Just over the AP Wire, Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) commenting on conservatives’ Social Security privatization scheme:

”This is like being for the Civil Rights Bill in 1960. You may not win but it makes you feel good and you’re on the right side.”

It’s quite the stretch, but maybe there are some striking similarities between the push for privatization and the 1960 Civil Rights Act:

Neither hit the core of the issue: The 1960 Civil Rights Act “barely touched on anything new.” Private accounts do nothing for the long-term solvency of Social Security.

Passing on the problem to future generations: Though he celebrated the passage of the 1960 act, President Eisenhower “was accused of passing the thorny problem of voters’ constitutional rights over to his successor.” The trillions that will need to be borrowed to pay for private accounts will vastly increase the already bloated federal deficit, a problem to be dealt with by another administration.

No one is sold: Though happy that the federal government was recognizing that “a constitutional problem existed,” the act actually “did little to impress civil rights leaders.” Similarly, the American people are none too impressed by privatization schemes.

It’s nice to “feel good,” but how about less focus on how one feels — or self-congratulations — and more on providing viable solutions?

Believe it or not: you might be subsidizing Tom DeLay’s legal defense when you buy an airline ticket, make a phone call or have a happy hour cocktail. A network of large corporate backers — including American Airlines, Verizon and Bacardi — have poured thousands into Tom DeLay’s legal defense trust. It’s time for this to stop. Visit dropthehammer.org and send a message to these corporations. Tell them to stop enabling Tom DeLay’s unethical behavior. Let these corporations know that unless they stop supporting Tom DeLay, you’ll stop supporting them.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) was on the floor of the Senate last night trying to limit the fallout from his incendiary remarks about judges. But he didn’t apologize or repudiate what he said. Instead, he just lashed out at his critics. Cornyn began:

As a former judge myself for 13 years, who has a number of close personal friends who still serve on the bench today, I am outraged by recent acts of courthouse violence. I certainly hope that no one will construe my remarks on Monday otherwise. Considered in context, I don’t think a reasonable listener or reader could.

In other words, Cornyn stands by everything he said. The real problem is, of course, with the people who criticized him. Here’s Cornyn:

I regret it that my remarks have been taken out of context to create a wrong impression about my position, and possibly be construed to contribute to the problem rather than to a solution.

Cornyn doesn’t regret what he said. He only regrets that people took what he said “out of context.”

Watch the video, read the transcript and judge for yourself. Cornyn is just digging his hole deeper.

Wal-Mart is reportedly intensifying its PR counteroffensive. Today’s St. Petersburg Times headlines an article, “Wal-Mart Stops Smiling At Critics,” in which Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott says he is sick and tired of being a “punching bag” for reactionaries who don’t understand the free market:

The thing is, innovation and competition tend to change the status quo. We were a small store once, too. We were able to innovate and use the economies of scale and volume buying to deliver the value our customers needed and wanted. If it weren’t Wal-Mart, it would have been someone else. I can assure you that people who live paycheck to paycheck are thrilled when we come to town.

Thrilled? Only if they don’t know the facts. The problem with Scott’s reasoning is that Wal-Mart has benefitted as much from state subsidies and handouts as it has from “innovation” in the free market. One study has documented more than $1 billion in state and local incentives for Wal-Mart nationwide since 1981.

Meanwhile, because of the way Wal-Mart treats its employees, much of the money the public supposedly saves because of the superstore’s low prices gets taken right back out of its pockets. In Florida, where the company has receieved more than $51 million in incentives since 1981, Wal-Mart, “has more employees and family members enrolled in Medicaid than any company in the state.” That means state taxpayers – many of whom live “paycheck to paycheck” – foot the bill for more than 12,000 workers and dependents. In West Viginia, 452 people — the most for any employer in the state — listed Wal-Mart on their applications with the state’s Children’s Health Insurance Program. And in California, a study showed taxpayers spend $32-million a year providing health care to Wal-Mart workers and $54-million a year in other assistance such as free school lunches and food stamps.

Unfortunately, Wal-Mart’s “innovation” consists primarily in getting strapped state governments to subsidize its massive profit margin. Perhaps that’s why the “chorus of critics” keeps growing.