DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS CAN DROP DEAD. Harvey Weinstein. Either he's a smug rich guy, or delusional. This dude corrected Rachel: He's not a "Democrat." He's for Obama, I think, because he's Hollywood and Obama's hip. He doesn't care about electing a Democratic Congress at all, and Rachel, inexplicably, didn't press him.
Any more reports like this, Rachel, and we might as well fold it up. Right? C'mon Rachel, give me the silver lining, because Harvey (the Pataki-Giuliani voter) Weinstein is sinking us. He wants his trophy black president and a GOP Congress is how I see it.
Rachel, you've got to ask tougher questions, and are you trying to dissuade us from voting? Because I didn't see the humor in the "other" Koch brother story. It was pretty horrifying — and depressing. Like Ezra's push-button voting story in which the NC governor's veto to defund Planned Parenthood was mistakenly overridden — BY ONE VOTE, A FEMALE DEMOCRATIC LEGISLATOR WHO PUSHED THE WRONG BUTTON. Ha-ha, isn't that a rip, eh Ezra!
That was such a BUMMER, and the way Ezra's tease went, I thought it would be a positive story. I was bummed out by that report a long time, Rachel, OK. Still am. Maybe it's time to pack it in and give up. That's the vibe I'm getting from TRMS. Not knocking you, Rachel. I just can't take the gallows humor anymore.
Friday, July 06, 2012
Michael Smerconish: Shame on You!
MICHAEL SMERCONISH IS A SO-CALLED "INDEPENDENT" former Republican operative and right wing radio talk show host who, unfortunately, is sitting in for Chris Matthews on Hardball this Fourth of July vacation week. As a liberal who has never changed my stripes, I don't trust people like Smerconish, or those of his execrable "libertarian" ilk. They're just Republican wolves in sheep's clothing. Here's why:
In one segment, Smerconish brought on Clinton toady Ed Rendell — who rarely misses an opportunity to diss President Obama — and the editorial page editor of the rabidly right wing Wall Street Journal to schmooze and give good advice to the Romney campaign (from Rendell, in particular) which was weird and off-putting to this Romney-loathing viewer. I thought I was watching FOX. I don't object to hosting a RAT from the WSJ to talk about some editorial of theirs, but then don't treat him like 'family' — capisce, Smerconish.
Then in the following segment, Smerconish dilutes an OUTRAGEOUS story about Pennsylvania's REPUBLICAN driven voter suppression and disenfranchisement of THREE QUARTERS OF A MILLION VOTERS by hosting a FUCKING RIGHT WING SCUMBAG NAMED DAVID FREDDOSO who was, I THINK DELIBERATELY, misidentified by Smerconish as a journalist from the Washington Examiner. Period.
The Examiner, which has endorsed Mitt Romney, is the conservative brainchild of billionaire Phillip Anschuz. But wait, there's more. The SCUMBAG FREDDOSO that Smerconish saw fit to speak on this topic as a PHONY expert, previously worked at the right wing National Review and for right wing columnist Robert Novak. Freddoso wrote, The Case Against Barack Obama, and an Obama campaign email described him as a “card-carrying member of the right-wing smear machine.” His latestwork smear, Gangster Government: Barack Obama and the New Washington Thugocracy, was released in April 2011. This ratbastard is a darling of the right wing who should NEVER, under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, be given a platform on MSNBC.
SO, WTF IS THE SCUMBAG DOING ON AN MSNBC PROGRAM?! And by the way, individuals who have written books ALWAYS GET THEIR BOOKS PLUGGED. How come you didn't plug this RATBASTARD'S "books" eh, Smerconish!? Or correctly identify his right wing SCUMBAG bona fides. If Smerconish isn't responsible for booking FREDDOSO THE SCUMBAG then I would submit that MSNBC is infected with right wingers in its production ranks, who work behind the scenes to undermine the progressive message by giving air time on the FAKE PROGRESSIVE CHANNEL to the most despicable, repulsive right wing SMEAR MERCHANTS they can book as poison pills.
Nice work, Smerconish. Now, GTF OUT OF OUR FACE and I hope not to see you again anytime soon!
In one segment, Smerconish brought on Clinton toady Ed Rendell — who rarely misses an opportunity to diss President Obama — and the editorial page editor of the rabidly right wing Wall Street Journal to schmooze and give good advice to the Romney campaign (from Rendell, in particular) which was weird and off-putting to this Romney-loathing viewer. I thought I was watching FOX. I don't object to hosting a RAT from the WSJ to talk about some editorial of theirs, but then don't treat him like 'family' — capisce, Smerconish.
Then in the following segment, Smerconish dilutes an OUTRAGEOUS story about Pennsylvania's REPUBLICAN driven voter suppression and disenfranchisement of THREE QUARTERS OF A MILLION VOTERS by hosting a FUCKING RIGHT WING SCUMBAG NAMED DAVID FREDDOSO who was, I THINK DELIBERATELY, misidentified by Smerconish as a journalist from the Washington Examiner. Period.
The Examiner, which has endorsed Mitt Romney, is the conservative brainchild of billionaire Phillip Anschuz. But wait, there's more. The SCUMBAG FREDDOSO that Smerconish saw fit to speak on this topic as a PHONY expert, previously worked at the right wing National Review and for right wing columnist Robert Novak. Freddoso wrote, The Case Against Barack Obama, and an Obama campaign email described him as a “card-carrying member of the right-wing smear machine.” His latest
SO, WTF IS THE SCUMBAG DOING ON AN MSNBC PROGRAM?! And by the way, individuals who have written books ALWAYS GET THEIR BOOKS PLUGGED. How come you didn't plug this RATBASTARD'S "books" eh, Smerconish!? Or correctly identify his right wing SCUMBAG bona fides. If Smerconish isn't responsible for booking FREDDOSO THE SCUMBAG then I would submit that MSNBC is infected with right wingers in its production ranks, who work behind the scenes to undermine the progressive message by giving air time on the FAKE PROGRESSIVE CHANNEL to the most despicable, repulsive right wing SMEAR MERCHANTS they can book as poison pills.
Nice work, Smerconish. Now, GTF OUT OF OUR FACE and I hope not to see you again anytime soon!
Lady Alex Will Find Any Excuse To Get Some Guapo Dude oh Her Show ...
OKAY, SO HE'S SMART, CULTIVATED, A REALLY REALLY NICE GUY, has an aristocratic name, is the REAL Indiana Jones, and his job description is: "Saving The Planet." No sooner do we have record triple-digit temps across the nation, Big Eddie, he books "The Science Guy." Lady Alex, she searches the globe for one of her favorite DUDES — Lady's got her priorities straight:
Memo To "The Cycle" Pundits: Cliché Or Not ...
BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR:
Heat wave claims first victims of the year: Precautions urged as high temperatures continue
The Banner
Updated July 2, 2012 at 02:53PM
BALTIMORE — The recent heat wave has contributed to the first 2012 heat-related deaths in Maryland, the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DHMH) has announced.
One Montgomery County male adult (between the ages of 18-65) and one Wicomico County male senior (65 years or older) have died during this current heat wave. High temperatures are expected to continue this week.
------------
16 shot in 6 hours Tuesday, Chicago police take on heat wave crime
Posted: Jul 03, 2012 8:41 PM CDT Updated: Jul 04, 2012 11:00 AM CDT
By Craig Wall, FOX Chicago News reporter - bio | emailCHICAGO (FOX Chicago News) - Chicago police know that the heat can lead to more trouble. They are gearing up with more officers on high visibility patrols.
Up to 16 people were wounded in shootings across the city since 5 p.m. Tuesday, police said. Three remain in area hospitals in critical condition, while a 15-year-old boy shot playing basketball was seriously wounded.
Thursday, July 05, 2012
S.E. Cupp Mangles History, Mimics Sheen in Misguided Ode to America
S.E. Cupp is in many ways emblematic of what’s wrong with America. Not that she’s a bad person, for a conservative, but being factually and history-challenged is only a virtue to conservatives and wingnuts lost in a delusional world of their own making, in which their political arm, the GOP, aka today’s Know-Nothings, pushes a mindless ideological agenda that is destroying our nation and our planet.
It’s bad enough that Sarah makes stuff up to bolster her point about American exceptionalism, but then she suggests that “winning” (said one Charlie Sheen) is “part of our national DNA” meaning, I suppose, that once you become an American citizen your DNA turns red, white and blue spelling “USA.” And here I thought it was the bacon ice cream and large quantities of Nathan’s dogs that turned us into blabbering coneheads.
But seriously, what seems most typically conservative, jingoistic and ethnocentric, yet utterly un-American to me, is that Sarah feels compelled to put others down to build America up. For starters, historically, take our two greatest allies: France and Britain. In her MSNBC version she sees fit to knock France, saying: “…we went on to win at all kinds of stuff, and we did it without apologizing. And we’re supposed to want to win. That’s what separates us from the French.” It’s sort of a weird non sequitur put-down because, well, it’s completely untrue. The French love to win. And they’ve done it, historically, with a certain panache, let’s face it, bloodletting that is, um … rarely matched except by Americans.
More important, though, it’s quite likely the United States of America would not exist were it not for France. When Sarah says, “We didn’t fight hard for our freedom on that summer day in 1776 so we could go ahead and be mediocre,” she forgets to mention that the colonials could not have sustained their independence in 1776 had the French fleet not defeated the British at the Battle of the Chesapeake and laid siege to Cornwallis at Yorktown. France blocked his escape route by sea with its fleet while by land it entrapped the British with the French Army, whose commanders included the Marquis de Lafayette.
Which brings us to Britain. Sarah writes “We’re aspirational by definition. Otherwise we’d all be bowing to Kate Middleton, while wearing really silly hats.” I’ll cop to the first part: We are aspirational, not because we’re Americans but because we’re sentient human beings. Even the harshest, most totalitarian dictatorship on the face of the Earth, in Pyongyang (right you are, S.E.), cannot extinguish that flame from the human spirit of those they oppress.
As for the reference to the Duchess of Cambridge, two things. First, there’s something to be said for tradition and ceremony and the trappings of royalty, especially in a parliamentary democracy — and no one does it better than the British. I had no idea you were an anti-monarchist, Sarah, particularly considering how many Americans are Ga-Ga for the largely ceremonial Royals. Perhaps, like your Alaskan namesake, you think Queen Elizabeth actually runs things across the pond.
Second, and much more important, this is where a good grasp of history holds you in good stead. No one can say how much British allegiance to the Crown has inspired their will to defend it or their sense of duty and patriotism, but all Americans save for a few twisted souls should be glad of it.
Were it not for the brave, the indomitable British people standing alone against the Nazi juggernaut in 1940, before America and the Soviets had entered the war, when its outnumbered air force defeated Hitler’s mighty Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain, “bowing to Kate Middleton, while wearing really silly hats” would be the least of your worries, Sarah. Moved by the gallantry of RAF Fighter Command, Sir Winston Churchill famously said, “Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.”
That includes you, Sarah. I would submit that had not the RAF prevailed, we would all be wearing Swastika armbands and delivering the Nazi salute instead of the Pledge of Allegiance to a grotesquely redesigned American flag.
Then there’s a little matter of all those things Sarah thinks were American inventions. She’s sort of like a one-woman Texas Board of Education, spreading historical untruths and inaccuracies to fellow American ignoramuses. It might surprise you to know, S.E., that —
So yeah, when it comes to choosing between the greatest, most influential pioneers of aviation, I’ll take Alberto Santos-Dumont, a Brazilian, over all comers. Incidentally, like Edison and the light bulb, Santos-Dumont did not invent but “popularized” the ubiquitous wrist watch. Why? Because he complained to a certain watchmaker named Cartier that he couldn’t keep fishing for his pocket watch and steering his airships at the same time. Result: Their joint development of the wrist watch.
It doesn’t get much better when S.E. jumps from aviation to space flight. She writes: “Charles Lindbergh didn’t land in Paris and apologize for getting there first. We didn’t have a space race with the Soviet Union to see who could get there last.”
No, Lindy didn’t “apologize” because he was too concerned about not inventing the first Mosh Pit for himself as enthusiastic Frenchmen mobbed him and carried him aloft, having lined up their cars and turned on their headlights to create a perfectly lit landing strip for his final approach.
The space race with the Soviets, particularly the Moon landing, was an awesome achievement. It was also the brainchild of a great liberal Democrat named John F. Kennedy to inspire Americans to new heights and possibilities. But I’d go easy on the rah-rah jingoism lest we be reminded that the U.S. space program, like the Soviets’, was driven by Nazi rocket scientists, like Werner Von Braun and his henchmen who surrendered to the Americans and were swiftly granted the privileges of U.S. citizenship.
And yet, I disagree with Sarah’s assertion that “Americans have grown disturbingly ashamed of winning. … We’re supposed to want a world where everyone gets a trophy and nobody has a house with a car elevator.” No. I’d rather not live in a country where my president is so out of touch with the people that he’s one of a handful of individuals who can afford the extravagance of a car elevator. Let him enjoy his car elevator on his own time and not accrue unlimited power to affect our lives with his decisions. Secondly, Sarah, I would point out that in the greatest sports stage on which the USA excels at “winning” the top three finishers all get a trophy: It's the Olympics, or “Les Olympiades,” as Mitt Romney is wont to say, and they’re called the gold, silver and bronze medals.
Poor Sarah. She’s drawing fire from all sides. One wingnut blog that I like to call “The American Idiot” worries that if S.E. “lies with fools she may get up a fool.” Well, I say … methinks that train has long since left the station.
So, argues the wingnut S.E. fan, she must “not lend one iota of credibility, let alone ratings boost, to MSNBC's narrative. Cupp's talent can better serve where it might reach reasoned minds.” As in this latest Cupp screed? “Reasoned minds” in Rightwingville are like raisins in the sun. Black, dry and shriveled.
What’s most exceptional about America, to me, is its celebration of the universal human spirit in an ideal. The human spirit that yearns for freedom, and justice, and democracy. These are values represented by the American idea to which oppressed peoples the world over have looked for inspiration.
It’s what we should celebrate about ourselves and about America. A grand idea. An ideal yet to be perfected. Because, even if it fails to match the reality, the American idea lies not in “winning” (said one Charlie Sheen) but in serving as the beacon of Jeffersonian democracy and freedom and justice for “your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” That ideal, now threatened more from within than without, however imperfect, still remains the best hope for Mankind.
Happy birthday, America. We love you.
It’s bad enough that Sarah makes stuff up to bolster her point about American exceptionalism, but then she suggests that “winning” (said one Charlie Sheen) is “part of our national DNA” meaning, I suppose, that once you become an American citizen your DNA turns red, white and blue spelling “USA.” And here I thought it was the bacon ice cream and large quantities of Nathan’s dogs that turned us into blabbering coneheads.
But seriously, what seems most typically conservative, jingoistic and ethnocentric, yet utterly un-American to me, is that Sarah feels compelled to put others down to build America up. For starters, historically, take our two greatest allies: France and Britain. In her MSNBC version she sees fit to knock France, saying: “…we went on to win at all kinds of stuff, and we did it without apologizing. And we’re supposed to want to win. That’s what separates us from the French.” It’s sort of a weird non sequitur put-down because, well, it’s completely untrue. The French love to win. And they’ve done it, historically, with a certain panache, let’s face it, bloodletting that is, um … rarely matched except by Americans.
More important, though, it’s quite likely the United States of America would not exist were it not for France. When Sarah says, “We didn’t fight hard for our freedom on that summer day in 1776 so we could go ahead and be mediocre,” she forgets to mention that the colonials could not have sustained their independence in 1776 had the French fleet not defeated the British at the Battle of the Chesapeake and laid siege to Cornwallis at Yorktown. France blocked his escape route by sea with its fleet while by land it entrapped the British with the French Army, whose commanders included the Marquis de Lafayette.
Which brings us to Britain. Sarah writes “We’re aspirational by definition. Otherwise we’d all be bowing to Kate Middleton, while wearing really silly hats.” I’ll cop to the first part: We are aspirational, not because we’re Americans but because we’re sentient human beings. Even the harshest, most totalitarian dictatorship on the face of the Earth, in Pyongyang (right you are, S.E.), cannot extinguish that flame from the human spirit of those they oppress.
As for the reference to the Duchess of Cambridge, two things. First, there’s something to be said for tradition and ceremony and the trappings of royalty, especially in a parliamentary democracy — and no one does it better than the British. I had no idea you were an anti-monarchist, Sarah, particularly considering how many Americans are Ga-Ga for the largely ceremonial Royals. Perhaps, like your Alaskan namesake, you think Queen Elizabeth actually runs things across the pond.
Second, and much more important, this is where a good grasp of history holds you in good stead. No one can say how much British allegiance to the Crown has inspired their will to defend it or their sense of duty and patriotism, but all Americans save for a few twisted souls should be glad of it.
Were it not for the brave, the indomitable British people standing alone against the Nazi juggernaut in 1940, before America and the Soviets had entered the war, when its outnumbered air force defeated Hitler’s mighty Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain, “bowing to Kate Middleton, while wearing really silly hats” would be the least of your worries, Sarah. Moved by the gallantry of RAF Fighter Command, Sir Winston Churchill famously said, “Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.”
That includes you, Sarah. I would submit that had not the RAF prevailed, we would all be wearing Swastika armbands and delivering the Nazi salute instead of the Pledge of Allegiance to a grotesquely redesigned American flag.
Then there’s a little matter of all those things Sarah thinks were American inventions. She’s sort of like a one-woman Texas Board of Education, spreading historical untruths and inaccuracies to fellow American ignoramuses. It might surprise you to know, S.E., that —
- The automobile was invented by Karl Friedrich Benz, a German, in 1885. His name now adorns arguably the world’s finest cars, Mercedes-Benz. You might have heard of it?
- “Thomas Edison did not invent the first electric light bulb, but instead invented the first commercially practical incandescent light.” Many foreigners can claim dibs on developing the light bulb, but British inventor Humphry Davy is often named the first. Edison improved upon the work of many who had come before. Good for him.
- And we have it on good authority that the mullet was variously invented by Emperor Nero of Rome, adapted by the Huns, copied by (no doubt) your favorite wingnut actor-director Mel Gibson in Braveheart, then traced to Paul McCartney.
- Invented the dirigible which flew around the Eiffel Tower;
- Worked on a helicopter design;
- Designed and flew the first heavier than air plane in Europe, which took off on wheels on its own power from a level field in 1906;
- Developed the first monoplane, the Demoiselle, which is the same basic design with the swept wings of today’s planes.
So yeah, when it comes to choosing between the greatest, most influential pioneers of aviation, I’ll take Alberto Santos-Dumont, a Brazilian, over all comers. Incidentally, like Edison and the light bulb, Santos-Dumont did not invent but “popularized” the ubiquitous wrist watch. Why? Because he complained to a certain watchmaker named Cartier that he couldn’t keep fishing for his pocket watch and steering his airships at the same time. Result: Their joint development of the wrist watch.
It doesn’t get much better when S.E. jumps from aviation to space flight. She writes: “Charles Lindbergh didn’t land in Paris and apologize for getting there first. We didn’t have a space race with the Soviet Union to see who could get there last.”
No, Lindy didn’t “apologize” because he was too concerned about not inventing the first Mosh Pit for himself as enthusiastic Frenchmen mobbed him and carried him aloft, having lined up their cars and turned on their headlights to create a perfectly lit landing strip for his final approach.
The space race with the Soviets, particularly the Moon landing, was an awesome achievement. It was also the brainchild of a great liberal Democrat named John F. Kennedy to inspire Americans to new heights and possibilities. But I’d go easy on the rah-rah jingoism lest we be reminded that the U.S. space program, like the Soviets’, was driven by Nazi rocket scientists, like Werner Von Braun and his henchmen who surrendered to the Americans and were swiftly granted the privileges of U.S. citizenship.
And yet, I disagree with Sarah’s assertion that “Americans have grown disturbingly ashamed of winning. … We’re supposed to want a world where everyone gets a trophy and nobody has a house with a car elevator.” No. I’d rather not live in a country where my president is so out of touch with the people that he’s one of a handful of individuals who can afford the extravagance of a car elevator. Let him enjoy his car elevator on his own time and not accrue unlimited power to affect our lives with his decisions. Secondly, Sarah, I would point out that in the greatest sports stage on which the USA excels at “winning” the top three finishers all get a trophy: It's the Olympics, or “Les Olympiades,” as Mitt Romney is wont to say, and they’re called the gold, silver and bronze medals.
Poor Sarah. She’s drawing fire from all sides. One wingnut blog that I like to call “The American Idiot” worries that if S.E. “lies with fools she may get up a fool.” Well, I say … methinks that train has long since left the station.
So, argues the wingnut S.E. fan, she must “not lend one iota of credibility, let alone ratings boost, to MSNBC's narrative. Cupp's talent can better serve where it might reach reasoned minds.” As in this latest Cupp screed? “Reasoned minds” in Rightwingville are like raisins in the sun. Black, dry and shriveled.
What’s most exceptional about America, to me, is its celebration of the universal human spirit in an ideal. The human spirit that yearns for freedom, and justice, and democracy. These are values represented by the American idea to which oppressed peoples the world over have looked for inspiration.
It’s what we should celebrate about ourselves and about America. A grand idea. An ideal yet to be perfected. Because, even if it fails to match the reality, the American idea lies not in “winning” (said one Charlie Sheen) but in serving as the beacon of Jeffersonian democracy and freedom and justice for “your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” That ideal, now threatened more from within than without, however imperfect, still remains the best hope for Mankind.
Happy birthday, America. We love you.
Tuesday, July 03, 2012
The Saga of Seamus Romney Depicted In Fuel Efficiency Ad
HERE'S A DRAMATIZATION OF the traumatic saga of Seamus, Mitt Romney's dog-on-the-roof.
Both dog and family vacation patriarch are dead ringers for the Weird Family Romney:
Both dog and family vacation patriarch are dead ringers for the Weird Family Romney:
Wingnut Star Sees The Light: LIBERALS Rule, Conservatives Stuck At 13
THAT'S THE BEST (BENIGN) EXPLANATION FOR WINGNUTTERY: No matter their age, they're stuck at the peak, post-pubescent adolescence of age 13. Forget mid-life crises or second childhoods; these NUT CASES never got past the raging hormones of being a 13-year-old. At least in their minds. Hence, the Daily Caller's drooling, immature sexism reminiscent of a base frat house mentality. Viewed from this prism, the bizarre GOP primaries and debates are understandable. They were ALL thirteen! Oops; nah-nah-nah (trans: 9-9-9), etc. Let's not forget the ongoing juvie 13-year-old attacks on the Chief Justice. I rest my case.
Jonathan Krohn, CPAC's 13-year-old wunderkind in 2009, now 17 says he's not conservative anymore. “I think it was naive,” Krohn says of his CPAC speech, which went viral. “It’s a 13-year-old kid saying stuff that he had heard for a long time.… I live in Georgia. We’re inundated with conservative talk in Georgia.… The speech was something that a 13-year-old does. You haven’t formed all your opinions. You’re really defeating yourself if you think you have all of your ideas in your head when you were 12 or 13. It’s impossible. You haven’t done enough.” Or, as they say, live and learn. Sounds like a kid with a good head on his shoulders.
It's OK not to say he's a liberal. Liberals are about pragmatism and solutions-based government to advance the common good. FDR-style. We proudly embrace the brand especially since it's been vilified by the Right as an ad hominem. FDR, Truman, JFK, Bobby ... an ad hominem?! Please. Jonathan is solidly liberal where it counts — in his political views:
Jonathan Krohn, CPAC's 13-year-old wunderkind in 2009, now 17 says he's not conservative anymore. “I think it was naive,” Krohn says of his CPAC speech, which went viral. “It’s a 13-year-old kid saying stuff that he had heard for a long time.… I live in Georgia. We’re inundated with conservative talk in Georgia.… The speech was something that a 13-year-old does. You haven’t formed all your opinions. You’re really defeating yourself if you think you have all of your ideas in your head when you were 12 or 13. It’s impossible. You haven’t done enough.” Or, as they say, live and learn. Sounds like a kid with a good head on his shoulders.
It's OK not to say he's a liberal. Liberals are about pragmatism and solutions-based government to advance the common good. FDR-style. We proudly embrace the brand especially since it's been vilified by the Right as an ad hominem. FDR, Truman, JFK, Bobby ... an ad hominem?! Please. Jonathan is solidly liberal where it counts — in his political views:
We've all been there, Jonathan, and welcome to the fold. How awesome is this kid? Watch:Gay marriage? In favor. Obamacare? “It’s a good idea.” Who would he vote for (if he could) in November? “Probably Barack Obama.” His favorite TV shows? “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report.” His favorite magazine? The New Yorker. And, perhaps telling of all, Krohn is enrolling this fall at a college not exactly known for its conservatism: New York University.
“One of the first things that changed was that I stopped being a social conservative,” said Krohn. “It just didn’t seem right to me anymore. From there, it branched into other issues, everything from health care to economic issues.… I think I’ve changed a lot, and it’s not because I’ve become a liberal from being a conservative — it’s just that I thought about it more. The issues are so complex, you can’t just go with some ideological mantra for each substantive issue.”
“I think I’ve just matured overall,” ... “Come on, I was thirteen,” he said. “I was thirteen.”
Monday, July 02, 2012
Memo To Lady Alex: It's Not Just Me Sayin' ...
THEY ARE TRYING REALLY HARD to corrupt you. Hope you're not biting.
(Calling Romney "president" couple times troubling slip of the tongue ...)
(Calling Romney "president" couple times troubling slip of the tongue ...)
 |
P.S. — New MSNBC Program, "The Cycle" Is a Trainwreck
HOW CAN THEY TALK ABOUT THE HEAT WAVE assaulting the nation without discussing Global Warming?! The NASA link/story in the post below was from 6/28. And all these foolish pundits can do is make jokes about the fact that 2 million people lack electricity in sweltering triple-digit temperatures in the world's "richest" country?! Where's the crumbling infrastructure story?! One pair of idiot pundits (who shall remain nameless) bantered that some people live in these conditions "all the time" with the outrageous reply, "they're probably better off"!?!
Have any of these narcissistic privilegiados read the seasonal summer stories of the weak, the elderly, the poor, the sick succumbing to the heat wave?! That such stories haven't emerged so far in this particular East Coast heat wave is a friggin' anomalous miracle. The program is disgusting in its insensitive frivolity, its underlying meanness, its rehashing of false equivalence 'they're equally to blame' Ratigan sophistry. Touré can't seem to decide whether to be serious about anything or remain a factotum for Dylan Ratigan. He sets the tone, and it's mostly a cynical turn-off. We don't need Ratigan 'Lite'. And not everything lends itself to a joke.
Have any of these narcissistic privilegiados read the seasonal summer stories of the weak, the elderly, the poor, the sick succumbing to the heat wave?! That such stories haven't emerged so far in this particular East Coast heat wave is a friggin' anomalous miracle. The program is disgusting in its insensitive frivolity, its underlying meanness, its rehashing of false equivalence 'they're equally to blame' Ratigan sophistry. Touré can't seem to decide whether to be serious about anything or remain a factotum for Dylan Ratigan. He sets the tone, and it's mostly a cynical turn-off. We don't need Ratigan 'Lite'. And not everything lends itself to a joke.
THIS IS WHAT THE RIGHT WING, STUPID TEA PARTY VOTERS, AND GOP ARE DOING TO THE PLANET
GLOBAL WARMING HOAX, ANYONE? As this year's record-shattering heat wave with temperatures soaring past the 100 livable degrees mark literally IGNITE the raging infernos in the American West, right wing Luddites from the GOP and a broad plurality of IGNORANT, STUPID, TEABAGGING and UNEDUCATED Americans who support them with their votes are strangely silent about their perennial, seasonal howls against SCIENCE. (Those stories usually emerge during the winter months when HUGE SNOW DUMPS due to increased atmospheric-captured moisture [due to GLOBAL WARMING] are mistaken for planetary cooling by Book of Mormon/Bible-thumping pseudo science experts.)
Meanwhile a plurality of the populace, legal and illegal drug-addled citizens, don't give enough of a flying fuck about the planet they squat on to drag their FAT ASSES to the voting booth. Such is the alarming state of anti-consciousness/enlightenment politics in the most consequential nation to the survival of the planet and the human race. Scientists are warning FOR THE NTH TIME that the world is fast approaching a "tipping point that will make it irreversibly hotter, making this decade critical in efforts to contain global warming."
Meanwhile a plurality of the populace, legal and illegal drug-addled citizens, don't give enough of a flying fuck about the planet they squat on to drag their FAT ASSES to the voting booth. Such is the alarming state of anti-consciousness/enlightenment politics in the most consequential nation to the survival of the planet and the human race. Scientists are warning FOR THE NTH TIME that the world is fast approaching a "tipping point that will make it irreversibly hotter, making this decade critical in efforts to contain global warming."
This stunning surface temperatures map from NASA's Terra satellite tells the alarming story of fast-rising temperatures in the American continent for more than a decade, from 2000-2011 compared to 2012:"As emissions grow, scientists say the world is close to reaching thresholds beyond which the effects on the global climate will be irreversible, such as the melting of polar ice sheets and loss of rainforests.
"This is the critical decade. If we don't get the curves turned around this decade we will cross those lines," said Will Steffen, executive director of the Australian National University's climate change institute, speaking at a conference in London."
 |
NASA Maps Heat Wave Fueling Wildfires in the RockiesOn June 28, 2012, wildfires raged across the western United States. The Waldo Canyon fire in Colorado attracted the most attention after spreading into Colorado Springs and charring hundreds of homes, but large wildfires also burned throughout Utah, Wyoming, Montana, New Mexico, and Arizona.A lack of winter snow cover and ongoing drought primed vegetation in these states for ignition. But in recent weeks, another ingredient for extreme wildfire emerged: heat. High temperatures dry out vegetation and decrease the relative humidity, making it easier for fires to ignite and spread.The intensity and scope of the heat wave in the western United States is visible in this map of land surface temperature anomalies for June 17–24, 2012. Based on data from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) on NASA’s Terra satellite, the map depicts temperatures compared to the 2000–2011 average for the same eight day period in June.Areas with warmer than average temperatures are shown in red; near-normal temperatures are white; and areas that were cooler than the 2000-2011 base period are blue. Colorado experienced the brunt of the heat wave and had eight large wildfires burning on June 28, 2012. Wyoming and Utah—other states that have seen unusually hot weather—together had nine wildfires burning.Land surface temperatures (LST) are distinct from the air temperatures that meteorological stations typically measure. LSTs indicate how hot the surface of the Earth would feel to the touch. From a satellite vantage point, the “surface” includes a number of materials that capture and retain heat, such as desert sand, the dark roof of a building, or the pavement of a road. As a result, daytime land surface temperatures are usually higher than air temperatures.This heat wave, like all extreme weather events, has its direct cause in a complex set of atmospheric conditions that produce short-term weather. However, weather occurs within the broader context of the climate, and there’s a high level of agreement among scientists that global warming has made it more likely that heat waves of this magnitude will occur. (Emphasis mine.)NASA Earth Observatory image by Jesse Allen, using MODIS data provided by Land Processes Distributed Active Archive Center (LPDAAC). Caption by Adam Voiland
Sunday, July 01, 2012
FINAL: SPAIN 4, ITALY 0, WITH AN (*)
IT WAS A GOOD OLD-FASHIONED THRASHING by a very good team, the best Euro side but slightly overrated, in my opinion. The thing is, Italy played a man down (due to injury) having exhausted its three-substitution rule, ruining the spectacle for the fans and casting a pall on Spain's victory, as it ran up the score.
FIFA must reform its arcane substitutions rule to avoid situations in which a team is unfairly penalized as a result of injury. In the 1962 World Cup in Chile, no substitutions were allowed and when Pelé was knocked out of the tournament in the 2nd game, with a groin injury, he stayed on the field by the sideline during the game as Brazil effectively played with ten men.
Not much has changed in the intervening 50 years, even with the three allowed substitutions. The rule needs to be changed by FIFA so that teams aren't penalized with a numerical disadvantage that isn't due to any red card infractions. Similarly, allowances should be made for replacing the unique goalkeeper position without burning the three regularly allowed substitutions.
Adding a microchip to the balls to determine whether the ball has crossed the line of the goal is all well and good, but bass-ackwards. FIFA, whose corruption and cronyism and sexism are legendary (their organizational model resembles the Catholic Church), must reform its byzantine structure so that it may enact sensible reforms of the greatest game on Earth.
FIFA must reform its arcane substitutions rule to avoid situations in which a team is unfairly penalized as a result of injury. In the 1962 World Cup in Chile, no substitutions were allowed and when Pelé was knocked out of the tournament in the 2nd game, with a groin injury, he stayed on the field by the sideline during the game as Brazil effectively played with ten men.
Not much has changed in the intervening 50 years, even with the three allowed substitutions. The rule needs to be changed by FIFA so that teams aren't penalized with a numerical disadvantage that isn't due to any red card infractions. Similarly, allowances should be made for replacing the unique goalkeeper position without burning the three regularly allowed substitutions.
Adding a microchip to the balls to determine whether the ball has crossed the line of the goal is all well and good, but bass-ackwards. FIFA, whose corruption and cronyism and sexism are legendary (their organizational model resembles the Catholic Church), must reform its byzantine structure so that it may enact sensible reforms of the greatest game on Earth.
EURO 2012 FINAL: MARIO BALOTELLI, ITALY'S FIERCE STRIKER
FOR SOCCER (FOOTBALL) FANS OUT THERE, the New York Times has a GREAT profile of Italy's fantastic striker, Mario Balotelli, who scored his winning side's two goals in the semifinal against Germany, propelling Italy to today's GRAND FINAL with Spain. If anyone thinks sports writing isn't a high art that stands alone in the universe of journalism, dig the Times' Jeré Longman's description of Balotelli's AMAZING winning goal:
Mario Balotelli was yellow-carded for this defiant affirmation of self, a counter-taunt to the racists. He shrugged off the howls of protest, saying: “They saw my physique and they’re jealous.”
GREAT WRITING to match a front page lead in today's New York Times sports page. Incidentally, the flamboyant 21-year-old Mario Balotelli is one of two players on Italy's squad of African descent. His rise to prominence has exposed the ugly underbelly of European racism, whose neo-Nazi and fascist history is still alive in a resurgent Right, laid bare by Europe's economic crisis and growing resentment against immigrants from African and Arab lands."KIEV, Ukraine — The long diagonal pass floated across midfield, its accuracy all the more remarkable for its distance. Waiting with impeccable timing was Mario Balotelli of Italy, one of soccer’s most gifted and eccentric players. He sprinted past the German defense and turned to meet the ball, nimbly switching directions, backpedaling with the gliding agility of a man on skates.The Germans gave chase, but it was desperate and futile. Already they must have known they would arrive too late. Thirty-five yards from goal, maybe 40, Balotelli let the ball bounce and tap his chest. And he was off again, racing, touching the ball once with his left foot, reaching the edge of the penalty area, the German captain Philipp Lahm in furious and vain pursuit.Now Neuer (the German goalkeeper) was exposed again, flat-footed, as Balotelli dashed at him. He shot with such power and slicing accuracy that the ball kept rising and swerving until it punched like a fist into the upper right corner of the net. Italy 2, Germany 0. Television cameras caught Joachim Löw, the German coach, picking his fingernails. His team’s chances, probably like his nails, were down to the quick.Balotelli kept running and removed his azure jersey and finally stopped, flexing his tattooed and chiseled arms and torso. Athletic tape fanned across his lower back like slats of an Adirondack chair. He remained unsmiling, his stare defiant, as a teammate ran up to hug him in celebration."
Mario Balotelli was yellow-carded for this defiant affirmation of self, a counter-taunt to the racists. He shrugged off the howls of protest, saying: “They saw my physique and they’re jealous.”
 |
| photo excerpt, courtesy Getty images: Michael Regan. |
Game update: Spain is up by 2. It's looking tough for Italy.
Memo To Sweet Melissa: When You Host Repugnant Party Cretins ...
TELL THEM IT'S "DEMOCRATIC PARTY." THERE'S no such thing as the "Demo-CRAT party." Can you PLEASE FUCKING CORRECT THESE RATBASTARDS FROM THE REPUGNANT PARTY!?
MITT'S MENDACIOUS PANDEMIC LIES!
I KNOW THE BELTWAY MEDIA, MUCH OF MSNBC ARE LOATHE to tell the TRUTH about Mitt Romney's PANDEMIC LIES. Some hosts are either time-constrained, or have a "cultural" block to calling a fellow ELITIST a LIAR — how's that "taking on powerful politicians" working for you, Andrea? — so they settle upon a false equivalence of mendacious neglect. Here's what I'd like to know: When is a nominally truth-seeking show like Meet The Press actually going to ask the question of a Romney Team surrogate: Why is your candidate INCAPABLE OF TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT ANYTHING?! Here's PolitiFact's compilation of Mitt's latest LIES on Obamacare:
1. Mitt Romney says "Obamacare" means up to 20 million Americans will lose insurance they like and want. — FALSE. Romney said that "Obamacare … means that for up to 20 million Americans, they will lose the insurance they currently have, the insurance that they like and they want to keep." That number is cherry-picked, and he’s wrong to describe it as only including people who "like" their coverage, since many of those 20 million will be leaving employer coverage voluntarily for better options. Romney also ignores that under the status quo, many more people today "lose" coverage than even the highest, cherry-picked CBO estimate. We rate his statement FALSE.
2. "Obamacare adds trillions to our deficits and to our national debt." — FALSE. We find no factual basis for Romney’s claim that the law "adds trillions to our deficits and to our national debt." We rate his statement FALSE.
BUT WAIT! MSNBC's very own Rachel Blog hosting the incisive Steve Benen has a little advertised, running weekly series: Chronicling Mitt's Mendacity, Vol. XXIV and XXIII linked here. (The latest entry includes 21 LIES Mitt Romney has uttered this past week. And the week before that, 30 LIES.) My question for Rachel — and for ALL MSNBC hosts — is why Mitt's SERIAL LYING isn't treated as a separate, discrete story worthy of its own examination, with a professional psychiatrist to opine?
Gee, silly me but I always felt that an individual who is constitutionally incapable of TELLING THE TRUTH is, by definition, MENTALLY ILL and that We, The People have an abiding interest in NOT ELECTING a MENTAL CASE as our president. (Am I right, Rachel? When is Steve, and in particular this series, going to crack your show on the TV Machine?!) PS. — Honorable mention for covering Mitt's pathological LIES to Martin, Big Eddie, and Lawrence. But that story, covering this weirdo's mental pathology is still lacking.
PPS. — FYI, Chris: Romney delivered his reply to the Court's ruling from the roof of the Heritage Foundation, not some "insurance company," according to D.C. resident and progressive radio host, Thom Hartmann. This is especially ironic, he noted, because (1) the idea for a mandate was hatched at the Heritage Foundation as an alternative to the Clinton health care proposal, Hillarycare; and (2) Mitt Romney's signature achievement as Massachusetts governor was the popular Romneycare, on which the conservative ACA is based, and which of course includes a mandate.
1. Mitt Romney says "Obamacare" means up to 20 million Americans will lose insurance they like and want. — FALSE. Romney said that "Obamacare … means that for up to 20 million Americans, they will lose the insurance they currently have, the insurance that they like and they want to keep." That number is cherry-picked, and he’s wrong to describe it as only including people who "like" their coverage, since many of those 20 million will be leaving employer coverage voluntarily for better options. Romney also ignores that under the status quo, many more people today "lose" coverage than even the highest, cherry-picked CBO estimate. We rate his statement FALSE.
2. "Obamacare adds trillions to our deficits and to our national debt." — FALSE. We find no factual basis for Romney’s claim that the law "adds trillions to our deficits and to our national debt." We rate his statement FALSE.
 |
Gee, silly me but I always felt that an individual who is constitutionally incapable of TELLING THE TRUTH is, by definition, MENTALLY ILL and that We, The People have an abiding interest in NOT ELECTING a MENTAL CASE as our president. (Am I right, Rachel? When is Steve, and in particular this series, going to crack your show on the TV Machine?!) PS. — Honorable mention for covering Mitt's pathological LIES to Martin, Big Eddie, and Lawrence. But that story, covering this weirdo's mental pathology is still lacking.
PPS. — FYI, Chris: Romney delivered his reply to the Court's ruling from the roof of the Heritage Foundation, not some "insurance company," according to D.C. resident and progressive radio host, Thom Hartmann. This is especially ironic, he noted, because (1) the idea for a mandate was hatched at the Heritage Foundation as an alternative to the Clinton health care proposal, Hillarycare; and (2) Mitt Romney's signature achievement as Massachusetts governor was the popular Romneycare, on which the conservative ACA is based, and which of course includes a mandate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
of you have sat, and perhaps thought, with us!