We Stand with the Democratic Six.

We Stand with the Democratic Six.

4 Comments
Last year, the budget deficit, which fluctuated between $60 and 83 million dollars, could have been solved by the implementation of new progressive tax rates on the wealthy alone. But we did nothing and now we have double the budget deficit. That was the main objection of the Democratic Six to the budget that passed last year. Their no votes were a reflection of disappointment that the can was kicked down the road. Guess what? Pete Schwartzkopf is not that strong of a kicker. Because "down the road" is January 2016. That's about 100 days from now. And no one time settlement money or budget gimmicks is going to balance the budget this year. And Pete Schwartzkopf is going to have to get over his hurt feelings, and not engage in petty retaliation against the six. Instead, he is going to have to follow their lead on the budget. We did it your way last year, Pete. Now we are going to do it our way.
I’m using “United States” and ditching “Union”

I’m using “United States” and ditching “Union”

19 Comments
The words we use shape our reality. This makes a concise case for not using the term "Union Troops" when we are talking about the armies of the United States of America.
I suggest we follow the lead of Finkelman and Baptist and alter our language for the Civil War. Specifically, let us drop the word “Union” when describing the United States side of the conflagration, as in “Union troops” versus “Confederate troops.” Instead of “Union,” we should say “United States.” By employing “Union” instead of “United States,” we are indirectly supporting the Confederate view of secession wherein the nation of the United States collapsed, having been built on a “sandy foundation” (according to rebel Vice President Alexander Stephens).
Wednesday Open Thread [9.9.2015]

Wednesday Open Thread [9.9.2015]

5 Comments
First Read says the Iran Deal is done, but the fighting over it isn't. Yesterday, four Democratic Senators came out in support, bringing the total to 42 Democrats in support, which means that there are more than enough Democrats to filibuster the disapproval resolution so as to prevent it from ever getting to the President's desk. Chris Coons might vote with the Republicans on the filibuster, since he has said that he wants up or down vote. Whatever. I could criticize him for that, but I won't. He has already been damaged by his summer of Angst and Grandstanding, that my only reaction to the latest news that me might not filibuster is to roll my eyes. “If you looked at all of today’s events, you’d think that we’re at some tipping point in the debate over the Iran deal. The Democratic and GOP frontrunners — Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump — are making dueling arguments regarding the deal. And Congress is equally fired up today. But much like the Battle of New Orleans, all of these rhetorical guns are being fired as the war over the Iran deal is essentially a done deal. The story is over, but the talking (or fighting) isn’t.” “We found that out yesterday after the Obama White House got 42 Senate Democrats to support the deal — one more than what’s needed to filibuster a resolution of disapproval, which would prevent the president from even having to issue a veto. (Now all of these 42 Senate Dems might not be committed to a filibuster right now, but do they want to have to take additional votes? That’s the question they’ll be facing.) So consider today a day full of sound and fury signifying nothing. As for Obama, the Iran deal represents his biggest achievement of his second term. But like with his other wins, it’s never pretty or easy. He may be getting what he wants, but it’s hardly a victory lap when bipartisan majorities in Congress and in the public aren’t celebrating with you." Once again Chuck Todd gives one last handjob to the ghost of Bipartisanship. Who the fuck cares about bipartisanship? I care about Partisanship. I don't want the Republicans agreeing with me, for it makes me think I am being tricked into something or that I am wrong in some way.

The Glacier Speech

4 Comments
DR Tucker at the Washington Monthly thinks the President's speech last week at the GLACIER conference in Alaska will down in the history books.
They should teach this speech in schools. Future generations are going to look back upon the date of August 31, 2015 and thank President Obama for stating, in clear, bold and stark terms, the immorality of carbon pollution and the moral necessity of taking action to defend the only planet we have. His speech to the “Global Leadership in the Arctic: Cooperation, Innovation, Engagement and Resilience” conference in Anchorage, Alaska was a soul-stirring call to action, and a testament to the power of words to awake the international conscience. Excerpts cannot do this speech justice. It must be watched, in full, to appreciate its grace and power.
Building the Party

Building the Party

25 Comments
I am a Democrat. I am a progressive Democrat, but I am a Democrat. And being a Democrat means I care about the Democratic Party. I care about building out the Democratic Party. Electing more and better Democrats across the land. Recruiting more and better candidates. Taking over state legislatures and Governorships. One of the reasons I am very resistant to a Bernie Sanders campaign is that he is not a Democrat. He does not care about the party or party building. In order for Bernie Sanders to win my vote in the primary he would first have to personally register as a Democrat in Vermont. I'm serious. Until he does that, I am not even considering voting for him, no matter how much I might agree with him. One of the negatives of the Obama Presidency has been the massive losses the Democratic Party suffered at the state and local level in 2010 and 2014. It is not necessarily President Obama's fault personally, as the same thing happened to President Clinton. Both Presidents came into office in economic downturn with an ambitious reform agenda and majorities in both Houses of Congress that allowed them to enact much of their plans. Benefits from the reforms do not come immediately (i.e. within 18 months), and thus voters more disposed to support the President are discouraged and stay home in the midterms, while angry conservatives who are eager to vote against the President's party turn out in droves. One of the reasons I am currently leaning towards supporting Hillary is that she and her campaign are attempting to build the party back up again, like Obama did in his first run for the Presidency....