We've Got to Quit Dancing to Their Sick Music

Don't we all remember Bush's greatest Bushism:

"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."

This was one lesson we could have learned from Bush. But instead we are the fools. Why are we allowing a pond scum dweller like Andrew Breitbart play us like marionettes?

He unfairly smeared and broke ACORN and now he's after Shirley Sherrod. And just like the good little puppets, Obama and the press do exactly what he wants and look guilty.

We have got to stop this nonsense!!

Andrew Breitbart selectively edited a clip of an African-American USDA official seeming to admit she treated a white farmer poorly out of her own racial bias while an USDA employee. It turns out that Shirley Sherrod was actually telling an anecdote of an experience she had 28 years ago to show how the issue of race often obscures the issue of class, and the fact that poor black farmers and poor white farmers had a lot in common (eventually, she helped and became close to the white farmer and his family) — but Breitbart left all of that out of the video (just as he selectively and unfairly edited his cartoonish ACORN tapes). The White House immediately insisted she resign before doing any kind of investigation and now looks like a whimp.

I hope Shirley Sherrod sues the life out of Breitbart! But only after Obama publicly apologizes to her and reinstates her immediately!

h/t http://www.srbwi.org/

UPDATE: Rachel Maddow was just on and reminded me that this really the third time they have done this. I completely forgot their role in getting Van Jones fired.

We have got to grow a spine!

How Do These Idiots Get on TV to Pontificate??

Former GE CEO and Chairman Jack Welch was on Morning Joe this morning demonstrating that he is senile.

He was asked by Joe whether it was a problem that Americans don't manufacture things anymore and that the Chinese are the big manufacturers now. Welch, who oversaw a lot of this off-shoring manufacturing during his rein as master of the Universe, said some stunningly stupid things. He claimed that the Chinese only manufacture small things where we have retained the manufacturing of important things like the iPad. One of the other "experts" on Joe's panel asked "what about high speed rail?" Welsh said that isn't the Chinese, he claims the high speed rail is in Japan. Yes, Japan has had high speed rail for year but unless you are under a rock everyone should know China has just leapfrogged over everyone with their high speed rail -- faster, safer, longer, freigh handling -- and Jack doesn't know?! China builds 1200 miles of high speed rail and has it operational this year and Welch denies it's occurring! He thinks we make the iPad?!! Is South Korea part of the USA now? Because Samsung, the manufacturer of the iPad is in South Korea. Only small things, huh? I guess Jack considers the GE wind turbines "small things" made in China. They are 80 meters high and made in Shenyang, China! It takes at least 6 HUGE flat bed tractor trailer trucks to move one of them from the port where we import them to the Columbia Gorge where they are being installed. GE's Global Research Center is in Shanghai and Jack Welsh doesn't know??!!

Idiots! Scarborough should do just a little sanity test on proposed guests before booking them on his show. At a minimum they should be up on current events in their own freekin' industry!

Rudy Giuliani Trashs Unions

Rudy Giuliani was on Morning Joe this morning and all the Country's ills are due to labor unions according to him. One of his examples was that we own GM and only kept the company afloat to appease the UAW. He then complained that Obama owned the banks and was controlling salaries. What kind of up-side-down world does Rudy live in? First of all -- BUSH bailed out the banks and there were NO salary controls connected to the TARP funds. Secondly -- the UAW took HUGE concessions repeatedly and additional concessions were demanded as a condition of extending TARP to the auto makers. The unions were thrown under the bus while Wall Street fat cats kept their precious.

Giuliani is so dishonest that he makes me mad. Why does the MSM give him a microphone to peddle his lies?

The Mount Vernon Statement

The CPAC clan has come out with the newest gimmick a sort of "Contract on American II", called The Mount Vernon Statement. It's all pretty with parchment background and scripty fonts and words like moral, honor, faith, God, traditional, freedom, etc. we are all invited to electronically sign on to the screed after the original signers. I for one will not "join" with these original signers nor do I ever want my name to be associated with these criminals who I would normally NEVER associate with those words:

Edwin Meese -- Remember Wedtech?
Wendy Wright -- her organization is against civil rights for gay and lesbians and is also the HPV vaccine (like Gardasil). She also wrote "An Ordinary Girl's Dialogue With God" one of those purpose driven life screeds
Lee Edwards -- who brags in his signature that he was present at the signing of the Sharon Statement. I preferred the Port Huron Statement.
Tony Perkins -- who has recently tried to prevent Planned Parenthood from providing earthquake relief to women in Haiti saying they were trying to promote their agenda (yes they were -- the agenda was to try to help women who had lost EVERYTHING PREVENT unwanted pregnancies, have healthy pregnancies, and safe births).
Brent Bozell -- who believes net neutrality amounts to a plot to "control the Internet."
Kenneth Cribb -- a professional Climate Change denier funded by Exxon
Grover Norquist -- remember the Abramoff scandal?

I don't think I need to go on. I for one will NOT be adding my name to theirs. I have NOTHING in common with these hacks.

However, I bet this screed gets tons of publicity and in the end it will be as effective as the the Sharon Statement 50 years ago or the Contract on America from 1994.

We Lost an Important Voice Yesterday

Howard Zinn died yesterday.

Howard Zinn, the Boston University historian and political activist who was an early opponent of US involvement in Vietnam and whose books, such as "A People's History of the United States," inspired young and old to rethink the way textbooks present the American experience, died today in Santa Monica, Calif, where he was traveling. He was 87.

Noam Chompsky said:

Both by his actions, and his writings for 50 years, [Howard Zinn] played a powerful role in helping and in many ways inspiring the Civil rights movement and the anti-war movement.

He immeasurably affected me and my life. I never missed a chance to see him speak and bought most of his books and videos, including his Emma Goldman play and his comic book!

As important as Dr Zinn was to a couple generations of Americans, I will be surprised if the MSM spends any time on reflecting on his accomplishments and influence. Howard Zinn is certainly more important to the changes we made in the United States in the '60's and '70's -- and his life and work should be celebrated more than Michael Jackson's, but I doubt it will be.

We have some really screwed up priorities.

h/t backbonecampaign.org for pix

Intellectually Dishonest

Are the Republithugs being intellectually dishonest, simpleminded, or deliberately obtuse on this Harry Reid is a racist thing? I'm not a big fan of Senator Reid and I hope a progressive Dem replaces him but it has nothing to do with his comments about 'light skinned' and 'negro dialect' -- it has EVERYTHING to do with his handling of Senators Landrieu and Nelson during the health care negotiations and his chumminess with Lieberman.

Republicans have been pouncing on Reid's comments and calling for Reid's resignation from the Senate leadership. They compare Reid's comments to Trent Lott's 2002 comments that America would have been better off had then-segregationist Sen. Strom Thurmond been elected president in 1948, which resulted in Lott being forced to leave the GOP leadership. There is a clear difference between the comments, of course: While Lott's words were interpreted as an argument that segregationist policies would have been better for America than integration, Reid was discussing a political strategic reality.

Joe Ritchey over at Fundamental Truths like me has noticed Joe Scarborough's obsession with this:

The irony here is the more Joe talks the more clear it is that it is him that has a racial issue not Harry Reid. . . . But Scarborough along with his other old white boy cohorts Pat Buchanan and Mike Barnacle dig a deeper and deeper hole for themselves by trying to claim some anti Republican bias as if there is no difference in the remarks. His biggest argument to justify his point are unprovable hypothetical, "what would happen" if it was a Republican that said it.

I find it amazing that in a effort to politically destroy Harry Reid by claiming racism, Scarborough is showing clearly how totally clueless about race he is.

Chuck Todd has joined the chorus claiming the two events are the same. Crooks and Liars captured Todd's Tweet:

Why is Reid surviving while Lott didn't? Dems are rallying around Reid; GOPers let Lott whither on vine.

Idiot.

Liz Cheney and Michael Steele are in the same sinking boat as Scarborough and Todd. It's telling when George Will is the voice of reason in this cluster-@#$%.

Where's the Dixie Chick Outrage??

Ted Nugent goes off to a foreign country and makes the following statement:

"I think that Barack Hussein Obama should be put in jail. It is clear that Barack Hussein Obama is a communist. (Former Chinese leader) Mao Tse Tung lives and his name is Barack Hussein Obama. This country should be ashamed. I wanna throw up."

Wasn't this the same mortal sin that caused the Dixie Chicks to be pilloried? Where's the foaming at the mouth? CD smashing events? Play list blacklist? Concert demonstrations? Death threats?

Doesn't the right ever see their own hypocrisy?

Men Protecting Us Little Women AGAIN

My fantasy Sunday morning show is Rachel Maddow hosting a panel made up of Ana Marie Cox, Arianna Huffington, Jessica Valenti, Digby, and Donna Brazile discussing the merits of the public money paying for prostrate exams and Viagra. Maybe then David Gregory and NBC will get a clue as to why it is so insulting for him to use a panel of men to discuss abortion.

Taylor Marsh covered it well:

Well, as with the late Tim Russert, once again with David Gregory on “Meet the Press,” women are not seen or heard at a time when abortion politics has been at the center of the healthcare debate. (I’ve been covering this reality for years.) That women also pay more for health insurance evidently doesn’t meet the “Meet the Press” standards for being included in the debate. That says it all, not only about the continuing If It’s Sunday, It’s Misogyny . . .

Silly me, why would the opinion of a woman be useful when talking about abortion rights anyway? We're so lucky to have the menfolk talking for us silly women!

Romney is Playing with Statistics Again

Mitt Romney just said on Meet the Press that the average Government worker makes approximately $30,000 more that private workers. Idiot. Yes, the average occupational wage of Civil Service occupations is about $65,000 but that is by occupation, not worker. There are far more entry level Civil Servants and blue collar workers than judges and Agency heads. This statistics also ignores the military service members which would further drive this number down. But even at that, Romney failed to compare the average occupational wage from the private sector to the Civil Service wage. Instead he seems to have compared it to the median individual wage. In 2007 the average household income in the United States was over $50,000 -- still a far way from $30,000 less than Civil Servants. What he must have been referring to is the median of people, not occupations, which was $26,000 in 2006.

Romney is mixing apples and oranges and NO ONE on Meet the Press challenged Mitt. Idiots!

Rush Limbaugh

Why is a bunch of rich white men keeping another rich man out of their private club a news story? It's been 2 days now and there are no signs of the coverage letting up. So Rush Limbaugh was uninvited to join a consortium of rich men buying the Rams -- so what?

Joe Scarborough for the last two mornings blames Rev Sharpton. Rush blames the media and 'liburrels'. As if the media, liberals, or Sharpton have ANY influence on rich clubby white men! Why would the NFL insiders listen to public conversation on anything they did? For GAWD sakes they re-hired Michael Vick! They couldn't care less what the public thinks -- only if it can turn a profit. Obviously they thought Rush's money and presence in their club had no value or they would have been falling all over themselves to include him in their little rich boy's club.

Can we talk about something important now?

Money Honey Dumb as a Stump

I've always considered Maria Bartiromo a pretty version of a get-rich-quick huckster with just a better time slot on TV than the other infomercials. She cares about one thing and one thing only -- the stock market. It's good news to her when people get laid off because stock will go up. It's great news if they off shore jobs because stock prices will go up. She sucks up to corporations and fawns over CEO's and lets them lie and do puff pieces on her "Closing Bell" show even just days before their companies implode or charges are filed on the CEO's -- who can forget her relationship with Todd Thompson of Citigroup, interview on Lehman Brothers last year, Ken Lewis on how their acquisition of Countrywide was a good thing, or with John Sauro of North American Mortgage. I always assumed that if people are smart enough to play in the stock market that they should be smart enough to see through her "Money Honey" persona.

But somehow last year Bartiromo started thinking she was a real commentator -- WOW! SHE IS DUMB!! Last year, conveniently just before the election in late September, Bartiromo hosted a special on the "Hunt for Black Gold" -- featuring Sarah Palin with her "drill, baby, drill" strategy. Bartiromo never challenged her -- it was definitely a puff Republican support piece. She has lied about Obama almost incessantly since -- he promised no earmarks, wants to tax small businesses, Obama gave AIG the bailout. But since then, she's been out and about more -- I don't care about "The View" pieces and some of the other soft stuff. But she pretends to be a serious commentator and she obviously doesn't have a clue. Last month it was the goof about Medicare on the Carlos Watsons' show:

At one point, Bartiromo was critical of the government-managed health care system in the United Kingdom. "How do I know the quality [of health care in the United States] is not going to suffer" with a public option? she asked.

Rep. Weiner reminded her that there already is government-managed health care in the United States -- namely, Medicare, the system created for Americans 65 years and older -- and that patients with Medicare report very high satisfaction rates.

Bartiromo's response to this argument was a true head-scratcher. In a mocking tone, she pressed the congressman: "How come you don't use it [Medicare]? You don't have it. How come you don't have it?"

Rep. Anthony Weiner, who turns 45 this week, tried to walk Bartiromo through it. "Because I'm not 65." But she was insistent. "Yeah... c'mon!" she exclaimed, laughing incredulously.

But before that she kept repeating that Health Care Reform was going to cost us over a trillion dollars over 10 years. I chucked both of these statements to her blind allegiance to supporting the stock value of her health care provider corporations.

This morning, she branched out to other topics, with equal idiocy. Tim Dickinson from Rolling Stone was on Morning Joe to talk about his newest article called The Lie Machine on who is behind the birthers, deathers, tea baggers. Bartiromo was on the panel and her "salient" point was that Democrats do it too. She thought she really got Tim when she accused "Who's behind "Move On"?!" WOW! Read much, Maria??

It was a really eye rolling moment. She should be required to do just a little research before she's allowed to open her mouth on her own without a script.

Who Do You Believe? Republicans or your Lying Eyes?

Why is it so uneven?
I agree with the sentiments of Code Pink but not their tactics. I’ve never seen Congressmen line up to speak to them. I’ve never seen MSM cry and beg them to show up for an event. I’ve never seen estimates that they’re 2 million strong or news coverage of their events go on for a week.


But the Republicans court and flatter the racists in the tea baggers. Glenn Beck controls them like a puppet master. And the MSM covers, discusses, and legitimizes them. The best of the Republicans just deny they exist.

It is a shame that it’s left to Democrats like Pelosi and Carter have to call them out. This morning Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan went on and on denying there are racists and criticizing Pelosi and Carter. How can they deny this? Why can’t they separate them out of the Republican party? I can only assume that they want them as constituents.

Here’s another one. Look how quick the Democrats threw Acorn under the bus after they were set up. Why are we taxpayers still paying Blackwater after sworn testimony that they are guilty of murder and they’ve been caught overcharging us?

Ted Kennedy

I loved Ted Kennedy. His speeches often brought me to tears. I've personally benefited from his work in the Senate through the legislation he pushed through and he was a real national leader.

But -- I find it interesting that the one event the talking heads keep pointing out as his biggest mistake in the Senate was his dressing down of Bork in 1987. The mainstream media keeps saying it was the tipping point for when supreme court judge conformations became politicized. My point of view is that it was Reagan's nomination of Bork that made it become politicized. Kennedy justifiably derailed that nomination. Reagan should have never nominated such a man so outside the mainstream.

I was very disappointed later in 1991 that Kennedy didn't challenge Clarence Thomas and we're stuck with this incompetent right winger because of it. At the time I blamed Kennedy's own perceived personal escapades with women that probably made him feel unable to appropriately question and point out Thomas' inappropriateness. I vividly remember Kennedy sitting there, not asking questions, looking circumspect. Women everywhere were disappointed and mad. It made many of us determined to make sure that more women would be in the Senate in the future. We realized we could not rely on the men to protect us.

My own Senators -- Cantwell and Murray -- have Kennedy to thank for making the rest of us so outraged that we insisted more women were elected.

I forgave Kennedy and I loved him but his actions concerning Bork wasn't his biggest failing -- his inaction on the Thomas hearing were.

h/t davidhorsey.com

Repercussions

Steve Brill (founder of CourtTV) used to publish a magazine called "Brill's Content". It was a pretty decent magazine but went bust in 2001. Each month the magazine published a running score of pundunt accuracy. The scores were dismal!

The smart and funny Bill in Portland Maine had a great post today on penalties. He listed off common penalties for sports, traffic citations, fines, etc. He then cited this penalty:

Neocon Republicanism: Lying about and/or being completely wrong and/or incompetent and/or deceitful about WMDs, torture, terror threats and civil liberties between 2001 and 2009 = Book deals, TV appearances, regular guest columns in major newspapers and magazines, huge speaking fees, credibility and authority inside the D.C. beltway, invitations to cocktail parties, lobbying power, Twitter/Facebook stardom, and serving as "balance" on talk shows against those who didn’t lie and were completely right and competent and candid about WMDs, torture, terror threats and civil liberties between 2001 and 2009.

How true!!

Digby is so Smart!

Digby is so smart and luckily for me, quicker to post just what I'm thinking. I get to just link to her and say things like "Amen" and "Ditto".

I wasn't going to wade into the David Letterman thing because it seemed pretty trivial to me on the media sexism scale. But it's obviously a growing brouhaha, so I might as well.

First of all, Sarah Palin does not look or act like a "slut" and it's nothing more than a sexual fantasy to think of her that way. She married her high school sweetheart and has five kids. She's a born again Christian. She does not dress provocatively, and she has said that she put her hair up and wore glasses specifically to take her looks off the table as much as possible. She's an attractive 40 something politician, she's not a Playboy model (not that there's anything wrong with that) and it would be nice if she didn't have to put up with that stuff. She's not trying to "sex herself up" for the camera or anything else. There's enough to criticize her for.

The daughter thing was in poor taste. Leave the kids out of the jokes. The fact that he meant her older daughter is obvious, but that doesn't make it any better. She's a young girl who didn't ask for the limelight and doesn't deserve to be mocked by middle aged men. It's cruel and unnecessary.

...Having said that, this ridiculous accusation that he was talking about raping the 14 year old is over the top and disingenuous, to say the least. That clearly was not his intention and claiming it was really cheapens the validity of the complaint.

And making Palin into a feminist hero because of this cheapens feminism. This woman is defending herself and her own daughter, but as Governor she never quite finds the voice to defend other women who have average real life problems, like workplace discrimination, rapes or unwanted pregnancies. Her complaints are not coming from feminist principle but rather political opportunism.

And these right wing monsters like Limbaugh who are suddenly concerned about the treatment of women in the media is laughable. This is the man who coined the term feminazis, and called Chelsea Clinton the white house dog. His record of rank, violent misogyny is clear. If Palin repudiated him as quickly as she goes on television to condemn Letterman, I might be able to take her a little bit more seriously as a feminist.

The media are fascinated by Sarah Palin, at least partially because of her camera friendly appearance and her colorful family life. That doesn't mean they can call her a slut and use her teenage daughter as the butt of crude sexual jokes. But it also doesn't mean that she and her politics aren't reactionary and anti-feminist. Having some feminist principles are required for that and Sarah Palin only seems to develop them when it involves her.

A big "ditto amen" from me!

In Case the Media is Interested

Let me go on record -- I don't give a rat's ass what Cheney, his daughter, or Newt have to say. They are not in office and hold no position in government -- their opinions of what documents should be released or what the behavior of those IN government are is completely irrelevant. You are wasting my time and paper and ink by covering them 24/7.

Cheney is not equivalent to Obama. His speeches are a waste of breath and I have no interest in seeing them. To present his opinion as somehow relevant in any discussion on how this President, we voted for, is doing means less to me than if you interviewed my dog.

You are NOT covering these has beens because that's what the public wants or is interested in. Obama is the President. Cheney and Newt are has beens. Dick's daughter is irrelevant.

"Liberal" media, my ass!