No way to hold his feet to the fire, then, is there?

Yet another example of sniveling-git-ism from "the Left". Liberal critics urge the liberalist-president-of-our-lifetime to be more, you know, liberal, and both he and his "supporters" get angry and defensive and start wagging their fingers and sermonizing. I guess there really is no way of holding President Obama's feet to the fire, as he urged the people of the Left to do, is there?

The President did "the one thing that he actually has the power to do" by instructing the DOJ not to enforce DOMA? Uh, not quite - he could also, you know, be a forceful advocate for what is right, even if there is nothing he could do in terms of legislation or the law.

This applies for many other things as well (but don't try to prevent him from blowing shit up in other countries!) - but Obama simply refuses to even make the case for what is right. And so America will keep getting what it probably deserves - hand-in-hand destruction of the bases of modern American society by the Republicans and the Democrats, while people like BooMan turn their fire against people who don't really like this outcome rater than the people who are doing their utmost to bring it about.

Not *quite* socialist...

The solution to this problem is clear: the military must be privatized.

Not quite liberal...

I hope that even the biggest Obama supporter is happy that his Justice Department lost this case:

A former spy agency employee agreed late Thursday to plead guilty to a minor charge in a highly publicized leak prosecution, undercutting the Obama administration’s unusual campaign to prosecute government officials who disclose classified information to the press.

The National Security Agency official, Thomas A. Drake, had faced a possible 35 years in prison if convicted on felony charges under the Espionage Act. Instead, he agreed to admit to a misdemeanor of misusing the agency’s computer system by providing “official N.S.A. information” to an unauthorized person, a reporter for The Baltimore Sun.
...

The flurry of criminal cases has led to both praise and criticism for Mr. Obama, who entered office promising unprecedented transparency but in less than three years in office has far outdone the security-minded Bush administration in pursuing leaks. Some political analysts say Mr. Obama’s liberal credentials may give him political cover for the crackdown.

The Drake case was seen as a test of the tougher line against unauthorized disclosures. But news media coverage of the charges against Mr. Drake, 54, an introspective computer specialist, has highlighted his motivation for sharing information about N.S.A. technology with a reporter for The Baltimore Sun in 2006 and 2007: the agency was rejecting a $3 million in-house program called ThinThread in favor of a $1-billion-plus contractor-run program called Trailblazer. His supporters have portrayed him as a diligent public servant who was trying to save taxpayers’ money and strengthen national security, not damage it. 

President Obama - the liberalest president ever... only not quite liberal.

Money and positive messaging

This is how easy it is for left/liberal groups to be bought off:

AT&T is lining up support for its acquisition of T-Mobile from a slew of liberal groups with no obvious interest in telecom deals — except that they’ve received big piles of AT&T’s cash.

In recent weeks, the NAACP, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation and the National Education Association have each issued public statements in support of the deal.
...

AT&T is working hard to win approval of the deal from the FCC and the Department of Justice. It’s not supposed to be a political process, but with Democrats — inherently skeptical of big corporate mergers — in control of both agencies, the company isn’t taking any chances.

It has assembled a platoon of more than 72 outside lawyers and consultants to work the FCC and Justice Department on the deal. 

And it’s brought on public relations agencies and other consultants to craft a message that the merger is more about spreading wireless broadband to underserved populations across America than about enriching the company’s shareholders.

To build support, AT&T employees and consultants have been making personal visits and calls as well as holding luncheons.

Out of about a dozen supporters interviewed by POLITICO, the vast majority said they decided to issue a statement supporting the AT&T/T-Mobile deal after being approached this way. 

Yep - endorsements are forthcoming, after the nice people from AT&T just happen to drop in for a chat. And we get some groups that might otherwise be skeptical of corporate mergers and that have no obvious expertise in telecoms or mergers giving their blessing to this deal. And then we'll get a new company that will probably continue its record of providing more funds to Republicans - who don't really care for any of these left/liberal groups - than Democrats.

It's that easy.

Sports, labor and "progressivism"

This is a rather curious post by the ever-curious Yglesias. First, it purports to lay out a "progressive" case for supporting the Miami Heat in their encounter with the Dallas Mavericks. But this case rests mostly on LeBron James and his decision to move to the Heat. There's no discussion at all about the Mavericks - something we might expect if someone is trying to convince us to pick sides. So there really is no "case" at all.

This brings us to what the post is really about: Yglesias's idea that it is "progressive" to allow full, unrestrained market forces to determine labor policy (and, by extension, employment policy) in the NBA. Simply writing that out - that it should be "progressive" to allow "the market" untrammeled ability to set wages - highlights how bizarre this "argument" is. Would it be "progressive" to export that argument outside of the NBA? How about getting rid of the minimum wage and letting "the market" set lower wages too?

But, then again, we're dealing with one of the leading lights of the American "left", so it shouldn't be too surprising that we get some kind of head-scratching "progressive" proposal that is nothing of the sort. But if Yglesias would like to see how "market forces" play out in sports leagues, all he'd have to do is look at the English Premier League, the Scottish Premier League, La Liga, or many of the other European football/soccer leagues. There's no draft, no maximum wages, no controls on players moving their labor to whatever employer will pay them - Yglesias' workers' paradise in action.

Sadly for this little fantasy, there's no real competition in these leagues, either. Titles are won by one of the same 2 or 3 teams, year after year after year. Competition among these super-clubs has led to the appearance of ultra-wealthy billionaire owners who raise ticket prices above the level average, long-time fans can afford and who sometimes saddle the clubs with huge debts. Smaller clubs' have no chance to really compete, and their best players are regularly picked off by the bigger, richer clubs.

And this should be considered "progressive"? Jesus - just beat what remains of the Left with a baseball bat and let's call time on it.

History repeats

This looks strangely familiar:

A Connecticut mother who says she wanted to give her son a better education will be arraigned on Wednesday on charges for enrolling the 6-year-old in another town, sparking outrage and support from people nationwide.

Tanya McDowell, a 33-year-old homeless woman whose last known address was in Bridgeport, Conn, is scheduled to be arraigned on charges of larceny and conspiracy to commit larceny for allegedly stealing $15,686 from Norwalk schools. Prosecutors allege that figure is the value of her son's education at Norwalk's Brookside Elementary School between the time he was illegally enrolled in January and McDowell's arrest on April 14. If convicted, she faces up to 20 years in prison.

Where have I seen that before? Oh yeah:

Williams-Bolar used her father's address, where she alleges she lived part-time. Yet the Copely-Fairlawn School District felt she was lying about being a resident, and hired a private eye to follow her, videotaping Williams-Bolar leaving her public housing home and dropping her children off at the suburban school.

They confronted Williams-Bolar, demanded that she repay the district $30,000, saying she didn't have the right to have her daughters in the district since she wasn't a taxpayer.

When she refused, Williams-Bolar was indicted on two felony charges, found guilty and sentenced to 10 days in prison. Because of the felonies on her record, the aspiring schoolteacher will never be able to enter the classroom.

Wanting better for your children used to be part of the American dream. Now, it's a ticket to jail - especially if you are poor and black.

Firefighters' union to national Dems: So long!

The International Association of Fire Fighters has announced that it is shifting its money away from national Democratic races and organizations to state-level campaigns as part of efforts to fight the wave of anti-unionism around the country:

"We are simply shutting down any contributions going to any federal candidates or to any federal PACs or committees until, quite frankly, our friends are willing to stand up and fight on our behalf with the same kind of ferocity that our enemies and those that are literally trying to destroy us are doing on the other side," Schaitberger told USA TODAY.

Good - it's about time.  The national Democrats have taken organized labor for granted for far too long. Talking hasn't sent them an effective message - maybe taking away money will.

(H/T Digby)

Jailbreak

Almost 500 Taliban prisoners have escaped from a prison in Afghanistan:

As the great escape was a break-in rather than a break-out, there was no need to surreptitiously get rid of the earth inside the camp; according to one local media report, the Kandahar plotters simply sold lorry loads of the earth in the city's bazaar from a tunnel stretching a reported 320 metres.
...

According to one of the escapees (whose numbers could dramatically tip the odds in favour of the insurgents on the eve of this year's "fighting season"), the tunnel was of sufficient diameter and high enough for the prisoners to stand upright for most of their walk to freedom.

Sections were lit by electric light and ventilated with fans, he said.
...
"It was very well organised. They only let a certain number of people go through at one time, because they wanted to make sure there was enough air to breath in the tunnel."

When the escapee prisoners got to the construction company compound at the end of the tunnel, they were met by their commanders and taken off in cars to safe locations.

And to compound the humiliation of the Afghan government and its Nato allies, the prison managers appear to have been totally unaware of the escape until long after the prisoners had disappeared into the night.

You know that an operation of this size and complexity had to have had people in the inside helping out, and people elsewhere turning a blind eye to what was going on.

This is not a reassuring sign for the US as it continues whatever mission it is pursuing in Afghanistan. Why are we there again?

See also: how does this new jailbreak rate in comparison to some other classic ones?

A media person explains why the media can't call idiots "idiots"

This column sheds much light on the craven nature of America's large media. In it, someone at the LA Times explains why it just wasn't possible for anyone in the media to come out and say about Palin - a serious candidate for the second-highest political office in the US - "hey - she's a fucking idiot".

This bit right here really brings the "argument" home:

Alas, we cannot [rip idiots like Palin to shreds]. Not only because it would be cheap and lazy and unbecoming, but also because Palin is too well-shielded by her own incompetence.

So: it is now "cheap" and "lazy" to call someone who is cheap and lazy "cheap" and "lazy", even a candidate for one of the highest positions of the land, and incompetence is an effective political strategy. It is difficult to imagine a clearer statement on the mindset that is preventing the press from actually being able to analyze and present in a serious way the major problems facing America today.

Mean-spirited rich assholes who are also idiots, #1

If you'd like a name attached to the sniveling mean-spiritedness, greed, and short-sightedness afflicting America today, try "Peter P. Pulkkinen":

Most family incomes in Bronxville are in the six and seven figures, ranking the village among the wealthiest enclaves in America. But even an additional $100 to $200 tacked onto property tax bills has met enough resistance to make town officials think twice.

Some residents argue that the town should be more businesslike, cutting other costs to offset the outlay for smaller classes. Peter P. Pulkkinen is one. A 40-year-old investment banker, he and his wife, Sarah, moved here in 2004 from the Upper East Side and their two oldest children are now in the first and third grades. He wants small classes for them. But rather than raise taxes, he would restrict the compensation of existing teachers — particularly their benefits.
 ...

“I think it is a false paradigm to have to choose between radically diminished services or exponentially higher taxes,” he said, “without first addressing the structural issue of teacher compensation.” 

A fucking investment banker demanding that teachers take a hit so that he doesn't have to pay a coupl of hundred bucks per year in property tax? That's bad enough - but this jackhole doesn't seem to realize that paying teachers less will certainly result in "radically diminished services", sooner or later.

If idiots like this are in charge of America's financial infrastructure, no wonder we're fucked. 

They named their institute after Hoover

They'll apparently let pretty much any idiot join the Hoover Institute, won't they?

WWJD?

What Would Jesus Do? According to Mike Huckabee, Republican politician and religious huckster, Jesus might very well support dictatorship:

"[T]he events of the past few days in Egypt have created a very tenuous situation, not just for Egypt, not just for the Middle East, but for the entire world, and the destabilization of that nation has the potential of cascading across the globe." [emphasis mine]

Can't have unruly people "destabilizing" their country in an effort to get rid of a dictator! Even worse, those irresponsible bastards might very well cause other countries, around the globe, to become "destabilized" and run out tyrants.

Without any irony, he went on to explain that "The essence of freedom, the very heart of it, is self-determination and self-direction." Uh, hey, Mikey - ever hear of a little thing called "principle"? Jesus might like that.

Freedom of speech

This is an interesting view of what "freedom of speech" entails - one, I believe, that is shared by many these days:

Free speech, not free from consequences speech.  (And remember, it’s only government suppression of speech that is illegal.)

 Right - so, by this definition, there has never been a lack of "free speech" anywhere in the world. Not even Stalin's Soviet Union could prevent people from physically saying "bad" things... even if there were some definite "consequences" for this speech.

Support of democracy

Comical:

7.30pm GMT: Time magazine talks to "a minister in the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu," and reports that Israel appears to be backing the Mubarak regime:

With a deep investment in the status quo, Israel is watching what a senior official calls "an earthquake in the Middle East" with growing concern. The official says the Jewish state has faith in the security apparatus of its most formidable Arab neighbor, Egypt, to suppress the street demonstrations that threaten the dictatorial rule of President Hosni Mubarak. The harder question is what comes next.

But this was the most eye-catching quote from the unidentified minister:

"I'm not sure the time is right for the Arab region to go through the democratic process."

Combine this with the so-called "Palestine papers", and what kind of picture do you get?

A good question

What if the Tuscon shooter had been Muslim?

That'll show 'em

Maine has apparently thrown its hat into the competition for Which State Can Elect the Most Ridiculous Official?, a contest that had until now been led by Minnesota with its reelection of Crazy Michele Bachmann. The statement by their entry is not so much crazy as just fucking stupid:

Maine's governor is telling critics to "kiss my butt" over his decision not to attend the state NAACP's annual Martin Luther King Jr. Day celebrations this weekend.

...

The NAACP's state director said the group felt it was being neglected by the new governor, a Republican elected in November with tea party support.
When asked by a reporter Friday to respond, LePage said: "Tell them to kiss my butt."

Yep - nothing like being disrespectful to a rights organization on the matter of commemorating a historical figure to burnish your leadership credentials!

Heavy-duty crazy

There is some heavy-duty crazy going on these days, if you haven't noticed.

A fanatic right-wing commentator at CNN - yes, CNN - tells us, in the wake of the shooting of Rep. Giffords, to remember to maintain a "saving faith in Jesus Christ". The guy may have a problem with his filthy mouth and thoughts of cartoonish violence against people he disagrees with - but remember, he has a "saving faith" in Jesus, so that makes it okay.

It's not crazy that crazy people with uncontrollable tempers and nothing to offer the public discourse except stupid religious homilies exist. What is crazy is that major social institutions protect them and offer them an open platform to reach out to other crazies, as well as people who are leaning crazy but just need that little extra push to fall over the edge.

Then there's this: important right-wing people are accusing the Conservative Political Action Conference of having been infiltrated by both radical homosexuals and the Muslim Brotherhood, in an assault apparently led by Grover Norquist. It sounds so over the top that it could be a comical parody of conservative paranoia and ignorance, were conservatives not so likely to take this stuff seriously.

Yes, there really are "death panels"

And Republicans sit at the head of them.

(H/T)

In defense of prosecutorial malfeasance

Kevin Drum - apparently separated at birth from his sniveling git twin Ezra Klein - wonders in this article how the Supreme Court can simply choose not to consider clear exculpatory evidence that has been withheld by evil, unscrupulous prosecutors.

It's a good question. Or, it would be, had it not been asked by someone who began their article like this:

Generally speaking, prosecutors are protected from lawsuits even if they break the rules. And generally speaking, this is probably a good thing. The level of prosecutorial abuse that judges routinely tolerate is outrageous, but still, a wave of lawsuits against prosecutors from everyone ever jailed wrongly probably isn't something we need.

Right: so you question the culture of courts siding with blatant malfeasance - and then you proceed to explicitly support such malfeasance by arguing that the single way malefactors might be held accountable (i.e., lawsuits) is not "something we need"?

Kevin: can I get a little of the shit you're smoking, please?

(H/T)

Things left unsaid

The Wall Street Journal trots out hack Michael Barone to argue the merits of Texas and something he calls the "Texas model". According to Barone, all of America's problems can be summed up in two words: taxes and unions. Texas, not being burdened by either of these, is what the rest of America should look like:

Back in the 1930-70 period, liberal political scientists hoped and expected that America would become less like Texas and more like New York, with bigger government, higher taxes and more unions. In one important respect—the abolition of legally enforced racial segregation—that has happened. But otherwise Americans have been voting with their feet for the Texas model, with its low tax rates, light regulation and openness to new businesses and enterprises.

It is somewhat odd - or it would be if right-wingers were not congenital liars - that Texas' wee budget problem goes unmentioned by Barone:

The Texas budget is expected to run a $27 billion two-year budget shortfall according to just-released state estimates.

That's worse than the $25 billion that Paul Krugman cited last week when he gleefully noted that a GOP bastion was facing deficit problems.

(Conservative pundit Kevin Williamson responded by saying that "insiders" were estimating a mere $11-$15 billion shortfall. Obviously those insiders were optimistic.)

Yep - add in batshit-insane politicians to this financial mess that is a direct result of batshit-insane fiscal policies, and Texas indeed offers some kind of model to the rest of the US!

Time for a conspiracy theory

A former aide to former President George W. Bush has died.

Has anyone suggested that Bush has him killed - similar to how the Clintons had Vince Foster whacked?