Daily Kos

Colleen Mathis

Of course they have no shame:

Gov. Jan Brewer may make another attempt as early as this coming week to fire the chairwoman of the Independent Redistricting Commission.

The governor said Friday her attorneys are studying the brief order issued late Thursday by the Arizona Supreme Court voiding the governor's Nov. 1 decision to fire Colleen Mathis. She said all options are on the table - including recrafting the letter she sent to Mathis firing her in a way that might pass court muster.

And Brewer said she also is weighing whether to ask the high court for a restraining order to block the commission from giving final approval to its draft maps - the ones she and other Republicans find objectionable - while she considers what to do next.

The report goes on to mention that Republicans are also considering a plan to push a ballot measure early next year that would repeal the IRC—which voters approved (via the ballot box, of course) just a decade ago by a 56-44 margin. If successful, that would allow the GOP-dominated legislature to draw its own maps, which is pretty much the only way these whiners will ever be happy.

Regardless, if Brewer tries to impeach Mathis a second time, Arizona Democrats seriously need to start thinking about an effort to recall their governor. This kind of abuse of power can't go unpunished.

Why does this man not yet have a TV show?

A new Fairleigh Dickinson PublicMind Poll finds that the Sunday morning political shows on television "do the most to help people learn about current events, while some outlets, especially Fox News, lead people to be even less informed than those who they don't watch any news at all."

Now that is an impressive accomplishment. You could literally turn your television off and you'd learn more through news osmosis via other means (reading, listening to the radio, overhearing random conversations on the street, talking with your plants) than you would by watching Fox News. Let's just savor that: Listening to Fox "News" makes you less informed than not watching news at all.

From the summary:

Among other topics, New Jerseyans were asked about the outcome of the uprisings in North Africa and the Middle East this past year. While 53% of New Jerseyans know that Egyptians were successful in overthrowing the government of Hosni Mubarak, 21% say that the uprisings were unsuccessful, and 26% admit they don’t know. Also, 48% know that the Syrian uprising has thus far been unsuccessful, while 36% say they don’t know, and 16% say the Syrians have already toppled their government.

But the real finding is that the results depend on what media sources people turn to for their news. For example, people who watch Fox News, the most popular of the 24-hour cable news networks, are 18-points less likely to know that Egyptians overthrew their government than those who watch no news at all (after controlling for other news sources, partisanship, education and other demographic factors). Fox News watchers are also 6-points less likely to know that Syrians have not yet overthrown their government than those who watch no news.

"Because of the controls for partisanship, we know these results are not just driven by Republicans or other groups being more likely to watch Fox News," said Dan Cassino, a professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson and an analyst for the PublicMind Poll. "Rather, the results show us that there is something about watching Fox News that leads people to do worse on these questions than those who don’t watch any news at all."

I'm not even sure how you accomplish that, but add another log to the raging fire that's burning away any remaining reputation for the Murdoch network. Perhaps it is the unrelenting propaganda or the giddy misinformation spewed by even the "straight news" hosts? Perhaps it is the dumb-as-a-post pundits and hosts themselves, people who are only still alive because their producers remind them during commercial breaks that they need to keep breathing? I have long suspected that the Fox & Friends crew live their offscreen lives in an elaborately constructed human-sized hamster cage, because if they were left to feed themselves or cross streets on their own we'd never see hide nor hair of them again.

Whatever the cause: Congratulations, Fox News, your network makes people less informed about news events than if they weren't watching at all. You are officially the opposite of a "news" channel.

(peppersprayingcop.tumblr.com)

While the first 60 seconds of the 8-minute YouTube video are dominated by the shockingly calm brutality of the policeman, the rest of it is remarkable mainly for the stoicism and resolve of the protestors. You don't have to idealize everything about them or the Occupy movement to recognize this as a moral drama that the protestors clearly won. The self-control they show, while being assaulted, reminds me of grainy TV footage I saw as a kid, of black civil rights protestors being fire-hosed by Bull Connor's policemen in Alabama. Or of course the Tank Man in Tiananmen Square. Such images can have tremendous, lasting power. [...]

What is going on is a war of ideas, based in turn on moral standing. This engagement, which started in Minute 1 with police over-reaction and ended in Minute 8 with nervous police retreat, was a rout.*

A rundown of recent Occupy-related news:

• The UC Davis chancellor's walk of shame. As Fallows says (link above): "Again, as a moral confrontation, this is a rout." Two officers have been placed on leave; Chancellor Katehi says she will not resign, but has put the UC Davis police chief on leave.
• Joining an ever-growing chorus, the faculty of UC Davis' English department has released a public statement calling on Katehi to resign.
• New York media outlets are demanding a meeting with Police Commissioner Ray Kelly and other police officials over recent treatment of reporters:

  The letter cites the blanket restriction placed on all members of the media that prohibited them from observing the late-night clearing of Zuccotti Park last Tuesday, as well as the arrests of credentialed journalists and others whose press credentials were seized by police. It also lists various alleged instances of physical aggression against journalists, including one in which "a female reporter, also displaying DCPI-issued press credentials," was allegedly shoved to the ground by a police officer and taken to Bellevue Hospital "for treatment of her injuries."

  Part of me is irritated that the concerns being raised are solely over overly harsh police responses toward reporters, as opposed to overly harsh police actions against everybody. Another part of me is at least happy they're complaining about their treatment at all.

• Video of another protester being beaten by Oakland police has surfaced. Kayvan Sabehgi, also an Iraq War veteran, suffered a lacerated spleen.
• Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin has stated strong support for the Occupy movement, saying, "It's a good thing for our democracy. My only surprise is that it took so long."
• A new USA Today/Gallup poll shows:

  More than half [of those surveyed] — 56 percent — say they do not consider themselves either supporters or opponents of the Occupy demonstrations.

  And even more, 59 percent, told pollsters they don’t know enough about the Occupy movement to form an opinion on it, despite the extensive media coverage it has received.

• The Law Union of Ontario has filed a complaint at the United Nations over the eviction of Occupy protesters in cities across Canada, saying the "actions of government officials and police in seeking to remove Occupy movement protests from Canadian municipalities indicate a widespread disregard for fundamental freedoms."
• Remember that "foreclosure mill" law firm that held a Halloween party in which employees dressed as foreclosed-upon homeless people? As a response to the publicity, Fannie and Freddie dropped them like a hot rock, and now the firm is closing down. Very, very sad. A tragedy, really.
• Speaking of mean-spirited bastards:

  At a November 19 town hall meeting in Gurnee, Illinois, Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL) smeared Occupy Wall Street protesters as “generally spoiled, pampered, unfocused, clueless young people and a smattering of other people who don’t understand this country and are advocating anti-American solutions.”  When asked by a subsequent questioner if his attack applied to “veterans who fought in foreign wars” who are part of the 99 Percent Movement, Walsh replied that they  were advocating “socialist solutions” and that “they don’t understand this country.”

• Speaking of mean-spirited bastards, again:

  John Tabacco and his brother Derek got massive press attention when they showed up at the big protest Thursday with anti-Occupy signs and posed for the news cameras, deriding the protesters as “animals” and demanding they leave Wall Street. They declared the launch of the “Wall Street Freedom Fighters” movement and were immediately embraced by Fox News.

  But it turns out John Tabacco was barred from the securities for misconduct back in the '90s. Wow, he's even better a representative of the 1 percent than Fox News thought!

• No longer speaking of mean-spirited bastards, but of the tools some of them use, a Scientific American commentary notes that dousing someone with "pepper spray" can be much more dangerous than it sounds:

  Pepper spray use has been suspected of contributing to a number of deaths that occurred in police custody. In mid-1990s, the U.S. Department of Justice cited nearly 70 fatalities linked to pepper-spray use, following on a 1995 report compiled by the American Civil Liberties Union of California. The ACLU report cited 26 suspicious deaths; it’s important to note that most involved pre-existing conditions such as asthma. But it’s also important to note a troubling pattern.

  So maybe it's not a good idea to use them on protesting students who are literally just sitting on the ground, doing nothing.

• A music video put together from Occupy L.A. footage.
• The U.C. Davis Pepper Spraying Cop has a tumblr page.

To keep up with Occupy related events, especially local actions and first-person accounts from our community, follow the Occupy Wall Street group and the Occupy Wall Street tag right here on Daily Kos.

Apparently, Republicans like what they see in Newt Gingrich (Daron Dean/Reuters)

Newt Gingrich: 24 (22)
Mitt Romney: 20 (24)
Herman Cain: 17 (14)
Rick Perry: 11 (12)
Ron Paul: 9 (8)
Michele Bachmann: 5 (6)
Rick Santorum: 4 (3)
Jon Huntsman: 3 (3)

It's been a decent week for Newt Gingrich. Despite getting drilled for being a lobbyist, he's gained a little ground. Mitt Romney is down four points, but he continues to stay near the top of every poll. Herman Cain also had a good week, picking up a little ground, suggesting that at the very least he's stopped the bleeding from his campaign. Everyone else trails Cain by more than the margin of error.

Since early September, Newt Gingrich has jumped 17 points while Herman Cain has gained 10 points. The big loser in that span is Rick Perry, who has dropped 21 points. Rounding out the double-digit candidates, Mitt Romney is basically even (down one point).

Two-thirds of Republicans say they could change their support, and if past is prologue, they probably will.

Probably the best number for Mitt Romney is that 40 percent of Republicans think he'd be their strongest nominee against President Obama. The runner-up is Newt Gingrich, but just 21 percent think he'd be the GOP's best candidate.

On the flip side, probably the worst number for Mitt Romney is that 16 percent say he's the candidate they are most likely to agree with, putting him below Newt Gingrich (25 percent) and Herman Cain (18 percent). He's basically tied with Rick Perry, who is at 15 percent.

Amazingly, 36 percent say Gingrich is the most qualified to be commander-in-chief compared to 20 percent for Romney. Another 43 percent say Gingrich is mostly likely to understand complicated issues, compared with 18 percent for second-place Romney.

As amusing as those numbers might be, by far the funniest result in the poll came in response to the question of which candidate Republicans believe to be most likely to "keep the same position on important issues." The top two candidates were Newt Gingrich (23 percent) and Mitt Romney (18 percent).

Mitt Romney: "I said we should do what with veterans' care?" (Shannon Stapleton/Reuters)

"Sometimes you wonder, would there be someway to introduce some private sector competition, somebody else that could come in and say, you know each soldier gets X thousand dollars attributed to them and then they can choose whether they want to go on the government system or the private system and then it follows them, like what happens with schools in Florida where they have a voucher that follows them, who knows."

Ah, but that was then. This is now.

"I have no proposal of that nature," Romney told the Nashua Telegraph on Monday. "We had a group of veterans and said, 'tell me about the quality of your care.' Some were concerned about the quality of their health care. I said, 'what kind of options do you have, what do you think about a system that let you go to private as well as VA hospitals?' The response was mixed, but I don’t have any proposal of that nature. We have a VA system that needs to be improved and I've got no plans to change that other than to make it better and to invest more money in providing for our veterans."

Uh huh. Gosh, who could've imagined Romney would change his position on this one?

Newt Gingrich wants to put kids back to work.
(Lewis Hine)

Oh yes he did. Speaking at Harvard (to remind us that he's a historian, no doubt) on Friday, Newt Gingrich not only called child labor laws "truly stupid," he did so as his answer to a question about income inequality. His answer had several prongs. First, use student labor to bust unions in schools:

"You say to somebody, you shouldn't go to work before you're what, 14, 16 years of age, fine. You're totally poor. You're in a school that is failing with a teacher that is failing. I've tried for years to have a very simple model," he said. "Most of these schools ought to get rid of the unionized janitors, have one master janitor and pay local students to take care of the school. The kids would actually do work, they would have cash, they would have pride in the schools, they'd begin the process of rising."

That's right. The answer to problem schools is to have kids do something other than learn in them, according to Gingrich. Even setting that aside, lots of kids refuse to eat their free school lunches because of the stigma attached to poverty. Now imagine the stigma of cleaning the bathrooms behind your classmates, or the food they spill in the lunchroom.

He added, "You go out and talk to people, as I do, you go out and talk to people who are really successful in one generation. They all started their first job between nine and 14 years of age. They all were either selling newspapers, going door to door, they were doing something, they were washing cars."

"They all learned how to make money at a very early age," he said. "What do we say to poor kids in poor neighborhoods? Don't do it. Remember all that stuff about don't get a hamburger flipping job? The worst possible advice you could give to poor children. Get any job that teaches you to show up on Monday. Get any job that teaches you to stay all day even if you are in a fight with your girlfriend. The whole process of making work worthwhile is central."

I knew a lot of kids who delivered papers or babysat or mowed neighbors' lawns before they were the legal age to work; in fact, I did so myself. But there's a hell of a big difference between having a paper route and working in a fast food kitchen filled with hot fry grease and other opportunities to burn or cut yourself. There's a big difference between deciding which babysitting or yard work job you will accept and being scheduled to work a shift at McDonald's and the decision being between showing up or losing your job.

Gingrich cloaks his attack on child labor laws in the language of teaching kids to get ahead, but what it boils down to is funneling poor kids into dead-end jobs as early as possible; using them for cheap labor, ideally to bust unions; and turning schools into a place the kids who need money clean up behind those who don't instead of spending their time learning.

What you missed on Sunday Kos ….

• Matt Wuerker's comic was It's good to be Supreme.
• Catholic bishops are mounting a campaign to demand "religious liberty." Hunter didn't think the phrase means what they think it means.
• In "Backsliding into Jim Crow," Denise Oliver-Velez examined Alabama's racist anti-immigrant law HB 56, its impact and the coalition of civil rights activists working against it.
• For 46 million Americans, poverty is a lived reality. With no shortage of Republicans blaming the poor for poverty and trying to slash the safety net, Laura Clawson asked if thought experiments in poverty by religious and political leaders or by the working non-poor have any potential to change the debate.
• Meteor Blades showed that, even in the age of Facebook and YouTube, the printed propaganda poster still has political impact and echoes its ancestors of a century ago.
• Income inequality is the cause, the result, and the goal. Mark Sumner wondered if we'll escape the plutocracy death spiral.
• From luxury Greek cruise to fact-finding mission on the plight of the working class: Georgia Logothetis examined Newt Gingrich's latest campaign spin and other attempts by the ruling class to "connect" with ordinary Americans, just in time for election season.
• Laurence Lewis explored the larger meanings behind the circulating rumors about the crackdown on the Occupy movement's encampments.
• Kids may not learn much labor history in school, but there are some wonderful books and movies telling stories of what working conditions were like in the past, and the struggles to change them. With the holidays coming up, Laura Clawson suggested some of these that would make good gifts.

The congressional “supercommittee” stumbled its way toward failure Sunday, with final staff-level discussions focusing mostly on how the panel should publicly admit that lawmakers could not meet their mandate of shaving $1.2 trillion from the federal debt.

Rather than making a final effort at compromise, members of the special deficit-reduction committee spent their final hours casting blame and pointing fingers [...]

Thinking human beings knew from the outset that this was doomed to "failure," if that's what this is, despite the fact that Washington's Pundit Class continued to believe that dividing the panel evenly was per se reasonable, and a formula for practically automatic seriousness and success. (This despite the previous failures of Gramm-Rudman-Hollings, the Simpson-Bowles Commission, the Reform Party, the Concord Coalition, Unity08, Americans Elect, etc., etc., etc.) But dividing things equally between economic saboteurs and, well, just about anyone else in the world, is really just a plan for dragging out the economic sabotage.

But one thing about this fiasco that has so far gone mostly unmentioned in the traditional media is that under the statute that created the Super Committee, missing the Nov. 23 deadline doesn't break up the band, nor does it absolve it of its charge. It only removes their "super" powers, that is, their ability to shield their bill from amendments and the filibuster—which, we might note, they were able to magically eliminate when they wanted to.

What's telling, to me, is that they're giving up and quitting now that the power is gone, even though the responsibility to produce a bill (if you're one of the people who thinks the sort of bill they were likely to produce would have been a responsible thing to do) still remains.

You see, being on the Super Committee simply isn't worth anything, anymore. Because the power is gone. They still technically exist as an entity until the end of January. They just won't try to do anything, because they're not magical and cool anymore.

What the Wise Men of Washington apparently thought they needed in order to "succeed" in this task was complete protection for their bill from any amendment, and from the filibuster in the Senate. In the case of the filibuster, that was something they earlier in the year declined to afford themselves, though it was clear even then that the 112th Congress would be defined by hostage situations enabled chiefly by the filibuster. (An intransigent majority in the House would be no help, but at least it was in fact a majority.)

What's most interesting to me about the outcome, though, is that once the Wise Men of Washington had given themselves the added advantage of setting the filibuster aside, they still produced nothing. There are many reasons for it, of course, but one I think should not be overlooked is that the continued existence of the filibuster at times gives legislators great comfort. Failures of all sorts, and in the face of allegedly great national import, can be blamed on the filibuster. "Well, I wanted to do the right thing, and I voted to do the right thing, but ... we just couldn't get 60 votes."

Among the many faults of the filibuster is that it distorts our ability to hold legislators accountable. If, going into a vote, everyone knows there's little or no chance of getting 60 votes in the upper chamber, the votes cast by representatives and senators alike are difficult to read, since they're all cast in a context in which no one really expects the bill to become law. It's an easy thing to vote to pacify certain constituencies at home by supporting a bill you're personally less than thrilled with if you know it isn't going anywhere. Similarly, it's easy to take a "bold" stance athwart history if you know "doing the right thing" won't get you anywhere, anyway.

So it's very interesting to me that even when the Very Serious People of Washington clear a pathway through the Conventional Wisdom for the Congress to take extraordinary measures to remove the menace of the filibuster, it still doesn't work. How strange that the Congress, stripped of the familiar shield of impenetrable process that usually deflects culpability in cases of failure and given the opportunity to take the tough votes openly and accountably, has opted not to produce any bill at all.

Here's the statement.

"After months of hard work and intense deliberations, we have come to the conclusion today that it will not be possible to make any bipartisan agreement available to the public before the committee’s deadline.

"Despite our inability to bridge the committee's significant differences, we end this process united in our belief that the nation's fiscal crisis must be addressed and that we cannot leave it for the next generation to solve. We remain hopeful that Congress can build on this committee’s work and can find a way to tackle this issue in a way that works for the American people and our economy.

"We are deeply disappointed that we have been unable to come to a bipartisan deficit reduction agreement, but as we approach the uniquely American holiday of Thanksgiving, we want to express our appreciation to every member of this committee, each of whom came into the process committed to achieving a solution that has eluded many groups before us. Most importantly, we want to thank the American people for sharing thoughts and ideas and for providing support and good will as we worked to accomplish this difficult task." [...]

Well, at least they succeeded in coming up with a statement that went beyond "He touched me!" "You touched me first!" "Nuh huh!"

We're still going to be having some fights, as Defense Secretary Leon Panetta enables Republicans in blocking defense cuts. But at least this crappy iteration of the debacle is over.

Mitt Romney mounts the "I'm running for office, for Pete's sake!" defense
 

Well, I think in government we should follow the law. And there has never been an administration that has provided to the opposition research team, or to the public, electronic communications. So ours would have been the first.

Of course, Romney is also the first governor of Massachusetts to seek the presidency since email became commonplace, so whatever he decided to do, his administration would have been the first, so that's a bogus defense. And, more to the point, can you imagine how paranoid and self-absorbed Mitt Romney must be to not realize that public records have value far beyond being fodder for his political opponents?

I did it, and it was fun.

The nation's 10 biggest banks could stand to lose as much as $185 billion in deposits in the next year due to customer defections, according to cg42, a Wilton, Conn.-based management consulting firm that has conducted research for several of the nation's top banks. The top 10 banks hold a total of $2.04 trillion retail deposits (deposits made by consumers and small businesses), according to data from cg42, which is based on each bank's annual report [...]

Out of all the big banks, Bank of America is the most vulnerable and could lose up to 10% of its customers and $42 billion in consumer deposits in the next year, the survey found. The bank's total retail deposits stand at $407 billion (while total deposits, including corporate deposits and deposits from other financial institutions, amount to nearly $1 trillion, according to FDIC data).

That's real money, but we can deliver more pain. Pressure your local municipalities to divest their holdings from the big banks, like San Jose already did, and like Portland and Seattle are trying to do. Pressure non-profits you are involved with to do the same, same with businesses.

Make it your New Year's resolution.

• Today's comic is The myth of sexual harassment by Tom Tomorrow:
  
• For over 60 articles a day on Occupy Wall Street, follow the Occupy Wall Street group and the Occupy Wall Street tag right here on Daily Kos.
• So how's the drive to recall Scott Walker going so far?

  Wisconsin Democrats, after last week’s official launch of the campaign to recall Gov. Scott Walker, made a major show of strength over the weekend.

  United Wisconsin, the group managing the recall, announced on Saturday that during the first four days of the effort — from Tuesday through Friday — they had brought in 105,000 signatures, nearly a fifth of the threshold they must legally meet: 540,208 signatures in a 60-day window.

• Keeping it classy:

  First Lady Michelle Obama and Dr. Jill Biden were on hand this afternoon at the Homestead-Miami Speedway to Grand Marshall NASCAR’s Sprint Cup finale, and to support Joining Forces, an initiative to hire and train veterans. When they were introduced to kick off the race, however, loud booing could be heard above the cheers.
  

• Michele Bachmann loves Garrison Keillor. It's not mutual:

  In Bachmann’s new book “Core of Conviction” (out today), she writes of her fellow Anoka High School alum, “His politics are very different from mine, but I love his gentle, knowing humor. Keillor understands Minnesota, from Lutherans to lutefisk, and his ability to squeeze laughs out of serious-minded midwesterners makes him a legend.”

  The proud son of Anoka does not hold Bachmann in such high regard. In September, Keillor wrote a letter of support for her Democratic opponent in Minnesota’s 6th district, Tarryl Clark, in which he called Bachmann an embarrassment to citizens of the state.

• A short primer on how to talk to your relatives about Occupy Wall Street on Thanksgiving.
• Still way too many:

  More people than ever are living with the AIDS virus but this is largely due to better access to drugs that keep HIV patients alive and well for many years, the United Nations AIDS programme (UNAIDS) said on Monday.

  In its annual report on the pandemic, UNAIDS said the number of people dying of the disease fell to 1.8 million in 2010, down from a peak of 2.2 million in the mid-2000s.
  

• This is scary:

  Across the U.S. and beyond, inmates are using social networks and the growing numbers of smartphones smuggled into prisons and jails to harass their victims or accusers and intimidate witnesses. California corrections officials who monitor social networking sites said they have found many instances in which inmates taunted victims or made unwanted sexual advances.

• In case you needed a reminder about what a low-life, scum-sucking waste of oxygen Rupert Murdoch is:

  The parents of murdered teen Milly Dowler say that phone hacking on behalf of a British tabloid made them think that she was still alive.

  Sally Dowler told the inquiry investigating Britain's media ethics that her 13-year-old daughter's phone had been cleared of some messages shortly after she disappeared in early 2002, suggesting that she was checking her voicemail.

  In fact Milly was dead and the person clearing the messages worked for the News of the World tabloid.

• Calling all crafters! The 3rd annual Netroots Nation Holiday Bazaar is Thursday, December 1 through Tuesday, December 6. Upload your donations directly to the Holiday Bazaar auction site or send them to Karen Kolber at karen at netroots nation dot org. All proceeds benefit Netroots Nation.