Monday, September 30, 2013

Remember the Gang of Six?

I do remember that the crafting of the Affordable Care Act involved both Republicans and Democrats (although, as it turns out, at least some of the Republicans were only there to sabotage the thing) but I rarely remember the particulars. This seems like a good place to start. This article in The Washington Monthly discusses Mike Enzi's admission that he took part in the bipartisan committee only because he had a good chance of making the bill worse. Here's the link: The Washington Monthly:

'via Blog this'

Friday, September 20, 2013

Yet Another Republican Uses a Racial Slur

So there's this guy in Maine, a Republican, who's running for local office. And he decided to say something about President Obama on his Facebook page. Again. This time, he said "Shoot the nigger." Sorry for those who are offended by words, but I'm not going to insert the asterisks that decency demands, because this man is anything but decent, and what he has to say is anything but decent.

This is what it has come to. We have a bi-racial man in the White House, and the Usual Suspects have gone nuts. But now they have the backing of the Republican News Network and it's OK to be openly and blatantly racist. Because, you know... Obama!

Obama is a Nazi. Obama is a Socialist. Obama is a Muslim. Obama is coming for your guns, is going to kill your grandmother, is going to take all your money and give it to his black friends.

Listen, I get that a very large percentage of the American population consists of idiots. Those are, in fact, the very people the Republican party depends on. That's sad, but it's life. It's the way the curve works. For every person smarter than average, there's a person who's dumber than average. But the primary difference between Republicans and Democrats is that Republicans live to exploit the less intelligent, while the Democrats try to protect them from those who would exploit them.

But I digress. Back to that moron in Maine, the guy who thinks that the term "nigger" isn't a racial slur. Why is he mad at President Obama? Because he's worried that under the Affordable Healthcare Act, a.k.a. "Obamacare," his wife is going to lose her benefits. Never mind that this is exactly the opposite of what will happen Never mind that this is precisely the kind of thing that ACA.. excuse me, Obama care... was designed to prevent. The moron in Maine gets all of his information from the likes of Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck and WorldNetDaily, and he doesn't have the wherewithal to check things out for himself.

There was a time when the media of this country -- television media, primarily -- would enlighten the public about things like this. But those days are long gone, dead at the hands of the cable news networks and talk radio and the Internet, dead at the hands of endlessly recycled chain mail purporting to "prove" that the President is a secret Kenyan Socialist Muslim who intends to round people up and put them in FEMA camps.

No, there's nothing I can do about this. I can write about it in a blog that no one will read. I can patiently correct friends and family when they parrot something they've heard on the Republican News Network, but that just doesn't do any good. I can, I suppose, console myself with the thought that this is nothing new. It was "yellow journalism" that created the Spanish-American war, banned Cannabis, and defeated Upton Sinclair in his run for Governor of California. These things have always been with us and probably always will be and, ultimately, will be our undoing. Humans have existed for a mere blink of an eye in the lifespan of this planet, far less time than any of the dinosaurs, and will probably fade from the planet in short order, leaving naught but our crumbling structures.

And who will be to blame when this ultimately happens?

Obama, of course!

 Sabattus man says ‘shoot’ posting wasn’t a threat against Obama, defends using racial slur — Lewiston-Auburn — Bangor Daily News — BDN Maine:

'via Blog this'

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Fox News, Explained

Your Daily Show Moment of Zen Truth

"I get that Fox opposes the Syria peace plan because its modus operandi is to foment dissent in the form of a relentless, irrational contrarianism to Barack Obama and all things Democratic to advance its ultimate objective of creating a deliberately misinformed body politic whose fear, anger, mistrust and discontent is the manna upon which it sustains its parasitic, succubus like existence, BUT... sorry, I blacked out for a second I was saying something?" 

 - Jon Stewart, The Daily Show, 9.10.13

Thursday, September 05, 2013

Another Republican Welfare Hog Hates Poor People

Rep. Stephen Fincher (R-Tenn.) wants to make it harder for people who have fallen upon hard times to receive the meager assistance (SNAP) known as food stamps. Stephen Fincher, who has no qualms about collecting $3.5 million -- yes, million -- in welfare from the very same Department of Agriculture that also administers the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Sadly, welfare given to agri-business giants like Mr. Fincher, doesn't carry a negative connotation. Mr. Fincher pocketed $70,000 last year in farm subsidies, quite possibly for doing nothing at all. Seventy. Thousand. Dollars. And he wants to cut $20 billion from the food stamp program because... well, we don't really know, other than the normal Republican belief that government funds should only be directed to the pockets of those who are wealthy enough to lobby for them.

The average monthly SNAP benefit in Tennessee is $132. It would take 530 months -- 44 years -- for a food stamp recipient in Tennessee to collect $70,000 in benefits.

And again, Congressman Fincher got $70,000 in taxpayer money, a direct payment, for not growing cotton.

The wrong Republican to talk about food stamps - The Maddow Blog:

'via Blog this'

Friday, August 23, 2013

Are Tea Baggers Racist?

Seriously. Does a bear shit in the woods? (Usually.) Is the Pope Catholic? (I think that's actually a requirement.) Yeah, maybe the Tea Party is just a wee bit racist. As in "Maybe the Ku Klux Klan has a problem with black people." And it's not just the Tea Party; it's wide swaths of America because, after all, we need somebody to blame our problems on. (But be of good cheer, black people! We're working on hating the Mexicans right now!)

So, anyway, here's some graphic proof: Cowgirl Up: Photo:

'via Blog this'

Tuesday, August 20, 2013

How Much Do We Spend on the Nonworking Poor? | Mother Jones

Your Crazy Uncle who Watches Fox comes at you with misinformation all the time, right? And your problem is that even though you know he's wrong, you never have the proper citation at your fingertips. Well, I'm here to help you solve that problem with handy links to actual facts and figures, compiled by highly competent and professional journalists. Just look for the tag "rebuttal." Here's the first in the series, from Kevin Drum, writing in Mother Jones magazine. Which, by the way, you subscribe to if you don't already.

How Much Do We Spend on the Nonworking Poor? | Mother Jones:

'via Blog this'

Friday, August 16, 2013

Why Rash Lumbaugh is an Idiot. Part LXVII

You know how Republicans go out of their way to refer to the "Democrat" party? Right. And you know they do it just to be annoying, right? Kind of like school children taunting one another with crude variations on their names. Anyway, forget all that stuff about nouns and adjectives; that's not why they're wrong. They're merely juvenile. You call it the "Democratic Party" because that's its name. Calling it anything else, especially on purpose, is ignorant and childish and entirely worth of today's Republican party. Go read this piece: Names: What's wrong with the "Democrat Party" | The Economist:

Monday, July 15, 2013

New Florida Commercial

Visit Florida!
You'll come for the sunshine!
You'll stay because we buried you there after some cop wannabe stalker blew your brains out because you looked suspicious!

Because Possession of Skittles is a Crime

For some reason, the folks on the right have been in a frenzy to find anything in Trayvon Martin's past that would prove that he was some lowlife cretin who deserved to die. And now, in the wake of Zimmerman's acquittal for Martin's death, we see a rush to further smear Martin. But there are more than a few details about Zimmerman that have been overlooked, and Amanda Marcotte does a good job of covering that here: George Zimmerman Shouldn’t Have Had A Gun | The Raw Story:

'via Blog this'

Saturday, July 13, 2013

Calbuzz Asks the Right Question

There's a congressman in southern California, Darrell Issa, who clawed his way into the ranks of the wealthy via any number of legally questionable maneuvers. Now, this "wealthy bully and proven liar" chairs the House Oversight Committee, even though -- by all rights -- he should be in jail. I urge you to read this:  Why Isn’t Darrell Issa In Jail? « Calbuzz:

'via Blog this'

Wednesday, June 26, 2013

Darell Issa Is A Lying Partisan Weasel, Part XXII

So, to nobody's surprise -- and probably not even mentioned by Fox News -- arsonist and car thief Darrell Issa ginned up the whole IRS scandal because he knew that if he only presented carefully edited snippets, if he carefully crafted the narrative, it might make Obama look bad. I suppose we should expect nothing less from a man who would leave the scene of an accident, but the point is that he's not only a representative in Congress, he's in charge of the House Oversight Committee, for Pete's sake.

IG: Audit of IRS actions limited to Tea Party groups at GOP request - The Hill's On The Money:

'via Blog this'

Thursday, June 06, 2013

The Republican Party Doesn't Want Black People to Vote

Here's a quote straight from the "No duh!" department:
“I'm going to be real honest with you. The Republican Party doesn't want black people to vote..." - Ken Emanuelson, Texas Tea Party activist.
Here's a question for you, America: What are you going to do about that?

Tuesday, May 14, 2013


So... let me get this straight: The emails concerning the Benghazi! talking points were selectively edited by "unknown actors" to prove that the Benghazi! talking point emails were selectively edited.

No, you can't make this stuff up. ABC "got hold" of some White House e-mails that "proved" that the Benghazi! talking points were selectively edited. Except... well, those e-mails that ABC "got hold" of were selectively edited. That is, they did not say what they used to say back in the days before they were selectively edited.

We used to call this lying. Now, of course, it's just "spin." Because... well, because Obama! Apparently, these days it's perfectly OK to take something that someone, in the course of doing their job, wrote, and then change the words to make it mean something different and then release it to the press as long as the changes you made cast the President -- you know, that Muslim Socialist Kenyan guy -- in a bad light. Perfectly OK.

You can read the whole sordid tale here.

Wednesday, May 01, 2013

This Should Be Fun

Item: "29 percent of Americans think that an armed revolution in order to protect liberties might be necessary in the next few years..." - Fairleigh Dickinson University's PublicMind poll, May 1, 2013.

There's a funny thing about these people who think we might need to resort to armed violence to protect "liberties." What liberties are they talking about? Their liberty to take their guns and force everybody else to do what they want. Yeah, that liberty.

Here's the thing: These people have demonstrated, time and time again, that they have no use for this "democracy" or the "will of the people" unless everybody else agrees with them. The Constitution of the United States? It's fine with them, but only one of the little bits that got tacked on after it was written, that bit that says "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." All that other stuff in the Constitution? They don't really have much use for it. They'd like the government to just leave them alone, thank you very much, except where they happen to like the things that government does for them.

Now, never mind that the second amendment is fairly baffling insomuch as nobody really knows what the hell "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state..." means. Not even the Supreme Court knows what the hell that means. There have been a number of decisions related to the second amendment -- United States v. Cruikshank, 1875; Unites States v. Miller, 1939; United States v. Heller, 2008, to pick three -- that say, respectively, that the right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution (Cruikshank), that the second amendment protects arms that have a reasonable relationship to the preservation of the efficiency of a well regulated militia (Miller) or that it protects a right, not unlimited, to  possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home (Heller).

Don't tell any of this to the knuckle-dragging mouth-breathers who threaten to take out their shotguns and their Rugers and their AR-15s to wave in your face if you disagree with them. They are, by and large, too stupid to understand anything containing words with more than two syllables.

Anyway, it looks like the rest of us might have to arm ourselves as protection against these gun-toting lunatics. That's the bad news. The good news? These idiots are more likely to kill themselves than they are to hit any target that might be shooting back. (See any of the GunFAIL diaries by David Waldman at Daily Kos. Here's a few links to get you started: Gunfail III, Gunfail IV, Gunfail V, Gunfail VI...) There are many, many idiots out there with guns. Note that I have not said "all gun owners are idiots." What I have said is that "many idiots own guns." And if those idiots keep insisting that I have to do things their way or else they will use their guns on me, well... you tell me. At any rate, I think if you say things like "I love this country!" then you should realize that this country is defined by a document, the Constitution, and the democratic-rule-of-the-people that the Constitution embodies. And that implies that you shouldn't get your way just because you're willing to wave a gun in my face.

Monday, March 18, 2013

Blast From the Past: Freepers on WMD

Newsweek Notices that Iraq has no WMD. In 2003. Freepers Go Nuts!

In March, 2003, Newsweek published a story entitled "The Defector's Secrets" wherein they described the testimony of one Hussein Kamel, the son-in-law of Saddam Hussein and the man who ran Iraq's nuclear, chemical, biological, and missile programs. He told the CIA and MI6 and the U.N. that Iraq had destroyed their stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, as well as the missiles to deliver them. He told them this in 1995, and his information was verified separately by his aide.

You may recall that we found no weapons of mass destruction when we invaded Iraq.

Now, hearken back to those halcyon days of 2003 for a trip to the alternate reality of the right wing. In particular, set the time machine for The Free Republic, March 3, 2003. Below, reprinted without permission, is the discussion concerning the Newsweek article. Here's a direct link if you'd like to read it at the source.

Exclusive: The Defector’s Secrets (Newsweek claims it was right)
Newsweek ^ | March 3, 2003 | John Barry 
Posted on 3/3/2003 9:52:02 AM by liberal whiner
March 3 issue — Hussein Kamel, the highest-ranking Iraqi official ever to defect from Saddam Hussein’s inner circle, told CIA and British intelligence officers and U.N. inspectors in the summer of 1995 that after the gulf war, Iraq destroyed all its chemical and biological weapons stocks and the missiles to deliver them.
...NEWSWEEK has obtained the notes of Kamel’s U.N. debrief, and verified that the document is authentic. NEWSWEEK has also learned that Kamel told the same story to the CIA and M.I.6. (The CIA did not respond to a request for comment.)...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Foreign AffairsNews/Current Events
KEYWORDS: husseinkameliraqkamelwarlistwmd
Newsweek claimed to have information that Iraq had destroyed most of its WMD. They were accused of lying. See another FR post. But they claim that they have proof. 
1 posted on 3/3/2003 9:52:02 AM by liberal whiner

To: liberal whiner
I suppose it is beyond Newsweeks ability to realize this guy is an Iraqi intelligence agent? 
2 posted on 3/3/2003 9:57:00 AM by The Vast Right Wing (Some drink from the fountain of knowledge, the French and Germans only gargle)

To: liberal whiner
But they claim that they have proof.Dear Newsweek: Cough it up or shut up. 
3 posted on 3/3/2003 9:57:12 AM by TADSLOS (Gunner, Target!)

To: liberal whiner
This is so stupid. If it were true, Iraq would have revealed it in their disclosures, and would have taken the inspectors to the disposal sites long ago. 
4 posted on 3/3/2003 9:59:58 AM by lady lawyer

To: liberal whiner
Let's see...can you spell DISINFORMATION? 
5 posted on 3/3/2003 10:08:04 AM by expatpat

To: liberal whiner
I have read that the CIA refused Kamel's demand that they overthrow Saddam and put Kamel in charge instead.

Also, this genius then returned to Iraq, on his own, along w/his brother-in-law. Both were executed. If they were telling the truth, why did Saddam kill them instead of calling them envoys of peace and going even further to publicly disarm?

Newsweek is not on the side of the Bush Administration. 
6 posted on 3/3/2003 10:23:01 AM by reformedliberal

To: expatpat
> Let's see...can you spell DISINFORMATION?

Disinformation by whom?

Newsweek? I don't believe they would go as far as lying about owning a U.N. debrief. Not after being openly accused of lying on the same subject.

The U.N.? I don't believe the U.N. would lie about the interview they did with Hussein Kamel. That was 8 years ago when there was pure harmony between the USA and the U.N. about Iraq.

Hussein Kamel? What should have been his reason to disinform the U.N. and CIA? Being an Iraqi spy? Sounds unlikely because he got killed after he returned to Iraq from his "successful mission". And if he was lying to make his information seem more important it would have been in the other direction: Exaggerating the danger by WMD.  
7 posted on 3/3/2003 10:27:43 AM by liberal whiner

To: reformedliberal
> Both were executed. If they were telling the truth, why did
> Saddam kill them instead of calling them envoys of peace
> and going even further to publicly disarm?

They defected from his regime, tried to overthrow him with the help of the USA and gave away many Iraqi national secrets to the CIA and U.N. 
8 posted on 3/3/2003 10:31:57 AM by liberal whiner

To: liberal whiner
Let's see, one Iraqi defector says, "no need to worry, my father-in-law destroyed all the WMD's, but didn't show the US or UN." Therefore, according to Liberal Whiner Newsweek, we can just trust to faith that there are no more WMD's, even though Saddam subsequently kicked all the UN inspectors out of Iraq, and has never shown the UN where he supposedly got rid of the stuff, or shown the UN the written records reflecting his disposal. Makes perfect sense to me. I'm sure our troops can now have complete confidence that Saddam won't use chemical or biological warfare against them. (sarcasm, for those with any doubts) 
9 posted on 3/3/2003 10:42:15 AM by Avid Coug

To: *war_list
10 posted on 3/3/2003 10:45:00 AM by Libertarianize the GOP (Ideas have consequences)

To: Avid Coug
I wonder, do those Al Samoud missles that travel further than the cease-fire agreement allowed, can they carry bio and chem weapons? Doesn't that prove this liar lied to Newsweek? 
11 posted on 3/3/2003 10:45:04 AM by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)

To: liberal whiner
Let's see--You signed up TODAY- 3/3/2003!! And you believe Newsweek! ( I bet you are against GW -- am I right?)
12 posted on 3/3/2003 10:46:06 AM by BobFromNJ

To: liberal whiner
Not a very high standard of proof--the word of one unverifiable defector. That's why it has always been customary to destroy weapons in the presence of credible witnesses chosen by the opposing party. 
13 posted on 3/3/2003 10:53:58 AM by Cicero

To: liberal whiner
Disinformation by Sadam and Kamel. The fact that he went back suggests his heart was still with Sadam; the fact that he was killed just reflects Sadam's paranoia -- he couldn't be sure that Kamel hadn't been 'turned' by the CIA, which is standard practice.Now one or two for you: (i)Why would Sadam destroy his WMD's when the pressure to do so had lessened, and (ii) why would he do it without getting brownie points from having it recorded by the UN? 
14 posted on 3/3/2003 11:40:05 AM by expatpat

Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Breaking: Ben Shapiro Makes Shit Up!

We have a slight correction to the headline. We do not know whether Ben Shapiro, of Breitbart News (sic) actually makes shit up. What we do know, however, is that he includes made-up shit in his stories and then, even when called on the made-up shit, actually stands by the made-up shit because "The story as reported is correct," according to Mr. Shapiro. In other words, he correctly quoted the bullshit that his source fed him even though he, in all likelihood, knew at the time that the story was bullshit.

Sources: Dave Weigel's article in SlateDavid Taintor's article on TPM, and, of course, the article by Dan Friedman, who's sarcastic comment started the whole thing.

To repeat: There is no group called "Friends of Hamas." We do not know whether or not Ben Shapiro is payed by "The Friends of Hitler" or even "The Osama bin Laden Memorial Society," but we do know that Breitbart News happily prints bullshit. That is all.

Friday, February 08, 2013

This is Why Everyone Needs to Carry Guns

So... L.A. Torrance Police, who were hunting for a 6-foot, 270-pound black ex-cop, came across two Latina women in a blue pickup truck who were delivering the L.A. Times, and pumped more than forty bullets into the truck.

Neither the 71-year-old Emma Hernandez nor her 47-year-old daughter, Margie Carranza, bore much of a resemblance to Christopher Dorner, the aforementioned 33-year-old fugitive who was neither female nor elderly nor hispanic nor short of stature and who was believed to be driving a different model and color pickup truck.

To repeat: Cops "riddled with bullets" a pickup truck containing an elderly Latina newspaper carrier and her middle-aged daughter. Riddled. With bullets. They shot an old lady in the back. Twice.

Christopher Dorner was said to be driving a 2005 charcoal gray Nissan Titan pickup truck.

Emma Hernandez was driving a blue Toyota Tundra truck.

Toyota; Nissan. Blue; Gray. Old hispanic woman; young black male.

For emphasis: 71-year-old women do not, it is safe to say, resemble 33-year-old black men, gray is not blue, Toyota is not Nissan, and that number of bullets -- at least 46 -- is indicative of something other than an intent to stop and question somebody.

Now, ask yourself this question: If this is the way trained police officers react -- trained big-city police officers -- how do you suppose Nervous Charlie will react if he's armed and encounters any kind of stressful situation?

What if Emma and Margie had been packing heat and decided to return the favor?

Manhunt: Newspaper carrier, 71, in ICU after being shot by police -

'via Blog this'

Saturday, January 19, 2013

The Right, Deconstructed

Every week, Daily Kos (a.k.a. "The Great Orange Satan") posts Saturday hate mail-a-palooza, a compendium of the best (or worst, depending on your point of view) examples of the hate mail Kos receives on a daily basis. Now, I know that a favorite topic of the right is how nasty and filled with invective the liberals (or progressives, depending on your taste in labels) are. Any time someone on the left says something that can, no matter what contortions are required, be viewed as less than courteous, the right goes nuts. With that in mind, let's have a look at this sample from Saturday hate mail-a-palooza, The Day America Died:

death of America?Are you trying to destroy America, you traitorous scumbag? Your precious Obama regime will be in power for four years to come and that's plenty of time for him to complete his plasn to destroy this country.

I will admit right here and now that I have no idea what a "plasn" is. And yes, it is true that anyone can commit a typo; I'm a writer. I am on a first-name basis with typos. But most word processing software alerts you to a misspelling with a squiggly red line under the word that is hard to ignore. For some reason, one of the hallmarks of posts from those on the right who have an axe to grind is the preponderance of typos, homonym errors, and grammatical errors.
Having said that, I have a question about this opening paragraph: How did you find out about Obama's plans to destroy this country? Shouldn't plans like that be secret? And if Obama is so terrible at keeping secrets, what makes you think he'd be any good at destroying the country? But going even deeper, how does this make any sense? Does he plan to destroy the country by giving us access to affordable health care? Was saving GM and Chrysler part of that plan? Your suggestion is long on conjecture and short on evidence, my friend. 
He has already turned American healthcare into soviet healthcare where every pill and surgery must be approved by bureucrats.
Again with the misspellings! Oh well. But... really. Soviet healthcare? What is that, anyway? Cheap vodka? But getting back to your charge, here's the reality: Every pill and surgery that I take or undergo must be approved by bureaucrats right now. You see, I have health insurance. Private health insurance, of the kind that the Affordable Care Act mandates. I can't just say "I want some Vicodin. Oh, and take my appendix out while you're at it!" No, I have to get approval for things like that. And who approves it? Some bureaucrat at my insurance company.
He has hiked taxes to skyhigh levels. He has ruined our economy.
O.K. This is getting old. It's sky-high, not skyhigh. And he hadn't hiked taxes. Taxes are at their lowest rate, as a percentage of GDP, in maybe a generation. I'd have to look that one up, but it's clear that you haven't looked it up. And the economy? It was ruined when he took office, ruined by the gutting of regulation, ruined by all the tax cuts for the rich, ruined by two unpaid-for wars, ruined by Medicare Part D, an unpaid-for giveaway to the health insurance companies. Have you even checked all the relevant statistics? The economy has been improving steadily ever since the stimulus was put into effect. It would be improving even more if the Republicans in the House and Senate weren't so hell-bent on making Obama, in their terms, a "one-term President." Maybe they should put the country first, yes?
He and his fellow traitorcrats are trying to put in place the "fairness doctrine" which would force Fox news to start airing liberal propaganda while letting MSNBC continue to be a motuhpiece for the Obama regime with no restrictiosn. Goodbye to the first amendment.
A typo bonanza! I have no idea what a motuhpiece is, nor do I know what a restrictiosn is. But the sad fact is that there has been no attempt to resurrect the "fairness doctrine," which might force Fox news to actually be accurate once in a while. And while we're on the subject, the fairness doctrine did not restrict what anybody could or could not say. It simply said that anyone using the public airwaves -- which are owned by you and me -- had an obligation to present the other side of things. Fox, which bills itself as "Fair and Balanced," is essentially a public relations arm of the Republican party. There's nothing inherently wrong with that; the First Amendment, after all, guarantees freedom of speech. And since Fox News operates through cable rather than the public airwaves, it wouldn't be subject to a resurrected fairness doctrine anyway. But clearly you are not one to let facts get in the way, nor do you care to do any independent research. This makes you the perfect target audience for Fox News, by the way.
He has built a mosque on Ground Zero so his muslim pals can celebrate the murders of Americans in the very same place where they commited the murders in the first place.
(Sigh.) Committed, not commited. First, Obama hasn't built any mosques. Presidents don't build mosques. Second, no mosque has been built on Ground Zero. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you're not from New York. I am. I know that the so-called mosque is actually a community center and I know that it was planned for a site some distance from Ground Zero. I also know that one of the principles this country was founded on was freedom of religion. It's right there in that first amendment that you mentioned earlier. Are you suggesting that freedom of religion applies only to Christians? I wonder if you're aware that all three major religions -- Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all trace their roots back to Abraham and all worship the same God?
One other thing: As a (former, if there is such a thing) New Yorker, I can assure you that nobody would dream of "celebrating the murders of Americans" in New York City. Not anyone with a hope of making it through the rest of the day in one piece. 
Then he nominated the anti-semitic, anti-Israel, pro-Iran communist Chuck Hagel for the position of the Secretary of Defense. This would be funny if it wasn't so sad. Hagel hates our country even more than Obama and he would gladly order every soldier to shoot themselves if he could.
Um... "Semite" is a term given to a group of people, and is therefore capitalized. Like "American." I see that you capitalized Iran, but decided that "Semite" did not deserve capitalization. What does this say about you? Are you anti-Semitic? Do you hate America? And why do you claim that Chuch Hagel, who served his country honorably in the Vietnam war (and earned the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry, two Purple Hearts, an Army Commendation Medal, and the Combat Infantryman Badge) hates our country? He hates it so much that he fought for it? Hates it so much that he saved his brother during combat? (That's a particularly heroic tale, by the way. You should look it up.) Did you serve? Did you know that Kos served? Wait... Why am I asking you questions? You get all your opinions from Fox News.
And now Barack Stalin has declared war on the Constitution with his evil plan to disarm law abiding Americans. His plan to take our Constitutionally protected guns is of course completely illegal but that doesn't matter since laws don't apply to traitorcrats.
Ah, here it is. The "evil plan to disarm law abiding Americans." It's such an evil plan that it does not exist. As much as I'd like to see fewer guns in this country -- there are currently 300 million guns, owned by 20% of American men and 10% of American women -- the steps President Obama has proposed, which have to be voted into law by Congress, do nothing to take away anybody's guns. You really should research these things, you know. It's possible, just possible, that Fox News is not being completely honest with you. Remember when they insisted that Mitt Romney was going to win the election?
Our country is dying and turning into a third-world stalinist dictatoship. So basically you got your wish. But I will rather go to one of your prison camps than be a part of the "Soviet States of America". And 50 years from now "Markos Moulitsas" will used like "Benedict Arnold" today.
Ah, yes. We're turning into a third-world... wait; what? A "dictatoship?" Is that anything like a potato ship? And third-world? I do not think you know what that word means. Prison camps? You mean those FEMA prison camps up in Montana, the ones that only exist in Glenn Beck's mind?
Here's the real deal: The only party trying to turn this country into a dictatorship would be the Republican party, those nice folks who want to restrict voting to the "right" kind of people (read: Republicans,) those nice folks who only have a majority in the House because they successfully gerrymandered their districts back in 2010*, those nice folks who are so desperately afraid of true democracy that they do everything in their power to stop it.
* - The Republicans even bragged about how they held their majority in the House despite getting one million -- that's one million -- fewer votes nationwide than the Democrats. Read about it here, in their official report.

Friday, January 11, 2013

A Compendium of Republican Threats

Republicans just hate it when they don't get their way -- especially when they don't get their way at the ballot box -- and are not shy about threatening violence. Remember Sharron Engel and her "Second Amendment Remedies?" For a political party that professes to love America, they sure don't have much use for democracy, do they? I'll add to this list as my research turns up more cases.

Tuesday, January 08, 2013


Today, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration released their "State of the Climate" report, in which they noted that 2012 was the warmest year on record. By a lot. Members of the Republican party are quick to point out that we can't do anything about it. Twenty kindergarten children were slaughtered a few weeks ago by a nut with an assault rifle. Republicans were quick to point out that we can't do anything about that, either. They, clearly, are Republican'ts.