Chait stains: over the weekend, I absolutely recalled the non-deal of Reykjavik… http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/03/conservatives-hate-iran-deal-hate-all-deals.html which seemed to turn out fine. So from there, I make the dilettante observation that, hey no deal with Iran, no biggie, right? Chait’s larger point is that conservatives have been ideologically unable to find any deals acceptable, ever, and there seems to be a certain truth in that. So ya say, conservative recalcitrance on Iran can be discounted, and yet you look at Chait and the other liberal commentariat and it is startling the low regard any dealings with the Iranians merit. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/29/the-good-bad-and-ugly-of-the-iran-deal.html. Other thing is, the usual sycophant chorus is finding it hard to backtrack and find the counterintuitive wisdom on things like Yemen. http://www.vox.com/2015/3/30/8309797/obama-yemen-model I have dovish, isolationist impulses ya know, but at this point I do wonder if being the biggest bad ass on the planet wasn’t the proper wisdom http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/03/us-has-no-clean-battle-lines-middle-east
Is the country ready to elect a sexless nag as President? http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/27/opinion/david-brooks-the-field-is-flat.html?_r=0 What I see, is that the structural electoral advantage that supposedly exists for Democrats is actually a reflection of Obama’s quality as a candidate. If he’s not running, you got problems. And actually, I just think it’s seldom that a 45 or 50 year old loses to a 70 year old. But I said also, I actually have some doubts Hillary even gets the nomination.
97% consensus http://theweek.com/speedreads/546704/california-congresswoman-thinks-global-warming-turn-women-into-prostitutes You’re a denier and anti-science if you disagree.
Joe Loveland’s Frank Luntz watch / estate tax – recall, Joe has always thought it was terribly deceitful of Luntz calling a tax levied upon death a “death tax” http://www.wrywingpolitics.com/minimum-wage-indexing-dfl-political-marketing-at-its-worst/ Slate disagrees, thinks that’s plausible enough http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2015/03/27/the_estate_tax_here_s_how_to_make_americans_love_it.html but does come to a Lakoff type conclusion that the ‘messaging’ has been a bit wrong, particularly on incidence. Problem there is, Democrats would like an estate tax that hits a lot more people, so arguing that’s it’s OK because incidence is low doesn’t really argue for much…
Norman Ornstein will be hardest it here right, what with Democrats shown to be petty obstructionists. The link I want explains the fight over the Hyde amendment better, this one will have to suffice. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/03/loretta_lynch_confirmation_mitch_mcconnell_and_the_gop_have_delayed_it_but.html
We just rewatched the wire http://www.vox.com/2015/3/27/8299631/barack-obama-david-simon I’m with Simon. It’s a paradox ya figure how unenlightened Obama is as a progressive on the drug war.