A Desperate Injustice By Tennessee Republicans

The following post is by Dan Rather and Elliot Kirschner:

In the 1950s and '60s, the forces that stood against a growing tide of civil rights were emboldened with a misguided belief that they represented the true America. They were bolstered by the living legacies of racism and white supremacy. They were empowered by the law and by tradition. They were invigorated by their own shamelessness. 

They believed they could act with impunity. They assumed that most Americans identified with their bigotry and cruelty. They concluded that the status quo that sustained them would continue indefinitely. 

They were wrong. They are now the villains in our history books.

 

It was tempting to believe that America had moved irrevocably beyond a world of such entrenched and pervasive injustice. We knew we had a long way to go on issues of race and equality. But to go backward? After all the sacrifice expended by so many to achieve progress?

 

And yet, here we are.

The expulsion yesterday of two young Black men from the Tennessee General Assembly echoes the old news footage of blocked schoolhouses and fire hoses and dogs set against young peaceful protesters 60 years ago. Reps. Justin Jones and Justin Pearson had been duly and lawfully elected. Their crime was having the temerity to challenge their fellow representatives on doing nothing about gun violence in the wake of mass murder at a Nashville elementary school. 

That the white colleague who had joined Jones and Pearson in their protest on the Assembly floor was not expelled tells you all you need to know about the role race played in the decision-making process. 

The Republicans who voted to expel Jones and Pearson would obviously claim that their decision wasn’t racially motivated. They argue that these two men disrupted the business of the government when they joined protesters and brought bullhorns to the Assembly floor. But the historical rarity of expulsion and the array of other sanctioning tools available show that this is ultimately about the same currents that have driven this nation’s uneven path toward greater justice since its founding — who has the power and who has the audacity to question an unjust status quo. 

Tennessee is a Republican state, but it is also heavily gerrymandered. It is a place where Republicans have complete control of the government and have used that control to silence voices of dissent.

 

This is different from the racism of the 1960s in some important ways. Those who seethed at Jones and Pearson would almost certainly welcome Black conservatives with open arms. One might safely assume that they are big fans of Justice Clarence Thomas.

 

But just because this situation is a bit more nuanced does not make it any less dangerous. This is about people being told they should know their place. This is about politicians who are so fragile that they can’t handle dissent. And make no mistake, this is also generational. It is not a coincidence that Jones and Pearson are in their twenties.

 

There seems to be a new era of protest and political involvement underway among the youth of America. They are overwhelmingly progressive, driven by issues such as gun violence, reproductive autonomy, protection of the environment, LGBTQ+ rights, racial justice, and preserving our democracy. They have energy and organization. And they are, by definition, the future.

 

That makes them a threat to those who are desperately clinging to some of the worst aspects of America’s past. 

After being expelled, Jones and Pearson reacted with steadfast determination and calm. They spoke compellingly about what they hope to accomplish. They were reasoned and focused. They understand the long game. 

In the 1960s, increased news coverage of the civil rights movement cast a bright spotlight on Jim Crow. 

The outrage that eventually ensued led to major changes. A similar spotlight now is on places like Nashville. And we are all forced to reckon with whether this is the America that we want for ourselves and our children. 

The expulsion of Jones and Pearson is part of a larger trend. There are anti-democratic measures taking place in other states. Books are being banned. History classes are being whitewashed. Voting rights are being curtailed. 

These are not the actions of people who are confident. These are people trying to entrench whatever power they can by whatever means necessary. 

They are desperate measures from desperate people who fear they have already lost the future. 

Mass Shootings Still On A Record Pace In U.S. This Year

 

The national news media is reporting another mass shooting. This time it was in a supermarket in Tennessee, where a shooter killed one person and injured at least 14 others. He then killed himself.

If you only got your news about mass shootings from the national news media, you might think this is a rare occurrence. That is far from the truth. The Gun Violence Archive reports that there have been 518 mass shootings in the U.S. this year. With slightly more than three months to go in the year, it looks like the mass shootings will easily top the record number from last year (610).

There have been 32,612 deaths from gun violence in the U.S. this year. That also could easily top the 43,500 gun deaths from last year.

This does not have to happen. Constitutional laws could be passed that would substantially reduce the number of mass shootings and gun deaths -- and the public supports that.

BUT CONGRESS CONTINUES TO DO NOTHING!

A Bombing In Nashville Desecrates The Holiday

 As if 2020 hadn't been bad enough, we have a terrorist act to cap it off. Someone intentionally set off a bomb in Nashville. Fortunately, no one was killed. But there were people injured and substantial damage. I have to wonder if this is a result of Trump's refusal to accept the outcome of the election, and his approval of some of his right-wing supporters. Is this the opening salvo in the civil war Trump is trying hard to start?

Here is initial coverage from AP News:

An explosion shook the largely deserted streets of downtown Nashville early Christmas morning, shattering windows, damaging buildings and wounding three people. Authorities said they believed the blast was intentional. The FBI is leading the investigation.

Metro Nashville Police Department spokesman Don Aaron said police responded to a call of shots fired just before 6 a.m. but found no immediate signs of a shooting, although officers noticed a suspicious vehicle and called for a hazardous unit. While they waited, the vehicle exploded.

Aaron said three people were taken to area hospitals for treatment, although none were in critical condition. He said some people were taken to the department’s central precinct for questioning but declined to give more details.

The FBI will be taking the lead in the investigation, said spokesman Joel Siskovic. Federal investigators from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives were also on the scene. The FBI is the primary law enforcement agency responsible for investigating federal crimes, such as explosives violations and acts of terrorism. 

Black smoke and flames were seen early Friday billowing from the area, which is packed with bars, restaurants and other retail establishments and is known as the heart of downtown Nashville’s tourist scene.

Some States Reopening As Virus Cases Still Climbing

Donald Trump wants the economy reopened, and he is urging states to do that. He is hoping that will cause a rebound of the nation's economy (and help his re-election efforts). Sadly, it looks like some Republican governors are going to give Trump what he wants.

Texas, Georgia, Tennessee, and South Carolina have all announced plans to reopen their businesses. But they are doing so inspire of the growing number of Coronavirus cases in their states. The charts above show the growth of cases in those states over the last couple of weeks. Note that none of the states show a leveling off of cases. In fact, the number of virus cases continue to grow in all four cases. (In South Carolina it looks like it is leveling off on the chart, but that is an illusion caused by no tests being done on some days, like 4/20).

These governor's are playing with fire. Their efforts to reopen businesses is likely to backfire on them, and increase the growth of the virus.

The charts were made using numbers from The COVID Tracking Project.

Dems Are Leading In Arizona & Tennessee Senate Races

A few months ago, it was unthinkable that the senate seats in Arizona and Tennessee would be competitive. Most pundits figured these were pretty safe seats for the Republicans. Things have certainly changed though.

New polls show the Democratic candidates in both states currently enjoy a small lead -- Sinema (D) over McSally (R) by 7 points in Arizona, and Bredesen (D) over Blackburn (R) by 8 points in Tennessee.

It's still a month and a half until election day, and anything can happen, but Democrats have a reasonable chance to flip these seats (both of which are currently held by retiring Republicans).

The CNN / SSRS Poll in Arizona was done between September 11th and 15th of a sample of 854 registered voters and 761 likely voters The margin of error for registered voters is 4.1 points, and for likely voters is 4.3 points.

The CNN / SSRS Poll in Tennessee was done between September 11th and 15th of a sample of 852 registered voters and 723 likely voters. The margin of error for registered voters is 3.9 points, and for likely voters is 4.3 points.

Critical States Oppose The GOP's Tax Cut Plan

There are five Republican senators who have not yet agreed to vote for the GOP's Tax Plan in the Senate -- Senator Collins (Maine), Senator Corker (Tennessee), Senators Flake and McCain (Arizona), and Senator Johnson (Wisconsin). If the Republicans lose three of those five senators, then their tax plan will fail (just like the effort to repeal Obamacare). That's because the bill gives most of the cuts to corporations and the rich -- something the Democrats cannot support.

Making the pressure on those Republican senators rise is a new poll in three of the four states. Those polls show that voters in Maine oppose the GOP tax plan by 31 points, voters in Arizona by 18 points, and voters in Tennessee by 17 points. Those same voters believe the wealthy are the ones that will benefit the most from the Republican tax plan -- Maine (62%), Tennessee (54%), and Arizona (52%). If these senators vote for the GOP plan, then they will be voting against the wishes of the people in their own states.

These charts reflect the results of a Americans for Tax Fairness / Hart Research Poll done of 400 registered voters in each state -- Maine (November 18-20), Arizona (November 18-21), and Tennessee (November 17-19).

It's The 90th Anniversary Of The "Scopes Monkey Trial"

The photo above is of Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan. The picture at left is of John Thomas Scopes. They are the major figures in one of the most famous religious discrimination trials in this country's history. It is commonly called the "Scopes Monkey Trial".

The state of Tennessee had passed a law making it illegal to teach evolution in that state's schools. Scopes, a teacher, was accused of violating that law. The case quickly became front-page news, and Clarence Darrow volunteered to defend Scopes. William Jennings Bryan volunteered to prosecute Scopes. They were two of the most famous lawyers of that time.

The case started on July 10, 1925 in Dayton, Tennessee, and was followed by Americans across the country. Scopes was found guilty of teaching evolution by a Dayton jury, and was fined $100 by the judge. The verdict was later overturned by the Tennessee Supreme Court on a technicality (that the judge decided the fine instead of the jury).

Sadly, we are still fighting this same silly fight in the United States today -- over whether science or religion should be taught in science class in our public schools.

Super Tuesday Chances And Predictions From Nate Silver

(The photo above of Clinton/Sanders is from leftfootforward.org.)

Today is Super Tuesday, and 11 states will go to the polls to choose their preference for the Democratic presidential nominee. America's best poll analyst, Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight.com, has released his chances of winning and predictions of voting percentages for nine of the Super Tuesday states. The other two (Colorado and Minnesota) have caucuses (which depend mostly on turnout, and not the will of most people). Mr. Silver says:

ALABAMA

Chance of winning
Clinton...............99%
Sanders...............1%

Prediction
Clinton...............73.6%
Sanders...............23.5%

ARKANSAS

Chance of winning
Clinton...............98%
Sanders...............2%

Prediction
Clinton...............64.1%
Sanders...............32.5%

GEORGIA

Chance of winning
Clinton...............99%
Sanders...............1%

Prediction
Clinton...............69.9%
Sanders...............26.9%

MASSACHUSETTS

Chance of winning
Clinton...............87%
Sanders...............13%

Prediction
Clinton...............51.7%
Sanders...............45.2%

OKLAHOMA

Chance of winning
Clinton...............17%
Sanders...............83%

Prediction
Clinton...............45.1%
Sanders...............51.5%

TENNESSEE

Chance of winning
Clinton...............99%
Sanders...............1%

Prediction
Clinton...............64.9%
Sanders...............31.8%

TEXAS

Chance of winning
Clinton...............99%
Sanders...............1%

Prediction
Clinton...............65.2%
Sanders...............31.9%

VERMONT

Chance of winning
Clinton...............1%
Sanders...............99%

Prediction
Clinton...............10.8%
Sanders...............86.9%

VIRGINIA

Chance of winning
Clinton...............99%
Sanders...............1%

Prediction
Clinton...............62.5%
Sanders...............34.5%

Southern "Super Tuesday" States Solidly Behind Clinton

Tomorrow, the Super Tuesday states will vote for their presidential choice. And just like in South Carolina, the Southern states voting tomorrow are solidly behind Hillary Clinton's candidacy for the Democratic nomination. She has a 26 point lead in Tennessee, a 20 point lead in Virginia, a 28-34 point lead in Georgia, and a 21-24 point lead in Texas. That's what the two latest polls of those states shows.

The NBC News / Wall Street Journal / Marist Poll:

Texas (Feb 18-23) 381 likely voters (5.0 point moe)

Georgia (Feb 18-23) 461 likely voters (4.6 point moe)

Tennessee (Feb 22-25) 405 likely voters (4.9 point moe)

The CBS News / YouGov Battleground Poll:

Texas (Feb 22-26) 750 likely voters

Georgia (Feb 22-26) 492 likely voters

Virginia (Feb 22-26) 471 likely voters

Presidential Preferences In North Carolina And Tennessee

Two new polls give us a look at the presidential preferences of North Carolina and Tennessee Democrats and Republicans.

The Public Policy Polling survey was done between December 5th and 7th. They questioned a random sample of 555 Democratic voters and 537 Republican voters in North Carolina. The margin of error for Democrats and Republicans is 4.2 points.

The Vanderbilt University Poll was done between November 11th and 23rd of a random sample of 346 Democrats and 495 Republicans in Tennessee. The margin of error for Democrats is 6.7 points, and the margin of error for Republicans is 5.6 points.

Green Party Blasts The Anti-Union Lies About Auto Industry

By now you've probably heard about the vote by VW workers in Tennessee to not unionize. This was not due to company opposition. VW has unionized shops all over the world, and took no position on whether the workers should unionize or not. The opposition to forming a union came from outside sources -- primarily Republican Senator Corker and the state's Republican governor.

These right-wingers engaged in scare tactics. They repeated the old right-wing lies that unionization would keep VW from expanding in the state, and might even cause them to close the plant in Tennessee. The truth is just the opposite -- since VW will be unlikely to expand or build new plants in the state because their own strong union (in Germany) would oppose expanding in non-union areas. In short, the right-wingers (with their propaganda and lies) scared the VW workers in Tennessee into voting against their own interests.

The Green Party comments on this in more depth, and on the outrageous lie that has been spread by right-wingers that the auto industry in Detroit was destroyed by unionization. Here is the Green Party stance as written by Robert Wolff on February 18th. Mr. Wolff is a member of the Green Party Shadow Cabinet.

Many factors led to the United Auto Workers’ (UAW’s) loss in the recent union election at the Volkswagen (VW) factory in Tennessee. Likewise many lessons can be learned. One especially important lesson concerns how one factor – “outside influence” – works so one-sidedly in the United States.

Several UAW spokespersons and supporters bemoaned “outside interference” in this election. It was chiefly Republican politicians and activists and business groups that tried actively to persuade VW workers to vote against unionizing the factory, while the VW management remained neutral. Yet outside interference always influences union elections. Outcomes are never results merely of what employers and employees say and do in election campaigns.

Just as important is the way workers see the larger world and their places within it. That emerges from the workers’ families and households, the education they received, the mass media they engage, and from political parties and government. All their life experiences shape how they think about everything including voting in union elections.

Organizations of business, the wealthy and the conservatives (think tanks, foundations, hired public relations firms, advertising enterprises, major newspapers, mass radio and TV stations, internet outlets and social media) work constantly to shape workers’ life experiences and thus how they see the world. Because of their dependence on financing from businesses and the wealthy, most Republicans and Democrats avoid conflicts with their campaigns to shape public opinion. Conservatives pander to them.

No alternative, different way to see the world similarly surrounds workers in their daily lives. Workers’ organizations (unions, think tanks, independent media) are many fewer, poorer and much weaker. “Outside influences” shape workers’ consciousness one-sidedly because of the gross disparity of resources available to those exerting that influence. What made local Republicans and conservatives’ billboards persuasive was public opinion; the shape of that opinion defeated unionization in Tennessee. How differently “outside influences” work in other countries is suggested by this simple fact: virtually all of VW’s 105 factories elsewhere are unionized.

During the middle 1930s, millions joined unions for the first time: the greatest unionization drive in history.

The history of unionization in the US reinforces the point. During the middle 1930s, millions joined unions for the first time: the greatest unionization drive in history. We had never seen anything like it before, nor have we since. Unionization then was achieved by a remarkable alliance: unions (allied in the Congress of Industrial Organizations or CIO) plus large, active socialist and communist parties. Those parties widely and effectively contested the “outside influences” stemming from business, the wealthy and conservatives. Socialists and communists mobilized their own media, writers, artists and academics into play. Their demonstrations on many social issues made news and their organizations disseminated a distinctive interpretation of that news. They contradicted what business, the wealthy and conservatives asserted and not only around particular issues. Many among them also contested the economic system arguing that the US could and should do better than capitalism. Interested teachers, clergy, students, immigrant and racial minorities and the general public thus continuously encountered perspectives other than those of business, the wealthy and conservatives.

 How workers thought about and responded to union activists in the 1930s reflected the “outside influences” stemming from their socialist and communist allies. Those influences helped to make unionization so stunningly successful then.

Consider the claim – evidently somewhat effective in Chattanooga – that high wages won by the UAW caused Detroit’s economic collapse. That the UAW’s enemies would make that claim is not remarkable; that some workers took it seriously is. Every significant decision at Ford, General Motors and Chrysler since their beginnings was made exclusively by their major shareholders and boards of directors, all small handfuls of individuals. They alone decided what vehicles and fuel efficiencies to produce, what technologies to use, how many workers to hire, and where to locate or relocate factories (north, south, at home, or abroad). They always excluded workers from participation in those decisions (and opposed the UAW’s participation in wage decisions). They insisted on management prerogatives and expertise and corporate responsibilities.

While Detroit’s auto industry was booming, those decision-makers took full credit; it was all about their entrepreneurial geniuses. Then, their many bad corporate decisions (on auto design, technical composition, fuel efficiency, marketing and much else) badly weakened the industry. That plus far better decisions among European, Japanese and Korean auto producers reduced US firms’ profits and market shares. US firms’ major shareholders and boards of directors then decided to leave Detroit, ignoring their decision’s disastrous effects. In contrast, while German manufacturers pay their unionized workers much more than their US counterparts, they have not abandoned their workers or their cities. Germany has no equivalent of Detroit.

As Detroit declined, auto-company decision-makers conveniently reversed themselves and asserted their non-responsibility. They were suddenly not the powerful “captains of industry” they once called themselves. Instead they want folks to believe that the UAW forced high wages on them and that they left Detroit because the UAW victimized them. Some Tennessee workers found such assertions plausible and voted accordingly. By contrast, the profound impact of German unions and their socialist and communist allies on public opinion there helps explain why this year VW’s unionized German workers are enjoying a 5.6 percent wage increase at a time of 1.2 percent inflation.

Only a sustained counterprogram of mass education could at least partly shift “public opinion” so that it functions less as an anti-union “outside interference.” The construction today of an alliance parallel to the one that proved successful in the 1930s might accomplish that counterprogram. Labor needs to rebuild collaborations with academics – students as well as teachers – and political activists who understand past and present contrary to the claims promoted by business, the wealthy and conservatives. In short, a besieged labor movement needs again to become part of a much broader social movement. This time the urgency is less to grow (as in the 1930s) and more a matter of organized labor’s survival.

GOP Infighting Shows A Party In Trouble

(The cartoon above is by Daryl Cagle at caglecartoons.com.)

There was a time when the Republican Party was united, and their biggest worry was stopping or modifying Democratic proposals. But today, many Republicans seem to think their biggest enemies are within their own party. This was recently highlighted by a disagreement within the party over immigration reform -- with some wanting that reform so they could reach out to Hispanic voters, and others wanting to kill the reform because they think the new citizens would be Democratic voters (and still others just wanting to maintain the ethnic purity of their party).

Now the problem is showing up again. One wing of the party wants to threaten a shutdown of the government unless Obamacare is either repealed or defunded, while others in the GOP think that is unlikely and would just hurt them in the next election. The teabaggers in Congress are still threatening a shutdown, but so far, they don't have enough votes in their own party to make it happen.

And it's not just in Congress where this party infighting is taking place. An interesting thing just happened in Maine -- where 13 prominent Republicans (one of them a member of the Republican National Committee and six others member of the state party committee) have published a letter saying they no longer consider themselves to be Republicans. They believe the party, with it's right-wing governor, is not far enough to the right to suit them.

The same type of thing is happening in other states. At least three right-wing Republican senators (McConnell of Kentucky, Graham of South Carolina, Alexander of Tennessee) are going to be challenged in their state primaries -- by teabagger candidates who don't think they are right-wing enough. And the teabaggers in Texas are currently looking for a candidate to challenge John Cornyn.

This is not a fight between moderates and right-wingers. The party's moderates have been either marginalized or driven out of the party. This is a fight between right-wingers,  and ultra-right-wingers who want to take the party farther to the right than it already is (a scary thought). None of those named senators (or Maine's governor) could be called anything but a right-winger. They just aren't on the ultra-right fringe, where the teabaggers that control the GOP in many states currently are.

It's actually a pretty crazy scenario, and I can't believe those in the GOP think this is something that will help the party. If the teabaggers win this fight, it will drive many Independents toward the Democrats -- and if the right-wingers win, it could drive some teabaggers out of the party (or have them sit out the next election. Either of those possible outcomes could tip the 2014 (and 2016) elections to the Democrats.

Democrats might as well put on the popcorn and get a cold drink -- because it looks like this GOP infighting will be a good show, and will continue for quite a while.

Red State Voters Also Support Background Checks For Gun Purchases

Recently the Congress had an opportunity to close the massive loopholes in the federal law requiring background checks for gun purchasers. And I'm not exaggerating when I call the loopholes "massive", since about 40% of all gun purchasers in this country are able to buy a gun without any kind of background check (through purchases at gun shows, from friends and acquaintances, and off the internet). Unfortunately, the Republicans (and a few red state Democrats) killed the bill in the Senate.

The thinking was that although voters nationwide supported the bill by a huge margin (about 90%), the voters in the red states did not -- and senators in those states would have a hard time getting re-elected if they voted for the bill to make background checks more effective. But there is now evidence that kind of thinking was faulty, and that voting for the bill would not have hurt senators of either party.

A new Public Policy Polling survey (conducted on May 22nd and 23rd) tested the waters in three Southern, and very red, states -- Arkansas, Georgia, and Tennessee. The survey questioned 522 Arkansas voters, 576 Georgia voters, and 500 Tennessee voters (giving a margin of error of 4.3 points in Arkansas, 4.1 points in Georgia, and 4.4 points in Tennessee). The found the support for closing the background checks had a strong majority in all three of those red states, easily eclipsing the margin of error -- 60% in Arkansas, 71% in Georgia, and 67% in Tennessee (see the chart above).

It seems obvious that the Democrats didn't win any new support by joining the GOP in killing the background checks bill. But did the Republicans cover themselves in a primary in their own party? Probably not. The polls had the breakdown of political demographics showing that the majority support pretty much cut across party lines (although the majority among Independents in Arkansas was within the margin of error). Here are the numbers for political groups in each state (with the first number being those who support closing the loopholes, and the number in parentheses being the those opposed):

ARKANSAS
Republicans...............48% (43%)
Independents...............45% (43%)
Democrats...............85% (10%)

GEORGIA
Republicans...............63% (30%)
Independents...............67% (27%)
Democrats...............82% (10%)

TENNESSEE
Republicans...............53% (38%)
Independents...............61% (29%)
Democrats...............88% (8%)

While the majorities in red states may have been slightly smaller than in some other states (to close the background check loopholes), they are still significant majorities. It doesn't look like those of either party who voted against the bill have won themselves any new friends. In fact, they may lose some support because of it. But they kept the NRA leadership happy, and that was probably all they cared about.

Church Businesses Should Be Taxed

Christ Church Pentecostal of Nashville is a large church -- with over 2,000 members and a property valued at $2 million. As with all churches (and other religious meeting places), the church enjoys a tax-exempt status -- and this is only fair, since all religious institutions should be treated equally. But this church went a little further, and created two profit-oriented businesses (a fitness center and a cafe/bookstore).

The church thought those businesses should be tax-exempt also, since they were owned by the church. They were wrong. The Tennessee State Board of Equalization ruled that the entire property should not be tax-exempt, since the two businesses were not used for religious activity (but were commercial enterprises). With the aid of the Alliance Defending Freedom, the church appealed the decision.

Now the appeals court has ruled -- and their ruling was against the church. The appeals court said the state taxation laws did not "interfere with or suppress religious activity" and did not violate the Constitution. The truth is that there is no constitutional right for churches to be exempt from taxation. That exemption is a legislative one and is not absolute -- especially when it comes to church-owned commercial enterprises.

The decision was a good one. When the church created these businesses, it went into direct competition with other businesses offering the same goods/services. To give the church businesses a tax-exempt status would be to give them a substantial financial advantage over their competitors (who must pay property taxes, business taxes, incomes taxes, etc.). It would have put the government in the position of giving one business an advantage it doesn't give to other similar businesses -- and the government should never be put in the position of favoring any business over others (even one owned by a religious entity). This is a matter of fairness and equal opportunity -- not religion.

A GOP Rep Lies About Minimum Wage

The congressional Republicans nearly had a stroke the other night when President Obama said he wanted to raise the minimum wage to $9.00 and hour (even though that would still keep its buying power below what it was in the 1960s). The GOP is now trying to say raising the minimum wage would cost jobs and hurt the economy. I posted yesterday about how that is simply not true -- it would actually spur both the economy, and due to increased demand, new job growth.

But no Republican has been more disingenuous than Tennessee Rep. Marsha Blackburn. In an effort to show that it helps teens to work for a small salary, she related her own story. She said:

What we’re hearing from moms and from school teachers is that there needs to be a lower entry level, so that you can get 16-, 17-, 18-year-olds into the process. Chuck, I remember my first job, when I was working in a retail store, down there, growing up in Laurel, Mississippi. I was making like $2.15 an hour. And I was taught how to responsibly handle those customer interactions. And I appreciated that opportunity.

That can sound like she had made the point that teens should work for less than minimum wage -- until you look at what she doesn't tell us about her first job. By saying she worked for $2.15 an hour, she makes it sound like that was a very low wage, and today, it would be considered very low. But Rep. Blackburn was born in 1952, which means she would have been 16 to 18 years old between 1968 and 1970. At that time, the minimum wage was only $1.60 an hour (and had the buying power of $10.56 an hour today).

But Blackburn didn't work for minimum wage. She worked for $2.15 an hour (the equivalent of more than $12.72 an hour today), which was 34.4% above the minimum wage of that time. Using the current minimum wage ($7.25 an hour) and adding 34.4%, her salary would have equaled $9.74 an hour if she had worked for the same percentage above minimum wage in this economy -- $0.74 an hour more than President Obama has asked the minimum wage to be raised to.

So Blackburn's first job, which she wants you to believe was a very low-wage job, would have paid her somewhere between $9.74 and $12.72 an hour in today's dollars. But she thinks that teens today should work for less than the current minimum wage of $7.25 an hour. Does that make any sense? Is it fair? Isn't she just telling an outrageous lie by comparing her 1968-1970 salary to today's wages? Isn't it a lie to infer that she once worked for less than minimum wage, when it is not true (and her salary was more than a third above minimum wage)?

This is the way a lot of congressional Republicans operate today. They love to throw out numbers that seem to back up what they want -- until you examine those numbers and realize it is nothing more than a lie. The president's desire to raise the minimum wage to $9.00 an hour is more than reasonable (since it would have to be raised to more than $10 an hour to equal the buying power it had in the late sixties). It should be done.

This Guy Shouldn't Be Allowed Near A Gun

I am an unabashed liberal. I also believe the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees American citizens the right to own a firearm. But that right is not unlimited (a fact that has been verified by the Supreme Court many times, including the current conservative court). We already know that large caliber machine guns, RPGs, tanks, and similar weapons are not covered under the Second Amendment, and I personally believe assault weapons and ammo clips holding more than 10 bullets should be added to that list of banned items.

It is also generally accepted in this country that felons, domestic abusers, and dangerously mentally ill people should not be allowed to buy or possess firearms. Even most NRA members agree with this (in spite of their insane leadership). And personally, I would add the man in the picture above. His name is James Yeager, and he is the owner of a company that supposedly teaches people how to use weapons (although the state of Tennessee, where he lives, says his company is NOT certified to do firearms training and Mr. Yeager is NOT certified by the state to instruct anyone).

A couple of days ago, this man made a video in which he threatened to start a revolution if President Obama and Congress passed any new gun restrictions. He said he would be happy to fire the first shot and was ready to start "killing people". I consider that to be a terroristic threat, and think he should have been arrested. At least the state of Tennessee did take some action. They suspended his right to carry a concealed handgun, saying:

The number one priority for our department is to ensure the public’s safety. Mr. Yeager’s comments were irresponsible, dangerous, and deserved our immediate attention. Due to our concern, as well as that of law enforcement, his handgun permit was suspended immediately. We have notified Mr. Yeager about the suspension today via e-mail. He will receive an official notification of his suspension through the mail.

I wish they could have done more. I consider this guy to be a perfect example of the kind of person who should not be allowed to even own a gun of any kind. He has already said he is willing to kill people because he doesn't like proposed laws that would tighten restrictions on who can own a gun, and possibly outlaw some types of assault weapons. I can easily picture him someday walking into a theater or shopping center or school and starting to kill innocent people, and thinking his action was justified because the government did something he didn't like.

I don't think that's an unreasonable point of view. Having been born and raised in Texas (and still living there), I have been around responsible gun owners all of my life, and I have no problem with that at all. They have a right to own those weapons for both sport and self-defense. Those men and women do not threaten to kill their fellow citizens (or try to overthrow our government), and if they did, I would want their right to own a firearm revoked. If we don't like the way things are going in this country, we have recourse at the ballot box. But we should never have the right to impose our own views by threatening to kill people. We have prisons for people like that.

Unconstitutional State Constitutions

All laws in the United States are supposed to be in accordance with the United States Constitution, and any laws, rules, or state constitutional provisions that violate any part of the U.S. Constitution is null and void -- not legal. It says this in Article VI:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

Note that Article VI also contains a provision that says no religious test shall be required to hold public office. That means no persons can be required to be a member of any religion in order to hold public office (whether it is an elected or appointed position), or to even be religious at all. That makes we wonder how the following six states can still have these provisions in their own state constitutions:

ARKANSAS (Article 19, Section 1)
 "No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any court."

MISSISSIPPI (Article 14, Section 265)
No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office in this state.

NORTH CAROLINA (Article 6, Section 8)
The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God.

SOUTH CAROLINA (Article 17, Section 4)
No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution. 

TENNESSEE (Article 9, Section 2)

No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of re- wards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state.

TEXAS (Article 1, Section 4)
 No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.

These state constitutional provisions all violate the United States Constitution by making it illegal for atheists to hold public office. They try to limit Article VI by interpreting it to just mean belief in no "particular" religion is required, as long as there is a belief in god. But Article VI does not limit itself in that way. It simply says there will be no religious test, and requiring a belief in god to hold public office is certainly a religious test.

It is time for these archaic and unconstitutional provisions in these six state constitutions to be changed.

Super Tuesday Is A Mixed Bag

The results from Super Tuesday show that a lot of Republican voters still have doubts about Willard Mitt Romney (aka Wall Street Willie). Here are the numbers:

VIRGINIA (99% reporting)
Mitt Romney...............156,765  (59.44%)
Ron Paul...............106,992  (40.56%)
TOTAL VOTES...............263,757

GEORGIA (97% reporting)
Newt Gingrich...............414,896  (47.46%)
Mitt Romney...............224,361  (25.66%)
Rick Santorum...............171,346  (19.60%)
Ron Paul...............56,823  (6.50%)
Others...............6,839  (0.78%)
TOTAL VOTES...............874,265

MASSACHUSETTS (98% reporting)
Mitt Romney...............260,509  (72.09%)
Rick Santorum...............43,614  (12.07%)
Ron Paul...............34,575  (9.57%)
Newt Gingrich...............16,756  (4.64%)
Others...............5,927  (1.64%)
TOTAL VOTES...............361,381

OKLAHOMA (99% reporting)
Rick Santorum...............95,478  (33.77%)
Mitt Romney...............79,327  (28.06%)
Newt Gingrich...............77,770  (27.51%)
Ron Paul...............27,199  (9.62%)
Others...............2,944  (1.04%)
TOTAL VOTES...............282,718

NORTH DAKOTA (100% reporting)
Rick Santorum...............4,339  (39.99%)
Ron Paul...............2,938  (27.08%)
Mitt Romney...............2,639  (24.32%)
Newt Gingrich...............933  (8.60%)
TOTAL VOTES...............10,849

TENNESSEE (99% reporting)
Rick Santorum...............202,198  (37.30%)
Mitt Romney...............150,511  (27.77%)
Newt Gingrich...............130,689  (24.11%)
Ron Paul...............49,299  (9.10%)
Others...............9,325  (1.72%)
TOTAL VOTES...............542,022

OHIO (99% reporting)
Mitt Romney...............453,430  (37.99%)
Rick Santorum...............441,501  (36.99%)
Newt Gingrich...............174,456  (14.61%)
Ron Paul...............110,516  (9.26%)
Others...............13,780  (1.15%)
TOTAL VOTES...............1,193,683

VERMONT (93% reporting)
Mitt Romney...............22,632  (39.78%)
Ron Paul...............14,488  (25.46%)
Rick Santorum...............13,466  (23.67%)
Newt Gingrich...............4,636  (8.15%)
Others...............1,676  (2.95%)
TOTAL VOTES...............56,898

IDAHO (91% reporting)
Mitt Romney...............27,301  (63.74%)
Ron Paul...............7,675  (17.92%)
Rick Santorum...............6,920  (16.16%)
Newt Gingrich...............916  (2.14%)
Others...............17  (0.03%)
TOTAL VOTES...............42,829

ALASKA (95% reporting)
Mitt Romney...............4,167  (32.73%)
Rick Santorum...............3,704  (29.09%)
Ron Paul...............3,033  (23.82%)
Newt Gingrich...............1,798  (14.12%)
Others...............31  (0.24%)
TOTAL VOTES...............12,733

COMBINED SUPER TUESDAY VOTES
Mitt Romney...............1,381,642  (37.95%)
Rick Santorum...............982,566  (26.99%)
Newt Gingrich...............822,850  (22.60%)
Ron Paul...............413,538  (11.36%)
Others...............40,539  (1.11%)
TOTAL VOTES...............3,641,135

Mitt Romney came out of Super Tuesday winning more states and more delegates than the other candidates, but once again his weakness is apparent. He wasn't even able to get 40% of the Super Tuesday votes, which means over 60% of the people who voted yesterday preferred someone else -- even if that someone else is Santorum, Gingrich, or Paul. Romney still hasn't won over the teabaggers and evangelicals.

Super Tuesday Is Here

Today is the biggest day so far in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. That's because ten states (Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia) are voting and 419 delegates are up for grabs. Wall Street Willie (Willard Mitt Romney) would like for today to put him far ahead in the delegate count and once again give him the title of "inevitable nominee".

He is assured of victory in two state. Massachusetts because he was that state's governor, and Virginia because he and Paul are the only two candidates on the ballot. After that, anything could happen. That's what makes today so much fun. I'm guessing that the results will be rather muddled, with at least three candidates winning some states. The states with the most delegates today are Ohio and Georgia. Here are the latest polls:

RASMUSSEN POLL (Ohio)
Santorum..........32%
Romney..........31%
Gingrich..........13%
Paul..........13%

PUBLIC POLICY POLLING (Ohio)
Romney..........37%
Santorum..........36%
Gingrich..........15%
Paul..........11%

QUINNIPIAC UNIVERSITY POLL (Ohio)
Romney..........34%
Santorum..........31%
Gingrich..........15%
Paul..........12%

AMERICAN RESEARCH GROUP POLL (Ohio)
Romney..........35%
Santorum..........28%
Gingrich..........18%
Paul..........13%

MERRIMAN POLL (Ohio)
Romney..........38%
Santorum..........33%
Gingrich..........18%
Paul..........8%

SUFFOLK UNIVERSITY POLL (Ohio)
Santorum..........37%
Romney..........33%
Gingrich..........16%
Paul..........8%

CNN/OPINION RESEARCH POLL (Ohio)
Santorum..........32%
Romney..........32%
Gingrich..........14%
Paul..........11%

RASMUSSEN POLL (Georgia)
Gingrich..........37%
Romney..........27%
Santorum..........18%
Paul..........10%

PUBLIC POLICY POLLING (Georgia)
Gingrich..........47%
Romney..........24%
Santorum..........19%
Paul..........8%

MASON-DIXON POLL (Georgia)
Gingrich..........38%
Romney..........24%
Santorum..........22%
Paul..........3%

AMERICAN RESEARCH GROUP POLL (Georgia)
Gingrich..........44%
Romney..........24%
Santorum..........19%
Paul..........9%

PUBLIC POLICY POLLING (Tennessee)
Santorum..........34%
Romney..........29%
Gingrich..........27%
Paul..........8%

WE ASK AMERICA POLL (Tennessee)
Romney..........30%
Santorum..........29%
Gingrich..........29%
Paul..........12%

GOP Still Unsure About Wall Street Willie

We hear many pundits (even Republican pundits) saying these days that the GOP presidential nomination race will be a long one -- possibly even going to the convention without a clear winner. That's quite a change from a few months ago, when virtually all of them were ready to hand the nomination to Wall Street Willie (Willard Mitt Romney). The chart above gives us a clue as to why this is true.

Eleven states have voted so far (holding either a primary or a caucus), and Romney has reached 50% in one of those states -- Nevada. The only reason he holds a significant lead in delegates so far is because he won the only two states giving all their delegates to the primary winner -- Arizona and Florida. In all of the other states he has had to share delegates with his opponents, and in most of them will receive less than half of the delegates.

Romney should reach the 50% mark in a couple of states on Super Tuesday -- Massachusetts and Virginia. That's because Massachusetts is where he lives and served as governor, while only he and Ron Paul qualified to be on the Virginia ballot. In a lot of the other states voting on Super Tuesday, he is not likely to do nearly that well. He trails badly in Georgia, Oklahoma, and Tennessee. And Ohio is looking like a toss-up (but even if he wins there, he is probably not going to reach the 40% mark).

The fact of the matter is that old Wall Street Willie still has not been able to convince the majority of Republicans nationwide that he would make the best candidate. The establishment has accepted him, but the teabaggers and evangelicals are still looking for someone else -- and that's pretty bad considering the someone else is either Santorum or Gingrich.

Here are some of the latest polls for Super Tuesday states:

RASMUSSEN POLL (Tennessee)
Rick Santorum...............34%
Mitt Romney...............30%
Newt Gingrich...............18%
Ron Paul...............8%

AMERICAN RESEARCH GROUP POLL (Tennessee)
Rick Santorum...............35%
Mitt Romney...............31%
Newt Gingrich...............20%
Ron Paul...............9%
Undecided...............5%

NBC NEWS/MARIST POLL (Ohio)
Rick Santorum...............34%
Mitt Romney...............32%
Newt Gingrich...............15%
Ron Paul...............13%
Undecided...............7%

REUTERS/IPSOS POLL (Ohio)
Rick Santorum...............32%
Mitt Romney...............32%
Newt Gingrich...............17%
Ron Paul...............6%