Thursday, November 25, 2010
Deep Breath
Well, that's going to be it for a while. Having transposed my historical posts, I'll be updating this (even) less frequently, as I generate them. Doubtful that anyone will have seen all of this, but if you happen upon it, hope you've enjoyed.
Republican "Review" of HCR Repeal, November 10, 2010
Forget about the morality of dumping new protections for our most vulnerable - a concern that obviously is not weighing on the minds of Congressional Republicans.
I think we can start with the premise that a wholesale repeal will be impossible, structurally and because there are clearly popular subparts of PPACA. That leaves the interesting question of what specifically would be proposed for repeal, something that would actually increase awareness of the beneficial parts of the PPACA. Here's a chart showing the political folly of that idea:
http://voi
This is all, therefore, little more than posturing of the bovine sort. Exactly what we would expect, I suppose.
I think we can start with the premise that a wholesale repeal will be impossible, structurally and because there are clearly popular subparts of PPACA. That leaves the interesting question of what specifically would be proposed for repeal, something that would actually increase awareness of the beneficial parts of the PPACA. Here's a chart showing the political folly of that idea:
http://voi
This is all, therefore, little more than posturing of the bovine sort. Exactly what we would expect, I suppose.
Equivocations on Afghanistan, November 10, 2010
Statements by SecDef Gates have been equivocal and noncommittal on the Afghanistan timetable. Understandable, given that the strategy is to use current forces to pressure various tribal elements to negotiate despite the prospect that relief will come to them soon, in the form of a US withdrawal. (Of course a negotiated settlement can never happen in any meaningful way, given the heterogeneity of these tribal elements, for which the generic moniker Taliban is misleading, and given the rampant corruption of the Karzai "regime".)
The more interesting piece of this puzzle concerns the use of India and Pakistan against one another: a $2 billion military aid package for Pakistan, coupled with US drone attacks inside Pakistan (and coinciding with a Mosque bombing there); and at the same time gestures seeming to invite India to even greater presence in Afghanistan - a strategic threat to Pakistan. A sly game, and difficult to predict the outcome.
Whatever the outcome of that complicated gambit, the cost benefit ratio of conquering and holding this particular foreign nation as a method of dealing with an estimated 50 AQ in Afghanistan and 300 in Pak does not support a continued presence, nor does any remote prospect of TAPI. Even more so in the context of movement repudiations of AQ as a result of its impact on innocent civilians.
Time to shut this one down.
The more interesting piece of this puzzle concerns the use of India and Pakistan against one another: a $2 billion military aid package for Pakistan, coupled with US drone attacks inside Pakistan (and coinciding with a Mosque bombing there); and at the same time gestures seeming to invite India to even greater presence in Afghanistan - a strategic threat to Pakistan. A sly game, and difficult to predict the outcome.
Whatever the outcome of that complicated gambit, the cost benefit ratio of conquering and holding this particular foreign nation as a method of dealing with an estimated 50 AQ in Afghanistan and 300 in Pak does not support a continued presence, nor does any remote prospect of TAPI. Even more so in the context of movement repudiations of AQ as a result of its impact on innocent civilians.
Time to shut this one down.
On Jim DeMint's Inability to Identify Specific Budget Cuts, November 7, 2010
The Republicans' entire fiscal philosophy, having been completely discredited for well over 25 years at this point (as fiscal policy Reaganomics failed almost immediately, hugely expanding the deficit), is transparently bankrupt and a joke. It makes sense only as a tool to deliver public goods to their corporate and high wealth constituents under what every congressional Republican recognizes are utterly vacant and disingenuous arguments.
We simply can't go on buying the world's most expensive military, funding basic research, having highways, running a department of justice, etc., and telling those well off citizens who most benefit from the system that they needn't pay for it. It's like having a bunch of grandees in a fancy restaurant, then sending the bill to the waiters to put on the waiters' personal credit cards. It would be comical if it weren't so tragic.
How about let's stay a first world country, and those of us who do well here grow a sense of shame and decency and be willing to pitch in.
We simply can't go on buying the world's most expensive military, funding basic research, having highways, running a department of justice, etc., and telling those well off citizens who most benefit from the system that they needn't pay for it. It's like having a bunch of grandees in a fancy restaurant, then sending the bill to the waiters to put on the waiters' personal credit cards. It would be comical if it weren't so tragic.
How about let's stay a first world country, and those of us who do well here grow a sense of shame and decency and be willing to pitch in.
On the Extinction of Southern Democrats, November 5, 2010
Let's calm down with all the hating on the South. The Southern states are chock full of people mired in terrible hardship and suffering, not least from the misinformation campaigns and economic policies that Republicans are exporting to other parts of the country. Unless these trends are resisted successfully, we won't be able to look very smugly at the South, because we'll all be experiencing the same types of conditions they're experiencing today - reduced opportunity, less fulsome labor protections, poor access to education, deeper social stratification, concentration of wealth and income, and so on.
So instead of deriding or writing off our brothers and sisters in the South, but with no illusions about the society there, let's confront directly the racial strife that underlies our problems (both here and there) and that makes it possible for basic protections such as health care to be undermined and caricatured as deprivations imposed for the benefit of some "other" (take your pick) rather than enhancements that will help us all.
Only by exposing the "divide and conquer" strategy implemented so successfully since the 1970s by the right, and making clear to everyone (both here and in the South) the need to stand together, can we put in the basic reforms we need to come up to the standards of other industrialized nations.
So instead of deriding or writing off our brothers and sisters in the South, but with no illusions about the society there, let's confront directly the racial strife that underlies our problems (both here and there) and that makes it possible for basic protections such as health care to be undermined and caricatured as deprivations imposed for the benefit of some "other" (take your pick) rather than enhancements that will help us all.
Only by exposing the "divide and conquer" strategy implemented so successfully since the 1970s by the right, and making clear to everyone (both here and in the South) the need to stand together, can we put in the basic reforms we need to come up to the standards of other industrialized nations.
On Conciliatory Post Election Statements by President Obama, November 3, 2010
"For nearly four years you have had an Administration which instead of twirling its thumbs has rolled up its sleeves. We will keep our sleeves rolled up.
We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace--business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.
They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.
Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me--and I welcome their hatred. "
Oh wait, no, strike that. What I meant to say was:
"I think I have been willing to compromise in the past and I will be willing to compromise going forward"
We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace--business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.
They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.
Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me--and I welcome their hatred. "
Oh wait, no, strike that. What I meant to say was:
"I think I have been willing to compromise in the past and I will be willing to compromise going forward"
On Statements by Ken Buck Disagreeing with Separation of Church and State, October 27, 2010
How wonderfully well thought out all these Tea Party ideas are!
Once we dispense with the First Amendment (as long as we're chucking the Establishment Clause, heck, why not go for it and get rid of the whole thing!), we can move on to figuring out who gets to establish their religion.
With about 78% affiliation (http://rel
1. The Catholic Church, 68,115,001 members, up 1.49 percent.
2. Southern Baptist Convention
Once we dispense with the First Amendment (as long as we're chucking the Establishment Clause, heck, why not go for it and get rid of the whole thing!), we can move on to figuring out who gets to establish their religion.
With about 78% affiliation (http://rel
1. The Catholic Church, 68,115,001 members, up 1.49 percent.
2. Southern Baptist Convention
On the Supreme Court, October 22, 2010
One attractive path for making our feelings known on this issue in a way the Court will understand would be, as I also mentioned in the Justice Thomas thread, reintroducing the text of the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1937. If passed today, it would give the President about five appointments to the Supreme Court, along with adding needed flexibility for lower court dockets. The new appointments, exercisable immediately, together with a dash of filibuster reform to facilitate Senate approval of nominees, would certainly bring a gust of fresh energy and perspective to the Court.
On Statements by Stephen Broden Advocating Revolution, October 22, 2010
Action begets reaction, so I wonder how this would ultimately play out for those on the right. The last few times a major revolutionary force has been unleashed (France 1793, Russia 1918-1922, China 1951-52), it hasn't worked out so well for the plutocracy.
Given the number of jobless and the increasing income and wealth inequality we are seeing these days, and the successful efforts of moneyed interests to stop help flowing to those in need, it's interesting those on the right are putting this in play just now. Rather an unwise choice I'd say.
Given the number of jobless and the increasing income and wealth inequality we are seeing these days, and the successful efforts of moneyed interests to stop help flowing to those in need, it's interesting those on the right are putting this in play just now. Rather an unwise choice I'd say.
Rand Paul Statements on Gun Rights, October 11, 2010
The original point of gun rights, from a Constitutional perspective, was to ensure a viable militia defense in the absence of a standing army. I haven't heard Mr Paul come out against a standing army yet, but you never know I suppose.
In the meantime, it would certainly behoove him to live in New York City for a while, and/or spend some time in a large city trauma unit, to get a better sense of what it really means to have a densely populated urban area awash in guns. Not that the guy who couldn't connect the dots between private conduct and civil rights is likely to absorb reality, or figure out the difference between city and country, with any degree of alacrity, but it couldn't hurt.
As to religion, Mr Paul seems all in favor of practical curtailments when the religion isn't popular, as shown by his stance on the lower Manhattan rec center, so perhaps he needs to reflect on that a bit further.
Indeed, with any luck he will reflect for a long, long time, in obscurity and not in any elected office.
In the meantime, it would certainly behoove him to live in New York City for a while, and/or spend some time in a large city trauma unit, to get a better sense of what it really means to have a densely populated urban area awash in guns. Not that the guy who couldn't connect the dots between private conduct and civil rights is likely to absorb reality, or figure out the difference between city and country, with any degree of alacrity, but it couldn't hurt.
As to religion, Mr Paul seems all in favor of practical curtailments when the religion isn't popular, as shown by his stance on the lower Manhattan rec center, so perhaps he needs to reflect on that a bit further.
Indeed, with any luck he will reflect for a long, long time, in obscurity and not in any elected office.
More Commentary on Middle East Talks, October 10, 2010
A small vignette from Israel's white phosphorus attacks on civilian areas in Gaza:
"The stairs were very smoky. We went inside and it smelled very strange. We had never experienced that before. It was difficult to go forward. First I saw my mother with burns coming out of the house. We found her at the entrance. She told us to go in and get my injured brothers. But when we got inside we saw nothing because of the smoke and dust, and we couldn't breathe. We found my brother's wife, Ghada, she was burning in flames, and also her daughter Farah, also burning. There were also my brothers Yusif and Ali. All of them were burning badly; their clothes were melting. They were all burned but Abd al-Rahim and my father had their heads cut from their bodies too. We took the wounded in two tractors, with my mother in the first one. We tried to call an ambulance but they said they couldn't come."
http://www
In addition to the use of white phosphorus on densely populated civilian areas, it is worth bearing in mind that Israelis have killed more than six times the number of civilians that Palestinians have during the past 10 years of conflict (http://www
Israel has also engaged in questionable conduct with respect to US military technology (e.g. http://www
Excerpts of the recent UN report on the humanitarian aid flotilla, intercepted by Israeli forces, on which they killed one American citizen and injured another:
http://www
"The conduct of the Israeli military and other personnel towards the flotilla passengers was not only disproportionate to the occasion but demonstrated levels of totally unnecessary and incredible violence. It betrayed an unacceptable level of brutality. Such conduct cannot be justified or condoned on security or any other grounds. It constituted a grave violation of human rights law and international humanitarian law. The Mission considers that several violations and offences have been committed. It is not satisfied that, in the time available, it has been able to compile a comprehensive list of all offences. However, there is clear evidence to support prosecutions of the following crimes within the terms of article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention:
• Wilful killing;
• Torture or inhuman treatment;
• Wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health."
Brief additional background:
http://www
"The stairs were very smoky. We went inside and it smelled very strange. We had never experienced that before. It was difficult to go forward. First I saw my mother with burns coming out of the house. We found her at the entrance. She told us to go in and get my injured brothers. But when we got inside we saw nothing because of the smoke and dust, and we couldn't breathe. We found my brother's wife, Ghada, she was burning in flames, and also her daughter Farah, also burning. There were also my brothers Yusif and Ali. All of them were burning badly; their clothes were melting. They were all burned but Abd al-Rahim and my father had their heads cut from their bodies too. We took the wounded in two tractors, with my mother in the first one. We tried to call an ambulance but they said they couldn't come."
http://www
In addition to the use of white phosphorus on densely populated civilian areas, it is worth bearing in mind that Israelis have killed more than six times the number of civilians that Palestinians have during the past 10 years of conflict (http://www
Israel has also engaged in questionable conduct with respect to US military technology (e.g. http://www
Excerpts of the recent UN report on the humanitarian aid flotilla, intercepted by Israeli forces, on which they killed one American citizen and injured another:
http://www
"The conduct of the Israeli military and other personnel towards the flotilla passengers was not only disproportionate to the occasion but demonstrated levels of totally unnecessary and incredible violence. It betrayed an unacceptable level of brutality. Such conduct cannot be justified or condoned on security or any other grounds. It constituted a grave violation of human rights law and international humanitarian law. The Mission considers that several violations and offences have been committed. It is not satisfied that, in the time available, it has been able to compile a comprehensive list of all offences. However, there is clear evidence to support prosecutions of the following crimes within the terms of article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention:
• Wilful killing;
• Torture or inhuman treatment;
• Wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health."
Brief additional background:
http://www
On Middle East Matters, October 9, 2010
Our taxpayers are supporting this sort of thing at present,
http://art
Not to mention this sort of atrocity:
http://www
I think we'll support programs here thank you very much.
http://art
Not to mention this sort of atrocity:
http://www
I think we'll support programs here thank you very much.
On Biden and Clinton Trading Jobs, October 6, 2010
Back in 2008, James Carville made some comments about Ms Clinton's fortitude, relative to then-candidate Obama's, that I found fairly repugnant (I won't repeat them, but they were posted on Huffpo in May of 08 if you want to look for them). And in fact I still feel that way.
Yet time has proven that there is a measure of truth in in Mr Carville's words. And for that reason, as far fetched as I think the possibility is that Ms Clinton would be put on the ticket with President Obama, I have to say I find it appealing, and I think, oddly enough, that they would make a great team in those roles.
Yet time has proven that there is a measure of truth in in Mr Carville's words. And for that reason, as far fetched as I think the possibility is that Ms Clinton would be put on the ticket with President Obama, I have to say I find it appealing, and I think, oddly enough, that they would make a great team in those roles.
More on Income Inequality, September 27, 2010
Let's start with how the federal government works. Essentially, through a complex process, there's a decision about how much we want to spend on various items. The largest of these, apart from health care for the elderly and social security (an insurance program), is military, but it would include things like highways, for example.
With that amount in mind, the question arises how it will be paid for. For most of the 20th Century, the tax burden has been graduated, with those making more money paying a greater percentage of income. That's because as you make less money, the same percentage of your remaining income, after bills, is harder to afford. During and following WWII, up to about the mid 70s, there was a consensus around this structure. Thereafter, accelerating dramatically in 1980 and beyond, this changed as taxes were diminished for the most affluent Americans. At the time, it was argued that this would lead to increased government revenue to make up the shortfall; this proved incorrect. In fact, it led to massive deficits and greater private wealth at the top. At the same time, income from stock ownership has been favored, further diminishing taxes and increasing wealth at the top.
Adding to this, deregulation in certain sectors, largely unrestricted open trade and ever more expensive education (among other factors) have shifted income and wealth upward and diminished social mobility in the US. These are conscious policy choices that affect you and will affect your children and grandchildren. Enjoy.
With that amount in mind, the question arises how it will be paid for. For most of the 20th Century, the tax burden has been graduated, with those making more money paying a greater percentage of income. That's because as you make less money, the same percentage of your remaining income, after bills, is harder to afford. During and following WWII, up to about the mid 70s, there was a consensus around this structure. Thereafter, accelerating dramatically in 1980 and beyond, this changed as taxes were diminished for the most affluent Americans. At the time, it was argued that this would lead to increased government revenue to make up the shortfall; this proved incorrect. In fact, it led to massive deficits and greater private wealth at the top. At the same time, income from stock ownership has been favored, further diminishing taxes and increasing wealth at the top.
Adding to this, deregulation in certain sectors, largely unrestricted open trade and ever more expensive education (among other factors) have shifted income and wealth upward and diminished social mobility in the US. These are conscious policy choices that affect you and will affect your children and grandchildren. Enjoy.
An Alternative Pledge to America, Septemer 26, 2010
How about this for a pledge to America:
* I'll make sure you have a job, and I definitely won't let some plutocrat trade in your future for a bunch of tax breaks. Nobody's going to be laughing on their extra yacht while you wonder how to pay the mortgage. Not on my watch.
* I'll make sure you have access to education for your children, all the way through college, and not just at the expense of hocking your children's future.
* I won't send your sons and daughters on some damn fool crusade, and I won't squander your taxes on a military bigger than the next ten combined.
* I'll make sure you have health care, just like the citizens of every other industrialized nation. Are we so inept we can't do what everyone else has? Folks, I call BS on that.
* I will let nothing and nobody get in my way. I will be ruthless. I will fight for you in any and every way possible.
* I'll make sure you have a job, and I definitely won't let some plutocrat trade in your future for a bunch of tax breaks. Nobody's going to be laughing on their extra yacht while you wonder how to pay the mortgage. Not on my watch.
* I'll make sure you have access to education for your children, all the way through college, and not just at the expense of hocking your children's future.
* I won't send your sons and daughters on some damn fool crusade, and I won't squander your taxes on a military bigger than the next ten combined.
* I'll make sure you have health care, just like the citizens of every other industrialized nation. Are we so inept we can't do what everyone else has? Folks, I call BS on that.
* I will let nothing and nobody get in my way. I will be ruthless. I will fight for you in any and every way possible.
More on Income Inequality, September 26, 2010
Memo to voters: Surprise! You've been a victim of class warfare for about the last 30 years.
And now all the folks who've been sticking it to you all that time are going to use their increased wealth and influence to make sure they can keep right on going. Woohoo!
Next time you hear one of them making fun of the people trying to give their fellow citizens a hand, calling them "socialist" or telling them to "get a job", ask yourself where you were when they were setting up their cozy little roost, and what, if anything, you're going to do about it in the next election.
And now all the folks who've been sticking it to you all that time are going to use their increased wealth and influence to make sure they can keep right on going. Woohoo!
Next time you hear one of them making fun of the people trying to give their fellow citizens a hand, calling them "socialist" or telling them to "get a job", ask yourself where you were when they were setting up their cozy little roost, and what, if anything, you're going to do about it in the next election.
On Fighting, September 26, 2010
All of the many millions of people in our nation are affected by our federal government, for good or ill depending on whom we elect. In many cases -- as with deployment of our military, elder care and health care -- life and death, privation and despair, hang in the balance of their decisions. The stakes could hardly be higher.
Hence progressives must not shrink before a fight, nor hesitate to prevail. Though the facts are on our side, we must not get lost in a blizzard of detail nor allow ourselves to be defined by our opponents. These are elections not dissertation defenses. They call for clear, direct, concrete language.
Our opponents will bring the full arsenal of rhetorical tricks to this contest: straw men, ad hominems, tacit assertions, mockery, needling, quick questions that call for complex answers, false dichotomies, exaggerated expert disagreement, bandwagon appeals, slippery slope arguments, misleading metaphors, and on and on. Being similarly armed in this high stakes fight is a small price to pay for the public good that victory can bring.
So long as -- and this is a critical caveat -- we faithfully and aggressively implement our own agenda, and do not use the moral and factual deficiency of our opponents to cover a failure on our own part.
Hence progressives must not shrink before a fight, nor hesitate to prevail. Though the facts are on our side, we must not get lost in a blizzard of detail nor allow ourselves to be defined by our opponents. These are elections not dissertation defenses. They call for clear, direct, concrete language.
Our opponents will bring the full arsenal of rhetorical tricks to this contest: straw men, ad hominems, tacit assertions, mockery, needling, quick questions that call for complex answers, false dichotomies, exaggerated expert disagreement, bandwagon appeals, slippery slope arguments, misleading metaphors, and on and on. Being similarly armed in this high stakes fight is a small price to pay for the public good that victory can bring.
So long as -- and this is a critical caveat -- we faithfully and aggressively implement our own agenda, and do not use the moral and factual deficiency of our opponents to cover a failure on our own part.
On Americans' Underestimation of Income Inequality, September 21, 2010
The CIA World Factbook pegs our GINI coefficient at the more or less the same levels as Ivory Coast and Uruguay. Without getting technical, that is an abysmal metric. And ironically, there is presently less social mobility here in the "land of the free" than in the former lands of the gentry in Europe that many of our ancestors left to come here.
These are not magical outcomes but the result of deliberate policy choices that can be undone. Though with an angry public set to put back in power the very same bozos who got us to this unfortunate spot, it doesn't look very likely at the moment.
These are not magical outcomes but the result of deliberate policy choices that can be undone. Though with an angry public set to put back in power the very same bozos who got us to this unfortunate spot, it doesn't look very likely at the moment.
On Deficit Concerns, September 21, 2010
Yes, let's pay close attention to deficits. In fact, let's see exactly how heavily the Bush tax cuts for the most affluent have affected our deficits:
http://www
http://www
On Bill Clinton - Rachel Maddow Fracas, September 21, 2010
Corporations and affluent individuals and organizations get more purchase in the system, whether it's with Bill Clinton or with any other politician, because they can spend large amounts of money, directly and indirectly, and campaigns are expensive. In the case of corporations, the ability to relocate, and the tax revenue and jobs associated with domestic facilities, provide additional leverage points.
Want to level the playing field? Limit all spending, across the board, whether on issue ads, or electioneering or anything else, to an amount that any normal private individual can afford. That would make things much more equal, though not completely equal, but would also make campaigns difficult to fund, given the expense of television and other ads. So there would also need to be a component of free airtime and/or public funding.
That would also take some of the sting out of Citizens United, since corporations and other organizations would be limited to modest expenditures.
Want to level the playing field? Limit all spending, across the board, whether on issue ads, or electioneering or anything else, to an amount that any normal private individual can afford. That would make things much more equal, though not completely equal, but would also make campaigns difficult to fund, given the expense of television and other ads. So there would also need to be a component of free airtime and/or public funding.
That would also take some of the sting out of Citizens United, since corporations and other organizations would be limited to modest expenditures.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
3. The United Methodist Church, 7,853,987 members, down 0.98 percent.
4. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 5,974,041 members, up 1.71 percent.
5. The Church of God in Christ, 5,499,875 members, no membership updates reported.
http://www
I hope our friends in the Tea Party have kept up with their Catechisms!