Worst April Fool's Day Joke Evar

House Republicans so desperately want HR 1 (a budget bill with $61 billion in spending cuts, which went to the Senate and was voted down 56 to 44) that they are going to try and suspend the Constitution on Friday to make it law.

That's right.  They're going to try and suspend the Constitution. 

Did your head just explode?  Thought so.

Oh, and the funny thing?  The Senate would have to willingly cede its constitutional authority for such a maneuver to work.  Yeah, that'll happen.

I guess, in the end, the joke's on them.  Or us.  Yeah, probably us.

Something I've Noticed

When Republicans win, by whatever margin, it is not only a mandate from the people, but God's will, and everyone who thinks otherwise can go suck it, and shut up, that's why.

When Democrats win, by whatever margin, it is evidence not only of voter fraud, but the hijacking of our great nation by dangerous, un-American forces bent on destroying everything the Founding Fathers stood for, and Republicans and their associated cadres of Libertarians, militiamen, and now Tea Partiers have not only the right but the absolute obligation to do everything in their power, to lie, cheat, threaten, and kill if need be, in order to take their country back.

More Hilarious Irony, a Response to Someone's Facebook Post

Q:  It's November 3rd and I'm so disgusted I could spit.  So many things yesterday went horribly, horribly wrong.  WTF is wrong with people???

A:  Congressional Blue Dogs prevented the stimulus from being large enough, and diverted too large a percentage of it to tax cuts, which had the overall effect of stopping the economy's slide into Depression but not reversing the momentum.  As a result, unemployment remained high, even as the economy began to grow again and more private sector jobs were created than in the entirety of the Bush Administration.  Unfortunately, it wasn't enough, and in the face of persistent unemployment and economic uncertainty, the electorate did what they always do, which is punish the party in power.  In a hilariously ironic twist, the majority of Dems who lost their congressional seats were the aforementioned Blue Dogs, whose conservative voting records and philosophical bent did nothing to save them from the monster they created and then failed to appease.
 
Also, a bunch of white folks freaked out because we have a Black President.

(hat tip Kristina for the prompt)

Pre-emptive Schadenfreude, or The Silver Lining

Everybody seems to agree that today will be an electoral bloodbath, not only for Democrats, but sane people who would like to see the nation's problems addressed in a constructive manner by qualified grownups in general.  And of course I do not wish to downplay the severity or tragedy that I believe is afoot.

But there is something funny that I think will come as an unintended consequence for those making up the bulk of the Tea Party movement.

From much of what I have read, the Tea Party is largely made up of anti-Socialist activists who have lots of time on their hands to go to rallies and listen to talk radio because many if not most of them are on some sort of state-sponsored financial support, be it Social Security, Federal Disability, or Medicare.  And while they do not appear to appreciate or even see the irony of such a position, there will be ironically hilarious consequences to their activism and votes for their wing of the Republican party.

See, the two things I think we can credibly expect from a Republican-controlled House of Representatives are a) investigations, most if not all of them spurious, into any- and everything the White House does or has done, and, more importantly, b) another Government shut-down like they pulled in the '90s when they don't get their way legislatively.  And that's where the hilarious irony kicks in, because when the shut-down occurs, all those dumb fucking assholes who voted Tea Party and who live on Social Security, Disability, and Medicare are suddenly going to stop receiving those checks.  If the shut-down goes on long enough, some of them may lose their homes, or become sick, or possibly even die, and it'll be their own damn fault for not paying sufficient attention to the actual policy outcomes and political platforms of the people and party they voted for.  They'll have to live in the dog-eat-dog paradise that is the unregulated market without the social safety net government properly provides, and may their God help them when they are suddenly forced to realize just what that really means.

And, individually, it will be tragic.  Just absolutely horrifying.  And it may make me a bad person to think that it's funny, or will be.  But I suppose I am, at heart, American enough to enjoy seeing people get what they deserve, and as I am forced to watch this land that I love turn away from what I believe in my heart to be the right way forward, and to become less than it is or should be, I cannot help but take some small comfort in the suffering of those who helped bring it about.

Initiatives, Referenda, and Joint Resolutions: a Guide to Washington State's Midterm Ballot

As an American, I feel it is every citizen's duty not only to vote, but to inform themselves as to the choices they have in the voting booth, and the consequences of those choices.  But I also understand that not everyone has the time or inclination to dig into it that I do.  So, as a public service (or possibly just a cry for attention), I have spent the afternoon going through the Washington State Voter's Pamphlet, reading through the wording, the consequences, and the statements for and against, and I have assembled this handy guide to how I think you should vote and why.


Please note that this is only a guide to Initiatives to the People, Referenda from the State Legislature, and State Senate and House Joint Resolutions.  I may or many not have time to write about the races for federal and state political office later this week.  I feel like people are probably already pretty set as far as the types of candidates they support, being that people generally know where they stand on the political spectrum.  But ballot initiative and the like take a little more unpacking, I think, and I wanted to devote a little time to figuring it out for myself, and apparently I've decided that you want to know what I think, too.  So here it is.


The Quick and Dirty Version:


I-1053:  NO
I-1082:  NO
I-1098:  YES
I-1100:  YES
I-1105:  NO
I-1107:  NO
R-52:  YES
SJR-8225:  YES
HJR-4220:  NO


Reasons why below the jump, for those who care to know.

Enthusiasm Gap

I've done my level best for some months now to stop obsessively following politics in America.  I still think it's important (being that this is the game that determines the shape of the field and the rules of the game we all play by), but I've been trying to concentrate on other things, for the sake of my sanity as well as many other good reasons.

But I still keep my ear to the ground, if for no other reason than that obsessions die slowly, and one thing I keep hearing in the run-up to the midterm elections this November is about the enthusiasm gap between those on the left and those on the right.  The story I keep hearing goes something like this:  the wingnut right is in ascendance, making lots of noise and getting lots of coverage, because their side lost last time and so they've decided it's the End of Days, and as a result they've gone even crazier (or just gotten louder about it).  And since apparently very few of them work they spend a lot of time protesting and driving up Glenn Beck's TV ratings.  They hate Barack Obama and everything he stands for, even when he stands for the same things they do, and they're all really excited to go to the polls and elect like-minded ignorami who believe things that are completely crazy, like that doctor visits should be paid for with chickens, that social security ought to be privatized or abolished, and that tax cuts will solve the budget deficit.

On the flipside you've got the left, who're upset because Obama hasn't completely reversed the world-historical fuckups of the Bush Administration and because the political realities of actually governing (especially when the opposition party doesn't negotiate in good faith or actually want government to work) require compromises that are disappointing to them.  And apparently many of them are so upset that they are considering staying home en masse come November in order to punish the Democrats for not living up to their dreams and making everything better in the two years or so they've had control of the White House and both Houses of Congress.

Now, I have every sympathy for people who find the Democrats maddening. 

Dept. of Yup

So many pixels are wasted in the pundit business arguing that good people shouldn’t have to follow the law of the land, when what ought to be argued is that the law of the land needs to change so good people can get on with their lives free of state interference.
-mistermix at Balloon-Juice

Dept. of Speak, Brother, Speak

When someone says that the drug war is a failure because instead of stopping drug use, it destabilizes narco-producing regions of the world, brutalizes the underclass, perpetuates inequality, and foments the expansion of the police-prison state, then that person has mistaken a slogan for a product. When someone muses that our "strategy" in Iraq or Afghanistan is a failure because it is not producing "a durable, non-violent resolution to . . . political conflicts", then that person is a fool. And when someone says that late, post-industrial capitalism fails to "bring together willing buyers with willing sellers in order to produce value," then I wonder in what idealized world of pure form and meaning has this man been living, because obviously, if you consider the current American economy and the global system in which it is embedded, the production of "value" is incidental to the continued concentration of material wealth and political influence. That is the point. It isn't a failure of the system. It is the system.

[...]

Cui bono, motherfuckers?

-IOZ

That last line should be the motto and first question of any serious seeker after political or economic truth.

Truth is a Bitter Pill to Swallow

While we were distracted searching for Iraq’s nonexistent weapons of mass destruction, Iran began revving up its actual nuclear program and Osama bin Laden and his fanatics ran free to regroup in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We handed Al Qaeda a propaganda coup by sacrificing America’s signature values on the waterboard. We disseminated untold billions of taxpayers’ dollars from Baghdad’s Green Zone, much of it cycled corruptly through well-connected American companies on no-bid contracts, yet Iraq still doesn’t have reliable electricity or trustworthy security. Iraq’s “example of freedom,” as President Bush referred to his project in nation building and democracy promotion, did not inspire other states in the Middle East to emulate it. It only perpetuated the Israeli-Palestinian logjam it was supposed to help relieve.

-Frank Rich

Chase Whiteside at Glenn Beck's Stealing King's Legacy Rally

Yup

There are many ways to distinguish between the two major political parties in the United States, but one of the more obvious ways is in how they choose to implode. Democrats, for example, tend to implode in slow motion, when their own aimless, plodding inertia turns them into lugubrious and easy targets for the right wing media, which scurries around them, draping yet another thin, disingenuous stratum of “they’re socialist grandmother killers!” over them until the whole sludgy edifice collapses from the accumulated weight, and the Democrats are crushed underneath. Republicans, on the other hand, implode like old, fat, gassy stars, when the depleted fuel of their empty ideology can’t sustain further inward pressure from their personal idiocy, and the whole mess sucks down and then spectacularly erupts into a blazing display of abject stupidity.
-John Scalzi

Obama's Oval Office Speech

Can be viewed here.

In all, I can't say I was impressed.  For me, this was a lost opportunity, a chance to go big, and ask the American people to rise to the historical occasion in a meaningful way.  Which, frankly, he didn't.  Far as I could tell, his grand call to arms was sort-of kind-of urging the Senate to pass the Climate and Energy bill that passed in the House a few months ago.  Oh, and to pray.

As somebody said in the comment thread at the Washington Monthly (and I'm paraphrasing here), when the President tells the American people to pray, we are well and truly f-cked.

Here's what I would have liked to have seen:

Libertarianism and the Limits of Ideology

Just in case you've been hiding under a rock these last couple of days, here's Rachel Maddow's interview with newly-minted Libertarian Senate Candidate Rand Paul (R-KY), son of Texas Congressman Ron Paul, in which he admits that he'd probably have voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 on ideological grounds (can't seem to get the video to embed).

For what it's worth, I don't think that Rand Paul is a racist. He goes to great lengths to say so, and I'm willing to believe him. He even comes across as a not unreasonable guy, who takes his beliefs seriously, even when they lead to conclusions that are difficult to defend.

And see, that's the sticky part. In the rarefied air, well separated from the dirt and grit of the real world in which we are all constrained to live, in which intellectual argument takes place, Paul's argument, and even libertarianism in general, has some merit, and he's to be respected for being willing to enunciate that he believes that business owners have a constitutional right to be racists and to discriminate against potential customers, even if he finds racism and discrimination to be personally abhorrent. On this ground at least, Paul is being intellectually consistent, which is laudable, if in this case almost wholly misguided.

There is, after all, a certain attractiveness to libertarianism. If everybody was cool, it might even be sort of viable in the real world. But everybody isn't cool. And that's where it all falls down.

This Made Me Smile

Furthermore, the lack of appropriate outrage from the left on this is also an outrage.  In response, we need to put together two simultaneous protests--one against the outrage, and one against the outrageous lack of outrage expressed by the absent left.
-Chris Bowers

 The whole thing's pretty funny.

Credit Where Credit is Due

"...It does offend me when one out of every three citizens in the state of Arizona are Hispanics, and you have now put a target on the back of one out of three citizens, who, if they're walking their dog around a neighborhood, if they're walking their child to school, and they're an American citizen, or a legal, legal immigrant -- to now put a target on their back, and make them think that every time they walk out of their door they may have to prove something. I will tell you, that is un-American. It is unacceptable and it is un-American."
-Joe Scarborough

He's right. It is un-American.

It's like in every movie ever about Nazis or Commies or Fascists or whatever other totalitarian regime, historical or fictional.

"You have papers?"

I don't think the incrementalism is creeping anymore, at least not in Arizona.

"In this entire year and a half of cleaning up the mess, it's been tough because the folks very responsible for a large portion of this mess decided to stand on the sidelines," Obama declared. "It was as if somebody had driven their car into the ditch and then just watched you as you had to yank it out, and asked you: 'Why didn't you do it faster -- and why do I have that scratch on the fender?' And you want to say: 'Why don't you put your shoulder up against that car and help to push?' That's what we need, is some help."

The Political is Personal, Too

"There's so much frustration going on right now with people not being heard," Tidrick said. "And we see this country in a spiral downward. People are lashing out in different ways... You take somebody that's had a bad day and sometimes they may say things they regret later. But until things get straightened out, we don't have a lot to hope for."
-from Eli Sanders' interview with a speaker at the Yakima Tea Party rally on April 10

In the above quote, Brad Tidrick is trying to, if not defend, then at least explain some of the rage that might've led Charles Alan Wilson to make more than a dozen threatening phone calls to WA Senator Patty Murray, cluminating in such statements as "Somebody's gonna get to you one way or another and blow your fucking brains out. If I have the chance, I would do it."

Obviously (at least it should be obvious), there's no real defense for such behavior. I'm all for rigorous disagreement in the realm of politics and ideas, but when you get to the point of making death threats, you're no longer debating the issues, you're essentially engaging in terrorism.

But there's a line in there that reflects something I've been thinking for a while, and I wanted to highlight it and tease out some of the implications. The line is "You take somebody that's had a bad day and sometimes they may say things they regret later."

I think a lot of what drives the passion that many people bring to their political views, especially those whose politics is driven by anger and rage, has little or nothing to do with politics at all.

What he said.

Class War

According to numerous reports, the US Treasury and Federal Reserve have pumped upwards of $14 trillion to support failing financial institutions. There are approximately 100 million households in the US. So if you divide that $14 trillion by 100 million and that means that each and every US household could have been sent a check for $140,000.
-Michael Thornton

We're not allowed to talk about class war in the United States.

Some of it has to do with our founding mythology. We like to see ourselves as having broken from the old European model of stratified society, in which the social class to which you are born is overwhelmingly likely to be the one in which you spend your life and die.

Some of it has to do with the Cold War, because the class struggle was and remains a revered trope of our Socialist enemies (not that they're really our enemies anymore in any realistic sense, but we hated on them so long that we're still not allowed to take any of their ideas into serious consideration, lest they infect us like AIDS or teh gay).

But mostly it has to do with this: the class war is already being waged and won, and the winning side doesn't want the rest of us wising up before it's too late.

For a good thirty years after WWII revitalized the American economy, things got better for everybody. Wages rose as productivity increased. The GI bill put college in reach for previously unheard-of numbers of Americans. You could support your family of four with a job in a factory, and know that when you'd put your twenty or thirty years in you would be taken care of for the rest of your life.

Sure, we still had rich folks, but the gap between the haves and the have-lesses was less gratuitous and obscene. As the economy grew, as it did each year, everybody made more money, right up til the early '70s. Since then, real wages have stagnated.

But the economy kept growing. So where did all that money go?

Into the hands of the super-rich.

Sure, they already had more money than they or their heirs could spend. But they wanted more. After all, when you have all the money and the sprawling masses don't have enough to feed themselves and pay their bills, it gives you a great deal of leverage. Leverage you can use, among other things, to hijack the national discourse to your advantage. You can pay smart, morally compromised people to come up with seemingly good reasons that the fruits of our collective national labor and effort should rightfully go to those who already have more than they or their heirs will ever need, instead of, say, to guaranteeing that nobody falls below a certain level, to sharing the wealth around more broadly, which would do all sorts of psychological and social good.

The truth is simple. We're not allowed to talk about class war in the United States because if we do, we'll realize that it's already happening. That is has always been happening. That throughout the history of human civilization, since the first tribe stayed in one place long enough to grow its own food, thus guaranteeing their survival and allowing some of its members to do things other than hunt and gather, there has always been a parasite class, who through monopolies first of violence and later of ideas arrogates to itself a greater than is rightful share of the fruits of the tribe's efforts and labor. Who takes more than it deserves because it can, leaving less for the rest of us.

We're not allowed to talk about class war, because the super-rich own most of the voices in the national discourse, and they do not want it spoken of, because they've been waging that war since time immemorial, and winning. They are a cancer on the body politic. And just as cancer eventually kills the host, through arrogating to itself more of the body's resources than the body can stand, so too does the parasite class sicken and weaken the American body politic.

Now let me be clear. I do believe in capitalism. Healthy competition keeps animals and organizations fit and capable, and drives innovation and progress. But capitalism is like fire. When channeled appropriately, it can be incredibly useful and productive. When left to burn unchecked, it consumes everything in its path, destroying all and leaving only ash and devastation in its wake.

The Reagan Era, which it seems perhaps we are on the verge of getting past, finally, after thirty long years of everybody getting fucked in the name of unfettered free-market capitalism, can and should be seen as a particularly effective and successful maneuver in the age-old war between the parasite class and the body politic. Despite its flaws, I believe that the passage of Health Care Reform signifies an important sea change, a tectonic shift, if you will, in the meme wars that serve as a proxy for the actual one.

A recognition that everybody, simply by dint of being American, deserves a safety net, a fair share of the fruits of our collective prosperity, enshrined into the law of the land and never to be repealed, despite how the parasite class and their mouthpieces and dupes might squawk.

It's a hopeful sign. An important victory. But without the collective recognition of the larger picture of the forces at work and the stakes over which they are struggling, it's not enough, and never will be. To borrow a right-wing trope, you can't fight a war properly if you don't recognize you're at war.

It's about time we did.

Bush did push us into a baseless war and rich bankers do rip everyone off, just not in the way that some conspiracy theorists think.
-DougJ at Balloon Juice