Skip to content

Hey Joe, how about apologizing to the rest of us?

Friday, April 26, 2019

Joe Biden, rightly anticipating some folks remembering, thought it would be a good idea to call Anita Hilland express his regrets for what she went through so many years ago, but not what he put her through. Joe was merely chair of the committee, how could he possibly prevent what happened to her? She didn’t view it as an apology, and clearly it wasn’t, because to this day Joe doesn’t see that he did anything wrong. 

Well, count me among those who think he owes her a real apology, but I don’t think he should stop there. He owes all of us an apology for letting Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court. Anyone with a lick of sense could see the man would be a disaster on the court, and Hill’s credible allegations (particularly if buttressed by the witnesses Biden refused to call) were more than a sufficient reason to send him packing. Remember, Biden was chair of the committee, and had almost total control of the process.

Biden will tell you that it was his job was to act as an honest broker in the interest of bipartisan comity. There was still a little of that comity hanging around back then, but, among other things, the Kavanaugh hearings showed that’s not the case anymore, nor was it very much the case back then. But there was enough to think that, if Thomas was rejected, the first Bush would have nominated a not so loony replacement.

Biden’s treatment of Hill may not disqualify him as a Democratic candidate for the presidency, but what should disqualify him is the fact that to this day he does not recognize, or will not admit, that those days when reasonable men (and only men) could sit down and hash out their differences are gone. He still believes that you can achieve things in a bipartisan fashion, in the face of mountains of evidence that the Republican Party has adopted a take no prisoners, make no compromises stand ever since Newt Gingrich sent the “moderates” into political exile. It boggles the mind that Biden still does not realize this. Among other things we could expect from his presidency is a return to those days when the Democrats bent over backward to secure some Republican buy-in to any measure they try to pass, thereby neutering whatever measures they actually do pass.

Here’s a bit from Crooks and Liarsthat I read after writing the first draft of this post, which I excerpt here merely as proof that I’m not alone in this analysis:

Handsome Joe has framed his candidacy as a run against Trumpism, with an inherent promise of a return to a bipartisan normal. It’s a premise built upon nostalgia for a time long past, and not entirely dissimilar to Comrade Trump’s own campaign slogan of making America great again. It will be interesting to see how two campaigns built on different visions of nostalgia work against each other.

But here’s the thing. Biden’s message doesn’t take into account that our problem is the Republicans; Trump (while a singular vile and corrupt individual) is the product of the Republican factory, which made the rise of American Nazis not just possible but inevitable. Trump’s racism and authoritarianism are the outcome of the Republicans morphing into a party of old, white, straight male, intolerant Xristians. The fascist Republican party will be around after Comrade Trump is long gone.

This Goat Rodeo cannot just be about personalities, it must be about fixing what is wrong, and while Trump himself might be the posterboy for everything wrong, America will not return to normal with his removal. The Republicans will not be bipartisan when the smoke clears. Amply be-chinned Mitch McConnell is already proclaiming that he will block every measure, Garland-style, if the Dems win.

I firmly believe that Biden’s front runner status will be a thing of the past once he’s actually in the game. I hope I’m right, because I also firmly believe he’s almost the worst candidate we could put up against Trump. As Exhibit 1 for that assertion, I submit the fact that so many Democratic beltway insiders think he’s our best hope. I would submit that in the case of our beltway insiders, past performance does guarantee future performance.

Filed in Presidential Politics | | Comments (0)

Heather Somers takes a principled stand

Sunday, April 21, 2019

I haven’t had much luck getting letters published by the New London Day, so I thought I’d publish this one here. 

Readers of the Day might be interested to know that State Senator Heather Somers, who “represents” the people of the 18th District, in which I reside, recently cast one of only two negative votes against a bill that would require diaper changing tables in the restrooms in all newly constructed buildings.

It is a rare event nowadays when any bill attracts such widespread bipartisan support, but then, anyone who’s been a parent, even most Republicans, can appreciate the desirability of such a requirement, particularly in light of the negligible cost involved, as it applied only to new construction.

But not our Heather.

From what I am given to understand, Somers voted against the bill because she is against “overregulation”. Regulations are what we use when people who run businesses put profits before people. It started with regulations curtailing the free market practice of selling rotting meat to the public, which, by the way, the current Republican Administration in Washington, agreeing with the Somers philosophy, is seeking to curtail, proposing to put the rotten meat selling capitalists in charge of policing the slaughterhouse. Republicans are against regulations, except where those regulations have the effect of suppressing the vote or shoveling money toward the rich, in which case, they can’t get enough of them.

Heather has been blessed with a charmed political life. She has one outstanding talent: the ability to avoid taking a firm position on almost any issue while at the same time making it appear that she supports whatever side the listener happens to favor. She also is a favorite of the New London Day, which would never think to report on a vote such as the one above, and can always be counted on to look the other way when Somers casts a vote for which it would heap scorn on a Democratic. But, as the Day pointed out in a recent editorial, this makes perfect sense, because while we must count on Democrats to do the responsible thing, Republicans have the right to play politics with important issues, and, while it would be nice if they would do the right thing, it would be unfair to expect them to do so. 

Still, Heather has a lot of work ahead of her if she wants to hit the big time. Though Heather has proven herself to be in the top 1% on the callousness scale here in Connecticut, nationwide, she’s a piker. Preventing parents from having a place to change diapers really pales beside, for instance, claiming that critical care nurses spend their days playing cards. Still, you have to give Heather credit for trying, and, given enough time, she may up her game and qualify for national recognition.

Filed in Local issues | | Comments (0)

A Good Friday tradition

Thursday, April 18, 2019

Today is Good Friday, and as I’ve done each Good Friday for the past 13 or so years (yes, I’ve been producing this drivel that long) today I pass on a Good Friday lesson. It’s a lesson that this year of all years we must take to heart.

For…

Some things in life are bad (like the fact that Trump is president).
They can really make you mad.
Some things just make you swear and curse (like the fact that the entire Republican Party is composed of racists and Nazis.)
But when you’re chewing on life’s gristle…,

well, if you’ve been reading this blog faithfully, you know what comes next.

Filed in Music | | Comments (0)

Something on the bright side

Tuesday, April 16, 2019

Let us take a few moments to appreciate a brief ray of sunshine in our otherwise cloudy times.

A few minutes ago I answered the call to come out with some other Groton Dems to support the strikers at our local Stop & Shop. I was wondering how the strike was going, and to what extent people were crossing the picket line. Groton is a union town, after all.

While I was there I saw no one enter or leave the store, except one guy who was possibly a scab.

The guy who runs Stop & Shop was there, in effigy, so to speak.

 

Dick Blumenthal came. He is apparently doing the rounds of stores throughout the state, and he said that there are empty parking lots all around, which is a good thing.

Here’s Dick with the workers, and another shot of him with our deputy town chair, Nancy Mello-Miller, and our esteemed Mayor, Patrice Granatosky.

 

I have made it a point to go to Stop & Shop in preference to its competitors precisely because it is unionized. I appreciate the irony in the fact that it is possible now to put pressure on Stop & Shop by shopping at the competition, all of whom are non-union, but you have to play with the hand that’s dealt you. Even in these Stop & Shopless days I will only go so far. I have never stepped foot in a Walmart, and I never will, unless and until it is unionized and the Walton siblings wear ashes and sackcloth as penance for their sins.

Anyway, it is a small but hopeful sign that people are staying away from Stop & Shop in droves. Who knows, maybe people are getting fed up with rising inequality, and they’re ready for a little solidarity. Miracles happen, even in this benighted country.

Filed in Local issues | | Comments (1)

You can’t get much more impeachable than this

Friday, April 12, 2019

When the genius first moved into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue I stated my intention of making note of each impeachable offense as it occurred. This proved impossible, since at the time I was a working person and couldn’t possibly keep up. My intentions were good. The spirit was willing, etc.

Anyway, it is only right and just that I make note of what must be the most blatant, out in the open impeachable offense every committed by the person holding the office Trump present holds:

Have we crossed over into impeachment territory yet? If reports from CNN are true, Donald Trump promised a pardon to the head of CBP if he broke the law by keeping asylum seekers out of the country.

CNN is reporting that during a visit to Calexico, California last week Trump told border agents to block asylum seekers from entering the United States, a violation of immigration law. It is obvious Trump knows this is illegal, because he promised the head of CBP, Kevin McAleenan, that if he ended up in jail for breaking the law, Trump would pardon him.

If true, and you know that it is, our so called President has ascended (from his personal baseline) to the level of a Mafia capo. Other presidents have engaged in cover ups, but he’s out in the open assuring his flunkeys that he’ll take care of them if they get caught committing the crimes he’s ordering them to commit. He’s not covering up, he’s engaging in criminal behavior out in the open. I guess he does believe in transparency after all.

It’s almost enough (well, no, it really isn’t) to make you feel sorry for Republicans like Lindsay Graham, who will now have to come up with reasons why it’s perfectly okay for a president to encourage criminal behavior with assurances that he’ll abuse the powers of his office by pardoning the malefactors. I’m sure Lindsay is up to it, though. I never was a McCain fan, but if I believed in ghosts I’d be sure that McCain would be starting to haunt Lindsay right about now.

Filed in Impeachable | | Comments (0)

The Democrats do something right

Friday, April 12, 2019

I drafted this yesterday, but never put it up. I’ll preface it by saying that I see today that it looks like the Dems may be getting their act together on the propaganda front.

Yesterday the Democrats in the House did something right. They voted to reinstitute net neutrality, which the Trump appointed telecom industries stooges at the FCC repealed. Mitch McConnell says it’s going nowhere, as I’m sure he won’t even let it come up for a vote, but while that’s yet another symptom of our crumbling democracy, it’s not unexpected.

The question now is whether the Democrats will be able to craft a narrative to take advantage of the refusal of Republicans to vote on, or pass this and other popular measures the Democrats will (hopefully) pass in the House in the next few months.

It should not be that hard for the Democrats to make a little list of those measures, get some trusted Hollywood celebrity type to read them off, and, after each, solemnly intone that the Republican Senate wouldn’t even vote on it (!). 

The media is not going to remind people of these things. Only the Democrats can do that, especially on mainstream media. Who knows, maybe the DCCC will take some time off from running an incumbent protection racket and get some commercials produced that will drive this point home. We need to beat the genius in 2020, but it will do us little good if we can’t take the Senate. Without that, we can never turn the tide of autocracy.

Filed in Democrats | | Comments (0)

Sometimes the old words are best

Tuesday, April 9, 2019

I checked my previous posts, and much to my surprise, I have not ranted on this subject before, so here goes.

Twitter is all a-twitter today because Ilhan Omar branded Stephen Miller a “white nationalist”. This is sort of like branding me a lapsed Catholic, but what Omar doesn’t seem to understand is that not only is it perfectly acceptable for a Republican to be a “white nationalist” but that it breaks the rules to point it out. She is an anti-Semite for stating a fact, and that means she should be scorned by Republicans and Chuck Schumer alike, but as a Republican Miller is entitled to his “white nationalism” being ignored even as it hides in plain sight. After all, CNN is undoubtedly keeping his seat warm should we escape the definite fall of the Republic in 2020.

But hypocrisy is not what this rant is about. This rant is about the term “white nationalist”, which has become a frequently used term over the course of the last couple of years. I may be wrong about the timing, but I think it’s come into vogue pretty much contemporaneously with the advent of our racist, anti-Semitic president.

I object to the use of this term.

For one thing, it is a term that out and proud “white nationalists” prefer. I don’t think they should get to call the shots on this any more than anti-abortion people should get to brand themselves “pro-life” as they happily support wars, the death penalty, and child kidnapping.

But I actually have a more nuanced reason for opposing the term.

First, lets agree that, depending on the context, “white nationalist” means “racist”, “bigot”, “anti-Muslim”, “anti-Semite”, or “Nazi”, or any combination of the foregoing. These are terms that the average person in this country understands fairly well. “Nationalism”, on the other hand, does not, in America, have the pejorative force that it has in Europe. Here it acts as a purifying agent, a respectable sounding substitute for the ugly reality, sort of like the way “ethic cleansing” has stood in for genocide.

So I take issue with Representative Omar. Lots of the terms I’ve listed above can be used to describe Miller. Personally, I’d go with “Nazi”, and so would his rabbi, but racist or bigot would do just as well. The term “white nationalist” lets him off far too easy.

On a related note, in that it relates to Stephen Miller, I think Steve over at No More Mister Nice Blog, has the right idea here as a way of getting rid of him.

Filed in Language | | Comments (0)

Thanks for thinking of us, Tim

Saturday, April 6, 2019

Ohio Congressman Tim Ryan is running for president. I know this because among other emails touting him, I got one from Mike Morley, someone who I’m sure is someone, who assures me that Tim has got what it takes:

Failed leadership and broken promises from the White House have made things much worse for everyone — from farmers in the Midwest to autoworkers here in the Rust Belt. Two years ago, people who felt abandoned by Washington and overlooked by our government embraced a con artist who told them what they wanted to hear. But in the end, it was all talk.

I guess the only people within the set of “everyone” eat in diners in the Midwest and voted for Trump. We people who, you know, actually vote for Democrats don’t qualify. And who know that the country was bounded on one side by the Midwest, and another by the Rust Belt, which in my ignorance I always thought was largely in the Midwest.

Ryan is the guy who considered running for Speaker of the House against Pelosi from the right. It just wasn’t enough, apparently, that she handed the DCCC over to the Blue Dogs. Generally speaking, he’s terrible, and is a loyal member of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. There’s a lot of deluded thinking within the Beltway; one of the prime delusions being the belief that Democratic voters are yearning for a candidate who is a “centrist” skilled at mouthing platitudes that translate into a promise to do absolutely nothing worth doing. 

There is a surplus of such candidates in the mix now. See, e.g., Corey Booker, and, most likely, Joe Biden. The danger is that one of them will float to the top because the good candidates split the plurality of the primary votes. If that happens, Ryan won’t be the piece of crap that floats to the top, so maybe his candidacy is a good thing, as it may siphon votes away from someone more likely to pull it off.

Filed in Presidential Politics | | Comments (0)

Say it’s no go, Joe

Tuesday, April 2, 2019

It isn’t often that a pundit (Krugman aside) hits the nail on the head, but Michelle Goldberg column about Joe Biden hit a homer in this mornings Times.

Biden has been the subject of a couple of recent accusations of inappropriate conduct toward women. Not exactly sexual harassment, more like the exact kind of conduct that led Kristin Gillibrand to force Al Franken out of the Senate. Goldberg doesn’t excuse the behavior, but she does get right to the meat of the reasons why Biden should spend a lot more time with his family.

Still, the widespread assumption that Biden would pose the strongest challenge to Donald Trump is unwarranted. In recent years, neither party has done well when they’ve chosen candidates who were meant to appeal to some elusive cadre of swing voters but lacked a robust grass-roots base. On paper, the war heroes John Kerry and John McCain looked electable; Obama and Trump did not. To those desperate to unseat Trump, the centrist, establishment Biden might seem like the safest choice, but it would actually be risky to pick a candidate who will need to constantly apologize for himself.

The “centrism” path doesn’t work, except with people like David Brooks, and even he probably pulls the Trump lever when in the safety of the voting booth. People have to feel like they’re voting for something, not for the status quo with a little kindness mixed in. It was progressivism that beat back the forces of darkness last time around, and it will either do it again or the republic will degenerate into complete autocracy while the planet burns. That’s our choice, and we can’t afford to nominate a guy who doesn’t see that stark reality.

Several months ago Biden was on Pod Save America, and I was absolutely flabbergasted at the degree to which his mind is still in the 1970s, talking about comity and reasonableness and bipartisanship. They were polite to him, but he was utterly clueless. This from someone who spent eight years as the Vice President of a guy who tried beyond reason to make nice with Republicans and who got nothing for it. This in an era when Mitch McConnell has the gall to complain about Democrats obstructing presidential nominations.

There’s no doubt in my mind that Biden’s front runner status will quickly disappear once the primary season begins in earnest. Fondly do I hope, fervently do I pray that I’m right. I’m sure the powers that be in the Democratic Party want to hand him the nomination, as much as they wanted to hand it to Hillary. Trump will eat him for breakfast if he gets the nomination, and he will inspire precisely no one. If the women who have made these complaints about his behavior put paid to his candidacy they both deserve the Medal of Freedom.

Filed in Democrats, Presidential Politics | | Comments (0)

The genius plots strategy

Friday, March 29, 2019

Trump is apparently planning to campaign in 2020 by trumpeting the Barr letter, which no one other than the brain dead (fortunately still not a majority in the country) accepts as valid.

A reliable barometer of Trump’s moods, Giuliani offered a glimpse into the future. Mueller might be done with his investigation, but Trump and company are loath to let it drop. They want to capitalize on the president escaping criminal charges and make Mueller’s findings a core piece of 2020 campaign messaging. In their view, Attorney General William Barr’s four-page summary of the report is a gift that vindicates Trump, undercuts Democratic investigations, and repudiates critical news coverage. There’s time enough to talk policy on the campaign trail. Team Trump first wants to showcase the special counsel’s conclusions: According to Barr, Mueller reported no evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians, and he couldn’t make a judgment on obstruction of justice. Even though the probe has led to 215 criminal charges and five prison sentences, Trump and his allies have framed Mueller’s findings as total exoneration.

Yet many Republican lawmakers and strategists fear that Trump would be fixating on the wrong message at the wrong time. They worry that Trump risks repeating the same strategic blunder he made in the midterm elections, which culminated in Republicans losing control of the House. Rather than spotlight economic gains rung up on his watch, the president might wind up dwelling on collateral issues of scant interest to voters. In the midterms, Trump locked onto migrant caravans making their way north from Mexico, warning of a national-security threat that never materialized, and ultimately made little mention of the bread-and-butter issues that some strategists believe would have bolstered his party’s odds for winning.

Even if no other shoes drop, which seems unlikely, I think the “many Republican lawmakers and strategists” may be right. It’s hard to see how a campaign message consisting of “the guy I picked to squelch an investigation of me says I’m not guilty” is going to garner many votes. That’s just preaching to an ever quieter choir, but it’s all Trump really knows how to do. If the Democrats had any messaging ability they might suggest in response, for instance, that if he’s so innocent why can’t we see the whole report, etc. In fact, the Democrats might actually have the intelligence to do just that. I really don’t think “I’m not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of selling out to Russia” is a great campaign message. Here’s hoping he sticks with that approach.

Filed in The Very Stable Genius | | Comments (0)