Sunday, August 11, 2013

Posted With Comment: Rick "F-ck The State" Scott Is Gonna Try To Purge Voters AGAIN

When the Supreme Court killed off the enforcement provisions of the Voting Rights Act, I kinda knew this was coming:

Florida Gov. Rick Scott will resume the state’s purge of suspected non-U.S. citizens from the voter rolls, now that a Supreme Court decision striking down a key part of the Voting Rights Act has cleared the way...

From Reuters:

...Advocacy groups called the review of non-citizens a thinly veiled attempt to disqualify Hispanic and African-American voters, who tend to vote for Democratic candidates. A disproportionately large number of those identified in 2012 were either Hispanic or black, the groups said.
Last year, Florida officials said they had drawn up an initial list of 182,000 potential non-citizens. But that number was reduced to fewer than 200 after election officials acknowledged errors on the original list. (Personal NOTE: they still can't prove there was any large-scale wave of non-citizens actually voting.  I think they caught one Canadian trying to vote, that was it.  Not exactly an army of illegals from Mexico, is it).
In identifying potential non-citizens, Florida officials sent their information to county election supervisors who then mailed letters to voters requesting proof they were U.S. citizens. If no response was received, the voter was dropped from the rolls.The effort, which angered some county election supervisors (NOTE: I'm pretty sure some of them are still pissed), was the subject of lawsuits from five voter protection groups and at least two individual plaintiffs.
Howard Simon, executive director of the Florida chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, said he expected many county election supervisors to press the state to offer precise documentation that a voter may not be a U.S. citizen in any forthcoming review.
"If it will be a fairer process this time, it will be because the County Supervisors of Elections got burned last time and are more skeptical now," he said.

I've written about the need to make voting easier in our state (hell, our nation), above all by making sure EVERYONE gets the right to vote.  These voter purges do the exact opposite: they make it harder for people, especially the poor who can't afford photo IDs and tend to move often, making prolonged residency to establish a voting precinct an issue.  But then again, that's pretty much the only way Republicans have left themselves to be certain they can win any more elections.  As the demographics turn against them, as their open hostility to women's rights and minorities worsen, as the party is starting to lose more of their base to old age, the Republicans are pretty much stuck with "cheating" as their primary method.

For a Party that's obsessed with the idea that their platform of God, Guns, and Tax Cuts is "beloved by all true Americans", the Republicans do a shitty job of selling that platform to all actual Americans when the time comes and rely more on mudslinging and false advertising to win elections.  And now, denying hundreds of thousands if not millions of Americans their civic right to vote.


Presidential Character: Week Twenty-Seven, I Was Gonna Use "Taftastic" But Someone Else Already Invented The Word

Dammit, I hate it when other people beat me to the punch on being clever with words...

From James Monroe up to Teddy Roosevelt, I've been doing these Presidential character reviews operating blind: the person who came up with the idea, James David Barber, had only covered most of the 20th Century Presidents as well as the first four Presidents - Washington, Adams, Jefferson and Madison - as examples.  As a result, I've really only guessed - using my own interpretation of each President's actions and inactions - as to which guy followed which trait.  I'd like to think I'm correct, but with Professor Barber passed away it's not like I can forward my reviews for... um, review.

But from here on, I can refer entirely to Barber's work on the history and traits of William Howard Taft, and rely entirely on Barber's assertions that Taft was a Passive-Positive at heart.

By that I mean I can cheat and quote extensively from Barber's book Presidential Character (4th ed.), especially Chapter 7, pages 195 to 207.  ...what, I have to do my own summarizing still?!  Sigh. Fine...

Taft came into politics from by all accounts a loving boisterous family where his father worked as a lawyer and eventually served as judge: from this Taft got his love of people and love of law.  As a young man he dithered at a few jobs - court reporter, revenue collector, sharing a law office - but came into his own when at the age of 29 he secured a judgeship in Ohio.  A decent reputation as a jurist led to a federal career with the appellate courts, and all things looked good for Taft to work his way up to what had to be the job he coveted above all: a seat on the Supreme Court.

Except in 1900, when McKinley, needing someone to chair his oversight committee managing the newly acquired Philippines territory, put Taft in charge of a purely political operation.  Even though Taft had personally asked McKinley, a fellow Republican from Ohio, to consider him for the Court rather than this.

That Taft accepted is the first clue to his Passive-Positive nature: rather than turn down the offer, fearing it would hurt his chances elsewhere or at least his standing among the Republicans, Taft accepted.  His Compliant nature making itself known.

While Taft didn't run the commission for long, it bore some of his fingerprints: a focus on civil service reform, and a strong judiciary came out of the first few years that the commission worked.  He didn't run it for long because he quickly received the Governor-General's position to run the Philippines during what he viewed as a transition from colonial to self-rule.  His Pass-Pos skills of being well-liked served him well: he became popular with the Filipinos for his sincere efforts to fix what had become a corrupt system under Spanish rule, and he was popular back in the States for pacifying through sheer charm an annexed nation that had during the three years prior to his arrival been suffering a violent insurrection.

This is where a paradox seems to happen in Taft's biography: Roosevelt, liking the man on a personal level and respecting the work he'd done, offered Taft the big prize of filling an open seat on the Supreme Court.  Under normal circumstances, Taft would have jumped at the chance.  But he turned the offer down.  The best explanation the historians can come up with was that Taft didn't like to leave jobs unfinished: a stickler for the rules (of law, of common sense), he felt compelled to stay on in the Philippines because he knew the situation remained tenuous and didn't want to leave the mess to someone else (it didn't help that he was openly beloved as much as a Governor-General could be loved in occupied territory).

It's rare to note a Passive-Positive character showing a rigorous work ethic (any Actives) or focus to details (Active-Negative).  Then again, the charting alignment between the four traits is not static: there can be overlap of sorts between traits, where Taft may be a Pass-Pos but right along the border to an A-P or A-N.

But another thing: Taft accepted other posts from his good friend Roosevelt, such as becoming Secretary of War in 1904 as well as helping out with Roosevelt's election campaign that year.  Taft apparently took the Secretary job because it still allowed him some influence in handling the Philippines while moving him up the chain of command to where he could convince Roosevelt to grant him the Chief Justice job (by that point a mere Associate Justice's position would not do for Taft, still oddly ambitious for a Pass-Pos).  If that were true Taft misread the situation entirely, because when it came time and Roosevelt declined another term of office Taft suddenly found himself tabbed as the successor Presidential candidate in 1908.

It was his own damn fault.  Being a Passive-Positive at heart, it made him Compliant to the needs and opinions of those around him: and the one closest to him was Teddy Roosevelt, the most over-sized ego-driven Alpha personality our nation ever conceived.  Where Taft was big physically (from birth), Roosevelt was big in spirit and personality.  And where Roosevelt and Taft would agree on key points - a shared love of fairness and justice, Roosevelt's skill in working the legal system to his reformer's desires and Taft's unbending commitment to the law - it overwhelmed other points where Roosevelt and Taft could disagree, such as administration and effective governance.  Roosevelt merely saw a fellow progressive-minded Republican who shared with him a love of trust-busting, an empathy for the common people, and a desire to make the United States a major international force for GOODNESS AND JUSTICE (basically, it'd be like Roosevelt as Batman keen on putting Taft as Commissioner Gordon in a Bat-suit): for that alone he felt Taft could be trusted to serve as President and continue fighting the Good Fight.

But it was also Roosevelt's fault as well for not recognizing his friend Taft was Compliant and congenial at heart.  Once Roosevelt took his retirement off to places like Africa, it left a huge void in Taft's world when it came to role-models and advice-giving.  While Taft still carried on various trust-busting of various industries, he did so with a slowness and caution reflecting the more conservative elements of the pro-business Republican Party.  Taft still worked on an open-minded foreign and economic policy, but reacted to situations more than acted, and also relied on Cabinet members and a State Department that sometimes left him in the dark, such as the crisis along the Mexican border that Taft didn't know about until he met one-on-one with his ambassador while the Secretary of State was on vacation.

Taft's biggest weakness was a failure to play the political game: while he was well-liked personally, Taft just wasn't very good at either broadcasting his intentions (to give his allies an idea of what to do) or organizing political support around any issue.  After the Bully Pulpit years of Roosevelt, it left both Americans and elected officials cold and in the dark, hurting Taft's public standing.

When Roosevelt returned from his safari he found the situation not to his liking, and made a play for the Presidency for the 1912 election cycle.  Taft, caught between an angered friend, a diminished level of respect within his own party, and the judgment of history, made the decision to run for re-election against Roosevelt rather than step aside.  We can't fault Taft on this point: most Presidents in their first terms desire a shot at a second term to validate their success (the exceptions being the ones who promised to serve just the single term).  But it created the worst of both worlds: a divided party between two well-liked leaders.  When Taft won the nomination by being better at the rules than Teddy, his friend-turned-enemy took his ambitious A-P traits and formed his own Third Party platform, basically ensuring the Republicans would be split on Election Day and allow the Democratic candidate to win the White House.

Taft's post-Presidency years started off working at his alma mater Yale at the College of Law.  He notably railed against the 18th Amendment for Prohibition, predicting the adverse affect it would have on law enforcement and its' conflict with other Constitutional rights.  Taft eventually got the Chief Justice role he desired when the seat was available under the next Republican administration (1921).  By all accounts he served well as Chief Justice: he reformed the legal process, clearing up the docket by making SCOTUS more discretionary in choosing which cases to hear.  He also argued successfully for a separate Supreme Court building (the court up until then was serving in Congress' basement: Taft argued SCOTUS needed to be physically independent of the Legislative Branch), and it surprises me that nobody's gotten around to name the damn thing after him.

One other note: Taft is to date the last Unitarian President our nation has seen.  We've had three (four if you count Jefferson, but he's more Deist than anything), and if you ask me we need another one soon to help get the re-enforcement of the Separation of Church and State back in working shape...  but I digress.

Next Up: A Nixon Before We Really HAD Nixon In Office.

Wednesday, August 07, 2013

Presidential Character: Week Twenty-Six, The President As Superhero

"To me, the key to understanding the character is that Bruce Wayne is Teddy Roosevelt." - Christopher Nolan

In my review of Andrew Jackson, I despaired of the fact that while Jackson was an asshole, he was also a Badass which meant by American standards he was and will always be admired.  The problem is that a Badass isn't always what we consider Good or Lawful (character alignment!), a Badass can be Chaotic or Evil as well.

If Andrew Jackson was Badass Evil, we can at least take comfort that another President served as Badass Good: Theodore Roosevelt.


Did we mention he had asthma growing up? He did, and after he beat asthma to death, he ate asthma's raw flesh and ran 100 straight miles off the energy it gave him. - Cracked.com article on badass Presidents (guess who topped the list).

Roosevelt comes to this review with one of the more impressive resumes a President could have (maybe Garfield comes closest): state representative, cowboy, Wild West sheriff, entrepreneur, New York City Police Commissioner (not only is he the template for Batman, he's also the template for Commissioner Gordon), adventurer/explorer, author, historian, Assistant Secretary of the Navy, volunteer cavalryman (the Rough Riders), New York Governor, and then Vice President under McKinley.  This last bit needs explaining: nearly everything Roosevelt did was as a progressive-minded reformer, a True Believer in the exceptional potential of the United States.  An upper-class socialite who took noblesse oblige seriously.  He went after corruption at all levels in nearly every form: he went after injustice.  And he did it with nerves of steel, total determination, and a willingness to get the job done with his own hands if need be.  And it pissed the hell out of his fellow corrupt politicians...

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. - Theodore Roosevelt's "Man In The Arena" paragraph from his Citizenship in a Republic Speech, 1910.  This is Roosevelt basically daring every living soul to be badass.

Roosevelt became Vice President for McKinley's second term because enough political bosses in his own party - Republicans - were sick of his meddling while serving as New York's governor.  The reasoning was that the Veep's office was where political careers went to die: Roosevelt would have no true power there (save as tie-breaking vote in the Senate), and almost nobody who served as Vice President went on to do anything else as a career.  Only one machine boss was against it - Mark Hanna out of Ohio - who knew that while the Vice President was powerless, all it would take is something happening to McKinley to make "that goddamn cowboy" the most powerful man in the political arena.  It had, after all, happened before.  And in three out of the four times, it led to disaster for both the party and the nation.

While it was sad for McKinley when he was assassinated, Roosevelt becoming President proved a good thing for the nation.

"Why spoil the beauty of the thing with legality?" - attributed to Attorney General Philander Knox, reportedly after Roosevelt spent another lecture defending his actions over Panama's independence from Colombia, which helped secure the Panama Canal deal.

Every adjective to describe an Active-Positive President could apply to Theodore Roosevelt: confident, self-controlled, Adaptive, optimistic, creative, and enjoyed the use of power not for himself but for the benefit of others.  In another way to describe him: Roosevelt was the MOST ACTIVE President we've ever had.

He pushed a Progressive platform, seeking reforms across the board from the political to the business world to education to everything.  Trust-Buster: he went after J.P. Morgan's railroad interests, he went after the sugar monopoly, he went after Big Steel, he started after Standard Oil before he left office.  The Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act.  He put regulations in place to ensure public safety and health.  He backed the efforts to establish a constitutional amendment to establish a progressive-scaled income tax.  He pushed for natural conservation as the industrialization spreading westward that threatened to over-consume everything (preserving wildlife and the natural beauty of the nation were beneficial side-effects).

In foreign policy, he put the United States at the forefront of international politics.  He settled an international crisis with Venezuela vs. European powers.  He negotiated a peace treaty between Russia and Japan, becoming the first President to win the Nobel Peace Prize.  He threatened an invasion of Morocco over the Perdicaris Incident but made shrewd diplomatic efforts to defuse the crisis.  If there was any bellicosity during his administration, it was his getting involved in a Panama uprising against Colombia in order to get a Pacific-Atlantic canal finalized that would open up global shipping trade (and military naval routes, although navy ships soon got to be too big for the Panama Canal later on).

The entire nation seemed to hum with energy and vigor while he sat in office.  The SOB - and I mean that in a good, awe-inspiring way - was powered by Pure Awesome (and a ton of coffee: he was a heavy coffee drinker for the day, which helped popularize the habit across America).

Politically, he gave a face and personality to the reformers in the Republican ranks, quickly identified (and still to this day) as Progressives.  Previous "accidental" Presidents - Tyler, Fillmore, Johnson, Arthur - never had a chance to build up a power base or take control of a party that didn't want them: Roosevelt - through sheer force of personality, intelligence, and willpower - became the first succeeding President to win a Presidential term in his own right.

Roosevelt left office at the height of his power and tenure: of the Presidents to serve more than one term, his second round in office is remarkably free of scandal - all the scandals were in the business circles - and he could have easily run again for a third.  But he took the idea of two-terms seriously, even if one was just a half-term, and decided to move on, allowing a hand-picked friend to succeed him into the White House. When his friend (more on him later) proved more, well, timid in pursuing a Progressive agenda, Roosevelt went and formed his own political party - Progressive/Bull Moose - to win back the White House and resume his reformer's agenda.  Well, it didn't work out, but he did dare greatly...

After Roosevelt left the White House, he went on explorations across the globe.  He made one trip up the Amazon rainforest in search of a waterway known as the River of Doubt.  When he was done, it was re-named THE RIVER OF UNQUESTIONABLE CERTAINTY - quote generally attributed to everyone who read up on everything Roosevelt did and came away stunned that such a person existed in real life.  The river actually got renamed Roosevelt River.

Roosevelt had personal energy the likes of which we've rarely seen in other historical figures, and most likely never will again.  Of the great Presidents at the top of the list, Roosevelt was the most Badass (and we're talking a list that includes Washington and Lincoln, no slouches in the Badass department).

The Last Thing Death Sees Before a Brutal Ass-Kicking:

It's the stunned look on Death's face that sells it.

Next Week: All In All He'd Much Preferred The Judgeship.

Tuesday, August 06, 2013

In Local News: City Probably Throwing Millions at Future Stadium While School, Library and Transit Needs Suffer

For all the railing about Miami Dade closing libraries - please keep up interest in the story folks, keep the pressure on the county commission to save their libraries! - the thing that bugs me most is how screwed the priorities are for our communities.

Rather than taking care of top needs like our schools (how many are outdated and falling apart?), our highways and bridges (how many bridges are falling apart?!), the lack of public rail transit in major Florida cities (we've got some of the largest metros in the nation without a city or metro-wide light rail alternative to road congestion)... our cities offer up millions in sweetheart deals to pro sport franchises owned by billionaires who ought to be smart enough to figure out financing their own stadiums without pilfering the public trust.

Look, I love sports: Go Bucs!  Go Rays!  Go Bolts!  Go Gators and Go Bulls!  But I cringe at the foolishness and the backroom extortion that's going on by these owners who threaten and bully their way to get public financed stadiums and get to pocket most if not all of the proceeds from buildings that end up empty 50 to 80 percent of the year.  And worse, empty during games.

That said, as a Tampa Bay resident I gotta note this:

With St. Petersburg Mayor Bill Foster saying he's willing to let the Tampa Bay Rays look at potential stadium sites in Hillsborough County, officials here want to move quickly."It is time we broke the stalemate," Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn said in a statement Tuesday. "I look forward to the opportunity for the Rays to explore all options."Hillsborough County Commission Chairman Ken Hagan said he plans to propose creating a task force of elected officials and business leaders to work with the Rays on exploring options......Both Buckhorn and Hagan have said they expect the lion's share of stadium funding to come from the team and private sector.But while ruling out the kind of general sales tax increase that paid for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers' stadium in the 1990s, both also have entertained using other forms of public participation for a stadium.For example, City Hall estimates it could contribute about $100 million to a downtown stadium project after 2015 when the bonds on the Tampa Convention Center are paid off.Buckhorn does not see the money as a tax increase since it is already being collected inside the city's downtown community redevelopment area. The revenue is generated as downtown property values rise, and the city must spend it on capital improvements and infrastructure to improve the CRA.Still, the CRA, which the county would have to agree to renew in coming years, is not expected to generate enough revenue to pay for a stadium and infrastructure."There's going to have to be some sort of investment from other sources as well," county Chief Financial Officer Bonnie Wise said.To close that gap, Tampa land-use lawyer Ron Weaver said there are a couple of things to keep in mind. Since 1990, 26 Major League Baseball teams have gotten new stadiums, and the public's share of the cost has averaged 59 percent, according to his research.A "humble" stadium might cost $492 million, while one more in keeping with what's been built elsewhere could cost $608 million, said Weaver, who has studied and been involved in such projects for 20 or more years...
I am personally convinced we're gonna see a sweetheart stadium deal for the Rays... that the public is gonna foot the bill for more than that 59 percent, even in our continued economic doldrums.
On the bright side, I doubt the Rays future stadium will be as ridiculously gaudy as the Marlins' boondoggle.  And I have slightly higher faith in the Rays' owner Sternberg than in the Marlins owner Loria, arguably the worst in baseball history... well maybe other than Comiskey...

Sunday, August 04, 2013

Breaking: 12th Doctor Revealed

It's Eddie Deezen.
YES!

...Wait, I'm being handed an updated notice, plus the editor is wielding a 2x4 extremely close to my noggin.

The 12th Doctor is Peter Capaldi.


...color me underwhelmed.

Evanna Lynch would have been so much mind-blowingly cooler...

Saturday, August 03, 2013

Worst Congress Ever Goes On Recess... Which Means They'll Come Back Fully Rested And Do Even Worse

Posted without comment.  The link includes a video (gonna try to embed it).

The 113th Congress left Friday for a five-week recess.  Through the first eight months of 2013, the House has passed just 22 bills that have been sent to President Obama. That’s the smallest number of passed bills since people began keeping track of these things.

Actually, I lied.  Here's a comment: IT WOULD BE NICE IF PEOPLE F-CKING WOKE UP TO THE FACT THEIR GOP INCUMBENTS RUNNING THE HOUSE ARE A BUNCH OF LAZY INCOMPETENT ASSES WHO DON'T DESERVE RE-ELECTION.

Gasp.  Wheeze.  Sorry for the CAPS LOCK, but had to be done.

You don't have to vote Democrat, just don't vote Republican.  You're better off voting for some unemployed bum panhandling on the street corner because, you know, that bum might actually be grateful for the job offer and show up to f-cking work.

Thursday, August 01, 2013

We Were Taught In School Never To Cheat On Our Grades

This was a big to-do in the state of Florida this week: Education Commissioner Tony "Not the Singer" Bennett, brought in from Indiana where he got voted out of office by the by, resigned his state post when evidence got out that he forced his Indiana office to change a privately-run charter school's evaluation grade from a C to an A...

Coming to Florida from the Hoosier State in January, Bennett had faced mounting calls for his resignation in the wake of revelations, first reported by the Associated Press, that he interceded on behalf of an Indiana charter school run by a prominent Republican Party donor. 
On Thursday, he called those reports "malicious and unfounded" but said, "I don't think the children of Florida, the state Board of Education or our governor deserve me constantly having to deal with this while commissioner."
He has recommended that Pam Stewart, who was interim commissioner before he took over, lead the department again. The Board of Education set an emergency 11 a.m. Friday meeting to appoint an interim.
His resignation is a major setback for Gov. Rick Scott and state education leaders, who are working to overhaul Florida's system of school accountability and assessment in compliance with the national Common Core standards...
Bennett, a nationally recognized education reformer (personal note: HA!), came on board after losing re-election in Indiana.  His tenure encountered some early bumps in June, when superintendents leaned on him to institute a "safety net" to prevent school grades from dropping dramatically. Bennett had some misgivings, but ultimately conceded.
The exercise sparked a statewide dialogue about the validity of school grades, which dipped despite the padding. One member of the state Board of Education questioned if the state had to release grades at all.  
Amid the controversy, scathing emails published by the Associated Press showed that Bennett had made changes to the school grading formula in Indiana after learning that a high-profile charter school would be awarded a "C" grade.
"They need to understand that anything less than an A for Christel House compromises all of our accountability work," Bennett wrote in one email. The formula was tweaked and Christel House received an "A." 
Bennett has denied that the decision was motivated by politics. He said he ordered the change because Christel House lost points for not having a graduation rate, despite only enrolling students from kindergarten through 10th grade. A dozen other schools benefited from the change, he said. "It is absurd that anyone would believe that I would change the grade of school based on a political donor, or based on trying to hide a school from accountability," Bennett told reporters Tuesday. "It's fictitious, at best, and it's totally unfounded. What we did do is make sure we were getting a transparent policy right for Indiana schools and Indiana schoolchildren."
Bennett is a longtime ally of former Gov. Jeb Bush, whose Foundation for Florida's Future has driven education policy in Florida for the past decade. He is active in Bush's coalition of state education leaders, Chiefs for Change. Bush could not be reached for immediate comment.
Bennett said Thursday, "I end my tenure with my head held very high, looking ahead, knowing that great things are ahead for this state under the leadership of Gov. Scott and the state Board of Education."
His departure could prove problematic for the already unstable education department...

The thing bugging the hell out of me is how Bennett and these other "free-market reformers" toss around the word Accountability when the evidence has been there that these Privatization salespeople don't care what accountability really means.  It's like they borrowed the word but refused to read the dictionary entry on it.

The whole point of a grading system is to evaluate which schools are performing or under-performing: if the grades can be tweaked or altered on a whim, what's the point?  There's no standards in that environment.  The schools getting the inflated grades get off the hook, and can go on muddling through rather than making the improvements needed to get that higher evaluation.

That Bennett went out of his way to protect a charter school adds insult to injury.  Charter schools have been pimped by so-called "reformers" as an antidote or solution to the failing school systems across the nation (rather than the subtle solutions of, oh, paying taxes to build more/better schools and hire more quality teachers).  Problem is, those charter schools operate outside of a lot of supervision and as a result those charters are taking in a lot of public (and private) funding, failing to produce projected results, and leaving a ton of needy kids under-educated and worse off than before.  There's been scandal after scandal after scandal: Bennett's is merely the latest.

And to any of the families in Indiana who sent their kids to that Christel House charter school on the idea that charter school was "A" caliber education?  You've got every right to sue that school for fraud.

Sunday, July 28, 2013

Presidential Character: Week Twenty-Five, The Forgotten Man At The Turn Of the Century

We remember the assassinated Presidents.  We remember Lincoln as the Great Emancipator, the martyr, a peaceful man who had the misfortune of leading our nation through its darkest and bloodiest hour.  We remember Garfield, dying for a crazed man's obsession with spoils, becoming the cause for civil service reform fixing decades of prolonged corrupt practices.  We remember Kennedy, the supposed promise of Camelot, but that can be mourned for another week, another review.

Who mourns for William McKinley?

Through no fault of his own, McKinley is one of the forgotten Presidents, lumped in with the meager One-Termers of the 19th Century who mattered little (or made things worse).  The more dedicated historians will know him, will debate the effects of his administration, but history itself had passed the man by.  Mostly because the man who followed him into office was the most active, most unstoppable, most reform-minded, most BADASS President we've ever had.  But partly because McKinley died for no damn good reason.

The 19th Century was awash across Europe and the Western hemisphere with various political ideological movements, unleashed from the tumult of the French Revolution, the fall of various monarchies, and the merging of divided states into nations (Italy, Greece, Prussia/Germany).  You had the democrats, the monarchists, the republicans, the communists, and the anarchists.  Of these, the anarchists gave birth to a violent strain of protests: a minority among the anarchist movements who sought to overthrow/end organized governments by any means, usually the assassination of key political figures.  Or worse, public figures with no political power but whose murders would attract attention.

The man who assassinated McKinley didn't do so because of any action McKinley took.  The assassin wasn't protesting McKinley's China policy, or the violence of the Spanish-American War, or the spread of American imperialism.  The assassin wanted to shoot somebody to prove his "heroic" deed of anarchism.  All it really did was kill two men, the victim and the shooter.  And the American government did not collapse: anarchism did not prosper.  And I ain't naming the SOB because we really shouldn't name these assassins who were in for their egos.  I've already written more about what this SOB did instead of writing what McKinley did, and what Character McKinley had as President.

McKinley served as President at a key change in the nation's history: from global backwater of the thirteen colonies to a major player on the international stage.  Elected into office at a time of economic depression, he worked with Congress more often than not to pass legislation stabilizing the economy (it helped the gold standard cause at the time when gold was discovered in the Alaska Yukon, improving the U.S.'s holdings).

The biggest aspect of McKinley's administration was the Spanish-American War, ostensibly started over the nation's outrage - stirred up by the yellow journalism of the day (just think of Fox Not-News today, but with better writers) - over Spain's mistreatment of Cubans during that colony's then-ongoing uprising.  While the Monroe Doctrine said the United States wouldn't directly interfere with any European nation's then-control of existing American hemisphere colonies, it was hard for the nation to ignore what was going on 90 miles off-shore.  Claiming the U.S. had interests in Cuba to keep safe - mostly businesses and personal property - McKinley sent a representative naval ship - the Maine - as a symbol of U.S. concerns.

And then the Maine blew up.

Current technology makes the case that the explosion was internal, but at the time enough evidence pointed to a mine or external attack.  Claiming the Spanish forces in Cuba had attacked a U.S. vessel, proponents for war had their casus belli, and thus war was beginning.

The war turned into one of the biggest curb stomp battles of the ages.  Building on 20-plus years of upgrades to the U.S. Navy, McKinley benefited from two naval victories in Cuba and the Philippines over an outmatched outgunned Spanish force.  The ground war in Cuba was messier but U.S. forces allied with Cuban uprisers managed to drive Spanish forces into a siege at Santiago.

How McKinley managed the war effort helps describe his character: while arming for war he kept diplomatic channels working; the scope of the war effort stayed focused on Spain even as the nascent German government was sending their fleet in to disrupt things; when it became clear that American forces in Cuba were dying not from the war but from illness - yellow fever - McKinley had the majority of men returned to the states for medical treatment rather than keep them there as a show of force (the naval victories had made the need for ground forces unnecessary).

In terms of the war results, McKinley's legacy is controversial at the least.  While Cuban independence was assured, the U.S. still annexed Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippines from Spain (on a side note, we also finished our takeover of Hawaii as well during his tenure).  It certainly put the United States on the global stage: it also marked the true beginning of American imperialism, creating a debate between Isolationists and Interventionists for the next 100 years (all the way up to today).  The handling of the Philippines itself - especially the start of another uprising that turned into a brutal suppression - was one of the biggest issues McKinley faced as he entered his second term of office, having handily won re-election due to an improved economy and victorious end to the war.  His final speech in Buffalo focused on tariffs and treaties, using their international prestige to improve the American economy through global trade.

If you bought into the legends of McKinley being a puppet of the machine politicians like Hanna, you'd think McKinley was a Passive-Positive.  He certainly leaned towards the temperament of being liked and socializing, and on some issues didn't so much lead the discussion but made his voice known.  However, a more thorough review of McKinley's administration shows someone who was hands-on, active in foreign policy resolutions and debates, active with Congress in passing legislation, open-eyed about the Cuban crisis and resulting conflict, willing to dismiss his friends and allies from office if they proved unfit or unable to the tasks at hand (on a side note, McKinley was one of the few Presidents on good terms with his Vice Presidents, especially the one serving his first term, Garrett Hobart.  Hobart was the one who helped manage the Cabinet and made sure the resignation of Secretary of War Algar went smoothly.  If Hobart hadn't died in office, he could have been the Veep for the Second Term... and what a huge twist in American history that would have been...).  These are the markings of an Active-Positive President: engaged, dealing, amicable to factions within (and without) his party but not beholden to one...

McKinley also set a legacy of party leadership for the early half of the 20th Century: every major player in the Republican Party well into the 1930s - including the guy who overshadows him - had ties to McKinley and was influenced in some degree by the tenor of his administration.  The impact of a Presidency is how it affects the administrations that follow: Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, Polk, Lincoln... McKinley could have made this list.

Whether or not McKinley was a great President - he lucked out with the Yukon Gold Rush resolving the gold standard issue for another day, his empire building of taking the Philippines and Hawaii had serious repercussions for American foreign and domestic policy for most of the 20th Century, and had he lived his responses could have tainted his legacy - remains debatable, and won't be resolved here or any time soon.  But he deserves better recognition in the history books: it's just, well, the next guy really takes all the attention...

Next Up: the Anti-Jackson.  The Good Badass Our Nation Deserves.

Tuesday, July 23, 2013

Slightly Off-Topic: Getting Published in Anthology

Just wanted to note that within the last 48 hours, the editors of the Strangely Funny humor-horror anthology got their publication up on the ebook markets for Amazon.com and Smashwords!


And just to explain why I'm so keen about this getting out there on the market... they accepted and published my story submission "I Must Be Your First."

(insert Snoopy dance here)

I've been mentioning it a lot on my writing/librarian blog but I'm not sure if the traffic I get here crosses over to there... so... CROSS-POSTING!

Also, YES!

It feels great to have a story published by someone other than yourself.  :sheepish grin:


Sunday, July 21, 2013

Presidential Character: Week Twenty-Four, And We're Back

It's Grover Cleveland 2: THE QUICKENING!

...what, were you expecting "Electric Boogaloo"?

As mentioned the first time around, Cleveland is the rare President who had two separate terms.  Technically it's the same guy, but historians have it that he's 22nd AND 24th, so the two terms have to be viewed separate as well.

There's not much to say about a President I've already labeled as an Active-Negative.  The thing about A-N types is that they tend to be stubborn, Uncompromising, respectably consistent.  Cleveland the Second Term would be expected to act pretty much the same way that the First Term did.  The problem for Cleveland was that while A-Ns do not change, the moods and trends of their times do.  And a lot was different four years after Cleveland had left the White House.

The administration stuck between Clevelands - Harrison's - was a period of economic mismanagement.  The GOP-led government had pursued a high-tariff, high-spending budget plan with little awareness of how the private sector would be altered.  The high tariffs encouraged businesses to raise prices, which hurt a lot of the poor and especially a lot of farmers in the South and West.  The Republicans tried a bi-metal money policy (Silver-to-Gold) that hurt the nation's gold reserves (this was one of the reasons why getting away from the Gold Standard was a key milestone of 20th century economics).

The reaction from the farmers and low-income Americans was to form one of the more successful third-party groups in the nation's history - The People's Party AKA the Populists - which divided the Republicans during the 1892 election well enough for Cleveland to win a clear electoral victory.  However, that victory turned rotten when the Panic of 1893 rolled around, caused by over-speculation in the railroad industry and by a run on banks tied into the Silver-to-Gold (16 to 1 rate, which cheapened the value of gold and made it too easy to cash in) policy of the day.  Despite Cleveland's efforts, the nation slid into a prolonged economic depression that lasted about 4-5 years.

Cleveland also had to cope with labor unrest, the most organized the nation had yet seen.  Worker unions had spread as the nation's industry had boomed, and the economic malaise hit a lot of workers hard, leading to strikes and the occasional riot.  When the Pullman Strike happened, it severely crimped our nation's railroads to where even the government was affected, which drove Cleveland to calling out the troops to suppress the strike.

The Panic dominated his entire tenure, and as an A-N President most of his options were limited to "stay calm" and "stick to the gold standard," which in the long-term are practical stances but in the short-term were very painful.  Coping with a party that didn't like him much, Cleveland could only stand by and watch his silverite opponents take control of the Democratic Party, merge it with the Populists, and fail in the 1896 elections.

In terms of legacy, Cleveland's first term was of more importance and effectiveness than his second.  While his administrations are not remembered fondly, his personal tenure - viewing Public Office as a Public Trust - remains a better monument.  If only he had been a more Active-Positive, he could have found solutions to the economic woes that ended his second term.

Next Week: Into the 20th Century With Our Greatest President E... Wait, He's Only Vice-President For This Entry...  Patience, My Progressive Allies, Patience...

Friday, July 19, 2013

Death By A Thousand Cuts, Well Not a Death But a Serious Wound To Public Service

Normally I've got another blog to talk about librarianship.  But this topic is more about politics than libraries, and besides this is the blog where I use curse words more often and after hearing this I'm in dire need of dropping some F-bombs:

Miami-Dade County commission just voted to NOT raise the county millage rates in order to keep their county libraries and firefighter stations properly funded.  They'll be closing out 22 out of 49 branches as well as a small number of fire stations, and cutting 251 employees from the library system while cutting back on everyone else's hours.

The cuts are the result of a $15 million library budget shortfall. (The system had been using leftover funds to bridge the gap for the past two years.) Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez recommended the budget which necessitates the cuts, as well as which cuts should be made, to the county commissioners, who approved his recommendation on July 16.Once the commissioners set the preliminary rate, it can be lowered but not raised. Throughout August, there will be six town hall meetings to explain the proposed budget to residents and receive feedback. On September 10 and September 16, there will be budget hearings. The commissioners will vote on the budget at the September 16 meeting, and it will take effect on October 1.But though the millage can’t be raised, Raymond Santiago, director of the Miami-Dade Public Library System and LJ’s 2003 Librarian of the Year, hasn’t given up on mitigating the worst of the impacts. He called the cuts presented to the commissioners and detailed above “a worst-case scenario,” and “probably the most drastic of all the options.”“Before the final budget vote in September,” Santiago continued, “the administration will continue to investigate options to reduce these negative impacts” through different adjustments to the library budget. “We’re looking at everything right now,” he said.

This county commission are pretty much the jokers who voted HOW MUCH in order to build a bullshit overpriced gaudy and unfilled baseball stadium for a morally bankrupt killer of baseball franchises - I dare you to say Loria's name in public anywhere in Canada, I dares ya - who as a businessman could have figured out a hundred other ways to raise his own goddamn money to build his own goddamn park.

The city/county mayor Gimenez is quoted in the article as saying "people have said that the age of the library is probably ending." I call bullshit on that, mayor (the Library Journal article I've linked to shows stats that library use has gone UP).  Which people?  'Cause there's a lot of people where I am - and where I've been at other public libraries as well - that come in to use libraries all the time.  People are still checking out books.  They're coming in to use library computers because libraries are now telecommunication hubs and workplaces.  I've got people coming in all the time needing help with logging into their unemployment benefits and online job hunts and typing up their resumes and downloading their medical records to get their HMOs to approve coverage.  Anybody who thinks libraries are ending hasn't been paying attention.

And speaking of all those people who come in to use libraries.  WHERE THE HELL DO THEY GO NOW?  There may be half of the county libraries still open, but they'll now be packed solid with people desperate to get onto computers - not everyone's got a laptop at home, Mister Mayor - and unable to find worktables to get any projects done.  I did the math of 49 branches to 2.5 million county residents, I got it roughly 52,000 people per branch.  With 22 branches closing, that 1.4 million residents suddenly put out without library access.  It will take them that much more effort to get to a library that's further away - not everyone's got a car, Mister Mayor, and buses get expensive too - and they'll be competing with that many more people to get onto a computer.

I worked in Broward County Libraries between 1994 to 2003.  We're right next door, county-wise, and we had a lot of traffic and usage of our resources, a lot of checkouts and a lot of people waiting their turn to use computers.  I can imagine Dade's libraries were just as busy.  I was there when we had a county referendum to vote for a bond issue in 1998, which involved a small tax increase.  We were expecting a close vote.  We got 72 percent approval, an unbelievable result, and it was because people in Broward liked their community libraries and wanted us to improve our services to them.

What the county commission did this week was unforgivable, unwarranted.  If they were having problems raising funds for libraries and fire stations, they should have done what Broward County did back in 1998: let the people vote on it.  Instead, they're cutting services rather than dare the ire of... lord, there's no sign of anyone even yelling at them to cut spending or even yelling about the taxes going up too high.  Why the hell did they do this?!

Here's a solution: sue Loria and Major League Baseball for that $500 million back for an unfilled baseball stadium.  Maybe when he's on the hook for it, Loria might actually spend his own money and field a fucking team in order to fill his goddamned empty seats.  That $500 million could easily pay for the county libraries, the county fire stations, the county police, and about twenty other social services a large metro like Miami have need for.  It's a far better solution than closing half of everything and forcing a ton of low-income families and retirees to suffer.

GOD.  Our political priorities are screwed, aren't they?  Our cities and counties and states and federal government are giving out millions to a handful of men who already have millions while the rest of us have to fight for table scraps.  At what point do we stop this bullshit?

In the meantime, call the Miami Dade County Commission's office (phone 305-375-4696).  Let them know that cutting back on library and firefighter services is a bad f-cking idea (don't say "fuck", but be very stern and concerned sounding) and if you're a county resident remind them that you can very easily vote them out like the idiots they are if they don't straighten up and do right by the citizenry.

Monday, July 15, 2013

What Happened To Trayvon Was Not a Flaw, It Was a Feature

Referring to what Mr. Coates had to say on the matter:

In trying to assess the killing of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman, two seemingly conflicting truths emerge for me. The first is that based on the case presented by the state, and based on Florida law, George Zimmerman should not have been convicted of second degree murder or manslaughter. The second is that the killing of Trayvon Martin is a profound injustice... The injustice inherent in the killing of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman was not authored by a jury given a weak case. The jury's performance may be the least disturbing aspect of this entire affair. The injustice was authored by a country which has taken as its policy, for the lionshare of its history, to erect a pariah class. The killing of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman is not an error in programming. It is the correct result of forces we set in motion years ago and have done very little to arrest.One need only look the criminalization of Martin across the country. Perhaps you have been lucky enough to not receive the above "portrait" of Trayvon Martin and its accompanying text. The portrait is actually of a 32-year old man. Perhaps you were lucky enough to not see the Trayvon Martin imagery used for target practice (by law enforcement, no less.) Perhaps you did not see the iPhone games. Or maybe you missed the theory presently being floated by Zimmerman's family that Martin was a gun-runner and drug-dealer in training, that texts and tweets he sent mark him as a criminal in waiting. Or the theory floated that the mere donning of a hoodie marks you a thug, leaving one wondering why this guy is a criminal and this one is not.We have spent much of this year outlining the ways in which American policy has placed black people outside of the law. We are now being told that after having pursued such policies for 200 years, after codifying violence in slavery, after a people conceived in mass rape, after permitting the disenfranchisement of black people through violence, after Draft riotsafter white-lines, white leagues, andred shirts, after terrorism, after standing aside for the better reduction ofRosewood and the improvement of Tulsa, after the coup d'etat in Wilmington, after Airport Homes and Cicero, after Ossian Sweet, after Arthur Lee McDuffie, after Anthony BaezAmadou Diallo and Eleanor Bumpers, after Kathryn Johnston and the Danziger Bridge, that there are no ill effects, that we are pure, that we are just, that we are clean. Our sense of self is incredible. We believe ourselves to have inherited all of Jefferson's love of freedom, but none of his affection for white supremacy...

An observer from Slate about the wackiness of Florida, and how the legal system in Florida isn't so much as wacky as it is screwed:

It doesn't help that the same prosecutor who lost the Zimmerman case recently won a conviction against Marissa Alexander, a black woman who fired a warning shot to chase off her abusive ex-husband, hurting no one. She was sentenced to 20 years in prison for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. Twenty years for a warning shot against a known abuser versus no time at all for killing an unarmed teenager leaves you scratching your head and wondering if justice is not just blind but also insane...I spent four years covering criminal courts in Florida. I covered every kind of case, from misdemeanors to murder. One thing I learned is that you can never predict what a jury might do once it’s locked away to deliberate. I covered one trial where the defendant was accused of bigamy, and his defense was: Sorry, I forgot I was married already. He walked...
Prosecutors around the state boast of their high conviction rates, but those stellar records tend to be built primarily on successful plea deals, not trials. And frankly, some of their trial successes turn out to be the result of flimsy or faulty evidence—Florida leads the nation in the number of death row inmates who were subsequently exonerated...People who work in the court system can blame the legislature for the way our laws are worded. For instance, Florida's “Stand Your Ground” law was based on a distortion of a single anecdote, and it has subsequently allowed drug dealers to avoid murder charges and gang members to walk free... 
We've got a serious problem with our legal system.  We've had a serious problem for decades, and we're still not addressing the issues of fairness or justice.  And it's not just the racial animus of the legal system, it's the aggressiveness of a criminal defense system that can go out of its' way to "blame the victim" like the way Zimmerman's lawyers went after Trayvon - what else is "Stand Your Ground" but a calculated method of blaming the guy you killed "oh if only he didn't force me to pack a gun and blow his heart out his chest" - not just for murder cases but also rape cases - a lot of rape victims don't even pursue legal recourse out of fear they'll be slut-shamed at trial.

Balancing the right of a defendant to a fair trial ought to be balanced by the right of the victim to gain (or regain) some semblance of justice for the crime that took place.  

Sunday, July 14, 2013

This Is What Fear And a Gun Creates: Trayvon Martin Is Dead.

Trayvon Martin's intent: walk to a store and back for a bag of Skittles and a bottle of tea. George Zimmerman's intent: follow a black kid walking through a neighborhood while carrying his gun. Confrontation ensues. Zimmerman shoots Martin. 
Zimmerman gets acquitted because of "reasonable doubt". Trayvon Martin is dead.
Try to remember this: Trayvon Martin had a bag of Skittles and a bottle of tea. Martin was not committing any crime. He was walking home through his neighborhood. Zimmerman still chases after him. And Zimmerman shoots him dead.
As a teenager I spent a lot of time biking and walking through my neighborhood, but I never had some freaked-out adult chasing after me with a gun fearing for his life. Maybe because, gee I dunno, I was white. Who's to say? Certainly not Trayvon Martin. Because he's dead now.
It is now legal in Florida, and pretty much the rest of the nation, for terrified angry white guys to shoot young black kids walking through neighborhoods.
This is not justice.


Saturday, July 13, 2013

Great: the House GOP Is Now Sadistic As Well As Stupid

This is one of those moments where you wanna break out a camera and document the atrocity for the sake of preserving history.

The House Republicans just two days ago passed a version of the 5-year farm bill (it's consistent and important enough to have its own Wiki page) that doled out the billions of dollars as expected to the agribusiness industry... and didn't show one red cent for food stamps to poor families.

In our political system, a payout system of subsidies to farmers (in truth, to massive corporations) wouldn't survive on its own as its supporters would be few (mostly rural, mostly corporate forces in agribusiness) because those subsidies distort the market.  In our political system where any system of welfare to the poor (such as a food stamps program) is viewed by conservatives as Dreaded Socialism, food stamps wouldn't survive on its own either.  So for the sake of political comity of getting things done, subsidies and food stamps tended to get bound together into an omnibus farm bill in order to secure enough support from conservatives and liberals.

Problem is, our current political system is not a sane political system.  The Far Right are in control of the House, and the Far Right are so opposed to any financial aid to the poor that they couldn't even pass a farm bill with food stamps in it back in June, making the House look like it's being run by idiots.  It threatened to create a situation where milk prices would skyrocket, for one thing.  And it just looked bad: the Senate was able to pass their version of the farm bill with some bipartisan effort.

So, here we are in July one month later, the House still needing to pass any farm bill at all... and the House GOP decided to vote for a version that simply didn't fund any food stamps at all.  At least the June version was massive cuts to funding: this one full-out killed it.

Now the deal with legislation is that it has to pass both houses of Congress, which means the House of Representatives has to match the Senate: there's usually a committee process that hammers out a compromise version that both sides re-vote on for final signature.  Given the disparity of versions, the Senate has a say on the farm bill and there is absolute certainty the Democrat-led Senate will refuse to accept this from the House.  So there's little threat of food stamps being completely eliminated here.  The outrage by the public would be huge if the Senate caved on this: we would finally get some rioting in the streets to match up with Egypt and Turkey.

But what does it say to the public already about the House Republicans, that they would intentionally vote to starve out poor families like this?  And this IS about poor families across the whole nation.  The Far Right already has this disdain against the growing number of people on food stamps, ignoring the fact that we're in a goddamn recession so of course we've got more people in dire need to feed their kids.  But now this disdain is public and fully on-record: it's not just the punditry foaming at the mouth on the Sunday talk shows, the elected Republicans are voting into law bills that are against helping out the poor (and not just the poor minorities: enrollment for food stamps is 36 percent White families, compare 22 percent Black and 10 percent Latino (where the remaining percentages go, most likely into other ethnicities like Asian, Native American and Pacific Islander).

While the "liberal" punditry like Jonathan Chait is going ballistic about it:

...There’s some policy rationale for this. Some of the farm subsidies drive up the price of food, making it harder for poor people to buy the food and thus making it more necessary to subsidize them. But the main rationale for joining food stamps is political. It gets urban liberals to vote for farm subsidies that hurt their constituents, and it gets rural conservatives to tolerate food stamps that they’d otherwise oppose. And since advocates of both farm subsidies and food stamps fear losing their program more than anything else, they strongly endorse keeping them together.
The coalition between the two has come undone in recent weeks. Why? Because under President Obama, conservatives have gone from not caring much about food stamps to detesting food stamps as the emblem of Obama’s Chicago-style urban socialist welfare dependency administration. Food stamp spending has increased, not because Obama is handing them out like candy but because the number of poor, hungry people has dramatically increased since the Great Recession...
...Now, some House Republicans would like to spend less on farm subsidies, but they’re willing to maintain the status quo. They’re not willing to maintain the status quo on food stamps. Indeed, the incredible position of many conservatives is that the government should be handing out money to people because they run a farm, but should not hand out money to people who happen to be poor...
It’s no longer novel that conservative Republicans have positioned themselves to Obama’s left on domestic spending that benefits their own constituencies. We have seen three years of Republicans attacking Obama for robbing Grandma’s Medicare. But at least Medicare is a justifiable program. The existence of farm subsidies is insane, and the fact that a party that hates government so much it engages in a continuous guerrilla war of shutdowns, manufactured currency crises, and outright sabotage can’t eliminate it may be the most telling indicator of the GOP’s venality. They only hate necessary government spending. Totally unjustifiable spending is fine with them.
There's the established "conservative" punditry like Ross Douthat wondering just what the hell is going on:
...But without a vision of the common good, a party is basically just a faction, seeking only the interests of its constituents, with no sense of its responsibilities to the country as a whole. And the Obama-era Republican Party’s worst tendency has been toward just this sort of factionalism: Not an ideological extremism, exactly, but rather a vision of government that you might call “small government for thee, but not for me,” in which conservatism is just constituent services for the most reliable Republican groups and voters.
This is what produced the party’s unfortunate Mediscare tactics during the 2009 health care debate, and it’s what produced yesterday’s egregious farm bill vote. It should go without saying that America’s agriculture policy has always been a terrible, stupid, counterproductive exercise in self-dealing cronyism. But when House Republicans severed the traditional connection, arbitrary but politically effective, between farm subsidies and food stamps, it briefly seemed like they were looking for an opportunity to put libertarian populist principle into practice, by separating both outlays in order to trim or reform both separately. But no — instead they were just making it easier for the party’s congressmen to vote for a bloated, awful big government program that benefits mostly-Republican states and interest groups, knowing that they weren’t also voting for something that pays out to the (mostly-Democratic) poor as well.
This is egregious whatever you think of the food stamp program, and it’s indicative of why the endless, often-esoteric debates about the Republican future actually matter to our politics. Practically any conception of the common good, libertarian or communitarian or anywhere in between, would produce better policy than a factionally-driven approach of further subsidizing the rich while cutting programs for the poor. The compassionate-conservative G.O.P. of George W. Bush combined various forms of corporate welfare with expanded spending on social programs, which was obviously deeply problematic in various ways … but not as absurd and self-dealing as only doing welfare for the rich...
Reasonable people can disagree, in other words, about what kind of conservatism would best serve the common good. But everyone should agree that any alternative would be preferable to a Republican Party that doesn’t seem to think about the common good at all.

To me, this is just one more bit of evidence of the GOP House's utter incompetence: that they couldn't even pass a no-brainer bill like a farm bill without shooting themselves in the collective foot.  Their stance against food stamps may play well on the wingnut blogs but it's not going to play well over the kitchen tables at a lot of voters' homes.

Consider Machiavelli's question about whether it is better to be loved or feared... the real trick was to avoid being hated, and a political party or elected official intentionally going out of his/her way to inflict pain on a lot of people - on a lot of families - all at once is a very good way to become hated.

Public Puts the Blame On Where The Problem Is: Congress

If you're gonna blame the gridlock in our nation on someone, you better blame the right suspect(s).  The recent polling from Quinnipiac suggests that a slim majority of Americans are figuring it out:

According to the latest survey from Quinnipiac University, 51 percent of voters believe gridlock is mainly a result of the congressional GOP's determination to block any of Obama's initiatives. A mere 35 percent blamed gridlock on Obama's lack of "personal skills to convince leaders of Congress to work together." Obama has drawn blame from both Republicans and the press for purportedly being too isolated and unwilling to perform the type of cajoling necessary to making a deal in Washington...

I wouldn't say 35 percent is "mere", but at least 51 percent can tell where the gridlock is really happening.  After all, Congress is where the legislation is supposed to come from.

And this is happening despite the Republicans' best effort to lay the blame on Obama (or on Obamacare.  Or on libruls.  Or on zombie FDR.  Anyone but themselves).  The voters are starting to not buy the snake oil they're selling.

In this, I refer back to John Cole, who brought up current pundits' observations at how broken Congress has become, and how he noted even as far back as 2009 just how stupid and horrifying the GOP Obstruction gameplan was going to be:

I really don’t understand how bipartisanship is ever going to work when one of the parties is insane. Imagine trying to negotiate an agreement on dinner plans with your date, and you suggest Italian and she states her preference would be a meal of tire rims and anthrax. If you can figure out a way to split the difference there and find a meal you will both enjoy, you can probably figure out how bipartisanship is going to work the next few years.

This is why I've been saying "Don't Vote Republican" the last 6 years 10 years.  And it's only now that a decent majority of fellow Americans are waking up to how bad Teh Crazy really is.

I can only hope this growing outrage against Congressional incompetence and insanity leads to more voters tossing the Far Right wingnuts out of office this 2014.

Thursday, July 11, 2013

When You Meet A Better Wit Than Thou

You have to give props.  (with thanks to Digby for mentioning this earlier)

Rep. Mark Takano (D-CA) received a petition by House GOP members over the immigration reform issue.

Takano's background was working as an English high school teacher.

He used those teaching skills to grade that GOP petition an "F".  You have to click the link and see it to believe it.

My mom worked as a high school teacher, albeit in history but working with the same skill sets of grading essays and term papers.  When I saw Takano's red pen mark-ups on the GOP petition, I couldn't help but laugh.  He specifically ripped the petition writer(s) on failure to provide citations, relying on allegations, and overuse of hyperbole/exaggeration.

Well played, professor.  Well played.