Hagel Confirmed Open Thread

Submitted by HankP on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 3:08am

Meta

... now the GOP can go back to obstructing everything else the government does. Government by tantrum looks to continue.

Indeed.

(#300526)

Submitted by JKC on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 9:26am.

All the posturing for TV cameras, all the wasted time, and in the end the nomination sails through, which was pretty much the expected outcome. Anyone want to remind me what the point of this whole exercise was?

"I've been on food stamps and welfare. Anybody help me out? No!" Craig T. Nelson (6/2/2009)

The point of the exercise?

(#300528)

Submitted by Jay C on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 10:35am.

For Hagel's opponents? Pretty much a win-win: they got to trash President Obama, get their mugs in front of the cameras, score brownie points with the Israel-first crowd, push their lame-ass conspiracy theories (Benghazi, again?? "Friends of Hamas"?), score more brownie points with the bitter-end neocons and conservative think-tank types, and, oh yes, get their mugs in front of cameras, repeatedly.

It's probably a moot point now that Hagel has been confirmed, but I was just a tad disappointed that there was not more of a pushback against the Republican smear campaign against Sen. Hagel; from either the Administration or (any) of his supporters in the Senate. I mean, maybe there was, but you wouldn't have know it from the "mainstream media" coverage....

ETA: And no, Hagel's nom DIDN'T "sail through" - that 58-41 vote was, seemingly , the closest ever for a SecDef nomination

Tribal signaling

(#300529)

Submitted by TXG1112 on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 10:09am.

The GOP is a cult and the current congressional district structure encourages extreme partisanship rather than broad support. In this scenario it is much more important to have a some high profile events that signal your fealty to the base than to compromise around good policy.

--- I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. My life is my own.

You're probably right:

(#300533)

Submitted by JKC on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 11:55am.

It also proves that congressional Goopers are fundamentally incapable of governing.

"I've been on food stamps and welfare. Anybody help me out? No!" Craig T. Nelson (6/2/2009)

It Might Be Useful Later

(#300536)

Submitted by M Scott Eiland on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 12:10pm.

Hagel will be on a short leash with his weaknesses well-documented. The overwhelming repudiation of Hagel by members of his own party in the Senate (he does apparently have the support of Lindbergh Republicans--Rand Paul will not become President by pandering to the Israel hating crazies among his father's supporters) will make it impossible for Obama to point to Hagel and say, "See--my foreign policy has Republican support!"

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Insight from inside the right wing bubble...

(#300540)

Submitted by TXG1112 on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 12:56pm.

"See--my foreign policy has Republican support!"

This cuts both ways. Considering what counts for Republican orthodoxy on foreign policy, there is no way that Obama really wants Republican support. What this also shows is just how far out of the mainstream Republicans really are, making it much easier to marginalize their views. I assure you, more war in the ME is not a popular position.

--- I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. My life is my own.

This is what's so dumb about this whole thing

(#300542)

Submitted by HankP on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 1:36pm.

The Secretary of Defense doesn't make foreign policy. Yet Kerry, the Secretary of State who actually does help make foreign policy sailed through confirmation. I don't know how much stupider one could get if they actually opposed Obama's foreign policy. But I'm sure the GOP will think up something else in the next few years.

I blame it all on the Internet

No, That's The Point

(#300544)

Submitted by M Scott Eiland on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 1:45pm.

Kerry's a Democrat, so Obama can't use "he's a Republican, so I'm being bipartisan no matter how much you complain about it" as a dodge. Kerry is a big, easy target with a "soft on the enemy" narrative built in, making bashing easy and with little political cost associated with it.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

So the division by party

(#300549)

Submitted by HankP on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 1:56pm.

is more important than the actual content of the policy. Good luck with that, as BDs diary shows it's working out just great.

I blame it all on the Internet

This confirmation is scary, as are other cooperative measures

(#300531)

Submitted by catchy on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 11:27am.

It means the GOP is battening down for a sequester fight.

What cooperation?

(#300550)

Submitted by HankP on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 1:58pm.

Hagel was confirmed by a razor thin margin compared to all other SecDefs of the past 50 years. That doesn't look like cooperation to me.

I blame it all on the Internet

The GOP dropped the filibuster on Hagel

(#300570)

Submitted by catchy on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 4:54pm.

It's not much cooperation by historical standards, but it's still not maximal un-cooperation.

They're caving on the Violence Against Women Act.

Lyndsey Graham made positive noises about productive bipartisan meetings on immigration reform.

I think that means they're getting ready to dig in their heels on the sequester, which is bad. I'd rather have them dig in their heels on Hagel, for example.

Antonin Scalia is an embarrasing hack

(#300555)

Submitted by Floater on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 2:53pm.

Hat tip to talkingpoints memo.

1. Justice Scalia today regarding the voting rights act: ”This is not the kind of question you can leave to Congress.”

2. The United States Constitution, Amendment XV: “SECTION 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. SECTION 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.” (My emphasis.)

Non-Sequitur

(#300556)

Submitted by M Scott Eiland on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 3:08pm.

Unless liberals are willing to put down a very shiny toy they've been playing with for decades now, the fact that Congress has power to legislate in an area does not mean that their efforts are not subject to judicial review based on possible constitutional infirmities:

The core struggle in the case is between the 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law, and the 15th Amendment, which tasks Congress with enforcing a ban on discriminatory voting laws.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

It follows quite logically

(#300560)

Submitted by Floater on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 3:34pm.

Scalia demonstrated very clearly what his real issue was.

"Whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes.”

Apparently he considers voting rights for minorities an "entitlement". Given the history of the southern states -- a history that plenty of folks still alive remember and lived through that's a very curious turn of phrase don't you think? Of course Scalia is the same guy who said in Citizens United that unlimited campaign contributions would not lead to corruption. The term hack is being kinder to him than he deserves.

Not quite

(#301020)

Submitted by Bird Dog on Fri, 03/08/2013 - 11:16am.

The context of "racial entitlement" is the present practice of racial gerrymandering, thus "entitling" blacks to some congressional districts and whites to others. Clegg explains:

In making this point, Justice Scalia used the phrase “racial entitlement” to describe one reason why a statute like this will never be allowed to expire. Justice Sotomayor apparently took offense at this phrase, and expressed that to Justice Scalia by asking the plaintiff’s counsel, on rebuttal, whether he thought the right to vote was a racial entitlement – suggesting, that is, that this was Justice Scalia’s position.

I think, though, that what Justice Scalia was adverting to was the fact that Section 5 is now used to create and protect voting districts that are identifiably black (or Latino). It does this through the concept of “vote dilution” and Section 5’s “effects” test, both of which were also alluded at the argument, though this phenomenon was never discussed in as much detail as it might have been.

Indeed, I would have liked to have seen more discussion of this particular racial entitlement, and not only so that Justices Scalia and Sotomayor will better understand each other. As Joshua Thompson and I discussed on National Review Online earlier this week, it is the principal use that is made nowadays of Section 5 – and using racial gerrymandering to create segregated voting districts is not only completely inconsistent with the ideals of the civil rights movement, but raises additional constitutional problems for Section 5.

Of course, there are some who engage in shallow knee-jerk responses by calling Scalia a white supremacist. The other issue Scalia brought up was the extent of deference accorded Congress, even when there is an overwhelming majority on a piece of legislation. In other words, does vote count trump constitutionality. Scalia appears to be leaning against.

Government is merely a servant – merely a temporary servant; it cannot be its prerogative to determine what is right and what is wrong, and decide who is a patriot and who isn’t. Its function is to obey orders, not originate them.

Yes, history started yesterday

(#301023)

Submitted by HankP on Fri, 03/08/2013 - 2:10pm.

it's so much easier to be a conservative if you believe that.

I blame it all on the Internet

On the other hand

(#301024)

Submitted by eeyn524 on Fri, 03/08/2013 - 2:40pm.

history didn't end in 1865 or 1965 either.

The wrong questions were being asked here.

1. Why the does the Voting Rights Act deny protection to minority voters in areas not covered. For example. Indiana, one of the KKK's strongest state, or miserably corrupt and racist places like Illinois and Ohio? Because those states were on the right side in 1865 and 1965 seems to me a very weak answer.

2. If "safe" districts are an entitlement - and let's say things are bad enough that they are needed - why aren't they needed everywhere, not just the ex-Confederacy and few other sports?

What I see in the VRA is a lack of sincere commitment to protecting minority voting rights everywhere; it's more about symbolic reaffirmation of the results of the Civil War and the civil rights era. Reaffirmation of those things is great, but not by creating unequal voting rights based on geography.

Yeah

(#301025)

Submitted by Model 62 on Fri, 03/08/2013 - 2:48pm.

The solution to the problem of the VRA's unequal treatment wrt to the States is to extend it to all 50.

I have no problems with adding covered areas

(#301026)

Submitted by HankP on Fri, 03/08/2013 - 3:30pm.

whether they be states or localities. But the areas covered are covered for a good reason, it's not like there haven't been recent issues - a lot more recent than 1865 or 1965.

I blame it all on the Internet

And history didn't stop in 1965

(#301080)

Submitted by Bird Dog on Mon, 03/11/2013 - 9:40am.

The VRA--and Sections 4 and 5--is 47 years and at least two generations old. It should be replaced and updated with something else instead of mindless and brainless reauthorizations. Absent congressional action, the USSC may do its own bit of updating.

Yes!

(#300567)

Submitted by Bird Dog on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 4:32pm.

Because opposing Hagel has nothing to do with a thin resume, or principle, or his stunningly ill-presented testimony before the Senate.

Or that he's a dimwit. Nope, GOP opposition is all about politics, nothing more.

Obama got his Republican for political cover, and now he can say that a Republican joined him on making major defense spending cuts. We've come a long way since the last time a Republican served as SecDef under a Donkey Party president.

Uh, Robert Gates was a Republican

(#300583)

Submitted by HankP on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 7:36pm.

and as far as Hagel, the GOP just loved him until he said invading Iraq was a mistake. Which it was, and which they've never forgiven him for.

BTW, John McCain stated that he'd consider Hagel a great pick for Secretary of State. Imagine that, your hero, John McCain, said that.

I blame it all on the Internet

You're right

(#300624)

Submitted by Bird Dog on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 11:27am.

I blanked on Gates, probably Obama's best personnel choice ever.

Hagel did more than just say that removing Saddam was a mistake. The key point of departure was his opposition to the surge strategy and his wrong predictions of its success.

McCain said Hagel would be a great SecState in 2006. I doubt McCain would have those same sentiments today.

Weren't there events out the scope of the surge prediction?

(#300627)

Submitted by brutusettu on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 2:48pm.

The key point of departure was his opposition to the surge strategy and his wrong predictions of its success.

We're totally sure the surge would have been a success had certain events outside the scope of the Surge strategy not happened?

McCain said Hagel would be a great SecState in 2006. I doubt McCain would have those same sentiments today.

Possibly completely regardless of what Hagel's views were on the surge, a new reason could have appeared once the Tea Party made McCain a primary target and a member of a different party was POTUS.

"I’m to believe that North Korea is so dangerously unhinged that they would attack without warning – yet so meek and easily cowed that they will sit quietly and not retaliate when we start bombing them."

Major Kong

Wonkblog quality control

(#300568)

Submitted by catchy on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 4:42pm.

Dylan Matthews of the Washington Post rebuts the claim, which he mistakenly implies that Elizabeth Warren made, that Too Big To Fail costs 83 *trillion* per year:

No, “too big to fail” is not worth $83 trillion.

... Gerri Willis of Fox Business News just can’t get over the amount of support the U.S. government gives big banks. We support them, she said, citing Elizabeth Warren’s comments to Ben Bernanke during a Senate hearing yesterday, to the tune of $83 trillion (over what time frame is left unspecified).

Dylan implies that Warren claimed that these subsidies are worth 83 trillion per year. Even if he did not misinform, Dylan at least failed to be informative, by not checking on the accuracy of the main topic of his post -- comments attributed to Elizabeth Warren by Fox News hosts.

Some of you may be surprised that a major news network in the US just makes sh&t up about what a US Senator says. But in fact Warren never said 83 trillion.

Federal spending by state

(#300576)

Submitted by catchy on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 5:47pm.

i.e. Who is gonna get nailed hardest by the sequester?

If you guessed "mostly welfare queen red states" (with apologies to NM, WA, CO, VT, and CT), you guessed right.

Catchy, I'm not a doctor or nuthin'

(#300581)

Submitted by Darth Cuddly on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 6:40pm.

and maybe it's just my screen, but it looks like 5 of worst 9 (black states) were blue states. Of the five states in the double digits 4 were blue.

In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome.

Let's do this right

(#300582)

Submitted by catchy on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 7:12pm.

Highest Risk.

4 Blue states: HI, NM, MD, VA

5 Red states: AK, MO, KY, GA, SC.

Hi Risk.

4 Blue States: WA, CO, VT, CT

7 Red States: ID, AZ, OK, KS, TX MS, GA

Total High/est Risk: 13 Red - 8 Blue.

Low Risk.

Red States: WY, AR, IN

Blue States: CA, NV, DE, NH, FL

Lowest Risk.

Red State: NE

Blue States: OR, MN, IA, IL, MI, OH, NY, NJ

Total Low/est Risk: 4 Red - 13 Blue

This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone familiar with the fact that blue states on average pay significantly more in federal taxes than they receive in federal spending, while the reverse is true on average for our welfare queen red states. The typical voter in red states is someone who mooches and takes from the more educated, wealthy and liberal members of the population.

erratum

(#300594)

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 10:25pm.

5+7 = 12, not 13.

Do you know that a priori or is that known synthetic a priori?

(#300600)

Submitted by catchy on Thu, 02/28/2013 - 10:51am.

I wrote that whole pedantic "Let's Do This Right" comment out and then F'd it up anyway. I can't be trusted.

Ha! I did the same thing.

(#300601)

Submitted by Darth Cuddly on Thu, 02/28/2013 - 12:12pm.

I counted DC. I can't get by the bracketing though. How do TX/AL belong in the same category as CO with a percentage spread of 1.6% while TX/AL are only 1.4% behind CA yet are considered two risk categories worse? And the logic isn't obvious that puts SC and VA in the same category with a 12+% spread between them.

In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome.

Fair question about the categories

(#300602)

Submitted by catchy on Thu, 02/28/2013 - 1:08pm.

I also notice MT is 4.0 and so is CA yet they're in different categories. I will never link to a "Moneygame" chart again. I thank you for your critical eye and equivalent arithmetic capabilities.

I still think the fact that 8 out of 9 lowest risk states are blue states, some of em quite populous, says something about the effects of the sequester.

Link to them if you want. It's good to know info

(#300605)

Submitted by Darth Cuddly on Thu, 02/28/2013 - 2:27pm.

it just needs some of the methodology spelled out. There may be a method to the madness, it just isn't very clear. Also, I think MT is 4.8%, maybe 4.6%, it gets fuzzy when I zoom in but I don't think it's 4.0

In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome.

Err. TX is a net contributor to the Fed's coffers, and dwarfs..

(#300690)

Submitted by Bernard Guerrero on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 1:20am.

....most of the other "red" states. Also, from my POV, most of the rest of humanity consists of under-educated, poverty-stricken moochers. Just sayin'. :^)

"Unfortunately the universe doesn't agree with me. We'll see which one of us is still standing when this is over." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky

"Dwarfs"

(#300703)

Submitted by catchy on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 4:28am.

TX's population doesn't dwarf the population of all the other welfare queen red states combined. Regardless, federal representation isn't solely determined by population. Unfortunately, TX gets 2 senators, just like the rest of the welfare queen red states, and its electoral votes aren't solely based on population either.

Also, from my PoV, by far the biggest moochers are upper-level financial employees, who can't think their way out of a closet, and who needed trillions of taxpayer bailout $s to stay afloat. Just sayin'. :^)

Three points:

(#300707)

Submitted by Bernard Guerrero on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 9:56am.

A) Avoiding that sort of situation is why they hire the guys in the Business Prevention Department, as we are affectionately known. You're welcome! (Gotta say, 2007 was like a big advert, biz has been good.)

B) You seem to be under the misapprehension that inflow as % of GDP is the same metric as net contribution. TX being a net contributor to the budget, "welfare queen" obviously doesn't apply. In case you needed a non-ass-clown source, unlike whatever that thing was you posted up above: http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/americas-fiscal-union

(Chagrinned to note that I have only ever resided in net contributor states, so with respect to the Loser Support System I suppose I am something of an enabler.)

C) I copyrighted the caret-nosed smiley back in 2009. (Also 3-bullet posts and excessive use of the parenthesis.) We can discuss where to send my royalty checks offline.

"Unfortunately the universe doesn't agree with me. We'll see which one of us is still standing when this is over." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky

Re: B

(#300714)

Submitted by catchy on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 11:13am.

I wasn't confusing the two, but the measurements line up reasonably well, which shouldn't be surprising.

At your link, guess which states are the biggest net contributors to the fed gov.? - IL, NY, CT, MA, MN, DE (all blue as heck).

And the biggest moochers are mostly red - NM, MS, WV, AL, MT, ND, and ME. (5 out of 7 are red).

On average, Republican voters are more likely to be mooching off liberal voters than vice versa.

It's not polite to say, but red states are in general way suckier, and their populations are in general significantly dumber and poorer than in blue states. Only under those circumstances could a political party of moochers popularly rail against mooching.

I'm pretty sure you were confusing....

(#300716)

Submitted by Bernard Guerrero on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 11:26am.

....something. The relationships you are looking for are a strong correlation between being urbanized and being wealthy and being a net contributor. Also that generally means that if you are rural and poor, you'll probably have a low population density and likely a bunch of icky stuff like military bases, which account for significant inflows.

But why should we argue? I think we can agree that being on the Loser Support System makes you a Loser, regardless of where you live! A pox on all the moochers' houses! :^)

Edit: Hey, while we're on the subject of harmony, here's a policy suggestion I bet you'll love. I've been mulling it over, and I think we should expand the level of EITC available to childless couples! Significantly! Whadda ya think?

"Unfortunately the universe doesn't agree with me. We'll see which one of us is still standing when this is over." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky

"why should we argue?"

(#300721)

Submitted by catchy on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 3:33pm.

Because we are MEN, in search of truth.

Or something.

Young urban professionals don't draw very many government benefits and are largely liberal.

Meanwhile rural voters in red states enjoy disproportionate political representation and are net beneficiaries of federal spending.

I'm not sure what your point is about military bases, since the US military is the most socialist institution we have in this country.

It's a central example of how dumb your average red state Republican is who rails against socialism and moochers, all while expecting their state to receive military spending that is partially, and in some cases largely, subsidized by others.

Of course there are many affluent Republicans who are voting their narrow self-interest, but in the absence of these "get your government hands off my medicare" rural redstate voters, the GOP would have about 10 senators and 50 House members.

... Your change to the EITC to avoid incentivizing having children is fine by me.

One worry would be that low pop growth and fewer younger workers might necessitate cutting retirement benefits.

But present-day discussions over cutting social insurance have shown that to be a specious worry. Even modest productivity gains, which the US has been enjoying for many decades, more than offset any such demographic trends.

So go ahead!

It is pretty silly to hear

(#300705)

Submitted by HankP on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 4:39am.

someone who works in the financial industry calling other people "moochers". Especially people who work in risk management.

I blame it all on the Internet

Trekkies and Civil Rights

(#300580)

Submitted by catchy on Wed, 02/27/2013 - 6:29pm.

Gotta love this story:

"Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. ... was instrumental in ensuring that actress Nichelle Nichols continued to play Lt. Uhura on Star Trek, just as she was considering leaving television for Broadway...

... a promoter at the event approached Nichols to say that her “greatest fan” wanted to meet her. As she sat waiting for the eager Trekkie, she looked across the room and saw Dr. King beaming at her. ”And I remember saying to myself, ‘Whoever this little Trekker is, they’re going to have to wait, because this is my leader, Dr. Martin Luther King, walking toward me with a smile on his face.’ ”

Then, King put his hand out and said, “..Ms. Nichols, I am your greatest fan.”

He told Nichols how important her role was, not least of all because until then, black people hadn’t been depicted in anyone’s vision of the future.

Antonin Scalia, Racist and White Supremacist

(#300595)

Submitted by HankP on Thu, 02/28/2013 - 3:37am.

and world class a$$hole (but there's nothing new about that)

About time the mask came off:

JUSTICE SCALIA: Well, maybe it was making that judgment, Mr. Verrilli. But that’s — that’s a problem that I have. This Court doesn’t like to get involved in — in racial questions such as this one. It’s something that can be left — left to Congress.

The problem here, however, is suggested by the comment I made earlier, that the initial enactment of this legislation in a — in a time when the need for it was so much more abundantly clear was — in the Senate, there — it was double-digits against it. And that was only a 5-year term.

Then, it is reenacted 5 years later, again for a 5-year term. Double-digits against it in the Senate. Then it was reenacted for 7 years. Single digits against it. Then enacted for 25 years, 8 Senate votes against it. And this last enactment, not a single vote in the Senate against it. And the House is pretty much the same. Now, I don’t think that’s attributable to the fact that it is so much clearer now that we need this. I think it is attributable, very likely attributable, to a phenomenon that is called perpetuation of racial entitlement. It’s been written about. Whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes.

I don’t think there is anything to be gained by any Senator to vote against continuation of this act. And I am fairly confident it will be reenacted in perpetuity unless — unless a court can say it does not comport with the Constitution. You have to show, when you are treating different States differently, that there’s a good reason for it.

That’s the — that’s the concern that those of us who — who have some questions about this statute have. It’s — it’s a concern that this is not the kind of a question you can leave to Congress. There are certain districts in the House that are black districts by law just about now. And even the Virginia Senators, they have no interest in voting against this. The State government is not their government, and they are going to lose — they are going to lose votes if they do not reenact the Voting Rights Act.

Even the name of it is wonderful: The Voting Rights Act. Who is going to vote against that in the future?

So by this twisted logic any unanimous vote is suspect. Perhaps he could comment on Senate Amdt. 10 to S. 47, providing assistance to child victims of sex trafficking. Or Senate Amdt. 3232 to S. 3254, enhancing sanctions on Iran. Or the National Defense Authorization Act, which also passed unanimously. Or all the District Court judges who were appointed unanimously. They're all obviously suspect because they're so popular. And the most suspect is Scalia's unanimous confirmation to the Supreme Court.

Of course, the real supremacist comes out when he identifies the voting rights act - which finally allowed blacks to vote freely and without the various laws set up to bar them from the polls - is a "racial entitlement". Of course it is if you're a supremacist who doesn't want blacks to vote anyway. This isn't ancient history either, violations have been ongoing over the past 50 years. With Republicans making it obvious that voter suppression of minorities is a major thrust in their election strategy, this is clearly Scalia putting his thumb on the scales of justice for partisan reasons - nothing new from him, unfortunately.

The man is a hack, and I wouldn't be surprised if he was starting to suffer from dementia given the ridiculousness of his quote above. But he'll go on giving inane arguments to satisfy all the racists in the GOP until he dies (soon, one hopes).

I blame it all on the Internet

I'll need to see the commnet Scalia made earlier

(#300596)

Submitted by brutusettu on Thu, 02/28/2013 - 4:38am.

The problem here, however, is suggested by the comment I made earlier, that the initial enactment of this legislation in a — in a time when the need for it was so much more abundantly clear was — in the Senate, there — it was double-digits against it. And that was only a 5-year term.

The act got fewer votes earlier on because there was a much bigger problem and politicians could openly be for segregation, Jim Crow, etc. But now that gerrymandering and substitute versions of Jim Crow light are routinely coming under the scope of the VRA, apparently problem solved, next problem.

There are certain districts in the House that are black districts by law just about now. And even the Virginia Senators, they have no interest in voting against this. The State government is not their government, and they are going to lose — they are going to lose votes if they do not reenact the Voting Rights Act.

What? And the bolded part is like some sort of Hitler was a vegetarian, so vegetarianism is evil argument.

Major Kong

Full transcript here

(#300608)

Submitted by HankP on Thu, 02/28/2013 - 3:35pm.

[link] - pdf

I blame it all on the Internet

Scalia, just asking questions?

(#300616)

Submitted by brutusettu on Thu, 02/28/2013 - 9:40pm.

Indeed, Congress must have
found that the situation was even clearer and the
violations even more evident than originally, because
originally, the vote in the Senate, for example, was
something like 79 to 18, and in the 2006 extension, it
was 98 to nothing. It must have been even clearer in
2006 that these States were violating the Constitution.
Do you think that's true?

Scalia's questions whether certain state legislatures or counties et won't violate or haven't repeatedly tried to violate the 15th Amendment, is that the statewide elections of Senators haven't gotten a outspoken "State's Rights" advocate?

Too difficult for Scalia to just look at the record of attempts at "legal" voter suppression?

Maybe Scalia should always leave his keys in the ignition and door wide open because afaik, his car hasn't gotten stolen once when he locks his car and takes the keys with him. If it hasn't gotten stolen in the latter cases, surely it's safe in the former.

Major Kong

He is a hack. Or more likely

(#300597)

Submitted by heet on Thu, 02/28/2013 - 8:10am.

He is a hack. Or more likely -- he has convinced himself that his twisted and blatantly political arguments are actually super-special forms of originalism that only he himself can perceive. The SC echo chamber must be a very comforting place.

Speaking of familiar odors

(#300625)

Submitted by nilsey on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 2:39pm.

Our very own blogfather joshua "trevino with a tilde" has been caught lying, hand in the till of the malaysian authoritarian government, dispensing cash to his fellow hacks to teh tune of almost $400K:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/covert-malaysian-campaign-touched-a-wi...

his filing is here:

http://www.fara.gov/docs/6152-Registration-Statement-20130124-1.pdf

and he is quoted here:

Trevino, who declined to communicate with me by email of phone, said in a Twitter direct message, "I was never on any 'Malaysian entity's payroll,' and I resent your assumption that I was."

so.. a lying hack. and a bunch of his hack friends are implicated as well, including "box turtle ben" domenech.

“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
-George Bernard Shaw

Part of a Trend

(#300637)

Submitted by Model 62 on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 3:31pm.

The federal filing specified that Trevino was engaged through the lobbying firm APCO Worldwide and the David All Group, an American online consulting firm. The contract also involved a firm called FBC (short for Fact-Based Communications), whose involvement in covert propaganda prompted a related scandal and forced an executive at The Atlantic to resign from its board.

The Atlantic, of course, was caught up in a scandal when it ran an advertorial written by the Church of Scientology. As online media struggles with declining ad revenue, many publishers have hopes that "Native Ads" -- advertorials in old media -- will make up the difference. We should expect to see more of this kind of thing as clever folks like Josh Trevino-with-a-tilde with access to publishers and relationships with writers play match maker with organizations that want to send a message.

But the hypocrisy Trevino-with-a-tilde displays here. Payola from a foreign government? With a poor record of human rights and democracy? After all the pages and pages of American democracy and American freedom bluster? Then to lie about it after having been caught? Stunning.

I figured

(#300640)

Submitted by Pranky on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 3:40pm.

he'd just latch onto the conservative pundit circuit. This surprises even me. What a d!ck.

I've Done a Bit of This Kind of Work

(#300641)

Submitted by Model 62 on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 3:55pm.

Not political. But native content type stuff.

Domenech, a former Washington Post blogger who runs a daily morning newsletter called The Transom, said he "was retained by Josh's Trevino Strategies and Media PR firm in 2010 with the general guidance to write about Malaysia, particularly the political scene there."

"I did not ever have anyone looking over my shoulder for what I wrote, and the guidance really was just to write about the political fray there and give my own opinion," Domenech said. "Of course, Josh picked me knowing what my opinion was - I stand by what I wrote at the time and I continue to be critical of Anwar Ibrahim, who I think is a particularly dangerous fellow."

We categorize different types of native content -- Tier 1 is advertorial ( or "conversion") with more or less advertiser messaging; Tier 2 is client mentions and no client messaging; Tier 3 may or may not include mentions or messaging; content and tags are enough pull Tier 1 and Tier 2 posts up in "related article" info boxes.

These guys are all confessing to Tier 3 type of work. It'll be interesting to see if Trevino-with-a-tilde is shown to have offered messaging guidance to his freelancers.

Every newspaper and magazine does this kind of stuff

(#300642)

Submitted by HankP on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 4:31pm.

people would be surprised to know how many articles are just re-written press releases.

I blame it all on the Internet

Sure

(#300643)

Submitted by Pranky on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 4:39pm.

press releases from Sony or Apple or XYZ, but the Malaysian government? A political writer?

IOKIYAR, he'll wind up on his feet somewhere else being the good little apparatchik that he is.

Interesting for us here! The Malaysian govt is anti-Israel

(#300648)

Submitted by mmghosh on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 5:26pm.

I seem to remember several pro-Israel comments here in the Iraq war days, including those about the death of Ms Rachel Corrie.

Mr Mahathir Mohammad (who originally started the witch hunt against Mr Ibrahim) was involved in the Gaza blockade flotilla imbroglio in 2009.

The idea of sending flotillas to Gaza originally came from former Malaysian Prime Minister and Perdana Global Peace Foundation’s (PGPF) founder Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad. For decades now he has been a very outspoken advocate of the rights of the Palestinians. Like most people who take a firm a stand against the illegal actions of the state of Israel, he was labelled “anti-Semitic”. This type of ad hominem attack is the only stratagem left for those who wish to defend an illegal and immoral occupation.

---

In 2010, PGPF joined the Freedom Flotilla with the “Rachel Corrie”. This year it decided to act alone and send its ship, the “Spirit of Rachel Corrie” (SRC), ahead of the Freedom Flotilla II. The mission’s ultimate goal was to “bring liberty in Gaza” and “prove to the world that Israel has no right to impose this illegal siege”, Mahathir told the participants of the mission about to set sail on the SRC.

To be charitable, perhaps Mr Trevino was unaware of these issues. Also, Mr Mahathir is both conservative and anti-gay rights, which could align him with some US conservatives in spirit.

literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it

Charitable?

(#300657)

Submitted by Pranky on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 6:07pm.

There isn't enough charity in the world to let me believe old Josh couldn't have googled around a bit before taking payola from the Malaysian government.

Hey, he's proven his bonafides as a true conservative again and again. This is just one more instance.

Malaysia has sent armed forces to Afghanistan as part of ISAF

(#300658)

Submitted by mmghosh on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 6:19pm.

http://www.bt.com.bn/news-asia/2010/07/16/malaysia-makes-first-military-...

so its not like Mr Trevino was writing paid puff pieces for an enemy of the US. Though I do think that the anti-Israel pro Rachel Corrie stuff would be a bridge too far for Mr T, if he knew about it.

Perhaps catchy should co-ordinate paying ostensible right wingers to be pro-government spending? 100,000 a year for 4 years?

literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it

I'm in!

(#300689)

Submitted by Bernard Guerrero on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 1:16am.

Make the check payable to me as per my Forvm name. I'll also expect reasonable pre-cleared expenses. And green M&Ms.

"Unfortunately the universe doesn't agree with me. We'll see which one of us is still standing when this is over." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky

I get my cut or I'll wipe the database nt

(#300693)

Submitted by HankP on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 2:17am.

I blame it all on the Internet

you know? i'm staring to think that...

(#300678)

Submitted by nilsey on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 7:55pm.

... this whole operation was aimed *internally to malaysia*.

as teh ambassador put it, why would you hire relatively unknown (i mean trevino? really?) PR hacks to repeat lies that no one in america particularly cares about?

because you want to be able to point to these articles in your onw state owne internal media (as propaganda) and saying "see, even these commentators in the USA say these things about rape and sodomy are to be taken seriously...."

edit: meant to quote:

The scandalous accusation was taken up widely in the Malaysian media, as had been the intention...

“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
-George Bernard Shaw

Yeah, it's usually in business news

(#300649)

Submitted by HankP on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 5:27pm.

but I wonder how much it's branched out into different areas. The press is in business to make money, not present "the truth". Just look at the Atlantic and their stupid ham-handed Scientology "advertorials".

But Trevino deserves this, his first instinct and response when questioned was to lie about it. Too bad he can't wipe the databases at Huffington Post, San Francisco Examiner, Washington Times, National Review, Redstate, ...

I blame it all on the Internet

LOL

(#300655)

Submitted by Pranky on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 6:03pm.

Too bad he can't wipe the databases at Huffington Post, San Francisco Examiner, Washington Times, National Review, Redstate, ...

Ha.

oh, heres a surprise!

(#300664)

Submitted by nilsey on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 6:50pm.

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.malaysiamatters.com/

Sorry.

This URL has been excluded from the Wayback Machine.

“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
-George Bernard Shaw

I think I see a pattern developing here ... nt

(#300666)

Submitted by HankP on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 6:57pm.

I blame it all on the Internet

I'm still surprised

(#300668)

Submitted by catchy on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 7:13pm.

He was a reasonable person and showed some integrity, for example openly discussing his mental health issues, for many years on the successor site.

And tacitus.org itself wasn't a grifting scheme, but an open place where good discussion took place.

His previous internet persona is really a far cry from dropping pro-Malaysian articles into the media for $s and then lying about it.

I got a sense that Josh was no longer interested in having a dialogue with his political opponents, but that's becoming increasingly true of myself as well. I just didn't sense this kind of change from someone I'd watched for years.

Wiping the database was a big red flag

(#300671)

Submitted by HankP on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 7:21pm.

as was excluding the site from the internet archives. I didn't spend a lot of time at tacitus but those moves seemed pretty extreme to me.

I blame it all on the Internet

I Don't Think He Earned Much of a Living

(#300672)

Submitted by Model 62 on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 7:22pm.

off tacitus.org.

He ended it and wiped the database as part of a career move -- first as an HHS speech writer, then his public policy position and... this PR sort of thing.

One wonders how pervasive this is, left and right.

I don't hear much about it on the left

(#300677)

Submitted by catchy on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 7:47pm.

There seems to be an entire generation of young corrupt internet conservatives, many with ties to redstate - e.g., Ben Domenech and Josh Trevino. It makes one wonder about Erick Erickson's funding. There's also that James O'Keefe fellow and the Brietbart crew.

Then there've been prominent and older op ed writers like Ben Stein who was fired from the NYT for just shilling for some credit report company.

Unless my impression is mistaken, there is entirely different levels of corruption among political commentators on the right vs. left.

Apparently Many of Those Malayasia

(#300667)

Submitted by Model 62 on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 7:07pm.

posts were also posted at something called "New Ledger" which, uhh, also seems to be defunct, but is still archived, and Malaysia Watcher (defunct; twitter still up; no archive), also a Trevino-with-a-tilde thing.

There's a chart listing the cross-posts here.

I'm too busy (HA!) to cross reference it myself.

There's a reason he was fired from The Guardian

(#300645)

Submitted by catchy on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 4:44pm.

I wouldn't be

(#300691)

Submitted by Darth Cuddly on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 2:04am.

Wife's a journalist so that makes me an expert*. A big problem is the thinning of newsrooms. The man-power simply isn't available like it used to be. I think the news wire services are an influence as well. Combined, the two have an influence in simply regurgiating somebody else's work IMHO.

*Not sure what I did, I was happy being a pert.

In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome.

Sure

(#300696)

Submitted by HankP on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 2:56am.

when the advertising finance model fell apart, so did everything else. But the use of supplied content has been going on for a long time.

I blame it all on the Internet

Josh Trevino admits to lying to the media

(#300626)

Submitted by catchy on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 2:39pm.

about being paid to write propaganda for the Malaysian government:

"When Ben Smith contacted me in July 2011, I ought to have come clean with him at the time," he said.

Wow.

you forgot the tilde!

(#300628)

Submitted by nilsey on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 2:46pm.

i;m sure the checks cashed just fine with or wihout the tilde, but show some respect!

“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
-George Bernard Shaw

Nearly $400k for a journalist to be a shill

(#300630)

Submitted by brutusettu on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 3:09pm.

I'm sure the money had nothing to do with Trevino being encouraged to not change his opinion nor pack more of a punch. The money had nothing important to do with Josh seeking out other journalist and encouraging them to write pieces.

If Trevino lied for a few years about being a shill for what is a Muslim state with Sharia Law for Muslims (oh no), lied to Ben Smith, I'm 100% willing to accept Trevino's claims currently that the money had nothing to do with what he wrote.

Major Kong

Did he get the entire $380K?

(#300688)

Submitted by Bernard Guerrero on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 1:03am.

I read it as gross revenue, out of which he had to pay the rest of the operation. Regardless, nice paycheck!

"Unfortunately the universe doesn't agree with me. We'll see which one of us is still standing when this is over." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky

It's all in his FARA filing

(#300692)

Submitted by HankP on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 2:15am.

[link]

lousy paycheck if it destroys your earning potential. Not sure it will do that, but if he becomes an internet joke (more than he is already) it seems that he sold himself cheap.

I blame it all on the Internet

The $380K looks like it....

(#300694)

Submitted by Bernard Guerrero on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 2:22am.

...was gross revenue, out of which the other payments were disbursed. Still not a bad paycheck, though.

"Unfortunately the universe doesn't agree with me. We'll see which one of us is still standing when this is over." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky

Yes, That's My Take Also, However, he Well could have...

(#300695)

Submitted by Traveller on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 2:42am.

...other income streams, even from other people or entities that file FARAs, or other PR firms.

What I want to see is Mr. Trevino's 1040 and Schedule C....!(heeheeheehee)

There might be a nice little business he made for himself here.

Best Wishes, Traveller

The problem isn't that he got paid

(#300698)

Submitted by HankP on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 3:14am.

the problem is that he tried to hide that fact. If he had disclosed it then anyone who read it could immediately tell if they thought it was worth reading or not, knowing it was a paid placement. But he wanted it both ways, to be considered the principled, objective analyst of politics and cultural issues, while also getting well paid for trading on that reputation.

Face it, from now on when he writes something everyone's first thought is going to be "Is this what he really thinks, or is this what he's getting paid to say?". He'll be like Ben Domenech, consigned to the echoiest parts of the echo chamber.

I blame it all on the Internet

This I can agree with, mostly.

(#300711)

Submitted by Bernard Guerrero on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 10:17am.

Though I'll note that there was a tacit (ha!) admission that there was a business relationship between Josh and Malaysian PR at the time of the split with the Guardian, if you read the press releases at the time. So some of the current reaction strikes me as jumping on non-news.

Regardless, you're correct. You can't have it both ways, at least not without being perfectly clear about what belongs in which bucket. However, as to it being permanent, merely google "Henry Blodget" and, say, "Slate".

"Unfortunately the universe doesn't agree with me. We'll see which one of us is still standing when this is over." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky

The News Here

(#300718)

Submitted by Model 62 on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 12:06pm.

is the admission of a business relationship as revealed by the FARA disclosure and Trevino-with-a-tilde's prior denials of same.

EDIT: Oh. And the schadenfreud. Which is ugly and so this is my last comment on this...

But Blodget makes my point

(#300719)

Submitted by HankP on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 3:30pm.

he had to start a company from scratch, if his previous job was something he really wanted to do that field is off limits to him now. I'm sure Trevino can find something to do for the rest of his life, but "principled conservative writer" isn't one of them any more, at least not for quite a while.

I blame it all on the Internet

Taken in isolation, sure

(#300697)

Submitted by HankP on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 3:02am.

but if it means he's basically limited to being a paid shill in the future, that may not be a good trade off. The career of serious essayist or talking head is pretty much out of reach now, or at least postponed for many years.

I blame it all on the Internet

The Person That Played His Hand Well is Red State's...

(#300700)

Submitted by Traveller on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 3:20am.

...Erick Erickson.

A paid gig and occasional talking head on CNN...Josh must be grinding his teeth in spitting frustration now.

I don't know all the steps that allowed him to do this, but he must have done it well.

And, in a different way, Kevin Drum I supposed.

Best Wishes, Traveller

Erickson is on Fox now

(#300702)

Submitted by HankP on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 4:19am.

preaching to the faithful. I don't see much in his future beyond wingnut welfare.

I blame it all on the Internet

Bernie Madoff had even higher revenues for a time

(#300704)

Submitted by catchy on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 4:29am.

Nice Paycheck!

This, however, is legal.

(#300710)

Submitted by Bernard Guerrero on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 10:07am.

So presumably he gets to keep it, unlike BM.

"Unfortunately the universe doesn't agree with me. We'll see which one of us is still standing when this is over." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky

Wow Indeed

(#300632)

Submitted by Model 62 on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 3:14pm.

That was enough of a jawdropper to drag me out of deep lurk.

so much hilarity in that article

(#300634)

Submitted by nilsey on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 3:17pm.

Domenech, a former Washington Post blogger who runs a daily morning newsletter called The Transom, said .. . blah blah blah

And so being fired for plagiarism after a few days on the jobs translates to a lifetime "former washington post blogger" credit.

these people have no shame. none.

“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
-George Bernard Shaw

and more....

(#300635)

Submitted by nilsey on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 3:24pm.

"The accurate answer is that I didn't know there was a foreign agents database at all." Trevino said. "When all the stuff with the Guardian went down in August, I had a friend ask me whether I regeistered with FARA and I said what's FARA?"

"Hi i'm josh trevino with a tilde. because of my expertise in public policy, international affairs, the internets, good writin' and all things governmental, you should hire me to be a major influencer and blahde blah bl;ah..

oh wait, there are laws governing me shilling for foregin governmentS? huh, well i'll be darned! learn something every day!"

“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
-George Bernard Shaw

It Just Gets Better And Better

(#300638)

Submitted by Model 62 on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 3:33pm.

Wow.

Some people co-ordinated the media during the Iraq War, too.

(#300652)

Submitted by mmghosh on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 5:44pm.

In the leadup, and subsequently. Shouldn't there be some sort of investigation?

literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it

Perhaps Mr Trevino-with-a-tilde

(#300654)

Submitted by Model 62 on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 5:51pm.

was taking payola as far back as that.

Not a surprise

(#300636)

Submitted by Floater on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 3:28pm.

at least not to me.

$389,724.70 is Real Money, I've Been Critical Before, but....

(#300644)

Submitted by Traveller on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 4:43pm.

...at least Mr. Trevino didn't sell out for nothing; I am kind of impressed by Josh's business sense...his purity & ideology was always for sale for the right price, and with the offered Junkets to Malaysia as early as 2008 he always knew who he was working for and what he needed to push, even if subtly, to get this kind of pay-off.

This is deeply corrupt as many people here in this thread have correctly noted, but at least it was corruption for a decent price.

A person's conscience is not cheap....or at least Josh Trevino's wasn't.

Best Wishes, Traveller

Sure, if you have no pride nor shame

(#300656)

Submitted by HankP on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 6:05pm.

and the number isn't that impressive when taken over 3 years and with what appears to be significant payments to others. But whatever it takes, I guess, his track record in electoral politics isn't too hot so maybe selling his opinions to the highest bidder was the best career available.

I blame it all on the Internet

haha i made a lot more than that in those three years

(#300660)

Submitted by nilsey on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 6:27pm.

and honestly.

“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
-George Bernard Shaw

So this wasn't you?

(#300662)

Submitted by HankP on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 6:30pm.

[link]

That's a relief.

I blame it all on the Internet

This thing is blowing up

(#300659)

Submitted by HankP on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 6:20pm.

google Trevino + Malaysia

plus, for those with more of a taste for schadenfreude (and boring conversation) than me, his twitter stream.

I blame it all on the Internet

And it gets murkier. A murder investigation of a Mongolian

(#300661)

Submitted by mmghosh on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 6:30pm.

translator is linked to Prime Minister Najib Razak, and there is some speculation that media in the US may have been paid to clean his image.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Shaariibuugiin_Altantuyaa

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Najib_Tun_Razak

Here's Mr Trevino's spin on Mr Razak in the Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/feb/28/islam-us-...

Consider, too, what Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak told me this past Wednesday in Istanbul (from where I am writing), when we discussed the Muslim Brotherhood in a group conversation about Islam and democracy [see footnote].

The Brotherhood, said the PM, "shouldn't be part of the [democratic] process as long as they don't reject violence and extremism ... Anyone who wants to be part of the political process should adopt values that are compatible with democracy."

That's a Muslim democratic head of state affirming some very Burkean basic principles.

literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it

Courtsey of teh Wayback Machine

(#300669)

Submitted by HankP on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 7:12pm.

Trevino's post on Anwar Ibrahim

For those who need a refresher on Anwar Ibrahim

Now this smells like bulls&^t to me.

I blame it all on the Internet

holee molee

(#300670)

Submitted by nilsey on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 7:20pm.

that article by trevino -- and teh comments! -- are priceless in retrospect.

“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
-George Bernard Shaw

Wow, this comment in particular

(#300673)

Submitted by HankP on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 7:26pm.

Joshua S. Treviño's first HuffPo column is as head of his own PR firm. Has he been compensated for writing about Anwar Ibrahim? This important question that must be addressed in order to ascertain whether his position on Anwar is venal. Especially in light of the fact that this article contains demonstrable errors and omissions that would indicate that Anwar is likely the target of a political persecution. For instance, Anwar's accuser admits to meeting with Prime Minister Najib just days before the alleged sexual act occurred.

Nowhere does Treviño point out that the current government of Malaysia has near-absolute control over Malaysian media: almost all major national newspapers, magazines, television channels, and radio stations there are tied to the ruling UMNO party--who has in Anwar its strongest critic. And Najib continues to tighten his grip in the face of Anwar's trial. Suara Keadilan, the publication of Anwar's PKR party had its permit to operate revoked on July 1. Why is none of this fishy to the Public Relations professional?

The Malaysian government has few allies in the western media who are not connected to APCO, its paid media consultant. Perhaps Treviño is paid to write this HuffPo article. The reading public deserves to know.

Thor Halvorssen
Human Rights Foundation
New York, NY

Ps. I do NOT get paid to write about Anwar, about Joshua Treviño, or about Malaysia. My own HuffPo column is here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/thor-halvorssen/malaysias-bridge-is-falli_...

I blame it all on the Internet

in some 4th dimension

(#300675)

Submitted by nilsey on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 7:38pm.

that guys is ALSO a trevino sock puppet.

“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
-George Bernard Shaw

Wow. Former US Ambassador to Malaysia replies to Trevino?

(#300674)

Submitted by mmghosh on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 7:26pm.

And in a blog post?

Mr Trevino, you are very out of date. The prosecution dropped the rape/assault charges two years ago, in August 2008, and charged Anwar with consensual sex.

You say that you are a longtime observer of Malaysian affairs. If so, you should have known this. It is basic.

Yes, it is true that Anwar used the phrase "Zionist aggression" after the assault on the Gaza aid ship. But Prime Minister Najib was worse. He used the phrase "Zionist terrorism."

I also was surprised that you say that Anwar remains Mahathir's protege.

As a former American Ambassador to Malaysia and someone who REALLY does follow Malaysian affairs very closely, I have to tell you and the readers of HuffPost that there are many comments in your op-ed that are just plain wrong. Perhaps you should pick another country to write about.

And it seems people were suspicious right from 2010.

literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it

Hankp

(#300676)

Submitted by nilsey on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 7:41pm.

i humbly submit that we need a website poll and it simply should be:

Trevino?

a - suprised

b - not surpised

“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
-George Bernard Shaw

Many here know Mr Trevino pretty well

(#300679)

Submitted by mmghosh on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 7:54pm.

IIRC, so they can speak with more knowledge; for me - yes I was surprised.

literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it

Not really

(#300684)

Submitted by HankP on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 11:25pm.

unless some of them have spent time with him in person, and quite a bit of time at that, I don't think blog comments allow you to really know a person. I've met and gone out for dinner and drinks with several people here, but I wouldn't say I know them well. That takes a bit more time and interaction IMO.

I blame it all on the Internet

Can we add

(#300680)

Submitted by Jay C on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 7:58pm.

Can we add

C. Disappointed but not surprised

tell ya what

(#300681)

Submitted by nilsey on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 8:39pm.

paypal me a few K and i'll consider your opinion.

“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
-George Bernard Shaw

Will you also

(#300682)

Submitted by Jay C on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 9:37pm.

Will you also pen a few advertorials bolstering the prestigious credentials of the "Jay C Institute of Everything" (and its chairman) in a series of ~~respectable~~ conservative online mags?

I'll maybe think about it. It'll be easy: no tildes (AFAICT) involved.....

+1. Nt

(#300708)

Submitted by Bernard Guerrero on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 9:59am.

"Unfortunately the universe doesn't agree with me. We'll see which one of us is still standing when this is over." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky

I prefer the comment format

(#300685)

Submitted by HankP on Fri, 03/01/2013 - 11:32pm.

also, what happened to all the conservatives around here?

I blame it all on the Internet

This is fascinating

(#300699)

Submitted by HankP on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 3:17am.

Apparently all the psychological research done in the past has used an extremely non-representative sample of human beings.

I blame it all on the Internet

That IS Interesting, Thank You Very Much! A Must Read...

(#300701)

Submitted by Traveller on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 3:36am.

I'm still working on it...but fascinating it is to be sure.

Subjects from more than a dozen cultures were tested, and Americans were at the far end of the distribution—seeing the illusion more dramatically than all others.

Best Wishes, Traveller

I'm probably going to harass the psychologists who work

(#300706)

Submitted by AndrewSshi on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 9:37am.

down the hall about this next time I'm in the office. A couple in particular work on counseling psychology in a multi-cultural context, so I'd be really interested in hearing what they have to say...

(But one thing made me grind my pedant teeth--rice cultivation as the central organizing principle of Chinese culture and thus an impact on cognition seems to be a problematic assumption, since it wasn't until the Song Dynasty of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries that rice farming assumed a central role in Chinese cultivation.)

Andrew, I'm going to jump in and note...

(#300709)

Submitted by Bernard Guerrero on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 10:06am.

....that a 700+ year history of doing a lot of X might be enough time for X to become a central organizing principle in how people view the world.

"Unfortunately the universe doesn't agree with me. We'll see which one of us is still standing when this is over." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky

But the study is presenting the difference between rice and

(#300715)

Submitted by AndrewSshi on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 11:24am.

cereal cultivation as being a difference that goes back to the Dim Mists of Antiquity, part of a difference between East and West as fundamental as the difference between Christ and the Buddha.

I think that's the Nisbett paper being cited....

(#300717)

Submitted by Bernard Guerrero on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 11:52am.

...rather the WEIRD paper which is the main topic of discussion, right?

Anyway, I think it's a fair point. However, playing devil's advocate, there is evidence of significant domesticated rice production in stretching back into pre-history in east Asia, spreading southwards thereafter. Would you need to claim dominance or exclusivity for it to have a large impact?

"Unfortunately the universe doesn't agree with me. We'll see which one of us is still standing when this is over." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky

Yeah, the Nisbett paper

(#300732)

Submitted by AndrewSshi on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 10:35pm.

Thing about rice vs. cereals is that in the formative years of the formation of China and Chinese culture, the center was the cereal growing areas around the Yellow River. It was quite a while before things shifted south to the Yangtze. (And I'm rather suspicious that until recently cereal cultivation was that much less labor intensive or that much more "individualistic" than rice cultivation.)

Isn't Christ just Buddha-for-the-Greeks? nt

(#300722)

Submitted by mmghosh on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 6:06pm.

literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it

Paging photographers here

(#300723)

Submitted by mmghosh on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 6:09pm.

opinions on the Canon 100-400 USM or similar

http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/lenses/canon_100-400_4p5-5p6_is

literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it

Are you sure you want this lens?

(#300727)

Submitted by Zelig on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 7:05pm.

I work with most of the Canon L series lenses. I haven't used this one though. These are their flagship lenses, designed for full frame sensors, such as the 5D. If you have a smaller sensor as most Canon DSLRs have, the lens will still fit and work, but your effective focal length would be around 150-600mm. Are you sure you need this much lens?

If you own a 7D or one of their lesser camera models, you would essentially be buying "too much glass". That is to say, all L series lenses form a full-sized 35mm image on the camera's sensor. Since most sensors are considerably smaller, you can get away with lens elements considerably smaller in diameter. However, your image quality is always best using an L series lens. They are built to be the best lenses Canon has to offer for their DSLRs.

This would be a great lens for taking pictures of birds and other wildlife, especially if you own a 5D. It would still be a great lens for a 7D or any other of their reduced size sensors.

Cheers!!

Me: We! -- Ali

The Canon 100~400 IS is a Fabulous Lens, I Feel About It...

(#300730)

Submitted by Traveller on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 9:43pm.

....the way I suppose many gun people feel about their pieces of steel...but this is a lens to take beautiful pictures with not hurt people; it feels good in the hand, to touch it's matt white surface, to look into that huge front lens element and see the faint green reflection of its various glass elements inside...

truly a thing to just see, to hold, to love....

I have done wonderful work with the 100~400 IS, and regret deeply not having it when I did Yellowstone and the Grand Tetons in September of last year. It would have been a great lens to have on my 3 generation old Canon Rebel T1i. I made do with my 70~200 F4L, non-IS (it is far better to have too much glass than too little....lol).

I don't own this lens because there are downsides:

1. It is Big!

2. It is Heavy!

3. It is Expensive!

The above being said, there probably isn't a finer long lens in production.

This is why these factors are bad for me: It is very obvious when you use this lens, you stand out, making one a target for robbery. This is a concern because if someone were to rob me and I had this expensive equipment with me, I would have to try to kill them...they steal my old Rebel T1 and 70~200 F4L, I'm unhappy, but I can let it go. (I've never been robbed of camera equipment, at least in part because I am careful, but also because my equipment is old and not obviously valuable)

I travel light. I have to if I am traveling internationally, but if I were to travel the USA, in my car, I would buy this lens immediately because weight would no longer be a factor.

Interestingly, today I was at Cosco picking up Yellowstone prints of my work, 24"x36" and 12"x18" and the Lower Yellowstone River Falls was shot with the 15~85 IS and the Buffalo, Bears and Owls were shot with the 70~200 and that's how they printed out. I just looked this up now to see, but for landscape you usually want wide, Animals you bring in. I'm stuffing them in mailing tubes and off they'll go on Monday.

Good glass is always good...a good camera is usually better, but, even with my Rebel T1i, you can do outstanding work so don't worry too much about that...just concentrate on taking good pictures; interesting subject, appropriate framing, good exposure and focus...it is pretty hard to go wrong.

And, as a bonus, I had almost a crowd at the Costco photo center counter...a little old Chinese woman started it, "Yours? Show me, show me..." and then Spanish people peaking in, and then anglos, (I live in a very diverse community), in the end maybe 20 people in all ooohing and Ahhhing...

That was nice too.

Best Wishes, Traveller

Thanks all. nt.

(#300733)

Submitted by mmghosh on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 11:17pm.

literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it

I Have Heard Back from Some 100~400 Owners, Insisting...

(#300737)

Submitted by Traveller on Sun, 03/03/2013 - 3:36am.

...that the lens is not that big, nor that heavy. They love their 100~400's and fee on me...lol

We will just have to agree to disagree. But if you were going to use the lens at home, or safe areas when you travel, then my objections would disappear.

I was trying to write this to make fun of myself, Cameras being as big a fetish for me as guns are for their owners...I do fawn over a beautiful lens or camera...

Maybe I didn't tell the joke well enough.

Best Wishes, Traveller

catchy, your latest hero figure

(#300724)

Submitted by mmghosh on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 6:12pm.

- JK Rowling loses billionaire status because she agrees to pay high taxes and massive contributions to charity.

literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it

Maybe children raised on Harry Potter books

(#300726)

Submitted by catchy on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 6:40pm.

might be less likely to buy into the Randian bullpucky that permeates our rapacious wealthy elites.

The popularity of Rowling's books, which seem to include nearly every ethical virtue you'd want young people to soak in, makes me feel positive about my fellow creatures.

Sheldon Adelson, David and Charles Koch, etc. are Death Eaters who must be defeated by Dumbledore's Army.

An Understandable Mistake

(#300728)

Submitted by M Scott Eiland on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 8:28pm.

After all, Scott Walker has been chewing up and spitting out Wisconsin Democrats for years now in spite of their best efforts to destroy him. It's understandable that a vicious idiot like Zielinski--clearly the product of an illicit encounter between longtime California Democratic operative Bob Mulholland and a rabid sewer rat--would become confused about the metaphorical part of that observation and jump right to invoking literal cannibalism during his tantrum about Walker spanking the Wisconsin Democrats yet again.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

Scott Walker has been chewing up and spitting out

(#300729)

Submitted by catchy on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 9:15pm.

Wisconsin's unemployed for years now, and this year's spanking of those looking for work is shaping up to be no different:

WI ranked 42nd in job creation at midyear, census report shows.

The Badger State trails other Midwest manufacturing states: Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota and Illinois.

But since pissing off Democrats and public sector unions is an end in itself for many Republicans, I can see why this objectively horrible governor is a subjective favorite for many conservatives.

Ha, a Scott Walker supporter

(#300731)

Submitted by HankP on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 10:04pm.

Sure you want to stick with this loser? Funny how all his vocal support is from out of state.

I blame it all on the Internet

New whiskey, Hank.

(#300734)

Submitted by Darth Cuddly on Sat, 03/02/2013 - 11:31pm.

Well, technically 'whisky', "McClelland's Single-Malt Islay". At $24 I can't complain but the smoke is strong and taste damn near closer to mesquite than peat. It's smoke and nuthin' but smoke, the nose, the palate, the finish, all smoke and schmoove, no burn at all. For the price and sipping ease I'd suggest it to any first time peated malt drinker. Though I'd willingly defer to those who know peated malts more than I to make a better suggestion at the price. I keep waiting for the accquired taste to be accquired and it's not really happening.

Got a new bourbon too. I'll try that tomorrow night and toss out a review.

In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome.

I just can't take that much smoke

(#300735)

Submitted by HankP on Sun, 03/03/2013 - 12:51am.

I've tried several, like Laphroaig, and I can taste a really good whiskey in there somewhere but the smoke is just too much for me. I can't take BBQ when it's too smoky, let alone liquor.

BTW this place just opened down the street from me. I think I might check them out one of these days.

I blame it all on the Internet

McClelland is not as smokey as Laphroaig

(#300736)

Submitted by catchy on Sun, 03/03/2013 - 1:17am.

Laphroaig is fantastic tho, so shame on ya.

Ok, reworked the McClelland's

(#300795)

Submitted by Darth Cuddly on Sun, 03/03/2013 - 10:58pm.

I'm a fan of dropping in some ice and letting it melt but I don't do that the first time I try something new. I did that tonight and it definitely rolled back some of the smoke. I could get behind this whisky, especially at the price. I spotted some Redbrest and Blanton's when I hit the state store. I didn't buy any, going for 2 new whiskies and an affordable and well liked known. Next trip I'll be picking up one of each.

In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome.

But Darth

(#300798)

Submitted by HankP on Sun, 03/03/2013 - 11:10pm.

I read that people in the armed forces would feel the sequester first and hardest. Doesn't sound like you're suffering too much.

I blame it all on the Internet

No, no, no, fire fighters were supposed to feel

(#300803)

Submitted by Darth Cuddly on Sun, 03/03/2013 - 11:38pm.

it the hardest. Some folks will feel it, I won't but that's because of how I'm set up personally. I had visions of retiring in June so I started disconnecting myself from any reliance on military provided bennies. As it turns out, you good citizens require my services for another two years, but I have no need for the bennies. Another factor is that the Army still sees fit to have me fall out of perfectly good airplanes*. To top that, they've come up with a new chute and on my last few jumps I hit the ground about as hard as you hit your couch. Sweet that is, and a helluva imrovement over the 'Slam! Bounce! Slam! Flip! Drag!' that has been my experience when reuniting with the planet until recently.

* I can't adquately explain why this is important but I know that it is to me.

In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome.

I Don't Know Why, but I Didn't Know You Jumped? I Will...

(#300804)

Submitted by Traveller on Sun, 03/03/2013 - 11:48pm.

...have to be nicer to you...lol

Sunday night is my TV night, so if anyone has more questions of need of insight, I be here!

60 Minutes

The Amazing Race

The Good Wife

Best Wishes, Traveller

Trav, I've even exited a plane w/o a parachute

(#300831)

Submitted by Darth Cuddly on Mon, 03/04/2013 - 10:57pm.

True story. I mean the thing was parked on the runway, but it's a true story.

In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome.

Didn't you tell me once

(#300805)

Submitted by HankP on Sun, 03/03/2013 - 11:55pm.

that you can't leave the Army until they say it's OK for you to leave? Maybe you should try f(*king up a bit more (but not on the parachute jumps).

I blame it all on the Internet

Another Item On The List Of Things To Be Grateful For

(#300787)

Submitted by M Scott Eiland on Sun, 03/03/2013 - 9:32pm.

Dennis Rodman never met Jane Fonda during her child-bearing years.

The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.

I Watched, Unfortunately, The Whole Thing, Deeply Weird..nt

(#300793)

Submitted by Traveller on Sun, 03/03/2013 - 10:04pm.

Traveller

You know, I'm not a big basketball fan

(#300794)

Submitted by HankP on Sun, 03/03/2013 - 10:51pm.

but is there anyone in this country over the age of 25 who didn't already know that Dennis Rodman was weird and has a history of saying and doing crazy things?

I blame it all on the Internet