I Guess I Didn’t Get That Far

Christine O’Donnell: “…perhaps they didn’t teach you Constitutional law at Yale Divinity School.”
Chris Coons: [Creationism, implicitly “a religious doctrine,” should not be taught in public schools due to the Constitution’s First Amendment.]

Christine O’Donnell: “The First Amendment does? Let me just clarify: You’re telling me that the separation of church and state is found in the First Amendment?”

Chis Coons: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,”

Christine O’Donnell: “That’s in the First Amendment…?”

In a New York Times/CBS News Poll last month, fewer than one in 10 respondents knew that the Obama administration had lowered taxes for most Americans. Half of those polled said they thought that their taxes had stayed the same, a third thought that their taxes had gone up, and about a tenth said they did not know. As Thom Tillis, a Republican state representative, put it as the dinner wound down here, “This was the tax cut that fell in the woods — nobody heard it.”

What if a president cut Americans’ income taxes by $116 billion and nobody noticed?(via southpol)

OR:

This is why they fail.

Source: The New York Times

What They Won’t Tell You

I’ve heard at least a half dozen media reports on the boom in “anonymous” campaign financing, mostly of the “a pox on both houses” variety, e.g. utterly misleading. Then there’s this email that was sent to Glenn Greenwald in reference to a bit of crap logic from David Brooks:

There are 435 House seats, and 37 Senate races being run.

Average Cash on Hand for Democratic House Candidates: $430,153
Average Cash on Hand for Republican House Candidates: $376,720
Average Cash on Hand for Democratic Senate Candidates: $2,937,267
Average Cash on Hand for Republican Senate Candidates: $2,998,816

So, the average House race has less than $1 million cash on hand to spend for advertising in the last month, between both candidates.

The average Senate race has less than $6 million between the two.

So, let’s say that Rove and his $60 million wants to target 30, close house races, and 10 close Senate races.
He could spend $3 million each on the 10 Senate races, DOUBLING the amount candidate spends.
He could also spend $1 million each in the House races, and effectively spend 3 TIMES more than the candidate.

Just $60 million is a HUGE amount targeted at just a few races.

And of course the “chamber of commerce” is spending even more than that.

And, of course, the vast majority of all this class of contribution is going straight into GOP pockets. Not that anyone would ever deign to mention it.

What They Won’t Tell You

So that’s what we want is a secure and sovereign nation and, you know, I don’t know that all of you are Latino. Some of you look a little more Asian to me. I don’t know that. What we know, what we know about ourselves is that we are a melting pot in this country. My grandchildren are evidence of that. I’m evidence of that. I’ve been called the first Asian legislator in our Nevada State Assembly.

Sharon Angle, Republican candidate for Senate from Nevada, addresses the Hispanic Student Union. You can see why she’s proving to be such a dynamic candidate.

Like Alcoholism and Some Other Things

David Gregory: “In a debate last month, you expressed your support for Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell [and] you alluded to ‘lifestyle choices.’ Do you believe being gay [is a] choice?”
Ken Buck (R candidate for Senate, CO): “I do.”
Gregory: “Based on what?”
Ken Buck (R): “I guess you can choose who your partner is.”
Gregory: “You don’t think it’s something that’s determined at birth?”
Ken Buck (R): “I think that birth has an influence over it, like alcoholism and some other things, but I think that basically you have a choice.”

It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds.

Sam Adams, clearly winning the “founding father most ahead of his time” award…
Edited in case you don’t click through:

The quotation is not only inaccurate, but it misrepresents Adams’s political situation. He usually led the majority in Boston’s town meeting and in the Massachusetts legislature. He rarely needed to win the majority over to his principles; rather, his challenge was convincing people to follow his plans for action. Therefore, he called over and over for unity, resolve, and mutual sacrifice from the majority, not “an irate, tireless minority" keen to set fires.

As NAME ISSUE HERE has come to light, the Obama administration has resisted calls for a more forceful response, worried that added pressure might spook the banks and hobble the broader economy.

Stimulus, bank rescue, China, foreclosure; it applies all along. At each point there were arguments for not acting; but the cumulative effect has been drift, and a looming catastrophe in the midterms.
Or to put it another way, the administration has never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity. And soon there won’t be any more opportunities to miss.

Paul Krugman, extending what we were talking about in the previous post.

In their darkest moments, White House aides wonder aloud whether it is even possible for a modern president to succeed, no matter how many bills he signs. Everything seems to conspire against the idea: an implacable opposition with little if any real interest in collaboration, a news media saturated with triviality and conflict, a culture that demands solutions yesterday, a societal cynicism that holds leadership in low regard. Some White House aides who were ready to carve a new spot on Mount Rushmore for their boss two years ago privately concede now that he cannot be another Abraham Lincoln after all. In this environment, they have increasingly concluded, it may be that every modern president is going to be, at best, average.

The Education of President Obama – NYTimes.com (via brooklynmutt)
Well, then, might I suggest all of you that feel this way: go do something else. Seriously, and right now. Because you’ve got at least two more years of a term to do something with up there, and it’s not going to get any easier. If you thought the GOP was going to greet you with a big palm parade upon your arrival to DC, you haven’t been watching. If you think a GOP-led House or (may the Gods forbid) a GOP Congress is suddenly going to get interested in policy, let alone serious policy of any kind, then you haven’t been watching. Maybe a life in politics isn’t for you after all, you self pitying, ever defeated children.
tl;dr: Better Democrats, please.
Source: The New York Times