Questionable Increases

I'm not so sure that this is something Obama wants to tout as a "success" due to his policies:

Does President Barack Obama deserve credit for the fact that corporate profits have risen faster under him than during any other 18-month period since the 1920s?

“The better question is whether he wants the credit,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who was an economic adviser to Republican Sen. John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. “Obama sounds a lot like he wants corporations to be less profitable.”

Profits have surged 62 percent from the start of 2009 to mid-2010, according to the Commerce Department. That is faster than any other year and a half in the Fabulous ’50s, the Go-Go ’60s or the booms under Presidents Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton.

Under another president, especially a Republican president, the data on corporate profits would be envied. George W. Bush, who dedicated a good deal of his presidency to tax cuts aimed at boosting business profits, probably would have loved such results. It took Bush nearly four years to post the gains that Obama has managed in less than half the time.

While this report stands in completely contrast of the narrative coming from the modern conservative movement, I'm not entirely sure this is going to sit well with most liberals/progressives. However, it would seem that this would be something that Republican politicians would want to at least mention in passing.

I just have one question in regards to this - if corporations are raking in such massive profits, where is the reinvestment into the economy? Not to get overtly conspiratorial, but could it be a concerted effort to see the Obama administration fail, even at the expense of the worker?

Predictabilities

I'm honestly not surprised by this report from The Hill:

Nowhere are Democrats more clearly threatened with heavy defeat than in the South.

Nov. 2 looks set to reverse a trend of recent elections that suggested the blue party might claw its way back in states dominated for a generation by the GOP.


The Hill’s polling shows senior Democrats in the South, who survived earlier Republican waves, poised to fall in next week’s predicted GOP sweep.

In 42 competitive districts polled in four weeks by The Hill, white Southern Democrats face stronger headwinds than any of their colleagues.

Democrats hold 59 Southern House seats and could lose a dozen of them — helping Republicans toward the net gain of 39 they need for control of the House.

But Sean Miller, who penned this article, is relying more on the hot talking point of the past nearly two years than the reality of what it's like to be a modern Democrat in the South.

Anti-spending sentiment may be stronger in the South than in any other region, Penn suggested, and “this election does seem to be driven more than anything else [by] the desire to curb spending.”

The South is more concerned about "spending"? Please pardon my inability to use a more apropos term and use what is a southern colloquialism - that dog don't hunt.

The "Southern Strategy" implemented by the modern conservative movement has been rather effective since Obama took office, simply because of how racial and ethnic fears play in this region of the US.

From parade floats featuring Obama as an apparent "slave owner" whipping a white male to Tea Party leaders using blatantly racial language in a "satirical" blog on down to some Tea Party leaders being none to afraid to drop the N-Bomb in reference to the American tax payer, it's no wonder that the South is ripe for a Republican take-over.

Here in Western Kentucky, it's no different. While I attended the last two "Tea Parties" held in my home town, the racial animus was as thick and palpable as anything I had experienced in my life. Needless to say, no one wanted to appear on camera, and I'm not really surprised. This isn't to say that all Tea Baggers are racists, but they certainly aren't willing to distance themselves from those that are. To that point, the desire for many within the modern conservative to feel like they are a part of something has greatly overridden their desire to be seen as "compassionate conservatives".

Media Perceptions

A recent Gallup poll shows that "trust" in the "media" is at an all-time low.

For the fourth straight year, the majority of Americans say they have little or no trust in the mass media to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly. The 57% now saying this is a record high by one percentage point.

The 43% of Americans who, in Gallup's annual Governance poll, conducted Sept. 13-16, 2010, express a great deal or fair amount of trust ties the record low, and is far worse than three prior Gallup readings on this measure from the 1970s.

Trust in the media is now slightly higher than the record-low trust in the legislative branch but lower than trust in the executive and judicial branches of government, even though trust in all three branches is down sharply this year. These findings also further confirm a separate Gallup poll that found little confidence in newspapers and television specifically.

Nearly half of Americans (48%) say the media are too liberal, tying the high end of the narrow 44% to 48% range recorded over the past decade. One-third say the media are just about right while 15% say they are too conservative. Overall, perceptions of bias have remained quite steady over this tumultuous period of change for the media, marked by the growth of cable and Internet news sources. Americans' views now are in fact identical to those in 2004, despite the many changes in the industry since then.

When one takes a look at the breakdown of whom holds these particular views, there's one question that quickly springs to mind: Is Fox"News" not part of the media any longer?

73% of those calling themselves conservative thought the "media" had a liberal bias. This is not surprising, as one of the pillars of the modern conservative movement is to vilify the media - that is, unless you are Fox. So again, are they left out of this equation? When you look at the polling data, it's readily apparent that conservatives consider this to be a question about everyone else.

I found this hypothesis even more plausible when I noticed that Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air had taken this in the predictable direction of "who is to blame" for the loss in trust. Naturally, he cast the blame directly at the feet of Dan Rather:

What happened? The CBS attempt to smear George W. Bush with the phony Texas Air National Guard memos. That episode made clear the political tilt and the situational ethics of the “layers of editors and fact-checkers” at CBS, providing a clear basis for the always-present suspicion that the national news media occasionally cooked a story for their own political purposes.

While the Rather piece was accurate, despite the alleged "fabricated font" in the memo, this is the conservative line of attack - all media is biased against us if they attempt in any way to hold us accountable.

Again, just as in the Gallup results, Morrissey never makes mention of Fox"News", even though just days ago he cited polling data to push the narrative that most Americans "trusted" Fox"News" - despite the fact that the poll done by Politico and George Washington University had nothing to do with "trust", but simply what people watched regarding political information.

It becomes glaringly apparent that Morrissey ( and most conservatives )is attempting to have it both ways, and you simply can't do that. Well, you can, but free thinking people aren't going to take you seriously if you do.

As for me, I have to question everything put forward to me - media or otherwise. Despite the fact that conservatives operate under the failed notion that liberal/progressive Democrats will blindly follow Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, or anyone else on MSNBC, I have to dig deeper into things that they report on simply because that's how I've always been.

Were I to be questioned in this survey, I would have to offer the opinion that I don't think there is an across the board "liberal bias" in the media. I do, however, feel that there are far too many people working in media that allow conservative memes to run unchecked and unchallenged. And to take this further, I believe that of the big three cable news networks, MSNBC does have a more liberal leaning prime time line-up that completely distinguishes itself from the more straight-forward reportage that makes up the bulk of every 24hr cycle. Compare that with the unblushing way in which Fox"News" not only allows but urges virtually all their programs to be seriously tilted towards conservative Republican points of view and theatrics over solid reporting and you'll get not only a sense of why conservatives prefer Fox but why they would shy away if asked to defend their standpoints in the Gallup versus POLITICO polling data.

This, Unfortunately, Isn't The Start

.....it's simply a continuation of what is already germinating in America.



Talking Points Memo has more details:

According to NY1, the cabbie managed to lock the passenger in the back seat while he called 911. Then both cabbie and crazy deranged passenger were taken to Bellevue Hospital, a few blocks away. According to NY1 -- and sort of incredibly -- as of late last night, the crazy deranged passenger had not yet been charged. No word on the condition of the cabbie at this point, either. Right now, NY1 appears to be the only source for this story (and their source seems to just be the police).

Okay so: Anyone else sadly not surprised at a Muslim hate crime in New York City these days? The anger that flared up at the anti-Mosque protest on Sunday sure looked like it could have led to something scary. Anti-Muslim invective is not a new phenomenon -- Glynnis MacNicol reminded me how after 9/11, many Muslim (and Indian) cabbies put American flags in their windows, to signal their patriotism. It's not just in New York, either: In San Diego, a cabbie was attacked in May after taking a pit-stop to pray. In Chicago, cabbies are now driving around with anti-Islamic ads on them, sponsored by a group called "Stop The Islamization of America." on Open Salon, a contributer wrote about hearing the 9/11 stories of cab drivers, particularly one Muslim man.

Hate crime, or opportunity for conservatives? If you guessed both, you're right - but that's not a good thing.

The apparent anti-Muslim assault on a New York city cabbie by a man shouting “Assalamu Alaikum. Consider this a checkpoint" produced an immediate round of recriminations over its connection to opposition to a New York Islamic Center and an apparent rising tide of Islamophobia.

But as often at the intersection of politics and violent crime, the story doesn't appear to fit any easy stereotype: The alleged assailant, Michael Enright, is — according to his Facebook profile and the website of the left-leaning media organization Intersections International — a student at the School of Visual Arts and a volunteer for Intersections, which recently produced a statement of support for the Park51 project and is funded by the mainstream, liberal Collegiate Church of New York.

Intersections did not respond to two messages, and the group does not appear to be picking up the phone. Enright did not respond to a message through his Facebook account.

But this appears to be the same man: Police described Enright as a resident of Brewster, 21 years old, and an employee of an "Internet media company who had recently spent time with a combat unit in Afghanistan filming military exercises until this past May."

While both Fox"Nation" and Politico play the "friend of a friend" game with this, it's rather easy to see through this paper-thin facade.

While the reactionary Right will claim that since this man was affiliated with Intersections, that THAT is conclusive proof that he is a leftist. That's a pretty sad argument to make, as people that want to break into visual media - particularly cinematography - will take on almost any available job that would grant them access to shoots that will boost their portfolio and hopefully garner them a position where they truly desire to be. Where you work doesn't directly reflect your political outlook. I worked for almost 5 years for a hydraulics firm packed with racist, Right-wing Palin worshipers and I'm definitely not aligned with them.

But then we are most certainly to see the "but he volunteered with them" argument that will be used to paint a portrait of "lefty-sympathy". It all wreaks of the continued conservative clamour to try and prove that it's the liberals/progressives that are the violent ones.

Exit question: Michelle Malkin's already got this man's name and place of residence, so why didn't she check his voter registration status like she has done so many times before to prove a point? Could it be that she wouldn't get the answer she wanted?

Dont' Call Them Out......

.....because accountability isn't in their genetic make-up!!!!

This is some unfiltered, unscripted, real talk from Obama that has some conservatives seriously bent out of shape.



So how did those Bush Tax Cuts that were designed to recirculate more money into the economy work out? How much did they cost? How about the cost of the occupation of Iraq and the confrontation in Afghanistan? Those dollar figures alone should make conservatives wet their collective Depends on a daily basis. But do they? Of course not, as that would admit that conservative ideology is responsible for more than half our current debt.

I say we need more talk like this from not only our President, but all Democrats. Let the Republicans twitch and whine. They always create the problems and want us to solve them, so why are we even reaching across the aisle now?

Those Media Bastards

In which Palin degrades that which created her. No, really.



Yeah, polls have no relevance if they say bad things about you. This from the woman that consistently references polling data that shows that Obama is below 50% in approval.

--- Just a side note, Obama is polling about even with Reagan during his second year in office in 1982. But don't tell Sarah, shhhh ---

Her blathering about her Q-score aside, this woman is a creation of the media - and not just Fox"News", mind you. If it weren't for the fawning mass media, then Palin would be about as meaningful to the socio-political landscape as Joe Eszterhaus is to screenwriting. To those that catch that last reference, you get extra "cool points".

It's almost to the point that we have reached a saturation point with Sarah Palin. It would almost make sense for her to quit Fox"News" at this point, just so she doesn't become any more stale than she already is. But where would she go? She couldn't do talk radio, as that would require her to take calls; and we all know that this woman can't survive in an unscripted landscape.

Some Thoughts For Your Morning

- It's never been surprising to me that conservatives favor discrimination and often full-throated racism. But when a black man actually defends these actions, then that's when you have to start asking yourself "how is this possible".

- After hearing about this private meeting that Obama had with Republican Senators on NPR yesterday, I was fully prepared for one or more of the Republican "leaders" to talk about how Obama was this "angry black man". Didn't take too long for them to get pretty close to that description, as Senator Bob Corker claimed the exchange was "testy" during the NPR segment. It seems clear to me that Republicans ( whether they be elected officials or not ) have a difficult time distinguishing anger from constructive criticism.

- Conservative love Chris Christie. From his standpoint on public school teachers, this doesn't surprise me. But what gets me is his gimmicky nature, his willingness to create this gangster persona, and how he appears to want to take the state of New Jersey in the same direction that came pretty close to killing Colorado Springs.

- Again, the xenophobic and racist nature of the modern GOP comes out. It seems that they think only white Americans born in the US are "patriotic". This has been a key talking point with Republicans since Obama took office last year - that they ( white Republicans that is ) are somehow more patriotic than anyone else in this country. Guess they've never met any non-whites that have served in the military or the families of those that have died protecting the very freedom that allows them to be so insatiably stupid.

- Most everyone within the conservative realm are really wanting Obama to screw up in some fashion that will allow them to crow like Peter Pan on crystal meth for the next few years. Even if there are dead people, animals, and destroyed eco-systems, I think it's a safe bet that there are even conservatives praying to God that Obama fails in regards to the BP oil spill. But contrary to their talking points, the Obama administration has been doing more then most people realize.

Here We Go Again

It looks like Elena Kagan just may be Obama's choice for SCOTUS. Get ready for more sexism and shouts of "activist radical" from conservatives.

Look for President Obama to name his Supreme Court pick Monday, and look for it to be Solicitor General Elena Kagan, a former Harvard Law dean. The pick isn’t official, but top White House aides will be shocked if it’s otherwise. Kagan’s relative youth (50) is a huge asset for the lifetime post. And President Obama considers her to be a persuasive, fearless advocate who would serve as an intellectual counterweight to Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Scalia, and could lure swing Justice Kennedy into some coalitions The West Wing may leak the pick to AP’s Ben Feller on the later side Sunday, then confirm it for others for morning editions. For now, aides say POTUS hasn’t decided, to their knowledge.

It's almost a guarantee that Fox"News" producers for Beck's and Hannity's program are working overtime to try and find anything "suspicious" in Kagan's past. Back in April, he was endorsed by Bill Kristol even though he followed that up with a call for the GOP to oppose her "just because they can".

It's no secret that she thinks that confirmation process is pretty much pointless, and these comments will likely be thrown back at her.

Not to get overly speculative, but if it is Kagan, I'm fully prepared for the onslaught of conspiracy that will most certainly come from Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. It seems that those two are vying for the "craziest wingnut on the planet" award.

The Face Of A Tea Bagger

I've said multiple times that I believe the Tea Bagger movement really doesn't have any clear goals in mind, nor do they have any form of leadership. It is clear, however, that every shoutfest that erupts throughout the year is clearly orchestrated by people like FreedomWorks with the accompanying PR push from Fox"News".

Now, Edison Research has compiled polling data taken from last week's Tax Day Protest in Washington and come up with some revealing answers as to who the Tea Baggers look up to.

The survey, an exit poll conducted Thursday by Edison Research at the massive Tax Day protest on the National Mall, found that the attendees were largely hostile to President Barack Obama and the national Democratic Party — three-quarters believe the president “is pursuing a socialist agenda.”


Yet they aren’t enamored of the Republican Party as an alternative. Overall, three out of four tea party attendees said they were “scared about the direction” of the country and “want to send a message to both political parties.”


The results, however, suggest a distinct fault line that runs through the tea party activist base, characterized by two wings led by the politicians who ranked highest when respondents were asked who “best exemplifies the goals of the tea party movement” — former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), a former GOP presidential candidate.

It's always been clear that animosity, hatred, and misplaced rage were part of the glue that kept this group in a semi-stable state, but it's only within the last few months that the Paulite's have been showing their true colors.

Anyone remember how conservatives reacted when Ron Paul won the straw poll at CPAC? It was at that moment, that you could tell that the nuttiest were starting to take over the nut house.

Palin has always been a "face" of the Tea Bagger clan, and is often referred to as a "leader" of the movement, though the spin has continuously been that since there is not an "elected" leader of the movement that THAT is what makes it organic and pure grass-roots. But Palin's status is actually no greater than the status of a movie star. Conservatives, by and large, prefer the gimmick over the substance, and Palin fits the former quite well. She's learned to be coached and to stay on message with some of the top conservative performers.

What was puzzling to me regarding this poll was that it made no mention of Glenn Beck, Michelle Bachman, or the Tea Bagger's former favorite politician Jim DeMint - and boy did he disappear fast after healthcare reform passed. This leads me to believe that, like all people that idolize a particular actor/actress/musician/author, the "idol" will become marginalized at some point when something louder, flashier, and with more pretty colors catches their attention.

And There's No Follow-Thru

Seems that the population within conservative counties across the country are returning their census forms at a higher rate than anyone else.

Here’s how we did our (somewhat unscientific) analysis. We took the 20 most conservative counties on this list compiled by the Daily Caller, which uses a variety of criteria, including voting patterns, legislative history, and local culture and tradition. We then looked at the percentages of households in those counties that have returned their census so far and compared them to the national average return rate, which is 56% right now.

Result: Of that 20, only six are returning their census forms at a rate below the national average. Thirteen are above, some by significant margins, and one is tied.

The Plumline has more on their analysis.

This leads me to question whether or not people like Michelle Bachman and Glenn Beck are going to spin this or simply ignore it. After all, these are the two loudest voices in the "anti-Census" movement. Surely, Michelle Malkin and Erick Erickson have their own loony points of view when it comes to the Census, but my question is still this - this is the same form we all filled out 10 years ago. Where was the paranoia of the conservative movement then?

Eating Their Own

Earlier in the week, I posted about the Tea Bagger/Reid challenger candidate John Scott Ashjian's tax problems and how there would likely be some serious spin on this later.

Turns out I was right. And it's fairly unique in it's presentation.

Some [Republicans] are accusing Jon Scott Ashjian, a new Tea Party candidate running for U.S. Senate, of being a fake. The allegation? He was put in the race by agents of Senate Majority leader Harry Reid to siphon votes from the GOP.

"No doubt about it", says Danny Tarkanian, one of the many Republican senate candidates hoping to challenge Reid in November. "Nobody in the Tea Party knows who he is. He didn't know any of the principles of the Tea Party," Tarkanian tells CNN. He even accuses "Harry Reid's staff, campaign, whatever" of picking Ashjian because he's Armenian, as is Tarkanian. He explains, "They know the Armenians are very close they'll vote for each other."

And while conservatives have long used the "plant" meme within the context of townhall debates and speeches that show that Democrats are a little more in touch with the realities of America than their liberal/progressive counterparts, I don't think I've ever seen this kind of defense used against a candidate.

But there's a little more intrigue to this than one might get at first blush.

Sue Lowden, the Republican front-runner in the Senate primary according to recent polls, is the former Nevada Republican Party chair and seems to be the Republicans' best hope of unseating Harry Reid in November. Or at least she did, until Ashjian got into the race. Lowden says she's been very active with Tea Party groups in Nevada. "I am a Tea Party voter, absolutely." Which is why she tells us she finds it "a little strange" that Ashjian is emerging now. "I don't know who this person is. He's never been involved with anything that I'm aware of in this state." She doesn't know if he's a spoiler. "We'll find out for sure," she promises, adding "I've never seen him at one of our tea parties, by the way."

Its clear why Lowden and Tarkanian would be concerned. A recent poll conducted for the Las Vegas Review-Journal indicates Lowden and Tarkanian each beating Reid in one-on-one hypothetical general election matchups. But add a Tea Party candidate on the ballot and that siphons off enough conservative votes to give Reid a narrow victory. According to the survey Reid would grab 36 percent of the vote, the Republican candidate 32 percent and the Tea Party candidate 18 percent in a possible three way showdown.

Are the Tea Baggers more afraid of splitting the GOP vote or Ashjian's tax problems coming to light? Is it both? I'm leaning on the later. And the only way that these people can reconcile this within the context of socio-political debate is to accuse him of being a Democrat, a spy, if you will.

I'm not entirely sure if they actually believe it themselves. After all, if a Tea Bagger shouts loudly enough that Obama is going to ban bass fishing or that churches are being taken over by pinko, commie, progressive, Nazis, it won't take long until the entire collective actually believes it.

Moist Tea Bags

You could tell that their plans to "take back" their country wasn't going to work out as well as they hoped as soon as Doug Hoffman appeared on the scene. And after Scott Brown blew-up in the Tea Bagger's faces, it's starting to look like things aren't getting any better.

From Texas to Illinois to upstate New York, a string of lackluster showings for tea party-linked candidates have highlighted a central question about the group’s future: Can an organic and fledgling movement that lacks the institutional grounding and top-down organizational strength of either major political party transfer protest-oriented grass-roots energy into tangible success at the polls?

Some observers raise the question of whether the tea party crowd is cut out to achieve electoral success — or whether it is more influential as a more radical, guerrilla movement. “I think they are tremendously influential as a force in the November election,” said Curt Anderson, a veteran GOP strategist and a top adviser to the Republican National Committee. “Except if you see them as an organized political force — in which case, they have been less relevant.”

The early results from tea party candidates, despite their focus on hot-button issues such as opposition to President Barack Obama’s health care reform bill and concern about budget-busting policies of both parties, have not been pretty.

The Tea Baggers can't afford to operate as a completely independent party, as they will drain votes away Republicans and Democrats will likely gain even larger majorities. However, some people could simply opt to not vote at all. But considering their newly discovered "patriotism" and "love of country", I'm guessing that there isn't going to be a Tea Bagger NOT voting - and we all know who they'll vote for.

Recently, though, NPR reported that many within the Tea Bagger movement that are considering running for political office are doing this at the local level. This, at least to me, makes more sense, as many within the Tea Bagger movement lack the policy and procedural chops required for national level positions. This isn't to say that they couldn't get votes, or worst, actually win a seat in the House or Senate at some point in the future. If the later were to happen, it's almost a certainty that their actions would be a detriment to the country in one fashion or another.

The Politics Of Fear

Well, at least they are honest about it now.

The Republican National Committee plans to raise money this election cycle through an aggressive campaign capitalizing on “fear” of President Barack Obama and a promise to "save the country from trending toward socialism."

The strategy was detailed in a confidential party fundraising presentation, obtained by POLITICO, which also outlines how “ego-driven” wealthy donors can be tapped with offers of access and “tchochkes.”

While this doesn't come as a shock to me or any liberal/progressive, it's interesting to see conservatives already trying to back-peddle on this.

If it’s a day ending in “Y”, it must be time for a Politico story about the RNC alienating its fundraisers. The good news? Given Obama’s state-by-state approval ratings, if fear of The One’s agenda is the key to big money then the path to November shall be paved with bricks of gold. The bad news? Calling your donors “reactionary” and “ego-driven” isn’t usually the quickest way to their wallets.

But they are ego-driven and reactionary, that's why this sort of campaign works so well for the RNC and conservatives all across the nation.

Out Of Touch And Unhinged

I'm guessing someone just lost their re-election bid.

In an unusual display in the normally sleepy chamber, Bunning – without the support of GOP leadership – has blocked efforts to quickly approve a series of extensions to measures that would otherwise expire Sunday, including unemployment insurance and the Cobra program that allows people who lose their health benefits to continue getting coverage.

And that has led to a furious exchange on the floor, with Democrats attacking the senator, who has refused to relent on his objection, in unusually harsh terms.

In a colloquy with Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Sen. Jeff Merkley, a freshman Democrat from Oregon, was pleading for Bunning to drop his objection, when the Kentucky Republican got fed up.

“Tough s—t,” Bunning said as he was seated in the back row, overheard by the floor staff and others in attendance.

It's a pretty clear case that Bunning isn't familiar with the unemployment situation in Kentucky ( my state ) as it's pretty horrific in some counties. In Trigg County along, the unemployment rate is near 20%, one of the highest rates in the nation. So, for Bunning to essentially tell the people of Kentucky that lost their job "touugh shit", it paints a rather clear picture as to what is motivating these elected officials.

Bunning is having his moment in the sun now, and like his fellow obstructionists, he is going to ride this for as long as he can. But one has to wonder exactly what Bunning thinks he will gain from this little stunt? Even though Kentucky is a "Red" state, unemployment doesn't just affect the Democrats. I'm thinking his next townhall meeting here will be rather interesting, if he even has the sand to face his constituency now.

Obama's Healthcare Reform Proposal

Barack Obama has his healthcare reform proposal up here. It shouldn't take long to read, as it's only 11 pages.

What happened to all the conservative complaint that this was going to be over 1000 pages?

And dont' let the brevity of this proposal fool you. There are specifics in there.

Play Ball

Scott Brown's daughter has a proposal for President Obama.

Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) and his daughter, Ayla, say they're serious about their proposal to play hoops with President Barack Obama at the White House.


And now the father-daughter team is taking it a step further: They'd like the option of opening the game up to the public in order to raise money for Haiti.


"I think it'd be really fun. … I was thinking why not charge admission. It'd be a really good game knowing me and my dad — we're very competitive — and give all the proceeds to Haiti," Ayla Brown said Monday in an interview with ABC News.


Brown aides tell POLITICO that the proposal is still in the "idea" stage and that a potential basketball charity game is still a concept that could be presented in a proposal. Aides say they haven't formally approached the White House yet.


But Brown did propose the idea to Obama just after he won the election last month. Brown also pitched the idea to Vice President Joe Biden shortly after his swearing-in

I have a feeling this will turn into the hot new talking point on Fox"News" if Obama doesn't accept the offer. I can just hear people like Malkin, Hannity, and Steve Doocy say, "How can he fight a war on terror if he's too scared to play basketball with a girl".

I'm guessing this has little to do with Haiti and more to do with Scott Brown's image management.

Ghostwriters To Ride Again

Seems that the bar for reasons a person should write a memoir is set pretty low in the conservative movement.

Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.), the party's hottest elected official, has decided to write a book that combines memoir and inspiration.

Gail Gitcho, his new Senate communications director, tells POLITICO, “Senator Brown is honored and humbled to be approached by many people who want him to tell his inspirational personal story about his life leading up to his election as a United State Senator from Massachusetts. He will tell his story in a book in hopes of providing insight and encouragement to others and also to ensure that the record is complete and accurate.

Scott Brown? Already?

Of course, this was to be expected. Ever since conservatives caught Palin-mania, this is the next logical step in a Republican politicians career - hire someone to make up a nice story about you.

I'm still of the opinion that Brown isn't the person that conservatives are insisting he is. After all, he is courting John McCain and is on record saying that he patterns his beliefs/style off of what McCain has done.

It's already a guarantee that this book, once completed, will automatically be #1 on the NYT Bestseller List, as conservative groups are already allocating funds to make bulk purchases.

The Taxman Cometh

The unifying factor amongst the GOP - whether they be on the fringe, a centrist, or the most milquetoast moderate - is that they all claim to be masters of various schools of thought. From economics to medical care, proper legislative technique to media accuracy, and even taxation. The later, at least since Obama's ascendancy to the Presidency, is the gold-standard for exactly how honest and knowledgeable you are as a person a especially as a politician.

Many conservative voices have pitched upward with rage anytime a Democrat may have a problem with their taxes. Not the least of these was America's favorite wingnut paranoid-delusional: Glenn Beck.




But it seems that he has problems of his own when it comes to taxes.

As Beck evolved from a medium-market local radio personality to a one-man media empire with top-rated radio and television shows, best-selling books, a monthly magazine and a traveling one-man comedy tour, his production company, Mercury Radio Arts, has at times struggled to keep up with the heightened tax and filing demands accompanying his success.


Mercury, a private corporation that lists Beck as chief executive officer and his wife, Tania Beck, alternately as vice president or secretary, since 2007 has fallen behind on its New York City business income taxes and has been cited for filing errors related to its obligations under Texas franchise tax and New York state workers' compensation insurance rules.

I'd like to see some other prominent conservatives tax records. Perhaps Michelle Malkin and Sean Hannity would care to show how pristine their papers are.

Who Can Really Afford It?

Every time I see a commercial on Fox"News" promoting investment in gold, I have to ask myself "who can afford to buy gold"?

For quite some time now, conservative talking-heads have openly promoted ( and some are even paid to promote ) investing in gold. From Sean Hannity, to O'Reilly, Beck and even domestic terrorist G. Gordon Liddy, gold is being hyped to viewers of Fox"News" and audiences of right-wing talk radio. But seriously, who can afford to do this?

With talk of the unemployed, those losing their homes, and those looking for affordable healthcare benefits, one has to wonder who these conservative pitch-men really have in mind while hawking the precious metal. Certainly not the lower income brackets, and not the middle class that they claim to love so dearly. Who is left but the more affluent in society that afford this avenue of investment. Sure, a small-time investor can use gold to strengthen their portfolio, but the reality of this comes down to the fact that investing in massive amounts of gold ultimately draws down the value of the dollar, a currency that conservatives claim to champion but seem to have little faith in.

An interesting sidebar to this is that on Friday, gold prices ( in fact all the precious metals listed ) closed down 4.2% while the dollar showed an increase of 1%. Though some analysts are showing this is a predictable dip that will rebound come March, there was literally no reporting done on this by those that touts golds superiority over the dollar.

While the Chinese are the worlds largest gold producing nation, as well as the largest holder of US treasuries ( which is still based on the value of the dollar ) I have to wonder exactly why they would want to promote gold as the more trusted currency and ultimately devalue their investment.

I am not an economist, never have claimed to be one, but the fact that conservatives are openly advocating that the more affluent in society drop their investments based on the dollar in favor of gold seems to smack of an urge to destroy the middle and lower income brackets of the entire country. Perhaps their perfect America is one where only the a small percentage of people actually matter.

Cuddling Up With Foxes

I've often wondered how Fox"News" could accept people like Juan Williams and Mara Liasson as part of their news format, considering that they work for a publicly funded ( read: socialist ) news organization. Moreover, how can NPR keep people like Williams and Liasson on staff.

Politico reports that NPR are taking a closer look at Mara Liasson's role as a continued Fox"News" correspondant.

Executives at National Public Radio recently asked the network’s top political correspondent, Mara Liasson, to reconsider her regular appearances on Fox News because of what they perceived as the network’s political bias, two sources familiar with the effort said.

According to a source, Liasson was summoned in early October by NPR’s executive editor for news, Dick Meyer, and the network’s supervising senior Washington editor, Ron Elving. The NPR executives said they had concerns that Fox’s programming had grown more partisan, and they asked Liasson to spend 30 days watching the network.

At a follow-up meeting last month, Liasson reported that she’d seen no significant change in Fox’s programming and planned to continue appearing on the network, the source said.

Though Williams has openly taken on the role as "go to black man" when people like Bill O'Reilly are taken to task when he lets fly with on of his racial divisive gaffes - he even quest-hosts The Factor, which should be grounds enough for his removal from NPR - Liasson is either lying in order to keep her Fox"News" gig and protect the "credibility" of the network or she simply hasn't been paying attention to what is going on.

But didn't this same inquiry happen with Williams last year?