Tuesday Open Thread [3.4.14]

Tuesday Open Thread [3.4.14]

3 Comments
In a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, McCain (R-Ariz.) said the "blatant act" by Russian President Vladi­mir Putin "cannot stand," even as he acknowledged that the United States does not have a realistic military option to force Russian troops to withdrawal.
And that, in a nutshell, is what is wrong with the Republican Party war hawks led by John McCain and Lindsay Graham. Their foreign policy vision essentially boils down to this formula: TOUGH TALK AND THREATS + ? = PROFIT Where profit can either figuratively mean policy success (i.e. regime change, or Russian withdrawal from the Crimea) or literally mean profits for defense contractors. Republicans resort first and always to military threats whenever a crisis occurs, because they truly believe it is the only way to 1) express and demonstrate the greatness of America and our strength, and 2) it is the only way to achieve American foreign policy goals. And yet, even John McCain, the belligerent war monger that he is, admits that we cannot go to war with Russia. So what is the point in threatening a military option? If you cannot back up a threat, doesn't that make you appear even weaker?
The Coons Doctrine: “The USA must constantly prove that we have the biggest dick”

The Coons Doctrine: “The USA must constantly prove that we have the biggest dick”

8 Comments
I tried to come up with a phrasing of the Coons Doctrine which captured Senator Coons' claim that the United States must constantly demonstrate Bushian levels of breathtaking and ill-conceived belligerence on a world wide scale, or else be perceived as pussies. I think I only partially captured it. We've seen this idiotic foreign policy doctrine promoted before. Usually it is territory covered by cretins like John Bolton and Dick Cheney. To hear it promoted by our blue state Democratic Senator is truly startling. Coons appears to be taking former Ct Senator Joe Lieberman as a foreign policy godfather. If it is true and Coons is guided by Lieberman on foreign policy and Carper on domestic policy - I can't help but wonder what good he can possibly be to his Delaware constituents? That isn't to say that Christine O'Donnell would have been better, but at least O'Donnell would have been a one termer. Coons, being a Democrat, has a lifetime sinecure in the Senate. Let that sink in as you consider the fact that Coons laments the fact that we didn't go to war in Syrian.
Monday Open Thread [3.3.14]

Monday Open Thread [3.3.14]

4 Comments
Over the weekend, I have seen it said that Putin's invasion of the Crimea in the Ukraine makes him and Russia appear strong, and the US weak by comparison. The blithering idiot pundits on the Sunday shows agreed, and David Gregory of Meet the Press said this was the premiere test of President Obama's foreign policy. Really? I see it completely differently, as do the others I link to below. This is a desperate and panicked move by Putin, one made from weakness not strength. It will not make Russia stronger. Indeed, if the crisis is not resolved shortly, it will destroy the Russian economy. Russia is not the Soviet Union of old, a strong empire equal to or greater than the United States and its Western allies. No, it is a second world country with nuclear weapons that is headed for demographic and political collapse. This is a chest thumping move designed to hide that fact. And it is going to backfire.
Coons’ fundraising email tries to cover too many bases

Coons’ fundraising email tries to cover too many bases

8 Comments
Senator Coons needs money to fight the horrible Tea Party, but also bipartisanship is AWESOME!!! (...or something, it made sense to the fundraising consultant.) Anyway, in addition to the philosophically hazy email, Coons is sitting on $2.9 million and has no GOP opponent, so I'll probably sit this round out. (Click through to read the muddled email)
Delaware Political Weekly: Feb. 22-28, 2014

Delaware Political Weekly: Feb. 22-28, 2014

49 Comments
Jonathan Gallo has filed to face Bobby Outten in the 30th RD. Gallo changed his registration from R to D to run and, if you check out his site  right now, you will not find the word Democrat, or the donkey, anywhere on the site. I mean, anywhere. He's got the classic bio, and he's a "man of dedication, integrity, and commitment, who early in his life felt a call to serve his community." Which means, he's a 'man of dedication, integrity, and commitment' who is hiding his party affiliation. He also rides a tractor standing up (picture). J. Kevin Robbins of Harrington, is challenging Harold Peterman in the conservative 33rd RD. Robbins is a long-time farmer and has the type of profile that could give him a shot in this district.  Here is his site.   Not only does he have the donkey there, he actually calls the Party the Democratic Party. Guess which one I prefer.
The 62 Project: #’s 21 and 41

The 62 Project: #’s 21 and 41

22 Comments
When I started the 62 Project, I had Pete Schwartzkopf ranked 13th on my initial list. That was largely because I thought that he, as House Majority Leader, effectively pushed through key progressive bills, including civil unions. He also was able to get the at-the-time controversial 'revenue enhancement' package through a fractured House. This helped balance the budget during the early Markell years. He wasn't afraid to use legislative power to get things done. While I didn't always admire his tactics, I respected the results. The role of House Majority Leader requires tough tactics in tough times. However, as Speaker of the House, Schwartzkopf has governed as if he were still Majority Leader. Aided and abetted by an equally-enthusiastic, though far less skilled, arm-breaker, Valerie Longhurst. Pete not only handpicked Longhurst to be his successor, he insisted that they both be elected as a team or he would not serve as Speaker. Uh, I wonder if he'd be willing, or in any position, to make the same demand today. Put simply, Pete Schwartzkopf is in danger of being a one-term Speaker, and not because the D's are in any way facing the loss of the House chamber.

Federal Court Says Texas’ Gay Marriage Ban Is Unconsitutional

3 Comments
Oh yes, I just wanted to write that headline! Remember that a court striking down Texas' anti-sodomy laws brought us Lawrence V Texas too -- invalidating the remaining anti-sodomy laws on several states' books. From TPM:
{Judge Orlando} Garcia, a Bill Clinton appointee, wrote in his decision that Texas' constitutional ban on same-sex marriage violates equal protection rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. “Texas’ current marriage laws deny homosexual couples the right to marry, and in doing so, demean their dignity for no legitimate reason," he wrote. "Accordingly, the Court finds these laws are unconstitutional and hereby grants a preliminary injunction enjoining Defendants from enforcing Texas’ bans on same-sex marriage.”