Via CNN:

Hillary Clinton struck a strong populist chord while wading into territory secretary of states rarely go Thursday: Domestic policy. [. . .]

"The rich are not paying their fair share in any nation that is facing the kind of employment issues [like the U.S.] – whether it's individual, corporate or whatever the taxation forms are," Clinton said after clearly stipulating that these were her opinions, no those of the Obama administration.

[. . .] "Th[is] formula [. . .] used to work for us, until we abandoned it, to our regret in my opinion," she added.

Three thoughts. First, go Hillary! Second, is this appropriate for a Secretary of State? Honestly? I'd say no. Third, I think she will run for President in 2016. And win.

Speaking for me only

Officials say BP's "Top Kill" has stemmed the oil leak...for now.

The next 12 to 18 hours are critical and it could take 48 hours for a final assessment of Top Kill's success. The Times reports this is the biggest oil leak in history, bigger than the Exxon Valdez. Obama is in Louisiana today.

Steve Benen writes:

It's too soon to know if Republicans will re-take the House majority, but it's probably a good time to consider the consequences of a GOP majority. The obvious outcome is gridlock, with Republicans passing right-wing legislation, which would either be blocked by the Senate or vetoed at the White House. [. . .] But Jonathan Bernstein argues that we can also expect a GOP majority to at least try to impeach President Obama.

[More...]

Discussing Rand Paul, Ross Douthat writes:

This was all that Rand Paul needed to admit, after his victory in Kentucky’s Republican Senate primary, when NPR and Rachel Maddow asked about his views of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. “As a principled critic of federal power,” he could have said, “I oppose efforts to impose Washington’s will on states and private institutions. As a student of the history of segregation and slavery, however, I would have made an exception for the Civil Rights Act.”

[. . .] it shouldn’t come as a shock that [Rand Paul] found himself publicly undone, in what should have been his moment of triumph, because he was too proud to acknowledge the limits of ideology, and to admit that a principle can be pushed too far.

(Emphasis supplied.) Douthat is disingenuous here. The questions to be asked are obvious - what other "exceptions" should conservatives concede? Does Deep Water prove an "exception" is necessary for government regulation of commercial activities that affect the environment? Does the 2008 meltdown prove that an"exception" for government regulation of financial markets is in order? The "exceptions" swallow Douthat's conservative principles. Republicans and conservatives like Douthat have long expressed a desire to relitigate the New Deal. In describing the New Deal, Prof. Bruce Ackerman wrote:

Sarah Palin was in Denver last night, speaking to her usual fringe following. Political scientist Larry Sabato seems to be drinking the kool-aid:

"She's avant-garde. She's a feminist. She cuts a dashing figure...Whether you love her or you hate her, you don't go to sleep when Sarah Palin comes on."

No, those of us with brains change the channel or turn off the TV. And just how is a reactionary like Palin considered "avant-garde?" And a Feminist? No, how about just crassly opportunistic.

Now back to regular programming.

The Act exceeds Congress’s powers under Article I of the Constitution of the United States, and cannot be upheld under the Commerce Clause, Const. art. I, §8; the Taxing and Spending Clause, id.; or any other provision of the Constitution. -- Para. 56 of the Complaint (PDF) joined by 20 Republican-led states challenging Congress's power under the Commerce Clause to enact the Obama Health Bill

Republican Senators will question Elena Kagan on the constitutionality of the Obama health bill:

[O]n Fox News, Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) said that he wants to make this fringe view of health care reform a centerpiece of Solicitor General Elena Kagan’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing:

BARRASSO: Twenty states right now, Martha, are suing the federal government, and she is going to have to make a decision if she’s on the court about how that goes forward with these 20 states suing. So where do states’ rights come in, where is the role of the federal government, what can they mandate to the American people, and I’m going to want to hear answers on that.

(Emphasis supplied.) Rand Paul's views on the Civil Rights Act and the Congress' Commerce Clause powers are not fringe Republican views. They are mainstream Republican views. The Republicans yearn for a return to the idyllic pre-1937 Era.

Speaking for me only

"I am Spartacus Rahmbo!" This appears to be the new rallying cry.

Why not go whole hog? Why not call them effing retarded?

Go ahead - punch those hippies. It feels great!

Speaking for me only

Via DougJ, from Republican and former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson:

[I]t would be absurd to deny that the Republican ideological coalition includes elements that are anti-immigrant -- those who believe that Hispanics, particularly Mexicans, are a threat to American culture and identity. When Arizona Republican Senate candidate J.D. Hayworth calls for a moratorium on legal immigration from Mexico, when then-Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) refers to Miami as a "Third World country," when state Rep. Russell Pearce (R), one of the authors of the Arizona immigration law, says Mexicans' and Central Americans' "way of doing business" is different, Latinos can reasonably assume that they are unwelcome in certain Republican circles.

[. . .] Republicans have now sent three clear signals to Hispanic voters: [1] California's Proposition 187, [. . . 2] the immigration debate of 2006, dominated by strident Republican opponents of reform; and now [3] the Arizona immigration law. [. . .] In a matter of months, Hispanic voters in Arizona have gone from being among the most pro-GOP in the nation to being among the most hostile.

[. . .] Whatever temporary gains Republicans might make feeding resentment of this demographic shift, the party identified with that resentment will eventually be voted into singularity. In a matter of decades, the Republican Party could cease to be a national party.

Yep.

John Amato:

BIG h/t to Cypress Hill for stepping up to the plate[:]

Rap veterans Cypress Hill have cancelled an upcoming concert in Arizona in protest of a new state immigration law. [. . .] Explaining the move in a statement, the California-based Latin group says, "This decision was made in an effort to show support and solidarity with those, undocumented and otherwise, being directly affected by this unconstitutional law. Cypress Hill recognizes those living in the struggle for their basic civil rights."

Please support Cypress Hill, dog.

The Media will tell you today that according to the latest NBC/WSJ poll, 64% of Americans support AZ SB 1070. What does this mean? I venture to say nothing. They May also tell you that 70% of Hispanics oppose the law. What does this mean. A whole hell of a lot. I discussed this earlier, but asking a question does not tell you what the political impact of the answer really is. Let's look at the poll (PDF):

Q. 11 [W]hich one of the following stories that have been covered by news organizations in the last few weeks is of most concern to you personally?

The Gulf Coast oil spill.............. 38
The attempted terrorist attack in Times Square, New York ... 31
New immigration legislation passed in Arizona ..... 19
The criminal investigation into Goldman Sachs ...................... 8
Florida Governor Charlie Crist changing parties ........................................ 1
None of these........................... 2

(Emphasis supplied.) Starting to get the picture? More . . .

This Brad DeLong post is rightly getting a lot of attention:

The most astonishing and surprising thing I find about Washington DC today is the contrast in mood between DC today and what DC was thinking a generation ago, in 1983, the last time the unemployment rate was kissing 10%. Back then it was a genuine national emergency that unemployment was so high [. . .] Today…. nobody much in DC seems to care. A decade of widening wealth inequality that has created a chattering class of reporters, pundits, and lobbyists who have no connection with mainstream America? The collapse of the union movement and thus of the political voice of America’s sellers of labor power? I don’t know what the cause is. But it does astonish me.

I like to criticize the Beltway as much as anyone, but this phenomenon transcends DC and has infected the entire country. I used to write a lot about the concept of the Common Good and how it historically animated the Dem Party and how it should again. But it simply hasn't. Matt Yglesias writes:

I guess hating on Latinos will not be the centerpiece of the GOP platform in 2012:

Officials said the Phoenix bid was complicated by the high temperatures in August and the recent debate over the state’s new immigration law.

Florida, of course, is nice and cool in August. Maybe Florida was chosen to highlight how Charlie Crist is the new face of the GOP . . . oh wait . . .

AZ SB 1070, a resounding success already!

Speaking for me only