Obsidian Wings

You can’t be Irish if you’re gay – or gay if you’re Jewish?

by JanieM

I’ve been too busy to pay much attention, but my son just pointed me to a controversy arising from the Chicago pride parade. What, a controversy surrounding LGBT issues? Surely not.

***

Rainbow flag with Star of David booted from Chicago gay pride parade triggers [pun intended] thoughts of googling the ongoing history of how you can’t be Irish if you’re gay.

 

If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?

--Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago

dead-heading

by russell

this is by way of a non-political post.  consider it an open thread, chime in with whatever.

it's actually a really nice day today, here in chilly old new england.  probably 80F, nice and dry.  sun is mostly out, with an occasional cloud to break up the monotony and provide a moment of shade.  

my wife and i spent the day doing yard chores.  my wife is an avid gardener, and before we bought our place she didn't have a garden for almost 15 years.  so, when we moved in, she dug in with both hands and both feet.  literally.  our family joke is that we live in the most intensively cultivated 1/8 acre on the planet.

she does most of the yard stuff.  i hire a kid to mow, i edge the beds now and then, and dig holes when we put new stuff in.  the one thing i do for her every year is dead-head the lilacs.  they're pretty tall, and she is not comfortable on ladders, so i take that on.  

i really like doing it, it's a nice excuse to be outside for a couple of hours on a nice day.  it requires just enough attention to keep from being utterly boring, but not so much that you can't sort of space out and let your mind wander around.  i also like doing it because my wife really loves lilacs, and dead-heading them means lots and lots of blossoms next year.  and, i also like doing it because it makes the lilacs look not so shaggy and disheveled.  it's kind of like giving them a nice haircut - i'm snipping out those unsightly tangles and split ends, and giving our lilac girls a fresh new look!  

plus, it lets them not spend all of their resources making seeds.  instead, they can focus on building themselves up, and putting out some new growth.  it's kind of a rejuvenating thing for them, i imagine.

i sometimes chat with the lilacs while i'm doing this.  we have a miss kim in the back, due to (i assume) our cool and rainy spring, she put out an astounding number of blooms this year.  so, as i dead-head her, i compliment her on what a show she put on.  good job, miss kim!!  i have no idea how or if this is received by the lilac.  whatever tree consciousness consists of, i suspect it is much too slow to follow human speech.  tree thoughts are probably more about air, and light, and heat, and water.  strategic thinking, maybe, to respond to stresses and damage.  defensive thoughts to ward off pests.  in any case, i send the lilacs my best intentions, and whatever gets through gets through.  maybe there is some overlap of mind there, somewhere.

there are a ton of birds in attendance while i groom the lilacs. they mostly seem agitated, rather than calm.  most of the time, when i'm in the yard, it's to fill the feeders and bird bath.  so, i sort of assume that they're annoyed, because there i am, but the feeders are still empty.  WTF, human!!  get on the job!!  i talk to them a bit, too, to let them know i'll fill the feeders when i'm done dead-heading.  like with the lilacs,i have no idea how this is received.  bird thoughts, unlike tree thoughts, are probably really fast - me talking probably sounds like weird whale songs to them.  birds seem to focus on sight, and short, sharp sounds.  they notice sudden motions, so when i'm out there i try to move calmly so i don't freak them out.  except the chickadees, who are amazingly unafraid of anything, they just want me to go away so they can eat.  like with the lilacs, i send them my best intentions, in case there is some area of mind overlap available.

i won't even get into the bugs.  bug world seems to be all about chemicals and energy waves.  plus, my intentions toward them are not always so positive, so i figure it's mostly best just to say nothing.  except for the bees, of whom we have a few kinds.  bumble bees, who must be the chillest creatures in the world, and honeybees, who are just too busy to care what i'm doing, and carpenter bees, who mostly don't care unless YOU ARE TOO CLOSE TO THEIR NEST YOU ARE TOO CLOSE TO THEIR NEST YOU ARE TOO CLOSE TO THEIR NEST, in which case they will be right in your face.  and the really tiny bees that come in various shapes and colors.  some of those guys are kind of pissy, it's good to give them a wider berth.

that, plus splitting a nice italian sub with my wife for lunch, was my day.  hope yours was as much fun as mine!

Ur GOP Senate ACA Repeal Bill Open Thread

by Ugh

The GOP Senate done released it's ACA repeal bill earlier today.  You can read the bill here if you want.  My brief, fair, & balanced summary: cruelty now, cruelty tomorrow, cruelty forever (even fits in a tweet).

Essentially, the same as the GOP House Bill. 

Was in Vegas on Mon/Tues and it was 117 degrees. Ouch.

Open thread!

The Wheels of Justice – Weekend Open Thread

by wj

A couple of stories floated by this week, possibly to little notice outside their local areas. They aren’t related to each other, but may be apropos things happening elsewhere in the country.

Here, our County DA has resigned, after pleading guilty to 1 count of perjury. That was a plea deal, as he had been charged with 12 counts.

It seems that he had been using his 2011 re-election campaign funds as a personal ATM. When caught (a newspaper article back in December), he claimed he had considered it a loan, and (finally) paid it back. Except his filings had said explicitly that he had taken no loans. In all, some dozen forms, signed “under penalty of perjury” (something a DA would presumably know something about) contained false statements.

It’s been a big local story for months, including lots of reports of serious unhappiness in the DA’s office here. But once he announced he was going to run for re-election, that state Attorney General’s office got involved -- leading to an indictment and trial. It took a while, but he’s gone. (And facing disbarment as well.)

Half way across the country, manslaughter charges have been filed against various Michigan state officials. They are charged, at least one with manslaughter charges, because they knew of the problems with the Flint, Michigan water supply but did or said nothing.

It’s common, in some circles, to say that the criminal justice system will never hold government officials responsible for their misdeeds. But an official is a fool (which, apparently some of them are) to assume that they will be able to skate if word gets out.

“Puerto Rico, Our Next State….”

by wj

I remember, way back when I was in high school, watching the Republican National Convention on TV. As they did the Roll Call of the States, to nominate their Presidential candidate, they came eventually to Puerto Rico. Like every other delegation, the island’s spokesman included a local color catch phrase when announcing their votes. In this case, Puerto Rico was characterized as “our next state.” That was over half a century ago.

Puerto Rico has held a referendum on its status several times over the years – independence, statehood, or remain a territory. Before today, every time the vote was to remain a territory, and it wasn’t particularly close. But today was different. Thanks, in part to a boycott of those opposed and in part to the mess the territory's finances are in. A substantially majority of the voters (in, admittedly, a small turnout) voted for statehood. And thus the dream of those favoring statehood may finally be realized. Or not.

Statehood for Puerto Rico has been the official position, indeed the enthusiasm, of the local Republican Party since those at least those conventions back in the early 1960s. And still is. But here’s a thought exercise for you. The Puerto Rico territorial government, lead by the Republican Party, comes to Congress to petition for statehood. In the Congress, as we all know, Republicans have a majority. So that should be a slam-dunk, right? Boycott and low turnout or not.

But somehow it’s hard to see a party which spends a lot of time and effort demonizing Hispanics** voting to admit a state full of Hispanics. Their assumption (not necessarily correct, but I can’t see them looking past it) is that a Hispanic population would elect all Democrats to Congress, thus working against them. Even though it is the Republican Party which is pushing statehood . . . and which won the referendum.

I find myself with two questions. When will Puerto Rico become a state? (If ever.) And why would someone decide to boycott a referendum like this? I just can't follow the logic.

** Yeah, yeah, I know. They only oppose illegal immigrants. And if you believe that their base embraces that parsing, I have this bridge….

Romans and Greek elections

by liberal japonicus

The title comes from Harold McMillan's line about the British being the Greeks to the US Romans. He said it several times, probably to make sure that we understood it, here is a longer version from a letter to Richard Crossman (whose diaries inspired the Yes Minister series)

We, my dear Crossman, are Greeks in this American empire. You will find the Americans much as the Greeks found the Romans—great big, vulgar, bustling people, more vigorous than we are and also more idle, with more unspoiled virtues but also more corrupt. We must run AFHQ as the Greek slaves ran the operations of the Emperor Claudius.

So this is a thread to talk about some elections I heard they had over there.  Παρακαλώ!!

And a short postscript, here is the BBC piece explaining what Hung Parliaments are.

Liberal, Conservative, Whatever – Open Thread

by wj

We are way overdue for an open thread, and this is it. No doubt it will go off onto the testimony from ex-FBI Director Comey, once that gets going. But perhaps it will give those of you in earlier time zones (which is pretty much everybody else) something to talk about before that starts.)

Over the past few decades, we have seen increasing divisions in our country. Team/partisan divisions. Liberal/conservative divisions (which largely overlap, but are not really the same thing). But this year, we seem to have moved to a three-way division.

We have liberals, conservatives, and a group which, for lack of a better term, I will label the latter-day Know Nothings. I will cheerfully put words into their (your) mouths, specifically on the subject of President Trump.

Liberals (including several here): Trump is an incompetent nut case and an embarrassment. We disagree with pretty much everything he says and does. In fact, there are only two positive things to be said about him:
1) He is keeping out folks energized, where otherwise they would probably be sitting brooding in the corner.
2) His incompetence is such that, while he says horrible stuff, he is failing to actually get a lot of it done.
A President Pence would probably be able to actually enact far more stuff that we would dislike. But at least we wouldn’t have to worry that he would launch a major war out of pique or something.

Conservatives (including several here): Trump is an incompetent nut case and an embarrassment. Sure, he has said some things we agree with (subject to change at any instant), and even done a couple of things we approve of. But a President Pence would actually do lots better on both fronts. And he wouldn’t embarrass us by association -- not to mention making major losses in 2018 less likely. Plus, he would refrain from offending our allies left and right, while embracing scumbag dictators at every turn.

Know Nothings (of which I haven’t noticed any here): Trump is our boy. He says things that we have long wanted to say, but have felt constrained from saying. And, as a bonus, offends a lot of folks who have been disrespecting us. He isn’t actually getting much done, and some of the things he says he will do would hurt us if he did do them, but we don’t care. He says things that are obviously untrue, and we still don't care. He makes us feel like we matter; like we are important again. And that’s enough.

No doubt many of you can come up with more for all three. But I think that sums up much of their position. And the position of the Know Nothings suggests that, contrary to a lot of hopes/expectations from the left, Trump actions which hurt his base aren’t likely to significantly erode it. As long as he keeps spewing bile, they’ll forgive almost anything.

Abigail Adams and Me

by JanieM

Some years ago I read Dearest Friend: A Life of Abigail Adams, by Lynne Withey, and John Adams, by David McCullogh, in quick succession. Unexpectedly, I ended up thinking a lot about communication.

John Adams took John Quincy to France when JQ was about ten years old. The trip took more than three months, then it took three more months for a letter to get back to Abigail saying that her husband and son had been safe and well in France as of three months before she got the letter.

By contrast, during the five years when my son lived in China, we could talk via Skype every day if we wanted to.

With video.

For free.

California -- What Happened?

by wj

California has a reputation, especially from far away, as a liberal bastion. But while it definitely is a solid blue state today, how accurate is that liberal image really? Yes, there are highly visible liberal areas: Los Angeles (city, not metro area), San Francisco, Berkeley, West Hollywood. But overall?

First, a bit of history. For the first 40+ years of my life, there were two paths to becoming Governor of California. You could be named Edmund G. Brown (Sr. or Jr.) . . . or you could win the Republican primary. Earl Warren or Ronald Reagan . . . Republicans everywhere you look. Republican Presidential candidates routinely got California's electoral college votes. And, for most of that time, one of California's US Senators was a Republican as well. (There were a couple of years when both were Democrats; an equal number when both were Republicans.) In short, not really your stereoytypical liberal blue state.

But then (circa 1990), something changed. Or, perhaps more accurately, a threshold was crossed by an on-going trend. The Republican Party, which had been getting steadily more conservative, went xenophobic as well. A Republican-driven ballot proposition (Prop 187) established a citizenship test for public education, non-emergency health service, etc. (NB: it was eventually found to be unconstitutional.) The proposition was endorsed by the Republican Governor.

Since then: the Governor generally has been a Democrat**. Both Senators have been Democrats. Both houses of the state legislature have overwhelming (over 2/3) Democratic majorities. All of the statewide elected offices are held by Democrats and have been for over a decade.

Did California abruptly get more liberal? Having lived thru it, I would have to say no. Or, at most, marginally. And most of that was more tolerance for (especially) ethnic diversity than anything else.

What happened was that the GOP went for ideological purity -- their candidates have been a mix of way far right of center with a leavening of the manifestly incompetent. And so they have lost. Even against someone as far left of center as Senator Boxer, they have contrived to lose repeatedly. Meanwhile, the Democrats went "big tent". For instance, my state senator is a Democrat who was originally elected as essentially a one-issue candidate -- the one issue being strong opposition to strikes by public employee unions (his prime opponent being the ex-head of the state teachers' union). Not exactly your stereotypical liberal position.

The future, however, could be different. Recently, a couple of special features have been added. First, as a result of a ballot initiative, we went with a non-partisan (and, more importantly, non-politician) body which draws district lines for the state legislature and for Congress. And yes, contrary to assumptions I have seen posted here and elsewhere, it really is a non-partisan body. As a result, we don't have the kind of classic gerrymander district shapes you see in, for example, North Carolina District 12.

Second, (again as the result of a ballot initiative) we have converted to a "top-two" primary system. That is, the two highest vote-getters in the primary, regardless of party get to the general election. In 2016, a couple of dozen state legislative and Congressional races, plus the US Senate race, saw two candidates from the same party pitted against each other.

The result of these two changes could be an increased premium on moderation. If you want to win, it isn't enough to appeal to the base of your party. You increasingly have to be in a position to attract voters from the other party. That means more moderation from the candidates. And we are already starting to see exactly that. There may not be any visible change in the probability of California's electoral votes going to the Democratic Presidential candidate. But that says more about who is likely to win the Republican nomination via party-only primaries elsewhere than it does about where California's voters are at.

In my more optimistic moments, I wonder if (hope) that we will eventually see something similar at the national level.

** The one exception, Arnold Schwarzenegger, won initially in a free-for-all to replace a recalled (Democratic) governor. There were actually 135(!) candidates who qualified for the ballot -- of whom a half dozen were actually serious contenders. Under the rules, a plurality was sufficient; no run-off required. A serious name recognition advantage, and major unhappiness with the incumbent Democrat, got the job done . . . without a majority. And note that Arnold was substantially more moderate/liberal that the other Republicans on the ballot. To the point where I doubt he could have won a GOP-only primary.