Thursday, November 27, 2014
Wednesday, November 26, 2014
a moment of clarity.
words.
"What could Obama have said to calm things down in Ferguson?
...there were no words that would have diffused people’s frustration, fear, and rage. There was nothing that could be said from the White House, by this president or any other, that would have made everything okay.
Healing is not going to come from words, and it won’t be delivered from above by the president. It will come from the creation of a system that produces justice, a system where police treat citizens with respect, where power is distributed equitably, where people can have a modicum of faith that their lives and those of their children are considered to have value."
THE WASHINGTON POST: Barack Obama, Ferguson, and racial wounds unhealed
EARLIER:
the next day.
"What could Obama have said to calm things down in Ferguson?
...there were no words that would have diffused people’s frustration, fear, and rage. There was nothing that could be said from the White House, by this president or any other, that would have made everything okay.
Healing is not going to come from words, and it won’t be delivered from above by the president. It will come from the creation of a system that produces justice, a system where police treat citizens with respect, where power is distributed equitably, where people can have a modicum of faith that their lives and those of their children are considered to have value."
THE WASHINGTON POST: Barack Obama, Ferguson, and racial wounds unhealed
EARLIER:
the next day.
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
the next day.
an ongoing discussion/moment of clarity.
words.
"The pleas of Michael Brown’s father and Brown’s mother, Lesley McSpadden, were ultimately incapable of containing the violence that erupted last night, because in so many ways what happened here extended beyond their son. His death was a punctuation to a long, profane sentence, one which has insulted a great many, and with damning frequency of late. In his statement after the decision was announced, President Barack Obama took pains to point out that “there is never an excuse for violence.” The man who once told us that there was no black America or white America but only the United States of America has become a President whose statements on unpunished racial injustices are a genre unto themselves. Perhaps it only seems contradictory that the deaths of Oscar Grant and Trayvon Martin, John Ford and Michael Brown—all unarmed black men shot by men who faced no official sanction for their actions—came during the first black Presidency. Or perhaps the message here is that American democracy has reached the limits of its elasticity—that the symbolic empowerment of individuals, while the great many remain citizen-outsiders, is the best that we can hope for. The air last night, thick with smoke and gunfire, suggested something damning of the President."
THE NEW YORKER: Chronicle of a Riot Foretold
SEE ALSO:
THE NEW YORKER: Ferguson: An American Dilemma
PAJIBA: Because I Am Sick And I Am Tired, And I Want You To Be Sick And Tired With Me - A Guide To Understanding Ferguson
ROLLING STONE: Watching Ferguson Burn: What Constitutes Appropriate Rebellion?
THE POWDER ROOM: Darren Wilson Was Afraid
SLATE: Why the Urgent Anger of Michael Brown’s Mother Matters
words.
"The pleas of Michael Brown’s father and Brown’s mother, Lesley McSpadden, were ultimately incapable of containing the violence that erupted last night, because in so many ways what happened here extended beyond their son. His death was a punctuation to a long, profane sentence, one which has insulted a great many, and with damning frequency of late. In his statement after the decision was announced, President Barack Obama took pains to point out that “there is never an excuse for violence.” The man who once told us that there was no black America or white America but only the United States of America has become a President whose statements on unpunished racial injustices are a genre unto themselves. Perhaps it only seems contradictory that the deaths of Oscar Grant and Trayvon Martin, John Ford and Michael Brown—all unarmed black men shot by men who faced no official sanction for their actions—came during the first black Presidency. Or perhaps the message here is that American democracy has reached the limits of its elasticity—that the symbolic empowerment of individuals, while the great many remain citizen-outsiders, is the best that we can hope for. The air last night, thick with smoke and gunfire, suggested something damning of the President."
THE NEW YORKER: Chronicle of a Riot Foretold
SEE ALSO:
THE NEW YORKER: Ferguson: An American Dilemma
PAJIBA: Because I Am Sick And I Am Tired, And I Want You To Be Sick And Tired With Me - A Guide To Understanding Ferguson
ROLLING STONE: Watching Ferguson Burn: What Constitutes Appropriate Rebellion?
THE POWDER ROOM: Darren Wilson Was Afraid
SLATE: Why the Urgent Anger of Michael Brown’s Mother Matters
Monday, November 24, 2014
Saturday, November 22, 2014
somewhere in america...
Wow @indystar edit page. Way to scaremonger & falsely stereotype http://t.co/rOqpIPbxaW
pic.twitter.com/r05MFyfDb4 h/t @margarita #Immigration
— Raju Narisetti (@raju) November 22, 2014
Friday, November 21, 2014
people.
an ongoing discussion/moment of clarity.
words.
"Markets, especially new ones, involve continuous exploration. Prices and offerings shift as buyers explore what is available at various prices and sellers explore what they can afford to offer at those prices. If the market works well, the process should lead to greater consumer satisfaction and more efficiency; in this case, better care at lower cost. The proponents of the Affordable Care Act don’t claim the law is perfect. The act’s markets are in their infancy. Both buyers and sellers need more information. The rules will have to be adjusted as experience accumulates.
But millions of people do have health coverage who didn’t have it two years ago. The markets are working pretty well and exploration is happening, consumers are learning and more insurers are testing the market. Should believers in market forces try to gut the Affordable Care Act? Heavens, no. They should seize this huge opportunity to prove their case by helping to make the law’s markets work effectively."
THE WASHINGTON POST: People who wanted market-driven health care now have it in the Affordable Care Act
words.
"Markets, especially new ones, involve continuous exploration. Prices and offerings shift as buyers explore what is available at various prices and sellers explore what they can afford to offer at those prices. If the market works well, the process should lead to greater consumer satisfaction and more efficiency; in this case, better care at lower cost. The proponents of the Affordable Care Act don’t claim the law is perfect. The act’s markets are in their infancy. Both buyers and sellers need more information. The rules will have to be adjusted as experience accumulates.
But millions of people do have health coverage who didn’t have it two years ago. The markets are working pretty well and exploration is happening, consumers are learning and more insurers are testing the market. Should believers in market forces try to gut the Affordable Care Act? Heavens, no. They should seize this huge opportunity to prove their case by helping to make the law’s markets work effectively."
THE WASHINGTON POST: People who wanted market-driven health care now have it in the Affordable Care Act
a moment of clarity.
words.
"Obama followed it up by insisting that he wasn’t going to give the undocumented a free pass. This was not “amnesty,” he insisted with a commendably straight face. Those affected—mainly immigrants who have been here for more than five years and have children who are U.S. citizens or legal residents—would have to register with the government, pass a criminal-background check, and pay their taxes, including fines for late payment. In return, they would be allowed to stay in the country and work legally. They wouldn’t get citizenship, or permanent residency, or access to “the same benefits that citizens receive”—i.e., no health-care subsidies—but they would no longer face the threat of being deported. “You can come out of the shadows and get right with the law,” Obama said. “That’s what this deal is.… What I’m describing is accountability—a common-sense, middle-ground approach.”
...Pointing out Republican obstreperousness isn’t a winning strategy on its own, however, and the President knows it. He also needs to persuade the American people that what he is doing is just and right, and in the final part of his speech he once again elevated his argument, by asking a list of rhetorical questions:
'Are we a nation that tolerates the hypocrisy of a system where workers who pick our fruit and make our beds never have a chance to get right with the law? Or are we a nation that gives them a chance to make amends, take responsibility, and give their kids a better future?
Are we a nation that accepts the cruelty of ripping children from their parents’ arms? Or are we a nation that values families, and works together to keep them together? …
That’s what this debate is all about.'"
THE NEW YORKER: Obama Goes Big on Immigration
SEE ALSO:
THE WASHINGTON POST: The Insiders: Republicans shouldn’t overreact to Obama’s immigration order
THE NEW YORK TIMES: Suffer Little Children
"Obama followed it up by insisting that he wasn’t going to give the undocumented a free pass. This was not “amnesty,” he insisted with a commendably straight face. Those affected—mainly immigrants who have been here for more than five years and have children who are U.S. citizens or legal residents—would have to register with the government, pass a criminal-background check, and pay their taxes, including fines for late payment. In return, they would be allowed to stay in the country and work legally. They wouldn’t get citizenship, or permanent residency, or access to “the same benefits that citizens receive”—i.e., no health-care subsidies—but they would no longer face the threat of being deported. “You can come out of the shadows and get right with the law,” Obama said. “That’s what this deal is.… What I’m describing is accountability—a common-sense, middle-ground approach.”
...Pointing out Republican obstreperousness isn’t a winning strategy on its own, however, and the President knows it. He also needs to persuade the American people that what he is doing is just and right, and in the final part of his speech he once again elevated his argument, by asking a list of rhetorical questions:
'Are we a nation that tolerates the hypocrisy of a system where workers who pick our fruit and make our beds never have a chance to get right with the law? Or are we a nation that gives them a chance to make amends, take responsibility, and give their kids a better future?
Are we a nation that accepts the cruelty of ripping children from their parents’ arms? Or are we a nation that values families, and works together to keep them together? …
That’s what this debate is all about.'"
THE NEW YORKER: Obama Goes Big on Immigration
SEE ALSO:
THE WASHINGTON POST: The Insiders: Republicans shouldn’t overreact to Obama’s immigration order
THE NEW YORK TIMES: Suffer Little Children
Thursday, November 20, 2014
Wednesday, November 19, 2014
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
that did it.
starring sleigh bells and tink.
ROLLING STONE: Hear Sleigh Bells' Fiery Collaboration With Chicago Rapper Tink
ROLLING STONE: Hear Sleigh Bells' Fiery Collaboration With Chicago Rapper Tink
Monday, November 17, 2014
in the air tonight.
an ongoing discussion/moment of clarity.
FILE UNDER: AMERICA.
THE NEW YORK TIMES: Inequality, Unbelievably, Gets Worse
FILE UNDER: AMERICA.
THE NEW YORK TIMES: Inequality, Unbelievably, Gets Worse
underneath the stars.
a moment of clarity.
words.
"Of course there are bad decisions and bad programs. But modern American political discourse is dominated by cheap cynicism about public policy, a free-floating contempt for any and all efforts to improve our lives. And this cheap cynicism is completely unjustified. It’s true that government-hating politicians can sometimes turn their predictions of failure into self-fulfilling prophecies, but when leaders want to make government work, they can.
...Conservatives want you to believe that while the goals of public programs on health, energy and more may be laudable, experience shows that such programs are doomed to failure. Don’t believe them. Yes, sometimes government officials, being human, get things wrong. But we’re actually surrounded by examples of government success, which they don’t want you to notice."
THE NEW YORK TIMES: When Government Succeeds
words.
"Of course there are bad decisions and bad programs. But modern American political discourse is dominated by cheap cynicism about public policy, a free-floating contempt for any and all efforts to improve our lives. And this cheap cynicism is completely unjustified. It’s true that government-hating politicians can sometimes turn their predictions of failure into self-fulfilling prophecies, but when leaders want to make government work, they can.
...Conservatives want you to believe that while the goals of public programs on health, energy and more may be laudable, experience shows that such programs are doomed to failure. Don’t believe them. Yes, sometimes government officials, being human, get things wrong. But we’re actually surrounded by examples of government success, which they don’t want you to notice."
THE NEW YORK TIMES: When Government Succeeds
Sunday, November 16, 2014
Saturday, November 15, 2014
Friday, November 14, 2014
Thursday, November 13, 2014
black.
words.
"There’s a woeful lack of diversity on the broadcast air at present; as a culture, we are still far too fixated on magically achieving racial harmony rather than confronting the honest conversations about race required to get there. Thanks to the smart people it has in front of and behind the camera, Black-ish has a chance to address both of these disparities. By presenting people that other shows won’t and saying things that other shows can’t, Black-ish could, in time, prove to be both good and important. What matters for now is that it’s simply focused on being good."
GRANTLAND: TV Check-In: Why ‘Black-ish’ Is the Best New Show of the Fall
"There’s a woeful lack of diversity on the broadcast air at present; as a culture, we are still far too fixated on magically achieving racial harmony rather than confronting the honest conversations about race required to get there. Thanks to the smart people it has in front of and behind the camera, Black-ish has a chance to address both of these disparities. By presenting people that other shows won’t and saying things that other shows can’t, Black-ish could, in time, prove to be both good and important. What matters for now is that it’s simply focused on being good."
GRANTLAND: TV Check-In: Why ‘Black-ish’ Is the Best New Show of the Fall
meltdown.
starring lorde, haim, pusha t, and q-tip.
PITCHFORK: Lorde, Haim, Pusha T, Q-Tip, Stromae Team for Mockingjay Song "Meltdown"
SEE ALSO:
PITCHFORK: Lorde Covers Jeremih's "Don't Tell 'Em"
PITCHFORK: Lorde, Haim, Pusha T, Q-Tip, Stromae Team for Mockingjay Song "Meltdown"
SEE ALSO:
PITCHFORK: Lorde Covers Jeremih's "Don't Tell 'Em"
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
forget me nots.
an ongoing discussion/moment of clarity.
words.
"Republicans are still crowing about the sweeping victories in 2014 that give them control of both houses of Congress. They will set the agenda, deciding what gets considered, investigated and voted on. Their ideas will drive the debate.
But Republicans have no mandate because they offered no agenda.
...Republicans paid no penalty for obstructing every measure that might have given the recovery more juice, blocking even the infrastructure spending that has been a bipartisan response in every downturn. They paid no penalty for shutting down the government and forcing mindless austerity that cost jobs. They paid no penalty for their perfervid hysteria on foreign policy issues – screeching about phantom terrors of pregnant immigrants helping Islamic State terrorists and Ebola victims slip in the country to kill us here at home. They never needed to fill in the magic asterisks in Rep. Paul Ryan’s risible budgets, enabling him to deny the damage to Medicare, education, food stamps and the most vulnerable that his plans would require.
...McConnell won his majority by brilliantly waging a partisan, dishonest, unrelenting policy of obstruction. But now, the absence of any ideas or of any clue will be exposed. And next time, when voters sensibly want to throw the bums out, they may have a far clearer view of just who the bums are."
THE WASHINGTON POST: Republicans will now taste their bitter harvest
words.
"Republicans are still crowing about the sweeping victories in 2014 that give them control of both houses of Congress. They will set the agenda, deciding what gets considered, investigated and voted on. Their ideas will drive the debate.
But Republicans have no mandate because they offered no agenda.
...Republicans paid no penalty for obstructing every measure that might have given the recovery more juice, blocking even the infrastructure spending that has been a bipartisan response in every downturn. They paid no penalty for shutting down the government and forcing mindless austerity that cost jobs. They paid no penalty for their perfervid hysteria on foreign policy issues – screeching about phantom terrors of pregnant immigrants helping Islamic State terrorists and Ebola victims slip in the country to kill us here at home. They never needed to fill in the magic asterisks in Rep. Paul Ryan’s risible budgets, enabling him to deny the damage to Medicare, education, food stamps and the most vulnerable that his plans would require.
...McConnell won his majority by brilliantly waging a partisan, dishonest, unrelenting policy of obstruction. But now, the absence of any ideas or of any clue will be exposed. And next time, when voters sensibly want to throw the bums out, they may have a far clearer view of just who the bums are."
THE WASHINGTON POST: Republicans will now taste their bitter harvest
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
Monday, November 10, 2014
deep impact.
an ongoing discussion/moment of clarity.
words.
"The president came to Washington thinking he could change Washington, make it better, unite it and the nation. He was wrong. As he ascended, the tone of political discourse descended, as much because of who he was as what he did.
...Some people blame the president for not cultivating more congressional relationships, across the aisle and even in the Democratic caucus. There may be some truth to that, but not much, I believe. No amount of glad-handing and ego-stroking would compensate for the depths of the opposition. Nor would messaging.
This is a president who was elected by an increasingly diverse national electorate that some find frightening, a president who is pushing a somewhat liberal agenda that some have found intrinsically objectionable, and a president who is battling some historical personality tropes that many cannot abandon.
To his opponents, this president’s greatest sins are his success and his self."
THE NEW YORK TIMES: The Obama Opposition
words.
"The president came to Washington thinking he could change Washington, make it better, unite it and the nation. He was wrong. As he ascended, the tone of political discourse descended, as much because of who he was as what he did.
...Some people blame the president for not cultivating more congressional relationships, across the aisle and even in the Democratic caucus. There may be some truth to that, but not much, I believe. No amount of glad-handing and ego-stroking would compensate for the depths of the opposition. Nor would messaging.
This is a president who was elected by an increasingly diverse national electorate that some find frightening, a president who is pushing a somewhat liberal agenda that some have found intrinsically objectionable, and a president who is battling some historical personality tropes that many cannot abandon.
To his opponents, this president’s greatest sins are his success and his self."
THE NEW YORK TIMES: The Obama Opposition
Sunday, November 09, 2014
Saturday, November 08, 2014
how to disappear completely.
an ongoing discussion/moment of clarity.
words.
"I’m not going to spend time trying to debunk the notion of Millennials as lazy or disengaged. I don’t buy those narratives, either anecdotally or statistically, but what’s important today is that we’ve seen the confirmation of a very dangerous trend: this moment of low turnout is perfectly in line with an all-time low in people’s faith in our institutions of government. If what we want from voting is for people to engage more with the rules that govern their lives, we need to make the process of engaging much more meaningful that what currently passes as voting.
I can’t blame us, either. The connection between voting and positive change has never been so tenuous. The elimination of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act has opened the door for disenfranchisement movements around the country, and there will be more felons prevented from voting in Georgia then the entire Alaskan electorate (who, by the way, still got to pick a senator). Money, as the Daily Show observed, pretty roundly trumped ideas in this election. Even worse, zooming further out reveals a federal government that seems pathologically incapable of doing anything at all. Why should we care that the senate swung red, or a congressional seat remained blue? We have passionate debates about global warming, about immigration, and about how to fix a healthcare system and an economy that both leave out large numbers of Americans, but when we get to the ballot box those debates seem very removed. How do you know if your vote is a vote for a carbon cap-and-trade program, or against gun control? You don’t, and you can’t, because the systems that govern our democracy are simply not that responsive.
...For our Federal government to work at all, we need people to buy in as voters. We need people to show up, to use voting as a starting point, and to assist on projects for the greater good. What if, instead of looking for people to joining the organizations that already exist to build to federal levels of power, we were looking instead for an affiliation of organizations? We are, at this point in our technological history, capable of communications structures and consensus building that is far more complex and more nuanced than it has ever been. And we’re also at a point where simply repeating the same tired political process is not just not working, it’s actively driving people away.
...Today, America is angry at Millennials for not voting. Instead, I would suggest that we should be angry at an American government that has passed on actual democratic principles in exchange for the consolidation of power. I think Millennials are smart enough to see this, and that we’re building different civic infrastructures, some of which will eventually grow to scale.
Could political parties be one of these things? Maybe. But they would need to embrace the grassroots, and stop worrying so much if that means getting some grass stains on their message."
SALON: Why millennials pulled a disappearing act on Election Day: Younger voters aren't disengaged. Their faith in our institutions is at an all-time low, and with good reason
words.
"I’m not going to spend time trying to debunk the notion of Millennials as lazy or disengaged. I don’t buy those narratives, either anecdotally or statistically, but what’s important today is that we’ve seen the confirmation of a very dangerous trend: this moment of low turnout is perfectly in line with an all-time low in people’s faith in our institutions of government. If what we want from voting is for people to engage more with the rules that govern their lives, we need to make the process of engaging much more meaningful that what currently passes as voting.
I can’t blame us, either. The connection between voting and positive change has never been so tenuous. The elimination of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act has opened the door for disenfranchisement movements around the country, and there will be more felons prevented from voting in Georgia then the entire Alaskan electorate (who, by the way, still got to pick a senator). Money, as the Daily Show observed, pretty roundly trumped ideas in this election. Even worse, zooming further out reveals a federal government that seems pathologically incapable of doing anything at all. Why should we care that the senate swung red, or a congressional seat remained blue? We have passionate debates about global warming, about immigration, and about how to fix a healthcare system and an economy that both leave out large numbers of Americans, but when we get to the ballot box those debates seem very removed. How do you know if your vote is a vote for a carbon cap-and-trade program, or against gun control? You don’t, and you can’t, because the systems that govern our democracy are simply not that responsive.
...For our Federal government to work at all, we need people to buy in as voters. We need people to show up, to use voting as a starting point, and to assist on projects for the greater good. What if, instead of looking for people to joining the organizations that already exist to build to federal levels of power, we were looking instead for an affiliation of organizations? We are, at this point in our technological history, capable of communications structures and consensus building that is far more complex and more nuanced than it has ever been. And we’re also at a point where simply repeating the same tired political process is not just not working, it’s actively driving people away.
...Today, America is angry at Millennials for not voting. Instead, I would suggest that we should be angry at an American government that has passed on actual democratic principles in exchange for the consolidation of power. I think Millennials are smart enough to see this, and that we’re building different civic infrastructures, some of which will eventually grow to scale.
Could political parties be one of these things? Maybe. But they would need to embrace the grassroots, and stop worrying so much if that means getting some grass stains on their message."
SALON: Why millennials pulled a disappearing act on Election Day: Younger voters aren't disengaged. Their faith in our institutions is at an all-time low, and with good reason
forgive them father.
a moment of clarity.
words.
"There was a time not so long ago when Americans, regardless of their political stripes, rallied round their president. Once elected, the man who won the White House was no longer viewed as a republican or democrat, but the President of the United States. The oath of office was taken, the wagons were circled around the country’s borders and it was America versus the rest of the world with the president of all the people at the helm.
Suddenly President Barack Obama, with the potential to become an exceptional president has become the glaring exception to that unwritten, patriotic rule.
...At some point, the treatment of President Obama went from offensive to ugly and then to downright dangerous.
...In President Barack Obama, Americans have a charismatic leader with a good and honest heart. Unlike his predecessor, he’s a very intelligent leader. And unlike that president’s predecessor, he’s a highly moral man.
In President Obama, Americans have the real deal, the whole package and a leader that citizens of almost every country around the world look to with great envy. Given the opportunity, Canadians would trade our leader, hell, most of our leaders for Obama in a heartbeat.
What America has in Obama is a head of state with vitality and insight and youth. Think about it, Barack Obama is a young Nelson Mandela. Mandela was the face of change and charity for all of Africa but he was too old to make it happen. The great things Obama might do for America and the world could go on for decades after he’s out of office.
America, you know not what you have."
THE FIFTH COLUMN: A CANADIAN’S VIEW ON OUR DISRESPECT OF PRESIDENT OBAMA’S PRESIDENCY
words.
"There was a time not so long ago when Americans, regardless of their political stripes, rallied round their president. Once elected, the man who won the White House was no longer viewed as a republican or democrat, but the President of the United States. The oath of office was taken, the wagons were circled around the country’s borders and it was America versus the rest of the world with the president of all the people at the helm.
Suddenly President Barack Obama, with the potential to become an exceptional president has become the glaring exception to that unwritten, patriotic rule.
...At some point, the treatment of President Obama went from offensive to ugly and then to downright dangerous.
...In President Barack Obama, Americans have a charismatic leader with a good and honest heart. Unlike his predecessor, he’s a very intelligent leader. And unlike that president’s predecessor, he’s a highly moral man.
In President Obama, Americans have the real deal, the whole package and a leader that citizens of almost every country around the world look to with great envy. Given the opportunity, Canadians would trade our leader, hell, most of our leaders for Obama in a heartbeat.
What America has in Obama is a head of state with vitality and insight and youth. Think about it, Barack Obama is a young Nelson Mandela. Mandela was the face of change and charity for all of Africa but he was too old to make it happen. The great things Obama might do for America and the world could go on for decades after he’s out of office.
America, you know not what you have."
THE FIFTH COLUMN: A CANADIAN’S VIEW ON OUR DISRESPECT OF PRESIDENT OBAMA’S PRESIDENCY
beavis & butt-head.
an ongoing discussion/moment of clarity.
words.
"...the 2014 to 2016 cycle will be a rough copy of the 2010 to 2012 cycle. This is more than a quirk of American elections. It represents a major shift in partisan cycles that, in turn, has serious consequences for our ability to govern the country and respond to the pressing problems of the day. With this seesaw of Democratic presidents and GOP congresses, we may be facing more than gridlock. We may be on the cusp of a generation of political stagnation that will be hardwired into our democracy by our country’s shifting demographics and the unwillingness of the Republican Party to compromise with those with whom they disagree.
...The problem for our present politics isn’t ideological division; it’s that the Republican and Democratic parties aren’t ideological in the same way. The Republican Party isn’t just more conservative and more polarized, it’s polarized against basic norms of compromise.
...All of this is to say one thing: The GOP is broken. And with its dominance in midterm elections, it’s poised to break American government for the foreseeable future. The 2013 shutdown—when House Republicans shuttered the government over the Affordable Care Act—is just the beginning. Indeed, there’s a good chance the 2014 midterm election results will worsen the ideas and factions that brought us to the brink. For extremist Republican figures like Sen. Ted Cruz (and now Sens. Joni Ernst and Tom Cotton), the confrontations of the past two years were a success. They vindicate a stance of implacable opposition. Far from cooperation, we should expect two years of even worse dysfunction.
And it’s not clear when that will end.
...the dysfunction of the Obama era—driven by the asymmetrical polarization of the GOP versus the Democratic Party—is likely to remain locked in place for the rest of the decade, perhaps longer. And while the country, and specifically liberals, might pass some legislation during periods after a presidential election—a higher minimum wage or minor action on climate change—the anti-deal norm in the Republican Party means more stasis and gridlock. Years could pass, for instance, where the Senate doesn’t confirm a nominee out of ideological pique.
... If there’s been an underlying current to the Obama years, it’s the degree to which liberals have been stymied and frustrated by institutional barriers, most famously the filibuster, which helped ensure a smaller-than-needed stimulus, the death of “cap and trade,” and a ramshackle health care bill passed at the eleventh hour.
In some sense, our divergent electorates are just another barrier. Which means liberals will have to find some way to account for them. Whether it’s through institutional change—a national voting holiday, for instance—or something else, we have to change the dynamics of American politics. Otherwise, we can look forward to a future of dysfunction where our government will fail to do the most basic tasks. And while we can muddle through for a little while, it’s not a condition we can survive for a generation."
SLATE: The Disunited States of America: Gridlock is only a symptom. Why our democracy may be hardwired to fail for a generation.
words.
"...the 2014 to 2016 cycle will be a rough copy of the 2010 to 2012 cycle. This is more than a quirk of American elections. It represents a major shift in partisan cycles that, in turn, has serious consequences for our ability to govern the country and respond to the pressing problems of the day. With this seesaw of Democratic presidents and GOP congresses, we may be facing more than gridlock. We may be on the cusp of a generation of political stagnation that will be hardwired into our democracy by our country’s shifting demographics and the unwillingness of the Republican Party to compromise with those with whom they disagree.
...The problem for our present politics isn’t ideological division; it’s that the Republican and Democratic parties aren’t ideological in the same way. The Republican Party isn’t just more conservative and more polarized, it’s polarized against basic norms of compromise.
...All of this is to say one thing: The GOP is broken. And with its dominance in midterm elections, it’s poised to break American government for the foreseeable future. The 2013 shutdown—when House Republicans shuttered the government over the Affordable Care Act—is just the beginning. Indeed, there’s a good chance the 2014 midterm election results will worsen the ideas and factions that brought us to the brink. For extremist Republican figures like Sen. Ted Cruz (and now Sens. Joni Ernst and Tom Cotton), the confrontations of the past two years were a success. They vindicate a stance of implacable opposition. Far from cooperation, we should expect two years of even worse dysfunction.
And it’s not clear when that will end.
...the dysfunction of the Obama era—driven by the asymmetrical polarization of the GOP versus the Democratic Party—is likely to remain locked in place for the rest of the decade, perhaps longer. And while the country, and specifically liberals, might pass some legislation during periods after a presidential election—a higher minimum wage or minor action on climate change—the anti-deal norm in the Republican Party means more stasis and gridlock. Years could pass, for instance, where the Senate doesn’t confirm a nominee out of ideological pique.
... If there’s been an underlying current to the Obama years, it’s the degree to which liberals have been stymied and frustrated by institutional barriers, most famously the filibuster, which helped ensure a smaller-than-needed stimulus, the death of “cap and trade,” and a ramshackle health care bill passed at the eleventh hour.
In some sense, our divergent electorates are just another barrier. Which means liberals will have to find some way to account for them. Whether it’s through institutional change—a national voting holiday, for instance—or something else, we have to change the dynamics of American politics. Otherwise, we can look forward to a future of dysfunction where our government will fail to do the most basic tasks. And while we can muddle through for a little while, it’s not a condition we can survive for a generation."
SLATE: The Disunited States of America: Gridlock is only a symptom. Why our democracy may be hardwired to fail for a generation.
Friday, November 07, 2014
loiter squad.
an ongoing discussion/moment of clarity.
words.
"Refusal is not a legislative plan, and neither is the Democrats' pleading "cooommme onnnnnnn!" reply, but this is the settlement we've long achieved, and the idea that the Democrats "lost control" Tuesday misses the point. As an anti-government party, Republicans have no incentive to do anything. As a pro-government party, the Democrats have to find every avenue for compromise. Thus you can have an Ebola outbreak and no confirmed Surgeon General, dozens of unconfirmed federal judges and the constant threat of credit default, and you know one side will almost always choose to lose this game of chicken and hope that every 2-4 years something will bail them out. In that way, "no" is a form of perpetual control.
...The trouble with sticking your fingers in your ears, stomping around and saying "No!" is that it looks really weird when you are in charge. (Who are you even yelling at?) And what the GOP has so far is pretty thin.
...But if Republican plans are thin, Democratic plans are thinner.
... The comforting fairytale liberals tell themselves is that everyone would vote for them if they just got their message across, and of course it's wrong. The yawning chasm at the heart of American liberalism is that it insufficiently addresses humans' capacity for fear and resentment, which the GOP message sends straight to the brain like a rail of uncut cocaine. Some people can't be reached, but at least turning them away on purpose is an ethos. In the meantime, the GOP response to the last six and the next two years is unmistakable. It doesn't change, and the circumstances don't change with it. You can push pieces of paper this way and that, and pick up any of them and see your answer. The answer is no."
ROLLING STONE: Election 2014: Getting to No – And Staying There
words.
"Refusal is not a legislative plan, and neither is the Democrats' pleading "cooommme onnnnnnn!" reply, but this is the settlement we've long achieved, and the idea that the Democrats "lost control" Tuesday misses the point. As an anti-government party, Republicans have no incentive to do anything. As a pro-government party, the Democrats have to find every avenue for compromise. Thus you can have an Ebola outbreak and no confirmed Surgeon General, dozens of unconfirmed federal judges and the constant threat of credit default, and you know one side will almost always choose to lose this game of chicken and hope that every 2-4 years something will bail them out. In that way, "no" is a form of perpetual control.
...The trouble with sticking your fingers in your ears, stomping around and saying "No!" is that it looks really weird when you are in charge. (Who are you even yelling at?) And what the GOP has so far is pretty thin.
...But if Republican plans are thin, Democratic plans are thinner.
... The comforting fairytale liberals tell themselves is that everyone would vote for them if they just got their message across, and of course it's wrong. The yawning chasm at the heart of American liberalism is that it insufficiently addresses humans' capacity for fear and resentment, which the GOP message sends straight to the brain like a rail of uncut cocaine. Some people can't be reached, but at least turning them away on purpose is an ethos. In the meantime, the GOP response to the last six and the next two years is unmistakable. It doesn't change, and the circumstances don't change with it. You can push pieces of paper this way and that, and pick up any of them and see your answer. The answer is no."
ROLLING STONE: Election 2014: Getting to No – And Staying There
a moment of clarity.
words.
"...the 2014 election looks more like part of a pattern than an aberration. Liberals’ grasp on American political culture and on the operation of American politics has been weakening for decades, not least because the rules of play have been set by conservatives. Practices and regulations regarding the raising and spending of money, the nature of political consulting and political advertising, and the press’s coverage of politics have generally been the product of the forces of conservatism. The Democrats’ chief contribution to the machinery of American politics, lately, has been the adoption of digital tools as campaign aids, the importance of which is nearly always wildly overstated. Sure, MoveOn.org helped get Obama elected in 2008. But in the history of American politics, the consequences of the Reagan-era F.C.C.’s abandonment of the Fairness Doctrine, in 1987, will be an entire chapter; MoveOn will be a Page Not Found.
At its best, a political party is a set of principles made manifest in a course of action. In this year’s midterms, neither party neared that standard. But since it is the Democrats who lost, it is the Democrats who’ve got to decide what lessons to learn. And they’ve got plenty of places to start. Democratic Party leaders have acted as if they believe that, between knowing how to use the Internet and espousing views typically considered more appealing to younger voters, the party’s future is assured. This is a dangerous misconception, and it lies behind a laziness of purpose. “Elect me because the G.O.P. is nuts” is no sounder a campaign message than “Elect me because Obama caused Ebola.” One reason that so many Democratic candidates so often fail to say much of anything substantial is that they prefer, instead, to wait for their Republican opponents to say something execrable.
...You can earn votes by pointing out that your opponent is even worse than you are, but you can’t run a political party that way. And it’s no way to run a government."
THE NEW YORKER: The Democrats Flunk Their Midterms
"...the 2014 election looks more like part of a pattern than an aberration. Liberals’ grasp on American political culture and on the operation of American politics has been weakening for decades, not least because the rules of play have been set by conservatives. Practices and regulations regarding the raising and spending of money, the nature of political consulting and political advertising, and the press’s coverage of politics have generally been the product of the forces of conservatism. The Democrats’ chief contribution to the machinery of American politics, lately, has been the adoption of digital tools as campaign aids, the importance of which is nearly always wildly overstated. Sure, MoveOn.org helped get Obama elected in 2008. But in the history of American politics, the consequences of the Reagan-era F.C.C.’s abandonment of the Fairness Doctrine, in 1987, will be an entire chapter; MoveOn will be a Page Not Found.
At its best, a political party is a set of principles made manifest in a course of action. In this year’s midterms, neither party neared that standard. But since it is the Democrats who lost, it is the Democrats who’ve got to decide what lessons to learn. And they’ve got plenty of places to start. Democratic Party leaders have acted as if they believe that, between knowing how to use the Internet and espousing views typically considered more appealing to younger voters, the party’s future is assured. This is a dangerous misconception, and it lies behind a laziness of purpose. “Elect me because the G.O.P. is nuts” is no sounder a campaign message than “Elect me because Obama caused Ebola.” One reason that so many Democratic candidates so often fail to say much of anything substantial is that they prefer, instead, to wait for their Republican opponents to say something execrable.
...You can earn votes by pointing out that your opponent is even worse than you are, but you can’t run a political party that way. And it’s no way to run a government."
THE NEW YORKER: The Democrats Flunk Their Midterms
Thursday, November 06, 2014
Wednesday, November 05, 2014
morningwood.
an ongoing discussion/moment of clarity.
words.
"Voters on Tuesday gave Republicans control of the Senate. But the GOP did not earn this victory.
That’s not because Senate Democrats, led by Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), deserved to win in the GOP’s stead, and it’s not because this country can do without a sensibly conservative party. It is because the GOP has not been a sensibly conservative party. Congressional Republicans’ behavior over the last four years deserved no reward.
...With President Obama still in office, it is up to Republican leaders to conclude that voters outside the hardcore GOP base did not demand more pettiness in this year’s midterm elections. Among other things, they will have to reign in hectoring partisans such as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the architect of the shutdown who, on CNN Tuesday night, argued that Washington can compromise over the next two years — if you define compromise as doing exactly what Republicans want.
And if GOP leaders fail at that, it will be up to voters to give them what they really deserve."
THE WASHINGTON POST: The GOP didn’t deserve to win
SEE ALSO:
piano in the dark.
THE WASHINGTON POST: For Republicans, the hard part is about to begin
THE NEW YORK TIMES: Negativity Wins the Senate
THE NEW YORK TIMES: The Tornado Election
words.
"Voters on Tuesday gave Republicans control of the Senate. But the GOP did not earn this victory.
That’s not because Senate Democrats, led by Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), deserved to win in the GOP’s stead, and it’s not because this country can do without a sensibly conservative party. It is because the GOP has not been a sensibly conservative party. Congressional Republicans’ behavior over the last four years deserved no reward.
...With President Obama still in office, it is up to Republican leaders to conclude that voters outside the hardcore GOP base did not demand more pettiness in this year’s midterm elections. Among other things, they will have to reign in hectoring partisans such as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the architect of the shutdown who, on CNN Tuesday night, argued that Washington can compromise over the next two years — if you define compromise as doing exactly what Republicans want.
And if GOP leaders fail at that, it will be up to voters to give them what they really deserve."
THE WASHINGTON POST: The GOP didn’t deserve to win
SEE ALSO:
piano in the dark.
THE WASHINGTON POST: For Republicans, the hard part is about to begin
THE NEW YORK TIMES: Negativity Wins the Senate
THE NEW YORK TIMES: The Tornado Election
one and all.
starring the smashing pumpkins.
HUFFINGTON POST: Smashing Pumpkins' 'One And All' Is The Latest Hit From The Band's Super-Album
HUFFINGTON POST: Smashing Pumpkins' 'One And All' Is The Latest Hit From The Band's Super-Album
piano in the dark.
a moment of clarity.
words.
"It’s “morning in America again,” Cory Gardner proclaimed—an echo, almost obligatory for a Republican, of Ronald Reagan. If so, it’s not the kind of morning in which the rising sun casts a new light on the landscape. It’s more the kind of morning when you wake up and find—despite your dreams—a sour taste in your mouth, and pretty much the same reality you shut your eyes against last night, and the night before that, when you turned out the light. The return of a Republican Senate changes nothing other than to make worse everything that Americans dislike about Washington, and for increasingly good reason: its smugness, its bitterness, its indifference to the hopes and struggles of so many of the people who voted last night."
THE NEW YORKER: The Message in Republican Victory Speeches
words.
"It’s “morning in America again,” Cory Gardner proclaimed—an echo, almost obligatory for a Republican, of Ronald Reagan. If so, it’s not the kind of morning in which the rising sun casts a new light on the landscape. It’s more the kind of morning when you wake up and find—despite your dreams—a sour taste in your mouth, and pretty much the same reality you shut your eyes against last night, and the night before that, when you turned out the light. The return of a Republican Senate changes nothing other than to make worse everything that Americans dislike about Washington, and for increasingly good reason: its smugness, its bitterness, its indifference to the hopes and struggles of so many of the people who voted last night."
THE NEW YORKER: The Message in Republican Victory Speeches
Tuesday, November 04, 2014
black thought.
an ongoing discussion/moment of clarity.
words.
"I am 60 years old — how did that happen? — and to me, what Mr. Obama has accomplished is far from insignificant: He saved us from economic meltdown, he got us out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and he signed the Affordable Health Care Act. He would perhaps be the first to admit we still have far to go. Because I am an old head now, I can accept incremental change, even value it. I voted for him, though I know he is more of a capitalist than I am. I voted for him twice, though in my heart I cannot forgive him for turning to economist advisers like Lawrence H. Summers (whom I despise). And I am dismayed by those who are obsessed by the mysteries of Mr. Obama’s personality, by his distance, his opacity. Nobody can make him lose his cool, just as nobody can move him from the center. So long as he occupies the middle ground as president, the Republicans are forced to stay on the right. Most of the world is relieved that the president of the United States is a man of integrity and intelligence. But here he is described as a flawed politician, a man not cut out for trench warfare, not the man for our historical moment. His early notion that the country could reconcile in him because of his personal story is dismissed as naïve.
Mr. Obama is criticized for not having done more for black people — not because they are black people, but because they are among his party’s most loyal supporters. Yet many whites resent or are afraid of those moments when the president seems to be taking the black side, speaking from the black point of view. Black people in turn can be frustrated that the black point of view is always ghettoized, never allowed to be, simply, the American point of view — especially when the issue at hand is about social justice. Historically, blacks have looked to the federal government for protection against the doctrine of states’ rights, a euphemism for the reactionary in American politics. But Mr. Obama’s experience in office has shown blacks the limits of executive power.
...The shooting in Ferguson, Mo., did not leave the news, because demonstrators stayed in the streets, just as Occupy Wall Street movement brought up the urgent matter of wage and wealth inequality and has not let the subject go. Maybe we are at the beginning of another age of activism on the part of youth. In Europe, disaffection from the major political parties has benefited far-right politicians. In America, the rabid Tea Party is the beneficiary. Mr. Obama said somewhere that troublemakers were catalysts for positive change, while others were caretakers of that change. History will remember him as the calm president who steered the nation through dangerous waters."
THE NEW YORK TIMES: Election 2014: Should Black Voters Keep Their Faith in Obama?
words.
"I am 60 years old — how did that happen? — and to me, what Mr. Obama has accomplished is far from insignificant: He saved us from economic meltdown, he got us out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and he signed the Affordable Health Care Act. He would perhaps be the first to admit we still have far to go. Because I am an old head now, I can accept incremental change, even value it. I voted for him, though I know he is more of a capitalist than I am. I voted for him twice, though in my heart I cannot forgive him for turning to economist advisers like Lawrence H. Summers (whom I despise). And I am dismayed by those who are obsessed by the mysteries of Mr. Obama’s personality, by his distance, his opacity. Nobody can make him lose his cool, just as nobody can move him from the center. So long as he occupies the middle ground as president, the Republicans are forced to stay on the right. Most of the world is relieved that the president of the United States is a man of integrity and intelligence. But here he is described as a flawed politician, a man not cut out for trench warfare, not the man for our historical moment. His early notion that the country could reconcile in him because of his personal story is dismissed as naïve.
Mr. Obama is criticized for not having done more for black people — not because they are black people, but because they are among his party’s most loyal supporters. Yet many whites resent or are afraid of those moments when the president seems to be taking the black side, speaking from the black point of view. Black people in turn can be frustrated that the black point of view is always ghettoized, never allowed to be, simply, the American point of view — especially when the issue at hand is about social justice. Historically, blacks have looked to the federal government for protection against the doctrine of states’ rights, a euphemism for the reactionary in American politics. But Mr. Obama’s experience in office has shown blacks the limits of executive power.
...The shooting in Ferguson, Mo., did not leave the news, because demonstrators stayed in the streets, just as Occupy Wall Street movement brought up the urgent matter of wage and wealth inequality and has not let the subject go. Maybe we are at the beginning of another age of activism on the part of youth. In Europe, disaffection from the major political parties has benefited far-right politicians. In America, the rabid Tea Party is the beneficiary. Mr. Obama said somewhere that troublemakers were catalysts for positive change, while others were caretakers of that change. History will remember him as the calm president who steered the nation through dangerous waters."
THE NEW YORK TIMES: Election 2014: Should Black Voters Keep Their Faith in Obama?
"real quick..."
words.
"For decades, Democratic policies and politicians grew pale and scrawny in the shadow of Franklin Roosevelt. It took Bill Clinton to modernize the Democratic appeal — providing government, at least in theory, with a catalytic, rather than supervisory, role. It is Republicans who now struggle in the shade of presidential greatness, even when they win congressional elections.
...Reagan, while conservative to the bone, would never have allowed himself to become captive to the past.” Reagan inherited a nation with high inflation and a 70 percent top marginal tax rate. Our nation has wage stagnation and a gap in skills and human capital that is hardening into a rigid class system.
This is a lesson that is particularly urgent for newly elected Republicans and prospective presidential candidates. A party truly animated by the spirit of Reagan will address the problems of our time, not of his."
THE WASHINGTON POST: Republicans are stuck in a Reagan time warp
"For decades, Democratic policies and politicians grew pale and scrawny in the shadow of Franklin Roosevelt. It took Bill Clinton to modernize the Democratic appeal — providing government, at least in theory, with a catalytic, rather than supervisory, role. It is Republicans who now struggle in the shade of presidential greatness, even when they win congressional elections.
...Reagan, while conservative to the bone, would never have allowed himself to become captive to the past.” Reagan inherited a nation with high inflation and a 70 percent top marginal tax rate. Our nation has wage stagnation and a gap in skills and human capital that is hardening into a rigid class system.
This is a lesson that is particularly urgent for newly elected Republicans and prospective presidential candidates. A party truly animated by the spirit of Reagan will address the problems of our time, not of his."
THE WASHINGTON POST: Republicans are stuck in a Reagan time warp
Monday, November 03, 2014
revolution indifference.
a video.
from until the ribbon breaks & run the jewels.
PITCHFORK: Until The Ribbon Breaks and Run The Jewels Team Up For "Revolution Indifference" Video
from until the ribbon breaks & run the jewels.
PITCHFORK: Until The Ribbon Breaks and Run The Jewels Team Up For "Revolution Indifference" Video
Sunday, November 02, 2014
Saturday, November 01, 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)