Month: September 2015

"President Jeb Bush" is not something this country will ever have to endure. And that is just as well. Jeb's economic brain-trust has come up with an economic plan that…

Ed Kilgore says the GOP can screw up a one car funeral. Greg Sargent says the GOP is going to snatch defeat from the jaws of defeat. What am I talking about? Well, we all know that the Iran Deal is done. President Obama has secured the support of enough Democrats in the House and Senate to not only sustain his veto of the potential Disapproval Resolution from the Congress, but also to filibuster the Resolution in the Senate so that it never passes in the first place. And that is not sitting well with your Radical Republican. They hate it when the President and America wins. So instead of going through with the vote on the Iran Deal and passing their Disapproval Resolution, radical conservatives in the House have hatched a new plan that is also doomed for failure.

The remaining member of our Congressional delegation, Congressman John Carney (D), came out in favor of the Iran Deal yesterday. His statement from his Facebook page:

After much thought and consideration, I have decided to support the Iran nuclear deal. I appreciate hearing from so many of you on this issue, and I know this is something many feel passionately about. I am under no illusions that we can count on Iran to adhere to this deal in good faith. That being said, this agreement allows us to immediately ‘snap-back’ sanctions should Iran cheat. It also curtails Iran’s nuclear program by blocking its pathway to a bomb. I do not believe it’s possible to go back to the negotiating table, and I have concluded that this deal is better than no deal at all.

You see, that is why I am so fucking angry at this staged rendering of the garments by Carney and Coons. If Iran reneges on the deal, then guess what? The sanctions get reimposed immediately AND we bomb the ever loving shit out of them. That is obvious to everyone.

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).

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.

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....