Month: March 2014

So, fraudulent voters are busy during the week?

by digby

Can someone explain to me what this has to do with “voter fraud”?

Pivotal swing states under Republican control are embracing significant new electoral restrictions on registering and voting that go beyond the voter identification requirements that have caused fierce partisan brawls.

The bills, laws and administrative rules — some of them tried before — shake up fundamental components of state election systems, including the days and times polls are open and the locations where people vote.

Republicans in Ohio and Wisconsin this winter pushed through measures limiting the time polls are open, in particular cutting into weekend voting favored by low-income voters and blacks, who sometimes caravan from churches to polls on the Sunday before election.

Are they saying that more potential fraud happens on the week-end? That there is some correlation between voter fraud and having more available days to vote? I haven’t seen any evidence that this is the case but seeing as there’s no evidence of any kind of systematic voter fraud of any kind, I think it’s unlikely it exists. This is clearly just straight up vote suppression.

I wonder if there are any other legitimate democracies in the world that are actively trying to make voting more difficult?

.

Sunday Funnies Part II

by digby

Via Daily Kos:

I’m afraid he’s right …

Sunday funny: “Choice”

by digby

.

Architects and Human Rights

 by tristero

Apropos a recent blog post, Graeme Bristol, Executive Director of the Centre for Architecture and Human Rights wrote me the following email:

I appreciate your Hullabaloo post this morning linking to the Andrew Ross op-ed. The Zaha Hadid quote in his article reflects a prevailing attitude among professionals: “I have nothing to do with the workers,” she said. “It’s not my duty as an architect to look at it.”

After all the reports from Human Rights Watch about the abuses of migrant construction labourers in the UAE (2006), the Beijing Olympics (2008), Russia(2009), Abu Dhabi (2009), Bahrain (2012), and the construction of the World Cup venue in Qatar (2012), this is still the common response from the architectural profession when I talk to them at conferences about the relationship between human rights and architecture and, more specifically, the abuse of migrant construction workers . Legislated professions are expected to work to a higher standard and they are expected to have the ‘common good’ as their first interest.

Sadly, this is not, nor, I expect, has it ever been the case. And yet, back in 2011, a group of international artists began a boycott of the Guggenheim in response to the conditions migrant workers faced in the Guggenheim construction site in Abu Dhabi. Any architects? Any representative architectural associations – the UIA? the AIA? Not a peep. Indeed, they give those architects awards for their stellar work in architecture.

The way we look to a distant constellation
That’s dying in a corner of the sky,
These are the days of miracle and wonder
And don’t cry baby don’t cry
Don’t cry,

.

Egypt shows the not-so-glorious results of anarchic change

by David Atkins

Two stories out of Egypt are making some headlines. First, over 500 people sentenced to death–for the killing of one police officer:

More than 500 people in Matea, Egypt, have been sentenced to death. On one street alone, a juice store owner, a sweets shop owner, a doctor and more than 20 others have been condemned.

Now to rural Egypt where the people of one town are reeling from a shocking court ruling earlier this week. Five hundred and twenty-nine people were sentenced to death for the killing of a police officer in street violence last year. Many were tried in absentia and the judge’s ruling came after barely any evidence was heard. Amnesty International says it might be the largest mass death sentence in modern times.

NPR’s Leila Fadel visited the town.

LEILA FADEL, BYLINE: Some 100 miles south of Cairo, there is a town called Matea, a town that feels condemned. Five hundred and twenty-nine people from a town of maybe 50,000 people who live here and in the surrounding villages were sentenced to death this week. This is a small spot on the map of mostly unpaved roads, low slung buildings and mom and pop shops.

And on every narrow street, at least one family, often more, have a relative or several who may be hanged for accusations they couldn’t defend themselves against. Last August, this town, like a lot of Egypt, saw clashes between police and Islamists. One policeman was killed and for that crime, after barely an hour of court time this week, a judge sentenced hundreds to die.

Then there’s the bill labeling student protest a terrorism crime punishable by death:

The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN) expresses its grave concern over two draft legislations that the Egyptian Cabinet has referred to the State Council Administrative Court for legal review. The first consists of amendments to provisions related to the crime of terrorism in the penal code while the second deals with the procedural aspects relating to combating terrorism. These laws are at the final stage and their adoption could take place shortly.

If Egypt’s history is of any indication, the adoption of more repressive legislations and security measures is not successful in deterring terrorist attacks, or even in identifying and punishing their perpetrators in most cases.

What Egypt needs are not more legislations to address terrorism, but serious revision to its legislative framework to ensure its conformity with international standards. The government has been using this framework to arrest and detain arbitrarily political dissidents and subject them to torture and ill treatment. This week’s ruling of a criminal court sentencing 529 people to death, possibly the largest mass death sentence in the world in recent years, testifies to the lack of basic due process protections and the urgent need for reform.

The legislative reforms in question are extremely worrying in the current context as they step up repression by criminalizing many peaceful and legitimate activities that fall within freedom of expression, association and assembly, lumping them as ‘terrorism crimes’ punishable by the death penalty. Indeed, these measures are paving the way for an undeclared state of emergency and arbitrariness.

Anarchic revolution does not produce a just world. Under extreme oppression it is sometimes necessary, but it must be followed immediately by a strong progressive organization for improvements to be made. That didn’t happen in Egypt, and this is the result.

.

Saturday Night at the Movies


City mouse, country bear 

 By Dennis Hartley

The beginning of a beautiful friendship: Ernest and Celestine

Wingnut welfare queens rebel against the usurpers

by digby

I must admit that I find this to be hilarious:

Republican leaders are stepping up their campaign to discredit tea party activists who are challenging them on Capitol Hill and on the campaign trail, accusing conservatives of lining their own pockets at the expense of the GOP.

A recent radio ad for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. — who is under attack from the right in his own primary — blasts the Senate Conservatives Fund for spending its money “on a luxury townhouse with a wine cellar and hot tub in Washington, D.C.” House Republicans joke privately about the “conservative-industrial complex.” Even Ann Coulter has warned of “con men and scamsters” infiltrating the tea party movement.

Such claims hold more water for some groups than others in a movement with no clear leader. The tea party, loosely defined, is scattered among more than a dozen multimillion-dollar organizations, from the Club for Growth to FreedomWorks, to the Tea Party Express and the conservative startup Madison Fund, all with different bottom lines and spending patterns.

Some of the groups that have come in for the most criticism, such as the Senate Conservatives Fund — which calls the McConnell radio ad inaccurate — actually do spend most of their money on candidates. Others, such as the Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund, have spent exactly zero in this election cycle on candidates, even as they raise millions from low-dollar donors.

Whatever their overhead, tea-party-aligned groups are spending tens of millions collectively, sometimes with little or no board oversight. Such groups tend to operate multiple fundraising entities, simultaneously pulling in checks for a 501(c)(3) charity, a 501(c)(4) advocacy group, a conventional political action committee subject to contribution limits and an unrestricted super PAC. Public records filed with the IRS and the Federal Election Commission revealed some unusual expenditures.

Club for Growth President Chris Chocola earned $510,786, from mid-2012 to mid-2013, tax records for the group’s advocacy arm show, pushing his election-cycle earnings to more than $1 million. Club spokesman Barney Keller called that “a pretty good deal,” given that U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas Donohue earns $5.5 million a year. “I would argue we have exactly the same effect on policy as the chamber does,” Keller said.

The Tea Party Express PAC raised $10 million in the 2012 cycle, more than three-quarters of it from donations of less than $200. But the group made only $259,500 in campaign contributions and $686,124 in independent campaign expenditures in that election, public records show. In the meantime, one of its lead organizers, political consultant Sal Russo, handled the bulk of the group’s fundraising, travel, consulting, direct mail and ad production — earning his California consulting firm Russo Marsh & Associates a cool $2.3 million, according to Political MoneyLine.

FreedomWorks paid its president and CEO, Matt Kibbe, $470,000 in 2012, or about $940,000 for the full election cycle. The group’s advocacy arm pulled in $15 million in 2012, according to its most recent tax disclosures, and spent $5 million on “advertising and promotion,” $1.4 million on “office expenses,” $1.3 million on “conferences, conventions and meetings,” and $74,285 in severance to a departing employee. A FreedomWorks board member also reportedly paid former House Majority Leader Dick Armey an $8 million settlement following his departure as chairman amid a FreedomWorks shakeup.

The Madison Project, a conservative PAC that has spent $51,884 opposing McConnell, spent $1.8 million in the 2012 election cycle. Some $97,500 of that was donated to candidates, FEC records show. But still more went to pay the group’s top organizers, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Chairman and ex-Rep. Jim Ryun, R-Kan., earned $66,540, according to the CRP, while his son, political director Drew Ryun, made $67,932.

Conservative organizers say they spend their money efficiently and employ relatively few staff while making a major impact. They take credit for helping elect such conservatives as Republican Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas, Mike Lee of Utah, Marco Rubio of Florida and Rand Paul of Kentucky. When McConnell told The New York Times recently that the GOP would “crush” conservative activists “everywhere,” tea party organizers turned his warning into a fundraising pitch.

This is the beast they created. And that flood of money they uncorked will be used against them as well. I think that’s what we used to call poetic justice.

.

And now a word from your congressman

by digby

It’s been a while since I featured Congressman Grayson here, but this was too good to pass by without a mention.  It would appear that the pre-eminent Village dowager, Cokie Roberts, has taken exception to his opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership trade pact. In fact, she was incensed that the hippies would even deem to involve themselves in such important grown-up issues. Grayson responds and, as always, pulls no punches. He patiently explains why the TPP is yet another assault on the middle class and why Democrats must oppose it. And then he reveals why Cokie is such a compromised messenger:

And now we get to the heart of the matter, today’s lesson in how Washington, D.C. works – for people like Cokie Roberts. And her brother.

Why is Cokie Roberts ignoring the trade deficit, that 800-billion-pound gorilla in the room? Could it possibly be because her brother’s law firm represents a slew of multinational corporations and foreign governments who stand to benefit from the TPP? In just the Middle East, that firm’s client list includes Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman and Kuwait. That was good enough for Cokie’s brother’s firm to take in a whopping $40 million in lobbying fees in 2013 alone.

Cokie’s brother’s firm has represented scads of multinational corporations who just can’t get enough of “free trade agreements.” Last year alone, Goldman Sachs poured $480,000 into the coffers of that firm. Citigroup tossed in another $300,000. And Halliburton and Exxon Mobil shelled out tens of thousands of dollars, too.

(If you question whether Cokie Roberts would bend over backwards to help her brother’s lobbying firm, then consider this: Dianna Ortiz is an American nun who was tortured and raped by the Guatemalan junta. Cokie Roberts’s brother’s law firm represented the Guatemalan junta. Cokie Roberts claimed on the air, with no basis whatsoever, that Ortiz had fabricated her story. Ortiz then proved it in court, and won a $5 million judgment.)

Cokie Roberts’s attack against me is designed to discredit not only me, but also to discredit the concerns of ordinary Americans — like you — in order to protect the Washington elite: corporate lobbyists, corrupt insiders, millionaires and billionaires, multinational corporations, big banks, the Halliburtons and Exxon Mobils of the world, and other economic aristocrats who would benefit from these “free trade” giveaways. In short, the people who think that they own us.

Shhhh. You’re not supposed to mention that sort of thing in polite company. Even though it’s all true. Roberts has a special role in the Village — she’s the “common sense gal” whose views are supposed to reflect the concerns of the average American. Seriously. Which is why it’s especially important to expose the various interests and connections Roberts actually has so that her schtick as DC’s golden girl next door doesn’t go unchallenged. Grayson is one of the few to have the guts to tell it like it is.

You can donate to Grayson’s campaign here.

.

Chart ‘o the day: Why we can’t have nice things

by digby

The next time someone tells you that the country is going broke, show them this:

As you can see, the post Cold War period has not brought us a peace dividend. In fact, we are still very busy turning our ploughshares into swords for the enrichment of the Military Industrial Complex.

In fact, I think we’re overdue for a reminder of this prescient speech:

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military–industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Keep in mind that those expenditures don’t include the massive sums of money spent in other areas of the Deep State defense establishment like the CIA and the NSA, of which I’m sure Eisenhower would have been equally suspicious. The point he makes is that these sort of institutions are self-perpetuating and must actively look for reasons to justify their existence. It’s the way the world works. But when it is a warmaking and enemy seeking institution, it’s very threatening to our “liberties and democratic processes” for obvious reasons.

It’s also threatening to our economic well-being. That chart up there is unsustainable. And it’s totally outrageous that we are still spending that kind of money on defense while cutting people off unemployment and food stamps and starving necessary public services of money in this time of economic insecurity.

h/t to @ianbremmer for the chart

Chris vs the Koch Kook

by digby

ICYMI:

Hayes introduced Jennifer Stefano, the Pennsylvania state director for AFP [Americans for Prosperity] as someone who he thinks “genuinely wakes up every day and thinks about how to destroy Obamacare.”

Any pretense of civility disappeared from the segment soon after that, when Stefano was set off by Hayes pointing out that she denounced the deadline extension as harmful to families and Medicaid recipients while offering no solution herself for insuring those families.

Hayes also pushed back against Stefano’s claim that the uninsured were not signing up for coverage, pointing out that Medicaid expansion did most of the work covering individuals who were not previously insured. When Stefano claimed that families pulling in $94,000 per year were included in the Medicaid expansion, Hayes shook his head and called that a “math trainwreck” — in 2014, a family of 4 that earns roughly $31,721 is considered to be at 133 percent of the poverty level.

“You know nothing about me,” Stefano said. “You have no idea why I wake up in the morning … you know nothing about my family. You don’t know if I was born and raised in a trailer park.”

“How dare you, like Harry Reid, try to undercut the voice of a woman simply because she disagrees with you,” she continued. “Now you may not like where I’m coming from on policy, but you have no right to undercut my voice!”

“I put you on my TV show, I’m not undercutting your voice!” Hayes insisted.

“You’re undercutting my voice because you’re making it personal,” Stefano responded, calling it “typical” for Hayes to attack her rather than “stick to the facts.”

It’s kind of shocking, to be honest:

I think this is the first time I’ve seen that particular kind of response from conservatives — they are often combative but the shrill accusation of personal attack isn’t their usual approach. This is the social media effect, I’d guess. I’ll be keeping my eyes open for more of this.

h/t to @AnnaHolmes for the funny screen shot.