Friday, December 19, 2014

Obama to Invade Cuba - Will send Walmarts instead of Tanks and Kanye West instead of Troops

Joe Klein describes Obama's move to outflank the Cuba Haters, the hard right fringe and the reactionaries. He won't blow the Island Nation up, nor will he continue the current strategy which largely consists of stomping our collectively feet while holding our breath and sucking up to the Cuban-exhile community in Florida.

No. The ever tricky Obama has a different approach:
Those who favor a continuation of our failed Cuba policy are a reflexive lot with a muddled argument. They’re the usual myopic tough guys–John McCain and Lindsey Graham immediately jumped on the President after his Cuba announcement today–who have no idea of the seductive power of the American way of life in the rest of the world. I can understand why the corroding Iranian regime would want to keep us out (a sign in Tehran: “When the Great Satan praises us, we shall mourn”). I’ve always thought: then let’s recognize the hell out of them. Let ‘em mourn. Let the Revolutionary Guard try to fend off Kanye West and Star Wars. Good luck with that.
And this is why the Mullahs that run Iran are hostile to the US. They know that when their people have a choice between singing and dancing  to the Happy Song from Pharrell Williams or to continue to follow the time honored repressive folk ways spawned by  a desert religion, more of 'em will choose to dance.

Its not that hard. Do you want to play video games 10 hours a day or would you rather spend 10 hours a day praying under the threat of being caned? Again. Not a very hard choice.

New Stupid Poll shows 60% of Americans support "Tyranny"

The Road to Serfdom looks like this:
The latest Kaiser Family Foundation tracking poll shows 60 percent of Americans have a favorable view of the Affordable Care Act’s “employer mandate,” while 38 percent view the provision negatively.
The mandate requires large businesses with 100 or more workers to provide affordable health insurance for full-time workers or face a penalty ...The Kaiser poll found that support for the mandate increases to 76 percent after opponents are told that “most employers with 100 or more workers already offer health insurance and won’t have to pay the fine.”
We are at a point in our Nation's Tragic History where only a dwindling number of folks can recollect the days when Americans were free.  When these folks are not busy yelling at the neighborhood kids to "GET OFF MY LAWN," they'll tell you what things were like before the government created Medicare and turned everyone into a slave.  But then a cloud drifts lazily overhead and they stop talking about the good ol' days and start yelling at the cloud, too.

Wednesday, December 17, 2014

Under Assault from both Bush III and Obama Rubio LASHES OUT at New Pope

It has to be tough to be Rubio. Once a Tea Party darling, Rubio rode the Tea Party Wave to victory in 2010 and was up until 2013 branded as the Savior and Future of the GOP.  But things change. Rubio embraced comprehensive immigration reform, and parts of the base turned on him, savagely. Some refer to the young and inexperienced fella' as "we behind the ears."

But on one level Rubio is still a potential compromise candidate for the GOP in 2016 - maybe he's the guy that can bride the RINO - Tea Party divide. And when Rubio looks in the mirror he see that guy.

But with news today that the ever tricksy Obama will normalize relations with Cuba and that Bush III, a fellow Floridian, Rubio had no choice other than to hit back TWICE AS HARD at Obama and the new Pope
Florida Republican senator Marco Rubio slammed the Obama administration’s plan to normalize relations with the Communist Caribbean nation of Cuba ... claiming the White House’s refusal to ask for any concessions from the Castro dictatorship is “absurd” but “par for the course.”

...“I think the people of Cuba have a right, if they are free, to choose any economic system they want,” the senator said. “Nothing the president will announce today is going to further that goal. . . . It’s absurd, and it’s part of a long record of coddling dictators and tyrants that this administration has established.”

“They’re creating no economic openings,” Rubio later said. “There are no concessions on freedom of speech, no concessions on elections, no concessions on the freedom to have alternative political parties — what democratic concessions?”

The senator called the deal “par for the course with an administration that is constantly giving away unilateral concessions — whether it’s Iran or, in this case, Cuba — in exchange for nothing.”
It Figures Obama is always sticking it to Republicans. But Rubio stuck it to the Pope, too after learning that the Pope was kinda down with easing off on Cuba:
Senator Marco Rubio (R., Fla.,) suggested that Pope Francis should “take up the cause of freedom” in support of the Cuban people.

“I would also ask His Holiness to take up the cause of freedom and democracy,” Rubio, a Roman Catholic, told reporters at the Capitol when asked if the pope’s role in the Cuban negotiations influenced his view of the deal.

“I think the people of Cuba deserve the same chances to have democracy as the people of Argentina have had, where he comes from — as the people of Italy have, where he now lives,” Rubio continued.
This is good stuff. Wingers aren't all that happy with the new Pope after learning that they are the new "Cafeteria Catholics" because according to the New Pope that stuff in the bible about poor people and peace and sandals actually mean something. But also it grabs a little  attention away from his 2016 rival Bush III.

In other words. Rubio just had a "look at me" moment that was too good to pass up.

Right Winger Blogger explains why its wrong to call Global Warming deniers, well, "deniers"

Its an old trick. You point out the fact that Scientists have been wrong in the past so, quite obviously, they could be wrong again:
The lesson here is not that science is worthless or that its popularizers are frauds. Even geniuses can make errors and go off the rails, particularly when a theory seductively reconfirms their existing political prejudices. The history of science is full of bogus ideas and quack remedies that seemed to be the best “science” had to offer at the time. The unique achievement of science has been its ability to correct itself. Every conclusion is subject to testing and independent confirmation—and it is open to being overthrown by any cantankerous skeptic who can put together the data to disprove it.

But this only happens when respected, famous figures—or some guy who’s been on TV a lot—don’t try to set themselves up as unquestionable authorities. It only happens to the extent that “skeptics” are not re-branded as “deniers” and then thrown out of the discussion.
A Blogger via The Federalist
These are all fair points, but global warming denial you find on the wingnet never gets into the physics of global warming theory, aka science. To be a skeptic you have to be skeptical about the science.

Why is the last 125 years of particle physics all "wrong" and "f'd" up and stuff? The deniers say nothing on the subject. Are there such things as "atoms?" Why would anyone care about that, the denier wonders. 

Instead they bitch about conspiracies (the scientists are trying to take our FREEDOM away) and cherry pick other possible explanations for so-called "global warming." "Maybe its the sun?" Maybe its "this" or "that." Or maybe it really isn't happening at all. Say, if that guy's computer model is not 100% accurate maybe its just because the theory is just bullshit.  Has anyone ever considered this?

But the one thing they never do is to take the time to disprove the consensus that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that absorbs heat and that by taking carbon from deep underground where it is stored in solid or liquid forms and turning these molecules into gasses that are released into the atmosphere, this means more CO2 goes into the air, and means more energy will be absorbed in the air which means more heat.

And it is not surprising that the deniers avoid debating the scientists on their own terms because they'd get drubbed. Cherry picking, guessing and conspiracy theory are far easier. Calling scientists mean for calling them a "denier" is also a tried and true approach (see above). 

Putting it all together, that is why it is OK, nay, you have a duty to call a global warming denier a "denier." 

To avoid the label, all the "denier" has to do is take off his tinfoil hat and admit its real and that we are causing it. He can then go on to the next stage and claim that Global Warming is in fact good. Why wouldn't you want to grow oranges in Alaska? Good question. Or he can claim that we should use Exxon's more responsible computer model to gauge what warming will be like rather than that stupid guy's stupid computer model. Why should we use that "dumb-ass guy's" model instead of the one produced by the "experts" at the Heartland Institute?  The answer would be that the fictional Heartland Institute computer model would likely have been put together by ex-big tobacco flacks, because that's how they roll. But this is besides the point. 

The point is that there are soooo many other fun games for them to play without having to be stuck on global warming denial. They're really missing out.

Come on in, guys. The water is good. It's all good.

Right Winger Bloggers Mostly Upset about Bush III

So across the wingnet, starting yesterday various malcontents started bitching about the coming resplendent glories of a Bush the Third campaign. "Wrong Bush and the wrong time," one winger moaned.

Other wingers are on the ABB "anyone but Bush" bandwagon which really means anyone but Bush, Romney, Christie or anyone else unwilling to tell the far right fringe whatever the fuck they want to hear whenever they want to hear it. So basically Bush III is another Huntsman to them. How dare he tell us, US - the real Americans, to STFU about all the bullshit we believe in. And they fume.

 However on others parts of the wingnet, while not enthused about Bush III some are keeping their pixels dry. And you have to think its because deep down they know that there is a good chance that Bush III will be the only thing standing between America as they know it and the worst tyrant in World History since Ghengis Khan and maybe since Obama. And that being the case, they know that eventually the urge to call Bush III a genius will become overwhelming and they will in due course submit to the urge to do what feels good.

So this other group of wingers is reluctantly planning ahead for whoever the RINOs appoint to rule them. Because this is what usually happens - The RINO usually wins out except for the two times when he didn't. And you know when that happens - the two times your guy moves forward - you either lose dramatically or maybe if you are lucky, the economy will go to hell and your guy wins.

Tuesday, December 16, 2014

Deep Thoughts from the Conservagentsia, cntd

What is Conservatism and what do conservatives believe?

This simple answer is that conservatism is a reactionary movement that seeks to return to the good ol' days when established social norms didn't just seem right but were right, goddammit.  In practice, this definition becomes problematic because conservatives have a hard time agreeing on the date of history's great error that ended the good 'ol days and ushered in the current dystopian hellscape we live in today.

The correct answer is that they - the conservatives - are like most other groups people and like other groups of people, they just believe in a bunch of contradictory bullshit. It just so happens that the contradictory bullshit that conservatives believe in these days is the least good option out there.

This is true, of course. And I know this because I read right wing blogs and sometimes they will tell you exactly what conservatism is - like this quote:
Conservatives these days are about restoring balance to an America distorted by the indiscriminate application in everyday life of the high principles of the libertarians and those of the politically correct (which aren’t as different as you might think).
In other words, don't ask us to tell you what we believe in so much when its so much easier to tell what we are against. Basically were are against a bunch of stupid stuff beyond our control that we don't like.  And thus we don't like them and we don't like those other guys and we wish there was a way to make things go back to the way we think that they used to be.

This is conservatism, too: "Goddammit free market. Quit giving people stuff they want to buy for cheap. Goddammit Liberals, quit insisting that the rule of law apply equally to all. What's wrong with the rule of force?"

And so it goes.

RINOs running roughshod over Real Americans in latest stupid Presidential Poll



A Recent Marist Poll [pdf] of Republican and GOP leaning independents (i.e., people embarrassed to say that they are Republicans) shows the RINOs of the apocalypse (Romney-Bush-Christie) out in front of their more patriotic peers. 

In the poll, Romney leads with 19%, followed by Bush III with 14%, Christie and good ol' Huck each with 9%, and Crazy Ben Carson with 8%. Tailgunner Ted is further down the list at 4%.

It’s still early. There is plenty of time for the cray-cray and for bright shiny objects to emerge and others to drop out.  And with so much craziness out there grooving in the GOP base, the RINOs shouldn't take anything for granted. Sure Crazy Ben Carson is Crazy and Tailgunner Ted is a shameless demagogue who probably does not have a soul, but in a GOP primary these flaws can work for you because if the crazy can consolidate around a single crazy candidate it'll be open season on RINOs again.

Monday, December 15, 2014

Wingnuts - Sydney Siege: Coming Soon to a Starbucks Near You

In Australia this kind of armed confrontation with a nut case and a gun is probably pretty rare.

But in America, when a malcontent with a gun starts a hostage crisis, its called a typical TUESDAY. Seriously IT HAPPENS EVERY WEEK.

And speaking of things that happen every week, I wonder how many times these guys wet their pants during an average week.

Via the Federalist Blog
That leads us to the final thing that is clarified by the Sydney attack. This is the next wave of terrorism.

Any time a show is this successful, they make a sequel. Terrorism is all about theater, about making a big splash and going down in a blaze of glory on behalf of the Muslim faith. That photo of terrified hostages holding the black flag of jihad up against the windows of an upscale cafe will be electrifying to other angry and disaffected Islamists. Anyone who cannot make it to Syria to join the jihad there—or, just as likely, someone who has already been there and come back—will see this as a new, highly effective way to bring terror to our streets.

This has been the trend for a while: many small lone wolf attacks in place of one big organized attack. The Fort Hood shooter, the would-be Times Square bomber, the machete attack on Lee Rigby, and so on. So it’s a minor miracle that what is happening in Sydney hasn’t already happened in Manhattan. We should assume that it is only a matter of time.

That’s the grimmest message from this story. You may not be interested in the War on Terrorism, but it is interested in you. Jihadism is back, and it may be coming soon to a Starbucks near you.
Its all good when a winger plagarizes Lenin. But then again, many of these wingers are infected by a crazy ideology just like the old school commies were.  So maybe that has something to do with it. 

More Likely its just the conservative brain. It thrives on Fear, because life just ain't worth living if there is nothing to be afraid of.

Grubergate and its Real Victims

Among the carnage left in the wake in what is known as "Grubergate," none is more damning than this anti-reality based excoriation of Mitt Romney by a former fan-boy.

Who needs this loser anymore:
Which brings me briefly to . . . Mitt Romney. There’s a boomlet for Romney to run again in 2016. But in addition to losing in 2012, let me mention the final two strikes against him. It was bad enough in 2012 that he had to do contortions to distinguish Romneycare from Obamacare, but how is he going to get out of explaining Jonathan Gruber’s involvement in Romneycare? There are videos of Governor Romney praising Gruber.
...
So yeah, maybe Romney could run again in 2016. But in which party? I hear Democrats are looking for a wider field than they have now. Someone might ask him if he’d keep McCarthy on as head of the EPA is he is elected, and more broadly, whether he supports the EPA’s new greenhouse gas regulations.
They sure liked him when he was the only guy in the GOP who could be tea party and appeal to the crazies and anti-tea party and not scare the bejesus out of everyone else during the last election. But that was sooo 2012. 

But that's one of the things about these far right wing kooks.  You never know what is going to set them off in the future. Essentially that's the reactionary strain within the hard right. If the market collapse had held off for another year and had President McCain appointed HHS Secretary Mitt Romney to implement Nationalized Romneycare, the poor miserable bastards would not  know that they were supposed to object to it as the greatest tyranny since the Dred Scott Case. Only after Obama stole their idea, did the outrage become apparent. Which really means, if you are an aspiring GOP politician, why come up with any ideas at all.  That tricky Obama will only steal your idea and then get you primaried by a loon. Man, Obama is always sticking it to them.

Goodbye Willard, the wingers don't need you to save them from Rick Santorum anymore (for now anyway). And quite naturally, they don't want you or your belief in science and conservative approaches to the established social contract (also known as "ideas") around anymore.

Global Warming? How stupid can someone like Romney be for falling for this scam. Fucking Moron.

Thursday, December 11, 2014

The NRO gets Hysterical Again, (sigh)

Because that's what they do.

The latest freakout, which is really a variant on previous freakout goes back to immigration reform.
President Obama’s recent immigration orders encourage transnational cartels to bring their violent activities closer to the border and even into the country....“It’s on the border now and it’s spreading into Texas and across the nation,” A.J. Louderback, sheriff of Jackson County, Texas, told National Review Online after a press conference in which he described a four-hour gun battle involving cartels just across the border on Sunday that left at least 50 people dead.

“The welcome sign is out,” he said. “It’s out. They’re coming.”...He said that Obama’s orders make it easier for smugglers to tell prospective immigrants that they will receive amnesty once they’ve paid to get across the border — a deal in which cartels get a cut of the profits.

“They have to pay to get on that road, they have to pay the cartels, so, the message is that if you don’t stop the amnesty and thereby stop the cartels from being able to market it then you’re not going to get anywhere,” Louderback said.
Of course there has been de facto amnesty for years and as long as there are jobs in the US, people will try to come here to better their lives. The one way you stop illegal immigration is to dry up the source of the demand. Throw business owners and boards of directors in jail if their companies are caught employing undocumented workers. Just start locking 'em up and that'll stop or reverse border crossings. But it is much easier to bitch and moan and whine and cry and carry on about immigration reform than it is to do anything about it which basically is what the NRO is good at doing.

But on the other hand, I did learn from the Arkansas Senate race this year that Islamic State terrorists posing as agricultural workers were planning on infecting themselves with Ebola, crossing the southern border and launching an Ebola attack on Arkansas. So maybe the NRO is on to something.

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

Deep Thoughts with Powerline Blog, cntd

So how do you know whether this torture technique or that technique is an ineffective way at gaining intelligence?  Good question. You could just ask John McCain or you could you could try them all!
...a great deal of the report is devoted to proving that the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques did no good. I didn’t find this discussion particularly persuasive, mostly because it is so patently partisan and one-sided. Further, while it is appropriate for the intelligence agencies themselves to analyze the success, or lack thereof, of various approaches they have used, this issue strikes me as almost beside the point. In the aftermath of 9/11, it was vitally important to learn all we could about al Qaeda–who was in it, how it was organized, how its members communicated, and above all, what other plots were in the works. It was appropriate to try just about anything to get information from the small number of high-level al Qaeda members to whom we then had access. If some techniques worked and others didn’t, so be it; but they all had to be tried.
Torture. Its all good.

I am convince and maybe I am naive that if you were to ask large numbers of wingers prior to learning about Abu Graib whether torture was a good thing to do or a bad thing to do. Overwhelming numbers would have said it was a "bad" thing to do. I don't think any poll exists to demonstrate this, but I am giving the wingers the benefit of the doubt. A lot of them believe the Jesus was tortured to death on a cross so I don't think its a stretch  to think that they'd vote on the side of torture being "bad."

However after it was revealed that the Bush Administration authorized torture - systematically, the embrace of torture by wingers was stunning.  Which to me says that people can convince themselves of just about anything if there is something in it for them.  And it also tells me that the Foxnews and the AM Radio's main purpose is just to eff with people - feed them bullshit and treat them like rubes. But that is just me. Maybe wingers were always down with torture and just waiting to break out a full throat-ed defense of it. One way or the other.

Tuesday, December 9, 2014

Always up to no good, the Chicago Thug Strikes Again

This quote could be about any action, taken at any time and anything really - via Powerline:
The explanation, I assume, is that Obama thinks it will be harder to mount a legal challenge to his unconstitutional usurpation if there is no actual order that defines what he has done. There is no bottom to the depth of the Obama administration’s corruption.
The complaint bouncing around the wingnet is that President Obama has used an "Executive Memorandum" instead of an "Executive Order" to implement the new immigration enforcement policy. Various wingers are griping about it.

Had Obama issued an Executive Order on immigration it would, of course, still be outrageous. But a "Memo?"  That's something you'd expect to see Michael Scott doing with his feet on his desk during an episode of "The Office" -  issuing a Memo.  Clearly, this "Memo" is more outrageous than an "Order."

I am still waiting for the "Memo" about the FEMA camps though.

Monday, December 8, 2014

Its 1914 and/or 1938 in the conservative fever swamp yet again, cntd

Again, one of the laws of the internet, Sowell's Rule, strikes. Recent events have alarmed a right wing activist and duly scared s/he trots out the old 1914/1938 fallacy.  They all do with this - some more than others - with boring regularity, sigh:

This time its VDH doing the hammering:
The ancient ingredients of war are all on the horizon. An old postwar order crumbles amid American indifference. Hopes for true democracy in post-Soviet Russia, newly capitalist China or ascendant Turkey long ago were dashed. Tribalism, fundamentalism and terrorism are the norms in the Middle East as the nation-state disappears.

Under such conditions, history’s wars usually start when some opportunistic — but often relatively weaker — power does something unwise on the gamble that the perceived benefits outweigh the risks. That belligerence is only prevented when more powerful countries collectively make it clear to the aggressor that it would be suicidal to start a war that would end in the aggressor’s sure defeat.

What is scary in these unstable times is that a powerful United States either thinks that it is weak or believes that its past oversight of the postwar order was either wrong or too costly — or that after Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, America is no longer a force for positive change.

A large war is looming, one that will be far more costly than the preventative vigilance that might have stopped it.
We have no choice, my friends, other than to raise and lead a coalition of the willing to defeat Saddam Hussein and plant in his place a liberal democracy which will be but a first to fall throughout the region spreading FREEDOM, constitutions liberal democracy and walmarts across the land.  And we MUST do this for the risks of inaction far outweigh the possibility that something will get all f'd up in the process. So let the first domino fall.

We know this because when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

Friday, December 5, 2014

Meanwhile, DEEP behind the Lines on the War on the War on Christmas

Right Wing Counter-Culture can be pretty funky at times. Consider this.

You are a winger. You believe in all the crazy stuff that other wingers believe. You got goosebumps when you first heard Sarah Palin's GOP convention speech back in '08. You believe that the one way to economic salvation is through faith in an unfettered free market and that President Obama poses an existential threat to western civilization. All that stuff about death panels and whatever the latest conspiracy theory that's being pumped by Foxnews at the moment, its all good. Well maybe not all of it, but you believe in a lot of it and the crazy stuff you don't believe in, you're at least sympathetic toward. In short you are down with team red.

But sometimes that just ain't enough. Take the war on the war on Christmas for example. Apparently, there are more fronts in this war than I realized. The foe in this desperate fight is not just that guy and the ones like him at the Mall who said "Happy Holidays" to you instead of "merry x-mas", its also fellow wingers. Though these wingers got your back, some of 'em may be insufficiently pure:
It’s beginning to look a lot like Christmas. But shhh! Don’t mention it. You’ll upset the Advent Purists.

If you don’t know what I’m talking about, spend a little time on my Facebook page. It’s crawling with Advent Purists. But even if yours isn’t, you may be familiar with the Advent Purist’s close cousin, the War on Christmas Crusader. Together, these dour figures are out to make sure we celebrate Christ’s birthday properly. They’re in no humor for your good humor, especially because they’re pretty sure you’re not even thinking about Jesus right now. You’re just happy about the eggnog that, like an undisciplined rube, you purchased the instant it became available in stores. Disgusting....
“People are celebrating Christmas incorrectly,” explained my friend, by way of urging me not to support Christmas concerts that take place in Advent. “It’s easy to be pro-Christmas, but we want more. We want people to celebrate it correctly.”
Do we want the world to rejoice over an almost-universally-beloved holiday? Or would we prefer that a small number of people celebrate it ‘correctly’?

That sounds pretty noble, and I think a lot of people do pride themselves on foregoing seasonal pleasures in the true spirit of the season. At some point, however, good Christian men may need to ask themselves: do we want the world to rejoice over an almost-universally-beloved holiday? Or would we prefer that a small number of people celebrate it “correctly”? Sometimes you do have to choose.
Usually when wingers start talking about "a time for choosing" - the choices don't turn out well. So if you are a winger, you should always be careful when talking to wingers farther on your right about about "choosing." Because sometimes they will.

Thursday, December 4, 2014

This is how you roll, RINO style, cntd

Want to keep the mouth breathers off balance and throw a bucket of icy water on their latest crazy scheme, Try jujitsu and use the derangement syndrome against 'em. In a rare moment, John Boehner takes the Tea Party to school:
In the wake of President Obama’s unilateral executive action on immigration, some Republicans are pushing Speaker John Boehner to fight back in one of the few ways he can – by withholding the traditional congressional invite to present the State of the Union address to Congress in January.

But the House leader had a novel reason for continuing to extend the invitation this year: It’ll give the president a chance to become even more unpopular.

Earlier this week, Georgia Republican congressman Paul Brown called on Boehner to keep Obama from addressing Congress, a sentiment echoed by some conservatives — including the editor of National Review.

But when Boehner was asked about the plan, he dismissed the idea with a brutal shot at the president. “Listen, the more the president talks about his ideas, the more unpopular he becomes,” the speaker quipped. “Why would I want to deprive him of that opportunity?”
This is the type of argument that a Teahadist simply cannot deny.

These guys hate Obama and everyone else they know hates him, too. So Boehner's suggestion - let's make Obama more unpopular by not doing the crazy thing is brilliant.  And it is another reminder that RINOs are very sneaky and should not be trusted.

For Boehner's sake, its a shame that this trick can't be used more often.  But you go into battle with the back backbenchers you have not the ones that you'd like to have someday.

The Year "2014" joins the Global-Global Warming Conspiracy

Word has hit the net indicating that 2014 could end up as the hottest year on record. Ominously, for those fearing Agenda 21, a ban on porterhouse steaks and mandatory hobbit-sized homes, the news that an actual year has joined "the greatest hoax known to mankind" is a dark development and probably a threat to FREEDOM and shit like that:
One record-hot year does not define a trend any more than one sparrow makes a spring, but the past three hottest years were in 2010, 2005 and 1998, the big El Nino year. This year almost certainly will be in the top four. In any case, each of the past three decades was warmer than the one before. Fourteen of the 15 warmest years on record were in the 21st century, and a whole generation has come to adulthood without ever experiencing a single month that was cooler than the previous normal.
While no one year can prove that AGW is happening, "2014" like con-artist species like polar bears and other animals that nobody cares about are doing there part to keep the conspiracy going.
Stupid Chart Found on Net added for the hell of it.
Let's hope that 2015 does decide to get in on the action.

GOP 2016 - Because its never too early for the CRAZY, cntd

Maybe its just me, but according to Twitter Newt Gingrich looks like he's climbing aboard the crazy train one MORE TIME!  You see President Obama is no longer an Keynan Anti-Colonialist with Mau-Mau tribal loyalities - no that sooo 2012. Now Newt is comparing the former Kenyan Anti-colonialist to King George the third:
Our entire constitutional structure is at stake. This new Obama power grab is the greatest threat to freedom since King George third.

Newt Gingrich (@newtgingrich) December 4, 2014
Not satisfied with that comparison and casting away the Foxnews approved rhetoric on Czar-dom (aka the Russian word for King)Gingrich goes one step further. Obama is not just a threat to FREEDOM like King George, he trying to be King himself:
Obama funding new staff and offices without congressional approval is step toward kingship or dictatorship. He must be stopped now

 — Newt Gingrich (@newtgingrich) December 4, 2014
Take that America, Newt is back in the game. The 2016 GOP primary might be a crazy-crazy ride if Newt has his say in it.

On the other hand, Newt best hope that he is wrong about all this King George bullshit, otherwise he could wind up on a prison barge anchored in the Long Island sound. Which, when you think about it, might be an acceptable trade off - Obama gets a third term and Newt gets sent to the mad house. If only we could be so lucky.

Wednesday, December 3, 2014

Foxnews Explained

Once you understand that it is the communication arm of the GOP responsible for delivering the party line, it all falls into to place:
Cast your mind back, if you can bear it, to the frenetic last days of the campaign in the mid-terms. The world, the GOP kept insisting, was coming undone – and everything was Obama’s fault. Somehow, Obama had fumbled the response to Ebola, letting infected people into the country, and risking a huge and fatal pandemic. At the same time, ISIS represented a grave threat to American security, was expanding with no limits in sight, proving that Obama had lost Iraq or thrown “victory” away in an act of reckless disengagement. And for good measure, Russia’s Putin was running rings around the president, creating a new world order in the Caucasus, while Obama fecklessly wrung his hands.

As a piece of political performance art, you have to hand it to the Republicans. They rolled up so many base-tingling themes into one hellish, end-times scenario: Obama as Carter, unable to stand up to the Soviets Russians; Obama as secret Muslim terrorist, standing by as Islamists terrorized Iraq and Syria; Obama as a dangerous import from Africa, which is why, we were told, the “O” in Ebola stood for Obama.

Funny, isn’t it, that almost all these themes evaporated after the election. And we now, moreover, have more time and evidence to judge how the president has responded to these different, emergent challenges. There have been no new Ebola cases in the US since the election; and the demon doctor who went bowling is now cured.
....the conservative media-industrial complex is really about delivering news that can work as political messaging. When the news doesn’t fit that template, they move swiftly on to something else that does. But reality tells us something different: that you should judge a presidency not by short-term panics, but by long term progress in the face of contingent events. Six years after the worst recession since the 1930s, we have accelerating growth, a collapsing deficit, falling healthcare costs and universal health insurance; a decade after the Federal Marriage Amendment, we have over 30 states with marriage equality; six years since Obama took office, we have the toughest new carbon regulations yet on the books and an agreement with China.

via Sullivan
 So onto the next freak out. The next one will come, as it surely will and will be very scary as they always are.

Tuesday, December 2, 2014

Wingnut says whaaat, cntd?

This edition takes us to RedState Blog home of lamestream media personality Erick Erickson:
The gates of Mordor sprung open at the President’s command. His outrage at the comment was, as a father, understandable. But the lack of mercy, lack of grace, and picking of the carcass reeks of an evil and exceeds the impropriety of the original remarks.

Elizabeth Lauten is now in need of a job and the GOP should show her the kindness the other side demands only for itself.
And we should take time to remember the real victim.........George Zimmerman. But that was a different time and a different blogge. Namely it was Right Wing Professor Paul Rahe who produced this masterwork:
Of course, there is a case to be made that there has been a conspiracy to deprive an American citizen of his civil rights, and the citizen in question would, indeed, qualify under federal law as an African-American. But the citizen whose rights were threatened was not Trayvon Martin. It was George Zimmerman himself, and the men who should be charged are those who have orchestrated the witch hunt underway now for more than a year. Erich Holder and Barack Obama are first on this list. And the top brass at NBC, The New York Times, CNN, CBS, and ABC as well as the special prosecutor, the presiding judge, and the leadership of the NAACP should be arraigned alongside them.
Its always Obama's fault and these wingers are always angry about something.And when you are as deranged as Rahe, you don't stop. You keep writing:
Barack Obama now piously proposes that "we honor Trayvon Martin," the burglar and dope-head who attacked and tried to murder George Zimmerman, and that we do so by working to "stem the tide of gun violence." The implication of his remarks is that Martin was an innocent worthy of deep respect and honor and that George Zimmerman is a scoundrel who should not have been accorded the right of self-defense.
I am old enough to remember how George Wallace subtly played on the fears and racial prejudices of white Americans.... I have seen visceral hatred up close, and I have watched a master demagogue at work.
I think if you compare Obama to George Wallace and you actually mean it - i.e., you are not writing a bunch of bullshit to entertain other wingers that is a sign that you need to be institutionalized.

Monday, December 1, 2014

Understanding the Wingnet: The Benghazi Conspiracy Explained


This is post is presented as a Public Service.

During an attack on the U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya on Sept. 11, 2012, four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, died in the hours that followed. At the height of 2012 presidential campaign, GOP insiders decided to use the attack as a political tactic against the incumbent president during the campaign by insinuating lack of competence, dishonesty and malfeasance on the part of the Obama Administration.

Though there was not evidence supporting these allegations, rank and file republicans gave party insiders the benefit of the doubt and took the allegations to be true. Thereafter fueled by Conservative Media, conspiracy theories took hold of the party as party members attempted to piece together facts into a narrative that would besmirch the Obama Administration.

Initially, the GOP charged the Obama Administration of whitewashing a terrorist attack, these allegations morphed into even more outlandish claims of a stand-down of military aid to the besieged facility, claims that the CIA was using Benghazi for running guns to Syrian Rebels and even that the attack was allowed to happen in order to murder the US Ambassador.

As the 2012 election ended in defeat for the GOP, Party Insiders kept the allegations alive as a ploy to be used against a potential 2016 presidential campaign by Hillary Clinton who was the Secretary of State during the attack. As a result, disinformation about the Benghazi consulate attack has been routinely disseminated through conservative media such as Fox News with such disinformation expected to continue on in effect for the duration of the 2016 presidential campaign  - if Hillary Clinton runs as a candidate for the democratic party.

Despite having been dispelled by 7 different investigations, the Benghazi Conspiracy continues to hold the attention of the hard right in America due to three basic components. First. There was an actual attack on a consulate and due to the "Fog of War" the sequence of events was not immediately apparent.

Next insiders within the GOP decided to use the attack on the consulate as tool to reinforce previously held views within the GOP base about the Obama Administration and it's approach to Islamic Terrorism.

And finally, understanding what caused the consulate attack and the events surrounding the attack required reliance upon "Elites" as the ordinary person lacks the capability and knowledge to make a determination on his/her own.  This reliance on Elites and in particular reliance upon partisan or dishonest Elites makes the ordinary individual particularly susceptible to disinformation and manipulation.  In the parlance of the right wing media, rank and file republicans were "Gruberized" or deliberately manipulated by GOP Elites in order to achieve a larger objective - defeating the incumbent party and returning to power.

Link to House Intelligence Committee Benghazi Investigation Report.

Meanwhile Editors at NRO hatch a brilliant new PLAN

This just might work:
Congressional Republicans have found themselves completely stymied by President Obama’s executive action on immigration. There’s no bill for them to vote down, they lack the votes for impeachment, and shutting down the government never works. National Review editor Rich Lowry has suggested an innovative new way for Republicans to express their displeasure: ban President Obama from delivering the State of the Union Address: 
“If I were John Boehner,” he said, referring to the House speaker, “I’d say to the president: ‘Send us your State of the Union in writing. You’re not welcome in our chamber.’ ”
Well, that is new. And it could work. If Congress bars Obama from delivering the annual State of the Union address to them, Americans will no longer have any way to hear Obama’s ideas and will probably start listening to the Republicans’ ideas with more sympathy.
You never know.

Instead of turning on the TV to listen to a boring presidential speech, folks are treated to an angry conservative yelling at them through the screen.  People think, the natural urge I have to pick up the remote to change the channel is somehow repressed. I wonder why. Instead of turning the channel to watch fashion model runway warriors, CSI-Topeka, doomsday duckhunters or just to head to the kitchen to make a skinny organic soy chai latte frappachino, I feel compelled to listen to a lecture from the angry fella. And instead of thinking this sounds like your typical run of the mill political bullshit, the viewer thinks, you know what I'm gonna join the cause and become a right winger.

Man these NRO guys come up with some good stuff.

Monday, November 24, 2014

November 20, 2014. A day that will live in Infamy

Was it over when the German bombed Pearl Harbor. Not for America, baby.

But it may be over for these guys as the deferred action Executive Order is just giving the far right fits:
How many such Days of Infamy like November 20, 2014, how many such liberal-endorsed disheartenings of their fellow citizens’ faith in the very basis of our society’s union, can our republic take?  Well, while I meantime call upon my brothers and sisters to repent of their hatefully cavalier treatment of things I and so many Americans hold dear, the truth is no-one will know until it becomes one too many
The election of Abraham Lincoln, by definition, has to be numero uno on the list of outrages. That was "one too many" for the most hardcore of conservatives to bear. Perhaps that comparison is unfair, but the conservatives back then thought it was outrageous enough to organize a secession movement that ultimately proved disastrous.

But there have been lots of conservative set backs in America throughout the ages - the late unpleasantness at being associated with the slavery just being one of them.  For example that executive order signed by President Truman desegregating the military has got to be high up on the list. More recently there have been meltdowns about same sex marriage bans being overturned by unelected unaccountable radicals in robes.

There will always be something outrageous about to happen and it doesn't even have to be real!  If change is a certainty - things never stay the same but yet are always changing, there will always be a market for conservative outrage.

There is one outrage that doesn't make the list that I am puzzled about however.  Presidential approval to torture people does not make it on the list of conservative outrages for some unknown reason. I can't figure out why. There must be an exception in the fine print section of the constitution - probably near the back that nobody bother reading anymore. Or perhaps its hidden in that clickwrap section on gop.com that wingers miss when they click "agree," click "agree," click 'agree" and before too long its like "whoa I agreed that torture was OK? How did that happen. Man, that Karl Rove sure is a sneaky bastard." 

Anyway that one is a real mystery that probably never will be solved.

Other than that, I propose that from this day forward, November 20th be call National Reagan Day in honor of 41st president many accomplishments and noting his decision to defer deportation for folks who did not receive "amnesty" in the 1986 Immigration Bill.

And then the 7th Benghazi Investigation Declared that "It was all a bunch of Bullshit"

And just like that, a report sheepishly released Friday evening by a committee run by House Republicans has effectively declared an "End to the Benghazi Conspiracy."  According the report, apparently there was no "there" - there.

One source on the internets attributes the prevalence of the Benghazi conspiracy theory on the right to the Derangement Syndrome:
When you think of the staggering amount of time and resources devoted to chasing down this rabbit-hole, you have to wonder what is really fueling the GOP. I don’t think it’s a positive agenda to tackle some of our obviously pressing problems: eleven million undocumented immigrants, climate change, Iran’s nuclear potential, Jihadism in Iraq, soaring inequality. I think it’s rabid hatred of a president who does not share their priorities and a desperation to find some kind of quick and easy way of consigning him to a treasonous asterisk. They’ve failed on both counts.
I think this is true.  But it is too early to declare this conspiracy theory dead. The 8th investigation, also being conducted by House Republicans, has yet to release its findings. And while it's not likely that it will deviate from the past 7 investigations, one winger holds out hope:
The administration and its supporters will, I assume, construe the lack of such findings as exoneration. They should not.

The Committee made no determination one way or another as to the motivation and thought processes of Susan Rice and other administration officials involved in the post-attack spin. It found neither bad faith and dishonesty nor their absence.

Why didn’t the Committee make such findings, one way or the other? The main reason, I suspect, is that the Republican members wanted bipartisan agreement as to the facts (including the fact that Rice’s comments were inaccurate). Keep in mind too that the House Intelligence Committee is something of an island of bipartisanship in the stormy seas of Capitol Hill, which is probably a good thing given the vital and sensitive nature of its work.

Republican members must also have been mindful that Trey Gowdy’s special committee is tasked investigating the Obama administration’s post-attack behavior, among other things. Thus, the honesty and good faith of Team Obama (or the lack thereof) remains the subject of an important, well-publicized House investigation. Indeed, by not opining on this subject, the Intelligence Committee invites Gowdy’s committee to focus sharply on it, and precludes any valid claim that the issue was resolved by another committee.
Keep hope alive.  Were administration officials like Susan Rice thinking ungood thoughts when she repeated intelligence community's best assessment of the cause of the Benghazi attacks - the so-called talking points? Perhaps maybe. Were others in the administration also thinking ungood things. Possibly. In that the administration did "the right things" in response to the attack, could it have been reluctant in doing so because of "bad faith?" Who knows.

So this thing will go on because that's how conspiracy theories work.  The very fact that there is not any credible evidence that the moon landing was faked, is itself evidence of a moon landing conspiracy. Of course there is no evidence that it was fake, that's because they are hiding it. Duh.

Tea Party Congressman, basically, "wusses out"

Now this is really Lame. In response to the latest in a series of outrages, many of which have been forgotten, Tea Party Congressman Raul Labrador's response to the recent executive order on immigration deferrals is the Censure the President and shut down the Department of Homeland Security.

I hope nobody tells the terrorizers:
Republican congressman Raul Labrador called on Congress to formally rebuke President Obama for his executive actions on immigration.

“We should censure the president of the United States,” Labrador told Bob Schieffer on Face the Nation Sunday. “We need to lay out clearly why this is unlawful.”

Representative Steve King (R., Iowa) has also called for censuring the president as a way to go on record opposing him short of impeachment. The move, while relatively rare in the nation’s history, would not be without precedent.

Labrador called for coupling censure with a funding bill that would not fund the Department of Homeland Security.
Now I did not watch the sunday talk shows, but if you go on one to allege that the President is acting in an unlawful manner and state that the GOP needs "to layout clearly why this is unlawful," why don't you just cut to the chase and "clearly" layout why it is "unlawful?" I mean you are on national television, so if not then, when?

That's the first point. Next. What is this wimpiness about "censure?" So you pass a resolution that says the President is mean and has hurt 27% of America's feelings. Fine. But how does this resolution stop all of the tyranny and shit?

It doesn't. What a wuss.

Friday, November 21, 2014

Right Wing Blogger Very ANGRY: Blames Obama for it

If its Amnesty time, it's Benghazi Time Too, baby:
You’d never know that President Obama got clobbered in the midterm elections held — when was it now? — earlier this month, a few weeks ago. Last night Obama was buoyant — not like Mark’s Twain’s “Christian with four aces.” He was way beyond that. He was gleeful.

What what he so happy about? He’s not facing the voters again. He’s free at last and it’s time for payback. He’s giving it to us good and hard. He’s sticking it to us big time.

Today he jets off to Vegas to take care of business and begin the celebrations. The symmetry is perfect. The last time he took off for Vegas this excited, Ambassador Christopher Stevens and his three colleagues had just been murdered by Islamist terrorists.
-Via one of the malcontents at Powerline Blog
These poor miserable bastards just hate the President.  Its enough to make you think that they might overreact and overreach and then do something incredibly stoopid.

Well, we now know what Mitch McConnell was talking about when he said that Reaganizing these undocumented folks would be like "waving a red flag in front of a Bull." The Bull in McConnell's analogy is his own base. McConnell didn't want to deal with the resulting shit storm of discontent from the true believers in whatever "the cause" stands for.

But such is life in the GOP. If you are the leader you have to be ready for it. Whether its Rat Finks or Yaffers or its Birchers or Baggers, there is always gonna be tons bullshit. McConnell knows that cutting deals with the devil (aka the lunatic fringe) is just part of the job.

Official Sources: Plan to "Reaganize" large numbers of undocumented "aliens" apparently "legal"

According to a Justice Department memorandum obtained via the internet through a right click and selecting "save as" from the menu, I've learned that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has proposed a policy to prioritize the removal of certain aliens unlawfully present in the United States. Since there are estimated 11.4 Million undocumented aliens present in the US and DHS only has the resources to deport up to 400,000 people per year.

It is an appropriate use of discretion to prioritize the removal of aliens who present threats to national security, public safety, or border security instead of focusing on grandma. This makes sense as an appropriate use of resources.

And since this is an appropriate use of discretion, DHS's proposed deferred action program for parents of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents, aka to "Reaganize" them in line with past precedent would also be a permissible exercise of DHS’s discretion in enforcing the immigration laws.

Should congress pass a law mandating and funding mass deportations, then the above prioritization policy would be changed to include a crackdown on grandma as well as those who present threats to national security, public safety, or border security.

So that's it in a nutshell. 

Which brings us to the inevitable FREAK out from the usual suspects. While I have not looked at the wingnet yet, I am sure that it is very angry.  And I am also sure that one of the outrages will focus on the "Take Care" clause impeachment argument that is popular in certain darker corners of the wingnet.

Under the "Take Care" impeachment argument, the President is basically omnipotent. He is responsible for ensuring that 100% of federal regulations are being complied with at all times - which is impossible. This means that he is not allowed any discretion in enforcing these requirements. This inevitably means, according to the winget, that whenever there are not resources to enforce a rule and the president has not prioritized this thing or that thing, he is violating his duty to "Take Care" to ensure that the laws of the nation are enforced. Its a really fun argument!

Imagine how this would play out during a Republican Presidency. As a thought experiment try imagining this. Say an employee working at hypothetical Moch Brother Industries slips and falls during shift. It is subsequently discovered that other people also have slipped and fallen during shifts at Moch Brothers. A pattern is established.

An angry partisan writes a Blog post:
"Where is OSHA? When was the last time Moch Brothers was inspected. Why hasn't the President ordered OSHA into Moch Brothers to put a stop to all this stuff? How many people must be injured before anything is done. Why has the President not shut Moch Brothers down. OSHA is the law. I want the law enforced. Why won't the President "Take Care" to enforce all the laws. Is he a tyrant? If we can't trust him to protect workers and enforce OSHA what can we trust him to do. NOTHING! These "Take Care" violations cannot be tolerated. I want him impeached." 
And on and on and on.

Now this is a little extreme. But the next mine accident will occur. Unfortunately when this happens Mine Safety and Health Administration will be under funded. It will also be headed by former Mining Executive or Mining Lobbyist. We will learn that MSHA did not adequately inspect the mine because it is underfunded - not because the MSHA Department head is an asshole.

Subsequently we will find out that the mine has a history of either borderline compliance or non-compliance and that everyone basically knew it was only matter of time before there was an accident. And of course since this is how things work out, the head of MSHA will be on record as opposing goddammed regulatory dictates from Washington because "mine owners know what's best for their workers, the community and the environment."

That's when the "take care" game that the wingnet has taught us would start up and you get to blame the systematic lack of resources for mine safety on the President.
What did he know? When did he know it? Why didn't he do anything about it? Seems to me that Republicans must not like working folks very much, because if the President had time to golf, he should have had time to call MSHA and protected those workers...
And on and on and on.

And so it goes.

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Tales from the Fever Swamp: Mitt Romney becomes Latest victim of "Grubergate"

Et Tu Powerline Blog:
Talk of running Mitt Romney again in 2016 has died down in the aftermath of the mid-term election...but the last nail in the coffin of a Romney repeat is his connection with Jonathan Gruber.  The video below, put together by the Obama campaign in 2012, uses Gruber extensively to attack Romney ...for being a hypocrite over Romneycare, which Gruber helped design.

The video raises the essential problem with Romney from the beginning.  He is a good man and would have made a decent president, but he is at the end of the day too much of a technocrat, who doesn’t understand why we must stop empowering the Grubers of the world ... We need a president who wants to tame the administrative state, not expand it further.  I don’t think Romney ever got that.  To be fair, a lot of Republicans don’t really get it.
This post criticizing health care and the "administrative state" is an example of Glennbeckism.

Glennbeckism and its adherents tell us that all was good and just and right in the United States until 1789, when congress full of founding fathers, turned their back on their own founding principles and created the first administrative agency within the government.

It was really stupid and perhaps tyrannical.

Later on succeeding congresses created other administrative agencies to deal with things like the railroads and interstate commerce. All of which was also a bad, bad idea because problems should solve themselves rather than being solved by people. Glennbeckism teaches us this. 

Later on other agencies were created to deal with increasingly complex issues that ordinary folks do not understand nor have time to understand...like "How should far away dairies be inspected and regulated to cut down on the number of people senselessly dying of poisoned milk supply, how should dangerous chemicals be handled to ensure that neighborhood children are not accidentally harmed, how should nuclear power be regulated to ensure things don't get blown to hell up."  These things are hard to do. But at the same time, the American people demand that they be done.

Glennbeckism teaches us that instead of having nuclear safety experts regulating reactors or infectious disease experts at the Center of Disease Control or stupid environmental experts at the stupid EPA, the public should vote directly on rules rather than having the experts draft the rules.  This is the real democratic way of doing things - Sarah Palin proposes a rule written in crayon on an index card and then there'd be a vote, dammit.

We know this because the founding fathers did not fear direct democracy.  Rather when they created the senate and the electoral college restricting democratic impulses it was because they were bored. That in doing so, they created these hedges against "popular passion" is just not relevant.  Sometimes stuff just happens - like the senate and electoral college.

We also know that these founders probably thought administrative agencies were not constitutional  because they waited until the very First Congress to create one.  If they thought administrative agencies were constitutional, these founders would have created an agency with fairy dust before the first congress convened.

So Glennbeckism teaches us all this.

And Glennbeckism is fundamental to understanding the Tyrant Mitt Romney and the Tyrant Barack Obama and the truly insidious guy named "Gruber" who said mean things before audiences of know-it-alls back in the day but which hurt the tender ears of wingers today.

For right wing health care to work in America without an administrative system, Glennbeckism teaches us that Medicare - a popular government run single payer system for seniors - must end. Medicaid, also a government program which provides medical care to the disabled, to the blind, to those born horrific diseases like cystic fibrosis, those suffering end of life diseases like Alzheimer's and Parkinsons and to the poor must also end.  Assistance to needy children through CHIP must also end. This is simple. These programs are issued through an administrative system of government. 

Without the Administrative state, once the free hand of the market is free to work its magic, the problem of delivering health care to vulnerable populations would (somehow) just be solved.  The market would respond and provide a solution for caring for penniless or soon to be penniless seniors with Alzheimer's. Ditto for the disabled or for children born with birth defects. And to it those without the ability to pay, too, but get care anyway through the emergency room. It would all just be magically solved. Perhaps the market would use pixie dust to ensure care for these folks. 

But instead, we have an administrative system of rules providing the framework for providers and insurers to meet market demand.  Romney and Obama and some guy named "Gruber" and lots of other people, too, just don't understand any of this.

IMPEACHMENT ALERT: The Wingnet Starts Whirring

Via the Wingnet:
As Andrew McCarthy points out in Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for Obama’s Impeachment, the Constitution provides three safeguards against abuse of power by the President: elections, the power of the purse, and impeachment. That’s it. Those are the tools.  Speaker John Boehner may pretend that suing the President will impede his lawlessness, but (as McCarthy has pointed out in several columns) the threat of a law suit is an empty threat.

Elections. The power of the purse. Impeachment.

We just had the election. The people spoke. Congress is unwilling to wield its power of the purse effectively. That leaves impeachment.

People scoffed a few months ago when the “i-word” was uttered.  Fewer are scoffing now.  After tonight, I suspect, you’ll start hearing a chorus demanding it.
You know that deep down the lunatic fringe is dying to go full metal wingnut on impeachment. It would just feel so good. After years of being told by AM radio and the Foxnews (and by RINOs) that Obama is tyrant, it looks like they're finally gonna get a chance to impeach. The poor miserable disgruntled bastards.

They are America's problem, yes, that is true - sabotaging the credit rating and initiating this crisis and that. But they are also the RINOs problem. The RINOs raised 'em up, nurtured 'em and urged 'em to cast stones. Now they own the chaos.

WARNING: Anarchists could resort to Anarchy

Outgoing Sen. Tom Coburn warns us:
“there could be not only a political firestorm but acts of civil disobedience and even violence in reaction to President Obama’s executive order on immigration,” ...The country’s going to go nuts, because they’re going to see it as a move outside the authority of the president, and it’s going to be a very serious situation. You’re going to see — hopefully not — but you could see instances of anarchy… You could see violence.”
Well, the Tea Party has that Anarchist vibe going sometimes. One California Republican referred to them as "Lemmings in Suicide vests" while the Wall Street Journal has referred to them as "Kamikazes."  So in that senses one should be aware of the threat.

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

Wingnuts Officially Lose it over "Grubergate"

How do you know that someone has the Derangement Syndrome and I mean know for sure that they have it?

Its not just saying something stupid because people do that all the time. And it can't be like to old definition of pornography - you know it when you see it.

One way to spot it - that a winger is seriously infected with the derangement syndrome when they go into Hitler mode - like they do at Powerline Blog:
In the video below, we catch a glimpse of Hitler’s reaction to the Grubergate videos. I’d love to see Obama’s reaction. It can’t be too far off from what is depicted here.

I can’t help myself; I think the video is funny as hell. The thing is full of quotable quotes, but I’m picking this one: “Even Ron Fournier knows we think he’s stupid.”
Dude is sick. But then again these guys thought Michele Bachman was a serious thoughtful politician too.

Tuesday, November 18, 2014

RINO War Plans Befuddle Conservagenstia - We've always been at war with executive deferrals.

What war plans? I don't see any war plans. These Poor Bastards really are confused.

With President Obama's pending Executive Order temporarily possibly deferring deportation of up to 5 million undocumented workers and their families for the duration of the Obama Administration- the biggest deferral since the 1.5 Million deferrals that occurred during the Reagan/Bush era - about to be unveiled, the true keepers of the faith fume and rage and wonder in bewilderment: "WHY ARE PEOPLE AS NOT AS MAD AS I AM ABOUT THE TYRANT OBAMA!!!!!!!!"

The answer is simple. Obama is only a tyrant deserving impeachment to those living in a fever swamp because immigration reform is complicated. But for folks that don't do nuance and actually believe that we've always been at war with Executive Deferrals, this issue is truly befuddling.  Its as iIf everyone you know says that Obama has done all these bad things and that he deserves impeachment for doing these bad things and that temporary Executive Deferral of deportation is like the totally worst most-est unconstitutional thing ever, then how can we -Real Americans - not be threatening this Tyrant with impeachment. GODDAMMIT!?

And the question answers itself. Resources are scare. If Congress wants mass deportations it should pass a mass deportation bill. If congress wants the status quo - defacto amnesty - it should do nothing. If it wants comprehensive reform, it should do that. But in the absence of congressional action, the President has discretion in how immigration resources are allocated. That he like President Reagan and President Bush would defer deportation is significant but hardly unprecedented ......unless you live in the fever swamp.

But the anger and the rage and denunciations cannot be suppressed:
So the ones I most denounce for leadership failure are top conservatives across the land, in conservative media, think-tanks, political organizations, etc.  I’d guess that at least a third of these people disagreed with the way Boehner his ilk continued, after repeated rejections, to pursue an immigration deal repugnant to most of the conservative base. So why didn’t these ones begin to make noise, or otherwise prepare for action?  And why couldn’t even some in the “Boehner camp” have tried to forcefully distinguish between the policy issue and the constitutional one?  The approach of this monstrosity has been visible for months.  The pattern of take-care-clause violations, ones with lower stakes, has been unfolding since 2012 and rather obviously so from the summer of 2013 on.  And as of today, I know of no organized group action to stop it, either from inside or outside the official GOP and conservative organizations.  Why don’t I?  On comment-thread after comment-thread, in poll after poll, evidence of astonishment and anger about Big Amnesty is seen again and again.  Is there no “entrepreneur,” either as politician, organizer, or media-salesman, who has stepped up to serve such sentiments?  Or, why haven’t we heard about them?  ... And no, the mere fear of uttering the “I-word” prior to an election cannot fully explain what’s going on here.
Why aren't there more people who have drunk the kool-aid or are still posting shit from their parents' basement or are warriors for the true cause wiling to take on these RINO overlords to make them do the painfully obvious?   

That's not a tough one.

The RINOs won the last election and the far right true believers lost. To them now that they are in charge, the Boehners and the McConnells have lived amongst the lunatic fringe their entire careers. Walking the tightrope between placating the cray-cray and not scaring the bejesus out of middle-America are the facts of life. Threading this needle - not making American lives better- is governing for now.  The Patriot should go out and vote - yes this is true, but at the end of the day they should STFU and submit to the will of their "betters"- the RINO. That is the natural order in the GOP.

Poor Bastards. I think they are going to try to drag down the GOP.

The GOP has really got itself worked in a tizzy over immigration

Has it come to this:
“Pope Francis announced that next year he is coming to the United States, or as Fox News is reporting it, Obama lets in yet another guy from South America.”
- Conan O’Brien
Maybe.

Adventures in Wingnutology: What is "Grubergate?"

Word of the Day:
Grubergate
Definition:
The word "gate" added to some guy's last name as a means to express anger at President Obama about national health care reform.
Some Guy named "Gruber"
So it goes like this. Gruber is this guy who back in the day helped design Romneycare. Back then, the wingnet did not care about him. Why should they have? I mean Romneycare was A-OK and a blueprint for healthcare reform nationwide.  A little later on he was the guy that helped design National Romneycare. Still wingers did not really care about him, especially with GOP President in waiting have written that National Romneycare was the model for American Healthcare Reform.

However today, now that national romneycare is now called double mean Obamacare, wingers are furious with the guy. It's not that the sausage tastes bad -  no it does not taste bad at all. If you get past the TYRANNY and that's a big if, people think it tastes kinda good.  It turns out that this guy described how the sausage gets made on video. One should never do that.

Now this poor bastard Gruber is ground zero for wingnut-rage - at least until folks start talking about the next "ground zero" mosque being planned or the next bright and shiny object. But that's my explanation about the wingnet's fixation on that guy Gruber - who basically is just some guy.

How about letting an actual wingnut in his native habitat using his own words describe "Grubergate?" That sounds fun! Lets  go to Powerline Blog:
What is Grubergate all about? It’s about more than Gruber’s obnoxious account of the passage of Obamacare, an account that exposes the illegitimacy of the law’s enactment. It is about more than the corruption through which he has profited handsomely in selling the law. It is about more than the sewage he pumped out for distribution by the White House, by Democratic leaders and officeholders, and by the mainstream media adjunct of the Democratic Party; the sewage was intended for consumption by the American public. Grubergate is about all of these things and more.
In other words they are mad - still mad that the President took their idea and turned it into national health reform.

This type of Pixel-fury is who these people express their emotions. When you think about, I guess its a lot better than shooting up a post office.  All in all its better that these guys are posting stuff from some basement rather than walking the streets. But that's just my take.

Monday, November 17, 2014

John McCain is really OLD

Via Jimmy Fallon
“This week, Bill Clinton tweeted a photo of himself reading George W. Bush’s new book ‘41.’ And then George W. Bush responded to that post on Instagram. And then John McCain said, ‘You two are hilarious’ by telegraph.”
This is actually just a joke. There is no evidence that McCain has ever used a telegraph.

Friday, November 14, 2014

Just like Clockwork Wingnut Blogger sounds the Alarm: She could be Worse than Holder.....

One of the laws of the wingnet is that when Democratic President's nominate someone to head an agency or the like, winger suddenly discover that the nominee is like the worst person in the world ever. Totally. And this new person is even worse that the last guy who used to be the worst person in the world.

It is a law of the internets. Someday social scientists may offer us clues as to why said phenomenon infects the wingnet, but until that day we have this:
The nomination of Loretta Lynch for Attorney General elicited praise from many familiar with her work as a prosecutor. From some conservatives, it brought relief that President Obama hadn’t nominated Tom Perez. And nearly everyone is relieved that Eric Holder will depart.

But there was a time when Holder received the same kind of praise Lynch is getting now. Indeed, he was something of a golden boy during his time as a prosecutor. It was only after he obtained significant administrative power that Holder revealed himself as a lawless left-wing ideologue and race-monger.

We don’t yet know whether Lynch, if installed at DOJ headquarters, would [duplicate] Holder’s lawlessness. But, as Hans von Spakovsky shows, there is evidence that she shares the left-wing mindset that induced Holder to act as he did....Eric Holder has done great damage to the rule of law. The Senate should not confirm Lynch unless she can show that there is meaningful difference between her and the man whom she would replace.
via powerline
First of all this von Spakovsky guy is a barking mad jim crow enthusist whose "vote fraud" theories routine get laughed out of court. So if you are a wingnut blogger, taking your cues from someone even wackier than you - well let's say that its not a good sign.

And this is the last thing the RINOs soon to be running the senate want for optics - a bunch of Tea Party Senators publicly persecuting a highly qualified African American woman over the conspiracy theory of the day. But you go with the majority you got not the one you hope to have one day. For now that means keeping the mouth breathers under wraps......if you can.