Short: Will Republicans let other Republicans drive drunk?

Will the more establishment Republican senators, like Coburn of Oklahoma, Cornyn of Texas, and of course Mitch McConnell, let the Tea Party senators delay the appropriations bills due on Sept. 30? That's what rebels Mike Lee and Ted Cruz are planning. They have threatened to stop any bill with funding for Obamacare, so the target is the Continuing Resolution for the next fiscal year starting Oct. 1. That is a promise to shut down federal government.

So, will the other GOP senators hand them the keys? That's the only unknown for the next two months. It's screaming for a ModeratePoli prediction, but I don't know yet. I'll update here when I have a solid guess.

Josh Barro, my new favorite pundit, says the sober ones will keep the keys. I'm rooting for the other option. Guess why! (No hints.)

Image: carkeyphiladelphiacarkeysphiladelphia.blogspot.com (really)

Meanwhile, the Dems continue their winning strategy of not letting the crazy get loose. Boring...

Leak: For them, Norquist is a RINO

OK, folks, I have no idea how politics is done, so this was eye-popping. You see, to be infulential (I mean influential) in politics, you have to host a weekly members-only strategy session where you talk about who's not pulling their weight, who stabbed you in the back, what words to use to attack someone, and what everyone has to accomplish before next week.

This is like Journolist, but for conservatives. The problem is that there's more than one of these members-only conservative networks. Norquist has had one for twenty years, but now there's an upstart that hates Norquist as a compromising-squish-establishment-fake-conservative. Wow. The right keeps moving so fast that we normal people can't keep up with what's extreme nowadays.

The people behind this ultra-conservative scout troop include Justice Clarence Thomas's wife, defunct representative Allen West, Ted Cruz, and a bunch of, ahem, journalists from Breitbart.

How do we know this? Someone got hold of documents from their private Google site and leaked the whole thing to Mother Jones. Just as I keep saying, whatever you want to hide, it ain't gonna stay hidden.

A good introduction is here, but be sure to read the long version to find out how the powers-that-be craft the news memes you can't stand. One. More. Second.

Oh, and they hate Karl Rove too.

Image: motherjones.com

Extra. Why are we bombarded with so many talking points? Per the Leesburg grid:

"Where this really gets interesting is when you're covering points faster than the opponent can create them. This puts them 'behind the eight ball,' and they never seem to create their own ideas; they only respond to yours."

Please, God, no, it's actually designed that way.

Update 7/30/13. Jonathan Bernstein of PlainBlog (still fascinating during these doldrums--great job!) says:

"Really? You're telling me that the same right-wing kooks who were publicly hyping Benghazi! and publicly urging Boehner and Issa to 'make this supposed scandal a top-priority' were...also doing the same thing when the TV cameras weren't on!"

He makes a valid point--none of this is particularly surprising or a scandal. I still found the information fresh, especially to know who's in the group and who's not.

Short: Sabotaging Obamacare

The GOP isn't going to let Obamacare die because it's a terrible program that people will hate or because it will cost too much. No, they have to torpedo it by all means possible. That includes making sure NFL players don't appear in any public service announcements. (How to prevent that? Intimidating letters to the commissioner.)

Norm Ornstein, a well-rounded egghead, writes this: [emphasis added]

But to do everything possible to undercut and destroy its implementation—which in this case means finding ways to deny coverage to many who lack any health insurance; to keep millions who might be able to get better and cheaper coverage in the dark about their new options; to create disruption for the health providers who are trying to implement the law, including insurers, hospitals, and physicians... —is simply unacceptable, even contemptible. One might expect this kind of behavior from a few grenade-throwing firebrands. That the effort is spearheaded by the Republican leaders of the House and Senate—even if Speaker John Boehner is motivated by fear of his caucus, and McConnell and Cornyn by fear of Kentucky and Texas Republican activists—takes one's breath away.

Hat tip: PlainBlog.

Image: littlegreenfootballs.com

Last outpost of crazy: For sale on ebay

These items for sale surprised even me:

Antique Amazon Indian LARGE Spears Native American South Peru Brazil Primitive

Image: ebay com

Now I'm going to see whether I can buy a brain on ebay.

Derbyshire Junior at National Review

Victor Davis Hanson has a column at National Review about race. Facing Facts about Race is a mess of a column, so I'm not quite sure what facts we are supposed to face.

The occasion for this column is the perennial race issues surrounding the Trayvon Martin shooting. Every time something happens in this case, certain people get bent out of shape because they don't want to be reminded that a guy with a gun shot an unarmed black teen that he wrongly suspected of being a burglar. I'm not sure why some people find that so uncomfortable, unless of course they see themselves in Zimmerman's shoes, wanting to catch a burglar and shoot in "self-defense."** But something about this case drives some white conservative bloggers to post reminders that blacks really are dangerous, this is all a case of race hucksterism, or some such.

Hanson complains about Obama's short speech (which I read) and Holder's longer speech to the NAACP (which I haven't read). I think I grasp the point of Obama's speech, which is to be careful about profiling young black man as thugs, because most aren't--some are just like he was when he was young.

Hanson's column is less clear:

• Maybe he's saying that blacks shouldn't have solidarity because there are a lot of young black male criminals. 
• Maybe he's not saying anything about solidarity, but just thinks Obama needs a reminder about black criminals. 
• Maybe he's trying to tell everyone to beware of young black men, because a lot of them are criminals. 

This last guess is probably closest to what he's attempting to say. However, this leaves us with a big problem in that there are a lot of young black men all over this country, and we really can't wall them off in a huge compound somewhere. Or maybe Hanson thinks we should do that. I can't tell because he's hasn't gone at all beyond his one fact to anything remotely helpful to anyone. So much for facing facts in the plural.

Hanson says to be careful of groups of young black men, but Trayvon Martin was just one black man. So, what advice does Hanson have about how to deal with a single black man walking in your community? Is Hanson implying that you should do as Zimmerman did? I don't think so because we don't particularly want to see that outcome repeated.

So I won't assume Hanson is giving any advice about single black men, but just groups of young black men. I'm not sure what his advice was. There were some anecdotes of his father's experience being robbed and Hanson's own two experiences, but what exactly is his prescription for the reader, and for his sons, to whom he passed on these anecdotes?

Well, that's not clear in the least. Maybe Hanson should reread Derbyshire (the piece that got him fired) because at least Derbyshire had some actions you could actually follow--if you want to live in a mostly white enclave and be frightened whenever you're in the company of any regular black folks on the sidewalks, shopping, or at the beach.

Why has the Zimmerman/Martin case prompted so much bad advice from conservative white columnists? How much longer are they going to keep doing this? Why are some people so deranged about the Zimmerman/Martin case?

Frightening group of young black male dancers

Image: kootation.com

**OK, I did think of one reason why people get upset about the Zimmerman investigation and trial. They are tired of being accused of racism. So anytime someone else is accused of racism, they rush in to defend the maligned person. They don't bother to notice that they aren't being accused, or that some people aren't making the argument that it was racism. It's all blurred together, and they are deep in reactive mode. Please, people, get out of reactive mode. I don't want to have to write about this anymore.


Update 1/14/14. I just wanted to note that I haven't had to write about this subject for nearly six months now. Very good, everyone.

Last outpost of crazy: 2016 preview!

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Image: theatlanticwire.com

Should Zimmerman have been tried?

After the acquittal of George Zimmerman, many are trumpeting that he should never have been tried in the first place. Well, if acquittal is the reason, then Casey Anthony and O.J. Simpson should never have been tried either.

So it's more than the acquittal that prompts this outcry. Many believe that the charges against Zimmerman were trumped up, that it clearly was self-defense, and that Zimmerman was charged and put through this ordeal merely to placate race baiters and their mobs.

"First, I believe all the fury over this case is the product of (a) the media and (b) the racists in the black community." -- blog comment

It's not that there's no evidence for this viewpoint. Definitely the case went forward because of media pressure (also known as reporting) and because of  demonstrations in the black community and the involvement of black political leaders such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. 

However, it's important to view more than just the media involvement, and not forget the particulars about the case. It seems to me that the shooting and killing of an unarmed man should be investigated. Really, any killing should be investigated. So the question is how deeply to investigate. 

The Martin family felt that the investigation had been too cursory. The lead detective agreed, the police chief and local prosecutor did not. Those against bringing charges felt there was not enough evidence for a conviction, which was born out. However, was there enough evidence to bring the case to a grand jury?

From what I saw, yes, there was plenty for evidence. The people who say Zimmerman shouldn't have been tried  have to ignore a lot of evidence, which they do. They tend to focus on the media and what they call racial hucksterism.

It's a losing argument to claim there was no media frenzy or race baiting. Why? Because there was some, so the proponents of this argument have examples to point to. However, it is unfair and impossible to demand that an issue have NO associated media hype or political grandstanding. You really can't defeat the argument that "it's all based on political X." That argument is not disprovable, but it also makes it suspect. 

So instead, I would hammer away at the non-political and non-hyped reasons why it was right to try Zimmerman. Like he shot an unarmed, non-burglar in his neighborhood. Like his story of what happened contains a lot of dubious claims, such as being punched in the nose 25-30 times. Besides, we usually want the deceased and their family to get to see some justice. Gee, I don't think I had to mention race once in this short list.

So I strongly contend that it was right to try Zimmerman. I was surprised to find out that Zimmerman, or at least his lawyer, agreed that he should go to trial. His lawyer, Mark O'Mara, waived his right to a Stand-your-ground hearing, clearing the way to go to trial. 

So, among those who think Zimmerman should go to trial is Zimmerman's own lawyer. I guess that answers the question I started with. Do I get to say QED?

...a head (not) slammed about a dozen times onto the cement sidewalk.

Image: everywhere

Extras.

• I always say and said that there needs to be a full investigation. 
• The major GOP leaders agreed at one point. Google shows that the change occurred approximately March 25 after Gingrich blasted Obama's comments on the case. BC (before change), what Gingrich says.
• Good pictorial review of evidence, also cited above.
• Important evidence turned up by the parents, ignored by the stalled investigation.
• Review of Zimmerman's many calls to police (scroll down for it)
• The chief investigator, Chris Serino, is a fascinating gauge of this case: thinks the investigation should continue, thinks they should file charges, thinks they don't have enough evidence. For you to follow up via your own searches.
• Typical laundry list of complaints--so much the same with most complainers, and not relevant to the evidence of this particular crime.
• Window into the alternative view of Trayvon. So little overlap in the set of facts each side looks at and considers. Surprise! There really is a drug you can make with skittles and a drink. Possible whitewash in the mainstream media? Or fake Facebook pages.
• Google white-on-black crime (one of the complaints).
• Got to see this: true-blue hucksterism.