The Zen Of Legal Hackery

Former Bush AG Michael Mukasey of course found nothing wrong with all the Bush/Cheney shenanigans in Iraq, Afghanistan, warrentless wiretapping, torturing prisoners, or any of the people involved in any of the above lying to Congress and the American people...but Joe Sestak?  WE NEED A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR NOW!

"It seems to me that if the offer came from the White House, you need a special prosecutor," Mukaskey said. "People were railing on me for months, demanding a special prosecutor for this, a special prosecutor for that. But here's a case where ... well, he hasn't said what happened."

Mukasey suggested that there were two extreme scenarios in the Sestak story, one that might not be a big deal, and one that would require a real investigation. "The least bad case," Mukasey said, "is that the guy's 20 points down, and everybody says you don't want to do this and bloody up a candidate to no end. You want to do something, we can find something for you. But to call somebody in and tell them, 'Look, you bow out and we'll offer you a job' is very serious. No rational prosecutor should indict unless it's that blatant.’ "

You have to be kidding me.  By Mukasey's logic, he should have appointed a dozen special prosecutors himself to look into his own bosses.

Top Kill Slays The Dragon?

Early this morning the LA Times is reporting that BP's "top kill" procedure has in fact actually worked.

Engineers have succeeded in stopping the flow of oil and gas into the Gulf of Mexico from a gushing BP well, the federal government's top oil spill commander, U.S. Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, said Thursday morning.

The "top kill" effort, launched Wednesday afternoon by industry and government engineers, has pumped enough drilling fluid to block all oil and gas from the well, Allen said. The pressure from the well is very low, but persists, he said.

Once engineers have reduced the well pressure to zero, they will begin to pump cement into the hole to entomb the well. To help that effort, he said, engineers are also pumping some debris into the blowout preventer at the top of the well.

No confirmation yet, but we'll see if BP finally got this damn thing fixed or not soon, I would think.  I'll reserve EPIC WIN status until then.

[UPDATE] Everyone's still hedging their bets on if it actually worked or not, but the official estimates are now in the 15-30k barrels a day range.  I think those are still several times too low.  Obama's presser:



And now the really, really bad news, there's far more oil under the surface, possible millions of barrels worth.

David Hollander, associate professor of chemical oceanography at the school, says the thick plume was detected just beneath the surface down to about 3,300 feet. He says it’s more than 6 miles wide. Scientists say they are worried the undersea plumes may be from chemical dispersants used to break up the oil a mile under the surface.

Not good.

Unimpeachable Character

Jill over at Brilliant at Breakfast argues this morning that the White House better get on stomping this Joe Sestak job offer thing into the ground, because the Party of No is already shifting into Lewinsky Mode.  Salon:

The zeal that Rep. Darrell Issa has brought to his pursuit of the allegations that the White House dangled some kind of job in front of Joe Sestak last year while they were trying to muscle him out of the Pennsylvania Senate primary is impressive, if also a little amusing. Issa, the ranking Republican on the House Oversight Committee, has been thundering about an alleged bribe, using scary words like "impeachable," "crime" and "ethics complaint." (Actually, considering how rarely the House Ethics Committee can be roused to do anything about lawmakers, that last one isn't so scary.)

But as Alex Pareene has already noted, this isn't exactly the first time someone in politics cut a deal for a job. When Sen. Judd Gregg was going to leave Congress to join the Obama administration -- which, in the end, he didn't do, because he realized he disagreed with everything President Obama stands for -- he wasn't going to take the appointment to become commerce secretary unless his replacement in New Hampshire's Senate seat would caucus with the GOP.

Right, so Issa's not about to throw fellow Republican Judd Gregg under the bus just to go after Obama, right?

If you've been paying any attention over the last, oh, 16 years, you know the answer already.

After we hung up, though, I found a quote from a Gregg statement, making clear he wanted a Republican appointed (and another quote from Gregg's appearance with Obama, where he thanked New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch, a Democrat, for "his courtesy and courage in being willing to make this possible through the agreement that we have").

Which, to Bardella's credit, and Issa's, meant he changed his tune a little bit.

"If the White House had come to Judd Gregg and said, 'We will make you the secretary of commerce, in exchange for which we will guarantee the appointment of a Republican,' that would be just as wrong," Bardella said. (Which is, of course, exactly what happened.) "That would be worthy of the same scrutiny and would still be a violation of how [Obama] said he would govern. Once you vacate your seat, you announce your intention to take another job, you lose the right to dictate what should happen to that seat. No one person owns a seat ... Offices in the United States Congress should not ever be used as bargaining chips."

So to recap: Issa's staff says Gregg's deal is just as bad as the one Sestak alleged. We'll pause here to allow for the angry phone calls and e-mails back and forth between people who work for Gregg and Issa. (And while we wait, we also have a call in to Gregg's office for comment, which wasn't immediately returned.)

As Jill points out, this is where it will begin.

Let's not forget that Republicans regard ANY Democrat who is elected President by the will of the people as illegitimate. This is a party that has embraced the teabaggers and the birthers and is looking for ANY EXCUSE WHATSOEVER to remove this president from office. They did it before with Bill Clinton, when they tried to impeach him for lying about an affair -- something their peeps do all the time. They will trump up bullshit, and their lackeys in the media will huff and puff and clutch their pearls in outrage. Because where the media is concerned, the IOKIYAR rule always applies. (And yes, I'm talking to you, Chuck Todd.)

But remember one thing: Whatever this president's shortcomings, he's got a lot on his plate right now: a still-faltering economy, a persistent terrorist threat from the Middle East, a rise in right-wing violence and threats of violence here at home, tension between the Koreas, Europe on the brink of chaos, and an oil company run amok in the Gulf of Mexico. The last time the Republicans decided to impeach a president over nonsense, the effort failed because Americans regarded him as a lovable scamp. Barack Obama's cool aloofness will not serve him as well.

I happen to agree with her.  Understand that should the GOP take control of the House in November, Obama will face impeachment hearings.  This is an absolute, like gravity, birds crapping on your freshly washed car, and Uwe Boll movies based on video game franchises sucking horribly.  If you think Obama's doing a lousy job, that's one thing.  Do you think the Republicans deserve to be back in control?  That's another thing entirely.

[UPDATE] WaPo's Jon Bernstein agrees.

The incentives all run to impeachment, as far as I can tell. The leaders of such an effort would find it easy to cash in (literally, I mean) with books and appearances on the conservative lecture circuit. It's hard to believe that Rush, Beck and the rest of the gang wouldn't be tripping over each other to wear the crown of the Host Who Brought Down the socialist gangster president. And we've seen the ability, or I should say the lack thereof, of rank-and-file GOP pols to stand up to the talk show yakkers. Besides, it's not as if a new Republican majority would have a full agenda of legislative items to pass, and what they did have would face an Obama veto (and most likely death in the Senate at any rate). Against all that is the collective preference of the Republican Party not to have a reputation as a pack of loons, but that doesn't seem to be much of a constraint in practice. Of course, also against impeachment is the lack of a serious offense by the president, but I don't see that as a major impediment -- if offering a job to a potential Senate candidate is an impeachable offense (and see Jonathan Chait if you think it really is), then they'll have no trouble at all coming up with something.

It's not like voters punished the GOP short term in 2000 for impeaching Clinton in 98-99.   They ended up controlling Congress and the White House, remember?

If It's Thursday...

460K new jobless claims, 4.61 million continuing claims.  Best line:

The U.S. job market has failed to bounce back convincingly despite three straight quarters of solid economic growth.

Well, that's because the "growth" is all in corporate profits through additional job cuts, genius.

Headless Chicken Scramble

I've seen a lot of folks on both the left and the right scream OBAMA NEEDS TO DO SOMETHING about Lake Palin.

Do...what?  What should be be doing?  Very few people seem to have those answers, but they sure are mad.

The response to the disaster by energy giant BP, President Obama and the federal government all get terrible grades from Americans in a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll.

Nearly three-fourths of those surveyed Monday and Tuesday say BP is doing a "poor" or "very poor" job in handling the calamity. Six of 10 say that of the federal government. And a 53% majority give Obama a poor rating.

So, suddenly now everyone's mad and worried about the environment:

The catastrophe has boosted concern about the environment over development of new energy supplies -- a long-time balancing act in American politics.

Now, a majority say protection of the environment should be given priority, "even at the risk of limiting energy supplies."

The 55%-39% divide on that question was a reversal of American views in March, before the April 20 explosion sent crude oil spewing into the gulf. Then, by 50%-43% Americans said development U.S. energy supplies should be given priority, "even if the environment suffers to some extent."

On a similar question, those surveyed divided 50%-43% over whether the environment should be protected "even at the risk of curbing economy growth" or if growth should be given priority, "even if the environment suffers to some extent."

That's a big swing from March, too. Then, by 53%-38% Americans chose economic growth as their priority.

So, maybe the American people want the federal government to take over the effort to clean up?

Who should be in charge of cleanup efforts? More than two-thirds say BP, not the federal government.

Umm...okay... well, Obama can at least stop offshore drilling, right?

There is still majority support for increasing offshore drilling for oil and gas in U.S. coastal areas: 52% favor, 44% oppose. Just one in five oppose all offshore drilling. 

Right then.  Carry on, America!

[UPDATE]  A TPM reader has some interesting perspective on "top kill".

On having Obama "do more," WTF is he supposed to do? Everybody seems to be calling for more fire in his belly and scary, threatening speeches. What does that accomplish? It's like people want him to do a dramatic speech like post-9/11 about bringing the criminals to justice. It does nothing to actually plug the damn well. The government does not have the expertise to do more to stop this gusher. It's in BPs interest to stop the gusher. All the conspiracy theories about wanting to preserve the well for future production are technically wrong and ignore that NOBODY in the industry benefits from this gusher continuing. BP wants what everybody else wants, though I'll concede that I suspect dispersants are about killing life where it's less easily photographed. Dispersants aside, the only conflict of interest is regarding the causes of the blowout, not the capping of the well. Fed investigations are already taking care of that part.

Do read the whole letter.

The Real Deal Appeal Of Repeal, Part 4

Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli has become the de facto GOP point man on the efforts to overturn health care reform, and he's confident that the matter will go before the Supreme Court relatively quickly, but they have to start with the federal district court.

"Just statistically, we're most likely to survive standing, and then we have a better than even chance of winning on the merits," he said in an interview Tuesday, a day after the federal government filed a response to his suit. "I wouldn't go farther than that. I wish I could."

At the same time, a loss would strengthen the hand of those who have argued that Cuccinelli's suit is frivolous with little chance of success, and, for that reason, Cuccinelli argues his suit is a marathon that will undoubtedly be decided by the Supreme Court. Winning along the way to Washington would be more fun than losing, but not a necessity.

"Nobody likes to lose, but we're in this for the long haul," he said. "We understand this is going to be decided ultimately by the Supreme Court, and that's the course we're on, regardless of what happens in the district court or the 4th Circuit. ...You take them one at a time -- you don't think about the next drive until you finish your putt."

Cuccinelli said he realizes he faces the burden of proof in convincing judges the law is unconstitutional. But the federal government faces "the burden of persuasion."

"The federal government has a significant burden in convincing judges they can order people to do something, to go buy something, under the guise of regulating commerce, when that has never ever ever been done before in the history of the United States," he said.

It still amuses me that the idea of an insurance mandate was originally proposed by and fully supported by Republicans like Chuck Grassley.   I've gone over the legal arguments for and against the constitutionality of mandates before, and they are worth looking at again.  The fact of the matter is the courts have already decided on several occasions that the Commerce Clause extends this far, most recently five years ago:

Numerous constitutional scholars say the mandate is well within the scope of what the court has defined as commercial activity -- pointing to the 2005 case, Gonzales v. Raich, in which the Supreme Court found that the federal government could criminalize the growth and possession of medical marijuana, even when it was limited to within a single state, on the grounds that doing so was part of an effort to control the interstate drug trade.

This lawsuit is just a cynical political exercise, nothing more.  They're wasting time and state tax dollars, which the TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY crowd doesn't seem to care about all of a sudden...

StupidiNews!

• Homeland Security officials say a record number or attempted terror attacks have been thwarted in the last year.
• The effects of the Gulf oil spill could reach the Bahamas over the weekend...
• ...as a BP worker who was at the rig before the explosion took the 5th Amendment rather than testify to federal officials in Louisiana.
• China is backing the euro "long-term", raising markets around the globe this morning.
• Dozens of House Democrats are now lining up against the FCC's net neutrality rules, saying they will cost jobs, and that only Congress has the authority to regulate the internet.

Last Call

Looks like Eric Holder and the DoJ are going to go after Arizona's immigration law after all.

Top Justice Department officials have drafted a legal challenge asserting that Arizona's controversial immigration law is unconstitutional because it impinges on the federal government's authority to police the nation's borders, sources said Wednesday.

At the same time, the government officials said, the department's civil rights section is considering possible legal action against the law on the basis that it amounts to racial profiling of Latinos who are legally in Arizona but conceivably could be asked to provide documents proving their citizenship.

U.S. Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. met Wednesday with 10 top police chiefs who object to the Arizona legislation and promised them he would act on the recommendations soon, a spokesman said.

The police chiefs urged Holder and the Obama administration, which has grave reservations about the Arizona measure, to stop the law. The chiefs said it would seriously hamper local police work if officers had to serve as border patrol policemen.

"He did say that the Justice Department is seriously considering what they would do and that could come very soon," said Chuck Wexler, the director of the Police Executive Research Forum, a think tank that helped bring the police chiefs together with Holder.

The sooner the better.  Take it to the courts.  Let the GOP go on record saying the law doesn't amount to racial profiling when it's struck down for doing just that.   After all, Latinos are rapidly becoming the next block of reliable Democratic voters.

Smart GOP strategists know this is a problem; the consensus is that Republicans need to capture AT LEAST 35-40% of the vote to win national contests. Yet looking at Republican primaries across the country, GOP candidates aren't looking at the long-term. In Arizona, John McCain is airing a TV ad declaring “complete the danged fence.” In California, Steve Poizner is comparing Meg Whitman to Mexico’s president in a TV ad criticizing her opposition to the Arizona law, while Whitman has a TV ad saying she “absolutely” opposes amnesty. And in Alabama, gubernatorial candidate Tim James says, “This is Alabama, we speak English. If you want to live here, learn it.” Pete Wilson is an important lesson here, says co-pollster Peter Hart (D): In presidential races from 1952 to 1988, Dems won California just once. After Wilson’s Prop. 187, Republicans haven’t come close to winning the nation’s biggest state. The next California could be Texas, and the GOP can't afford to have that big state become competitive.

Texas, Florida, California, New York and increasingly states like North Carolina and Ohio have growing Latino populations.  They see what the GOP is doing to them in Arizona.  They see that Republicans increasingly don't care about them either, more and more just want to deport millions and couldn't give a damn about Latino families, children, or communities caught in the collateral damage.

So thanks, GOP.  We appreciate you handing over the country to the Dems for the next couple decades.

The Tale Of McCain Unable

I actually feel sorry for John McCain after the long string of horrible decisions he's made, turning him from the GOP's post-Bush hope just two years ago into a bitter old laughingstock at the end of his political career now.  Today, he showed why Republicans will continue to get mauled in the polls as despite an overwhelming call from Americans to repeal DADT, John McCain vowed to filibuster the defense bill that the repeal is included on anyway.

Armed Services ranking member John McCain said Thursday that he would “without a doubt” support a filibuster if the bill goes to the floor with repeal language.

“I’ll do everything in my power,” the Arizona Republican said, citing letters from the four service chiefs urging Congress not to act before a Pentagon review of the policy is complete. “I’m going to do everything I can to support the men and women of the military and to fight what is clearly a political agenda.”

Keep in mind a solid majority of Republicans now support repealing DADT.

A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Tuesday indicates that 78 percent of the public supports allowing openly gay people to serve in the military, with one in five opposed.

"Support is widespread, even among Republicans. Nearly six in ten Republicans favor allowing openly gay individuals to serve in the military," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "There is a gender gap, with 85 percent of women and 71 percent of men favoring the change, but support remains high among both groups."

And yet poor John McCain has to run to the right of Teabagger primary opponent J.D. Hayworth, which means he feels he must be rabidly homophobic or he loses his job.

That's John McCain's GOP in 2010.

I Do Not Believe That Word Means What You Think It Means

"Libertarian", as in "Rand Paul is one."  Seems actual Libertarians here in Kentucky are pretty pissed off at him.

The state chairman of the Libertarians of Kentucky has disavowed statements by the party's vice chair, that suggest the group is considering running a real Libertarian candidate against Kentucky Republican Senate nominee Rand Paul.

Chairman Ken Moellman told TPM that those statements were "not an official communication or an official stance." However, Moellman did insist that Paul's views are not in line with those of Libertarians'.


The Associated Press reported today that Party Vice Chairman Joshua Koch "said the idea of fielding a candidate has been an ongoing discussion among Libertarian leaders in Kentucky and hasn't been an issue of contention internally."

"The reason why we would even consider running somebody in this race," Koch said, "is because we're not going to let Rand determine what a Libertarian stands for. I'm here to say Rand does not have the Libertarian ideology."

That's because Rand Paul is something called "A Republican."   Funny how that works.  Hey, Kentucky Libertarian Party, you want to run somebody against Rand Paul, you go right ahead.

A Matter Of Responsibility

As we wait to see if BP's Operation Mudball can stop this mess in the Gulf, let's not forget why there's a massive geyser in the first place.

Company executives and top drill hands on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig argued for hours about how to proceed before a BP official made the decision to remove heavy drilling fluid from the well and replace it with lighter weight seawater that was unable to prevent gas from surging to the surface and exploding.

One employee was so mad, the rig's chief mechanic Doug Brown testified, that he warned they'd be relying on the rig's blowout preventer if they proceeded the way BP wanted.

"He pretty much grumbled, 'Well, I guess that's what we have those pinchers for,' " Brown said of Jimmy Harrell, the top Transocean official on the rig. "Pinchers" was likely a reference to the shear rams in the blowout preventers, the final means of stopping an explosion.

Brown said in sworn testimony on Wednesday that the BP official stood up during the meeting and said, "This is how it's going to be."

And this is the result.  To save a couple bucks for the company, BP risked ruining America's Gulf coastline and costing taxpayers potentially hundreds of billions.  And this time, they rolled snake eyes.

Never forget.

On The Edge

In a stark reminder that the economy is nowhere near good, cities like Harrisburg, Pennsylvania are on the edge of survival and contemplating bankruptcy.

The possibility of a bankruptcy filing by the city of Harrisburg, Pa., the state capital, looms large these days—and it could be the first in a series, say some Wall Street traders.

Harrisburg, population 55,000, owes nearly $70 million in debt payments this year, and it's unclear where that money will come from. Harrisburg now has one of the lowest credit ratings of any municipality in the United States.

Harrisburg Mayor Linda Thompson told CNBC Wednesday that she had assembled a group of bond stakeholders, the city council and other interested parties to work out the crisis "so that we don't become the poster child of the world in terms of bankruptcy." 

Municipal bond underwriters are monitoring Harrisburg, which has struggled to contain the costs of financing a troubled incinerator project.

 

In 2003, the city borrowed $125 million to expand and retrofit its incinerator, which officials thought would make money for Harrisburg. The incinerator re-opened five years later, but it's turned out to be nothing but a money drain. 

On May 1, the city missed a $452,282 loan payment related to the incinerator. 

Raising taxes or selling assets, like real estate or parking lots, are options for Harrisburg. So is a restructuring plan—either inside or outside of bankruptcy. 

If Harrisburg does file for bankruptcy, it would do so under Chapter 9—which is employed by cities, but rarely. In one closely watched case, the city of Vallejo, Calif., has been in Chapter 9 since 2008.

The GOP plan is to take it out on "overpaid" city workers and cut their jobs.  After all, they work for the government, they must be lazy, evil, and stupid, right?  But Harrisburg's problems weren't caused by horrible, demonic unions or awful social programs that rewarded tax-dodging leeches...no the problem is Harrisburg tried to make money off the city's trash incinerator.

It failed miserably.  Problem is, the "free market" didn't want what Harrisburg was selling -- excess trash incineration capacity -- and the incinerator itself was a toxic mess that had to be shut down.  And it's the city workers that have had to pay the price ever since.  When you're never allowed to raise taxes, only cut spending, you get to a point where you basically can never function.  Businesses are allowed to raise revenues by increasing prices.  Governments?  Sure as hell can't even think about that, or they're run out of town by an angry mob.

So cities like Harrisburg will continue to fall apart.

By The Time I Get To...Illinois?

What, you thought our Deportation Nation was limited to the Grand Canyon State?

Eduardo Caraballo, a U.S. citizen born in the United States, was detained for over three days on suspicion of being an illegal immigrant.

Despite presenting identifying documents and even his birth certificate, Caraballo was held by federal immigration authorities over the weekend and threatened with deportation, according to an NBC Chicago report. He was only released when his congressman, Luis Gutierrez -- a vocal supporter of immigration reform -- intervened on his behalf.

Caraballo was born in Puerto Rico, making him a natural-born citizen of the United States. He moved to the mainland as an infant, and now lives in Chicago.

Last week, NBC reports that he was arrested in connection with a stolen car in Berwyn. Caraballo maintains his innocence. In any case, when his mother posted bail on Friday, he was not freed.

"Instead of being released, he was told by authorities that Immigration and Customs Enforcement was detaining him because he was an illegal immigrant," NBC reports.

Caraballo spent the weekend in the custody of federal immigration agents. When he presented them with ID and his birth certificate, he says officials were skeptical: "Because of the way I look, I have Mexican features, they pretty much assumed that my papers were fake."

Guilty until proven innocent.  That's the regime the GOP wants for Latinos.  Gotta prove you are a US citizen, and do it time and time again, onus is on you, not the government.  What's to stop the police from saying your papers are fake and deporting you anyway?  That's a hell of an implied threat.  You're Latino...what can you do about it?  Your word against ours, hermano.  And you lose.

You're naive if you don't think this is going on in police precincts all over the United States in 2010.  If you can't round up and deport millions, make being Latino in the United States such a terrible experience that they all want to leave, right?  That's got to be a hell of a thing, being a second or third generation Latino in the US and knowing that if the right people decide you've done the wrong thing, you're gone.

Nobody could have predicted that the GOP's purity campaign would result in stories like this.  Nobody could have predicted that Latinos are now flocking in huge numbers to the Democrats, either.

On Tenther Hooks

The Tenthers are back in the news, fighting the bad fight for states' rights against federal laws (while continuing to take as much federal money as possible.) This time they're combining their two favorite pastimes:  Obama Derangement Syndrome, and firearms.

Under the rationale that the federal government only has the power to regulate issues that affect inter-state commerce, they've been pushing legislation in states from Florida to Alaska that would exempt guns and ammunition made within the state from federal gun laws. The idea is "the latest crack cocaine for gun-rights advocates," says Peter Hamm of the Brady Campaign.

In seven states, bills have already been passed into law, and they've been introduced in 20 others. (Here's a state-by-state map of where things stand.)

In most cases, say experts, the laws won't have much practical effect, because very few of the guns sold in a given state -- not to mention the ammunition they fire -- were made in that state. They're also likely unconstitutional, according to gun control groups, since the supremacy clause makes clear that federal laws trump state laws when the two are in conflict. In Oklahoma, Governor Brad Henry, a conservative Democrat, recently vetoed the bill, saying it wasn't worth the cost of defending it in court because it would ultimately be struck down. Court challenges have already been launched in Wyoming and Montana. "We will take [the laws] seriously until the federal courts throw them out, as we presume," says Hamm.

But in the context of other recent conservative challenges to federal action, the effort seems as much designed to make a point about state sovereignty as to make guns more accessible. It's in keeping with the conservative challenge to the health-care reform law on similar grounds -- and even with the new suggestion from Arizona right-wingers that states can determine who is and isn't a U.S. citizen. 

Once again, you have to view this in the context of the larger battle:  there's a growing movement out there to invalidate as much of the federal government as possible while saying that states have the power to do whatever they want inside their own state.  If that means states have the power to ignore federal mandates and regulations, so be it...just as long at the feds continue to send federal taxpayer money collected from blue states to run red state programs for infrastructure, health care, and Social Security.

The hysterical thing is that the Republicans behind the Tenther movement are the same ones screaming that the feds haven't done enough to stop the oil spill in the Gulf or the immigration problem along the Mexican border.  Even better, at the national level the GOP is doing everything they can to block both raising liability caps on energy companies for oil spills, and any sort of comprehensive national immigration reform.

In other words, Tenthers want all the federal revenue, and then none of the federal oversight.  Republicans aren't serious about solving problems, just serious about pandering to voters with illogical and unsustainable wishful thinking.

Anything to serve as justification to hide their actual agenda.

The Paranoid (Joisey) Style

Gotta love New Jersey Teabaggers.  In the paranoid, know-nothing world they inhabit, politicians are king, and schoolteachers are the enemy.  Exhibit A, Gov. Chris Christie.

Governor Christie on Tuesday told a borough teacher to find another job if she did not feel she was compensated enough as he defended his state budget cuts and promoted a plan to cap annual growth in property tax collections.


He also told an 89-year-old former mayor she'd have to wait until next spring for a rebate she'd been getting for more than a decade in the late summer. And he told a parent that cuts to services, including the local library, are needed because "we are out of money."

A largely friendly crowd of about 150 people turned out in a church gymnasium to hear Christie deliver a half-hour talk that trashed greedy public employee unions and state laws that handcuff local officials trying to control spending.

He then opened the floor to questions. A few were softballs, including the declaration by Clara Nebot of Bergenfield that Christie is "a god" to her relatives in Florida.

But borough teacher Rita Wilson, a Kearny resident, argued that if she were paid $3 an hour for the 30 children in her class, she’d be earning $83,000, and she makes nothing near that.

"You’re getting more than that if you include the cost of your benefits," Christie interrupted.

When Wilson, who has a master’s degree, said she was not being compensated for her education and experience, Christie said:

"Well, you know then that you don’t have to do it." Some in the audience applauded.

Christie said he would not have had to impose cuts to education if the teachers union had agreed to his call for a one-year salary freeze and a 1.5 percent increase in employee benefit contributions.

"Your union said that is the greatest assault on public education in the history of the state," Christie said. "That’s why the union has no credibility, stupid statements like that."

Politicians are "gods".  Teachers who educate millions of students in New Jersey meanwhile are an "assault on public education".   You know, I vaguely recall an America where teachers were actually considered useful and beneficial members of society, certainly far more than politicians.  But not if you're a Teabagger.  The teacher might actually tell you something that you might not want to hear, like "facts" or "knowledge".  Since both are anathema to your average Teabagger, teachers are now the Enemy.

And that goes straight to the larger picture of how these guys operate.  Critical thinking, reasoning, problem solving?  That's for egghead elitists.  Real Americans catapult the propaganda and are never wrong because by God, they believe they are right.  So naturally anyone who might instill those dreaded "thinking" skills in the minds of America's youth have to be attacked.

We live in a country where millions of Americans think teachers are bigger scumbags than say, the Governor of New Jersey.  No wonder our children is not learning.