Philly and Pittsburgh With Alabama In Between

Just drove through central PA on my way to the AP reading in Louisville.  Man is that backwoods.

I was listening to The Devil and the White City on CD, since my iPod is dead.  Listening to the descriptions of 19th century Chicago is a helpful antidote to the idea that things are shitty right now.

Indulgent

I just treated myself to a hot towel, straight razor shave, my first.

Definitely worth it.

I could never bring myself to getting a pedicure, though I hear they are awesome and my feet certainly could use some help.

But this is about as close as I'm going to get to that level of pampering, and it was pretty damned nice.

The Essential Negativism Of The GOP

The two main stories circulating at the moment are Romney's embrace of nutzoid birther and serial bankruptcy defendant Donald Trump and the profound and systematic voter purges going on in Florida.

I don't think Obama needs Florida, and I don't think he's going to use Florida as a firewall or part of his math to 270.

But basically, the GOP has yet to come up with a single positive message for this campaign cycle.  Obama is a Kenyan/Socialist.  Brownish type people should not vote.

To the degree that there is an agenda, it is the nebulous "plan" of Paul Ryan, which effectively ends the social safety net, while cutting taxes on the rich and increasing defense spending.

If our politics were based on actual policy, the election would be effectively over.

Donald Trump: Sleeper Agent

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/donald-trump-lets-loose-with-unhinged-birther-rant-after-romney-reaffirms-support.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

He might possibly be Obama's secret weapon.

At War In A Time Of Terror

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?_r=2&hp&pagewanted=all

The above piece from the Times outlines the new US strategy for dealing with Al Qaeda.  Basically, we've replaced the hammer with a scalpel, using drones to fight Al Qaeda rather than invading countries.  Part of the strategy in Iraq was to create a "jihadi magnet" to draw in foreign fighters and kill them on the battlefield.

That turned out to be a sucky plan.

Instead, there is a "Star Chamber" set up to review life or death decisions and recommend action.

It's difficult to know what to think of this.

On the one hand, there is no transparency, no accountability and no final reckoning when things go wrong.  Decisions are made and implemented without it ever becoming a matter for public debate.  And while national security is less bound by public debate, these things are being done in our name, under our flag.  That's troubling. It is also troubling that we have set a precedent for future presidents and other countries that tracking people down and killing them remotely is OK.

But terrorism is such a fundamentally different form of warfare.  We are not at war with a state - something the Bush Administration seemed to struggle to understand.  We are at war with various loosely allied groups of individuals who can do great damage if they succeed only once out of a hundred attempts.  In some ways, targeted killing is really the only smart way to fight this type of enemy.  Certainly striking guys like Awlaki makes more sense than invading Yemen.

If there is one issue that most disturbs the left about Obama, it is likely this.  But for whatever reason, I've had trouble getting too upset over these strikes.  I'm probably more disappointed in his lack of advocacy for global warming.  I understand the constitutional and moral scruples over targeted assassination.

Yet, this is not a conflict we started.  It is not a conflict that has any clear definable end.  The only way to win it is to make it too painful for the other side to wage.

I don't like it, but I don't see an alternative.

The Well Timed Compliment

By the time graduation comes around, we are all ready to see the Seniors leave.  They are done with us and we with they.

But this year, we had an especially "nice" group of seniors, and they delivered some especially nice thank yous.

That helps remind us - the faculty - that these are genuinely good, interesting young people who are just ready to leave high school, not sluggards and sloths.  And it makes the job so worthwhile.

So, if any of my students are reading this - as some claim to - you are very, very welcome.

It has been a pleasure.

Breaking Radio Silence

Something weird happened yesterday.

I didn't go online at all.

Somehow the world kept spinning.

Which is good because they next ten days or so is going to be pretty sporadic.

The Difference Between Policy And Politics

Austerity has failed.  The evidence is overwhelming that Keynes is right and all the Austerians are wrong.

But the basic idea that "governments, like families, should tighten their belts during hard times" is deeply ingrained in the public mind.  Once something becomes a trope, it's hard to dislodge.  Obama has managed to make the Democrats the responsible party on national defense, but he was helped a ton by the raging incompetence of Team Bush, the Iraq Quagmire and shooting bin Laden in the face.

But the idea that governments should cut sail in the face of an economic storm is incredibly entrenched and incredibly damaging.

Look, if the GOP wins both branches of government next fall (God help us), they will become Keynesians.

But right now they can exploit the idea that Obama is fiscally profligate - which is entirely false - and the idea that they will balance the budget.  Again, we KNOW from the past thirty years that Democrats are more balanced in their fiscal policy than Republicans.

The challenge that Obama is facing is that he must win the political debate - "I'm not a big spender.  I believe in fiscal discipline." - while also winning the policy debate - "We must stimulate demand in a sluggish economy and that requires temporary planned deficit spending."

I remember a few years back, I was arguing with my dad about the Bush tax cuts and how they represented poor leadership.  He said he didn't care, because Bush was getting the Global War on Terra right. (I would argue that last point, too.)

Needless to say, he's now VERY concerned with deficits.

If it wasn't for the Fifty Little Hoovers, the Fifty Little Greeces, we'd be out of the unemployment recession already.  If it wasn't for the policy debacle in the Eurozone, I bet we'd be out, too.

But austerity makes a sort of gut-level sense and it's what people believe, evidence be damned.

Needless to say, given Mitt Romney's demonstrated propensity to say literally almost anything and the flood of Super PAC money, I think we are in for a very depressing debate.

Holy Distractions, Batman

There are two BIG stories this week apparently.

Potential breakthrough in negotiations with Iran?  No.

The Facebook IPO SNAFU?  Hell, no.

Orange Julius (Boehner) saying he'll create another debt crisis?  Nope.

No, the two big stories are that Cory Booker undercut Obama's assault on Romney's time at Bain Capital and now Larry Flynt did something gross.

The Booker thing shows that despite his tremendous personal story and magnetism, Booker is still a pol who looks out for himself first.  As mayor of notorious hellhole Newark, he has to keep Wall Street happy, as he has enlisted them in certain efforts to make his notorious hellhole slightly less brimstoney.  I'm sure Booker IS troubled by Obama attacking the lessons that R-Money learned at Bain.  And he should probably keep it to his damned self when he acts as a surrogate for Obama.

While this is a messaging problem, it hardly rises to the level of a problem, the way that - for instance - Romney speaking to Latino businessmen at the Chamber of Commerce and not mentioning anything to do with Latino interests does.  Outreach!

As for the Larry Flynt thing, the right wing wurlitzer is asking us to believe that Hustler's degrading photoshop of a female conservative columnist is exactly the same as what Rush Limbaugh said about Sandra Fluke.

The problem with this analogy is that Larry Flynt is a creepy cretinous lecher who no politician (outside of a drunken John Edwards) would be caught within a mile of.  Limbaugh has been the de facto voice of the GOP for years.  Limbaugh was made an honorary member of Congress by the GOP.  When he speaks, GOP leaders fall in line.

As Booman put it, liberals defense of Flynt extends entirely to the fact that he has a right to publish his filthy magazine and people have a right to buy it or not.  They extend the same rights to the publisher of the Turner Diaries, too.

Politics inevitably seizes on little moments and small acts.  So much of a politician's life is scripted and controlled that these tiny glimpses of real humanity are what matter.  It's why Mitt's dog on the roof and his wife's battle with MS are important in figuring out who the guy really is.  My read is that Mitt cares a great deal about the people close to him, but doesn't really give a damn about people in general.  Maybe that's wrong, but that's the sense I get from him.

Meanwhile, you have this:

A young boy wanted to know if the President of the United States hair felt like his.  And for the first time in 220 years, it did.  And the President asked him to touch it.

Does this matter when it comes to figuring out which man will do a better job getting the economy going?  No.  But little things like this do matter in assessing which person you trust with the job.

This nonsense noise about Booker and Flynt and whatever else will come down the pike... not so much.

The Children Of Amy Winehouse

Amy Winehouse may have been a tragic trainwreck of a human being, but without her, there is no Adele.

Nor is there this:

Mitt Romney Is A Terrible Candidate (And His Campaign Staff Isn't Too Hot Either)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/22/1093930/-Mitt-Romney-punts-on-Bain#comments

Really?

One thing we've always been able to count on is ferocious message discipline from the GOP.  The Romney campaign and Romney himself are simply all over the map.

This was a problem with McCain, too, and to some degree it represents the problems guys like Romney and McCain have.  Both men probably believe in certain things that they have to bury in order to represent the GOP.  And since that's tough to maintain, you wind up careening all over the place like McCain did in 2008 and Romney's Etch-A-Sketch in 2012.  Santorum would have been consistent and on-message, because he actually believes the crap he's talking about.

Of course, the example above IS something Mitt believes deeply, so the ineffectual response to attacks on Bain is just mystifying.

It's also worth noting that when Obama's surrogate went off message on the Sunday morning Snooze shows, it has consumed all the oxygen in the room.  But the GOP simply wanders around saying, "You can't talk about Bain, unless you're talking about Bain."  IOKIYAR.

Fascinating Facts That Have No Bearing On Our Political Discourse

Well, well, well.  Turns out President Obama is NOT a big spender.  Any liberal could have told you that.  Paul Krugman could have told you that repeatedly.

In fact, anything strike you about that chart?  Who is REALLY good at controlling spending?  Not the Republicans.  Now some of that is because two years into Clinton and Obama's presidencies, they lost control of Congress (or at least the House), and divided government tends to reduce spending.

But Democrats controlled the House in all but two years of the Reagan/Bush I era.  They had significant control of the Congress for the last two years of Bush II.

Maybe it's because when the GOP is in power, they want to retain power.  Maybe it's because they realize that people "hate government in general but like it in the specific" and therefore do things the public wants.

The other day there was someone saying that Obama enjoyed a substantial (and unsurprising) lead over Mitt Romney on foreign policy.  And that was, like, weird!  A Democrat enjoying higher approval on foreign policy?  Unpossible!  Except that C+ Augustus did such a crappy job overseas that Americans have decided to give the Democrats a look and discovered they generally prefer the approach that have characterized Democratic foreign policy since William Jennings Bryan resigned from Wilson's cabinet.

So, too, the idea that Democrats are bigger spenders is part of the tacit understanding of American politics.  It doesn't matter if it's true (turns out it's not, at least at the Presidential level), it FEELS true.

And no amount of data will convince people otherwise.

Which is why our political discourse is so stoopud.

Arizona Brings The Crazy

This guy is in charge of elections in Arizona.  Feel better?

We all know Sheriff Joe Arpaio, or we would if we kept track of racist fascists in Maricopa County law enforcement.  He's being targeted by the Justice Department for being a racist fascist.

He's also a Birther.

His being a Birther means that other Arizona politicians have to become Birthers, too.

What we are seeing is an echo chamber of teh Crazee.  A feedback loop of racist, nativist Teatard nonsense.

At some point Arizona will likely tip Blue because of the brown people living there.  It happened to California - the state that gave us Nixon - and it will likely happen in Arizona.

And not a moment too soon, if you ask me.

(BTW: I got my computer back finally, so more pictures.  Yay!)

Segregation Now, Segregation Tomorrow, Segregation Forever

http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/sets/72157626354149574/

You think we live in a post-racial America?

Look at these maps of urban areas based on race.

More Mann And Ornstein

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/want-to-end-partisan-politics-heres-what-wont-work--and-what-will/2012/05/17/gIQA5jqcWU_print.html

As usual, spot on.  I especially like the idea of turning the election into a lottery, where you get a receipt and that's you ticket for a, say, $50M prize.  Their point about mandating (or at least dramatically improving) voter turnout would likely decrease extreme partisanship founded on turning out the base.

Interesting piece.