You may have heard it from Chris Cuomo on CNN during the Democratic debate, and from Anderson Cooper (at approximately 5:00 You may have read it from Jeff Greenfield, who claimed he "took a body
shot from Julián Castro, who (inaccurately) accused him of forgetting what he’d
said a moment earlier, but didn’t crumple." You can read it from
supposedly straight news reporter Rebecca Morin of USA Today, who quoted the leading candidate stating "Anyone who can't afford it gets automatically enrolled in the
Medicare-type option we have" and (Morin added) "Several minutes later, if Americans lose their insurance, 'you
automatically can buy into this.'"
Neither Morin, who is paid to be objective, nor Cuomo or
Greenfield, who are not, noted that former Vice-President Joe Biden had stated
also
If you want Medicare, if you lose the job from your
insurance — from your employer, you automatically can buy into this. You don't
have — no pre-existing condition can stop you from buying in. You get covered,
period.
You automatically can buy into this (and) no pre-existing
condition can stop you from buying in.
That means two things: 1) Julian Castro was accurate when he charged
Biden with having said "just two minutes ago that they would have to buy
in;" and 2) Cuomo, Greenfield, and Morin did not follow what Biden said or did
not read the transcript.
Rebecca Morin of Axios, by contrast, is merely confused. She points
out "Biden did reference his plan earlier in the night saying that anyone
who can't afford gets automatically enrolled in the medicare type option."
However, he had not stated "Medicare" but "Medicare-type
option," which may be anything given reference to Medicare-type and option, the latter a funny way of describing something which is
automatic.
Later, in the exchange featuring Castro's charge, Biden
indicated that it would not be automatic. ("Nothing can stop you from
buying in.")
It is possible, of course, that if elected, Joe Biden will
undergo a progressive transformation and- under pressure from Republicans not
to permit any option- will demand that the GOP accept automatic enrollment. And
I am the King of England.
If you believe the 22 "experts, insiders, activists and
political professionals" polled by Politico about the Democratic
presidential debate of Thursday night, one thing is clear
"Castro was mean, and too biting."
"The loser of the night, hands down, was former Housing
and Urban Development Secretary Castro for taking a cheap shot at Biden on his
memory. Dinging Biden for his age was a calculated risk that failed. You can
have policy differences without getting personal."
"Biden did little to dispel the notion that he has lost
his fastball, though he may have received an inadvertent boost from Castro’s
ill-advised, mean-spirited personal attack."
"Castro, on the other hand, secured the title of the
biggest loser. His mean-spirited remarks directed at Biden drew boos from the
audience and uncomfortable looks from the debate stage."
".... while irrelevant players like Castro took overly
aggressive swipes toward the front-runner former vice president..."
"The underperfomers were Castro, Yang and Buttigeig.
Castro came off as too hot."
"I doubt that—or Castro proving less effective than
normal at knifing people—moves the numbers up or down."
"Castro’s attacks on Biden didn’t come off as
calculated or strategic; they came off as mean. He came off as unlikeable and
insensitive."
"In an evening marked by civility and calls for unity,
Castro misplayed his interaction with Biden over what he could and could not
recall."
The only positive comment about the confrontation in the
first half hour between former HUD Secretary Julian Castro and former Vice
President Joe "a noun, a verb, and Barack Obama" Biden came from
political science professor Seth Maskett.
If you read everyone's statement, one obvious omission is consideration of whether Casro's charge was accurate. Although that's difficult to determine definitively- understanding Biden's health care plan is even more difficult than
understanding the ACA- the verdict still should be yes.
Castro charged
I know that the
problem with your plan is that it leaves 10 million people uncovered.
Now, on the last debate stage in Detroit, you said that
wasn’t true, when Senator Harris brought that up. There was a fact check of
that, and they said that was true...
If they choose to hold on to strong, solid private health
insurance, I believe they should be able to do. But the difference between what
I support and what you support, Vice President Biden, is that you require them
to opt in and I would not require them to opt in. They would automatically be
enrolled. They wouldn't have a buy in.
And then the figurative fireworks:
BIDEN: They do not have to buy in. They do not have to buy
in.
CASTRO: You just said that. You just said that two minutes
ago. You just two minutes ago that they would have to buy in.
BIDEN: Do not have to buy in if you can't afford it.
CASTRO: You said they would have to buy in.
BIDEN: Your grandmother would not have to buy in. If she
qualifies for Medicaid, she would automatically be enrolled.
CASTRO: Are you forgetting what you said two minutes ago?
Are you forgetting already what you said just two minutes ago? I mean, I can't
believe that you said two minutes ago that they had to buy in and now you're
saying they don't have to buy in. You're forgetting that.
BIDEN: I said anyone like your grandmother who has no money.
CASTRO: I mean, look, look, we need a health care system...
BIDEN: She — you're automatically enrolled.
Automatically enrolled? Not quite, Wilmington/Scranton Joe,
for you had stated
The option I'm proposing is Medicare-for-all — Medicare for
choice. If you want Medicare, if you lose the job from your insurance — from
your employer, you automatically can buy into this. You don't have — no
pre-existing condition can stop you from buying in. You get covered, period.
Very likely Biden sneaked in the word
"automatically" to assure voters that it would be easy to opt in- or
simply to mislead them. He stated that individuals who want Medicare "can
buy into this. You don't have- no pre-existing condition can stop you from
buying in." ("You get covered, period" emphasizes that the person will be covered as long as she buys in, with no further requirements.)
Castro was widely slammed for implying his rival was
suffering from dementia because of the criticism
Are you forgetting what you said two minutes ago? Are you
forgetting already what you said just two minutes ago? I mean, I can't believe
that you said two minutes ago that they had to buy in and now you're saying
they don't have to buy in. You're forgetting that.
It was, we are to believe, "insensitive," "a
cheap shot," and "mean-spirited," or at least
"ill-advised." Perhaps Castro
should have said "there you go again, intentionally misleading voters.
We've already had too much of that the past four years," which would have implied that the former Senator and veep is a liar. But there was no
reason that front-runner Joseph R. Biden should have been allowed to reverse
course and contradict himself without someone calling him out on it.
Elizabeth Warren was right, though it took another
candidate- Kirsten Gillibrand- to prove it. On May 14, Senator Warren defended herdecision not to bolster Fox News' bottom line and give the network cover against
advertisers queasy about a far-right network in Donald Trump's pocket. She
used a series of Twitter messages to accuse the network of
giving “a megaphone to racists and conspiracists” and providing cover for
corruption. She also returned to one of her campaign’s central themes, framing
the channel as the sort of corporate “profit machine” she has railed against.
“Hate-for-profit works only if there’s profit, so Fox News
balances a mix of bigotry, racism, and outright lies with enough legit
journalism to make the claim to advertisers that it’s a reputable news outlet,”
Ms. Warren wrote. “It’s all about dragging in ad money — big ad money.”
“A Democratic town hall gives the Fox News sales team a way
to tell potential sponsors it’s safe to buy ads on Fox,” she continued. “I won’t
ask millions of Democratic primary voters to tune into an outlet that profits
from racism and hate.”
Refusing to perform (and it is a performance) at a town hall
must have been a difficult decision because nobody has failed to come out smelling
like a rose in this venue since President George Herbert Walker Bush repeatedly
looked at his watch while debating Bill Clinton in 1992. It's set up that way,
and no politician fails to charm the audience.
So Warren's position was an outlier, for which the
Massachusetts senator has faced some criticism. Yet if not earlier, it became
clear what the objective of these affairs is when
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) challenged Fox News’
coverage of abortion during a town hall event on Sunday, accusing the network
of peddling disinformation to the chagrin of host Chris Wallace.
Gillibrand, the latest Democratic candidate among a crowded
field to appear on the network for an hourlong Q&A session, used a question
about late-term abortions to pivot toward Fox News’ coverage of the issue. Just
over 1% of abortions across the country are performed at 21 weeks or later,
according the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, but such procedures
get outspoken criticism by groups against reproductive rights.
“What we’ve created, unfortunately, is a false choice and a
false narrative. Chris, I want to talk about the role Fox News plays in this,
because it’s a problem,” Gillibrand said in response to the question. “I can
tell you before President Trump gave his State of the Union, Fox News talked
about infanticide. Infanticide doesn’t exist.”
Wallace quickly cut the senator off, saying that the network
had invited her there as a guest and had thus far been treating her “fairly.”
“I understand, maybe to make your credentials with the
Democrats who are not appearing on Fox News, you are going to attack us,”
Wallace said. “I’m not sure, frankly, it’s not very polite when we’ve invited
you to be here.”
Gillibrand said she would address her concerns politely, and
continued on.
She continued (inserting criticism of Fox News), passionately defending her position on abortion while avoiding answering the actual question asked. That was satisfactory to the Fox News host because these events aren't really about information, anyway.
We don't know Senator Gillibrand's view of late-term abortion specifically, but we do know that these
"town halls" are a charade, with the intent to normalize an extreme
cable "news" network among advertisers. We know that as long as Fox
News can host good little boys and girls who participate in the charade by
avoiding criticizing Fox News, everyone wins.
Thus far, Gillibrand, Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar, and Bernie Sanders have appeared, with Julian Castro due later this week and Bill
deBlasio negotiating. Those who have or will show up know what the deal is. It's not
necessarily with the devil, but it is in return for the inevitable applause,
good optics, and favorable news coverage. However, with Warren's emphatic
refusal and the decision of Kamala Harris not to participate, we're learning which candidates aren't going
to play ball with Trump TV and the expectation that candidates show deference to it.
Merriam-Webster defines "idiot" as "a foolish
or stupid person." Donald Trump is no idiot, although the former mayor and cabinet secretary from Texas evidently believes he is, given that
Democratic presidential hopeful Julián Castro heard about
President Trump’s rally in Panama City Beach, Florida, on Wednesday night—and
he’s not having it.
“The president,” he said in an interview with Mother
Jones on Thursday, “is being a grade-A idiot.”
Trump was speaking about the tens of thousands of migrants
at the US-Mexico border when he started talking about Border Patrol agents
using deadly force. “And don’t forget—we don’t let them and we can’t let them
use weapons,” Trump said. “We can’t. Other countries do. We can’t. I would
never do that. But how do you stop these people? You can’t. There’s—”
From the crowd, a woman reportedly yelled
out, “Shoot them!”
The president paused before deadpanning, “That’s only in the
Panhandle you can get away with that stuff. Only in the Panhandle!
People love being name-checked, even if it's in apparent
ridicule. Evangelical Christians adore Donald Trump not only because he
supports forced-birth and puts right-wing judges onto the US Supreme Court, but
also because he mentions them, directly or indirectly. It's why
the Christian right loved him his flippant remark "That's my second favorite book
of all time. You know what my favorite is?" The Bible!
Nothing beats the Bible, not even The Art of the Deal. Not even
close." (Of course, Trump wrote about as much of "The Art of the Deal" as he
did of the Bible.)
It's why he came out unscathed- arguably even more popular- when he demeaned, by misrepresenting, the sacrament of communion by stating "When I drink my little wine — which
is about the only wine I drink — and have my little cracker, I guess that is a
form of asking for forgiveness, and I do that as often as possible because I
feel cleansed. I think in terms of ‘let’s go on and let’s make it right.'”
And it's one of the reasons the crowd roared it's approval
when Trump,with a "boy are these people off the wall" look, said "it's only in the Panhandle you can get away with that
stuff."
Mother Jones added
In an exclusive interview in San Antonio, Castro slammed
Trump, calling his behavior “unbecoming of a president.”
“I mean, the president is being a grade-A idiot,” he said.
“Entertaining the idea that you would shoot a human being just because they’re
looking for a better life. You know, somebody can think that that’s all fun and
games, but we’ve already seen during this administration the level of hate
crimes increase. We’ve seen so many white supremacists go out there and say
that they’re inspired by President Trump and shoot people. And so he’s being a
grade-A idiot.
The President is no grade-A idiot, or any kind of
idiot. Journalist Greg Sargent and another tweeter recognize:
That “totally exonerated him” is for people who haven’t read any of the report, and “is a partisan hit job” is for people who are aware of the report’s contents. All bases covered. Trump loyalists can pick which one works best for them.
Trump is skillfully trying to have it both ways, yet either
approach satisfies the longing of Trump's base supporters for the red meat it
wants served up to them. It is an effective strategy which belies the argument
that the President is an idiot or his remarks idiotic. And each time Julian Castro or another political
opponent mistakes evil for idiocy, it reinforces the impression that Donald J.
Trump as merely another flawed politician, but one devoted to the interests of
his supporters and of the country
