Right Wing Entitlement Culture: Pt. II - The Media

UPDATE: Somehow I posted the unchecked, raw version of this post the other day without noticing it. So, in the spirit of showing you that I'm not a dithering buffoon who doesn't understand grammar, here's the version that should have been posted.

---------------------------------------------

In the second installment of our series on Right Wing Entitlement Culture, we examine the singular aspect of the modern American landscape that the Right claims is largely against them - The Media.

While the Modern American Right continually blast the "Mainstream Media", it's interesting to note that they also love to blather endlessly about how Fox"News" enjoys a massive audience share that other outlets should be jealous of.

Admittedly, I do watch Fox"News" now and again, but not for the reasons that they claim most people do. More on that aspect of the Right and the media in America in a moment.

I thought I would start this off with what is likely the perfect example of Right Wing Entitlement machinations: a healthy dose of rank conjecture, conspiracy, and more than a sprinkling of insistence of victimhood.



Immediately Breitbart goes after his most prestigious foe - Media Matters. Not because they are explicitly wrong by using context and the precise and accurately accounted words of the Modern American Right and their Fox"News" masters, but because he has a metaphorical hard-on to see Eric Boehlert and company be proven false by any means necessary.

This is the first, and most shining example, of conservative framing - attack the messenger without merit.

In terms of O'Reilly's insistence that he and Fox"News" have proven that Media Matters is a sham operation funded almost exclusively by George Soros, he again references the demonstrably misleading chart of Soros's financial contributions to Media Matters - something Breitbart and Fox"News" have tried to do with NPR as well.

This is where Breitbart - accompanied by an easily convinced O'Reilly - start to make completely false connections with Media Matters, Daily Kos, and Anthony Weiner's staffers that is the perfect definition of "unfounded". What O'Reilly postulates is that simply because people question Breitbart's motives and sources, they are simply trying to "smear" him.

Here is where they actually got it wrong, though their instincts were right from the start.

Andrew Breitbart has been so eager to prove that his socio-political opposites are nothing but corrupt and immoral that he will distribute and champion material that he apparently doesn't properly vet. And for those that used this template as a rational for going after the story and it's credibility, they were wrong - this time.

Breitbart then tries to explain his specious and laughably poor "connections" by referencing the non-controversial Journolist story as if it were in any way controversial. But, to a Conservative or Libertarian, any way to besmirch media that you don't control automatically demands that you label it as controversial.

The pair then went full-on Beckian to insist that MSNBC, Media Matters, and the White House are in this together in order to attack Breitbart and Fox"News". Again, this is something that is not even provable or even in the realm of speculation. What Breitbart and O'Reilly are relying on is another piece of conservative framing - something that media outlets have decided to cover based on nothing more than the Right has said that it was true.

Certainly, Barack Obama has had meeting with bloggers and reporters that champion the Left, but he has be equally open to those on the Right. But, I suppose that O'Reilly and Breitbart think that since they have both not been invited to an exclusive "sit-down" with Obama that this means that there is some sinister plot to destroy them.

Immediately following, O'Reilly defends his network's easily probable track record - defending, championing, and even employing members of the Modern American Right - against attacks targeting them when Breitbart boasts it is simply "projection" by the Left. It's at this point in the "interview" that reality is completely turned on its head.

After Brietbart lambastes The Huffington Post for being a primary source for ensuring that conservative claims never see the light of day - something that simply doesn't happen - O'Reilly goes full on "you know they are going to try and kill you". And Breitbart is more than eager to embrace that meme. After all, conservative victimhood works to their advantage more often than most people are willing to admit.

With that said, I'm not going to state that people of any ideological stripe have not threatened Breitbart. But one has to question what those threats are and if they are real or just posturing. We have all seen where conservative rhetoric leads to.

So how does this "interview" express the very real aspect of Right Wing Entitlement Culture in relation to modern media?

Primarily, it demands that anyone within the Modern American Right never be accountable for their previous mistakes and favor a singular instance where they were correct. I'm reminded of the popular phrase that "a blind squirrel can find a nut every great once in a while".

Secondly, The Right demand on a daily basis that their framing be used as a primer for all media coverage. Unfortunately for those of Liberal/Progressive perspective, this is all too true - even though the opposition that makes these demands will never admit it. Just take a look at virtually all the Sunday Shows on all major networks and you will see this in action. The Modern American Right demand that all media push their narrative - regardless of its merit - again and again and again. This is where they get the term "Liberal Media Bias". If someone doesn't genuflect to their particular belief system then you are guilty of heresy of the highest order.

For classic examples of what Breitbart and O'Reilly are referencing, check here and here.

Let's get back to the notion that Fox"News" has such a large audience share because their "reporting" is accurate, yet they can't seem to embrace the idea that this would make them "mainstream".

I have stated many times that accurate reporting and ratings-share are mutually exclusive creatures and to state that one equals another is a complete fabrication. This equivocation is another form of Right Wing framing. If this were true, then it should cross over into all forms of communications to audiences: The film AVATAR would have been more factually accurate than The Hurt Locker, as more people saw the former at theatres than the later.

Also, employees of Fox"News" have also claimed that America is a nation that is "Center-Right", yet that flies in the face of the fact that a plurality oppose the views that Fox and their compatriots champion.

The job of the American Media is to report the events of the day. When those events are beginning to be largely shaped by Right Wing ideology - and the media doesn't accept that premise - those that are attempting to shape it consider themselves being attacked by those they are attempting to control. This is the very nature of Right Wing Entitlement culture in relation to media.

Essentially, they are spoiled children being told that they can't have all that they want all the time. The reality is that their socio-political opponents are not in control the way they are being presented as.

Memoirs Of An Abstinence Fairy

How in the world can a girl at barely the age of 20 even be considering writing a memoir?

Well, when that girl is Bristol Palin, it's actually expected of you.

Bristol Palin, daughter of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, will soon be able to add "author" to her resume with the release of an as-yet-untitled memoir set to hit bookshelves this summer.

As noted by Political Wire, an Amazon listing for an "Untitled Bristol Palin Memoir" -- in hardcover no less -- has been created, announcing that the 304-page book will be available for a little over $17.

PopEater reported late last year that the 20-year-old mother was exploring a variety of options to cash in on the visibility provided by her successful, but not victorious, run on ABC's hit show, "Dancing With the Stars." Apart from the book deal and speaking engagements -- which no longer include a panel at Washington University's "Sex Week" -- a source also told PopEater that future jobs might include a role on another reality-TV show and as a spokeswoman for a fashion line.

According to the Amazon page, the book will be published by William Morrow & Co for release on June 21.

Interesting to note is that Amazon has removed the link to Bristol's book page. Could this have been due to pressure from the Palin militia? Possibly.

Is Bristol even writing this? Considering that Mama Palin has her Facebook posts written for her, and that every word from this family is carefully scrutinized - not to mention how their damage control team works overtime should they ever go off script - I'm guessing that there's a team of writers cranking out pages that they will bring to Bristol to "review" and then later have her pose for a cover to make it look official.

The larger point is that this is just another piece of Palin-Porn expressly designed to keep their mouth-agape followers thinking they are an important part of the American socio-political landscape, even the "saviors of the future".

At nearly 36, I've had some great adventures, experienced glorious highs and been to the depths of sadness and horror. I've sought out the excitement that life has to offer, tried to learn as much as I can, and had my own measure of "celebrity" at one point or another, but don't even think that my life is so spectacular that I believe it would sell a book. The unchecked hubris of the Palin family is something to marvel at in this regard.

However, I'm not to blind to not realize that being the child of a prominent political opportunist like Sarah Palin has placed you into some very interesting and I would even go so far as to say uncomfortable positions. But then the money starts coming in and people like Sarah and Bristol start to become comfortable with whatever is thrown at them. Soon after, all they had to do was hold out their hand and they could have and do whatever they wanted - or told that they needed.

Look for this book to be launched to the top of the NYT Bestseller list in the same way that all Right Wing tomes make it there - bulk purchases.

So what will the title be?

The Socialism Bowl : Updated w/ "Last Word" Commentary

Last night's Super Bowl victory by the Green Bay Packers is largely being drowned out by commentary on Christina Aguilera botching a line from the National Anthem ( which every Right Winger in America is naturally taking advantage of - even alluding that they could have performed it better ) to making hay out of a car commercial that aired during the game.

And while the Packs certainly performed well - even getting some unintentional assistance from Big Ben via some poor passing - it shouldn't be ignored that the Green Bay Packers aren't owned by a single entity, but by "the people" :

Since 1923, Green Bay has been the only publicly owned, nonprofit major professional sports team in the nation. And that doesn't just make the franchise a charming anachronism, or the answer to a barstool trivia question.

It makes them an example. A case study. A working model for a better way to organize and administer pro sports.

Namely, through public ownership, a system that could mitigate some of the most irritating ills plaguing our games -- and with little downside, to boot.

The modern American Right are want to breathlessly claim that "Socialism" is evil and will destroy the country they claim to love and cherish. But it seems to have worked for the Packers. And while there is a Board of Directors that are tied to the team, the style of ownership plays a much larger role than most are willing to admit. Is it responsible for their win last night? I think in some small way it is, as the make-up of a team, in any sport, is largely predicated on the decisions of the team owners.

In all, it was a great game. All that's left now is to try to tolerate the complaints and conspiracy theories of all the Steeler's fans at work.

UPDATE

Lawrence comes through...............again

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The Dumbing Down Of American Culture

I often wonder what people from other nations think of America in terms of what we have to offer within the landscape of "culture". What do they think of our music, our literature, our art, or even fashion and entertainment. The conclusion I often find myself arriving at is that America, by and large, are a nation populated by "consumers", meaning that we desire things to be prepacked in pretty little containers that come with clever slogans that can be easily memorized, repeated, and processed by those we encounter.

It was this story that reaffirmed my beliefs. Not only is modern American culture being poisoned with laziness and ignorance dressed up to be "sexy", we seem to have lost the ability to recognize greatness in the words from our own people.

Christine O'Donnell's TV ad declaration "I'm not a witch" during her U.S. Senate campaign topped this year's best quotes, according to a Yale University librarian.

O'Donnell's quote is cited by Fred Shapiro, associate librarian at Yale Law School, who released his fifth annual list of the most notable quotations of the year. In the ad, O'Donnell was responding to reports of her revelations that she had dabbled in witchcraft years ago.

Where have all the great minds of America gone? According to Yale, they apparently don't exist any longer. As preposterous as that is - as we all know that there have been more prophetic and intelligent words spoken in America over the last calendar year - here are the list of "notable" quotes.

1. (TIE) "I'm not a witch." Christine O'Donnell, television advertisement, Oct. 4.

1. (TIE) "I'd like my life back." Tony Hayward, comment to reporters, May 30.

3. "If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested." airline passenger John Tyner, remark to Transportation Security Administration worker at San Diego airport, Nov. 13, 2010

4. "Don't retreat. Instead – reload!" Sarah Palin, Tweet, March 23.

5. "Chi! Chi! Chi! Le! Le! Le! Los mineros de Chile!" Chant at Chilean mine rescue, Oct. 13.

6. "I hope that's not where we're going, but you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies. They're saying: My goodness, what can we do to turn this country around?" Sharron Angle, radio interview in January.

7. "We have to pass the (health care) bill so you can find out what is in it." Nancy Pelosi, speech to National Association of Counties, March 9.

8. "I'm going to take my talents to South Beach." LeBron James, television broadcast, July 8.

9. "You're telling me that the separation of church and state is found in the First Amendment?" Christine O'Donnell, Delaware senatorial debate, Oct. 19. (The Associated Press reported the quote: "So you're telling me that the separation of church and state, the phrase `separation of church and state,' is in the First Amendment?")

10. "They should never have put me with that woman. ... She was just a sort of bigoted woman who said she used to be Labour." Gordon Brown, comments about a voter he met while campaigning for British general election, Apr. 28.

While two of these are from Britans and one from the site where the Chilean miners were rescued, are we to actually accept the fact that the quotes from Americans are representative of where we are now as a culture?

From my point of view, I think this shows that our ideas of what America is and what is important is far too often colored by where we get our information and how we utilize it. To an extent, this poll shows America's ridiculous obsession with the Tea Baggers, and the media that either propped them up as the true and accurate voice of Constitutional integrity or were too afraid to take them to task on their rhetoric.

Off To The Races

Every time I hear conservatives talk about how they aren't racist, are against Obama because of his actions and words and not his race, or insist that it's really the Democrats that have a problem with race, I have to really restrain myself from doubling over with laughter.

And now, "Mamma Grizzly" Sarah Palin seems to think she could use a dose of Limbaugh-speak in her pre-presidential campaign rhetoric. Her target - Michelle Obama.

Certainly his wife expressed this view when she said during the 2008 campaign that she had never felt proud of her country until her husband started winning elections. In retrospect, I guess this shouldn't surprise us, since both of them spent almost two decades in the pews of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright's church listening to his rants against America and white people.

Despite the fact that much has been made of Jeremiah Wright because Fox"News" and conservative talk radio have decided to use truncated clips from, what are essentially, classic "fire and brimstone" sermons - ever been to a Southern Baptist revival in Kentucky? - and used those context free moments to formulate a narrative far too juicy for any conservative to pass up.

Do I agree with Rev. Wrights positions? Not particularly, considering I'm not a religious person and he ultimately latched onto the new found fame he was given and attempted to capitalize on it - with pretty poor results.

That aside, what are the potential repercussions that Palin could face because of this blatantly race-based and unfounded attack on Michelle Obama? The reality surrounding these statements in her book is that Palin will never have to answer for this - from her conservative supplicators, at least. She will, in all actuality, be praised by the modern conservative movement. Either that, or people will claim that this never happened, just like Beck fans claiming they never heard about him calling Obama a racist or simply stated that he would never say such a thing.

I truly hope that Sarah Palin runs for President. It will be a wonderful campaign to watch, as I'm sure that there will be more and far worse instances than this where she can be coached into making herself look like an even bigger failure as a human. That, and the fact that it will be interesting to see if modern conservatives are so blitheringly ignorant to cast a vote for a person that is more concerned with her own image than those she had been tasked to represent in the past.

Racial animus is, and will always be, part of the conservative ideological construct. No matter how often and how loud they scream it isn't, you should always remember that it's still there.

Decision Flexible

It's not surprising that Bush's book has themes and passages lifted from previous writings that lauded him as a great leader.

It also comes as no surprise that Bush's book - was it even written by him? - is being recognized as a "best seller", considering conservative authors rely on bulk purchasing to further the narrative the America actually buys into such nonsense.

And it should come as a shock to no one that Fox"News" is going to give Bush a multimedia handjob as often and as fervent as they can. But when they say he's "the boss", then one has to look at what they consider a successful "boss" to be.

Here's Hannity offering yet another dose of his man-love for W.



Seems that Fox, and apparently their viewership, think a "real boss" displays these qualities and runs his "business" like this:

- Taking credit for the successes of others

- Failing at literally every level of his private sector business attempts

- Ignoring a glaring warning of a threat against our nation

- Isn't concerned with the leadership of those that attacked us on Sept. 11th

- Presided over an administration that is responsible for a "bailout" that is now attributed to Obama and Democrats

- Increased the national debt by trillions in less than 10 years

Is that the type of "boss" you want?

The Sounds Of Silence: UPDATED

While self-appointed Tea Bagger Queen Michelle Bachmann makes plans to be part of "Republican leadership", it seems that some that are already poised to take up a "leader" position aren't too keen on her asperations.

Self-proclaimed tea party leader Michele Bachmann's bid for a top Republican post in the House received a cool reaction Thursday from Speaker-to-be John Boehner, an early test of how GOP leaders will treat the antiestablishment movement's winners in Tuesday's elections.

"Constitutional conservatives deserve a loud and clear voice in leadership!" Bachmann, R-Minn., who founded the Tea Party Caucus, said in a one-paragraph Facebook announcement that she is running for GOP conference chairman.

House Republican leaders don't disagree. But that doesn't mean they want the hyperbolic Bachmann being a spokeswoman for the new majority during the 2012 election cycle.

Boehner, aware of the role tea partiers played in making him the next House speaker, is endorsing no one. His lieutenants are lining up behind Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, leaving no doubt that Hensarling – and not Bachmann – is the leadership favorite to chair the GOP conference.

And while no one can take Boehner's silence on Bachmann's desires to mean that he doesn't want anything to do with her, this does bring up the very real aspect of how the "entrenched politicians" that the Tea Baggers were allegedly against are going to deal with the new faces on Capital Hill. In other words, are we likely to see the modern GOP even further divided now that they have the gains in the House that they wanted?

UPDATE

In which Palin isn't exactly endorsing the woman she initially defends - from completely unfounded claims, mind you - in this piece from the Daily Caller.

In terms of the leadership fight between Bachmann and Hensarling, Palin said she was not taking a position — not yet, at least.

“I’m taking a position on who gets to sit in the big boy highchair this morning for breakfast… Trig or Tripp?” Palin said, referring to her son and grandson, respectively.

“Leadership in the US Congress this morning? Nah … not ’till after the Cheerios,” Palin said.

I think she actually means not 'till after she downs a double-shot of kool-aid fed to her from the folks at the Fox"News" payroll department.

What Does TLC Stand For Again?

Let's just get this out of the way, as I don't really think we need to devote a great deal of time to it - even though it does bring up some interesting questions.

This is a clip from Palin's reality show that is to air on what once was a semi-respectable network.

This bit is about "invasion of privacy"

Yep, just a good ole day out on the "concrete slab" pretending to do the writing that she pays others to do. If it were a bit warmer she might run over the "holler" and get some of her "kin" to come play at the "cement pond".

Sure, a writer legally renting a home just yards from your home does create the illusion that he/she is "stalking" you. However, Palin has the clear desire to frame this as a person that is out to harm her children - as evidenced from her expression of "concern".

Palin's concern for her "privacy" extends about as far as the poorly disguised "tough questions" she is paid to answer on Fox"News".

Palin's Special Effects

Brace yourself. It's "morning in America" again.



Just like a Micheal Bay film - all style and no substance.

Let's mark this occasion and count the days from the new legislative year until all these people featured in Palin's video end up disappointing those that elected them. Remember, after all, these people "represent" a modern movement that demands instant gratification.

We should also realize that not all the Palin-backed candidates won. Those candidates whom Palin endorsed and ultimately lost shows that the Palin brand isn't as powerful as conservatives would like to believe it is. Most notably, Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell's losses have seriously damaged Palin's street cred. But the damage control has already begun in regards to O'Donnell - who is already playing the victim card - and I'm sure that Sharron Angle is going to call for a voter fraud investigation after her loss to Reid.

And if you're looking for O'Donnell to end up as the newest Fox"News" employee, the network is already denying any rumors.

Reality Disconnect

Dumb response or dumbest response from George W. Bush?

That's -- "he's a racist." And I didn't appreciate it then. I don't appreciate it now. It's one thing to say, "I don't appreciate the way he's handled his business." It's another thing to say, "This man's a racist." I resent it, it's not true, and it was one of the most disgusting moments in my Presidency.

Yeah, because right after Sept 11th having Kanye talk shit about you really puts a dent in your agenda, doesn't it.

Attack Everything

I'm guessing had Michelle Obama wrote each spouse of the delegates of the UN a personal letter that conservatives would concoct yet another conspiracy about how the Obamas are out to create a "one world government". But they've only got vegetables and a gift basket to work with this time.

A special recipe of pickled, hand-picked ingredients from the White House Kitchen Garden, including sun gold tomatoes, okra, cucumbers, chocolate bell peppers, carrots, lemon verbena, and fresh herbs are presented in jars with the First Lady's signature. The jars are topped with original artwork done by California artists, Michael Cronan and Karin Hibma, who were inspired by a photo of Mrs. Obama tending to the garden with children and a wheelbarrow.

That's right, a gift based around the idea of healthy eating, promoting American small-business, and the very ideals that make up the American spirit of creativity and exceptionalism.

Naturally conservatives want nothing to do with that at all.

As the world leaders were back in the City scheming to divvy up money that doesn’t belong to them, the spouses hung around with FLOTUS and received a basket that I’m predicting will come to be known as “the re-gifting heard ’round the world”

Because all Republicans have been taught since Obama started his bid for the Presidency that you can't eat vegetables anymore, as only "liberal elites" do that.
This actually fits in quite nicely with Glenn Becks tirades about his french fries. Wait, are they still calling them "Freedom Fries"?

Oh, and for an added bonus, check out how quickly the racial invective starts up at Fox"Nation" in their comments section about this story. Yeah, no racists in the conservative movement - none at all.

Pregame Jitters?

In which Angle claims she will be a "mainstream" Senator, immediately after she claimed she "doesn't know what that means" when asked if she'd be a "Tea Party" Senator.



And while the reporting on Angle's continued positions is - both controversial and downright idiotic - there is one thing that is missing from it all.

Sharon Angle, and all those that identify with her ideology, have somehow become a more extreme and mutated version of those they once decried as "unhinged" or suffering from some "derangement syndrome". This is their new mainstream; a gathering of people that skirt the very limits of sanity. Their new mainstream is openly attempting to rewrite history, to "re-educate" the easily lead masses into a mindset that the government has suddenly turned on it's own people.

But what if Angle is finally becoming aware of the fact that she is so far in that she has to keep up the facade until she gets into office. Then she will all bust disappear from the national conversation after he first few votes are not seen in line with the group that swept her into office. You know, like Scott Brown did.

Some Thoughts For Your Morning

- Upon hearing the news that Sen. Robert Byrd had died early this morning, I began to wonder exactly how long it would take conservatives to politicize his passing. Considering the upcoming vote on Financial Reform in the Senate, as well President Obama's desire to have a vote by the end of the week, I'm looking for conservatives and their media masters at Fox"News" to be going full throttle on this one.

- Elena Kagan is to start her Supreme Court confirmation hearings today, after opening remarks from Senators, and it's likely to be a much bumpier ride than Justice Sonya Sotomayor got. With all the falsehoods being perpetuated by conservatives - and even some normally reliable media like NPR - this confirmation process is likely to take some of the spotlight away from the Gulf oil disaster. Perhaps someone like Glenn Beck or Sean Hannity will find a way to bundle the two together.

- I heard Geraldo's initial offering of this comments regarding Rolling Stone writer Micheal Hastings when he was debating the firing of Gen. Stanley McCrystal with The Howard Stern Show's Robin Quivers - herself a military vet. You can usually tell when a person - be they conservative or not - has reached the bottom of the barrel when the comparisons to terrorists come out as the keystone to your argument.

- It usually the loudest within the conservative movement, be they hardcore Tea Bagging screamers or not, that decry the government are going to be some of the first with their hands out when they see the opportunity to gain from it. In a regarding manufacturing, 74% of self-described Tea Baggers support a nationalized manufacturing strategy. This is in stark contrast to the "message" that they are attempting to bring with them. Not only that, but such a pro-worker stance does tend to smack of hypocrisy, considering their utter disdain for an organized workforce.

- Arizona Governor Jan Brewer continues to milk her 15 minutes of political fame with a misleading ad that continues the false narrative that the Obama administration has surrendered American soil to Mexico. And while this has been completely discredited, the shear gimmick factor for conservatives is just too juicy to give up.

Ethically Shielded

Here's a bit of old news regarding Palin that landed last week and I think it needs addressing within the context of accuracy in reporting.

Here's what the Huffington Post reported:

Thousands of donors who contributed to a $390,000 legal defense fund for former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will get their money back after an investigator said Thursday the fund was illegal because it was misleadingly described on a website.

State Personnel Board investigator Timothy Petumenos said the Alaska Fund Trust inappropriately used the word "official" on its website, wrongly implying that it was endorsed by Palin in her role as governor.

But Petumenos also found that Palin – the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee – acted in good faith and relied on a team of attorneys to make sure the fund was lawful and complied with the Alaska Executive Branch Act.

So, according to Alaska Ethics Laws, the fund was illegal because of how it was presented and Palin gets off on a technicality because she said that it was the lawyers that were at fault. Is this woman ever accountable for anything?

Here's where we get a true sense of how far conservatives are willing to go to bat for Palin.

Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air thinks he's the one to determine when ethics laws should be changed and who they should apply to. After all, no one in the conservative realm should be accountable for their actions - and that goes double for Palin.

...the probe has now concluded, and the only change Palin will have to make is to return the money the fund received before July 26, 2009, when she resigned as Governor, and find other trustees. As far as an ethics slam goes, this isn’t even weak tea. It’s more an indication that Alaska really needs to address its Byzantine ethics regime, which forces public officials to privately fund their own defense and then makes the legal code surrounding that effort so confusing that three top-notch law firms couldn’t figure it out.

The truth of the matter is that Palin didn't have to create a private defense fund while she was Governor. For that matter, she didn't have to quit - which leads many of us to believe that there was much more verifiable weight to the complaints being leveled against her. Not only that, but considering the position that Palin was putting herself in not only in regards to potentially being the VP of the United States, but as someone that continues to boast that she cleaned-up corruption in her state, she really botched this one. If she's going to make such claims, one would think that she would have the "executive experience" to know what is and what isn't going to fall into a category of illegal.

But we all know that Caribou Barbie is never accountable for anything. From her packing her kids around on official trips while governor, to accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in wardrobe from the RNCC, to even being accountable for not being able to finish her term as Governor. It's truly amazing how conservatives are more than willing to shield their own from the light of truth.

The Exit?

According to an anonymous tip given to the Associated Press, Peter Orzag may be stepping down.

White House Budget Director Peter Orszag plans to resign, a Democratic official said Monday night, positioning him to be the first high-profile member of President Barack Obama's team to depart the administration.

Orszag is expected to leave in the coming months. The exact timing is not known.

As director of the Office of Management and Budget, Orszag holds Cabinet-level rank and a pivotal role in shaping and defending how the administration spends the public's money. He quickly emerged from a bureaucratic post to become a camera-friendly face of Obama's government, often in front on plans to confront the deficit and to spur the economy.

The official confirmed the news to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because it had not been announced.

Orszag's spokesman, Kenneth Baer, said only: "Peter's focused on his work, not on Washington speculation."

And while most of these anonymous reports turn out to be true, even after spokespersons make statements that "nothing has been decided", I have to wonder why a news outlet as storied as the Associated Press is all to eager to use unsourced information. Granted, many people in todays world are rightfully skeptical in using their identities in relation to a given report, but this does tend to make the AP look like a bit of a "fly by night" operation.

That aside, this pending resignation from the Obama White House is going to be fodder for conservatives for quite some time. We'll be hearing the phrase "under the bus" for no less than a month, if not more.

But could this be Orzag sacrificing himself in order to help burnish the image of the Obama administration? I hardly see how it would even begin to work, considering how no matter what changes are made within the administration, conservatives will not be happy untill Obama leaves office - either by refusing to run for re-election, resigns, is impeached, or worse.

There are even whispers of Orzag taking Tim Geithner's place as Treasury Secretary, though I hasten to give that even a modest amount of reflection, considering that would send the conservative movement into even more of a tailspin. Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity would likely be reduced twitching madmen - well, more than they are right now anyway.

Regardless of the reasons why Orzag is possibly leaving, it's a win/win for conservatives. They will crow that this is somehow a "victory" for the conservative movement - possibly more so than when Van Jones left his advisory duties. I'm almost certain that the producers of Glenn Beck's program are already gearing up for a multi-part special report on how Peter Orzag was in league with George Soros in financially destroying America via Socialist/Communist/Marxist economic policies.

The Power Of Prayer

Conservatives in action. Typical.

A resolution encouraging people to pray for an end to the BP oil spill crisis has been approved by the Louisiana Senate.

Sen. Robert Adley, a Republican from Benton, won unanimous approval of the resolution last week. The resolution made this past Sunday a state-designated day of prayer in Louisiana, during which people of all faiths in the state and around the nation will be encouraged to seek divine intervention to end the crisis.

Because .begging the invisible man in the sky to suck the oil up with his straw of divine wisdom is just the ticket we need. No need for conservatives to actually do any of the heavy lifting to get this issue reconciled, it's all about Teh Jeebus.

Is there not a more clear signifier that conservatives are simply unwilling to take the lead against national emergencies like this? They made a few speeches and yelled at Obama for not acting fast enough, then promptly did a 180 and said he was acting too harshly.

But wasn't one of the conservative talking-points last week that this oil disaster was God's doing to start with? So who are they to question God's judgement now?

Rand's Hands In Gov't Programs

Whenever you hear a prominent conservative figure in America talking about the damage that government programs like Social Security or Medicare and Medicaid are doing, it's a safe bet that these same people are utilizing these programs. Rand Paul is certainly no exception.

Kentucky GOP Senate candidate Rand Paul says he opposes federal handouts, but the eye doctor takes government payments for treating Medicare and Medicaid patients.

The dichotomy has drawn taunts of hypocrisy from his Democratic opponent, Jack Conway who on Tuesday called on Paul to quit "stonewalling" and release his Medicare billing records.

"When it comes to government spending that benefits Paul, suddenly deficits don't matter," Conway's campaign said in a release this week.

Paul campaign manager Jesse Benton defended Paul's acceptance of Medicare and Medicaid payments, saying that to shun the two health care programs would "penalize his older patients or his poor patients."

Paul's hawkish nature regarding deficits most certainly stops when it comes to taking money from the government for his medical practice. His campaign spokespeople are certainly distancing themselves from Paul's previous comments regarding Medicare as "socialized medicine", a common narrative amongst the Tea Baggers.

The hypocrisy of Rand Paul continues to mount as the days and weeks go by. Like most Tea Baggers, Paul wants the government services but doesn't want the cost. I'm wondering how much of his clientele are of the same ideological bent - conservatives that rail against government programs but utilized them on a continual basis.

Self-Certified

Isn't it always good fun to watch conservatives squirm when they are put under the same microscope that they place liberals/progressives under.

Rand Paul, who touts his career as a Kentucky eye doctor as part of his outsider credentials in his campaign for U.S. Senate, isn't certified by his profession's leading group.

He tried Monday to bat away questions about it by calling it an attack on his livelihood, saying the scrutiny stems from his challenge of a powerful medical group over a certification policy he thought was unfair.

The libertarian-leaning Republican helped create a rival certification group more than a decade ago. He said the group has since recertified several hundred ophthalmologists, despite not being recognized the American Board of Medical Specialties – the governing group for two dozen medical specialty boards.

So he's in favor of a private institution discriminating against those they don't like based on a variety of facets, but when it comes to him it's simply not fair. Does the hypocrisy get any more clearer than that?

I don't see why Paul is taking such issue with this, considering he touted his board certification. He calls it a "hypocritical power-play", but where is the hypocrisy in fact checking something that he boasts about?

I'm really hoping that Republicans in Kentucky are going to pull their collective heads out of Sarah Palin's crotch long enough to see that Rand Paul is not the man they want representing them. November is going to be very interesting around here.

Some Thoughts For Your Morning

- Conservatives are ever eager to find a Democrat that does something stupid. I don't really blame them, as they have to find a way to deflect from their own party's failings on a daily basis. But this sort of action by a Democratic representative needs to be address on several levels and not just a partisan one. Certainly, it was pure stupidity for Bob Etheridge to assault the "student journalist" like that, but considering the nature of "journalism" amongst the Right these days, one can't but almost understand why a person ( be they an elected official or not ) react in similar fashion. Still, it was a bone-headed move and I'm of the mind that Etheridge should be punished for it.

- I've been saying for years that there is no possible way that conservatives have the time, talent, or cognitive skills to write multiple books within a calendar year. Glenn Beck has another book coming out and there's a fairly good case put forth that he didn't write it. Considering the fact that Sarah Palin hired someone to write the book she put her name on and not one conservative seemed to take issue with that, and taking a look at how Glenn Beck is revered as a messiah among the Fox"News" establishment, I'm guessing that his latest ream of nonsense isn't going to be challenged either.

- Michelle Bachman continues with the fringe ( mainstream? ) conservative line that Obama is in league with terrorists by claiming that funds used to aid Gaza and the West Bank will be appropriated by Hamas. This really doesn't surprise me, as most conservatives are in favor of completely cutting off all foreign aid entirely.

This Is Getting Sad

Really? There's a piece up at Huffington Post about Obama possibly appearing in a "rap" video in the early 90s?

Probably not. But if you check out the video for Tag Team's early 90s anthem "Whoomp (There It Is)" you'll find an Obama doppelganger at the 1:01 point. And when seeing it, if you're response is "oh-my-god-that's-Obama-but-wish-I-could-have-a-GIF-that-looped-it," you're in luck. That exists.

Perhaps Biden was in the video for 95 South's non-union Mexican equivalent "Whoot There It Is."

Yeah, we get it, he's black. And while it's only marginally funny - and the Huffington Post sees fit to waste bandwidth in actually putting this in their comedy section, this only leads to the blatantly racist angle that "all black people look alike".