Flailing Away At Trump

There is no stand-up comedy routine that can compete with the arguments of the conservatives who took part in National Review's recent "The Case Against Trump" (although a fellow named Reno makes a little sense).

Take Hoover Institution senior fellow Thomas Sowell, whom Republicans long have relished pointing out as a black conservative and intellectual. Uncertain whether Donald Trump or Barack Obama is more of a Nazi, he writes

No national leader ever aroused more fervent emotions than Adolf Hitler did in the 1930s. Watch some old newsreels of German crowds delirious with joy at the sight of him. The only things at all comparable in more recent times were the ecstatic crowds that greeted Barack Obama when he burst upon the political scene in 2008.

That's from an "intellectual," although as Gary Legum points out, conservative intellectual is on the same level as the oxymoron "jumbo shrimp;" or as Charlie Pierce writes, "yes, expanding healthcare and invading Poland, virtually the same thing."

Dana Loesch writes "Dissent used to be 'patriotic' — until the Obama administration used its alphabet agencies to persecute groups such as True the Vote and deny conservative organizations nonprofit status."  Truly frightening the number of conservative groups which lost their non-profit status, a number approaching one.

There was at least one liberal group, the Maine chapter of Emerge America, which did lose its non-profit status, while we await conservatives identifying one conservative group met the same fate. "You can see Dana being oppressed pretty regularly on CNN these days," Pierce remarks, "Give me phony tax breaks or give me death!"

Among those groups investigated, and not "persecuted," were those with "9/12" in their name, which fairly shouts Glenn Beck!, who started the "9/12" movement.  Glenn Beck's contribution to the NR issue included condemning Trump for supporting the "three policies" constituting the "endless fractures in the façade of individual freedom," which he identified as "the stimulus, the auto bailouts, and the bank bailouts."  Surely, there is nothing that defines authoritarianism better than putting 1-3 million more Americans to work, and afterward saving the American automobile industry. And when Beck starts supporting Dodd-Frank (or a strengthening of the legislation) or a breakup of the big banks, we'll all lose consciousness from uncontrollable laughter.

That's no more foolish, however, than the remarks of Federalist publisher Ben Domenech who as a frequent guest on MSNBC's "All In," Chris Hayes appears to find credible. Domenech believes

President Obama’s core domestic-policy agenda was designed to pull working- and middle-class voters left. It assumed that once they received the government’s redistributive largesse, they would be invested in maintaining it — and maintaining the Left in power. Trump’s rise bespeaks the utter failure of this program for the American working class: They have seen the Left’s agenda up close and do not believe it is good enough to make a nation great.

You know about that "government largesse," in which under our socialist President, the top 1% captured over 99% of all income gains generated in the USA from 2009-2012 (graphs, top .1% wealth share in the USA. over time and comparison of wealth among the richest over time, from Saez and Zucman). And it's where the federal minimum wage, stuck at $7.25 per hour since 2009, is worth $4.82 in constant 1996 dollars.

Arguably the most common theme which emerges from the opinions published by the NR is that Trump does not represent traditonal conservative values. The libertarian vice president of the Cato Institute, David Boaz, noted Trump's authoritarian tendencies. However, in a similar vein to Sean Hannity, who once implicitly compared the 40th President to Jesus Christ in his "What Would Reagan Do" campaign, Boaz also wrote

Not since George Wallace has there been a presidential candidate who made racial and religious scapegoating so central to his campaign. Trump launched his campaign talking about Mexican rapists and has gone on to rant about mass deportation, bans on Muslim immigration, shutting down mosques, and building a wall around America. America is an exceptional nation in large part because we’ve aspired to rise above such prejudices and guarantee life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to everyone....

I think we can say that this is a Republican campaign that would have appalled Buckley, Goldwater, and Reagan.

Reagan-love strikes again.  Law professor and author Ian Haney-Lopez explains

Reagan’s race-baiting continued when he moved to national politics. After securing the Republican nomination in 1980, Reagan launched his official campaign at a county fair just outside Philadelphia, Mississippi, the town still notorious in the national imagination for the Klan lynching of civil rights volunteers James Chaney, Andrew Goodman, and Michael Schwerner 16 years earlier. Reagan selected the location on the advice of a local official, who had written to the Republican National Committee assuring them that the Neshoba County Fair was an ideal place for winning “George Wallace inclined voters.” Neshoba did not disappoint. The candidate arrived to a raucous crowd of perhaps 10,000 whites chanting “We want Reagan! We want Reagan!”—and he returned their fevered embrace by assuring them, “I believe in states’ rights.” In 1984, Reagan came back, this time to endorse the neo-Confederate slogan “the South shall rise again"....

Reagan also trumpeted his racial appeals in blasts against welfare cheats. On the stump, Reagan repeatedly invoked a story of a “Chicago welfare queen” with “eighty names, thirty addresses, [and] twelve Social Security cards [who] is collecting veteran’s benefits on four non-existing deceased husbands. She’s got Medicaid, getting food stamps, and she is collecting welfare under each of her names. Her tax-free cash income is over $150,000.” Often, Reagan placed his mythical welfare queen behind the wheel of a Cadillac, tooling around in flashy splendor. Beyond propagating the stereotypical image of a lazy, larcenous black woman ripping off society’s generosity without remorse.


Libertarians are like that. As long as the stereotypes don't include "black" or "white," no harm is intended. For that matter, most conservatives have come a long way- tactically- since the tim Lee Atwater used "Ni_ _ _ _ freely to describe GOP strategy. Even without the overt appeal to bigotry, however, the National Review symposium is, as Pierce put it, "the '27 Yankees of bad ideas."

Share |

Not For Votes

On Tuesday, a class action lawsuit was to be filed against Michigan Governor Rick Snyder and others, the National Guard was being brought in to Flint, and the mayor of the Michigan city was meeting with White House super-aide Valerie Jarrett.  Mayor Karen Weaver would urge declaration of an emergency in her city to obtain direct federal aid. Media Matters reported that Fox News host Heather Nauert, concerned it might be approved, responded "well, this is a way they could potentially get more black votes in the coming election" (video, below).






Not to worry, Ms. Nauert. The Republican Party will not cease its effort to prevent black people from voting.

There are several reasons drinking lead is not a good thing, one of which- its connection to crime- Bill Maher helpfully pointed out on Friday's Real Time.   Kevin Drum, relying on the research of Rick Nevin (graphs below, his) and others, has done groundbreaking report on the impact upon the youthful brain of lead and the strong evidence in the USA and abroad, of a link between lead and crime.

It so happens, additionally, that one skeptic of the theory has inadvertently contributed to substantiating it.  In April, 2014 Mark Kleiman quoted Duke University's Phil Cook writing

My skepticism about the “lead removal” explanation for the crime drop stems from the same source as my skepticism about the Donohue-Levitt explanation in terms of abortion legalization. They have an exact parallel to the previous explanations for the surge in violence of the late ‘80s by John DiIulio and others. The focus in both cases is the character of the kids – the belief that during the 80s the teens were getting “worse,” and during the 90s they were getting “better.” Even a fairly casual glance at the data demonstrates that whatever the cause of the crime surge, and then the crime drop, it was not associated with particular cohorts. It was an environmental effect – 10 cohorts were swept up in the crime surge simultaneously, and the drop has the same correlated pattern.

Except: no. Crime rates for youth and for adults increased separately and dropped separately.   Using data through 2012, Nevins noted

... the declining prison population reflects plummeting incarceration rates for young adults, offset by higher rates for older adults. These incarceration trends result from arrest rate trends by age, caused by earlier preschool lead exposure trends. From 2002 to 2012, the incarceration rate fell 51% for men ages 18-19, 30% for men ages 20-24, and 21% for men ages 25-29. ...

The aging prison population is partly due to longer sentences, but mostly reflects arrest rate trends by age. From 1992-2012, violent crime (murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) arrest rates fell 61% for ages 10-17, 51% for ages 18-19, and 42% for ages 20-29, but increased by 11% for ages 45-54.

There are a bunch of reasons for getting the lead out, and for the federal government to assist the State of Michigan and the city of Flint in switching to safe water.  If Nauer and other conservatives don't want to see this happen, they're going to have to do a lot better than complaining that Democrats are eager for votes from blacks.

Share |

Feminists Who Want The State To Control Womens' Bodies

"Nearly half a century after Roe v. Wade," Carlos Maza of Media Matters writes (with the accompanying video), "news coverage of abortion stories continues to be plagued by negative and damaging stereotypes about the procedure. Those stereotypes are the product of 'abortion stigma,' and they pose a real threat to accurate abortion coverage."







The best way to combat abortion stigma is through personal stories of courageous women who have had abortions and are willing to talk about them. In the meantime, the neo-liberal Vox strikes a blow against womens' autonomy with articles like the one by former Roman Catholic missionary Claire Swinarski  on the occasion of the 43rd anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

Swinarski contends "Family leave and child care access are areas where the feminist and pro-life agendas perfectly intersect: Better policies are good for women, and could help reduce the perceived need for abortion." No need to belabor the reality that most of the anti-choice base (arguably) opposes family leave and child care access while most anti-choice politicians (inarguably) oppose family leave and child care access.

Similarly, Swinarski recommends "society" find "ways to tackle these (social) structures at their base and try to realize why exactly so many African-American women find themselves in a situation where they don't have the resources to make it through a pregnancy and potentially adoption or parenthood."

We don't have to look too hard; we've known about them for quite some time. They include discrimination, low pay, insufficient public transportation and funding for schools in poor communities, and other policies typically favored by the vast majority of anti-choice politicians, most of whom are Republicans.

Other factors include inadequate sex education and restricted access to contraceptives. Curiously, the same Swinarski who bleeds concern for "African-American women (who) find themselves in a (difficult) situation" reveals she "joined the pro-life campus group at my liberal state school. We prayed outside of a Planned Parenthood (after hours)."  Protesting an organization dedicated to availing women of birth control, information about pregnancy, and health care is bizarre behavior for a self-proclaimed "feminist."

Citing Madeleine Albright and J.K. Rowling, Swinarski notes "Mothers — successful, thriving mothers — are everywhere." Pro-choice advocates, however, have never denied that mothers can be successful. (And unlike Swinarski, they probably know of more than two.) The issue is one of choice and of reproductive freedom.

"Humans have free will," she  argues, and "society projects a moral code on people every day."  Equality, free will, moral code: then she assures us "we have no interest in legal punishment for women who've had abortions."   Evidently, we need to condone ending what they consider a life, but without any consequences for the person responsible for the decision.  For Swinarski, there is a question of how much she truly respects women. For her fellow travelers, there is a question whether they truly believe the fetus is a life.

Swinarski is right when she maintains March for Life marchers "are not just conservative, mindless drones." But if "they support women," as Swinarski claims, and she is the feminist she claims to be, I'm a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist.

Share |

Only The Beginning

On January 18, as introduction to his interview of Michigan governor Rick Snyder, the National Journal's Ron Fournier wrote

The slow and pos­sibly deadly pois­on­ing of Flint, a hard-bit­ten in­dus­tri­al town of nearly 100,000, began in April 2014, when the city switched its wa­ter source from De­troit to the Flint River to save money. Res­id­ents’ con­cerns were ig­nored for 19 months un­til in­de­pend­ent tests by Vir­gin­ia Tech and a loc­al hos­pit­al re­vealed dan­ger­ous levels of lead ex­pos­ure.

Only then did Michigan’s en­vir­on­ment­al agency ad­mit to vi­ol­at­ing fed­er­al reg­u­la­tions re­quir­ing the treat­ment of Flint’s wa­ter to avoid cor­ro­sion of the city’s an­cient wa­ter pipes, a lapse that caused the lead pois­on­ing. The fate­ful de­cision to switch Flint’s wa­ter source was made by an emer­gency city man­ager ap­poin­ted by Snyder.

In early 2015, months be­fore the lead pois­on­ing was pub­licly an­nounced, an ana­lyst at the En­vir­on­ment­al Pro­tec­tion Agency dis­covered dan­ger­ous levels of lead in Flint’s wa­ter. An appointee of President Obama forbade the results from being released to the public.

Presumably, we've now determined who that appointee is, for on Thursday we learned

The Environmental Protection Agency's regional administrator for Flint, Michigan, has resigned, the agency said in a statement Thursday.

"EPA Region 5 Administrator Susan Hedman has offered her resignation effective February 1, and EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy has accepted given Susan's strong interest in ensuring that EPA Region 5's focus remains solely on the restoration of Flint's drinking water," the agency said.

In late June, then-Flint Mayor Dayne Walling wrote to Hedman, seeking information about the issue of lead in Flint's drinking water. She essentially shot him down in her response.

"The preliminary draft report should not have been released outside the agency. When the report has been revised and fully vetted by EPA management, the findings and recommendations will be shared with the City and MDEQ (Michigan Department of Environmental Quality) -- and MDEQ will be responsible for following up with the City," Hedman wrote.

She had also fallen under fire for allegedly retaliating against EPA employees involved in investigating sexual harassment cases.

President Obama now has pledged $80 million to the state of Michigan for improving its water-related infrastructure.  That is a good start, as is the resignation of the official who apparently kept scientific findings from the public for several months, during which lead exposure to the citizens of Flint (Flint River from Bill Pugliano/Getty Images, below) continued to rise.  It is now time for the media to begin to hold accountable Governor Snyder, his appointees, and the GOP-controlled legislature for their role in destroying one of Michigan's cities.

Share |

In The Manner Of Speaking

On Wednesday, Rush Limbaugh needed to explain away the endorsement by a woman he admires, Sarah Palin, for a candidate he continually defends but does not support for the GOP's presidential nomination. He observed

The point is that if conservatism were this widely understood, deeply held belief system that united conservatives and united people as conservatives, then outsiders like Trump wouldn't stand a prayer of getting support from people.  Yet he is.  Therefore, it's safe to conclude that there are other things at play here that make people conservative.  And look, I'm gonna go back to it. 

The thing that's in front of everybody's face and it's apparently so hard to believe, it's this united, virulent opposition to the left and the Democrat Party and Barack Obama.  And I, for the life of me, don't know what's so hard to understand about that.

For much of the Republican base, feeling has always been paramount. The candidate needs to feel the grievances he or she does, and must express it well, as do Trump and Palin. Logic and evidence are optional, and generally nowhere in sight.

Akin to that is the sense that the candidate cares about what they themselves care about or feel. The leading GOP candidate stated (segment below) at Libery University "Two Corinthians, 3:17. That's the whole ballgame. 'Where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. And here is liberty." There was a bit of chuckling, and later a little ridicule, because Trump referred to "Two Corinthians" rather than "Second Corinthians."

Less discussed was Trump's remark, in reference to 2 Corinthians 3:17, "Is that the one? Is that the one you like? I think that's the one you liked, because I love it."

Here is Trump at his Trumpest- telling people he's pandering to them.  It was similar to his irreverent pronouncement while campaigning in August in Birch Run, Michigan that The Art of the Deal was only "my second favorite book of all time. Do you know what my first is? The Bible! Nothing beats the Bible."

Perhaps Trump was channeling the '80s commercials with the tagline "Nobody beats the WIZ" because no evangelical ever will compare the Bible to any book. If you believe it is divinely inspired, it is incomparable, in a category of its own, not unlike Aaron Rodgers as a quarterback. Or maybe even unlike that.

But they love the pander, as reflected in the remark of a Liberty University senior "I think the fact that he's putting forth an effort to relate to us is omething decent." Translated: He may not believe it, but at least he cares enough about us that he's saying what he knows we want to hear.

They have to like the effort, because he doesn't talk like they do.  In Michigan, it was "nothing beats the Bible." In Lynchburg, it was "Two Corinthians." Also, in Lynchburg it was "I'm a Protestant. I'm very proud of it. Presbyterian, to be exact.  But I'm very proud of it; very, very proud of it."

Few people (outside of Northern Ireland) refer to themselves these days as "Protestant." Roman Catholics may refer to themselves as "Catholic" and some Catholics (and possibly Orthodox Christians) as well as many Protestants refer to themselves as "Christian." But "Protestant?" Sad to say- as Trump would word it- very, very few.

Having declared himself "Protestant," it was a wise move to add the sect, Presbyterianism.  Still, not many Americans confess to being proud of their religious affiliation, especially if passed on to them by their parents. They may assert pride in their Christian faith or belief but rarely admit to pride in being Catholic or Protestant. If not politically incorrect, it is sociologically incorrect. But then as Trump would proudly assert, there is nothing correct or conventional about his campaign.

Share |

Racism Only One Factor In Opportunity Gap

Critical of Bernie Sanders, the Atlantic's Ta-Neheisi Coates has made a fine argument for the nomination, and election, of the Vermont senator.

Those familiar with the writing of Coates recognize him as a fervent advocate of reparations for African-Americans.  Sanders was asked last week at a forum in Iowa whether he supports "reparations for slavery" and according to Coates responded

No, I don’t think so. First of all, its likelihood of getting through Congress is nil. Second of all, I think it would be very divisive. The real issue is when we look at the poverty rate among the African American community, when we look at the high unemployment rate within the African American community, we have a lot of work to do.

So I think what we should be talking about is making massive investments in rebuilding our cities, in creating millions of decent paying jobs, in making public colleges and universities tuition-free, basically targeting our federal resources to the areas where it is needed the most and where it is needed the most is in impoverished communities, often African American and Latino.

This reply did not satisfy Coates, not in the least. He argues

This is the “class first” approach, originating in the myth that racism and socialism are necessarily incompatible. But raising the minimum wage doesn’t really address the fact that black men without criminal records have about the same shot at low-wage work as white men with them; nor can making college free address the wage gap between black and white graduates. Housing discrimination, historical and present, may well be the fulcrum of white supremacy. Affirmative action is one of the most disputed issues of the day. Neither are addressed in the “racial justice” section of Sanders platform.

Sanders’s anti-racist moderation points to a candidate who is not merely against reparations, but one who doesn’t actually understand the argument. To briefly restate it, from 1619 until at least the late 1960s, American institutions, businesses, associations, and governments—federal, state, and local—repeatedly plundered black communities. Their methods included everything from land-theft, to red-lining, to disenfranchisement, to convict-lease labor, to lynching, to enslavement, to the vending of children. So large was this plunder that America, as we know it today, is simply unimaginable without it. Its great universities were founded on it. Its early economy was built by it. Its suburbs were financed by it.Its deadliest war was the result of it.

Coates' argument fails on several accounts (not all of which will be addressed here) and begins with his assertion that the "class first" approach originates "in the myth that racism and socialism are necessarily incompatible."

Sanders, who has not denied nor embraced the "socialist" label, has never alleged that racism and socialism are necessarily incompatible. It is not an issue, nor should it be. Instead, he realizes that as someone's economic circumstances improve, her socio-economic class- or at least the perception of her socio-economic class- is elevated.  At that point, white people (presumably, hispanics and Asians also, though they are missing from an analysis which presumes all Americans are of either European or African descent) perceive the individual differently.

That is dramatically true of the perception of black people by white people. Some of that derives, unfortunately, from surprise that a black can make it so far. However, it may emanate also from a sincere appreciation of the individual's achievements or a recognition that the latter now is on the same (usually, middle class) level as the white person.  In either case, if the material aspects of a person's situation is improved, racism directed toward her diminishes.

It shouldn't be necessary to inform the author of that; but on planet Coates, it is. It shouldn't be necessary, either, to explain to Coates that not all white communities are extremely advantaged.  In fact, there is as much- nay, more- deviation among white communities as there is on average between white and black communities. Remind Coates that whites constitute a plurality of the poor people in the USA (table from U.S. Census via Institute for Policy Studies), and his narrative suffers further.

Efforts to reduce income inequality among all Americans, however, is of little interest to Coates, who contends "raising the minimum wage doesn’t really address the fact that black men without criminal records have about the same shot at low-wage work as white men with them; nor can making college free address the wage gap between black and white graduates."

Blacks comprise a disproportionate number of people being paid the minimum wage. It may not mean much to Ta-Nehisi Coates, but raising an individual's pay from $7.25 per hour- the federal minimum wage- to $15.00 an hour (as advocated by Sanders) would mean a great deal.  It would still be "low-wage work"; but low-wage work is a little more tolerable when the wage isn't so low.

Similarly, there are many blacks, especially young blacks, for whom college would be affordable only if free, or nearly so.    Not only would their employment and income prospects benefit, but as there are more, hence more successful, black graduates the good old boy white network would be eroded.  The wage gap thus is addressed, and far more effectively than blaming white racism.

Were "racism" as much a priority for Coates as he implies, his solution would not be reparations. Not only would it obviously be divisive- as Sanders recognizes- but would do little or nothing to address racism itself. Wage inequality and discrimination, in employment, housing, and elsewhere, are more important targets.  Sanctions against disparate treatment have a way of focusing the mind.

There is also an issue, a huge issue, of process with reparations.  Determining who gets what and when is a nearly insurmountable problem. It shouldn't escape our attention either that most of the victims of racism and/or discrimination are deceased, as are most of the perpetrators.  It's unfortunate that the latter cannot be held accountable. It's also unfortunate that quarterback Peyton Manning, before the decline in his throwing arm, never enjoyed the exceptional defense the Denver Broncos now possess.  Alas, sometimes the clock cannot be turned back.

Coates deserves credit, nonetheless, for being fair-minded. A more biased individual would not have quoted Bernie Sanders in full, which may have prevented wide distribution of a quote which demonstrates the importance of electing Bernard Sanders President.









Share |

This Goes Well Beyond Race

"Well Lester," the leading Democratic candidate said Sunday night in South Carolina in a debate strategically scheduled by Debbie Wasserman Schultz to discourage viewership,

I spent a lot of time last week being outraged by what’s happening in Flint, Michigan and I think every single American should be outraged. We’ve had a city in the United States of America where the population which is poor in many ways and majority African American has been drinking and bathing in lead contaminated water. And the governor of that state acted as though he didn’t really care.

He had request for help and he had basically stone walled. I’ll tell you what, if the kids in a rich suburb of Detroit had been drinking contaminated water and being bathed in it, there would’ve been action.

That's doubtful, but moot.  Neither children in rich suburbs in Detroit, nor children in any rich community in Michigan, has to put up with this.

Writing for MSNBC in March of 2013, Ned Resnikoff explained how democratically-elected mayors and city councils are "neutered" by the State of Michigan, which since 1990 has had the authority to assign Emergency Financial Managers to downtrodden municipalities and cash-bereft school districts. In 2011 the GOP-controlled legislature passed, and Republican governor Rick Snyder signed, Public Act 4, which was later repealed in a referendum but replaced with the nearly-identical Public Act 36. Though

Ostensibly a mechanism for rescuing insolvent Michigan cities and school districts from the brink of bankruptcy, the Emergency Management system has turned into a way for unelected officials to break up public sector unions, privatize public services, and drastically shrink the size of municipal governments. Currently, five Michigan cities are being administered by emergency managers—all of whom were appointed by the state’s Local Emergency Financial Assistance Loan Board (ELB).

When a city fails to meet certain financial benchmarks, the state can step in.

“Basically, there’s a set of conditions that trigger this law, things like missing a payroll or bound default,” Michigan State University economist Eric Scorsone told msnbc. A state review team then examines the city or school districts’ financial health for the governor, who then decides whether a financial emergency has taken place. The governor and state treasurer then determine whether “local officials have the wherewithal to enact a plan,” Scorsone said.

Several Michigan municipalities have fallen under control of an emergency manager, who has assumed greater power since the most recent law was put into effect 36 months ago. It has disproportionately encumbered black citizens more than white; however, the chance to rip up labor contracts, sell public assets, and impose new taxes has been a far greater incentive than any effort to disadvantage African-Americans.

This program of austerity has included unlimited opportunity to cut spending by an emergency manager, who may serve for up to 18 months.  In Flint, the decision to switch water supply to the Flint river was signed by emergency manager Ed Kurtz, who was replaced by Darnell Earley (on right in photo- from the Flint Journal- below, with the city Department of Public Works director). Earley was in charge in Flint, as state Democrats noted, "when the decision was made to switch the city to unsafe drinking water." He later "toasted the switch to the river with city leaders in a ceremony in April 2014," Resnikoff reported.

Contrary to the spirit of the law, Earley was replaced by a new emergency manager when he resigned after 17 months and 29 days, whereupon he was rewarded for spectacular management by being appointed emergency manager of the 36,000-student Detroit public school system.

The Flint River, reports CNN, had a "reputation for nastiness" and even after Virginia Tech researchers found the water was very corrosive the state Department of Environmental Quality didn't treat the water for corrosion.

The city in October switched back to Lake Huron for its water supply but the impact upon the brains of children from lead caused by corrosion of the pipes leading from the Flint river will grow greater in the years ahead.  Learning disabilities, mental health issues, and crime will grow exponentially. Eventually, there will be an article in The New York Times, and nowhere else, examining the issue.

In one manner or another, Governor Snyder should be removed his position, as both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders advocate.  (Republican politicians and donors, of course, have little issue with anything that has gone on.)  The problem, however, goes deeper than that, with the concept of the all-powerful manager being hatched at the Mackinaw Center, a right-wing think tank associated with the Heritage Foundation and one of whose major donors is the Charles G. Koch Foundation.
It's about austerity, union-busting, privatization, about exploiting citizens for the wealthy and the well-connected.  If most of the victims are black, so be it.  It is the conservative movement at play.

When the leading Democratic presidential contender- on the eve of Martin Luther King Day- implied that it's primarily about race, she may have been merely pandering to voters in a state in which without blacks, the Democratic Party could meet in a phone booth.  If she was really serious, however, the water ingested in Flint, Michigan is not our biggest problem.









Share |