Hullabaloo

Monday, January 02, 2012

 
Carrying the torches

by digby

FYI:



All things being equal Gary Johnson looks like a better civil liberties choice than anyone else in the field (although I do find myself somewhat shocked that not one candidate stands absolutely against torture.) Unfortunately, Johnson takes the states' rights cop-out too, so the effect of his more tolerant stands would have the practical effect of creating less freedom for a substantial number of people.

The problem is there's this, which the ACLU doesn't score:

Johnson believes the United States is on the verge of an economic collapse that he compares to the 1998 Russian financial crisis, which he believes can be stopped only by balancing the federal budget. As such, he promises to submit a balanced budget for the year 2013 and promises to veto any bills containing expenditures in excess of revenues. He promises to look at every decision as a cost-benefit analysis. His budget would cut federal expenditures by 43% in every area, "across the board," including "responsible entitlement reform," because the "math is simple: federal spending must be cut not by millions or billions, but by trillions." He calls the notion "that we can control spending and balance the budget without reforming Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security" "lunacy." Johnson supports amending the U.S. Constitution to require an annual balanced budget.

Johnson did not support the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010, or any other "bailout" or "stimulus" bills, and opposes President Barack Obama's proposed American Jobs Act. He believes the federal spending in these laws is wasteful and ineffectual, and calls them "bloated." He famously quipped, "My next-door neighbor's two dogs have created more shovel ready jobs than this current administration."

Johnson supports ending the federal personal and corporate income tax system and replacing it with the FairTax reform proposal, a national consumption tax on new goods and services. He believes the FairTax would "reboot" the American economy without impacting those at or under the poverty level, who would not be subject to it. He believes that abolishing the federal corporate income tax, which he says is the second highest in the world, would create tens of millions of jobs immediately. Due to his stance on taxes, David Weigel described him as "the original Tea Party candidate".

I think that's pretty cracked. But then that's why, despite my lifelong opposition to most of the "Democrat wars"(as Bob Dole used to call them) and my strong belief in civil liberties, I'm an egalitarian, liberal Democrat instead of a laissez-faire, libertarian Republican. I just don't agree with more than 1% of that economic vision. (And the weepy Masters of the Universe have confirmed all my worst suspicions about what kind of world we can expect with them being left entirely to their own devices.)

Still, if I were a libertarian, I think I'd expect my candidates to ditch this states' rights cop-out. Human rights are human rights and the US "states" aren't sacred institutions allowed dispensation to infringe them any more than the federal government is. "States' rights trump individual rights" isn't exactly a universal principle. It's not as if we don't have a very colorful history to inform us in this regard.

But let's get real here and take a good look at that chart. Unless Paul unexpectedly gets the GOP nomination or Johnson suddenly surges as a third party candidate, we are assuredly looking at GOP nominee who is basically an authoritarian nutcase across the board. There's not even the tiniest bit of daylight there. Good God.

Update: Oh my:

“Then, in summer 2008, Johnson started seeing Kate Prusack, a passionate cyclist and Santa Fe Realtor. Early in their courtship, Johnson gave her a copy of Ayn Rand’s free-market manifesto 'Atlas Shrugged.' ‘If you want to understand me, read this,’ he said.”

*Disclaimer: I'm not saying Barack Obama is better than Gary Johnson on civil liberties. But he is substantially better than Mitt Romney and marginally better on many other things I also care about. My perfect political idol unfortunately isn't running, although there are some really good anti-war, social justice, egalitarian liberal candidates down ticket.

.

digby 1/02/2012 07:00:00 PM |

 
Why do conservatives hate Americans?

by David Atkins

Given the Right's recent lurch toward Ayn Rand-style Objectivism, it seems that an intelligent journalist would put the following facts together:

• 80% of Americans own only 7% of America's wealth.


• The new mainstream in conservatism maintains that the poor are only poor because of laziness and lack of initiative.

It's not exactly a leap in logic to point out that mainstream conservatism now maintains that 80% of Americans are simply ungrateful, lazy bastards who need tough love to do better.

In that context, trying to get rid of Social Security and Medicare makes sense for them. But shouldn't someone start asking, then, why conservatives have such contempt for the vast majority of Americans, and their work ethic? It's not a hard question to ask. The politics of it may be controversial, but the logic isn't.




.
thereisnospoon 1/02/2012 03:30:00 PM |

 
Action - Reaction

by digby

Corey Robin and the Reactionaries (featuring Amanda Marcotte). No it's not a band, it's a conversation. And a good one:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Buy the book: it's really good.




.
digby 1/02/2012 02:00:00 PM |

 
Because they're just that much more productive than you are

by digby

Chart 'O the Day:



We should be thanking them.


.
digby 1/02/2012 12:00:00 PM |

 

Dazed and confused

by digby

There's a lot of chatter about Ron Paul among lefties these days, some of which I've addressed here, here and here. Apparently there are quite a few liberals and progressives who normally vote Democratic who are going to vote for Ron Paul instead. Many have decided to support him based upon Obama's national security and civil liberties apostasies. Others are hoping to hasten what they see as the inevitable destruction of the political system in order to get on with it. (What "it" is remains a bit vague.)

But on the ground in Iowa, where the first votes are about to be cast tomorrow, the reasoning is a bit more ... eccentric:

Rep. Ron Paul, in a tight race for first place in Iowa with Mitt Romney, is perhaps the most likely to benefit from Democratic crossovers. His campaign is distributing information sheets advising Iowans that they can register Republican "for a day" on caucus night, then switch their registration back afterward if they want.

"It's easy. You can register on your way in the door," David Fischer, co-chairman of Paul's Iowa organization, told voters Thursday at a campaign stop in Atlantic.

John Long, a registered Democrat, said that "last time, unfortunately, I believed a lot of the rhetoric" and voted for Obama, after going to a Democratic caucus as a Joe Biden supporter. Long feels that job-crushing regulations have gotten worse under President Obama, who he said had failed to end the "embarrassing" political spectacle in Washington, in part because he was too weak to stand up to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, the Democratic leaders in Congress.

The 65-year-old semi-retired accountant plans to vote for Paul at a Republican caucus in West Des Moines. "Ron Paul has a lot going for him, particularly in the economic area," he said. Long doesn't care for the Texas congressman's isolationist foreign policy but says that no candidate is perfect and that Paul "is principled enough not to say stuff just to get elected."
[...]

Cheryl Hout, an Obama voter from Osceola, Iowa, said she "fell for" Obama in 2008 "because he's such a good speaker," but now calls the president "a liar." The 54-year-old special-education teacher is very unhappy that he didn't deliver on the change he promised, especially with a healthcare plan whose implementation has been much too slow to meet her family's medical needs. She and her husband, Terry, 63, an independent who says his Obama vote was "a mistake" and who has never attended a caucus before, plan to vote for Paul.

"We're looking for something new to revive the country," she said. "We're so close to losing our whole country. China owns us. They could just walk right in and take us. It's scary."

Ooookay.

I'm reminded of this very insightful piece by Chris Hayes, about how some voters make their decisions. It's well worth reading again as we go into campaign season in earnest.

.

digby 1/02/2012 10:00:00 AM |

 
Teens react to Rick Perry's "Strong"

by David Atkins

This is almost like beating a dead horse at this point given Rick Perry's irrelevance to the GOP race, but this video posted a few days ago is priceless:



Republicans are screwed with the younger generation, particularly on the social conservative front. Libertarianism is making some dangerous ideological inroads, as the only people unafraid to be against insane foreign interventions and insane drug policies also happen to be in favor of insane Objectivist domestic spending policy. If Democrats don't figure out that the future lies in taking more progressive stances on social issues, foreign policy and drug policy, they're going to get flanked by libertarian nutcases who will implement objectively horrible domestic spending cut policies.

But the traditional conservative base is dying and it isn't coming back. The kids are all right.


.
thereisnospoon 1/02/2012 07:30:00 AM |

Sunday, January 01, 2012

 
The failure to prosecute bankers leads to revolutionary, divisive politics

by David Atkins

There has been some conversation among liberal bloggers about the Occupy protests and the recent moves even by liberal mayors to remove the campsites. Many like myself have argued that America is supposed to be a nation of laws, after all, and a representative democracy. Constitutional democracy depends on rule of law. The people vote on representatives who make laws. If the representatives don't make the right laws, they get replaced in elections. Judges make sure the rights of minorities are protected from the rule of the majority mob. Executives are supposed to enforce those laws--which gets tricky, of course, when it's the executive who is allegedly breaking the law, but let's bypass that special case for a moment because it's not the point of this post, nor the lawbreaking most Americans are really concerned about.

If the people's representatives continue to refuse to make the laws, the people can engage in civil disobedience and get arrested to highlight the issues, again to shame elected officials into passing or enforcing the right laws. But it's still about the laws and the people who make them, democratically elected by the people. It's one thing to engage in civil disobedience with the expectation of being arrested as part of the visibility of the protest. It's another thing to expect that authorities will simply ignore the flagrant legal violations and allow indefinite encampments without arrests.

Still, elected officials have more moral authority than mobs of people by virtue of their being elected. That's the whole point of representative democracy which, as Winston Churchill dryly noted, is the worst form of government--except for the others that have been tried from time to time.

One can argue that the system is so hopelessly corrupted by money that the laws are inherently unjust and the officials not worth dealing with, but that is the logic of revolution, of systemic collapse. And that goes to some very uncomfortable places, especially when you consider that the extremists on the Right are perfectly capable of making similar arguments and putting them into action. If it's revolution we're talking about, it's going to take a lot more than public camping to bring about the movement's goals. In a nation as bitterly divided as this one, a revolution against the current system in a more progressive direction would almost certainly by a very bloody, bitter battle--not an Aquarian change of utopian consciousness. The change could probably happen peacefully over a couple of decades through the buildup of grassroots political pressure and electing progressively better people into office. But to accomplish the goals quickly would take guns and lots of them, not protest signs--which is partly why Candidate Obama's promises to "change our politics" fell so drastically short once he became President Obama. Nobody can change this economic system on a dime without making some serious political systemic changes, including especially to the filibuster. That in turn takes not an executive, but an adequate number of progressive legislators who see the problem and are willing to make the changes in spite of being labeled "divisive."

Even so, it's awfully hard even for folks like me to argue that mayors have an obligation to enforce the rule of law, when the rule of law so obviously only applies to the little people. In case you missed the 60 Minutes segment from last week, it's clear that the laws are only being enforced against regular people, even as the billionaire criminals skate free.



The failure to hold any of these egregious thieves accountable is fraying the social contract. It legitimizes the revolutionary worldview.

Part of the decision not to prosecute them has undoubtedly been (apart from pure corruption and the difficulty and expense involved in the prosecutions) the desire not to do anything too divisive. But the fact is that not prosecuting them has led to increasing political division in this country, as groups on both the left and the right believe the system incapable of dispensing justice. That in turn leads to a revolutionary theory of change, which (each in their own characteristic way) is what binds Tea Partiers with guns at congressional rallies promising "second Amendment remedies," and Occupiers illegally shutting down ports, declaring basic city zoning laws unconstitutional, and demanding the right to pitch tents on public property for years on end if need be to accomplish undefined goals.

Don't blame the Tea Partiers or the Occupiers for this state of affairs. Blame the elected officials who have refused to the prosecute the people responsible for the economic crisis. If people thought the system was working the way it should be and prosecuting the right people, it would do a lot to pull the release on the political pressure valve.


.
thereisnospoon 1/01/2012 04:00:00 PM |

 
"In the absence of passion we are tender of our persons"

by digby

Looking back over the past year, it seems like a good day to reprise this post by Caleb Crain from some years back about asymmetric political warfare:

William Hazlitt explained the nature of it in his 1820 essay, "On the Spirit of Partisanship."

Conservatives and liberals play the game of politics differently, Hazlitt wrote, because they have different motivations. Liberals are motivated by principles and tend to believe that personal honor can be spared in political combat. They may, in fact, become vain about their highmindedness. Hazlitt condemns the mildness as a mistake, both in moral reasoning and in political strategy. "They betray the cause by not defending it as it is attacked, tooth and nail, might and main, without exception and without remorse."

The conservatives, on the other hand, start with a personal interest in the conflict. Not wishing to lose their hold on power, they are fiercer. "We"---i.e., the liberals, or the "popular cause," in Hazlitt's terminology---"stand in awe of their threats, because in the absence of passion we are tender of our persons.

They beat us in courage and in intellect, because we have nothing but the common good to sharpen our faculties or goad our will; they have no less an alternative in view than to be uncontrolled masters of mankind or to be hurled from high---

"To grinning scorn a sacrifice,
And endless infamy!"

They do not celebrate the triumphs of their enemies as their own: it is with them a more feeling disputation. They never give an inch of ground that they can keep; they keep all that they can get; they make no concessions that can redound to their own discredit; they assume all that makes for them; if they pause it is to gain time; if they offer terms it is to break them: they keep no faith with enemies: if you relax in your exertions, they persevere the more: if you make new efforts, they redouble theirs.

While they give no quarter, you stand upon mere ceremony. While they are cutting your throat, or putting the gag in your mouth, you talk of nothing but liberality, freedom of inquiry, and douce humanit…. Their object is to destroy you, your object is to spare them---to treat them according to your own fancied dignity.

They have sense and spirit enough to take all advantages that will further their cause: you have pedantry and pusillanimity enough to undertake the defence of yours, in order to defeat it. It is the difference between the efficient and the inefficient; and this again resolves itself into the difference between a speculative proposition and a practical interest.

It is not fair play, and Hazlitt thinks that liberals who decline to fight fire with fire are fools. "It might as well be said that a man has a right to knock me on the head on the highway, and that I am only to use mildness and persuasion in return, as best suited to the justice of my cause; as that I am not to retaliate and make reprisal on the common enemies of mankind in their own style and mode of execution."

Last year's legislative antics show that not much has changed.


.
digby 1/01/2012 02:00:00 PM |

 
Looking for a cure

by digby

If you overdid last night you're probably still feeling the effects. I'm sorry. I know how it feels.

If you can focus, you might enjoy this in depth article about the various science relating to hangovers and the most common thinking about how to cure them. If not, just drink water and try to wait it out. I learned some time back to drink a lot of water while I'm drinking alcohol, before I go to bed and during the day after. (I also always drink light colored alcohol and brush my teeth frequently during hangover day.) It has cut my pain by at least 50% on the occasions I overdue (much, much less often than in my youth.) And sleep as much as possible so your body can deal with the toxic reprocessing while you are unconscious.

Plus comfort food. Necessary to soothe the soul as well as the stomach.

You'll feel better tomorrow.

.

digby 1/01/2012 12:30:00 PM |

 
Mitt's Mammonism, Mormonism ... and Mayanism?

by digby

Ok, now this is even stranger than usual. Howie discusses Mitt Romney's Mormonism and Mammonism and then reveals a little factoid that will scare the bejeezuzs out of the Religious Right if they ever hear about it:

But back to Mammon. That isn't the only thing Romney worships. His family fled to Mexico in the 1800s in order to preserve their polygamist way of life and lived there for generations. I'm in the Yucatan now and have been visiting Mayan sacred sites all month. I've heard again and again from Mayans that Mormon missionaries-- they're everywhere in Mexico, thick as fleas-- tell them that the Mayan feathered-serpent god Quetzalcoatl was the resurrected Jesus Christ, who Mormons believe as a prime tenet of their "religion" visited the Americas after being crucified.

The chief Mormon after Brigham Young, John Taylor, who began the Mormon colonization of Mexico, wrote: "The story of the life of the Mexican divinity Quetzalcoatl closely resembles that of the Savior; so closely, indeed, that we can come to no other conclusion than that Quetzalcoatl and Christ are the same being." Does Mitt Romney worship Quetzalcoatl as the resurrected Jesus? He won't say. In fact, for a powerful Mormon bishop, he sure hates talking about his faith.

Whoa.

The White Bearded God – Quetzalcoatl in the Book of Mormon

Ancient American literature frequently refers to a “white, bearded god who descended out of the heavens.” Called by many names, this legendary figure is often referred to as Quetzalcoatl. “Historians of the sixteenth century recorded pre-Hispanic beliefs concerning the white, bearded god who came to the Americas long before the arrival of the Spanish conquerors” (Brewerton, 30). While this may seem to be merely a legend or an unexplainable part of history, the Book of Mormon, believed to be written by ancient American prophets, reports the visitation of Jesus Christ to the American continent following his resurrection. The congruencies between the Book of Mormon account and Native American legends are astonishing. The following paragraphs contain examples of these Native American legends:

Bernardo de Sahagun (born 1499) wrote: “Quetzalcoatl was esteemed and considered as a god, and was worshipped in older times. He had long hair and was bearded. The people worshipped only the Lord” (Historia General de las Cosas de Nueva España, Mexico: Editorial Porrua, S. A., 1985, pp. 195, 598).

Diego Duran (born 1537) wrote: “A great man—a person venerable and religious—bearded, tall, long hair, dignified deportment, heroic acts, miracles—I affirm he could have been one of the blessed apostles” (Historia de las Indias de Nueva España, 1867, first ed., 2 vols., Mexico: Editorial Porrua, S. A., 1967, 1:9).
Bartolomé de las Casas (born 1474) wrote that Quetzalcoatl, the plumed serpent, was white, had a rounded beard, was tall, and came from the sea in the east, from whence he will return (see Los Indios de Mexico y Nueva España Antologiá, Mexico: Editorial Porrua, S. A., 1982, pp. 54, 218, 223).
The Tamanacos Indian tribes in Venezuela have the same legend of a white, bearded god: “[Amalivacá] had a face the color of the light fluffy clouds of the morning, and white was his long head of hair. … He said: ‘I am Amalivacá, and I come in the name of my father INA-UIKI’ ” (Arturo Hellmund Tello, Leyendas Indígenas del Bajo Orinoco, trans. Ted E. Brewerton, Buenos Aires, Argentina: Imprenta Lopez Peru 666, 1948, pp. 19–22). (Brewerton, The Book...)

Although it is not a commonly told tale in the Christian world, it is possible that the congruencies in the Book of Mormon and Ancient American legends teach us that Jesus Christ Himself appeared to the people in America following His resurrection. These accounts may reveal the meaning behind Jesus Christ’s statement to his apostles in John 10:16 when he says, “And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd” (King James Version). Holy Bible John 10 In the Book of Mormon, Christ explains to the ancient American people that they were the "other sheep." Read Jesus' words to the ancient Americans

Of course, the Mayans depict Quetzalcoatl like this, but it's just a detail:

.
digby 1/01/2012 11:00:00 AM |

 
The 20 Most Important cats of 2011

by digby

The 20 Most Important cats of 2011

Note how no matter what nationality, the laughter is the same. Clearly we need more cats involved in world affairs.

The one on the right is obviously a Wall Street fatcat.

Thanks again to all who chipped in so generously to the holiday kitty and a special thanks to those who did so anonymously. You know who you are --- and know also that you have my deepest gratitude.

Happy New Year everyone!


.
digby 1/01/2012 09:00:00 AM |

Saturday, December 31, 2011

 

Saturday Night At The Movies

Subjective as hell: Top 10 films of 2011

By Dennis Hartley

I now don my Kevlar vest once again, to offer up my picks for the best films that opened in 2011. I should qualify that. These are my picks for the “top ten” movies out of the 50+ first run features I have selected to review on Hullabaloo since January. Since I am (literally) a “weekend movie critic”, I don’t have the time (or the bucks, frankly, with admission prices these days) to screen every new release; especially with that soul-sucking 9 to 5 gig that takes up my weekdays (so I can eat and pay rent and junk). Unless, of course, you’d like to offer me a six-figure salary, and cover my expenses to attend Cannes, Toronto, Sundance and Tribeca…no? Then I’m afraid this is as good as it gets, dear reader-presented in alphabetical order, as per usual. Oh, and Happy New Year!

Another Earth-I will bet you dollars to donuts that you heard blather aplenty in 2011 regarding Terrence Malick’s Tree of Life (which I reviewed here) yet next to nothing about this thematically similar gem. Funny thing…Malick’s film cost $32,000,000 to produce, and this one cost, well, next to nothing ($150,000). I’m just saying. In essence a two-character drama, writer-director Mike Cahill’s auspicious narrative feature debut is a “sci-fi” film mostly in the academic sense; don’t expect to see CGI aliens in 3-D. Orbiting somewhere in proximity of Andrei Tarkovsky’s Solaris, its concerns are more metaphysical than astrophysical. And not unlike Tarkovsky, it demands your full and undivided attention. The emotionally raw performances from (co-scripter) Brit Marling and William Mapother are quite remarkable, and will haunt you for days. Full review

Certified Copy - Just when you’re being lulled into thinking this is going to be one of those brainy, talky, yet pleasantly diverting romantic romps where you and your date can amuse yourselves by placing bets on “will they or won’t they-that is, if they can both shut up long enough to get down to business before the credits roll” propositions, Iranian director Abbas Kiarostami throws you a curveball. Then again, maybe this film isn’t so much about “thinking”, as it is about “perceiving”. Because if it’s true that a “film” is merely (if I may quote Orson Welles) “a ribbon of dreams”-then Certified Copy, like any true work of art, is simply what you perceive it to be-nothing more, nothing less. Even if it leaves you scratching your head, you get to revel in the luminosity of Juliette Binoche’s amazing performance; there’s pure poetry in every glance, every gesture. Full review

The Descendants- In the course of (what passes for) my “career” as a movie critic, I have avowed to avoid the trite phrase “heartwarming family film” as a descriptive. Well, so much for principles. The Descendants is a heartwarming family film. There, I said it. Now, let me qualify that. Since it is directed by Alexander Payne (Citizen Ruth, Election, About Schmidt, Sideways) it is not a typical heartwarming family film. It is a heartwarming family film riddled with dysfunction and middle-aged angst (which is how I prefer my heartwarming family films, thank you very much). Think of it as Terms of Endearment goes Hawaiian. Payne’s screenplay (co-adapted with Nat Faxon and Jim Rash, from the novel by Kaui Hart Hemmings) consistently hits the sweet spot between comedy and drama, giving us characters who, in spite of (or perhaps, due to) their contradictions and flaws, are people to whom we can all (un)easily relate to. Full review

3 (Drei)- German director Tom Tykwer finally answers that age-old question: What would happen if a bio-ethicist and an art engineer, who have had a loving, 20-year relationship should find themselves falling head-over-heels in love (unbeknownst to each other) with the same genetics research scientist? This is a relatively low-key effort from a director who has built his rep from kinetic, stylized fare like Run Lola Run and The International. Still, I found this surprisingly conventional romantic romp about an unconventional love triangle amongst the Berlin intelligentsia playful, erotic and smart. And if there is a message, it’s surely imbedded within the film’s most quotable line: “Say goodbye to your deterministic understanding of biology.” Uh, bon voyage? Full Review

Drive- Ryan Gosling gives one of his best performances to date as a Hollywood stuntman by day, a wheelman-for-hire by night in this richly atmospheric, top-notch crime thriller from Danish director Nicolas Winding. Paradoxically (and in true Steve McQueen fashion) Gosling is technically giving more of a non-performance; he is not quite all there, yet he is wholly present (i.e. the less he “does”, the more intriguing he becomes). From a purely cinematic standpoint, the director proves himself to be on a par with masters of modern noir like Michael Mann, David Lynch and Christopher Nolan. Perhaps the biggest surprise is Albert Brooks, whose quietly menacing turn as a mean, spiteful, razor-toting viper goes against type (don’t expect Albert to be the “ ha-ha” kind of clown in this outing; this is more like the, er, John Wayne Gacy kind of clown). Full review

The First Grader- Even though I knew from frame one that this year’s SIFF opening night selection was one of those “triumph of the human spirit over insurmountable socio-economic and/or political odds” tales engineered to tug mercilessly at the strings of my big ol’ pinko-commie, anti-imperialist, bleeding softie lib’rul heart, I nonetheless loved every minute of it. Beautifully directed by Justin Chadwick, the film dramatizes the true story of an illiterate 84 year-old Kikuyu tribesman (Oliver Litando) who had been a freedom fighter during the Mau-Mau uprising that took place in Kenya in the 1950s. Fired up by a 2002 Kenyan law that guaranteed free education for all citizens, he shows up at his local one-room schoolhouse one day, eager to hit the books and realize a long-time dream. The real story, however, lies in his past. The sacrifices he made and personal tragedy he suffered comes slowly and deliberately into focus; resulting in a denouement that packs a powerful, bittersweet emotional gut punch a la Sophie’s Choice. Full review

Midnight in Paris- Let’s put this to bed once and for all. Were Woody Allen’s early movies really “funnier”-or are they simply portals back to a carefree time when we still had our whole life ahead of us? Lest you think that this is one of his gloomy, Bergman-esque excursions-I assure you that it’s not. It’s romantic, intelligent, perceptive, funny, and yes…it’s magical. There’s a fantastic supporting cast, including Rachael MacAdams, Marion Cotillard, Kathy Bates and Adrien Brody. And to think that Woody could make me love a film starring Owen Wilson? Now, that is some kinda magic trick. Full review

Summer Wars-Don’t be misled by the cartoonish title of Mamoru Hosoda’s eye-popping movie-this could be the Gone with the Wind of Japanese anime. OK…that’s a tad hyperbolic. But it does have drama, romance, comedy, and war-centering around a bucolic family estate. Maybe Tokyo Story meets War Games? At any rate, it’s one of the better animes of recent years. Although a few narrative devices in Satoko Ohuder’s screenplay will feel somewhat familiar to anime fans (particularly when it comes to the more bombastic “cyber-punk” elements of the story), it’s the humanistic touches and subtle social observations (quite reminiscent of the films by the great Japanese director Yasujiro Ozu) that make it such a worthwhile and satisfying entertainment. BTW...just to head some smarty pants off at the pass: Yes, I know the film was released in Japan in 2009. However, it did not open in the U.S. until Christmas 2010 (as a limited engagement). It opened here in Seattle February 2011. Get it? Got it. Good! Full review

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy- When I say that Swedish director Tomas Alfredson’s adaptation of John le Carre’s classic espionage thriller is “byzantine and multi-layered”, I mean that in the best way possible, thanks in no small part to that rarest of animals found at the multiplex these days: The Intelligent Script (#1 on the endangered species list). Not only do Alfredson, his writers (Bridget O’Connor and Peter Straughan) and actors (an exemplary stable of British thesps led by Gary Oldman) stubbornly refuse to insult our intelligence, but they aren’t afraid to make us do something else that we haven’t done in a while: lean forward in our seat to catch every nuance of plot and character. Full Review

The Trip- The latest from eclectic British director Michael Winterbottom (24 Hour Party People, The Road to Guantanamo). Pared down into feature film length from the 6-episode BBC TV series, it could be seen as a highlight reel of that show-which is not to denigrate, because it is the most genuinely hilarious comedy I’ve seen in many a moon. The levity is due in no small part to Winterbottom’s two stars-Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon, essentially playing themselves in this mashup of My Dinner with Andre and Sideways. The simple narrative setup is basically an excuse to sit back and enjoy Coogan and Brydon’s brilliant comic riffing (much of it feels improvised) on everything from relationships to the “proper” way to do Michael Caine impressions. There’s some unexpected poignancy as well-but for the most part, it’s pure comedy gold. Full Review

.

Dennis Hartley 12/31/2011 06:00:00 PM |

 
"A sample of the hopes, fears and reflections on that last night of American history’s most momentous year"

by digby

Here's a nice piece from the New York Times, recalling where the nation was exactly 150 years ago today:

Camp Wood, near Munfordville, Ky., Dec. 31, 1861

Near a half-ruined railroad bridge along the Green River, a fresh Union Army recruit stood on lonely sentry duty as the year 1861 passed into history. Pvt. Lyman Widney, a 19-year-old farmer’s son, wrote in his diary:

December 31, 1861.

Being detailed on guard duty today, it was my lot to stand solitary and alone at my post when the old year died. Watching its dying hours from ten to twelve, my mind reverted to the watch meetings of previous years. All was so quiet in the camp before me and in the deep shadows of the towering hills behind me that life and animation seemed to be ebbing away with the old year, leaving me alone with my gun to guard the camp of the dead; and as the lengthened moments of the eleventh hour gave place to the twelfth and last, I was almost tempted to commit a breach of discipline and discharge my musket to warn my comrades that the old year was about to slip away unobserved and a new year of untried, undiscoverable dangers, victories and peace, or defeats and death, was spreading its wings of light or darkness, who could tell, to envelop us all.

The young soldier’s reverie was interrupted at midnight by distant cheers and a burst of music from the regimental band. The year ahead was indeed to bring undiscoverable dangers for his comrades in the 34th Illinois Infantry, many of whom would lie dead or injured on the field at Shiloh before the leaves of springtime had fully bloomed.

On that first New Year’s Eve of the Civil War, Private Widney was not alone in pondering what the past 12 months had meant and wondering what the next 12 might bring. Neither he nor most other Americans could have guessed that the final moments of 1862 would see thousands of African-Americans standing vigil in churches and meeting halls, awaiting midnight and a new birth of freedom.

For now, emancipation still lay in the unseen future. But herewith is a sample of the hopes, fears and reflections on that last night of American history’s most momentous year, as expressed in newspaper editorials both Northern and Southern.

Read on for those. (And ponder the eloquence of this 19 year old farmer's son of 150 years ago.)


.
digby 12/31/2011 04:30:00 PM |

 
Jon Swift Memorial Roundup

by digby

For those of you spending the evening at home with kids or alone with your champagne, here's the only thing you need to keep you entertained:

Welcome to a tradition started by the much missed Jon Swift/Al Weisel. He left behind some excellent satire, but was also a nice guy and a strong supporter of small blogs. As Lance Mannion puts it:

Our late and much missed comrade in blogging, journalist and writer Al Weisel, revered and admired across the bandwidth as the “reasonable conservative” blogger Modest Jon Swift, was a champion of the lesser known and little known bloggers working tirelessly in the shadows...

One of his projects was a year-end Blogger Round Up. Al/Jon asked bloggers far and wide, famous and in- and not at all, to submit a link to their favorite post of the past twelve months and then he sorted, compiled, blurbed, hyperlinked and posted them on his popular blog. His round-ups presented readers with a huge banquet table of links to work many of has had missed the first time around and brought those bloggers traffic and, more important, new readers they wouldn’t have otherwise enjoyed.

It may not have been the most heroic endeavor, but it was kind and generous and a lot of us owe our continued presence in the blogging biz to Al.

Click this link to read a collection of fantastic writing from around the blogosphere this year that you may have missed.

And kudos to Hullabaloo Contributor and my pal Batocchio for keeping the tradition alive.

.

digby 12/31/2011 03:00:00 PM |

 
What really drives austerity

by David Atkins

An adviser to Margaret Thatcher explains, in carefully and cautiously couched terms, the real reason for the conservative emphasis on austerity (h/t Tom Sullivan):



As a way of reducing national deficits, austerity is terribly ineffective policy, as it weakens the middle-class tax base and long-term economic growth. But as a way of raking more money out of the middle class and into the pockets of the super-wealthy parasitic brigands, it's fantastic policy.


.
thereisnospoon 12/31/2011 01:00:00 PM |

 
Today's Hayes

by digby

Where are they now? Catching up with the Iraq War luminaries who once dominated our every thought and have pretty much escaped into well compensated obscurity:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

digby 12/31/2011 11:12:00 AM |

 
How do you like me now?

by digby

Newtie, hoist by his own petard:

When Newt Gingrich opened up a sizable lead in Iowa last month, he was promptly broadsided by a torrent of negative Super PAC advertisements that now threaten to sink his once-promising campaign...

According to data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics, 264 Super PACs have raised more than $32 million and spent nearly $16 million in the 2012 election cycle so far.

The plurality of the funds spent in the GOP presidential primary have targeted Gingrich, whose surprising rise in the polls far surpassed the brief booms by other second-tier candidates, such as Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain...

The impact is clear: With the Iowa caucus only four days away, Gingrich has fallen into the second tier of candidates and currently sits in fifth place, according to an NBC-Marist poll released Friday.
[...]
But the former House Speaker doesn’t need to look too far back to find historical context for what plagues him: Gingrich was a vocal supporter of the 2010 Supreme Court decision in favor of Citizens United against the Federal Election Commission that opened the door for the unlimited spending the Super PACs that back his rivals are now using against him.

With his familiar grandiloquent flair, Gingrich at the time called the Supreme Court ruling “one of the most sophisticated, methodological and serious strategies I’ve seen in my years in looking at government.”

“We need to recognize the effect of virtually all efforts to limit political speech, which I believe are unconstitutional,” Gingrich said. “You would have a much freer and healthier system if you say any American can give any amount of after-tax income as long as they report it every night on the Internet so that everybody else can determine who is supporting who.”

The Restore Our Future (ROF) PAC reports its numbers on the Internet, and it supports Mitt Romney. ROF has spent more than $4 million this cycle in ads against Gingrich, and now seems as if it’s just piling on him: It spent more than $1.2 million this week alone, even though Gingrich no longer poses the threat he once did.

I don't think Newtie was serious about becoming president and he knows which side his Tiffany credit card is buttered on so he won't say anything. But he's got to feel like he was run over by a Mack truck. Live by Citizens United, die by Citizens United.

This New York Times article has more details. If this continues, there really won't be much point in having primaries. It basically adds up to very rich rich people in very expensive smoke filled rooms buying the nomination. How it affects the general remains to be seen but it's hard to imagine that it won't have an impact. All we can hope for is that these ads become so ubiquitous and the bombardment so annoying that people's subconscious rebels and they cancel themselves out. Then all that money will be a sort of economic stimulus and nothing more.


.

digby 12/31/2011 09:00:00 AM |

Friday, December 30, 2011

 

No Sharia In Coach

by digby

Uh oh:

Here’s a recent story that didn’t get much notice; a firefighter aboard a flight to Kansas City subdued and restrained a man who was trying to break into the airplane’s cockpit, potentially saving the lives of everyone aboard: Action aboard airplane creates a reluctant hero. You might suspect that this incident involved a Muslim, and you’d be right.

Paging Pam Geller. They're coming to get us!

Oh wait:

His name is Jabir Hazziez Jr., and he’s the firefighter who saved the plane.

Ooops. How are we going to tell the good guys from the bad guys now?


.

digby 12/30/2011 07:00:00 PM |

 
Taunting gay robots on the campaign trail

by digby

(No, we're not talking about Rick Perry ....) A real gay robot.

Via gawker:

It was another day of thuggery on the Iowa campaign trail as Michele Bachmann’s remaining followers mercilessly booed and taunted a sad gay robot.

It's long past time to put an end to robophobia.

.

digby 12/30/2011 05:00:00 PM |

 
Hey baby, show us yer Tax!

by digby

Apparently, ole Mitt is ashamed of his ... assets:

We already know Mitt Romney is a really, really wealthy guy. And, though he was born to wealth, he has also made a lot of money himself. He’s also said he’ll release information about his wealth, his assets … a lot of stuff. But just not the taxes.

So what’s the deal? It’s pretty simple. We might say that a specter is haunting Mitt Romney — the specter of the Buffett Rule.

[...]

This is Romney’s problem. While we don’t know the specifics of Romney’s tax returns, we know enough about his finances and sources of incomes to know that he is the poster-boy for the Buffett Rule. As Romney likes to say, he’s unemployed. He doesn’t draw a salary. But he seems to still be making big big money off capital gains which are currently taxed at a very low rate. He doesn’t seem to have drawn a salary at any time recently. So he likely pays no payroll taxes. And that’s before you get into legal but aggressive tax-sheltering. It seems virtually impossible that Mitt Romney doesn’t pay the sort of effective tax rate that would make people’s eyes pop when compared to middle income and even relatively wealthy (by normal standards) people who pay considerably higher rates.

Perhaps. But well-bred candidates of a certain class simply don't go around showing their taxes to just anyone. Why buy the politician if he already owns the cow?

I think people should show up at all his events and whistle and catcall him to show his tax(es).

.
digby 12/30/2011 03:00:00 PM |

 
Devolution for some of the people

by digby

As always, Adele Stan nails the story when it comes to the connections among the far right fringies. In today's piece she draws together the strands that bring Ron Paul and the lunatic Christian Reconstructionists together. I urge you to read the whole thing -- it's quite illuminating. Here's the conclusion:

Ron Paul seeks to shrink the federal government to minimal size not because it intrudes in the lives of individuals, but because it stands in the way of allowing the states and localities to enact laws as they see fit -- even laws that govern people's behavior in their bedrooms.

Here's what Paul published on the Web site of Lew Rockwell -- allegedly one of the authors of his racist, homophobic newsletters -- about the Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas that struck down the state's anti-sodomy laws, which prohibited sex between men:

The Court determined that Texas had no right to establish its own standards for private sexual conduct, because gay sodomy is somehow protected under the 14th amendment "right to privacy." Ridiculous as sodomy laws may be, there clearly is no right to privacy nor sodomy found anywhere in the Constitution. There are, however, states' rights — rights plainly affirmed in the Ninth and Tenth amendments. Under those amendments, the State of Texas has the right to decide for itself how to regulate social matters like sex, using its own local standards. But rather than applying the real Constitution and declining jurisdiction over a properly state matter, the Court decided to apply the imaginary Constitution and impose its vision on the people of Texas.

This plays neatly into the hands of Paul's Christian Reconstructionist friends, who seek the destruction of the federal government for the opportunity to implement "God's law" on earth. Via Warren Throckmorton's invaluable Web site, comes this quote from the Christian Reconstructionist Bojidar Marinov, who writes of why "theonomists," as Reconstructionists define themselves, should root for Ron Paul:

The theonomic solution to the problems of sodomy and abortion can not be achieved at the Federal level because at that level liberals outnumber conservatives 20 to 1. And theonomic Christians are almost non-existent at that level. It is only when the socialist state is dismantled and power returned back to the states and the counties that we will be able to successfully deal with the other social and moral issues. As long as sin is protected at the Federal level, our political job as Christians is to dismantle the Federal bureaucracy and return all power to the local communities. Therefore, the great battle is against the socialist state.

Given that, Ron Paul is the man with the best position to work for that goal on the national level.

I continue to wonder why Ron Paul is considered a libertarian. He's an isolationist Tenther. If that's your philosophy, then fine. But I think an awful lot of libertarians are missing the bait and switch.

Update: There's a lot of talk about how all this libertarian white supremacy was just a political pact with the devil 30 years ago, along the lines of the Southern Strategy. That may be true. But it seems that Ron Paul has bought his own hype, if that's the case.

He could be crusading to end the drug war, for instance, on a moral or philosophical level. But as with his defense of Lawrence as a states' rights issue, he isn't. He crusading for it to be devolved to a state by state issue. That is not the same thing.

Libertarianism has a real position on this and it's universal:

Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government.

Nothing in that says force is ok as long as its used by the state of Texas instead of the FBI. And yet, that's Ron Paul's position on sodomy laws and drug laws and choice and a whole host of issues pertaining to individual liberties and human rights. So all of you who believe that Ron Paul would release the millions incarcerated for the victimless crime of using drugs should realize that he would only release those held in federal prisons. If you're locked up in the State Penitentiary, he sympathizes, but thinks that States have a perfect right to do it.

In case you were wondering, the total federal prison population in 2010 was around 200,000 people while the state and local prison population was about 1.5 million. Paul says there's nothing he can do about the latter and wouldn't dream of telling those states what they should and shouldn't do. That's his principle, not freeing the victims of the drug war.

Update II: More on Paul's Antebellum politics here and here.
.

digby 12/30/2011 01:00:00 PM |

 
Poor Little Newtie

by digby

Sam Stein reports that little Newtie is feeling all sorry for himself now that he's tanking in Iowa after being barraged by 10 million dollars worth of negative ads:

At the Rotary Club, he waxed nostalgic about the old days, recalling -- in a sanitized way -- how he had run a "positive" campaign to taker over the House based on his "Contract with America."

"It was a positive, issue-oriented campaign that fall," he told the Rotarians. He said he had wanted to do the same in the presidential campaign but had been blindsided by how nasty and "cynical" the contest was. "We got off to a bad start," he said. "I can't do modern politics." A tired Gingrich suddenly looked the part of the college professor he once was.

Right. He don't know nothin' bout all this negativity. He's just an old country perfesser --- a political Mr Chips, if you will --- who got caught in the crossfire of modern political warfare.

Except, of course, he invented the weaponry used against him:

As you know, one of the key points in the GOPAC tapes is that "language matters." In the video "We are a Majority," Language is listed as a key mechanism of control used by a majority party, along with Agenda, Rules, Attitude and Learning. As the tapes have been used in training sessions across the country and mailed to candidates we have heard a plaintive plea: "I wish I could speak like Newt."

That takes years of practice. But, we believe that you could have a significant impact on your campaign and the way you communicate if we help a little. That is why we have created this list of words and phrases.

All those years of practice paid off --- for his opponents.


Update: He's a very sensitive fellow:



The Villagers are all calling it a "Hillary moment." But when she welled up in New Hampshire they all claimed it was a ruthlessly calculated "Madame DeFarge" moment. Newtie's just showing his softer side.


.
digby 12/30/2011 11:00:00 AM |

 
Your last moment of zen

by digby

Now THIS is America:



The Rude Pundit explains:

Yesterday, the Rude Pundit was walking down near Ground Zero, New York City, as one must sometimes do in the course of day-to-day activities, when heard someone over a megaphone say, "Never forget. Never forget," repeatedly, flatly, almost mournfully. This was on the corner of Broadway and Fulton, across the street from St. Paul's Chapel, one block from the former World Trade Center twin towers. He turned to see what this was, thinking perhaps another protest.

Instead, he saw four figures. Two men, one with a voice that sounded like a megaphone and a sign that read, "Support Our Heroes," the other with an American flag. And two people wearing what seemed to be brightly smiling ping-pong ball outfits. And, oh, dear, kind readers, the Rude Pundit is not lying to you when he says that one of the ping-pong balls had a "9" emblazoned on it and the other had an "11." They also wore caps.

Ah, the people on the street were delighted at the sight. And when they took out their cameras or phones to snap a picture, the entire group stopped and waved at the grinning photographers. Then, the photo op done, the foursome would move on, with the first man continuing his sad wail of "Never forget." read on...

It's a good thing those ping pong balls weren't Muslim, that's all I can say. That would have been so disrespectful.

.

digby 12/30/2011 09:30:00 AM |

 
Getting married today

by David Atkins

I'll be getting married today at 1pm Pacific time to my lovely fiancee and life partner of 7 years KK Holland. The only thing that dims the brightness of this day is the knowledge that the freedom to share the same expression of devotion is still denied by force of discriminatory law to same-sex couples across America. Hopefully those barriers will come down soon as the long arc of justice continues on its course.

In the meantime, here's hoping for a beautiful day for you and your loved ones as we approach a new year.


.
thereisnospoon 12/30/2011 07:30:00 AM |

Thursday, December 29, 2011

 
QOTW

by digby

On Ron Paul's rise:

And much hand-wringing will ensue on the left, as they try to decide whether or not they like a racist anti-war isolationist who favors a society of bare-foot, pregnant women smoking dope in the kitchen.

What to do?


BTW: You can hear Jay tonight with Stuart Zechman on Virtually speaking A-Z.
digby 12/29/2011 05:30:00 PM |

 

"Queer as blazes"

by digby

Uhm, ok. Maybe everyone else has seen this, but I missed it. Here's Ron Paul being "interviewed" and then hit on by Bruno (Sasha Baron Cohen.) Yikes.

I would have thought that he was in on the joke somehow, but apparently not:

I don't know what it all means but it certainly does add to the already surrealistic atmosphere of the Republican presidential campaign.

.

digby 12/29/2011 04:30:00 PM |

 
New boss same as the old boss?

by David Atkins

plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose:

Egyptian security forces stormed the offices of 17 nonprofit groups around the country on Thursday, including at least three democracy-promotion groups financed by the United States, as part of an investigation that the military rulers say will reveal foreign hands in the recent outbreak of protests.

In Cairo, heavily armed men wearing the black uniforms of the central security police tore through boxes, hauled away files and computers and prevented employees from leaving the offices of the two American groups, the National Democratic Institute and the International Republican Institute, which are affiliated with American political parties and financed by the United States government. The security forces also raided the offices of Washington-based Freedom House.

The raids were a stark escalation in what has appeared to be a campaign by the country’s military rulers to rally support by playing to nationalist and anti-American sentiment here.

The military has the money and guns in Egypt. When the people gathered en masse in Tahrir Square, the military eventually found it more convenient to dump Mubarak than to keep him.

I honestly don't see how this resolves well. Certainly, history tells us that military juntas do sometimes end without the need for external war, civil war or bloody revolution. But they tend to stay in power for a long time once they're created, and there's not a whole lot the people can do about it.


.
thereisnospoon 12/29/2011 03:00:00 PM |