Yesterday I managed to stay up to date on replying to comments and returning visits. Doing so today should present no difficulty.
Jig Zone Puzzle:
Today it took me 4:50. To do it, click here. That babe is a real dog. How did you do?
Fantasy Football:
Because it was clear that we will not get enough players, and CBS will not let us publish the league to get players from the general pool, I moved the league to Fox Sports, because they will let us go public. I have sent an email initiation to everyone who was in and two have responded, so far. If you would like to play, sign into Fox Fantasy Football with any MSN ID. The League ID is 1023560. The Password is nogop
Short Takes:
From CNN: A federal appeals court has denied Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer’s request for an expedited hearing on the state’s controversial immigration law. Instead, the case has been scheduled for a hearing during the first week in November.
Love it!
From Right Wing Watch: On September 11, the folks at Dove World Church in Gainesville, Florida (perhaps best known for their "No Homo Mayor" signs a few months back) will be hosting "International Burn A Quran Day."
What hypocrites Republicans are! If a Muslim group were to ban Bibles, every Republican in both the House and the Senate would need an underwear change.
From McClatchy DC: Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson Friday became the first Democrat to oppose Elena Kagan, President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee.
Were I not so dead set against violence, I’d be tempted to imitate Glen Beck.
We have been covering the US Constitution line by line. When Republicans wave their paper props and parrot their vile machinations, we will be prepared to expose the lies. We have finished the main body of the Constitution. Now we continue with the Amendments. You can find the last article on the main body of the Constitution here. It has links to all the others. The text comes from The US Constitution. Previous articles in the Amendment series:
1: After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.
2: The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
3: This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
The Eighteenth Amendment provided for prohibition. It is not controversial in itself, because it has been repealed. However, it is still worthy of discussion because of what it illustrates.
The founding fathers were wise to include the establishment clause in the First Amendment. In spite of it, the religious right have tried to force their piety codes upon people who did not want them throughout our history. The Eighteenth Amendment demonstrates what happens when they are successful in those attempts. The effects were catastrophic. Prohibition brought organized crime out of the seedy ghettos and into the open. Gang bosses became celebrities. Lawless violence became rampant. Enforcement overwhelmed the criminal justice system.
This is relevant today, because government has outlawed drug use, and the war on drugs has brought many of the same problems. There were (and are) social ills associated with both alcohol and drugs, but in both cases, it is their misuse that causes the problems. Many drink, or use, responsibly. The way to deal with social ills is to provide social services. Some people abuse guns, but we don’t ban their responsible use. Some people drive aggressively and cause accidents, but we don’t ban cars.
Republicans argue that we should impose morality, and often use the illegality of murder for support. However good that might sound, there is a big difference. If I murder you, my action interferes with your rights. If I have a beer or smoke a joint, it does not. But Republicans argue that I may violate someone’s rights by my subsequent behavior, like drunk driving. If I do, restrict me as an individual, but not everyone.
For clarity, I neither drink nor use illegal drugs, and neither support nor advise their use. This is not a personal issue for me. The issue is the manner in which Republicans try to impose their will on those whose behavior they dislike.
I can understand differences on issues. I respect that. I can understand differences in beliefs. I respect that too. In political life there is a proper way to resolve such differences. We argue passionately in honest debate. Then voters decide. What I cannot respect is intentionally deceiving voters. Nobody who cannot win on the basis of honest comparison, deserves to be in office. Now I won’t say Democrats never lie, but extreme deception is a Republican art form, because they cannot win honestly.
Two of the emails I [Kos] got today:
You know the honeymoon is over when the comedians start.
The liberals are asking us to give Obama time. We agree . . . and think 25 to life would be appropriate.
–Jay Leno
America needs Obama-care like Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask.
–Jay Leno
Q: Have you heard about McDonald’s’ new Obama Value Meal?
A: Order anything you like and the guy behind you has to pay for it.
–Conan O’Brien
Q: What does Barack Obama call lunch with a convicted felon?
A: A fund raiser.
–Jay Leno
Q: What’s the difference between Obama’s cabinet and a penitentiary?
A: One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers, and threats to society. The other is for housing prisoners.
–David Letterman
Q: If Nancy Pelosi and Obama were on a boat in the middle of the ocean and it started to sink, who would be saved?
A: America!
–Jimmy Fallon
Q: What’s the difference between Obama and his dog, Bo?
A: Bo has papers.
–Jimmy Kimmel
Q: What was the most positive result of the "Cash for Clunkers" program?
A: It took 95% of the Obama bumper stickers off the road.
–David Letterman
All of this is false, of course. None of the comedians on this list said any such things. That hasn’t stopped this email from flying around the wingnutosphere. Googling around, I caught a Free Republic thread with respondents high-five’ing each other over this, convinced that the world has turned against Obama and Democrats.
Then there’s this:
Hello, you communist shitbag!
I own a small company with 8 employees, 6 of them black. A friend of mine (who is in a position to know these things) says that the Obama administration is quietly planning a scheme which would classify businesses such as mine as "minority controlled" and turn them over to the minority employees. I would of course receive "compensation" but I would lose my company. Is this your idea of "social justice"? Are you trying to get me to fire my black employees so that they would again be at the mercy of government bureaucrats and government handouts? Is this your way of bringing socialsm to America? Or is this your version of reparations for slavery? I think that you and the rest of Obama’s errand boys are nothing but brownshirts. If you want to steal American private property I can guarantee that you will all be impeached and tried for treason! It’s starting to look like Obama’s race talk was only a ruse to allow him to socialize the economy (starting with health care), and the republicans are letting him get away with it. We need to send real patriots to the next Congress,people who are not afraid to stop Obamas socialist agenda in it’s tracks.
Of course, no such thing is ever going to happen, but that doesn’t stop this crowd from literally making shit up, whipping themselves into a frenzy over the coming armageddon, whether it’s over guns, death panels, or minority workplace uprisings.
How can we have a debate with a political movement that has zero allegiance to the truth?
I’m sad to say that Washington, DC offers so many opportunities for graft that many honest politicians have succumbed to the temptations there. Although Charlie Rangel has served his district and the people of America long and well, it’s time for him to accept our thanks and resign.
In laying out 13 charges of ethical violations committed by Representative Charles B. Rangel, the House ethics committee set the stage for a rare public trial of the Democratic Congressman this fall, a potential embarrassment for the Democratic leadership during the election season.
The unveiling of the charges Thursday came even as Mr. Rangel’s lawyers suggested they were trying to reach a settlement to avoid such a fate for Mr. Rangel, 80, a Harlem Democrat.
Ethics committee members appeared somber on Thursday, expressing fondness for Mr. Rangel even as they issued the stinging report, which states that Mr. Rangel’s “actions reflected poorly on the institution of the House and, thereby, brought discredit to the House.”
Mr. Rangel did not appear at the meeting on Thursday, but issued a written response denying “each and every allegation” and criticizing the committee’s report as “deeply flawed in its factual premises and legal theories.”
In the 40-page report, the committee said it substantiated the major charges that had been hanging over Mr. Rangel for two years: that he improperly used his office to solicit donations for a school to be named in his honor; failed to pay taxes on and report rental income from his Dominican villa; filed incomplete financial disclosure forms; and improperly accepted from a Manhattan developer rent-stabilized apartments, one of which he used as a campaign office.
But while those alleged infractions had been widely reported, the committee unearthed new details about Mr. Rangel’s conduct. The committee said Mr. Rangel not only reached out to corporate executives seeking contributions to the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at City College, but he also personally sought donations from registered lobbyists whose corporations had business before Congress. In some cases, Mr. Rangel asked for contributions of as much as $30 million from businesses with issues before the Ways and Means Committee, of which he was the chairman until March.
“Reasonable persons could construe contributions to the Rangel Center by persons with interests before the Ways and Means Committee as influencing the performance of Respondent’s governmental duties,” the report stated, saying it violated the Congressional Code of Ethics.
In addition, Mr. Rangel, when he secured a rent-stabilized apartment for his campaign operation at the Lenox Terrace development in Harlem, signed an application saying that the apartment would be the primary residence for his son, Steven Rangel, and not be used for business purposes, the report said. Steven Rangel never lived in the apartment, and the committee said the developer, the Olnick Organization, included Mr. Rangel on a “special handling list,” apparently for V.I.P.’s, and did not take action against him even as it cracked down on other tenants whose apartments were not being used as primary residences.
The report suggested that, after 20 terms in Congress, Mr. Rangel had come to rely on his government-paid staff for activities unrelated to his Congressional work…
But what about innocent until proven guilty? I can certainly see Republicans trying to shaft him if he were innocent. Nothing frightens a Republican more than integrity. But the Democrats on the committee agree. If Rangel were acquitted, voters will believe it was a cover-up. From what I know of the evidence, I think he’s guilty. With that belief, I would be a hypocrite, if I did call for him to resign, as I have over so very many Republican scandals. In addition, Democrats promised to clean up the culture of corruption. Unless we keep that pledge, we’re just like Republicans.
Sorry Charlie. Nobody can take away all the good you have done. For the good of America, for the good of the party, for the good of your own party, say goodbye.
Yesterday I devoted most of the day to catching up. I replied to all the comments, which took most of the morning. Then I visited half of our blogroll. I’ll stay caught up today.
Jig Zone Puzzle:
Today it took med 4:03. To do it, click here. How did you do?
Fantasy Football:
Because it was clear that we will not get enough players, and CBS will not let us publish the league to get players from the general pool, I moved the league to Fox Sports, because they will let us go public. I have sent an email initiation to everyone who was in and two have responded, so far. If you would like to play, sign into Fox Fantasy Football with any MSN ID. The League ID is 1023560. The Password is nogop
Short Takes:
From TPM: Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) has declined to hold another hearing on the New Black Panthers case, which had been requested by the committee’s Republicans.
Thank you for refusing to allow more GOP distraction.
From Public Policy Polling: One of the interesting dynamics occurring in the Nevada Senate race right now is that Harry Reid is outrunning his approval numbers- about 10% of voters who don’t approve of his job performance are planning to vote for him anyway.
The automatic assumption would be that those are folks who think Sharron Angle’s too conservative, but only 40% of them actually hold that opinion. When you ask them whether Reid or Angle would be more effective as a Senator though 87% of them say Reid to only 10% for Angle.
See? We coulf have dumped Reid as Majority Leader. People who don’t think Angle is a wing nut thing she’s a dingbat. A progressive could have beaten her easily.
From Think Progress: Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who many previously thought would co-sponsor comprehensive immigration reform this year, is considering radically changing the 14th amendment. Graham may introduce a constitutional amendment that would overturn the portion of the Constitution which states “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” In other words, Graham wants to end the practice of granting citizenship to the children of undocumented immigrants born on U.S. soil.
And people wonder why I say thet the Tea Party and the GOP are one.
We have been covering the US Constitution line by line. When Republicans wave their paper props and parrot their vile machinations, we will be prepared to expose the lies. We have finished the main body of the Constitution. Now we continue with the Amendments. You can find the last article on the main body of the Constitution here. It has links to all the others. The text comes from The US Constitution. Previous articles in the Amendment series:
1: The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.
2: When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.
3: This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.
The Seventeenth Amendment, adopted in 1913, provides for the direct election of Senators by popular vote, when previously, they were chosen by state legislatures.
It is only controversial today, because some Republicans want to repeal it. I find that quite ironic, because they insist that they are the champion of individual rights. OOPS! I suppose we just caught them in another lie.
I shall try to put up a new article in this series almost every day. It will take some time to cover it all, but when we’re done, we shall be immune to the lies with which Republicans seek to undermine our freedoms.
Republicans have undermined the US economy and blocked its recovery at every turn, while accusing Obama and the Democrats of socialism. Since socialism is such a fearful thing, lets compare how it is practiced today with Republican policies.
Bob Cesca wrote an excellent piece on where Republican policies have gotten us.
We’re only three months away from the midterm election when a shockingly large number of American voters will inexplicably vote for Republican candidates. I have no idea if this will mean a Republican takeover of the House or Senate or both, but there will definitely be enough voter support for Republicans to significantly reduce the Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.
Why? Because too many voters tend to be low-information, knee-jerk Springfield-from-The-Simpsons types, and the Republicans have lashed their crazy trains to this new wave of inchoate roid-rage to help sweep them into more congressional seats.
• 61 percent of Americans "always or usually" live paycheck to paycheck, which was up from 49 percent in 2008 and 43 percent in 2007.
• 66 percent of the income growth between 2001 and 2007 went to the top 1 percent of all Americans.
• Over 1.4 million Americans filed for personal bankruptcy in 2009, which represented a 32 percent increase over 2008.
• The bottom 50 percent of income earners in the United States now collectively own less than 1 percent of the nation’s wealth.
• In America today, the average time needed to find a job has risen to a record 35.2 weeks.
• More than 40 percent of Americans who actually are employed are now working in service jobs, which are often very low paying.
• Despite the financial crisis, the number of millionaires in the United States rose a whopping 16 percent to 7.8 million in 2009.
Oh, and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reported that wages for the highest 20 percent of earners rose by nearly 300 percent since 1979, while wages for the bottom and middle 20 percent increased only by 41 percent — combined. Plotted on a graph, middle and working class wages have flatlined for 30 years. Roll all of these tragic figures into a slow growth recovery and here we are. Most of us in the middle class are screwed.
And thanks to an alliance between the Republicans (which includes the tea party), the increasingly dominant far-right media, a traditional "old media" that panders to the far-right, and right-of-center "conservadems" who pander to the Republicans, too many voters have decided that the Republican Party might be better suited to turn all of this around.
The big lie here is that if Congress stops spending, cuts the deficit and makes permanent the Bush tax cuts, especially the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, our problems will be solved — even though these concepts are in direct conflict with each other. Not surprising given the ever-lengthening Republican syllabus of contradictions.
Here’s how this new batch of contradictions plays out.
According to Republicans and their conservadem enablers, we have to cut the deficit and pay for every program Congress passes or else we’re all doomed. We’re stealing from our children, they say. This has manifested itself in Republican filibusters of both unemployment benefits ($34 billion) and a new jobs bill ($33 billion over ten years). A Republican filibuster killed the jobs bill, and, after many failed cloture votes, the filibuster of the unemployment benefits was finally defeated and the Senate Democrats passed the extensions. Throughout the past year and a half, it’s been the same story. Any effort made by the Democrats to stimulate the economy has been filibustered by the Republicans. They say it’s because of the deficit and debt.
And yet they want to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, which would add $678 billion dollars to the deficit — and that’s just the cost of the tax cuts going to the top two percent of earners. In other words, the Republicans want to spend $678 billion in further giveaways for the wealthiest two percent, and they don’t care whether it increases the deficit.
By the way, the Republicans also recently voted against and defeated an amendment to strip Big Oil of its $25 billion in subsidies. Just thought I’d pass that along. Put another way, $678 billion in tax cuts for the wealthy? No problem. Deficit-shmeficit! But $34 billion in unemployment benefits for an out-of-work middle class at a time when companies aren’t hiring (say nothing of the aforementioned bullet-points)? Evil! Instead, the Republicans want to give almost as much money to Big Oil in the form of corporate welfare during the worst oil spill in American history while telling unemployed middle class families to piss off.
Do we have a clear picture in terms of who and what the Republicans care about?… [emphasis added]
Now for the contrast, socialism, as practiced today is not the totalitarian socialism of the USSR. It is the democratic socialism of Europe. Chris Hayes with author, Tom Geoghegan, discuss socialism.
We have some good news on the immigration front. The Republicans may not implement their racist profiling law in Arizona.
A U.S. judge on Wednesday blocked key parts of Arizona’s tough new immigration law hours before it was to take effect, handing a victory to the Obama administration as it tries to take control of the issue.
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer said she would file an appeal to reinstate the provisions, which had popular support but were opposed by President Barack Obama and immigration and human rights groups.
"This fight is far from over," Brewer said, adding that "at the end of what is certain to be a long legal struggle, Arizona will prevail in its right to protect our citizens."
The Republican-controlled state legislature passed the law three months ago to try to drive nearly half a million illegal immigrants out of Arizona and stem the flow of human and drug smugglers over the border from Mexico.
The provisions blocked by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton included one that required a police officer to determine the immigration status of a person detained or arrested if the officer believed the person was not in the country legally.
Bolton also halted provisions requiring immigrants to carry their papers at all times and making it illegal for people without proper documents to tout for work in public places.
Immigration as an issue has festered in U.S. politics for years and attempts to overhaul the system have failed, most recently in 2007 when Republicans torpedoed reforms pushed by George W. Bush, then the Republican president.
The ruling is a significant victory for Obama, who wants to break the deadlock with Republicans to pass a comprehensive immigration law tightening border security and giving millions of illegal immigrants a shot at legal status — an already difficult task before November’s congressional elections… [emphasis added]
I’m quite surprised to hear some in the MSM saying that this decision will be bad for Democrats, because it will energize the Tea Party over Big Government interfering in state issues. This is not a state issue. The Constitution, in Article I, Section 8, Clause 4, gives Congress the sole authority to establish immigration and naturalization policy for the entire nation. It is the Republicans who are interfering with federal issues. Should we be surprised that Republicans are waving the Constitution, but ignoring what it says? Considering that Republicans routinely wave the flag and ignore the individual liberty for which it stands, and considering that Republicans regularly wave the Bible and ignore Jesus’ emphasis on care of the poor and outcast, we should not be surprised at all.
Republicans are also screaming about “those activist Democrat judges”, because Susan Bolton was a Clinton appointee. They are ignominiously failing to disclose that Clinton appointed her at the specific request of Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ). I so wish I could have seen the look on his face when he learned of her decision.
We’re only three months away from the midterm election when a shockingly large number of American voters will inexplicably vote for Republican candidates. I have no idea if this will mean a Republican takeover of the House or Senate or both, but there will definitely be enough voter support for Republicans to significantly reduce the Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.
A U.S. judge on Wednesday blocked key parts of Arizona’s tough new immigration law hours before it was to take effect, handing a victory to the Obama administration as it tries to take control of the issue.