Search Results for: ’

Just how badly has the G.O.P. lost on the payroll tax break issue? Bad enough to lose the Wall Street Journal editorial page opinion like this:

GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell famously said a year ago that his main task in the 112th Congress was to make sure that President Obama would not be re-elected. Given how he and House Speaker John Boehner have handled the payroll tax debate, we wonder if they might end up re-electing the President before the 2012 campaign even begins in earnest.

The GOP leaders have somehow managed the remarkable feat of being blamed for opposing a one-year extension of a tax holiday that they are surely going to pass. This is no easy double play.

That’s pretty damn bad.

And if that’s one outcome of yesterday’s House Republican fiasco, today’s theater should sting at least as much.

In trying to complete a quick pro forma session of the House today, Speaker Pro Tempore Michael Fitzpatrick (R-PA) walked away while Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) implored the House to take up the bill that would extend the tax break (via ThinkProgress):

Hoyer got a few good slams in on the Republicans before turning the microphone over to Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD). Van Hollen never got a chance. His microphone was cut off, and a few seconds later, the video feed was terminated.

But the issue isn’t just about how Scrooge-like the Republicans have become for the holiday season. The other side of this story is about the collapse of Republican discipline. Speaker Boehner had a revolt among the House masses that forced him to beg-off an agreement he made with the Senate leadership and, in particular, with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) (via Politico):

While the two men have been remarkably united this year, the year-end package has prompted an unusual amount of confusion, disunity, frustration and increased finger-pointing, both publicly and privately, between House Republicans and Senate Republicans over who is at fault in the political fiasco.
[…]

“This is a colossal fumble by the House Republicans,” said a senior Senate GOP aide, requesting anonymity to speak candidly about his own party. “Their inability to recognize a win is costing our party our long-held advantage on the key issue of tax relief. It’s time for Boehner and [House Majority Leader Eric] Cantor to look these rookies in the eye and explain how the game is won or lost.”

For most of the past year, the House Teabaggers have been less of a liability than I figured they would be. But with reelection campaigns on the horizon and a distinct lack of positive accomplishments to their credit, the House Teabaggers are feeling unsettled and maybe even nervous.

Boehner will have increasing difficulty keeping the feral hordes from further trashing the Party.

Erica C. Barnett has a post on Metro cutting the hours of the 99.

However, the low ridership is a bit of a Catch-22. Before Metro eliminated the streetcar, ridership on the corridor was dramatically higher than it is today—about 404,000 trips a year in 2003, compared to about 252,000 in 2010 (and 204,000 in 2009). The reason, probably, is twofold: First, Metro cut service on the route from every 15 minutes to every 30, making the faux-”streetcar” less reliable and convenient. Second, and perhaps more importantly: People like riding streetcars—and buses painted like streetcars don’t fool anyone.

Fair enough, and as good an argument for rail as anything. The bus gets stuck in traffic and traffic grinds to a halt on rainy days down there, probably more now with construction. But there’s another reason that Erica doesn’t mention, and that’s that the 99 only runs one way. So it makes a circle, going South along the waterfront, then across Pioneer Square through the ID, and then back North up First Ave.

If this were a commuter route going from the suburbs downtown, a few blocks wouldn’t be a big deal. But if you’re a tourist and you get off the bus anywhere other than the ID, you’re not going to catch it close to where you got off. Also, the route to the sculpture park doesn’t go by the waterfront, so you can’t get off for a bit, look at the aquarium or whatever and then hop back on.

Still, I’ve always pictured it as potentially a great route, even a bus route. If it ran every 15 (or dare to dream 10) minutes each way a lot of people, not just tourists, would use it. As it is, poorly thought out and underfunded, it doesn’t do much.

I’ve been quietly concerned that the Republican Primary Entertainment Franchise could peter-out shortly after the 3 Jan. Iowa caucus. I’m just not ready for it to be over yet.

Sarah Palin to the rescue?

In a pre-taped interview set to air tonight on Fox Business Network’s “Follow The Money,” Eric Bolling mentioned to Sarah Palin that people constantly tell him they wish she was running for President.
[…]

“You know, it’s not too late for folks to jump in,” Palin replied. “And I don’t know, you know, it — who knows what will happen in the future?”

So… good news for all those people who bought “Palin 2012″ t-shirts as a joke four years ago; they may soon be wear-able outside of Halloween parties or in ironic neighborhoods of Brooklyn.

Please, oh please, oh please, oh please!

10 Conversations On Racism I’m Sick Of Having With White People (h/t Howie on Facebook)

– It seems like Ryan Blethen had already mostly stopped writing anyway.

– Two of the most insightful, best writers among lefty blogs are having fundraisers.

– I’m surprised more Neocons aren’t claiming Kim Jong Il’s death as a glorious victory against the Axis of Evil.

– a very dangerous president.

– Merry Christmas from Batman.

Ask, and ye shall receive! Last Thursday, I gleefully wished out loud for Ron Paul to get his moment in the GOP spotlight:

And how ’bout that Ron Paul at 18%!?! Most of the other nutberger candidates have had their fling with the pole position…Ron Paul should get his shot, too. And to top the whole thing off like a layer of creamy chocolate frosting, we should get Rick Santorum [the] next week.

And looky here:

Newt Gingrich’s campaign is rapidly imploding, and Ron Paul has now taken the lead in Iowa. He’s at 23% to 20% for Mitt Romney, 14% for Gingrich….
[…]

Paul’s ascendancy is a sign that perhaps campaigns do matter at least a little, in a year where there has been a lot of discussion about whether they still do in Iowa. 22% of voters think he’s run the best campaign in the state compared to only 8% for Gingrich and 5% for Romney.

Romney is so unlikable that GOP voters can’t give him credit for running a persistent, reasonably professional, and not overly negative campaign in Iowa?!? Huh.

I’ll sure miss Newt as the front-runner. His reckless quirkiness, monster ego, and his deliciously rich past make him a dream opponent for Obama. Ron Paul makes a dream opponent, as well, but he has zero chance of becoming the Republican nominee. Seriously…if Newt crashes and burns, Mitt Romney is the only plausible alternative, and a lot of Republicans will be holding their noses supporting him.

(Seeing all the nose-holding, Mitt will, no doubt, assume they soiled themselves, throw ’em on the roof of the car, hose them down, and drive boldly onward to the general election.)

Yeah, I’ll miss Newt, for sure. But a Ron Paul win in Iowa has an acute payoff: GOP Mayhem! Don’t believe me? Let’s ask the Washington Examiner’s Timothy Carney, who recalls Pat Buchanan’s 1996 victory in the New Hampshire primary:

“It was awful,” Buchanan told me this week when I asked him about his few days as the nominal GOP front-runner. “They come down on you with both feet.”

The GOP establishment that week rallied to squash Buchanan. Just after New Hampshire, Gingrich’s hand-picked group of GOP leaders, known as the Speaker’s Advisory Group, met with one thing on their minds, according to a contemporaneous Newsweek report: “How to deal with Buchanan.”

No doubt, Ron Paul will be pummeled by his own party. In fact, I wouldn’t put it past them to start first thing Monday morning to head off any threat of a Ron Paul win in Iowa.

The most intriguing possibility out of all this is that Rick Santorum might get a brief stint as the next not-Mitt Romney. That would be awesome for a couple of reasons. First, every time the Republicans rally around a new not-Mitt Romney only to experience an abrupt case of buyer’s remorse, it diminishes the Republican primary process and, in particular, the Romney campaign’s credibility. That’s right…Republicans are engaging in an internal battle that can be described as (if I’m allowed to engage in a bit of hyperbole) mutual assured destruction.

A Santorum rally could also be awesome because of the timing of the Iowa caucuses. If the Republicans take out Paul before the Iowa caucuses, and Santorum hits the wave just right, he could actually take Iowa. And that would be an exquisite New Year’s gift.

I don’t know about you, but I’m just about out…so it’s off to the store tomorrow to stock up on more popcorn.

Well, the Legislature passed something crappy.

The Legislature adjourned shortly after the Senate approved the new budget plan by a 42-6 vote. Gregoire had called for $2 billion in changes and a fully revamped budget by Christmas, but lawmakers settled on a plan that provides a $480 million fix through a combination of cuts, transfers and delayed payments.

Our Democratic legislature is still too chickenshit to even consider putting revenue in front of the people, let alone just passing a package outright.

Budget negotiators said it was impossible to get full consensus on a plan during a session that would last a maximum of 30 days.

I have to say, the we only had a limited time nonsense is stupid, stupid, stupid. I’m not suggesting it should have been easy, especially given the Republicans and Roadkills. I understand saying we didn’t get as far as we need because a significant portion of the legislature hates math. But to pretend nobody had any time to prepare? Please. They should have known as soon as they passed the budget that this was possible. And they definitely should have known several months ago when the revenue forecast that precipitated this session came about.

Anyway, kudos to Marko Liias for drawing a line in the sand.

“Not one bill came to the floor nor where there any committee hearings on revenue,” Liias says, explaining that he wants to “tax the one percent” and close corporate loopholes. “I know the high-earners’ income tax (Initiative 1098) failed before, but that was before Occupy. That was before people were occupying the Capitol asking us for revenue.”

And while I appreciate Josh Feit covering this aspect of the session that far too many reporters ignored, seriously, what the fuck is “Was Liias’ lone vote (among the Democrats) simply a bratty grandstand?” I mean really, “bratty grandstand” in an otherwise straight piece? I guess I can understand parsing out how serious he was and how much this is electoral stuff, bratty seems a totally unnecessary word.

– I can’t fathom how a middle class white guy thinks it’s OK to write this piece.

– While we cannot officially speak for every worker who shares our occupation, we can use this opportunity to reveal what it’s like to walk a day in our shoes for the 110,000 of us in America whose job it is to be a port truck driver. It may be tempting for media to ask questions about whether we support a shutdown, but there are no easy answers. Instead, we ask you, are you willing to listen and learn why a one-word response is impossible? (h/t)

– Film The Police

– I’m no fan of Michell Bachmann, but the Washington Post is a disgrace.

– That Made in America label

– Newt Gingrich is no Reagan, and he’s also no Howard Dean.

– That’s probably the best Rick Perry 3 things joke.

– Newt is a scary, scary guy.

Throughout the Republican debate season, former front-runner Mitt Romney has been long on platitudes, but less specific on his positions within the Republican weltanschauung. Romney has tended to verbalize adopted positions with near universal acceptance within the G.O.P. and then contrast himself with President Obama.

Now with Newt Gingrich surging in multiple G.O.P. primary polls, the Mitt Romney campaign is being forced to take concrete stances—offer some ideological nuance—in order to differentiate himself from Newt. Will Mitt tack to the left? Will he cut back to the right?

Apparently, it is that latter. Today, during the daily Romney for President press conference call, Mitt went right-wing extreme. Sen. Jim Talent and Gov. John Sununu took up the case for Mitt, spinning his previously wishy-washy stance on the Ryan plan for Medicare into something concrete.

The Ryan plan would eliminate Medicare as it exists now and replace it with a voucher system. The plan would, more or less, privatize Medicare.

Gov. Sununu starts out criticizing Newt:

For Newt Gingrich, in an effort of self-aggrandizement, to come out and throw a clever phrase that has no other purpose than to make him sound a little smarter than the conservative Republican leadership, to undercut Paul Ryan, is the most self-serving, anti-conservative thing one can imagine happening. He gave the liberals and the Democrats the ammunition they needed to moot, if you will, at least for the time being, Paul Ryan’s presentation.

He then asserts Mitt’s support for the plan:

Mitt Romney supports what Paul Ryan did. He endorsed what Paul Ryan did. Mitt Romney had his own package of entitlement reform, which Paul Ryan has praised. They both meshed together. They are both based on really understanding entitlement reform.

and later on:

Paul Ryan’s plan which Mitt Romney supported is the solid basis for moving forward on entitlement reform. And Newt Gingrich not only rejected it then, but he rejected repeatedly by saying I was right what I said that it was wrong and the fact is that Newt Gingrich to this day still continues to undermine Paul Ryan.

Okay…Mitt Romney, 8 Dec 2011, is pro-Ryan plan. That is, Mitt supports eliminating Medicare and replacing it with a voucher system.

Remember this, folks, because if Mitt wins the nomination, he’s got some major Mitt-flopping to do. The public overwhelmingly rejects this radical plan. Mitt owns it now.

I believe you can envision the simple modifications needed for this ad:

I hate to write about this non-local thing, but if men don’t, it becomes women’s work to point out that this is a terrible policy.

I’m talking, of course, about today’s news that Obama’s health and human services secretary Kathleen Sebelius has overruled the recommendation of her own experts at the Food and Drug Administration, killing a rule change that would have made Plan B emergency contraception available to teenagers and adults over the counter. Emergency contraception works by preventing the ovaries from releasing eggs, and is 89 percent effective at preventing pregnancy if taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex.

We quite rightly criticized Bush for being anti-sex and anti-science, so it seems fair to say that this is disappointing. Sebelius should have let the rule go into effect.

I don’t know if this was a policy or a political decision, but either way it stinks. The forced pregnancy movement in this country isn’t going to support Obama, no mater what. And the need for emergency contraception isn’t going to go away.

Goldy highlights this gem from Frank Luntz.

“I’m so scared of this anti-Wall Street effort. I’m frightened to death,” Luntz said. “They’re having an impact on what the American people think of capitalism.”

While I think the Occupy movement in general and Occupy Wall Street in particular changed the discussion and have had a positive impact, a much larger driver is that the economy has turned many people against capitalism (or at least the brand of capitalism in the United States). It’s the housing bubble and the myriad foreclosed houses it’s left since it burst. It’s the high unemployment rate, and what it does to people who can’t find work or to people who are afraid to ask for a raise or who aren’t able to take that vacation any more or who aren’t getting as many tips as they did a few years ago. It’s the high price of gas. It’s the degradation of government services.

No, if you want to make people think positive things about capitalism, build a capitalism that works for them. Make capitalism more democratic, and more fair. Make it a vehicle for building a strong middle class accessible to anyone who works hard.

Six months after derailing a very well-crafted medical marijuana bill, Governor Gregoire joins Governor Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island to ask the DEA to reschedule marijuana as a Schedule II drug. Leaving aside the argument that marijuana probably shouldn’t be a Schedule II drug either (the same as cocaine and certain forms of methamphetamine), this is clearly the most progressive position on marijuana we’ve seen from the Governor. But I also agree with the Drug Policy Alliance’s Ethan Nadelmann here:

“The governors’ call for rescheduling marijuana so that it can be prescribed for medical purposes is an important step forward in challenging the federal government’s intransigence in this area,” said Nadelmann. “But their call should not serve as an excuse for these two governors to fail to move forward on responsible regulation of medical marijuana in their own states. Governors in states ranging from New Jersey and Vermont to Colorado and New Mexico have not allowed the federal government’s ban on medical marijuana to prevent them from approving and implementing statewide regulation of medical marijuana. Govs. Gregoire and Chafee should do likewise.”

As the federal pressure on medical marijuana grew over the summer, Gregoire and Chafee were the two governors who balked and scrapped sensible regulations supported by the people of their state and passed by the legislature. This happened even as both Republican Chris Christie (NJ) and Democrat Peter Shumlin (VT) moved forward with their states’ programs despite the threats. It’s good to see Gregoire have the courage to stand up to the DEA (many still won’t), but there’s certainly more she can and should do.

The Columbian has a bold strategy to plug the horrible budget hole without the hassle of raising taxes or cutting programs that people depend on. Magic? No, silly. Reform. But without getting very specific or putting a price tag on it.

This special session was necessitated by a projected $2 billion revenue shortfall. Many lawmakers talk about dealing with this only by various combinations of spending cuts or revenue increases. Again, though, state Sen. Joe Zarelli of Ridgefield, the Republican leader on the Senate Ways and Means Committee, is advocating a third tactic that never seems to draw the attention it deserves: reform.

Oh. Reform. Of course. If we do things better then things will be better.

And Washingtonians have to wonder why reform never carries more clout in these agonizing budget discussions. After all, the concept of reform is largely (though far from totally) nonpartisan. Reform means simply changing the way government does its business, maximizing efficiencies. While conservatives advocate budget cuts and liberals insist on boosting revenue, both sides ought to agree that a bigger bang for the taxpayers’ buck would be a good thing.

It couldn’t be that there isn’t much money in the so-called reforms. That will require the rest of the article to mention some of the ones that will have the most “bang for the taxpayers’ buck” and really delve into them. How they effect the programs, how they effect the workers tasked with implementing them. That sort of thing. Or I guess quote one state senator.

Even with the limited attention given to reform, Zarelli points to steps already taken by legislators in that direction: “more choice for injured workers, a refocusing of the Basic Health Plan and disability lifeline, and clamping down on fraud and abuse involving food and cash assistance to low-income people,” all accomplished with bipartisan support.

You guys, all we have to do is cut the fraud and abuse budgets! Also, if we make Workers’ Comp and Basic Health less effective, it’s not a cut, it’s reform. Anyway, you know what would make this article the best ever? More vague suggestions from the same person without any attempt to see what they would do to state services and state workers let alone how much they might save or cost.

Surely, that cannot be the end of what can be done. In his article for The Herald, Zarelli advocated focusing on “long-term obligations that are huge cost drivers, such as state-worker pensions, health-care services, paying off the state’s debt and efforts to bring our K-12 education system into compliance with court rulings” plus at least having discussions about “services for non-citizens, state liability, non-Indian gaming, state workplace efficiencies such as competitive contracting and defined-contribution pensions, and how the state subsidizes low-income child care.”

Almost all of those things will cost money, or are cuts (except expanding gambling). This article promised something other than “combinations of spending cuts or revenue increases” and yet pay down debt is on the list? How do you expect to pay down debt without raising taxes or cutting spending?* Hopefully the next paragraph will answer some of those questions instead of being a whiny nonsense metaphor.

The reform menu keeps getting longer, doesn’t it? Why, then, are legislators so reluctant to place their orders?

It’s because most of those reforms are bad ideas, cuts by another name, or bland generalities. While some of them may be part of the solution, this article doesn’t make the case for any of them, and certainly doesn’t weigh the pros and cons. The legislature is trying to solve a $2 Billion budget gap, and the Columbian is proposing gimmickry and trickery while demanding we take them more seriously.

[Read more…]

– Yesterday was the Transgender Day of Remembrance.

– I can’t understand why Wenatchee area property owners who benefit from the project can’t pay for their own town center. Also, the 2/3 stuff is a good point. Also, also, Reuven talks a good game, but if I had to put money on it, I say he’ll support bailing it out.

– The stupid party.

– Responding to peaceful protests and other expressions of growing citizenry unrest with brute force is a direct by-product of what we’ve allowed to be done to America’s domestic police forces in the name of the War on Terror (and, before that, in the name of the War on Drugs).

– Who is against giving children good food for lunch?

– David Attenborough was once a young man.

Today wasn’t a good day for me to stay on top of a big news item, so for the latest news on the federal raids that occurred today across the Puget Sound region, check out these links:

Gene Johnson – Police in W. Washington target medical pot shops
Curtis Cartier – DEA Raiding Medical-Marijuana Dispensaries in Seattle, Tacoma and Olympia
Dominic Holden – Why Today’s Pot Raids?
Jonathan Martin – Authorities raid Puget Sound medical-pot shops
Jeremy Pawloski – 17 arrested in raids on five Thurston County pot dispensaries
Russ Belville – DEA Raids Washington Dispensaries In Cities That Often Won’t Prosecute Marijuana Crimes
Stacia Glenn – 18 people arrested in three-county medical pot raids

The Cannabis Defense Coalition has information about the raids here.

UPDATE: Steve Elliott at Toke of the Town has a post up with info about today’s protest in downtown Seattle.

– Repeal Seattle’s jaywalking laws.

– Google street view of Seattle Trails

– You would think that a study analyzing the consumption of fast food by poor people would take into account a massive sea change in the way fast food was consumed by poor people. But then again, I’m not a science-type person.

– How dare you call our hero self-sacrificing?

– Hanson endeavors to drag Cain up by Cain’s bootstraps, and he does so by denigrating women and black people with such ease one suspects that Hanson has never met a stereotype or bias that he didn’t call “science.”

– This Twitter language map is pretty amazing.