previous “ultimate” edition (yeah, I know-pure marketing) are carried over, plus two brand new entries. You will need to clear a little space; the fully loaded edition is in a bit of an oversized box for my liking (and I’m not sure I really needed the set of 4, erm, coasters they threw in there), but the hardback 62-page art production book is a nice bonus, as well as a full-size replica of the original movie poster. If you truly love the film, it’s worth the investment. Otherwise…we’ll always have Paris.












She prays like a Roman with her eyes on fire

“Political questions, if you go back thousands of years, are ephemeral, not important. History is the same thing over and over again.”
-Woody Allen
Thirty-five years ago (best to my hazy recollection), I was living in a house in Fairbanks, Alaska with 4 or 5 (or was it 6 or 7?) of my friends. Being twenty something males, ragingly hormonal and easily sidetracked by shiny objects, it was a rare occasion when all the housemates would actually be congregated in one room for any extended period of time. But there was one thing that consistently brought us together. For about a three month period in the fall of 1977, every Sunday at 9pm, we would abruptly drop whatever we were doing (sfx: guitars, bongs, Frisbees, empty Heineken bottles and dog-eared Hunter Thompson paperbacks hitting the floor) and gather in a semi-circle around a 13-inch color TV (with rabbit ears) to rapturously watch I, Claudius on Masterpiece Theatre.
While an opening line of “I, Tiberius Claudius Drusus Nero Germanicus…” could portend more of a snooze-inducing history lecture, rather than 11 hours of must-see-TV, the 1976 BBC series, adapted from Robert Graves’ 1934 historical novel about ancient Rome’s Julio-Claudian dynasty, was indeed the latter, holding U.S. viewers in thrall for its 12-week run. While it is quite possible that at the time, my friends and I were slightly more in thrall with the occasional teasing glimpses of semi-nudity than we were with, say, the beauty of the writing, the wonder of the performances and historical complexity of the narrative, over the years I have come to the realization that I think I learned everything I needed to know about politics from watching (and re-watching) I, Claudius.
It’s all there…the systemic greed and corruption of the ruling plutocracy, the raging hypocrisy, the grandstanding, glad-handing and the back-stabbing (in this case, both figurative and literal). Seriously, over the last 2000 years, not much has changed in the political arena (this election year in particular finds us tunic-deep in bread and circuses; by Jove, what a clown show). Although it’s merely a happy coincidence that a newly minted 35th Anniversary Edition of the series was released on DVD this week by Acorn Media, the timing couldn’t be more apt. I’ve been finding it particularly amusing the past few days to zip through the nightly network newscasts on the DVR, then immediately follow it up with an episode of I, Claudius so I can chuckle (or…weep) over the parallels.
Kawkinkydinks with the ongoing decline of the American empire notwithstanding, the series holds up remarkably well. In fact, it still kicks major gluteus maximus on most contemporary TV fare (including HBO and Showtime). What’s most impressive is what they were able to achieve with such austere production values; the writing and the acting is so strong that you barely notice that there are only several simple sets used throughout (compare with Starz’s visually striking but otherwise distressingly chuckle-headed Spartacus series). It’s hard to believe that Derek Jacobi was in his mid-30s when he took on the lead role; not only does he convincingly “age” from 20s to 60s, but subtly unveils the grace and intelligence that lies behind Claudius’s outwardly afflicted speech and physicality. Another standout in this marvelous cast is Sian Phillips, with her deliciously wicked performance as Livia (wife of Augustus) who will stoop to anything in order to achieve her political goals (Machiavelli’s subsequent work was doo-doo, by comparison). George Baker excels as her long-suffering son, Tiberius, as does Brian Blessed, playing Augustus. And John Hurt’s take on the mad Caligula is definitive, in my book. The new transfer on the Acorn release is excellent, making this DVD set well worth your denarius.
.