Skip to content

Month: July 2015

Disabling the argument

Disabling the argument

by digby

There has been a lot of loose talk about slackers claiming SSI disability when they should be out there working like Real Americans. Krugman notes:

[I]sn’t there an epidemic of people declaring themselves disabled? Actually, no. You have to bear in mind the reality that people don’t stay perfectly healthy until they reach 65, or 70, or whatever age plutocrats think they should work until. As all of us pre-seniors can attest, things start to go wrong with increasing frequency all along the life cycle; sometimes they can be managed, but often they can’t, especially for manual workers. And if you look at age-adjusted disability rates, they have been flat or even declining:

Needless to say, the many millions of right wing Republicans who become injured or sick and collect disability payments are the only ones who deserve it.

.

Big Ideas

Big Ideas

by digby

This is a great piece by Paul Rosenberg at Salon about what really constitutes “mainstream.” (Also too about how Sanders agenda exemplifies it.)

Here’s just a taste:

You can get a strong sense of this from the results of the “Big Ideas” poll commissioned by the Progressive Change Institute in January, which has thus far gotten far less attention than it deserves. (Full disclosure: I’m a former blogmate with Adam Green, co-founder of PCI’s affiliate, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.) PCI first solicited ideas online through an open submission process (more than 2,600 specific proposals were submitted) and then let people vote on them (more than a million votes were cast). This bottom-up process was then tested out in a national poll. The following all received 70% support or more:

Allow Government to Negotiate Drug Prices (79%)
Give Students the Same Low Interest Rates as Big Banks (78%)
Universal Pre-Kindergarten (77%)
Fair Trade that Protect Workers, the Environment, and Jobs (75%)
End Tax Loopholes for Corporations that Ship Jobs Overseas (74%)
End Gerrymandering (73%)
Let Homeowners Pay Down Mortgage With 401k (72%)
Debt-Free College at All Public Universities (Message A) (71%)
Infrastructure Jobs Program — $400 Billion / Year (71%)
Require NSA to Get Warrants (71%)
Disclose Corporate Spending on Politics/Lobbying (71%)
Medicare Buy-In for All (71%)
Close Offshore Corporate Tax Loopholes (70%)
Green New Deal — Millions Of Clean-Energy Jobs (70%)
Full Employment Act (70%)
Expand Social Security Benefits (70%)

All of the above are in line with Bernie Sanders’ politics and all are extremely popular, with support across the political spectrum. For example, the infrastructure jobs program (a key element of Sanders’ platform) had 91% support from Democrats, 61% from independents and even 55% support from Republicans—compared to only 28% who were opposed. Donald Trump can only dream of being that popular among Republicans.

If people voted strictly on issues, Sanders would be a bipartisan dream. Unfortunately, the calculation that goes into voting is much more complex. But it’s always good to know how people look at this stuff in the abstract. All Democrats should pay heed. So should Republicans but they are hamstrung by a base that’s driven by the propaganda they’ve been feeding them for the past 40 years and they no longer have any actual idea of what government policies are or what the government does. But Democrats do …

.

QOTD: Jan Brewer

QOTD: Jan Brewer

by digby

Here’s your responsible Republican Governor for you:

“I believe that Mr. Trump is kind of telling it like it really, truly is,” Brewer said on “CNN Tonight,” calling herself the governor of the “gateway of illegal immigration.”

She went on to echo Trump’s repeated statements calling immigrants, “rapists, killers and drug dealers.”

“I think that the people of Arizona realize that we picked up the tab for the majority of the violence that comes across our border in regards to the drug cartels, the smugglers, the drop houses,” she said.

“It has been horrendous,” Brewer added. “I think everybody knows that he’s right.”

Boy, if we could just get rid of all those immigrants we wouldn’t have any crime at all.

This should be good:

D

onald Trump is holding a massive rally in Phoenix Saturday to take on illegal immigration — an event that generated so much interest that the campaign had to book a larger venue.
Trump will speak at the Phoenix Convention Center, after aides said demand for tickets exceeded space at the original venue, the Biltmore Resort and Spa.

This is where America gets a good look at the GOP base. It’s always clarifying.

Update: And the GOP intelligentsia too:

They’re just blubbering incoherently now.

Revenge of the Midas cult by @BloggersRUs

Revenge of the Midas cult
by Tom Sullivan

The troika didn’t take well to Greek voters telling them where they could stick their austerity. Rebels from the country that invented democracy last week seemed poised to jump into their X-wing fighters and … okay this is really going off the rails. Or maybe not.

Creditors counterattacked and tightened their grip. Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras now seems ready to accept more austerity with no write-down of his country’s debt, something voters soundly rejected just last Sunday:

“Each one of us shall be confronted with his stature and his history. Between a bad choice and a catastrophic one, we are forced to opt for the first one,” Tsipras said in a speech before his party’s lawmakers, according to local media. “It is as if one asks you for your money or your life.”

It’s just slightly less than Bond-villianish. The Washington Post reports that the deal includes “phasing out a subsidy for poor pensioners and privatizing sprawling state industries.” The voters have spoken and were ignored.

At the Guardian, George Monbiot examines how the financial powers have built a colonial empire that essentially renders democracy moot. (Throughout, I’m citing the referenced version of this piece from Monbiot’s blog.):

Consider the International Monetary Fund. The distribution of power here was perfectly stitched up: IMF decisions require an 85% majority, and the US holds 17% of the votes. It’s controlled by the rich, and governs the poor on their behalf. It’s now doing to Greece what it has done to one poor nation after another, from Argentina to Zambia. Its structural adjustment programmes have forced scores of elected governments to dismantle public spending, destroying health, education and the other means by which the wretched of the earth might improve their lives.

The same programme is imposed regardless of circumstance: every country the IMF colonises must place the control of inflation ahead of other economic objectives; immediately remove its barriers to trade and the flow of capital; liberalise its banking system; reduce government spending on everything except debt repayments; and privatise the assets which can be sold to foreign investors.

Politically, the conservative political project of the last several decades has been to roll back the 20th century: those advances that helped the middle class grow more comfortable and minorities marginally more politically powerful. (In the U.S.: Social Security, the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, Medicare, etc.) Financially, the conservative project seems to be to mine the middle class and public assets to reclaim what the world’s financial elite believes is rightfully theirs. Not only wealth and assets, but control. Monbiot continues:

Consider the European Central Bank. Like most other central banks, it enjoys “political independence”. This does not mean that it is free from politics; only that it is free from democracy. It is ruled instead by the financial sector, whose interests it is constitutionally obliged to champion, through its inflation target of around 2%. Ever mindful of where power lies, it has exceeded this mandate, inflicting deflation and epic unemployment on poorer members of the eurozone.

For some time I have used “economic cult” to describe their perspective. It is a little bit Midas, a little bit Ayn Rand, a little bit multi-level marketing. Like the real estate bubble and the financial crash. Those who got in early made out like the bandits they are. Day to day, there are the rigged markets for which no one seems to go to jail. The players are not only too wealthy for that, but too well-connected to be punished by the political system. They are the system. Monbiot:

The Maastricht treaty, establishing the European Union and the euro, was built on a lethal delusion: a belief that the ECB could provide the only common economic governance that monetary union required. It arose from an extreme version of market fundamentalism: if inflation was kept low, its authors imagined, the magic of the markets would resolve all other social and economic problems, making politics redundant. Those sober, suited, serious people, who now pronounce themselves the only  adults in the room, turn out to be demented utopian fantasists, votaries of a fanatical economic cult.

All this is but a recent chapter in the long tradition of subordinating human welfare to financial power. The austerity now imposed on Greece, brutal as it is, is mild by comparison to earlier versions. Take, for example, the Irish and Indian famines, both exacerbated (in the second case caused) by the doctrine then known as laissez-faire, but which we now know as market fundamentalism or neoliberalism.

Or the Midas cult. It is a group driven by an avaricious compulsion to turn everything it touches into gold. Members only. Others it keeps on a short leash, as I’ve written before:

Post-Reagan, deregulated capitalism has long looked like something out of Mary Shelley or science-fiction films, a creature we created, but no longer control. Billionaires and their acolytes see only its benefits, but as Jeff Goldblum’s Dr. Ian Malcolm says in The Lost World: Jurassic Park, “Oh, yeah. Oooh, ahhh, that’s how it always starts. Then later there’s running, and then screaming.” Where once We the People held capitalism’s leash, now we wear the collar.

Whether it’s turning your child’s education from a shared public cost into a corporate profit center; or turning the principle of one-man, one-vote into one-dollar, one-vote; or carbon tax credits and accounting tricks for addressing rising sea levels; questioning the universal application of a business approach to any human need or problem prompts the challenge, “Do you have something against making a profit?” A more subtle form of red-baiting, this ploy is supposed to be a conversation stopper. Yes? You’re a commie. Game over.

Maybe not. This game hasn’t played out yet. (Now where did I park my X-wing?)

QOTW: Megyn Kelly

QOTW: Megyn Kelly

by digby

She’s very upset as usual:

Kelly: Kate’s murder has since exploded into a national debate on illegal immigrant, sanctuary cities in crime. With the White House ducking the issue of its own acquiescence in these city’s decision to flout the federal immigration laws which were duly enacted. When asked repeatedly this week to speak to this case, White House Spokesman Josh Earnest declined to weigh in other than to refer folks to the Department of Homeland Security. A stark contrast to what we saw after Michael Brown was killed in Ferguson, Missouri. A man we now know was attacking a police officer at the time of his death. His funeral saw three Obama officials in attendance, his death drew comments from President Obama personally. And the administration also sent in the DOJ and 40 FBI agents dispatched to Missouri after Michael Brown was killed.

Where is the swarm of agents in San Francisco? Then there was Freddie Gray in Baltimore, a repeat drug offender who was killed in police custody. Here again his funeral was attended by three Obama administration officials and again the President spoke personally to Freddie Gray’s death. And again, sent the DOJ in to investigate. When Trayvon Martin was killed in Florida, the President spoke to his death which was later ruled to be in self-defense. But Kate Steinle, nothing. No comments, no swarm of FBI agents, no DOJ investigation, nothing. Why?

[President Obama] picks and chooses the victims he wants to highlight and apparently this victim wasn’t deemed worthy.”

If Kelly thinks the president’s job is to go to the funeral of everyone who is gunned down in America he’s going to be very busy indeed. In fact, we will need a full time executive bureaucracy devoted to the task.

This is a line they’ve been using every since three obscure members of the administration attended Michael Brown’s funeral. At that point they were shrieking like hyenas that Obama was sending officials to the young thug’s funeral while ignoring the funeral of General Michael Green. That didn’t turn out so well:

On August 18, Washington Examiner editor and Fox News contributor Byron York described how claims that the Obama administration neglected to send a representative to pay respects to Greene began on right-wing blog Legal Insurrection and began to gain traction in the right-wing media. York apologized for personally pushing the story and pointed to coverage of Hagel’s attendance to set the record straight.

I was wrong. It turns out Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel did, in fact, attend the Greene funeral, a fact I should have known. Before sending out the tweet, I made a couple of perfunctory checks to see whether Hagel had attended, didn’t see him in the news coverage I read and passed on the information without further checking. If I had looked into it just a bit more, I would have seen, for example, a Stars & Stripes article that specifically mentioned Hagel’s presence. Once I saw that, I sent out two tweets correcting the mistake.

Right wingers spend an inordinate amount of time criticizing Democrats for their funeral habits. It’s a real thing with them.

Oh, and by the way, that Kelly commentary? Eric Wemple reminded us that Kelly insists, “I’m a straight-news anchor. I’m not one of the opinion hosts at Fox.”

.

Uhm, what exactly is Lindsay Graham’s economic agenda?

Uhm, what exactly is Lindsay Graham’s economic agenda?

by digby

Lindsay Graham fit to be tied. But not mad enough to call Trump what he is — a racist, opportunistic, know-nothing, blowhard clown. But he is a little concerned about the way he’s getting across his message. Maybe:

“Well, I think he said something that has brought people who are frustrated about our immigration system to light, but he also said it in a way that’s going to kill my party,” Graham said in an interview with CNN on Friday.

Actually, it’s this sort of thinking that’s killing his party. And unfortunately, everybody else too.

“I would prefer that Donald Trump bring his economic genius and his talents to the table in a more constructive way,” he added, noting the billionaire’s charity efforts with military veterans and their families.

“I think he should do better, because I think he’s a better man than that,” he said

Don’t go too far out on a limb with that criticism there Senator or someone might think you mean it.

But let’s talk a bit out that comment concerning Donald Trump’s “economic genius” shall we?

Donald Trump has filed for corporate bankruptcy four times, in 1991, 1992, 2004 and 2009. All of these bankruptcies were connected to over-leveraged casino and hotel properties in Atlantic City, all of which are now operated under the banner of Trump Entertainment Resorts. He has never filed for personal bankruptcy — an important distinction when considering his ability to emerge relatively unscathed, at least financially.

“Corporations, limited partnerships, and LLCs in which he had an ownership interest or companies that had his name attached have filed for bankruptcy,” said Michael Viscount of Atlantic City law firm Fox Rothschild LLP, who represented unsecured creditors when Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts, as it was then called, filed for Chapter 11 protection in 2004. “Therein lies the big distinction.”

He did take a personal hit the first time around: he’d financed the construction of the Trump Taj Mahal with junk bonds and was unable to pay the high interest. His business was in the red, and so was he, to the tune of about $900 million in personal debt. By the mid-90s, he’d reduced most of that debt, selling his Trump Princess yacht, his Trump Shuttle airline, and his stake in a handful of other businesses. More importantly, he stopped guaranteeing debt with his own wealth. “The first bankruptcy was the only time his personal fortune was at stake,” said Ted Connolly, a Boston bankruptcy lawyer who used Trump as model for getting out of debt in his book The Road Out Of Debt: Bankruptcy and Other Solutions to Your Financial Problems. “He learned from it. He’s insulated.”

Trump has never apologized for using Chapter 11 as a business tool — indeed, when he spoke to my FORBES colleague Keren Blankfeld recently, he noted that many “great entrepreneurs” have used bankruptcy to restructure debt, free up capital and improve their businesses.

“I’ve cut debt — by the way, this isn’t me personally, it’s a company,” Trump said. “Basically I’ve used the laws of the country to my advantage and to other people’s advantage just as Leon Black has, Carl Icahn, Henry Kravis has, just as many, many others on top of the business world have.”

The article goes on to say that it’s very important to allow all this because job creators ensure that regular people are able to earn a living.

And anyway, when creditors don’t get paid back by rich people it’s no big deal, the creditors knew they were taking a risk. Regular people, on the other hand, must be required to pay back every penny with interest because a deal’s a deal and to not do it would cause a major moral hazard.

Atlantic City lawyer Viscount doesn’t believe Donald Trump himself should be held accountable for any of his company’s bankruptcies — his creditors, he said, knew what they were getting themselves into when they lent Trump money over and over again. “They’re all big boys and girls,” he said. “They’ve all played this game before, in the insolvency space. The company that possessed his name filed bankruptcy because it was overleveraged. What does that tell you? People want to lend him money. He does grandiose things with it.”

It’s just a game to them. But when it comes to us, they’ll put us in the street to teach us a lesson we won’t soon forget.

Anyway, Lindsay Graham appears to think he’s an economic genius whose ideas are valuable for running the country. I shouldn’t be surprised by that. It’s how Republicans always run the country.

Update: Also this comment from Graham makes me laugh coming as it does from the party that fetishizes Ronald Reagan:

It’s all about money and celebrity he said, blasting the use of national polling averages to determine the 10 candidates who will appear on the debate stage.

Brad Pitt would have a better chance getting in the debate at this point, Graham said.
“Anybody with any celebrity would be in the debate. I think this is a dumb way to weed out the field. I don’t mind weeding out the field over time, but a national poll tests celebrity, big states have an advantage versus small states,” the South Carolina senator and presidential candidate said. “People who have run before have an advantage over those who haven’t.”
“It’s July, for god sakes. So a national poll is a lousy way, in my view, to determine who should be on the stage, and I quite frankly resent it,” he said.

It’s such a shame they maneuvered to have their allies at Fox do these debates. They can’t blame the liberals so they just don’t know what to do.

The GOP’s nightmare

The GOP’s nightmare

by digby

It isn’t just a few of them …

Almost two-thirds of Republicans oppose the Supreme Court’s backing of gay marriage, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll, which gives hope for conservative presidential candidates who have come out strongly against marriage equality.

Republicans would struggle to make opposition to same-sex marriage a winning issue in next November’s general election because more than half of Americans support it, according to the online survey.

But there is still a clear majority of Republicans – 63 percent – who think the court’s historic decision last month to legalize gay marriage nationwide was wrong.

That could give a boost to gay marriage opponents like Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee in the fight for the Republican nomination.

Walker, whose is widely expected to declare his candidacy next week, described the Supreme Court ruling as a “grave mistake,” and has called for a constitutional amendment to allow states to decide whether to allow gay marriage.

These are probably conservative Christians and older people. You know, the ones who always vote.

.

Get over it, Ted

Get over it, Ted

by digby

If anyone is laboring under the illusion that Ted Cruz isn’t a total hack without even a modicum of ideological integrity, this should disabuse you of that notion:

“Look, if unelected judges are going to seize every major policy issue in this country — you know, there was a time…” Cruz said.

Matthews interjected: “They seized the presidency in 2000. You did not complain! The Supreme Court said no to the state of Florida: ‘You can’t recount, even though it’s a close election, you are not allowed to recount. We’re giving this to our guy, 5-4 Republican vote in the Supreme Court.’ If there was ever a case of partisanship or ideology getting out of hand, it was 2000, and you loved it.”

“Chris, those are great talking points,” Cruz said, before asking how many times Florida recounted its ballots, noting that George W. Bush prevailed all four times. “The Democrats’ strategy was, ‘We’re going to keep counting and counting and counting and counting, and eventually maybe enough people would cheat and somehow our guy will win,’” he added.

Cruz also compared the decision of Florida’s Supreme Court to allow a ballot recount to a couple of recent decisions from the nation’s highest court.

“It was partisan defiance of the Court,” Cruz said of the decision, “and frankly, what the Florida Supreme Court did in the Bush v. Gore recount, is the same thing the U.S. Supreme Court did with Obamacare and marriage.”

He’s way too slippery Matthews but that doesn’t make what he said any less fatuous. Calling what Matthews says “talking points” and then blathering on the Bush team’s robotic recount talking points in the next breath was a nice touch though.

I just wish Matthews had had the presence of mind to say at the end of Cruz’s little speech: “Get over it.”

How long will it take?

How long will it take?

by digby

So New York decided to give the Women’s Soccer Team a ticker tape parade today. That’s great. They deserve it.

But this depressed the hell out of me:

Friday’s ticker-tape parade in honor of the U.S. women’s national soccer team, which won the World Cup on Sunday, is the first such parade in New York to honor exclusively women since 1960. That’s when Carol Heiss received the ticker-tape treatment in honor of her figure-skating gold medal at the 1960 Winter Games. The most recent parade in which a woman was included took place in 1998, when Chiaki Mukai was honored along with the rest of the crew of the Space Shuttle Discovery.

Since 1899, the year of the earliest recorded New York ticker-tape parade to honor a living person, 159 parades have honored exclusively men, 12 have honored exclusively women, and 23 honored a mix

Women were most frequently given parades because they were royalty. Thirteen queens and princesses received ticker-tape parades: 11 accompanied by their spouses, two solo. The next most common kinds of female honorees were athletes and adventurers (seven parades for each category). Women have been honored as part of Olympic teams or for a particular sports victory. The adventurers crossed the Atlantic (in planes) and the English Channel (under their own power).

The gap in parades reflects the exclusion of women from many domains, not simply a sexist parade-allocation method. A large share of the historical parades were offered for generals and heads of state at a time when women were not considered for these positions. Parades have become rarer in recent years, just as more women have achieved the positions that might have earned them parades in the past.

I’ve said this before and people roll their eyes at it. But whenever I see things like this I’m just struck by how incredibly weird it is that half the population has traditionally been at such a secondary level of status and achievement. It’s so much the norm that people don’t even think about it — including most women! And we certainly seem to be extremely patient about changing it. Even liberals seem to be rather laissez faire when it comes to women’s rights. (Certainly on a political level, they’re always the first to be traded away for something really “important.”)

It’s nice that the women’s soccer team got the recognition it deserves. But come on — 55 years since any ticker tape parade for women’s singular achievement? Like I said … depressing.

Also too:

Friday’s festivities won’t make upset fans forget that the women’s team took home $2 million for their momentous victory, less than a quarter of the $9 million that the U.S. men’s and other teams were awarded last year after losing in the first round of the men’s World Cup. (The Germans, meanwhile, took home $35 million for the championship.)

But the total prize pool for the men’s tournament was $576 million—40 times the $15 million prize pool for the women’s games.

The Women’s World Cup generated $17 million in sponsor revenue compared to the $529 million revenue pile for last year’s (men’s) World Cup tournament.

They used to say that nobody wanted to watch chicks play, but that wasn’t true this time at all: 25.4 million viewers tuned in to Fox, making it the most-watched soccer game in U.S. history. Don’t worry, all the experts say that this will likely result in a bump in women’s soccer revenue so it’s all good. They won’t make what the men make, of course, but they’ll get a little taste and that should make them happy. After all they got that rare ticker tape parade, what do they expect?

.