Bro-Choice. CLASSIC!

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

Lame

When Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen took Mitt Romney to task for putting his wife, Ann, front and center as an expert when it comes to women's economic issues with the factual statement that Ann Romney hadn't "worked a day in her life," the Romney campaign and the right lost their collective shit, accusing Rosen of waging a war on stay-at-home mothers. They work hard too, dammit! And they weren't going to let an opportunity pass to misconstrue Rosen's comment and try to tie her to the Obama camp even though she doesn't work for the Obama campaign. The faux outrage was palpable - enough for Rosen to apologize while clarifying her comment - and for the story to run at least three news cycles.

Fast forward just a week or so later. Today, rock-n-roll has been and NRA gun nut Ted Nugent, whose endorsement was sought out by the Romney camp to bring the NRA into the fold, made some pretty scary comments regarding President Obama and Democrats in general.



"If Barack Obama becomes the president in November, again, I will be either be dead or in jail by this time next year." Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are criminals. We will be a suburb of Indonesia. We need to chop their heads off.

While the White House basically shrugged off the rantings of a crazy, stupid person, this threat was enough of a concern to have the Secret Service launch an investigation. Now, while I haven't been watching much cable news lately, my guess is that the right will come to the defense of Nugent with yet more misunderstanding of the First Amendment and they too, will shrug off what I consider to be a disturbed man discussing thoughts of assassinating the President of the United States. Eh, it's only Obama, right? It's not like someone was threatening George W. Bush. But I digress.

You'd think that Mitt Romney would come out and denounce these types of comments and specifically tell Ted Nugent that he can take his endorsement and shove it up his rifle warmer. Right?

...Andrea Saul, a campaign spokesperson, said in an email, "Divisive language is offensive no matter what side of the political aisle it comes from. Mitt Romney believes everyone needs to be civil."

Lamest. Condemnation. Ever.

No matter what side of the political aisle? Ms. Saul, Mr. Romney, are you trying to equate what Hilary Rosen said (not related to the Obama campaign) about Ann Romney to an assassination threat on President Obama by a man who is ENDORSING YOU for the Oval Office?

So weak.

Leave Romney ALLONNNE! *bawl*

POSTED BY JHW22



Hey, give the guy a break!

When you have that much money and can claim every deduction the rest of America can't even qualify for, and you have to keep track of what money is off-shore, and you need to make sure you have the illegal lawn guys off the paperwork, and you are trying to decide how to deduct the new mansion you just demolished so you can build a new one, and you're wondering if the car elevator is considered a business expense since you are a "job creator", and your paperwork is spread over multiple states and houses, it's just hard.

The Romneys struggle, y'all. And it's damn class warfare to criticize them for having so much money that they get to take advantage of opportunities we will never have. And we're just envious. It has nothing to do with fairness at all. So quit whining over not being able to take more than the standard deduction! You got your $400 refund already. So what if you had to use it to pay the termite people to insure the termites don't come back and destroy your ONLY house that is worth $113,000. Waaaahhhhh. You can't relate to the Romneys and that's not *their* fault.

This is TOTAL snark, FYI.

As a Dog Lover...

...all I can say is, "Holy crap!"

Weighing in at over 245 pounds and standing 43 inches tall, George is the Guinness World Record holder for the Tallest Living Dog and Tallest Dog Ever. The Great Dane, now 6 years old, is almost 100 pounds bigger than other dogs of his breed, twice as tall as an average Golden Retriever and about the same weight as four German Shepherds, 11 Beagles or 26 Shih Tzus.

Must Reads

Justin Rosario: Supreme Court To Re-Examine Its Citizens United Ruling

Andrea Grimes: Texas Rep, Having Failed to Pass Anti-Choice Law, Orders Department of Health to Do His Bidding Anyway

Philip Kitcher: The Taint of 'Social Dawinism'

Paul Krugman: The Gullible Center

Maureen Dowd: Men in Black

Eclectablog: Major conflict of interest for elections panel member reviewing Emergency Manager petition challenge

The Fox Mole: Announcing Our Newest Hire: A Current Fox News Channel Employee

E.J. Dionne: Tell us more about Romney’s ‘private’ views

President Obama's Weekly Address - April 14, 2012

It’s Time for Congress to Pass the Buffett Rule

What Is Wrong With Foster Freiss?

Billionaire Santorum, and now apparently Romney, backer Foster Freiss should just sit quietly behind the scenes, sign the checks and keep away from the lens side of a camera.

“There are a lot of things that haven’t been hammered at because Rick and Mitt have been going at each other,” Friess said during an interview on Fox Business Network. “Now that they have trained their barrels on President Obama, I hope his teleprompters are bullet-proof.”

What. The. Fuck.

Look, I know he was speaking in metaphors and his comment wasn't meant to be taken literally, but is it possible for just a moment to not use gun analogies when speaking of the President, ANY President, of the United States?

I think the best way for Freiss to stop with the stupid comments is to put an aspirin between his lips as an effective method to stop diarrhea of the mouth. What an idiot.

**UPDATED** Relatability

POSTED BY JHW22

Hilary Rosen created quite a firestorm last night. In my view, the firestorm is more about the offense people perceived rather than the truth she put forth. Her phrasing was inarticulate, but her point was relevant.

Yes, I know the Obama administration is wanting people to back away from Rosen's comments. I understand that. But guess what? I don't always agree with the administration and in this case, I'm going to take a stance as someone a little more knowledgeable on the issue than Axelrod or President Obama.

I am a Stay-at-Home Mom -- a SAHM. But not married to a millionaire. And I think Rosen's comments were valid: the wife of a millionaire should not be revered as a "surrogate" for her husband on women's economic issues. We can share being moms and the regular concerns that go with that. But the relatability stops there. I think it's MORE than acceptable to call out Ann Romney as being out of touch with women who make the work/family choice because of economic requirements. Good for her for choosing to stay home to raise her kids. But she can't relate to moms whose choices are made for them by economic realities.

I also notice a trend lately. Seems that when women get mad and start debating, the issue we're debating is called a "distraction". Sorry folks, but talking about how women provide for their families, whether they can or want to stay home or work outside the home, how she manages to pay bills, save for college, pay for activities, etc IS AN ECONOMICALLY RELEVANT DISCUSSION!

The war isn't between SAHMs or moms who work outside the home. The war is on women who are consistently being pushed back -- in policy and discussion. Mitt Romney is SO out of touch on women's issues that he is sending his wife out to defend him and speak for him and gather information for him.

All Rosen was saying, and I agree, is that as lovely as Ann Romney may be, as wonderful of a mother as she may be, she will NEVER be able to relate to me or the millions of other women who didn't have the luxury to make the "choice" she made. That's a point we should all be ready to state again and again. It's not a personal attack. It's a reality that must matter in the debate over women and our economic role in America and the fact that the Romneys have no business speaking for the average family.

UPDATE:

Since I posted, Ann Romney has said "my career choice was motherhood." Seems to me that is as rhetorically offensive as Hilary's implication that being a mom isn't a job. But I haven't heard anyone criticize her implication that women who don't stay home, don't choose motherhood. But that's OK. I also find it interesting that Ann Romney also said we all need to respect the "choices" mothers make. Oh, so she's pro-choice?

Also since my original post, the Catholic League Tweeted

Lesbian Dem Hilary Rosen tells Ann Romney she never worked a day in her life. Unlike Rosen, who had to adopt kids, Ann raised 5 of her own.

And I haven't heard any outrage about that.

Hilary Rosen has also since apologized.

Here's the deal, folks, Ann Romney has had struggles. Yes, MS and motherhood is hard. But PLEASE understand that we do not relate to each other based on our struggles. We relate to each other on how we can get through those. My mother-in-law had MS and eventually had to stop working as a nurse, go on Medicaid and live in adult foster care. Her resources were limited. THAT was hard on all of us. I'm not about to suggest Ann let nannies raise her kids and, let's face it, moms who work outside the house have to rely on others to help raise their kids, but the struggles Ann Romney faced or faces today are lessened by her access to help with those struggles.

We can relate about being moms. DO NOT try to relate to me on the economics of being moms.

Why Do We Care...

...what this deranged, megalomaniac has to say about anything?

U.S. Rep. Allen West told about 90 largely supportive Palm City voters Tuesday that locally prioritized federal projects — such as the St. Lucie Inlet dredging — aren't going to matter if Washington officials don't address a mounting deficit...

The conservative tea party icon also got in shots at Democrats and President Obama, who spoke Tuesday at Florida Atlantic University. West said Obama was "scared" to have a discussion with him. He later said "he's heard" up to 80 U.S. House Democrats are Communist Party members, but wouldn't name names.

He's "heard"? Well I "heard" that Allan West likes to have sex with goats, and how can you trust a goat fucker? No really, it must be true because I "heard" it. See how that works?

A big round of applause for the 21st Century Joe McCarthy.

ADDING... A Sarah Palin endorsement for VP must count for something, huh? Well, at least in the Land of the Cuckoos.

ALSO... Yes, I'm sure one of the smartest Presidents we've seen in generations is "scared" to debate or have a conversation with Allan West. That must be it.

Is It Over Yet?

CBS: Rick Santorum is poised to suspend his bid for the presidency on Tuesday, removing the last significant obstacle in Mitt Romney's now all-but-certain march to the Republican presidential nomination.

Santorum will make the announcement at a press conference in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania shortly, a senior member of his campaign staff told CBS News.

My first thought: He didn't want to get embarrassed in his home state in two weeks. My second thought: He may be crazy, but at least he's smarter than Newt Gingrich. And my final thought: Santorum making his announcement at Gettysburg seems so apropos.

Mike Wallace Dies at 93

CBS News legend Mike Wallace, the "60 Minutes" pit-bull reporter whose probing, brazen style made his name synonymous with the tough interview - a style he practically invented for television more than half a century ago - died last night. He was 93 and passed peacefully surrounded by family members at Waveny Care Center in New Canaan, Conn., where he spent the past few years. He also had a home in Manhattan.

As faithful reader Nowhere Man said to me today, "He lived a full life. I wonder how he felt about his son becoming a right wing douche."

Must Reads

James A. Feldman: The flawed case against Donald Verrilli

Eugene Robinson: Mitt Romney can’t shake away impressions he’s made

Bob Cesca: Another Right-Wing Terrorist Hits Planned Parenthood

Jim Hightower: The Truth About the U.S. Postal Service

Dan Froomkin: Karl Rove's NAACP Analogy Runs Afoul Of Law, History

Mike Sacks: President Obama Locks Horns With Chief Justice Roberts Over Health Care Case

Adam Davidson: The Real Reason Gas Costs $4 A Gallon

Rachel Maddow: RNC chairman reflects on women, caterpillars

Sara Robinson: Did Rick Santorum just declare the next right-wing crusade?

Brendan McCarthy: Judge imposes stiff sentences on 5 NOPD officers convicted in Danziger shootings

Paul Buchheit: Five Preposterous, Persistent Conservative Myths

Sam Parry: If the Supreme Court Goes Rogue

President Obama's Weekly Address - April 7, 2012

Easter and Passover Greetings from President Obama

Chart of the Day

Via Steve Benen:

...when jobless claims fall below the 400,000 threshold, it's considered evidence of an improving jobs landscape, and when the number drops below 370,000, it suggests jobs are actually being created rather quickly...

...Here's [a] chart -- which reflects the revised, seasonably-adjusted data -- showing weekly, initial unemployment claims going back to the beginning of 2007. (Remember, unlike the monthly jobs chart, a lower number is good news.)

President Obama Speaks at the Associated Press Luncheon

More like this, please. Watch the whole thing if you have an hour.

Why the Hell is Tony Soprano in Israel?!

AP - New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie kicked off his first official overseas trip to the Middle East Monday, meeting Israeli leaders in a visit that may boost the rising Republican star's foreign policy credentials ahead of November's presidential elections. He will move on to Jordan later this week for a personal visit with Jordan's King Abdullah.

...Christie's trip, billed "Jersey to Jerusalem," is a trade and diplomacy mission, according to his office.

How many bialys can one guy eat?!

Must Reads

Radley Balko: Illinois Traffic Stop Of Star Trek Fans Raises Concerns About Drug Searches, Police Dogs, Bad Cops

Steven Pearlstein: Eat your broccoli, Justice Scalia

Eugene Robinson: A stronger prescription for what ails health care

President Obama's Weekly Address - March 31, 2012

Passing the Buffett Rule So That Everyone Pays Their Fair Share

SCOTUS Loss GOOD For Us? HELL, NO!

POSTED BY JHW22

I'm sick of the "a SCOTUS loss is a win for Dems" crap. A SCOTUS loss means another goddamn fight for healthcare reform. And right now, I need my insurance to stay as it is and not as my insurance company will want it to be. I LIKE ObamaCARES. I like that my son’s pre-existing condition didn’t impact our premium when we switched companies after ObamaCARES passed. I like that his and my annual exams are covered at no additional cost. I like that Sebelius is going after companies that are hiking rates too high. I like that companies can’t charge more for their income than for our care. I like ObamaCARES!

And this shit about “it will fire up the base if SCOTUS rules against the law” is pure BULLSHIT! We were fired up during the last debate and what good did it do us? We had infighting aka BITCHING from day one. Democrats fired on Obama as much as the Republicans did. We left him undefended from the shit storms of death panels every time we decided he wasn’t “fighting” hard enough. Remember? Remember how the whole “grow a pair”, “grow a spine”, “fight” rhetoric was fired at Obama every damn day by his own damn party?

Yah, we were fired up! Fired up and ready to fucking yell at our own President.

I do not want that shit again. And I don’t trust all of you to fight the next round any differently. Some of you get me on this. Some of you know EXACTLY the shit I mean and know that it will require composure and energy we don’t want to waste on the same assholes who were so COUNTERPRODUCTIVE and then didn’t even fucking bother to get out the vote the next time. Why THE FUCK do I want to enter that stadium AGAIN?!?! I don’t trust my team enough to march into that game all over again. Hell, I know what to expect from the right, but from the left? I sure as hell know some of you would fucking bail and wail.

Will I be fired up if this fails? Yeah. Will I trust that you’ll all be fired up in a productive way? HELL, NO!

I want single payer and I think either SCOTUS decision could fire us up to move toward that. But some of my teammates will totally fuck this up for all of us either way. So I’d rather keep ObamaCARES in tact and go from there. Not go back to 2009 and fuck it all up from there.

It's Okay, White People, We Can Admit The Truth.

POSTED BY JHW22

When the Trayvon Martin news became a big social media event, I was on vacation in the beautiful woods of Oklahoma - yes they exist. I went to two Walmarts for groceries and was nervous as hell for my car with the Obama sunrise O sitting out in the parking lot. My hope was no one knew what that was. It was creepy. I was surrounded by hunters and obvious Tea Partiers. I felt like I'd walked into the wrong universe.

I am a white woman, so I guess there was no real way to identify me as an outsider -- although, I do look like Rachel Maddow's twin, so it's possible someone could have assumed I was a lesbian liberal Yankee and I'd have been in trouble. I'm not a lesbian but I am a liberal and was raised in New Hampshire, so I was shaky.

But I was lucky. No one sniffed me out. For that period of time, I felt vulnerable. It was my own brain doing that to me, though. No one else.

I read about Trayvon one of the days on that vacation when I hopped online for a few minutes. My immediate thought was, "I can't read that, it's gonna hurt too much". I knew there was nothing good in a story about a dead, beautiful kid. I couldn't bring myself to know what happened because I don't handle grief so well anymore.

After several losses of loved ones in the last six years, and after becoming a mom, I can't watch movies or read books that even touch on a child's death, a parent's death -- or anything sentimental for that matter.

Then we got home and unpacked and I read. I spent the next two days reading and crying and thinking about Trayvon. Thinking I'd had days where I could choose to avoid the grief. His parents had had weeks of nothing but facing theirs. And I got mad. I got mad at a law that allows police to be lackluster, to take the word of a a living man against the silence of a dead kid. I got mad at the man who stalked a child then claimed self-defense.

And now I am mad at the people who haven't uttered a peep. I am mad at apologists trying to make self-defense apply to one person but not another.

And now I am awake.

For years I have read about black men being imprisoned at higher rates than white men. I have read about more black men being falsely incarcerated and later exonerated, than white men. I have read that more black communities suffer from hunger, lack of safe housing, weaker education, slower police response times, and on and on. I've known the data. I was a Sociology minor. I'm a Democrat. I know all of the data.

But until Trayvon Martin was killed and I had to face the sadness and read and listen, I never woke up to the life. The life that is lived by a person who has lived with a system set against him in ways he never knew. In a way society still whispers in our ears but never wants to address.

I have been accused of being a Becky, or of saying the wrong thing when my intent was clearly something benign. I have been stupid and at times in my life, extremely naive. I imagine most of us have thought or said ignorant or fearful things. But we can't play tit for tat or argue over a person's past statements and deeds in lieu of listening and watching current motivation. We can't treat this time as a moment of race-baiting or PC-idealism. And that being said, we HAVE to talk about the fact that Trayvon Martin was killed because he was black. It's okay to actually say it and not feel like backs need to hunch or defensive retorts need to be spit. It's not anti-white people to say it. We can all acknowledge the truth. We, as white people can say, "I don't like that a kid died because he was black". No spite is needed. There's no need to defend Zimmerman's actions because white people are on trial for perpetuating racism by not ever wanting to admit racism. We don't need to find lame excuses or ways to blame a dead kid. It's okay to admit that the President is not being divisive when he says that if he had a son, "He'd look like Trayvon". We don't need to play stupid and act like that wasn't profound as hell. It's alright, white America, to say, "A kid died because he was black and he matters to me".

The Martin family can't hide from the loss and we can't hide from the truth. We can move forward by admitting we are sad and angry and awake.

And yes, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and every vile white person posting at Fox.com, I'm talking to you.

Must Reads

Bob Cesca: The Most Underrated but Huge Obama Accomplishment

Greg Smith: Why I Am Leaving Goldman Sachs

Christopher Brauchli: Science and Santorum

Robert Reich: The Widening Wealth Divide, and Why We Need a Surtax on the Super Wealthy

Barnett Shale: Study finds no link between oil drilling, gas prices

Eugene Robinson: Trayvon Martin and dangerous times for black men

Jonathan Capehart: Under ‘suspicion’: The killing of Trayvon Martin

President Obama's Weekly Address - March 24, 2012

President Obama Says House Must Pass Bipartisan Transportation Bill



...and while I'm at it, here's last week's weekly address that I failed to post do to very limited to no blogging time. I'll be back in full force by the end of this week.

Ending Subsidies for Big Oil Companies

Keystone Argument Just Got More Interesting

POSTED BY JHW22

As we all know, the GOP has been blaming Obama for killing jobs and the high gas prices, in part by saying his decision (that they pressured him to make) to delay one leg of the Keystone Pipeline. The GOP forced him to delay it then then blamed that delay for the cost of gas. It was predictable.

What wasn't predictable was the conundrum the GOP now faces on the Oklahoma to Texas Gulf branch. In case you weren't aware, we've already had oil coming into America from Canada via the Keystone Pipeline for YEARS. The branch Obama delayed is a pipe that just sends more oil to Oklahoma -- where all the oil is bottle-necked. In fact, the oil has had to be re-routed because the facility couldn't contain it all. Why? Because the oil in Oklahoma can't get to refineries in Texas. Why? Because Texas land-owners in RED counties have blocked the pipeline. Why? Because they don't want the state to take their land so a foreign company can make profits while their land is at risk of pollution.

WAIT! WHAT?

You heard me right. Conservative Republican Libertarians in East Texas Red Counties don't want a corporation to make money off their sacrifice. They want Big Government to stop the very pipeline their own party has used to paint Obama as THE reason for high gas prices. The very people fighting the Texas branch of Keystone are the very people who support the GOP's attempt to force the Keystone Pipeline expansion.

So, if we make sure every American knows that East Texas doesn't want the pipeline and if we make sure every American knows that those landowners are Republican, then we box the GOP into a corner.

So, even though I don't like the pipeline, I sure like this corner and paint can the President presented us with today. Let's paint!

MUST READS

POSTED BY JHW22

I'm filling in for Broadway Carl today so I was ready to post some must reads. But for some reason, I can only bring myself to post this.

Just this.

The Right Not to Know

Another Example of Post Racial America

Yeah... right.

A photograph of a bumper sticker that features racist, anti-Obama language has gone viral on Facebook and other social networks.

The sticker reads "Don't Re-Nig In 2012," in large white type, above smaller text that reads: "Stop repeat offenders. Don't re-elect Obama!"

Other offensive stickers from the company selling this one include a picture of a chimp that reads "Obama 2012."

We've come so far as a post racial society since electing a man of color to the Presidency, haven't we?

Rick's Hispanic Pandering

Not!

My work schedule has prevented me from blogging and it'll be sparse here for the next week or so, but I had to chime on Rick Santorum's trip to Puerto Rico this week.

According to a Spanish translation of the interview posted on El Vocero’s Web site, Santorum responded that “as in any other state, (Puerto Rico) should comply with this and every other federal law -- and that is that English must be the main language.”

Now, not only is Santorum being what can be described as bigoted when it comes to the issue of the English language, but what I take the most offense to is the notion that somewhere in our Constitution, he thinks there is a federal law that states English must be the main language for territories applying for statehood.
In his defense, the Santorum campaign is claiming he was misquoted and didn't say that English should be the "only" language, but that is a lame excuse. The subject shouldn't even have been broached. I'll even take Rick at his word and substitute "only" to "main" or "primary." It's still a dumbass thing to say or think.

A proud cultural heritage and tradition are things Hispanics in general have strong feelings about. For Rick to dismiss a language they've been speaking almost 300 years before the birth of the United States is a callous, insensitive and bigoted thought.

And I say bigoted because a Santorum spokesman said...

“In Puerto Rico, Rick would encourage people to speak English in addition to Spanish because English is the language of opportunity in America,” he added.

The language of opportunity? I disagree, Rick. Opportunity, as far as language is concerned, may come from the advantage of being bilingual or multi-lingual. But to think you have an advantage because you speak English as opposed to multiple languages is, oh I don't know... elitist?

Way to go, immediately alienating the Puerto Rican/Hispanic vote. What a snob!

The Big Gas Lie

Last week, I received an email from House Republicans. I guess I'm on their list, or someone being a wise guy put me on their list. But no matter - I love seeing the latest shit that comes out of their ass and their attempt to pass it as some kind of idea.

The email was hitting all talking points of the most recent attack on President Obama in blaming him for the current gas prices. Here's the chart they included:



Perhaps they should have included a wider timeline range... like this:



You see that big peak in June of 2008 when gas prices were $4.12 per gallon just before that precipitous decline? Can anyone remind me who was President in June of 2008? Oh, right! It was George W. Bush. Was he to blame for to blame for that? No. Just as President Obama isn't to blame for current prices. And the reason for the nose dive to $1.61 by December of 2008, just one month before President Obama took office was the huge recession that we are still recovering from these three and a half years later.

But that doesn't stop the GOP from trying to tie high gas prices to Obama administration policies. Hell, that's all they really have, isn't it? They scream about Keystone XL even though any oil from that project would go on to the global market. We are in our 24th straight month of private sector job growth, unemployment is down to 8.3% from a high of 10% in October of 2009 and more people are now encouraged to enter the job market which is why the unemployment rate remained steady.

So if they can't attack Obama on the economy, and they can't attack the man who gave the go ahead to take out Osama bin Laden as being weak on terrorism, and their attacks on the contraception battle are backfiring, what can they attack him with? Something he can't do much about: the price of a gallon of gas. Even though the fact is that no presidential or congressional policies can do much to affect the cost of gas.

What is driving up the price of gas is global oil prices,  Wall Street speculation, Middle East unrest (I'm looking at you Iran and Israel.)

But that doesn't stop Newt Gingrich's from bellowing that he can give us gas for $2.50 a gallon while we are headed for $10 per gallon at the current rate because of that meddling President Obama. Gingrich is lying. Plain and simple. Not that it matters. Anti-Obama factions will believe what they want to believe. They'll even believe a thrice married, twice adulterer, disgraced former Speaker of the House who was run out of town on ethics violations. But I never claimed those people were smart.

Dumbass Quote of the Day

Mitt Romney just can't stop bragging about his rich friends. First it was his NASCAR owner friends when he visited Daytona and made fun of the Average Joe wearing plastic ponchos, and now it's this:

"Well, you know I’m surprised to hear that Denver’s thinking about [Peyton Manning], they’re -- I don’t want him in our neck of the woods to Miami or to the Jets," Romney said. "But I’ve got a lot of good friends, the owner Miami Dolphins, and the New York Jets — both owners are friends of mine. But let’s keep him away from New England, so Tom Brady has a better chance of picking up a championship."

You know who aren't friends of Jets owner Woody Johnson? Every Jets season ticket holder who had to pay a personal seat license to be eligible to buy tickets. You know, the average fan. Something Mitt Romney knows nothing about.

Tweet of the Day

Must Reads

Greg Sargent: Dems twist knife in birth control fight

Dana Milbank: The GOP’s gasoline alley

Sen. John Kerry: Romney’s wrong-headed assertions about Iran

David Macaray: Rush Limbaugh Is No Joke

Kai Wright: How a Racist Email Reveals the Grand Old Party Has Become a Petty Affair

Jim Wright: The Absurdity of Rush Limbaugh

Limbaugh Defends Joseph Kony Solely To Be Anti-Obama

Some people will do or say anything strictly because it's in opposition to that evil, Socialist, Marxist, anti-colonial Kenyan world view, Manchurian candidate President Barack Obama. How much farther can Rush Limbaugh stick his head up his own ass. This time, Rush defends Ugandan leader of the Lord's Resistance Army, Joseph Kony. If you don't know what the LRA is...

The LRA is a militant group with a syncretic pseudo-Christian extreme religious ideology, known for the atrocities they commit against civilians, including murder, mutilations, rape, and in some accounts even cannibalism.

Directed by Kony, the LRA has earned a reputation for its actions against the people of several countries, including northern Uganda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic, South Sudan, and Sudan. It has abducted and forced an estimated 66,000 children to fight for them, and has forced the internal displacement of over two million people since its rebellion began in 1986.

But because Limbaugh and most of the GOP say and do everything they can to oppose President Obama, then they've got to be against this, right? It has to be some conspiracy to defeat the Christian faith if you go after someone who's "army" is called the Lord's Resistance Army. I mean, it's right there in the name! "Lord" is part of their name, therefore they must be fighting on behalf of God. ...Seriously.



How do you combat this type of idiocy and ignorance?

It reminds me of this Key & Peele comedy clip.



UPDATE: As Rush continued his statements, which aren't in the video, here's what he said:

...So that's a new war, a hundred troops to wipe out Christians in Sudan, Uganda, and -- (interruption) no, I'm not kidding. Jacob Tapper just reported it. Now, are we gonna help the Egyptians wipe out the Christians? Wouldn't you say that we are? I mean the Coptic Christians are being wiped out, but it wasn't just Obama that supported that. The conservative intelligentsia thought it was an outbreak of democracy. Now they've done a 180 on that, but they forgot that they supported it in the first place. Now they're criticizing it.

Lord's Resistance Army objectives. I have them here. "To remove dictatorship and stop the oppression of our people." Now, again Lord's Resistance Army is who Obama sent troops to help nations wipe out. The objectives of the Lord's Resistance Army, what they're trying to accomplish with their military action in these countries is the following: "To remove dictatorship and stop the oppression of our people; to fight for the immediate restoration of the competitive multiparty democracy in Uganda; to see an end to gross violation of human rights and dignity of Ugandans; to ensure the restoration of peace and security in Uganda, to ensure unity, sovereignty, and economic prosperity beneficial to all Ugandans, and to bring to an end the repressive policy of deliberate marginalization of groups of people who may not agree with the LRA ideology." Those are the objectives of the group that we are fighting, or who are being fought and we are joining in the effort to remove them from the battlefield.

Yes, President Obama is defending Muslims and killing Christians. That was what Rush was trying to get across to his ditto heads. And they'll buy it hook, line and sinker because they want to believe it.

President Obama's Weekly Address - March 10, 2012

Investing in a Clean Energy Future

Chris Christie's Bully Syndrome

Now granted, this is an edited video, mostly of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie's response to law student and former Navy SEAL, William Brown. We don't see the possible and probable interruption(s) of Brown. But I really don't need to see a full, unedited version, because here's the thing: this is just another instance in a continuing pattern of Christie being a bully to constituents who attend his town hall meetings, teachers and teachers unions, call into his live, on-air interviews or anywhere else he happens to be speaking in a public forum.

The problem with Chris Christie (as if there were only one) is that he thinks he's Tony Soprano. He's not. He's an elected official, one of only fifty governors in the country. Yet Christie acts like he's a bouncer at the Bada Bing. He thinks he can say anything he wants. He's beloved by his party for being so "blunt." But what would his party say, if President Obama, during a town hall meeting where you know some serious and sometimes awkward questions will be asked, called a former Navy SEAL an idiot? There would be mass outrage of epic proportions.

Maybe Chris Christie is a normal, guy next door. Who knows? But as governor, I don't want the guy next door that you can sit down and have a beer with while he eats all the spare ribs. I want a thoughtful, responsible, intelligent person. He, along with all elected officials, must be held to a higher standard. So sit back, Chris, take the question, take deep breath and answer it as politely as possible, then move on. Despite what you may think, you don't have the power to have somebody whacked.

Visual Aid

POSTED BY JHW22

I'm a visual person. So a few weeks ago I decided I needed a chart that shows how many bills have been introduced to limit women's health care. But it was hard to find all the information to make an accurate chart. I even contacted my friend who is a well-connected Sociology professor on women's issues, and particularly women's reproductive care. But even her contacts couldn't get me information. Why? Because there is so damn much.

Today, I heard that the Guttmacher Institute released a report in January that documents the record number of bills proposed in 2011, across the country, to destroy abortion rights. I like their chart a lot. It's a very dramatic chart. But I still needed to make my own. Granted, theirs is based on facts and mine is based on rage, but you get the point.

Because The Bible Says So...

...that's why.

Via Alan Colmes:

Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK): Well actually the Genesis 8:22 that I use in there is that ‘as long as the earth remains there will be seed time and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, day and night,’ my point is, God’s still up there. The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous.

The arrogance! Outrageous, I tells ya!

...Seriously, you can't make this shit up. Parody is dead. DEAD I TELLS YA!

WHEN DOES THIS SHIT STOP!?!

POSTED BY JHW22

This AZ bill would prevent parents from suing doctors for not telling them about any health conditions of their unborn babies. So, if a baby will have any life-threatening problems, the doctors won't be required to tell the parents prior to birth. Or, the parents don't have any recourse, at the least.

The reason: they don't want parents to choose abortion. SO, you may never consider abortion for a baby with health problems but because the doctor doesn't want to take that chance, you won't know to prepare for a baby's needs once its born. I, for one, would want to have everything lined up the second my child was born. To not be told of a health condition before the child's birth is the most backwards way of practicing health care. The right-wing's ideology is really putting lives at risk. How "pro-life".

And remember, all those transvaginal ultrasounds are meant to give women all the "facts" about her pregnancy. Or so the right-wing says.

My New Policy

POSTED BY JHW22

You know how the House Republicans required some Constitutional statement at the beginning of all new bills? Well, I've decided that from now on, any time a "Christian" wants to talk politics with me, they have to cite a section(s) in the Bible where JESUS (not Paul or Moses or anyone else) is quoted in support of their political stance.

If they want to say poor people are lazy, they have to show me where JESUS said it. Not where Paul wrote a letter to the Thessalonians. And if they can't support their political views with their more important religious views of CHRIST himself, then their principles are compromised and thus not even remotely relevant in a conversation. Not worth my time.

Let's Get This Straight

POSTED BY JHW22

I just hit my limit of hearing jackasses talk about Sandra Fluke's Congressional testimony on contraception and getting it WRONG. Tony Perkins was on Martin Bashir and said that, although he wouldn't want his daughter insulted, his daughter would never go before Congress to talking about "sexual promiscuity".

THAT DID IT! I am about as pissed as I can be.

It's painfully clear Mr. Perkins didn't hear or read Ms. Fluke's testimony or he'd know that the only mention of contraception for sex was about a married couple who couldn't afford birth control any longer. It's painfully clear he takes his cues from Limbaugh and the right-wing talking heads on the value of LYING.
But what REALLY sent me into shaking, screaming, rising blood pressure mode was the next topic of discussion: transvaginal ultrasounds for women seeking access to their legal rights. He said that transvaginal ultrasounds are important for sharing FACTS with women.

Well, I suggest Mr. Perkins begin by educating himself on facts by reading and watching Ms. Fluke's testimony before he goes on air again to distort and further insult Ms. Fluke by making her out to be someone she's not. Yes, Mr. Perkins, facts are important. GET SOME! Perhaps you can help me educate Mr. Perkins by Tweeting him with facts @tperkins

Leader Pelosi, members of Congress, good morning, and thank you for calling this hearing on women's health and for allowing me to testify on behalf of the women who will benefit from the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage regulation.

My name is Sandra Fluke, and I'm a third-year student at Georgetown Law School. I'm also a past president of Georgetown Law Students for Reproductive Justice, or LSRJ. And I'd like to acknowledge my fellow LSRJ members and allies, and all of the student activists with us, and thank them so much for being here today.

We, as Georgetown LSRJ, are here today because we're so grateful that this regulation implements the nonpartisan medical advice of the Institute of Medicine. I attend a Jesuit law school that does not provide contraceptive coverage in its student health plan. And just as we students have faced financial, emotional and medical burdens as a result, employees at religiously affiliated hospitals and institutions and universities across the country have suffered similar burdens. We are all grateful for the new regulation that will meet the critical health care needs of so many women. Simultaneously, the recently announced adjustment addresses any potential conflict with the religious identity of Catholic and Jesuit institutions.

When I look around my campus, I see the faces of the women affected by this lack of contraceptive coverage. And especially in the last week, I have heard more and more of their stories. On a daily basis, I hear from yet another woman from Georgetown or from another school or who works for a religiously affiliated employer, and they tell me that they have suffered financially, emotionally and medically, because of this lack of coverage. And so I'm here today to share their voices, and I want to thank you for allowing them -- them, not me -- to be heard.

Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that's practically an entire summer's salary. Forty percent of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they've struggled financially as a result of this policy.

One told us of how embarrassed and just powerless she felt when she was standing at the pharmacy counter and learned for the first time that contraception was not covered on her insurance, and she had to turn and walk away because she couldn't afford that prescription. Women like her have no choice but to go without contraception.

Just last week, a married female student told me that she had to stop using contraception because she and her husband just couldn't fit it into their budget any more. Women employed in low-wage jobs without contraceptive coverage face this same choice.

And some might respond that contraception is accessible in lots of other ways. Unfortunately, that's just not true. Women's health clinics provide a vital medical service, but, as the Guttmacher Institute has definitively documented, these clinics are unable to meet the crushing demand for these services. Clinics are closing, and women are being forced to go without the medical care they need.

How can Congress consider the Fortenberry, Rubio and Blunt legislation, that would allow even more employers and institutions to refuse contraception coverage, and then respond that the nonprofit clinics should step up to take care of the resulting medical crisis; particularly when so many legislators are attempting to defund those very same clinics?

These denials of contraceptive coverage impact real people. In the worst cases, women who need this medication for other medical reasons suffer very dire consequences. A friend of mine, for example, has polycystic ovarian syndrome, and she has to take prescription birth control to stop cysts from growing on her ovaries. Her prescription is technically covered by Georgetown's insurance, because it's not intended to prevent pregnancy. Unfortunately, under many religious institutions' insurance plans, it wouldn't be. There would be no exception for other medical needs. And under Senator Blunt's amendment, Senator Rubio's bill or Representative Fortenberry's bill, there's no requirement that such an exception be made for these medical needs.

When this exception does exist, these exceptions don't accomplish their well-intended goals, because when you let university administrators or other employers, rather than women and their doctors, dictate whose medical needs are legitimate and whose are not, a woman's health takes a backseat to a bureaucracy focused on policing her body. In 65 percent of the cases at our school, our female students were interrogated by insurance representatives and university medical staff about why they needed prescriptions and whether they were lying about their symptoms. For my friend, and 20 percent of the women in her situation, she never got the insurance company to cover her prescription. Despite verification of her illness from her doctor, her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted birth control to prevent pregnancy. She's gay -- so clearly, polycystic ovarian syndrome was a much more urgent concern than accidental pregnancy for her.

After months of paying over $100 out of pocket, she just couldn't afford her medication anymore, and she had to stop taking it. I learned about all of this when I walked out of a test and got a message from her that, in the middle of the night in her final-exam period, she'd been in the emergency room. She'd been there all night in just terrible, excruciating pain. She wrote to me: "It was so painful I woke up thinking I'd been shot." Without her taking the birth control, a massive cyst the size of a tennis ball had grown on her ovary. She had to have surgery to remove her entire ovary as a result. On the morning I was originally scheduled to give this testimony, she was sitting in a doctor's office trying to cope with the consequences of this medical catastrophe.

Since last year's surgery, she's been experiencing night sweats and awaking and other symptoms of early menopause as a result of the removal of her ovary. She's 32 years old. As she put it: If my body indeed does enter early menopause, no fertility specialist in the world will be able to help me have my own children. I will have no choice at giving my mother her desperately desired grandbabies, simply because the insurance policy -- that I paid for, totally unsubsidized by my school -- wouldn't cover my prescription for birth control when I needed it. Now, in addition to potentially facing the health complications that come with having menopause at such an early age -- increased risk of cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis -- she may never be able to conceive a child.

Some may say that my friend's tragic story is rare. It's not. I wish it were. One woman told us doctors believe she has endometriosis, but that can't be proven without surgery. So the insurance has not been willing to cover her medication, the contraception she needs to treat her endometriosis. Recently, another woman told me that she also has polycystic ovarian syndrome, and she's struggling to pay for her medication and is terrified not to have access to it. Due to the barriers erected by Georgetown's policy, she hasn't been reimbursed for her medication since last August. I sincerely pray that we don't have to wait until she loses an ovary or is diagnosed with cancer before her needs and the needs of all of these women are taken seriously, because this is the message that not requiring coverage of contraception sends: A woman's reproductive health care isn't a necessity, isn't a priority.

One woman told us that she knew birth control wasn't covered on the insurance, and she assumed that that's how Georgetown's insurance handled all of women's reproductive and sexual health care. So when she was raped, she didn't go to the doctor, even to be examined or tested for sexually transmitted infections, because she thought insurance wasn't going to cover something like that, something that was related to a woman's reproductive health.

As one other student put it, this policy communicates to female students that our school doesn't understand our needs. These are not feelings that male fellow students experience, and they're not burdens that male students must shoulder.

In the media lately, some conservative Catholic organizations have been asking, what did we expect when we enrolled at a Catholic school? We can only answer that we expected women to be treated equally, to not have our school create untenable burdens that impede our academic success. We expected that our schools would live up the Jesuit creed of "cura personalis," to care for the whole person by meeting all of our medical needs. We expected that when we told our universities of the problems this policy created for us as students, they would help us. We expected that when 94 percent of students opposed the policy, the university would respect our choices regarding insurance students pay for completely unsubsidized by the university.

We did not expect that women would be told in the national media that we should have gone to school elsewhere and -- even if that meant going to a less prestigious university. We refuse to pick between a quality education and our health, and we resent that in the 21st century anyone thinks it's acceptable to ask us to make this choice simply because we are women.

Many of the women whose stories I've shared today are Catholic women. So ours is not a war against the church. It is a struggle for access to the health care we need. The president of the Association of Jesuit Colleges has shared that Jesuit colleges and universities appreciate the modification to the rule announced recently. Religious concerns are addressed, and women get the health care they need. And I sincerely hope that that is something we can all agree upon.

Thank you very much.