TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Taylor Marsh has been writing on line since 1996, with the archives provided here a representation of that work.

Archive | July, 2010

Be Careful What You Tweet

By on 08 July 2010

–updated–

“Sad to hear of the passing of Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah… One of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot.” – CNN’s Former Senior Editor of Mideast Affairs Octavia Nasr

That’s what it took for Ms. Nasr to be shown the door after 20 years at CNN.

Meanwhile, in a tweet fight with Joe Scarborough, Markos Moulitsas has gotten himself banned from MSNBC. After Scarborough got upset about nobody thinking the Sestak job kerfuffle was anything new under the son, Markos tweaked Scarborough on a very sore subject, the death of an intern in his office, when actually invoking Gary Condit a certain summer long ago. Scarborough took it very personally.

JoeNBC: @markos Unbelievable. You have a long history of spreading lies suggesting I am a murderer. This is the 3rd or 4th time by my count.

Markos: @JoeNBC, I’ve never suggested you’re a murderer. I’ve noted media hypocrisy in going after Gary Condit. But he was Dem. You aren’t.

JoeNBC: Anyone in media who interviews @markos, know that you’re extending your credibility to someone who regularly suggests that I’m a murderer.

Markos: A bit touchy, @JoeNBC? Links for where I accuse you of being a murderer please.

I have no idea why Mr. Scarborough chose to blow up this tweet exchange by reminding everyone of something that no one paid much attention to at the time.

It reminds me of not long ago when Donny Deutsch mentioned Keith Olbermann in a spot about cable anchor anger, only to get his week-long hour show yanked.

CNN fired a long-time pro in Middle Eastern affairs for saying something stupidly flippant.

MSNBC seems to have a host of male anchors who are not only thin-skinned, but whose egos are more important than the content of their shows or guests who actually are not the usual suspects. These anchors also continually add only male analysts to their contributor lists, the latest being David Weigel and Mark Halperin, the latter earning it after “Game Change,” though Weigel’s notoriety after his email kerfuffle fits the rescue penchant males have for other males. I don’t notice Andrea Mitchell asking for female foreign policy experts like Laura Rozen to be added to her show’s contributor lists; but then again, Mitchell’s show is not close to being must TV for most.

Let me add something here, because a reader reminded me that some of the stuff that’s written on the web exposes people’s children to smears, which cannot be explained away. It can only then become a teachable moment about the hideous attacks that go on across the board in hopes that the kids learn to ignore them, though that only comes with age; the young have no such defenses. It’s also true that since I began writing on the web 16 years ago, especially after doing investigative work in the sex trade, I’ve been called every name in the book, so I simply laugh it off, which is why my hate mail page was born. Children don’t laugh character assaults off, so point taken.

But frankly, Scarborough pushing his weight around because of a tweet fight is just silly, because Markos is never booked on “Morning Joe,” a show that was important to many of us back in 2007-08. I’ve got issues with Scarborough’s disrespect for new media and what we do out here, having also exchanged a few tweets with him on Sestak, proving that story was nothing new. But I remember back when Scarborough and Buchanan, talking on “Morning Joe,” were the only defenders on a show that was one of the the only places being fair to Hillary during the primary season. That still goes a long way with me.

Meanwhile, amidst this spat, you have Rachel Maddow doing the real heavy lifting in Afghanistan for MSNBC.

Boys continue to be boys.

Read full story · Comments { 11 }

What Will Palin Haters Do Now?

By on 07 July 2010

“Last year, after Bristol and I broke up, I was unhappy and a little angry. Unfortunately, against my better judgment, I publicly said things about the Palins that were not completely true,” he tells PEOPLE exclusively. “I have already privately apologized to Todd and Sarah. Since my statements were public, I owe it to the Palins to publicly apologize…” Johnston and the former vice presidential candidate had been engaged in a war of words, with the 20-year-old accusing Palin of complaining about her job as governor of Alaska and claiming “there was a lot of talk of divorce” in the Palin household. {…} “So to the Palin family in general and to Sarah Palin in particular, please accept my regrets and forgive my youthful indiscretion,” Johnston says in the statement. “I hope one day to restore your trust.” – People Magazine

I love a good soap opera when the thermometer tops 100. …and this one is as good as it gets.

But what will Andrew Sullivan do now? He’s freaking. But he might start by rethinking this whole Palin fetish. ..and by retracting this post. But if this is any indication, he’ll scramble until the next turn of events. First he is befriending Mercede Johnston. I do feel for her, though getting to rant center stage can be a tonic for some.

Sarah Palin’s politics are not mine, but I have no intention of helping the haters or the screed monsters make truth out of lies. Though if I were her I suggest Bristol stay away from Levi. He’s got issues.

Read full story · Comments { 14 }

Obama Slides to New Low with Independents

By on 07 July 2010

Thirty-eight percent of independents approve of the job Barack Obama is doing as president, the first time independent approval of Obama has dropped below 40% in a Gallup Daily tracking weekly aggregate. [...] Over the past year, Obama has lost support among all party groups, though the decline has been steeper among independents than among Republicans or Democrats. Today’s 38% approval rating among independents is 18 percentage points lower than the 56% found July 6-12, 2009. – Gallup


In mid-term election years, Reagan and Clinton all faced horrific challenges, losing seats, but retained the presidency two years later. Bush 43 actually gained seats in 2002, with a wave of commander in chief support after 9/11.

But the signs are not good right now for Democrats, despite some individual bright spots, which is mainly because of the economy and how people feel about things right now. However, none of this should worry anyone until the fall season, because Republicans continue to sound out of step, with Tea Party activists like Sharon Angle and Rand Paul leaving no room for adults.

The fact remains that Pres. Obama has dropped 18 points with independents since this time last year. Is anyone surprised?

Read full story · Comments { 12 }

Joe Lieberman: Military Action Against Iran ‘If We Must’

By on 07 July 2010


Senator Lieberman used some very harsh language at the Wednesday press conference to describe the Iranian nuclear program, saying the US must do everything it can to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power. The US will address the Iranian threat “through diplomatic efforts and economic sanctions if we can, but through military action if we must,” said Lieberman. – Jerusalem Post

You really have to wonder what universe some members of Congress are living in.

The quote above, which of course would be trumpeted from JPost, happened after a meeting with Defense Minister Ehud Barak in Jerusalem, which included the three stooges of foreign policy interventionism, Lieberman, McCain and Lindsay Graham.

Read full story · Comments { 6 }

From the Webmaster – What’s up??

By on 07 July 2010

The site was attacked which triggered Google to put up a security alert.  All is fine now but depending on what browser and security settings you use, you may still receive warnings about the content until Google gives us the stamp of approval.  Right now Internet Explorer and Google Chrome are not having any trouble displaying the site.

We hope this is resolved soon but it’s in Google’s hands!

Read full story · Comments { 4 }

Glenn Beck University

By on 07 July 2010

Hubris alert.

Because when the summer heat hits 100 degrees everyone needs a good morning laugh.

TM NOTE: Dear Beckies, Thanks for the attention, but really, considering you’ve got to conjure up new curriculum for your Nutty Professor, you’d there are more important things to do than attack us.

Read full story · Comments { 6 }

Frank and Paul Join Demand for Military Cuts

By on 06 July 2010



Since the BP blowout, and the lies and broken promises from the oil giant, didn’t inspire Pres. Obama to lead an economic energy revolution (or fire Ken Salazar for his part in the ecological holocaust), I’m not sure anything will move our Congress to cut our military overspending. However, I support it unequivocally.

Reps. Frank and Paul join together in demanding sanity. Via Huffington Post:

[...] By far the single most important of these is our current initiative to include substantial reductions in the projected level of American military spending as part of future deficit reduction efforts. For decades, the subject of military expenditures has been glaringly absent from public debate. Yet the Pentagon budget for 2010 is $693 billion — more than all other discretionary spending programs combined. Even subtracting the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, military spending still amounts to over 42% of total spending.

It is irrefutably clear to us that if we do not make substantial cuts in the projected levels of Pentagon spending, we will do substantial damage to our economy and dramatically reduce our quality of life.

We are not talking about cutting the money needed to supply American troops in the field. Once we send our men and women into battle, even in cases where we may have opposed going to war, we have an obligation to make sure that our servicemembers have everything they need. And we are not talking about cutting essential funds for combating terrorism; we must do everything possible to prevent any recurrence of the mass murder of Americans that took place on September 11, 2001. [...]

We will make it clear to leaders of both parties that substantial reductions in military spending must be included in any future deficit reduction package. We pledge to oppose any proposal that fails to do so. …

The emphasis above is for obvious reasons.

If only we could also talk about the aid we give to countries that disrespect U.S. priorities in exchange for tens of millions of U.S. cash.

Let’s hope Reps. Frank and Paul get traction on their call to economic arms.

Read full story · Comments { 6 }

Mitt Romney, the Anti-Reagan

By on 06 July 2010

…and the 2012 positioning has begun, as the right-wing hyperbole goes where Ronald Reagan never went before. Otherwise known as the day Mitt Romney drew a new cold war line in the sand.

Too bad he didn’t do his homework. Ronald Reagan wouldn’t embrace Romney’s “worst foreign policy mistake” nonsense any more than the Republicans should. Hey, but in the era of the Tea Party extremists, let the civil war begin.

Romney today:

… Despite all of this, the president’s New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New-START) with Russia could be his worst foreign policy mistake yet. The treaty as submitted to the Senate should not be ratified.

New-START impedes missile defense, our protection from nuclear-proliferating rogue states such as Iran and North Korea. Its preamble links strategic defense with strategic arsenal. It explicitly forbids the United States from converting intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) silos into missile defense sites. And Russia has expressly reserved the right to walk away from the treaty if it believes that the United States has significantly increased its missile defense capability. [...]

Also see Wonk Room.

It further proves today that Ronald Reagan couldn’t be elected RNC chairman, let alone the nominee of today’s Republican Party.

Read full story · Comments { 4 }

Kabuki or Resetting Obama and Netanyahu Relationship?

By on 06 July 2010

… HaYovel is one of many groups in the United States using tax-exempt donations to help Jews establish permanence in the Israeli-occupied territories — effectively obstructing the creation of a Palestinian state, widely seen as a necessary condition for Middle East peace. The result is a surprising juxtaposition: As the American government seeks to end the four-decade Jewish settlement enterprise and foster a Palestinian state in the West Bank, the American Treasury helps sustain the settlements through tax breaks on donations to support them. [...] – Tax-Exempt Funds Aid Settlements in West Bank

There is no news in the story excerpted above, but it will come as an education for those not usually paying attention to American involvement in Jewish settlements beyond the political. Some aren’t aware of the huge input religious organizations in our country play in making the lives of Palestinians more difficult.

The reinforcement of this reality comes as Pres. Obama and P.M. Netanyahu try a reset on their relationship, which is really nothing but political theater that Rahm Emanuel has been trying to orchestrate for several months.

It comes as a story reporting Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren saying there is a “tectonic rift” between our countries is being denied by Oren. As the story goes, “Israeli diplomats” said that the “rift” was not considered a “crisis,” because that can pass, with Oren going much further: “Relations are in the state of a tectonic rift in which continents are drifting apart.”

The last time Netanyahu was in the U.S. there were no photo ops, with Obama making it clear through the unusual chilly reception after the Biden – settlement announcement disaster that he was not pleased with the Netanyahu government’s treatment of Israel’s greatest friend.

You decide if the latest invitation is real or political theater to shore up Pres. Obama’s Jewish left flank, which by the way really shouldn’t need any repairing, because it’s not like Obama is suggesting anything to the Netanyahu gov. that isn’t in Israel’s best interest or for the Palestinians.

Oh, and the answer to this ridiculously absurd question is emphatically no. Right-wingers can’t be taken seriously on anything they say about the Middle East, because their emotional quotient is so high they shouldn’t be taken seriously.

Read full story · Comments { 14 }

In Afghanistan, No More Mister Nice Guy

By on 06 July 2010

General Petraeus writes a letter:

“… Protecting those we are here to help nonetheless does require killing, capturing, or turning the insurgents. We will not shrink from that; indeed, you have been taking the fight to the enemy and we will continue to do so. Beyond that, as you and our Afghan partners on the ground get into tough situations, we must employ all assets to ensure your safety, keeping in mind, again, the importance of avoiding civilian casualties. [...]” – General Petraeus (via Danger Room’s Spencer Ackerman)

“Turning the insurgents” just got bumped in priority. Pres. Karzai knows he’s got to reconcile the Taliban or he’s toast.

It’s that simple… and complicated.

Read full story · Comments { 5 }

Are Tea Party and Republicans Heartless?

By on 05 July 2010



Gallup came out with a weird poll recently on patriotism. CNS, a wingnut site, has a post up trumpeting results that make no sense, but are a favorite talking point of the right. In a nutshell: Conservatives Are More Than Twice as Likely as Liberals to Be Strongly Patriotic, Says Gallup Poll. Truth is that the right is in a state of hyper nationalism right now. By right that means Tea Party activists. What I think Gallup has done is take “patriotism” and allow it to be hijacked, because the state of things today is that some of the people on the right are not really patriotic as much as they are paranoid and anti-Obama, which is being loaded in the “fear for our country” capsule. It’s being driven by Tea Party activists, 78% of whom — no shock — are “frustrated” Republicans.

But what does this over-exuberant “patriotism” mean? How is it driving their politics and what they want to do with this country? Better yet, is it good for America?

Paul Krugman’s column gives you a sense of the mean side of Tea Party-ism, but also the problem with Republicans.

By the heartless, I mean Republicans who have made the cynical calculation that blocking anything President Obama tries to do — including, or perhaps especially, anything that might alleviate the nation’s economic pain — improves their chances in the midterm elections. Don’t pretend to be shocked: you know they’re out there, and make up a large share of the G.O.P. caucus.

By the clueless I mean people like Sharron Angle, the Republican candidate for senator from Nevada, who has repeatedly insisted that the unemployed are deliberately choosing to stay jobless, so that they can keep collecting benefits. A sample remark: “You can make more money on unemployment than you can going down and getting one of those jobs that is an honest job but it doesn’t pay as much. We’ve put in so much entitlement into our government that we really have spoiled our citizenry.”

Tea Party activists complain a lot, but they have no solutions intended to make anything better for America, but more importantly, for the American people.

Hyper-patriotism rooted in paranoia leads to nationalism for the sake of it. This stringent ideology from the right, which comes without a fix for what ails this country, leads to a dead end, especially those most in need.

Read full story · Comments { 70 }

4th of July News Round-Up

By on 04 July 2010

Happy 4th of July everyone.

On July 4, 1776, the Second Continental Congress unanimously adopted the Declaration of Independence, announcing the colonies’ separation from Great Britain.

How educated are Americans regarding their own history? Here’s the good news- about 74% of people can name the country that America declared independence from in 1776. Here’s the bad news- 74% of people can name the country that America declared independence from in 1776. And so it goes.

~On this July 4, 2010, irrespective of where we each stand on the political spectrum, particularly with respect to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, perhaps stories like this could remind us of the ongoing battles some people face against tremendous odds. While most of us can turn off our televisions when the images of 19 year-olds fighting in a country we can’t begin to comprehend become too troubling, some Americans will never really be able to turn the war off.

~Joe Biden is spending the 4th with the troops in Baghdad.

~Petraeus takes command of the Afgan War today.

~Here’s a run-down of who will be chattering away on the Sunday talk shows (h/t Firedoglake).

~The court of appeals for the DC Circuit has let the administration know that it better come up with some more convincing evidence that an Algerian detainee held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for more than eight years is “part of” al Qaida. And if they can’t show that, then he should be set free.

~Side note- if you want to take a look at some good old fashioned journalism, wander over to McClatchy and check out their in-depth series on the abuse of detainees at Bagram air base in Afghanistan. It’s hard to win “hearts and minds” when this stuff goes on. I wish some of the stenographers over at the NYT and WaPo would take a look at McClatchy reporting. You know, kind of as a refresher course on journalism.

~There’s been a lot of talk about the weird Russian spy arrests which took place last week. But honestly, the more serious threat? Our banker, China.

~As the GOP and some Blue Dogs enjoy their 4th of July today, thousands of unemployed will be wondering where their next rent, electricity or mortgage payment will come from. And why is that? Because the so-called fiscal hawks believe federal spending is wrong don’t ‘cha know! Of course, when it’s the big corporations that are gorging themselves at the public trough, well, that’s ok in fiscal-conservative land! And this refusal to extend the benefits come as new Pew Research study finds that over half of all Americans are jobless or underemployed.

~Republican Mitch McConnell has announced he will be a “no” vote for the Elena Kagan nomination because apparently only conservatives are allowed to be activists both off and on the Court.

~I didn’t know Thurgood Marshall was made a Saint by the Episcopal Church! Of course, I haven’t been to church in quite a while….Anyway, the Episcopal Church isn’t happy that the GOP used Thurgood Marshall as a punching bag during the Kagan hearings. But honestly, that really speaks for itself doesn’t it? With each passing day of the confirmation hearings the GOP just really came across like a bunch of guys who longed for the good ‘ole days of the Antebellum South. Lets be honest, if Thurgood Marshall were nominated for the Supreme Court today, the GOP would never vote for him.

~Avigdor Lieberman, Foreign Minister of Israel, is probably the Israeli equivalent of our very own John Bolton in terms of diplomatic skills and even Bibi Netanyahu seems to be tiring of the endless diplomatic scuffles which Lieberman partakes in.

~And speaking of Israel, Prime Minister Netanyahu will be visiting with the President this coming Tuesday and it has become clear that while some tensions remain (like over Israel’s refusal to sign onto the nonproliferation pact) all signs point to this visit essentially being a political love-fest of sorts. Everything I have read, from White House readouts of conference calls to reports from Laura Rozen, seem to suggest that there will be lots of happy photo ops to reassure nervous nellies that the US and Israel are not in the midst of a divorce.

~Missouri congressman Roy Blunt seems to bucking the conventional Tea Party wisdom which the mainstream media has fallen in love with- despite being Mr. Washington Insider, he seems to be doing well in the polls against both his GOP primary challenger and the Democratic Senate candidate, Robin Carnahan.

~The WaPo has an interesting story about the challenges facing USAID in Afghanistan as part of the “civilian surge.”

Read full story · Comments { 12 }

Bill Clinton’s ‘Loyalty Tour’

By on 03 July 2010

The media has been covering former Pres. Bill Clinton’s “loyalty tour” quite closely, the latest event in Colorado. However, it’s much wider than the current focus.

The most hyperbolic of the coverage comes from Alexander Burns of Politico, calling it “payback,” which is preposterous. After watching and covering the Clintons for over 15 years one thing is constant. They reward politicians who stand beside them. It’s not “payback” it’s politics.

Then there’s the playing nice meme.

While the Clintons and the Obama White House have made nice since the 2008 primary (finally) ended — and Bill Clinton recently praised President Obama in an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer — it’s clear that the former president has a long memory for those who were with his wife (and he) during that campaign. And, given his record of success in primaries to date — see Blanche Lincoln and the Pennsylvania 12 special election — a Clinton endorsement is a major “get” for candidates these days. – Chris Cilizza

In a new survey by Sienna Research Institute, Pres. Obama is rated in 15th position, though it’s hardly fair, because he’s just getting started.

Ronald Reagan dropped from 16th to 18th, though he deserves to go even lower considering the economic structure fallout and deregulation that started on his watch, the failures of which we’ve been seeing for the last couple of years in full.

There is no one like Bill Clinton who understands the reality of past sins of southern boys and race. He bluntly talked about Sen. Robert Byrd’s life and the mistakes he made, with candor few people are brave enough to use, because it can cost you.

“He once had a fleeting association with the Ku Klux Klan, what does that mean? I’ll tell you what it means. He was a country boy from the hills and hollows from West Virginia. He was trying to get elected,” former President Bill Clinton said of Sen. Robert Byrd. “And maybe he did something he shouldn’t have done come and he spent the rest of his life making it up. And that’s what a good person does. There are no perfect people. There are certainly no perfect politicians,” he added.

I have no doubt that former Pres. Clinton was thinking of James William Fulbright when he said those words.

Former Pres. Clinton has gained in stature going from 18th in 2002 to 13th today. In 2010, he likely will continue to be a formidable aid to Pres. Obama, because there are still a lot of “Clinton Democrats” out there who remember not only that during Clinton’s presidency things were good. But relate in a way to Bill Clinton that some people simply don’t to Barack Obama Obama.

Fortunately for all of us, both men understand that the cause and loyalty to country is much greater than any purpose for self.

Read full story · Comments { 25 }

Michael Steele, Phone Home

By on 02 July 2010

Updated with Democratic comic relief below.

You are, I know, a patriot. So I ask you to consider, over this July 4 weekend, doing an act of service for the country you love: Resign as chairman of the Republican party. – Bill Kristol, in an open letter in the Weekly Standard




Huffington Post focusing on Afghanistan all July 4th weekend. My essay is here.

Lock up the liquor! Michael Steele has just pronounced Afghanistan is “a war of Obama’s choosing.” Evidently George W. Bush never existed, so Pres. Obama trying to pick up the pieces from his predecessor also never occurred. Wasn’t it Mary Matalin who was still blaming Bill Clinton in December for 9/11? Oh, but Mr. Bush never happened.

I’m not sure if the RNC chairman knows he’s channeling Patrick J. Buchanon, or if he actually believes people will buy this baloney. However, the growing chorus of Republicans completely ignoring Bush-Cheney’s hit and run Afghanistan policy, while blaming Obama for the mess he inherited, which he had to address, is remarkable even for Mr. Steele.

Will the McCain coalition speak out or is the Republican Party so split apart between Tea Party activists, neoconservatives and simple partisans like Steele, who’ll take any position just to oppose all things Obama, that it’s gotten down to every right-winger for him or herself?

To add, it didn’t take long to get the answer to the question I posed. It came in Bill Kristol’s open letter to Michael Steele to resign. It pits neoconservative vs. conservative to see who will run the message of the Republican Party. Something tells me Tea Party activists will want to weigh in on this one.

UPDATE: Oh. My. God. The Democrats (see Tim Kaine) are simply too comical. Get a load of this statement, which as Greg Sargent rightly says, is straight out of Karl Rove’s playbook. Check your party, people, we’re down the rabbit hole now.

RNC CHAIRMAN MICHAEL STEELE BETS AGAINST OUR TROOPS, ROOTS FOR FAILURE

“Here goes Michael Steele setting policy for the GOP again. The likes of John McCain and Lindsey Graham will be interested to hear that the Republican Party position is that we should walk away from the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban without finishing the job. They’d also be interested to hear that the Chairman of the Republican Party thinks we have no business in Afghanistan notwithstanding the fact that we are there because we were attacked by terrorists on 9-11.

“And, the American people will be interested to hear that the leader of the Republican Party thinks recent events related to the war are ‘comical’ and that he is betting against our troops and rooting for failure in Afghanistan. It’s simply unconscionable that Michael Steele would undermine the morale of our troops when what they need is our support and encouragement. Michael Steele would do well to remember that we are not in Afghanistan by our own choosing, that we were attacked and that his words have consequences.”

This post has been updated.

Read full story · Comments { 20 }

If You’re Going to Attack Social Security, Be Honest About It

By on 02 July 2010

What’s the evidence for the belief that fiscal contraction is actually expansionary, because it improves confidence? (By the way, this is precisely the doctrine expounded by Herbert Hoover in 1932.) Well, there have been historical cases of spending cuts and tax increases followed by economic growth. But as far as I can tell, every one of those examples proves, on closer examination, to be a case in which the negative effects of austerity were offset by other factors, factors not likely to be relevant today. For example, Ireland’s era of austerity-with-growth in the 1980s depended on a drastic move from trade deficit to trade surplus, which isn’t a strategy everyone can pursue at the same time. – Paul Krugman

Light a sparkler. Democrats keep their promise to have a vote on recommendations from the deficit commission. They’re “serious” about the debt. Be impressed.

The rule passed by Pelosi’s House will be good until the end of the 111th Congress. Whatever Obama’s debt commission decides, the House will have to give an up or down vote on it. The set up is that Speaker Pelosi knows exactly what’s coming.

Hey, Speaker Pelosi sold women out to the Catholic church, so why should this come as any surprise? But you can bet if she’s doing it it’s because Pres. Obama wants it done.

To hear politicians whining about the debt after the Bush-Cheney years is like seeing Democrats get deficit hawk fever while they continue to bloat the Pentagon budget. If you ever had any doubt about why nobody believes in either party this is a good reason.

Alan Simpson and a former Clintonite, Erskine Bowles, who is a numerologist, are the co-chairs of the Deficit Commission, ghoulishly referred to as the “Catfood Commission”. The numerology isn’t a big deal in the scheme of things, until you remember that the Democratic Party is now ruled by conservatives who think numbers are more important than people.

The talk on changing Social Security began with lifting the retirement age, which was telegraphed long ago by the “third way” crowd that includes now V.P. Joe Biden. Rep. James Clyburn, also leading the way in the House for Obama, is on board, as is Rep. Steny Hoyer.

But let’s be honest for a second instead of simply partisan or political.

Longevity is much different now than it was in the mid-20th century, let alone earlier. I know this is unpopular to even broach, but we are living much longer lives, so heightened talk about raising the retirement age on Social Security should come as no surprise to anyone.

It just shouldn’t be considered on the canard that Social Security is in trouble or that this needs to be done because of some austerity and deficit reduction plan. There should be simultaneous talk about raising the mandatory retirement age in corporations that demand retirement when a person is in his or her mid-sixties. The vibrancy of 60-something individuals today makes it absurd to force anyone into retirement before 70. That makes it more difficult for younger people moving up, but you shouldn’t be able to have it both ways, while pushing 60-something corporate executives out the door.

Means testing is another aspect that has been gaining ground for a long time as well. It’s tantamount to federal robbery to realize you’ve paid into Social Security your whole life and are now going to be denied access to your own money, but Washington has deficit fever so get ready to suck it up. There are good arguments that if you’re wealthy you shouldn’t be pulling Social Security, so just smile that you live in the U.S.A. while someone else gets your cash.

I’m not sure how any of this will go down with the larger public, though these numbers aren’t surprising, but it’s a cinch that credit will go to Pres. Obama and the Democrats, which will amount to blame in many quarters.

What Speaker Pelosi has done right before a big holiday when no one is looking is likely being forced on her by a President who believes that deficits should be reined in by what people can sacrifice, because politicians fear the power in the Pentagon more than anyone else. It’s a gift to Republicans who can sit back and watch their ideas enacted by Democrats, with more conservative votes sure to be available after November, regardless of whether Dems keep control of Congress.

I’m rather impressed with the Democratic dishonesty, for one thing, because using the deficit as an excuse while the Pentagon budget remains way too large for 21st century reality reveals priorities that no Democrat should support, though they’re doing it with such brazen aplomb.

Hey, but it does foreshadow change if it happens.

What it telegraphs about the Democratic Party under Obama is a fundamental shift away from F.D.R. We’ll see how movement progressives take it. As for seniors, they vote in droves, as do 50-something individuals. However, since Republicans would be worse, I’m not sure where anyone goes with their anger.

Read full story · Comments { 57 }

2010: The Democratic Enthusiasm Gap

By on 01 July 2010

With the mid-terms four months away, this is where it stands according to PPP. Think 2006:

The Republican Party now holds about the same advantage in enthusiasm among its party’s voters that the Democratic Party held in June 2006 and the GOP had late in the 1994 campaign. Moreover, more Republicans than Democrats are now paying close attention to election news (64% vs. 50%). At this stage in previous midterms, news attentiveness was about the same for voters in both parties.

One thing is certain, the coverage about an enthusiasm gap won’t make it any better for Democrats. It’s not a prediction, but a snapshot that can act like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The Tea Party may have been incubating in 2006, but it didn’t burst into the open until Obama’s presidency began. However, the reality is that regardless of Sen. Lindsay Graham predicting their demise, this year the disaffection felt through people who call themselves tea partiers is helping the Republicans fuel their GOTV rage.

Read full story · Comments { 21 }

Establishment Boys Will Be Boys

By on 01 July 2010

“The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure.” –Thomas Jefferson to Lafayette

Our establishment media helped get us in this mess. (I won’t get into what the media establishment did to Hillary Clinton for 18 years, which impacted her presidential run because today’s wider media establishment, including new media, aided by cable talking heads, even our brightest, joined in on the pile on.) But like countries around the world where women are not a major force so their country stumbles, our media is woefully unequal, which perpetuates the abysmal situation that now exists.

“Every blogger or writer who has ever offered an opinion is now on warning,” Sullivan wrote. “Your opponents will not just argue against you, they will do all they can to ransack your private life, cull your email in-tray, and use whatever material they have to unleash the moronic hounds of today’s right-wing base.” – Andrew Sullivan

Having Andrew Sullivan whine about privacy is sort of like hearing Republicans whine that Democrats are blaming Bush when they haven’t stopped blaming Bill Clinton.

Anyone been reading Sullivan on Sarah Palin since she hit the big leagues? Fake pregnancy fantasy ring a bell?

Between Sullivan vs. Breitbart, and David Weigel vs. everybody else, with a side of Ezra Klein’s listserv drama, I’m wondering if these self-important, puffed up males have any time to actually do any work.

At least Markos Moulitsas’ drama over his polling firm is actually a real issue.

You can bet Jeffrey Goldberg, and Joe Klein taking time out from his vacation to swat his favorite nemesis, Glenn Greenwald, isn’t the stuff of intellectual stimulation. It began out of Weigel’s resignation when Goldberg suggested “toilet-training” in a post that was embarrassing, but considering The Atlantic’s top writers it’s expected from that crew (saving Marc Ambinder, James Fallows). Later Goldberg said he “despise[s] violent keyboard-cowboyism,” trying to extricate himself out of his pissy potty post.

If you’re waiting to see where the girls fit in among this upper echelon establishment fight, we’re still outside looking in, even as traditional media outlets bring in more bloggers to raise their sagging status. So…

Jeffrey Goldberg, Joe Klein, Jonathan Chait and others went after Greenwald by manufacturing a lie about what he wrote, because the former got pissed they were called out for their Iraq war cheerleading, but also their Judith Miller-esque “reporting.” Greenwald got in trouble because he dared to have an intellectual exercise about our preemptive misadventure on Iraq with the pro-preemption crowd, citing the Kurds, while bringing in the historical fact that the Sudetan population welcomed the German invasion. This inspired Goldberg to invite Greenwald to sit down with the Prime Minister of Iraqi Kuridstan to explain to the Kurds in a sort of town hall why the Iraq invasion wasn’t good for them. Glenn gets at the larger point, which the establishment preemption boys cannot afford to consider:

Pointing to some happy Kurds who remained largely shielded from all of that destruction, and who even benefited from it, doesn’t erase the serial deceit of Jeffrey Goldberg’s pre-war “reporting,” and it certainly doesn’t justify the untold human suffering that was and continues to be unleashed.

Too bad we can’t get Patrick J. Buchanan to disabuse the three blind mice of mendacity, because it would be worth the words to watch Buchanan take Greenwald’s attackers down, with Buchanan on his side likely to make Glenn cringe. Reading Buchanan’s “Churchill, Hitler and The Unnecessary War,” you can find any number of quotes to make Goldberg, Klein. etal look ridiculous; also remembering that even with Buchanan’s many philosophical faults he was able to see the bankruptcy of the Iraq war. Preemption made for odd foreign policy bedfellows.

But for bringing up Germany’s invasion of the “Sudetanland,” Glenn got a reaction from Goldberg that basically said “he’s an unpatriotic Kurd-hater who is comparing the U.S. to The Nazis!!!!!,” to quote Greenwald’s mocking of Goldberg, because Goldberg’s writing isn’t worth it. It all turns around the word “invasion” but also the incredible statement by this guy that “[t]here was no Nazi invasion of the Sudetenland, no invasion of Slovakia, hardly one of Austria and even less of Bohemia.” um… I guess this alleged historian thinks it’s a cute argument because we’re talking about Czechoslovakia and the Sudetan Germans, but that he won’t admit “invasion” doesn’t turn on any resistance thereof is one for the debate books. Nuremberg Military Tribunals, cited in this brilliant post, prove Glenn is correct, which anyone interested in history, while not thinking their own analytic ass saving for supporting preemption more important, would know.

The reason I go through this rundown for you is that it all gets down to why our government isn’t working. Think Thomas Jefferson’s views on the importance of a free, unfettered and independent press. Glenn links to a new study from Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government on torture and the media.

The current debate over waterboarding has spawned hundreds of newspaper articles in the last two years alone. However, waterboarding has been the subject of press attention for over a century. Examining the four newspapers with the highest daily circulation in the country, we found a significant and sudden shift in how newspapers characterized waterboarding. From the early 1930s until the modern story broke in 2004, the newspapers that covered waterboarding almost uniformly called the practice torture or implied it was torture: The New York Times characterized it thus in 81.5% (44 of 54) of articles on the subject and The Los Angeles Times did so in 96.3% of articles (26 of 27). By contrast, from 2002‐2008, the studied newspapers almost never referred to waterboarding as torture. The New York Times called waterboarding torture or implied it was torture in just 2 of 143 articles (1.4%). The Los Angeles Times did so in 4.8% of articles (3 of 63). The Wall Street Journal characterized the practice as torture in just 1 of 63 articles (1.6%). USA Today never called waterboarding torture or implied it was torture. In addition, the newspapers are much more likely to call waterboarding torture if a country other than the United States is the perpetrator. In The New York Times, 85.8% of articles (28 of 33) that dealt with a country other than the United States using waterboarding called it torture or implied it was torture while only 7.69% (16 of 208) did so when the United States was responsible. The Los Angeles Times characterized the practice as torture in 91.3% of articles (21 of 23) when another country was the violator, but in only 11.4% of articles (9 of 79) when the United States was the perpetrator. 2

You can also throw in Fox News channel in this how we got into this mess media misinformation. The torture crowd over at Glenn Beck central is the widest watched network on cable.

Think high school boys on Bush’s squad fighting over the last preemption pom pom.

It also tells you why when I turn to ask the real question about nation building after McChrystal’s revealing implosion no one, certainly not Pres. Obama or anyone blindly supporting the Administration, wants to take it up.

TM NOTE: I found the “kitty boxing” picture on Facebook, but I honestly don’t remember where.

Read full story · Comments { 9 }

Tom Coburn, NRO’s Kathryn Lopez Prove Republicans Think Freedom is Only for Men

By on 01 July 2010

Sen. Tom Coburn thinks we were all more free 30 years ago. That proves the point I’ve been making for months. For Republicans, freedom has absolutely nothing to do with women. Our individual rights are not only expendable, but irrelevant.

Watch the video as Sen. Klobuchar disabuses Mr. Coburn of his misogyny.

NRO’s Kathryn Lopez tweeted this yesterday:

When Nikki Haley was fighting to win the Republican nomination, I made it a point to say her politics weren’t mine, but that it was hard not to cheer for her. That’s because I understand what having a minority woman in the state house means broadly for women everywhere.

The right has no such vision. It’s part of the reason our country is not rising on economics, why we’re spending more blood and treasure outside the U.S. than inside, why we can’t tackle energy through vision, and why we’re stuck on the hamster wheel of mediocrity.

Read full story · Comments { 22 }