Month: December 2014

I spent most of the day doing editing work for the online launch of the January/February issue of the Washington Monthly. It should be ready to go by Monday morning, and you’ll love the cover story about man-eating polar bears.

The rest of the day was spent making preparations for the Finnster’s fifth birthday tomorrow morning. It’s hard to believe that it’s been five years since he was born. We’ve done a pretty good job of keeping him healthy and safe so far, and I hope we can maintain our record. He’s the sunshine of our lives.

In retrospect, 2014 was not a fun year for me and it was a tough year for the whole family, but Finn has been a constant source of joy and wonder.

This holiday season we made a big investment in music, and I am hoping that music is going to be a much bigger part of our lives in 2015. It’s one of the things that kind of went by the wayside for many years, and I felt it needed to be rectified.

It’s safe to say that 2014 will be the last full year for Booman Tribune, too. As soon as I can pull it off, we’ll be closing this joint down after a ten year run and launching something more fun and modern. Keep tuned for announcements.

Thanks to everyone who reads this site and especially to those who participate and make donations to keep it going. I hope you all have a great celebration tonight and tomorrow, and I’ll see you next year.

I don’t know if it is really accurate to say that Pope Francis is splitting from the GOP, but he isn’t following their party line on abortion, contraception, gay rights, tax policy or climate change, primarily because he is both more moderate and more sane than the Republicans. He also has a much healthier respect for the intelligence and integrity of the scientific community. And this is going to become much more apparent next year.

Next year, as part of a speech he’ll give to the United Nations General Assembly, Francis will issue an edict urging the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics to do what they can to fight climate change.


“He’s modeling the church as a place for open disagreement,” said Vincent J. Miller, who chairs the University of Dayton’s Catholic theology program. “In that sense, one of the most important changes he’s making is that conservative politicians are now openly disagreeing with him,” Miller said.

Perhaps it is because Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI were such hardliners on social issues that American Catholics have developed the habit of picking and choosing which papal policies they will respect and which they will ignore. So, there is no guarantee that taking the reality-based community’s position on climate change will make much discernible difference in the voting patterns of Catholics in America. Republican Catholics may simply ignore the pope on that particular issue, just like millions of Catholics have ignored papal instruction on birth control.

Still, it creates difficulties for a political party when their positions are opposed by the Vatican, as pro-choice Democrats have known for quite some time. When the pope tweets “Inequality is the root of social evil,” and criticizes “trickle-down” economics as a “crude and naïve” theory, that is going to have an effect, especially over time.

Perhaps most importantly, the idea that a “good” Catholic is a Republican will weaken and perhaps even shift.

We hear a lot of talk about the Democrats’ difficulty in attracting white working-class voters. Among that group, the Dems have always done better with Catholics than Protestants, which can be seen by looking at the religious affiliation of white Democrats in Congress. I think we should anticipate an even better performance in upcoming elections, as the Francis Effect begins to take hold.

Another way of making Zandar’s point is to ask whether or not anyone would notice if the New York Police Department suddenly reduced its overall arrests by 66% and its issuance of traffic citations by 94%?

And, if not, would it be fair to say the following?

So your brilliant, devious plan is this: you’re going to show the people who believe that the NYPD is full of power-hungry bullies and paramilitary goons what for by displaying to the country exactly how most of the collars you make are in fact wholly unnecessary exercises of petty microagression towards the citizenry you hold in open and rancorous contempt.

Okay then. Go with that plan, guys.

The way I see it, if the police want to do somewhere between six and thirty-four percent of the work they normally do, then we ought to look very closely to see if it makes any discernible difference or not.

And, if it doesn’t, that’s a great argument for drastically reducing the man-hours of the whole department.

I assume they need to issue traffic citations to raise revenue, but it’ll be interesting to see if there are more traffic accidents or complaints about double-parked cars. Will the street cleaners walk off of the job because no one moves their cars on cleaning day?

The cops serve a vital purpose, but that doesn’t mean that most of what they do isn’t just obnoxious busywork that mainly serves to separate poor people from their money.

Let’s test it out.

Reduce arrests by a third and basically stop giving a shit what people do in and with their cars.

We’ll come back in six months and see how it went.

The resolution failed to get the 9 votes in favor with 5 abstentions and two NO votes: the US and Australia. Only Al Jazeera had a LIVE broadcast of this crucial UN vote. President Bush promised the Palestinians statehood by 2005 when PM Ariel Sharon evacuated settlements out of Gaza. Of course, the US negated on its promise. Under President Obama, more of the same and effectively a worsening conditions for the Palestinian people under Israel occupation. Kerry was deeply involved during the last 48 hours to find sufficient opposition against the Jordanian initiative. The 5 states who abstained were: United Kingdom, Lithuania, Rwanda, Korea and ?? .

UPDATE: The resolution failed to achieve the 9-votes majority required to pass. Eight countries voted in favor of the motion – China, France, Russia, Argentina, Chad, Chile, Jordan, Luxembourg – two opposed – US and Australia – and five abstained – UK, Lithuania, Nigeria, Korea, Rwanda.

US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power said in comments after the vote that: “Instead of giving voice to the aspirations of both Palestinians and Israelis, this text addresses only one side.”

UN Security Council votes against Palestinian statehood | Al Jazeera |

The UN Security Council has rejected a Palestinian resolution calling for peace with Israel within a year and an end to Israel’s occupation by 2017. The resolution failed to muster the minimum nine “yes” votes required in the council for adoption.

The United States, Israel’s closest ally, had reiterated its opposition to the draft resolution earlier on Tuesday. Washington said it could not support the draft because it was not constructive and failed to address Israel’s security needs.

The resolution had called for occupied East Jerusalem to be the capital of Palestine, an end to Israeli settlement building and settling the issue of Palestinian prisoner releases.

The resolution also called for negotiations to be based on territorial lines that existed before Israel captured the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip in 1967.

Israel had said the Security Council vote, following the collapse in April of US-brokered talks on Palestinian statehood, would deepen the conflict.

The Palestinians, frustrated by the lack of progress on peace talks, have sought to internationalise the issue by seeking UN membership and recognition of statehood via membership in international organisations.

Updated Security Council resolution calls for East Jerusalem as Palestinian capital, Israel says UN creating ‘second Hamastan’ | Mondoweiss |

The United States has said they would not support the latest Palestinian-Arab draft resolution, citing differences over how to achieve the shared goal of a negotiating a two-state solution.

“As we’ve said before, this draft resolution is not something that we would support and other countries share the same concerns that we have,” said State Department Spokesperson Jake Rathke yesterday hours before Jordan gave the resolution to the secretariat. Rathke continued, “We think it sets arbitrary deadlines for reaching a peace agreement and for Israel’s withdrawal from the West Bank, and those are more likely to curtail useful negotiations than to bring them to a successful conclusion.”

“Further, we think that the resolution fails to account for Israel’s legitimate security needs, and the satisfaction of those needs, of course, is integral to a sustainable settlement.” The State Department’s comments mark a departure from previous remarks where Secretary of State John Kerry has said the U.S. could not support a Palestinian resolution if the text called for “unilateral” action to achieve an independent Palestinian state.

○ Shmuley Boteach’s Multi-Million-Dollar Hasbara Ad Campaign in U.S. National Media Funded by Adelson
○ Jewish Home MK Candidate for 2015  Directs Settler Rabbi Group Which Advocated Genocide

I’ve been swamped with WaMo duties, primarily getting our new January/February issue posted online so all you freeloaders can read it without getting a subscription to the print version.

When I have a chance, I will be responding to Paul Waldman’s assertion in the Washington Post that the next Democratic presidential nominee (presumably Hillary Clinton) will not need to do particularly well among white working class voters in order to win the election.

The short version is that this is correct but that, unless the next president wants to spend four to eight years limited to signing executive orders and issuing vetoes, they’ll need to do much better among so-called downscale whites than Obama did, or than the Democrats have been doing in midterm elections.

Winning the presidency is great. Being able to do something when you get there is much better.

NOTICE: The following is a work of SATIRE. If you don’t like satire that addresses police shootings of unarmed black men, or feel that this subject is inappropriate for satirical treatment, then please do not read it.

Thank you,

Steven D

# # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # #

Dear Gentlemen of Color, Gang Members, Delinquents, Crack Addicts, Unemployed Welfare Cheats and Other Male Members of the African American Race:

It has come to our attention that many of you have a “lack of respect” for your betters problem, and by betters we mean officers of the law, whether we are members of local, state or federal law enforcement agencies. This lack of respect for our authority, and for the heavy responsibility to keep the peace that is our primary mission, has often led to confrontations between a number of young (and older) black males and law enforcement personnel. Regrettably, a significant number of such incidents each year invariably result in bodily harm or death to those of you who have failed act appropriately in our presence.

This series of unfortunate incidents has caused great grief, emotional suffering and trauma, especially among our most trusted and dedicated public servants, that is to say, our fellow law enforcement officials. We are the front line of America’s Justice System, officers of the law entitled to use deadly force for the protection of the public. Even though we understand that sometimes the use of deadly force is unavoidable, we feel our pain whenever we are forced to make the ultimate decision necessary to serve and protect your community.

Therefore, as a public service to all of you in the Black Community – especially you hotheads and activist types and outside agitators trying to stir up resentment against American heroes – and in the sincere desire of fostering a more congenial attitude (on your part) during your next ‘stop and frisk’ by your friendly neighborhood police officer, we offer you the following rules, or guidelines if you prefer, to help ensure that your next experience with the law enforcement community does not end in your untimely death.

Rule No. One: Never Disrespect The Uniform.

The uniform we wear is a symbol of truth, justice and the American way. It stands for all that is good and right in our country. Those who wear the uniform don it proudly, with humility and understanding of the people we are pledged to protect. Disrespect our uniform and you disrespect not only the person wearing it, but your country and its system of laws.

Disrespect may take many forms, from cursing, failure to obey lawful orders issued by a police officer – or not obeying them in the proper manner expected by the police officer. It goes without saying that talking on your cellular phone while ignoring lawful commands is a big no-no.

There are many ways in which you may disrespect the uniform. A full accounting of all of them is not possible here, but in most circumstances it is always safest if you lower your head in a submissive manner, speak only when spoken to and then exhibit the highest standards of courtesy when responding. This may or may not avoid all incidents in which deadly force may be used against you, but it can’t hurt.

Rule No. Two: Keep Your Hands In Sight At all Times.

How hard can following this rule be? Yet, it continues to amaze many of us how often you people insist on moving your hands about in an aggressive manner, or using them to compulsively reach into your waistband or your pockets when stopped by the police.

This is a very simple rule to follow if you just remember the following mantra: “Just Say No to The Hands.”

Rule No. Three: Do Not Reach For Our Weapons.

Trust us on this one. You reach for our guns and we will shoot you. And trust us on this point as well: we know when you are reaching for our guns better than you.

Rule No. Four: Your Mental or Physical Disability is No Excuse to Act Out.

Time for you whiners to buck up. We all have our little problems, even police officers.

However, just because you’re a whack job is never a good reason to talk back to us or resist a lawful arrest. Neither is any other medical condition. Don’t blame us if you’re too fat or have poor health and we’re required to use necessary force to make you comply.

Rule No. Five: Do Not Run Away From Us. Period.

Believe it or not, we don’t like having to shoot you people. We would much prefer that you stand still and take your beating like a man. But if you insist on running away, the decision is taken out of our hands. How do we know you aren’t armed? How do we know you don’t have super-strength and therefore pose a danger to yourself and others? Trust us we don’t like having to shoot you in the back. It makes us look bad. So don’t run. Bullets are still faster than your legs, regardless of what your genes tell you.

Hopefully, following these five simple rules may save your life or the life of someone you care about. Obviously, we are doing everything in our power to keep you from choosing to lead the thug life, but there is only so much we can do if you decide to follow the wrong path. Everyone has to make difficult choices in our lives. We suggest you start making better ones, so we don’t have to suffer the consequences of your poor decisions. Have a good day.

Sincerely,

Law Enforcement Officers Everywhere

Ps. Obviously, all bets are off if you are holding or carrying a weapon, or anything we can reasonably believe may be a weapon. Then you are just shit out of luck. And we always act very reasonably in the performance of our duties.

When I was growing up in the shadow of New York City, we were too busy learning The Hustle in music class to worry about some Klansmen in Cajun Country. We were indoctrinated into something a little more positive than race hatred. Like this:

But, hey, anyone who is familiar with the joy of the music scene of New York in the late 1970’s would never have doubted that we’d prevail over the Soviets. Even our dispossessed couldn’t stop dancing and having a good time. Forget about nuclear submarines and Ronnie’s arms build-up. Funk and disco were rebuttals that the Russians had absolutely no answer to.

Vietnam Syndrome? Gasoline lines? Sky-high interest rates? Hostage crisis? Presidential malaise?

Please…

A culture like that isn’t in decline.

We needed Reagan like a hole in the head.

The office of House Majority Whip Steve Scalise has confirmed that he spoke at what was essentially a Klan meeting in 2002.

No word yet on whether he was wearing a Smoochy costume.

According to Time, 2,356 Americans lost their lives fighting in Afghanistan during the period of our “official” war there. Beginning yesterday, we are now in the unofficial phase. More troops will be more or less permanently stationed in Afghanistan than were stationed there in 2002 and 2003.

I don’t really know if Kabul will stagger along for a few years before falling again to the Taliban, but I don’t wish a new Saigon on the Afghan people, nor would I like to see our sacrifice come to nothing.

The Afghan people have suffered enough.

But we have suffered, too. If the edifice we have erected in Kabul is too weak to hold out, the answers must lie in Pakistan where the Taliban gathers its strength, and in Saudi Arabia where it gets much of its financial support and its ideological rocket fuel.

If the Taliban can be starved of its foreign sources of succor, it can be defeated in Afghanistan. Our troops should not die on the ground there any more.

What the September 11, 2001 attacks didn’t interrupt, they changed forever, and never for the better. One thing they interrupted was an 18 year string of Hillary Clinton being the most admired woman in the world. For one brief year, that honor went to First Lady Laura Bush.

I don’t put much stock in Gallup polls, especially in recent years where their record has been horrible. But I don’t think we have to quibble much here; Hillary Clinton is very famous and extremely popular.

When she’s not running for president, she’s even fairly popular among Republicans, despite having been accused of murder and numerous other nefarious crimes. The Republicans even seem to like her husband fairly well, now that he isn’t tormenting them in his State of the Union speeches. Bill Clinton was, after all, a Democrat that they could work with.

The truth is, it doesn’t matter what a Democrat stands for or what their record might be, if they are trying to run for president or be president, then they are the worst people ever.

But most of the country and most of the world does not feel the same way about Hillary Clinton. And that’s going to be a problem for the Republicans, and for any Democrat who is thinking about trying to deny her the nomination.

She could be her own worst enemy, but it looks to me like she is the only one formidable enough to derail her own ambitions.