Wednesday Open Thread [3.27.13]
Ross Douthat imagines the state of our politics today if the Iraq War never happened:
[T]ake away Iraq’s imprint on our politics, and America might well have still elected a Democrat to replace George W. Bush. But because of Iraq, the Democratic majority that did come to power in 2006 and 2008 has been more aggressive on public policy, less defensive in the culture war, and more proficient in the art of base mobilization than a hypothetical Clinton Restoration would have been – and their Republican opposition has been more ideologically bunkered-down, less nimble and less inclined to woo the center, than the G.O.P. might have been absent the trauma of Iraq.
Without Iraq, there is no Obama presidency. Obama would not have been able to distinquish himself from Clinton in the primaries and would have lost to her. Perhaps even more importantly, there would have been no Howard Dean. Thus, while Hillary would have gone on to beat John McCain due to the 2008 economic collapse, the Democratic Party would be a moderate mess, as the progressive take over of the party in 2005 would not have happened, and the 2006 retaking of Congress probably does not happen (although it would have in 2008).
Meanwhile, a new Gallup poll finds that public support for new federal spending to create jobs is, as Greg Sargent puts it, “simply overwhelming.”
72% support federal spending “to put people to work on urgent infrastructure repairs” and 72% support a “federal jobs creation law that would spend government money for a program designed to create more than 1 million new jobs.”
Here is an ad that will be playing a lot in 2014:
Finally, back to Iraq…
“Is it really too much to ask that those who supported the invasion and occupation of Iraq so enthusiastically at the time, and whose second thoughts have been far less fierce and full-throated than their initial enthusiasm, not deploy virtually the exact same crusading rhetoric about the necessity of the use of U.S. power in the name of overthrowing tyrants, and of America serving as an armed midwife to the birth of democracy in the Middle East, with regard to Syria as they did a decade ago with regard to Iraq?” – David Rieff, TNR.
Don’t know if any of you were in the house, but our state looked great on national TV last night as the Blue Hens came back to beat North Carolina, 78-69. Now it’s on to Bridgeport for the regional semifinal against Kentucky. You may not know it from watching ESPN, but this team is more than one player. Best of luck to Tina Martin and the team Saturday. Hope they keep the magic ride going at least one more game.
Mike: I was rather disturbed by the lack of diversity in the stands. That crowd was whiter than the Republican National Convention.
I must have slept through this:
I am referring to Howard Dean becoming the DNC Chair.
Hmmmm….OK. But for Douthat’s article — I agree that the Iraq War was a galvanizing issue, but so was the fact that the GOP under Bush was decidedly NOT centrist (no matter how much they want to delude themselves on that, I see no reason to enable that) as was the one thing not really under any party’s control and that was generational change. Much was made of Obama’s capture of young voters (and much wrong expectation that young people would stay home in 2012 too) and this I think Hillary would not have done as well as Obama.
POLITICIANS CREATE THE GAP—PING HOLES OF GUN VIOLENCE
Part 1 of 2
INSURANCE IS THE ANSWER. If gun/owner aren’t insured, they should be considered illegal, possession would be a crime. Registration, insurance card should be with the weapon and readily available at all times of storage, transport.
There are approx. 300,000,000 weapons floating around America, a large percentage of which are unregistered and in the hands of the unknown and likely, untold millions of unqualified, dangerous possessors. This is largely because of the ‘enabling’ and ‘permitting’ by legislators and the lack of law enforcement. Laws for new purchases are one thing, but American should be safe from the 300,000,000 existing weapons as well. What if there were 300,000,000 unchecked vehicles/drivers?
Have the government declare guns illegal if not insured. Let the insurance companies verify backgrounds and current records of who is stable, qualified to own a gun; what fire power is necessary for what task and where; how many guns are where; what type of guns are available to whom in a home/business; if those with guns available have mental, safety skills that are up to par and date; if they’ve aged out as incompetent; if they maintain safe handling, availability procedures; if persons at registered address have just been arrested for violence or other crimes; issued a no contact order; been physically abusive; threatened a neighborhood; are an alcoholic, are drug users, take prescription drugs for aggressive or unstable personalities, etc. Have law enforcement have the record available, of which guns are legal, which aren’t. Separate the proper from the illegal. Good example: Law enforcement,the motor vehicle dept and insurance companies work together on keeping track of every necessary record, registration tag, vehicle, driver, license, insurance card.
Politicians are wholly responsible for the gap–ping hole in the laws, the lack of enforcement. Guns laws are inadequate and be what they may, aren’t even being enforced by law. (Ask the government, the law enforcement, who owns the 300,000,000 guns – they can’t tell you.) Just as politicians enable climate change by supporting “lack of air pollution laws,” “resulting lack of enforcement;” – politicians supports gun violence by supporting “lack of gun laws,” “resulting lack of enforcement,” that benefit the weapons, ammo industries. Lawlessness by default. And as usual, special interests, their politicians, turn citizen against citizen to bicker unproductively for decades, it’s a hoax, no it isn’t; the cause is unknown, no it isn’t,) as special interests/politicians hold hands, laugh and skip – all the way to the bank and re election, to the bank, re election, bank…..
“LaPierre said that a list making it easier to track weapons used at crime scenes would be ‘abused.’ “Our names are going to be in the system, there is going to be a list created, the ‘list’ will be abused,” LaPiere said, being more concerned over privacy for gun owners, than deaths. “Some newspaper will print it off, somebody will hack it, there will be a ‘registry’.”
Abusing a list, what? How about innocent people being shot -now that’s ‘abuse.’ Big deal – a gun ‘registry’ in the hands of law enforcement. LaPiere conveniently ignores that his above example includes a “CRIME SCENE.” Here’s another place to start: If you ever want to call 911, you should register, either as non gun possessors, or as legal gun owner – beforehand. (Kind of like, if you want mail, you need an address, a mail box number.) When a policeman is called to confront a violent scene, don’t the ‘lawmakers think the officer should know if there are guns in the house, before he knocks on the door? Politicians aren’t looking out for the public by ‘allowing’ unregistered guns anywhere, and politicians aren’t even looking out for law enforcement, who have to deal with helter skelter gun possession. Think of all things you can’t keep or do on your property, but guns …sure who cares. Gun interests care.
Reality is, the public is abused by abusive politicians, so is law enforcement. As with all abusive, billion dollar industries, the weapons and ammo industry would like the public to continue to bare the burden, pay the expenses, bare the deaths – that are the result of free for all- gun violence, that political ‘lawlessness’ enables. (Fossil fuel industries – prime example – they make billions selling polluting product, you pay for health, environmental damages, climate damages – as politicians do NOTHING about “lack of laws.’ to reduce CO2 pollution sufficiently. (The politicians’ bonus – getting re elected for supporting pollution, business-as-usual. (Ask Castle, if one gets elected for trying to reduce CO2 pollution, even though cap and trade was an ineffective attempt.)
The result of free-for-all CO2 = climate crisis.
The result of free-for-guns = gun crisis.
Both are deadly, as politicians stand by ‘pretending’ they ‘don’t know what the ’cause’ is, as they do next to nothing but continue enabling and protecting their re election interests.
The fossil fuel industry is still denying climate change by saying, ‘we don’t know what causes it.’ In fact, even after Sandy’s aftermath, Republican, N.J. Gov.Christie said he would vote for ‘we don’t know why,’fossil fuel backed Romney. Same thing with guns. twenty, 5-6 year olds get shot and men buy up the shelves of the same weapon and ammo.
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/airport-full-of-sandy-damaged-cars/#photo-5533346/
Today, you can read that FEMA flood insurance is increasing for homeowners. No legislative action on the ’cause,’ a CO2, climate change, however.
Continued….
Part 2 of 2
POLITICIANS CREATE THE GAP—ING HOLES OF GUN VIOLENCE
A car, its’ driver, are registered and the insurance industry collects , to the tune of approx. $30,000-60,000 per one vehicle ownership over a lifetime, in some cases, for faultless driving. Guns however, end up costing billions of dollars in damages, from deaths, lifetime mental trauma/physical disabilities, fatherless/motherless children, lifetimes of depression; unsolved robberies, murders, etc. (Not to mention criminals controlling areas, where law officers fear to go.) And the illegal gun owner, of course, wants to continue to walk away nameless, untraceable, with no responsibility for his weapon and his contributing damages. Even if your car is stolen, within a day, the police , your insurance co., will be questioning you. Why is a hand held weapon different from a driven weapon? Answer: The industry. The insurance industry makes billions, when laws are enforced. (Cars and drivers are safer.) The weapons industry makes billions when a violence society is ‘enabled’ by lawlessness., lack of insurance. The free-for-all, no questions asked, shoot-em-up, we’re gonna buy every gun off the shelf, gun mentality, are the gun industries’ ‘profitable’ front line, with a soulless freak like LaPiere, egging them on, saying, ‘you’ll be ‘abused;’ you’ll be on a ‘list.’ (in other words, come stock up now boys.) Meanwhile, every 16 yr old with a ‘permit’ needs to be on a list as a legal vehicle possessor/driver -for a lifetime of tens of thousands of dollars of insurance.
What’s the difference? If one had a $100,000 Fisker Karma parked on the street, thieves would be eyeing it at night, trying to hot wire it, tow it or someone might use a gun to hijack it. That’s why the insurance company is charging the Karma owner every day, for that added risk factor. LaPiere is saying, some one’s gun can be used for a crime, but that irresponsible gun owner, shouldn’t have his name on any list; shouldn’t be identified, shouldn’t be questioned, shouldn’t be responsible, nadda. (LaPiere sure knows how to sell guns.) In other words, irresponsible (illegal) gun ownership is what the weapons industry wants. Anonymity sells guns.
No insurance should mean -it’s illegal to possess. Turn it in until one is qualified to possess it, if ever. If an unlicensed driver, in an unregistered, uninsured Karma gets in an accident with a Mercedes, kills people – Karma owner pays the price. Same for illegal guns/illegal gunman. You say, some penniless persons will have unregistered, uninsured guns anyway? Long jail time for possession; society doesn’t need armed lawbreakers roaming streets.
Topic 2) People who don’t want to legally register their guns, are afraid to do so, because they don’t want people to know what guns they have. Why don’t they want people to know? Because they are afraid some armed persons will come to steal them and the owner (possessors) will be subject to being attacked by armed gunmen? In other words, the illegal gun owners want to be the only persons armed and ready to kill humans if they feel it’s necessary – and they think lack of laws (by default) should protect their secret ‘ability to kill.’ And of course, LaPiere knows illegal gun activity and violence means big business. And…politicians know, ‘enabling’ big business, insures their re election.
Topic 3) Another issue. There is legitimacy to legally defending oneself in one’s own home, on one’s own property if sufficiently threatened. Or legally defending oneself in a public place. But mostly, these types of attacks on a person are short distance, man to man so to speak. It seems there should be limits on the range of fire power and the distance of the shooters weapon. If there is a short distance between their home or property line, (apt, condo, townhouse, development, for example,) their firepower is presently allowed into their neighbor’s home, on the other side of the plastic siding, drywall or the neighbor’s yard. Same over kill principle applies to shooting someone on a crowded street. Aren’t deer hunters, for instance, limited to the type and range of firepower, plus a list of other laws, to be applied to hunting in the neighborhood woods? If someone stole $10, should the ‘victim’ be able to shoot a half block away where an innocent bystander could be shot?
Topic 4) Or this, a person is ‘called’ abusive, trespassing, threatening (even though it may or may not be true,) is shot dead and no one is left, but the illegal gun shooter, with an illegal gun – he would be charged with murder.
Or, if an unlicensed driver, driving around in an unregistered, uninsured vehicle, gets in an accident – is automatically guilty.However, if a legal, licensed driver, is driving his registered, insured Fisker Karma and gets in an accident, he’s covered.
Politicians have created and maintain the gap—ping hole under a bridge as the weapon industry has ploughed through 300,000,000 weapons. Politicians continue to be responsible for ‘permitting,’ ‘enabling’ gun violence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oevxzs0rluA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmsRhlG7grQ
This post is actually a pretty decent analysis. I can’t pick it apart at its core. The truth is the economic collapse may not have occurred without Iraq War so the 2008 part may not have happened. Bush had the housing problem on his radar, but invested his political capital in the Iraq war and social security reform. If he would have had Afghanistan looking great, been able to have Bin Laden instead of Saddam, he would have been able to push tax reform and Fannie Mae reform. The economic collapse would not have occurred in 2007- 2008.
Bravo. “Fannie Mae reform” that is first class wingnuttery considering that fact that sub-prime loans and elaborate derivatives created by regular for profit banks caused the housing bubble and resulting collapse.
Speaking of first class wingnuttery, Rep. Louis Gohmert is throwing his weight around to not get a ticket.
typical teabagger
the rules are for everyone else – not him
BTW, thought I’d share this
Interesting read
http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/02/11/study-confirms-tea-party-was-created-big-tobacco-and-billionaires?fb_action_ids=10152715295825711&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%5B425125154232410%5D&action_type_map=%5B%22og.likes%22%5D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D
Geezer, it was hard not to notice that. Also, the average age of those in the stands was kind of up there. Still, it was a great atmosphere and lots of fun.