• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    MsMass on He knew he was a looooose…
    riverdaughter on He knew he was a looooose…
    jmac on He knew he was a looooose…
    Propertius on He knew he was a looooose…
    Propertius on He knew he was a looooose…
    William on Thanksgiving Week Wordles
    William on He knew he was a looooose…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on He knew he was a looooose…
    riverdaughter on He knew he was a looooose…
    riverdaughter on He knew he was a looooose…
    Propertius on He knew he was a looooose…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on He knew he was a looooose…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on He knew he was a looooose…
    Beata on Thanksgiving Week Wordles
    William on Thanksgiving Week Wordles
  • Categories

  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    October 2010
    S M T W T F S
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

  • Top Posts

Thursday News: Downwind

That's right, lower that gas mask

We didn’t start the fire but we wouldn’t mind being downwind of one of the biggest marijuana bonfires the world has ever known.  134 tons of confiscated weed were set ablaze in Mexico yesterday.  We’re a little puzzled over the draconian steps to eradicate the pot before it makes its way across the border.  What this country needs right now is some tasty weed or a batch of brownies.  What a waste.

New Jersey Cablevision customers are downwind of a nasty dispute between their cable provider and News Corp, the company that shoves Fox down our throats.  For the last 5 days, Cablevision customers have been without Fox programming including Glee, House, and some major league baseball and football games.  I can’t find any evidence that Fox News was pulled, however, which is a shame.  News Corp is doubling the subscription fees for retransmission of Fox programming for Cablevision.  That’s $150,000,000 for Cablevision alone.  It looks like Cablevision customers who just get the broadband service were also affected.  They were unable to download programming from Hulu for a period of time but that seems to be restored.

News Corp is going up against Dish at the end of the month.  As a Dish customer, I’d like to encourage management to take a hard line with News Corp.  Take it all off the Dish lineup, including Fox News.  It’s extortion but maybe this latest move is a good thing. The more we can contain the Fox News contagion, the better.  I’ll download Glee from iTunes.  But more than that, this is just another example of a corporation thinking that the average Joe has unlimited disposable income.  We don’t.  The fees for every damn little thing are skyrocketing.  Enough already.  Try to make due with the billions you already have.

On the mortgages/foreclosure fiasco, the rule of law appears to be downwind of some very sketchy bank tactics for seizing what might not be theirs and throwing families out of their houses.  Atrios has been doing a really good job finding more and more evidence of bankster fraud.  In the latest article on the mess, Battle Lines Forming in Clash over Foreclosures, the New York Times reports:

Now those missing and possibly fraudulent documents are at the center of a potentially seismic legal clash that pits big lenders against homeowners and their advocates concerned that the lenders’ rush to foreclose flouts private property rights.

That clash — expected to be played out in courtrooms across the country and scrutinized by law enforcement officials investigating possible wrongdoing by big lenders — leaped to the forefront of the mortgage crisis this week as big lenders began lifting their freezes on foreclosures and insisted the worst was behind them.

Federal officials meeting in Washington on Wednesday indicated that a government review of the problems would not be complete until the end of the year.

“The misbehavior is clear: they lied to the courts,” she said. “The fact that they are saying no one was harmed, they are missing the point. They did actual harm to the court system, to the rule of law. We don’t say, ‘You can perjure yourself on the stand because the jury will come to the right verdict anyway.’ That’s what they are saying.”

Robert Willens, a tax expert, said that documentation issues had created potentially severe tax problems for investors in mortgage securities and that “there is enough of a question here that the courts might well have to resolve the issue.”

Ah, yes, the poor investor will have to sort through all of the tax issues.  So sad.  It’s so much worse for investors than the families that lose everything including the roof over their heads just because the documentation is screwed up.  I guess it never occurred to anyone that lowering the principle on some of the loans would allow some homeowners to stay in their houses and pay their mortgages.  At least the investors would get *something* for their investments.  Or investors could take it up with the banks who always seem to be in the middle of all these messes.  But banks seem to make money off of of foreclosures.  Hmmm, if I had been a congressman, I might have made foreclosure a lot less attractive for banks and avoided much of this mess.  Oh, well!  Not my problem.

It does appear to be a problem for those congresspersons, however, who appear to be downwind of voter anger over Congress’s complacency with the economy.  In A National Election, Like it or Not, E.J. Dionne reports on the experience of Democratic Congresswoman Mary Jo Kilroy from Ohio, who mistakenly keeps trying to tell her voters about the “accomplishments” of the last two years.  For some stupid reason, the voters aren’t paying any attention to the half assed Lily Ledbetter law or Health Care Reform or the financial bailout:

Kilroy recalls encountering a voter who told her: “I’ve voted for you throughout your career, but I’m not voting for you this year because I don’t have a job.”

She spoke to her constituent about what Congress had accomplished, and also about how the tied-up-in-knots U.S. Senate had blocked other House initiatives.

To which the voter replied: “Do you think I care they’re stuck in the Senate? I don’t have a job.”

Stivers, who lost to Kilroy in 2008 by just 2,312 votes, has had much happier doorstep experiences. “People were mad at George Bush two years ago and they were going to take it out on anyone with an ‘R’ after their name,” he said. This time, they’re eager to talk about — you guessed it — “the debt and jobs.”

Yep, it’s a mystery.

As Greg Sargent reports in The Enthusiasm Gap Remains just Awful for Dems:

But still, the enthusiasm deficit remains enormous, even though Dems have tried everything to turn this around: They’ve chanted Bush’s name in unison for months. They’ve raised the specter of foreign money rigging our elections. They’ve floated the possibility of GOP investigations that will make the 1990s look like a latter-day Era of Good Feelings. And they’ve relentlessly elevated the craziest of Tea Party crazies to iconic status. Yet Dems still aren’t goosed up about this election in anywhere near the numbers they need to be — mainly because the GOP enthusiasm levels are essentially steroidal at this point.

It’s like that Far Side cartoon where Einstein can’t figure out the famous relativity equation until his cleaning lady starts straightening up his desk.  “All squared away” The Democrats have tried everything but the stuff that actually works.  Denigrating the stupid hicks who join the Tea Party doesn’t work, Greg.  And I know a lot of Democrats don’t want to hear this but if the closest you’re going to get to having a liberal in the White House is Hillary Clinton, then you might just want to elect Hillary Clinton.  There’s no way in God’s green earth that Kucinich is ever going to get there.  Get squared away already.

Here’s a hint, Mary Jo and all you Democratic Congresspeople:  Congress didn’t do enough for the working class.  The best you can do is say, “I’m sorry.  I get it now. I’ll put pressure on Obama to kill the Catfood Commission.  Please don’t vote for Republicans.  They’ll only make it worse, er, faster than we will.”

Ed Potosnak can balance an equation and gets my vote.

And that goes for all the rest of you Democrats sending stupid emails to me, assuming I’m some low information, irrationally angry voter who doesn’t know what the heck is going on.  The destruction that ongoing layoffs have had on my friends and family is devastating.  I really don’t want to hear about some half assed health care reform bill or some lame Ledbetter bill that doesn’t guarantee me equal pay- now, this very moment without any legal hassles.  I want to hear about how you’re going to save my retirement and my job.  I guess it’s just irrational to want to be able to maintain my base caloric and shelter requirements.  As it happens, I have a Democrat , Ed Potasnak, to vote for this November but I’m not supporting a party that seems incapable of getting its act together when it had every possible advantage in the past two years.

And finally, Juan Williams is downwind of someone at NPR who has some scruples. Last night, NPR fired him.  After years of being the not-so-secret conservative mole at NPR, Juan finally took things too far on his other gig at Fox:

NPR has terminated its contract with Juan Williams, one of its senior news analysts, after he made comments about Muslims on the Fox News Channel.

NPR said in a statement that it gave Mr. Williams notice of his termination on Wednesday night.

The move came after Mr. Williams, who is also a Fox News political analyst, appeared on the “The O’Reilly Factor” on Monday. On the show, the host, Bill O’Reilly, asked him to respond to the notion that the United States was facing a “Muslim dilemma.” Mr. O’Reilly said, “The cold truth is that in the world today jihad, aided and abetted by some Muslim nations, is the biggest threat on the planet.”

Mr. Williams said he concurred with Mr. O’Reilly.

He continued: “I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

I’ve been disappointed with NPR since the Bush administration when it went from National Public Radio to Nice Polite Republicans.  The consensus reality/perception bending by Williams, Mara Liason and Steve Inskeep got to be too much for me to take in the mornings.  It was nauseating to hear it on the program I had listened to faithfully since I was in college.  I’m glad that Williams got the boot because his remarks were designed to mislead viewers like my mother into believing that Muslims are going to go all jihad on helpless Americans.  The purpose of those remarks are to terrify people who will short circuit their risk assessment thought processes.  And studies have shown (damn, where is that reference?) that voters who are fearful of their own mortality will vote for conservative politicians who promise to protect them.  Those viewers of Juan Williams on Fox will not think about how most Muslim Americans have families and jobs and don’t have time to do terrorist activities.  They’ve got PTA meetings and shopping to do.  Besides, they’re so small in number, how the heck are they going to get away?  It’s a big country. Don’t get me started.  I have to deprogram my mom of this stuff every time I see her.

Yeah, Juan Williams is one of the bad guys and he’s been sitting on NPR like some big ugly insect that the NPR listeners are just supposed to ignore.  We’re supposed to believe that Williams was an unbiased journalist who just coincidentally has this other job on Fox News where he’s allowed to spew nonsense and deceive people.  But none of that could ever possibly spill over into Morning Edition.  Riiiiight.

Now, get rid of Liason and Inskeep and I’ll come back.  Maybe I’ll even write a check.

184 Responses

  1. NPR firing Juan Williams was long overdue .

    • Ditto. I feel like having a mimosa this morning. This calls for champagne and a celebration.

    • Early on in the primaries, Juan kept referring to Hillary as Mrs. Clinton while everyone else called her Senator Clinton. Someone eventually wised him up. He later referred to her as Senator Clinton.

      As far as I can tell his civil rights movement writings were all about HIS civil rights.

    • It’s like a breath of fresh air. Oh yea, I went there.

    • I was glad to see that firing too. Mainly because I find him so tiresome to listen too.

      He’ll be happier with his Fox buddies.

  2. Ok, well now the giant weed cloud of happiness will linger in my head all day, while I am suppsoed to be working. .

  3. Terrific post

    But more than that, this is just another example of a corporation thinking that the average Joe has unlimited disposable income.

    Like they do!!! That’s why they don’t believe our pockets are not endless

    We don’t. The fees for every damn little thing are skyrocketing. Enough already. Try to make due with the billions you already have.

    Amen….but they are like sharks , can’t help themselves…and no one is stopping them….then they blame us for not spending everyone out of a downturn….while firing people left and right…this forecloser tsunami they are now commencing is just in time for the merry xmas mass firings that have become a Christmas tradition !

  4. RD, NJ customers can get the NY local channels by antenna! (all it takes these days is a cheap converter which works very well – we use it!)
    From the tabloids we find out what these elections mean for Obama: will the GOP subpoena him now? It’s all about HIM. Better lawyer up, just in case. Never mind these kind of news don’t help the whining base in November.

    • Low tech wins! I love it.
      Take that, Fox.

      • Over the air digital + one of those fancy boxes (appletv, googletv, etc.) are looking better every day.

        • How do those boxes work … can you point me to a site to compare? Our contract is ending and I’d like to find a better alternative…

          • Most of them plug into your TV via HDMI connector (requiring a digital TV). And they connect to the internet either wirelessly if you have WiFi in your home or via an ethernet connector.

            Then they often have apps running on them for things like Netflix, Hulu, Youtube, and related. And they often connect to your local media collection on a home computer if you have one, e.g., iTunes or similar. And some of them have a mostly full web browser letting you just play video’s directly from a broadcaster.

            None of them quite get the idea of just playing TV. So they tend to feel a bit computer like. Some less than others.

        • if you are lucky enough to have a digital tv then all you need is an antena..lets lots of local stations:)

      • You can’t get FN or MSNBC, CNN or Comedy Central without cable. News channel are awful and I don’t watch them, so there’s not missing them.

  5. This is what Greenwald tweets on Williams

    ggreenwald Glenn Greenwald
    Watch how many people who cheered when Octavia-Nasr/Helen-Thomas/Rick-Sanchez were fired scream CENSORSHIP!! all day over Juan Williams.

  6. 9.11 who? We are now selling arms to the Saudis

    The Defense Department has notified Congress that it wants to sell $60 billion worth of advanced aircraft and weapons to Saudi Arabia. The proposed sale, which includes helicopters, fighter jets, radar equipment and satellite-guided bombs, would be the largest arms deal to another country in U.S. history if the sale goes through and all purchases are made.

  7. BO must be really celebrating today. He got DADT back AND he protected the Federal Courts from being infiltrated by an openly gay judge.
    And people say he has no accomplishments!

  8. I hope NPR fires Terry Gross next. I can’t stand her koolaid flavored reporting.

    • Sad. she use to be so good…but she’s a koolaid stand out among kool-aid chuggers now

      • Yeah, I’m mad because now I’d rather listen to right-wing talk radio than Fresh Air. Something that was inconceivable to me 2 years ago.

    • I used to love listening to Terry, but now, if the show has anything to do with politics, I just go somewhere else on the dial.

      But as for Juan W, I’m against the grain this morning. I don’t watch his commentary much anymore, but I do remember him advocating strongly for Hillary during the primary, when everyone else was kool-aid addled. He really took some hits because he argued that she was a stronger candidate and that Obama was too inexperienced. Meanwhile, KQED, my NPR station, was horrible toward Hillary, really sexist, mocking, CDSish.

      I don’t get the same nefarious intent that RD did, since he goes on to comment about what the Times Square bomber said in court recently (which does have the intended effect of striking fear into people), and he rejected O’Reilly’s attempts to equate extremists/terrorists with all Muslims.

      I saw his confession of an inner fear-probably one he doesn’t feel good about–as an intro to a longer thought that was more complex. The focus on this truncated bit and NPRs canning of him reminds me of Shirley Sherrod’s case where some comments were isolated from the larger context.

      Anyway, NPR listeners have been complaining about him for a long time, and NPR got their reason to jettison him, which is their right. But in the speedy rush to punish, I worry that honest conversation, in which people are imperfect, will be silenced more than it is already.

      • I’m against the grain on Juan as well. If you watch the tape of the entire segment, he went on to say that we did have to be careful not to mistreat or discriminate against the vast majority of peaceful Muslims.

        Juan was not off on some anti-Muslim rant. He was trying to make some thoughtful points on genuine and understandable anxieties vs. how to deal with that honestly without blindly judging people. If you see the ENTIRE segment, he makes it very clear.

        Whatever one’s other issues with Williams, painting him as a bigot over this is just ridiculous.

        • I don’t think he’s a bigot. I think he talks out of both sides of his mouth—differently to different audiences–and it was bound to catch up with him.

          • Perhaps, but that’s not the purported reason for the firing, nor is it the picture that is being painted of him all over the left blogosphere. He’s being painted as a bigot.

          • Well left blogistan is a lost cause, but according to this internal memo, NPR’s reason for firing him actually does seem to be what I suggest:

            The following is an internal memo sent on behalf of NPR President and CEO Vivian Schiller:

            Dear AREPS,

            Thank you for all of your varying feedback on the Juan Williams situation. Let me offer some further clarification about why we terminated his contract early.

            First, a critical distinction has been lost in this debate. NPR News analysts have a distinctive role and set of responsibilities. This is a very different role than that of a commentator or columnist. News analysts may not take personal public positions on controversial issues; doing so undermines their credibility as analysts, and that’s what’s happened in this situation. As you all well know, we offer views of all kinds on your air every day, but those views are expressed by those we interview – not our reporters and analysts.

            Second, this isn’t the first time we have had serious concerns about some of Juan’s public comments. Despite many conversations and warnings over the years, Juan has continued to violate this principal.

            Third, these specific comments (and others made in the past), are inconsistent with NPR’s ethics code, which applies to all journalists (including contracted analysts):

            “In appearing on TV or other media . . . NPR journalists should not express views they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist. They should not participate in shows . . . that encourage punditry and speculation rather than fact-based analysis.”

            More fundamentally, “In appearing on TV or other media including electronic Web-based forums, NPR journalists should not express views they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist.”

            Unfortunately, Juan’s comments on Fox violated our standards as well as our values and offended many in doing so.

            We’re profoundly sorry that this happened during fundraising week. Juan’s comments were made Monday night and we did not feel it would be responsible to delay this action.

            This was a tough decision and we appreciate your support.



            Vivian Schiller

            President & CEO, NPR

          • That’s a strict policy. Since everything ends up on the web these days, NPR basically owns every opinion that comes out of their commenter’s mouths?

            Doesn’t that seem extreme control by an employer? Maybe the Juan should contact the ACLU?

          • what I’m wondering is… shouldn’t this policy affect Mara Liasson too? Or does NPR think that Special Report with Brit/Bret panels are “fact-based analysis”?

          • On the other side — what about Nina Totenberg? Does NPR approve of everything she says on Inside Washinton?

          • Pleeease. I’ve listened to NPR and their commentators enough to know that Juan Williams hasn’t said anything any further out of the mainstream than a lot of their other commentators do.

            There’s a broad variety of political thought in this country, and Juan Williams is pretty much a centrist – reviled as a liberal by the right and a winger by the left.

            NPR has given no case for saying anything that Williams has said is fringe, or not part of normal political discourse in the USA. And no, going on Fox does not count as “out of the mainstream”. Because however much you or I may dislike the idea, Fox IS mainstream, not fringe.

          • I think NPR is acting in a chilling manner, considering that it is public radio.

          • I didn’t say anything at all about fringe or mainstream. Neither did the NPR memo. All I’m saying is there was an obvious conflict of interest between Juan’s NPR and Fox gigs that wasn’t sustainable and this was bound to happen someday.

            I stopped listening to NPR in 2008. I don’t care for them or their policies. But, I get why Juan was fired. This collision course was set in motion many years ago and we’ve been watching it play out. Last year NPR asked Juan to stop even appearing on Fox with the descriptor “NPR analyst.”

          • It’s one thing when a completely private organization like CNN cans Rick Sanchez for the stupid that comes out of his mouth. But NPR is tax-payer funded.

            When they fire someone for his point of view it has first amendment implications.

          • myiq, I completely agree.
            Williams should contact the aclu.

          • I wouldn’t be opposed to defunding NPR (I don’t like NPR, I think it’s a progressive oatmeal), but my understanding is that NPR’s funding from gov’t grants has gone way down since the 70s — I thought most of NPR’s funding comes from corporate sponsors and member donations.

          • During W’s terms in office, the conservatives made a push to add a conservative element to public broadcasting. See “Political composition of the CPB Board”
            They were effective.

            There was a move to cut its funding as well. Without PBS and NPR my source for news and quality programing would be seriously compromised. The BBC is being cut back seriously and with it the World Service. I’m able to sift through the shlock in all of these sources. I don’t even want to bother sifting through cable TV offerings.

          • NPR seems almost-privatized to me as it is anyway and the murkiness of it is causing more problems. Ideally I would like it to go back to it relying on public funding (and additionally once you do that, I think NPR’s other problems would start to resolve themselves..), but in the absence of that happening, I’m not going to get too worked up if people want to just make it not so murky any more and officially privatize it. At least that would make it clear what’s going on.

        • Yeah, Mara Liasson. I’d be glad to see her go too. She’s another Fox homey.

      • Darn, in spammy again. Probably because I used the “M” word – that sometimes trips it after our whole I/P screeching fiasco.

      • At least a few on the left are agreeing. One writer at Slate compares it the the right’s knee-jerk reaction to the out-of-context Shirley Sherrod video:

        The damning video clip of Williams, like the damning clip of Sherrod, cuts off the speaker just as he’s about to reverse course. According to the full transcript, immediately after saying, “I don’t think there’s any way to get away from these facts,”

        Williams continues: “But I think there are people who want to somehow remind us all as President Bush did after 9/11, it’s not a war against Islam.” That continuation has been conveniently snipped from the excerpt.

        A few seconds later, Williams challenges O’Reilly’s suggestion that “the Muslims attacked us on 9/11.”
        Williams points out how wrong it would be to generalize similarly about Christians:

        “Hold on, because if you said Timothy McVeigh, the Atlanta bomber, these people who are protesting against homosexuality at military funerals—very obnoxious—you don’t say first and foremost, “We got a problem with Christians. That’s crazy.”

        Williams reminds O’Reilly that “there are good Muslims.” A short while later, O’Reilly asks: “Juan, who is posing a problem in Germany? Is it the Muslims who have come there, or the Germans?” Williams refuses to play the group blame game. “See, you did it again,” he tells O’Reilly. “It’s extremists.”


      • I am with you Erica. I did not know about his defense of Hillary, but it is nice to know.
        I think his firing is a case of PC gone wild. I not fear anyone on a plane, i do not think a hijacker could get away with what those Muslim men did on 9-11. I learned a long time ago that fear is paralyzing and worrying about something is not going to stop it from happening. It is not PC to admit that you take a secound glance at Muslims in the line to board a plane, but it is not totally irrational either.
        I cross the street to avoid both young men in hoodies (white black or hispanic…) and young men who are obvious skin head/nazi youth types. I do not cross the street to avoid gangs of Hasidic Jews walking to temple on Friday night. Call me crazy, but I think I am just cautious and realistic.
        There are not large groups of Hasidic Jews trying to recruit their young to blow up airplanes and chanting “death the America”, there are unfortunately segments of the Muslim world who are doing those very things.
        And yes I have Muslim friends and in the great I/P debate I tend to come out more on the side of Palestinians…….

  9. Oh brother… this just pulled up on my Raw Story newsfeed…

    Obama cancels Sikh temple visit over ‘Muslim headscarf’ fears October 21, 2010 Agence France-Presse

    • AFP/Raw Story:

      NEW DELHI — US President Barack Obama has canceled a visit to a Sikh temple in India, sources said Wednesday, over apparent concerns that photos of him with his head covered would revive claims he is a Muslim.

      Again with this shit. a) There’s nothing wrong with being Muslim and b) Sikhs are not Muslims.

      • Try explaining that to Juan Williams. 🙂

        • India will eat up the attention and shower him back, but O-hole is such an asshat he’s already making me mad and. he’s not even there yet. He’s indirectly insulting the Indian prime minister with this kind of a move

          • Oh, he’ll make it up by excessive bowing, I’m sure.

          • Actually, the sikhs look quite handsome in their turbans. Might look quite nice on him.

            But I guess he still smarts over that picture of him in some african headdress and a funny-looking apron or something.

            His skin is thin, especially where the backbone is missing.

    • that possibility was talked about a few days ago…I said if he was required to bow, there would be no problem. But a Muslim headscarf? nah…

  10. Dem candidate helps Tea Party candidate get on ballot:


    Lentz is the Dem candidate for Sestak’s current seat and he admitted that his staff helped collect signatures to get the TP candidate in the ballot.

    • Speaking of Sailor Sestak, did you know the forced the Green Party candidate out of the race?
      His campaign challenged the signatures on the petitions of the Green and another Indy candidate. Since they were both on a shoe string they had no choice but to drop out because they couldn’t afford to defend their ballot petitions.
      In PA if you are a Dem or a republican you need 2,000 signatures, an Indy needs 20,000. In other words the major parties care more about the status quo than good governance. But we knew that.

      • If I were in the 7th district I’d be tempted to vote for that TP candidate.

      • Challenging the signatures is exactly what Obama did to Alice Palmer in Chicago, and the outcome was the same–it took her time to get organized to fight the challenge (I bet to her it came as a surprise since B0 was a newcomer then), while B0 had something like 4 lawyers on the case. She couldn’t verify in time and was off the ballot, poof.

        So major party candidates need one tenth the sigs that indy/green candidates need? Wow, the embodiment of democratic principles there is overwhelming (in a sleep inducing fashion).

        It’s discouraging to hear that Sestak pulled that kind of punch.

        • Obama made his challenge on the LAST DAY to qualify for the ballot. He knocked Palmer and every other candidate off the ballot.

          They had no warning and no chance to fix things.

          BTW – Obama was originally Palmer’s choice to replace her in the state senate, then she lost her primary bid for Congress.

          • I remember it was a blindside, and that he was really lawyered up, but I don’t recall it was the last day–what a scumbag.

            I know he was running for her seat. When she lost her primary, she asked him to step aside so she could get her seat back. He refused, and the rest is ugly history.

            And another little aside: guess who mentored 0 when he first got to Congress. Who showed him the ropes, gave him support when he was a nobody? Yep. Hillary.

            He’s backstabbed more than one woman in his political life, yet he goes courting women voters as if he’s really on our side.

          • And it would have been such beautiful justice if Obama’s Senate seat had gone to … Palmer!

  11. Speaking Of Billy Joel, I’ve been thinking about writing my Senators and Representative again.
    If you remember I wrote them about the availability of grants for citizens wishing to leave the country in search of the jobs they allowed to go overseas.
    This time I’m thinking of asking them to sponsor legislation that will allow changing our National anthem to something more relavent for today.
    Billy Joels Allentown.

  12. To which the voter replied: “Do you think I care they’re stuck in the Senate? I don’t have a job.”

    There it is, short and sweet, why dems will lose.

    • The thing is they only did HCR to twist the knife they stuck in Hillary Clinton’s back. If they really cared about the people it would have been something more than an insurance company bailout.
      Had they stuck with reforming Wall Street and pushing the republicans into enacting a real stimulus package they wouldn’t be circling the drain today.
      Remember Bill Clinton’s budget battle with Newt Gingrich & Co? Do you think Obama would have had the guts to let the government shut down?

      • Obama and the D congress had to everything, stimulus, DADT, DOMA, in 2009.

        With a good stimulus we’d be still chugging along. But the Ds thought Obama had changed the world and the Republicans would sign off on everything. The Ds didn’t believe Hillary.

        The Ds in Washington deserve to lose.

        • Obama and the D congress had to pass everything, stimulus, repeal DADT, DOMA, in 2009.

        • They not only deserve to lose, they need to lose. Otherwise they’ll be back saying the public loves what they did and they have a mandate. Bah.

  13. clueless and offensive!

    President Barack Obama is reaching out to female voters, perhaps the most important bloc in the Democratic base. … “kitchen table conversations” …

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43926.html#ixzz1309gZc9M

    Me I got out of the kitchen many years ago……..

    …..pessimistic in this economy. They (women) think a jobless recovery is an oxymoron.”

    Note to WH: in describing women as just not hopey emoting negativeness in their view of the recovery is just stupid, out of touch and biased. We woman know, because we are smart, empowered and aware that the economy is harmed when joblessness is at 18 percent. Me I got out of the kitchen many years ago……..

    • At least he didn’t say “barefoot and pregnant” too.

    • They (women) think a jobless recovery is an oxymoron.

      And that BO is a moron.

    • “It’s really up to the women whether the Democrats win or not,” said Democratic pollster Celinda Lake. “The problem that we saw was that, while there is a gender gap, men are more enthusiastic for the Republicans than women are for the Democrats.”

      There it is again, shaping the narrative to blame the wimminz instead of Obama. The Democrats’ idea of “reaching out to wome”n is having “Democratic” talking heads out there talking like this… which makes it all the more obvious they moved on from 2010 long ago and this is just about assigning blame.

      Women “have pulled back from the Democrats … [because] they believe the economy is hurting their families,” Lake said. “Women are very pessimistic in this economy. They think a jobless recovery is an oxymoron.”

      Gee! The nerve of these low-info wimminz. Can’t they see how Obama hurting them is all a labor of love on his part? Can’t they see the 11 dimensional chess?

      • Bu-bu-but Donna Brazile said they don’t need our stinking bitter clinging knitted votes?

      • What? Obama take the blame?
        Why now when he has let others do the heavy lifting throughout his career.

      • I kind of like “blaming” the women. Shows what power women have, and that we’re not buffaloed. We won’t fall for the trap of “we’re an iota better than the opposition.” Badger away, we’re listening to a different drummer.

        • That’s a nice way to reframe it. for me though the problem is women are one of the few blocs that even still support the Ds even though they aren’t enthusiastic about midterm voting. it’s less about women’s power in this instance and more about the Ds pre-emptively scapegoating women for not casting votes that were never owed to the Ds. Rather it was the Ds responsibility to earn those votes/turnout and they abdicated that responsibility. Yet women are always one of the first to be blamed in post-election analysis and also be the first ones guilt tripped and blackmailed into voting D on election day. I’d like to be more optimistic about women not giving in again, but it’s hard to see at this point.

          • Well, “blaming” the women certainly does not go far enough. The Democrats may never get to the “why” of not winning the hearts and minds of women voters this time around. That’s the crux of it for me. Yes, they expect women to get in line. They do not listen nor even care to ask the appropriate questions. And, yes, many women are committed Democrats carrying a lot of the load. But there are women missing among the ranks. This fact has escaped my local Democrats. Perhaps they are lumping them (us) in with the unenthusiastic. Ha!

            I don’t fault my Democratic leaning friends. Really, the options are entirely slim. But they do listen to me when I point out the obvious that neither party is proposing solutions. It’s not about parties, it’s about solutions.

            Most people are caught in the “corporate overlord” tactic of divide and conquer. Railing against the “radical” (perceived or real) element in the opposition which ultimately guarantees inaction at every turn.

            I don’t see leadership anywhere proposing solutions to our problems. Bucking the corporate imbalance in our governmental affairs is a long way off …. if ever.

          • Most people are caught in the “corporate overlord” tactic of divide and conquer. Railing against the “radical” (perceived or real) element in the opposition which ultimately guarantees inaction at every turn.

            I agree completely — very nice comment, purplefinn.

            I’m in a more pessimistic mood today — all I can think is that the Axelrod machine will try much harder to blackmail women when it comes to O’s re-election and what the O permanent campaign is doing is starting to feed the idea that it’s the women’s fault in ’10, setting that up as an argument for women to get out the vote in ’12.

      • The Dems already have, and will ramp up, the scary abortion ads. It’s the usual “terrify the wimminz into clutching their uteri in fear and rushing back to the protection of The Party.”

        Two problems with that:

        1) They haven’t done such a stellar job of protecting choice.

        2) In times as bad as these, the average woman (even if she is pro-choice, because a sizable percentage are not), is not focused on that. When she lies down at night after working all day, and is worrying over how she’s going to pay the bills, or whether she will have a job tomorrow (if she still does today), or what is going to happen to her insurance premiums, she does not muse to herself : “Gee, isn’t it grand that I could theoretically get an abortion if I theoretically wanted one? All this other stuff is nothing compared to that”

        No, that’s not really on her mind a lot. That’s so far down the list right now it ain’t even funny.

        • I agree, but I also think Democratic women will be pressured much more strongly with the Roe card in 2012 than they are being pressured in 2010. I hope it won’t work after Stupakistan, but I would have hoped it wouldn’t have worked after what happened on May 31, 2008 either. The women’s orgs are without a pulse and haven’t done a good enough job raising activist awareness on Stupakistan and on all the mini-Stupaks that have resulted across the country.

          • Roe is a yoke around our necks; just like DADT & DOMA is around the lgbt community. See how it’s the BO WH that’s desperately trying to keep DADT intact.

      • Sucks to be them……I don’t give my resources to a party that utilizes my reproduction as a bartering tool for anything and everything from the stimulus to health care.

        Perhaps they should ask the catholic bishops to help them get out the vote.

        I remember hearing that they said it would be a year before they decided on whether or not birth control would be covered in the pools because they need to study the issue. Well, I think I need to study the issue of whether or not Democratic members deserve my vote.

  14. Great post! And, if we had any doubts, it is clear that the administration will do nothing to stop or slow down the foreclosures:


    If only we had Democrats in the White House!


  15. This is exactly what I thought this morning: “National Public Radio to Nice Polite Republicans” while I was listening to that morning show I also have listened to since college.

    They were discussing the Obama administrations sucessful appeal of the decision that DADT is unconstitutional. Never once did they say that the Obama administration did not have to appeal the decision. But even worse, they reported “all the problems that will take so much time to solve if we let gays in the military”, like how will we give benefits to gay partners in the army, and how do the rest of the soldiers feel about it. “This is a huge bureaucracy, and it takes time to move it.”

    And I kid you not, “we have to wait for the survey to be complete”, and the survey includes questions like “How do you feel showering next to a gay soldier?”

    NO IT DOESN’T. It’s the ARMY. You don’t ask people to do something, you ORDER them to! “um, mr kkk guy, would you mind if we let the non-white people drink from your water fountain?”

    But these nice, polite Republicans on NPR just reported it as spoonfed “facts”.

  16. A 20-year-old college student has stepped up to be the new police chief in Chihuahua, Mexico, because everyone else was too terrified of the drug violence to take the job.

    This is one immensely brave young woman. I’ll pray for her safety:


    (CNN) — Some headlines are hailing her as the bravest woman in Mexico. Marisol Valles Garcia, all of 20 years old, says she’s just tired of everyone being afraid.

    Valles Garcia, a criminology student, became the police chief this week of Praxedis G. Guerrero, one of the most violent municipalities in the border state of Chihuahua. She was the only person who accepted the top job in a police force whose officers have been abducted and even killed.

    “Yes, there is fear,” Valles Garcia said Wednesday in an interview with CNN en Español. “It’s like all human beings. There will always be fear, but what we want to achieve in our municipality is tranquility and security.”

    There’s good reason for the fear. Just this past weekend, a 59-year-old local mayor, Rito Grado Serrano, and his 37-year-old son, Rogoberto Grado Villa, were killed in a house in which they they were hiding in nearby Ciudad Juarez. Another area mayor was killed in June.

    • Karma commented on this on the last thread with some great comments:

      Karma, on October 21, 2010 at 1:15 am Said:

      So we have Obama who couldn’t stand up to a past statement about a Christmas greeting……vs this 20 year old woman in Mexico who is the newest police chief in the board town of Guadalupe.

      The contrast is stunning! She might lose her life and he might suffer a paper cut reading the bad press.

      And Dario had this to say in response to the article Karma posted, which was too funny:

      Dario, on October 21, 2010 at 1:37 am Said:

      One Mexican criminology professor told the Arizona Republic that getting elected to public office in Mexico “is like winning a tiger in a raffle.”

      Mexicans have great sayings. Maybe that’s what Obama won in the 2008 election. 😆

  17. I too listen to NPR every day. Its all thats usually on in my car. BUT, after listening to the talking points repeated directly from the White House yesterday I’ve finally realized that they’re too far gone and will be changing the dial today. I’ll miss Diane Rehm and Science Friday but too bad.

  18. Trying to explain to them – slowly – the mystery of Clinton’s popularity

  19. I am moving this up from prior thread -I posted in the wrong place.

    Given that we are still chatting about Anita Hill I have been doing a little thinking. I called a friend last night in Oklahoma to review our personal memories regarding the event. I asked my friend if he could remember how many years some asshole state senator introduced a resolution at the beginning of the session requiring the University of Oklahoma to remove her from the law faculty. It never passed but we could not get a handle on how many times it was introduced. But she did leave.

    So today I was trying to do some research on that resolution. I came upon the introduction to her book “Speaking Trust to Power”. Below are a couple of snips and the link.

    As we have discussed the Hill-Thomas hearings we mentioned Simpson, Specter, and Biden. I could not remember the name of the Democratic southern senator (I knew it began with an H) that almost caused my tv screen to be smashed in. Following is the beginnging of the introduction to the book. The entire piece is worth a read.

    May Senator Heflin rest in hell.

    “Midway through the morning of my testimony at the Thomas confirmation hearing, Senator Howell Heflin, Democrat of Alabama, summed up the Republican attack on my credibility. A former state supreme court judge and trial attorney, Senator Heflin appeared to be deliberating aloud as he explained his approach.

    “I, and I suppose every member of this committee, have to come down to the ultimate question of who is telling the truth. My experience as a lawyer and a judge is that you listen to all the testimony and then you try to determine the motivation for the one that is not telling the truth.

    “Now, in trying to determine whether you are telling falsehoods or not, I have got to determine what your motivation might be. Are you a scorned woman?” he asked.

    “No,” I said, a bit surprised by the line of questioning but certain of my answer.

    “Do you have a martyr complex?” With his heavy accent and deliberate pacing, “martyr” came out sounding like “mah’duh.”

    “No, I don’t.”

    “Maybe she is a martyr and doesn’t know it,” someone behind me snickered.

    “Do you have a militant attitude relative to the area of civil rights?”

    “No, I don’t.” I was not certain what he meant, but I knew I was not a militant in the way the term was defined in the 1960s.

    “The reality of where you are today is rather dramatic,” Senator Heflin said. “Did you take, as Senator Biden asked you, all steps that you knew how to take to prevent being in the witness chair today?”

    “Yes, I did. Everything that I knew to do, I did.” I felt like a child who was being chastised for wandering into traffic.

    Senator Heflin’s questions revealed a truth about the hearing. Generally, questions about motive are raised in the context of a criminal trial. They are designed to elicit the impetus for a criminal act. The prosecution presents the theory that the accused committed the crime out of greed, rage, or passion. The defense attorney attempts to show that none of these factors existed in the case. Heflin’s questions revealed that I was being treated as a defendant.”


    • Thank you for reminding me yet again that Anita withstood all the hatred and misogyny leveled at one lone woman who happened to be uppity enough to complain about the sexist treatment and the double standard. Biden, Specter, Kennedy et al really outdid themselves – as did every other man involved in the travesty – it was all about protecting the male – both then and now.

      • Yep – they put her on trial and it still goes on.

        • Yeah, Dee, it continues but now it’s a woman taking the patriarchal lead – and don’t anyone suggest that Clarence didn’t know what wifey was going to do. Disgusting people – the whole disgusting lot of them. Funny thing – Anita looks as beautiful today as she did 20 years ago – her inquisitors look as if time was not their friend. My mom always told me, your life is reflected in your eyes and face. While I am wrinkled from too many laugh lines, when I look in the mirror I know that I have lived a good life. These cretins – look at a picture of them – focus on the face, particularly the eyes. Nuff said.

          • The use of women against women is a long and honored patriarchal “tradition”, meant again to take the heat for the atrocity off the males. I’m not surprised it was Virginia Thomas who made the call to Hill.

          • Branjor, on October 21, 2010 at 12:43 pm

            Very well said and astute

          • Just like O.J. Simpson, everyone in the court of public opinion knows the truth that was suppressed in the court of law, in Anita Hill’s case, the court of the senate hearing.

            I believe Clarence Thomas has lived ever since that public hearing knowing that people know that Anita Hill spoke the truth. The knowledge of that has seared his soul and he cannot escape it and it may be a very fitting punishment for his crimes against Anita Hill. He is everlastingly bitter about that truth that people know about him. As to Joe Biden et al, I doubt if their conscience is hurting them, although it should.

  20. Burning weed HURTS MY HEART!!!

    *heads for fainting couch*

  21. Hillary seems to always be ahead of everyone else. Hillary spoke about the subprime mess way before everyone else. Now I read that she also spoke about the gay teen suicides back in June.

    Schohn noted that Clinton was one of the first public figures to speak publicly about gay teen suicides, raising the issue during a Gay Pride Month speech at the State Department in June:e…

    • yup. She was also ahead on, among other things– healthcare, on 9-11 workers’ health concerns, and on NAFTA. I know people like to pin that last one on her but Hillary was a critic within Bill’s Administration on NAFTA.

      • Thanks for bringing up NAFTA – Hillary was never a fan, however like so many other situations, she gets the blame because – well because she was and is a threat to the big boys, and because she continues to breathe and challenge, and work and show up her critics without even trying. Hillary’s Mother must be so very proud and rightly so – she raised one helluva human being.

        • I was thinking about this the other day, all the ways we’ve been lied to and I remembered the NAFTA deal, how the word got out that Hillary had advised Bill Clinton against NAFTA and how she made a point of saying she would work to even the playing field for American workers. It was then that Obama came out and said, oh yes, he would renegotiate NAFTA. And then sent Goolsbee up to Canada to reassure the leadership that he was merely using campaign-speak.

          Any other candidate would have been flailed alive for that deceit. But the press hardly raised an eyebrow–mentioned it and then quickly swept it all under the rug.

          And Goolsbee? He’s now POTUS’s chief economic advisor. Liars to the left of us, liars to right. Seems to be the way the world turns anymore.

  22. I stopped supporting National Privatized Radio in 2004 (after a quarter century of sending money to them every year). My disgust with them had been steadily growing, but I remember 2 specific incidents that year that sent me off the deep end: the firing of Bob Edwards (replacing him with Inskeep, whom I deplore, and his even lighter-weight sidekick, Renee Montagne); and the female “reporter” who offered up a quote from “the missile expert at the Heritage Foundation,” like he was a scientist, without explaining that the Heritage Foundation is nothing more than a Republican spin machine.

    I still have them on my clock radio, because it’s a guaranteed method for getting me out of bed in the morning. Most days, I go from groggily listening to jumping out of bed screaming at the radio. Then I’m up! Of course, I start the day steaming mad, but I’m bound to get that way sometime during the day anyway as I peruse the internets.

    I’ve never liked Juan Williams, and I think he belongs with Fox Noise. To disagree with glennmcgahee, I’d be happy if they took Diane Rehm, too. She’s the only one who has me diving for the off button, every time.

  23. Apparently, nobody told CNN what the story line is supposed to be about the economic gains black Americans made in the the 90s.

    NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) —

    The economic boom of the 1990s led to an historic expansion on Main Street, especially for African Americans. But in the decade that followed, a major unraveling began that pushed many blacks back onto the side streets of America.

    From March 1991 to March 2001, more than 22 million jobs were added to the economy. The overall unemployment rate fell from 7.4 to 3.9 percent and stayed low for more than two years. African-American families in particular enjoyed huge income increases and a significant drop in poverty.

    While the 1990s boom didn’t come close to ending persistent racial inequality, it made some pretty significant dents.

    But the 2001 recession, the weak expansion that followed and the Great Recession that still hangs over the economy today have erased many of those gains.

    The boom years: During the 1990s economic expansion, African-American family income increased by 29 percent, poverty among African-American families fell by 10.4 percentage points and the share of African Americans in the workforce increased dramatically.

    Making big gains in the lower earning group is easier. I understand that, but a 29 percent gain for a group that seem to be stuck, it’s a significant change.

  24. Apparently Lt. Choi is not so happy with Valerie Jarret and Dear Leader:


    Welcome to under the bus…. wait, Das Underbus was overfilled some time ago – where are Dems putting the unwashed masses now…?

    Oh yeah – we welcome you to Leper-Island.

    • Wow Dan – don’t get on a small plane.

      I am such a big fan…

    • Great clip, and I love his passion: “I have a message for Valerie Jarrett and all the other politicians in the White House–you have lost my trust, and I will not vote for Barack Obama again.”

      Welcome to the club Dan.

      • I wrote this last nite on the site and it is still in moderation today.tell me why??? October 21st, 2010 11:35 pm ET
        Your comment is awaiting moderation.

        Why doesn’t CNN pretend it is Bush or a Clinton decision and talk about the issue with this LT Choi honestly ,instead of making excuses for bad policy .It was the same for single payer,wall street reform …….just keep making excuses . This administration has /had both houses and a dem president.,there are no excuses for this lack of passing more meaningful changes. We will not get this chance again because of the lack of commitment from the white house. The democrats have lost credibility.

  25. Ted Olson is quoted at Think Progress:

    “I don’t know what is going through the [Obama] administration’s thought process on ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’” Olson said. “It would be appropriate for them to say ‘the law has been deemed unconstitutional, we are not going to seek further review of that.’”

    From the comments, it appears that koolaid is more difficult to swallow nowdays.

    • Mr. O’s “thought process” is indeed diffiuclt to reckon with.

      He expressed the stupid idea that to go ahead with court orders would be an “abrupt” change for the soldiers.

      Poor widdle American soldiers. Soldiers of Canadian miliatry, Israeli military, and military of most other civilized nations, have never had any of these stupid laws discriminating against gay/lesbian soldiers, and they never seem to report any diffiuclties.

      Mr. O. likes to masturbate his “thought processes,” believing himself to be the brilliant thinker his acolytes declare that he is. But his thought processes, it becomes increasingly apparent, are as naked as the proverbial emperor.

      • The Obot shills are the ones that get me.

        They can’t even say “He’s wrong on this one” they have to try to spin his bigotry as a good thing.

        • Obama says he’s perfect in every way:

          Obama says he’s a ‘pretty good president’

          SEATTLE, Washington (AFP) – Barack Obama’s approval ratings might have slipped, but he gave himself an appreciative job appraisal Thursday, saying on the campaign trail that he was a “pretty good president.”
          Obama gave the upbeat assessment of his own performance during a stem-winding speech to an overflow crowd at a rally for Washington state senator Patty Murray, part of a four-day mid-term election campaign swing.

          Go∂ blessed us with a leader.

    • I think O’s thought process is pretty simple. In the thought bubble above his head it says “if we deal with DADT now I will get pinned with it before my run in 2012. This way I am please both sides, damn I am talented at standing on both sides of any issue. Go ME”!

    • I’m surprised the koolaide crowd’s gag reflex still works anymore with the rapidity of these reversals. If Obama spent as much time defending policy instead of championing process, we’d all be better off.

      Yesterday Obama’s housing chief said he saw no need to look at the history of fraud in the foreclosure debacle, that he would make sure the banks were compliant going forward. So trampling the rule of law is not important as long as it happened yesterday–our eyes are fixated only on the rosy, rosy future.

      Do these people listen to themselves speak?

      William Black has no trouble listing what needs to done and how incredibly underreported the story of lawlessness truly is: Link:


      Here we have a man with experience in cleaning up bank and financial catastrophes [Black worked the S&L crises for Poppy Bush].

      And what does Obama do? Put blinders on and point to tomorrow. Clueless, gutless or incredibly corrupt. Take your pick.

  26. From The Note:

    ABC News’ Huma Khan reports: The brains behind the controversial ad that urges Hispanics not to vote isn’t backing down, despite backlash from the Latino community and a repudiation from Republican candidates.

    Robert de Posada, head of Latinos for Reform, a conservative independent expenditure that sponsored the ad, said he’s not planning to buy any more airtime. But he’ll continue to push the ad on the Internet. The “Don’t Vote” ad was pulled by Univision after it aired five times on radio in Nevada.

    “We basically have no options” if Univision, the largest Spanish-language media company in the U.S., decides not to air it, de Posada told ABC News, adding that he plans to file an FEC complaint against the network.

    The ad specifically targets Democrats and calls on Hispanics to stay away from the polls because of lack of action from the leadership on immigration. Neither the English nor Spanish-language ad features any Republican leader. De Posada insists he’s going after all lawmakers and claims there was a second version of the ad that showed Sen. John McCain, Sen. Jim DeMint and former Rep. Tom Tancredo, but it wasn’t finished before Univision decided to pull his ads altogether.

    Hispanic leaders both nationally and in Nevada denounced the ad as the “height of cynicism” and as an “ugly” example of “overt voter suppression,” a charge that de Posada denies.

    “We’re saying to people, you need to look at the record of the candidates and understand that in a civic engagement situation, you have the options of not necessarily voting. You should not be told you have no option but to support the lesser of two evils,” he said. “We need to start making people accountable for their efforts and at the same time, we cannot reward this irresponsible behavior, and a perfect example is Harry Reid.”

    De Posada, a conservative, launched a similar ad in 2008 attacking President Obama’s record on Hispanic issues. In that election cycle, Latinos for Reform spent $54,300 — the bulk of its expenditure — on media efforts, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

    De Posada was the Republican National Committee’s director of Hispanic affairs and worked for the Bush administration and a group founded by Tea Party leader Dick Armey.

    Senate GOP candidate Sharron Angle’s campaign denounced the ad Wednesday, which Democrats say came too late.

    “No ad should ever discourage voters from voting or expressing their opinions at the ballot box,” Angle’s spokesman Jarrod Agen said in a statement to ABC News.

    Yes, the guy is a evil conservative with all the wrong connections. But he’s sending the same message as lots of liberals – vote “None of the Above.”

    I think it’s outrageous that Univision pulled the ad. NOTA is a legitimate voting strategy and no network should be able to censor political ads for content that doesn’t support the legacy parties.

    If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice.

    • NOTA is a legitimate voting strategy and no network should be able to censor political ads for content that doesn’t support the legacy parties.

      If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice.

      Honk honk

      • Voters choose NOTA, and because it’s a choice, it’s not telling voters not to vote.

        • Even where the actual NOTA choice isn’t available on the ballot, staying home or voting only the lines where you want to vote are valid voting strategies and they aren’t throwing a vote away. Votes aren’t owed and protest votes aren’t the only way to put pressure on incumbents. The rightwing stayed home in 2008 and it gave them an opening to take on the establishment of their party.

    • I’d have more respect for NOTA if people would excercise that right by NOT clogging up my line at the polls just to say “never mind”.

  27. TGW:

    “Hurricane Sarah” OR How Sarah Palin Refuses to Meet All Our Needs, Whine GOP Men

    Politico has another hit job full of anonymous sources whining about how mean old Sarah Palin refuses to nurture the babies and give the needy men everything they need whenever they demand it. Yes, it really is a 4-page article about a whole lot of sullen GOP candidates whining loudly for mama’s attention.

    Don’t they know Sarah Palin already has enough children?

    • I love Janis’ comment on that thread:

      Jesus, they really are all the same. Dems are no different with Hillary — we hate you, solve all our problems. It’s totally a mommy thing. I hate mommy, hey wipe my butt.

  28. you can’t get Glee? That’s terrible! I watch it every week and am reminded of my HS days. I was az Gleek.

  29. I have to say I’m rather troubled by some here who think that NPR, an entity that is funded by donations and tax dollars, should fire people with whom the posters here at TC disagree ideologically. Do you want NPR and public television to be an echo chamber of the left? Just how long do you think their tax dollars and donations would keep rolling in if that were the case, if they became that one-sided and biased?

    JW was only stating his honest knee-jerk feelings and went on to say that he is against anyone discriminating against Muslims. What is also troubling is that NPR did not give him a chance to explain or apologize publically before firing him.

    And why the animus here against Fox News? If I recall, it was Fox that was fair to Hillary during the primary and it was MSNBC, that liberal bastion, that tore her down.

    I hear outrageous statements from MSNBC hosts, like Olbermann calling a woman a mashed up bag of meat with lipstick on it, yet he doesn’t get fired nor is he even made to apologize. (And that’s just one example.) Where was the outrage from the left and from feminists????

    I realize that there are some on this site who lean further left and others who are more centrist yet I realize that we are all Hillary supporters and would like to see the Democratic Party regain its former pro-working class template.

    When issues like this come up it makes me uneasy to see TC echoing left blogistan and calling for the ouster of anyone with whom we disagree. Again, NPR is a donations and tax funded entity and should worry about the appearance of liberal bias and making the right appear correct in that assumption. As a side note, Whoopi Goldberg said that what NPR did was stupid (and she was recently in a well-publicized squabble with O’Reilly.)

    And when it comes to disagreements and letting all voices be heard, I can’t help but notice that along the TC sidebar are links to websites that some would consider conservative and one that frequently posts anti-Muslim blogs. But hey, who’s looking for consistency? I mean, oh noes! Juan Williams says he gets nervous on a plane when he sees someone in Muslim garb! Now if only he had made a misogynistic statement against a woman, everything would be hunky-dory and he’d still have a job.

    • Maybe you should read all the comments before jumping to conclusions.

      Not everyone here agrees with the firing.

      Myself included.

    • I hear outrageous statements from MSNBC hosts, like Olbermann calling a woman a mashed up bag of meat with lipstick on it, yet he doesn’t get fired nor is he even made to apologize. (And that’s just one example.) Where was the outrage from the left and from feminists???

      Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa? Do you hang around here very much? if you did you would know that almost all of us loudly objected to what Olbermann said.

      ps… whoopie also said that Polanski was not guilty of “rape rape”, she is not the shiniest button on the jacket at times. NPR did not fire JW for the reason of his statement being anti muslim as much as the fact he made a statement at all when he is supposed to be neutral in public.
      That being said, I think they should give him his job back.

      • I said Olbermann wasn’t fired for his misogynist statements.
        And when I asked where was the outrage from the left and from feminists, I didn’t mean TC, I meant from feminist orgs and from most left-leaning blogs. (I should have been more specific.)

    • I don’t like NPR. It already is a progressive oatmeal echo chamber. I don’t like Fox or Juan either.

      But whatever taxpayer dollars go to NPR ( I thought it was not as dependent on gov’t funding as it was a few decades ago), I don’t think they should be going to a channel that has someone on who sings one tune on their station and then plays a very obvious and different shtick when he goes on conservative media. I think that was the crux of the problem which has been ongoing for a decade. Last year NPR had Fox stop identifying Juan as even from NPR when he appeared on there. So this wasn’t just one thing. I still don’t support NPR, but there’s been a conflict of interest between Juan’s roles on Fox and on NPR — all I’ve said was something was bound to give sooner or later.

    • I’m not going to suffer a self-inflicted wedgie over Juan getting the ax. NPR says that Juan broke NPR’s guidelines. That’s good enough for me. Helen Thomas was not even at work, but was fired for her views. I didn’t like it. But I also didn’t get my knickers twisted over the issue.

      Now Juan can write a book and share his views, and those who want to know can buy his book.

      • I’m not going to lose any sleep over it. He’s still got his job at FOX

        I’m not defending what he said either, just his right to say it.

        • Who would deny him the right to say it? NPR is just doing what we would do if we found a bigot here or Someone trying to promote deceptive talking points. We tell them to go elsewhere. No one’s freedom of speech is violated. Juan Williams can go wherever he likes to say what ever he wants. But NPR doesn’t have to let him report on their team.
          NPR has a policy, they are only now starting to enforce it. Juan violated that policy. He was terminated.
          As far as I know, he’s free to speak whatever he likes, for $2 million.

    • I for one don’t wish anyone fired for their comments – however outrageous. But all this outcry over Williams is a bit hypocritical, especially as Fox just gave him a 2 million 3 years contract.
      Frankly, what he said, reminds me a bit of what Jesse Jackson once said re: blacks. A bit iffier though as he was referring to a group he didn’t belong to.
      On misogyny, I remember the suspension of what’s his name from MSNBC for the “Chelsea pimping” comments. Hillary expressly didn’t ask for it (It’s MSNBC’s business) she said – yet Obama’s fans jumped on her and how she was censoring the media. Right after CNN took Begala and Carville off the air.
      As for Williams, it’s been years since I ditched NPR (partly because of Williams) and I never watch Fox. So, no skin off my nose either way.

    • I would like it to go back to the days when it did quality reporting without a partisan spin.
      It may have seemed liberal but as Steven Colbert once said, “the truth has a strong liberal bias.”

      And yes, I think NPR had a very good reason to fire him. He was on a network with a clear partisan agenda, spewing prejudicial stuff about Muslims. In particular, his remarks about jihad were very offensive and feed directly into the fear and hysteria that movement conservatives are trying to promote among Fox News viewers. I think he went too far. And it doesn’t make it better that he qualified it by saying that there are some “good Muslims”. That’s like some hick in Alabama saying that he’s not racist because there are some “good negros”. What constitutes good? Are only Sufis good Muslims? What if they are observant and wear hijab? Does that make them bad? If we’re supposed to be afraid of people who dress differently for religious reasons, shouldn’t I be terrified that Hasidic Jewish women will make me shave my hair and wear a wig?
      I suspect that the reason that Juan was ultimately fired is that he crossed the line from journalism to political propaganda and infotainment and it didn’t meet NPR’s standards. In this case, Juan is not like some Joe bagodonuts with a job on an assembly line. He’s a journalist and it’s his obligation to NPR to maintain some objectivity, not stoop to the lowest common denominator. Juan wiliams has been damaging the credibility of NPR’s supposed objectivity for years. He pandered on Fox and crossed the line.
      Actually, it’s about time someone at NPR did something. They have a brand and reputation to protect and they’ve let it slide for too long.

  30. boy I must be pushing all of spammy’s buttons today.

  31. Juan williams is fine with me ..he’s no bigot.
    Obama should be fired…the biggest homophobe president who lies about it and a sexist pig… referring to Michelle as “cute” after she introduces him at a rally at Ohio state….what a disgusting pig!

    • Referring to Michelle as cute is the least of Obama’s problems. He’s probably jealous of the attention Michelle gets anyway. People tend to gravitate toward other people rather than toward teleprompters.

    • “In fact, I haven’t really been on the trail since a little campaign you might remember a couple of years ago — (for) this cute, tall, skinny guy”

      … Michelle Obama said when she started campaigning a week ago. Guess her husband is just sticking to the script. 😉

  32. I wrote on the mortgage foreclosure at dkos in 2006 or 07 as I forget. I was taking a legal seminar at the time by a renegade legal expert named Gene Zimmerman. He told us about this at the time, but I already knew. He told us exactly how to fight it too and end up with your house free and clear. The banks have violated Federal Lending Law and can be closed down for this. You have to know exactly how to threaten them and bring suit against them. The Nazi troopers at dkos brought me down over this. Many comment threads are gone unless you have TU status. But under abbeysbooks you will get the general idea. I was in the throws of exhilaration at the time so forgive my enthusiasm. I came home and reviewed from memory and notes until the wee hours then headed back in the am at 8 am. I was exhausted but thrilled. Forgive my passionate ones on the O man. I turn red when I think of those diaries. Fooled by rhetoric.

    • HAMP is a deli platter to be served to the TBTF. I never wanted my house for free. Just a mod. But I am now so “glass half full kind of person” I don’t believe it if I can’t see it. I researched HAMP and said no thanks.

    • DailyKos is designed as a game and you were caught up in it. You were rewarded with TU status for saying things that the group approved and punished when you didn’t. Every thing you might have done to get recommends or on the Recommended Diary List was deliberately designed into the application to move you to a certain frame of mind. You were rewarded for adapting to the herd, love bombed when you converted and pressured by your peers to stay with them. We understand. That’s why we don’t do any of those things. There are no trusted users here. There are front pagers but we add people when we like the quality of their writing and when they seemed motivated by principle. Sadly, we don’t think Obama was motivated by principle and many people were swept up in a giant orgasm of Obama. It’s over now.
      Don’t beat yourself up over it. You are certainly not alone. Just ask yourself what you believe in. That’s the best place to start to get a handle on what to do next.

      • Thank you so much for this explanation! Makes perfect sense.

        When I started reading blogs in early 2008 I heard a lot about “cheetos”, “The big orange satan”, “Markos”, and … “ko”. (Often I was confused about whether the last referred to dkos or Keith Olbermann!)

        I clicked at the site only once, and remember wondering “But who reads all those comments?” Over a thousand (several thousands?) in just one thread! No way that can make for meaningful discussion! It seems it wasn’t intended to either.

        Well, I for one am thankful and appreciative that TC neither “recs” nor “categorizes” readers/posters – except for the FPs – and that everybody’s voice is important, and heard. That’s Democracy at work. 🙂

      • That’s exactly right! Very manipulative set-up.

        TC is a great place to hang out. I am so glad you started this blog.

  33. I just attended a seminar on BEDBUGS.

    Ask me anything.

    • I spent nine years in the pest control business and never had a call for bedbugs.

      • From my notes – in my area in 2006 the number of bedbug calls was zero. It all began in 2007 here. Each year the calls doubled until now. In 2010 through Sept. they have tripled over 2009.

      • Just want to say that the bug hunting dog was very cute. He seemed to be part Jack Russell and part Westie. He is the only dog in the area trained to know the difference between live bedbugs and dead bedbugs. Knowing the difference between live and dead is very important for the followup assessment.

      • You can call it..”unprecedented”. Historical. A sign of the times.

    • And yet another reason that waterbeds rule…lol

  34. I can’t seem to turn away from the Hill-Thomas hearings.

    The 1994 and 2003 articles linked in this Huff piece are as disturbing today as they were back then.


    • Thanks for sharing what you know. It has been very interesting and has me unable to turn away either. She is brave woman and I thank her as well. It made a huge impact on millions of women.

      Granted, I and many other women, had been threatened/advised by bosses around the same time as a result. But it didn’t matter we all cheered her.

      It was an important moment in time.

  35. This thing with NPR is political. Posturing like they are exercising some kind of centrist moral authority is either pompous or naive. They want to be strong left, cool…they should own it. Saletan at Slate has the right read imo.

    • Oooo, Saletan. Isn’t he the guy who thinks women are past their peak when they hit 18?
      I don’t think NPR is posturing about any moral authority. They just have a journalistic reputation to protect. They are listener supported and their audience is a lot like me- extremely skeptical of the content presented by “analysts” like Juan Williams and Mara Liasson who frequent Fox. They are either a.) sympathetic to the conservative cause or b.) in it for the money and whoever will pay them the most. That affects the way I perceive NPR content and credibility. And I won’t donate money to them if I think they are hiring people who are promoting conservative talking points, especially the egregious ones from Fox.
      This is not a moral decision on NPRs part. It is a business decision. Listeners who found Juan Williams’ comments to be offensive will stop listening to NPR because Williams does not share our values. To be perfectly honest, Williams and Liasson have not hidden their attempts to bend over backwards to kiss the asses of conservative viewers over the past decade. I’d prefer it if they just report the truth, whether it is favorable to one side or not. But they’ve chosen to play this dual role.
      No one is oppressing Williams. He can say whatever damn thing he wants. But NPR is not obligated to keep him on their payroll and I will defend their right to terminate his contract because he did not live up to the standards he was clearly informed of on more than one occasion.
      I’m a liberal and there were no free speech rights violated here. NPR’s business is journalism and they have to protect their franchise, as damaged as it might be these days,

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: