Last Call

David Brooks basically writes one of the more important pieces this year in Village Idiocy.

He starts out saying he was a "sap" for believing Obama was different, you standard firebagger refrain...

I liked Obama’s payroll tax cut ideas and urged Republicans to play along. But of course I’m a sap. When the president unveiled the second half of his stimulus it became clear that this package has nothing to do with helping people right away or averting a double dip. This is a campaign marker, not a jobs bill. 

...spends the next several paragraphs laying into Obama for being awful by using GOP talking points on how the rich pay too much in taxes, then admits this at the end:

The president believes the press corps imposes a false equivalency on American politics. We assign equal blame to both parties for the dysfunctional politics when in reality the Republicans are more rigid and extreme. There’s a lot of truth to that...

 What's this?  Actual honesty?  Oh wait.

...but at least Republicans respect Americans enough to tell us what they really think. The White House gives moderates little morsels of hope, and then rips them from our mouths. To be an Obama admirer is to toggle from being uplifted to feeling used. 

Yes, Republicans respect Americans and evil extremist Obama hates them.  And by "Americans" Brooks means "moderates."  And by "moderates" Brooks means people who make $600 grand a year.  You know, regular, salt of the earth types.  Brooks admits to the constant unfair media false equivalency of Obama being "just as bad or worse" as the fringe GOP, and then proceeds to make that false equivalency in the second half of the same goddamn sentence.   To Brooks, the notion that the rich should pay even Clinton era tax rates is as bad as Rick Perry saying evolution is "a theory that's out there."  He's just as bad and Brooks is saying he's so stupid for believing otherwise, because they're the same.

If only Obama wasn't such a liberal extremist...

The White House has decided to wage the campaign as fighting liberals. I guess I understand the choice, but I still believe in the governing style Obama talked about in 2008. I may be the last one. I’m a sap. 

Yes, you, David Brooks, are the last person who believes in President Obama, you know.   Mewling idiot.

Exciting New Horizons In Obama Derangement Syndrome

How do you know President Obama is scoring hits on the Republicans?  The birthers are suddenly "back in the news".  Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Orly Taitz, Pat Boone all making news this week with the idiocy we all know and love...like herpes these fools will never die.

You ever notice the birthers get the loudest just when President Obama is making positive news?

The Dark Moose Candidate

The Rumpies flag down Joe "OBAMATRONS IN MY WATER" Farah's suggestion that Sarah Palin should primary Obama.  (Please wipe off your screen now from the spit take.) YAFB:

Farah’s logic is unassailable. Palin’s “career” is going nowhere. The Repub establishment mistrusts if not hates her, and the Tea Party, now considerably off the boil, has no shortage of batshit insane candidates willing to say any old crap to pander to the basest of the base.

Chortling at his own ingenuity, Farah's goes on to cite Limbaugh’s “Operation Chaos.” Because that was so successful. And because Hillary Clinton is obviously still totally indistinguishable in terms of accomplishments, intellect, and electability from quitty ex-governor and soundly defeated hasbeen veep candidate Sarah Palin in the minds of the wingnutariat.

The masterplan is already being greeted with some enthusiasm over at FreeRepublic. I have yet to check whether it’s found its way to Conservatives4Palin yet, but it can only be a matter of time.

But see, nobody can appreciate the brilliance of his idea because Sarah Palin's 15% for to 75% against approval numbers among Democrats is really just an outlier and doesn't represent how happy Democrats would be to have her, right?

So mega-stupid it's tautology.  God, the cult around Sarah Palin is creepy.

A Sour Note

Normally, I don't get my knickers in a twist over celebrity behavior. It's our fault that they are outrageous, we demand it.  To remain relevant, they must top the headlines or be forgotten.

However, I am disappointed in the coverage for Journey guitarist Neal Schon and "celebrity" Michaele Salahi.  She is a wannabe, and both have left their spouses without answer, apology or acknowledgement.  Schon's wife learned from TMZ what happened.  Foreigner made headlines when he said he was "impressed" with the publicity Schon brought thanks to this media hype. 

Is it real?  Is it crap?  Either way, it's disgusting.  So where is the Republican flood on this?  Don't they want to do something to protect the meaning of marriage?  Where the hell are the bible thumpers and the holier-than-thous?  Is it worse for two gay people who honor each other to marry than a bimbo and a has-been wrecking lives?  If you want to talk about setting examples and doing the right thing, start here.  There's a lot of mess to clean up.

Also, on a sad note, Salahi's dog passed away.  Rumor has it he was so depressed he wouldn't leave the bed after her disappearance, and already had heart problems.  Just had to throw that in because one good bitch deserves another.

Netflix Conundrum: A Conundrum By Any Other Name

... is still a conundrum.  I know Z hit this briefly this morning, but I wanted to expand a little.

Netflix is renaming its DVD-by-mail program.  The red envelopes will continue, but the name Qwikster will be stamped on them.  Personally, I am still not impressed.  A name change means nothing, and after their 60% price hike they lost a lot of customers and even more trust from remaining customers.  This is a whole lot of  media for a very small change.  The addition of games will be nice, but it may be an example of too little too late for customers who feel burned and misled.

Netflix CEO Reed Hastings manage to irritate people more than comfort them in the wake of the price hike.  Netflix customers lashed out not only at the price hike, but how it was handled.  Customers were sent a very dry and borderline rude notice of the price change, without explanation or apology for the circumstances.  In fact, there was no mention of the circumstances at all.  Customers were left without any reason to explain the increase.  When that explanation finally came, it was again delivered terribly and with a "sorry about your luck" approach that was as off-putting as it was informative.  The article I read first said it perfectly, it's like someone saying "I'm sorry what I said offended you," instead of a simple "I'm sorry."

Netflix has become a monster in technology, but it goes to show that even the most successful business has to treat its customers well or face the consequences.  In this case, Netflix has shown where they need to improve.  Instead of fighting the technology, a little customer relations work could go a long way towards preserving their future.

Orly? Ya Rly! In 2012?!?

Oh please please please let this happen.

So-called "birther queen" Orly Taitz is considering running for Sen. Dianne Feinstein's seat in 2012.

"I think I do have a chance specifically because I do speak Spanish and I speak Hebrew," Taitz told the Sacramento Bee following a town hall event on Latino issues at the California Republican Party convention.

A Senate run, Taitz said would "give me a platform to talk about the issues that corrupt establishment... are refusing to talk about."

Like KENYANS IN THE WHITE HOUSE.  Oh please, the comedy factor alone is worth her running for DiFi's seat.  Can't wait for this, bring it on.

The Three Million Pound Elephant In The Room

The News Corp phone hacking scandal?  Why yes, it's still an issue.  Maybe that's why the Murdochs are so eager to bury it.

News International is expected to pay about three million pounds($4.7 million) to settle hacking claims by the family of murder victim Milly Dowler against the now defunct News of the World newspaper, sources close to the case told Reuters on Monday.


The settlement is likely to involve close to a two million pound payment to the murdered schoolgirl's family and a donation of at least one million pounds to charity.

News International and Mark Lewis, lawyer for the family, declined to comment.

If we're down to the "throw money to make it go away" stage this early, then the real meat of this story can't be too far off.  Keep an eye on this one.

Winning At Planning By Planning To Win

Deaniac83's piece at The People's View on President Obama's actions this month is nothing short of outstanding.  Go read it.

None of these things should be a surprise. When I called Paul Krugman a political rookie compared to President Obama, he wasn't alone in underestimating President Obama's political acumen. Just as the Professional Left screamed and moaned, John Boehner claimed that he got 98% of what he wanted, a claim so stupid it was buoyed by Daily Kos' Markos Moulitsas later.The truth is that the Republicans lost the battle to "drown the government in a bathtub" back on August 1. The president took all their cards, and left them holding a whole bunch of teabags. And now that Congress' approval is at 12% and members are deathly afraid of being themselves thrown out of office if they are not seen as productive, the President brings the hammer down in the form of a veto threat.

Republicans were screaming for a specific plan from the president on jobs, and he gave them one. They were clamoring for a specific plan from him on deficit reduction, and he gave them that today. He threw a challenge: that he will always protect and defend the American middle class, students, poor and the elderly, and it would be the choice of the Republicans if they want to protect the same people or the tax welfare system for the superwealthy.

Do read the whole thing and arm yourself with those arguments.  We're going to need them. President Obama really did lay the foundation for pantsing the GOP in the last six weeks, and he's continuing to build on it daily.

StupidiNews!

• The US military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy is officially gone as of today.
• Israel says it is ending a bilateral police cooperation program with Turkey as relations between the two countries continues to sour.
• President Obama's proposal to save the Postal Service includes ending Saturday delivery and raising the price of stamps.
• US officials say they are probing eight offshore banks for possible tax evasion, with grand jury investigations underway.
• Researchers are finding ways to detect single molecules out of trillions with new optical technology based on hyrdophobic substances.

Last Call

The New Yorker's James Surowiecki bemoans that the GOP will be rewarded by voters for doing nothing about the jobs crisis.

But people are underestimating a number of factors that could allow the G.O.P. to pursue an obstructive line without being much punished for it. To begin with, studies show that voters are more likely to hold politicians accountable for economic conditions when there’s “clarity of responsibility”—and responsibility for the economy now belongs to Obama and the Democrats. The recession started long before Obama took office. But, from a voter’s perspective, he had two years with sizable majorities in Congress to do something about it. While the 2009 stimulus plan succeeded in making the recession less awful than it might have been, you rarely get credit in politics for what didn’t happen. More important, in launching the plan, the President effectively took responsibility for the result. If you try to fix it, it’s yours. The Republicans were out of power for two years, and now control only one house of Congress. They can dodge blame, since they’ve had little chance of enacting anything. Coöperating on a bill would make it harder for them to disclaim responsibility for a weak economy at election time. They need to do enough to seem as if they cared about unemployment but not so much that they get blamed for it.

Well then, who's letting them get away with that obviously cynical plan?  Would be nice if you called them on it rather than saying "Well, here's what they are doing and it's crap but what can a major national news outlet do to set the record straight."

In addition, while most voters say that they want the government to do something about jobs, talking about voters in general is deceptive: different sets of voters react to economic conditions quite differently. The Republican base is actively hostile toward more government spending, and polls show that swing voters think that reining in deficits is the main priority. That reduces the pressure on Republican politicians to do something about the jobs crisis. Compounding this is the fact that Republican and Democratic voters seem to have different expectations of officeholders. The economist Douglas Hibbs has found that, historically, Democratic voters were more likely to punish incumbents for presiding over periods of high unemployment, while Republican voters were likely to punish incumbents for presiding over periods of high inflation. And a study of gubernatorial elections found that Democrats who presided over increases in taxes and spending were rewarded by voters, while Republicans who did the same were punished. Voters, it seems, don’t expect Republicans to do much about jobs, so they’re not penalized as much for inaction. Uncooperative Republicans are really just delivering what their constituencies expect.

Republican voters expect Republicans to do nothing, and that GOP lawmakers want to do nothing.  They win, because Republicans apparently only give a damn about themselves.

It’s not that the Republican approach is popular: one recent Bloomberg poll found that forty-five per cent of those surveyed think congressional Republicans are responsible for the gridlock in Washington. But it seems to be working: for the past year and a half, the Party has consistently gone for a do-nothing approach and voters have consistently rewarded it. In the run-up to last year’s midterms, Republicans were explicit about their opposition to past, present, and future stimulus programs. They won a landslide victory. And, just last week, in two special elections for the House, Republican candidates who campaigned largely against Obama’s policies won seats in Nevada and New York by margins that were much bigger than expected. Americans may be saying that they want the government to use fiscal policy to get the economy moving again, but the way they vote tells a different story. Perhaps fourteen more months of economic stagnation and no job creation will change that. But, for now, it’s not only our representatives who are to blame. It’s ourselves.

Gee, by taking advantage of low-information voters for 30 years the GOP has managed to wreck the country.  If only there was some sort of media outlet who could spread corrections to that theory...

Funny how that works.

It's Not Class Warfare, It's Math...Or Maybe It Really Is Warfare

As BG in KC points out, the Obama '12 folks have their bumper sticker phrase.  The President unveiled his plan to pay for the American Jobs Act with the Buffett Rule today at the White House.

"During this past decade, profligate spending in Washington, tax cuts into multi-millionaires and billionaires, and two wars have turned a record surplus into a massive deficit," Obama said. "If we don't act, the debt will eventually crowd out everything else, eventually affecting us from investing in things like education and Medicaid. We need to cut what we can't afford to pay for things we need."

Even before Obama delivered the speech, which clearly laid out the differences between both parties in the 2012 contest, Republican leaders were reacting angrily to early reports outlining the President's "go big" push, calling on Congress to cut deficits by $4 trillion over 12 years and institute automatic, across-the-board spending cuts and tax increases if a first target isn't reached by 2014.

Any reform plan must include revenue increases, he argued, because the tax system isn't fair, allowing billionaires such as Warren Buffett to have a lower tax rate than middle-class families.

"This plan eliminates tax loopholes that primarily go to the largest business and corporations--tax breaks that small businesses and middle class Americans don't have to pay," Obama said. "We can't afford these special lower rates for the wealthy, which by the way, were initially talked about as temporary measures."

"Either we have to ask the wealthy to pay their fair share, or we have to ask seniors to pay more for medicare, or gut education," he continued. "This is not class warfare. It's math." 

And there could not be a more stark contrast today than with GOP Rep. John Fleming of Louisiana:

Rep. John Fleming (R-LA) appeared on MSNBC with Chris Jansing this morning to attack President Obama’s new deficit reduction plan, which includes some tax increases on the wealthy. Taking up the typical GOP talking point, Fleming said raising taxes on wealthy “job creators” is a terrible idea that kills jobs because many of these people are small business owners who pay taxes through personal income rates.

Fleming is himself a businesses owner, so Jansing asked, “If you have to pay more in taxes, you would get rid of some of those employees?” Fleming responded by saying that while his businesses made $6.3 million last year, after you “pay 500 employees, you pay rent, you pay equipment, and food,” his profits “a mere fraction of that” — “by the time I feed my family, I have maybe $400,000 left over.”

And as ABL points out, 500 employees and $6 million a year means he's paying his workers on average $12,000 a year or about $6 an hour...less than federal minimum wage.  Sufficient advances in nanotechnology may arise in the next few years in order for science to make a violin small enough to play for this particular asshole, but we're not there yet.

On the other hand, when the whackjob right says class warfare, they mean actual warfare.



Keep the difference in mind.

This Is Already Getting Old

Chicago Tribune politico Steve Chapman brings us This Month In Obama Should Hang It Up.

But there is good news for the president. I checked the Constitution, and he is under no compulsion to run for re-election. He can scrap the campaign, bag the fundraising calls and never watch another Republican debate as long as he's willing to vacate the premises by Jan. 20, 2013.

That might be the sensible thing to do. It's hard for a president to win a second term when unemployment is painfully high. If the economy were in full rebound mode, Obama might win anyway. But it isn't, and it may fall into a second recession — in which case voters will decide his middle name is Hoover, not Hussein. Why not leave of his own volition instead of waiting to get the ax?

Five words:  President Perry's Supreme Court picks.  OK, and who should run in his place?  Oh gosh, let me guess.

The ideal candidate would be a figure of stature and ability who can't be blamed for the economy. That person should not be a member of Congress, since it has an even lower approval rating than the president's.

It would also help to be conspicuously associated with prosperity. Given Obama's reputation for being too quick to compromise, a reputation for toughness would be an asset.

As it happens, there is someone at hand who fits this description: Hillary Clinton. Her husband presided over a boom, she's been busy deposing dictators instead of destroying jobs, and she's never been accused of being a pushover.

Not only that, Clinton is a savvy political veteran who already knows how to run for president. Oh, and a new Bloomberg poll finds her to be merely "the most popular national political figure in America today."

That's awesome.  Even though Hillary has said again and again that there's no way she's running, and it's gotten to the point where Big Dog is publicly saying that Hillary's not going to run, and that conservatives like o'l Nameless One are trying to push Hillary to weaken President Obama.  Gosh, you think?

You'll excuse me if I don't believe for a milisecond here that Mr. Chapman here is truly worried about the President's best interests.  In fact, Conservatives are praying that Hillary runs.  I wonder why that would be?  Steve M. reveals the truth about Chapman, who had a much different view of Hillary this time four years ago during the Dem primary.

Everyone knows Hillary Rodham Clinton, and everyone has a different reaction to her. Some find her as irritating as fingernails on a chalkboard. Some find that she makes their skin crawl. Some run screaming from the room. And some want to drink a gallon of rat poison while lying across a railroad track.

Right. President Obama's best interests at heart here, not to mention they love Hillary. And if you believe that, you may be a Useful Idiot.

How To Bee A Hero

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Thousands of angry bees swarmed a man in a wheelchair, sending him and three others who came to his aid to the hospital in the Southern California city of Santa Ana.

The attack also shut down a street and forced the evacuation of several businesses while beekeepers removed the hive, which was estimated to contain 60,000 bees.

The bees were so aggressive that the three men had to retreat initially, but they dove back in and managed to pull the man to safety, Snyder said.

The men were stung dozens of times during the "very impressive" rescue, he said.

"They probably saved his life," Snyder said.

This is good stuff. I've been feeling more cynical, and without even trying I find two accounts of selfless acts of goodness. It gives me hope for people, and for our future. I've been stung by mass bees, it's no fun. I didn't have to go to the hospital but I remember the pain, and how it seemed to go forever without end. The poor fellow in the wheelchair wsa utterly helpless, but three people went in to certain pain to help him.

Warm fuzzies, folks. Think of this the next time you are behind a rude soccer mom and it will level the rage (some).

Definition of Hero

A 39-year-old hunter killed by a wounded grizzly bear yelled out to draw the 400-pound male bear toward him in an effort to keep it from attacking his young hunting partner, the man's family said.

"They both shot it and it kept coming," Steve Stevenson's mom, Janet Price, said on Saturday. "Steve yelled at it to try and distract it, and it swung around and took him down. It's what my son would have done automatically, for anybody."

The Lincoln County Sheriff's Office in Montana said Stevenson, of Winnemucca, Nev., died Friday after 20-year-old Ty Bell wounded what he thought was a black bear and the two men tracked it into thick cover along the Idaho-Montana border where it attacked at about 10 a.m. Friday.

I'd like to think I would do the right thing, the helpful thing. But it takes some marbles to distract a 400 lb. animal and draw it to you to save another person. Steve Stevenson did the right thing and paid the ultimate price for it. He died a hero's death, but I hope it inspires people to remember the dangers of the woods, and the humanity we bring to it.

The Texas Miracle Is A Tall Tale, Part 2

Rick Perry says he should be President because he knows how to create jobs.  But do those jobs keep Texans out of poverty?  The closer you look at it, the more Perry's "Texas Miracle" economy looks like nothing more than smoke and mirrors.

While it's true that Texas is responsible for 40% of the jobs added in the U.S. over the past two years, its poverty rate also grew faster than the national average in 2010.

Texas ranks 6th in terms of people living in poverty. Some 18.4% of Texans were impoverished in 2010, up from 17.3% a year earlier, according to Census Bureau data released this week. The national average is 15.1%.

And being poor in Texas isn't easy. The state has one of the lowest rates of spending on its citizens per capita and the highest share of those lacking health insurance. It doesn't provide a lot of support services to those in need: Relatively few collect food stamps and qualifying for cash assistance is particularly tough.

"There are two tiers in Texas," said Miguel Ferguson, associate professor of social work at University of Texas at Austin. "There are parts of Texas that are doing well. And there is a tremendous number of Texans, more than Perry has ever wanted to acknowledge, that are doing very, very poorly."

And the vast majority of those new jobs in Texas are minimum wage jobs.  The median hourly wage in Texas is $11.20, well under the $12.50 an hour that the US is averaging.  And as the article says, being poor in Texas is a pretty raw deal, with the state making major cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, and other social programs.

All told, if the GOP theory that people are just on unemployment because they are lazy is true, then the combination of steep social spending cuts and high numbers of minimum wage employees should result in one of the lowest poverty rates in the country, yes?

Of course the numbers above show Texas is one of the most impoverished states in the union.  And remember, Rick Perry wants to do to all of America what he's done to Texas.

All hat, no cattle indeed.