StupidiNews!

• Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel appeared humbled as he won the city's first ever mayoral runoff election last night to capture a second term and "a second chance".
• Kansas has become the first state to ban a second-trimester abortion procedure used in fewer than 10% of abortions in the US.
• A US District Court judge in Texas continues to refuse to lift a temporary block on President Obama's executive orders on immigration, claiming the administration misled the court.
• Dutch energy giant Shell will buy Brazilian energy company BG Group for $70 billion in what could be the beginning of another round of energy mega-mergers while oil prices continue to slump.
• The DEA ran an extensive phone metadata collection program from 1992 through 2013, according to a major story in USA Today.

Last Call For Eight Is Enough

Eight shots to his back while running away from a police officer.

This is how Walter Scott died in North Charleston.

A white police officer has been charged with murder, the mayor of North Charleston, S.C., said Tuesday, after a video surfaced showing him shooting and killing an apparently unarmed black man in the back while he ran away.

The officer, Michael T. Slager, had said he feared for his life because the man took his stun gun in a scuffle after a traffic stop on Saturday. A video, however, shows the officer firing eight times as the man fled. The state charges were announced in a news conference Tuesday evening.

The only reason Michael Slager is facing murder charges is because of this video, which was provided to the New York Times.  In it you can clearly see the officer reaching for Scott, who turns around and flees.  The officer then takes a shooting stance with his sidearm and fires eight times at the fleeing Scott.

Later in the video, it very much looks like Slager drops his taser next to Scott's body.

The shooting unfolded after Officer Slager stopped a Mercedes-Benz with a broken taillight, according to police reports. The driver, Walter L. Scott, 50, ran away, and Officer Slager chased him into a grassy lot that abuts a muffler shop. He fired his Taser, an electronic stun gun, but it did not stop Mr. Scott, according to police reports.

Moments later, Officer Slager reported on his radio, “Shots fired and the subject is down. He took my Taser,” according to police reports.

But the video, which was taken by a bystander and provided to The New York Times by Mr. Scott’s lawyer, presents a different account. The video begins in the vacant lot, apparently moments after Officer Slager fired his Taser. Wires, which carry the electrical current from the stun gun, appear to be extending from Mr. Scott’s body as the two men tussle and Mr. Scott turns to run.

Something — it is not clear whether it is the stun gun — is either tossed or knocked to the ground behind the two men and Officer Slager draws his gun, the video shows. When the officer fires, Mr. Scott appears to be 15 to 20 feet away and fleeing. He falls after the last of eight shots.

So no, he didn't take the officer's taser, and the officer shot Scott multiple times while he was running away.   Then he dropped the taser next to Scott's body.

This is the police in America in 2015.

The Incredible Evitable Jeb

Either the NY Times is still pretending that the GOP nomination hasn't been locked up by Jeb Bush because they want a nice long primary fight news cycle for the next year, or Jeb really isn't quite as good at this campaign thing as his dad and brother were.

Three months into what allies once confidently described as a “shock and awe” drive to overcome his rivals and dominate the Republican presidential field, Jeb Bush’s early campaigning looks like the juggernaut that wasn’t.

He is grappling with the Republican Party’s prickly and demanding ideological blocs, particularly evangelical leaders and pro-Israel hawks. He is struggling to win over grass-roots activists in Iowa and New Hampshire, states he has visited only a handful of times. And Mr. Bush’s undisputed advantage — the millions of dollars streaming rapidly into his political organization — may not be enough to knock out other contenders.

For all the Republican “bundlers” who have signed up to raise money for Mr. Bush, others remain uncommitted or are hedging their bets by aiding more than one candidate. Some are privately chafing at what they view as the Bush camp’s presumption of their loyalty.

Other wealthy donors, mindful of their power to reshape the Republican race with “super PAC” donations, have been more direct: The casino magnate Sheldon Adelson recently made what two people briefed on it described as an “animated” call to one of Mr. Bush’s top supporters after former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, a Bush adviser, criticizedPrime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel in a speech in March.

It is a far cry, party officials, activists and donors said, from the early success of George W. Bush, Mr. Bush’s brother, in securing the 2000 Republican presidential nomination.

For the Bush family, inevitability is not what it used to be. “There hasn’t been a coalescing around him like there was for his brother in 1998 and 1999,” said Ed Martin, who led the Missouri Republican Party until February and is now president of the Eagle Forum, the conservative group founded by Phyllis Schlafly. “I just don’t have a sense among big donors and Republican leaders that this is Jeb’s to lose.”

This is all wishful thinking, frankly.  If the last week in Indiana proved one thing, it's that the corporate wing of the GOP is firmly in charge, and the Tea Party nut jobs aren't calling the shots anymore.  Bad bets in 2012 won't be made again this time around.

Jeb may be a meatball, but in the end I think he's more inevitable than Hillary as the respective 2016 nominee of their party.  Too much old money, old power, and old skeletons for something new to emerge from the party of the 1850s.

Rolled By Rolling Stone

Columbia School Journalism dean Steve Coll writes the autopsy of Rolling Stone's journalistic credibility as last November's disaster of a sexual assault story has now officially been retracted. Coll's 12,000 word deconstruction is longer than the original article by about a third and is absolutely brutal to the magazine, the Columbia J-school author, and her editors.

The collapse of "A Rape on Campus" does not involve the kinds of fabrication by reporters that have occurred in some other infamous cases of journalistic meltdown. In 2003, the New York Times reporter Jayson Blair resigned after editors concluded that he had invented stories from whole cloth. In February, NBC News suspended anchor Brian Williams after he admitted that he told tall tales about his wartime reporting in Iraq. There is no evidence in Erdely's materials or from interviews with her subjects that she invented facts; the problem was that she relied on what Jackie told her without vetting its accuracy.

"It's been an extraordinarily painful and humbling experience," Woods said. "I've learned that even the most trusted and experienced people – including, and maybe especially, myself – can make grave errors in judgment."

Yet Rolling Stone's senior editors are unanimous in the belief that the story's failure does not require them to change their editorial systems. "It's not like I think we need to overhaul our process, and I don't think we need to necessarily institute a lot of new ways of doing things," Dana said. "We just have to do what we've always done and just make sure we don't make this mistake again." Coco McPherson, the fact-checking chief, said, "I one hundred percent do not think that the policies that we have in place failed. I think decisions were made around those because of the subject matter."

Yet better and clearer policies about reporting practices, pseudonyms and attribution might well have prevented the magazine's errors. The checking department should have been more assertive about questioning editorial decisions that the story's checker justifiably doubted. Dana said he was not told of reporting holes like the failure to contact the three friends or the decision to use misleading attributions to obscure that fact.

For his part, Coll does provide a fair number of things that should immediately be improved by the magazine, and for journalists covering sexual assault in any capacity. Whether or not anyone listens is the key, but the bottom line is I would not expect to see anything resembling a hard-hitting expose' on college sexual assault and rape anytime soon, and the damage done by Rolling Stone here plays right into the idiotic right-wing myth that sexual assault simply doesn't happen on campus.

People, not just women, will be hurt and will not report assault because of this article and the fallout from it.  Period.

And that's Rolling Stone's biggest shame.

Were we as interested in flaying the malefactors behind journalistic malpractice when FOX or the Wall Street Journal commits it, daily.

StupidiNews!

• The Duke Blue Devils defeated the Wisconsin Badgers 68-63 to take coach Mike Krzyzewski's fifth career national NCAA men's basketball title.
• Maine GOP Gov. Paul LePage is the latest Republican to crack down on welfare fraud, wanting legislation that will require at least three job applications before benefits can be received.
• Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul will officially launch his presidential campaign in Louisville this morning, joining Texas Sen. Ted Cruz in the 2016 arena.
• Turkey has unblocked access to social media sites after Facebook, Twitter and YouTube complied with a court order to remove images of a slain prosecutor taken hostage by terrorists.
• Gamers who bought a Sony PlayStation Vita before June 1, 2012 can now claim a $25 credit or cash after a Sony settlement with the Federal Trade Commission over false advertising claims.

Last Call For Shaming You Into Wealth

For a bunch of small government conservatives, Kansas Republicans sure don't mind regulating the hell out of the common people if they happen to be poor.

Kansas welfare recipients will be unable to get more than $25 per day in benefits under a new law sent this week to Republican Gov. Sam Brownback's desk by the state legislature.

The bill also prohibits welfare recipients from spending their benefits at certain types of businesses, including liquor stores, fortune tellers, swimming pools and cruise ships.

"We're trying to make sure those benefits are used the way they were intended," state Rep. Michael O'Donnell (R) said, according to the Topeka Capital-Journal. "This is about prosperity. This is about having a great life."

By the way, that $25 a day limit means that should you want to use cash assistance to pay your rent, you'd have to keep making $25 withdrawals daily, each time incurring a 85-cent processing fee.  And that's if you can find an ATM that gives $5s.  Bank ATMs in America only are stocked with 20 dollar bills, so really it's a series of $20 withdrawals with a 4.25 percent surcharge.

Democrats tried to amend the bill, but let's not forget that the goal of government is to punish those who are poor until they choose to stop being poor because America.

But that's who you voted for, Kansas.

The Oliver And The Snowman

John Oliver's Last Week Tonight on HBO is by far the best of the "informational satire" shows out there, mainly because with the show being on pay cable, Oliver can say whatever the hell he wants to, and it's far funnier and more effective than Jon Stewart or even Colbert on top of his game.  So far Oliver has really yet to make a major miss like Colbert did on the rare occasion (or Stewart did far more often, descending into "both sides do it" nonsense just to be a contrary bastard.)

So it was with some trepidation that I watched this week's episode as it tackled government surveillance and an interview with Dudebro Defector himself. If there was any subject where Oliver's razor wit could have faded into preachy garbage, it would be praying at the church of the Snowbro.

Luckily, he was up to the task.



The interview with Snowden picks up at the 14 minute mark, but the entire episode is worth watching.  The Daily Beast's Marlow Stern weighs in on the grilling:

Oliver didn’t pull any punches. “How many of those documents have you actually read?” he asked Snowden with a palpable air of skepticism. “I do understand what I turned over,” the ex-CIA systems admin mumbled.

Not good enough. “There’s a difference between understanding what’s in the documents and reading what’s in the documents… because when you’re handing over thousands of NSA documents the last thing you’d want to do is read them,” Oliver said.

He continued, “So the New York Times took a slide, didn’t redact it properly, and in the end it was possible for people to see that something was being used in Mosul on al Qaeda.”

“That is a problem,” Snowden replied.

“Well, that’s a fuckup,” said Oliver.

“It is a fuckup, and those things do happen in reporting. In journalism, we have to accept that some mistakes will be made. This is a fundamental concept of liberty,” Snowden said.

“Right. But you have to own that then,” grilled Oliver. “You’re giving documents with information you know could be harmful, which could get out there.”

It's kind of sad that by far the best interview that I've seen with Edward Snowden, one that actually explains where he believes he's coming from in his own words, was conducted by a fake news host.  Snowden came across here as an actual person and not a techno-martyr.  He honestly believes he did the right thing, but Oliver pointed out that Snowden had managed to dodge the consequences of what he did, and for once, Snowden seems to actually think about those consequences and the responsibility he has for those actions.  I don't think anyone has ever forced him to consider those consequences before, certainly not in any of the other interviews I've seen him in.

And then Oliver explains NSA surveillance through something that we can all understand:  penis pictures.  It's actually very good and he makes some excellent points about the NSA having done unacceptable acts in our name.

If there's anything I took away from this, it's that Snowden is naive and didn't quite fully understand the megatonnage of the stuff he swiped before he put it out there.  And he didn't understand it because he never had time to dissect it all and still hasn't.

And frankly, this interview is an admission that he hasn't even read over everything he got his hands on.  People did that for him, and that's a problem.  It also means that when he said he did evaluate all the documents he took out of the NSA in his NBC interview last year, he was lying, point blank.

That's a major concern and no matter what you think of the guy personally, he has feet of clay. Snowden's defense of his actions were 100% based on having evaluated all the documents he took from the NSA, and finding them all worthy of public release, that the necessity of releasing them outweighed the harm the information might cause.

We know now that was complete nonsense.  He took it all and released it all and didn't carefully evaluate it.  The NSA has to answer for what it has done, but so does Edward Snowden.

I thought it was tough but fair, and it didn't make me want to pull my hair out.  At the same time, I'm still not among the crowd that thinks we should be putting up statues of the guy, either. A trial awaits this guy if he ever returns to the states, and rightfully so.

GOP Health Plan In Tennessee Remains "Don't Get Sick"

Once again Republicans in Tennessee's legislature have killed GOP Gov. Bill Haslam's plans to expand health insurance.  What makes "Republicans tell thousands of voters to shut up and die" actually newsworthy is that Haslam was pushing what national Republicans say they want as far as replacing Obamacare's Medicaid expansion: vouchers and health savings accounts.  The plan didn't even make it out of a state Senate committee.

It was never very likely the nine-member committee, eight of whom are Republicans, would approve the plan. Opponents repeatedly said they thought the plan would end up costing the state tax money, questioned whether Tennessee could opt out of the plan and criticized its ties to the Affordable Care Act, also known as "Obamacare."

During the hearing Tuesday, though, there was very little discussion. Sen. Dolores Gresham, R-Somerville, asked one question about the plan, the only question asked by a committee member.

"It was disconcerting to see the lack of any meaningful discussion. The people of Tennessee deserved better from their legislature today," said Senate Democratic Caucus Chairman Jeff Yarbro, D-Nashville.

Yarbro initially sponsored the resolution that allowed Haslam to move forward with the plan during the regular session after a GOP-backed measure failed in a special legislative session earlier this year. After a subcommittee and committee approved the plan, GOP Sens. Doug Overbey and Richard Briggs took over as lead sponsors of the resolution.

"It is not an expansion to Medicaid. It is a new approach. It is a Tennessee approach," Overbey, R-Maryville, told the committee Tuesday.

Overbey sponsored the resolution during the special session, and Briggs, who also is a doctor, voted for the plan when it died in special session. Because of concerns raised during that session, lawmakers amended the latest version of Insure Tennessee.

The new plan required Haslam to wait until after the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the ACA case called King v. Burwell; created a six-month "lockout" for people who don't pay Insure Tennessee premiums; and required Haslam to have a letter from federal health officials promising to let Tennessee end the program at any time.

Otherwise, the plan is the same as introduced during the special session. The plan creates two programs for people who earn up to 138 percent of the federal poverty line: one would create vouchers for people whose employers offer insurance that they cannot afford, and a second program would create savings accounts that members could use to pay costs after partaking in healthy choices, such as appropriate use of an emergency room.

"Is Insure Tennessee Obamacare? I think you can give it a resounding no, it is not," said Briggs, R-Knoxville.

And Insure Tennessee's Republican plan lost the committee vote 2-6-1.  If poor people die, they're no longer the state's problem, are they?  

When Republicans say they want to replace Obamacare with a Republican version, point to Tennessee as proof they are lying.

StupidiNews!

• The death toll in Copiapo in northern Chile has reached 25 as rescuers are still searching for more than 100 missing.
• Conservatives have raised $80,000 in support of a Washington state florist after the business was fined $1,000 for violating the state's Consumer Protection Act for refusing service to a gay couple.
• Senate Republicans are demanding that President Obama obtain a vote on any deal with Iran, saying that they will go ahead with a vote next week to force the President to continue sanctions.
• "Furious 7" blew the doors off the box office to set an April opening record of $143 million, beating the debut of last year's "Captain America: The Winter Soldier".
• After two years of maintenance and realignment, the Large Hadron Collider is open for business again and ready to ramp up to full power later this summer.

Last Call For The State Street Riots

Hey UK fans?  You lost.  That sucks being that close to 40-0 and a national title.  What's worse is you guys promptly proceeded to riot, even if papers refuse to call it that.

Thousands of Kentucky fans shared the suspense, and then the grief, of Saturday night's game after cramming into bars, yards and viewing parties at the Kentucky Theatre and other locations.

On State Street, which had been the epicenter of previous post-game celebrations, downcast expressions and stunned silence quickly gave way to chants of "(expletive) Wisconsin."

Bottles were thrown into the air and fires were set and quickly extinguished by firefighters, who asked for police escorts into the rowdy crowd.

There were several reports of assaults, and fights, and reports of people with minor injuries, such as facial lacerations, a head injury and a foot injury from broken glass.

City officials said 29 people had been arrested, and at least three people had been taken to the hospital. The city said police used pepper spray to break up some fights, and the city brought street sweepers in to defuse the crowd around 2 a.m. City officials described the crowd as "rowdy, and at times hostile."

"We're trying to get out of here. It's a little too chaotic," said Brandon Heinrich. "It's different than if we had won."

Jackie Thompson described the scene as "pretty hostile right now. I just think everyone's kinda at a loss of words and doesn't really know what else to do."

The Lexington Herald-Leader here goes out of its way to call this anything but a riot.  29 people got arrested, but it was all okay because they were college basketball fans, right?

But Ferguson?  Yeah, "thugs, criminals, rioters, looters".  Something to think about next time, right?

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2015/04/04/3784849_thousands-of-fans-pack-bars-yards.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

Sunday Long Read: Bastards Of The Universe

Vanity Fair's Bill Cohan catches us up on the architects of the financial collapse of 2008.  Turns out the people in the banking industry that wrecked our economy to the tune of trillions ended up A-OK. 81-year-old Jimmy Cayne, former Bear Stearns CEO, doesn't want to talk about it much.  Neither do his friends.

Cayne is not alone among former Wall Street executives in preferring not to revisit the events of 2008. Stan O’Neal, the former chairman and C.E.O. of Merrill Lynch & Co., contacted through a friend, doesn’t want to talk about that time, either. In the years leading up to the crisis—he resigned under fire in October 2007—O’Neal was the person, many people at Merrill believe, chiefly responsible for ratcheting up the firm’s risktaking, allowing its balance sheet to get larded with squirrelly debt securities, just as savvier firms such as Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase were aggressively de-risking their balance sheets. He is said to feel “bitter” about the way he was treated by the press before and after Merrill’s collapse. But he isn’t nursing his wounds on the breadline.

O’Neal left Merrill with a severance package of around $161.5 million, on top of his 2006 pay of $91.4 million. It is not exactly clear what he does these days, other than serve on the board of directors of Alcoa. He doesn’t much keep in touch with his old friends, and he has moved from his Park Avenue apartment to the Upper West Side of Manhattan. “He seems to have retreated from the world,” a friend says.

John Thain, a former partner at Goldman Sachs and onetime C.E.O. of the New York Stock Exchange, got a $15 million signing bonus to replace O’Neal as the C.E.O. of Merrill in January 2008. Thain then steered Merrill to its inevitable demise, in September 2008, when Bank of America bought it for $50 billion in stock, thanks to a major financial assist from the federal government. Thain, too, declined to be interviewed for this piece. Since February 2010, he has been the chairman and C.E.O. of CIT Group, a middle-market lender. His total compensation from CIT in 2013 was $8.25 million and his approximately 350,000 shares of CIT stock are worth around $16 million.

But Thain was already rich. As a pre-I.P.O. partner of Goldman Sachs and a co-chief operating officer of the firm, he received a windfall of more than $500 million when Goldman went public, in May 1999. He still lives at 740 Park Avenue, home to Ronald Lauder and Stephen Schwarzman, among others, in an apartment he bought for $27.5 million from the philanthropist Enid Haupt, in 2006. He also still owns a 14-bedroom mansion, on more than 10 acres, in Westchester, with two swimming pools and a tennis court.

The man who bought Merrill Lynch for $50 billion right before it would have tumbled into bankruptcy, Ken Lewis, the former C.E.O. of Bank of America, is also keeping mum these days. “Thanks for the opportunity but I have no desire to go back to that time,” Lewis wrote me. In March 2014, Lewis agreed to a three-year ban from serving as an officer of a public company and to pay a $10 million fine as part of a settlement with Eric Schneiderman, the New York State attorney general, dealing with claims that he and other Bank of America executives misrepresented to shareholders the impact the Merrill acquisition would have on Bank of America’s earnings. In bringing the lawsuit against Lewis, Andrew Cuomo, Schneiderman’s predecessor (and now New York’s governor), alleged that Lewis knew that Merrill’s earnings would be far less than originally expected, in part because of large bonuses that the brokerage had paid out to its bankers, traders, and executives and in part because of the ongoing write-downs of its risky mortgage-related assets. As part of the settlement with Schneiderman, Bank of America agreed to pay $15 million and to cover Lewis’s $10 million fine, too.

When Lewis left Bank of America, at the end of 2009, he was entitled to as much as $83 million, in a combination of pension and insurance benefits, as well as stock and other compensation. He now, reportedly, lives in a 10,000-square-foot, $4.1 million condominium in Naples, Florida, overlooking the Gulf of Mexico.

So these guys are pretty much doing alright.  Certainly far better than 99.9999% of America since 2008.  They're not in jail or anything, nor will they ever be. And if there's one major failing of the last 7 years, it's that we didn't demand tumbrels and guillotines for these bastards of the universe.

Back To The Drawing Board

With the outrage in Indiana and Arkansas (not to mention corporate America moving jobs elsewhere as a result) Nevada Republicans have killed their version of "religious freedom" legislation for now.

Nevada legislation criticized as giving businesses and corporations a license to discriminate against gay customers appears to have fizzled in light of nationwide outrage over similar “religious freedom” bills in Arkansas and Indiana.

Silver State officials opposing the bill in Carson City gained a high-profile backer late Thursday.

“The Governor believes that this bill is not necessary because the interests of all Nevadans are protected under current law,” Mari St. Martin, spokeswoman for Gov. Brian Sandoval said Thursday night.

Even the bill sponsors are backing away from it.

“After careful reflection and consultation with legislative counsel, I have determined that Nevada’s Constitution already contains adequate safeguards and protections for the civil liberties of Nevada’s citizens, and further legislative emphasis of these rights would be unnecessary,” freshman legislator and Assembly Judiciary Committee Vice Chairman Erven Nelson, R-Las Vegas, said Thursday.

The reaction to Indiana’s legislation was a factor in deciding to withdraw the bill, Nelson said.

“We obviously do not want to have happen in Nevada what’s been threatened to happen in Indiana as far as a boycott and things like that.”

If this isn't the final piece of evidence that the entire point of Indiana's RFRA bill was to codify discrimination against LGBTQ Americans, don't know what is.  But the almighty dollar has a lot of power in a tourism-heavy state like Nevada, and given the mess Indiana is now in, Nevada doesn't want squat to do with that fight.

So back to the drawing board until red states can find a way to discriminate again.  It's what Republicans do, you know...and the next state looks to be Louisiana.

Last Call For Bloody Bill's Revenge

Since Bill Kristol has been wrong about pretty much everything for years now, it's no surprise that he's totally wrong about President Obama's nuclear framework with Iran.  It's even less surprising that he's calling for open war with Tehran as a result.

It's certainly fair to criticize the particulars of the deal, which is honestly less of a "deal" than a series of cascading concessions to Iran. Some of the particulars are so indefensible that they may become the best vehicle for stopping or killing the deal. In fact, Congress might advance several pieces of legislation or amendments along these lines, in addition to the cumbersome Corker-Menendez bill. For example: no sanctions relief if Fordow, which Obama himself said was utterly unnecessary for a peaceful nuclear program, stays open. No sanctions relief if there aren't any-time, any-place inspections. No sanctions relief if the centrifuges don't stop spinning, or if enriched uranium isn't shipped out of the country. No sanctions relief without recognition of Israel's right to exist. One could—and Congress should—multiply examples of the arrows that can be launched to try to bring down this vulnerable deal.

But it's important not to lose sight of the whole, even as one goes after its most vulnerable parts. The whole of the deal is a set of concessions to an aggressive regime with a history of cheating that will now be enabled to stand one unverifiable cheat away from nuclear weapons. In making these concessions, the U.S, and its partners are ignoring that regime's past and present actions, strengthening that regime, and sending the message that there is no price to be paid for a regime's lying and cheating and terror and aggression.

We opponents of the deal disdain to conceal our views and aims. We urge Congress to stop this bad deal. We urge Congress to kill it. We believe sanctions, sabotage, and the threat of military force can better constrain the Iranian regime's nuclear weapons program than this bad deal. But we will also say openly that, if it comes to it, airstrikes to set back the Iranian nuclear weapons program are preferable to this deal that lets it go forward.

So if the GOP can't kill the deal then what, a coup where Congress takes control of the military and attacks Iran?  Kristol is insane, and yet he's still a media voice taken seriously rather than a bloody warmonger who helped sell us a false war with Iraq that killed hundreds of thousands.

Again, utter and complete insanity.  The man belongs in prison, not the opinion pages.

The Insurrection Question

Over at the Washington Post, Colbert King asks if the GOP congress would side with Republican-led states in open defiance of the Obama administration through nullification, the practice of simply declaring through state law that federal edicts that states don't like are simply null and void.

It’s a scary thought, but here it is: If some red states were to openly defy the authority of President Obama in the exercise of his constitutional duties, would today’s Republican Congress side with him? Or would they honor the insurrection?

I wish it could be said with confidence that the legislative branch would oppose a rebellion against the executive branch of government. But I’m not so sure.

Last month, the Republican-led Arizona House of Representatives passed, on a 36-to-24 party-line vote, a bill sponsored by tea party Rep. Bob Thorpe (R-Flagstaff) that “prohibits this state or any of its political subdivisions from using any personnel or financial resources to enforce, administer or cooperate with an executive order issued by the President of the U.S. that has not been affirmed by a vote of Congress and signed into law as prescribed by the U.S. Constitution.”

If adopted by the Arizona Senate and signed into law, executive orders issued by the president would have no force or effect in that state. What’s more, the Arizona House has passed a number of other bills aimed at nullifying policies, rules and regulations of the Obama administration that have not been approved by Congress.

The word “insurrection” does come to mind. Yet the resistance out West to federal authority has been received in virtual silence on Capitol Hill. It’s almost as if the GOP Congress wanted an uprising against the president.

As I've been pointing out, nullification of Obama's executive orders has been in play for several years now, with several states passing laws that refuse to force existing or new federal gun control laws, and Mitch McConnell openly telling states to ignore EPA regulations on power plant emissions, I'm pretty sure we've been in a constitutional crisis for a couple of years now.

To answer King's question, yes, the GOP congress will side with red states and has been. Hell, this is a congress that is constantly suing the President for being the President.

So yes, we're on a dangerous path and have been.  It's about time that maybe our media woke up to this.

Bad At Electoral Math

Political author Eric Ham predicts that Jeb Bush has the edge in the electoral college based on the 2014 midterms, and that by taking Gov. John Kasich as his running mate, he can win Ohio, or by picking Gov. Brian Sandoval, he can win Nevada and take the advantage with Latino voters nationally.

Though Pennsylvania, Virginia and possibly Colorado lean toward Clinton in an all-important White House run, no two states are more integral to any presidential victory than Nevada and Ohio, and they stand solidly in Bush's corner. Nevada has been carried by the winner in every presidential election since 1912, with the exception of 1976. Not to be outdone, since 1964, Ohio has been the only state in the nation to back the winning candidate in every presidential cycle. The advantages held by the GOP in these two bellwether states will make even Clinton's inevitability a tall climb. The Silver State leaned Democratic in 2008 and 2012, with Obama besting Mitt Romney 52 to 46 percent even in a brutal economic climate. Fast forward to 2014, and the Republicans have picked up both chambers of the state legislature. Adding to the list of Republican advantages, Gov. Brian Sandoval, one of the nation's most prominent Latino officeholders, won reelection in a landslide with a whopping 70 percent of the vote. Sandoval and Bush (no stranger to the Latino community) could provide the blueprint for reaching the crucial Latino vote and moving Nevada into the red column. Like Nevada, the Buckeye State is currently enjoying a decided red advantage that could tilt the presidency to Bush in 2016. The single biggest advantage is its immensely popular Republican governor, John Kasich. While harboring his own presidential ambitions, should Kasich decide not to run, there would be no better champion for a Bush-led ticket than him. A two-term governor and former congressman, Kasich has deep roots in Ohio. The Republican presidential nominee will also enjoy the same advantages of the Democratic National Convention, as Cleveland is the host city for the Republican National Convention. Clinton's inevitability makes her formidable, but like his brother before him, Bush recognizes the Electoral College, not the popular vote, is the difference between victory and defeat.

But as David O. Atkins points out, Ohio and Nevada will not be enough for Bush to win without the rest of the electoral college firewall that the Dems have totally collapsing.

Let’s grant Ham’s premise that Bush’s background in Florida will help any more than Gore’s background in Tennessee aided him. Let’s also grant the dubious notion that the Kasich effect and the GOP convention will somehow put the GOP over the top in Ohio. Let’s give the GOP Colorado despite its ever-more-blue demographic shifts, and let’s assume that some combination of Bush’s Spanish speaking and Sandoval’s endorsement somehow pulls Latino voters in Nevada to Bush in spite of the GOP’s rabid freakout over immigration and unwillingness to budge on the issue.

It’s a series of dubious longshots, but let’s give Bush Florida, Colorado, Nevada and Ohio. Let’s also give Bush the swing state of North Carolina (because this isn’t a discussion otherwise), and let’s assume that 2016 isn’t the year that demography overwhelms the GOP in Arizona and Georgia. Let’s also assume (as is likely but not at all certain) that every red-leaning swing state like Missouri and West Virginia falls to Bush.

Even all that still doesn’t get the GOP to more than 268 electoral votes. The Democratic nominee would still win the White House, even under that highly improbable scenario. Bush would have to go beyond that feat to somehow pluck off Iowa, Wisconsin or Virginia just to eke out a narrow win—nor is there any particular reason to believe that will happen. Scott Walker will be dragged through the mud by grueling presidential politics, Virginia continues to solidify its Democratic core in the north, and an older white Democratic nominee is likely to perform significantly better in Iowa than even Barack Obama did in 2008 and 2012.

In other words, Florida, Ohio and Nevada aren't going to be enough for Bush to beat Clinton in 2016.  Not by a long shot.  He's going to need to get several more swing states as well, namely Colorado, Iowa, and New Hampshire without losing Missouri, Georgia, and North Carolina.

Even if Bush wins the three states Ham has him with the "advantage" in, he still loses.