Sen. Sanders and the Democrats

Centrist Democrats would like nothing better than to have independent socialist U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primaries.

But the effect of drafting the Vermont senator into the Democratic competition would be to neutralize him.

If he runs, Sen. Sanders will be forced to pledge allegiance to the party's eventual nominee and we will enter the fall of 2016 with the strongest voice on the left either silenced or looking like a hypocrite by shilling for Hillary Clinton, Andrew Cuomo or some other servant of the corporate elite.

The way to maximize Sander's influence is to give all-out support for a run as an independent so that in the fall of 2016 in the debates and in the media he can continue to educate the public on alternatives to the status quo and to reveal that the emperor's surrogates have no clothes.

Bernie Sanders will never be the Democratic nominee.

But he can play an important and honorable role in building support for progressive policies in state and local elections, in congressional contests, and for a serious try for the White House from the left in the future by someone else. All a Democratic primary challenge by Sen. Sanders will achieve this round is to help the presidential Democrats maintain the illusion that they are an instrument of change.

Voting made simple

The midterms are not about whether or not the president is a doing a good job.

They're about whether or not you want a legislature made up of people who think that facts are stupid; that Obamacare caused Ebola; that Al Qaeda has camps on the Mexican border; that George Washington authorized wide-scale electronic surveillance; that there is such a thing as legitimate rape; that taxing tanning salons is racist discrimination against pale Americans; that something isn't necessarily constitutional just because the Supreme Court says it is; that Roe v. Wade led to gun massacres; that equal rights for women is a socialist, anti-family plot to get women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians; that Tinky Winky is gay; that marriage equality will result in people having sex with their dogs; that Democrats want everyone dependent on crack cocaine; that the biblical Great Flood is proof that global warming is a natural phenomenon; that wind farms are using up the wind; that Christopher Columbus was a great American; and that immigrants should be forced to learn English, just like Jesus.*

*All opinions above expressed by Republicans, not Democrats.

What about Santa Monica?

Okay, since you asked:

Although the campaign against Pam O'Connor has been so extreme and unfair as to almost make you want to vote for her in protest, I intend to cast ballots tomorrow for Frank Gruber, Mike Feinstein and Richard McKinnon. I decided against a protest vote for O'Connor for the same reason I wouldn't vote for Kevin McKeown: I think the council will benefit from some new blood. Gruber and McKinnon in their service on the planning commission -- and Gruber in his writing -- have demonstrated they can bring both experience and reasonableness to the council chamber. While Feinstein is not exactly new blood, during his previous council tenancy he showed a capacity to learn from experience, and his time away from city government has given him the opportunity to reflect on policy decisions past and future.

As far as the local measures, my votes will be no, no, no, no and no.

With all the spending for and against measures D and LC, you'd think they actually mean something. They don't. Santa Monica's agreement with the FAA expires at the end of June. When the smoke clears from the current battle, the City will still need to negotiate with the FAA and it is the federal agency that will have the final say in what changes there will be at the airport. While both measures are pointless, D has the added negative of challenging the idea of representative government; elected officials and city staff negotiating with the Feds have disadvantages enough without having their authority undermined further. The likelihood that the FAA will agree to close Santa Monica Airport is close to nil. (As an aside, current FAA rules have two interesting side effects: the presence of the airport forces planes flying to LAX to approach at a higher altitude, cutting noise; and take-off and landing regulations near Clover Field limit building heights.)

Measures H and HH would raise the city’s real estate transfer tax for commercial and non-commercial parcels selling for $1 million or more -- that's pretty much everything in Santa Monica -- from $3 per $1,000 of sales price to $9 per $1,000. We need more affordable housing in Santa Monica, but we need to find a less regressive way to pay for it. Meanwhile, measure FS would take the local rent control department's current maximum annual registration fee of $174.96 per controlled rental unit to $288 (reality check: Los Angeles' rent control stabilization fee is $67.83 per unit), 50% of which a landlord can (and any rational landlord will) pass on to tenants. The effect of all three measures would be to make Santa Monica an even more expensive place to live.

See no evil

"The U.S. government agreed to a police request to restrict more than 37 square miles of airspace surrounding Ferguson, Missouri, for 12 days in August for safety, but audio recordings show that local authorities privately acknowledged the purpose was to keep away news helicopters during violent street protests." -- AP news report

Where have you gone, Herbert Hoover?

"It is inconceivable that we should allow so great a possibility for service, for news, for entertainment, and for vital commercial purposes to be drowned in advertising chatter." -- Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover, in 1922, commenting on Radio, um, Neutrality.

Asking for a friend

How are laws against impersonating a police officer affected by Halloween?

Man Bites Dog

 A homeless guy came into Pitfire Pizza at L.A.'s Main & Second about 10 p.m. tonight looking for water. It's probably sufficiently noteworthy to be worth reporting that he was treated by the staff with the respect.

Regressive Tax

I am in downtown L.A. On the block I'm visiting, there are several restaurants and at least four clubs with live performances. The parking meters went off duty at 8 p.m. and, yet, there appears to be no parking shortage, as compared to downtown Santa Monica where nothing much happens and the punitive parking tax devices are not deactivated until 2 a.m.

2Gary Gordon and Paul Lyons

It's turned out to be a dark and stormy night.

How about that?

Ted Cruz staffer:

'Before Obamacare, there had never been a confirmed case of Ebola in U.S.'

These people can say anything that pops into their heads, however idiotic.

It must be really easy to get a GOP staff job, though.

I could listen to Fats Waller all day.

Oh, wait. That's what I'm doing.

quote unquote James Baldwin

“Americans are the youngest country, the largest country, and the strongest country, we like to say, and yet the very notion of change, real change, throws Americans into a panic.” -- James Baldwin (November 1963)

Give 'em hell, Harry!

The Republicans … will try to make people believe that everything the Government has done for the country is socialism. They will go to the people and say: "Did you see that social security check

you received the other day—you thought that was good for you, didn't you? That's just too bad! That's nothing in the world but socialism. Did you see that new flood control dam the Government is building over there for the protection of your property? Sorry—that's awful socialism! That new hospital that they are building is socialism. Price supports, more socialism for the farmers! Minimum wage laws? Socialism for labor! Socialism is bad for you, my friend. Everybody knows that." And here you are, with your new car, and your home, and better opportunities for the kids, and a television set -- you are just surrounded by socialism! Now the Republicans say, "That's a terrible thing, my friend, and the only way out of this sinkhole of socialism is to vote for the Republican ticket." -- Harry S Truman, 1948

Universitäten wollen frei sein

At the same time that the U.S. government is raking in huge profits from usurious loans to America's young people, all German universities are now free to Americans and all other international students.

The last German state to charge tuition at its universities struck down the fees this week. In explaining why Germany made this move, Dorothee Stapelfeldt, a Hamburg senator, called tuition fees "unjust," adding that "they discourage young people who do not have a traditional academic family background from taking up study. It is a core task of politics to ensure that young women and men can study with a high quality standard free of charge in Germany."

You Can Now Go to College in Germany for Free, No Matter Where You’re From By Rebecca Schuman (Slate)
How US students get a university degree for free in Germany by Franz Strasser (BBC)

Those Randy conservatives

Conservatives employ Ayn Rand the way they do Jesus. You take any damn-fool position you want and then say, "because, you know, Ayn Rand." Nobody over 15 actually reads her stuff.

Where is Big Bill Haywood when you need him?

The Wobblies were right.

Workers of the world, and nearly everyone else, must unite against the predator class that will otherwise enslave and finally destroy the planet.

From the American Exceptionalism Desk:

“America leads. We are the indispensable nation. We have capacity no one else has. Our military is the best in the history of the world. And when trouble comes up anywhere in the world, they don't call Beijing. They don't call Moscow. They call us.” -- Barack Obama, last Sunday

"If that statement were a vehicle, it would be a Hummer with chrome-plated bumper nuts. It’s belligerent. It’s remarkably tone-deaf, coming from a man whose words are typically finely crafted. And it is, yes, stupid. There is a truth in it – no denying that. Given the amount of money we pour into our military, it certainly has the capacity to bomb, shoot, and generally wreck vast swathes of the world. We have enough nuclear weapons to ignite the Earth’s atmosphere. Our capacity is huge. We are freaking awesome." -- Akira Watts

Mantra

There are no eyes, no ears, no nose, no tongue,
no body, mind; no color, sound, or smell;
no taste, no touch, no thing; no realm of sight,
no realm of thoughts; no ignorance, no end
to ignorance; no old age and no death;
no end to age and death; no suffering,
nor any cause of suffering, nor end
to suffering, no path, no wisdom and no fulfillment.
                                    -- The Heart Sutra

The Heart Sutra: A Comprehensive Guide to the Classic of Mahayana Buddhism by Kazuaki Tanahashi

Thinking about Ferguson:

Tear gases are not merely irritating, they are nerve agents that, except for the objections of the US, would have been outlawed when the Chemical Weapons Convention was adopted in 1993. Legal or not, their use against protesting citizens is evidence of moral bankruptcy.

Good news:

LAUSD is giving up its grenade launchers. Bloomberg.

Labor Day!

“Never forget, people DIED for the eight hour workday.” — Rebecca Gordon

This poster is from the fabulous Ricardo Levins Morales Art Studio.

From the Unintended Consequences Desk:

Sadam Hussein would have kicked. ISIS'. Ass.*

On the other hand, without the Gulf War, there'd be no ISIS. That aside, America's evil, gutless, directionless military adventurism rolls on.

It was not even a year ago when we were bombarded with messaging that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is a Supreme Evil and Grave Threat, and that military action against his regime was both a moral and strategic imperative. The standard cast of “liberal interventionists” – Tony Blair, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Nicholas Kristof and Samantha Power – issued stirring sermons on the duties of war against Assad. Secretary of State John Kerry actually compared Assad to (guess who?) Hitler, instructing the nation that “this is our Munich moment.” Striking Assad, he argued, “is a matter of national security. It’s a matter of the credibility of the United States of America. It’s a matter of upholding the interests of our allies and friends in the region.”

U.S. military action against the Assad regime was thwarted only by overwhelming American public opinion which opposed it and by a resounding rejection by the UK Parliament of Prime Minister David Cameron’s desire to assume the usual subservient British role in support of American wars.

Now the Obama administration and American political class is celebrating the one-year anniversary of the failed “Bomb Assad!” campaign by starting a new campaign to bomb those fighting against Assad – the very same side the U.S. has been arming over the last two years.

It’s as though the U.S. knew for certain all along that it wanted to fight in the war in Syria, and just needed a little time to figure out on which side it would fight.

The rest of the story:
The Fun of Empire: Fighting on All Sides of a War in Syria by Glenn Greenwald (The Intercept).

*Just sayin'.

Oh, say...

Because of the upcoming anniversary of its creation, we will have to endure endless twaddle for the next year or so about "The Star Spangled Banner." It will be useful to recall that the only reason this difficult to sing and ideologically compromised ditty was belatedly adopted as the national theme song was that news reached the capital in 1931 that pinkos on the Erie, PA city council were opening meetings with rousing renditions of “The Internationale."

'This is the Story of Power in this Country'

"The quiet militarization of police departments began in 1990, when Congress passed the National Defense Authorization Act, a provision of which — known as the 1033 program — allowed the Secretary of Defense to 'transfer to Federal and State agencies personal property of the Department of Defense, including small arms and ammunition.'

"In 1996, during the peak of the War on Drugs, Congress expanded the program and incentivized active use of the equipment, making it free for recipient agencies and simultaneously requiring them to use it within a year. The expansion of the 1033 program also required agencies to give preference to transferring equipment for 'counterdrug and counterterrorism activities.' And it hasn’t stopped there.

The rest of the story:
Ferguson, Institutionalized Racism and the Militarization of Police: 'They're willing to sacrifice the lives of the community members based on the actions of a few' by Nadia Prupis (Common Dreams)

Just spent

...an awesome couple of hours immersed in Charles Bradley (thank you, Amazon Prime) after watching the live-stream Roseanne Cash-Buddy Miller-Jim Lauderdale concert in NYC (thank you, Lincoln Center). But felt terrible for the local band that stole the Lincoln Center show. I realize that we ran out of band names around the time of Vanilla Fudge. But, The Lone Bellow? Really? Would you walk across the street to see an outfit called The Lone Bellow? You know you wouldn't, unless you thought you were going to see a Shel Silverstein cover band or a reading of Humboldt's Gift. Maybe, before they release their new album, they could sponsor a naming contest. The Zach Williams Band would work (he's the band's leader). "The Zach Williams Band stole the show at Lincoln Center last night." See? Or, if there's never been a band named Brooklyn, like Boston or Kansas, that'd work: "Brooklyn stole the show at Lincoln Center last night." The Lone Bellow? Not so much. In any case, if you're a Prime member, add Charles Bradley to your Amazon Music playlist now, and get the several Anthony Hamilton albums while you're at it. And, at least for now, it's still possible to watch Jim Lauderdale, Buddy Miller, Roseanne Cash and, yes, The Lone Bellow at Lincoln Center.org.

The Lone Bellow, Mill City Nights 10/29/13 (full concert):


Turns out, there has never been, apparently, a band named Brooklyn. There was, however, Brooklyn Bridge.

From the Nanny State desk:

An elderly scofflaw just moved a table and a chair from shadows of the cold coastal fog on Main Street to the bright warm sun around the corner on Hill, despite the Santa Monica Fun Police's strictures against such an action. The old reprobate is no doubt unaware that his transgression may cause the store owner to suffer a $1000 fine for public amenity abuse.

Who are the animals?

The cynical campaign to turn the "actor and model" Jiff into a media star came to Main Street this week with a visit to one of the local coffee shops for a photo shoot with the mini-dog for which it appeared that the little critter's entourage of six to eight photographers, videographers and hangers-on had no permits. With typical self-absorbed Hollywood arrogance, his handlers had him prancing around on tables and slopping up whip cream-topped drinks in blatant disregard for common sense, public sanitation, and health and public safety regs. Are there no "jackie cooper laws" to prevent the exploitation of defenseless pets? Does PETA think dancing monkeys are "adorable"?

Factoid

21% Of Americans Spend More On Their Cell Phones Than On Groceries.

Don't know what it means, but it's not good.

This Exists:

Citizens united against Citizens United

This is the wording of the proposed constitutional amendment passed last week by the Senate Judiciary Committee:

SECTION 1: To advance democratic self-government and political equality, and to protect the integrity of government and the electoral process, Congress and the States may regulate and set reasonable limits on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to influence elections.

SECTION 2. Congress and the States shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation, and may distinguish between natural persons and corporations or other artificial entities created by law, including by prohibiting such entities from spending money to influence elections.

SECTION 3. Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the press.

Economic Populism at Heart of Emerging Debate Among Democrats

Published on Friday, July 11, 2014 by

Campaign for America's Future Blog

[Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), center, accompanied by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, right, make statements introducing Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) seated at left, to the committee during his confirmation hearing to become secretary of state, replacing Clinton, Thursday, Jan. 24, 2013, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)]

by Robert Borosage

Over at The Washington Post, the usually sensible Greg Sargent endorses the notion that divisions among Democrats are “mostly trumped up.” The tension between the Wall Street wing of the party and the Warren (as in Elizabeth) wing is an overblown fiction of a press corps desperate for some action.

It’s true that the prior divisions on social issues have dissipated, as liberals have swept the field. Obama’s halting attempts to wean the US from its foreign wars have garnered widespread support. And on economics, Sargent argues that Democrats “largely agree on the menu of policy responses to the economic problems faced by poor, working and middle class Americans — a higher minimum wage, universal pre-K, higher taxes on the wealthy to fund a stronger safety net, job creation and job training — whatever the broader rhetorical umbrella is being used.” Even Hillary says she agrees with Thomas Piketty that extreme inequality is a “threat” to our democracy.

There are differences on how aggressively to go after the big banks or whether to expand Social Security, Sargent admits, and a debate underway about “whether to push the Democratic Party in a more populist direction,” which he declines to define. But generally, he argues, there’s broad agreement that Hillary or any Democratic candidate will run on.

All of this is true except the conclusion. There is a broad agreement on what might be called a “populist lite” agenda — one that has been put forth repeatedly by Obama and frustrated by Republican obstruction. And the reforms — from the minimum wage to universal pre-K — are important and will make a difference.

But it strikes me as bizarre to suggest that there is no serious debate among Democrats when the National Education Association, the largest teachers union in the country and a key power in Democratic circles, has just called for the resignation of Obama’s education secretary. Democratic House and Senate leaders refuse to allow even a vote on fast-track trade authority sought by the president, and a majority of the Democratic caucus lines up against Obama’s Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations. Progressives in both houses demand bold action on jobs, on taxing and investing that the president resists. Democrats revolt against the White House desire to trim Social Security benefits.

In fact, there is a fundamental debate brewing in the party, grounded on very different perspectives that lead in significantly different directions.

On one side are the passive voice populists, which include both Clintons and Obama. They argue that our Gilded Age inequality is the product of technology and globalization, as if these were autonomous forces like the weather. The effects — a declining middle class, stagnant wages, spreading misery — can be ameliorated by sensible policies, like the agenda Sargent ticks off. Most of all, Americans need to make certain the next generation gets better education and training so they can better compete in the global marketplace. Universal preschool is a first step to that. But the largest thrust — driven by the party’s deep pocket donors — is an assault on teacher’s unions and public schools, investment in charters, public and private, and a focus on high-stakes testing to measure teacher and school performance.

Undergirding this is an acceptance that we can’t really afford to do even the minimum in public education or child poverty, so the focus has to be on cheaper ways to make progress. This assumption also fuels the interest in cutting Social Security and Medicare benefits, experimenting with public-private partnerships to raise funds, and so on. All this assumes that we’re close to the limits on taxes, that corporate tax reform should be “revenue neutral,” (that is, companies should not contribute one dime more to our investment or budget needs), and that taxes on the wealthy can’t produce much additional revenue.

The activist-voice populists disagree fundamentally with both the analysis and the prescription. They argue that extreme inequality results from rules that were rigged to benefit the few and not the many. That leads to the demand for structural reforms to change the rules: fair and balanced trade and tax policies to replace those created by and for the multinationals; breaking up big banks and curbing Wall Street’s casino as opposed to accepting banks that are too big to fail and too big to save; progressive tax reforms to create revenue for the public investments that we need in everything from education to infrastructure to an expanded safety net; empowering workers and curbing CEO license to ensure workers share in the profits they help to produce; expanding Social Security and public pensions while moving further towards true universal, affordable health care.

These differences are only now emerging, as the failure of the recovery forces a bigger debate about our economy. The Wall Street wing presses forward with corporate trade deals that are opposed by a growing majority of voters. The bankers bear no accountability for their pervasive frauds and lawlessness, while most Americans are looking for perp walks. Well-heeled lobbies block any sensible tax reform, while polls show Americans strongly want the rich and the corporations to pay their fair share of taxes. Obama has already felt the revolt of the Democratic base against his plans to pare Social Security benefits. Clinton and Obama have been essentially AWOL in the war on labor and collective bargaining, essential elements of any strategy to rebuild the middle class.

Obviously, many of these questions pit the wealthy Wall Street and Silicon Valley donor class against the vast bulk of Democratic voters who are struggling in this economy. It’s not surprising that smart politicians have moved to adopt the populist lite agenda to appeal to the latter without offending the former.

But the divisions are likely to grow because most Americans are struggling in this economy. (Most still think it is in recession.) And with the deck still stacked against most Americans, little is likely to change without a new deal (to borrow a phrase).

And in addition to this is Hillary’s apparent intent to run to the right of Obama on foreign policy — to champion more interventionist and hawkish views at a time when Americans want to rebuild at home. If she pursues this course, it will likely spark a new debate around foreign policy that Obama’s relative caution largely avoided.

Democrats have always been a big-tent party. The divisions between Southern segregationists and Northern liberals were apparent. The battles over civil rights, women’s rights, choice, wars and gays and guns were fierce. Many of these debates now have largely dissipated as liberals have won and the party’s base has evolved. The New Dem scorn for traditional liberals and labor drove big primary fights.

But the new debates over economic direction and the likely battle over policing the world are just beginning to take shape. And if the economy continues to reward the few and not the many, the divisions won’t need to be trumped up.

[Robert L. Borosage is the founder and president of the Institute for America’s Future and co-director of its sister organization, the Campaign for America’s Future. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.]

Won't Be Fooled Again #257,963

Hey, you! Yeah, you with your "It's Hillary's Turn" bumper sticker. Has Obama taught you nothing? The Neolibs -- knowing which side of the bread is buttered -- are lining up for jobs in the next Clinton administration, the one that will make Obama's look like the New Deal. It's not Hillary's turn. The One Percenters don't get another turn. It's the turn of the American people.

See, Hillary Clinton Flaunts Her Surveillance State Baggage by Robert Scheer (TruthDig).

Damaged Collateral

U.S. banks are getting out of the business of international remittances -- cash transfers -- because law enforcement requirements to prevent and monitor terror funding and drug money laundering are becoming too irksome. Guess who will be hurt by this. Drug smugglers? Nope. Terrorists? Uhn-unh. Mexicans and to a lesser extent Central Americans? Yep. Because cash transfers to Latin America make up by far the largest share of remittances. And ordinary people are far less apt to have the resources to negotiate around petty bureaucratic obstructions.

Swamp in the Desert

As the course of events in the Middle East twists and turns, it's going to be fun to listen to the White House and the State Department try to explain how the Assad regime in Syria, less than a year ago so pestilent we were prepared to bomb it out of existence; Iran, charter member of the Axis of Evil, Assad's primary backer and, until just the other day, "the world's most active state sponsor of terrorism;" Hezbollah, Iran's Lebanese sidekick; and expansionist Russia, in the gunsights of US sanctions over its bullying of Ukraine, became our new best friends, and why our "ally," the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, is on the opposite side of nearly every fight we pick.

Burger king

Worth noting: If you're headed out for fast food, keep in mind that In-and-Out Burger, whose fresh ground chuck burgers Consumer Reports lauds as "standouts," pays its workers at least $10.50/hour, well above the minimum wage and the White House's proposed boost to $9/hour.

Aaachtung!

Extremely rude Santa Monica building inspector just came into Starbucks on Main Street to issue a "second warning" about verboten chairs and tables outside the store. Aside from the absurdity of the city's attitude toward commercial activity on sidewalks (amenities that enhance the quality of urban life, btw), there is no reason for a public functionary to take an aggressive attitude toward a citizen at all, let alone over a minor infraction of an arbitrary rule. Is Starbucks dissing petty authority? The republic's foundations shudder.

The month my bathtub made more than I did

The bathtub of my $35 a month Lower East Side walk-up on the cover of National Lampoon. That's coffee, by the way: this was art directed (it was bad, but not that bad).

The Long War: Endless. Pointless.

"Ultimately, the public is at fault for this catastrophe in Afghanistan, where more than 1,000 G.I.’s have now lost their lives. If we don’t have the courage as a people to fight and share in the sacrifices when our nation is at war, if we’re unwilling to seriously think about the war and hold our leaders accountable for the way it is conducted, if we’re not even willing to pay for it, then we should at least have the courage to pull our valiant forces out of it." -- The Courage to Leave by Bob Herbert (New York Times 2010-06-11)

President Obama and I are both in Palm Springs today, with the not insignificant difference that no one has offered me $38,000 to have dinner with them.

'Bout sums it up

 

Fly me to the moon, let me play among the stars...

Talk about disruptive technologies.

Not only is SpaceX's new Dragon V2 space transport able to carry up to seven astronauts to and from the international space station, not only is its thermal protection system sufficient for the spacecraft to be capable of lunar missions, not only will it be able to return to earth with the precision of a helicopter (paving the way for interplanetary tourism), but its eight SuperDraco engines were produced entirely with a 3-D printer (using a super-alloy called Inconel), making it the first 3-D printed rocket engine to take flight.

Dragon V2 will begin shuttling passengers to and from the space station in late 2016.

Welcome to Tomorrowland.

Act like a national party

The Democrats should use their pac money for a national congressional campaign; instead of backing a few potential "winners" here and there, they should tie the GOP's reactionary majority to its truly lunatic fringe, turn every vote in the country into a judgement on Republican radicalism, make it clear that you can't have that nice Monica Wehby in Oregon, say, without getting Joni Ernst, the new Republican nominee for Iowa’s Senate seat, who is anti-amnesty for immigrants, hates the Nixon-backed Clean Water Act, and wants to privatize Social Security.

Actually, Monica Wehby doesn't seem that nice, but you get my point.

The Beat Goes On

“So today, Mosul fell. Mosul is the second largest city in Iraq. The Iraqi government we 'installed,' has now 'lost' Fallujah, Ramadi, Mosul and other large swaths of the country we invaded at the cost of thousands of American lives, tens of thousands of Iraqi lives and a couple trillion dollars. (What could your school district do with a trillion dollars?).

"One more maddening day in this 11-year illegal, immoral, greedy and stupid war. Today in Mosul, that Iraqi Army YOU pay for, freaked out, threw down their guns, and literally RAN away. I have friends and acquaintances who lost sons in all three of those cities. I can only imagine what they're feeling tonight. FOR WHAT? FOR WHAT! I am so sorry we couldn't do anything to stop this when it started. A few million of us tried. Last week, Richard Clarke, Bush's former head of counter-terrorism, said he now believes that his fellow members of the Bush administration committed 'war crimes.'

"I continue to await the perp walk.” -- Michael Moore

Take the "D" Train

Despite his own modest appraisal of his piano playing, Duke Ellington did fantastic duos and trios with Jimmy Blanton, Louis Armstrong, Mulgrew Miller, Billy Strayhorn, Max Roach, Charlie Mingus, Ella Fitzgerald, and more.

He's the Willie Nelson of jazz.

                                                       (Richard Avedon, 1963)

Duke Ellington, Charlie Mingus, Max Roach: Money Jungle

Living big at $7.25 an hour

The Times spent a few column inches yesterday mulling over the mystery of why the poverty rate hasn't budged in 30 years. Gosh. I don't know. I'm sure it can't have anything to do with the systematic decimation of organized labor and the shipping of American jobs to China and Mexico. Can't see how starving the free universal education system could have anything to do with it. It can't be because of all that expenditure of public wealth on the liberal project of empire-building instead of on the building roads and bridges and harbors and airports and hospitals and schools and housing here at home. Can't be that. You can't blame the war on drugs, or the creation of a vast army of former inmates without jobs, or the expenditure of hundreds of millions of dollars on incarceration instead of education, on building prisons instead of schools. I'm sure it has nothing to do with Bill Clinton's welfare reforms. Surely it wasn't because the minimum wage wasn't linked to inflation or to worker productivity so that as the decades rolled by low end jobs were worth less and less. Couldn't be that. Certainly it had nothing to do with the mortgage crisis. Or allowing the banks to bleed us dry. Or slashing services for the poor and middle class so that taxes for the very wealthiest could be slashed, too. I can't think what the reason might be. Can you?

“The most valuable sense of humor is the kind that enables a person to see instantly what it isn't safe to laugh at.” -- Donald Rumsfeld

Many of you frequent flyers will recall that for a time TSA had signs and loudspeakers prohibiting humor attacks at security checkpoints. “You are reminded that any inappropriate remarks or jokes concerning security may result in your arrest,” warned one loudspeaker message in Dallas last fall. It's ironic that a sign at Burbank's Bob Hope Airport should say, "No jokes."

This came to mind because of the announcement this week by the U.S. Secret Service that it has issued an RFP for software that can detect sarcasm. Since we are decades from producing a computer with a sense of humor, it's likely the service will have to make do with a program that sorts through a giant database of pre-screened tweets and emails looking for tells: wannabe terrorists would do well to get in the habit now of putting smiley faces and LOLs in all their social media posts.

The fact that no one can be absolutely certain the Secret Service itself isn't kidding is evidence of how difficult a task deciphering snide remarks will be. The safest thing is probably to assume that, like TSA, the service is deficient in the skill set needed to detect and catalog gradations of wit, and to try to help them out with some practical alternatives. I started to suggest that, instead of wasting resources developing software that will never be operational, the service ask working comics to apply their expertise to the problem, until I remembered that the functionaries interviewing prospective government humor analysts would be the same ones who can't see the whimsy in an airport sign prohibiting jokes; they'd just end up with a government facility full of Dennis Millers.

More effective might be a change in staffing practices: the service should immediately stop hiring seminary dropouts and returning Mormon missionaries and limit their recruiting to inner city Jews, blacks, Irish and Italians.

This is a serious problem needing serious attention. We certainly don't want anyone arrested at a fund-raising dinner or a Fourth of July picnic for asking the agent groping him, "Do you want me to do you now?," let alone for bringing up his fling with Hitler's mother.

“Common sense and a sense of humor are the same thing, moving at different speeds. A sense of humor is just common sense, dancing.” -- William James

Clarification

The government of China is charged with spying on behalf of companies it owns. This is completely different from the American government's spying on behalf of companies that own it.

The War Party outvotes the Democrats and Republicans

This is not an endorsement of his candidacy -- no doubt there are other issues to consider, but it's worth noting that in his campaign Ted Lieu, one of the horde running to succeed Henry Waxman, has taken a stand against unconstitutional domestic spying.

That this is important is demonstrated by the fact that Jim Sensenbrenner's Orwellian USA Freedom Act just breezed through the House, 303-121 (here's the roll, if you want to see how your rep voted). Most members from both parties are eager to continue unconstitutional, warrant-less bulk spying against U.S. citizens. Leaders of the opposition included the reliable Florida firebrand Alan Grayson and our own Zoe Lofgren, who in debate said "regrettably, we have learned that if we leave any ambiguity in the law, the intelligence agencies run a truck right through that ambiguity."

Only 70 Democrats and 51 Republicans voted against the bill, which enables and codifies large-scale, unconstitutional domestic spying. No incumbent who voted for this monstrosity (looking at you, Nancy Pelosi) deserves your vote on June 3rd or in November. Many CA Democrats did vote to protect constitutional rights, but citizens in places like Mill Valley, the Bay Area, Davis, Sacramento, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, the Coachella Valley and San Diego need to ask themselves if they are outraged enough to withhold their support from the likes of Pelosi, Jared Huffman, John Garamendi, Mike Thompson, Doris Matsui, Ami Bera, Jim Costa, Lois Capps, Julia Brownley, Judy Chu, Adam Schiff, Brad Sherman, Grace Napolitano, Raul Ruiz, Linda Sánchez, Lucille Roybal-Allard, Maxine Waters, Juan Vargas, Scott Peters and Susan Davis.

With so many candidates in contention, the open primary next month gives you an opportunity to express your support for constitutional government.

Ain't it the truth

"From our use of drones to the detention of terrorist suspects, the decisions we are making will define the type of nation and world that we leave to our children." -- President Barack Obama, 2013-05-23

Know your place

I realize it was unseemly for irascible congressman Alan Grayson to openly lobby for a seat on John Boehner's select committee to "investigate" the 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!, and no doubt speaker-in-exile Nancy Pelosi saw it as a test of her authority (what isn't?), but it's counterproductive not appoint the aggressive former prosecutor to challenge what he called the GOP's "dredging up one fake scandal after another fake scandal"? Pelosi's selection of Elijah Cummings, the ranking member on Darrell Issa's out-of-control and off-the-wall House Oversight Committee, was probably unavoidable, but the rest of the choices -- Adam Smith, Adam Schiff, Linda Sanchez and Tammy Duckworth -- are reliable backbenchers who can be trusted not to make too much of a fuss over GOP bullshit.

What would Eugene Debs do?

The Democrats are attempting to con Bernie Sanders into running for president as a Democrat.

This would have two salient benefits for the Party of Wall Street.

First, it would shore up its quadrennial marketing hustle as the champion of economic justice for working people and the middle class.

Second, it would destroy Sen. Sanders reputation as an independent social democrat, effectively silencing the most effective opponent of political business-as-usual; in order to run in the party's primaries he would be required to pledge to support the eventual nominee -- if that is Hillary Clinton or someone of her ilk, as it will be, he would be committing himself to backing a politician who stands in contradiction to everything he has fought for politically.

Even if he didn't actively campaign for the Democratic ticket in the fall, his silence would undermine his credibility, and hurt the cause of reform by allowing the issues he has championed -- jobs, infrastructure, progressive taxes, fair treatment for veterans, affordable universal health care, energy efficiency, etc. -- to be ignored, and the campaign to once again to hang on the question of which candidate is the lesser evil.

Democrats Need Bernie Sanders to Run for President by Michael Kazin (The New Republic)

Heh heh

Lowering the Bar

On that day when Cyrus Vance the Enumerated, whose father was likewise a patrician Democratic Party hack, inevitably seeks higher office, he will put himself forward at best as a proponent of economic justice, at worst as the lesser of evils. Will you believe him?

The Disturbing Verdict Against Cecily McMillan by Maurice Isserman (Dissent)

Pass

The only solace I take from the news that Matt Miller is running for Congress is that I can't imagine anyone -- Left, Right or Center -- voting for him.

From the Kleptocracy Desk:

This is how American democracy is done now: To the tune of $1,000,000, according to Bloomberg News, two childhood friends of Florida state representative Paige Kreegel are bankrolling his bid for a U.S. House seat.