Scared to the Center

No Labels

2010-12-16T07:19:00.000-05:00

Wingnuts need not apply, but all are welcome to watch this video.

And God said... No More Global Warming!

2010-11-09T17:56:00.000-05:00

This is just fantastic.

Sorry for the layoff. Work got in the way of bloggery fun times.

A Mountain of Dumb, ctd.

2010-06-21T11:24:00.000-04:00

Wow. Somehow she managed to raise (lower?) the bar with this one:

"Gulf disaster needs divine intervention as man's efforts have been futile. Gulf lawmakers designate today Day of Prayer for solution/miracle"
~Sarah Palin via Twitter

I get high with a little help...

2010-06-21T10:18:00.003-04:00

I'd like to welcome a new voice to the Scared Center family, Eric Giordano.   Eric brings a centrist perspective, Poli-Sci edumacation and a desire to rant to the table which really means someone who knows what they're talking about will be helping me out in this space. Eric shares in my loathing of the Tea Party movement and also thinks Sarah Palin is the anti-christ. In other words he's awesome.

The good thing about this is it will free me up to write more about my two favorite things: boobs and golf.   It's a Win/Win when you think about it.

(note: Eric is not the hot Asian in the picture above, which is a god damned shame. That's Jarah Mariano.   Jarah probably thinks Drill Baby Drill has little to do with oil prospecting which is totally fine in most circumstances, just not on this blog)

US Open Final Thoughts

2010-06-21T10:02:00.004-04:00

After the insanity that was Moving Day at the US Open on Pebble Beach, Sunday's cool-down should have come as no surprise. There was no way anyone was going to match the dual-66 magic that Tiger and Johnson posted Saturday, especially on a US Open Final Round setup.

So the winning number? Even Par. Not -3, not -6. E. Just the way the USGA drew it up. Graeme McDowell's victory required an "unflappable" final round score of 3-over 74.   So if you wanted to see low scores and eagles abound - or a replay of Tiger's unreal second on 18 - you came to the wrong place.   Pebble was playing lightning fast and hammering away at mistakes. It's casualties were three of the biggest names in the sport, Tiger, Phil and Ernie, and the bomber who had a seemingly commanding three-shot lead in the final group.

The Notables:

McDowell's Golden Arcs - Standing-freaking-O for this guy. All the buzz before the final group went off at 5:15 was about Dustin Johnson and his Tom Brady nerves.   All completely ignoring the Irish dude he was playing with who was cooler than the other side of the pillow. I was hoping to dig up a cool stat on this guy but apparently the USGA only posts high-level numbers.   Suffice to say, the Irishman simply made the fewest mistakes tee-to-green and his short game held him up when he needed it.   That's really all it takes to win the toughest tournament in golf.

Phil's Putter (or lack thereof) - I must admit I enjoyed watching Phil pull every putt right when it mattered most. What more can I say? I just don't like the guy.

Ernie's Chokes - Els came out on fire yesterday shooting 3-under for his first 6 holes and looking like a freakin' man on a mission. The came his bogey-double-bogey run on 9, 10 and 11.   Wheels. Came. Off. Even as the leaders were falling back to him, The Big Easy's putter became a Big ol' Albatross and kept him out of the mix down the stretch.

DJ's Trainwreck - Words can't even describe this debacle. It's was simply brutal to watch.   Poor guy's Open was over in a matter of 30 minutes. I'll let the AP give the blow-by-blow:

He had a three-shot lead and was in the middle of the fairway at No. 2 with a wedge in his hand after a 343-yard drive. When he walked off the green at No. 4, he was three shots behind, a six-shot turnaround in three holes:

• From thick grass on the edge of a bunker, he chopped at it left-handed, then nearly whiffed right-handed, and, when he finally chipped it to three feet, he missed the putt and took triple bogey. His lead was gone.

• With a driver on the par-4 third, he pulled it so far left that it disappeared into a cluster of trees behind the 16th greens. Fans heard it, but didn't see it. The five minutes allowed for the search ended, and seconds later, someone cried out, "Found it!" Too late. He went back to the tee, hit into a fairway bunker and made double bogey.

• Trying to drive the fourth green, it went right into the hazard along the ocean for a bogey.

Y. E. Yang's Friday Scorecard - Holy shit. I've never seen a pro do such a good impersonation of one of my rounds. Check out Yang's back-nine 49. (courtesy of my new blog-crush, Stephanie Wei and the USGA) Yes, Forty-Nine. Yikes.

The Hole of Shame - The beautiful Par 3 17th played to an average score of 3.49.   The top 12 golfers played #17 at +18 for the tournament (+8 on Sunday) Anyone playing procrastination golf hoping to finish strong was sadly mistaken.

Johnny Miller's Awful BP Joke - I tweeted and blogged about Berman and McDonough ruining the tournament from me on Thursday. In hindsight, maybe that was a tad premature. Midway through the final round coverage, with player after player throwing up crooked numbers, Johnny tossed out the following gem:   "Looking at these scores, I don't know what's leaking worse, the field or British Petroleum"

Note to NBC: Just sign Nick Faldo as your color guy already. Nobody does a better job and he's certainly not going to insult the entire gulf coast with ham-handed blather like idiot Miller. Hey, did you hear he shot a 63 in the final round at Oakmont? Did you know it played harder then than any US Open since?    Did you know that Rocco Mediate looks like Tiger's pool boy?   And that Miller knew Tom Watson was going to missed his birdie tap-in on 18 yesterday?   Now, I don't want to mince words.   And I mean this in the nicest way possible when I say: Fuck you, Johnny Miller!

And on that note... Congrats to Graeme McD! I'm sure Guinness tastes even better out of his newest silver cup.

Gotta Give Biden Props for This

2010-06-21T07:20:00.002-04:00

Fool me eight times?!

2010-06-18T08:45:00.000-04:00

Jon Stewart tears up the last eight administrations' empty promises to get the US off of oil dependence. Call me a pinko if you will but this guy is pretty much the only one talking politics in the media with the slightest shred of integrity. There, I said it.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

An Energy-Independent Future

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show Full Episodes

Political Humor

Tea Party

US Open Day 1

2010-06-18T08:31:00.001-04:00

Golf's Second Major Championship is the only thing that can dull the pain of the Celtics horrible loss last night. The Masters and US Open are by far my favorite tournaments and the obsession is practically unhealthy. Nothing quite compares to the drama those two tournaments consistently give us and yesterday's opening round was no exception.   Let's breakdown some highlights and lowlights.

Another Moronic Phil Shot - Mickelson was trapped behind the two cyprus trees on the 18th fairway and instead of taking his medicine and laying up - which every other player on tour would have done - he tried to hit a retarded draw around the trees and over the water. Didn't work out.   No shit it didn't work out!   People ask me all the time why I don't like Loveable Loser Phil.   This shot was exhibit A.

De Jonge What? Micheel Who? - Two of the three 18 hole leaders are relatively unknown, which is unfortunate for poor Sean Micheel who only won the '03 PGA Championship "It's amazing how quickly people forget you." he said after the round.

Hoffman's 18 - This was just heart-breaking. After the amateur's second shot was slightly boxed out by the cyprus trees on 18, he tried to bend a low cut only to clip a branch and have it ricochet into the ocean. Two-in-Three-out.   He yanked his fourth left and into the water again. Four-in-Five-out. Six into the right greenside bunker. Seven stayed in.   Eight popped out to 10 feet and he saved himself a dreaded ten by nailing the putt. Poor guy was even par on the tee box and dropped 70 spots on the leaderboard by the time he tossed his ball into the Pacific.

Moore's 17 - This was just baffling.   First he pulls out a fairway metal on the 208 yard par 3 - way too much club - and pushed it right.... all the way over the 18th tee box.   From here he got some miraculous relief from the tee box sign, popped his come backer into the left greenside bunker and somehow got up and down for one of the wackiest bogey's you'll ever see on tour.

Paul Casey's Grindin' - This guy kicks ass. Not because he's a big name, because he's not.   Not because he makes it rain with wins on tour; he doesn't.   No, I like him because Yoda the Golf Instructor used Casey's swing for my comparison video (compare these mirror-image swings after the jump!)   Casey was strong early with birdies on 3 and 5 but then started struggling to hit greens. But boy did he make up for it with the flat stick.   He finished the round with 24 putts on the late-day poana greens to put him in a tie for the lead with what's-their-names.

Stay tuned for Round 2 action!

Me!

Casey

Phew! Stimulus Saves A World At Play

2010-06-17T13:58:00.000-04:00

Okay look, if you rake in $1.3B in annual revenue, you don't need another $54M from the taxpayers, mmmkay?

The Mohegan tribe, which owns the Mohegan Suncasino in Uncasville, Conn., has been awarded a $54 million loan from federal stimulus funds.

The tribe runs the sprawling Mohegan Sun casino, halfway between New York City and Boston, which earned more than $1.3 billion in gross revenues in 2009. Each tribe member receives a cut of the profits, a number a tribal official said was "less than $30,000" per capita per year. The stimulus money is a loan from a U.S. Department of Agriculture rural development program that is meant to help communities of less than 20,000 people that have been "unable to obtain other credit at reasonable rates and terms and are unable to finance the proposed project from their own resources."

Not that I really expect any less from Leiberman and Dodd, but... cmon guys! At a time when every excessive dollar spent by the government is heavily scrutinized, they should know better than to pull this kind of crap.

HCR Savings begin seeping into public consciousness

2010-06-17T13:36:00.000-04:00

Yglesias passes on a great tidbit:

Everyone knows that health care costs are a major component of the federal budget, but they also have important implications for state budgets, so Mainers will likely be interested to learn that the Affordable Care Act signed into law earlier this year will save their state money.
Mal Leary of the Bangor Daily News explains:

A state analysis of the impact of the new federal health reform law indicates it will cost Maine in the near term, but will save the state tens of millions of dollars a year after it is fully implemented in 2014.

This is the type of news that is sure to bubble up over the next 6, 12, 24 months that spells complete doom for all the HCR naysayers and Palin '12 grand-standers.

Sully on the Tea Party

2010-06-17T09:11:00.000-04:00

In a fantastic two part post, Sully reiterates his confusion with the Tea Party ideology, or lack thereof. Specifically his confusion with the movement's curious anti-government veil covering what amounts to a pro-government face.

The Bush-Cheney presidency was, in some respects, the perfect pseudo-conservative administration. They waged war based on loathing of the experts (damned knowledgeable elites!); they slashed taxes and boosted spending for their constituencies, while pretending to be fiscally responsible; they tore up the most ancient taboos - against torture - with a bravado that will one day seem obscene; and they left the country in far worse shape than they found it.

Throughout all this, the Tea Partiers supported them. So how do they manage the cognitive dissonance that two failed wars, a financial collapse and a debt crisis have brought? How do they deal with the fact that their beloved president was manifestly the most incompetent and disastrous in modern times? They blame it on the next guy.

Yes, they are doing all they can to avoid facing the fact that they did all of this ... to themselves. And sometimes, the truly, deeply humiliated can only carry on through blind rage.

Fatty Labs Body-Boarding on Snow

2010-06-08T16:58:00.000-04:00

Oh how I love Labs and their quirky made-up little games.

Watch the vid, bitches

Porn, Sword, Stun Gun, Cliff Fall? Check!

2010-06-07T07:53:00.000-04:00

If there's a better lead paragraph from a news story, I've yet to read it.

A porn actor, who was accused of killing a coworker with a sword, died after falling off a cliff in California on Saturday when police used a stun gun to subdue him.

A Mountain of Dumb

2010-06-02T12:55:00.000-04:00

Really, is there any other way to describe this fucking bimbo?

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is using the Gulf Coast oil spill to promote the issue of drilling in the Alaskan Wildlife National Refuge – the 20-million protected acres where untapped oil and gas reserves have long served as a lightning rod of controversy.

"Extreme Greenies: see now why we push 'drill,baby,drill' of known reserves & promising finds in safe onshore places like ANWR? Now do you get it?" the former Republican vice presidential nominee wrote Tuesday evening on her Twitter account.

Chait on Gerson's EC

2010-06-02T08:19:00.000-04:00

Good stuff. Chait busts up two vacuum-chamber rattles about Health Care Reform.

First, that Obama and the left hid the cost of HCR in the "doc fix"

This isn't part of the "overall cost of the entitlement." It's part of the cost of running Medicare. The cost exists irrespective of the Affordable Care Act. The paper savings from lower physician reimbursements were not used to cover insurance subsidies in the bill. If health care reform had died, Congress would still be passing a doc fix. Gerson's charge is utterly, unambiguously false.

Then that HCR is an entitlement for the un-needy

Focus on Gerson's claim that the Affordable Care Act benefits citizens who are not "vulnerable." By what possible standard is this true? The primary beneficiaries are people who can't afford to buy health insurance! They're vulnerable to getting sick and suffering terrible pain, bankruptcy, or even death either because they or a family member has a preexisting condition, or because their employer doesn't offer health insurance and they're priced out of the dysfunctional individual market. That's not "vulnerable"?

Gaza Flotilla

2010-06-02T07:57:00.004-04:00

My first reaction to the IDF attack on the Palestinian aide vessel was annoyance mixed with utter despair and concern. Just another insult on the way to the inevitable breakout of WWIII that Israel seems to welcome. As I've been perusing left and right blogosphere though I'm left more confused than anything. I think Chait breaks it down the best (after ample prodding by Sullivan, of course.

First, is the underlying blockade of Gaza humanely constructed? No it is not:
Israel prevents Gazans from importing, among other things, cilantro, sage, jam, chocolate, French fries, dried fruit, fabrics, notebooks, empty flowerpots and toys, none of which are particularly useful in building Kassam rockets. It’s why Israel bans virtually all exports from Gaza, a policy that has helped to destroy the Strip’s agriculture, contributed to the closing of some 95 percent of its factories, and left more 80 percent of its population dependent on food aid. It’s why Gaza’s fishermen are not allowed to travel more than three miles from the coast, which dramatically reduces their catch. And it’s why Israel prevents Gazan students from studying in the West Bank, a policy recently denounced by 10 winners of the prestigious Israel Prize. There’s a name for all this: collective punishment.
Second, given that the blockade was in place, was Israel militarily justified in responding as it did? Yes, it was:
We have no sympathy for the motives of the participants in the flotilla -- a motley collection that included European sympathizers with the Palestinian cause, Israeli Arab leaders and Turkish Islamic activists. Israel says that some of the organizers have ties to Hamas and al-Qaeda. What's plain is that the group's nominal purpose, delivering "humanitarian" supplies to Gaza, was secondary to the aim of provoking a confrontation. The flotilla turned down an Israeli offer to unload the six boats and deliver the goods to Gaza by truck; it ignored repeated warnings that it would not be allowed to reach Gaza. Its spokesmen said they would insist on "breaking Israel's siege," as one of them put it.
Third, given that Israel had a right to stop the ship and reply to the lethal force used against its soldiers, was it wise to respond as it did? No, it was not:
Better information was needed. The commandos didn't know they were going to face an angry mob armed with knives and bats. Different equipment was needed: The raiders apparently didn't have enough nonlethal weapons on hand. A more creative approach was needed: Maybe a way to stop the ship without having to board it. But these are all just technical details of an operation gone sour.

This level-headed perspective is why I like reading Chait. The Blockade is inhumane; the Israeli's had a right to deter the ship from breaking the blockade; the Israeli's used excessive force. In the end it seems the Flotilla's main goal of bringing political attention to the Gaza blockade was wildly successful in that it put Israel's inhumane blockade in the forefront of world news. The whole ordeal also gave us a glimpse into the future of Western border security, should the right ever get their wish to turn the US into a isolated giant. Excessive force? Sure! As long as we protect our borders!!

But I digress. Where I'm most disappointed in all this is Obama's response, which to me was like the equivalent of a soccer mom threatening to pull the minivan over. Now now kids, mommy's trying to concentrate here. When nine civilians are murdered on an aide vessel by your supposed ally, you should come right out and denounce the damn action. Plain and simple. Stop being a pussy about it and put your foot down, Mr. President.

Time to take charge, B, ctd.

2010-05-27T20:57:00.000-04:00

The Deepwater Rig disaster gets the Big Picture treatment. Crazy stuff.

I enjoyed this comment, too.

It is easy to cast blame for this horrible disaster - it's BP's fault, it's George Bush's fault, it's the fault of corporate greed, whatever. But you know who's really at fault here? Look in the mirror, sunshine. At the end of the day, each one of us has to accept some level of blame by continuing to fuel the market for oil.

Do you drive a car? Then you're partly to blame. Do you have any plastic products in your home whatsoever? Then you are as guilty as anyone.

We all drive cars or take public transit (which runs on oil). We all buy stuff made out of plastic. We all wear synthetic clothes and shoes, we all go to Wal-Mart for deals on cheap crap that came here from Bangkok on a ship that burns oil. We wash our hair with shampoo that comes in a plastic bottle (made from oil) and put on deodorant (which comes in a plastic container) each and every day. Heck, I'm typing this rant on a plastic keyboard that was made from oil, and you're probably reading it on a plastic computer with an LCD screen. They're made with oil too. That makes every single one of us - you too - collectively responsible for those birds and turtles and dragonflies dying.

Stop casting blame and start looking at how we're all screwing up the world we live in. Until we are willing to change the way we live, we will only keep doing this again and again. I'm not saying we all go back to wearing loin cloths and hunt our own food, but reduce our demand for oil by reducing, reusing and recycling.

Three Blind Mice

2010-05-27T09:01:00.001-04:00

Three-parts gubernatorial candidate; one-part people's vote on the Massachusetts Sales Tax Rollback. Apparently, that's the recipe for a bun cake of retarded political douchebaggery, according to this article from Boston.com. This story (curiously?) came and went with little fanfare or discussion in this little blue state, considering the November mid-term races are heating up.

How is it that all three candidates have absolutely zero response for the prospect of a $2.4B revenue gap? Maybe list out some sensible budget cuts? Instead they simply bang away on the scare-tactic of "limiting local aid" which has been a proven winner to sway the pussified liberals here in the past.

[T]he major candidates for governor, all of whom say they oppose the initiative to reduce the sales tax rate from 6.25 to 3 percent, a move that would cost the state up to $2.4 billion in annual revenue beginning Jan. 1.

What if voters approve it anyway? Well, the candidates say they'll cross that bridge when they come to it.

"If that's the decision they make, we're all going to have to deal with it in state government one way or another," said Republican candidate Charles Baker, who supports rolling the rate back to 5 percent. "Of course everything would be on the table."

Baker's lack of a plan is shared by independent candidate Tim Cahill and incumbent Democrat Deval Patrick.
Cahill, who also supports rolling the sales tax back to 5 percent, said he will "enforce the will of the voters and will wait to see what they decide," but hasn't outlined what he would cut to make up for the sudden loss of revenue.

Patrick, who supports returning the sales tax rate to 5 percent after the state fully recovers from the recession, also has yet to detail how he would cope with the cut but warned through his campaign that a cut to 3 percent "would have a devastating impact on the essential services that everyone in the Commonwealth relies upon."

This should be eye-opening to any voters who believe the ridiculous notion that either party is serious about fiscal sanity. They both want to spend. One is no better than the other. Time for residents in this state to wake up and choose someone who will lay it on the line and start talking about cuts.

Time to take charge, B

2010-05-27T08:39:00.000-04:00

Check out this great editorial from Boston.com, urging President Obama to take the reigns on the Deepwater oil spill disaster.

Money Quote:

It’s appalling that the federal government, under any administration, would allow drilling deep underwater without making adequate preparations for a massive oil leak. But that’s what happened. After the oil spill, Obama announced a moratorium on permits for drilling new wells and said that he is stopping the type of waivers that BP was able to obtain. But, as The New York Times has reported, at least seven new permits for various type of drilling and five environmental waivers have been granted since then. That is an insult to those harmed by the disaster unfolding on the Gulf Coast.

It's certainly turning into his giant debacle, with every passing BP failing attempt to plug the leak. I'm glad he called out BP to pay for it all, but at some point he needs to grab every top mind in oceanography, physics, engineering etc to come up with solutions. Pointing fingers just isn't enough.

The Trouble with Taxes and Cuts

2010-05-25T12:05:00.000-04:00

Bartlett and Bainbridge go at it over the federal defict and how it will inevitably impact defense spending or lead to a tax hike of some sort. I think both make excellent points to one another, from two similar but different ideological positions . Here are the two key points.

Bartlett:

Republicans primarily concerned about national security ought to be in the forefront of efforts to raise revenues to reduce deficits, free up domestic saving for domestic investment, and reduce the importation of foreign saving and the trade deficit. But so far they are not. They remain loyal to the Republican obsession with tax cuts and a refusal to raise taxes in any way for any reason. However, I think my national security-minded friends are soon going to discover that massive defense budget cuts will necessarily be a big part of the price that will be paid for not raising revenues.

Bainbridge:

Given a choice between spending $100 billion on defense [or] shoring up public sector union pension funds, what does Bartlett think his Democratic buddies would do? Given a choice between spending $100 billion on the troops and $100 billion on an unnecessary war of choice, what does Bartlett think the neoconservatives would do?

It's sort of like the old joke about an economist stranded on a desert island, whose punch line "assume a can opener." Bartlett's critique of his old friends would have a lot more traction if he could explain why we should assume a sudden outbreak of good government.

Until I see proof the beast has reformed, I say starve the [expletive deleted].

Can't realy argue with Bainbridge there. New boss, same as old boss. Personally I prefer any heavy spending be done domestically and not on American Imperialism ventures. That aside, something needs to be done about the deficit. Bainbridge does well to wrap up after a short back-and-forth with Bartlett and gets more to the heart of the matter:

To be clear, however, my point is not that deficit reduction and other sensible budgetary policies can be achieved only through cutting spending. (Just as Bartlett presumably thinks we need spending cuts as well as tax increases.)

On a bipartisan basis, our rulers have spent us into a position in which taxes probably will have to go up at least for a while. But agreeing to tax increases ought to be done only in return for a package of fundamental reforms. We need entitlement reforms (including raising the retirement age), budgetary reforms (bans on ear marks, a line item veto, and a balanced budget amendment), political reforms (real restrictions on gerrymandering), and the like. Letting the powers that be have higher taxes without those other reforms will not solve the problem. All it does is make for a bigger candy store to which we've given the keys to the children.

Put simply, absent real reforms, I don't want anybody in Washington or Sacramento getting their grubby hands on any more of my money because I don't trust them to spend it wisely. My guess is that a lot of Bartlett's new friends on the left, for example, would be quite content to raise taxes and massively cut defense. So the either/or he presents strikes me as a false choice.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid we probably need to wait until things get bad enough that politicians on all sides will be forced to agree to fundamental reforms to avoid going the way of Greece.

Erica Blasberg 1984 - 2010, ctd.

2010-05-20T08:13:00.000-04:00

Stephanie Wei shares some anecdotes and pictures from Ray Kim, Erica's close friend and former caddie. It makes for a touching memorial.

The Illusion of Rasmussen Polling

2010-05-20T07:29:00.001-04:00

Kos breaks down how Rasmussen weaves in and out of polling desirable and non-desirable primaries and elections in order to frame his preferred narrative and keep his precious "most accurate pollster" grades up.

Nothing shady here at all (rolls eyes)

It's not as if Rasmussen doesn't poll primaries. In fact, it polled the Pennsylvania Senate Democratic primary two weeks ago. But again, it refused to do a pre-election poll, because doing so would no longer help set narratives, and that's all Rasmussen cares about.

Today, Rasmussen released a poll showing Dick Blumenthal suddenly in trouble in Connecticut. How convenient! And narrative setting. Too bad he couldn't poll actual elections.
And yes, by November, Rasmussen's polling will be nicely in line with the rest of the polling aggregate, as he adjusts his voter screens to match reality, not whatever GOP-heavy universe he currently lives in. By then, he'll be less worried about setting narratives, and more worried about getting races right so that he can brag about his electoral track record. That way, he uses that credibility in order to once again set bullshit narratives in the 2012 election cycle. It's quite the scam!

Because if it itsn't a scam, there's no reason he should've skipped polling the big Tuesday races.

Carrying luggage takes a wide stance, ctd.

2010-05-19T11:19:00.000-04:00

Sullivan opens up about the George Rekers RentBoy.com thing.

Sometimes I wonder how much of the most aggressively anti-gay campaigning is done by closeted and tortured gay men, who seek to extirpate from others something they could not banish from themselves. The list of the closeted gay-baiters is long. From Roy Cohn and J Edgar Hoover all the way to Larry Craig and George Rekers. I have no doubt that the primary anti-gay forces in the Vatican are gay themselves, and working out their tortured psyches by demonizing others more honest and principled than they are.

These are men terrified by their own inherent orientation, who equate it with emasculation, and end up, in some cases, raping children and in others, merely abusing them, to keep their own demons at bay.

Miss USA Causes Confusion, ctd.

2010-05-18T08:33:00.001-04:00

Surprisingly, the right hasn't been irrationally hysterical at all about a Lebanese-born Muslim-American woman with ties to Hezbollah winning the Miss USA pageant.

Oh, wait.

Exposing Liberal Lies

In all fairness, the winner, Miss Michigan Rima Fakih, an Arab American and Muslim with roots in Lebanon, was drop-dead gorgeous. But, it is interesting to note that she has relatives who are members of the terrorist group Hezbollah. You may remember that it was Hezbollah which was responsible for the Beirut Marine barracks killings in 1983 which resulted in the death of 241 Americans.

Debbie Schlussel

It’s a sad day in America but a very predictable one, given the politically correct, Islamo-pandering climate in which we’re mired. The Hezbollah-supporting Shi’ite Muslim, Miss Michigan Rima Fakih–whose bid for the pageant was financed by an Islamic terrorist and immigration fraud perpetrator–won the Miss USA contest. I was on top of this story before anyone, telling you about who Fakih is and her extremist and deadly ties.

Gateway Pundit

Miss Oklahoma Morgan Elizabeth Woolard was a top contestant for the Miss USA crown this year. But, after she came out in support of the Arizona immigration law she was forced to take a back seat to Miss Michigan. Miss Oklahoma was runner up in this year’s competition.
[...]
Apparently, although a great majority of Americans (62-73%) agree with her, the judges didn’t like her answer. She placed second.
Instead, Miss Michigan Rima Fakih, an Arab American whose family reportedly has strong ties to the Hezbollah terror organization, won the crown.

Daniel Pipes

News that Rima Fakih, 24, of Dearborn, Michigan, won the Miss USA beauty pageant today prompts me to recall some prior instances of Muslim women winning beauty contests in Western countries.
[...]
They are all attractive, but this surprising frequency of Muslims winning beauty pageants makes me suspect an odd form of affirmative action.

McArdle on the Mass Health Care debacle

2010-05-17T20:46:00.000-04:00

In the wake of Mass insurers posting huge losses for the 1st quarter, Megan sees it as an ominous sign of doom on the horizon for the rest of the country. While her points are valid, she leaves out the question of price gouging on the part of the large conglomerate provider networks like Partners which go along with the ignorant election year power play that Deval pulled this spring.

I'm not quite so pessimistic. For one I don't foresee that level of ignorance from Team Obama. Give it a gander and decide for yourself.

A Brief History of the Party of No

2010-05-17T20:35:00.000-04:00

Arun Gupta's op ed on the Republican and Tea Party obstructionist strategy is informative, riveting and terrifying. It points out the irrational nature and bigotry of the right and the poor strategy of the Obama Administration and Democratic leadership of pandering too heavily to the right and open the door for a hard swing come November. There's a lot to be concerned about if you're even remotely moderate-minded a person.

The entire lengthy piece is well worth the read. Some highlights:

I use “the right” instead of “Republican” or even “conservative” to describe the movement and its ideas. Until recent years, there was a breed of socially liberal, fiscally conservative Republican that retained a foothold in the GOP. These Republicans provided critical support for civil rights and other progressive legislation. This segment, which tended to concentrate in the North, has largely shifted to the Democratic Party (with the result of pushing the Democrats further to the right). So while the right may now overlap significantly with the Republican Party, it wasn’t always so. More important, as shown by the Christian Right in years past and the Tea Party today, the right will try to purge those Republicans deemed not sufficiently orthodox, making the party more and more extreme.

The Tea Party is the latest chapter in the history of the Republicans as the “Party of No.” Its existence depends on continuous promotion from FOX News, organizing by Republican consultants, front groups such as Americans for Prosperity and Freedom Works, and the GOP itself. Much of the Tea Party’s funding comes from right-wing foundations through the front groups, and its politics are anti-government, anti-labor, pro-corporate and often socially conservative, which is the same agenda the right has been pushing for more than 30 years.

(emphasis mine) and

Wallace pioneered the race-based appeals that still excite the populist right today. But he was also a deft cultural warrior who, writes Carter, “knew that a substantial percentage of the American electorate despised the civil rights agitators and antiwar demonstrators as symptoms of a fundamental decline in the traditional cultural compass of God, family, and country, a decline reflected in rising crime rates, the legalization of abortion, the rise in out-of-wedlock pregnancies, the increase in divorce rates, and the proliferation of ‘obscene’ literature and films.” Add gay marriage, Islamophobia and immigration, and you pretty much have the right’s culture war agenda of today.

and

There is one final step in how the right mobilizes grassroots support behind an obstructionist agenda. Few people mull over philosophical concepts when making political decisions. That’s why mobilizing group resentment and solidarity simultaneously is so effective. It gives people a way to see both enemies and allies in their daily lives. In the case of immigrants, the narrative is about “illegals” stealing jobs and social services from taxpayers. In the case of the Obama administration, the story is that taxes are being stolen from hard-working Americans to support parasites ranging from welfare recipients to Wall Street bankers.

and finally

However irrational this position may be, the logical consequences are not: anything Obama and the Democrats do must be opposed because it is a life-and-death struggle. In opposing the health care plan, the right is not just trying to deny services to the undeserving, it is affirming and protecting free choice, family, the sanctity of life, the market, God, country, the Constitution – all arguments trotted out in the last year.

Like the Clinton years, no matter how much Obama tries to appease Republicans, he will remain under attack and be held responsible for bizarre crimes and conspiracies because the right has nothing to gain from compromise. In fact, Republican opposition has devolved from the philosophical to the tactical. The right-wing noise machine frames Obama and the Democrats as the source of all evil, making compromise virtually impossible. Republicans now assail Obama policies they used to champion from the market-friendly health care law and huge tax cuts in the stimulus bill to the bipartisan deficit commission and pay-as you-go budget rules.

At the same time, the Obama administration has stoked support for the Tea Party by providing aid and comfort to Wall Street rather than Main Street. The Republicans have exploited legitimate anxieties over high unemployment, a shrinking economy and onerous taxes by scapegoating the weak and marginal for policies that are structural and historical in nature.

The lesson for Obama and Democrats is not that they went too far to the “left,” it’s that they went too far to the right. Obama had the political capital and the leverage over the banking and auto industries to push for a “Green New Deal” that could have restructured the transportation and energy sectors and created millions of new jobs. Slashing the bloated military budget while fighting for some type of single-payer health care – instead of a plan that uses public money to subsidize the for-profit healthcare industry – budget deficits could have been constrained while reducing the financial burden of medical bills for most American households. Implementing such an agenda could have created a mass constituency that would fight for a progressive vision and against the right’s repressive politics.

The right has well-thought-out ideologies, a specific agenda, clearly defined enemies, and ruthlessly pursues power to achieve its goals. And it’s fighting a Democratic White House and Party that stand for nothing, which is why being the “Party of No” will continue to be a winning strategy for Republicans.

Excellent Sullivan Reader email...

2010-05-17T13:21:00.000-04:00

A Sullivan reader emails...

Pascal notes, then asks:
When I consider the brief span of my life absorbed into the eternity which comes before and after--memoria hospitis unius diei praetereuntis--the small space I occupy and which I see swallowed up in the infinite immensity of spaces of which I know nothing and which know nothing of me, I take fright and am amazed to see myself here rather than there: there is no reason for me to be here rather than there, now rather than then. Who put me here? By whose command and act were this place and time allotted to me?

The answers that make sense to me now are: no one, and by no command. When I was young, I believed in God and I was terrified of death. When I was in my late teens, I realized: there is no God. It was a hot summer's night. I was laying in bed. And a deep sense of calm washed over me. There would be no me, and thus I need have no fear for that person who would not be. That freed my life from fear. I stopped asking 'who'--a human question if there ever was one. Pascal describes a feeling that I still feel. It's called the sublime. Existence is sublime. I am here in this time and place, and I have no fear.

Nail on the head, really. Some people like to deal with the inevitability of death by believing (hoping?) that their loved ones are "happy somewhere, looking down on us." Frankly the thought of that freaks me the hell out. But if it helps you through your difficult times I take no issue.

I do believe, however, that the finite nature of life and non-existence of death can breed a better moral society than one which should supposedly live in fear of an almighty judgment or an eternal life loaded with forgiveness. For the judgment line, this would appear rather disingenuous; as if to say you only act just and morally because you're being watched. Where's the integrity in that? The forgiveness line opens the door for the lawless behavior of the Catholic hierarchy, who deem the sexual abuse and emotional handicapping of children as a "forgivable" offense.

But if this is it? A finite existence with no judgment or forgiveness to speak of? One thinks that should gives us all the more reason to do what's right with the small space and time we've been afforded.

Miss USA Causes Confusion

2010-05-17T10:29:00.002-04:00

The Miss USA Pageant was held last night and the winner was Miss Michigan Rima Fakih, the first Arab-Ameircan Muslim winner in the pageant's history.

This is sure to cause endless confusion in the GOP ranks today. They are no doubt unsure whether to deport her, torture her or plug her in the chili ring.

American Pride on Cinco De Mayo

2010-05-12T19:32:00.003-04:00

A lot has been made of the five California High School students who wore American Flag T-shirts on Cinco De Mayo and were sent home by their principal when they refused to turn them inside-out or change. The right has been aflutter with claims that this is another example of the PC Left's trashing of patriotism.

I found the whole issue revolting on a few different levels. As a result I've avoided discussing it on here, but after reading Roger Ebert's self-defense from Tea Party attackers over the issue and engaging in some healthy discussion with a friend over email I guess it's time to share my thoughts.

______________________________________________

Kids need to learn how to express themselves properly...

and learn the repercussions of those expressions.

By curbing their expression, the faculty did nothing but make these

kids less prepared for the real world.

______________________________________________

See, I find fault not in the ignorant redneck kids who wore the shirts... or their ignorant redneck parents who sent them to school this way... or with the latinos who may or may not have been offended by the "expression of speech"... or with the school officials who sent the kids home.

Rather I find fault with the American school system at large for putting in place a dress code at all. That's the precursor of the entire issue here. School tells kids what they can and can't wear; suggests that people wear things in celebration of (the American-made) Cinco De Mayo; kids wear something in defiance of said observance; people get upset.

Don't put policies in place to dictate dress code in a public school and the whole problem never happens.

(continued after jump)

Now, being where we are, it's a damn shame that the entire thing turned into a politicized pissing match about illegal-loving liberals vs pro-american conservatives. There is not battle over free speech and freedom of expression here. That shit was taken away when someone decided that there was a dress code at all. I hope those who are "offended" by the kids being sent home can recognize that at some point.

A friend chimes in after reading Ebert's column:

The intention of wearing the US flag was to marginalize, if not shun, Cinco De Mayo (or more specifically Mexican Americans in general). However it’s even worse for the schools to ban students from wearing images of the American flag, especially when images of other flags are permissible. This is just an asinine response and will of course only big time escalate the issue and make it media worthy. Those with the intention of causing a stir could not have asked for a better response from the school administration.
Fact is, flag images should have been perfectly permissible (whether American or Mexican). And any inflammatory incidents (in either direction) should have been dealt with on their merits (absent what apparel was being worn at the time). The tension at the school was not caused by people wearing respective flags and otherwise keeping to themselves. The tension was caused by active verbal and physical harassment (likely in both directions by the way).

With this said, it was shameful of the white kids to wear the flag because it was obviously that they were doing it to belittle others. And it was also low of the Mexicans to escalate the situation by responding harshly and violently. But we are talking high school kids here. Still, what needs to be dealt with are actions not apparel. Seems the school administration attempted to take a lazy way out of the situation rather than addressing the real issues, and it below up in their faces.

Indeed. The thing was handled as poorly as could possibly be imagined. If this was my Utopia High School, I would have let the shit degrade to the ugliness that the white kids were asking for. Let them get their asses kicked all over the school for being pricks... and then take the responsible Latino parties and drag them through whatever disciplinary action is warranted. Even involve the police if need be.

Kids need to learn how to express themselves properly... and learn the repercussions of those expressions. By curbing their expression, the faculty did nothing but make these kids less prepared for the real world.

Because I got high, ctd.

2010-05-12T09:39:00.000-04:00

Radley Balko, who some might consider the centerpiece in the battle against excessive forces used in drug raids, weighs in on the Missouri raid.

Money shot:

The militarization of America's police departments has taken place over a generation, due to a number of bad policy decisions from politicians and government officials, ranging from federal grants for drug fighting to a Pentagon giveaway program that makes military equipment available to local police departments for free or at steep discounts. Mostly, though, it's due to the ill-considered "war" imagery our politicians continue to invoke when they refer to drug prohibition. Repeat the mantra that we're at war with illicit drugs often enough, and the cops on the front lines of that war will naturally begin to think of themselves as soldiers. And that's particularly true when you outfit them in war equipment, weaponry, and armor. This is dangerous, because the objectives of cops and soldiers are very different. One is charged with annihilating a foreign enemy. The other is charged with keeping the peace.

Soon enough, our police officers begin to see drug suspects not as American citizens with constitutional rights, but as enemy combatants. Pets, bystanders, and innocents caught in the crossfire can be dismissed as regrettable but inevitable collateral damage, just as we do with collateral damage in actual wars. This is how we get images like those depicted in the video.

It's heartening that nearly a million people have now seen the Columbia video. But it needs some context. The officers in that video aren't rogue cops. They're no different than other SWAT teams across the country. The raid itself is no different from the tens of thousands of drug raids carried out each year in the U.S. If the video is going to effect any change, the Internet anger directed at the Columbia Police Department needs to be redirected to America's drug policy in general. Calling for the heads of the Columbia SWAT team isn't going to stop these raids. Calling for the heads of the politicians who defend these tactics and promote a "war on drugs" that's become all too literal—that just might.

Are you effing serious, Maxim?!?

2010-05-11T22:11:00.002-04:00

Alright look.   I'm a fan of boobs.   The bigger the better. The realer the better.   I can't believe I'm saying this but why the fuck is Katy Perry #1 on the 2010 Maxim Hot 100?? I love me some Katy Perry because - I don't want to mince words here: she has gigantic real funbags. And I hear she kisses girls. But this broad dresses and does makeup like a god damned mental patient. I imagine having intercourse with her is illegal in most states.

Bad job yet again by the Maxim crew. I couldn't be more annoyed by this year's list.   A few low-lights:

#55 - KP's roommate from the sanitarium, Ke$ha.   Really? So according to Maxim, This is hotter than this, this and this. C'mon. I'd rather bang the 10,000BC version of Camilla Bella than whatever that is wallowing around on the beach. But that's not saying much. (I may have a thing for prehistoric women)

#20 is Olivia Wilde. Meaning she managed to get 19 points less hot in a shade under a year.   Not sure how that's even possible.

#s 10, 19 and 22 are 9, 17 and 19 spots too low, respectively. Any list creator that puts Marisa Miller, Bar Rafaeli, and Mila Kunis outside the top 5 should either be castrated or have their clams sewn shut.   No need for sexual organs if you lack the taste to use them.

#s ?? - No Jarah Mariano or Jamie Chung, proving once and for all that the Maxim editors are all Korean War vets.

That's all for now. A bunch of tremendous pics of the birds mentioned above - minus Ke$ha, of course - after the jump.

Erica Blasberg 1984 - 2010

2010-05-11T15:12:00.000-04:00

It was a sad day in the golf world yesterday as new broke that the LPGA had lost one of it's more photogenic and popular young stars.   Erica Blasberg died of unknown causes in her Las Vegas suburban home, at the young age of 25.

Being a golfer and a huge golf fan I recall catching a glimpse of Erica on TV during an event in Mexico. Having never heard of her, I looked her up and found it interesting that she was in her first or second year on tour and was relatively unknown. Thinking it might be interesting to follow an up-and-comer's progress, I made a point to occasionally check for her name on leaderboards.   I even followed her on Twitter. She did pretty well for a few years and achieved exempt status through Q school. Even took a lead into the final round of the 2008 SBS Open at Turtle Bay - a course I had the privilege of playing while on my honeymoon 6 months earlier.   She finished tied for 8th; her career best finish.

Then this year began and Erica failed to make exempt status and was playing in little to no tournaments, one to be exact.   I also noticed that her twitter account was mysteriously shut down a few months ago amid some cryptic blog reports that she was getting heavy into the Vegas party scene.

I can only hope that her sudden death and the reports of her lifestyle are unrelated, but one can't help but fear the worst.   It's not often that a talented and attractive 25 year old leaves us suddenly without some level of foul play involved.

My heart goes out to the friends of family of Erica and to the rest of the girls on the LPGA, who are no doubt deeply sorrowed by the news.

Because I got high...

2010-05-10T09:45:00.000-04:00

Sullivan posted a YouTube video, via Radley Balko, of a drug raid in Missouri, during which two family dogs were shot and killed in front of a seven year old child. Turns out the target of the warrant only had a small amount of marijuana and the entire horrific event was for naught.

In addition to Sully's post and follow up reader emails, Megan McArdle sums up the terrifying state of affairs with today's drug war aptly:

You shoot two dogs in front of a seven year old--who could have been killed by a stray round, and at the very least will carry this hideous recollection to the grave. And why? For misdemeanor pot possession?

No, say the police; they executed the warrant too late. Had they come earlier, undoubtedly they would have found . . . dealer sized amounts of pot.

This response is nonsensical. It's like hearing that they came too late to catch the family bootlegging cable. Sure it's illegal, and maybe it's even wrong. But "dealer-sized" pot possession isn't necessarily related to actual drug dealings--I have several friends right now who probably qualify, and I'm pretty sure they aren't going to do anything that merits a SWAT intervention, because those sorts of things can get you drummed right out of your Tuesday-night book club, not to mention how they'd take it at the Rotary.

But frankly I don't care if the owner of the pot was a drug dealer. For that matter, I do not care if he had a mountain of marijuana in his back yard in which he liked to roll around naked. It still wouldn't constitute a good reason for armed men to burst through his door without knocking, much less light up the family pets in front of the kid.

This scares the shit out of me- which I suppose is the desired effect... but the ends cannot possibly justify the means. This is precisely why we need more widespread reform for our drug laws. Leave potheads the hell alone and go after the illegal oxy dealers or heroin pushers. Legalize the cultivation and sale of marijuana and even tax the shit out of it for all I care. Make a nice tax profit and along the way you can stop killing family dogs because some dude wants to high while watching South Park.

Vid after the jump. Watch at your own risk.

I think I'm gonna be sick

2010-05-07T11:11:00.002-04:00

It's been a glorious morning.   70 degrees and sunny.   It's Friday. I'm looking forward to a cocktail - or four - tonight and a relaxing weekend with no major responsibilities, save for a bit of yard work and visiting the Moms in my life.

Of course, Bill O'Reilly and Sarah Palin teamed up to ruin all of that for me.    I can't embed the video for some reason - I can only assume for the same reason that press and cameras aren't allowed at her speeches - so you'll have to watch it for yourself.   Just make sure you're not on a full stomach. Spare yourself the cleanup.

Seriously, is there anyone on the planet with less brains who is granted the kind of massive audience of devoted and unquestioning mongoloids that this inbred fool is afforded?   Just look at her dumb face. Look at it! This idiot was one busted hip or blood clot to the brain away from the oval office 18 months ago.   She honestly believes that the this is a "Christian Nation" and that the founding fathers planned it to be this way. And O'Reilly goes right along with her! Why wasn't Hitchens on with these two to spare us from getting dumber just for watching?

This is not a Judeo-Christian nation. This is a secular nation. The Founding Fathers were mostly Deists, not Christians - which Bill mentions and Sarah nods in agreement to, curiously.   Deism meant they believed in a creator, but stood fast that said creator did not meddle in the affairs of man - and as such, did not meddle in a budding republic's government either.

The Pilgrims? They were Christians. But they were not the Founding Fathers. They were brave puritans who set out in search of religious freedom, sure. But the founders of America as we know it, they were not.

In God We Trust was adopted as our national motto during the 1950s. And the unalienable rights of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness were not granted to us by God but rather by a creator.   There is a difference there and, while subtle, it is completely lost on this shrew.

She really needs to be stopped. Every time she's allowed to invade our senses with her vulgar diatribe about religious values and rugged anti-elitism a puppy gets skinned.   That's scientific fact. Stop killing puppies, people.

Update: Got video embedded... after the jump.

Carrying luggage takes a wide stance

2010-05-05T15:04:00.002-04:00

What do you know. Another gay-hating Family Research Council bigot got caught with a male escort from RentBoy.com - not to be confused with AltarBoy.com, of course - who apparently is known for his "well-built 8 inch cock and tight ass"

A Christian leader and prominent neuro-psychiatrist who co-founded the Family Research Council with evangelist James Dobson took a ten-day European vacation with a callboy he met through RentBoy.com and was caught in an airport with the escort by a Miami newspaper.
The escort said he had met George Rekers, professor of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science at the University of South Carolina, on RentBoy.com. Rekers, when confronted, didn't deny that he'd met the callboy online, but said he had hired him to help him carry his baggage and didn't learn he was generally hired for "private company" until mid-way through his European vacation.

According to Penn and Thorp, the slender, 20-year-old escort's profile advertises his "smooth, sweet, tight ass" and "perfectly built 8 inch cock." RentBoy.com's profiles are not indexed by Google.
“It is clear that Rekers has baggage and certainly needs help,” said Wayne Besen, a prominent opponent of the "ex-gay" movement and director of the nonprofit Truth Wins Out. Referring to South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, a conservative who claimed he was hiking when he'd actually been meeting with a mistress, he added: “At least he did not say he was walking the Appalachian Trail.”
"This is a bombshell that completely discredits the ex-gay industry and proves that the movement is a fraud,” Besen added.

Every time one of these stories break it puts a wry smile on my face. The hypocrisy is astounding. It would be like finding Hayden Panettiere on a Japanese fishing boat. Or catching Al Gore living in a gigantic power-eating mansion.

What does this tell you?

2010-05-05T10:38:00.001-04:00

Sullivan posts a nugget from Weigel/WaPo about Favorability of the term Libertarian:

Overall, 38 percent of Americans view "libertarian" favorably to 37 who view it unfavorably. Democrats (39-37) and independents (44-32) view the term most favorably, while Republicans view it negatively by a 13-point (31-44) margin.

I'd say this makes pretty clear how someone like me - who enjoys the finer points of Libertarianism - can be turned off by the current GOP and Tea Party Movement. These groups are not free thinking or small-government-minded at all if they perceive a movement like Libertarianism as a negative thing. More negative than those evil pinko socialist liberals do, to boot.

More on Epistemic Closure

2010-05-05T09:53:00.002-04:00

William Saletan does a tremendous job rounding up the sad state of affairs in today's partisan climate. Funny that many of the positions he cites are exactly what I hear trumpeted from my conservative friends (not that they'll even consider reading this list, of course). Specifically, the points Saletan makes about how the right defines themselves by their enemies and round up and cast out any dissenting members of their own group as RINOs or Closet Liberals (see: Frum, Bartlett, Manzi, Crist, etc etc etc)

The whole she-bang is worth the read. My favorites:

3. Never define yourself by an enemy. Conservatives duck internal disputes because their coalition is "a motley assortment of political tendencies united primarily by their opposition to liberalism," writes Douthat. The only thing they agree on is "trashing Obama." Megan McArdle makes a similar point: "The Republican Party is not putting forward bold new ideas; its energy lies in thwarting the Democrats' policy plans." Accordingly, conservatives reinforce their identity by denouncing dissenters as closet liberals. Bruce Bartlett, who was kicked out of a conservative think tank after criticizing George W. Bush, calls this "a closed loop in which any opinions or facts that conflict with the conservative worldview are either avoided, ignored or automatically dismissed on the grounds that they must be liberal or come from liberals." The net result of this reflexive antipathy is that conservatives don't define what they stand for. Liberals do. Whatever you're for, we're against.

5. Seek wisdom, not just victory. Some conservative bloggers, responding to Sanchez and his sympathizers on the right, dismiss conversation with the liberal enemy as a political trap. Creative policy ideas won't bring Republicans to power, argues Jonah Goldberg, and "political reality" dictates that "when liberals control all of the policy-making apparatus, being the party of no is a perfectly rational stance." Hogan, a blogger at Redstate, takes this argument further, reasoning that it's OK to "distill" complex facts to propaganda "when you are at war" with the left. Such ruthlessness might be the surest path to power. But what's the point of power if you haven't learned how to govern? "An open mind seeks wisdom, first and last," writes Millman. I can't put it better than that.

10. Overcome your urges. Hogan refuses to analyze opposing arguments in detail, arguing that he lacks "the desire" to do so. Perhaps he should brush up on the tradition he purports to represent. Real conservatives understand that desire is a lousy way to run a society. You don't feel like working? Work. You don't feel like supporting the kids you fathered? Support them. You don't feel like challenging your biases? Challenge them. We're all vain and lazy. In the electronic echo chamber, it's easier than ever to shut out what you don't want to hear. Nobody will make you open the door and venture out. You'll have to do that yourself.

Calling All Nerds

2010-05-03T13:55:00.000-04:00

I've always been a bit of an astronomy/science geek and find myself on space.com and checking on news from SETI and the like. I've also come to regret not being as well-versed in American history as I'd otherwise prefer to be. These tidbits in mind, to say I've been in my damned glory the last few Sunday nights would be a major freakin' understatement.

Check out the Sunday night Geek-TV schedule:

8pm on Discovery: How the Universe Works

9pm on Discovery: Into the Universe with Stephen Hawking

9pm on History: America - The Story of Us

All three manage to balance telling us things we already know while threading in some new tidbits and angles. They come with decent production value in the graphic interpretations and re-enactments of events. And best of all, the great Mike Rowe narrates How The Universe Works. That guy is the shit. He could be narrating two hours of me sitting stoned on my couch eating Doritos and I'd be captivated.

This is huge

2010-04-29T09:21:00.001-04:00

Looking for someone to blame for rapidly rising Health Care costs in Massachusetts? Look no further than Partners Health Care Systems. You've got the largest collection of hospitals and physicians in the region using their power to demand their rates be 15-60% higher than other groups for the same services. Just because they bargain collectively. Fuck that.

Luckily, The Justice Department is finally calling bullshit:

The US Department of Justice has opened a civil investigation into possible anticompetitive behavior by Partners HealthCare System Inc., the region’s most powerful hospital and physician network.

In a letter sent to Partners and the state’s three largest health insurers on April 19, investigators from the Justice Department’s antitrust division demanded documents relating to Partners’ “contracting and other practices in health care markets in Eastern Massachusetts.’’

The letter, obtained by the Globe, said the probe sought to determine whether the practices violated the Sherman Antitrust Act, which bars companies from using their market power to limit trade or artificially raise prices. The parties were told to respond by May 19.

The federal probe comes as Massachusetts business and government officials wrangle over how to control soaring medical costs, and who is to blame for a decade of skyrocketing insurance premiums.

Boston-based Partners has been under growing scrutiny because of its market power and ability to draw high prices from insurers. The company employs about 5,500 physicians and operates a half dozen smaller hospitals, in addition to their prestigious Harvard-affiliated Boston teaching hospitals, Mass. General and the Brigham.

Everyone is so quick to blame the insurers as profit hogs, but no one looks at how well groups like Partners have been doing for the last decade or so. Remember, 90% of premiums collected by insurers from YOU go towards medical costs. The biggest group of medical professionals and facilities get paid more than everyone else. The insurers - a lot of whom are non-profit - are held hostage by their collective bargaining.

This is how to stop the bleeding. Bravo to the Justice Dept.

Bartlett on Epistemic Closure of the GOP

2010-04-29T07:53:00.002-04:00

Bartlett rounds up some examples of the conservative establishment's ostracizing of anyone harboring a dissenting voice.

Another example of how social pressure is brought to bear against dissident conservatives occurred shortly after this incident and also involved Heritage. Ryan Sager, then a columnist for the conservative New York Post, published a book in 2006 called The Elephant in the Room: Evangelicals, Libertarians, and the Battle to Control the Republican Party. His argument, similar to the one I made in my Impostor book, was that the Bush White House had abandoned the historical libertarian position of the Republican Party on many issues in pursuit of votes among anti-libertarian evangelicals.
Sager had been invited to talk to a group called the Prosperity Caucus, a loose-knit private group that meets about once a month in Washington to discuss economics and politics over pizza and beer. Usually, the group borrows a room on Capitol Hill or at a conservative think tank. As it had done often before, this particular month the Prosperity Caucus had booked a room at Heritage.
Even though Sager’s criticism of Bush was far milder than mine, he was deemed radioactive by Heritage, which canceled the Prosperity Caucus’s reservation and booted them out of the building when it came to its attention that Sager was speaking.

I have friends who chide me for "going liberal" in recent times. It's something I love and hate all at the same time. I love it because those who do are simply proving the point that the modern day GOP has only power-grabbing and obstructionism in mind and are mentally allergic to pragmatism. I hate it because it's an indication that the battle for power in the GOP between the Libertarians and the Bible Thumpers is being controlled by the latter.

I'm no liberal, this much I can assure you. But I'm left only with a choice between these:

a) Cut taxes and spend heavily on Defense and Medicare while working to restrict Civil Rights
and
b) Leave middle class taxes alone, spend domestically on much-needed reform and be mindful of individual rights

Is there even a question which way I'd choose?

Drum Defends the New Atheists

2010-04-29T07:37:00.000-04:00

Kevin Drum takes David B. Hart to task for his smear of New Atheists Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins.

But no matter how beguiling those questions are, surely the metaphysical one always comes first. To say merely that Christianity is comforting or practical — assuming you believe that — is hardly enough. You need to show that it's true. And if you want to assert that something is true, the onus is on you to demonstrate it, not on the New Atheists to demonstrate conclusively that it isn't. After all, in the end the only difference between Hart and Dawkins is that Hart believes in 1% of the world's religions and Dawkins believes in 0% of them. It's Dawkins' job only to question that remaining 1%. It's Hart's job to answer him.

I want this...

2010-04-20T08:53:00.000-04:00

Winscape. Just watch the vid...

Two 46-inch Panasonic TC-P46G10 plasma screens bring the images to life. They are fed by an Apple Mac Pro workstation in the adjacent room running custom OS X software called Winscape. Using the displays’ physical layout parameters, the Winscape software renders the proper portions of the video to fill the appropriate displays using Quicktime and OpenGL. A Wii remote reports the position of a custom-built IR-emitting necklace in the room via bluetooth. The Winscape software uses this tracker information (when available) to shift the view for the person wearing the IR necklace. Sleep, Wake, and Scene Selection can be controlled by a web page served by the software or by the Winscape Remote iPhone App.

Sully on Tea wth Miss McGill

2010-04-17T11:14:00.000-04:00

Meant to post this yesterday - or at least thought I had. Sully breaks down the Tea Party express and the article may as well have sucked from my mind as if we were hooked up to a Frankenstein machine.

The whole thing is worth a read. His wrap:

In my view, this confluence of feelings can work in shifting the public mood, as seems to have happened. When there is no internal pushback against crafted FNC propaganda, and when the Democrats seem unable to craft any coherent political message below the presidential level, you do indeed create a self-perpetuating fantasy that can indeed rally and roil people. But the abstract slogans against government, the childish reduction of necessary trade-offs as an apocalyptic battle between freedom and slavery, and the silly ranting at all things Washington: these are not a political movement. They are cultural vents, wrapped up with some ugly Dixie-like strands.

When they propose cuts in Medicare, means-testing Social Security, a raising of the retirement age and a cut in defense spending, I'll take them seriously and wish them well.

Until then, I'll treat them with the condescending contempt they have thus far deserved.

Sully does well to leave Palin out of the mix, but I wonder if that was simply to avoid cheapening his criticism and catching guff for Palin Derangement Syndrome. Still, it shouldn't ignored that she's the de facto leader and iconic face of the movement. A truth that speaks volumes of the group's validity.

The Pliable Romney

2010-04-16T12:22:00.001-04:00

This couldn't possibly go over well with the Tea Partiers come 2012...

(via Sullivan)

Quote For The Day

16 Apr 2010 10:35 am

"If ever again somewhere down the road I would be debating [Obama], I would be happy to take credit for his [healthcare] accomplishment," - Mitt Romney.

I Love Willie!

2010-04-16T08:14:00.001-04:00

Nelson that is... He chatted with Larry King - interview to air tonight - talking up the greatness of getting kushed, even right before going on the show. This guy is my fucking hero.

Another Small Step for Gay Rights

2010-04-16T08:06:00.000-04:00

President Obama issued a memo to the Department of Health and Human Services directing them to create an exception to the relatives-only policy for gay couples. The exception comes in handy for same-sex couples in states where gay marriage is not legally recognized.

Obama requested that the regulation make clear that any hospital receiving Medicare and Medicaid funding, which includes the vast majority of U.S. hospitals, must allow patients to decide who can visit them and prohibit discrimination based on a variety of characteristics, including sexual orientation and gender identity.

This is another feather in the cap for the gay community, as the memo follows on the heels of Obama's repeal of DADT. While it doesn't solve all of the problems related to the ban on gay marriage that exist in most states, it's another solid step in affording equality to all. Kudos.

Of course we respect you for your mind

2010-04-16T07:40:00.000-04:00

The ought's most recognizable whore*, Ashley Dupre, was on Opie and Anthony this morning to promote her burgeoning career as a singer and working with children. She wants us to ignore that she probably used to spank Elliot Spitzer while wearing a clown suit. Opie took offense to the notion and the two battled to the death on the air. Good times.

* Hilton, Kardashian and Lohan stole each others votes for this honor

Hitchens on the Promise of Eternal Life

2010-04-13T11:26:00.002-04:00

I can't get enough of this exchange from the Great God Debate between Christopher Hitchens and moderator Tom Ashbrook. The conversation ducks in and out of how religion helps people come to terms with our mortality, and Hitchens pounces:

Hitchens: I think despair is quite a good starting point. I think it's very good to know we're born into a losing struggle. Everything is governed by entropy and decline and annihilation and disaster. And because you are a mammalian primate you know you are. And you know you're going to die and that there will be a lot of struggling along the way. I don't want a world without anxiety and grief and pain and struggle. I can't get it. If it were offered to me, I'd spurn the gift. I don't want what you want. I don't want the feeling of eternal love and peace. Love and peace are very overrated in my view.

Tom: How is that not misanthropic of you?

Hitchens: Misanthropic? It doesn't mean I have to hate people. It means I respect them enough not to offer them false consolation. The realm of illusion will not help you to cure this conviction.

This is precisely the reason most people who don't necessarily subscribe to the tenets of Christianity or Judaism remain ardently faithful. And precisely why I do not. No illusion for me, thank you. I've come to grips with the fact that this is it and am quite content as a result.

Brown > Palin

2010-04-13T09:23:00.000-04:00

A lot has been made the last few days over Scott Brown's decision to forgo Sarah Palin's Tea Party rally on Boston Common on Wednesday. While I try not to read too much into decisions like this - Brown's explanation was that he's busy, you know, doing Senator stuff - you have to admire the guy for leaving the loonies to themselves. Of course, the Palin Teabag machine had to spin it as if they weren't pissed about it:

“It’s not about paying favors back,” said Mark Williams, chairman of the Tea Party Express, which organized the rally and invited Brown. “I’d happily forgo (having him) if he’s truly doing the job of the people. He has half a century of Kennedy damage to compensate for, after all.”

Of course, this isn't the first time Brown pulled the ol' 'I'm going this way; which way are you going?" routine.

Barbara Klain, head of the Greater Lowell Tea Party, said Brown also turned down an invite to speak at their April 15 rally in downtown Lowell. “He said he was going to be in Washington,” Klain said. “He needs to be doing his job.”

And of course we know that Brown somehow forgot that Caribou Barbie herself called to congratulate him after his special election win. Pretty shrewd if you ask me.

You've gotta commend this guy for keeping a safe distance from the loony brigade. In a state where there are more liberals and independents than conservatives, palling up with the neo-cons and fringe fuckers would be like doing tequila shots with your alcoholic uncle at thanksgiving dinner.

Keep up the good work, Scott.

Ron Paul Gets it Right

2010-04-13T08:53:00.000-04:00

Those in attendance at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference were clearly confused by Ron Paul's just criticism of Republican foreign policy positions.

Later, when it was his turn to speak at the convention, the libertarian Paul delivered a scathing criticism of Republican foreign policy views:
Conservatives spend money on different things. They like embassies, and they like occupation. They like the empire. They like to be in 135 countries and 700 bases. (boos) [...]
Don’t you think it’s rather conservative to say, ‘oh it’s good to follow the Constitution, oh, except for war. Let the President go to war anytime they want.’ [...] We can do better with peace than with war! (mixture of boos and applause)
Throughout his speech, Paul’s comments were met with an awkward tension from the crowd, many of whom appeared uncomfortable with him.

It's tremendous how Paul, who many deem to be too kooky and flighty for serious contention for president, is the one making the most sense at these things. As ThinkProgress points out, the neo-con right already began their swift break from him after his success at CPAC in February:

Rush Limbaugh responded by claiming CPAC is “not an organization of conservatives,” and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee similarly said CPAC is becoming “increasingly libertarian and less Republican.”

None of this should come as a surprise to anyone following the steady bifurcation of the Republican Party over the last few years. Anytime some self-proclaimed Tea Partier tries to bemoan the liberal destruction of the constitution and sprawl of our federal government, remind then about Ron Paul's position and watch them flail about and make strange noises.

Teabaggers love stressing individual freedoms and constitutional liberty until you remind them that their position should also mean an end to American imperialism, the legalization of marijuana, allowing a woman's right to an abortion and full civil rights for the gay community. Then, of course, all bets are off.

The Great God Debate

2010-04-11T14:41:00.000-04:00

On March 23rd I attended the Great God Debate between Christopher Hitchens and Rabbi David Wolpe at the Hancock Hall in Boston. The tickets included a cocktail reception with the speakers after the event and my friend and I were lucky enough to sneak a photo op with the great Hitchens himself, Johnny Black under arm and all.

Anyway, the debate was being filmed and I've been waiting for a while now for the footage to show up on YouTube and now the wait is over. Take 90 minutes or so of your precious day to give these guys a listen. Quality stuff. Q&A portion was top notch as well.

Embedded vid for part 1 after the jump...

A Tradition Like No Other

2010-04-07T08:22:00.000-04:00

You know that giddy look kids start to get in the middle of December, because they think this is the year they finally get the pony they've been asking for from that lying prick, Santa? That's pretty much what I've looked like for the last month whenever The Masters is mentioned. In related news, you know the face you make when you step into the outhouse at a chili cook-off? That's the face I've been making whenever I see another story about Tiger Woods that doesn't involve his abilities on the golf course.

The lesson, of course, is that this could mark the weekend that we finally stop talking about Tiger the Trashy Whore Slayer and start talking about Tiger the Best Golfer in the World. Outhouse face be damned!

Honestly, I couldn't be happier. As with years past, I am taking Thursday and Friday off to golf myself and then watch the best tournament in golf without interruption. I am a bit concerned about how Tiger will play, seeing as he hasn't played competitively since November and spent much of that time in rehab and also talked about playing "not as hot, but not as exuberant." This is probably most concerning. Playing hot and/or exuberant is what made him the best. If Tiger's not all fired up and intense he's just a skinny version of Vijay Singh. Eff That.

Tiger's comeback aside, there really is nothing like The Masters. Start with the most legendary and exclusive golf course on the planet and add in the calming theme music and steady call from Jim Nantz. The sense that for four days you're slowly building toward another historic moment is undeniable. Can't. F'n. Wait.

Good Dem, Bad Dem

2010-04-06T08:34:00.002-04:00

So Politico posted a piece on Sunday, claiming that President Obama's 2010 priority is getting Deval Patrick re-elected as governor of Massachusetts.    To which I say, are you out of your God Damned Mind?!

Deval Patrick is political fucking napalm - and not in the ass-to-mouth-loving, Jessica Simpson way.   This is a guy who fucked over the unions that got him elected, raised the state sales tax, built his entire campaign on legalizing casinos (which failed miserably), and just cost a major provider of jobs in the state $100M when employment is already on shaky ground as it is.

This guy embodies reason that Scott Brown got elected to the Senate in January; people are sick of tax-and-spend-achusetts and Deval represents the very foundation of that angst. As I've said before in this space, while Obama's voting record as a Senator may have been to the left, his governing as president has been very much centered. This is what makes him a desirable political figure in today's age of hyper-partisanship and hate-fueled rhetoric.    Aligning himself with a guy who's liberalism would make Gore Vidal blush can't possibly be a political home run. He shouldn't have to disown the guy, but he should at least watch from a safe distance.

What in hell happened to Mischa Barton?

2010-04-06T07:58:00.000-04:00

I know there's rumors aplenty about her delicate grasp of sanity lately, but that's no excuse for her to steal Jessica Simpson's pants and try smuggling lamb shanks in the pockets. Just a reminder, a year ago, she looked like this and this. Now she looks like she should be fronting the band at the Star Wars bar.

Pics that might not make you question the meaning of life below jump...

GOP Purges Another

2010-04-05T19:07:00.000-04:00

Chris Currey, a pragmatic conservative, details his GOP chagrin on FrumForum.

Highlight:

Then something happened in the 1990s. The leaders of the GOP grew belligerent. They became too religious, almost zealots. They became intolerant. They began searching for purity in Republican thought and doctrine. Ideology blinded them. I continued to vote Republican, but with a certain unease. Deep down I knew that a schism happened between the modern Republican Party and the one I grew up with. During the fight over the impeachment of President Clinton, the ugly face of the Republican Party was brought to the surface. Empty rhetoric, ideological intolerance, vengeance, and religious zealotry became the common currency. Suddenly, if you are pro-choice, you could not be a Republican. If you are for smart and sensible taxes to balance out the budget, you could not be a Republican. If you are pro-civil rights, you could not be a Republican.

It started with minorities: they left the party. Then women; they divorced the GOP and sent it to sleep on the couch. Then, the young folks; they left and are leaving the Republican Party in droves. Then, someone stood up and told my niece and my grandchild that they are not fully Americans — just second class Americans because they are homosexual. They wished hell and damnation upon my loved ones just because they are different. Are we led by priests or are we led by rational politicians? Now, we have became the party of the Old Straight White Folks. We should rename the Republican Party the OSWF rather than the GOP.

Recently, since the election of Barack Obama, common sense has left the Republican Party completely. We are in the era of craziness. As David Frum has written, a deal was there to be made over the healthcare bill. Instead, this ideological purity blinded the GOP. As LBJ said it, instead of being inside the tent pissing out, we choose to be outside the tent, pissing against the wind. And we got splashed by our own nonsense.

Apache Gunner Video

2010-04-05T19:02:00.001-04:00

So this video, decrypted and released by the WikiLeaks, of an American Apache helicopter providing air support for ground troops in a suburb of Baghdad, is disturbing on a few fronts. For one, yes, there were innocent people killed. For another, there was clearly a tinge of overzealous behavior, coupled with some poor communication between the pilots, gunners and ground soldiers.

Should the servicemen involved catch shit for what they did? Of course not. It might be a bruise on the cheek of the US Military PR but at the end of the day this is a guerrilla war going on. If two reporters are going to walk around with armed men - and other men are going to bring their children on the rescue mission - collateral damage will happen. It doesn't make it right but until the Iraqi military can handle its gun-toting civilians and we can get the hell out of there, this shit will happen.

Vid below the jump.

Deval Patrick - you're doing it wrong, ctd.

2010-04-01T14:08:00.002-04:00

Dammit all, Deval.

Using crappy public opinion of health insurers to your political advantage is a deceptive practice, to be sure, and to boot he clearly doesn't understand how premiums are established. In fact he probably thinks like these commenters on Boston.com do:

Thanos73 wrote:
ToniCa wrote:
"Deval just doesn't get it. Health care cost increases come from hospitals and doctors. The insurance companies have to increase their rates based on what the hospitals and doctors charge them"

Wow, you really need to put the pipe down. The Insurance companies dictate rates to Doctors and Hospitals, they don't negotiate.

Thanos73 here may want to ask the hundreds of people who work in Provider Contract negotiators and Actuaries at insurance companies what they think about his comment. Does he really think payers pull premium increases out of thin air?

Then there's this...

JasonSeacrest wrote:
I have yet to hear from the Insurance carriers WHY they needed these huge increases (yet again.). There's no inflation..so why are only YOUR costs increasing?

Is it to feed the stockholders that 10%+ return on their investment? Nobody else is getting raises, why should you?

EXPLAIN!

SURE, JASON! In Massachusetts fully-insured plans are Not for Profit, so it's not as if shareholders are making a ton of money every year because (drum roll, please) there are no shareholders! Why isn't Jason calling his PCP and asking why he's getting that 10% raise every year? The misconceptions in this debate are staggering.

Look, I get it: we all saw Erin Brokovich and know there are evil health insurance companies out there that deny services for the really sick and reject coverage for those with pre-existing conditions all while whistling their way to the bank. Those companies needed to be dealt with and ObamaCare did that for the other 49 states. But in Massachusetts, land of Non-Profit health, universal care and bans on preX denials? Why the hell are you stomping all over us? We're not the bad guys!!

As I've noted before on this blog, this concept of limiting the premiums without addressing what drives 90% of those costs addresses the symptom and not the disease. Provider contracts are negotiated on a bi-annual basis and those contracts that are already set for this coming year can't be changed because they're, you know, legally binding and all that. Also premiums are based upon utilization as well and there's been a spike, which the proposed rates were an answer to. So basically two unmovable forces are crashing head-on into the now-easily-moved-because-Deval-said-so force.

It's a bandaid and one of two things will happen as a result. 1) Payers with already shaky bottom-lines will be in trouble and you could see some smaller plans go out of business, or 2) Rates will go up in subsequent - *ahem* non-election - years to offset the loss caused by this year's rejection.

Another crappy thing about the potential byproducts are their indirect impact on the national health care debate. For Republican's dying for talking points to bash ObamaCare, this overreach by Deval Patrick and Massachusetts democrats comes at just the right time. "Look at Massachusetts! They passed universal health care and within three years were setting costs in the private market!"

My prediction: when Fallon or one of the other smaller insurers goes out of business, the first headline you'll see on Fox News: "ObamaCare claims first victim!" Even though anyone with half a noodle in their head knows the two are not related. But it doesn't have to have a basis in reality if it sounds scary!

If this is Deval's Hail Mary for re-election, he may have just tossed it right through the hands of Barrack Obama.

Second verse, same as the first

2010-04-01T08:28:00.000-04:00

John Avlon has a great article on the Obama-as-Hitler and Bush-as-Hitler hysterics that have been so prevalent the last few years.

This may come as a shock to some but neither claim is appropriate. And getting more pissy about one over the other, based solely on your political allegiance, is no better.

Says John:

I condemn both Bush-as-Hitler and Obama-as-Hitler comparisons in my book and subsequent speeches. Liberals frequently object to my invocation of Bush Derangement Syndrome, just as conservatives bristle at my detailing of Obama Derangement Syndrome. Centrists are used to liberals calling them conservative and conservatives calling them liberal. This impulse is designed to discredit independents and reinforces the left/right divide.

But what's most striking to me is the way committed partisans miss the broader moral equivalency behind these two syndromes: If you only object to the president of your party being compared to Hitler, then you're part of the problem. (my bold for emphasis)

Holy motorboat, batman!

2010-04-01T07:49:00.002-04:00

Need to step away from politics for a second and what better reason than Katy Perry and her God-given assets?

(April fools! God had nothing to do with those sweater cows. Love me some large-breasted genetics)

Good Christians?

2010-04-01T07:34:00.001-04:00

Sure they are. And our courts, sadly, are helping them:

The father of a US Marine killed in Iraq in 2006 has been ordered to pay 16,000 dollars to [the Westboro Baptist Church] who organized an anti-gay protest during his son's funeral, an attorney has said.

Depending on your perspective, these asshats may be better than some calling the shots in the Catholic hierarchy right now.

Nonetheless, my stomach does an extra-special turn whenever I read a story about their "Free Speech" protests at funerals of servicemen and women. I get that it's all done for the shock factor and buzz generation, yet it's still sickening to me that the soldiers who's funerals they're using as a prop for their piddly cause died while protecting their right to such a protest.

I've got an idea, why not take some of the energy to Vatican City? If these lunatics are so enraged about homosexuality, shouldn't they be all the more fired up over the Holy See and his army of pedophiles?

HCR Debate, the screenplay

2010-03-28T20:13:00.000-04:00

Some truth in comedy, from Nicole Belle:

Democrats: "We need health care reform"
Republicans: "Liberal fascists! Give us a majority and we'll do it better"
Democrats: "Done, you have majority of both houses"
12 years later, health care is irrefutably worse in every respect for every single person in the United States
Democrats: "We need health care reform"
Republicans: "Liberal fascists! Americans are tired of partisan politics!"
Democrats: "OK, let's compromise"
Republicans: "OK, get rid of half your ideas"
Democrats: "Done"
Republicans: "Too liberal, get rid of half your ideas"
Democrats: "Done"
Republicans: "Too liberal, get rid of half your ideas"
Democrats: "Done"
Republicans: "Too liberal, get rid of half your ideas"
Democrats: "Done"
Republicans: "Too liberal, get rid of half your ideas"
Democrats: "Done. Time to end debate"
Republicans: "Too liberal, we need more debate, we will filibuster to prevent you from voting"
Democrats: "OK, we'll vote--sorry guys, debate is ended. It's time to vote on the bill"
Republicans: "Too liberal, we vote no"
Democrats: "OK, it passed anyway--sorry guys."
One month later
Republicans: "Wait--wait, OK, we have less of a minority now so we can filibuster forever."
Democrats: "Sorry, the bill already passed, we need it to pass the House now"
Republicans: "But we have enough to filibuster"
Democrats: "Sorry, the bill already passed, we need it to pass the House now"
Republicans: "Liberal fascists! You haven't listened to our ideas! You've shut us out of this whole process!"
Democrats: "Sorry, show us your proposal"
Republicans: "Smaller government"
Democrats: "That's not very specific"
Republicans: "OK, here's our detailed proposal--It's our common-sense ideas we spent 12 years not enacting"
Democrats: "OK, we'll add a bunch more of your ideas"
Republicans: "Liberal fascists! You included all these back-room deals"
Democrats: "OK, we'll get rid of the back-room deals"
Republicans: "Liberal fascists! You're using obscure procedural tricks to eliminate the back-room deals!"
Democrats: "No, we're using reconciliation, which both parties have used dozens of times for much larger bills"
Republicans: "Liberal fascists! You're pressuring Congressmen to vote for your bill! Scandal!"
Democrats: "It's called 'whipping', it's been done since 1789"
Republicans: "Liberal fascists! Can't you see the American people don't want this?"
Democrats: "This bill is mildly unpopular (40-50%), doing nothing (your proposal) is extraordinarily unpopular (4-6%)"
Republicans: "We need to start over! We need to start over!"
Democrats: "We should really consider voting--"
Republicans: "Liberal fascists! Start over! Clean slate! Common-sense! America!"

Is it really about Health Care?

2010-03-28T12:58:00.001-04:00

Frank Rich's opinion piece in today's NYT is a wonderful collection of the GOP Hysteria over the Health Care bill and a frightening comparison to the similar freakouts after passage of the New Deal, Medicare and Civil Rights laws.

To be sure, this bill nothing even remotely close to the budget atrocity the Palins and Boehners want to make it out to be, costing roughly $94B per year for the first ten years, revenue generation and other savings excluded. In the grand scheme of the $1.3T deficit Bush handed to Obama by the end of 2009, it's a drop in the bucket. But this isn't really about "government takeover" or "power grabbing" the way the RNC/FNC puppets want you to believe it is, but rather a frantic collective clawing at the floor while being dragged out of power.

That a tsunami of anger is gathering today is illogical, given that what the right calls “Obamacare” is less provocative than either the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or Medicare, an epic entitlement that actually did precipitate a government takeover of a sizable chunk of American health care. But the explanation is plain: the health care bill is not the main source of this anger and never has been. It’s merely a handy excuse. The real source of the over-the-top rage of 2010 is the same kind of national existential reordering that roiled America in 1964.

In fact, the current surge of anger — and the accompanying rise in right-wing extremism — predates the entire health care debate. The first signs were the shrieks of “traitor” and “off with his head” at Palin rallies as Obama’s election became more likely in October 2008. Those passions have spiraled ever since — from Gov. Rick Perry’s kowtowing to secessionists at a Tea Party rally in Texas to the gratuitous brandishing of assault weapons at Obama health care rallies last summer to “You lie!” piercing the president’s address to Congress last fall like an ominous shot.

If Obama’s first legislative priority had been immigration or financial reform or climate change, we would have seen the same trajectory. The conjunction of a black president and a female speaker of the House — topped off by a wise Latina on the Supreme Court and a powerful gay Congressional committee chairman — would sow fears of disenfranchisement among a dwindling and threatened minority in the country no matter what policies were in play. It’s not happenstance that Frank, Lewis and Cleaver — none of them major Democratic players in the health care push — received a major share of last weekend’s abuse. When you hear demonstrators chant the slogan “Take our country back!,” these are the people they want to take the country back from.

They can’t. Demographics are avatars of a change bigger than any bill contemplated by Obama or Congress. The week before the health care vote, The Times reported that births to Asian, black and Hispanic women accounted for 48 percent of all births in America in the 12 months ending in July 2008. By 2012, the next presidential election year, non-Hispanic white births will be in the minority. The Tea Party movement is virtually all white. The Republicans haven’t had a single African-American in the Senate or the House since 2003 and have had only three in total since 1935. Their anxieties about a rapidly changing America are well-grounded.

Frum, ctd.

2010-03-25T18:15:00.000-04:00

Bartlett with a rather telling anecdote re: the Frum firing.

I don't know all the details, but I presume that his Waterloo post on Sunday condemning Republicans for failing to work with Democrats on healthcare reform was the final straw.

Since, he is no longer affiliated with AEI, I feel free to say publicly something he told me in private a few months ago. He asked if I had noticed any comments by AEI "scholars" on the subject of health care reform. I said no and he said that was because they had been ordered not to speak to the media because they agreed with too much of what Obama was trying to do.

It saddened me to hear this. I have always hoped that my experience was unique. But now I see that I was just the first to suffer from a closing of the conservative mind. Rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed, and the conservative brain will slowly shrivel into dementia if it hasn't already.

Purity tests at their ugliest...

(via Sullivan)

Frum - One sensible voice on the right, ctd.

2010-03-25T17:24:00.000-04:00

To the shock of, well, pretty much nobody, David Frum was pushed out of his post at the AEI on Wednesday. Remember kids, if you come to the Republican table with sensible and realistic ideas and can see your party for exactly what they are, you can expect to be berated by the talking heads, the WSJ and ultimately shown the door.

Three days after calling health-care reform a debacle for the Republicans, David Frum was forced out of his job at the American Enterprise Institute on Wednesday.

The ouster also came one day after a harsh Wall Street Journal editorial about the former speechwriter for President George W. Bush, which said that he "now makes his living as the media's go-to basher of fellow Republicans" and accused him of "peddling bad revisionist history."

Frum made clear in a letter to AEI President Arthur Brooks that his departure after seven years at the conservative think tank was not voluntary. "I have had many fruitful years at the American Enterprise Institute," he wrote, "and I do regret this abrupt and unexpected conclusion of our relationship." AEI did not comment immediately.

In a brief interview, Frum said "there was no suggestion by AEI" that his sharp criticism of the GOP's health-care strategy was the reason for his dismissal. He declined to say what Brooks had told him.
"They invited me to remain associated with AEI on a non-salaried basis," Frum said, and he declined.

No, It's really just rhetoric...

2010-03-25T15:16:00.000-04:00

Urging your movement to violently mobilize against our elected leaders, that is. Sarah Palin seems to have no problem doing so. John McCain seems to have trouble... with condemning such behavior. Has this whole world gone crazy?! Yes it has, says Ezra Klein:

I don't want to exaggerate the importance of the death threats being made against congressmen who voted for health-care reform. Nuts are nuts. But there is a danger to the sort of rhetoric the GOP has used over the past few months. When Rep. Devin Nunes begs his colleagues to say "no to socialism, no to totalitarianism and no to this bill"; when Glenn Beck says the bill "is the end of America as you know it"; when Sarah Palin says the bill has "death panels" -- that stuff matters.

And the stuff on talk radio, of course, was worse. So take the universe of people who really respect right-wing politicians and listen to right-wing media. Most of them will hear this stuff and turn against the bill. Some will hear this stuff and really be afraid of the bill. And then a small group will hear this stuff and believe it and wonder whether they need to do something more significant to stop this bill from becoming law. And then a couple will actually follow through. And one will cut the gas lines leading to house of Rep. Tom Perriello's brother after seeing a tea partyer post the address online.

(via Sullivan)

Getting warmer...

2010-03-25T14:31:00.000-04:00

Via Slate:

1. Pope Implicated in Sex Abuse Scandal

The Catholic Church is in the middle of another sex abuse scandal, and this one keeps inching closer and closer to Pope Benedict XVI. As more lawsuits are filed, more documents that have been hidden from public view for years are making their way into the courts. It was revealed on Wednesday that when the pope was still known as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, he "failed to defrock an American priest who molested hundreds of deaf boys, despite receiving letters from a number of American bishops pleading with him to act on the matter," the Times reported. "Internal correspondence from bishops in Wisconsin directly to Cardinal Ratzinger, warning him and other top Vatican officials that failure to act could embarrass the church, have been unearthed as part of a lawsuit." The Rev. Lawrence Murphy worked at St. John's School for the Deaf in Wisconsin from 1950 to 1974, during which time he molested up to 200 boys. (A social worker who evaluated the priest many years later said the reverend admitted to the molestations and exhibited no remorse.) Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, now the Vatican's secretary of state, was Ratzinger's second-in-command in the mid-'90s when U.S. bishops wrote about the situation surrounding Murphy. Bertone told the bishops to begin a canonical trial that would result in Murphy's defrocking if he was found guilty, but Ratzinger called it off after receiving a letter directly from Murphy. " 'I simply want to live out the time that I have left in the dignity of my priesthood,' Father Murphy wrote to Cardinal Ratzinger, according to the Times. "'I ask your kind assistance in this matter.'" Instead of disciplining Father Murphy, the church moved him from the region but allowed him to continue working in schools and a juvenile detention center. He died in 1998, still a priest.

Frum - One Sensible Voice on the Right

2010-03-23T15:09:00.000-04:00

David Frum follows up on his Waterloo column from yesterday and adds some credible ideas for the GOP going forward:

Shifting the tax on high-end earners to another source of revenue; ie. carbon tax
Stop defending Employer-based care and embrace individual choice
Reduce regulation on the exchanges to promote more flexibility for the insurers to create affordable plans
Move to end the small-business fines for payrolls of > $500K, to promote competition among employers

These things, he says, are better alternatives to campaigning solely on the repeal of the measure as a whole. He then goes on - brilliantly, I might add - to reprimand the conservative establishment for the vitriol and anger that has warped and negated any rational debate and discourse for the last 14 months:

That platform is ambitious enough -- but also workable, enactable and likely to appeal to voters. After 18 months of overheated rhetoric, it's time at last for Republicans to get real.
I've been on a soapbox for months now about the harm that our overheated talk is doing to us. Yes, it mobilizes supporters -- but by mobilizing them with hysterical accusations and pseudo-information, overheated talk has made it impossible for representatives to represent and elected leaders to lead.
Now the overheated talk is about to get worse. Over the past 48 hours, I've heard conservatives compare the House bill to the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 -- a decisive step on the path to the Civil War. Conservatives have whipped themselves into spasms of outrage and despair that block all strategic thinking.

Maybe there's hope after all.

Hitchens on the pedophile protecting pope

2010-03-22T15:05:00.001-04:00

Hitch demands the Wall of Silence be torn down:

Almost every week, I go and debate with spokesmen of religious faith. Invariably and without exception, they inform me that without a belief in supernatural authority I would have no basis for my morality. Yet here is an ancient Christian church that deals in awful certainties when it comes to outright condemnation of sins like divorce, abortion, contraception, and homosexuality between consenting adults. For these offenses there is no forgiveness, and moral absolutism is invoked. Yet let the subject be the rape and torture of defenseless children, and at once every kind of wiggle room and excuse-making is invoked. What can one say of a church that finds so much latitude for a crime so ghastly that no morally normal person can even think of it without shuddering?

And then onto the question of what to do with the man who's been harboring these criminals...

The supreme leader of the Roman Catholic Church is now a prima facie suspect in a criminal enterprise of the most appalling sort—and in the attempt to obstruct justice that has been part and parcel of that enterprise. He is also the political head of a state—the Vatican—that has given asylum to wanted men like the disgraced Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston. What, then, is the position when the pope decides to travel—as, for example, he intends to do on a visit to Britain later this year? Does he have immunity? Does he claim it? Should he have it? These questions demand serious answers. Meanwhile, we should register the fact that the church can find ample room in its confessionals and its palaces for those who commit the most evil offense of all. Whether prosecuted or not, they stand condemned. But prosecution must follow, or else we admit that there are men and institutions that are above and beyond our laws.

Finally!

2010-03-22T12:09:00.000-04:00

A great day for anyone who honestly cares about fixing a broken system that consumes 1/6th of our nation's GDP - honestly being the key term, of course. A quick glance of the left and right of today's blogosphere highlights that ever-deepening chasm between the two sides, what with their reactions to the Health Care reform bill.   Most interesting is what each side is taking away from the fight and what it says about their true interests.

Democrats celebrate a victory for the 32M people who will be insured by the plan, the protections for those with pre-existing conditions, and a meaningful first step towards controlling the costs of a system that is clearly unsustainable.

Republicans are knocking the process and celebrating - prematurely, to be sure - the perceived political fallout of their counterparts.

Sensing a pattern here? One side acted on what was and is right; their careers and partisan control be damned.   The other? Pretty much the exact opposite. To the right at large, it's not about doing what's right and fixing what's broken, but rather demagoguery and doing whatever it takes to pander to the widest voting bloc in order to regain power by any means possible.

How's that for honesty?    I imagine this will backfire horribly on the right, as there's a lot of time between now and November and their only hope is that improvements in other areas of the country are overshadowed by their own ugly rhetoric and vile name-calling and propaganda.

Bartlett on Tom Scully's Op-Ed

2010-03-18T17:02:00.000-04:00

Whenever discussing the "tremendous cost" of the Health Care bill, if you dare mention the $1 trillion unfunded Medicare Part D program to a Republican, they respond by putting fingers in both ears and start screaming la-la-la-la-la-la-la over you.

Bruce Bartlett explains:

This morning's paper carries an op-ed criticizing health care reform primarily on the grounds that it will cost too much. It urges that the plan be sharply scaled back so that it will get bipartisan support.

If this op-ed were written by a Republican member of Congress it would be unremarkable; not even worth publishing. But this particular op-ed was authored by someone who appears to have meaningful expertise on the subject. The writer, Tom Scully, is identified as the former administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and a White House official during the George H.W. Bush administration.

Given this resume, one might think that Scully was a career health professional, an expert that those on both sides of an issue might look to for counsel and guidance. In fact, Scully is a rank Republican political hack who was responsible for one of the most reprehensible episodes in recent American political history. It was Scully who helped ram through Congress the totally unfunded Medicare Part D program that will cost taxpayers roughly $1 trillion over the next decade--that's $1 trillion more than Obama's plan, which is fully paid for according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Worth the read. Included within, he also reposts his November '09 detailing of Scully's hypocrisy with a great lead-in:

Rather than go through the whole sorry story again, I am reprinting below my Forbes column from last year in which I discussed Scully's duplicitous behavior. Included are hyperlinks documenting his culpability for saddling taxpayers with trillions of dollars of debt just so his party could buy the votes of seniors and win the 2004 election.

The GOP's Worst Nightmare Coming True

2010-03-18T15:24:00.000-04:00

Oh this is just too good to not post. I practically have wood over here. Here's a great string of posts by Sullivan and others on the CBO report and other Health Care Reform related items.

The first being a grid that shows pretty clearly how silly the right's grandstanding of Obama's inexperience has been (i/r/t pundits/blowhards citing how disjointed his own party was around the HC Debate) New year, new tactic, new solidarity.

-- Nate Silver on why the left is suddenly unified behind the bill:

Personally, I think the reason for the increase in support is mostly this: the Democratic leadership, and particularly President Obama, are now fighting for this bill tooth and nail. They didn't necessarily have to do this; they could have thrown in the towel, passed off some bipartisan crap that didn't do much to help the uninsured, and called it a day. That's what Rahm Emanuel wanted to do, as Chris Bowers points out. But that isn't what Obama did: instead, he's gone all-in on the thing, potentially staking his Presidency on the outcome. Liberals like the idea of being the scrappy underdog -- being the fighter -- and Obama, after a strangely aloof performance on the health care bill throughout 2009, has been fighting the good fight.

Then some fiscal sanity figures. Not too F'n shabby, if you ask me.

-- Ezra Klein unpacks the CBO score:

The bill will cost $940 billion over the first 10 years and reduce the deficit by $130 billion during that period. In the second 10 years -- so, 2020 to 2029 -- it will reduce the deficit by $1.2 trillion. The legislation will cover 32 million Americans, or 95 percent of the legal population. To put this in context, that's more deficit reduction than either the House or Senate bill, and more coverage than the Senate bill.

-- Hotline:

The bill is now headed to the House Rules Committee, where Dems will finalize their options for moving forward. Floor action is expected on Sunday, 72 hours after the bill gets posted online.

Chait on getting close:

MSNBC's First Read reports, "We’re told that the White House and House Dem leaders are fewer than five votes away from 216." I have always thought that the key is to get within four or five votes. Once you're there, you're very likely to win. Why? Because then the White House and Democratic leaders can concentrate all their attention on a few holdouts. And they can make an irresistible argument: If you don't vote for this bill, you will be responsible for the political and moral disaster that ensues. I just don't think anybody is willing to be the person who kills health care reform. They may hold back, they may want to see if the bill is going to die anyway, and they may want somebody else to go first. But when the finish line is in sight, they won't say no.

Rollins on the Texas Schoolbook Fiasco

2010-03-18T08:12:00.000-04:00

Henry Rollins opines on the schoolbook debate:

Perhaps the powers that be in Texas consider Thomas Jefferson an extraneous ingredient and will seek to extract our third president and other major figures in American history from their school’s textbooks. It seems that there will be a bit of revision in Texas, and I fear it will be big—as things often are in the Lone Star State.

What will be the fate of Charles Darwin and Martin Luther King after the great cleansing, I wonder? I fear for the New Deal reforms and any other bits of history that may somehow be seen as inconvenient truths to the architects of the Great Texan Rewrite. I cringe when I think that the Civil Rights movement may magically vanish from the state’s history or be seen as an uppity peasant uprising. What will become of the Emancipation Proclamation? The outcome of the Civil War?

I understand a desire for nostalgia. I still listen to records I bought as a teenager. But a return to the dim-bulb cruelty and religious fascism of the past is a little too far in the way-back machine for me. What do you bring back next, the Bubonic Plague? The Texas Witch Trials!

Poorly educated people are not an asset unless you desire citizens who cannot think critically. Now why would any state want that? If I wanted my state to secede, I would need the voters to see that it is in their best interest to detach from a nation full of infidels and unpatriotic enemies. If it were me, I would start in the schools and the books that students read.

GOP: Paul Rand is "Not one of us"

2010-03-18T08:07:00.002-04:00

Rand Paul, the slightly-less-kooky son of Ron Paul, is making a serious bid at the Kentucky Senate seat in 2010 marking a potentially major first impact from the Tea Party movement (sorry kiddies - and I know this may come as a shock - but the yokel from Alaska doesn't count as a success by any standards.) One would look at this as a truly positive move for the GOP, a party in dire need of re-branding, right?

Wrong:

Recognizing the threat, a well-connected former aide to Vice President Dick Cheney convened a conference call last week between Grayson and a group of leading national security conservatives to sound the alarm about Paul.
"On foreign policy, [global war on terror], Gitmo, Afghanistan, Rand Paul is NOT one of us," Cesar Conda wrote in an e-mail to figures such as Liz Cheney, William Kristol, Robert Kagan, Dan Senor and Marc Thiessen.
With an attached memo on Paul's noninterventionist positions, Conda concluded: "It is our hope that you can help us get the word out about Rand Paul's troubling and dangerous views on foreign policy. [...]

"This guy could become our Republican senator from Kentucky?" he exclaimed. "It's very alarming."

Yes yes. Someone who believes in individual rights, State's rights and non-interventionist foreign policy is very alarming indeed. Man the harpoons! We've got a live one, Dick! The hysteria has even gotten to the point that Trey Greyson, his Kentucky GOP opponent, has created a scare-page listing all the horrible things that Rand represents, like being Pro Choice, Pro Marijuana Legalization, Pro Gay Marriage, Anti-Iraq/Afghanistan wars, etc. (I'll set aside for the moment that Paul is probably big-time against Health Care Reform - hey, no one's perfect!)

And the best hypocrisy, as Reason points out, is that he is Funded By Out of State Libertarians! Wait, isn't that how Scott Brown got elected? How the Gay Marriage repeal was denied in Maine? How all GOP Money Bombs work?

I guess when there are "no" ideas, morals or leadership in the Party of No, all they have left to stand on are scare tactics and smear campaigns. And the sorry state of affairs for American politics continues...

Pixar's Flooded Basement

2010-03-15T14:08:00.000-04:00

Two seemingly unrelated events came crashing together for me this weekend. The first was watching the terrific Pixar animated movie Up on Saturday and the other was walking down my basement stairs on Sunday morning to find the beginning stages of a flood. How are these two related?   Well for one, both are debilitatingly depressing in their own special way. More to the point, though, is how early on in the movie Carl Fredricksen and his wife, Ellie, start the spare change jar to fund their epic dream of living next to Paradise Falls, only to have a blown tire and an untimely fallen tree postpone their ultimate goal, sadly for good for poor Ellie.

Having purchased a house of our own only 18 months ago, my special lady and I have had our own Paradise Falls jar meet the business end of a hammer a few times already. From tax bullshit to replacement appliances to an unplanned below-grade balineum - hey shit does happen - those Paradise-like plans of a return to Jamaica or a remodeled kitchen get pushed a little farther over the horizon. And you know what?   It's fine.

Normally at a time like this, I would be feeling the pang of demoralization deep in my craw. But the moral of the story of Up had kinda resonated with me and even lessened the pain, to whatever minor extent was possible.   After all the hard work and despair Carl suffered in trying to keep his posthumous promise of filling out the 'Things I Will Do' section of Ellie's scrapbook, he realizes that they've been filling out the book all along, just by being together. Through all the times. With or without Paradise Falls.

And that's where the two crossed together for me: Even while we're mopping a soggy basement floor at a mopey, downtrodden pace we're still doing it together and just putting another photo into our own happy little scrapbook of life together. I wouldn't have it any other way.

Well my polling numbers say you're an asshat, Scott

2010-03-14T21:13:00.002-04:00

I wasted a solid ten minutes of my life watching Instapundit Glenn Reynolds' video Q&A with Scott Rasmussen on PJTV. Disingenuous was the word that came to mind earliest and often, starting with the lead-in by Reynolds describing Rasmussen as the guy with "his finger on the pulse of American politics" leading to this quote by Scott himself:

The American people don't want to be governed from left, right or center; they want to govern themselves

Sure, Scott, that makes sense [/sarcasm]

For those who aren't familiar with Rasmussen polls and the pulse-fingered-people he's got minding his every publication, Rasmussen's polls tend to skew towards the right, with his approval numbers lower on average than the rest of the polling universe on both Obama's favorability and the Health Care Reform bill. He - and his supporters - claim this is because his numbers reflect likely voters where the others simply hit the general public. Not to get all double-negative on you, but I'm not entirely sure that explanation doesn't reek of slant. I'd love to see some hard analysis of it, but in lieu of that, I'd venture that his recipe of likely voters consists of those older, more vocally invigorated and religious voters the right relies on for all their grassroots movements and campaigns.

That being said, the guttural tone of the interview was suggesting that Scott wasn't there to represent either political party, but rather to serve the populist goal of limited government. Something I'm normally all for getting behind. Until I heard this exchange:

Reynolds: "The gap between Americans who want to govern themselves and the politicians who want to rule over them may as big today as the gap between the colonies and england during the 18th century. And recently you had a poll asking people if the federal government has the consent of governed and only 21% of AMERICANS said THAT IT did. I find that troubling. should I be worried about that number?"

Rasmussen: I think you should probably be more worried than you are. That stat certainly worries me and I think it creates a situation. There is a massive federal government right now. Lots of employees, lots of revenues, lots of things it does for the American people, but our founding document says that the government derives its sole legitimacy from the consent of the governed. If people don't believe it has the consent of the governed, that disconnect can lead to all sorts of problems. And again, this is not because democrats are in charge right now, it happens whether democrats are in charge or republicans are in charge" ... [there is] a sense that there's a gap in that the government is doing what it sees fit regardless what the people want"

So we're supposed to believe that this gay-hating, right-leaning Methodist, who's firm has been paid by the RNC and George W Bush's campaign, would stand up for small government regardless who is in power?

Sorry, but I call bullshit. Thanks, Scott, for making me doubt the veracity of yet another political faction which is about all I accomplished in those fateful ten minutes.

Avlon on Reason TV

2010-03-12T10:45:00.005-05:00

This ten minute discussion between John Avlon and Nick Gillespie is worth the watch. John does a decent job in his delivery, though a little rushed. I was certainly confused when he described Wingnuts as "people who are always trying to unite us rather than divide us" Luckily we know he meant the opposite.

Where he did well, of course, was explaining how independents relate to libertarianism as they tend to be Fiscally Conservative and Socially Liberal. He correctly notes that both fringes get this wrong and seem unable to grasp the mix, instead claiming that independent vote boons represent some kind of referrendum for their ideology. (see: liberals taking Obama's victory as a liberal mandate; conservatives taking Brown's victory as a mandate against health care reform) The truth is, on the whole, independents are deficit hawks; they don't want either party spending recklessly, demonstrated by the struggle incumbents go through trying to hold office.

At one point Gillespie asks him where in the scheme the Tea Party movement fits, which Avlon rightly explains as a group of grassroot deficit hawk populists who are sadly experiencing Obama Derangement Syndrome. All due to the shift in genesis of political talking points coming from the media, rather than the politicians.

I agree with John in hoping we eventually get to the point where the focus of government is more than just establishing and maintaining power by pandering to extremes and vilifying ideological opponents

Video below the jump.

Quick Hits

2010-03-11T10:12:00.003-05:00

Not Megan Fox

New jobless claims edge lower - Certainly positive news on the economic front.

Foreclosures slowing - Also positive news, especially for homeowners worried about the ever-dropping value of their investment. One may also say that this could usher in a jump in new home sales, if folks who have been hesitant to buy start regaining confidence in the market.

Sullivan passes on a Tax Policy Center breakdown of Paul Ryan's proposed budget. Summary: Great for the rich, not so much for the middle-class. Surprise, surprise. And Ryan was one republican who I actually liked.

The interweb was abuzz over an outtake pic of Megan Fox posing provocatively on all fours. Turns out it's not even her. We'll still pretend though. That's the American way.

The Tiger whores who don't think they're whores, and don't want to be considered whores, had a battle to determine who is actually the best whore of those whores. Jamie Jungers won. Imagine bringing this girl home? Your grandmother would have a stroke when she jumps pantiless on dinner table to demonstrate what she does for work. Jungers, that is; not grandma. You sicko.

Jon Stewart tears apart Marc Thiessen over the "Al-Qaeda 7" bullshit that hacks like Liz Cheney and Bill Kristol are pushing on the public. By the end, Thiessen turns into a puddle and starts whining that Stewart talked over and didn't allow him to make his points. Watch the video and decide for yourself. Personally, I don't think you can blame Marc for stomping and crying like someone stole his Mailbu Barbie house. Everyone knows Stewart's chairs are painful on the vagina.

Well, he does drive a truck...

2010-03-10T13:01:00.000-05:00

Just saw on Boston.com that Scott Brown inked a deal with Harper Collins to publish his memoir. And why not? After all, he's been relevant for a whole two months and a whopping three senate votes.

I love how right wing ballwashers fawn over flash in the pan people like Brown and Palin because they catch a few headlines but then shit all over Obama for being inexperienced in the very next breath. I'm sure Glenn Beck will be pimping this book out in early 2011.

Here we go again...

2010-03-10T09:55:00.003-05:00

A Catholic School in Boulder, Colorado has denied re-admission of two children because their parents are a lesbian couple, triggering protests from families of other enrolled children and the GLBT community. The Archdiocese callously defends the decision, citing unjust pressure on the staff to reconcile the couple's orientation with the teachings of the church. A quick perusal of the local news comment boards shows a stark contrast of positions on the issue. Some of which are nauseatingly bigoted and comically misinformed:

nativecolorado wrote:
9news: You should be ashamed for even giving this story the time of day...what a total farce! To make it the lead story the past day or so is a disgrace! Your bias is shameful!

This is America and the last time I checked a free country. Free to worship your religion...so a news flash to all of you intolerant and hate filled homosexual and liberal people: You preach tolerance yet are completely intolerant of those that follow the teaching of the Catholic Church! Get a life!

That is what public schools are for...to indoctrinate children with your intolerance! The Catholic school has EVERY right to make this decision! Why do you think private and charter schools are so popular? It always amazes me how quick people are to attack the Catholic Church and spew hatred and lies about it.

.I'd like to see these people try this with a Muslim or Jewish organization…

I can assure you 9news would not have covered the story and would have been afraid to do so.

That there exist in this world people who believe it's the gays and liberals who are the ones being intolerant on this issue is almost mind-numbing. But I digress.

One has to wonder, first, why this couple would bother to send their kids to this school in the first place, knowing what we do about the church at large. One argument made on this front says that if the church is allowed to enjoy tax exemptions from the city and state then they also need to stifle their own discriminatory practices that lie in contrast with the laws of said city and state. I can agree with that, though I'd prefer that such exemptions were abolished completely, paving way for a true separation of church and state, but that's a separate issue.

The bigger question is how many of the other kids enrolled at this school were born out of wedlock? Have single parents who are living in sin? Have divorced and remarried parents? We already know the school accepts children from different faiths. These families would also be in defiance of the morally upstanding teachings of the Catholic Church, right?

Says Archbishop Chaput: Nope:

It’s also true that some of our schools exist as a service outreach in largely non-Catholic communities. Many of our schools also accept students of other faiths and no faith, and from single parent and divorced parent families. These students are always welcome so long as their parents support the Catholic mission of the school and do not offer a serious counter-witness to that mission in their actions.

The hypocrisy is astounding.

Extremism comes in more than 2 flavors

2010-03-09T08:29:00.000-05:00

via Sullivan, James Joyner begs:

Can we please stop with the political name-calling whenever one of these nuts goes off?
Look, we’re a big country. There are over 300 million of us. Almost everyone holds a position or two that’s way off the charts and a whole lot of people believe in 9/11 Trutherism, black helicopters, and all the rest. Less than a handful of those people are out trying to kill people. However stupid or loathesome a political view may be, the fact that some nut also holds it adds nothing to the counter-argument.

Since Andrew didn't comment, I'll take it up. Talk about a misguided vendetta on this guy's part. And talk about some misguided commentary coming from the MSM and blogosphere. Few things in my mind are worse than staunch ideologues from either side who demand that "government stay out of their Medicare" or preach that George Bush lied for oil, but Truthers and/or JFK conspiracy theorists give them a run for the money.

John Avlon does well to break it down:

Any reflexive media attempts to tie the shooter to the Tea Party movement should be regarded as totally unfounded. He appears to have been more focused on his hatred of former Vice President Dick Cheney than President Barack Obama. Bedell seems to be less connected to right-wing politics than what I call “fright wing” politics—the murky ground beyond left and right where conspiracy theories reside.

...and then goes on to point our a scary trend:

Earlier this week, the invaluable Southern Poverty Law Center released a new report that detailed the dramatic increase in militia and so-called Patriot groups over the first year of the Obama administration. Among its findings was the establishment of 363 new Patriot groups last year alone. “Militias—the paramilitary arm of the Patriot movement—were a major part of the increase, growing from 42 militias in 2008 to 127 in 2009,” the center found.

As more information comes in, it appears that Bedell is the latest self-styled suicidal warrior for the extreme anti-government movement that has exploded since President Obama’s inauguration. It is a reminder of the real costs that come with the paranoid conspiracy theories that are peddled on the edges of the Internet and sometimes encouraged by hyper-partisan media outlets.

Hate is a cheap and easy recruiting tool—but hate ultimately leads to violence.

This can't possibly end well.

Even a little means a lot

2010-03-08T20:50:00.000-05:00

Hard to argue with Jonathan Cohn's piece on TNR. He breaks down how the current versions of the bill may only reduce cost marginally over the short term but that in the long-term - by implementing a variety of control measures in moderation to see what works and what doesn't - it can be very beneficial. Certainly more beneficial than the unsustainable status quo.

Some of the people complaining about this bill seem to acknowledge the political forces at play. If it's not possible to pass a bill with stronger cost control, they suggest, there should be no bill at all--or, at least, not one that looks like this one. They'd prefer only a very small expansion of coverage, if any, until real cost control has set in.

But here, too, the political logic isn't so simple. Just think about hospitals for a second. Reducing spending on health care is going to require a massive change in the way both public and private insurers pay them.
[...]
You could make the same argument about other interest groups--or what the public, as a whole, would be willing to tolerate. The most aggressive cost control efforts from left and right would start by getting everybody out of their present insurance arrangements. Good luck trying to enact that.

To be absolutely clear about this, I would support health care reform if it did nothing more than expand and strengthen health insurance coverage. I think it's a moral imperative, as much for the sake of the middle class as the poor. But it so happens that the bill moving through Congress will do something more. It will reduce the cost of care--not by a lot and not by as much as possible in theory, but as much as is possible in this political universe. That's far better than the alternative, which is to do nothing.

Deval Patrick - you're doing it wrong (again!)

2010-03-08T10:59:00.001-05:00

Raise your hand if you want Health Care costs to go down (or stop going up)

Wow, that's just about everyone. No surprises there.   Now raise your hand if you think capping insurer premium hikes without capping provider contract hikes is a financially viable way to control premiums.

Confused? Well don't feel bad because the Governor of Massachusetts doesn't understand this either. See, if 90% of premiums cover medical expenses and those expenses can rise by 10-12% but the premiums can't rise higher than 4.8%, then there's a bit of a discrepancy on the bottom line.

Simple-minded people like using lemonade stands for analogies and I like simple terms so let's try this one.   Little Cindy runs her lemonade stand and can only purchase lemons from Massachusetts lemon growers.   One of those growers is a massive conglomerate that has banded together most of the biggest lemon farms in the state for bargaining power.   They pretty much dictate what the costs should and will be for all farmers in the state. Every year this massive group jacks up the cost of lemons by 10-12%.

Now, Deval Patrick doesn't like that every time he stops at Cindy's stand the cost for a glass goes up. So he makes a law that says Cindy can't raise her lemonade cost but in the meantime the lemon growers can still demand the big increase because no law prevents that.   Eventually, where does Cindy's margin go? How can she pay workers' salaries to squeeze the lemons and run the stand?   She can't and now little Cindy is on little kiddie unemployment.

Look, from a free market perspective, telling the doctors they can't make money is no better than telling insurers they can't but by imposing this on the insurer side is treating the symptom but ignoring the cause. The biggest mistake the general public makes is to constantly lay the blame solely at the feet of the insurers without ever asking why the docs' costs have to go so high every year.

What can you do to help? Well, unless you're a physician or a contract negotiator at one of the payers, you can't have a direct impact.   But indirectly you can be prudent about the care you utilize and push back on your doc when they order excessive tests or visits for ridiculous things.

One of my bigger pet peeves was when my doc prescribed my a pump blocker for heartburn. He told me when he wrote it that I would have to take this medication for the rest of my life.   But then when the script ran out, the office manager told me I had to come in for a refill?! Huh?   We already know what I have to take and why and no magical new information can be garnered from the visit. Why on earth would I be asked to come in for this needless formality?    Because it's in the doctor's best interest to schedule as many appointments as possible. Straight Cash Homey. Obviously I argued this point and established a standing order with my primary for the meds. It's that easy.

So be smart. Ask questions. Demand that your health care costs are being used in efficient ways. You have the right and you certainly have reason to do so, if you want premiums to go down.

Let he who is without... flipper?

2010-03-05T19:19:00.001-05:00

A friend forwarded me this little gem (I swear I wouldn't be caught dead reading the douche rag that is HuffPo) about the American Family Association's spin of how SeaWorld should handle that murderous mammal, Tillikum: Stoning. Because scripture says so. But of course!

Says the ancient civil code of Israel, "When an ox gores a man or woman to death, the ox shall be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten, but the owner shall not be liable." (Exodus 21:28)

And it gets even better. Apparently, according to these ravenous loons, Tilly should be thrust against the wall alongside the training manager, Chuck Thompson, as well.

But, the Scripture soberly warns, if one of your animals kills a second time because you didn't kill it after it claimed its first human victim, this time you die right along with your animal. To use the example from Exodus, if your ox kills a second time, "the ox shall be stoned, and its owner also shall be put to death." (Exodus 21:29)

Just so we're clear, Exodus is same book that Moses was set adrift in a raft like some message in a bottle... supposedly waved his staff and did this... talked to a flaming bush and came down with these... so I'm not sure how reliable a source it is to determine the sentence anyway.

Seriously, are these people ever going to realize that it's not the friggin' 3rd century anymore? And could a calculatedly innocuous name like American Family Association be any less genuine or more sinister? Whale stoning aside, I'm sure you could guess where these people stand on things. Sadly, it's not on the slippery edge of a SeaWorld holding tank.

Hitchens' Ten Commandments

2010-03-05T14:22:00.001-05:00

No doubt a riff he has played during his many book tour stops and debates on religion, Christopher Hitchens expands a bit on his preferred re-write of the Ten Commandments in April's Vanity Fair.

His wrap is terrific:

I am trying my best not to view things through a smug later prism. Only the Almighty can scan matters sub specie aeternitatis: from the viewpoint of eternity. One must also avoid cultural and historical relativism: there’s no point in retroactively ordering the Children of Israel to develop a germ theory of disease (so as to avoid mistaking plagues for divine punishments) or to understand astronomy (so as not to make foolish predictions and boasts based on the planets and stars). Still, if we think of the evils that afflict humanity today and that are man-made and not inflicted by nature, we would be morally numb if we did not feel strongly about genocide, slavery, rape, child abuse, sexual repression, white-collar crime, the wanton destruction of the natural world, and people who yak on cell phones in restaurants. (Also, people who commit simultaneous suicide and murder while screaming “God is great”: is that taking the Lord’s name in vain or is it not?)

It’s difficult to take oneself with sufficient seriousness to begin any sentence with the words “Thou shalt not.” But who cannot summon the confidence to say: Do not condemn people on the basis of their ethnicity or color. Do not ever use people as private property. Despise those who use violence or the threat of it in sexual relations. Hide your face and weep if you dare to harm a child. Do not condemn people for their inborn nature—why would God create so many homosexuals only in order to torture and destroy them? Be aware that you too are an animal and dependent on the web of nature, and think and act accordingly. Do not imagine that you can escape judgment if you rob people with a false prospectus rather than with a knife. Turn off that fucking cell phone—you have no idea how unimportant your call is to us. Denounce all jihadists and crusaders for what they are: psychopathic criminals with ugly delusions. Be willing to renounce any god or any religion if any holy commandments should contradict any of the above. In short: Do not swallow your moral code in tablet form.

Video of his explanation after the jump

Ok Go Video... Holy crap!

2010-03-04T07:31:00.000-05:00

This video has been flying around the interwebs for a few days now, so unless you've been living in a cave, you'll think I'm just another noob who showed up late to the party wearing women's underwear again. So what if I did drag my balls across the deli platter? What's it to you? The avocado dip is fine.

But if you have been in that cave, watch this vid. Cool Rube Goldberg shit. These guys have some other sick one-take vids that'll blow your freakin' mind so far out that no fruit salad will be safe.

Catholic Charities: Gays Ruin Benefits for Everyone

2010-03-03T07:35:00.000-05:00

On February 1st, the Washington DC Catholic Charities moved to end their foster care programs in a retaliation against the city's new law allowing gay marriage. Sullivan has commented on the issue at length, asking the question: will Catholic Charities cut benefits for any employees who have divorced and remarried under DC law? Well, here's your answer, Andrew:

Catholic Charities President and CEO Edward Orzechowski sent a memo out to employees yesterday informing them that spouses’ who have already been enrolled in the health plan would continue to receive care under a grandfather clause, but that new employees or newly married employees would no longer be eligible to obtain coverage for their spouses through Catholic Charities.
The change goes into effect today. The District of Columbia will begin granting marriage licenses to same-sex couples beginning on March 4.

I don't think I'll ever understand how the church reconciles Jesus' teachings of goodwill towards your fellow man with their draconian stance on gay rights. This latest move to is the political equivalent of the Diocese taking its ball and going home. Just goes to show, when you think bar is set low, the Catholics somehow manage to go even lower.

Well, if you put it that way...

2010-03-02T13:00:00.000-05:00

wwtdd.com posted a bunch of pics of this gigantic-breasted J-Woww chick.

So wait... these Jersey Shore birds don't all look like oompa-loompas? When was someone gonna tell me!? Still have to worry if this chick is mad hairy in all the wrong places or not. She could be the type of girl who stands naked in front of a fan and her bush swirls in the wind like a Pantene commercial.

Food Inc.

2010-03-02T12:21:00.002-05:00

Sunday night my wife and I sat down to watch Food Inc., the fantastic Oscar-nominated documentary about the corporate nightmare that is the American agricultural industry. I would be hard-pressed to find someone - save for the CEO of Tyson - who wouldn't be affected in some small way by this film. There weren't many bullet points that one could genuinely consider as previously unknown but the way they filmmakers delivered them was sobering to say the least. There were some shocking scenes (the kill floor of the hog slaughterhouse; cows standing ankle deep in their own filth, etc) yet I thought the film did well to avoid the easy lay-up, PETA-style impact shots that would turn even the strongest stomach to mush. The point wasn't to get us to stop eating meat or pork - or food in general - but rather to pull back the veil and fully understand the stranglehold large food corporations have on the supply chain.

Some major points worth noting:

In 1970 the Top 5 meat packing companies were responsible for 25% of the market. Today, due to corporate consolidation, the top 4 companies are responsible for 80%.

The USDA is essentially a toothless oversight group that monitors producers to ensure that standards are being upheld, but has no jurisdiction to actually enforce anything. The film notes that the USDA, per regulation, moved to shut down one slaughterhouse which had repeatedly failed bacteria tests. The parent companies lawyers fought the shut-down in court and won on the basis that the USDA lacked proper jurisdiction to do so.

Patent laws put in place a decade ago paved the way for one company, Monsanto, to copyright a genetically-modified strain of soy bean seed that resists pesticides. At face value seems fair enough, except that they dominate the market and constantly sue non-par farmers for infringement when the Monsanto crops cross-pollinate with the little guy's crops, lawsuits that have put the small farmers out of business, one by one.

Stonyfield Farm, an organic grower/raiser, is leading the charge to fight back against factory farming and putting Organic products on the map by selling to big retailers like Wal-Mart. I enjoyed this free-market approach to fighting off the big guys. As Stonyfield CEO Gary Hirshberg says,

“We’re on the battlefield now and we need to fight with the same weaponry. We need to not be David up against Goliath. We need to be Goliath.”
The scene where a Latino family goes shopping for broccoli and emphatically state that it's "cheaper to buy McDonald's than groceries"... ugh... This was the one spot I wish had been framed a little differently. It's ludicrous to claim that four happy meals costs more than a 99-cent pound of pasta and a $2 jar of sauce. Sure its easier to hit the drive through, but the laziness factor was curiously removed from the equation. At some point, personal responsibility has to come into play.

The heartbreaking story of Kevin Kowalcyk, who died at 2 years old from E.coli poisoning after eating a hamburger. The story outlined the power of industry lobbyists and their ability to block legislation over food-borne illness regulation and the aforementioned USDA misfires. Now, I'm certainly not a pro-regulation, big government guy but this segment was tremendously moving. Say what you want about a free-market, self-regulation approach to product safety but when the big guns are so big that dirty plants are left unchecked, it points to major, major flaws in our government system.

The finishing note. Epic. I really like how they drove the point home about how you, as an individual, can affect change in this massive system. A much better tactic than "Big Business is bad! Vote Democrat!!" that most documentaries wrap with today *cough* Michael Moore *cough*. Instead the films ends with a checklist of how you can cast your "vote" 3 times a day.

I personally felt good about a few things by the end of this movie. That there exist people like Gary Hirshberg, who understand that pure radicalism isn't the only answer to fighting the big show. That my wife is already cognoscente about what foods come into our house and works to buy as organic as possible. That we've been planning a raised garden bed to grow our own vegetables this year.

This movie may not teach you anything new, but it will inspire you to think twice about what it is you're putting on the dinner plate. Needless to say, I highly recommend giving it a whirl.

8001050F? F$%#^$ You, PSN!

2010-03-01T12:32:00.000-05:00

So the PlayStation Network decided to prove how vastly inferior it is to the Xbox 360 last night, when anyone with a pre-slim PS3 experienced this error.

8001050F - Hardware failure. Cannot update Firmware or connect to Internet

Really put a damper on my Modern Warfare 2 campaign to dominate the world of parents' basements and leave my wife questioning her very existence.

Teaching Old Dogs New Tricks

2010-02-28T12:52:00.000-05:00

Jonathan Bernstein has a great break down of the perception by GOP pols and pundits on the effectiveness of Purity Tests and nominating extreme ideological candidates for the upcoming mid-term elections.

The larger lesson is that politicians, and political actors, tend to interpret political events based on their own biases and interests. Polling on health care right now is ambiguous, but conservatives are absolutely convinced that the Democratic health care reform bill is massively unpopular, while liberals are equally convinced that it's quite popular. So conservatives interpreted the 2008 election as a repudiation not of conservatism, but as a repudiation of Congressional and presidential deviations from conservatism (in fact, the 2008 election was more of a reaction to a deep recession than anything else -- of course, that just moves the argument to whether liberal or conservative parties were responsible for the recession). It's not impossible for pols and activists to learn useful lessons, but the evidence is that they learn slowly and inefficiently.

Bottom line: yes, it is electorally bad for parties to nominate unelectable ideological candidates. No, Republicans aren't going to stop doing it even if it costs them seats in the 2010 election cycle.

Obviously the general idea of shoving more moderate candidates out of the landscape is a nauseating prospect to this blogger.

Those Condescending Elitists

2010-02-26T14:16:00.002-05:00

Not that this should come as any surprise, but the Right has already begun their whine-fest from the Health Care Summit. Apparently because that elitist a-hole Obama comes across so damned smarmy. I love the give and take between Chait and Poheritz. Pretty much epitomizes the two sides of this debate:

Earlier I noted of the health care summit that the Republicans in attendance seem to be divided between those who have no data at their disposal and those who have incorrect data. It is therefore difficult for President Obama, who obviously has a deep command of the issue, to engage with those Republicans without somewhat projecting condescension.

John Podhoretz shoots back:
Here’s how. By not being condescending. That’s how.

Never mind facts vs fiction; It's all in the delivery. I wonder if the right will ever realize how this tactic looks from the outside. It's plain to see that they're essentially cheerleading ignorance and opposing intelligent thought.

New Drinking Game: Terrorist, Radical or Protester

2010-02-25T18:56:00.004-05:00

Sullivan linked to an internal debate among the Newsweek staff which was initially intended to be a banter about the difference between Joe Stack and the Undie-Bomber but evolved into a taxonomic discussion over the definition of the term "Terrorist." It's certainly worth a read to see how the different positions are defended.

Sullivan and Greenwald keyed in on Managing Editor, Kathy Jones' take (Sullivan today questioned the potential irony factor):

Did the label terrorist ever successfully stick to McVeigh? Or the Unabomber? Or any of the IRS bombers in our violence list ? Here is my handy guide:
- Lone wolfish American attacker who sees gov't as threat to personal freedom: bomber, tax protester, survivalist, separatist
- Group of Americans bombing/kidnapping to protest U.S. policies on war/poverty/personal freedom/ - radical left-wing movement, right-wing separatists
- All foreign groups or foreign individuals bombing/shooting to protest American gov't: terrorists

Personally, I'm not convinced it was irony but I also see the world through dark, slanted glasses and assume that we're loaded up with people who only understand terrorism as defined in a post-9/11 world. I was much more interested in Digital Editor, Devin Gordon's spin:

Fundamentally, I'm with Dan: a Texan white guy named Joe Stack isn't as interesting / enraging / anxiety-inducing as a Nigerian Muslim named Abdulmutallab. I'm also with Eve: Stack's philosophy, unlike Abdulmutallab's, is pretty kosher with many—maybe even most—Americans. [...]
But I'm most intrigued by a couple of things Mike suggested. First, that Abdulmutallab's actions fit into a much larger terrorism narrative that has stretched out for years, resulted in ongoing wars and decided presidential elections. Isolated, Underpants Man's actions are surely milder than Stack's—it still amazes me that a man flying a plane into a building doesn't make us flinch much more—but Stack's actions are just that: isolated.

Then again, what if they aren't? That's the other thing that intrigued me about what Mike wrote: "The FBI gets skittish when you ask what they do about domestic terrorist groups because they clearly realize that the line between domestic terrorist and political dissident can sometimes be a blurry one." One thing that could've stretched out this Austin Wacko story out quite a bit longer is if the mainstream media had been bolder about connecting it to the larger anti-tax political phenomenon in this country today: the Tea Party. But most of us weren't willing to go there. Why? Because we are perceived as being dismissive and condescending toward the movement—OK, we *are* dismissive and condescending toward the movement. In short, we tend to treat them like wackos and we are gun-shy about going the full Monty and suggesting they are this close to being *violent* wackos. The FBI is skittish about that blurry line, and so is the media.

(my bold for emphasis) And it gets better... Here's how correspondent Mark Hosenball followed:

[I]f you look at patterns of extreme-right-wing violence—and I have been collecting some string on this, which maybe it's about time to tie together—then the Austin airplane guy's actions don't look quite so isolated. For example this guy was grabbed by authorities in New Jersey less than two weeks ago. "Ready for 'Armageddon'" says the headline in the Gloucester Daily Times, about a man who got busted with a stockpile of hand grenades, 20 guns, handcuffs, camouflage clothing, handcuffs and assorted other military paraphernalia. The folks at Talkingpointsmemo reported that he was a Tea Party activist and big fan of Sarah Palin. How is it not terrorism if this guy at some point goes bats and shoots at or throws grenades into a crowd? Just because such a person is a fan of Sarah Palin, of course, doesn't make her a terrorist or even an inspiration to terrorists in the same way that Osama or Anwar Awlaki both deliberately have set out to be. But if such a guy goes bananas and killed a bunch of people—even if his personal views were so extreme (like the Unabomber's) that he constituted a political party of one—if he sets out to deliberately impose or advertise his views to the world by blowing up a bunch of innocent people, then to my mind that's terrorism. But I guess it's easier and more convenient—politically correct, even—to use that word to describe someone if they have a beard.

(more of my bold for emphasis)

Whoa. How is this the first I've heard of a guy who was arrested in my own damn back yard with enough weapons to wage a war on Martha Coakley's entire election return? Yes I digress, but click that TPM link for some entertaining lit.

Now, clearly Hosenball's example is largely conjecture but the larger point remains: it's much easier to lay the terrorist stigma on a "guy in a cave" than on the system engineer from Pennsylvania. This is displayed, rather pathetically, by most of the contributors of that email chain. After all, if we label people who perform acts of terror as terrorists, who aren't brown and bearded, it severely decapitates the anti-Islam fear breeding agenda that's dominated our political landscape, media and elections for the last decade. Something I'm sure Newsweek and the WaPoCo umbrella understand and are careful to avoid like the vapid lemmings they are.

This topic did get me thinking about the term and how it should be defined. I solicited the help of a few friends, asking how they would define the term terrorist and the message was consistent - and, shockingly, not in line with the lemmings:

a person or group who plots against either another group or government using radical means, weapons, scare tactics, etc.

a radical who is involved with groups of people with certain interest that will use fear and violence to promote or carry out their cause

a person or group who uses violence to send a message, usually part of a religion or cult.

Maybe there's hope for this world after all. No muslim ties, no exclusion of lone-wolf types, no sparing of the ignorant to push an agenda. Clear and concise: a Person or Group who sends their message through violent or radical means. Much easier. And we don't have to continue lying to ourselves about Timothy McVeigh, Ted Kaczynski, Scott Roeder, Joe Stack or anyone else for that matter. Bottom line of this long-winded story, I think, is that the pathway to honesty begins without the mainstream media as a guide.

Christian Girls Love Anal

2010-02-25T10:26:00.002-05:00

That's science. Want proof?

wwtdd.com posted a story about George Clooney buying an island for his little tramp, and then accompanied that post with set of pics of said tramp.

Now there's no way you're gonna tell me this girl doesn't take it in the corn knot. I love how it's always the girl in leather boots and see-through top with the fun jugs pouring out - or taking a chunky load to the chops, for that matter - who felt strongly enough about her religion to blaze the crucifix in front of it all.

Praise Jesus for that.

Amen.

Stay Classy, PETA

2010-02-25T07:47:00.001-05:00

The 'net is abuzz with fear and chatter over the death of a Sea World trainer at the, uh, fins of Killer whale, Tillikum, yesterday. A few different accounts have surfaced already from visitor eyewitnesses to the park itself, and it's probably just a matter of time before a cell phone cam vid finds it way to the public.

Until then, the forum is open to any and all commentary on the incident so it should come as a shock to nobody at all that a rep from the People for the Ethical Treament of Animals came forward with their own celebration of the killing.

Jaime Zalac said the organization had called on SeaWorld "to stop confining oceangoing mammals to an area that to them is like the size of a bathtub, and we have also been asking the park to stop forcing the animals to perform silly tricks over and over again. It's not surprising when these huge, smart animals lash out."

Hey, I've been to Sea World and watched a show at that same area. Probably saw the same killer Killer Whale, too (see what I did there?) That place is like an enormous fish day spa. What's lost on these PETA meatheads is that these trainers aren't just carney freaks, they're marine freakin' biologists who love their subjects more than most people love their own kids. That PETA would come out to cheer this as some sort of freakish payback for making them live in a bathtub is low even for them.

Stay Classy, PETA

God's Will strikes again

2010-02-24T14:15:00.000-05:00

via CBSNews:

Stephen Garcia, from all indications, didn't want to live without his ex-girlfriend, Katie Tagle, or share custody of their infant son, so in an apparent murder-suicide, the California father killed his child, then himself. Hours later he was still telling the world just how he felt, in a suicide note on Facebook, possibly posted by a friend.

Fantastic. Hitchen's Test scores again.

"Dissent is called Disloyal"

2010-02-24T14:11:00.000-05:00

Here's a great piece by John Avlon highlighting the disconnect between Washington and it's constituents i/r/t nasty partisanship:

Ninety-three percent of Americans believe that Washington is too partisan, according to a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll taken one month ago.

That's not a subtle message. Ninety percent of Americans rarely agree on anything—60 percent is a landslide mandate in elections. But the professional partisans and pundits in Washington have been falling over themselves arguing that bipartisanship is a fool's game as of late. They insist that Americans must get more sophisticated when it comes to the ways of Washington and embrace the town's bitter and predictable partisanship as both wise and inevitable.

This disconnect is the reason more and more Americans believe that government is broken—addicted to division and controlled by corrupt special interests. Ideological absolutism always comes dressed up as purity and principle. Conformity is characterized as courage. Dissent is called disloyal. Partisanship is confused with patriotism.

Thursday's bipartisan health-care summit is already being dismissed by cynics as the equivalent of a show trial. But both parties had better wake up to the clear message that Americans are sending Washington: This is not a game. This is our country, and we elected you to work together—to move America not left or right, but forward.

Just this morning I had to listen to a blowhard on the local news yapping his trap about how Scott Brown is a turncoat for breaking ranks on a bill that would create an assload of jobs. Didn't see that one coming.

Problem is these talking heads have convinced themselves that Brown was elected to solely serve the out-of-state parties that contributed 75% of his campaign funds. Wrong again, teabaggers. He was elected in defiance of a worthless shrew of a woman on the left and by a large majority of centered individuals - from Massachusetts. So, save your purity test for someone else.

Lost in Health Insurer Hatred

2010-02-24T11:15:00.003-05:00

Yglesias has a great write up on excuse-making by two Dems, acting to protect Sallie Mae's interests from the SAFRA bill:

When you have a substantial inefficiency, you also have a whole bunch of people whose jobs depend on that inefficiency. That’s why it’s hard to treat coal the way we should and that’s why it’s hard to treat Sallie Mae the way we should. It’s also an important reason why “Medicare for All” isn’t really the political no-brainer that people sometimes claim it is—insurance companies employ tons of people, the vast majority of whom are not cackling and evil executives.

Now at the end of the day, I don’t think policy should be made on that basis. The best path, over the long-run, to ensuring good jobs for all Americans is to have sustainable prosperity built on economic growth. And that means accomplishing our public sector tasks in efficient ways—no needless subsidies to private student lenders, no teachers who stay on the job no matter how badly they do, no unnecessary health insurance company middlemen taking a slice of all our spending, no Medicare payments for useless or harmful treatments, etc. But all of this stuff is very challenging to do in part because of special interest money but also in part simply because behind every instance of waste stands someone whose livelihood depends on the waste.

(my bold for emphasis)

Hey, I'm one of those livelihoods! Since a private payer pays my salary -- and, to some extent, since I'm not convinced that fully-government-controlled anything is the best direction -- I stand behind those evil corporations and lobbyists who strive to prevent Single-Payer Health Care. Conversely, my job security is also one of the big reasons why I favor the recent incarnations of the health care reform bill: They leave the private market - and all the employees who work for them - very much intact.

This much is lost on both fringes.

The Party of No is so blindly hell-bent on preventing "the full takeover" of our Health Care sector that they're railing against a far, far less sinister proposal. The Progressives, on the other hand, are so adamant that the only way to lessen the cost of care for everyone is to let the government run the whole show that they completely discount the millions of people employed by insurers. People who, as Matt Y points out, aren't exactly millionaire CEOs.

ESPN Overreaction? Say it ain't so!

2010-02-24T07:28:00.001-05:00

So the great Tony Kornheiser has been suspended for comments critical of fellow ESPN GILF/Cougar/Erin Andrews Wannabe, Hannah Storm, for wearing this atrocity of an outfit.

This is par for the course for ESPN, who are constantly censoring their best talent (see: Simmons) from being even remotely critical of ANY sportscasters or on-air talent, even those from other networks. While I enjoy much of what the network has to offer this do-as-we-say conglomerate approach to managing content is quite boorish. Interestingly Hannah Storm, who I'm guessing is a tad attention starved, should probably thank her lucky stars for this whole shake up. Her google trends shot to the damn moon in the last 36 hours. However, I'm pretty sure this is lost on the tight-assed execs in Bristol.

At the end of the day, it's all just entertainment and public figures should be considered fair game. From anyone. Especially those calling a spade a spade. I mean look at the outfit! She's 47! If she walked into a college bar the place would go silent. In a bad way.

Some other erection-murdering outfits that remind me why the younger, hotter, cooler theory should be in place for all aspects of life, after the jump

Gonna get high with my mom

2010-02-23T14:38:00.001-05:00

From Sullivan/HuffPo:

The Boomers Get Stoned
More seniors are toking up. It can sure help with back pain and other ailments of getting older. Joe Klein thinks that we "are in the process of a back-door legalization, sweeping from the libertarian west to the east." I watched Bill Maher's new stand-up the other night. I love the idea that marijuana use is one dividing line between free societies and Islamist ones:
"I want to live in a country where being stoned is a good thing, not a bad thing."

Maybe I misjudged you, Scott Brown

2010-02-23T08:45:00.000-05:00

In his first vote as the answer to the Party of No's prayers, Scott Brown broke ranks and stopped a far-right-led filibuster on the $15B Jobs Bill.

"I came to Washington to be an independent voice, to put politics aside and to do everything in my power to help create jobs for Massachusetts families," said Brown, whose election last month gave Republicans the 41st vote that could sustain filibusters. "This Senate jobs bill is not perfect ... but I voted for it because it contains measures that will help put people back to work."

Certainly a tinge of self-preservation here, since Brown of all people knows he can't just fall into lockstep with the Tea Baggers and expect a sniff at re-election in this state.

Kudos to Brown and the other GOP senators who stood up for the people over partisan politics - something Washington's been completely devoid of for the last 13 months.