Tomorrow’s Republican Debate

Tomorrow, there’s going to be a debate in South Carolina between some guys who are running for the Republican nomination for president. These guys are:

Former Governor of Minnesota Tim Pawlenty
Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum
Texas Representative Ron Paul
Former Governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson
Herman Cain, Former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, columnist and radio talk-show host

Slate’s David Weigel asks:

Who benefits from a debate like this? Pawlenty is the only candidate up there seen as a likely or possible nominee. Paul and Johnson are both in the race, essentially, to spread their messages; in Johnson’s case, he’ll get much more time from moderators than he would (or will) when the race fills out. Santorum and Cain get to vie for the trophy of Most Likely to Make a One-Liner That Dominates Second-Day Coverage.

Look at this poll from 1991:

1992/OCT. ’91
Jerry Brown: 12%
L. Douglas Wilder: 8
Bob Kerrey: 7
Bill Clinton: 5
Tom Harkin: 3
Paul E. Tsongas: 2

So, it’s kind of like putting Douglas Wilder, Bob Kerry, Bill Clinton, Tom Harkin and Paul Tsongas in a debate, which would have been pointless because clearly none of them had a chance at the nomination.

“How Many Gays Must God Create Before We Accept That He Wants Them Around?”

Minnesota state Representative Steve Simon (DFL Hopkins/St. Louis Park) makes a pretty solid point in arguing against a proposed state constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage, saying that it’s all about religion.

Stupid kids don’t know who Osama was, also apparently use Yahoo!

At the Yahoo! company blog, a post* notes how many kids asked the search engine (now powered by Bing, right? — I haven’t been there since 1997) who Osama bin Laden was:

According to Yahoo!, The Top Searched Questions on Osama bin Laden are (based on Sunday, 5/1):

1. Is Osama bin Laden dead?
2. How did Osama bin Laden die?
3. Who killed Osama bin Laden?
4. How old is Osama bin Laden
5. Who is Osama bin Laden
6. Where was Osama bin Laden killed?
7. Is Osama bin Laden dead or alive?
8. How tall is Osama bin Laden?

Younger Generation. News of Osama bin Laden’s death seemed to have struck a chord with younger folks who grew up during the war on terrorism.

-          On Yahoo!, 1 in 3 searches for “how did osama bin laden die” on Sunday were from teens ages 13-17.

-          According to Yahoo!, 40% of searches on Sunday for “who killed osama bin laden” were from people ages 13-20.

-          However, it seems teens ages 13-17 were seeking more information as they made up 66% of searches for “who is osama bin laden?”

* An annoyingly super-awkwardly formatted post, that is.

The news that actually mattered

First Read nails it when they mention what was lost in the wilderness yesterday while all that everybody could bother to notice was the non-news story of the president’s birth certificate (and the Royal Wedding!):

Birth Certificate Day, of course, overshadowed a bigger story that will actually impact U.S. lives: the news of Obama’s new national security team, which includes a lot of familiar faces; it’s more of a “staff shuffle” than “shakeup.”

….

Well, there was Bernanke’s first press conference and the announcement that the Fed’s $600 billion bond purchase will end in June and that interest rates will remain low for a while longer. There was the news that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid plans to hold a Senate vote on the House budget plan (which means that Dean Heller will have to vote for it again). And there was the story about some rowdy GOP town halls, especially in senior-rich Florida.

….

Of course, the biggest story today is the tornadoes that ripped through much of the South yesterday.

All lost because the president proved what everybody already knew. And those who didn’t believe it still pretty much don’t, according to a new poll by Survey USA. Of those who have seen the president’s birth certificate:

* 57% say they knew all along that the President was born in the USA.
* 14% say they had doubts, but now are satisfied that the President was born in the USA.
* 18% say they still have doubts about where the President was born.
* 10% say they are sure the document released 04/27/11 is a forgery.

Selected comments from Fox News story “White House Releases Obama’s Long-Form Birth Certificate”

So, the White House today released President Obama’s long-form birth certificate, and, being a pretty lame but I guess Important News Item, Fox News had to—I assume reluctantly—report it.

I went into the danger zone: yes, the Fox News comments. Below are some choice samples.

4arkie notes:

Is it real? After delaying two years it is possible it could be a forgery, our Government can produce some pretty good “copies” of anything they choose. How do you think our spies get their “papers”? I am not saying it is a forgery but it makes one wonder why it took so long. The more important question is , “How do we make SURE Obama is NOT re-elected to another term”. America cannot survive another four years of the current policies whether foreign or domestic!

beetle_baily says:

That’s it play the race card again when there is no race issue. McCain was asked to produce a birth certificate during the election, as was Obama. One APPEARED to have something to hide, and it wasn’t his skin color. And another thing. Why do you think Fox News is racist? Do you think they were the only ones reporting on this issue? Think again.

howard521 has some questions:

1. It took two years, pressure from Trump, and from the public, for Obama to finally produce a
birth certificate, which Obama should have presented when he first ran for the Presidency.

2. The timing is very suspicious. How do we know this document is even authentic?

3. Not long ago, stories were circulating that at the time of Obama’s birth, Hawaii wasn’t even issuing
long form birth certificates.

4. How come his religion isn’t listed ?

5. Regardless of his birth certificate, Obama is destroying America, our economy is in shambles, and
Obama wants to squander Trillions more !

6. If Obama is doing so well, why does he need to spend a Billion dollars to get reelected ???

More beyond the pale.

Continue reading »

Michigan Republican State Senator Bruce Caswell wants to turn foster kids into hipsters

Reports Michigan Public Radio:

Foster children in Michigan would use their state-funded clothing allowance only in thrift stores under a plan suggested by State Senator Bruce Caswell.

Caswell says he wants to make sure that state money set aside to buy clothes for foster children and kids of the working poor  is actually used for that purpose.

He says they should get “gift cards” to be used only at Salvation Army, Goodwill or other thrift stores.

You see, clearly the problem is that poor kids aren’t cool enough. They’re buying their crappy clothes at Target and Walmart and just not picking up on the latest trends. Remember when that Napoleon Dynamite kid got that choice chocolate brown suit at the thrift store? See, CLEARLY THERE IS NOTHING ABOUT THIS PLAN THAT CAN BE CONSTRUED AS ANYTHING BY PURE COMPASSION.

Oh:

“I never had anything new,” Caswell says. “I got all the hand-me-downs. And my dad, he did a lot of shopping at the Salvation Army, and his comment was — and quite frankly it’s true — once you’re out of the store and you walk down the street, nobody knows where you bought your clothes.”

Well, never mind: You are an asshole.

Congress has always been kind of shitty

I’ve been making my way through Daniel Walker Howe’s What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848. It’s an extraordinary piece of historical non-fiction, spanning the era between the end of the War of 1812 to the Mexican American War. I have the paperback edition, and it’s quite simply too large to handle comfortably. But, as its Pulitzer would attest, an incredible and magnificent tome.

In any case, I thought I’d pass along an anecdote that I hadn’t heard before but found entirely amusing.

It’s important to note that the 26th amendment, which prohibits congress from giving itself pay raises, was not in force at the time. Although meant to be the 2nd amendment and passed by the 1st Congress, it was not ratified by the states until 1992.

The 14th Congress was an extremely productive congress. After the War of 1812 came to a close, they, led by such luminaries as Henry Clay and  John Calhoun, passed a still-historic amount and breadth of legislation.

So, of course, they voted themselves a modest pay raise. And, as a result, two-thirds of the congress (sure makes that 2010 “wave” seem more like a mild current) were either voted out of office or declined to seek reelection.

Now, here’s the balls maneuver. At the time, the so-called “lame duck” session was almost a year long, as the next congressional term didn’t begin again until December (the 20th amendment, much later, dialed it back to January). What did these brave men do with the lame duck? They repealed the pay raise for the next congress, while keeping it for themselves.

The real spending problem

Chart courtesy of Veronica de Rugy at The American.

We don’t have a debt crisis. We don’t have a spending problem. We don’t even really have that much of a tax problem. Hell, we barely even have a deficit problem. What we do have is a health-care problem. James Surowiecki explains:

Yet, strange as it may sound, the federal government does not have a spending problem per se. What it has is a health-care problem. The cost of most budget items typically rises at a reasonable rate, if at all, but the cost of Medicare, Medicaid, and the tax subsidy for employer-provided insurance has been rising much faster than everything else: in the past forty years, Medicare costs increased 8.3 per cent annually. If they’re not controlled, Medicare and Medicaid will eventually be by far our biggest expense. Preventing that is the key to getting our fiscal house in order.

Let’s just point out that the Affordable Care Act was the first, and only, piece of law passed to start to address this problem. And Republicans want to tear it down. Only President Obama and the Democrats (as sheepishly as they were) have acted on the real upcoming problem.

Nevada

Senator John Ensign has announced that he will resign effective May 3.

Nevada was already going to be an important battleground in 2012, and for good reason.* With Ensign out the picture, it was also going to be a senate-seat slugfest as well. But, Ensign played a rough move by getting out now.

The seat will almost definitely be handed to Rep. Dean Heller, who was pretty much the front-runner for the seat in 2012 already.  Yet, because of this development, in 2012 he’ll now be defending the seat as an incumbent as opposed to it being an open seat. Advantage: Republicans, and especially Heller, who probably now won’t have a tough primary fight.

Should also be noted that Heller’s House seat will be up for grabs, and so would be the first special election since November. Honestly, that’s going to be the race to watch to see what the electorate’s real mood is going into next year.

* Way-too-early prediction: Romney wins Nevada if he’s the nominee, Obama otherwise.

Americans Trust Businessmen

Yglesias points out a recent Gallup poll that shows Americans trusting “business leaders” more than the president on the economy.

If you’ve been following me (especially my post on Romney’s chances), this won’t surprise you, and it doesn’t surprise me. Americans love business leaders, and, in general, distrust politicians. Call it the inevitable consequence of the grand old “Protestant Work Ethic” or whatever.

Of course, many don’t think this through: Business leaders are those same people who reaped million-dollar bonuses while the economy was collapsing; hell, they’re the ones that brought it down. They’re the bankers, the hedge-fund dealers, the upper one percent of one percent of earners, and the ones that decided that you should have to pay extra to check the luggage you’re required to check.

Praying for Rain

This is real:

TO ALL TO WHOM THESE PRESENTS SHALL COME:

WHEREAS, the state of Texas is in the midst of an exceptional drought, with some parts of the state receiving no significant rainfall for almost three months, matching rainfall deficit records dating back to the 1930s; and

WHEREAS, a combination of higher than normal temperatures, low precipitation and low relative humidity has caused an extreme fire danger over most of the State, sparking more than 8,000 wildfires which have cost several lives, engulfed more than 1.8 million acres of land and destroyed almost 400 homes, causing me to issue an ongoing disaster declaration since December of last year; and

WHEREAS, these dire conditions have caused agricultural crops to fail, lake and reservoir levels to fall and cattle and livestock to struggle under intense stress, imposing a tremendous financial and emotional toll on our land and our people; and

WHEREAS, throughout our history, both as a state and as individuals, Texans have been strengthened, assured and lifted up through prayer; it seems right and fitting that the people of Texas should join together in prayer to humbly seek an end to this devastating drought and these dangerous wildfires;

NOW, THEREFORE, I, RICK PERRY, Governor of Texas, under the authority vested in me by the Constitution and Statutes of the State of Texas, do hereby proclaim the three-day period from Friday, April 22, 2011, to Sunday, April 24, 2011, as Days of Prayer for Rain in the State of Texas. I urge Texans of all faiths and traditions to offer prayers on that day for the healing of our land, the rebuilding of our communities and the restoration of our normal way of life.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed my name and have officially caused the Seal of State to be affixed at my Office in the City of Austin, Texas, this the 21st day of April, 2011.

RICK PERRY
Governor of Texas

I’d say “Only in Texas,” but you know that’s not true.

More U.S. crazies than Egyptian crazies (what Islamic Brotherhood takeover?)

YouGov’s Peter Kellner notes some positive polling from Egypt:

Finally, a finding that will come as a great relief to Israel and much of the international community: 60% think Egypt should continue to uphold the peace treaty agreed in 1978 at Camp David; just 27% think Egypt should now end the treaty and sever diplomatic relations with Israel.

Adam Serwer adds:

Egyptians already have a civil war going on next door; it makes sense that they wouldn’t want to escalate tensions with their neighbor on the other side. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the number of people who want to sever relations with Israel are about the same number who want an Islamic state, but either way, we’re talking about the political fringe. Let me put it this way: There is a larger percentage of birthers in the Republican Party than hardcore Islamists in Egypt.

Same-sex marriage is winning

Nate Silver offers the above chart and points out that opponents of same-sex marriage are quickly becoming the minority:

There is a margin of error associated with the calculation of the trendline, so it is too soon to say with confidence that support for gay marriage has become the plurality position (let alone the majority one). Other polls — like a Pew survey released in March — continue to show opinion split about evenly.

However, opponents of gay marriage almost certainly no longer constitute a majority; just one of the last nine polls has shown opposition to gay marriage above 50 percent.

….

If support for gay marriage were to continue accelerating as fast as it has in the past two years, supporters would outnumber opponents roughly 56-40 in the general population by November 2012.

Truth is, though, that even if it becomes a minority opinion, conservatives will still use the issue to batter supporters. More people support reproductive rights than want to ban abortion, but abortion is still a wedge the right uses successfully. Hell, even same-sex adoption rights are an issue that somehow hasn’t been settled.

Yes, Virginia yesterday shot down a proposal to end discrimination in adoption.

Facts

This shit is B-A-N-A-N-A-S:

A plurality of Republican voters, 47 percent, said they believed Mr. Obama, who was born in Hawaii, was born in another country; 22 percent said they did not know where he was born, and 32 percent said they believed he was born in the United States.

That’s at least 69% percent of the Republican party that doesn’t really believe the fact that President Obama was born in Hawaii.

But, I mean, I guess it’s to be expected when it’s the same party that doesn’t agree that spewing millions of tons of carbon dioxide might just have an effect on the climate, or wants to stop schools from teaching actual science, or posits that you can magically balance the budget by cutting taxes.

At some point, people are going to wake up and realize that a once proud and honorable party has gone absolutely bat-shit insane.

Roe v. Wade is dead. Long live Roe v. Wade

Dahlia Lithwick at Slate wrote a good piece on how as legal strategy takes the place of actual law, Roe v. Wade is becoming less and less relevant:

Supporters and opponents of abortion agree on nothing. One side says this is a conversation about fertilized eggs; the other says it’s about fetuses. One side says the debate is about personal autonomy; the other says it’s about murder. One side sees exceptions to abortion restrictions for reasons of maternal life or health as necessary to protect life; the other sees them as cunning “loopholes.”

Increasingly, however, there is a fundamental assumption both sides seem to share, even if they don’t say so, and it may well shape the future of abortion rights in America: Opponents and supporters of abortion appear to have taken the position that Roe v. Wade is no longer the law of the land.

She’s absolutely right. God help us the day that Justice Ginsburg retires.

Another sign they’re not taking this shit seriously

Washington Post columnist Matt Miller nails it:

Ends and Means

Ed at Gin and Tacos asks the most relevant question:

So remind me again how austerity is supposed to help. As Mike asks and I have asked before, let’s say we have a magic wand that balances the budget for us; then what? What is the benefit? Do interest rates fall? They’re already insanely low. Does unemployment fall? If so, how and why would we expect that? Are there businesses out there that want to hire but won’t because of the budget deficit? This is what I get from the statements by Paul Ryan and like-minded conservatives: If we cut spending it will restore “confidence” to “the market” and suddenly the economy will start growing in leaps and bounds.

The deficit was never the “problem” that needed solving. They’ve gone and switched the ends and means. The deficit is just the means to the end of scrapping the modern welfare state. Call it “starving the beast,” or what have you, but it’s been the strategy for thirty years now. Run up huge deficits, all the while saying “sure, deficits,” and “they don’t really matter,” then, a decade later, you have carte blanche to eviscerate federal spending. Clinton kind of fucked things up for a while, getting in there and applying some actual fiscal discipline (and meanwhile showing that a healthy economy is the best and only way to balance the budget), so they had to go and mount some gigantic tax cuts (mostly, naturally, for the wealthy) and start a couple of wars off the books.

So, is it any surprise that the two-pronged approach now is: a. complain rabidly about the deficit (which apparently didn’t matter not even a decade ago) and b. do your damnest meanwhile to eff up the economic recovery?

I guess if you can bust a few unions in the mean time, all the better.

California Republican party officer Marilyn Davenport refuses to resign after sending racist email

Reports (of all places), the New York Daily News:

A California Republican party official who sent out an e-mail of President Obama’s face super-imposed onto a chimp says she’s sorry, but insists she wasn’t trying to be racist.

Um, okay, so you don’t think it’s racist. Let’s see.

Marilyn Davenport, an elected member of the Orange County Republican central committee, sent the e-mail on Friday. The “family photo” features the commander-in-chief as a baby chimpanzee with two chimp parents.

Along with the offensive image was the tagline “Now you know why — No birth certificate.”

Seriously. Yeah, that’s super racist. Maybe you didn’t mean it?

“In no way did I even consider the fact he’s half black when I sent out the email.”

You forgot?

“I’m sorry if my email offended anyone. I simply found it amusing regarding the character of Obama and all the questions surrounding his origin of birth. In no way did I even consider the fact he’s half black when I sent out the email.”

So why did you think it was funny? I hate to tell you, but when you find a super racist email amusing, that’s kind of racist. Do you happen to have a defense to that? Wait, you do!

Reached by telephone and asked if she thought the email was appropriate, Davenport said, “Oh, come on! Everybody who knows me knows that I am not a racist. It was a joke. I have friends who are black. Besides, I only sent it to a few people–mostly people I didn’t think would be upset by it.”

You seriously said that.

Rick Santorum’s campaign slogan

This is pretty funny:

Santorum by and large stayed on message but was tripped up a bit when a student asked him if he knew that the choice of his slogan, “Fighting to make America America again,” was borrowed from the “pro-union poem by the gay poet Langston Hughes.”

“No I had nothing to do with that,” Santorum said. “I didn’t know that. And the folks who worked on that slogan for me didn’t inform me that it came from that, if it in fact came from that.”

The student, whose name was not immediately available, was referring to the poem “Let America Be America Again.” When asked a short time later what the campaign slogan meant to him, Santorum said, “well, I’m not too sure that’s my campaign slogan, I think it’s on a web site.”

It was also printed on the campaign literature handed out before the speech.

Reminds me of the time George H.W. Bush used “This Land is Our Land” as his campaign song.

House Democrats pull clever stunt

There were some shenanigans afoot today in the House. Won’t lie: I think it’s pretty hilarious. Ezra Klein explains:

I haven’t paid much attention to the Republican Study Committee’s budget, as it wasn’t going to pass. It wasn’t even going to come close to passing. This is a document, after all, that House conservatives released to make Paul Ryan look like a squishy moderate. No one was going to vote for it. No one, that is, until earlier this afternoon, it almost passed.

Here’s what happened: In the House of Representatives, a simple majority can pass a bill. But you can do more than just vote “yes” or “no.” You can also vote “present.” So a bunch of Democrats — 172 of them, to be exact — either voted “present” or, more sneakily, switched from “no” to “present.” As the number of “no” votes dwindled, the confused Republican realized their “yes” votes — votes that were friendly expressions of conservative solidarity rather than an actual effort to pass the RSC’s plan — were becoming a majority. The result, as Brian Beutler says, was “chaos” on the House floor, as Republicans, once they realized what was going on, rushed to switch their “yes” votes to “no” votes to make sure the RSC budget didn’t actually pass.

I hope somebody cued the Yakety Sax.