;)
The Commentariat -- April 11, 2015
Internal links removed.
** Tim Egan: "The great, nation-shaping accomplishments of Lincoln's day happened only because the South, always with an eye on protecting slavery and an estate-owning aristocracy, had left the union -- ridding Congress of the naysayers.... What unites the Republican Party, on this 150th anniversary of the murder of Lincoln, is that they are against the type of progressive legislation that gave rise to their party." ...
... CW: Wars are always mistakes, albeit sometimes unavoidable. The American Civil War was avoidable. It was Lincoln's Big Mistake. He should have let those people go.
"Karen DeYoung & Nick Miroff of the Washington Post: "President Obama and Cuban President Raúl Castro will hold a bilateral meeting Saturday on the margins of the Summit of the Americas here, the first such encounter between leaders of the two nations in more than 50 years, White House officials said. Planning for an Obama-Castro meeting has been a slow diplomatic choreography since December, when the two leaders announced that Cuba and the United States would restore diplomatic relations, including three rounds of lower-level negotiations over the mechanics of normalization." ...
... The New York Times story, by Julie Davis & Randal Archibold, is here. ...
... Josh Lederman of the AP: "The presidents of the United States and Cuba have spoken by phone for only the second time in more than 50 years, setting the stage for a historic encounter between the two leaders at a regional summit starting Friday in Panama. The call between President Barack Obama and Cuban President Raul Castro came on Wednesday, shortly before Obama departed Washington on his trip to Latin America and the Caribbean, the White House said." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Coral Davenport of the New York Times: "The Obama administration is planning to impose a major new regulation on offshore oil and gas drilling to try to prevent the kind of explosions that caused the catastrophic BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, administration officials said Friday. The announcement of the Interior Department regulation, which could be made as soon as Monday, is timed to coincide with the five-year anniversary of the disaster, which killed 11 men and sent millions of barrels of oil spewing into the gulf. The regulation is being introduced as the Obama administration is taking steps to open up vast new areas of federal waters off the southeast Atlantic Coast to drilling, a decision that has infuriated environmentalists."
** Tim Egan: "The great, nation-shaping accomplishments of Lincoln's day happened only because the South, always with an eye on protecting slavery and an estate-owning aristocracy, had left the union -- ridding Congress of the naysayers.... What unites the Republican Party, on this 150th anniversary of the murder of Lincoln, is that they are against the type of progressive legislation that gave rise to their party." ...
... CW: Wars are always mistakes, albeit sometimes unavoidable. The American Civil War was avoidable. It was Lincoln's Big Mistake. He should have let those people go.
Emily Badger & Christopher Ingraham of the Washington Post: "In case you are still skeptical that many of the non-poor -- and, in fact, a lot of the rich -- receive benefits from government, too (for which we don't make them pee in a cup or promise not to buy luxuries), we've rounded up some more examples below." CW: Tax week is upon us. Don't forget to take your yacht deduction. ...
... CW: Finally, a "welfare" benefit that I, too, find outrageous. Josh Hicks of the Washington Post: "Hundreds of Puerto Rico's residents qualified for federal disability benefits in recent years because they lacked fluency in English, according to government auditors. The Social Security Administration's inspector general questioned the policy this month in light of the fact that Spanish is the predominant language in the U.S. territory." ...
... Update: See today's Comments.
White House: "In this week's address, the Vice President laid out his and the President's plan to make two years of community college free for responsible students":
"The Laffer Swerve." Paul Krugman: "The question you should ask ... is why [Arthur Laffer's] always-wrong economic doctrine now has a stronger grip on the GOP than ever before.... And of course it's not just economic policy. What do we do in the face of a major party gone mad?" ...
... Steve Benen: "... the economic plan Laffer created for Kansas has resulted in debt downgrades, weak growth, and state finances in shambles.... Many Republican presidential hopefuls -- including the entire current top tier -- are eager to bring their economic plans in line with Laffer's discredited thinking. Or put another way, a wide variety of national GOP candidates are looking at recent developments in Kansas and thinking, 'How can I impose this model on the entire United States?'"
Manny Otiko of Salon: Lawrence Wilkerson, a Republican & former Secretary of State Colin Powell's chief of staff on GOP warmongering & racism.
Keith Alexander & Carol Leonnig of the Washington Post: 'An off-duty member of the Secret Service's uniformed division was arrested Friday morning and charged with trying to kick in the front door of his ex-girlfriend's apartment. Arthur E. Baldwin, 29, was charged with first-degree burglary and destruction of property."
Charles Pierce on how police racism makes us all less safe.
Ben Mathis-Lilley of Slate: "The White House released the Obamas' 2014 tax returns Friday.... The Obamas paid an effective federal tax rate of 18.8 percent ($93,362 on total income of $495,964). That's around normal for a household at their income level, per this chart, and is lower than the effective rates paid in many developed countries. It's also more than the 14.1 percent Mitt Romney famously paid in 2011." The President's & Vice President's tax returns are here.
Annals of "Journalism," Ctd. Hadas Gold of Politico: "Bloomberg Politics published a report about Nancy Reagan based off of fake news site NationalReport.net . The piece, headlined 'Nancy Reagan gives her endorsement to... Hillary Clinton,' quoted a supposed 'Drudge Report' saying that the former first lady told the History Channel series 'First Ladies In Their Own Words' that it's time for a female president.... The piece, which was published just before 5 p.m. on Friday, was deleted within minutes.... Bloomberg has reposted the article with a note that the piece has been retracted. 'This story has been retracted. We fell for a hoax. Apologies,' the note states." ...
... CW: Not anymore. The page has been 404'd as of 8:45 pm ET Friday.
Presidential Race
All Hillary, All Weekend!
Anne Gearan & Philip Rucker of the Washington Post: "Instead of a splashy launch event, Clinton's plan is a calculated understatement. She is scheduling a series of small roundtables and other give-and-take sessions with voters, first in Iowa and later in New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada -- the states holding the first presidential primaries and caucuses early next year. The idea is to showcase Clinton's abilities as a problem-solver and crusader for the rights of those struggling to climb into or stay in the middle class.... Clinton's human-scale approach is modeled on the listening tour she conducted across New York state at the start of her successful 2000 Senate race." ...
... CW: The approach also is a concession to two factors: (1) Clinton can't give the stem-winding, ideologically-winger types of speeches that Ted Cruz & Rand Paul did. (2) She might find it tough to fill a hall with wildly-cheering enthusiasts (even going the Cruz route of assembling a crowd of the conscripted wouldn't work for her, as the detractors wouldn't just be a few fellows in Rand Paul T-shirts).
Brian Beutler of the National Journal: Hillary Clinton's run for the Democratic nomination, which may go virtually unchallenged, is "the source of genuine anxiety among liberals, who worry she'll enter the general election rusty and untested unless someone formidable dares to challenge her in the primary.... It may even be the case that some of these Democrats with rattled nerves are less anxious about Clinton's prowess against Republicans than about the fact that all of the party's hopes now rest on her shoulders. Her campaign has become a single point of failure for Democratic politics.... If she loses, it will be absolutely devastating for liberalism."
John McCormick of Bloomberg: "... nearly three-quarters of Democrats and independents in [a Bloomberg] survey said it would be a good thing for the Democratic Party if she were to face a 'serious' challenger for the nomination. Democrats and independents hold the same view, with 72 percent of both groups saying her party would be best served by a robust primary."
David Freedlander of the Daily Beast: "After [announcing her presidential run, Hillary Clinton's] nascent campaign will embark on a fundraising push that the Clinton camp says will dwarf anything seen in the history of presidential politics. 'They are going to raise in one week what some Republican presidential candidates are going to raise the entire cycle,' said one Clinton aide." CW: Great! I feel much better about the future of democracy now.
Stephen Koff of the Cleveland Plain Dealer: "Wasting no time, the Republican Party says it will launch Web ads critical of Hillary Clinton on Sunday, when she is expected to announce what the world has long expected: She is, in fact, running for the Democratic nomination for president in 2016."
CW: As the news of Hillary's campaign washed me in a bath of ennui, I began wishing for a third Obama term. Now I learn there is hope! (Not that I'm all that thrilled about the "nuclear destruction" part, mind you.) ...
... Apocalypse Soon! Hitler! Brian Tashman of Right Wing Watch: "In a WorldNetDaily column titled 'Is Iran Deal Part Of Obama-3rd-Term Scheme?,' conservative activist Alan Keyes writes today that President Obama has made a secret deal with Iran that allows the country to 'unleash nuclear destruction' since it would give him the justification to launch a Nazi-style 'coup d’état' here at home. Keyes, who was Obama's GOP challenger in the 2004 U.S. Senate race in Illinois, alleges that Obama is aiding both ISIS and Iran in order to create an excuse to illegally remain in power after his second term in office." CW: Thank you, Alan Keyes; I'm feeling better already.
Some Other Candidates
Li'l Randy Walks out on Guardian Reporter. Paul Lewis of the Guardian: "The Republican presidential candidate Rand Paul walked out of a live interview with the Guardian on Friday, in his third testy exchange with a journalist since launching his campaign for president three days ago. The Kentucky senator abruptly ended the interview when he was pressed over whether his campaign focus on the racial imbalances of criminal justice reform would win him support among Republicans." CW: Again, Randy lectured the reporter, in this instance Paul Lewis. With video. Maybe reporters will now quit writing Hillary-hates-the-press stories. So far, she hasn't shushed any reporters or talked over them to lecture them on talking over her. ...
... Jim Rutenberg of the New York Times: "... it's the boring details of the organization that Paul is building that provide the best reason to take him seriously. If Paul's views are unusually idealistic, the ground game that his team is planning is pure realpolitik."
Charles Pierce on Scott Walker's serial mendacity & Politico's penchant for sugar-coating it.
New York Times Editors: "The use of [tax-exempt,] nonprofit groups for partisan politics has been growing in recent elections as the Internal Revenue Service has failed to draw firm lines against blatant politicking. The creation of a pro-Bush group floated by secret donors can only advance the nonprofit guise further, and rivals can be expected to match the deviousness with little to fear from the I.R.S. or the F.E.C."
Beyond the Beltway
Paloma Esquivel of the Los Angeles Times: "Ten San Bernardino County sheriff's deputies were placed on paid administrative leave Friday after TV news video showed them beating and kicking a suspect.... Also on Friday, the FBI opened a civil rights investigation into the incident....."
News Ledes
Reuters: "A man shot himself dead in front of the U.S. Capitol on Saturday, police said, sparking a temporary security lockdown at the complex on one of the busiest days for tourists in Washington."
Washington Post: "An Egyptian American citizen has been sentenced to life in prison for supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in the wake of a military coup that ousted the group from power in 2013. A Cairo criminal court issued the verdict against Ohio native Mohamed Soltan, 27, and 37 other defendants in a televised session Saturday. The judge also confirmed death sentences previously handed down to Soltan's father, Salah Soltan, and 13 others for 'inciting chaos' and planning anti-government demonstrations after the military takeover in July 2013."
Share Article
Reader Comments (11)
That Peurto Rico Spanish speaking disability is a travesty in scare reporting.
I'll have to go dig up the full story but to head off this story going viral please be assured that you have to have a disability. The Inspector General's Report on this is easy to find. Hold on while I get it.
Here's the IG Report. The great thing about RC is that I know you all will read it. Not so in places like the Turley Law(less) blog.
http://oig.ssa.gov/sites/default/files/audit/full/pdf/A-12-13-13062.pdf
Here's a bit more on the Grid Rules (the Last step in the process of determining if one is entitled to disability due to a MEDICAL condition) that relate to the SSDI story. I found it here:
http://socsecnews.blogspot.com/
" Let my explain why Social Security has a rule that allows a few severely disabled people onto benefits, in part, because of their inability to read and write in English, even though they live in Puerto Rico and are able to read and write in Spanish. It's fairly simple. Social Security is a national program. What is the agency supposed to do? Put someone on disability benefits when they're living in New York but cut them off once they move to Puerto Rico? Deny their claim while they're living in Puerto Rico but allow it as soon as they move to New York? It's not only impractical to have different rules for different locations; it's probably unconstitutional. What are you going to say next -- that inability to read and write in English has no effect upon a person's ability to hold down a job? You're not going to be able to do a surveillance system monitor job if you can't communicate in English. You can still be an agricultural laborer or a landscaper but when you get to the point in the grid regulations where ability to communicate in English is an issue, laboring jobs are already off the table because of the claimant's physical impairments. In fact, most jobs are off the table throughout most of the country if you can't communicate in English. So what do you want? A rule that may seem a bit odd when applied to a handful of people in Puerto Rico or a rule that's very unfair when applied across most of the country?"
The IG is fixing the 35 year old rule.
You know what's sad? Other than the IG Report there are no sources that accurately report this story. There are hundreds that lede with the misleading headline that the government is awarding SSDI to Puerto Ricans because they speak Spanish.
I did run across one interesting bit of news while searching on this...
Condoleeza Rice is leading polls to replace Boxer.
Won't that be fun.
I'm done on this. I hope everyone is convinced that this is bull shit reporting.
@Haley Simon. I did scan the IG report, thanks to you, & it appears the English-fluency rule is considered only after it is determined that the applicant has some kind of physical or mental impairment, but one that doesn't meet the "severe" impairment level of scrutiny required to obtain disability benefits outright.
This isn't at all clear from the reporting. I can't see where Hicks even hints that the language test is secondary.
IMO, it still remains a stupid test in Puerto Rico, which has two official languages & where the overwhelming majority of residents are Spanish-speaking. In Puerto Rico, it would make more sense to apply the test to applicants who don't speak Spanish.
Could an applicant -- if rejected in Puerto Rico -- move to New York City & qualify for disability benefits? Probably. That smacks of scammy, & I'm sure a few people would do that every year, but probably not enough to warrant a new set of complex criteria to determine if the applicant changed locations primarily for the purpose of qualifying for benefits.
Anyway, the SSA agrees with the IG's report & is proceeding to re-examine its policy re: Puerto Rico.
Marie
Marie
It is not just Hicks. It's all over the internet and it is disgusting 'reporting'. I don't want to search again, but I don't think I saw anything from any mainstream reporting. No NYT or WaPo. Small comfort.
I think this is a pretty good look at our journalistic future - lies and damned lies. There just isn't anybody out there, or at least consistently out there, who does solid reporting.
I'm very bummed.
Condaleeza Rice. Ugh.
@Haley Simon: I wrote to Hicks & told him he needed to write a clarification because his reporting was misleading. I'm not holding my breath.
Marie
BTW, I'm not so sure the English literacy issue is just confined to Puerto Rico. What might be found in Miami or any state with some populations of naturalized citizens that cannot speak English?
This is going to set lots of right-wing nuts hair on fire.
Excellent post by Stan Sorscher on "corporate agendas." The chart included in the article says it all, clarifying further, if any more clarification were needed, whose side the Trans Pacific Partnership is on.
'Corporatist Agenda,' and Where Can We Find One? - Huffington Post
www.huffingtonpost.com/stan-sorscher/what-is-a-corporatist-age_b_7042618 .html
Haley and Marie,
Your colloquy on the SSDI story is exhibit A in the difference between Confederate approaches to a report that seems like it might require some additional checking, and the approach favored by your garden variety intelligent person.
This isn't to say that progressives can't be taken in by a certain amount of sensationalism (I was once punked by Andy Borowitz!!), but it seems that people who value truth and accuracy over ideological points for their side will spend the extra time poring over multiple sources before crowing over outrages or calling victory.
The truly dangerous thing is that far too many on the right will happily adhere to first impressions if it appears an inaccurate reading of the data provides a win for their side, even if a small investment of their time would enable them to gain a more realistic and nuanced understanding of the event in question, one that might not support their initial sense of outrage or victory over the forces of whatever group they're against that day (and that covers a lot of ground).
So, ladies, thanks for doing that legwork. We're all better--and more accurately--informed because of it. Would that Confederates valued truth and accuracy, even a little bit. We'd all be far better off. But just imagine Tucker Carlson or Sean Hannity coming back with a "on second thought, we may have been a bit hasty with our initial reading of that story..."
Never gonna happen.
Denial is setting in around the Clinton candidacy.
I can't let myself go that place where she loses to Juanito Arbuto (which would be horrible enough), but the idea that one of the other Confederates (and that includes Juanito--he's no moderate) gets to drive the GOP clown car up to the White House front door is seriously starting to freak me out. I read the précis of that Beutler article last night and couldn't sleep afterwards. The press will all be in Clinton Attack Mode within a day or so, and my sense of her team's ability to, on one hand, stave off the marauders and begrudgers, and on the other, to craft a convincing campaign platform is inchoate at best.
What seems inevitable rarely is. Just ask Tom Dewey.
Or Hillary Clinton.
The Avoidable Civil War
Given the way things are, I share your thought. But, I understand why Lincoln had to preserve the union. I often wonder how differently things might have turned out, had he been there to preside over the reunification. So fuck John Wilkes Booth and fuck the confederacy.