Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
The Future of the GOP
I had always wondered how someone as clearly insane as Jim Bunning could be returned to the Senate time and again. His grasp of the issues is non-existent, and along with Inhofe, is arguably the most unhinged member of either house.
Well, here's your answer...behold, his constituents. Tea Partiers to the core.
Well, here's your answer...behold, his constituents. Tea Partiers to the core.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Friday, November 20, 2009
A few thoughts on the USPST
A few quick items on the revision of the breast cancer screening guidelines issued this week....
Obama had nothing to do with it. The USPST is a non-partisan panel made up of primary care physicians. Their recommendations come from work that they've been compiling over a two year period. In fact, the administration explicitly disagreed with their findings.
This has nothing to do with the healthcare reform bill. In a quick visit to wingnuttia on my AM dial, it's pretty clear that Rush, et al are working feverishly to instruct their listeners that this is the first salvo from the death panels and that Obama's true nature as a socialist or something has been exposed.
The findings are based upon science. Basically, the panel recommends that women make their own decisions when it comes to this important issue. It also simply states that statistically the amount of prevention may not be meaningful. That is not to say that women's lives have not been saved by early detection or that it is not a good idea to have a mamo at the age of 40. Rather, women should continue to have mamos at whatever age they would like, knowing full well that if they decide that it may not be necessary, the science says that they are not being irresponsible.
Insurance companies are not in any way bound by this decision. Further, with the American Cancer Society, several high profile cancer hospitals, and the administration in vocal opposition, it would be hard to imagine that insurance companies will change their existing coverages. Further still, in a world with a competitive healthcare system, as envisioned by the Reid legislation, insurers would be incented to provide the most attractive options in this regard, wouldn't they?
My gut tells me that part of the reaction comes from the fact that over the past 8 years, we have been led by an administration that has cynically and amazingly ignored and distorted scientific fact. We endured a President who denied that global warming exists. We witnessed a VP candidate who is convinced that Jesus rode on a dinosaur, and we saw a Senate Majority Leader diagnose a woman in a vegetative state over the TV. It is a long way out of the hole that we've been dug into.
Lastly, do a reverse Glen Beck on the issue and look at it from the conspiratorial point of view. If the dusky hewed Kenyan socialist was intent on stripping us of our healthcare options, could he have picked a worse time to announce this? Wouldn't it have made more sense to change the coverage options after the bill was passed?
Obama had nothing to do with it. The USPST is a non-partisan panel made up of primary care physicians. Their recommendations come from work that they've been compiling over a two year period. In fact, the administration explicitly disagreed with their findings.
This has nothing to do with the healthcare reform bill. In a quick visit to wingnuttia on my AM dial, it's pretty clear that Rush, et al are working feverishly to instruct their listeners that this is the first salvo from the death panels and that Obama's true nature as a socialist or something has been exposed.
The findings are based upon science. Basically, the panel recommends that women make their own decisions when it comes to this important issue. It also simply states that statistically the amount of prevention may not be meaningful. That is not to say that women's lives have not been saved by early detection or that it is not a good idea to have a mamo at the age of 40. Rather, women should continue to have mamos at whatever age they would like, knowing full well that if they decide that it may not be necessary, the science says that they are not being irresponsible.
Insurance companies are not in any way bound by this decision. Further, with the American Cancer Society, several high profile cancer hospitals, and the administration in vocal opposition, it would be hard to imagine that insurance companies will change their existing coverages. Further still, in a world with a competitive healthcare system, as envisioned by the Reid legislation, insurers would be incented to provide the most attractive options in this regard, wouldn't they?
My gut tells me that part of the reaction comes from the fact that over the past 8 years, we have been led by an administration that has cynically and amazingly ignored and distorted scientific fact. We endured a President who denied that global warming exists. We witnessed a VP candidate who is convinced that Jesus rode on a dinosaur, and we saw a Senate Majority Leader diagnose a woman in a vegetative state over the TV. It is a long way out of the hole that we've been dug into.
Lastly, do a reverse Glen Beck on the issue and look at it from the conspiratorial point of view. If the dusky hewed Kenyan socialist was intent on stripping us of our healthcare options, could he have picked a worse time to announce this? Wouldn't it have made more sense to change the coverage options after the bill was passed?
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
RuffTuffCreamPuffs
The incoherence of the Right appears pretty consistently these days, but maybe no more starkly than in the pants pissing that is going on concerning the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The immediate and reflexive response to the Administration's decision to try KSM in our legal system proves conclusively that not only do these small minded bigots have no sense of historical perspective or understanding of our system of government, but their blinding hatred of Obama overtakes any semblance of consistency in their arguments. As Glenn Greenwald points out
And here is rightwing nutbag and coward John Shadegg (R, AZ)
The various ridiculous arguments against a trial by jury for KSM in New York are as disingenuous as they are puerile. They treat these terrorists like they have Super Powers worthy of a Marvel Comic, for chrissakes. As Greenwald says, it is a combination of pitiful fear and cynical manipulation, and it runs through their worldview. Whether it is Beck tearfully wailing that Obama and his dusky hewed African minions are Nazis, or whether it is Lou Dobbs wailing about the brown hordes spilling over the borders, these faux tough guys appeal to their pathetic follower's fears of losing control of their white, male ascendancy. Like the Irish Question, time and generational change will roll over them like a tide rising slowly, but before this country becomes a place where a culturally diverse majority is abundantly clear, their death cries will be increasingly shrill and violent.
Joining the xenophobes and Beck's legions, of course, are the bloodthirsty ghouls of the last administration, who have a separate fear...that their misdeeds and illegal goings-on will be exposed in a court of law. As Digby says:
the Right's reaction to yesterday's announcement -- we're too afraid to allow trials and due process in our country -- is the textbook definition of "surrendering to terrorists." It's the same fear they've been spewing for years. As always, the Right's tough-guy leaders wallow in a combination of pitiful fear and cynical manipulation of the fear of their followers. Indeed, it's hard to find any group of people on the globe who exude this sort of weakness and fear more than the American Right.
People in capitals all over the world have hosted trials of high-level terrorist suspects using their normal justice system. They didn't allow fear to drive them to build island-prisons or create special commissions to depart from their rules of justice. Spain held an open trial in Madrid for the individuals accused of that country's 2004 train bombings. The British put those accused of perpetrating the London subway bombings on trial right in their normal courthouse in London. Indonesia gave public trials using standard court procedures to the individuals who bombed a nightclub in Bali. India used a Mumbai courtroom to try the sole surviving terrorist who participated in the 2008 massacre of hundreds of residents. In Argentina, the Israelis captured Adolf Eichmann, one of the most notorious Nazi war criminals, and brought him to Jerusalem to stand trial for his crimes.
It's only America's Right that is too scared of the Terrorists -- or which exploits the fears of their followers -- to insist that no regular trials can be held and that "the safety and security of the American people" mean that we cannot even have them in our country to give them trials. As usual, it's the weakest and most frightened among us who rely on the most flamboyant, theatrical displays of "strength" and "courage" to hide what they really are. Then again, this is the same political movement whose "leaders" -- people like John Cornyn and Pat Roberts -- cowardly insisted that we must ignore the Constitution in order to stay alive: the exact antithesis of the core value on which the nation was founded. Given that, it's hardly surprising that they exude a level of fear of Terrorists that is unmatched virtually anywhere in the world. It is, however, noteworthy that the position they advocate -- it's too scary to have normal trials in our country of Terrorists -- is as pure a surrender to the Terrorists as it gets.
And here is rightwing nutbag and coward John Shadegg (R, AZ)
The various ridiculous arguments against a trial by jury for KSM in New York are as disingenuous as they are puerile. They treat these terrorists like they have Super Powers worthy of a Marvel Comic, for chrissakes. As Greenwald says, it is a combination of pitiful fear and cynical manipulation, and it runs through their worldview. Whether it is Beck tearfully wailing that Obama and his dusky hewed African minions are Nazis, or whether it is Lou Dobbs wailing about the brown hordes spilling over the borders, these faux tough guys appeal to their pathetic follower's fears of losing control of their white, male ascendancy. Like the Irish Question, time and generational change will roll over them like a tide rising slowly, but before this country becomes a place where a culturally diverse majority is abundantly clear, their death cries will be increasingly shrill and violent.
Joining the xenophobes and Beck's legions, of course, are the bloodthirsty ghouls of the last administration, who have a separate fear...that their misdeeds and illegal goings-on will be exposed in a court of law. As Digby says:
But the possibility is what's got the rufftuffcreampuffs on the right quaking in their booties, that American law will actually shine a light on the murderous, torturing, incompetent, insanely frightened, paranoid, corrupt, and completely out of control Bush/Cheney regime.
It is going to be quite an ugly fight, once these trials start.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Behold the Teabaggers
As John Stewart said a while back about the teabaggers, they seem to be confusing tyranny with losing. From Crooks and Liars, a quick ten point reminder for the confused opposition:
President Obama Cut Your Taxes
The Stimulus is Working
First Ronald Reagan Tripled the National Debt...
...Then George W. Bush Doubled It Again
Republican States Have the Worst Health Care
Medicare is a Government Program
Barack Obama is Not a Muslim
Barack Obama was Born in the United States
70,000 Does Not Equal 2,000,000
The Economy Almost Always Does Better Under Democrats
Monday, September 14, 2009
Post 9/11
With no offense to anyone, this really sums up my thoughts on the eighth anniversary.Shortly after (or maybe during) that day, our president at the time, a little fuckhead no one liked, handed over the reins to the most psychotic elements of his administration. In the vast national wave of jingoism, paranoia, dread, and fear that followed, he and his friends led us into an unrelated war they'd been planning beforehand, allowed the CIA to wiretap and torture anyone they liked (and encouraged the CIA to wiretap and torture even more than they were comfortable with!), and regularly insisted that our memory of that day should not be sullied with critical thinking or expressions of anything other than still-palpable fear.
and, this:On 9/12, people in New York (and DC) did not feel as "great" as Glenn Beck. They just felt like shit. They felt scared and confused and depressed. Many of them were drunk. And only an idiot or an actual terrorist would want to always feel like it was 9/12/01. And eight years later, normal people, with brains and souls, have decided that some emotional distance from that disaster is healthier and wiser than trying to recapture the dread.
So thank fucking christ that the Commander in Chief is no longer subjecting the nation to death porn.
No, this year it's limited to a nutty little cult leader on basic cable who is encouraging his radicalized band of fanatical followers to invade the cities where the tragedy actually happened in order to shock the populace back into fear.
Glenn Beck is an actual terrorist, and the people attending his rally in DC tomorrow are al-Qaeda in America.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Glenzilla, Digby on Torture
Glenzilla takes apart Peter King, but more broadly, indicts the Right for assuming that their beliefs even have a passing familiarity with those of the founding fathers.
Money:
Maybe even more importantly, Digby points out that the constant "restarts" on the torture revelations are dilatory and hurtful to the ultimate goal. All of this has been revealed over and over again. Not only did we torture, we tortured innocents, we murdered and disappeared captives held without trial, and it was all approved from the highest levels. The notion that there is anything more or new to reveal is simply wrong. The Holder investigation is good news, but it is long overdue and needs to now move forward unimpeded.
Money:
Few things are more repellent than watching the contemporary Right in America invoke the principles of the Founders -- in general -- to justify their warped and lawless authoritarianism. But nothing is more repulsive than watching them pretend that Thomas Paine -- of all people -- has anything to do with them (Glenn Beck actually wrote his most recent book based on the explicit pretense that he is the modern day Paine). Any casual reading of Paine makes clear that, today, he would be so far on what is deemed the "left" side of the spectrum that you'd be unable to find him. Paine is nothing but what Joe Klein refers to as a "crazy civil liberties absolutist" and what Rush Limbaugh similarly calls "far, fringe, lunatic kooks, far left radical lunatic fringe."
The Right today argues that condemning torture is wrong because the people who were tortured were just Terrorists -- barely human -- and they deserve no defense, not even the force of law. Thomas Paine argued as a first principle that those devoted to liberty "must guard even his enemy from oppression." Could the contrast be any more stark?
Maybe even more importantly, Digby points out that the constant "restarts" on the torture revelations are dilatory and hurtful to the ultimate goal. All of this has been revealed over and over again. Not only did we torture, we tortured innocents, we murdered and disappeared captives held without trial, and it was all approved from the highest levels. The notion that there is anything more or new to reveal is simply wrong. The Holder investigation is good news, but it is long overdue and needs to now move forward unimpeded.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
We probably shouldn't be surprised....
As Atrios says, it won't get as much attention as Michelle Obama's shorts, or the latest insane ramblings of Sarah Palin, but it should be mentioned that the use of the threat of terror in order to affect politics or elections is, um, what terrorists do.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Where we find ourselves...
This is where we are with regard to the wingnut right in America. Glen Beck and his guest, Michael Scheuer are openly rooting for an attack on America, to save us from ourselves and our Islamonegrophied President, who is totally into socialism and is plotting to take away all of our guns and ammo. Don't bother to try and stomach the entire clip, it's mainly two chimps throwing poo around their cage. Skip to the six minute mark for the denouement..
Keep in mind that 2.5 million people get their news from this guy.
Keep in mind that 2.5 million people get their news from this guy.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
The GOP concern trolls...
Bret Stephens has an entirely predictable opinion piece in the WSJ today, in which he voices the concern and newfound support for the Iranian populace, who have taken to the streets in an historic and inspiring fashion in order to protest the incumbent regime's handling of the recent presidential election. Leaving aside the obvious ironies of the Katherine Harris/Norm Coleman type, the concern trolls unleashed at the Journal are a bit hard to swallow, as they are the same group that until recently was insisting that it would be a swell idea to bomb the shit out of these same people. As Greenwald points out, at about the same time that Batshit Crazy John McCain was singing "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran", the Journal was running an editorial from Norman Podhoretz, the bloodthirsty ghoul who breathed life into the neocon movement, explaining that he "hopes and prays" that we bomb Iran.
The other toadies of the neocon movement, including Bill Kristol, Dick Cheney, John Bolton, and Joe Lieberman fell quickly into line, supporting pre-emptive strikes against the 70 million or so souls who live in Persia. Their recent conversion to Iranophiles may be somewhat cynically viewed by the protesters in the streets of Tehran, I'd guess.
Look, I don't know whether the election there was fairly counted or not. It seems plausible that the will of the Iranian people may well have been to return Ahmadinejad, certainly some of the polling supports that conclusion. My guess is that Stephen's bold assertion that the "election was so transparently rigged that the only serious question is whether the regime even bothered to stuff the ballot boxes", is probably a rash assertion based upon his hopes and not any familiarity with the facts on the ground or the true wishes of the Persian people. The elections in Iran probably had much more to do with the day to day lives of the citizens there than they did with what Bret Stephens, John McCain, and George Will hoped to happen there.
More to the point is the sad irony that we continue to take seriously the opinions of the Kristol's and Podhoretz' of the neocon right, who have been so transparently wrong on every question on which they have opined, and now cry crocodile tears for a people who up to a few months ago they lusted to destroy.
UPDATE: Leave it to TBogg to play the Pam Geller card. Read the whole post, it's priceless.
The other toadies of the neocon movement, including Bill Kristol, Dick Cheney, John Bolton, and Joe Lieberman fell quickly into line, supporting pre-emptive strikes against the 70 million or so souls who live in Persia. Their recent conversion to Iranophiles may be somewhat cynically viewed by the protesters in the streets of Tehran, I'd guess.
Look, I don't know whether the election there was fairly counted or not. It seems plausible that the will of the Iranian people may well have been to return Ahmadinejad, certainly some of the polling supports that conclusion. My guess is that Stephen's bold assertion that the "election was so transparently rigged that the only serious question is whether the regime even bothered to stuff the ballot boxes", is probably a rash assertion based upon his hopes and not any familiarity with the facts on the ground or the true wishes of the Persian people. The elections in Iran probably had much more to do with the day to day lives of the citizens there than they did with what Bret Stephens, John McCain, and George Will hoped to happen there.
More to the point is the sad irony that we continue to take seriously the opinions of the Kristol's and Podhoretz' of the neocon right, who have been so transparently wrong on every question on which they have opined, and now cry crocodile tears for a people who up to a few months ago they lusted to destroy.
UPDATE: Leave it to TBogg to play the Pam Geller card. Read the whole post, it's priceless.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Friday, May 22, 2009
Long Weekend
Here's yer music:
Jay Farrar and the boys. I actually caught a few minutes of Jeff Tweedy and Wilco at Jazzfest, walking out after a full day of New Orleans sun. James Taylor and Erykah Badu were playing at the same time. Erykah has no competition for best 'fro in the business.
Jay Farrar and the boys. I actually caught a few minutes of Jeff Tweedy and Wilco at Jazzfest, walking out after a full day of New Orleans sun. James Taylor and Erykah Badu were playing at the same time. Erykah has no competition for best 'fro in the business.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Funny Stuff.
Let's just get this straight. Wanda Sykes silly joke about Rush Limbaugh, the gasbag that routinely calls our President Osama, who spits bile and racist lies on a daily basis to 20 million mouth breathing subhumans, and who when challenged on his hateful discourse hides behind the excuse that he is "just an entertainer", was not not particularly funny. The feigned outrage of hypocritical torture supporters and fear mongering embittered old men like William Bennett are truly pathetic. But tasteless? Over the line? Outrageously insensitive and truly offensive. You want offensive humor at the White House Correspondents Dinner? That I've got:
Give me a break.
Give me a break.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
