Birdie Sanders

Graham, Bush reluctantly climb on Cruz bandwagon

(God love Charles Kuffner for doing the blogging I cannot bring myself to do: Ken Paxton, Sid Miller, the statewide and Harris County runoffs.  There's just no resolve in me to commiserate about causes lost two years ago, and barely any for the Houston political scene.  Maybe next month I can manage a post or two about our awful state officials and our stultifying local elections.  I'm hoping.  For the moment it's just too dreary.)

Last week when Miz Lindsey picked poison over a bullet to the temple, I didn't bother with anything but a single Tweet to note the moment.  A blog post?  Why?  I just figured ... well, Lindsey Graham.  Once a dumbass douchebag, always, ya know?

But Jeb!?  That's quite a bit more craven.

We can only hope, Mr. Lowe.

"Ted is a consistent, principled conservative who has demonstrated the ability to appeal to voters and win primary contests," Bush said in a statement provided to CNN.

"Washington is broken, and the only way Republicans can hope to win back the White House and put our nation on a better path is to support a nominee who can articulate how conservative policies will help people rise up and reach their full potential."

It's no surprise this ringing endorsement was posted to Facebook instead of holding a presser.  Had Bush done so in more conventional fashion, he wouldn't have been able to suppress his gag reflex, and the media wouldn't have been able to suppress their guffaws.

But to be certain, this is the ongoing "lesser of two evils" balsamic reduction for the GOP.

Like Graham, Bush seems to have made his decision based on whom he hated least. The former governor had refrained from endorsing Rubio while he was still in the race, a Republican source told Politico, because he believed his fellow Floridian and one-time protégé “was not up to the job of being president.” In endorsing Cruz, a Tea Party-aligned extremist, Bush follows in the footsteps of Chris Christie, who was driven to endorsing Trump by his obvious disdain for Rubio, and Ben Carson, who threw his support behind Trump in part out of animosity toward Cruz, whose dirty tricks in Iowa the retired neurosurgeon never forgave. 

Please clap.  With one hand.

Scattershooting Arizona and Brussels

But thankfully no more about war-mongering at AIPAC.

-- The Apache State sets this week's record for futility, incompetence, and/or fraud at the polling place.  Be sure you understand the difference between unicorns (Greg Abbott's voter "fraud") and actual election fraud.

1. Lines were so long people literally spent an entire work day waiting in line

The queues were lengthy because the election administrators failed to properly allocate resources.

Consider: 2012 primary had 300,000 voters and 200 polling places. 2016 primary has estimated 800,000 voters at 60 polling places. #12News

— JOE DANA (@JoeDanaReports) March 23, 2016

Maricopa County (Greater Phoenix, nation's sixth largest city, 1.5 million people as of 2010) Recorder (the chief elections official) Helen Purcell blamed the voters for the delays.

Purcell may have been responsible for a new Maricopa County record: The last ballot in her county wasn’t cast until after midnight local time, or 3 AM Eastern time. The elections are such a mess in Arizona that the Secretary of State and the Office of the Maricopa County Recorder are admitting they can’t handle running an election. Both Purcell and Secretary of State Michele Reagan support legislation that will turn the administration of elections over to state party organizations.

2. Clear voter suppression in Latino neighborhoods

Just click over and read about it, and then ask yourself if you're surprised that a place that elects Joe Arpaio sheriff conducts its elections this way.

It gets worse.

3. Democrats mistakenly registered as independents, given provisional ballots

As Arizona voters were still waiting to cast their ballots, US Uncut reported on allegations that voters who had previously registered as Democrat were instead listed in the voter database as “independent” or “no party listed.” In Arizona’s closed primary system, independent voters are denied their voice by having to vote with a provisional ballot. But what voters classified as “independent” who cast provisional ballots don’t realize is that their ballots are never counted.

Emphasis mine.  A reminder: NEVER ACCEPT a provisional ballot if offered.  It's nothing but a pacifier.  Its sole purpose is to fade heat; to shut you up, making you think you participated in an election when you actually did not.

42-year-old Kelly Thornton, who worked as an Election Day Technician in Yavapai County voting center 5 on Tuesday, told US Uncut that roughly two thirds of voters who came to her precinct had been mistakenly identified as independent by the election software. All of those voters were subsequently forced to cast a provisional ballot.

“One man was a lifelong Democrat who was listed as independent. He left the precinct, went to his house, and came back with a card showing that he was registered as a Democrat,” Thornton told US Uncut. “But when I called the election center (administered by the county recorder’s office), they told me to just give him a provisional ballot anyway.”

[...]

Thornton was also given a script by the Yavapai County recorder’s office to read to voters, verbatim, when they asked if their provisional ballots would be counted. The script outright tells the voter that if they cast a provisional ballot when the system lists them as independent, their vote will not be counted...

This is where it gets ugly for Democrats.

“I called the Arizona Democratic Party office around 1 PM, and I said, ‘Something is not right here.’ They said someone would call me back, and nobody called me back,” Thornton said. “This is the exact same thing that voters have been experiencing in Pima and Maricopa County all day.”

Given that one of Bernie Sanders’ largest bases of voter support comes from independents, it isn’t hard to see why the Vermont senator lost Arizona handily: his core supporters’ ballots weren’t counted.

So when you hear calls from Democrats for Bernie Sanders to drop out -- on the heels of the calls that Sanders isn't/wasn't a Democrat anyway, that he should play by the Democrats' rules, i.e. superdelegates -- be clear on the understanding that these are the rules they are talking about.

Democrats predictably might just blame Purcell, the Republican elections official, who is certainly the right and proper scapegoat.  She's of course blaming all the dysfunction on Democrats for registering wrong.

Helen Purcell might be worse at her job than Harris County's own Stan Stanart, which makes this episode a similar Catch-22 we have in Texas' largest county: not enough Democrats voted in the election when Republicans like Purcell and Stanart were on the ballot themselves, due in no small part to the Republicans in charge practicing voter disenfranchisement of Democrats as hard as they can ... and round and round it goes.  Like the water in the toilet when you flush it.

There's more at the link about how this set things up nicely for Hillary Clinton's comfortable win in the Grand Canyon State last night (or this morning), and it's certainly not one of the two reasons I anticipated when I predicted nearly a year ago that Sanders would be ultimately be denied the Democratic nomination.  The bottom line, unvarnished ...

Still, for Sanders to emerge as the nominee, he has to win a majority of the remaining states and win by some very big margins. On Saturday, Alaska, Hawaii and Washington hold Democratic caucuses. 

-- As a result of yesterday's (or today's) returns, calls grow louder for Bernie to take a seat on the bench.  Markos Moulisas has no standing -- whatever he believes about the power of his influence -- to bring the contested primary to an end, or even to censor posters to his blog who disagree with his choice of presidential candidates.  Yesterday, in the richest of ironies, he sent me a blegging e-mail, touting Daily Kos traffic stats and asking me to chip in $5 'to continue their work'.

So over and done with that guy and his shitty blog.

But more to the point: when Bernie finally does leave the race, he's taking a lot of Democrat votes with him somewhere.  Whether they are going to the Greens' Jill Stein, a futile Sanders write-in campaign, or back to sleep on the couch is to be determined.

More and more people are coming to the same realization I did last summer, and there's significantly more anecdotal evidence on my social media feeds -- and, I'm guessing, yours -- that indicates D voters in droves are getting off the bus.  Probably doesn't mean anything for Hillary's electoral prospects countrywide, but could have severe ramifications for Democrats downballot in places like Harris County.  This is more evidence that Clinton's value at the top of the ticket in Texas is unlikely to change the electoral color of the Lone Star State.

No need to get your hopes up, Chuck; any early poll will probably be done by the Texas Tribune/UT/YouGov conglomerate, which has consistently demonstrated its extraordinarily lame predictive value on its best day, and its absolute worthlessness this far out.

-- As the results in the two states with heavy Mormon populations that voted yesterday suggest, Trump is a hard sell in the LDS caucus.  Ted Cruz took advantage with an ad showing a little too much of Melania Trump's assets, and that started the weekly catfight we have come to expect now from the GOP 'presidentials'.

Nothing to add.

-- In the aftermath of a horrible day in Belgium, one message is clear: Yerp, specifically the EU and its "capital" city of Brussels, faces the most serious threats of instability from terrorism of every kind that can be conceived.  Anarchy and chaos cannot be very far away now, with immigrant xenophobia in full rage throughout the continent before the Belgian attacks.  Read this comment at No More Mister Nice Blog and decide for yourself whether the deep-seated problems, particularly in the Molenbeek ghetto, are understated or not.

Hillary Clinton rattles a mean saber

Balloon Juice called it beating the Likud war drums, another appropriate description of America's former top diplomat publicly slobbering for a pre-emptive strike on some brown people in the eastern Mediterranean.

Palestinian and human rights advocates were aghast over remarks made by Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton at the annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) convention on Monday, saying that her speech represented "everything that is bad" with U.S. imperialism and policy in the Middle East.

During the address, Clinton vowed to take the U.S.-Israel relationship to "the next level"—a level which seemingly includes more war and imperialism, few, if any, rights for Palestinians, and definitely no economic boycotts of Israel.

She even used hawk talk against the BDS initiative, exhorting the young draft-eligible warriors in the crowd to arm themselves and run to the front.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton spoke at an annual conference held by AIPAC and praised students at colleges and universities who are on “the front lines of the battle to oppose the alarming boycott, divestment and sanctions movement known as BDS.”

The part of the speech on BDS was specifically directed at young people attending the pro-Israel lobby group’s conference, and it received roaring applause.

During her speech, Clinton declared, “Particularly at a time when anti-Semitism is on the rise across the world, especially in Europe, we must repudiate all efforts to malign, isolate, and undermine Israel and the Jewish people.”

Just your standard neoconservative talking points.  Credit her for swinging the terrible, swift sword of  'anti-Semitism' as swiftly and strongly as she uses 'sexism' and 'misogyny' (and her supporters use "Berniebros").  The best defense is a good offense, after all.

Politicians like Clinton and groups like AIPAC use a State Department definition of anti-Semitism. Palestine Legal argues this definition “erroneously includes criticism of Israel as a nation state in the definition.” This departs from the “conventional understanding of anti-Semitism as hate and ethno-religious bias against Jewish people.” It redefines anti-Semitism to include “demonizing Israel,” “applying a double standard to Israel,” and “delegitimizing Israel.”

Words matter, you see.  Did you ever think that Hillary Clinton could get to the right of Donald Trump on foreign policy American hegemony continuous war in the Middle East?

Last month, Trump suggested he was “neutral” in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict so that he could negotiate with both parties.

“I think making a deal would be in Israel’s interests,” the brash billionaire said on ABC’s This Week With George Stephanopoulos on Sunday. “I don’t know one Jewish person that doesn’t want to have a deal, a good deal, a proper deal, but a really good deal. But I would say it’s probably one of the toughest deals. Me being a dealmaker, it’s probably one of the toughest deals in the world to make, because there’s just so many — there’s just so many decades of hatred between the two sides.”

Clinton seized on Trump’s reluctance to take a stand.

“America can’t ever be neutral when it comes to Israel’s security or survival,” she said. “We can’t be neutral when rockets rain down on residential neighborhoods, when civilians are stabbed in the street, when suicide bombers target the innocent. Some things aren’t negotiable. And anyone who doesn’t understand that has no business being our president."

More "Let's Make a Deal" from Donald.  Sounds kind of pussified to me.  At least we know, between the two front-runners, who's got the bigger fingers.  

Maybe the Nobel Committee could award her a pre-emptive Peace Prize, like they did for Obama.  That worked out pretty well.  Not so much for American soldiers or Afghani wedding parties or Syrian children, but Lockheed Martin, et.al. sure turned a tidy profit.  There will always be Republicans who believe Clinton is not more pro-Israel than Trump, however, and Sheldon Adelson is helping with that (hat tip for this link to No More Mister).

In the meantime, tough-talking theocrats like Ted Cruz are sufficiently blocked from their own pandering to the Jewish lobby.  No matter how much he'd actually like to carpet-bomb some country or turn the desert into glass, Cruz and his devout Christian-soldier ilk are only in the fight to see if the prophecies in their favorite book can come true: their Savior floating down from the sky with a thousand angels on white horseback in tow, and them floating up to meet Him.

This Easter season, it's not rebirth being celebrated.  It's death.