Immune To Facts

Usually, I don't read or post comments on YouTube under President Obama's weekly addresses because they are filled with moronic, non-thinking statements - and really, who wants to be subjected on a Saturday morning to the fact that almost half the country's citizens are either brainwashed by the Fox News/Rush Limbaugh faction, or are complete morons, idiots and racists, or a combination of all of the above?

But after watching President Obama's innocuous address today regarding the remembrance of our troops on this Memorial Day weekend, I went against my better judgment and decided to see who could possibly disagree with the President on something as nonpartisan as "supporting the troops." That was my first mistake. The vitriol was palpable, you know, because there are those who insist on disagreeing with the President about everything. And so after reading a few comments from the Obama haters, I had to chime in and got into a debate with another commenter.

The following is what I can put together in hopefully the correct chronological order. I've also included links to references I made that aren't allowed in YouTube comments.

Broadway Carl: It's pretty amazing to see such ridiculously nasty comments regarding this particular video message. The hatred against this President astonishes me, even when he's making a statement about honoring the fallen on Memorial Day; a simple, mundane message that has been repeated by every President before our current one. And yet some will call this political exploitation. Those same idiots would also criticize him had he not made this type of statement. Q: How do you live with such hatred day to day? 

Joey Juarez 1: To quote Queen Moochelle Obama, it sounds like for the first time in your adult life, you are proud of your country, Carl...and what is amazing is that this president will single-handedly bring this country to it's knees and you don't care at all about that... 

BC: People like you say stuff like that all the time, joeyjuarez1, but you never have any facts to back it up. President Obama will "single-handedly bring this country to its knees"? How? By saving the auto industry? By destroying Al-Qaeda? By cutting taxes for 95% of all Americans? By stopping us from going over the financial cliff we were headed for? Prove it and stop talking in simplistic GOP/Fox News talking points. Don't just parrot what someone else says because you want to believe it, prove it. 

JJ1: He "saved" the auto industry???? Dude, he threw tens of thousands of non-union auto workers under the bus! Now that $85 million dollar bail out is part of the $6 Trillion dollar debt that he's racked up "single-handedly"!! AND he brags about it! 

BC: Auto bailout facts from 8/25/11 LA Times: "After a massive restructuring and several high-profile bankruptcies, a leaner, more aggressive auto industry is making a comeback, hiring workers and ramping up manufacturing plants. From a trough 2 years ago, Ford, General Motors, Chrysler and other auto companies have added almost 90K manufacturing jobs, a 14% increase, according to federal employment data." 

Every economist agrees over one million manufacturing related jobs were saved.

JJ1: Oh, wow...this dude...the LA Times?? The articles says "TAXPAYERS bailed out much of the U.S. auto industry. Now the CARMAKERS MIGHT be what saves the nation's economy from falling back into recession." Remove your blind Choombama cataracts and put your glasses on and learn to read and not "spin" the facts...what a liberal!

I'll pause at this point to point out that he's called me "dude" twice, referred to Michelle Obama as "Queen Moochelle," apparently in reference to the false meme that she's some kind of moocher, and now calls President Obama "Choombama." I don't even know what the fuck that means. But we continue:

BC: Yes, I used the conservative LA Times to make a point. And I did point out the article is 9 months old. But who made the decision? And if it was such a bad one, why is Romney trying to take credit for it when he originally wrote an op-ed titled, "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt"? And before you say that it was structured bankruptcies that he was in favor of, remember that there was no private equity flowing - even Bain passed on it. So the government was the only solution. Hell, even Bush knew that.

JJ1: He destroyed Al-Qaeda (this from a man who didn't want them referred to as "terrorists")...he is sending 1.5 BILLION DOLLARS in military aid to the Muslim Brotherhood...and the terrorism continues...


BC: If you're going to claim funds going to the Muslim Brotherhood, you should read up on these pesky little things called facts instead of Breitbart or Beltway Pundit.
 

From The Guardian: "US officials and lawmakers said Sec of State Clinton has determined that it's in the US national interest to allow $1.3 billion in military assistance to flow. She also certified that Egypt is meeting its obligations to the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty, which frees up an additional $200 mil in economic aid... All of the $1.3 billion in foreign military financing is obligated to pay U.S. defense and security companies for contracts they have to supply equipment and support for the Egyptian military." 

So no, it's not going to the Muslim Brotherhood. Good try, though.

 

Need I mention Osama Bin Laden is dead? Maybe, but I didn't.

JJ1: There you go, leaving out facts to "spin" the article your way once again...the beginning of the article says: "The OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TOLD CONGRESS on Thursday it will waive democracy requirements to release up to $1.5 billion in aid to Egypt despite concerns that the country is backsliding on commitments it made to democratic governance and rule of law." Read and don't spin, stupid!

BC: Continue reading, jackass. It's going to US contractors. "All of the $1.3 billion in foreign military financing is obligated to pay U.S. defense and security companies for contracts they have to supply equipment and support for the Egyptian military." Not the government, not the Muslim Brotherhood, the military.
 

My main point remains: the guy can't even commend the troops on Memorial Day without guys like you criticizing it as some ulterior motive. You'd think everyone would agree with something so nonpartisan, but no. Hate and fear trumps even thanking the troops.

JJ1: Carl, buddy, you're missing the point...this guy has lied over and over and over again that when we see him on camera, when we hear his lying voice and false words filled with false promises, we can't help but scorn everything that comes out of his mouth...like one politician stated to Choombama 'YOU LIE!!!" and he continues to lie and you believe him... 

BC: Joey, I'm asking you to show me what he's lied about. Give me one example where he's been caught in a red handed lie, you know, like Romney saying Obama has "doubled the deficit." Just give me a few examples if he's lied so much. 

JJ1: So, Carl, do you REALLY think that Obama has our best interests at heart? Are you really buying into the lie that things are getting better? One only needs to look around and see what is really going on all around us...businesses closing down, multiple families living together to make ends meet, not being able to travel across town to see relatives because gas is too high, opting for no-name brand products at grocery stores, less out-to-eat evenings or "sharing plates" at restaurants...really? 

BC: Yes, I do. Maybe it's not as fast as we'd like, but things are getting better. Unemployment is slowly coming down. The only reason it isn't lower is because public sector work is being slashed, you know, that "smaller government" stuff. We were losing 700,000 jobs a month 3½ years ago. Stock market is up 5000 points in the last 3 years. Retail and growth are up. Gas prices are down from this time last year and have dropped the last seven weeks in a row (not that any administration can affect gas prices directly, that's just another straw man argument). 

JJ1: The WSJ: Number of the Week: Half of U.S. Lives in Household Getting Benefits - "As of early 2011, 15% of people lived in a household that received food stamps, 26% had someone enrolled in Medicaid and 2% had a member receiving unemployment benefits. Families doubling up to save money or pool expenses also is likely leading to more multigenerational households. But even without the effects of the recession, there would be a larger reliance on government." 

The Census data show that 16% of the population lives in a household where at least one member receives Social Security and 15% receive or live with someone who gets Medicare. There is likely a lot of overlap, since Social Security and Medicare tend to go hand in hand, but those percentages also are likely to increase as the Baby Boom generation ages.

With increased government spending comes the need to pay for it, and if taxes aren’t going to increase that means deficits. Nearly three-quarters of Americans blame the U.S. budget deficit on spending too much money on federal programs, according to a Gallup poll last year, but when the conversation turns to which programs to cut, the majorities are harder to find. For example, 56% of respondents oppose making significant changes to Social Security or Medicare.

The more people who receive benefits, the harder it’s going to be to make cuts, and it’s never popular to raise taxes. In some respects that argues for letting a combination of tax increases and spending cuts that is set to automatically hit in 2013 take effect. There’s just one problem: the Congressional Budget Office says it would sink the economy into recession.

BC: I agree with your entire last comment. So where is the lie? The CBO also says that Obama's current budget would decrease the debt by $2 trillion over 10 years, while Romney's would raise the debt $5 trillion over the same period. But it's Obama that's pointed to as spending like a drunken sailor when he's lowered the budget each of the last three years.  

JJ1: The Food Stamp President 

BC: So those people that you just used as an example of things not getting better, you'd cut off their government assistance until they get back on their feet? 

JJ1: Senator Obama crossed the country promising that his campaign, and administration would be the most transparent in history. He promised that he wouldn’t allow lobbyists in his staff, or money in his funds. That was in 2007, as it stands today the President has accepted millions of dollars from lobbyists and special interest groups. The President even took it one step farther by appointing many of those lobbyists into positions of power and influence. 

BC: I'm not entirely happy with it, but hey, it's politics.  

"...another watchdog, Meredith McGehee of the Campaign Legal Center, praised Obama’s rules as “a good starting place” and urged patience in judging their efficacy. 

“Any good set of ethics rules has the opportunity for waivers, but if the waivers become the rule, rather than the exception, then you have to look at whether the waivers are being sought too frequently or whether there’s a problem with the rule. I don’t think we’re at that point yet.”

I did fail to mention that, while not as transparent as we hoped the Obama administration would be, there's no doubt that they've been more transparent than any previous administration has been. I also didn't bring up the "No lobbyists" rule was defined as no one who'd been a lobbyist the previous two years - with few exceptions that continues to be the case. And while I may consider it a "promise broken," I wouldn't call it an outright lie. Lies are intentionally told to conceal something or to malign another. But I digress...

JJ1: "President Obama falsely claimed that no Republicans in the Senate voted for the payroll tax cut. “Virtually every Senate Republican voted against the tax cut last week,” he told reporters. 

There's only one huge problem. The statement is completely false. According to the Senate Roll Call, twenty Republicans voted for the measure to proceed, including Idaho's Mike Crapo and James Risch. On the other hand, every Democrat but one voted against it." 

BC: Don't try conflating the two separate bills (I know it's not you necessarily, but the author of the article you site). 

S. 1917 (Middle Class Tax Cut Act of 2011) was a 51-49 vote. No Republican voted for it. 

S.1931, which the author tries to confuse the reader with, could be more accurately described as ONLY 20 Republican Senators voted for it. It failed 20-78, which means 27 Republican Senators voted AGAINST it, with all the rest of the Democrats. 

JJ1: Carl, vote for Obama in Nov 2012, ok...you are all too happy to do so...thank you for contributing to the ruin of the lives of the American people...we thank you so much...your blind eyes will never let you see...your drone mind will never change...continue to support this sheep in wolves clothing...not until all of American's cities turn into what Detroit is today will you fully understand what will happen if this man stays in office...good luck... 

BC: I will, and you'll thank your lucky stars in avoiding a President Romney who says things depending on which way the wind blows any given day. Thanks for having the conversation though. I appreciate it. Good luck.

And there you have it. My good faith attempt to try and enlighten the unenlightenable. Faced with facts, JJ1 decides to give up and thank me for dooming the future of the country with my intended vote for President Obama in November. I'll never waste my time like that again.

Must Reads

Rex Nutting: Obama spending binge never happened

Ilyse Hogue: Et Tu, Cory Booker? The Pathology of False Equivalence

Sreeizzle2012: Some Shocking Obamacare Facts

Jim Hightower: Snarling Banks

Paul Buchheit: How the Ultra-Rich Betray America

President Obama's Weekly Address - May 27, 2012

Honoring Our Fallen Heroes this Memorial Day

Leave Cory Alone!

This morning, Newark, NJ Mayor Cory Booker was a guest on Meet The Press and sort of stuck his foot in his mouth in the false equivalency market, and Fox News ran with it.

"This kind of stuff is nauseating to me on both sides," Booker said. "It's nauseating to the American public. Enough is enough. Stop attacking private equity. Stop attacking Jeremiah Wright. This stuff has got to stop, because what it does is it undermines, to me, what this country should be focused on. It's a distraction from the real issues."

Booker was immediately attacked on Twitter, some of it justified, some of it way over the top, to the point that he decided to clarify his remarks in a video.



I think he realized the false equivalency and tried to correct the record. But in no way did Booker deserve some of the nasty comments he received on the interwebs.

Anti-Obama SuperPAC Ad is Obama's Fault

Yes, you read that right. Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus is blaming President Obama for the leaked Joe Ricketts race baiting Rev. Wright proposal.

...this president’s got a bigger problem and his problem is no matter what he puts out there, no matter what distractions he puts out there, he can’t change the truth and escape the reality of where we are in this American economy. And it’s no good.

Got that? In the twisted mind of what is probably one of the worst RNC Chairmen in recent memory, Priebus is trying to push the meme that it's the Obama administration that put the story out there. Kinda makes you long for the days of Michael Steele, doesn't it?

You. Must. Watch. This.

"Rich people do not create jobs."

Must Reads

William Saletan: The Marriage Trap

Suzy Khimm: Democrats talk about cutting entitlements. Republicans don’t talk about raising taxes.

Jeff Zeleny and Jim Rutenberg: G.O.P. ‘Super PAC’ Weighs Hard-Line Attack on Obama

Tim Murphy: Joe Ricketts, Government Handout Hypocrite

Adam Serwer: Jeremiah Wright Is Not a Silver Bullet

Joan Walsh: More Rev. Wright hate porn!

Paul Krugman: Win Some, Lose Some

Steve Benen: This Week in God

Robert Reich: The Commencement Address That Won’t Be Given

Tim Karr: The First Amendment and the Smartphone Journalist

Christopher Brauchli: Mitt the Barber and The Church

President Obama's Weekly Address - May 19, 2012

Congress Must Move Forward, Not Back On Wall Street Reform

Stupidest. Quote. Ever.

I’m not familiar precisely with exactly what I said, but I stand by what I said, whatever it was. 

~Mitt Romney on whether Rev.Wright attacks on President Obama are legitimate while being reminded that he used Rev. Wright to attack President Obama on Sean Hannity's show in February.

Is this guy that stupid? 'I don't know what I said but I stand by it.' Also, his reaction and active avoidance on his campaign aircraft to reporters' questions surrounding the Joe Ricketts/SuperPAC controversy before he knew the full story shows how much of a weasel and a coward he can be when confronted with such issues. A thinker on his feet he's not.

Donna Summer Dies at 63

NY Times: Donna Summer, one of the most influential singers of the disco era, died on Thursday. She was 63.

The cause was cancer, according to Brian Edwards, a publicist for Ms. Summer, who said she died at her second home in Naples, Florida.

Ms. Summer was a five-time Grammy winner who became a superstar in the 1970s with hits like “Love to Love You Baby,” “Last Dance,” “Hot Stuff” and “Bad Girls.”

I have always had a soft spot in my heart for Donna Summer. She was at the height of her disco career while I was becoming an adolescent, and although it "wasn't cool" to like disco in my circles back then, there was, and still is, something riveting about her particular beat and orchestral arrangements that I loved. Of course, I didn't know I loved them until decades later. Ask my wife. Anytime a Donna Summer song pops up on the car radio, I sing along enthusiastically. And I never owned a single recording. It's just seared in my mind.

 

Mitt Likes...

Must Reads

Greg Sargent: Obama comes out, and makes history

Keith Boykin: Blacks Won't Abandon Obama Over Gay Marriage

Jason Horowitz: Mitt Romney’s prep school classmates recall pranks, but also troubling incidents

Amy Davidson: Mitt Romney, Bully

President Obama's Weekly Address - May 12, 2012

Congress Must Act on "To-Do List"

President Obama Endorses Marriage Equality

Via Think Progress -

President Obama: I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together, when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married.

Evolution complete. BOOM!, goes the dynamite.

This comes on the heels of Vice President Joe Biden's comments on Meet The Press and of course the heinous North Carolina Amendment voted on yesterday banning same-sex marriage in a state where you are allowed to marry your first cousin... as long both cousins aren't gay.

Right wing freak out in 5... 4... 3...

 

Romney Proves Himself To Be A Pandering Coward

Leadership takes guts. Leadership takes balls. Leadership means occasionally having to make a tough decision and stand up for what you think is right. And so far, Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney has shown none of those leadership qualities. Why else would he let a comment about trying President Obama for treason go without comment at one of his own town halls?



Now, I do believe Mitt Romney when he says that he disagrees with the woman who made the treason comment while asking a different question. But why is it that it took someone else to actually ask the question of Romney? Why didn't Romney take the bull by the horns like Sen. John McCain did in 2008 when confronted with a similar situation?

The answer of course, is that Mitt Romney has proven himself to be a pandering coward. He is willing to say anything or do anything to garner potential votes. What he and his staff don't realize is that he needn't pander to the extreme right wing. He doesn't have to cater to the crazies, because those nut jobs have no intention of voting for Barack Obama in the first place. He already has their votes. What he needs are moderates and independents to think he would make a good president, and by letting pivotal moments like this slide, he's showing the opposite.

And this happened on the heels of strategic advisor Richard Grenell resigning from the Romney camp without so much as a peep after conservatives balked at the thought of an openly gay man advising Mitt Romney. Heaven forbid! And to top it off, the main culprit, the American Family Association's Bryan Fischer, who stirred that anti-gay shit in the first place had this to say of Romney after the Grenell resignation:

How is he going to stand up to the Chinese? How is he going to stand up to Putin, how is he going to stand up to North Korea if he can be pushed around by a yokel like me? I mean, I don't think Romney is realizing the doubts that this begins to raise about his leadership.

Doubts about Romney's leadership. I couldn't agree more.

Maurice Sendak Dies at 83

NY Times: Maurice Sendak, widely considered the most important children’s book artist of the 20th century, who wrenched the picture book out of the safe, sanitized world of the nursery and plunged it into the dark, terrifying and hauntingly beautiful recesses of the human psyche, died on Tuesday in Danbury, Conn. He was 83 and lived in Ridgefield, Conn.

The cause was complications from a recent stroke, said Michael di Capua, his longtime editor.

For those who grew up with Where The While Things Are, which I think are a vast majority of us, this is a sad day. But I'll leave you with a smile on your face - with Sendak being interviewed by Stephen Colbert.

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor; Satire Blog,Video Archive

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor; Satire Blog,Video Archive

Obama Weak on National Security

Uh... yeah. Right.

Yemeni officials said an airstrike killed a top al-Qaeda leader who was wanted in the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole. 

Local official Abu Bakr bin Farid said Fahd al-Quso was killed Sunday, along with an aide, in an airstrike in the southern Shabwa province. 

The Yemeni Embassy in Washington confirmed the report. 

The airstrike resembled earlier American drone attacks, but the U.S. did not immediately confirm it.

At this point, about 20 of the Top Commanders of Al Qaeda captured or hunted down under directives from the Obama administration, including Osama Bin Laden. Now whether or not you agree with the drone strike policy is another argument, but if we are really in the middle of a "war on terror" which in my definition consists of neutralizing and dismantling terrorist groups, then you can't deny the success rate of the last three plus years. President Obama weak on national security? Just not even remotely true.

Fired Up, Ready To Go!

President Obama in Columbus, Ohio today.

"This is a make or break moment for the middle class, and we've been through too much to turn back now."

Small Government Republicans

Yes, Republicans want to shrink government small enough to drown in a bathtub... or stuff into a woman's vagina.

 

Republicans, Get In My Vagina! from Kate Beckinsale

More Like This, Please

I have a feeling this is only the first in what will be a long line of debunking Mitt Romney, Karl Rove, the Koch Brothers and the GOP in general over the next six months.


(Via Upworthy) 

 Here's the debunkification.

Must Reads

Paul Begala: What's Mitt Romney Hiding in His Record as Governor

Stephen King: Tax Me, for F@%*’s Sake!

Bob Cesca: The Republicans Can’t Handle the Truth About Bin Laden

Ben Demiero: The Obama Ex-Girlfriend Conspiracy Inevitably Falls Apart

Paul Krugman: Wasting Our Minds

Jed Lewison: Paging Donald Rumsfeld: If the bin Laden raid was such an easy call, why did you say no?

David A. Graham: Obama's Composite Girlfriend: How Politico and Drudge Created Fake News

Sahil Kapur: Krugman Unloads on Paul Ryan

David Macaray: There Is a Plague Loose Upon the Land

Paul Buchheit: Five Tax Fallacies Invented by the 1%

President Obama's Weekly Address - May 5, 2012

A New Chapter in Afghanistan

Quote of the Day

"Oh, Tim, if you’re looking for someone who’s never changed any positions on any policies, then I’m not your guy." 

~Mitt Romney to Tim Russert, on Meet the Press in 2007

Well, no shit, Sherlock. Mitt Romney has taken changing policy positions, AKA flip-flopping in his case, to an art form.

This quote was unearthed by Think Progress in regards to the resignation of openly gay policy advisor Richard Grenell, affirming at the time that Romney doesn't think it's the job of the federal government to protect workers from being fired based on sexual orientation. Based on the recent caving to the evangelical right on the Grenell affair, it seems this is one of the few policy issues on which he hasn't flip-flopped.

No Mitt, you're not my guy.

Take That, Joe Scarborough!

Posted by Desert Crone NM

Joe Scarborough, the former Florida congressman, full-time pundit, and pseudo-journalist, claimed Sen. Marco Rubio isn't ready to be vice president just like "'Barack Obama wasn't ready to be president in 2008, just like Sarah Palin wasn't ready to be on the national ticket in 2008.'" So Scarborough thinks Rubio, Palin, and President Obama are and were similarly unprepared to be president and vice president. Shall we take a serious look at this comparison.

Scarborough is right about Sen. Rubio. In fact, he didn't go far enough. Rubio isn't just unprepared; he's the shallow GOP's pretty pet parrot. Compared to President Obama, Rubio is "Bush" league. Rubio attended Tarkio College, a now closed, bankrupt Missouri college and Santa Fe Community College in Florida. I'm not casting aspersions on community colleges since I was an English instructor at one for 10 years. However, Columbia they are not.

Rubio's biography claims he was a football star at Tarkio College in 1989-1990, when the team went 1-8. Seriously, I probably could have been a star on that team. Rubio transferred to Santa Fe Community College and then the University of Florida, where he graduated with a BA. In 1996 he graduated from the University of Miami with his law degree. My google searches failed to produce a single prestigious award he earned from any of his colleges.

Lawyer by trade but politician by profession, Rubio became a city commissioner and never looked back. Accordingly Rubio's wealth grew along with his political clout. In 2000, when he was elected to the Florida State House of Representatives, he made over $82,000, and by 2008, when he was elected Speaker of the House (FL), his income was over $399,000. As a United States Senator, he has sponsored 18 bills, which is the fewest bills of any senator. He has missed nearly 7% of senate votes this session, which is below the senate average attendance.

Shyster by trade and profession, Sarah Palin attended 5 (6 if you count the University of Idaho at Moscow twice) colleges and universities in 5 years. Frankly, I can't imagine how any of the colleges she attended could possibly have kept up with her grades, much less her credits.

Again her colleges were not Columbia. She went on to work as a sports reporter for an Anchorage TV station. She eventually won a seat on Wasilla, Alaska city council, a town of 7800 citizens. I would like to point out that I won a seat on the board of education in a town of 25,000, so I'm thinking that I could be .....oh skip it. Anyway, we are painfully aware of the rest of her story. Palin was catapulted onto the national stage in one of the most egregious, self-centered, damaging, not to mention unpatriotic, acts by a politician and his staff ever.

Palin's lack of general knowledge about American history, world history, world geography, and global politics was abysmal. She was and still is a divisive figure and should be an embarrassment to every American. Well, except to those who share the same qualities. Oh, and she wrote a book or maybe even two with a ghost writer.

From Occidental to Columbia to Harvard, where Barack Obama graduated magna cum laud and was president of Harvard Law Review, the President's academic record is certainly more impressive than the others to whom he has been compared. According to many who have participated in White House meetings, the President also possesses an eidetic memory. In fact, his frequent critic Keith Olbermann claims Pres. Obama is one of the 1000 most intelligent people in the United States. Those of us who have read President Obama's books know he is a self-actualizer who possesses an impressive intellect as well as profound, thoughtful insight into others. Lawrence Tribe, esteemed Harvard law professor, pronounced Barack Obama to be his best student ever.

Unlike Palin and Rubio, Barack Obama didn't become wealthy because of holding public office but because of his superior writing skills. In fact, his wealth doesn't compare to many politicians, say, such as Darryl Issa. (I know I veered slightly off subject, but I couldn't stop myself.) Both Rubio and Palin have been accused more than a few fabrications and found guilty of unethical and illegal behavior. The same certainly cannot be said of President Obama.

I believe it's fair to conclude that, in terms of both character and intellect, the President is far superior to the other two. However, Scarborough is probably referring to leadership skills possessed by the President, Palin, and Rubio. Well, then let's examine the President's leadership skills. He was elected president of the Harvard Law Review, a most prestigious and probably political position. In fact, being elected president of the law review at any law school is considered one of the highest honors at any university Pres. Obama's selection shows exceptional leadership when you consider this was over 25 years ago, not a time commonly known for Black men or women to be recognized at revered white institutions. (Remember his embrace of his African-American professor Derrick Bell--black on black hugging that gave Sean Hannity the vapors.)

And then there was that silly community organizing thingy, which, of course, you only think is silly if you don't give a damn about people. By the way, if any of you have attempted community organizing, you know it is like herding cats. Organizing any group of people with different opinions, desires, goals, etc. is a tough job. It's damn hard even when the people have similar goals and desires. I know. I was president of a local teachers' union. But the Republicans, ignoring the juggernaut of a campaign organization put together by a man with organizing skills, scoff at this experience as if it's nothing. Folks, that's not nothing to put together a machine that defeated both the Clinton team and the GOP. Besides President Obama did employ lots of people, so he should be called--wait for it--a job creator.

President Obama, a civil rights lawyer and professor, could have had, along with Mrs. Obama, a very lucrative career as a lawyer in powerful law firm. Instead President Obama entered politics as an Illinois state senator, a position he served in for 8 years. Get that---8 years, not half a term, and was elected by 46,000 voters. Later in the United States Senate, he served on both the international affairs and homeland and national security committees where he was well-suited with his degree in political science (emphasis on international relations) from Columbia. As a senator for nearly 4 years, Barack Obama sponsored--not co-sponsored--but sponsored 137 bills. As a comparison, look again at Sen. Rubio's rather lackluster accomplishments. In fact, if you compare their original pieces of legislation, I think you will find much more fluff and less substance in Rubio's offerings. If you do the math, at Sen. Rubio's pace, he will never be as productive or prolific a senator as Senator Obama.

Let's pretend for a minute ol' Joe reads my post, and he shoots holes in it-- in a sort of right wingy way-- I still have one more bit of proof that will separate President Obama from those two lightweights. Historians such as Doug Brinkley and Doris Kearns Goodwin have praised President Obama as one of the most productive presidents in history. His accomplishments would be historical even without some of the most intense obstructionism and extreme partisanship in American history. So don't tell me he was unprepared, Joe. Even if you disagree with his politics, you cannot deny that President Obama has been a pretty doggone amazing president. How else can you possibly explain his accomplishments. No one has the qualifications to be President unless they've been President. No occupation fully prepares one for such a job, but in President Obama we see a kind of "harmonic convergence" of intellect, curiosity, maturity, wisdom, leadership, and temperament. How else do you explain his preparedness but to conclude that Barack Obama was born ready to be President.

This Post Isn't Really about Elizabeth Warren

Posted by Desert Crone NM

I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren, and if you're a liberal like I am, why wouldn't you be. She is a warrior for the poor and middle class. She is outspoken, honest, and sincere. Warren, like President Obama, carries a big stick. However, she has a problem now with her claims to be a minority faculty member at Harvard, which can't be easily dismissed by even her most fervent followers.

Ms. Warren, the darling of the Left much like President Obama was, is already being haled as a presidential candidate by many folks on the Left. That overzealousness, as I see it, gives me butterflies--just a slight feeling of nervousness. I frequently caution those who ballyhoo her as a 2016 Presidential contender with "shouldn't we get her elected to the Senate first?" Let's face it, we don't know how she'll perform as a senator. Many believed a Senator Clinton would also be a bulldog, but instead, she was a (gasp) compromiser. And, lest we forget, a hawk.

My caution has proven to be prescient. As you may know by now, Harvard claimed Ms. Warren as a minority faculty member. Sorry folks, you can't claim minority status by virtue of 1/32 of minority ancestry. Ms. Warren has stated (or at least a campaign staffer has) that she didn't know Harvard made such a claim. I'm a bit skeptical about this since as a high school and college instructor, I was always well aware of the contents of my bio. Secondly, how would Harvard have known about Warren's ancestry if she had not mentioned it.

Like Ms. Warren many Americans claim Native American ancestry with much pride and an abundance of ignorance. For example, my great-grandmother was a Kiowa, who was referred to as Kiowa Woman in the small Oklahoma town where she lived. I only discovered the truth when I was working on a graduate project in folklore in the early 70's and conducted extensive interviews with my grandmother. She rarely discussed her heritage although both my grandmother and mother would've qualified for Oklahoma tuition credits based on their Kiowa ancestry. (My mother's parents left Oklahoma for New Mexico during the Great Depression and Dust Bowl.) In spite of my ancestry, I know very little about the Kiowa Nation, other than what I learned in college history classes. I'm not ashamed of my ancestry, but, frankly, I had nothing to do with it. I certainly wouldn't have claimed to be a minority or allowed anyone else to claim it for me.

However, this issue alone should not hurt her and will probably be a blip on the political radar by Nov. if she will just be honest be about it. The question that arises from the incident is, as a political novice, would she even be ready for the presidency in four years. The incident also tells us that Elizabeth Warren is human with the accompanying flaws. Let's be clear--her authenticity is not based on 1/32 of minority ancestry but of her long advocacy for the underdog. She is what she is--a wealthy white woman who is a bulldog for the poor and middle class.

She has earned our respect and admiration, but let's not make her more than she is, which is exactly what many on the Left did to Barack Obama. Liberal critics of the President emerged as little emoprogs, who became, do I dare say it, emofrogs, croaking their disappointments endlessly. I've often commented that the first time Warren makes a political decision rather than a purist one, many of her starry-eyed fans will scream that she betrayed them.

We liberals desperately want to bestow the hero's cape on someone along with all the unstated expectations that accompany that cape. The emoprogs, bewailing the "impurity" of President Obama, obviously didn't listen to the man but only heard what they wanted to hear. In doing so the critics denied his authenticity as a human being. Let's not make the same mistake with Warren because, as we see now, she is very human.

Let's be honest about Elizabeth Warren. We have no idea how she'll perform in the Senate. Will she be a Sen. Sanders, who, too, is a champion of the poor and middle class but rarely gets a bill passed? Or will she be a pragmatist like President Obama, whose objective is to get as much done for us as possible? Frankly, I hope she's a pragmatist rather than a purist.

MLB, Won't You Please Join Us in the 21st Century?

This morning after watching a few minutes of ESPN and some of the highlights, I was ranting about the idiotic call made yesterday by Major League Baseball umpire Tim McClelland, ironically calling his 4000th game in the majors, and making a boneheaded mistake.

The Kansas City Royals' Jeff Franceour had just crushed a ball that bounced off the top of the wall in left-centerfield and Detroit outfielder Austin Jackson made a good play to catch the ball on the rebound and prevent a home run. But McClelland called Franceour out, even though it was a live ball. After reading accounts, I understand that it was a case of brain freeze. McClelland realized his mistake immediately and tried to correct it.

But that is nothing in comparison to what happened today:



This kind of play begs the question: When will Major League Baseball step into the 21st Century with the rest of the world and set up an instant replay system?

It's bad enough that the only replays currently allowed are home run calls because it got so bad a few years ago, umpires couldn't even figure out when balls when over the fence or hit the foul poles. And even in some cases after instant replay had been instilled in those situations, they still got the call wrong.

But more and more, I've noticed a growing rash of horrible calls. Yes, there's the occasional "bang-bang" play at first base that can go either way when you're watching in real time, but I'm not talking about those types of plays (although those can easily be corrected by watching an instant replay). I'm talking about calls that are egregiously wrong.

Two years ago, Armando Galarraga was robbed of a perfect game that could easily have been corrected had MLB had an instant replay system. There are plays too numerous to mention when it comes to blown umpires' calls in the MLB from regular season games to more important playoff games. But in a world where the average viewer sees an instant replay of practically even play during the game, routine as well as controversial, why is Major League Baseball so adamantly against using instant replay to help correct human error?

Practically every other sport uses it. The NFL has a challenge process by which head coaches can challenge a ruling on the field. The NBA can review baskets that come close to the expiration of the shot clock even long after the event during the next stoppage of play. The same applies to NHL goals. Even pro tennis players can challenge the ruling of whether a ball was in play or out and it's checked by computer graphics. But the resistance of MLB to the use of instant replay is mind boggling.

And I don't know why. Some say it would slow down the game even more than its current snail's pace, or that the umpires' union would never allow it. Well, what if an extra umpire were hired for every game to sit in a video booth and instantly see every replay just like we do at home? That would be 16 extra umpires employed by MLB and the video review would be instantaneous. Some say you don't want to show up the umpires. Ask Jim Joyce if he'd prefer being "shown up" instead of giving Armando Galarraga the perfect game he so richly deserves. And what shows up the umpire more than an angry manager arguing a questionable call on the field in front of thousands of fans?

MLB Commissioner Bud Selig can etch his name into the annals of baseball history by mandating some form of instant replay system to double check important calls that can sway the outcome of a game. God knows he won't be remembered for much else. So, please, Major League Baseball, for the sake of the Baseball Gods, join us in the 21st Century and consider making instant replay part of the day to day operations, simply for the sake of making the right call.

CORRECTION: A previous version of this post misidentified Jeff Franceour as a Detroit Tiger and Austin Jackson as a Kansas City Royal, and has since been corrected. (Thanks, Annette.)

Stay Classy, NY Post

Spiking the Football

I've heard this phrase, "spiking the football," mentioned numerous times in the last few days in reference to the GOP and the right wing punditry accusing President Obama of politicizing the killing of Osama Bin Laden under his administration's watch.

"Shame on Barack Obama for diminishing the memory of September 11th and the killing of Osama bin Laden by turning it into a cheap political attack ad." ~Sen. John McCain.

Uh-huh. It's not like McCain would ever do something like politicize 9/11, right?

"If he wants to take credit for it I have no problem with that at all. I wish he wouldn't use it as a source of negative campaigning. I think that's a big mistake." ~Mitt Romney

Mitt Romney said this, at of all places... wait for it... in front of a New York City firehouse that lost 11 members of their department on 9/11 after sharing pizza with the current crew and Rudy "Noun, Verb, 9/11" Giulani. He's literally criticizing President Obama, the man who gave the order to take Bin Laden out, for politicizing his accomplishment while politicizing a New York CIty visit with first responders. A pizza photo op.

And this is an accomplishment that no one else can claim. Certainly not the previous administration, and no, not Mitt Romney either. Romney who, back when then Senator Obama gave a hypothetical during a presidential debate about unilaterally going into Pakistan and taking out OBL if they wouldn't, said it was a foolish thing to say, doubled down on it today while standing if front of a plaque with the names of fallen 9/11 firefighters.

"I said that very clearly in the response that I made, but that I thought — and many people believed as I did — that it was naive on the part of the president at that time, the candidate, to say he would go into Pakistan."

Yet, that's the situation that President Obama found himself in, And that's the decision he made. A decision Mitt Romney probably wouldn't have had the opportunity to make because according to Romney himself, it wasn't worth it.

Romney: “It’s not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.”

So yeah, spike the fucking football. Spike it all the way to November, because America has to remember that while one candidate didn't think it was worth going after Bin Laden, and while a previous president didn't "spend that much time on him," the current President did.

The GOP has constantly claimed to be the daddy party, with some phantom stranglehold on national security dibs. But no more. They insist President Obama is weak on foreign policy and national security, and when it's presented to them in black and white that this President has been more successful than any of their clown car politicians, they claim he's politicizing. Fuck, yeah he's politicizing! But the difference is he's touting his results and displaying his bona fides for all to see, as opposed to scare tactics like, say... raising the terror threat level for political reasons or invoking 9/11 constantly while running for President.

So spike the fucking football, then pick it up, sign it and shove it down their throats.


UPDATE: It looks like Bob Cesca and I were on the same wavelength.

When McCain noted that President Obama criticized Hillary Clinton’s “invoking on Bin Laden,” McCain was right. And so did I at the time. But here’s the big difference: the president isn’t using Bin Laden to scare us. The Republicans only ever used 9/11, Bin Laden and terrorism to scare people into voting for them. This is fearmongering. It’s the flagrant exploitation of both a tragedy and the threat of an on-the-loose maniac to trick voters into supporting Republican policies for no other reason than to ameliorate their irrational fear.

His Daily Banter piece is a good read - great videos to drive home the point too.


ALSO, this:

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Victory Lapse
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Victory Lapse - The Anniversary of Osama bin Laden's Death
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

AND THIS!!!

 

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

Disarming the GOP Memes

Yesterday I posted the video to Saturday night's White House Correspondents' Dinner and took the opportunity to watch them a second time. I thought the second time was better than the first in regards to both the President's and Jimmy Kimmel's performances.

But something struck me while watching the President. There were the dog eating jokes. A lot of dog eating jokes. Just when you think he'd move on, he'd come in with another one. For a bit, I thought it was too much. But watching it a second time, I realized that all the self deprecation was yet another tool to disarm some of the ridiculous right wing talking points and conspiracy theories that still resonate with the uninformed, misinformed and ignorant that plague our society.

The President's wink after he stating he was born in Hawaii, the GSA scandal cracks, Hillary Clinton's "drunk texting from Cartajena" joke, and the constant dog eating jokes, all designed to disarm the constant harping from the right wing on things that don't matter, or more serious issues that are being dealt with but are used to misplace the blame on the President.

Why this struck me the way it did was because I can't recall such self deprecation on the other side. Sure, there's that hilarious time President Bush was looking under his coffee table for nonexistent weapons of mass destruction, but that wasn't so much humorous as it was sad and insulting. Eating dog because it's part of the culture in Indonesia when you're eight years old is a little different than starting a war under false pretenses. An "Oops, my bad" joke in that situation is not at all funny. But I digress.

The point is, watching the idiots on Fox and Friends or Hannity make the off-handed dog eating joke now is only going to make them look childish.

White House Correspondents' Dinner - April 28, 2012

President Obama



Jimmy Kimmel



I don't mean to sound like an Obamabot, but you have to admit that President Obama is a natural at this. He's likable, not stiff and knows how to dish it out as well as being a master of self deprecation while also being able to take Kimmel's best punches.

Jimmy Kimmel was funny and a bit more biting than performers from previous years. I thought he did well, although in my opinion not as well as Seth Meyers last year and the command performance of Stephen Colbert in 2006. It seemed he rushed through some of his material. Whether it was due to nervousness or the fact that he seemed to have a large volume of material and was trying to get through it all is yet to be determined. Just because you write a thousand jokes doesn't mean you have to use all of them.

But overall, it was a good time. With so much caustic, partisanship these last couple of years, it's nice to sit back and not take things so seriously. Anyone who was offended (I'm looking at you Keith Olbermann and awaiting a Donald Trump tantrum) needs to lighten up.

Must Reads

Digby: Jesuit snap

E.J. Dionne: How to beat Citizens United

Dana Milbank: Romney won’t be able to shake immigration debate

Steve Benen: Rubio thinks Bush did 'a fantastic job'

Steve Benen: The one term that must not be mentioned

MsLibrarian: Scottish Parliament laughs at Donald Trump

Sam Stein: Robert Draper Book: GOP's Anti-Obama Campaign Started Night Of Inauguration

Stephen D. Foster, Jr.: Sarah Palin Claims Child Labor Laws Are Causing America To Fail

Dana Milbank: On Arizona immigration law, Justice Scalia and street protesters make same case

Bill Moyers: The Ghost of Joe McCarthy in Today's Republican Party

Rebecca Schoenkopf: Ann Coulter: Hollywood Libels Businessmen By Telling Their True Stories

Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein: Let’s just say it: The Republicans are the problem.

President Obama's Weekly Address - April 28, 2012

Helping our Veterans and Servicemembers Make Informed Decisions about Higher Education

Tweet of the Day

And that, in a nutshell, illustrates the rank hypocrisy of the right wing pundits in today's Republican Party. Good for you to call it out, Meghan.

UPDATE: Louis C.K.was announced as host of the June 8 Radio and Television correspondents’ dinner – which is not the same as the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. He has since withdrawn from the event.

Welcome to Post-Racial America...

...in the world of Obama, because now that we have a black president, we don't have to worry about racism, right?

While Joel Ward's series-winning overtime goal in Game 7 had Capitals fans celebrating in D.C., it sparked a backlash of racist reactions on Twitter... . 

..a small but vulgar group vented its anger on Twitter, using the N-word to refer to the Caps' hero.

And this is just sports. Can you imagine what they think of our country's leader? But it's just us overdramatic liberals making mountains out of molehills and playing the race card at every turn. ...Yeah. Sure it is.

Cartoon of the Day

The Spine of America

POSTED BY JHW22

OK, after this post, I will no longer give anti-Obama Democrats an ounce of my energy, a second of my time. Why? Because as much as they say they believe it's American to criticize or they're just holding him accountable or yadda yadda fart fart, they really just want to focus on certain things while removing all nuance, complexity and reality. They want to pretend that it's all easy peasy to get exactly what they want despite millions of Americans who don't want those exact same things the exact same ways at the exact same time. After about two years of their shit, I realized there is NO POINT debating, discussing or even acknowledging them. But I still try. Not anymore. After tonight, I am done with the anti-Obama left. We have an election to win and a fantastic President to re-elect. We need to ensure better state and federal legislatures and governorships. We have school boards and city councils to pay attention to. And the anti-Obama left doesn't deserve a fraction of me.

I want to make my final statement on them about one specific thing. One thing that I think symbolizes the difference between them and me.

"Spine."

For years now, I've heard Democrats say Obama "needs to grow a spine" or that he's "spineless." And as often as I, and other sensible Democrats, have tried to counter with facts and reality checks, we never looked at an actual spine.

A spine is the center of our body uniting the left and the right. It bends forward and backward, it turns side to side. It moves. Its point is to connect all the parts and keep us balanced. It is the part of the body used for movement and thought. It's a part of the body that, if damaged, could cause the entire body to stop moving completely. It's made up of parts rather than a single bone. It's a part of our body that we take for granted until we need an excuse to get out of heavy lifting. And it always has our back even when we don't see it. Our spine is what makes us flexible and strong. It makes us able to dodge or walk tall. It does what it needs to do on reflex. It supports the rib cage that houses our hearts and is the base of all the magic of our minds.

When you think of the truth of a spine, of the reality, of its actual role in our lives, Barack Obama not only has a spine. He IS our spine.

Factoid of the Day

Via GottaLaff:

...Until recently, the military has been a stalwart source of support for Republican hopeful Ron Paul. 

But in March, it was Obama that scooped up the most support from the armed forces -- about twice as much as Paul, in fact. Romney remains an also-ran when it comes to backing from the military... 

...members of the military who donated more than $200 have given Paul's campaign about $333,134, versus $184,505 to Obama and just $45,738 to Romney. 

But in March, Obama and Paul switched places. Members of the military sent $36,448 to Obama and just $17,733 to Paul. Even though Romney solidified his position as the presumptive Republican nominee, military donations to his campaign remained anemic -- only $8,630.

The Preezy of the United Steezy

President Obama "slow jams" the news with Jimmy Fallon.



Muthafucka be too cool fo' skool, yo.

Seriously, can you imagine Mitt Romney doing anything this humorous and still getting out a very important message? Yeah, me neither.

Newt Gingrich Calls It Quits

Newt Gingrich has officially stated that he will suspend his campaign for the Republican nomi...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....

Colbert Interviews Julie Andrews

This is one of the funniest interviews I've ever seen.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Grim Colberty Tales with Julie Andrews
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog Video Archive

Poor, Oppressed White America

Yesterday, I received probably one of the most ridiculous emails I've ever gotten. Words cannot explain the stupidity someone would have to agree with, and forward, something like this. My friend sent it to me because he knew I'd respond in kind. My usual M.O. in these situations is not only to respond to the sender, but to every single address it was sent to, if they've chosen to forward the email without editing out the previous addresses.

Here's the body of the email:

Subject: Fw: Why haven't we heard of this atrocity? 

This is a difficult “read.” 

Another example of how "WE" do not count in New America!!!!! 

Why hasn’t this gotten even a CRUMB as much publicity as the Trayvon Martin case. The text description is horrific. As horrible as this is, it needs to be widely circulated. The animals below car-jacked then raped Christopher Newsom, cut off his penis, set him on fire and shot him to death while they forced his girlfriend, Channon Christian, to watch. An even more cruel fate awaited her. She was beaten and gang-raped in many ways for four days by all of them, while they took turns urinating on her. They then cut off her breasts and put chemicals in her mouth... and murdered her. 

VICTIMS: 

  

PERPS: 

 

Knoxville (WVLT) - The District Attorney General of Knox County announced the list of charges facing now five suspects in the double murder of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom. 

The District Attorney General, Randy Nichols, is not saying whether or not he will seek the death penalty, but he does say the State will seek conviction for all charges filed in a 24-page indictment from the Knox County Grand Jury. 

Lemaricus Davidson, 25 , faces a total of 46 charges. Letalvis Cobbins, 24 , faces a total of 46 charges. George Thomas, 24 , faces 46 charges. Vanessa Coleman, 18 , faces 40 Tennessee state charges. Eric Boyd, 24, arrested in connection with the fatal car jacking, only faces federal charges as an accessory after the fact. 

So . . . where is Al Sharpton, President Obama and Jesse Jackson? Are they providing counsel and help to the families of the victims? 

No - the victims were white 

Why hasn't this received national coverage like the "Duke rape case"? Oh, that's right - the victims were white 

Why hasn't the NAACP, ACLU, New York Times, etc., called for an investigation? 

The victims were white. 

Why hasn't the FBI been called in to investigate this as a hate crime? 

Because the victims were white. 

When a white radio shock jock uses the phrase 'Nappy-headed Ho', it got 2 weeks of constant news coverage and cost the announcer his job. But when a white couple is tortured, raped and murdered by a black gang, it gets barely a passing blip on the local news -- and NO MENTION AT ALL on the national evening news. 

Pass this around, and maybe it will land in the hands of someone in the media or politics who has the guts to stand up and recognize the unfairness of this Racism.

My response:

Well, now I've seen it all. 

Do you know why you haven't heard about the Christopher Newsom murder on the news? Because it happened in 2007. If you were paying attention, you would have heard about it. All the suspects we're arrested, convicted and are serving multiple sentences for this horrific crime. 

The FBI didn't investigate this as a hate crime because there was no proof it was racially motivated. No, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson didn't show up to protest because the perpetrators were caught, but do you know who did? Around 30 white supremacists led by Alex Linder rallied in downtown Knoxville on May 27, 2007. 

I wonder if George W. Bush "provided counsel to help the families of the victims." After all, he was President at the time. 

Complaining about the Trayvon Martin coverage has got to be the silliest thing I've heard in a long time. The reason it's news is because unless there was an outcry from activists, there would have been no charges filed, and George Zimmerman would still be "patrolling" the streets thinking he has every right to "Stand His Ground." But I suppose Trayvon Martin didn't have the right to stand his? 

And we never heard of Natalie Halloway, or Etan Patz, or JonBenet Ramsey, or Stacy Peterson because they're white, right? Oh, wait. WE DID HEAR about those cases. 

But maybe you're right. I mean, history has shown that white Americans have been SOOOO oppressed in this country. What is this "New America" you speak of? The one that's supposedly post-racial because we have a black president? Doesn't show by these types of emails. Or perhaps you think you have it so bad, you'd rather trade places with a black person. 

 

On Education

POSTED BY JHW22

Paraphrasing Mitt Romney: Oh, hey, poor people, don't set your education heights so high! Leave the good colleges to the people who can afford them. Don't even consider expensive colleges even if you'd be the doctor to cure cancer. Poor people need to know their place and stay there.





Paraphrasing Obama: America needs the best and brightest to succeed and it's our job as fellow citizens to give them that chance. If you are the future doctor who cures cancer, we'll all be better off for having made your education possible. Being poor shouldn't mean you can't cure cancer and save lives!





Thx to my Twitter helpers finding a link. And h/t on the Romney link to @MzYun, @glomad67

Does the Republican Party Bother Vetting Anyone Anymore?

What is the deal with the GOP? Have they stopped hiding who they truly are and just don't care to put their true face front and center?

Richard Grenell, a former Bush administration official who joined the Romney campaign Thursday as national security and foreign policy spokesman, appears to have deleted more than 800 of his past tweets following scrutiny over numerous swipes aimed at the media, prominent Democratic women and the Gingriches. Grenell also apparently took down his personal site, which featured writing on politics, foreign affairs and the media.

Among Grenell's deleted tweets were such insults as inferring that Rachel Maddow looked like a man, Calista Gingrinch's "snap on" hair, other sexist remarks regarding women's appearances, and calling the contraception argument "Obama's population control strategy."

 So how does the Romney campaign, which has already seen its share of gaffes and asinine comments, not just from the candidate but from its campaign staff, not know that these types of things should be vetted and it only reflects poorly on Mitt Romney? The answer is probably that they do know, but they just don't give a shit. It's an Etch-a-Sketch world in their minds, and no one will be talking about this in three months when the general population starts paying attention.

I suppose if Sarah Palin can vie for the Vice Presidency (and I will forever curse the name of John McCain for bringing her to national prominence) then what's the big deal if you have a misogynist on your campaign staff?  After all, for the GOP, it's not about what you're for. With their choices for presidential candidate, it's about vilifying the other guy.