And it's me and my machine for the rest of the morning/ And the rest of the evening/ And the rest of my life...
- 'Millworker,' from the Studs Terkel musicial 'Working'

Every once in a while, someone will introduce me as a well-known blogger. I'm shocked if people even know who I am (or know what blogging is, for that matter), because really, I just sit in my living room and write stuff late at night, or early in the morning when normal people are still asleep. Come to think of it, I'm pretty much hunched over a computer for an average of 18 hours a day.

And I wonder why people think this is glamorous. Dear God, why?

I'm sitting here with one of those "As Seen On TV" compression socks on my right arm, because the nerves are so shot. (I cut holes in the end for my fingers.) I don't think it's so much the typing, because I did that for more than 15 years as a full-time journalist and the damage wasn't this bad. It's the damned cutting and pasting that does it, I think. Sometimes the pain is so bad, it makes me cry. (It's what makes me so succinct.)

I have an ergonomic mouse, an ergonomic chair. Thank God I have an articulating keyboard tray that one of my readers paid for because when the pain got really bad, I had to take a week off.

I'm plugged in most of the time. If I'm not home, I'm checking my smartphone. I have the TV on in the background with the sound turned off, because you never know what you might miss. It's like any assembly line job - you have to feed the content machine.

When I'm not writing, I'm reading. Looking for story leads on Twitter, on blogs, on news sites. I always prided myself on how much I read, but now my idea of heaven would be six months without reading any news. I suspect (although I can't be sure) that most of my C&L colleagues feel the same way, at least some of the time.

Because while the readers get to skip over anything that's just too upsetting, we don't. It's our job. We immerse ourselves in the muck, and we swim through it pretty much 24/7, 365 days. While you have the option of walking away when it gets to be too much, we don't. And we're still here when you decide to come back.

It's depressing as hell, diving into the dark side all the time.

And while you might say, "Hey, then go get a regular job," it's not that easy. Because you know what HR people do now? They Google your name. So bloggers' reward for the many years we've spent blogging, the years we've sifted through the news and the politics chaff for you, is to frequently get screened out as a potential employee. So here we are, delivering up a heapin' fresh platter of news and opinion because hey, it's what we do.

Continue reading »

Alicublog: Right-wing bloggers versus gay pride.

Distributorcap NY: Packing them in at the Supreme Court.

Poor Man Institute: Toilet trained and dumb.

His Vorpal Sword: North to Alaska – Moose of Darkness.

The Reaction: Thoughts on the G20 summit in Toronto.

The Existential Cowboy: The oil industry lobbied against blow-out preventers.

Also, Music of the World Cup.

Guest post by Batocchio. Temporarily e-mail tips to batocchio9 AT yahoo DOT com.

Howdy, everyone! My name's Brad Reed and I'm comin' over here from Sadly, No! where I spent many a glorious year making fun of jerks. At any rate, I thought I'd introduce myself to y'all by bringing you the novel economic theories of one of my favoritest conservative bloggers ever, Bob "Confederate Yankee" Owens.

Last week, Bob discussed his novel theory on unemployment. Now, there are several reasons why unemployment is so high in America right now. One is that we had a decade of economic growth that was based on an $8 trillion housing bubble that saw the vast amounts of capital invested in houses that no one wants to buy. Another is that the housing bubble left in its wake more than 2 million construction workers who now face long-term structural unemployment since the housing boom is unlikely to return anytime soon. And then there's the problem that there's inadequate aggregate demand needed to boost overall consumption that would lead more businesses to hire and... OK, so you get the picture.

But Owens doesn't have any use for none of that fancy-pants economics talk. When he sees that there's 10% unemployment, his gut tells him what the real problem is:

THEY'S JES' LAZY!

Have a look:

By stopping unemployment benefits, the Senate will force those lazy Americans enjoying "funemployment" to get off their backsides and get back to work.

This is pretty awesome. I mean, you'd expect seasoned political operatives such as Mr. Yankee to do the smart thing and blame unemployment entirely on Obama's $700 billion stimulus check made out to ACORN. But instead of doing the politically savvy thing, he goes Full Metal St00pid and blames the unemployed.

Next he'll deliver a weaselly qualifier to show us that he's not, you know, a little bit empathetic to people who have lost their jobs...

I know that many long-term unemployed people have made a sincere effort to return to work...

...before reverting back to form:

...but I know for a fact that many haven't.

Given the weight of the charges that Mr. Yankee has leveled here -- i.e., that everyone who has lost their job over the past two years is nothing more than a shameless drifter living off government largess -- you'd think he'd provide some solid evidence to back it up. And indeed, he comes to the table with some of the strongest type of evidence known to man: namely, the anecdotal kind:

As everyone like anecdotes, I can mention the stories of one of my brother and my two brothers-in-law. My brother was in construction management, one of my brothers-in-law is in auto body shop management, and the other brother-in-law is a mid-level manager.

All three lost jobs within the past two years due to their companies facing economic woes. My brother immediately sent out resumes and spoke with industry contacts in his area, and was re-employed—working longer hours at less pay—within a month. With his work ethic, I suspect he be promoted once an opportunity becomes available.

My brother-in-law the body shop manager has gone through a string of layoffs in south Florida, but never was out of work for long because he was willing to compromise and take less than he thought he was worth to support his family. He even moved from Florida to North Carolina in pursuit of work opportunities, and seems to be making a good impression at his new shop.

My brother-in-law the middle-manager has been under-employed over a year. He works a part-time job and collects unemployment.

When he does get interviews, he torpedoes them. He recently told a perspective employer that what they were offering salary-wise wasn't good enough.

These anecdotes run true almost everywhere.

Similarly, I have a brother-in-law who was spent his whole life working as a first-class surgeon and when he was laid off from his hospital after it was taken over by Obamacare he could only get a job offer as a Wal-Mart greeter. And do you know how he repaid Wal-Mart for offering them this fine, prestigious position? Why he pulled down his pants and done peed right on that thar floor!

This goes to prove that all highly-paid surgeons enjoy spraying their bodily fluids in public places, or something like that. Much like Confederate Yankee, I've forgotten what this useless anecdote was supposed to prove.

As progressives, bloggers and experts like Paul Krugman said at the time, cutting the stimulus package the first time around to make Republicans happy only weakened the stimulus effect to the point where it was enough to deter the worst effects of the financial crisis, but not enough to fix it. (Kind of like having a bacterial infection and taking half a dose of antibiotics.)

Krugman said then that he doubted the political climate would permit a later stimulus package, and he was right - which is probably why David Axlerod is tying himself in knots to avoid calling it that:

President Obama wants Congress to spend more money to help states and localities struggling with huge deficits. But he does not want to call it a stimulus package, apparently.

Mr. Obama has intimated in the past that the federal government’s job of propping up the economy was not yet done. Last week, he sent a letter to Congress supporting efforts to pass two separate measures totaling as much as $50 billion in aid for states and cities.

With states still facing large budget shortfalls, Obama wants to minimize the potential loss of teachers, law-enforcement officers, and firefighters. He estimates that as many as 300,000 teachers could be laid off. In this way, the money would largely pick up where the $787 billion federal stimulus bill left off.

Yet on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday, Obama adviser David Axelrod plumbed the depths of the English language in order to try to avoid calling the money a stimulus.

In the end, he conceded: “We should not be too careless about pulling out of our stimulative efforts too quickly.”

Mr. Axelrod’s discomfort is an acknowledgment that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act did not deliver in precisely the way it was promised. Touted as the only way of keeping unemployment below 10 percent, the unemployment rate tipped 10 percent anyway.

Obama’s push for more stimulus, however, suggests that the administration believes that the stimulus package blunted the worst of the recession – as the White House has repeatedly argued. The state and city stimulus is a bid to repeat the process this year for states and localities that cannot run deficits by law.

Critics argue that this tactic has created only the veneer of a recovery. Jobs numbers released June 4 showed that the vast majority of new jobs were Census jobs paid for by the government. The private sector created only 41,000 jobs – its worst performance since January.

UPDATED: John Amato:

Paul Krugman has been attacking the lurch towards 'Fiscal Austerity' for a few days becoming very shrill in the process. That's always a good move. He uses Ireland and Spain for his example.

But I suddenly realized this morning that there’s yet another question for the deficit hawks: what evidence do you have that fiscal austerity of the kind you’re demanding would reassure markets, even if they did lose confidence? Consider, if you will, the comparative cases of Ireland and Spain.

The countries responded differently, however. Ireland quickly embraced harsh austerity; Spain has had to be dragged into austerity, and still faces major political unrest.

--

So, I’m glad to hear that Ireland’s stoic acceptance of austerity is reassuring markets; it must be true, because that’s what everyone says. Because if I didn’t know that, I might look at the data and conclude that markets actually have less confidence in Ireland than they do in Spain, and that austerity in the face of a deeply depressed economy doesn’t actually reassure markets at all. But hey, what are you going to believe: what everyone knows, or your own lying eyes?

And as Digby says:

I feel as if we are watching a slow motion train wreck, mouths agape, powerless to do anything to stop it --- the Very Serious People are all on board, assured in their own minds, for different reasons, that history has ended and nothing that came before can possibly be of any consequence.

In fact, I feel exactly the same way I felt in the lead up to the Iraq war.

Although I really don't care to read these right-wing milbogs, I find it very encouraging that they are not just clear-headed about the issue of allowing homosexuals in the military to serve openly, but they're willing to put it in a formal statement.

JOINT STATEMENT FROM MILITARY BLOGGERS 12 MAY 2010

We consider the US military the greatest institution for good that has ever existed. No other organization has freed more people from oppression, done more humanitarian work or rescued more from natural disasters. We want that to continue.

Today, it appears inevitable to us that the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy and law restricting those displaying open homosexual behavior from serving will be changed. And yet, very little will actually change. Homosexuals have always served in the US Military, and there have been no real problems caused by that.

The service chiefs are currently studying the impact and consequences of changing the DADT policy, and how to implement it without compromising the morale, order and discipline necessary for the military to function. The study is due to be completed on Dec. 1st. We ask Congress to withhold action until this is finished, but no longer. We urge Congress to listen to the service chiefs and act in accordance with the recommendations of that study.

The US Military is professional and ready to adapt to the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell without compromising its mission. Echoing Sec. Def. Gates and ADM Mullen, we welcome open and honorable service, regardless of sexual orientation.

Matt Burden - Warrior Legacy Foundation & BLACKFIVE
Jim Hanson - Warrior Legacy Foundation & BLACKFIVE
Blake Powers - BLACKFIVE
Fred Schoenman - BLACKFIVE
David Bellavia - House to House
Bruce McQuain - Q&O
JD Johannes - Outside the Wire
Diane Frances McInnis Miller - Boston Maggie
Mark Seavey - This Ain't Hell
Michael St. Jacques - The Sniper
Mary Ripley - US Naval Institute Blog
John Donovan - Castle Argghhh!
Andrew J. Lubin- The Military Observer
Marc Danziger - Winds of Change
Greta Perry - Hooah Wife

So good on you. Much respect, except, as you guys ought to recognize, if you ask DOD to wait until December, there is the very real chance that a Republican-dominated House could block any action to repeal DADT. Next time, call your left-wing milbloggers into the effort. Or is our position perhaps a little less nebulous?

Our own David Neiwert flew to DC to participate in the huge march on DC for immigration reform. He'll be filing in some reports as soon as he can.

America's Voice:

Today's the day. Tens of thousands of people are registered to come to the National Mall for today's immigration reform rally, called the March For America. Hundreds of buses are still pouring in from across the country, and several major progressive and pro-migrant bloggers will be reporting directly from the rally, which starts at 2pm. Expect coverage from Vivir Latino and Crooks and Liars, among others, as well as pictures and video from the National Mall. Look for a performance by Grammy award-winning talent, Los Lonely Boys! Live-streamed video should pop up at C-SPAN, Telemundo or Univision. On twitter, check out the #m4a hashtag. Follow @AmericasVoice and @RI4A.

I'm hearing that there are well over 200K people protesting at the March, but I expect the media to not care all that much about it.

That's Why: Basic middle class assumptions are full of holes.

Sparkle Pony: Could some one explain why two months of pills costs three thousand bucks?

Echidne of the Snakes: Where the female bloggers are.

Figleaf (NSFW): New acronym: IJNNWCDI. "It's just not news when conservatives do it."

Off the beaten path: When is evil cool?

Guest round up by Blue Gal; Mike returns tomorrow. Send tips to finnsagain AT aol DOT com

I just got back from DC after a whirlwind trip (Saturday to Tuesday). I hate flying cross country; it really bothers my injury. But I thought it would be interesting to go to the Dept. of Treasury with a bunch of bloggers and kick it with a host of Treasury officials including Tim Geithner. It was an "off-the-record" meeting and I think that made the participants more relaxed to speak freely, but did they say anything they might not have because it was supposed to be off the record? I doubt it.

I brought up the fact that they were losing their political capital on the CFPA if they move it to the Fed because the public wants it to be an independent agency with actual power. Unfortunately, they seemed to think that as long as it had the teeth they wanted, they weren't--and the public shouldn't be--concerned where it was housed. And then of course some members brought up that the Senate (Dodd and Corker) still had to work out their issues first anyway and they intimated how problematic the Senate has been. I pushed the point that it does matter where it's housed, especially to the American public.

Another issue brought up is one many bloggers have talked about: Republicans do an incredible job with messaging. And the Obama White House has been terrible framing their priorities. The Treasury officials admitted that they weren't very good at getting their message out there. Some seemed resigned to it, while others admitted there was a pressing need to get better at it.

Felix Salmon of Reuters has a very good piece up about the meeting:

I can’t quote what anybody said, even anonymously, but I can tell you that the message from Treasury was that financial reform is not dead in the Senate, and that in fact on some matters, including derivatives reform, there’s real hope that the Senate can put something together that’s even stronger than what the House passed. I’ll believe it when I see it, but the general idea seems to be that so long as something gets out of committee, the final bill might actually have some teeth.

---

More generally, I came away with the impression that life at Treasury is not much fun, on a day-to-day basis, and that the stresses of trying to set economic policy in the face of strong opposition from both the banking lobby and the Republican party are wearing on the officials there.

We really need to keep the pressure up on this issue. The CFPA is too important.

Continue reading »

We all wondered what had happened to him, particularly since he did not come forward even for his own baby, Blogroll Amnesty Day.

Jon Swift passed away on February 27. His mom left this comment at the last post to his blog:

I don't know how else to tell you all who love this blog. I am Jon Swift's Mom and I guess I'm going to OUT him. He was Al Weisel, my beloved son. Al was on his way to his father's funeral in VA when he suffered 2 aortic aneurysms, a leaky aortic valve and an aortic artery dissection from his heart to his pelvis. He had 3 major surgeries within 24 hours and sometime during those surgeries also suffered a severe stroke. We, his 2 sisters, his brother, his partner and his best friend since he was 9 years old were with him as he took his last breath. We have all lost a shining start who warmed our hearts, tormented us and made us laugh as he giggled at our pulling something over on us. He passed away on February 27, 2010. My beloved child will live on in so many hearts. I miss him more than I can say. If you are on Facebook, go to organizations and join "Friends of Al Weisel, Unite!" It will give you just a taste of how special he was. Farewell, Jon (Al)

3/02/2010 8:14 AM
Jon Swift was already terribly missed because he stopped blogging abruptly last March. He was not only a very talented blogger, he was a true blog citizen. He linked to all of us, cared passionately about the community of small bloggers, and was one of the best at giving the ones and zeros in which we bloggers interact some heart and soul. And he was very funny.

Love to his family and may he rest in peace.

I watched Evan Bayh this morning and I was left a little bit speechless. He went on with Andrea Mitchell today and seemed to pull back from whining about the liberal bloggers and focused a little more on what the real problems in the House of Lords (Senate) are. He absolutely wants to change the filibuster because it's not allowing the party that won the election the chance to legislate.

BAYH: I go back to my father’s time, the great civil rights debates. The filibuster was being used to frustrate some basic, fundamental equities in this country. So the threshold was 67 votes in those days. They reduced it to 60. Now it’s being routinely used to frustrate even low-level Presidential appointees. So perhaps the threshold should be lowered once again.

MITCHELL: Would you propose steps, would you lead an effort in the Senate to change the filibuster rule?

BAYH: You know, I would… (crosstalk) Well, that’s right, but Tom Harkin and others have talked about this. I think it’s something we need to do, perhaps looking at changing the threshold once again, down to 55. Perhaps saying that, Administration appointees, other than the very highest ones, should not be subject to the filibuster. Because it’s just brought the process to a halt, and the public is suffering. So the minority needs to have a right. I think that’s important. But the public has a right to see its business done. And not routinely allow a small minority to keep us from addressing the great issues that face this country. I think the filibuster absolutely needs to be changed.

I was actually stunned that he didn't blame the dirty hippies for wanting to expand Medicare or the liberal support for the public option, but he actually blamed Republican obstructionism the whole time. And to think that he would like to lower the filibuster to 55 really was shocking to me. He's like a lot of the royal ones. He wouldn't say any of this while he was in the Senate, but now that he left suddenly it's fine to get somewhat honest. I do applaud him for getting this sentiment out there, since the media is always slow to the dance.

d-day saw it too.

However, this was important for a variety of reasons. Bayh here finally cited the MEANS by which all these abstract concepts of “partisanship” and “gridlock” get their purchase. Before he sounded like a self-important blowhard assuming the superiority of his “centrist” policy ideas, as if partisanship hasn’t been a function of American government since its founding.

Here, he actually identifies the problem – fix the process and suddenly the problems of gridlock start to melt away. And he actually manages to offer a pretty good case for majority rule – the public, who selects its representatives, has a right to see its will expressed after it delivers a mandate.