In Defense of the Obama Application

What if John Edwards was chosen to be Poverty Czar or Attorney General by the Obama Administration and then it was revealed that he had an affair? Or what if the affair came to light during the vetting process?

This is what I ask myself as I see grumblings and outrage over the news this week that the Obama transition team has asked prospective applicants for cabinet or other high ranking positions to fill out what some are calling an extensive and even invasive questionnaire.

Jesse Wendel, Group News Blog:

Like it makes sense to give professional political operatives, HR people no less, your deepest, darkest, most personal secrets, along with your medical and tax records going back years. Then TRUST THEM. Because they work for the President-Elect, so they won't fuck you over, no Sir, nuh-uh.
Other than the on the transition website, which goes further than the Bush Administration's, there's no assurance, absolutely none that they won't use everything you tell them to fuck you...

...So go ahead, hand some 20-30 year old political staff the political equivalent of blackmail video-tapes of you having a torrid affair with Bill O'Reilly, surrounded by luffas and candy you stole from children.

Wendel goes on to say that it's all about checks and balances.

"No one should be forced to submit to political vetting (and trust their public identity to non-existent assurances that their identity won't be destroyed by a trial balloon or a tactical leak for political purposes by the Obama team) on hiring decisions PRIOR to initial hiring."

He uses the phrase "tactical leak for political purposes" immediately after after saying how he knows some of the people on the transition team and trusts them deeply.

Wendel doesn't like the idea of the untrained eye - this is the first Obama Administration after all - going over personal information and compares it to the FBI's years of experience, as if the FBI has a pristine record and would never use information for political purposes. He calls it hypocrisy, something the Republicans would do, and even questions the legality of it.

Is this even legal? I know it wouldn't be anywhere else. Or is this another one of those bullshit situations where the Executive and Congress have exempted themselves from the same laws the rest of the United States must live under. Because if I were hiring people for GNB, I sure as shit couldn't ask a potential hire these questions and base hiring decisions on them. I'd get my ass sued and rightly so.

...If President-Elect Obama with his cocaine use is too much of a chicken-shit to use me and grownups like me, then really, he and the transition team can shove it up their hypocritical asses.

Well, I think you've just blown your chance with that last paragraph, Jesse. And by the way, you're wrong about the legal issue, but we'll get to that in a second. I get where you're coming from but you gotta lighten up.

Let's go back to my initial hypothetical question. Imagine if Edwards was chosen as AG and then the affair came out because there wasn't full disclosure? Game. Fucking. Over. While some see this questionnaire as over the line, and while it may be overprotective, I think it's a smart move on the Obama team's part because of all the bullshit attacks they need to defend themselves from daily just on the stuff that's made up. The last thing they need is to put out fires in their administration before getting off the ground.

As far as the legality of the application, here's a comment from "Myrtle Hussein June":

In 1980 I worked for a government contractor on the space shuttle mission at an air force base. I had to fill out a 10 year history, not unlike Obama's questions except no e-mail/internet stuff, for a security clearance and had to pass a drug test for that job.

Today, where I currently work, every single applicant has to submit to a 10 year background check/security.... for a state university. Every single person no matter the position.

Another blogger just got hired and reported having to answer some highly personal questions.

So, it's not JUST the Obama application or just for the federal government. I think no matter where you go these days there are more and more "security" measures connected with getting employment. Thank you Patriot Act.

... I'm applying to the Obama admin, got the app right here. I'm going to fill it out honestly. I'm not going to judge anything I've ever said or done to qualify as being an "embarrassment" to Obama. It just is what it is.

I don't think it's "chicken-shit"; I think it's the laws that have been passed. It's the crazy right wing extremists, or maybe left wing extremists, they're looking out for. And no, I don't consider fighting for our country to take a hard left BACK to the center "extremist" of any sort. I don't think they do either. The Obama transition team is NOT the Bush Administration.

Sorry, I don't think this is all that unusual for government workers. At least, that's not been my experience since 1980.

And that's how I see it as well - you can't be too careful when there's a world of wingnuts looking for that one opportunity to stab you in the back 24/7. Is it a little over the top? Perhaps. But if more than a little intrusion into your privacy when applying for a government job in a post 9/11 America is not your cup of tea, then don't apply. No one is forcing you to divulge information. If you've got nothing to hide then go for it; if you know you have skeletons in your closet that you don't want people to find out about but still want a job in politics, then go work for the RNC. Apply or don't apply - it's up to the applicant and they have full knowledge of what's being asked of them before they apply.

It's also matter of getting things done in a straight forward, organized fashion. Remember that the Obama camp dubbed the President-elect, "No drama Obama." It's not just a catchphrase. They don't abide any distracting bullshit. It rarely happened during their campaign, but the second there was a distraction - like foreign policy advisor Samantha Power calling Clinton a monster for example - she was gone before the end of the day. Look at how the delayed reaction regarding the Rev. Wright mess affected the campaign. It took weeks for them to shake that off. If you don't nip it in the bud early enough, all you'll be doing is fighting off bullshit distractions and never concentrate on real issues. Case in point is the McCain camp for fuck's sake - they got a poll bump from the Sarah Palin pick and then when she became the distraction, they couldn't get rid of her and they sunk like a stone.

I might tend to lean more towards Wendel's argument if the Obama Administration were walking into a "peace and prosperity" White House, but let's face it: shit has never been more fucked up than it is now and they have to hit the ground running. This will just narrow the search earlier than later. It'll shoo away those that are hesitant to apply if they think they have something to hide and cull the herd. Also, no one's 100% kosher, and I'm sure that having something on your record like a traffic violation isn't going to automatically disqualify you, but it's not so bad that it'll ruin your career if it should be nefariously leaked.

Now for those who thought Barack Obama was a lefty liberal's dream, one only need look at the FISA vote long before the election took place, or the $700 billion bailout approval to tell you that with Obama you get a pragmatist who is maybe just slightly left of center on issues that have broad bipartisan appeal. We all knew that coming in and anyone who thought he was a 21st century Che Guevara was deluding themselves.

We can't lose sight of the bigger picture. Change doesn't come in eight days. We just broke the Ronald Reagan deathgrip on this country for the last 28 years - it can't all happen in one day. Baby steps. Already there are those who are pissed at Obama for the Rahm Emanuel pick, or the possibility of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, or the incredibly invasive application questionnaire. But I think I might wait til maybe Inauguration Day before I start flying off the handle. The fact that his was one of the best run campaigns in American politics wasn't a happy accident. I doubt that his entire staff went "Teh Stupid" on November 5th.

But like I said, I just don't think they can be too careful with all the loonies out there. It's not like they're trolling for information to hold against you like the other side does (see 'illegal wiretapping'). And yes, ultimately we don't know who peeks into those files, so if you like instant messaging minors in a sexual fashion, if you rail against gays while picking up men in airport bathroom stalls, if you killed someone and buried them in your backyard, then maybe you shouldn't fill out an application. But if you think you have what it takes, still like your mom and don't fuck your cat Fluffy on a Saturday night bender, then go for it! Make change happen!

Must Reads

Frank Schaeffer: Sarah Palin Will Never Be President -- Trust Me

Bob Cesca: What Doesn't Kill The Far-Right Only Makes Them Crazier

The Rude Pundit: Fun With Lieberman: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Dr. Biobrain: Conservative Catastrophe: Bigger Than Bush

Jay Dixit: I can has cheezburger ... and pathos?

Obama's First Weekly Address

President-elect Obama has taken the weekly radio address into the 21st Century. His weekly addresses will be posted on YouTube for viewing at your convenience. It'll also help to expand his message across many more households than had been previously listening to the radio address.

Think about it? Raise your hand if you've heard a weekly radio address from a president on the radio? ... That's what I thought.

I'll be putting these up weekly.

T Minus 66 Days

"As a matter of fact, I know relations between our governments is good."

- Washington, DC, November 2006, discussing relations between the U.S. and South Korea

Well... at least he didn't say "relations 'tween our guv'ments be good."

Out With The Old...

...in with the new.

Some of you may know that I'm a Mets fan. A rabid Mets fan. I've been a Mets fan since I went to my first game in 1975. It's been 33 very long years, with two World Series appearances and one World Series Championship. The Mets have won two championships in their 46 year history but I was too young to remember the first in 1969. So I'm left with one. One... in thirty-three years... in a town that shares baseball real estate with the New York Yankees.

You know the Yankees. 26 World Championships. TWENTY-SIX. And six in my lifetime. And they beat the Mets in 2000. I think Mets fans' only solace is that they haven't won since 2000 even while outspending every other team in payroll. But I digress.

The point was that the Mets are getting a new stadium next season. Citi-Field will open on April 13th. I'll be there rooting for my team, and enjoying the new stadium I'm sure. Shea Stadium was one of those cookie cutter stadiums built in the 60's and 70's. Pedestrian traffic patterns were horrible, not enough bathrooms, the food sucked and the seats were small and uncomfortable, no leg room.

But it's bittersweet because I'll always have fond memories of Shea. My first Major League baseball game watching players live instead of on the screen. My amazement at Dave Kingman popping up a ball that flew higher than the top of the stadium. Going to double headers on my own as a kid with my friends and sitting in the upper deck. Being at the game in 1986 when Dwight Gooden won against the Chicago Cubs to win the pennant for the first time in thirteen years. And my only time on the field watching Billy Joel play the final concert at Shea. So it's a little sad to drive by and see the dismantling of a place that holds a lot of memories. The seats are gone, the scoreboard is down, the field is slowly being covered by debris.

Anyway, a friend sent this picture to me - his brother was coming back from vacation and took this shot as he was landing at LaGuardia Airport. (Click picture for full size.)

Out with the old, in with the new. And hopefully a change of luck in the process. Those season tickets are getting expensive!

GOP Identity Crisis

What is the future of the Republican Party? Who will the future leaders of the GOP be? All the talk has been focused on Sarah Palin, and although the thought of Palin dragging the party down to Titanic depths is very appealing to me, I don't think the Republican Party can stand nor will they choose another George W. Bush in Armani jackets and Prada pumps.

Still, here's Chris Matthews having a debate with Pat "Even A Stake Through The Heart Won't Kill Me" Buchanan and Republican strategist Mike Paul. Buchanan and Paul get into it at about the 8 minute mark.



Well, that was a very interesting debate. Mr. Paul was correct. For the Republican party to remain relevant, they're going to have to change the way they cater to the elite in this country and the party as a whole needs to examine itself and try to get minorites (soon to be majorities) on their team, to which Buchanan responded, "Why dont you examine yourself?" I don't know what he meant by that, but Pat's brain isn't as sharp as it used to be - carrying water for the GOP has a numbing effect on your synapses.

"Why dont you examine yourself?" Buchanan always refers to 1964, 1968 and Nixon (probably the only time he was actually relevant) but that was FORTY-FOUR YEARS AGO, PAT! It's a shame that they can't see or perhaps don't understand that lip service and wedge issues are no longer going to be enough. What your party does while it's in power will be dragged out onto the mat and there will be accountability.

This election was a reckoning. Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Indiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado (did I forget one?) jumped into the blue paint vat because the old GOP system is broken. Did anyone ever think the Democrats would win Virginia, North Carolina and Indiana in one cycle?! It shows that their system of politics is broken - the Lee Atwater/Karl Rove style, while working well in the 80's and 90's and the notion that there could be a permanent Republican majority - burned white hot and extinguished itself out in four short years. (I say short in the grand scheme of things - I know they were four very long years for most of us.)

But I don't know how they can fix it. Being a fiscal conservative is one thing. But being anti-union and forcing religion into the public arena is another. I'm an Hispanic and I can't for the life of me understand why any Hispanic or African-American would vote against their own self interests by voting Republican. I'm dumbfounded by the likes of African-American Republican strategists Ron Christie and Joe Watson on the air. What are they thinking?! How do they sleep at night after bald-faced lying on the air daily?

Mike Paul was the first African-American Republican strategist I've seen who made any sense, but his basic premise is to change the party. The thing is if you remake the party, if you change the party for the better ethnically and demographically, if you change the philosophy of the party to attract more people of color, then is it really still the Republican Party we all know?

There will always be a base that you can spoon feed the red meat to - just look at Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity making asses out of themselves with the latest wingnut talking point, "The Obama Recession" - but it's no longer enough. The Republicans that listen to the hate mongering who still think that their party is what it was 40 years ago are dying out, their base is shrinking and unless they really start paying attention to the fact that caucasians will soon be the minority in this country, the GOP will go the way of the dinosaur, the automat, and $1 per gallon gasoline.

T Minus 67 Days

"We need a common enemy to unite us."

- Happy 54th Birthday Condoleezza Rice

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton?

Andrea Mitchell:

Two Obama advisers have told NBC News that Hillary Clinton is under consideration to be secretary of state. Would she be interested? Those who know Clinton say possibly. But her office says that any decisions about the transition are up to the president-elect and his team.

Armadillo Joe and I was tossing names around a few months ago (including John Edwards for Attorney General before the whole affair thing) and he said that Hillary would be good for Secretary of State. I agree with him. Does she want it? Who knows. I'm also not crazy about another open Senate seat should this situation come to pass.

Apparently John Kerry and Bill Richardson are very interested in the job.

What do you think?

Sadie's Getting Big!

Our little girl is growing up. She got her final rabies shot at the vet yesterday. Clean bill of health and she's already 25 lbs!

Here are a couple of pictures from a trip to the park last week.

Amazingly, we met another pup named Indy who'd been adopted from the same shelter within the same week.

They played for a good long while.

If A 7 Year Old Can Figure It Out...

.. why can't the 46% of the electorate that voted for McCain/Palin?

Seven year old blogger and future voter Stanislaw Gunkel gets it. And also got a personal thank you note from President-elect Obama.

Here is why I'm asking grown-ups to vote for Barack Obama. I am 7 years old so I can't vote......

My mom told me that I shouldn't base my election analysis on "feelings" (I like him/her) or "beliefs" (I share his/her beliefs) but on logical arguments. She asked me to create my own rational explanations for my support of Obama. Here is one of my arguments:

McCain and Palin are not be qualified to be President / Vice President of the U.S. The President's job is to do good for the country and the world. To do good for the country, the President must make smart decisions on important situations.

Governor Palin believes the world is 6000 years old. This is absurd. This is not a rational belief. This is a mistake. Scientists, experiments and evidence have shown this to be completely false. Therefore, she is not rational. If she is not rational, she should not be allowed to be President or Vice President.

Please vote for Barack Obama.

Wow. Check out his blog, it's pretty damn good.


(H/T Crooks & Liars)

T Minus 68 Days

"The United States and Russia are in the midst of transformationed relationship that will yield peace and progress."

- Washington, DC, November 13, 2001


What was that quote by John Hinderaker again?

Oh yeah :

"Obama thinks he is a good talker, but he is often undisciplined when he speaks. He needs to understand that as President, his words will be scrutinized and will have impact whether he intends it or not. In this regard, President Bush is an excellent model; Obama should take a lesson from his example. Bush never gets sloppy when he is speaking publicly. He chooses his words with care and precision, which is why his style sometimes seems halting. In the eight years he has been President, it is remarkable how few gaffes or verbal blunders he has committed. If Obama doesn't raise his standards, he will exceed Bush's total before he is inaugurated."

HAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!! Douchebag!

Following My Blog

(BUMPED - Originally posted 11/3/08, 11:19 am)

Hello reader(s).

I've added a little widget on the right side of my page in order to help me figure out how much traffic I'm actually generating. After almost two years of blogging and over 1,300 posts I'm a little curious to find out if I am connecting with anyone and if you like my stuff enough to come back. I'm not so much worried about the single hits, but if you like what you read and stop by on a regular basis, won't you please take a moment to add yourself to the Blog Followers List? It would do wonders for my posting motivation and best of all, it's free!

Thanks,
Broadway Carl

All The News We Hope To Print - UPDATED

On the way in to work this morning, I was handed a copy of the New York Times for free. "How nice," I thought. But then I read the headline and spit out my coffee. IRAQ WAR ENDS.

What the fuck?! That was fast! Obama rules!

This morning, commuters in New York City were handed free copies of what appeared to be the New York Times. In fact, what they had been given was a surprisingly elaborate forgery: A fake version of the paper dated July 4th, 2009 that offers as its lead story "IRAQ WAR ENDS."

Other headlines in the paper, which is full of stories that, if true, would be cause for celebration among liberals, include "USA Patriot Act Repealed" and "National Health Insurance Act Passes"; the fake newspaper's slogan is "All the news we hope to print."

It's a full 14 page print version - a website version is also available but it seems overloaded.

Later on Wednesday morning, the Yes Men issued a statement claiming credit for the prank. The statement said, in part:

In an elaborate operation six months in the planning, 1.2 million papers were printed at six different presses and driven to prearranged pickup locations, where thousands of volunteers stood ready to pass them out on the street.

Pretty fucking brilliant. Even the ads are fake, but oh, so good. Here's what the full page ad from Exxon Mobil read:

We at Exxon are committed to meeting the new Congressional guidelines for socially, economically, & environmentally responsible enery. That's why we applaud the end of the war in Iraq.

The invasion of Iraq was supposed to mean access to oil without the costly interference of national sovereignty, and lower prices at the pump for you and your family. Projections and reality differed, but now we've learned: PEACE can also be lucrative.

Times have changed. Oil fields have reverted back to a newly independent Iraq, and Congress has mandated "Fair Trade," in which most profits go not to brokers, stockholders and a small management circle, but flow directly to those who produce. Exxon is excited about helping do things better - not just because it's the law, but because Exxon has always been about innovation. It's also an opportunity to turn over a new leaf. As Exxon finds itself under feredal oversight, we are more than happy to use our profits to develop sustainable, decentralized energy production. This will help fight further climate change, and prevent costly new wars over energy in the future. After all, if everyone can turn the sun or wind into power, what's there to fight about?

Peace. An idea the world can profit from.

Brought to you by Exxon. Finding decent ways to deliver the energy you need.

________________________

Now that's an advertisement!

Of course, my favorite article is "Court Indicts Bush on High Treason Charge." I'll scan and post it late tonight.

UPDATE (11/13/08 10:40am): Here's that scan. It' looks so much better in print, doesn't it? (Click on picture for full size.)

Kyl Threatens Filibuster

It's been eight days since Senator Barack Obama officially became President-elect Obama and already the freakazoid Republicans in the Senate are threatening filibusters on possible Supreme Court appointments that haven't happened yet.

Jon Kyl, the second-ranking Republican in the U.S. Senate, warned president-elect Barack Obama that he would filibuster U.S. Supreme Court appointments if those nominees were too liberal.

..."He believes in justices that have empathy," said Kyl, speaking at a Federalist Society meeting in Phoenix. The attorneys group promotes conservative legal principles.

Kyl said if Obama goes with empathetic judges who do not base their decisions on the rule of law and legal precedents but instead the factors in each case, he would try to block those picks via filibuster.

Give me a fucking break. Obama is 10 weeks away from taking over and already these obstructionist motherfuckers are threatening to block confirmation of an appointment to a position that doesn't exist. This from the same fuck-o who threatened the nuclear option when it was Bush's stellar appointments that were in danger of rejection.

You know what? Give it your best shot, Kyl. But you'd better get your orthopedic shoes on because it ain't gonna be a bullshit, pansy ass filibuster. You're going to have to - how does Sarah Palin put it? - "walk the walk" and stand up there as long as your feeble ass can take it. We'll wait until you kick the bucket from exhaustion and then confirm the appointment anyway, whenever that should take place.

So in short, go fuck yourself, Kyl. This is a new ballgame. Game on, brohim.

(H/T Crooks and Liars)

T Minus 69 Days

"Wow! Brazil is big!"

- Upon seeing a map of Brazil at a meeting with the Brazilian president, November 2005

Joe Lieberman Must Go

I know that President-elect Obama has suggested that Lieberman remain in caucus with the Democrats and retain his chair positions, and in the spirit of bipartisanship I tried to go along with it, but I can't bring myself to agreeing with Obama on this one. Not after the way Lieberman treated the Democratic party like a doormat, not after the way he spoke about Barack Obama after saying he wouldn't be negative towards Obama, just positive toward McCain.

Brave New Films has produced another great video. Call your Senators. Joe Lieberman must go.

This Veteran's Day...

... I would be remiss in not taking a moment to remember and give thanks to every Veteran who has served our country bravely and honorably.

Sometimes we walk around with blinders on, but it's good to take a look around every once in a while. Thanks to my good friend, Armadillo Joe, for the reminder.

T Minus 70 Days

"They misunderestimated me."

- Bentonville, Arkansas, November 2000

Douchebag Of The Day

Rep. Paul Broun (R-Georgia): "It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he's the one who proposed this national security force," Rep. Paul Broun said of Obama in an interview Monday with The Associated Press. "I'm just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may — may not, I hope not — but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism."

..."We can't be lulled into complacency," Broun said. "You have to remember that Adolf Hitler was elected in a democratic Germany. I'm not comparing him to Adolf Hitler. What I'm saying is there is the potential."

Where has this douchbag been for the last eight years? It's amazing how they can't see the forest for the trees.

I Don't Like This

President-elect Barack Obama has informed party officials that he wants Joe Lieberman to continue caucusing with the Democrats in the 111th Congress, Senate aides tell the Huffington Post.

Obama's decision could tie the hands of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who has been negotiating to remove Lieberman as chair of the Homeland Security and Government Reform committee while keeping him within the caucus. Lieberman has insisted that he will split from the Democrats if his homeland security position is stripped.

It shows you the type of leader Barack Obama is, putting differences aside in order to work together, but I'm not so sure it's the best move. What's the point of keeping Lieberman's vote if he doesn't vote with you? It's not like he's shown any loyalty to the party, first running as an Independent after losing his Connecticut primary to Ned Lamont and then endorsing McCain and not being too kind to Obama in the process.

Lieberman was hedging his bets by running with McCain every chance he got, going so far as to saying Obama voted against troop funding and therefore was against the troops. When you gamble there should be consequences. For Lieberman to get away with spitting in the face of the Democratic Party time after time with no repercussions is not a good thing for the party. Don't get me wrong, we don't have to march in lockstep like the Republicans do, but Lieberman's actions are beyond the pale.

ADDING (11/11/08 8:50am) - What really pisses me off is that Lieberman is the one who's finding all this "unacceptable." Shut the fuck up, Joe, you made your bed. Unfortunately, Obama has made a suggestion, recommendation, whatever you want to call it, and that should weigh heavily in the Senators' decision on what to do with Lieberman in deference to Obama. I don't like it but should they consider keeping Lieberman on, they should make it clear he's on the tightest of leashes and if he keeps tacking to the right with the fear mongering and acting as if Israel is more important than the country he was elected to represent, he's done.

Scarborough Says "Fuck You" On Air

A priceless Morning Joke™ moment. Scarborough drops the F-Bomb! He doesn't even realize he said it. And then Mika goes with the tried and true "Run away! Run away!" desk anchor technique and goes so far as to say he didn't just blurt out "fuck you" on national television, but then realizes that even she can't talk the country out of this one.



Can he be fired now? Please?

ADDING - The sad part was that he was finally making a good point; that the Obama campaign and their members were a good group of steady men that "don't go around flipping people off and screaming fuck you at the top of their lungs" like John McCain.

UPDATE (10:30am): Commenter "dontpanic23" on Bob Cesca's blog brings this to our attention - it wasn't the first time he had said it on air.



Now there is rumor that Scarborough has been suspended for the incident. I haven't found any confirmation of that yet.

T Minus 71 Days

"They want the federal government controlling the Social Security like it's some kind of federal program."

- St. Charles, Missouri campaign speech, November 2000

By the way, George Bush won St. Charles in 2000 with 58% of the votes. The good people of that county voted for him in 2004 with 60% of the votes cast. But in 2008? Boy, did they change their minds! McCain won with 54% of the vote. Just sigh and move on.

Why Does This Dipshit Still Have A Job?

Will someone tell me why anything Bill Kristol writes matters? Only a weatherman can be wrong so often and still be able to retain his job. And yet, here is Kristol in the New York Times again with this craptacular observation:

Sure, the election results had been bad — but they weren’t devastating. Obama wasn’t winning the popular vote by double-digit margins, as some polls had suggested he might. Republican losses in the Senate and House were substantial but not catastrophic.

...there was virtually no change in the voters’ ideological self-identification: in 2008, 22 percent called themselves liberal, up only marginally from 21 percent in 2004; 34 percent were conservative, unchanged from the last election; and 44 percent called themselves moderate, compared with 45 percent in 2004.

In other words, this was a good Democratic year, but it is still a center-right country.

Oh, Bill. Bill. You can try to talk yourself into your idiotic assessments until you're blue in the face, but the reality is that the country is not "center-right." In fact, it never has been. Here's a little something from Gallup brought to us by our good friend, Mr. Bob Cesca:

• Americans are pro-choice (67 percent)
• Americans support the Geneva Conventions with regards to torture (57 percent)
• Americans don't want the government snooping in their bank and internet records (67 percent)
• Americans want the USA Patriot Act changed or eliminated entirely (81 percent)
• Americans support protecting the environment at the expense of economic growth (55 percent)
• Americans believe that global warming is happening (86 percent)
• Americans believe that it's the government's responsibility to provide health care (69 percent)
• Americans support the decriminalization of marijuana (55 percent) and support the legalization of medical marijuana (78 percent)
• Americans are opposed to attacking Iran (68 percent, according to a CNN Poll)
• Americans support labor unions (60 percent)
• Americans want government funding of embryonic stem cell research (56 percent)
• Americans believe that free trade hurts American workers (65 percent)
• Americans believe rich people and corporations aren't paying enough taxes (66 and 71 percent respectively)
• And overall party affiliation? 54 percent of Americans are Democrats (with leaners) and 39 percent are Republicans (with leaners).

Bob also mentions this little tidbit of information:

Of the last 30 Congresses, since 1945, Republicans have controlled the House for a grand total of seven Congresses. Seven out of 30. The 80th Congress, and the 104th-109th. In the Senate, the numbers are slightly better. Ten out of 30.

We know you really, really, really want to think that the country is more conservative, but just because you say it doesn't make it true. Here's a handy, dandy little map brought to you by the newspaper of record that you happen to work for, The New York Times:

See all the blue there, Billy boy? Those are counties that shifted and voted more Democratic than in 2004. That's a lot of blue, isn't it? A bit too much blue to claim that the country is "center-right."

And yet, this moron still has a job, but hopefully not for long.

T Minus 72 Days

"Throughout our history, the words of the Declaration have inspired immigrants from around the world to set sail to our shores. These immigrants have helped transform 13 small colonies into a great and growing nation of more than 300 people."

- Charlottesville, VA, July 4, 2008