Wednesday, September 10, 2014

Last Call For Here Comes The Boom


Our objective is clear: we will degrade, and ultimately destroy, ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counter-terrorism strategy.

First, we will conduct a systematic campaign of airstrikes against these terrorists. Working with the Iraqi government, we will expand our efforts beyond protecting our own people and humanitarian missions, so that we’re hitting ISIL targets as Iraqi forces go on offense. Moreover, I have made it clear that we will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are. That means I will not hesitate to take action against ISIL in Syria, as well as Iraq. This is a core principle of my presidency: if you threaten America, you will find no safe haven.

Second, we will increase our support to forces fighting these terrorists on the ground. In June, I deployed several hundred American service members to Iraq to assess how we can best support Iraqi Security Forces. Now that those teams have completed their work – and Iraq has formed a government – we will send an additional 475 service members to Iraq. As I have said before, these American forces will not have a combat mission – we will not get dragged into another ground war in Iraq. But they are needed to support Iraqi and Kurdish forces with training, intelligence and equipment. We will also support Iraq’s efforts to stand up National Guard Units to help Sunni communities secure their own freedom from ISIL control.

Across the border, in Syria, we have ramped up our military assistance to the Syrian opposition. Tonight, I again call on Congress to give us additional authorities and resources to train and equip these fighters. In the fight against ISIL, we cannot rely on an Assad regime that terrorizes its people; a regime that will never regain the legitimacy it has lost. Instead, we must strengthen the opposition as the best counterweight to extremists like ISIL, while pursuing the political solution necessary to solve Syria’s crisis once and for all.

Third, we will continue to draw on our substantial counterterrorism capabilities to prevent ISIL attacks. Working with our partners, we will redouble our efforts to cut off its funding; improve our intelligence; strengthen our defenses; counter its warped ideology; and stem the flow of foreign fighters into – and out of – the Middle East. And in two weeks, I will chair a meeting of the UN Security Council to further mobilize the international community around this effort.

Fourth, we will continue providing humanitarian assistance to innocent civilians who have been displaced by this terrorist organization. This includes Sunni and Shia Muslims who are at grave risk, as well as tens of thousands of Christians and other religious minorities. We cannot allow these communities to be driven from their ancient homelands.

This is our strategy. And in each of these four parts of our strategy, America will be joined by a broad coalition of partners. Already, allies are flying planes with us over Iraq; sending arms and assistance to Iraqi Security Forces and the Syrian opposition; sharing intelligence; and providing billions of dollars in humanitarian aid. Secretary Kerry was in Iraq today meeting with the new government and supporting their efforts to promote unity, and in the coming days he will travel across the Middle East and Europe to enlist more partners in this fight, especially Arab nations who can help mobilize Sunni communities in Iraq and Syria to drive these terrorists from their lands. This is American leadership at its best: we stand with people who fight for their own freedom; and we rally other nations on behalf of our common security and common humanity.

Meanwhile, Republicans like Georgia Rep. Jack Kingston are accidentally telling the truth about how they feel about airstrikes.

A lot of people would like to stay on the sideline and say, ‘Just bomb the place and tell us about it later.’ It’s an election year. A lot of Democrats don’t know how it would play in their party, and Republicans don’t want to change anything. We like the path we’re on now. We can denounce it if it goes bad, and praise it if it goes well and ask what took him so long.

In other words, there's nothing that President Obama can do on ISIS that will satisfy Republicans. They'll go after him no matter what.

Long way from 9/12/01, huh.

Another Milepost On The Road To Oblivion

Today's Wall Street Journal editorial page:


No, not linking to the story.  This story can go to hell, and Dick Cheney along with it.

The Mask Slips Again

...and Republicans reveal themselves for who they truly are.  Today's contestant: Georgia state Sen. Frank Millar.

A Republican state senator in Georgia has vowed to end Sunday balloting in DeKalb County due to the fact that the area is "dominated by African American shoppers and it is near several large African American mega churches."

The news was flagged by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. In a longwinded email state Sen. Frank Millar (pictured) rants that Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal "appointee Interim CEO Lee May has disappointed those of us that hoped he could help bring the county together."

Millar goes on to note that DeKalb county happens to include a number of African American mega churches.

"Now we are to have Sunday voting at South DeKalb Mall just prior to the election," Millar wrote in the email. "Per Jim Galloway of the AJC, this location is dominated by African American shoppers and it is near several large African American mega churches such as New Birth Missionary Baptist. Galloway also points out the Democratic Party thinks this is a wonderful idea – what a surprise. I’m sure Michelle Nunn and Jason Carter are delighted with this blatantly partisan move in DeKalb."

We can't have black people voting.  They don't vote for Republicans.  Why should Republicans allow that?  It's "blatantly partisan" if black people vote, you know.

Here's the best part: when confronted, Millar kept right on going down the racist road.

"I do agree with Galloway and I never claimed to be nonpartisan," Millar wrote. "I would prefer more educated voters than a greater increase in the number of voters. If you don't believe this is an efort [sic] to maximize Democratic votes pure and simple, then you are not a realist. This is a partisan stunt and I hope it can be stopped. Furthermore I don't control where people are allowed to vote but am glad Brookhaven has been added for the last week."

Can't have us stupid ni-CLANGs voting.  If we were just edumacated, we'd vote for the party that thinks we're stupid ni-CLANGs.

Like I keep saying, Republicans want fewer people to be allowed to vote. This is a solid plank of their platform, to make sure a few people vote as possible.  When that happens, they win.  When people vote, they don't.  Therefore, they must stop people from voting by any way possible.

Especially if those people are black.

This is why when I see people declare there's no difference between the two parties and that voting doesn't matter, I want to slap them.  If voting doesn't matter, why are Republicans trying so hard to stop people from doing it?

StupidiNews!

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

Last Call For The State Of The States

Business Insider has ranked all 50 states based on their 2013-2014 economies, using cold hard stats:

Previously, Business Insider examined ranked every state by how quickly the economies were growing. This time around, we calculated which states had the best economies outright.

We ranked each state on seven economic measures: the July unemployment rate; the change in non-farm payroll jobs from June to July 2014; the 2013 GDP per capita; the 2012 per capita consumption; the 2013 average annual wage; the 2013 exports per capita; and the 2012 government expenditures.

So which state is where?  The top 10 are actually surprising:

10) Wyoming
9) Vermont
8) Delaware
7) Connecticut
6) Massachusetts
5) Washington
4) Alaska
3) New York
2) Texas
1) North Dakota

Several blue states, but 3 of the top 4 are red states with energy industry booms.  Fracking has been really good for the bottom lines of several state budgets, not so good for the people who live there.  It put Wyoming the the top 10 and knocked California to 11.

Meanwhile the bottom 10 will surprise precisely nobody:

41) Hawaii
42) Idaho
43) Nevada
44) Kentucky
45) West Virginia
46) South Carolina
47) Maine
48) Arkansas
49) New Mexico
50) Mississippi

States with dwindling natural resources and little to no investment in infrastructure?  Check across the board.  Nevada has bet the state's economy on that Tesla gigafactory in an effort to get out of the basement, but the rest of this pack have several problems.Hawaii has the highest cost of living of any state, Kentucky and West Virginia's coal industries are dying, as is Maine's fishing.  Idaho, Arkanas and Mississippi have all made brutal education cuts and GOP Gov. Susana Martinez has run New Mexico's budget into the ground.

How long will North Dakota's boom last?

We'll see.

Nobama Country Is Killing Grimes

The NY Times crew is being awfully nice about it, but they see a near-lock for Mitch McConnell to win at this stage of the campaign, and the reason why is Kentucky's pure hatred of Obama.

Mr. Clinton won eastern Kentucky coal country, defined here to include both Democratic and Republican-leaning areas, by 11 points. He lost the rest of the state. Since then, the Democrats have fared worse and worse in coal country. The Democrat Daniel Mongiardo, who nearly won a Senate contest in 2004, won coal country by eight points in 2004. Mr. McConnell then carried coal country by five points in 2008, and Rand Paul by 13 points in 2010.

The inexorable decline of Democratic standing in coal country has been driven by the collapse of the national Democratic Party in this region, where environmental regulations on coal-fired power plants are deeply unpopular, as are Democratic positions on cultural issues. Like in West Virginia, Kentucky coal country first swung to the Republicans in 2000, and the G.O.P. presidential nominee made additional gains in every successive election. Mr. Obama suffered cataclysmic losses between 2008 and 2012 because of the so-called War on Coal.

Knott County, the most Democratic county in the heart of coal country, was perhaps the most Democratic county of the 20th century. It never gave less than 64 percent of its vote for the Democratic presidential candidate. Mr. Clinton won by a margin of 73 to 18 percent. Barack Obama won just 24 percent of the vote here in 2012. 
As a result, the traditional and narrow Democratic route to victory in Kentucky might not exist anymore, at least for a candidate seeking federal office. Ms. Grimes would need to fare better in the rest of Kentucky than any federal candidate since 1976.

"War on Coal" is to Kentucky what "optics" are to DC, a not-so-subtle code switch that has everything to do with Barack Obama's race and how Kentucky Democrats feel about him.  Here's a hint:  people around here despise the man.  Democrats would rather chew off their own arms than deal with him.  I bet in 2016 they'll pull the lever for Hillary, EPA support and all.

But keep telling yourself it's President Obama's position on the EPA that cost him 40 points in the most Democratic county in the country and is in turn costing Alison Grimes this race in 2014.

Let Slip The Polls Of War

The latest WaPo poll on foreign policy shows that the recent beheadings of two US journalists by Islamic State terrorists has galvanized the country towards taking military action in both Iraq and Syria.

Americans overwhelmingly view Islamic State terrorists as a serious threat to vital U.S. interests and, in a significant shift, widely support airstrikes in Iraq and Syria, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll
The nation’s increasingly hawkish mood will form part of the backdrop fora speech by President Obama on Wednesday, when he will outline his thinking on how to confront the threat from the Islamic State. Obama’s remarks will come a day after he confers with congressional leaders at the White House about the administration’s planning.

Those meetings with Congress are taking place today, and I'm sure that the results will be historic. Good, bad, and historic, actually.

His overall foreign policy ratings are his lowest yet in a Post-ABC News poll. A majority says the president is too cautious when it comes to international problems and specifically in dealing with Islamic State militants. His handling of Russian aggression in Ukraine receives somewhat better marks, but more than 4 in 10 still say he is too cautious.

The war drums are beating pretty loudly and the people are forgetting the last ten years in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Today, 71 percent of all Americans say they support airstrikes in Iraq — up from 54 percent three weeks ago and from 45 percent in June. Among those who say Obama has been too cautious, 82 percent support the strikes; among those who think his handling of international affairs has been about right, 66 percent support them.

Nearly as many Americans — 65 percent — say they support the potentially more controversial action of launching airstrikes in Syria, which Obama has not done. That is more than double the level of support a year ago for launching airstrikes to punish the Syrian regime for using chemical weapons. 
Support for arming Kurdish forces opposing the Sunni insurgents in Iraq also has risen over the past month, from 45 percent in August to 58 percent in the new survey. 
Republicans are most supportive of military action, but sizable majorities of Democrats and independents also support airstrikes in both Syria and Iraq.

So will this be Libya, where airstrikes and Libyan rebels were able to defeat Qaddafi, or will this be Iraq War III: This Time We're Serious?

We'll see what Wednesday's speech holds.

StupidiNews!

Monday, September 8, 2014

Last Call For Nameless Helpers

Dick Cheney is not only not in a small cell, he's giving the House GOP election advice.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney will meet with House Republicans on Tuesday, according to a Politico report.

A source told Politico that Cheney will talk about the midterm elections and "highlight the importance of keeping a GOP House majority."

The Huffington Post and CNN confirmed that Cheney will address the House GOP.

To recap, President Obama, horrible albatross on his party.  Dick Cheney, trusted party statesman and adviser.

America, you've lost your way.

Stopped Clock Is Right Alert, Warpigs Edition

Well now I've seen everything: Ron Fournier is correct about something substantial, to the point where I agree with him.  And he actually thinks President Obama needs to be be cut some slack on ISIS as it's a complex issue that cannot be solved with bumper sticker jingoism.

We can't shake it. Like the flu—no, like posttraumatic stress disorder, memories of wiretapping, waterboarding, and a war of false pretense in Iraq cling to the nation's consciousness. Called again to confront a threat in the Middle East, Americans keep tripping over the baggage of George W. Bush. 
In 2003, we trusted. Not again. The president vowed retribution against terrorists who slaughtered Americans. The Defense secretary and secretary of State spoke of imminent threats. The intelligence community leaked word of Americans-turned-terrorists and sleeper cells. Those actions echo today, but Americans are of a different mind—not nearly as credulous, or as willing to fight. 
President Obama is a living reflection of this psychological context. Uncertain and contradictory, Obama is grasping for the right mix of hawk and dove to rally Americans, unite the world, and confront ISIS without locking the United States into another unholy mess. 
God bless him. It's a hellish task. Obama's lack of clarity so far has drawn criticism from the across the political spectrum, including from me (here and here). Two loyal readers remind me by email, and for different reasons, that Obama needs time to get this right.

Fournier then went on CNN's media analysis show, Reliable Sources, to point out to host Brian Stetler that the media appears to be pushing for the rush to war again, and maybe that's a bad idea.





Amazing.  Not only do I agree with Ron Fournier, but Katrina vanden Heuvel as well.  When these two are the voice of reason in the Village, things have gotten dire indeed on the war drums front.

The Rise And Fall Of Bob McDonnell

The Washington Post story of former Virginia GOP Gov. Bob McDonnell and his wife Maureen is a fascinating morality play on privilege and hubris, the both of them convicted last week on multiple felony counts relating to trading influence to nutritional supplement businessman Jonnie Williams in exchange for tens of thousands in cash and gifts.  His meteoric fall from 2016 hopeful to convicted felon represents everything wrong with today's GOP.

As McDonnell entered the last of his four years in office in 2013, things could not have been going better politically for the former state attorney general. Nationally, he had recently concluded a term as president of the Republican Governors Association, and he was increasingly being mentioned as contender for his party’s nomination for president in 2016. 
At home, polls showed McDonnell to be hugely popular as he prepared to steer his signature achievement through the state legislature: a bipartisan plan to improve the state’s crumbling transportation network. 
But unbeknown to McDonnell, the chain of events that would lead to last week’s guilty verdicts had already begun. 
Virginia State Police were quietly investigating allegations that Williams had paid $15,000 for catering at the 2011 wedding of one of the governor’s daughters. The governor had not disclosed the gift. 
The information came from the mansion’s former executive chef, Todd Schneider, who was fired in 2012 after he came under suspicion of stealing food. 
On Feb. 15, 2013, state police officers interviewed the first lady about Schneider, a session scheduled purportedly to help close out their investigation of the chef and send his case to a grand jury for charges. 
They asked Maureen McDonnell questions about the former mansion chef. But an officer also asked her about an unrelated topic: Williams, his wedding check and an additional $50,000 check made out to the first lady from a trust run by the businessman.

McDonnell lawyered up, and the rest is history.  The Washington Post broke the story last March and the whole dirty ball of twine began to unravel.  By April a grand jury had been convened, by July Jonnie Williams had agreed to turn state's evidence, and the rumors about McDonnell's resignation had begun.  By Christmas, the plea bargain of guilty for one count of lying to a bank in exchange for his resignation and disbarment as a lawyer was in the works.  Maureen McDonnell would have not been charged.

McDonnell rejected the deal insisting he wasn't guilty.

Last week a jury proved otherwise.  Enjoy prison, Bob.  Shoulda taken the deal.

StupidiNews!

Sunday, September 7, 2014

Last Call For Wonks For Sale

Everything else is for sale in American politics to foreign countries with cash at the expense of US workers, why not think tanks and lobbyist firms?

More than a dozen prominent Washington research groups have received tens of millions of dollars from foreign governments in recent years while pushing United States government officials to adopt policies that often reflect the donors’ priorities, an investigation by The New York Times has found.

The money is increasingly transforming the once-staid think-tank world into a muscular arm of foreign governments’ lobbying in Washington. And it has set off troubling questions about intellectual freedom: Some scholars say they have been pressured to reach conclusions friendly to the government financing the research.

Here's the billion dollar question:  if unlimited money influencing politics by US billionaires and corporations is "protected free speech", what's unlimited money by foreign billionaires and corporations in US politics called?

The think tanks do not disclose the terms of the agreements they have reached with foreign governments. And they have not registered with the United States government as representatives of the donor countries, an omission that appears, in some cases, to be a violation of federal law, according to several legal specialists who examined the agreements at the request of The Times.

As a result, policy makers who rely on think tanks are often unaware of the role of foreign governments in funding the research.

The smartest policy wonks in the country didn't know who they were shilling for.  Let that sink in.

The arrangements involve Washington’s most influential think tanks, including the Brookings Institution, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and the Atlantic Council. Each is a major recipient of overseas funds, producing policy papers, hosting forums and organizing private briefings for senior United States government officials that typically align with the foreign governments’ agendas.

Most of the money comes from countries in Europe, the Middle East and elsewhere in Asia, particularly the oil-producing nations of the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Norway, and takes many forms. The United Arab Emirates, a major supporter of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, quietly provided a donation of more than $1 million to help build the center’s gleaming new glass and steel headquarters not far from the White House. Qatar, the small but wealthy Middle East nation, agreed last year to make a $14.8 million, four-year donation to Brookings, which has helped fund a Brookings affiliate in Qatar and a project on United States relations with the Islamic world.

Do you not think that other countries haven't noticed that our politics and politicians are on sale to the highest bidder?  Why should they be left out?  Just because it's against the law?  The Supreme Court "fixed" that in Citizens United for US corporations.  I'm sure they'll "fix" it for foreign powers too.

The Kids Are Not Alright

A new Harvard University survey finds that under 25% of Millennial voters under 30 plan to definitely vote in NovemberLess than one in four, folks.  Just how bad is it?  This bad.

The numbers show voter enthusiasm among young people is down even from 2010, when Republicans took back the House of Representatives. Enthusiasm for the 2014 midterms is especially low among Democratic millennials, with the survey showing that 44 percent of young people who voted for 2012 GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney “definitely” plan to vote this year, while only 35 percent of President Barack Obama’s voters are planning to come back to the ballot box in November.

That could spell disastrous news for Democrats, who have traditionally relied on youth voters to give them the advantage on Election Day.

The poll begs the question of whether the Obama turnout machine can really get young people motivated without a president at the top of the ticket. It also found that young women, another key Democratic constituency, are feeling uninspired to head to the polls. Just 19 percent of women said they were “definitely” going to cast a ballot, compared to 28 percent of men.

Part of the reason young people are not all that interested in voting, experts said, is they don’t believe politicians in Washington are addressing issues that matter to them. The poll found that young people are very concerned about issues like wealth disparity in the country and student debt.

Well, the best way to make sure politicians continue to not give a damn about those issues is to not vote.  Why should politicians in either party care about you if you're going to sit at home?  Let the adults who do vote determine the country's future if you abdicate your role in being part of the decision.

But when the Tea Party controls all of Congress, and only passes Tea Party laws, well maybe you'll care about voting then.

Maybe.



Another NBA Owner Ousted Over Racism

Say what you will about new NBA Commissioner Adam Silver: in the wake of former LA Clippers owner Donald Sterling's virulent racism, Silver isn't tolerating very much from the billionaire owners of NBA teams.  The latest example being made is of Atlanta Hawks owner Bruce Levenson, who is giving up his controlling interest in the team after a nasty 2012 e-mail surfaced.  The email reads in part:

Before we bought the hawks and for those couple years immediately after in an effort to make the arena look full (at the nba's urging) thousands and thousands of tickets were being giving away, predominantly in the black community, adding to the overwhelming black audience.

My theory is that the black crowd scared away the whites and there are simply not enough affluent black fans to build a signficant season ticket base. Please dont get me wrong. There was nothing threatening going on in the arean back then. i never felt uncomfortable, but i think southern whites simply were not comfortable being in an arena or at a bar where they were in the minority. On fan sites i would read comments about how dangerous it is around philips yet in our 9 years, i don't know of a mugging or even a pick pocket incident. This was just racist garbage. When I hear some people saying the arena is in the wrong place I think it is code for there are too many blacks at the games.

I have been open with our executive team about these concerns. I have told them I want some white cheerleaders and while i don't care what the color of the artist is, i want the music to be music familiar to a 40 year old white guy if that's our season tixs demo. i have also balked when every fan picked out of crowd to shoot shots in some time out contest is black. I have even bitched that the kiss cam is too black.

Gradually things have changed. My unscientific guess is that our crowd is 40 pct black now, still four to five times all other teams. And my further guess is that 40 pct still feels like 70 pet to some whites at our games. Our bars are still overwhelmingly black.

This is obviously a sensitive topic, but sadly i think it is far and way the number one reason our season ticket base is so low.

Besides the fact Levenson badly needs to invest in an iPad email program that has spell check, he basically self-reported the email to Silver during the whole Sterling scandal.  With the Clippers now firmly in the hands of Microsoft co-founder Steve Ballmer, Silver's now free to deal with Levenson, who to his credit is stepping down immediately.  Not that he had a choice.

My guess is that somebody ratted Levenson's email out to Silver, and Silver let Levenson fall on his own sword after seeing that he didn't have a choice, and that he was smart enough to take Silver's way out, rather than emulating Sterling's futile attempt to fight while still losing.  That means Levenson is not completely stupid, unlike Sterling was.

We'll see how this gets cleaned up, and what other little nuggets of Levenson's "wisdom" surface.  But it's clear to me that the second this went public, Levenson really was going to find out what a "low season ticket base" actually meant.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Bruce.



Related Posts with Thumbnails