Month: December 2011

Last I knew, Conrad Black was in prison, where he belongs. Yet, here he is committing crimes against syntax and using words like ‘pelagic’ and ‘Pelosified’ in the pages of the National Review. He offers us wisdom, such as this:

After the rise and decapitation of each non-Mitt, the frustrations of the average reasonable Republican or independent who loves America and is horrified by the most incompetent administration since that of James Buchanan (who at least had the decency not to seek reelection) seem to have become explosive and irrational.

Of all the criticisms I’ve seen leveled against the Obama administration, the only one less credible than ‘incompetent’ is ‘corrupt.’ This, after all, is the administration that administered a flawed TARP program to near-profitability, that rescued a bankrupt auto industry that is now thriving, that brought us seamlessly out of the quagmire of Iraq, that actually managed to pass a comprehensive health care bill, that has overseen 21 straight months of economic growth, that led the effort to remove Moammar Gaddafi from power without incurring any coalition casualties, and that finally located and hunted down Usama bin-Laden. If they have sometimes committed acts of political malpractice and at times made a blunder or two, no one can reasonably look at their body of work and call it incompetent.

In fact, it is the competence of the Obama administration that justifies, more than anything else, their reelection. After witnessing the countless acts of incompetence of the Bush administration, people didn’t care about ideology anymore. They just wanted people in charge who could respond to a natural disaster. They’ve got that now, and they won’t be handing power over to a clown like Newt Gingrich. Conrad Black is right about that. That’s about the only thing he is right about. Although, I join him in the fervent hope that the Republicans will have a brokered convention.

Peggy Noonan gives a rave review to the Margaret Thatcher movie today, then asks this:

The left in America has largely thrown in the towel on Ronald Reagan, but in Britain Thatcher-hatred remains fresh. Why?

While you’re debating the truth of that, I’ll tell you that she ascribes it to sexism:

Because she was a woman. Because women in politics are always by definition seen as presumptuous: They presume to lead men. When they are as bright as the men they’re disliked by the men, and when they’re brighter and more serious they’re hated. Mrs Thatcher’s very presence was an insult to the left because it undermined the left’s insistence that only leftism and its protection of the weak and disadvantaged would allow women to rise. She rose without them while opposing what they stood for. On the other hand, some of the Tory men around her had been smacked on the head by her purse often enough to wish for revenge. What better revenge than to fail to fully stand up for her to posterity?

The lefty part of that is conservatism’s “liberals are the real sexists” boilerplate, the nonsense that was the right’s excuse for pretending to warm to Hillary Clinton in early 2008. (We allegedly hated Hillary, but she got 18 million votes from all us sexists. Hey, how’s that Michele Bachmann campaign working out for you righties?)

The implication here is that we on the left would be much angrier at Ronald Reagan if he’d been a woman.

Nahhh. If our anger has faded, it’s for one simple reason: the bastards who’ve followed him have been so much worse. The Gingrich Congress? The teabag House? And, in between, Bush and Cheney? In retrospect, Reagan seems like a beta version of these lunatics. His presidency seems like an out-of-town tryout of the full-blown craziness to come.

Really, Peg, it’s simple. Don’t overthink it.

(By the way, here’s Steve M.’s Rule: Who’s the worst president in American history? Answer: the next Republican president.)

(X-posted at No More Mister Nice Blog.)

The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) has recently released its annual index on the state of democracy around the world. The findings are not uplifting, as the general trend shows declining values in nearly all regions of the world. In 2011, only 11% of the world population live in what is defined as “full democracies”. The trend has been negative since 2008. North America, Western and Eastern Europe are all seeing a decline – only North Africa/Middle East and Asia/Australasia have seen regional improvements.

Follow below:
The study measures five criteria to arrive at a compound index:

• Electoral process and pluralism
• The functioning of government
• Political participation
• Political culture
• Civil liberties

The methodology of the study is explained in the end section of the report (from page 33).

Link to full study (you must register to be able to download; it’s free).

Only 25 nations qualify as full democracies (26 in 2010) with an index value between 10.0 and 8.0, with another 53 defined as flawed democracies (7.9 – 6.0).

Wikipedia has a good table with the rankings and adding the nominal form of government for all of them. A curious (?) observation is that seven of the top ten are constitutional monarchies and (not so curious) nine of the top ten are parliamentary democracies.

There is not much change in the top ten, where we find the 5 Nordic nations as well as New Zealand, Australia, Switzerland, Canada and the Netherlands.

Norway remains on top with an index of 9.80 (unchanged). The US fell from 17 to 19 with an index of 8.11 (down from 8.18).

From the report:

A turbulent year
2011 was an exceptionally turbulent year politically, characterised by sovereign debt crises and weak political leadership in the developed world, dramatic change and conflict in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) and rising social unrest throughout much of the world. It featured important changes in democracy, both in the direction of unexpected democratisation and a continuation of decline in democracy in some parts of the world.
The momentous events in the Arab world have been extraordinary in several respects. The popular uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt a year ago were sudden and unexpected, occurring in seemingly infertile territory. These revolts were home-grown affairs that overturned a host of stereotypes about the MENA region and caught the outside world unaware.

Other key developments in 2011 include:

• Popular confidence in political institutions continues to decline in many countries.
• Mounting social unrest could pose a threat to democracy in some countries.
• US democracy has been adversely affected by a deepening of the polarisation of the political scene and political brinkmanship and paralysis.
• The US and the UK remain at the bottom end of the full democracy category. There has been a rise in protest movement. Problems in the functioning of government are more prominent.
• Although extremist political forces in Europe have not yet profited from economic dislocation as might have been feared, populism and anti-immigrant sentiment are on the rise.
• Eastern Europe experienced another decline in democracy in 2011. In 12 countries of the region the democracy score declined in 2011.
• Rampant crime in some countries–in particular, violence and drug-trafficking–continues to have a negative impact on democracy in Latin America.

The unprecedented rise of movements for democratic change across the Arab world a year ago led many to expect a new wave of democratisation. But it soon became apparent that the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt would not be repeated so easily elsewhere and that democracy remained a highly uncertain prospect. Many MENA autocracies resorted to a mix of repression and cosmetic changes.

To be noted is the fact that European nations such as France, Italy and Greece fall in the category of flawed democracies. Israel is also in this category.

Tribbers may want to check out the whole report.

Here is Charles Krauthammer’s summation on the House Republicans’ performance on the payroll tax holiday.

The GOP’s performance nicely reprises that scene in “Animal House” where the marching band turns into a blind alley and row after row of plumed morons plows into a brick wall, crumbling to the ground in an unceremonious heap.

With one difference: House Republicans are unplumed.

I can go with that.

It is still a little demoralizing to see Krauthammer engage in the kind of myopia on stimulus the Republicans are becoming famous for. He argues, in a seemingly convincing manner, that no businessperson is going to hire someone just because of a two-month or one-year payroll tax holiday. Here’s how he puts it:

Obama is also selling it as a job creator. This takes audacity. Even a one-year extension isn’t a tax cut; it’s a tax holiday. A two-month extension is nothing more than a long tax weekend. What employer is going to alter his hiring decisions — whose effects last years — in anticipation of a one-year tax holiday, let alone two months?

This is a $121 billion annual drain on the Treasury that makes a mockery of the Democrats’ reverence for the Social Security trust fund and its inviolability.

Here’s the problem. It isn’t just a $121 billion drain on the Treasury. It’s a $121 billion stimulus package. And it’s not just an extension of the payroll tax holiday; it’s also an extension of unemployment benefits. It puts a lot of money in people’s hands. Or, more accurately, it puts a little bit of money in a lot of people’s hands. This will translate into lots and lots of small transactions that would not have taken place without the bill. And that means more revenues and more profits for countless businesses. Unemployment insurance is the most effective stimulus known to man, because almost all of the money is spent immediately. And increased demand and increased profits opens the door to more hiring.

So, no, people aren’t going to hire someone because they have to change their payroll withholding formula. They’re going to hire people to meet increased demand and they’ll pay for it with increased profits. This will create economic growth, and the government will get a lot of its money back as a result.

This is what’s missing from all Republican rhetoric about creating jobs. They think rich people will hire people if they have more money. But they won’t hire people unless they have customers with money to spend. Letting the rich hoover up ever cent of wealth created in this country has resulted in an economy where the rich are richer than ever but no one else has enough money to keep the wealth machine growing.

On the politics, I agree with Krauthammer. The Republicans have acted like morons. But he isn’t any better than them when it comes to the substance.

Also, too, the bill doesn’t cost Social Security a dime.

.

Arab, treason and plot: Army finally rebuts claims of Pasha coup plot

ISLAMABAD (The Express Tribune) – The chorus of resignation calls, which were fuelled by some serious allegations against the country’s intelligence chief, has managed to elicit a response – finally.

The military denied that the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) chief visited some Arab countries soon after the May 2 Abbottabad raid to discuss a military coup against the civilian government.

Earlier, on December 13, a blog in the UK daily The Independent, quoted Mansoor Ijaz, the Pakistani-origin American businessman, and self-proclaimed whistleblower in the Memogate scandal, as saying: “Their [US intelligence] information was that Pasha had travelled to a few Arab countries to talk about what the necessary line of action would be in the event that they had to remove Zardari from power, and so forth.”

Calls for resignation

The revelation led to first audible calls for Director General (DG) ISI Lt Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha’s resignation on the parliament floor.

PM Gilani: There cannot be a State within a State

Gilani’s comments signify new rift between military, civilian govt

ISLAMABAD (The Express Tribune) – In today’s episode we take a look at Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani’s comments in the National Assembly. Gilani’s comments point towards a new spat between the military and the government after the Memogate scandal.

Kamran Yousaf, Senior Reporter for The Express Tribune in Islamabad, says that Pakistan has a chequered history when it comes to power tussles between the two institutions. He says that no one can tell what will happen as a result of this latest spat.

Gilani, while addressing the National Assembly, had said that the establishment would always remain answerable to the parliament.

Commenting on the May 2 raid in Abbottabad that killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, the premier had said: “I formed a commission to investigate how OBL [Osama bin Laden] was residing in Pakistan for six years.”

He said that people had begun asking him about the issuance of visas, but he wants to ask who issued the visa to Bin Laden, making an obvious link to the lax security measures at the Pak-Afghan border.

The prime minister had said, “There can’t be a state within the state; they [establishment] would always be answerable to the parliament… All institutions of the country are answerable to the parliament.”

• Army wants Zardari out but not a coup: Military sources
• Dial M for Memo

See also my recent diary – Pakistan’s Protectorate of Terror – Kabul Attack Kills 60

"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."

Ron Paul is doing a lousy job of handling the spotlight into the racist writings of his old newsletters. By walking off the set of CNN he made a molehill into a mountain. Paul needs to understand that you can’t run for President and then try to control the media by telling them what they can and can’t ask questions about.

The more Paul looks angry at the media for asking questions about the racist rantings in his old newsletters, the more it looks like he has something to hide regarding the sorts of racists he appeals to.

For a long time, Ron Paul got a free pass from the media. He was the cool, quirky guy who had the guts and independence to stand up against the war and a lot of other Republican sacred cows. But he got a free ride because no one thought he had a chance of winning the nomination. Now that he’s first or second in the polls, reporters are doing their jobs. And a part of that job is looking at a candidate’s record and that includes a record of mailing openly racist and anti-Semitic newsletters with your name on them and profiting from that sort of filth.

Paul plays the quirky curmudgeon on TV debates and his followers love that, but if he really wants to capitalize on his newfound success in the polls he’s going to have to learn how to answer questions from the media. Even questions he doesn’t like.

Paul could learn from John McCain. McCain had a problem with the Keating Five scandal in his past. He solved it by answering every single question from reporters and by talking about it and apologizing for hour after hour after hour until reporters were sick of hearing about it. That’s how you put a scandal to rest.

Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner R Wisconsin is getting the biggest press coverage of his life. He’s on the front page of the Drudge Report, Huffington Post and, basically, everywhere else. Did he finally author earth-shattering legislation after 33 years in Congress? Nope. He said the First Lady has a “Large Posterior.”

A Democratic operative recently overheard Sensenbrenner on the telephone in an airport lounge saying the following:

“She (the First Lady) lectures us on eating right while she has a large posterior herself.”

That quickly made its way into the press and it is dominating news coverage as I write this. The Congressman’s office did not deny the statement and said he would be sending an apology to the First Lady.

First, full disclosure. Sensenbrenner is not my kind of politician. I am not a fan. In fact, I was friendly with close relatives of his 30 years ago in college who assured me than that Sensenbrenner was a bit of a boob and considered an embarrassment, the “black sheep of the family.”

So it gives me great joy to see him publicly humiliated.

Still…I am worried that any single comment a public official ever says on a private phone call is now considered fodder for embarrassing tabloid coverage. It just doesn’t seem, well, or fair. Do we really want to eliminate anyone from public office who has told a non-PC joke or has made less than flattering, candid remarks about someone?

This episode again reaffirms my belief in my wisdom for not pursuing a career in public office!

A public space in a public airport is not exactly a private talk in a private home. Still, how many of us haven’t had a cell phone conversation in a public place where we thought no one could hear us and we said some indelicate things?

I think the media needs to be very careful about adopting the new rule of “anything embarrassing ever said on a public phone call by a public official is now fair game” or it could lead us down the road of a British style intercepting of phone calls.

Now, in the Sensenbrenner Affair, all of these issues become moot for the simple reason that he apparently made the same statement about the First Lady to a constituent in a church a few weeks ago. The phone call in question was talking about the possibility that the media might be running with the story anyway.

So in this case, the media is completely in the clear and did the right thing. So we can all have a good laugh at Sensenbrenner’s expense. The story is additionally savory given that Sensenbrenner’s complaining about the size of the First lady’s “posterior” is roughly the equivalent of the sun complaining about how big and bright the moon is.

PS. I will take to dinner the first reader who sends me an unflattering, un-retouched photo of Jim Sensenbrenner in a bathing suit. Then we can have a true comparison on “posteriors.”

It’s been a rough year. I almost had to shutter the Frog Pond at the end of the summer, but a lot of you came through with generous donations in September and saved the site. We’re still barely getting by, and we’d like to stick around at least through the presidential election next November. Recently, Geov Parrish rejoined front-page. And Steve M. of No More Mister Nice Blog has come on board. They’re really outstanding writers and they’re helping Steven D and me keep the site fresh with quality material and excellent conversations. I think it’s better to have a diversity of viewpoints rather than an echo chamber, and all of our front-pagers bring something original to the table. I hope you are enjoying it.

If you value what we do here, please consider making a contribution to the site during this holiday season. We really do depend on our readers to supplement the meager advertising revenue we get. The right has their think tanks and blanket radio coverage and the highest-rated cable news network. All we have is the shitty blogosphere, and half of it seems useless most of the time.

All contributions will be very appreciated. And I hope you and your families have an excellent end of the year, and hopefully some time off from work.

Happy Holidays!!

If you want to follow me on Twitter, just open this thread and you’ll have an opportunity to do so. You can Facebook-like the site by clicking in the top-left corner.

Thanks, again.

Boo

So, the White House sent this along:

Readout of the President’s Call with Speaker Boehner

Speaker Boehner called the President this morning and the President reiterated to the Speaker that the only viable option currently on the table is for the House of Representatives to pass the bipartisan Senate compromise that received the support of nearly 90 percent of the Senate. The President told Speaker Boehner that he is committed to begin working immediately on a full-year agreement once the House passes the bipartisan Senate compromise that prevents a tax hike on 160 million Americans on January 1.

Apparently, Boehner didn’t get the message because he and his lieutenants went in front of the teevee cameras and reiterated that he isn’t backing down.

“We need people to sit down and work with,” Boehner said. “We’re not going to sit here and negotiate with ourselves.”

That earned a swift rebuke from Senate Dems, who echoed the president’s message:

The No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, Dick Durbin of Illinois, rejected any plan aside from the extension that the Senate passed on Saturday with an 89-10 vote.

“That’s it,” Durbin said of the Senate bill on MSNBC. “It’s the only option.”

Seeing that no lifeline was forthcoming from the Democrats, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell offered Boehner an anvil.

In a blow to House Republicans, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has called on the House to pass a two-month payroll tax extension — while pushing Democrats to negotiate a full year extension of the tax break.

McConnell’s statement came just 30 minutes after Speaker John Boehner pledged that he and House Republicans weren’t backing down from their push for a one year extension of the tax, which expires Dec. 31.

McConnell also made some other suggestions, but they are largely irrelevant. The bottom line is that he sandbagged Boehner. Of course, that’s only fair since Boehner sandbagged McConnell by failing to insist that his conference pass the bill McConnell had negotiated. By undercutting Boehner’s stance, he further isolated the House Republicans.

Boehner doesn’t want to sit around and negotiate with his own members, but the White House was clear about this. During yesterday’s White House briefing, Press Secretary Jay Carney was repeatedly asked how the president could help Speaker Boehner save face. He offered nothing, but instead insisted that Boehner simply offer a vote on the Senate bill.

Q Might that not spark a revolt within his own caucus?

MR. CARNEY: The President has an enormous amount of responsibilities. Every President does. He cannot be responsible for the internal politics of the other party in one house of Congress. He is simply focused on doing what is best for the American people, and working with Republicans, as well as Democrats, to achieve what’s best for the American people. And that’s what the bipartisan compromise reached in the Senate represents. Ninety percent of the United States Senate on a substantive issue, an important issue like this, is quite an accomplishment. Senators McConnell and Reid deserve a lot of credit for the work they did on achieving the two-month extension and on the progress they made towards a full-year extension. And so the House should act on that.

It doesn’t happen that often when we have this kind of bipartisan consensus on an important issue. We should act on it.

In other words, the White House doesn’t give a shit about Speaker Boehner’s problems and is perfectly content to let him twist in the wind. If that means that the payroll tax holiday doesn’t get done before it expires, they don’t seem to mind.

If you had to vote for one of the Republican presidential contenders or…I don’t know, Hitler would become president…who would you vote for?