Archive

June 26th, 2016

What Republicans' obstruction costs them

    For more than 20 years, Republican politicians have followed one overarching strategy: pursuing maximum opposition to the president when they don't control the White House.

    While liberals may hate this obstruction, they agree with conservatives that it is successful and makes sense from a Republican point of view. Jonathan Chait describes it this way:

    "The link between the design failures of the presidential system itself and these failures is clear enough. The worse things go for the president, the better the chances for the opposition party to regain power. Cooperating would merely give the president bipartisan cover, making him more popular and benefiting his party as well. Republican leaders have openly acknowledged these incentives. In the Obama era, this has forced the Republican leadership to mount a scorched-earth opposition, demonizing the president as an alien socialist who threatens America's way of life."

Full text and e-editions are available to premium subscribers only. To subscribe to the digital edition, please visit subscription page. If you are already a subscriber, please login to the site.

We'd be happy to set up login information for a free week of the Liberal Opinion Week website for you. Please email liberal@iowaconnect.com with your request. Thanks for your interest in the Liberal!

Trump sells out faith

    Where religion is concerned, Donald Trump's bigotry is his biggest problem, but his ignorance comes in a close second.

    We already know that Trump will say whatever he thinks will appeal to the crowd he is talking to, but calling Hillary Clinton's faith into question before a group of evangelical leaders on Tuesday represented a new low -- if such a thing is possible in a campaign that hits those markers on an almost-daily basis. Trump's comprehensive and often factually challenged attack on Clinton Wednesday is drawing much attention. But his comments on her faith say even more about him.

    Trump does not appear to be very religious and seems uncomfortable around the subject. In principle, this is not a problem. The Constitution explicitly forbids religious tests for federal office. Over our history, presidents have varied in their attachment to religion, and there is no sure-fire way to know whether what a politician says about his or her belief in God is true.

Full text and e-editions are available to premium subscribers only. To subscribe to the digital edition, please visit subscription page. If you are already a subscriber, please login to the site.

We'd be happy to set up login information for a free week of the Liberal Opinion Week website for you. Please email liberal@iowaconnect.com with your request. Thanks for your interest in the Liberal!

The Supreme Court reminds everyone why it's the most important issue in the 2016 election

    In two dramatic decisions, the Supreme Court Thursday reminded everyone of what the most important issue in the 2016 presidential election really is. In the first case, the justices upheld the University of Texas's affirmative action program in a surprising 4-to-3 decision written by Justice Anthony Kennedy. (Justice Elena Kagan had to recuse herself.) But I want to focus on the other case, in which the court, shorthanded because Senate Republicans have refused to consider President Barack Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland to fill the seat of the late Antonin Scalia, deadlocked 4-to-4 on a critical immigration case:

    "The Supreme Court handed President Obama a significant legal defeat Thursday, refusing to revive his stalled plan to shield millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation and give them the right to work legally in the United States. …

    "The court's liberals and conservatives deadlocked, which leaves in place a lower court's decision that the president exceeded his powers in issuing the directive."

Full text and e-editions are available to premium subscribers only. To subscribe to the digital edition, please visit subscription page. If you are already a subscriber, please login to the site.

We'd be happy to set up login information for a free week of the Liberal Opinion Week website for you. Please email liberal@iowaconnect.com with your request. Thanks for your interest in the Liberal!

Money for nothing

    By an overwhelming 3-to-1 margin, Swiss voters have rejected a proposal that would have guaranteed all residents a monthly income, whether they worked or not. Yet supporters of the concept elsewhere are not taking the Swiss "no" for an answer.

    Frequently proposed in the past, guaranteed income for all is back in vogue because of fears that robots and artificial intelligence threaten whole categories of jobs, especially for less skilled workers, and that any remaining jobs will be unstable "gigs." Mass poverty and inequality loom.

    Economists' usual prescription is greater investment in education and training, to equip people for high-paying work. The guaranteed-income movement says it's smarter and simpler to separate subsistence from labor.

Full text and e-editions are available to premium subscribers only. To subscribe to the digital edition, please visit subscription page. If you are already a subscriber, please login to the site.

We'd be happy to set up login information for a free week of the Liberal Opinion Week website for you. Please email liberal@iowaconnect.com with your request. Thanks for your interest in the Liberal!

Hair-trigger alert

    I feel the finger on the trigger. I also feel it on the button.

    "Dear President Obama," the letter begins. It goes on to remind him of something he said in his 2008 presidential campaign: "Keeping nuclear weapons ready to launch on a moment's notice is a dangerous relic of the Cold War. Such policies increase the risk of catastrophic accidents or miscalculation."

    The letter, from the Union of Concerned Scientists, is signed by 90 scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates. It continues: "After your election, you called for taking 'our nuclear weapons off hair-trigger alert.'"

    Presidential campaigns, mass killings, war . . . nuclear war. Washington, we have a problem.

Full text and e-editions are available to premium subscribers only. To subscribe to the digital edition, please visit subscription page. If you are already a subscriber, please login to the site.

We'd be happy to set up login information for a free week of the Liberal Opinion Week website for you. Please email liberal@iowaconnect.com with your request. Thanks for your interest in the Liberal!

Democrats' sit-in is a justified act of civil disobedience

    Sometimes civil disobedience is justified. Sometimes it is necessary. The unprecedented events playing out on the House floor -- Democratic members staging a sit-in in the well of their own chamber - represent such a moment.

    The immediate, and understandable, precipitating events were the massacre in Orlando and the refusal of House Republican leaders to permit a vote on a measure to try to keep lethal weapons out of the hands of possible terrorists and others whose past behavior and mental state mirror the profile of the mass murderers who have made the United States the citadel of gun violence.

    But the underlying cause for the revolt runs far deeper. Partisan polarization and intense competition for control of Congress have ushered in a ruthless stewardship of the first branch of government, motivated mostly to kill bills and avoid votes, all in the quest to retain or gain majority control. Regular order did not carry the day in the House, but then regular order has not been in evidence in the House or Senate for many years.

Full text and e-editions are available to premium subscribers only. To subscribe to the digital edition, please visit subscription page. If you are already a subscriber, please login to the site.

We'd be happy to set up login information for a free week of the Liberal Opinion Week website for you. Please email liberal@iowaconnect.com with your request. Thanks for your interest in the Liberal!

Will Trump Last The Election?

    An ordinary sociopath would have known to pretend shock and sorrow after the terrible mass murders in Orlando. Shielded from ordinary human interaction by his arrogance and wealth, however, presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump had no clue how to act. So he sent out an instinctive, self-serving reaction on Twitter:

    "Appreciate the congrats for being right on radical Islamic terrorism, I don't want congrats, I want toughness & vigilance. We must be smart!"

    Meghan McCain, Arizona Sen. John McCain's daughter, reacted incredulously: "You're congratulating yourself because 50 people are dead this morning in a horrific tragedy?"

    Even more pointed was GOP consultant and TV talking head Ana Navarro: "Translating Trump: '20 people (sic) are dead. 42 people are injured. But of course, 1st, it's all about Me. Me. Me.' Ugh."

    Both women spoke for millions. Is there no tragedy so grave, no sorrow so profound, that it can penetrate the hardened carapace of Donald Trump's ego?

Full text and e-editions are available to premium subscribers only. To subscribe to the digital edition, please visit subscription page. If you are already a subscriber, please login to the site.

We'd be happy to set up login information for a free week of the Liberal Opinion Week website for you. Please email liberal@iowaconnect.com with your request. Thanks for your interest in the Liberal!

What the Russian hackers who attacked the DNC don't get about 'oppo research'

    Last week, The Washington Post broke the news that for the better part of the past year, Russian hackers have been in and out of the Democratic National Committee's computer servers, targeting the opposition research that the party has developed to use against presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

    Why were Russians looking in the DNC's oppo files, and did they get what they were looking for? Probably not the 211-page document most of the media has been digging though since Gawker published it on Wednesday. That looks like a traditional and fairly basic "book" that political researchers like me prepare for non-researchers. (And judging by the relatively slim length and December date, it's probably a preliminary glance.) It gives campaign leaders a window into what public information is out there and what themes and narratives have been out on Trump before. It's the CliffsNotes to the research, not the research itself. Most likely, what the Russians were after is something much bigger. But what they did find was a lot of information they could have gotten elsewhere in the public domain, legally.

Full text and e-editions are available to premium subscribers only. To subscribe to the digital edition, please visit subscription page. If you are already a subscriber, please login to the site.

We'd be happy to set up login information for a free week of the Liberal Opinion Week website for you. Please email liberal@iowaconnect.com with your request. Thanks for your interest in the Liberal!

Welcome to Half Dome, Sponsored by Nike

    Imagine painstakingly making up your way up the cables of Yosemite National Park’s famous Half Dome peak — only to see swooshes and slogans encouraging you to “Just Do It.”

    “Welcome to Half Dome,” a gleaming banner greets you, “sponsored by Nike.”

    Unfortunately, it’s a possibility. As the coverage swells over Barack and Michelle Obama’s recent visit to Yosemite and Carlsbad Caverns, Americans are learning that national parks will now start selling naming rights.

    The parks are facing a hefty budget shortfall, so they’re turning to corporations — who are apparently more generous with cash than the current Congress.

    Truly, this is a bummer.

    We go to national parks to escape the commercialism of modern life. Nothing is more spectacular than enjoying the beauty of a waterfall or the sunset over the mountains, or the magnificence of wild grizzly bears, wolves, and bison that one rarely sees outside of a national park.

Full text and e-editions are available to premium subscribers only. To subscribe to the digital edition, please visit subscription page. If you are already a subscriber, please login to the site.

We'd be happy to set up login information for a free week of the Liberal Opinion Week website for you. Please email liberal@iowaconnect.com with your request. Thanks for your interest in the Liberal!

June 25th

Hillary Gossip Redux

    I am so excited to tell you that we’re returning to the question of whether or not Hillary Clinton threw a vase at her husband in the White House.

    Really, this one hasn’t come up for about 20 years. But Gary Byrne says he saw the pieces! In a box! Byrne is a former Secret Service officer who has written a tell-all book, “Crisis of Character,” about the (horrible/embarrassing/appalling) things he purportedly witnessed during the Bill Clinton presidency.

    It’s coming out next week to what’s supposed to be a big rollout in the conservative media. Donald Trump has been twittering about it, and he quoted from it in his speech Wednesday. (That was the speech in which the new, measured Trump said Clinton “may be the most corrupt person ever to seek the presidency,” whose “decisions spread death, destruction and terrorism everywhere she touched.”)

Full text and e-editions are available to premium subscribers only. To subscribe to the digital edition, please visit subscription page. If you are already a subscriber, please login to the site.

We'd be happy to set up login information for a free week of the Liberal Opinion Week website for you. Please email liberal@iowaconnect.com with your request. Thanks for your interest in the Liberal!