The Return Of The Granny Starver

If you have any doubt what GOP control of the Senate would mean in 2015, it would entail the GOP putting Paul Ryan's budget on President Obama's desk and saying "sign it or else".  Robert Costa pulls no punches:

Ryan and his aides are unsparing in how they take the hammer to current federal policies. On page after page, the report casts a critical eye on how the government administers money to the poor and related bureaucracies, using a bevy of academic literature and federal studies as evidence.

Ryan said the crux of the report is the conclusion that federal programs need to be entirely reimagined, with more than tweaks or axed appropriations, and that legislation this year should move toward broader solutions that solve what he thinks are structural weaknesses in how the government supports the poor.

“Because these programs are means-tested — meaning that benefits decline as recipients make more money — poor families face very high implicit marginal tax rates,” the report says. “The federal government effectively discourages them from making more money.”

During the Clinton years Republicans demanded that programs had to be means tested to make sure that Cadillac-driving welfare queens weren't magically buying T-bone steaks on Uncle Sugar's dime and getting rich.

Now in the Obama years, means-testing means the welfare queens are poor and staying poor because it "discourages them from working".  So now "reforming" these programs means scrapping them entirely.

According to the report, Head Start, a federal program for early-childhood education and nutrition, is “failing to prepare children for school,” and “a consolidated, well-funded system would be better.”

Medicaid, which provides health coverage to low-income families, is the object of a sharply worded review. “Medicaid coverage has little effect on patients’ health,” the report says, adding that it imposes an “implicit tax on beneficiaries,” “crowds out private insurance” and “increases the likelihood of receiving welfare benefits.”

Head Start and Medicaid have to go.  Time for block grants, which means states can use the money however they want to, and that of course means "not for the poor".

Ryan also huddled with Iain Duncan Smith, a former leader of Britain’s Conservative Party. Smith is well known in the United Kingdom for his attempts to better connect conservatives with the poor.

“We’ve been paying very close attention to the Tories and their think tanks,” Ryan said. “They’ve done a lot of work already, and we can learn from their experience, both their mistakes and their successes, so we can rework our welfare system and get people out of poverty and onto lives of self-sufficiency and dignity.”

Remember, what Republicans mean by "self-sufficiency and dignity" is "working more than 40 hours a week, with no minimum wage, with overtime pay replaced by 'comp time' that your employer never has to actually let you have, for an employer who can fire you for any reason without recourse, for a rent payment that takes up the vast majority of your income."

And if the GOP wins control of the Senate, the Ryan Austerity plan becomes the budget.

Rand Paul, Constant Blockhead

It wouldn't be a week without my duly elected US Senator Rand Paul making an ass out of himself by pitching a tantrum and blocking President Obama from carrying out something Congress already approved.

When a bipartisan Senate panel last week lambasted Swiss bank Credit Suisse for helping rich Americans evade billions in taxes, some watching the high-profile hearing couldn’t help but notice an elephant in the room.

That is, Sen. Rand Paul.

The connection? Paul for years has single-handedly blocked an obscure U.S.-Swiss tax treaty that lawmakers, prosecutors, diplomats and banks say makes the difference between U.S. law enforcement rooting out the names of a few hundred fat-cat tax evaders — and many thousands more.

Kentucky’s tea party darling says the treaty infringes on privacy rights. But his critics say Paul’s hold just hamstrings the Justice Department’s tax evasion work.

“Credit Suisse is ready, at this moment, to provide the additional information about Swiss accounts requested by U.S. authorities but has been unable to do so because the U.S. Senate has not yet ratified the protocol,” said Credit Suisse CEO Brady Dougan at a hearing on the topic Wednesday — just after admitting his institution helped Americans evade taxes.

Just another reminder that Rand Paul has been blocking President Obama's ability to conduct foreign policy for years.  Harry Reid could force a vote to override Paul's block and hasn't.  But Republicans would have to block that override vote too, so what's the point?

“These are people that are alleged, not convicted of doing anything wrong,” Paul said a few weeks ago. “I don’t think you should have everybody’s information from their bank. There should be some process: accusations and proof that you’ve committed a crime.”

In other words, we can't go after tax evaders' financial information without definitive proof of tax evasion, which we would need financial information for.  The best part is that the Swiss want to help us because tax evasion is hurting them financially as well, but since Paul is blocking ratification of the agreement, they can't lift a finger.  Here's the real issue though:

Paul’s protest is also linked to his abhorrence of the soon-to-take-effect Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, which will force foreign banks to disclose U.S. account information to the IRS, and domestic banks to reciprocate to other nations’ revenue departments.

And of course Rand Paul wants to repeal that legislation entirely because the "privacy rights" of criminals hiding billions of US taxpayer dollars is more important.

StupidiNews!

• Ukraine's ambassador to the United Nations told the Security Council Monday that Russia had moved at least 16,000 troops into the country already.
• Australian climate scientists warn the country is in for more massive heatwaves like 2013 as temperatures will continue to rise.
• Japan's banking regulators are urging the country's smaller regional banks to merge as the country's population decreases.
• President Obama expressed optimism that a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians is still possible at a White House meeting with Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu.
• At least one Chicago-based bank is warning customers to stop paying for taxi fares with plastic after a security breach at a payment processor may have compromised thousands of credit cards.

Last Call For The Politics Of Resentment

NY Times political reporter Jackie Calmes talks about the Great White Whale for the Dems:  winning over white male voters.

No Democratic presidential candidate has won a majority of white men since Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964. Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama all prevailed with support of the so-called rising electorate of women, especially single women, and minorities. But fewer of those voters typically participate in midterm elections, making the votes of white men more potent and the struggle of Democrats for 2014 clear.

“Realistically, winning votes from working-class white men has just been a very tough political challenge for Democrats,” said Geoff Garin, a Democratic pollster. With demographic trends favoring Democrats nationally and in many states, strategists say it makes sense to concentrate resources on mobilizing women, young people, Hispanics, blacks and other minority voters.

Democrats generally win the votes of fewer than four in 10 white men. But they win eight of 10 minority voters and a majority of women, who have been a majority of the national electorate since 1984, while white men have shrunk to a third, and are still shrinking.

Republicans have been playing the Politics of Resentment for 50 years now.  It's difficult to imagine that Democrats are going to be able to fix that by November.

“Democrats are for a bunch of freeloaders in this world as far as I’m concerned,” said Gari Day, 63, an Avis bus driver from suburban Detroit. “Republicans make you work for your money, and try to let you keep it.”

Michael Bunce, 48, buying parts at a Lowe’s in Southfield, Mich., first ascribed his Republican bias to fiscal matters, but quickly turned to social issues like gay rights. “I don’t see why that’s at the top of our priority list,” he said. “But you say that out in the open, and people are all over your back.”

Here's my question:  why should Democrats want to win over voters like that?  It's not going to happen and if it does, it's going to come at a far greater cost of current Democratic voters.  It hasn't happened in 50 years, so why is it a problem now?  Answer:  it's not.   

Had only White men voted in the 2012 presidential election, this is how it would have looked. pic.twitter.com/CP7oA9soGE
— Sarafeminista (@FeministaJones) March 3, 2014

Here's your lesson:  In 1988, getting 38% of the white male vote was Dukakis's political death knell in a 315 point electoral vote bloodbath.  In 2012, Barack Obama getting 35% of the white male vote was an easy 124 point electoral vote win.  One last paragraph from the Times article:

Republicans say Democrats’ appeals to women, minorities and gays have been counterproductive with white men. “When you’re spending 60 percent of your time talking about birth control and Obamacare, not a lot of men are paying attention to you,” said Brad Dayspring, spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Right, because Obamacare has been the problem for the last 50 years?

I suspect Hillary Clinton in 2016 would get something pretty close to Obama's 41% of the white male vote in 2008.  If that's the case, she'll win handily and the Republicans damn well know it.  The issue here isn't the Dems giving up on white male voters, it's the Republicans giving up on winning the White House.

Deeply Stupid Solutions "R" Us

Crystal Wright, aka @GOPBlackChick on Twitter, has an opinion piece in The Guardian on President Obama's "My Brother's Keeper" program.  There are not enough trains on earth that can be simultaneously wrecked in the same spot order to provide sufficient visual representation of how bad of an article this is.  Here's the gist:

Sadly, the message to minorities – and blacks in particular – is that we blacks can’t be expected to take individual responsibility for our lives like our white counterparts ... so the government has to do it for us. Blacks should find Obama’s assumptions more than disturbing. Young black men wouldn’t be wrong to find My Brother’s Keeper downright offensive. And everyone should realize that the first black president is not holding blacks accountable to the same standards as whites when it comes to parenting.

Let's understand that the entire point of being a black conservative pundit is saying whatever President Obama does or does not do is "downright offensive" to blacks, because all the grim statistics backing up the notion of centuries of struggle by black families in America only became a problem on January 20, 2009. 

Why won’t America ever see a government program that teaches white men how to live responsibly? Because society expects whites to take responsibility for their lives. Even the progressive black politics of a progressive black president seem to hold whites to a standard of excellence – and blacks to an all too familiar standard of inferiority.

Except for the part that the vast majority of people on assistance programs are white, so whatever.  So what's her solution?

Potential solutions could include making long-needed changes to Clinton’s 1996 welfare-to-work reforms by cutting off aid to mothers who have more than two children out of wedlock. And by punishing black men by putting them on probation for fathering babies out of wedlock and forcing them to do community service or other government work.

To recap, the small government strict constructionists want to criminalize black people having sex before marriage and punish the kids born out of wedlock to boot.  Sure, that seems reasonable and totally doesn't invalidate her entire premise as inane.

Jesus wept.

Well Things Just Got Real

In case you were wondering what the White House response on Crimea was going to be, it's the following:

We, the leaders of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States and the President of the European Council and President of the European Commission, join together today to condemn the Russian Federation’s clear violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, in contravention of Russia’s obligations under the UN Charter and its 1997 basing agreement with Ukraine. We call on Russia to address any ongoing security or human rights concerns that it has with Ukraine through direct negotiations, and/or via international observation or mediation under the auspices of the UN or the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. We stand ready to assist with these efforts.

We also call on all parties concerned to behave with the greatest extent of self-restraint and responsibility, and to decrease the tensions.

We note that Russia’s actions in Ukraine also contravene the principles and values on which the G-7 and the G-8 operate. As such, we have decided for the time being to suspend our participation in activities associated with the preparation of the scheduled G-8 Summit in Sochi in June, until the environment comes back where the G-8 is able to have meaningful discussion.

"G-8 summit?  You mean G-7 Summit.  There are only seven nations."

I personally think this is a mistake, because it allows Putin to play the victim card and say all the other countries are ganging up on him.  That will "justify" whatever next step he decides to take.  If Putin were a rational actor, this would be a good idea.  But it's not because Putin is not a rational actor, he's basically pulling a Tea Party 101 move.

So we'll see what Putin's next move is.

StupidiNews!

• "12 Years A Slave" took home Best Picture, but "Gravity" crushed the Oscars competition with seven awards including the first Latino winner for Best Director for Alfonso Cuaron.
• US Secretary of State John Kerry will travel to Kiev in a bid to show American support for Ukraine's leadership as the seven other G-8 nations look to cut at least a few ties with Russia.
• At least 10 have died in bomb attack on Pakistan's federal court in the capital of Islamabad on Sunday, leaving at least 30 more wounded.
• Microsoft is raising eyebrows with the appointment of former Hillary Clinton adviser and campaign manager Mark Penn as the company's new chief strategy officer.
• Epidemiolgy researchers have traced the modern flu virus to a "global selective sweep" mutation in the 1870s that they believe has affected influenza outbreaks ever since.

Last Call For The Poor Little Rich

Art Brooks, president of "venerable" winger think tank American Enterprise Institute, takes to the "liberal" NY Times to scold all of us for being envious of our ultra-rich masters. 

How can we break the back of envy and rebuild the optimism that made America the marvel of the world?

First and foremost, we must increase mobility for more Americans with a radical opportunity agenda. That means education reform that empowers parents through choice, and rewards teachers for innovation. It means regulatory and tax reform tailored to spark hiring and entrepreneurship at all levels, especially the bottom of the income scale. It means recalibrating the safety net to ensure that work always pays — such as an expansion of the earned-income tax credit — while never disdaining the so-called dead-end jobs that represent a crucial first step for many marginalized people.

Second, we must recognize that fomenting bitterness over income differences may be powerful politics, but it injures our nation. We need aspirational leaders willing to do the hard work of uniting Americans around an optimistic vision in which anyone can earn his or her success. This will never happen when we vilify the rich or give up on the poor.

Only a shared, joyful mission of freedom, opportunity and enterprise for all will cure us of envy and remind us who we truly are.

And of course, the solution to the problem is tax cuts and privatization of everything in sight so these same masters can gain even more wealth to not share with anyone, and it means giving Americans the dignity to work 80 hours a week at two jobs making $7.25 an hour.  Or you know, less than that, because hard work itself is its own reward. 

Because if you think the game is rigged, you're un-American or something.

You're also right, but that doesn't actually matter, right?

Back-Seat Presidentin'

Not to be outdone by Sen. Marco Rubio, Sen. Lindsey Graham and Sen. Dick Durbin are DEMANDING that President Obama DO SOMETHING DAMMIT about Vladimir Putin.

Graham, who sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said there needs to be more than threats coming from the White House, and called President Barack Obama “weak and indecisive” on matters of foreign policy.

"No. 1, stop going on television and trying to threaten thugs and dictators - it is not your strong suit. Every time the President goes on national television and threatens Putin or someone like Putin, everybody’s eyes roll, including mine,” Graham said.

This from the guy who went on national television to threaten someone who he believes is like Putin.  That motion you're feeling in your face is your eyes rolling, reflexively.  Durbin on the other hand is scarcely better:

The Illinois Democrat said that Russia's "charm offensive," dumping billions of dollars into the 2014 Winter Olympics held in Sochi, has done little to redefine the nation's image among Western nations.

"That Sochi charm offensive died on the streets of Sevastopol (Ukraine) when he moved in thousands of troops days after the closing ceremony. He is trying to have it both ways," Durbin said. "We've got to make him feel like there is a price to pay for this kind of conduct."

Which is what the President said, so how about working with him and making that happen, gentlemen?

PS, Huckleberry Graham should really stop making insipid threats like this:

"I would like to create a democratic noose around Putin's Russia," Graham said.

Thanks for demonstrating so clearly why you're not even remotely qualified to be President there Huckleberry!

Straight And Narrow

NY Times cultural scold Ross Douthat complains that the forces of LGBTQ equality are sore winners and that the veto of Arizona's "religious freedoms" bill really means that we should stop being so awful to the people who see them as sinners who need to be punished.

What makes this response particularly instructive is that such bills have been seen, in the past, as a way for religious conservatives to negotiate surrender — to accept same-sex marriage’s inevitability while carving out protections for dissent. But now, apparently, the official line is that you bigots don’t get to negotiate anymore.

Which has a certain bracing logic. If your only goal is ensuring that support for traditional marriage diminishes as rapidly as possible, applying constant pressure to religious individuals and institutions will probably do the job. Already, my fellow Christians are divided over these issues, and we’ll be more divided the more pressure we face. The conjugal, male-female view of marriage is too theologically rooted to disappear, but its remaining adherents can be marginalized, set against one other, and encouraged to conform.

I am being descriptive here, rather than self-pitying. Christians had plenty of opportunities — thousands of years’ worth — to treat gay people with real charity, and far too often chose intolerance. (And still do, in many instances and places.) So being marginalized, being sued, losing tax-exempt status — this will be uncomfortable, but we should keep perspective and remember our sins, and nobody should call it persecution.

But it’s still important for the winning side to recognize its power. We are not really having an argument about same-sex marriage anymore, and on the evidence of Arizona, we’re not having a negotiation. Instead, all that’s left is the timing of the final victory — and for the defeated to find out what settlement the victors will impose.

Alas and alack!  If only the horribly tyrannic equality forces who will probably win a Supreme Court ruling would give Ross Douthat a way to still legally practice hating those people!

Sure, just like women "won" after Roe v Wade.  How many legal loopholes and blockades can same-sex marriage opponents put on getting married in red states?  Works for abortion clinics, right?

Last Call For Marco, Rube

Sen. Marco Rubio thinks he has the stones to tell President Obama what he must do on Russia re: Ukraine, and as expected, the last of his "eight steps" is to block State Department under-secretary Rose Gottmoeller.

Finally, in the Senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid should immediately halt his effort to force a Senate vote on Rose Gottemoeller next week to be under secretary of state for arms control and international security. As I, Sens. John Cornyn and Jim Risch said yesterday, we shouldn’t even be thinking about arms-control negotiations with Russia anytime soon. And especially not negotiations led by a State Department official, such as Ms. Gottemoeller, who has tried to play down and potentially kept information from Congress and our allies about Russian violations of arms-control agreements.

This is of course the real thrust.  Rubio could give a damn about what happens in the Ukraine, but this is the perfect excuse to demand that the State Department dismantle our arms control treaty with Russia, which the GOP has always opposed.  Well, under a Democrat, anyway.  They have no issue with it when a Republican is President.

Have a glass of water and sit the hell down, Marco.

Last Call For More Adventures Across The Rubin-Con

Jennifer Rubin's response to President Obama's new "My Brother's Keeper" initiative is as banal as it is predictable.

It’s odd, really, that we just got through celebration of the veto of Arizona’s anti-gay legislation that would have allowed business owners to refuse service on the basis of sexual orientation – if they could show they are acting upon a sincerely held religious belief. That was Wednesday. Now on Thursday the government itself wants to exclude at-risk boys who don’t meet the racial and ethnic requirements of the program. (If it was focused on only “straight” youth, would the left be up in arms?)

Now, it is refreshing that the administration has paused from its “war on women” rhetoric to take notice that it really has been men who were hurt more than women in the recession, have worse educational outcomes than women and seem to be more affected by the absence of a father in their lives.

The problem with hyping gender and racial differences is not simply the increased resentment and divisiveness it creates but also that it uses victimhood as a political weapon. Pretty soon words like “discrimination” lose meaning. It seems you are either for an inclusive society – devoted to diminishing racial, ethnic, religious and other distinctions — or you’re not.

Like the Arizona anti-gay law, no good can come from a program that divides up the population by these categories.

Rubin actually compares the program to Arizona's anti-gay laws because Liberals Are The Only Real Racists(tm). This is, quite literally a "Why do we even have your divisive 'Black History Month' anyway for you people?" rant dressed up nicely as "I'm the voice of the moderate middle/both sides do it" pablum.  It's as stupid as asking why the government sanctions May as Jewish American Heritage Month.  Congress passed that in 2006 and rightfully so.

It's vile and stupid, but then again, this is Jen Rubin we're talking about.  By the way, the program itself seems badly necessary.

Under Obama's initiative, businesses, foundations and community groups would coordinate their investments to come up with, or support, programs that keep youths in school and out of the criminal justice system, while improving their access to higher education. Several foundations pledged at least $200 million over five years to promote that goal.

Meanwhile, Obama signed a presidential memorandum creating a government-wide task force to evaluate the effectiveness of various approaches, so that federal and local governments, community groups and businesses will have best practices to follow in the future. An online "What Works" portal will provide public access to data about programs that improve outcomes for young minority men.

We could pretend like the bulk of the school to prison pipeline in this country isn't stuffed full of black and Latino boys I guess, but bravo for the President to name the slouching beast in the room.  This is exactly the kind of "compassionate conservatism" stuff that Bush would have gotten a spot on Mt. Rushmore for.

The White House listed a litany of facts showing the need for the effort: The unemployment rate for African-American men over the age of 20 was 12 percent last month, compared with 5.4 percent for white men. Hispanic men over the age of 20 faced an unemployment rate of 8.2 percent. The U.S. Census Bureau showed a poverty rate of 27.2 percent in black households and 25.6 percent for Hispanic households in 2012, compared with 12.7 percent in white and 11.7 percent in Asian households.

But let's pretend like race doesn't matter in America, because admitting it does upsets Jennifer so. 

Oklahoma, Yet Again

Not to be outdone by Texas in anything, Oklahoma is trying out its own bevy of anti-choice abortion regulations that will result in shutting down all but a few clinics in the state.

The Oklahoma House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill on Thursday to apply new restrictions on abortions that lawmakers said are aimed at protecting women's health but opponents say are designed to shut down clinics.

The legislation includes a provision similar to one put in place in neighboring Texas that requires physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at an appropriately equipped hospital within 30 miles of their practice.

The Republican lawmaker who wrote the legislation, Mike Ritze, a physician, said his goal was to ensure women who experience complications like hemorrhaging, can have access to hospital care immediately.

"If the federal law is going to allow abortions, the state has a responsibility to our citizens to ensure those procedures are done as safely as possible," Ritze said.

The bill also requires abortion clinics to meet heightened building standards, bans abortion after 20 weeks, and requires strict adherence to guidelines in prescribing abortion pills.

The process is working well here in Ohio, as Cincinnati's two remaining providers are fighting court battles just to stay open.  Texas has already lost dozens of providers, and once again, small government conservatives are using the power of government to regulate women's bodies.  To death.

Your vagina belongs to the state.  Until what comes out of it is old enough to own a gun, that is.

StupidiNews, Weekend Edition!

• The S&P 500 closed out the month of February at a record high near 1,860, staging a strong rally after January's slump.
• Generic drugmakers are fiercely resisting a new FDA proposal that would require changing labeling upon new safety information.
• US 4th Quarter GDP was revised downward to 2.4% growth, but warmer weather is expected to push the economy faster.
• The Secret Service is looking into a major data breach at Sears, which would be the latest hacker attempt to expose millions of customers to possible identity theft and fraud.
• An Illinois man has filed the first class-action suit against all but bankrupt Mt. Gox, accusing the Bitcoin exchange of fraud and demanding repayment.

Last Call As Going Insane In The Ukraine Continues

Josh Rogin at the Daily Beast drops this little wrinkle in the whole "Happy democratic ending for Ukraine" deal.

Private security contractors working for the Russian military are the unmarked troops who have now seized control over two airports in the Ukrainian province of Crimea, according to informed sources in the region. And those contractors could be setting the stage for ousted President Viktor Yanukovich to come to the breakaway region.

The new Ukrainian government in Kiev has accused Moscow of “an armed invasion and occupation” in the Crimean cities of Simferopol and Sevastopol, where well-armed and well-organized troops with no markings or identification have taken control of the airports. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told Secretary of State John Kerry over the phone Friday that no Russian military or marines have been deployed outside of the base of the Black Sea Fleet, which is anchored nearby, officials in both governments said.

Lavrov was technically telling the truth, but the troops are being directed by the Russian government. Although not confirmed, informed sources in Moscow are telling their American interlocutors that the troops belong to Vnevedomstvenaya Okhrana, the private security contracting bureau inside the Russian interior ministry that hires mercenaries to protect Russian Navy installations and assets in Crimea. Other diplomatic sources said that the troops at the airport were paramilitary troops but not specifically belonging to Vnevedomstvenaya Okhrana.

 “They don’t have Russian military uniforms and the Russia government is denying they are part of the Russian military. Actually most of them may be Ukrainian citizens. But these are people that are legally allowed to perform services to the Russian fleet,” said Dimitri Simes, president of the Center for the National Interest.

There's a price for crossing Vladimir Putin, as Ukraine is finding out the hard way.  Meanwhile, whoever these guys belong to, they control the airports in Ukraine's southernmost provinces, with Crimea province bordering the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov.  In other words, these guys now have options should they want to cause more trouble by land, sea, or air:



The several billion dollar question: What's the Obama administration's response?