Welcome to your weekend open thread. So far it looks like it’s going to be a great weekend. I hope you’re enjoying the weather.

TPM brings us a really bizarre story out of Missouri. A GOP candidate for the state Senate is being accused of threatening the campaign manager of his primary opponent in a disturbing way:

Bell alleges that, on his way home to Jefferson City on August 4th, he happened by Nieves’ campaign office and noticed the car of Nieves’ campaign treasurer, Dave Bailey, parked outside. Not seeing Nieves car, Bell told police he decided to stop to congratulate Bailey. But no sooner did he offer his congratulations to Bailey than he was surprised by Nieves. Bell says that Nieves called him a “little fuck” threw him across the room as Bailey closed the blinds. When Bell reminded him that they both were Republicans, he got an unexpected response.

then pulled out a black gun out [sic] of his pocket and made sure that I saw it and set it on a table. He told me he was going to kill me. I began to curl up into a ball and break down in fear and was yelling for help. He asked if I was wearing a wire and I told him NO; that I didn’t come to bring harm. He felt my chest, stomach and back to feel for a wire. He was still yelling at me and saying how back he was going to fuck me up. He head butted me on my forehead and It hurt but it wasn’t full power. I have had a headache ever since. He also slapped me across the face several times (at least twice, maybe more) but also not to his full potential He then drug [sic] me into the next room that appeared to be a kitchen area with a fridge, tile floor, and a sink. He still insinuated that I had a wire and made me take off my shirt.

After that, Bell says Nieves mocked his weight and then forced him first to get on his knees to beg forgiveness and then to lie on the floor.

As I was laying down looking up at him, he began to talk about when he was in the Navy. He asked me if I had ever had the absolute shit kicked out of me and I told him no. He asked if I had ever been in a fight and I told him once when in college. He said that he grew up in the projects and that “niggers” used to jump him and kick and beat the shit out of him relentless. He said everyone needs a theaurapeutic [sic] ass kicking in their life and that he was about to give me one.

Bell said that Nieves told him Bailey wouldn’t back him up in court, told him he was sick of looking at his chest and allowed him to get dressed. Nieves then reportedly told Bell to come into his office, where he demanded to know whether Bell had been the opposition researcher behind some of the allegations during the campaign. Bell told police he denied it, but that Nieves then went through the text messages in his phone and began writing some of them down, and then accused Bell of “flipping off [Nieves’] family while they were in the car on Sunday.”
When Bell denied it, Nieves accused him of calling Nieves’ family liars. Then Nieves reportedly threatened Bell’s boss James Harris, and told Bell that Harris was the adulterer. Finally, Nieves demanded that Bell apologize to Nieves’ wife over the phone. After the phone call finished, Bell said Nieves asked for explanations of who certain people in Bell’s phone were and said, if Bell lied, “he would fuck me up like the little pussy bitch I am.” Nieves reportedly discovered Bell had asked people to “mess with” Nieves’ Faebook page or call into his radio show as part of the campaign.

I don’t even know what to say about this incident except that paranoid crazy people act crazy.

In California, the Prop 8 case keeps moving. Opponents of same sex marriage asked the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to stay the ruling while appeals occur (remember Judge Walker says they might lack standing to appeal) but the state of California is asking that the stay be lifted permanently.

State Attorney General Jerry Brown filed documents late Friday urging a federal appellate court to allow same-sex marriages to go forward in California on Wednesday, saying there is “overwhelming evidence” that a voter-approved ban on such marriages is unconstitutional.

Brown’s filing comes as same-sex marriage opponents have asked the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to halt implementation of a landmark ruling from Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker until a full appeal is heard.

If you want to read the actual filings by the state of California and the city of San Francisco, you can read them at the Prop 8 Trial Tracker. I guess we’ll have to wait until Wednesday to find out if the 9th Circuit will continue to stay the ruling. If the 9th Circuit denies, the Prop 8 defenders can still appeal to SCOTUS.

Welcome to your Friday open thread. Today is a special Friday, it’s Friday the 13th! I hope only good luck finds you today.

I like this guy, Jared Bernstein, Chief Economic Advisor to the Vice President.

John Boehner wants a lot of people to lose their jobs.

We were awfully surprised to hear Rep. Boehner come out for killing jobs en masse in his own state and district by stopping the Recovery Act on last Sunday’s news shows.

Though we’re sure he didn’t know it, the Congressman is advocating to kill the expansion of the Butler County Community Health Center and bring some of the twenty-five highway projects across the district to a grinding halt. Across the state of Ohio, he said that approximately 4 million working families should get an unexpected cut in their paycheck as the Making Work Pay tax credit disappears, unemployed workers should go without unemployment benefits, and major Ohio road projects like the US-33 Nelsonville Bypass project and the Cleveland Innerbelt Modernization project should be stalled or stopped. Oh, and some of the more than 100 clean energy Recovery projects employing workers across the state should be shut down.

That would be the direct consequence of his suggestion that we shut down the Recovery Act: “There’s still about $400 billion or $500 billion of the stimulus plan that has not been spent. Why don’t we stop it?” Now if you have been following this blog, you know that the notion there is “$400 billion or $500 billion” in Recovery Act funding unspent couldn’t be further from the truth. In fact, we’re right on track to hit the goal set when the Recovery Act passed: that 70% of the $787 billion in funds would be “outlaid” or provided in tax benefits by September 30, 2010. But you don’t have to take our word for it – independent fact-checker Politifact.com recently rated Rep. Boehner’s claim flat-out false. As they noted:

[R]ight off the bat, Boehner’s $400 billion to $500 billion figure is much too high.

But then they go on to say:

[W]e think it’s misleading to refer to even that lower number as “unspent” stimulus, because much of the $292 billion has been obligated, even though it has not been paid out.

One’s of the right’s big talking points is that there are unspent stimulus funds. Those are actually funds put aside for the middle-class tax cuts. Ezra Klein notes that since the recession began in 2007, we’ve lost 8M jobs. Only 41,000 jobs have been lost since the stimulus went into effect.

Remember how George W. Bush is the worst president ever? Today’s Republicans make him look good in comparison. Former Bush aide Michael Gerson criticizes the push by today’s Republicans to repeal the 14th amendment.

Today’s dispute over birthright citizenship reveals the immigration debate in its starkest form. Usually, opponents of illegal immigration speak of giving lawbreakers what they deserve. But this does not apply in the case of an infant. Consider two newborn babies at, say, Parkland Hospital in Dallas. One is the child of citizens, the other of illegal immigrants. Critics of birthright citizenship look at the child of immigrants and feel . . . disturbed? Outraged? But why? Do they see a child somehow tainted by illegality? That hardly seems fair. A burden on resources? No more than any other poor child. An alien lacking allegiance? How could they possibly know? Why not a soldier, or an entrepreneur, or, as the Constitution specifically permits, a president?

For nearly a century and a half, Americans have taken the view that these two children at Parkland start their lives as equals. They acquire their rights not because of their parentage or their bloodline or the permission of politicians but because they are born in the United States.

The radical, humane vision of the 14th Amendment can be put another way: No child born in America can be judged unworthy by John Boehner, because each is his equal.

It’s scary to think it could have been worse. Bush was a moderating influence over Cheney? Oy.

Welcome to the Thursday edition of your open thread. The floor is yours…try not to leave a mess.

Former Vice President Dan Quayle’s son Ben is running for Congress in Arizona. He’s looked like a sure thing until lately. First he got caught using other people’s children in his campaign literature (the children were his nieces). Now’s he’s been outed as a former writer for a gossip rag called Dirty Scottsdale.

But Quayle, 33, has had to confront a much bigger credibility issue this week after a blogger revealed that he had once been a contributing writer for Dirty Scottsdale, a raunchy, sex-themed website that covered the club scene in his adopted home town before morphing into the national gossip site TheDirty.com.

At first, Quayle denied the claim, telling POLITICO Tuesday that he “was not involved in the site.” But hours later, after blogs, news websites and other media picked up the story, Quayle told several Phoenix TV stations that he had posted on the site “to try to drive some traffic.”

He continued to maintain, however, that he did not post under the pseudonym “Brock Landers,” a reference to the name of a porn star in the 1997 flick “Boogie Nights.”

Most of us don’t care if he wrote naughty pieces in Scottsdale. However he’s running on “family values” and is just another GOP family values hypocrite.

Today we’re waiting to hear whether Judge Walker will lift the stay on his Prop 8 ruling, allowing same sex marriages to begin again in California. Already the ruling has had huge consequences. A new CNN poll found a majority of Americans support the right of same sex couples to marry. Now the American Bar Association has issued a resolution supporting same sex marriage.

Gays and lesbians should have the right to marry in civil ceremonies, the ABA’s policy-making House of Delegates declared on Tuesday. The measure passed on a voice vote.

A lineup of ABA leaders, both past and present, spoke in favor of the resolution. Incoming ABA President Stephen Zack asked “Why would anyone in this country not want two people who love each other to enjoy the blessings of marriage and the protections of law?”

Former ABA President Tommy Wells told the House that “our citizens of the same sex who are being denied the right to a civil marriage are only seeking to participate in an equal basis in a foundational institution of our civil life. They simply want to share in the legal blessings that we give to married couples. It can only strengthen marriage.”

…

Resolution 111 (PDF) had been gaining momentum in the House since a U.S. district court judge ruled last week in Perry v. Schwarzenegger that California’s Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage violated the U.S. Constitution. On Saturday, Laurence Tribe, the U.S. Justice Department’s senior counselor for access to justice, speculated during a program at the annual meeting that there is a good chance the U.S. Supreme Court would uphold the district court ruling, with Justice Anthony M. Kennedy likely providing the swing vote.

Good for the ABA. The Prop 8 ruling is turning out to be quite a watershed and the opponents of same sex marriage are being left behind.

Welcome to your Wednesday open thread. Today is a special day because it’s my birthday. Happy birthday to me! I’m celebrating by working like a normal workday.

If you enjoy food & cooking, you might enjoy my husband’s new food blog: ZOMG Food Pr0n! Check it out.

Republicans are taking a bit of a beating for wanting to meddle with the Constitution. This time it’s Fox News analysts Andrew Napolitano taking Republicans to the proverbial woodshed:

Today, Fox News analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano slammed Republicans trying to change the 14th amendment to end birthright citizenship. When asked about the effort to change the amendment, Napolitano derided it as “nothing but political chatter.” He then went on to castigate the Republicans who are advocating for ending birthright citizenship, saying, “These people took an oath to uphold the Constitution whether they agree with it or not! All of it not part of it!”:

NAPOLITANO: The law has been upheld uniformly since 1868 and without exception. And we start with a couple of basics. The Congress cannot change the constitution of the 14th amendment on its own. It takes 2/3 of each house of Congress and 3/4 of the states to change the amendment. […] so this is nothing but political chatter by those who are concerned understandably by problems at the border. […] I can’t imagine that there’d be a consensus to change the 14th amendment. […]

HEMMER: But if the [Birthright Citizenship Act] were carried out, you had 100 co-sponsors about a year ago, it would require at least one parent to be a US citizen for a baby to become an american citizen at birth. If you were to enact the BCA as some refer to it, is that a way to get around the 14th amendment, and get done what people like John Cornyn, and John Kyl and John Mccain, and we heard John Boehner are trying to do.

NAPOLITANO: No! That would not be a a way around it. There is no way to get around the 14th amendment. These people took an oath to uphold the Constitution whether they agree with it or not! All of it not part of it! The Supreme Court has said you cannot take privileges or benefits away from a child because of a crime committed by the parent. Therefore everybody born here is an American citizen, no matter what their parents’ status was at their birth.

Napolitano makes very good points here. Amending the Constitution is extremely difficult and extremely unlikely. It’s all about wedge issues and Republicans know they’ll never have to act on it. Isn’t it interesting though that Republican amendments to the Constitution are all about limiting people’s rights? Like banning flag burning, limiting marriage and now limiting birthright citizenship.

I hope Democrats are listening to digby.

I do hope the Democrats are paying close attention to this because it might just save their bacon if they play their cards right. Here’s the lugubrious GOP star Mike Pence on the passage of the emergency state teacher, cop and firefighter funding:

Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) picked up on that theme today on ABC’s Top Line, calling it a “massive state bailout.” When host Z. Byron Wolf asked what the GOP plan would be to help teachers who are about to lose their jobs — particularly the 3,600 in Indiana, Pence didn’t have much to offer:

PENCE: Well, look I’m married to a school teacher. My wife spent more than a decade in a public school classroom. So I love teachers! Teachers, firefighters, policemen are all Americans and they all know that the economic policies of bailouts and handouts have failed to create jobs.

can you spot the fear and dissonance there? I knew that you could.

I’m telling you, this is where the vulnerable underbelly of their “just say no” campaign. They are voting against nice, white, suburban middle class Americans this time (along with nice brown and black suburban middle class Americans) with this crusade. And going after teachers, cops and firefighters is a very, very dangerous thing to do. And as I wrote before, the Democrats should throw it right in their face.

Republicans are against jobs for “special interests” like teachers, police and firemen. They’re pretty incoherent about this too – they throw a hissy fit if it’s not “paid for” (although tax cuts are free) and even when it’s paid for they still vote against. It’s almost like they want the economy to be bad or something.

Welcome to the Tuesday edition of your semi-daily open thread. I hope you’re having a fabulously wonderful Tuesday.

Today is primary day in several states: Minnesota, Connecticut and Colorado as well as a run-off election for the GOP nomination for Georgia governor.

In Minnesota, the governor’s race is interesting. Tom Emmer, who thought that waiters should take a pay cut, is the likely Republican nominee. On the Democratic side, former Senator Mark Dayton is the likely nominee but he’s taking on two challengers, Margaret Anderson Kelliher and Matt Entenza.

Connecticut has gubernatorial primaries for governor and U.S. Senate. In the Democratic gubernatorial primary, almost-Senator Ned Lamont takes on Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy. The last poll had this as a toss-up with Lamont with a small lead (45-42). On the Republican side there’s a 3-way race between Tom Foley, Lt. Gov. Mike Fedele and Oz Griebel. Foley is leading 38-30-17 with a lot of undecideds. On the Senate side AG Richard Blumenthal has no challenger on the Democratic side and the on-again, off-again candidacy of Rob Simmons may be off-again for good. Linda McMahon is expected to win this primary.

Colorado has the most intriguing match-ups. Appointed incumbent Senator Michael Bennet is being challenged by Andrew Romanoff. Romanoff has come on strong in the last few weeks, he was endorsed by Bill Clinton and a funding scandal has hurt Bennet – Bennet approved a deal while Superintendent of Denver public schools which has turned out to be a very bad deal. The last poll gave Bennet a small lead 49-43 but Colorado has mail-in ballots so the scandal may have been too late to help Romanoff. On the Republican side, Ken Buck (birthers are dumbasses) and former Lt. Gov. Jane Norton (establishment pick) are tied. On the Senate side, crazy Dan Maes (bicycles lead to abortion) and wounded Scott McInnis are also tied. Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper is unopposed for the Democratic governor nomination.

For the Georgia run-off Palin-endorsed “mama grizzly” Karen Handel takes on Gingrich-endorsed Congressman Nathan Deal. Three different polls have either a small Handel lead, a small Deal lead or a tie. This one is a toss-up.

So lots of suspense tonight watching the primary results come in.

Welcome to your Monday open thread. It’s Monday, so it’s back to the grind. What’s on your mind?

Surveys have found (surprise, surprise) that racial resentment is highest among people who identify themselves with the Tea Party movement:

National surveys of the Tea Party have found that explicit racist sentiment is a strong component of the tea-party make up, in addition to economic conservatism and strong Republican partisanship. The April, 2010 New York Times/CBS News national survey of Tea Party supporters found that they are:

– More than twice as likely as the general public (25% vs 11%) to believe that “the policies of the Obama administration favor blacks over whites.”

– Half as likely as the general public (16% to 31%) to believe that “white people have a better chance of getting ahead in today’s society.”

– Almost twice as likely as the general public (52% to 28%) to believe that “too much has been made of the problems facing black people” in recent years.

…

In a broad study of adults in Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, and California conducted between February and March, the University of Washington Institute for the Study of Ethnicity, Race, and Sexuality (WISER) asked a number of questions about “racial resentment” — such as whether blacks don’t try hard enough or have gotten more than they deserve. Conservatives are 23 percent more likely to be racially resentful, and Republicans 15 percent more likely than Democrats. However, the institute found that this racial sentiment isn’t simply a byproduct of white conservativism:

[E]ven as we account for conservatism and partisanship, support for the Tea Party remains a valid predictor of racial resentment.

It is untrue, as political commentator Dave Weigel argues, that racism in the Tea Party is merely reflective of its conservatism. The WISER study found that compared to other conservatives, Tea Party supporters are:

– 25 percent more likely to have racial resentment.

– 27 percent more likely to support racial profiling.

– 28 percent more likely to support indefinite detention without charges.

The new campaigns against building mosques is part of this same isolationist, xenophobic rhetoric. Xenophobia may be big topic right now but apparently the California Prop 8 decision is getting barely a wimper from the usual suspects on the right.

When a federal judge in California last week ruled the state’s ban on gay marriage unconstitutional, several political observers braced for a flood of Republican blasts on the issue that could end up resonating in campaigns nationally.

Instead, the anticipated GOP bang over the ban — known as Proposition 8 — amounted to little more than a whimper. There were angry columns and cries of protest from right-wing groups and conservative writers, but the majority of the Republican establishment kept on a bread-and-butter message — and party leaders are encouraging them not to stray.

…

In California, the two leading GOP candidates — gubernatorial hopeful Meg Whitman and U.S. Senate nominee Carly Fiorina — issued muted statements.

On MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” the day after the ruling, Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), who opposes gay marriage, said he thought it may come up in a “subliminal” way in campaigns and moved off the topic fairly quickly.

The national committees didn’t touch it in a real way — “I haven’t been following closely,” said one Washington GOP operative who works with one of the committees. Meanwhile Republican leaders made clear their strategy is staying on jobs.

Will we get a civil war between the social conservatives and the Tea Partiers. The social conservatives are being pretty much ignored right now.