Not good:

U.S. Capitol Police arrested a staffer in the office of Houston Democrat Sheila Jackson Lee for allegedly posting personal information about one or more senators involved in the hearings on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Jackson A. Cosko, 27, faced charges Wednesday of making public, or “doxing,” restricted information, unauthorized access of a government computer, burglary, and other violations of federal law.

Funny thing about this alleged miscreant: he used to work for Senator Feinstein.

Senior congressional sources tell Fox News that Cosko most recently worked as an unpaid intern for Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas. He previously worked with Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., and former Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer of California. He also worked or interned with the office of Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, as well as with at least one other unnamed lawmaker. A LinkedIn page with Cosko’s name on it describes him as a “Democratic Political Professional & Cybersecurity Graduate Student.”

This comes at a time when bad people at leftist publications urge the public to stalk Republican senators and treat them as evil:

Tell me again why we shouldn't confront Republicans where they eat, where they sleep, and where they work until they stop being complicit in the destruction of our democracy. https://t.co/YEft6pmc7o

— Ian Millhiser (@imillhiser) September 28, 2018

And that in turn comes at a time when people shoot Republicans because they believe them to be evil.

[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]

The House voted yesterday to authorize a lawsuit against Obama for unilaterally changing the date by which businesses must comply with the provisions of ObamaCare. Democrats raised a lot of money recently by comparing this to impeachment — so naturally Big Media makes this, not about the merits of the lawsuit, but about whether conservatives are ruling out impeachment. Just look at Dana Milbank’s column, which doesn’t even tell you what the proposed lawsuit is about — but spends the whole column discussing whether the lawsuit is a stalking horse for impeachment.

Conservatives, for their part, are refusing to let Big Media set the narrative for them, and focusing on Obama’s unconstitutional actions dutifully falling in line with the Big Media narrative, and making this all about impeachment — with the True Conservatives pushing it, and the Pragmatists worried about the effects it might have on mid-term elections.

I will admit that my kneejerk reaction was that the suit was a dodge for a body unwilling to take on Obama for his excesses. But a kneejerk reaction is not always the right one. If you’re interested in the actual merits of the suit, and reading some reasons why the arguments you’ve heard against it might not be right, here’s a primer from National Review. Short version: contra what you may have heard, courts are sometimes willing to take on these issues (see the recent Supreme Court decision on recess appointments as one example), and why not sue in addition to other possible remedies? My view is: there’s no need to run down a possibly successful tactic until you have fully examined it.

Anyway, as interesting as the impeachment debate might be, we might consider focusing on what the lawsuit is about: Obama’s usurping of the legislative function. Or, you can just keep on playing into the lefty Big Media narrative and talk impeachment, impeachment, impeachment. Your choice — but as Simon Jester often says, think twice before doing something that makes David Axelrod smile.

In the meantime, here’s some good fun: Sheila Jackson Lee proclaiming yesterday that Democrats did not seek to impeach Bush.

I ask my colleagues to oppose this resolution for it is in fact a veiled attempt for impeachment and it undermines the law that allows a president to do his job. A historical fact that President Bush pushed this nation into a war that had little to do with apprehending terrorists. We did not seek an impeachment of President Bush, because as an executive, he had his authority. President Obama has the authority.

As BuzzFeed noted, Sheila Jackson Lee was a co-sponsor of Dennis Kucinich’s resolution to impeach Bush for leading us into the Iraq War.

The surprise is not that they lie, but that they are so laughably bad at it.

[Guest post by DRJ]

In an article about Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee’s health care town hall meeting held Tuesday 8/11/09 — the meeting attended by “Dr.” Roxana Mayer — the Houston Chronicle reported her constituents and the public were given one day’s notice of the meeting if they called Jackson Lee’s office the day before:

“Several of Jackson Lee’s constituents opposed to the health care plan complained the meetings were never posted on the congresswoman’s Web site. They also said they had called her office repeatedly but were only informed about the meetings when they called the day before it happened.

“Someone kept telling me that it would be on her Web site or they would make a list and call me. But they never did. I was lucky to find out about it,” said Linda Lehman, a retired accountant, who is “terrified” by how much the health care reform package may cost.
***
Allan Meason, another constituent, who thinks the health care bill won’t work without controlling malpractice lawsuits, agreed, “I kept calling every office she had for three weeks.”

In response to a question about why the meeting wasn’t posted on her Web site, Jackson Lee said anyone could learn about it by calling her office. “I will be having a series of these meetings and the notices will be different,” she added.

Other attendees from the Fifth Ward said they had received a notice in their door informing them of the meeting the day before or learned about the forum when showing up for their senior citizen program at the center that day.

Jackson Lee is known for aggressively promoting her events by e-mailing and calling local news media. But the Houston Chronicle didn’t receive any notifications from her office about the Tuesday forum.“

But some people may have received advance notice of Jackson Lee’s health care meetings — the Precinct 224 Democrats:

According to the Page Info for that website, the Precinct 224 Democrats knew about Sheila Jackson Lee’s health care meetings no later than August 8, 2009:

Maybe some constituents are more important than others.

— DRJ

[UPDATE: Mayer has admitted to me that she is not a doctor. Details here.]

Yesterday, DRJ posted on a comical town hall meeting that Sheila Jackson Lee held in Houston on Tuesday, in which Jackson Lee talked on her cell phone as a constituent asked a question.

A reader writes to raise questions about whether there was a Barack Obama plant at Jackson Lee’s town hall meeting, in the form of one “Dr. Roxana Mayer,” who was mentioned in this Houston Chronicle article:

Some attendees at the meeting spoke in favor of the plan, go so far as to want a system where the government had complete control.

One supporter, Dr. Roxana Mayer, a physician who does not live in Jackson Lee’s district, praised the reform plan for overhauling a broken system.

“I don’t know what there is in the bill that creates such panic,” she said.

MyBarackObama shows a Roxana Mayer was a Texas Delegate for Obama (click on Directory in the center of the page).

But I can’t find any evidence that she’s a doctor. Instead, I find evidence of a Roxana Mayer who appears to be a graduate student studying social work at the University of Houston, where Jackson Lee’s husband is a vice president for student affairs.

If Roxana Mayer is a doctor, she isn’t listed where you would expected her to be listed. For example, the AMA Doctor Finder doesn’t list any physician named Roxana Mayer.

Nor does the Texas Medical Association.

The search

The result: nothing

Now, this is not conclusive. It is not clear whether all doctors are members, and I suppose that it’s possible that some kinds of doctors may not be listed there. (For example, I’m not sure about the licensing or registration requirements for osteopaths.)

However, the University of Houston lists a student by the name of Roxana Mercedes Mayer.

In addition, Linked In lists a Roxana Mayer — who, according to LinkedIn, is slated to graduate from the University of Houston with a Masters in Social Work in 2010.

And oddly, there is a connection between Jackson Lee and Roxana Mayer’s University of Houston. Namely, Jackson Lee is married to one Elwyn C. Lee, who has a dual appointment as the “University of Houston System vice chancellor for student affairs and University of Houston vice president for student affairs.”

What does it all mean? I’m not quite sure at this point. But it’s enough to make me go:

Hmmm.

P.S. I have whited out the e-mail address in the screenshot of Roxana Mayer’s University of Houston listing, although you can see it at the link. I have written the Roxana Mayer at the e-mail address to see if she will answer some of my questions.

P.P.S. Hey, if Obama can do it at his own town hall meetings, who’s to say it’s not happening everywhere.

PHOTOGRAPHIC PROOF UPDATE: A picture of the Roxana Mayer at the town hall meeting, hugging Jackson Lee, is clearly the same person as a Roxana Mayer on MySpace from Houston, TX.

Not the greatest vetting by the Chronicle.

Thanks to David Mickelson at Ace’s for the link to the town hall meeting picture, and beedubya for the MySpace idea.

[Guest post by DRJ]

Houston Democratic Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee held a town hall meeting today in Houston where she demonstrated her multi-tasking skills:

“Occasional chastising punctuated the rest of the meeting, some comments accusing her of wasting time when introducing a state politician who had joined the crowd and other jeers when she talked on her cell phone while a constituent posed a question to her.

“In Congress, we have to multi-task,” she explained.

Some constituents also complained that Jackson Lee did her best to dodge hard questions:

“Several of Jackson Lee’s constituents opposed to the health care plan complained the meetings were never posted on the congresswoman’s Web site. They also said they had called her office repeatedly but were only informed about the meetings when they called the day before it happened.
***
Jackson Lee is known for aggressively promoting her events by e-mailing and calling local news media. But the Houston Chronicle didn’t receive any notifications from her office about the Tuesday forum.”

I hope someone got a video of Jackson-Lee’s multi-tasking comment.

— DRJ

UPDATE BY PATTERICO: Someone did:

Start watching at 4:30 if you’re pressed for time. Simply amazing.

[guest post by JVW]

Our friends in the progressive caucus raised a lot of eyebrows yesterday evening when they released a letter calling upon President Biden “to pursue direct diplomacy for a negotiated settlement to end Russia’s war in Ukraine.” While acknowledging this is a war of Russian aggression and affirming Ukraine’s right to defend itself and its territory, the letter seems to suggest that Ukraine ought to surrender the territory annexed by the Russian military in return for the rest of Ukraine securing its newly reduced borders by joining NATO. It goes without saying that a negotiated settlement would not see Vladimir Putin or any of his deputies tried for war crimes, and in the interests of international harmony most sanctions on Russia would be lifted so that Western Europe could once again purchase energy from the oligarchs. In other words, in service of peace Vladimir Putin would be allowed to snatch a pretty comprehensive victory from the jaws of defeat, which would no doubt warm the heart of Xi Jinping as he looks longingly towards Taiwan.

This letter was signed by thirty members of the Progressive Caucus (all Democrats naturally) including the Chairwoman Pramila Jayapal, the tiresome Castroite Marxist Barbara Lee of Oakland, noted comedian Sheila Jackson Lee of Houston, the ethically challenged Jamie Raskin of (naturally) the DC suburbs, and our dear nieces and nephews from The Squad. As you might imagine, the letter’s release last night caused some consternation within Washington, not only among warmongering Republicans (though, to be sure, some libertarian Republicans welcomed it) but also among Establishment Democrats who undoubtedly see our support for Ukraine’s war efforts (tepid though it sometimes is) as about the only bright spot in the first 21 months of the Joe Biden Administration, and resent the childish naïveté in believing that Putin could be a reliable partner in negotiations.

The backlash was swift and severe, to the degree that earlier today the Progressive Caucus formally retracted the letter, implausibly claiming that despite bearing the signatures of two-and-one-half dozen leftist Democrats, it was merely an unfinalized draft which had mistakenly been released and then promoted via the caucus’s Twitter account. Because all of us have been a part of a large group to affix our signatures to a draft letter at one time or other in our lives, haven’t we? Some diehards, like the indefatigable lefty peace creep Ro Khanna of Silicon Valley, refused to recant the position staked out in the letter and took to his personal Twitter account to defend it. So, irrespective of the caucus’s pretty blatant lies about the letter’s release being a mistake, it looks like it will still serve the purpose of driving a wedge between the party’s left-wing activists and its panicking establishment who is desperately trying to avoid a complete ballot bloodbath two weeks from today.

This whole imbroglio brought back warm memories from nearly four years ago, when freshman Progressive Caucus susperstar Congresswoman Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, our Adorably Ornery Clueless neice, released a blueprint for her Green New Deal which included a helpful FAQ that would have made Kim Il-sung shudder with envy of its bureaucratic totalitarianism, only to suddenly declare that — here comes the coincidence! — it was only a draft plan, had not yet been finalized, and should not have been released. It’s great to see a beloved trick from a playbook of yore brought out to rescue a disastrous sally into complex foreign entanglements by a crew with the general foreign policy sophistication of the average high school sophomore.

All in a day’s work for a party which has conclusively proven they can’t be trusted to govern on their own.

– JVW

[guest post by Dana]

Three days after the mass shooting in Uvdale, Texas that saw 19 children and two adults killed, the National Rifle Association will hold its annual convention in Houston:

Donald Trump is still scheduled to speak at an NRA meeting in Houston…The former president is set to join fellow Republicans, including Texas Governor Greg Abbott, Senator Ted Cruz, and Congressman Dan Crenshaw, at the annual NRA Institute for Legislative Action Leadership Forum over the weekend.

The pro-gun lobbyist group is still intending on holding on the meeting at the George R. Brown Convention Center from Friday to Sunday, despite the massacre at the Robb Elementary School in Uvalde.

Michael Heckman, CEO of Houston First, the government corporation that oversees the convention center, said he was not aware of any plans to cancel the event or change the schedule in the wake of the school shooting.

Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner said that the NRA meeting will be held in Houston as scheduled because if they were to renege on the contract, “it would open the city up to a number of lawsuits”:

“The convention has been on the books for more than two years,” Turner said during Wednesday’s City Council meeting. “It’s a contractual arrangement. We simply cannot cancel a conference or convention because we do not agree with the subject matter.”

The NRA’s website continues to promote the upcoming event:

The Exhibit Hall is open all three days and will showcase over 14 acres of the latest guns and gear from the most popular companies in the Industry…Make plans now to join fellow Second Amendment patriots for a freedom-filled weekend for the entire family as we celebrate Freedom, Firearms, and the Second Amendment!

After the massacre, the NRA tweeted this:

pic.twitter.com/l5msXNjX4l

— NRA (@NRA) May 25, 2022

Meanwhile, Rep. Sheila Lee Jackson, who represents Houston in Texas’s 18th congressional district, has called on the NRA to cancel its event in light of the massacre. I rarely agree with her on anything, but I do agree with the representative on this: “It’s not the time” for the event to be held.

Also, Sen. Chuck Schumer, who was all about bringing gun control measures to the floor today, announced that it would not be happening:

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) told colleagues on the Senate floor Wednesday that he will not immediately bring gun control measures to the floor in the wake of two mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde, Texas, because he doesn’t expect them to muster enough Republican votes to pass.

Instead, the Democratic leader said he will wait for Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and other members of his caucus to try to negotiate a bipartisan compromise with Republicans on a measure that has a better chance of securing 60 votes to overcome a filibuster.

“There are some who want this body to quickly vote on sensible gun safety legislation, legislation supported by the vast majority of Americans,” he said. “They want to see this body vote quickly so the American people can know which side each senator is on …. I’m sympathetic to that, and I believe that accountability votes are important.”

But Schumer said he thought that bringing gun-control legislation in the immediate aftermath of Buffalo and Uvalde, where two lone shooters left a total of 31 people dead in the span of 10 days, would be fruitless because of staunch Republican opposition to such reforms.

As with Sheila Jackson Lee, I can’t remember agreeing with Schumer on much of anything, but I have to say I agree with him on this, regardless of his posturing:

“If the slaughter of schoolchildren can’t convince Republicans to buck the NRA, what can we do?” he said, referring to the National Rifle Association.

I believe the optics of the NRA holding their convention this soon after the shooting and this close to Uvalde are horrible. Nothing like rubbing salt into an unspeakably raw wound.

I don’t know what the answer is with regard to getting current measures on the books enforced and establishing new safety measures. We’ve discussed tightening up red flag laws, increasing wait time for purchase, universal background checks, more available mental health outreach and treatment, an armed presence at schools (including teachers/staff), etc. But really, unless Texas raised the legal age to purchase firearms, would any of the above measures have prevented the 18-year-old with no criminal record from legally purchasing the two guns, 375 rounds of ammunition, and a tactical vest? As I said yesterday, I’m gutted by yet another school massacre where small children who had just barely begun to live their lives are now dead. In perusing the internet, it remains shocking that some gun advocates seem to feel that the imposition of having to wear a mask or the thought of having Ruby Bridges Goes To School read to elementary students is cause for a much more immediate and bigger response than the massacre of 19 children. I don’t get it.

In the face of the Second Amendment, America’s romance and reverence for guns, the staggering proliferation of guns in the U.S., and an increasing level of hostility and anger as a result of social upheaval and the massive political dysfunction of Washington, at the very least, let’s start here:

In 2018 Arizona Governor @DougDucey and his team analyzed the deadliest school shootings since Columbine. What did they find? A red flag law had a chance to stop every single one. Pass red flag laws. Now. https://t.co/Wh3VJMnOrV pic.twitter.com/i6uN0Jj0PZ

— David French (@DavidAFrench) May 25, 2022

UPDATE: As expected, protestgroups will be at the George R. Brown Convention Center where the NRA annual convention will be held this weekend in Houston. Several groups will be represented:

Ashton P Woods says they [NRA] are not welcome in his home town.

“These people are coming into our community. The city of Houston needs to kick them out,” said Woods, an activist and founder of Black Lives Matter Houston. “We have to be just as tough about these things as they are.”

Woods is helping organize one of several protests planned just outside the George R Brown Convention Center…

The goal of the Black Lives Matter protest, Woods said, is to “get loud” outside while powerful speakers take the podium inside. Woods said the issue of firearms was particularly important to the civil rights group that primarily tackles issues of police brutality in America.

“Whether it be death by suicide, death by cop, death by mass shooter, we need to control the access people have to deadly weapons,” Woods said. “These things are interconnected.”

…

Outside the convention center, multiple counter-demonstrations are expected in Houston – especially in light of a mass shooting that killed 19 children and two adults at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas.

…

Hansen and Pecinovsky have organized an interfaith gathering that will include a silent march and a moment of reflection when organizers will read the names of those who died in Uvalde.

UPDATE 2: After facing pretty widespread criticism, it was announced that Texas Gov. Abbott will no longer be attending the NRA convention, but will instead be sending in a pre-recorded video address to attendees:

Abbott, 64, was originally slated to speak in person as the three-day event gets underway at the George R. Brown Convention Center in Houston.

But the Republican governor changed his plans after facing a widespread backlash for holding a fundraiser just hours after a gunman stormed into a Uvalde elementary school, killing 19 students and two teachers.

He will instead head to the site of Tuesday’s horrific school shooting to hold a press conference “on state’s ongoing efforts to support the Uvalde community.”

Also no longer attending the convention are several country music artists who were slated to perform this weekend.

And just this morning, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick announced he is dropping out of speaking at the convention after giving it “prayerful consideration”.

–Dana

[guest post by Dana]

Today is Juneteenth, a day that is set aside to celebrate the official end of chattel slavery in the United States, and it is also the day chosen to hold a House Committee hearing on slavery reparations, including setting up a commission to determine what reparations would entail with regard to the descendants of slaves. Today’s proposal, H.R.40 is being sponsored by Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas. Speaker Nancy Pelosi is backing the bill. Sen. Cory Booker, actor Danny Gover, and author Ta-Nehisi Coates, who is seen as having brought the issue of reparations back into the public conversation, are scheduled to testify in support of Lee’s measure.

Supporters of “reparatory justice” want people to know that they view this as more than just the government sending a check to black Americans:

Advocates emphasize that reparations would address more recent policies, and do not necessarily mean the government would be writing checks to black people… government could engage in…zero-interest loans for black prospective homeowners, free college tuition, community development plans to spur the growth of black-owned businesses in black neighborhoods — to address the social and economic fallout of slavery and racially discriminatory federal policies that have resulted in a huge wealth gap between whites and blacks in America. It would be up to the commission to explore such options and others.

From Cory Booker:

Booker…told the committee that America has not yet grappled with racism and white supremacy and that the hearing presents a “historic opportunity to break the silence, to speak to the ugly past and talking constructively about how we will move this nation forward.”

“It’s about time we find the common ground and the common purpose to deal with the ugly past and make sure that generations ahead do not have to continue to mark disparities,” Booker said on Wednesday.

Booker had previously told CNN’s Jake Tapper:

“Do I support legislation that is race-conscious about balancing the economic scales? Not only do I support it, but I have legislation that actually does it.”

Booker has authored his own companion bill:

It’s the only reparations bill to be introduced in the Senate after Reconstruction. Like Jackson-Lee’s bill, the senator’s bill would establish a commission to examine the impacts of slavery in the U.S. — from its inception until the end of the Civil War in 1865 — and recommend ways to compensate the descendants of slaves.

Co-sponsors of Booker’s bill include Democratic presidential candidates Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and Amy Klobuchar. A spokesperson for Joe Biden commented that the candidate “believes that we should gather the data necessary to have an informed conversation about reparations, but he has not endorsed a specific bill.”

Recent polling about reparations puts hopeful Democratic candidates in an interesting position, especially the top-tier Democrats who are embracing the issue:

A Fox News poll in April found that 60 percent of Americans oppose paying cash reparations to descendants of slaves, while just 32 percent support it. A Rasmussen poll in the same month found that just 21 percent of likely voters think taxpayers should pay reparations to black Americans who can prove they are descended from slaves.

However, in a finding that could put 2020 Democratic presidential hopefuls in a bind, the Fox poll found that among Democratic primary voters, 54 percent said they were likely to support a candidate who backed reparations, while 33 percent said they were not likely.

Additionally, Data For Progress found in a poll last year that while the measure had only 26 percent of Americans in favor, it had net positive support among voters under 45. A Point-Taken Marist poll in 2016 found that while 68 percent of Americans were opposed to reparations, 6 in 10 black Americans said they were in favor.

Additionally:

A recent government survey found that 52 percent of Americans — including growing percentages of whites, blacks, independents, Democrats and Republicans — believe the government does not spend enough money on improving the conditions of African-Americans, according to The Associated Press. But the survey found that just three in 10 Americans think the government is obligated to make up for past racial discrimination.

Postscript 1: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was asked his thoughts about reparations, and his comments made very clear his position on whether any reparations bill would be given a hearing:

I don’t think reparations for something that happened 150 years ago for whom none us currently living are responsible is a good idea. We’ve tried to deal with our original sin of slavery by fighting a civil war, by passing landmark civil rights legislation. We elected an African-American president.

I think we’re always a work in progress in this country, but no one currently alive was responsible for that, and I don’t think we should be trying to figure out how to compensate for it. First of all, it would be pretty hard to figure out who to compensate. We’ve had waves of immigrants come to the country and experience dramatic discrimination of one kind or another. So no, I don’t think reparations are a good idea.

Postscript 2: Unbelievably, (and ironically or expectedly, depending on your level of cynicism), only Elizabeth Warren has said specifically that American Indians should be part of any conversation about reparations.

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)

–Dana

Clearing out some links that have been sitting open on my laptop:

There are a few people more entertaining than Ace of Spades when he gets going on one of his truly inspired rants. This one is worth reading all the way through, but I’ll tease you with the end:

This is a dangerous moment. I keep saying this, but I do think Tyranny is in the air. When the press decides that our Dear Leaders are above suspicion, and any suspicion is evidence of both mental illness and treason simultaneously, we’re living on the cusp of Chavez-like times.

Dear Self-Proclaimed Rationalists/Empiricists,

You’re doing it wrong. Please note this for your records.

Respectfully,

People Who Would Like To Know What’s In the Kool-Aid,
Before We Drink It,
If That’s Quite All Right By You

Another thing I liked about Ace’s piece is that it reminded me of this excellent year-end takedown of fact-checking pieces. I think the “fact-checkers” are some of the most dangerous enemies of freedom we have these days, because they don’t care about the facts, but they are treated as if they do because they declare it to be so. As Ace reminds us, in these fact checking pieces, “true claims made by Republicans are deemed false, because the liberal ‘fact’ checkers don’t like the implications made, and [] false claims made by Democrats (especially Obama) are deemed ‘true,’ because, well. Let them explain.”

Continuing down the list: it’s another crazy White House petition, this time asking the White House to “authorize the production of a recurring television program featuring Vice President Joe Biden.” Because there aren’t enough buffoons in prime time TV. Anyway, this is apparently the pilot episode, titled “Spread Your Legs, You’re Gonna Get Frisked”:

Finally, we have Nancy Pelosi altering a photo to show more women Congresscritters in it:

A few years ago, the Newseum hosted a terrific exhibit called “The Commissar Vanishes,” which chronicled Soviet dictator Josef Stalin’s editing of official photos to eliminate Communist officials who had fallen out of favor with the mercurial tyrant.

The technology has advanced — we have Photoshop now, after all — but politicians still see a need to alter history.

That brings us to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

The Democratic leader found herself on the defensive today in response to charges that she altered a photo … to add four lawmakers who weren’t there.

The missing lawmakers — who arrived late for the photo — included Houston Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee and Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida. The doctored photo included the four absent representatives as a fictional top row of the photo.

Make no mistake: she would do the same thing with votes if she thought she could get away with it.

[Posted by Karl]

Let’s just say it. After all, that’s what Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein did to the Republicans at the WaPo, apparently set off by this incident:

Rep. Allen West, a Florida Republican, was recently captured on video asserting that there are “78 to 81” Democrats in Congress who are members of the Communist Party. Of course, it’s not unusual for some renegade lawmaker from either side of the aisle to say something outrageous. What made West’s comment — right out of the McCarthyite playbook of the 1950s — so striking was the almost complete lack of condemnation from Republican congressional leaders or other major party figures, including the remaining presidential candidates.

It’s not that the GOP leadership agrees with West; it is that such extreme remarks and views are now taken for granted.

***

The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.

Although Ornstein and Mann claim to “have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted,” they provide no links to all the op-eds they did about the extreme statements about Republicans being Un-American, comparing them to fascists, Nazis, racists and so on made by Democratic Reps. Nancy Pelosi (on her own and with Steny Hoyer), George Miller, Debbie Wasserman-Shultz, Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, Jerrold Nadler, Jesse Jackson Jr., Sam Gibbons, Tom Lantos, Keith Ellison, Baron Hill, Jared Polis, Steve Cohen, Sheila Jackson Lee, Eleanor Holmes Norton and Louise Slaughter.  Or Senators Robert Byrd and Blanche Lincoln.  Or current Califonia governor Jerry Brown. Or repeat offender Al Gore.  People might be forgiven for thinking Democrats, not to mention Ornstein and Mann, take that extreme rhetoric for granted in their rush to condemn the GOP.

As for the supposed anti-science bent of the GOP, Ornstein and Mann probably should not have picked the week in which Gaia theorist James Lovelock announced he and others had been unduly alarmist about global warming to wheel out this particular trope.  Moreover, O&M apparently have not noticed the degree to which Democrats are anti-vaccination, anti-nuclear, and anti-animal research.  And they missed how Democrats ditch science whenever it threatens party dogma on race and gender issues. (more…)