;)
The Commentariat -- June 26, 2014
Internal links removed; graphics removed.
Since you suspicious lot are not buying the scam financial & dietary products I've been hawking here, I have tried yet another stunt to lose my Armenian "business partner." I'll give it a day to see if Stunt 2 works. -- Marie of Armenia
Paul Kane of the Washington Post: "House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) announced Wednesday that he intended to initiate a federal lawsuit seeking to declare President Obama’s executive orders as an unconstitutional power grab by one branch of the government." ...
... Dana Milbank: "To sue the president, Republicans are tying themselves in ideological knots. After howling about excessive lawsuits, they are embracing long-shot litigation. After lamenting activist judges, they are now insisting that judges be more activist and shed their long-standing reluctance to adjudicate disputes between the elected branches.... But the real problem with the lawsuit approach is that it misunderstands the cause of the problem: congressional dysfunction." ...
... Jonathan Capehart has a terrific post on the GOP's history of moves to obstruct President Obama (and government in general, of course), of which this latest is only one. And, yeah, crazy ol' George Will is still in the loop; his advocacy last weekend for just such a move certainly did not spring from the head of Zeus George. ...
... Capehart has a follow-up post which features this chart from the Brookings Institution:
;)
CLICK ON THE CHART TO SEE A LARGER IMAGE. ... Capehart, citing Brookings: "Republicans are right: President Obama is absolutely unique … in how infrequently he issues them! The last president to issue executive orders at such a slow rate was Grover Cleveland who served from 1885-1889 & 1893-1897. What’s more, Republican complaints about President Obama’s use of such powers is a bit ironic, given historically Republican presidents use executive orders more frequently." As for Capehart, he call Boehner's lawsuit "a dress rehearsal for Obama’s impeachment." ...
... CW: Worth Noting: there are executive orders & executive orders. While I suspect the chart is a more-or-less accurate reflection of presidential assertion, if, for instance, FDR had limited his orders to fixing the date of Thanksgiving Day (he didn't) while Dubya had used them solely for starting wars (he didn't), then the chart would be meaningless. A chart of "meaningful" or "substantive" orders would be highly subjective. One might be able to put a dollar value to each order -- though again conclusions would be nebulous -- but even then, does an order that saves $1BB cancel out one that costs $1BB, or is the total there $2BB?
Adam Liptak of the New York Times: "In a sweeping victory for privacy rights in the digital age, the Supreme Court on Wednesday unanimously ruled that the police need warrants to search the cellphones of people they arrest. While the decision will offer protection to the 12 million people arrested every year, many for minor crimes, its impact will most likely be much broader. The ruling almost certainly also applies to searches of tablet and laptop computers, and its reasoning may apply to searches of homes and businesses and of information held by third parties like phone companies." The opinion, by Chief Justice Roberts, is here. ...
... Amy Howe of ScotusBlog explains the ruling "in plain English." ...
... In Salon, Marcy Wheeler links the decision with the Snowden disclosures (and to an earlier Sotomayor opinion). CW: I'm surprised others have not remarked on the Snowden connection. As for this being a liberal opinion, I'm not so sure. I think conservatives have always been attuned to privacy rights, though it's tough for them because they love the police state law-and-order so much.
... CW: In a column titled "The Supreme Court Justices Have Cellphones, Too," Linda Greenhouse amplifies what I wrote a few days ago about conservatives lacking empathy: "I had planned to conclude my discussion of the court and the search cases with a mention of 'empathy,' the ability to put oneself in someone else’s shoes, so often missing from the Supreme Court’s criminal law decisions but perhaps on display here. But on reflection, it’s not really empathy. The justices are walking in their own shoes. The ringing cellphone could be theirs — or ours."
Adam Liptak & Emily Steel of the New York Times: "In a case with far-reaching implications for the television industry, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that Aereo, a start-up streaming service, had violated copyright laws by capturing broadcast signals on miniature antennas and delivering them to subscribers for a fee. The 6-3 decision was a victory for the major television networks, which had argued that Aereo’s business model amounted to a theft of their programming. The judges’ ruling leaves the current broadcast model intact while imperiling Aereo’s viability as a business after just over two years in existence.... In a dissent that expressed distaste for Aereo’s business model, Justice Antonin Scalia said the service had identified a loophole in the law. “It is not the role of this court to identify and plug loopholes,” he wrote.Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. joined the dissent." The opinion, written by Justice Breyer, is here. ...
... Lyle Denniston of ScotusBlog analyzes the opinion.
Hannah Fairfield & Adam Liptak of the New York Times on the liberal views of individual justices, based on their 2013 opinions:
CW: Sam Alito & Clarence Thomas are liberal 40 percent of the time. Really? This would get the right wing a-squawkin' -- if they only read the Times.
Jessica Miller, et al., of the Salt Lake Tribune: "A federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled that states outlawing same-sex marriage are in violation of the U.S. Constitution. By upholding a Utah judge’s decision, a three-member panel of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver became the first appeals court in the nation to rule on the issue, setting a historic precedent that voter-approved bans on same-sex marriage violate the Fourteenth Amendment rights of same-sex couples to equal protection and due process. But the court immediately stayed the implementation of its decision, pending an anticipated appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Utah attorney general’s office said Wednesday it will initiate that appeal."
Steve Benen: "This was the worst quarter for economic growth since the first quarter of 2009 – when the economy was facing a massive crisis. So, is this GDP report cause for alarm? It’s certainly not good news, but for a few reasons, it’s probably best to keep the handwringing in check. For one thing, most economists and financial-industry analysts expect the economy to bounce back in the second quarter, which ends next week." Also, unlike in 2009, the economy is adding jobs, not hemorrhaging them.
Eric Lipton of the New York Times: "The Office of Congressional Ethics, in a preliminary review, unanimously concluded in March that there was 'substantial reason to believe that Representative [Michael] Grimm [R-N.Y.] threatened a reporter with bodily harm and engaged in a threatening or menacing act that created a fear of immediate injury,' which would violate local law in the District of Columbia as well as House ethics rules. The investigation took place after Mr. Grimm, a second-term Republican from Staten Island and a former Federal Bureau of Investigation agent, threatened to 'break' a NY1 reporter and throw him off a House office building balcony at the end of a television interview with the reporter. Any further investigation of the threats against the NY1 reporter, Michael Scotto, is being put off at the request of federal criminal investigators. They separately charged Mr. Grimm with fraud in April...." ...
... CW: It's reassuring to know, isn't it, that members of Congress find this kind of behavior unethical? --
Matt Apuzzo of the New York Times: "More than four dozen Iraqi citizens are scheduled to travel to Washington to testify in court against the former Blackwater guards who they say fired wildly on unarmed citizens, leaving 17 Iraqis dead."
Mark Mazzetti of the New York Times: "The Obama administration’s embrace of targeted killings using armed drones risks putting the United States on a 'slippery slope' into perpetual war and sets a dangerous precedent for lethal operations that other countries might adopt in the future, according to a report by a bipartisan panel that includes several former senior intelligence and military officials.The group found that more than a decade into the era of armed drones, the American government has yet to carry out a thorough analysis of whether the costs of routine secret killing operations outweigh the benefits."
Maya Rhodan of Time: "The Department of Veterans Affairs said Wednesday that two senior officials are stepping down next week as the agency looks to rebound from a scandal over concealing long wait times for veterans to get care. The VA said the resignation of Will A. Gunn, the current General Counsel, and the replacement of Dr. Robert Jesse, the acting Under Secretary for Health, are 'aimed at accelerating Veterans’ access to quality health care and rebuilding the trust of America’s Veterans.'”
Oboy. Another Issa-generated scandal: the EPA can't retrieve some 2009 e-mails Darrell Issa says he has to have. This Lost E-Mails thing is a bonanza for him. He can just keep asking agencies for more e-mails. Not infrequently, he'll find out their antiquated archival system crashed. Then he calls a presser & yells SCANDAL!!! COVER-UP!!! Why, Issa hard has to do any work at all. ...
... Dave Weigel: "New IRS Scandal: Lois Lerner Thought About Doing Something, Then Didn’t Do It."
Ari Rabin-Havt, in Salon: WalMart "fact-checks" Tim Egan's last column -- with anecdotes. Or less.
Senate Race
Alan Rappeport of the New York Times: In helping Republican Sen. Thad Cochran win the GOP primary against Tea party challenger Chris McDaniel, Mississippi's black voters remember the martyred Rev. George Lee of Belzoni, who fought for black voting rights in the 1950s. “'I’m sure that George Lee would be smiling at the impact that black voters have had in trying to determine the next senator for the state of Mississippi, 50 years after the Freedom Summer, and the passage of the civil rights bill,” []Wardell] Walton, who served as mayor [of Belzoni] from 2005 to 2013, said in a telephone interview after the polls closed. 'His life and death was not in vain.'” ...
... Harry Enten of Five-Thirty-Eight: "... we have county-level results to go on, and that data [sic.] suggests that traditionally Democratic voters provided Cochran with his margin of victory." ...
... Here's Another Way to Put It. Daniel Strauss of TPM: "Conservative Freakout Blames 'Uncle Tom' And Voter Fraud For McDaniel Loss." ...
... New York Times Editors: "Now it’s time for Mr. Cochran to return the favor by supporting a stronger Voting Rights Act and actively working to reduce his party’s extreme antigovernment policies." ...
... Update: Sam Levine of the Huffington Post: "In an interview with HuffPost Live, Derrick Johnson, president of the Mississippi NAACP, said that Cochran could thank black voters by supporting efforts to re-establish protections in the Voting Rights Act that the Supreme Court struck down last year." As Johnson points out, Cochran would have lost if not for the civil rights movement's efforts to restore voting rights to black Southerners.
Anna Palmer of Politico: "On Wednesday afternoon, [McDaniel's] campaign released a statement saying they would look into 'irregularities' before deciding whether to challenge his loss." ...
... CW: My favorite part of Palmer's report: "Senate Conservatives Fund’s Ken Cuccinelli hung up on a POLITICO reporter when asked if they would consider challenging the result in court." Emphasis added. I recall Kate Madison's saying that Little Kenny had obnoxiously good manners. Apparently he got over that. ...
... Ed Kilgore: "... what these birds are really complaining about is black participation in a 'white primary.' This is certainly not an argument consistent with broadening the appeal of the GOP or the conservative movement."
Yo, Chris. The GOP Presidential Primaries Are for Losers, Too. Steve M. thinks McDaniel is setting his sights way too low: "He should declare himself a Republican candidate for president. He should say he's taking on the entire party establishment.... Could he actually win it? Maybe not -- but just being a contender would open up a much more elevated level of right-wing grift to him. Go for it, Chris. Visit Iowa and New Hampshire soon."
Dave Weigel of Slate: Actually, the Tea party has had a pretty bad primary season all around, Eric Cantor's defeat notwithstanding. ...
... Molly Ball of the Atlantic. "The Tea party blew it.... Tuesday's Republican primaries were the Tea Party's last chance. And the Tea Party struck out. In Mississippi, challenger Chris McDaniel failed to dethrone six-term incumbent Senator Thad Cochran in the second round of their hard-fought contest. In Oklahoma, Representative James Lankford won by a massive margin over conservative favorite T.W. Shannon. The Tea Party industrial complex — groups like the Tea Party Patriots and FreedomWorks, figures like Sarah Palin and Ted Cruz — invested heavily in both races and came up short. Now both of these red states will almost assuredly send Republican senators to Washington who owe the national Tea Party nothing, and quite likely wish it ill.... In state after state this Republican primary season—particularly in Senate races—candidates acceptable to the party's business wing have defeated, co-opted, or marginalized right-wing populists." ...
... Palin, of course, remains the gracious, articulate loser she always was. ...
... CW: Funny thing is, it sounds to me as if the towns of the Mississippi Delta where people came out to vote for Cochran are precisely the sort of places Palin had in mind when she described "real America":
We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard working very patriotic, um, very, um, pro-America areas of this great nation. This is where we find the kindness and the goodness and the courage of everyday Americans. -- Sarah Palin, in Greensboro, North Carolina, October 2008
Whatevah could be the difference?
OR, Maybe Gail Collins Gets It Right: "Nobody came straight out and said: 'Look, Mississippi gets three bucks back from the federal government for every dollar we send in. Don’t kill the golden goose.' But the message was pretty clear, and in some ways a little revolutionary. Like voters in many poor, conservative states, Mississippians have spent decades happily deluding themselves that they’re victims of Washington rather than its top beneficiaries. You could argue that Thad Cochran staged an intervention for his state’s residents, in which he pierced, at least temporarily, their veil of denial."
Congressional Race
Kate Taylor of the New York Times: "Representative Charles B. Rangel, the Harlem Democrat who said he wanted to be able to decide on his own when to retire from a career in Congress that began in 1971, held off a determined challenge by State Senator Adriano D. Espaillat to win the primary for a run for a 23rd term. Mr. Rangel’s lead of about 1,800 votes in the primary held on Tuesday was enough to overcome any gains Mr. Espaillat could make in the counting of absentee and affidavit ballots filled out by voters at the polls, The Associated Press reported on Wednesday afternoon, citing new information from the New York City Board of Elections. Mr. Rangel had 47.4 percent of the vote; Mr. Espaillat, 43.6 percent."
Share Article
Reader Comments (12)
Aside from being a nuisance, I don't understand what your Armenian friends have in mind.
Oh please, CW, I may have said that 'Lil Kenny had "obnoxiously good manners," but that was when he was 8-9 years old! Plus, he said a prayer and crossed himself before he went onto the soccer field--which was not often. I think I told all of you that my son, his "colleague" said all these years later when I asked him what he thought of his former teammate, "He was one weird dude!" And he was as lousy at soccer then as he is at thinking and political action now. YUK!
Both my son and I think that 'Lil Kenny's meteoric rise has cratered!
@James Singer. They want you to send them money. And in so doing, give them your credit/debit card info. If only you had popped for some of that garcinia extract, my partners would be vacationing on Lake Sevan. On your dime.
I have to give my business partners some credit; they seem to know that dropping Obama's name might help with readers of this site. When they crack Erik Erickson's code, I guess they'll mention Reagan.
Marie
@Kate Madison. Well, soccer is kind of a sissy European-y sport, anyway. These days, Cooch is more into manly GOP pursuits; like shooting doves at one of those phony Cheney-type hunting farms. Sez Cuccinelli to his fellow fake-hunters, who have gathered for a party during Cooch's failed gubernatorial bid: "I’ve been hunting or fishing in Virginia for as long as I can remember. Besides not getting to see my family every day, one of the hardest parts about being on the campaign trail 24/7 is not being able to be outdoors very often.” I wonder if he prayed for the birds of peace before he shot 'em dead.
Marie
“Well, you know, as for the primary, and perhaps if it’s true, some shenanigans going on there, nothing should surprise you, but that’s old-school politics where it’s a bit of the status quo and that’s got to go,”
Does this make sense? What does this even mean? This is Sarah Palin complaining, I think, that the election in Mississippi in which Chris (Negroes can vote? Since when?) McDaniel lost, despite interventions by wealthy 'bagger groups and endorsements by former half-term governor and full time quitter Palin and senator Ted (Shutdown Man) Cruz, was stolen. But what it says (and I'm sorry, I don't speak fluent Palin, but I'll give it a shot) is something along the lines of something, something, something, nothing is a surprise, but status quo--meaning what the voters chose--has to go.
Mighty democratic of her, I must say.
Maybe McDaniel lost because the voters couldn't understand what Palin said when she endorsed him. I certainly can't. She needs to hire an interpreter and that person can translate her pidgin patois into standard English. "Blah, blah, blah....duh, duh, duh, America..." "Well, Bob, what Sarah means...."
One funny shaped mole away from the nuclear codes. Thank you again, John McCain. It's like giving an illiterate Cruella de Vil keys to the Oval Office.
Take a peek at the Jonathan Capehart article Marie links above. The one about all the asshole maneuvers Republicans have been running since Obama was elected, dirty tricks that forced the president to use the power of his office to get something--anything--done, in the face of historic intransigence by the GOP's collection of three-toed sloths.
While you're there, take a look at the accompanying picture. Look at the Snidely Whiplash expression on Boehner's orange face as he eyes a smiling Obama at some photo op.
So here's my question. What is going through his gin soaked brain?
Is he thinking
A) I cut short my four martini lunch for this shit?
B) He should be sweeping floors not living in the White House.
C) I don't know who's worse. This guy or the TP loons.
or
D) All of the above.
Before my quick run to CA had time to send this off to the local paper:
"The headline on Monday's front page "Supreme Court Could Deal Setbacks to Obama" made me wonder just how the Court's potential rulings might harm the President. Now that I’ve thought a little about it, I think I know.
In its Hobby Lobby decision, where a corporation is claiming the "right" to impose its religious beliefs and practices on its employees, this corporate-friendly Court could again decide that corporations’ rights are more important than those guaranteed to individuals in the Bill of Rights; and if it does, when the unemployed ex-President takes a job with Hobby Lobby, he will do so knowing that due to his employer’s religious beliefs, his insurance will not pay for his contraception.
Then there's the quiet zone Massachusetts established around abortion clinics to control the haranguing, harassment and outright bullying the clinics' patients were regularly subjected to. In the name of free speech, this Court could strike down that thirty-five foot quiet zone. If it does, the next time the President seeks an abortion in Massachusetts, he too can expect to be bullied by those the Court has said have the right to their loud and obnoxious zealotry.
What else might the Court do to the President? According to the article, the Court might allow industry to pump more CO2 into the atmosphere, despite carbon dioxide’s documented connection to climate change. Thank goodness such an industry-friendly decision will hurt the President only. It would be terrible if the whole nation were affected by more drought, severe weather and rising sea levels.
Now that I understand the headline, I certainly feel better. I feel sorry for Mr. Obama, who already has enough troubles, but I am relieved, as we all should be, that Supreme Court’s upcoming decisions will affect no one else."
Now that I'm home and see today's stories about the Supreme's Massachusetts and recess appointment decisions, I see the President is, as the headline suggested he might, really taking it in the shorts.
Guess I have to wait until Monday to hear if he gets his contraception.
Teabaggers may have had a pretty rough time of it lately, but they have actually met with a great deal of success.
They have moved the country far to the right. They've made it not just okay to be oafish, ignorant, insulting, and racist, but mandatory for any candidate with an R after his or her name, forcing even reasonable people to behave like clownish dolts in obsequious obeisance to obstinacy. They've encouraged the worst instincts of the citizenry--paranoia, hatred, suspicion, closed mindedness--to bubble to the surface and sucker punch the better angels of our nature.
They've subverted and debased the national debate on serious issues and substituted Molotov cocktails for rational discourse. They've peppered congress with insane people, who, like an opportunistic disease, have sickened the body politic.
They may not have succeeded in killing it, but they've done a lot of damage.
And they're not through yet.
Teabag thuggery is the disease. Election of rational actors is the cure.
Great news, kids!
Let's say you're a guy. A regular guy. Well, sort of. You are the kind of guy who occasionally, now and then, well, okay, maybe every day, likes to beat up his wife or girlfriend. And do a little stalking on the side, cuz where's the harm in that? But sooner or later John Law catches up with you and you're convicted of domestic violence.
Now you might think, as does Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn) that guys like you probably might not be allowed to own a gun or three or eight, given your....er..."condition". Right? At least in a sane world.
But guess who thinks every convicted abuser and stalker should own as many guns as possible.
The N fucking RA, of course! Way to go, Wayne-O, you frighteningly amoral sack of shit.
Seriously, is there no end to the depravity of these fucking people?
Can't wait to see all the Republicans vote against this. If the Democrats don't hit them all over the head with this every day from now until election day, I'll be seriously disappointed.
Guns for all the stalkers and wife beaters! It's the American Way.
Obama needs to get his appointment groove on and fill the remaining (33) vacancies on the Federal benches. Even though the Supreme Court is likely to continue to make new law and push the oligarch model forward, perhaps the lower courts can buy some time.
http://www.uscourts.gov/JudgesAndJudgeships/JudicialVacancies.aspx
I expect Scalia to adopt a tricorn hat as regular attire on the bench, require women who have had abortions to wear a large AB on their clothing and to re institute separate WCs (preferably of the out house variety) for minorities. This will come on the heels of the the added qualifications of a candidate for the Presidency: must be Caucasian and have a penis since birth.
A bit of snark. I can't hear a mention of Alito, i.e Dunder Dickhead, without seeing his unlovely wife at the nomination hearing, blubbering over some perceived slight against him. Really? Women like her make my ass work buttonholes.
Diane,
Because of Nino's regularly scheduled stentorian siren blasts from the frontiers of Wingnuttia, we sometimes fail to realize that Snarling Sammy Alito, the guy who very publicly dispensed with propriety during a State of the Union address (because uppity negro), makes conservative troglodytes like Thomas and Scalia look like fucking Emma Goldman, at least according to the article linked above on the relative liberality of their decisions. Okay, I may be exaggerating a tad.
But leave us not forget that his wife's tearful distress erupted when his menbership in an exclusive, and now defunct, right wing hate group at Princeton was brought up at a senate hearing on his nomination (you remember, that was the one where he lied through his teeth when asked if he could act in an impartial, non-partisan manner on the court). This pleasant little group of white supremacists and freaked out misogynists were committed to denying admittance to the college of any additional pesky women and annoying, uppity minorities. Conservatives, along with the Alitos, were incensed that he was even questioned about this. I mean, how DARE they!!
Can you imagine the wingnut outrage if a so-called liberal candidate for the high court took umbrage at being questioned about their membership in a communist organization when they were in college?
Winger hero Joe McCarthy destroyed people for far less.
Could there be more convincing evidence of the white, Christian,
privileged, patriarchal universe the Alitos inhabit?
If you don't fit their view of who is worthy, you're fucked.
His decisions follow this trail like hungry pigs to the trough.
I never had an abortion, but I can, very easily, walk in the shoes of those women who have and will have. It's for many women a difficult decision, even though a decision well thought through and certain it's the best thing to do for myriad reasons. So there you are walking into a facility for the procedure and because of the Supreme Court ruling today you will be bombarded with pleas from those "protectors of all things fetal" not coming from a distance of 35 ft. but up close and personal so that THEIR freedom of speech is not curtailed in trying to convince you––no, to SHAME you––to change your mind. What a travesty! What a goddamn travesty!