So a deal has been reached between Iran and the west. And I’m thrilled. For one thing, I’m not afraid of Iran. As a country, it has shown itself to be reasonable. And the people of Iran are generally quite pro-American. I’ve long felt that we should be engaged with Iran. As it is, we act like a jilted lover — just can’t get over that 1979 revolution. And we refuse to take any responsibility for creating it. You know, if we actually did push democracy overseas — if we had held the Shah in line and made him create a more just country — the revolution probably never would have taken place. Khomeini could have died in obscurity in France.

But what do my fellow Americans think? Well, mostly, they think, “What?! A deal, you say?” They just aren’t plugged in. They don’t especially care. The only people who really care are those who are plugged into conservative media. They’ve been fully manipulated into thinking that this is the worst thing in the world. So this evening, I was treated to a local news segment on it that really highlighted the people who were angry about the deal. Now each and every one of them was angry for the same reason. As the Merovingian would say, “They were told to be angry and they obeyed.” If a Republican were in office, they would think this was a good deal.

I don’t really care what Americans think. Similarly, I don’t care what Benjamin Netanyahu has to say. P M Carpenter gave Matt Yglesias a little ribbing because he posted one of Netanyahu’s tweets in Hebrew. But how could it possibly matter? We all know exactly what he had to say: this is the worst thing ever; Armagedeon; betrayal; shame shame shame; and so on. Who cares? Clearly Netanyahu has incentives that have nothing to do with the good of the world, the US, or even Israel.

But I am interested in what the Iranians think of this deal. So I was pleased to see that Glenn Greenwald and Murtaza Hussain over at The Intercept wrote, Iranians’ View of the Nuclear Deal: Optimistic, With Significant Caveats. It’s not surprising that the Iranians would be pleased with the deal: like people everywhere in the world, they care about economics. This is a deal that will both improve their economy and make war less likely. What’s not to like?

The people in Iran who are against the deal are very interesting: “fundamental Islamists who are now the only real hard-core nationalists in the country.” Other than the “Islamists” in that, the same could be said of the US: “fundamental Christians who are now the only real hard-core nationalists in the country.” That’s one of the things that has been so amazing to watch since 9/11: the two sides hate each other because they are so much alike. Or perhaps I should say the three sides, because the Israelis are the same.

What’s sad, is that Americans don’t know this. And that’s because our “neutral” press thinks that the right way to balance Netanyahu is to quote Lindsey Graham.

It seems that the conservatives have done another one of the undercover videos that we so love from James O’Keefe. And here we have the same thing with questionable edits. But the main thing is that it shows Deborah Nucatola of Planned Parenthood talking about selling fetal body parts from abortions.

Snopes gives the claim a rating of “undetermined” because they are careful and lack much of a backbone. But the article is pretty damning. To begin with, it notes that even in the full length video, it isn’t clear what Nucatola is talking about. But this should tell you everything you need to know, “Nucatola states a price of ‘$30 to $100’…” For body parts?! No wonder Planned Parenthood is in so much trouble: they clearly aren’t good at business if they are going to sell off body parts at this price.

Planned Parenthood has made clear what’s going on in a statement:

So what’s with the money? Healthcare providers charge for the storage and transportation of the material. That’s why Nucatola said, “It has to do with space issues, are you sending someone there who is doing everything, or is their staff, what exactly are they going to do, is there shipping involved or are you coming to pick it up.” And certainly the people who have produced this undercover “sting” know this. Back in 2003, Planned Parenthood went through the same thing — being accused of selling body parts.

After Planned Parenthood pointed this out, the group (laughably calling itself “Center for Medical Progress”) responded more or less triumphantly. They claimed that the reproductive healthcare group had admitted to this heinous act of selling body parts. This is pretty typical of conservatives. Accuse an enemy of doing something that is completely standard and ethical, and pretend that it is a big deal. And it is: to conservative outlets. The Federalist reported, BLACKOUT: Media Go Dark on Planned Parenthood Organ Trafficking. Yes, if only the mainstream press would credulously repeat every conservative hoax, the world would be so much better! (Note: the mainstream press has on many occasions done exactly that.)

So what is this Center for Medical Progress? Well, it seems to have only been in existence for about two months. It is the brainchild of David Daleiden, an anti-choice activist. And Daleiden is — Wait for it! — a college buddy of James O’Keefe. So it’s the same old thing. Throw a bunch of tape together and hope that you can make the nation far worse off before anyone notices that it was a total scam. Will it work in this case? I don’t know. I thought International Business Times did a good job with the subject, Who Is Deborah Nucatola? 5 Things To Know After Planned Parenthood Director Is Accused Of Selling Baby Body Parts. But I’m a bit concerned about just how seriously The Washington Post took it, Undercover Video Shows Planned Parenthood Official Discussing Fetal Organs Used for Research. The fact that anyone is even talking about it is pretty bad. How long will these chicanery artists be given a fair hearing?

H/T: Paul Bibeau is a comedic genius with a bit of a political bent. He is, for example, the guy who brought us the hilarious Ayn Rand and L Ron Hubbard short stories. I don’t go to him for politics, however. But the other day he brought my attention to this, Snopes Thinks That Planned Parenthood Black-Market-Baby-Parts-Story Might Be Bullshit.

I am so done with the Confederate flag. As you all should know, I’ve been complaining about it for years. It is not just because it was retrieved from the dustbin of history for specifically racist reasons. It was the flag of treason. Yet we did not punish the south for this horrible act of treason. We looked forward, but there are certain people in the south who have done nothing but look back. So I’m glad that there is a more concerted effort to get rid of it. But I hadn’t figured that I would be writing about it again — at least not so soon.

But this is just too amazing a story not to pass along. David Edwards over at Raw Story wrote, Man Calls Cops After Mostly Black Town “Hurts” His Feelings by Disrespecting Confederate Flag Parade. The man in question is Chris Oliver. He, his wife Angela, and about 100 other people in Virginia took part in a Confederate flag “parade.” Basically, they outfitted their cars with big Confederate flags and drove around. The problem is that they drove through Petersburg, a majority African American town. And not surprisingly, the people of Petersburg did not appreciate this display of “southern pride.”

According to Oliver, “There was people protesting, throwing bottles, hit my truck, hit numerous other vehicles, people yelling, yelling racial slurs.” His wife noted that they had brought their Confederate flags to Petersburg as a “peaceful ride.” And the result? “People throwing bottles at our vehicles, our property that we worked for.” Apparently, the local police weren’t too keen to help when Oliver went to the police. After all, a few plastic bottles thrown and some unkind words? The Olivers come off as pathetic. But I suspect in their minds, this is just what “those people” are always doing. So it makes sense.

But that’s not the worst of it. Oliver said, “The racial slurs are really what hurt me. You know, it’s uncalled for. There’s no need for that in today’s society.” Yes, can’t we all just get along? I mean, there these people were just minding their own business. Just taking a flag with a long history of racial oppression, and parading it through a town that is overwhelmingly populated with African Americans. What’s the big deal? Haven’t the people of Petersburg heard of a little thing called southern hospitality?

I can only assume that the Olivers are in earnest — that they really don’t see that they’ve done anything offensive. If that’s the case, this is an amazing example of white privilege. If the situation were reversed, certainly they could see it. It really doesn’t matter what the Confederate flag represents to fans of The Dukes of Hazard, to the people of Petersburg, it represents a long history of slavery, lynching, and oppression. But okay, maybe the Olivers didn’t know that when they started their parade. But they certainly should have known it afterward. And they should be ashamed.

Hillary Clinton has announced some of her economic policies, and I have to admit that I find them compelling. I’m sure I will write more about it later. But for now, I want to focus on some of her family friendly policies. Yes, of course, we should make it easier for workers to have families. I’ve always found this very interesting that social conservatives don’t get on the liberal economic bandwagon. Instead, they seem to think that family values are something that only the rich should be able to afford. Similarly, they want to outlaw abortion, while both making access to birth control difficult and then not providing for mothers after the children are born. So great: let’s make work better for young mothers.

But Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig has an even better idea, Liberate Women From Full-Time Work. She noted that it would be good if new mothers were not pushed out of the work place. So Clinton’s ideas are certainly welcome. But maybe we should also create a system where new mothers don’t feel that they have to work. Bruenig pointed out that in the very happy Netherlands, 76% of women work only part-time. In the US, it it is more or less reversed: 80% of prime age women work full-time. And that is not what they would prefer.

I find it constantly amazing that the liberty caucus is not the least bit interested in actual liberty. To them, liberty is something that the government takes away from rich people. If a poor woman works 70 hours a week and has to have her children raised by institutions, well that’s not a lack of liberty. That’s just the laws of economics and there is nothing that can be done about that! Of course, that is nonsense. We are at a curious point in social evolution, where we actually have a lot of choices, but we are denied them because the rich are afraid they might lose a couple of pennies.

The great American lie is that things are pretty much the way they must be. And the only way forward is to take more rights away from workers — to make the whole of civilization more like the law of the jungle. Even if that made sense — and it makes absolutely none — in the jungle, everyone is born more or less equal. No chimpanzee is born owner of a whole section of jungle with a police force and judicial system dedicated to protecting those property rights.

We really need to start thinking differently than we have been in the past. We live in a society in which liberty is not a right of all humans. Liberty is a right inherited from one’s parents. The children of the rich have happy childhoods filled with exposure to all the greatest things that humans have accomplished. The children of the poor have unhappy childhoods filled with standardized testing and inconsistent nutrition. When the children of the rich grow up, they do whatever they want. When the children of the poor grow up, they will be lucky to get a soul crushing job and become technologically unemployable by the time they reach 50.

I’m for doing anything that will help. Clinton’s proposals are mostly great. But Bruenig is right: we can do a lot more. The least we can ethically do is make sure that all children have happy childhoods filled with exposure to all the greatest things that humans have accomplished. Doing quite a lot less than that would be to allow mothers to actually raise their children. And the least we could possible do is what we are doing: nothing. Because: liberty!