This is the same line of questioning that the deniers are using. Yet, the same scientific methods that convinced us that oxygen exists have been used to prove climate change secondary to man’s burning of fossil fuels.

Climate change. Conservatives have taken this term and run with it. They played on the fact that most Americans know a little bit of science, but not much. Most of us remember that there were many ice ages. The earth warmed iand the ice receded. The earth cooled down and the ice proceeded over the large continents. So, every time a scientist mentions climate change, conservatives point to this natural cycle. They then ask, “how do we know that the warming trend that we’re seeing now is not part of this natural cycle?” Before I get to this answer, let me add one other thing. One of the final arguments that deniers use is that the world is so big and you and I are pretty small compared to the size of the world. How can we, as God-fearing little human beings, have an impact on this great big world of ours? This is probably the deniers’ weakest and simplest arguments. There are multiple ways to refute this argument. Let me just say that currently scientists have tested the air in California and have detected pollutants that were generated, beyond a shadow of a doubt, in China. Therefore, what happens in one part of the world can have an impact on people thousands of miles away.

How can climatologists point to some of the events that are happening now as evidence of climate change secondary to man’s burning fossil fuels? Well, thankfully, I don’t have to come up with an experiment off the top of my head. Smart people, scientists, have done this for us. There are a few places in the world that don’t change all that much. As a matter fact, they haven’t changed for thousands of years. One place would be Antarctica the other would be Greenland. In these two places, it gets extremely cold. The ice in some places is several miles thick. NASA explains it like this:

Throughout each year, layers of snow fall over the ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica. Each layer of snow is different in chemistry and texture, summer snow differing from winter snow. Summer brings 24 hours of sunlight to the polar regions, and the top layer of the snow changes in texture—not melting exactly, but changing enough to be different from the snow it covers. The season turns cold and dark again, and more snow falls, forming the next layers of snow. Each layer gives scientists a treasure trove of information about the climate each year. Like marine sediment cores, an ice core provides a vertical timeline of past climates stored in ice sheets and mountain glaciers.

The Obama administration is making a new effort to protect barrier islands and other coastal areas in the Gulf of Mexico area. Mississippi and Louisiana seem to be a specific focus of this program.

(Above–A picture of Ship Island off the Mississippi coast. In the background you see Fort Massachusetts. The federal government controlled the island in the Civil war and used the island as a prison for Confederate soldiers. Black combat units were also trained on Ship Island. Here are facts about Ship Island.)

From the Associated Press article on the Obama Gulf Coast effort—

“Since the 1930s, the Mississippi River delta has been slowly falling apart and eroding due to levee construction, oil drilling hurricane damage and other factors. Louisiana has lost about 2,100 square miles of coast and loses about 25 square miles a year, according to the U.S. Geological Survey…With sea levels on the rise due to global warming, experts warn that much of south Louisiana and Mississippi are at risk of being lost for good.”

Here is the full story.

This sure is interesting. You’d think that the good folks down in Mississippi  and Louisiana might oppose federal dollars to help remedy the effects of the great scam of global warming.

Here is a recent New York Times story about how people who think evolution is not real, are now adding global warming to their list of hoaxes.

I’m out of patience with this stuff. People are free to believe what they wish. Freedom of religion is a principle our nation is founded upon. But schools and public debates are places for facts. They are not places for ideologically-driven lies.

Maybe a referendum should be held in Mississippi and Louisiana to be sure that folks in these places believe in global warming. We don’t want to be wasting taxpayer dollars.

Here is a Times of London story about the possible impact of global warming on people and animal life across the globe.

Here is more from the Associated Press story—

“Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal said the report “clearly demonstrates a positive shift in direction, but must be coupled with aggressive action on the ground — turning dirt. There is no time for delay.”

You are reading this correctly—Republican Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana wants some swift federal action to help address a problem in his state.

Here is how Governor Jindal felt about federal money last year–

“Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal announced Friday that he will decline stimulus money specifically targeted at expanding state unemployment insurance coverage, becoming the first state executive to officially refuse any part of the federal government’s payout to states.”

I see.

Here is the White House press release about this federal help that the people of Mississippi and Louisiana will no doubt be glad to take.

From the release–

“Ultimately, successful implementation of the shared vision depends on access to the best available science in a form that is useful for management decisions.  The Working Group will assess current capacities and identify gaps in science so the Federal-State vision will be implemented based on the best information.”

I put the term “best available science” in bold so that nobody would miss what is being said. The Feds are coming down South to cram global warming down the throats of the people. Time for a tea party!

Is Republican Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi going to tolerate this federal intrusion?

From Think Progress, here is a portion of Mr. Barbour’s record on the environment from when he was a corporate lobbyist–

“Back at his lobbying firm in early 2001, Barbour was hired “to help apply pressure in all the right places.” He convinced President Bush to break his campaign promise to reduce global warming pollution from power plants. Barbour’s memo “Bush-Cheney Energy Policy & CO2” belittled global warming as a “radical fringe issue,” and called the regulation of carbon dioxide pollution “eco-extremism.” He urged the President Bush to avoid making decisions informed by science, which would “trump good energy policy, which the country has lacked for eight years.”

Here is the full report on Mr. Barbour’s record on the environment.

The federal government has dominion over the states. In this case, the federal government is going to provide help for Mississippi and Louisiana no matter if they like it or not.

(Below–Fort Livingston on Grand Terre Island off the coast of Louisiana. This fort, named after a political figure from New York, was built by the federal government and fell back into federal hands after the fall of New Orleans in the Civil war. Here are some facts about Grand Terre Island.)

The public option is been tossed around like a medicine ball. In junior high school, we were asked to throw a medicine ball in order to build up muscle strength and coordination. Every other throw, the ball was dropped, kicked and then picked up and thrown again. This is exactly what has happened with the public option. What was once a robust counterweight to private health insurance has turned into something that states can opt in or opt out of, depending upon the whims of their legislature. Oh, and it seems that opposing healthcare is a great way to get on TV and increase your image/status… as in the case of Bart Stupak.

I have stated both on my radio show and on this blog that health-care reform must include something that is cost-effective, portable and increases access to healthcare. Currently, we are looking at a health-care bill that seems to do none of this. Many progressives have decided that they cannot support this bill. They want something else done. I understand the sentiment. I find this whole process extremely frustrating. Democrats seem to be completely unable to stick to their principles and stand up for the middle class. It seems like the only difference between Republicans and Democrats is that Democrats know what is right but can’t do it. Republicans have no idea what is right and won’t do it. BTW, President Barack Obama is a leader-come-lately. Look, I love this man, but I’m telling the truth. Where was he in the middle of the heat of the summer when healthcare was taking the big hits? He needed to be out of front stating that we HAD to have a robust public option. Alas, he wasn’t there.

Here’s my problem. Washington seems to be controlled by big business. Lobbyists from K St. seem to surround the Capital like locusts. If we scrapped the health-care bill and start all over, how are we going to come up with a different outcome? We’re going to have the same politicians, the same White House and the same lobbyists. As a matter of fact, the lobbyists will be better armed to combat arguments they’ve already heard. They will probably be armed with more money. I’m afraid that starting over will leave us with a bill that’s even worse than what we’re looking at now — if that is possible.

We’re spending $2.4 trillion on health care every year (we spent that much in 2008). Isn’t that enough money? Why do we need to pay any more? Everyone agrees that insurance does not add any value to healthcare. Why is Washington coddling the insurance companies? The whole reason for their existence is not to improve health care, to help doctors deliver better care or to help increase access to doctors by patients. Instead, their whole deal is to simply make money. They make money by not paying claims.

$2.4 trillion is enough money to take care of all 300 million Americans. Combine Medicare and Medicaid and SCHiP and all of the state-run programs into one program. Medicare for All! The government will set up a system to negotiate prices with pharmaceutical companies and medical device/product manufacturers. Premiums are paid out of our taxes in a graduated fashion. The more you make, the more you pay. Let’s extend patent protection for pharmaceutical companies by 2-5 years. Since the government is negotiating drug prices, pharmaceutical companies can recoup some of their losses through this mechanism. Doctors will be awarded for opening early and staying open late and on the weekends. This way, Americans can go to their physicians without having to take off from work. This increases access. Anyway, Medicare for All, at least for now, is a pipe dream. Right now, I’m good to try to work with my congressional representatives to try to get the best bill possible.

Billy Preston was right. Nothing from Nothing leaves nothing. The Senate is trying to sell us nothing and tell us it is something. They need to do better.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

From Political Animal:

• The potency of Iraq’s insurgency seems to be waning: “Defying a sustained barrage of mortars and rockets in Baghdad and other cities, Iraqis went to the polls in strength on Sunday to choose a new Parliament meant to outlast the American military presence here.”
• On a related note: “Iraqi forces are on track to assume control of the country’s security and the United States is on course to draw down its troops to 50,000 by President Obama’s August deadline, U.S. officials said today.”
• Incredible bloodshed in Nigeria: “Officials and human rights groups in Nigeria said Monday that about 500 people had died in weekend ethnic violence near the central city of Jos, considerably more than what had initially been reported.”
• Vice President Biden travels to Jerusalem today, hoping to kick start Israeli and Palestinian talks. Negotiations have been on a hiatus for 14 months.
• U.S. troops begin their withdrawal from Haiti.
• A new TSA nominee: “President Obama has chosen a retired army intelligence officer, Maj. Gen. Robert A. Harding, to head the Transportation Security Agency, a job that officials call the most important unfilled position in the administration.”
• Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), still prepared to vote with right-wing Republicans to kill health care reform.
• Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II (R) is urging the state’s public colleges and universities not to extend discrimination protections to LGBT employees.
• CNN’s Wolf Blitzer never should have aired that ridiculous “Dept of Jihad?” segment, but I was glad to see him apologize.
• Jon Chait 1, Mike Allen 0.
• Fact checking the Sunday shows.
• Can online schools simply purchase legitimacy?
• The unintentional humor of The Weekly Standard.
• If I thought the National Review’s Mark Stein had any idea what he was talking about, I might not like health care reform either.
• Sullivan: “Halperinism really is part of what’s deeply wrong about Washington.”
• Anti-gay California Republican admits that he’s gay.
• Maybe someday racists will realize that their ugly emails can and should have consequences.

From TP:

In November of 2009, Sarah Palin — who is always suggesting that health care reform will lead to socialism— insisted that Canada needs to reform its health care system to “let the private sector take over.” But this past Saturday in Calgary, Canada — at “her first Canadian appearance since stepping down as governor of Alaska last summer” — Palin seemed to deviate from her fear of socialized Canadian medicine when she revealed that her family may have benefited from the Canadian system:

PALIN: We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada. And I think now, isn’t that ironic?

This isn’t the first time Palin highlighted the difficulty of obtaining affordable health care in America. During the presidential campaign, Palin discussed how she and her husband Todd had “gone though periods of our life herewith paying out-of-pocket for health coverage until Todd and I both landed a couple of good union jobs.” At the vice presidential debate, Palin recalled times in her marriage “in our past where we didn’t have health insurance and we know what other Americans are going through as they sit around the kitchen table and try to figure out how are they going to pay out-of-pocket for health care?” (more…)

Southwest Airlines, based in Dallas where I grew up, was always thought of as a cute and interesting airline. They started about 40 years ago and just flew flights inside Texas. They would fly between Dallas and Houston, Dallas to San Antonio, San Antonio to Austin, etc. Nobody really paid them much attention. Currently, Southwest Airlines is the largest carrier in the United States. They have more scheduled domestic flights than any other carrier. They are bigger than American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Airlines. Southwest Airlines is the only major carrier that has never had involuntary layoffs. They’ve never downsized. According to MorningStar (may need a subscription), “we still think Southwest has one of the strongest balance sheets in the industry.” Never downsized. Even after 9/11, they didn’t lay off one worker, but the company still has one of the strongest balance sheets in the industry. How can this be?

Unfortunately, there’s no way to do a traditional blind study looking at corporations and downsizing. But there appears to be a growing body of literature suggesting that downsizing is not helpful. One study looked at over 100 companies that laid off workers between 1979 and 1997. The study found that the larger the layoffs, the larger the negative stock returns to that company. Another study looking at productivity found that productivity decreased after layoffs and not increased as we’ve been told time and time again. Another study looking at 122 companies found that downsizing reduced subsequent profitability.

Now let’s think about this. You have a job at some giant mega-corporation, a Fortune 500 company. Five years ago, they had their first layoffs. You were spared. You were told by the corporation and they had to get rid of “dead weight.” Three years ago, the company decided to have a second round of layoffs. Where’s the dead weight now? If you got rid of all of your dead weight two years earlier, now you’re getting rid of essential personnel. How is that beneficial? After these layoffs, you and the remaining coworkers have this feeling of dread. Some people had just been laid off had worked just as hard as you do. A year later, there’s another announcement and more layoffs. Now, how motivated are you and your coworkers to give 110%? When you have a presentation that is due, for example, how likely are you to stay after hours and put in that extra effort? As a matter fact, you and your coworkers might be bitter towards management. You’ve seen their salaries increase over the last five years while yours has remained stagnant.

Cities and towns which at one time were dependent upon these large corporations to provide jobs, now cannot even depend on the corporations to stay in town. You’ve lost the stability of your city or town. Your tax base is unstable. How can you make a reliable city budget when you’re unsure if the corporation will stay in town or lay off half its workforce in a couple years?

If downsizing has negative effects on corporations, employees and cities, then why do CEOs continue to insist that downsizing is helpful… not just helpful, but essential to the survival of the corporation? Wall Street has fallen in love with the phrase, “lean and mean.” This is in spite of the fact that lean may make them unable to do the same quality work as they were able to do five years ago. We have all seen the effects of downsizing, yet we have closed our eyes and pretended that this practice is necessary. Two years ago, Dell computers was having a problem with some of their laptops spontaneously igniting. That didn’t happen five or six years ago. I switched from Gateway to Dell over 10 years ago because of Dell’s excellent customer service. Now, I can describe Dell’s customer service in multiple different ways, but “excellent” is not one of them. (I did buy a Dell Computer, one of their fast XPS computers, and it was shipped with the wrong processor.) Every one of us has a tale about a corporation that we used to trust to do X, Y or Z. the corporation was reliable. They delivered an excellent product. Now, not so much.

If we’re looking for ways to revitalize America, if we are looking for a way back, maybe corporations need to invest in a stable workforce here in the United States. To quote one former head of human resources, “If people are your most important assets, why would you get rid of them?”

Much of this post is based on an article by Jeffrey Pfeffer, Lay off the Layoffs, published in Newsweek.

Rachel Maddow may have an idea:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Political Animal has more:

Arguably the single biggest threat to health care reform is Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and his dozen Democratic allies, who are threatening to kill the legislation over indirect, circuitous funding of abortion.

Efforts to work with Stupak are ongoing, but it’s worth emphasizing a relevant detail: Stupak is just wrong about the underlying policy dispute. Whether he knows he’s wrong, and he’s just hoping to kill health care reform, is unclear. But the accuracy of Stupak’s claims aren’t in dispute: the facts aren’t on his side.

ABC News did a nice job fact-checking Stupak’s argument this week, and Slate’s Tim Noah (a Monthly alum) published the definitive takedown a couple of days ago, explaining that some areas of the debate are open to interpretation and debate, but this isn’t one of them: “Stupak happens to be wrong.”

Ideally, this would be enough. Democratic leaders would explain the truth to Stupak and his allies, making the case on the merits — the Senate compromise language, endorsed by center-right Dems who oppose abortion rights, already does what Stupak & Co. want, which is to prevent public funding of abortion.

Hope for Haiti raises $57 million for Haiti. Military contractor DynCorp has lost millions in Iraq. James O’Keefe was arrested for trying to wiretap Mary Landrieu. This is really crazy. We have never gotten the real story on O’Keefe and ACORN. These stories and more.

Now, this is progressive radio! Enjoy!

I’m not a law professor. I will never profess to be one. Stephen Schwinn is an associate professor of law at the John Marshall Law School. He runs the blog constitutional law prof blog. Here’s what he had to say –

After reflecting on the case law, I agree with the Adler/Massey/Balkin formulation for several reasons. First, I think that Professor Adler correctly asserts that in Gonzales v. Raich, the Court made clear that the Commerce Power extends to the power to regulate markets.  Justice Stevens stated, “[W]hen a general regulatory scheme bears a substantial relation to commerce, the de minimis character of individual instances arising under that statute is of no consequence.”  The opinion goes on to say, “[W]e have no difficulty concluding that Congress had a rational basis for beleiving that failure to regulate the intrastate manufacture and possession of marijuana would leave a gaping hole in the [Controlled Substances Act].  These words seem to leave little to interpretation.  In fact, in dissent, Justice O’Connor interpreted the majority’s opinion in the same manner.  Thus, the regulatory scheme argument seems logical and sound.

Second, Rivkin and Casey may be overselling the non-economic quality of the decision not to purchase health care.  While Rivkin and Casey are clearly well-versed in the relevant cases, it appears that some critical portions of those cases are omitted from their reasoning.  For instance, Lopez and Morrison do stand for the proposition that the Congress should use its Commerce Clause power primarily to regulate economic activity.  However, the authors mention, but seem to discount, the breadth of the definition of “economic” provided in the Gonzales case.  In her dissent, Justice O’Connor stated, “The Court’s definition of economic activity is breathtaking.  It defines as economic any activity involving the production, distrubution, and consumption of commodities . . . [T]he Court’s definition of economic activity for purposes of Commerce Clause jurisprudence threatens to sweep all of productive human activity into federal reach.” Thus, after Gonzales, we still have a Commerce Clause jurisprudence that favors economic activity.   However, as pointed out by Justice O’Connor’s dissent, the definition of economic is now so broad that the number of activities coming within its ambit has been increased, rather than decreased.  Since health insurance is certainly a commodity, it stands to reason under our new, broader difinition, that Congress can regulate the “production, distribution, and consumption” of said commodity, even where a person may not wish to become a consumer.  In other words, if Congress can regulate the purchasing of goods, it should be able to regulate their non-purchase, as Professor Balkin suggests.  To suggest otherwise would not only invite a sort of tortured logic, but would overlook the spirit of cases such as Wickard, a spirit which was soundly reaffirmed by the Gonzales majority.  Thus, I believe an argument can be made that even the non-purchase is an economic act able to be regulated by Congress.

Finally, it is worth noting that the Court’s decision in Morrison is broader that Rivkin and Casey’s analysis admits.  Though the Morrison court was careful to state that gender violence was not an economic activity, Chief Justice Rehnquist went on to state, “. . . we need not adopt a categorical rule against aggregating the affects of any non-economic activity . . .”  Here, the Court left an opening, realizing that a fact pattern could occur which might allow for the aggregation of non-economic activity.  Assuming (contrary to my prior paragraph) that a refusal to purchase health care is a non-economic decision and the regulatory argument does not work, the game might not be over.  An individual person’s decision not to purchase healthcare might not be regulable on its own.  But in the aggregate, that person’s choice would obviously affect the interstate healthcare market.   Due to the strong, strong connection between the refusal to purchase health care and interstate commerce (something sorely lacking in both Lopez and Morrison), if there were a case for arguing for non-economic aggregation, this would seem to be a perfect test-case.

For those who are still not convinced Jack Balkin debated David Rivkin and Lee Casey. The two-part debate can be found here.

The Tenthers believe that states should have to the right to tell the federal government to stick healthcare where the sun don’t shine.  Again from Professor Schwinn -

If Congress has authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate, these state measure run up against the Supremacy Clause: They are almost surely unconstitutional, as conflicting directly with the federal requirement.

But advocates of the measures nevertheless claim that they interfere with “state sovereignty.”  As one advocate in the last line of this morning’s story said, “No Supreme Court has ever been more sympathetic to state sovereignty than the current Court.”

Whether that’s right or not, it almost surely would not affect the Supremacy Clause analysis (unless the Court were willing to undo well settled Supremacy Clause principles).  So what does it mean?

One possible answer: A mandate’s interference with “state sovereignty” means that Congress lacks authority under the Commerce Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause to enact a mandate in the first place.  This interpretation might draw support from U.S. v. Lopez (holding that Congress lacked authority under the Commerce Clause to enact the Gun Free School Zone Act) and U.S. v. Morrison (holding that Congress lacked authority under the Commerce Clause to enact the civil damages provision of the Violence Against Women Act).  The majority in both of those cases referred to the slippery slope that might result if Congress had authority to enact those laws: “Congress could regulate any activity that it found was related to the economic productivity of individual citizens . . . .  Under the[se] theories . . . it is difficult to perceive any limitation on federal power, even in areas such as criminal law enforcement or education where States historically have been sovereign.”  But neither case turned on this slippery slope, and the interference with traditionally state regulated activities alone is surely not enough to render congressional action unconstitutional.  See Gonzales v. Raich (upholding a federal drug possession law).

I must add the 1st and 5th amendment challenges that conservatives have mentioned from time to time.  Professor Mark Hall has addressed these and other challenges in a 26 page brief. Here’s what Professor Hall has to say about the 1st and 5th amendment challenges -

Challenges under the First and Fifth Amendments relating to individual rights may arise, but are unlikely to succeed. The federal government should include an exemption on religious grounds to a health insurance mandate as an added measure of protection from legal challenges based on religious freedom. In the alternative, the federal government can simply exempt a federal insurance mandate from existing federal legislation protecting religious freedom.

Finally, it really doesn’t matter what law I site. To those who want to kill healthcare at any costs, I’m sure they will never be convinced by any rational argument. They simply want to hear that they are right. Unfortunately, in this case, it doesn’t look they are even close to being right.

I was recently reading a book I bought when I was a kid called Ships–Through The Ages. The book is by Douglas Lobley.

This book was first published in 1972.  I think I bought my copy in the years I lived in Providence, Rhode Island.

Here is what the book says about the papyrus boat such as you see in the picture above—

” Papyrus boats, so much a feature of early Egyptian boat-bulding, had their counterparts as far away as Lake Titicaca in South America, where balsa was and still used for the construction of  boats.”

Papyrus boats are still made today.

Isn’t it excellent that technology that worked thousands of years ago still works today?

Isn’t it excellent that the things that we have always felt to have value will always have value?

Loyalty to our significant other and to our friends and family.

Commitment to our political ideologies and to our beliefs.

A desire for knowledge and for purpose.

These are the things that matter across the years.

More from Political Animal:

• Iraq: “Iraq opened its polls early on Thursday for hundreds of thousands of soldiers and police officers responsible for protecting the country’s electorate, and they came under assault themselves. In all, three attacks in Baghdad, two in Mosul and another in Diyala struck near polling stations where Iraqi forces mustered to vote, a potentially ominous foreshadowing of the violence extremists have vowed to carry out in an effort to mar Sunday’s pivotal election of a new parliament.”
• Jobs bill: “Democrats’ jobs agenda is moving again after stalling briefly, as the House passed one measure designed to boost employment Thursday and the Senate pressed forward on another. The House voted Thursday afternoon, 217-201, to approve a $15 billion jobs measure whose centerpiece is a Social Security tax break for companies hiring new employees. Six Republicans joined the vast majority of Democrats to approve the bill.”
• Still not good, but slightly better: “Claims for U.S. jobless benefits dropped last week from a three-month high, pointing to an improvement in the labor market that is slow to develop.”
• You know who’ll win if health care loses? Wellpoint.
• Robocalls as part of the NRCC’s “code red” program: “National Republicans are planning to unleash a huge wave of robocalls tomorrow targeting dozens of House Dems and warning their constituents that Obama and Nancy Pelosi are plotting to ‘ram’ their ‘dangerous’ health reform plans through Congress.”
• On a related note, the robocalls are filled with deceptive claims. Try to contain your surprise.

Rachel has more on the robocalls:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

• New chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee: Rep. Sander Levin (D) of Michigan.
• The House approved a resolution yesterday characterizing the Feb. 18 suicide plane attack in Austin as “terrorism.” The final vote was 408-2. Both opponents were Republicans.
• Get well soon, Michael Froomkin.
• I have to admit, I enjoy these stories immensely: “It’s no good for a family values Republican to get picked up on a DWI. But substantially worse to get picked up for a DWI after leaving a gay nightclub with an unidentified man in a state vehicle.”

From CNN:

A movement born of $1 billion in budget cuts to California’s state university system has blossomed into a nationwide protest, as students and professors in 33 states will challenge administrators and state lawmakers to ante up.

Most of Thursday’s demonstrations will focus on cuts to state-funded colleges and universities, which supporters say drive up tuition, limit classes and make higher education unobtainable to many.

A blog called Student Activism said in a Twitter update that 122 events are slated from coast to coast — most on campuses, and some at state capitals.

Dissatisfaction, anger and an uncertain future have led professors and students to call for a day of action to defend education. (more…)

From LAT:

A day of passionate protest against education funding cuts attracted thousands of demonstrators Thursday to generally peaceful rallies, walkouts and teach-ins at universities and high schools throughout California and the nation.

From Los Angeles to New York and from San Diego to Humboldt, students, faculty and parents at many schools decried higher student fees, reduced class offerings and teacher layoffs in what organizers described as a “Day of Action for Public Education.”

“We are paying more to get less of an education. That’s why I’m out here today to protest against that,” said Cal State Long Beach art education student Jessica Naujoks, who joined an estimated 2,500 others at a campus rally there.

There were reports of some trouble in Northern California. Demonstrators blocked access to UC Santa Cruz and smashed the windshield of a car, triggering denunciations of such violence. At UC Berkeley, fire alarms were pulled in some classroom buildings, interrupting lectures. But statewide, no arrests were reported by early evening. (more…)

Above you see, in better days, former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer–on the right— with his 2006 running mate as Lieutenant Governor David Paterson.

Mr. Spitzer had to resign his office because he was visiting prostitutes.

His successor as Governor, Mr. Paterson, may now have to resign because he may have pressured a woman to drop a complaint in a domestic abuse case involving one of his aides.

Both these men would be in good shape today if they had treated women in a respectful fashion.

Here is some of what Mr. Carrillo said in an e-mail message to supporters–

“As you now surely know, last night I was defeated (61% / 39%) in my statewide Republican Primary by my opponent, David Porter. Porter, an unknown, no-campaign, no-qualification CPA from Midland residing in Giddings filed on the last day that he could file while I was waiting in Abilene to bury my dad. He has never held any elected office, has no geoscience, industry, or legal experience other than doing tax returns for oil and gas companies.”

Here is the full message.

As the Marshall (Texas) News Messenger reported, there is precedent for Hispanic last names costing Republicans in Texas primary elections.

I have nothing but the back of my hand and a hearty good riddance for Mr. Carrillo. What did he expect from the Republican primary electorate?

If you’re a fair-minded Texan—or a fair-minded person from any place— you see here the nature of the Texas Republican party.

This November, Jeff Weems is the candidate for Texas Railroad Commission who is running on experience instead of on his last name.

From Political Animal:

• Iraq: “Three powerful suicide bombings killed at least 33 people and wounded more than 50 Wednesday in the restive Diyala province northeast of Baghdad, authorities said. Most of those killed and wounded were Iraqi police officers charged with securing the province’s capital city ahead of elections Sunday. “
• Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) announced a “leave of absence” from his powerful post as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee today. Whether he’ll ever get his gavel back remains unclear.
• Marriage equality reaches the nation’s capital. Western civilization remains unaffected.
• Matters get slightly worse for New York Gov. David Paterson (D).
• Greece tried to alleviate creditors’ fears today with a new $6.5 billion austerity plan.
• Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) is blaming Harry Reid for Bunning’s five-day hostage standoff over unemployment benefits.
• On a related note, Kevin Drum explains, “Bunning is a moron.”
• Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), the co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, is threatening to vote with far-right Republicans to kill health care reform. This isn’t the first time Grijalva has talked like this.
• I was very sorry to hear that the blogger known as “Jon Swift” has died.
• Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) is not above trying to connect his hatred for gays to his opposition to federal wage requirements.
• As part of our ongoing coverage of SUNY Binghamton’s troubling transition to Division I athletics, the school announced this week that its basketball team will not be participating in the America East tournament this year.
• Leave Grant’s picture on the $50 alone.
• And finally, Rod Blagojevich was — in all seriousness — the “guest of honor at a Northwestern University panel on ethics in politics last night.” The disgraced former governor reportedly “elicited laughs from the audience — and not necessarily intentionally.”

We need Representatives like Anthony Weiner. He knows the facts. He understands the issues. He can articulate his thoughts. He doesn’t give any ground.  I love this guy!!

From DK:

Lamar Alexander, John Barasso, Bob Bennett, Jim Bunning, Richard Burr, Tom Coburn, Bob Corker, John Cornyn, Mike Crapo, Jim DeMint, John Ensign, Mike Enzi, Judd Gregg, Orrin Hatch, Mike Johanns, Mitch McConnell, James Risch, Jeff Sessions and John Thune. Those are the guys who decided Tuesday night that Americans limping along on meager unemployment benefits apparently are, in the word chosen by Nevada Rep. Dean Heller, “hobos.” They all voted against extending those benefits.

If you’re drawing such benefits in Tennessee, Kentucky, Wyoming, Utah or Idaho, you have both of your Senators to thank for telling you to get off the dole and get a job ya lazy bum. Yep. Who would want to work instead of enjoying all that these magnificent government checks will buy? It’s such a cush life on the $275 weekly maximum you can draw from unemployment coffers if you live in Tennessee, where the jobless rate is 10.9%. If it’s you, your spouse and a couple of kids in the family, those benefits will put you $8,000 below the federal poverty line.

That is, if you were lucky enough before being laid off to work in a job covered by unemployment insurance in the first place. Only 38% of out-of-work Americans have that option. But whether you’re covered by benefits or are one of the less fortunate 62%, the above 19 members of the Party of No Way, No How have a couple of words for you: Tough shit. Like Jim Bunning riding the Senators-only elevator, they all just keep giving out-of-work Americans the finger. Those exact same 19 Senators plus 19 of their Republican colleagues also voted against the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act a year ago. And most of them were on board to oppose the teensy job-creation bill that passed the Senate last month.