• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Propertius on Throwback Thursday: Corey the…
    Propertius on Throwback Thursday: Corey the…
    jmac on Throwback Thursday: Corey the…
    William on Throwback Thursday: Corey the…
    William on Is “Balance of Nature…
    thewizardofroz on Is “Balance of Nature…
    Beata on Is “Balance of Nature…
    William on Is “Balance of Nature…
    Beata on Is “Balance of Nature…
    seagrl on Why is something so easy so di…
    Propertius on Is “Balance of Nature…
    jmac on Is “Balance of Nature…
    William on Is “Balance of Nature…
    Beata on Is “Balance of Nature…
    Beata on Is “Balance of Nature…
  • 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

    • God As Idea, By Eric Anderson
      I woke up last night feeling like I was suffocating, because in my dream I was. It began in a church, or an old university lecture hall. Antique. And everyone in attendance was being asked to say little prayers honoring Jesus. Everyone was reciting little prayers that are common among the devout. But when it was my turn, I stood and exclaimed: Jesus was a ph […]
  • Top Posts

Friday News: Things I don’t have time to read (but you should)

protein art. See foldit below

Running late again, sports fans.  I’ve been quizzing Brooke on lipids vs fatty acids vs trigycerides this morning.  Gahhh!  Make it stop!

So, anyway, I have a small compilation of news but I haven’t had much time to read them all the way through.  Take a look and tell me what you think.

1.) Myiq has already touched on this.  The New York Times has a big headline that reads:

Bill Clinton Urged Democrat to Quit Senate Bid


Jeez, the White House must really hate the guy(s).  Who do they hate more?  The beloved ex-president who is busting his ass campaigning for Democratic candidates or the Democratic senate candidate who supported the Big Dawg’s wife for president?  Damn, does this make sense?  Why would the White House cripple two important candidates 5 days before the election?  And why does the rest of Congress put up with it?

2)  Obama is a piss poor socialist.  According to Politico (always take with a grain of salt), under Obama Corporate profits have climbed magnificently.  Note to the socialists: this guy is giving you a bad name.

3.) Ted Strickland is toughing it out in Ohio.  Seems like a pragmatic guy.  The Big Dawg campaigned for him.  But it looks like Obama has the most to lose if Strickland loses:

Even as party leaders in Washington leave some vulnerable Democrats to fend for themselves in the final days of the campaign and scramble to shore up incumbents who might be more viable, one candidate is being given particular assistance: Gov. Ted Strickland of Ohio, who is in a difficult battle for re-election.

The reason is not simply that he still has a chance of winning. For Mr. Obama, the fate of Mr. Strickland could be very much tied to his own, since a Republican in the Ohio governor’s seat could make his re-election to the presidency in 2012 that much more complicated.

Ohio is one of nine states where Mr. Obama expanded the Democratic map in the last presidential election, and his advisers believe the electoral votes here are likely to be among the most critical to assure his return to the White House. Republicans do not disagree and have used that argument in the final stages of the midterm election campaign as a motivating factor.

Wow, that’s a tough one.  Vote for the guy Bill Clinton endorses or vote for the Republican to exact revenge on the president you were pressured to vote for instead of the candidate you actually voted for in the primary of 2008.  I’d be asking myself, can I survive four years of a Republican governor?  Well, we in NJ are suffering through it.  It’s not pleasant and for sure the guy’s no long term thinker…

Ehhh, go with Strickland.  Obama’s not savvy enough to save his own ass in 2012.  And anything can happen.  He might even be challenged by a better presidential candidate from his own party.  (Hint to party: you only have *one* viable alternative)

4.) Charles Krauthammer is not really in David Brooks league as the Saruman of the right.  He doesn’t know how to finesse his words as finely as Brooks in such a way to make you think you have absolutely no hope of prevailing against the masters of the universe so why don’t you just bow down or slit your throat now, you helpless underlings?  Still, Chuck gives it the old college try and attempts to wrangle the obvious- that voters are pissed as hell at Democrats for a variety of reasons- into some kind of reason to celebrate the Reagan revolution?  Ehhh, I don’t get it.  Nevertheless, Chuck is taking the anger part seriously in a way the Democratic party is not:

The beauty of this year’s campaign, and the coming one in 2012, is that they actually have a point. Despite the noise, the nonsense, the distractions, the amusements – who will not miss New York’s seven-person gubernatorial circus act? – this is a deeply serious campaign about a profoundly serious political question.

Obama, to his credit, did not get elected to do midnight basketball or school uniforms. No Bill Clinton he. Obama thinks large. He wants to be a consequential president on the order of Ronald Reagan. His forthright attempt to undo the Reagan revolution with a burst of expansive liberal governance is the theme animating this entire election.

Democratic apologists would prefer to pretend otherwise – that it’s all about the economy and the electorate’s anger over its parlous condition. Nice try. The most recent CBS/New York Times poll shows that only one in 12 Americans blames the economy on Obama, and seven in 10 think the downturn is temporary. And yet, the Democratic Party is falling apart. Democrats are four points behind among women, a constituency Democrats had owned for decades; a staggering 20 points behind among independents (a 28-point swing since 2008); and 20 points behind among college graduates, giving lie to the ubiquitous liberal conceit that the Republican surge is the revenge of lumpen know-nothings.

Yeah, he’s not in Brooks’ league.  It must be maddening.

5.) Anglachel has a trio of new posts.  I haven’t had time to dig in but don’t let that stop you.

Marketing and Sales

Clouds and Clarity

Plebian Acts

Hypergraphia:  It’s not a bug- it’s a feature!

And now for something completely different.  Have you ever had a secret desire to fold a protein but didn’t know where to start?  What would your friends think?  Does that mean you have to start wearing pocket protectors and a calculator on your belt?

Well, worry no more, secret protein folders.  You can get in on the game with no experience necessary.  In fact, you might even have an advantage if you know absolutely nothing about science and if you’re a female who works well with others in cooperative teams  (there’s a study that says so.  I’ll add the link later).  The game is called Foldit: Solve puzzles for science.  Check it out.  I expect The Confluence to have the winning team.  Let’s kick some tertiary structure ass!!!

162 Responses

  1. why was dakinikat’s politics may be ugly article removed? it never happened? what is going on with the confluence? we dont’t need censorship. i think we are all adult enough to handle a little discord. there had to have been at least 400 comments on the article. if river daughter is the parent and the frontpagers are the children, then the parent should never side with one of the bickering siblings. i can’t be the only one who needs an explanation.

    • Dakinikat is no longer with us. She has resigned. We wish her well. If you would like to read the post you are referring to, you can find it at Skydancing in a Man’s World.

      That’s all the explanation you are going to get.

      • That’s weird — I must have read his post wrong but I coulda sworn myiq2xu said if she left he would as well.

        A shame it couldn’t be resolved in a way she felt comfortable staying here. Thanks for the link to her blog.

        • That’s weird — I must have read his post wrong but I coulda sworn myiq2xu said if she left he would as well.

          That was my intention until I received a private email from DKat that persuaded me to change my mind.

          • Well I am glad you stayed on… I prefer snark and witty repartee to liberal moralizing… not into people’s self-righteousness whatever belief system they come out of. One of liberalism’s big problems these days, IMO, is the moralizing… liberals good, others bad UGH, then what’s the difference between that and religion?

          • Would you settle for half-witty repartee?

          • One of liberalism’s big problems these days, IMO, is the moralizing… liberals good, others bad UGH, then what’s the difference between that and religion?

            What Bob Somerby refers to as tribalism at dailyhowler. Also what the O-bots do to non-believers.
            Demonise them.

          • Yeah, MrMike, I have no problem with people arguing that someone’s point of view is wrong on any issue. I do have a problem with viewing people as essentially blasphemers, and treating one’s political opinions as some weird sort of quasi-religious identity.

          • I read some of the replies about that Rand Paul incident and I got the impression that people were talking past each other.
            If a reader was a victim of spousal abuse or bullying I can see them taking issue with some of the comments made.
            OTOH, I got a scar above my eyebrow where my head was spit open in one fight and know you don’t provoke a tiger by poking a stick between the bars of its cage. So, why would anybody want to prank a group of paranoid goons?

          • I think it’s unfair to categorize that liberals are the only folks who act as if anyone outside their groupthink is acting in bad faith.

            As a matter of fact, I just consider that behavior out of the conservatives playbook.

            Anyone who disagrees with war is an unpatriotic terrorist symapathizer. Anyone who believes that women deserve the right to choose what happens in their bodies is a godless babykiller. People who are homosexuals are perverts and similar to pedophiles. Any of these canards sound familiar?

            The bullying on the left is the result of years of bullying on the right by the Coulters, O Reillys and the Hannitys.
            It’s funny because a whole bunch of righties used to laugh and call it entertainment. I guess it’s not so funny when the person being disparaged is themselves.

          • I’m glad you stuck around. Every blog needs a least one good clown. 🙂

          • The groupthink is a problem with all sides.

            I am pretty far on the left by USA standards, but I’m on the populist left. That pretty much doesn’t exist here anymore so sometimes that puts me on the TP side. But basically it makes me regularly feel like outsider in any camp.

          • Here’s my problem with the Tea party.

            It’s leaders. They are presently pushing the Overton window so far right it’s absurd. The idea that every Muslim is responsible for 9/11 and therefore should be disqualified from service is disgusting and our government founders who embraced the idea of worshiping as you choose would roll over in their graves to hear these people espouse themselves as patriots. Then there is the socialism canard. If I actually believed Sarah Palin was dumb I could find it excusable, as it stands I don’t. I consider her behavior on health care disingenuous and inexcusable. Our country needs its leaders to have real debates with facts not made up demagoging. Then there’s the guy in Alaska who wants to get rid of Social Security most likely brought in by Armey, another Tea Party leader although he’s just a money man.

            These are people moving the Overton Window rightward and making these things acceptable discourse.

            I understand that people are busy. They work hard. They feel they should only have to pay attention every 2 years at election time. The truth is democracy is hard work. (It isn’t just some talking point that we made up for the Iraqis). You have to pay attention to what is being said on your behalf and not just every 2 years but every day. Sacrifice isn’t and shouldn’t be limited to people in uniform. It ought to be understood that EVERYONE is going to need to sacrifice some of their free time to pay attention to what their representation and potential representation is doing on their behalf.

          • Yup, the leaders stink, policy-wise.

            But I can’t stand the classist attacks on the regular tea-party rally-goers. They are rightfully riled-up and the TP is the only group letting them air their grievances. And that is democracy. We need more of it, not less.

            As to them moving the Overton window rightward, I look at it as them trying to take down the middle GOP. The left should be trying to do the same to the DLC. Attack the corporate-controlled middle from both ends.

          • I disagree that the Tea Party is the only venue to air grievances.

            Plenty of single payer folk aired their grievances and they didn’t need the Tea Party to do so.

            It’s a venue- but the wrong venue. If the leaders of a movement are flat out lying to their population then nothing good is going to come out of advancing it and as a result, them.

            We’re presently looking at putting a couple of those extreme viewpoints in our Congress. I don’t see that as helpful to either our country (since I believe we need to shift left) or the liberal cause.

          • I’m glad you stayed. I do wish you both had.

          • It is a bit of a head-scratcher, because I would have expected unions to be at the front of a populist movement.

            Here’s what is probably shaping my pov. I’m an immigrant from a 3rd world country that did in fact manage to get a 22yr crony capitalist dictator to step down peacefully. WHat did it in the end was a a very broad opposition alliance. Religious (priests & nuns) rallying with communists and workers and even army sympathizers. Led by a woman. I can’t even imagine that ever happening here but maybe it doesn’t have to.

            Maybe if enough people decide that the corporate corruption of government is a big enough evil that they can for the moment put aside the wedge issues that keep them apart, maybe that would be enough to restore the democratic process.

          • Count me on the side of glad the clown is staying.
            I like the irreverence and the snarkfest posts.

            Life is boring enough, so something that slaps me upside the head is a good thing.

        • Yes, it is a shame. She will be missed.
          OTOH, I wouldn’t poke the clown if I were you. It displeaseth me greatly.

          • Wow.

            I recognize bullying when it happens to me.

            All right, great and powerful excellency, I shall refrain from saying anything that might displease you or your clown.

          • I wish her well, too, RD. I’m glad Myiq is still here. I think each front-pager gets to “manage” their own threads, differently than others, without BULLYING from other fp-gers who approach topics from a different point of view.

            At the risk of enraging you, I will say once—and never say again—-that many of us who are Christian, but never bullied any atheists on the board—-felt quite bullied by the anti-Christian threads.

            I am also against bullying, as are we all.

            I’m done , on that topic. But it needed to be said.

            Peace to all.

          • So now resisting the pressure to get rid of someone, and saying everyone can have their opinions here, is taking sides and bullying? Odd definition.

          • Oh, heck, Mary, there have been tons of threads on TC where I disagreed with the majority opinion. Or found some comments offensive. Some of the religion threads were of that sort.

            big effing deal. People have radically different views from myself on a topic or two. And? So? I can either go into that thread and argue my point of view (knowing I’m likely outnumbered, and being okay with that reality), or I can choose to skip it. But I certainly am not going to decide that people that sometimes (not always) make me uncomfortable need to go.

          • To those of you who are running for the smelling salts over perceived bullying, I would highly recommend you read the book, “Queen Bees and Wannabes: Helping your daughter survive cliques, gossip, boyfriends and other realities of adolescent behavior” by Rosalind Wiseman.

            If you are currently the parent of a teenage daughter, you tend to spot cliquish behavior and mobbing of targets much quicker than many other people. It’s funny how some bullies have a tendency to project and use passive aggressive behavior to make themselves look like victims while they are secretly stabbing you in the back with gossip and manipulation of people they think are weaker than they are. Some people have no idea that they’ve Bern recruited by a queen bee to gang up on her targets. They are completely duped. Fascinating.

            I would never do stuff like that. I highly recommend people read up on the malicious behavior of girls. Very revealing. I mean, if you’re seriously interested in the subject of bullying.

          • Oh, I agree, WMCB, re threads that offend me—just move on, let those who agree with the bullying engage how they want.

            That’s not the point, really.

            For all of her concerns about bullying—-Muslims, gays, women, yada , yada—and complaining that some fp’gers were engaging in same, she couldn’t see her own bullying.

            That’s all I meant—you and I just calmly stayed out of those threads—no big deal. I don’t impose private religious beliefs on anyone; neither do you. Nor do we ridicule. That’s cool.

            I don’t want to fight. I wish her well, really.

            But “bullying” comes in all shapes, sizes, and colors, depending on whose eyeballs you’re looking out of. Some envelopes are large, and some are not. LIve and let live, which I think makes me QUITE liberal.

            I’m done. Too touchy. Go with God, all.

          • I don’t think disagreeing is the same thing as bullying. Furthermore, I respect that the collective people who put the work in on the site creating and posting articles have the last say on content and determining where the invisible line between disagreement and non productive discourse is.

            I’m going to have to remember to visit Skydancing. Dak is an incredible voice and I’m sure she will be missed here. It’s great that we’ll still be able to read her on the site she has.

          • Yes, cwaltz, she’ll still be able to be read at skydancing, and I plan to go read her. I have no ill will toward DK at all, quite the contrary. I love the vast majority of her posts!

            *shrug* I don’t require that every person/blog that I associate with like every other person/blog that I associate with. Not the way I roll.

          • Disagreeing, even disagreeing vigorously, is not the same as bullying.

            I didn’t care for Dakinikat’s lumping all people of faith into the wacko fundamentalist column,and I said so. I felt perfectly capable of defending my point of view. Dkat was also capable of defending hers. That’s what makes an informative exchange. It’s not bullying.

            If you want to see what real bulllying on this subject really looks like, have a look at the Religion/Theology forum at DU. There you have a little gang of people, each of whom plays out his (mostly his; occasionally her) little script and generally prevents any discussion of religious issues from a religious point of view. Dkat’s presentation was nothing like that. Not at all.

          • cwaltz and WMCB are right. Disagreement is not bullying. There is always a good chance that an atheist’s argument will offend a religious person. That doesn’t mean that opposing ideas must be silenced.

            May chaos be kind to you.

          • {{snort}}. My comment must have come from left field. What the fuck is RD talking about?? What does girl culture have to do with bullying on TC?
            what indeed?

          • I’ve been here through several of these tempests, and I am grateful for RD’s clarity and strength re: her own p.o.v. People tend to forget: this her HER blog. It’s ours to share, yes I know, but it is her creation and she has a right to make a call about the conversation here. As we’ve been reminded: it’s a big internet out there–create your own blog if you want.

            I’m sorry to see Dak go. She gave us so much of her effort and knowledge, and she will be missed. I wish her all the best.

            As for the clown…don’t even think about leaving us without your rather ‘unique’ view of the world. Where would we be without brilliant absurdism?

          • To the extent that this is my blog, my role is relegated to playing the heavy. I prefer to think of it as a group blog and no one personality should dominate. We all have unique perspectives but share the same values. I valued the input of all frontpagers past and present.

          • Your policy of if an FPer disagrees with a post, they can write their own post rebutting it, seems quite sensible to me.

            I remember you mentioning the Queen Bees book before; I really should read it. Got 2 girls of my own (yikes).

          • I agree with Okasha and cwaltz – disagreeing, even vigorously, is not bullying.
            Not to minimize the effects of gossip and backstabbing, which are considerable, but for all the talk of “mean girls”, boys are still more likely to be bullies.
            I remember feeling as if girls were being ganged up on by adults after reading some news articles following school shootings. After the Columbine shootings, a long front page article in my local paper quoted adults alleging that girls were “just as bad.” Searching for the evidence of this, I finally found it deep in the interior of the article’s continuation on another page – it seemed that girls were responsible for about 10% of school violence! Well, whoop-de-doo! If I’m not mistaken, that still leaves boys responsible for the other 90%.

          • I too am glad the clown is still here…

        • Sorry Dak left. Happy Myiq is still there. I wish both were….

      • i am sorry dakinikat resigned. i do think she called attention to a change in tone in the comments. i noticed it in in the flyover thread, in particular the response to fachero voicing a dif of opinion about people voting against their interests . i felt like his opinion was not tolerated and there was kind of a gang-up on him/her. it made me thankful that i only lurk here, because i would not be able to defend myself against that. but think about it, people who come to the confluence every day feel that their comments may be unwelcome. i guess it feels exclusive.

        • Some of that mjr is because we are a bit of a PTSD community. We came here because we were relentlessly battered elsewhere, and many of the stalkers like(d) to follow and continue their irrational abuse. Sometimes, if someone is unfamiliar and swoops in with a comment that has a certain tone, there is suspicion about their motives, and it can get reactive. If something feels uncomfortable, we’re all free to take a break and come back. That’s what I do. As RD said, I think there’s a lot of projection that goes on and then complaints of victimization.

          That’s why we need a clown around–comic relief. We’d all go mad if we continued to witness our political climate without humor.

        • I agree, fif. Also, throw in that it’s election season, all the choices suck, and we are all watching our former (for some of us) party implode just as we predicted. So you get both excessively bitter recriminations and last-minute panicked attempts to find some good in them, butting heads in the threads.

          There’s a lot of emotion right now. And most of it is understandable, because we all love our country. And all the various strategies for taking it back are longshots fraught with peril – whether it be burning it down or trying to preserve some good.

          Deep breaths.

        • I am sorry she resigned too. And if that flyover thread had anything to do with it…I am sorry about that also. If someone feels that this blog is exclusive and are scared to jump in.

          Well, with all due respect, I have yet to see a blog or messageboard that didn’t have a baptism by fire. You have to stick it out and stated your case, especially if you are being misunderstood and like the blog.

          However, my complaint was someone claiming that voting/being against unions is means they’ve plucked their own economic fairy wings is a generalization. Much all Hillary Democrats couldn’t vote for a black man and/or are low information, and sorry losers. It is a false construct that doesn’t take into account not all unions/Dems are the same.

          It is also part of the same Democratic party line that insults people who dare not vote for them. Which we are seeing all over the place. Sen Kerry just came out with another version of today.

          But truly, how can someone who doesn’t live in that environment know what is best for someone who does? Who am I or that poster to insult someone’s religious beliefs if that is what inspires their voting as stupid? That is a bit offensive to me and I’m not religious. I will stand up for others to believe what they want, even if I disagree.

          The internet sucks sometimes as a communication device with all the context clues that facial expressions and tone of voice offer to a conversation missing. So sticking it out is the only option.

          I hope you stick it out and don’t feel scared to post more.

          Personally, the mosque debate got a little heated for me and was hard to watch too. So I understand the sentiment and the feeling of reading between your fingers like it is a scary movie or something.

          Hope you stick it out.

      • I’ll miss her. She is brilliant.

  2. The Fold It site reminds me of this site I stumbled on
    where people can try to solve problems and if their solution is picked they get a prize.

    On the one hand a great way to harness the internet; on the other hand a way for companies to have people working for them for free. (Think of it — if your solution doesn’t get picked, you essentially gave away free research/thinking time).

    At least the Fold it site appears to provide entertainment value…

    • OTOH, if The companies were getting their research for free, I’d be out if a job and would never recommend the site to you.
      MAYBE the site creators were trying to find a better way to help researchers use computational tools to solve complex biological problems and you have an opportunity to participate in that study by playing the game.
      Or not. Some people are motivated by curiosity. The conspiracy theory really doesn’t apply in this example.
      If course, if you don’t think you can do it ..,

      • No, I was talking more about the innocentive site which it reminded me of. Where basically they are asking for people to solve problems for companies. Which before the internet these companies would hire people for this. They have categories of problems, and in one category (theoretical) they specify that you will have to transfer or license your IP rights to the “seeker” company.

        Having people play games to hopefully help solve real world problems is like capturing the energy created when people walk and storing it in batteries — they are going to walk anyway, might as well put that energy to good use.

      • I reread my first comment — I am not discouraging anyone from playing FoldIt. Sorry if it came across that way.

        I was thinking about the trend of companies using the internet to access what is basically cheaper and sometimes free labor.

        • We have that where I work, employee involvement. When I’m asked to participate my reply is,”Are you going to pay me applicable union scale for the job or allow me to bill the company at the same rate consultants get?”

          • All your hours are belong to us.

          • When they have functions out side of my scheduled work time and ask if I plan to attend my reply is the same,” If I’m on the clock, I’ll be here”.

  3. Let’s kick some tertiary structure ass!!!

    I don’t speak geek

  4. Cool site re: the puzzles! I’ll have to show that to hubby. He’s the big science geek in the family.

    One of the many Retropolis teeshirts he wears:


  5. My therapist:

  6. So you actually think David Brooks is better than Krauthammer? First I heard. I think Brooks is too shallow, both in content and style. His prose is realy bad and he has no sense of humor. Kraut on the other hand can turn a phrase and can be piercingly funny. Come to think of it, none of the current NYT columnists have any writing skills imho.

    • Honk!

    • Yeah, unfortunately, I DO think Brooks is better precisely because he seems so sober. But more than than, Krauthammer doesn’t hide his contempt and disdain. He’s a bit of a buffoon.
      Brooks had a very specific job to do and he does it deftly. His job is to make you feel despair if you are not one of the well connected or uber rich. Every sentence us carefully crafted to make you feel helpless and powerless against the forces that obstruct you from achieving a stable middle class lifestyle with a secure safety net. His whole message is, “Give Up. We will crush you”. It is designed to reinforce learned helplessness and despair.
      I’ll deconstruct one of his columns someday and you’ll see what I mean. He’s all honey voiced and sounds so reasonable. But he’s as deadly as Saruman.

  7. I don’t think the socialists are the ones calling Obama a socialist. It’s the Tea Party movement that has pretty much insisted that anything and everything he has done with the exception of war is socialism. Bank bailouts- socialism(even though banks profitted from the bailout-certainly not average Americans). Health Care reform-socialism (nevermind that private entities will be guaranteed a profit and no government option was created). Socialism, Socialism, Socialism! Someone needs to explain to the masses and their leadership what socialism actually is. If we nationalized the banks or if we abolished private health care and created a national system like the Veterans Admin then you could call it socialism. Unfortunately far too many Americans don’t seem to know what socialism is.

    • I was talking to a an active GOP mom at school who was talking about obama’s socialism last year. And she described it basically as authoritarianism/totalitarianism and the handy example being the ex- USSR.

      I tried to explain about how we both see the same problem, but it is actually because of the unholy merging of big business with the government. As I am not a very good talker, I don’t know if I got through (probably not).

      • I live in a red area so yeah I’ve had to explain socialism and fascism more times than I can count. I slowly explain that in socialism people own all the resources rather than a collective few. If we nationalized oil, the banks and health care then we’d be socialist. As it stands private enitites have access to public resources and get to profit off it, not anywhere near the same thing as socialism- it’s fascism.

        • I’ve had more luck talking with swing/conservative voters when I avoid labels and just talk about The State/Big Business getting in bed together and screwing us all.

          There are two heads to this hydra, and frankly, the right tries to lop off one while the left tries to lop off the other. Both can go overboard with their lopping (i.e. demonizing all business as bad, or all govt as bad.) I will never agree with these people on a lot of issues, but having both the honest right and the honest left go after the two halves of oppression would be a good thing, IMO.

          You can actually make headway with a lot of (not all) TP-ers, if you don’t get hung up on labels or get offended at buzzwords, and instead talk about OUR LIVES.

          • Those are good guidelines. Thats’ what I tend to do..I talk about how I can’t stand the crooks, the corruption, the lies.

          • It’s funny because when you stick to your principles and argue vehemently with a conservative, quite often, the very least you get is respect that you actually have and believe in principles.

            I have a friend who is conservative. We agree on very little, yet we still respect each other. Both of us can acknowledge the other cares for his/her country and progeny.

            It’s weird because policy is also alot about perspective. He considers me uber-liberal. However, from a liberal mentality I tend to be slightly left of center, it’s only because his viewpoint is to the right quite a bit that I actually seem uber liberal.

        • exactly–Cwaltz. Socialism and fascism are opposites. Fascism is a form of Totalitarianism and Communism is the extreme form of Socialism. Sorry, I used to teach this stuff.

          • Communism is totalitarianism also. I judge by results, not pretty words. And Mao and Stalin killed more than Hitler ever did. And Che was a murdering bastard.

    • The conservative radio talk show hate spewers use whatever label that will get the biggest reaction out of their audience. The term Socialist works so Obama is a Socialist.
      Well, laundry to fold, see ya.

      • That’s the thing most people are talking about the liberal bullies. Well, I honstly believe these liberal bullies are a result of conservatives. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction so to speak. You can’t push people around and disparage their thought processes forever and not expect to have pushback occur. If you continually cut off their mikes then eventually they will find their own microphone and when they do don’t expect their discourse to be pretty.

        Just as I understand that some of the tea partiers anger is justified, I can equally see how people who have had characterization after characterization heaped upon them would have a right to speak out back.

        I see the Obots and Tea Partiers as both screaming extremists.

        TPer: Socialist!
        Progressive: Idiot!
        TPer: Godless amoral heathen!
        Progressive: Xenophobic racist
        TPer and Progressive: You hate America!

  8. And now a word from actual socialists

    The 2010 elections, the working class and the Democratic Party


    …….According to a report in the Wall Street Journal Thursday, liberal Democratic Senator Russell Feingold is working with ultra-right Republican Tom Coburn “on new legislation to trim billions in federal subsidies and other spending programs,” and there were potential agreements on trade policy and renewing the No Child Left Behind Law, which has devastated public education. The Financial Times reported that Obama told business lobbyists he is open to a cut in the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 24 percent provided it is offset by closing “loopholes,” noting that the “reform” is similar to one brokered by Republican President Ronald Reagan in 1986….

    • Oh goody!

      Those tax cuts should be uber helpful to the companies who are already presently hoarding billions.


      • Seems like increasing business taxes on money sitting around might encourage spending it. What do I know?

        • He’s such a crony capitalist.

          • Yup. When you have a govt that enforces the laws, has sane regulation to prevent monopolistic behavior and fraud and book-cooking, etc, then real competition thrives.

            Regulation which picks and chooses which politically well-connected firms will be allowed monopolistic behavior and abuses, to the detriment of other firms, is NOT competition. It is a further entrenchment of the corp/govt power axis, and a winnowing down of uncooperative players.

            This is why I don’t knee-jerk shout “YAY!” when Dems propose or pass “regulation”. It depends on what it is. What, exactly, does the “regulation” do? “Regulation is good” is just as simplistic a view as “Regulation is bad”. I don’t trust the fuckers.

          • Successful capitalists are the enemy of free markets. Once they succeed the start using their wealth to turn free markets into monopolies.

          • Yup, myiq. Which is why I wonder why no one has pulled out and dusted off our good-old anti-trust laws and applied them in, like, FOREVER.

            Competition can’t occur in the presence of monopolies. Would we have had the advances in phone technology and eventually cell-phone technology if we’d never broken up ATT?

            Sometimes I think we should say screw Big Finance experience, and let’s get a couple of NFL coaches in there to run the regulatory agencies. They understand the basic concept of “you can’t have a competitive game if two people hog the ball and have 6 more players on the field than anyone else.”

            I jest, but you get the point.

          • And once they become big ol monopolies the become the too big too fail corporations that we end up having to pour money from the public coffers into them to ensure their viability.

            The deck is definitely stacked against the little guy.

      • Even the liberals on MSNBC admit that “too big to fail” IS government policy now.

        Irony lives, eh?

        • Why is that ironic?

          I’m sure GE is quite happy that they will never have to worry about being allowed to fail because they employ too many people and take up too large of a percentage of the GDP.

          What I find ironic is the conservatives who insist we must have a free market and keep whining how regulation will mean that we can not create jobs. Lack of regulation enforcement and deregulation is what set us upon this path to begin with.

          • I think she meant that it was ironic for the liberals on air to think so, not for GE itself to think so.

            And a lot of GE’s safety is not just in being to big a percentage of GDP, but in being cozy enough with the govt that they get the sweet deals.

            “Too big” is only part of the story. Lehman Bros was allowed to fail, Bear Stearns wasn’t. That was about political connections, not market share.

          • Yes, of course. I thought my point was obvious: A liberal president , supported by a liberal Congress, praised by a liberal cable channel……passes a new “Financial RegulationsBill” that essentially makes corporate welfare PERMANENT.

            Now THAT’s irony.

            (Original point made by Dylan Ratigan on MSNBC)

          • Not to mention that same liberal government creating a “Healthcare Reform Bill” that makes PERMANENT the transfer of tax dollars to corporate insurance and pharmaceutical companies, while allowing huge rate increases for the “little people” they purport to support.

            Like I said, Irony Lives!

          • Oh….and the fact that under this liberal administration & Congress, women were Stupak’d , and that was endorsed by the liberal Speaker of the House and the liberal President.

            Tea Partiers and Catholic Church didn’t do that.

            That corporate-welfare-giving liberal Congress did. Done deal, for the deal. Woo-hooo!!

  9. I want to say one thing on the Dak post and then I’m done. Reading that post upset me tremendously. It troubled me for days. I had no idea what the hell she was talking about. Was it myiq? Was it WMCB? Did someone assault her verbally? Was she threatened? Abused? Or were her sensibilities merely offended?

    A lifetime ago I worked as a public defender in the NYC criminal injustice system. After that I spent many years as a civil litigator. Dak’s complaint, such as it was, would have been thrown out of court as either constitutionally void for vagueness (criminal) or for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted (civil).

    Some of you understood what she was referring to, but those of you who did understand what she was saying would not be able to judge the facts as jurors because you are already familiar with the case and have ties to the complainant. Others of us were completely in the dark.

    Dak needed to name names and specify words or actions. Not simply offer conclusory statements.

    I was called a racist by Obama and his minions – something I will never forget or forgive – so before you call someone a defender of racists, you better show me how those being defended are racists. Each person – not a group of people. Each individual person.

    Now, maybe some of you will think Dak just wanted to express her feelings and clear the air. But attacking someone (and, IMO, she was attacking) without affording that person the opportunity to respond strikes me as McCarthyesque. And does the opposite of clearing the air. It leaves a stench.

    Quite frankly, I’m not particularly interested in Dak’s feelings. I’m interested in facts. I think she should not have written the post (and I liked her other posts, generally). She should have just left. It was like she had to lob in a hand grenade as she was walking out the door. (I know I’m mixing metaphors.)

    I see nothing seriously wrong – or any split – on this blog. There are several strong voices – RD, bostonboomer, WMCB, Dandy Tiger, cwaltz, votermom, mablue2, myiq, lots of others (sorry to anyone I forgot; I am, as an old fogy, still stressed) – I don’t always agree, and they don’t always agree with each other, but I see no disharmony of substantial proportions. This place is a refuge for me and I hope it continues to be so. I see us all (well, except for the occasional interloper-troll) as on the same team.

    There. I’m done.

    • I think you have two different perspectives. Neither one is completely right or wrong since they are both theoretical at this point(we have no way of knowing whether appealing to within the tea party will work or not). They both come from a good place even if they see different emerging strategies. As different strategies emerge it makes sense that people might see it better to part ways amenably.

      I think it’s clear dak bears myiq no ill will. Likewise I think the clown cares for dak. They both just have different viewpoints that required different avenues of pursuit. It happens sometimes.

      • No, I think the old foggy nailed it. Very perceptive. The mixed metaphor was very apt.

        • I don’t know everything that went on because I know that there is dialogue that occurs behind the scenes.

          That being said I understand where dak was coming from and I don’t think her intent was to attack a person as much as a strategy. What I got out of her post was that she finds the Tea Party movement destructive to liberal values and would rather spend the bandwidth addressing issues and discussing policy and how to improve it. She dislikes advancing an agenda or protecting the values of people who are diametrically opposed to liberal values. She thinks the Tea Party itself is dangerous because anger can be utilized to launch people who are destructive. Additionally she thought it was unfair to attack progressives on their mischaracterizations of tea partiers without addressing the mischaracterizations that the tea party itself is responsible for.

          In her thread she was quite clear that she was not attacking myiq or anyone in particular but rather a series of events that she saw unfolding and I have not known her to be dishonest so my conclusion can only be that she sees herself going in a different direction then she perceives this blog to be going. Anyway that was how I read her post. As I have said though I’m not privvy to behind the scenes discussions.

          • With all respect (and I mean that), I think you make my case for me. A “series of events” does not occur in a vacuum. People are usually involved (unless one is talking about an Act of God, which doesn’t apply here). So, Dak may have been saying what you think, but she was also condemning, sub silentio, specific people for specific acts or specific statements. And I believe her post appeared right after the Rand Paul post, so I think it is a reasonable inference that she was responding to that post, although she chose not to say whether that was the case or not.

            In addition, you are vouching for Dak. I don’t mind that at all (and you may very well be right about her as a person), except it means you are not impartial about this particular post. I am looking at her words as a lawyer and as a writer – with no vested interest, really, only concern and dismay about what I took as an attack on somebody (unnamed) for something (unspecified). That, to me, is fundamentally unfair. And an equally valid (IMO) conclusion would be she left this site in a self-righteous huff because she didn’t get her way.

            As for anger, again in my opinion, anger can be channeled to very good ends. It certainly saved my life and gave me the skills necessary to help many others who were unable to fight for themselves. Injustice always makes me angry and want to take action. I’ll feel that way when I’m stuck in a nursing home – which is, unfortunately, nearer than I’d like.

            No, I see the post as destructive and petty. And fundamentally unfair. Terribly unfair. Something very un-liberal about it. Sometimes otherwise well-meaning and decent people make mistakes. Her post, to me, was such a mistake.

          • I agree that series of events do not occur in a vacuum. What I tend to disagree with is that this is about is one person(or persons for that matter) being set upon by another.

            There was a fundamental disagreement about the tone and content of the site. Dak tried to lay out her case as to why she disagreed with what she saw without apportioning blame. It wasn’t unliberal, unliberal would have been screaming “you’re all a bunch of liberal haters or some such blather.” As for condemning people she didn’t do that, she condemned actions. There is a one sidedness to picking on liberals for calling tea partiers dumb while ignoring the fact that tea partiers have no problem calling others names or picking on subsets of people like the gay community or muslims. If you are going to defend Palin on sexism it isn’t wrong to equally discuss her boneheadedness on an issue like health care equally in depth.

            As for me not being impartial, on the contrary, I don’t see myself as choosing a side because I am choosing to defend dak’s post anymore then you would be partial for choosing to condemn it. It’s my opinion. People are entitled to their opinions.

            As I see the facts laid out she made it clear in her post that this was not specifically about one event so it is factually inaccurate to say that she did not make it clear that this was not about Rand Paul. She also made it clear that this was not specifically about Myiq but rather about about the tone that she had seen expressed in comments as well as posts themselves. She talked about the tone in regards to unions and the CoC as an example. She talked about issues like continually front paging Sarah Palin or Christine O Donnell when there are issues like unemployment or Social Security that really need addressing. She also talked about the fact that there are sites out there of a liberal persuasion discussing things like those issues in depth that aren’t being linked to on policy issues rather than just being poked at when they discuss Palin. These are all things laid out in the comment of her post.

            The Tea Party leadership(and let’s make it clear since they are running candidates that there is a leadership and backing) is advocating demolishing Social Security. They are on the record as believing a government run plan would be akin to making the USSR and health care as it stands is hunky dory except for the horrendous lawsuits. Their founder yesterday made the statement that Ellison being Muslim should be grounds for him to be considered unqualified to run for office. THAT is what anger is going to push people towards. Do you honestly see the idea of decimating a safety net as productive in terms of anger relief? I certainly don’t. Do you honestly believe the answer health care woes is to make physicians less accountable when something tragic happens? I don’t and I don’t think it begins to cover problems like million dollar caps or denying people coverage. Do you honestly see condemning someone’s faith as a productive action? Again, that’s not how I want to see my country go forward. Let’s make it clear though since the Tea Partiers have candidates in these races that IS how things will go forward by continually coddling the Tea Party members and insisting that ALL of these people are just sadly misinformed and we can educate them all one at a time before any real damage is done.

            Anyways, I hope this also comes off as respectful since I have said that I realize you have a different perspective and we all are entitled to our perspectives.

          • Wow! Mjames, I want you as my lawyer.

          • “Do you honestly see condeming someone’s faith as a productive action?”

            No, I don’t. See posts above re anti-Christian threads.

          • RD, and mjames, I agree. Oftentimes vague hints of the unsavory are a worse breed of stinkbomb-throwing than outright accusation.

          • People here condemned the ACTIONS of varying belief sets. Their condemnation didn’t exist in a vacuum. If many Christians would adopt a live and let live mentality rather than attempting to inflict their belief sets on others through policy then I feel fairly confident that their would be more tolerance on both ends.

            As it stands there are many of faith that feel that they have the right to tell others how to live their lives and for that I completely understood where the frustration is born from.

            Faith is a difficult thing because how belief sets are adopted is not something completely understood. I believe in God? Why? Is it culture? If so why does someone else raised in the church grow up to reject that particular belief set as my husband did? The more you dig the more questions it creates.

            Anyway let me know when the Muslims in Congress actually are trying to pass Sharia law as it stands right now the Catholic church is standing in the way of birth control coverage for low income women.

            That’s my two cents on that issue.

          • Sometimes people are vague because they are trying to be diplomatic. They aren’t interested in singling anyone out. They are attempting to handle things in a way so that something doesn’t become a flame war with people picking and choosing sides.

            I saw her thread as an attempt to address tone and content. Not as some sort of thread where she was picking on a person or people.

          • Well said, cwaltz. Wow, I didn’t know TC was a court of law. As to Dak’s post appearing after the Rand Paul post – well, post hoc ergo propter hoc. Logical fallacy. She did say the RP post was just the last straw.

          • “Anyway let me know when the Muslims in Congress actually are trying to pass Sharia law as it stands right now the Catholic church is standing in the way of birth control coverage for low income women.

            “That’s my two cents on that issue.”

            And that shot goes straight into the gold. I think it was RD, or maybe it was Dak, who observed that their policy essentially turns every American woman into an involuntary Catholic.

          • cwaltz: Or maybe they’re only vague to the general audience but the message is crystal clear to the intended target(s).
            In this case, Dakinikat was extremely specific and her message was unambiguous.

          • Wow, mjames thank you for explaining some of the things I was feeling after reading Dak’s post. I have loved her posts and have come here specifically to read her economic insights and, in the past, for her comments on the Gulf oil tragedy. You lay the whole thing out very well and I finally understand why I felt so uneasy after reading that post. Thank you again.

        • Very perceptive, indeed, RD.

          BTW, most of us didn’t mean to ignore your Queen Bee allusion—we got it.

          Just didn’t wanna go there or get stalked.

          But we got it. 🙂

    • And done very well. Thank you. 🙂

    • This means I’m going to have to post more doesn’t it. Yes, it’s all about me. 🙂

    • I’m a strong voice! yay! 🙂

      I really don’t know what the post was about except for the Rand Paul bit. Maybe it’s because I’m not around at night or on weekends — what crazy wild parties are going on here when I’m away?

    • “I don’t always agree, and they don’t always agree with each other, but I see no disharmony of substantial proportions. This place is a refuge for me and I hope it continues to be so. I see us all (well, except for the occasional interloper-troll) as on the same team.”

      Yup, it is a refuge for me as well. And I will never be able to get over the fact that my party, the Dems, screwed me big time over Hillary. They f@cked with the one thing that was mine to give, my vote. I can’t get over it. Am I bitter? You bet your ass I am!

    • To be honest, I didn’t have any idea what she was upset about in her post.

      I did comment and I hope she is finding peace. She did some great work here.

    • Well said.

  10. well I plan on being here tomorrow just like yesterday and all the days before.hugs all.love the Confluence. :mrgreen:

  11. Roubini gives O too much credit (blaming the GOP for stopping what needed to be done, when O didn’t need their help), and keeps pushing entitlement reform.

    A presidency heading for a fiscal train wreck
    By Nouriel Roubini

    The result will soon be the worst of all worlds: neither short-term stimulus nor medium-term fiscal sustainability. Fiscally the only light at the end of the tunnel may be that which causes the upcoming crisis. With two years of gridlock in prospect, it will fall to the next president in 2013 – whoever he or she may be – to start fixing America’s fiscal mess. Whether that is Mr Obama or not, that he may leave this challenge may become the worst of his legacy.


  12. I guess there was a salacious piece posted about O’Donnell, and they invoke HRC and 2+ years later, NOW decides to defend a woman re: sexist attacks. Better late than never?

    Christine O’Donnell camp rips Gawker ‘slander’

    Christine O’Donnell’s campaign late Thursday night responded to an anonymous Gawker post claiming a drunken encounter with Delaware’s Republican Senate nominee, calling it “sexism and slander.”

    “This story is just another example of the sexism and slander that female candidates are forced to deal with — from Secretary [Hillary] Clinton to Gov. [Sarah] Palin to soon-to-be Gov. [Nikki] Haley. Christine’s political opponents have been willing to engage in appalling and baseless attacks — all with the aim of distracting the press from covering the real issues in this race,” O’Donnell Communications Director Doug Sachtleben wrote in a post on Facebook.

    “NOW repudiates Gawker’s decision to run this piece,” the organization said in a statement. “It operates as public sexual harassment. And like all sexual harassment, it targets not only O’Donnell but all women contemplating stepping into the public sphere.”


    • I’m glad that they are finally getting on board. You can disagree with a person on issues and still defend them from slander and sexist comments.

    • I guess there was a salacious piece posted about O’Donnell, and they invoke HRC and 2+ years later, NOW decides to defend a woman re: sexist attacks

      NOW is under new leadership and it was primarily due to the work of the Hillary supporters that went in and took over (myiq2Xu did a post about it
      https://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2009/06/21/terry-oneill-elected-now-president/ ). The younger group at the time were complaining, but I for one think the NOW NEW Leadership under NOW President Terry O’Neil is AWESOME! Terry O’Neil was the only womn’s org to take on President Obama’s Executive Stupak Order and took heat for it too.

      So, lets give credit to the Hillary Supporters that went in and voted for Terry O’Neil who said she would press on, on Women’s Rights and women’s issue PERIOD.
      Go Terry GO!

      • I commend her for this. I hope though that she goes on offense for the Fair Pay bill and that she can at least next go round target Stupak’s torchbearer and the Catholic church’s attack on birth control.

        There’s alot of work ahead since we seem to be slipping backwards as a demographic. However, this was a good first step.

  13. I wish Dak the best…………She’s shown her dedication to the feminist cause, and I know she continues in that effort.

  14. Vote for Strickland. I think we need good people at the state level. The D at the state level will be ready to take over when the GOP messes things up in Washington.

    • ITA. Plus, a governor can have a really big impact locally, so I think that’s one vote you really have to pick what’s going to be best for your own interests.

    • I wouldn’t vote for Strickland again on a dare. I won’t be voting for any other candidate just because of the party they belong to, either. He’s a nice guy personally but in over his head since the beginning of his term.

  15. A majority of active-duty and reserve service members surveyed by the Defense Department would not object to serving and living alongside openly gay troops, according to multiple people familiar with the findings.

    Interesting. This part in particular struck me:

    In July, the Pentagon sent a survey with dozens of questions to 400,000 active-duty and reserve troops. It asked whether they had ever shared a room or the showers with gay peers, and how they might act if a gay service member lived with a same-sex partner on base.

    Military officials did not say how many troops completed the survey, but at least 103,000 had done so just days before it was due, according to the Pentagon. A similar survey was later sent to military spouses.

    The reason why that last part is interesting to me is that only around one fourth even had a strong enough opinion to fill out the survey.

    Which says to me that a minority out of 1/4 the total are opposed to repeal, the majority out of 1/4 the total are in favor of repeal, and the biggest chunk don’t have strong feelings one way or another and could care less. I’d read that as pretty much: “If it happens, great, if it doesn’t, who cares.” So we are holding this up because less than 1/8 the total have issues with it? They can get over it.


    • The housing question is interesting, I don’t know the first thing about on-base housing for families… does anyone know how it works?

      • I wouldn’t imagine the base housing issue is most of the issue since they are single dwelling abodes for the most part. The bigger issue would be berthing. Enlisted share quarters. You have two to three people to a room. It could be awkward since hooking up frequently occurs in berthing(even though most dorms say that visitors are supposed to be out by 10 it isn’t like room checks are conducted. Additionally, it might be difficult if one person ends up with an attraction that isn’t reciprocated. I could see the government having to change rooming assignments.

        For the record, I roomed with a gay person. She was a nice person. I felt horrible when she cried as she told me. It was terrible that a person should feel shame for who they are and who they’re attracted to.

        Anyways my favorite part was the people threatening to quit the military. Who knew that you had the ability to quit a contract once you enter into it? Bahahahahaha
        Anyways, intolerance shouldn’t be accepted and if someone feels that strongly that they can’t tolerate someone else’s sexuality, race or religion then perhaps it is best if they leave government service.

  16. Freepers officially took over DU, silence old timers – in this edition of the DUdies

  17. This post is spot on.

  18. For anyone interested, Hillaryis44 has an excellent timeline and breakdown up of all that went on with the Meek dropping out story. Bill’s no dummy.


  19. The former president of Argentina Nestor Kirchner has died at age 60. A left wing Peronist, Kirchner opposed the international banksters who drove his country into economic depression and he led a recovery that had the country’s creditors take a backseat to the interests of the people. Kirchner was a friend of organized labor and the common everyday people of his country. South America is in mourning and we should be, too. A great democrat has passed. Condolences to his widow, the current President Christina Fernandez de Kirchner, and to the family and to the people of Argentina.

  20. Conservative-women-are-still-women sexism watch part 3,465:

    From Joe Klein today, taking a cheap shot at teh vaginas while rightfully excoriating the execrable Karl Rove:

    I can’t say that I disagree with Rove’s criticism of Sarah Palin and the other assorted Teasies

    Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/10/28/rove-explained/#ixzz13mIo0iAp

    Teasies?? Teasies??? Fuck you, Klein. Does the fact that inside the loony bin of your head she is “teasing” you mean she’s asking for it? Is that the dog whistle now? Want to “hate fuck” her, Joe? Is that it? Fuck you yet again, Joe Klein.


  21. The lack of courage of these frat-boy bloggers is staggering. Klein so wants to be in the ‘cool crowd’ of journalists that he regularly prostitutes himself. What I wouldn’t give to see someone with a microphone call them out for their sexism.

    OT–this morning, I heard Savannah Guthrie on whatever that show is after ‘Morning Joe’ say that she’d like to know who started the ‘Bill is racist’ again stuff. Well, so would I–although, I could make a good guess.

  22. This is taken from the Hillary Is 44 post about the Meeks race in Florida. In the comments, someone posts Bill Clinton’s press release about it:

    ” “Kendrick Meek is my close friend. I have supported his campaign from the beginning, though our relationship extends far beyond politics. We did talk last week following a rally in Orlando about the race and it’s challenges. I didn’t ask Kendrick to leave the race, nor did Kendrick say that he would. I told him that how he proceeds was his decision to make and that I would support him regardless.

    Over the years, I have watched Kendrick become an able, effective public servant with the strength to fight for what he believes and the common sense to work with people of different parties and points of view. I still believe he could be the best Senator to help Florida and America emerge from the current crisis and build a growing middle class economy.” ”

    Obama really doesn’t want Rubio to win, but apparently he is now leading in the polls.

    Fasten your seat belts, Tuesday night is going to be fascinating.

  23. Could it be ‘the wonder child?’ ‘He who must be loved more than anyother?’ “the petty, insecure one?’ Obviously, I still have alot of anger for that crew.

  24. Shades of Bush 2004 right before the election, we’re having some terrorists activity. There’s a press conference going on right now.

    • Oh dear.

    • But not to worry, Obama is still campaigning and will be in my town in about two hours, campaigning for my districts anti abortion new Dem candidate. You’ve got to have priorities of course.

      • The timing is strangely close to the election. The target is Chicago. I find it all weird. Whoever is doing it is trying to manipulate the voters, but I can’t see in which direction.

    • It appears to be genuine activity as well. Bombs on UPS planes from Yemen? Hmmmmm

  25. This could be filed under the “why people who aren’t of faith resent people who are” category.


    Apparently God doesn’t want gays to serve in the military because they’re “sinners”and it would offend the sensibilities of chaplains to have to stop saying such things.

  26. Suspicious packages

    One suspicious package, found in the United Kingdom, contained a “manipulated” toner cartridge and had white powder on it as well as wires and a circuit board, a law enforcement source said.

    A similar package was discovered in Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates, the source said. Sources in the UAE described the package as an explosive device with “sophisticated” wiring. It is believed to be a printer, the sources said. The UAE General Authority of Civil Aviation issued a statement saying the package was to be shipped on a FedEx cargo plane.

    Both packages were bound for the United States, “specifically two places of Jewish worship in Chicago,” Obama said.

    “Initial examination of those packages has determined they do apparently contain explosive material,” he said.

    • “…determined they do apparently contain…”

      Means: We have determined exactly nothing about the contents.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: