From a period many years before the groundhog took over forecasting duties…

“If Candlemas is bright and clear,
There’ll be two winters in the year;
If Candlemas brings snow and rain,
Old winter shall not come again.”

Required legal boilerplate: Not a scienterrific methodology. So, what’s the weather like in your neighborhood this morning?

James Fallows has another excellent post on the death-spiral fallacy of “bipartisanship” in modern American politics:

I got this note from someone with many decades’ experience in national politics…

“Bipartisanship in the American sense means compromising on legislation so that a sufficient number of members of Congress from BOTH parties will support it, even if (as is typically the case) a few majority party members defect and most minority party members don’t join… It can’t happen if the minority party members vote as a block against major legislation. And that can happen only if the minority party has the ability to discipline its ranks so that none join the majority, which is the unprecedented situation we’ve got in Congress today.

“The way parliamentary parties maintain their discipline is straightforward. No candidate can run for office using the party label unless the party bestows that label upon him or her. And usually, the party itself and not the candidate raises and controls all the campaign funds. As every political scientist knows, the fact that in the U.S. any candidate can pick his or her own party label without needing anyone else’s approval, and can also raise his or her own campaign funds, is why there cannot be and never really has been any sustained party discipline before—even though it is a feature of parliamentary systems.

“The GOP now maintains party discipline by the equivalent of a parliamentary party’s tools: The GOP can effectively deny a candidate the party label (by running a more conservative GOP candidate against him or her), and the GOP can also provide the needed funds to the candidate of the party’s choice. And every GOP member of Congress knows it. (Snowe and Collins may be immune, but that’s about it.)

“I’ve missed almost all the punditry this past week… but what I’ve seen seems almost like a lot of misleading fluff designed to fill the void that should follow an understanding of the foregoing, at least on the subject of ‘why no bipartisanship?’ There’s really nothing more to be said about “why no bipartisanship,” once one recognizes the GOP party discipline. On this issue, it’s absolutely astounding to blame Obama or even the Congressional leadership (although Pelosi and Reid leave much to be desired otherwise). It’s doubly astounding that the GOP did it once before, less perfectly, but with a very large reward for bad behavior in the form of the 1994 mid-term elections. Yet no one calls them on it effectively, and bad behavior seems about to be rewarded again…

” ... a Dem could run against that GOP incumbent by pointing out that the GOP opponent lost X or Y or Z project or policy benefit for his or her district or state by insisting on voting down the line with the GOP. ‘Put his party above his constituents,’ might be the charge, or ‘Put Michael Steele above you and me.’ But so far, the Dems don’t seem to have cottoned onto this. They could go into the 2010 elections not just challenging the obstructionists in the GOP, but showing the electorate what the price of obstruction has been for real people back home.”

Fallows’ whole post is well worth reading, along with his cover article “How America Can Rise Again” (which I discussed here last week). Obama’s been compared to a lot of previous presidents, but it’s beginning to feel like his closest analogue may be Teddy Roosevelt—the progressive Republican whose bold measures to keep America during its first Gilded Age from devolving into another failed banana republic basically split his own party and reversed the social polarity of both major parties. The question may be whether President Obama has the character (in the old-fashioned sense) to defy his own inherently conservative instincts by going after “the malefactors of great wealth” and working to preserve our joint natural resources even when such preservation won’t be seen as “profitable” for another couple of generations.

Finished season two last night, and I thought it was a great finale. Some really funny lines and the plot was fun- enjoyed how Morgan’s life always has a similar story arc as Chuck’s and even though they are going through completely separate things, their communication to each other can be applied to the individual situations they are in. Just a really fun show, and even though it doesn’t even pretend to be high-brow tv, it is still really entertaining and a great time sink. I like frivolous shows like this, and you can tell the writers are having fun. Plus, I like all the characters- even the annoying ones. And even though I am not a fan of blondes- Sarah. Wow.

Also, Jeffster rocks! When Awesome’s dad asked him “Why are you letting Sam Kinison and an Indian lesbian ruin your wedding,” I laughed for a solid five minutes.

At any rate, new show in 20 mins.

Also saw the Hurt Locker, and that was an excellent flick. Really enjoyed that.

The useless party is going to cut a deal with the evil party:

A proposal by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker to limit bank’s proprietary trading will be either be dropped or significantly modified in the Senate, lawmakers and staffers told dealReporter.

Senate Banking Committee ranking member Richard Shelby (R-AL) said he opposes the so-called Volcker rule and the Obama administration’s call to levy a USD 90bn tax on banks. His comments come as House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) predicted the proposals outlined by President Obama could be law within six months.

Speaking to this news service on Thursday, Shelby said if Democrats push forward with the proposals they risk unravelling much of the bipartisan support already reached regarding the passage of financial regulatory reform in the Senate. Shelby said that the Obama administration risks losing Republican support for the bill if they begin to “politicise” the issue.

However, Shelby said he expects to hold a meeting with Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) regarding the way forward on regulatory reform in two weeks time. A Democratic banking committee staffer confirmed that the meeting between Dodd and Shelby will be critical as Dodd needs to determine the level of bipartisan agreement and the timing of bringing the bill through committee and on the Senate floor.

Not only will watering down the bill in the name of bipartisanship not give us the needed regulatory restructuring that we need, but it is also politically stupid in another way. Let the Republicans come out opposed to regulating the market and the bankers and then beat them to death with it in the fall. Passing a shitty bill with their support blurs the distinctions between the parties.

But then again, given that some of the Democrats are almost as beholden to corporate interests as the Republicans, there really isn’t much to blur, is there? There really isn’t anything quite as worthless as the US Senate, is there?

Not too interested in anything atm, so I am going back to the chair and the ice pump to let my mind rot in front of the tv. Despite all the bitching I am doing, I feel super lucky. Can you imagine what an injury like this would be like without insurance? Or in the 1800’s?

And all the little things that make this recovery so much easier. The baby wipes, the pain meds, the ice therapy, etc. Hell, I’m even paying a maid service to come in and clean the kitchen and bathroom because I can not sweep or mop. So fortunate I have the means to do this.

I’ve read several reports stating the budget will be 100 billion more than last year, but aren’t the Afghan/Iraq wars included instead of being supplementals? If that is the case, the budget is actually, using the accounting bullshit of the Bush years, 50 billion less?

Marc Ambinder (via GOS):

For the first time in recent history, the lobbying, grassroots and advertising budget of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has surpassed the spending of BOTH the Republican National Committee and Democratic National Committee.

This is significant. It means that the Great Transition has already begun. In the days following the decision in Citizens United, campaign finance experts predicted that the decision would open the floodgates of money for trade associations like the Chamber of Commerce. The influx of corporate money, according to some, would weaken the power of the political parties and candidates and lead the political parties to become less important. Republican lawyer Ben Ginsberg went so far as to say that the parties would be “threatened by extinction.” And Ginsberg supports the CU decision!

(emphasis mine)

If you accept the premise that Roger Ailes is the effective chairman of the GOP, one could argue that the Republican party, in its traditional form, is already extinct. When you strip away Fox News and AM radio and the Chamber of Commerce, is there any Republican party left?

I also believe that the reason, for better or worse, that Obama (Rahm!) cut so many sweetheart deals for corporations in the HCR bill is that the the companies could and would have killed the bill immediately otherwise.

The Wasilla wingnut is still playing the long con:

Sarah Palin has been using her political action committee to buy up thousands of copies of her book, “Going Rogue,” in order to mail copies of the memoir to her donors, newly filed campaign records show.

The former Alaska governor and 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate had her political organization spend more than $63,000 on what her reports describe as “books for fundraising donor fulfillment.” The payments went to Harper Collins, her publisher, and in some instances to HSP Direct, a Virginia-based direct mail fundraising firm that serves a number of well-known conservative politicians and pundits.

I guess this is her version of trickle down.

DPL is a round-heels, I guess:

Prepare to be Seduced by Madness [Jonah Goldberg]

This has been making the rounds on the interwebs. It is a two-fistfuls-of-fantastic theory that The Shining was in fact Stanley Kubrick’s confession to faking the Apollo moonlandings (while filming 2001: A Space Odyssey).

I think you’ll be surprised by just how crazy this is.

I don’t know how Rahm got to John Judis:

[T]here is one extremely consequential area where Obama has done just about everything a liberal could ask for—but done it so quietly that almost no one, including most liberals, has noticed. Obama’s three Republican predecessors were all committed to weakening or even destroying the country’s regulatory apparatus: the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the other agencies that are supposed to protect workers and consumers by regulating business practices. Now Obama is seeking to rebuild these battered institutions. In doing so, he isn’t simply improving the effectiveness of various government offices or making scattered progress on a few issues; he is resuscitating an entire philosophy of government with roots in the Progressive era of the early twentieth century. Taken as a whole, Obama’s revival of these agencies is arguably the most significant accomplishment of his first year in office.

If you don’t think regulatory issues are important, you need to read Rick Perlstein.

Any Democratic president would have done this, you say? Sure, and that’s part of the point here. The “just as bad as Bush stuff” is just plain wrong.

You make shitty-SCOTUS-decision-ade:

In the wake of the Massachusetts Brown out—or—hastened by that event—the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee wants their Senate candidate to emphasize two main points on the campaign trail: pin down Republican opposition to a tax on banks—and pin down Republican support of the Citizens United decision, which would open the door to increased corporate influence in American elections.

This item is a few days old (Ambinder wrote it on Friday), but I think it’s especially relevant in light of this (via Steve Benen):

Democratic Party committees entered an off-year election with more money in the bank than their Republican counterparts for the first time in at least 18 years, giving the party a financial boost as it tries to stave off a surge by the opposition.

The Democratic National Committee and the fundraising arms of House and Senate Democrats reported $37.9 million in the bank as of Dec. 31, almost double the $19.4 million the Republicans had, Federal Election Commission filings show.

Part of the impact of Citizens United may be to blunt, or frankly overwhelm, any Democratic financial advantage in 2010. So there’s no doubt the decision helps Republicans politically, unless Democrats can find a way to take advantage of the optics of the decision.

They need to hammer home the foreign corporations angle, IMHO.

Felt pretty good when I woke up this morning, and then I went to rehab with a cute little perky therapist whose name I forget, but I think it might have been Dr. Mengele. I’m on to their ruse, though. Distract me with attractive and harmless looking females and hope I won’t notice THAT THEY ARE TORTURING ME.

Now my shoulder is throbbing and I think I need a good cry.

E.J. Dionne, bless him, is shrill:

The nation owes a substantial debt to Justice Samuel Alito for his display of unhappiness over President Obama’s criticisms of the Supreme Court’s recent legislation—excuse me, decision—opening our electoral system to a new torrent of corporate money.

Alito’s inability to restrain himself during the State of the Union address brought to wide attention a truth that too many have tried to ignore: The Supreme Court is now dominated by a highly politicized conservative majority intent on working its will, even if that means ignoring precedents and the wishes of the elected branches of government.

Obama called the court on this, and Alito shook his head and apparently mouthed “not true.” His was the honest reaction of a judicial activist who believes he has the obligation to impose his version of right reason on the rest of us.

The controversy also exposed the impressive capacity of the conservative judicial revolutionaries to live by double standards without apology.

The movement’s legal theorists and politicians have spent more than four decades attacking alleged judicial abuses by liberals, cheering on the presidents who joined them in their assaults. But now, they are terribly offended that Obama has straightforwardly challenged the handiwork of their judicial comrades.

More columns like this, and less Media Village Idiot chatter, and we’d have to stop calling it the Kaplan Daily.

Tomorrow is a marker day—Candlemas, Imbolc, Groundhog Day—the point halfway between the Winter solstice and the Spring Equinox. Still plenty of ugly weather to live through, but as my Irish ancestors used to say, “Live, horse, and you’ll get grass.”

Coldest weekend so far here in New England, but there’s a wild bunny buck the size of a well-fed cat ensconced in the huddle of planters next to our front steps.

Hi, everyone, my name is Randy Paul. I normally blog at my own blog, Beautiful Horizons. John has graciously accepted my offer to blog about the upcoming soccer World Cup in South Africa starting in June.

My love of this sport goes back some thirty-six years and I blog about it regularly. A brief explanation as to my passion for the game is here. I have a breakdown of the groups and my educated guesses as to who comes out of the group stage in this post.

A bit about my biases: I’m married to a Brazilian and unless I’m possessed by an urge to sleep on the couch, I tend to pull for Brazil – except when they play the USA. I want to see the sport grow here and success on the international stage will only help. While I admire a number of Argentina’s players, especially Leo Messi and Gabriel Batistuta from several years ago, I don’t much care for Diego Maradona.

I think South Korea got away with murder in 2oo2. I’m not a big fan of the Italian national team’s typically boring defensive game, although I credit their last coach with some daring play in the 2006 World Cup. I think England has some fine players, but I think they are overrated. Spain is my favorite team in Europe, Ivory Coast in Africa and Japan in Asia.

On the club level, I pull for Arsenal in England, Barcelona in Spain, Lyon in France, Fiorentina in Italy, PSV Eindhoeven in Holland, Cruzeiro in Brazil and FC Kaiserslautern in Germany.

So, enough about me. As of this writing, there’s 129 days till the start of the first match. I’ll be back around Memorial Day with some updated predictions educated guesses. I hope you all will follow along and add your comments!