
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
THE CRETINS AT THE NEW YORK POST (a Rupert Murdoch publication)

Tuesday, February 17, 2009
WHY DO PEOPLE LISTEN TO THIS IDIOT?

Obviously Adobe seems to think you can.
PRESIDENT OBAMA FINDS SUPPORT AMONG REPUBLICAN GOVERNORS

UPDATE BELOW
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.
[skip]
“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.”
[skip]
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
GOP CELEBRATES LOSING!
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?"
UPDATE:
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
FILE UNDER "NO ONE IS SURPRISED"

Sunday, February 15, 2009
WHY PRESIDENT OBAMA AND AMERICA WON

Saturday, February 14, 2009
RNC CHAIRMAN, MICHAEL STEELE IS HONEST ABOUT THE GOP
"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!"
A VERY BEAUTIFUL LOVE SONG FOR VALENTINE'S DAY
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
BAD NEWS FOR AMERICA: WE'RE DUMB WHEN IT COMES TO EVOLUTION

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 leaves of the oak and the willow shall fade,
The peasant, whose lot was to sow and to reap,
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
OH THOSE CRAZY CONSERVATIVES
"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!]
CHARLES ROBERT DARWIN, Born February 12, 1809

“In the long history of humankind (and animal kind, too) those who learned to collaborate and improvise most effectively have prevailed”--C. D.
On February 12, the world will celebrate the 200th anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin (it is also the 200th anniversary of the birth of Abraham Lincoln--but that's for tomorrow).
Like the great geniuses before and since Darwin, his contributions to our understanding of evolution and how it works are immeasurable--and we're learning more every year.
Evolution is a fact. There is no controversy.
Those who contest this are like people who would contest the theory of gravity ("Evolution is just a theory."--Ronald Reagan famously said this.) Well yes, and so is gravity, and relativity--special and general, and a scientific theory does not mean "just a guess." I suggest anyone who wishes to educate him or herself on this to look up the meaning of scientific theory.
I try to ignore those who deny that evolution brought us to where we are today, and blame our educational system for so poorly serving those people who stubbornly cling to foolish denial. (Side note: The Taliban do not allow the teaching of evolution in their schools. Heh.)
Here are some highlights about one of the greatest men in human history:
On Thursday, February 12, 2009, there will be a worldwide celebration of the 200th anniversary of the birth of Charles Robert Darwin. His insight that all biological species have evolved from common ancestors through natural selection, first discussed in his monumental book, "On the Origin of Species" published in 1859, & then expanded upon 12 years later in "The Descent of Man," has become the cornerstone of modern biology. The diversity of species and the continuing mutations that are observable today, especially on the scale of microscopic organisms, find a clear, simple and powerful unified explanation. Simply put, modern biology would be totally incomprehensible without Darwin's enormous contribution. The concept of progress was very much in the air at the close of the 19th century, which paved the way for ready acceptance of theories of evolution by biologists. However, in contrast to his peers, one striking characteristic of Darwin's view of evolution is that evolution is not purposeful or that it is not directed towards any particular end. This clash with the dominant prejudices of a Judeo-Christian tradition hindered full acceptance of the Darwin theory of evolution for many years—his main ideas only began to dominate biology in the 1930s. Celebrations of Darwin birthday and discoveries will take place all through the Bay Area. At Revolution Books a discussion of The Science of Evolution will be held on Tuesday. The Essig Museum of Entomology at UC Berkeley will open its doors to public for tours on February 12. Lectures at UC Davis on Feb 23 will discuss The Evolution-Intelligent Design controversy. In Fresno, A Faculty panel will invite questions from the audience regarding Darwin’s ideas and the societal impact of evolutionary biology.
February 11, 2009
Darwin and the RightBy Alvaro Vargas Llosa
WASHINGTON -- Polls, particularly in the United States, tell us that many conservatives still distrust Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. The bicentennial of his birth should be a fitting occasion for the right to take another look at a man who contributed immensely to some ideas that it holds dear.
Darwin was not an atheist but a Victorian believer. He was not a proto-Marxist but a liberal, which in 19th-century Britain meant someone who favored individual liberty over big government. Darwin was an admirer of John Locke and Adam Smith, two of the greatest thinkers of freedom. And although he was influenced by Malthus, whose writings on overpopulation were later used by critics of capitalism to justify collectivism, Darwin used that political economist's ideas in biology, not political economy.
[skip]
Darwin's teachings have been caricatured and grossly distorted. Social Darwinism, which turned his biological theory into a sociopolitical one to justify eugenics, harmed his reputation. But Darwin was an early opponent of slavery and, precisely because he identified a common origin in nature, he did more than anybody to debunk the notion that different races belong to different species.
Herein should lie Darwin's appeal to the right: The English naturalist gave scientific validity to the revolutionary idea that order can be spontaneous, neither designed by nor beholden to an all-powerful authority. The struggle for existence that drives natural selection according to Darwin has nothing predetermined about it. In fact, he maintained that the presence of certain habits, values and institutions, including religion -- themselves part of man's adaptation to the environment -- can impact evolution. The instinct of sympathy, for instance, drives some stronger members of the human species to help weaker ones, thereby mitigating the struggle for existence.
It is fascinating that conservatives who advocate for a spontaneous order -- the free market -- in political economy and decry social engineering as a threat to progress and civilization should resent Darwin's overwhelming case for the idea that order can design itself. In an essay in the British publication The Spectator, the conservative science writer Matt Ridley reflects on the paradox that the left has claimed Darwin even though leftist political ideas contradict his basic teaching: "In the average European biology laboratory you will find fervent believers in the individualist, emergent, decentralized properties of genomes who prefer dirigiste determinism to bring order to the economy."
*********************************************
In a Scientific American, published in the summer of 2007, physicist Lawrence Krauss and evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins -- both prominent defenders of evolution, but with very different styles -- discuss their tactics for debating evolution with people of religious faith. The contrast is quite entertaining:Dawkins: I like your clarification of what you mean by reaching out. But let me warn you of how easy it is to be misunderstood. I once wrote in a New York Times book review, “It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I’d rather not consider that).” That sentence has been quoted again and again in support of the view that I am a bigoted, intolerant, closed-minded, intemperate ranter. But just look at my sentence. It may not be crafted to seduce, but you, Lawrence, know in your heart that it is a simple and sober statement of fact. [...] To call somebody ignorant is no insult. All of us are ignorant of most of what there is to know. I am completely ignorant of baseball, and I dare say that you are as completely ignorant of cricket. If I tell somebody who believes the world is 6,000 years old that he is ignorant, I am paying him the compliment of assuming that he is not stupid, insane or wicked. [...]
Krauss: ... I was recently asked to speak at a Catholic college at a symposium on science and religion. I guess I was viewed as someone interested in reconciling the two. After agreeing to lecture, I discovered that I had been assigned the title Science Enriching Faith. In spite of my initial qualms, the more I thought about the title, the more rationale I could see for it. The need to believe in a divine intelligence without direct evidence is, for better or worse, a fundamental component of many people’s psyches. I do not think we will rid humanity of religious faith any more than we will rid humanity of romantic love or many of the irrational but fundamental aspects of human cognition. While orthogonal from the scientific rational components, they are no less real and perhaps no less worthy of some celebration when we consider our humanity.
HAPPY DARWIN DAY!!! EVERYONE!!!
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
HAPPY BIRTHDAY MAX!!!!!

PRESIDENT OBAMA CONTINUES TO ENJOY HIGH SUPPORT FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

[skip]
Seventy-six percent of those questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released Monday gave Obama a thumbs-up on how he's performing his duties, while 23 percent disapproved.
By Eric Kleefeld -
Monday, February 9, 2009
AMERICANS SUPPORT PRESIDENT OBAMA'S HANDLING OF THE STIMULUS PACKAGE

True to his word, Obama has gone to great lengths to demonstrate his commitment to bipartisanship
CORNYN: This is hardly a bipartisan effort. I think it’s a disappointment, it surely must be for President Obama.
McCAIN: This agreement is not bipartisan.
GINGRICH: The result has been a very partisan process.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
DO YOU BELIEVE IN ROCK AND ROLL?
YOUR "LIBERAL" MEDIA, PART II

Saturday, February 7, 2009
The President and First Lady at the Kennedy Center

TODAY'S OPERA. ENJOY!
The Metropolitan Opera will broadcast Lucia di Lammermoor with soprano Anna Netrebko.
The above is a recording of a concert presentation of the famous sextet in Donizetti's opera. Pavarotti and Fleming are the tenor and soprano.
Friday, February 6, 2009
ANDY CARD IS A NINCOMPOOP


What's the matter with Andy? Is he really that dumb?
Thursday, February 5, 2009
PRESIDENT OBAMA: THEY GOT US INTO THIS SITUATION
I really don’t understand how bipartisanship is ever going to work when one
of the parties is insane. Imagine trying to negotiate an agreement on dinner
plans with your date, and you suggest Italian and she states her preference
would be a meal of tire rims and anthrax. If you can figure out a way to split
the difference there and find a meal you will both enjoy, you can probably
figure out how bipartisanship is going to work the next few years.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
OBAMA ADMITS MISTAKE OVER DASCHLE
03 Feb 2009 07:31 pm
He Said It!
-->
It has taken Obama two weeks to say something that George W. Bush couldn't manage to say in eight years: "I screwed up." This is change we can really believe in.
How refreshing.
We have a president who doesn't hesitate to take responsibility for a screw-up. Even though he personally did not screw up.
And yet this is news, since we've been used to a presient who never admitted making errors in judgment or any errors at all. (In the last month or so, Bush did say he regreted the "Mission Accomplished" statement and the "Bring 'em On" comment, but that was it. Those were his only two "mistakes" in 8 years.)
(Remember when Bush was asked in a presser if he had made any mistakes? He said he couldn't think of any. Imagine that. He'd been president for quite some time and hadn't made one mistake!)
The Obama administration claimed that it would have the most
ethical administration yet. It put together a 63-point questionnaire for its top
jobs that at first was criticized for being too intrusive.
Despite that, the White House ended up promoting two men with tax
stains on their records. First, it came to light that the eventual Treasury
secretary, Timothy Geithner, needed to pay $43,000 in back taxes and penalties.
That came from unmet payroll taxes while he was working for the International
Monetary Fund — and until pressured he was going to leave unpaid some of that
money because the statute of limitations had expired.
Then came what Daschle described as an “unintentional” slipup on
charitable contributions deducted in error and overlooking a car-and-driver
service given to him for three years.
Ethicists note that in anonymous surveys large numbers of Americans
confess to cutting corners on their taxes. The IRS estimates a tax gap between
what should be paid and what is paid of $345 billion a year.
Yet in surveys, people often rationalize their underpayments by citing
their notion that the rich don’t pay their part.
Certainly, Daschle is not alone. Michael Josephson of the Josephson
Institute of Ethics said the country needs to separate “moral misdemeanors from
moral felonies.”McClatchy News Service
It's over. Daschle's gone and now the Obama administration has to choose someone else to head HHS.
I hope the vetting is better.
More from Sullivan:
A reader writes:
I had the same reaction. I happened to walk into the room and hear the words, "...and I've got to own up to my mistake..." and I immediately thought: Grownups in the White House. Hallelujah.
Furthermore I just so appreciate the way our President takes everything in stride. Even this. No bluster. No defensiveness. It is what it is and it has to be done, it has to be said. Instead of telling us about what hard work presiding is, he is just doing it.
Once again, the predominant feeling is relief. Even in the midst of this.
There are two possible reactions to all this. The first is to jump up and down and yell "See! Change my ass!" While I certainly do not discourage such healthy expressions of civic realism, and am as happy as MoDo to see the Obamaites bump down to earth, I'm not sure this is the most revealing thing of the past two weeks.
For me, that is simply a relieved expectation that a) this president understands that change is a process in which other actors and interlocutors need to be heard from; b) his team seems able to take constructive criticism and adjust; and c) this president is not fazed by much.
Monday, February 2, 2009
MICHAEL STEELE IS SILLY

PLEASE! DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME!
Sunday, February 1, 2009
SARAH PALIN BACKS PRESIDENT OBAMA'S STIMPAK PLAN

Palin Among GOP Govs Backing Obama Plan
January 31, 2009 7:34 PMdschabner-->
Retreat organizers tell ABC News that Palin politely declined, giving a perfectly understandable reason. According to the Congressional Institute, which hosted the conference, Palin said she simply could not make it to the retreat because pressing state business made it impossible for her to leave Alaska this weekend.
Asked about Palin's no-show, House Republican leader John Boehner shrugged.

