Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston



Saturday, February 28, 2009


My conservative friend, Gordon, who guest-blogs over at A Political Glimpse from Ireland, has a post up titled "Hearts and minds, or Why liberal bigotry is okay, and the main thrust of the post is what Ann Althouse IMAGINES people think about Gov. Jindal:

"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
The Times-Picayune
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


He's not a stupid man. Why did he feel it necessary to make up the story about himself and Sheriff Harry Lee and how Jindal told Lee he could ignore the government bureaucrats' requirement for permits for the volunteer boats to rescue stranded Katrina victims?

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!" 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
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.


“The claim that tax cuts pay for themselves…is contradicted by the historical record,” reported the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which showed that revenues grew twice as fast in the 1990s, when taxes were raised, than in the 1980s, when taxes were cut. called the claim that Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) made--"Every major tax cut we’ve had in history has created more revenue. "--“highly misleading” and stated the obvious fact that “we can’t have both lower taxes and fatter government coffers.”


Since 2001, the Administration and Congress have enacted a wide array of tax cuts, including reductions in individual income tax rates, repeal of the estate tax, and reductions in capital gains and dividend taxes.

Nearly all of these tax cuts are scheduled to expire by the end of 2010. Making them permanent would cost about $4.4 trillion over the next decade (when the cost of additional interest on the federal debt is included). (

Because important decisions about these tax policies must be made in the next few years, it is essential to understand their effects on deficits, the economy, and the distribution of income.

Supporters of the tax cuts have sometimes sought to bolster their case by understating the tax cuts’ costs, overstating their economic effects, or minimizing their regressivity.

Here, we address some of the myths heard most frequently in recent tax-cut debates. (For a discussion of myths specific to the estate tax debate, see

For a discussion of issues surrounding the Alternative Minimum Tax, see

“You cut taxes and the tax revenues increase.” — President Bush, February 8, 2006

“You have to pay for these tax cuts twice under these pay-go rules if you apply them, because these tax cuts pay for themselves.” — Senator Judd Gregg, then Chair of the Senate Budget Committee, March 9, 2006

Reality: A study by the President’s own Treasury Department confirmed the common-sense view shared by economists across the political spectrum: cutting taxes decreases revenues.

“Some in Washington say we had to choose between cutting taxes and cutting the deficit… Today’s numbers [the updated 2006 budget projections] show that that was a false choice. The economic growth fueled by tax relief has helped send our tax revenues soaring.” — President
Bush, July 11, 2006

Reality: Robust revenue growth in 2005-2007 has not made up for extraordinarily weak revenue growth over the previous few years.

Thursday, February 26, 2009


"$140 million for something called "volcano monitoring." Instead of monitoring volcanoes, what Congress should be monitoring is the eruption of spending in Washington, DC. "- Bobby Jindal

What was he thinking? Throw something out there that sounds weird and hope the American people agree with you that it's stupid? Despite the fact that volcanic eruptions are real and kill real people? Does he believe hurricane monitoring is a waste of taxpayer money too? Are the Republicans and their "stars" really this out of touch with reality?

Alaskans Erupt Over Jindal Volcano Jab

Alaskans of all stripes are incensed by Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal’s disparaging comments Tuesday about the necessity of volcano monitoring, the Anchorage Daily News reports. It’s “a matter of life and death in Alaska,” Sen. Mark Begich wrote the Republican. Even Gov. Sarah Palin’s office weighed in. “Of course Alaskans want to know if a volcano is going to blow,” a rep said.

Not only is Alaska the locus for much of the volcano activity in the US, but an eruption threatening Anchorage could disrupt international trade. “Any interruptions,” Begich wrote, could be felt even in “Baton Rouge.” Experts also wondered why Jindal singled out monitoring, which will get $14 million in federal dollars, not the $140 million he quoted. “It saves lives to be able to warn people,” one said.

Republicans are against the stimulus bill, but that doesn't mean they won't take the money. Bobby Jindal is a particularly excellent example.

Wednesday, February 25, 2009


And Jindal absolutely adores Limbaugh? Is this what the GOP has sunk to? A Rhodes Scholar in love with a loud-mouth demagogue?

I am astounded that a man with Jindal's educational background would be so in love with a political hack. And yet it's true.

During his Feb. 28, 2008 radio show, Limbaugh explained that Jindal is among the small group of conservative leaders with the “guts to articulate” right-wing “Rushism” principles.

Right-wing Rushism principles? OMG! Windbag now thinks the GOP worships at his little porcine feet, and what he bloviates on is what will put the GOP back in power in 2012? Keep at it "el Rushbo," I hope you continue to snort and grunt this narcissistic nonsense over the air because it reminds the rest of America--the MAJORITY, BTW, of what a self-absorbed cacafuego you are.

In an interview with Limbaugh in 2007, Jindal gushed that he reads Limbaugh’s books and that he is a “huge fan” of Limbaugh’s program. In addition, Jindal proudly displays Limbaugh’s kind words for him on his campaign website, where there are links to Limbaugh transcripts and articles.

Paul Begala urged Jindal to “dump Rush.” Begala writes, “But if it is Pres. Bush who haunts Gov. Jindal’s past, it is Rush Limbaugh who haunts his future.”

Last night on Twitter, conservative commentator Amanda Carpenter wrote:

"Hackwatch: Conservatives/GOP-ers who try to spin Jindal's performance as anything better than it was..are hacks. Ugh, I have to go to bed."


President Obama's speech to Congress last night was very well received.

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"'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 a moment where only the Federal government is big enough to do 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.


Tuesday, February 24, 2009


The "liberal media" meme spread by the conservatives has always been a lie, but that didn't stop their non-critical thinking followers from repeating it time and again and believing in the fiction. I have posted the reality here and here showing that even though the White House and the Congress is in the Democrats' hands, the cable and network news stations STILL favor Republicans on their shows. Why is that?

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.



President Obama's approval numbers are still high.

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:

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.
Obama's presidency is off to a strong start, marked by a large lead over the Republicans on handling the economy and 68 percent job approval.
Nonetheless Obama clearly holds the upper hand, both in overall approval and on the dominant issue of the day. He leads the Republicans in Congress by 61-26 percent in trust to handle the economy, the biggest such lead for a president in ABC News/Washington Post polls since late 1991. (Bill Clinton came close at the start of his first term.)

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.
Another interesting piece on conservatives being on the wrong side of history is noted over at Congress Matters by David Waldman:

"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.
Polls: Americans Want Republicans To Drop Ideology And Work On Obama’s Priorities
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:
WaPo/ABC News: 73 percent say Obama is “trying to compromise with the Republican leaders in Congress” while just 34 percent believe Republican leaders are trying to compromise with Obama.
NYT/CBS News: 74 percent think Obama is “trying to work with Republicans in Congress” while just 31 percent think Republicans in Congress are trying to work with Obama.
Fox News/Opinion Dynamics: 68 percent believe that Obama “has sincerely tried to reach out to Republicans and be bipartisan” while only 33 percent believe Republicans have “sincerely tried to be helpful to Barack Obama and be bipartisan.”
As Greg Sargent points out, the New York Times/CBS News poll had a particularly interesting finding regarding bipartisanship. According to the poll, “a sizable majority wants Obama to pursue his policies with or without Republican support” while “a huge majority says that Republicans should emphasize working with Obama in a bipartisan way over pursuing their policy ideas.” Matt Yglesias put the numbers into a chart:


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


And to Sean Penn and to everyone who works for equal rights for all Americans.



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."


Senator Richard Shelby, (R. Ala.) questions President Obama's citizenship:

"Well his father was Kenyan and they said he was born in Hawaii, but I haven't seen any birth certificate," Shelby said on Saturday, in response to a constituent's question at a public event. "You have to be born in America to be president."

Pssst..., Senator Shelby, Hawaii is in America.

(This guy is a U.S. Senator? Where do they find these people?)

And this:

ELIZABETHTOWN, Ky. -- U.S. Sen. Jim Bunning predicted over the weekend that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg would likely be dead from pancreatic cancer within nine months.

During a wide-ranging 30-minute speech on Saturday at the Hardin County Republican Party's Lincoln Day Dinner, Bunning said he supports conservative judges "and that's going to be in place very shortly because Ruth Bader Ginsburg … has cancer."

"Bad cancer. The kind that you don't get better from," he told a crowd of about 100 at the old State Theater.

"Even though she was operated on, usually, nine months is the longest that anybody would live after (being diagnosed) with pancreatic cancer," he said.

Thank you, Senator Bunning. I'm sure Justice Ginsberg and her family are grateful for your sensitive comments about her life expectancy at this very difficult, sad, and challenging time. Your kind words are duly noted. Now please, find some heavy duty duct tape, wrap it around your idiotic head, placing emphasis on the mouth area, and go away for a long, long time.

(Seriously. Where do they get these people?)

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal announced his intention to oppose changing state law to allow his Lousiana citizens to qualify for the second two unemployment provisions. Jindal said the state would only be accepting money to increase the unemployment insurance payments for those who currently qualify for unemployment insurance.

In all, Jindal turned away nearly $100 million in federal aid for his state’s unemployed residents. Further, as the National Employment Law Project projected on Febuary 13, EUC extension alone would have benefited 24,981 Louisiana residents. Jindal justified his decision by claiming that expanding unemployment benefits would result in tax increases for businesses. In a press release, the governor’s office explained:

The Governor said the state will not use a portion of the stimulus package that requires the state to change its law to expand unemployment insurance (UI) coverage to qualify for up to $32.8 million of the federal stimulus funding because it ultimately would result in a tax increase on Louisiana businesses.

But it is not clear why participating in the expanded unemployment insurance program would result in tax increases for business. By Jindal’s own estimate, the recovery package would have funded his state’s unemployment expansion for three years, at which point the state could — if it chose to do so — phase out the program.

Shelby from Alabama: Hawaii is not a state and the president is an alien.

Bunning from Kentucky: Justice Ginsberg will be dead in nine months.

Jindal from Louisiana: I'm putting my career ahead of the welfare of my state.

Sunday, February 22, 2009


We have too much stuff! Dave Miller, whose blog the mission is well worth reading, talked about Mexico and stuff recently, and that's why I posted this Carlin routine.


America's Top 15 Emptiest Cities

These Once Boom Cities Are Now Quickly Turning Into Recession Ghost Towns
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.

Friday, February 20, 2009


Really. I hope the Secret Service pays this figu di putana a visit. And real soon. This is the guy who LOST big to President Obama in the Illinois senate race. Obama got over 70% of the vote, and he wasn't even an incumbent! Alan Keyes is a loser of the first magnitude. Take a look at how he's treated his lesbian daughter.

Keyes has said he would not be coerced into "approving of that which destroys the soul" of his daughter. He contended that he must "stand for the truth [Jesus Christ] represents" even if it breaks his heart.

[BTW: Jesus says absolutely nothing about gays in the New Testament.]


Americans don't like people who incite mayhem--especially against a popular, duly elected* president.

If there is anyone more repulsive and pathetic than Alan Keyes, I haven't found him.

Alan Keyes was in Nebraska the other day where he was the featured speaker at a fundraiser for the Triple A Crisis Pregnancy Center. Outside of the event, KHAS-TV's Curt Casper caught up with the perennial presidential candidate to get his thoughts on his one-time campaign rival and current president, Barack Obama.

Needless to say, Keyes is not a fan:"Obama is a radical communist and I think it is becoming clear. That is what I told people in Illinois and now everybody realizes it is coming true. He is going to destroy this country and we are either going to stop him or the United States of America is going to cease to exist," said Keyes.

KHAS also released the video of the four-minute interview and it is really worth watching, especially when Keyes starts getting upset that the interviewer is not taking seriously his claims that Barack Obama's presidency is illegitimate, saying "it's not a laughing matter ... we're in the midst of the greatest crisis this nation has ever seen and if we don't stop laughing about it and deal with it, we're going to find ourselves in the midst of chaos, confusion, and civil war"

How exactly does Keyes propose he and his malcontented, disaffected, fellow conservatives "stop him?"

What is he suggesting?

*h/t dmarks. See comments section.

The Republican Stimulus Plan

Selling these.


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:


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.


A new AP/GFK poll taken during the final days of the fight over the stimulus bill shows that Americans overwhelmingly disapprove of Republican efforts to block Obama’s plan:

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


From CNN's Ed Henry's twitter:

Along motorcade route, one handmade sign said, "After God, It's Obama".

Sharp contrast from protests here in Bush years.

Today, President Obama arrived in Canada, his first foreign trip since taking office. Already, the trip is a stark departure from the Bush years. U.S. presidents have traditionally made their first trip abroad to Canada. President Bush, however, broke with tradition and headed south to Mexico.

Already, there’s been a noticeable difference in the way the Canadian public has received the two presidents. Bush was wildly unpopular in Canada. Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who supported the Iraq war (and later admitted it was a mistake), was lambasted by Canadians as supporting “Harper-Bush” policies. Not surprisingly, Bush’s visits to Canada spurred massive protests.

Early Crowds Await Obama,” the Toronto Star reads today.

American flags are being hung up around Ottawa in preparation” for Obama’s visit, reports the Ottawa Citizen.

How wonderful it is that our neighbors and other people around the world actually respect and like our leader again.

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

THE CRETINS AT THE NEW YORK POST (a Rupert Murdoch publication)

think this cartoon is incisive political satire. I had not heard about the woman and chimpanzee in Connecticut, so when I saw the cartoon, I saw it as the Post's attempt at making a joke about murdering the president.
(And then there's the disgusting chimpanzee symbolism--racists have used that image to denigrate the black man all through our disgusting history. When people have the image of a chimpanzee (a sub-human image) they tend to treat people in a sub-human way.)

The Democratic Party authored the Stimulus Package, and Barack Obama is the head of the Democratic Party. How else would one read this cartoon except as a incentive to murder the president, the person who signed the Stimulus Package?

They can't defend this--no matter what the racist pigs try to say to justify their treason.

Tuesday, February 17, 2009


From the February 13 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
LIMBAUGH: In addition, they have reformatted the bill -- they've made it a PDF file when they posted it. Now, for those of you that don't use computers, basically what that means is that it cannot be keyword searched. A PDF file is essentially a picture of a page. And, so, you can read every page, but you cannot keyword search it. It's not a text file as legislation normally is as posted on these public websites. They don't want anybody knowing what's in this; they want it happening as fast as possible so nobody can know what's in it.
"In fact, PDFs are searchable in multiple ways. In its Help Resource Center for Adobe Reader, a program that reads PDFs, Adobe Systems writes: "You can run a simple search, looking for a search term within in a single file, or you can run a more complex search, looking for various kinds of data in one or more PDFs. You can run a search using either the Search window or the Find toolbar. In either case, Reader searches the PDF body text, layers, form fields, and digital signatures. You can also include bookmarks and comments in the search.
h/t Media Matters
Really, O Hindenburg of Gasbags? You can’t search PDF files?
Obviously Adobe seems to think
you can.
I don’t know about other bloggers, but the fact that Rush is now the unquestioned voice and kingmaker of the Republican party just fills me with a sense of glee and uncontrolable mirth.
I just love hearing about his fatuous bloviations on subjects he knows nothing about--and then thinking about all the people who listen to him, nod their heads and say to themselves "Damn right!" These are the same people who encourage the Republican party to follow their leaders off the political cliff into the canyon of irrelevance.



Unlike their counterparts in Congress, governors are required to balance budgets. President Obama is finding support among many Republican governors--especially from two states with huge budget shortfalls: California and Florida. A blogfriend of mine who lives in Texas has posted in comments here on "Progressive Eruptions" that Gov. Perry of Texas has talked out of both sides of his mouth--condemning the stimpak at the same time he anticipates the funds to help his state's budget shortfalls.

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.

Bob Herbert tells us why we are so lucky to have President Obama.

Monday, February 16, 2009


Too funny.

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! "

Weird, eh?

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


Today, C-SPAN released its second Historians Survey of Presidential Leadership, in which “65 presidential historians ranked the 42 former occupants of the White House on ten attributes of leadership.

Coming in first was Abraham Lincoln, followed by George Washington, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt, and Harry Truman.

Finishing last was James Buchanan.

George W. Bush came in 36th, just beating out Millard Fillmore, who ranked 37th.

Sunday, February 15, 2009


President Obama's stimulus package passed, and the Republicans have decided to throw their lot in with defeat, despair, and desperation. They've compared the stimpak to the New Deal, which they've pronounced a failure. (They've forgotten that their hero, Ronald Reagan, was always associated with winning, optimism and hope.)

But let's take a look at a more recent comparison and see how wrong they were on that, too:

Republicans have seen to it that Obama has complete ownership of the economic rescue. By withholding nearly all their votes, they are betting that it will fail, just as they did in 1993 when the newly elected Bill Clinton pushed his first budget and tax package through Congress without a single Republican vote.

Back then, Newt Gingrich predicted that the Democratic plan would lead to "a job-killing recession," and Dick Armey, his lieutenant, called it "a recipe for disaster."

Even if they had been right, they took the risk of seeming to be betting against something most voters hoped would succeed. But they were wrong -- the economy soared under Clinton.

Sixteen years later, today's Republicans seem to have forgotten that experience.

From the outset, the Republicans in Washington pored over the bill to find trivial issues to make hay with. They found some small funding for HIV and sexually transmitted diseases prevention; they jumped up and down about renovating the national mall; they went nuts over a proposal - wait for it - to make some government buildings more energy-efficient; they acted as if green research and federal funds for new school building were the equivalent of funding terrorism. And this after eight years in which they managed to turn a surplus into a trillion-dollar deficit and added a cool $32 trillion to the debt the next generation will have to pay for. Every now and again their chutzpah and narcissism take one’s breath away. But it’s all they seem to know.

The stimulus opponents, egged on by all the media murmurings about Obama “losing control,” also thought they had a sure thing. Their TV advantage added to their complacency. As the liberal blog ThinkProgress reported, G.O.P. members of Congress wildly outnumbered Democrats as guests on all cable news networks, not just Fox News, in the three days of intense debate about the House stimulus bill. They started pounding in their slogans relentlessly. The bill was not a stimulus package but an orgy of pork spending. The ensuing deficit would amount to “generational theft.” F.D.R.’s New Deal had been an abject failure.
This barrage did shave a few points off the stimulus’s popularity in polls, but its approval rating still remained above 50 percent in all (Gallup, CNN, Pew, CBS) but one of them (Rasmussen, the sole poll the G.O.P. cites). Perhaps the stimulus held its own because the public, in defiance of Washington’s condescending assumption, was smart enough to figure out that the government can’t create jobs without spending and that Bush-era Republicans have no moral authority to lecture about deficits. Some Americans may even have ancestors saved from penury by the New Deal.

Saturday, February 14, 2009


Fox News' Glenn Beck laid into RNC Chairman Michael Steele during an interview Friday following the House's passing of the stimulus bill, telling him that the party had "betrayed" conservatives.

"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!"


Edith Piaf lived a short, messy, glorious life as France's greatest popular singer. I visited her grave at the famous Père Lachaise Cemetery in Paris.

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


The most technologically advanced country in the world has a majority of its population that does NOT believe in or have an opinion on evolution?

I hate to use the word "believe" when referring to this. It's like saying a group of people don't believe in or have an opinion on gravity.

The Gallup poll taken was based on telephone interviews with 1,018 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Feb. 6-7, 2009, as part of Gallup Poll Daily tracking. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.

The poll showed that those who have a higher level of education understand that evolution is a fact and that those who attend church the most do not understand that evolution is a fact.

PRINCETON, NJ -- On the eve of the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin's birth, a new Gallup Poll shows that only 39% of Americans say they "believe in the theory of evolution," while a quarter say they do not believe in the theory, and another 36% don't have an opinion either way. These attitudes are strongly related to education and, to an even greater degree, religiosity.
Those with high-school educations or less are much more likely to have no opinion than are those who have more formal education. Still, among those with high-school educations or less who have an opinion on Darwin's theory, more say they do not believe in evolution than say they believe in it. For all other groups, and in particular those who have at least a college degree, belief is significantly higher than nonbelief.

Thursday, February 12, 2009

ABRAHAM LINCOLN, February 12, 1809--April 15, 1865

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 greatest of all our presidents, Abraham Lincoln. The more I read about him, the more I am convinced of this.
In the 1830s, Dr. Jason Duncan introduced Lincoln to the poem "Mortality" (sometimes called "Immortality" or "Oh, Why Should the Spirit of Mortal be Proud?"). At the time, the increasingly melancholy Lincoln lived in New Salem, Illinois, and had already lost several friends and relatives to death.
Gradually Lincoln memorized the piece, but did not know the author's identity until late in life. He became so identified with the poem that some people thought he had written it. However, he only wished he had. He once remarked, "I would give all I am worth, and go in debt, to be able to write so fine a piece as I think that is."
Lawrence Weldon, who traveled the law circuit with Lincoln, recalled Lincoln reciting the poem in 1860. He said, "The weird and melancholy association of eloquence and poetry had a strong fascination for Mr. Lincoln's mind. Tasteful composition, either of prose or poetry, which faithfully contrasted the realities of eternity with the unstable and fickle fortunes of time, made a strong impression on his mind."
President Lincoln wrote poetry, too:
Short Verses
Around the time when Lincoln was fifteen or seventeen, he wrote a few short poems in his arithmetic book but they are not very substantial.
Abraham Lincoln is my nam[e]
And with my pen I wrote the same
I wrote in both hast and speed
and left it here for fools to read
After his compositions of 1846, Lincoln continued to write poetry. Such poems include the short piece dedicated to Linnie Haggard, daughter of the owner of a hotel where Lincoln stayed in Winchester, Illinois, dated September 30, 1858.
To Linnie—
A sweet plaintive song did I hear,
And I fancied that she was the singer—
May emotions as pure, as that song set a-stir
Be the worst that the future shall bring her.
Mr. Lincoln's favorite poem:
By William Knox
Oh! why should the spirit of mortal be proud?
Like a swift-fleeting meteor, a fast-flying cloud
A flash of the lightning, a break of the wave
He passeth from life to his rest in the grave.

The leaves of the oak and the willow shall fade,
Be scattered around, and together be laid;
And the young and the old, and the low and the high,
Shall moulder to dust, and together shall lie.
The infant a mother attended and loved;
The mother that infant's affection who proved;
The husband, that mother and infant who blest,--
Each, all, are away to their dwellings of rest.
The maid on whose cheek, on whose brow, in whose eye,
Shone beauty and pleasure, -- her triumphs are by;
And the memory of those who loved her and praised,
Are alike from the minds of the living erased.
The hand of the king that the sceptre hath borne,
The brow of the priest that the mitre hath worn,
The eye of the sage, and the heart of the brave,
Are hidden and lost in the depths of the grave.

The peasant, whose lot was to sow and to reap,
The herdsman, who climbed with his goats up the steep,
The beggar, who wandered in search of his bread,
Have faded away like the grass that we tread.
The saint, who enjoyed the communion of Heaven,
The sinner, who dared to remain unforgiven,
The wise and the foolish, the guilty and just,
Have quietly mingled their bones in the dust.
So the multitude goes -- like the flower or the weed
That withers away to let others succeed;
So the multitude comes -- even those we behold,
To repeat every tale that has often been told.
For we are the same our fathers have been;
We see the same sights our fathers have seen;
We drink the same stream, we view the same sun,
And run the same course our fathers have run.
The thoughts we are thinking, our fathers would think;
From the death we are shrinking, our fathers would shrink;
To the life we are clinging, they also would cling; --
But it speeds from us all like a bird on the wing.
They loved -- but the story we cannot unfold;
They scorned -- but the heart of the haughty is cold;
They grieved -- but no wail from their slumber will come;
They joyed -- but the tongue of their gladness is dumb.
They died -- ay, they died; -- we things that are now,
That walk on the turf that lies over their brow,
And make in their dwellings a transient abode;
Meet the things that they met on their pilgrimage road.
Yea! hope and despondency, pleasure and pain,
Are mingled together in sunshine and rain;
And the smile and the tear, the song and the dirge,
Still follow each other, like surge upon surge.
Tis the wink of an eye -- 'tis the draught of a breath--
From the blossom of health to the paleness of death,
From the gilded saloon to the bier and the shroud:--
Oh! why should the spirit of mortal be proud?