Friday Talking Points [184] -- Long Live Steve Jobs
A corporate leader passed away this week, and millions mourned his passing and celebrated his life.
A corporate leader passed away this week, and millions mourned his passing and celebrated his life.
The protesters in the Occupy Wall Street movement have been getting criticized for not being focused enough, or not providing a list of demands, or not having leaders, or any number of other things by the media. But this can be forgiven, because the media are now at least paying attention, rather than just completely ignoring the protest. What surprises me is that the media (at least so far) haven't realized the frustration the protesters feel is the real story here. Call it free-floating rage, if you will. Or, even better, call it an updated Howard Beale moment.
Last week (as with this week) the subject de semaine was "class warfare." The comment which inspired this week's mini-rants contained a simple, repetitive concept: "When [something outrageous pushed by Republicans happens], nobody calls it 'class warfare'. Maybe we should."
The United States Postal Service very quietly changed one of their bedrock rules this week. Up until this point, in America, you had to be dead to be on a stamp. Now, anything goes -- the living will get their chance to be immortalized on an American stamp alongside the dead. This is a very bad idea, and Congress should really step in and put a stop to it as soon as possible.
A satellite is falling out of the sky, but it probably won't hit anybody. Probably. I personally got over this fear by listening to Creedence Clearwater Revival's "It Came Out Of The Sky" (which I heartily recommend, just on general principles).
Elizabeth Warren is a polarizing figure. Liberals love her with a fierce passion. Republicans hate her with a fiery passion. What this means is that lots and lots of money from outside the state will be pumped into this race. The reason why Democrats are going to be watching this race closer than any other Senate race next year is easy to see: this may be the only state Democrats have a good chance to pick up a seat from the Republicans. The math isn't good for Democrats this time around in the Senate, and they are in danger of losing control of the chamber next year. Warren may be the sole bright spot in this environment for Democrats.
Today marks the end of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy of not allowing gay servicemembers to openly do their duty in the American military. There are plenty of other columns out there celebrating this fact, so instead of going into details, I'd like to offer an excerpt from a book I recently read. The book is One Nation Under Sex, by Larry Flynt and David Eisenbach, Ph.D. Whatever you may think of Flynt for his other activities, his books are always a good read and always exhaustively researched and annotated. Which is why his telling of this particular story is the best I've yet come across. Gay people have been in the United States military from the very beginning. They've always served, the only change now is that they'll be able to do so without having to hide who they are. Which is why this is such a good lesson to ponder on today of all days.
"Populism" is a word that gets thrown around with abandon by folks masquerading as journalists on television these days. Sarah Palin had the word used to describe her, and later, the entire Tea Party movement was labeled "populist" by the chattering classes. Today, President Obama unveiled a truly populist agenda, by proposing to tax millionaires at the same tax rate that middle-class Americans pay. By doing so, Obama will (hopefully) redefine the term "populism" in the political conversation. Or, to be technical, he will re-redefine the word back to what it originally meant.
Since the president is not facing a primary challenger, and since the president has raised a whopping big pile of money already, and (most importantly) since the president has rediscovered the joys of speaking directly to the American people about his agenda -- why not buy some political ads, now?
Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon has just proposed a stunningly good idea: for all legislation which emerges from the joint committee charged with lowering the deficit, direct the congressional "scoring" referee not only to provide the numbers for the impact on the federal budget, but also to provide data on the impact on the unemployment rate and the jobs situation. This is such an excellent idea, both on its merits and politically, that it should immediately be supported by all Democrats. Because it would force the public debate to cover the entire scope of the proposals being offered up, and it would do so by providing the data the public most cares about right now: how will this create or destroy jobs?