“Pondering the Pundits” is an Open Thread. It is a selection of editorials and opinions from around the news medium and the internet blogs. The intent is to provide a forum for your reactions and opinions, not just to the opinions presented, but to what ever you find important.
Thanks to ek hornbeck, click on the link and you can access all the past “Pondering the Pundits”.
Follow us on Twitter @StarsHollowGzt
Gail Collins: The Republicans’ Sin of Endorsement
How can things get worse for Republicans? Jeb Bush turned out to be a terrible candidate. Marco Rubio turned out to be an annoying twit. Donald Trump is a nightmare. Something had to be done, and so the solid, steady moderate elite decided the best strategy was to rally around … Ted Cruz.
Welcome to worse.
They were terrified of Trump, whose short list of foreign policy advisers includes a 2009 college graduate with a résumé that boasts he once took part in a Model United Nations. Far better plan to nominate Cruz, whose list includes a guy who wrote an opinion piece suggesting President Obama is a Muslim, and a woman who thinks Senator Joseph McCarthy’s judgment about communists in the federal government was “spot on.”
They thought Trump would be such an unpopular nominee that the party would face a historic disaster in November. Obviously, the way to improve chances was to support the most actively disliked Republican politician in America.
Our question for today is, Why aren’t these people rallying around John Kasich? The Ohio governor is the other Trump alternative, far and away the sanest member of the trio. True, he’s kind of boring, but that doesn’t seem all that terrible a quality when you’re comparing him with Cruz, who is, at his best, excruciatingly irritating.
Ray McGovern: Torture Doesn’t Work (The 2016 Election Campaign Edition)
To those living “outside the Beltway” it may seem counterintuitive that those of us whose analysis has been correct on key issues that the U.S. government got criminally wrong – like the invasion of Iraq in 2003 – would be blacklisted from “mainstream” media and ostracized by the Smart People of the Establishment. But, alas, that’s the way it is.
Forget the continuing carnage in which hundreds of thousands have been killed and millions made refugees. Within the mainstream U.S. media and around Washington’s major policy circles, there is little serious dialogue, much less debate about what went so hideously wrong; and Americans still innocently wonder – regarding the people on the receiving end of the blunderbuss violence – “why they hate us.”
After more than 13 years of presenting thoughtful critiques to senior officials – and having little discernible impact – we Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity are strongly tempted to take some solace in having made a good-faith effort to spread some truth around – and, now, go play golf. But the stakes are too high. We can’t in good conscience approach the first tee without having tried one more time.
Scott Lemieux: A split supreme court means contraception is more likely to remain a right
On Wednesday, the US supreme court heard oral arguments in Zubik v Burwell. The case challenges the Affordable Care Act requirement that employers include contraceptive coverage in taxpayer-subsidized health plans, with potentially negative ramifications for women nationwide should the court rule against the government.
The arguments suggest, however, that the issue will remain unresolved by a shorthanded court likely to split 4-4, which may well be the best-case scenario under the circumstances.
In the wake of the supreme court’s controversial 2014 holding in Burwell v Hobby Lobby that in some cases the requirements violated the religious rights of employers, the federal government offered a way for employers with a religious objection to providing contraceptive coverage to exempt themselves without denying the rights of their employees. Employers could simply send the government a form announcing their objection, and the government would provide the plan that covered contraception without the involvement of the employer.
Heather Dibgby Parton: Don’t believe Paul Ryan’s bogus “apology”: His Randian worldview means he’s no better than Donald Trump
Speaker of the House Paul Ryan gave a nice speech about treating people decently to a group of young House interns yesterday. Despite the fact that he never mentioned his name, it was nonetheless seen as a rebuke to a 60-year-old adolescent named Donald Trump.
Ryan’s not the first, of course. Just two weeks ago, the man with whom he once shared a presidential ticket said much the same thing although as a private citizen, he could be much more explicit. Mitt Romney called Trump out, saying, “He has neither the temperament nor the judgment to be president. And his personal qualities would mean that America would cease to be a shining city on a hill.” Make no mistake, the 2012 Republican presidential ticket thinks that Mr. Donald Trump has very bad manners.
Ryan had earlier issued some mild criticisms of Trump’s call to ban Muslims from entering the country and his refusal to disavow the KKK, which is what passes for responsible Republican leadership these days. After all, he’s second in line for the presidency. It’s literally the least he can do.
Amanda Marcotte: Hate is alive and well in North Carolina: State Republicans overturn an anti-discrimination law because of an urban legend
So much for the Republican conviction that small and local government is better: North Carolina Republicans were so offended that the city of Charlotte passed a local non-discrimination law that they convened a special legislative session to block the city from doing it. The city ordinance bans public places from discriminating against people based on sexual orientation or identity, which is quite obviously the reason that Republicans oppose it. Gov. Pat McCrory signed the bill overturning the city ordinance Wednesday night.
Since homophobia is quickly becoming socially unacceptable, North Carolina conservatives had to come up with some disingenuous excuse for this shameful behavior, and the one they latched on to is a completely bonkers urban legend: That straight, cisgender men put on dresses and lurk in bathrooms, waiting for women and children to rape. Conservatives, in a strike against logic that is low even for the right, believe that this supposed behavior of straight, cisgender men somehow justifies discrimination against gay and transgender people.
Recent Comments