What a Fool Believes

The drama. It just keeps overflowing. And they just can't stop themselves from churning out even more of it. They're addicted to the drama, we tell you!

Of course, we're talking about the drama addicted Nevada Republican Party. When they're not fighting mythical enemies and nonsensical conspiracies, they're fighting each other. And even when their own supposed leader, Governor Brian Sandoval (R), tries to take his party in a saner direction, they rebuff him and instead down more of Sharron Angle's signature Kool-Aid full of crazy.

So what is that crazy Nevada Republican Party up to now? Once again, it's cannibalizing itself over its new pre-primary endorsement policy. The former Nevada Republican Party Chair admitted on Twitter that the current Nevada Republican Party Chair "has little power". The Washoe County Republican Party passed a resolution condemning the State Republican Party's endorsement plans (while also condemning Sandoval's). And once again, we're seeing pure chaos erupt all over social media.

Queue the other Mr. McDonald...



Indeed. What a fool believes... We're seeing manifest itself in today's Nevada Republican Party. Crazy is king, folly is celebrated, and ignorance is bliss. No wonder why Senator Dean Heller (R) sounded so foolish last month when he tried to defend the crazy chaos of his party.

But then again, he's not alone. Just today, US Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) simultaneously attacked and praised the very 21st Century Know Nothings who will determine his political future. He has to figure out how to win his own primary, yet he's afraid of the havoc they're wreaking in other primaries. And suddenly, his bizarre "gun show" at CPAC starts to make sense.

Meanwhile in Florida, Republicans are already bickering over an election that's yet to conclude tomorrow. And House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) already has a case of the sads. Perhaps he can join some discouraged Nevada Republicans for a drink at Las Vegas Country Club so they can all feel better. (Oh wait, that already happened.)

We've seen a whole lot of foolish behavior from G-O-TEA Culture Warriors and their favorite pandering politicians lately. And this is no accident. Republican "leaders" thought they could ride the wave of "TEA" to victory. They just forgot to consider what happens when they drink too much "TEA".

The drama. It just keeps overflowing. It overflows like the dangerously spiked "TEA" that's drowning the Republican Party locally and nationally. Perhaps they were a little too willing to accept what a fool believes.

Busted CPAC

Brace yourselves, kittens. And definitely hide the children. It's looking mighty scary over there.

Over where, you ask? CPAC. Oh, yes. That's right. It's back, and it's already giving us nightmares. (Not really. It's just giving us a strong case of sh*ts & giggles. #AllTAllShade)

Why? Let's start with New Jersey Traffic-jammer-in-chief Governor Chris Christie (R-Sleaze). During his big CPAC moment in the slime, he threw a temper tantrum. But why? Oh, because that "Big Bad Harry Reid!!!" (D-Fierce) is fierce enough to read to filth the dirty shade the Koch-topus keeps throwing at America. We figure since Chris Christie can't keep his own damned house in order, he's trying to change the subject by throwing red meat at the base he so desperately wants (since he's still entertaining delusions of 2016 grandeur).



And speaking of desperation, how 'bout that Mitch McConnell (R-Desperado)? He wanted to look macho at CPAC today (while pandering to the NRA), so he mishandled a gun on stage. Apparently, he's still upset over Harry Reid out-foxing him at every turn. #Pobrecito



Unfortunately for Mitchums, his gun stunt was no match for the pearls of wisdom that Paul Ryan (R-P90X) unleashed during his CPAC moment. Oh no, he brought the house down with his paean to "The Hunger Games". No really, he sang the praises of letting poor kids starve. And that explains his rather lurid austerity fetish. #Kinky #Freaky

But of course, none of them could match the unique sophistry of this year's CPAC Award Winner. And really, how could they? Mark Levin is another one of their true leaders.



What he says goes in today's G-O-TEA (along with the guidance of Levin's H8 radio colleague, Rush Limbaugh). And his award at this year's CPAC proves that the Nevada Republican Party is anything but an isolated incident. Rather, batsh*t crazy has spread throughout the G-O-TEA nationwide.

And that's why CPAC has become quite the crazy spectacle. Yet even as it's become such a spectacle, its stars have yet to reveal any wigs under their wigs. And until that happens, color us unimpressed. And definitely keep hiding the children from those gawd-awful mugs. #Busted

Are They Happy Now?

We told you so. It's over. No really, it's game over.

As expected, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) finally reached a deal. And here's what's in it.

Many concessions that tea partiers attempted to extract from the Obama administration in exchange for reopening the government and raising the debt ceiling are not expected to be included in the bill. Conservative Republicans had, over the course of the budget fight, demanded a one-year delay to Obamacare, a delay or repeal of the act's tax on medical-device manufacturers, and a "conscience clause," which would have allowed employers to block their employees from buying health insurance that covers birth control. None of those measures are expected to appear in the Senate's bill. The only concession Republicans seem to have won is a slightly stricter set of rules for verifying the incomes of Americans who are receiving subsidized health insurance under Obamacare.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the final bill won't include a GOP proposal that would stop the Treasury Department from using extraordinary measures to raise the debt ceiling. But it will include back pay for federal employees who missed paychecks during the shutdown and establish a committee taskedwith working out a longer deal ahead of the new January 15 and February 7 deadlines. The bill also reportedly includes a provision that could make it harder to use the debt ceiling as a bargaining chip: At the next deadline, Congress would be required to pass a bill if it wants to block the ceiling from increasing. Otherwise, the ceiling would go up automatically.

The House is expected to vote on the proposed bill first, which would allow the Senate to skip some of its cumbersome procedures and quickly move to a final vote. Politico calls this "an extraordinarily risky play" because the majority of House Republicans are expected to oppose the bill. However, Robert Costa of the National Review reported that Boehner has agreed to pass the bill with mainly Democratic votes. There's still a chance that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) could go rogue and filibuster the bill in the Senate, dragging out the debate past the October 17 deadline, but his office has not said whether or not he will do so, according to the Wall Street Journal.

So Congressional Republicans nearly forced America into Armageddon... To slightly tighten income verification rules that were already in the Affordable Care Act? Are they happy now? Their antics likely cost this nation far more than whatever we'll save under the new ACA subsidy rules.

Oh yes, and they get us more austerity. Never mind that it's led to less growth and more job losses. Republicans embraced austerity and declared it their "victory". And as a result, we're stuck with another three months of it.

So Republicans essentially shut down the federal government and threatened to turn America into a deadbeat nation over a nearly inconsequential tweak to the Affordable Care Act and continued government funding at austerity levels? They could have accomplished the same thing three weeks ago without a government shutdown and credit default scare!

Are they happy now? Are they happy about the lost jobs, lost economic growth, and lost credibility they forced upon this nation? Oh, and are they happy about their own mounting political losses?

We just have to wonder...

Really?

A little earlier, we caught up on the latest news regarding the possible diplomatic breakthrough on Syria. The Obama Administration is now agreeing to UN talks on Syria. While White House officials are publicly leaving military options on the table, they are looking closely into Russia's latest offer.

So against this backdrop, Senator Dean Heller (R-??!!) finally announced his opposition to military action against Syria. Um... OK?! And this came on the heels of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Duck & Cover) announced his opposition to military action against Syria.

Why did they announce this today? Frankly, this feels awfully "day late and dollar short".

Many Members of Congress have had to struggle over this decision. And many have reached differing conclusions for various reasons. And yes, some have even still had trouble reaching a conclusion very recently.

However, it seems awfully odd that certain Republicans have quickly abandoned their bellicose foreign policy posturing "principles" to oppose President Obama no matter what. Some have even gone as far as to praise Russian President Vladimir Putin for recent developments while castigating President Obama for... Something, anything! And Republicans wonder why their party has become so dysfunctional?

Many on the left and on the right have differed with President Obama's Syria proposal for legitimate and principled reasons. That's not being questioned here. Rather, what is being questioned is politicians playing political games with the Syria issue.

In recent days, we've had a chance to have a legitimate debate on the use of force, and on the future of US foreign policy. It's just irritating to notice how some have tried to cheapen the debate by trying to score fast political points while ignoring the real policy issues at stake.

Blurred Lines? (Or Just Plain Crossed?)

Before the nation started getting jittery over possible drumbeats for war in Syria, we were dealing with a very different kind of crisis. All over the media, pundits were aghast. There were cries of horror. And there was plenty of wailing and gnashing of teeth. And it was all over Miley Cyrus twerking at the VMAs.

Sure, there was plenty about Ms. Cyrus' twerking that was disturbing. However, what also disturbed me was the sexist "slut shaming" she had to endure afterwards. Why was she condemned for her suggestive dancing on stage... But not Robin Thicke for his alarming song? Perhaps the New Zealand law students shown below were also thinking about this, as their parody of Thicke's "Blurred Lines" music video (which is also the same song Thicke & Cyrus danced to at the VMAs) aims to highlight the degradation of women in using them as naked props while suggesting rape can sometimes be "excused".

(The video below may not be safe for work, but Thicke's actual video most definitely is not.)



So why are we talking about Robin Thicke and Miley Cyrus today? Simple: The "Blurred Lines"/VMAs controversy is emblematic of the larger problem of sexism in our society.

And the sexism isn't limited to the entertainment industry and pop culture. Just this week, Rep. Joe Heck's (R-TEA Curious) campaign manager flippantly dismissed criticism of Heck's own voting record on (disrespecting) women's rights. Also this week, Senator Mitch McConnell and the national Republicans backing him caught a whole lot of heat over their misogynistic attacks on McConnell's Democratic opponent. And on top of that, a Washington Post columnist (Richard Cohen) even tried to blame Miley Cyrus for the increasingly infamous Steubenville rape!

How can we ever achieve true equality when we stomp on women's rights and treat them as mere sexual toys? America, we have a problem. And no, the problem is not the feminists pointing out the problem.

Robin Thicke may sing/rap about "Blurred Lines", but I'm concerned about him and so many other men flagrantly crossing the line on degrading women. When did it become OK to do this in Hollywood and Washington? Think about it.

Filibuster(ed)

Yesterday, we talked about possible changes to the filibuster in the US Senate. Today, it looks very dead. Why? Harry Reid cut a deal with Mitch McConnell.

Here's how Senator Reid explained his latest move.

A second explanation for Reid’s early enthusiasm for reform might be that Reid needed to convince McConnell to strike a deal and that the only way to do that was to scare him a bit. “Whenever you change the rules here,” Reid said, “you have to show the other side you can change them with 51 votes.” It’s the fear of the partisan reforms, in other words, that leads to bipartisan reforms.

Reid still wants to keep Republicans a little scared. He recalled that earlier in the 112th session of Congress, Senate Republicans began filing motions to suspend the rules after their filibusters were broken. “They couldn’t win these votes,” Reid said. ”It just ate up time. I put up with it for awhile and then said no more. I went to the floor, and I said that’s dilatory. The chair said no, it isn’t. I overruled the chair, and now you can’t do that because I set a precedent. I’m capable of doing more of that.”

I asked Reid whether he really thought the filibuster could survive in a Senate where, in truth, the majority leader, alongside 49 other senators and the vice president, could change any rule they wanted.

“The only way we’ll get rid of the filibuster is if it continues to be abused,” he said. “Hopefully, what we’ll do here will stop some of the abuse, but what will happenif the minority continues to abuse the rules is we won’t get rid of the filibuster, but we’ll go to something like what [Sen. Tom] Harkin has pushed, where one vote is at 57, and then another vote is at 55.”

He's always been a strong believer in Senate process, despite the whining & complaining of certain media pundits. Senate process has always been about comity, and about reaching consensus, rather than muscling together whatever majority is necessary to pass a bill (as the House typically works). Yet while Harry Reid has been able to maneuver his way to quite a few legislative victories, there's still far more to do (including legislation that's been killed by Senate filibusters in the past). And some progressives are notably irritated by Reid's reluctance to truly shake up the Senate.

“Reid said he wants to make it easier to move on bills,” the [pro-reform Senate Democratic] aide told TPM. “This doesn’t do that. He still has to negotiate with McConnell to get on a bill. This is a negligible difference to how the Senate operates today. I don’t see how they can make that argument.”

Outside proponents of reform lamented the Reid-McConnell deal.

“Unfortunately, the incremental ‘reforms” in the agreement do not go nearly far enough to deliver meaningful change,” said Fix The Senate Now, a coalition of groups pushing filibuster reform. The coalition said Democrats have “missed an opportunity to restore accountability and deliberation to the Senate, while not raising the costs of obstruction.”

So what's been agreed to? Here's the gist of it.

The new rules would permit a Senate majority to bypass the filibuster on a motion to proceed to debate with the condition that either a group of senators on each side of the aisle agrees, or the minority is guaranteed the chance to offer amendments.

The new rules limit debate time for sub-cabinet and district court nominations and reduces the number of required hours between cloture and final confirmation from 30 to two. It also lowers the number of cloture motions required to go to conference with the House.

Believe it or not, this is a big deal. Senate rules haven't been changed significantly since 1917. And the last time the filibuster was even tweaked was in 1964, when the cloture threshold was lowered from 67 votes to 60 in order to ease the way for passage of the Civil Rights Act.

Steve Benen is another progressive who's frustrated with the filibuster as is, but he thinks this negotiated package of changes is at least a good first step towards stronger reform that can fix the Senate. It's maddening to think of all the unfilled executive branch positions, all the unfilled judge's seats, and all the stalled legislation over the years. And while Reid's deal with McConnell will curb the more extreme abuses of the filibuster, it still leaves plenty of room for more of the above to happen.

Again, Harry Reid very much believes in the institution of the United States Senate. Despite the balking of some media pundits, he's given plenty of deference to Senate tradition. That's actually why some on the left are angry today. We'll just have to see if this actually helps the Senate function... And if/when the opportunity rises for stronger reform.