Wednesday Open Thread [1.29.14]

Wednesday Open Thread [1.29.14]

14 Comments
Andrew Sullivan:
The metaphor of the soldier slowly, relentlessly, grindingly putting his life back together was a powerful one for America – and Obama pulled off that analogy with what seemed to me like real passion. One aspect of his personality and his presidency is sometimes overlooked – and that is persistence. He’s been hailed as a hero and dismissed as irrelevant many times. But when you take a step back and assess what he has done – from ending wars to rescuing the economy to cementing a civil rights revolution to shifting the entire landscape on healthcare – you can see why he believes in persistence. Because it works. It may not win every news cycle; but it keeps coming back. If he persists on healthcare and persists on Iran and persists on grappling, as best we can, with the forces creating such large disparities in wealth, he will look far, far more impressive from the vantage point of history than the news cycle of the Twitterverse sometimes conveys. This was True Grit Obama. And it was oddly energizing.
When the book closes on this Presidency, given all he has done, President Obama will rank pretty high. Not among the greats like FDR, Lincoln, and Washington. But I think he will be regarding among the very good: Kennedy, Reagan, Clinton, Eisenhower, Truman; and not among the very bad: Carter, Bush II, Nixon, Hoover, and Buchanan.
State Of The Union Open Thread

State Of The Union Open Thread

61 Comments
Have at it!  I'll be here all night! (Am I the only one that loves these things?  Is that wrong? Or really weird?) [Update from Delaware Dem]: Some excerpts of the speech are starting to leak, as they always do. The White House, all White Houses, do this to prep the ground and give the pundits something to talk about in the run up to the speech. Here is one such excerpt...
President Obama’s Election Reform Commission-Small Ideas

President Obama’s Election Reform Commission-Small Ideas

2 Comments
Last week the President's election reform Commission published its report with their ideas on reforming our election systems. The ideas seemed to be to improved voter participation, particularly in national elections. Because it was intended to provide a bi-partisan answer to our obvious electoral deficiencies, the solutions proposed, while mostly helpful, were incremental and did not offer answers to our long-standing crisis in our so-called participatory republican democracy.
Joe Scarborough Thinks He’s Found <i>A Way To Shut This Whole</i> Hillary <i>Thing Down</i>

Joe Scarborough Thinks He’s Found A Way To Shut This Whole Hillary Thing Down

6 Comments
Here's Joe Scarborough pretending to think out loud over whether "invoking Monica Lewinsky against Hillary Clinton could be an appropriate tactic."
"If Hillary Clinton attacks the Republican Party's handling of women, and treatment of women and disrespect for women, and suggests they’re misogynists et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, it does seem to be a fair question to ask right now, a few years out, does the media have a responsibility to say, ‘Well, let’s see what happened when you were in the White House, and how women were treated when you were in the governor’s mansion and the White House?’ Is that fair?" the 'Morning Joe' host asked Monday morning, as quoted by Mediaite. [...] "Does this not compromise Hillary Clinton's ability to bash Republicans as being terrible toward women, misogynist, et cetera?" he asked.
How exactly would Republicans use Bill Clinton's infidelity against Hillary Clinton?  How does that look?  Would they say she was a-okay with infidelity because, if she wasn't then she would have divorced him?  Would they say she's sexist and misogynist because she's married to a man who had an affair?  Most likely they would do what they love to do and tell Hillary to sit down and shut up... maybe they could even tell her to go make them a sandwich. But whatever route they choose they will end up putting forth this message:  Ladies, you are merely an extension of your husbands.  Your opinions will only be considered if they align with your husband's opinion and behavior.  If they don't, well... then you may not speak on certain subjects.
Carper, Coons and Carney vote for Trans Pacific Partnership because NAFTA really didn’t eff things up enough

Carper, Coons and Carney vote for Trans Pacific Partnership because NAFTA really didn’t eff things up enough

5 Comments
Our congressional delegation just voted to give President Obama "fast track trade authority" on enacting the TPP, thereby denying Congress the right to debate or amend the pending trade agreement. Just as NAFTA was rushed through Congress 20 years ago resulting in the loss of 700,000 manufacturing jobs to Mexico, the TPP has been fast-tracked by Democrats because... ? They need the big campaign donations, I guess. NAFTA didn't eff things up enough? I don't know. Actually, the vote hasn't happened yet - but let's face it, Carper, Carney and Coons are going to vote for it.
Be above average – support the Delaware Shakespeare Festival’s “I am Hamlet”

Be above average – support the Delaware Shakespeare Festival’s “I am Hamlet”

1 Comment
You've heard about this campaign, right?
The DSF is in the planning an exciting community-wide discussion of Shakespeare’s most famous play. We’re calling it the “I Am Hamlet” Project and it will lead up to our summer 2014 production of Hamlet. From March to May, DSF will reach into the community to find what this play means to you, how it resonates with your life, what personal reflections it causes, etc. We’ll be doing this through a number of initiatives; Classroom Workshops, Retirement Home Visits, Essay Contest, YouTube Videos, Social Media Campaigns, Town Hall
They've applied for grants to help fund the project, but we need to raise matching funds to bring the "I Am Hamlet" Project to life. Surely, you can kick in a measly $10 or $20 bucks? (Right now the average donation is $39.17 - so all you have to do to be above average is give a measly $39.50)
Should liberals vote?

Should liberals vote?

40 Comments
The knee-jerk response to the question above is, "Of course. What if Republicans win more elections because liberals don't vote?" In this very interesting and provocative clip Russel Brand takes a different point of view and makes a pretty good case for not voting. He points out that voting in a system as rigged and corrupt as ours is nothing more than meek acquiescence. It is collaboration. If you accept the premise that too much water has flowed over the damn to be fixed by voting for the LEAST corrupted candidate, then not voting becomes the only valid alternative. Voting for Democrats is a "relief valve" that makes some people feel as if they've done some good for the world, when really they've only endorsed a completely corrupt system. I know many will comment on this thread without watching the entire video - but watch it.
The RNC hands Charlie Copeland a golden opportunity

The RNC hands Charlie Copeland a golden opportunity

21 Comments
As Delaware Dem reported, the RNC voted to shorten its primary season in order to try and freeze out the whack jobs. What I recently learned is that the rules changes could put Delaware Republicans in the drivers seat when it comes to picking the party's next Mitt Romney. Iowa and New Hampshire have traditionally enjoyed the "first in the nation status" when it comes to primaries and caucuses. They get all the media and candidate attention, as well as the economic benefit that comes with hosting the circus every four years. However, Charlie Copeland, in his position of Acting GOP Chair, has a golden opportunity to jump in front of New Hampshire and make sure Delaware Republicans get a voice in the process and Delaware citizens get the $264 million that flows into New Hampshire every four years. The reason Delaware has this opportunity and other states don't has to do with the way the penalty for jumping to the front of the calendar is structured.

Saturday Open Thread [1.25.14]

19 Comments
So the RNC has voted to shorten its primary season in order to make it easier for an establishment candidate to win quickly and easily without being tarnished by the crazies that he or she must debate. Further, it would make it easier for the candidate with the most money to swamp his or her lesser funded tea party upstarts and underdogs. Unfortunately for the Republicans, I don't think they thought this through. The plan is obviously meant to benefit Christie. But think about this. The first two contests are still the Iowa Caucuses and the New Hampshire Primary. Does anyone really think Chris Christie is going to win the Iowa Caucuses against Ted Cruz or Rand Paul, or even Rick Santorum. Lets assume Rand Paul wins. That sets him up for another quick victory in New Hampshire (remember, his father came in second there in 2012). And then after that he is a run away freight train. The same logic applies for Cruz, though I don't necessarily see him winning New Hampshire. And now with a tighter and shorter primary calendar, there is less time for the establishment candidate to smash these upstart underdogs down in a debate, for there are going to be fewer debates.
Senator Tom Carper’s Greatest Hits: The DL Guest Posts

Senator Tom Carper’s Greatest Hits: The DL Guest Posts

From 2007 to 2009 we got some great guest posts from Senator Tom Carper. I always enjoyed the saltiness of them even though I was routinely threatened with dismemberment.   Anyway,  stumbling over one of them yesterday made me nostalgic, so I went and dug up TC's greatest hits. This was the first one.  In it, he was trying to explain to the DL audience why he voted to give George W. Bush the authority to bug every phone, and read every email in the country without probable cause.