Proof that science fiction predicts the future (future… future… future)
Yesterday, I was watching the 1967 British semi-classic Five Million Miles to Earth (known as Quartermass and the Pit outside the US) and couldn’t help but fall over at this dialog.
Quatermass: The will to survive is an odd phenomenon. Roney, if we found out our own world was doomed, say by climatic changes, what would we do about it?
Roney: Nothing, just go on squabbling like usual.
Okay, so that’s not exactly nailing the design of the iPhone, but it does show one thing: people who think this generation invented cynicism? Nope.
Eugene Robinson makes the case for something many of us would like to see.
I’m assuming that Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee. The delegate math is just brutal: There is simply no viable way now for Bernie Sanders to catch up. Sanders appeared to acknowledge reality this week when he announced that his campaign would lay off “hundreds” of paid staff members. He will use his clout at the convention, he said, to “put together the strongest progressive agenda that any political party has ever seen.”
Which is where Warren comes in.
Yes, I know the advantages of having Elizabeth Warren in the Senate. And I know the relative weakness of the veep as an actually job. Still… I’d be ecstatic.
It is absurd to claim that Clinton does not merit the “progressive” label; she has the scars from decades of attacks by the “vast right-wing conspiracy” to prove her bona fides. But on most issues — gun control being a glaring exception — Sanders is well to her left. And, as his surprising campaign has shown, that’s where the energy and excitement in the Democratic Party happen to be this year. …
As Clinton’s running mate, Warren could erase this potential weakness with the Democratic base.
You know what would be the most valuable ticket of the year? Elizabeth Warren debating. whoever the hell Trump names. I’d give up front row Hamilton for that… if I had front row. Or any row.
Come on. Let’s see if any of these pundits can predict anything.
Leonard Pitts is my favorite almost every week, but this week I sincerely hope he’s wrong.
Last week, [Bernie Sanders] announced he was laying off hundreds of staff members after a series of bruising primary losses to Hillary Clinton. She increased her lead in the delegate count, and Sanders, who was already walking a narrow pathway to the Democratic nomination, now walks a high wire in a high wind. …
It may not be over yet, but the fat lady is running the scales. Now, how to break that to Bernie Nation?
You say it. Then you say it again. Not in a mean way, but in a way that says “and now I hope we go forward together.” Which is why this is a problem.
Once in a while, a politician leads not a campaign, but a movement. … That’s Sanders in a nutshell.
Small wonder people love him. He has spoken against the corporate hijacking of American government and dreams. And he has pulled the Democratic Party back toward progressive values of which the party has seemed vaguely ashamed since the Reagan tsunami rendered “liberal” a four-letter word.
But Sanders is not going to win the Democratic nomination. As this sinks in, many of his believers are declaring their intent to boycott the fall election. …
They sound like the kid who snatches his ball and storms out of the park after losing a game.
But worse than churlish and childish, they sound Cruz-ish, as in Ted, who is hugely unpopular not just for his harshly conservative ideology, but even more for his hardline absolutism, his willingness to drive the nation off a cliff rather than bend.
It doesn’t have to be that way. I don’t believe it will be that way. I think we’re all going to sit down in Philadelphia and beat out a platform that champions a number of issues from Sanders’ campaign. Then Bernie is going to give a barn-burner of a speech, one that makes it clear he’s going to keep an eye on Hillary, but also that he’s handing her the torch, asking her to run the final mile for all the people who came out for him. Then Hillary is going to give an equally gracious speech, name a kick-ass VP candidate, and we’re all going forward. Together.
And even though I hope that Mr. Pitts has the outcome wrong, I’m going to urge you to read the piece, no matter who you’ve supported to this point.
Nicholas Kristof says that Trump is the one playing cards.
Republicans have often been indignant at being portrayed as waging a “war on women,” and the rhetoric sometimes was, indeed, a bit over the top. Until Donald Trump showed up.
Trump seems to be trying a strategy of what Ted Cruz would call “carpet bombing,” insulting Carly Fiorina’s face, Megyn Kelly’s menstrual cycle, Heidi Cruz’s looks and now Hillary Clinton’s “woman’s card.” …
To me, it looks as if Trump is playing the man’s card!
That’s the card that says you can say any racist, misogynistic, insensitive, and plain old abusive thing you want, then say that anyone who calls you on it is trying to claim a special privilege. In other words, it’s a Get Out of Common Decency Free card.
Kathleen Parker plays the pissed-off card.
Trump… can say nearly anything and escape judgment from a majority of Republican primary voters. Hearing him refer to women as “dog” or “fat pig” — or discuss his wives’ gastrointestinal functions with Howard Stern — have left him sufficiently unscathed.
Usually, you start in on a Parker column and find that she begins by making sense, only to turn around and finish with a “thus B = A and Democrats are awful.” But this time, her ire for Trump leaves no time for anything else.
If Trump were a woman, not only would he not get 5 percent of the vote, but also he would be tarred, feathered, branded and ridden out of town backward on a donkey. Voters male and female would recognize immediately that such a woman was inappropriate, lacking in quality and character, perhaps more than a little crazy — and utterly unqualified to be president of the United States.
You know, I like to hear a woman shouting. Especially when they’re fired up over a sexist ahole like Trump.
Doug Lasdon and Hugh Ryan note that their organization has eliminated gender-specific bathrooms, and so far, the sky has not fallen.
As the transgender community gains visibility across the country, one ugly issue keeps coming up: bathrooms. There’s a reason for this. Bathrooms are places where we feel vulnerable, where we literally have our pants down, and feeling vulnerable is one step away from feeling fearful. And fear is a useful emotion — at least, it is for some politicians, who cynically manipulate the unfounded fears of their constituents in order to take a blowtorch to nondiscrimination laws.
Is there anyone who actually feels comfortable in a multi-person bathroom? Women, you want to know what it’s like in most men’s rooms? Disgusting, that’s what it’s like, with privacy maintained only by a strict keep-your-f&$kin’-eyes-to-yourself policy. I’m not interested in looking at people of either sex in the restroom. I’m interested in looking at less people. Ideally, no people.
If anyone is endangered in restrooms, however, it is trans people. A 2013 study by the Williams Institute found that 70 percent of trans people in the Washington area had experienced some kind of negative reaction while using a public bathroom, up to and including assault. When we bar transgender people from choosing the restroom that feels safest to them, we increase the dangers faced by a vulnerable population.
What’s making the bathrooms even more dangerous isn’t giving rights to trans individuals, it’s the attention and fear being generated by politicians who are hoping for an incident they can use to generate votes.
Patrick Healy and Ashley Parker are having trouble finding a dance partner for Donald.
It’s a time-honored tradition for politicians to deny any interest in the vice presidency. But this year, with the possibility of Donald J. Trump as the Republican nominee, they really mean it.
“Never,” said Chris Schrimpf, a spokesman for Gov. John Kasich of Ohio, who is still running against Mr. Trump. “No chance.” …
“Scott Walker has a visceral negative reaction to Trump’s character,” said Ed Goeas, a longtime adviser to the Wisconsin governor.
Or, as Senator Lindsey Graham put it, “That’s like buying a ticket on the Titanic.”
But don’t you worry. Trump will get the best people. The greatest people. And I think we can all agree that Scott Walker and John Kasich are on no one’s list of greatest people. The betting odds favor Chris Christie, but even Trump may sense that he already has the Northeastern blowhard vote sufficiently nailed down. Like Cruz, he may want to have someone with an XX chromosome set, to prove that not every female on the planet hates him. The trouble with that is, every female on the planet hates him.
The New York Times pleads for the Supreme Court.
Eight justices heard oral arguments in the final case of the Supreme Court’s term on Wednesday. When will the court return to full strength?
That question is as urgent today as it was immediately after the death two and a half months ago of Justice Antonin Scalia. But the initial wave of outrage at the Senate Republicans’ hard-line refusal to consider replacing Justice Scalia has ebbed, making it that much easier for Republicans to keep the seat empty through the presidential election. If they succeed, the court will go nearly two terms, and possibly longer, without a ninth member.
Worse still, if the outrage really does ebb, it makes it that much easier for Republicans to keep the seat open by keeping their seats occupied.
Ross Douthat constructs an iron-clad case that musical theater is responsible for Donald Trump.
You think I’m kidding.
Every era gets the heroic founding father it deserves, and thanks to Lin-Manuel Miranda’s celebrated musical, ours has Alexander Hamilton — the immigrant striver, the political genius, and of course, the closet monarchist. ...
Hamilton floated the idea of a presidency-for-life during the fraught debates over the Constitution, and favored a powerful executive throughout his tumultuous career.
And now, we double down on crazy.
Executive-branch Caesarism has been raised to new heights by the last two presidents, and important parts of the country have responded by upping the ante, and — like ancient Israelites in the Book of Samuel — basically clamoring for a king.
The number of executive orders from Barack Obama is less than the number issued by George W. Bush. Which was less than those issued by Bill Clinton. Which was less than those from Ronald Reagan. Which was less than Truman, which was less than Roosevelt, which… Oh, nevermind. Obama has acted like Caesar! You know it’s true (in the Republican mind)!
Now, where would those parts of the country be which are ready to crown a king? We don’t know. We don’t care. Because we know the next line.
That clamor is loudest from the Trumpistas and their dear leader.
Donald Trump, his name is Donald Trump, There’s a million insults he hasn’t said, But just you wait…
And Ross Douthat, he’s just the damn fool who came up with this damnfool theory.
I am not going to violate the George Will rule. Understand that the George Will rule (along with the Maureen Dowd law) is in place for a very good reason. It protects us all (mostly me) from having to read George Will and keeps us all (mostly me) from breaking items in the vicinity when Will repeats the same argument he’s been making since 1972 and covers utter ignorance of the current century with a baseball metaphor. However, I will link to this diary.
Howard Gutman exists to prove there are people who write sillier columns than Douthat.
The United States may soon have its first female president. And it may not be Hillary Clinton.
Look. If you’re drinking anything. Put it down. This is a public service announcement.
Over the past few weeks, the best answer to the question of who will emerge as the Republican presidential nominee — businessman Donald Trump, Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.), Ohio Gov. John Kasich, some other failed 2016 contender or even House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (Wis.) — has become “none of the above.”
Gutman now explains why everyone who actually ran for president, the people with real, live delegates wearing their sticker, is eliminated. And I’m serious. If you’re holding hot coffee, you need to just sit it down. Now.
For these reasons, much of the inside money recently shifted to Ryan. … Threatened with a damaging loss of credibility and harboring no great desire to be a sacrificial lamb in a losing year, Ryan shifted his denials from coy to resolute. ...
Enter Nikki Haley.
Exactly when do Republicans move out of the denial stage? Can’t we just get on to anger?
Danielle Allen says the “Trump is only acting” meme is true… but backwards.
I’d like to pause to consider what has become of the word “presidential.”
Everybody appears to agree that Donald Trump needs to become, or “appear,” more “presidential.” The chorus includes the media, Melania and Ivanka Trump, Trump adviser Paul Manafort and even — at least at times — the candidate himself. Everybody also seems to agree on what being presidential requires: fewer swear words, fewer insults, a tone of decorum, speechwriters and teleprompters.
How sad. All of that is cosmetic. Trump is, of course, an expert in cosmetics. He has a fragrance line, and his wife and daughter market beauty products. He has demoted the art of presidential leadership to skill at cosmetology.
So is the real version of Trump the shouty ignorant racist, misogynist one, or the quiet ignorant racist, misogynist one? Yes.
Maxine Crump and Richard Cellini have a suggestion on how Georgetown should deal with its unsavory history.
In 1838, Georgetown University cheated bankruptcy by selling 272 slaves owned by the Maryland Jesuits to sugar plantations in Louisiana. Until just a few months ago, Georgetown folklore said that they all quickly succumbed to fever in the swamps of Louisiana. But in fact scores survived for decades. Thousands of their descendants are alive today.
Was the “then they all died” story supposed to be the good option? I guess compared to the “and then they all lived in miserable confinement, facing torture, disease, and near starvation only to pass this awful fate on to their children” dying doesn’t carry its usual weight.
First, let’s make short work of the question of whether the slaves and their descendants are “members of the Georgetown family.” The Maryland Jesuits themselves called the slaves and their children “the family.” Welcome at Georgetown? They built Georgetown. They are the ultimate insiders.
Let’s also rebut any suggestion that many descendants seek involuntary reparations. Not a single descendant reached so far has asked for any such thing. They seek reconciliation and reunion, not reparations.
So how do you honor people who laid down everything, their very bodies, to save the university?
If a single person had erased Georgetown’s debt in 1838, that benefactor’s name would today occupy a place of honor. The names of each and every one of the Georgetown slaves should appear in a place of honor for their priceless sacrifice.
These were real people, with real names, and what they did was beyond the value of anyone whose name is currently above the door of a lecture hall or dormitory. Find a place for them. And it wouldn’t hurt to find room for their descendants. You want to talk about legacy students? These students have a legacy.
Later today I’m going to talk about therapsids and new information on creatures that have been dead for 250 million years. Plus possums. And cod. How exciting is that?
Oh, and I think you forgot to buy that copy of On Whetsday. You still have time to fix that.