Krugman Does Buffalo Springfield — And Hits Nail On The Head

One of the anthems of the 60s demonstrations against the Vietnam War was the Rock classic by Buffalo Springfield, which later morphed into CSN&Y, "For What It's Worth." Many of the Occupy Wall Street protesters hadn't even been born when the song came out, but as with every great piece of music it has an enduring, universal message that is as relevant today as it ever was. Notably, Paul Krugman's column starts off with the song's opening, and he nails the landing. Here's Steven Stills with a kickass solo version of the song.

Confronting the Malefactors
By Paul Krugman

There’s something happening here. What it is ain’t exactly clear, but we may, at long last, be seeing the rise of a popular movement that, unlike the Tea Party, is angry at the right people.

When the Occupy Wall Street protests began three weeks ago, most news organizations were derisive if they deigned to mention the events at all. For example, nine days into the protests, National Public Radio had provided no coverage whatsoever.

It is, therefore, a testament to the passion of those involved that the protests not only continued but grew, eventually becoming too big to ignore. With unions and a growing number of Democrats now expressing at least qualified support for the protesters, Occupy Wall Street is starting to look like an important event that might even eventually be seen as a turning point.

What can we say about the protests? First things first: The protesters’ indictment of Wall Street as a destructive force, economically and politically, is completely right.

A weary cynicism, a belief that justice will never get served, has taken over much of our political debate — and, yes, I myself have sometimes succumbed. In the process, it has been easy to forget just how outrageous the story of our economic woes really is. So, in case you’ve forgotten, it was a play in three acts.

In the first act, bankers took advantage of deregulation to run wild (and pay themselves princely sums), inflating huge bubbles through reckless lending. In the second act, the bubbles burst — but bankers were bailed out by taxpayers, with remarkably few strings attached, even as ordinary workers continued to suffer the consequences of the bankers’ sins. And, in the third act, bankers showed their gratitude by turning on the people who had saved them, throwing their support — and the wealth they still possessed thanks to the bailouts — behind politicians who promised to keep their taxes low and dismantle the mild regulations erected in the aftermath of the crisis.

Given this history, how can you not applaud the protesters for finally taking a stand?

Now, it’s true that some of the protesters are oddly dressed or have silly-sounding slogans, which is inevitable given the open character of the events. But so what? I, at least, am a lot more offended by the sight of exquisitely tailored plutocrats, who owe their continued wealth to government guarantees, whining that President Obama has said mean things about them than I am by the sight of ragtag young people denouncing consumerism.

Bear in mind, too, that experience has made it painfully clear that men in suits not only don’t have any monopoly on wisdom, they have very little wisdom to offer. When talking heads on, say, CNBC mock the protesters as unserious, remember how many serious people assured us that there was no housing bubble, that Alan Greenspan was an oracle and that budget deficits would send interest rates soaring.

A better critique of the protests is the absence of specific policy demands. It would probably be helpful if protesters could agree on at least a few main policy changes they would like to see enacted. But we shouldn’t make too much of the lack of specifics. It’s clear what kinds of things the Occupy Wall Street demonstrators want, and it’s really the job of policy intellectuals and politicians to fill in the details.

Rich Yeselson, a veteran organizer and historian of social movements, has suggested that debt relief for working Americans become a central plank of the protests. I’ll second that, because such relief, in addition to serving economic justice, could do a lot to help the economy recover. I’d suggest that protesters also demand infrastructure investment — not more tax cuts — to help create jobs. Neither proposal is going to become law in the current political climate, but the whole point of the protests is to change that political climate.

And there are real political opportunities here. Not, of course, for today’s Republicans, who instinctively side with those Theodore Roosevelt-dubbed “malefactors of great wealth.” Mitt Romney, for example — who, by the way, probably pays less of his income in taxes than many middle-class Americans — was quick to condemn the protests as “class warfare.”

But Democrats are being given what amounts to a second chance. The Obama administration squandered a lot of potential good will early on by adopting banker-friendly policies that failed to deliver economic recovery even as bankers repaid the favor by turning on the president. Now, however, Mr. Obama’s party has a chance for a do-over. All it has to do is take these protests as seriously as they deserve to be taken.

And if the protests goad some politicians into doing what they should have been doing all along, Occupy Wall Street will have been a smashing success.

Steve Jobs, Apple Creator And American Genius, Dead at 56

Chris Matthews Remedial Ed: Michael Moore Schools Chris ...

Touted as the "Great Democratic Debate"— should President Obama jaywalk or go "passionate progressive" (code for "HARD LEFT") — Chris Matthews pitted Mark Penn, a contemporary of Bob Schrum's in the can't lose (Hillary) win-loss column and Democratic establishment pol with a rather gross Nixonesque upper-lip sweat (worse in HDTV), versus filmmaker Michael Moore. Viewed as a "passionate progressive" (code for non-politico, non-pragmatic silly idealist who will argue generalities against the pragmatic electoral/electorate analysis of pros like Penn) Moore was supposed to be a relative pushover in this opening segment. Oops ...

Michael began by schooling the Beltway Idiot Punditocracy on key definitional terms, pushing back against their twisted, right-leaning political worldview: "I don't know that I agree with the definition of terms here. Let me say this, President Obama should actually move to the center, because he's not there now. The center of American public opinion right now is the vast majority of Americans want to tax the rich. Every poll shows that. The vast majority of Americans want these wars to end ASAP. The vast majority of Americans want strong environmental laws. And you go down the whole list of things, that's the center position."

Here it is, AGAIN, a nice picture for the slow learners among the Idiot Punditocracy:

Michael Moore continued: "What you're calling the left position is actually the center, middle position — the majority of Americans want this and they don't want Social Security or Medicare touched. Not one single dime of it touched. The more that [President Obama] talks about creating some grand bargain with the Republicans or trying to appease them in some way, that's why he, I think, has suffered in recent times, because he's left where the center of real — where the real political majority is in this country right now and he`s gone over to try and placate this other side. And when he does that, he loses so many people that are either no longer interested in him or they`ll vote for him but they`re depressed about it."

GAME, SET — MATCH to Mr. Moore!

From Chris's perspective, his planned choreography of the wimpy center (actually the center-right) went downhill from there. Chris got snippy when Clarence Page, columnist for the conservative Chicago Tribune, unsettled him by going off-script — Chris's script. Chris (irritably): "I thought you were going to make the moderate argument, the Mark Penn argument, the Eddie Rendell argument, should go down the middle ..."

PAGE: That is the middle.

MATTHEWS (Irritably): Progressives — OK. Here we go with the definitions.

WALSH: That is the middle.

MATTHEWS (Über-irritably): We can play this game all night.

WALSH: I know.

MATTHEWS: If the progressive side was such a popular side in this country, why do they have to keep changing their title, their name? If liberalism sold, we'd still be calling it liberalism. This country has a built-in resentment against big government.

PAGE: That's not the real America, Chris. That's not the real America part about populist, liberal, conservative. People of real America care about the issues; rebuilding roads and bridges. Whether you're left, rightor middle or whatever, it doesn't matter. They want to see the jobs. They want to see the work being done. They want to see Obama out there fighting for their side. They want to feel like he is an ally, and not too aloof.

Then Chris gets downright snippy and confrontational when his guests go off-script, and lets us in on, maybe this wasn't supposed to be an open, free-wheeling discussion after all:

MATTHEWS: I thought Clarence was going to go on tonight — and that's what I thought you said you were going to do (Oops ...) — and back the Bill Clinton approach, not the populist approach. I'm going back to Clarence. What is your position, sir?

WALSH: No, but you know what?

MATTHEWS: I need to know. You first. (Condescendingly) I know where — I know where you are, Joan. Where are you, Clarence?

WALSH: So compromise with Boehner. Forget about it. The other thing I want to say —

MATTHEWS: (Inaudible; blowing Joan away). I got to divide the time. I'm sorry. Clarence, should he be seen trying to make friends with Republicans across the aisle, having beer lunches and all that other crap? Or should he be going to war with the right?

PAGE: He should be seen — he should be seen as getting something done or trying to get something done. And if he fails, at least he'll be able to say he fought hard.

MATTHEWS: OK, there we got your position, trying to cut a deal with Republicans.

END SEGMENT.

Um, Chris ... FYI, it may be your show but the audience isn't stupid and neither are your guests. You lost it here trying to fit a square peg into a round hole to push your bankrupt Beltway Media political fallacies. You present us (and your guests) with a false choice, go to "war" with the right or "make friends with Republicans across the aisle." Huh? That's yesterday's news, pal. The ONLY thing on the table now is the President's jobs bill, which he is pushing hard with support from a phalanx of progressives while it's your remaining so-called MOR Blue Dogs who are balking. What Clarence is saying, CLEARLY, is the President should get his jobs bill done, and if he fails the American people will know he tried and he can run on it blaming Republicans BY NAME.

Incidentally, THIS BLOG, not some of our friends at MSNBC now taking credit for it, was first out of the gate (as we are with most of our cutting-edge political analysis) in pleading with President Obama to "take numbers and name names." So far, he's called out John Boehner, Mitch McConnell and Eric Cantor, the top Republican leadership in Congress. So much for the "expertise" and "wisdom" of the Idiot Punditocracy.

And Chris, you and Joan may go way back, but even old friendships can be strained by the kind of rudeness you showed Joan. She deserves an apology. A real one. Best quote of the program from one of my favorite historians, Douglas Brinkley:

"Obama has to not just work about his reelection, but he`s fighting for the history of the Democratic tradition of Franklin Roosevelt, and to abandon it by a kind of mealy-mouthed middle course would be a mistake. There is no grand bargain. This is war in 2012, and Obama has to win."

TEA PARTY Remedial Ed: OCCUPY WALL STREET Protester Schools Fox

Attention Teabaggers: Have you ever wondered what it would be like to be able to articulate more than three words into a coherent sentence rather than a stupid slogan — "SHUT 'ER DOWN!" or "TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY!" — when the Fox propaganda machine shows up at your widdle demos? I know, I know, you're brain-addled, overweight, middle-aged white people in stupid costumes.

But there's always room for growth, if you're willing to reform your ways and join a true-blue populist movement. Hell, even Dylan Ratigan found a Teabagger amid the protesters to justify his wingnuttery even as he works through decades of his Reaganomics neurosis. What I'm curious about is what's this "lefty agenda" that so offends Dylan.

But we digress. Take note Teabaggers, here's how a LEFTY protester in regular street clothes schooled a Fox crapagandist ON THE ISSUES THAT MATTER TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, AND HOW FOX AND THE REST OF THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA ARE GROSSLY MISINFORMING THE PEOPLE. POP QUIZ, Teabaggers: Was this clip, or any part of it, ever aired by Fox. What do you think, Teabaggers? I can't HEAR YOU ...

The young man's name is Jess LaGreca, and I LOVE how SMART AND ARTICULATE these kids are. You're totally awesome, Jess:

Here Comes The GOP ELEPHANT (Are You In Or Out?): Chris Christie's Campaign Song

Waiting for New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to throw his FAT into the ring ... MEANWHILE, here's the Republican savior's campaign song:

SUPERSIZE 'EM!

Plugging Chris Matthews, LITERALLY: EXTRA RIDICULOUS Show Tonite!

You can always count on the Dean of the Idiot Punditocracy for some totally amorphous, irrelevant, unintentionally hilarious political theater. Let's LISTEN to Chris:

"Which way should Obama go? Which way will offer the most compelling case for reelection next November? What will attract the majority of voters to decide that an Obama second term, four more years of a Democrat controlling the White House and setting national direction is a better bet than giving the Republican candidate a chance? ...

But the problem for Obama is that like a batter in the Major Leagues, by the time you know what pitch is coming your way, it`s too late to adjust your swing. So, it would be best for Obama to make up his mind, HARD LEFT OR DOWN THE MIDDLE."

Hmm ... Well, it seems Mr. Yellow-Stripe-Roadkill has already made up his mind and President Obama's for the rest of us. Since it's Dean Matthews's show, count on it to be accordingly tilted and choreographed with an assortment of Chris's favorite idiot pundits to make the case for Chris's treasured "40-yard line" where nothing much other than lots of spectatin' speculatin' (Chris's specialty) happens. Here's some homework for Chris: Please to define what, and who, is "HARD LEFT." Is it Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman? Is it Gene Robinson, David Corn, Eric Boehlert, E.J. Dionne? Is it his "blogger friends"? Or his hated "netroots people"? Is it Michael Moore (we already know he's being set up for an attempted takedown on Hardball)? Or could it be Chris's colleagues Lawrence (a self-described Hollywood "socialist" — we call them "festive left" in South America) or Rachel, our muse? Maybe it's some "gadfly" Chris and Michael Steele hadn't read about first on this blog, when I described Ron Paul as a GOP "gadfly" and therefore a safe target for (MS)NBC-POLITICO to ask the anti-government questions of, when everybody else on that debate stage subscribed to the same basic nonsense.

So please define for us, Chris, who or what is "HARD LEFT" on the American political spectrum. Unfortunately, I'll bet Chris was too busy scurrying under his desk, fearful of those mean commies on the "HARD LEFT" ...

To catch this political science class — and he's been mangling this reality ever since; even when we show him the PICTURE!

Chris, you will begin the road to recovery once you realize the problem isn't US ... it's YOU. AND THEM:

The REVOLUTION Is Being Televised ... Sort Of

This weekend New York City's finest staged a mass arrest of some 700 protesters participating in OCCUPY WALL STREET with relatively little fanfare. The protesters were blocking traffic on the Brooklyn Bridge, creating a public nuisance. But the BIG STORY here is the ho-hum attitude of the mainstream media that continues under-reporting this true grassroots populist uprising, a peaceful occupation of the Wall Street area by people representing the rest of us 99ers — barely topping 53% of the nation's wealth compared with 47% owned by 1-ONE-UNO% of the occupied shuffling trillions of money bytes in their trading casinos. Here's Michael Moore at Liberty Square, lending his support to the protesters: "I want to see a perp walk! I want to see the people responsible for destroying the lives of millions of people in handcuffs, and put away, and brought to justice — IMMEDIATELY!" Yeah!

Oh the media came, for a spell, when three young women were MACED by a PIG named Bologna. (You're on YouTube, ASSHOLE.) "If it bleeds, it leads," noted Keith Olbermann sardonically. But not for long. You see, the diverse rainbow of humanity occupying Wall Street — multicultural, multilingual, multiracial and overwhelmingly poor — don't have a "TEA PARTY" label in front of their movement. Therefore, in the corporate media's "editorial judgment," they aren't worthy of anything more than drive-by coverage. Why? Well, they don't have the financial backing of right wing millionaires and billionaires; they don't have a dedicated propaganda network (Fox) hyping them 24/7; and they don't pose a (perceived) threat to the mainstream media's financial assets.

Wall Street isn't governed by the ups and downs of Bulls and Bears. It's ruled by SACRED COWS. As we have learned (below) from the eye-opening insights of a Eurozone trader, the markets could care less whether this rescue package or that jobs bill succeed or fail. They stand to make money hand-over-fist no matter what, as long as they prepare and are properly positioned to profit from a "downward market."

The fact is, Wall Street and the top 1% are the ultimate anti-government nihilists; they are governments unto themselves, and they have the hubris and power that comes with unlimited wealth to believe and act as if they're above the law — ANY LAW, national or international — when the rubber meets the road. Oh they'll put up with defanged rules and regulations as long as they don't hurt the bottom line, for cosmetic purposes mainly — go along to get along, and make sure they've bought the whole damned government with millions in chump change to do their bidding. They even fund private groups to write the state and federal laws and regulations that govern the rest of us — 21st century serfdom is their business model, they being the Lords of the Manor.

And they control what's left of freedom of the media, to varying degrees. We still have pockets, enclaves of free media that push back against the corporate media narrative that seeks to box all substantive news and commentary within certain defined parameters. The Beltway Media narrative is one example of peer pressure gone wild. If you don't have "access" (a word that defines emasculated faux journalists) you're nothing. "Access" means giving every rogue and liar the deference due their exalted titles. "Access" also means reporting whispers, innuendo, gossip and lies from anonymous sources as if they're the gospel truth.

Sadly, we acknowledge, celebrate, and encourage the few, the stalwart journalists who are televising the first rumblings of a new American Revolution which began in the states, kept alive by Big Eddie's passionate advocacy for unions and the middle class (they're symbiotic, linked at the hip; people need to understand this), and moved on to Wall Street with an ongoing, remarkable demonstration against the entrenched power of the oligarchs, plutocrats, and ruling elites.

KUDOS to MSNBC's LAWRENCE (my DVR's not working, so sue me!) who has been on top of this story from the very beginning, hosting Michael Moore with a live feed from the Belly of The Beast, Rachel, and Chris Hayes, and of course, the great Keith Olbermann. Everywhere else there's been a virtual news blackout. But not for long. Welcome to AMERIKA!

TEA PARTY Remedial Ed: President Obama, Terrorist Hunter

No shit, Teabaggers!

While Republicans talked an evil game, mostly to inflame the racist predilections of their bloodthirsty base, President Obama actually went about the task of killing terrorists who would do Americans harm.

You have no idea, Teabaggers, not the slightest clue. As stated here, it came as no surprise that President Obama erased OBL. In fact, it's not that hard to hunt down and kill these scumsuckers, given our military and intelligence resources. Seriously. Bin Laden was a useful tool to the Bush regime, including W's re-election, so they kept him alive. Bin Laden's cockiness, living pretty much in plain sight in a heavily guarded compound in Pakistan right around the corner from their "Pentagon" indicated he was in on the game. Or so he thought.

Until a new sheriff came to town. No one should be surprised at President Obama's tough stance. He was to the right of John McCain in this regard, when he said during the campaign that, given actionable intelligence, he wouldn't hesitate to take Al Queda's leadership out, no matter where they were hiding. John McCain, sounding like a Democrat, criticized President Obama for circumventing the proper channels of international collaboration, etc. The Idiot Punditocracy thought the President's statement was hyperbole. Not any more.

 Some have argued that killing terrorists who are U.S. nationals abroad, in hostile territory — Yemen and Pakistan — is unconstitutional; that we should capture them and try them in our courts and, while we're at it, give them a latte and a scone. I don't think so. A U.S. citizen who joins the terrorist organization that killed some 3,000 innocent people on 9/11 is, by definition, a traitor. Whether or not terrorist mass murderers are held for trial, their fate is sealed. They will be executed, just as the Nazi war criminals hung at Nuremberg. Another important distinction is that the Nuremberg trials were held after WWII ended, when Germany was defeated. During the war, Hitler was fair game. There were numerous attempts to assassinate him, and his headquarters were reduced to rubble. Dictators and terrorists have one thing in common: They're protected by heavily reinforced concrete bunkers, compounds, and natural fortresses such as caves.

The notion entertained by Ron Paul that, given actionable intelligence, we should risk the lives of Special Forces teams to extract a terrorist who happens to be a U.S. citizen and bring him up on charges, is ridiculous. Wherever terrorists may gather in hostile territory, whether it be Yemen or Pakistan or any other country that harbors people bent on the mass killing of innocent Americans, if we find them with our 24/7 remote-controlled drones, they're toast.

And good riddance. No more Mr. Nice Guys (Bush and Cheney) keeping terrorists alive to foment internal fear in the population in order to justify the national security state. We've got a Ninja President in the White House who has a different idea of how best to protect the lives of Americans. Here's President Obama's impressive record of hunting down and killing terrorists:

Nate Silver Rubs It In: The Red Sox's Epic Meltdown, By The Numbers

Did the New York Times' Master Geek Nate Silver write this exposé of the Boston Red Sox late season meltdown, which let the Tampa Bay Rays in through the playoffs back door courtesy of the New York Yankees, just to torment Rachel Maddow? (Nate usually reserves his probabilities expertise to polling and politics.) But if Nate's numbers baffle, there's always the conspiratorial view of sports. Here's the New York Times account of those dramatic eight minutes that sealed the fate of two teams. Can anybody say, "yeah, right"?

“Within eight minutes the world changed,” said Yankees third baseman Alex Rodriguez, who was one of several Yankees players monitoring both games in the clubhouse. “That’s what makes baseball the greatest game.”

As the clock approached midnight, the Orioles came back to tie the Red Sox with two outs in the bottom of the ninth, and when the score was relayed to the fans at Tropicana Field, their cheers let the Rays know what was happening up north.

A few minutes later, the Orioles won their game on a walk-off single by Robert Andino, and as the cheers went up again, Rays second baseman Ben Zobrist turned to his teammates in the dugout and said: “This is our game now. We have to win this now.”

At 12:05 a.m. Thursday morning, they did. Evan Longoria, the Rays’ most talented player and the face of the franchise, ripped a 2-2 pitch from Scott Proctor over the low part of the left-field fence and the Rays completed two improbable comebacks, beating the Yankees, 8-7, in 12 innings to win the American League wild card.

After trailing the Red Sox by nine games on Sept. 4, the Rays overcame the largest September deficit in major league history to make the playoffs, unleashing a wild celebration in the process.

“I don’t think there’s any specific explanation for it,” said Longoria, who also hit a three-run home run as part of a wild comeback in the eighth inning. “It’s just a bunch of guys who put together an incredible season.”

Oh really, Mr. Longoria? Here's one "specific explanation": Maybe the fix was in; not for an entire game, but for one inning, maybe even one at-bat. Consider this sequence of events: The Yanks improbably blow a 7-run lead to the Rays — the fastidious Mr. Silver calculalted the chances of this happening at 0.2% while the Red Sox had what can only be termed as a 99.6% metaphysical mortal lock probability of making the playoffs; the game is tied going into extra innings early Thursday morning; the players are tired and want to get off the field, especially the Yanks, for whom this is a meaningless (wink-wink) game; the fans erupt as news of the Red Sox defeat to the Orioles flashes on the scoreboard; then Longoria, their franchise player, seals the Red Sox fate by ripping a (telegraphed? batting practice?) Yanks pitch over the fence.

Hollywood ending? Cinderella finish? Or A-Rod — "who was one of several Yankees players monitoring both games in the clubhouse"— huddling with his millionaire teammates fixin' to inflict some more of the Babe's Curse on their arch-rivals by playing sports gods with a double-whammy: The Yanks clinch a playoff berth and are instrumental in keeping the Red Sox out ... against the same team and principal beneficiary, the Tampa Bay Rays! Sealed with a fist pump. Yep, and it's happened before, too. On the World Cup stage. Just sayin'. Kidding. Maybe. Is Henry Kissinger a Yankees fan, too?

Should that mysterious cosmic force sometimes called "Bad Karma" hit the Yankees during the playoffs, we'll know for sure the fix was in.

TEA PARTY Remedial Ed: A View From The Belly Of The Beast ... VOTE For the AntiChrist!

Attention Teabaggers: You’re about to get a chilling, blood-curdling look inside the BELLY OF THE BEAST, courtesy of this low-level trader whose twisted remnant of a conscience cattle-prods him into letting us in on their filthy, deranged, treasonous little secret: How to make money from the imminent collapse of the world’s economies. Maybe he’s hedging his bets against the suffering of billions he’ll be profiting from, just in case things go south on him too. And for those of you who think this is about Europe, not the U.S. economy, think again: “The governments don’t rule the world. Goldman Sachs rules the world.”

If you're a Republican, or vote Republican against your own best interests — unless you're a two percenter — and you can't believe Republicans are seriously trying to tank the U.S. economy, think again. This isn't the action of irrational people. Treasonous, maybe, but irrational, no. The sole remaining impediment to Republicans making money hand-over-fist from another Great Depression is President Obama. Mitch McConnell openly declared his top priority is defeating Obama in 2012. As we have seen from accidental revelations of Republicans like Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan who stand to benefit from investments and policies that bet against economic recovery, this is only the tip of the iceberg. Watch and you'll understand the evil webs these Republicans weave. They've taken this dude's advice. They're uniquely prepared:

“See, I’m a trader. I don’t really care about that kind of stuff. If I see an opportunity to make money I go with that. So, for most traders, we don’t really care that much how they’re going to fix the economy, how they’re going to fix the whole situation. Our job is to make money from it. And, personally, I’ve been dreaming of this moment for years.

I have a confession: I GO TO BED EVERY NIGHT, I DREAM ABOUT ANOTHER RECESSION, I dream of another moment like this. Why? Because people don’t seem to maybe remember, but the 30’s DEPRESSION, the (GREAT DEPRESSION) of the 1930s wasn’t just about the market crash. There were people who were prepared to make money from that crash. And I think anybody can do that. It's not just for some people in the elite. ... It’s an opportunity. When the market crashes, when the Euro and the big stock markets crash, if you know what to do, if you have the right plan set up, you can make a lot of money from this. For example hedging strategies is one, [the Republicans — Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan, whose investments against economic recovery came accidentally to light] then investing in bonds, Treasury bonds, that sort of stuff.

Everybody who’s watching this; this economic crisis is like a cancer. If you just wait and wait, thinking this is going away … just like a cancer, it’s going to grow and it’s going to be too late. What I would say to everybody is, get prepared. This is not a time right now to wishful thinking that government is going to sort things out. The governments don’t rule the world. Goldman Sachs rules the world. Goldman Sachs does not care about this rescue package, neither do the big funds.”

Then this dude goes on to say he wants to “help people” actually make money from a “downward market” because in less than 12 months “my prediction is, the savings of millions of people [will] vanish. So, I would say, be prepared and act now.” But wait, Teabaggers, there's still hope. Comes the AntiChrist to the rescue, and ... Rapture! Lawrence explains:

REPUBLICAN USES INCENDIARY LANGUAGE AGAINST PRESIDENT OBAMA ON FOX HANNITY SHOW

Tonight I tuned in (just for a minute before being outraged) at America's uncensored PORN channel, Fox, curious to find out whether the Hamlet of Trenton, Jersey BLUBBERMOUTH Governor Chris Christie would finally release the Coultergeist, Hannity, Karl Rove, and a bunch of KOCH-snorting tycoons into orgasmic paroxysms should this be the day Snooki's BEACH BALL announced his candidacy for president. It didn't happen. Hannity's program was on 30-second delay in case heads, or other body parts, exploded, so to speak.

Christie's religious revival was held at the Reagan Tent Library, a speech about leadership and the Republican Gospel according to their LITERAL GOD, Ronald Reagan. Word has it that some Republicans are desperately trying to clone Reagan, and others even hope he will descend from the skies in the chariot used by Charlton Heston in Ben-Hur to reclaim his throne. Meanwhile, in the Hannity set, body temperatures and sexual tension kept rising, manifesting as a dribble of spit from Sean's mouth, the hair inside Karl's ears achieving full piloerection, generalized Nixonesque upper lip sweating, and a pervasive sense of wingnut B.O. reeking of the subtle aromas of McDonald's fries, Meatloaf, cooked vegetables, and cheap cologne.

Wingnut Republican Congressman Connie Mack was on hand to provide off-color and offensive commentary about President Obama. He spoke in weighty terms of Blubbernor Christie, then mentioned the obligatory "shining city on a hill"... Hmm. Has it ever occurred to the wingnuts that the closest physical manifestation of a "shining city on a hill" in this country is the beautiful and gay, ULTRA-LIBERAL European-style enclave and little patch of heaven in America, the City of San Francisco? Yes, the Democratic city where liberal policies achieved affordable universal health care, where crime and unemployment are low, and where one-party Democratic rule ensures a government that works for all the people. As a rule American cities, shiny, flat, or hilly, are Democratic strongholds. Even in Texas. (Or "Te-HAS" as los ilegales de Rick Perry pronounce it.) Compare this to the typical Republican demographic, which lives in Wonder Bread 'burbs, gated communities, and inbred trailer parks.

Republican WORD DU JOUR from the Frank Luntz Propaganda Mill: "DEMONIZE." The wingnut HIVE first started using it with calls from phony "plants" to liberal radio talk shows. They call in claiming to be small business owners with a familiar sob story about Democrats and President Obama trying to "demonize" them for being "successful" and how they're oh, so burdened by "job-killing government regulations." You know, the kind that maintains a safe working environment and keeps benzene out of the water and mercury out of the air. Big Eddie smokes them out, usually after a whole series of callers crying that mean ol' President Obama is out to "demonize" them with his Crass Warfare.

Ironically, the wingnut HIVE are the very opposite of the "entrepreneur" and the creative personality. They must be told what to say and work from a script. They're disciplined worker bees, hence the HIVE, and they will die flying solo. They're a kind of one-dimensional proto-collectivist that even Ayn Rand could not have envisioned, for she gave hers a brain, the better to crush them. For all intents and purposes, when they call Big Eddie, their brain belongs to Frank Luntz. And so, it came as no surprise that Governor Christie charged President Obama with "insisting that we must tax and take and DEMONIZE those who have already achieved the American Dream." Straight from the HIVE. But then LOATHSOME Rep. Connie Mack of Florida said of the Republican mob, which cheered for the death of the medically uninsured, hollered for Perry's record executions, and jeered a gay Marine who is serving our country in Afghanistan:

"They want somebody to TAKE OUT Barack Obama and get this country back on track."

Those were his precise words. Every single word. There was no Fox editing as they did by excising "everybody here’s got a vote" from Jimmy Hoffa's speech when he used the words "take these sons of bitches out" referring to Tea Party candidates. Salty language, to be sure, but the unedited Hoffa passage left no doubt that he was talking about voting them out of office. What Connie Mack said was HATE SPEECH. But no one will protest because it was said on Fox, which traffics in hatred and incendiary, irresponsible language on a daily basis.

Phantom Wall Street Demonstrators MACED By Cops — THE STING IS REAL

Most Americans, not only those who get their news exclusively from Fox, have no idea that an organized grassroots protest by the group Occupy Wall Street involving thousands of demonstrators peacefully protesting Wall Street greed and corruption has been ongoing in the Wall Street area since September 17. How can the public know, when there has been a virtual news blackout imposed on coverage of this demonstration, even if it dwarfs a typical Tea Party demonstration attracting heavy media coverage? Why the news blackout? It's a rhetorical question. Mainstream media is corporate-owned and Wall Street is the transnational corporations' banker. It's really that simple.

But the mainstream media bias regarding which demonstrations to cover — Tea Party, yes; the Left, no — is so blatant that we are reduced to reading NYU Campus media or the British press to find out what the hell is going on in our own backyard. The Guardian actually covered the substance of the demonstration on Wall Street, not simply the visuals. On cable, Keith Olbermann has been flying solo. Things suddenly changed for the media when three young women were pepper sprayed by New York's finest. Here's only PART of Keith's segment. For some inexplicable reason, the most compelling and disturbing part, which shows and discusses the young women being pepper sprayed by the police, is not shown:

Here's the video from USlaw.com which shows the assault in detail. Does this qualify as police brutality?

Obama Campaigning In Poetry — Bob Dylan's Poetry

Mario Cuomo once said you “campaign in poetry but govern in …” well, we won’t get into that. Obviously, the Beltway Media hasn’t got an ear for poetry. But our awesome Rachel Maddow does. (Hell, even Rick Perry confessed to listening to Jesus Christ and Rachel Maddow — not necessarily in that order.) Where the Idiot Punditocracy sees conflict and recrimination, Rachel sees courtship and solidarity. You decide, right?

Seeking compromise and conciliation, proposing a fire sale of the Democratic crown jewels for the sake of his soul-selling “grand bargain” pact with the Devil, the President hits rock-bottom. Then he begins to realize something’s going on here ... It takes the Republican brinksmanship of two government shutdowns, + one for Mr. Obama to fully, finally, grasp its meaning.

This song speaks to the President's futile and fruitless "compromise" phase. Interesting that the media back then (65 or 66?) was just as shallow, stupid, and clueless as it is today. Genius, like Dylan at his peak, is fleeting and impermanent. But you can always count on mediocrity to comfort the comfortable and afflict the afflicted ... through the ages. Watch this rare Bob Dylan performance of “Ballad of a Thin Man” filmed in a small, intimate setting in Copenhagen. It’s totally mesmerizing.

And here’s a great Robert Palmer/UB-40 version of Dylan’s “I’ll Be Your Baby Tonight”… dedicated to President Obama courting the base and the CBC:

58 Second FLAT Post-GOP Debate Analysis: Perry — Do I Get To Go To DISNEYWORLD Now?

THE AUDIENCE auditions for a part in George Romero's latest flick, "ZOMBIE DOMINION USA"...

... RICK PERRY recovers from his "PONZI SCHEME POKER NIGHT" bender ...

"UH ... IF THIS IS WEDNESDAY ... THIS MUST BE FLORIDA?! HOW'M I DOIN', FELLAS?

PIZZAMAN Herman Cain wins the Florida Straw Poll, which sends the Idiot Punditocracy and Chuckles Toddy scurrying and scrambling for rewrite of suitable alternate explanation that doesn't include: ... "its historic role in predicting the next Republican nominee ..." 

RON PAUL rails,"DAMNED COLLECTIVISTS ... DIE! DIE! DIE!!" — 

RACIST, BLOODTHIRSTY, LORD OF THE FLIES AUDIENCE says, plaintively, "We're not racists, WE HAVE A HEART, EVEN IF WE DON'T HAVE A PULSE (CHENEY), we're not the second coming of the Spanish Inquisition, we love FA ... HOMO-sex-UALS ... SEE ... WE CAN CAST A protest vote for the BLACK GUY too ... provided he don't get the TEA PAR ... GOP NOMINATION."

GEORGE ROMERO: "YES YES YES!"

Elizabeth Warren Is AWESOME! (Cont.)

Here's how a true-blue LIBERAL kicks some serious rightwing ass:

Send In The Democratic Party Clowns, Jonathan Alter And Bob Schrum

I couldn't believe it. Coming from Jonathan Alter, a writer I admire (still), particularly as an FDR historian. He wrote a fine book about the greatest president of the 20th century: The Defining Moment: FDR's Hundred Days and the Triumph of Hope. I read it in one sitting. The title gives us a clue to Jonathan's next project, an account of President Obama's first year in office, Promise, perhaps suggesting that the president whose slogans were "hope" and "change" would be the one to pick up FDR's torch and complete the work of forging a more perfect union. The historical conditions were similar and called for sweeping solutions.

That was the hope. The reality turned out to be quite different. Some supporters like Alter and Bob Schrum, as we shall see, are still in stages of denial. As Jonathan was busily interviewing White House insiders for his sympathetic portrait of the inner workings of the administration's policy-making, basking in the glow of his unique access and the President's brilliance, he lost sight of what was happening outside the "bubble," just down the street even, and the gathering storm of Tea Party and corporate opposition to Obama's presidency, beyond the Beltway. Jonathan never did see the forest for the trees. He was in the enchanted forest and loving every minute of it. The positive New York Times review of Promise notes, "Alter never really discusses the larger ideological battles that have buffeted Washington. The Tea Party movement, Sarah Palin and Fox News have only walk-on parts. Instead, the spotlight shines firmly on the intricate maneuverings of the White House’s inner circle." Likewise, Alter devoted little more than a contemptuous, dismissive line or two to Progressive concerns.

This is at once the book's greatest virtue and its biggest flaw. It lacks the big picture context from which Progressives — mostly on the outside looking in — argued, pleaded with the President to draw his lines in the sand against Republican obstructionism while his political capital with the public was at an all-time high. Strike while the iron was hot. Every poll showed the public's strong support for the liberal prescriptions not taken in the face of minority Republican opposition — in the stimulus bill jobs, not tax cuts, and in health care a progressive, simplified bill, with the public option and without giveaways to pharmaceuticals and the insurance industry. That was the moment the President should have seized to take the fight to the insurance industry and the big corporations. His current fight for jobs and a millionaires tax may be too little too late, according to some critics in the Beltway Media. Not to most Progressives. Our position is better late than never.

Earlier this week, at one of the frequent pit stops of the Beltway Media, Andrea Mitchell Reports, Jonathan was asked by the affable host to the Washington elites to explain us, the "base" of the Democratic Party, in ways her millionaire friends could understand. Jonathan seized the opportunity to fire a mean-spirited cheap shot at Progressives which was, frankly, surprising given his rep as a political historian and careful journalist. Here is the text of that jaw-dropping exchange:

ANDREA MITCHELL: "Is the base happy?"

JONATHAN ALTER: "The base is pretty happy right now, and I think they’re starting to realize in part because people like Bob Schrum are telling them to stop being crybabies, as he calls it, that they need to act more like Republicans when they’re in power. You know when Ronald Reagan raised taxes, which the base hated, they didn’t go oh we don’t like Reagan anymore, they went, we’ve got power, we like power, we want to keep power, and we’re gonna rally around the President. Democrats traditionally don’t do that very well, so this gives them some ability to do it, and it also gives Obama some cover for some pretty deep cuts that are in this package that are getting no attention now because of this base bait that he’s offered with this millionaire tax cut." [emphasis mine]

It can't be a coincidence. This is the third instance, to my knowledge, on MSNBC (there are many more examples) of faux "liberals" — actually they should more accurately be described as the Beltway "establishment" — going off on Progressives. The first was Chris Matthews muttering contemptuously under his breath, "It must be those netroots people." Next, Lawrence erupted at Salon's Glenn Greenwald on Morning Joe over political labels like liberal v. progressive (he claims to be a "socialist"... that's like calling the Pope a former member of the Hitler Youth). And now, this cheap shot from Jonathan.

So what gives? What's with all the latent hostility toward Progressives from the Democratic establishment? I have a theory: It's simple, really. We're right and they're wrong. We were right then, when they cast their lot with the President's capitulations, and we're right today when the President finally came around to our position. They call it "populism" because, you know, these two percenters are political snobs. They look down their noses at unions and regular working class people. They speak of the "base" — at best, a catch-all misleading term — as if we're spoiled children or a monolith that votes in lockstep on every issue based on edicts handed down by Comrade Adam Greene.

In fact, the President is only reverting back to Democratic Party roots and the liberal ruling ideology of this country when we were at the pinnacle of our prosperity. He is us in the moment, and we are the keepers of FDR's legacy. Where the party establishment stands, well, that's more complicated. Let's break down Jonathan's hilarious and absurd statement. (Jonathan should have taken his own advice to avoid the “polemics of punditry.”)

Item: Bob Schrum, or BS for short, as I like to call him, darling of MSNBC political hosts. For those unfamiliar with BS's record as a Democratic political consultant, here's a rundown of his Greatest Hits, with the presidential candidates who hired BS's professional services. Consider BS's impressive list of winners:

Ed Muskie — the original "crybaby," touted as a shoo-in, lost his Democratic primary contest to challenger George McGovern; then rising star BS jumped to McGovern's campaign whereupon George suffered a landslide defeat to popular Tricky "Dick" Nixon ... It was rumored BS was on McGovern's B-list for Veep;  next, Jimmy Carter, incumbent president, was sufficiently softened by BS's prescient advice to become Reagan bait in 1980; that year BS joined Ted Kennedy's primary challenge of a sitting president, effectively killing two birds with one stone, knocking off two strong Democrats, paving the way for Reagan's 40-year nightmare ... Here’s a brain teaser: would Ted have beaten Carter in the primaries and Reagan in the general had BS not jumped ship and joined his team? Hmm … But everyone agrees BS writes a great concession speech; undeterred, in 1986 BS went to work for Dick Gephardt, who lost the Democratic primaries to Michael Dukakis; BS then landed his impressive expertise with the Duke, who promptly blew a double-digit lead, losing to Bush I; thankfully, in 1992 BS rested and Bill Clinton managed to retake the White House for the Democrats, presiding over a historic period of growth and prosperity; but then, (no, no, no!) in 2000, political observers were treated to BS's political masterpiece. He went to work for Al Gore. Mark Papantonio explains:

"The Democrats are going to blow it again. It’s like they’re never going to rid themselves of BS ... The Democratic political handlers process is so incestuous that it hasn’t changed as far back as when BS “political expert” types decided it would be a good idea to let Joe Lieberman run as a VP candidate with Al Gore. These “skilled” and crafty Democratic handlers made that peculiar decision, even though Bob Graham, probably the most popular politician in Florida history, was the guy that all the polls pointed to for carrying the key state of Florida in a hands-down Gore victory, that should have happened. Rank-and-file Democrats were pleading with the party to make that happen, and the GOP was terrified by that very prospect. But no, the "genius" of the highly paid Democratic consultant prevailed once again, and that Lieberman joke decision has plagued us for the last [11 years, now]. The ghost of BS is still alive and well in Democratic leadership … That overbred incestuous crowd of overpaid, over-relied-on political handlers are going to manage once more to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. You watch."

Wow. With such a ringing endorsement of BS's political skills, no wonder he shamelessly hitched his wagon to the John Kerry campaign for one last hurrah. Naturally, Kerry lost to the most unpopular president in recent memory, after being swiftboated in the process. I don't know about you, but my guess is, the few Democrats in the know breathed a collective sigh of relief when BS finally retired to Academia, making his way back to idiot punditry on MSNBC, a position for which he, along with good buddy Jonathan, are uniquely qualified. President Obama's team will probably be giving BS a wide berth, even as he's dropping hints that he'd like to be "helpful" to the campaign. Whether the BS "curse" translates to his punditry at MSNBC is anyone's guess. Watch for any precipitous drop in the ratings and good luck, peeps! Here's how legendary cartoonist Al Capp might have portrayed BS:

Evidently, Jonathan hasn't read BS's piece, which was culled from a snarky POLITICO — Beltway Media publication of record — slam on its usual political scarecrows, the Democratic Party, Labor, and Progressives. (Has anyone noticed, lately, that the new Idiot Punditocracy assumptions assembled by Beltway Media narrative driver POLITICO are that the President is on the ropes, based on his latest numbers, Democrats are disaffected, based on the usual quotes from secret sources, and the landscape favors the GOP, based on the clowns we saw last night? It's really disgusting how Chris Matthews, and others, lap it all up without an ounce of critical thinking, once POLITICO lays down the law and determines how the Idiot Punditocracy must think.)

BS starts out by ripping into the local NY machine for losing Weiner's seat, and "anonymous" Democratic donors, bitching about feeling "betrayed, disappointed, furious, disgusted" who "weren't for Obama in the first place" but now can say "I told you so." Well, this hardly describes the "base." I know some people who donated upwards of $600 to Obama's campaign, but most of us can scarcely part with five bucks. We've made up for it by working hard for Obama in the 2008 election volunteering our time with boots on the ground. But, quite honestly, any baser who has donated hundreds to the Obama campaign has every right to vent. They're not attending $30,000 a head fundraisers. But $600 puts plenty of food on the table.

As for saying "I told you so," most Progressives would reply, guilty as charged. We don't rub it in, but when BS artists like BS and Jonathan smear us with a snarky lie (we weren't for Obama in the first place) we'll throw it back in their face. During the healthcare wars, while Jonathan was crafting his magnum Obama, I sent the White House a "Dear Mr. President" e-mail, also posted on this blog. This is part of what I wrote:

Dear Mr. President:

In watching your recent town hall meetings on healthcare, it seems that you're losing the pro-healthcare reform message to the forces arrayed against it — significantly the insurance industry, with its $1.4 million daily investment aimed at spreading fear and misinformation among vulnerable populations, such as our seniors.

I wish you'd hone your message. For example, why haven't you mentioned the waste, fraud, and abuse of the insurance industry. Twenty cents out of every dollar is spent by insurers on non-healthcare delivery; lining the pockets of CEOs and shareholders, and on advertising to defeat your plan. The other day you were at AARP. Their Medicare supplement is insured by UnitedHealth Group, which posted a 155% profit and had agreed to a $400 million settlement with the New York Attorney General for defrauding its customers over a period of years. The Lewin Group, a wholly owned subsidiary of UnitedHealth, has been dishing out misleading statistics in talking points to Republicans in the House and Senate, including Senator Grassley, slamming your public option.

The White House response: crickets.

Sure, you've spoken of the public option in town halls, but not once have you specifically pushed back against your opposition: the health insurance industry and Congressional Republicans. Why?

Rather than giving Congress a clear direction on your priorities, drawing a line in the sand, you have allowed the tail to wag the dog. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus is prancing around the Senate halls like a Maharajah with his loyal sidekick, Republican Senator Chuck Grassley. Their closed door meetings of the so-called Group of Six have resulted in the evisceration of key Democratic provisions and priorities of yours, most notably the public option. All of this to peel off two or three Republican votes so that it can be called bipartisan?

With all due respect, Mr. President, we didn't vote for change, we didn't hand you huge majorities in the House, and a filibuster-proof 60 votes in the Senate, to have the fate of meaningful healthcare reform for all Americans decided, or rather destroyed, by Senator Chuck Grassley, who is a shill for the insurance industry.

I'm among a growing number of Democrats who are outraged by Senator Baucus's capitulation. We believe Senator Baucus should be divested of his chairmanship. Senator Rockefeller favors this as well. We hear of all the hard work the Senator is putting into this effort, the long hours. The problem is, he's not working on behalf of the American people; he's working for the insurance industry. Are we really to believe it makes no difference that Senator Baucus is the second highest recipient of insurance industry campaign donations, behind Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell?

The other day I saw a photo of the Group of Six: Senators Baucus, Grassley, and Snowe were chortling, while the Democrats around the table looked grim. This was in the wake of the news the Group will slash the public option and other Democratic priorities. Not surprisingly, Aetna stock rose 12% on this expectation. One observer noted that insurance industry CEOs would be exchanging high fives in their corporate boardrooms.

I know you're a student of history, Mr. President, and if I could suggest a role model in this fight, it would be Bobby Kennedy. One reason that Bobby could bridge the great divides in American society, communicating as easily with inner-city blacks and latinos as with white conservative hardhats and rural voters is that he didn't pander to any of these groups. He told it to them straight, he didn't back down, and he couched his message in clear moral terms. When he said something was unacceptable, people knew he meant it.

We're losing this fight, Mr. President. If you don't push back against the powerful anti-reform forces, we will not get meaningful healthcare reform for all Americans.

One can summarize this text in four words: "I Told You So."

Although it focused on healthcare, this message generally embodies the Progressive critique of this President. Simply substitute "healthcare reform" for reform and we can go down the list of reforms this President tried to achieve which have been blocked, rejected, or watered down by an obstructionist Republican minority. Financial institutions reform is on life support. Card Check, the "Employee Free Choice Act," passed by the House in 2007, never got an up-or-down vote in the Senate. President Obama threw it under the bus early on — a useless concession to Republicans and business — who gave nothing in return. And the critical jobs agenda, which should have been front and center in the stimulus bill, was sacrificed in favor of minimally stimulative tax cuts.

Through it all, the President acted as if he and the Democratic Party hadn't received a clear and unambiguous mandate from the American people to pursue his agenda and ram it through, LBJ-style, if he encountered the obstructionism he did. Progressives believe the genesis of the Democratic Party's historic losses in the House to an extremist, well-funded anti-government minority of zealots can be traced not only to the White House's atrocious messaging during this critical phase but to the President's passivity, ceding the bully pulpit to corporatist Democrats like Max Baucus and Ben Nelson, and allowing Republicans to step into the leadership void with their obstructionism and lies.

All of it — all of it could have been have been avoided had President Obama heeded our warnings. Had he fought back then, instead of now, drawing his lines in the sand and confronting Republican obstructionism early on, this President and the Democratic Party would have been in a far stronger position politically heading into the 2012 elections. More to the point, had the President neutralized the Republicans and passed the progressive program he ran on — jobs, healthcare, aid to states and education, infrastructure — our country, today, would be in a stronger position economically, and the President's polls would be stronger too.

Next, BS slams "disaffected elements" of the Labor movement. It's an easy, de riguer target for the Beltway Media. POLITICO, naturally, is quoted by BS claiming Labor might concentrate on state contests rather than Obama's re-election. First, BS and Jonathan and their Beltway pals might be surprised to learn Labor can walk and chew gum at the same time. With Scott Walker facing recall in Wisconsin and tanking approval ratings for Republican governors in key states like Ohio, New Jersey, Michigan, and Florida, why shouldn't Labor press its advantage? These state populations are energized against their radical Republican state agendas, the centerpiece of which is to kill Labor, and have organized to support their public employee unions. While BS blasts Labor for being "ungrateful" it seems Labor's trial balloon worked because President Obama came running back to the fold — and was received with open arms.

You see, BS and Jonathan, the President didn't lift a finger to help Labor while its epic struggle for survival in the states was going on. When asked a direct question during his "listening tour" he prevaricated and said Labor needed to "sacrifice" — a direct slap in the face to any union member in these states who has sacrificed pensions, salary, and health care and is fighting to hold on to collective bargaining and a seat at the table. This set Big Eddie off big time. I think, here, BS gives us a glimpse of the kind of bad advice he typically passed on to his Democratic candidate clients which contributed to their electoral defeat. It was only later, during his speech before a joint session of Congress that the President reaffirmed his commitment to collective bargaining.

So far, we've dispensed with the cheap shots against small Democratic donors (BS never makes the distinction because he knows full well the complainants are the large donors) and Labor. So what about individual Progressive Democrats? We need some names, BS and Jonathan. C'mon, you elitist jackasses; if you're going to broad-brush us with the "crybabies" label, the least you can do is have the balls to name names. Oh wait, I spoke too soon; BS does name names. Here's the list: James Carville, Steny Hoyer, and Sherrod Brown. Of these, only Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio can be called a genuine Progressive. Carville is a CNN gadfly, a faux liberal whose biggest achievement in life is getting the Lord of Triangulation and bad trade agreements, Bill Clinton, elected president. See my blog post, in which I blow Carville out of the water. But let me help you; here are some names you didn't mention: Senators Mary Landrieu, Jim Webb, Kay Hagan, and our fearless Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, all of whom are balking at the President's jobs bill.

Wow. What an impressive array of Progressive flamers. I must congratulate BS for exposing all these named and unnamed "crybabies" representing the "base" of the Democratic Party. I must have missed something in the political translation. You know, us Progressives are kind of slow, doctrinaire, not as "nuanced" as the Idiot Punditocracy. (Shoutout to Dean Matthews: Keep trying pal; you might get there with us someday.) As for Senator Brown, funny POLITICO should quote him out of context, because just the other day I got an e-mail from Senator Brown in which he said, in part:

Dear Carlos,

The hard work you're doing on behalf of Ohio's public employees, firefighters and police officers hasn't gone unnoticed. And I want to let you know that it's making waves across the country. Recently Ed Schultz came to Columbus to find out firsthand what this fight looks like. I joined my colleague, Rep. Tim Ryan (OH-17), and Jack Reall, president of the Columbus Professional Firefighters Union, to talk about how our state has come together to stand up for our working families. If you didn't have a chance to see it when it aired, take a few minutes today to watch the segment, then click on the links to share it with your friends. It's like I told Ed. Establishing a lasting middle class and investing in our nation's infrastructure made our nation strong for generations -- it's a legacy you're helping to preserve by sticking up for our firefighters, teachers, nurses and police officers. I'm proud to stand with you in this fight to ensure that our families and children have the opportunity to get ahead and achieve their dreams.

I'll keep doing what I can, Senator, and thanks for sticking up for Progressive values. Needless to say, Senator Brown stands foursquare behind the President's jobs bill. Okay, enough of BS, let's dump on Jonathan and wrap this up. Jonathan said "Democrats need to act more like Republicans." Wrong, egghead! As I wrote the President, Democrats need to be more like Bobby — ruthless toward our enemies and standing up for principles and values the American people can get behind. The template applies equally well to FDR and Harry Truman.

But the cheap shot that really sticks in one's craw is this that Jonathan said: "Democrats traditionally don’t do that very well (act like Republicans), so this gives them some ability to do it, and it also gives Obama some cover for some pretty deep cuts that are in this package that are getting no attention now because of this base bait that he’s offered with this millionaire tax cut."

The President's millionaire's tax proposal is "base bait" — really? Jonathan must think Progressives are really stupid, that we don't know this has very little chance of passage in the House. Or that the Bush tax cuts are due to expire, once again, next year. What the President has done is move the debate nationally, pressuring obstructionist Republicans to justify not allowing an up-or-down vote on the bill, with an issue that enjoys support across the political spectrum, polling between 66 percent and 80 percent in favor of taxing millionaires. This isn't "base bait." If anything, it's "independent voters bait." Despite the cheap shots and false allegations, Progressives are standing with the President. And, it seems, BS and Jonathan can't stand it.

Jonathan and BS, emperors of BS, where are your clothes? Please jump in the proverbial lake because, frankly, you're a couple of naked eyesores. This one clearly belongs in The Zone. But since Big Eddie is constrained from selecting a colleague, I'll do the honors:

And just to show there are no hard feelings, here are a couple of FDR clips to assist Jonathan in getting back on track with his political re-education:

a

THE DAY AFTER ...

The sun is out, the skies are blue, it's not raining cats and dogs, and there's no plague of locusts on the horizon.

Gays who serve in our military, and served our nation honorably, no longer have to lie about who they are. The repeal of DADT finally went into effect at 12:01 AM this morning, passing as if it had never been.

What gives, Brother John (McCain)? What was all the fuss about? Why did we have to kick more than 14,000 personnel out of the armed services based solely on their sexual orientation, after all, just to satisfy your misguided generational hang-ups?

It's a great day for those who can now serve without living a lie, but a bittersweet moment for those unjustly sacrificed simply for being who they are.

Around The World In 61 Seconds — Wow ...

"A time-lapse taken from the front of the International Space Station as it orbits our planet at night. This movie begins over the Pacific Ocean and continues over North and South America before entering daylight near Antarctica. Visible cities, countries and landmarks include (in order) Vancouver Island, Victoria, Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles. Phoenix. Multiple cities in Texas, New Mexico and Mexico. Mexico City, the Gulf of Mexico, the Yucatan Peninsula, El Salvador, Lightning in the Pacific Ocean, Guatemala, Panama, Columbia, Ecuador, Peru, Chile, Lake Titicaca, and the Amazon. Also visible is the Earth's ionosphere (thin yellow line), a satellite (55sec) and the stars of our galaxy."

Just add your own musical soundtrack and enjoy the show.

MAKEOVERBAMA

Make way for the new, improved BADASS Barack Obama:

Let's hope it lasts ... WHOZZAT making a beeline for the donuts? Why, I do believe it's Chuckles Toddy.

MSNBC WINGNUT INFESTATION HAS LIBERTY TO LIE WITH IMPUNITY

Take note, MSNBC hosts: Wingnuts and Republicans (they're interchangeable) LIE. They LIE indiscriminately and blatantly. They take advantage of the platform MSNBC gives them to spread LIES and disinformation, because of the network's policy that "balance" means, e.g., giving equal time to those who claim the Earth is 6,500 years old based on 17th century calculations by Bishop Ussher of the generations in the Bible, rather than reliable 21st century scientific radiometric dating techniques used by geologists, that the Earth is at least 4.5 billion years old.

This is a big problem for a news network that, unlike Fox, purports to give the public factual information. What's worse, these LIES go largely unchallenged, not through any fault of the hosts who cannot be expected to have all the facts at their fingertips at all times, but because of a format based on false equivalencies that hold the LIE as just another version —"from the other side"— of the TRUTH.

President Obama today finally drew some lines in the sand. He called out Speaker John Boehner for flip-flop demagoguery: being against "my way or the highway" before he was for it (as long as it was the Republicans' way) in the same speech. And the President declared he will veto any deficit reduction measure from the joint congressional committee that does not include a tax on the rich. Better late than never; this is the speech Mr. Obama should have made much earlier in his term when he and his advisers made the monumental miscalculation of trying to mollify and reason with extremist, ideological right wing hostage-takers.

Following the President's speech, up pops on MSNBC smooth Republican LIAR par excellence Ron Christie to spout the GOP talking point LIES with absolute impunity. (Christie has the habit of sounding indignant and filibustering when anyone calls him for the LIAR he is.) Christie immediately lowered the respect bar by calling the President a liar (projection is a well-worn technique of GOP crapagandists) who was practicing "class warfare" on the super-rich top one percent (yeah right, Ron, pitting the stratified billionaires who have already won the "class" war, against the other 99 percent is really, like, pitting "one group against another"), to which the President had reasonably argued, "it's not class warfare, it's (simple) math."

One technique of these crapaganda wingnut LIARS is to keep pounding the same talking point LIES regardless of their merit in a reasoned, factual response. They will NEVER concede ANY argument on its merits. They are schooled by their Rovian language manipulators to keep repeating the same LIES over and over again, because in repetition a BIG LIE gains the veneer of truth with viewers or listeners being brainwashed. Then Christie made the specious BIG LIE argument that "47 percent of the American people pay no taxes" — later amending his remark to no "federal" taxes, when called out on it. As if, the poor, the working poor, the struggling middle class do not bear an IMMORAL and disproportionate share of the tax burden while corporations and millionaires and billionaires pay a lower rate, as the President pointed out, than their secretaries, janitors, or teachers.

Here are the facts, from David Leonhart of the New York Times:

Income taxes aren’t the only kind of federal taxes that people pay. There are also payroll taxes and investment taxes, among others. And, of course, people pay state and local taxes, too.

Even if the discussion is restricted to federal taxes (for which the statistics are better), a vast majority of households end up paying federal taxes. Congressional Budget Office data suggests that, at most, about 10 percent of all households pay no net federal taxes. The number 10 is obviously a lot smaller than 47.