Lincoln Mitchell

Blog

This page contains links to recent blogs by Lincoln Mitchell

Posted in: US Politics

The American People and American Interventions →

The question of whether the US should, or can, sustain a foreign policy that is increasingly out of synch with the views of the people is one that should be taken seriously in a democratic country. If the American people have no appetite for further intervention, then that should be a major consideration for any president or policy maker. If those leaders believe the policy is essential for US interests or security it is their responsibility to build public support for that policy. A failure to build that support is a failure of leadership and ultimately of democracy as well.

Comment

Blankets, Guns and Plumbers →

The letter was an extraordinary brew of mean-spiritedness, cruelty, insensitivity, arrogance and egotism. The most quoted line from that letter, written by a man singularly incapable of empathy was "your dead kids don't trump my constitutional rights." That line is painful to read and probably makes many people angry with Joe the Plumber. The extraordinary chutzpah required to write something like that to a total stranger who has just lost a child and does not care about your opinion notwithstanding, the worst thing about that line is that it is essentially the official position of the US government.

Comment

The Bergdahl Beard and the Longest American War Ever →

Did the Obama administration make a grievous mistake in swapping prisoners for the release of US solider Bowe Bergdahl? Yes, no, maybe, I don't know, who really cares? All of these answers are, in one respect or another true. The Bergdahl controversy is almost a caricature of American political discourse in the Obama era with both sides taking strong and outspoken positions based simply on whether or not they like the President, fighting in the media over something that is not very important, and making sure that the public bickering obscures more significant government decisions and policies.

Comment

Let the Republicans Talk About Clinton's Age and Health →

Karl Rove's latest attempt to make Hillary Clinton's health and age an issue in her campaign, or non-campaign, for president was buffoonish and embarrassing for Rove, but it was also probably not very effective. Although voters have a right to know these things about a candidate who would be 69 years old on inauguration day, and who had a head injury not that long ago, the corollary that it helps the Republicans to have Rove raise them in such a way, is not true. It also demonstrates that Clinton is a truly unusual, and increasingly lucky, politician.

Comment

The Logic and Illogic of Climate Change Denial →

The news that a large ice shelf in Antarctica has begun to collapse may not be as important as Karl Rove's opinion of Hillary Clinton's glasses, or Timothy Geithner's descriptions of the early years of Barack Obama's presidency, but it should still not be ignored entirely. Although there are still some, including unfortunately powerful government officials like Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fl), who do not recognize the import, or indeed reality, of global climate change, and the role of human activity in that, climate change can no longer be ignored.

Comment

The Import of Raising the Minimum Wage →

Arguing against raising the minimum wage because it might limit the creations of jobs that don't pay enough for people to survive it not only disingenuous, it is also cruel. That is, however, precisely what opponents of increasing the minimum wage are doing. It is a reminder that the fight to raise the minimum wage is concerned better pay for people, but also goes to the core to preserving, or perhaps rebuilding, rights, fairness and dignity for American workers.

Comment

Is America Ready for Another Bush-Clinton Campaign →

The growing possibility of another Clinton-Bush race is also something that reflects significant problems with our democracy. In most other countries, the spouse of a former president running against the son and brother of another former president would be prima facie viewed as evidence of structural problems with the country and probably widespread corruption as well. This election will not be seen that way because, well Hillary Clinton is beloved by many Democrats, and Bush can become beloved by many Republicans if he is seen as the guy who can beat Clinton. It is probably, however, worth taking a closer a look about what a Clinton-Bush matchup tells us about about our democracy.

Comment

Why Would Paul Ryan Think About Race? →

A Republican Party that has over a period of decades removed itself from any close political contact with African Americans not only will naturally have a very poor understanding of that group, but will be committed to the belief that race is no longer an important issue in the US. If race is not an important issue, it is much easier for Republicans to explain away their lack of success with or interest in African American. This contributes to the Republican insistence that racism is a thing of the past and that any suggestion that race or racism is driving a policy or campaign tactics is dismissed as somebody else is playing the race card.

Comment

California and the Republican Party →

The veritable collapse of the Republican Party in California is not news, but it is worth considering, particularly given the party's failure, again, to even have a serious campaign for governor in 2014. California is the most populous state in the country, but it was at the center of the Republican Party for most of the years from 1952-1992, a period of ascendancy for the Party nationally. The national ticket in most of those years included national politicians, notably Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan with roots in California. Many big states are aligned with one party, but California is different both because of the Republican's strong recent history there but also because the diversity of the state that makes it both a harbinger of what the country will become and a place that should be a battleground for competing ideas and visions. In recent years, however, the Republican Party was not made itself relevant in that battleground.

Comment

McCutcheon, Money and Democracy →

The other impact of the Supreme Court ruling is less direct, but possibly more profound. The ruling sends a completely unambiguous message that as the Supreme Court sees money as a form of speech. We have heard this, in one form or another, that the absurdity of that notion is rarely questioned. It should be. In a democratic system, equality between citizens is a bedrock foundational principle. This is why every person gets one votes regardless of gender, race, status or wealth, and also why countries that do not meet this criteria can never be fully democratic.

Comment

Gun Regulation, Profanity and Thuggery in Rhode Island

It is rare that the comments of a state legislator make national news, even more so when those comments are only three short words. Last week, however, State Senator Joshua Miller made national news when he told Dan Bidondi of Infowars to "Go f#ck yourself!" Bidondi, an avid supporter of unrestricted gun ownership had been present at a press conference where Miller and other state legislators appeared. Miller's comments came after Bidondi had been harassing and berating participants at the event.

Miller later apologized for using profanity. However, as more information about this confrontation and about Bidondi comes to light, Miller should probably be lauded for his restraint. Bidondi is associated with the website Infowars, a right-wing site that is given to conspiracy theories questioning, among other things, veracity of the Sandy Hook shooting and the Boston Marathon bombings. Bidondi has sought to represent these views through among other things intimidation and shouting down opponents. Nonetheless, Bidondi has a right to express his views and elected officials, even ones trying to defend constituents from harassment should, on balance, avoid using profanity.

Since these events, and his apology, Miller has faced an unrelenting campaign of thuggery, threats and bigotry. Miller is a small businessman who owns several restaurants in and around Providence. Since he made those comments, Miller's restaurants' web presence have been compromised through floods of negative reviews on sites like Yelp and Trip Advisor and the Facebook pages of his restaurants. Other websites belong to Miller and his campaign have been hacked as well. These are apparently the tactics of the gun supporters who interpret Miller's support of a bill to do things like ban assault weapons and make it illegal to bring guns onto school grounds as undermining the US constitution.

Critics of Miller have also attacked the senator for being too far left. It is not clear that Miller, who chairs the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services, would disagree with the substance of this. Miller is a strong supporter of gun regulation, expanding access to healthcare, marriage equality, the environment and labor. Attacks on Miller for his progressive politics are no surprise given how his position on gun regulations and comments to Bidondi undoubtedly infuriated many on the right.

Pointing out that Miller, a strong supporter of gun regulation, has a generally progressive agenda, is an appropriate political strategy in this context. It is unimaginable that this is the first time Miller has been criticized for being a progressive, and it almost certainly will not be the last. Attacking Miller because he is Jewish, however, is not appropriate at this, or any, time. Bigotry of that kind never plays a constructive role in the political discussion, yet Miller's Judaism has drawncomments of a very bigoted and vile nature since the Bidondi incident.

The anti-Semitism Miller has confronted in recent days is disturbing and draws on some of the oldest and vitriolic prejudices against the Jewish people. It is saddening, but not altogether surprising, that his kind of hatred still exists and is so easily aimed at Miller by some on the far right. More upsetting than the noise from these bigots has been the silence from the more moderate and allegedly reasonable factions of the conservative and pro-gun movements. While these people have every reason to condemn Miller for his profanity, his views on gun regulation and his politics generally, they also have a greater obligation to speak out against the bigotry that some have used against Miller. While it is clear that it is not the mainstream of the Republican Party or the gun movement that made Miller's religion an issue, the need to take a position against this kind of thing remains strong. In their silence, too many on gun supporters tacitly condone attacking Miller for being Jewish, rather than his politics. While this may not be the intent, it is, unfortunately, the effect.

Miller's words have led to different interpretations. Opponents of gun regulation have accused Miller of being an arrogant and elitist politician who cares little for the constitution and specifically the second amendment. Miller's supporters, on the other hand, have asserted that the Senator was standing up to a bully who was using aggressive and confrontational methods to try to stifle debate on gun regulation. Although it is possible to disagree about which of these interpretations is right based on the initial incident, the fallout from Miller's comment makes it clear that the forces of intolerance and intimidation are clearly on the side of Bidondi, as Miller's opponents have resorted to hacking websites, dishonest and negative reviews of decent small businesses, and bigotry to make their point. I don't get to Rhode Island much, but the next time I do, I know whose restaurants I'll be patronizing.

Comment

Russia, Ukraine and American Myopia →

The debate in the U.S. about how to respond to the Russian invasion has shows the complete self absorption of much of the American political establishment. Russia invaded Crimea primarily because of Russia's interest in Ukraine, domestic political issues in Russia, and as a reaction to recent political events in Ukraine. However, the response in Washington, particularly from the right, has suggested that Russia acted because of America's, and specifically President Obama's, weakness. This assertion was, of course, more about politics in the U.S., than anything happening in Ukraine, but it nonetheless demonstrated that for many what happened in Crimea had to be attributable to something that the U.S., and the Obama administration, did or did not do.

Comment

After CPAC →

The difference between the Tea Party and the rest of the Republican Party is minor and more a matter of style than substance. This is not a division based on big picture policy differences in which, for example, the mainstream Republicans understand that seeking to slightly raise taxes on the wealthy does not make somebody a socialist or that income inequality should be a concern to all policy makers interested in stewarding the economy towards prosperity. Moreover, mainstream Republicans have been alarmingly reserved over the last five years in their reactions to the often offensive statements made by some in the Tea Party movement.

Comment

Four Things You Might Not Want to Know About the Conflict in Ukraine →

Russia's invasion Ukraine has set off paroxysms of frustration, anger and incredulity in the west, not least in Washington. Some policy makers and pundits are struggling with ways to constructively address the problems raised by Russian action, others struggle to ensure that somehow President Obama is blamed for these events, and many are trying to figure out the complexity, context and background of these events. Understanding the conflict in Crimea, and the best way forward for the US, requires holding several, conflicting, and often unappealing, ideas in one's head at the same time. These are four of the most important of these ideas.

Comment

Remember A Month Ago When the Democrats Care About Income Inequality? →

In the last two months, income inequality has quietly fallen out of its brief prominent place in the public debate and discussion. It still mentioned by some economists and some progressive pundits, but something has changed. A few months ago the President of the United States was making speeches about income inequality; the new Mayor of New York placed that issue front and center in his inaugural address; and the Pope, of course, was drawing the most attention the issue by pointing out the contradictions between dramatic income inequality and the teachings of the Catholic Church. All that seems like a long time ago now.

Comment

Marijuana, Human Rights and the US Image →

The debate about legalizing marijuana is beginning in earnest. It is a debate about individual rights, criminal justice, medicine and economics. It is also a debate where a lot of money is at stake. There are people who stand to lose a lot if the prisons are not full and if new ones are not being built. Those who have profited from the prison-industrial complex will fight hard to ensure that marijuana remains illegal because they know that legalizing it is the first step towards a drug policy that is more rational and humane, although less profitable for them.

4 Comments

A Tale of Two Ukraines →

Yet, the West rarely recognizes that Russia, like countries in the West, has its own interests. To Westerners, Russia’s actions are part of a storied narrative: It consistently acts in outrageous ways to thwart not Western interests, but also moral and political good in Ukraine. There’s a big problem with that view: By recasting a struggle between two political forces and interests as one simply between right and wrong, the West makes it more difficult to understand and combat Russian influence. If the U.S. and Europe want to change Russia’s behavior, they must toss those antiquated, Cold War notions, and accept that modern tensions are substantially based on economic and political interests, not just on latent Russian anger, or its alleged inferiority complex. That means accepting, for example, that scolding Russian leaders for breaking Western rules and expectations won’t provoke changes in Moscow. More dramatically, it may require the U.S. to recognize the limits of its ability to influence outcomes in Ukraine or other countries where Russia also has interests at stake.

Comment

What Mitt the Movie Tells Us About the Republican Party →

This is not just an observation about why Romney lost in 2012, but explains what has happened to a party where certainty and partisan inflexibility have not only become more important than governing or problem solving, but have been elevated as values that trump analytical rigor our sound strategic thinking. The Republican Party has become one where certainty and faith are among the most cherished values of both the leadership and the base. The same is true of the Democratic Party, but to a much smaller degree. President Obama's almost freakish commitment to the concept of consequence, for example, stands in stark contrast to his predecessor's incessant boasting about his certainty. The leap between being surprised on Election Night in 2012 and believing climate change is a hoax is not that big. In both cases, eschewing scientific approaches leads to fundamental misunderstandings of reality. In 2012 it helped cost Mitt Romney the presidency. In the policy arena the consequences for the anti-science approach could be much higher.

Comment

Is a Non-Competitive Primary Really What the Democrats Need? →

As the 2016 election approaches and the question of whether or not Hillary Clinton runs becomes an even bigger topic of discussion among the punditry, it is likely that we will also be told that having a clear nominee early in the process, rather than a hard fought, and potentially nasty, campaign for the nomination will be good for the party. This idea is intuitively appealing as contested primaries can make it hard to unite behind one candidate in the general election and can damage the eventual nominee. It is additionally something that we frequently hear from front-runners hoping to avoid a tough primary. This idea is intuitive and attractive, but it should be noted that it also completely false.

Comment

Chris Christie's Problems Are Not Going Away →

Much of the discussion in recent days has been about whether or not Christie is a bully. Being seen as a bully is not something that will prevent Christie from being a strong candidate, particularly because a portion of the population is inevitably going to think somebody who looks and talks like Christie is a bully anyway. If the scandal only reinforced the worst thing that some people thought about Christie, it would not be a big deal. However, the scandal makes is impossible for Christie to take advantage of the best thing that people used to think about the New Jersey governor, that he could put partisan issues aside to address real problems facing people.

Comment