It's Not If We Win, It's That They Lose

Paul Krugman at the NY Times has an excellent piece on the state of the Republican party and their moral bankruptcy these days. It's true that there's an element of what he's talking about in the Democratic party, but it's not as prevalent; it's practically the Republicans' reason for being now. Make sure the other side loses.

Do We Need to Worry About the Nutjobs?

Frank Rich of the NY Times thinks so, and while the nutjobs are nutty, he thinks there may be a real and legitimate gripe or two beneath the ignorance. He treats the nutjobs with a lot more respect than I currently am, and he's probably right.

We Can Handle 'Em

As usual, CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen is the voice of reason regarding the Gitmo detainees and what we should do with the ones we don't want to let go: Put them in an American prison. Politicians are trying to block the move. We have worse people who aren't terrorists in there now.

The Milton Berle--Or Is It the Dane Cook?--of Op-Ed Columnists?

Huh. Today's Washington Post features an article by Michael Gerson, usually a fairly moderate Conservative but today a bit shrill because of his emotional attachment to the underlying issue, trying to make Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg out to be a proponent of eugenics through abortion. Eugenics is the science of trying to improve the hereditary qualities of a race or breed, according to Merriam-Webster. I understand the emotion; if I shared his position I would be equally emotional. As it is, I'm no fan of abortion. I think very few are. But I think it's important women have that choice if they decide it's necessary. It's a provocative article that is purposefully unfair to Justice Ginsburg.

Anyway, the interesting thing about this article is that the always shrill nutjob Jonah Goldberg at the LA Times did the same hatchet job last week! The articles are also structured almost identically. Coincidence?

Look at me, shrilly trying to drag someone's reputation down, and with it discredit a whole area of thought with moral outrage when chances are good no moral outrage is warranted.

...Or is it?

Massachusetts Stepping Up to the Plate

The state of Massachusetts is suing the federal government over the "Defense of Marriage Act" (aka no marriage for fags act). They say it's "an overreaching and discriminatory federal law." That's a state that remembers what America is supposed to represent.

What Do We Do About the Hate Mongers?

Bob Herbert in the NY Times points out that we shouldn't ignore the hate speech that's going on, especially in the wake of these killings in the name of extremist right wing ideals. He focuses on the NRA and the Holocaust Museum shooting, but I saw more than one article in mainstream sources that minimized the killing of the doctor in Kansas and played up "how many lives he took" and how it's good that his clinic is closing, not to be reopened. If that's not condoning (and encouraging) that behavior, I don't know what is.

Congestion Pricing--Coughing Up a Bad Idea

Tim Rutten in the LA Times takes a look at the congestion pricing proposal for the LA area "freeways." It's being done in many other areas already and it ain't fair for the lower-income folks. So it ain't right.