get-m

on hiatus

2008-11-25T15:21:00.000-05:00

... for any of you who care ... mamma's on break for a bit.

prop 8: nothing more need be said

2008-11-11T13:56:00.001-05:00

except w/ an overturn.

astonishing to witness

2008-11-09T23:09:00.000-05:00

reliving the magic: a most memorable evening in our history

2008-11-08T19:49:00.001-05:00

one more ...

what to do, what to do ...

2008-11-06T09:02:00.010-05:00

Post election: Obama supporters realize how empty their lives are ...

via videosift.com

LOL!!!! Courtesy of friend, Tommi

Maybe I should start w/ feeding my kids healthy meals again ... or go back to yoga ... or as Jason says "GET A JOB!"

Seriously tho, will be pausing here a bit.

the good ol' days ...

2008-11-05T09:08:00.004-05:00

I would like to take this opportunity to channel a memory from high school [and believe me, I don't like to do that so often]

V-I-C-T-O-R-Y

Victory is our battlecry!

um ... Oh, Yes We Can and Oh, Yes We Did!!!

or something like that

addition to the latest lengthy list

2008-10-31T21:40:00.002-04:00

of conservatives for Obama:

Ken Duberstein, Former Reagan chief of staff

to redistribute or not to redistribute, that is the question america answered eons ago

2008-10-30T22:43:00.006-04:00

by Mike Bullis

The idea that taxation is really government confiscation of "my" resources seems so simple and obvious, that it's hard to argue with. Particularly when I look at my paycheck. The problem is we just haven't come up with a better way.

At one level, the problem is wealth and intelligence and success aren't distributed equally. God knows I wish they were. Roughly ten percent of the people alive today will be very successful as measured by money accumulation. Partly because they're smarter than the rest of us, and partly because they're luckier. Then there is a broad group of about seventy percent of the population who will pretty much eek out a living, not being able to save much, and working from day to day. When they get old or have a crisis in health, they'll either be thrown over the side of the boat or we'll find a way to help them. We used to send them to poor farms here in the U.S. and in other societies we just let them die.

Then there is the bottom fifteen or twenty percent. They're just plain too stupid or lazy or, well, hell, you could say lots of things about them. They're a drain on society because no matter how much we spend on them they don't ever seem to get to the place that they'll really contribute to the over all good. So, what do we do with or about them?

What seems to happen in societies is that if we just leave them to fend for themselves, they unite with some of that broader seventy percent group and overthrow the rest of society. They're starving and desperate and eventually they get behind some new leader who promises them a piece of the pie that they, either through inability or lack of initiative, have been unable to get for themselves.

Much of the government turmoil in Central America, Central Africa, Indonesia and other places can give you a glimpse of what happens when you let massive parts of the population starve or fend for themselves. It leads to social instability, rampant crime and government instability--which translate into revolutions. The solution is often brutal dictatorships to keep the masses under control.

The honest truth is that we really struggle with this as a society. It offends our sense of justice that people who haven't contributed should get what "we" earned. But, again, we just haven't found a better way.

Republicans have used mantras against "socialism" and "wealth redistribution” very successfully since the 1980's. It plays well with voters, particularly if they're young and healthy--read as in baby-boomers. The dirty little secret is that Republican leadership knows what I've said above as well. They know that our society would not long tolerate the abandoning of the poor. They know it wouldn't be tolerated not just because it's ultimately cruel and destabilizing to society, but, it's destabilizing to Capitalism.

When John McCain calls Barack Obama a socialist he's really saying that the Democrats are far more willing than he is to pander to these unworthy groups and promise them more of the money they haven't earned than are the Republicans.

Every society has interest groups that form around particular issues. In the simplistic view, there are the free enterprise business interests and the humanitarian interests.

Although we capitalists talk about the fact that capitalism raises all boats, we've never been able to prove our contention. Yes, we can argue that capitalism raises the overall level of society's value (whether measured in dollars or production or standard of living), but the truth is that many are still left out.

Our country, in the 1930's came to a crisis point. We had had several major recessions in our history. The one in the 1890's was horrendous. The one after the Civil War was also very ugly. Millions out on the roads without a place to live, people dying without help. It was truly awful.

In the 1930's we decided that, whatever we may think about society, we had to do something to keep society from disintegration. We were being hit by the Communists, saying that capitalism was using workers and not giving them the value for their work. We had Hitler who argued that the superior amongst us should be allowed to cull out the inferior.

Our nation truly stood at a brink. Would we intervene to stabilize or simply let the chips fall where they would.

We chose to stabilize. I don't regret that decision.

Rather than simply inflame the masses against government and against programs we truly need for social stability, I'd rather work toward a government that produces results more efficiently.

The problem right now, is that for the past thirty years, the distance between the top and the bottom is increasing. That seventy percent in the middle is getting smaller and smaller. Their incomes are going down. Those kindly companies that we work for have found it more expedient to reward shareholders than employees. Although unions got greedy and out of control, the thing they did provide through the 70's in our country, was a baseline for wages and benefits. They gave workers some bargaining power, a place at the corporate table if you will. When unions declined, working people had no bargaining power. No matter what we capitalists say, we don't give up our profits willingly to workers. Yes, yes, I know, the marketplace should fix that.

But, the truth is that the marketplace devalues workers because company owners can use a so-so worker almost as well as a really good one. And, a really good worker just isn't that much more valuable to them. In other words, the rich have been getting richer and the poor have been getting poorer and the middle class has been moving toward the bottom.

There's no doubt that what we will see under Obama and a Democratically controlled Congress will be an attempt to change this. For millions in the 1930's the problem was that they simply couldn't ride out an economic crisis. Do you have two years worth of income in the bank ready for any problem that comes? If you don't, you're going to need help from someone if things get tough. Can you afford to pay your mortgage if you lose your job? If not, what will you do? If you lose your job how will you feed your kids? Put a garden plot in the backyard? That's a great idea but it won't help enough. Are you going to shoot deer in the neighborhood? Probably not a likely option for most people.

When we were a simpler society it was a bit easier for people to "live off the land" but with most of our population in cities it just isn't easy.

If, God forbid, your wife or mother should get breast cancer and die, what should happen? Will the kids just go to orphanages or live on the streets? What test do we give those in need for worthiness? How will we decide whether they're the ones who should receive help?

Look, there's no doubt that the Democrats go further than I would on helping those at the bottom. There's a fine line between too much help, cutting off the development of survival instincts and making people dependent, and not giving enough help, pushing people further toward the bottom.

My own feeling, for now, is that the Democrats will help rebalance society for a time in the direction of restabilizing the middle class. They'll probably overshoot and the Republicans will take power again to rebalance the other way. In the mean time, John McCain and the Republicans just don't answer the basic questions that we're wrestling with. The trickle down theory of economics has never worked as efficiently as they would have liked. The reality of capitalism is that in any large society, left to itself, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. What we have to do is find a way to rebalance that very real effect.

Yes, that's wealth redistribution. We should acknowledge that from the get go. We're a society that does that. Every society that has been at all successful over time has realized that it needs to be done.

If somebody finds a better way then I'm all for looking at it.

people in the middle for obama

2008-10-30T22:00:00.000-04:00

http://www.peopleinthemiddleforobama.org/

this man is why progressives-liberals, whatever you wanna call us, exist

2008-10-29T20:07:00.007-04:00

Saw this today on Bob Cesca's site. Posted by Elvis. A phenomenal writer-human.

It's the best clip I've seen at highlighting the essence behind Barack Obama's support. As a daughter of Depression-era babies, I say it shines a bright light on what's too frequently been dim of late. This IS the heart of a liberal ...

Read all and watch. It's well worth your time.

[...]

There's no denying these videos can border on the hagiographic, and by now Republicans must be inventing new drinking games for every Obama Video Tearjerker starring some iconic figure from America's troubled past finding Hope and Salvation in the prospect of the Senator's winning this election. And I understand that "Because it's Historic" is not reason enough to support a candidate for president; electing a particularly retarded eggplant would make history, too, but surely there were more legitimate reasons for voting for George W. Bush (POW! ZAP! I've still got it, baby!).

But this video does what no ad or stump speech or vapid, smirking, sarcastic punchline of the McCain campaign's has been able to accomplish [...] It puts a human face, and real Hope, on this long march of ours. It makes it personal, and gives us all a sense of pride and purpose in what we're doing. While their side tears Barack Obama down, and calls names and scrambles for any last shred of humanity in the chum buckets of their anger and vitriol and fear, our side talks about what this man, and his candidacy, mean to us. As people. As Democrats. As Americans.

Their side can roll their eyes and mock these personal stories for their treacle and their tears, but we know it's precisely these moments of humanity that, when taken in aggregate and amplified across this aching country, are the reason we're here, and the reason we'll win.

sarah palin is a SOCIALIST!

2008-10-29T18:32:00.003-04:00

man, when Olbermann is firing on all cylinders, he just rocks ...

i wish i could make my inlaws watch this.

then there's this: more much ado

2008-10-28T18:39:00.009-04:00

McCain Campaign Falsely Claims Obama Described Court's Failure to Redistribute Wealth As "Tragedy"
By Greg Sargent - October 27, 2008, 12:16PM

The McCain campaign's efforts to portray Barack Obama as a closet socialist took a turn into the burlesque today, with the McCain camp falsely claiming that in a seven year old interview, Obama said that it was a "tragedy" that the Supreme Court hadn't redistributed wealth away from hard-working Americans.

The Obama interview in question is being pushed relentlessly today by the wingnuts, who are circulating this audio of it.

The McCain campaign just blasted out a quote from senior economics adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin hammering Obama. In the interview, Holtz-Eakin claimed, "Obama expressed his regret that the Supreme Court hadn't been more 'radical' and described as a 'tragedy' the Court's refusal to take up 'the issues of redistribution of wealth.'"

Holtz-Eakin asserted that this proves that Obama wants to take money "away from people who work for it" and give it to people "Obama believes deserves it." Apparently McCain himself is going to pick up this cudgel on the trail today, too.

But as usual, this latest attack rests on a complete falsehood.

If you look at Obama's full quote -- which you can read right here -- it's very clear that Obama was not directly "regretting" the failure of the court to be "radical." Rather, he was saying that the court's failure to take up redistributive issues proved that it wasn't as "radical" as some have claimed. The "radical" line was clearly a dispassionate claim about the reality of history.

What's more, take a look at the operative part of Obama's quote that includes the "tragedy" line:

One of the I think the tragedies of the Civil Rights movement was because the Civil Rights movement became so court focused I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change and in some ways we still suffer from that.

READ ON

oh, for cryin' out loud (as my mother used to say)

2008-10-28T18:17:00.009-04:00

Well, the nutwings are at it again. Of course, that's no surprise, but lord, this is getting exhausting. So, in an interview from 2001 Obama said the Consititution is flawed (something any first year law student could tell you ... or any first year high school student) and the conspiracy theorists are slobbering over themselves. Claiming this is proof of Obama's radical, ultra-left wing leanings. So, when did they start holding the Constitution with the same regard they hold the Bible? Certainly not during the Bush Administration.

Anyway, I found this today. Clearly he's irritated (and who can blame him), but spot-on:

The Majority of Blog Pundits (and their readers) are Idiots
The American Pundit embedded a YouTube video of Obama saying the Consititution is flawed. OK, even the Founders believed that, but they ratified it anyway. Benjamin Franklin is on the record as having said the document isn’t perfect but it’ll do. I guess it would have had to, wouldn’t it?

Blog pundits are notorious for making much ado about nothing. We’ve heard that Obama is a Muslim, that he “pals around” with terrorists, and that he is a socialist - none of which are true. They are only inferences derived at from half-truths, fear, and irrational thought processes. In the spirit of bi-partisanship, we’ve heard similar urban legends about Sarah Palin.

I’ve got no problem with people choosing the candidate they feel best represents their values. Everyone must support someone and if an individual does the research then makes a decision based on solid, provable evidence, they’ve done what is required of a dutiful citizen. But most of what we hear coming from talk radio and the blog pundits is ludicrous and damaging. There is no critical thought that goes into most of it and my fear is that the majority of Americans will cast a vote on election day based on one of the urban myths they read in an e-mail without investigating whether or not there is any truth to it. That certainly is not what the Founders had in mind.

Watch the video yourself and then ask yourself, “What’s the big deal?” Read and view on ...

happy obamaween!

2008-10-28T10:10:00.002-04:00

Here to download election stencils/designs

feeding frenzy

2008-10-28T09:29:00.003-04:00

Well now. Do they really want to do this? For her?

[...] the GOP is set splinter into a trio of factions: the Palin-philes, the Romney remainders, and those excommunicated from the movement for daring to make a lick of sense at one point.

This is, indeed, a "bloodbath," and for what? A distinctly semi-pro Alaskan governor who's more or less made the charisma-free Tim Pawlenty look like What Could Have Been? Additionally, this sort of line-in-the-sand drawing avoids another obvious truth -- come 2012, someone besides Palin is going to vie for the GOP nomination. Someone like, say, Mitt Romney, who famously earned the backing of the National Review, which called him a "full-spectrum conservative." What happens to Romney, now that he's on the wrong side of the Palin line?

[...] Fitting isn't it, that a McCain loss might precipitate his party coming to resemble the factionalism of the Iraqi misadventure they all cooked up in the first place. Maybe Joe Biden can help them reach some sort of triple-partition solution!

Read on for complete commentary.

the lengthy latest list: conservatives & republicans who endorse obama

2008-10-27T14:28:00.007-04:00

From Republican Switchers: WHY CONSERVATIVES SUPPORT BARACK OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT --- and why you, and the conservatives you love, should vote for Obama, too

Public Servants:
Colin Powell, Secretary of State under Bush 43
Scott McClellan, Former Press Secretary to President George W. Bush
Douglas Kmiec, Head of the Office of Legal Counsel under Reagan & Bush 41
Charles Fried, Solicitor General of the United States under Reagan
Jackson M. Andrews, Republican Counsel to the U.S. Senate
Susan Eisenhower, Granddaughter of President Eisenhower & President of the Eisenhower Group
Francis Fukuyama, Advisor to President Reagan
Rita Hauser, Former White House intelligence advisor under George W. Bush
Larry Hunter, Former President Reagan Policy Advisor
Bill Ruckelshaus, served in the Nixon and Reagan administrations
Ken Adelman, served in the Ford administration
Lilibet Hagel, Wife of Republican Senator Chuck Hagel

Elected Officials:
Jim Leach, Former Congressman from Iowa
Lincoln Chafee, Former United States Senator from Rhode Island
William Weld, Former Governor of Massachusetts
Arne Carlson, Former Governor of Minnesota
Wayne Gilchrest, Congressman from Maryland
Richard Riordan, Former Mayor of Los Angeles
Lowell Weicker, Former Governor and Senator from Connecticut
Jim Whitaker, Fairbanks, Alaska Mayor
Linwood Holton, Former Governor of Virginia

Columnists and Academics:
Jeffrey Hart, National Review Senior Editor
Andrew Bacevich, Professor of International Relations at Boston University
David Friedman, Economist and son of Milton and Rose Friedman
Christopher Buckley, Son of National Review (NR) founder William F. Buckley & former NR columnist
Andrew Sullivan, Columnist for the Atlantic Monthly
Wick Alison, Former publisher of the National Review
Michael Smerconish, Columnist for the Philadelphia Enquirer
CC Goldwater, Granddaughter of Barry Goldwater

The Latest Endorsements:
38 NEWSPAPERS SWITCH, ENDORSING OBAMA AFTER ENDORSING BUSH IN '04!
From Editor & Publisher: 160 newspapers have endorsed Obama and only 59 have endorsed McCain.

The 160 endorsements include 38 newspapers, such as the conservative Chicago Tribune, which switched from endorsing a Republican in the last presidential election to Barack Obama in this election. (Photo: Shane Vigil)

Think about it--why are so many conservatives and newspapers switching? They know Obama is the best candidate for a better country and a better world!

**i'd also semi-add Peggy Noonan, David Brooks and half-way acknowledge George Will ... though they haven't endorsed Obama, they've, on occasion walked to the edge.

quote of the day

2008-10-25T18:28:00.001-04:00

You can't reason someone out of something they weren't reasoned into. - Johnathan Swift

snl happiness ...

2008-10-24T08:51:00.005-04:00

conservatives for change

2008-10-23T13:55:00.004-04:00

fabulous.

more at http://www.conservativesforchange.com/

dear red states,

2008-10-23T13:31:00.006-04:00

*email text received today. I love it!

Dear Red States,

We've decided we're leaving. We intend to form our own country, and we're taking the other Blue States with us. In case you aren't aware, that includes California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and all the Northeast. We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation, and especially to the people of the new country of New California.

To sum up briefly: You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states. We get stem cell research and the best beaches. We get the Statue of Liberty. You get Dollywood. We get Intel and Microsoft. You get WorldCom. We get Harvard. You get Ole' Miss. We get 85 percent of America's venture capital and entrepreneurs. You get Alabama. We get two-thirds of the tax revenue, you get to make the red states pay their fair share.

Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than the Christian Coalition's, we get a bunch of happy families. You get a bunch of single moms. Please be aware that Nuevo California will be pro-choice and anti-war, and we're going to want all our citizens back from Iraq at once. If you need people to fight, ask your evangelicals. They have kids they're apparently willing to send to their deaths for no purpose, and they don't care if you don't show pictures of their children's caskets coming home. We do wish you success in Iraq, and hope that the WMDs turn up, but we're not willing to spend our resources in Bush's Quagmire.

With the Blue States in hand, we will have firm control of 80 percent of the country's fresh water, more than 90 percent of the pineapple and lettuce, 92 percent of the nation's fresh fruit, 95 percent of America's quality wines, 90 percent of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the U.S. low-sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools plus Stanford, Cal Tech and MIT. With the Red States, on the other hand, you will have to cope with 88 percent of all obese Americans (and their projected health care costs), 92 percent of all U.S. mosquitoes, nearly 100 percent of the tornadoes, 90 percent of the hurricanes, 99 percent of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100 percent of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Jones University, Clemson and the University of Georgia. We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.

Additionally, 38 percent of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62 percent believe life is sacred unless we're discussing the war, the death penalty or gun laws, 44 percent say that evolution is only a theory, 53 percent that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61 percent of you crazy bastards believe you are people with higher morals then we lefties.

Finally, we're taking the good pot, too. You can have that dirt weed they grow in Mexico.

hell ya!

2008-10-19T21:55:00.004-04:00

there. he said it all. the only thing i might've added would be a little bit of name calling glued to a long string of four letter words. but that's why he's the public servant and i'm not. grace and politeness are not characteristics i'm able to possess when pissed off.

the simplest explanation

2008-10-18T00:32:00.035-04:00

Today on Hardball, crazy Uncle Pat [Pat Buchanan] was at it again. Blathering on about that unforgivable crime of Obama's--having associated professionally w/ Bill Ayers. Actually, I appreciate having him on MSNBC so I don't have to listen to the Limbaugh-Coulter-Hannity-Beck-O'Reilly-Malkin, socialist-conspiracy theorists who spew their no-longer-fringe paranoia. I get just enough right-wing ranting to stay informed by watching Pat's Cliff's Notes.

But, I'm flabbergasted [not really] that he doesn't hold the same degree of outrage regarding Palin, her abuse of power charge--you know, the one she keeps lying about--her close association w/ the Alaskan Independence Party, McCain's friendship w/ G. Gordon Liddy, Singlaub and the US Council for World Freedom. But the Right is quite deft at dismissing w/contortionist skill those associations.

It's curious the Left has no sustained interest in that game. I like to think it's because we have more moral grounding, but admittedly, I'm partial. It's probably just that we know we're not gonna sway any nutwings with that argument. They couldn't care less about just equivalencies.

But, this obsessive, tireless Ayers thing is making me pace, throw kitchen utensils and mutter furiously to myself. In other words, I'm in a constant state of pissed-off-ness--and becoming miserable to myself.

This thing keeps getting repeated and repeated--incorrectly. So, I'm pleading, dear reader [no matter how few of you there are] to pass along a message to all your hater friends and relatives.

For crazy Uncle Pat and followers, the Ayers argument--distilled from Faux News, Palin multitudes and right wing talk-radio--hinges on two issues: (1) that Ayers hasn't said he was "sorry" and (2) Obama's career was "launched" in unrepentant Ayers' living room.

To the issue of repentance ... from Wikipedia

Statements made in 2001
Chicago Magazine reported that "just before the September 11th attacks," Richard Elrod, a city lawyer injured in the Weathermen's Chicago "Days of Rage," received an apology from Ayers and Dohrn for their part in the violence. "[T]hey were remorseful," Elrod says. "They said, 'We're sorry that things turned out this way.'"[19]

Much of the controversy about Ayers during the decade since 2000 stems from an interview he gave to The New York Times on the occasion of the memoir's publication.[20] The reporter quoted him as saying "I don't regret setting bombs" and "I feel we didn't do enough", and, when asked if he would "do it all again," as saying "I don't want to discount the possibility."[15] Ayers has not denied the quotes, but he protested the interviewer's characterizations in a Letter to the Editor published September 15, 2001: "This is not a question of being misunderstood or 'taken out of context', but of deliberate distortion."[21]

In the ensuing years, Ayers has repeatedly avowed that when he said he had "no regrets" and that "we didn't do enough" he was speaking only in reference to his efforts to stop the United States from waging the Vietnam War, efforts which he has described as ". . . inadequate [as] the war dragged on for a decade."[22] Ayers has maintained that the two statements were not intended to imply a wish they had set more bombs.[22][23]

The interviewer also quoted some of Ayers' own criticism of Weatherman in the foreword to the memoir, whereby Ayers reacts to having watched Emile de Antonio's 1976 documentary film about Weatherman, Underground: "[Ayers] was 'embarrassed by the arrogance, the solipsism, the absolute certainty that we and we alone knew the way. The rigidity and the narcissism.' "[15] "We weren't terrorists," Ayers told an interviewer for the Chicago Tribune in 2001. "The reason we weren't terrorists is because we did not commit random acts of terror against people. Terrorism was what was being practiced in the countryside of Vietnam by the United States."[3]

In a letter to the editor in the Chicago Tribune, Ayers wrote, "I condemn all forms of terrorism — individual, group and official". He also condemned the September 11 terrorist attacks in that letter. "Today we are witnessing crimes against humanity on our own shores on an unthinkable scale, and I fear that we may soon see more innocent people in other parts of the world dying in response."[24]

Views on his past expressed since 2001
Ayers was asked in a January 2004 interview, "How do you feel about what you did? Would you do it again under similar circumstances?" He replied:[25] "I've thought about this a lot. Being almost 60, it's impossible to not have lots and lots of regrets about lots and lots of things, but the question of did we do something that was horrendous, awful? ... I don't think so. I think what we did was to respond to a situation that was unconscionable."

On September 9, 2008, journalist Jake Tapper reported on the comic strip in Bill Ayers's blog explaining the soundbite: "The one thing I don't regret is opposing the war in Vietnam with every ounce of my being.... When I say, 'We didn't do enough,' a lot of people rush to think, 'That must mean, "We didn't bomb enough shit."' But that's not the point at all. It's not a tactical statement, it's an obvious political and ethical statement. In this context, 'we' means 'everyone.'"[26][27]

Sounds like repentance to me, how 'bout you?

To the second issue of "launching" Obama's career in Ayers' living room [which, of course means they must be blood-brothers.] Nutwings drool and shoot their load over the idea this meeting was some sort of dark, plotting social-radical cabal. I mean, *gasp* what could they have said to one another? Oh, I know!

Ayers: "Hey Barack! I just had the most brilliant idea! Why don't we come up with a plot to turn this immoral, redneck country we all hate into an elitist, socialist nation ... or we'll start blowing things up! Kinda like I used to!"

Ayers, again: "Hey, I know [to nameless other socialists in attendance], let's get Obama to run for president and seize the reins of power! He'll do it! He'll do anything! ...we command him!"

Obviously, I'm being glib, but the point is this: first, Obama's career was launched plenty well on his own, thank you. He'd already been president of the Harvard Law Review [where he'd developed coalitions b/w conservatives and liberals] and a professor at the University of Chicago.

Second, this was a "coffee," or rather "meet the candidate" event where Ayers introduced Obama to other politicos in his bid for the Illinois State Senate. Who was more connected and established with conservatives AND liberals on the scene in Chicago at that time? Ayers. This is what's called "networking," folks. We've all had to suffer those kinds of meetings before, right?

Finally, that coffee took place in 1995 ... long before 9/11 after which the country developed a rabid hyper-vigilance against anyone quietly working for social and educational justice, who had the word "terrorist" attached to his distant past yet who appeared "rehabilitated." I'm sure, at the time, it was easier to look beyond such things--if Obama even knew then--as it may have been for most of us. We homo-sapiens tend to evaluate people by what/whom we think we see standing before us in the immediate moment. Including, I'm only guessing, the very political Pat Buchanan--especially if that former, rehabilitated terrorist standing before him was on the far right instead of the left. Who was it that said the simplest explanation is usually closest to the truth?

And, oh ya, how about this--wasn't there a famous dude from oh, say, 2,000 years ago who embraced anyone--thieves, prostitutes, murderers, anyone--as long as they were repentent, wanting to better themselves and build a more humane, compassionate society? How is it the Christian right, time and time again overlooks the most important lessons of Christianity.

it gets more insidious by the second

2008-10-18T00:17:00.003-04:00

If I ever had a modicum of doubt that McCain has turned into Bush ... well ... I've lost it.

BUT ...

Really, folks. Let's be sure to put all traces of this current fascist administration behind us on Nov. 4th.

the final debate and small business taxes

2008-10-16T10:43:00.011-04:00

email text from Mike Bullis--a primo friend, former small business owner and past Republican candidate for the Oregeon state congress--who frankly has a better handle on the economy than almost anyone else I know:

I think McCain did better in this final debate than the other two debates at several things.

He interpreted Obama's answers to the audience.
He clearly differentiated himself from Bush.
He showed emotion that felt a bit more authentic.

Those were the broad themes. The problem is that he's had the Republican nomination locked up since April and this is likely too little to late. He just came up with the "change" theme in September. What the hell was he doing for the five months prior to that? He talks the right words but Obama actually has plans to describe what he's going to do and has had them for over a year.

McCain made the argument for not redistributing wealth. This country is, like all taxing economies, about redistributing wealth. When we cut taxes for people with wealth in 2001 we redistributed wealth in effect. We said that people with money could keep theirs and the revenue would be made up by more jobs and a better economy. What actually happened is that people who had money did invest some of it but they also kept lots and when all was said and done, we ran up an additional five trillion dollars in debt because the economy didn't grow enough to make up for those reduced taxes.

It's sort of like what Willy Sutton said about why he robbed banks. He said it was because that was where the money was. This country has experimented with lowering taxes on high income people for thirty years and what has happened is that the middle income folks are losing purchasing power. They're the ones who buy the goods and if they're buying less the economy is going to tank. We tried to borrow our way out of it as families, as businesses, Etc. That too is coming home to roost.

Every economy down through history has struggled about what to do with the reality that money breeds money. Or, in the vernacular, "The rich get richer." I think what we're in now is a rebalancing act but doubt that we're somehow going to hurt the engine of job creation for small business. The truth is, for those of us who have been in small business, we pay very few taxes. This country is a wonderful place for small businesses and will continue to be. As far as the Joe Plumber thing was concerned tonight, I saw that clip. He could write off his investment in the plumbing business he wants to buy and so really, he doesn't know much about taxes and needs a better accountant/tax adviser.

I was pleased to see McCain be more like the old McCain, but, I think it's to little too late and frankly, so much of it has been contrived in the last two months, it doesn't feel real to me. Yes, McCain is real, but, he lost his way in this campaign some time ago and hasn't found his way back at a personal level. Tonight he came closer than any other time but....Not enough.

how presidential

2008-10-16T08:37:00.009-04:00

after the debate ... do goofy images of mccain looking like a barfing salamander matter?

omg! this is one of the most fabulous things i've seen in a billion years!

2008-10-15T20:43:00.001-04:00

quote of the day

2008-10-14T00:15:00.004-04:00

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed – and thus clamorous to be led to safety – by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

— H.L. Mencken

hmmm. sound like a campaign we all know?????

ethics for thought ...

2008-10-13T09:14:00.003-04:00

So, for the first time in American history, we have a political team running for the highest office in the land, who've both been cited for ethics violations. Keating Five. Troopergate.

Genius, repugs.

fr. pan's labyrinth

2008-10-12T00:40:00.009-04:00

"Many, many years ago in a sad, faraway land, there was an enormous mountain made of rough, black stone. At sunset, on top of that mountain, a magic rose blossomed every night that made whomever pluck it immortal. But no one dared go near it ... Men talked amongst themselves about their fear of death, and pain, but never about the promise [...] And every day, the rose wilted, unable to bequeath its gift to anyone... forgotten and lost at the top of that cold, dark mountain ... "

***

Let's hope more of us are smarter than those sad folks in that faraway land who--like Repugs--only see fear, hate and death around them. Vote on election day.

what the troopergate report really says

2008-10-11T21:04:00.003-04:00

By Nathan Thornburgh
TIME

Friday's report from special investigator Stephen Branchflower to Alaska's Legislative Council answered some basic questions about the political and personal bog known as Troopergate.

Did Governor Sarah Palin abuse the power of her office in trying to get her former brother-in-law, State Trooper Mike Wooten, fired? Yes.

Was the refusal to fire Mike Wooten the reason Palin fired Commissioner of Public Safety Walt Monegan? Not exclusively, and it was within her rights as the states' chief executive to fire him for just about any reason, even without cause.

Those answers were expected, given that most of the best pieces of evidence have been part of the public record for months. The result is not a mortal wound to Palin, nor does it put her at much risk of being forced to leave the ticket her presence succeeded in energizing.

But the Branchflower report still makes for good reading, if only because it convincingly answers a question nobody had even thought to ask: Is the Palin administration shockingly amateurish? Yes, it is. Disturbingly so.

The 263 pages of the report show a co-ordinated application of pressure on Monegan so transparent and ham-handed that it was almost certain to end in public embarrassment for the governor. The only surprise is that Troopergate is national news, not just a sorry piece of political gristle to be chewed on by Alaska politicos over steaks at Anchorage's Club Paris.

A harsh verdict? Consider the report's findings. Not only did people at almost every level of the Palin administration engage in repeated inappropriate contact with Walt Monegan and other high-ranking officials at the Department of Public Safety, but Monegan and his peers constantly warned these Palin disciples that the contact was inappropriate and probably unlawful. Still, the emails and calls continued — in at least one instance on recorded state trooper phone lines.

more [and you betchya you should read the "more"]

seems you've got a pink kink in your think

2008-10-10T19:37:00.002-04:00

guess who's the jackolope and guess who the fur-robbers are. admittedly, i see through a certain lense these days.

alaskan independence party: the last refuge of a scoundrel

2008-10-09T18:34:00.004-04:00

from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Oct 9, 2008

If McCarthy-era guilt-by-association is once again a valid political consideration, Palin, it would seem, has more to lose than Obama. Palin, it could be argued, following her own logic, thinks so little of America's perfection that she continues to "pal around" with a man--her husband, actually--who only recently terminated his seven-year membership in the Alaskan Independence Party. Putting plunder above patriotism, the members of this treasonous cabal aim to break our country into pieces and walk away with Alaska's rich federal oil fields and one-fifth of America's land base--an area three-fourths the size of the Civil War Confederacy.

AIP's charter commits the party "to the ultimate independence of Alaska," from the United States which it refers to as "the colonial bureaucracy in Washington." It proclaims Alaska's 1959 induction as a state "as illegal and in violation of the United Nations charter and international law."

AIP's creation was inspired by the rabidly violent anti-Americanism of its founding father Joe Vogler, "I'm an Alaskan, not an American," reads a favorite Vogler quote on AIP's current website, "I've got no use for America or her damned institutions." According to Vogler AIP's central purpose was to drive Alaska's secession from the United States. Alaska, says current Chairwoman Lynette Clark, "should be an independent nation."

Vogler was murdered in 1993 during an illegal sale of plastic explosives that went bad. The prior year, he had renounced his allegiance to the United States explaining that, "The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government." He cursed the stars and stripes, promising, "I won't be buried under their damned flag...when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home." Palin has never denounced Vogler or his detestable anti-Americanism.

Palin's husband Todd remained an AIP party member from 1995 to 2002. Sarah can be described in McCarthy-era palaver as a "fellow traveler." While retaining her Republican registration, she attended the AIP's 1994 convention where the party called for a draft constitution to secede from the United States and create an independent nation of Alaska. The McCain Campaign has reluctantly acknowledged that she also attended AIP's 2000 Convention. She apparently found the experience so inspiring that she agreed to give a keynote address at the AIP's 2006 convention and she recorded a video greeting for this year's 2008 convention. In other words, this is not something that happened when she was eight!

read full post here

something that made me laugh ... even midst these tense, somber times

2008-10-09T10:33:00.007-04:00

at least, it struck me at the moment I received it. Thank you, Martin, for sending ...

Liquid Assets

If you purchased $1,000 of Delta Airlines stock 1 year ago, you would have $49.00 today.
If you purchased $1,000 of AIG stock one year ago, you would have $33.00 today.
If you purchased $1,000 of Lehman Brothers stock 1 year ago, you would have $0.00 today.

But, if you purchased $1,000 worth of beer 1 year ago, drank all the beer, returned the aluminum cans for a recycling refund, you would have $214.00.

Based on the above, the best current investment plan is to drink heavily & recycle. It is called the 401-Keg.

A recent study found that the average American walks about 900 miles a year. Another study found that Americans drink, on average, 22 gallons of alcohol a year. That means that, on average, Americans get about 41 miles to the gallon!

Makes you proud to be an American!

"a fatal cancer to the republican party .."

2008-10-09T08:25:00.007-04:00

fr. well-known "smarty-pants" conservative, David Brooks ... who used to work for Bill Buckley at the National Review ... so it's not like he can be construed by nutwings as some kind of covert socialist. Not that any of them know who he is cause he works for that "lefty rag," the New York Times.

But Brooks needs to pop his head into the airspace at those low information-voter/Palin rallies. Then again, he's Jewish so someone would have his head ... probably yelling "sit-down, boy, or we'll string you up by the closest stars and stripes flagpole." "My friends," such is the ugly, devolved state of our other "friends" "patriotism."

Nothing you don't already know.

afternoon funny ... a little late, but fun nonetheless

2008-10-08T11:18:00.000-04:00

A European Perspective on the Election

2008-10-05T18:17:00.002-04:00

The Guardian -- UK
Jonathan Freedland

If Sarah Palin defies the conventional wisdom that says elections are determined by the top of the ticket, and somehow wins this for McCain, what will be the reaction? Yes, blue-state America will go into mourning once again, feeling estranged in its own country. A generation of young Americans -- who back Obama in big numbers – will turn cynical, concluding that politics doesn't work after all. And, most depressing, many African-Americans will decide that if even Barack Obama -- with all his conspicuous gifts -- could not win, then no black man can ever be elected president.

But what of the rest of the world? This is the reaction I fear most. For Obama has stirred an excitement around the globe unmatched by any American politician in living memory. Polling in Germany, France , Britain and Russia shows that Obama would win by whopping majorities, with the pattern repeated in Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Latin America . If November 4 were a global ballot, Obama would win it handsomely. If the free world could choose its leader, it would be Barack Obama. The crowd of 200,000 that rallied to hear him in Berlin in July did so not only because of his charisma, but also because they know he, like the majority of the world's population, opposed the Iraq war.. McCain supported it, peddling the lie that Saddam was linked to 9/11. Non-Americans sense that Obama will not ride roughshod over the international system but will treat alliances and global institutions seriously: McCain wants to bypass the United Nations in favour of a US-friendly League of Democracies. McCain might talk a good game on climate change, but a repeated floor chant at the Republican convention was 'Drill, baby, drill!', as if the solution to global warming were not a radical rethink of the US's entire energy system but more offshore oil rigs.

If Americans choose McCain, they will be turning their back on the rest of the world, choosing to show us four more years of the Bush-Cheney middle finger. And I predict a deeply unpleasant shift. Until now, anti-Americanism has been exaggerated and much misunderstood: outside a leftist hardcore, it has mostly been anti-Bushism, opposition to this specific administration. But if McCain wins in November, that might well change. Suddenly Europeans and others will conclude that their dispute is with not only one ruling clique, but Americans themselves. For it will have been the American people, not the politicians, who will have passed up a once-in-a-generation chance for a fresh start -- a fresh start the world is yearning for. And the manner of that decision will matter, too. If it is deemed to have been about race -- that Obama was rejected because of his colour -- the world's verdict will be harsh. In that circumstance, Slate's Jacob Weisberg wrote recently, international opinion would conclude that 'the United States had its day, but in the end couldn't put its own self-interest ahead of its crazy irrationality over race.'

Even if it's not ethnic prejudice, but some other aspect of the culture wars, that proves decisive, the point still holds. For America to make a decision as grave as this one -- while the planet boils and with the US fighting two wars -- on the trivial basis that a hockey mom is likable and seems down to earth, would be to convey a lack of seriousness, a fleeing from reality, that does indeed suggest a nation in, to quote Weisberg, 'historical decline.' Let's not forget, McCain's campaign manager boasts that this election is 'not about the issues.'

Of course I know that even to mention Obama's support around the world is to hurt him. Incredibly, that large Berlin crowd damaged Obama at home, branding him the 'candidate of Europe ' and making him seem less of a patriotic American. But what does that say about today's America , that the world's esteem is now unwanted? If Americans reject Obama, they will be sending the clearest possible message to the rest of us -- and, make no mistake, we shall hear it.'

no fear of letting anger fly

2008-10-04T01:45:00.004-04:00

there's a reason i love erica jong:

you betcha she's doggone cute

Sarah Palin is a character out of Lewis Carroll. No one can translate that smile. She's the Cheshire Cat.

She says nothing and she grins triumphantly. Her smile lingers when the words have gone.

Nothing she says makes sense but the eyelashes never stop batting. Catch phrases and buzz words bounce in the air above her head. She adores the word "also." Also, she adores herself. She is so doggone cute she turns herself on.

She is the woman politician advertisers have been waiting for -- all style and no substance. Full of confidence and full of beans, the walk of feminism without the talk. Nobody can object because there's nothing to object to. Hillary Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro had ideas you could disagree with. But Sarah Palin is perky and inscrutable at once, you betcha. She talks. We listen but we have no idea what's been said.She is the female candidate of GOP dreams. She talks, she smiles, she flirts, she never opposes. She makes mistakes but nobody seems to care. We watch her lips go up, go down, go sideways. We watch her eyes glisten behind rimless glasses. The beauty pageant promoters removed her soul so it wouldn't get in the way. How can we dismiss her or debate her? She's a bubble. She's fizz.

She is the perfection of beauty pageant womanhood. All image, no ideas. Camera-ready for hair and lipstick commercials. Her patriotism is of the Fourth of July variety. Let's eat a heck of a lot of hot dogs, pun intended.

She's pure as a sex-phone operator. You can fantasize but not touch. The bill comes later.

She reminds me of Paris Hilton -- who once tried to trademark the expression "That's hot." Will Palin trademark "You betcha"? Or "doggone"? Or "team of mavericks"? I wouldn't put it past her. Whatever happens with the "election" the endorsements will come flooding in. Maybelline will want her. And Kellogg's. And Wal-Mart. Some publisher must already have an offer on the table.

Sarah Palin has already won the Olympics of reality TV. She'll do just fine. As for the rest of us -- I'm not so sure.

"we're the ones that have the babe on the ticket"

2008-10-04T00:49:00.005-04:00

oh, puke. and, of course, ridiculous. but kinda proves my earlier point [the debate: restore my faith].

*wtf?*

does the mccain camp think rich lowry is sexist?

wow! glad to hear it!

2008-10-03T08:50:00.001-04:00

lets see how this plays out: Debate poll says Biden won, Palin beat expectations

ok, a good elitist laugh makes me feel better

2008-10-03T00:48:00.003-04:00

Sarah Palin is No Brad Pitt
Posted by JumpyPants

Sarah Palin is no Brad Pitt. Brad Pitt played Achilles in the movie Troy. Sarah Palin doesn't know who Achilles was, nor what the significance of his heel is.

The debate confirmed a lot of things tonight, many of them inspiring things, many of them scary things, but one thing that is absolutely certain: Sarah Palin doesn't know what "Achilles heel" means.

My 9-year old, who has seen Troy (we're a liberal house, after all), knows who Achilles was and what his heel is all about.

But Sarah Palin doesn't know. You'd think at one of the five colleges she attended en route to her BA, she would've learned about this guy. But then again, she was pretty clear that she doesn't like looking back to the past.

the debate: resurrect my faith, please ... anyone?

2008-10-02T22:54:00.040-04:00

not to be too elitist--actually, i prefer it to being dumb. but suddenly i have the urge to re-read MacBeth. especially the parts about the lady.

ok ...

she didn't stammer
gave a few folksy "joe-sixpack" gal winks
said she was glad to hear joe was a friend to israel [oh ya, she's such a friend to those "misguided" jews*]
was such a fan of women's rights [r u kidding????????????]
gave a shout out and extra credit to third graders
said the word "tolerant"

*i was being ironic there, folks

and has a firm butt.

oh ... and of course went on and on about those evil taxes ... even when she wasn't asked.

i'm afraid folks, that may be enough to move the needle on bubba voters who didn't notice there were questions she didn't answer ... and who were looking for a reason--any reason--not to vote for obama.

and why, for god's sake, did joe not say ... those rich people you don't want to pay for things. they've been getting a free pass for eight freakin' years. time for some comeuppance to the piper. have we seen anything substantial in the way of job creation under your daddy bush's gameplan? NO, goddamnit ... we've lost 600,000 jobs in this country just this last year! [don't quote me on that statistic, but it's something like that, give or take a zero]. what makes you think that grandaddy mccain's repeat plan will suddenly succeed? isn't that the definition of insanity?

so, girlfriend, you're just gonna bet on a wing and a prayer this notion is gonna miraculously create jobs. [oh ya, i forgot. she believes prayer can actually do those things]. and then you're gonna make YOUR kids pay later--with interest--for YOUR irresponsibility! that for sure ain't what my pappa taught me was right. someone, please tell me why that never get's mentioned?!

and how about this whole "gov't has to be more efficient" mantra. weeeeeeeeelll, let's start with planning to get out of a misbegotten war [aka "a task from god"] in Iraq. Responsibly, you beeyotch. No one's talking about waving a white flag of surrender, you ... achem. but plan we must. so why is the obama camp only using a teensy weensy itsy bitsy brush to fill in the big fat line b/w iraq and our current stinker of an economy? does borrowing from china to pay for war reflect that folksy fiscal responsibility i've heard rumor conservative's love?

and what did she prove? she knows how to regurgitate with a little style. i don't know. maybe i've been brainwashed by the media ... that all she needed to do was speak in complete sentences to "win." don't get me wrong. joe was statesmanly, knowlegable, empathic ... and even sweet.

but geezus ... i saw that glimmer in joe's eye. he TOTALLY wanted to doink her [and maybe smack her at the same time]! a woman [ya ... i am one] knows these things. i wanted to yell, "NO JOE! DON'T LOOK! just turn away, look straight ahead and clench that podium!"

i hate to say it, but i'm ye of little faith in the electorate's ability not to buy a barrel of horseshit just cause some cute, sassy chica with overblown ambition says it's gold.

and jeezus ... she held the baby.

i need more tequila shots.

p.s. joe's wife did NOT like her. did you see how pinched her face was when they were "chatting" at the end!

p.p.s. oh ya. and wolves. how come no one ever brings up those poor wolves?

biden debate prep

2008-10-01T23:52:00.001-04:00

this is one of the funniest freaking things i've seen in ... oh just click thru and have fun!

god, i love this guy!

2008-10-01T20:21:00.008-04:00

he chops, slices and ginsus so much better than me, myself and I.
plus, i found a new vocabulary word!

***

Sarah Six Pack Needs to put Country First by Stepping Down
by Bob Cesca

Huffington Post: Mike Judge, the creator of King of the Hill and Beavis & Butthead, once told a story on Letterman about how, one day, his Joe Six-pack next-door neighbor was inexplicably removing the back windshield from a 1978 Chevy Nova. So Judge walked out to the parking lot of his apartment building and asked the neighbor, "What are you doing?" And the neighbor gleefully answered, "Huh-huh-huh! Huh-huh! Now it's like a truck!"

In the freakishly hamfisted world of Sarah Palin, Mike Judge's neighbor is qualified to be vice president of the United States.

Yesterday, Palin said the following to talk radio wingnut Hugh Hewitt:

"Oh, I think they're just not used to someone coming in from the outside saying you know what? It's time that a normal Joe Six-pack American is finally represented in the position of vice presidency, and I think that that's kind of taken some people off guard, and they're out of sorts, and they're ticked off about it."

There's so much awfulness in this quote, it's difficult to know where to begin. Out of sorts? Ticked off? Oh you betcha.

For the last eight dark years we've had a president who continues to be framed as a Joe Six-pack type. And it's been a disaster. No-one, at this point, is disputing the toxicity of the Bush presidency.

read on ...

i know how you feel, girlfriend: i need an intervention, too

2008-09-30T21:27:00.006-04:00

Salon.com:

Dear Cary,

Sarah Palin is ruining my life! I rant about her; I can't stop thinking about her; I cannot stand to look at her; I'm possessed by her! ...

I have crossed every line I believed should never be crossed in public discourse -- I have criticized not only her policies and her record, but her hair, her personal style, her accent, her abilities as a mother, etc. I've also begun to suffer personally and professionally. I bore my friends with my constant tirades against her, and am constantly distracted from my work by my need to continually update myself on the latest criticism, and indeed, ridicule, of her. In my hatred for her, I have begun to hate myself.

I don't want this woman ruining my life before she even gets a chance to ruin our country. How do I stop? Is there a self-help group for this?

--A "Hater"*

*As Sarah Palin calls all those who disagree with her (New York Times, Sunday, Sept. 14, 2008)

more

hell ya! it's time for an elite presidency

2008-09-29T19:50:00.009-04:00

Lord, thank you Thom Hartman [author].

Can people start shouting this from rooftops, please? I mean, come on. At what point, exactly, did we decide it best to have the guy/girl most drunk or most irrational in college be our leaders? When did the virtues of the WWE become the litmus test?

Huffington Post:
"America loves its elites -- we love our sports stars, our movie stars, our rock stars and even our political stars.

John Kennedy was an elite. He came from an elite family, had an elite education, and he had the calm demeanor and the good fashion of a man who knew he was part of the intellectual and political elite. Americans didn't just love him they lionized him calling his administration Camelot -- the story of an elite king in an elite time.

If George W Bush has taught us one lesson, it's that the god-awful consequences of having the guy you want to have beer with running the most complex, powerful, and massive institution in the world, the US Government, is a terrible mistake.

John McCain graduated from the Naval Academy in June 1958; he was fifth from the bottom, 894th out of 899. He has no training at law. Sarah Palin attended 5 schools before getting a degree from North Idaho College that qualified her to be a TV sportscaster. North Idaho College takes pride in its "open-door" admissions policy. She also has no training at law.

Most of our great presidents have been trained in law from John Adams and Thomas Jefferson to Lincoln to FDR and Clinton. Bush and Cheney have no legal training and we were told how great the MBA presidency would be.

It's been a disaster.

Barack Obama got his BA from Columbia University in New York and his JD from Harvard. While at Harvard he was president of the prestigious Harvard Law Review. He was a professor of constitutional law at the University of Chicago. Joe Biden similarly has a JD degree.

It's time for an Elite presidency. It's time for the best and the brightest to once again lead this nation."

fascinating: newt and george will chat

2008-09-29T13:24:00.002-04:00

just what i've been sayin: sarah palin has the world view of a 7 yr old

2008-09-29T10:09:00.008-04:00

Huffington Post: op-ed, by bonnie fuller

mccain's healthcare plan: $3.6 trillion tax increase and a shove into the open market---w/out a paddle

2008-09-28T23:26:00.005-04:00

Huffington Post: "not every voter wants to hear about "insurance exchanges" and "risk pooling" at this stage of the game. But they should know that McCain's plan threatens a very large change in the treatment of heretofore untaxed benefits, a large decline in employer coverage, and a subsidy that starts out too low and grows at about a third the rate it needs to in order to keep up with the costs families face today."

more

palin answers

2008-09-28T21:54:00.002-04:00

btw, this is fun:

Help Sarah Palin w/ her interview questions: a satirical take on the hopelessly un-gifted politician

http://www.palinanwers.com/

what does $700 billion look like?

2008-09-27T22:54:00.006-04:00

Not being a finance guru, this whole bailout bickering has me bewildered. What the hell? Are the House Republicans onto something better for the American taxpayer?

Beats the hell outa me. I've read theories and proposals from Ron Paul and economists here, there and everywhere. Seems whatever I read last sounds reasonable.

But just what does $700 billion look like? [graphic from NPR]

the princess who became the toad

2008-09-27T12:59:00.007-04:00

you know, i think i had a moment where i felt a little sorry for her. not that sorry, though.

maybe something more like spitefully giddy, gleeful ... and grateful.

"palin should step down"

2008-09-26T20:04:00.002-04:00

(CNN) – Prominent conservative columnist Kathleen Parker, an early supporter of Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin, said Friday recent interviews have shown the Alaska governor is "out of her league" and should leave the GOP presidential ticket for the good of the party.

The criticism in Parker's Friday column is the latest in a recent string of negative assessments toward the McCain-Palin candidacy from prominent conservatives.

It was fun while it lasted," Parker writes. "Palin’s recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who is clearly out of her league."

Palin's interview with Couric drew criticism when the Alaska governor was unable to provide an example of when John McCain had pushed for more regulation of Wall Street during his Senate career. Palin also took heat for defending her foreign policy credentials by suggesting Russian leaders enter Alaska airspace when they come to America. Palin was also criticized last week for appearing not to know what the Bush Doctrine is during an interview with Charlie Gibson.

“If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself," Parker also writes. "If Palin were a man, we’d all be guffawing, just as we do every time Joe Biden tickles the back of his throat with his toes. But because she’s a woman — and the first ever on a Republican presidential ticket — we are reluctant to say what is painfully true."

Parker, who praised McCain's "keen judgment" for picking Palin earlier this month and wrote the Alaska governor is a "perfect storm of God, Mom and apple pie," now says Palin should step down from the ticket.

“Only Palin can save McCain, her party, and the country she loves," Parker writes. She can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first. Do it for your country."

Parker's comments follow those by prominent conservatives David Brooks, George Will, and David Frum who have all publicly questioned Palin's readiness to be vice president.

"Sarah Palin has many virtues," Brooks wrote in a recent column. "If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she'd be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness."

omg! i heart sarah ... um ... silverman

2008-09-26T11:58:00.011-04:00

only watch if you're hard to offend. when i say "hard" i mean "difficult" as in incredibly-hugely-massively!

remember, it's comedy [reference: if "borat" offended you, just say "no" and move on]

so wrong-so wrong-so wrong; yet genius ... sarah silverman has the biggest balls in the universe!

The Great Schlep from The Great Schlep on Vimeo.

i have no words ...

2008-09-25T23:06:00.013-04:00

ok, so i have a few ... we now know someone who needs to stay home and change diapers.

a little black comedy amidst our economic reality.

but really, girlfriend? you were surprised by the ... um ... mocking? really?

i mean, the amount of ego, hubris, ignorance and brazen opportunism this woman must possess to think she didn't need to blink before introducing herself on the world stage ... well, like i've said before, it must rival or surpass george shrub.

my long, breathless case against sarah palin

2008-09-14T17:57:00.009-04:00

The following are just a FEW of my objections to Sarah Palin as nominee for VP:

Knowing where to drill for oil and gas and being able to view Russia are not the baseline requirements for foreign policy competence and diplomacy.

But, a brain is.

Seriously ... is that all you got, girlfriend [obviously, not the brain part]? But hey, your "knowledge"--such that it is--might be good enough for a cushy cabinet post!

However, thinking one should never blink before going to war--with Russia, no less--IS a foreign policy ANTI-requisite. Come on lady, war is not one of your son's hockey games! In the words of Therese Heinz-Kerry [2004], perhaps this little lady may be a bit “fazed by complexity.”

And she seems to have more than a little of George Bush's hyper-charged certainty. I don’t know about you, but THAT doesn’t make me feel safer. And sure, let’s just add a few more conflicts to our federal deficit! Let's prop up China's economy even more [cause that's where we're borrowing to pay for the war in Iraq], watch the dollar burst into flames and really break the backs of our children and our children’s children! Or let's watch what's happened to 3 of 5 of our most venerable financial institutions happen to our gov't!!! I'm sure those white supremist groups holed up in Montana would say, Yayyy!

Achem ...

Sorry.

Kinda went off the rails there ... mixing flames, broken back metaphors w/ white supremists. I'm a little worked up over this stuff in case you couldn't tell.

Whew, so, moving on ...

Building a tax surplus in a state with low populations and large oil and gas revenues does not require the intellect of a brain surgeon. 85% of the state's budget comes from those oil/gas revenues. And what has the price of oil been doing lately? Right! Going up! In fact, Exxon-Mobil, BP et al. have been at record highs during the Palin administration, right? So guess what, Alaska's coffers have increased 66% from the prior administration. Did that have anything to do with Palin? No. Alaska's unique in that their budget has less to do w/ the state govt than the price of oil. But in Palin's meager defense, she did give taxpayers quite a chunk of change--$1200/every man woman and child in the state. You can do that when you're oil rich.

So maybe she has high approval ratings in her state, but how hard was that to accomplish in a mostly white, "conservative" [whatever that means anymore], evangelical population that got an extra $1200+ in their pockets? What's not to like?

But does anyone really think she has anything to contribute to reducing a $10 Trillion [now, possibly $11 trillion] debt in a $14 Trillion economy [or dealing w/ the worst Financial crisis in our economy since the Great Depression]? You think she can fix that by working to cut taxes? Of course, I’m speaking in the ghastly case of a Palin-McCain administration. Or worse, a Palin administration. Not only that, she has a history of secretiveness and NOT reaching across the aisle. But we'll get back to that later.

And trust me, if I can get this, that means it's not rocket science.

Views the war in Iraq as a “task” sent from God. And don’t give me that horse sh*t about Lincoln. I saw the video! She was not up on the pulpit giving a civics lesson on the Gettysberg address! Nor was she suddenly struck by the spirit of Lincoln.

Her handlers forsaw that question hurtling toward them like a meteor. She was clearly rehearsed, and only the far right could convince themselves that part of Gibson's interview was anything but ridiculous. Also, tells you what the campaign thinks about what the American people will swallow.

And note this comment from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.:

"Fascist writer Westbrook Pegler, an avowed racist who Sarah Palin approvingly quoted in her acceptance speech for the moral superiority of small town values, expressed his fervent hope about my father, Robert F. Kennedy, as he contemplated his own run for the presidency in 1965, that "some white patriot of the Southern tier will spatter his spoonful of brains in pubic premises before the snow flies."

It might be worth asking Governor Palin for a tally of the other favorites from her reading list."

Comes from a fire and brimstone brand of belief that, not infrequently, likes to flirt a little with anti-Semitism.

And I've been to Assembly of God churches on a half-dozen occasions. That was quite enough, thank you. I know very well what they're about. I had two women fall on the floor speaking in tongues right next to me.

Not only that, Palin is seen on video from this past June giving praise to Pastor Muthee. The guy who laid hands on her and "made" her "a way" to become Alaska's Governor. Ok. So, that's a little freaky for me, but it gets a lot freakier. Seems this pastor Muthee is a confirmed witch hunter [as in, actual witches] and was praised by other senior members of Palin's church for abolishing crime and closing down bars one day because he deposed said witches and demons during a revival in a Kenyan town. Could the non-existent crime rate that day have something to do with--oh, say--everyone in the village being at the revival/exorcism---just maybe?

[UPDATE 9/27: careful what you pray for ... seems "making a way" can mean becoming a nail in the wheels of the "No Talk Express."]

Oh, and apparently, she and her congregation think Alaska's gonna be the place to go at the end of days.

Just imagine if all this stuff had been connected to Obama. He'd never survive till morning.

So ... um ... what century are we in? Are you effing kidding me? And yup, I did it. I criticized her religion and her pastor. Her's makes his look like freakin' Troy Donohue.

Has disdain for ideas that don’t serve her unscientific, supernatural worldview; which is fine [not really, but that's just my opinion]. But she seems inclined to inject religious belief into her policy. [i.e. teaching intelligent design/creationism as a legitimate science, desire to ban books in her public library] so I'm doubtful about her capacity to honor the separation of church and state.

Who was it today that called her the equivalent of a flat earth society member?

And while we're on the topic of the book-banning, let's be clear. She did not fervently pursue such efforts.

But note:

"While the purported list [of banned books circulating the internet] is bogus, we do know that something happened with regards to Palin and at least a question about book banning.

Time reported last week, for example, that Palin asked the Wasilla librarian, Mary Ellen Baker, about the process for banning books. Baker was reportedly "aghast" at the question. Soon after taking office, Palin, according to a New York Times report, fired Baker, and news reports from the time indicate that Palin thought Baker hadn't done enough to give her "full support" to the mayor.

Palin reversed course on Baker's dismissal after a local outcry, and later said the discussions about banning books were "rhetorical." [CBS News]

Moving on. About that bridge. Personally, I don’t care that she was for that bridge before she was against it. I think it’s legitimate for a politician to change their mind about public policy if, once in office, they come across perspective-altering information [we don't think that's quite what happened here, tho.].

However, I DO think it’s LYING if you get up in front of the American people and claim you said “Thanks, but no thanks” when you actually said “THANKS for the cash! NO, we won’t build that bridge with money you've already given us. BUT THANKS, we'll keep the change [$223 M].” Seems to me she doesn’t have a problem misrepresenting herself. Interesting, given her supposed religious values.

Claimed that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac got too large off of the backs of taxpayers. Hmmmm. Well, now they are! So she didn’t even have a basic understanding of how two of the most important institutions in the American economy function.
Larry Persily
So I don’t even NEED to argue about right-wing trigger issues like Choice [which I concede, over which reasonable people might differ ], humanity's influence on climate change, gun control, drilling, shooting wolves from helicoptors/airplanes or Troopergate and the abuse of power to consider her a looming catastrophe for our country.
Oh, and did she really have the nerve to claim that Barack Obama was more concerned about terrorist’s rights than the safety of our country? Well, I guess she did. But, I thought ... hmmmm, Alaska's close to Russia ... maybe she thinks it's still the 80's [proof: big poofy hair] and that Alaska's part of the Soviet Union! Anyway, more fodder for my “complexity,” or lack thereof, argument.

So lets follow this a little more. First, off---dirty, dirty, dirty. Lie, lie and lie! Spin, spin and spin. Does she really think just because we state what a prisoner's been charged with they won’t be convicted at trial? Or that everyone rounded up in Guantanamo is guilty of whatever it is they’ve been blamed for? Forgive me, but the current administration has been caught in so many blunders and lies it’s hard to believe maybe they haven’t screwed a few things up here, too. Stating charges is really just a way of protecting anyone who’s innocent.

But great, just what we need. Another hardline, non-thinking, fascist member of the executive branch who has complete disdain for the Constitution. Either that, or they didn't get a copy in Alaska.

And what is this bit about being against earmarks? Let's see, oh for instance, here:

So I think it's safe to say, first she was for it before she was against it. So, the b.s. about how she’s such a "we'll do it ourselves" kinda gal ... well, it’s self-serving horse poopy.

She gave one good speech [over and over again on the stump] and truly, that’s it.
And what is she so afraid of that she can’t take random questioning from the media? That is, if she’s ready for prime time, now.
And my number one objection to Palin as the Republican VP pick—she could become President!

If there’s anyone who coalesces EVERY character flaw [maybe more] of the current administration, it’s absolutely Sarah Palin! And her running mate is a grumpy, 72-year old man in questionable health!

But don't fret, I don't only have bad things to say about her. After all she's a great cheerleader and does phenomenal introductions! The snarky Vanna White of politics, if you will. But being perky, cute and exciting on stage does not make one truthful or equipped to be a "grabber"--as my brother-in-law says--away from the most important position in the world.

And it's not lost on me that Obama's loudest detratctors would claim the same about him, but he's been vetted for the last 19 mos. and at least 1/2 the country is satisfied w/ his answers. Sarah, not so much.

Sorry, but I don’t think she deserves our faith in her judgment. And now I have absolutely no faith in John McCain choosing Country first before losing an election. Come on America, don’t we want to make a different choice this time? Don’t we want to choose intellect over bluster ... or idiocy? Don’t we want to hire a team who at least understands the concept of nuance? Important when considering getting out of Iraq properly and reigniting a wacked out economy? Don’t we want the good ol’ USA back in the black [ha! or at least no ballooning deficit--which McCain's plan would do] and leading the world economically, intellectually again? Don’t we? Because peeling away the layers and solving 8 years of screw ups and out-of-control SPENDING is gonna take at least a couple of minds capable of complex thought.

And that sure ain't the fading mind of McCain [who's clearly off kilter talking about the economy] or the simple mind of Sarah Palin [who we're not allowed to even hear from on the economy and the financial crisis. Where the hell is she?] So, lord knows those two won’t be pulling off any of those aforementioned minor miracles.

Not only that, she's the most appalling candidate to ever run for the executive branch in my life time ... only surpassed [by a hair] by David Duke. To quote my new favorite senator, Chris Dodd from our new home state of CT, "[Palin] is the choice of [James] Dobson, [Pat] Robertson and [Rush] Limbaugh. This is a real sop to the extreme conservative elements of the Republican Party."

Man, I love blue states!

Oh, and did I happen to mention, I can't stand Sarah Palin?

more hot stuff

2008-08-13T23:13:00.005-04:00

goin' for a little ride on the hot tamale train ...

yummmmmm

2008-08-12T19:22:00.019-04:00

i cannot express how much this guy's work makes me salivate. interesting, huh? who knew rocks and trees and wood [pun intended] could be so sexy?

Now, is that hot stuff, or what?

http://www.philipnixondesign.com/

a wonderful story

2008-07-20T21:57:00.025-04:00

This one got me a little verclempt. And I don't gravitate to flat out happy stories or easily choke up anymore. Unless I've just had a baby ... [that was a postpartum joke. Haha. ok. not really funny. so, ... um ... moving on]

Amid the bluster of nasty news, a reminder that a world of possibilities still exists--and those possibilities often start in the mind of one wonderful person.

epilogue

Maybe I appreciated this because it wasn't about luck or super-sunny pollyanna-ish positive thinking.

As an aside, I hate those "life-is-beautiful-if-you-only-open-your-eyes" chain emails that clutter our inboxes day after day. I mean, maybe some of it's worth considering, but I can't even get to that place. Plus, I just can't take being bludgeoned by any idea; positive or not. Rouses my inner attorney. Like, one email about sunsets and puppies is really gonna make me say, "oh, wow. I'm so grateful now ... thanks for changing my worldview." It's beyond presumptuous [and frequently includes a not-so-subtle religious conclusion, or two]--and I HATE that.

Um, ya ... I digress ... a lot. I must have gotten one of those annoying msgs today ... although I can't really remember. But, this wasn't supposed to be about my email annoyances or my doubts about a deity. I'll get to that another time.

So, back to why I liked this story--it's about work for the sake of something absolutely pure: the preservation of hope in innocence, rising above the insensate randomness of birth and unearthing beauty [in music, dedication and discipline]. Would I want my own girls armed with any greater lessons? Maybe, but not many.

homemade jamz blues

2008-07-12T12:22:00.007-04:00

dang! these kids are tight!

All Things Considered, July 10, 2008 - When you picture someone playing the blues, you imagine someone who's been through the school of hard knocks. The lead singer for the Homemade Jamz Blues Band has been to school, all right — high school.

Frontman Ryan Perry is 16 years old. He sings like a man and manhandles his [homemade, muffler] guitar, but when he and his bandmates break into giggles, it's clear they're all kids.

The three Perry siblings are 9, 14, and 16 years old; together, they're the Homemade Jamz Blues Band. Ryan took up the guitar at age 7. His brother, Kyle, followed with an electric bass, and their baby sister, Taya, rounded out the trio when she picked up drumsticks. The three are now regulars on the blues-festival circuit.

listen, and check 'em out!

or here!

more proof ...

2008-06-24T22:10:00.065-04:00

that our current leader ["Shrub" and co.] is more fearless than ... well ... name it: deft, a constitutional scholar, an historian, conceptually aware of checks and balances ... and let's see ... let's not exclude "virtuous," "moral" and "dignified" ... just stick with the despicable descriptor(s) and you're on target ... like completely embarrassing, appalling, smug, corrupt and has shit-for-brains. See link below ... just one more in a line of this administration's five bazillion unprecedented, unconstitutional tactics that conjur my not-so-inner bitch. grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!! And for those who immediately dismiss anything that "left-wing rag," the NYTs, has to say, this article cites a report prepared by the Justice Department's own inspector general.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/25/washington/24cnd-justice.html

So, how is it possible that we EVER elected such a neo-monarchist-imperial-fascist-friggin'-fratboy-blockhead ... TWICE [sort-of]! America, could you not see what you were doing?! Were you all so blinded by puritanical indignation just cause Bill Clinton couldn't keep it in his pants? Get over the sex hang-up, people! Americans should be more indignant about Death, War, eight years of increased climate change [cause neo-cons denied it even existed, till this year ... a phenomena all relevant, peer-reviewed science screamed 10 years ago! None of the naysayers were peer-reviewed and only showed up on Fox-faux-news as part of their thinly-veiled, "fair and balanced," bullshit].

So, where was I ... oh, yes ... more of my tantrum:
... a war that will likely have a price tag closer to 3 TRILLION DOLLARS** [and the first war ever paid for by DEBT... to China of all places]. Consequently, China owns our asses ... in other words, our childrens' and our children's childrens' futures. And lest we think otherwise, this scenario is, in no small part, significantly contributing to the decline of the almighty Dollar.

For all you mini Karl Roves out there, hope you're happy. Well, of course you are. Shrub "believes" in the power of prayer. Of course! What an all-important qualification for becoming president!

Guess you can't even see the irony--that y'all handed the Prince of Darkness the keys to the kingdom ... or rather, handed them to his butthead of a frat brother!

All hail our frat-boy-in-chief.

**See The Three Trillion Dollar War by Joseph E. Stiglitz, Nobel Prize-winning economist, and Kennedy School of Government professor, Linda J. Bilmes. But of course, in-line neo-cons have pledged their souls to the Devil ... I mean, to this administration. So they'll just do the same ol'-same ol' and cry, "wa-wa-wa ... more liberal ax-grinding, more liberal hate speech [standard battlecry when the Right can't come up with a reasonable rebuttal] --um ... we mean ... liberal hate numbers!"

Well, the truth ain't always easy to swallow, now is it, Darlin's?

and the beat-down goes on ...

2008-02-02T21:04:00.006-05:00

as does my obsession. it's like watching mike tyson in the ring with ... say ... alfalfa ... from the dark-side, of course. [strangely, i think i just read that tyson and k.o. are some sort of cousin through marriage]

oh yes, on imdb. anyhoo, view on ...

if i weren't already married to a super-fabulous guy i think i'd be proposing to k.o. right about now.

nail--meet billo's proverbial coffin

2008-01-19T20:59:00.008-05:00

i know i'm way late on this story, but i haven't paid attention to billo, that blustery windbag, in eons. he made me want to go out and start bar fights. so, for safety reasons, i did my best to ignore all things "orally" [and fox noise] for the last six or so years -- until i heard k.o. reference falafels and loofahs over-and-over.

so, being a curious kitty, i said, "hmmmmm" and did a google search. and, oh-my-lord! i can't stand it. this makes me totally giddy! complete nuclear annihilation! can you hear me jumping up and down?!

if you're a johnny-come-lately, like me, and, of course despise the man ... or, if you love him it's probably more important you see this ... cause i'm pretty sure the details haven't aired on "the spin zone," i mean, "the factor."

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1013043mackris1.html

and for fun, let's rub it in a little ...

link to the complete cartoon (although hard to read onscreen)

god bless the smoking gun, the village voice and those snarky "liberal, elitists," keith olbermann and tom tomorrow.

so, how does keith's favorite punching bag still have a job? ... oh ya, roger aisles and an oxygen-deprived viewership.

all hail k.o. ... billo slayer

2008-01-18T09:03:00.026-05:00

"the Sisyphus of Morons" ... now, that's absolutely sublime! i'm sure billo and fan club thought "who the hell is this Sisyphus?" [well, they would've if they watched]

bow to the superhero of liberal elitism [i.e. he's obtained a classical education; is capable of logical argument, research and full-spectrum thought. as in, he's not a redneck or moron].

k.o.--you're a rock star ... and my fav!