US President kowtows to foreign leader, traditions

Going analog for awhile..

...so go read someone else.

Do you know how many medical bankruptcies there were in France last year?

He does--Zero.

"Fox News and the far right have a race deck and they play the Ace of Spades every day."

Yep. And, locally, Fred Dooley is the biggest joker around.

Won't somebody please think of the insurance company executives?

Protect Insurance Companies PSA from Will Ferrell

Goodbye, Mary

New York Times: Mary Travers of Peter, Paul, and Mary Dies.

Jim Carroll: People Who Died

New York Times: Jim Carroll, 60, Poet and Punk Rocker, Dies

In speech, Obama will not insist on public option

So says the New York Times.

I admit to being extremely disappointed in how cowardly this administration has been on the healthcare issue.

I really didn't think I was electing John McCain when I voted last year.

Of course the one thing you can always say about Democrats is that they've always been more worried about upsetting Republicans than they have about turning off progressives in their own party.

Who knows. Maybe the speech will be better than I think.

Unpopular president tries to indoctrinate nation's schoolchildren

Wankers.

Who's going to save MPS?

It's no stretch to argue that that the financial and educational crises facing the Milwaukee Public Schools are a direct result of the years of political tensions over the district's management, and yesterday Lisa Kaiser of the Shepherd Express broke the news that it's about to get dramatically worse:

MPS Board President Michael Bonds has submitted a letter to Mayor Tom Barrett announcing his decision to resign from Barrett’s appointed MPS Innovation and Improvement Advisory Committee “immediately.” I just got off the phone with Pat Curley, Barrett’s top aide, who hadn’t heard that Bonds had turned in his resignation letter. “We’re very, very disappointed if that is the case,” Curley said.

It will surprise no one that the cause of Bonds' displeasure appears to be the that the mayor and the governor are no longer being coy about their intentions regarding MPS:

Gov. Jim Doyle and Mayor Tom Barrett both said for the first time Thursday that achieving significant reform in Milwaukee Public Schools would require the mayor to lead the school system and select the next superintendent.

Mayoral control of the school system - a tactic that experts say has improved the academic and fiscal performance of some other urban districts - has been hinted at in Milwaukee since late spring, but wasn't formally endorsed until Doyle did so Thursday in an interview with a member of the Journal Sentinel's editorial board.

In addition to selecting the superintendent, Barrett said, the mayor should also appoint the School Board. Doyle did not commit to that but indicated he was open to new ways for the School Board to operate.

[...]

The comments from Doyle and Barrett, which were supported by state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Evers, set off immediate criticism from Milwaukee School Board President Michael Bonds.

Actually, serious intimations of mayoral control have been going on for longer than the paper suggests above, but there's no need to quibble. A change in the governance structure of MPS seemed inevitable following Barrett's sharp criticisms of the board following last year's budget deliberations. (And , as a side-note, Milwaukee area progressives who were very supportive of Evers during the spring DPI race are probably sharpening their own criticisms of him today.)

I have no idea why Barrett and Doyle chose to take this issue on now, but it seems strange that they would deliberately pick a fight with Bonds, who, if anything, is sympathetic to the need to introduce significant reforms in how MPS is run. In addition, Bonds understands the complex attitudes Milwaukee's African American community has towards MPS, and is somebody the mayor should have on his side if he wants to have any measure of credibility in moving forward with such a plan.

I'm against mayoral control on principle, but also for practical reasons. There just isn't much evidence that it has any affect on student performance. (pdf) I also doubt that much of the politics surrounding the schools (a large share of which has nothing to do with education policy or management of the district) would change all that much under the model. And parents should probably be concerned about whether they will get a fair hearing if decisions about curriculum and school closings are being made from City Hall.

But individuals who are opposed to mayoral control of MPS underestimate the incredible frustration parents and many others in the community have for a system they see as failing generations of students. This is not, somewhat ironically, due to the district's low achievement scores, but because even casual observers of the district know that many schools and programs are thriving. A main failure of MPS over the years has been its difficulty in replicating the success of high-performing schools like Rufus King and Riverside throughout the district.

As a result, I would posit that if Barrett really wants take over MPS, he'll be hailed for wanting to do so--and by wide margins. This is not to say that other stakeholders like labor, the teacher's union, and some interest groups will be happy. But in a move like this, Barrett can appeal directly to parents and taxpayers.

Part of accomplishing that, however, will be related to patching up his differences with Bonds. Unfortunately, for the mayor, the events of the last 24 hours are going to complicate that effort.

Ted Bobrow has a good take on this issue too.

(Disclosure: Most readers of this blog know that I ran for the school board in the spring.)

Congratulations, crazies!

Way to go:

The cost of caring for patients who are near death accounts for a big piece of the government's medical spending. But a furor over a provision for government-paid counseling to plan for end-of-life care is steering lawmakers away from the issue.

Tucked inside a sweeping House bill to overhaul the health system is a provision that would require Medicare to pay physicians to counsel patients once every five years. During those sessions, doctors could discuss how patients can plan for such end-of-life decisions as setting up a living will, obtaining hospice care or establishing a proxy to make their health decisions when they are unable to do so.

The end-of-life counseling provision in the House bill is expected to cost a few billion dollars over the next decade. But health policy experts say it could lower medical spending by reducing end-of-life medical care that patients don't want.

The picture here succinctly presents why encouraging living wills and advanced directives is a remarkably good idea and should be a part of any health care reform. It's one of those issues for which there isn't even really a question. You may disagree with the notion of the government paying for it, but like quitting smoking and not drinking and driving, there isn't much to argue about in respect to the benefits for individuals and society.

As a matter of politics, agreeing to drop the provision from the bill is an unmitigated disaster. Democrats have now validated the tactics of the crazy wing of their opposition in this debate. The GOP certainly won't ever return the favor when they're in the majority so I can't think of a single reason why the Democrats should have--particularly in regards to such an important issue.

And of course, as we all could have guessed, as governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin encouraged citizens to get advanced directives.

Added--Steve Benen: "And here's the real kicker: it won't make any difference. Lawmakers can take the measure out of the bill, and right-wing critics will continue to equate reform with the Nazi Holocaust, because a) they're unconcerned with reality; and b) they'll assume the measure is still there anyway."

Whether it's Walker or Neumann, Doyle should burnish his pro-Choice credentials

The above is an ad from a Democratic gubernatorial candidate in Virgina, and Governor Jim Doyle should make note of it for his 2010 reelection campaign. Whether he faces Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker or former Congressman Mark Neumann, turning out a large contingent of voters concerned about protecting reproductive freedom rights could play a key role in winning reelection.

Why? While Ken Lamke lays out a few decent (if somewhat routine) reasons why a primary strengthens rather than weakens the eventual GOP nominee, the fact is that a contest in which Walker or Neumann are forced into staking out conservative positions to impress party activists will put them at odds with most state voters, thereby boosting Doyle in the general election.

And why the Choice issue? Both candidates, but particularly Neumann, have taken extreme anti-Choice views. Forcing them to defend these views early, and, perhaps, even encouraging them to compete on the issue, will reinforce how disconnected they are from Wisconsinites

Even as terms like pro-Choice or pro-Life are becoming more nuanced, extraordinary numbers of Americans--nearly 70%--think it's important to preserve the rights women and their families have through the 1973 Roe versus Wade decision. In Wisconsin, the political divide over legislation like the very popular Compassionate Care for Rape Victims bill highlights how reactionary the anti-Choice movement actually is. In pointing out these differences early and often, Doyle can start to establish the very real concern everyone should have about how hostile a Walker or Neumann administration might be for women.

And one has to wonder if Walker and Neumann are aware of this. Walker's Web site makes no mention of the Choice issue, as far as I can tell, and Neuman's has only a brief reference.

Regardless of which GOP nominee faces Doyle, the economic message and the hammering on taxes will be the same. Given the state of the economy, it's possible, and understandably so, that those issues might find some traction with voters. As a result, it's going to be vital to emphasize areas in which Walker and Neumann are well outside of the mainstream. Promoting his stance on reproductive freedom is a good place for Doyle to start.

Video via Crooks and Liars.

The health care debacle

Emily Mills, as usual, is indispensable:

The most vocally anti-health care reform Republicans have decided that their own political ambition and desire to see Obama taken down a peg or two trumps the well-being of their fellow Americans. That's the cold, hard truth of the matter. Petty backstabbing and one-upsmanship has taken precedence over honest discussion and work toward bettering the health care situation for their country.

How we've allowed this to happen is beyond me. There's plenty of blame to
go around: Democrats too spineless to stand up for what's right or make clear what's really in the bill, politicians too willing to sacrifice work for the great good in the name of ambition, everyday folk too susceptible to the bald-faced lies and fear mongering, a media too ready to spend more time covering nonsense than issues and events that really matter.

The underlying issues are even more complicated. It's fairly obvious that questions of race and class insecurity permeate much of this debate. Selfishness, ignorance, pride, arrogance, and greed play their part, too.

And she's right about this too: This whole mess is "fucking despicable."

Saving newspapers

John Dvorak

The Internet, of course, has changed everything, they say. Has it? It changed distribution and accessibility. That's for sure. But what else has it really changed? Yes, it changed the way people read because, let's face it, as a vehicle for the printed word, it seriously stinks. Staring at a bright screen to read text is ridiculous and tiresome. Any essay or column over 700 words becomes tedious. I'm already over the limit right now. Stop me!

So, what's the answer to the dilemma? Immediate and drastic downsizing! And I do not mean keeping all the buildings, overhead, and executives while firing reporters. Just the opposite is needed.

Eliminate layers of redundant editors. Turn off the lights, sell the desks, and get rid of the buildings. Reporters should work in the field and file reports over the network. Hire more ad sales people and make them pound the pavement. I know of no major newspaper or magazine that has ever even considered virtualizing the entire operation. The model of having to go in the office and be seen and supervised is one of the things that's killing these companies. It's expensive. If the reporters need to socialize with each other, let them do so at a coffee shop.

Leave the reporters at home where they can watch (or not!) C-SPAN all day. The same Internet and massive worldwide connectivity, which is killing newspapers and magazines, can be used to save them, too, by virtualizing the entire industry. Companies who know how to manage teleworkers have a huge competitive edge. And it's a natural fit for the publishing business. How many book authors come into the office? Would they get less or more work done if they did?

I'm sure this will all fall on deaf ears, as editors read this and say to themselves, "Nah. What we need is edgier writing to get the young reader on board."

Not all of this is sensible. Serious enterprise journalism, for example, requires an infrastructure that can't be replicated in a home office. I also don't think you can compare the resources a book author requires to be productive to the resources required to collect and produce breaking news stories. Centralized work locations are always going to be a feature of the news business, whether the final product is print or digital.

Still, Dvorak's main point that adopting technology solutions to more efficiently produce, as opposed to just distribute, news and information. is a good one.

(H/T: Tom McMahon)

Won't somebody please think of the children?

Classy.

Seriously, who let's their kid stand next to a guy like that? And why can't they get her a sign that makes sense?

Opium of the people

Any other institution...

Had any other group or organization in this country been involved in this case, there would be a line of people ready to accuse the group of murder. Religion gets a pass, though, and instead, the girl's parents stand alone in court.

I'm sure the Journal Sentinel's mailbox will be pretty full after that column. One doesn't often see religion talked about in that context in the mainstream press.

Irrational?

Jim Rowen breaks down yesterday's grotesque, racist rant from Mark Belling:

Rightie talker Mark Belling devoted the entire first hour of his show to a what was even for Belling a relentless attack on Congressman Gwen Moore for scheduling a health care forum scheduled for Tuesday afternoon at North Division High School - - which is a well-known public building landmark in her district, the 4th.

Belling said:

People would be "intimidated" at attending at a central city location.

People who attended at the site would fear "being shot in the head."

Suggested that if he sent his producer, Paul, to cover the event he'd be spotted as "the white guy" attending.

When a caller on the line offered a first-person account of the event, Belling said he was afraid of putting the caller on the air because if the caller were identified calling the Belling show "they might kill him."

And Belling wasn't alone in trying to whip up Whitey over Moore's health care event.

So, do you get it yet, or is this all still too vague? Maybe this will help. It's an e-mail sent to the SEIU recently in advance of a Racine health care event:

You socialist f---s have the nerve to say stop the violence at the town hall meetings when they weren't violent until you p---ies showed up because your n----- leader obama said to?????? When we have ours in Racine, Wi, I want you there. I want one of your little b----- to put his hands on this Marine."

The issue here isn't really health care or the stimulus package or the government's stake in GM--it's about control. And it's about entrenched interests with a deep economic stake in maintaining that control who are now realizing they might be on the verge of losing some of it.

So, naturally, they're upset. They're losing. But some of them are reacting--a small number, I would agree--by reverting to form. Ed Kilgore:

Conservatives are hardly unique in reacting selfishly or self-righteously to political issues, or dressing up personal prejudices with public policy arguments; we all do that from time to time, and to one extent or another. But whether we are talking about gay marriage, government-backed mortgages, or health care reform, there may well be a strongly dynamic relationship right now between privately held feelings of strong disdain for the purported beneficiaries of Obama's agenda, and some of the wilder arguments being made publicly to attack it.

Belling's always been a racist thug, but most of his followers probably lived out their own prejudices vicariously through him. But now, spurred to action by conspiracy theories spun and reiterated by conservative media outlets, town hall meetings are being filled with people who are uninterested in having a rational debate about health care. They're just there to scream.

Putting up with the occasional oddball is part of the job elected officials sign up for when they run for office, but it's hard to see why any representative owes much deference at all to every racist nut job who honestly believes that a public option for health insurance would lead to government death panels.

Rational? (Part 2)

Via Ta-Nehisi Coates:

According to Public Policy Polling (PPP), a North Carolina polling firm, only 24% of self-identified Republican voters in the state believe Barack Obama was born in the United States. 47% do not believe that Obama is American born, and 29% of Republicans aren't sure.

One part of PPP's data might reassure sentient readers somewhat: 7% of those who voted for John McCain do not believe Hawaii to be a part of theUnited States. Now perhaps this is just another irrational expression of Obama hatred. But, it may also be older voters who never quite absorbed the news that our 50th state is indeed our 50th state.

On the other hand individuals, who self-identify as Republicans these days are at an all time low, leaving not much in the political gene pool, so to speak. As to the geography knowledge of John McCain supporters, North Carolinians can thank years of underfunding public education.

Tonight's Jam: Elf Power

"All the World is Waiting"

Capitalism

Shocked at Fox commentator Glenn Beck's racist attacks on the Obama administration, advertisers are starting to flee his program:

Beck's (recent) claim that the president is a "racist" with "a deep-seated hatred for white people," was enough to cause three major advertisers to flee. Will his comment about poisoning Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi push more out the door?

Urged on by ColorofChange.org and many of its 600,000 members, who highlighted Beck's "racist" attack, this week NexisLexis-owned Lawyers.com, Proctor & Gamble and Progressive Insurance announced they would no longer advertise on Beck's program.

Still, Beck still enjoys the support of scores of blue-chip advertisers, and we can't help wondering why brand managers would want to be associated with Beck's hateful and unhinged rants about Nazis and racists. Why would companies like Bowlfex, Nutrisystem, Gerber, UPS, Orbitz, Geico, Vontage, Ameritrade, and Verizon wireless want their products associated with a Beck's race-baiting?

Media Matter is getting in the act too by reminding us which companies are endorsing Beck's program:

Where was all this anger when children were getting blown up by US bombs in Iraq?

"Send them home with a bullet in the head."



Via, Brawler.

Protesting against their pocketbooks

Matt Wion has a good comment at this post:

What I find sad about all this is that many, perhaps most, of these protestors are middle and working class people who are hurt the most by the insurance industry.They have the most to gain by health care reform and they are opposing it!

Equally sad is how easy lies and distortion can whip up people into a frenzy AGAINST THEIR OWN INTERESTS! We are seeing democracy badly undermined by this propaganda and the vulnerability of many to it.

Of course they were lying

The lies, double-dealing, and reports of criminal behavior from the worst presidential administration in history seem to have no end:

The former federal prosecutor at the center of the controversy over the 2006 U.S. attorney firings said today that he feels fully vindicated by newly disclosed e-mails from the Bush White House showing that Karl Rove and his deputies were actively involved in arranging his dismissal from the Justice Department. "This confirms my worst nightmares," David Iglesias, the former U.S. attorney in New Mexico, said in an interview with NEWSWEEK. "There were improper and potentially illegal—as incriminally illegal—reasons for my removal."

His comments came shortly after the House Judiciary Committee released hundreds of pages of interview transcripts of Bush White House officials and internal e-mails that were obtained by the panel earlier this year and kept confidential until today. The material suggests, at a minimum, an often aggressive effort by Rove's office for more than a year and a half to have Iglesias removed as the chief federal prosecutor in New Mexico following a barrage of complaints from Republican Party officials and members of Congress that he was not doing enough to prosecute voter-fraud cases and bring indictments that would hurt Democrats and boost the GOP's prospects in the key swing state.

Iglesias said today that he was "surprised" last month when Rove insisted in a rare joint interview to reporters from The New York Times and The Washington Post that he was merely a "conduit" of complaints about Iglesias, rather than a driving force behind the decision to fire the prosecutor. "This doesn't sound like he was merely a conduit," Iglesias said about the newly released e-mails and testimony. "This sounds like he had a very active role."

[...]

..."I would really like to move forward with getting rid of NM USATTY," Rove's deputy, Scott Jennings, wrote in an e-mail on June 28, 2005, to one of his colleagues, Tim Griffin, complaining about Iglesias's refusal to bring vote-fraud cases that had been pushed by New Mexico Republicans.

In perhaps the most significant passage in the new material, former White House counsel Harriet Miers—questioned by the judiciary committee for the first time in June—described getting a phone call from a "very upset" Rove telling her that Iglesias was "a serious problem and he wanted something done about it."

In June of 2005, when Rove was "very upset" and when some punk in his office was pushing around career prosecutors in the Justice Department, 78 US soldiers died in Iraq in incidents that ranged from accidental weapons discharges to attacks from insurgents to a pair of "non-hostile" homicides. That number is dwarfed by the more than 1,200 civilian casualties who were killed during attacks by American soldiers, in suicide bomb attacks, or just as part of the general chaos caused by the US occupation and invasion.

These people were and still are completely apalling.

Rational?

LEBANON, PA - AUGUST 11: Katy Abram of Lebanon, Pennsylvania, holds a sign as she waits in line to attend a town hall meeting held by U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter August 11, 2009 in Lebanon, Pennsylvania. Specter held the town hall meeting to speak about health care reform. (Photo by Chris Gardner/Getty Images) (H/T: Jezebel)

Upadte: Later, Ms. Abram told Fox News: “I know that years down the road, I don’t want my children coming to me and asking me, ‘Mom, why didn’t you do anything? Why do we have to wait in line for, I don’t know, toilet paper or anything?’ ”

The GOP’s baffling stance on health care reform

Former Bush 41 speechwriter David Frum has a provocative post about the perils to Republicans should they defeat health care reform:

The problem is that if we do that… we’ll still have the present healthcare system. Meaning that we’ll have (1) flat-lining wages, (2) exploding Medicaid and Medicare costs and thus immense pressure for future tax increases, (3) small businesses and self-employed individuals priced out of the insurance market, and (4) a lot of uninsured or underinsured people imposing costs on hospitals and local governments.

We’ll have entrenched and perpetuated some of the most irrational features of a hugely costly and under-performing system, at the expense of entrepreneurs and risk-takers, exactly the people the Republican party exists to champion.

Not a good outcome.

Frum is something of an outsider among establishment Republicans and conservatives, so his point will probably be lost among the tea-baggers storming town hall meetings. But he raises, perhaps inadvertently, a central issue in the health care debate worth emphasizing: most Republicans would prefer that we not reform the health care system at all.

And this isn’t just a matter of failing to propose a counter program it’s a matter of being against even rational changes to the system.

Take our own US Representative Paul Ryan, often held out by the GOP as one of its deep thinkers on economic issues, including health care. It’s one thing for Ryan to be tethered to market solutions as an answer to the health care crisis, but Ryan has repeatedly stood in the way any reform whatsoever, no matter how modest or justified, including efforts to provide insurance to poor children under the federal SCHIP program, known as Badger Care in Wisconsin. Helping poor children is a win for most politicians, which is why many Republicans, including Ryan’s colleague, US Representative Tom Petri, supported expanding SCHIP. Despite this, Ryan joined a small band of House Republicans in upholding Bush’s vetoes of extra funds for the program. Passage had to wait until Barack Obama became president.

And the efficacy of Ryan’s own health care proposals just don’t stand up too much scrutiny and wouldn’t, in any event, prevent his constituents from having to exhaust their life savings due to illness. This isn’t reform; it’s maintaining the status quo, just as Frum warns. And Americans don’t much like the status quo.

It’s instructive, as well, to note conservative blogger Rick Esenberg’s recent post suggesting that the practice of rescission—where an insurance company denies, often with little justification, payment for care after a policy holders gets ill—as not a good enough reason to seek reform in the health care system. If there is no justification to chane a system that lets insurance companies takes payments for coverage, but then provides no protection for consumers when the promised care is denied, when would reform ever be justified?

The answer is probably never.

All of the Congressional opposition to health care reform, the shouting and bullying at the town halls, and the seeming unwillingness to accept any reasonable reform is, actually, quite baffling. It’s hard to imagine why any member of Congress running in 2010 would want to run on a platform of denying coverage to poor children, emptying the savings accounts of seniors, and preserving a system that hurts consumers.

Hasn’t it yet occurred to anyone in the GOP how boxed in they are on this issue? If health care reform passes without their support, the nation adopts badly needed reforms to a broken system and Democrats get to take the credit.

But if it doesn’t pass, Republican incumbents will have to run on their record—a record that puts them at odds with most Americans and, as Frum points out, the GOP’s natural constituency.

Julaine Appling: Watch what I say, but not what I say

Back in 2005 and 2006, when Julaine Appling was trashing gay and lesbian families in an effort to convince state voters to mar Wisconsin's constitution with an amendment banning gay marriage, she repeatedly said the measure wouldn't hurt efforts to set up domestic partnership registries.

Now, not surprisingly, her take on registries has apparently changed.

Conservatives seeking to strike down the state’s same-sex domestic partner benefits registry could face an unlikely obstacle if their case moves forward, legal experts said: their own words.

The lawsuit by Wisconsin Family Action contends a 2006 state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and civil unions prohibits the benefits registry.

But in 2006, members of the group and other supporters of the constitutional ban said the measure would not affect domestic partner benefits, according to public statements reported in the media and on their Web sites.

Family Action president Julaine Appling, for example, told The Associated Press on December 8, 2005, that courts wouldn’t strike down domestic partner benefits for couples if the amendment were passed by voters in a referendum later that year.

“If the state Legislature wants to take up adoption and inheritance rights, it can do that,” she said. “Nothing in the second sentence (of the amendment, which forbids civil unions) prohibits that.”

Donald Downs, a UW-Madison professor of political science and law, said such statements by high-profile figures are “highly suggestive” of how the amendment was presented to the public. Such statements would “absolutely” be one of several factors the court might consider, he said, although justices have discretion in how much weight to give them.

The dynamic of the debate in 2006 always required voters to believe two lies. The first lie was that civil society is endangered by opening the marriage franchise to gay men and lesbian women, despite the fact that marriage is available to partners in opposite sex relationships with almost no restrictions, such as individuals with multiple convictions for child abuse. This lie was offered to those voters whose existing prejudices against gays and lesbians just needed a nudge to get them to vote.

The second lie was that supporters didn't have a problem with gay men and lesbian women, per se. This was the basis of Appling's claims that domestic partnership registries wouldn't be threatened by the amendment. Her side had to take this position because, as we all know, there is a strong generational shift in favor of extending such marriage rights, that denying them violates a basic sense of fairness among younger voters who grew up with openly gay co-workers, neighbors, and colleagues. Hospital visitation? Don't worry. Inheritance rights? Don't worry. Preserving your family through adoption procedures? Don't worry.

But we were right to worry, as Appling's latest gambit demonstrates. This amendment wasn't about preserving marriage, it was a gun aimed a gay and lesbian relationships.

Unfortunately, too many Democrats, in Wisconsin and throughout the nation, bought into the lies. Shamefully, nearly every Democratic presidential candidate opposed gay marriage, echoing the lies told about this amendment and similar efforts in other states. Mike Tate, the new chair of the state Democratic Party who was active in trying to defeat the amendment, should try to convince more Democrats to show some courage on this issue.

I don't think anyone can predict how the Wisconsin Supreme Court will react to the domestic partner registry challenges; but, regardless, this amendment needs to be removed from the state's constitution. As Martin Luther King, Jr. once pointed out, an unjust law is no law at all, and there is no justice in denying such a basic right.

Fine, give the GOP what they want on health care reform

Okay, we promise: We will not euthanize your grandmother. Satisfied?

Whatever.

H/T: Steve Benen.

Sykes, WTMJ Web site promoting comparisons between Obama and Hitler

Radio squawker Charlie Sykes is now using his Journal Communications Web site to make comparisons between Hitler and Obama and his administration and Nazis. Here's a sampling of the comments Sykes had approved at this post as of 7:53 AM this morning:

6:57 AM Ollie Green wrote ...Obama sends out his gestapo, the union thugs, to deal with citizens exercising their right to petition Congress.

7:06 AM Reba again wrote ...Hitler himself said "The day of individual happiness has passed." Obama keeps trying to deter the individual from thinking and acting on his own, and instead wants one collective populace that is easy to persuade. To be "free of freedom," just like the Nazi motto. If that isn't political terrorism, I don't know what is."The individual is the central, rarest, most precious capital resource of our society." - Peter Drucker. A nation of one can only go in 1 direction, failure. FREEDOM!!!

And another one from Reba:

I am not a racist, a Nazi, or a political terrorist. Neither is anyone in my family who shares my beliefs, or any of my friends. Although President Obama did side with Gates knowing only one fact, that he was African American and the officer was white. He also appointed Sototmayor, who believes a Latina can be a better judge simply because she is a Latina. Antisemitism was an ugly part of Nazi ideology, but so was the desire to gain control of every aspect of the citizen's life.

I don't expect to agree with Sykes, but I used to think he had some standards, some lines he wouldn't cross; that he wasn't, for example, Mark Belling, who uses his show to promote racial stereotypes. Remember when Sykes threw a flag on Mike Gableman? Yeah, good times.

I don't know if Sykes himself actually believes what the crazies above are suggesting, but since he's allowing these comments to appear at his site, he's probably decided it's good for his pocketbook. Pathetic.

Cross posted at Whallah.

Defend this

Via Talking Points Memo, now that Sarah Palin has a lot of time on her hands, she's updating her Facebook page with messages like this:

The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's "death panel" so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their "level of productivity in society," whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.

No, evil is you using your baby, over and over and over again, as a cheap prop in your political career and as a wedge to prevent people from gaining access to the kind of health care that you'll always be wealthy enough to afford.

As Rising Hegemon, points out, "Just when you think she can't get any lower, she descends deep into the slime once again."

What we did August 9, 1945

Lawrence Miller, science writer for the New York Times:

WITH THE ATOMIC BOMB MISSION TO JAPAN, AUGUST 9 (DELAYED)--We are on our way to bomb the mainland of Japan. Our flying contingent consists of three specially designed B-29 Superforts, and two of these carry no bombs. But our lead plane is on its way with another atomic bomb, the second in three days, concentrating its active substance, and explosive energy equivalent to 20,000, and under favorable conditions, 40,000 tons of TNT.

We have several chosen targets. One of these is the great industrial and shipping center of Nagasaki, on the western shore of Kyushu, one of the main islands of the Japanese homeland.

I watched the assembly of this man-made meteor during the past two days, and was among the small group of scientists and Army and Navy representatives privileged to be present at the ritual of its loading in the Superfort last night, against a background of threatening black skies torn open at intervals by great lightning flashes.

It is a thing of beauty to behold, this "gadget." In its design went millions of man-hours of what is without a doubt the most concentrated intellectual effort in history. Never before had so much brain-power been focused on a single problem.

[...]

My mind soon returns to the mission I am on. Somewhere beyond these vast mountains of white clouds ahead of me there lies Japan, the land of our enemy. In about four hours from now one of its cities, making weapons of war for use against us will be wiped off the map by the greatest weapon ever made by man. In one-tenth of a millionth of a second, a fraction of time immeasurable by any clock, a whirlwind from the skies will pulverize thousands of its buildings and tens of thousands of its inhabitants.

Our weather planes ahead of us are on their way to find out where the wind blows. Half an hour before target time we will know what the winds have decided.

Does one feel any pity or compassion for the poor devils about to die? Not when one thinks of Pearl Harbor and of the death march on Bataan.

[...]

The winds of destiny seemed to favor certain Japanese cities that must remain nameless. We circled about them again and again and found no opening in the thick umbrella of clouds that covered them. Destiny chose Nagasaki as the ultimate target.

[...]

"There she goes!" someone said. Out of the belly of the Artiste what looked like a black object came downward.

Captain Bock swung around to get out of range, but even though we were turning away in the opposite direction, and despite the fact that it was broad daylight in our cabin, all of us became aware of a giant flash that broke through the dark barrier of our ARC welder's lenses and flooded our cabin with an intense light.

We removed our glasses after the first flash but the light still lingered on, a bluish-green light that illuminated the entire sky all around. A tremendous blast wave struck our ship and made it tremble from nose to tail. This was followed by four more blasts in rapid succession, each resounding like the boom of cannon fire hitting our plane from all directions.

Observers in the tail of our ship saw a giant ball of fire rise as though from the bowels of the earth, belching forth enormous white smoke rings. Next they saw a giant pillar of purple fire, 10,000 feet high, shooting skyward with enormous speed.

Taniguchi Sumiteru, 16 at the time of the bombing:

The earth was shaking so hard that I lay down on the ground and held on so as not to be blown off again. When I looked up, the buildings around me had been smashed. Children who were playing near me had been blown down like they were mere dust. I took it that a big bomb had been dropped nearby and I was struck by the fear of death. But I kept telling myself that I must not die.

When the commotion seemed to be over, I rose up and found my entire left arm had been burnt and that the skin was hanging from it like a tattered rag. I reached for my back and found that it too had been burnt. It was slimy and covered with something black.

My bike was bent and twisted out of shape, the body, the wheel and all, as if it were spaghetti. Houses nearby were all crushed and fires were breaking out from the houses and on the mountain. Those children who had been away were all dead: some were burnt to a crisp, others looked uninjured.

There was a woman whose hearing was all gone and face swollen to the degree she could not open her eyes. She was injured from head to toe, and groaning in pain. I still recall the scene as if I saw it only yesterday. I could not do anything for those who were suffering and desperately calling for help. I deeply regret that, even today.

Michie Hattori, 15 at the time of the bombing:

When the bomb exploded, it caught me standing in the entrance to the shelter, motioning for the pokey girls to come in. First came the light — the brightest light I have ever seen. It was an overcast day, and in an instant every object lost all color and blanched a brilliant white. My eyes couldn’t cope, and for a little while I went blind.

A searing hot flash accompanied the light that blasted me. For a second I dimly saw it burn the girls standing in front of the cave. They appeared as bowling pins, falling in all directions, screaming and slapping at their burning school uniforms. I saw nothing for a while after that.

Immediately, a powerful wind struck me. It propelled me farther into the cave; then in an instant it threw me out the front entrance. I guess the shockwave hit the back of the cavern and bounced. It took me with it and others who had sought refuge in the shelter. We came tumbling out onto the ground.

When my senses, including my sight, began returning, I heard crying from the girls in front of the shelter. All, except one, were now standing and blowing on their skin. Looking at the one lying down, I saw her leg twisted at a crazy angle. To this day, we don’t know how it became broken. The face and hands of the other girls quickly turned bright red. I guess my being partially inside the cave provided some protection because my stinging began to disappear before long.

We told Haruko, the girl with the broken leg, to lie still; we would go for help. Fires started all around us. Flames leaped from paper and wood scraps, some from collapsed structures. Thick smoke and dust filled the air. The fires gave the only real illumination. Even the noontime sunlight, filtering through the clouds, darkened. The word I kept hearing the girls say, jigoku, means hell. That’s the closest I ever want to come to jigoku.

Kazuko Sadamaru, a nurse who, incredibly, survived the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings:

"The first survivors came on a truck. All their clothes were tattered, they were bleeding all over and their skin was burst, swollen or peeled off. Their clothes stuck to the burns, so we used scissors [to cut them off]. They were writhing in agony, especially those who were burnt all over, and some even fell from their beds. I heard helpless voices, crying for water. It was difficult to identify the bodies' ages and gender because even the name tags were burnt.

"We had to keep working all day without rest and I automatically did whatever I had to do. There was no time to think how sorry I was to see so many miserable patients. I tried to comfort them by saying, 'Hold on, hold on. I know how hurt you are.' For those who had lost their children, I said, 'They'll be OK, you'll find them,' although I knew I was lying."

Despite being close to both bombs, she suffered only a temporary abnormal white blood cell count and loss of hair. In 1946 she married Sadato Sadamaru, now 86, and has a son, a daughter and four grandchildren.

The modest Mrs Sadamaru refuses to be photographed, but did permit pictures of her Red Cross cap "because I'm proud I was a nurse."

The whole package of right wing healthcare crazy, complete with "Obama is Hitler" references, can be found...

...right here.

Because voters got it wrong

The Journal Sentinel’s editorial board on the need for the rights granted under Wisconsin’s new domestic partnership law:

Such rights are about basic decency, the semantics about marriage vs. civil unions vs. domestic partnerships be hanged. Including the language in the '06 constitutional amendment on "a legal status identical or substantially similar to . . . marriage" telegraphed early intentions to deny gays such basic decency.

State voters should not have been a party to such denial of rights, particularly since state law already recognized marriage as possible only between a man and a woman. The courts now should not be a party to such denial of rights. Both on legal grounds and for the sake of fairness, the courts should reject this challenge to the domestic partnership registries.

The couples who lined up at county clerks' offices to enter into their domestic partnerships are part of a national trend. At least eight states allow, will soon allow or recognize gay marriages from other states. This has been accomplished by the courts and legislatures.

It would be not just a shame but shameful if Wisconsin were not at the forefront of recognizing basic civil rights. And with gay couples, civil rights are precisely what's at stake.

Shameful is exactly right. And, make no mistake, that amendment will be repealed.

"Political Terrorists"

Steven Pearlstein, writing in the Washington Post:

The recent attacks by Republican leaders and their ideological fellow-travelers on the effort to reform the health-care system have been so misleading, so disingenuous, that they could only spring from a cynical effort to gain partisan political advantage. By poisoning the political well, they've given up any pretense of being the loyal opposition. They've become political terrorists, willing to say or do anything to prevent the country from reaching a consensus on one of its most serious domestic problems.

There are lots of valid criticisms that can be made against the health reform plans moving through Congress -- I've made a few myself. But there is no credible way to look at what has been proposed by the president or any congressional committee and conclude that these will result in a government takeover of the health-care system. That is a flat-out lie whose only purpose is to scare the public and stop political conversation.

[…]

Health reform is a test of whether this country can function once again as a civil society -- whether we can trust ourselves to embrace the big, important changes that require everyone to give up something in order to make everyone better off. Republican leaders are eager to see us fail that test. We need to show them that no matter how many lies they tell or how many scare tactics they concoct, Americans will come together and get this done.

If health reform is to be anyone's Waterloo, let it be theirs.

Playing off Pearlstein’s column, The Washington Monthly’s Steve Benen points out how the mainstream media is failing to even adequately cover the story.

It's a genuine cause for concern. Because reality has a well-known liberal bias, right-wing criticisms of health care reform are reported as plausible, and Americans are understandably confused about who's telling the truth. In order for the system to function, Americans need some kind of independent institution(s) that can separate fact from fiction, and can identify, plainly and factually, which side is trying to deceive the nation.

I don't doubt that Republicans will be outraged by Pearlstein's column, because he failed to honor the forced he-said/she-said neutrality that the right counts on to confuse Americans ("Republicans said today that health care reform might lead government agents to kill your grandparents; Democrats disagreed").

But that's what makes columns like these so important. Pearlstein has watched professional liars engage in a campaign of deception, so he's telling the public the truth. And in this case, a major political party is deliberately lying so they can derail the health care reform Americans have been waiting for.

The solution? Get the word out, call the talk shows, raise the issue with your co-workers. In short, don’t let them lie.

Earlier: Jay Bullock, Because they’re lying, that’s why.

(H/T: Heartland Hollar.)

The cold heart of a gun dealer

As the Journal Sentinel points out, the Green Bay dealer whose products have now been tied to three mass murders in the US sees these events as something of a business opportunity:

An online gun dealer from Green Bay sold accessories to the gunman in this week's mass shooting at a Pittsburgh health club, the GreenBay Press-Gazette reports this morning. The same dealer, Eric Thompson, also sold guns or accessories to the shooters in the mass slayings at Virginia Tech in2007 and Northern Illinois University in 2008.

After those two mass killings, Thompson called his company's ties to the slayings "uncanny."

A TV station in Pittsburgh reported that it had obtained a receipt showing that George Sodini had purchased a Glock Magloader, a Glock 9mm and a Glock Factory Magazine from TGSCOM, the company that Thompson runs. Through that company, he sells weapons and accessories through more than 100 Web sites.

Thompson's firm had sold a Walther .22-caliber handgun to Seung-Hui Cho, who killed 32 people at Virginia Tech in April 2007.

Steven Kazmierczak, the man who killed five people at Northern Illinois University in 2008, ordered gun accessories from Thompson's Web site www.topglock.com.

In a statement issued to the Green Bay Press-Gazette, Thompson expressed condolences to the families of the three victims in the Pittsburgh shooting and promoted more weapons sales.

"This event underscores the need for people to realize two important facts," Thompson wrote. "The first is that no matter how responsive law enforcement is or can be, it is not good enough to rely upon for the safety of yourself or your family. The second fact is that you are legally responsible for your own protection."

“Legally responsible”? Can someone out there who lives in Gunland let me know if Thompson is actually suggesting that victims of mass shootings should be prosecuted for failing to exercise their legal responsibilities? Did I overlook a new law requring people to own guns?

What we did August 6, 1945

From accounts of eyewitnesses and victims of the US bombing of Hiroshima:

Father John A. Siemes, professor of modern philosophy, Tokyo’s Catholic University

The Church, school, and all buildings in the immediate vicinity collapsed at once. Beneath the ruins of the school, the children cried for help. They were freed with great effort. Several others were also rescued from the ruins of nearby dwellings. Even the Father Superior and Father Schiffer despite their wounds, rendered aid to others and lost a great deal of blood in the process.

In the meantime, fires which had begun some distance away are raging even closer, so that it becomes obvious that everything would soon burn down. Several objects are rescued from the Parish House and were buried in a clearing in front of the Church, but certain valuables and necessities which had been kept ready in case of fire could not be found on account of the confusion which had been wrought. It is high time to flee, since the oncoming flames leave almost no way open. Fukai, the secretary of the Mission, is completely out of his mind. He does not want to leave the house and explains that he does not want to survive the destruction of his fatherland. He is completely uninjured. Father Kleinsorge drags him out of the house on his back and he is forcefully carried away.

Beneath the wreckage of the houses along the way, many have been trapped and they scream to be rescued from the oncoming flames. They must be left to their fate. The way to the place in the city to which one desires to flee is no longer open and one must make for Asano Park. Fukai does not want to go further and remains behind. He has not been heard from since. In the park, we take refuge on the bank of the river. A very violent whirlwind now begins to uproot large trees, and lifts them high into the air. As it reaches the water, a waterspout forms which is approximately 100 meters high. The violence of the storm luckily passes us by. Some distance away, however, where numerous refugees have taken shelter, many are blown into the river. Almost all who are in the vicinity have been injured and have lost relatives who have been pinned under the wreckage or who have been lost sight of during the flight. There is no help for the wounded and some die. No one pays any attention to a dead man lying nearby.

Akihiro Takahashi, who was 14 at the time of the blast

We were about to form lines facing the front, we saw a B-29 approaching and about fly over us. All of us were looking up the sky, pointing out the aircraft. Then the teachers came out from the school building and the class leaders gave the command to fall in. Our faces were all shifted from the direction of the sky to that of the platform. That was the moment when the blast came. And then the tremendous noise came and we were left in the dark. I couldn't see anything at the moment of explosion just like in this picture. We had been blown by the blast. Of course, I couldn't realize this until the darkness disappeared. I was actually blown about 10 m. My friends were all marked down on the ground by the blast just like this. Everything collapsed for as far as I could see. I felt the city of Hiroshima had disappeared all of a sudden. Then I looked at myself and found my clothes had turned into rags due to the heat. I was probably burned at the back of the head, on my back, on both arms and both legs. My skin was peeling and hanging like this. Automatically I began to walk heading west because that was the direction of my home. After a while, I noticed somebody calling my name. I looked around and found a friend of mine who lived in my town and was studying at the same school. His name was Yamamoto. He was badly burnt just like myself. We walked toward the river. And on the way we saw many victims. I saw a man whose skin was completely peeled off the upper half of his body and a woman whose eye balls were sticking out. Her whole baby was bleeding. A mother and her baby were lying with a skin completely peeled off. We desperately made a way crawling. And finally we reached the river bank. At the same moment, a fire broke out. We made a narrow escape from the fire. If we had been slower by even one second, we would have been killed by the fire. Fire was blowing into the sky becoming 4 or even 5m high. There was a small wooden bridge left, which had not been destroyed by the blast. I went over to the other side of the river using that bridge. But Yamamoto was not with me any more. He was lost somewhere.

Akira Onogi, who 16 at the time of the blast

I couldn't see anyone around me but I heard somebody shouting ``Help! Help!'' from somewhere. The cries were actually from underground as I was walking on. Since no choose were available, I'd just dug out red soil and roof tiles by hand to help my family; my mother, my three sisters and a child of one of my sisters. Then, I looked next door and I saw the father of neighboring family standing almost naked. His skin was peeling off all over his body and was hanging from finger tips. I talked to him but he was too exhausted to give me a reply. He was looking for his family desperately. The person in this picture was a neighbor of us. I think the family's name was the Matsumotos. When we were escaping from the edge of the bridge, we found this small girl crying and she asked us to help her mother. Just beside the girl, her mother was trapped by a fallen beam on top of the lower half of her body. Together with neighbors, we tried hard to remove the beam, but it was impossible without any tools. Finally a fire broke out endangering us. So we had no choice but to leave her. She was conscious and we deeply bowed to her with clasped hands to apologize to her and then we left. About one hour later, it started raining heavily. There were large drops of black rain. I was wearing a short sleeve shirt and shorts and it was freezing. Everybody was shivering. We warmed ourselves up around the burning fire in the middle of the summer.

Eiko Taoka, 21 at the time of the blast

TAOKA: When we were near in Hatchobori and since I had been holding my son in my arms, the young woman in front of me said, "I will be getting off here. Please take this seat." We were just changing places when there was a strange smell and sound. It suddenly became dark and before I knew it, I had jumped outside.

INTERVIEWER: What about your son?

TAOKA: I held him firmly and looked down on him. He had been standing by the window and I think fragments of glass had pierced his head. His face was a mess because of the blood flowing from his head. But he looked at my face and smiled. His smile has remained glued in my memory. He did not comprehend what had happened. And so he looked at me and smiled at my face which was all bloody. I had plenty of milk which he drank all throughout that day. I think my child sucked the poison right out of my body. And soon after that he died. Yes, I think that he died for me.

To date, the United States remains the only country in the world that has ever used nuclear weapons against another country.