Must Reads

Marcus Cederstrom: What if Tim Tebow were Muslim?

Digby: Straight Up Racism, No Dogwhistle Necessary

Ezra Klein: Who will get the ‘Recovery Presidency’?

Andrew Sullivan: How Obama's Long Game Will Outsmart His Critics

Robert Reich: The Romney Tax Loophole

Ruth Marcus: Mitt Romney’s miserly concern for the poor

E.J Dionne: Republicans keep moving Obama to Europe

Our blast from the past comes courtesy of loyal reader Chris U. who wants to remind us all of Newt Gingrich's political past, sans revisionist history.

John E. Yang: House Reprimands, Penalizes Speaker

President Obama's Weekly Address - January 21, 2012

America is Open for Business

In Follow-Up to the Newt Affair

POSTED BY JHW22

Ooops, I probably shouldn't have called it an affair. I might hurt Newt's feelings and make him go all nukuler on me.

But, anyway, here's this.





h/t Rick Parry on Facebook.

Why Am I Not Surprised?

Gingrich flatly denied [Marianne Gingrich's] story and attacked ABC News at Thursday's GOP debate. He said, "Every personal friend I have who knew us in that period says the story was false. We offered several of them to ABC to prove it was false. They weren't interested because they would like to attack any Republican."

On Friday, ABC senior vice president Jeffrey W. Schneider said that Gingrich's account was "just not true." He said in a statement, "His daughters were interviewed for our 'Nightline' story last night and we sought interviews with Gingrich or surrogates very aggressively starting Tuesday morning. We would have been happy to interview anyone they put forward."

At this point, who are you going to believe? If what Gingrich said was true, he would have been accommodating in at least having someone fight back the open marriage allegation, but the better political road would be to claim it's a witch hunt and blame the media. How very Herman Cainsian of him.

Etta James Dies at 73

NY Times: Etta James, whose powerful, versatile and emotionally direct voice could enliven the raunchiest blues as well as the subtlest love songs, most indelibly in her signature hit, “At Last,” died Friday morning in Riverside, Calif. She was 73.

Her manager, Lupe De Leon, told The Associated Press that the cause was complications of leukemia.

I Really Tried

I took a deep breath, grabbed my remote and tuned in to CNN last night to watch the latest Republican debate. Normally, when I flip these things on in passing (the GOP debates, I mean) it's just to make sure something miraculous hasn't happened and they started debating in truths rather than whatever fantasy world they live in. But alas, that moment never comes.

Well, while still not living in reality, this night had the makings of being different. After all, Rick Perry had bowed out just that morning and now the GOP Nomination Clown Car was down to four. Newt Gingrich's second ex-wife, Marianne, accused him of wanting an open marriage after he began an affair with his now third wife, Callista. And after two weeks of recounting Iowa caucus votes, we found out that Rick Santorum actually beat Mitt Romney, but since Iowa takes its voting so seriously and eight precincts worth of votes went missing, the recount will never be complete, so we'll never really know, will we?

I knew I was in for a long night when the first question out of the gate was directed at Newt and the open marriage accusation. And an angry, defiant Gingrich went after moderator John King for having the gall to ask such a question at the debate, blamed the media for attacking him and "protecting Barack Obama" and the crowd lapped it up and went along for the ride.

And I think that's what disgusted me most about this South Carolina debate - the audience was chomping at that red meat like there was no tomorrow. They were cheering Gingrich's "fuck you" attitude while simultaneously forgoing their Christian conservative selves in support of a thrice married, twice divorced, serial adulterer. Let alone the hootin' and hollerin' when Newt once again chose to go after welfare recipients (you know, because there are no white people on government assistance) to appease the blood thirsty crowd who'd left their torches and hoods at the coat check.

Somewhere along the line I felt my blood pressure rise and decided my health was more important than a futile exercise. I noticed the time was 8:36pm EDT, probably the longest I've sat through a GOP debate this season... and actually the first time I consciously tried. But to tell you the truth, besides the Newt opener and Santorum claiming victory in Iowa, the rest is a blur. It's hard to concentrate when you have blood boiling in your eyes.

Santorum Won?!

Well where the hell does this put the GOP presidential nomination race? It would seem that after a recount of the Iowa caucuses that gave Mitt Romney a slim eight vote victory shows that Rick Santorum actually won with a 34 vote edge. And it's still a clusterfuck.

Republican officials indicated Santorum finished ahead of Romney by 34 votes on Thursday. The Des Moines Register reports that votes from eight precincts will never be counted, however, and therefore the ultimate tally remains inconclusive.

...Officials found inaccurate counts in 131 precincts, including one that had an error by 50 votes, the Des Moines Register reported on Thursday.

Chad Olsen, the party’s executive director, told the Register that the results showed "a split decision." The final tallies, exempting the eight precincts that will not be tallied, were 29,839 for Santorum and 29,805 for Romney, according to the Register.

Boy, the Republican party is in such disarray that they can't even rig their own elections properly. And now what happens in South Carolina? With a couple of days left and Newt Gingrich's negative carpet bombing of Romney cutting his poll lead in half, anything can happen when you combine the fact that the GOP still can't stomach Newt.

One more thing: after this complete debacle in which the votes of eight precincts will never be counted, and errors exposed in practically every other precinct, can someone please explain to me why it is that we give a shit about Iowa?

Rick Perry Throws In the Towel

Texas Governor, GOP gaffe machine and Jethro Bodine doppelgänger Rick Perry is announcing he is dropping out of the race for the Republican nomination. Nothing like quitting while you're behind.

Reports say he will endorse Newt Gingrich.

SOPA & PIPA are Personal for Me

POSTED BY JHW22

Technically, SOPA is on hold in the House. PIPA is moving forward in the Senate -- there is a vote whether to discuss it or not, next week. There is a whole other bill in the Senate that is similar.

As a business owner who sells my own creative/intellectual property online, I am torn in two by all of this. I want my designs protected in a reasonable way. At the same time, I sell via sites that I need to be open for business 24/7.

The intent of the bills expand protection from existing laws to encompass international theft of intellectual rights. It's really about getting current with the global reality.

As a business owner who is effected either way by these bills, and as a social media user, my hopes are these:

1) All of Congress adjusts the language to protect free speech and deal with the new realities of how people communicate and share, while ensuring that the people who design/create aren't treated as donors. People who create for a living don't do it for free. Their work is less tangible than a couch or a saw blade or a shirt and therefore do need special consideration. However, the protection of the creative can't come at the cost of the very tools we use to sell.

2) American citizens, journalists and websites must stay CURRENT with the language of all these bills at each stage. Something that annoys me is when we, as a whole, keep yelling about a bill AFTER the language is changed. We lose so much when we don't keep up with changes and keep fighting about language that doesn't exist anymore. The process of passing a bill is longer and more complex than people have the attention span for. If this issue matters, people need to make sure they know what they're talking about at each step. Yelling about version one when we're already on version three is stupid.

3) I hope people will avoid letting the bad parts of any bill blind them to the good parts that are workable. We don't always need to throw a whole bill out. Sometimes we just need to re-work it. Maybe we need to re-work it a lot, but sometimes, that's all that's needed.

A must read, seriously.

POSTED BY JHW2212

If you are a regular reader of this blog, then you must read this article in the Guardian. Jonathan Freedland has nailed so many points like no one I've read.

Here's a tease:

The Republican shift is now towards an anti-government fervour that recalls the militia movement of the 1990s, convinced that every Washington move – even a plan to expand healthcare – is motivated by wickedness and constitutes a step towards tyranny. In that context, any action to thwart the government beast is justified. Such ideas were always around on the lunatic fringe, but they have entered and now dominate the Republican mainstream. Today's Republicans are less like a traditional political party and 'more like an apocalyptic cult'. There is a bitter irony here, that the party that insists it is conservative and patriotic now threatens the centuries-old political system that lies at the core of the US's national identity.

Perry Shows Off Alamo Boots

Seriously? (1:38 mark.)



I know the man is a joke, but if you want to be taken seriously for the highest office in the land, maybe you would think about wearing a pair of regular dress shoes, you goddamn shitkicker.

Hey, Y'all, Let's Move!

POSTED BY JHW22

I get annoyed by Republicans and their "personal responsibility" meme because so often, they preach it while they completely avoid living it. So often, the meme is really just a spiteful response to reasonable ideas. And at times, it's used in response to issues that aren't applicable to a single person. For example, smoking in public. It's NOT a personal responsibility issue when MY lungs are filled with YOUR smoke. See? See how personal responsibility sounds great but isn't realistically implemented because YOU have an impact on ME. My personal responsibility to not smoke is moot because your personal responsibility is to say, "Fuck it. I have the right to liberty and freedom and any shit I want to do because I'm a damn American". But, no. The idea of personal responsibility stops at your skin. Like it or not, your choices effect others. So, if you make poor choices that effect me, I DO get a say.

The underlying problem, as I see it, is that the element of spite is there in almost every single issue where Republicans try to encompass themselves with some make-believe shield of "I wanna and you can't stop me". Not locking a gun away from your kids just to spite gun control advocates. Turning on every light/appliance/TV in your house on Earth Day or driving an old truck that can't pass inspection to spite the clean air advocates. Choosing to feed your kid total crap to spite Michelle Obama.

At some point, the revered "personal responsibility" is replaced by spite.

So, what does a 60-something year old woman's eating habits have to do with personal responsibility or spite or me? If she eats poorly, how does that effect me?

Well, when that 60-year-old woman's entire career is built on eating unhealthy foods and enabling you, me and every obese person in America to eat unhealthy, then her personal responsibility crosses a line into either denial, enabling, greed, pride or all of the above.

Paula Deen was diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes. How long ago she was diagnosed, we don't know. But the scuttlebut is that she has known for quite a while and didn't disclose it. So, how does that effect others? Because she may have knowingly allowed people to keep eating in ways that cause serious harm to their bodies, that put a strain on the health care industry and that, in turn, effects the cost of health care for everyone. Not to mention the effects it has on a whole new generation of kids who have been taught that their personal responsibility is to eat more butter. These kids will have a much harder time re-learning how to eat.

I have NO CLUE what party Paula Deen votes for. I have NO CLUE if she is a "personal responsibility" Republican. But she is a perfect example of the abuse of the thinking that what you do only effects you. No, Ms. Deen. It effects millions of people when you promote a lifestyle that actually harms people. If you knew you had this food-related disease, why did you choose to pretend your role in society was irrelevant? Could you just not accept it? Could you just not figure out how to adapt your reality to the image you created? Could you not see the "personal responsibility" you had to your fans?

And through all of this Americans with spite and denial and pride, Michelle Obama has been educating kids and families about eating and exercising in realistic and healthy ways. She has been vilified for educating people. Her "personal responsibility" has been to set a good example of enjoying foods that aren't great for you -- in moderation. She has never said all Americans should eat only salads. But people despise her for suggesting we think and take personal responsibility for our health, and the health of our kids.

So, here we have two women. One who is beloved for her image of unhealthy. And one who is derided for her image of healthy. And yet, I imagine many of the same people who criticize Michelle Obama will come to the quick defense of Paula Deen.

So, you know what? Personal responsibility and spite don't mix. And in this case, it may actually kill someone.

Sully Gets It

POSTED BY JHW22

I know, I know. Andrew Sullivan comes with baggage. But for the last four years, he has made more sense than not, and far more sense than many people in all parties. Like him or not, Andrew Sullivan GETS President Obama. And it was nice hearing someone say what many of us have been saying for years. So, thanks, Sully. It was a pleasure having you express reality so clearly.

You can watch him on Hardball



or read his insight in Newsweek.

I would like to add, that when Chris Matthews asks why the Obama team doesn't shout his accomplishments, they do. The media just misses it, ignores it, or doesn't get the significance.

Thanks to The Obama Diary for getting this online so fast!

And There Goes the Sane One

POSTED BY JHW22


Jon Huntsman is withdrawing from the campaign in the morning.

OK, Republican friends, this guy was your most mature, sane, reasonable candidates. I have been telling you for years that your party was slipping from your grip. Do you realize that this man would have given Obama, and America, an honest, fair challenge to hear and think about?

If I were a Republican, I'd be really sad for my party. As an American, I am really sad what the Republican party is doing to America.

Cartoon of the Day

(H/T Bob Cesca)

An Open Letter to Arthur Brisbane

Here is my response to Arthur Brisbane, New York Times' Public Editor after his piece, "Should The Times Be a Truth Vigilante?" If you haven't read it yet, although I don't know how you may have missed it with all the hullabaloo about it, please follow the link.

Dear Mr. Brisbane:

"[Our readers] worry less about reporters imposing their judgment on what is false and what is true."

This line most struck me in your piece as an interesting take on what you feel is "judgment" as opposed to journalism. I was always under the impression that a reporter's job was not only to report on the facts of what they witnessed or heard, but also to distinguish between what is truth and what isn't.

The Mitt Romney example you put forth regarding his repeated accusation of President Obama "apologizing for America" is a perfect example. But let's take it one step further and ask the following: What if Mitt Romney had said that President Obama goes around the world insisting that the sky is green? Is the reporter bound to play stenographer and simply repeat the quote, or is he obligated to research the truthfulness of that quote in an effort to paint a more accurate picture? Facts are facts, opinions are opinions and lies are lies. The phrase "imposing their judgement" implies the reporter is giving their opinion and facts are secondary and inconvenient.

Maybe there is a difference between journalism and investigative journalism, but there shouldn't be. I would imagine a reporter wants to be as accurate as possible, and if that means researching to prove the subject of their story truthful or not, then in my opinion, that's what the job must entail. Otherwise, anyone can be a reporter simply by recording and transcribing an event.

Thanks,
Broadway Carl

And to me, that's the long and short of it. An entire online industry was born to fact check what journalists don't. Poltifact, Media Matters, FactCheck and others are watch dogs to what politicians, pundits and talking heads pass as news, but even some of them are now afraid to be labeled as biased toward the liberal end of the scale and try to play it down the middle. This was clearly evidenced by Politifact's 2011 Lie of the Year, calling the Democrats' accusation that the Paul Ryan economic plan would end Medicare as we know it, a falsehood.

Anyone looking at Ryan's plan would come to that conclusion - simply keeping the "Medicare" name while making the program an inadequate voucher system does not mean Medicare equals Medicare. I could shit in a box and gift wrap it, complete with a "Medicare" label on it. Does that make it Medicare? But I digress.

I agree with Tweeter @Shoq that the conversation is an important one, but I also understand the blowback when such a question need be asked, and that a reporter fact checking someone he/she is covering would be categorized as "truth vigilantism." There are still a majority of the population who rely on the fourth estate for their daily news. They assume what they read in major newspapers is fact. Opinion should be left in the editorial pages, but front page news must deal with the facts and be accurate. And I believe that it is the responsibility of the reporter to research the subject and double check the accuracy of the subject's statements.

Must Reads

Extreme Liberal: The Truth About ObamaCare!

Stephanie Cutter: Romney's Economic Record: Profit at Any Cost

John Cook: Fake Economist Ben Stein Sues Company for Discriminating Against Global Warming Deniers

Catharine Smith, HuffPo: White House Will Not Support SOPA, PIPA

Matt Taibbi: Everything You Need to Know About Wall Street, in One Brief Tale

President Obama's Weekly Address - January 14, 2012

Helping American Businesses Succeed

Talk About a Circle of Death!

This is strange... and a little sad.

Beijing (CNN) -- Microsoft is investigating a report that workers at a Chinese plant that makes its Xbox game systems threatened mass suicide in a pay dispute, according to a statement issued Wednesday by the company's Hong Kong office.

How bad does the workplace has to be for this kind of situation to develop? Another feather in the cap for unregulated free market capitalism. I'm not an anti-free market guy by any means, but I also don't appreciate a smaller piece of the pie for those who actually make the pie.

Dumbass Quote of the Day

“It’s astounding to me that the president is claiming these are recess appointments and within his authority, when Congress was not in fact in recess. These appointments are an affront to the Constitution. No matter how you look at this, it doesn’t pass the smell test. I hope the House considers my resolution as soon as we return to Washington so we can send a message to President Obama.”

—Rep. Diane Black (R-TN)

...As soon as we return to Washington from where, you goddamn moron? If the house is in session, shouldn't you be there?

Look, I'm not saying that they aren't technically pulling the "pro forma" stunt that Harry Reid did when George Bush was in office, but Democrats also didn't block every fucking confirmation vote the way the current 112th Congressional Republicans are obstructing every Obama nomination because they don't have the balls to put it up to a vote.

(H/T Chris U.)

Compare This To Standardized Tests

What. The. Fuck?!

Third graders in in Gwinnett County, Ga., were given math homework Wednesday that asked questions about slavery and beatings...

...Another math problem read, "If Frederick got two beatings per day, how many beatings did he get in one week?"

Another question asked how many baskets of cotton Frederick filled.

Oh, those silly, Georgia teachers, with their slavery beating and cotton picking questions. I suppose Frederick received the beatings for not filling enough baskets of cotton.

Must Reads

Zerlina Maxwell: Critics Say “Obama Could Rape A Nun” And Still Get Support

Muskegon Critic: Yeah, Cuz I'm The A$^hole.

Bob Cesca: Ron Paul Is No Friend to Progressives

Arthur Delaney: Dems Fire Back At GOP Proposals To Drug Test Jobless: 'You Pee In The Cup'

Jim Wright: Everybody’s So Different, I Haven’t Changed

Eugene Robinson: Romney’s not-a-mandate

Dana Milbank: Mitt Romney out of control

Jason Sparks: Cenk’d

President Obama's Weekly Address - January 7, 2012

Continuing to Grow the Economy in the New Year

Confession Time For Santorum

When I was growing up, I was told lying was a sin and since you have to confess your sins in the Catholic faith, I'm waiting for Rick Santorum to head for the nearest confessional.

A few days ago, GOP Presidential candidate Rick Santorum put his foot in his mouth by saying “I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money.”

Santorum allegedly made the controversial comments when discussing welfare in an interview Wednesday night with Fox News' Bill O'Reilly, but he maintained that people misheard the word "black" when he stumbled on a word.

“I looked at that, and I didn't say that. If you look at it, what I started to say is a word and then sort of changed and it sort of - blah - came out. And people said I said ‘black.’ I didn't," Santorum said while smiling away.

He said, "blah?"



Sounds like Newt Gingrich a few months ago: "Any ad which quotes what I said Sunday is a falsehood."

Oh, Rick. You can't have it both ways. Either you meant "black" to demonize the have-nots and push the the welfare queen meme (as if there aren't poor white people in this country) or you meant "poor." Either way, you're frothing up the base in an "us again them" class warfare mentality. But for a "blah" candidate, maybe he did say "blah."

Recess Par-TAY!

This is what happens when Republican opposition is only for reasons of trying to cripple the government under the Obama administration, be it the Consumer Protections Bureau, or the National Labor Relations Board to establish a quorum, or an ever growing number of vacancies in the federal judicial system (101 and counting). So enough is enough.

President Obama touched off a fierce election-year confrontation with Congressional Republicans on Wednesday, defying their deep opposition to appoint Richard Cordray as director of a new consumer protection agency and fill three labor board vacancies.

Whine all you want, Republicans, but refusing to even meet to vet or discuss nominations for positions to make the gears of government run is a bullshit move, and you can just fuck off.

“I refuse to take ‘no’ for an answer,” Mr. Obama said, adding, “I am not going to stand by while a minority in the Senate puts party ideology ahead of the people we were elected to serve.”

Oh, and there's also this:

"Despite the inevitable conservative complaints that President Obama is engaged in some kind of massive overreach by recess appointing Richard Cordray as the nation’s chief consumer financial protection watchdog, the truth is that Obama has used his recess appointment power very sparingly. After today’s appointment, President Obama will have made a total of 29 recess appointments. By comparison, George W. Bush made 171 recess appointments; Bill Clinton made 139 recess appointments; George H.W. Bush made 77 recess appointments; and Ronald Reagan made 243. When you divide these numbers by the number of years each man spent in the White House, it reveals that Obama is far and away the least likely president to invoke this power."

So yeah, fuck off, hypocrites.

Trump Takes Credit For Santorum and Bachmann

Say what now? Donald Trump hasn't been in the headlines for a week or so? Well, he'd better do something about that! We wouldn't want to forget about him, would we? So how about taking credit for Rick Santorum's frothy surge in the Iowa caucus last night?



Does Trump mean the debate that he backed out of because no one would be subjected to his idiocy? That debate? The one that didn't take place? I suppose that goes for Newt Gingrich as well, who was the first to accept Trump's invitation but came in fourth with 13% of the vote.

But not to leave well enough alone, he then explained why Michele Bachmann sank in the polls.



Ah, of course the reason Bachmann dropped in the polls wasn't her outlandish, gaffe prone rhetoric. Or that she would chest thump with Iran. It's because she denied The Donald and refused to kiss his debate ring. It has to be the only reason.

How many times in her life must Ivanka have uttered the phrase, "Daaaaaad... You're embarrassing me!!!"

Eight Votes

Oh, to be a fly on the wall of Romney campaign headquarters... What must they be saying behind the scenes after watching the results of the Iowa caucuses and realizing that they ended up in a statistical dead heat with Rick Santorum? Not Newt Gingrich. Not Ron Paul. Not Even Michele Bachmann or Rick Perry. RICK SANTORUM!

After Mitt Romney spent the equivalent of about $113 per vote compared to Santorum's $1.65 in the state, Mitt won the caucus by eight votes. EIGHT. He is so despised by the Republican establishment and the average GOP voter at large, that he can't even win the Iowa caucus in commanding fashion. He's been the perennial second place choice over Bachmann, Cain, Gingrich, Perry... hell, even Donald Trump was a front runner topping Mitt in early polls. But Romney has always been the bridesmaid, never the bride... until last night. And it was a shotgun wedding.

To put things in perspective, basically after four years of Iowa campaigning, Mitt did no better than he did in 2008. Actually, he did do better. He gained a total of 66 votes since 2008 when he finished in, you guess it, second place.

Eric Cantor Reveals His Phoniness

What a way to ring in the New Year!

If you watched 60 Minutes Sunday evening, you treated yourself to a "Get to know the real Eric Cantor" propaganda interview conducted by Lesley Stahl. In it, Cantor wanted to show you his personal side, complete with the family portrait, faded photos of the young couple soon to be Mr. & Mrs. Cantor in love, and a few tidbits of information courtesy of Cantor's son. He likes rap music, like JayZ and Lil' Wayne. (...Yeah, right.)

What turned out to be a complete sabotage and revealed Cantor to be a fraud was when Stahl asked Cantor about compromising, just as his "hero" Ronald Reagan had to do on occasion.



Who else was just as shocked as I was when hearing Cantor's press secretary yelling from off camera to dispute the fact, THE FACT, that Ronald Reagan actually raised taxes during his presidency? He exposed Cantor for the fraud we all know he is on national television. Did he think that 60 Minutes would edit that section out of the piece?! An interview at Cantor's home with his wife at his side, and his press secretary hanging on every word and making sure they don't violate Lord Norquist. Even Weeper Boehner came across better in his 60 Minute interview.

Happy New Year!

Look! An INSANE Republican Candidate!

No, not all of them... just lil' ol' Newt Gingrich for this:

"[Sarah Palin] is certainly one of the people you would look at [as a running mate.] I am a great admirer of hers, and she was a remarkable reform governor of Alaska. She's somebody who I think brings a great deal to the possibility of helping in government and that would be one of the possibilities. There are also some very important cabinet positions that she could fill very, very well. I can't imagine anybody that would do a better job of driving us to an energy solution than Gov. Palin, for example. Tell her that she would certainly be on the list of one of the people we would consider."

If ever there was a wingnut pander in the face of free falling poll numbers, this is the mother of all panders. Sarah Fucking Palin, Newt? Seriously?

The only other thought that comes to mind is that Gingrich is purposely sabotaging his campaign because he never really wanted to be President in the first place. This was all a ruse to increase his exposure for the latest book sale. It's all about money for Newt, and since his child labor law schtick didn't implode his candidacy, you know because the current GOP voting public has gone bats hit crazy, why not throw Palin into the mix?

(H/T Chez Pazienza)

Look! A Sane Republican Candidate!

If he had any shot of gaining in the polls, speaking the truth blew it.

Jon Huntsman made one thing abundantly clear after a campaign stop in Portsmouth on Friday – he has no doubt that Barack Obama was born in America.

"The president was born in the United States – end of conversation," Huntsman said.

It's a shame he's polling at 11% in the state in which he's been putting all his eggs.

Must Reads

E.J. Dionne: Obama: The conservative in 2012

Greg Sargent: Mitt Romney’s Casual, Effortless Falsehoods

Charles P. Pierce: "Appearing to Be a Racist" — a Strategy Still

Bob Cesca: What Does Ron Paul Stand For?

Andrew Roberts: You’re No Thatcher!

Emily S. Rueb: Violet the Red-Tailed Hawk Is Dead

JM Ashby: He Didn’t Write The Newsletters? And His Book?

President Obama's Weekly Address - December 31, 2011

Working Together in the New Year

Quote of the Day

Here's another Ted Sorensen quote to stick in your back pocket the next time someone uses the right wing "class warfare" jab, from "Why I Am A Democrat."

"Democrats have no wish to turn millionaires into paupers. Indeed, they do not object to the rich getting richer, particularly when their creative talents, energetic efforts, and sound investments enlarge the national pie for everyone to share... What Democrats dislike is the rich getting richer at the expense of everyone else, particularly those whose labor in helping to enlarge the pie but who receive a smaller piece in return."

Read this book!

Romney Son A Birther?

They just won't let it go.

Appearing in New Hampshire as a surrogate for his father, Matt Romney suggested to a group of voters that Mitt Romney would not release his tax returns until Barack Obama released “his grades and his birth certificate."

[Responding to the question of whether Mitt Romney will release his tax returns, Matt Romney said,] "He has not said that he will not do it. He has also not said that he will. It’s a matter of time until that issue comes up because I think everyone has to get a chance to do that. So I don’t know the answer to that. I’m not sure he knows the answer to that. But he will do everything that he needs to do. He’s certainly not afraid of anything. Hiding anything. I heard someone suggest the other day that as soon as President Obama releases his grades and birth certificate and sort of a long list of things then maybe he’d do it."

Where do I begin?

1- President Obama has released his birth certificate.

2- If he's going to represent his father, Matt Romney should know what his father said regarding the release of his tax returns just last week.

“I will provide all the financial info, which is an extraordinary pile of documents which show investments and so forth.”

“But you won’t do the tax returns?” asked Chuck Todd, host of “The Daily Rundown.”

“I don’t intend to release the tax returns. I don’t,” Mr. Romney responded.

3- Nothing will sink a national campaign faster than giving any credence to Birtherism. Even your dad thinks it's silly, Matt.

And now, as I write this post that I haven't had time to publish yet, Matt Romney has already apologized for his comment, albeit via Twitter:

One of Mitt Romney's sons is expressing regret for a joke about President Obama's birth certificate.

"I repeated a dumb joke," Matt Romney tweeted today. "My bad."

I suppose the Romney campaign has no tolerance for idiotic talk... just your average flip-flopping.

Dumbass Quote of the Day

“If you graduate from high school, you get married before you have children, and of course you work — that’s sort of a given, you have to work — you do those three things, there’s a 2 percent chance you’ll be in poverty."

~Rick Santorum, campaigning in Iowa.

Someone should let Rick Santorum know that poor people get married too. And oh, yeah, screw same sex marriages, those people deserve to be in poverty, right, Rick?

My Pet Peeves of 2011

POSTED BY JHW22

The media breaking that OBL was killed before Obama had a chance to tell us.

The GOP cutting government jobs then uses those job losses as proof that unemployment is Obama's fault.

People who have STILL not read the NDAA bill and STILL think Obama is going to personally lock them up in concentration camps indefinitely. The biggest part of the pet peeve: I'm not talking about Michele Bachmann and Victoria Jackson. I am talking about people who think Glenn Greenwald, Cenk Uygur, et al, have told them everything they need to know.

The 9-9-9 Plan.

I'd say Rick Perry, but as my governor, he's my pet peeve every year.

The fact that Glenn Beck lives near me now and I fear I may see him at my favorite chicken fried steak restaurant some day.

The Supreme Court Justices who think it's OK to hob-nob with players in extremely significant and controversial cases they will hear just in time for an extremely significant election.

Not being able to trust journalists/pundits I used to be able to count on for fair perspectives. Reporting on Obama is increasingly lacking in the full perspective by many people I USED to think presented better information. Makes me wonder if they tell the whole story on other issues. That doubt is why I stopped watching them for the most part.

The words: caved, grow a pair, grow a spine, get tough, etc.

Hyperbole, in general. Even when I use it.

Historical low public opinion of Congress makes a blanket statement of members who are actually very good and doing their jobs. It bothers me that people like Sherrod Brown, Debbie W-S and others, are graded in the same clump as Louie Gohmert and Eric Cantor.

Americans who blame Obama for the GOP's obstinacy. Because he said he'd try to change the tone, he was apparently the only one expected to work toward that.

Newt and Calista Gingrich using the Presidency as cover for their money-raising scheme.

Mitt Romney for being a dud. He could at least bring some fun to his campaign so disliking him would be more like disliking an opposing football team and less like disliking a plain, gray rock that tripped you.

Speaking of football, and this is really not a pet peeve because it's far more than that: football coaches who allow violence towards kids. Whether they personally committed the violence or didn't do anything to help prevent more.

I just realized, it's hard to distinguish pet peeves from really bad shit this year. So on that note, I think I'll end my pet peeves list and start preparing my "Hopes for 2012" list. Better energy.

Happy New Year, Y'all!

Brain Dump

POSTED BY JHW22

It's been a while since I posted and I have a million thoughts swimming in my head. So, since Broadway Carl is nice enough to give me the key, I thought I'd let myself in and dump all these thoughts and be done with it. So, here goes:

Rick Perry says that when he's the President, he'll "shut down" the border (with Mexico) within 100 days. I love how the anti-Big Government guy says that when he's Big Government he'll do what he couldn't do as Medium Government. And if he were President and if his replacement as Governor didn't want Big Government coming into the state, then what? See, there's a problem when you always say Big Government is bad and that states are the shiznit. And then you, as the Big Gun of The Big Shiznit State, can't shut the shiznit down without begging the Big Government to do it for you. And all the while you've been wanting Federal employees to get a freeze/cut in pay or lose their jobs altogether and or lose some of their benefits. Oh, wait, those same people you want to lose their jobs or pay are the very people the Big Government needs to send into your big shiznit state. So, how's that gonna work for ya? Good thing we'll never find out.

*****

Speaking of Rick "Keep Big Government Out -- Until I am Big Government" Perry, he wants to force rape and incest victims to be blocked from accessing abortions. Now, in some ways, at least this is consistent. I never understood how someone who said the SANCTITY OF LIFE was so damn precious that a piece of tissue was the essence of life, could then throw in a moral exception for rape or incest. Either you think that baby is more sacred than its mommy or you don't. So in that regard, his revelation (a week before a really important campaign trip) at least is consistent with his SANCTITY OF LIFE ideas. But here's the problem. Rick Perry hasn't been raped and impregnated. Yes, there are women who are raped who give birth and give their babies to loving families. Or there are women who are raped and choose to make something good of something horrible. And those women raise their children with love and respect and no angst whatsoever over the conception trauma. If I met a woman like that, I would bow to her in awe. A woman like that would have to be kind and loving and selfless in her love for her child. That, as a mom myself, is commendable. But what about the women who are held at gunpoint, and cut with knives and left for dead after being raped by more than one man? The women who lock themselves away from the outside and jump at the sound of the mail truck outside. What about the women who can barely move on with life, let alone nurture a growing child inside. A child she may not consider a child because she doesn't think life begins at conception. What about that woman? Those women? Let's honor the children of rape as survivors. Let's be glad they had a chance at life despite the first step in getting them here. But let's not ask every woman to be strong enough to get through nine months if she can't even get through the first nine days.

******

Riding on his tour bus with his wife and Wolf Blitzer, Mitt Romney was saying that Obama has been so bad for the economy, yadda, yadda, yadda. Then he did something that makes me scream. You see, one of my biggest pet peeves about politicians is when they make definitive statements (like "Obama has been bad for the economy") yet, when CBO data is presented to them to show the opposite (like Wolf did to Romney) they say, "I'll take a look at that, but...". NO! If you've formed an opinion about Obama's policies, you should ALREADY have read the CBO data. The CBO data is one of the most trusted, accurately processed data in the country. PERIOD.


******

My last thought of the evening is about Rachel Maddow screaming for days about us needing a ticker-tape parade. I had to stop listening because it bothered me so much. Do I want to show our appreciation for the troops? YES. But before we spend a lot of money on confetti and road closures, can we make sure each man or woman coming home has a job? Or a home? Can we make sure their medical needs are met? And before we have a big celebration, can we wait until every troop comes home from that OTHER war? That other war that many who have come from Iraq may very well be shipped off to soon. Can we show we respect the men and women who have fought these long wars by DOING MORE than a parade? Please?

And considering Rachel is the only major media person I have heard saying this for days, you can imagine who popped into my head today when I heard all these damn GOP candidates complaining that Obama hasn't thrown the returning troops a parade. Thanks Rachel. Thanks a frickin' lot. This is why I get frustrated with Rachel. As much as I adore her, she drives me crazy. Why can't some of that "we want a parade" energy be directed toward giving us phone numbers and websites of resources where we can help returning troops and their families. I am sure many troops would LOVE a parade. Let's just wait until we can have it for all of them, and until we've done everything else for them that we can. Okie doke?

****

Disclaimer: this was a quickly-typed brain dump so screw it if there are typos. You get my points or you don't.

Our Voting Reality

I just came across a Facebook post linking to a Glenn Greenwald article titled, "Vote Obama – if you want a centrist Republican for US president." Knowing Greenwald's work, I declined to read the Guardian article. But I did rebut my Facebook friend who'd commented on his post with, "I've been saying this all along."

My response:  "Sure, you can say that. But if you DON'T vote Obama, you'll have an extreme right wing conservative Republican to take his place. And you'll have no one to thank but yourself."

The reality is that, whether we like it or not, we participate in a two party system.

I picked up a book that everyone should read, but unfortunately it's out of print. Still, look for it on Amazon or a used book store... maybe even the public library. It's called "Why I Am A Democrat" written by Ted Sorensen. The same Ted Sorensen who was President John F. Kennedy’s special counsel, adviser and speechwriter. And the main reason why I responded to my friend the way I did, was eloquently written by Sorensen just 11 pages into his book, published in 1996, at the height of the Newt Gingrich controlled House of Representatives. Substitute a name here and there, and it could have been written yesterday. I'm including it here because no amount of paraphrasing can do it justice. (Emphasis mine.)

...I have always deemed it an obligation of citizenship to cast a vote for that better major party candidate, however deeply disappointed I may have been for some of his positions or actions and however skeptical I may have been about any likely improvement.

I understand why many people find voting the lesser of two evils objectionable. But it is necessary to remind ourselves that voting for a third-ticket candidate with no reasonable prospects of victory can only help the "more evil" of the two major candidates become President.

Nor are the two presidential candidates ever equally "evil" - or equally "good." Any voter who reads or listens with care can discern important differences in how they would behave in moments of crisis and in whom each would appoint to high office, important differences in how each would lead and would react to the failures and frustrations of leadership. In some election years, these differences may seem small and the choice unappealing. But a choice must be made.

Moreover, Independent candidates - with or without temporary tailor-made third parties - who say they are "above" politics or who substitute personal piety and pleasing platitudes for hard decisions on controversial political issues are usually either naive or hypocritical and would almost certainly be doomed to failure in the Oval Office. Deadlocks and delays in Washington and the inadequate response to knotty problems like the decline in family economic security are not simply the result of failed personalities, waiting to be reminded by personal strength and charm. I do not want to be "rescued" from politics by a white knight unable or unwilling to balance a ticket, make a deal, form a coalition, compromise a policy, trade a favor, and displease a lot of people. Politics, with all its need for reform, is still the fiber with which democracy is woven, the grease that enables the wheels of government to turn, the cement that binds a diverse and disparate country. Most members of Congress will not long listen to a President who constitutionally lacks the legal authority to lead without them and politically lacks the practical tools to lead with them.

If an independent or third party candidate - or, worse yet, several of them - did in fact win enough states to block an electoral vote majority, for either major party nominee, the President would be chosen by the House of Representatives on a one state, one vote basis, a surefire route o an undemocratic, bitterly divided process that would leave the winner with a faint mandate and a fragmented nation.

There is still another option for disaffected voters: stay home on election day in order to send a message of protest. But that "message" is not distinguishable from those sent by 100 million others, most of whom are not protesting or disgusted or disillusioned, but simply too busy or lazy, too ill informed or unconcerned, too tired or far from home, to go to the polls. Disappointed protesters failing to vote, only help the candidate whom they would most protest, while increasing within their own party the proportionate influence of those who disappointed them.

So with respect to all the Greenwalds and the Hamshers, et al, the choices are not the same. Listen and read what President Obama is talking about. Listen and read what the prospective Republican nominees are currently talking about. How can you say they're both the same?

Can we please stop with that "both sides are the same" meme? Look at any of the Republican candidates and ask yourself if any of them would have repealed DADT, passed health care legislation, ended the Iraq War, passed consumer finance reform, and the myriad of other things that have been accomplished under President Obama's watch. It's a no-brainer, folks.

Crazy Lady

Just read and shake your head in amazement.

Former "Saturday Night Live" actress Victoria Jackson, working on confidential information she as a web talk show host has special clearance to obtain, has claimed that the United States is being overtaken by radical Muslims bent on bringing the nation under Sharia law.

Yes, Virginia. There IS a Santa Claus!

Nebraska "Democratic" Senator Ben Nelson is retiring.

The 70-year-old conservative Democrat, whose seat is being heavily targeted by Republicans in 2012, said in a statement that "while I relish the opportunity to undertake the work that lies ahead, I also feel it’s time for me to step away from elective office, spend more time with my family, and look for new ways to serve our state and nation."

"Therefore, I am announcing today that I will not seek re-election," he said. "Simply put: It is time to move on."

This story is being spun as a blow to Democrats, with Republicans needing to net four seats to regain control of the Senate in 2012. But really, if you look at Nelson's voting record, is this other than good news for Democrats? Nelson may have a "D" after his name, but on the big votes he could not be counted on.

Gingrich View on Confederate Flag

Does Gingrich think South Carolina should fly the Confederate flag on its capitol? I'll give you one guess.

“I have a very strong opinion. It’s up to the people of South Carolina.”

Why would anyone be surprised with his answer? After all, this is an "historian" who wrote a trilogy of alternate history novels in which the Confederacy won the Civil War. But hey, at least he's against slavery.

Must Reads

Benjamin Wittes: NDAA FAQ: A Guide for the Perplexed

Chris Chase: Braylon Edwards Gave 79 Students $10,000 for College

The Rude Pundit: Politifact and The Lie of The Lie

Justin Rosario: A Very Merry Fox Christmas: Obama’s Christmas Card Just Isn’t American Enough

Tom McMahon: Merry Christmas, Middle Class! House Republicans Just Voted To Raise Your Taxes By $1,000

Dana Milbank: Braveheart Republicans? Or false-hearted?

Eugene Robinson: Which Candidate Should Answer That 3 a.m. Phone Call?

BooMan: Wanker of the Day: Charles Krauthammer

Dino Grandoni: Perry's Latest Oops Moment: 'Kim Jong the Second'

Jonathan Chait: When Did Liberals Become So Unreasonable? - If every Democratic president disappoints, maybe there’s something wrong with our expectations. Tough love from a fellow traveler.

President Obama's Weekly Address - December 24, 2011

The President and First Lady Thank our Troops for their Service this Holiday

Dumbass Quote of the Day

“I’ve talked to enough members over the last 24 hours who believe that, ‘Hey, we don’t like this two month extension [but] if you can get this fixed, why not do the right thing for the American people, even though it’s not exactly what we want.”

~John Boehner, Speaker of the House, explaining why House Republicans decided to cave on the temporary extension of the payroll tax cut after painting themselves into a corner.

As one of my readers posited regarding the bold text above, "Let's mull that over for a minute."

"...Why not do the RIGHT THING for the American people, even though it's NOT EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT?" For someone who's fond of using the phrase, "We're here to do the people's work," he sure has a tendency to disregard what the people actually want.

Fair and Balanced (The Brent Bozell Is a Racist Edition)

Judge for yourself:

Bozell appeared on Hannity as part of the show's weekly "Media Mash" segment to talk about purported mainstream media failings. After listening to a clip of MSNBC host Chris Matthews saying that Newt Gingrich "looks like a car bomber," Bozell responded:

BOZELL: How long do you think Sean Hannity's show would last if four times in one sentence, he made a comment about, say, the President of the United States, and said that he looked like a skinny, ghetto crackhead? Which, by the way, you might want to say that Barack Obama does. Everybody on the left would come forward and demand he be fired within five minutes for being so insulting towards a leader of the United States.

Really? Well, that skinny, ghetto crackhead took out Bin Laden, something the previous dry drunk, coke head couldn't do. ...See how easy that is? And disgusting?

I Can't Believe This Is Still Going On

What a waste of time and money.

The so-called birther movement was dealt another legal blow Thursday when a federal appeals court tossed out a lawsuit challenging President Barack Obama's U.S. citizenship and his eligibility to serve as commander in chief...

...The lawsuit was filed in 2009 by 40 plaintiffs, including conservative activists Alan Keyes and Wiley Drake, who ran for president and vice president respectively as members of the American Independent Party against Obama in 2008.

Alan Fucking Keyes. This is just disgraceful. What was that thing about frivolous lawsuits they constantly harp about?

Just Say "Oops" and Get Out (The House GOP Payroll Tax Cut Fiasco Edition)

What the hell happened? How is it that the Republican "We'll-Slit-Our-Wrists-Before-We-Raise-Taxes-All-Hail-Grover-Norquist" Party found themselves on the wrong side of a tax cut issue?

House Republicans have privately offered up the terms of their surrender on the payroll tax cut, pending sign off from their notoriously unwieldy caucus...

...After conceding for weeks, the Dems finally said this far and no further — and actually meant it. You read that right.

And there is the crux of the issue. For the last year, Republicans decided that to defeat President Obama in 2012, they were going to be the Party of No, even on issues with which they agreed. They would grind the gears of government to a halt, economy and the American people be damned, just to regain control of the White House with whatever clown du jour would rise to the top of the GOP primary elections.

And for a while it worked. The President, whether you agreed with him or not, would make compromises with the intransigent Republicans because unlike them, he wasn't prepared to throw his fellow Americans under the bus. Some called it "pragmatism," some called it "caving." Either way, President Obama never stopped trying to make it work. He never walked away from the table, unlike others.

But there's a problem when you go all-in on every hand. Eventually, your bluff is going to be called. You can't have the winning hand every single time. And the pot the House Republicans eventually lost is any possible credibility with the voting public. What they could possibly have been thinking in their push to kill the payroll tax cut is anyone's guess. Perhaps it's Obama Derangement Syndrome kicking in at such a high level, they believed their own bullshit that anything the President says or does must be a bad thing, therefore it must be opposed. Even if it means rejecting issues and policies that the GOP has historically been in favor of.

So today they thought better of it and they've finally decided to fold a hand, but wagered too much in the process. Time will tell how much this will harm their chances in 2012, but judging by Congressional Republican approval ratings, my guess is that they're in for a rude awakening come November.

Let The Feeding Frenzy Begin

When the Wall Street Journal... the Rupert Murdoch owned, conservative Wall Street Journal is shaking its head at the John Boehner "led" House of Representatives (AKA Lord of the Flies), you know you're in trouble.

The GOP leaders have somehow managed the remarkable feat of being blamed for opposing a one-year extension of a tax holiday that they are surely going to pass. This is no easy double play...

...At this stage, Republicans would do best to cut their losses and find a way to extend the payroll holiday quickly. Then go home and return in January with a united House-Senate strategy that forces Democrats to make specific policy choices that highlight the differences between the parties on spending, taxes and regulation.

Now I don't really agree with this op-ed's point of view as to why the House GOP should cut their losses, but they certainly got it right in that Boehner and Co. have painted themselves into a corner, and should retreat and live to fight another day. Sometimes you have to know when to fold your hand. But for some reason, they think seem to think the best strategy is to go all-in every time. The problem with that strategy is that eventually, someone is going to call your bluff.

Cartoon of the Day

Just Say "Oops" and Get Out (The Romney/Osama Bin Laden Edition)

Via Political Wire:

"I do not concur in the words of Barack Obama in a plan to enter an ally of ours... I don't think those kinds of comments help in this effort to draw more friends to our effort."

-- Mitt Romney, quoted by Reuters in 2008, on the United States entering Pakistan to kill Osama bin Laden.

"I think other presidents and other candidates like myself would do exactly the same thing."

-- Romney, in an interview on MSNBC earlier today, downplaying credit for Obama for ordering the raid in Pakistan that finally killed Osama bin Laden.

Another Example of Boehner Leadership (Kill C-SPAN Edition)

How cowardly can the House Republicans and House Weeper John Boehner get? Cowardly enough to prevent as vote on the Senate payroll tax holiday that passed with huge bipartisan support, adjourn for the day completely ignoring Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer at the podium... and then cutting off the C-SPAN feed.

“We regret, Mr. Speaker, that you have walked off the platform without addressing this issue of critical importance to this country,” Hoyer added.

Moments later, the mic appeared to cut out. A few seconds after that, the video feed switched away from the House floor to a still image of the Capitol Dome. It appears someone in House Speaker John Boehner’s (R-OH) office cut the feed, as C-SPAN tweeted afterwards: “C-SPAN has no control over the U.S. House TV cameras – the Speaker of the House does.”

Transparency, indeed.

Go To NewtGingrich.com

You'll like what you'll see.

Gingrich owns Newt.org, but NewtGingrich.com is controlled by someone with very different motives.

The website alternately redirects to a slew of websites with negative association to Newt: from the homepage of Tiffany, to the Freddie Mac homepage, to negative news articles about his campaign.

Try it: NewtGingrich.com

So, hey, come up with a Plan B

POSTED BY JHW22

Within hours of Secretary Sebelius denying an application to make a morning after pill available, over the counter, to girls under 17, women's rights groups went ape shit on their fellow woman's rights advocate. Ignoring their own previous appreciation of Secretary Sebelius' years of advocacy and ardent support of reproductive rights, she was enemy number one and she was playing "politics".

I called bullshit right away.

My take has always been that the ball was dropped by the FDA and the pharmaceutical company, NOT Secretary Sebelius. It's easy to blame her because she did the hard thing. But the anger should be directed toward the folks who rushed the data and the application.

The same people who acted as if the FDA was infallible should be SCREAMING about Yaz. We can't say the FDA is perfect on this issue and condemn them for allowing women, like my friend, Heather, to suffer a stroke because of her reproductive choices.

I also found the cries of her playing politics extremely hollow when just days prior to her being accused of playing politics, she denied a grant to Catholic Bishops because they didn't provide access to family planning centers in their human trafficking resource program. As someone who cares a great deal for programs to combat and aid victims of human trafficking, this hurt my heart. But I completely understand that women victims of trafficking need full access to full health care. How does the Secretary who was willing to make that Solomon choice, suddenly become the enemy playing politics?

The issues the Seretary faces aren't easy. They are going to piss someone off. To accuse her of playing politics because you don't like the choice she made is lame and ignorant of complexities.

I think the real politics were being played by women's rights groups who focused so much on one aspect, that may have inadvertantly caused harm to the very girls they are trying to help.

This issue can be resolved if the women's groups put the politics aside and make every decision thoroughly and with great care and foresight. I commend Secretary Sebelius for keeping the bigger picture in mind despite being accused of playing politics. No women should play any part of a political game at the sake of the girls.

And if I lose my feminist card for this, so be it. I'll go with my plan B and join a group of logical people who care that the girls are spoken up for in more ways than one.

A Small Price To Pay

So once again, Weeper of the House John Boehner shows his toothless bite when it comes to bringing his side of the aisle in line for a vote not to raise taxes. Yes, you read that correctly, NOT TO RAISE TAXES.

The Senate came together to pass a two month extension of the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance by a bipartisan vote of 89-10, and while that may not be an ideal situation, it staves off an automatic increase on taxes for 160 million Americans when the current payroll tax cut expires, hardly something to sneeze at in the current economic state of affairs. But that wasn't good enough for Tea Party Republicans who rejected the bill.

“When we met last week, Speaker Boehner requested that Senator McConnell and I work out a compromise,” [Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid said, referring to the minority leader, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. “Neither side got everything they wanted, but we forged a middle ground that passed the Senate by an overwhelming bipartisan majority.”

Well, that was last week, Senator Reid. This week Boehner's got new marching orders from the extreme right.

This may be easy for me to say, but if having taxes raised (yes, Republicans are sitting idly by and breaking the Norquist code of raising taxes at any cost) is what needs to happen to make the general public aware of how intransigent the current Republican Party has become, and the result is a mass termination of House GOP jobs via the 2012 election, then it's a small price to pay for progress.

The House is currently in session to have another vote by 6:30pm which Boehner expects to fail. The system isn't broken. The Republican Party is broken.