So Hot, You Can’t Deny It

I’m in Southwest Harbor, Maine tonight. It’s cool enough that I just put on a long sleeve shirt so I can comfortably sit outside. However, nearly everywhere else in the country is scorching, if not actually ablaze. I am not a climate scientist, but I do respect what climate scientists have to say. They say that these high temperatures are going to become the new normal because we’re putting too much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. I remember when any temperature higher than 101 fahrenheit was unheard of outside of Arizona, parts of California, and maybe in Texas. Certainly temperatures above 110 fahrenheit simply did not happen outside of those locales.

We’ve already abandoned the Outer Banks for New England when we talk about a summer vacation. And I doubt that will change. The only good thing about these high temperatures is that they are so extreme that they are already changing people’s behavior. And if their behavior changes, certainly their opinions must soon follow.

Hire Me!

Here in Dover, NH, along with my complimentary breakfast of cold cereal, dry bagels and bad coffee, I received a free copy of today’s Foster’s Daily Democrat. The only opinion piece on their opinion page is by Jonah Goldberg. It accuses the president of lying about his health care bill. There’s something wrong with that. We need more liberals in syndication, for starters. I guarantee you that I can do a better job than David Brooks or Jonah Goldberg.

More Jokes From the Penn State Trustees

Whenever I need a couple of laughs, I turn to the bumbling self-aggrandizing antics of the Republican wing of Congress.

However, in the past few months, the Penn State Board of Trustees has done the near-impossible; they have provided more laughs than the menagerie in the Capitol.

To call either the Legislators or the Trustees “clowns” would demean the hard work of the circus performers who spend significant time to develop and execute comedy routines. There is no evidence the Trustees even have a thought process before they make outrageous and just plain silly statements.

The latest Trustee joke is that the reason they really fired Joe Paterno abruptly on Nov. 9, 2011, is because of “a failure of leadership.” The Board released what it called a “report,” but which is nothing but a press release of rehashed statements. This “report” claims the Trustees fired Paterno after they read the Grand Jury report that outlined a series of allegations against former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky, whose name is now known among more Americans than anyone who ever won a Nobel Prize.

Marianne Alexander, one of the trustees, told the media the Board’s intention “was to clarify, because everyone’s been asking for clarification.” This, of course, is the same Board of Trustees that, mouthing the prattling of the ethically-challenged Gov. Tom Corbett, had condemned Paterno for being “morally corrupt,” or “not doing enough,” or whatever phrase they could quickly find in a Thesaurus of Blame.

Even children barely able to read a newspaper know the basics of the issue. A graduate assistant had seen or heard (it’s still not completely clear) Jerry Sandusky, who was no longer employed by Penn State but who used the university fields and showers, possibly molested a child. The assistant told his supervisor, Joe Paterno. The legendary coach whose ethics and morals were never questioned in six decades as a coach and member of the faculty, followed university policy and procedure and told his superiors, one of whom oversaw the university police force. (Sandusky, of course, was later convicted on 45 counts that should keep him in prison for life.)

Some claim that Paterno was “morally wrong” not to “do more” and use his power at Penn State to have Sandusky immediately arrested. These Monday Morning Know-Nothings fail to understand that to “do more” would have been nothing less than interfering with a police investigation.

Corbett, attorney general at the time, could have conducted a thorough investigation, but allowed the latest accusations to simmer for more than two years while he campaigned for the governorship and take more than $200,000 in campaign funds from current and former board members of Sandusky’s Second Mile charity; he only stopped a $3 million grant to Second Mile after Centre County, the conduit for the funds, refused to continue to be a part of the funding.

The Trustees, clueless as most college trustees are, could have learned about the allegations and taken action to protect the university and children. They did not do so. They did not do so even after a Grand Jury was convened and reported about in the local newspaper. They apparently didn’t even have a crisis communications plan should anything happen about anything.

And so, when the festering sore of university ineptness became infected, they tried covering it up with band-aids. And then everything blew open, catching the Trustees by surprise–or at least that’s what they seemed to want us to believe.

In quick order, they continued to violate the state’s Sunshine Law–they never really obeyed it to begin with–had secret meetings, and violated their own policies and state requirements on personnel actions. When all the hand-wringing was completed, they decided the best way to deal with a child predator was to fire the best-known football coach in America–who was never under any suspicion of having committed any crime–and to do it during the middle of a football season after Paterno announced his retirement.

While the media, always hungry for salacious news content, and a few hundred thousand sanctimonious pretend-fans were yelling, “Joe Must Go!” millions supported Paterno. This, of course, caused more problems for the Board That Couldn’t Think Straight.

As individuals and blogs began condemning the Board for its actions–and especially for what it didn’t do–the Board (composed primarily of high-level business executives, farmers, and assorted professionals who should have known better) continued to come up with lame and mostly laughable excuses of why it did what it did. Several trustees even stupidly told the media that people should withhold judgment on the Board’s actions until all the evidence was available. The irony was lost on the Board but not upon millions who were rightfully indignant about why the Trustees could take abrupt and unexplained action against Paterno, but wanted everyone else to withhold judgment about its own reasons.

In an effort to placate the alumni and several million Americans still outraged at the Board’s incompetence, the Board (or whoever writes the Board’s public statements) issued its “report,” beginning with a trickle of crocodile tears about sharing “the grief of the entire Penn State family at the passing of Coach Paterno,” and then praising both his and former President Graham Spanier’s “lasting contributions.” The Board declared it “has always been” its intention to “to fulfill [Paterno’s] employment contract and to name him head coach emeritus.” Considering that the Trustees had fired Paterno illegally, they had no choice but to honor the contract. The title of “head coach emeritus” is window dressing. A more fitting title, although it would never assuage the pain the Board caused Joe Paterno and his family, would have been to name him “professor emeritus,” which does carry privileges and would recognize that Paterno, a member of the faculty, was far more than a coach. Almost as an after-thought, the Trustees in the latest statement casually tossed a one-liner that “other options” to honor Paterno “are also under consideration.”

Trustee Marianne Alexander said the latest “report” was made because “We’re trying to be responsible to our constituents.”

If the Board of Trustees really wants “to be responsible,” it would stop violating the state’s Sunshine Law, would agree to be included in the state’s Right-to-Know Law, would stop issuing silly statements to justify their own incompetence, reverse the firing of Joe Paterno (and possibly that of Dr. Spanier), and then resign.

[Walter Brasch was recently named the Pennsylvania Press Club’s Communicator of Achievement, a lifetime honor for excellence in journalism and community service; it was the first time in 10 years the Club issued the CoA honor. Dr. Brasch’s latest book is the critically-acclaimed novel, Before the First Snow, which looks at the 1960s counterculture as being relevant to today’s American culture.]

Saturday Painting Palooza Vol.359

Hello again painting fans.

For this week’s cycle I’ll be continuing with the Cape May shingle style Victorian house.  I’ll be using my usual acrylic paints on an 8×8 inch gallery-wrapped canvas.  The photo that I’m using is seen in the photo directly below.

 

When last seen, the painting appeared as it does in the photo directly below.

Since that time I have continued to work on the painting.

Unfortunately, I did not get as much done as I would have liked.  However, I did manage to get a much better photo than that of last week.  My efforts for this week’s installment involved 2 areas of the upper structure.  First, the flattened roof gable has been restored.  It now mirrors that of the gable in the photo.  It is one of the things that gives this house so much character.  The windows within have been marked out for later refinement.  They may need to be enlarged as well.

Secondly, the pointed arch below has been further refined.  It now appears with the separations seen in the photo.  (or at least the start of separations)  I will continute to add more detail.  I’m especially looking forward to the horizontal trim on each side.

The current state of the painting is seen in the photo directly below.

That’s about it for now. Next week I’ll have more progress to show you. See you then. As always, feel free to add photos of your own work in the comments section below.

Earlier paintings in this series can be seen here.

 

   

Wall Street’s Verdict on Upholding the ACA

The most devastating, criminal, traitorous, scheme in the history of American government (at least in the minds of Right Wingers/Teabaggers such as Sarah “I’m a White Grizzly Bear Momma” Palin, Micheal “The Only Good Negro President is a [Fill in the Blank] One!” Savage and Rush “We Shouldn’t Kill All the Liberals – Yet” Limbaugh) was upheld as constitutional by the US Supreme Court yesterday. So what effect did this devastating blow to our democracy have on the barometer of all things economic, i.e., the Stock Markets?

Stocks

Dow: 12,880.09 up 277.83 points for a +2.20% gain
Nasdaq: 2,935.05 up 85.56 points for a +3.00% gain
S&P 500: 1,362.16 up 33.12 points for a +2.49% gain

I guess investors just don’t see the infallible logic of the right that the health care reform law, i.e., the PPACA, will inevitably lead to tyranny, the end of Capitalism and the destruction of the American Way of Life. Must be sad day for Republicans and conservatives when even the markets refuse to follow the proper script.

Why I am happy (with caveat)

Why am I happy?

My son can remain on our health insurance plan for three more years.

If we lose our health insurance because of the bankruptcy of our former employer, NY has a plan in place to which I can apply in 6 months (not ideal but better than nothing) and in 2014 the insurance exchanges will provide competition and lower cost policies — again not an ideal solution, but something.

My son, daughter and I will not have to worry about the not being granted health insurance or non-coverage of claims because of our pre-existing conditions.

The donut hole for my wife’s medicare prescription drug coverage will continue to go away.

Caveat to my happiness: If Romney is elected all this will go away. The only thing between my family’s continued health care coverage and our economic survival is the re-election of President Obama.

I have been greatly disappointed by Obama’s presidency during the past 4 years, but if he is elected the health care reform bill cannot be repealed because of his veto power. If Romney is elected we lose everything: We get the Ryan budget on steroids. We see Medicaid eliminated. We see Medicare turned into a voucher program. We see Social Security destroyed piece by piece.

We see the United States of Multinational Corporations (if you think this is already the case just wait and see how much worse it can get — just ask Greece and Spain) and the end of voting rights for millions of citizens. We see the beginning of a one party state.

I’d like to live in a fantasy world where all the progressive, common sense policies I support would be enacted: the end of trade deals, strengthening of union rights, reduction of carbon emissions, higher taxes on the wealthy, subsidies for renewable sustainable energy, investment in crucial infrastructure, free higher education for all college students, increased regulation and enforcement of existing laws regarding the financial markets, increased voting rights and voting made easier, equality for all LGBT individuals in every aspect of their lives, the death of Citizens United along with the idea that corporations are persons with greater rights and liberties than ordinary human beings, and so on and so forth.

However we don’t live in that world. So today I will be happy for what I still have.

SCOTUS-The Story Behind The Story

Nothing is ever straight ahead in an empire.

Nothing.

Ever.

Yesterday I wrote in a reply to the largely self-congratulatory thread that Booman started called Health Care Ruling:

I see [this Supreme Court ruling as the result of] one of two possibilities or a combination of the two.

1-The fix is still in for Obama. Romney’s numbers were rising, so the Supremes…or at least some of them…were told to sing a different tune.

2-The initial opponents of Obamacare saw that they could either:

   1–Make more money from it than they first realized.

    or

   2- Have another plan to take it down.

The Supremes as heroes?

I don’t think so.

No one on that court has passed through the system without major compromises to their integrity. Sorry, but there it is. One simply cannot successfully hustle one’s way to the top of this rotted-out system with inextricably allying oneself with the PermaGov controllers. It cannot be done, any more than a store owner or businessman can successfully run a business in a mafia-controlled area without having some serious silent partners.

As above, so below folks.

Sorry, but there it is.

Any other view of this is naivete squared.

Cubed, even.

Yup.

Later…

AG

Later I ran into the following article by Richard Eskow. Don’t Kid Yourself. It’s Still a Corporate Court. Here Are 10 Lessons From CEO Roberts.

This guy seems to have pinned it as well as it can be pinned.

Read on to learn something.

Don’t Kid Yourself. It’s Still a Corporate Court. Here Are 10 Lessons From CEO Roberts

by Richard Eskow.

Posted: 06/28/2012 7:35 pm

Was today’s ruling a victory for justice over corporate power? Did Chief Justice John Roberts rise above partisan differences because that’s where an honest reading of the law took him?

Nah. The majority on this Supreme Court is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Corporate America. Call it SCOTUSTM Inc., and it’s brought to you by the same fine folks that gave you Citizens United and Bush v. Gore. John Roberts is its CEO, not its chief justice.

The point isn’t to reinforce anybody’s cynicism. The point is to act more effectively on behalf of our ideals, by seeing things as they really are.

That is the point of much of what I write here as well. I share many of the same ideals as do well-meaning progressives of the sort who frequent this blog, but I do not share the naive pro-Dem partisanship that is evident  throughout almost the entire leftiness blogosphere. If we are to survive as a nation, we must become more realistic about how the empire works.

Following is a good snapshot of the truth of the matter.

Roberts Rules

It was a shrewd move. Remember, as CEO of SCOTUSTM Inc., John Roberts is running the subsidiary of a large conglomerate. I’ve had that job myself, and trust me: you’ve got to please the parent or you’re out of business.

By casting the decisive vote (who knows whether it really was the deciding vote, or whether the right-wing majority made it look that way) Roberts acted in the best interests of corporate conservatism, for-profit healthcare companies, and — most importantly of all — of the far-right political force which is today’s Republican Party.

He had three options: Strike down a signature piece of Democratic legislation in its entirety, which would look highly partisan; strike down the individual mandate, which would look even worse since it was a conservative Republican idea; or uphold the law in a way that’s designed to do maximum political damage to the Democrats and protect the Court’s current corporate status.

Weighing the Options

Striking down the law would have cost the Court immeasurably in what corporate accountants call “good will. “It would have widened and deepened the common (and accurate) perception that this Court’s majority acts in a partisan, ideological, and pro-corporate manner, regardless of the law. It would have polluted the Court’s brand even further.

It also would have given new momentum to the single-payer movement, galvanized Democrats, alienated independents, and strengthened the argument against electing a Republican president who would provide more justices in favor of Bush v. Gore type decisions.

What about striking down the individual mandate alone? The mandate has provided great rhetorical fodder for the right (we were among the few to predict it would, or to accurately predict the political impact of this law), so why deprive them of such a good political tool? It was never in the GOP’s partisan interests to do that. It would have left the bill’s most popular provisions intact, giving the Democrats a stronger bill to run on and weakening the GOP’s case against it.

Besides, it’s a great boon for health insurers. I never believed the court would strike down the mandate and leave the law’s other provisions standing. That would be an actuarial nightmare for the insurance industry. They’d never tolerate a move like that.

The Decision

By defending the law, Roberts made the right decision for Corporate America. He was also able to severely limit the federal government’s ability to regulate commerce, which I believe is a major setback in a number of legal areas that’s likely to provide a lot of benefit to corporations in the years to come. Since I’m not an attorney, I’ll leave that analysis to others. But I’m surprised that aspect of the ruling hasn’t received more attention.

Stock prices in the for-profit hospital industry soared, rising 7 percent in heavy trading immediately after the Court ruling. Stocks for the nation’s largest health insurers barely moved, despite what must have been some heavy pre-Court betting that the conservative majority would overturn the entire law.

That tells us something important: Roberts’ decision to side with the liberals and moderates didn’t exactly create a revolution in our health care economy.

Like the head of any subsidiary, Roberts made the choice that was best for his parent. Sure, he’s taking some heat from the Right. Like any good executive, he’s willing to take one for the team.

He may not be much of a chief justice, but John Roberts is a very good CEO.

Yup.

There it is. Deal wid it.

There’s much more. Follow the above link to read the whole thing.

But as always…all you really have to do is follow the money to find the truth of power.

Bet on it.

Further…

Red Meat

By joining with the liberals, Roberts was able to write the ruling himself. He did it in a way which the other four disagreed with, but which was designed to provide talking points for Republicans and the Right. He labeled the mandate’s penalty a “tax” (which it is; so is the so-called “Cadillac tax” on higher-cost health plans, which Obama campaigned against and then personally inserted into the bill).

That was red meat, and it was immediately gobbled up by the likes of Sarah Palin. “It is a tax,” said Palin. “Obama lies; freedom dies.” But Palin also “thanked God” for the ruling because she said it would fire up her base. “We did not want this tax,” she said. “We can’t afford this tax.”

Democrats, take heed: That’s the battle cry, and the battle plan, for November.

Take heed, babies. It ain’t over yet.

Not by a long shot.

Politics is a games of feints and shakes. Saints and fakes. Something like that, anyway. “Smoke and mirrors,” as the ol’ House fox Tip O’Neill used to say. Never inhale that smoke, my friends, and always remember that a mirror reverses the direction of all that it reflects.

Mr. Eskow also submits what he calls “10 Lessons for the Battles to Come” that if taken in their entirety and well-applied would literally revolutionize the Democratic Party and its position in this society. Of course, if that were to happen the corporate interests that now control both parties would first have to lose control of the Dems, and that is not a likely scenario. But a little dreaming is always good for the soul, so here they are, compressed.

There’s a corporate war against the middle class and its financial security, with many battles yet to come. Will the left stop waging them from a defensive position? There are 10 lessons to be learned from this ruling:

1. Declare victory where victory is real.

—snip—

2. Don’t BS the public.

—snip—

3. Pledge to strengthen the law.

—snip—

4. Strike back at the “tax” message.

—snip—

5. Keep the pressure on.

—snip—

6. Defend Medicare.

—snip—

7. Expand Medicare.

—snip—

8. Medicaid is a core part of our values. Our decency, integrity, and stability as a society depends on our ability to ensure that no one dies, is disabled, or suffers needlessly because of economic hardship.

—snip—

  1. SCOTUSTM matters. Whatever disappointments you may have with Barack Obama — and I’ve had plenty of them — the next president could very well pick several more members of the Court. President Romney would choose judges who are willing to bend the law into a pretzel over and over, just as Scalia, Thomas, and the others on the right have done, to serve the interests of the corporate class.
  2. Don’t forget about nutrition. Don’t let them gut food programs that are essential to the health of our children. They need a balanced diet to make sure they become strong, healthy, productive adults.

And yes, a balanced diet includes broccoli.

There it is.

Richard Eskow for Chairman of the Democratic Party!!!

Fat chance.

Later…

AG

On the Road

Today is a travel day for me, so any blogging will be Atrios-style. For starters, we have Mr. Will’s effort to salve the right’s butt-hurt over the SCOTUS decision on health care. I don’t think Will is wrong, exactly. I just think that the mandates’s potential to act as a precedent for all kinds of regulation of non-activity was always greatly exaggerated. I have a hard time conjuring up a scenario that has been avoided by Roberts’ rejection of the Commerce Clause argument, and I have an even harder time caring. How about you?

ACA Makes Democrats Strong

Watching the Republicans react to John Roberts’ ruling on ObamaCare is a lot like going to an exotic zoo and seeing animals you’ve never seen before. Their behavior is unfamiliar and fascinating. I guess we’re used to the collective freak-out aspect of it, but they seem so stunned and disoriented. It’s also kind of revealing in the sense that many conservative politicians are showing that they really believe their own horseshit.

On the one hand, you have savvy politicians like Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina who came out and said he wasn’t surprised because the mandate was clearly a tax. He knows the GOP has been engaged in pure political posturing. But then you have guys like Rep. Jack Kingston of Georgia, who tweeted that he felt like he had lost two friends today: John Roberts and America.

Let’s be honest. Most of these pols are smart enough to know that making people pay a small fine if they aren’t insured isn’t going to change the fundamental character of this country. It’s not a slippery slope that will soon find the government taxing people for having children or getting married, as Rep. Mick Mulvaney of South Carolina suggested today. What these folks are afraid of is something different.

They are afraid that people will like these reforms when they are fully implemented and demand that the government continue to regulate and improve the system. Let’s start with the CBO estimate that the bill will eventually result in 30 million people getting health insurance who would not otherwise have it. Think about that number for a minute. And then ask yourself, “who could possibly think that is a bad thing?”

The answer is obvious. If you don’t like the Democratic Party, you are not going to like the idea of 30 million voters out there who only have health insurance because of the Democratic Party. Republicans don’t like this bill because they know it makes the Democratic Party stronger.

If there is a slippery slope, it isn’t that the government will use today’s ruling to start infringing on people’s rights in other areas. The slippery slope is created when a family of four, making four times the poverty rate ($88,200 annually) gets a $1,480 subsidy to help them afford their health insurance and sees their maximum out-of-pocket annual premium capped at $8,379 (or 9.5% of annual income).

The Affordable Care Act benefits too many people. Once people see those benefits they will be grateful for them and think the government is doing something nice and valuable for them. Anyone who tries to lower their subsidy or raise their cap is going to get punished. And the party that tried to destroy all of this at the Supreme Court? They’re the new enemy.

At the most basic, the Affordable Care Act will put a lot of money in a lot of struggling folks hands. And that is not good for the Republican Party that desperately needs struggling people to see the government as an unhelpful antagonist.

The new national health care plan was implemented several years ago by Mitt Romney in Massachusetts. It now covers over 98% of the citizens of the Bay State. No one thinks the bill is tyrannical, because it isn’t. It does matter whether something is done on the state of federal level, but health care isn’t an issue where the jurisdictional origin makes any difference in people’s lives. The sting of being coerced into buying private health insurance you don’t want isn’t any lesser or greater if it comes from the governor’s office or the Oval Office. Republicans that have convinced themselves otherwise are delusional.

Republicans should be happy that America came up with a solution for health care that preserved a robust private health insurance industry. In that sense, the right won. But so many of them seem genuinely to believe that this health care reform spells doom for our country. Some of them are actually confused. The rest realize that the Democrats just won a great victory by winning many new adherents who will make it tougher for them to win elections and enact the kind of policies in other arenas that they would like to enact.

They Put a Car Thief in Charge

Here’s the White House statement on the stupid Contempt of Congress vote today. It’s nice to know that we have 17 gutless Democrats in Congress. At least two of them (Mike Ross (D-AR) and Jason Altmire (D-PA)) aren’t even candidates for reelection, and they still voted to hold Holder in contempt. I guess, for them, it was a matter of simply not liking the dude. After all, they just held him in contempt for not turning over information that the president has asserted is covered by executive privilege. How is that for genius? Shouldn’t the president be the one held in contempt in those circumstances?

Wasn’t Darrell Issa a car thief who got rich by creating car alarms that actually work? Why, yes, yes he was.