The Attention Whores Have A Plan

In what is obviously nothing more than a stunt designed to show that they are somehow more "morally adjusted" and "patriotic" than their Democratic counterparts, the new GOP majority in the 112th Congress with read the Constitution once John Boehner takes over as Speaker.

The Constitution frequently gets lip service in Congress, but House Republicans next year will make sure it gets a lot more than that – the new rules the incoming majority party proposed this week call for a full reading of the country’s founding document on the floor of the House on Jan. 6.

The goal, backers said, is to underscore the limited-government rules the Founders imposed on Congress – and to try to bring some of those principles back into everyday legislating.

“It stems from the debate that we’ve had for the last two years about things like the exercise of authority in a whole host of different areas by the EPA, we’ve had this debate in relation to the health care bill, the cap-and-trade legislation,” said Rep. Robert W. Goodlatte, Virginia Republican, who proposed the reading. “This Congress has been very aggressive in expanding the power of the federal government, and there’s been a big backlash to that.”

This is akin to contestants in the Miss USA pageant telling the judges that they want world peace, to end hunger, and to save little kitties from trees. It's political posturing at it's most pathetic.

Certainly, this will go further to gin up the Republican base and provide more material for Fox"News". Likely the talking point of the moment will be "why didn't Democrats open each session with a reading of the Constitution"? To that, I would ask why the Republican majority didn't do it prior to the 11th Congress? Oh, that's right, we still had Bush in office. Silly me.

Make no mistake about it, Congressional Republicans aren't going to change course even though they have a majority in the House of Representatives. It's going to be the same "party of no" antics we've come to expect over the last two years. It's just that they are going to have to be the ones doing the explaining when the economy doesn't instantly rebound after Boehner bangs the gavel for the first time next month.

Remembrances

Powerful election ad or Most Powerful election ad.



( Blue Girl over at They Gave Us A Republic posted this earlier )

This ad strikes right at the heart of the Tea Bagger movement and their inability to recall even recent history. From the continued complaints about the financial "bailout" ( crafted by the Bush administration ) to insisting that privatizing Social Security is a grand fix-all that a majority of Americans are against ( also ignoring the fact that administrative costs would quadruple and the guarantee of benefits would disappear ) the modern conservative movement either lacks the ability to remember or simply chooses not to.

Filibustering Our Desires

Are you really surprised?

Undaunted by a Senate setback, Democrats appeared increasingly confident Monday they will be able to take advantage of Americans' anger at Wall Street and push through the most sweeping new controls on financial institutions since the Great Depression.

The Senate, in a 57-41 vote, failed to get the 60 supporters needed to proceed on the regulatory overhaul. One Democrat, Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, joined with the Republicans.

This certainly shouldn't come as a shock to anyone, as Republicans will do their level best to stop or slow down anything that the Obama administration wants to accomplish, even if it's against their better interests.

I'm honestly not surprised that Ben Nelson voted with the Republicans on this, considering the fire-storm of criticism that was leveled at him after the so-called "Cornhusker Kickback".

But what the average American is largely ignoring is this - Republicans would be willing to destroy you, your family, their future, and this country if it meant that the Obama administration wouldn't be able to stop corporations from doing it. Rather ironic, I think.

Repeal At Your Own Risk

The talk on this is dominating the corners of the internet today. But before Republicans bet the metaphorical farm on this, they might want reconsider their options.

First, and foremost, in order to do something of this magnitude successfully, they would need a 2/3 majority in the Senate. Hate to break it to them, but that's not mathematically possible right now.

Secondly, and this really should be part of the initial thoughts of Republicans, is that they need a plan to put in action should they pull off the near impossible task of repealing this. What are the voting populous going to think when all these improvements that have already started get pulled away? Are they going to have legislation equal to or superior to replace it with? My guess is not at all. Honestly, I wouldn't call that a guess, I would say it's an iron-clad guarantee.

Third, there are already Republicans saying it's over already for the GOP.



Frum, actually sounding like a voice of reason within the party, makes the very valid point that Republicans - ever eager to find someone to blame - are going to start looking at who within their party caused this to happen. The Tea Baggers are going to go after the more moderate voices within the GOP while it could turn out the the Tea Baggers could no longer find themselves in the good graces they once enjoyed. Considering the current socio-political climate though, I'm going to say the later is a bit of a long shot. But this doesn't remove the fact that Republicans do tend to get caught up in finger-pointing and completely miss the plot.

Will Republicans get so mired in their desire to place blame that the repeal process gets pushed aside? My guess is they will try to do both and the healthcare reform bill will still be law come 2012. The GOP has proven to the American people that they can't take on two tasks at once. How are they going to repeal, campaign, come up with their own healthcare plan, AND find a scapegoat within the party all at once?

I say let the games begin.

The Myth Of The Centrist Nation

In which Kathleen Parker has no idea what her nation is about.

Approximately 70 million strong, these are America's new homeless class, people who are equally disgusted with both traditional parties and the special interests that control them. They're all ages, sexes, races, ethnicities, though younger Americans are crowding the front rows. Of those born after 1977, 44 percent identify as independent.

Independents as a group outnumber either party, in other words. Yet, given the hyperpartisanship that began under George W. Bush -- and has accelerated during President Obama's first year, thanks in large part to the enabling mechanism of the Internet -- one would think that America were divided into hard left and hard right.

We're not. We're a vast middle, slightly right-of-center nation. How is it that so many feel so disenfranchised by so few?

Who are these mysterious "independents"? That all depends on who's doing the polling. While we will likely hear about "independents" and how they relate to conservativism in America from the likes of Fox"News" and Rasmussen, those people are largely Republicans wearing a slightly less funny-looking hats. There are no "independents" within the TeaBagger movement, they are all card carrying, party-line voting Republicans, no matter what they or anyone tells you.

Conversely, true "independents" ( if there are any anymore ) either don't vote at all or lean more the way of Bernie Sanders - at least that's how I've always read it.

You can really gauge where the nation ( at least the voting populous ) is at whenever we elect a new President. We've been clearly divided between strict left/right ideals since the 2000 election. I don't think anyone can argue with that. But the subtle nuance of midterm elections do give off an air of swaying back and forth between the catagories every two years, though it's a bit disingenuous to claim that the nation makes any sort of radical shift or is completely neutral at those moments. Then again, I might be wrong.

One factor to not ignore is how we as Americans have gotten our information for the better part of the last 10 years. The Internet and the 24hr news networks have completely changed the political landscape to where it's completely impractical to call us a "centrist" nation. While Democrats are more prone to edge towards "centrist" ideals while still holding firm to ideals on both sides of that median signifier, it is in stark contrast that we see Republicans edging further and further to the Right every year. I don't think that's been made any clearer than after Obama's win over John McCain. Republicans completely lack any ability to be "centrist", it's just not in their genetic make-up.

But this is what makes this whole notion that Kathleen Parker, Fox"News", or me tell you what direction the nation is headed and what our real identity is. It all depends on your definition of "center". Think about where Bill O'Reilly's center is. It's most certainly to the Right of me and probably to the hard left of Glenn Beck - even though you won't hear either of them admit it. And that's why no one will ever be able to truly gauge who we all are and how to properly classify us, even though I have done my best to at least analyze the scene as I see it.

Considering the events of the past year, we are more divided than at any other time in my 30+ years. We are, despite reports to the contrary, a nation that desires change. Those of us that are opposed to it should probably check our sources before making a decisive answer. Then again, those that are pushing for that change shouldn't be so timid as to confront misinformation. In the end, we are going to have to live with the fact that we will never be "centrists", holding hands, singing songs, and finding common ground of everything.

HCR Day 1

Well, it wasn't a pretty process and not everything that I wanted to be in is in ( public option and rate regulation for starters ) but it's at starting point and as soon as Obama signs this, some good will have already begun that wasn't there. But guess what else is going to get started, or at least amp up to the Nth degree?

Complete, unchecked - and more than likely largely unchallenged - conservative hysteria.

Did anyone catch Tom DeLay on Geraldo last night? He was waving his pocket Constitution around and practically foaming at the mouth. Micheal Steele called in and was boasting that he is forming a group to impeach Pelosi. God only knows what Limbaugh and Beck are going to talk about on the radio today, but I'm certain there's going to be plenty of talk about communisitic, Nazis, with fascist, totalitarian plans for medical rationing facilities that euthanize babies at a reduced price to the consumer.

Since when is the "Alex Jones" mentality so widely accepted?

It's going to be an interesting ride, get ready.

Why Even Have The Meeting

I didn't get to see it live, but I watched lots of highlights from yesterdays Healthcare Reform Summit and have come to the following conclusion - what was the goddamned point?

Obama has done everything to try and appease the unappeasable know-nothings that make up the Republican party. Conservatives across the country care more about clinging to debunked talking points and cherry-picking seemingly negative aspects from CBO scores and being spoon-fed fear and conjecture from the likes of Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh.

Obama was asked to a televised forum.

Done.

He was asked to provide a format.

Done.

He was then asked to provide his own plan.

Done.

So what did Republicans do? What they always do - find a way to complain about this that carries the narratives that Obama is going to do what he wants regardless of what Republicans want and what they claim their electorate wants. Republicans can't let this legislation pass, as it will be successful and they can't be seen as losers.

What Obama should do now is pass this through reconciliation and damn whatever Republicans have to say about it. If they aren't on board, fuck 'em.

Independantly Deceptive

Granted, this is Newsmax we're talking about here, but even their loyal readership should realize that this is a steaming pile of excrement.

Just when it appeared the various tea party organizations couldn't agree on anything, it looks like many of them have found common ground in support of a "Declaration of Tea Party Independence."

They primarily are declaring their independence from the political parties.

The declaration, posted on PolicyNotParty.com, is another sign the tea party organizations will continue to distance themselves from the Republican Party. More than 60 tea party leaders in more than 20 states reportedly have signed on to the new document. Among its highlights.

Considering that Tea Bagger Princess Sarah Palin has already addressed the seething throng of maladjusted prattle-boxes, telling them they HAVE to chose a party, doesn't this whole story wreak with the stench of "identity crisis"?

On the one hand, the Tea Baggers aren't going to vote Democratic no matter what happens. The Obama administration could cure cancer, AIDS, resurrect Reagan and bring out the worlds largest budget surplus and they'd still find fault. The flip-side is that their narrative have to match their actions. This is something that they will never be able to accomplish. These people are Republican through and through. No "Declaration" or spin from Newsmax is going to remove this very blatant and shining truth.

The Fringe Is The New Center?

This says a great deal about the modern Republican party.

39% of Republicans want President Obama to be impeached

This isn't surprising, as there will always be talks of "impending articles of impeachment" for Democratic Presidents. But the reasoning used for impeachment is what is beyond comprehension. She my post from earlier in the week regarding the current "Impeach Obama" movement.

63% think Obama is a socialist

And these people also think that he's a Marxist, Totalitarian, Communist, Maoist. It's fair and safe to say without fear of contradiction that these people don't know what any of these titles really mean.

42% believe Obama was born in the United States

While this particular belief set is based both in racial divisive and nativist mindsets, no amount of proof will convince the 58% of Republicans that apparently align themselves with the "birther" movement.

21% think ACORN stole the 2008 election, 55% "not sure"

You can thank Fox"News" and conservative activists for this one, as there was never one instance of voter fraud in the 2008 election. At best, you had several instances of "registration fraud" perpetrated by minimum-wage temps ACORN used during the election season.

53% think Sarah Palin is more qualified than Obama to be president

For the life of me, I'll never be able to comprehend how and why people believe this.

23% want to secede from the United States

Again, you can thank conservative activists for this little gem. I remember Kieth Olbermann doing a piece on what it would be like if Texas seceded - and it didn't play out well for Texans.

73% think gay people should not be allowed to teach in public schools

This whole idea that "gay" is something you can catch is not only preposterous but laughably ignorant.

But it's the last one that makes absolutely no sense......

31% want contraception to be outlawed

Really? So the use of condoms would result in jail time? You would be fined thousands if you were on the pill? Talk about taking abstinence-only education too far.

Strike One?

I'm going to call this one early - don't expect Scott Brown to win any more friends or maybe even lose his re-election bid if this the man he will patterns his legislative practices on is John McCain.

Malkin most certianly isn't a fan of McCain ( anymore ) and let's it known as often as she can:

Red Flag Number One: A reader from Arizona informed me the day after the Bay State Bombshell that he had received a robo-call from Massachusetts GOP Sen.-elect Scott Brown. “He basically wanted me to vote for John McCain in November,” the reader said in his description of the automated campaign call supporting the four-term Sen. McCain’s re-election bid. “No wonder [Brown] said he hadn’t had any sleep…he was busy recording phone messages!”

Malkin is one of the most vocal supporters of the Tea Bagger movement ( aside from Beck is more of a "studio-gangster" on that front anymore ) and her opinion, patently absurd as it is, is often taken as gospel.

Ed Morrissey over at HotAir seems rather pleased that key portions of McCain/Feingold have been overturned:

Free political speech is not free if the government can dictate when and where you exercise it. It’s true that CU could have run the movie earlier than 30 days before the election. They felt — not without reason — that their speech would be more effective using the same venues within 30 days of the election. Assuming they break no other laws, what gives government the right to dictate when on the calendar they can exercise free political speech? Apparently, being “rich” is a Constitutional exception through which the government can infringe on rights.

So with reports of the GOP rearranging it's "strategy" to not just include by mirror Brown's, one has to wonder if his plan really is so revolutionary.

Supreme Backfire?

I was thinking this morning that aside from the recent SCOTUS decision to allow big corporations/labor unions the same "free speech" rights as individuals wouldn't necessarily be a complete molestation of the political process. The reasoning behind this is rather easy to see when you realize that you'll be able to see what companies are backing a particular candidate. And, considering Wall-Street's love of Republicans, wouldn't it stand to reason that this should be an eye-opener for perspective Republican voters?

But the broader question is this - will the GOP care if people know who stands with them, because they sure are loving this decision.

– Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX): “It is about a nonprofit group’s ability to speak about the public issue. I can’t think of a more fundamental First Amendment issue. … [The ruling could] open up resources that have not previously been available [for Republicans].” [NYT]

– Rep. Steve King (R-IA): “The Constitution protects the rights of citizens and employers to express their viewpoints on political issues. Today’s Supreme Court decision affirms the Bill of Rights and is a victory for liberty and free speech.” [Statement]

– Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN): “If the freedom of speech means anything, it means protecting the right of private citizens to voice opposition or support for their elected representatives. The fact that the Court overturned a 20-year precedent speaks volumes about the importance of this issue.” [Statement]

– Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY): The court took a step toward “restoring the First Amendment rights [of corporations and unions]. … By previously denying this right, the government was picking winners and losers.” [AP]

– RNC Chairman Michael Steele: “Today’s decision by the Supreme Court in Citizens United v. FEC, serves as an affirmation of the constitutional rights provided to Americans under the first amendment. Free speech strengthens our democracy.” [Statement]

– Senate Candidate Marco Rubio: “Today’s SCOTUS decision on McCain-Feingold is a victory for free speech.” [Statement]

There is a fair bit of Republican camouflage being thrown around with this decision. They are framing this purely as a "First Amendment" issue, that it's private citizens that will benefit. This completely ignores that fact that large corporations will have more control over the voices of politicians that claim to have "private citizens" best interest at heart.

Year One : Attack Of The Teabaggers ( or ) Nice Try But Not Enough

By and large, conservatives became the party of paranoia, revisionist history, misdirection, and distortion on Janurary 20th of last year. This isn’t to say that they hadn’t already been steeped in these practices prior to the inauguration of Barack Obama, but they were certainly amplified to the Nth degree.

This has not been an easy year for Obama, The monumental task of repairing damage done the previous 8 years wasn’t going to be easy, yet his record has been molested into something completely unrecognizable in many respects. His successes have been marginalized or completely ignored by many in this country. In replace of substantive discussion regarding Obama’s actions as President, the majority of Americans are caught up in responding to specious accusations like Obama’s birthplace, alleged ties to “radicals”, his view of America, and those chosen to be in his cabinet.

Conservatives invested every ounce of energy they had in turning Obama into a morbid caricature of evil. He was labeled a Socialist, Totalitarian, Marxist, Communist - even though none of those can co-exist along side one another – that jaunted around the globe “apologizing” for America and was literally inviting a terrorist attack. There were no attempts at bipartisanship by Republicans in either House of Congress, even though there were cries for it by them. From the very start, Obama was faced with obstructionism from the entire Republican Party.

While he had succeeded in many areas, including the Stimulus, the beginnings of Cap and Trade, vastly improved the image of America around the world, and seated a US Supreme Court Justice. However successful these things were, they were quickly labeled as abject failures by conservatives. Not in-so-much as they were bad, but conservatives would not be seen as failures in their own right. They would do anything to ensure that Americans were convinced Obama had already failed.

Republicans, conservative “tea-party” activists or not, throughout the campaign claimed that Democrats revered Obama as a God-like figure that could do anything. However, they faced their own ironic deification of the man, as they set the bar so high that it was literally unapproachable. This isn’t to say that Obama didn’t try. The only problem was that he didn’t try hard enough. The stimulus wasn’t enough, the full implementation of Cap and Trade still hasn’t taken effect, healthcare reform became ensnared in too many Republican trappings, and he hadn’t effectively pushed-back at those conservatives that leveled inflammatory attacks.

Suddenly obstructionism, willful ignorance, and yes – racial animus ( though the later will be viciously denied despite conclusive proof of its existence ) were considered “patriotism”. Suddenly there had been no terrorist attacks during Bush’s term, that the economic collapse was solely the fault of Obama, that even pointing out the widely recognized and recorded history of the Bush administration was unacceptable. Conservatives were convinced that America did not exist anymore, that we were in danger of losing every freedom and liberty once the Oath of Office was taken by Obama.

It’s been a difficult year, and Obama has faced a great deal. He’s still got more work to do, but so do all Democrats. We can’t let ill-informed conservatives control the message or rewrite history any longer.

Ms. Amos Goes To Washington?

I've always been a fan of Tori Amos. He wit and ability to capture an emotion or moment is more powerful than most female musicians of her era. But would that make her a good politician? Moreover, would she be accepted - as a Republican?

American singer TORI AMOS has vowed to run for office if former U.S. Vice President candidate SARAH PALIN ever tries to get elected again.
Republican Palin's role in the 2008 White House race divided America, with many questioning her credentials - and the Spark hitmaker insists she'll run alongside the Alaskan if she ever eyes the vice presidential candidacy again.
She says, "If Palin runs again, I'm going to run on a Republican ticket. What I know about Middle Eastern policy could fit on a thumbnail, but I still know more than she does. You have to ask, how could a nation nearly vote in somebody who isn't qualified for the job?"
But Amos feels more positive about the future of her country now U.S. President Barack Obama is in power: "I'm a lot more hopeful. The (George W.) Bush years were really difficult times if you were an American who loved your country. Having someone now that so many people respect doesn't mean there aren't going to be problems, but so many problems have been left behind."

Even though Tori Amos is more extensively travelled and knowledgeable of the world around her - as well as being an activist for multiple causes for many years - it's far more likely that that Cubs would win the next two World Series than her gaining political office.

And this is just the type of statement that the fine folks over at Fox"Nation" just love. It gives them a chance to make fools of themselves again while defending Sarah Palin without being able to enumerate even one aspect of her that would be beneficial to the American public. Not only that, but a lot of these people don't even know who Tori Amos is. But that's the least of their problems.

The Morning After

While on Twitter last night, watching election results pour in for the 4 races that the media at large were hellbent on covering like Obama actually going to be threatened by them, it was quite interesting to attempt conversation with conservatives.

Regardless of what you said about Christie's win, Corzine's loss, or VA going right back where it was a few short years ago, you were guilty of perpetrating the most egregious spin imaginable.

But there's something that these conservatives aren't willing to recognize.

Living in one of Reddest states in all of the nation ( Kentucky ) I think I have a fairly good perspective on what went down in Virginia last night. While the elecorate in VA went for Obama last year, something that hasn't happened for a Democratic candidate since the 60s, it's not suprising that the state now has a Republican governor. It's a matter of history. Kentucky, at least in my lifetime, has never gone for a Democratic presidential candidate - save Bill Clinton in the 90s, yet we have a Democratic Governor for several years. You see the parallels now? Just because your state leadership shifts away from the previous presidential election results has absolutley no bearing on whom your state will vote for in 2012.

As far as Jersy is concerned, Christie had this one in the bag from the start, as Corzine's polling was floating between 29% and 30% for some time. The only reason that conservatives were focusing on this issue with drooling intensity was that Obama had taken such an active roll in trying to ensure Corzine remain governor of that state. It was a move that I wouldn't have made, and it does put Obama in a position to be roundly ridiculed by the Right - which they have done.

So what of th infamous NY-23 results?

while some conservatives are actually attempting to create Hoffman's loss in NY-23 as a victory for the tea-bagger set, it's actually just as embarassing ( if not more than ) Obama actively fighting for Corzine. From Sarah Palin to Glenn Beck to virtually every program on Fox"News" and all corners of the conservative blogging community, Hoffman was seen as some bright and shining figure that would vindicate the fringe conservative movement and prove that third party candidate can win.

This was most certainly not the case.

The reality of NY-23s results are largely seen by people that make strict party-line votes each and every time there is an election, regardless who is on the ticket. There are Republicans that would vote for Satan, should he be on the ballot, simply so they wouldn't have to vote for a Democrat. But was there something else in play last night in New York? Were people really voting for Hoffman, or were they voting because of his endorsements? Had he actually won, what do conservaties think they would have gotten that Michelle Bachman, Steve King, and Joe Wilson can't do - dispense nothing but white noise and say no to everything.

The true historical significance that has come out of NY-23 is that a Democrat holds a seat that was warmed by Republican ass for over 100 years. So all the money, all the coverage, all the hype largely for nothing.

A main talking point amongst conservatives and even some moderate Republicans was that these three elections were to be a referendum on Obama. And while exiting polling, which can be seen as a rather unreliable metric in most instances, show that Obama was hardly the deciding factor in how people voted, yesterdays off-year elections resulted just as history would have predicted they would have. The only difference, the only game-chaninging result, was that the tea-baggers lost - again.

Found In Translation

Has anyone really thought about why conservative Republicans haven't done any of the heavy lifting in healthcare reform? While some will point out - though not on any of the 24-hour news channels - that it was primarily Republicans that pushed and helped pass the Medicare Prescription Drug Act, it should be noted that this was nothing more than a nod to the drug companies and put wads of cash into the coffers of Republican politicians. The reason that it won't be mentioned is that it flies directly in the face of conservatives "anti-entitlement" mentality. And the last thing that Republicans want to have to defend is their actions that created any form of entitlement.

There are two things that conservatives continually and unflinchingly will claim: America has the greatest healthcare in the world and the currently proposed legislation will harm the economy and the American public. The only problem is the two fundamental flaws in these statements are simple to see. The former leaves out the reality of why sweeping change is needed in healthcare reform - far too many people can't afford it. And what they can afford ultimately isn't enough. The later continually makes members of the Republican party look like rank amateurs, as they can't craft any proposed legislation tha would accurately reflect their alleged ideals without wrecking healthcare even more.

The single most lauded form of healthcare reform is for "competition" - the ability for companies to sell their coverage across state lines. And while this sounds like a fantastic idea, it would ultimately create such mass deregulation that insurance companies that the level at which people would be insured would plummet. It would completely remove the mandiate that is supposed to dictate what providers have to cover.

And even though this deregulation would be harmful to the American public, conservative Republicans don't seem to understand this. Much in the same way that deregulation was one of the primary catalysts of the financial meltdown that began several years ago, deregulating the healthcare industry is precisely what the insurance providers want.

The larger question is whether or not Republicans realize that their ideals, their belief system, isn't able to me married with reform of healthcare or any industry that damages the nation. They don't realize that shopping for healthcare is in no way comparable to shopping for a loaf of bread and a gallon of milk on payday.

That is precisely why Republicans have literally done nothing to reform healthcare. It is precisely why they never will.

To Guarantee The Freedom To Still Not Afford It

Logan Murphy over at Crooks And Liars highlights this video of State Senator Mary Pilcher-Cook of Kansas attempting to explain how the public option is going to destroy essential freedoms and the very soverignty of her state.



The tea-bagger mentality of Mrs. Pilcher-Cook is so glaringly obvious, that the mind recoils in horror when attempting to disect her rationalization of how providing healthcare to the populous of Kansas is actually a threat to them. But, such is how these reationary creatures function.

But this style of legislative obstructionism brings up a valid point - if states have the ability to craft legislation to block a public option or they are offered an "opt-out" stance, isn't this going to be an incentive for people to leave Kansas and other states that follow suit? Certainly, not eveyone is going to be able to leave their particular state, should they not consider the health and well-being of their citizens, but it is not a great leap of logic that some very well may choose to do so.

People like Mrs. Pilcher-Cook don't have any solutions to help struggling members of her state, she is simply concerned with advancing a failed ideological point of view.

Breaking News: Meghan McCain Has Tits - Twitter Followers Goes Nuts

I follow lots of people on Twitter - from the average joe and jane, to businessmen, porn-stars, politicos, other bloggers, and yes, Meghan McCain. She's not always someone that I agree with and there is still that spektre of John McCain being her day, but she's still a more tolerable than say Mary Kathrine Ham and not nearly as single-minded as that Scott Baio kid from Happy Days. But when people get incensed about this pic:



Then what's really going on?

I honestly didn't recognize her at first, but realized it was here. What I didn't expect was to hear that she was suddenly branded a slut. Was it the fact that she like Warhol? Was it her pseudo-90s banana-clip hair-style? Oh, it's the boobs.

You know, for all the salivating that men in the Republican party did over Sarah Palin, of all the adoration that was showered upon her simply because of her cougarish looks, why suddenly are people enraged by Meghan McCain's sweater tigers?

Yes, she's good looking and has a great pair of baby feeders. Are Republican women not supposed to be proportionate in this way? Apparently some think so. People are quite perculiar at times in their behavior towards women that are attractive, and this is just another example of that.

It apparently got so bad that Meghan was considering deleting her Twitter account:

why I have been considering deleting my twitter account, what once was fun now just seems like a vessel for harassment.

If she quits, then she quits, but if she lets the puritanical ravings of a small segment of the Twitterati get to her like that, then she really needs to toughen-up. She certainly handled the Laura Ingraham dust-up better than this.

Song Of The South

Considering the way that the Republican party is pushing it's message ( ie: tea-baggery nonsense, racial devisiveness, anti-everything from healthcare reform to clean energy, and a complete and total embrace of the Palin/Beck/Bachman wing of the party ) does this chart come as any suprise?



With all the talk about the 2010 Midterm Elections next year, this research doesn't show that the GOP are gaining any ground outside the southern states. So if they want to make any real headway, and potentially regain control of either house of Congress, they are going to have to bolster their numbers elsewhere.

Some Thoughts For Your Monday Morning

- Why do people on the Right continually think that their Congressional representatives are going to vote with what their constituancy wants? This entire healthcare debate has been framed by the Right as to what "they" want, not what the voters in their districts want.

- While it is true that ACORN has problems with a handful of people ( which they have severed ties with ) there is somewhat of a hypocritical message that is being sent by conservatives - the Republican party in specific. While the Republican party, just within the last few years, has seen several sex scandals ( one involving an underage boy in the Mark Foley incident ) corporate corruption, drugs, and misuse of state funds, how do they have the right to lambast ACORN?

- Has anyone else noticed that Bill O'Reilly has been so marginalized since Glenn Beck got to Fox"News" that he's hardly a headlining act in the American psyche anymore? Sure, he's got his audience every night, but his relevance is all but gone.

- For those that watched the VMAs last night, and saw what Kanye West did to Taylor Swift, do you think that was planned? There's been some chatter on Twitter over the last few hours that it was. If so, I have to ask why? Why would West, a man that is widely known for his childish behaviors, want to continue validating those opinions? That's not exactly good marketing.

- How many blacks did you see at the "9/12" protests? I wasn't there, but I counted 2 that were interviewd by Beck. Diversity? I think not.

- And speaking of the continuing "tea-bagging" within the conservative movement, where were these same people when Bush more than doubled the national deficit? Where were they when Bush's tax cuts and the Iraq occupation cost more than double what proposed healthcare legislation will? Where were they when Bush clearly violated the Constitution, that these people claim to be scholars of, by using warrantless wiretapping on Americans?

-

How Many?

Considering that the "birther" conspiracy is becoming a more acceptable meme within not only the conservative movement, but the Republican party as a whole, I wonder how many Republican mambers of Congress believe such nonsesnse.



From FireDogLake

Mike Stark has been up on the Hill all week whipping Democrats to hold fast on the public plan, and in his spare time, he decided to ask Republicans if Barack Obama was born in the United States. Not only do they not want to answer -- they run.

He asks Republicans Tom Price, Thaddeus McCotter, Jeff Fortenberry, Charles Boustany, Aaron Schock, Greg Harper, Mike Coffman and others what they think. Tim Murphy hides, looking at pens for 20 minutes to try and avoid him.

So, Thaddeus McCotter is busy with healthcare? Really?