Month: July 2013

I know it’s hard to accept, but they really believe this stuff


by digby

Ed Kilgore hits the nail on the head again. Conservatives aren’t just power mad for the sake of holding power:

[W]here I part company with Cassidy and a lot of other progressive and/or neutral observers who wonder, as Barack Obama put it, when “the fever” might break, is that I don’t think this is just about conservative inability to think straight about how to win elections. History is littered with “lost” political causes that inspire intense loyalty and far outlive their practical usefulness. For one thing, while you might think of politics as a matter of winning the next election so your “team” can implement its immediate agenda, intensely ideological people tend to think of politics as a matter of winning wars rather than battles, and focus on winning elections that put them into the position to radically change history. And for another, some people express themselves politically in order to vindicate minority points of view—e.g., that the United States is in the midst of a “Holocaust” against unborn babies that’s not fundamentally different from what the Nazis did—whether or not they ever prevail.

So the best way to understand the contemporary conservative movement is as a coalition with an unusually large number of people who either don’t agree with the CV on how to win elections, don’t care about short-term political implications, or don’t care about anything other than expressing their opinion about the hellwards direction of the Republic and perhaps of the human race. Mix in another significant number of people with a large pecuniary interest in reactionary politics, and you have a movement that’s not going to turn from its current trajectory with any great speed. You can stamp your feet or call them crazy people or deplore their impact on the level of discourse all you want, but they just aren’t going away, and we might as well get used to it instead of marveling about it as though it came out of nowhere and will soon disappear.

I know this makes liberals unhappy. It makes me unhappy. These folks are not just going to wake up one morning and realize they need to “moderate” because they are losing political clout. Anyone who thinks that completely misunderstands these people and their movement.

.

Common sense and common law

by digby

Eric Holder is right:

“It’s time to question laws that senselessly expand the concept of self-defense and sow dangerous conflict in our neighborhoods,” Holder said in a speech to the NAACP in which he again called the death of Trayvon Martin “unnecessary.”

“These laws try to fix something that was never broken,” he said.

On Tuesday Attorney General Eric Holder took issue with the so-called ‘Stand Your Ground’-type of laws during a speech at the NAACP Annual Convention in Orlando. Meanwhile, demonstrations over the verdict in the George Zimmerman trial continued, with one protest in Los Angeles turning violent on Monday night. NBC’s Ron Mott reports.
“There has always been a legal defense for using deadly force if — and the ‘if’ is important — if no safe retreat is available. But we must examine laws that take this further by eliminating the common sense and age-old requirement that people who feel threatened have a duty to retreat, outside their home, if they can do so safely.

“By allowing — and perhaps encouraging — violent situations to escalate in public — such laws undermine public safety. The list of resulting tragedies is long and, unfortunately, has victimized too many who are innocent.
“It is our collective obligation. We must ‘stand our ground’ to ensure that our laws reduce violence and take a hard look at laws that contribute to more violence than they prevent.”

This stand your ground BS is the fever dream of macho man wannabes like George Zimmerman and other delusional NRA cowboys. There is a reason that common law developed over centuries that said a person should retreat if it was safe to do so. It saved lives. There was a time when people understood that mattered more than swaggering around like a comic book hero saying “come to papa.”

Good for Holder. I’m sure those comments caused the wingnuts to blow their tops, but so what? That’s a daily occurrence with them anyway.

.

Gay marriage approved in England and Wales. All of it.

by digby

So this happened today. In a whole country. On a bipartisan basis no less:

Same-sex couples will be able to get married in England and Wales after new measures became law.

The government’s controversial legislation on the issue received Royal Assent on Wednesday.

The Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat leaderships all backed the proposals, which were finally approved by MPs and peers earlier this week.

It is expected that the first gay and lesbian wedding ceremonies will take place by summer next year.

Under the terms of the the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill, religious organisations will have to “opt in” to offering weddings, with the Church of England and Church in Wales being banned in law from doing so.

Commons Speaker John Bercow announced the bill had received Royal Assent – the formal approval of the sovereign required for all legislation. The news was greeted with cheers in the Commons chamber.

They make it look easy.

Of course out country’s system was constructed to make the rights we all cherish often difficult to access on a national basis. Often it’s taken violence before we are able to get all the states to agree to do it. Maybe they figured we’d appreciate them more?

Anyway, congrats to our gay British cousins. I’m sure the devout will still fight the battle to be allowed to marry in the church, but at least they’ll now have the right to all the legal protections that the state offers to married couples. That’s all I would have ever cared about in the first place.

.

Be sure to buy the premium catfood. It’s healthier.

by digby

This piece by Michael Hiltzik at the LA Times made my stomach turn this morning. It’s a horrifying story of what happens if you are unlucky enough to live a full lifespan:

As if you haven’t been scared enough by the projections that most Americans haven’t saved enough to maintain their lifestyles as they enter retirement, here’s something even more terrifying:

Nearly half of all Americans will outlive their assets, dying with practically no money at all.

Even more worrisome, that’s true even among households that met the traditional standards for secure retirement income. Economic factors and changes in employer pensions and in economic reality have made it much harder to stretch income and assets so they last, especially as people live longer.

“The oldest old are suffering a great deal now,” says Debra Whitman, an AARP expert on the financial issues facing retirees.

The real bad news is that nearly the entire political establishment wants to cut their meager incomes even more:

For the most part, the consequences of these economic trends have been overlooked in the debate over the future of Social Security.

For example, the most commonly proposed “fix” for the program, embraced by President Obama and conservative Republicans alike, is to change its inflation index to one that produces lower cost of living increases. Because the difference resulting from the “chained consumer price index” builds over time, the effect of the change would be greatest on the oldest retirees.

Those retirees are already heavily dependent on the program: AARP’s analysis of census data shows that about one-third of retirees ages 65 to 69 rely on Social Security for more than half their annual income, but the figure rises to more than 60% of those ages 80 and older.

By all means let’s cut their incomes even more. Because they obviously aren’t being “smart consumers” and substituting cat food for tuna — the logic behind the Chained-CPI.

It’s still out there folks. And like the Village zombie it is, it will not die easily. You can help with that:

		Digby, The Chained CPI—the Social Security benefit cut proposal that would mean thousands of dollars less for everyone—is still alive in the House. This week, House Republicans announced that they were including it in their “menu” of demands in exchange for raising the debt ceiling. But Representatives Alan Grayson (D, FL-9) and Mark Takano (D, CA-41) are recruiting members of Congress to a letter stating: “We will vote against any and every cut to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security benefits — including raising the retirement age or cutting the cost of living adjustments that our constituents earned and need.” Already, 44 members of Congress have signed the Grayson-Takano letter and 6 more have released public statements. Click here to see if your representative has pledged no cuts! House Republican demands to tie Social Security cost of living increases to the debt ceiling are outrageous. Since Social Security is paid for by the payroll tax, it has NEVER contributed a penny to our nation’s debt. Click here to ask your Representative in Congress to make the strongest possible statement against Social Security cuts by signing the Grayson-Takano Letter today. We’re working with the Other 98% to track members who have already signed the letter, and have noted whether or not they’ve supported earlier measures along similar lines. The members need to hear from their constituents: We will not stand for any cuts to Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid, and we will not stand with any member of Congress who votes for them. Here are some important tips to keep in mind when calling your representative about the Grayson-Takano Letter: Determine if your member of Congress has signed a previous letter opposing cuts, such as the 2013 Schakowsky-Ellison letter to keep Social Security out of budget talks, or has progressive credentials like membership in the Congressional Progressive Caucus. You should bring that up when you ask them to sign the Grayson-Takano Letter. Ask them to stand up for Social Security now as they have in the past, and challenge them if they claim to have changed their views. Be polite but firm; feel free to follow our script below If a member of Congress has signed—or agrees to sign—the Grayson-Takano letter, but is not yet on the Cicilline Resolution, please ask them to sign it as well. The Cicilline Resolution opposes the use of Chained CPI, and we would like to build up the number of members on both. If you don’t get a chance to speak to a person on the phone, please leave a detailed message or follow up by e-mail. They will be tracking all messages from their constituents. Here is a sample call script: Hi, my name is [NAME] and I’m calling from [TOWN, STATE]. As a constituent, I want [MEMBER NAME] to publicly oppose any deficit reduction or debt ceiling deal that cuts Social Security benefits. That is why I am asking [MEMBER NAME] to sign onto the Grayson-Takano letter to vote against any deal that cuts benefits. Can you please tell Rep. [MEMBER NAME] that I want [HIM/HER] to publicly stand against any cuts to Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid benefits? [Answer] Thank you. And can you please tell your press secretary that I called and asked Rep. [MEMBER NAME] to make a public statement against cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security benefits? [Answer] Close the call: Thank you for your time! Please, find your member in our table, and call them today. The Grayson-Takano letter is one of the strongest statements against cuts to SocialSecurity. Thanks for all you do, Michael Phelan Social Security Works .

QOTD: “you were fighting a never-ending war that gave you a never ending excuse for looking into people’s lives”

by digby

And yet, perhaps individuals can be empowered by the same technology that subjugates us in the hands of the government?

Michael Shelden, author of “Orwell: The Authorized Biography,” told NPR earlier this month that today’s surveillance society is just like the book.

Orwell, Mr. Shelden said, “could see that war and defeating an enemy could be used as a reason for increasing political surveillance.” He added, “You were fighting a never-ending war that gave you a never-ending excuse for looking into people’s lives.”

Data collection and video surveillance are only going to continue to grow as technology seeps into more areas of our culture, either strapped to our bodies as wearable computers or hovering over cities as inexpensive drones that monitor people from the sky.

So what can people do? Those who want to protect people’s civil liberties say more cameras is the only real check and balance left.

“In the hands of an individual, the video camera can be a very empowering thing,” Mr. Stanley said. “When it’s employed by the government to watch over the citizens, it has the opposite effect.”

I’m not sure what I think about that. But it’s an interesting thought.

Meanwhile some governments are doing all it can to stop individuals from documenting its activities. But you do still have rights.

.

Headline ‘o the Day

by digby

Military seeks stay of Guantanamo groin search ban

Yes, they’re apparently afraid that prisoners are smuggling weapons and hoarding medication in their groins areas so they’ve instituted searches to and from meetings with their lawyers.

Acting on a series of complaints filed by detainees at the prison for terror suspects, U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth found that the new search procedures—formally imposed in May—unduly interfere with detainees’ ability to pursue court cases challenging their detention.

“The Court finds that the new search procedures lack a ‘valid, rational connection’ to the legitimate government interest—security—put forward to justify them,” Lamberth wrote in a 35-page decision (posted here). “The motivation for the searches is not to enhance security but to deter counsel access.”

The judge rejected claims by Guantanamo’s latest commander, Army Col. John Bogdan, that the new procedure was necessary because the previous one had been applied inconsistently, because of the suicide of an inmate who may have hidden hoarded medication in his groin area, and because a recent search of the detention facility turned up a variety of contraband items including improvised weapons.

And for the second time in a week, a federal court judge cited President Barack Obama’s words as part of a critique of practices at Guantanamo. Lamberth noted that in a May speech, Obama declared: “We will insist that judicial review be available for every detainee.”

“This matter concerns whether the President’s insistence on judicial review may be squared with the actions of his commanders in charge of the military persion at Guantanamo Bay. Currently, it cannot,” Lamberth wrote.

What else is new?

The military denies that it’s just doing this to inhibit prisoners from meting with their lawyers. Why would anyone ever think otherwise?

.

Meet the future of the Progressive Movement: Heather Mizeur

by digby

One of my oldest friends lives in Maryland, way out in the country. She’s a hard working single mother, trying to get by in this bad economy. It isn’t easy. I visited her this summer and we talked about the pressures that are upon her and she told me that for all of her struggles to keep up, she was immensely grateful that she lived in a state that provides her daughter with health care. Maryland is the only state in the union that offers universal coverage for all kids, no matter what.

I didn’t know at the time that my friend could thank one particular Maryland Assembly delegate for that little bit of peace of mind in her tumultuous life, a woman by the name of Heather Mizeur. And when I told my friend about her and how she sheparded that bill through the Assembly, she was devastated that she didn’t live in her district so that she could vote for her.

Well, now she can. Today, Heather Mizeur is announcing her candidacy for Governor of Maryland and Blue America is honored to endorse her. She is the perfect embodiment of the progressive leaders we believe will lead the Democratic Party in the direction we must go if we are to change this country.

The daughter of a UAW member from Illinois, she aspired to public service from the time she was a little kid. “The experience of walking picket lines taught me the value of sacrifice and hard work and standing up for the courage of your convictions,” she said. “Catholic teachings on social justice also inspired me.”

And for someone who’s only 40, she has amassed an impressive amount of experience in management and governance, with a decade of senior staff experience on Capitol Hill before her tenure in the General Assembly. A policy wonk who likes to delve into the details, (she wrote John Kerry’s 2004 health care plan) she is also called the “Transparency Queen” by the Baltimore Sun, for sponsoring and winning passage of the Maryland Open Government Act. She is a leading anti-fracking activist and was one of 10 featured speakers at the huge Keystone Pipeline rally in front of the White House along with Bill McKibbon and leading climatologists. And last but not least, she was a leading strategist in the fight for marriage equality in Maryland and now lives in a state that fully recognizes her marriage to her wife of 8 years, Deborah. Yes, a Governor Mizeur will be breaking several glass ceilings as the first woman and first openly gay person to win the office.

I had the privilege of sitting down with Heather at Netroots Nation this year and came away from the conversation believing that I had just met the future of the progressive movement. This is a person who can not only lead on policy (she’s scary smart) but she can lead on strategy as well: as you can see, she gets things done. And more than anything she leads with her heart, up front and without apology, a true blue progressive in every way.

We don’t often endorse in Governor’s races, but this one is a no-brainer for us. We simply couldn’t not support Heather Mizeur. We know she will be a great Governor of Maryland and we’d be grateful if you could help us get her there by donating to her campaign.

The video at the top, in which Heather told the members of the Maryland Assembly, “you can’t stop us!” says it all. Below is the full speech which the Baltimore Sun reported: “One of he most memorable speeches came from Mizeur whose emotional plea that her colleagues vote for love left the chamber in silence.

Mizeur is  a smart, strategic politician and sees a path to victory. But she’ll needs the help of the grassroots and the netroots to do it.  Please donate to her campaign if you can.

.

Climate change won’t just affect humans

by David Atkins

One of the popular misconceptions about climate change is that it will mostly affect human beings, primarily those in dry areas and on the coasts. There is a small school of thought that a reduction in the human biosphere might be acceptable, and that other fauna and flora will adapt. That’s a morally outrageous view, of course, but it’s also wrong:

Nature doesn’t like to be rushed. But to keep up with climate change, many animals will need to evolve 10,000 times faster than they have in the past, a new study suggests.

Manmade climate change — fueled by excess greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, namely carbon dioxide — is expected to raise global temperatures by up to 10.8 degrees Fahrenheit (6 Celsius) within the next 100 years. That will transform many ecosystems in just a few generations, forcing wildlife to either evolve quickly or risk extinction.

Published online in the journal Ecology Letters, the study concludes that most land-based vertebrate species evolve too slowly to adjust to the dramatically warmer climate expected by 2100. If they can’t make high-speed adaptations or move to a new ecosystem, many terrestrial animal species will cease to exist, the researchers report.

“Every species has a climatic niche which is the set of temperature and precipitation conditions in the area where it lives and where it can survive,” co-author and University of Arizona ecologist John Wiens says in a press release. “We found that on average, species usually adapt to different climatic conditions at a rate of only about 1 degree Celsius per million years. But if global temperatures are going to rise by about 4 degrees over the next hundred years, as predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change, that is where you get a huge difference in rates. What that suggests overall is that simply evolving to match these conditions may not be an option for many species.”

Climate change doesn’t just mean severe impacts for humans. It also means mass extinctions.

I realize that the percentage of Americans that cares whether entire species of plants or animals live or die largely intersects with that empathetic portion of the public that also cares about climate change and most other liberal causes. But for those on the extremes of both conservative and liberal politics who think that doing away with the human riffraff is fine and dandy, they might want to think twice if they care at all about the other species we live with.

.

She’s doing it

by digby

She doesn’t mention that she’s seeking to unseat a sitting GOP Senator, Mike Enzi. But who cares, right? She’s Liz Cheney!

Don’t be surprised if she turns right around and runs against Clinton in 2016. In fact, I think that’s probably the plan. (The Republicans are already teeing up their campaign against Hillary the old bag — they could very easily think Liz would neutralize the sexism charge.)

Oh, and by the way, she makes her daddy look like a hippie by comparison.

.

Da Bears!

by digby

…are back.

Go see them sit there and wait for salmon to leap into their mouths:

.