The Independent Republican Conference

The Independent Democratic Conference is a group of six renegade Democrats who effectively let the GOP control the New York State Senate, despite its nominal Democratic majority.

I do not expect there to be an Independent Republican Conference in the U.S. Senate. It will be a 52-48 Republican majority (barring something truly shocking in Louisiana's runoff) -- a two-seat Democratic gain (pickups in Illinois and New Hampshire).

But what is plausible -- maybe -- is that a cohort of Senate Republicans might be willing to break from the past eight years policy of absolute, resolute, kneejerk party line voting and join with Democrats to insure there will be some actual oversight of the Trump administration.

Who are the likely candidates to take up that mantle?

The leader almost certainly would have to be Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE). He was one of the earliest, most consistent, and most outspoken critics of Trump from within the GOP (here's his column on Trump's victory, tealeaf it yourself). That's one -- not because it's guaranteed, but because if he doesn't take the lead I can't imagine any caucus forming. Who else?

The supposedly moderate Susan Collins (ME) is an obvious possibility, but she's never exactly been renowned for her backbone. It'd be a major change for her to start bucking her party on a regular basis. But if ever there was a time for her to grow an actual spine, it'd be now.

Lindsey Graham (SC) could be a possibility. He's likewise been pretty critical of Trump, and has some personal grudges against Trump's wing of the party. His colleague Tim Scott (SC), as the only Black Republican in the Senate, is a complete wild card on this -- I wouldn't normally slot him in unless Trump goes so avowedly White supremacist that he can't not say something.

John McCain (AZ) ... well, who knows what he's thinking these days. I don't have a lot of faith. Jeff Flake might actually be a more realistic shot from this rapidly purpling state.

Marco Rubio (FL) and Ted Cruz (TX)? Don't make me laugh. Both have raced to snuggle up to Trump after getting blown apart by him in the primaries.

Chuck Grassley (IA), Orrin Hatch (UT), and maybe Pat Roberts (KS) might be old enough to do the whole "elder statesmen" thing. None of them will suffer any repercussions if they don't, though.

Dean Heller (NV) might look at Joe Heck's defeat and feel the need to avoid a similar fate. Or he might think that Heck was undone by his late wince away from Trump.

The Democratic Party is in a routed state right now. It will recover, but it will take time. In the meantime, it'll be up to congressional Republicans to decide if they want to put brakes on Trump or let him run wild. Democrats are, for the short-term at least, out of the equation: the last eight years have shown that a unified Republican majority can completely, utterly, entirely shut out the Democratic minority if they want to.

The ball is in your court, Sasse.

Workshop Roundup

Come to law school for the makeup class, stay for the workshop (actually going to the makeup class is apparently optional).

* * *

Former Utah Gov. and Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman takes the bold (for a GOPer) stance that climate change is real and scientists are worth listening to -- except for the part where we do something about it. Oh well, baby steps.

Newt Gingrich's poll tests -- too extreme even for Rep. Allen West (R-FL).

Cornel West flips out at Barack Obama. Melissa Harris-Perry has the best response. My favorite part was West's outrage that a hotel bellhop could get tickets to Obama's inauguration, but he couldn't. Outrageous!

Ex-Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) declares John McCain knows nothing about torture, McCain's office responds with "who?"

PA President Mahmoud Abbas has a manifesto in the New York Times. Rebecca Lessee lets fly at it, but while I think a lot of her points are well-taken (and Abbas' misleading omissions and use of the passive-voice are aggravating), I'm beginning to come around to the notion that centering the Israel/Palestine discussion around endless sniping over narratives is probably not all that useful (though I continue to hope that respect for each others' stories is the "end game").

Hamas interviews one of the protesters at the Jordanian/Israel border. She misses the good old days when her father "massacred the Jews" of Hebron (she's 92 and originally from Hebron, so she's speaking from experience regarding the 1929 pogrom). Meanwhile, a Hamas official is licking his lips over the opportunity to wipe the Jews out.

Basic Instincts

For much of his career, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) was one of the foremost champions of immigration reform. Then a few things happened. He lost the 2008 election to Barack Obama -- an event which unquestionably left him spectacularly bitter. He also faced a right-wing primary challenger in 2010 that left him racing to deny he ever was a maverick.

And so when the DREAM Act came to the floor, McCain voted nay. Grant Woods, an old friend of McCain and his first chief of staff, explains why:

Woods said "it hurts" McCain to vote against legislation like the Dream Act after years of working on reform but said the senator felt betrayed when Latinos overwhelmingly supported Obama in 2008. "When you carry that fight at great sacrifice year after year and then you are abandoned during the biggest fight of your life, it has to have some sort of effect on you," he said.

So basically, much like everything else McCain has done over the past two years, his DREAM Act vote was a fit of pique to wound those who kept him out of the Oval Office. Of course, it's no mystery why Latinos broke hard for Democrats in 2008, and it seems like their instincts that Senator McCain was naught but a fair-weather friend were spot on. "Country first", indeed.

Staring History Down

Regarding continued GOP intransigence over the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, Matt Yglesias asks:

I really wonder what’s happening, subjectively, inside the heads of people who oppose repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Do any of them think they’re on the right side of history here? That people are going to look back from 2040 and say “if only we’d listened to John McCain thirty years ago?”

I've often wondered the same thought myself. I can't imagine that any but the most deluded souls are unaware where this debate is heading, or how it will be evaluated 30 years hence. The opponents of DADT repeal have to be aware that they will be considered villains by history.

In a sense, that makes it a little admirable (odd as that is to say). There is something to be said for looking history in the eye and standing on principle, knowing full well you are forever committing your name to disgrace. For the people whose opposition to gay equality is genuine and heartfelt, there is something rather amazing at their willingness to take on such a role. I disagree with such people stridently, and will do my utmost to ensure that they are inscribed as villains sooner rather than later, but such deep commitment is a rare thing.

Of course, that only applies to those whose opposition stems from heartfelt commitment. For those who act this way for the sake of short-term political expediency -- or worse, pettiness and spite -- it's just sad.

Is It Still Moot Roundup?

The first round of the Moot Court is over, and I think it went well. Same moderate concerns about speaking too fast (though none about gesticulation), but this time, they were pretty explicitly couched in terms like "it distracted me from your brilliant substance" -- so, good sign. "The only reason I kept listening [after being exhausted by the speed] was because of how compelling you are" is kind of an odd comment to get, but I'll take it.

* * *

Interesting interview between Adi Schwartz and John Ging of the UNRWA. One legitimate point Ging makes is that the UNRWA doesn't set its mandate -- the UNGA does. And hence, it is the UNGA that is preventing the UNRWA from treating its refugees like all others, and thus perpetuating the conflict by refusing to countenance resettling the refugees. The UNRWA is simply the hand that implements a malignant policy set elsewhere.

Spanish liberals and Western Sahara.

The Ottawa Protocol on Combating Anti-Semitism.

Glenn Beck and Iran are two peas in a pod when it comes to George Soros.

The lame-duck session of Congress included the House Ethics Committee finding that veteran-Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) committed ethical violations. I applaud the Committee for taking these matters seriously, and hope that the incoming Republican majority shows as much diligence in policing the ethical foibles of its own members.

Sen. John McCain has been an embarrassment on DADT, so it's quite just that he be embarrassed over it.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), who likely won her write-in bid for re-election to the Senate, has opened fire on Sarah Palin, and is indicating that she will not play any role in tea party-backed efforts to sink the Obama administration.

Three more Oxford academics have resigned from the UCU, alleging it to be infected by institutional anti-Semitism. The final nail in the coffin, it seems, was the UCU's rejection of an Oxford branch-backed motion to disassociate the UCU from the views of noted hate speaker Bongani Masuku, whom the union had invited as part of its boycott Israel agenda.

You Can Say That

God, John McCain is such an enormous prick.

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

Via.

Reconsideration Roundup

The problem with going big or going home is that sometimes ....

* * *

Is Bibi thinking of selling the West Bank withdrawal to right-wing Rabbis by waving US security guarantees over their head?

Ahmadinejad blusters: "The United States doesn't understand what war looks like. When a war starts, it knows no limits."

Senate minority blocks the repeal of DADT. Relatedly: John McCain still a hack, Tony Perkins still a dick.

The stats of a "front-runner".

Like all other religions, Christianity has a broad array of different views on moral questions, and we shouldn't take the seemingly abhorrent perspectives advocated by some and paint the entire faith with a broad brush.

Nate Silver has a comperenehsive assessment of the likely impact of the Tea Party, on election day and beyond.

A neat map that tracks the racial divides in DC.

Monday Evening Roundup

Forgive me, I've been busy.

* * *

A host of leftist luminaries, including Noam Chomsky, have lent their imprimatur to a book which, among other things, effectively denies the 1994 Rwanda genocide. Well, let nobody accuse folks of singling out the Jews anymore, at least.

The internal IDF probe of the Gaza flotilla incident (distinct from the independent Terkel commission) has found mistakes in the operation, but fully sanctioned the use of force by the commandos. One of its observations was that there aren't really that many ways to stop a ship from going someplace without boarding it, and there aren't that many ways to board a ship whose crew is violently resisting without yourself using some violence.

Whoever wrote the screenplay for this World War II thing I keep seeing on the History Channel needs to find a new profession. I mean, sheesh.

It's not nice to kick folks while they're down, but Matt Yglesias I think is appropriately harsh to journalists just now discovering that John McCain is 95% hack. He didn't really change, you just weren't paying attention.

Switzerland refuses to extradite Roman Polanski, bowing to an international outcry that punishing a convicted child rapist is a gross injustice when the rapist is friends with important to people.

Adam Serwer has a good post on the Justice Department dropping voter intimidation charges against the New Black Panther Party.

The NAACP is considering a resolution condemning racism in the Tea Party movement.

Times Have Changed

Senator John McCain (R-AZ), flashing that "country first" maverick streak for which he is renowned, won't support the comprehensive immigration reform package he's pushed for years because ... well, because it's no longer in his political interest to do so. And, I suspect, because supporting it would mean helping Obama, which is the most deadly sin of all in the modern Republican Party (the excuses of the other 10 Republican Senators who used to support comprehensive immigration reform, but have mysteriously flipped, are equally pathetic).

Still Alive

I'm making a note here, huge success....

Work is very interesting, but a lot of, well, work. It's quite the time consumer. But I am still around, and I even (occasionally) am able to keep an eye on the news.

On Alas, a Blog, I wrote what I think was a pretty solid comment detailing less my views on the Gaza flotilla incident than my views on the best reaction to the incident. One of the things I said was that even amongst defenders of the legality or justifiability of the Israeli reaction to the blockade, you can find very few defenders of its wisdom. It would have been great to able to cite to Alan Dershowitz to back that assertion up, but unfortunately I hadn't seen this column yet. Oh well.

Meanwhile, I absolutely agree that the efforts of some Republicans, here Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), to turn this into a political issue is incredibly damaging to the notion that support for Israel ought to be bipartisan. By constructing partisan divides where none truly exist, McCain is only enforcing the idea that Republican equals pro-Israel and Democrat equals anti-Israel -- possibly good politics, but bad for the state of Israel in a context where image often becomes reality.

Scratch One Maverick

Senator John McCain (R-AZ) informs us that, contrary to popular perception, he's never been an independent voice for anything:

Many of the GOP's most faithful, the kind who vote in primaries despite 115-degree heat, tired long ago of McCain the Maverick, the man who had crossed the aisle to work with Democrats on issues like immigration reform, global warming, and restricting campaign contributions. "Maverick" is a mantle McCain no longer claims; in fact, he now denies he ever was one. "I never considered myself a maverick," he told me. "I consider myself a person who serves the people of Arizona to the best of his abilities." Yet here was Palin, urging her fans four times in 15 minutes to send McCain the Maverick back to Washington.

I'll leave to others as to whether McCain has served the interests of Arizona, but I whole-heartedly agree that what others called maverickism, I call "principle-less support of whatever position is most politically expedient or ego-enhancing at the present moment" -- the abandonment of the decades-long "maverick" label because it was hurting him in a GOP primary being only the most recent example.

So at least we're on the same page there.

DADT Pushers

In the annals of those who support the continued exclusion of gays from the military, we've already talked about Senator John McCain's stunning reversal of his "listen to the leaders" position. Now that top military officials are onboard with repealing DADT, he no longer cares what they think! Now that's mavericky!*

But Senator McCain is hardly the only offender here. Let's look at some of the other top movers on the issue. There's Elaine Donnelly, whose professional responsibility is keeping gays out of the military, mostly by trafficking in obscene stereotyping. I enjoyed watching veteran Rep. Patrick Murphy eviscerate her in 2008 on the issue. Duncan Hunter is currently getting attention for his fear of a hermaphrodite wave, but I still recall fondly his belief that Israelis aren't "Judeo-Christian" enough to have problems with gay people.

Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), beloved in the military community for savaging the patriotism of war hero Max Cleland, is worried that homosexuality is incompatible with the military's "high standards". Not an expression of hostility towards gay people at all! He also, in perhaps the most bizarre charge ever, fretted that gayness would lead to soldiers with (brace yourself) TATTOOS!

Given all that, it's almost refreshing to here some true straight talk from FRC bigwig Peter Sprigg, who flatly wants to overturn Lawrence and ban homosexuality outright. Tony Perkins, the chief of the FRC, is a military veteran himself. But he seriously indicated that he would not have chosen to serve if it meant serving next to gay and lesbian peers. Put him next to the gay and lesbian servicemembers who risk their lives for country that still sanctions official discrimination against them along several axis. I know who best represents our military traditions.

* "Mavericky" is a registered trademark of John McCain, meaning "principle-less support of whatever position is most politically expedient or ego-enhancing at the present moment." In this case, opposing DADT-repeal both helps him in a primary challenge from far-right ex-Rep. J.D. Hayworth, and sticks it to President Obama. So it's a bit of a gimme.

Tomorrow's Another Day Roundup

Busy busy day tomorrow -- may not have much time for blogging. Better clear the browser now.

* * *

If Nancy Grace could take on Nancy Grace.

North Korea seems to have ditched the communism facade completely, and now is embracing full on classic racist fascism.

Top defense officials are onboard with repealing DADT.

Relatedly, Senator John McCain (R-AZ), who previously indicated that support from the top brass was what he needed to reconsider his support for DADT, has let anti-gay animus trump prior statements of principle. Stunning.

Why we should be especially thankful for our gay and lesbian servicemembers. Their sacrifice for a nation that fundamentally still rejects their equal citizenship is heart-rending.

Michael Klarman pops the myth that courts have been historical friends of racial minorities.

It's so scary when Jews have opinions and try to convince others to share them.

What's the trajectory of the California gay marriage litigation?

What if McCain Loses?

A new pol shows Senator John McCain (R-AZ) is vulnerable to a primary challenge from the right. In response, he's busy flip-flopping his way over to oppose bipartisan climate-change efforts.

I have to say, I'd be thrilled if John McCain loses a primary. From my perspective, it's win-win. His reputation for bipartisan maverickism has always been overstated, so it is not like Democrats are losing a member that is easy to work with. But a primary defeat would set off a torrent of "the GOP has been hijacked by a far-right base and has no room for moderates" reporting by a punditocracy that still, beyond all reason, sees McCain as a national bellweather.

Plus, it gives Dems a fighting chance to flip the Arizona seat.

It's all good from my vantage point.

Careful -- What You Say is Heresy

The Fix (a WaPo political blog) asked its readers to name the "most overrated Senator". They responded by naming John McCain (R-AZ), by a reasonably healthy margin. But The Fix writer is incredulous! Don't readers know that this is John McCain we're talking about? The maverick-y maverick of the Senate?

I concede that McCain has legislative accomplishments. What makes him overrated isn't that he doesn't do anything, it's that he's considered to be some sort of level-headed, sober independent, when in reality he's a pretty doctrinaire conservative on most issues, with a bad temper and a foreign policy disposition that basically boils down to "war rocks". Yet he gets trotted out on media talk shows with what can only be described as a reckless indifference to the scope of the contribution he makes to the public discourse. Hence, overrated.

Square One

Point:

"On the issue of the Hispanic voter, we have to do a lot more. We Republicans have to recruit and elect Hispanics to office," McCain told CNN's State of Union. "And I don't mean just because they're Hispanics, but they represent a big part of the growing population in America. And we have a lot of work to do there. And I am of the belief that unless we reverse the trend of Hispanic voter registration, we have a very, very deep hole that we've got to come out of."

While he was one of only a handful of Republicans willing to tackle immigration reform in 2007, McCain faced a massive deficit with Hispanic voters in the 2008 election. His aides have said that, were he not the home state senator, he would have lost Arizona to Barack Obama, in large part because Hispanics had left the Republican Party in droves.

Counterpoint:

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) called Judge Sonia Sotomayor a “judicial activist” today, announcing he’ll vote against making her the first Latina on the Supreme Court.

Sotomayor “cannot change her record. She has a long record of judicial activism” as a federal judge since 1992, McCain said. “Her decisions too often stray from legal norms.”

Best of luck, Senator (via).

McCain Lashes Out

The National Journal reports that Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) is not happy with the Latino community, whom he views as betraying him by giving 2/3 support to Barack Obama in spite of his strong support for immigration reform legislation:

"He was angry," one source said. "He was over the top. In some cases, he rolled his eyes a lot. There were portions of the meeting where he was just staring at the ceiling, and he wasn't even listening to us. We came out of the meeting really upset."

McCain's message was obvious, the source continued: After bucking his party on immigration, he had no sympathy for Hispanics who are dissatisfied with President Obama's pace on the issue. "He threw out [the words] 'You people -- you people made your choice. You made your choice during the election,' " the source said. "It was almost as if [he was saying] 'You're cut off!' We felt very uncomfortable when we walked away from the meeting because of that."

In 2006 and 2007, McCain was a leader on immigration, but his efforts ran aground largely because his legislation included what many Republicans derisively characterized as "amnesty," a pathway to citizenship for the nation's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants if they took a series of steps to earn legal status.

Having stuck his neck out in the past, McCain apparently is in no mood to do so again for an ethnic group he seems to view as ungrateful. On NBC's Meet the Press on March 29, McCain repeated his message that the ball is in the Democratic president's court. So far, the senator said, he has not seen much on immigration from the Obama White House, although the president recently met with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and set the goal of launching the debate in the fall, a senior administration official said.

It would be perfectly reasonable for a Latino voter to say "John McCain bucked his party to support a position I care intensely about, and thus I'm voting for him." It would be equally reasonable for that voter to say "I'm glad John McCain voted the way he did, but that's one issue and on a host of others, we have fundamental disagreements. At the end of the day, I'm closer to Obama than McCain." It'd also be reasonable to say "I like McCain fine, but the Republican Party has gone crazy and I'm not comfortable putting them into power -- even with McCain as the leader." The notion that they owe him something is ridiculous.

Bauer Channels The Bad Romney

Back in the cesspool that was the 2008 Republican primary, Mitt Romney indicated that he would refuse to hire any Muslims into his cabinet were he President of the United States (to his credit, John McCain was I believe the only Republican candidate to sharply criticize the remarks).

Now, former candidate and all around nut Gary Bauer has a column up entitled "Muslims in the White House?", raising the terrifying specter that Obama, who "says he's a Christian", may still appoint some Muslim persons to various jobs in the White House.

I Know Who You Know

Gov. Sarah Palin: "It seems that there is yet another radical professor from the neighborhood who spent a lot of time with Barack Obama," referring to Columbia University professor (formerly at the U of C) Rashid Khalidi.

Look, any politician who spent time in public life is going to have some unsavory associations. For example, I hear John McCain is well acquainted with a pathological liar who is out on the campaign trail building yet another bridge to nowhere. Such is politics.

Anyway, as far as I can see, Prof. Khalidi seems rather tame (although not someone with whom I would necessarily agree with). What he does have is a few superficial signifiers that might make some Jews uneasy -- being part of Columbia University's Middle East Studies program (which is a war zone between pro-Israel and pro-Palestine forces), and the fact that his endowed chair is named after Edward Said. But he was not, as the McCain campaign is saying, a spokesperson for the PLO, and most of his active criticism of Israel has come at the level of policies which are certainly in-bounds to be criticized (even if I disagree with the particulars).

Democrats Love Superior Firepower

If Barack Obama advertised in video games. I particularly like the huge-ass tank with "HOPE" emblazoned on the side.

Also, McCain's video game ads.