;)
The Commentariat -- March 28, 2014
Internal links removed.
Amanda Cochran of CBS "News": "President Obama, in an interview in Rome with 'CBS Evening News' anchor ... cott Pelley, said Russia must take steps now to reduce tensions over Ukraine":
** Paul Krugman: "... the demonization of anyone who talks about the dangers of concentrated wealth is based on a misreading of both the past and the present. Such talk isn't un-American; it's very much in the American tradition."
Tara Culp-Ressler of Think Progress: "On Thursday, President Obama announced on a call with volunteers that the number of Americans who have enrolled in health insurance plans under Obamacare has hit six million. With several days left to go before open enrollment ends on March 31, the administration has met its target. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that Obamacare enrollment would hit six million by the end of its enrollment period. Although the CBO initially projected a seven million enrollment figure, that number was revised down after technological issues plagued the insurance marketplaces' websites this past fall." ...
... See also this post by Marilyn Tavenner, Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the person who oversaw the Healthcare.gov clusterfuck. ...
... Sheryl Gay Stolberg & Robert Pear of the New York Times: "The disparities [among state programs] reveal a stark truth about the Affordable Care Act: With the first open enrollment period set to end Monday, six months after its troubled online exchanges opened for business, the program widely known as Obamacare looks less like a sweeping federal overhaul than a collection of individual ventures playing out unevenly, state to state, in the laboratories of democracy." ...
... Sahil Kapur of TPM: "A few street blocks away from Supreme Court oral arguments Tuesday on the contraceptive mandate, an appeals court heard a separate case that poses a far greater threat to Obamacare and could cripple the law.... The case is about whether the Affordable Care Act permits the federally-run insurance exchange to provide subsidies to consumers.... Unlike the birth control challenge, which carries broad legal implications but implicates only a small portion of Obamacare, a loss for the administration in this case, Halbig v. Sebelius, would deal a fatal blow to Affordable Care Act. The federal exchange serves 36 states, and the millions of residents in those states would not be able to afford insurance without subsidies." ...
... ** Scott Lemieux in the American Prospect has more: "...above all the Republicans on the nation's second most important appellate court are committed to doing everything they can to ensure that the federal government can't work." ...
... Noah Feldman, in Bloomberg News, elaborates on some points made by the justices during oral arguments in the Hobby Lobby case. ...
... It's All a Koch Brothers Plot! Really. If you read Noah Feldman's argument (Feldman is a professor of Constitutional law), follow it up with this analysis by Bill Blum in Truthdig. Blum's piece is a two-pager. Read both pages. You can't understand the impact of Feldman's analysis (I doubt if he realizes it, either) without reading Blum. Many thanks to contributor Lisa for the link.
... Andrew Cohen in the Week: "We live in an age in which we have an activist conservative court eager to expand constitutional protection for some at the expense of others, and willing to do so by upending old precedents." Cohen notes the contrast between Sandra Day O'Connor & Sam Alito, who replaced her "and whose disdain for the health care law, and for women's rights in general, go back a long way."
Kathleen Hunter of Bloomberg News: "The U.S. Senate voted to advance legislation restoring benefits for the long-term unemployed that the Obama administration has sought to revive since they expired late last year. By a vote of 65-34, with 60 required for approval, the Senate agreed to move toward taking up the measure, which is the product of a bipartisan agreement struck earlier this month by Rhode Island Democrat Jack Reed, Nevada Republican Dean Heller and eight other senators." CW: No telling what the House will do.
Mike Lillis of the Hill: "Passing comprehensive immigration reform is more important than Democrats' success at the polls in November, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday."
Charles Pierce: "The party of Christian values and self-reliance and personal responsibility gathered its elite [including Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.)] to pay homage to creepy old gambling magnate Sheldon Adelson...." Here's the underlying New York Times story, by Nicholas Confessore & Eric Lipton.
New Jersey News
"I Can't Recall." Michael Barbaro of the New York Times: "The Port Authority official [David Wildstein] who directed the shutdown of lanes to the George Washington Bridge said that he informed Gov. Chris Christie about it at a Sept. 11 memorial while the lanes were closed, according to an internal review that lawyers for the governor released on Thursday.... But the report said that Mr. Christie did not recall Mr. Wildstein's raising the topic during their interaction and, in a sweeping claim of vindication, found no evidence that he -- or any current members of his staff -- was involved in or aware of the scheme.... Mr. Christie has said previously that he did not know of the lane closings before or while they were occurring...."
... CW: This is very similar to Steve Martin's advice on how to become a millionaire & never pay taxes:
First, get a million dollars. Now, you say, 'Steve, what do I say to the tax man when he comes to my door and says, "You have never paid taxes"?' Two simple words: 'I forgot!'
Here's Randy Mastro, the lead attorney on the "investigation," at a presser yesterday:
The Star-Ledger report, by Ted Sherman, is here.
Christopher Baxter, of the Star-Ledger has excerpts of Christie's report here. The page also has the full report.
"Irate Friends See Sexism in Report." Kate Zernicke & David Chen of the New York Times: "The report moves aggressively to consolidate blame on Ms. Kelly. In one passing example, the report asserts that she canceled meetings with Mayor Steven Fulop of Jersey City, who had declined to endorse Mr. Christie's re-election. In fact, documents have established that those meetings were canceled not by Ms. Kelly but individually by the officials who had been scheduled to meet with the mayor." ...
... CW: The report also casts Hoboken Mayor Dawn Zimmer as a dingbat who made "demonstrably false" & "unbelieveable" accusations because she was "confused" and her "subjective impressions" did not match "objective reality."
Michael Linhorst of the Bergen Record: "Democrats investigating the George Washington Bridge controversy are panning today's report released by a lawyer hired by the Christie administration" saying it raises new questions.
If you would like to hear Chris Christie tell Diane Sawyer that he is as innocent as a newborn babe & he's suffered terribly over this, yadayadayada, you can do so here.
I think they love me in Iowa, too, Diane. I've been there a lot. I think they love me there, too. -- Chris Christie
Recent polls in Iowa have found 57 percent of Iowa adults disapprove of the way he has handled the [George Washington Bridge lane-closings] situation. Another poll found 41 percent thought he would not make a good president, compared to 36 percent who thought the opposite. -- Mario Trujillo of the Hill
A Des Moines Register Iowa Poll in February this year showed that 57 percent of Iowa adults disapproved of the way Christie has handled the bridge controversy and 25 percent approved. Among Republicans, 47 percent disapproved and 34 percent approve. And in December, in an Iowa Poll that tested 10 Republicans considered likely 2016 suspects, Christie tied for fifth most popular.... -- Jennifer Jacobs of the Des Moines Register
The Star-Ledger Editors call the Christie-Mastro report "a million-dollar whitewash."
New York Times Editors: "We can now add this expensive whitewash to all the other evidence of trouble in Mr. Christie's administration."
Elsewhere Beyond the Beltway
Will Weissert of the AP: "A federal appeals court on Thursday upheld Texas' tough abortion restrictions that have forced the closure of about 20 clinics around the state, saying the new rules don't jeopardize women's health. A panel of judges at the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court judge who said the rules violate the U.S. Constitution and serve no medical purpose.... Justice Stephen Breyer called the issue of the law's constitutionality a difficult question. 'It is a question, I believe, that at least four members of this court will wish to consider irrespective of the Fifth Circuit's ultimate decision,' Breyer wrote in a brief opinion that was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor."
Congressional Race
I have always believed in our founders' idea of a citizen legislature. I had a career before politics and always planned to have one after. The genius of our institutions is they are not dependent on the individual temporary occupants privileged to serve. -- Rep. Mike Rogers, re: his retirement
Ed O'Keefe of the Washington Post: "Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, plans to retire from Congress after his current term to host a national radio show syndicated by Cumulus Media, he announced Friday." ...
... CW: Assuming Rogers is sincere, I think he's quite right in his reasoning. And becoming a radio jock is not as horrible as becoming a lobbyist. ...
... Tim Alberta of the National Journal: "Although hawkish on national security matters, Rogers is viewed as one of the more moderate voices in his conference -- which has helped him earn seven terms representing an evolving congressional district that was carried by President Obama in 2008 and Mitt Romney in 2012 after redistricting. Rogers's retirement is likely to spawn a free-for-all of candidates scrambling to submit election paperwork before the April 22 filing deadline."
News Lede
New York Times: "Walmart, Gap and Children's Place this week became the first three United States companies to contribute toward a $40 million fund for victims of the Rana Plaza factory collapse in Bangladesh last April, in which more than 1,100 workers died."
Share Article
Reader Comments (10)
Oh yeah, the classic 'I forgot' strategy. Might I add that it was perfected by the Dubya administration's torture abetters and national ass clowns David Addington and John Yoo. These stains of national embarrasement engrained a modern precedent of feigning stupidity and the onsetting of alzheimers at each strategic moment something important comes up.
Puhlease give me a fucking break on this one. I lost a huge amount of respect and trust in our system of government when I watched these hearings go down and these TORTURE ENABLERS get off with a rap on their soft creamy knuckles. Disillusioned was I.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUpC-4ppSIQ
@Re:Christie's memory. I'll give Christie credit. He's a very accomplished liar. That oh-so-sincere expression he exibits but what NJ pol isn't?
When Reagan was questioned during Iran-Contra he frequently said "I don't remember." In his case, he probably didn't, what with his Alzheimer's. The number of things Christie "didn't know about" or "doesn't recall" strains credibility, especially for a "hands on" administrator. And this guy wants to be President? "I didn't know about the Air Force bombing that country. If someone told me about it, I don't recall who or when."
Sheesh! SMYHID. (Shaking My Head In Disbelief.)
Petition seeks to give Alaska back to Russia:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/whitehouse-gov-petition-seeks-to-give-alaska-back-to-russia-165159170.html
If Palin is included in the deal I might sign it!
Though inhabiting Rumsfeld's brain for such a long stretch is like getting a mouthful of cavities carved out without Novocaine, a kind of masochist's holiday, I've been reading the NYTimes Errol Morris series that tries to explain the way Rummy thinks.
Of course, the blinders inherent in his ideology explain part of Rumsfeld's inability to learn from experience, ideology even when combined with a (un)healthy dose of hubris doesn't go far enough. There's that element of inhumanly cynical manipulation that must also be acknowledged if we hope to understand the Right's brain.
Yesterday, in the Times I tried to explain it this way:
"Another reason the known unknowns and the unknown unknowns mantra so well fits Rumsfeld and the Right's world view is that it's so darn handy for those who don't like to recognize or acknowledge the truth.
Since the Right is so frequently wrong, it habitually relies on creating and expanding doubt where we're actually pretty sure about something. They mount multi-million dollar campaigns to question climate science (and scientists, never missing an opportunity for an ad hominem attack), the findings of evolution science (teach the controversy that they themselves have created), the grim facts about our creaky and uncaring healthcare insurance system, the nasty effects of our only minimally regulated industries on our environment and our citizens, and now and always, the fairy tale that there's nothing fundamentally awry with our economic system, just lazy workers who happen to live in the inner city.
On every side, the Right specializes in pretending the many known knowns are unknown, using the truism that little is always absolutely 100 percent true to expand uncertainty's territory enough to drive a deeper wedge between truth and fiction.
Iraq is only one case of many. The certainty about the WMD (were they unknown knowns)? The mess we made of Iraq by trying to impose Wall Street on Baghdad overnight, blinded by ideology and greed, yes, but yet predicted by many, another known unknown, perhaps.
Maybe to Rumsfeld the thousands of deaths, in Iraq or elsewhere, remain unknown unknowns, too."
Later today, I'll wade through Pt. III of Morris' attempt to come to grips with Rummy's brain, more fascination of the abomination, perhaps, but so far I confess, I just don't get these folks. I continue to read about Cheney, Rummy and the boys and still, no matter what they say or how they are explained, they remain pretty much unknown knowns to me.
Another species, perhaps?
Regarding the restoration of unemployment benefits, Marie wonders what the House will do now that the Senate has seen voted to help Americans still struggling with long term unemployment, largely created by Republican policies.
I can't say exactly what they'll do, but throwing stones in the passway is their usual MO concerning anything that helps average Americans rather than the rich or the connected.
Cheeto Man Boehner is readying the groundwork for a NO vote. He's complaining that the Senate bill takes no action to create jobs. Well, okay. Typically unemployment legislation is a stop gap to help citizens get through some tough times. If Boehner and the other obstructionists in his party try to hold this up because it doesn't "create jobs", I'd like to hear what their plan is. But then they don't have one, do they?
Their "plan", their standard schtick is to scream that whatever the Democrats do isn't enough or doesn't do this or do that. They never actually say what they would do. It's like Rumsfeld and Romney and McCain and Graham whining about what the president is or isn't doing about Crimea. They never actually say what THEY would do. Because it's so much easier to cry and stamp their feet and point fingers and whine that it's not being done right so they don't want to play anymore.
And that, just my guess of course, is what the House will do with the long term unemployment situation.
Just pathetic.
Ken,
Good point about how the right sustains their ideological penchants by using canards like unknown-unknowns and declaring that they can't act because they aren't 100% sure if this is the correct way to go (helping the poor, for example. They'd rather spend millions conducting Heritage studies to prove that the poor are better off than Jamie Dimon, or that government programs don't help. Of course, more studies will be needed...) so might as well not do anything.
The flip side of this, of course, is that, when it serves their purposes, they have no problem acting on a 1% chance, the infamous Cheney One Percent Doctrine. If there is a 1% chance that we can bomb the ever loving crap out of some foreigners, we just got to take it.
I don't want to say it's a waste of time trying to parse their thinking (I'm a longtime fan of Morris' work), but really, they just do and say whatever is most convenient for achieving their goals. Opportunism is not exactly the right descriptor because that implies jumping on an emergent (ie, real) situation. If the time is not right, if no opportunities present themselves, they simply make something up and declare it to be true. Then they can do whatever they want, facts, legality, morality, and ethics be damned.
The Republican Way.
(I will very likely read Morris' dissection of Rumsfeld's brain, so don't feel too alone. It's an odd thing to read the thoughtful work of a rational investigator who writes about about the muddled thinking of irrational actors.)
Re: Here's a good idea; let's elect ethics officers for political offices rather than elect crooks and then we won't have to pay for the crooks to hire ethics officers to explain right from wrong.
The appeals court support for wingnut measures to deny women in Texas their legal right and to ensure that choice, for them, is not a choice at all, is a signal measure of the success of thirty years of Republican administrations salting the legal soil for as far as the eye can see by burying far-right moles in the federal judiciary, especially appeals courts, guaranteeing that justice never again grows on those fields.
Many of these lifetime appointees have little or no business being able to decide anything. The history of many, coming from various state and local benches, and their specious decisions from those courts, make appalling reading.
Their most important qualification is unswerving fealty, not to justice, but to the conservative cause. They're like sleeper cells, foreign agents who awaken when needed to roll back Constitutional protections for Americans who need them most, especially for those considered enemies of right-wing ideology.
Elections do matter.
JJG,
Those pols would simply take Groucho Marx's position on such things.
"I'll consult my lawyer. If he tells me to do it, I'll get a new lawyer."
Akhilleus: Good luck to us all when we set out to parse the Right wing brain.
Agreed there is more than one lobe at work there, so consistency is present only in its absence (think Rummy could have said that?). That's why I'm forced to find multiple explanations for what they say and do.
We keep hearing about the R's lack of a big tent. Au contraire, their moral, psychological and intellectual tent is capacious, indeed. No wonder we see occasional rents in its fabric. It includes those so blinded by undocumented and insupportable belief in God, in the moral rightness of unregulated capitalism, in the mythology of American exceptionalism, in the conviction that their freedom is absolutely dependent on the possession of a personal arsenal, in the innate inferiority of non-whites (and women) that they are wholly immune to scientific, economic or political fact. When it is uneducated, we call this group their base; in its more educated incarnation, as you say, it inhabits the conservative think tanks, where it creates a story line that the uneducated can and will be pleased to follow.
Then we have the puppet masters who pull the strings of the the ideologues. In pursuit of both more money and more power, these oligarchs brutally and cynically manipulate everything from the "facts" that make it into the news to to our elected representatives themselves. In a purported peoples' democracy that businesses and industry often writes their own regulations should be anathema; instead it is a common, essentially purchased, practice. What the manipulators "believe" doesn't really matter. The the purity of their motives (whatever purity test we apply) is independent of the results of their actions.
We know them their by their deeds. And whether those deeds are another military adventure that costs the taxpayers trillions of dollars (could the real motive behind Iraq have been to bankrupt and thereby deliberately weaken government?) or another racial dog whistle piercing the landscape, summoning the haters, they are negative and regressive, and the world is invariably the worse for them.
Maybe the best way to think about the Right's multi-lobed brain is that whatever it does possess, whatever its motives, it is defined by what it does not, the presence of another absence: a sense of humanity and common purpose.