I did not hear his inaugural address, but I did read the transcript, and I’m with Digby when she says, “nothing the President says matters.”
This is not specific to Obama, it’s a fact of life about Presidential speeches in general, and what he says at the inauguration in particular don’t mean a whole lot.
In his latest bon mot, he comes out against gun control and suggests that government abrogate the 1st amendment to ban video games:
Not one to keep his opinion to himself, former presidential candidate Ralph Nader has come down hard on video games. In fact, he has gone as far as to call the companies that make them “electronic child molesters.”
In an interview with Politico yesterday, Nader blasted President Obama’s gun control package that was unveiled last week. The two-time Green Party presidential candidate said that the president’s plan needs to go further in regulating video game creators that add violence to their games.
………
“All this is fine with the companies — these boys and girls spent more than $25 billion last year, and what they got in return is violent, addictive, and tawdry sensuality,” Nader wrote in his blog at the time. “These electronic child molesters have little sense of restraint or boundaries. Their odious fare is becoming more coarse, more violent, and more interactive to seduce these youngsters into an addiction of direct video game involvement in the mayhem.”
(emphasis mine)
Tawdry sensuality?
Just how f%$#ed up is this man?
Nader made contributions to the public space on consumer safety and the environment in the 1960s and 1970s, but then in the 1960s and 1970s, Fred Phelps was a fierce fighter for civil rights in Kansas.
Neither of their actions in the past reflect who they are today.
This:
Earlier this month, the UK Treasury declared that, following a period of intense and prolonged analysis of the economic numbers, each of us would be £1 a year worse off in an independent Scotland. Put another way, for £1 a year you will never have to endure the economic privations of a Conservative government ever again. You will not be penalised for being poor or old and nor will you suffer the pain of watching your young boys being killed in illegal wars or occupations.
Harry Reid on the filibuster.
Yes, he’s trying to preserve the silent filibuster:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) doesn’t plan to advance a “talking filibuster” proposal envisioned by liberals who want sweeping changes to the stodgy Senate.
But he still may invoke what critics call the “nuclear option” to change Senate rules that would limit the use of the filibuster, force senators to hold the floor in certain situations and require those stalling legislation to deliver 41 votes, several people familiar with the matter said Thursday.
Un-Dirtyword-Believable.
He is concerned that the Republicans will be even more obstructionist if he requires a talking filibuster.
Hello? Mitch McConnell, the Minority Leader, filibustered his own bill, and have you seen the graph? (Note that the 2012 numbers are incomplete)
Seriously. They cannot get any more obstructionist.
What the f%$# is he thinking?
H/t AMERICAblog
He talks about the chattering classes, and aptly titles it What Are The Gobshites Saying These Days?
Just go read it.
Paul Finkleman makes the obvious point that the 2nd amendment was passed after the Constitution was approved, as evidenced by the fact that it’s an amendment, making Thom Hartmann’s argument that the it was about slave patrols moot.
The Bill of Rights was passed about two years after the Constitution was ratified, though some states had not ratified the Constitution, by the time that the Bill of Rights was proposed.
The actual line may be somewhere in the middle. You see, one of the factors in the ratification of the Constitution, was the Massachusetts Compromise, which involved a commitment to amending the Constitution, including the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which includes militia rights.
Considering that it was Mason and Madison, both of whom were slave holders, who were instrumental in the development and ratification of the Bill of Rights, it’s still a matter of some dispute.
My inclination is to lean a little bit on the side of Thom Hartmann, particularly given the history, which clearly shows that slavery was arguably the most contentious issue at the constitutional amendment.
In any case, it is more ambiguous than I originally suggested.
H/t DC at the Stellar Parthenon BBS.
Seriously, the Republicans are now arguing that they are intransigent assholes because Obama made them do it:
The first day of the House Republicans’ retreat was devoted, in large part, to persuading House Republicans to stop saying offensive things about rape and to stop thinking they can use the debt ceiling to hold the economy hostage after losing the 2012 election.
To state the obvious, these are not topics that should actually need to be covered at a retreat of House Republicans. We should be able to take it for granted that our legislators won’t petulantly crash the economy or offend rape survivors. That the House GOP leadership had to mount an organized campaign to convince GOP members of those things is evidence that something has gone wrong in the Republican Party.
No one knows that better than Republicans themselves. But it’s very difficult to be a Republican in a time of GOP dissolution. And so recent weeks have birthed the strangest strain of commentary I can remember: The Republican Party’s crazy opinions are President Obama’s fault.
The logic here is weirdly impeccable. The Republican Party’s dilemma is that House Republicans keeps taking all kinds of unreasonable and unpopular positions. If Obama weren’t president, the House Republicans wouldn’t be taking so many unreasonable and unpopular positions. But since Obama is president, and since he does need to work with House Republicans, he is highlighting their unreasonable and unpopular opinions in a bid to make them change their minds, which is making House Republicans look even worse. And so it’s ultimately Obama’s fault that House Republicans are, say, threatening to breach the debt ceiling if they don’t get their way on spending cuts. After all, if Mitt Romney had won the election, the debt ceiling wouldn’t even be a question!
If you are wondering why this sounds like a sketch from show on Comedy Central, it’s because it is a sketch from a show on Comedy Central. (See vid)
Of all the lame excuses that I’ve ever heard from anyone, “It’s not our fault, Barack Hussein Obama makes us batsh%$ insane!” is the lamest.
You guys might want to consider some very powerful anti-psychotic drugs.
The Swedish Air Force has ordered 60 of the new Gripens, (paid subscription required) with the first to be delivered in 2018.
It will be interesting to see how it plays in the world market.
It’s light weight and low operational costs, along with Saab’s decision to partition between mission systems and flight-critical functions, which should simplify upgrades, should make it attractive to budget conscious nations.
The IRS is investigating the political Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS to see if they violated tax code:
Big dark-money groups like the Karl Rove-advised Crossroads GPS promised the IRS they would have “limited” involvement in politics—in order to protect their nonprofit tax-exempt status—yet went on to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to influence the 2010 and 2012 federal elections. Now several tax policy experts, including a former high-ranking IRS official who ran the division overseeing nonprofits, say the IRS must bring the hammer down on these shadowy nonprofits or risk looking weak and useless.
“The government’s going to have to investigate them and prosecute them,” says Marcus Owens, who ran the IRS’s tax-exempt division for a decade and is now a lawyer in private practice. “In order to maintain the integrity of the process, they’re going to be forced to take action.”
………
The most high-profile nonprofit to tell the IRS one thing and seemingly do another is Crossroads GPS, the powerful group cofounded by Karl Rove. In a 41-page application, dated September 3, 2010, Crossroads told the IRS it would spend only a “limited” amount of money on influencing elections. Crossroads is different from the two groups mentioned above in a crucial way: The IRS has yet to approve its tax-exempt application, which means its 2010 application is confidential. Yet ProPublica obtained it and exposed the gap between what Crossroads said in September 2010 and what it went on to do.
Despite telling the IRS it would spend a “limited” amount of money on politics, Crossroads unloaded nearly $16 million in dark money on political advertising during the 2010 campaign and more than $70 million to influence the presidential and congressional contests in 2012.
………
Hill says she doubts whether the IRS has the “political will” to go after political nonprofit groups, which spent well over $400 million on the 2012 elections and often have direct ties to top Democratic and Republican lawmakers. Yet what’s at stake, Hill adds, is nothing less than the very integrity of the tax law. “We have tax laws on the books—the question now is, does the IRS intend to enforce the law?” she asks. “Or are we all just going to pretend that the laws are going to be enforced?”
I’m inclined to believe Frances Hill when she doubts that the IRS has the political will to enforce the law.
The IRS cannot do this without support from the Department of Justice and from the White House, because there will be a storm of coordinated faux-outrage from the right wing punditry.
Based on prior history, it is highly unlikely that the White House will have the IRS’s back when this happens.
The DC Court of Appeals has just ruled that almost all recess appointments are unconstitutional:
Strictly curbing the President’s power to temporarily fill government posts to keep an agency in operation, the D.C. Circuit Court ruled Friday that the constitutional authority to fill a vacancy can only be used when one Congress has ended and before a new Congress comes to town, or when there is a formal break at the end of one session, but not during any other mid-session break. That part of the ruling by the three-judge panel was unanimous. On a second part, a two-judge majority ruled that the vacancy-filling power only applies to vacancies that actually open up during a formal recess, between sessions or between Congresses. Because lower courts are split on both issues, this historic controversy over the constitutional separation of powers is likely to go on to the Supreme Court.
In the current atmosphere of partisan gridlock, which often involves thwarting of presidential nominations, the ruling provides a major new opportunity for a minority in the Senate to deny the President the authority even temporarily to put a new government officer to work in a vacant spot. When a vacancy arises while Congress is in session, and the Senate does not act on it, the President will not be able to fill it during the next time the Senate takes a break. The ruling came one day after the Senate chose not to make a major change in its filibuster rule, which is the main weapon of a Senate minority seeking to challenge presidential action.
I expect an appeal to the Supreme Court, though they may ask for an en banc hearing by the whole court of appeals first.
Unsurprisingly, David Sentelle, the right winger who gave us Ken Starr, is a part of this.
The 2nd part of the ruling ruling, where they say that the only recess that counts is the few days every two years when the old Congress has ended, and the new Congress is sworn in, flies in the face of over 150 years of precedent.
As to the pro-forma sessions, Obama needs to go Article 2 Section 3 of the Constitution on Congress:
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of
Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.
(emphasis mine)
So, with the House refuses to adjourn, which is what led to the pro-forma sessions, Obama can adjourn them.
As to the claim that recess appointments can only be made during intercongress recesses, and not intracongress recesses, I cannot believe that the Supreme Court could support that, but since Bush v. Gore, I’ve made it a point of never underestimating the politicization of the right wing of that body.
Here is a video from Saab for the Gripen.
It’s a little bit fantastical, but at least it has a narrative, as opposed a to pr0n movie metal soundtrack.
I think that the Gripen really has the possibility to be this generation’s F-5, small, cheap, and ubiquitous, though it is operating at a political handicap, because it is not made by, or going to be fielded by, the nations that are the biggest players diplomatically or militarily.
H/tThe DEW Line
The Department of Defense lowers the target:
The US Department of Defense is lowering the performance bar for the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter according to a new report by the Pentagon’s director of operational test and evaluation (DOT&E).
The specifications for all three variants pertaining to transonic acceleration and sustained turn rates have been reduced. Worst hit in terms of acceleration is the US Navy’s F-35C carrier-based model.
“The program announced an intention to change performance specifications for the F-35C, reducing turn performance from 5.1 to 5.0 sustained g’s and increasing the time for acceleration from 0.8 Mach to 1.2 Mach by at least 43 seconds,” reads the report prepared by J Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon’s DOT&E. “These changes were due to the results of air vehicle performance and flying qualities evaluations.”
The US Air Force F-35A’s time has slipped by eight seconds while the US Marine Corps short take-off vertical landing (STOVL) F-35B’s time has slipped by 16 seconds. However, turn rates for both the A and B models have been impacted more severely than the USN variant. Sustained turning performance for the F-35B is being reduced from 5G to 4.5G while the F-35A sinks from 5.3G to 4.6G according to the report.
They also have issues with the horizontal tails getting too hot and delaminating, buffet/wing drop issues, and the they still do not have the helmet mounted display working properly.
And let’s not get started on the software.
This continues to be a clusterf%$#, but with hundreds of billions already invested already, no one is willing to bite the bullet and walk away.
They will continue to throw good money after bad.
5 People Shot At 3 Different Gun Shows On Gun Appreciation Day
Even by the standards of the NRA, “Gun control is hitting the target,” this is an unqualified fail.
Thankfully, no fatalities.
How is the world ruled and how do wars start?
Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read.
—Karl Kraus
H/t A Tiny Revolution.
Full disclosure, I have not read the book in question, but this review of Kill Anything that Moves, by Nick Turse gives a remarkable picture of our experience in Vietnam:
Now, in Kill Anything that Moves, Nick Turse has for the first time put together a comprehensive picture, written with mastery and dignity, of what American forces actually were doing in Vietnam. The findings disclose an almost unspeakable truth.
Meticulously piecing together newly released classified information, court-martial records, Pentagon reports, and first-hand interviews in Vietnam and the United States, as well as contemporaneous press accounts and secondary literature, Turse discovers that episodes of devastation, murder, massacre, rape, and torture once considered isolated atrocities were in fact the norm, adding up to a continuous stream of atrocity, unfolding, year after year, throughout that country.
This is the reality of war, and this is the reality of occupation and counter-insurgency.
For all those people who wonder about what will happen when when our military leaves Afghanistan, and our mercenaries leave Iraq, the first question is whether our presence helps them in the first place, and the burden of proof must be on those who support occupation.
Karl Rove just got a 4 year contract extension from Fox News, despite his meltdown on election night 2012:
Politico reports that Fox News has extended Karl Rove’s contract through 2016. If the past is any indication, you can expect the network to continue to be used as a fundraising and publicity vehicle for Rove-affiliated outside groups, Republican Party propaganda masked as news analysis, and repeated failure to disclose Rove’sentangled interests.
Rove, the so-called “architect” of President Bush’s election wins, was hired as a Fox contributor in 2008.
During his appearances, Fox has frequently failed to inform its viewers that Rove is still an active participant in Republican Party politics — specifically the creation and operation of American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS, his PAC and non-profit, respectively, that spent millions opposing Democrats in the 2010 and 2012 elections.
He called everything wrong, he pissed away millions of dollars given him by right-wing rich chumps, and he ……… gets his paid gig at Fox extended by 4 years.
I wish that I had a job where I could f%$# up this badly, and still get my lucrative contract renewed.
Say what you will about the VWRC (Vast Right Wing Conspiracy), but their pay and benefits are pretty damn good.
We have the 2nd bank failure of the year, 1st Regents Bank, of Andover, MN.
I’ll start putting out a graph with the next closing, there is just not enough data for good data pr0n right now.
I’ve made the comment that the current gun regulation regime is driven by issues of race.
Specifically, once the Black Panthers (the real ones, not the current wannabees) started carrying weapons openly, and then went to the California legislator while packing heat, it led to the passing of what was then the strictest gun control laws in the nation, signed into law by Ronald Reagan, because, “Oh Noes, Blax with Gunz“, and this panic about “black militancy” also led to the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968.
Once this law was, passed, gun organizations, most notably the NRA started freaking out, because, Oh Noes, I Needs Gunz to Protekt me from Blax!
So we saw the development of the modern paranoiac gun “rights” movement.
Well, it turns out that race has had a major role in using and owning firearms in the United States goes back far further.
Historical documents show the 2nd amendment was put in the constitution to sanction paramilitary militias used to keep slaves from revolting or escaping:
The real reason the Second Amendment was ratified, and why it says “State” instead of “Country” (the Framers knew the difference – see the 10th Amendment), was to preserve the slave patrol militias in the southern states, which was necessary to get Virginia’s vote. Founders Patrick Henry, George Mason, and James Madison were totally clear on that . . . and we all should be too.
In the beginning, there were the militias. In the South, they were also called the “slave patrols,” and they were regulated by the states.
In Georgia, for example, a generation before the American Revolution, laws were passed in 1755 and 1757 that required all plantation owners or their male white employees to be members of the Georgia Militia, and for those armed militia members to make monthly inspections of the quarters of all slaves in the state. The law defined which counties had which armed militias and even required armed militia members to keep a keen eye out for slaves who may be planning uprisings.
As Dr. Carl T. Bogus wrote for the University of California Law Review in 1998, “The Georgia statutes required patrols, under the direction of commissioned militia officers, to examine every plantation each month and authorized them to search ‘all Negro Houses for offensive Weapons and Ammunition’ and to apprehend and give twenty lashes to any slave found outside plantation grounds.”
It’s the answer to the question raised by the character played by Leonardo DiCaprio in Django Unchained when he asks, “Why don’t they just rise up and kill the whites?” If the movie were real, it would have been a purely rhetorical question, because every southerner of the era knew the simple answer: Well regulated militias kept the slaves in chains.
Sally E. Haden, in her book Slave Patrols: Law and Violence in Virginia and the Carolinas, notes that, “Although eligibility for the Militia seemed all-encompassing, not every middle-aged white male Virginian or Carolinian became a slave patroller.” There were exemptions so “men in critical professions” like judges, legislators and students could stay at their work. Generally, though, she documents how most southern men between ages 18 and 45 – including physicians and ministers – had to serve on slave patrol in the militia at one time or another in their lives.
And slave rebellions were keeping the slave patrols busy.
The 2nd amendment was not about allowing citizens to resist tyranny, it was about allowing states to enforce the tyranny required to keep slaves in chains.
Live and learn.
H/t Cthulhu at the Stellar Parthenon BBS.
It appears that the best friend of DC self rule is ……… Darrell Issa???
The summons to Capitol Hill didn’t bode well. It was May 2011, and Mayor Vince Gray and D.C. Council Chairman Kwame Brown had been called to testify on the city’s fiscal stability before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s subcommittee on the District of Columbia. The short hearing advisory offered few clues to the panel’s aims, outside of one ominous paragraph.
“In 1995 the District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance Act established a five member ‘Control Board’ to oversee financial matters,” the advisory read. “The Control Board was disbanded in 2001 when the District had achieved four consecutive balanced budgets and met other criteria. There are seven separate ‘triggers’ which would automatically revive the Control Board.”
………
Their supplications quickly proved unnecessary. After listening to city officials testify and respond to a few scattered questions from his colleagues, committee chairman Darrell Issa took control of the hearing and revealed what was really on his mind: budget autonomy for the District.
“I am going to be offering an alternative that I hope [Norton] will join with me on that provides a mechanism for a separate vote and separate consideration of the District’s funds,” Issa said, adding, “I’m looking for some sort of a structured mechanism to where this committee could say, ‘They have a plan, they can live without federal dollars and still meet the requirement,’ and each time that is received, it would allow us to say, ‘We have no reason to be in the way of your spending your dollars if you can make the commitment.’”
Everyone in the room was taken by surprise—including Issa’s aides, who had no idea their boss was going to propose the policy long sought by D.C. officials to free the city’s operations from the mercy of a fickle Congress.
Seriously, Darrell Issa is DC self-rule’s best friend in Congress?
This is so weird.
