Elizabeth Hinton thinks we should "Turn Prisons Into Colleges." If we could keep prisoners away from the for-profit sector, though, that'd be nice. I suppose the ragehead crowd will squeal PRIZUNZ ARE FOR TEH PUNISHMENTZ!!!!, though actually prisons are for rehabilitation. But those who only care about punishment and retribution can take heart that a lot of prisoners would find studying to be an absolute chore, at least at first. What rageheads will say when more of those prisoners become functioning members of society again? Oh, who am I kidding -- they'll point to the ones who don't and declare the whole thing a failure. And their heroes will say PRIVATEZ PRIZONZ ARE TEH ANSWURZ!!!!!
Our Department of Defense tells Congress it can't tell them not to refuel Saudi planes that go on to drop bombs on Yemen, which suggest a certain ignorance, on Defense's part, on how the Constitution is actually supposed to work. They're not even trying to argue that the 2001 AUMF, which needs to be repealed yesterday if not sooner, gives them all the authority they need! Instead, they're trying to say helping Saudi Arabia bomb Yemen doesn't "constitute 'hostilities'." Anyone want to ask any Yemenis about that?
Ho hum, the Obama Administration started a commission that finally got some health care help for Cold War-era nuclear workers exposed to toxins, but the current Administration has let that commission's expired seats (i.e., all of them) go unfilled. Because GUBMINT BAD REGULASHUNZ BAD ADMINISTRATIVEZ STATEZ BAD!!!! I predict that once someone explains to President Manchild that a lot of these workers probably voted for him, he promptly takes to Twitter to slam Democrats for holding up his nominees, even though they literally can't now.
Well, this is a watershed moment: brilliant but occasionally infuriating centrist Matthew Yglesias not only says the DCCC should stop trying to pick nominees for voters, but that the Democrats' whole elect-someone-who-can-win theory has "very little evidence" to back it. Which we've known for a while -- long before 2016, even! -- but again, nice to have some science behind it, and nice to hear it from an unlikely source, too. Studies do not, in fact, show that candidates who "moderate" their positions do better, and where have Democrats been cleaning up in special elections so far this cycle? In red areas where they did better before 2016, and notin places like Georgia's 6th district, where Barack Obama got shelled but where Hillary Clinton barely lost.
Finally, the Administration has told Idaho it can't break the Affordable Care Act as nakedly as it had planned to do, by selling health insurance plans that don't comply with Affordable Care Act requirements in re pre-existing conditions, for example. Still, we shouldn't congratulate the Executive branch for doing its job, nor should we ignore all the wink-winks in Ms. Verma's letter to Idaho Gov. Otter, which could just as easily have read "we told you how to break Obamacare, but NOOOOO! You had to do it your way!" And, ah, what "freedoms" is Gov. Otter talking about Obamacare destroying? The "freedom" to buy crappy health insurance that won't be there for you when you need it?
Comments