Jeb Out

There's nothing surprising about Jeb Bush dropping out of the 2016 race at this stage--looking back over the campaign that was is a joyless task I'm in no way interested in, and I'm mostly just happy not to have to watch him run, or whatever it was he thought he was doing, anymore.

What I am reminded of, though, was when WI Gov. Scott Walker dropped out. He had said at the time:

“I encourage other Republican presidential candidates to consider doing the same, so that the voters can focus on a limited number of candidates who can offer a positive conservative alternative to the current front-runner. This is fundamentally important to the future of the party and, more importantly, to the future of our country.”

At the time, I joked that you just couldn't talk the other losers in the race to bow out in favor of Jeb Bush, as being the handiest example of the "establishment" favorite. And of course, nothing of the kind did happen. And for some reason, Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich all have reason to like their odds at this point, even if I think Rubio's the default. (Carson's campaign is really just buckraking, and it's sort of peculiar that that actually still has any flavor left for the rubes to chew on.)

It's too late to "what if" how things might have been different with a narrower field from the beginning. But it is clear that Jeb was never the guy everyone was going to rally around. I'll tell you when I was sure of that--when Donald Trump said that Jeb had to like immigrants because of his wife. Jeb should have jumped down Trump's throat for that on general principles, never mind because you have to hit in a political contest.  He asked for an apology. Big whoop.

So when I see a handful of pieces about the Bush campaign's "civility"--I wouldn't actually call it that. The only good thing about his campaign was that it proved that campaign spending can only do so much for a poor candidate.

Walker: Leading, Following, and Getting out of the Way

The Man from ALEC is going back to Walkerstan because he has been called to drop out of the 2016 Presidential race by God, and more likely the donors, saying:

“I encourage other Republican presidential candidates to consider doing the same, so that the voters can focus on a limited number of candidates who can offer a positive conservative alternative to the current front-runner,” Mr. Walker said in the short appearance, at which he took no questions. “This is fundamentally important to the future of the party and, more importantly, to the future of our country.”

So it seems like all at once, he is simultaneously following in the polls, hoping to lead a pack of "never-gonna-get-its" out of the race, and getting out of the way so a "positive conservative contender" can clearly emerge.

I have to say, nothing so becomes Walker in the entirety of his campaign like his leaving it. He never caught on, I would say, specifically because the persona of reality TV celebrity Trump forced the other candidates to also try crafting personas or working on their gimmicks, like wrestlers going into a Battle Royale. Walker's persona remained elusive--there was no "there" to hang a campaign on. Bowing out with .05% poll numbers is pretty bad, but if he can save face by starting an "Anyone But Trump" movement, that at least is face-saving.

There are some questions though--clearly, throwing his .05% interest at any candidate isn't such a big ol' help to them. And can you convince flop-sweaty oddballs like Rick Santorum, who wants to do away with the State Department because diplomacy is apparent too gay for him, or Mike Huckabee, who seems like he's had the mask pulled off his cheery jocular normal guy character to reveal he was, like, a really homophobic creep all this time, that they just aren't going to win, so they should let--

Jeb Bush win?

Seems like a big order.

And of course, who will be the next "coulda been" to Walker away?

This One Weird Fedex Trick...

Sometimes, political rhetoric can get a little bit out of hand, and maybe needs to be pulled back from the ledge--that's what I think might be part of the problem with the immigration debate. I've noted in the past that some of the ideas about what to do with actual human beings who want to be in this country without all the legal hassle are either a futuristic civil liberties nightmare--like implanting RFID chips, or seem like the fantasies of a comic book villain, like an electric fence with a moat and alligators. I'm a silly old stick-in-the-mud. I want policies that are effective and actually can happen in the real world where the people are.

GOP presidential candidate and NJ Governor, Chris Christie made a bit of a stir by suggesting that people on a US visa be tracked in the way that FedEx tracks packages. I have to admit--I've very recently noted that something like 40% of illegal immigration stems from folks overstaying their visas, and I recommended they be tracked in some way. But I think this is probably better done by a voluntary self-reporting scheme of checking in with one's current address, and not the way packages are kept track of, because barcodes are actually used for package tracking. There's a lot of people who feel some kind of way about putting barcodes on people, and I would guess that the problems with a barcode scheme would go about as awkwardly as the RFID idea.

I have the feeling that there's a "political will" issue regarding immigration--politicians understand this is something citizens feel strongly about, but they also are very nervous about introducing a serious, comprehensive plan because of the emotional, amped-up rhetoric that goes into play. The immigration issue is more of a matter in the red-state stronghold south specifically because this is where Latin@ immigration and the low-wage agricultural/factory jobs come up and might be why Democrats don't really reference it in the same way. Donald Trump has managed to magnify the issue--but it results in WI Gov. Scott Walker talking about a Canadian border fence. Seriously? That's one long border, and one long fence.

If there's a wrong way to be talking about immigration, I have a feeling following the lead of Trump and getting more extreme is the wrong way. This is, essentially, the problem with an outsider candidate--they might have bold ideas, but no concept of process. And when they come up in the polls like Trump has, people who ought to know better, start acting like they don't. And that isn't good for the debate.

He's a Rhodes Scholar!

We need to end birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants.

— Gov. Bobby Jindal (@BobbyJindal) August 17, 2015

The illegal immigrants don't get birthright citizenship. Kids born here do. If they are born here, they aren't immigrants, because they did not come from somewhere else. Sure, you can say "But, we know what he meant."

Yeah. I know what he meant. My husband's parents were documented legal residents, but not citizens, but my spouse is a citizen. And Bobby Jindal, Donald Trump, and Scott Walker aren't probably talking about him, anyway, because his parents were coming from a European country (although there are some Birthers who actually have an issue with Sen. Santorum's immigrant father, so who even knows?)

I think we can understand what these candidates are saying very well. Every now and again, people say gays, liberals and atheists should be deported, too. If any of those ideas got a bandwagon going, I almost think you could count on Gov. Jindal to hop on so hard his ankles would hurt.

GOP Baby Daddies and the Not-A Donkey DNA Schedule

Marco Rubio has an idea about humanity which is a bit crude and unscientific:

Watch this video and sign this petition if you know that a human life won’t become a donkey or a cat: https://t.co/neRez6ule9

— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) August 10, 2015

Now, I know my toe is 100% human, but that does not make it a person. So I am not sure why Marco Rubio thinks that the inability of a fetus to become a donkey should mean anything but Duh, science. But hell, I don't even know what Mike Huckabee means when he refers to a "DNA schedule"--although scientists don't either, so...)

I also know, even if Scott Walker is confused, that even if pregnancy from rape is rare,that it happens means that some women might want to terminate rape-resulting pregnancies, and that sometimes, pregnancies are dangerous to the mother, so that, too matters.

Women really do sometimes require an abortion to live. As in the case of Savita Halappanvar.

The ignorance of these candidates about how women's bodies work should be disqualifying--they are ideology-based and fueled by an angry ignorance about how women's bodies work to even make other people. Which is what we do. With difficulty, in an actual medical process that is fraught with potential complications. They demand we produce children whether we want them or not--but deny that we bear them with any difficulty or stigma or even pain or trauma. It simply isn't the case.

I'm from Philadelphia--We Break Stuff

I think it helps to know that I was born in Philadelphia and my accent is like an insect trapped in amber and my outlook is always hooded by a feeling that expectations should be responsibly lowered to get to the nut of why nothing is actually sacred to me--

I'm from Philadelphia. We break stuff. Or at least, that's our reputation.  We have booed Santa and destroyed whole city blocks in anger. We're the home city of Bill Cosby and Gary Heidnik. The Fresh Prince of Bel Air was better off from seeing the back of us. W. C. Fields, a Darby kid, wrote his and our epitaph--"On the whole, I'd rather be in Philadelphia"--basically saying this city is marginally better than Hell, which is "praise by faint damned" if I ever heard it.

For some reason, our signature sandwich is supposedly a political barometer: I'm not sure why John Kerry was supposed to have failed a sandwich test by ordering swiss on a cheesesteak (his wife, a quasi-Pennsylvanian, probably could have warned him) but seriously, this cheese thing, is not a thing. I like provolone and mushrooms on mine. American is perfectly cromulent, although cutting in line and wasting food are looked down on. (Frankly, I think Cheez Wiz tastes like cat piss smells. So "Wiz wit" proponents can, well, eat that stuff if that's how they like it, but for me, no.)

But our most recent "being Philly" outrage is what we did to a poor little Canadian robot (no not Drake, and Meek, you just live with yourself, because unless you drop brilliance and quickly you aren't right on time, you need a time machine). Yes, we manhandled an experiment in human kindness, because no, we aren't a kind people in Philadelphia.

The Man from ALEC: Or, The Stupidian Candidate

I think I've made clear that I don't believe that Donald Trump is a real candidate, so much as a reality tv candidate (although if he decides to launch a third party candidacy, I can't be sure that I am not, on some very schadenfreude level, rooting for him--against the GOP).I also don't think brother of W., Jeb Bush, wants the job very much, or he would have spent the last umpteen years thinking more about how to craft and convey a compelling message about why he's supposed to be of any use to us, instead of making gaffes and coming off as a weenie.

Among people I consider valid GOP candidates: Scott Walker. I'm a die-hard lefty and I hate his guts, so I think that probably means he has a great shot at winning the nomination for the 2016 Best of the Worst Contest, especially now that WI court cronies have struck down the John Doe proceedings in or around his various runs for the office he holds. Maybe he uses his office and the taxpayer funds therefrom to run for things. Feh.

Of course, he's bad for climate issues. He might be one of the candidates least prepared to deal with foreign policy.  And I've pointed out myself, he simply refrains from answering questions he doesn't consider profitable to himself. But the thing that fascinates me is why--

Because I kind of have come to the opinion that unless some agency is feeding him the answers he doesn't have any. He gets a lot of his thought processes from the thinking of other folks. I mean really, how does someone actually say out loud where the people can hear that the "minimum wage is lame" unless you never thought for yourself what it might be like to live on it? How do you suppose that calling mandatory ultrasounds just a "cool thing" makes sense, unless you disregard the part about their being mandatory, and unnecessary to women who know full well what a pregnancy is and means to them? How do you come to the idea that piss-testing food stamp recipients for drugs and restricting their purchases is a great thing, when drug testing is useless and costly to taxpayers.

He doesn't have any thoughts in his pointy little head that ALEC or maybe the Koch brothers haven't put there.  If he ever seems dubious about an issue, it just means the correct answers have not been downloaded to his firmware, yet. His slightly skewed eyes are like the windshield of a driverless car. His lackluster stump speech that nonetheless brings all the stans to the yard? Is time-tested and ALEC-approved. He channels RW talking points--he is a political medium (because his type in politics is neither rare nor well-done.)

He would bomb Iran on his inauguration day. That is a thing he seriously said. And yet he is a serious candidate. I would say, a serious sociopath. But don't try him on that--he isn't for turning. He isn't for learning.  He's for ALEC and cronyism--it has worked so far. And I would call that lack of ability to be more than a talking-points-turner a real problem.

Happy Earth Day, If You Want It

It makes sense that President Obama gave an address about global warming on Earth Day in the Everglades National Park, because this sensitive region has dozens of species of plant and animal life that would be impacted by sea level rise. But let's make no mistake: even if we discount the loss of irreplaceable habitat, the advance of climate change will have significant impact on the livelihood of people living in regions like Florida, with impacts to fishing, tourism, agriculture and real estate.

Addressing climate change isn't the job-killer--climate change is.

It also makes me a little happy to see the President take a message about climate change to Florida in light of word that "climate change" is forbidden as a topic of conversation for officials in that state. That strikes me as nonsensical, and even a little chilling. (Really? Recommending someone seek a mental health evaluation for indulging in a little "politically incorrect" truth-telling? That seems like some kind of Soviet tactic, to me.)  I hope the whole affair gave Governor Scott the vapors.

In other news, WI Governor and likely 2016 GOP Presidential Primary contestant Scott Walker decided Earth Day is exactly when you propose to cut 57 employees from the Department of Natural Resources. (Gov. Walker does not seem especially sentimental regarding his state's natural resources or popular input regarding them.) Wisconsin is another state where discussion of climate change has been, well, chilled. Which is a damn shame, because ground water is at risk in case of climate-change related drought even if WI is a land of lakes and streams--and as dairy country, watering and having lush grazing land for livestock is at a premium. I am a bit of a cheese fan. I would like my supply guaranteed, please.

One might take a moment to reflect that, while climate change is global, all politics is local. Responsible conservation begins with people electing responsible state government to act as stewards of the people's resources. Making the Earth cleaner, safer, less-polluted, and less at-risk of large-scale awfulness seems remote, but in many ways involves managing what you can--like not having people who regard your state as so many saleable resources to unload, as opposed to a precious place to sustain for your family and future generations to enjoy, as your governor.

The CPAC 2015 Poll is in

I've really not made a big point of following CPAC this year because I finally get that I am not the audience this whole shindig is for. Of course, part of the deal is that the prominent voices of today's conservatism are supposed to be showcased. Yes, some of these people are running for POTUS. But that doesn't mean I have to take it totally seriously, because the likelihood that, for example, the CPAC straw poll actually ever meant anything would probably mean that we were experiencing Ron Paul's second term. And we are not. So, if Sen. Rand Paul has enjoyed his third CPAC poll win, this has more to do with inheriting his father's libertarian apparatus, and less to do with anything like being able to win in 2016. (I think.)

WI Gov, Scott Walker has come in a respectable second, despite or probably because he compared union workers to ISIS, which would no doubt haunt him if he made it to a general election. His claims that facing protesting union folks prepares him for foreign policy is kind of strained, I think. And making the "Reagan" connection is so obvi. Try harder, you try-hard!

Scott Walker and the Litmus Test

Technically, there really ought not be a religious "litmus test" when it comes to achieving any elected office. It honestly should not matter whether our current president, Barack Hussein Obama, is a Christian, as he actually professed publically many times over and witnessed to as a member of Trinity United Church for 20 years, is a practitioner of Islam, having some incidental relationship with that faith having a father and stepfather who were in some respects Muslim, or even as I am, an intellectually inquisitive militant agnostic. The First Amendment technically means that everyone is free to worship as they will, and does not deny anyone their rights because of some heterodoxy. This needs to be understood as part of a long tradition within US history, where Islam was considered among many religions as part of the experiment in allowing such a freedom of thought.

"Ho, Ho, Ho!" Would Be Descriptive.

WI Governor Scott Walker is not even possibly the target of a John Doe inquiry especially not regarding his recall election, so stop all your reluctant going about your life avoiding paying any attention or campaign contributions to one Scott Walker, Stoner-faced Weasel Prince of the Great Land O'Cheddar, because you know full well that Christmas would not be Christmas without the one you love--and that would be your goodbuddy Scotty.

The one who is not either the target of a John Doe investigation.

Nor a bought and paid for Koch fiend.

Who is selling off bits of Wisconsin like it was a fire sale.

But no really. Why have Christmas when you can donate to this mug? Of course you would, duh? What is even the alternative? Transparent government not owned by the fossil fuel interests? Bah, crazytalk.

Am I actually titling a blog-post "On, Wisconsin"?

I have no idea what is going to happen in Wisconsin tomorrow, although the recent (I guess, last, except for exit polling) poll showing Walker only up by 3% is heartening.  That's within the margin of error, and if turnout is significant enough (sounds like it is) there's a good chance a recall might be pulled off.  There is a gap though in voter enthusiasm according to WSJ (yeah, I know) indicating that GOP voters might actually be more motivated. I'd say I don't understand that, except I kind of do. Walker has probably got some serious fans because he's a piece of work and so is the Republican Party in Wisconsin right now (think Paul Ryan, Reince Preibus, Mark Block--chief of staff of Herman Cain's campaign came out of Wisconsin, and my gosh, they've got a Republican history in that state from the birth of the party through Sen. McCarthy right up through Kathy Nickolaus--vote misplacer). And there has been some discussion on yon blogs regarding what the impact of a Walker win/loss would be, and how it might impact the presidential race.

My take is--it doesn't have a thing to do with the presidential race at all, as the White House has pretty carefully kept itself out of Wisconsin affairs, and some say the DNC support has even been tepid. There's numerous reasons for this. The cynical but probably dead-accurate cost-benefit analysis on political capital expenditure suggests that a loss would be more of a pain in the ass for the president and the national party than a possible win would offset, so things being roughly even--they'll just let this one go--keeping in mind of course that grassroots progressive support and the local party organization have been phenomenal to get this far.  But the Wisconsin race is special to Wisconsin, and is more particularly a referendum on whether Governor Scott Walker has gone too far as an aggressive partisan, than a statement on the relative merit of the Democratic organization in WI.

What I do suspect, though, is that the vote in Wisconsin will set an example for other states--as it has been doing. Political reality is what you can get away with. So even if a win for Scott Walker might not mean, for example, that people are less likely to vote Democratic in the fall, it does mean that other GOP administrations in other states might feel more comfortable adopting Walker's strategies. You know--bastardy. 

I'm rooting actively for Walker's defeat, but I fear it'll be close and probably contested and/or controversial. And even if Walker wins, I'm still bolstered by the idea that he is the target of the "John Doe" investigation, owing to, most likely, his own self-serving ambition in his previous elected office.  I hope the general rule of right bastards not prospering is an actual thing.  Otherwise, this political season will feel really and truly too long.

Postcards from Walkerstan

From The Christian Science Monitor:

Wisconsin lost 23,900 jobs between March 2011 and March 2012, according to data released Tuesday by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. The state’s lead in job losses is significantly greater than the rest of the 50 states: No other state lost more than 3,500 jobs. 

The majority of the losses in Wisconsin, 17,800, were in the public sector. However, the state lost more private-sector jobs, 6,100, than any other state. The only other states to report private-sector job losses in the same time period (instead of private-sector gains) were Mississippi and Rhode Island.

Just sayin'.

Walker Recall Drive Gets Over One Million Signatures

The peteitions have finally been rounded up and submitted in the bid to recall Scott Walker (R-etrograde corporatist lackey), and the total is mighty impressive: the figure is said to be over a million, already pre-sorted for duplicates and general fuckery.  This is large compared to the original vote.

This is a pretty big deal.  What it demonstrates is that grass-roots support and organization can pull off big things. What it should also suggest is that outside big money still doesn't take the place of bodies--maybe Walker can raise some big money--but will it translate to votes? Also important, will signatures translate to votes against?

We will have to see.  But this has been a very promising sign about what regular people can accomplish regarding their representation when they feel it has not been truly representative. And also, this is an example that might be followed in other states--some may work their own recall processes; some states may be encouraged to try to legislate such a process. And I think this is a good thing. If a candidate isn't what you expected once they get in office, maybe it is a good plan that they be "returned" for a better exchange. If you can do it with shoes--why not with a governor?

WI Gov. Scott Walker gets a "Mic Check"

I haven't visited with Weasely Walker in a while--so I think this version of the human microphone to describe Walker's infamy is a nice reminder that he's still about, and in need of recall.   Also of note--the points that the protesters here are spelling out:  Scott Walker is a creature of the Koch brothers and their money and its influence, that corporate money has too much to do with who gets power as well as who gets heard in our democracy and that people must have the right to organize in order to express their assembled power to protect their needs.

This protest was a beautiful thing.

So, the GOP in Wisconsin went and did it.

The tactics that have been used all along in this union-busting debacle in Wisconsin have been overtly anti-democratic and bullying.  From the opening salvo a month ago when Governor Walker threatened to use the National Guard to clamp down on any demonstrations over his proposal to end collective bargaining rights for state workers--

what we've been treated to since has been a spectacle of unfairness and over-reaching.  There's this. And this. And this. And this. So why in the world would anyone be surprised that Governor Grabby and the Gross Old Party resorted to this?

Wis. GOP bypasses Dems, cuts collective bargaining

MADISON, Wis. (AP) -- The Wisconsin Senate succeeded in voting Wednesday to strip nearly all collective bargaining rights from public workers, after Republicans outmaneuvered the chamber's missing Democrats and approved an explosive proposal that has rocked the state and unions nationwide.

"You are cowards!" spectators in the Senate gallery screamed as lawmakers voted. Within hours, a crowd of a few hundred protesters inside the Capitol had grown to several thousand, more than had been in the building at any point during weeks of protests.

"The whole world is watching!" they shouted as they pressed up against the heavily guarded entrance to the Senate chamber.

All 14 Senate Democrats fled to Illinois nearly three weeks ago, preventing the chamber from having enough members present to consider Gov. Scott Walker's "budget-repair bill" - a proposal introduced to plug a $137 million budget shortfall.

The Senate requires a quorum to take up any measures that spends money. But Republicans on Wednesday took all the spending measures out of the legislation and a special committee of lawmakers from both the Senate and Assembly approved the revised bill a short time later.

Note to Teabaggers--this is what something being "rammed down people's throats" actually looks like.  And this is also what actual freedoms being taken away looks like, courtesy of the Republican party. And this is what very justifiably angry people with purpose look like. They aren't being bussed in by astroturf groups and treated to the stirring support of Joe the Plumber, a folk hero who once...asked then-candidate Obama a slightly contentious question. They have the support of people who demonstrated in all 50 states, and they have been sent pizza and water by people not just here in the States, but all over the world.

I just don't see how this can stand.

Gov. Walker's Budget--some Cradle-to-Grave Perspective

Two items via ThinkProgress, which has really been on the Governor Walker/Koch Brothers stuff in the best way, that when juxtaposed, kind of elaborate where this flagrant ice-water douche sees the role of government in addressing the needs of the people of his state.

Item One:

Scott Walker's Budget Limits Birth Control Coverage, Eliminates Access to Health Care Services for Women


Item Two:

Walker's Budget Slashed Medicaid, While Increasing Funeral Assistance For Destitute Who Die

I think his guiding motto is "FOAD, Wisconsin."

So, a funny thing happened to WI Gov. Walker.

I haven't been blogging for a while, even though I have been watching what's going on in Wisconsin with a lot of interest. I'm a union-represented state-worker, myself, and I don't really like the rap we get as being overpaid or lazy--the reality is, we are working people, and if we have good pay and benefits, we have our unions to thank for them--and that is what a union is for. There is no shame in wanting to be properly compensated for one's labor. And for what it's worth, the power of collective bargaining is about demonstrating to employers the raw value of the work people do by making them recognize the man (and woman) power behind any productive operation, and if need be, forcing them to recognize the value of that work by withholding it. Make no mistake--the labor movement that the anti-union forces want to represent as "thugs" is made up of working people whose paychecks and benefits are a crucial support of middle-class households, and an attack on their collective bargaining rights is an attack on regular folks by a government that is not recognizing their value as people.

So I can't help but boggle at the misguided efforts of some tea-party fools trying to make mischief against regular people on behalf of Big Government aligned with Corporate Backing. That just makes no sense.

But on to the funny crank call, because finally--there's something I have to comment on.