Why Aren't We As Stupid And Fearful?

Amanda Marcotte (a great blogger from Austin) has a few ideas about something that I've been wondering about for a while. From where I've been sitting, Americans in the latter half of the Clinton administration through the Bush years have been extremely easy to manipulate, mostly through fear. I always assumed that it was because people in general are pretty stupid. So now I'm wondering whether there are more smart people that I thought, or if the smart people are just more engaged.

Here's a clip from Amanda's post:

...one of the most interesting and underrated things that Obama did was quietly but decisively demonstrate that you don’t have to fit the badly-dressed fishing and chewing stereotype to be a Real Man. And in doing so, I think he woke up the right wing and mainstream media to something that should have been obvious, which is that the redneck set and their worshippers don’t actually have a lock on secure masculinity. It’s really kind of silly, because the right wing noise machine and their mainstream enablers knew for a fact that the way to stir up the troops was to provoke those insecurities---imply that someone was out to rob them of their manhood or provoke insecurities about being ignorant and provincial by calling liberals “elitist"---but despite this, I guess they must have honestly not realized that said insecurities were easily provoked because the people who have them are, duh, insecure.

But America is getting more urban, more diverse, and we’re even getting exposed to more things, and it’s changing the equation. As each generation comes up, fewer of them feel left out of the sexual revolution. (I went to a condom couture show on campus a few weeks ago, and even the College Republicans had entered a dress. Made of condoms. This should make their elders realize they’re losing the war rapidly.) And frankly, there’s a lot more models for how to be a Real Man nowadays, despite mainstream media’s brave attempts to shame men who shower and dress nice by calling them “metrosexuals”. Geeks aren’t excluded from the manhood club, not when the most famous business owners in the country aren’t car manufacturers so much as the guys who brought you your computers and iPods and video game systems. Intelligent, urbane men are a constant right wing target for masculinity shaming, but let’s face it, said men have a couple aces in the pocket, namely they aren’t little babies that are scared of dealing with women as equals and they win the sexual prowess contest without even breaking a sweat, and good luck defining masculinity without that.

I don't think that she's completely answered the question (for instance, she doesn't address the whole "there's a terrorist under your bed" thing). This country has made a pretty significant shift in attitude in a remarkably short time (although sometimes hard to tell, living in Texas). But it's nice to see I am not the only one wondering about this.

Sotamayor's Refusal To Legislate From Bench Could Prompt Conservative Backlash!!

From Fox News:

The chief concern is her position in the 2009 Maloney v. Cuomo case, in which the court examined a claim by a New York attorney that a New York law that prohibited possession of nunchucks violated his Second Amendment rights. The Appeals Court affirmed the lower court's decision that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states.

The ruling explained that it was "settled law" that the Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government might seek on individual gun rights.

Really?!?! this is the best they have?? She upheld a lower court ruling instead of engaging in the dreaded "judicial activism". Wow - Supreme Court pick #1 (of ??) looking like an easy confirm.

U-Neek

Summer's almost here. Let the reggae flow!
Eek-A-Mouse!!

What Glennzilla Said

Remember this when you hear that Sotomayor engaged in "judicial activism" in the Ricci case:

...And the idea that her decision in Ricci demonstrates some sort of radicalism -- when she was simply affirming the decision of a federal district judge, was part of a unanimous circuit panel in doing so, was supported by a majority of her fellow Circuit judges who refused to re-hear the case, and will, by all accounts, have at least several current Supreme Court Justices side with her -- is frivolous on its face.

President Obama Calls For Release of Aung San Suu Kyi

Today:

Making his first statement on the trial of Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, President Obama issued a stern statement late Tuesday calling on the Burmese government to release her "immediately and unconditionally."
...
The Obama administration has been conducting a high-profile review of policy toward Burma, including the effectiveness of sanctions. But the sudden trial of Suu Kyi, just as her detention was set to end, has instead inspired calls for increased sanctions.

"Suu Kyi's continued detention, isolation, and show trial based on spurious charges cast serious doubt on the Burmese regime's willingness to be a responsible member of the international community," Obama said, adding the government had "an important opporttunity... to demonstrate that it respects its own laws and its own people."

Burma Democracy and Development has the full text. Another excerpt:

By her actions, Aung San Suu Kyi has represented profound patriotism, sacrifice, and the vision of a democratic and prosperous Burma. It is time for the Burmese government to drop all charges against Aung San Suu Kyi and unconditionally release her and her fellow political prisoners. Such an action would be an affirmative and significant step on Burma’s part to begin to restore its standing in the eyes of the United States and the world community and to move toward a better future for its people.

Whacked-out Lib General Petraeus

What's his take on closing GITMO?

"With respect to Guantanamo," Petraeus added, "I think that the closure in a responsible manner, obviously one that is certainly being worked out now by the Department of Justice -- I talked to the Attorney General the other day [and] they have a very intensive effort ongoing to determine, indeed, what to do with the detainees who are left, how to deal with them in a legal way, and if continued incarceration is necessary -- again, how to take that forward. But doing that in a responsible manner, I think, sends an important message to the world, as does the commitment of the United States to observe the Geneva Convention when it comes to the treatment of detainees."

Elections Have Consequences

This is a nice summary of the change as exhibited yesterday

A view from the Justice Department

Found this to be pretty interesting:

I think the President respects, and wants to restore, the Department of Justice to its rightful place: as representatives of the American people in the cause of justice in defense of the Constitution. And not, as it has been in large measure for the last 8 years, a White House tool for implementing ideological policy goals, law be damned; and, perhaps more damaging, as a shop to help cover, excuse me, a lot of ass.

Those days are gone. I can see it from here, where I sit, on the inside.

So, for President Obama to make that statement--"The Department of Justice and our courts can work through and punish any violations of our laws"--he meant it.

He is not shutting the door on prosecutions. He could have shut the door today, but he did not.

He's going to let this Department--a group of attorneys who cherish their independence and role as protectors of the Constitution and the laws of this nation--look into the matter.

And:

Here's another little secret: I work with conservatives. People I would clearly classify as conservative ideologues. I have a guy next door with some pretty zany views on some things. He walks into a booth and likely pushes every candidate button I do not. The guy is Hannity lite. He's a nut bag.

But you know what? You put my legal writing next to his, and there's no difference in argument. His position on certain sections of the law are the same as mine, and the same as everyone in our office. Because it's the law. It says A, we argue A. Because in 90% of our cases, the law always says A. And that's true even though we're doing some things in a relatively hot policy area. Not to brag, but my office is not doing asset forfeiture work or postal truck crashes. We are doing stuff in hot areas.

You can read the whole thing at Daily Kos.

Memorial Day - CHECK YOUR MEAT!

100,000 pounds of ground beef are being recalled after 3 infections and one child's death in Cleveland. Details at the USDA site.

Petition to the U.N to Demand Aung San Suu Kyi's release

Sign Here

Saw This on CrooksAndLiars

That is some sweet singing. Reminds me of a place I went...

"Trial" News video

Sham Trial of Aung San Suu Kyi Begins

News coming out of Burma:

The state media have avoided making any mention of the arrest of Ms Suu Kyi, who is being detained in Insein Prison after the intruder, John Yettaw, secretly swam across a lake to the house where she has been held under house arrest for most of the past 20 years. Today US consular officials reportedly were allowed into the prison, where he too is to be charged with entering a restricted area and immigration offences.

...

Her latest six-year term of house arrest was due to expire later this month, and Western governments have accused the Burmese regime of using the current case as a pretext for prolonging her detention. According to reports in the state media, Mr Yettaw, a Vietnam veteran and Mormon, swam across Inya Lake and spent two nights in Ms Suu Kyi’s compound, despite her pleas for him to leave. He was arrested by the security forces as he took the same route out again.

He made a similar visit last November, when he escaped detection. Ms Suu Kyi has been charged with violating the terms of her house arrest by not reporting the intruder to the authorities, as have her two friends and house keepers, Khin Khin Win, and her daughter Win Ma Ma.

Burmese courts invariably find for the government in political cases, and the authorities further stacked the odds in their favour on Saturday when one of her lawyers was struck off for “not abiding by professional ethics”.

This Is What Happens...

...when you cut funding to NPR and "allow" them to make up the shortfall by taking corporate advertising. Another corporatist news outlet. Today's example:

I listened to this Planet Money interview yesterday and it wasn't even close. Elizabeth Warren, a class act in every sense, totally destroyed the host's argument that concerning herself with the economic health of the American family was somehow her liberal "pet cause" and outside her bailiwick as TARP oversight chair. Not that it made any difference in his evident scorn!

NPR may have some nice little essays, but the only time their hosts show anything resembling teeth is when they attack... people who attack corporate interests! From the Columbia Journalism Review's "So That's Why The Press Won't Cover Elizabeth Warren!" by Ryan Chittum:

A couple of times in the last few months I’ve taken the press to task for ignoring the Congressional Oversight Panel and its report on the TARP. I’ve talked to reporters in the biz since and got the impression that many of them don’t really take it seriously because its chairwoman Elizabeth Warren is a liberal who, they say, pushes her agenda.

So it’s worth listening to this entire Planet Money podcast from NPR, where Adam Davidson badgers Warren for more than an hour to justify her existence, so to speak.

If you want a peek inside business-press mentality, and why certain stories get reported and others don’t, you can do worse than start here. It sees Warren as an outlier whose views, based on decades of research, are suspicious. It would never, ever have badgered a former bank exec, say, like this if one had been chairman of the panel. Davidson, like the reporters I referenced above, has been talking to too many bankers and insiders who sneer at someone not inside their bubble. Perhaps he’s trying to prove his objective journalist bona fides at “liberal” NPR by taking it to a liberal.

Yeah, what right does she have trying to make the taxpayer-funded bailout provide some actual benefit to taxpayers?!?! Doesn't she know that we're all here to provide executive bonus guarantees?? She is such a liberal!

Aung San Suu Kyi Ill, Imprisoned

Two stories developing regarding the democratically elected leader of Burma and Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi. First, she has fallen ill and was initially being refused medical treatment after her doctor was arrested. Second, she has been arrested herself and taken to prison through no fault of her own. So, just to be clear, she has been arrested while under 'house arrest'.

From UPI:

Nyan Win, a spokesman for Aung San Suu Kyi's party, said she met with a doctor Monday who put her on a drip and there was no longer cause for concern about her health, CNN reported. The doctor was allowed to see her after being barred earlier from doing so.

The CNN report said while it was not clear why she was put on an IV, the procedure is used to give saline solution to patients facing dehydration.

The doctor attending on her was not her regular physician Tin Myo Win, who was arrested last week on an undisclosed charge, Nyan Win was quoted as saying.

Regarding her arrest, the story is strange to say the least. I received an email from Burma Campaign UK containing this information:

This morning Burma’s democracy leader, Aung San Suu Kyi was arrested by the regime and moved to Burma’s notorious Insein prison. It appears she will face trial for breaking the terms of her house arrest which forbids visitors, after an American man, John Yettaw, swam across Inya Lake and refused to leave her house.

Aung San Suu Kyi has committed no crime, she is the victim of a crime. There was an intruder in her house who refused to leave, yet she is the one being imprisoned.

HELP AUNG SAN SUU KYI - TAKE ACTION NOW
The United Nations and ASEAN must dispatch envoys to Burma to demand the immediate release of Aung San Suu Kyi and all Burma’s political prisoners.

Please go to this page where you can email the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon and ASEAN leaders to urge them to send envoys immediately. http://www.burmacampaign.org.uk/ASSK_action.html

Guardian U.K. has this:

Hopes for the release of Burma's pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi were dashed today with the announcement she has been arrested for violating the terms of her house arrest and could face up to five years' confinement after a bizarre intrusion by an American who swam across a lake to her home.

The news was greeted with anguish by supporters of the increasingly frail Nobel peace laureate: her most recent six-year term of house arrest was due to end in less than two weeks.

International reaction was swift, and appalled.

The UK prime minister, Gordon Brown, who included her in his book on courage, said: "I am deeply disturbed that Aung San Suu Kyi may be charged with breaching the terms of her detention. The Burmese regime is clearly intent on finding any pretext, no matter how tenuous, to extend her unlawful detention.

"The real injustice, the real illegality, is that she is still detained in the first place. If the 2010 elections are to have any semblance of credibility, she and all political prisoners must be freed to participate. Only then will Burma be set on the road to real democracy, stability and prosperity."

Please contact the U.N. and/or your members of Congress and ask them to intervene on Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's behalf.

Should I Stay or Should I go?

If this is true:

But the stem cell battle is not just a high-profile clash of values. The dispute provides a sharp focus on how science may help reshape America. Several states have set aside billions of dollars to support stem cell research, and the new federal money Obama is promising will generally flow to those areas. That means states supporting stem cell research will experience an economic windfall while attracting highly educated technology workers who tend to vote Democratic. The more conservative states restricting stem cell research will attract fewer funds and fewer socially liberal voters. In short, a state's stem cell policy will influence electoral results and help determine whether a state turns red or blue.

...then what should one conclude from this?

Texas researchers who thought President Barack Obama’s executive order lifting the restrictions on embryonic stem cell research would finally free them to ramp up work with the cutting-edge science are facing a new obstacle: the state Legislature.

Eighteen of the state’s leading scientists signed a letter sent to the Legislature Monday objecting to a provision inserted in the Senate budget bill last week that would ban state funding from supporting research involving the destruction of human embryos.

“Such an amendment would be detrimental to Texas,” said the statement. “A ban would halt ongoing research projects and negatively impact the ability of Texas academic health institutions, both public and private, to competitively recruit and retain world-class scientists, professors and students in the biological sciences.”

Doctors Fighting for Real Health Care Reform

Over on DKos there's a diary that I thought needed more exposure, so I'm linking to it here so 1 or 2 more people will see it :) When you start seeing all the BS ads about how public health care will make your life so bad, ask yourself why these 8 doctors were willing to get arrested in an effort to keep the publicly funded option on the table...

On May 5, eight health care advocates, including myself and two other physicians, stood up to Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and the Senate Finance Committee during a "public roundtable discussion" with a simple question: Will you allow an advocate for a single-payer national health plan to have a seat at the table?

The answer was a loud, "Get more police!" And we were arrested and hauled off to jail.

The fact that a national health insurance program is supported by the majority of the public, doctors and nurses apparently means nothing to Sen. Baucus. The fact that thousands of people in America are dying every year because they can’t get health care means nothing. The fact that over 1 million Americans go into bankruptcy every year due to medical debt — even though most of them had insurance when they got sick — means nothing.

Good Work by Republican Senator (no snark)

Props to Charles Grassley for adding Fed transparency to the bankruptcy bill:

A last-minute amendment to the bankruptcy reform bill passed in the Senate Wednesday opens the Federal Reserve to congressional scrutiny.

The amendment was pushed by Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, the highest ranking Republican on the finance committee, and quietly breezed through 95 to 1. Grassley said that his measure wasn't aimed at limiting the Fed's independence, but that Congress just wanted to know a little bit about what it's doing.

The proposal is, said Grassley, "an important reform for holding the entities involved in the massive taxpayer-funded economic bailout accountable to the public."

How the Mighty Have Fallen

I've been trying to hold off on the conservative bashing as much as I can. It seems a little gratuitous at this point. But then I see something like this from RedState (no link):

4. DNC Chair and Obama lose two council seats in their backyard
The media will ignore it, but they shouldn't.

Democrats lost two seats on the Alexandria, Virginia city council.

Boy, how long has it been since I've been able to report good news on an election night for Republicans? With results from 26 out of 26 precincts, and absentees included, Republican Frank Fannon and GOP-endorsed independent Alicia Hughes appear to have won seats on the Alexandria City Council. The Democrats will still control a majority of four out of six seats, but this is a couple rippes of red in a deep blue community in a purple state - the best news for local Republicans in a long time.

But the implications are bigger. Barack Obama won this county 72-27. Senater Mark Warner is from Alexandria. Democratic National Committee Chair Tim Kaine is the Governor of Virginia.

Barack Obama lost today. The Democratic National Committee lost today.

That's right, Alexandria city council. A massive loss for the Democratic National Committee (and the President). I guess the tide is turning. Palin '12! Whatever gets you through the night...

Corporate Taxes

This is worth reading. I think I'd hit this point in a press conference, not just on the White House blog if I were president:

Jason Furman: Kyle, you are correct that the United States has the second highest statutory tax rate in the world, the official rate published in the tax code. But the United States also has more loopholes and special tax preferences than many other countries. As a result, the United States has a much lower effective tax rate. If you look at corporate taxes as a share of GDP they are below those of most major economies.

Cyclone Nargis anniversary

It was a year ago (May 2-3) that Nargis devastated the Irrawaddy delta region of Burma (Myanmar). The people are still struggling:

Foreign governments and charities provided US$315 million for food aid and emergency assistance in the months after the tropical storm hit the country May 2-3, 2008, leaving 138,000 people dead or missing and another 800,000 homeless.

But international charities and U.N. agencies like the World Food Program say hundreds of millions of dollars are still needed over the next several years to rebuild the delta's decimated infrastructure and provide farmers and fishermen with the cash they need to regain their livelihoods.

Many noted the funds raised so far are about 40 times less than US$12 billion raised for the 2004 tsunami, even though Nargis was the worst natural disaster in Myanmar's modern history and the world's fifth deadliest in the past 40 years.

At least the illegitimate military dictatorship has stopped obstructing aid, even if they are not doing much to help:

But perhaps the most shocking aspect of the disaster was the military government's indifference to the suffering of its own people.
The ruling generals said Burma did not need "chocolate bars donated by foreign countries", and refused to allow aid into the region for nearly three weeks.

The international community was appalled, and eventually - after intense diplomatic lobbying - Burmese leaders were persuaded to accept foreign assistance.
A full-scale aid operation got under way, and the world heaved a collective sigh of relief.

Burma's military generals are wary of any outside influence
A year later this aid operation is still in full swing, and while lots of people remain dependant on outside help, most have now been given some form of assistance.
The government has not spent much of its own money on the relief effort, but at least it has mainly left the aid agencies to their own devices, enabling them to distribute supplies throughout the region.

Sitagu Sayadaw has had great success both raising funds and getting supplies into the country (including during the first three weeks). If you want to contribute to his efforts, you can do so here.

Power to the Peaceful

A little Michael Franti in celebration of his upcoming return to ACL Fest. His first visit was a real breath of fresh air in the dark early days of (as Michael sang in "We Don't Stop") Bush War II.

Saint Ronnie??

Greenwald (as usual) has a point:

The views that Ronald Reagan not only advocated, but signed a treaty compelling the U.S. to adhere to, are ones that are now -- in the view of our dominant media narrative -- the hallmarks of The Hard Left: torture is never justified; there are "no exceptional circumstances" justifying it; it must be declared to be a serious criminal offense ; and -- most of all -- the U.S., as Ronald Regan put it, "is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution." Reagan's explicit view that the concept of "universal jurisdiction" permits signatory nations (such as Spain) to prosecute torturers from other countries (such as the U.S.) is now considered so fringe that it's almost impossible to find someone in mainstream American debates willing to advocate it.

If you now believe about torture and prosecutions exactly what Ronald Reagan advocated in 1988 -- or what Israel today advocates -- then, according to our establishment narrative, you are, by definition, a member of the Hard Left.

He also references the Pew poll released today:

White evangelical Protestants were the religious group most likely to say torture is often or sometimes justified -- more than six in 10 supported it. People unaffiliated with any religious organization were least likely to back it. Only four in 10 of them did.

The analysis is based on a Pew Research Center survey of 742 American adults conducted April 14-21. It did not include analysis of groups other than white evangelicals, white non-Hispanic Catholics, white mainline Protestants and the religiously unaffiliated, because the sample size was too small.

Andrew Sullivan comments:

So Christian devotion correlates with approval for absolute evil in America. And people wonder why atheism is gaining in this country.

Notice the poll does not even use a euphemism like "coercive interrogation" - forcing Allahpundit to substitute it. (Even HotAir, it seems, finds it difficult to write the sentence: "Evangelicals are more likely to be conservative and conservatives are more likely to support torture.") But it remains a fact that white evangelicals are the most pro-torture of any grouping. Mainline Protestant groups were the most opposed. A mere 20 percent of non-Hispanic Catholics believe that torture is never justified.