TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Pot and the President

By on 25 May 2012

“When a joint was making the rounds, he often elbowed his way in, out of turn, shouted ‘Intercepted!’ and took an extra hit.” – “Barack Obama: The Story,” by David Marinass

via Buzzfeed

MARIJUANA DECRIMINALIZATION is long overdue, with medical marijuana a societal benefit that should be respected and embraced instead of treated as a crime. Both would be more likely if we didn’t have so many politicians preening they were above inhaling or didn’t have a past of pot-smoking.

We are not our parent’s generation and that’s a good thing.

This story was teased in Mike Allen’s Playbook, for those of you who don’t start your mornings there.

The picture above is from Buzzfeed, titled “Choom Gang.” You say wha?

A self-selected group of boys at Punahou School who loved basketball and good times called themselves the Choom Gang. Choom is a verb, meaning “to smoke marijuana.”

As the video above reveals, Obama admits he wouldn’t want to use “a whole lot of political capital” on the issue of medical marijuana. That’s one thing, but the Obama administration has instead led a crack-down on medical pot that exceeds anything George W. Bush did.

It’s change that’s very hard to believe in.

ROLLING STONE: Let me ask you about the War on Drugs. You vowed in 2008, when you were running for election, that you would not “use Justice Department resources to try and circumvent state laws about medical marijuana.” Yet we just ran a story that shows your administration is launching more raids on medical pot than the Bush administration did. What’s up with that?

PRES. OBAMA: Here’s what’s up: What I specifically said was that we were not going to prioritize prosecutions of persons who are using medical marijuana. I never made a commitment that somehow we were going to give carte blanche to large-scale producers and operators of marijuana – and the reason is, because it’s against federal law. I can’t nullify congressional law. I can’t ask the Justice Department to say, “Ignore completely a federal law that’s on the books.” What I can say is, “Use your prosecutorial discretion and properly prioritize your resources to go after things that are really doing folks damage.” As a consequence, there haven’t been prosecutions of users of marijuana for medical purposes.

The only tension that’s come up – and this gets hyped up a lot – is a murky area where you have large-scale, commercial operations that may supply medical marijuana users, but in some cases may also be supplying recreational users. In that situation, we put the Justice Department in a very difficult place if we’re telling them, “This is supposed to be against the law, but we want you to turn the other way.” That’s not something we’re going to do. I do think it’s important and useful to have a broader debate about our drug laws. One of the things we’ve done over the past three years was to make a sensible change when it came to the disparity in sentencing between crack cocaine and powder cocaine. We’ve had a discussion about how to focus on treatment, taking a public-health approach to drugs and lessening the overwhelming emphasis on criminal laws as a tool to deal with this issue. I think that’s an appropriate debate that we should have.

Read full story · Comments { 20 }

Lanny Davis Joins Booker and other Democrats Slamming Obama Bain Ads Against Romney

By on 24 May 2012

The attacks on Newark, N.J., Mayor Cory Booker (D) by the more vitriolic liberal commentators for what he said about Bain Capital on this past Sunday’s “Meet the Press” are just as indefensible as the Republican Party’s cynical and dishonest attempt to exploit and distort what the mayor actually said during the program. – Cory Booker Got It Right, by Lanny Davis

JOE LIEBERMAN’S MAN pipes up to join what is a growing number of Democrats slamming Obama’s reelection efforts from the right as they target Mitt Romney on Bain Capital. If only there had been this strong a campaign launched on “Meet the Press” from the “left,” though we all know the Sunday shows shrink from offering progressives an equal time option to make the case against Obama, that is, if there was a campaign on the left to take on Pres. Obama on economics as strongly. This all comes the day Mitt Romney is unleashing his “Day One” general election ad that is scheduled to hit North Carolina, Ohio, Iowa, and Virginia today.

Cory & company don’t like Obama’s Bain ads, which Davis calls “misleading,” as did Rattner in his weirdly defensive op-ed. It comes as Pres. Obama loses 42% of the Democratic vote in Kentucky and Arkansas, while two headline Democratic candidates, Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota and Ron Barber, who is competing for Gabrielle Giffords’ seat, also distance themselves from Obama.

The Cory Booker faction represents one of the main differences between Democratic and Republican campaign efforts. Democrats like Booker, Ford, Rattner and now Davis are squeamish about attack ads that go for the jugular, while Republicans win elections through them, because truth isn’t important in negative attacks. Obama’s team knows this well and has been utilizing the same tactics since Barack Obama came on the scene.

Pres. Obama’s problem is that he’s pushed the Booker-Ford-Rattner-Davis soft ball, apolitical and bipartisan Wall Street approach for years, while utilizing the Karl Rove style evisceration of his opponent under the radar. Now the Obama-Axelrod-Plouffe contingent are being hoisted on their own kumbaya petard.

Many of you may remember a column I did back in January at the height of the Republican primaries when the 30-minute video came out from the Gingrich people attacking Mitt Romney on Bain Capital. Here’s part of what I wrote, which is instructive, because I utilized Steve Rattner’s defense of Bain to prove my points, which are further emphasized as being correct through Cory Booker, Harold Ford and Lanny David:

Capitalism Out of the Closet

The caterwauling over Mitt Romney tapping the core of American capitalism for his own benefit is rooted in partisanship and doesn’t address the wider reality, which is that there are hundreds of Mitt Romneys in this country, many of whom got the Bush tax cut extensions, which Pres. Obama gladly gave and never really mounted a nationwide fight against. If you truly understand the calamity facing our middle class there is no way morally or in good conscience you could possibly back down from this fight, turning it into a war if you have to. Yes, a class war, but when Democrats hail compromise and gut Dodd-Frank or go along to keep things moving how innocent are they for watching what’s developed under their own backers and bundlers?

Using Steve Rattner’s defense of Mr. Romney and Bain Capital as an example, what are Democratic venture capitalists and heads of holding companies and investment bankers supposed to do in the shadow of this damning video that reveals the sausage making that is our economic system? As Rattner reveals, Democrats in his class can feel his pain and you can bet they’re just glad it’s Romney and not them.

That Obama reelect will trumpet the video and all of its parts in the general election season, freaking out their own Democratic version of the Mitt Romney class, is wrought with irony.

That freak out is what we’re watching right now.

Democrats are very willing to ignore the Washington Post report that Pres. Obama made more from Wall Street in his first term than George W. Bush did in eight years.

The largest banks are larger than they were when Obama took office and are nearing the level of profits they were making before the depths of the financial crisis in 2008, according to government data. Wall Street firms — independent companies and the securities-trading arms of banks — are doing even better. They earned more in the first 2 1/2 years of the Obama administration than they did during the eight years of the George W. Bush administration, industry data show.

What Obama reelect has run up against is their marketing versus reality, which the Cory Booker contingent represents, something that is foundational in both the Democratic and Republican parties.

It just might be that insider and elite Democrats know the truth and are incensed by the hypocrisy of team Obama because they know they can’t get elected without their Wall Street and corporate backers.

Coming from an Administration that opened the White House to Goldman Sachs, protected big banks, and also extended the Bush tax cuts after being politically pummeled in 2010, though they couldn’t bring themselves to mount an economic case the entirety of Obama’s first term, it’s all a bit much for team Booker. A group of Democrats who are attacking Obama from even further right than he is, with the next big move likely to come after Obama’s elected in the form of a “grand bargain” on entitlements, with which the Cory Booker and the Democratic corporate contingent likely agrees.

Former Pres. Bill Clinton is their cover.

“Our party’s problem is, we are always reluctant to give up the gains of the past to create the future,” Bill Clinton told the audience at the Pete Peterson’s fiscal summit. “Democrats are reluctant to commit to longer-term health-care savings; they don’t want to touch Social Security.” [TM]

As I’ve said before in response to corporate politicians wherever they reside, when Democrats and Republicans start reining in the Pentagon and admitting we need to curtail our military misadventurism in places now secure, I’ll analyze the sense in changing the U.S. entitlement structure. If we start focusing instead on economic models for populations instead of military intervention, aided by Special Force ops, while beginning with rescinding all the Bush tax cuts, including for the middle class, instead of the ridiculous notion of making them permanent, plus raising the taxable income for Social Security, then I’ll be willing to deal on entitlement “reforms.”

Obama’s kumbaya is coming back to bite him through Democrats employing Barack Obama’s famous apolitical big bank and big corporation embrace.

Mitt Romney is a symptom of the American political system, but as I wrote in January when Pres. Obama’s own car czar, Steve Rattner, was the first to come to Mitt Romney and Bain’s defense, emphasized through the very popular Cory Booker, Democrats have a mirror image of corporate Mittism inside their own ranks and everybody knows it.

Ask Cory, Harold, Lanny or Steve, they’ll tell you all about it, with a lot of people behind them agreeing, including, I would bet just about anything on it, former Pres. Bill Clinton, too.

It’s why the contest of Obama vs. Romney is perfect and represents exactly what American politics is today: two Wall Street, right leaning political parties bankrolled by the 1% Wall Street corporate crowd, while the American public screams at the TV, because more and more people don’t consider either of these two men or political parties an actual “choice.”

Read full story · Comments { 50 }

Queer Talk: You Can’t Change Things By Leaving

By on 24 May 2012

Joyce L. Arnold, Liberally Independent, Queer Talk, equality activist, writer.

John Aravosis has a post up, “A straight North Carolinian weighs in about Amendment One.” It’s an excerpt from a May 12 piece by Bobby DeMuro at CLT Blog in Charlotte, NC (emphases in original).

Last night, North Carolinians passed Amendment One. As they should be, many North Carolinians are disappointed. …

My out-of-state friends are busy making fun of North Carolina today, and it hurts. The way they see it, all North Carolinians are a bunch of rednecks … .

Hell, maybe we are.

But the only way that perception of us changes is if North Carolinians stay here, and do what needs to be done to make this right – for gay people, for unwed couples, for children — for our state.

This hits on one of my biggest sources of frustration, on two levels. First, the stereotypical labeling itself. Second, the argument that if you’re an LGBT resident of, in this case, NC, you should just leave.

At Aravosis’ post, one of the comments makes this kind of thinking explicit.

… The majority of Southerners are assholes. Bigots, under-educated boobs, and hillbillies. That is the predominant culture of the South, aided and abetted by the indifference of many good people. …

If leaving is the answer, as is frequently stated, then basically that’s deciding to lose, in this case, an entire region of the nation. Cede it to the “bigots.” The attitude shown in this comment isn’t unusual, and apparently easily done, slapping an “under-educated boobs and hillbillies” label in one big, predictable, stereotyping move. I fully agree that votes like the recent one in NC are indeed “abetted by the indifference of many good people.” But if you think that there are “many good people,” you have the basis for a very different kind of answer. It’s not as quick as a move to NYC, but it’s one that refuses to give up and has already made very big changes toward equality. You stay and fight.

One reason that LGBT equality, and the acceptance of the right to that equality, continue to increase is because people in “the South,” like everywhere else, haven’t abandoned their area. It’s really rather sad for me to hear this kind of argument because, among other reasons, it discounts and demeans LGBTs and allies who live in “the South.” Or say, in Texas, where I am. Or how about in Michigan, Missouri, Florida, Ohio, Idaho, Nebraska or any of the other states which have amended their constitutions to prevent marriage between same gender couples?

There are certainly times when leaving is the best decision, one I respect. But leaving isn’t the only good option. It’s only by people willing to fight the equality fight where it’s most needed that national change will occur. Further, the choice to stay goes well beyond orientation considerations.

I recently talked with a twenty-something year old lesbian in a Texas small city of about 30,000. She stays, among other reasons, because she shares the care-giving for her grandmother. A gay friend, some years ago, left the safety and support of the large LGBT communities in NYC to return to tiny town Oklahoma because friends needed his help. A lesbian couple left the, relatively speaking, progressive Nashville area to return to Alabama. That’s where family, friends, job opportunities and more took them. It’s where they want to be. It’s where “we can do some good Alabama work for queer equality,” including raising children who won’t fit the stereotype. Why should they give that up? Why should they be judged as somehow failing to be the lesbians they “could be” if they’d just be “smart enough” to move to Chicago, or at least Atlanta?

People who chose to live in regions, cities, towns, rural areas; and people who do so because of obligations and commitments, or even out of lack of ability to move, and who then use the opportunities they have – right there in “hostile territory” – to work toward equality … why should they be judged as somehow less than LGBTs living in big, gay enclaves or particularly friendly cities? Why should allies who share the efforts be demeaned with labels that are as ignorant as any forced on “the homosexuals”? And why should potential allies be abandoned to the labeling process?

As long as we allow entire regions to be reduced to generalized ridicule, we’re part of the problem. See the variety of real people, not a lazy label. See the possibilities of changes already occurring, not just the actions of those who oppose them, even if they are in the voting majority.

Equality, as I know I frequently write, comes over time, with lots of work and patience. Over time, you build numbers. I remember conversations with friends in Nashville about the need to gain a “critical mass” at the Pride Festival – a large enough number of people to make us much harder to ignore, dismiss or demean, and much easier for those who were “selectively out” to feel safe in coming. We got there, with the very hard work of a lot of people – including some straight allies. It was a part of larger advocacy efforts by various LGBT and supportive organizations and individuals. Homophobia certainly still exists in Nashville. But thousands of LGBT people refused to leave when it was even harder to live openly, and slowly, things improve.

That’s the same kind of thing that’s happening in every region of the nation, because people in every region of the nation refuse to walk away.

(You Can Make A Difference via WipeoutHomophobiaOnFB
PFLAG North Carolina Triangle North Carolina Triangle PFLAG
Straights For Gay Rights via WipeoutHomophobiaOnFB
PFLAG Birmingham, AL via Birminham, AL PFLAG )

Read full story · Comments { 5 }

Paycheck Fairness Act Squeezes Republicans

By on 24 May 2012

The legislation, spearheaded by Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), aims to build on the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act by protecting women from retaliation if they sue for equal pay. It would also narrow the criteria under which an employer can defend pay disparities and enlist the Department of Labor to help eliminate gender-based pay gaps. Beneath the effort is an ongoing debate as to why, as Census data shows, women earn 77 cents for every dollar men make. [TPM]

AGAINST LEDBETTER, will Republicans and conservatives continue to stand against women on pay equity?

On the politics of it, Democrats certainly hope so, because it would further solidify the right’s war against women, this time on the economic front.

Republicans blocked the Paycheck Fairness Act bill in November 2010, siding with corporations against women.

Read full story · Comments { 4 }

Target of Fantasy Flynt Ad “Commends” Hustler for “Honesty”

By on 24 May 2012

“That’s satire. I’m able to publish this because of the Supreme Court case I won in 1984, Flynt v. Falwell.” – Larry Flynt [h/t The Blaze]

HE’S THE RUSH Limbaugh of graphic images. The leader in sliming the right, as Limbaugh is to the left.

Like Limbaugh’s verbal assault on Sandra Fluke, Larry Flynt has attacked conservative S.E. Cupp, but in graphic visual form, which will make her a heroine to the right, as Fluke became to the left, and give her a larger platform than she otherwise would have on her own.

Like Rush Limbaugh, Larry Flynt will do or say just about anything to confront conservatives on their philosophical ideas over sex and contraception. What he’s done using S.E. Cupp as the subject is legal, but it is reprehensible in every way. If there is a more vile way to make your point I don’t know what it would be.

In her interview with Glenn Beck, Cupp said, “I have to commend that as being incredibly honest.” They have “uncomplicated” the belief system that makes the portrayal of abortion rights opponents in this way okay, by revealing what many people think about conservative philosophy on sex and reproduction, but won’t say so out loud.

“Celebrity fantasy” was the Hustler magazine plot line. More from Flynt’s response:

The photo of Cupp, a GBTV host and conservative commentator, showed her engaging in a sex act with what appears to be a penis in her mouth. It ran in the magazine beside the headline “Celebrity Fantasy” and the question: “What would S.E. Cupp look like with a [d**k] in her mouth?”

A disclaimer beneath it stated: “No such picture of S.E. Cupp actually exists. This composite fantasy is altered from the original for our imagination, does not depict reality, and is not to be taken seriously for any purpose.”

I’ve met Larry Flynt. He’s something else. He continues to prove that the landmark case against Falwell over the 1st Amendment is more important to him than any one person’s feelings or reputation, including his own. He’s reviled by everyone, religious conservatives and feminists, Democrats and Republicans, mothers and fathers, sons and daughters, with his tactics to shock unrelenting and always producing the desired reaction.

“It’s embarrassing,” is how Cupp begins the interview. “It will be out there forever,” Cupp continued.

The political pornography in our culture has come up to the line of obscenity for decades. We saw it in South Carolina, when George W. Bush allies defamed John McCain in ads that lied about his family and his character. We saw it when Republicans targeted a three-limb amputee Max Cleland, as well as Silver Star recipient John Kerry. There was Bush 41′s Willy Horton ad.

Larry Flynt’s Hustler is attacking S.E. Cupp’s beliefs and philosophy on sex and reproductive freedom, something he’s hit conservatives on for decades. But through satirical weaponry Hustler attempts to demoralize and harm her persona in a way he knows will make her squirm. Subjecting her forcibly to swallow a phallus against her will, directly intending to publicly humiliate her. It’s character rape through pornographic satire.

You can bet Republicans will embrace the war on women now, though it comes through Limbaugh’s microphone every day. Is seen in Hustler‘s S.E. Cupp fantasy page. It happens every time a female is attacked, controlled, vilified or her freedoms are curtailed, something the right knows a lot about.

I celebrate the 1st Amendment and Larry Flynt’s right to express his opinion, including through satire, however vile it may be. He took a bullet for it. It’s why I’ve never joined a boycott against Rush Limbaugh or ever believed the answer was to pull him off the air.

This column has been edited.

Read full story · Comments { 35 }

It’s Not News that Romney Can Win

By on 23 May 2012

MITT ROMNEY’S LUCKY the Republican primaries unmasked his warts long before anyone started paying attention. Sure America saw the clown show, but the circus has passed and now it’s down to business and economics, Romney’s strong suit.

I started following Mitt Romney during the 2007-2008 primary season, writing back then that he was dangerous for Democrats. Progressives scoffed at my analysis, though they did as well when I warned them about candidate Obama back in 2007.

But that was long before Pres. Obama decided to compromise with himself and take the economic argument so far right that it benefits Republicans across the board. Obama’s bipartisanship anti-ideological politics is why he and his campaign are fighting to keep their Bain Capital strategy against Mitt Romney alive. That his own car czar, followed by two well known African American Democrats, have followed his apolitical lead where Wall Street economics is concerned has now become the biggest threat to Pres. Obama’s reelection.

From Politico’s Jonathan Martin:

Margin-of-error polling, fundraising parity last month, conservative consolidation around Romney and a still-sluggish economy has senior GOP officials increasingly bullish about a nominee many winced over during a difficult primary process.

Interviews with about two dozen Republican elected officials, aides, strategists and lobbyists reveal a newfound optimism that with a competent, on-message campaign, Romney will be at least competitive with a weakened incumbent. That’s a dramatic shift from the fatalistic view many party stalwarts shared mere weeks ago.

The other reason Romney could win is the tepid nature of Pres. Obama’s reviews as leader of the economy among nonpartisans. If Mitt Romney is inoculated on Bain Capital he will emerge as the competent business leader who voters might decide is worth giving a shot. There’s no evidence incumbency is the plus it once was in fact it’s just the opposite.

That Obama hasn’t made solid relationships inside the Democratic Party and in the progressive community, beyond his die hard fans and supporters, makes it rougher for him. I don’t know anyone who thinks Obama runs the Democratic Party, with more evidence today that he doesn’t. He’s the un-Lyndon Johnson, a man who gets by on his own steam, not through relationships inside Democratic or progressive circles. The attitude of Robert Gibbs is brought to mind and just what a bad beginning the Administration made toward their base. Obama is another in a long line of presidents who don’t feel compelled to build the political party that made his rise possible. The feeling is Pres. Obama’s a one man ego band.

Meanwhile, team Obama has dispatched Steve Rattner, the first in the line of Bain boosters, long before Cory Booker and Harold Ford hit, who’s written a defensive op-ed for the New York Times. Laugh track not included.

I am among those who have been drawn into the argument — there was even a snippet of me defending private equity in a Romney campaign ad.

As a former Obama administration official, I was uncomfortable about being used in a Romney ad in support of his position.

However, I was also concerned that the Obama ads, while narrowly accurate, might be seen to portray Bain Capital (and implicitly, private equity) in an ugly light because a few of the companies the firm invested in went bankrupt while Bain Capital still made money…

And that’s just the first three paragraphs. All defense and whispering that “the Obama ads” are “narrowly accurate,” while vamping in order to scrape a way forward to help the boss.

This is a very serious moment for team Obama, an inflection point in the 2012 race.

But like the Romney campaign’s Etch A Sketch event, some things in politics simply define what is already known, solidifying a politician’s image. It’s not like anyone today actually thinks Pres. Obama represents the “hope and change” his team marketed, many never did.

What makes the Bain Capital gaffe, which in Washington speak is really the truth, potentially lethal for Pres. Obama is that it has the potential of equaling the playing field between Obama and Romney by taking Bain off the board in many nonpartisan eyes, with the only thing that could tilt it back to Obama being a foreign policy crisis, a field of expertise of Pres. Obama’s where Romney simply cannot compete.

Read full story · Comments { 74 }

Facebook IPO Fiasco: Where the 1% Wall Street Elite Screw Everybody Yet Again

By on 23 May 2012

“There is no debating this is a misadventure of epic proportion.” – Max Wolff, an economist and senior analyst with Greencrest Capital.

Earlier, we reported that the analysts at Facebook’s IPO underwriters had cut their estimates for the company in the middle of the IPO roadshow, a highly unusual and negative event. What we didn’t know was why. Now we know.The analysts cut their estimates because a Facebook executive who knew the business was weak told them to. – Here’s The Inside Story Of What Happened On The Facebook IPO, Henry Blodget

FACEBOOK WAS WEAK, but only an elite few were given the information and now Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs are on the grill.

The SEC and FINRA are investigating.

According to reports, including the one above from CBS “This Morning,” the cutthroat three sliced Facebook’s revenue projections days before the IPO, but only shared the information with “a select few” of their chosen clique. Then Morgan Stanley increased the Facebook offering price and the size of the deal, signaling greater demand at a higher price that actually existed among institutional analysts.

No “first day pop,” part of the lure that entices buyers to jump in on a Hollywood-esque IPO like Facebook, as Henry Blodget told Charlie Rose this morning, led to a big sell-off and the subsequent drop. Blodget was banned from trading for life after utilizing “false research,” a story that made all the headlines years ago. His articles are must reads on the subject.

“In compliance with all applicable regulations” were the weasel words used by Morgan Stanley.

Facebook stock was down 18% in three days, with two investors filing lawsuits because of the fishy circumstances that have surfaced since the Facebook IPO imploded.

The Facebook IPO is being seen as yet another Wall Street betrayal, where the elite 1% screw everybody else, because regular investors don’t have the access to details that inform the gambling they’re doing, while insider type information protects the Wall Street elite.

Read full story · Comments { 14 }

Cory Booker, Day 3

By on 22 May 2012

The MSNBC host attacked Cory Booker for breaking with the Democratic Party line. As a journalist, he ought to celebrate truth-telling. – The Misplaced Loyalties and Dubious Code of Chris Matthews, by Conor Friedersdorf

JUST HOW DENSE is the new media elite?

The Atlantic’s Conor Friedersdorf proves how thick today when reviewing Chris Matthews’ harangue against Cory Booker last evening. This is what Friedersdorf actually wrote today:

If Matthews were a political operative, perhaps the code he’s defending would make sense.

But he is a journalist.

Stop the servers!

Chris Matthews lost his journalist credentials in 2007-2008, during the “thrill going up my leg” primary season where he vilified Hillary Clinton at every turn and reveled in his serial political porn on the Clinton marriage, while parading every misogynist in his DC Rolodex across his Clinton hating guest roster.

What makes matters worse is that Politico’s Dylan Byers picked it up without any analysis that computes the history of Chris Matthews, and Byer’s covers media.

Chris Matthews has been a die hard Barack Obama supporter for over four years now, which is his choice. Fox News Channel is a ratings juggernaut doing partisan coverage. Are Friedersdorf and Byers really the only ones who don’t know MSNBC is now the bookend to Fox News Channel?

Of course, the game in elite new media circles is you never tell the truth about your colleagues, because that wouldn’t be cool. But writing about the shock associated with the reality that Matthews would attack someone who just took a rhetorical I.E.D. to team Obama’s entire strategy to take Mitt Romney down is analytical malpractice.

If you’re an Obama supporter, which I assure you Matthews is, why wouldn’t he be outraged?

Of course, all of this is just a side show, but for once Chris Matthews was actually arguing his own personal conscience transparently, so both Friedersdorf and Byers had it exactly backward.

Booker remains the villain in this PR disaster.

What does actually matter is the day after Think Progress reported that Mayor Cory Booker had accepted $565,000 from private equity firms and “at least $36,000″ from Bain, neither Friedersdorf of The Atlantic, nor Byers of Politico, even bothered to mention this fact, showed any interest or even knowledge that Mayor Cory Booker’s idea of “truth-telling” was to take the side of his own private equity backers against a fellow Democrat who also happens to be the President.

Now you know the dubious code of the elite media and what “truth-telling” means to them.

Hey, but maybe this will all blow over now that James Clyburn has once again skimmed the bottom of the barrel, this time by accusing Mitt Romney of “raping companies.”

The next verbal gaffe festival begins in 3…2…

Read full story · Comments { 34 }

Brewing Beer or Manufacturing Molotov Cocktails?: Welcome to ‘Preemptive Policing’

By on 22 May 2012

Joyce L. Arnold, Liberally Independent, Queer Talk, equality activist, writer.

Can you tell the difference between beer brewing equipment and Molotov cocktail building equipment? A middle of the night raid by the Chicago PD raises that question. The raid was one piece of the several days of actions immediately before and during the NATO Summit, and the various protests which occurred, “permitted” and otherwise. From my perspective, this particular police operation, along with several others, further reveals the riot geared nature of more and more militarized police departments.

As usual, estimates vary widely, in terms of the total number of people – from military veterans to nurses to Occupiers and more – who participated in the NATO Summit protests. Regarding the largest marches / rallies on Sunday, I’ve seen official estimates as low as 1800 to 2000, and unofficial estimates as high 75,000. Based on what I’ve seen at various sites and sources it seems safe to say the total on Sunday was between 5,000 to 10,000.

But before the various actions, including the National Nurses United rally (the city refused a permit for a march), a march to Mayor Emanuel’s residence, the Iraqi / Afghanistan veteran lead anti-war march and rally on Sunday, and various marches and gatherings (frequently by way of police kettling), several things happened that while not surprising, should (my opinion, obviously) raise concerns for anyone interested in freedom of speech and assembly.

So, about beer brewing and Molotov cocktails, the Chicago Tribune provides “Mystery over Bridgeport arrests: Molotov cocktails or brewing equipment?” Regarding the same story, from OpEdNews:

Three NATO Activists Charged with Terror Plot After Posting Video of Police Harassment

Three activists in Chicago for the NATO Summit protests – Bryan Church, Jarred Chase, Brent Betterly – are being charged with a major terrorist plot and ‘material support for terrorism’ after they posted a video of police threatening the three with violence during the NATO summit. … The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) contends the charges are fabricated and that the arrests are retaliation. Guild attorney Michael Deustch charged that firebombs, ‘Molotov cocktails,’ were brought by undercover officers to the apartment where the three were staying. …

The men’s attorneys released photos of home brew beer making equipment after charges were handed down alleging the filling of beer bottles with gasoline. Home brewers often use clean, empty beer bottles and reusable caps to store and refrigerate finished beer. …

In the video (of the earlier stop by police) … one officer can be heard in the video saying, ‘We’ll come look for you, each and every one of you.’… The police can also be heard saying:

CPD Officer 1: ‘… You guys know all about ’68. What did they say back in ’68?’

CPD Officer 2: ‘Billy club to the f*cking skull.’ …

The raid occurred on May 16, six days after the video was posted.

Two more men were later arrested, as reported at Truth Out:

As with the original ‘NATO 3’ protesters slapped with charges of ‘conspiring to commit domestic terrorism during the NATO summit’ by the Circuit Court of Cook County, the NLG believes the terrorism charges are farcical in nature.

‘These additional charges related to terrorism are sensational, politically motivated and meant to spread fear and intimidation among people protesting the NATO summit,’ said NLG attorney Sarah Gelsomino in a press release.’

The Guardian adds that Cook County State Attorney Anita Alvarez indicated, “The charges were the state’s first for violation of Illinois anti-terrorism statutes.”

Protestors were not, as usual, the only ones to have the focused attention of law enforcement. Once again the members of the media got some of that, too. At AlterNet read “Chicago Police Attack Press, Use Bikes As Weapons.” And at FDL, “Occupy Journalists Stopped, Searched, Handcuffed & Interrogated at Gunpoint.” Five journalists known for their work in livestreaming and tweeting Occupy events were riding together when twelve police cars stopped them.

Rudkowski of We Are Change managed to record the Chicago police approaching the journalists in the car. The police have their guns drawn. They shout, ‘Hands! Hands! Get your hands up!’ And then, ‘Fuckin’ hands!’ …

The stop was another episode of preemptive policing. No person was told why they were being searched. They were put in cuffs and interrogated because police … know that these people are involved in reporting and livestreaming protests … .

In fact, mainstream media representatives have also been arrested, and even more have been prevented access to reporting on Occupy events. Legal battles have resulted, and there have been recent wins for the media, and Occupiers. Via TruthOut:

The first victory was the acquittal of Alexander Arbuckle, an NYU student arrested in January (ironically while completing a photojournalism project aimed at exploring the NYPD’s side of an Occupy Wall Street protest). Charged with disorderly conduct for standing in the middle of the street and blocking traffic, Arbuckle was vindicated by considerable photographic and video evidence showing that it was police, not protesters, blocking traffic.

The protesters, including Arbuckle, are shown to have remained on the sidewalk. …

At the same time, Obama-appointed judge Katherine Forrest handed down what may be a landmark decision finding two controversial indefinite detention sections of the National Defense Authorization Act facially unconstitutional and serving injunctions against President Barack Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder and others’ enforcement of the provisions. …

Other NATO in Chicago stories: Framing Protesters and Media as Terrorists; From Pride to Shame: Vets Return Their Medals; Criminalizing Dissent Is a Travesty to Democracy: Chicago is Only the Latest Example; Today in Chicago I Witnessed Police Brutalizing Activists.

Perhaps the next big police / protestor stories will come at Democratic and Republican party conventions. We already know that in Tampa, you can carry a handgun, but water guns won’t be tolerated.

(Chicago/NATO March photo via US Uncut’s FB Wall Photos
Chicago/NATO Arrests photo via OWS News)

Read full story · Comments { 7 }

A Kindler, Gentler Attack Against Obama

By on 22 May 2012

INDEPENDENTS ARE SQUEAMISH about harsh, personal attacks against the President. People like the guy, just not the U.S. reality.

As the New York Times reports, Karl Rove’s group is drawing from their set of facts about Obama’s record hoping to hit a chord that rings true.

The ad is the work of two of the most fearsome players in Republican politics: Larry McCarthy, the producer behind the infamous Willie Horton commercial in 1988, and Crossroads GPS, the political battle squad founded by Karl Rove.

When it makes its debut Wednesday in 10 swing states as the centerpiece of a $25 million campaign, it is expected to become one of the most heavily broadcast political commercials of this phase of the general election.

The ad pushes austerity.

It remains stunning just how little people know about economics in a rough environment, thinking that taking revenue, also known as taxes, out of the system will help things. The bookend is the Obama administration’s half measures and economic message void for most of his first term.

The best ad I’ve seen this season was for Mitt Romney during a Food TV show. It was a biographical ad, showing Mitt Romney in a purely positive light, no mention of Obama. It was the most effective ad I’ve seen, but I’m sure there will be others. We live on the Virginia side of the Beltway, which is one of the battleground states being fought over by both Obama and Romney.

Read full story · Comments { 7 }

The Plot Thickens in Huffington Post Lawsuit

By on 22 May 2012

“Significant new evidence has come to light that demonstrates Arianna Huffington was passing along to third parties Boyce’s and Daou’s confidential ideas and plans about The Huffington Post without Boyce’s and Daou’s knowledge or consent, then using that information with those third parties to launch the website. The new evidence also shows defendants Huffington and Lerer actively schemed to conceal Boyce’s and Daou’s central role in The Huffington Post’s creation.” – Rodney S. Margol, attorney for plaintiffs

FORBES REPORTS new evidence, found through discovery, that sounds troublesome for Arianna Huffington, in the lawsuit brought by Peter Daou and James Boyce.

In discovery, however, the plaintiffs obtained the minutes of a meeting held March 29, 2005, at which Huffington, Lerer, Sekoff and Breitbart “discussed possible responses to press inquiries on the subject of when and how the idea for the website originated.” According to the minutes, Sekoff and Breitbart suggested that Huffington and Lerer deflect questions about how they came together by saying it “doesn’t matter.”

The plaintiffs say the exchanges detailed in the minutes “reflect the deliberate creation of a false and fraudulent ‘narrative’ to explain the origin of the idea for The Huffington Post.”

An earlier class action lawsuit spearheaded by Jonathan Tasini was dismissed. Tasini alleged “implied promise” of compensation by HuffPost. I’m sorry, but I just can’t imagine this at all.

Full disclosure, both Peter Daou and James Boyce are colleagues. I’ve seen them over multiple years in tremendously stressful and difficult political situations, so I have an idea of the mettle of both of these men.

I started writing on Huffington Post in 2006, but stopped around the time AOL purchased HuffPost, as did many of their original writers I knew. During the time I was fortunate to be a part of the crew regularly featured is when HuffPost was made and became what it once was, though today it’s not the same beast.

Arianna Huffington deserves credit for the coverage by HuffPost on Afghanistan, a subject on which they have been relentless. David Wood’s military coverage received a Pulitzer Prize in April, the first for the Huffington Post.

Arianna Huffington is covered in my book, because of her place in new media and specifically for the coverage HuffPost gave Obama versus Hillary in 2008.

The Forbes report and the facts at issue in it have got to be making some people just a little antsy. AOL, for one.

Read full story · Comments { 4 }

A Defensive Patriarchy Sues

By on 22 May 2012

THEY HID PEDOPHILES, so a lawsuit backed by the Council of U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, joined by over three dozen Catholic men’s clubs, was guaranteed.

This very defensive statement from Notre Dame is fitting.

Let me say very clearly what this lawsuit is not about: it is not about preventing women from having access to contraception, nor even about preventing the Government from providing such services. Many of our faculty, staff and students — both Catholic and non-Catholic — have made conscientious decisions to use contraceptives. As we assert the right to follow our conscience, we respect their right to follow theirs. And we believe that, if the Government wishes to provide such services, means are available that do not compel religious organizations to serve as its agents. We do not seek to impose our religious beliefs on others; we simply ask that the Government not impose its values on the University when those values conflict with our religious teachings. We have engaged in conversations to find a resolution that respects the consciences of all and we will continue to do so.

That’s the second paragraph. The first paragraph describes the products as “abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives and sterilization procedures which are contrary to Catholic teaching.”

The majority of women pay absolutely no attention to the hopelessly misogynistic and backward Catholic male hierarchy, who also just happen to believe that women shouldn’t have a direct line to God. You see, that’s the province of the people with penises.

That these men continue to believe that contraception is wrong, hidden behind “contrary to Catholic teaching,” is just one of the reasons our country and developing nations can’t cap the reality of women having to bear children they can’t afford to raise, either emotionally or financially.

Whenever anyone making an argument begins by telling you what something is not about you can bet that’s exactly what it is about.

The Catholic Church is about protecting itself and the fraternity under the guise of “conscience,” as their irrelevancy mounts. Faith adhering women of certain generations may always be attached to the ceremony and beauty of church images, to which I can certainly relate, but our spirituality is something separate and unbound. What can be assured is that modernity is setting women free of corrupt religious institutions that deny spiritual power and leadership posts based on gender.

Fundamentalism is antithetical to spiritual excavation, the most enlightened living beyond the doctrines and dictates of men.

Read full story · Comments { 11 }

Defining Mitt Takes a Hit, The Video

By on 22 May 2012

DAVID AXELROD “LOVES” Mayor Cory Booker. He said so while calling him an idiot on economics and suggesting he’d better start looking for a firehouse that has openings.

Mitt Romney loves Cory, too, but his team is pretty crazy about Ford and Stevie, too.

This story has marathon legs that equals Mitt’s Etch A Sketch catastrophe.

It’s all so embarrassing for team Obama, but unfortunately they don’t have much cover for themselves where Wall Street, insider coziness and business as usual is concerned.

From the Washington Post on Monday:

The White House visitor records make it clear that Obama’s senior officials are granting that access to some of K Street’s most influential representatives. In many cases, those lobbyists have long-standing connections to the president or his aides. Republican lobbyists coming to visit are rare, while Democratic lobbyists are common, whether they are representing corporate clients or liberal causes.

[...] White House spokesman Eric Schultz referred in a statement to Obama’s “unparalleled commitment to reforming Washington” and noted that this is the first administration to release the visitor records. “The people selected for this article are registered lobbyists, but this article excludes the thousands of people who visit the White House every week for meetings and events who are not,” he said. “Our goal has been to reduce the influence of special interests in Washington — which we’ve done more than any Administration in history.”

The White House visitor logs capture the ordinary (and extraordinary) pulse of the presidency, from state arrival ceremonies to bowling alley tours.
Explore White House visitors database

Acting on a pledge to make government more transparent, Obama released the visitor logs, although he did so to settle a lawsuit seeking the records. The administration publishes the information monthly, with a three-month delay, so the latest information is from January.

I just can’t stop laughing.

The Obama White House got a sudden urge of transparency, but it came because they were settling a lawsuit. How perfect is that?

Didn’t I tell you the perfect match-up was Obama versus Romney.

I’m counting the days until the debate that pits Obama’s saving the auto industry talking points, which tells an American success story, meets up with Romney’s argument that what Pres. Obama actually did was a structured bankruptcy, which caused layoffs and other personal collateral damage that comes with trying to save a company, ala Bain style.

On the other hand, the squeeze play Pres. Obama can put on Mitt over Romneycare is likely to match that.

“The whole process was interesting for me. It’s a little scary,” Menter said. “You need a lobbyist to get a meeting.” – White House visitor logs provide window into lobbying industry

The founders would not recognize this country.

Read full story · Comments { 9 }

Dogfish Head Alehouse: Great Brew, Worst Pizza Ever

By on 21 May 2012

An outstanding Egyptian brew… savory elixir, with rosemary, sage and thyme… Mixed berry beer… tasting was a treat, though I’m definitely anything but a beer connoisseur. Dogfish Head Alehouse in Fairfax, Virginia was a nice place to stop by Sunday.

The roasted garlic Caesar salad was spectacular, and I’m very picky about this dish. Many restaurants are under the impression that romaine with a creamy dressing, stale garlic and croutons is enough, totally misunderstanding the sacred nature of the Caesar. This salad is worth it.

The wings are above average, but they’re not the crispy greasy things you get most places that so many people enjoy. We had the Thai, as well as the traditional.

Worst. Pizza. Ever. It’s on the menu as “wood grilled pizzas.” The crust is flabby, the dough tasteless and with no crisp char the slice lays in your hand like a wet piece of paper and tastes about the same (I imagine, though I’ve not had wet paper). I took one bite and didn’t take another. Quattro formaggio was our choice, adding basil, the only tasty element. Mark is a pizza man and thought it was ghastly. It was, but he ate it anyway; he’s like that. Avoid the pizza at all cost.

The service was extraordinary. Our waiter, George, took me through the beer list, graciously teaching along the way. It was slow on Sunday at the Fairfax location, so we also met others in the Dogfish Head Alehouse team. I cannot say enough about the service. We sat in the bar, as usual wherever we eat, where the atmosphere is large, with high tables we enjoy, as well as flat screens, though we were into each other. Everyone was extraordinarily friendly and helpful.

Hearty recommend for the Egyptian ale, which had a sourdough flavor we both thought spectacular. I’d explain it further, but I don’t have the experience drinking a lot of beer to do so.

Because of George, this wino learned something about beer. It can be fantastic. Dogfish Head brand beer and ale is popular for a reason. But you likely already knew that.

Read full story · Comments { 3 }

2 Democrats, 2 Days, Obama’s Bain Argument Blown to Smithereens

By on 21 May 2012

“I would not have backed off the comments if I were Mayor Booker,” Ford, a Democrat, said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” “The substance of his comments on ‘Meet the Press,’ I agree with the core of it. I would not have backed them out… private equity’s not a bad thing. As a matter of fact, private equity is a good thing in many, many instances.” [Politico]

TWO DEMOCRATIC BROTHERS blew away the Obama campaign’s entire economic strategy against Mitt Romney in just two days. First it was Mayor Cory Booker on Sunday, followed today by Blue Dog Democrat Harold Ford. It’s been a devastating start to the week.

Booker tried to fix things on Twitter, then with an embarrassing YouTube that I will not insult you by posting. The guy’s a mess.

I awoke this morning to a press call announcement from team Obama rolling out the video above and hitting hard on “RomneyEconomics” and his management decisions regarding Ampad, which after Booker’s “Meet the Press” performance read like damage control.

It hit its target, because Bain actually responded:

Throughout Bain Capital’s 28-year history, we have been focused on growing businesses and improving their operations. We acquired Ampad from Mead Corp. in 1992, and grew the overall business during the four years we controlled the company. The Marion plant was a challenging situation in a business that was performing well overall, growing revenues and adding jobs. Our control of Ampad ended in 1996, fully four years before it encountered financial difficulties due to overwhelming pressure from ‘big box”’ retailers, declines in paper demand, and intense foreign price pressures. Despite political attacks that emphasize the few companies that have struggled, the facts are that during Bain Capital’s ownership, revenues grew in 80 percent of the more than 350 companies in which we have invested.

Mitt Romney’s now got a ready made ad, using Democratic voices, African Americans no less, to bolster that Bain’s not bad. He can even throw in Steve Rattner for color.

Well done, Democrats.

You’ve turned from being known as hep civil rights advocates and hell fire and brimstone social and economic justice advocates to squishy, nouveau riche, Wall Street, grand bargain Blue Dog conservatives bent on compromise with yourselves.

Read full story · Comments { 27 }

Race Center Stage on Right

By on 21 May 2012

via Buzzfeed

“In Obama’s America, the white kids now get beat up with the black kids cheering,” says Limbaugh.

AFTER STEPPING IN over the weekend, because in the conversation over Trayvon Martin things turned ugly, coupled with Zimmerman apologists ignoring his own behavior in escalating the situation that led to Martin’s killing, the article on Buzzfeed today is particularly timely.

It goes well beyond the Trayvon Martin case, but remains pinned to it, because of the reaction to the killing of the youth by Pres. Obama, which was understandable to anyone who is a step away from reactionary Obama derangement syndrome, but also what’s developed in other communities since.

If you’ve spent much time consuming conservative media lately, you’ve probably learned about a slow-burning “race war” going on in America today. Sewing together disparate data points and compelling anecdotes like the attack in Norfolk, conservative bloggers and opinion-makers are driving the narrative with increasing frequency. Their message: Black-on-white violence is spiking — and the mainstream media is trying to cover it up. – In Conservative Media, A “Race War” Rages, by McKay Coppins

Defense attorneys are making the case for Zimmerman’s defense across the web and new media, while amateur Zimmerman defenders are doing something else entirely, represented by Daily Caller boss Tucker Carlson.

“I wouldn’t call it political correctness, I would call it lying,” said Tucker Carlson, editor-in-chief of The Daily Caller, describing what he considers to be the media’s racial double-standard. “To the press, the only hate crimes are straight white men somehow committing acts of violence against people who are not straight white men. When in fact, the real world is a lot more complicated than that.”

Ah yes, it’s all “a lot more complicated than that.”

If you’re talking about whether George Zimmerman will be found guilty or not, yes, it is, because it will be up to a jury of human beings who come with their own emotions, judgments and prejudices, which live beyond a judge’s instructions to them or their duty to be impartial.

However, if you’re talking about people looking at the case of an individual who got out of his car carrying a concealed weapon to engage a youth who was doing nothing wrong and ended up dead, it’s not complicated at all.

An individual’s civil rights is one of the cornerstones of our democratic republic.

Anyone, regardless of race, who abridges another’s civil rights when that person is doing nothing wrong and going about his or her business, is creating an event out of nowhere. But when that person helps cause an altercation that leads to the death of an innocent unarmed citizen, who wasn’t doing anything wrong in the first place, something has not only gone terribly wrong in our society, but with the foundational tenet of freedom in this country.

Conservatives feel aggrieved because no one is standing up for a white person who’s been beaten? The latest was an incident that went down in Norfolk, VA., when two reporters in a car were attacked.

Outraged that the national media didn’t give this story the same extensive coverage as the Martin shooting, O’Reilly launched into a campaign that has stretched over several nights of Fox’s top-rated show. Along the way, his team has uncovered an early police report that described the assault as a hate crime (authorities said it was a clerical error), and found neighborhood kids who speculated on camera that the assailants were exacting racial revenge for the death of Trayvon. O’Reilly has also publicly shamed the local newspaper for ignoring the story, and even called on Va. Gov. Bob McDonnell and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to intervene in the investigation.

But while Norfolk may be the most high-profile chapter yet in the “race war,” it’s hardly the only one conservatives have highlighted. Over the past four years, the Drudge Report has run dozens of headlines chronicling acts of violence against white victims — often by black youths.

Having lived through the tumultuous times of the O.J. Simpson trial, as well as the Rodney King verdict, it’s not hard to see the beginning’s of something serious developing in the American atmosphere.

The professional defense case may end in a not guilty verdict on second degree murder charges, but George Zimmerman is not innocent. No one is, regardless of race, who abridges an individual’s civil rights. This is what makes it complicated.

Conservatives are utilizing the Trayvon Martin killing as a springboard to attack the media on separate cases that often don’t get reported. Not all domestic battery and abuse cases get reported either, but conservatives aren’t ranting about that injustice. Black children go missing, yet they don’t get the attention white children do in the media either. This is a conservative identity crisis, because of what began a long time ago as a bedrock of Republican politics. It’s called the southern strategy that was created to mine and appeal to racists to beat Democrats.

That it’s being utilized in a presidential election year to rev up people against Pres. Obama, while conservatives in new media and their Republican allies hype all sorts of swiftboating angles surrounding the first African American president, is obvious to any fair minded analyst watching the spectacle.

They’re coming for Pres. Obama and people against him will use any means necessary, going well beyond issues and policy debate, including race baiting, to do it.

Unfortunately, team Obama utilized race baiting themselves in the ’07-’08 primary season, with the formerly distinguished Rep. James Clyburn willing to even call former Pres. Clinton out on race to help candidate Obama in South Carolina, as did Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. when he questioned whether Hillary cried during Katrina, which exploded into a horrendous spectacle between Democrats. It’s covered in my book in the chapter “Eating Your Own,” proving yet again how relevant this history remains today.

In a country built through slavery and just now seeing the first African American president, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that at a time of great economic angst deeply woven grievances are rising to the surface after an unarmed black teen is killed, not by a police officer, but by an American citizen.

That an African American president can see Trayvon Martin as a possible son and relate to the tragedy shouldn’t shock anyone. So why does Pres. Obama relating to Trayvon Martin upset conservatives and other anti-Obama zealots so much?

Where are people on Trayvon Martin’s civil rights? For too many, it’s the same place we were prior to 1964.

Read full story · Comments { 44 }

Cory Booker is ‘Very Uncomfortable’

By on 21 May 2012

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

“I’m not about to sit here and indict private equity,” Booker added. “If you look at the totality of Bain Capital’s record, they’ve done a lot to support businesses — to grow businesses. And this to me, I’m very uncomfortable.” – Mayor Cory Booker on “Meet the Press” [HuffPost]

THERE GOES Cory’s cred, or what’s left of it after siding with Gov. Christie on education reform.

The problem for Democrats is that he’s not the first to say something like this. Former Obama administration official Steve Rattner defended Bain on “Morning Joe” months ago.

Fair is fair. … But I think these attacks are unfair. I think Mitt Romney, not only had a very successful career throughout business, but Bain Capital is a terrific, first class firm. Managing money mostly for foundations, for endowments, for pension funds on behalf of exactly the people Rick Perry thinks he’s trying to harm, and they had a great record with 80 or 90 investments, all of which made a lot of money for their investors… and he did it in a perfectly honorably, appropriate way. … – Steve Rattner, on “Morning Joe” (comes at around 3:11 in video above) [TM]

It illustrates there’s not much difference between Democrats and Republicans in many things and one in particularly. When it comes to their penchant to excuse big business and big banks, both bend over backward.

It’s not that business or the banks are evil, because capitalism is run by individuals. It’s the deck is stacked in their favor by Congress and the Executive branch, no matter who’s in charge. The big money machine stands as more important in the eyes of today’s politicians, with very few exceptions. This isn’t a false equivalency between Dems and the GOP, but the truth about our political systems that pretends to be looking out for we the people, but really is all about sucking up to the powers in the financial system so they’ll put them in charge.

Political preservation depends on having big business and big banks on your side.

One difference is that there is at least a small coterie of Democrats, including Sen. Sherrod Brown, plus Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, who do work alone and against the congressional tide on these issues, starting with strengthening Dodd-Frank and crafting a stronger Volker Rule.

Unfortunately, when Republicans get involved their first instinct is to gut or weaken regulations, as well as expand tax advantages for private equity, something Mitt Romney hails as a good thing. This is a fact, so you have to ask yourself why Democrats aren’t making that case on “Meet the Press.” The answer is obvious.

Republicans and most Democrats today think the very wealthy are the “job creators.” It’s what ails this country.

Mitt Romney, who made just over $20 million in investment income in 2010, wasn’t having any of it. During an August 2007 appearance on Kudlow & Company, Romney was asked what he thought of the effort to close the loophole. He wasn’t happy. “I want people to be able to save their money and invest in America’s economy tax-free,” Romney said. “I want to lower taxes. I want to lower marginal rates across the board. I want to lower taxes for corporations,” he told Kudlow.

[...] From 1998 to 2006, private equity and investment firms spent $3 million a year lobbying Congress, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Bain got into the game in 2007, registering with prominent Washington lobbying firms Public Strategies, Inc. and Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld. To date, Bain has paid some $3 million to these firms to make sure corporate taxes stay low and CEOs remain fat and happy.

… Of course, private equity isn’t the exclusive terrain of one party or the other. As Hacker and Pierson outlined in their book, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) has been one of the carried interest loophole’s most ardent defenders. And as Kosman points out, four of the past eight Treasury secretaries have direct ties to the private equity industry. …

Read full story · Comments { 7 }

The Choice for Romney is Liz Cheney

By on 19 May 2012

Why not the best for President Obama and the Democratic party? And how much more will victory be worth having this November when it’s a victory over the liberal dream team of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton? – “Why Not the Best,” by Bill Kristol

DON’T TELL ME Republicans are going to make Elizabeth Cheney, former “Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs,” go through the Senate farm system.

Don’t tell me Sen. Marco Rubio is a better vice presidential choice than Dick Cheney’s eldest daughter, Elizabeth. She beats him on experience alone, though we all know that doesn’t matter to Republicans.

Because Republicans are more worried about the Hispanic vote more than the women’s vote? No doubt Rubio could change this and heaven knows the Republicans sure could use a shift away from their “illegal” immigration phobia. When I first mentioned Sen. Rubio as the best pick, it was soon after he gave the obligatory no, he wasn’t interested. If they could get the women’s vote, which is possible on economics alone, they won’t need many Hispanics, which looking at the map out west isn’t very encouraging.

But Mitt Romney will never be confused with Rick Santorum on these issues, and many women understand that. (I should disclose here that my husband is an adviser to Mr. Romney; I have no involvement with any campaign, and have been an independent journalist throughout my career.) The struggling women in my life all laughed when I asked them if contraception or abortion rights would be a major factor in their decision about this election. For them, and for most other women, the economy overwhelms everything else. – Obama: Stop Condescending to Women, by Campbell Brown

Where are conservative women on this one?

Why aren’t women on the right being more aggressive for a woman vice presidential nominee?

Are they really going to settle for two men on the ticket? It’s so 20th century.

Is Sarah Palin’s disastrous candidacy actually going to make them miss this moment? A moment ripe to beat Pres. Obama, but which comes with a Republican nominee who’s a horrific political candidate that desperately needs a lift, someone who could appeal to the majority voting block, women.

When Mrs. Cheney was asked about her political ambitions on Fox News Channel, she demurred: “I’m really focused on defeating Barack Obama. We don’t have the luxury, frankly, of looking beyond this election.”

What better way to take on Obama than next to Mitt Romney?

Now, I’m not a fan of Mrs. Cheney’s politics, obviously. But I’m sick to death of making incredibly strong women be subjected to the boys’ rules when it’s clear she’s prepared, served in sensitive positions in government, as well as having a solid anti-women’s rights stance on every issue that matters to religious conservatives.

Liz is mentioned in my book, the chapter on “It’s All the Women’s Fault,” for a couple of reasons, beginning with her role in a weird honor crimes case that turned out to be a hoax, as well as the embarrassing lawyer squabble she got into with conservatives over the constitutional right of legal representation of alleged terrorists. But also because I think she’s worthy of the Republican all star ideological national security team, as the video above illustrates.

Going down the list of women on the right who deserve attention for vice president, Mrs. Cheney is a more attractive candidate than Sen. Ayotte, Gov. Haley and Gov. Martinez combined, while also wiping away the Sarah Palin stain, because she’d play with the media like a cat with a bird, while not missing a beat on policy questions, no matter the subject. That is if anyone could get a question in edgewise, with mighty Liz talking about whatever she wanted and doing so with acrobatic aplomb.

The other factor is Mitt Romney’s hopeless befuddlement on foreign policy. He just can’t help it, because he’s reading off of a script without any depth on the subject matter whatsoever. Liz Cheney is reading off the same script, but she’s been dyed in her daddy’s neoconservatism fervor, through tutelage of the man who helped author the right wing manual on foreign policy.

Who wouldn’t pay to see Liz Cheney debate Joe Biden?

Marco versus Joe? That’s just funny, but the vetting sweepstakes would be a ball.

Oh, and what a vice presidential pit bull Liz would be, complete with lipstick.

If someone isn’t whispering in Mitt Romney’s ear about Elizabeth Cheney, I’d like to know why not.

This is my answer to Bill Kristol’s nauseating article for the Weekly Standard that once again trots out the ridiculous Obama-Hillary for 2012, because what he should be writing about is Elizabeth Cheney. He’s just distracted, because his main goal is to get Hillary Clinton tarred with the whole Obama – Romney 2012 disaster, which it will be no matter who is elected. Because if Bill Kristol and his back room boys aren’t worried about Hillary for 2016 they’re certifiable. They know she’s not sure if she’ll run, but they also realize if she does she’ll be a political bullet train.

Read full story · Comments { 23 }

Queer Talk: NAACP Passes Resolution in Support of Marriage Equality

By on 19 May 2012

by Joyce L. Arnold, Liberally Independent, Queer Talk, equality activist, writer.

A release this afternoon from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is another, and a quite significant, indication that “the times, they are a-changin’.”

Via NAACP:

Decision Affirms Opposition to Government Efforts to Codify Discrimination …

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People today released a resolution supporting marriage equality. At a meeting of the 103-year old civil rights group’s board of directors, the organization voted to support marriage equality as a continuation of its historic commitment to equal protection under the law.

‘The mission of the NAACP has always been to ensure the political, social and economic equality of all people,’ said Roslyn M. Brock, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the NAACP. ‘We have and will oppose efforts to codify discrimination into law.’

‘Civil marriage is a civil right and a matter of civil law. The NAACP’s support for marriage equality is deeply rooted in the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and equal protection of all people’ said Benjamin Todd Jealous, President and CEO of the NAACP.

The NAACP has addressed civil rights with regard to marriage since Loving v. Virginia declared anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional in 1967. In recent years the NAACP has taken public positions against state and federal efforts to ban the rights and privileges for LGBT citizens, including strong opposition to Proposition 8 in California, the Defense of Marriage Act, and most recently, North Carolina’s Amendment 1, which changed the state constitution’s to prohibit same sex marriage.

Below is the text of the resolution passed by the NAACP board of directors:

‘The NAACP Constitution affirmatively states our objective to ensure the ‘political, educational, social and economic equality’ of all people. Therefore, the NAACP has opposed and will continue to oppose any national, state, local policy or legislative initiative that seeks to codify discrimination or hatred into the law or to remove the Constitutional rights of LGBT citizens. We support marriage equality consistent with equal protection under the law provided under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Further, we strongly affirm the religious freedoms of all people as protected by the First Amendment.’

A Human Rights Campaign release regarding the announcement begins:

On the heels of President Obama’s historic support for marriage equality and subsequent polling on the issue among African-Americans, the NAACP Board of Directors today endorsed marriage equality. …

Half of African-Americans, according to an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll conducted earlier this month, back marriage equality. The Journal reported, ‘Almost every demographic slice was more in favor of gay marriage than it had been in 2009.’

One of my favorite parts of the NAACP release: “We have and will oppose efforts to codify discrimination into law.”

Read full story · Comments { 16 }

Chen Guangcheng on a Jet Plane Bound for Newark

By on 19 May 2012

The departure of Mr. Chen, one of the country’s most prominent dissidents, and the negotiations that led up to it, appeared to reflect careful calculations in both countries as they seek to cooperate on a range of economic and security issues.

The American role in aiding Mr. Chen — spiriting him into the embassy after he escaped with the help of other dissidents — infuriated the Chinese, who complained fiercely about what they considered interference in their internal affairs, but in the end they quietly engaged with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and a team of diplomats to defuse what could have evolved into a full-blown diplomatic crisis. – New York Times

ALL’S WELL that ends well.

But it was a close one for both our country and the Chinese.

Read full story · Comments { 2 }