With Trouble A-Brewin' At Home, Presidents Head Overseas

To coin a phrase, they "get out of Dodge." It may be to Camp David (Jimmy Carter to meditate before disastrous 'Malaise' speech/Bill Clinton to mend fences with Hillary), the ranch (George W. Bush/Ronald Reagan), or to friendly (for them) foreign policy pastures in Cairo and Afghanistan (Nixon/Obama).

Nixon  in  Cairo,  June  1974 — Obama in Afghanistan,  December 2010

Two months after his triumphant trip to Cairo, Egypt President Nixon would resign in disgrace, while back home the Watergate noose tightened inexorably around his doomed presidency. Obviously, President Obama's problems today dwarf what Nixon faced at the time, but they are similar in one respect: Both Presidents' problems were of their own making.

President Obama has consistently reneged on his campaign promise to take a firm stand on ending tax cuts for the rich, now that the rubbber has hit the road. And he is on the verge of caving on every other issue too, from START, a treasonous and unprecedented treaty obstruction by Republicans, to DADT to extending unemployment benefits, which are being held hostage to the Bush tax cuts. As Paul Krugman said: "It’s hard to escape the impression that Republicans have taken Mr. Obama’s measure — that they’re calling his bluff in the belief that he can be counted on to fold. And it’s also hard to escape the impression that they’re right."

Nixon's triumphant motorcade through the streets of Cairo was but a brief respite from the fires of Watergate consuming his presidency. Two months after this President's trip to Afghanistan, once the new Republican Congress takes over, wither his presidency? It would be less surprising were President Obama to announce he's not running for a second term and then proceed to spend his dwindling days in office rubber stamping reactionary Republican initiatives while playing War Chief, than if he suddenly decided to channel his inner Democrat. At this critical juncture in our history, the last thing we need is a Lear or a Hamlet roaming the White House corridors. What the country needs, and deserves, is a generous helping of the spirit of FDR and Truman in our president.

TEA PARTY Remedial Education: Who Benefits From Tax Cuts For The Rich?

Your heroes! The Teabaggers hang on these overpaid hucksters' every word, actually PAY their salaries. How's that working for ya, teabaggin' fool tools? Do you stand to benefit too? Demographically, considering how much government benefits you receive, Medicare and Social Security, gladly paid by MY TAXES, you're not cashing in on much of this Chinese BONUS BONANZA; you're just the saps who nod your heads in fear at the latest absurd conspiracy or racist broadside, and fall in line. Senator Claire McCaskill alluded to this: If this OBSCENE genuflecting to the super rich in which the disparity in wealth between the few at the rarefied top and the rest of us, the widest it's been since 1928, continues, there will be a REAL populist uprising:

“I don’t know how anyone can keep a straight face and say they are for deficit reduction while they insist on a permanent tax cut for the wealthiest Americans, completely unpaid for,” McCaskill said of the GOP stance. “If they think it’s OK to raise taxes for the embattled middle class because . . . (Democrats) don’t give more money to millionaires, it really is time for people in America to take up pitchforks.”

Coming from a  U.S. senator, this was an extraordinary (and WELCOME) statement. It also reflects a level of frustration with the lack of leadership from the White House that is spilling over within Democratic ranks. Just remember (for the few who've read your history) what happened just one year later.

Hail to The Capitulator-in-Chief

There's something slightly off-putting about President Obama paying a "surprise" visit to our troops in Afghanistan at the height of the Bush tax cuts extension debate, which will burn a $100 billion hole in our deficit, in order to give the top 2 percent super rich a bonus — millionaires get the same tax cut everyone else gets up to $250,000 — courtesy of China and the taxpayers, including the unemployed who pay taxes too. It's as if the President is running away from the withering criticism by Democrats on the Left, furious at him for caving to the Republicans. Sure, it's great to see the Commander-in-Chief boosting our troops' morale; that's one of his solemn duties. But the timing of it, just as the Senate is about to ratify the result of his preemptive capitulation to the Republican minority (they will still be a governing minority next year), as the unemployment rate ticked up .2 percent, without even a semblance of standing up for Democratic priorities (extending unemployment insurance, holding firm on the middle class tax cuts) or calling Republicans on their fraudulent "concern" over deficits is, well ... the adjectives abound based on one's scale of seething. Paul Krugman (here's why he's my favorite columnist) tells it like it is in his New York Times Nov. 2 column:

Freezing Out Hope By Paul Krugman - NYT, Nov. 2, 2010

After the Democratic “shellacking” in the midterm elections, everyone wondered how President Obama would respond. Would he show what he was made of? Would he stand firm for the values he believes in, even in the face of political adversity?

On Monday, we got the answer: he announced a pay freeze for federal workers. This was an announcement that had it all. It was transparently cynical; it was trivial in scale, but misguided in direction; and by making the announcement, Mr. Obama effectively conceded the policy argument to the very people who are seeking — successfully, it seems — to destroy him.

So I guess we are, in fact, seeing what Mr. Obama is made of.

About that pay freeze: the president likes to talk about “teachable moments.” Well, in this case he seems eager to teach Americans something false.

The truth is that America’s long-run deficit problem has nothing at all to do with overpaid federal workers. For one thing, those workers aren’t overpaid. Federal salaries are, on average, somewhat less than those of private-sector workers with equivalent qualifications. And, anyway, employee pay is only a small fraction of federal expenses; even cutting the payroll in half would reduce total spending less than 3 percent.

So freezing federal pay is cynical deficit-reduction theater. It’s a (literally) cheap trick that only sounds impressive to people who don’t know anything about budget realities. The actual savings, about $5 billion over two years, are chump change given the scale of the deficit.

Anyway, slashing federal spending at a time when the economy is depressed is exactly the wrong thing to do. Just ask Federal Reserve officials, who have lately been more or less pleading for some help in their efforts to promote faster job growth.

Meanwhile, there’s a real deficit issue on the table: whether tax cuts for the wealthy will, as Republicans demand, be extended. Just as a reminder, over the next 75 years the cost of making those tax cuts permanent would be roughly equal to the entire expected financial shortfall of Social Security. Mr. Obama’s pay ploy might, just might, have been justified if he had used the announcement of a freeze as an occasion to take a strong stand against Republican demands — to declare that at a time when deficits are an important issue, tax breaks for the wealthiest aren’t acceptable.

But he didn’t. Instead, he apparently intended the pay freeze announcement as a peace gesture to Republicans the day before a bipartisan summit. At that meeting, Mr. Obama, who has faced two years of complete scorched-earth opposition, declared that he had failed to reach out sufficiently to his implacable enemies. He did not, as far as anyone knows, wear a sign on his back saying “Kick me,” although he might as well have.

There were no comparable gestures from the other side. Instead, Senate Republicans declared that none of the rest of the legislation on the table — legislation that includes such things as a strategic arms treaty that’s vital to national security — would be acted on until the tax-cut issue was resolved, presumably on their terms.

It’s hard to escape the impression that Republicans have taken Mr. Obama’s measure — that they’re calling his bluff in the belief that he can be counted on to fold. And it’s also hard to escape the impression that they’re right.

The real question is what Mr. Obama and his inner circle are thinking. Do they really believe, after all this time, that gestures of appeasement to the G.O.P. will elicit a good-faith response?

What’s even more puzzling is the apparent indifference of the Obama team to the effect of such gestures on their supporters. One would have expected a candidate who rode the enthusiasm of activists to an upset victory in the Democratic primary to realize that this enthusiasm was an important asset. Instead, however, Mr. Obama almost seems as if he’s trying, systematically, to disappoint his once-fervent supporters, to convince the people who put him where he is that they made an embarrassing mistake.

Whatever is going on inside the White House, from the outside it looks like moral collapse — a complete failure of purpose and loss of direction.

So what are Democrats to do? The answer, increasingly, seems to be that they’ll have to strike out on their own. In particular, Democrats in Congress still have the ability to put their opponents on the spot — as they did on Thursday when they forced a vote on extending middle-class tax cuts, putting Republicans in the awkward position of voting against the middle class to safeguard tax cuts for the rich.

It would be much easier, of course, for Democrats to draw a line if Mr. Obama would do his part. But all indications are that the party will have to look elsewhere for the leadership it needs.

New York Daily News Captures GOP MERRY XMAS Card to The Unemployed

This was an opportune time for New York's second newspaper and original tabloid, the NY Daily News, to recycle its most famous headlines ever: "FORD TO CITY: DROP DEAD." It was 1975. (And the newspaper cost 15 cents!) As New York City teetered on the verge of bankruptcy, President Ford (unelected successor to Richard Nixon who had resigned in disgrace over Watergate) gave a speech denying federal assistance to the city. Eventually, President Ford signed legislation providing federal loans to the city, which were repaid with interest. There was miscalculation and posturing on both sides. Ford was rightly miffed because he never said those words. But it was an editorial stroke of genius (there's not much room for boringly accurate block headlines on the News' front page) and it cost President Ford reelection the next year.

Fast forward to Nov. 2, 2010. Today's headline and story behind it focuses on the plight of 95,000 of the city's unemployed whose benefits were cut off today, at the height of the Holiday season, because the Republicans are playing games with their lives. In this instance it was Massachusetts senator Scott Brown, whose name is SHIT in New York, blocking a vote to extend jobless benefits. It's a dangerous kabuki dance these GOP bastards are playing, and if history is any indication they'll end up paying for their craven heartlessness laced with hipocrisy. Teabaggers should take note of the subhead: "But Wall Street Parties Like It's 1999." When a conservative newspaper makes the sweetheart connection between the Tea Party tools and Wall Street, your gig is up. You've hit your highwater mark; now you're headed for a big fall, Teabaggers. Here are the two headlines, side-by-side:

NASA Discovers New Form of Life Made of Arsenic

The discovery of this new biochemical system was made following a sweep of the Republican Caucus and Tea Party rallies in search of human biological carbon life forms. at poisonous Lake Mono in California. Pressed for comment, Republican leaders said this is further confirmation NASA should be scuttled and sold for parts to the Chinese. Mitch McConnell released a letter stating that "Republicans and the American people respect the separation of church and state" and are "appalled" by big government "meddling in God's private affairs." Senator John McCain groused, "get off my lawn! I've already said what I think of DADT!"

New GOPoisonous Life Form Discovered by NASA

RACIST OF THE WEEK: CONGRESSMAN STEVE KING OF IOWA

And it isn’t even Friday.

When Steve King called President Obama an “urban” candidate which is white code language for BLACK, Keith Olbermann said rather generously that he was getting close to “jumping the racism shark.” Keith, this guy made that jump a while back and he’s just circling back to make another jump and another and another, ad nauseum. King tried to walk back his remarks on the ‘little black T-shirt’ dude’s program. This racist’s claim would be a wee bit more credible if he didn’t have a history of racist comments. Back in June, King said the President has a “default mechanism that favors the black person.” More recently, Rep. King said a decades-long settlement of government agencies' discrimination against African American and Native American farmers was “slavery reparations.”

Strange. If unemployment among African Americans is a whopping 52.6 percent compared to the national average of 9.6 percent, I’d hate to think what Mr. King’s non-“default” position is: A return to slavery, or perhaps only indentured servitude? This little-discussed figure is behind the cruelty of  Tea/Republican Party lawmakers in denying millions of unemployed Americans an extension of unemployment benefits. These imbeciles think it’s a “black” problem even though African Americans make up only 13 percent of the general population. While the Idiot Punditocracy opine imperiously that the unemployed have no political leverage (true) it’s the false perception of their skin color that seals the deal for Republicans to vote NO.

(Wait. They’ll vote YES on an $18 billion extension of unemployment as long as it’s paid for from unspent stimulus revenues which are already allocated, but will gladly add $108 billion to the deficit to give the super rich 2 percent of the population a tax cut.)

Ironically, one of the many serious critiques of the Obama administration thus far is he has not paid enough attention to the urgent problems of the black community lest he not be perceived as president of  ALL the people. They’re saying that ANYWAY, Mr. President, so why not forget the optics and just do what’s right.

Congressman Steve King takes his punishment.

Is blatant, open racism by members of Congress part of the House Ethics Committee purview? If something isn't done to address the common use of racism in Congress (especially now with more racists and Teabaggers descending on our capital) we could see another incident like this. In the alternate, restoring the punishment of the pillory on the public (square) Mall as a great new tourist attraction of the evils of Washington D.C. might be enthusiastically embraced by originalists in the Tea Party!

Dear Mr. President: What Would FDR do With a Hand Like This?

Or Truman, or RFK — which is it, Mr. President? Stand on the solid, hallowed ground of the Titans of the Democratic Party or the shifting sands of (with all due respect to their good works) Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.

President Obama Remedial Education: HOW TO BEHAVE LIKE A DEMOCRAT

Ted Strickland, outgoing governor of Ohio, knows. This is his HARSH BUT CONSTRUCTIVE criticism of  the President. Frankly, when the Democratic governor of a key electoral state is so utterly baffled by the President’s inability to recognize Republicans want to ROLL, NEUTER, AND DESTROY HIM, WHAT WILL IT TAKE FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA TO SIT UP AND TAKE NOTICE?!?

LISTEN UP, Mr. President, this isn’t your base whom you seem to be contemptuous of (hasn't listened to us in any substantive way for two years), this is Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland:

“I saw what CNN said after that meeting yesterday. A line saying the president said he should have been willing to work with the GOP earlier. What? After all of this you don't realize these people want to destroy you and your agenda?" he asked. "How many times do you have to be, you know, slapped in the face? Look what they did with health care.

I mean, I understand a reluctance to reach the conclusion that I think a reasonable person can reach: that [Senate Minority Leader Mitch] McConnell was speaking the truth when he said his goal was not to govern, not to develop public policy, but his goal is to defeat this president in 2012. And I think when the base understands that that's what's at stake, the base is going to be much more willing to engage and to join the fight. The base is going to be less willing to join the fight if they don't see the clear differences. The differences are there, for God's sake.”

LESSON #1 FROM THE MASTER — HOW TO STICK THE KNIFE IN REPUBLICAN HIDES AND TWIST IT, WITH A WINK AND A SMILE, IN INCOMPARABLE FDR-STYLE (He could be delivering this speech TODAY):

PS. "Intellectual elitism" is Gov. Strickland's code denomination for Blue Dog/DLC/corporatist inauthentic Democrats of the type Chris Matthews cannot get enough of. Chris is already going on one of his bonehead rampages re: the deficit, playing on the enemy's territory in which he's throughly comfortable and sanguine. Once again, his negative obsession with the public option manifests itself. No, Chris, it has been anything but "thoroughly discussed" on your show. Misrepresented and slimed, by you, yes.

Funnin’ Rachel Maddow (Part Deux): Rachel Gets Her Wish as Keith Repels Michele’s Come-On (Kinda)

(This isn’t rating week, is it? Just checking …)

Caption This:

Rachel embraces her "inchoate yearning ..."

Meanwhile, back at 30 Rock, the “cable” show … For some weird, inexplicable reason wingnut women (many repeat Worst Persons) flock to Keith Olbermann as if he were the embodiment of that character in the Dos Equus beer commercial, “the world’s most interesting man.” Laura Ingraham allegedly dated him. Ruthie, Olbermann’s possessive-compulsive media stalker at the Daily Caller, dedicates a weekly column to Keith’s every utterance. And now, most shocking of all, Michele Bachmann has expressed a burning desire to be stranded on a desert island with him:

“I think it would be so interesting to have a discussion with him. And I think he would be willing to have a discussion. I do.”

Sounds like a come-on to me. After splitting a few coconuts, what “discussion” could Keith and Michele possibly have on a desert island? Think about it. Keith’s reaction to Michele:

SUGGESTED ALTERNATE REACTION:

If President Obama Were More Like Harry Truman

He'd never stand for this outrage from Texas Rep. Joe Barton, the pallid, pathetic clown lobbying to chair the House Energy Committee. Barton had the unmitigated gall to compare himself to legendary WWII general George S. Patton in this tasteless adolescent self-promotion:

If Barton is Patton, Boehner Eisenhower and Cantor Omar Bradley, what does that make President Obama — Hitler? If President Obama were like Harry Truman, here’s what he might say to Joe Barton:

“Joe, my Grandfather served under General Patton, and you dodged the Vietnam draft when your number came up. That’s the reality. I’m glad you’re no Patton or you’d still be trying to fight your way out of Sicily today.”

And to Mitch McConnell, who said his number one objective is defeating the President: “Make my day, Mitch. Give me your best shot. But don’t try playing hardball with me if you can’t match me stride for stride.”

Instead we got the pablum of today’s photo-op in the White House. We’d like to see President Obama throw a few more elbows around instead of taking them. Be more like ‘Give ‘em Hell Harry’ Mr. President.

Heh … As if.

Funnin’ Rachel Maddow: Flippin’ The Prop

Rachel Pop Quiz: Name the prop Rachel was holding up to make a serious point about “our problem” before she dropped this saucy double entendre: “This is very nice. And it works both ways! It just means something different …”

WikiLeaks: Damaging or a Positive Paradigm Shift in Foreign Policy?

What do you do when you’ve got the mightiest military force hanging out in your backyard at your beck and call, putting out brushfires, while you fret about a suspicious neighbor from a different tribe beefing up his own military power and behaving like he’s king of the block? You might just ask your big bad military “guests” to snuff out the suspicious neighbor’s military force before it gets too strong.

According to the latest documents dump of State Department cables — some 250,000 of them — by the WikiLeaks website, that’s exactly what our Mideast “ally” Saudi Arabia did by urging America to attack Iran and take out its nuclear capacity. The UAE added helpfully that ground troops may be required. Gee, and we thought Bibi Netanyahu’s Israeli government was hawkish and warlike … certainly not compared to Saudi King Abdullah. While the Israelis focus on non-lethal cyber attacks to cripple Iran’s nuclear program, the Saudi king and his junior potentates in their medieval garments are all gung-ho over war with Iran. As long as it’s American lives on the line.

King Abdullah reminds me of  the anti-Castro agitator who kept alive the dream of “liberating” Cuba by “urging” America to invade the island and take Castro out. I remember telling one of these dudes that if he wanted his island “back” (a common refrain these days re: the U.S. … where did it go?) do what Castro did: lead a group of guerrillas to Cuba, head for the Sierra Maestra, and start a war against the Cuban government. Oh, and maybe grow a beard to look like Che. But don’t demand (he wasn’t asking) that the U.S. should expend blood and treasure staging another Bay of Pigs to satisfy his right wing agenda. Needless to say, that didn’t go over very well.

For Americans like Sarah Palin who don’t know the difference between EYE-ran (Iran) and EYE-rack (Iraq) here’s a brief primer:  In the tribalist world of Middle East (and environs) Arab and Muslim nations, of the two major Islamic sects — Sunni and Shia — Sunnis comprise about 85 percent of Muslims with large majorities in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and most Arab nations, as well as non-Arab Turkey, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Iran is the Shia outlier and a major regional power made stronger by George W. Bush’s reckless invasion and war of choice in Iraq.

By deposing Saddam Hussein, the U.S. turned a tenuous regional balance of power on its head, empowering Iran to flex its regional muscles and the weaker oil-rich Sunni states to secretly (lest their interests be aligned with Israel’s) urge a U.S. strike on Iran. The minority Shia dictator of Iraq had nothing at all to do with the 9/11 terrorist attacks carried out by Sunni fanatics, most of whom were Saudi nationals. Nor did Saddam have weapons of mass destruction or the means to obtain them. But he did provide a check on Iranian power and regional hegemony, which was shattered by the invasion of Iraq.

In backing the Iraqui Shia insurgency against the U.S. and the Sunni government of Iraq, Iran has been just destabilizing enough to inflict pain in casualties, resources and materiél on the U.S., while weakening the political structure. And we haven’t even gotten to Af-Pak yet, the nexus of Islamic terrorism today. That is the border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan where Bin Laden and Al Qeda (Sunni fundies) are holed up, with hot spots all the way to Yemen. It may be an oversimplification but the relevant point, getting down to brass tacks, is that the Shia-Sunni sectarian divide is thousands of years in the making and we’re the clueless kids on the block taking fire from all sides.

Fahrenheit 911 had a scene of U.S. authorities hustling (facilitating) the flight of Saudi members of Bin Laden’s family out of the country only hours after the 9/11 attacks, when all commercial flights were grounded. Nothing could have been more symbolic of the incestuous vassal-master relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia than the country from which most of the 9/11 terrorists originated should be given the royal treatment to remove members of the 9/11 terrorist mastermind family from the reach of U.S. law. 

This uneven relationship drove President Obama to insist throughout his campaign and presidency on the urgency of freeing ourselves of Middle East oil dependency: It wasn’t just about the abstract need (in most Americans’ minds, amid all this “cheap” Saudi oil) to gain strength through energy independence. He spoke of what we knew to be true but didn’t have “official” confirmation of: Saudi Arabia is one of the sleaziest anti-American operators (they’re not a country, they’re a crime family) on the face of the globe, and they have us by the balls.

All they need to do is turn off the oil spigot.

The U.S. government knew of Saudi madrassas throughout the world, those schools that have become breeding grounds for terrorists. But they chose to look the other way. Now we get “official” confirmation thanks to WikiLeaks that “Saudi donors remain the chief financiers of Sunni militant groups like Al Qaeda.” How can the Saudis be our “allies” at the same time they're funding and perpetuating terrorism? My educated guess is that Saudi intelligence knows a whole lot more about prospective terrorist plots against America than it is willing to share. But it will continue to warn U.S. intelligence when such plots go operational … as long as the U.S. does its bidding. The word for this is, extortion.

Perhaps we can turn the WikiLeaks State Department documents dump into an opportunity. Turn lemons into lemonade. Go in a different, honorable direction of open and frank diplomacy, of sunshine, and treat those nations that harbor, fund, promote and encourage terrorism as the pariahs they ought to be. And if they deign to turn off the spigot, we shall take all necessary measures to protect our interests — a paradigm shift in foreign policy that recognizes the new realities of a WikiLeaker's world.

NEED I SAY MORE?

By Gabriella Schwarz - CNN | Published: 11:30 AM 11/28/2010 | Updated: 11:58 AM 11/28/2010

Please note, people. Published here first.

Take Me to Your Leader: Inside Sarah Palin’s Primitive Brain And Its Reaganesque Origins

Analysis overkill is what the Idiot Punditocracy, Palin’s “lamestream media,” (they love it because it sets them apart from her peeps) is doing with its incessant and loopy speculation over whether Sister Sarah will run in 2012. She’s running. Most of the Idiot Punditocracy/”lamestream media” know it. But they keep the ratings-war speculation going. Besides, playing Palintology parlor games is big in Washington these days. The latest Palin/media collaborative howl was mistaking North for South Korea. As gaffes go, it wasn’t that serious if not for her well-known and obvious ignorance of the most elementary Fifth grade history and geography facts. One British publication said dryly that Palin needs to “brush up” on her geography.

Conservative media immediately put up a stoic defense of Palin. The right wing website Weekly Standard noted that she “correctly identified North Korea as our enemy literally eight seconds before the mix-up.” As if this was a pop quiz and Sister Sarah passed the FAIL test literally by beating the 10-second rule — it used to be five seconds, but who’s counting — or some version thereof, in which food as metaphor for faux pas “promptly picked up is not considered fallen.” Our favorite wingnut slime site, Daily Caller, went further by falsely claiming Palin “corrected herself” quickly:

“In a discussion Wednesday about how to react to North Korea’s recent attacks on its southern neighbor, Palin accidentally said, “we’ve got to stand with our North Korean allies” but then quickly corrected herself. Media outlets jumped on the isolated quote, and some neglected to mention that just eight seconds earlier, Palin had correctly identified the two countries and has spoken about conflict on the Asian peninsula at length in the past.”

This is typical of what passes as journalism in Rightwingville. All media at one time or another omit certain facts from a story and give others relevance. But only in right wing media is the actual omission of facts as used to misrepresent the story a common occurrence, so common in fact that “fixed” or “faux” news is just another way of saying propaganda. Here’s how the Palin interview and faux pas actually went down, with the full transcript for context, courtesy of the liberal media, because the truth is not our enemy. Sarah Palin did not  “correct herself”— rather, she was corrected by the radio co-host.

Most interesting and revealing, though, was Sister Sarah’s defensive reaction. First, she whined that the media was applying a kind of double standard on her, compared with President Obama’s occasional gaffes. Then she posted a Facebook lament with YouTube links “just in case you doubt the accuracy of these all too human slips-of-the-tongue.” Mama Grizzly hasn’t yet realized this train has left the station. The minimum threshold of competence, intellect, and knowledge assigned to the president of the United States has long since been crossed by President Obama in the public’s view. Barack Obama is the President, with a long list of achievements and better approval ratings today than Ronald Reagan had at the same time in his presidency. Worse still, Palin insists on attacking the First Lady. Reagan, whom Palin pretends to emulate, wasn’t  nearly so classless and trailer trashy.

Palin’s whiny lament becomes ever more pathetic once we consider the examples she plucks from YouTube. Obama conflating Europe as a country isn’t that big a deal given that the European Union with its 27-member countries has often been compared to one country: Europa. It’s one huge trading market with 500,000 citizens and one currency, offering EU citizenship and passport with the right to work and travel in all member countries. What would you call that, Teabaggers … a socialist conspiracy? (I can already picture Teabagger and birther heads exploding all around us.) Other common Obama “slips-of-the-tongue” included 57 states (50), 100 days (100 years), and so on. My favorite so-called Obama “gaffes” though were “rise of privacy” instead of piracy (the context was recovery of a pirated vessel, so it shouldn’t even have merited mention), and “I don’t know what the term is in Austrian for that …” in response to an Austrian reporter’s question at a NATO gathering. Huh?

Obviously, the wingnuts who breathlessly collect such clips, not to speak of Sister Sarah, lack a sense of humor. The President continued by saying, “wheeling and dealing.” He had injected an American figure of speech using a variation of “pardon my French,” which is how someone about to make a slightly slangish remark for the setting or audience may preface it. Since the President was holding an international presser at NATO headquarters, his reply to an Austrian reporter made perfect sense. It wasn’t a gaffe; just ignorance on the part of those who thought so. But no other words, facts and figures Mama Grizzly could mangle can possibly compare to this torture-equivalent Bushism:

There’s a tendency to go overboard with these Palinisms. She’s a media phenomenon in her own right and a lightning rod for right wing politics such that any effort by the “media” to tamp down its Palin compulsion would be impossible. Mama Grizzly is a hot media property. She is as active in promoting her brand as the “media” is in stoking Palinist ratings controversies. The Bristol Palin Dancing With The Stars voting demi-scandal is a good example of what we might call the Palin effect. Curiously, conspiracy peddlers on the right have been strangely silent; they will expend energy stoking fear and loathing in the low-information populace with absurd conspiracies but when a possibly genuine one comes along pushed by the hated “liberal media” they’re MIA.

Is there a right wing conspiracy in the works to destroy Sarah Palin’s powerlust for the presidency? Or have even the Palins come to recognize the cred-demolishing absurdity of Bristol beating out Jennifer Grey of “Dirty Dancing” star power on the strength of the Tea Party vote? Had the votes been correctly counted giving Bristol the victory, it would have become the perfect metaphor for the ignorance-is-bliss insanity represented by the Tea Party. Sadly, though, it seems higher powers intervened and adversaries collaborated to ensure the “proper” outcome. And who ever said conspiracies and cover-ups aren’t real? Paging Glenn Beck.

The conservative take on Mama Grizzly is an amusing mix of wishful thinking and vox populi endearments. Conservative radio personality Michael Medved claims Palin is just like the “rest of us” in contrast to the Washington elites. Apparently he hasn’t checked Mama Grizzly’s sky-high negatives. Yes, she has a base among Teabaggers, Christian fundies, and reality show junkies, but these constituencies do not a majority of the American people make. New York Times columnist David “bobo” (means dummy in some languages) Brooks opined Palin is not running because her statements are mainly directed at the media and she really isn’t that interested in issues and governing. Um David, when have Republicans last had an interest in governing — don’t you know their thing is all about power, heaping more unearned wealth on their rich and powerful cronies, and destroying the New Deal?

You’d have to go back to ‘Tricky Dick’ Nixon for a Republican president who last harbored an actual interest in governing. And look at what happened to him. Paranoid of his own shadow, surrounded by real “enemies” on the right and imagined ones on the left, Nixon went down in a blaze of infamy consumed by the flames of his own powerlust and the forces (“get on with it!” hissed Don Regan, Reagan chief of staff and Merrill Lynch CEO) that later elevated the “amiable dunce” Ronald Reagan to the presidency.

The Reagan agenda consisted of transferring wealth from the middle to the ruling classes and “starving the beast” of government with trickle-down tax and fiscal policies that exploded the deficit triggering downward pressure on FDR New Deal programs that had effectively created the Democratic-voting middle class. In building his New Right coalition, Reagan doubled down on Nixon’s successful “Southern strategy” on steroids by kicking off his 1980 presidential campaign from Philadelphia, Mississippi, site of the heinous murders of three civil rights “freedom rider” workers in the 1960s. This was widely recognized by the white racist “states rights” voter accustomed to communicating in coded racist language as a Reagan ‘wink-and-a-nod’ in their direction. Some will rightly recall Reagan’s Berlin Wall speech calling on Gorbachev to “tear down this wall” as the high point of his presidency. And yet as symbolism goes, few Reagan boosters are willing to concede the dark symbolic low points represented by Philadelphia, MS and Reagan’s visit to the SS cemetery in Bittburg, Germany.

Reagan invited the dormant Christian Right into grassroots Republican politics, forever changing the party’s face for the worst. Gone were the last vestiges of moderation in the GOP, and the so-called moderate holdouts today, all targeted for elimination by the Tea Party, behave more like conservatives than shifting “centrists” (whatever “centrist” means today). Ancillary to this was a disastrous deregulatory regime that persists to this day — an all-out assault on environmental, drug, food, and financial regulations that have had tragic costs for the country, from increased deaths from tainted drugs and food to more deaths and environmental disasters brought on by lax regulation of fossil fuels and the energy industry. After Carter’s energy program was scuttled, overreliance on imported Middle East (terrorist) oil set the conditions for foreign multinational BP to extract conditions from so-called sovereign U.S. states and an apology from a sitting Republican Congressman.

The point of this brief sojourn back to Reagan Republicanism is to suggest that Sarah Palin is the true, authentic heir to the Reagan legacy. It’s not about Reagan having served two terms as governor of California and Sarah Palin only two years as governor of Alaska. It’s about Palin’s charismatic appeal to Reagan’s natural base. Most of her supporters grew up idolizing Ronald Reagan. They see in Palin the prodigal daughter. And this drives the Republican establishment to fits of conniption. But astute political observers recognize Palin as the main force in the Tea/Republican Party going into the 2012 elections.

For liberals and progressives a Palin candicacy represents both opportunity and peril. Strangely enough, the opportunity will be confronting and slaying the Reagan ideological anti-government beast on the battleground of ideas. The prospect of a Palin candidacy revealing to all Americans that the Empress has no clothes in a drip-drip-drip of daily devastating revelations terrifies the Republican establishment. The GOP talk of stopping her 2012 candidacy is real. The peril for liberals and progressives is that Palin may actually win. Especially if billionaire technocrat Mike Bloomberg pursues an independent candidacy. In the last analysis, no great opportunity comes without risk.

Thanksgiving/TSA jokes

Safe travels, everyone. If you must fly, be thankful you're not a woman in an SRO Japanese subway car.

TEA PARTY Remedial Education: Now You No Longer Need to Watch Glenn Beck

The Glenn Beck Conspiracy Generator: TRY IT.

Five (And-a-Half) Signs That The “GOPOCALYPSE NOW” is Upon Us

Chris Hayes of the Nation magazine subbing for Rachel last night summarized the perilous crossroads we’re at as a country as well as anyone. Using the game of “chicken” metaphor Chris laid out the dangerous, destructive and unpatriotic brinksmanship being played by Republicans in the House and Senate in their almost arrogant expectation that the President and Democrats will cave. After all, that's been their MO, and the Republican minority has heaped huge political rewards from being obstructionist bullies. Indeed, if President Obama and the Democratic Party do not hold fast against this oncoming GOP train wreck the results could be catastrophic, with unforeseen consequences for the nation.

President Obama and the Democratic Party. Feeling lucky, anyone? Watch:

1. FILIBUSTERING the START Treaty. Essentially, this treaty “would make modest reductions, cutting both countries' deployed arsenals by 30 percent, down to 1,500 strategic nuclear weapons each. It would also reestablish verification measures.” Valerie Plame, the CIA agent outed by Karl Rove and the Bush regime, is an in situ expert on the current state of nuclear proliferation in the world. She is emphatic that START must not be rejected.

In terms of nuclear arms treaties, it’s a no-brainer. Never before in the history of bilateral nuclear arms negotiations between the U.S. and Russia (the former Soviet Union) have Republicans been so reckless and irresponsible at playing politics with it. The consequences are severe; killing the treaty would: (a) increase the real likelihood that stray nuclear weapons in uninspected arsenals fall into terrorist or rogue state hands; (b) precipitate arms races worldwide once the two largest nuclear arsenals failed to make mutual reductions; (c) shatter U.S.-Russia bilateral relations, which are built on mutual trust (plus verify) and results; (d) weaken President Obama’s influence on the world stage, emboldening potential enemies such as North Korea and Iran, and adversaries such as China to flex their regional muscles, heightening the threat of regional war leading to a nuclear exchange. North Korea’s nuclear trigger finger is twitchy as it is.

It was Republican Senator Arthur Vandenberg who said in 1947 that “politics stops at the water’s edge.” He meant that in matters of  national interest we set partisan issues aside and do what’s right. This has been a cornerstone of nuclear arms treaties honored by the two major parties and four Democratic and five Republican presidents from JFK to GWB.

Until now.

Senator John Kyl of Arizona (what is it about Arizona that produces such detestable politicians as Kyl, McCain, and Brewer?) announced his intention to block START despite ringing endorsements from world leaders and former secretaries of state from both parties. As Spencer Tracy said to the judge in that famous scene playing Clarence Darrow, this Arizonan cactus ass may have the POWER but not the RIGHT to block a treaty that has been fully vetted in the U.S. national interest.

2. FILIBUSTERING the debt limit raise. Not only are these hypocritical bastards RESPONSIBLE for our debt and economic plight, but now they have decided to engage in nihilistic anarchy, like so many spoiled children in their own private Lord of The Flies world, to destroy the good name and credit of the United States and plunge our country into another Great Depression. These scumsuckers, Teabaggers, and wingnuts are quite simply INSANE.

Only Paul Krugman could cast this showdown in Biblical, but accurate, proportions.

3. FILIBUSTERING an extension of tax cuts for rich oligarchs. The Republicans are shameful LIARS on this issue. There is ZERO empirical evidence that the super-rich getting a deficit-exploding tax extension will create jobs. Warren Buffett slammed the idea as did patriotic millionaires who said they do not need nor do they want their tax cuts extended.

What is the President’s reaction? He wants to talk, to reason with these scumsucking bastards, even after they turned down his invitation to dinner at the White House.

WILL PRESIDENT OBAMA EVER LEARN?!?

4. FILIBUSTERING repeal of DADT. Secretary Gates is for immediate repeal. So are the JCS, the President (ostensibly, you never know with him), even Senator Lieberman. Will it pass? In a word, NO.

5. FILIBUSTERING an extension of unemployment insurance. It will have expired for 2 million Americans whose benefits have run out at the height of the Holiday season. Will it pass? Again, in a word, NO.

What about our grandchildren, the rosacea-boy buzzword Republicans are instructed to repeatedly mention at every turn? The chutzpah of these Republicans is UNREAL.  If we leave it up to these bastards, our grandchildren will have inherited a dying planet with melting polar icecaps, rising sea levels, extreme climate, and ever rising temperatures. If you’re anywhere near your grandkids, stay away. They may want to KILL YOU.

The time has come for FDR-Truman-RFK Democrats to stand up and be counted. Progressives and liberals watch with growing alarm as our President continues to reach out to Republicans in the face of their growing insanity and extremism. Politics is a learning and adjusting process. But it is, fundamentally, about learning the right lessons. Progressives derive no “I told you so” pleasure at having been consistently right from the very beginning of this administration about the nature and tactics of the Republicans. Had the President been more like Truman and RFK I, for one, am convinced we would have a stronger healthcare law with a public option today and not suffered the losses the Democratic Party did in the midterms.

Part of Bobby Kennedy's appeal with conservative white Democrats that Obama never seemed to internalize is that these voters saw Bobby as a straight shooting tough guy who didn't owe anyone anything. The moment Obama embraced the economic elites with his awful appointments of Summers and Geithner, dropped the public option like a hot potato, and sent chief Clinton triangulator Rahmbo off to make sweetheart deals with key corporate players, the President lost progressives and the Heartland.

Sadly, we can no longer rely on a president who has decided it’s a good idea to break bread with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. This is is tough love, Mr. President, but honestly it's starting to look like a scene from Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Or that signature line used by progressive Pat Quinn to defeat his wingnut opponent for governor of Illinois: “WHO IS THIS GUY?”

Let's call it a preemptive critique. If President Obama as the Democratic Party's LEADER stands up to the Republicans, giving his party an injection of backbone, progressives will be delighted to echo Roseanne Roseanadana and say ... "never mind." Because the other choice is this:

Look Out, Idiot Punditocracy ... Sister Sarah's Out to Getcha!

With her "Communications degree" no less ... "I want to help clean up the state (that is so sorry today) of journalism; who, what, where, when, and why of reporting." She's pretty good at it, too. Not very bright, but media savvy. First Mama Grizzly deep-sixed Katie Couric. Who's next: Andrea Mitchell, Contessa Brewer, Chris Jansing, or Tamron Hall? Better bone up on your journalism 5Ws, 'cause the Empress of the Tundra's comin' for ya!

Gretchen Carlson's Subconscious Takes a Dump on Sister Sarah

Mama Grizzly's new reality show is aptly described, for once:

Socialist Party Youth of Catalonia PSA: Voting Is a PLEASURE ...

Sex, socialism, and the perfect orgasm: VOTING! (Why couldn’t the Dems think of creative PSAs like these to close the “enthusiasm gap” in the youth vote?)

Shout-out to Bina for this.