The PCTC Blog

That Wacky Mainstream Media! We Passed This Story on Last Week!

UPDATE: Want to know why the public in this country seems so mud-dumb sometimes?

It's because the major news media doesn't pick up on stories for a long time after bloggers do.

Check out the story that was on CNN.com today. We passed this along to you last Wednesday, when Truthdig featured it.

Read our take right here...  There's a link to the original Truthdig story right there...

Let this be a lesson... if you want to know the truth, you have to dig...

IS CBS Trying to Be the New Fox News?

Pity the poor eye.

At one time, CBS News was called the Tiffany network in part because of its brilliant commitment to news. Even when Walter Cronkite stepped down and was replaced by Dan Rather, one got the sense that the network's interest in reporting the news in a way that was actually fair (not balanced; we'll get to that in another post -- balanced is not a good thing) and presented the news in an unbiased, less-filtered way.

For all of the things you could say about William Paley, he knew how to run his business, and he knew how important the news division was to the rest of the network.

Now, Viacom doesn't seem to know what to do with the news division, and their latest move is one of the strangest.

Beginning today, Jeff Ballabon becomes Senior Vice President of Communications for CBS News. According to CBS News Chief Sean McManus, Ballabon "will oversee all media relations and public affairs for CBS News, including strategy and planning, day-to-day publicity, internal and external communications, and coordination with CBS Interactive regarding CBSNews.com."

Why should we care?

Because a formerly reputable news organization has hired itself a Republican mouthpiece. Isn't it bad enough we have to deal with Fox News? Now, we have to worry that Ballabon will play Roger Ailes at CBS?

Previous to this position, Ballabon Group, a lobbying and right wing consulting group. One of the testimonials on his web site comes from none other than G. Gordon Liddy, who says, "When Jeff Ballabon tells you he can do something, consider it done, and done well."

According to Ira Forman in the Huffington Post, Ballabon said the following during the 2008 campaign; "Obama is incredibly dangerous."

Forman also recounts a time when he personally debated Ballabon in New York:

During the debate, Ballabon claimed that, after his most recent job in Washington, he became convinced that Democrats are inherently bad people and Republicans are fundamentally good people.

Gee, it's good to know that CBS will be so "Fair and Balanced," run by a guy who thinks Democrats are bad and Republicans are good.

Friday Night Reading Room

Joanna Grossman on the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009

Jane Hamsher wonders why a certain Billionaire Gasbag gets so much WH Access

Media Matters has Larry Kudlow being moronic again... why does this guy work?

Who'll Stop the Pain? by Paul Krugman

Clive Crook in The Atlantic on Obama's new housing plan

Bobby Jindal turns down $90 million in help for the unemployed -- Think Progress

Court: No Class Action in 'Vista Capable' Claims Against Microsoft

John Dean on how David Frost convinced Nixon to Talk

PFAW -- Attacks on DOJ Nominees Signal Right's Judicial Nominations Strategy

Stephanie Zacharek in Salon on Comeback Kids Robert Downey, Jr. and Mickey Rourke

Moron vs. Moran -- Limbaugh takes on TVNewser... Loses...

Druggie Limbaugh and Moron DeMint: More On the Fairness Doctrine Ruse

A few days ago, I offered an alternative to the Fairness Doctrine on this blog, and it received a lot of attention. But the reason I offered it was because something has to be done about the radio business. We own the airwaves, and the current license holders are effectively killing it. Right now, the airwwaves in most markets are controlled by very few very large, out of state interests, and it's crippled the industry badly. It's not just talk radio; the reason podcasts and iPods are so popular, is because the radio is largely bereft of quality programming. If record companies want to know why no one buys their music anymore, they should take their earbuds out of their goddamn ears, and listen to the radio: it's largely shit.

The issue at hand, however, is informational radio, and the complete and utter lack of standards, accountability and diversity in the so-called "marketplace of ideas." The only iteration of the mass media that is truly populist is radio. Everyone has a radio, including many homeless people. It is also a very key tool in dissemination of information in the event of a national or local emergency, and the corporate idiots who have been allowed to run the show for the past 12 years are actually putting it in jeopardy with their actions.

Once more, the airwaves belong to us, not them. THEY are under a contractual obligation (their license) to braodcast in a way that serves the "public interest." Not the interests of right wingers only, or the interests of the schmucks who paid too much for the licenses, and are suddenly finding it difficult to make money because of it. OUR interests.

I have absolutely ZERO interest in shutting up Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or any of the other idiots on the right. I even support Michael Savage's right to make a fool of himself, although I still wonder why he has thus far escaped FCC scrutiny for some of his more outrageous statements. In fact, if anyone even attempted to shut up any of these right wing morons, I would be on the picket line with their drooling fans, demanding that they be put back on the air. (Okay, maybe not right next to them, but I'd be close.)

Right Wing Monkeys Get Us to Dance!

Update: I'm looking really psychic about now...

The New York Post has issued a half-assed apology for the offensive cartoon below. More info when we receive it...

----------------------------------------------------------------------

When are we going to get it?

This is a cartoon that appeared in this morning's New York Post.

The cartoon is essentially typical right wing commentary. In a news story from yesterday, a woman from Connecticut was badly injured after she was mauled by a chimpanzee that had apparently suffered a really bad reaction to the Xanax its owner had given it to calm down.

The right wing editorial cartoonist from Rupert Murdoch's shitrag, Sean Delonis, who has a typical right winger's sense of humor (meaning none whatsoever), took that story, and applied it to the typical right wing opinion of the Democrats' economic stimulus package.

Starting with Al Sharpton early this morning, this cartoon has been talked about non-stop throughout the progressive blogosphere and on talk radio. I resisted until now, for a very basic reason;

It's just what THEY want me to do.

David Gregory's Question Deserves an Answer

David Gregory's Latest Tweet:

Q for Obama on housing: does keeping people in their homes (who can't afford to be there) help the economy or is it only social policy?

deserves an answer...

With apologies to President Obama, I'm going to answer it, even though I am just a regular guy; not an economist, or even a genius.

Before the Republicans took over the economy, it was possible for a family to own a home with one income, and the economy boomed at almost all levels for the first 28 years after World War II. The economy started to hit the skids while Nixon was president, and we never really recovered, because Ronald Reagan threw the entire economy into supply-side nonsense. Bill Clinton had the economy on the right track in the 1990s, with the first real increases in wages since 1973, but Gramm-Leach-Bliley put the economy back on the skids.

The problems that President Obama and the Democratic Congress face were a long time in the making, and they stem from several decades of mismanagement, and an economic model that was unsustainable in the long run. If you look closely at the economy in the post-war period, it was marked by a constant investment in infrastructure, a strong manufacturing base, and an almost constant investment in technological development.

Cutting the Crap! Republican Senator ONLY Skeptical of Bailing Out Americans

Don't let them fool you. Republicans sound like they're concerned about wasting money bailing out the US car industry. But this is not about giving money to the car companies, and a concern about getting it back. This is about killing the last major bastion of American manufacturing, and breaking the unions.

If you doubt that, take special note of WHO is speaking in the following article from the New York Times:

Senator Remains Skeptical About Auto Bailout - NYTimes.com.

Senator Bob Corker, a Tennessee Republican, said that he did not know whether he would support the larger loan requests that G.M. and Chrysler made Tuesday but that he had reservations about G.M. owing taxpayers $30 billion, nearly 24 times the amount that the company is worth based on its outstanding stock.

Mr. Corker said he was also concerned that G.M., which was negotiating with bondholders to cut much of its debt to them, would continue to ask for more money.

“They’re coming back for debt that will load down their balance sheets,” he said in an interview. “How much better off is the capital structure of G.M. when another $30 billion of public lending supplants that private debt?”

Bob Corker. Tennessee.

Ring any bells, folks?

Republicans; Shameless as they Drown, Politically

You really have to hand it to these assholes. They have balls, even if they don't have a brain in their heads. The Huffington Post is reporting that House Republicans are going back to their districts, and pretending they never voted against the damn thing. Here's what they report:

GOP Fighting For Money From Stimulus They Opposed.

House Republicans, as a group, may take great pride in the goose egg they offered President Obama's stimulus package. But now the unanimous opposition is struggling to bring that money home.

Republicans will be working hard to make sure the money they opposed ends up benefiting their home districts, highlighting the political tightrope they walk in this economic crisis. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is watching House Republicans -- and reading local media -- closely and is only too happy to highlight any happy talk about a stimulus Republicans voted against.

Back in his home district, Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO) found some nice things to say about the plan.

"Within the stimulus package there is some Pell Grant money, which is a good thing. It helps students be able to pay for their education and that's kind of a long term stimulus effect there. I mean obviously that's not gonna provide a job in the next 120, 180 days, but the ability of someone to get an education is an economic development tool," Luetkemeyer said at a local college. He was there, in another inside-outside Washington twist, to celebrate an earmark for a college building.

I guess what I'd like to know is just why he thinks the people of Missouri -- or at least the ones in his district, are so stupid.

Obama Gets It: A Plan To Start Fixing the Foreclosure Mess

The number one problem at the heart of our economic meltdown is the mortgage problem. The key to fixing the economy on the short term is to stop the bleeding in the housing market. This is step Number one, and proof that President Obama gets it.

Obama Plans to Spend $75 Billion to Fight Foreclosures - NYTimes.com.

Seeking to stabilize the foundering housing market, President Obama is offering a plan to help as many as nine million families refinance their mortgages or avoid foreclosure, according to a summary released by the White House on Wednesday morning.

The plan, which is more ambitious than expected, would spend $75 billion to help keep as many as four million families in their homes, and would help as many as five million more refinance their mortgages to take advantage of lower interest rates.

“The plan not only helps responsible homeowners on the verge of defaulting, but prevents neighborhoods and communities from being pulled over the edge too,” the White House said in a fact sheet.

Mr. Obama is set to detail the plan later Wednesday at a high school in Phoenix, a city emblematic of housing’s boom and bust in the last nine years. The administration laid out the proposal as a new report offered more evidence that the housing market remained caught in a free-fall. New-home construction fell to its lowest level on record in January, the Commerce Department reported, amid falling demand, tightened credit markets and a flood of foreclosure properties. Privately owned housing starts in January fell 16.8 percent from December, to an annual rate of 466,000. That was their lowest pace since at least 1959.

The administration’s initiative, called the Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan, is an effort to slow the decline in the housing market. As the economy drops deeper into a recession, home values are falling faster and faster, and more Americans are losing their houses to foreclosures or distressed sales.

The plan would allow four million to five million homeowners refinance mortgages guaranteed by the government-controlled housing giants Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. The administration said allowing people to refinance at lower mortgage rates would reduce monthly payments and save families thousands of dollars every year.

This is a great first step, and will ease a lot of pain out there in the housing market. The next step will be to do what Bush promised to do back when he insisted that Congress approve the original bailout plan in September, and that would be to buy up the mortgage backed securities and move that market out of the private sector, and back to Fannie and Freddie, where they belong.

The Right Wing Republican Legacy: Kids being Jailed for Money

This is what happens when you implement the Republican ideal, wherein anything that makes someone money is okay, because wealth is king. If you want to know why this society is broken, here's a prime example, from Truthdig - Jailing Kids for Cash, by Amy Goodman".

As many as 5,000 children in Pennsylvania have been found guilty, and up to 2,000 of them jailed, by two corrupt judges who received kickbacks from the builders and owners of private prison facilities that benefited. The two judges pleaded guilty in a stunning case of greed and corruption that is still unfolding. Judges Mark A. Ciavarella Jr. and Michael T. Conahan received $2.6 million in kickbacks while imprisoning children who often had no access to a lawyer. The case offers an extraordinary glimpse into the shameful private prison industry that is flourishing in the United States.

Take the story of Jamie Quinn. When she was 14 years old, she was imprisoned for almost a year. Jamie, now 18, described the incident that led to her incarceration:

“I got into an argument with one of my friends. And all that happened was just a basic fight. She slapped me in the face, and I did the same thing back. There [were] no marks, no witnesses, nothing. It was just her word against my word.”

Jamie was placed in one of the two controversial facilities, PA Child Care, then bounced around to several other locations. The 11-month imprisonment had a devastating impact on her. She told me: “People looked at me different when I came out, thought I was a bad person, because I was gone for so long. My family started splitting up ... because I was away and got locked up. I’m still struggling in school, because the schooling system in facilities like these places [are] just horrible.”

This is what happens when you privatize what should be a public function. But worse, when you privatize a public function, and you then turn around and incentivize the operation, you have corruption. I have a sneaking suspicion that, if we did an audit of this sort of thing where private prisons are concerned, it's more common than we think.

Think about it; cities and states hire private companies to run traffic and red-light cameras, and then pay them a percentage of the revenue they bring in. How much of those tickets are actually the result of legitimate violations, and how much of them are simply a private company trying to pad its bottom line?

Republicans have created an economic system that bastardizes the capitalist concept. It's not enough for a company to make money anymore. Now, they have to make more money every year, or they lose money, because their stock tanks. Companies lose money if they don't maintain an unsustainable "growth" every year.  The system encourages cheating, and rewards companies that cheat and/or cut corners. It's the primary reason why we don't make anything here anymore, and why companies don't seem to be out for "America" anymore.

That's bad enough when we're talking about closing plants and stores and putting people out of work. But when it comes to the justice system, money can NEVER be a motivating factor in any decision, period. And when it comes to our children's lives, our society cannot afford to allow something like this happen.

I guess my question is, Is this finally the point where we decide that money really isn't everything?

It's time we got back to our roots, folks, and make money the means to a good life, and not a life in and of itself.

Cutting the RW Crap: PDFs and Oxycontin: a Potent Mix!

There is no end to the excuses the right wingers are trying to use to tar and feather Democrats when it comes to the stimulus. The latest load of crap that has been going around the right wing crap machine is the notion that President Obama and the Democrats have broken their promise of transparency and openness, by not making the final stimulus bill available for 48 hours before voting on it.

This is a load of crap in so many ways, not the least of which is the fact that the final, consolidated bill was an amalgam of the House and Senate versions of the bill, which had been out for more than 48 hours. There were few changes, and all Congresspeople have a staff to look over the bills and track any changes. Speaking of which, they could have done a track changes on the documents themselves, and concentrated on just the parts that had changed.

Besides; all Republicans were under orders from The Boner to vote against the bill, even before it was written, so it wouldn't have mattered if they had read the bill or not.

Okay, so along those lines, check this out, from Recovering Addict Limbaugh on yesterday's crapfest. This is priceless:

There was a promise from the Obama administration, the new era of responsibility and transparency, that all such legislation would be posted on the Internet for five days so that the public could read what is being voted on.  Ain't going to happen.  In addition, they have reformatted the bill.  They've made it a PDF file when they posted it.  Now, for those of you that don't use computers, basically what that means is that it cannot be keyword searched.  A PDF file is essentially a picture of a page, and so you can read every page but you cannot keyword search it.  It's not a text file as legislation normally is, as posted on these public websites.  They don't want anybody knowing what's in this.

Republican Stupid Idea of the Day: Nationalize the Banks!

Was I dreaming?

Didn't the Republican noise machine spend the last few months of the presidential campaign trying to portray Barack Obama as a socialist?

So, what the hell is this? This is from Lindsay Graham yesterday, speaking on ABC's This Week:

"I would not take off the idea of nationalizing the banks" from the table, Graham, R-S.C., told George Stephanopoulos on ABC's "This Week" program

"This idea of nationalizing banks is not comfortable, but I think we have gotten so many toxic assets spread throughout the banking and financial community throughout the world that we're going to have to do something that no one ever envisioned a year ago, no one likes," Graham said. "But, to me, banking and housing are the root cause of this problem. And I'm very much afraid that any program to salvage the bank is going to require the government.."

The first question I have is, why the HELL are Republicans still all over the goddamn talking head shows, spouting their bullshit, while Democrats, who are in charge, are still standing on the sidelines, when it comes to the major media? 

It's a good question, but one I'll get into that in another post, though. Let's talk about this, the stupidest damned idea to EVER come down the pike from a Republican, and that's saying a hell of a lot.

Today's Republican Party

Okay, SNL hasn't been at its best this year, but once in a while, they hit one out of the park, not because a sketch is funny, but because it's true...

Enjoy...

Excellent Post on Why Republicans are Responsible for Poisoning the Food Supply

From Firedoglake.

Thanks To Grover Norquist, Salmonella Poisoning Our Food Supply Is A Feature, Not A Bug

When we have the USDA and FDA, why are we still dying from salmonella and risking brain damage from the mercury in foods known to be contaminated before they ever left the factory? How were industrial food megacorps and the Peanut Corporation of America able to get foodstuffs they knew were tainted past Federal food safety agencies?

The dirty little secret about America's food safety agencies is that for decades leaders in both corporatist parties have been sacrificing our health and safety to the deregulation cult...and the banquet of campaign contributions the food megacorps serve up for complicit pols. The USDA (broadly responsible for meat and poultry) has authority over 20 percent of our food supply; the FDA is responsible for maintaing the safety of the remaining 80 percent of our food supply. And the Congresscritters and Presidents with the power to fund FDA repeatedly chose to starve the FDA of the resources required to protect us.

Read the rest here...

Boehner's Lasted More Than Four Hours! Call Someone!

How far the neocons in the Republican Party have come, eh?  You have to love their leader in the House, don't you?

 

Their leader during the "revolution," way back in 1995, was Newt Gingrich. Say what you will about Newtie (and believe me, there is a lot to say, and I've said it all over the years), but he was a skilled politician. He's not as bright as he thinks he is, but his political skills were actually quite good, at least when it came to phrasing his bullshit.  I remember when I was very young, and he was brand new to politics, and running as a liberal Republican in Georgia. I met him when he was trolling other liberal Republicans for support. He only had to lose two elections before he realized where the party was headed and promptly changed every single one of his core political principles so that he could win.

 

If he had actual core political principles, he might still be in power today.

 

After Newtie was dethroned because of his lack of principle and his wandering pecker,  he was replaced by a twosome; Dennis Hastert as Speaker, and Dick Armey as Majority Leader.  Once more, the GOP was led by people who had zero principles, but the political skill to pull off the trick of doing the exact opposite of what the Republicans said they would do, while sounding like they’re keeping their promises.  Hastert was a master at making sure Democrats had as little input into the process as possible, all the while looking reasonable and fair, while the unfortunately named Dick Armey (rumors that he had been forced to change his name from Penis Marines are unfounded) drew the resulting firepower away from Hastert, which allowed Denny to get his work done, and screw the country for a generation.

Republican Moron on Moron: Beck vs. Steele

I truly feel sorry for the right wing cognoscenti. Just think of the number of morons they rely on for information and leadership. How could anyone on the right feel hopeful with "leaders" like they have?

This is a classic example of what I mean. Here is the Moronic Glenn Beck, interviewing the empty suit Michael Steele, and both of them agree that (and I swear this is a direct quote:

"You have absolutely no reason, none, to trust our word or our actions at this point."

No shit, Sherlock.

Investigation and Due Process of the Bushies: Are we Americans or are We Mice?

I am excited at the prospects offered by the Obama Administration, and I am looking forward to a future that is much brighter than anything we've seen since we ceded the government to the neocons 28 years ago, culminating in the last eight years of pure hell on earth.

The Obama Administration is like a breath of fresh air, when compared to the governments of our recent past. There is already an air of openness and transparency that we haven't seen in many years, even when Clinton was president. Even when a mistake is made, there is an easiness about admitting it and moving on with a solution.

But while I do agree with them on most issues, there is one issue on which we seem to stand on different sides of the fence.I say "seem," because I have a feeling we can find ourselves on the same side of the fence with a little prodding. But for now, the Obama Administration seems to be far too willing to let bygones be bygones, and let the previous administration slide on its sins.

That's just a crock, and we cannot be allow that attitude to stand.

I don't care who does the investigation, as long as the people involved are impartial, but a complete investigation of the last eight years has to be conducted. And if we care at all about the concept of justice for all, we simply cannot allow anyone responsible for the crimes committed in our name to slide, without prosecution, and a payment for their crimes. If that means we have to watch a former president and vice president and/or a bunch of their underlings be frog marched to jail for the cameras, and repeatedly interviewed from a jail cell by Fox News and Inside Edition, then so be it.

Right Wing Crap Flows Through Media Goose

Have you ever watched a couple of dogs play with a chew toy? For some reason, that's the image that comes to mind when right wingers get hold of a talking point and simply will not let go. No matter how much the rest of us try to take it back and expose it as a lie, they just hang on, as if their life depended on it.

The latest example is the disgusting display on the part of the far right regarding a provision for digitization of medical records that was included as part of the stimulus package. Now, one could argue that such a measure should probably have its own bill, with clear provisions, but the provision merely creates the impetus and the funding to put all medical records into electronic form, so that doctors will have easy access to it when it becomes necessary, "to help guide medical decisions at the time and place of care."

See the above phrase? The one in quotes? That is actually from the bill itself, and has been taken as a talking point and gnawed on by nearly every right wing crank in the media, as meaning the government will be telling doctors what to do.

Yes, that's right; in right wing world, creating a medical records database, so that a doctor doesn’t have to guess on treatment when you end up in the ER while on a business trip on the other side of the country, has become "the government wants to tell your doctors how to treat you." And it's become "conventional wisdom" among the gullible morons who sop this crap up with a biscuit.

Annie Coulter: Squealing Like a Stuck Republican

I got this in an e-mail last night, and I just had to share. It's Annie Coulter's latest column, and it demonstrates just how much she despises the very people who buy her books... wingnuts, pay attention; she's talking about you...

Goodbye, America! It Was Fun While It Lasted

by Annie Coulter

Posted 02/11/2009 ET
Updated 02/11/2009 ET

It's bad enough when illiterate jurors issue damages awards in the billions of dollars because they don't grasp the difference between a million and a billion. Now it turns out the Democrats don't know the difference between a million and a trillion.

Why not make the "stimulus bill" a kazillion dollars?

All Americans who work for a living, or who plan to work for a living sometime in the next century, are about to be stuck with a trillion-dollar bill to fund yet more oppressive government bureaucracies. Or as I call it, a trillion dollars and change.

------------------------------------

Note the tone. Can you hear "The Democrats" rolling off the tongue with that signature sneer?

Can you imagine? After eight years of Bush Junior, suddenly, she's concerned about the deficit, and the inability to discern the difference between million, billion and trillion.

Let's give Annie here a little bit of history, shall we? Okay.

When Jimmy Carter left office, and Ronald Reagan took over, as a percentage of GDP, the national debt was at its lowest point that at any time in the post-war era; 32.6%. For the first time since the war, the national debt was within sight of being eliminated. In eight short years, the debt had climbed to 53.1% of GDP. In other words, the debt was growing far faster than the economy, even though Reagan and the wingnuts were telling us how strong the economy was.

Gee; it wasn't growing because of runaway government spending was it?

The Republicans Have Lost It -- They Really Have...

They spent the last eight years screwing up everything they touched. Best case scenario, they stood back and did nothing, while the most incompetent administration in US History took apart the federal government and put the economy in the toilet.

Now, it's time to fix things. Voters made themselves crystal clear last November; they were dissatisfied with the way Republicans ran things, and they wanted Democrats to take charge. The Republican Party is on the ropes, and they are in desperate need of a make over.

Yet, read this article from today's Washington Post. If you're Republican, it should worry you greatly. 

Three months after their Election Day drubbing, Republican leaders see glimmers of rebirth in the party's liberation from an unpopular president, its selection of its first African American chairman and, most of all, its stand against a stimulus package that they are increasingly confident will provide little economic jolt but will pay off politically for those who oppose it.

After giving the package zero votes in the House, and with their counterparts in the Senate likely to provide in a crucial procedural vote today only the handful of votes needed to avoid a filibuster, Republicans are relishing the opportunity to make a big statement. Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Tex.) suggested last week that the party is learning from the disruptive tactics of the Taliban, and the GOP these days does have the bravado of an insurgent band that has pulled together after a big defeat to carry off a quick, if not particularly damaging, raid on the powers that be.

"We're so far ahead of where we thought we'd be at this time," said Rep. Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), one of several younger congressmen seeking to lead the party's renewal. "It's not a sign that we're back to where we need to be, but it's a sign that we're beginning to find our voice. We're standing on our core principles, and the core principle that suffered the most in recent years was fiscal conservatism and economic liberty. That was the tallest pole in our tent, and we took an ax to it, but now we're building it back."

The second-ranking House Republican, Rep. Eric Cantor (Va.), put it more bluntly. "What transpired . . . and will give us a shot in the arm going forward is that we are standing up on principle and just saying no," he said.

When I first read that, I actually checked the date. No, it wasn't April 1. Then I checked the source, just to make sure I hadn't gone to the Onion by mistake. Nope; it was a reputable news source, and the article was written by its staff writers.

Don't Just Give Us Money! Get a Good Read in the Process!

This Novel Will Tell You Exactly What the Right Wing is Likely to do to Our New President!

Plus, Click the button below and get a great read and support liberal causes. TWO DOLLARS from each sale will go to ActBlue!

A new president just took office, and he’s no far-right ideologue. You just know the right wingers who tried to take down Bill Clinton will be back at work on the new president. Billionaire right wing hate mongers never stop going after others; they just try to figure out new tactics.

What will they try? And how will it work this time?

Talent on Loan tells you exactly what they'll try. Look at what they're doing to the stimulus package for a clue. They never change. Talent on Loan is a cautionary tale for anyone who would like to become president in the future. It accurately portrays and also skewers the right wing hate machine, and makes fun of their tactics, their politics and their hatred of this country. Take a fat, moronic right wing talk show host (we all know one of those, at least), a couple of White House secretaries who want to be famous for various reasons, and a billionaire who won't stop until he eliminates his enemies once and for all.

Talent on Loan is a must-have for anyone who wants to laugh at the right wing; and don't we all want to do that? The novel puts what right wingers believe in the perfect context, and the result is pure laughter. The dialogue used in the radio talk show segments is actual dialougue from actual right wing talk shows. The result is a funny, profane romp that takes no prisoners. It’s time for a new era in American politics, but I think we all agree, we need a way to laugh at how we got here.

Buy Talent on Loan here by clicking on the button below and you’ll get one of the best political satires written in many years, signed by the up-and-coming author, and $2 of the purchase price will go to support progressive causes and candidates.

Celebrate the end of the right wing era and laugh your ass off in the process.

 

Margaret and Helen on Mann Coulter

If you haven't had occasion to check it out, you owe it to yourself to check out the blog "Margaret and Helen." They have been friends for more than 60 years, and their insight is just wonderful.

Their latest is Helen Philpot, posting on Ann Coulter's new book, and it's priceless. Here's a snippet:

Margaret, you are the only person for whom I would do this.   Reading Ann Coulter’s book is like chewing aspirin without water.   I just finished another chapter and I am sitting here wondering if anyone has actually seen Ann using complex tools like a ball point pen or say… I don’t know… a toaster?  After reading the 4th chapter of her book I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that she actually doesn’t even have opposable thumbs. I could be wrong, but it is hard to believe that the person who wrote this book is also capable of fine motor skills.

You might have to read these next lines more than once.  It is very difficult trying to summarize the logic being used by Coulter in this chapter titled: Witless Witnesses to History.  Try typing that 10 times with no opposable thumbs and a size 17 foot in your mouth!  I can only assume she was under deadline and needed to fill some pages. 

According to Coulter, some Republicans are idiots because they write books calling other Republicans idiots.  Now Margaret, help me out here. Ann is calling some Republicans idiots for writing books where they say nasty things about other Republicans, but in this chapter alone Ann trashes about a dozen Republicans for doing this.  So doesn’t that make Ann an idiot a dozen times over?  I hope you can follow that because I read the whole chapter and I am still confused.

Now if the chapter was written by say - a sloth - then I might understand. But this book is written by a #1 New York Times Bestselling Author. It says so right there on the jacket cover above the picture of Ann.  Come to think of it, Ann is not only hiding her feet in that picture, she is also hiding her thumbs.  I wonder…

Why David Sirota is Wrong...

I saw this article, and because it was written by David Sirota, I read it. But this isn't exactly vintage Sirota, and its premise is not only weak, but demonstrably false. This is surprising, since I am usually a big fan of David's, and usually find his reasoning to be sound.

I am not just offering the opinion that he's wrong. I'll demonstrate exactly what I mean...

From Salon.com | Obama's team of zombies, by David Sirota.

Only weeks ago, the political world was buzzing about a "team of rivals." America was told that finally, after years of yes men running the government, we were getting a president who would follow Abraham Lincoln’s lead, fill his administration with varying viewpoints, and glean empirically sound policy from the clash of ideas. Little did we know that "team of rivals" was what George Orwell calls "newspeak": an empty slogan "claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts."

Obama's national security team, for instance, includes not a single Iraq war opponent. The president has not only retained George W. Bush's defense secretary, Robert Gates, but also 150 other Bush Pentagon appointees. The only "rivalry" is between those who back increasing the already bloated defense budget by an absurd amount and those who aim to boost it by a ludicrous amount.

Okay, here's the first mistake. First of all, we have no way of knowing which of Bush's people were actually pro-war or anti-war, since no one in his right wind who is working for a president will publicly speak out against him. It's also quite possible that they might refuse to quit, because while they can't stop the occupation, they might be able to mitigate its effects somehow. Not only that, but the only person whose opinion matters was Bush's, and is now Obama's.

Does Sirota understand what caused the Democrats to lose everything in 1994? It was the Clinton Administration's decision to replace every ReaganBush official with a green Democratic official. who saw his same "vision." In short, Clinton didn't appoint anyone who knew his ass from a hole in the ground, and it showed, as his administration sputtered for the first two years, despite having a majority in Congress. It doesn't help to have a vision, but hire a bunch of people who don't know how to implement it.

Cutting the Ted Nugent: Right Wing Demi-God and Shit-Thrower!

One of the duties of this blog going forward will be to deconstruct the Right Wing crap machine, and expose every aspect of it to you. To that end, it's time to expose you to right wing "demi-god" Ted Nugent. I got the following e-mail from "Human Events" this morning:

Dear Fellow Conservative:

You don't have to be fan of rock music to love rocker/hunter Ted Nugent. You just have to share the unabashed patriotism and "rock"-solid conservative values that come through in his music and bestselling books.

Now comes the Motor-City Madman's wildest, most politically incorrect book yet. In Ted, White, and Blue: The Nugent Manifesto, "The Nuge" lays out his plan for defending red-blooded, full-throated Americanism against pantywaist politicians, nanny-state judges, and tofu-eating Obamamaniacs -- calling on readers to "Roll up your damn sleeves, sharpen your crowbars, and think hardcore."

Ted, White, and Blue rocketed to #8 on The New York Times bestseller list in its first week of release. But now, HUMAN EVENTS is making it available to you FREE.

"You're gonna love this!" -- Gov. Mike Huckabee

In your FREE hardcover copy of Ted, White, and Blue you'll discover:

• Why if Ted were a Mexican, he'd start a revolution (and how, since he's not, we can control our own borders)

• How to put Uncle Sam on a diet (a "waste-watchers program" for Big Government)

• The Ted Plan for energy independence by 2018 -- how to keep America rockin' into the future

• How to change the world for the better through the power of God, guns, and rock 'n' roll

CLICK HERE to get your FREE copy of Ted, White, and Blue today.

Sincerely,

Thomas S. Winter
Editor in Chief, HUMAN EVENTS

Yes, I've removed the various links from this e-mail. I'm here to critique this e-mail, not give free publicity to "Human Events." If you've always wondered who puts idiots like Ann Coulter and Ted Nugent on the best seller list, groups like this do it. They buy boxes and boxes of these books, put them onto the best seller lists, and then give the books away as "premiums" for paying them an annual fee for absolutely nothing, except the opportunity to spam your e-mail inbox with a half dozen sales pitches a day.

So, if you're wondering how Ted Nugent made the "best seller" lists, even though you've never seen his books in stores, now you know why.

Ted Nugent is one of the greatest bullshit artists of all time, and he is paying his bills by preying upon the idiot hordes on the far right. You would think, by listening to the right wing, that Nugent was this great rock and roller; a masterful guitarist with a huge following. Hell; listen to them, and you'd think he was the second coming of the Beatles. He was, at best, a mediocre talent with a big mouth. He's released 31 albums overall, and one album with the Damn Yankees, was his greatest success, selling about 5 million on its own. He had one other album that sold more than one million copies. You can do the math to figure out just how successful he is as a "rock legend."

As a guitarist, he's average, and after so many concerts (he has reportedly done more than 6000 concerts over the years), one would think he'd be better. He's had one hit on his own, and one hit with Damn Yankees, in a career that spans 40 years. (Nugent claims he has been playing professionally for 50 years, starting in 1958, but no one with a brain would pay to see a 9 year old play guitar, except as a novelty, so his actual career dates back to 1967.) In other words, as a celebrity, he's excellent at attracting attention, but he's a second- or even third-rate rock talent.

Why do I think Nugent is a bullshit artist? Let's look at the following paragraph from the e-mail for a clue:

Now comes the Motor-City Madman's wildest, most politically incorrect book yet. In Ted, White, and Blue: The Nugent Manifesto, "The Nuge" lays out his plan for defending red-blooded, full-throated Americanism against pantywaist politicians, nanny-state judges, and tofu-eating Obamamaniacs -- calling on readers to "Roll up your damn sleeves, sharpen your crowbars, and think hardcore."

First of all, who but a right winger takes pride in being "politically incorrect"? That term is actually code for "I'm going to say nasty things about brown people and gays, but you can't call me a bigot." The whole "political incorrectness" movement is a fiction, perpretrated by the right wing, to give it an excuse to be racist, and blame the reaction to it on "liberals." Yes, there are some on the left who overreact to certain things, but most of us don't care, as long as something is not overtly racist or sexist, or portrays a point of view falsely ir unfairly. When used by someone on the left, "politically incorrect" means you're about to tell the truth about someone, and you know certain people on the extreme sides of the political spectrum will either take offense (left), or pretend to take offense (right).

When a right winger like Nugent is "politically incorrect," however, it's because he's going to say something mean and hurtful, or something untrue, or both. It's a signal to all that he intends to say something nasty and personal about someone based on something they say politically. Nugent's entire "conservative" viewpoint is actually a parody of the right wing's viewpoint on everything, although I'm not sure whether it's intentional or not.

Oh, who the hell am I kidding? He's a walking parody. He can't possibly believe the bullshit he throws. For example, he's supposedly virulently anti-drug and anti-alcohol abuse, at the same time he's done 6000 concerts (and continues to do them) in front of high and shitfaced audiences. He claims he's in favor of hunting and "conservation," but he runs a "canned" hunting facility, where he charges exhorbitant fees for killing animals. Now, except for a few anti-huntin fanatics, most of us understand the value of hunting to thin animal populations, which is actually quite a healthy activity that protects the animals themselves. But canned hunting is nothing but wasteful and pointless, and only far right extremists could possibly rationalize such activity.

I would also point out that true conservatives actually have respect for the political views of others, just as true liberals (like yours truly) actually have respect for true conservatives. It truly is possible to respect someone who sees a situation from a different angle, and simply differs in approach to solving problems. But right wingers are not conservatives, despite the fact that they call themselves by that name, and Ted Nugent is one of those, not a conservative.

How many true conservatives would call for the "clubbing" of an animal rights activist on the radio and receive a $75,000 fine for doing so, as Nugent did? How many true conservatives would say, "Our failure (in Iraq) has been not to Nagasaki them."? And how many true conservatives would ever request at a consert that prominent Democrats, including presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama "suck on his machine gun"?

Ted Nugent is not a conservative. In fact, one of the major themes of this blog will be the request that we stop calling these extremist bastards "conservative" altogether. They're not conservative. They are parodies of "conervatives." They're actually radical extremists. And you should not believe anything they say, because they will always lie to make you believe what they want you to believe. 

For example, when you hear this second-rate guitarist and first-rate asshole talk in glowing terms about the military, remember that he, like many of his right wing brethren did everything they could to make sure their own asses didn't get shot off in Vietnam.

Yeah, that's right; this self-described "patriot" avoided Vietnam. What isn't clear is how he avoided service exactly, because he has given two different stories as to how he avoided serving. One, he gave in an interview with High Times magazine in 1977, when he said;

"I got 30 days' notice of the physical," Nugent told them. "I ceased cleansing my body. Two weeks before the test I stopped eating food with nutritional value. A week before, I stopped going to the bathroom. I did it in my pants. My pants got crusted up."

Now, the first thing that came to my mind was, why would someone who was so incredibly "anti-drug" since the 60s, and has bragged about it since then, even even give an interview to High Times magazine in the first place? But worse, Nugent tries to explain this away, and come up with a new version of "the truth" that falls in line with this "conservative" self-parody he's created:

"You've got to realize that these interviewers would arrive with glazed eyes and I would make stories up." He explained that he did not go to Vietnam because he had a 1 year student deferment. When questioned, he admitted that he had "not wanted to get his ass blown off in Vietnam," but made note of a tour he made with the USO in 2004 to Fallujah and Afghanistan as support of his assertion that "I am not a coward." He also said that "Because I failed to serve in Vietnam, I feel an obligation now, to do everything I can to support those defending our freedom. Do I feel guilt and embarrassment? Yes."

No, he doesn't. If he did feel guilt and embarrassment, he would bend over backward to understand why our soldiers are in Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place, and would be doing his best to make sure as many as possible came home alive. Someone who actually supported the troops would actually be disgusted by the Bush attitude, in which he basically said, for years, that more soldiers had to die so that the soldiers that had already died would not have died in vain. You don't just do a few USO shows and claim a moral high ground. You should do the USO shows and also work to bring those soldiers home alive and in one piece.

But that wouldn't fit in with the phony persona he's created for himself. He claims he's a Christian, but a true Christian would never run a "canned hunt" and would not be an apologist for racist views. (Don't you wonder why Ted would "start a revolution" if he was Mexican? Or how he would "control our borders" since he's not?) While he's in favor of his view of Second Amendment gun ownership rights, he demonstrates no tolerance for any of the other rights mentioned in the Constitution, preferring to denigrate pretty much anyone who doesn't agree with his extreme views, so it's difficult to take him seriously as a gun advocate. True conservative gun rights advocates understand why gun controls, such as registration and licensing, are useful tools to enhance gun rights for owners, rather than insidious tools for government confiscation of guns. But "The Nuge" is outspoken, to the point that he considers gun ownership and hunting to be something akin to religion. 

This guy, divorced, with more children than he acknowledges and takes care of; who claims an affinity with the military, despite the fact that he reportedly shit himself to get out of serving in Vietnam; who publicly ridicules and occasionally calls for the death of, anyone who doesn't share his extremist views, is nothing but a parody of the far right, who think of themselves as "conservative," but are anything but, and he is a tool used by other right wingers, like those who own Regnery Press and "Human Events," to make money off ignorant morons.

Wingnuts should get a clue. You're fools, and they're taking advantage of your foolishness...

Right Wingers on NRO: 50 De-Stimulating Myths Disguised as "Fact"

One of the worst aspects of the "debate" over the economic stimulus package has to be the sophistry exhibited by the far right when discussing  the issue. One of the purest examples of the bullshit coming from the far right was in The National Review Online this morning, in the guise of an article entitled "50 De-Stimulating Facts: Chapter and Verse on a Bad Bill" by Stephen Spruiell & Kevin Williamson. In the article, the two wingnuts cite "facts" that are certainly not factual, but no more than opinion., and that is being kind, because they are the opposite of factual. This is not unusual, of course; right wingers are always posing their opinions as "fact," even though they're usually wrong. But what makes the current effort by the right wing to muddy the waters is the fact that the lives of millions of families who are struggling with the economy these same idiots screwed up, are hanging in the balance.

We literally don't have time for this kind of crap: We just don't.

Before I get into their list of items they don't like, let's get something else out of the way first. In the introduction to the piece, they make the following claim:

The idea that the government can spend the economy out of a recession is highly questionable...

This is right wing sophistry at its ballsiest, folks.

Stimulate THIS, Republicans!

Look, Democratic Senators; it is this simple. The current incarnation of the Republican Party will only play ball when they lose enough fights, and realize they have no choice but to either help craft legislation, or get the hell out of the way while you do.

The people want and need a stimulus package, and they will get one. The most Republicans might be able to do is to delay it a bit, but they can’t stop it, so stop acting as if they can. If moderate Republicans make decent proposals that make sense, and could help move the economy along, you’d be crazy not to consider it. But stop listening to the bullying tactics and the promises to “not vote” for the package. They lost the last election, and they seem poised to lose the next few elections, and it really doesn’t matter what they like and don’t like.

And don’t worry about a filibuster. If they do filibuster this, they will be sorry. See, the unemployment figures are about to come out, and they’ll be the highest we’ve seen in many decades; possibly even higher than they were in 1982; the last time supply-side economics pushed us over a cliff. And if Republicans delay or kill a stimulus package that might work, or even if they vote against a stimulus package that ends up working, they will be screwed, and they know it.

Bipartisanship With Petulant Children; Is it Possible?

Look, I'm all for President Obama seeking support from Republicans.  After all, he is the president of all of the people, and Republicans are people, too. But for Chrissakes; at what point does he get that the leadership representing the Republican Party in Congress -- especially the Senate -- is made up mostly of people whose election hasn't come around yet, so they haven't had the opportunity to be tossed out on their asses. Yet. Moreover, they have no concept of what "bipartisanship" actually means, so you have to teach it to them. To them, bipartisanship means, "you do what we want." They sound very much like the biggest kids in fifth grade, who have gotten to ninth grade, but don't seem to realize all of the other kids are now bigger. 

 

When you listen to these morons, I swear to you they're living in a goddamn echo chamber or something. They seem to be sealed off from the real world somehow; to them, 2006 and 2008 never even happened.  First, the idiot Republicans in the House voted as a bloc AGAINST a stimulus package designed to relieve the current economic mess that THEY caused in the first place. And what did they choose to bitch about? I mean, besides the pennies the bill was scheduled to toss at contraceptive programs.

 

The DEFICIT!

 

I kid you not! I almost fell out of my chair! Suddenly, John Boner (sp?), the House MINORITY Leader (I made the letters bigger so that he understands that's who he is now -- the MINORITY Leader), decided he finally gives a shit about the deficit, and perhaps we shouldn't add to it, because, well, it's pretty big. HIS PARTY is responsible for adding $10 trillion of the $11 trillion debt we find ourselves with, and they accumulated that debt at a time when they were declaring the economy was just humming along. Now, suddenly, after they tossed our tax money to their friends and supporters for the last eight years, they've decided we're borrowing too much, and we should really be a little more responsible with the people's money.

 

Bite me, Boner (sp?).

KBR Negligence Kills Soldiers; Bushies Covered it UP!

This is outrageous, folks!

From the Associated Press: Sailor electrocuted - Yahoo! News.

A third U.S. service member has been determined to have been electrocuted in a shower in Iraq, and Navy criminal investigators are investigating, The Associated Press has learned.

Navy Petty Officer 3rd Class David A. Cedergren, 25, of South St. Paul, Minn., died Sept. 11, 2004, while showering. His family was told he died of natural causes.

Late last year, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology changed the manner of Cedergren's death to "accidental," caused by electrocution and inflammation of the heart. The Naval Criminal Investigative Service has reopened an investigation into his death, Ed Buice, a NCIS spokesman, said Monday.

Cedergren's death is among 18 electrocution deaths — 16 U.S. service members and two military contractors — under review as part of a Department of Defense Inspector General inquiry. Improperly installed or maintained electrical devices have been blamed in some of the deaths, while accidental contact with power lines caused others.

THIS is how Dick Cheney's been getting rich? Letting his Halliburton contractor buddies get away with putting up defective facilities, and then covering up the deaths and injuries that result from it? And worse is lying to the families of the servicemen about how the death occurred?

Eighteen Americans -- 16 of them soldiers -- may have died because of KBR's negligence, and they're just raking in the billions and padding their bottom line. And the Bush Administration was apparently helping them cover it up!

What else have they lied about, folks? If we can spend trillions of dollars fixing the mess they've made of the economy, and trillions more fixing their messes in Iraq and Afghanistan, we have to dedicate a few billion dollars investigating these assholes, and finding out about everything they've lied about.

Gregg: Example of Obama Political Genius or...??

Okay, so President Obama is about to appoint Judd Gregg as Commerce Secretary. When this was first announced, many liberals were giddy at the prospect of getting a 60th Democratic vote in the Senate, despite the reality that there is no such thing as a "filibuster-proof majority" in a Senate with at least a half dozen Democrats who are practically Republicans. But Gregg whined, and stated that he wouldn't serve his country as Commerce Secretary if it meant it changed the make up of the Senate, thus putting party ahead of country, as Republicans are wont to do. So, Governor Lynch will be appointing a Republican to replace Gregg, thus denying Democrats the magical 60 seats so many think they need.

 

Judd Gregg seems like a bad fit with the Obama Administration, but Barack Obama has amazing instincts as a politician; I don't think anyone should question his political motives quite  yet. So, what is he doing, nominating so many Republicans to his administration?

 

Here's what I think he's doing.

 

The two most contentious issues Obama will deal with during his first year or two in office are the two occupations, In Iraq and Afghanistan, and the economy. And these are the issues on which the far right will most likely try to oppose him, and do so quite strongly.  Since public opinion will have a lot of influence  on these issues, and will either strengthen or weaken the opposition to things such as the stimulus.

 

So, what better way to blunt the Republicans' criticism of the measures Obama will have to take regarding the occupations and the economy, than to have Republicans in charge of both Commerce and Defense?  What can the wingnuts in Congress say? Can they claim "partisanship" when the leaders of both efforts are being undertaken by fellow Republicans, Gates and Gregg?

 

I may be off base here, but Obama seems to be demonstrating some incredible political agility here. He's knocking the wind out of the Republicans' sails, by walking the walk, and creating a truly bipartisan administration, and making Republicans who would oppose him on look like fools. How can they possibly oppose  him, and not look like fools, when members of their own party are actually implementing the laws the Democrats "make" them pass?

 

Of course, if Republicans were smart, they could use this as a  way to improve their standing with voters. When the stimulus package works -- and it will -- they can claim a measure of credit, since one of theirs -- Gregg -- helped make it work. When the two occupations  end, and the entire Middle east doesn't dissolve into pure chaos, one of theirs -- Gates --was a major player in that effort.

 

But right wing Republicans aren't smart, so Obama's the one who will benefit, when he looks like the bipartisan reformer, and they just look like petulant children.

 

I think I get this now…

It's Time to Change Our Energy Mindset; Green Will Bring in the Green

One of the key aspects of the current stimulus package that is exciting is its investment in new energy production, that is more attuned to the needs of the average person and the planet, than anything we've seen before. It reflects a new reality, and it's about time.

 

The way we've designed our lives has necessitated the use of energy to fuel every aspect of  them. We have to heat and cool our homes, we have to travel and move goods around the country and around the world, and we depend greatly on electrical energy these days, to the point that electrical energy must be plentiful and dependable.  In other words, most of the world has chosen not to live like the Amish. Whether or not that is a wise choice is a matter of debate, but we are what we are.

 

One thing is not debatable, however. No matter how we as humans choose to live our lives, we still need the world around us in order to function. Therefore, we must balance our production and use f energy with the need for clean air, wholesome, nutritious food and a clean and plentiful supply of water. And as everything in nature works in harmony, we have to figure out a way to produce what we need, while disturbing as little of the natural world as possible. It doesn't matter if you "believe" in global warming or not, nor does it doesn't matter how many jobs, companies and countries are "dependent" on the extraction of fossil fuels for their economies. What I am talking about is the survival of the human race, and the planet as a whole.

 

Okay, that last part probably overstated things just a bit. We won't kill the planet; this planet is pretty resilient, and will probably survive whatever we can do to it. But the survival of the human species depends greatly upon the health of the planet. So, how do we reserve as many of the technological gains we have made in recent generations, and still preserve the natural worlld, so that we survive?

If we want to increase the chances of human survival, -- and we do -- and preserve the planet we love, then we have to change our approach to energy production. Production of energy must involve two concepts; first, we must stop using natural resources as if they belong to humans alone;. The world belongs to every plant and animal species here, as well. Therefore, we have to be more careful when extracting resources, and we must stop burning things to supply us with energy.

 

We must solve this energy crisis. But first, we have to recognize that there is a crisis. The fact is, we have been in an energy crisis since we first realized that we could burn oil and gas to make light. and run machinery. But the crisis has been most acute in the last 40 years, and it will not end until we create most of our energy naturally, without burning natural resources, and to make maximum use of every bit of energy we produce.They keys are natural energy production and conservation.

We Can't Fix the Economy Without Fixing Health Care

Here are a couple of questions to ponder…

If you’re an average American, you’re sitting in front of your computer reading this and simultaneously wondering if you’ll even have a job in a year or two. How does the prospect of health insurance premiums doubling by 2016 strike you?

And if you’re a business owner who’s now providing health insurance to his employees, how would you like to be paying double the current premiums by 2016?

I would also point out that this is a conservative estimate, made before the economy took a nosedive. Given some of the bills people are receiving in their mail these days, the problem may be more acute than we thought. On his program Wednesday, Ed Schultz told listeners that his health insurance had increased by  almost 20% over last year. At that rate, his insurance premiums would double by the time Obama's being inaugurated a second time.

A current report by the United States Public Interest Research Group estimates that, if something drastic isn’t done by the President and the current Congress, the cost of health insurance premiums will more than double betweeb 2006, when the average annual premium was $11,381, and 2016, when it estimates they will reach an estimated $24,281, even when adjusted for inflation.

Who the hell can afford that possibility, seriously?

How can a country that arguably has the best health care system in the world, and the best doctors in the world, be so absolutely boneheaded when it comes to financing the system? No one in their right mind would fund one industry using money from a competing industry, the mission of which is at absolute cross purposes with the industry needing the financing.

Think about it.

House Republican Steele Says the GOP is Perfect As-Is... GOP is Toast!

So, just how did someone like Michael Steele, who has no successful political experience -- he won one election as a governor's running mate, and has never won election on his own -- get to lead a party that most agree is on it's way down?

By being black, and declaring that nothing is wrong... 

You can't make this crap up.

The following is from a transcript of RNC Chairman Michael Steele on 'FOX News Sunday' with  Chris Wallace.

On immigration;

STEELE: The GOP's position is secure our borders first. Let us know and let us make sure the American people know that we've taken care of the important business of dealing with illegal immigration into this country. You cannot begin to address the concerns of the peop le who are already here unless and until you have made certain that no more are coming in behind them.

Believe it or not this was the first thing Steele mentioned. Immigration. The economy is falling apart, and Steele wants to talk about immigration. Ironically, the economy in the shitter is probably the one thing that will keep people from wanting to come here. (Well, unless they're invited by bankers, of course. See previous post.)

But here's the thing; the Republicans HAVE NOT dealt with illegal immigration in any significant way. They've had control of the government since 1981, and all they have done is give illegal immigrants amnesty over and over. The immigration departments are still overwhelmed with everything, and we're behind other countries when it comes to using advanced technology to track immigrants.

Here's a clue, folks. The biggest problem isn't brown people swimming the Rio Grande or climbing over a fence. It's people who come over legally and never leave.

Republicans: Party Before Country

Republican Senator Judd Gregg is a typical Republican, through and through, thinking of his party's power first, and the country second.

From Senator: Appointment wouldn't affect Senate makeup - Yahoo! News.

Republican Sen. Judd Gregg has told colleagues that if he becomes commerce secretary, his replacement would affiliate with the GOP, denying Democrats' total dominance, his party leader said Sunday.

That would require an agreement involving President Barack Obama, who would appoint Gregg to his Cabinet, and New Hampshire Democratic Gov. John Lynch, who would name Gregg's successor to the Senate. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky suggested such an arrangement was in the works.

"Sen. Gregg has assured me that if this were to happen, if it were to happen, it would not change the makeup of the Senate," McConnell said on "Face the Nation" on CBS. "In other words, whoever is appointed to replace him would caucus with Senate Republicans, so I think it would have no impact on the balance of power in the Senate."

There are a lot of questions that come to mind immediately, of course.

First of all, what kind of person is asked to serve his country as Secretary of Commerce, and puts his political party's power ahead of that service? I mean, look at what he's saying. Essentially, he would only serve the country, as long as his party's power in the Senate wouldn't be negatively affected.

Good thing Democrats don't feel that way, right? I mean, Janet Napolitano, the current Secretary of Homeland Security, didn't refuse the position, even though her appointment left a right wing idiot in charge of the state of Arizona.

When you are called to serve your country, you serve your country, unless you feel that you can't do the job for some reason. There is no excuse whatsoever for this.

But I would also note that the Republicans are putting a lot of stock in the filibuster as a weapon. It seems to me that they intend to use if liberally, to stop anything they don't like. Isn't it strange that when they were in charge, they were willing to kill the filibuster, and now that they're no longer in charge, the filibuster is their best friend?

They're into power, and they're into kicking the legs out from under Democrats. They have no principle, as a party, and they truly do not care about average Americans.

At what point to real Republican voters -- those who care about the country -- finally get rid of this kind of leadership?

Just asking..

Banks Take US Tax Dollars, Use it to Hire Foreigners

Why do bankers hate America?

Check this out. Apparently, while they were heading for meltdown, and as they were laying off thousands of American workers and then demanding taxpayers bail them out, major US banks were apparently trolling for foreigners to fill high-paying jobs. What gives with this?

This is from the Associated Press Investigation: Banks sought foreign workers. Major U.S. banks sought government permission to bring thousands of foreign workers into the country for high-paying jobs even as the system was melting down last year and Americans were getting laid off, according to an Associated Press review of visa applications.

The dozen banks now receiving the biggest rescue packages, totaling more than $150 billion, requested visas for more than 21,800 foreign workers over the past six years for positions that included senior vice presidents, corporate lawyers, junior investment analysts and human resources specialists. The average annual salary for those jobs was $90,721, nearly twice the median income for all American households.

As the economic collapse worsened last year — with huge numbers of bank employees laid off — the numbers of visas sought by the dozen banks in AP's analysis increased by nearly one-third, from 3,258 in the 2007 budget year to 4,163 in fiscal 2008.

I have to admit, I didn't get this. I have been wracking my brain, trying to figure out why these banks would go to foreigners to fill positions that could easily be filled with recently laid-off Americans.

If they're looking for "cheap labor," then perhaps they would do well to just offer Americans the lower wage, and see who takes it. Ya think?

For their part, Republican Charles Grassley and Democrat Dick Durbin are equally pissed, and working on a bill that would force companies getting bailout money to consider American workers first.

Gee, thanks.

Grassley should look at himself if he wants to locate a culprit here. For a generation, his Republican Party has been facilitating the move of manufacturing and jobs overseas, and even paying companies to do it. When you call the warranty center of your local American company, and you speak to a perfectly nice person living in Mumbai, isn't that basically the same thing? Apparently, it's perfectly okay to hire foreigners to do jobs from other countries, but to come here and do them is suddenly wrong.

Oh, please cut the crap, Grassley!

Yeah, what the banks are doing is wrong. But it's only slightly more wrong than hiring foreigners in other countries to do jobs that people here are perfectly capable of doing. The only reason our workers are forced to "compete" with China is because the government, led by Republicans, has done nothing to protect them. We could make stuff to sell here. We can make cars that people want to buy, and we can make spatulas that sell for $1.50, instead of a dollar. It can be done, and done successfully.

The Republicans have raped our economy for years, and now, all of a sudden, one Republican senator is incensed, because a handful of $90K a year bank jobs are being given to "furr'ners."

Guess what, Senator; we've been bitching about the same thing for years; what made ya change your mind all of a sudden?

Hypocrisy, they name is Republican.