The Assault On Science

The Wingers never make an attack that's half-assed.  The assault on "Climategate" has turned into a full-fledged indictment of science itself in the British press, and the Wingers are in full outrage mode, demanding that basically all the climate change science done over the last generation be redone because it's now 100% suspect, the world is fine, and we're free to really pollute as much as we can.

God'll fix it.  Let's all drive Hummers.

What all this really goes into is the Winger tenet that science is bad.  Scientists are all "elitist atheist liberals" who are all trying to scam the good "everyday" people with their climate change and evolution and their human trials crap, and all science really does is promote thought, which the Wingers abhor.  You're not supposed to think critically, you're supposed to do what the Wingers tell you to do, treat it as the truth, and never question it.  2+2=4 is a scam, they tell you.  You should consider alternatives, because science itself is suspect, unlike religion and groupthink.  Scientists are outside this, so they are suspect too.  You see, if 99 scientists and 1 Winger come to the same conclusions about the way the world works, the Winger is the "free thinker" because he's wrong.

It's suspect because they can't control it.  It's been going on since the days of Galileo and well before that.

Stamp Of Disapproval

More and more Americans are using food stamps these days.  In some places in the country, the number of people on food stamps has doubled in just two years.  The biggest growth in food stamp usage?  It's not the inner city, folks.  It's the suburbs hit hardest by the housing depression.

There are 239 counties in the United States where at least a quarter of the population receives food stamps, according to an analysis of local data collected by The New York Times.
The counties are as big as the Bronx and Philadelphia and as small as Owsley County in Kentucky, a patch of Appalachian distress where half of the 4,600 residents receive food stamps.

In more than 750 counties, the program helps feed one in three blacks. In more than 800 counties, it helps feed one in three children. In the Mississippi River cities of St. Louis, Memphis and New Orleans, half of the children or more receive food stamps. Even in Peoria, Ill. — Everytown, U.S.A. — nearly 40 percent of children receive aid.

While use is greatest where poverty runs deep, the growth has been especially swift in once-prosperous places hit by the housing bust. There are about 50 small counties and a dozen sizable ones where the rolls have doubled in the last two years. In another 205 counties, they have risen by at least two-thirds. These places with soaring rolls include populous Riverside County, Calif., most of greater Phoenix and Las Vegas, a ring of affluent Atlanta suburbs, and a 150-mile stretch of southwest Florida from Bradenton to the Everglades.

America.  The great country of free markets and innovation and "rising tides lifting all boats" can't even afford to feed itself.  The shocking part?

Nationwide, food stamps reach about two-thirds of those eligible, with rates ranging from an estimated 50 percent in California to 98 percent in Missouri. Mr. Concannon urged lagging states to do more to enroll the needy, citing a recent government report that found a sharp rise in Americans with inconsistent access to adequate food.

That's right: only two-thirds of people actually eligible for food benefits receive them. Remember that this holiday season.
Here in Kentucky, to get food benefits you have to be a U.S. citizen with a job (or on SS) and you can't have any drug convictions.  They've made it quite difficult as a matter of fact to get EBT here.  You also can't have more than $2000 in the bank.  For a family of four, the income limit is $28,665.

And still, here in Boone County, the number of people who are on food benefits are up 43% from 2007 (map).  Kenton County next door, up 24%, Campbell County up 21%, and across the river Hamilton County Ohio, where Cincy is, has seen its rolls jump by 41%.

Check that map link above to see how your county is faring.  Times are tough, folks.  They will only get tougher.

Learning Curve Is A Flatline

Good to know Arizona GOP Sen. Jon Kyl is incapable of reading the newspaper.

"Talk of an exit strategy is exactly the wrong way to go," Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) told Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday. The Senate's second-most powerful Republican wants President Barack Obama to defer to the generals' wishes in Afghanistan without announcing a strategy to end the war.

Exit strategy...now where have I heard that before...
Oh, yes, Iraq.  Of course, it doesn't help that FOX News's idea of the "opposing viewpoint" is Evan F'ckin Bayh.

"As I understand it we're going to go with 30 to 35 thousand American troops," Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) said on the program. "We're going to try and make up the difference with NATO. They're probably not as good and effective as American troops but I think its good that we have some burden-sharing. After all the American taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for this whole thing if our allies are wiling to step up and do their part."

Bayh at least is worried about the money we're wasting in Afghanistan.  Only took him eight years, but hey.

Bayh and Kyl stuck to the talking points for the most part on Sunday morning, but Kyl brought up Vietnam and Bayh mentioned the cost of the war, suggesting there will be criticism from all sides immediately following Obama's speech. Just one day earlier, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) told Fox News, "This war is undermining our nation."

"35,000 new troops? That's going to cost $35 billion more a year," he said. "Where are we going to find that money? Who's going to finance this? You're going to tell the taxpayers we're going to borrow more money from China so we can fight a war in Afghanistan? Come on!"

Obama's speech is expected to put his alliance with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to the test as well. House members may introduce a Resolution of Disapproval to counter Obama's plan. Pelosi and the President met privately last week as Obama concluded his deliberations on Afghanistan, according to The Hill.

On the contrary, an exit strategy from Afghanistan is what we needed eight years ago.

In Which I Strongly Disagree With John Cole

John Cole believes America's making a mountain out of a molehill on the Salahi state dinner party crasher incident.

People are aware that the only thing that happened in the breach is that they were not officially invited, right? You all are aware out there that they went through intense screening on-site, went through metal detectors and everything else, and there was no chance they had a weapon on them. You are aware that if one of them had, as Peter King suggested, “grabbed a knife off a table” and lunged for POTUS, they would have been tackled by any one of the thousands of security personnel there. You are aware that they were through far more security screening than it takes to get on an airplane, and tons more than any of the hundreds of thousands of people who shook hands with Obama the last year on rope lines?

In short, you are aware that the only thing that was missing was their name on an official invite list, and it is looking like they were helped out by an Indian dignitary.

Stop acting like Osama bin Laden crashed the damned dinner with a MOAB under his trenchcoat. If this gets the Secret Service more money and resources, great, but no one was in danger and this is really just silly.

Bullshit, John.  Bullshit and you know it.  This President has been threatened more in his first year than any other one in modern history.  The security around him -- and the professionalism of that security -- should reflect that.  It didn't.
What should have happened?  The Salahis should have been refused entrance and removed from the party in a discreet manner, and the world should really have never known about it.  Instead, the two people that got by the USSS were budding reality TV stars looking for an angle to sell, and boy did they get it.  That raises the question of how many other close calls the President's had over the last year or so.

I agree with you that more money and personnel need to be devoted to the President's security because of this incident and I hope that occurs.  But somebody's head has to roll for this.  Period.  Obama's security is nothing to take lightly.

Not with all the psychos out there telegraphing death threats daily, and an entire political party making political points off that aura of hatred.

[UPDATE 10:50 AM] Then again, marindenver over at Rumproast has a good point about the eerie similarities between the Salahis and the Heenes and the whole Balloon Boy hoax.

Dead Or Alive

It's interesting to see the reaction of today's news about the Senate report on the fact that we had a chance to pursue and capture Osama Bin Laden in December of 2001 and simply chose not to do so.

“Removing the Al Qaeda leader from the battlefield eight years ago would not have eliminated the worldwide extremist threat,” the committee’s report concludes. “But the decisions that opened the door for his escape to Pakistan allowed bin Laden to emerge as a potent symbolic figure who continues to attract a steady flow of money and inspire fanatics worldwide.”

The report, based in part on a little-noticed 2007 history of the Tora Bora episode by the military’s Special Operations Command, asserts that the consequences of not sending American troops in 2001 to block Mr. bin Laden’s escape into Pakistan are still being felt.

The report blames the lapse for “laying the foundation for today’s protracted Afghan insurgency and inflaming the internal strife now endangering Pakistan.”

Its release comes just as the Obama administration is preparing to announce an increase in forces in Afghanistan.

The showdown at Tora Bora, a mountainous area dotted with caves in eastern Afghanistan, pitted a modest force of American Special Operations and C.I.A. officers, along with allied Afghan fighters, against a force of about 1,000 Qaeda fighters led by Mr. bin Laden.

The committee report, prepared at the request of Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the committee’s Democratic chairman, concludes unequivocally that in mid-December 2001, Mr. bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, were at the cave complex, where Mr. bin Laden had operated previously during the fight against Soviet forces.

The new report suggests that a larger troop commitment to Afghanistan might have resulted in the demise not only of Mr. bin Laden and his deputy but also of Mullah Muhammad Omar, the leader of the Afghan Taliban. Mullah Omar, who also fled to Pakistan in 2001, has overseen the resurgence of the Taliban.

Gosh, you mean if Bush had captured OBL then, not only would we not be in Afghanistan now, but he wouldn't have been able to sell the Iraq War to Americans and the world, either?

The reaction from the right so far is textbook: in hindsight, everything is 20/20 and that capturing OBL wouldn't have changed the fact that Islam is the most singularly evil thing on the planet, or something. 

I'll tell you what:  anybody who feels the need to make excuses as to why Bush failed to get OBL in December 2001, please explain that to the families of the 9/11 victims and to the families of all the troops that we've lost since OBL's escape into Tora Bora, not to mention all the families of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi, Pakistani and Afghan civilians lost to eight years of war.  Then, help pay back the trillions of dollars we spent on this little foreign policy exercise.

Thanks.

In Which Zandar Answers Your Burning Questions

Newsweek's Jon Meacham asks "Why Dick Cheney Should Run in 2012".

Umm, because Obama would win for sure?

Last Call

We've downgraded what a huge success means for Teabaggers these days.  Instead of pretending 70,000 is two million, we're down to pretending 4,000 is a massive, country-changing event.

You know what really was a country-changing event?  Nearly 65 million people voted for Obama in 2008.

Have a nice day.

That Domestic Terrorism Problem We Have

It's funny.  The same folks willing to condemn the entire Muslim world for the the actions of one man at Fort Hood are dead silent when it comes to a non-Muslim right-wing anti-government bombmaker in Cleveland.

Following a pipe bomb explosion Monday night, police and federal law enforcement officials are trying to figure why a Center Avenue man turned his apartment into a bomb factory.

Police said no charges have been filed against Mark Campano, 56. Police found 30 completed pipe bombs in his apartment along with components to make more, plus 17 guns and hundreds of rounds of ammunition.

Campano is in an Akron hospital with injuries received when one of the bombs exploded.

As police and federal authorities puzzle over Campano's past and what he planned to do with the bombs, a former neighbor said Campano often railed against the government.

Barbara Vachon lived next door to Campano at the Center Park Place Apartments for several years and said he was a big reason she moved.

"He was always trying to get me and another neighbor to listen to anti-government tapes and watch anti-government videos," said Vachon. "I would never watch them. He was some kind of radical, and he didn't believe in the government."

She said there were other warnings.

"There were a few times I heard minor explosions from outside the apartment building, and he would scream that he had hurt himself," she said. "I never knew what he was up to."

Vachon said Campano seemed to be most active at night.

"There was a steady stream of creepy visitors going in and out of his apartment," she said.

If Campano were a Muslim, well, as Dave Neiwert says,

...we'd be getting talk-show panels on Hannity featuring Michelle Malkin ranting at length about the threat of Islamic jihad, blah blah blah. Not to mention chatty discussion on Fox and Friends and Morning Joe. 

But instead, because he's just a white anti-government extremist, hey, let's just give it a big shrug.

More on the case here and here.

Do check out the Campano case, and keep in mind the Wingers love to pretend that there's no such thing as right-wing domestic terrorism in the US.

Mind The Gap, Lads

Steve Benen notes the latest Daily Kos/Research 2000 poll has good and bad news for the Dems:

The latest Research 2000 poll for Daily Kos included the usual question on the generic congressional ballot, with Dems still enjoying a modest edge over Republicans, 37% to 32%, with 31% unsure. Democratic numbers were strongest in the Northeast (53% Dems, 7% GOP), and Republican numbers were strongest in the South (51% GOP, 21% Dems).

That's the good news.

But this poll added a new question to the mix to measure voter enthusiasm: "In the 2010 Congressional elections will you definitely vote, probably vote, not likely vote, or definitely will not vote?" The overall results aren't nearly as interesting as the partisan breakdown.
Among self-identified Republican voters, 81% are either "definitely" voting next year or "probably" voting, while 14% are "not likely" to vote or will "definitely" not vote.

Among self-identified Independent voters, 65% are either "definitely" voting next year or "probably" voting, while 23% are "not likely" to vote or will "definitely" not vote.

And among self-identified Democratic voters, 56% are either "definitely" voting next year or "probably" voting, while 40% are "not likely" to vote or will "definitely" not vote.

And that's the bad, bad news for the Dems in 2010.  The solution of course is to pass the legislation promised:

Finish health care. Pass a jobs bill. Finish the climate bill. Re-regulate the financial industry. Finish the education bill. Pick up immigration reform. Repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." It's ambitious, but a Democratic Congress and a Democratic president can prove to the country that they know how to tackle the issues that matter and know how to get things done.

The R2K/Daily Kos poll shouldn't cause panic among Democratic leaders; it should serve as a wake-up call.

But will it?  More than ever, the Dems need to pass real legislation.  More than ever, the GOP will try to stop them.  Unless the Dems deliver, the GOP will be back.

On The Road Again

I'm heading back from my vacation and I'll be on the road until this evening, so if you have any stories to flag or discuss, let's hear it.

How was your Thanksgiving?  It's an open thread.

Secret Service's Not-So-Secret Screwup

With evidence last night that last Tuesday evening's party crashers at the White House state dinner actually met with President Obama, I honestly find myself thinking two things:

1) America actually owes the Salahis a debt of gratitude for exposing this security lapse.  Considering this President has been under more death threats than any other in modern history to the point where it cannot fill its duties outside of protecting the President, this lapse here may have just saved the President's life in the future.

2) It takes staggering incompetence of such an earth-rattling magnitude, in this case on the part of Secret Service director Mark Sullivan, to make me agree with the Hot Air gang, but it is imperative that heads must roll in the USSS on this one, up to and including Sullivan.  With all due respect to the Service and the men and women who serve our country in this capacity, 99.9% is not good enough.  The honorable thing is to tender your resignation, sir.

StupidiNews, Weekend Edition!

• Russian officials believe a terrorist explosion may have derailed a Moscow express train that killed 26 people.
• Tiger Woods has been released from the hospital after a car crash yesterday, but many questions remain for the sport of golf.
• Thousands of Americans are still out of work and are getting subsidized COBRA insurance, which expires for many in December.
• At least one group is buying London's luxury homes again:  British bankers having a record year.
• The DOJ is fighting a losing battle against unmarked and counterfeit computer chips for the U.S. military.
  

Last Call Plus

Oh and one more thing tonight:  I thought "Climategate" was the indisputable proof that climate change was a myth, and that Copenhagen was now doomed.

Gosh, if anything it's looking like Copenhagen will be a major international success, and even China and the US are in, according to UN head Ban Ki-Moon.

"Our common goal is to achieve a firm foundation for a legally binding climate treaty as early as possible in 2010. I am confident that we are on track to do this," Ban told a summit of Commonwealth leaders in Trinidad and Tobago.
"Each week brings new commitments and pledges -- from industrialized countries, emerging economies and developing countries alike," he added.

"An agreement is within reach ... We must seal a deal in Copenhagen," Ban said. He, Rasmussen and French President Nicloas Sarkozy attended the summit of the 53-nation Commonwealth as special guests to lobby on Friday for international consensus on a climate pact.

Rasmussen said Denmark had received an "overwhelmingly positive" response to its invitation to world leaders to attend the talks next months. "More than 85 heads of state and government have told us they are coming to Copenhagen, and many are still positively considering," he said.

He urged major developed countries to deliver firm commitments on cutting greenhouse gas emissions and to "put figures on the table" for "up-front" financing to help poor nations combat climate change.
"The need for money on the table -- that is what we want to achieve in Copenhagen," Rasmussen told a news conference later.

There's just too much evidence out there showing we're in real trouble, guys.

Last Call

When Sully's not sticking a loaded gun to his head over Trig Palin, he's capable of smashing blowhards like Karl Rove.

I learned then that nothing beyond short term politics motivates Rove. Nothing. And I also learned: this fathomless cynicism is not just repulsive, it's invariably wrong. People sure did vote on deficits in 1992. And one small reason Obama won in 2008 is because many Independents and Republicans couldn't trust the GOP to stop spending and borrowing us into oblivion in an era of economic growth.

Now, Rove - whose shamelessness is only matched by his incompetence - is writing a deficit hawk column for the WSJ.

The sliver of argument he has left is that the debt we now face is vaster than we imagined only a year ago. The reason? Rove would have you believe it's those spend-and-splurge Democrats. In fact, of course, the massive debt has been building for years and its new height was precipitated by the recession begun under Bush (who was still in office a year ago), by the stimulus necessary to prevent a total abyss, by the bailout money required to rescue the banks, and by the continued de-leveraging after the reckless private borrowing of the Bush-Cheney years.

Steve Benen gets in on this one too.

Rove wants to see an "honest appraisal" of where we are. Good idea. The stimulus was necessary because Rove's old boss left the president an economy on the verge of wholesale collapse. S-CHIP expansion was necessary because Rove's old boss rejected a bipartisan measure to help low-income children go to the doctor. Rescuing the auto industry was necessary because it was a continuation of Rove's old boss' policy and the nation couldn't afford to cut off American manufacturing at the knees at the height of the recession. Cap and trade, Rove neglected to mention, wouldn't add to the deficit, and is necessary because Rove's old boss ignored the climate crisis for eight years. The health care reform bill would cut the deficit significantly, and is necessary because Rove's old boss fiddled while the dysfunctional health care system got worse.

That's an "honest appraisal."

Granted, Karl Rove takedowns are low-hanging fruit, but considering he gets a new column in the WSJ to lie about every two weeks or so, it's necessary harvesting.  Karl Rove's about as qualified to write about deficit reduction the same way GOP Sen. David Vitter is qualified to write about monogamous relationships.

The Kroog Versus Dubai

With the U.S. markets losing a percent and a half or so on today's half-day session due to the growing likelihood of a 'major sovereign default' in Dubai, Paul Krugman takes a look at what Dubai means for the bigger financial picture here in the states and across the globe.

As far as I can tell, there are three ways to look at it — three stories, if you like, about what Dubai means.

First, there’s the view that this is the beginning of many sovereign defaults, and that we’re now seeing the end of the ability of governments to use deficit spending to fight the slump. That’s the view being suggested, if I understand correctly, by the Roubini people and in a softer version by Gillian Tett.

Alternatively, you can see this as basically just another commercial real estate bust. Either you view Dubai World as nothing special, despite sovereign ownership, as Willem Buiter does; or you think of the emirate as a whole as, in effect, a highly leveraged CRE investor facing the same problems as many others in the same situation.

Finally, you can see Dubai as sui generis. And really, there has been nothing else quite like it.

At the moment, I’m leaning to a combination of two and three. For what it’s worth (not much), US bond prices are up right now, suggesting that the Dubai thing hasn’t raised expectations of default.

(More after the jump...)