Happy Mothers’ Day!

It’s Mothers’ Day and time to celebrate all of the wonderful women who make the world a better place for us!  Happy Mothers’ Day to everyone.

Share your special stories about “Mom” or your own motherhood tales.  It’s your day and HER day.

Your Breakfast Read, Served By The Confluence

WHCD

Obama had fun with his constituency
President Barack Obama gets laughs at White House Correspondents’ Dinner

Obama the Star at Reporters’ Annual Dinner

We’re all waiting with bated breath

Scouring Obama’s Past for Clues on Judiciary

In Court Pick, Obama Seeks to Be Bold but Not Provocative

Hispanics push Obama for a Supreme Court seat

Isn’t Mitch McConnell the chinless clown who was threatening Democrats withe the “nuclear option” not too long ago?
McConnell: No ’empathetic’ Court pick

Maybe cool heads will prevail in the US-Israel alliance

Israel’s Netanyahu: Taking a Turn Toward Pragmatism?

The Power of the First Impression

When President Obama meets Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, behind the diplomatic niceties, their encounter will have profound implications for confronting the threat of a nuclear Iran.

Af-Pak Headache

U.S.-Afghan report blames Taliban for civilian deaths

Officials in Afghanistan have said dozens of civilians were killed by U.S. airstrikes during clashes in Farah province. But a report on early findings says Taliban used civilians as human shield.

Trapped by Taliban terror

Innocent families are hemmed in as the army tries to crush the hardline Islamic militants fighting for control of north-west Pakistan

Pakistanis flee Swat as violence escalates

The Never-ending Story

‘It’s Time for the Iraqis to Step Up’

Local Forces’ Conduct During Mission to Help Disabled Children Raises Questions About Future After U.S. Withdrawal

Iraqi Leader Sees Fraud as a Top Worry

“Torturegate”

This is getting ugly
Top Pelosi Aide Learned Of Waterboarding in 2003

A top aide to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi attended a CIA briefing in early 2003 in which it was made clear that waterboarding and other harsh techniques were being used in the interrogation of an alleged al-Qaeda operative, according to documents the CIA released to Congress on Thursday.

They can’t handle the truth: Torture critics in Congress were in on it all along

Memos shed light on CIA use of sleep deprivation

Though widely perceived as more effective and less objectionable than other interrogation methods, memos show it’s harsher and more controversial than most realize. And it could be brought back.

Personal Finance

Obama Urges Credit-Card Reform

A swipe at credit card firms

If you are drowning in credit card debt and expect Congress to throw you a lifeline, you are going to be disappointed.
Credit card legislation that is being considered in Washington will not allow you to escape the debt you now have, for example, but could keep card companies from throwing you an anchor.

Losing Your Job: A Blow to Your Health Too

Could a layoff send a perfectly healthy person into a downward spiral of sickness? It’s possible, says Kate Strully, a sociologist at State University of New York in Albany. In her new study published in the journal Demography, Strully analyzed a variety of job loss situations — including being fired or laid off or losing a job after the entire company shut down — and found that job loss may indeed trigger serious physical and physiological illness

Don’t forget: Today is Mother’s Day

Happy Mother’s Day! Top 10 worst movie moms

Startrekmania
New ‘Star Trek’: A Splendid Enterprise

All too often the trailer is better than the movie, but not, it turns out, in the case of “Star Trek.” If you want to know why this huge production will be a huge success — and why it deserves to be — you can find the answer in the terrific trailer that’s been showing for many months.

What are you reading?

Obot – The Movie

I think I’ve found the secret to understanding the Obot mind (or what whatever it is they use in place of one)

This is an open thread

WTF – Country & Western Edition

Big city folk shouldn’t talk about stuff they don’t know nothin’ about.  From the Washington Post:

But the Atkins song and others of its ilk — from Jason Aldean’s “Hicktown” and Miranda Lambert’s “Famous in a Small Town” to Zac Brown Band’s “Chicken Fried” and Josh Turner’s “Way Down South” — are narrowcasting to a specific community: the core country audience, whose roots aren’t exactly in America’s urban centers.

The symbolism and prideful sentiments of the songs are intended to create a sense of belonging among people with similar backgrounds and lifestyles, or at least people who romanticize life in the rural South. (It’s not a place; it’s a state of mind.) To some listeners, though, it might sound as if the artists are closing ranks.

“Some of these songs seem to fall into the ‘we’re from Real America, and you’re not’ camp,” says Peter Cooper, who covers country music for Nashville’s daily newspaper, the Tennessean. “Seems like being divisive while the industry around you crumbles is a poor decision.”

Divisive?  Are you kidding me?

Country & Western music is the oldest genre of music to originate in this nation.  It’s come a long way from it’s roots in the Appalachian Mountains and the rural deep South.  It’s not twangy 3-piece bands wearing sequined suits singing about cowboys anymore either.  Many rock and roll legends got their start playing C&W, including Elvis and Jerry Lee Lewis.  Music legend Ray Charles covered  C&W classics in his hit albums Modern Sounds in Country and Western Music and Modern Sounds in Country and Western Music Vol. 2.

If you want to to understand how people in the red states think then don’t pay attention to the Washington Post, watch CMT or GAC.  You might be surprised to find that rednecks know more about big city life than city people know about the boondocks.

Your Breakfast Read, Served By The Confluence

War on Judge Sotomayor (Cont’d)
after taking some serious beating over his third-rate hatchet job on Judge Sotomayor, Jeffrey Rosen tries to polish the turd:
More Sotomayor

The headline–“The Case Against Sotomayor”–promised something much stronger than I intended to deliver. As soon as the piece was published, I regretted the headline, which I hadn’t seen in advance. The piece was not meant to be a definitive “case against” Judge Sotomayor’s candidacy.
(…)
I was satisfied that my sources’s concerns were widely shared when I read Sotomayor’s entry in the Almanac of the Federal Judiciary, which includes the rating of judges based on the collective opinions of the lawyers who work with them. Usually lawyers provide fairly positive comments. That’s what makes the discussion of Sotomayor’s temperament so striking. Here it is:

Sotomayor can be tough on lawyers, according to those interviewed. “She is a terror on the bench.” “She is very outspoken.” “She can be difficult.” “She is temperamental and excitable. She seems angry.” “She is overly aggressive–not very judicial. She does not have a very good temperament.” “She abuses lawyers.” “She really lacks judicial temperament. She behaves in an out of control manner. She makes inappropriate outbursts.” “She is nasty to lawyers. She doesn’t understand their role in the system–as adversaries who have to argue one side or the other. She will attack lawyers for making an argument she does not like.”

Wow! That is some nasty bitch.

Dissenting Justice takes that folly on:
Scalia v. Sotomayor: The Use of Gender-Coded Language to Evaluate a Judge’s “Temperament”

Compare the lawyer responses to Sotomayor with the AFJ comments on Justice Scalia — whom many lawyers consider a tough questioner as well. While lawyers negatively describe Sotomayor’s toughness, in Scalia, toughness receives praise, if not awe. Scalia’s hazing of lawyers is just part of the understood fun among the brotherhood of lawyers. Although reviewers describe Scalia as tough, this does not make him a dangerous “out-of-control” she-judge. Notice the sporting and friendly hazing metaphors in the AFJ description of Scalia:

Never utter the words “legislative history.” If you do, chances are Scalia will interject with a ridiculing harangue that makes it clear he views legislative history as poppycock. Legislative debates are often contrived and can’t trump the actual words of the statute, Scalia insists. But even if you play it safe, you can expect tough, persistent questioning from Scalia, often delivered with an almost gleeful lust for the sport of jabbing and jousting with advocates before him. And Scalia is an equal-opportunity jouster; even when his position seems obvious, Scalia will be just as hard on the lawyer he agrees with as the lawyer he’ll oppose. Ever the law professor, Scalia will sometimes ask questions with no clear relevance, just to see if you are on your toes. In a now-legendary exchange during arguments on a federal rule that barred the advertising of the alcohol content of beer, Scalia asked a lawyer for Coors to define the difference between beer and ale. The lawyer, the late Bruce Ennis, answered without missing a beat, to the amazement of justices and spectators alike, and Coors won the case. But Scalia can be nasty, as well. When a lawyer once paused too long before answering his question, Scalia said sharply, “You have four choices, counselor: “Yes,” “No,” “I don’t know,” or “I’m not telling.” But the most important advice on how to sway Scalia at oral argument or in brief-writing is to buy his new book.

In Scalia, toughness is positive; in Sotomayor, it is nonjudicial.

(All emphasis are mine)

Maybe President Obama should give Sen. Hatch another call:
Hatch: Sotomayor has ‘a problem’

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said Thursday that Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s past statement that the “court of appeals is where policy is made” would be a problem for her if she were nominated for the Supreme Court.

Dissenting Juistice who’s on a roll has a newsflash for Orrin Hatch:
Earth to Orrin Hatch: Even Conservative Judges Make Policy!

We are are agnostic about the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the SCOTUS. We are looking for a “liberal” SC Justice and we wish it would be something other that a white man. As for Judge Sotomayor, we will let NY DA Robert Morgenthau speak for us:
Sotomayor Is Highly Qualified

How “stressy” was the stress test?
Banks Won Concessions on Tests

The Federal Reserve significantly scaled back the size of the capital hole facing some of the nation’s biggest banks shortly before concluding its stress tests, following two weeks of intense bargaining.

US banks claim line softened on $74bn

Yves Smith has become very shrill:
Details on Banks’ Victory Over Treasury in Stress Tests Emerge

It was bad enough that the Treasury came up with an adverse case that is hardly a worse case scenario. As we pointed out, it is considerably more optimistic, both in duration and intensity of the downturn, than is typical for serious financial crises. And the earlier comparables did not take place in the context of a global downturn, which meant the afflicted countries got a substantial boost from depreciating their currencies and rising an export boom. Pursuing that strategy aggressively risks competitive devaluations and worse, overt protectionism. a negative sum game.

Investors bet that worst of recession is over and predict new bull market

On Wall Street: Beware of the sucker’s rally

The market is a cruel mistress indeed. Compounding the pain of big swoons, it kicks investors when they are down by luring them into sucker’s rallies – typically sharp but fleeting bounces in the middle of a bear market.

Green Shoots or Rose-Colored Glasses(Zero Hedge)

Af-Pak Headsaches
Afghan Leader Says Civilian Deaths Strain Ties With U.S.

Exodus of Pakistani civilians as battle against Taleban rages

Karzai’s Ex-Allies Vie for Afghan Presidency

Are we screwed with this economy?
Fine Line for Obama on How to Convey Hope on Economy

As the government announced this week that the nation’s largest banks had steered away from the precipice and that job losses were beginning to slow, Mr. Obama has carefully begun trying to mine any national leader’s most precious commodity in a crisis: optimism.

His past references to “glimmers of hope” were modestly upgraded at the White House on Friday, with his declaration — which he stumbled over, taking some of the assertiveness out of the line — that “the gears of our economic engine do appear to be slowly turning once again.”

For those who care about anything David Broder has to say about anything:
Molehill Out of a Budget Mountain

The entire nation has been wondering why there wasn’t any Breakfast Read yesterday: MABlue went on a one day strike to preemptively protest any cuts in our News Division. We took page from the Frenchies. Vive la France!
Workers of the World, Enjoy!

“Torturegate”
It looks like Nancy, Rockefeller and a bunch of Dems knew
Records suggest Pelosi, others were told of harsh interrogations

Uh ooh! Both sides will go nuts about this:
Obama Set to Revive Military Commissions

The Pope is in the Middle East
Personal Trip Carries Weight of Diplomacy

Pope makes visit to Jordan mosque

The latest on the photo-op
Aide who approved Air Force One flyover in New York resigns
(Nice pic though)

---

Please DIGG!! & — Share!

On a lighter note

The reviews are in, and THIS is the movie to see.

According to the critics true Trekkies will hate this movie because it’s cool and exciting to watch.

(I really hope there are no Trekkies here, cuz I could use a few flame-free hours.)

Keeping your eyes on the prize

All of us have issues we care about, some more than others.  Some of us have one or two issues we are very passionate about.  That’s usually a good thing, unless our passion causes us to lose perspective.  It becomes a problem when we are so emotionally invested in an issue that we can’t tell friend from foe, and it becomes a serious problem when we start attacking our allies because they disagree over strategy or tactics.

The Civil Rights struggle was fought on three fronts.  There was the legal front, where court cases were filed challenging discriminatory laws.  One of the big victories in that front was Brown v. Board of Education which reversed Plessy v. Ferguson and struck down “separate but equal.”

There was the political front, where blacks were encouraged to vote and politicians were pressured to pass new laws. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawed racial segregation in schools, public places, and employment, and Voting Rights Act of 1965 eliminated discriminatory practices that kept blacks from voting in many states.

The third and arguably the most important front was the battle for public opinion.  Led by Martin Luther King this effort set out to win the hearts and minds of white America and convince them that segregation and discrimination were wrong.  They used a strategy of peaceful non-violence, where all the hatred, anger and violence flowed one direction.  It was enormously successful, as love literally conquered hate.  In a few short years racism went from being common and in many places enforced by law to being socially unacceptable everywhere.

Racism isn’t dead, but it’s been driven underground.  But another form of bigotry is still out in the open, although it too is under assault.  That bigotry is homophobia.  The good news is we appear to be reaching a tipping point where the last vestiges of legal discrimination will be wiped away.  The bad news is we aren’t there yet.

Women are the majority in this country.  If every woman joined with all the others and voted as one for the same woman candidates they would hold every elective office in this nation within six years.  In just four years they would hold the White House and would control Congress.  The only remaining stronghold of male domination in politics would be the life-tenured judiciary.

African Americans are about 12% of our population and LGBT’s about 3% so neither group can prevail politically just by standing united.  Nor can they count on the law because as 52% of California voters showed last year the law can be changed.  That’s why the battle for public opinion is so important.

In this kind of civil rights  struggle there are basically five groups of people:

1.  Those whose rights are directly affected.

2.  Those whose rights are not directly affected but who support those who are.

3.  Those who are ambivalent or uninterested in the struggle.

4.  Those who mildly oppose group #1, mainly through ignorance and inertia.

5.  The haters

Groups #1 and #2 are already allies united in the struggle for equality.  In order to prevail they need to win the support of enough members of groups #3 and #4 to achieve a majority.  That’s the tipping point.

During the Vietnam War there was a saying:

“If you have them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.”

History shows that theory didn’t work out so well.  Winning “hearts and minds” means getting people on your side emotionally and intellectually.  To appeal to someone’s intellect you use facts, logic and reason.  Far more important is to appeal to their emotions, because when you have them by the heart their minds WILL follow.

In order to win their hearts you have to get past fear and ignorance and gain their sympathy.  You have to replace the derogatory stereotypes and caricatures in their minds with images of real people.  You have to make friends with them.

Dale Carnegie’s classic “How to Win Friends and Influence People” didn’t have a chapter called “Get Up in Their Faces and Call Them Names.”  I’m pretty sure that scaring the bejeebus out of people wasn’t one of his recommendations either.  That’s how you harden peoples’ hearts against you.

This brings us to Carrie Prejean, whose 15 minutes of fame are unfortunately not over yet.  To say we should ignore her is not to defend what she said, it is a recognition that to continue to attack her is counterproductive to winning anyone’s heart or mind.  She is young and pretty and attacking her will only make people feel sympathy for her.

Her position on gay marriage is shared by a lot of people, including President Barack Obama.  Ignore her and she will go away.  Focus on people who actually hold power instead.

That brings us back to my original point about being so emotionally invested in an issue that you forget who your friends are. Just because your friends and allies don’t turn the knobs up to 11 doesn’t mean they aren’t really your friends and allies.  Nor does their telling you to back off a little or to focus your attention elsewhere mean they want you to STFU.  The disagreement is over strategy and tactics, not the ultimate goal.

This principle is not exclusive to any one issue.  Keep your eyes on the prize and win.

---

Please DIGG & Share!

Friday: Free Milk and a Cow- Reprise

The stress tests are finished and the verdicts are in:  The Bankers Have Won.

James Kwak and Simon Johnson of Baseline Scenario have a not-to-be-missed post that lay it all out:

In short, relationships between the government and the large banks have never been closer, with large amounts of money flowing in one direction, and complete co-dependency going in both directions. Those relationships are not entirely friendly, which is not surprising. In any crisis when public resources are called on to bail out the private sector, not all of the oligarchs will survive; Bear Stearns and Lehman have already vanished. But the winners – which should include Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase and Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman – will emerge even more powerful and influential than before.

In rejecting “nationalization” (regulatory takeover and conservatorship), the government has not ensured a private, properly functioning banking system. Instead, it has muddled into a broken-down, undercapitalized system that is nominally in private hands, but is able to tap the state for apparently limitless support. And to date, that support has flowed on one-sided terms, with the taxpayer accepting downside risk but limited upside potential. No wonder bank shareholders are comfortable with this outcome.

As a result, the banks have largely preserved their existing management teams and bonus plans: on Wall Street, first-quarter accruals for bonuses returned to the levels of the glory years of 2006 and 2007. Creditors and counterparties have been kept whole, most notably through the AIG bailout. And shareholders have seen their share prices supported by the promise of sustained government support. The incentives we have ended up with are more similar to those of a nationalized system than those of a free market. Instead of state-owned coal mines run for the benefit of miners (the U.K. in the 1970s) or state-owned oil and gas companies run for the benefit of bureaucrats (the Soviet Union in the 1980s), we have state-backed banks in the U.S. run for the benefit of bankers and their creditors.

The smart economists in the Obama administration must know what is going on. But having insisted that large bank takeovers are tantamount to nationalization and therefore off the table, the administration is betting that the financial system will repair itself – or “earn their way out,” as StatsGuy put it.

This is possible. With the competition in both investment banking (Bear Stearns, Lehman) and mortgage lending (most of the specialist mortgage lenders) gone, the survivors all enjoy larger market shares and higher prices, contributing to their somewhat healthy profits in the first quarter. Even the large banks that receive the lowest grades in the stress tests will be given relatively cheap capital by the government; Treasury will use its resulting stakes to apply behind-the-scenes pressure to the banks (more government influence), but without taking decisive steps to clean up bank balance sheets. Instead, it will hope that the PPIP will do the trick, using cheap government financing.

According to Paul Krugman, H. Rodgin Cohen, once nominated by the Obama administration for Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, is to have made the following statement recently. “I am far from convinced there was something inherently wrong with the system.”

In short, the Change! that we all Hoped for last year is that the Democratic party is now firmly in the hands of the Republicans.  Well, that’s what it looks like to me.  I imagine that the smart, techy, creative class Republicans and Wall Street types didn’t much like living in the 14th century with the fundamentalist Goddies of their own party.  They weren’t into war either.  And they could see that the Republican party had sort of dug itself into a hole with Bush, DeLay and all the creepy GOP politicians who had issues with diapers and tapdancing in men’s bathrooms.  (not that there’s anything wrong with tapdancing in men’s bathrooms but if you’re going to do it, for gawdsakes, get a room)  The Republican party became so declasse.  How does one keep mainlining money when you’re no longer on the A list?  Hey!  Why not take over the other guy’s party?

We should have seen this coming.  Actually, I think *we* did see this coming.  The traditional media is owned and operated by big corporations that love neo-feudalism and cut-throat competition where winner takes all.  So, when they started praising Barack Obama like he was the second coming of Jesus, our antenna started to twitch.  This was a media that was so in the tank for everything Bush for eight straight years and was opposed to everything Democratic, in their words “liberal” for eight years before, that their support of anyone would have to have been seen as self-serving.

But there were warning signs before the 2008 election.  There was Joe Lieberman, for example.  Ned Lamont won the Democratic primary in CT in 2006 but it was Lieberman who got the support of the party in the general.  It was almost like the primary never happened.  The party did what it damned well pleased.  It was followed up with last year’s presidential primary where once again, the party chose the victor and bent over backwards in the most obvious way to finagle the numbers so that Obama’s disastrous experiment of forgoing the Michigan primary was not held against him.  But there’s more!  Now, we have Arlen Specter, newly minted Democrat who is having problems adjusting, given a guarantee by the party that he won’t face a primary challenger for the Democratic nomination for Senator next year.  Yes, the governor of PA has just decided that voters need not apply, their choices have been made for them.

Maybe these party officials think they are doing us a favor by removing what must be an agonizing and difficult responsibility from us.  Maybe they think we are too immature and untrustworthy to handle these decisions ourselves.  I thank them for my part but I don’t need the kind of guidance they are providing.  But maybe they think they can now get away with it.

I was watching Frost/Nixon the other night and one of the characters, a research assistant, tries to explain to Frost why it was so important to nail Nixon publicly.  It was because he  committed constitutional crimes and letting him get away with it with a pardon would come back to haunt us in the future.  And it did.  We don’t hold anyone responsible anymore for anything.  Nixon got away with Watergate, Reagan and Bush with Iran/Contra, Bush II with torture.  We let the Savings and Loan crisis happen and didn’t learn a thing from it.  We watched the debacle at Enron and Tyco and clicked our tongues in sympathy for the employees that lost everything.  But the finance industry at large has adopted Enron’s Wild West risktaking and accounting practices.  And now, no one will be held accountable but the taxpayers for the trillions of dollars lost.

It didn’t have to be like this.  We could have gotten off the emotional roller coaster last year when there was time.  We could have asked the party what we were going to get in exchange for nominating this neophyte with the pockets overflowing with cash.  We could have set conditions for his nomination, raised a ruckus when our votes were callously thrown away.  We could have held the party accountable for the decisions it was intending to make.  We tried.  We were called racists.

This is what happens when you don’t ask for anything in return for your vote.  Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?

And there is no such thing as being a little bit pregnant.  We are all now well and truly fucked.

---

Please DIGG & Share!!

Stormy Daniels For the Senate!!!

(Little Isis Note: I’ve decided not to sell my laptop… selling my TV instead! So my Hiatus is officially over! Besides, this was just too irresistible not to post about.)

I went over to Uppity Woman earlier this evening and nearly choked on my juicy juice when I came across her gem of a post about Porn Star Stormy Daniels considering running against David Vitter for his Senate Seat in 2010!!!

I’m sorry, but this is just irony at it’s finest. The hilarity! I would consider it the Ultimate Karma if Diaper Boy was booted out of his Louisiana Senate Seat by a Porn Star… and a woman Porn Star, no less!!! THERE IS A GOD!!!

Oh please, please, please let this happen!!! I will PRAY for this!!! Oh, this is just too, too rich!!!

Now, seeing as how Vitter would be in no position to criticize Stormy for her profession, for obvious reasons that I will not mention here for fear of becoming X-rated in my snark (I am sorry, but can you blame me??? This is hilarious!!! You cannot make this sh*t up!!!), it is easy to see how many in Louisiana might be able to over look Stormy’s Porn Starness if she were the alternative to Senator Diapers- I mean, Vitter.

But it all leads to this interesting Generational experiment. I’ll admit it up front: I would have no problem whosoever voting for a Porn star if He/She was the best, qualified candidate for the office, had character and principles that he/she stood by, and a left leaning stance on the issues in line with my own policy positions. It is the standard by which I have so far judged all of the public officials I have voted for. I don’t see how it could be any different for a Porn Star, but seeing as how all of you here are older than me, I am aware of the fact that you may disagree.

I am also aware of the fact that you may now be staring at the computer screen with an expression of disbelief on your face. Oh come on! You all KNOW ME!

In any case, I am just interested in your thoughts, as I always am. Try to stay on topic in this thread. In the meantime, I’m just going to Google images of Stormy Daniels and…. OH MY LAWD!!!!

---

Please DIGG & SHARE!!!

Pardon me, do you have any Grey Poupon?

Who ordered the one with extra arugula?

The more things change, the more they remain insane.  From Willam A. Jacobson at Le-gal In-sur-rec-tion:

My post the other day, MSNBC Hides Obama’s Dijon Mustard (aka Dijongate), has hit a nerve unlike anything else I have written.

The post concerned the lunch trip of Obama and Biden to a burger shop to get a “Hell Burger.” I accept that this should not have been news, but the White House image makers wanted to portray the two as just regular guys out at the local diner, so the event was hyped. MSNBC just happened to be in the burger place with cameras rolling when Obama and Biden came in and ordered. Again, not sure why MSNBC had to cover it, but they did, on live TV with Andrea Mitchell at the news desk and Kelly O’Donnell on scene. The dialogue between the two harped on how the trip had a “real guy kind of quality.”

And that was the story line. Two regular guys out for a guy kind of meal. A script written in the White House and read by MSNBC.

But MSNBC edited out the audio when Obama ordered his Hell Burger just at the moment when Obama asked for Dijon mustard. Now I have nothing against Dijon mustard, but the image didn’t fit with the image being spun by the White House and MSNBC. Dijon mustard on a Hell Burger had a very John Kerry-ish quality about it.

So I did the post, made note of the Dijon mustard, the MSNBC editing, and quipped how Obama must have sought Kerry’s counsel. Instapundit (which dubbed the scenario “Dijongate”) and Hot Air linked to the post, with the commentary that they thought the mustard thing was a non-scandal and non-issue.

Like most of my posts, Dijongate could have and probably should have fallen into the black hole of internet punditry, never to be seen or heard of again. But the reaction from the nutroots was widespread and swift, and they have kept the story alive.

Check out the links to the original post, and you will see that many of the high profile nutroots blogs have linked. If you check out the links and comments, you will see that the full foul-mouthed, abusive intellect of the nutroots has been brought to bear.

So BO and Joe go out for a burger just like regular guys, and the whole press corps tags along. BO does something that Jacobson finds snark-worthy and the nutroots gets its two-minute hate on.

Meanwhile important news like the lastest on Joe the Plumber and Carrie Prejean’s allegedly gay father get pushed off the front page.

I’m either drinking too much or not enough.

---

Please DIGG & Share!!