Month: September 2013

Feeling safe

by David Atkins

People need to start asking some serious questions here:

The shooting Monday at Washington’s Navy Yard that killed at least a dozen people occurred not only at a secure military installation but in a very secure building.

Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy Lanier said the shooting took place in Building 197, the headquarters of the Naval Sea Systems Command, a workplace for about 3,000 people, both military and civilian.

NAVSEA, as it’s called in the military, is the largest of the Navy’s five system commands, with an annual budget of nearly $30 billion. It’s responsible for designing, building, buying and maintaining the Navy’s ships, submarines and combat systems.

And it’s home to lots of classified information and shrouded in tight security. To access the building, employees must pass through multiple checkpoints.

Sam LaGrone, news editor at the U.S. Naval Institute and a frequent visitor to the Navy Yard, described the building as a “rabbit warren.”

Most people who work for NAVSEA, he said, enter the Navy Yard through the Isaac Hull Gate off of M Street in Southeast Washington, not far from Nationals Park.

Civilian and armed Navy police guard the entrance and do a 100 percent ID check, LaGrone said. Visitors without military credentials require a sponsor to escort you onto base.

Getting on the base, though, does not mean you can get into Building 197, said Chris Cavas, a reporter with Defense News who makes frequent trips to the Navy Yard.

“A shooting on the base would be one thing, but the idea that this would be inside NAVSEA is kind of amazing because it’s not an easy building to access,” he said.

Since much of the work there is classified, people who work in the building would notice a stranger wandering around unescorted, Cavas said. “You’re either known or you’re watched,” he explained.

What’s worse? That in spite of the hundreds of billions thrown at national security infrastructure, that some random person can kill a dozen people in one of the supposedly most secure military installations in the country?

Or that assault rifles are such dangerous weapons that a killer carrying them can slip in to commit atrocities almost anywhere?

Either way, wouldn’t the logical choice be to spend fewer billions on what is obviously security theater, and a lot more simple time and energy on commonsense gun control to make it much harder to acquire assault weapons?

.

Welfare Reform 2.0: alleviating hunger is a moral hazard

by digby

You’ve got to hand it to these misanthropic wingnuts.  They don’t suffer from a surfeit of self-awareness, that’s for sure:

At a sugar lobby symposium at a Napa resort, of all places, Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) chose to champion the cuts last month, preaching of “certain moral hazards we’ve built into most social safety net programs” — like food stamps. This from a commodity chairman who had just voted to make the sugar program permanent law and begin a new 80 percent taxpayer-financed insurance premium subsidy for cotton. Who writes this stuff: Jonathan Swift?

The editorializing is from a Politico writer. Politico. That’s how outrageous these comments really are.

These Republicans are calling this “welfare reform 2.0”. Because when people become dependent on government assistance for food they lose the ability to work. Or something.

Meanwhile a new report on poverty in the US is expected tomorrow. Here’s what the watchers are anticipating:

We predict that it will tick down just a bit. Based on recent and forecast poverty rates and unemployment rates, our projections suggest an overall 2012 poverty rate of 14.8% and 21.4% for children, very similar to the 2011 rates of 15.0 and 21.9, respectively. This translates to roughly 46.5 million people in the US in poverty in 2012, of whom 16 million are children. For a single mother with two children, this means living with an annual cash income under $18,500.

By the way, those rich single mothers with children are among those lazy bums those Republicans believe have developed a culture of dependency on food and must be taught a lesson.

.

What good is all that Homeland Security money doing, again?

by David Atkins

How is this even possible?

WASHINGTON — The 34-year-old former Navy electrician’s mate identified as the gunman who killed 12 people at the Washington Navy Yard had been discharged from the service in 2011 after multiple disciplinary infractions, a Navy officer said Monday.

Aaron Alexis “had a pattern of misconduct,” the official said.

Law enforcement officials have identified Alexis as the shooter who conducted a two-hour rampage at the sprawling naval base in Washington, but have not yet said what they believe was his motive.

Alexis, a native of New York, who served in the Navy from 2007 to 2011 as an aviation electrician’s mate 3rd class, entered the base early Monday morning, authorities said, perhaps using another man’s identification card to pass through the gates.

Once inside, officials say, he headed for the massive building 197, the headquarters of the Navy Sea Systems Command. Armed with three weapons, including an AR-15 assault rifle, he went to the building’s fourth floor, according to officials. About 8:15 a.m., according to witness accounts and police dispatch recordings, the gunman began shooting down into a crowded atrium that houses an employee cafeteria.

It’s still not entirely clear from the story whether the shooter brought the guns into the building, or acquired them on site. Either one is a terrifying prospect.

Let’s be clear about something: the federal government is cutting basic social services while funding SWAT gear for local police departments and building up a massive surveillance state ostensibly in order to prevent random acts of terror.

But the secure arsenal of a major Navy base in the nation’s capital is so poorly guarded that someone without proper clearance can simply walk in with a bunch of high-powered guns, or pick them once he’s there? It’s not like this guy was a Hans Gruber level criminal mastermind.

Most terrorists aren’t very sophisticated. But what if, heaven forbid, there ever were a villain out there worthy of an action film or Robert Ludlum novel? You know, the sort of villain without whose existence it doesn’t make much sense to be spending untold billions on “Homeland Security?” The ease with which some random guy was able to accomplish this is disturbing.

What are paying for with all this security money?

.

Mandrake, have you ever seen a commie with a glass of water?

by digby

Michelle Obama is encouraging people to drink more water. And the right is having a full blown meltdown.  Here’s Roy Edroso with the evidence:

Wait for it…

Regardless of the wisdom of public-health campaigns launched by the first lady in general, this one is silly in its own right: There isn’t good scientific evidence that people should drink more water. The first lady’s claim that one more glass of water per day will “make a real difference” for “your energy” and “how you feel” is homeopathy, not public health. (Who’s the party of science, again?)

That’s Patrick Brennan, who apparently picked the short straw at National Review.
[…]
Several commenters suggest the First Lady start other common-sense drives, such as Don’t Stick a Fork in a Light Socket and Don’t Whack Yourself in the Crotch, so conservatives will stick forks in light sockets and whack themselves in the crotch. No, no, it would only end up hurting the little people — Brennan would write about it, but in the end it’d be those poor saps in the tricorner harts and knee breeches who’d be contusing and electrocuting themselves. I realize my lack of ruthlessness goes to the heart of the liberal dilemma.  

But then, this may be happening regardless: Commenter D Johnston tells me Brennan’s commenters are actually talking about how you can hurt yourself by drinking too much water — a ridiculously remote possibility that these doofuses now treat as a clear and present danger (“without clear guidelines this is actually a dangerous suggestion”) because Moochelle. I can imagine them fainting in the hot sun, their last coherent thought “can’t let the socialists overhydrate me,” a LIVE FREE AND DRY banner clutched in their blistered hands.

There’s actually nothing all that new about this. The right has hbeen suspicious about water for a very long time:

The financial crisis: it ain’t over til it’s over

by digby

Mike Konczal has written the best piece I’ve read about the anniversary of the financial crisis. He correctly points out that it was much more than the crash and the colapse of Lehman and AIG, although those were massive crises. He points out that nobody’s talking about the other two crises which are even more catastrophic for average people and are still unresolved: the housing crisis and the ongoing corruption in Wall Street culture.

Every day we read about new horror stories involving foreclosure fraud and error. And the only punishment that befell the malefactors of wealth who perpetrated the greatest crimes is that they are left with a lot of time on their hands to live in luxury and count their ill-gotten gains.

Konczal writes:

The “I’ll be gone, you’ll be gone” approach to what the financial industry was selling — where it would make enough money to disappear before the consequences happen — was rampant during the bubble. The toxic culture that has been exposed, and the subsequent crisis of legitimacy Wall Street faces, is a whole other crisis.

Concerns about the persistence of the “I’ll be gone” mentality is one reason why people wanted to see criminal convictions, rather than just a “perp walk” — something that could have forced real institutional change in addition to bringing justice. When we see HSBC pay a small fine for money laundering for drug cartels, or another settlement on foreclosure fraud that is quickly ignored by the big banks, we are still living through this crisis of legitimacy.

There’s a list circulating of more than 300 books (!) written on the financial crisis. One that I think stands out for its moving human quality didn’t make it. That book is “The Trouble is the Banks: Letters to Wall Street,” and it’s a project of Occupy the Boardroom and n+1. It consist of more than 150 pages of letters written to Wall Street executives from ordinary Americans on everything from the bailouts to foreclosures.

Though the letters are often angry, it’s remarkable how many of them are motivated by the basic notion of fairness. The sense of betrayal caused by Wall Street’s unwillingness to accept responsibility, much less shame, for its actions, as well as an urge to call out an institutional double standard tie together the wide range of different letter writers. They speak for most people I’ve talked to. Yet these kinds of things are notoriously difficult to change, and it remains open on whether or not that will happen.

It’s become commonplace for Wall Street executives to say that the chance of another crisis “is as close to zero” as it can be. And perhaps that is true, or will be if we tweak regulations a certain way. But remember: The crisis remains with us in every foreclosed neighborhood and ripped-off investor — and in the suspicion ordinary people have that the economy as a whole is rigged against them.

People in this country tend to believe in the concept of fairness and equality as a bedrock value (even if too many of them find far to many exception to the rule.) Those values are considered naive concepts among our elite and it’s a big part of the reason who so many of them are held in contempt by average Americans. It’s one thing to rig the game, it’s quite another to brag and laugh and then dare people to do anything about it.

.

QOTD: President Obama

by digby

“I will spend every moment of every day I have left fighting to restore security and opportunity” for the middle class.”

I assume that means he’s dropping his offer to the GOP to cut Social Security and other vital programs in exchange for some temporary chump change from the corporations even though he just reiterated it over the week-end. Because cutting those programs would do exactly the opposite of what he’s promising today. In fact, if what he wants is to restore security for the middle class he will propose raising the benefits instead.

.

Talk about missing the point

by digby

Earlier today, David Frum wrote a series of tweets explaining the rules that opponents of gun law reform attempt to impose on conversations about it:

Another mass casualty shooting, this time at Washington Navy Yard.

In wake of this most recent mass-casualty shooting, it is important that we all respect the feelings of America’s gun enthusiasts.

Observing a few simple rules of etiquette will help the post-shooting conversation to proceed in appropriate ways.

Rule 1: It is “ghoulish” to suggest in any way that the easy availability of guns might in any way enable gun slaughter.

Rule 2: Gun crime in the president’s hometown proves that guns anywhere else are no fit topic of conversation.

Rule 3: All gun owners are to be complimented as responsible and law-abiding until they personally have hurt themselves or somebody else

Rule 4: Any attempt to stop mass casualty shootings is “political.” Allowing them to continue is”non-political.”

Rule 5: Gun ownership is essential to freedom, as in Serbia & Guatemala. Gun restrictions lead to tyranny, as in Australia & Canada.

I think that’s right. And who else but Erick Erickson would rush to prove it:

As a shooter roamed the Navy Yard, a relatively secure facility, and as people who worked there were dead or dying or bleeding, David Frum became a twitter stream about gun control — comparing America to third world countries.

At the time, we did not know if it was terrorism. We did not know if there were multiple shooters. We did not know how many were wounded. We did not know how many were dead.

Yet some decided it was, in the heat of the moment, already time to drag race, politics, and policy arguments into the fray.

I’ve been there. I’ve done that. Even I’ve learned how inappropriate it is.

There are people calling frantically, I’m sure, right now wanting to know if their husband, brother, wife, sister, mom, or dad is alive or dead. There are others being told about their dead or dying or wounded or safe loved ones.

I would not dare step in the way of America’s national past time of bitching about the politics of everything on twitter, but there has to be a better time for it than as the temperature of bodies on the ground in the Navy Yard are not even yet cold.

Life is more than politics. And if you don’t understand that, you are one seriously maladjusted person.

Grow the hell up, people. You too David Frum.

* He also took some conservatives to task for tweeting that the shooter was a black man, which was apparently some sort of comment on Trayvon Martin and black people shooting other black people. Huh??

A PSA for days like today

by digby

Americans have apparently decided that events like those happening today in DC are acts of God like the Colorado floods or hurricanes in the Atlantic. There’s nothing we can do to prevent it. Mass shootings are the American Way.

So, governments are now producing instructions on what to do when it happens to you:

Emergency responders pose this scenario: you’re deep in work at your desk, when suddenly the sound of gunfire and screaming wash over you. Somebody is repeatedly firing a gun in your office and your co-workers are hurt or, perhaps, dead.

What do you do?

This situation won’t happen to most people. But in case it does, the city of Houston prepared a very realistic six minute video instructing people what to do should a gunman open fire in a public place. There are three basic responses: run, hide and fight.

Running is the best choice – get out of the building or area quickly and don’t let anybody slow you down. When you’re safe, call 9-1-1. If you can’t get out, hide. Turn off room lights and silence your cell phone to evade the shooter’s attention. If you must face the shooter, do it decisively. Use improvised weapons (like a chair or a fire extinguisher) and fight aggressively.

Remember, when the first police officers arrive, they’re likely coming in heavily armed and with a purpose: they’re there to stop the shooter, not to treat the wounded. Emergency medical teams will follow.

The video was produced with money from the Department of Homeland Security, notes the Houston Chronicle. Dennis Storemski, who heads the Houston mayor’s Homeland Security office told the paper the short film was finished two weeks before the Aurora, Colo. movie theater shooting. “We didn’t release it at the time because we didn’t know it was relevant. Now it is.”

When I was a kid, we used to have drills to practice our response in case of nuclear war. Now they do drills in schools in case a shooter decides to fight the tyranny of Big Government (or whatever other insane motivation) by killing little kids.

This is America today.  We produce videos to instruct people how to evacuate a building in case of fire and how to respond to mass shootings.

.

House conservatives should choose: is Obama a weakling or a dictator?

by David Atkins

After years of being told that by House Republicans that President Obama is an implacable fascist dictator attempting to destroy the country through socialized medicine, Americans should a little shocked by this:

A weakened President Obama will back down if there is a standoff over funding ObamaCare and preventing a government shutdown, House conservatives say.

They are urging Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) to gamble that Obama and Senate Democrats will take the blame if they reject legislation that keeps the government running but stops ObamaCare.

At least 43 conservatives want the GOP leadership to go for broke, asserting that Obama has been damaged by stumbles over Syria and by several delays in implementing the Affordable Care Act.

The GOP’s internal battle pits lawmakers who want the party to take a calculated risk against leaders who fear it would be a big losing bet.

Democrats say there is no chance that they or the president will agree to hollow-out their signature domestic achievement.

The White House did not comment for this story, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) last week said the Senate would reject any attempt to defund the law.

Still, the GOP’s roll-the-dice faction is undaunted.

“I think the president’s too weak to shut the government down … I think we will win,” Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.) said.

“Syria has hurt him significantly … it is a factor in the CR going forward, it is a factor in the debt ceiling,” Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said.

House Republicans have stymied chances of President Obama enacting any aspects of a second term agenda. I supposed they can be congratulated for that, insofar as it goes. But to think that the President will be cowed into abandoning by far the most consequential legislative action of his presidency in order to avoid a conflict that hurt Republicans when they tried it against Bill Clinton and will almost certainly harm them again is insanity.

The President may well over other pieces of the safety net in exchange for a continuation–in which case those concessions should be fought tooth and nail. But defunding Obamacare? It will never happen.

Most of all, it’s hard not to laugh at people who believe a fascist crypto-Muslim anti-American dictator will back down in the face of Peter King on his signature initiative. These are not serious or smart people. Still, they do in theory have the power to kneecap the American economy if House Republican Leadership doesn’t abandon the Hastert rule and bring a continuance to the floor to pass with Democratic votes.

.

The Accountants, Tax Lawyers and Lobbyist Full Employment Act

by digby

And you wonder why I’m cynical about trading away cuts in Social Security in exchange for “corporate tax reform”?

Full story at the link.

.