Skip to content

Month: March 2016

Drinking water is no joke

Drinking water is no joke

by digby

Good God this is bad:

The latest e-mails released  from Gov. Rick Snyder’s office on Thursday include playfully written messages about the quality of Flint’s drinking water and the challenge of confronting the issue.

One was sent from a DEQ district engineer who repeatedly told residents that drinking water from the Flint River is safe and downplayed suggestions otherwise from reporters and other officials.

“Thanks Richard…now off to physical therapy…perhaps mental therapy with all of these Flint calls….lol,” engineer Mike Prysby wrote to fellow DEQ official Richard Benzie on Sept. 18, 2014, five months after Flint switched to the Flint River as its drinking source. Prysby did not immediately respond Thursday to an e-mail requesting comment.

“I cannot provide the context for a message I did not compose, and for which I cannot recall the circumstances from more than 18 months ago,” Benzie wrote in an email responding to a request for comment.

This is about drinking water folks, drinking water filled with lead. I realize people often use gallows humor in a crisis, but that’s not what this is. Public officials knew they were poisoning people.

.

Can you feel the integrity? by @BloggersRUs

Can you feel the integrity?
by Tom Sullivan

Can you feel the election integrity? By now, you’ve heard of the mess in Arizona during primary voting this week. Or rather specifically, in Maricopa County. The Arizona Republic diagnosed the problem succinctly:

Polling sites were overwhelmed for Tuesday’s Presidential Preference Election after county officials reduced the number sites to save money.

Most counties surveyed by The Arizona Republic had enough polling places to average 2,500 or fewer eligible voters per polling site. Maricopa County had only one site per every 21,000 voters.

Ari Berman blames the Supreme Court’s gutting the Voting Rights Act in 2013 for allowing Arizona free rein to make these kinds of voting changes in a county with a 40 percent minority population. The decision has certainly fueled a certain, shall we say, attitude about certain kinds of people exercising the franchise. Paul Waldman assembled for the Washington Post a short list of the hurdles erected in Republican-controlled states to voting since the court ruling:

In that 2013 decision, the Supreme Court conservatives said that key parts of the Voting Rights Act are no longer needed because discrimination in voting is a thing of the past. As soon as the decision came down, Republican state legislatures moved swiftly to pass new voting hurdles that previously would have required Justice Department approval before. Here’s a summary of the Republican voting program:

  1. Impose voter ID requirements
  2. Shorten early voting periods
  3. Eliminate early voting on Sundays, when many African-American churches organize “souls to the polls” voting drives after services
  4. Eliminate same-day registration
  5. Restrict the ability of citizen groups to conduct voter registration drives
  6. Reduce the number of polling places

To Waldman’s short list throw in surgical (and illegal) gerrymandering, voting roll purges, registration challenges, eliminating out-of-precinct voting, and the kitchen sink. A map of the states that have added restrictions since 2010 is here.

I wrote in 2014:

Gaming election results through precision gerrymandering and repressive voting laws aimed at the poor and minorities is political Viagra® for the flagging demographic potency of the Republican base. Voter data matching exercises are not meant to uncover crimes, punish criminals, or even amass credible evidence. They are the pretext for a party suffering a lack of electoral confidence to throw smoke bombs into newsrooms and yell, “Voter fraud!” By the time the smoke clears and no evidence is found — again — of a “massive” problem, all viewers remember is that they saw smoke and heard cries of fraud. And where there’s smoke there must be a fire, right?

All this to combat the “existential threat” of “massive” fraud that for all the hue and cry remains all but immeasurable. All this to restore integrity to a voting system the designers of these voting hurdles have spent decades undermining. To paraphrase Matt Hooper from Jaws, this was not a voting accident.

While thousands stood in line in Maricopa County this week, election officials in North Carolina were still grappling with how many of the over 40,000 provisional ballots cast in its March 15 primary would count. That is nearly twice the 23,000 cast in the 2012 primary. Voters stood in lines until 11 p.m. in Durham County which, like Maricopa, also has a 40 percent minority population, just a different mix.

How many of the elusive fraudsters would wait in line for five hours to commit a felony that adds a single extra vote to their candidate’s tally? How many uncounted provisional ballots cast by minorities and students to restore white America’s confidence? Whose definition of integrity is at work here?

Loaded for bear at the RNC #whatcouldgowrong?

Loaded for bear at the RNC

by digby

What could go wrong?

Support is growing for an online petition to allow guns inside Quicken Loans Arena during the Republican National Convention.

More than 4,000 people have signed the Change.org petition since it was started two days ago.

Quicken Loans Arena, the location of many RNC events, does not allow firearms or any other weapons on its premises.

The petition said the policy is “a direct affront to the Second Amendment” and “puts all attendees at risk.” It also calls Cleveland one of the most dangerous cities in the United States, citing an October 2015 Forbes article.

The petition is asking the Q to suspend its policy, GOP president candidate and Ohio Gov. John Kasich to use executive authority, and the Republican National Committee to explain “how a venue so unfriendly to Second Amendment rights was chosen for the Republican Convention.”

I’ve been joking about this for a while now but seriously, these people want the rest of us to be subjected to a bunch of loons and crackpots armed to the teeth everywhere we go, they ought to be forced to do it too.

What are they so afraid of? If everyone has a gun, they’ll all be ready to fire into the crowd if someone loses their cool, right? Isn’t that what they always say will keep everyone safe?

.

He keeps the ladies in their places

He keeps the ladies in their places

by digby

Chris Hayes was filling in on MSNBC daytime to day and he interviewed a bunch of reporters who are working on the gender beat about Trump. There was lots of good stuff, but anecdote from Jay Newton Small floored everyone on the panel:

Trump always says that he has been a champion of women in the private sector, and when you talk to women who are close to him and I remember talking to one who said she likes Donald Trump, she supports Donald trump but he also kept a picture of her in his desk from when she had her thrid child and she was pretty overweight having just given birth to her third kid and every time he thought she was doing her job or perhaps getting a little too big for her britches he would take out what he called “the fat picture” to remind her that she wasn’t perfect. That’s a woman that supports him and thinks he was a good boss …

You should have seen the look on Chris Hayes’ face …

This isn’t exactly it, but it expresses the emotion:

The Donald doesn’t like it when his female employees get “too big for their britches.” They’re there to serve him:

When Donald Trump and his Apprentice sidekick Carolyn Kepcher spoke the week before Labor Day, there were no TV cameras, no boardroom and no contestants nervously awaiting his withering “You’re fired!” But the end result was the same: This time Kepcher was out as COO and general manager of the Trump National Golf Clubs in Westchester, N.Y., and Bedminster, N.J. ..

During the past year, according to sources, Trump was none too pleased at how his employee of 11 years handled her Apprentice success. She wrote a book, set up speaking engagements and even lobbied for one of the vacant spots on The View. “She was building her own personal brand,” says a Trump source, while another calls her “a prima donna.”

Speaking of which I thought this bit on Jimmy Kimmel was pretty funny — and frighteningly true.

He even mansplained the term “mansplaining.”

“That’s when a man explains something to a woman in a patronizing way?” Clinton said when Kimmel asked if she’d heard of the term.

“Actually it’s when a man explains something to a woman in a condescending way,” Kimmel replied.

Then Kimmel had Clinton start giving her usual stump speech so he could critique her. She only got a sentence in before Kimmel stopped her.

“You’re shouting, you’re too loud,” Kimmel said. “It comes off as a little shrill.”

Clinton continued more quietly.

“You know what, you have to speak up, because we can’t hear you,” Kimmel said.

Then he suggested that she smile. But when she did: “Don’t smile like that, it’s too forced; it looks like you’re faking it.”

“You know, Jimmy, your comments are kind of contradictory,” Clinton said after some more of this. “It’s like nothing I do is right.”

“Exactly, you’re not doing it right,” Kimmel said. “I can’t quite put my finger on it, but something is not — you’re not—”

“A man?” Clinton said.

“That’s it”!

What are these dirty tricks you speak of?

What are these dirty tricks you speak of?

by digby

I wasn’t going to write about Ted Cruz’s sex scandal because well, there’s enough sleaze in this world. But I have to weigh in on this, at least. Donald Trump’s statement:

“I have no idea whether or not the cover story about Ted Cruz in this week’s issues of the national Enquirer is true of not, but I had absolutely nothing to do with it, did not know about and have not, as yet, read it.  I have nothing to do with the National Enquirer and unlike Lyin’ Ted Cruz I do not surround myself with political hacks and henchmen and then pretend total innocence. Ted Cruz’s problem with the National Enquirer is his alone, and while they were right about O.J. Simpson, John Edwards and many others, I certain hope they are not right about Lyin’ Ted Cruz. I look forward to spending the week in Wisconsin, winning the Republican nomination and ultimately the Presidency in order to Make America Great Again.”

It doesn’t get any more sleazy than that.

I particularly like the statement that he doesn’t surround himself with political hacks and henchmen. Well, except for his no-holds-barred spokeswoman Katrina Pierson, who is believed to be one of the women with whom Cruz is alleged to have had an affair. (Gosh, I wonder if she might have been involved with this?) Then there’s Corey Lewadowski, his campaign manager who’s been accused of sexual harassment and assault on both reporters and protesters. 

Finally, there’s his old friend the dirty trickster Roger Stone, the most famous “henchman” in American politics for more than 40 years. The word “ratfucker” will be etched on his tombstone.

Please.  This has all the telltale elements of a Trumpian trumped up scandal. The man has no boundaries.

.

One way to solve the problem of the pay gap

One way to solve the problem of the pay gap

by digby

Stop paying women and minorities less. Easy peasy:

In an email to staff on Thursday, Wall Street Journal editor Gerard Baker pledged to close the gender and race gaps in newsroom salaries, after union data revealed that white men make significantly more money than everyone else at publications owned by Dow Jones & Co. 

“I am personally committed to eliminating it as a matter of urgency,” Baker wrote in the internal email (read the note in its entirety below). “We have the finest journalists in the world and I am anxious to ensure that we reward them properly and equitably.” 

Baker’s words echoed a Wednesday memo from Dow Jones chief executive William Lewis, who said he ordered a review of hiring, development and compensation programs at the company, which includes the Journal, MarketWatch.com and Barron’s. […]

The conversation follows the release of an analysis by the Independent Association of Publishers’ Employees 1096, which found, on average, full-time women at Dow Jones properties make about 87 cents for every dollar paid to full-time men. (The figure covers all Dow Jones workers who are represented by the union — a group of about 1,400 across North America, including writers, copy editors and customer service representatives.)

Sadly, they apparently did a previous study that came to the same conclusions back in 1991. So we’ll have to see if this time they actually follow through.

And by the way: closing the gender gap could pull half of working single mothers out of poverty.  That represents millions and millions of women and children in this country.

“If you see something, say something”

“If you see something, say something”

by digby

People for the American Way cleverly takes the government mantra and turns it around.

People will rage and call it “PC” but you know, to hell with them. The only way to change this stuff is through social disapprobation.

.

Schadenfreude overdose

Schadenfreude overdose

by digby

I wrote about this week’s conservative crack-ups for Salon this morning:

It’s not very generous of spirit to enjoy the conservative crack-up too much, but it’s awfully hard for anyone on the left to beat back the schadenfreude these days. And frankly, considering just how malevolent the top two Republican presidential contenders are, it’s doubtful too many lefties are losing sleep over it. Watching the various factions of the GOP run around in circles trying to figure out what to do about it is one of the most entertaining political spectacles in decades.
So far, Donald Trump has won 20 primaries and caucuses. Nobody who has won so many has ever been denied the nomination in either party. If it were anyone but him, the political professionals would pretty much be going through the motions by now, continuing to wage perfunctory primary campaigns but beginning to ready themselves for the the next phase of the campaign against the Democrats. But because Donald Trump is the presumptive nominee the party is still flailing about, trying to figure out a way to wake up from their nightmare.
Right now, all eyes are on Wisconsin which votes on April 5th. The conventional wisdom says Ted Cruz has to win there in order to even sustain the argument that he might be worthy of taking the nomination on the second ballot at the convention if Trump comes up short. This is something of a desperate gamble, but it’s all they’ve got.
Yesterday, Governor Scott Walker said he planned to announce an endorsement “after Easter” and admitted that it will either be Ted Cruz or John Kasich. The smart money’s on Cruz, as members of the establishment are all already swallowing their bile to get behind him as much as it pains them to do so.
This in-depth report from the Washington Post’s Dave Weigel  calls Wisconsin “the Masada of the Stop Trump movement” with millions of advertising dollars pouring into the state and the highly influential local right-wing talk radio hosts all pushing hard against Trump. He quotes WTMJ’s Charlie Sykes saying,  “the GOP’s current dumpster fire was set and largely fueled by some national talk show hosts who have decided that their infatuation with Donald Trump overrode their commitment to conservative principles.” (And yet another fault line in the conservative movement breaks open …)
The thinking goes that Wisconsin Republicans are more ideological than other states, having been through years of pitched battles between the governor and the Democrats, including a recall campaign, lawsuits and capitol protests. This leads some to believe that even though their Washington representatives would dearly love to see John Kasich as the vehicle to stop Trump rather than the much loathed Cruz, they understand the reality of the delegate math.  Cruz will be living in Wisconsin over the next week while Trump and Kasich spend some of their time looking toward New York. It’s Cruz’s crucible.
And what about the money? Last week, The Club for Growth came out for Cruz, which isn’t really a stretch. He’s a good dogmatic, tax-cutting ideologue and if it weren’t for the fact that he’s so personally unpopular, they might well have backed him earlier. And Jeb Bush’s begrudging endorsement has shaken loose some of his donors for the Cruz crusade.
However, even as much of the ragged remains of the GOP establishment put whatever’s left of their clout on the line for Cruz, it doesn’t seem that anyone in politics besides the candidates and their wives have any confidence that either of the top two can win the general election. So the inevitable blame game is already taking shape.
The old school movement  conservatives like Richard Viguerie, who genuinely prefer Cruz, are having to deal with the fact that the math looks very bad for their man and they are trying to decide if they should go with Trump or try to preserve their philosophical integrity and either run a third party or stay home.  They don’t see the “Washington Cartel” endorsement’s coming Cruz’s way as being sincere, and they’re right. Their candidate is being used as a tool to sow chaos at the convention so the establishment can install someone from their own ranks. But they cannot abide the idea that anything they do could result in a Democratic victory in the fall.  One senses they are heading toward a reluctant acceptance of Trump.
Others are already looking beyond November to lay the groundwork for who will shoulder the responsibility for the debacle that’s about to unfold. Activist Erick Erickson assumes that Trump is going to be the nominee and he is going to lose no matter what. He therefore rules out a conservative third party bid because he fears that it will be blamed instead of the Trump campaign. He writes:
If a third party rises up to take on Trump, they’ll be able to point out that this third party is to blame for Trump’s loss, not that Trump was always going to lose.
A lot of people need to be held accountable for the fraud being committed on angry, hurting voters. They’ve taken advantage of these voters’ anger and sympathies. A third party allows them to escape accountability and remain unscathed by the con-job they are helping pull over on the American people.
Frankly, a lot of careers should justifiably end when Trump loses to Hillary, but a third party effort against Trump will give them one more opportunity to lie, obfuscate, and escape accountability.
Meanwhile, according to former Obama advisor David Axelrod, some high level Republicans also assume a loss in November but would rather lose with Cruz so they can shut up the Tea Party faction once and for all:
“I don’t like Cruz, but I can defend most of his positions with a straight face,” one prominent Republican leader told me. “I don’t know how I go on TV and make an argument for Trump.” There is a potential bonus of a Cruz nomination, this party leader explained. For the past several cycles, conservative activists have complained that by nominating relatively moderate candidates — Romney in ’12 and Sen. John McCain in ’08 — the party spurned its base and depressed Republican turnout. “Let’s have Cruz, and we will put that issue to rest,” said this party leader, convinced that the Texan’s appeal, pitched to evangelicals and the right, is too narrow to command a general election. “If it’s Trump, there will be no resolution. Each side will blame the other for the disaster.”
Ross Douthat in the New York Times predicts that there will be no real resolution for the party for some time to come:
A Trumpian schism probably wouldn’t lead to a full realignment, a real re-sorting of the parties. Instead it would likely just create a lasting civil war within American conservatism, forging two provisional mini-parties — one more nationalist and populist, concentrated in the Rust Belt and the South, the other more like the Goldwater-to-Reagan G.O.P, concentrated in the high plains and Mountain West — whose constant warfare would deliver the presidency to the Democrats time and time again.
Obviously, nobody knows how this will actually turn out. And Donald Trump has left a trail of  better politicians in his wake, so it would be extremely foolish for the Democratic party to rest on its laurels. He’s got something and whatever it is, it’s unique.  But he’s also brought the Republican Party to an existential crisis which has the entire coalition forming a circular firing squad before the nominee is even chosen, eight months before the general election.
Did I mention anything about schadenfreude?

If you’ve got a fear, they’ve got a bill by @BloggersRUs

If you’ve got a fear, they’ve got a bill
by Tom Sullivan

South Carolina is not to be outdone by its northern neighbor when it comes to legislation written to address unreasoning fears. The S.C. Senate on Wednesday passed a bill to create a refugee registry that requires law enforcement to investigate refugees entering the state:

“We can make South Carolina out of the 50 states the most unwelcome state for refugees,” said state Sen. Kevin Bryant, a Republican from Anderson.

ABC News reports:

The bill requires refugees resettled by the federal government into South Carolina to register with its Department of Social Services. That agency would share the information with state police, who would be asked under the measure to confirm that the refugees aren’t security risks and report back to lawmakers.

The bill passed 39-6. Some Democrats supported the measure after Bryant agreed to remove a requirement that no state money be spent on refugees — including funds to educate their children. Bryant also removed a provision that would make the registry public after many lawmakers worried that would threaten the safety of the refugees.

If passed in the S.C. House and signed by Republican Gov. Nikki Haley, it would be the first of its kind in the nation:

Haley has expressed concerns about the vetting of refugees to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and FBI Director James Comey. Registry backers said they are concerned terrorists could enter the state under the guise of being refugees.

[…]

A provision in the bill would hold refugee sponsors — often church organizations — liable in civil court if a refugee commits a violent crime or act of terrorism. That provision could slow or halt refugees from entering South Carolina, said state Sen. Kevin Bryant, R-Anderson, who co-sponsored the bill.

“With the danger today of a terrorist infiltrating the refugee program, we have no other option than to enroll this information,” Bryant said. “We’ve got to choose our own citizens over those who are not citizens of our country.”

State Sen. Brad Hutto, a Democrat from Orangeburg, voted against the bill for singling out people based on national origin. He doubts any court would hold churches or refugee agencies liable for criminal acts committed by people they help. “I think there is a higher likelihood of being struck by lightning while drowning,” Hutto said.

Mother Jones points out that, yes, South Carolina’s “refugee registry” is just what it sounds like: a means to confront the international refugee conspiracy.

Perhaps there should be a national registry to monitor state governments with a history of committing terrorist acts against the United States. Off the top of my head, I can think of at least eleven.

Whether your personal phobia is young, old, and brown people voting, Mexicans, transgender people in restrooms, or hourly workers getting a raise, these stout-hearted manlies have your back. And they are watchful for other fears they can gin up.