;)
The Commentariat -- Dec. 21, 2012
From yesterday afternoon's Commentariat: "My column in the New York Times eXaminer is titled "Boola Boola, Professor Brooks." It's an "exclusive"!
Robert Ariail of the Spartanburg Herald-Journal. Thanks to Julie L. for the link.
Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard is fabulous:
Asawin Suebsaeng of Mother Jones tells you everything you ever wanted to know about the supposed Mayan Apocalypse -- like 12 percent of Americans think the end is upon us. Thanks to contributor Barbarossa for the link.
Alexandra Alper of Reuters: "Thousands of mystics, hippies and spiritual wanderers will descend on the ruins of Maya cities on Friday to celebrate a new cycle in the Maya calendar, ignoring fears in some quarters that it might instead herald the end of the world. Brightly dressed indigenous Mexican dancers whooped and invoked a serpent god near the ruins of Chichen Itza late on Thursday, while meditating westerners hoped for the start of a 'golden age' of humanity."
AND this is serious: Motoko Rich of the New York Times: "... the latest prophecy, tethered to the Mayan calendar and forecasting that the world will self-destruct on Friday, has prompted many rumors of violence, with a particular focus on school shootings or bomb threats."
Cliff Notes
Oh, for Pete's Sake. Andrew Taylor of the AP: "House Speaker John Boehner signaled on Friday he's still open to negotiations with President Barack Obama on avoiding across-the-board tax increases set to hit taxpayers Jan. 1.... In the aftermath, Boehner said any deal with the president to avoid the looming 'fiscal cliff' would require more compromise by Obama and greater involvement of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and the minority leader, Mitch McConnell, R-Ky."
Jackie Calmes of the New York Times: "With House Republicans' revolt over their leader's tax plan the evening before, President Obama on Friday faced the challenge of finding a new tax-and-spending solution -- perhaps working now with Senate Republicans -- to prevent a looming fiscal crisis in January. Yet ... officials at the White House remained as incredulous and bewildered as the rest of Washington after Speaker John A. Boehner, short of votes from his Republican majority, was forced to cancel Thursday's vote on what he called his 'Plan B.'" CW: not too sure why this is up to Obama. Seems to me Boner should come up with a Plan C, as in "capitulation."
Ker-Plop. Lori Montgomery & Rosalind Helderman of the Washington Post: "The House called off a vote Thursday evening on House Speaker John A. Boehner's plan to extend tax cuts on income up to $1 million -- known as Plan B -- because he could not muster enough votes from fellow Republicans to pass the measure." Story has been updated; new lede: "House Speaker John A. Boehner threw efforts to avoid the year-end 'fiscal cliff' into chaos late Thursday, as he abruptly shuttered the House for the holidays after failing to win support from his fellow Republicans for a plan to let tax rates rise for millionaires." ...
... If this was a parliamentary system, tonight’s dissent on Plan B would be seen as a vote of no confidence in Boehner. The national GOP is now simply a collection of warring tribal factions. -- Craig Shirley, GOP strategist
Jake Sherman & John Bresnahan of Politico: "Things were so bad for Speaker John Boehner Thursday night, support for his Plan B tax bill so diminished, the limits of his power with his own party laid bare, that he stood in front of the House Republican Conference and recited the Serenity Prayer. 'God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.' Boehner nearly cried." CW: note that, once again, Boner demonstrates that the only person he ever feels sorry for is himself. Boner's much-touted "sensitivity" applies only to Boner.
In his column, Paul Krugman expands on a blogpost linked here yesterday: "... earlier this week progressives suddenly had the sinking feeling that it was 2011 all over again, as the Obama administration made a budget offer that, while far better than the disastrous deal it was willing to make the last time around, still involved giving way on issues where it had promised to hold the line -- perpetuating a substantial portion of the high-income Bush tax cuts, effectively cutting Social Security benefits by changing the inflation adjustment. And this was an offer, not a deal. Are we about to see another round of the president negotiating with himself, snatching policy and political defeat from the jaws of victory? ... This is no time for a Grand Bargain, because the Republican Party, as now constituted, is just not an entity with which the president can make a serious deal."
The AFL-CIO Has Your Back. Greg Sargent. "The AFL-CIO wants Obama to pull back his proposal to raise the income threshold on the tax hikes to $400,000 and to rescind the offer of Chained CPI on Social Security.... Damon Silvers, the policy director for the AFL-CIO ... said Obama should reboot and get back to a set of proposals that is more in line with the policies he ran on -- the ones that got him reelected."
NEW. Totally Predictable (and Predicted). John Cushman of the New York Times: "The National Rifle Association on Friday called for schools to be protected by armed guards as the best way to protect children from gun violence.... Wayne LaPierre, the group’s executive vice president, read a statement at a news conference but did not take questions. He also criticized violent video games and spoke of the need to deal more effectively with the mentally ill.... During the news conference ... protesters repeatedly interrupted, raised a banner saying 'NRA killing our children' and shouting similar messages, such as 'N.R.A. has blood on its hands' and 'ban assault weapons now.'"
Tim Egan: "By threat and force, the gun and anti-tax extremists have been able to stop every sensible plea for reform.... Bullying is the favorite tactic of these political thugs in K Street suits, but as the last week has shown, they are also cowards." ...
... New York Times Editors: The NRA "presents itself as a grass-roots organization, but it has become increasingly clear in recent years that it represents gun makers. Its chief aim has been to help their businesses by increasing the spread of firearms throughout American society.... Sales of firearms and ammunition have grown 5.7 percent a year since 2007, to nearly $12 billion this year...." ...
... President Obama responds to We the People petitions related to gun violence:
... CW: Note that Constitutional scholar Barack Obama agrees with Nino Scalia's interpretation of the Second Amendment. Constitutional scholars who disagree with Nino & Barack? -- John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg & Stephen Breyer.
... Michael Schmidt & Charlie Savage of the New York Times: "Nearly two decades after lawmakers began requiring background checks for gun buyers, significant gaps in the F.B.I.'s database of criminal and mental health records allow thousands of people to buy firearms every year who should be barred from doing so. The database is incomplete because many states have not provided federal authorities with comprehensive records of people involuntarily committed or otherwise ruled mentally ill. Records are also spotty for several other categories of prohibited buyers.... The gaps exist because the system is voluntary; the Supreme Court ruled in 1997 that the federal government cannot force state officials to participate in the federal background check system." ...
... ** Bloomberg News Editors on how the NRA/gun lobby have stymied law enforcement from identifying criminal gun purchasers & otherwise stifled gun safety efforts. CW: the NRA, et al., really are aiding & abetting criminal enterprises for their own gain. They might as well run the drugs or hold up the banks themselves; they're getting their cuts anyway.
Déjà vu All over Again. J. K. Trotter of the Atlantic. "The trio of senators who led the months-long wave of criticism against U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice are suddenly focusing their attention on Obama's potential pick for Secretary of Defense: Chuck Hagel, who's been widely reported as the nominee. Kelly Ayotte, Lindsey Graham, and John McCain -- whose problems with Rice ended with her withdrawal from consideration for Secretary of State last week -- all spoke out today against the former Nebraska senator," a Republican. Hagel was Cray Z. McCain's national campaign co-chair in 2008.
Ed O'Keefe of the Washington Post: "Friends from both sides of the aisle stood shoulder-to-shoulder Thursday in the U.S. Capitol Rotunda to remember the late Sen. Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii), who became the first Asian-American afforded the honor of lying in state at the revered spot." ...
... Ken Burns interviews Sen. Inouye about his enlistment:
Ron Nixon of the New York Times: "Lost in the political standoff between the Obama administration and Congressional Republicans over the budget is a virtually forgotten impasse over a farm bill that covers billions of dollars in agriculture programs. Without last-minute Congressional action, the government would have to follow an antiquated 1949 farm law that would force Washington to buy milk at wildly inflated prices, creating higher prices in the dairy case." Milk prices could go to $6 to $8 a gallon.
Ethan Bronner of the New York Times: "Thirty-six years after the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty, its use is waning, with prosecutors and juries preferring to sentence convicted murderers to life in prison without parole. New data for 2012 show that nine states executed inmates this year, the fewest in two decades, and the number of death sentences handed down this year -- 80 -- was about a third of the total in 2000."
** Laura Gottesdiener of AlterNet, in Salon: "More than 13 percent of the workforce is expected to face unemployment at some point in the New Year.... This means that one in every eight workers -- and their families -- will be forced to cope with the financial and emotional burden of temporary unemployment this coming year. While these numbers are disturbing, they shouldn't be surprising, given the considerable shift the private sector is making towards temporary and contract workers. In 2010, for example, more than one-quarter of the 1.17 million new private sector jobs added to the economy were temporary. Compared to past economic recoveries, this higher emphasis on temporary workers is unprecedented -- leading many to worry that the shift towards unstable part-time and contract work will become a dominant feature of our economic reality."
C. J. Chivers of the New York Times on Syrian use of cluster bombs, "... the deliberate targeting of civilians by President Bashar al-Assad's military, in this case with a weapon that is impossible to use precisely.... The munitions in question -- Soviet-era PTAB-2.5Ms -- were designed decades ago by Communist engineers to destroy battlefield formations of Western armored vehicles and tanks. They are ejected in dense bunches from free-falling dispensers dropped from aircraft. The bomblets then scatter and descend nose-down to land and explode almost at once over a wide area, often hundreds of yards across."
Alex Pareene of Salon: "This year, my annual list of the worst of political media highlights not just individuals, but the institutions that enable those individuals. The 2012 Hack List [is] counting down the 10 media outlets that are hurting America...." Top prize goes to Politico and its stars Mike Allen & Jim VandeHei. Natch. More here, here and here.) Coming in at No. 10 was the New York Times, with special mention of Tom Friedman & Nicholas Kristof -- an excellent takedown all around: "Friedman is certainly the worst actual human being employed by the New York Times. But his vileness often lets his colleagues off the hook.... While Thomas Friedman travels the globe attending conferences and making obscene amounts of money speaking to billionaires for an hour, Nick Kristof travels the globe rescuing sex workers by getting them arrested and then attempting to find them jobs in sweatshops to produce our cheap clothing."
News Ledes
Los Angeles Times: "President Obama will nominate John F. Kerry, the five-term senator from Massachusetts, to replace Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of State, White House sources confirmed, choosing a longtime political ally who shares much of his foreign policy worldview and is likely to sail through confirmation hearings." ...
... Politico Update: "President Barack Obama nominated Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry to be the next Secretary of State on Friday." ...
... Update. The New York Times story is here.
Reuters: "Many Americans will remember the victims of the Newtown, Connecticut, school massacre with a moment of silence on Friday, just before a powerful U.S. gun rights lobbying group plunges into the national debate over gun control."
AP: "Admirers will bid farewell to Democratic Sen. Daniel Inouye at a memorial service before a final trip home to his native Hawaii. President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden were to be among those offering tributes during the ceremony Friday at Washington National Cathedral, along with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki. Biden also spoke at a ceremony Thursday at the Capitol, where Inouye was given an honored resting place: beneath the dome."
Share Article
Reader Comments (18)
Apparently a number of people only read half the sentence I wrote the other day because I am getting repeated criticisms here & in private suggesting I wrote that I'd never ever say a nasty word about a person once he took his last breath, and/or that I suggested one should only say nice things about a dead guy. Here's what I wrote, cut & pasted from the original:
"I generally prefer not to speak ill of the dead before the family has had a chance to mourn (or in this case, even bury him)."
This does not imply, in my opinion, that one should speak of a scoundrel in glowing terms. You know the adage: "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all." Toobin excoriated Bork. That's his choice. It is not a choice I would make on the day a public figure died. I know it's hard to tell from my usual tone, but I have better manners.
Marie
Tax The Rich: An Animated Fairy Tale narrated by Ed Asner and produced for the California Federation of Teachers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6ZsXrzF8Cc
Writing this after the House adjourned, promising to take up Plan B, which they apparently could not pass this evening, again after Christmas. They apparently could muster enough votes, though, to specify which cuts would replace the automatic sequester they had agreed to earlier. In short, nothing from the proposed military budgets that fund the people they like but billions from the people they don't, like people who use food stamps or the Affordable Care Act or those who wish to regulate Wall Street.
These are the people with whom the President is supposed to communicate and compromise, our very own Taliban of True Believers who, by the way, are now primarily funded and thus most beholden to a small group whose vast bank accounts greatly exceed any vestiges of moral sense their class and party once possessed.
Interesting to consider the Houses' current crack-up in the context of Brooks' promised defense of humility. If the House Republicans who pulled the legislative and negotiating rug out from under their Speaker tonight are anything, it is not humble. Intellectual humility is akin to hesitancy and skepticism, the opposite of a rush to judgment or strict adherence to ideology. Humility is tolerant because it is not sure, it is even distrustful of oneself, only too aware that because things are complicated, hasty decisions are too often wrong.
I cannot improve on Marie's marvelous take down of Brooks in yesterday's Xaminer (liked it so much I read it twice) but in addition to the large irony of Brooks doing anything humble or humbly I was particularly offended by his highjacking of Montaigne, long one of my favorites. Montaigne's motto, "What do I know?" expresses the essence of skepticism, and the power of his thinking and writing lies in his willingness to go wherever his questioning mind takes him. One reads Montaigne to see where that questing mind will travel once common assumptions are stripped away. That's why his thought is always so deliciously and gently surprising. He does not write to convince, only to explore, inviting the reader along as a guest as he gently pushes aside the clutter of cultural givens and reveals things in a way that is fresh and new.
At least that's the Montaigne I know and not the Brooks I seldom read. Because Brooks is always trying to make a case for or to excuse a political stance that has become unsupportable and indefensible, his mind is not open; his day job does not allow it to be. In effect then he is not humble in person or in product, and I wish he would not sully Montaigne's name by associating that revered name with his own.
But then maybe by announcing this interest in humility he's trying to teach the Tea Party conservatives something. If so, it's a ploy far too subtle and far too late. Witness today's conservative debacle.
BTW, yesterday I suggested in these debt negotiations the President might be very smart or we very lucky. The world didn't end today and the Repugs imploded. So far, so good.
I agree, Ken, about Montaigne being an uncomfortable fit for Brooks. Let's hope that one or more of his students might raise the very points you have just made unless of course Brooks doesn't accept the fact that students can teach their teachers.
I have been watching Eric Cantor for a long time. I watch him instead of Boehner when the ubiquitous cabal do their press conferences. I watch him as he intently watches Mr. Orange, someone, I think, he'd like to replace sooner than later. I actually feel sorry for John–––he doesn't have control of his people and while we hear Cantor is supportive, I think it's a sham. Too big a smile on his face as he walked the corridors after Plan B was DOD. Why do I detect an Iago scent in the air?
coming over AP:
NRA Calls for Armed Police Officer in Every School
"The nation's largest gun-rights lobby is calling for armed police officers to be posted in every American school to stop the next killer "waiting in the wings.""
A senseless idea guaranteed to sell more guns, and get more kids killed, imho.
I've got a beloved, but wrongheaded brother who has the vanity plate NRA. It is embarressing to ride in his car.
mae finch
Ken and PD have both beaten me to the Montaigne punch (directed toward the smug puss of Our Mister Brooks, self-satisfied, pretentious pedagogue that he is) but I’d like, in any event, to pass on some thoughts that came immediately to mind when I read of Brooks’ proclaimed interest in Montaigne as a figure of study, one whose works he could use to burnish his own impoverished intellectual knob.
Perhaps he should actually read Montaigne sometime. He could stand to learn a few things.
For one thing, Montaigne would be appalled by the political and moral (?) positions routinely adopted and supported by Brooks. The Frenchman was eternally inquisitive, never presumptuous, and (as Ken noted) determined not to forget that, in his opinion, rationality left much to be desired and therefore as an avowed skeptic, was forced to question everything and doubt, in the end, that he could know anything for sure (and, as he said, he wasn’t even sure of not being sure of that—a true skeptic!).
Montaigne’s sense of empathy for all creatures and even for plants and trees sets him diametrically opposite nearly all the important right-wing positions held by Brooks and his conservative ilk. In his essay “On Cruelty”, Montaigne begins with a lengthy consideration of virtue, delving into the natural state, quality, and difficulties of virtue.
For Brooks the word is used as a punch line. For Montaigne, it requires serious reflection and a careful approach. Very un-Brooksian, since for Brooks qualities like virtue, honor, morality, freedom come with pre-packaged and pre-approved right-wing definitions that will not heed nor even brook any outside (non conservative) approaches or understandings. They become more like affectations than qualities, useful for accessorizing one's public image. Montaigne would not be pleased by such consistent demonstrations of wizened hearts, padlocked minds, and cynical comportment.
As the essay progresses, Montaigne slides into the issue of cruelty inflicted upon animals. He declares that “Those natures that are sanguinary towards beasts discover a natural proneness to cruelty.” Pascal, years later, sniffed that Montaigne would ride his horse as if he had no business doing so, as if the horse should be his equal. If that kind of empathy toward other living creatures and the natural world was considered unusual in the 17th century (when Pascal was writing), it’s nonexistent in the party supported by Brooks for which tossing the poor, the elderly, the infirm out on the dung heap so as to make the wealthy more comfortable is the routine business of the day, outcries to the contrary equally impossible to find.
Pursuing Montaigne’s assessment of the morally lax nature (and lack of virtue) in those for whom cruelty has become a regular feature of their personality, we might consider those whom Brooks supported without fail for a decade.
How about George W. Bush and his entire administration, for starters? As a young boy Bush delighted in torturing small animals, sticking firecrackers into live frogs and blowing them up, or shooting animals with BB guns. Is it any wonder that he had no problem using the horror, death and destruction of war as a first choice against a people and a country that had done nothing to United States? Brooks supported this unconscionable cruelty every.single.step.of.the.way. The Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld Shock and Awe was little more than shooting giant BBs at helpless human beings.
But Brooks saw nothing wrong with it. No problem at all.
How dare this charlatan call upon a great humanist like Montaigne in his attempt to puff up his own paltry intellectual pavilion. More like a pup tent than the large, billowing, encompassing canvas that surrounded Montaigne.
Prick.
(I have yet to read Marie’s takedown on the Examiner site so apologies if I’ve covered some of the same ground.)
PD,
Kudos on the Cantor comparison to Iago, but Iago, methinks, was much more well spoken. Cantor is a more a back alley thug, albeit with the the same amoral, depraved lust for power.
In Verdi's version of Othello, his brilliant librettist, Arrigo Boito, created a Creed for Iago which is not in the original play but I think it suits the likes of Eric Cantor to a T. In part, he declares:
Dalla viltà d'un germe
o d'un atomo vile son nato.
I come from a vile seed, a base atom.
Sounds about right.
So...the "Mayan Calendar" is right. The world did end today--for the Republicans! Too bad, so sad. Let's let the door hit them in the ass on the way out.
@PD Pepe - Could not agree with you more. Iago Cantor is transparently both ambitious and evil. He has been "gunning" for Boehner for years. No good will come of this. Especially since the Repubs are ALL headed for Doomsday!
The difference between Iago & Cantor -- tho they both seem to play the same roll of faithless assistant -- is that Iago was a rather complex character whose motivations are still debated (and often re-imagined by the actors who play him). Cantor's motivation, I should hazard a guess, is a bit more transparent.
Marie
Oh my heavens to Betsy, now we have Mae reveal she, too, has a conservative brother, like Kate's and mine whose vanity plate's a plug for the NRA. We need to form a "Sister's brothers Suck society, meet at the local pub and cry into our frosted mugs.
@Pepe
I wholly agree with the Cantor Watch. He's an interesting creature to dissect, always fidgeting with his soulless beetle eyes darting in the front of the lights. I can't help but think maybe his boner didn't develop right and he's got a vendetta against the world due to his personal deficiencies.
On the other Boner questions though, let the man rot in hell. He cares for no other soul other than his own. He deserves no legitimate sympathy. He signed up for the job, takes the back room checks to the bank and lives submerged in the Conservative crazy bus with his flask of moonshine always within reach, especially for sad days like this when it's clear no one loves him.
Cry your fuckin' eyes out Johnny boy!
On another note, I had a good chuckle reading the headline of the NYT after the N.R.A. speech declaring armed officers in every school as the golden solution. By the way, it wasn't clear.. are they proposing to pay for that?
During my travels in Central America, one of the things that I recalled as being extremely different was the fact that down south, they have armed guards with giant, black, scary shotguns/rifles standing in the front entrance of some private universities and most banks. This has been common practice since at least 2007 when I first studied abroad.
I didn't attend the particular private university (U Latina in San José, Costa Rica por ejemplo), but I passed by it everyday in the bus. I remember thinking whoa, the insecurity here is such a serious problem that they have to have armed personal guards at the doors. And the weapons were clearly the proposed deterrent because they were in plain view and to enter you had to walk right by Terminator. That had to be unsettling for the students. However, I believe that these guards were deterring vandalism and robberies of the faculty/students, not potential mass murderers. That's a gringolandia specialty.
For the banks, armed guards with shotguns buzz you in and swipe you with a metal detector before you can take your number. Rare are the banks where metal detectors/armed guards aren't awaiting you at least in the capitals of Costa Rica and Nicaragua to my knowledge.
We've had discussions before about the USA's slow and steady march toward Banana Republic status. This NRA proposition brought me straight back to this idea.
Let's see know...
A relatively small group of families in control of the majority of the nation's wealth.....check
The exploitation of the impoverished working class by the said plutocracy....check
A systematically corrupt political class serving the wealthy's interests over those of the general population......check
The for-profit privatization of nearly our entire country mainly serving aforementioned plutocrats....check
Inadequate social programs while potentially available money goes back to the plutocracy....check
A social instability grave enough that calls for armed guards in schools....in progress
Besides our diversified economy and widespread private land ownership, we pretty much fit the bill.
Bonne fête du fin du monde mes ami(e)s !
@PD: It ain't just us guys! Don't forget my sister, who swears by every idiotic idea she hears from Rushbo.
Ah, Cantor. While comparing him to Iago comes to mind--along with Brutus--he looks very much like the comic book villains who seek world domination from a remote headquarters. The villain in The Simpsons comes to mind, also. It is the eyes, I think, the "soulless beetle eyes" as safari puts it. Also the wide fake grin/grimace.
http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/14593/presidents-column-32/
"Our greatest accomplishment has been to make guns “cool.” Anyone who thinks gun owners are a bunch of “bitter clingers” is making a huge mistake; today there are more gun enthusiasts in this country than ever in our history … and our numbers continue to grow."
This is obscene....
mae finch
@PDPepe: yes another brother on the wrong side... we do not duscuss politics- the arguing is too much for me.
However, his left leaning daughter will go toe to toe with him.
I love it.
We gotta find a new name as Calyban has a sister with the same wrongheadedness...
mae
What do we need for Christmas?
The Rs need a new slogan: "The Republican Party: Coming to Logical Conclusions from False Premises Since 1964"
We need a new Richard Hofstadter to explain this epic foolishness.
I don't think LaPierre got the message. The idea is not to shoot the gunman dead in a hail of gunfire in front of 5 year olds. It's to stop him from showing up at all.
@Jack. Like your new R slogan, and your comment about Hofstadter makes me think one reason I have so much trouble taking the rightward drift of American politics seriously--despite its very serious consequences--is that Hofstadter, along with Montaigne and others I will reserve for another time, explained it all so well so long ago. His "Anti-Intellectualism in American Life" and his essays on the paranoid style in American politics were written sixty and seventy years ago but, except for the examples he uses, remain disturbingly fresh today. Few have done better at holding up a mirror to America's Right. It wasn't a pretty picture then, and because we have had half a century at least to learn better, it's ever more ugly now.
Does that age me or not?
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/john-boehner-over-the-fiscal-cliff-122112#ixzz2FisEFheY
Oh, Kate. I don't think what happened last night is anything to cheer about. Read Charlie. It's a brilliant piece, but scary as hell. He also points out an additional horror to gerrymandering...
P.S. Will you let me join your club? I too have a beloved, but hard right, brother. He was in the very first Peace Corps contingent, but I think that was his last stab at humanism. I had to stop talking to him about six weeks before the election. Although many states apart, we would have killed each other.