Month: December 2016

Yes

Over at FT, Gillian Tett asks, “Did Obamacare help Trump?

The answer, of course, is yes, and it did Even If It Improved Medical Outcomes for one very simple reason:

Or to put it another way, Obamacare is not just a tale about healthcare and costs; it is also a story of people who feel trapped in a capricious system that they don’t understand, much less control. Little wonder, then, that Trump’s message about empowerment and fixing Obamacare turned out to be so popular this year. Now let’s see if he can deliver.

(emphasis mine)

This is typical of incrementalist “squish” progressives.

They create a program with overweening bureaucracy with extensive means testing, and create a system that is opaque and abusive to to its recipients.

For them, it’s a win-win:

  • They think that they can sell this to conservatives, because they ensure that all recipients are “deserving”. (Note: this never happens)
  • They create jobs for the professional class that is the base of the Obama/Clinton wing of the party.
  • They create opportunities for private gain, which is an independent good according to their neoliberal worldview, because it will create market driven innovations.

Of course, this makes any of their programs about as pleasant as a trip to the DMV, and convinces the general population that government screws up anything.

When You’ve Lost the Forward………

The battle for the next head of the DCCC is heating up, and it appears that someone is concerned that Keith Ellison is jeopardizing their phony baloney jobs,* because they are casting broad aspersions of antisemitism.

A number of outlets have called bullsh%$ on this most recently The Foreward, formerly known as the Yiddish Daily Forward, which declares that his so-called antisemitic speech is a result of deliberately deceptive editing:

If you’ve been following the uproar over Congressman Keith Ellison and his run for chairman of the Democratic National Committee, you might recall hearing about a 36-second audio clip containing a snippet of an Ellison speech that, according to his critics, proves he’s anti-Israel and shouldn’t get the job. You may even have listened to the clip and been left wondering exactly what it means.

If so, you’re in luck. The other 22 minutes of Ellison’s speech are now available for your listening pleasure. You can listen and make up your own mind.

Some background: The audio file captures Ellison, the first Muslim ever elected to Congress, addressing a 2010 campaign fundraising event for a fellow Muslim who was running (unsuccessfully) for the Virginia state legislature. Ellison is heard claiming that U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East is “governed” by “what’s good or bad” for a certain nation of 7 million. Translation: Israel’s welfare is a primary goal of American policy.

He goes on to say that American Muslims could wield their own influence on American policy if they got more involved in the political process. In other words, donate tonight and help the Muslim cause. More on that later.

………

I posted a piece on Friday morning dissecting various bits of evidence that Ellison’s critics cite to prove he’s anti-Israel, including the 36-second audio. I expressed skepticism about the case against him. Regarding the audio, I wrote that it could just as easily be understood as a description of plain fact: that Israel’s welfare ranks high among U.S. policy priorities and Muslims might have more influence if they were better organized. That Israel’s advantage is held up not for condemnation so much as emulation.

It’s worth noting that the first interpretation — the ADL’s reading — accords with the image of Ellison as an Israel-hater that’s popular in conservative Jewish circles. The second, more benign reading, on the other hand, jibes with the picture of Ellison portrayed by the Democratic leadership in Congress and virtually the entire leadership of the Jewish community in Ellison’s hometown of Minneapolis-St. Paul, where he’s consistently described as a friend and ally of the community and a supporter of Israel.

………

Well, on Friday afternoon I got an email from Steven Emerson. He wrote that there was no intention to leave the audience dangling, and that the full speech, audio and transcript, was about to be released. And sure enough, an hour later the full speech appeared on the project’s website. Click here to read and listen to the full 22-minute speech.

………

Fifth, in case anyone thought he was advocating extreme action, he’s calling for “public diplomacy.” He says it twice. And, he adds, crucially: “This is not to say that I don’t want the U.S. to be friends with Israel.” (Having trouble sorting out all the double and triple negatives? Hint: He just said he wants the U.S. to be friends with Israel. To what he thought was a closed audience of Muslim activists.)

He continues: “I just want the United States to have a lot of friends. And to be in a position with the friend to say — you are wrong and you must stop.” (That is, Israel is and will continue to be a friend, but friends don’t let friends drive drunk.)

Finally, here’s his most conspiratorial-sounding statement: “That country” — Israel — “has mobilized its Diaspora in America to do its bidding in America.” Sounds ominous, right? He’s accusing AIPAC of doing a good job. But now he draws the lesson he wants to drive home to Muslims: “The question is, with all of us here, we ought to be able to do at least as much. You understand what I am trying to say? That we got a lot of work to do.” That is, the Jewish community does effective work on its causes. Muslims should learn from them.

While this is not an official OP/ED of The Forward editors, it is from its former editor-in-chief, Jonathan Jeremy “J.J.” Goldberg.

Rather unsurprisingly, this is all about a battle power, control, and money among the party apparatchiks.

*One of the most vociferous condemnations of Ellison have come from Clintonistas and other members of the Democratic Party Nomenklatura such as Clinton megadonor Haim Saban.

Quote of the Day

It is hard to think of an election defeat more singularly absent of important lessons, since the most important lesson of the election is glaringly obvious and shared by all sides: Don’t nominate Hillary Clinton for president again.

Jonathan Chait

Wise words from what might have been the most clueless* pundit of this election cycle.

*There were certainly pundits writing stupider things, but I think that it was malice and self interest, not pure stupidity that drove them.

Clearly, Raising the Minimum Wage in Seattle was anAbject Failure

Two years after $15.00 an hour became the law in Seattle the city has experienced some of the strongest employment growth in the nation:

In light of a recent monthly release from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), time for a quick trip to the glorious pacific northwest and the Seattle, WA area to revisit what’s been happening there in the wake of that city’s rising minimum wage.

………

Well, in the Seattle-Bellevue-Everett Metropolitan Division (MD), comprised of King and Snohomish Counties, BLS just reported (on November 30) this:

Now, as good as that news is (and it’s pretty impressive), it does represent a two county area and not just the city of Seattle proper. Some may recall that in many of his pieces on Seattle, [American Enterprise Institute Puke] Mark Perry very inappropriately used the even larger three-county Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), and I called him out on that.

Well, as luck would have it, we can actually drill down to the city of Seattle proper and take a look at its unemployment rate (among other things). So, how’s Seattle faring?

What’s more, restaurant and hospitality employment is way up, exactly the opposite of what the right wingers predicted.

Once again, the conservatives are certain, determined, and wrong.

Madeline Allbright, How About a Nice Warm Cup of Shut the F%$# Up?

Madeline Albright, the poster child for “liberal interventionism” has justheaded a task force that is calling for an occupation of Syria with US forces, because they find failed regime change such a good idea:

The United States should prepare to use greater military power and covert action in Syria to help forge a political settlement to end the country’s civil war, according to a bipartisan report to be released on Wednesday.

Produced by a task force led by former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, a Democrat, and former U.S. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, a Republican, the report amounts to a bipartisan rejection of President Barack Obama’s decision to limit U.S. military engagement in the nearly six-year civil war.

Largely drafted before Republican Donald Trump’s victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton in the Nov. 8 U.S. presidential election, the paper, which has not been presented to Trump, makes a case for deeper U.S. involvement in the Middle East.

“Isolationism is a dangerous illusion,” said the report, which was obtained by Reuters on Tuesday. It calls for outside nations to help wind down conflicts in Iraq, Libya and Yemen and back home-grown reform throughout the region.

Its key recommendation for Syria may be moot when Trump takes office on Jan. 20 if government forces seize eastern Aleppo, the opposition’s most important urban stronghold. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has been dramatically strengthened by Russian military support over the past 14 months.

“The United States should be prepared to employ air power, stand-off weapons, covert measures and enhanced support for opposition forces to break the current siege of Aleppo and frustrate Assad’s attempts to consolidate control over western Syria’s population centers,” the report said.

Let me get this straight: They want to deploy US troops in support of al Qaeda, (there is no moderate opposition) because they are fixated on regime change.

These people are supposed to be foreign policy experts, but I wouldn’t hire them as pastry chef.

Chinese Appear to Have Very Long Range AAM in Test


On a Chinese Flanker Derivative


The background appears deliberately obscured


MBDA ASRAAM


Probable flight profile

We are now seeing reports, and pictures of a Chinese Su-27 derivative carrying what appears to be an enormous air to air missile: (Paid Subscription Required)

Last year, the U.S. Air Force was worried about the PL-15, a long-ranging Chinese missile that could reach U.S. fighters too far away to shoot back. Now the appearance of an even farther-flying Chinese weapon must be forcing the air force to wonder about the vulnerability of vital tankers and surveillance aircraft flying behind its fighters.

The latest Chinese weapon is comparable to a long-range surface-to-air missile in size and appearance and so can probably reach well over 200 km (120 mi.). With no aerodynamic surfaces except small tail fins to help turn its hefty bulk, it does not look suited for attacking a fighter that can maneuver sharply to avoid a hit. Instead, it seems far more likely to climb high on a ballistic trajectory and drop onto a big and sluggish target that can hardly do anything to get out of the way, such an airborne-early-warning (AEW) aircraft.

As an aside here, while maneuverability at the far extents of its range is probably limited, at slightly shorter ranges, say 30-50 km less than maximum range, it should still be at a high speed, at which point the control surfaces and body lift should generate significant maneuverability for an intercept.

Note that the aerodynamics appear to be similar to the (much smaller) ASRAAM, which is known to sustain something in excess of 50G.

If that is the mission, then the system is probably a supplement to—perhaps a backup for—the Avic Chengdu J-20, a big fighter that looks designed to penetrate an enemy fighter barrier with stealth and high speed to knock out support aircraft in the rear (AW&ST Nov. 7-20, p. 24). The same job could be attempted with a powerful but nonstealthy aircraft that lobbed weapons over the fighter barrier. Such an aircraft could be an Avic Shenyang J-16, a Chinese Flanker—such as the one in recent photographs revealing the weapon’s existence (see photo).

An anonymous user of a Chinese microblog service published the photos in November. There is always a chance of fakery—analysts have been tricked before by phony Chinese pictures—but the images not only look genuine, they also depict a weapon that makes sense for the Chinese air force. Just clear enough for good estimates of dimensions by reference to the J-16, the pictures were almost certainly released by the air force or, on its behalf, by the missile- or fighter-maker. This is the Chinese military’s idea of a press release.

………

Assuming equally energetic propellant, equally efficient trajectories and a modern, dual-pulse rocket motor or ramjet, PL-15 should greatly outrange the 3.7-m long, 178-mm thick Raytheon AIM-120 Amraam, prompting Carlisle to call for development of a longer-ranging U.S. weapon. The new Chinese missile seen on the J-16 is about 5.8 m long and 320 mm thick, and therefore about six times bigger than the Amraam.

It’s also a a lot bigger than the last US VLR AAM, the AIM-54 Phoenix:

 AIM-54 Phoenix  Chinese VLRAAM
 Diameter  380 mm (15 in)  320 mm (13 in)
 Length  4 m (13 ft)  5.8 m (19½ ft)
 Wing Span  910mm (36 in)  ~650mm (26 in)
 Weight  450 kg (1000 lb)  ~700 kg (1550 lb)
 Range  200 km (120 mi)  300 km (180 mi) (guess)
 Speed  4700 km/h (3000 mph)  4700 km/h (3000 mph)

I am not sure if the missile would need advanced propulsion to achieve very long ranges.

The missile is likely intended to be launched at high speed and altitude, which means that simply using a slow and long burning motor may get the performance desired, though this would compromise short range (less than 20 km) performance.

The likely profile would have the the J-16 launching the missile in a climb at supersonic speeds at about 15 km.  The missile would them climb to 30-40 km, where air drag is less, and accelerating to around Mach 5.

It would then dive on the target, with an active seeker used for terminal guidance. (See picture)

This could be an effective deterrent, but it would have limited application:  The AIM-54 was used something less than 10 times in actual combat, with an 0% success rate.

I do agree that the primary targets would be tankers and AWACS type aircraft, so the use of some sort of very long range sensors for cuing would need to be a part of its effective deployment.

I Couldn’t Watch This Last Night

Last night Trevor Noah had right wing conservative Tomi Lahren.

It was a very polite conversation, and since Lahren is basically a blond shapley Rush Limbaugh without the charm, I got frustrated with the genial tenor, and watched Alton Brown macerate squashes or suchlike.

Today, I read glowing reviews of how thoroughly he destroyed her.

He really did. It kind of sneaks up on you, it’s like watching Raymond Burr as Perry Mason, setting the witness at ease before making them confess to murder.

The first 5 minutes are hard, but it is worth it.

M

Emblematic of the Failure of the Euro Left

French President François Holland has announced that he will not seek a second term.

This isn’t surprising, considering the fact that polls right now are showing him to be less popular than Eurodisney.

The problem, and why the right wing nationalist parties are eating their lunch is that the European left refuses to be left any more.

Basically, they have bought into the EU and its associated institutions, (Particularly the Euro) lock, stock, and barrel, and these regimes have been explicitly designed to reduce social services and worker protections while increasing the inequality.

The focus on balanced budgets and unfettered free markets make it impossible to for social democrats to function as social democrats, and absent the ability to improve their constituents lives, they end up serving capital instead.

Harry S Truman said it best when he said, “Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time.”

While there are left wing Euroskeptic left wing parties in Europe, most notably Die Linke in Germany, they are conspicuously absent from the governing process.  (I would argue that the “mainstream” parties work harder to distance themselves from these parties than they do the racist right wing.)

Even with his standing down, I do not expect the French Socialists to make it to the runoff for the Presidential elections, so the race will almost certainly end up between Thatcherite François Fillon and right wing populist  Marine Le Pen.

My condolences to the voters of France.

Linkage

The one thing you can’t replace: