Rachel Maddow's Blog, page 3387
June 20, 2013
E.W. Jackson just can't help himself
Shortly after E.W. Jackson was chosen as the Republican Party's candidate for lieutenant governor in Virginia, the far-right activist tried to dismiss questions about his extraordinary rhetorical record. His controversial comments on a wide range of issues, he said, "were spoken in my role as a minister, not as a candidate."
In other words, Jackson's record apparently doesn't count. But what about the absurd arguments he continues to make as a candidate for statewide office?
Watch on YouTubeFor those who can't watch clips online, here's what Jackson told voters at an event yesterday:
"My great grandparents, Gabriel and Elijah Jackson were slaves and sharecroppers in Orange County, Virginia. I am a direct decedent of slaves. My grandfather was born there, to a father and a mother who had been slaves. And by the way, their family was more intact than the black family is today and I'm telling you that slavery did not destroy the black family even though it certainly was an attack on the black family, it made it difficult. But I'll tell you that the programs that began in the '60s, the programs that began to tell women that you don't need a man in the home, the government will take care of you, that and began to tell men, you don't need to be in the home, the government will take care of this woman and take care of these children. That's when the black family began to deteriorate.
"In 1960, most black children were raised in two parent, monogamous families. By now, by this time, we have only 20% of black children being raised in a two parent, monogamous families with the married man and woman raising those children. It wasn't slavery that did that, it was government that did that. It tried to solve problems that only god can solve and that only we as human beings can solve."
Got that? Slavery was bad for families, but not as bad as the Great Society programs that reduced poverty nationwide.
And why does Jackson hate the Great Society so much? In part because, in his mind, the anti-poverty programs told American women they "don't need a man in the home."
A few weeks ago, Jamelle Bouie said, "The Virginia GOP has essentially posed an experiment: Can we win off-year elections regardless of who we run?" The analysis appears increasingly accurate as each day passes.
Jobless claims increase, but remain below threshold
The news on initial unemployment claims has been quite encouraging lately, but the trend is never a straight line, and as we're reminded this morning, there are exceptions to the good news.
The number of people who applied for unemployment benefits last week jumped by 18,000 to 354,000, putting initial claims back near the recent average and indicating little change in a modestly improving labor market. Economists polled by MarketWatch had expected claims - a proxy for layoffs - to increase to a seasonally adjusted 340,000 in the week ended June 15. The average of new claims over the past month, a more reliable gauge than the volatile weekly number, rose by 2,500 to 348,250, the U.S. Labor Department said Thursday.
To reiterate the point I make every Thursday morning, it's worth remembering that week-to-week results can vary widely, and it's best not to read too much significance into any one report.
In terms of metrics, when jobless claims fall below the 400,000 threshold, it's considered evidence of an improving jobs landscape, and when the number drops below 370,000, it suggests jobs are being created rather quickly. We've been below the 370,000 threshold 24 of the last 27 weeks, and below 350,000 in 7 of the last 11 weeks.
Above you'll find the chart showing weekly, initial unemployment claims going back to the beginning of 2007. (Remember, unlike the monthly jobs chart, a lower number is good news.) For context, I've added an arrow to show the point at which President Obama's Recovery Act began spending money.
GOP and Tea Partiers: it's like deja vu all over again
Associated Press
There was a certain irony to the timing. Yesterday, the House Republican leadership began a new outreach effort to leaders of the Latino community, trying to repair years of damage. And during their discussions, and assurances about the GOP's sincerity, a far-right rally was underway on the national mall featuring anti-immigrant speeches from one Republican after another.
As Kate Nocera reported, Rep. Steve King's (R-Iowa) "was prepared to talk about immigration for six hours all by himself if he had to," but it didn't come to that.
But King didn't have to talk by himself. Crowds showed up in droves. One member of Congress after another showed up to give speeches. The Heritage Foundation's Robert Rector dropped by to talk about his widely criticized study that the Senate's immigration bill would cost $6 trillion (though there was no criticism from this crowd).
For King the outpouring of support from Tea Party groups and likeminded members of Congress was proof that his efforts to stall, and hopefully kill, the Senate's immigration bill in the House were working. If party leaders had hoped King would sit this fight out, by day's end on Wednesday he had made it abundantly clear he wasn't going anywhere. [...]
"This bill is at its core amnesty," King said to cheers. "We're here to today ... to take this debate outside the halls of Congress. If it's not going to be good enough inside, we'll take it outside!"
To help underscore the larger problem, consider the fact that Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) appeared at the event, spoke briefly in Spanish, and was heckled.
It's true that immigration wasn't the only subject discussed yesterday -- the legion of far-right lawmakers were also eager to talk about the IRS. Imagine that.
But the point of the gathering was to condemn the bipartisan immigration legislation pending in the Senate: "Protesters wore T-shirts emblazoned with American flags and tea party slogans, and they waved homemade signs that read, 'John Boehner: no amnesty, get a backbone,' 'Boehner: go home,' 'exporting illegals = importing jobs for Americans, stop socialism,' and 'if we lose rule of law we become Mexico.'"
And for a moment, if you lost track of the calendar, you might even think it was 2010, which isn't exactly the Republican Party's goal right now.
Indeed, consider yesterday's event in the larger context: what have Republicans shown the nation lately? There was a Tea Party rally this week, which followed a big fight over an anti-abortion bill that can't pass. In the states, we see a focus on culture-war issues, including state-mandated, medically-unnecessary ultrasounds. On Capitol Hill, most Republican lawmakers are running around talking about "amnesty" and "illegals," which is every bit as insulting as their rhetoric about women.
Yesterday, we even heard talk about "takers," as if the "47 percent" video never happened.
And on the horizon, many in the GOP are already planning another debt-ceiling crisis.
I argued a week ago that the Republican Party's "rebranding" effort had gone off the rails, but in retrospect, I probably understated matters. Party leaders hoped to apply some lessons from 2012 and move the party forward, but half-way through 2013, it's clear Republicans are moving backwards.
Morning Maddow: June 20
AP
The Taliban offers to trade an American prisoner (presumably Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl) for 5 Guantanamo prisoners.
Virginia's GOP Lt. Gov. candidate says another astounding thing.
The Boston Globe endorses a Senate candidate.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal signs a bill protecting the names of gun owners.
The founder of the border-activist Minutemen is suspected of being a child molester.
Exodus International is now an ex-ex-gay group.
Idaho Republicans go after local ordinances protecting workers from discrimination based on sexual orientation.
The new, spectacularly-coiffed Secretary of Energy chooses an environmentalist as his chief of staff.
June 19, 2013
Decryptomaddowlogical #70
Despite serving in some of the most powerful positions in American government, Jack Lew is probably not familiar to most Americans. The one thing he is perhaps most famous for is the way he signs his name. You might call that his...
Need help? Need to shout out the answer without spoiling anyone else's game?
*Remember to mention the number of the puzzle you're talking about.
Links for the 6/19 TRMS
Wednesday's citations are listed after the jump.
Northern Alberta pipeline spill contained; cleanup efforts underway
Pipeline in northern Alberta leaks 9.5 million litres of industrial waste water
ERCB Updates Volume Spilled on Pipeline Incident Near Zama City
Toxic waste spill in northern Alberta biggest of recent disasters in North America
Northern Alberta pipeline was only five years old before toxic spill
Introduction: 37 years of oil spills in Alberta
Obama hints decision soon on Keystone XL pipeline
TransCanada CEO `Confident' in Keystone Approval
Keystone XL pipeline shuns high-tech oil spill detectors
Obama outlines major nuclear reductions in Berlin speech
As Obama moves forward on climate, he faces a tough political task
Obama Readying Emissions Limits on Power Plants
Heritage study co-author opposed letting in immigrants with low IQs
The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer (pdf)
S. 744, Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act
Happy 500th Fugitive to the FBI's 'Ten Most Wanted' List
Walter Lee Williams, one of FBI's "Ten Most Wanted" fugitives, caught in Mexico
Famous cases and criminals - Billie Austin Bryant
Protests Expand in Brazil, Fueled by Video of Police Brutality
The Story Behind the Brazil Protest's Shocking Pepper-Spray Photo [Updated]
Mass protests in Brazil ahead of World Cup, Olympics
Body of Ibragim Todashev is flown to Russia
FBI Boston Division's Response to Shooting Incident in Orlando, Florida
MAN SHOT TO DEATH WHILE QUESTIONED IN BOSTON PROBE
Statement Regarding Shooting Incident in Orlando, Florida
Man shot to death while questioned in Boston probe
Officials: Man who knew Boston bombing suspect was unarmed when shot
Deadly End to F.B.I. Queries on Tsarnaev and a Triple Killing
Man Tied to Boston Suspect Is Said to Have Attacked Agent Before Being Shot
FBI tight-lipped on Todashev killing
Islamic group calls for probe of fatal FBI shooting of Orlando
Sources: Ibragim Todashev was unarmed when FBI agent killed him
The F.B.I. Deemed Agents Faultless in 150 Shootings
F.B.I. Shooting Incident Reviews, 1993-2011
Many questions 10 days after FBI killed Fla. suspect
The problem with Jack Lew's new signature
Treasury Secretary Jack Lew's new signature may be more dignified for signing money,
but it's not as good as his old one for signing cupcakes.
Ahead on the 6/19 Maddow show
Tonight's guests include:
Steve Kornacki, host of “UP with Steve Kornacki” and senior writer for Salon
Tim Weiner, Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter and the author of "Enemies: A History of the FBI".
Here's tonight's soundtrack, and here is executive producer Bill Wolff with a preview of tonight's show:
Talk of 'nuclear option' prompts GOP backlash
Associated Press
By all indications, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is serious about pursuing the so-called "nuclear option," ending filibusters of administration nominees in the upper chamber.
To pull off the procedural tactic, Reid would need near-unanimous support from his fellow Senate Democrats, and at this point, he doesn't have it. Just yesterday, Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), who is retiring next year, reiterated his opposition to the "nuclear option," telling TPM his position "won't change."
But Reid doesn't just have his own members to worry about; he's also hearing from Senate Republicans, who've begun making threats in the hopes of forcing Democrats to back down.
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), a former member of the GOP leadership close to Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), has assembled an agenda Republicans would pursue with the nuclear option if they retake control of the upper chamber.
It includes repealing the 2010 Affordable Care Act, converting all federal education spending into school vouchers and scholarships to middle-income and low-income children, opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas drilling and repealing the estate tax.
"Sen. Reid is an able and experienced leader. He knows that if Democrats figure out a way to do anything they want with 51 votes, Republicans can figure that out too. And if we're in charge, we'll do it.
For his part, McConnell added on the Senate floor, "There's not a doubt in my mind that if the majority breaks the rules of the Senate to change the rules of the Senate with regard to nominations, the next majority will do it for everything."
Got that? Democrats are considering a plan to allow majority rule on judicial nominees and Senate-confirmed administration positions, including the cabinet. Republicans are now arguing that if Dems pursue this, when the GOP is in the majority, they'll allow majority rule on literally everything, including taking affordable health care coverage away from tens of millions of Americans.
As threats go, McConnell's efforts at intimidation fall short for a few specific reasons.
First, I find it rather amusing to hear experienced lawmakers talk about a majority-rule Senate as if it would be shocking and unprecedented. It's all quite silly, really -- the Senate was designed to be a majority-rule institution in which bills and nominations would be brought to the floor and members would register a "yea" or a "nay." If the former outnumbered the latter, the bill or nomination would be approved, and the chamber operated this way for nearly two centuries.
McConnell and Alexander, whether they understand this or not, are effectively arguing, "Watch it, Democrats, or we'll return the Senate to the way it used to function before the era of endless obstructionism and intractable gridlock! And you don't want that to happen!"
Second, there's no guarantee that Republicans, the moment they're back in the majority, won't do this anyway. People forget this, but the "nuclear option" was a GOP idea in 2005. The next time there's a Republican White House and a Republican-led Senate, what's to stop the party from eliminating filibusters and governing as they please? Nothing, really.
And third, McConnell and Senate GOP leaders have already vowed to use the reconciliation process to do all sorts of things, including repealing the Affordable Care Act, the next time Republicans are in control, regardless of the state of filibuster rules.
As Jon Chait asked, "That's your No. 1 threat? 'If you change the rules, I'll do exactly what I told everybody I was planning to do anyway'?"
It's my understanding that there are a handful of Senate Democrats who remain on the fence when it comes to changing the rules and pulling the trigger on the "nuclear option" -- enough to sway the outcome in the event of a floor fight. I'm not sure what it'll take to sway them one way or the other, but if they're rattled by Republican chest-thumping, they're not paying close enough attention.
The inanity of the 'war on men' talking point
The Wall Street Journal's James Taranto
It's never been entirely clear to me whether the Wall Street Journal's James Taranto believes everything he says, or whether he occasionally publishes needlessly provocative arguments to get attention, along the lines of a Coulter or a Limbaugh.
But while we'll probably never know for sure whether Taranto is entirely sincere, columns like these, first flagged by Hannah Groch-Begley, are unsettling. Apparently, the Wall Street Journal opinion writer, who's also member of the paper's editorial board, believes there's a "war on men" underway, coinciding with an "effort to criminalize male sexuality."
Taranto brought up the case of Capt. Matthew Herrera, an Air Force officer accused of sexual assault by a fellow servicewoman, in a column as an example of Congress' "effort to criminalize male sexuality." Capt. Herrera was ultimately not convicted of sexual assault by his commander, Lt. Gen. Susan Helms -- but as a consequence, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) put a "permanent hold" on Helms' nomination to serve as vice commander of the Air Force Space Command, a career setback Taranto laments.
Capt. Herrera had testified before Helms that his accuser "flirted" with him, and a lieutenant who was present at the time of the alleged assault agreed. Therefore, Taranto reasons, Herrera's accuser was equally at fault.
Indeed, Taranto complained in his piece, "The presumption that reckless men are criminals while reckless women are victims makes a mockery of any notion that the sexes are equal."
In this case, the "reckless" woman is a female lieutenant who got into a car with her accused assailant.
Later in the day, Taranto had an opportunity to walk back his argument, but instead did the opposite, complaining about the costs of "female sexual freedom."
A recent Pentagon survey found that an estimated 26,000 sexual assaults took place within the military last year, up from 19,000 the year before. Some respond to this epidemic by looking for a solution; others respond by chastising "reckless" women and whining about imaginary efforts to "criminalize male sexuality."
