Skip to main content

Jonathan Bernstein at The Washington Post explains that it's not "divided government" that's the problem with Congress. It's a GOP divided against itself:
As to the problem: Yes, there’s divided government. But political scientists have found that divided government isn’t necessarily an impediment to legislative productivity.

No, the problem is actually pretty simple. It’s not, overall, a dysfunctional Congress; it’s a dysfunctional House.  Sure, the Senate has plenty of inefficiencies, but it’s the House now which really just can’t do much of anything. It’s pretty simple: most Republicans are either hostile to the entire idea of finding compromises with Democrats or are terrified of other conservatives who hate compromise; and, at the same time Republicans aren’t unified enough to be able to pass very much in the House on their own. There’s a lot more to say about it, but that’s really the bottom line: They aren’t going to compromise and they can’t get anything done without compromising.

We already know that immigration reform faces an uphill battle in the House, where the Republican Party is boiled down to its pure obstructionist base. Ezra Klein explains, via Janet Hook's WSJ analysis, why so many House Republicans are so set in their unreasonable ways:
First, “only 38 of the House’s 234 Republicans, or 16%, represent districts in which Latinos account for 20% or more of the population.” Second, “only 28 Republican-held districts are considered even remotely at risk of being contested by a Democratic challenger, according to the nonpartisan Cook Political Report.”

So for about 200 of the House’s Republicans, a primary challenge by conservatives angry over “amnesty” is probably a more realistic threat than defeat at the hands of angry Hispanic voters, or even angry Democrats.

More analysis on the Republican Party's intransigence from Jamelle Bouie:
If the foundation of the GOP’s majority—and the cause of its extremism—is gerrymandering, then you can fix the problem with bipartisan (or nonpartisan) redistricting. But if the problem isn’t connected to the process, you have a different challenge.

The evidence, I think, points to the culture of the Republican Party as the problem, and not the circumstances of its particular lawmakers. For starters, you have similar attitudes among Republican members of the Senate, i.e., politicians who represent entire states, and not just districts (Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, for example). What’s more, even if you could explain GOP extremism through gerrymandering, there’s nothing about a highly ideological approach to politics that requires intransigence. You can have a strong attachment to your beliefs and show a willingness to compromise for the sake of advancing them.

What’s missing in the Republican Party is that willingness to compromise for anything, even if it benefits the particular interests of individual lawmakers or the interests of the party writ large. And this seems to stem from an attitude that emerged during the 1994 elections and has only grown since—the idea that conservatives aren’t just opposed to liberals but that they’re at war with liberalism.

More analysis on the day's top stories below the fold...

Switching over the Supreme Court, constitutional scholar Erwin Chemerinsky examines how the Court screwed over workers and helped big business profit:

THE Supreme Court’s momentous decisions last week on affirmative action, voting rights and same-sex marriage overshadowed a disturbing trend: in the final two weeks of its term, the court ruled in favor of big business and closed the courthouse doors to employees, consumers and small businesses seeking remedy for serious injuries.

A majority of the justices seem to believe that it is too easy to sue corporations, so they narrowly construed federal laws to limit such suits. These decisions lack the emotional resonance of the cases involving race and sexuality, but they could have a devastating effect on people who have been wronged by companies.

Meanwhile, The Atlantic's Matthew O'Brien examines another crisis -- the country's economic crisis -- and dismantles the Republican claim that unemployment benefits dissuade the unemployed from seeking jobs:
Long-term unemployment and long-term unemployment benefits both hit record lengths during this Lesser Depression. The average length of unemployment hit a postwar high of 40 weeks, and unemployment insurance did too, getting extended to 99 weeks (though it's fallen significantly the past two years). But there's no evidence that long-term unemployment benefits have discouraged the long-term unemployed from taking jobs -- because they can't get jobs to begin with.

They can't even get interviews. As Ghayad showed before in a field experiment, employers largely ignore the resumes of people who have been out of work for six months or longer. Firms assume there must be something wrong with people who have unemployed that long, and don't want to spend time finding out what it is, not when they have a stack full of resumes to get through. But the long-term unemployed have kept looking, at least in part because of benefits.

Gerald Friedman at Roll Call urges a renewed investment in America's labor force and calls out Republicans for obstructing President Obama's NLRB nominees:
The Senate is currently considering five nominees for the National Labor Relations Board. All five are experienced, highly qualified candidates, and last month the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee approved their nominations. But Senate Republicans are refusing to allow a floor vote on the nominees. By blocking the confirmation of new board members, Republicans have rendered the NLRB dysfunctional. It now lacks the quorum necessary to issue decisions.
This is an unprecedented attack on the NLRB, which has long been an area of bipartisan agreement. As Senate Republicans block these nominees, it is worth considering the history of the NLRB and the crucial role in our country it has played over the past three-quarters of a century.
The Detroit Free Press sounds the alarm on climate change in blunt and truthful terms:
Climate change is surely the looming disaster of our time.

Scientists say it’s inevitable that sea levels will rise 2 1/2-6 1/2 feet — sufficient to endanger or wipe out many cities. One scientist believes that in the long-term, 69 feet of sea level rise is inescapable.

And the source of the swelling oceans — rising temperatures — will stress the nation’s food system, while the increasing number of devastating storms will place an economic burden on a nation reeling from disaster to disaster, patching its wounds without effecting meaningful change.

It’s tempting to dismiss these projections as hysterical. That life as we know it could change so dramatically, so quickly, seems impossible. But on this topic, the scientific community (if not the political one) speaks with one voice.

Over at MSNBC, Chloe Angyal highlights another episode of Republicans behaving badly against women:
What does it look like when seven men ignore seventeen thousand of their constituents?
It looks like this: Ohio’s Republican Governor John Kasich, flanked by six other men, signing the state’s new budget into law and, by doing so, catapulting the Buckeye State to the number one spot on the Nation’s Most Restrictive Abortion Laws list.
The budget strips funding from Planned Parenthood, the nation’s leading provider of reproductive healthcare, and gives that money to Crisis Pregnancy Centers, the pseudo-clinics that lure pregnant women with the promise of free ultrasounds and can then misinform them about abortions. That’s just the beginning.
And since we're on the topic of Republicans behaving badly, Pat Garofalo examines why the GOP is so intent on stopping promotion of the new health insurance law:
A Kaiser poll found that just one in five Americans are aware of the health insurance exchanges. And, in a larger sense, the new system falls apart if too few healthy Americans (like, young, football-watching men, for instance) are brought in to offset the increased cost of covering all of those who have pre-existing conditions.

And that, in fact, seems to be the point of what the GOP is doing. The more dysfunctional the health care law is, the more Republicans can claim to have been right about it all along. It's the same strategy that is at work in GOP efforts to underfund the financial reform law or a host of federal agencies: render government ineffective by not giving it adequate resources to do its job, then argue for more cuts on the grounds that government is ineffective.

Finally, on the issue of Edward Snowden, Jonathan Capehart at The Washington Post reacts to the latest revelation that Snowden may be seeking asylum in Russia:
Last month, I pleaded for an end to the breathless comparisons between Edward Snowden and Daniel Ellsberg. News that the present-day intelligence leaker has asked the Russians for asylum should put it to rest. Sure, Snowden made the same request of other nations. But flirting with Moscow is a credibility killer.

I’m all for whistleblowers revealing what government is doing, especially if it stretches the bounds of legality or if it’s flat-out illegal. What we know of what Snowden has released of interest to the American public has been known for a while. But what has stuck in my craw from the outset was Snowden fleeing the country.

Tags

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Didn't some obscure Republican once say a house (28+ / 0-)

    divided against itself cannot stand?

    The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy;the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness

    by CTMET on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 04:47:46 AM PDT

    •   I think he was a carpenter. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      se portland, Stude Dude, Gemina13, GAS

      Or was he an architect?

      Anyway, no worries. Fall is still a few months away.

      What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

      by agnostic on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 04:51:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  He was a lawyer. (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        se portland, Stude Dude, Gemina13, GAS

        Also a president.  But that's almost two centuries ago.  Apparently things change.

        "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

        by SueDe on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 05:40:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Jesus was a lawyer? (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wintergreen8694, gtomkins, GAS, eztempo

          Abigail Adams in 1812 said somewhat elegantly  "A house divided upon itself - and upon that foundation do our enemies build their hopes of subduing us."

          “We can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all the other possibilities.” - Winston Chuchill

          by se portland on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:23:53 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Really. I had no clue. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          se portland, Gemina13

          (snark intended)

          What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

          by agnostic on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:35:29 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I like Palin yesterday invoking Lincoln and Reagan (0+ / 0-)

          As if the party today would have ANYTHING to do with them. She said this as a threat (promise?) to form a new party if those darned ole Republicans, the party of Lincoln and Reagan couldn't act more Teapartyish.

          What stronger breast-plate than a heart untainted! Thrice is he arm'd, that hath his quarrel just; And he but naked, though lock'd up in steel, Whose conscience with injustice is corrupted. King Henry, scene ii

          by TerryDarc on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:01:53 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I think he/she said.....'Just say No' (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      skohayes, se portland, agnostic, sap
    •  He wasn't a real Republican nt (6+ / 0-)

      nosotros no somos estúpidos

      by a2nite on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 05:05:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Abe is spinning in his grave. (9+ / 0-)

      The Republican Party IS a House Divided. It can't continue to talk the Jesus talk and walk the Ayn Rand walk. It's only a matter of time before Wall Street diverts the big money to the Libertarian Party.

      I really believe that the Republican Party is going to go down the same road as the British Liberals did after Labour replaced them as the Opposition. They'll wind up a regional party with a few scattered seats in the South and Rocky Mountain states.

      •  It's The Base! (7+ / 0-)

        The Republican party is defined by it's base.  The base is defined by its pieces, religious nuts, tea nuts, conservative nuts, Libertarian nuts, and the omnipresent nut nuts.  

        Throw in a heavy dose of racism, prejudices, discrimination, homophobia, xenophobia, paranoia, and schizophrenia.  Then there is the upper crust that bring their greed, avaricious, and all around cheapness.  

        Put it all together and you get an immovable, intransigent, uncompromising,  intractable, stiff, unyielding bunch that is the Republican base.   Their motto is, their way or the highway.  They don't change, you do!

        God bless them one and all...

        Hillary 2016

      •  Even when the states were at each others (4+ / 0-)

        throats, just before some of the southern states began to secede (as a gift to the incoming president) they still managed to compromise and pass legislation. That is something today's GOP is completely incapable of.

        One piece of shit legislation, the Misery Compromise, comes to mind. Even though it predate our very unCivil war by about 30-40 years, slavery was already a hot topic, dividing the bourgeoisie yanks from El Norte, and the pre-communistic communes of the South.

        While the Misery Compromise did add states to the Union, it only served to further widen the divide between pro and anti slavery forces, and kicked the can down the road far enough to make the whole mess explosive.

        (OK, I need to explain. I was sent on an exchange program to the USSR in 1976. They taught soviet history, culture, and (ahem) American history. They claimed that the south should have won, because it was a pre-communistic effort at socialistic, communal society)

        What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

        by agnostic on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:44:52 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Everything and I mean everything is a referendum (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DSPS owl, agnostic

          on Barack Obama: sketch in racism if you like. Simple minded greed for sure and desperately wanting to keep power in a government they only want to weaken.

          What stronger breast-plate than a heart untainted! Thrice is he arm'd, that hath his quarrel just; And he but naked, though lock'd up in steel, Whose conscience with injustice is corrupted. King Henry, scene ii

          by TerryDarc on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:05:00 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  there's some truth there. (0+ / 0-)

            The same small group of neanderthals who make up the TeaBugger Party, are the ones who are directly responsible for the shape of the GOP today. And they are responsible for making everything a referendumb on Obama.

            What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

            by agnostic on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:53:49 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  I thought he was a printer (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      UnionMade, agnostic, Stude Dude

      but in any case he was a small businessman.

      Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

      by a gilas girl on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:05:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I really, really don't get the "GOP is hopefully (24+ / 0-)

    dysfunctional" meme - heck, as far as I can tell they continue to get 98% (or more) of want they want.

    Which is paralysis of the federal government (except for funneling $$s to the military-security apparatus, which continues at a historically rapid pace despite the sequester).

    •  It's another excuse for Obama and the Dems not (12+ / 0-)

      to confront them.  It's all of a piece with the Dems letting the Republican lies sit out there assuming the truth will out.  Or figuring that eventually people will see how crazy the Repubs are and reject them.  These beliefs/attitudes relieve the Dems of responsibility to actually do anything.

      The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

      by accumbens on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 04:58:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  What's wrong with the Republicans? (13+ / 0-)

      Evil.

      Nothing less than evil.

      What they really want is hinted at most by their objection to common people having work, income, money, food, or healthcare.

      Put that together and what's it tell you?

      They have no need for hundreds of millions of human beings.

      My hope is that a critical mass of people realize this threat for what it is and...well.... do something about it.

      •  Warm and Cuddly Louie Gohmert evil? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        xxdr zombiexx
      •  But that's not "wrong" - it's intentional on (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        xxdr zombiexx, a gilas girl

        their part.

        But on the plus side, as shown in this pdf: the evil thing at least clears up what shape they are

        •  It's totally intentional. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Roadbed Guy

          It's sociopathic.

          They WANT most human beings to die off.

          Plain and simple.

          •  I don't think they care enough (6+ / 0-)

            about those large groups of human beings that they put in the "other" category to want them to die off.

            What they want is for the basic tenets of liberalism and modernism not to get in their way, and since that's impossible, they have to get rid of liberalism and modernism.

            You make them larger than they are when you ascribe "evil" to what is mostly hubris, greed and opportunism.  The latter three are all rather puny human attributes, "evil" is something that sort of transcends the human and steps stuff up into another realm.  Which is the main reason I find the 'evil' explanations lazy and hyperbolic.  

            Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

            by a gilas girl on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:13:10 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  woah! that's a youtube video, not a PDF! (0+ / 0-)

          egad, all this talk of evil has gone straight to my brain.

      •  I think (9+ / 0-)

        relying on explanations like "evil" is part of the problem of how what's wrong is being confronted.

        It isn't evil; it is exactly what Jamelle Bouie said: it's a war (and a purposeful one) against liberalism. That's not evil, it is a very specific strategy.  As long as Democrats, progressives, liberals, policy makers and politicians pretend like it's something gone wrong in the emotional make-up of individuals rather than seeing it as a very specific (albeit extreme) and not at all new strategy, they won't do anything to confront that strategy, and thus will it continue.

        Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

        by a gilas girl on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:10:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  HATRED of liberals = core GOP principle (5+ / 0-)

          ..though the gemisch seems to be primarily dirty hippie/race traitor/commie snob - and that doesn't seem to be much from which to hang so much manufactured anger.

          But war it is, and it's a team sport, too...which is why it's all trash-talk w/ them, and ganging up, and how a cheap and unfair 'victory' is now good enough:  'sportsmanship' now means, 'I keep winning'.

          The Rebubbas will continue to use their single-minded indifference to truth until they get called on it every time.  I know, the sheer scale and sweep of their effrontery knocks the breath clean out of one, but it's the lack of of a challenge RIGHT THERE, in that moment, that allows this stuff to stay afloat.

          We MUST do better.  We must learn to attack them.  Cleanly, fairly, and with the truth, but we need to attack them with it, like Joe Biden beat Li'l Paulie in the debates.  They do spectacularly poorly when under attack, too.

          Show me the whisky stains on the floor
          Show me an old drunkard as he stumbles to the door
          And I'll see a young man with so many reasons why...
          ...and there, but for FORTUNE, go you - or I... - thanks, Phil

          by chmood on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:35:08 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  We do attack, they don't give a shit. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Womantrust

            All this "Democrats are weak" shit is playing their game for them.  Carter? Kerry? Clinton? Gore?  Some troll starts talking about weak Democrats on Sunday Talk and the entire Left runs with it.  They don't even have to pay anyone, we are so terrified of some red-faced cracker calling us effete snobs or mocking arugula we promote their propaganda.  

            Being civil, sane, adult, thoughtful, or politically astute is now weak.  Being batshit crazy, vicious, dishonest, and LOUD is something to aspire to.  

            I beg to differ.  Wendy Davis wasn't channeling Michele Bachmann she was telling her colleagues the truth.  Barack Obama doesn't scream "You lie", he empowers the EPA.  They hate him because he's making government more effective, despite their best efforts.  Why do we hate him?  He's not leftie enough.  Great.  Let's all unite behind Ted Cruz so we don't have to sweat the reality of center left America.  

            I'm not looking for a love that will lift me up and carry me away. A love that will stroll alongside and make a few amusing comments will suffice.

            by I love OCD on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 07:23:05 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Unfortunately they all DO come across as weak (0+ / 0-)

              (or worse!)

              All this "Democrats are weak" shit is playing their game for them.  Carter? Kerry? Clinton? Gore?
              Carter being bested by a killer rabbit? Really?

              Kerry deliberately ignoring the Swift Boat allegations to stay above the fray after promising "to fight"?  How stupid was * that * ?

              Clinton?   Well OK he might not have been weak - but is being on the side of the opponents any better?

              Gore?? ditto.  He was a total establishment tool until he fell out of power.

        •  Visiting with some old friends (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          a gilas girl, Rick Aucoin

          who are Republican, I heard a woman say:  "I think we still have a pretty good country." In context, she had said earlier  "There are a lot of liberals in Oregon." We weren't having a political discussion and refused to be drawn into one, but I sense she thinks that "liberals" don't like the U.S. because they criticize it.  A relative happened to read a copy of the Nation recently and commented that he doesn't know why people who hate the U.S. so much don't move to another country.

          The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right. -- Judge Learned Hand, May 21, 1944

          by ybruti on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:35:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  that's because the Dems are just as dysfunctional (6+ / 0-)

      We have no agenda (other than "stop the goppers"), we have no hardline ideals that we will not bargain away, we have little reason for anyone to vote FOR us (rather than voting AGAINST the other side).

      We have a two-party system with two dysfunctional but co-dependent parties. Both depend on the other for their very survival.

      •  I agree with all you say except for the (3+ / 0-)

        parenthetical "other than 'stop the goppers'."  Based on their political passivity, one would not assume this is in fact an agenda item.

        The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

        by accumbens on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 05:40:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Based on this site, we do have a second agenda (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a gilas girl

        which is to mock the GOPPERS, which I think is a fun and attractive thing to do (that's why I'm here mostly, I suppose).

        As far as accomplishing much, however, that doesn't seem to be all that effective of a plan.

        Getting the Dems to shape up and lead by example would be preferable I am sure.  But that's hard!!  

      •  The only agenda the Dems have is (4+ / 0-)

        "get elected", which in the design is supposed to be a means to an end, but today it's just the end.

        Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

        by a gilas girl on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:13:57 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  many senators are from states (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Roadbed Guy, Rick Aucoin

        with majority white population.  Due to the 'great compromise' senators are more likely to be from small conservative states than large liberal states.  Many are from states that aggressively push this white majority in a country where that majority is becoming less common, even those who are liberal.  Yet the senate can get meaningful work done.  Not just what the republicans don't want, but what polls say Americans do want.  It is important to remember that Americans do want immigration reform, but the blue collar worker who votes democrat is worried about losing a job.  Americans do want access to abortion, but struggle with the idea that a 10 ounce fetus is not a human with a soul that will be dammed if we kill it before it can be christened against original sin.

  •  Can't agree with Capehart on this (14+ / 0-)
    But what has stuck in my craw from the outset was Snowden fleeing the country.
    Snowden knows that if he'd stayed here he'd either have been killed or caught and tortured like Bradley Manning.

    It's true his escape plan was ill thought out.  He should have escaped under a load of cabbages or something in a sampan or junk leaving Hong Kong harbor, sailed to another place where a freighter could have picked him up, and then gone to Iceland or else somewhere in Latin America.  For a disguise he could have assumed niqab.  I've seen women wearing niqab in the suburbs of London.

    I hope he gets away or, if he doesn't, I hope he's got a cyanide capsule. It would be most unpleasant to fall into the clutches of the NSA, CIA, and FBI.

    "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

    by Diana in NoVa on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 04:54:15 AM PDT

  •  Breaking Nooz....Villagers finally notice that (11+ / 0-)

    something  is very wrong with the House.

  •  That's the GOP (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skillet, Remediator, skohayes

    Cutting off their nose to spite their face since 1994.

  •  Garofalo and health exchanges (11+ / 0-)

    The onus for success or failure of Obamacare, including the  health exchanges, falls squarely on Obama.  He has been horrible - HORRIBLE - in communicating the value of the ACA.  Just like Tea Party filled the vacuum Obama created when he went AWOL from the health care debate that summer, the Repub continue to fill the vacuum as the big pieces of the ACA are about to be implemented.  It's simply not about the Republicans, it's about Obama and the Dems.

    The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

    by accumbens on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 05:02:13 AM PDT

    •  I think part of that may have been (0+ / 0-)

      Nobody was quite sure how things would work. They're still not quite sure. By January, when the exchanges have been running for a couple months and things are a little more concrete, we'll have a better idea, and have a sense of what changes are needed.

      That's not a totally bad thing. It means that in the summer, when the campaigns start to heat up, the GOP will be campaigning on repeal Obamacare and keep women from getting reproductive care, and the dems can campaign on making it better.

      Because there are some good things in that bill, and it definitely can be made better.

      •  Well, the Repubs don't know how they will work (5+ / 0-)

        out either, yet they are out in front getting their message out about it.  Once again, Obama and the Dems are forced to play catch up.  It's simply pathetic that they never play offense in any concerted way.  Also, staying silent educates no one and by the time they are forced to respond to the lies, the public has already learned the lies as the truth.  It's really not that complicated or nuanced.

        The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

        by accumbens on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:48:10 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I agree (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          accumbens, DSPS owl

          I think they should have been running publicity campaigns from the day it was passed, with calendars of when things happen, where to get the latest info, who to contact in your state to find out what's happening locally, etc.

          I think it was a real missed opportunity.

          But I think the reason why they didn't do it is because they didn't know quite how it was going to work and didn't want to put out wrong info.

          Which, as you pointed out, the GOP has no problem doing.

    •  That vacuum led to the devastating outcome (6+ / 0-)

      of the 2010 elections.

  •  I think the Republican Party may (7+ / 0-)

    need to be dramatically reprogrammed before it can undergo rebranding.  

    They're not terribly cerebral, they're distrustful of anyone who is, and they regard women and minorities as subhuman trash and behave accordingly.  

    Time to fuel the bulldozers and clear the landscape.  

  •  Bouie doesn't get it, like others don't get it (15+ / 0-)

    This is about the twentieth article I've read since January pondering the roots and sources of contemporary Republican ideology and its impact on American politics, especially in Congress. And like every other such article, Bouie bizarrely ignores the 800-ton elephant in the room that underlies everything that the GOP does. We have a major political party whose philosophy, ideology, and practical politics are controlled by people who believe that Adam and Eve had vegetarian dinosaurs for neighbors in the Garden of Eden 5,000 years ago, that evolution is a Satanic fraud, that the earth is 10,000 years old, and that even sciences such as embryology are from "the pit of Hell"—in the immortal words of Georgia Senatorial candidate Paul Broun. And they believe all these things because they say the Bible tells them so. Today's Republican Party is a de facto theocratic party, whose most influential and powerful members see no reason to attempt to solve serious global problems if they confirm their religious beliefs in an impending Armageddon. When half the government is in thrall to religious fundamentalists who believe that the Bible should supplant the Constitution in directing the federal government's activities, there is no possibility whatsoever of compromise.

    •  While you're right about the theocrats (6+ / 0-)

      there's more going on in the GOP than that, and I think Bouie actually hits the nail on the head with his idea that contemporary Republicans like Cruz, Dewhurst, and Walker conceive of themselves not in a political conflict with liberals but in a war with liberalism.  To them, it is a zero-sum game, in which any compromise with the other necessary leads to a loss for themselves.

      In fact, they remind me of nothing so much as the Unión Demócratica Independiente, the far-right party established during the Chilean dictatorship partly on the base of Patria y Libertad, the paramilitary group that helped destabilize the Allende government and bring on the coup in 1973.

      The UDI candidate, by the way, won the presidential primary elections in Chile on Sunday, and will face off against ex-president Michelle Bachelet in November.  He doesn't have much of a chance -- Bachelet alone got nearly twice as many votes in her primary as the two right-wing candidates got combined...

      When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

      by litho on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 05:25:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Racism is a big part of that "war" (0+ / 0-)

        Let us not forget who sits in the Whitehouse. In 20 or 30 years, we're going to see a lot about the effect of Barack Obama both positive and negative. More of the latter if he causes the US to go more and more cranky, white people trying to run everything, having disenfranchised everyone else.

        Democracy is supposed to prevent the latter. It only remains to be seen whether the rubes in red-land get shit upon enough to rebel. Go, sistah Sarah!

        What stronger breast-plate than a heart untainted! Thrice is he arm'd, that hath his quarrel just; And he but naked, though lock'd up in steel, Whose conscience with injustice is corrupted. King Henry, scene ii

        by TerryDarc on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:18:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I see a possibility of compromise (0+ / 0-)

      I just don't see most on the left being willing to make those compromises.

      •  I'm not compromising (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mmacdDE, Heart of the Rockies

        with the far right- their idea of compromise is "Do it my way or don't do it at all".
        Several Tea Party legislators have made that quite clear.

        What is compromise? Getting more of what you want, according to House Republican Policy Committee Chairman Tom Price of Georgia.

        Appearing this morning at a policy briefing hosted by National Journal and United Technologies, Price was asked by National Journal's John Aloysius Farrell whether a term in office would make the Tea Party freshmen more likely to compromise.

        His response was classic: “Compromising is one thing as long as you’re compromising and moving in the direction of your principles. If you’re compromising and moving away from the direction of your principles, I’m not sure it’s a compromise.”

        Of course by definition, compromising means, um, compromising your principles. Here in fact is the dictionary definition of the word: “an adjustment of opposing principles … by modifying some aspects of each.”

        http://www.usnews.com/...

        They're such idiots.

        “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

        by skohayes on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 05:47:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          skohayes

          The very definition of compromise means that nobody is really happy. They might like some things, and hate others. That's what a compromise is.

          The GOP doesn't think they should have to compromise. They think not getting everything, but still giving the other side absolutely nothing, is compromise.

    •  Your claim defining the contemporary (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Apost8, malharden, DSPS owl

      Republican ideology as having its roots in the bible and its members being in thrall to religious fundamentalism may be true for a segment of the GOP, but this definition does not hold for all members of the party, and I suggest not even the majority of them.

      There is a substantial segment of GOP members who are totally agnostic toward religious influence in the party.  These are members whose ideology and objectives center around monetary interests and manifest in the drive for privatization.  No less extreme than the religious fundamentalists in the party, these devotees of unfettered capitalism are compulsively motivated to privatize as many aspects of government - local, state and federal - as possible that could generate privatized profits.  Anything the government does that can be done through private enterprise, which expenses for set-up, operation and maintenance can be paid by government or charged to users is targeted for privatization, e.g., military, security, education, roads, prisons, parks, natural resources, ports - the list is virtually endless.

      In a sense, religion is already privatized and profit-driven, which may be why the agnostic privatizers in the GOP so easily tolerate the religious fundamentalists in the party and vice versa.

      "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

      by SueDe on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 08:48:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Bernstein's right that the primary source today (6+ / 0-)

    of government dysfunction is in the House, but he glosses over McConnell's role in the first term of simply obstructing absolutely every single one of the president's initiatives.  Remember that his objective was to make Obama a one term president, and his strategy was to paint him as partisan and ineffective.

    Now that we're in a second term -- won by a healthy majority, by the way -- McConnell has relented somewhat and is allowing joint action on the immigration law and other initiatives.  But he set the stage for the politics of obstruction, and it would be wrong to absolve him of responsibility for the current crisis.

    When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

    by litho on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 05:13:27 AM PDT

    •  Rand Paul is going to force McTurtle so far right (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      skohayes, Stude Dude, TerryDarc

      in 2014 that he'll prolly fall off the earth.

    •  Considering the blocking of Obama's nominees (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      litho, DSPS owl

      for judgeships, federal agencies and boards that must be approved by the Senate, I don't see where McConnell and his merry band of obstructionists have relented at all where the object is to install people in the positions who will implement the president's policy prescriptions.  Some agencies have been denied directors, boards have been left without the members needed to do their jobs and operational funding has been withheld in order to starve them of resources needed to carry out their assignments.

      Among high-level openings right now is Directorship of the ATF and the EPA, and the NLRB lacks even a quorum, so can accomplish nothing in its portfolio.  In additional there are currently 31 nominations pending for open judgeships in federal courts.  Grover Norquist should be proud.

      "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

      by SueDe on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:08:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What explains the republican partys intransigence? (4+ / 0-)

    Fear + Greed

    "Let's see what fresh fuckwittery these dolts can contrive to torment themselves with this time." -- Iain Banks, The Hydrogen Sonata

    by Rikon Snow on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 05:17:51 AM PDT

  •  Gerrymandering (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LLPete, voicemail

    The solution is NOT bipartisan/non-partisan districting.  Making districts, no matter how you do it, is political.

    If you have a dense urban center (Dem) surrounded by a suburban/exurban rings (Repub), how do you slice it?  Do you pie-slice the urban center?  If so, do you include the first ring which will dilute the Repub vote?  Or do you go all the way out to the exurbs and let the Repub's dominate?

    The real answer is: NO districts.  Simple proportional representation.  We just have to recognized that parties are part and parcel of our system.  Your party puts together a full slate of candidates and you vote your party.  If R's get 48% of the vote and D's get 52%, that's what you send to congress; the party picks which ones from its slate.

    The other bit is: this gives third parties a better fighting chance.

    There are more complicated methods that allow you do vote for individuals instead of a whole party...

    •  The Answer--Proportional Representation (0+ / 0-)

      Expand the size of the House. Each state gets a minimum of three representatives.

      Eliminate districting and apportion Representatives in each state based on Proportional Representation.

      That makes every vote no matter where you live count.

    •  With modern technology, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mmacdDE

      it should be possible to allow voters to prioritize a list of candidates in a way that would give minor parties a chance.  Let's say that when you vote, you pick your first choice for an office, your second choice for the same office, and so on.  When votes are counted, the votes for the candidate with the fewest votes are reassigned to the voters' second choice.  Candidates are eliminated successively, and voters' votes reassigned to their next choices, until there are only two candidates left, and then the candidate with most votes wins.  

      The advantage would be that everyone could vote for the person they really wanted as their first choice, without having to compromise to keep a bad candidate from winning.  Such a system would probably lead to the election of lots of candidates from minor parties, and I think it would be a good thing.  

  •  I blame the Christian religion (8+ / 0-)

    It is an evil, intolerant religion that has little to do with the teachings of Jesus to feed the poor, heal the sick, practice peace, and love thy neighbor. The history of Christianity is very grim. It's based on forcing everyone to accept that religion OR ELSE! The GOP has been captured by Christian theocrats, who are incapable of living in peace with their neighbors. They want to force their sexual morals on us, silence women, and snuff out science that proves their religion is ridiculous, and force our children to hear their sermons in public schools.

    The Republican brand is totally bankrupt.

    by vlyons on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 05:57:02 AM PDT

    •  You are not far wrong (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Laconic Lib

      Or maybe in this context of a dysfunctional congress, completely right.

      But more broadly, it is religion in the world today that is screwing up almost everything that can be screwed with.

      I specifically implicate Islam (even though that make get me hide-rated) as being, in general, at least as evil as the asshole fundies in this country. But in Islam, it's more mainstream than our bunch of country-loonies.

      It's no accident that both religions come out of the same crucible, either: hierarchical, male-dominated, vindictive and judgmental.

      We need more atheists in government. Long live the FSM!

      What stronger breast-plate than a heart untainted! Thrice is he arm'd, that hath his quarrel just; And he but naked, though lock'd up in steel, Whose conscience with injustice is corrupted. King Henry, scene ii

      by TerryDarc on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:27:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  There are many kinds of Christians (0+ / 0-)

      Without the fervor of black churches, the civil rights movement would not have taken off and developed into a mass movement.

      There are varieties of Christianity (and most other religions) that are rigid, hateful, and all that bad stuff. There are also varieties of non-religious ideology that are the same.

      There are also Christians and varieties of Christianity that stand firmly with the poor, stand firmly against the military-industrial complex, etc. etc. etc.  

  •  Bouie is correct (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skohayes, TerryDarc, DSPS owl

    all these diagnoses that call the problem "excessive partisanship" are missing the boat: the GOP is at war with liberalism.

    They aren't trying to oppose Democrats, they aren't even trying to oppose liberal Democrats, or progressives, they are attempting to obliterate liberalism.

    Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

    by a gilas girl on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:04:22 AM PDT

    •  Which is exactly why they are taking deliberate (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a gilas girl

      aim on  abortion, across the country in red state legislatures.

      Also why simply opposing unemployment compensation and the ACA, even if those latter two are going to severely hurt the people of their states: like missing federal grants which would help their flailing economies. Even then, the war to the death.

      What stronger breast-plate than a heart untainted! Thrice is he arm'd, that hath his quarrel just; And he but naked, though lock'd up in steel, Whose conscience with injustice is corrupted. King Henry, scene ii

      by TerryDarc on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:31:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Here's a great column from Benjy Sarlin (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Livvy5

    about the GOP's desperate embrace of the white folk, because the same people who told them Romney couldn't lose are now telling them they can win with the white vote (good luck with that, boys!):

    After November’s stunning loss, an array of influential Republicans argued that immigration reform was the party’s best chance to claim Latino voters before they become permanent Democrats. But in a mere eight months, a counter-narrative has taken hold in conservative circles, nurtured by a shrewd group of anti-immigration lobbyists and Tea Party enthusiasts. The new argument sees immigration reform at best as a divisive distraction from the GOP’s real problem of countering “white flight” from the polls. At worst, they view it as an electoral apocalypse, a seventh seal behind which lies an unbroken line of future Democratic presidents...
    At the heart of their dueling approaches is a basic question: can the party win back the White House without winning more Latinos?
    Rush Limbaugh argues that it can, and if House Republicans and their constituents take his side, the motivation to pass immigration reform will vanish. For months, he’s tried to convince his listeners that Latinos are unlikely to vote for the current Republican Party even if immigration reform passes. During one on-air confrontation with Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, Limbaugh asked whether “the Republican party is committing suicide” by adding “nine million automatic Democrat voters” through a path to citizenship.
    http://tv.msnbc.com/...

    They seem to think there's enough white voters out there  to overcome the Latino vote. Good luck with that, guys.
    Unfortunately for the Republicans, most are poor, uneducated and will be unable to register due to the new voter ID laws that are popping up all over the US now.

    But conservative commentators are convincing themselves they can find a few million more whites tucked between the couch cushions–at least enough for one more election. Two columnists have been particularly influential in this regard. Sean Trende at Real Clear Politics has argued that census data shows about 5 million mostly poor and rural white voters were “projected” to vote in 2012 based on population growth and past turnout but didn’t show up to the polls. Byron York, a columnist at the Washington Examiner, published a related piece noting that Romney would have lost even if he had racked up a majority of Latino voters.
    “Recent reports suggest as many as 5 million white voters simply stayed home on Election Day,” York wrote in May. “If they had voted at the same rate they did in 2004, even with the demographic changes since then, Romney would have won.”
    Of course, the commentator doesn't mention that Romney still would have lost, because there's no way he would have gotten all 5 million of those votes, but never let facts get in the way of a right wing narrative!

    “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

    by skohayes on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:06:51 AM PDT

    •  You know why they stayed home? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      skohayes, DSPS owl

      They didn't have a way to get to the polls.
      They have to work 2 or 3 jobs and couldn't take the time.
      They can't read.
      They didn't know where to vote, or how to register.
      They don't care and don't want to care.
      They were in jail.
      They were drunk, or high, or otherwise incapacitated.
      They were sick, or in the hospital, or mentally ill.

      And that's just the ones I can think of fast.

      There are tons of reasons for people not to vote. I think the best bet we have to take the house is to provide help with getting registered, getting whatever documents are required to register, and figuring out how to physically get people to the polls or help them get absentee ballots.

      People vote for the ones who help them. We've got the organization and the energy to do that. The GOP, made up of richer, older, and less helpful people, doesn't.

    •  Flaw in Limpball's logic (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      milton333, skohayes, DSPS owl
      “the Republican party is committing suicide” by adding “nine million automatic Democrat voters” through a path to citizenship.
      The problem with this logic is that maybe 3 million of those people will actually register to vote and only roughly half will actually vote regularly.  Even if the Dems were to get 80% of those potential voters that would only net them 800,000 more voters total give or take.

      Meanwhile the GOP and Rush Limpballs are demonizing and denigrating the Hispanic community.  Every year there are 800,000 or so Hispanics who are turning 18 and are thus eligible to vote.  Add in the fact that the Hispanic community historically votes at lower rates than other groups which means there are a lot more potential voters for the Dem Party to tap into.  At some point that will change and Rush Limpball and the GOP will play a big part in all that.  

      They're running the risk of creating more Dem Hispanic voters EVERY YEAR than would be created by passing Immigration Reform.  Not only that but those immigrants would not be eligible to vote for another 10 + years whereas the people they're pissing off are eligible now or very soon.  Not that I care.  The sooner the Hispanic community flexes it's political muscles, the sooner those racist, bigoted pieces of shit will be relegated to the scrapheap of history.  

      This is your world These are your people You can live for yourself today Or help build tomorrow for everyone -8.75, -8.00

      by DisNoir36 on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 08:27:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Do nothing Congress(es) (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DSPS owl
    Six months into its term, there’s little evidence that the 113th Congress will be the worst Congress ever. But they might be the laziest.

    On Monday, simply by doing nothing, they allowed the interest rate on student loans to double, from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent. That might be permissible if they were busy with more important things, like inventing a cure for cancer that’s also a source of endless clean energy. But they’re not even working this week.

    The 112th Congress passed 220 laws. That’s the fewest of any Congress since we began keeping track in 1948. But the 113th Congress is on track to pass even fewer laws than that. “Just 15 bills have become law this year, compared to 23 over the same period in 2011,” writes Dashiel Bennett at the Atlantic Wire. It’s the do-nothingest Congress ever!

    That doesn’t make it the worst Congress ever. In fact, it doesn’t even make it the worst Congress lately. Looking back at my 14 reasons the 112th Congress is one of the worst congresses ever, the 112th still has a ways to go. For instance, they haven’t derailed the recovery and nearly crashed the global economy, as the 112th managed to do during the debt-ceiling shenanigans of 2011. And that list doesn’t even include sequestration, which the 112th created and didn’t manage to avert. The 113th Congress has inflicted a bit of damage by doing nothing — those student loans being a great example — but the 112th Congress almost blew up the world through gridlock.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

    “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

    by skohayes on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:10:33 AM PDT

  •  Ooops (0+ / 0-)

    Russian (unmanned) rocket, carrying two satellites, crashed moments after take-off:

    “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

    by skohayes on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:15:45 AM PDT

  •  Never have to compromise when you're the boss (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mmacdDE, DSPS owl

    and I hypothesize that one of the things that's happening in the Republican House is that many congressmen are people who are the biggest fish in their little ponds, the top of the social heap, and they're accustomed to telling other people what to do, not having to ask. Drop them into a situation where they're the equals of everyone around them -- except for the party leadership, which is above them, something they're totally unaccustomed to -- and they function ineffectively. They can't give orders to their peers, but give-and-take is unknown to them. So they settle for the next best thing: ultimatums.

    "The great lie of democracy, its essential paradox, is that democracy is the first to be sacrificed when its security is at risk. Every state is totalitarian at heart; there are no ends to the cruelty it will go to to protect itself." -- Ian McDonald

    by Geenius at Wrok on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:54:44 AM PDT

  •  It's not that the Senate is all that functional, (0+ / 0-)

    either.  The Minority party decides what does and doesn't go to debate.  The Hastert rule has nothing on the mere mention of a possible filibuster when it comes to bringing shit to a grinding halt.

    It's just that the House is even MORE fucked up than the Senate because they've got more crazy fucks and an orange guy as speaker who is either too afraid or too drunk to lead.

    Once in a while you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

    by darthstar on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 07:00:02 AM PDT

  •  Snowden's not Ellsberg. He's MLK+Jesus+Ned Stark (0+ / 0-)

    rolled up in a big Che t-shirt.  Don't you watch All In with Chris Hayes?

    Once in a while you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

    by darthstar on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 07:20:41 AM PDT

  •  Divided government only works when there's debate (0+ / 0-)

    But when you have half of one side running around screaming "death to the infidels", "god is great", and flying planes into IRS buildings...

    - Tea Baggers...

    Then divided government has broken down.

  •  Path to Dem Majority (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DSPS owl
    First, “only 38 of the House’s 234 Republicans, or 16%, represent districts in which Latinos account for 20% or more of the population.” Second, “only 28 Republican-held districts are considered even remotely at risk of being contested by a Democratic challenger, according to the nonpartisan Cook Political Report.”

    So for about 200 of the House’s Republicans, a primary challenge by conservatives angry over “amnesty” is probably a more realistic threat than defeat at the hands of angry Hispanic voters, or even angry Democrats.

    Last I checked, the Dems only needed to flip 17 seats to gain the majority.  If there are 28 republican held districts considered even remotely at risk then I would start there.  Getting credible candidates, raising serious money and running solid campaigns.  

    Also, if there are 38 GOP held districts with 20% or more Hispanic population, then I'd focus there too.  I'm sure some overlap with the first group and I wish we knew which they were without having to go through every district to figure out what the 38 are.  The Dems should canvass heavily and register those Hispanics to vote, then get them out to vote.  That could be the difference in a lower turnout election.  

    This is your world These are your people You can live for yourself today Or help build tomorrow for everyone -8.75, -8.00

    by DisNoir36 on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 08:36:44 AM PDT

  •  Absolutely correct about hard right (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DSPS owl

    dysfunctionality. However, our fearless leader, President Obama must also shoulder a portion of the blame. In other words, it takes a dysfunctional politician to know a dysfunctional politican.

    As far as Jonathan Capehart  goes,

    But what has stuck in my craw from the outset was Snowden fleeing the country.
    Comparing Snowden to Ellsberg is like trying to compare apples and oranges. It doesn't work. Why? Because Ellsberg wasn't thrown in solitary confinement the minute he was arrested as we all know will happen to Snowden.

    Knowledge is Power. Ignorance is not bliss, it is suffering. If you like hypocrite Obama, you'll love hypocrite Hillary.

    by harris stein on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 08:56:24 AM PDT

  •  WP Capehart: Nail meets Head (0+ / 0-)

    Capehart hit the nail perfectly with that simple statement about Snowden's credibility killer. I'm supportive of cleaning up government overreach and bringing some sense of privacy back into our lives these days. But Mr. Snowden screwed up by leaving the country to tell his tale. By doing so, he created a criminal issue out of what should have been a whistleblower issue. Sure, he would still have been brought up on charges of espionage, but his case would have been a lot stronger if he hadn't run off to China and now Russia. And to top it all off he pulls a threat of releasing supposedly more damaging documents if he is somehow killed.

    He pretty much screwed up his defense strategy.

    "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." -- George Carlin, Satirical Comic,(1937-2008)

    by Wynter on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 10:36:50 AM PDT

  •  Dysfunction "emerged during the 1994 elections" (0+ / 0-)

    I knew this is all Newt Gingrich's fault.

  •  Keep the crazies happy and stay in the House (0+ / 0-)

    These GOP representatives know that they just have to tell an occasional lie about Obama or something stupid about abortion and they will maintain the support of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and the Fox News commentators who preach to the dittoheads. They do not have to do anything productive. In fact, that would only give their supporters something to complain about. BETTER TO BE SAFE AND CREATE CHAOS.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site