Fear and/or Sanity is Restored!!!!!!!!!!

Millions descend on American capitol!!!!

Mainstream media is reporting the figure well off of actual attendance, however.  NYT puts the crowd well over 200,000.  The DC metro service is reporting that before 3pm Saturday more than 350,000 had ridden.

CBS measured the crowd at 215,000, well above the measure of Fox News' rally in August of a meager 87,000. 

The real, honest, truthful, factual numbers will come from Stephen Colbert after he finishes his painstaking process of counting every single individual.  It doesn't matter what the media states.  It only matters what Glenn Beck Comedy Central tell us.

*Update:

I used a flyover image and roughly counted the crowd to be about 1.3 million.  I was doing a couple things at once, so it's possible I'm off by a handful of people or so.

No, Not Libertarian at All

Finally something I agree with on Lew Rockwell's blog:

The Non-Libertarian Tea Party Movement

I’m highly skeptical of this claim that 48% percent of tea partiers are libertarian. Add war and monetary policy to your criteria and then see what you have left. Or abolishing entitlement programs, the Department of Education, or the war on drugs. How many tea partiers are on board with even one of those things? I’m amazed at the great strides libertarianism has made thanks to Ron Paul, but they aren’t that great — yet.

Actually there are times I agree quite a bit with what is on Rockwell's blog.  Their adoration of Libertarianism rubs me wrong most times but in this case, I agree.

Tea baggers are not big L or small l libertarian.  They are Republicans.  Everyone knows this.  But the narrative is better if we get to pretend that they are these rebel-minded laissez faire heart throbs that want to restore greatness to America.  They aren't. 

Sign of the Times

This should work...

It gets better.  A commenter on the site digresses:

This is the same thing I’ve been wondering for some time now. Why is it that the Repubs get the sham concerning Black Americans, it is the Repubs that freed them, allow them to fight as equals, and want nothing more then for them to prosper–unlike the Dems who want to keep them at the bottom, struggling, pushing a belief of entitlement instead of engagement in our Captialist economic society?

Hopefully this campaign will begin to open some eyes.

Yes this billboard campaign should really open their eyes.

I didn't realize white conservatives "freed them."  It's my understanding the abolition of slavery in America was anything but a conservative movement and actually broke the bonds of capitalist economics by instituting property redistribution and ultimately income.  But hey we can pretend can't we.  Wheeee!!


(H/T TPM)

Destroying A President

Paul Krugman writes today that the real lesson from the 1994 GOP takeover of Congress was that in 1995 Republicans didn't do enough to destroy Clinton.

If you read the whole thing, what you get is that McConnell is taking a very different lesson from the events of 1995 than the one most pundits take, and expect Republicans to take. The whole attempt to bully Clinton into slashing Medicare by shutting down the federal government was a political failure for the GOP; but McConnell doesn’t see this as evidence that Republicans were too confrontational.

No, he sees it as evidence that they weren’t confrontational enough; they were too focused on their policy agenda, and neglected the necessary work of destroying Clinton:

And thus now, looking back, they realize they didn't do enough to stop a man they believed was destroying the very fabric of our nation. So in 2011, Republicans won't make the same mistake twice and will see to it that they take down this Democratic president or at least make him a one-termer.

There's a lot of validity to Krugman's words.  Though none of us have any clue what Republicans are thinking in the long term when it comes to the havoc they can wreak.  Underestimating their crazy is what put us in this predicament in the first place.  Justly, Krugman's post leaves out bringing down presidents they didn't vote for is what Republicans do, always.

As we all know, Clinton did not destroy America.  With no help from the GOP, he went on to become one of the most popular presidents in modern history.  He worked diligently to put America on a 21st century footing.  He had his mistakes, his flaws, his unnecessities, but one thing he was not was an enemy of this country.  We all know this now and millions knew it then.  Fortunately the GOP failed.  But will they twice?

Today we are faced yet again with a resurgent Republican minority telling us that our president, simply because he doesn't belong to their party, wants to destroy this country.  That if his agenda is allowed to carry on, we will succumb to a socialist style EU member floating numbingly through time.  The only way we can guarantee the survival of America and the tradition for future generations is to vote Republican.  That's how they view the entire world.

When Republicans weren't able to destroy Clinton or beat him at the ballot box what did they do?  They impeached him, because-- God forbid-- America be ruled by someone who is not Republican.  They utterly disdain a country that is not Republican.  And when they aren't in power, their mission is to paint whoever is as an anti-American zealot that must be stopped at all costs.

Seeing to it that President Obama doesn't win again is what opposition parties do. Campaigning on the element that the current president is un-American, bent on destroying our society, is racist and must be stopped are two totally different things. One is sane.  The other is deranged. Good night, and good luck.

Boehner to Campaign With Nazi Reenactor

Incredible. The probable next Speaker of the House of Representatives is set to campaign for a fellow Republican candidate that spends his leisure time as a Nazi reenactor.  God help us all.

Deep Thought

If you can't curbstomp a woman's head anymore we're pretty much screwed as a country.

Vote Republican or taste concrete biatch!
Via Barefoot and Progressive

Whatever Happened to the America Where a Man Could Curbstomp a Woman's Head and Not Have to Worry About Camera Angles??

See this guy? He's Rand Paul's head stomper, or also known as Tim Profitt. He protects America's civil liberties by stomping on the heads of women who didn't vote for George Bush.

He is a very manly man.  He admits to stomping a defenseless woman's head to the curb but blames the camera angle for making it look worse than it actually was.  The victim received a concussion and mild sprains.  But thankfully Profitt rescued America from evil liberalism.

See this guy?  He's the very tough macho man that held the woman down so Profitt could curbstomp her.

He's packing a sidearm and an AK-47 assault rifle in the picture because he is a very manly man.  He's so tough and not scared of anything.  He has to carry his weapons around in case a defenseless woman appears carrying signs about something he might not agree with.  When that happens, he turns on his tough guy machismo and gets to work protecting America.

(All photos and commentary are taken from Barefoot and Progressive where free speech still reigns until she gets her head stomped too by some very Patriotic and Constitution-minded pussies)

*Update:

In a world where Republican street toughs get to curbstomp innocent and defenseless women, it is the responsibility of the said women to apologize to the crusty old white men doing the stomping.

And when asked if he [curbstomper] would apologize to Valle [the woman he feared]. "I would like for her to apologize to me to be honest with you," Profitt said.

She should also be made to apologize for not voting for George Bush while she's at it. How dare a 120lb. woman think she can carry an anti-Republican sign to a political debate opened to the public. How dare her.

Vote Republican or taste the concrete biatch!
Via Barefoot and Progressive

There Was a Time When Radicals Were Called Just That

Last night at the Rand Paul/Jack Conway debate we saw a visible example of how Republicans view dissent.  Nothing has changed since the days of George W. Bush.

We saw first-hand how Republicans expect people to act when someone around them has different ideas, undeniably showing us how we can expect Republicans to govern if given the opportunity again. In their America there's no room for differences of opinion. You are either with us or against us. Anything short of all out support for Republican ideas is treason. That's how they are. That's how they've been for some time now.  And that's how they will govern once again.

But what else is going on in the GOP? Aside from roughing up people that didn't vote for George Bush what is this modern-day tea bagging Revolutionary Freedom Fighting Party really all about?  What is their vision for this country?  What is it they want to return America back to?  What sort of legislation will they enact and expect everyone to comply with?  Just what exactly is this country about to do.

In Alaska, they're about detaining journalists that print stories they don't like.

In Wisconsin, they're about calling Hitler a "strong leader" coinciding well with their fascist behavior in KY.

In Iowa, they're about banning activities on Wednesdays and removing the President of the United States from office.  Yes the Iowa GOP wants to ban activities on Wednesdays purportedly so people can attend Bible study.

In Colorado, they're against the Separation of Church & State because not only should Wednesdays be a state-mandated prayer night, government, they believe, is ordained by God for such reasons.

In Texas, they're for a "violent overthrow" of the government if Republicans don't take back Congress.

In Utah, they're for "Second Amendment remedies" for legislators that don't vote Republican.

All over the country, Republicans are running on a radical platform that Social Security, Medicare, the minimum wage, unemployment benefits, the Civil Rights Act, and the Affordable Care Act are all unconstitutional and should be abolished or defunded.  It's a draconian agenda deep in fear.

We've seen how they behave but do we really know their goals for this country?  Legislating the Bible, suspending journalist's First Amendment rights just because they don't like what they print.  No activities on Wednesdays, what does that even mean???  Violent overthrow if Republicans don't win at the ballot box.  Is this your vision for America in the 21st century.  Don't say you weren't warned.  Don't say you sat this one out because you didn't care.  There's more at stake than you realize.  All it takes is for good people to do nothing.

And Then the Brown Shirts Came and All We Could Do Was Watch

Rand Paul supporters shove woman to ground, literally curb-stomped her head before a debate between Paul and his Democratic opponent and the street thugs did not get arrested. All happened because the woman was not a Sir Rand supporter and was carrying a sign that expressed her support for something other than right wing rule.

Take a look:



Be proud GOP, be oh so proud.

On CNN Afghan President Admits Bush Knew Iran Was Sending Bagfuls of Cash

Iranian influence in Bush's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan gained considerable attention in 2005 and again in 2007. There was talk, and Republican chest-thumping, to spread the wars into Iran to bring them Glorious Freedom just like we had to its neighbors.  The casus belli was that Iran was funding and arming terrorists and the only way to stop the supply routes through Cambodia, I mean Iran, was to bomb them.

Anyone who thought back then and still today that Iran was not influencing both American theaters of war was and is an idiot.  This was predicted by numerous people long before Bush invaded Iraq.  But now we are learning, like the gullible idiots we are, that the Bush administration was well aware of the quid pro quo of Iran working both sides to fund peace and war in the region.  Via CNN:

Kabul, Afghanistan (CNN) -- President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan acknowledged Monday that he has received cash from Iran -- and he said the United States knows about it and does the same thing.

Ahhhhh when Bush does it, it's mere Patriotism to defend America from evildoers. But when President Obama says Iran has a right of sovereignty he is allowing his Muslim-birth and Kenyan anti-colonialism brainwashed mindset to prevail.  Y'all can go suck a big fat one.

The Party of TARP Gets Its Kickback

Despite public opinion, TARP is GOP policy. It was proposed to congress by the Bush administration. Championed by GOP leaders, voted into law with broad Republican support and signed by Republican George Bush.  Through and through it is Republican policy and would not have been possible without the backing of a two-term Republican president.  Spin it however you like, but you are only trying to rewrite history if you figure it any other way.

TARP, however, has been extremely successful.  It is actually the most successful Bush policy of his two-terms.  With that success comes the returns, and by returns I mean the financial industry is returning the favor back to the politicians in the form of campaign donations.  Naturally, the political party responsible for the $700 billion bailout reaps the the largest returns.  And of course that is the GOP.  Yes, the party that is now wanting everyone to forget that they are responsible for TARP; that is freely getting to pretend that it is the champion of small government conservatism; and is trying its hardest to blame on Obama, is actually receiving the bulk of campaign cash from companies that benefited the most from the Republican bailout in 2008.  No conflict of interest I'm sure.

GOP Candidate Running To Make Government Leave Us Alone, Received Nearly a Million Dollars in Farm Subsidies

Par for the course...

A Republican House candidate in Missouri's 4th congressional district, Vicky Hartzler, claims she's running for office to get government out of people's lives.

My husband and I are small business owners. We sell farm equipment, we have three stores. I was a teacher for several years, was a state rep for six years, a wife and a mom. We just want the government to leave us alone here in Missouri’s 4th.

Hartzler has received $774,325 in farm subsidies since 1995. I wish the government would leave her alone too and start bothering me a little bit.  I could use the cash.

Republicans aren't against Big Government.  They're only against government that isn't led by Republicans.

Republican Tea Bagger in Illinois Helps Shed That Bothersome Racist Label

Tea baggers are having a hard time shedding their racist label. Surely this will help:

The Republican candidate for state Senate in the 52nd District said Wednesday night that black men “find it more lucrative to be able to do drugs or other avenues rather than do education.”

[…]

After the forum had ended, Reynolds repeated his comments.

“Look at the number of black men who opt out of getting a job and opt out of higher education. They don’t even make it out of high school because the lucrative drug trade is so rampant that it’s just easy for them to fall into that. What are the avenues for the black man to get out of the ghetto? He becomes a star athlete or he does drugs. I mean very few men of the black race get out of that ghetto through education.

“The women do. The women do because, number one, they’re forced to because they don’t have anybody to take care of them. They do a good job. A lot of the women are very good about getting out and getting an education. The men just have a more … you know, the lure of high money because it’s high money in drugs without having to pay the price of going to school.”

Tea Bagger Founder Calls Movement and Palin a Joke

Some harsh words from an original tea bagger.

In a "message" to the Tea Party Wednesday, Karl Denninger declared that he "ought to sue" anyone who uses the Tea Party name "for defamation."

"Yeah, that's a joke," he writes. "But so are you. All of you. Especially Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Bob Barr, and douchebag groups such as the 'Tea Party Patriots.'"

Denninger is mad because he claims the tea bagger label has been hijacked by Republicans.  And indeed it has.  The idea that government run by a Democratic president is on the wrong track always resonates within GOP circles.  Every poll ever taken has demonstrated tea baggers overwhelmingly vote Republican or plan to. If you vote Republican guess what?  You're Republican.

Despite what Denninger had hoped his political rebellion against the government would turn into, it nonetheless turned into a mass Republican hysteria ran by hypocritical elitists that are mad Republicans aren't still in power.  They are a deranged people that simply want the GOP back in charge.  Those who vote Republican and watch Fox News, let's face it there is no difference, are more than happy to have the tea baggers on their side.

O'Donnell Declares Herself Constitutional Scholar

I was reading through a transcript this morning of CNN's Anderson 360. In it Anderson Cooper is reporting on Republican Christine O'Donnell's latest Sarah Palin moment when she asks her opponent where in the Constitution is the Separation of Church & State.  What stuck out at me is how many times O'Donnell makes reference to her 7-day fellowship at a conservative think-tank, which she continually refers to as a graduate fellowship in constitutional government.

From the transcript:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What responsibilities or experiences in jobs and past -- past activities do you feel qualify you to be a senator?

O'DONNELL: Well, for one, I have a graduate fellowship from the Claremont Institute in constitutional government.

She's lying, continuously.

Again Cooper points out another instance where she claims graduate study of the constitution.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Ok.

O'DONNELL: I also have a graduate fellowship in constitutional government from the Claremont Institute. It is the Constitution that I will defend and it is by the Constitution by -- that I will make all of my decisions.

Cooper rightfully makes note that the graduate study she keeps referring to was not at a university but a non-accredited Republican think tank and it lasted a whopping 7-days.  You cannot get "deep analysis of the Constitution" in a 7-day workshop from a Republican think tank.  In the real world it just doesn't work that way.  That explains why she did not know where the Separation of Church & State was located in the Constitution.

Also, keep in mind, when O'Donnell was attending her week-long in-depth study of the Constitution at a Republican think tank, she had not even completed her bachelor's degree yet.

As an undergraduate I had a full year of course work in Constitutional Law.   That's way more "analysis" of the Constitution than her Republican crash course at Claremont.  And I in no way would ever consider myself having the analytical capacity to run for U.S. senate bragging about my constitutional skills.  Not for Republicans, though.  All you have to do is attend one of their think tank workshops and you get to tell everyone you have a graduate fellowship in Constitutional Law.

*Update:

O'Donnell declared on ABC News this morning that she had won the debate about the First Amendment.  She claims she was giving high-fives to her staff after it was over in celebration of demonstrating her deep knowledge of the Constitution.

After that debate my team and I we were literally high fiving each other thinking that we had exposed he doesn't know the First Amendment, and then when we read the reports that said the opposite we were all like 'what?'"

Whether or not the exact phrase "separation of church & state" is explicitly mentioned in the First Amendment or not is pointless. Nor did she ask where the phrase was located. She asked where the concept was located. And it is located in the First Amendment.

Here's what tea baggers and Republicans are doing. A large number of them believe that unless it's directly written in text on the document of the Constitution that it's an invented power created by liberal activist judges.  The health care debate is a perfect example.  They believe unless the constitution explicitly states that Congress can require health coverage for all Americans then it is not a power granted to Congress; therefore Democratic health care reform is unconstitutional.  Never mind the fact that the Constitution explicitly grants Congress the power to regulate commerce and to provide for the general welfare of the country.

The Success of Bush's TARP

In October of 2008 I stood opposed to TARP.  In October of 2010 I still stand opposed to TARP.  I don't like the idea of government interfering with private markets.  I don't like the idea of government taking ownership in private companies. And I certainly don't like the idea of tax payer money being used to prop up very rich Wall St. CEO's who couldn't balance a checkbook.  I see something fundamentally wrong with all that.  Yet TARP has proven to be a huge success and will undoubtedly become the biggest success of the Bush presidency.

The legislation itself was a massive $700 billion financial aid package used to purchase assets from failing financial companies to hopefully strengthen the American financial sector.  It succeeded at warding off a complete financial meltdown, something I did not think would happen in 2008.  I was wrong, obviously.

As a breakdown, TARP sunk $250 billion into a capital purchase program used to scatter money to small banks all throughout the country.  $40 billion was used to buy up AIG.  $20 billion went to Citi Group and another $20 billion went to Bank of America.  $25 billion went to the automakers and their financial institutions.  Many billions more went into funds to back all of it up.

The result has been surprising.  Bloomberg reports this morning the money sank into the financial sector has earned the American government a return of about $25.2 billion.  The money sank into the auto industry has earned the government a return of about $11 billion.  Given the offset of the earnings, the total TARP program is now only expected to cost the government $30 billion.  WSJ reports this amount is significantly cheaper than the Reagan financial bailout in 1982.  All of this is very good news.  The American people should be grateful President Bush had the leadership to do what was unpopular but in the best interest of the country. It worked and the program should be recognized as a success instead of being trampled on by people who just want something to complain about.

I'm still opposed to the policy.  I don't like it.  But I have enough sense to admit it worked.

O'Donnell Asks Where Seperation of Church and State is at in the Constitution

In a debate this morning at Widener University Law School in Delaware, Republican tea bagger candidate for U.S. Senate specifically asked her Democratic opponent where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state.  No joke.

AP reports:

Coons said private and parochial schools are free to teach creationism but that "religious doctrine doesn't belong in our public schools."

"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him.

When Coons responded that the First Amendment bars Congress from making laws respecting the establishment of religion, O'Donnell asked: "You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?"

The best part is her answer to Coons, "You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?" Yes Ms. O'Donnell the First Amendment specifically forbids the government of the United States from making laws respecting religion.  More specifically it states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The AP story reports that O'Donnell seemed stunned the First Amendment did any such thing.  Along the same topic of Separation of Church and State, O'Donnell responded to Coons by stating, "You've just proved how little you know not just about constitutional law but about the theory of evolution," reports the AP.

What most people don't understand is that as a tea bagger Republican who also professes to be an evangelical Christian, Christine O'Donnell really believes the Founding Fathers were guided by the Hand of God and fully meant for Christianity to be part of government.  They really do not believe a Separation of Church and State exists, or that it does solely because of a Liberal activist interpretation of the Sacred words written by White Men ordained by God to rule us in the 21st century.  That's not a joke.  It's really what they believe and want applied to our government right now.  No, actually, they want to take our government back to that because they believe that's what our founders intended and we have somehow strayed from it.  Strayed from it because of liberalism of course.

*Update:

The O'Donnell Camp responds via spokesperson Matt Moran:

Christine O’Donnell was not questioning the concept of separation of church and state as subsequently established by the courts. She simply made the point that the phrase appears nowhere in the Constitution. It was in fact Chris Coons who demonstrated his Constitutional ignorance when he could not name the five freedoms contained in the First Amendment.”

Clearly the video shows O'Donnell asking Coons where the establishment of the Separation of Church and State exists and when he tells her in the First Amendment she seems shocked.

"You're telling me there's separation of church and state established in the first amendment," are her exact words (6:21).  Nothing about the phrase itself.  Clearly asking where the establishment comes from.  It comes from the First Amendment. Despite her campaign press release, she was questioning the concept.

Ross Douthat: Space Alien Man Child

Ross Douthat

It's a personal policy of mine not to read anything Ross Douthat writes. Not because he doesn't know anything. I assure you I read stuff by people all the time who don't know anything. I don't have any policy against that. Mainly just because he looks like a space alien is reason enough for me not to read anything he writes. Aside from my superficiality, the dude also has not a clue what he's talking about.

Douthat writes-- again--  in his latest Times column about his favorite topic, Republican Tea Baggers.  Douthat opines the country better hope the evil liberals aren't successful at labeling tea baggers as a simple faction of angry Bush voters because our financial future depends on it:

So the jury is still out. If Tea Party standard-bearers end up being as hypocritical on entitlements as most American politicians, then this liberal narrative, at least, will have been vindicated.

But for the sake of the country’s finances, liberals should hope that the Tea Party proves their most convincing story wrong.

The jury is not still out.  There was no jury.  Tea baggers are hypocrites that love government entitlement programs so long as the money is being spent on them and ushered in by Republicans.  It's only when Democrats have the reins do tea baggers care one bit about federal spending.  When Bush and the Republicans passed the largest expansion of Medicare since its inception, an expansion that was totally unfunded adding nearly a trillion dollars to the deficit, tea baggers were no where to be found.  When Bush ran up a $1.4 trillion deficit and more than doubled our national debt, tea baggers were too busy polishing their knobs to be concerned about petty items like fiscal responsibility.

To say, like Douthat does, unless politicians seriously adopt the tea baggers' grave concern for fiscal matters, that our country's future will continue to be perilous is mind-boggling stupid.  If it were a simple matter of fiscal responsibility, the so-called deficit hawks would fully realize this president has a very good track record on the issues they claim to care about.

President Obama has cut taxes for every single American that receives a paycheck. His stimulus legislation contained over $300 billion in tax cuts alone.  His signature legislation, and the most progressive bill to come out of Washington in 50 years, the Affordable Care Act,  is a deficit REDUCER.  The state aid bill passed in August is also a deficit REDUCER.  In fact, since taking office he has reduced the budget deficit by $122 billion.  He has lived up to his promise on Iraq.  And the Dow is up nearly 30% since Jan. 2009.  How would the narrative be any different if the president had done more instead of less?  It wouldn't.

How about the party tea baggers and Douthat vote for get held to the same standard they want to set for everyone else?

Obama and Dems Shrink Deficit by $122 Billion

According to the U.S. Treasury, for the 2010 fiscal year that ended on September 30, the government had a budget shortfall of 1.294 trillion dollars, down 122 billion dollars from the previous year's record-setting high.

The 2010 fiscal year was President Obama's first federal operating budget. The previous year's budget was the final Bush budget which set a record for the largest deficit in American history.

When Flat Earthers Become Serious People

I guess I'm way behind on my Republican conspiracy theories because I didn't see until today where tea bagger Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in Nevada, Sharron Angle, added to her long list of conspiracy theories by suggesting Sharia Law had already taken over two American cities, one of which doesn't even exist, and that unless we vote Republican we can expect more places to follow suit.

It's too bad we can't hold Republicans accountable for their mass hysteria.  Instead we have to treat candidates like Angle, Rand Paul, Palin and the rest of Flat Eathers like Serious people with grave concerns for our future and give them equal credence to candidates that want to do something about real, factual problems like 10% unemployment.

America's Top Gen.: Iraq War and Aftermath Was Due to Bush Lies

Wonder how much play this will get in the "Bush is God" controlled media?  Top Iraq commander unloads on Bush's Iraq blunder:

Shelton, who was the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1997 to 2001, makes the comment in Without Hesitation: The Odyssey of an American Warrior, a soon-to-be-published memoir reviewed at Foreign Policy by Thomas E. Ricks.

"President Bush and his team got us enmeshed in Iraq based on extraordinarily poor intelligence and a series of lies purporting that we had to protect Americans from Saddam's evil empire because it posed such a threat to our national security," Shelton writes in his memoir.

Ouch!  This guy obviously doesn't watch Fox News.

Christine O'Donnell Brings Revolution! to America's Living Rooms

We had ourselves a dandy last night in Delaware. The best the tea bagging Republicans have to offer should, in a sane world, shed some light on their whole movement.  Alas, though, if you don't conclude from watching the debate between Christine O'Donnell and Democrat Chris Coons that it was a stellar performance for all Freedom Fighting Super Patriot Americans, then you are solemnly anti-American in every way.  Sorry folks, that's just how it is when Fox News controls our world.

Great American, Freedom Fighting highlights:

• O'Donnell could not name a single Supreme Court case (strikingly amazing in every sense)
• O'Donnell stated we fought the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 80s and 90s and didn't finish the job
• O'Donnell stated she thinks public schools should be allowed to teach creationism, i.e., the Christian version

*Update:

I wonder if O'Donnell knows that it was Reagan and the subsequent Republican administration that "didn't finish the job" in Afghanistan? Just a thought, but honestly whether she realizes it or not, she actually opened the door to the notion that yes indeed it was Reagan that armed, funded and supported the Mujahideen against the Soviet Union.  In other words, the people we fight today in Afghanistan are in existence entirely because of Ronald Reagan and the Republicans.

I doubt O'Donnell is smart enough to realize what she said and its implications on debate.  And not that it matters any way because I'm certain if you question her remarks all you are doing is demonstrating just how unserious and un-American you really are.

Jon Stewart Systematically Dismembers Republican Eric Cantor

I almost entitled this post my usual "Pretty Certain These Are Points That Should Be Made By Someone Other Than a Comedian," but I didn't. Why? Because, comedian or not, Jon Stewart is doing the heavy lifting of not only modern media but anyone aspiring to be a future journalist.

The biggest joke of all, however, is when Republicans talk about their core principles of shrinking government, cutting spending and earnest fiscal responsibility.  As Jon Stewart so adequately reminds "Young Gun" Rep. Cantor, the only track record the GOP has is one of growing government and out of control spending.  Cantor seems surprised anyone would call his bluff:

STEWART:  "You voted for No Child Left Behind. You voted for Read I.D. You voted for the Medicare bill which was a trillion dollars unfunded. You voted for the Patriot Act. In what way are you a limited government -- in what way do you want to shrink government because your record clearly is not."

Crooks and Liars has the video...

Sure Slavery Was Bad, but this is worse

I love when conservative white Republicans compare modernity to slavery. Just love it.

Circle Jerk

Matthew Yglesias uses "circle jerk" in his post today. Yet more proof The Fold Blog is having a positive impact on modern society.

So Much for the Small Government Crowd

It's worth mentioning a few more notes about the latest national survey to gauge the public's view of government and its role. Below I mentioned that the public overwhelmingly favors government services. Social Security, Medicare, unemployment benefits, etc., all get exceedingly high marks from the public. But that's only because the tea baggers aren't getting their voices heard, right?

Wrong!

Regular readers already know that tea baggers are some of the biggest recipients of government welfare social services.  Their biggest candidates for office who daily espouse hatred for social programs, make a living off of Big Government.  Rand Paul in Kentucky has made millions from Medicare.  Sharron Angle in Nevada has lived her whole life on tax payer funded jobs and from a government-run health care program.  In tea bagger language that would mean she's lived her whole life living off the government's tit.  Since she's a Republican and a self-described tea bagger, it means she's a Super Great Patriot.  Even Joe Miller in Alaska has admitted that his wife once received unemployment benefits, not to mention that Alaska is the largest recipient of federal funding of any state in the Union.  Certainly a disdain for Big Government that have not.  What they are, however, is Republican and yet another poll totally backs that up.

The WaPo-Kaiser-Harvard study found that self-described tea baggers really do like government too.

89% of tea baggers think government should be involved in fighting terrorism
56% of tea baggers think government should regulate environmental standards
52% of tea baggers think government should be involved in reducing poverty (that's huge!!)
46% of tea baggers even think government should regulate Wall St.!!

These are supposed to be our anti-government crowd???  How in the world can they ever be taken seriously when talking about shrinking government and cutting spending.

Right Wing Gunman Credits Glenn Beck for His Actions

The problem with this is Glenn Beck is neither newscaster nor school teacher. He's a right wing extremist with a television and radio show propped up and paid for by Fox News. The impression Fox gives to Beck and his views are intentionally programed to be that of Great Americanism and millions of people believe it.

So when idiots like Byron Williams open fire on police officers and plan battles of Armageddon because he believes Glenn Beck is an evangelical savior of America, Fox News is more at fault for spreading treasonous anti-American hate speech than Beck could ever be.

No one in their right mind would ever pay any attention to anything Glenn Beck says or does.  But because of Fox News, millions do and indeed heed his words very carefully.  What's surprising about all of this is not the fact that Beck is the motivation behind Williams' plans but that there aren't more and more examples of this popping up everywhere.

Americans Support Government's Role Just Not Government

An excellent new report in the WaPo this morning highlights the vast array of views on modern American government. Too big? Too small? Too nazi? Too commie? It's all in there and it's a topic The Fold Blog has always found interesting enough to bring to the main page.

I'll maintain all day long, as I always have, that a vast majority of Americans do not care about the size of government as long as they get what they want from it.  In addition, efficiency plays a much larger role in contentment than does size.  And the this latest report backs me up.

• 96% believe Medicare to be important
• 95% believe Social Security to be important
• 90% believe Defense spending is important
• 82% believe food stamps are important
• 91% believe federal aid to public schools is important
• 91% believe unemployment benefits are important

And a whopping 49% said they would prefer more services from the government even if that meant higher taxes.

Gallup: Obama Approval Higher Than Reagan's or Clinton's at Similar Points

Gallup latest 48% approval rating places Obama well ahead of GOP poster boy

At 48% approval, President Obama's numbers are higher than Reagan and Clinton's 42% approval at the same points in their respective administrations.

O'Donnell: I'm You, I didn't go to Yale, I just lied that I went to Princeton

Christine O'Donnell's latest ad is up and she desperately tries to playoff her opponent's Ivy League education.



There's a huge problem with O'Donnell's ad, however. She has routinely lied about having attended graduate school at Princeton. She even tried to use her graduate studies at Princeton in a sexual harassment lawsuit claiming a loss in lifetime earnings based on her acceptance into Princeton graduate school.  She was never accepted into Princeton and later had to drop her sexual harassment suit.

With $100B in Cuts, GOP Says It Will Balance Trillion Dollar Deficit

Bloomberg analyzes the GOP "Pledge to America" that is being passed around by the Republican Young Guns and gives us some specifics on what Republicans would do if put back in charge of Congress.

Right off the bat, anyone worried about reducing the budget deficit must first figure in the Pledge's number one priority, making the Bush tax cuts permanent.  Let's start there.  Extending the tax cuts would add nearly $5 trillion to the deficit in the first ten years.  Yet the pledge only outlines a meager $100 billion in cuts.  Once again, the math is psychotically stupid.  Five trillion dollars is much greater than one hundred billion.  How in the world you expect to "balance the budget and pay down the debt" like the GOP says its pledge will do is pure, super-retarded fantasy.

From the Top Down, GOP is Full of Liars

Rep. Eric Cantor

Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) lying through his teeth to some Republican base supporters:

CANTOR: Well James, we can stop it, and that’s why we need your help. We’ve got to stop this cycle of spending money we don’t have. This spending and debt we’ve incurred over the last two years has exceeded that which this country has incurred over the last 200.

Not only is Cantor lying, it's a remarkably stupid thing to say.  There's absolutely nothing true about it.

As we've mentioned numerous times on this blog, the national debt was roughly $10.6 trillion when President Obama took office.  Since then, $2.8 trillion has been added to it.  Not that it matters, since Republicans can't grasp the simple mathematical summation that 10 is greater than 2, but most of the $2.8 trillion added since Obama's inauguration was from Bush's 2009 budget (all his bailouts..TARP).  Obama's first year in office, yes.  But Bush's budget.  Nonetheless, Republicans wouldn't dare admit that if they refuse to admit 10 is greater than 2.   Let's run through this again, just for the smell of it.

Reagan = 186% increase in the national debt
Bush I = 58% increase in the national debt
Clinton = 39% increase in the national debt
Bush II = 107% increase in the national debt
Obama = 10% increase in the national debt

For the sake of argument, I'll even give Republicans the opportunity to apply all of the 2009 debt accumulated by Bush's budget to Obama.  Still yet, that only equals a 19.5% increase in the national debt if it is applied to Obama's tenure.  Either way, the amount in no way equals more debt that has been run up in the last 200 years like Cantor is trying to say.  It doesn't even equal the amount of debt George W. Bush ran up.  Simple, simple math a caveman could understand but their propensity to lie is too great.  And these are the people we are supposed to vote back into power?

More Tea Bagger Hypocrisy Edition 412

Alaska Republican senate candidate and tea bagger favorite, Joe Miller, admits his wife received unemployment benefits. Not a big deal unless you consider unemployment benefits to be unconstitutional like Miller does. According to his logic, his wife participated in illegal activities by accepting the benefits. But Miller is a Republican so everything is fine. He'll never be held to the standard he wants set for everyone else.

Single Women That Like to Have Sex Shouldn't Be Allowed to Teach School

I'm just saying...

Note to Tea Baggers: Lincoln Was a Liberal

One of the more hilarious aspects of the tea bagger crowd, besides their personal contradiction when it comes to social services, is their fondness for Abraham Lincoln.

Lincoln with tea baggers at local event

This was the case-- again-- last Saturday night in Williamson County when a local tea bag chapter held a Patriotic rally at the Marion Cultural and Civic Center that drew a whopping crowd of 300.  Getting past the fact that the Civic Center was built with tax payer money, that the attendees drove to the event on roads built with tax payer money and that most of the organizers and attendees were or are employed by tax payer money, it then becomes easier to focus on the simple fact that Lincoln was a liberal and is the father of federal supremacy.  But, hey, enough with facts let's talk about shrinking government!!

In addition to the small government, state's rights Lincoln, Joe the Plumber (aka Joe Wurzelbacher) was in attendance and gave a talk about how he would not let the country fall.  Joe the Plumber, who doesn't have a license to plumb, was once on welfare and has numerous times received unemployment benefits.  Enough, enough, it's time for some more small government talk.

Maybe we really should consider the tea bagger proposal to bring back literacy tests before allowing people to vote.  I'm starting to think that doesn't sound like a bad idea.

Bill Brady's Fuzzy Math Gets Fuzzier

Bill Brady (R-IL)

Republican math is like a treasure trove of wonderful things you've only heard of in fairy tales but are promised to you by politicians to make your life better. Bill Brady's formula for "reining" in Illinois' massive $13 billion deficit is no different.

First Brady tells voters that he wants to cut 10% across the board. With a $53 billion state budget that would equal about $5.3 billion in cuts. Alrighty then. Assuming he'll do what he says that takes the deficit down to $7.7 billion, right? Well not so fast. Brady admitted just a few weeks ago that his plan to slash 10% across the board and cut taxes would actually increase the deficit by at least a billion dollars the first year. How is that you might ask? Well if you cut $5 billion from the state budget it will lead to massive layoffs of state employees. Such layoffs lead to fewer people paying state income taxes, which in turn leads to smaller revenues for the state increasing the deficit by at least a billion dollars-- maybe more.  And if  you cut taxes on top of that you get, yet again, even smaller revenue.  Not rocket science.

So we have Brady cutting taxes, cutting $5 billion from the budget and still increasing the deficit.  Good work.  But now Brady realizes that you just can't slash 10% from the top of the budget.  Some items can't be cut, like items involving federal funding or debt services.  Brady tells Crain's editorial board that only $45 billion can be subject to his 10% across the board cuts, leaving the state with an $8.5 billion deficit before his self-admitted one billion dollar increase takes effect because of his policies. Adding in his deficit increase, the deficit is at least $9.5 billion.  Great job.

Unfortunately Bill Brady's Bush-style accounting doesn't end there.  State budget experts say Brady's $45 billion number is way off.  After you figure in all the untouchable items that can't legally be cut by 10% the state budget stands at about $30 billion.  Ten percent cut from that would equal $3 billion.  Add back the one billion Brady says his policies will add to the deficit and you get $2 billion.  So we go from a $13 billion deficit to an $11 billion deficit and huge amounts of layoffs statewide.  Brilliant!

The only other way to come close to balancing the budget, which Brady claims he can do, is to cut some programs and agencies by 20% instead of 10%.  And Brady says that may have to happen.  In reality even 20% cuts won't balance the budget unless there is a new revenue stream (i.e., tax increase) and a huge one to make up for the loss that will result in thousands of people being laid off because of the 20% cuts.

He has no clue really.  We are only supposed to take him at his word that he will cut taxes, shrink the deficit and cut spending all the while making Illinois more prosperous and business friendly.  And all this from a millionaire that paid no federal income taxes last year.

It's Called Mommy and Daddy's Money

Image via Wikipedia

Mark Zuckerberg

All the rage right now is The Social Network. Include me in it as well cause I will surely watch it. Maybe not at the movies but I will rent it on DirecTv when it's released. Not to take away from Mark Zuckerberg's genius, or from his rival Adam Goldberg who also created a college network interface. Both are owed and given their due diligence when it comes to brainyism.  What I don't get about the whole 'create a really hip social networking device and change the world' sensation that is currently sweeping this nation is the lack of attention given to parental wealth.

Sure Zuckerberg created Facebook and I don't buy the notion that he stole it for one minute.  Goldberg also created a similar device but eventually lost out to Zuckerberg's strategy.  In addition to being a genius coder, Zuckerberg is an even better businessman.  And even better than being smart with computers and with money is being smarter with other people's money, namely that of your parents.  I don't know too many people who can afford to take some time off from college, move to California and mess with code all day long without capital of their own.  It just doesn't happen all that often in Middle America.

That's not to say that Zuckerberg couldn't have invented Facebook without coming from a rich family.  He could have.  It's only to say that someone else given the means he had easily could have too.  I think Zuckerberg knows this, hence his gracious gift to a New Jersey school district for a pocket change amount of $100 million. 

Libertarians Are Liberals But Serious

It's a common American political stereotype that anything Serious and well grounded can't possibly come from the left. Naturally, anything Serious has to come from the right and from very Serious people who always have very Serious ideas.

So what do these tree hugging liberal hippies want to do?  I searched the most liberal and unserious hippy blogs I could find, via Blue Texan at Fire Dog Lake, and discovered their crazy left-wing, fringe ideas.

“We’ll fight to add the public option to the health care bill.”

“We’re getting out of Afghanistan.”

“We are pulling the remaining 50,000 troops out of Iraq.”

“We’re going to cut the approximately $1T annual defense budget in half and use the remainder to fund US infrastructure projects, including high speed rail.”

“We will roll back the Bush/Cheney executive power grabs.”

“We will repeal DADT.”

“We will fight for marriage equality.”

“We will reform the Senate and eliminate the filibuster.”

“We will make the Fed transparent.”

“We will legalize marijuana.”

Can you believe the nerve of such unserious people?

In fairness I wanted to search out what the very Serious mainstream people were thinking.  To do this I went to the most conservative, small government site I could find, home of the Libertarian Party, and I discovered some very reasonable, rationale and Serious ideas.

Pull out of Afghanistan
Pull out of Iraq
Cut the defense budget
Roll back executive power grabs
Repeal DADT
Support Marriage Equality
Make the Fed transparent
Legalize marijuana

Very Serious proposals if you ask me.

Aside from expanding health care, ending the filibuster (which I would think they support) and investing in domestic infrastructure, what's the difference?  Oh yeah, one claims to come from the political right touting their "mainstream" ideas and the other gets trashed by the media and everyone to their right as commie loving fascists that want to destroy America. 

Ministry of Propaganda

Paul Krugman's Sunday column delivers a blistering outtake on the direction of modern American media. Most notably, Fox News has taken the blurry mix of political affiliation and media to a whole new level. Krugman notes since the 2008 elections, Fox News and/or its parent company has:

1. Hired every top tier Republican contender for the presidency
2. Donated $1 million to the Republican Governor's Association
3. Donated $1 million to the Chamber of Commerce
4. Allowed its employees to directly raise money for Republican candidates
5. Allowed its employees to organize protests against the current Democratic government
6. Allowed its employees to organize political movements designed to elect Republicans to office

One can no longer call any organization with such outright affiliation to a political party independent or ethical.  When asking oneself how a political party that was as defeated and demoralized as the GOP was in 2008 could survive by actually professing even more George Bush policies, stop and think how nice it would be to have the most watched news organization in America doing all the work for you.

Quickies

• Adding to the long list of lies Republican tea bagger Christine O'Donnell has told in regards to her education background, TPM has discovered she listed that she attended and received a certificate from Oxford University, Oxford UK on her application for Claremont Institute.  As the world has later learned, unless you are a Fox News viewer, O'Donnell never attended Oxford and never received a certificate from the school.

• The Republican staffer who wrote "All Fags Must Die" on a pro-gay rights blog has been fired.

• After building her campaign largely around an anti-immigration platform, including explicitly calling for tougher fines for people who use illegal immigrant labor and encourage illegal immigration into the country, California Republican gubernatorial candidate, Meg Whitman, has admitted that she may have known her maid was an illegal alien.  That's gotta be rough.

• The Dow had its best September since 1939!

• White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel will leave his post today to run for mayor of Chicago.

• Illinois' Democratic governor closes the gap on his Republican opponent according to the newest Chicago Tribune poll.

• Just another day in the Republican-controlled media world.  Fox News' parent company gave $1 million to the Chamber of Commerce.  The Chamber is spending millions helping to elect Republicans all over the country.  It was reported last month Fox's parent company gave $1 million to the Republican Governor's Association, which, as you may have guessed, is spending millions to elect Republicans all over the country.