Rick Perry and "Niggerhead"

Is Rick Perry a racist? He doesn't seem to be from what those who know him are saying. Was he a little more than insensitive in this situation? Absolutely, especially for a public servant.

WaPo: "In the early years of his political career, Rick Perry began hosting fellow lawmakers, friends and supporters at his family’s secluded West Texas hunting camp, a place known by the name painted in block letters across a large, flat rock standing upright at its gated entrance.

'Niggerhead,' it read."

Here's the insensitivity:

"...the name of this particular parcel did not change for years after it became associated with Rick Perry, first as a private citizen, then as a state official and finally as Texas governor. Some locals still call it that. As recently as this summer, the slablike rock — lying flat, the name still faintly visible beneath a coat of white paint — remained by the gated entrance to the camp."

Perry has a record showing he is not a racist, naming African-American justices and staff members during his tenure as Governor, but in trying to avoid the subject because it's not politically convenient at the current time shows he's more interested in damage control than having the courage to address this issue head on.

Will O'Reilly Quit If Taxed at a Higher Rate?

Absolutely not. And he said as much on The Daily Show.

Here's Jon Stewart taking Bill O'Reilly to the woodshed yet again. I would truly love to see O'Reilly in a serious discussion with Stewart regarding the issues they speak about, instead of his insistence in trying out a punchline here and there. I do believe he's a smart guy - but I also believe he knows where his bread is buttered and therefore leans towards conclusions with which he might not otherwise agree.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

The Solyndra fiasco was reported, or shall I say regurgitated by the media before all the facts were made known.
And the $16 muffins? That's already been debunked as well. Too bad Stewart didn't know anything about it.

Oh, and This Happened Too.

While everyone is in a tizzy after the President's press conference because either A) he nailed it, B) he schooled the Republicans or C) he sold out the liberal "base," this also came to light:

PWIRE: Journalists from across Rupert Murdoch's News International "repeatedly targeted" the former British prime minister Gordon Brown, "attempting to access his voicemail and obtaining information from his bank account, his legal file as well as his family's medical records," the Guardian reports.

"The sheer scale of the data assault on Brown is unusual, with evidence of attempts to obtain his legal, financial, tax, medical and police records as well as to listen to his voicemail. All of these incidents are linked to media organisations. In many cases, there is evidence of a link to News International."

Holy fuckballs! A Murdoch operation hacked the Prime Minister of England?! Is a world wide investigation to see if NewsCorp has tried this elsewhere the next step? In hindsight, it's no wonder they decided to fold NOTW so quickly. This may just be the tip of the iceberg.

Chris Lee Resigns

Here's why.

For Immediate Release: Wednesday, February 9, 2010 

Statement from Congressman Chris Lee (NY-26) 

"It has been a tremendous honor to serve the people of Western New York. I regret the harm that my actions have caused my family, my staff and my constituents. I deeply and sincerely apologize to them all. I have made profound mistakes and I promise to work as hard as I can to seek their forgiveness. 

"The challenges we face in Western New York and across the country are too serious for me to allow this distraction to continue, and so I am announcing that I have resigned my seat in Congress effective immediately."

Heirarchy Complicitus

Mark Fiore's new animation hits the nail on the head regarding the tone deafness of the Catholic Church's failure to address decades of child abuse.

Scandal Sells

What is going on with the MSM feeding frenzy on tyring to put Nancy Pelosi smack dab in the middle of the torture scandal because of Intelligence briefings? While the networks all reported that Pelosi accused the CIA of "lying" in her briefing in opposition to the CIA's assertion that she knew the specific interrogation methods had been used, none of the reports noted that in a letter accompanying the documents, CIA Director Leon Panetta suggested the information in the documents may not be "an accurate summary of what actually happened."

I'm not a Pelosi fan, and if she is not being truthful then she should be gone as well. That being said, she's asked the CIA to release the documents that prove them right and her wrong, but they've refused. If they have her nailed to the wall, then why the refusal? She's also suggested for a truth commissin to sort this all out. Would someone who is lying ask for truth commission? If your operation is being called bogus, then it's in the CIA's best interest to release said documents and prove Pelosi wrong, shut her up and save face. Why won't they do that?

It's also come to light that the former head of the Intelligence Committee, Sen. Bob Graham, is siding with Pelosi. His meticulous notes confirm attendance at only one meeting in which they were not told about waterboarding being used while the CIA said he'd been briefed four times.

Graham: "When I asked the CIA when I had been briefed, they gave me four dates, two in April and two in September of '02. On three of the four occasions, when I consulted my schedule and my notes, it was clear that no briefing had taken place on that date and eventually the CIA concurred in that. So their record-keeping is a little bit suspect."

Ultimately, this is a distraction from the fact that waterboarding was used in August of 2002 and the committee wasn't briefed until September of 2002. That's the story.

The media focusing on Nancy Pelosi and the CIA discrepancy over torture techniques and when they were used is the equivalent of dangling a carrot on a stick in front of a mule. "Oooh! Pelosi called the CIA liars!"

It's a distraction from what they should be covering. It also sells. The CIA is a department with no face. Scandal loves a face, and if they can connect a little, grandmotherly type like Pelosi to torture it sells papers. What are they going to do, post a picture of the CIA building entrance next to the type? Have the CIA logo over the talking heads' shoulders while they try to blame torture on a department instead of someone in the former Vice President's office? Doesn't Pelosi's face over that pundit's shoulder look more scandalous?

PizzaGate? Seriously?!

In yet another example of "We Got Nothin', So We'll Try To Make Anything a Scandal," the fringe zanies are trying to hang an environmental / I'm the president and therefore can request anything hypocrisy moniker on President Obama by insisting that he ordered pizza. From St. Louis. On the taxpayers' dime.

One problem. It's all wrong.

Is this what the wingnuts have come to? Pizzagate? This is what we're going to have to contend with for the next four, and most likely eight, years. Pathetic.

The Gift That Keeps On Giving

Sarah Palin's sister-in-law arrested for burglary

Police say Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's sister-in-law is accused of breaking into the same home twice to steal money.

Deputy Wasilla Police Chief Greg Wood says 35-year-old Diana Palin was arrested Thursday after she was confronted by the homeowner in the governor's hometown of Wasilla. She faces two counts of felony burglary and misdemeanor counts of criminal trespass and theft.

This is really something else. Can a week go by without something happening in Palin World that doesn't show how close we came to dodging that bullet?

You can take the girl out of the trailer park...

What's All The Blagojevichin' About?

Innocent until proven guilty. Sure. But in the political world, when your hands are so dirty that you aren't just brought in for questioning, but actually arrested, I think you're done. And to fan the flames, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich's arrogance just one day before the corrupt shit hit the fan truly shows you how out of touch he was.

But what's all the Blagojevichin' about? According to the wingnuts, it seems that just because Blagojevich and his hair are from Illinois and Obama is from Illinois then *GASP!*, ipso facto, Obama's hands are dirty as well. Even though US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said there was no tie between Obama and the Blagman, and even though rumors surfaced that it was Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel who blew the whistle on the Blagmeister (althought he denies it), even though Obama's push for ethic reform in the state legislature was the beginning of Blagoroonee's shakedown takedown, the wingnuts are frothing at the mouth with their usual guilt by association meme.

Let's take a quick stroll through the wingnut blogosphere, or as I like to call it, Dante's 8th Circle of Hell, and see what they have to say:

Michelle Malkin -"The Democrat culture of corruption" : ...Fitzgerald says President-elect Obama was not implicated in the plethora of charges against Democrats Blago and Harris. The national media went out of their way to absolve him, too. But declaring Team Obama’s hands clean — especially with Blago crony and indicted Obama donor Tony Rezko in the middle of it all — is premature. (And if you’re wondering why I keep putting “Democrat” in front of the accused corruptocrats, it’s because the mainstream newspapers can’t seem to remember to identify their party prominently the way they do when Republicans are nabbed.)

Chicago’s Fox affiliate reports that Obama Chief of Staff and Chicago hometown heavy Rahm Emanuel was the catalyst for the Blago takedown and suggests Rahm-bo tipped off the feds. If so, this raises more questions than it answers about who on the transition team may have talked to Blago and his shakedown artists about what and when. Needless to say, if it were the Republican Bush administration tied to the Blago bust, the White House press corps would be frothing like a pack of Michael Vick’s pit bulls.

Hoo-hoo! "Corruptocrats." She's so clever. And she writes as if this story is being completely ignored and not being covered for the last 36 hours straight. Same with the Cowardly Whale.

Rush Limbaugh: ...By the way, you have to look long and hard in the news today and on television to find that Blago's a Democrat. It's fascinating, but it's very difficult for the national media to find out his party affiliation.

Powerline: ...No doubt Obama would now say that the Rod Blagojevich who tried to sell his vacant Senate seat “isn’t the Rod Blagojevich I knew.” Maybe it’s time to take notice of the fact that Barack Obama is either 1) an astonishingly poor judge of character, or 2) a politician who swims comfortably and successfully in what must be America’s most corrupt pond. This is, apparently, the “change” that millions of Americans voted for.

You're right, John from Powerline. We really didn't want change. We knew all along that Obama's a poor judge of character and is corrupt. We got used to it and wanted more of the same after eight years of the Bush administration.

And it goes on and on from the wingnutosphere. I can't stomach much more so I'll stop there. Stop your whining and Blagojevichin', wingnuts. Obama will be President in 41 days. Get used to it. By the way, are any of them talking about the FBI's investigation into Norm Coleman? Didn't think so.

Palin's Scandal Du Jour

And the hits just keep on coming!

WASHINGTON POST:

Palin Billed State for Nights Spent at Home

ANCHORAGE, Sept. 8 -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has billed taxpayers for 312 nights spent in her own home during her first 19 months in office, charging a "per diem" allowance intended to cover meals and incidental expenses while traveling on state business.

The governor also has charged the state for travel expenses to take her children on official out-of-town missions. And her husband, Todd, has billed the state for expenses and a daily allowance for trips he makes on official business for his wife.

Just think of how many headaches the McCain campaign would have saved with a little vetting. And this is only 10 days after McCain's selection of Palin... or should I say the religious right's selection of Palin?


UPDATE (12:45pm):

TIME MAGAZINE: Sarah Palin's Alaskanomics

Although Palin praised John McCain in her acceptance speech as a man who puts the good of his country ahead of partisan politics, McCain pretty much proved the opposite with his selection of a running mate whose main asset is her ability to reignite the culture wars. So maybe Governor Palin does represent everything that is good and fine about America, as she herself maintains. But spare us, please, any talk about how she is a tough fiscal conservative.

...Of the 50 states, Alaska ranks No. 1 in taxes per resident and No. 1 in spending per resident. Its tax burden per resident is 2½ times the national average; its spending, more than double. The trick is that Alaska's government spends money on its own citizens and taxes the rest of us to pay for it.

...Alaska also ranks No. 1, year after year, in money it sucks in from Washington. In 2005 (the most recent figures), according to the Tax Foundation, Alaska ranked 18th in federal taxes paid per resident ($5,434) but first in federal spending received per resident ($13,950). Its ratio of federal spending received to federal taxes paid ranks third among the 50 states, and in the absolute amount it receives from Washington over and above the amount it sends to Washington, Alaska ranks No. 1.

...Palin bragged that she had vetoed "nearly $500 million" in state spending during her two years as governor. This amounts to less than 2% of the proposed budget.

...Although Palin's words side with McCain in the [oil windfall-profits tax] dispute, her actions side with Obama. Her major legislative accomplishment has been to revamp Alaska's windfall-profits tax in order to increase the state's take. Alaska calls it a "clear and equitable share" tax. The state assumes that extracting oil from the tundra costs about $25 per bbl. and takes as much as 75% of the difference between that and the sale price.

Why is a windfall-profits tax good for Alaska but not for the U.S.? Well, it's obvious, isn't it? People in [Sarah Palin's] Alaska are better than people in the rest of the U.S. ...

UPDATE (3:50pm):


For my friend, Mr. The Elvis Dingeldein, who commented the following...:

Okay, it's now officially time to have Joe Biden fitted with a Matrixesque data port in his skull into which a giant upload spike might be shoved, so that he can quite simply beat the living shit out of Marty Moose with this stuff. Jack in, Biden. Jack the fuck in.

... and inspired me to quickly do this:






It's no driftglass, but he's a fucking artist.

Disappointment

I would be lying if I said I wasn't disappointed.

John Edwards: "In 2006, I made a serious error in judgment and conducted myself in a way that was disloyal to my family and to my core beliefs. I recognized my mistake and I told my wife that I had a liaison with another woman, and I asked for her forgiveness. Although I was honest in every painful detail with my family, I did not tell the public. When a supermarket tabloid told a version of the story, I used the fact that the story contained many falsities to deny it. But being 99%honest is no longer enough.

I was and am ashamed of my conduct and choices, and I had hoped that it would never become public. With my family, I took responsibility for my actions in 2006 and today I take full responsibility publicly. But that misconduct took place for a short period in 2006. It ended then. I am and have been willing to take any test necessary to establish the fact that I am not the father of any baby, and I am truly hopeful that a test will be done so this fact can be definitively established. I only know that the apparent father has said publicly that he is the father of the baby. I also have not been engaged in any activity of any description that requested, agreed to or supported payments of any kind to the woman or to the apparent father of the baby.

It is inadequate to say to the people who believed in me that I am sorry, as it is inadequate to say to the people who love me that I am sorry. In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic. If you want to beat me up - feel free. You cannot beat me up more than I have already beaten up myself. I have been stripped bare and will now work with everything I have to help my family and others who need my help.

I have given a complete interview on this matter and having done so, will have nothing more to say."

I caught David Shuster and Mike Barnicle on Hardball basically saying that it's guys like Edwards that make people distrust politicians. Guys like Edwards? I can think of more than a few politicians worthy of distrust but it has nothing to do with extramarital affairs. They were outraged over the perceived betrayal, not of Elizabeth Edwards, but of all the young volunteers that worked for him and the donors to his campaign. I was one of his donors and that thought didn't cross my mind in the slightest. Barnicle went so far as to call Edwards a "complete fraud."

Does Edwards' affair make his stance on poverty any less important? Does it make his discussions on homeless veterans lies? I'm not taking any particular stance on this subject in defense or condemnation of John Edwards. Everyone makes mistakes and far be it from me to cast judgement of another person's personal matters.

Was it a dumb mistake for a possible presidential candidate? Obviously, but I'm not going to waste energy being outraged over what could have happened had he won the nomination. He didn't, so it's a moot point. There are too many other things to get my hackles up that are more pressing at this time.

I do feel a sense of melancholy for John and Elizabeth Edwards and their family, and hope that they can work through this difficult personal matter, and judging by Mrs. Edwards' statement, I think they're on their way.

Is Obama Christian Enough?

Whenever I hear someone ask about Barack Obama's religion or religious beliefs , I always ask, "Why is that important? What difference does it make?"

Would you refuse to vote for someone on the simple point of his or her religion? If the answer is 'yes' then you don't know your history.

Article Six of the US Constitution states that "...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. " Our forefathers, religious men all, knew of the consequences of a theocracy and actually wrote a directive in our soon to be 222 year old Constitution to prevent such a thing happening in the United States as it happens in Saudi Arabia or Iran.

The reason I bring this up is because when I hear supposed "Christians" like Cal Thomas not only question someone's Christianity, but whether they are "Christian enough", I shake my head in amazement.

In a column published last week, Cal Thomas took a verbal swing at Barack Obama's claim to be a committed Christian. "He can call himself anything he likes," wrote the syndicated columnist, "but there are certain markers among the evangelicals he is courting that one must meet in order to qualify for that label."

..."... [T]here is a clear requirement for one to qualify as a Christian and Obama doesn't meet that requirement," stated Thomas. "One cannot deny central tenets of the Christian faith, including the deity and uniqueness of Christ as the sole mediator between God and Man and be a Christian. Such people do have a label applied to them in scripture. They are called 'false prophets.'"

Oh really, Mr. Thomas? He has to meet with the approval of evangelicals to "qualify" as a Christian? And which evangelicals would those be? Do you happen to have a list? Perhaps we can start with the more Christian ones and work our way down, seeing as you know who the real Christians are and who are "false prophets."

A quick Google search of "Cal Thomas" reveals a few books he's written, his official website and various articles and appearances he's made on Fox News. His Wikipedia page reveals a very light biography stating that he was a reporter in the 60's and 70's and the Vice President of the Moral Majority from 1980-1985. There is no mention of schooling, whether secular or seminary.

And yet this man seems to know who is more Christian, less Christian or Christian at all. I don't claim to be a religious expert, but I'll defer to someone who commented on Thomas' website in regards to Obama's Christianity:

Posted by radar, June 20, 2008 4:36:41

First, let me say that I am a political moderate; with over 40 years voting, I have probably divided my votes equally between Republicans and Democrats, altho [sic] I have also voted for 3rd party candidates. I agree with Cal that no one should use their Christianity to gain political (or any other) advantage. While Obama may be headed that way, clearly the Republican Party has been doing this for years. I hope and pray that all guilty folks will stop, be they Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative, black or white, or whatever. I also am moderate when it comes to my Christianity; my father and both grandfathers were ministers, and I have been in Baptist churches all of my 64 years, and currently serve as Chairman of Deacons in a Southern Baptist Church. Based on my 64 years of study and being taught at my ancestors' tables, I disagree with Cal as to our right to judge another person's Christianity; while we can judge someone's actions, to say someone is not a Christian when they profess to be is not our job. If someone who professes to be a Christian doesn't behave as a Christian, we certainly have a responsibility to confront that individual, but not to denounce him/her as being a non-Christian. I think Cal crosses the line when he writes that Obama is not a Christian.

Truly the Christian answer.

Perhaps it is Cal Thomas for whom we should be reserving the right to confront as "someone who professes to be a Christian but doesn't behave as a Christian." And even so, for the sake of argument, let's listen to those evangelicals Thomas speaks of and see what they have to say about those "certain markers... one must meet in order to qualify for that [Christian] label."

From the Washington Post:

This month, the Illinois senator held a closed-door meeting in Chicago with almost 40 Christian leaders, including evangelical heavyweights such as the Rev. Franklin Graham, publishing magnate Steve Strang and megachurch pastor Bishop T.D. Jakes.

..."I've never seen anything quite like it before," said evangelical author Stephen Mansfield, who wrote "The Faith of George W. Bush" and has a forthcoming book about Obama. "To be running against a dyed-in-the-wool Republican, and to be reaching into the Christian community as wisely and knowledgeably as (Obama) is -- understanding their terms and their values -- is just remarkable."

Strang wrote in a blog, Obama "won over the loyalties of many. He came across as thoughtful and much more of a 'centrist' than I would have expected," Strang wrote, adding that he hopes McCain will host a similar gathering.

It seems that the religious evangelical leaders that met with Senator Obama were impressed by him, much more so than a crackpot like Cal Thomas would have been, with his preconceived ideas and his notion that he can decide who is a Christian and who is not. The fact is that Cal Thomas is a political tool, a pundit hiding in evangelical clothing, casting doubt on those he is told to cast doubt upon. He is a reporter, and a hackish one at that, using lies and smears for his political agenda. Is that how a Christian acts?

And speaking of acting like a Christian, if you're not planning on voting for Obama because of a religious question, that leaves John McCain. And is McCain a Christian? A man who cheated on and divorced his first wife after finding out she had a disfiguring car accident while he was a POW? A man involved in a savings and loan scandal that robbed thousands of their retirement funds and cost the US taxpayer $3.4 billion? A man who was tortured for five and a half years during the Vietnam War and spoke out against torture his entire life in public service until it was politically convenient for him to vote against a ban on waterboarding? Is that the kind of "Christian" man you would vote into the Oval Office?

As the first lines of the Cal Thomas/Obama smear e-mail I received state, "Please read this and take this coming election very seriously. Please pray about how you will vote." And for those of you who do pray, I hope you will pray for the strength to vote for what you believe is right, and not for what you are told to believe is right.


Also read: Keep Cal Thomas Away From Your Kids

Rudy, Rudy, Rudy...

Giuliani refused to take questions here today about allegations that travel expenses were picked up by obscure city offices when he was mayor of New York City.
“We’ve already explained it,” he said, walking past reporters after a town hall meeting.

Giuliani, who is normally friendly to reporters, bristled past them, and campaign staffers were unusually physical in keeping the press away.

Here comes the Gestapo! It's only a matter of time before the horns break through on Giuliani's forehead.

Giuliani Scandal Du Jour

ABC News: Well before it was publicly known he was seeing her, then-married New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani provided a police driver and city car for his mistress Judith Nathan, former senior city officials tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com.

"She used the PD as her personal taxi service," said one former city official who worked for Giuliani.

Tick, tock, tick, tock...

...former city officials said Giuliani expanded the budget for his security detail at the time... many of the security expenses were initially billed to obscure city agencies, effectively hiding them from oversight.

Tick, tock, tick, tock...

New York City Comptroller Bill Thompson: "That's not the way that we operate these days, and it would not be the preferred way of doing business. In the end, it's a very convoluted way of getting things done."
"If anyone hoped that no one would notice, they were being foolish," Thompson told ABC News.

Does the enjoyment I'm currently feeling make me a bad person?