Hasselbeck Said What Now?

I saw this headline in passing and didn't think twice about it...

Hasselbeck supports gay marriage, calls Obama a ‘cool guy’

... but a friend of mine brought it to my attention hoping I would comment on it and saying it needed my "wry sense of realism."

So here I am thinking, hell, what with a new baby, my wifey returning to work this week after her maternity leave, my softball team winning the league championship this season (yours truly manning 1st base and managing), making the familial rounds showing off the new progeny and scraping spare time together to do the occasional handyman jobs necessary to maintain a 90-year old house that we just bought, I guess I need to produce something for the semi-neglected blog. I'm trying not to completely ignore it but's not like I've been burning up the keyboard lately either.

So Hasselbeck.... Hasselbeck... uh, nope. I got nothing.

You see, the thing about The View's Elisabeth Hasselbeck is that I really don't give a rat's ass what she has to say, either for or against President Obama, gay marriage, abortion rights or anything else for that matter.

Why should I care that she thinks Obama is a "cool guy" when she campaigned for Sarah Palin? Why should I listen to someone's view on abortion rights after she said the morning after pill is the same thing as "birthing a baby and leaving it out on the street"? Does it matter to me that she needed a "mani-pedi to prepare" for an interview with the leader of the free world instead of preparing by, you know, actually researching facts and statistics?



It doesn't matter. And do you know why?

The woman is a dolt. I mean, her claim to fame is eating bugs on the Survivor reality TV series while her hair fell out for God's sake. So why would I care that she should shift her views as the wind blows?

If one minute she says she thinks the morning after pill is akin to leaving a baby in the street, but also believes the government shouldn't tell a woman what to do with her body, how can you take her seriously? If she says she supports gay marriage but is a Sarah Palin supporter, I would think she is, at the least, confused about her beliefs. So why would I give a shit about her thinking President Obama is "cool"?

You know what would be cool? If we stopped elevating not ready for prime time players like Elisabeth Hasselbeck on the same level of a Barbara Walters simply because she happens to be on the same show.  Even Walters can make casting mistakes.

Who's next? Snooki?

Colbert Is A Terrorist! Follow The Money

Classic.

My Response to a Wingnut

POSTED BY JHW22

After a long back-and-forth with a Republican who showed no grasp of facts or staying on a subject, I was done with the jerk. But then he had to bring up ACORN, the Black Panthers and something else (which I'm not about to go back to check on for fear of blowing my top). To that I responded the following -- which you are free to copy and paste as needed:

OK, so I was about to counter each one of your questions regarding ACORN and the Black Panthers, etc. But then I realized that you are a member of the party of personal responsibility so you should take responsibility and do your own research. I can tell you that I know the answers to all of those questions and I can tell you that the answers are not what Fox wants you to think they are. You will be so disappointed.

So I am not going to do the legwork for you, you should be a grown-up enough to handle that on your own. But I will give you some big tips (they're good ones so write them down):

1) When you see multiple sites support a claim, make sure the multiple sites don't use the exact same language. If you find 5 sites that pick up the same exact text, it only counts as one site.

2) Check dates. You may think you're reading something new, when in fact the story may have taken place earlier and is being presented as something it isn't. Make sure you know who was President during the events in question (this is especially helpful on the Black Panther case).

3) Check parties involved for conflicts. Just because someone USED to be a liberal Democrat, doesn't mean they still are. So don't let labels (because I know you don't like them) sway you into accepting what they say as fact.

4) Don't rely on articles. Check court documents, press releases, financial statements, interviews, speeches, etc. Articles and blogs are rarely a true representation of what actually happened.

5) For a broader picture, it's good to also research similar situations (for example, how many Republican voter registration organizers have been sentenced to prison -- good for balance and just to be fair).

6) It's also good to know definitions. For example, the difference between voter fraud and voter registration fraud is a doozy. And be sure to read all policies and actions (say for ACORN) taken within an organization to catch, prevent and report those things to the authorities.

7) It's good, when video (say of a fake pimp) is involved to see the whole video or to at least read court documents that show what REALLY happened when footage was edited. (Shirley Sherrod wasn't the first black person edited to look like she was saying something she wasn't.)

I guess that's about it. For now, anyway. See, I have spent months and years researching shit like you mentioned and I have learned that it takes more than reading comments on blogs and watching TV to understand the whole story. In fact, I have learned that anyone who thinks any of those issues can be addressed in less than 30 seconds doesn't really want to know the whole story.

Sooo.... because I think you need to learn this all on your own and I don't want to waste the time and energy I have spent learning more about these BS claims than you probably ever will, then I am not about to share with you what I have learned. You can be a responsible citizen all on your own. And until then, ask yourself this question: are YOU prepared to learn that Fox and stupid emails, that float around as if it's in an email it must be true, are wrong? Because they are. And you're going to have to face that all on your own time.

Quote of the Day

"After months of promising a look at his party agenda for his plans for America, his chief proposal, when you look at it, apparently was that the president should fire his economic team. Very constructive advice and we thank the leader for that."

~Vice President Joe Biden regarding House Minority Leader John Boehner's touted economic plan

Fox: The Parent Company Trap

Another awesome Jon Stewart segment.



So, do Fox News employees know that Murdoch's Newscorp partner is funding Park51 or are they really that fucking stupid? My guess is depending on the show, it's the former with a little bit of the latter. The little bit being the hosts of Fox and Friends.

How Childish

Via Oliver Willis:



Kudos to the man recording the video for not backing down. What, did Sarah and the First Dude think they were going to intimidate him by taking pictures with their BlackBerries? If this idiot has higher aspirations in 2012, I have no idea how she's going to handle the media, let alone your average man on the street with a camera every day for an 18 month campaign. But I still think she won't bother, because it's too much work and she's too lazy.

Cartoon of the Day

Hannity: America Caused Muslim Hostilities? NO WAY

Sean Hannity doesn't understand why some believe that American actions in the Middle East has caused anti-American sentiment.

Via GottaLaff:



Convenient time to cut to a commercial after four consecutive legitimate questions from a Frank Luntz focus group in opposition to what Hannity is desperately trying to push.

Obviously, Hannity is not so naive to believe that US foreign policy has absolutely nothing to do with anti-American sentiment by jihadists and terrorist (not "Muslims"), but when your agenda is such that you have to push the GOP/Newscorp line and are laughing you way to the bank because of it, you just act stupid and shrug your shoulders in disbelief.

ADDING... Gee, I wonder what gives the outside world the idea that America is so frightened that it rages against an entire religion?

Quote of the Week

So virulent is the Islamophobic hysteria of the neocon and Fox News right — abetted by the useful idiocy of the Anti-Defamation League, Harry Reid and other cowed Democrats — that it has also rendered Gen. David Petraeus’s last-ditch counterinsurgency strategy for fighting the war inoperative. How do you win Muslim hearts and minds in Kandahar when you are calling Muslims every filthy name in the book in New York?

~ Frank Rich

Must Reads

Bob Cesca: Ground Zero Mosque Opponents Have a Lot of Work to Do

Eugene Robinson: Republicans pander over 'Ground Zero mosque'

Todd Purdum: Washington, We Have a Problem

David Weigel: Today In Journalism

BooMan: Your Daily Dose of Right Wing Stupid

Rude Pundit: You Hate America If You Are Against Park 51

Dick Cavett: Real Americans, Please Stand Up

Maureen Dowd: No Love From the Lefties

Gladstone: 3 Reasons the “Ground Zero Mosque” Debate Makes No Sense

The Ecomonist: What the Arab papers say

And so may other good editorial cartoons today...
John Sherffius, Stuart Carlson, and Mike Luckovich.

President Obama's Weekly Address - August 21, 2010

No Corporate Takeover of Our Democracy

More Tabloid Rag Ranting

I know I've been a little obsessed with the inanity that are the local papers, specifically the Daily News here in New York City, first with sports columnist Mike Lupica's op-ed piece, because we all want to know what a sports writer thinks about the Not-At-Ground-Zero-Not-A-Mosque, and then raging over the ridiculous editorial that takes credit for forcing President Obama to make a statement regarding HR847, the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, as if somehow the president was secretly against it because he hadn't commented on it.

Usually I don't bother with their crappy coverage, but I stopped by to see if my letter had been published (...heh...) and caught a couple of letters written by others in the Daily News' "Voice of the People" section. I suppose the editors don't bother fact checking anything written by their readers before publishing because what I read was pretty appalling.

Here are a few goodies:

Move the mosque

Fairfield, N.J.: Mayor Bloomberg has it wrong. Today's soldiers are not fighting for our country's religious freedoms but to keep Islamic terrorists out. Respect is a two-way street. The mosque builders should build somewhere else.

Beth Evans

Really, Beth? So I suppose the soldiers don't mean it when they say, "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..." in the first line of their oath?

Sickened by health plan

Brooklyn: Besides President Obama's support for the Islamic center and not giving seniors the $250 raise promised, there might be an even worse controversy awaiting him. Although promising that his health care reform wouldn't impose any new middle-class taxes, buried in the law it states that workers' health care premiums paid for by employers must be declared on W-2 forms starting in 2011 and be taxed. This would put many middle-class workers and retirees into higher tax brackets. Our taxes would rise by thousands a year. Nice going, Mr. Obama!

Myron Shulman

Oh, Myron. You really must stop believing everything Rush tells you, or what you see on Fox News.

If Myron had just taken 30 seconds to fact check his claims (like I did), he'd know he was dead wrong. 750,000 checks have already been sent out to alleviate the Medicare donut hole written into the law back in 2003 (what party was in Congressional majority at that time? Please remind me, Myron) with another 3 million checks estimated to go out over the next fiscal year.

And while it is true that employer health care premiums will be added as an informational line on your W-2s, it will not be considered taxable income. By the way, as FactCheck.org notes...

Those who followed the 2008 presidential campaign may recall that it was Republican candidate John McCain who proposed to make the value of employer-sponsored health insurance taxable. Democrats hated that idea; Barack Obama ran an ad claiming, falsely, that it would be the "largest middle-class tax increase in history."

So it is ironic that some of President Obama’s critics now claim that the bill he signed would do what his opponent proposed and he denounced. Ironic, but false.

It took 30 seconds, Myron. Check your facts before assuming the smear e-mails you're receiving are true.

An open wound

Sunnyside: We are not saying they can't build their mosque. We are saying they can't build it there. We will never fully heal from 9/11. I still cry.

Lynn Ward

We know what you're saying, Lynn, and it's still wrong. As long as they are abiding by zoning laws and city ordinances, it's perfectly legal. As I've said before, would you prevent the Roman Catholic church from building near the Oklahoma City bombing site because Timothy McVeigh was raised Catholic?

Over his head

Monroe, N.J.: President Obama's lack of experience is showing. He has taken a bad economy and made it much worse. Now he's in favor of the "victory mosque" at Ground Zero. America has proven that it's not a racist country by electing him, but he is not meant for this job.

Tom Scott

The economy is bad, but in my opinion, President Obama hasn't made it worse. Although we are technically out of a recession (GDP growth for two consecutive quarters), unemployment continues to hover between 9.5 and 10%. However, had it not been for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, we could be currently looking at an unemployment rate of up to 16%.



Red lines: Bush's job "growth" in his last 13 months in office. Blue lines: Obama's first 15 months. Although we're not out of the woods yet, it looks like positive job growth to me. But all you have to do is read the "victory mosque" comment to know where Tom Scott's head is, and no matter how hard he looks, he's not going to find any common sense up his ass.

You see where I'm headed with all this so I'll stop now and there are more than a few common sense letters in this "people's editorial" section. But what's the point of publishing them if they're not fact based? There are not two equal sides to every argument. Sometimes, actually most times, one side is right and one side is wrong. I just wish there were more vetting by the common man before deciding which side they chose to believe.

Parody NY Post Commericial

NSFW - Here's an awesome response to the New York Times "Weekender" commercials brought to you by a very funny group at Funny or Die. It's funny because it's true.

The NY Post's (unofficial) response to the New York Times Weekender commercial - watch more funny videos

The Stupidest Member of Congress

Michele Bachmann? Virginia Foxx? Steve King?... Patrick McHenry?...

...uh... John McCain?...

BEHOLD! Louie Gohmert!

NY Rag Takes Credit For WH 9/11 Responder Bill Comment

I am speechless. Well, almost speechless or I wouldn't be writing with fury right now.

I just came across this headline in the New York Daily News:

Wham! And thanks, Bam: At last, Obama backs health bill for 9/11 responders

It seems that the editors at this bastion of journalistic excellence are taking credit for what they see as putting pressure on President Obama with the headline, "9/11 SLAM ON BAM," to make a statement in favor of a bill providing health care and compensation to sickened Ground Zero rescue and recovery workers. Yes, the same bill that the Republicans in the House voted against on procedural grounds. The same bill Rep. Anthony Weiner freaked about when co-sponsor of the bill, Rep. Peter King, accused the Democrats of playing politics with the bill, while not bothering to whip up votes for his own legislation.

Are the Daily News editors high, stupid or both? Every Democrat save four voted for the bill. We have a Democratic president. 12 out of 178 Republicans voted for it. Logic would dictate that the White House would obviously be in favor of the bill and would sign it into law. But that would mean that logic would have to enter into the minds of these hapless editors.

Oh, they do acknowledge that the Republicans should have the "decency" to stand for what is right and vote in favor of the bill... in the very last line of the piece. Up until then, no comment from the White House meant an assumption by the Daily News that, for some insane reason, President Obama wouldn't be in favor of such a measure. After all, he spoke about the Not-In-Ground-Zero-Not-A-Mosque, why didn't he weigh in on this?

Maybe because legislation passed by a Democratically led Congress on such an issue is a no-brainer and ANY president in Obama's position would be committing political suicide if he vetoed it. But then again, why educate the reader when you can stir up faux controversies to sell your rags?

New Poll: Majority of Americans Are Idiots - UPDATED

18 percent of Americans say that President Obama is a Muslim, an increase of seven points since Pew Research last asked the same question in March 2009. 40% aren't sure. Only 34% know he is Christian. So 58% of Americans are basically morons.  ... Sounds about right.

Immediately I'm hearing pundits blaming the White House for its lack of message on the issue. Seriously? Are we expecting the White House to put out a statement saying that presently, President Obama is still a Christian and we'll be updated weekly as to his religious status? It's too bad they didn't have a Bush Denomination of the Week update.  But hey, he was a white guy so he couldn't have been a Muslim, right?

UPDATE (8:20pm): I truly don't know what to say. I think I'm living in BizarroWorld.

Jen Psaki, White House deputy communications director:  

President Obama is a committed Christian, and his faith is an important part of his daily life. He prays every day, he seeks a small circle of Christian pastors to give him spiritual advice and counseling, he even receives a daily devotional that he uses each morning. The President's Christian faith is a part of who he is, but not a part of what the public or the media is focused on everyday.

The poll's findings are not surprising given the scope of the issues we are focused on-a recovering economy, bringing troops home from Iraq, putting healthcare and financial reform implementation in place. The President's strong Christian faith is what guides him through these challenges but he doesn't wear it on his sleeve.

I guess we really will see a weekly faith status update. And I can only shake my head in embarrassment.

(H/T Bob Cesca)

Too Dumb To Tweet

So according to Sarah Palin, Dr. Laura can say anything she wants because it's her right to freedom of speech, but if she is criticized for her comments by others using their right to freedom of speech, they're actually being "Constitutional obstructionists" and are "trying 2silence" her...

Huh... I guess Trig really is her son after all.*


UPDATE (9:23am): Joan Walsh weighs in.

UPDATE (8/20/10, 7pm):

* I was approached privately by a friend wanting clarification on the last line of this post regarding Trig.

In no way was my intention to make fun of Trig. I was insulting Sarah's intelligence. When publishing this post I thought I might be treading on thin ice by making that comment and some might misconstrue what I meant. I was saying Sarah Palin is an idiot. But either way you look at it, it was insensitive on my part. So for that, my apologies.

From now on, I'll just come right out and say Sarah Palin is a moron.

NY Daily News: Letter to the Editor

Dear Editors:

I used to be a Mike Lupica fan, that is until I read his column in your Monday, August 16th, 2010 edition, "Ground Zero mosque debate is about common sense, sensitivity to 9/11 vics, not religious freedom."

In and of itself, the title alone shows that Mr. Lupica could not be more wrong. I would write to him myself but he doesn't have the courtesy to leave leave an e-mail address or provide a comments section for responses as do most other opinion columnists.

Where do I begin?

If we are to make this issue about "common sense" and about "sensitivity" as Mr. Lupica states, then how much more common sense do we need to demonstrate than showing the world, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, that regardless of the tragedy of September 11th and its victims, regardless of the scar that remains a gaping hole in downtown Manhattan after nine long years, that our country and the resolve of its citizens is strong enough to refuse to allow our emotions to cloud our judgement and compromise our principles? How do we stand tall in the eyes of the world and more importantly, how do we look at ourselves in the mirror if we decide to abandon Constitutional rights of our fellow Americans when it is emotionally convenient?

There is no contradiction in President Obama's statements, as Mr. Lupica would lead us to believe. There was no walkback of his stance. President Obama was affirming our First Amendment rights when he said, "I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country." Whether or not it's a good idea is not for him to say, as it ultimately doesn't matter. Not commenting on the "wisdom" of the decision is irrelevant as it is a local decision. I find it interesting how those in favor of limited government and states' rights look for a federal response or intervention when it suits their needs.

If we forego our rights just this one time for sensitivity's sake, what is the next step? Do we forbid the building of a Roman Catholic church near the Oklahoma City bombing site because of Timothy McVeigh's religious upbringing? Should we prevent Muslims from worshipping just two blocks further north than the proposed site, as they've done for the last 40 years? Is that still too close and insensitive? Do we shut down the mosque at the Penatgon? After all, it's not two blocks away but in the very building that was hit on 9/11. Is Mr. Lupica suggesting we base our decisions on mob rule and not the rule of law? Is that how we should conduct trials as well? Should we have the families of rape or murder victims pronounce sentencing for sensitivity's sake?

The government has no authority or right to tell any religion where they can or cannot build places of worship as long as they adhere to local laws and ordinances. Not a church, not a synagogue and not a mosque. It's been this way since the founding of the country. It should be this way now.

And again, let's call this construction plan what it actually is: this is a community center equivalent to a YMCA, complete with a basketball court and culinary school, with Muslim prayer rooms in its upper two floors. It is not a mosque.

But where Mr. Lupica flies off the rails is in comparing the opinion of Obama's thoughts on LeBron James to defending a religious group's First Amendment rights. You know, because they're so equivalent. Maybe the President should create March Madness pool with all the world's religions and decide who'll be in the Final Four? We can call it  Mecca Madness.

But the topper has to be his last sentence.

Everything Bloomberg and Barack Obama say about this sounds right. But if the only constituency that matters here - the ones left behind by the victims of Sept. 11 - think they're wrong, they are.

So according to Mr. Lupica, two plus two equal four unless a majority disagrees, and because they're the only ones "that matter" (we'll just forget about the hundreds of American Muslims that died on 9/11) they'll just insist the answer is wrong. And Lupica will agree with them.

Stick to the sports pages, Mike. You'll embarrass yourself a little less.

Combat Troops Leaving Iraq NOW

All combat troops are leaving Iraq as I watch MSNBC. Richard Engel is in the back of the last truck in the convoy that will cross into Kuwait any moment. Rachel Maddow is reporting from Baghdad. Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews are in-studio. They are the only network covering this historic moment. It's as awe-inspiring as the invasion was shock-inspiring.

50,000 troops will stay one more year as training and security forces. But all combat troops are coming home RIGHT NOW.

This Is Madness

When even Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan (PAT BUCHANAN!) gang up on Newt Gingrich, you know there's a problem.

Dr. Laura Wants Her Rights "Back"

Why is it when someone is expressing their First Amendment rights in disagreeing with someone else's bigoted, racist, insanely stupid comments, it's mistakenly perceived as an infringement of the latter's First Amendment rights? Nobody stopped "Dr." Laura Schlessinger from shouting "nigger" in a crowded radio station, and no one is stopping others from saying she's an asshole for doing so and complaining to the station and her sponsors. See? She spoke freely. Listeners responded freely. First Amendment rights for all! So where were her rights infringed upon?

"Dr." Laura, Sarah Palin and every other moron who waves Constitutional rights in peoples' faces without knowing what the hell they are should realize that exercising their First Amendment right to freedom of speech does not make them immune to the consequences and repercussions of whatever idiotic thing spews from their mouths.

So Much For The Libertarian

Isn't Rand Paul for limited government? Well, yes, unless it's politically convenient to side with Tea Party know-nothings who pick and choose which Constitutional rights apply to whom.

Kentucky Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul says that he opposes developing plans for a mosque to be built in close proximity to "Ground Zero" in New York City.

Great job, hypocrite.

Quote of the Day

"Kebabs do not threaten our way of life." 

~ Eugene Robinson on the Republican politicization of the not Mosque not on Ground Zero

Bobby Thomson Dies at 86

NY Times: Bobby Thomson, who hit “the shot heard round the world” — an epic home run for the New York Giants against the Brooklyn Dodgers’ Ralph Branca at the Polo Grounds on Oct. 3, 1951, to climax baseball’s most memorable pennant drive — died Monday at his home in Savannah, Ga. He was 86.

In the Shadow of Columbine

POSTED BY JHW22

On April 20, 1999 two boys entered their high school loaded up and ready to shoot in a town called Columbine.

On May 1, 1999 the National Rifle Association held it's annual meeting in Denver, CO approximately 20 miles from Columbine.

Victims were still in the hospital. Parents were still looking into bedrooms that were just as their children left them 11 days earlier, never to return. The grief was raw. Time had not yet had a chance to pass for families suffering the shock and despair of violent deaths of their loved ones. Colorado did not want the NRA meeting in the shadows of their grief.

The N.R.A., which is fiercely opposed to sensible gun laws, has urged its members to attend as a show of unity, if only for a day. On a purely emotional level, this is an insult to grieving families and to a city still shaken by tragedy. Mayor Wellington Webb bluntly told the group last week, ''We don't want you here.''

The NRA derided the desire that the meeting not be held so close, so soon:

Heston waved to the crowd from the dais with gritty determination and what appeared to be a dead raccoon stapled to his head. He began his opening remarks by addressing Mayor Webb's request that the NRA not "come here. We don't want you here."

The crowd booed at the mention of Webb's name, and one attendee shouted out, "Get out of our country, Wellington Webb!" much to the amusement of the crowd.

Today, almost nine years after the horror of September 11, famous members of the NRA say it's too soon, too close, for Park51/Cordoba House, a community center, to be New York City blocks from where the Twin Towers once stood.

But if 11 days was soon enough for guns, shouldn't nine years be soon enough for community?

Coward

"The First Amendment protects freedom of religion," reads a statement from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's office (D-Nev.). "Senator Reid respects that but thinks that the mosque should be built someplace else. If the Republicans are being sincere, they would help us pass this long overdue bill to help the first responders whose health and livelihoods have been devastated because of their bravery on 911, rather than continuing to block this much-needed legislation."

This is what's wrong with the Senate Democratic leadership. He has no balls. He can't even stand up for Constitutional protections guaranteed to its American citizens without fear of losing in November to a nutcase Teabagger.



Heckuva job, Harry.

Olbermann: "There is no 'Ground Zero Mosque'"

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

"...[T]his is America, dammit.

And in America, when somebody comes for your neighbor, or his bible, or his torah, or his Atheists' Manifesto, or his Koran, you and I do what our fathers did, and our grandmothers did, and our founders did. You and I speak up."

This Guy Wants To Be President

Newt Gingrinch: "Nazis don't have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust Museum in Washington," Gingrich said on Fox News. "We would never accept the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbor. There is no reason for us to accept a mosque next to the World Trade Center," he said.

Equating Islam, a religion with 1.5 billion followers... to Nazis.

Code Words and Dog Whistles

I'm late to the party on this one but I really don't remember much being said about this. Please correct me if I'm wrong (I was away that week):

Rallying the GOP to win in November and urging supporters to "get on the bus," [GOP Chairman Michael] Steele capped off his call to action by predicting that "Nancy Pelosi will be in the back of the bus."

Why is it that the AAINO (African-American In Name Only) GOP Chairman is the most insensitive when it comes to racial dog whistles? I know he's mentioning Nancy Pelosi in this little rant, but she's two steps away from the Oval Office... and who's in there now? Oh, yeah.

"Back of the bus," Michael?

Nigga, please!

Sarah's Survey

sur·vey –noun
a sampling, or partial collection, of facts, figures, or opinions taken and used to approximate or indicate what a complete collection and analysis might reveal.

Sarah Palin's definition of a survey:
a skewed, biased questionnaire designed to malign, mislead and disinform; if you disagree with the content of the survey, then disregard and throw it away, as you may skew they intended outcome.

From the Palingate website comes a story of an RNC letter with Palin's name on it and an accompanying survey. The second paragraph caught my eye.

"If you think Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid are doing a good job running America, then put this down. This Victory 2010 Survey isn't for you."

That's right. The RNC and Sarah Palin are pushing an anti-Democratic survey, sending it to registered Republicans and telling them not to send it in if they think Obama is doing a good job. I don't know about you, but I think that pretty much defeats the whole purpose of a survey, unless the purpose is to advance ridiculously skewed numbers to shoehorn them into a desired result.

Here are the questions:



Wealth redistribution, future debt, bowing to foreign leaders, border fences and give us money. In other words, nothing new. But if you don't agree with us, for God's sake, DO NOT send back this survey.  Although it doesn't matter because we'll see the answers and throw it in the trash anyway.

Presidential

President Obama: "As a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America. And our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country and that they will not be treated differently by their government is essential to who we are. The writ of the Founders must endure."

Greg Sargent: Obama's speech transcends the politics of the moment, and will go down as a defining and perhaps even a breakthrough performance. Obama recognized that this dispute is a seminal one that goes to the core of our running argument about pluralism and minority rights and to the core of who we are. He understood that the gravity of the moment required an equally large and momentous response. And he delivered.

Of course, those who say they are trying to help elect politicians that "know the Constitution" have a different take. Sometimes I wish that those who say they support the Constitution and want to protect it, actually read the damned thing once in a while.

Abbey Lincoln Dies at 80

NYTimes: Abbey Lincoln, a singer whose dramatic vocal command and tersely poetic songs made her a singular figure in jazz, died on Saturday in Manhattan. She was 80 and lived on the Upper West Side...

...Ms. Lincoln’s career encompassed outspoken civil rights advocacy in the 1960s and fearless introspection in more recent years, and for a time in the 1960s she acted in films with Sidney Poitier.

Must Reads

Electablog: BREAKING! Gibbs Attacks "Professional Right"

Joe Gandelman: No, Virginia, There Is No Liberal Media Conspiracy

Josh Kraushaar: Senate In Play, With Or Without Reid

Elvis Dingeldein: First Amendment to Newt Gingrich: SUCK IT

Peter Schuck: Birthright of a Nation

Sheryl Gay Stolberg: Obama Says Mosque Upholds Principle of Equal Treatment

President Obama's Weekly Address - August 14, 2010

Honoring Social Security, Not Privatizing It

Terror Babies... Shazzam!

The House of Representatvies' own Gomer Pyle is freaking out over terror babies. TERROR BABIES! Republican Rep. Louis Gohmert (Texas... where else?) is convinced, CONVINCED I TELL YOU!, that illegal terrorist Muslim immigrants are having babies in this country as sleeper cells who will commit heinous acts of terrorism in 15 to 20 years. And Surprise! Surprise! Surprise!, he has no actual proof.



IEEEE! TERROR BABIES!

Oh, and just to make us all feel a little better, Louis Gohmert was a judge.  ...Oy...

Tancredo AGAINST Repealing 14th Amendment?!

Tom Tancredo is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma surrounded by a douchebag.

Via TPM:
It turns out that Tom Tancredo... actually opposes changing the Constitution in order to end birthright citizenship.

...Instead of changing the Constitution to put a stop to so-called "anchor babies," Tancredo says he would instigate a good old-fashioned court battle.

Reports CNN:

Tancredo also said he would force the issue "through the mechanism we use to fund education. We could say for instance that we are not going to provide support for people, the children of people who are here illegally."*

Snapping his fingers for emphasis, he explained, "That would immediately start a lawsuit just like that and hopefully it would get to the Supreme Court right away."

* That's the douchebag part.

Stewart and the Ground Zero Mosque

Funny that I would comment on the compromisers and nutbags of the sort-of-near-Ground-Zero-Mosque-but-not really-at-Ground-Zero ridiculousness and the Daily Show would cover it just minutes later. I've got my finger on the pulse, people!

Anyway, they do it a lot better.

Stop Catering to the Crazies

I knew New York Governor David Paterson was blind, but I didn't know he was dumb too.

Paterson agreed that there is "no reason" why the Cordoba House shouldn't be built at the site known as Park51. But in light of political response from conservatives, the governor is open to state intervention to help explore alternatives. "Frankly, if the sponsors were looking for property anywhere at a distance that would be such that it would accommodate a better feeling among the people who are frustrated," Paterson said, "I would look into trying to provide them with the state property they would need."

What the fuck, Dave? I know you're having a "can't we all get along" moment, but for fuck's sake, the argument against building Cordoba House is based on rage, bigotry, religious intolerance and irrational fear.

And where is this proposed property you'd look to provide? North of 14th Street? The Upper East Side? The Bronx? ...Buffalo? How far away from Ground Zero is far enough? Because the fact of the matter is that those you are trying to appease with your good intentioned idea will never be satisfied. They range from the politically opportunistic to the irrational to the just plain crazy. They will never agree to any cultural center or any mosque, anywhere. And to think that the overall problem of their intolerance will go away if only the site for the proposed center were further away from where hundreds of American Muslims tragically died at the World Trade Center along with the rest of the 9/11 victims is astonishingly naive.

Palin's Facebook Scrub Continued

Just for the fun of it.



17 minutes later...



...but shit like this remains.



Just sayin'.

More Like This, Please

"...Would you like Fox’s right to free press put up to a vote and say well, if five states approved it, let’s wait till the other 45 states do? These are fundament constitutional rights. The Bill of Rights guarantees Fox News and you, Chris Wallace, the right to speak. It’s in the constitution. And the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the denial of our citizens of the equal rights to equal access to justice under the law, is a violation of our fundamental rights."

(H/T Think Progress)

Dumbass Quote of the Day

Do as I say, not as I do. ‎

"It doesn't matter what I do, people need to hear what I have to say. There's no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn't matter what I live."

~ Newt Gingrich in an Esquire profile regarding his less than moral personal life

BREAKING NEWS: Plane Down in Alaska

(Bumped)

10:38am: A plane has gone down in Alaska killing some of its nine passengers. Among the passengers on the plane are former Senator Ted Stevens and former Navy Secretary and NASA Chief Sean O'Keefe.  No word as to who specifically has been killed as bad weather has prevented rescue workers to get to the wreckage.

More details to follow.

UPDATE (2:41pm): Former Senator Ted Stevens comfirmed killed in the plane crash.

Repeal Schmepeal

Rachel Maddow puts in great perspective the prospects of any politician running on or voicing support for the repeal of the 14th Amendment. Hint: It ain't gonna happen.

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

Rangel Kicks Ass On The Floor - UPDATED VIDEO

I just caught part of Charlie Rangel on the House floor using a personal point of privilege to make his case and insist on a trail date from the House Ethics Committee, something that has not been done to date after two years of allegations of corruption.

He said there were definite violations and that he takes responsibility for not more closely looking at his books and those working the books for him, but vehemently denied corruption.  He also basically dared his  Democratic colleagues to expel him if they thought he was a liability in the upcoming elections, but also reminded them that they didn't mind him raising and accepting money from Rangel when they were running and needed it.

He may or may not be guilty, but it was pretty ballsy and a joy to watch - I hope to find the video and post it here.

UPDATE: Here's the C-SPAN link to Rangel's speech.

The Palin Eye Roll and a Facebook Scrub Test

While reading co-blogger JHW22's post about Palin's celebrity status, I came across her update about Palin's Facebook post blaming the "lamestream" media for taking her disrespectful eye roll out of context after finding out the constituent she was speaking with was a teacher.

There is absolutely no way "the eye roll" can be spun any other way. Just look at the video.  Who are you going to believe, Sarah Palin or your lyin' eyes?

I decided to click on the link to read Palin's pathetic attempt to try and spin this as an out of context, media gotcha moment and lo and behold! I came across a negative comment and decided to take a screen shot of it and see how long it would last.

Here's what I saw (comment highlighted in shadow box):



Poor David Jones. Besides thinking that Palin has any good ideas, doesn't he know that he will now be forever banned from commenting on Sarah's page?  Oh, the agony of being shunned by your political crush!  Here's the same page refreshed four minutes later:



I see Warren Sims' comment... I see Charlotte A. Branham Hall's comment... David Jones' comment was between those two.  Where is it? Comment gone.  DE-FRIENDED!  It's really no surprise.  I was actually shocked it lasted for the 15 or so minutes it was up.

The best part of this whole back and forth with teacher Kathleen Gustafson is Sarah Palin's own words in that video:

"...And, no we both agree on the freedom of speech and the - you know - the protection of that. So, um, no I and, you know… best of everything to you too and Yeah."

She's soooo articulate. Sarah agrees on freedom of speech until some negative comment is written about her on her own Facebook page. Then it's no freedom of speech for them and um, yeah - banned!

Anatomy of Blind Outrage

POSTED BY JHW22

In a Facebook post about Obama wanting to promote jobs for "Made in America", someone commented that instead he's creating jobs abroad and linked to two articles. The first article linked cited the second article linked so the commenter was kind enough to provide both. My problem was the lack of either article or the commenter to provide a link to the appropriate federal agency's website or any press release, statement, document or anything else to back up the article's claim.

For the sake of argument, say that the US is funding jobs in Asia. I am pretty sure they do. But I refuse to get upset until I have a chance to read the strategy, the purpose, the expected results or benefits. But if an article isn't going to share a link to the source with a broader explanation, they are essentially telling me to feel blind outrage.

The main reason I started following Broadway Carl regularly is because he is the king of links. He backs up his posts with resources and allows the reader to decide whether the links support the outrage or not.

So thanks, Broadway Carl. Thanks for providing information for your readers to develop their own thoughts.

To Celebrity or Not To Celebrity, That is the Question, Also, Too - UPDATED

POSTED BY JHW22

I think Shannyn Moore rocks. She is a sensible, fair and calm journalist who may be one of the people who actually gets through to Americans who are enamored by Sarah Palin. This week, she shares a little diddy in the Huffington Post and at her blog about my new hero, Kathleen Gustafson. Kathleen had the cojones to show up where Sarah Palin was filming her TLC teevee show about Alaska and call her out on her poor governing. She had a chance to say, to Palin's face,

"You're not a leader, you're a climber!"

She also accused Palin of being a celebrity, to which both Sarah and her daughter took great mocking offense. Sarah Palin a celebirty? In what respect, Kathleen? Oh, yeah, the respect that she's FILMING A TV SHOW! And perhaps because she HAS A TV STUDIO IN HER HOUSE (the house that's next door to her regular, non-celebrity house).

But I guess my favorite part of the whole exchange is when Palin says she's helping America by helping to elect good people who understand the Constitution. See, I do that, also, too. And I don't need to be a celebrity to do it. She is lazy and opportunistic and pretends she is working for America as she rakes in the cash. Thanks to people like Shannyn Moore and Kathleen Gustafson, perhaps more people will start to see that.

Oh, and my least favorite part of the exchange was when she showed complete disdain for Ms. Gustafson when Ms. Gustafson said she was a teacher. Yes, we know Sarah hates learning. But to despise a teacher just for being a teacher? Really? That's just stupid.

UPDATE: Sarah has since posted a Facebook defense blaming the lamestream media for misinterpreting her reaction to the teacher as an eye roll. My husband posted a comment to her post telling her what he saw (disrespect) and it was deleted.

Grain of Salt

POSTED BY JHW22

I take great pride in posting comments at politics blogs and sites. I try to be honest and thoughtful. I sign my name to all my comments to hold myself accountable -- well just my first name because I don't want any stalkers. But I respect the premise of the comment.

But after years of commenting at all kinds of sites, I've learned that not all comments are written by people with integrity and/or facts. There are an abundance of comments that make declarative statements without any quotes or links (not that I would follow links in a comment anyway). And it seems the more definitive -- yet lacking in support -- the comment, the more people adopt that comment as fact. I see this happen mostly on right-wing sites and or places that like to stir the pot rather than have a true discussion.

So over time, I've started limiting my reading to a few select sites and if I am in a grouchy mood I avoid the comments altogether. For the most part, however, I tend to read the comments only at sites I am familiar with and feel confident that the comments are written by people who know what they are talking about, or when the comments can be easily cross-referenced.

Perhaps that is why I was shocked and awed when I saw several job postings at a freelance website for commenters. Yes, some people get paid to comment.















And others get paid to re-write articles: have you ever noticed how right-wing blogs will have all of the same "information" but written differently and rarely with any links? It appears that several people get the scoop which gives the effect that it must be right.

Washington Examiner Needs Editors' Heads Examined

Today's Washington Examiner's editorial, "Time to admit Obamanomics has failed" is a doozy. Whipping their readers up in a frenzy, they claim that President Obama is going to "raise everybody's taxes by allowing the Bush [tax] cuts ... to expire" and that the stimulus bill "has failed to create jobs." It also criticizes the Wall Street reform bill because of its regulation. Really? We all know that deregulating the markets is what got us into this mess in the first place.  The whole piece reads like a nutball teabagger screed.

I'm reposting my response here, as I doubt it'll get past the moderators at their site.

Do the editors of the Washington Examiner bother to fact check what they write or are they purposely misleading their readers?

President Obama's FY 2011 budget calls for the expiration of the Bush tax cuts only for those making UNDER $250,000. Not "raising everybody's taxes" as the editors claim. Making the Bush tax cuts permanent would add $3.1 TRILLION to the deficit. So much for fiscal conservative hawks.

And claiming that the stimulus has not created jobs is laughable on its face. The Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) stated: "The CEA estimates that as of the second quarter of 2010, the ARRA has raised employment relative to what it otherwise would have been by between 2.5 and 3.6 million. These estimates are broadly consistent with the direct recipient reporting data available for 2010:Q1."

Even the conservative Wall Street Journal has reported that 70% of economists surveyed said the stimulus helped.

If I can look this stuff up in ten minutes, I would hope that your readers could as well, instead of blindly taking these "editors'" words as fact.

The Blame Game

POSTED BY JHW22

As proud as I am of President Obama, I tend to find myself falling in the rut of hating the right more than celebrating our accomplishments on the left. I guess it has something to do with the idea that if you hear ten compliments but one criticism, you're likely to focus on that one criticism.

But what Obama and his team have been doing is attempting to highlight their accomplishments by reminding people where he started from on January 20, 2009. In doing so he's accused of still blaming Bush as if poor W didn't do anything wrong and all the messes are Obama's. Fine. Whatever. But the point remains that Obama MUST highlight the past to spotlight the present. And all presidents have done it.

Let's take a look at what W was saying in his radio address about his predecessor this far into his own administration -- well, a little further actually. Let's look at December 2002 which was four months further into his own administration than Obama is now:

Good Morning. 2002 Brought Great Challenges to America, and we had many successes at home and abroad. In 2002, our economy was still recovering from the attacks of September the 11th, 2001, and it was pulling out of a recession that began before I took office.

Many will argue that we were NOT in a recession at the end of Clinton's administration and that the actual recession began a month or so after Bush took office. But you can see where he'd want to give some of the blame to Clinton. Sure. I'll give him that. But geez, Obama can't criticize the worst recession since the Great Depression without getting in trouble for blaming Bush.

Well, surely Bush stopped blaming Clinton by the election... right?

But a senior administration official says the budgetary problems stem from what he called inadequate defense, intelligence and homeland security resources that were handed down from Clinton.

I should probably add that by "election" I meant the 2008 election. Did I forget to mention that? Yes, the Bush administration was still blaming Clinton for its financial problems in July of 2008.

We could argue forever about the nuances of who is to blame and who is just making excuses. But the point stands: all presidents put blame on previous presidents and they do it for as long as they are seeking to pass bills, get elected or keep their party in power.

As a regular ol' citizen, I plan on blaming Bush for the wars and the economy until I die or until dementia sets in. But that's just me.

Beyond Crazy

POSTED BY JHW22

Give me the "Sarah Palin isn't Trig's Mom" conspiracy any day over the "Obama and Soros are emailing each other and want Glenn Beck dead" conspiracy. Glenn Beck hasn't exactly said that there's a plot to kill him (well, maybe he has but I'm not going to listen to him enough to find out) but he has sprinkled enough seeds about some relationship between Soros and Obama and has planted the seed that Soros would possibly try to kill him. Water those seeds a bit with references to Obama as Lucifer (when we ALL know that Cheney is Lucifer), Obama wants to take your guns, religion, money (do I really need to provide links for any of that?) and all of a sudden, you have people who think that Obama AND Soros want to kill Glenn Beck.

Now, as a former X-Files fanatic, I can say that some conspiracies do exist. I have some serious doubts about a few things that if I asked questions about would have me tagged as crazy. But I'll tell you what, when Democrats cling to conspiracies, we tend to have a few more facts that raise more questions than answers. When right-wing freaks cling to conspiracies, they make even Fox Mulder roll his eyes.

The only conspiracy going on with Glenn Beck is his own. He is a charlatan manipulating viewers into not thinking. He doesn't want them to think because he makes money off zombies. Now, even zombies are more believable than anything Glenn Beck can come up with -- just LOOK at his viewers.

(Now, Mr. Soros, I will be looking for that check that I have heard you'll be sending me.)

h/t to Desert Crone for the heads-up on the latest crazy.