Sorry

Poll Shows Democrats Still Have An Edge In The Election

These charts are from the latest survey from the Pew Research Center. It was done between September 18th and 24th of a national sample of 1,754 adults, with a margin of error of 2.7 points.

Both parties are energized for this election -- but Democrats have a 67% to 59% advantage. Democrats are also viewed as more honest and ethical by 15 points (47% to 32%) and more concerned about people by 25 points (56% to 31%). The Republicans are viewed as having the most extreme positions by 9 points (39% to 48%). Democrats are also viewed better on the issues.

Perhaps most important is the gender gap. Men prefer Republicans by 3 points (45% to 48%), while women prefer Democrats by 23 points (58% to 35%).

Hero

Political Cartoon is by Clay Bennett in the Chattanooga Times Free Press.

Kavanaugh Evaded Answering Too Many Hearing Questions

The Senate Republicans (and Donald Trump) said they were proud of Kavanaugh's performance before the Senate Judiciary Committee last Thursday. They were evidently living in some kind of dream world, because Kavanaugh (in addition to be strident and angry) evaded answering far too many questions.

Here is how Axios.com called it:

We went through the transcript of the hearing and noted every single time a question was asked of Ford and Kavanaugh. (We didn’t include the times a questioner didn’t ask an explicit question.) Then we noted every instance in which answered the question or said they didn’t know the answer — and we also noted every time they either refused to answer or gave an answer that didn’t address the question. Here are the results:

Credible Vs. Shameful

Political Cartoon is by David Fitzsimmons in the Arizona Daily Star.

Five Myths Of Capitalism

(Image is from the website of the Foundation for Economic Education.)

Right-wingers would have you believe that capitalism is good for everyone in our society. And to convince people of that, they have developed some myths about capitalism. In an article for The Washington Post, Steven Pearlstein explodes five of those myths. He writes:

MYTH NO. 1

Greed, a natural human instinct, makes markets work.

Adam Smith, the father of economics, first pointed out in his most famous work, “The Wealth of Nations ,” that in vigorously pursuing our own selfish interests in a market system, we are led “as if by an invisible hand” to promote the prosperity of others. Years later, Smith’s theme that capitalism runs on selfishness would find its most famous articulation in a speech by a fictional corporate raider, Gordon Gekko, in the movie “Wall Street”: “Greed . . . is good, greed is right, greed works.” (Defenders of free markets have been desperate to disown the “greedy” label ever since.)

Smith, however, was never the prophet of greed that free-market cheerleaders have made him out to be. In other passages from “The Wealth of Nations,” and in his earlier work, “The Theory of Moral Sentiments,” Smith makes clear that for capitalism to succeed, selfishness must be tempered by an equally powerful inclination toward cooperation, empathy and trust — traits that are hard-wired into our nature and reinforced by our moral instincts. These insights have now been confirmed by brain researchers, behavioral economists, evolutionary biologists and social psychologists. An economy organized around the cynical presumption that everyone is greedy is likely to be no more successful than one organized around the utopian assumption that everyone will act out of altruism.

MYTH NO. 2

Corporations must be run to maximize value for shareholders.

This is an almost universal belief among corporate executives and directors — that it is their principal mission and legal obligation to deliver the highest possible return to their shareholders. The economist Milton Friedman first declared in the 1970s that the “one social responsibility of business [is] . . . to increase its profits,” but the corporate raiders of the 1980s were the ones who forced that view on executives and directors, threatening to take their companies or fire them if they didn’t go along. Since then, “maximizing shareholder value” has been routinely used to justify layoffs and plant closings, rationalizean orgy of stock buybacks, and defend elaborate corporate schemes to avoid paying taxes. It is now widely taught by business schools, ruthlessly demanded by Wall Street’s analysts and “activist” investors, and lavishly reinforced by executive pay packages tied to profits and share prices.

In fact, corporations are free to balance the interests of shareholders with those of customers, workers or the public, as they did routinely before the 1980s, when companies were loath to boost profits if it meant laying off workers or cutting their benefits. Legally, corporations can be formed for any purpose. Executives and directors owe their fiduciary duty to the corporation, which is not owned by shareholders, as widely believed, but owns itself (in the same way that nobody “owns” you or me). The only time a corporation is obligated to maximize its share price is when it puts itself up for sale.

MYTH NO. 3

Workers' pay is an objective measure of economic contribution.

The theory of “marginal productivity” holds that a worker’s wage or salary reflects the “amount of output the worker can produce,” according to Harvard’s Greg Mankiw, author of a best-selling economics textbook. This idea is useful in constructing economic models, but Mankiw and others have also relied on it to justify widening income inequality and to oppose proposals to redistribute income based on subjective notions of what is “fair.” It is why we are supposed to accept that private-equity king Steve Schwartzman, at $800 million, should earn 20,000 times what the average American worker earns, as he did last year.

In reality, however, the pay set by markets is also subjective, reflecting the laws and social norms under which markets operate. The incomes earned by workers who planted tobacco — and those who owned tobacco plantations — changed considerably after slavery was abolished, and again after laws protecting sharecroppers were enacted, and again when minimum-wage laws were passed, and again when farmworkers won the right to unionize. Changes to trade law, patent law and antitrust law also alter the distribution of income. While it is probably better to rely on markets rather than government to set pay levels, that doesn’t mean that the way the markets set pay is a purely objective assessment of economic contribution or that redistribution is theft.

MYTH NO. 4

Equality of opportunity is all people need to climb the economic ladder.

No moral intuition is more hard-wired into Americans’ concept of economic justice than equality of opportunity. The reason Americans tolerate higher levels of income inequality is because of our faith that we all have a fair chance at achieving the American Dream or becoming the next Bill Gates. “In America we stand for equality,” writes Arthur Brooks of the American Enterprise Institute, a leading defender of the morality of capitalism. “But for the large majority of us, this means equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.” In a 2015 New York Times poll on income inequality, 35 percent of Americans said they believed everyone has “a fair chance to get ahead.”

But while the United States has made great strides in removing legal barriers to equal opportunity, at least half the difference in income between any two people is determined by their parents, either through inherited traits like intelligence, good looks, ambition and reliability (nature), or through the quality and circumstances of their upbringing and education (nurture). As our society has become more meritocratic, we’ve simply replaced an aristocracy based on title, class, race and gender with a new and equally persistent aristocracy based on genes, education and parenting. Unless we are prepared to engage in extensive genetic reengineering, or require that all children be brought up in state-run boarding schools, we must acknowledge that we can never achieve full equality of opportunity.

MYTH NO. 5

Making the economy fairer will make it smaller and less prosperous.

Economists have long believed that there is an unavoidable trade-off between equality and growth — having more of one means having less of the other. Arthur Okun’s book about it, “Equality and Efficiency: The Big Tradeoff,” remains a classic. The implosion of communism and the decisions of socialist countries like Sweden to reduce taxes and welfare are widely seen as acknowledgments of the failure of overly egalitarian systems to produce adequate economic growth.

But evidence suggests that there is also a point at which high levels of inequality begin to deliver less economic growth, not more — and that the United States has passed that point, according to research by the International Monetary Fund. That’s partly because more-unequal economies tend to have oversize and overcompensated financial sectors that are more prone to booms and busts. Other researchers have found that worker productivity suffers when economic gains are not widely shared.

United

Political Cartoon is by John Cole in the Scranton Times-Tribune.

Evidence Over Intuition

Elections Matter

Kavanaugh Lied Under Oath About His H.S. Drinking

(Cartoon image is by Darrin Bell at darrinbell.com.)

Brett Kavanaugh testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday. He cried, he raged, and he did his best to pose as the victim. He also, in an attempt to paint a picture of himself as always abiding by the law, claimed several times that it was legal for him to drink beer while a senior in high school. He stated that several times in his sworn testimony before the committee.

There's only one problem with that. It is NOT TRUE. He lied.

He had said it was legal for 18 year-olds to drink in Maryland (where he went to high school). But Maryland had raised the drinking age to 21 on July 1, 1982 -- nearly 7 months before Kavanaugh turned 18 on February 12, 1983. It was never legal for Kavanaugh to drink beer (or any other alcoholic drink) before he turned 21.

Kavanaugh knew that. He just thought he could slip that lie by Congress while posing as a good person who never broke the law. But it brings up a question -- since he lied about drinking legally, what else is he lying about? Everything? It's a valid question.

I'm sure some will claim it's a small mistake, and he just didn't remember. I'm not buying it. Think about your own youth. Many of us drank before the legal age at times while a teenager. And we knew it was not legal. We also remember it as being illegal now that we are adults. So does Kavanaugh. He just stupidly didn't think anyone would check on it.

His confirmation vote has been put off for a week while the FBI investigates. I hope they find proof of more of his lies. He should never sit on the United States Supreme Court. If for no other reason, because he lied under oath to a Senate committee -- and it was witnessed by people on nationwide TV.

Big Babies

Political Cartoon is by Clay Jones at claytoonz.com.

Supreme Court Approval By Gender And Party

These charts are from a recent Gallup Poll -- done between September 4th and 12th of a national sample of 1,035 adults, with a margin of error of 4 points.

It shows that the Supreme Court has a job approval of only 51% -- far lower than it used to have.

And the approval shows big differences by both gender and party. While 60% of men approve of the job being done by the court, only 45% of women approve. And if Kavanaugh is put on the court, we can expect the approval by women to drop even further.

The approval by party is even wider. About 67% of Republicans approve, while only 36% of Democrats approve.

No Virgin

Political Cartoon is by Joel Pett in the Lexington Herald-Leader.

Murder Rates In The Largest U.S. Metropolitan Areas

I found this to be interesting, and thought you might also. The charts below (using information from CBS.com) show the murder rates for the 60 largest metropolitan areas in the United States for 2017. The rates show the number of murders per 100,000 people. I was a bit surprised at the rates of some areas (and I expect you might be also).

Who's The Victim ?

Political Cartoon is by Adam Zyglis in The Buffalo News.

The United States Is Exceptional (In Both Good & Bad Ways)

(Cartoon image is by Mike Judge in The Kansas City Star.)

It is not uncommon to hear that the United States is exceptional among all the nations of the world. It is especially common among those on the right -- who would have us believe this country is the best and does not need to change.

The truth is that America has been exceptional -- in both good and bad ways. We have not always been on the right side of history, and we are still struggling to become a better nation. The following is just a small part of an excellent article on America and its history by Nebraska school teacher Tim Royers. I urge you to read the whole piece.


The reality is that there is a fundamental duality underlying American political history, and until we fully acknowledge this duality in current public school curriculums, our classrooms will continue to offer only a partial glimpse into the past. This is not an either/or proposition — America is exceptional — but just in ways that have done both good and bad.

We can trace this duality in American history to a conundrum that dates back to the very founding of the United States: When the leaders of the Revolution chose to seek independence, they launched a movement that espoused conservative ideals, but which used radical means to achieve them. Here, I am using “conservative” in the nonpolitical sense — the goal of the leaders was to return to American colonial society as it was before the increased interference of the British crown. . . .

As much as we celebrate the profound rhetoric of the Declaration of Independence and similar documents, we should clearly acknowledge that their original purpose was to restore liberties, control over property, and access to political decision making for a privileged few. Indications of this fact are in the documents themselves — the very same document which famously affirms that “all men are created equal,” with women intentionally omitted (the thinkers of the Enlightenment era felt that politics was exclusively the realm of men), also contains a passage that decries the “merciless Indian savages.”. . .

In short, while the founders utilized radical new means to achieve their ends, those ends remained fundamentally entrenched in an effort to restore a romanticized colonial past. They wanted to access the tools of social contract, natural rights, and consent of the governed, but only for themselves and with no intention to share those tools with everyone else.

Needless to say, this is why the same person who writes about the equal standing of all men can legally own slaves. It is why the same people that decry a lack of representation would also put in place institutional barriers to mitigate the influence that direct elections could have through the Electoral College. It is why most states limited voting to white male property owners and no one else. This was a revolution based in Enlightenment-era principles, both positive and negative. . . .

This sets up the great paradox of our country: the constant battle between the Two Americas. One America seeks to uphold the ends of the Revolution, by maintaining a society dominated by a ruling elite. The other America seeks to uphold the means of the Revolution, extending the promises of liberty and participation in government to an ever-increasing percentage of American society who demand an end to their marginalization.

The tug-of-war between these two Americas has defined our country from its establishment to the present era, through the quandaries that arise between those who comfortably have their rights, and those on the margins seeking to be included in that group. . . .

Throughout history, this has created an interesting phenomenon: As the sphere of those who do enjoy rights expands, those newly-included groups have ideologically joined the entity seen from the margins as oppressive. In many ways, they have been seen to begin seeking to maintain a romanticized status-quo version of America which keeps them in a position of privilege, especially as a new wave of groups challenges and protests their excluded status in society.

The same members of the working class that would have been denied the vote in the early 19th century fought against expanding suffrage to women or minorities. The same skilled laborers that fought for collective representation resisted the extension of the same privileges to unskilled labor. The same women that sought to give themselves the vote at the turn of the 20th century sought to actively deny its extension to minority women. As the mission of earning legal rights was accomplished for each specific group, similar missions for other groups seeking to achieve the same thing were seen as dangerous enough to jeopardize the social order each prior group had had fought so hard to obtain. . . .

We must continue to teach the vision of the United States as the work of forming a shining city upon a hill, built around “the great principles (of the Declaration of Independence) and the genius of American institutions,” as Frederick Douglass once described. But we do a grave disservice in teaching this vision while hiding the fact that various groups and individuals (and at times even the vast majority of the American population), have historically sought to undermine the very democratic institutions that serve as the foundation of our civic life. This has been done, and continues to happen, in order to pull the country towards an America built on policies that restrict the liberties and rights of those who are marginalized, and in order to preserve the perceived power of the privileged in our society. . . .

We can never forget that the same America which oversaw the gradual expansion of rights that we celebrate today has a darker side. This is the side that sought to erase the culture of indigenous people, worked (and in many ways, still works) to prevent black families from owning homes or moving into certain neighborhoods, and which led an imperial conquest of the Philippines. Acknowledging this “other America” is not only needed for a healthy civic life in the present, but actually strengthens the accomplishments of the better, “more democratic” America through strength in opposition.

They Don't Care

Political Cartoon is by David Hayward at nakedpastor.com.

Willie On Values

Of Course He Knew

Senate Republicans Put On A Shameful Bit Of Theater

The Senate Judiciary Hearing was held on Thursday, and both Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh testified. Dr. Ford was credible and believable. Kavanaugh was not. But none of it makes a bit of difference anyway.

This was not an effort to get the truth. If it had been, they would have asked the FBI to investigate the new charges against Kavanaugh. They would have had other accusers testifying. And they would have had witnesses testifying that could corroborate their stories (or disprove them). But they didn't have any of that.

They didn't have it because this was nothing more than a bit of political theater. It was just an attempt by the Senate Republicans to try to provide some cover for what they have intended to do all along -- ignore all evidence and confirm Kavanaugh. Graham (pictured) made that very clear when he spent his time trying to turn Kavanaugh into the victim (he's not) and vilifying Democrats for trying to get the truth (even though all their efforts were blocked by the Republicans).

Kavanaugh's nomination will go to the Senate floor, and he will be confirmed. It's just false hope to think that Collins, Murkowski, Corker, or Flake will block the nomination. They are Republicans, and they will toe the party line. None of them have the courage to vote their convictions. That type of Republican hasn't existed since the death of John McCain.

I hope I'm wrong, But I wouldn't put any money on that remote possibility. I just hope decent Americans were watching -- and will punish the Republicans in November for putting a sex abuser on the Supreme Court.

The GOP Frat

Political Cartoon is by David Horsey at the Tribune Content Agency.

Is The U.S. An Oligarchy Ruled By Billionaires ?

That's the question asked by The Guardian. And they provide the graphic images below, which tend to show that it is true.

Cowards

Political Cartoon is by Clay Jones at claytoonz.com.

A Trump Word Salad

(Image was found at jacobrcampbell.com.)

On Tuesday, Donald Trump had an 80 minute press conference. It was full of lies and bragging, but contained very little real information about important issues. Instead, we got word salads. The following is a prime example. He was asked if his Mideast peace plan supported a two-state solution. He said:

I’d love to be able to make a deal with the Israelis and the Palestinians. You know, my whole life I was told that’s the toughest deal. And I disagree, I think health care is probably tougher, okay, you want to know the truth.

But it is tough, but we’re going to take care of that too. That’s going to get taken care of. We’ve already taken care of a lot of it. But the whole — my life I’ve always heard the deal between, as you know, Israel and the Palestinians, that’s like the toughest deal.

Every possible thing is tough about that. I think we’re going to make a deal. I think we’re going to make a deal. So at one of our many meetings today, I was with [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu, a man who I have a lot of respect for.

A man who’s been extremely nice to me, very happy that I did the whole thing with Jerusalem and the embassy, which by the way we got open in four months for less than $500,000 and the budget was over a billion dollars.

So we saved let’s say a billion dollars, that’s not so bad. And it’s open and it’s beautiful by the way, Jerusalem stone, one of my favorite stones. I will tell you the question somebody said today well this is the first news conference in a long time.

I said what do you mean? I did like five today. Every time I sit I take a lot of questions from people that are screaming like maniacs in the back of the room, meaning reporters. And one of the reporters, I won’t say that it was John Roberts that said that, our issues (ph).

But one of the — it was, but that’s OK, don’t feel guilty, John. But one of the reporters that was screaming asked about the one state two state, and I said I think the two state will happen, I think it’s one way more difficult because it’s a real estate deal, because you need meets and bounds and you need lots of carve outs and lots of everything.

It’s actually a little tougher deal, but another way it works better because you have people governing themselves and — so they asked me about that. I said well I think the two state will happen, I think we’re going to go down the two state road.

And I’m glad I got it out and Jared [Kushner], who’s so involved, he loves Israel. He loves Israel. But he’s also going to be very fair with the Palestinians. He understands it takes two people to be happy, two groups of people to be happy.

Everybody’s got to be happy and that’s why it’s so tough, because there’s been so much hatred and anger for so many years, that’s what probably the number one ingredient of toughness is.

We Believe You

Political Cartoon is by Benjamin Slyngstad at slyngstadcartoons.com.

Vote Them Out!

On The Ballot

NBC News Reports A Fourth Accusation About Kavanaugh

It's like the dam has broken, and the accusations against the character of Brett Kavanaugh are gushing forth. NBC News has learned of a fourth woman accusing Kavanaugh of sexually aggressive behavior. This latest incident happened in 1998, when Kavanaugh was an adult.

Here is what NBC reporters Kasie Hunt, Leigh Ann Caldwell, and Heidi Przybyla are reporting:

The Senate Judiciary Committee is inquiring about at least one additional allegation of misconduct against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, according to a letter obtained by NBC News and multiple people familiar with the process.

Republican Senate investigators asked Kavanaugh about the new complaint, NBC News has learned, during a phone call on Tuesday between Kavanaugh and committee staff. Sources told NBC News that Kavanaugh denied the allegation in the letter during the call and a spokesman for the committee declined to comment.

A Republican aide on the committee said the conversation took place shortly after noon. While Republican staff posed questions to Kavanaugh, their Democratic counterparts were also on the call but did not ask any questions.

According to an anonymous complaint sent to Republican Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado, Kavanaugh physically assaulted a woman he socialized with in the Washington, D.C., area in 1998 while he was inebriated.

The sender of the complaint described an evening involving her own daughter, Kavanaugh and several friends in 1998.

“When they left the bar (under the influence of alcohol) they were all shocked when Brett Kavanaugh, shoved her friend up against the wall very aggressively and sexually.”

“There were at least four witnesses including my daughter.” The writer of the letter provided no names but said the alleged victim was still traumatized and had decided to remain anonymous herself.

Black Clouds

Political Cartoon is by Steve Breen in the San Diego Union-Tribune.