Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 6:02 PM ET, 01/13/2011

Happy Hour Roundup

By Greg Sargent

* The "tale of two speeches" narrative continues with a nice piece by Dan Balz, with this blunt headline: "As Obama urged unity, Palin brought division."

* Nice catch by Jonathan Capehart on what one of Obama's off-script moments last night tells us.

* John Dickerson reports that Obama stayed up all night writing the speech, and that it embodied the hopes and fears of a husband and father.

* DADT dead-ender watch! T-Paw wants the rubes to believe he would reinstate don't ask don't tell.

* Which prompts Adam Serwer to marvel at the degree to which "homophobia" remains "a litmus test for the Republican presidential nomination."

* TPM digs deeper and finds that the whole tale of John Boehner supposedly snubbing Obama is much ado about nothing, another reminder that left-leaning outlets are often willing to stick to the facts even when they go off the script dictated by almighty Soros.

* Matthew Cooper asks: Was Palin's "blood libel" reference all about sending a signal to her deeply pro-Israel evangelical Christian supporters?

* Digby says "blood libel" may have alienated elites, but solidified Palin's role as leader of "aggrieved Americans who cannot accept the legitimacy of their political opposition."

* The Palin damage control tour continues with a planned interview with Fox News. Talk about stepping out of the bubble!

* Steve Benen skewers James Taranto's effort to get Michele Bachmann off the hook for her "armed and dangerous" comment.

* Jed Lewison offers a qualified endorsement of the bipartisan SOTU seating idea, but adds the crucial point that the best way to get Congress working together is to remove incentives for obstruction, via filibuster reform.

* Gallup finds most don't think incendiary rhetoric played a "major" role in the killings, but 42 percent think it played a major or minor role, versus 42 percent who say it didn't.

* Andrew Sullivan offers a compelling reason why you should you can chip money to support Glenn Greenwald's blog, which you can do right here.

* And despite what you may have heard, Gabrielle Giffords's doctors have confirmed that she did in fact open her eyes spontaneously for the first time.

What else is happening?

By Greg Sargent  | January 13, 2011; 6:02 PM ET
Categories:  Happy Hour Roundup, House Dems, Senate Dems, filibuster  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Palin, 'blood libel' and the old epistemic closure discussion
Next: The Morning Plum

Comments

It was the best of times it was the worst of times, I love Tolstoy

Posted by: shrink2 | January 13, 2011 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Oh, good. I could use a drink.

Silly righties -- Kos congratulates Ms. Palin on the completion of her reality show, and they misinterpret it as blame for some pie-throwing, or some-such.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 6:10 PM | Report abuse

"Ms. Palin rarely does interviews, and when she does, she tends to submit only to questions by conservative-leaning questioners."

Submit. What is that supposed to mean? Skip, back me on this, the D thugs are calling her submissive. Am I right?

Posted by: shrink2 | January 13, 2011 6:11 PM | Report abuse

What the Democrats should brand The GOP health care repeal act:

Coverage For The Healthy and Wealthy Only.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 6:12 PM | Report abuse

Good speech by Obama.

Also unscripted - "it did not"

"Let’s remember that it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy – it did not – but rather because... "

Posted by: sbj3 | January 13, 2011 6:13 PM | Report abuse

This is very encouraging news.

"3 mins ago

TUCSON, Ariz. – Rep. Gabrielle Giffords is opening both eyes, moving both legs and arms and is responding to friends and family. Her doctors call it a "major milestone" in her recovery. "We're hoping that she crosses through many more," said her neurosurgeon, Dr. Michael Lemole"

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Its no surprise that T-Paw (love that nickname!) or any other GOP possible pres. candidate would feel the need to assert their homophobic street cred. The GOP isn't getting more *moderate* as far as I can see.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 13, 2011 6:19 PM | Report abuse

"It was the best of times it was the worst of times, I love Tolstoy"

All this coded language. We all know you're making fun of Michael Steele, here.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 6:19 PM | Report abuse

I've been arguing (including, by chance, today) that bipartisanship will be fought by Republicans for a number of reasons but that one of the key reasons is because that goal or value has been identified (correctly) with Obama since his first big public speech ("we are not a blue America or a red America...). And it is a prime electoral strategy to attempt to neuter or denigrate whatever an opposing candidate might come to represent positively in the minds of voters. If the candidate represents X and the citizens agree that X is a good, then try to show that the candidate doesn't really have X at all. If the candidate is perceived as "honest", then find ways to make him look dishonest. Etc.

Here's Rove today in the WSJ...

"Mr. Obama's best chance of success 22 months from now rests on reclaiming his image as a reasonable, bipartisan and unifying figure."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704803604576077813329940804.html

Posted by: bernielatham | January 13, 2011 6:19 PM | Report abuse

T-paw is a fool. I think Chris Cillizza created the idea in Tim's mind that he might really be able to matter over in Washington...yes I mean the District of Columbia. Hey Tim, nudge, word to the wise, you can not appear to upstage the choices of the "values voters" (Pence, for example). There are people who have built their careers on gay bashing. The Republicans need leadership. All they have are posers trying on costumes.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 13, 2011 6:21 PM | Report abuse

An argument for keeping the partisan seating at the SOTU:


"Unity is great, sure, but apart from the entertainment value, there is an important practical reason to maintain the State of the Union's partisan seating arrangement. A neat separation of the parties allows the American people to see, in real time, their positions on the president's agenda and the issues of the day. It's actually very informative and helpful to be able to easily assess which proposals the Republicans and Democrats support, respectively, through the decision to applaud. It also allows us to identify the few party-bucking independent thinkers who, every so often, stand up to clap while the rest of their colleagues remain seated.

Thrown together in one big bipartisan hodgepodge, congressmen and senators would still carefully regulate their applause, but that brief chamber reaction shot on TV becomes nearly impossible to decipher. The country could certainly benefit from more symbolic demonstrations of solidarity, but the State of the Union address is one instance where a stark partisan divide is actually good for democracy."

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/01/colorado_senator_mark_udall_wa.html

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 13, 2011 6:21 PM | Report abuse

ps... obviously, that establishes a key element in the PR/propaganda blueprint over the next two years. So watch for it.

Posted by: bernielatham | January 13, 2011 6:21 PM | Report abuse

"Steve Benen skewers James Taranto's effort to get Michele Bachmann off the hook for her "armed and dangerous" comment."

You must be joking. Benen provides the context, take a look, and only a moron would read into that quote that Bachman was literally exhorting her followers to arm themselves with weaponry to oppose cap and trade.

This is as ridiculous as the Palin map controversy.

Posted by: sbj3 | January 13, 2011 6:22 PM | Report abuse

I heard some ridiculous notion that a Rush Limbaugh billboard was covered up in Tucson, today. Can anyone tell me

1.) what the billboard said, and;
2.) who gave the order to have it covered, and why?
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 6:30 PM | Report abuse

Limbaugh billboard:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/13/rush-limbaughs-tucson-billboard_n_808563.html?ir=Comedy

Posted by: sbj3 | January 13, 2011 6:32 PM | Report abuse

@sbj3-

I'm inclined to agree w/ you re: Bachmann.
What's more disturbing to me coming out of her mouth was the "anti-American" b.s. which she had to partially recant in regards to Obama.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 13, 2011 6:34 PM | Report abuse

This is very encouraging news.

"3 mins ago

TUCSON, Ariz. – Rep. Gabrielle Giffords is opening both eyes, moving both legs and arms and is responding to friends and family. Her doctors call it a "major milestone" in her recovery. "We're hoping that she crosses through many more," said her neurosurgeon, Dr. Michael Lemole"

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 6:18 PM | Report abuse

It's a freakin miracle is what it is. Shot through the brain and 3 days later awake and moving her arms and legs. It's astonishing.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 13, 2011 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Ugh.

I hate HuffPo. It's like People magazine for liberals who can't read, or something.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 6:36 PM | Report abuse

"Matthew Cooper asks: Was Palin's "blood libel" reference all about sending a signal to her deeply pro-Israel evangelical Christian supporters?"

Now, that is an interesting idea. I have been rather flummoxed by why that term was inserted in Palin's PR thingey. But, first of all, I have no thought that Palin herself wrote the speech. I also doubt very much she was terribly familiar with the term if familiar with it at all. So it was used by someone composing the speech for some specific reason and this is the most credible possible answer I've bumped into so far.

Posted by: bernielatham | January 13, 2011 6:39 PM | Report abuse

@Chuck: Any politico using the un-american or anti-american terms is tone deaf. I find it quite startling how often it is still used.

Here's another startling bit I read today: "Marc Lamont Hill Calls Obama ‘Murderer’ After Asking Media To Stop ‘Language Of Violence’"

http://www.mediaite.com/online/dr-marc-lamont-hill-media-must-stop-language-of-violence-pres-obama-is-a-murderer/

Posted by: sbj3 | January 13, 2011 6:39 PM | Report abuse

"It's a freakin miracle is what it is. Shot through the brain and 3 days later awake and moving her arms and legs. It's astonishing."

Some will no doubt see this as proof that she is, in fact, the Biblical antichrist.

Others will see this simply as proof that she is a Cylon agent.

Abortion for some, tiny American flags for others.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 6:44 PM | Report abuse

"I heard some ridiculous notion that a Rush Limbaugh billboard was covered up in Tucson, today. Can anyone tell me

1.) what the billboard said, and;
2.) who gave the order to have it covered, and why?"
------

Covered? Don't know about that. Clear Channel has decided to take it down because of the shooting-related graphics.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01clear_channel_yanks_straight_shooter_limbaugh_ad_in_tucson.php?ref=fpa

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 13, 2011 6:44 PM | Report abuse

"John Dickerson reports that Obama stayed up all night writing the speech, and that it embodied the hopes and fears of a husband and father."

I'm sure.

"Steve Benen skewers James Taranto's effort to get Michele Bachmann off the hook for her "armed and dangerous" comment."

He skewers nothing but his own credibility (well, as if he had any to skewer). I posted a link the other day to an audio of the entire interview. It's not hard to find. The outrageous call to harms is between 11 and 12 minutes.

It's a litmus test of intellectual honesty, because it isn't possible to listen and interpret as anything other than a metaphor for being informed. If you can't admit that, you can't admit anything that's true.

Greg, tell us you've listened to the audio and deny this. Please.

"Gallup finds most don't think incendiary rhetoric played a "major" role in the killings, but 42 percent think it played a major or minor role, versus 42 percent who say it didn't."

What are we supposed to take from this, now that it's admitted incendiary rhetoric had nothing to do with it?

That your (collectively) smear effort misled at least 42%? When does the apology and correction campaign begin?

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 13, 2011 6:45 PM | Report abuse

Excuse me, does Glenn Greenwald live like a pauper or an international jetsetter?

If it is not relevant that he lives in 2 countries, I would like an explanation of why that is so.

Posted by: smd1234 | January 13, 2011 6:47 PM | Report abuse

"You must be joking. Benen provides the context, take a look, and only a moron would read into that quote that Bachman was literally exhorting her followers to arm themselves with weaponry to oppose cap and trade. "

It's even worse because he inserts a paragraph break to try to misrepresent the context and give his aburdity optical plausibility -- since there isn't any substantively.

Listen to the audio. This charge is risible.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 13, 2011 6:52 PM | Report abuse

Take a look at the billboard ad that Clear Channel had put up in Tucson, prior to the shooting rampage.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01/clear_channel_yanks_straight_shooter_limbaugh_ad_in_tucson.php?ref=fpa


A huge billboard saying:

"Rush Limbaugh, Straight Shooter", and just in case people did not quite get the drift of that message, they added images of bullet holes riddling the area below the message.

Clear Channel has now decided to remove it, because of the shooting rampage, which only goes to show, that they should never have put it up, in the first place.

I saw a recent TV spot, for the Golf Channel, showing Rush in shorts, being given golf lessons.

It was not a pretty sight. Each time he swung the driver, the image of those Hippos in Tutus, from Disney's Fantasia, kept coming to mind.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 6:52 PM | Report abuse

Why can't the pollsters ask a more revealing question like "In the wake of the Arizona tragedy, would you like politicians to tone down incendiary rhetoric?"

Gallup is asking people to guess about causality; sure, there are about 300 people in the country who are paid to lie that they have some insight into such things, but they are really just guessing.

I'd like to know what the public would like to see happen in the future. That would at least be useful.

Posted by: mercerreader | January 13, 2011 6:54 PM | Report abuse

I am starting to believe the Post doesnt think it can survive financially without Sarah Palin.

Posted by: Bcjbs1 | January 13, 2011
-----

What was true at the Fix is true at Plum Line. If you want a lot of hits, just mention Sarah Palin in the title of the piece. She's definitely a ratings booster for both left and right.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 6:54 PM | Report abuse

"I saw a recent TV spot, for the Golf Channel, showing Rush in shorts, being given golf lessons."

I'm reminded of what Carmin Lupertazzi once said to Tony Soprano: "A Don doesn't wear short pants."
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 6:55 PM | Report abuse

Yesterday showed not only to Americans but to Republicans that Sarah Palin will not only NEVER be President but she will absolutely NOT become the Republican nominee for President in 2012.

Put a fork in it, she is done.

Posted by: maritza1 | January 13, 2011
-------

According to Dems, she's been done since 2008. So why all the obsession with her?

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 6:56 PM | Report abuse

This is yet another reason for the Dems to focus on a positive vision for the country and not get into fingerpointing and side alleys.

Posted by: Mimikatz | January 13, 2011
-------

LOL. Probably not gonna happen.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 6:57 PM | Report abuse

"Which prompts Adam Serwer to marvel at the degree to which "homophobia" remains "a litmus test for the Republican presidential nomination."

No kidding. Again, nothing libertarian in this position, it is the christian right's power still showing itself. And again, it is exclusionary - us versus that lesser other or the illegitimate type of pseudo-American that litter society.

Posted by: bernielatham | January 13, 2011 6:57 PM | Report abuse

"She's definitely a ratings booster for both left and right."

I find her very entertaining, but I wish Orly Taitz got some of that sweet, sweet 24/7/365, instead. She's a *lot* more entertaining, IMO.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 6:58 PM | Report abuse

@quarterback1

I heard the ever-hypnotized evangelical Ms. Bachmannnnnn say those words in her own voice (on the internet).

There is no doubt Benen is right.

MB need not have been inciting armed resistance in order for her language to contribute to the confidence, willingness to act, and overall passion/energy level of the
. . . anti- THIS
. . . anti- THAT
. . . let's overthrow the government
extremists.

IF AND TO THE EXTENT
she is more than an imbecile,
which I find hard to conclude,
she is utterly irresponsible.

Posted by: smd1234 | January 13, 2011 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Good evening guys.
Just getting caugth up on the web today.
So far, I notice that the former governor of Alaska still lives rent-free in lefties heads 24x7x365.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 13, 2011 7:00 PM | Report abuse

The Dems need to stop messing around and just name the bill "The Republicans Want You to Die Act of 2011."

Repeat as necessary.

Posted by: Observer691 | January 13, 2011
-------

They tried that. Remember Alan Grayson? How'd that all work out for him?

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Palin in 2012. I am going to work the primaries for her, just to repay Rush for having urged his listeners to work in the Democratic primaries, back in 2008.

It would be rude of us Democrats not to repay Rush for his kind support in 2008.

Palin in 2012. Yup Yup, You Betcha.

Here's winking at you kid!

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 7:01 PM | Report abuse

bernielatham:
"Over the last few months, we've brought you news that prominent social conservative Bryan Fischer has blamed gays for the Wikileaks disclosure"
-------

Maybe bernie's found the punk for whom he's been searching.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Liam:

http://www.primariesforpalin.com/

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 13, 2011 7:04 PM | Report abuse

"It was the best of times it was the worst of times, I love Tolstoy"

All this coded language. We all know you're making fun of Michael Steele...

Well that is a spurious allegation. Just because I asked Greg for the over-under on Steele getting past his recall vote I mean election next week...then he wrote, "The "tale of two speeches"...it is all an unfortunate coincidence.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 13, 2011 7:06 PM | Report abuse

You must be joking. Benen provides the context, take a look, and only a moron would read into that quote that Bachman was literally exhorting her followers to arm themselves with weaponry to oppose cap and trade.

This is as ridiculous as the Palin map controversy.

Posted by: sbj3 | January 13, 2011 6:22 PM
------

"only a moron". Judging from the last few days, I think we can make that "morons".

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 7:06 PM | Report abuse

"T-Paw wants the rubes to believe he would reinstate don't ask don't tell."

Yeah, as if he could. It would be lawsuit heaven, and go nowhere. But go ahead, Tim, lie to 'em. They like it.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 13, 2011 7:07 PM | Report abuse

It's a freakin miracle is what it is. Shot through the brain and 3 days later awake and moving her arms and legs. It's astonishing.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 13, 2011 6:35 PM
--------

Better keep an eye on Palin. I don't think this is the way she wanted it to play out.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 7:08 PM | Report abuse

Personally I don't think (or care if) Palin will run. Others are better and incumbent presidents are tough to beat.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 13, 2011 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Liam:

http://www.primariesforpalin.com/

Posted by: suekzoo1 | January 13, 2011 7:04 PM |
...................

Sue,

Now that is just downright malicious. My motives are pure. I just feel that one good turn deserves another, and it would be unforgivably rude of us not to repay Rush for all his help in our 2008 Democratic Primaries.

Palin in 2012.

Attention all true Democrats. Repay Rush's act of generosity, toward us, back in 2008, by working the Republican Primaries for Sarah in 2012.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 7:11 PM | Report abuse

I saw a recent TV spot, for the Golf Channel, showing Rush in shorts, being given golf lessons.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 6:52 PM
-------

How long before your pants came off?

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 7:13 PM | Report abuse

smd,

Thanks for reporting. You flunked the honesty test, or maybe you are just what sbj said.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 13, 2011 7:13 PM | Report abuse

smd,

Thanks for reporting. You flunked the honesty test, or maybe you are just what sbj said.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 13, 2011 7:14 PM | Report abuse

IF AND TO THE EXTENT
she is more than an imbecile,
which I find hard to conclude,
she is utterly irresponsible.

Posted by: smd1234 | January 13, 2011 7:00 PM
------

She has a law degree and was a practicing attorney. You might want to look into finishing work on your GED before criticizing someone else's intelligence.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Meanwhile the lefty that hacked her email account starts his federal felony prison sentence today.

http://hillbuzz.org/2011/01/13/obama-operative-david-popcorn-kernell-son-of-disgraced-democrat-tennessee-state-rep-mike-bad-father-kernell-begins-year-long-prison-sentence/

Posted by: TominColorado | January 13, 2011 7:19 PM | Report abuse

"She has a law degree and was a practicing attorney."

Orly Taitz. She's a dentist, too.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 7:22 PM | Report abuse

"SPRINGFIELD, Ill. – While many states consider boosting their economies with tax cuts, Illinois officials are betting on the opposite tactic: dramatically raising taxes to resolve a budget crisis that threatened to cripple state government.

"Neighboring states gleefully plotted Wednesday to take advantage of what they consider a major economic blunder and lure business away from Illinois.

"It's like living next door to `The Simpsons' — you know, the dysfunctional family down the block," Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels said in an interview on Chicago's WLS-AM."----AP

=====================================

It's starting. We'll see how 46% tax increases work for these states that have spent and promised themselves into near bankruptcy. A laboratory experiment.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 7:22 PM | Report abuse

"She has a law degree and was a practicing attorney."

Orly Taitz. She's a dentist, too.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 7:22 PM
-------

You're out of work? I hear they're hiring in the bean fields.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 7:24 PM | Report abuse

"We'll see how 46% tax increases work for these states that have spent and promised themselves into near bankruptcy."

Meanwhile, Texas will contract with whom to borrow against their grandchildren to cover their massive shortfalls?
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 7:25 PM | Report abuse

"You're out of work? I hear they're hiring in the bean fields."

Yeah, but I'm overqualified... meaning I am a white guy and a U.S. citizen, and the cops might actually listen to me when I complain about sub-legal pay and unsafe working conditions.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 7:28 PM | Report abuse

Actually, Bachmann's pratice was in tax law, she was a prosecutor for the US Treasury Dept for five years.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 13, 2011 7:30 PM | Report abuse

This bears repeating:

Sarah Palin has spoken so much in her speech, yet the only words American lamestream media deliberately and maliciously pick up are "blood libel", and then they try to distort and smear her yet again. There is no better example of "blood libel" than this....

This constant distortion of words and images by American lamestream media to destroy Sarah Palin brought back sad memories of the Great Chinese Cultural Revolution when every word spoken by people were analysed and distorted so that they can be intimidated into submission. Every words and images used had to be approved so as not to offend the Great Leader.....

Btw as a Chinese, I don't even know that the words "blood libel" have already been copyrighted and cannot be used recklessly....Can someone print a list of Jewish taboo words not to be used so that I will not cause any offense. To avoid charges of racism, it should also accompany taboo words from the Irish, Italian, Indians, Zulus, Javanese, Eskimos, Abcxyz, etc…. Or should I just registered as a liberal and a Democrat, then I would have free license to say anything I like, just like the good old days when a Chinese can say anything and do anything after he had registered as a Red Guard and wore the glorious red armband.

Posted by: skponggol | January 13, 2011 6:59 PM

Posted by: actuator | January 13, 2011 7:30 PM | Report abuse

"We'll see how 46% tax increases work for these states that have spent and promised themselves into near bankruptcy. A laboratory experiment."

They still have lower state tax in IL than we do here in CA!

Posted by: sbj3 | January 13, 2011 7:31 PM | Report abuse

"Actually, Bachmann's pratice was in tax law, she was a prosecutor for the US Treasury Dept for five years."

The very definition of a make-work government job, innit?
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Researched Bachmann a bit more.
After law school for her JD she continued to the College of William and Mary for an LLM.

Likely knows more about the tax code than all other congressmen combined.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 13, 2011 7:36 PM | Report abuse

"Likely knows more about the tax code than all other congressmen combined."

Enough to snag a cool quarter-mil of agri-welfare for her fambily, for sure.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 7:39 PM | Report abuse

Eric Erickson gets classier every day...

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/01/13/hes-just-a-shot-away-hes-just-a-shot-away/

Posted by: bernielatham | January 13, 2011 7:41 PM | Report abuse

"She has a law degree and was a practicing attorney."

Orly Taitz. She's a dentist, too.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 7:22 PM
..........................

And a foreign born and raised Birther loon.

She should start taking a Daily Irony Supplement.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Bachmann probably even knows enough to read bills to find what's in them BEFORE passing them.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 13, 2011 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Revolution in Tunisia?

http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2011/01/12/what-if-tunisia-had-a-revolution-but-nobody-watched/

Posted by: bernielatham | January 13, 2011 7:43 PM | Report abuse

How long before your pants came off?

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 7:13 PM

Didn't happen. It wasn't me that your wife was shacked up with last night.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 7:45 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if Obama might ask some of his supporters to tone down the rhetoric:

=====================================

"In the 21st century, white America got a wake-up call after 9/11/01. White America and the western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just 'disappeared' as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns."
Jeremiah Wright

"The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. The government lied."
Jeremiah Wright

"We started the AIDS virus. We are only able to maintain our level of living by making sure that Third World people live in grinding poverty."
Jeremiah Wright


“The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, God damn America"
Jeremiah Wright

“Hillary is married to Bill, and Bill has been good to us. No he ain’t! Bill did us, just like he did Monica Lewinsky. He was riding dirty.”
Jeremiah Wright

=======================================

RUSSERT: The title of one of your books, "Audacity of Hope," you acknowledge you got from a sermon from Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the head of the Trinity United Church. He said that Louis Farrakhan "epitomizes greatness."

He said that he went to Libya in 1984 with Louis Farrakhan to visit with Moammar Gadhafi and that, when your political opponents found out about that, quote, "your Jewish support would dry up quicker than a snowball in Hell."

"On Sunday, the headline in your hometown paper, Chicago Tribune: "Louis Farrakhan Backs Obama for President at Nation of Islam Convention in Chicago."

=======================================

"The Jews don't like Farrakhan, so they call me Hitler. Well, that's a good name. Hitler was a very great man."
Louis Farrakhan

"Anarchy may await America, due to the daily injustices suffered by the people."
Louis Farrakhan

“White people are potential humans – they haven’t evolved yet.”
Louis Farrakhan

“The white man is our mortal enemy, and we cannot accept him. I will fight to see that vicious beast go down into the late of fire prepared for him from the beginning, that he never rise again to give any innocent black man, woman or child the hell that he has delighted in pouring on us for 400 years.”
Louis Farrakhan

“These false Jews promote the filth of Hollywood. It’s the wicked Jews, the false Jews that are promoting lesbianism, homosexuality, [and] Zionists have manipulated Bush and the American government [on the war in Iraq]“
Louis Farrakhan

“I believe that for the small numbers of Jewish people in the United States, they exercise a tremendous amount of influence on the affairs of government …Yes, they exercise extraordinary control, and black people will never be free in this country until they are free of that kind of control … “
Louis Farrakhan


Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 7:46 PM | Report abuse

"Eric Erickson gets classier every day..."

Wow. Southern Beale is a good friend of mine. She lives just a few miles from where I do. I'm glad to see more people taking note of her excellent blogging.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 7:47 PM | Report abuse

How long before your pants came off?

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 7:13 PM

Didn't happen. It wasn't me that your wife was shacked up with last night.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Didn't happen. It wasn't me that your wife was shacked up with last night.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 7:45 PM
------

No, it was you my bald, fat neighbor was shacked up with last night.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 7:51 PM | Report abuse

I imagine that when Sarah Palin released her video yesterday morning, a siren went off in the Washington Post newsroom with employees running around bumping into each other, papers flying in the air and Columnists scurrying to their desks to write the 74 Sarah Palin articles that have appeared in the Post the last two days.

Seriously, there have been more articles about Sarah Palin in the Post the last two days than about Jared Loughner.

I understand a newspaper needs to make a buck but this is ridiculous.

Posted by: Bcjbs1 | January 13, 2011 7:51 PM | Report abuse

I appreciate that some of our pols have tried to begin at least some measure of regaining some of our lost civility.

But here is the problem. It's not just the pols...no matter what you may think of Bachmann or Palin they look like Ms Manners compared to the filthy hog on the radio. He makes his money by appealing to those like Brigade who actually enjoy wallowing in hate and insulting as many people as he can on this blog. Wait for it and we'll see what kind of insult I can dig up from the humorless one.
Kevin I'm getting you troll hunter this weekend. Reading some of these folks who think they are funny is like listening to that tone deaf relative play piano. In addition to the sorrow of realizing there are such hate filled insult spewing folks on this earth..at the end of the day these folks like Brigade, RFR Kaddeffi and the other bitter burned out haters worst offense may simply be they are BORING!

Because of that audience of haters and other bitter folks, Rushbo, Beck, Hannity et al earn a great living. Imagine what would happen to them if we take their golden goose away from them.

For me this is the confirmation of Oscar Wilde's famous observation...
"Life imitates Art far more than Art imitates Life".

How many of you remember the incredible classic...the 1976 Oscar winner...the talented Paddy Chayefsky's prescient classic "Network"

It's so close to what's happening it's almost eerie...do you remember the film?
Fox News er United Broadcasting system has an anchor Glen Beck...er Howard Beale who is given two weeks notice and goes on the air and says he will commit suicide on the air on his final broadcast. Can't imagine Beck with that much flair for the dramatic?
Really?

Of course the company pulls the anchor for obvious reasons. Beale's good friend Sean Hannity...er Max Schumacher persuades the Network to give Beck oops Beale one last show to say farewell to his audience. Fox er UBS lets him back on the air, ostensibly for a dignified farewell. Beck/Beale promises he will apologize for his outburst. However, once on the air, he launches into a rant claiming that life is "bullshit". Beck/Beale's outburst causes the newscast's ratings to soar. Much to Schumacher's dismay, the upper echelons of UBS, Roger Ailes, decide to exploit Beale's antics rather than pulling him off the air. In one impassioned diatribe, Beale galvanizes the nation with his rant, "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!" and persuades Americans to shout out their windows during a lightning storm. Soon Beck/Beale is hosting a new program called "The Glen Beck/Howard Beale Show", top-billed as a "mad prophet." Ultimately, the show becomes the highest rated program on television, and Beck/Beale finds new celebrity preaching his angry message in front of a live studio audience(Brigade/Kde/RFR/Skip) that, on cue, chants Becks/Beale's signature catchphrase en masse: "We're as mad as hell, and we're not going to take this anymore."

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 7:51 PM | Report abuse

I imagine that when Sarah Palin released her video yesterday morning, a siren went off in the Washington Post newsroom with employees running around bumping into each other, papers flying in the air and Columnists scurrying to their desks to write the 74 Sarah Palin articles that have appeared in the Post the last two days.

Seriously, there have been more articles about Sarah Palin in the Post the last two days than about Jared Loughner.

I understand a newspaper needs to make a buck but this is ridiculous.

Posted by: Bcjbs1 | January 13, 2011 7:54 PM | Report abuse

I imagine that when Sarah Palin released her video yesterday morning, a siren went off in the Washington Post newsroom with employees running around bumping into each other, papers flying in the air and Columnists scurrying to their desks to write the 74 Sarah Palin articles that have appeared in the Post the last two days.

Seriously, there have been more articles about Sarah Palin in the Post the last two days than about Jared Loughner.

I understand a newspaper needs to make a buck but this is ridiculous.

Posted by: Bcjbs1 | January 13, 2011 7:54 PM | Report abuse

"Btw as a Chinese, I don't even know..."

So this is how the right makes their case?

Louis Farrakhan, ignorant Chinese...

Do you have a message? Republicans, do you have a message?
Thought so. Please...let people who care lead the country.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 13, 2011 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Anyone curious to know how the movie ends?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_%28film%29

There is such a classic line in that film besides the famous mad as hell line.

"indifferent to suffering, insensitive to joy. All of life is reduced to the common rubble of banality."

Well the movie not only features Fox News and Glen Beck but also obviously understands some of our posters.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 7:56 PM | Report abuse

No, it was you my bald, fat neighbor was shacked up with last night.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 7:51 PM |

Wrong again, but that would be a definite improvement over you or your wife.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 7:56 PM | Report abuse

I still think Beck is more akin to Lonesome Rhodes from _A Face In The Crowd_ than to Beale. Impressed with his ability to persuade, but not able to reign it in at the point it becomes obviously self-destructive.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 7:59 PM | Report abuse

Need RainforestRising to add some class to this place tonight.

I have a retasking for him if he shows up.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 13, 2011 8:05 PM | Report abuse

@jprestonian

"I still think Beck is more akin to Lonesome Rhodes from _A Face In The Crowd_ than to Beale."

I can certainly see why you think that. It is simply a matter of opinion and yours could very well be the predominant one.
K.O. Obviously agrees with you as that is exactly how he refers to Beck.

I guess I'm a bit prejudiced because Peter Finch gave such a great performance as Beck..I mean Beale. He had the drama down perfectly. Andy Griffith did a fine job with Lonesome Rhodes as well in "Faces in the Crowd. Both classic excellent movies and both very prophetic and both lend a lot of credence to Wilde's famous statement.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 8:07 PM | Report abuse

Beck is just a Rodeo Clown, and so is Olbermann. They are both putting on an act.

Just like there are Elvis impersonators, Keith has developed an Edward R. Murrow, impersonation act.


Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 8:09 PM | Report abuse

Liam and prestonian...

Again I think the reason Network is in my mind is not so much Beck...although Beck's tears and his view of himself as a prophet do lend themselves to some Beale comparisons...it's also quite eerie to see how the fictional UBS so closely resembles Fox and how the top UBS exec behaves very much as Roger Ailes is currently operating.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 8:15 PM | Report abuse

"I guess I'm a bit prejudiced because Peter Finch gave such a great performance as Beck..I mean Beale. He had the drama down perfectly."

Yeah, but the character's politics were all wrong. Not so, Lonesome Rhodes.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 8:16 PM | Report abuse

"Yeah, but the character's politics were all wrong. Not so, Lonesome Rhodes."

Point taken. In addition Rhodes was also a drunk ala Beck before he found real fame.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Breaking Bigot News

"(AP)Mel Gibson's return to the big screen will begin at the South by Southwest festival in March.His publicist, Alan Nierob, says in an e-mail that he did not yet know whether the 55-year-old actor-director will make an appearance.Gibson stars as a troubled family man* who uses a beaver puppet he wears on his hand to help him cope."

How about that for a compelling story.

*troubled family man...need I say more?

Posted by: shrink2 | January 13, 2011 8:24 PM | Report abuse

I need to re-acquire _Network_ from the awesome socialist public library... I had recently done so with _A Face In The Crowd_, so my recent re-exposure may be coloring my opinion.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 8:25 PM | Report abuse

rukidding7:
"In addition to the sorrow of realizing there are such hate filled insult spewing folks on this earth..at the end of the day these folks like Brigade"
-------

Looks like the quotes from Obama's buddies really got to you. Don't like to see the utter hypocrisy of the left pointed out? I don't suppose talk like that could have inspired Colin Ferguson to jump on a commuter train and start shooting. Do you? I recommend you use Troll Hunter at your earliest opportunity---and maybe call for all conservatives to be banned. You certainly can't hold your own in an honest debate of issues. You'll like it better in the echo chamber. Or maybe you can hang on to a conservative or two who will just humor you instead of calling you out. I'll be happy to point out each and every instance of your idiocy and couldn't care less whether you read it or respond.
For someone who claims to be a vet, you're awfully short on spine.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 8:25 PM | Report abuse

Ru..

Beck is a recovering addict. Those types usually latch on to some new substitute obsessive addiction.

For many of them, it becomes religion; others start to manifest a messiah complex.

Like that grand old Dublin man, George Bernard Shaw, once remarked: "The problem with people who break a habit is; too often they have the pieces mounted and framed."

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 8:26 PM | Report abuse

Wrong again, but that would be a definite improvement over you or your wife.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 7:56 PM
-------

Definitely. Neither my wife nor I do perverts.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 8:28 PM | Report abuse

The equivalence trick.

Asserting equivalence ("everybody lies") functions to lessen the appearance of guilt - that is, the uniqueness or the seriousness of guilt. You get caught with your hand in the cookie jar and so you let on that "Billy took one too!" That could be true or a lie but the motive is the same. You don't want to be singled out for bad stuff.

In the political sphere, we have an example of how this works with electoral fraud claims. There's been a long-running campaign to have people believe that elections have been corrupted by people voting more than once or by people voting who are ineligible to legally vote. A raft of investigations have found nearly zero evidence that this has actually happened.

But it provides equivalence cover for the real corruption for which a lot of people have actually gone to jail - keeping people from voting at all.

Obviously, the present provides an even more clear example and it is strategic. Note that this can be done in a pre-emptive or predictive manner (I am going to do this bad thing and might get caught so I'll spread it around that the other side has been doing it). As Jay Rosen put it in a tweet...

"Does this thing have a name? "Watch: To sow confusion and stoke rage, I'll accuse those people there of exactly what I am doing right now."

OK, so the Palin camp (apparently) contacted ABC and told them that Palin had been receiving death threats at unprecedented levels. Then US News and World picked it up.

Bad, of course, if real but the Palin camp provided and still provides no evidence that this is true.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/157732/sarah-palins-death-threat-claims

So we'll have to see if any evidence is provided that this is true. If such evidence isn't provided, you'll have a fine example of how the equivalence trick is used as a propaganda tool.

Posted by: bernielatham | January 13, 2011 8:29 PM | Report abuse

"Looks like the quotes from Obama's buddies really got to you."

Yes -- their influence on public policy these last couple of years is direct and obvious.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 8:30 PM | Report abuse

Since we're on movie motif tonight...here's one for the current Governor of my State..Rick Scott....from All About Eve and Betty Davis....""Hang on it's going to be a bumpy ride"

Yesterday a staunchly conservative R Florida State Senate told the Medicare Fraudster to forget about tax cuts with a 4 billion $ deficit to deal with already.

Today it gets even better...Fraudster Scott's Cabinet while all conservative R's are elected to their offices not appointed and can tell the Guv to kiss their backsides...which is pretty much what they did today.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/aging/nursinghomes/cabinet-to-rick-scott-no-you-cant-veto-our-regulations/1145391

TALLAHASSEE — Thirty minutes after taking office last week, Gov. Rick Scott signed an executive order requiring his approval for any new state rules in departments under his purview.

Three days later, he sent an e-mail asking agencies that are not under his control to voluntarily "consent to the pre-authorization process" as well.

That request went to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Chief Financial Officer Jeff Atwater and Agricultural Commissioner Adam Putnam — state Cabinet members who were elected in their own right.

Their response?

Thanks, but no thanks.

A spokeswoman for Atwater said his office will review its rules and regulations "following their own standards."

Putnam took a similar stance.

"We are not sending our rules to the governor's office," said Putnam spokesman Sterling Ivey. "We are looking at all of our rules internally to make sure they align with the direction the commissioner wants to go with the department."

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 8:31 PM | Report abuse

Definitely. Neither my wife nor I do perverts.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 8:28 PM |

Which explains why she never does you, and explains why, like Ruby, she keeps taking her love to town.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 8:32 PM | Report abuse

Wow, I'm a conservative republican and I think I've seen Beck on TV once and heard him on the radio twice.

Sounds here like half his audience is the Left. Those eeevil rethuglikkkans ain't gonna sneak nuthin past y'all on Daytime TV! Gig'em Boys!

Posted by: TominColorado | January 13, 2011 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Gibson stars as a troubled family man* who uses a beaver puppet he wears on his hand to help him cope."

How about that for a compelling story.

*troubled family man...need I say more?

Posted by: shrink2 | January 13, 2011 8:24 PM .
...............................

Hey Wally, where's The Beaver.

Wally: On that crazy old jew hater's hand.

Good night all. Be sure to tip the wait staff.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 8:35 PM | Report abuse

Looks like the quotes from Obama's buddies really got to you."

Yes -- their influence on public policy these last couple of years is direct and obvious.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 8:30 PM |

--------

You too, huh? Well, their man and yours is in the White House. No effect on policy though. Too bad about Van Jones. It would have been nice to have one of the nutters right in the cabinet.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 8:35 PM | Report abuse

Which explains why she never does you, and explains why, like Ruby, she keeps taking her love to town.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 8:32 PM
-------

I take it Ruby is your wife. I thought his name was Glenn.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 8:37 PM | Report abuse

@jprestonian - "I need to re-acquire Network"

As it happens, I watched it again two weeks ago (not having seen it since release years ago). It's extremely bright and prescient - far more so than I had any real conception of when I first saw it.

Posted by: bernielatham | January 13, 2011 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Ruby don't take your love to town.

Look it up, you ignorant fat bald neighbor stalker. He fits the description, that SBJ posted of himself, so I am sure you will make a lovely couple, if you stop stalking him, and ask him out to dinner first.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, I got time for homophobic jokes, too. Not.

Gave it a chance, but sadly... *plonk*
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 8:42 PM | Report abuse

Wow, I'm a conservative republican and I think I've seen Beck on TV once and heard him on the radio twice.

Sounds here like half his audience is the Left. Those eeevil rethuglikkkans ain't gonna sneak nuthin past y'all on Daytime TV! Gig'em Boys!

Posted by: TominColorado | January 13, 2011 8:34 PM
-------

You've hit the nail on the head. I never listen to Beck or Limbaugh, but Ethan, Bernie, Liam, Wbgonne, DDAWD, Rukidding, et al. hang on their every word. I swear, FOX must have more liberal viewers than conservative. No wonder Keithie the jock-sniffer's ratings are in the toilet. All the libs are watching O'Reilly---when they're not trolling leftwing hate sites.
And they're making Sarah Palin obscenely rich and influential in policy matters.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 8:44 PM | Report abuse

"For someone who claims to be a vet, you're awfully short on spine."

You're such a wimp...gratuitous insults and all. I can remember you while I was in the service in Thailand...you were the bully who tried to intimidate until the day someone kicked your butt....Do what you wish Brigade...comments about peoples manhood and their spine simply reflect your own projection. Perhaps you has a very unhappy childhood or your wife is beating you but your posts reveal a very unhappy human being...

Again Brigade...."indifferent to suffering, insensitive to joy. All of life is reduced to the common rubble of banality."

Since your posts reveal a lot more testosterone than brains...

ba·nal
   /bəˈnæl, -ˈnɑl, ˈbeɪnl/ Show Spelled[buh-nal, -nahl, beyn-l] Show IPA
–adjective
devoid of freshness or originality; hackneyed; trite

I'll end my end of this exchange with a sincere wish for you that is snark free.
I hope you manage to find something that brings some peace and harmony to your life and you can stop viewing mean spiritness as entertainment.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 8:44 PM | Report abuse

Liam:
"Look it up, you ignorant fat bald neighbor stalker."
-------

Tsk, tsk. Temper, temper. I'm neither fat nor bald.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 8:47 PM | Report abuse

As it happens, I watched it again two weeks ago (not having seen it since release years ago). It's extremely bright and prescient - far more so than I had any real conception of when I first saw it.

Posted by: bernielatham | January 13, 2011 8:40 PM

....................

For me, Broadcast News; with William Hurt, Holly Hunter and Albert Brooks painted a more realistic portrait of today's TV faux news presentations.

The only thing missing from today's network newscasts, is hard news coverage.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 8:47 PM | Report abuse

Tsk, tsk. Temper, temper. I'm neither fat nor bald.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 8:47 PM

.................

You already said that you had been stalking your "fat bald neighbor",

and that your wife will not do you.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 8:49 PM | Report abuse

I'll end my end of this exchange with a sincere wish for you that is snark free.
I hope you manage to find something that brings some peace and harmony to your life and you can stop viewing mean spiritness as entertainment.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 8:44 PM
-----

You probably should review the posts. My shots at you came after your shots at me. I appreciate your wishes of peace and harmony, but I'm really a very happy fellow. Thailand? I thought you were in Vietnam.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 8:50 PM | Report abuse

Brigade:

It took me awhile but I finally figured out why the left has gone so bat crazy. No it's not Bush v Gore / Florida, Afghanistan, Iraq or Club Gitmo. It is:

POISONING BY GOVERNMENT CHEESE.

The calf-behavior genetics must be carrying through and they just can't get off the teat.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 13, 2011 8:51 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, I got time for homophobic jokes, too. Not.

Gave it a chance, but sadly... *plonk*

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 8:42 PM
-------

Certainly looks like a cao sock puppet. How will I ever muddle through without this genius commenting on my posts?

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 8:52 PM | Report abuse

The calf-behavior genetics must be carrying through and they just can't get off the teat.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 13, 2011 8:51 PM

.......................

That is no way to talk about your mother.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 8:53 PM | Report abuse

You already said that you had been stalking your "fat bald neighbor",

and that your wife will not do you.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 8:49 PM
--------

I think we've already dealt with your deficiencies in reading and comprehension in another thread. I'm leaving for a short while; please don't talk about me when I'm gone. Bad manners.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 8:56 PM | Report abuse

Double down GOP ... double down.

Posted by: pragmaticagain | January 13, 2011 8:57 PM | Report abuse

POISONING BY GOVERNMENT CHEESE.

The calf-behavior genetics must be carrying through and they just can't get off the teat.

Posted by: TominColorado | January 13, 2011 8:51 PM
-----

I believe I've suggested once or twice that some of the liberals go pick up their rations of government cheese. I hope they don't go all Palin on me if they've been poisoned.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 8:58 PM | Report abuse

Democrats - you are all going to tell us that YOU haven't lost confidence in this dude Obama ???

The guy doesn't even know how to properly handle a mass murder.


The democrats have to be holding back their complete lack of confidence that Obama can do anything right.


Obama and his people treated the country to nothing less than a circus this week.

And at every turn, they are attacking - or demanding that the other side join them in a truce for their own good.


A mass murder is an opportunity for Obama to play political games - the country is not happy.

Obama is in control of his own people - his SILENCE this week while his people attacked -

These idiot pundits this morning - pretending that none of that happened - and the first thing we have heard from Obama and his people this week started after the Indian left the stage.

Seriously folks, this is a major political party of a Superpower???

This is the fourth clown act in the side ring of a bad circus.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 8:58 PM | Report abuse

ruk (brought forward):

“I agree with most of your solutions..although I'm not really comfortable with taking out the TV cameras.”

Unfortunately, that is pretty much my entire solution.

“Could we compromise by simply waiting until the "royal" arrival scene is over...Pick up the feed as the President approaches the podium...show on a very few cutaway shots of the crowd..concentrate on the Pres remarks. Won't completely solve what I feel you have accurately described as something undesirable but at least we could calm it down some.”

It’s not the pomp and ceremony that I am talking about, although I find that a bit unseemly as well. It is the TV audience that makes it a political rally. If the president didn’t have a national audience to which to sell his agenda, he wouldn’t.

As an aside, I do hope at the very least that the Supremes boycott the SOTU this year, after Obama’s unprecedented display of disrespect last year.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 13, 2011 8:59 PM | Report abuse

Greg

I have to call you an Urban Rube - because you think you know what you are talking about.

Your kind of rubishness is worse, because it is tinged with arrogance.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Sex jokes are just sex jokes. They are neither homophobic or heterophobic.

Equality means treating people the same, regardless of their sexual orientation, including accepting that jokes that can be made about gay sex, are no different than jokes that can be made about straight sex.

No need to read homophobia into a bit of sexual banter, back and forth, between a Lib, and a Con.

By the way, every time they call us "Libs", feel free to call them Cons.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Kevin...if you are out there, somehow the formatting of my post has been totally mangled in your CrappyBlogSoftwareFixer. Not sure why my comment got placed in the boxquote, nor why my second quote from ruk is not in a boxquote. Any suggestions?

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 13, 2011 9:02 PM | Report abuse

Thailand for 8 months Vietnam for 4 months.
I was young and dumb and too curious. I was stationed in Thailand and wanted to see what a war zone was like and so I requested a transfer...not too hard to get. When I landed at Tan Son Nhut Air Base and saw the S. Vietnamese soldiers behind sand bunkers with flack jackets and locked and loaded weapons I realized I had effed up.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 9:02 PM | Report abuse

The Difference between Urban Rubes and the Rubes people like Greg look down upon.


The Urban Rubes think they are better than other people - mainly because they hold liberal views.


The truth is, for the most part, rubes go to Church more than Urban Rubes, actually making regular rubes better people than the Urban rubes.


The arrogance is unbelievable - it actually blinds the liberals.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 9:03 PM | Report abuse

"after Obama’s unprecedented display of disrespect"

History buff, I see.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 9:03 PM | Report abuse

So, will Mel Gibson be giving special showings, to Right Wing Christian Groups, to promote his new movie:

The Passion Of The Beaver?

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 9:07 PM | Report abuse

"No need to read homophobia into a bit of sexual banter, back and forth, between a Lib, and a Con."

Not interested, either way. I can get gratuitous insults anywhere. Keith's plonker will take care of that.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 9:08 PM | Report abuse

Thailand for 8 months Vietnam for 4 months.
I was young and dumb and too curious. I was stationed in Thailand and wanted to see what a war zone was like and so I requested a transfer...not too hard to get. When I landed at Tan Son Nhut Air Base and saw the S. Vietnamese soldiers behind sand bunkers with flack jackets and locked and loaded weapons I realized I had effed up.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 9:02 PM
-------

Don't tell caothien9. He'll accuse you of being prejudiced against Asians and of shooting some of his future friends and relatives. But congrats on your service to country and don't take anything I say too seriously.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 9:08 PM | Report abuse

Im not sure all this dead-ender stuff makes much sense.


What is true is the ENTIRE liberal agenda is at a dead-end. Dead and buried actually.


The House will block any other attempt to put the liberal agenda in place. Voters have stopped all gay marriage at every vote.


The Senate is only in the hands of the democrats by virtue of the rotation of seats - it is sure to go Republican in the next election.


Obama will lose.


The question is: how many decades will it take for the democrats to recover? Because they sure are not recovering with this liberal agenda and collection of mis-fit interest groups.


The democrats are finished. Even worse, they have lost all credibility with the American People -

When a democrat makes a campaign pledge, after Obama there is NO REASON to believe that person.... ALL the democrats do is LIE TO GET SOME CENTRIST VOTES, AND THEY ARE GOING TO SWING TO THE FAR LEFT.


The democrats can NOT be trusted.


I predict the democrats will fall to gerrymandered districts and hand-full of blue States - all of which are in horrible financial condition.

A new party will emerge in its place. I don't see the democrats surviving redistricting in 2020.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 9:10 PM | Report abuse

Keith's plonker will take care of that.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 9:08 PM
-----

You mean Kevin's plonker. Keith's plonker is the one you've been chewing on.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 9:11 PM | Report abuse

"No need to read homophobia into a bit of sexual banter, back and forth, between a Lib, and a Con."

Not interested, either way. I can get gratuitous insults anywhere. Keith's plonker will take care of that.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 9:08 PM

.........................

Since it means nothing to you, then spare us your sanctimonious whining about it.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 9:12 PM | Report abuse

My apologies -- KEVIN's plonker, by which I mean Troll Hunter. Only three in the cage, now.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 9:13 PM | Report abuse


Democrats - you are all going to tell us that YOU haven't lost confidence in this dude Obama ???

The guy doesn't even know how to properly handle a mass murder.


The democrats have to be holding back their complete lack of confidence that Obama can do anything right.

A mass murder is an opportunity for Obama to play political games - the country is not happy.

Obama is in control of his own people - his SILENCE this week while his people attacked -

Seriously folks, this is a major political party of a Superpower???

This is the fourth clown act in the side ring of a bad circus.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 9:14 PM | Report abuse

"after Obama’s unprecedented display of disrespect"

History buff, I see."


Rim shot please...badda boom!!!

Great snark prestonian.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 9:15 PM | Report abuse

"Since it means nothing to you, then spare us your sanctimonious whining about it."

Make that *four*.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 9:15 PM | Report abuse

Democrats - time to have an honest discussion

Obama is running a government by circus.


You can't be happy with this guy's performance.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 9:19 PM | Report abuse

And they're making Sarah Palin obscenely rich and influential in policy matters.

Posted by: Brigade | January 13, 2011 8:44 PM |
.........................


So you get to accuse Sarah Palin of having an obscene lifestyle, but how dare any Democrat say anything close to that about her, right, Mr. Janus?

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 9:20 PM | Report abuse

This week Obama did NOTHING ABOUT JOBS


NOTHING ABOUT THE ECONOMY


ALL Obama did was run a smear campaign, complain about Sarah Palin, and try to be a hero with a teleprompter in Tucson.


All because of a kid who was supposed to be better off , because he went to a special school with a special liberal program funded by.... William Ayers and Obama himself.....

This is a joke


OBAMA IS SUPPOSED TO BE WORKING ON THE ECONOMY.


NOT running this circus of a smear campaign and being SOLELY concerned with HOW HE LOOK AT THE MEMORIAL SERVICE,

If you want to call it that. (quite a stretch)

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 9:26 PM | Report abuse

It seems Clear Channel's local management in Arizona made the decision on the Limbaugh billboard in Tucson. I say bully for them -- good call.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 9:26 PM | Report abuse

Bsjbs,

Had I been drinking milk, would definitely have come out my nose.

I imagine they have a Batpole at Wapo too but probably fall off a lot, keystone cops style.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 13, 2011 9:26 PM | Report abuse

Right you are Sybil.

President Obama is no circus master.

Republicans are the ones who know how to run a circus, with their Elephant, and all their special perpetually weeping Clown act.

You miss the steady work, that cleaning up after the Elephant provided for you, don't you, because you hated to give up show biz, didn't you?!

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 9:31 PM | Report abuse

@brigade....Thanks very much it is truly appreciated.

"don't take anything I say too seriously'

Well honestly with the exception of RFR/STRF or whatever he is currently calling himself, and KDE I truly respect every poster's opinion and since this blog has a significant number of conservatives who as Q.B. has correctly IMHO pointed out, make this place a lot more interesting. I especially work hard to try and respect their opinions even when disagreeing with them. I used to try Politico and redstate to see what conservative thought was taking place, but it was just too much talking points and snark and never real discussion. I enjoy snark as much as the next guy, as long as it's clever, not banal (nothing like wearing out a new favorite word eh)or too mean spirited. Anyway the beauty of having all of our conservative friends here is that while there is certainly enough snark there are also plenty of really neat policy discussion. I feel like here conservatives who stick around eventually get seduced into a rational..dare I say it.civil conversatio. I can get a better picture of what you righties believe at any given moment.

If it wasn't for PL I might believe all those nasty stereotypes promulgated by MSNBC and HuffPo. :-) Here I get to see some "genuine" conservative out of talking point mode...well some of you anyway.

As for meanness I can see you and Liam enjoy playing a game very close to the African American game called "The Dozens" and in fact Liam even engaged in that very game when he brought up "yo mama".

I guess my weakness Brigade is that I'm not a great multitasker when it comes to jumping quickly from serious political discussion to the "dozens" and back again..especially since between the serious discussion and the "fun" you and Liam enjoy are folks here who are quite serious about hating we on the left. I'm glad to know you're just playing around when you go for the jugular. :-) Don't wish to spoil your fun.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 9:31 PM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"So we'll have to see if any evidence is provided that this is true. If such evidence isn't provided, you'll have a fine example of how the equivalence trick is used as a propaganda tool."

So let me understand...it is your thesis that Palin is pretending to have received death threats in order to divert attention from the fact that she is actually issuing, or planning on issuing, death threats?

Utterly laughable.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 13, 2011 9:39 PM | Report abuse

Greg

Obama is supposed to be working on the economy, not smear campaigns.


The other thing - the democrats are STILL attacking the Conservatives.


These attacks are CONTINUING


Half the democrats are asking for a truce, and half are still attacking.


The democratic party is OUT OF ITS MIND.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 9:41 PM | Report abuse

Breaking News


Gabrielle Giffords first words: "Sarah Palin must die."


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 9:43 PM | Report abuse

s for meanness I can see you and Liam enjoy playing a game very close to the African American game called "The Dozens" and in fact Liam even engaged in that very game when he brought up "yo mama".
....................

Ah, I have been found out.

Good night to all, regardless of your politics, and some one put out a glass of milk and some cookies for poor Sybil, when all her bedraggled personalities come straggling in.

.......................

A little wisp of a whimsical poem by a man who was a friend of James Joyce, and who Joyce based the Buck Mulligan character on.


Ringsend

(after reading Tolstoy) Oliver St. John Gogarty Gogarty

I will live in Ringsend
With a red-headed whor*,
And the fan-light gone in
Where it lights the hall-door,
And listen each night
For her querulous shout,
As at last she streels in
And the pubs empty out.
To soothe that wild breast
With my old-fangled songs,
Till she feels it redressed
From inordinate wrongs,
Imagined, outrageous,
Preposterous wrongs,
Till peace at last comes,
Shall be all I will do,
Where the little lamp blooms
Like a rose in the stew;
And up the back garden
The sound comes to me
Of the lapsing, unsoilable,
Whispering sea.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 9:44 PM | Report abuse

There are probably some crazy, left-inspired loons out there who would wish Ms. Palin harm, but for the life of me, I can't understand why. She's so far fallen short of Orly Taitz capability to entertain, but she holds a lot of promise, and no shortage of available on-site cameras and microphones.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 9:44 PM | Report abuse

jp:

"History buff, I see."

Probably you don't.

ruk:

"Great snark prestonian."

Don't be such a cheap date, ruk.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 13, 2011 9:44 PM | Report abuse

STRF AKA Sybil's first baby words;

"Attention Kmart shoppers."

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 9:46 PM | Report abuse

Obama can't even handle a mass murder properly.


Come on folks, this week has been a complete Obama-run circus.


Then Obama thinks he is going to get up there - and TELL US WHAT OUR VALUES SHOULD BE.


After running a smear campaign, Obama sounds like a COMPLETE IDIOT


Then the crowd cheers. RIDICULOUS. This is a bad circus, a bad movie - a sitcom that should have been cancelled last season.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 9:49 PM | Report abuse

"Probably you don't."

Probably I don't, indeed. That is central to my point!

I wonder... how unprecedented would an opposition party's verbal outburst during the SOTU be?
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 9:52 PM | Report abuse

@Scott While I agree with your basic point I get a different reaction than you.

"Utterly laughable." For me it's more a sadness. I love Bernie but I agree it's time now we all let Sister Sarah sail off into the profitable sunset that will make her a wealthy powerful woman...if not President. No need to kick someone when they're down regardless of perceived past transgressions.

On a related thought. Just a personal peeve on my part. I realize that we on the left have no right trying to dictate or even influence who you on the right decide to run for political office. But let me see if you can understand a real aggravation for us.

When I hear Chris Cristie or Marco Rubio or Paul Ryan or....well the list is too long to complete...when I hear these guys talk I think wow I don' agree with them but they are obviuosly bright people who understand the issues and can put two sentences together...when I hear Louis Gohmert....Bachmann it's not just their politics that get on my nerves...again I don't support Rubio or Christie but I do respect them, they worked hard for their positions....immersed themselves in the issues...in short I feel as if they are qualified even if I don't agree with them. But some of these goofballs are really insulting to a person's intelligence.

No particular point I guess I'm just venting Scott. You guys have plenty of talented, smart, well educated, and well prepared people...why have these goofballs gotten so much attention? In fact Scott...Louis Gohmert? I keep waiting for him to go to the well of the House and say.."Shazam...shazam...shazam...perhaps its because Gohmert sounds sooo much like Gomer.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 9:53 PM | Report abuse

The Memorial Service was the perfect cap to a week of baseless smears by Obama's people.


Who cheers and applauds at a Memorial Service? Who hands out t-shirs like it is some union rally???


Let's be serious -


The whole thing was ridiculous.


Obama ONLY CARED ABOUT SCORING POLITICAL POINTS.

Obama doesn't have the ability to convince ANYONE that he really cares about the victims.

Ironically, all they had to do was let McCain and Kyl speak - and ask the crowd to tone it down - and maybe Obama would have been able to pull this off.


This is a LIBERAL NIGHTMARE.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 9:53 PM | Report abuse

ruk,

"Thailand for 8 months Vietnam for 4 months.
I was young and dumb and too curious. I was stationed in Thailand and wanted to see what a war zone was like and so I requested a transfer...not too hard to get. When I landed at Tan Son Nhut Air Base and saw the S. Vietnamese soldiers behind sand bunkers with flack jackets and locked and loaded weapons I realized I had effed up."

Would make a pretty good memior or movie opening. Had no idea you could do understatement so well as opposed to overstatement, which I know you can do. ; )

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 13, 2011 9:55 PM | Report abuse

Again I agree with you Sybil. Obama is not someone you could count on to commit mass murder.

Why, he probably has never even shot five rounds at a moose.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 9:55 PM | Report abuse

Of course, some truly believe that SCOTUS allowing corporations, foreign and domestic, to give unlimited money to political campaigns without transparency is a good thing -- free speech, y'know.

Money = speech, right.

Well, no.

Speech = speech. Money = volume control of the speech.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 9:58 PM | Report abuse

Hey Whispering Sea


How bad a job does Obama have to do, how much worse does Obama have to do - for you to withdraw support from Obama???


Obama is dragging down the economy.


Obama has done nothing to curb the big banks.

Obama's Economic policies are in a sense of drift.


So, how much more does the nation have to be PUT THROUGH in order for you to withdraw your support and ADMIT this guy is just not right for the job???


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 9:58 PM | Report abuse

"Don't be such a cheap date, ruk."

This has been a rough day for me. First Kevin tells me I'm not allowed to use the excuse "the girl was really hot" as an explanation for cheating and now Scott you're telling me not to be cheap.

Thank heavens I didn't know you guys in my 20's or I would have had a lot less fun. :-)

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 10:00 PM | Report abuse

jp:

"Of course, some truly believe that SCOTUS allowing..."

If this was directed at me on the back of my hoping the Supremes boycott the SOTU, you have obviously missed the point.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 13, 2011 10:06 PM | Report abuse

Liam

How did you know I wrote that line for K-Mart????

I make a half a penny everytime they say it.

It is sweet.


_________________________________


Obama can't even handle a mass murder properly.


Come on folks, this week has been a complete Obama-run circus.


Then Obama thinks he is going to get up there - and TELL US WHAT OUR VALUES SHOULD BE.


After running a smear campaign, Obama sounds like a COMPLETE IDIOT


Then the crowd cheers. RIDICULOUS. This is a bad circus, a bad movie - a sitcom that should have been cancelled last season.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 10:07 PM | Report abuse

"If this was directed at me on the back of my hoping the Supremes boycott the SOTU, you have obviously missed the point."

I didn't insist you wear the hat, dood.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 10:10 PM | Report abuse

Ok kiddies hate to leave the fun but time to go to bed.

Q.B. "Would make a pretty good memior or movie opening. Had no idea you could do understatement so well as opposed to overstatement, which I know you can do. ; )"

Thanks...I think. :-) Actually I have written my first novel about the experience...not Vietnam but about an assignation I had on a three day pass in Bangkok. Now you know why Scott's inference about my cheapness and Kevin's snatching any hope for an excuse have cast a pall upon my day...lol

I do not wish to overplay my Vietnam experience. I still retain a large amount of survivors guilt because I was assigned to the 101st Airborne but because I only had four months left I was luckily for me..assigned to the rear area division base in Bien Hoa instead of going up to the front in Hue where the guys were really slugging it out...I saw them as they passed through on their way to RR...some amazing dudes. In addition there was my motivation...I didn't volunteer because I was a hero or patriot but simply because I was 20 and it was a lark...until as I say that I realized they were using real live ammunition and it was locked and loaded.

Everybody else...play nice and don't leave this place a mess. Remember reality and not perception. Today is not about Obama or Palin it is truly about Christina Taylor-Green. Watching a small custom made coffin sized for a nine year old at her funeral today brought tears to my eyes.
She is REALLY the story of the day!

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 10:12 PM | Report abuse

The Five Supreme Right Wing Stooges have emancipated all American Corporations, and they now must be treated as persons, under the law.

That means that they can run for office, including President and VP.

Halliburton/Raytheon
should be the Republican ticket in 2012.

Of course; should they decide to merge, as in marry, I will leave the job of making sure that they are not gay or lesbian corporations up to Nino Scalia.

Let him check out their undercarriages, to determine if they can have a traditional marriage.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 10:13 PM | Report abuse

This is very encouraging news.

"3 mins ago

TUCSON, Ariz. – Rep. Gabrielle Giffords is opening both eyes, moving both legs and arms and is responding to friends and family. Her doctors call it a "major milestone" in her recovery. "We're hoping that she crosses through many more," said her neurosurgeon, Dr. Michael Lemole"

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 6:18 PM | Report abuse

It's a freakin miracle is what it is. Shot through the brain and 3 days later awake and moving her arms and legs. It's astonishing.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 13, 2011 6:35 PM | Report abuse
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Prayer works.

Posted by: tao9 | January 13, 2011 10:13 PM | Report abuse

The Liberals dont get it


Obama loses the election, he goes on vacation

He comes came, and jams through the lame duck session, which believe me, made no friends.


Then OBAMA GOES ON VACATION AGAIN.


Then, we have this week-long smear campaign - memorial service CIRCUS.

WHERE IS OBAMA WORKING ON THE ECONOMY?

WHERE IS OBAMA WORKING ON JOBS???

This dude Obama is a complete joke.


You democrats must be horrified at this guy's job performance.


If a Republican acted like this in office, Republicans SURE WOULD NOT CONTINUE TO SUPPORT HIM.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 10:16 PM | Report abuse

"So we'll have to see if any evidence is provided that this is true. If such evidence isn't provided, you'll have a fine example of how the equivalence trick is used as a propaganda tool."

Scott already skewered this as only he can do, but I was almost shocked when I read this bernie screed -- almost, as in, if I have any capacity for shock left. This might be the screwiest and most deplorable rant I've seen yet from bernie.

Bernie is concerned -- gravely concerned -- when left-wing officials give out that they are receiving threats. Officials high and low, famous and obscure. From the Obamas on down.

Bernie knows that these threats are fomented by right-wing rhetoric and rise and fall with it. He scoffs at doubters of his wisdom on this.

But Sarah Palin, that's another matter. True, she's a very prominent political figure and without a doubt the most vilified one in the land. Bernie's team has just this past week been on her like pack of wild dogs accusing her of personally inciting mass murder and bringing the entire country to the eve of self destruction. Probably 100 time more people have been deluged in attacks on Palin than had ever heard of Gabby Giffords before Saturday.

The internet is chock full of fantasies, wishes and threats to Palin. There are Facebook pages dedicated to wishing she were killed.

But when it comes to Palin, why, Bernie just doesn't buy it. Palin, that dimwit who can't even think for herself must be inventing threats to distract from . . . from what? All the threats she is making? All the threats she is inciting . . . how exactly?

I used to be indifferent to whether Sarah stayed prominent and active, but now I hope she does, because she is clearly driving people like bernie completely crazy. The slanders they are now reduced to inventing are spectacularly nonsensical.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 13, 2011 10:16 PM | Report abuse

Luck and good health care work. Prayer is a placebo for helpless onlookers.

It is absurd to claim that some God, allowed the little girl to be murdered, and that once a bunch of people started uttering incantations, he changed his mind about letting Congresswoman Giffords die.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 10:20 PM | Report abuse

"I used to be indifferent to whether Sarah stayed prominent and active, but now I hope she does"

And they say that agreement between left and right is difficult. Look what we've done, right here, right now.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 10:21 PM | Report abuse

I'm working on my bi-partisanship and found this from Jason Linkins. He's talking about some of the goofy stuff coming out of Congress while they try to save us all, well mostly them, from the next deranged shooter. The crazy is coming from both sides. He probably shouldn't have used the "brainpan" if he wanted to be PC, but I thought it was still funny.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"And it might be a difficult road to tread -- sometimes there's just nothing you can do to fix something, no matter how hard you want to. But a slow and thoughtful process that goes nowhere is infinitely preferable to rushing to pass the first crazy law that you barfed out of your brainpan while stewing in a broth of worry, adrenaline, and panic."

Posted by: lmsinca | January 13, 2011 10:21 PM | Report abuse

quarterback1, I just finished listing half a dozen GWB-assassination fantasies as well:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/01/in_which_i_propose_a_truce_bet.html

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 13, 2011 10:23 PM | Report abuse

tao...before I drag off....I'm trying to remember from your days bantering with BGinChi (wonder what happened to him...I miss his posts) whether you guys used to discuss hockey or lacrosse?

If it's hockey are you an NHL fan. Do you have a favorite team?

I ask these questions because finally my Lightning are good enough to make me cocky enough to challenge your team...I may not be able to beat you in a debate but my hockey team will kick your hockey team's butt. The gauntlet has been tossed.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 10:25 PM | Report abuse

"Thanks...I think. :-) "

Yes, it was meant as a compliment. No suggestion of playing up your experience etc. I just thought it was a well-turned little paragraph that would catch my interest if I read or heard it . . . whether it led to a story of heroism or a dark comedy or memior of futility and dissipation or whatever. (Or some cynical Oliver Stone propaganda piece.) It's sort of a classic intro paragraph. Keep writing!

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 13, 2011 10:25 PM | Report abuse

Btw, ScottC3 -- I meant you could take off the hat anytime, and raise objections to the SCOTUS dialog in last year's SOTU any time you wish. Or, remain silent, and just imply that there's something inherently wrong, and let us all follow our internal dog whistles to our respective corners.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 10:25 PM | Report abuse

Bernie quoted and linked this "editorial" earlier today.

"Political violence in America. Who profits?

"Political violence in America always has been a matter of great convenience to the people who actually own the country. They don't have to inspire it, or finance it. They can even deplore it. All they really have to do is control the reaction to it — not let it get so wild that it disturbs the stock market and, at the same time, not let the reality of political violence disrupt the anesthetic consensus that swaddles the centers of real power. Thus do we get lone gunmen, and ritualized "healing," and infinite misdirection. Earnest cud-chewing about talk-radio. David Gergen wonders about violence on TV and David Frum talks about marijuana, but nobody asks the old Latin question: Cui bono? Who profits?
There is even a reluctance in the prim and proper precincts of the elite corporate press to call what happened to Gabrielle Giffords an assassination attempt, and to call what Jared Loughner did a political act, because it is not nice to admit how thoroughly ingrained violence has become in our amnesiac American politics, because then we might ask who profits from walking on the fringe...."

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/political-violence-in-america-4834173#ixzz1Ave66RTA"

Bernie, did you think this editorial was intelligent?  Do you agree with the authors that the Hunt brothers inspired Lee Harvey Oswald to first try and kill known lefty Gemeral Walker, and then Kennedy?  Or do you subscribe to the authors apparent belief in a rightwing conspiracy?  And who would benefit from Rep. Gifford's death?  Or does the rightwing somehow magically benefit, like they did after JFK?

You thought the editorial was as stupid as I did, right?

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | January 13, 2011 10:25 PM | Report abuse

qb:

It seems one the newbies is ripe for being educated by you on Citizens United. Have at it, if you don't mind wasting your time yet again.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 13, 2011 10:26 PM | Report abuse

The Nation needs someone to work on the Economy and jobs.


Obama hands us a baseless smear campaign and a bogus Memorial service -

And tells us that his poll numbers should go up.

What a moron.......

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 10:27 PM | Report abuse

The biggest obstacle to getting Republican Congress members to work in a bipartisan fashion is;

Many of their religious right base think Bipartisan means some sort of kinky sexual behavior, and the bible must surely condemn it.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 10:27 PM | Report abuse

Q.B. "Keep writing!" Thanks for the encouragement. I'm attending a writers group right now working on polishing my little effort. But it was genuinely nice of you to provide encouragement.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 13, 2011 10:28 PM | Report abuse

@jprestonian: “It's like People magazine for liberals who can't read“

No, that's people magazine.

I've never been a huge fan of HuffPo, but I don't think I've ever found it repugnant. Perhaps that's just me.

@tao9: “ ' It's a freakin miracle is what it is. Shot through the brain and 3 days later awake and moving her arms and legs. It's astonishing.' -- Prayer works.“

Indeed it does. In this case, it may also be retroactive--if she does recover generally, it's almost certain to be a case of a millimeter to the left or right and there would have been very little hope.

@qb: “Scott already skewered this as only he can do...“

I have come to regard (and this is not the first or last time you will hear this from me) the accusation of false equivalence as a rhetorical Get Out of Jail Free Card. It's a rationalization as to why "do as I say, not as I do" is a legitimate philosophical choice. I've come to treat the charge of false equivalence as the equal (see what I'm doing here?) of saying: 'It's okay when our side does it, because we're the good guys".

Of course people on the left and right get death threats, and the more prominent they are, the more often they get them. There were folks who kept champaign in the fridge for the day they heard Reagan was dead. And, when he died, they popped the cork.

I'm really not a big fan of bringing it up now, myself, but the idea that it's fictional . . . oh, come on. Someone's going to be sending Sarah Palin death threats just based on the fact they think she's a space alien and is sending secret messages to their fillings.

For Pete's sake, say I. Isn't anybody thinking about Pete?!

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 13, 2011 10:29 PM | Report abuse

ruk,

It just occurred to me for some reason -- have you ever read the Flashman novels?

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 13, 2011 10:30 PM | Report abuse

It sure sounds like the suspect was subjected to some drug-induced mind manipulation.


Here is the strange part: William Ayers of the Weather Underground apparently was funding a special liberal school program which the suspect attended.


AND Obama when he was on the board of some non-profit actually FUNDED the suspect's school.


This Ayers-Obama connection is certainly curious.


An investigation is needed.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 13, 2011 10:31 PM | Report abuse

"I've never been a huge fan of HuffPo, but I don't think I've ever found it repugnant. Perhaps that's just me."

What **really** bugs me about it is all the Web 2.0 crap. However, editorially, I think they focus far too much of the celebrity gossip or its political equivalent.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 10:32 PM | Report abuse

Bill Mahr says no one in Congress ever said "kill Bush"

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 13, 2011 10:35 PM | Report abuse

Do anyone of you prayer pushers honestly believe that if Congresswoman Giffords' aide had not rushed to staunch the blood loss, and if she had not received expert medical care, from the start, that prayer would have kept her alive.

People with brain wounds on the battle field, who do not receive rapid expert medical care, die while surrounded by prayers, where as those who get the proper medical care, promptly, have much better chances of surviving.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 10:39 PM | Report abuse

Regarding threats of violence, I think we can all say unanimously that we hope and pray nothing else happens. We've had enough tragedy for awhile and people need to get back to their own lives and loved ones and let the healing process work. This isn't some kind of a game where we now compare threats I hope, one upmanship shouldn't be part of the political dialogue concerning such serious matters. I hope Sarah Palin and all public figures embroiled in the current nastiness that is politics remain safe.

Posted by: lmsinca | January 13, 2011 10:41 PM | Report abuse

Liam,

I believe all those things you mentioned.

And that prayer works.

Not pushin', just sayin'.

Posted by: tao9 | January 13, 2011 10:44 PM | Report abuse

"Of course, some truly believe that SCOTUS allowing corporations, foreign and domestic, to give unlimited money to political campaigns without transparency is a good thing -- free speech, y'know."

SCOTUS hasn't "allowed" any such thing. Citizens United concerns expenditures for independent speech, not compaign contributions.

"Money = speech, right.

Well, no."

They didn't really say that, either, although that has been used as a shorthand since . . . at least the 1970s, when SCOTUS held that regulating expenditures for speech implicates the 1st Am.

If you don't like it, perhaps you'd not have a problem if the government said you can speak, but you can't use your vocal ccrds more than 5 minutes a day. Or you can publish but you may not use paper or ink.

It's funny how liberals can find exotic "rights" like abortion in "emenations from penumbras" no one else can even see in the Constitution but have trouble with the idea that if the government can forbid you from spending money to speak or publish it can prevent you from speaking or publishing.

"Speech = speech. Money = volume control of the speech."

Which you sort of admit without realizing it here. One thing the first amendment means is that the government doesn't get to control the volume.

CU did nothing really except reverse a 20-year aberration in SCOTUS precedent.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 13, 2011 10:46 PM | Report abuse

jp:

"I meant..."

Perhaps in the future you should say what you mean instead of something incomprehensible to anyone existing outside your own noggin.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 13, 2011 10:48 PM | Report abuse

"Perhaps in the future you should say what you mean"

Great to hear your substantive response on Citizens United. Keep up the excellent work.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 10:52 PM | Report abuse

This is important I think as we all consider the new age of austerity. Seniors are not faring all that well during this recession and the idea that we are even considering cut to Social Security needs to be revisited with these new poverty numbers.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Less than ten percent of the nation's 38 million elderly people are living in poverty, according to the official statistics. But once medical care and other costs of living are factored in, the number of people 65 and older living in poverty jumps to 16.1 percent, according to a new Census Bureau analysis.

The new numbers have been a long time coming. The official poverty rate has been calculated the same way -- based primarily on the cost of food -- for decades, while life has become more expensive. In 1995, the National Academy of Sciences released a report (PDF) calling for changes in the accounting of poverty. Those recommendations are largely reflected in the new Census numbers. The Census will continue to report poverty numbers using the old formula for the sake of comparison, but will also report the more comprehensive figure.

Overall poverty using the new methodology is only slightly higher. The official poverty rate for all groups rose in 2009 to 14.3 percent from 13.2 percent the previous year, reflecting not only the impact of the recession, but also the expanded safety net that came from the stimulus bill, which prevented the number from rising as much as economists expected. Under the alternative measure, poverty would have been 15.7 percent in 2009.

Among the elderly, the new method of calculation had the biggest effect. Even with Medicare's prescription drug coverage, seniors are still responsible for some copays and fees, which can add up for a person living on a fixed income. For the past two years, Social Security beneficiaries have been denied a cost-of-living increase.

The new elderly poverty stats come as politicians wrestle with cutting Social Security benefits in the name of reducing the budget deficit -- though the program is funded separately by payroll taxes and does not contribute to the debt.

What the numbers show is that rather than Social Security benefits being too generous, they are too meager to keep one in six old folks out of poverty."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/13/elderly-poverty-rate-census_n_808797.html

Posted by: lmsinca | January 13, 2011 10:53 PM | Report abuse

Unhinged people can make threats against any well known person. It has nothing to do with politics.

For some of them, it is just some weird psychotic notion, that they will become famous if they take the life of someone famous.

The murder of John Lennon was a clear example of that sort of mentally deranged thinking playing itself out.

The Tucson madman, was obsessed with not getting enough respect, even though what he demanded respect for, was pure gibberish. The more he pushed to get people to accept his ravings, the more they had to close him out, and so he ended up, coming to the point where he was going to really make a name for himself by murdering a congresswoman, but he wanted to make sure that he created such mayhem, that his act would surely gain massive publicity. That is why, he planned and armed for to slaugher as many people as possible, once he first shot the congress woman.

This guy was not a Republican or a Democrat, or an Independent, or....


He was simple a violent psychotic.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 10:55 PM | Report abuse

"SCOTUS hasn't "allowed" any such thing. Citizens United concerns expenditures for independent speech, not compaign contributions."

So, you're saying before Citizen United, Hyundai could not have, for instance, spent $400 million dollars on television advertising, the content of which could be anything that the broadcaster of said advertising would agree to air?
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 10:56 PM | Report abuse

Liam:

"Do anyone of you prayer pushers..."

I am curious...why does it bother you that someone else might think that prayer is productive? Why the desire to convince them that it doesn't?

BTW, I ask this as someone who has not said a prayer in earnest in over 35 years.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 13, 2011 10:56 PM | Report abuse

jp:

"Great to hear your substantive response on Citizens United."

As I said, you missed the point. My comment had nothing to do with the substance of the Citizens decision. It had to do with Obama's behavior during the SOTU.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 13, 2011 11:03 PM | Report abuse

"So, you're saying before Citizen United, Hyundai could not have, for instance, spent $400 million dollars on television advertising, the content of which could be anything that the broadcaster of said advertising would agree to air?"

Although I doubt this is a serious question, I'll just answer it since I don't feel like wasting my time.

No. CU held unconstitutional a restriction on independent expenditures by corporations for certain political speech.

And btw, there isn't that much controversy even among liberals over the "money=speech" concept that bothers you. The real question argued in CU and the preceding cases whether the restriction on corporate speech was nevertheless constitutional.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 13, 2011 11:04 PM | Report abuse

"My comment had nothing to do with the substance of the Citizens decision. It had to do with Obama's behavior during the SOTU."

Right. It was "unprecedented." Nothing at all like Joe Wilson's behavior.

Except that neither behaviors were unprecedented.

Why do you want to limit the President's freedoms, btw?
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 11:07 PM | Report abuse

Scott,

Why does it bother you if someone expresses a skeptical viewpoint about the efficacy of prayer, but you never question those who claim that prayer works?

I have seen great numbers of children dying young from malnutrition, and lack of medical care in several impoverished countries, where there was no shortage of religious buildings and prayer gatherings.

I recall a passage from a John Steinbeck book, it may have been Tortilla Flats; where one single mother of several children relied on harvesting missed beans from fields that had been harvested. Each year she would spent her last remaining money to light candles in front of the Statue of The Virgin Mary,and pray for a good crop yield.

One year the rains rotted all the crops, and the single mother of several children, turned bitter, because she had bought the candles, and the Virgin Mary had let her down.

So, she knelt in front of the Statue and said: I do not believe you are really a Virgin. I do not remember who was the father of some of my children either.

Good night all.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 11:10 PM | Report abuse

"No. CU held unconstitutional a restriction on independent expenditures by corporations for certain political speech."

So, if Hyundai had wanted to buy $400 million worth of TV ads to announce its pro-life views, that WOULD have been illegal prior to Citizens United, or not?

I'm sincerely appealing to your legal knowledge.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 11:12 PM | Report abuse

Uh oh, while you Republicans joke about Citizens United, the music for here comes your bride has already started, Mitt, you love Mitt.

But those nasty Mormon hating bigots are everywhere,

"Before Romney can even think of getting my vote, he'll have to explain why, when he was a thirty-something up-and coming Mormon, he believed that blacks were so inferior to whites that his church would not allow them full faith and fellowship.
Romney claims to have cried on that day in 1978 when his church and their 'prophets' received a revelation from god saying that blacks could now 'belong' to Mormonism --he of course doesn't explain why he was crying. I'm sure he would tell you they were tears of joy; but he certainly doesn't mention any tissue-wetting tear fests before this wretched and racist doctrine was removed so his beloved church could remain tax-exempt."

No matter. Money can buy love. That is what Citizens United is all about. Money, speech, love, money, you will vote for the corporate candidate, magic pajamas or not, you are Republicans.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 13, 2011 11:13 PM | Report abuse

jp:

"Nothing at all like Joe Wilson's behavior."

I suppose a history buff like you might be able to fill us in on exactly what year it was that Joe Wilson gave his first SOTU address.

"Except that neither behaviors were unprecedented."

Which president prior to Obama used a SOTU to chastise a Supreme Court decision, mischaracterizing the decision in the process?

"Why do you want to limit the President's freedoms, btw?"

What freedoms do you bizarrely think I would like to limit? All I have said is 1) I wish the SOTU was not televised and 2) I hope the Supremes boycott the SOTU. This is wanting to limit the Presidents freedoms? You must have some strange notions about freedom.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 13, 2011 11:19 PM | Report abuse

I though Digby had a pretty good comment regarding the gun fetish that exists in the old wild west of the USA.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"I was at the drug store earlier today and a couple of guys were in there with guns strapped to their legs. They were speaking very loudly (and calmly, I must say) about their politics and the view that it was unfair to blame the Arizona shooting on gun owners. That's fine. They have the right to say what they want. And I guess they have a right to wear guns to buy aspirin. But let's just say the combination pretty much ensures that nobody's going to disagree with them. For some reason that doesn't strike me as particularly heroic."

Posted by: lmsinca | January 13, 2011 11:19 PM | Report abuse

I hope that I speak for others in the conversation that aren't attorneys who would like some specific examples of what Hyundai CAN do post-Citizens United vs. what they could NOT do, pre-Citizens United.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 11:21 PM | Report abuse

"I suppose a history buff like you might be able to fill us in on exactly what year it was that Joe Wilson gave his first SOTU address."

Forgive me -- I thought we were talking about unprecedented behavior. I know we weren't talking about Citizens United -- you punted on that in your first cry for help to qb1.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 11:24 PM | Report abuse

Palin was way too prole for the Republican money, she knows it. She tried to make enough money fast enough, but she is trailer trash and that won't work for people who invest those many, many millions of dollars of their corporate "free" speech in these candidates. When the blue-bloods attacked her, it was over, nothing left but the shouting...there will be plenty more of that.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 13, 2011 11:25 PM | Report abuse

"No matter. Money can buy love. That is what Citizens United is all about. Money, speech, love, money, you will vote for the corporate candidate, magic pajamas or not, you are Republicans."

It's getting a little late in the game for a dark horse shrink, so I think it's either going to be Romney or Huckabee or Romney/Huckabee 2012, they're the only ones IMO who can play the waiting game, where is everyone btw, and come out ahead.

Posted by: lmsinca | January 13, 2011 11:26 PM | Report abuse

So, ScottC3 is more interested in debate over decorum, than substance. I can dig.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 11:29 PM | Report abuse

I should ask ScottC3 if he can help me to decide on which side of the plate the salad fork goes.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 11:32 PM | Report abuse

You might want to just google up the CU decision and read it. You'll probably find it on a Cornell cite that's very handy.

Simplistically speaking, corporations can now engage in political speech, including spending their money to produce ads, film, etc. The case itself involved a film about Hillary Clinton.

Hyundai isn't a good example because it is a foreign corporation.

And Scott is right: Obama mischaracterized CU (to put it kindly) in his SOTUA, among other things falsely stating that it reversed a century of precedent. That's when Alito mouthed "no." It was disgraceful demoguery by Obama. As a supposed Con Law teacher, he had to know better.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 13, 2011 11:32 PM | Report abuse

Liam:

"Why does it bother you if someone expresses a skeptical viewpoint about the efficacy of prayer..."

It doesn't.

"...but you never question those who claim that prayer works?"

I've had plenty of discussions with believers about the efficacy of prayer, as I have had about the whole concept of God in general. But I confess I have never begun the discussion by denigrating them as "prayer-pushers".

Any chance you might answer my questions?

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 13, 2011 11:33 PM | Report abuse

"Hyundai isn't a good example because it is a foreign corporation."

So, Hyundai is barred from producing ads and films that will air in the U.S., or no?
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 11:34 PM | Report abuse

ruk, we took the family up to the Kings (vs. Columbus Blue Jackets) on Saturday. First time in the Staples Center, which was nicer than the Anaheim Ducks stadium down here.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 13, 2011 11:35 PM | Report abuse

If praying makes you feel better, have at it.

But if you really believe it accomplishes anything, and especially if you believe it accomplishes more than physical action, you need to get some help.

Don't pray for the needy. Donate to them.

First time I've seen Briade posts in over a month. Wow. Barely even adolescent. Won't read this blog on an iPad for a while...

Posted by: caothien9 | January 13, 2011 11:35 PM | Report abuse

Romney/Huck 2012. Yup, that is it.

Skip Tampa August after next, I get geschwitzed just thinking about it. Who chose Tampa in August anyway? Mitt and Huck will lead the Republicans to defeat in 2012. Look, it could be worse. Better than McCain Palin, don'cha think?

Anyway, Republicans, enjoy goofing off in the lower House, it suits you. Plenty of "free" speech and no responsibility for what happens.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 13, 2011 11:38 PM | Report abuse

"So, if Hyundai had wanted to buy $400 million worth of TV ads to announce its pro-life views, that WOULD have been illegal prior to Citizens United, or not?"

I'm not an expert in campaign law, but CU dealt more specifically with election ads -- i.e., advocacy of candidates, not general policy advocacy. So the law partly struck down -- McCain-Feingold -- would not, as I recall, have prohibited general prolife ads. It would have prohibited "Vote for Jones, He's Pro Life" or "Vote for Pro Life Candidates." But the lines get sticky, or would get sticky.

Again, Hyundai as foreign corporation wouldn't have the same protection.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 13, 2011 11:40 PM | Report abuse

"I'm not an expert in campaign law, but CU dealt more specifically with election ads -- i.e., advocacy of candidates, not general policy advocacy. So the law partly struck down -- McCain-Feingold -- would not, as I recall, have prohibited general prolife ads. It would have prohibited "Vote for Jones, He's Pro Life" or "Vote for Pro Life Candidates." But the lines get sticky, or would get sticky."

Well, here's where I get confused (and I appreciate your taking the time to answer the non-salad-fork questions I have about this!). You said above that corporations could still not contributed unlimited money to *campaigns*, if I understood you correctly. Citizens United decision allows this, now, or not?

"Again, Hyundai as foreign corporation wouldn't have the same protection."

What about HyundaiUSA, Inc., a Delaware Corporation?
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 11:45 PM | Report abuse

jp:

“I thought we were talking about unprecedented behavior.”

Well, I was. You seem to want to talk about something else.

“So, ScottC3 is more interested in debate over decorum, than substance.”

The two are not mutually exclusive. Besides, since this particular thread began with you seemingly objecting to my reference to Obama’s lack of decorum at the previous SOTU, it seems odd that you would want the thread to be about something else.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 13, 2011 11:49 PM | Report abuse

"The two are not mutually exclusive."

Oh, fully do I realize.

We should concentrate on the fact that people clapped and cheered at a memorial service, and not on what was said right before the clapping and cheering.

We should talk about what side of the plate the salad fork goes, rather than what is being served for dinner.

Or, as I posited above, maybe I should only expect your participation on discussions of the former in both these examples, and never the latter, as was the case, tonight.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 13, 2011 11:55 PM | Report abuse

I just found my morning reading, yuck, boring economic stuff. The banks got a scare in MA and it looks like third way has a solution. Daley used to be on their board BTW. Good for the banks, not so good for the homeowner or investors, who could have guessed. Here's the read if anyone wants to delve into the dark side of our housing bust.

I admit to not having read the entire piece yet but I thought I'd put it out there, maybe someone can find something to prove Yves Smith wrong and a reason why this is a good idea.

Hasta manana.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Their proposal, not surprisingly, is yet another bailout.

The big difference between the original and the new, improved version of the bailout model is that the payouts to the banks were at least in part visible the first time around. This is an effort yet again to spare the banks any pain, not only at the cost of the rule of law but also of investor rights.

This proposal guts state control of their own real estate law when the Supreme Court has repeatedly found that “dirt law” is not a Federal matter. It strips homeowners of their right to their day in court to preserve their contractual rights, namely, that only the proven mortgagee, and not a gangster, or in this case, bankster, can take possession of their home.

This sort of protection is fundamental to the operation of capitalism, so it’s astonishing to see neoliberals so willing to throw it under the bus to preserve the balance sheets of the TBTF banks. Readers may recall how we came to have this sort of legal protection in the first place. England learned the hard way in the 17th century what happens with low documentation requirements: abuse of court procedures, perjury and corruption become the norm. Parliament enacted the 1677 Statute of Fraudsto establish higher standards for contracts, such as witnessing by a third party, to stop the widespread theft of property that was underway.

The memo completely ignores the harm to investors from the bank mistakes and lacks any provisions for damage to investors to be remedied. Moreover, denying borrower rights removes their leverage to obtain deep principal mortgage modifications, which for viable borrowers produces lower losses than costly foreclosures and sales of distressed property. Thus this shredding of contractual protections in mortgages not only hurts borrowers but also harms investors."

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/01/dc-puts-its-bankster-friendly-solution-for-foreclosure-fraud-on-the-table.html

Posted by: lmsinca | January 13, 2011 11:55 PM | Report abuse

But I confess I have never begun the discussion by denigrating them as "prayer-pushers".

Any chance you might answer my questions?

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 13, 2011 11:33 PM

...................

Elementary my dear Watson,

When some one reposts my posting of a news report, that lays out the improving condition of Congresswoman Giffords, and they then add on to it, their own claim: "prayer works", as their way of claiming that is actually why the Congresswoman is improving.

No matter how you slice it, they decided to push the prayer claim, which in turn makes them prayer pushers.

Of course the could just as easily have claimed that putting a frog under a milk pail is what has brought about the improvement. They would have exactly the same amount of actual proof that it did, as they do that prayer did the job.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 13, 2011 11:56 PM | Report abuse

A U.S. subsidiary of a foreign corporation or a U.S. corporation that is owned by foreign nationals may be subject to prohibition. A domestic subsidiary of a foreign corporation may not establish a federal political action committee (PAC) to make federal contributions if:

The foreign parent corporation finances the PAC's establishment, administration, or solicitation costs; or
Individual foreign nationals:
Participate in the operation of the PAC;
Serve as officers of the PAC;
Participated in the selection of persons who operate the PAC; or
Make decisions regarding PAC contributions or expenditure.  11 CFR 110.20(i).
(See also AOs 2000-17, 1995-15, 1990-8, 1989-29, and 1989-20.)

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 13, 2011 11:56 PM | Report abuse

Kevin:

What creates a block quote? It seems to occur in my posts randomly, including text that is both inside and outside quotation marks. Let me know if you have any explanations.

BTW, have you considered adding a function that allows people to see how many others are blocking them? Or who those others are?

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 13, 2011 11:57 PM | Report abuse

"A U.S. subsidiary of a foreign corporation or a U.S. corporation that is owned by foreign nationals **may** be subject to prohibition."

That word, right there. What does that tell you?

And here, we're only talking about PACs.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 14, 2011 12:03 AM | Report abuse

jp:

"We should concentrate on the fact that people clapped and cheered at a memorial service, and not on what was said right before the clapping and cheering."

Well, if one person says "people should not have clapped and cheered" and you reply "no one clapped and cheered", then yes, the dispute is about the fact of people clapping and cheering, and it wouldn't make much sense to talk about what was said in the speech.

"We should talk about what side of the plate the salad fork goes, rather than what is being served for dinner."

Well, if the person setting the table puts the forks on the left, and you insist they put them in the wrong place, then yes, the dispute is about what side of the plate the salad fork goes on, and it wouldn't make much sense to talk about what is being served.

"Or, as I posited above, maybe I should only expect..."

I suspect you are going to expect whatever you want to expect.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 14, 2011 12:10 AM | Report abuse

jp,

Start with several distinctions. One is contributions to candidates versus independent expenditures. Corporations are prohibited by statute from contributing to candidates. CU does not concern that issue.

The second is election versus issue ads. CU concerns election ads (really election speech more broadly).

To answer what isallowed now versus before you have to ask two questions: what did the statute allow and prohibit, and how did the court hold on the constitutionality of the restrictions.

McCai Feingold basically forbade election speech by corporations. The court held that restriction unconstitutional.


So, under McCain-feingold, corporations could run issue ads but not election ads. After CU they can run both.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 14, 2011 12:10 AM | Report abuse

"Well, if one person says "people should not have clapped and cheered" and you reply "no one clapped and cheered", then yes, the dispute is about the fact of people clapping and cheering, and it wouldn't make much sense to talk about what was said in the speech."

Funny -- I don't recall saying no one clapped and cheered.

So... run that by me again, please.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 14, 2011 12:13 AM | Report abuse

"So, under McCain-feingold, corporations could run issue ads but not election ads. After CU they can run both."

So, assuming Hyundai forms a U.S. corporation that falls outside the "may be restricted" clause cited by clawerence12 (and we KNOW that "may" does not equal "shall," right?), they can now put $400 million into ads saying that Alan Keyes is the man they want for President in 2012... is that correct?
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 14, 2011 12:17 AM | Report abuse

I don't do election law either (which is why I provided the Regs. so you can look it up yourself).

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 14, 2011 12:20 AM | Report abuse

"I don't do election law either (which is why I provided the Regs. so you can look it up yourself)."

Well, that makes two of us. However, it doesn't take a paralegal, even, to know what the word "may" means when looking at legislation. It sure does not mean "shall."
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 14, 2011 12:22 AM | Report abuse

"Which you sort of admit without realizing it here. One thing the first amendment means is that the government doesn't get to control the volume."

So, thems with the bux can deafen anyone within earshot, if they can afford the amps and speakers. What a country!
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 14, 2011 12:29 AM | Report abuse

HamasUSA, Inc. (a Delaware company) finds attorneys that says it is perfectly legal for them to buy millions of dollars in ads supporting, oh, say, "accurate textbooks in Texas schools."

This is going to be freakin' awesome.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 14, 2011 12:36 AM | Report abuse

jprestonian, "may" indeed does not mean "shall" but I was not quoting actual election law. You can look up whatever you want at FEC.gov

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 14, 2011 12:38 AM | Report abuse

"You can look up whatever you want at FEC.gov"

Great -- but that'll tell me, as a non-attorney -- what, again?

Oh, wait -- if I want to know whether or not foreign entities will be able to pour unlimited campaign funds into the U.S. to influence elections, I either have to hire my own campaign finance attorneys, or...

... just wait until the next election, when it happens, and the case will not come to court until well after the election, horse, barn, oops?

That's what I mean.
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 14, 2011 12:46 AM | Report abuse

Government of the corporations, by the corporations, FOR the corporations.

Ain't that America, somethin' to see, yeah?
.

Posted by: jprestonian | January 14, 2011 12:50 AM | Report abuse

You don't have to hire an attorney. Try contacting your Representative's office.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 14, 2011 1:10 AM | Report abuse

Romney Huckabee now there's a laugh. Who'll sub for Larry Fine?

Patrician Romney trying to do cornpone, cornpone Huckabee trying to do dignified. Romney running breakneck from his record, Huckabee aww-shucksing his way across the primary states.

And so many great ideas, like ... uh ....

... uhh ..

Hmmm.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 14, 2011 2:10 AM | Report abuse

About Boehner and not going to Tuscon...

Both he and majority leader Eric Cantor were at that vigil before the cocktail party. Couldn't the GOP spare one of its House bigshots for the service or did both have partisan plans afterward that they considered more important?

Posted by: MicrowavableJohnnyCakes | January 14, 2011 2:27 AM | Report abuse

Re: Greg's call for truce.

Nice idea, best of intentions, but, really, come back to reality. The divide is is uncrossable. We should stop using words like partisanship that imply we have a mere misunderstanding here, one that can be fixed and will have us all linking arms and agreeing that we're united. We're not.

On one side we have people who see a moral imperative in government's role in minimizing suffering and equalizing opportunity; on the other we have the angry conviction that taxation and regulation toward that goal are tyranny on the level of concentration camps. Taking money from people who have earned it and giving it to others, however desperate their need, is a greater immorality than letting them starve to death.

Sorry Greg but I don't want to be reconciled with people like that. I want them to lose, I want their morality condemned in the most unequivocal terms.

A few days ago just after Giffords' shooting there were calls from a few of the PL conservatives, or one of them anyway, to put aside rancor and hope for her recovery. But much more strident from that side were the sneers that similar calls from The Left were intended to play on the shooting to make conservatives, Palin in particular, "look bad." OK, they were in defense, but along the way they mocked the very idea of compassion and seem to disbelieve in it entirely. They don't feel it, they don't believe anyone else does either, it's always a pretense.

The division isn't just ideological, it's moral, it's fundamental. The viral psychopathy of libertarianism has managed to infect a vital political organ and the prognosis is terminal.

There will be some short-lived warmth, hate speech will pass the bump in the road and will continue to pick up speed. There will be uglier rhetoric and more assassinations until something snaps. There is no political surfactant for this immiscible slime.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 14, 2011 2:39 AM | Report abuse

Pawlenty pounds his narrow chest and promises the base he'll reverse the repeal of don't. Note the furrowed brows and the counting on fingers. Triple negative. That would mean ... ?

Why stop there, Gov.? Why not give all the currently enlisted gays two weeks to come forward and face arrest and discharge before the investigations begin? The base would eat that up. Cillizza would be beside himself and panting about the perils for Democrats.

Why would anyone vote for these guys?

Posted by: caothien9 | January 14, 2011 4:09 AM | Report abuse

Liam:
"I have seen great numbers of children dying young from malnutrition, and lack of medical care in several impoverished countries, where there was no shortage of religious buildings and prayer gatherings."
-------

Don't confuse this place with heaven. Young or old, everyone's number's coming up.

Posted by: Brigade | January 14, 2011 6:34 AM | Report abuse

Romney Huckabee now there's a laugh. Who'll sub for Larry Fine?

Posted by: caothien9 | January 14, 2011 2:10 AM
-------

He and Stepin Fetchit = the current duo.

Posted by: Brigade | January 14, 2011 6:46 AM | Report abuse

Why would anyone vote for these guys?

Posted by: caothien9 | January 14, 2011 4:09 AM
-------

Some people in repressive communist countries would love the opportunity to vote for more than one party or candidate. On the other hand, some people choose to live in repressive communist countries and despise their own country, even though their own country gave them the opportunity to earn the money that now allows them to act prosperous and important among the rabble of the communist country. Those people are occasionally used as instruments of propaganda by the repressive regimes; they may even get their pictures in a magazine, which makes them feel even more special and superior to the commie rabble.

Posted by: Brigade | January 14, 2011 6:56 AM | Report abuse

jprestonian | January 13, 2011 11:12 PM


The answer to your question is before Citizens United, if all the company wanted to do would be to air their views on a particular issue, that was always OK.


The issue involved Direct Advocacy in Federal Elections - which means that one could directly mention vote for or against a particular candidate.


Issue ads were always OK.


The reasoning for the prior rule was that corporations were restricted from giving money DIRECTLY to Federal candidates - which is still in place.


In order to enforce that law, previously, direct advocacy ads were not allowed.


Now, the new Court decision says the companies can air issue ads on their own.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 14, 2011 6:56 AM | Report abuse

I'm working on my bi-partisanship and found this from Jason Linkins. He's talking about some of the goofy stuff coming out of Congress while they try to save us all, well mostly them, from the next deranged shooter. The crazy is coming from both sides. He probably shouldn't have used the "brainpan" if he wanted to be PC, but I thought it was still funny.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"And it might be a difficult road to tread -- sometimes there's just nothing you can do to fix something, no matter how hard you want to. But a slow and thoughtful process that goes nowhere is infinitely preferable to rushing to pass the first crazy law that you barfed out of your brainpan while stewing in a broth of worry, adrenaline, and panic."

Posted by: lmsinca | January 13, 2011 10:21 PM | Report abuse

I agree, Imsinca, that panicky laws are often worse than none at all. As someone who has spent a lot of time in federal criminal law, however, I can assure you that if a crack-crazed wacko tried to assassinate a Congressperson there would be new mandatory minimum sentences for crack the next day. Is that the right way to proceed? Probably not. But it is how things have ever been done in American government. I find it odd that for this single incident we are being asked -- not by you, Imsinca -- to assume that it has no relevance to any policy or rhetoric. Why? Is it because every lesson to be drawn from the tragedy is contra to the GOP's current incarnation? Opposition to Gun control. Refusal to provide mental health care. Anti-government hate speech. These are the provinces of the Right but they are also the obvious issues raised by the Tucson tragedy. We should refuse to adopt the Conservative position that reality is to be ignored when it is inconvenient or incompatible with Conservative ideology. And, once again, the nation plays by Conservative rules.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 14, 2011 6:57 AM | Report abuse

These people are unbelievable - these people who say they are against the Citizens United decision

For the most party, I am astonished that they do not understand what the law was before the decision.

AND they actually do not understand what changed. And they do not understand that corporations STILL can not give money DIRECTLY to candidates.


They just don't get it at all.


Posted by: RainForestRising | January 14, 2011 7:01 AM | Report abuse


The Nation needs someone to work on the Economy and jobs.


Obama hands us a baseless smear campaign and a bogus Memorial service -

And tells us that his poll numbers should go up.


What a moron.......


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 14, 2011 7:06 AM | Report abuse

SCottC3: "Kevin...if you are out there, somehow the formatting of my post has been totally mangled in your CrappyBlogSoftwareFixer. Not sure why my comment got placed in the boxquote, nor why my second quote from ruk is not in a boxquote. Any suggestions?"

Apparently, I'm going to have to re-evaluate my system. Or, to whit: the system is perfect, except for the users! ;)

I will figure out the technical reason, but off the top of my head I'm not sure why it would be doing that.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 14, 2011 7:09 AM | Report abuse

What is amazing is the liberals are still talking - they are still accusing people.

The liberals LOST the election.


And yet the nation has been subjected to the ANGER of the liberals - that in combination with a hissy-fit.


Even though the liberals lost the election, the nation was subjected to the lame duck session - a month-long DISRESPECT to the American People and to the Election.

The DISRESPECT extended to Democracy itself because the democrats refused to act in accordance with the wishes of the American People as expressed in the Election.


Then this week - a complete Circus of a smear campaign from Obama and his people for 5 days -

And now we hear the democrats STILL insisting they were right about something -


And the American People are completely sick of it. The democrats lost the election - go back to Washington and WORK WITH THE REPUBLICANS.


All the nation has seen from the democrats over the past 2 months is a fit at the prospect of going back to Washington - as the de facto minority party which is only holding onto office because their terms have not expired yet.


The American People wants them OUT - and they are going OUT.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 14, 2011 7:12 AM | Report abuse

Scott, I currently have blockquotes as two open smart quotes (ala, option-[, my quote, option-[, not an open and close quote. So, it blockquotes the stuff between the two open quotes when you post your comment.

I may adjust Troll Hunter to recognize either? It's a thought.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 14, 2011 7:13 AM | Report abuse

Delightful to see that Mother Jokes have survived into the Era Of Good Feelings.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 14, 2011 7:13 AM | Report abuse

"And, once again, the nation plays by Conservative rules."

Thank God.

{{{sshhhh, don't tell Liam...giggle}}}

Posted by: tao9 | January 14, 2011 7:19 AM | Report abuse

Kevin


Why can't your write a program which would instantly eliminate any opinion with which anyone disagrees ???


Imagine the sense of superiority the liberals would have if they actually believed that everyone agreed with them???


Why don't you go to work on that?


You can call it the Echo Chamber of death.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 14, 2011 7:24 AM | Report abuse

Excellent article by Paul Krugman about the possible demise of the Euro.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/magazine/16Europe-t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

Posted by: wbgonne | January 14, 2011 7:27 AM | Report abuse

Hey Tao!

We Pats fans are expecting all you Ex-Pats to come home for the Super Bowl drive. Brady is as good as I've ever seen him. And Belichick is a football genius. Now we gotta whup the J-E-T-S!

Posted by: wbgonne | January 14, 2011 7:30 AM | Report abuse

jp:

"Funny -- I don't recall saying no one clapped and cheered."

OK, let's recap. I said that, given Obama's unprecedented display of disrespect last time, I hope the Supremes boycotted this year's SOTU.

You responded directly to this with "History buff, I see.".

Granted this is a bit cryptic, but I gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you were actually trying to make a point rather than mindlessly posting words with no connection to the quotation of mine that you included. What point? Well, I interpreted it as a) sarcasm (I wasn't the only one...see ruk's response), implying that b) I was wrong about history because c) there was nothing unprecedented/disrespectful in Obama's SOTU last year.

So, in the context of your analogy, you did say that no one clapped and cheered. If not, then what in the world did you mean by "History buff, I see"?

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 14, 2011 7:34 AM | Report abuse

Kevin, thanks for the info. I admit it would be useful if it recognized either. But, I suppose, beggers can't be choosers. (Unless I was a liberal....then I would just demand that I have a right for it to recognize both. How dare you give away a product that doesn't work the way I want it to. There oughta be a law...)

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 14, 2011 7:41 AM | Report abuse

wbg and tao - I suspect liberals always think conservative rules control, and in legislative politics there is a mechanical bias in that direction: it is always easier to kill legislation than to pass it, so change is difficult.

BUT

when a conservative legislature wants to roll back liberal legislation that bias works in favor of liberals.

Its mainly POV, I think. The history of legislation since TR would suggest that liberals are steadily ascendant, if we mean "somewhat more liberal" as opposed to "somewhat more conservative". The history since RWR, only, would probably lead one to conclude exactly the opposite.

Some political historian has distilled this. If you know who, recommend the book, please.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 14, 2011 7:49 AM | Report abuse

Sure glad I took the time to answer jp's questions. I can see it was worthwhile.

"Oh, wait -- if I want to know whether or not foreign entities will be able to pour unlimited campaign funds into the U.S. to influence elections,"

That would be illegal.

"HamasUSA, Inc. (a Delaware company) finds attorneys that says it is perfectly legal for them to buy millions of dollars in ads supporting, oh, say, "accurate textbooks in Texas schools."

No, actually it would be illegal unless all the money came from the US and decisions were made by US residents. They can't use foreign money. Here is how your President and party lied about this issue in the election last year.

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/10/foreign-money-really/

And that's ignoring that your hypo is owned by Hamas, which I'm guessing would run afoul of federal law for being a terrorist front organization.

"So, thems with the bux can deafen anyone within earshot, if they can afford the amps and speakers. What a country!"

No, actually there are noise regulations in most places, and they aren't barred by the 1st Am.

. . . or, oh, you were using an angry metaphor, I see. It's always been that way. You probably don't have a problem when George Soros or Moveon or Tides floods us with their propaganda. Or unions, or the NYT and major "news" networks. You probably didn't mind how Obama completely drowned out McCain with his $800 million broadcast carpet-bombing campaign of lies.

If you don't like this messy freedom business you could always move to Vietnam with Colonel Kurtz. Things are more efficient and equal and fair there, I understand. Without freedom of speech, the government can make sure no one gets drowned out.

Plus, if you are a rich American, as Brigade reminds us, you can build a palatial house and live like royalty, lording it over the native population, get photo spreads and be "noticed," and spend most of your time on the internet hurling imprecations and death wishes at your former country. Heck, you an even get the Vietnamese to chase your stray cats, cuz everyone "helps each other" an stuff.

I'm sure Kurtz can hook you up. Maybe you can even crash in his extra wing for a while.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 14, 2011 7:49 AM | Report abuse

@cao: "Sorry Greg but I don't want to be reconciled with people like that. I want them to lose, I want their morality condemned in the most unequivocal terms."

I tend to think Cao is generally right, here. Rush Limbaugh has said almost the exact same thing--he wants liberals to lose. Says there's no room for reconciliation. Etc. Whether or not there is room for compromise in a completely neutral sense is irrelevant (although, of course, there is). There are plenty of people on both sides who have no interest in it, and for whom taking a political scorched earth policy is a moral imperative. There's no truce.

Of course, there's not ever going to be a decisive defeat or victory for either side, either. The goal posts will move, back and forth, back and forth. :)

That being said, Cao, I can get Troll Hunter to run on iCab. There is a caveat: having it autorun doesn't seem to work. I'm testing it on a 1st generation iPhone, an iPad may not have this problem, but I think it's probably inherent in how iCab handles modules.

So, on any page you'd want Troll Hunter to run, you'd have to click on the puzzle piece and tap the Troll Hunter module and then wait for it to run. Then, you see someone you want to ignore. You press the ignore button, wait for the page to load, then you have to tap the Troll Hunter to run again, and then it will execute your ignore command.

It's more manual labor intensive than I'd like, but it does work. I may try and contact them about how their modules work to see if there is a reliable way to have the script execute only after the page is entirely loaded, but not execute repeatedly (my two options right now, it appears).

Let me know if you're interested. I'll try to get it posted somewhere today so it can be added to iCab mobile.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 14, 2011 7:50 AM | Report abuse

"Its mainly POV, I think. The history of legislation since TR would suggest that liberals are steadily ascendant, if we mean "somewhat more liberal" as opposed to "somewhat more conservative". The history since RWR, only, would probably lead one to conclude exactly the opposite."

Mark:

The historical evidence, as you suggest, is that liberalism was ascendant from TR through Nixon. From Carter through today, the historical evidence shows, liberalism has declined (today liberalism is more moribund that since the Gilded Age). I think that is more than Point-of-View; it is historical reality. When I say that we are once again playing by Conservative rules that is a reference to modern history, i.e., the past 40 years.

I'm not sure what type of book you are looking for: a history of Liberalism in the U.S.?

Posted by: wbgonne | January 14, 2011 7:56 AM | Report abuse

Here is a good digest of the pay to play rules, the history of corporate "free" speech, now no one has to know whose money is in that bag.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/01/19/us/politics/0120-scotus-campaign.html

It is no mystery why the RNC is in debt, the money went to the unlimited anonymous donation "third party" groups, Rove and Gillespie's in particular.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 14, 2011 8:03 AM | Report abuse

"Corporate money is being funneled through third-party groups, many of them organized under Section 501(c) of the tax code, which can accept donations of unlimited size and do not have to disclose their donors under Internal Revenue Service rules.

The third-party groups groups had already been growing in popularity on both the left and the right in recent elections, in large part because of the anonymity afforded donors. With the 2010 midterms, the biggest players have been on the Republican side.

Such nonprofit advocacy groups are permitted by the I.R.S. to engage in political activity, so long as it is not their “primary purpose.” They are allowed to do an unlimited amount of lobbying on issues related to their core purpose. Stopping short of what would clearly be considered “express advocacy” in most of their ads enables them to better make the case to the I.R.S. they are merely doing issue advocacy. It is often hard, however, for the casual observer to tell the difference between the issue advocacy and express advocacy.

As long as most of a group’s advertisements are not explicit calls to vote for or against candidates, the Republican election commissioners are likely to leave them alone, ruling their “major purpose” is not political, campaign finance lawyers said. That would effectively block any action against them because the commission is divided evenly along party lines and a majority vote is needed for it to take any action." NYT

Posted by: shrink2 | January 14, 2011 8:07 AM | Report abuse

@ScottC3: “beggers can't be choosers. (Unless I was a liberal....then I would just demand that I have a right for it to recognize both. How dare you give away a product that doesn't work the way I want it to. There oughta be a law...“

Indeed. Although, you say liberal, and I've run across that mentality in almost every ideological (and other) stripe. Once accustomed to something being provided at no apparent cost, almost everyone begins (especially over time) to view these things as entitlements.

Which is why when evil conservatives try and constrain social service expansion as a matter of general policy, it may not be such a bad thing, given certain features of human nature.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 14, 2011 8:10 AM | Report abuse

Pat Buchanan:

"The speech in Tucson confirms what seemed a month ago to be a conscious decision by the president to effect a course correction in his presidency after the “shellacking” in November. The decisive moment came when the left was loudly demanding that he fight to the last ditch for repeal of the “Bush tax cuts for the rich,” even if it meant the lame-duck session of Congress ended in a dead-duck session. Instead, recognizing Sen. Mitch McConnell’s Republicans not only had the votes but the will to block any action in the Senate before the GOP took over the House in January, Obama shoved aside Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and moved to cut a deal with the GOP.

The Republicans got the Bush tax cuts. But Obama got a Social Security payroll tax cut for every worker, an estate tax raised back to 35 percent and another full year of unemployment compensation. Obama had entered negotiations with a weak hand. But he had emerged with so impressive a deal from his own party’s standpoint that Republican deficit hawks wanted their party to walk away from it, even if it meant all the Bush tax cuts expired on Jan. 1. After cutting that deal and breaking the logjam, Obama got votes and victories on allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the military and on providing billions for the first responders of 9/11. He came close to getting a limited amnesty for illegal aliens.

In short, by shouldering Pelosi and Reid aside and taking charge of negotiations with the Republicans himself, Obama not only won a string of victories, he proved bipartisan government could work. Since then, he has been on a steady ascent in the polls. And, in his choice of new aides like Chicago’s William Daley, brother of the mayor and son of the legend, Obama has signaled that after an era of confrontation on Capitol Hill comes an era of negotiation.

What does this mean for Democrats?

The left wing of the party, for the immediate future, is going to be the “dummy” at the bridge table. Obama is going to play every hand. For this president has been jolted into an awareness that, today, if not in 2008, this is a center-right country, and he and his party have drifted dangerously far out of the mainstream. He is now paddling his own canoe back to the middle of the river, leaving the left up the creek."

What does this mean for Liberals and the Left?

Greens in 2012! (They're good for you!)

Posted by: wbgonne | January 14, 2011 8:11 AM | Report abuse

jp:

"So, thems with the bux can deafen anyone within earshot, if they can afford the amps and speakers. What a country!"

I think you've extended the metaphor beyond its utility. Spending lots of money expressing opinions doesn't "deafen" anyone. You don't have to listen if you don't want to.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 14, 2011 8:11 AM | Report abuse

Hmmm, Kevin, the block quote thingy needs work. That was a simple cut and past from an article that had no smart or curly quotes or any formatting marks or changes evident.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 14, 2011 8:11 AM | Report abuse

I think shrink2 just did the opened-then-closed smart quotes thing. I'm going to fix it so TrollHunter recognizes both, it just may not be until later today, and that's assuming no emergency situations. ;)

I should have recognized that would become a problem. Doh!

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 14, 2011 8:13 AM | Report abuse

An example of my point above that government officials almost always alter policy in response to tragic events. A few weeks ago a parolee in MA shot and killed a policeman. Now:

"Governor Deval Patrick announced a sweeping overhaul of the Parole Board yesterday, including the mass resignation of five board members, as he released a devastating review detailing the agency’s missteps in releasing a career criminal who killed a Woburn police officer last month."

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/01/14/five_out_as_governor_overhauls_parole_board/

If the Tucson tragedy is somehow different, I wish someone would explain how.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 14, 2011 8:18 AM | Report abuse

@shrink2: That's the other reason I need to fix it, although it will blockquote cut-and-pasted text with smart-quotes in it. Which the text in question had, even if you couldn't see 'em. I can't do anything about it, unless I change the blockquote algorithm to two-smart quotes or maybe single-quote, double-quote . . . ? Or something like
|bq:This is my blockquoted text|

That's just unfriendly to non Troll Hunters.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 14, 2011 8:18 AM | Report abuse

"Once accustomed to something being provided at no apparent cost, almost everyone begins (especially over time) to view these things as entitlements."

Also when it is provide at someone else's cost, and when it is provided at unseen cost.

And the final evolution is when "it" is simply declared "a human right" and is no longer an "it" at all. Here the "something" loses its somethingness altogether, and we may no longer discuss its cost, because it has none, as everyone has a right to it. In the worst case, we must "bend the cost curve down" until such time as the cost goes away.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 14, 2011 8:18 AM | Report abuse

Or what about || for blockquotes? Or |" then "| or something?

I dunno. There's got a be a better solution. I still wanna be able to do blockquotes, though. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 14, 2011 8:20 AM | Report abuse

None of you know Kevin

He could easily have placed a code within his program which allow him to get credit card numbers off your commputer.


OR look at the other files on your computer.


Be careful.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 14, 2011 8:22 AM | Report abuse

I wouldn't dignify the ideology in vogue by calling it conservatism, Goldwater was conservative. Bush II was something else. Something much less thoughtful and much more nasty.

What we're seeing is the result of 30 years of relentless and scripted Norquist messaging and antigovernment corporate rhetoric, replacing the global Keynesian consensus and the spirit of the New Deal with a grim dog eat dog libertarianism. And libertarianism isn't conservatism, it's something far shabbier.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 14, 2011 8:24 AM | Report abuse

"That's just unfriendly to non Troll Hunters."

Well now that I've mastered the pipes, works for me so, Fυck 'em!
Just kidding.

Maybe double quote would be the best compromise because it is easy on the eyes, easy to do and there are no hidden double quotes in published texts.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 14, 2011 8:24 AM | Report abuse

Kevin:

"I still wanna be able to do blockquotes, though. ;)"

Me too. That was the very impetus for me to start using it.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 14, 2011 8:25 AM | Report abuse

wbgonne

I'm in favor of gun control and I'll take just about any walk back we can get, especially outlawing the purchase of extended mags. There's a piece of legislation to cover this, anyone think it has a shot? Uh no, that horse rode out of the NRA barn years ago. Instead they're looking at bills to put plexi-glass around the chamber to keep the riff raff out, bills to keep "gun language" out of political discourse (who gets to decide?), set up a 1000 foot perimeter around congress people, etc. etc. Don't you see the ridiculousness of the whole over-reaction?

I would prefer civil discourse, I don't expect it though, and I think it's dangerous to try to legislate it. I think people sink or swim by their own words and ideas, didn't Angle lose, aren't SP's favorables falling like a stone, don't aides lose their jobs for inflammatory language? It's the American people who will decide, that's where I place my faith, not the halls of Congress.

Posted by: lmsinca | January 14, 2011 8:26 AM | Report abuse

I wouldn't dignify the ideology in vogue by calling it conservatism, Goldwater was conservative. Bush II was something else. Something much less thoughtful and much more nasty.

What we're seeing is the result of 30 years of relentless and scripted Norquist messaging and antigovernment corporate rhetoric, replacing the global Keynesian consensus and the spirit of the New Deal with a grim dog eat dog libertarianism. And libertarianism isn't conservatism, it's something far shabbier.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 14, 2011 8:24 AM | Report abuse

Fair enough. But whatever you call it, it has been the dominant philosophy in American governance for 40 years and it sure ain't liberalism.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 14, 2011 8:27 AM | Report abuse

cao:

"Goldwater was conservative. Bush II was something else."

Indeed. He was much more, er, liberal.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 14, 2011 8:29 AM | Report abuse

wbg and tao - I suspect liberals always think conservative rules control, and in legislative politics there is a mechanical bias in that direction: it is always easier to kill legislation than to pass it, so change is difficult.

BUT

when a conservative legislature wants to roll back liberal legislation that bias works in favor of liberals.

Its mainly POV, I think. The history of legislation since TR would suggest that liberals are steadily ascendant, if we mean "somewhat more liberal" as opposed to "somewhat more conservative". The history since RWR, only, would probably lead one to conclude exactly the opposite.

Some political historian has distilled this. If you know who, recommend the book, please.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 14, 2011 8:30 AM | Report abuse

"The "tale of two speeches" narrative continues with a nice piece by Dan Balz, with this blunt headline: "As Obama urged unity, Palin brought division.""

Translation: Palin divides the country by being attacked by the Obama left, while Obama unites the country by letting the attack happen and then calling for healing.

Headlines of the future and Past:

Wife Charged with Domestic Violence for Being Beaten

Woman Charged with Being Raped: Mayor Declares City Crackdown on Rape Victims

Poland Resists Invasion, Threatens World Peace

Divisive Melians Refuse Peace

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 14, 2011 8:31 AM | Report abuse

Imsinca, it is all about the money, obviously. Dial down this list of articles on our two party, pay to play, crony capitalist system and see how many are about the gun lobby.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/l/lobbying_and_lobbyists/index.html?offset=10&s=newest

Posted by: shrink2 | January 14, 2011 8:32 AM | Report abuse

All, Morning Roundup posted:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/01/the_morning_plum_167.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | January 14, 2011 8:34 AM | Report abuse

"I would prefer civil discourse, I don't expect it though, and I think it's dangerous to try to legislate it."

Agreed 100%. That is not a fit subject for legislation. But laws concerning gun control and mental health treatment are certainly relevant to what happened. For instance, if Obama had resurrected Clinton's assault weapons ban would the assassin have been able to purchase the gun clip he did? And while legislating speech is patently absurd and plainly unconstitutional, criticizing anti-government hate speech is not only appropriate, it is inevitable in a reality-based environment.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 14, 2011 8:34 AM | Report abuse

Plus, if you are a rich American, as Brigade reminds us, you can build a palatial house and live like royalty, lording it over the native population, get photo spreads and be "noticed," and spend most of your time on the internet hurling imprecations and death wishes at your former country. Heck, you an even get the Vietnamese to chase your stray cats, cuz everyone "helps each other" an stuff.

I'm sure Kurtz can hook you up. Maybe you can even crash in his extra wing for a while.

==

I'm sure most anyone would enjoy living in my guest rooms a lot more than you enjoy living in your own head. You really don't sound anything like a well-adjusted person.

Wow, so many collated details about me. Am I, like, your hobby?

Yeah people help each other here. I note you single that out for maximal derision. I don't want to even guess what sort of manipulative and dysfunctional family life left you with that ugly attitude.

My cat says hey.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 14, 2011 8:35 AM | Report abuse

"Poland Resists Invasion, Threatens World Peace"

Hey, does paraphrasing the messaging of Goebbels & Ribbentrop mean you have to put money in the Godwin jar?

Posted by: shrink2 | January 14, 2011 8:36 AM | Report abuse

Already fielded that grounder, Mark.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 14, 2011 8:37 AM | Report abuse

Sarah's tragic victimhood as seen from another in the Jewish community...

"President of Jewish Funds for Justice Simon Greer said in a statement that "the term 'blood libel' is not a synonym for 'false accusation.' It refers to a specific falsehood perpetuated by Christians about Jews for centuries, a falsehood that motivated a good deal of anti-Jewish violence and discrimination. Unless someone has been accusing Ms. Palin of killing Christian babies and making matzoh from their blood, her use of the term is totally out-of-line."

"In the past two months, Ms. Palin and Glenn Beck, the most well-known media personalities on Fox News, have abused two of the most tragic episode in the history of the Jewish people: the Holocaust and the blood libel," Greer said, adding "in addition, Roger Ailes, the head of the Fox News channel, referred to the executives at NPR as 'Nazis.' Perhaps the popular news channel has such an ingrained victim mentality that it identifies with one of the most persecuted minorities in human history. But the Jewish community does not appreciate their identification, which only serves to denigrate the very real pain so many Jews have suffered because of anti-Semitic violence. It is clear that Fox News has a Jewish problem."

http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/u-s-jewish-leaders-slam-sarah-palin-s-blood-libel-accusation-1.336653

Addendum: re Godwin... in the last eighteen months, Beck has brought up Hitler four hundred times. As a comic on John Stewart's show said, "Beck has Nazi-tourettes"

Posted by: bernielatham | January 14, 2011 8:43 AM | Report abuse

wbg - I was thinking to myself how much easier it is to kill a bill than to pass one [I have done the former in the TX lege] that perhaps someone has done case studies of landmark bills over, say, the post WW2 period. Who lobbied for them, who lobbied against them, how was resistance to them overcome?

EXAMPLE:

The tax reform of the 80s must have faced stiff opposition. That effort cleaned up the Code quite a bit. Of course, each lobby went to work on it immediately to muddy the waters. IMHO, Tax Reform should be a ten year recurring item because the lobbies will have screwed up any cleaning in each decade. But that effort in the 80s overcame widespread and powerful resistance, and if we are to try for it again today, along the lines of closing loopholes and simplifying brackets, we could learn from history, if someone has written the actual nuts and bolts of that struggle as a case study.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 14, 2011 8:58 AM | Report abuse

"Hey, does paraphrasing the messaging of Goebbels & Ribbentrop mean you have to put money in the Godwin jar?"

It would just be deducted from my positive account balance.

Posted by: quarterback1 | January 14, 2011 9:37 AM | Report abuse

There was some incoherent babble on huff post about Palin and weird apocalyptic Christian views of Israel. It all gave her way too much credit for logical thinking but one fat shone through clear: she's connected with some REALLY nutty religious groups.

Posted by: caothien9 | January 14, 2011 9:42 AM | Report abuse

bernielatham, there are differing opinions on "blood libel." Professor Dershowitz and JewsForSarah.com have defended her use of the term.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 14, 2011 10:03 AM | Report abuse

MicrowavableJohnnieCakes, they weren't too busy. They didn't want to make it about themselves a la 56 interruptions of applause. Did you ever watch how Speaker Hastert was treated at the Wellstone Memorial?

RainForestRising, I suspect most of them know the import of Citizens United (Obama TAUGHT Con Law for goodness sake), but are simply lying about it for the rubes.

ScottC3, I hope that Roberts and Alito stay away too. I doubt that Kagen and Sotomayor will.

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 14, 2011 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Bernie:

"Addendum: re Godwin... in the last eighteen months, Beck has brought up Hitler four hundred times."

How many times do you suppose you have made allusions to Nazi Germany in the last 18 months? It is a standard tactic of yours, of course.

Posted by: ScottC3 | January 14, 2011 11:29 AM | Report abuse

@shrink: “Hey, does paraphrasing the messaging of Goebbels & Ribbentrop mean you have to put money in the Godwin jar?“

He's just getting a warning this time. If does it again, nickle-penalty.

@bernie: “"Addendum: re Godwin... in the last eighteen months, Beck has brought up Hitler four hundred times. As a comic on John Stewart's show said, 'Beck has Nazi-tourettes'“

That was Lewis-Black, and he illustrated the point with a compelling video showing Glenn Beck repeatedly compare everything to the Nazis.

I listened to 15 minutes of Glenn Beck this morning (first time in a year or so). Nothing about Nazis, but he did warn about a coming (leftist) insurrection by people we don't even know are going to be the insurrectionists. They're walking among us, and we don't even know! Which seemed way-paranoid, to me. Then he attacked politicians for not signing the civility pledge. Which seemed very enough, and his position against violent rhetoric is pretty clearly 100% against, if this morning was any indication.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 14, 2011 1:52 PM | Report abuse

On Obama's victory-day the illinois Lottery drew 666: it's time to spread this news everywhere to everyone so no one doesn't know it.

Posted by: GeirSmith | January 14, 2011 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company