Saturday, February 28, 2009
"Bad, bad Bobby Jindal. Quick! Help me think of all the ways Bobby Jindal is just terrible. Ack! Don't look at him! He's horrible! I can barely stand to look at him. When he first emerges from behind a curtain, I moan "Oh, God." This is terrible. This is automatically horrible. A man of color, who is not supporting our side. One look and I am disgusted. How loathsome!"
There isn't anything in her post that links to any ACTUAL racial bigotry toward Gov. Jindal. Only her imaginings and opinions. What a colossal waste of time and bandwidth.
Gov. Jindal was criticized for his awful delivery of his rebuttal to President Obama's speech to the joint session of Congress. And it was awful. No one denigrates his educational achievements nor his political accomplishments. But, as important as those are to a rising politician, there are other attributes that one needs in 0rder to be perceived as a contender for the presidency. To point that out is not bigotry.
One more thing. A number of conservatives have made fun of Pres. Obama's use of the name Barry when he was a young man. He tried it for a time, because he felt the name Barack was too exotic, and like all young people, wanted to "fit in." As he matured, he became comfortable with who he was and accepted the name his parents gave him. No big deal. Except conservatives routinely use the name "Barry" derisively when they refer to Pres. Obama.
Now the Republicans have one of their rising stars who also wanted to "fit in" and decided his given name, Piyush, was too exotic, so he chose the name Bobby, (from the Brady Bunch, which he so admired at the time).
Will the conservatives disrespect Gov. Jindal's wish to be called what he chooses to call himself, "Bobby," and instead mock him by using his given name, Piyush? Just wondering. Because they were so diligent in calling Pres. Obama "Barry," a name he decided he didn't want.
On another issue, Gov. Jindal has a problem with honesty (see my post below) and with hypocrisy as well, and it isn't bigotry to point that out:
Louisiana to seek New Orleans-Baton Rouge passenger rail line from federal stimulus pot that Jindal called wasteful
by Robert Travis Scott
Friday February 27, 2009, 6:08 PM
BATON ROUGE - Louisiana's transportation department plans to request federal dollars for a New Orleans to Baton Rouge passenger rail service from the same pot of railroad money in the president's economic stimulus package that Gov. Bobby Jindal criticized as unnecessary pork on national television Tuesday night.
The high-speed rail line, a topic of discussion for years, would require $110 million to upgrade existing freight lines and terminals to handle a passenger train operation, said Mark Lambert, spokesman for the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development.
Jindal on Tuesday delivered the official Republican Party response to President Barack Obama's address to Congress. He criticized the stimulus package passed by the Democratic-majority in Congress and the president and noted examples of projects that he found objectionable.
"While some of the projects in the bill make sense, their legislation is larded with wasteful spending," Jindal said. "It includes ... $8 billion for high-speed rail projects, such as a 'magnetic levitation' line from Las Vegas to Disneyland."
Friday, February 27, 2009
According to Jindal, he told Lee, "that's ridiculous," which prompted Lee to tell the bureaucrat that the rescue effort would go ahead and he or she could arrest both Lee and Jindal.
In Jindal's rebuttal to Pres. Obama's speech, and in recalling this story, Jindal specifically states that he was there at the time this was happening.
After Sheriff Lee told him about the permit and insurance requirements Jindal states:
"I told him, Sheriff, that's ridiculous. Before I knew it, he was yelling on the phone, 'Congressman Jindal's here and you can come and arrest him too!"
Except...it is NOT true. Jindal was NOT there at the time of the incident. He did not tell Harry Lee anything of the sort.
Jindal Admits Katrina Story Was False
By Zachary Roth - February 27, 2009, 12:39PM
But now, a Jindal spokeswoman has admitted to Politico that in reality, Jindal overheard Lee talking about the episode to someone else by phone "days later." The spokeswoman said she thought Lee, who died in 2007, was being interviewed about the incident at the time.
This is no minor difference. Jindal's presence in Lee's office during the crisis itself was a key element of the story's intended appeal, putting him at the center of the action during the maelstrom. Just as important, Jindal implied that his support for the sheriff helped ensure the rescue went ahead. But it turns out Jindal wasn't there at the key moment, and played no role in making the rescue happen.
There's a larger point here, though. The central anecdote of the GOP's prime-time response to President Obama's speech, intended to illustrate the threat of excessive government regulation, turns out to have been made up.
Why did Gov. Jindal fictionalize the real story and insert himself into it when he wasn't there? Are the Republicans so bereft of ideas that the only way to convince people that they are the party of solutions is to make up stories and hope people will believe that their fictions prove that they're anti-government heroes?
And why didn't Gov. Jindal think anyone would find out the truth? Telling the truth about that story would have made the point Jindal was going for. Finding out that he lied about his involvement brings everything else he said in his rebuttal into question.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Gov. Jindal's rebuttal? Not so much.
Here's conservative columnist David Brooks' take on Jindal:
LEHRER: How well did he do?
BROOKS: Not so well. You know, I think Bobby Jindal is a very promising politician, and I opposed the stimulus package - I thought it was poorly drafted - but to come up at this moment in history with a stale, "government is the problem...we can't trust the government"...it's just a disaster for the Republican Party. The country is in a panic, now. They may not like the way the Congress passed the stimulus bill. The idea that government is going to have no role in this...in a moment where only the Federal government is big enough to do stuff...to just ignore all that and say government's the problem...corruption, earmarks, wasteful spending - it's just a form of nihilism. It's just not where the country is, it's not where the future of the country is. There's an intra-Republican debate: some people say the Republican party lost its way because it got too moderate, some people say they got too weird or too conservative. He thinks they got too moderate, and he's making that case. I think it's insane. I think it's a disaster for the party. I just think it's unfortunate right now.
Republicans have to take serious, serious note of this, otherwise, they will be seen as nothing but negative, obstructionist pessimists who have only old worn-out rhetoric to offer and nothing else. If the GOP continues down that path, and if Gov. Jindal is the best they have to offer, they're in big trouble.
GOP OFFERS RETRIBUTION AGAINST MODERATE REPUBLICANS:
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Facts are stubborn things, and this study shows that the bellowing bullies in the Republican Party spreading the nonsense about a liberal media are simply wrong.
Study: Network news coverage favored Republicans from 1992-2004.
It’s a truism among conservatives that the media has a liberal bias, but a study of campaign
coverage released by Indiana University has found that ABC, CBS, and NBC favored Republicans
in each of the presidential elections from 1992 through 2004. The study, which is the “first
major research project analyzing the relatively unexplored territory of visual coverage in
presidential elections,” found that “production decisions” such as editing techniques, camera
angles and shot lengths were more favorable to Republicans. The study also looked at “who is
given the last say in a piece,” finding that “GOP candidates were favored in terms of having the
last say in all but the 2004 election.”
- Michael Wilson
From Huffington Post:
The three major broadcast networks favored Republicans in elections from 1992 to 2004, according to a study that analyzed presidential campaign coverage.
That effect was largely due to journalists censoring their own reporting out of frustration at being accused of a liberal bias, according to Maria Elizabath Grabe, associate professor in the Department of Telecommunications at Indiana University College Of Arts and Sciences, who co-authored "Image Bite Politics: News And The Visual Framing Of Elections" (Oxford University Press) with fellow academic Erik Bucy.
Grabe and Bucy examined 62 hours of network news coverage - 178 newscasts - between Labor Day and Election Day over four elections and examined the visual coverage, including such package techniques as the "lip-flap shot - when a reporter's voice is heard over video of the candidate, which tends to be unflattering for that candidate.
They also examined the "Goldilocks effect" - which party gets the last say in a piece and is better remembered by viewers.
According to their research, Democrats were more likely to be the subject of the unflattering "lip-flap" effect while GOP candidates had the last say in every election but 2004. In 1996, Republicans got the final say eight times as many times as Democrats.
When GWB was in office and his approval numbers were in the toilet, I remember reading conservative blogs and learning that it doesn't matter what the pollsters say, that George W. Bush was beloved by the American people, no matter what his approval rating was. LOL!
Now when I visit some of these blogs I read comments about how Mr. Obama's numbers are "tanking" and how the American people don't like him, and he's really not the president because his father was born in Kenya, and he's a radical communist, and blah, blah, blah...
From today's NYTimes:
By JEFF ZELENY and MEGAN THEE-BRENAN
Published: February 23, 2009
President Obama is benefiting from remarkably high levels of optimism and confidence among Americans about his leadership, providing him with substantial political clout as he confronts the nation’s economic challenges and opposition from nearly all Republicans in Congress, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
A majority of people surveyed in both parties said Mr. Obama was striving to work in a bipartisan way, but most faulted Republicans for their response to the president, saying the party had objected to the $787 billion economic stimulus plan for political reasons. Most said Mr. Obama should pursue the priorities he campaigned on, the poll found, rather than seek middle ground with Republicans.
More broadly, 68 percent of Americans approve of Obama's job performance to date, not atypical for an incoming president (it precisely matches Ronald Reagan's first-month rating, and trails George H.W. Bush's) but a striking counterpoint to George W. Bush's departing 33 percent approval last month. Bush hadn't seen a 68 in five and a half years.
"I have with me a hard copy of a collection of Republican quotes predicting doom and disaster in the wake of the 1993 Clinton economic stimulus plan, and much of the rhetoric is eerily similar to today's. Of course, that should come as no surprise, since the point of the compilation was in fact to point out that the 1993 rhetoric -- particularly on health care, which was still a live proposition at that time -- was itself eerily similar to Republican doom and disaster rhetoric during the debate on the original Social Security and Medicare legislation."
Rep. Dick Armey (R-TX), CNN, 8/2/93:
Clearly this is a job killer in the short run. The revenues forecast for this budget will not materialize; the costs of this budget will be greater than what is forecast. The deficit will be worse, and it is not a good omen for the American economy.
Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA), GOP Press Conference, House TV Gallery, 8/5/93:
I believe this will lead to a recession next year. This is the Democrat machine's recession, and each one of them will be held personally accountable.
Rep. Deborah Pryce (R-OH), 5/27/93:
The votes we will take today will not be soon forgotten by the American voter. (They) will lead to more taxes, higher inflation, and slower economic growth.
Rep. Jim Bunning (R-KY), 8/5/93:
It will not cut the deficit. It will not create jobs. And it will not cut spending.
In the past few days, a number of national polls have been conducted that measure President Obama’s performance after one month in office. Beyond Obama’s continuing high job approval rating, the polls have found that the public believes Obama has made a good faith effort to work in a bipartisan manner to address America’s problems:
The Republicans were obstructionists then and were absoultely WRONG--why should we listen to their posturings now?
"plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose"
Monday, February 23, 2009
President Obama and First Lady Michelle at the Governor's Dinner held Sunday night at the White House.
Go here to see the rest of the "swells."
Sunday, February 22, 2009
These Once Boom Cities Are Now Quickly Turning Into Recession Ghost Towns
By ZACK O'MALLEY GREENBURG
Feb. 22, 2009
Call it a modern-day tale of two cities.
Las Vegas edged Detroit for the title of America's most abandoned city. Atlanta came in third, followed by Greensboro, N.C., and Dayton, Ohio.
For decades, Las Vegas, ripe with new construction and economic development, burgeoned into a shimmering urban carnival. Detroit, once the fulcrum of American industry, sagged and rusted under its own weight.
These days, it's the worst of times for both.
Las Vegas edged Detroit for the title of America's most abandoned city.
Atlanta came in third, followed by Greensboro, N.C., and Dayton, Ohio.
Our rankings, a combination of rental and homeowner vacancy rates for the 75 largest metropolitan statistical areas in the country, are based on fourth-quarter data released Feb. 3 by the Census Bureau. Each was ranked on rental vacancies and housing vacancies; the final ranking is an average of the two.
Those who live in the U.S. love and hate these 10 spots.
In Depth: America's Most And Least Popular Cities
Looking to start over?
Those who have lost their jobs, defaulted on their mortgages or are simply searching for a change might want to consider Denver. The city-- known for its skiing, culture and bustling singles scene--is where Americans would like to live the most, according to a recent survey conducted by Washington, D.C.-based group Pew Research Center.
In Depth: America's Most And Least Popular Cities
At the opposite end of the spectrum, Americans say they'll stay clear of Detroit, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Minneapolis, Minn., and Kansas City, Mo.
Good old Beantown is looking better and better every year.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Friday, February 20, 2009
*h/t dmarks. See comments section.
I found this over at the Huffington Post by Jason Linkins:
"These stickers were apparently inspired by those aforementioned "Impeach Bush" stickers, or the "Impeach Laura Roslin" stickers, or the "Impeach Doctor Zaius" stickers, or the "I Brake For Joe The Plumber" stickers. One of those. Obviously, these Obama versions have some original touches of their own. For instance, did you know that "Osama" and "Obama" sort of rhyme? That's what all the "off the hook" kids grooving on Michael Steele's new urban-suburban dis track tell me, anyway! Plus, the word "lying" is depicted as "lyin'" which is a shout-out to Sarah Palin.
You can probably purchase this stickers in person if you come to CPAC, a convention of conservative Furries and Mitt Romney fetishists, next week. Or buy them here. Consider it a bailout!"
Here's the ad for the stickers:
IN STOCK FEBRUARY 19th - PRE-ORDER TODAY!
During the Bush Administration, "IMPEACH BUSH" stickers circulated around the country.
We've had several requests from Patriot Depot customers to create an "IMPEACH OBAMA" sticker. Popular radio talk show host Michael Savage has called for the nation to start displaying these stickers as well. So, due to popular demand, here they are!
While we are waiting for impeachment charges, keep in mind that our nation was bamboozled into electing a man who is hell-bent on taking away your freedom, raising your taxes, and ushering in a Socialist State not much different than the old USSR.
And don't forget that his campaign was launched in the living room of a terrorist. If 2012 seems too far away, Impeachment is the only answer!
US Residents get FREE SHIPPING!
The poor benighted lunkheads who thought this piece of theater up believe that they will incite enough "GOPmentum" to persuade all 20% of the Americans who support them to riot in the streets and call for the overthrow of the month old Obama presidency.
You have to love these clowns--they are good for a rolicking belly laugh.
Every country needs a political party it can routinely ridicule. Thank you, GOP, for fulfilling that need.
Congress’ approval is only 31%-59%, but additional questions show a much more complicated picture. The number for Congressional Democrats is at 49%-45%, while Republicans are at 33%-59%. The Republicans appear to be cramping Congress’ style.
Only 30% say Obama hasn’t done enough to cooperate with Republicans in Congress — the GOP base vote, basically — while 62% say he’s doing the right amount and 6% say it’s been too much.
Flipping it around, only 27% say Republicans have done enough to cooperate with Obama, with 64% saying not enough and 5% saying too much.
Meanwhile, people are increasingly confident that Obama is leading the country in the right direction.
Since Obama’s election, there’s been a 23 percent rise in those saying the country is headed in the right direction.
In October, only 17 percent of Americans felt that way, while 78 percent thought the country was headed in the wrong direction.
h/t Think Progress
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Obviously Adobe seems to think you can.
The Congressional Repubs would rather listen to a radio talk-show comedian than to the men and women who actually govern.
All of this points to the complete disconnect [and cynicism] of almost all the Republicans in Congress [only three Republican senators voted for the stimpak]--they've placed their party above their country.
More from today's NYTimes:
WASHINGTON — President Obama must wish governors could vote in Congress: While just three of the 219 Republican lawmakers backed the $787 billion economic recovery plan that he is signing into law on Tuesday, that trifling total would have been several times greater if support among the 22 Republican state executives counted.
“It really is a matter of perspective,” Mr. Crist said in an interview. “As a governor, the pragmatism that you have to exercise because of the constitutional obligation to balance your budget is a very compelling pull” generally.
With Florida facing a projected $5 billion shortfall in a $66 billion budget, and social costs rising, the stimulus package “helps plug that hole,” Mr. Crist said, “but it also helps us meet the needs of the people in a very difficult economic time.”
Recently, Governors Schwarzenegger, Crist, Douglas and Rell joined 14 Democratic governors in signing a letter to Mr. Obama lauding his economic plan. Other Republicans would have signed on, said a person familiar with the letter’s drafting, but for party pressure in their states.
The National Governors Association sent a bipartisan letter of support to Congressional leaders of both parties, signed by its Democratic chairman, Edward G. Rendell of Pennsylvania, and Mr. Douglas, its Republican vice chairman. “The combination of funds for Medicaid, education and other essential services is critical for governors as they work to manage the downturn in their states and improve government for the long term,” it said.
Privately, Republicans favorably contrasted Mr. Obama with the outgoing Republican president, George W. Bush, according to two participants.
Though Mr. Bush had been a governor — in good economic times — his relations with state executives were distant at best. Amid a downturn early in the decade, he unsuccessfully opposed $20 billion for the states. Last fall, he resisted some Republicans’ pleas for aid.
Mr. Douglas in January sought a meeting with the new administration at the White House office that is a liaison to governors. Instead, he got an Oval Office meeting with Mr. Obama.
When reporters briefly came in — the two men flanked the fireplace just as presidents and foreign heads of state typically do — Mr. Douglas praised Mr. Obama for his leadership. The stimulus bill “might be a little different” if he had written it, the Republican said. “But the essence of a recovery package is essential to get our nation’s economy moving.”
While the irrelevant Congressional Republicans fiddle with Aerosmith tunes and crow about being losers, the Republican governors of 22 states are working with President Obama to deal with our economic crisis--they are the real examples of bipartisanship.
Monday, February 16, 2009
The GOP led by Eric Cantor is celebrating to Arrowsmith's "Back in the Saddle" their inability to stop Barack Obama in passing the stimulus package.
"WooHoo! We lost! "
The dirty little secret is that GOP governors are happy to accept the money being sent their way to help them out of the dire economic situation left by the previous administration.
I have no idea what drives the Grand Old Party to place all their chips on the defeat of the American people.
Someone on another blog suggested this as their rightful theme song:
"He's a real Nowhere Man
Living in his Nowhere Land
Making all his Nowhere plans for nobody...
He's as blind as he can be
Just sees what he wants to see
Nowhere Man, can you see me at all?"
We, like the American people, are charitable and generous by nature. We therefore assume that any overtones of irony are unintentional. So, in the bipartisan spirit of the times, let's help the online community come up with a better song choice for the Republicans in Congress. (And, no ... it wouldn't be very bipartisan to suggest "Fool On the Hill.")
If the GOP wants to stay within the Aerosmith oeuvre, may we suggest "Love In An Elevator?" That's the one whose chorus summarizes our last eight years of governance: "Livin' it up while we're going dooown ..."
Or how about "Tell Her No"? Here's the chorus to that sixties nugget:
No no no no no no no nono no no no no no no no nono no no no no no
The word "no" is repeated 23 times. Seems appropriate, doesn't it? What's more, the group that performed it is "The Zombies," which brings to mind that persistent (though disproved) "zombie lie" that the stimulus bill will "dictate how health care is provided" (a topic we'll return to in a more serious moment).
h/t Democratic Underground
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Saturday, February 14, 2009
"My radio audience is more pissed at you guys than the Democrats" Beck explained.
Beck went on to say that conservatives didn't expect "socialism" from some members of the GOP. Steele's response:
"You have absolutely no reason, none, to trust our word or our actions at this point."
Ah, an unintended moment of truth from the GOP.
And that, Mr. Steele, is why they gave you the job of RNC chairman?
Who are conservatives and Republicans going to believe? The guy who says the GOP can’t be trusted who has been entrusted with THEIR party, or…ummmm... the guy who says the GOP can’t be trusted?
Suggestion for a GOP bumper sticker:
Republicans: "America! You Can't Trust Us!"
This song was dedicated to the love of her life, the married boxer Marcel Cerdan, who died in a plane crash in October 1949, while flying to meet her in New York. Piaf and Cerdan's affair made international headlines, as Cerdan was the middleweight world champion and a legend in France in his own right.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009
The top photo is the last image taken of the great man on April 10, 1865. The bottom is the first known image taken--date unknown.
The leaves of the oak and the willow shall fade,
The peasant, whose lot was to sow and to reap,
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
"This goes without saying, but I am going to have to warn you that since this 'spendulus' bill was passed it was as if the government was saying, "We WANT the economy to get worse so that we can totally take over".
[This "government" that this person writes of was inherited by Mr. Obama less than a month ago. This "government" was run, for 6 long, painful years, by the Republican Party. But the poor dear seems not to have been aware of it. Nevertheless, the poor dear is warning us. And we thank her for that.]
It is as if a coup just happened under our noses when Obama and the left took over in Washington.I have never seen in my lifetime so many executive orders by a president the first two weeks in office.
[She must have slept through 8 years of Bush.]
We have to face reality that America has collectively lost her mind and we are now witnessing the effects of allowing 'the flesh' to rule. What we are seeing in America is really a snapshot of what we saw in our lives before we believed, before we became followers of Christ.
[Aha! "The flesh!" We are being ruled by Flesh! BTW, if America has "collectively lost her mind" that would include the person who wrote that last paragraph. Obviously.]
What does this mean for us as believers? I don't know how God is going to work through this but I do know God is allowing it. I do know that as a 'people' we have gone astray and there will be consequences to face.
[She knows what God allows but doesn't know how God will work through this? (How does she know one very important aspect of God but not the other? God only let's her in on half of his unknowable celestial plans?) And we as a quote people unquote? Why the quote marks around people? Does that mean that we're not really quote people unquote, but perhaps chipmunks?]
God has set up 'universal principles' in scripture that 'work' for both believers and non-believers. I am not saying that if someone 'follows' these rules that they will be saved from their sins, and be reconciled to God so please don't misunderstand me.
[Wait. Wait. So if someone does follow these quote universal principles unquote that quote work unquote for everyone, no one is guaranteed to be saved? That is one lousy deal if I ever heard one. You do it all right according to the God rules but there's still the chance you're gonna get your ass fried? Even if you quote follow unquote the rules? No fairsies! Uh-huh! That's one bad-ass god if you ask me.]
For example, our laws are based on the ten commandments which is what our society must follow or chaos will ensue.
[Poor demented dear. Our laws, of course, as any sane person knows, are NOT based on the ten commandments. For example--and, pay attention, because this is important--no one in this country is put to death for working on the three different Sabbaths that the three Abrahamic religions observe. Also for the poor misguided dear, there are no laws on the books in any state in the good ole USofA that punishes people for having false gods, or taking the Lord's name in vain. Now in Taliban Country, perhaps. But this poor dear isn't aware that we do not live in Taliban Afghanistan, which she apparently admires so very much.]
Also the principles in scripture about debt and that you shouldn't get into debt if you can't pay it back which is what we have done with this spendulus bill. There are many other biblical principles this bill has gone against so we will suffer the consequences as a nation.
[What about all the debt the Bush Administration got us into? Will we be punished for that too? Or just the Republicans? Help me out here.]
God has also set up a universal principle called "Taleonic justice" where what you do will eventually come around to you whether you get caught or not. A great example of this in scripture is when Jacob tricked Isaac, his father, into thinking he was Esau so that he would get the birthright-ownership of everything Isaac had.
[Hol-eee Shyte! Bush and Cheney are gonna get waterboarded? Who knew!]
We need you in order to ensure the freedom we have to even talk about Jesus.I have written this post today because of my concern for us as a body in regard to our witness and how easy it will be for us to dim our lights when we are faced with real challenges in the future and pressure from everyone around us to 'cave' and embrace certain sins as o.k. by God.
[Where to begin with that? She implies that perhaps the freedom to even talk about Jesus is in danger? Um. No. Any US citizen is free to talk to Jesus and about Jesus with her family, friends and church group or even her gerbil. So she doesn't need to dim her lights, she can even put them on high beam or on one of those energy saving bulbs--I encourge that sort of dim light behavior. And don't worry about caving and embracing sin. The one sin that seems to be evident in that last paragraph is the sin of mixed metaphors. Unforgivable.]
It all depends upon whether or not we remain diligent walking with Christ as to how we will respond.
I see this as an opportunity for us to 'straighten up' and get back into the word with diligent study so that we can rightly divide it.
We need to have our armour on."
[Amen! Get your armour on! Old chaps! And invite Lancelot over for some fish and chips!]