Nuked Gingrich, Part 13

With just 5 days until the Iowa Caucuses, Team Newt is "managing expectations" for Gingrich's crash and burn.

On Wednesday evening around 6:30 ET, Newt Gingrich strategist Joe DeSantis declared the Gingrich surge in Iowa officially over.

“Oh I think anywhere in the top five would be surviving Iowa,” DiSantis told CNN.

Just a couple weeks ago, Gingrich was riding high in Iowa, leading by huge margins. DeSantis acknowledged that his candidate is no longer in “the top tier” however, chalking up the decline to the blanket of negative ads that have been run against Gingrich since he surged.

“I don’t care what candidate’s in the race, if they get $9 million in negative advertisements against them they’re going to drop in the polls,” he said. “Considering we’ve been outspent 30-1 on the air, that still being very competitive for fourth place right now and, frankly, really not that far off from being in the top tier in Iowa still is pretty impressive.” 

The latest polls find Romney having regained the lead, with Ron Paul now dropping to second, Gingrich dropping to fourth rapidly, and if anything, Rick Santorum gaining a bit of momentum as he's now in third.  Gingrich has disintegrated, going from 33% to 14% and falling.

But Mitt can't seem to break that 25% mark.  That means a vast majority of Republicans still want him to jump off the nearest pier.  That probably explains why Newt is talking about sticking around after finishing fifth or so:  whoever does drop out after Iowa would end up giving their votes to, well, anybody but Mitt.  And it's not going to take much to beat Mitt's weak showing down the road.

And for now, that may be enough.

StupidiNews!

• An Arizona court has ruled in favor of the state in finding that Tuscon school district's teaching of Mexican-American studies violates state law.
• Some 23 states are eligible for a total of nearly $300 million in federal funds for participating in the SCHIP insurance program for kids.
• State universities, looking to cut costs, are trimming remedial classes for under-performing students.
• Gold looks to be headed for its first quarterly fall since 2008 as prices have dropped towards $1,500 after close to $1,900 an ounce highs during the worst of the euro zone crisis.
• The NY Times is apologizing after accidentally sending out expired subscription emails to nearly 8 million customers.

Breaking News: Bwahahahaha Edition

It seems Michele "Crazy Eyes" Bachmann has lost one of her advisors.  He appeared with her this morning, and later in the day announced his plans to join Ron Paul's camp effective immediately.

"It's difficult, but it's the right thing to do. Because he fights for the values that I hold dear as well. And I just want to tell you guys I'm going to do everything in the next few days to help in Iowa and beyond. And we're going to take Ron Paul all the way to the White House 2012."

Bazinga, you crazy beeyotch!

Last Call

President Obama and the Democrats are winning the payroll tax cut and unemployment benefit extension fight in the polls...but not by much.

Americans have slightly more confidence in President Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress (41%) than in the Republicans in Congress (34%) when it comes to the looming debate on what the government should do about a more permanent extension of payroll tax cuts and unemployment benefits.

These findings, collected on Dec. 27 in Gallup Daily tracking, also show that about a quarter of Americans either don't have an opinion on the issue (10%) or say they have confidence in neither (15%) or both (1%) of the two partisan groups.

Everything's split pretty evenly along partisan lines, but Independents are very much split, 35% back the Dems, 27% the Republicans, and 21% say "neither".  Apparently, the Republicans blinking hasn't hurt them much with the American people...and hasn't helped the President, either.

We'll see what round 2 brings in February.

A Second Take On Ben Nelson

I gave my reasons as to why the Dems will miss Ben Nelson yesterday, mainly because his replacement will almost certainly be a Tea Party nimrod.  The Nation's Jamelle Bouie disagrees.

During the Obama presidency, Nelson turned his loathsome behavior up to eleven, as he obstructed the stimulus bill and worked with Republican senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins to needlessly strike tens of billions in aid to state governments. As a marginal vote in the Democratic caucus, Nelson was key to the passage of healthcare reform in the face of unified Republican opposition. True to form, he used that power to extract ridiculous concessions from President Obama and in the process nearly scuttle the bill. Since then, he has done everything he could to undermine liberals in Congress, from coming out against provisions in financial reform (that he voted for), to dragging his feet on “don’t ask, don’t tell” repeal (he eventually voted for it), to acting as a constant deficit scold, urging President Obama to ignore unemployment and sluggish growth in favor of austerity.

With his parochialism and narrow concern for his own influence, it’s no exaggeration to say that Ben Nelson represented the worst of the Senate. His retirement is a good thing for Congress and a good thing for the country.

Don't get me wrong, Ben Nelson is a complete douchebag who in many ways was the worst Democrat in the Senate, and Bouie does list many of those ways.  He has hurt the Democrats time and time again.  But his replacement will be worse, and by retiring now he's all but assured that Republicans will easily win the seat.  It's a final dick move of epic proportions, and the only thing Nelson had going for him was the D after his name.

Now?  Enjoy your even worse Republican Senator, I guess.  Lemme know how that works out six years from now.

POTUS Plays The "You Mad, Bro?" Card

Republicans are preparing to go into full OUTRAGE MODE over the Obama Administration's request to the Treasury to raise the debt ceiling another $1.2 trillion.  The debt ceiling deal worked out earlier this year gives the Republicans a chance to pass a resolution of disapproval, but the President would have to sign the resolution after it somehow passed a Democratically-controlled Senate in order to stop the debt ceiling hike.  In other words, there's nothing the Republicans can really do other than complain loudly.

Except President Obama has outfoxed the elephants once again:  the GOP may not even get the chance to do that much, because they're on winter break until January 17.  Brian Beutler explains:

The key issue is the 15-day deadline Congress has to vote on a resolution of disapproval of the President’s request to raise the debt ceiling. The timing of the administration’s planned certification implies that the 15 days would be up before Congress returns in January from its holiday recess. Whether this was an accident or not, we’re told that the calendar issue created a behind-the-scenes mess — with Republicans threatening to return early from recess — and that the administration is trying to figure out a way to keep it from spilling out into the public.

I’ve reached out to the administration for further guidance on both questions. It’s still unclear whether this was a hardball political move, a dumb mistake, or just a misunderstanding — or what, if anything, can be done to avoid a public clash with the GOP over the timing.

The size of the debt hike -- easily getting the country through 2012 without having to bring it up during the election -- and the timing seems to indicate to me that A) this was done on purpose, B) it was done to pants the GOP, and C) most importantly the Obama administration understands full well that raising the debt ceiling was going to be portrayed by the GOP as an impeachable offense no matter what the President actually did about it.   So the White House is looking to get this out of the way.

Pretty sure this was the plan all along, and the GOP is now facing having to blow their vacation or miss their big chance at portraying the President as the most vile of all villains when of course previous Presidents jacked up the debt limit all the time, including Dubya's seven times and Reagan's 18 times.   Your move, Republicans.  You already lost that fight once.

You mad, bro?  If you ask me, President Obama's got them by the short hairs.  Again.

That's A Mighty Fine Blind Spot You Have There

They got thisclose to solving the problem and then they blew it.

Slate ran an article talking about the failure of school lunch programs.  It's not what you think.  Sure, money comes to mind but nope... they managed to find a way to make it work after encouragement and aid from the First Lady and a growing movement to teach kids healthy eating habits.  No, the problem is that the kids won't participate.  No surprise, they are bringing chips from lunch or refusing to eat the healthier food.

Here's the stupid part: they are getting away with it.

The complaints?  Stomach pains.  Headaches.  What-the-hell-ever-itis.  It's all bunk, and any mother worth a darn would call out those lies.  Or maybe they are true.  Stomach pain can occur when someone introduces fiber into their diet.  Headaches happen when blood sugar has been extraordinarily high and comes down (trust me, I know).

To give them credit, Slate calls out the "snotty-nosed brat" behavior.  They are ruthless when they explain that our little Snowflakes might just have to suck it up.  Research was done, the food was too watery or without enough flavor.  Study groups have isolated what kids hate, and much expense has been put into making the choices more attractive to kids.  Then, right when they were building towards the final solution, the grand finale as it were, they screwed up.  They called it a loss.  They proceeded with the false assumption that the kids hold the power.  Who could possibly back up these efforts and make them work?

Nobody mentioned the parents.  Why?  Why do we assume it's all up to the school and the kids to fight this battle?  Why aren't we enlisting the parents in the drive to have healthier kids?  You know, those guys who are actually legally responsible for the welfare of their kids.  Our kids have all the food they want but are not getting adequate nutrition, and the people with the most influence are not mentioned even once.  I find that strange and yet completely in line with everyday expectations.  Maybe we should teach our kids that when someone goes through a lot of effort and expense to do something nice, the least you can do is show reasonable appreciation.

Michelle Obama has her work cut out. I wish her the best of luck.

Cheesy Moon Theory Makes A Whole Lotta Sense

Now, two prominent scientists have published a paper suggesting that although we have an entire universe to seek out the proverbial alien needle in a haystack, perhaps looking in our own backyard would be a good place to start.

Paul Davies and Robert Wagner of Arizona State University have suggested a crowd-sourcing effort to find artificial structures on the moon. After all, lunar missions like NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter are returning some dazzling, high-resolution imagery of the moon's surface. If aliens have been there, perhaps we could spot evidence of their presence.

They raise perfectly logical points. The moon is close enough to be reached, evidence would be preserved because of the lack of atmosphere. If aliens decided to check us out, the moon would make an excellent place to play peek-a-boo. Unless they went through extraordinary lengths to cover their footprints something would remain.

It's intriguing, and I would happily donate processor time to lend a hand. As it sometimes happens, the logical starting place was right in front of us all along.

Iran, So Far Away, Part 3

With the US and western countries ready to hit Iran with oil export sanctions and Saudi Arabia and other OPEC allies ready to boost production to make up for Iranian shortfall, the Iranians aren't about to simply roll over, as they do have one major piece of leverage left:  oil tanker traffic in the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran's threat to stop the flow of oil from the Gulf supported crude prices on Wednesday and put world shares on the back foot, while looming Italian debt auctions hampered the euro.

Tehran said on Tuesday it would stop oil transiting through the Strait of Hormuz if sanctions were imposed on its crude exports over its nuclear ambitions, a move that could conceivably trigger military conflict with economies dependent on Gulf oil.

Brent crude oil steadied above $109 a barrel after climbing more than a dollar in the previous session. Prices have surged over 5 percent since Dec. 16.

European shares dropped 0.4 percent and Asian stocks also slipped, pushing the MSCI world equity index down 0.25 percent on the day.

"The only way Iran would actually close Hormuz is when it is attacked and war breaks, but such a possibility appears low as no country would want to take the risk when growth worldwide was likely to slow down," said Naohiro Niimura, a partner at research and consulting firm Market Risk Advisory Co.

But he added the tensions would be a major source of volatility in 2012 along with the euro zone debt crisis. He expected Brent to trade between $105-$110 in 2012.

If all Iran has to do in order to force $110 a barrel oil is look crosseyed at the Strait of Hormuz, and can boost what exports it can make by jacking up prices through zero-cost saber-rattling, it seems like somebody hasn't quite thought these oil sanctions through all the way. You won't hear OPEC countries complaining too loudly either.  Iran doesn't have to actually do anything in order to keep oil in the triple digits for the foreseeable future.

I'm betting Iran thinks it can cause just as much economic damage to the US through higher oil prices than the US can cause to it through sanctions...and considering the sanctions may end up benefiting Iran in the long run if it can keep oil prices high and sell less oil for more money, it's the rest of the world that gets hurt through more expensive fuel.  Iran may actually come out ahead.

We'll see who wins.  It's the American consumer who stands a fair chance of being the loser, however.

Capitalism: Working As Intended

Chris Hayes mentioned this Steve Waldman post at Interfluidity on banking, capitalism, and the game theory behind why proper investment, the lifeblood of any capitalist system, requires good ol' fashioned lying to really work well:

Like so many good con-men, bankers make themselves believed by persuading each and every investor individually that, although someone might lose if stuff happens, it will be someone else. You’re in on the con. If something goes wrong, each and every investor is assured, there will be a bagholder, but it won’t be you. Bankers assure us of this in a bunch of different ways. First and foremost, they offer an ironclad, moneyback guarantee. You can have your money back any time you want, on demand. At the first hint of a problem, you’ll be able to get out. They tell that to everyone, without blushing at all. Second, they point to all the other people standing in front of you to take the hit if anything goes wrong. It will be the bank shareholders, or it will be the government, or bondholders, the “bank holding company”, the “stabilization fund”, whatever. There are so many deep pockets guaranteeing our bank! There will always be someone out there to take the loss. We’re not sure exactly who, but it will not be you! They tell this to everyone as well. Without blushing.

And instinctively, we understand that capitalism is a zero-sum game:  as Guy sang it in the theme from New Jack City, "Somebody's gotta win, somebody's gotta lose."   We get that.  We don't want to actually believe that, as Doug J and Charles Pierce remind us.  But we instinctively get that.

Waldman goes on to explain that the occasional Gilded Age/Depression is a feature of the system, not a bug.

This is the business of banking. Opacity is not something that can be reformed away, because it is essential to banks’ economic function of mobilizing the risk-bearing capacity of people who, if fully informed, wouldn’t bear the risk. Societies that lack opaque, faintly fraudulent, financial systems fail to develop and prosper. Insufficient economic risks are taken to sustain growth and development. You can have opacity and an industrial economy, or you can have transparency and herd goats.

A lamentable side effect of opacity, of course, is that it enables a great deal of theft by those placed at the center of the shell game. But surely that is a small price to pay for civilization itself. No?

In other words, the dynamic connection between "It takes money to make money" and "A fool and his money are soon parted" is the real engine of American growth.  When the winners are winning this much, you have to have a proportionally massive number of losers losing badly, that's what zero-sum game means.

The cynic in me agrees with Waldman.  The optimist in me remembers that eventually all systems break down completely and are replaced with other systems, and yes, that qualifies as "hopeful" in this situation.

StupidiNews!

• A lawsuit in California may help determine legal ground rules for who "owns" a company's Twitter account, the company or the person hired to maintain it socially.
• Documents obtained by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation shows that Canada is supplying nuclear fuel to the US by truck, raising safety concerns.
• North Korea has held its official state funeral for leader Kim Jong-il, officially leaving the country in the hands of his 27-year-old son, Kim Jong-un.
• In 2012, analysts expect Britain's job market will be the worst in two decades, with 120,000 jobs lost across the country and 8.8% unemployment.
• Italian officials are working on a plan to install floodgates in Venice that may regulate the city's famous "acqua alta" high tide floods.

Last Call

We com not to praise Nebraska's Ben Nelson and his Senate career, but to bury it as he screws over the Democrats one last time.  Steve Benen:

Democratic leaders from the White House and Capitol Hill pleaded with Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), asking him to run for re-election for one main reason: the party is desperate to keep its Senate majority and it has no one else to run in Nebraska.

As is often the case, Nelson is letting his party down.

Oh, it gets worse.  Nelson chooses now to retire, after the Dems had bought six figures in ads to help him keep his seat, and well too late to find a replacement.  And let's not forget what he leaves behind:

Nelson has voted with the right many times over the last couple of years — even on filibusters — offering Republicans cover on a wide range of issues. When pressed, Nelson would often tell his Democratic allies the votes were necessary to bolster his re-election bid. Now that he’s leaving, Nelson’s votes with Republicans appear to have no value at all.

That said, Nelson’s record wasn’t all bad. In 2009, after nearly balking many times, he stuck with his party on the Affordable Care Act and the Recovery Act. Those proved critical, and both measures would have failed without his vote. As exasperating as Nelson has been, he never drifted so far to the right that he was more conservative than Republicans.

He was a Democrat...barely.  His replacement will almost certainly be a teabagging mouth-breather who will vote with the Democrats a grand total of zero times. This makes Ben Nelson, as rotten as he was, an improvement over, well, this guy.



I'd prefer Ben Nelson, thanks.

Moving Forward At Your Own Perry-il, Part 13

I'm not 100% sure I have the gist of things here, but it looks to me that Rick Perry is trying to energize his all but dead campaign for President by saying "Vote for me, I'll remove the checks and balances on the Oval Office!"

Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s latest campaign advertisement in Iowa calls for a part-time Congress and knocks four fellow GOP presidential hopefuls who’ve served there.

“If Washington’s the problem, why trust a congressman to fix it? Among them, they’ve spent 63 years in Congress, leaving us with debt, earmarks, and bailouts. Congressmen get $174,000 a year and you get the bill,” an announcer in the 30-second ad says.

A recent Gallup poll found that more Americans are dissatisfied with Congress than ever before. The governing body is now set to end 2011 with the lowest one-time approval rating in its history: 11 percent. Their annual average for 2011 came to a whopping 17 percent, which is also the lowest ever recorded.

“Gov. Perry is the only Washington outsider in this race. He has never served in Washington or been an establishment favorite,” Perry campaign spokesman Ray Sullivan explained in a statement. 

Sure, Congress has the approval rating somewhere between that of breeding velociraptors next to hospital nurseries and setting your own genitals on fire, but it doesn't mean we should basically eliminate Congress.

On the other hand, as I said yesterday all the Republicans are more or less running on a platform of getting rid of the federal government.  Rick Perry certainly is no different in this respect, and in many ways he and Newt Gingrich (who wants to all but rid the country of the Judicial branch) are almost running for dictator.

On the gripping hand, Congress is full of a lot of people whose job apparently is getting richer for being on Congress while their constituents get poorer.  Something does need to be done about Congress and Washington DC politics in general, but giving more power to the Executive Branch isn't the solution.

Still, "Washington doesn't work, let's complete the transition to the Imperial Presidency!" is ludicrous, and yet these jokers keep screaming that President Obama is just waiting to take over the country and round us up into FEMA camps.  Funny how that works.

See A Need, Errm, Fill...A Need

If you can't spice up the relationship with a trip to the Côte d'Azur in this economy, you can always try Walgreens as sexy goes mainstream for one California company, Justin Ross and Keith Caggiano's growing business, Screaming O.

Screaming O's desire now is to sell through mainstream channels while maintaining its racy branding. In late 2009, Walgreens signed a licensing deal to sell one of Screaming O's brands in 7,000 drugstores. Their products, with bright, explicit packaging, are also sold through Amazon.com, Drugstore.com, and RiteAid.com, as well as stores in 27 foreign countries. “We stand right at the edge. We want to market and brand ourselves as a company that sells fun,” Ross says, “without becoming so demure" that customers overlook the products.

It’s a tricky balance to achieve. Trojan, which has sold condoms for more than eight decades, first introduced vibrators to its product line a year ago. It’s taking a low-key approach, with television commercials that feature girlfriends chuckling knowingly over their “personal massagers” and packaging designed to disappear on the grocery store conveyor belt. In contrast, with a name like Screaming O, Ross, 38, and Caggiano, 44, can hardly be accused of subtlety.

“When people see our brand, the barriers go down and we melt their defenses,” says Caggiano, who developed the company’s online advertising and offline promotions, which mostly center on sponsoring international sporting events, spring-break hot spots, and safe sex forums on college campuses. “We want to find a way to help people be comfortable with themselves and their sexuality,” he says. 

I honestly think we're seeing this because of the economy, frankly, and more than a little backlash against the prudes...oh yeah, and the internet.  Let's face it, there's no way you're putting that genie back in the bottle.  Today's folk are more than happy to experiment safely with sex in the privacy of their own home, because let's face it, it's cheaper than dinner and a movie these days.

More power to you, gentlemen.

Teacher Dating Student AND Mother

Gerard Cassidy, a physical-education instructor at a Queens middle school, was caught in a love triangle and fired for having an “inappropriate relationship” with an ex-student — while dating her mom, The Post has learned.

Cassidy, 44, who taught at MS137 America’s School of Heroes in Ozone Park, lost a fight for his $83,600-a-year job even though the 16-year-old student recanted her claim that she had sex with the teacher, according to city Department of Education documents and court records.

When questioned by Condon’s office, the teen denied any sexual contact with Cassidy, saying he only held her hand “for support and encouragement” and kissed her hello and goodbye.

She said Cassidy helped her with family problems, the way she dressed and her vocabulary.

But the DOE still charged Cassidy, a teacher for 18 years, with misconduct after Condon’s office obtained records showing that he called the girl’s cellphone 553 times between March and July 2009 and sent 383 text messages to her iPhone. About 125 calls occurred between 8 p.m. and 6 a.m.

In his DOE hearing, Cassidy said he was only motivating the girl to do her homework and get up to go to school. The girl’s mother insisted that she permitted Cassidy to call her daughter any time.

The mother testified Cassidy’s mentoring helped her daughter rocket to an “A” average. But records show she was still failing

It's a pretty nifty trick to get both mom and daughter to life for you.  This guy sounds like a real piece of work, but he couldn't have done any of this without the mother's knowledge and consent.  She claims to have known how often he was contacting her daughter, and seems fine with it.  Except for that whole statutory rape thing, it might have worked out just dandy for the couple.

But seriously, we must stop allowing teachers access to kids like this.  There are thousands of honest teachers who keep a respectable distance from students so they cannot be accused of something like this.  Then you have jackasses like this, and jackass mothers who pimp their kids out with full knowledge of what could happen.  This is disgusting and does nothing but damage innocent teachers and students right along with those who work against the system.  There can be healthy relationships (not the dating kind) between student and teacher, but after stupidity like this nobody would dare take the risk.