Kevin Drum

Housekeeping Note -- Font Edition

| Tue Jun. 10, 2014 11:08 AM EDT

By the way: to all the people who wrote asking why the body font on the blog has changed, I don't know. I was as surprised as you when I saw it after our weekly site update Thursday night. However, web designers, like God, move in mysterious ways, and I'm sure there were some deeply-considered aesthetic reasons for making the change. Unfortunately, I don't know what those reasons are, since for excellent and obvious reasons,1 I'm not consulted about this stuff. Perhaps some member of our design team will see this and let us know in comments.

1Principally that I have about the artistic taste of a seven-year-old.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Campus Christian Groups Should Be Allowed to Remain Christian

| Tue Jun. 10, 2014 10:56 AM EDT

I think I'm over the stomach bug that laid me up this weekend, so let's get back to this blogging thing. Today, the New York Times informs me that university Christian groups are losing official recognition because they won't agree to allow anyone, regardless of religious beliefs, to become a group leader:

At Cal State, the nation’s largest university system with nearly 450,000 students on 23 campuses, the chancellor is preparing this summer to withdraw official recognition from evangelical groups that are refusing to pledge not to discriminate on the basis of religion in the selection of their leaders. And at Vanderbilt, more than a dozen groups, most of them evangelical but one of them Catholic, have already lost their official standing over the same issue; one Christian group balked after a university official asked the students to cut the words “personal commitment to Jesus Christ” from their list of qualifications for leadership.

At most universities that have begun requiring religious groups to sign nondiscrimination policies, Jewish, Muslim, Catholic and mainline Protestant groups have agreed, saying they do not discriminate and do not anticipate that the new policies will cause problems. Hillel, the largest Jewish student organization, says some chapters have even elected non-Jews to student boards.

Apparently this was sparked by a court decision that ruled it was OK for public universities to deny recognition to student groups that exclude gays—including Christian groups. I'm fine with that. But requiring Christian groups to allow non-believers to lead Bible studies and prayer services and so forth? That seems pretty extreme. I have to admit that if I were a member of a campus Christian group, I'd have a hard time believing there were no ulterior motives at work here.

As for the Jewish/Muslim/Catholic/etc. groups that "do not anticipate" problems, I hope they're right. But this is the kind of thing that's ripe for mischief-making. I can easily imagine a bunch of campus halfwits who think it would be the funniest joke in the world to join a religious group en masse and then elect an atheist president. These are 19-year-olds we're dealing with, after all.

But maybe not. Perhaps that requires too much sustained effort. Nonetheless, if it were up to me, I'd allow Jewish groups to remain Jewish and Christian groups to remain Christian if that's what they want to do. It's hard to see the harm.

Housekeeping Note

| Mon Jun. 9, 2014 11:02 AM EDT

I'm ailing in multiple ways this morning. I'll try to be back later in the day.

Friday Cat Blogging - 6 June 2014

| Fri Jun. 6, 2014 2:41 PM EDT

Today we have a stripey Domino. This picture required a bit of art direction: I had to pick up Domino and move her a few inches to the left to get her fully into the stripey shadows. Surprisingly, she allowed me to do this without complaint. This was never a problem with Inkblot. I could plonk him down anywhere I wanted and he'd obligingly lie there like a sack of potatoes. Domino is not normally so cooperative.

Anyway, I'm mentioning this because I don't want a big scandal after I win my Pulitzer Prize for catblogging and somebody rats me out to the jury. They're pretty strict about this kind of thing.

How Many Countries Have Direct Access to All Phone Calls?

| Fri Jun. 6, 2014 2:33 PM EDT

Vodafone is one of the largest telecom companies in the world, with a strong presence in Europe, Africa and the Middle East. Here's what they told us today:

Vodafone said that it had received thousands of requests from 29 countries in the 12 months through March 31. But the report also said that governments in certain countries had direct access to its networks without having to use legal warrants.

In a “small number” of countries, Vodafone said in the report, the company “will not receive any form of demand for communications data access as the relevant agencies and authorities already have permanent access to customer communications via their own direct link.

Vodafone wouldn't say which countries have this kind of unrestricted access, but the Guardian takes a guess here.

Like it or Not, Guantanamo Is Here to Stay

| Fri Jun. 6, 2014 1:34 PM EDT

Praise the Lord. Max Fisher has taken on the thankless task of explaining to both left and right why the Taliban prisoner exchange isn't either of the following:

  • The first step in a secret plan from the lawless despot Obama to close Guantanamo.
  • Proof that Obama could have closed Guantanamo all along and that he now has no excuse not to.

Obama is not going to close Guantanamo. The legal loophole he used in the Bergdahl prisoner exchange—no matter what you think of it—flatly wouldn't apply to shutting down the entire prison. Plus there's the fact that Congress would go ballistic if he tried—including plenty of Democrats. Impeachment would go from a fever dream of the tea-party right to a very realistic bipartisan possibility. Finally, there's frankly never been much evidence that Obama cares all that much. He'd obviously like to shut down Guantanamo, but he just doesn't feel that strongly about it.

So give it up. Guantanamo will be here through the end of Obama's presidency, and quite possibly until its last prisoner dies. It's fanciful to think anything else.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Here's One Big Reason the Economy Is Still Treading Water

| Fri Jun. 6, 2014 12:22 PM EDT

David Leonhardt passes along this chart today, and it's one of the most important ones you'll see. It was my candidate for chart of the year in 2013.

What it shows is unprecedented: government employment fell during an economic recovery. This has never happened before in recent history. Employment rose during the Reagan recovery. It rose during the Clinton recovery. It rose during the Bush recovery. And that's one of the reasons those recoveries were fairly strong.

Only during the Obama recovery did austerity fever force government employment to fall. It's not the only reason this recovery has been so weak, but it's certainly one of the leading causes. More here.

When Will Fury Start to Grow Over Growing Fury?

| Fri Jun. 6, 2014 12:01 PM EDT

The White House, says the LA Times for the third straight day, is facing "growing fury" over L'Affaire Bergdahl. How many times have I read a headline like this over the past few years. Dozens? Hundreds?

Hard to say. But it sure seems to be the defining quality of American politics these days. We just bounce from one outrage to the next, mostly ginned up by the right, but sometimes by the left too. It's a wonder that America hasn't dropped dead of a collective heart attack yet.

Has it always been this way? Maybe. It's not as if we lacked for partisan outrages in the 50s and 60s. But I'd sure like to hear from folks who have a good memory for those years. Was the procession of outrages really as nonstop as it is today? Did we at least take a break between outrages back then? Or has nothing changed except our exposure to this stuff thanks to Twitter and 24-hour cable news?

In any case, I think this is the fundamental reason that I continue to sympathize so much with President Obama, regardless of whether he's pursuing policies I happen to like. I exchanged some emails with a friend about Obama's seemingly tone deaf handling of the Bergdahl case, and one of the things he said is this: "My read is he is getting bored and detached after being so boxed in and hammered. He sounds like he is starting to check out. I think the staff is getting demoralized and are just not caring too much since they know it's going to get hit one way or the other."

Obama has always had a certain amount of contempt for the modern media and its endless Politico-style pursuit of shiny objects designed to "win the morning." Ditto for the parochial nature of congressional politics and the insane tea-party style of no-compromise governing adopted by the modern Republican Party. Because of that, he's often a lousy politician. He's not willing to pander to the requirements of fake, outrage-of-the-day PR, nor does he even really want to engage in the normal sort of horse-trading that's always been a part of politics. Aside from pure personal preference, I suppose his excuse on the latter is that there's no point: Republicans are no longer willing to horse-trade, so why bother playing the game?

Instead, he wants to take the long view and ignore all the childish nonsense. Logic tells me that's probably dumb, but in my heart I find it almost impossible to blame him. I keep thinking that if someone acts like an adult—or at least a little more like an adult—maybe eventually the media and the public will get a little chagrined and start ignoring the shiny objects. I know it's not going to happen, but I still can't bring myself to rebuke Obama for holding out hope. I think that's why I often cut him so much slack.

Chart of the Day: Net New Jobs in May

| Fri Jun. 6, 2014 10:34 AM EDT

The American economy added 217,000 new jobs in March, but about 90,000 of those jobs were needed just to keep up with population growth, so net job growth clocked in at 127,000. The headline unemployment rate stayed steady at 6.3 percent.

As near as I can tell, there are no serious gotchas in this month's report. The labor participation rate was stable, and the unemployment rate didn't stay where it is because lots of people exited the labor force. This is a straightforward, decent-but-not-great jobs report, and it's sure starting to look like this is where we're going to be stuck for a while.

Bowe Bergdahl, Then and Now

| Thu Jun. 5, 2014 2:30 PM EDT

Speaking of Bowe Bergdahl, Charlie Savage and Eric Schmitt have a fascinating piece in the New York Times that just went up. They got hold of a detailed report that was written two months after Bergdahl walked off, and what makes it interesting is that it's based on extensive contemporaneous interviews. This allows us to compare what people are saying now with what they were saying back then. For example, there's this:

A classified military report detailing the Army’s investigation into the disappearance of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl in June 2009 says that he had wandered away from assigned areas before — both at a training range in California and at his remote outpost in Afghanistan — and then returned, according to people briefed on it.

....Whether Sergeant Bergdahl was a deserter who never intended to come back, or simply slipped away for a short adventure amid an environment of lax security and discipline and then was captured is one of many unanswered questions about his disappearance. The issue is murky, the report said, in light of Sergeant Bergdahl’s previous episodes of walking off.

And this:

The report is said to contain no mention of Sergeant Bergdahl having left behind a letter in his tent that explicitly said he was deserting and explaining his disillusionment, as a retired senior military official briefed on the investigation at the time told The New York Times this week. Asked about what appeared to be a disconnect, the retired officer insisted that he remembered reading a field report discussing the existence of such a letter in the early days of the search and was unable to explain why it is not mentioned in the final investigative report.

And this:

Its portrayal of him as a soldier is said to be positive, with quotes from both commanders and squadmates — apparently including some of the men now criticizing him — describing him as punctual, always in the correct uniform and asking good questions. It quotes colleagues as saying that he expressed some boredom and frustration that they were not “kicking down doors” more to go after insurgents who were destroying schools.

And this:

The report is also said to contain no mention of any alleged intercepts of radio or cellphone traffic indicating that Sergeant Bergdahl was asking villagers if anyone spoke English and trying to get in touch with the Taliban, as two former squadmates told CNN this week in separate interviews that they remembered hearing about from a translator who received the report.

The moral of this story is simple: memories can change, and once you've taken sides you're likely to embellish things considerably. The stuff that Bergdahl's critics are saying today may be accurate, or it may be a product of anger growing out of control over the passage of time. We really need to wait before rushing to judgment.