Skip to content

Doing the right thing

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

We owe Chris Dodd a debt of gratitude for doing the right thing today. Some of his problems were self inflicted. Most were not, but none of that matters in politics, where perception so often makes reality.

He was an excellent Senator, and a year from November that’s the way most people will remember him, too late, unfortunately, for this November. We’re lucky that we have a strong bench here in Connecticut. We now have to hope that Simmons both stays in the race and gets the nomination. Blumenthal will grind him up. Simmons didn’t beat Sam Gejdenson in 2000; Sam beat himself. Simmons’ only hope this year was for Dodd to beat himself, and now that hope is gone. Simmons fundraising has been anemic at best, considering that Dodd was considered so vulnerable. The money will now dry up awfully fast. Here’s hoping it doesn’t dry up so much that he drops out. I may be alone in this, but I worry about McMahon. Money talks in this country.

I just got a phone call from a friend who congratulated me on correctly predicting that Dodd would drop out. I would feel better about my prescience if I had any recollection of doing so. He says he has witnesses, so I guess I did.

By the way, don’t be fooled by the media’s willingness to spread the Republican meme about Democrats jumping ship, or, as ABC reported, about Democrats “dropping like flies“. More Republicans Senators, Congresspersons and Governors have chosen not to run than Democrats in like offices. That doesn’t mean the Democrats won’t have it tough this November. They have turned off their base and the Independents too. They are naturally situated ideologically to spend the next year slamming Wall Street, which might bring them back into the good graces of the electorate, but they won’t do it. And, with Chris gone,they are poised to put Wall Street’s best friend in charge of the Banking Committee, something they will surely do (assuming they manage to hold onto the Senate) rather than disturb the collegiality of the Senate. After all, what’s more important, good feeling among Senators, or the American people?


Filed in Dodd | | Comments (0)

McMahon wrestles with FEC

Tuesday, January 5, 2010

I have often criticized the New London Day, my sort of hometown newspaper. But for all it’s faults, the Day sometimes does yeoman work Ted Mann may be the best political reporter presently operating in Connecticut. He exposed Rell’s pollster shenanigans, and he also took the initiative to burrow into Linda McMahon’s campaign finance reports. Last month he reported that she reported huge, unspecified expenses as in-kind contributions from herself. McMahon, who perhaps is more obviously seeking to buy a Senate seat than anyone else in history (and that’s going some) pooh-poohed the story, but apparently the FEC begs to differ, as Mann reports:

After The Day first reported on the in-kind contributions in December, the McMahon campaign blasted the article as “erroneous,” since the campaign had not received a notice from the FEC requesting more detailed disclosures. And a spokesman said he saw no reason to file additional details with the FEC disclosing the identities of the campaign’s vendors.

“Why would we amend or re-file something that without question is filed correctly?” McMahon spokesman Ed Patru said on Dec. 11.

But attorneys for the FEC believe more detail is required. In a letter sent to the campaign on Christmas Eve, the commission instructs the campaign to provide the names of the recipients of McMahon’s in-kind payments, information that is “essential to the full public disclosure of your federal election campaign finances.”

The notice instructs McMahon’s campaign to provide the information by Jan. 28 or face “enforcement action.”

It should be noted here that it takes a rather blatant violation to get the usually quiescent FEC to take notice. Mann is doing a good job. Here’s hoping Dodd doesn’t do anything to draw his attention.


Filed in Politics | | Comments (1)

Caucus Tomorrow

Monday, January 4, 2010

Just a reminder that the Groton Democratic Town Committee will be holding its caucuses (one for each district) tomorrow to choose those lucky people who will hold the awe inspiring position of town committee member for the forthcoming two years. Any registered Groton Democrat is eligible to attend, vote and seek this exalted post. Sign-in starts at 6:30 PM at Fitch Middle School.


Filed in Local issues | | Comments (0)

Asymmetries Revisited

Sunday, January 3, 2010

I don’t normally respond to comments, but sometimes it’s worthwhile, and this may be a case in point. In a recent post I made the case that Obama is being treated differently than Bush, specifically citing the way Republican are trying to blame him for a thwarted attempt at terrorism, when Bush was given a pass for successful terrorist attacks. In the course of my post I noted that this was a terrorist attack “about which Obama appears to have gotten no warning”. A commenter of the right wing stripe upbraided me for not reading the news, asserting that “[i]n fact obama was briefed on this the Tuesday before Christmas.” (Apparently capital letters are beyond some people’s capacity to use).

When I read the comment I assumed it was bullshit, but I was frankly too lazy to look into it. However, when something falls into your lap you might as well use it. I recently came across this post at the Washington Monthly. The commenter was apparently referring to a Newsweek article titled Exclusive: Obama Got Pre-Christmas Intelligence Briefing About Terror Threats to ‘Homeland.’

As the folks at Politico point out (quoted at the Monthly) the title implied more than the article proved:

Did the December 22 briefing include a warning of an attack? No. It did not. And despite the provocative headline on his story, the Newsweek reporter does not report that there was one. Because he couldn’t. Because there wasn’t.

The meeting in question was one of a series held at Obama’s behest so that he is kept abreast of the issue. He was, in other words, merely doing his job, something Bush had a certain reluctance to do in the bests of times. Politico’s reporting merely confirms what I assumed, and the commenter merely reinforces my point: the right is certainly holding Obama to a standard wildly different than that it applied to Bush.


Filed in Media | | Comments (1)

A New Year’s Tradition

Sunday, January 3, 2010

About ten years ago my wife began a New Year’s tradition of making cinnamon buns on New Year’s Day. Unfortunately, something happened and the buns went unmade for the years twixt then and now, though the tradition endured as an aspiration, so to speak. This year it has returned in a blaze of glory, somewhat transmogrified, into sticky buns, which are depicted below.

These pictures illustrate a truism, at least one that applies to me. Food is the most difficult subject for photography. The first picture shows the buns in their original baked state, the second, flipped over, with the caramel and pecan coating showing in their fully glory. Unfortunately, we didn’t think to flip them over until we’d already eaten two of them.

First thing this morning I trekked to the Mystic Y and swam a mile. Then I came home and had one of these sticky buns. According to my handy little Iphone app, there are more calories in one of these buns than I burned in over half an hour of swimming. Life is not fair.


Filed in Food | | Comments (0)

Person of the Year

Sunday, January 3, 2010

While at the Supermarket recently I saw, to my initial surprise, that Time Magazine has named Ben Bernanke person of the year. I had actually read what I thought were rumors that he might win this prestigious award, but I discounted that as being wildly absurd. I haven’t read the article, but upon reflection I have come to agree with Time’s choice. I assume, of course, that Bernanke was chosen not because he accomplished anything of note, but because he perfectly exemplified where we are as a nation. If that’s the criteria, and I’m sure it is, who better symbolized our great nation than Ben Bernanke?

Here is a guy who was in a position to stop, or at least minimize the great economic train wreck before it happened, but apparently missed all the obvious signs that his brethren at Goldman Sachs were betting on. Once the proverbial waste product hit the fan, he stepped right up and shoveled free money as fast as he could to the very people who caused the problems, no strings attached of course. (Attached strings are for welfare recipients and other scum, not captains of industry) He is now busying himself trying his level best to make sure that the governmental response to the criminal behavior that led up to this is weak and ineffectual enough to maximize the chance that it will happen yet again.

Now, in light of that, is there anybody out there more deserving of this recognition? I think not.


Filed in Economics | | Comments (0)

%%TITLE%%

Friday, January 1, 2010

%%CONTENT%%

Filed in Uncategorized | | Comments (0)

Happy New Year and some resolutions

Thursday, December 31, 2009

I have taken the period between Christmas and New Years off from my legal labors, at least I took off from the office, though I put in a few hours a day of legal work. I have discovered anew that age old truth-the more time you have to do things, the less you do. But I feel no guilt. I began taking this week off, or somewhat off, back when my kids were living at home, so there was actually some sense to it at the beginning. I continue the tradition because all harmless traditions should be respected, particularly traditions which relieve one from the obligation to work.

Anyway, my semi-vacation is coming to an end, and it’s fitting that I offer my own best wishes to whoever happens to read this, as well as to express my hopes that the coming year will be better both personally and politically for all. On the former point, we can be optimistic. On the latter, well, early signs are not good. But there is always hope, and there are no final victories in politics.

As for myself, I’ve been writing this blog for almost five years, the exact anniversary being sometime next month. It all began as a failed attempt at a collective effort centered around a new defunct (I think) chapter of DFA. Needless to say that didn’t work out, but I kept going, against all odds and all reason.

I’m detecting the signs of burn out. I realize that there needs no Sherlock Holmes come from his grave to tell us this. The signs are clear.

So, along with the standard resolutions I’ve decided to resolve to read more and blog less, something I’ve already started doing. I have a stack of books I bought myself for Christmas, along with several I was given. I already finished the one by Zizak (sorry, I can’t find the “z” characters with the umlauts, or whatever those accent marks are called) that I mentioned in a previous post. Next (not really a book, but remember I’m on vacation) I have to burn through season four of The Office. I’ve just begun Richard Dawkins’ newest, after which I’ll proceed to the rest of the stack. Who knows, maybe I’ll start writing book reviews. Friday night videos will stay, because it’s always fun to scout around for a good piece of music, but the days of daily or more than daily posts are over. At least I think they are.

Anyway, here’s hoping that 2010 will be an improvement over the past year.


Filed in Ramblings | | Comments (2)

Beltway logic

Thursday, December 31, 2009

There’s a lot to criticize about Obama’s presidency, but his response to failed terrorist attempts is not among them. This piece by Glenn Greenwald is must reading. Our punditry is living in a sort of inverted world, in which Obama’s strengths are his weaknesses, and his weaknesses are his strengths. Fondly must we hope, fervently must we pray, that Obama at least resists their calls that he become our fearmonger in chief.


Filed in Media | | Comments (0)

Asymmetries

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

It has been observed that we are living in a time of asymmetrical warfare. In this country we seem to be afflicted with asymmetrical politics. Witness the reaction to the unsuccessful attempt to blow up an aircraft, about which Obama appears to have gotten no warning, to the reaction to 9/11, about which Bush was warned, if only in a general way.

Bush and his partisans immediately turned the situation to his own advantage, and literally commanded the Democrats not only to keep their mouths shut, but to not investigate the events leading up to the successful (from the terrorists point of view) attack. Obama has settled comfortably into the typical Democratic defensive crouch.

This is particularly galling because the attack presents the perfect opportunity to merge good policy and good politics. There is currently no head of the Transportation Security Administration. For why? Because like almost all of Obama’s appointments, his nominee is being held up by a hold placed by a single Senator, in this case, Jim Demint. This is a perfect opportunity for the Democrats, including the Obama administration, to focus attention on a practice that is causing immense harm to the country, putting aside what it is doing to the American system of government. We can’t blame the media for this. It’s up to the Democrats to make it an issue, but of course they won’t. Wouldn’t want to be un-collegial, would we Chris?

Speaking of asymmetries, another by-product of successful Republican obstruction is the ineluctable drift of the federal judiciary to the right. It works like this. When a Republican is in office he appoints hard right judges. Some get knocked out, but the Republicans jump up and down about Democratic obstructionism, when it happens at all, and most of them get through. When Democrats get in, Republican serve notice that they will stop any liberal judge from being confirmed. The Democrats then obediently nominate “moderates”, who the Republicans call liberal anyway and obstruct. Eventually some get through, but the center of ideological gravity on the bench is barely affected. When the Republicans get back in, they quickly change their tune on obstruction, pay no price for it, and get their judges. This is yet another reason to ditch the filibuster, since only the Republicans benefit. If things continue as they are, Obama’s successor (even if Obama is reelected) will inherit huge numbers of vacancies. I would give slim odds at Obama having a Democratic successor, so that means yet more right wing appointments. This by the way, is in a Senate with an alleged filibuster proof majority, on an issue about which even Lieberman might feel ashamed to engage in his usual rank hypocrisy.

If this keeps up we may see a time when the Republicans are able to overturn even the pallid programs the Democrats manage to pass, by getting them declared unconstitutional by ideological judges.


Filed in Politics | | Comments (1)