S#*! Sarah Palin Says ("Blood Libel" Edition)

Soon after the tragedy at Tucson, Sarah Palin took to her Facebook page to express her condolences to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and the victims of the Safeway shooting, while her commenters raged about the shooter, who thought to blame Nancy Pelosi, the "negro abortion" problem, and someone who assumed it was an illegal alien and wanted more border security long before we ever heard the name Jared Loughner. Conservative David Frum was less than impressed at Palin's statement.

"Palin’s post-shooting message was about Palin, not about Giffords. It was defensive, not inspiring. And it was petty at a moment when Palin had been handed perhaps her last clear chance to show herself presidentially magnanimous."

And just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, after five days of silence, Palin decides to release a pre-recorded 7½ minute speech, also released on Facebook and with the help of a teleprompter, in which she is the victim on the designated day for a Tucson victims memorial.  She had five days, and neither she nor her speech writer could figure out that the term "blood libel" is probably not the best turn of phrase.

But ultimately, how did Palin respond to the criticism leveled at her vitriolic political rhetoric which some partly blame for the senseless shooting that occurred? She quoted Ronald Reagan (that's becoming a staple for her), invoked 9/11 and doubled down on the rhetoric.

"No one should be deterred from speaking up and speaking out in peaceful dissent, and we certainly must not be deterred by those who embrace evil and call it good."

Who is embracing evil and calling it good, Sarah? Care to be more specific? And her fans/commenters were overjoyed. Funny how there never seems to be any negative comments on Sarah's Facebook page.

Richard Clark: Sarah, you must be doing something right, the Liberal Media hates you. Keep up the good work, you're awesome 

Yes, the liberal media hates Palin. All three of them.

Lena Kins: If Jared had been MUSLIN, Obama would see that the MEDIA was "somewhat quiet as possible" not much of a big deal about this tragic massacre of innocent people. Sarah we need LEADERS like you in the White House.

"Muslin"? Seriously?

Al Holloway: Thank God, Dipshit Obama finally stopped talking, it makes me sick how he always says that we need to start speaking to one another in a way that brings us together. As if all of the violent & hateful rhetoric is not coming from Democrats.

All the violent rhetoric is coming from Democrats. Got it.

That last quote was written after President Obama spoke at the Tucson Memorial service. I guess he misunderstood the message.  And Sarah showed she didn't get it either in her feeble attempt to preempt the President's speech in Tucson. Andrew Sullivan put it best in his latest post:

"Palin does not possess the self-awareness, responsibility or composure to respond to crises like this with grace. This message - even at a time of national crisis - was a base-rousing rallying cry, perpetuating her own victimhood and alleged bloodthirstiness of her opponents.

...to moderate that tone, to acknowledge that one can make an error, to defend oneself from unfair accusations while acknowledging the need for a calmer discourse in future - this is beyond her."

My son is four

POSTED BY JHW22

I just told my son, after I watched Obama's Tucson Memorial speech, that I love his President. My son said, "He's not my President. He's everyone's President because everyone likes him in the whole world. The world is like a ball."

Why Does Anyone Take This Man Seriously Anymore?

Rush Limbaugh: "What Mr. Loughner knows is that he has the full support of a major political party in this country. He's sitting there in jail. He knows what's going on, he knows that...the Democrat party is attempting to find anybody but him to blame. He knows if he plays his cards right, he's just a victim. He's the latest in a never-ending parade of victims brought about by the unfairness of America...this guy clearly understands he's getting all the attention and he understands he's got a political party doing everything it can, plus a local sheriff doing everything that they can to make sure he's not convicted of murder - but something lesser."

False Equivalency Equals Faulty Equation

POSTED BY JHW22

Equivalency means two things being almost equal if not exact. Therefore, if I say an apple is fruit and a banana is fruit, I am making a correct equivalency. However, if I say a Red Delicious apple is the same as a banana some could argue a false equivalency because a Red Delicious apple is red, whereas a banana is yellow. Someone else may say, yes, but they are still fruit. Then someone else could say some apples are yellow and bananas are yellow and they are both fruit so they are the same. Then someone else could say, yes but bananas are only yellow when they aren’t green or brown.

See, when it comes to fruit, you can’t have a discussion without someone having an alternate version that isn’t false but which is different from the opponent’s position.

If I say that trees are green someone can say, not all are green and not all green trees are green all the time.

If I say boys are more active than girls someone will provide examples of hyper-active girls and sedate boys.

If I say clouds are all the same someone will point out the various types.

So when I say that some people on the left have used vitriolic language, I should not be accused of making a false equivalency because it’s a far more nuanced issue than fruit. Hell, even that statement could be argued as a false equivalency.

Now, if I point out 3 instances of when the left has used questionable hyperbole while I also point out 30 cases where the right has done it, I should not be accused of making a false equivalency. I have not said 3 = 30. I have said they each share a digit, they are each numbers. There are many similarities between 3 and 30 but they are not equal and pointing out the similarities is not a statement that they are equal.

I have been a part of and have witnessed two conversations since the tragedy in Tucson. I am going to paraphrase both conversations and show why I think the “false equivalency” argument is a waste of real opportunity to get everyone, regardless of their party’s eagerness or opposition to use vitriol in the debate, to stop using it – period.

Conversation A:

Republican: “Sarah Palin did not incite hate. If you think she did, what do you have to say about the time Obama said, ‘Don’t take a knife to a gunfight’, huh?”

Democrat: “Looking back, I’d have to say I wish he hadn’t used that line. Even though it’s an old cliché, I wish we weren’t using any language that implies aggression or violence. I pledge not to use that language and to reject it if anyone in my party uses it. Now, do YOU reject that language used in your party?”

Republican: “Yes, I reject that language in my party.”

Conversation B:

Republican: “Sarah Palin did not incite hate. If you think she did, what do you have to say about the time Obama said, ‘Don’t take a knife to a gunfight’, huh?”

Democrat: “There is no comparison between the left and the right here. The right has had far more vitriol and has created this atmosphere since a black man became President. So, no, there is nothing vitriolic about his statement. No one in MY party has called for shootings or ‘second amendment remedies’ or for people to ‘reload’ or be ‘armed and dangerous’. So no, MY party isn’t part of the problem.”

Republican: “Oh, I see. MY party is racist and violent because we’re white and want to protect our rights and hate the way the government is destroying our country. Your party can say whatever it wants and use whatever words and images it wants because you when you use it it doesn’t mean anything. But when MY party uses it, we’re telling crazy people to kill people. Only crazy people are on the right, is that what you’re saying?”

Democrat: “No, there are crazy people on the left but our crazies don’t take guns to speeches and don’t kill people.”

Republican: “Well this guy was a liberal. Look at the books he read.”

Democrat: “What he read doesn’t mean he was a liberal. He shot a Democrat who Sarah Palin put a target on in campaign rhetoric.”

Republican: “Two of the victims who died were Republicans.”

Democrat: “The shooter couldn’t have known that.”

Republican: “And Sarah Palin couldn’t have known some crazy would misconstrue what she meant.”

Democrat: “We warned of this. She could have known because we raised this point over and over.”

Republican: “See, you wanted this to happen just so you could say, ‘I told you so’.”

In Conversation A, the Democrat acknowledged the FRACTION of poor choices by the Democratic party and the conversation moved forward.

In Conversation B, the Democrat decided that acknowledging a fraction was conceding a false equivalency. That conversation is still spiraling into an abyss of nothing.

EDIT: Here is the transcript from Obama's Tucson Memorial speech. All he said is what I meant to say.

Well, duh!

POSTED BY JHW22

So the current response to the "tone down the rhetoric" common sense is "but, but, but... the guy was crazy" Well, no shit! That's who we have said WOULD be the wrong person to hear the violent rhetoric. I don't recall anyone saying, over the last two years, that we need to be careful what we say because some SANE person might decide to react with violence. Um, DUH!

(BTW, I am avoiding using the name of the shooter/terrorist/assassin so as not to give him one more search result.)

Quote of the Day

"...I’m not blaming Sarah Palin for 20 people being shot – six of them dying from their injuries. I’m blaming Sarah Palin for taking down her “take down” map sans comment. I’m not blaming her for throwing bombs. I am blaming her for not uttering remorse when they explode.

Palin wants her followers to “stand up?”

Her first."

~ Tina Dupuy

Who's Politicizing the Arizona Shooting?

There seems to be a lot of umbrage at Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik and his opinion that the heightened political rhetoric is partly to blame for the Safeway shooting that targeted Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed six others. That somehow he was polticizing the event.

Well, who's politicizing now?

In the wake of Saturday's tragic shooting in Arizona, Gateway Pundit and Breitbart blogger Jim Hoft has been on a one man mission to prove that the deranged shooter was a "typical leftist nut." This morning, Hoft posted what he seems to think is bulletproof evidence supporting this thesis, but, as is usually the case with him, it is merely evidence that someone as hackishly irresponsible as Hoft should have no role in our national political discourse.

...That Hoft would reprint the outrageous assertion that Loughner idolized Obama - based on a random commenter on a fringe message board that provided no evidence for his assertion - says a lot about his complete lack of journalistic integrity.

Reloading, Surveyor's Symbols and Gun Rights

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was one of the House members targeted in Sarah Palin's infamous "Take Back the 20" SarahPAC map. I'm not going to blame Palin for the shooting, but I will blame her for the lack of foresight in not understanding what the affect can be in the incendiary rhetoric she's been peddling since she came on the scene.

And she's not the only one who has gone a little too far with the metaphors. With phrases like "pallin' around with terrorists," "don't retreat, reload," Sharron Angle's "Second Amendment remedies" and Michele Bachmann's "armed and dangerous," it was only a matter of time before someone mentally unstable person took the matter into their own hands. There have been other violent attacks. The Richard Poplawski incident in Pittsburgh immediately comes to mind. But this is the first time there has been an attack on a political official. And I can't believe that the angry Republican anti-government rhetoric has nothing to do with it.

While a definitive motive hasn't been established for Jared Loughner's attack on the ironically named Safeway, anti-government sentiment has been an issue in his online writings. Is he disturbed and unstable? Looks that way, which is why prominent politicians and pundits have to realize that their message doesn't just go out to rational people who understand that bullseyes, targets and vitriol isn't literal.

And while we are all familiar with her lack of foresight, Ms. Mama Grizzly Reality TV Caribou Hunter isn't doing herself any favors by surrounding herself with people who aren't the sharpest tools in the shed either, the latest example being a radio interview by a Palin spokesperson trying to explain away the crosshairs in the SarahPac map.

...this exchange between Palin aide Rebecca Mansour and Palin-supporting radio host Tammy Bruce is completely absurd. Bruce begins by describing the map of SarahPAC's 20 midterm election targets -- members of Congress in districts that went for McCain/Palin in 2008 who voted for health care reform -- and referring to the targets on the map as "surveyor's symbols." Mansour points out that "targeted districts" are part of political parlance -- obviously true -- and says this. (It starts at around 11:40 in the clip.)

MANSOUR: I just want to clarify again, and maybe it wasn't done on the record enough by us when this came out, the graphic, is just, it's basically -- we never, ever, ever intended it to be gunsights. It was simply crosshairs like you see on maps.

BRUCE: Well, it's a surveyor's symbol. It's a surveyor's symbol.

MANSOUR: It's a surveyor's symbol. I just want to say this, Tammy, if I can. This graphic was done, not even done in house -- we had a political graphics professional who did this for us.

Right wingers are now pointing to an old Daily Kos diary by Markos Moulitsas in an attempt to equate and diffuse in which Moulitsas uses the terms, "target" and "bullseye." But their attempt at their tried and true revisionist history falls short this time. While some can justifiably point to vitriol on both sides that needs to be toned down, in my opinion this comparison is apples and oranges, if only for the visual aids of targets on the districts the SarahPAC map wanted to "take back." That coupled with Palin's usual rhetoric, gun metaphors and especially the audience that she's trying to reach, in my opinion makes all the difference.  No one said a word about the Kos article when it came out. But there was a definite reaction to Palin's map with crosshairs, one of those being Gifford's. For Palin supporters to go back two years to search for something remotely similar on the liberal side is disingenuous.

My final point in all of the chaos of this past weekend was my realization of the lack of dialogue regarding guns and gun rights. I don't personally own a gun. But I don't begrudge anyone else owning one. You have a right to own one. But does that right preclude stricter gun laws for the sake of safety? Is there any legitimate reason to be against gun control? I say again, any legitimate reason. I have no problem with someone wanting to purchase a gun, but shouldn't there be certain procedures in place to prevent mentally unstable people from gun ownership?  It has come to light that Loughner attempted to join the military and was rejected. If the reason was due to mental instability, shouldn't there be information pipelines in place so that the FBI (whose background check Loughner supposedly passed before his gun purchase) received that info? Yet, I haven't heard a word from the mainstream media in regards to this issue. No one has even broached the subject. Maybe politicians will think twice about gun control laws now that it's hit so close to home, but I'm not holding my breath.

ADDING... I hope we as a collective group take more seriously the next instance of someone bringing a gun or an assault rifle to a political rally in which the President is present, or more closely scrutinize a gun toter looking to "water the tree of liberty."

TOO FAR!

POSTED BY JHW22

Per an article in November regarding the violent rhetoric and what Congresswoman Giffords' opponent did to stoke the flames.

He seems to be embracing his fellow tea partier's idea. Kelly's campaign event website has a stern-looking photo of the former Marine in military garb holding his weapon. It includes the headline: "Get on Target for Victory in November. Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly."

Arizona Rep. Giffords Shot

NY Times: A congresswoman from Arizona was shot on Saturday along with several others during at public event at a grocery store in Tucson, according to her spokesman, C.J. Karamargin. The Tucson Citizen reported that Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, a Democrat, had been shot at close range in the head.

This is horrific. And be honest: what was your first reaction upon hearing the news that a Democratic member of Congress was shot in the head during what amounts to a town hall meeting in Arizona?

UPDATE: Although shot in the head, Giffords is expected to pull through. According to a sheriff's official, there were 18 other injured parties, including a Federal Judge who at this point was mentioned as having died.

The shooter's name is Jared Loughner, a 22 year old male.  And after reading some comments on Sarah Palin's Facebook page, I'm not ashamed to admit that I'm relieved the perpetrator is not of hispanic origin, since there are some who were already blaming border security and assuming the shooter was an illegal alien. Those same people were aghast that anyone would mention that Giffords was a "target" on Sarah Palin's SarahPAC "Don't Retreat, Reload" map.

Must Reads

Russell King: An Open Letter to Conservatives

Bob Herbert: Get Ready for a G.O.P. Rerun

Jason Linkins: WaPo Editors Finally Realize The GOP Isn't Serious About The Debt

Adam Serwer: Huck Finning the Constitution

David Cole: The Conservative Constitution of the United States

President Obama's Weekly Address - January 8, 2011

Tax Cuts Kicking In

Doing The People's Work

House Republicans took another step Friday toward a repeal of last year's sweeping health care overhaul, as the lower chamber approved a key rule allowing a repeal bill to proceed to a vote.

Friday's procedural vote, largely along party lines, set the stage for a symbolic showdown over the signature Democratic law of the last Congress, under which parents can keep children on their health plans until the age of 26, insurers are barred from denying service due to preexisting conditions, Medicaid funding is dramatically expanded and some 30 million uninsured Americans are projected to receive coverage by 2019.

And then the Weeper of the House called a recess for the day at 12:30pm. You know, because it's getaway day and there are planes to catch and fund raisers to attend.

My Favorite Podcast

Book-wise, I haven't been reading much lately. And the reason for that is I've been using my work commute to listen to Marc Maron's podcast, WTF. I've been a fan of Maron's for a long time and have followed his career on and off, from his Comedy Central specials to his appearances on Late Night with Conan O'Brien, his stint as a morning host of Morning Sedition on Air America when they first launched, and most recently saw him live in a workshop of his one man show, Scorching The Earth.

I've always appreciated his raw, emotional style and his williness to let his audience into his life. We can laugh at his mistakes and life lessons while taking something away from them, whether associating with it in a way to hits close to home, or as a guidebook on what not to do in relationships.

He and his very popular podcast were just featured in the New York Times. Give it a quick read it you like and swing over to his free podcasts for a listen. My guess is you won't be disappointed.

Vaccination/Autism Fraud

I kind of knew this all along, but to each his own.

The first study to link a childhood vaccine to autism was based on doctored information about the children involved, according to a new report on the widely discredited research.

The conclusions of the 1998 paper by Andrew Wakefield and colleagues was renounced by 10 of its 13 authors and later retracted by the medical journal Lancet, where it was published. Still, the suggestion the MMR shot was connected to autism spooked parents worldwide and immunization rates for measles, mumps and rubella have never fully recovered.

Bill O'Reilly is a Moron - UPDATED

What causes the tides to roll in and out? According to Bill O'Reilly, it can't be explained. That's his argument when debating American Atheist Group President David Silverman.

O'REILLY: I'll tell you why [religion's] not a scam, in my opinion: tide goes in, tide goes out. Never a miscommunication. You can't explain that. 

SILVERMAN: Tide goes in, tide goes out? 

O'REILLY: See, the water, the tide comes in and it goes out, Mr. Silverman. It always comes in, and always goes out. You can't explain that.

Gee, Bill, it couldn't be science, could it?

UPDATE (1/7/11): Stephen Colbert discusses Bill O'Reilly's mystery.

Can't. Contain. My. Anger.

POSTED BY JHW22

Holy fricken shit!

The Republicans in the House decided to read the Constitution on the House floor today. Great. I have no problems with that. In fact, I often listen to members of Congress act like they have the Constitution memorized yet don't seem to know what's in it. My beef is with the way they are having one member at a time read from it then another member and so on. I don't want them to recite it -- I want them to comprehend it.

But NOW, NOW, Boehner and Cantor ARE GIVING A FUCKING PRESS CONFERENCE!! DURING THE READING. They left the chamber during the reading THEY DEMANDED of the sacred document that they profess to love and respect and protect and they left to GIVE A DAMN PRESS CONFERENCE!!!!

GET YOUR ASSES BACK IN THE DAMN CHAMBER! FAIL! FAIL! FAIL!

What's Going On at the Washington Post?

The Washington Post is long removed from it's Woodward and Bernstein/Watergate days.  In the last couple of days alone, its editorial staff is shocked to discover that perhaps the new Republican majority in the House isn't as serious about debt reduction as they claim, despite their own journalists reporting on the hypocrisy, post an online poll asking the reader to prioritize issues that Congress should tackle while completely omitting "job creation" or "economy" as one of the choices until long after the poll was made available thereby skewing the numbers, and now publishes an article about Estonia's growing economy and their success story while they are in the middle of recovering from a depression.

Maybe Judith Miller should apply for a job there.

Jon Stewart's Back!

... And he's setting his sights on John McCain. An instant classic.

Let's All Stand on John McCain's Lawn

Constitutionally Supported?

POSTED BY JHW22

Soooo.... apparently a new House of Representatives rule requires Representatives to provide proof in each proposed bill that the bill is supported by some part of the Constitution. Yep, they insist that each bill have supporting evidence that it's Constitutional. Cool. I guess.

Homework assignment: find the part in the Constitution that says Congress can rename Post Offices. Alright, fine, you don't need to do any homework. The Constitution does say that Congress will "establish Post Offices and post Roads" in Article 1, Section 8 but that one statement barely seems substantial enough to validate the hundreds of renaming bills that are introduced every Congress.

Now, look, I don't have a problem with a post office being named after a fallen member of our armed services or a firefighter who died in the Twin Towers. I don't have a problem with that. I just think it's funny that the Republicans created a new rule just to pander to the teabaggers that will in effect, limit the amount of pandering they can do by naming a building after someone.

On a slight tangent, I keep hearing (like in the ABC link above) that the reading of the Constitution by the new House is a "first." Yet, that seems odd to me and I swear Keith Olbermann said a bit ago that it has been done twice before. I tend to believe Olbermann on this. So, this goes back to my running annoyances and distrusts of the media -- why must they report with such certainty something they likely haven't bothered to fact-check? The talking points from the media can be as nauseating as the talking points from politicians.

And So It Begins

Welcome to Day One of the 112th Congress in the Republican led House of Representatives.

From the C-SPAN chyron:



"...won't apply to tax cuts or Republican priorities."

Weeper of the House!

Okay, I have to ask. What's with that gavel? Is he compensating for something else? For Christ's sake, buy a Porshe!

AHAAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!

Please....stop! HAHAA!!  Too... funny..... sides.... hurt!

A source close to the three-term congresswoman said [Michele] Bachmann will travel to Iowa this month for multiple meetings to seek advice from political forces there and party elders close to the caucus process before coming to a final decision regarding a potential presidential run.

HAAHAHAAHAHAAAAAAAA!!!

Dead Birds: Science or End Times?

So... dead birds. Many dead birds... thousands of dead birds. What could the reason be? Speculation was that the birds were "shocked" to death by fireworks nearby. Really? I never thought that could be a possibility, but okay.

Then I heard a scientist on MSNBC discuss the possibility of a microburst, a column of sinking air coming down forcefully. The lead bird gets disoriented and flies directly into the ground, and the rest follow, kamikazi style. It's taken airplanes down before, so it sounds plausible enough.

But leave it to CNN and Anderson Cooper to play the Armaggedon angle with an interview of Kirk Cameron.

Cooper: ...Some people are even saying that these mass deaths are a sign that the end times are near, some have cited The Left Behind series of books, so we thought we'd talk to actor Kirk Cameron. He's a born-again Christian. He's written a lot about his faith. He's also starred in the Left Behind series of films. I spoke to him earlier.

The sad part is, Cooper probably had nothing to do with the booking, it's the CNN producers that thought this would make good television. How are those CNN ratings doing again?

My theory: The birds were shocked that Glenn Beck was canceled in New York, and soon in Philadelphia, and did an imitation of Beck's ratings.

By the way, the dead fish nearby was a completely unrelated incident and attributed to disease since there were no pollutants and it was only one particular type of fish that died... although I haven't ruled out the Glenn Beck theory.

Hypocrisy, Thy Name Is Miller

Remember Judith Miller? She was the New York Times reporter who drummed up the case for the Iraq War with front page news on weapons of mass destruction; stories that were cited by the Bush administration as evidence for the need to invade and remove Saddam Hussein from power. Where did she get those stories that wound up to be completely unfounded? "Official secrets" and "secret government reports." See how that works?

Anyway, it seems that Miller is now criticizing Julian Assange for his failure to verify the stories in the Wikileaks cable releases.

Miller said that Assange "didn't care at all about attempting to verify the information that he was putting out or determine whether or not it would hurt anyone."

Uh-huh. But stories about WMD that didn't exist didn't hurt anyone either, so that's cool, right?

The funny thing is that when she came under fire for her hack journalism, she responded, "'[M]y job isn't to assess the government's information and be an independent intelligence analyst myself. My job is to tell readers of The New York Times what the government thought about Iraq's arsenal.'"

So just to sum up, Miller, a journalist who worked for the NY Times for 28 years, who dropped the ball on WMD whether intentional or not, and was involved in protecting Scooter Libby during the Valerie Plame outing, criticized a wanted fugitive for not verifying stories in illegally obtained government cables for his data dump. ... Got it.

It's All About Jobs...

...right, Republicans? So tell me, what's the first thing on your agenda when you take over the House on Wednesday, January 5th?*

Republican leaders in the new House say they'll hold a vote next week to repeal President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.

WHAAAA?!?! But you've spent the last year and a half criticizing the White House for prioritizing the concept of affordable health care for all and that what they really needed to do was focus on the economy and jobs.

The announcement of the Jan. 12 vote by the No. 2 House Republican, Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor, sets the stage for a showdown with the Democratic-led Senate.

Excellent! Let's reinstate the power of insurance companies to deny coverage due to pre-existing conditions, dropping you when you get sick after years of paying premiums and opening up that Medicare donut hole again. That'll be a real winner with constituents.

Of course, it's just all for show because it'll never pass the Senate. Welcome to the first week of the 112th Congress. Out with the old, in with... ah, nevermind.

____________________
*Why can't Congress go back to work on Monday like the rest of us common folk?

Must Reads

NY Times Editorial: Deficit Hypocrisy

Gail Collins: The End-of-the-Year Quiz

The Rude Pundit: End of Year Haiku 2010, Parts One, Two and Three

Christopher Brauchli: The Congressman King-Reincarnated as Senator Joe McCarthy

Quote of the Day

This is not a game. You know, the debt ceiling is not something to toy with. If we hit the debt ceiling, that's essentially defaulting on our obligations, which is totally unprecedented in American history. The impact on the economy would be catastrophic. That would be a worst financial economic crisis than anything we saw in 2008.

As I say that's not a game. I don't see why anybody's talking about playing chicken with the debt ceiling. If we get to the point where you've damaged the full faith and credit of the United States, that would be the first default in history caused purely by insanity.

~Austan Goolsbee, the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers

President Obama's Weekly Address - January 1, 2011

The New Year

Happy New Year!

Rosie the Riveter Dies

Huffington Post: Geraldine Hoff Doyle, the inspiration for "Rosie the Riveter," died on Sunday at the age of 86 due to complications from arthritis, the Washington Post reports.

...Rosie's story began in the 1940s, when the 17-year-old Doyle was working at a metal factory in Ann Arbor, Michigan. A visiting United Press International photographer snapped a pic of her sporting a red-and-white bandana.

I wonder if she finally gave up after seeing this:



Although this little tidbit of information gave me a chuckle:

According to the Wall Street Journal, Doyle quit after just one week at the factory where her picture was made famous.

Was "Rosie" the Riveter the 1940's version of Sarah Palin?

Tucker Carlson's Christian Values

There is obviously nothing that the neoconservative right wing will allow to go unchallenged when it comes to anything related to President Obama.

The latest faux-rage comes at the expense of the President's comments regarding Michael Vick. Comments that, by the way, were made in a private conversation to Eagles owner Jeff Lurie in a phone call to initially praise him for using alternative energy sources to power his stadium. During the call, Obama also commended the Eagles owner for giving Michael Vick a second chance.

“He said, ‘So many people who serve time never get a fair second chance.’ He said, ‘It’s never a level playing field for prisoners when they get out of jail.’ And he was happy that we did something on such a national stage that showed our faith in giving someone a second chance after such a major downfall.”

Lurie relayed the conversation to a Sports Illustrated reporter who ran with it. And here is where the hair-on-fire reaction begins. Animal activists naturally were aghast that the President would think to say such an insensitive thing as to giving a human being a second chance after serving time for his crime.  That's what the correctional institution in the US is all about right? Rehabilitation?  Fox New's Megyn Kelly compared animal cruelty to rape. Yes, rape. But self-proclaimed Christian and former bow tie addict Tucker Carlson really showed how he follows his faith by not only criticizing Obama for the private comments, but stating that Vick should have been executed for his actions.

"I'm a Christian, I've made mistakes myself, I believe fervently in second chances," Carlson said. "But Michael Vick killed dogs, and he did in a heartless and cruel way. And I think, personally, he should've been executed for that. He wasn't, but the idea that the President of the United States would be getting behind someone who murdered dogs? Kind of beyond the pale."

So, holier than thou Tucker Carlson, who admits to making mistakes and "fervently believes in second chances" is looking into his so called Christian heart not for forgiveness, but for vengeance. Must be an Old Testament type of guy. I wonder what type of vengeance should be cast uopon a person who maliciously wrote emails in someone else's name in an attempt to get that person in trouble? Isn't falsifying your identity through email a crime? Maybe that's a crime punishable by execution. Maybe Carlson should have been sentenced to hang by the bow tie until he was dead.

But I digress. The point is that this situation is exactly the way our legal and justice system is supposed to work, isn't it? You're guilty of a crime, convicted and sentenced by a jury of your peers, do the time and re-enter society a rehabilitated person. I didn't realize part of the deal after you were released was to never have the opportunity to work again.

And on a side note, now you know the reason why Carlson's shows always fail.

S#*! Sarah Palin Says (QWERTY Edition)

[Sigh.] I'd actually force myself to have the slightest bit of respect for Sarah Palin in this instance if she'd just admit she fucked up. But no. She brought up the whole "refudiate" story all over again in a feeble attempt to prove that it was just a typo.

"I pressed an F instead of a P and people freaked out," said Sarah, pointing out that her blunder was the second-most-searched word on Google trends.

Really, Sarah? Because when I look at my BlackBerry, the letter 'F' is about two thirds away from the letter 'P' on my keyboard. Oh, what's that you say?

In the clip from "Sarah Palin's Alaska"... it turns out that Palin claims she "pressed an 'f' instead of a 'd'" on the way to creating the word "refudiate." While the "f" and "d" keys are indeed closer to each other on a QWERTY keyboard, such an explanation would suggest that she was intending to spell the word "redudiate," which is also not a real word.

Once again... *sigh*... If you'll just admit that you melded the words "refute" and "repudiate" together in the excuse you call a brain, this would have been dropped long ago. Actually, it WAS dropped, but in your infinite wisdom, you decided to bring it up again to prove that you're never wrong when in actuality, you're often wrong (see Death Panels, Michelle Obama's anti-obesity campaign, the Bush Doctrine, abuse of power while governor of Alaska, etc.).

A Nation of Wussies

Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell was more than a little pissed off about the early cancellation of Sunday night's game in Philadelphia versus the Vikings due to an anticipated blizzard that hit the east coast. And I have to say, that while I initially understood the reason for the postponement, I couldn't agree with Rendell more, especially in light of the fact that the cancellation took place 9½ hours before game time before any snow had fallen, and as Rendell says in the clip below, they had more than enough time to make the call later in the day if they needed to, as happens in baseball.



And let's remember that it was the NFL that made this decision, not the mayor of Philadelphia or any government official before we get any "nanny state" whiners trying to misplace blame.

Christie Goes To Disney World During Blizzard - UPDATED

A lot of people are making an issue out of NJ Governor Chris "The Cannoli" Christie going on vacation to Disney World during the big blizzard we've experienced.  I really don't think it's that big a deal. What's he going to do, shovel New Jersey out himself? He probably needs help getting out of bed in the morning.

As much as I don't like Christie, this was obviously a planned vacation with his family. A trip to Disney World during Christmas week is not a spur of the moment thing.  But I do hope he enjoys the wonderful, balmy Florida weather.



Heh.

UPDATE (12/28/10 4:45pm): This is the reason Christie should be held accountable:

..it was Governor Christie's responsibility to ensure that the separated powers of the executive branch remained separated. Either he should have scheduled his family trip at another time, or he should have been a boss and told [Lt. Gov.] Guadagno that she could not travel at the same time as he was.

For someone who seems eager to exercise the power of the bully pulpit at public events, the reticence to exercise the legitimate powers of his office responsibly is puzzling, and alarming. It is a dereliction of duty and an abrogation of responsibility. Yes, the world will keep turning. But it isn't the Governor's duty to keep the world turning. It is his duty to ensure the administration of the state government and to run the executive branch. Especially in an emergency. Especially when there is almost a week's notice that the emergency is going to hit. It is inexcusable.

S#*! Sarah Palin Says (Stationery Edition)

Submitted without comment.

While touring a logging camp with her family on Sunday's episode of "Sarah Palin's Alaska," Palin took the opportunity to skewer conservationists who use pencils and paper as a medium to complain about her stance on the environment.

"Conservationists write me these nasty letters because I support an industry like this," the former vice presidential candidate said, after taking a chainsaw to an Evergreen Timber tree. "They write me these nasty letters using their pretty little pencils on their pretty little stationary not realizing. Where do you think your pencil and your piece of paper came from, people? It came from a tree that was harvested."

Casual Observation

I'm sorry, Huffington Post. You can't use the headline, "Snowpocalypse" for every snow storm.



Yes, I know this is a bad storm, but you blew your wad last season with a "Snowpocalypse" headline, so it kind of defeats the purpose of what your definition of "Snowpocalypse" is.

a·poc·a·lypse   [uh-pok-uh-lips] –noun
1. ( initial capital letter ) revelation ( def. 4 ) .
2. any of a class of Jewish or Christian writings that appeared from about 200 b.c. to a.d. 350 and were assumed to make revelations of the ultimate divine purpose.
3. a prophetic revelation, esp. concerning a cataclysm in which the forces of good permanently triumph over the forces of evil.
4. any revelation or prophecy.
5. any universal or widespread destruction or disaster: the apocalypse of nuclear war.

You see, the definition of "apocalypse" in comparison with a snowstorm is dubious at best. And being that this snowstorm is not even countrywide let alone universal, kind of makes the headline a little overblown. But ultimately, using the phrase "Snowpocalypse" for EVERY snowstorm is a bit "been here, done that"; soooo 2009.  Go with "Snowmageddon" next time.

President Obama's Weekly Address - December 25, 2010

Merry Christmas from the President & First Lady

Merry Christmas

"DEAR EDITOR: I am 8 years old.

"Some of my little friends say there is no Santa Claus.

"Papa says, 'If you see it in THE SUN it's so.'

"Please tell me the truth; is there a Santa Claus?

"VIRGINIA O'HANLON.

"115 WEST NINETY-FIFTH STREET."

VIRGINIA, your little friends are wrong. They have been affected by the skepticism of a skeptical age. They do not believe except [what] they see. They think that nothing can be which is not comprehensible by their little minds. All minds, Virginia, whether they be men's or children's, are little. In this great universe of ours man is a mere insect, an ant, in his intellect, as compared with the boundless world about him, as measured by the intelligence capable of grasping the whole of truth and knowledge.

Yes, VIRGINIA, there is a Santa Claus. He exists as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you know that they abound and give to your life its highest beauty and joy. Alas! how dreary would be the world if there were no Santa Claus. It would be as dreary as if there were no VIRGINIAS. There would be no childlike faith then, no poetry, no romance to make tolerable this existence. We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight. The eternal light with which childhood fills the world would be extinguished.

Not believe in Santa Claus! You might as well not believe in fairies! You might get your papa to hire men to watch in all the chimneys on Christmas Eve to catch Santa Claus, but even if they did not see Santa Claus coming down, what would that prove? Nobody sees Santa Claus, but that is no sign that there is no Santa Claus. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see. Did you ever see fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that's no proof that they are not there. Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders there are unseen and unseeable in the world.

You may tear apart the baby's rattle and see what makes the noise inside, but there is a veil covering the unseen world which not the strongest man, nor even the united strength of all the strongest men that ever lived, could tear apart. Only faith, fancy, poetry, love, romance, can push aside that curtain and view and picture the supernal beauty and glory beyond. Is it all real? Ah, VIRGINIA, in all this world there is nothing else real and abiding.

No Santa Claus! Thank God! he lives, and he lives forever. A thousand years from now, Virginia, nay, ten times ten thousand years from now, he will continue to make glad the heart of childhood.

Have a Cool Yule

Light blogging this next day or two, but I just wanted to take the opportunity to wish those who stop by a very Happy Holiday and a happy and healthy New Year.

Must Reads

Sarah Jones: Sarah Palin Exposed as a Teleprompter Using Fraud

Larry David: Thanks for the Tax Cut!

Melissa Harris-Perry: Obama in the Age of Accommodation

Joe Gandelman: Yes Virginia, There was a Time When John McCain Was Admirable

JHW22 recommends...

Carol E. Lee & Glenn Thrush: Obama Plans 2011 Staff Makeover

Angry Black Lady: FireDogSycophants: A Smorgasbord of Sheer Idiocy With a Soupçon of Racism

Sarah Posner: A Tea Party Leader Hates Christians

Specter's Parting Shots

Just watch.

Today's Drudge Headlines...

... include no mention of the DADT repeal, START Treaty ratification or the 9/11 responders bill approval. But as Will Bunch notes, Matt Drudge rules our world, yet none of these items are newsworthy enough to warrant a link on the Drudge Report?


(Click photo for full size.)

Not So Lame Duck

That's President Barack Obama signing the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" into law. And with that signing, another major legislative accomplishment has been achieved at a time when no one thought anything would get done.

This lame duck session of Congress hasn't been so lame. And some would say that this is not an appropriate time to pass such sweeping legislation, when clearly after such an overwhelmingly Democratic defeat in the last election showed that the American people were not happy with the Democratic agenda. Those "some" would be 100% wrong. America didn't reject the Democratic agenda. America was reacting to the growing frustration of an economy that is recovering much too slowly for their taste because we are an impatient people. Voters are responding to a stagnant unemployment rate that isn't coming down fast enough as they can't pay their bills, are losing their homes and are struggling to make ends meet. Anyone in office, whether Democrat or Republican, would have felt the blowback. That has absolutely nothing to do with the repeal of DADT, or the yet to be passed 9/11 responders bill, or the soon to be passed START Treaty with Russia.

What should enrage voters, but you'll never see a poll verifying it, is the obstructionist Republican party doing anything they can to delay, stall and prevent any significant legislation from passing for fear that it amounts to another feather in President Obama's cap. They claim they're ready to "do the people's work," and do anything but, including moaning about working during the holidays, as 99% of the rest of the country does.

If Republicans are representing the American people, why on earth would they be delaying ratification of a treaty that every past and present national security advisor and military leader says is important for our security? Why, after wrapping themselves in a patriotic blanket of 9/11 for these last nine years, did Republicans block legislation to help 9/11 first responders who are literally dying of the aftereffects of breathing in the toxicity they slogged through to help their fellow Americans? Why did Republicans fight tooth and nail against the repeal of DADT, even though the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff thought it was time to end this flawed policy; why, despite nearly a year of study to review the affects of military morale and readiness after a possible DADT repeal, was that study no longer good enough? Why did they want a study of the study?

The truth of the matter is that this has nothing to do with ideology or morals or ethics. The stonewalling of the Republican party of almost every piece of legislation (over 400 filibusters in the last two years) and the blockage of scores of executive appointments to vacancies in government positions that desperately need to be filled for the proper running of the country is all about preventing anything that could affect President Obama in a positive way.

They've said it themselves. Senator Jim DeMint wanted healthcare reform to be the President's "Waterloo." Senator Mitch McConnell categorized preventing a 2nd presidential term for Obama as their No. 1 priority. How can these politicians think they can be taken seriously when they complain about the President's "lack of bipartisanship" when these are the typical statements made? Bipartisanship and compromise work both ways, something the GOP continually fails to understand, or at least their actions and rhetoric makes it seem so.

But ultimately, for a Congress that pushed back at the White House continually, this President's accomplishments if his first two years rivals that of any other president.  Rachel Maddow's piece last night puts it all in perspective.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Imagine how much more could have been accomplished with an opposition party focused on governing rather than obstructing.

UPDATE (3:28pm): START Treaty was just ratified in the Senate 71-26. Also, the Senate approved a workable 9/11 Health Care bill for first responders.

Dumbass Quote of the Day

"I stand here very disappointed in the fact that our lead negotiator on the Republican side ... basically is going to have his work product ignored and the treaty jammed through in the lame duck. How as Republicans we justify that I do not know. To Senator Kyl, I want to apologize to you for the way you've been treated by your colleagues."

~Senator Lindsey Graham on the hubris of the Democratic leaders in the Senate for... doing their job and legislating.

Steve Landesberg Dies at 74

NY Times: Steve Landesberg, an actor and comedian with a friendly and often deadpan manner who was best known for his role on the long-running sitcom “Barney Miller,” died on Monday in Los Angeles. He was 74.

2010 Jib-Jab Style

I caught this when it premiered on CBS Sunday Morning yesterday. It's pretty funny, even if you're an Obama fan. Enjoy.

Hey, Broadway Carl

POSTED BY JHW22

Jinx, you owe me a Coke.

S#*! Sarah Palin Says (S'mores Edition)

Apparently, Sarah Palin's take on the Michelle Obama's "Let's Move" campaign to fight childhood obesity means she can't have dessert.

"...in the latest episode of Sarah Palin’s Alaska, [P]alin rooted around for s’mores ingredients and then said that it was “in honor of Michelle Obama, who said the other day we should not have dessert.”

What makes this woman so full of hatred? Is it her bitter campaign loss? It is a realization that she's not as smart as she thinks she is and needs to lash out? Is it a petty need for attention and confrontation where none exists? How sad this woman is; everything she says and does is a direct response to perceived slights, including her agitation during her dwindling book signings.

Let them eat cake -- or whatever

POSTED BY JHW22

Michelle Obama is NOT telling parents what to feed their kids. There isn't some food Gestapo in America. A parent can send their kid to school with a paper sack full of lard if they want. All she is saying is that if schools are going to use tax dollars to feed kids, those tax dollars should provide healthy meals. So if you want to spite Michelle Obama, go ahead and pack some slabs of bacon and blocks of caramel for your kid's lunch. That'll show her.

Oh, and by the way, what does Sarah Palin have against farmers? Doesn't she know that Michelle Obama's initiative is good for farmers?

Hey, if Sarah Palin can send her kid around the country telling teenage girls not to get pregnant, I think the First Lady should be able to tell families they should try to eat healthy and get some exercise. But apparently food is a taboo subject for some.

Edit: Or as my husband put it, "We can talk about nookie but not about cookie."

Irony of Ironies

Ironic headline of the year:

Lawyers cry foul over leak of Julian Assange sex-case papers

Incriminating police files were published in the British newspaper that has used him as its source for hundreds of leaked US embassy cables.

In a move that surprised many of Mr Assange's closest supporters on Saturday, The Guardian newspaper published previously unseen police documents that accused Mr Assange in graphic detail of sexually assaulting two Swedish women.

...In an editorial, The Guardian defended its decision to report on the incriminating police files. It said having been given access to the official papers, it had a duty to present a "brief summary" of the sex allegations against Mr Assange, together with his response.