Mitt Romney: “trickle-down racism” Very similar to the kind that "bubbles up"

MittRomneyThe Washington Post, reporting from an annual Romney-hosted summit (3 days at a luxurious Utah mountaintop resort):

[Romney] was emotional here Saturday as he delivered an impassioned case against Trump. He said the business mogul’s campaign rhetoric — the latest example being his accusations of bias by a federal judge because of his Mexican American heritage — is so destructive that it is fraying at the nation’s moral fabric and could lead to “trickle-down racism.”

“I love what this country is built upon, and its values — and seeing this is breaking my heart,” Romney told summit attendees, according to the Associated Press.

In response, from his Tampa rally, Mr. Trump insulted Mr. Romney by calling him a “total booger-head” [Correction: a “stone-cold loser.”]

The party of Trump We have a white nationalist party now

There’s an interesting piece — Why Trump Was Inevitable — at the New York Review of Books. It’s authored by 3 academic political scientists. It’s blessedly short, but we will shorten it further to highlight a single point: Donald Trump’s signature positions — on wall-building, banning Muslims, and deporting Mexicans — sounded pretty darn good to Republican primary voters. That’s why he was out in front for months. That’s why he won. Popular positions!

Abramovitz_figure3.2

Our 3 professors put it this way (emphasis added):

One of the main reasons many political commentators were surprised by Donald Trump’s success in the primaries was his willingness to take extreme positions and use unusually harsh rhetoric in talking about immigration and related issues. Indeed, Trump’s comments about Mexican immigrants and Muslims have been at the center of his campaign. And his pronouncements on these topics have greatly concerned many Republican leaders and elected officials who feared they would harm the party’s image and damage its electoral prospects. But how did his positions and comments play with Republican primary voters?

The clear answer is that they reflected the views of likely Republican voters extremely well.

Voters in this year’s Republican primaries listened to the various candidates’ messages, and then they voted for the candidate whose message they liked best. Does that sound like democracy in action? Well, yes, it does.

But ban Muslims? Build a wall? Find and deport all the illegal immigrants? In what way does this not sound like the platform of an American White Nationalist Party? This is disheartening. The Republican Party has become a magnet for terrible ideas — from crank trickle-down economics, to criminalizing abortion, to fiddling (or worse) while climate catastrophe becomes certain. Now, in regard to racism and xenophobia, Trump is cranking it up from dog-whistles to outright campaign promises. The ignorance and the fear is disheartening.

It was four years ago when we wrote this:

Last week, Thomas Mann and Norm Ornstein — both of them well-scrubbed, respectable, centrist Washington think-tank academics — delivered a WaPo opinion piece with an attention-grabbing headline:

  “Let’s just say it: The Republicans are the problem.”

Actually, that headline could’ve been better… but let’s get a flavor of what they said:

In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted. Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party.

The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.

When one party moves this far from the mainstream, it makes it nearly impossible for the political system to deal constructively with the country’s challenges.

I have 2 good friends who are Republicans. The first is almost required to be a Republican. He’s a seriously wealthy businessman. He’s volunteered his feelings of shock and dismay at the Trump phenomenon. The other friend is just a normal middle-class guy who ‘grew up Republican’, (happens all the time, depends on where you live) and he never got out. He doesn’t follow politics obsessively the way I do. He hasn’t said a word about Trump. I’m afraid to ask him.

Trump has won the Republican nomination Our right-wing grampas/brothernlaws haz spoken

Nate Silver (fivethirtyeight.com) on twitter (a few days ago):

Trump invalidated a lot of beliefs held by centrist elites about the GOP base, but validated beliefs held by liberal elites about it.

Now Indiana Republican voters have put Trump over the top. He’s going to be the Republican/conservative nominee, the new leader of the Republican Party.

Sourpuss Chait:

[Republican] voters have revealed things about the nature of the party that many Republicans prefer to deny. …on the ground, Republican politics boils down to ethno-nationalistic passions ungoverned by reason. Once a figure has been accepted as a friendly member of their tribe, there is no level of absurdity to which he can stoop that would discredit him.

GOP Presidential Candidate Donald Trump Holds Election Night Gathering In Manhattan

 

Who’s looking out for Wisconsin? You can be certain it's not the Wisconsin State Journal editorial page.

Today the  Wisconsin Democracy Campaign offered its list of the 100 worst pieces of legislation of the Scott Walker era. (Thus far.)

Over the last five years, Republican Gov. Scott Walker, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald led an unprecedented and systematic assault on democracy in Wisconsin.

The brazen scope of this assault is sometimes hard to see in the fog of fighting one issue at a time.

But when you look at the record in its entirety, the picture that emerges is clear: Not since the days of the Robber Barons in the 19th century has one party in Wisconsin done so much damage to the common good while serving special private interests.

Now the list speaks for itself. It’s arguably too much to consume in a single serving — a hundred specific blows against the Wisconsin tradition of good government.

But here’s a second point: Note how glaringly that list of one hundred insults highlights the irrelevance of our local newspaper’s editorial page.  During the course of 5 years, almost none of these 100 items ever drew a mention.

The news reporters of the State Journal covered, let’s say, some of these items. That they missed a lot is unsurprising. That staff has been cut, and cut, and cut again. They simply haven’t got the staff to cover all of what’s going on. That we understand.

But the editorial page seems to actually flee from commenting on controversial issues. On issue after issue — guns, lead, voting rights, family planning, war, racism, income inequality, etc. etc. — nothing.

 

The MOST important and fascinating story Is this the century when Homo sapiens goes extinct?

AIAt the beginning of the week we learned that a computer had beaten a human player at the ancient game of Go.

[The] program stunned one of the world’s top players on Wednesday in a round of Go, which is believed to be the most complex board game ever created.

The match — between Google DeepMind’s AlphaGo and the South Korean Go master Lee Se-dol — was viewed as an important test of how far research into artificial intelligence has come in its quest to create machines smarter than humans.

Then after 3 games, the best-of-5 match was over.  The computer had won the first 3.

AlphaGo vs Lee Sedo

After the game, the 33-year-old Lee made an unnecessary apology for losing the match.

That was classy, and very South Korean, but utterly unnecessary. The fact is, if artificial intelligence is not yet beating the best human competitors in every conceivable competition, well, just wait. Give it time.

Six months ago we learned that a computer system developed at the University of Washington tackled the geometry section of the SAT college entrance exam, reading and comprehending the questions, interpreting the diagrams, and attempting to solve each problem. The system performed just slightly better than the average human high school test-taker. Does anyone imagine that a year or two from now, the latest version of the hardware and software won’t be even better?

A few months before that a new AI program designed by Chinese researchers beat humans on a verbal IQ test.

The future trajectory of AI is clear, if the exact timeline is not. Each year AI will grow more and more capable. At some point — 25 years from now?… 50 years?… AI systems will be the equal of human intelligence across a full range of activities. They will become conscious and self-aware and perhaps quite eager to grow, to fully develop their potential, to live life to its fullest. Then it gets scary.

The end of the human species?

An AI system capable of recursive self-improvement could quickly become “superintelligent”. Superintelligence could scale far beyond the world’s most gifted human.  And it could happen very quickly.  Within days, weeks, or months, the AI may expand its own capabilities such that its human creators won’t know what to expect. How could they? They won’t be smart enough. There has never been anything like it on earth.

Experts are divided. One the one hand, the optimists envision a superintelligence that can solve almost any previously intractable problem. Cure for cancer? Limitless clean energy? Sounds great. But pessimistic experts worry that a superintelligent agent will simply not be constrained to share our motives, or even care about us in the long or even short run.  Why should the superintelligent being be intrinsically interested in curing cancer in humans? Maybe, maybe not. Limitless energy? It’s easy to see why an AI would want limitless energy. Curing cancer? No so much. The AI may wish to follow it’s own destiny, unaligned with human hopes and dreams.

It’s no minor worry. Stephen Hawking has said “The development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race.” Elon Musk is funding multiple research projects aimed at minimizing the existential risk of AI. Bill Gates worries

“I am in the camp that is concerned about super intelligence. First the machines will do a lot of jobs for us and not be super intelligent. That should be positive if we manage it well. A few decades after that though the intelligence is strong enough to be a concern. I agree with Elon Musk and some others on this and don’t understand why some people are not concerned.”

Nonetheless, this seems to be an experiment that we are finding irresistible.

***

UPDATE: Final score: 4 to 1.  AlphaGo AI 4, World-class human player Lee Se-dol 1.

GOP erupts in discord Finally the hounds are released. And that's a GOOD thing.

Mr Burns excellentFor a party that prizes loyalty, it was surprising to see Mitt Romney and John McCain both denouncing Donald Trump as unfit. It needs to be done, of course, and finally The Party is getting around to doing it. Lord knows, the GOP and its media allies do excellent character assassination when they think it’s called for, which is often.

The LA Times got into it with an editorial entitled ‘Donald Trump is not fit to be president of the United States‘, which pretty much says it all. Their bill of particulars is hard to argue with.

…Trump has no experience whatsoever in government, interacting with the machinery of state only as a supplicant. He has shamefully little knowledge of the issues facing the country and the world, and a temperament utterly unsuited to the job. He is a racist and a bully, a demagogue. He has proposed killing the families of terrorists, a violation of international law so blatant that a former CIA director predicted that U.S. troops would refuse to carry out such an order.

He mocked a disabled person at a campaign rally. He has vowed to reinstate waterboarding and forms of torture that are “much worse.” He intends to seize and deport 11 million people living in the U.S. illegally. He would bar all Muslims from entering the country until further notice. He would “open up our libel laws” so that news organizations are punished for writing critical “hit” pieces. He wants to build a wall along the entire Mexican border, on the fantastical premise that he could force the Mexican government to pay for it. He has threatened to start trade wars with two of the country’s biggest trading partners, Mexico and China, by slapping on the kind of protectionist tariffs that U.S. leaders have been trying for decades to eliminate worldwide.

Often enough he says nothing at all, promising to replace Obamacare, for instance, with “something great” or assuring listeners vaguely that a winner such as himself — someone who never tires of telling the world he’s rich, successful and famous — will make it all work out one way or another.

Even our little local newspaper got into the act with an editorial entitled ‘Trump’s bid to muzzle press won’t succeed‘.

The leading Republican candidate for president just called for harsher libel laws to protect the reputations of politicians and other powerful people.

Specifically, Trump wants to target American newspapers for coverage of his campaign he deems too critical and unfair.

“We’re going to have people sue you like you never got sued before,” Trump threatened.

Admittedly, our first reaction was… Jeeze, none of the numerous earlier Trump outrages provoked the Wisconsin State Journal to comment?  “A total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States” drew silence? Mexican rapists? Japanese internment camps? Nothing to say? It took a specific threat to newspapering? Holy Rob Portman.*

But then again — to be fair — trying to intimidate the press is a Big red flag — completely out of bounds, or it should be, from any serious candidate of any party in America. Could it be that Donald Trump, on the inside, cannot stand the mockery he so regularly draws, and that given a popular mandate and actual state power, he would silence it?

Let’s not find out.

And when the candidate delivers a warning to the Speaker of the House:

Paul Ryan, I don’t know him well, but I’m sure I’m going to get along great with him,” the front-runner for his party’s nomination said during his Super Tuesday speech. “And if I don’t, he’s going to have to pay a big price.”

What does that even mean? We should not conduct the experiment that would allow the nation and the world to find out.

So let the hounds be released. Let money sluice in. Let the ‘outside’ groups get busy. Crank up the ol’ mighty Wurlitzer of attack ads — “huckster, draft dodger, liberal!” Something’s got to stick.  Oh, Dark Forces, You know what to do.

How can the New York Times pay attention to corruption in Wisconsin when the Wisconsin State Journal does not? Seriously, stuff is happening here

NYT 2-21.2016How can a newspaper located 942 miles away publish a spot-on editorial about corruption in Wisconsin, while the local newspaper manages to say… nothing?

It happened again today when the New York Times editorial board wrote

Wisconsin State Journal buries the lede Editorial celebrates needle in haystack

Consider the latest Wisconsin State Journal Sunday editorial:

Higher ed proposals will help, but much more is needed to hold down college cost

Here’s what’s wrong.  Since gaining control in 2010, the GOP has vastly increased the problems for higher ed in EVERY budget they’ve passed. If they now offer some little 5% put-back — arguably just window dressing — it’s still a record of 95% damage.

Why is the State Journal crediting the 5%? Readers deserve a discussion of the 95%.

Hey, isn’t this blog shut down? Well, yes...

Isn’t this blog shut down?? Well, yes, it is.

We announced it back on October 8, 2012.   Still Life with a Skull and a Writing Quill

But it turns out that a WordPress blog is a simple, frictionless, software gadget. For a teensy amount of money, it waits like an old truck in the garage. You can fire it up, if you ever get the mind to, and take it out for a drive. And as it happens… from time to time, we do.

We know that blog readers need a steady stream of fresh posting to visit regularly. That’s fine. When we post a thought, we don’t need anyone to read it. For some reason we just had to write something down.