HorsesAss.Org

Fringe campaigns

by — ,

The Washington Post’s Jonathan Bernstein makes a couple of good points today. First:

Here’s what you need to know about the Republican candidate field: this is it. No one starts running for president in August, less than six months before the voters start getting involved in Iowa and New Hampshire, and has any chance at all. At least, it’s never happened since the modern process has been fully in place (say, by 1980).

He does suggest that Sarah Palin could be a quasi-exception, because she has been running for President—in her quirky, Wasillaly way. (I think she started her Presidential bid in September of 2008, after realizing that there would never be a President McCain.)

So if you are a Republican, don’t hold out for a savior in Rudy Giuliani, Chris Christie, Paul Ryan, The Donald or even John Bolton’s mustache. Boltons_mustache

The second point:

What you’re upset with isn’t the candidate — it’s the party. It’s inconceivable that anyone could get the Republican nomination while using anything but solid Tea Party rhetoric on pretty much every issue. They’re all going to claim that taxes should never, ever, ever be raised no matter what, that half of what the government does is evil or unconstitutional or whatever, that the scientific consensus on climate is some sort of crazed conspiracy, and so on down the line.

In other words, the Republican Party has vacated the center for the fringes. The party hasn’t really moved to the traditional right-wing, fiscal and social conservative fringes. Rather they seem to have moved to some fringe in another dimension: a fringe in which validation and proof comes from the emotional reaction an idea evokes; a fringe where facts that don’t pass the “feels good” test are dismissed; a fringe that is largely divorced from the everyday wants and needs of Americans.

Frankly, the only candidate that stands out from the fringe is Mitt Romney—a candidate who is seriously flawed by his numerous position reversals, and a candidate that comes of as totally disingenuous every time he spews a talking point. Even with these flaws, chances seem high that Mitt will succumb, first and foremost, to right-wing religious bigotry….

Déjà vu and other tales of the early 2012 campaign

by — ,

The 2012 presidential contest took an interesting twist this weekend. One lackluster candidate, a former governor of a mid-west state, dropped out after being unable to upgrade his image to “presidential class” and, more importantly, after not finishing first or second in the Iowa straw poll.

And another candidate, after months of great anticipation, jumped into the race with high praise and huge expectations.

You know what this reminds me of? The summer of 2007, and the Tale of Two Thompsons.

Former Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson was an early Republican candidate in the 2008 race. I guess he though his gubernatorial experience (elected four times), his experience a Bush cabinet member (Sec. of Health and Social Services), and his small town “charisma” would make him a natural in the eyes of Iowans.

After practically living in the state for months, poor Tommy placed sixth in the August Iowa straw poll. The next day, he dropped out of the race.

This is eerily similar to the Tim Pawlenty story. Pawlenty is 18 years younger, and has far less political experienced than Tommy Thompson. What they both lacked was presidential charisma. Nobody had any idea why either one of them was running for President.

The other Thompson that ran in the 2008 campaign was former Senator and actor Fred Thompson. Good ol’ Fred, teased for months and months. He eschewed the Iowa Straw poll, and didn’t officially declare until the first week of September, 2007. He was immediately placed among the front-runners. It seemed the Republicans had found their next Ronald Reagan….

Ol’ Fred was briefly the darling of the Republicans—at least, the ones paying attention to the primary. But it quickly became apparent that Fred just wasn’t up to the task. He came off as a tired old dog that just needed a front porch. He withdrew toward the end of January, 2008. (Parodies of his withdraw—here, here, and here—were among my favorites of the 2008 campaign.)

This is the problem with finding a “savior” that nobody knows anything about.

And that seems analogous to the lateish entrance of Texas Governor Rick Parry Perry. Everyone knows he prays and he is a fundamentalist. A few folks may remember his hint of a Texas secession, which sounds too extreme to be real. Republicans would likely attribute it to an attention-getting, teabagger upgrade to Ronald Reagan’s “…the government is not the solution to our problems; government is the problem.”

Ahhh, yes, the Republicans have found their new Ronald Reagan. The don’t really know him, but the love him anyway.

And here is where the analogy with Ol’ Fred ends. Because Gov. Perry isn’t a tired old dog. Rather, he is a fucking extremist! I am talking an order of magnitude more extremist than Rep. Michele Bachmann (a.k.a. Ol’ Crazy Eyes).

Ezra Klein has an excellent, and quite positive, review of Perry’s book, “Fed Up!: Our Fight to Save America from Washington.” Klein highly recommends the book. In it, Perry lays out his extreme “State’s right” position that would remove the federal government from civil rights protections, labor laws, creation of a minimum wage, environmental regulation, gun regulation, Medicare, Medicaid, and education.

This is a level of extremism that is not acceptable to the majority of Republicans, and is likely threatening to the Republican establishment. Hell…it’s pretty much too extreme for FAUX News. Perry has about the same chance of winning the nomination as fellow Texan Rep. Ron Paul does.

If Obama is lucky, it will take many months until Republicans figure out who Perry really is.

To some extent, each major Republican candidates has “issues” that make him or her unacceptable to big chunks of the Republican base. In 2008, McCain was chosen because he was the least unacceptable candidate, and he performed better than any other candidate in most head-to-head polls against Clinton, Obama, and Edwards.

Acceptable choices for the Republicans seem even more limited this cycle.

Open Thread

by — ,

– So the amount of Border Patrol agents in Port Angeles has gone from fewer than 4 to 40 in the past five years? Huh? Here’s some background on the unpopularity of the Border Patrol out in the peninsula.

– Another victory in the drug war.

– Warren Buffett wants the government to raise his taxes. Isn’t he supposed to fix the economy by giving everyone jobs instead?

– Nouriel Roubini explains why he thinks that our current economy is proof that Karl Marx was right about the potential perils of capitalism.

– Rebels in Libya are closing in on Tripoli and a former army colonel says that the Gaddafi regime is collapsing. And now Syria is turning into the next Libya.

– Yakima attorney and Sensible Washington member Alex Newhouse writes about why we should legalize marijuana in the Yakima Herald.

– This made me laugh (via Reddit, of course)

HA Bible Study

by — ,

Exodus 32:27-29
Then he said to them, “This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: ‘Each man strap a sword to his side. Go back and forth through the camp from one end to the other, each killing his brother and friend and neighbor.’” The Levites did as Moses commanded, and that day about three thousand of the people died. Then Moses said, “You have been set apart to the LORD today, for you were against your own sons and brothers, and he has blessed you this day.”

Exodus 20:13
Thou shalt not kill.

Discuss.

An inconvenient reporter

by — ,

Yesterday CNN’s Don Lemon was roughed up by Michele Bachmann’s thugs. And the “thugs” included Michele’s totally not gay husband Marcus:

“She came out, after speaking for just a couple minutes,” Lemon said. “There were other reporters and cameras there. And I asked her very respectful questions: ‘How do you think you did in the debate last night?’ and ‘How do you think you’re going to end up in the Ames Straw Poll?’ And her two campaign aides started elbowing me.”

Lemon continued: “I told them, asked them not to elbow me. And then her husband Marcus started doing the same thing. And then he elbowed me into the cart. And I said, ‘You just pushed me into the cart.’ And he goes, ‘No, you did it yourself.’

“It was just, I don’t know, why they would choose to do that. We weren’t asking any ‘gotcha’ questions,” Lemon added.

Why, indeed!

I’m left wondering…is Don Lemon blacklisted by the Bachmann campaign? And if so, is it because he is gay? Or because he is black? Or both?

Either way, Don Lemon just needs to cool off and accept personal responsibility for their actions….

Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza!

by — ,

Thom: The Good, the Bad and the VERY, VERY Ugly.

On Wisconsin:

White House: West Wing Week.

Sam Seder: Al Franken confronts anti-gay group’s lies.

Olbermann with Markos: Obama’s “plan” to destroy the Mittster.

Stephen: Liberal media’s big temperature.

Sam Seder: How the American Legislative Exchange Council uses taxpayers money to destroy our government.

Commissioner Dean Foster on redistricting Washington.

Following the Hostage “Situation,” S&P Downgrades U.S. Political Process:

Greenman: This is not cool—heatwave 2011:

Thom: Is FAUX News now a bastion of Socialism?

Rep. Michael Burgess of Texas resolves his way to Worst Person in the World.

Obama: Celebrating Ramadan at the White House.

The Onion: Week in Review.

Ed with some major psychotalk from Hannity.

Sam Seder: Job are missing from the discussion in Washington.

The week in presidential campaign.

Olbermann: The GOP downgrade.

Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) on workforce investment act.

The GOP Primary Funny Farm:

Young Turks: Another gay Republican hypocrite.

Greenman: Lord Christopher Monckton brings the crazy to New Zealand.

Second City: The Bachmann Institute for curing gayness : .

Obama at Johnson Controls battery plant.

Thom: The Good, the Bad and the VERY, VERY Ugly.

The Friday Funnies.

“Concerned parent” Amber Hahn is Worst Person in the World.

Last week’s Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza can be found here.

Free Ride

by — ,

I love the deal to end the free ride zone (Is it a zone or an area? I’ve always called it a zone, but John Jensen at calls it an area at the link. Then again I still call it the Bus Tunnel, so let’s concede that a transit expert may know more than me about transit terminology.) and adopt the $20 car tab/saving bus service. In addition to the points Jensen made, the economic rule about free things (that people don’t value them) certainly applies to the free ride zone.

The jokes about the rolling homeless shelters have been around since I’ve been in Seattle. You find yourself sitting next to a drunk or a junkie sometimes. Of course we all try to ignore them, but sometimes you can’t if they smell like piss or are yelling. I imagine it’s worse if you’re a woman, and there’s harassment, etc. Those riders will still be on the bus, but in fewer numbers and more distributed throughout the system. Buses aren’t equipped to handle social services anyway.

The other problem is that all the people who can’t afford to pay get off the bus at the same time. I’ve always suspected that at least part of the reason that the open air drug market on Bell Street is so persistent is that all the junkies who ride back and forth in the free ride area get off there (there are other factors, of course, the Recovery Cafe was nearby for a long time, there were businesses that catered to that clientele, a general neglect of downtown).

I guess what I’m saying is that while the $20 tabs and saving bus service is clearly the best part of the deal, ending the free ride zone is a nice bonus. Here’s hoping they implement the changes well.

Republicans CAUSED the credit rating downgrade

by — ,

Why was the credit rating of the U.S. downgraded by S&P? An S&P director explains in unambiguous terms:

…[O]ne reason the United States lost its triple-A credit rating was that several lawmakers expressed skepticism about the serious consequences of a credit default — a position put forth by some Republicans.

Without specifically mentioning Republicans, S&P senior director Joydeep Mukherji said the stability and effectiveness of American political institutions were undermined by the fact that “people in the political arena were even talking about a potential default,” Mukherji said.

“That a country even has such voices, albeit a minority, is something notable,” he added. “This kind of rhetoric is not common amongst AAA sovereigns.”

In other words, the Republican party has become so fringe, that they jeopardize the fiscal health of the United States.

Yeah…it’s just a minority of Republicans. But the rest of the congressional Republicans didn’t have the intestinal fortitude to stand up to that nut-case minority. Instead, they permitted—indeed, they fully participated in—the process that sank into a chaotic battle of ideology that brought the U.S. to the brink of default.

Congressional Republicans tangibly harmed the U.S. In doing so, they failed to live up to their oath of office.

So, No

by — ,

The other day when Patty Murray was appointed to the Superduperextraspecialcommittee, I noted that the choice of words calling her a co-chairwoman was potentially off.

Also, one other thing. The Caucus piece linked above refers to her as the future “co-chairwoman” of the committee. I assume that means the Republican co-chair will also be a woman. Otherwise, let’s hear it for gender neutral language in the future.

Well, sad to say, she won’t even be the co-woman on the panel. Yes, that’s right, our government has decided that a population underrepresented in Congress should be even underrepresenteder in the Awesomesaucepeachykeancommittee.

Asked by PubliCola whether Murray felt the makeup of the committee is fair or representative, Murray’s spokesman Eli Zupnick responded: “Senator Murray would always like to see more women at the table, but as the only one on this Committee she will be in there fighting for those women who don’t have a voice at the table—as well as for everyone who is counting on her and her colleagues to come together with a balanced plan that works for families across the country.”

The Republican sitcom debate

by — ,

I just finished watching the Republican debate. And…Wow!

No, not “wow” about the debate. That was pretty much formula. Political debates have become as formulaic as TV sitcoms. And this debate could be, perhaps, the archetype of political debates. We had a stage full of people who want to be President of the U.S. and they were parroting bullshit lines fed to them by political consultants, designed to invoke an emotion.

Let me explain. As a teen, I was given some bullshit advice about how to win a woman’s heart. “In an early encounter, you must evoke a strong emotion from her. It doesn’t matter if it is pity, or lust, or anger, or fright, or extreme nausea. Just make it extreme. Because later on she’ll only remember that you stirred her passions.” (No…I’m not endorsing the idea….)

Contemporary political consultants must have all heard that same story. That’s what the candidates were doing all evening. Trying to evoke a little anger, patriotism, angst, fear, disgust, etc.—hoping to connect with voters so that the only thing they remember the next morning is how much candidate X stirred their passions.

The problem is, they all did it and it was formulaic. It was generic political sitcom. Tim Pawlenty was transparently engaging in it—he came off as a total buffoon. Michelle Bachmann was just off…she seemed detached and robotic. At one point, coming back from a break, she wasn’t at the podium! She came scurrying back whilst on camera. WHAT. THE. FUCK. (My guess is she was in the middle of a debilitating migraine and puking her guts out in the restroom. But who knows.)

There were two exceptions to the robot-a-thon. Newt Gingrich did less of it than the rest. He seemed much more earnest and analytical in his answers (even if the underlying ideas are lousy).

And Ron Paul was certainly passionate and genuine and honest. After all, madness has it privileges!

None of that was the “wow” part.

The “wow” part was the “Spin Room” post-debate circle-jerk on the FAUX News livestream. (Were they on TV too? Beats me. I don’t have a functioning TV in my house.) The “wow” part is that they said many of the same things about candidates I just articulated. No…worse, they outright savaged each and every one of the candidates. They savaged the debate format. They savaged the questions. They made the excellent point that none of the candidates on the stage inspired people to the point of personal sacrifice and devotion. Its because none of them showed real leadership—just formulaic sitcom bullshit answer after answer.

And so I am in the hugely embarrassing position of agreeing with a panel of fucking FAUX News infotainers, none of whose names I know or even remember. (In fairness…they probably don’t know who I am, either.)

Here’s the thing. Newt would lose because he is a deeply flawed person. Ron Paul would lose because he is a nut-case. And all of the rest of them would lose because they are a “relationship of convenience” to Republican voters. Just like Bob Dole, who was “their guy”. He was ok-ish. “he’ll do.” Blah.

And that’s just not good enough.

What we have on the Republican side is a group of people who desperately want to be President, but haven’t given Republicans a good reason why. George W. Bush got away with the sitcom-like formula, but times were good.

Not so much right now.

The GOP Nonsense Debate

by — ,

Here’s a thread for this bullshit if you want to talk about it.

… I’m not sure anyone will ever talk about “Minnesota nice” again. And apparently Newt Gingrich, John Huntsman, and Herman Cain exist.

… As always, it feels odd when Ron Paul makes more sense than anyone else. In this case RE immigration. Although, his proposals are still garbage.

… Republicans sure don’t like taxes, even though they supported them when they supported them as governor.

… I really like the Minnesota people hating each other. NOBODY CARES ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED IN THE MN LEGISLATURE, you guys.

… If anyone else is watching online, is the video cutting out a lot for anyone else?

… We also don’t care about the MA Constitution (although it is pretty rad).

… Santorum wants to “fight marriage imposed by the states.” And I think he just compared gay marriage to slavery!

… Everyone on the Fox News online panel during the commercial are in love with Newt Gingrich.

… They’re talking about Rick Parry, as “the candidate who isn’t here.” Then they mentioned Palin and Guilani. I thought for a minute someone might have mentioned Fred Karger.

… Romney, Newt, are you guys hypocrites on foreign policy? Nuh huh.

… And Paul also makes sense (mostly) on Iran and foreign policy (at least in the 30 second bites, if you extend it out, there are things to disagree with).

… “Social issues, that should be fun” after the break. I doubt it. I’m going to make myself a samich.

… Byron York asks a sexist question of Bachman, and she answers it fine. Please stick to issues everyone because I really don’t want to defend Bachman.

… As someone who is used to to watching sports on ESPN3 and MLB.com, I think Fox News cutting out like this is their website and not me. Step up, guys.

… Who wants to use the power of the federal government to force women to stay pregnant the most? Everyone on stage claims its them.

… Mittens, do you hate people who are unemployed? Yeppers.

… John Huntsman wants education to go back to local people because nobody cares more than local electeds and parents. Um, students and teachers?

… Closing comments. Let me just say that this sammich is really good. You guys, I can’t recommend living near Pike Place Market highly enough.

Lack of Unity 2012

by — ,

Seattle Weekly’s medical marijuana columnist Steve “banned in China” Elliott has put up two posts about the internal conflict in the marijuana legalization movement in Washington state. This conflict has been my #1 source of headaches for the past year or so, and it’s starting to look like I need to invest in a lot more Excedrin.

With the failure of Sensible Washington to make the ballot for the second year running (disclosure: during the most recent signature gathering effort, I volunteered to help with their media relations and some IT projects, but have stepped back significantly since starting a new job in June), a new group called New Approach Washington (NAW) emerged with an impressive roster of supporters. NAW is headed up by Alison Holcomb and the ACLU of Washington and has some big names on its side, including Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes, former U.S. Attorney John McKay and TV personality Rick Steves. This should be good news for everyone who wants to see the end of marijuana prohibition, but as Elliott points out, there’s a bit of a problem.

The initiative that NAW put together includes some provisions that aren’t perfect, but still a step forward – like the fact that individuals still won’t be able to grow their own plants unless they’re a medical patient – but it has one big provision that is absolutely toxic. The NAW initiative introduces a Delta-9 THC limit (5 ng/ml) that would become the equivalent to the .08 BAC limit for alcohol. The problem is that Delta-9 THC isn’t an accurate measure of impairment the way that a BAC reading is. As Elliott explains:

According to Alison Holcomb of New Approach Washington, fact sheets found on the FAQ portion of New Approach’s website [PDF] address [Sensible Washington’s Douglas] Hiatt’s objections.

The fact sheets assert that a 5 ng/ml THC level “is analogous” to a .08 blood alcohol content, but that assertion is unproven and quite debatable — with possibly hundreds of patient DUI arrests hanging in the balance.

Cited as evidence on the NAW site [PDF] is a scientific study which, crucially, measured THC levels of recreational — as opposed to medicinal — marijuana users. Typically, medical marijuana users, especially those dealing with heavy nausea and pain, smoke much, much more than recreational users, resulting of course in higher acute and residual THC blood levels.

For example, Denver Westword medical marijuana dispensary critic William Breathes tested three times over the proposed legal limit of 5 ng/ml while completely sober and unimpaired.

Breathes took the test when an identical limit of 5 ng/ml was proposed for Colorado. The Colorado Legislature backed away from the DUI limit when presented with the scientific evidence.

As a result, the reaction from some corners has been downright visceral. Some members of Sensible Washington disrupted a volunteer meeting for NAW last month, and the more moderate factions of the group have been trying to dial back the group’s rhetoric.

At the last monthly public meeting of the Cannabis Defense Coalition, an NAW representative heard an earful from a few folks, but it wasn’t quite as bad as I expected it to be. And CDC founding member Ben Livingston defended the NAW’s approach by pointing out how the issue of driving while stoned can be a difficult one politically. Although he also pointed out how someone he knew – a medical marijuana patient – had been written up for a cannabis-related DUI that morning merely by having a tail light out. Under the law now, any competent attorney can beat that charge. If NAW’s initiative passes, that likely won’t be possible any more.

And now an offshoot of former Sensible Washington members calling themselves Yes End Penalties (YEP) has filed their own initiative to the legislature. YEP’s initiative uses the language from last year’s Sensible Washington initiative (which lacks the part that directs the legislature to regulate it), and they’ll be collecting signatures soon. NAW’s initiative is I-502. YEP’s is I-505.

The conflict will continue to play out at next weekend’s Hempfest. NAW will insist that YEP’s approach is too radical while YEP will insist that NAW’s attempts to appease fence-sitters will alienate the motivated supporters you need to win. Both sides may be right, and that makes me as pessimistic as I’ve been about getting a legalization initiative passed in 2012. An initiative that can both end prohibition in a smart way and win at the ballot box is possible, but I’m not so sure we have one yet.

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Follow Goldy

[iire_social_icons]

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.