Uh, tell me again why I should vote for Obama? What party is he affiliated with? Obama probably thinks this move will endear him to the GOP.
Obama Ignores Democratic Choices for Texas U.S. Attorneys; Chooses 4 GOP Favorites
By Andrew Ramonas
June 29, 2011
President Barack Obama snubbed Texas Democrats on Tuesday and nominated Republican picks for leaders of all four U.S. Attorneys' offices in Texas.
Obama tapped John Malcolm Bales for the Easter District of Texas, Kenneth Magidson for Southern District of Texas, Robert Pitmanfor the Western District of Texas and Sarah Saldana for the Northern District of Texas. Texas Republican Senators John Cornyn and KayBailey Hutchison recommended the nominees for Obama in October 2009.
But the nominess were not on the list the Texas House Democrats led by Rep. Lloyd Doggett sent to the President in October 2009. And Doggett is not pleased.
Full story here.
I wonder if Al Gore is ready to run again? At least I know he's a Democrat.
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Hell's Barbie
There is no chance that Michele Bachmann can be elected President of the US. But then again, I thought the same thing about George W. Bush. Surely, this country can't get any dumber than Bush ... can it?
Michele Bachmann, hell's Barbie
By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Meanwhile, while you were sleeping, while you were allowing your attention to wander to issues more pressing, heartwarming and good, such as gay New Yorkers in love and goofy dogs running marathons, easily the most insane and wide-eyed squirrelmonkey pseudo-politician in your lifetime announced that she is hereby running for president of the United States.
And by "running" she does not mean putting on those supercute little silver jogging shoes with the funny blinky LED lights in the heels that she saw at DSW that one time, because that would be silly and not make any sense at all, and she wants people to understand she is very serious about this campaign thing and is definitely not as totally loopy bats--t crazy as your demented Aunt Sylvia with the twitchy eye, 23 parakeets and the addiction to little tubes of Oscar Meyer bologna wrapped around a fistful of oxycodone.
Except, of course, that she totally is.
Yes, Michele Bachmann is running for president. Michele Bachmann, fundamentalist Christian zealot, paranoid isolationist, lowbrow conspiracy theorist, heavily shellacked automaton, anti-choice anti-gay anti-everything neo-Stepford throwback and easily the flat-out nuttiest female ever to raise a hugely depressing $13 million for her clumsy campaign launch, Michele wants to lead us all to salvation.
Well OK, not all of us exactly, mostly the whites and the rich and people who collect colorful black-light posters featuring sweaty, bare-chested Jesus riding a T-Rex into the Castro to smite the gays. But you know, that's nitpicking.
And why? Why on earth is she running? Because apparently certain key GOP advisers were partially sober just long enough to tell her, well, not that she actually has a shot, not that she can possibly make it past the second round of debates without imploding, but that she could, you know, "change the conversation."
That's just an educated guess, by the way, because "you can change the conversation" is basically shorthand for "score big points with your rabid constituents," "make national headlines you'd never make otherwise," "suck in piles of money from the freaky old Koch brothers," and "maybe, just maybe become the next Sarah Palin, who herself isn't really Sarah Palin anymore, given how numb the country has become to her endless malapropisms and embarrassing public moments, thus leaving a huge opening for someone even more dangerously bizarre to step in and mortify the human race." Thanks, Minnesota!
That Bachmann can now reference God and Jesus more times than Sarah Palin can reference mama grizzlies and Paul Revere? That she could half-heartedly represent the Tea Party in all its ragged, nonsensical, Coors Light-filled, garage band glory? That she can now espouse any one of her laundry list of bizarro claims, including (but far from limited to) the idea that AmeriCorps is a government brainwashing program, that Michelle Obama wants to force all women to breast feed, Sharia law is coming to middle America, Creationism is fact, global warming is a hoax, the Treasury has a secret plan to create a "one world" currency, health care reform will send kids on "abortion field trips," and that Obama might use new census data to round up Americans and put them in camps? Baby, that's just for starters.
But let this not solely be a column detailing the well-documented and -- let's just admit it -- hugely entertaining insanity of Michele Bachmann. I don't nearly have the space, and Matt Taibbi's fantastic Rolling Stone piece, combined with Mother Jones' disturbing three-page list of assorted Bachmann bombs, does a far better job of cataloguing her big box of crazy than I ever could.
Let us instead pause for a moment as we offer wayward and sidelong thanks to ... Hillary Clinton.
You read that right. For without Hillary, there would be no Michele. Without Hillary to pave the way for all shapes and IQs of women to follow her lead, well, Bachmann would still be cruising the wealthy suburbs of Minnesota, hurling Bibles at terrified children from the trunk of her pink Lexus.
Let us briefly recall all those lifetimes ago -- going on four years now -- when Hillary was in top form as presidential candidate, when all the talk surrounded whether or not America was possibly ready for a female president and everyone was all aflutter over the notion that an enormously intelligent, capable woman was finally about to shatter the last political glass ceiling.
Well, Hillary did it. She might not have won, but she certainly made it far enough that no one is batting an eye that Bachmann is (well, questionably) female. No one is flinching at the idea that a woman could run a successful campaign, be a serious candidate, possibly win the big prize.
In fact, so successful was Hillary in cementing this truism in the American consciousness, it's essentially negating the collective, agonized scream of all former Hillary supporters, all the feminists, pro-choicers, intelligent and empowered humans everywhere who are right now looking at Bachmann -- the monstrous, reverso-world embodiment of everything Hillary is not -- and going, "Oh sweet Jesus no, this is not what we meant at all."
Regardless, perhaps it is time for celebration. I know plenty of liberals -- myself included -- who were completely delighted to hear Bachmann declare her candidacy. Despite the dour alarmist bells sounded by a few pundits who think there's a very slim chance Bachmann could actually be a threat, her announcement pretty much guarantees the GOP race will be nothing short of a hilarious madcap clown car slugfest, with Jesus.
And if Newt Gingrich manages to stay afloat and Ron Paul and perhaps even Palin herself gets in there, and someone asks if Jesus is gay, gold should be the only valid currency or whether or not God can take Allah in a Wrestlemania grudge match? Let's just say, history will be made.
What's more, if all goes well, if the Bachmann Express does what it's expected to do and makes easy mockery of the last iotas of human intelligence the GOP has left, her campaign -- already off to a cringing start when she confused John Wayne the actor with John Wayne Gacy the serial killer -- could easily spell the end of the Tea Party once and for all. Bonus.
No matter how you slice it, it's guaranteed to be a stretch of political theater so wonderfully absurd and surreal, so brazenly insulting to history, grammar, science, logic, sexuality, common sense, gender and fundamental human progress itself, well, you'd have to be crazy not to watch it.
Original.
Michele Bachmann, hell's Barbie
By Mark Morford, SF Gate ColumnistWednesday, June 29, 2011
Meanwhile, while you were sleeping, while you were allowing your attention to wander to issues more pressing, heartwarming and good, such as gay New Yorkers in love and goofy dogs running marathons, easily the most insane and wide-eyed squirrelmonkey pseudo-politician in your lifetime announced that she is hereby running for president of the United States.
And by "running" she does not mean putting on those supercute little silver jogging shoes with the funny blinky LED lights in the heels that she saw at DSW that one time, because that would be silly and not make any sense at all, and she wants people to understand she is very serious about this campaign thing and is definitely not as totally loopy bats--t crazy as your demented Aunt Sylvia with the twitchy eye, 23 parakeets and the addiction to little tubes of Oscar Meyer bologna wrapped around a fistful of oxycodone.
Except, of course, that she totally is.
Yes, Michele Bachmann is running for president. Michele Bachmann, fundamentalist Christian zealot, paranoid isolationist, lowbrow conspiracy theorist, heavily shellacked automaton, anti-choice anti-gay anti-everything neo-Stepford throwback and easily the flat-out nuttiest female ever to raise a hugely depressing $13 million for her clumsy campaign launch, Michele wants to lead us all to salvation.
Well OK, not all of us exactly, mostly the whites and the rich and people who collect colorful black-light posters featuring sweaty, bare-chested Jesus riding a T-Rex into the Castro to smite the gays. But you know, that's nitpicking.
And why? Why on earth is she running? Because apparently certain key GOP advisers were partially sober just long enough to tell her, well, not that she actually has a shot, not that she can possibly make it past the second round of debates without imploding, but that she could, you know, "change the conversation."
That's just an educated guess, by the way, because "you can change the conversation" is basically shorthand for "score big points with your rabid constituents," "make national headlines you'd never make otherwise," "suck in piles of money from the freaky old Koch brothers," and "maybe, just maybe become the next Sarah Palin, who herself isn't really Sarah Palin anymore, given how numb the country has become to her endless malapropisms and embarrassing public moments, thus leaving a huge opening for someone even more dangerously bizarre to step in and mortify the human race." Thanks, Minnesota!
That Bachmann can now reference God and Jesus more times than Sarah Palin can reference mama grizzlies and Paul Revere? That she could half-heartedly represent the Tea Party in all its ragged, nonsensical, Coors Light-filled, garage band glory? That she can now espouse any one of her laundry list of bizarro claims, including (but far from limited to) the idea that AmeriCorps is a government brainwashing program, that Michelle Obama wants to force all women to breast feed, Sharia law is coming to middle America, Creationism is fact, global warming is a hoax, the Treasury has a secret plan to create a "one world" currency, health care reform will send kids on "abortion field trips," and that Obama might use new census data to round up Americans and put them in camps? Baby, that's just for starters.
But let this not solely be a column detailing the well-documented and -- let's just admit it -- hugely entertaining insanity of Michele Bachmann. I don't nearly have the space, and Matt Taibbi's fantastic Rolling Stone piece, combined with Mother Jones' disturbing three-page list of assorted Bachmann bombs, does a far better job of cataloguing her big box of crazy than I ever could.
Let us instead pause for a moment as we offer wayward and sidelong thanks to ... Hillary Clinton.
You read that right. For without Hillary, there would be no Michele. Without Hillary to pave the way for all shapes and IQs of women to follow her lead, well, Bachmann would still be cruising the wealthy suburbs of Minnesota, hurling Bibles at terrified children from the trunk of her pink Lexus.
Let us briefly recall all those lifetimes ago -- going on four years now -- when Hillary was in top form as presidential candidate, when all the talk surrounded whether or not America was possibly ready for a female president and everyone was all aflutter over the notion that an enormously intelligent, capable woman was finally about to shatter the last political glass ceiling.
Well, Hillary did it. She might not have won, but she certainly made it far enough that no one is batting an eye that Bachmann is (well, questionably) female. No one is flinching at the idea that a woman could run a successful campaign, be a serious candidate, possibly win the big prize.
In fact, so successful was Hillary in cementing this truism in the American consciousness, it's essentially negating the collective, agonized scream of all former Hillary supporters, all the feminists, pro-choicers, intelligent and empowered humans everywhere who are right now looking at Bachmann -- the monstrous, reverso-world embodiment of everything Hillary is not -- and going, "Oh sweet Jesus no, this is not what we meant at all."
Regardless, perhaps it is time for celebration. I know plenty of liberals -- myself included -- who were completely delighted to hear Bachmann declare her candidacy. Despite the dour alarmist bells sounded by a few pundits who think there's a very slim chance Bachmann could actually be a threat, her announcement pretty much guarantees the GOP race will be nothing short of a hilarious madcap clown car slugfest, with Jesus.
And if Newt Gingrich manages to stay afloat and Ron Paul and perhaps even Palin herself gets in there, and someone asks if Jesus is gay, gold should be the only valid currency or whether or not God can take Allah in a Wrestlemania grudge match? Let's just say, history will be made.
What's more, if all goes well, if the Bachmann Express does what it's expected to do and makes easy mockery of the last iotas of human intelligence the GOP has left, her campaign -- already off to a cringing start when she confused John Wayne the actor with John Wayne Gacy the serial killer -- could easily spell the end of the Tea Party once and for all. Bonus.
No matter how you slice it, it's guaranteed to be a stretch of political theater so wonderfully absurd and surreal, so brazenly insulting to history, grammar, science, logic, sexuality, common sense, gender and fundamental human progress itself, well, you'd have to be crazy not to watch it.
Original.
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
I didn't notice...
How drunk do you have to be to hit somebody on the freeway, have their body crash through your windshield and come to rest in the passenger seat, and you not notice? Just when you think you've heard it all...
Police: Man keeps driving on I-45 with pedestrian in windshield
A driver who hit a pedestrian along Interstate 45 in southeast Houston early this morning didn’t stop even though the victim smashed through his windshield and landed in the front passenger seat, officials said.
The collision occurred in the 12200 block of the southbound Gulf Freeway near Fuqua about 12:30 a.m. Tuesday, according to the Houston Police Department.
Police said the victim, whose name has not been released, died at the scene. No other injuries were reported.
Police said a man was driving his Ford Explorer on the freeway when it broke down. He pulled to the shoulder and got out and began trying to cross the freeway.
The man was hit by the driver of a black Mazada, police said. Police said the collision forced the victim’s body through the windshield and he landed in the front passenger seat inside the car.
The driver did not stop after the collision, police said. Police said he got off the freeway and drove a few blocks before a Precinct 8 Harris County Constable pulled him over at 11600 Kirkvalley near Beamer and the deputy noticed the car’s front was damaged. Then the deputy saw the victim in the car, police added.
Police said the driver told the deputy he had hit something on the freeway and that he didn’t know the victim was in the passenger seat beside him.
Police are still investigating the case.
Original
Police: Man keeps driving on I-45 with pedestrian in windshield
A driver who hit a pedestrian along Interstate 45 in southeast Houston early this morning didn’t stop even though the victim smashed through his windshield and landed in the front passenger seat, officials said.
The collision occurred in the 12200 block of the southbound Gulf Freeway near Fuqua about 12:30 a.m. Tuesday, according to the Houston Police Department.
Police said the victim, whose name has not been released, died at the scene. No other injuries were reported.
Police said a man was driving his Ford Explorer on the freeway when it broke down. He pulled to the shoulder and got out and began trying to cross the freeway.
The man was hit by the driver of a black Mazada, police said. Police said the collision forced the victim’s body through the windshield and he landed in the front passenger seat inside the car.
The driver did not stop after the collision, police said. Police said he got off the freeway and drove a few blocks before a Precinct 8 Harris County Constable pulled him over at 11600 Kirkvalley near Beamer and the deputy noticed the car’s front was damaged. Then the deputy saw the victim in the car, police added.
Police said the driver told the deputy he had hit something on the freeway and that he didn’t know the victim was in the passenger seat beside him.
Police are still investigating the case.
Original
Monday, June 27, 2011
Solar breakthrough?
Could this country drag its feet any slower in the "race" to create alternative energy sources? Yes, yes, I know the Republicans are throwing roadblocks into anything the Democrats might want to do, and yes, I know that the Republicans don't care if they destroy the economy in their mad dash to destroy Obama, but there is always more than one way to skin a cat. (Eww)
Too bad we have a President that doesn't have a clue about how to fight for what he believes in (that is, if he believes in anything besides bipartisanship.)
Pythagoras Solar Turns Windows Into Panels Of Energy
Sarah Lai Stirland June 27, 2011
A start-up in Northern California is working on creating "solar windows" that could act as solar panels at the same time as blocking sunlight from entering office buildings to reduce their energy needs, according to a Sunday story in the San Francisco Chronicle.
The company Pythagoras Solar is based in San Mateo, California, and it won an award from the "GE ecomagination Challenge," award of $100,000 last week for its idea.
The company makes a "window laced with solar cells," that could generate power for office buildings and shield offices from sunlight, thus reducing air conditioning costs.
The GE award is a "validation of three things -- that (the window) is unique, that it's feasible and it could have a big impact," Gonen Fink, Pythagoras' CEO told the Chronicle.
The technology is a class of equipment that seeks to replace parts of buildings with solar panels to generate energy. Other possibilities include window awnings and roofing tiles.
Some of Pythagoras' windows are already installed on Chicago's Willis Tower (formerly known as the Sears Tower.)
CEO Fink wouldn't reveal his system's cost per watt to the Chronicle, but he says that "for the typical customer" the system will pay for itself in three to five years.
He's excited about the technology, he says, because it could change the way buildings are built.
Original.
Too bad we have a President that doesn't have a clue about how to fight for what he believes in (that is, if he believes in anything besides bipartisanship.)
Pythagoras Solar Turns Windows Into Panels Of Energy
Sarah Lai Stirland June 27, 2011
A start-up in Northern California is working on creating "solar windows" that could act as solar panels at the same time as blocking sunlight from entering office buildings to reduce their energy needs, according to a Sunday story in the San Francisco Chronicle.
The company Pythagoras Solar is based in San Mateo, California, and it won an award from the "GE ecomagination Challenge," award of $100,000 last week for its idea.
The company makes a "window laced with solar cells," that could generate power for office buildings and shield offices from sunlight, thus reducing air conditioning costs.
The GE award is a "validation of three things -- that (the window) is unique, that it's feasible and it could have a big impact," Gonen Fink, Pythagoras' CEO told the Chronicle.
The technology is a class of equipment that seeks to replace parts of buildings with solar panels to generate energy. Other possibilities include window awnings and roofing tiles.
Some of Pythagoras' windows are already installed on Chicago's Willis Tower (formerly known as the Sears Tower.)
CEO Fink wouldn't reveal his system's cost per watt to the Chronicle, but he says that "for the typical customer" the system will pay for itself in three to five years.
He's excited about the technology, he says, because it could change the way buildings are built.
Original.
Friday, June 24, 2011
Republican jokes
Republican jokes! Get it? Heh heh.
''Forget Obamneycare, I want to know how Minnesota's health plan keeps Tim Pawlenty alive without a spine.'' —Stephen Colbert
''Newt Gingrich announced he was running for president. His top advisers quit, and then his campaign fundraisers all quit. Newt was thinking, 'I don't need this, I'll just put it all on my Tiffany's credit card.''' —David Letterman
''Tea Party candidate Michele Bachmann said the Revolutionary War started in New Hampshire when it really started in Massachusetts. Interesting that a woman who believes so strongly in states rights can't get her states right.'' —Jay Leno
''Mitt Romney was on the 'Today Show' and admitted he likes to read the 'Twilight' books and watch 'American Idol.' If elected, he would be the 1st Mormon and the 1st 13-year-old girl to be President.'' —Jimmy Kimmel
''According to a poll, over 50 percent of viewers thought Mitt Romney won this week's presidential debate. They thought Mitt Romney won, yeah. Romney credits the win to his grasp of the issues and the good people at Mattel, who built him.'' —Conan O'Brien
''Mitt Romney has announced he's running for president in 2012. At the same time, he's announced he'll try again in 2016.'' —Stephen Colbert
''If Bachmann and Palin get in, that's two bimbos. And there there's Mitt Romney, the millionaire and Newt Gingrich, a professor. We just need a skipper and a buddy and we've got 'Gilligan's Island.''' —Bill Maher
''Well, the presidential race is getting interesting. In an effort to clear up his reputation as a flip-flopper, Mitt Romney will give a speech on health care. And then, right afterward, he'll give a five-minute rebuttal.'' —Jay Leno
''Donald Trump is not running for president. This is devastating news for Trump's supporters -- all of whom are late night comedians.'' —Conan O'Brien
''Mitt Romney was sitting down with some unemployed workers the other day. Mitt is worth a quarter of a billion dollars, and he said, 'Hey, I'm unemployed too.' That is the famous Mormon sense of humor. A little tip Mitt, your people are only funny when the 'South Park' guys write your jokes.'' —Bill Maher
''Newt Gingrich explained why he fooled around on his first two wives by saying he loved this country so much that it led him to cheating. He was so passionate about it he had to take his pants off.'' —Jay Leno
''Newt Gingrich made it official: he's in. Not in the presidential race -- in a trivia book called 'Whatever Happened to Last Century's Biggest A**holes?''' —Bill Maher ''Newt Gingrich made it official: he's in. Not in the presidential race -- in a trivia book called 'Whatever Happened to Last Century's Biggest Assholes?''' —Bill Maher
''Everyone in the blamestream media, copyright, is saying Newt Gingrich is on the ropes. Wrong, you parasites. This man will rise again, just like the sourdough he appears to be made of.'' —Stephen Colbert
''Michele Bachmann says she will launch her presidential campaign in either Massachusetts or New Hampshire as soon as she figures out which is which. There could be some eligibility problems for her. She has her birth certificate, but nobody can produce her high school diploma.'' —Jay Leno
''Lenscrafters is upset with Tea Partier Michele Bachmann because she called Planned Parenthood 'the Lenscrafters of abortion.' Lenscrafters released a statement today calling her 'the Costco of crazy.''' —Conan O'Brien
''A gay activist dumped glitter all over Newt Gingrich. He wants Newt to stop being against gay marriage. But Newt believes marriage is a sacred bond between a man and his wife and his mistress and the other woman he's seeing on the side.'' —Jay Leno
''Jon Huntsman is fluent in Chinese. In a short period of time the Republicans have come quite a long way. The last Republican president wasn't even fluent in English.'' —David Letterman
''Newt Gingrich said he's afraid America will become an atheist country dominated by radical Islamists. Right. Our big problem could be religious atheists, almost as bad as pacifist warmongers. If they hook up with the communist capitalists we're screwed.'' —Jay Leno
''Sarah Palin is driving all over the country in a bus, I guess to pick up where Charlie Sheen left off.'' —Jimmy Kimmel
''Herman Cain, the former CEO of Godfather's Pizza, announced that he's running for president. And this is cool -- if his campaign isn't over in 30 minutes or less, you get your pizza for free.'' —Jimmy Fallon
''Ron Paul is announcing for President tomorrow. He supports legalizing prostitution and heroin. His campaign slogan is 'Let's Just See What Would Happen.''' —Conan O'Brien
''In a new interview, Newt Gingrich says he cheated on two of his wives because he was too consumed with love for his country. Yeah, apparently he misunderstood the phrase, 'Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.''' —Conan O'Brien
''Right now the Republicans' strongest contender is still Hillary Clinton with a fake mustache.'' —Jon Stewart
''Newt Gingrich is so pro-marriage, he can't stop doing it. He is so morally upright, that he's only had sex after he was married. Just not always to the woman he was married to.'' —Stephen Colbert
''Newt Gingrich has a new campaign slogan: 'Now hiring!' Sixteen of Gingrich's top staff quit last week, and today, two of his top fundraisers quit. He's not even president and he's already raising the unemployment rate.'' —Jay Leno
''Most of Newt Gingrich's campaign staff quit on the same day, and some people are blaming Newt's third wife. When asked about it, Newt said, 'I'll win them back with my fourth wife.''' —Conan O'Brien
''New Rule: Stop comparing Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann just because they're both Republican women. And crazy. And know-nothings. And Jesus freaks, who claim to receive messages from God. Who both get their historical facts wrong all the time. Who both give off a sound that only animals can hear and makes microwaves explode. Seriously, stop comparing them.'' —Bill Maher
''Republican candidate Ron Paul came out for the legalization of heroin and prostitution, unfortunately not in time to be cast as Charlie Sheen's replacement on 'Two and a Half Men.''' —Conan O'Brien
''Today in New York City, Sarah Palin had a meeting with Donald Trump. Now, experts say if those two joined forces on a presidential ticket it would be the greatest gift ever given to comedy.'' —Craig Ferguson
''Michele Bachmann said Planned Parenthood is the Lenscrafters of Big Abortion.' Which is a realy double-whammy because the conservatives hate Planned Parenthood and they hate Lenscrafters, because Lenscrafters makes glasses, and that could lead to reading.'' —Bill Maher
''Ron Paul announced he's running for president. And get this: he supports the legalization of prostitution and heroin. Now, I know he doesn't have much of a chance but if he does win that's going to be one hell of a victory party.'' —Conan O'Brien
''I think Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin would be the perfect ticket. She can't answer basic questions, and he has two answers for every question.'' —Jay Leno
''Some people say Newt Gingrich may have trouble winning over traditional values voters because he has had three marriages. So as a result, the campaign has announced a new slogan, 'Newt Gingrich, so committed to marriage, he can't stop doing it.''' —Conan O'Brien
''Tea Party rebutter Michele Bachmann is under fire for saying the Founding Fathers eliminated slavery. Sarah Palin is very upset. Another female Republican trying to steal the dumbass vote.'' —Jay Leno
''Newt Gingrich knows that before he throws his giant hat into the ring, he has to explain his past positions -- specifically, why those positions were so often on top of women who weren't his wife.'' —Stephen Colbert
''Experts are predicting that in the first Republican debate, Mitt Romney will face his fiercest ideological opponent: himself from four years ago.'' —Conan O'Brien
''There are rumors that Sarah Palin will run for president. It's a big decision. On one hand, running for president is a long and grueling process that goes on for months and years. But she could just quit halfway through, right?'' —Jimmy Kimmel
''Have you seen these Republican presidential candidates? I bet Obama is sorry now that he spent all that money on the new birth certificate.'' —David Letterman
''No! Not Captain Buzzkill! Not the guy who looks like everyone who ever fired your dad! He's gonna suck all the fun right out of this crazy thing. Just look at the online video announcing his run. It looks like it could double as an ad for erectile dysfunction pills. 'Mitt Romney: for when the moment's right.''' —Jon Stewart
Original.
''Forget Obamneycare, I want to know how Minnesota's health plan keeps Tim Pawlenty alive without a spine.'' —Stephen Colbert
''Newt Gingrich announced he was running for president. His top advisers quit, and then his campaign fundraisers all quit. Newt was thinking, 'I don't need this, I'll just put it all on my Tiffany's credit card.''' —David Letterman
''Tea Party candidate Michele Bachmann said the Revolutionary War started in New Hampshire when it really started in Massachusetts. Interesting that a woman who believes so strongly in states rights can't get her states right.'' —Jay Leno
''Mitt Romney was on the 'Today Show' and admitted he likes to read the 'Twilight' books and watch 'American Idol.' If elected, he would be the 1st Mormon and the 1st 13-year-old girl to be President.'' —Jimmy Kimmel
''According to a poll, over 50 percent of viewers thought Mitt Romney won this week's presidential debate. They thought Mitt Romney won, yeah. Romney credits the win to his grasp of the issues and the good people at Mattel, who built him.'' —Conan O'Brien
''Mitt Romney has announced he's running for president in 2012. At the same time, he's announced he'll try again in 2016.'' —Stephen Colbert
''If Bachmann and Palin get in, that's two bimbos. And there there's Mitt Romney, the millionaire and Newt Gingrich, a professor. We just need a skipper and a buddy and we've got 'Gilligan's Island.''' —Bill Maher
''Well, the presidential race is getting interesting. In an effort to clear up his reputation as a flip-flopper, Mitt Romney will give a speech on health care. And then, right afterward, he'll give a five-minute rebuttal.'' —Jay Leno
''Donald Trump is not running for president. This is devastating news for Trump's supporters -- all of whom are late night comedians.'' —Conan O'Brien
''Mitt Romney was sitting down with some unemployed workers the other day. Mitt is worth a quarter of a billion dollars, and he said, 'Hey, I'm unemployed too.' That is the famous Mormon sense of humor. A little tip Mitt, your people are only funny when the 'South Park' guys write your jokes.'' —Bill Maher
''Newt Gingrich explained why he fooled around on his first two wives by saying he loved this country so much that it led him to cheating. He was so passionate about it he had to take his pants off.'' —Jay Leno
''Newt Gingrich made it official: he's in. Not in the presidential race -- in a trivia book called 'Whatever Happened to Last Century's Biggest A**holes?''' —Bill Maher ''Newt Gingrich made it official: he's in. Not in the presidential race -- in a trivia book called 'Whatever Happened to Last Century's Biggest Assholes?''' —Bill Maher
''Everyone in the blamestream media, copyright, is saying Newt Gingrich is on the ropes. Wrong, you parasites. This man will rise again, just like the sourdough he appears to be made of.'' —Stephen Colbert
''Michele Bachmann says she will launch her presidential campaign in either Massachusetts or New Hampshire as soon as she figures out which is which. There could be some eligibility problems for her. She has her birth certificate, but nobody can produce her high school diploma.'' —Jay Leno
''Lenscrafters is upset with Tea Partier Michele Bachmann because she called Planned Parenthood 'the Lenscrafters of abortion.' Lenscrafters released a statement today calling her 'the Costco of crazy.''' —Conan O'Brien
''A gay activist dumped glitter all over Newt Gingrich. He wants Newt to stop being against gay marriage. But Newt believes marriage is a sacred bond between a man and his wife and his mistress and the other woman he's seeing on the side.'' —Jay Leno
''Jon Huntsman is fluent in Chinese. In a short period of time the Republicans have come quite a long way. The last Republican president wasn't even fluent in English.'' —David Letterman
''Newt Gingrich said he's afraid America will become an atheist country dominated by radical Islamists. Right. Our big problem could be religious atheists, almost as bad as pacifist warmongers. If they hook up with the communist capitalists we're screwed.'' —Jay Leno
''Sarah Palin is driving all over the country in a bus, I guess to pick up where Charlie Sheen left off.'' —Jimmy Kimmel
''Herman Cain, the former CEO of Godfather's Pizza, announced that he's running for president. And this is cool -- if his campaign isn't over in 30 minutes or less, you get your pizza for free.'' —Jimmy Fallon
''Ron Paul is announcing for President tomorrow. He supports legalizing prostitution and heroin. His campaign slogan is 'Let's Just See What Would Happen.''' —Conan O'Brien
''In a new interview, Newt Gingrich says he cheated on two of his wives because he was too consumed with love for his country. Yeah, apparently he misunderstood the phrase, 'Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.''' —Conan O'Brien
''Right now the Republicans' strongest contender is still Hillary Clinton with a fake mustache.'' —Jon Stewart
''Newt Gingrich is so pro-marriage, he can't stop doing it. He is so morally upright, that he's only had sex after he was married. Just not always to the woman he was married to.'' —Stephen Colbert
''Newt Gingrich has a new campaign slogan: 'Now hiring!' Sixteen of Gingrich's top staff quit last week, and today, two of his top fundraisers quit. He's not even president and he's already raising the unemployment rate.'' —Jay Leno
''Most of Newt Gingrich's campaign staff quit on the same day, and some people are blaming Newt's third wife. When asked about it, Newt said, 'I'll win them back with my fourth wife.''' —Conan O'Brien
''New Rule: Stop comparing Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann just because they're both Republican women. And crazy. And know-nothings. And Jesus freaks, who claim to receive messages from God. Who both get their historical facts wrong all the time. Who both give off a sound that only animals can hear and makes microwaves explode. Seriously, stop comparing them.'' —Bill Maher
''Republican candidate Ron Paul came out for the legalization of heroin and prostitution, unfortunately not in time to be cast as Charlie Sheen's replacement on 'Two and a Half Men.''' —Conan O'Brien
''Today in New York City, Sarah Palin had a meeting with Donald Trump. Now, experts say if those two joined forces on a presidential ticket it would be the greatest gift ever given to comedy.'' —Craig Ferguson
''Michele Bachmann said Planned Parenthood is the Lenscrafters of Big Abortion.' Which is a realy double-whammy because the conservatives hate Planned Parenthood and they hate Lenscrafters, because Lenscrafters makes glasses, and that could lead to reading.'' —Bill Maher
''Ron Paul announced he's running for president. And get this: he supports the legalization of prostitution and heroin. Now, I know he doesn't have much of a chance but if he does win that's going to be one hell of a victory party.'' —Conan O'Brien
''I think Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin would be the perfect ticket. She can't answer basic questions, and he has two answers for every question.'' —Jay Leno
''Some people say Newt Gingrich may have trouble winning over traditional values voters because he has had three marriages. So as a result, the campaign has announced a new slogan, 'Newt Gingrich, so committed to marriage, he can't stop doing it.''' —Conan O'Brien
''Tea Party rebutter Michele Bachmann is under fire for saying the Founding Fathers eliminated slavery. Sarah Palin is very upset. Another female Republican trying to steal the dumbass vote.'' —Jay Leno
''Newt Gingrich knows that before he throws his giant hat into the ring, he has to explain his past positions -- specifically, why those positions were so often on top of women who weren't his wife.'' —Stephen Colbert
''Experts are predicting that in the first Republican debate, Mitt Romney will face his fiercest ideological opponent: himself from four years ago.'' —Conan O'Brien
''There are rumors that Sarah Palin will run for president. It's a big decision. On one hand, running for president is a long and grueling process that goes on for months and years. But she could just quit halfway through, right?'' —Jimmy Kimmel
''Have you seen these Republican presidential candidates? I bet Obama is sorry now that he spent all that money on the new birth certificate.'' —David Letterman
''No! Not Captain Buzzkill! Not the guy who looks like everyone who ever fired your dad! He's gonna suck all the fun right out of this crazy thing. Just look at the online video announcing his run. It looks like it could double as an ad for erectile dysfunction pills. 'Mitt Romney: for when the moment's right.''' —Jon Stewart
Original.
Thursday, June 23, 2011
New Whole Foods
Just yesterday, the brand-new Whole Foods opened in north Montrose, which is just west of downtown Houston. This is pretty close to where we live, and so that's great. The previous closest Whole Foods on Kirby at West Alabama (about 5 miles from our house) was just impossible. The parking lot for that store is not that large, and it is ALWAYS full of cars. So many cars that they spill over on the streets all around the store, so we could hardly ever even get inside that store.
For this new store, they built a much-larger parking lot, HOWEVER, on opening day, it was insane. I didn't try to go, and will probably stay away for a couple of weeks until things die down a bit. It seems that people can't wait to spend more money on food than they would at Kroger, Randalls, Fiesta or HEB. I can wait.
CRAZINESS AT THE NEW WHOLE FOODS
For some reason, people really get excited about new grocery stores. While the media and customers have been gushing about the new Whole Foods at West Dallas and Waugh… security on AIG’s campus was scrambling to keep shopping mom’s from illegally parking in parking garages and on streets. The original plans for the Whole Foods involved having an underground parking garage… but they decided later that a surface parking lot would be sufficient.
So just how long will these crowds remain? Time will only tell, but if parking is anything like other Whole Foods… they may soon be regretting their decision to scrap that garage.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
The Hum
WTF?!
Me, I'm all about the furtive mysteries, the bizarre phenomena no one can quite explain, all flavors of tantalizing magic that make science and the rational mind twitch and hiccup, then shrug and think surely someone, somewhere must have a simple explanation, even though no one really does.
Whale songs? Dark energy? Pyramids? Quantum physics? Oddly curved Polish trees? Newt Gingrich? Mystical million-year-old cave paintings by the lost tribes of French-Indian Trepanning Podiatrists? Obvs.
But I also adore the lesser-known and the seemingly meaningless mysteries, the countless smallish, transitory tales of OMG WTF scattered about the human psychodrama that seem to point to something larger and weirder, something more deeply tattooed into the collective subconscious, but which we're simply unable to understand at this glitchy phase of human evolution. That sort of stuff makes my eyelashes curl. In a good way.
One of these items flitted over the newswires recently, a story about a mysterious phenomenon plaguing a small town somewhere you've never traveled, gladly beyond any experience. It's a tiny English village called Woodland, in Durham County, where not 300 English humblefolk live, many of them reporting the same issue, the same confounding woe, and nearly each and every one going just a little bit insane because of it.
The townspeople are complaining about headaches, fatigue, lack of sleep. They are reporting unhappy pets, unsettled dreams, a slight but palpable freaking of the hell out. (More than a few are also immensely annoyed by all the media attention aimed their humble way right now, but never mind that now).
It's all due to a strange, deep vibration, a town-wide hum akin to the throb of a car engine; it occurs every night, all night, waking the locals, rattling their bedframes, vibrating their mattresses and throbbing their bones. And not in the good way.
This odd mystery is known as the Hum (capital H for creepy effect, thank you) and it's been going on for months. The locals do not know what it is. They do not know why it is. Also, not everyone can hear it. But most of them can. Which is neither here nor there, unless it is.
There are no factories or government facilities nearby. There is no rumbly train station 10 miles just over there, no giant Wal-Mart distribution center, quietly churning up the bones of five million Chinese sweatshop laborers deep in the dank basements of its massive and ruthless heart. It's just the humble little town, same as it ever was. Except for the throb.
"In certain areas of the house you can hear it more loudly. It is definitely from outside, it's in the air, all around, very faint," said one Marylin Grech, 57, a retired store detective. "It vibrates through the house. Sometimes we'll be in bed and it vibrates right through our bed, like a throbbing."
"And not in a good way," she unfortunately did not add.
Thing is, the Hum is far from an isolated incident. It has happened before, in other towns in various parts of the world including Australia, New Zealand and the US, over the last 40 years. It happened most famously in the '70s in Bristol, where a thousand people went mildly nuts because of it. So famous is the Hum that it was even mentioned in a storyline on "The X-Files" way back in the 1920s or whatever, so you know it must be cool.
Everyone thinks they know what the Hum must be. Surely it's a water system. Surely it's some sort of mining operation nearby. Surely it's the government's sinister HAARP experiment, or some other blandly evil plot to disrupt the ionic sonosphere and disable the vibrational codification matrix of the sublingual preconscious plane. I mean, duh.
Following its initial report on this most pressing matter, The Telegraph newspaper went so far as to send a cheeky reporter and cheeky video dude to investigate further and perhaps catch the Hum in action. Of course, nothing could be heard by either mate, because that's just the nature of cheeky British media. "Ho hum," they reported, mildly amusingly.
Still, the Hum persists. For now. It could very well have something to do with the abandoned mineshafts nearby. It could very well be 10 billion red army ants marching to fight the black army ants across town every night, beating tiny little war drums. But nothing really explains all the weirdly similar incidents around the globe. You'd think someone would have found a good answer by now. Scully, maybe. No luck.
Here's a fun aspect: If you read the comments to the Telegraph story -- hell, if you scan a few of the comments people posted on my Facebook page, for that matter -- you will discover numerous people complaining of the exact same infuriating Hum, in their own towns, their own midnight dreamgasms, their own throbbing heads. Turns out the Hum is sort of oddly universal. Hmmm. Or rather, hum.
It is possible it's a form of mass hysteria, the power of suggestion, a "hear it once and you can convince yourself you're hearing it always" sort of thing, like a mosquito's midnight whine, or perhaps Justin Beiber. Or it could be the mind tricking you, amplifying the silence to a deafening roar. It's also possible you should not care in the slightest about any of this because you've got better things to care about, like work and porn and sunshine. Off you go, humming a merry tune.
Me, I'm leaning into the weird little fire, and laughing. I'm going toward the slippery and the strange, because that's where the juice is. It's always possible such phenomena are easily answerable, something simple and clean and a tiny bit stupid. Often that's true. Sometimes it's not.
We think we know so much. For every answer and breakthrough, a hundred more questions unpeel and spin off into the ether, beckoning us to follow. Maybe the Hum is just the Earth itself, doing what it's always done, vibrating low and deep, singing its timeless tune, occasionally reaching a pitch baffled bipeds can barely hear. Maybe it's the shift of the planet itself, the poles calmly realigning for the giant 2012 metaconscious whoopjamboree. Maybe the great goddess left her vibrator running. Again.
Do you think you know what the Hum is? Do you have a tantalizing theory? You are probably wrong. Just like everyone else. Isn't that fantastic?
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Mother Nature
Yes, I have been neglecting the blog lately, and you'll have to click the image below to read it. Go on. Click it! Don't make me come over there!
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Pitt - In the Ditch
Why don't we ever seem to get people like William Rivers Pitt elected to public office? People who can make a point, turn a phrase, and are not already beholden to special interests seem to be pretty rare.
Usually, it seems, the really good people don't ever make it past primaries, or they have too much "history" that will prevent them from being elected, or they've basically given up on making a difference.
It takes so much money to run for any office these days that a lot of people don't even try.
Down In The Ditch
by William Rivers Pitt, Truthout
Sometimes, however, the Stupid skyrockets to new and heretofore unknown heights. It takes a special kind of purebred dunderhead to raise the benchmark, and in that spirit, I give you Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), who opined last week that once Iraq becomes a rich and prosperous country, they should repay the United States for the money spent on the invasion and occupation.
Let that sink in for a moment.
Now, don't get me wrong: it would be awfully nice to have back the hundreds of billions of dollars that were wasted through our blood-soaked exercise in futility in Iraq. Given the current state of the American economy, suddenly having gobs of cash injected back into society would indeed be a boon. We could maybe stop terrorizing elderly people with threats to the continued existence of Medicare. We could stop dunning public-sector employees and actually pay them what they deserve. We could even perhaps fix a bridge or two.
But you see, that money is already spent. It did not just dry up and blow away. It was stolen in fistfuls by companies like Halliburton and KBR. It was stolen in fistfuls by private mercenary contractors like Blackwater. Thieving scumbags like Ahmed Chalabi got their slice, and as for the rest? Well...
Think it was an accident? That all this plunder took place because of a lack of "oversight?"
Ha.
The first thing George W. Bush and his people did upon (literally) taking office was to rampage through the Clinton surplus by way of two insane tax giveaways to the wealthiest among us. This was done for one reason: to kill the federal government's ability to spend money on the citizenry. The Grover Norquist "Drown It In The Bathtub" tactic extended to a pair of wars - one in Afghanistan and the other in Iraq - that became the single greatest defense industry payday in human history...while further denuding the federal government's ability to spend money on the citizenry. It was not an accident, but a deliberate plan, and from their perspective, it was executed flawlessly. This was a smash-and-grab robbery writ large, and if you think all that money is just "gone," well, you must not travel in the "right" circles.
The current crop of Republican leaders still play from the same cheat sheet, as evidenced by their desire to annihilate the remaining shreds and tatters of the American economy by threatening to let the debt limit slip, even as they chortle into their sleeves about getting away with several of the greatest American bank robberies of all time. Why are they daring the economy to implode? So they can eviscerate Medicare and Social Security, of course, not to mention collective bargaining rights and the ability of workers to earn a fair wage.
And after all that, one of their bright bulbs coughs up the suggestion that a nation we literally ground into powder should do us a big favor and pay us back all the money we spent putting boots to their necks and bullets through their bodies.
Hm...I wonder how soon that will happen...
Yes, friends and neighbors, these are the strokes of genius we have come to expect from our friends in the GOP. And people wonder why the United States of America is down in the ditch.
Original.
Usually, it seems, the really good people don't ever make it past primaries, or they have too much "history" that will prevent them from being elected, or they've basically given up on making a difference.
It takes so much money to run for any office these days that a lot of people don't even try.
Down In The Ditch
by William Rivers Pitt, Truthout
"It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stabilityThere is never a shortage of Stupid in American politics, but by normal standards, our recent history has been pretty spectacular. Rep. Anthony Weiner is caught in what could very easily go down in history as the single most absurd sex scandal to ever unfold. The Republican leadership continues to play chicken with the debt limit, making even the titans of the financial industry nervous. Michele Bachmann is being taken seriously by the "mainstream" news media after the first GOP debate...and as far as Stupid goes, really, that's all you need to say.
in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure
the surrender of Saddam’s security forces and his army. Hard to imagine."
- Paul Wolfowitz, 2/27/2003
Sometimes, however, the Stupid skyrockets to new and heretofore unknown heights. It takes a special kind of purebred dunderhead to raise the benchmark, and in that spirit, I give you Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), who opined last week that once Iraq becomes a rich and prosperous country, they should repay the United States for the money spent on the invasion and occupation.
Let that sink in for a moment.
Now, don't get me wrong: it would be awfully nice to have back the hundreds of billions of dollars that were wasted through our blood-soaked exercise in futility in Iraq. Given the current state of the American economy, suddenly having gobs of cash injected back into society would indeed be a boon. We could maybe stop terrorizing elderly people with threats to the continued existence of Medicare. We could stop dunning public-sector employees and actually pay them what they deserve. We could even perhaps fix a bridge or two.
But you see, that money is already spent. It did not just dry up and blow away. It was stolen in fistfuls by companies like Halliburton and KBR. It was stolen in fistfuls by private mercenary contractors like Blackwater. Thieving scumbags like Ahmed Chalabi got their slice, and as for the rest? Well...
The Iraqi and U.S. governments have been unable to account for a
substantial chunk of the billions of dollars in reconstruction aid the Bush
administration literally airlifted into the country. If the cash proves to have
been stolen, the heist could represent "the largest theft of funds in national
history," according to a report in the Los Angeles Times.
Pentagon officials determined that one giant C-130 Hercules cargo plane
could carry $2.4 billion in shrink-wrapped bricks of $100 bills. They sent an
initial full planeload of cash, followed by 20 other flights to Iraq by May 2004
in a $12-billion haul that U.S. officials believe to be the biggest
international cash airlift of all time.
Iraqi officials say it was the U.S. government's job to keep track of
the funds, which were brought in as an emergency measure to keep basic
infrastructure going after Saddam Hussein's ouster. House Government Reform
Committee investigators found in 2005 evidence of "substantial waste, fraud and
abuse in the actual spending and disbursement of the Iraqi funds."
Witnesses testified that millions of dollars were shoved into
"gunnysacks" and disbursed to Iraqi contractors on pick-up trucks, with what
seemed to be little financial controls or accounting on the part of the U.S.
government.
Think it was an accident? That all this plunder took place because of a lack of "oversight?"
Ha.
The first thing George W. Bush and his people did upon (literally) taking office was to rampage through the Clinton surplus by way of two insane tax giveaways to the wealthiest among us. This was done for one reason: to kill the federal government's ability to spend money on the citizenry. The Grover Norquist "Drown It In The Bathtub" tactic extended to a pair of wars - one in Afghanistan and the other in Iraq - that became the single greatest defense industry payday in human history...while further denuding the federal government's ability to spend money on the citizenry. It was not an accident, but a deliberate plan, and from their perspective, it was executed flawlessly. This was a smash-and-grab robbery writ large, and if you think all that money is just "gone," well, you must not travel in the "right" circles.
The current crop of Republican leaders still play from the same cheat sheet, as evidenced by their desire to annihilate the remaining shreds and tatters of the American economy by threatening to let the debt limit slip, even as they chortle into their sleeves about getting away with several of the greatest American bank robberies of all time. Why are they daring the economy to implode? So they can eviscerate Medicare and Social Security, of course, not to mention collective bargaining rights and the ability of workers to earn a fair wage.
And after all that, one of their bright bulbs coughs up the suggestion that a nation we literally ground into powder should do us a big favor and pay us back all the money we spent putting boots to their necks and bullets through their bodies.
Hm...I wonder how soon that will happen...
BAGHDAD-In a city where sand clings to everything and the culture permits
empty plastic water bottles to be tossed into the street, residents in the
city's prosperous Zayuna neighborhood make sure their lawns stay green and their
fruit trees are pruned. But when residents step out of their walled-in
sanctuaries, they can't escape a city that in many ways still feels ungovernable
more than eight years after the U.S.-led invasion.
They see dirt and gravel streets marked by ruts and sinkholes large
enough to swallow a tire. Empty lots are garbage pits, and sewage from broken
pipes collects in small pools on neighborhood streets amid downed cables and
wires. There are a few slides at the neighborhood playground, but nearly as many
abandoned cars.
Although security has improved in recent years, the task of overseeing
the estimated 250,000 police and army officials who guard the city has also
created new management concerns, ranging from gaps in intelligence sharing to
frustrations from local officials about who should be contacted to report a
suspicious vehicle. Meanwhile, Baghdad's municipal government continues to
sputter as different entities jockey for control over reconstruction dollars and
grapple over whether American-style local governments can work in the Middle
East.
"Baghdad lives in chaos, chaos, chaos," said Jawad al-Hasnawi, a
parliament member.
Yes, friends and neighbors, these are the strokes of genius we have come to expect from our friends in the GOP. And people wonder why the United States of America is down in the ditch.
Original.
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Republican deficits
The Republicans amnesia from the Bush years is near-total. Or, maybe they're all just liars.
Gathered from another Netizen:
96% of debt comes directly from Republicans and Signed into law by Bush:
National Debt Increased by 75% under Bush:
2001 - $5.871 trillion
2008 - $10.640 trillion
National Debt Increased 25% Under Obama:
Jan 31st 2009 = $10.569-Trillion
Jan 31st 2011 = $14.131-Trillion
But of the $3.56-trillion increase, 98% was carry over from Bush programs:
Bush: $910-billion = Interest on Debt 2009/2011
Bush: $360-billion = Iraq War Spending 2009/2011
Bush: $319-billion = TARP/Bailout Balance from 2008 (as of May 2010)
Bush: $419-billion = Bush Recession Caused Drop in taxes
Bush: $190-billion = Bush Medicare Drug Program 2009/2011
Bush: $211-billion = Bush Meicare Part-D 2009/2011
Bush: $771-billion = Bush Tax Cuts 2009/2011
SubTotal 2009-2011l: $3.181-trillion
Bush's Combined contributions:
2001 to 2008: $4.769-trillion
2009 to 2011: $3.181-trillion
Total: $7.950-trillion
Increase Since 2001 = $14.131 - $5.871 = $8.26-Trillion
Bush's contribution: $7.950-trillion / $8.26-Trillion = 96%
Obama only contribution: $580-billion = Stimulus Spending (as of Dec 2010).
Increase caused By Bush's Programs: 96%
Increase caused by Obama's Programs: 4%
Gathered from another Netizen:
96% of debt comes directly from Republicans and Signed into law by Bush:
National Debt Increased by 75% under Bush:
2001 - $5.871 trillion
2008 - $10.640 trillion
National Debt Increased 25% Under Obama:
Jan 31st 2009 = $10.569-Trillion
Jan 31st 2011 = $14.131-Trillion
But of the $3.56-trillion increase, 98% was carry over from Bush programs:
Bush: $910-billion = Interest on Debt 2009/2011
Bush: $360-billion = Iraq War Spending 2009/2011
Bush: $319-billion = TARP/Bailout Balance from 2008 (as of May 2010)
Bush: $419-billion = Bush Recession Caused Drop in taxes
Bush: $190-billion = Bush Medicare Drug Program 2009/2011
Bush: $211-billion = Bush Meicare Part-D 2009/2011
Bush: $771-billion = Bush Tax Cuts 2009/2011
SubTotal 2009-2011l: $3.181-trillion
Bush's Combined contributions:
2001 to 2008: $4.769-trillion
2009 to 2011: $3.181-trillion
Total: $7.950-trillion
Increase Since 2001 = $14.131 - $5.871 = $8.26-Trillion
Bush's contribution: $7.950-trillion / $8.26-Trillion = 96%
Obama only contribution: $580-billion = Stimulus Spending (as of Dec 2010).
Increase caused By Bush's Programs: 96%
Increase caused by Obama's Programs: 4%
Monday, June 13, 2011
Perry=bad news
Rick Perry actually looks worse than George W. Bush, if that's possible. I hope we can head off this ass at the pass before he craps in the White House. We tried to warn the country about Bush to no avail. Well, actually, that's not true. Gore did get about a million more votes than Bush, and it took the Supreme Court to give the White House to Bush. That was actually a massive crime, in retrospect.
Top 10 Things That Texas Gov. Rick Perry Doesn't Want You To Know About Him
With widespread discontent on the right over their current presidential field, all eyes are trained on a likely new entrant: Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R).
Perry, who has been elected governor three times and served for more than 10 years, enjoys bona fides from social conservatives and Tea Party-types alike. Glenn Beck even described Perry as a man he was so enamored with that he wanted to “French kiss.”
However, as conservatives fawn over their newest presidential hopeful, it’s worth taking a closer examination at his record as governor. On issues across the board, from Perry’s support for dropping out of Social Security and Medicaid to his state’s abysmal pollution levels and his proposal that Texas secede from the United States, the Republican governor has amassed a record of far-right extremism.
ThinkProgress has assembled the top ten hits from Perry’s tenure as governor:
(1) PERRY ALLOWED THE EXECUTION OF A LIKELY INNOCENT MAN, THEN IMPEDED AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE MATTER: In 2004, Cameron Todd Willingham was executed in Huntsville, Texas after being convicted of arson and the murder of his three children. Even after significant evidence emerged showing that arson had not caused the fire (thus exonerating Willingham), Perry refused to grant a stay of execution. Five years after Willingham was executed, a report from a Texas Forensic Science Commission investigator found that the fire could not have been arson. As the commission prepared to hear testimony from the investigator in October 2009, Perry quickly fired and replaced three of its members, forcing an indefinite delay in the hearing.
(2) PERRY WANTS TO REPEAL THE 16th AND 17th AMENDMENTS, ENDING DIRECT ELECTION OF U.S. SENATORS AND THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX: In his 2010 book Fed Up!, Perry called the 16th and 17th Amendments “mistaken” and said they resulted from “a fit of populist rage.” The 16th Amendment allows the federal government to collect income taxes, which is the single biggest source of revenue, accounting for 45 percent of all receipts. The 17th Amendment took electing U.S. senators out of the hands of political insiders and allowed the American public to decide their representation instead. If Perry had his way, the federal government would be stripped of its current ability to fund highway construction projects, food inspectors, and the military, and the American public would not even be permitted to elect their own senators.
(3) PERRY PROPOSED LETTING STATES DROP OUT OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICAID: Despite the programs’ importance and popularity, Perry has argued that states like Texas should be allowed to opt out of Social Security and Medicaid. Were Perry to have his way on Social Security, “the entire system would collapse under the weight of too many Social Security beneficiaries who had not paid into the system,” notes Ian Millhiser. On Medicaid, in addition to stripping 3.6 million low-income Texans of their health care, Perry’s proposal would actually hurt, not help, the state’s budget deficit. This is because, as Igor Volsky writes, opting out of Medicaid would take “billions out of the state economy that goes on to support hospitals and other providers,” while forcing hospitals “to swallow the costs of caring for uninsured individuals who will continue to use the emergency room as their primary source of care.”
(4) TEXAS IS THE COUNTRY’S BIGGEST POLLUTER, BUT PERRY SUED THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR DISAPPROVING OF THE STATE’S AIR QUALITY STANDARDS: Texas is the biggest polluter in the country, leading the nation in carbon dioxide emissions. However, when the EPA published its “disapproval” of the state’s air quality standards for falling short of the Clean Air Act’s requirements, Perry sued the federal government to challenge the ruling. Perry’s environmental record doesn’t end there. He is a global warming denier who called the 2010 BP oil spill an “act of God” while speaking at a trade association funded by BP.
(5) PERRY DESIGNATED AS “EMERGENCY LEGISLATION” A BILL REQUIRING ALL WOMEN SEEKING ABORTIONS TO HAVE SONOGRAMS FIRST: In January, Perry proposed requiring all women seeking abortions to have a sonogram at least 24 hours before the procedure. Under the bill, doctors would be required to “tell a woman the size of her fetus’ limbs and organs, even if she does not want to know.” Before a woman is permitted to have an abortion, physicians are also forced to provide an image of the fetus and make the woman listen to the sound of its heartbeat. Perry designated his proposal as “emergency legislation,” allowing the bill to be rushed through the legislature. He signed it into law last month.
(6) PERRY GUTTED CHILDCARE SERVICES EVEN AS TEXAS CHILDHOOD POVERTY HIT 25 PERCENT: Facing a $27 billion budget deficit this year, Perry decided to gut child support services, despite a report from the Center for Public Policy Priorities that found nearly one in four Texas children lived beneath the poverty line. Instead of raising revenue like California, a state facing a similarly sized deficit, Perry scaled back more than $10 billion of child support over two years. As Think Progress’ Pat Garofalo noted, these cuts were proposed despite Texas’ possession of a $8.2 billion rainy day fund.
(7) PERRY WAS A STRONG SUPPORTER OF TEXAS’S ANTI-SODOMY LAWS: Perry was a strong proponent of Texas’s anti-sodomy law that was struck down in 2003 by the Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas. Calling the law “appropriate,” Perry dismissed the Court decision as the result of “nine oligarchs in robes.” Even after being struck down, Perry supported the Texas legislature’s refusal to remove the law from its books.
(8) PERRY IS A STIMULUS HYPOCRITE WHO LOUDLY CRITICIZED FEDERAL RECOVERY MONEY BUT USED IT TO BALANCE HIS STATE’S BUDGET: As the nation struggled to avoid economic collapse in 2009, Perry was a vocal critic of Congress’s recovery package, even advocating that Texas reject the money because “we can take care of ourselves.” Months later, after Perry was able to balance the state’s budget only with the aid of billions in federal stimulus dollars, Perry again repeated that he would reject federal funding, arguing that the government “spends money they don’t have.” Five months later, Perry again took advantage of federal funding to issue $2 billion in bonds for highway improvements in Texas. Even so, the state faces a $27 billion budget deficit.
(9) PERRY SAID THAT TEXAS MIGHT HAVE TO SECEDE FROM THE UNITED STATES: One hundred and fifty years ago, Texas and other southern states seceded from the Union, resulting in a bloody Civil War. 148 years later, Perry floated the idea that Texas may again have to secede because of a federal government that “continues to thumb their nose at the American people.” Perry was roundly criticized for his proposal, yet he repeated his threat the next month on Fox News, telling host Neil Cavuto, “If Washington continues to force these programs on the states, if Washington continues to disregard the tenth amendment, who knows what happens.”
(10) DESPITE HAVING THE WORST UNINSURED RATE IN THE COUNTRY, PERRY CLAIMS THAT TEXAS HAS “THE BEST HEALTH CARE IN THE COUNTRY” : On Bill Bennett’s radio show last year, Perry claimed that “Texas has the best health care in the country.” In reality, Texas has the highest rate of uninsured residents of any state. More than one in four Texans lack coverage; the national average is just 15.4 percent. As such, there are more uninsured residents in Texas than there are people in 33 states. Despite Texas’s low coverage rates, the state has some of the most restrictive Medicaid eligibility thresholds, and Perry has even proposed dropping out of the program. Texas also has an inordinately high percentage of impoverished children, yet Perry opposed expanding the successful State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).
ThinkProgress intern Sean Savett contributed to this report.
Original. There will most likely be many more than 10. Question is, will the message get through?
Top 10 Things That Texas Gov. Rick Perry Doesn't Want You To Know About Him
With widespread discontent on the right over their current presidential field, all eyes are trained on a likely new entrant: Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R).
Perry, who has been elected governor three times and served for more than 10 years, enjoys bona fides from social conservatives and Tea Party-types alike. Glenn Beck even described Perry as a man he was so enamored with that he wanted to “French kiss.”
However, as conservatives fawn over their newest presidential hopeful, it’s worth taking a closer examination at his record as governor. On issues across the board, from Perry’s support for dropping out of Social Security and Medicaid to his state’s abysmal pollution levels and his proposal that Texas secede from the United States, the Republican governor has amassed a record of far-right extremism.
ThinkProgress has assembled the top ten hits from Perry’s tenure as governor:
(1) PERRY ALLOWED THE EXECUTION OF A LIKELY INNOCENT MAN, THEN IMPEDED AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE MATTER: In 2004, Cameron Todd Willingham was executed in Huntsville, Texas after being convicted of arson and the murder of his three children. Even after significant evidence emerged showing that arson had not caused the fire (thus exonerating Willingham), Perry refused to grant a stay of execution. Five years after Willingham was executed, a report from a Texas Forensic Science Commission investigator found that the fire could not have been arson. As the commission prepared to hear testimony from the investigator in October 2009, Perry quickly fired and replaced three of its members, forcing an indefinite delay in the hearing.
(2) PERRY WANTS TO REPEAL THE 16th AND 17th AMENDMENTS, ENDING DIRECT ELECTION OF U.S. SENATORS AND THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX: In his 2010 book Fed Up!, Perry called the 16th and 17th Amendments “mistaken” and said they resulted from “a fit of populist rage.” The 16th Amendment allows the federal government to collect income taxes, which is the single biggest source of revenue, accounting for 45 percent of all receipts. The 17th Amendment took electing U.S. senators out of the hands of political insiders and allowed the American public to decide their representation instead. If Perry had his way, the federal government would be stripped of its current ability to fund highway construction projects, food inspectors, and the military, and the American public would not even be permitted to elect their own senators.
(3) PERRY PROPOSED LETTING STATES DROP OUT OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICAID: Despite the programs’ importance and popularity, Perry has argued that states like Texas should be allowed to opt out of Social Security and Medicaid. Were Perry to have his way on Social Security, “the entire system would collapse under the weight of too many Social Security beneficiaries who had not paid into the system,” notes Ian Millhiser. On Medicaid, in addition to stripping 3.6 million low-income Texans of their health care, Perry’s proposal would actually hurt, not help, the state’s budget deficit. This is because, as Igor Volsky writes, opting out of Medicaid would take “billions out of the state economy that goes on to support hospitals and other providers,” while forcing hospitals “to swallow the costs of caring for uninsured individuals who will continue to use the emergency room as their primary source of care.”
(4) TEXAS IS THE COUNTRY’S BIGGEST POLLUTER, BUT PERRY SUED THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR DISAPPROVING OF THE STATE’S AIR QUALITY STANDARDS: Texas is the biggest polluter in the country, leading the nation in carbon dioxide emissions. However, when the EPA published its “disapproval” of the state’s air quality standards for falling short of the Clean Air Act’s requirements, Perry sued the federal government to challenge the ruling. Perry’s environmental record doesn’t end there. He is a global warming denier who called the 2010 BP oil spill an “act of God” while speaking at a trade association funded by BP.
(5) PERRY DESIGNATED AS “EMERGENCY LEGISLATION” A BILL REQUIRING ALL WOMEN SEEKING ABORTIONS TO HAVE SONOGRAMS FIRST: In January, Perry proposed requiring all women seeking abortions to have a sonogram at least 24 hours before the procedure. Under the bill, doctors would be required to “tell a woman the size of her fetus’ limbs and organs, even if she does not want to know.” Before a woman is permitted to have an abortion, physicians are also forced to provide an image of the fetus and make the woman listen to the sound of its heartbeat. Perry designated his proposal as “emergency legislation,” allowing the bill to be rushed through the legislature. He signed it into law last month.
(6) PERRY GUTTED CHILDCARE SERVICES EVEN AS TEXAS CHILDHOOD POVERTY HIT 25 PERCENT: Facing a $27 billion budget deficit this year, Perry decided to gut child support services, despite a report from the Center for Public Policy Priorities that found nearly one in four Texas children lived beneath the poverty line. Instead of raising revenue like California, a state facing a similarly sized deficit, Perry scaled back more than $10 billion of child support over two years. As Think Progress’ Pat Garofalo noted, these cuts were proposed despite Texas’ possession of a $8.2 billion rainy day fund.
(7) PERRY WAS A STRONG SUPPORTER OF TEXAS’S ANTI-SODOMY LAWS: Perry was a strong proponent of Texas’s anti-sodomy law that was struck down in 2003 by the Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas. Calling the law “appropriate,” Perry dismissed the Court decision as the result of “nine oligarchs in robes.” Even after being struck down, Perry supported the Texas legislature’s refusal to remove the law from its books.
(8) PERRY IS A STIMULUS HYPOCRITE WHO LOUDLY CRITICIZED FEDERAL RECOVERY MONEY BUT USED IT TO BALANCE HIS STATE’S BUDGET: As the nation struggled to avoid economic collapse in 2009, Perry was a vocal critic of Congress’s recovery package, even advocating that Texas reject the money because “we can take care of ourselves.” Months later, after Perry was able to balance the state’s budget only with the aid of billions in federal stimulus dollars, Perry again repeated that he would reject federal funding, arguing that the government “spends money they don’t have.” Five months later, Perry again took advantage of federal funding to issue $2 billion in bonds for highway improvements in Texas. Even so, the state faces a $27 billion budget deficit.
(9) PERRY SAID THAT TEXAS MIGHT HAVE TO SECEDE FROM THE UNITED STATES: One hundred and fifty years ago, Texas and other southern states seceded from the Union, resulting in a bloody Civil War. 148 years later, Perry floated the idea that Texas may again have to secede because of a federal government that “continues to thumb their nose at the American people.” Perry was roundly criticized for his proposal, yet he repeated his threat the next month on Fox News, telling host Neil Cavuto, “If Washington continues to force these programs on the states, if Washington continues to disregard the tenth amendment, who knows what happens.”
(10) DESPITE HAVING THE WORST UNINSURED RATE IN THE COUNTRY, PERRY CLAIMS THAT TEXAS HAS “THE BEST HEALTH CARE IN THE COUNTRY” : On Bill Bennett’s radio show last year, Perry claimed that “Texas has the best health care in the country.” In reality, Texas has the highest rate of uninsured residents of any state. More than one in four Texans lack coverage; the national average is just 15.4 percent. As such, there are more uninsured residents in Texas than there are people in 33 states. Despite Texas’s low coverage rates, the state has some of the most restrictive Medicaid eligibility thresholds, and Perry has even proposed dropping out of the program. Texas also has an inordinately high percentage of impoverished children, yet Perry opposed expanding the successful State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).
ThinkProgress intern Sean Savett contributed to this report.
Original. There will most likely be many more than 10. Question is, will the message get through?
Krugman on Medicare
The sky-high cost of private insurance is primarily what is keeping me from retiring.
Every once in a while a politician comes up with an idea that’s so bad, so wrongheaded, that you’re almost grateful. For really bad ideas can help illustrate the extent to which policy discourse has gone off the rails.
And so it was with Senator Joseph Lieberman’s proposal, released last week, to raise the age for Medicare eligibility from 65 to 67.
And here’s what you need to know: Medicare actually saves money — a lot of money — compared with relying on private insurance companies. And this in turn means that pushing people out of Medicare, in addition to depriving many Americans of needed care, would almost surely end up increasing total health care costs.
The idea of Medicare as a money-saving program may seem hard to grasp. After all, hasn’t Medicare spending risen dramatically over time? Yes, it has: adjusting for overall inflation, Medicare spending per beneficiary rose more than 400 percent from 1969 to 2009.
But inflation-adjusted premiums on private health insurance rose more than 700 percent over the same period. So while it’s true that Medicare has done an inadequate job of controlling costs, the private sector has done much worse. And if we deny Medicare to 65- and 66-year-olds, we’ll be forcing them to get private insurance — if they can — that will cost much more than it would have cost to provide the same coverage through Medicare.
By the way, we have direct evidence about the higher costs of private insurance via the Medicare Advantage program, which allows Medicare beneficiaries to get their coverage through the private sector. This was supposed to save money; in fact, the program costs taxpayers substantially more per beneficiary than traditional Medicare.
And then there’s the international evidence. The United States has the most privatized health care system in the advanced world; it also has, by far, the most expensive care, without gaining any clear advantage in quality for all that spending. Health is one area in which the public sector consistently does a better job than the private sector at controlling costs.
Indeed, as the economist (and former Reagan adviser) Bruce Bartlett points out, high U.S. private spending on health care, compared with spending in other advanced countries, just about wipes out any benefit we might receive from our relatively low tax burden. So where’s the gain from pushing seniors out of an admittedly expensive system, Medicare, into even more expensive private health insurance?
Wait, it gets worse. Not every 65- or 66-year-old denied Medicare would be able to get private coverage — in fact, many would find themselves uninsured. So what would these seniors do?
Well, as the health economists Austin Frakt and Aaron Carroll document, right now Americans in their early 60s without health insurance routinely delay needed care, only to become very expensive Medicare recipients once they reach 65. This pattern would be even stronger and more destructive if Medicare eligibility were delayed. As a result, Mr. Frakt and Mr. Carroll suggest, Medicare spending might actually go up, not down, under Mr. Lieberman’s proposal.
Now, none of what I have said should be taken as a reason to be complacent about rising health care costs. Both Medicare and private insurance will be unsustainable unless there are major cost-control efforts — the kinds of efforts that are actually in the Affordable Care Act, and which Republicans demagogued with cries of “death panels.”
The point, however, is that privatizing health insurance for seniors, which is what Mr. Lieberman is in effect proposing — and which is the essence of the G.O.P. plan — hurts rather than helps the cause of cost control. If we really want to hold down costs, we should be seeking to offer Medicare-type programs to as many Americans as possible.
If I could get into the Medicare program at my current age of (almost) 55, I might just retire from the workforce and allow one of the millions of unemployed to take my job.
My company pays 75% of my health insurance cost, leaving me to pay around $250/month to cover me and my wife. If I had to pay the full cost, I'd have to have an even higher-paying job than I have right now to be able to afford health insurance AND food.
I wish I could retire early enough that I could still enjoy life with a (mostly) functioning body. But NO, all the plans on Capital Hill seem to be to either RAISE the age of entrance into Medicare or dismantle the program entirely.
Here is yet another example of too-powerful special interests preventing Congress and the American people from doing the right and best thing: allowing EVERYONE access to Medicare.
Every once in a while a politician comes up with an idea that’s so bad, so wrongheaded, that you’re almost grateful. For really bad ideas can help illustrate the extent to which policy discourse has gone off the rails.And so it was with Senator Joseph Lieberman’s proposal, released last week, to raise the age for Medicare eligibility from 65 to 67.
Like Republicans who want to end Medicare as we know it and replace it with (grossly inadequate) insurance vouchers, Mr. Lieberman describes his proposal as a way to save Medicare. It wouldn’t actually do that. But more to the point, our goal shouldn’t be to “save Medicare,” whatever that means. It should be to ensure that Americans get the health care they need, at a cost the nation can afford.
And here’s what you need to know: Medicare actually saves money — a lot of money — compared with relying on private insurance companies. And this in turn means that pushing people out of Medicare, in addition to depriving many Americans of needed care, would almost surely end up increasing total health care costs.
The idea of Medicare as a money-saving program may seem hard to grasp. After all, hasn’t Medicare spending risen dramatically over time? Yes, it has: adjusting for overall inflation, Medicare spending per beneficiary rose more than 400 percent from 1969 to 2009.
But inflation-adjusted premiums on private health insurance rose more than 700 percent over the same period. So while it’s true that Medicare has done an inadequate job of controlling costs, the private sector has done much worse. And if we deny Medicare to 65- and 66-year-olds, we’ll be forcing them to get private insurance — if they can — that will cost much more than it would have cost to provide the same coverage through Medicare.
By the way, we have direct evidence about the higher costs of private insurance via the Medicare Advantage program, which allows Medicare beneficiaries to get their coverage through the private sector. This was supposed to save money; in fact, the program costs taxpayers substantially more per beneficiary than traditional Medicare.
And then there’s the international evidence. The United States has the most privatized health care system in the advanced world; it also has, by far, the most expensive care, without gaining any clear advantage in quality for all that spending. Health is one area in which the public sector consistently does a better job than the private sector at controlling costs.
Indeed, as the economist (and former Reagan adviser) Bruce Bartlett points out, high U.S. private spending on health care, compared with spending in other advanced countries, just about wipes out any benefit we might receive from our relatively low tax burden. So where’s the gain from pushing seniors out of an admittedly expensive system, Medicare, into even more expensive private health insurance?
Wait, it gets worse. Not every 65- or 66-year-old denied Medicare would be able to get private coverage — in fact, many would find themselves uninsured. So what would these seniors do?
Well, as the health economists Austin Frakt and Aaron Carroll document, right now Americans in their early 60s without health insurance routinely delay needed care, only to become very expensive Medicare recipients once they reach 65. This pattern would be even stronger and more destructive if Medicare eligibility were delayed. As a result, Mr. Frakt and Mr. Carroll suggest, Medicare spending might actually go up, not down, under Mr. Lieberman’s proposal.
O.K., the obvious question: If Medicare is so much better than private insurance, why didn’t the Affordable Care Act simply extend Medicare to cover everyone? The answer, of course, was interest-group politics: realistically, given the insurance industry’s power, Medicare for all wasn’t going to pass, so advocates of universal coverage, myself included, were willing to settle for half a loaf. But the fact that it seemed politically necessary to accept a second-best solution for younger Americans is no reason to start dismantling the superior system we already have for those 65 and over.
Now, none of what I have said should be taken as a reason to be complacent about rising health care costs. Both Medicare and private insurance will be unsustainable unless there are major cost-control efforts — the kinds of efforts that are actually in the Affordable Care Act, and which Republicans demagogued with cries of “death panels.”
The point, however, is that privatizing health insurance for seniors, which is what Mr. Lieberman is in effect proposing — and which is the essence of the G.O.P. plan — hurts rather than helps the cause of cost control. If we really want to hold down costs, we should be seeking to offer Medicare-type programs to as many Americans as possible.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
7 Types of Idiots
7 Types Of Republican Idiots
By Matthew Desmond
By Matthew Desmond
January 7, 2011
I'm going to start with the most intelligent of the Republican idiots, then work my way down the list getting progressively more stupid.
The Educated Republicans:
These are the rarest of all Republicans. Occasionally you will run into one in public, or in a public-forum online. These Republicans are the smartest of the Republican idiots. They have learned everything there is to know about their position, from a Republican perspective. They’ve educated themselves on all the reasons why their position is correct.
The reason why this type of Republican is an idiot:
Anyone with the internet and 5 minutes can find something that thoroughly discredits their version of the “facts”. Even when confronted with contradictory facts they will continue to fall back on their original arguments, try to change the subject to something they are more comfortable talking about, or start expressing opinions with no factual merit.
What to Remember when debating them:
Keep them on-topic. Don’t let them ignore your counter-points and then change the subject on you. They’re masters of that, but if you can keep them on topic eventually they will just start expressing opinions to which you can say “do you have any facts to back that up?”
Fox News and Conservative Talk Radio Republicans:
These are one of the angriest groups of Republicans. They watch Fox News or listen to Conservative Talk Radio and they think it makes them an expert on politics. The only knowledge they have of politics is parroted talking points without any facts to back them up. When you defeat them in debate they will resort to calling you names like “Liberal”, or “commie” or “socialist” or “baby-killer” etc. They think all liberals are socialists that want to take their money and give it to people who don’t deserve it.
The reason why this type of Republican is an idiot:
They have no idea what they are talking about. Usually they’re just repeating things they have heard from Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh. They think that liberals want to take away their freedoms and they clearly don’t know what the word “liberal” means, or what liberals have done for our country and freedom. They think President Obama is comparable to Hitler for passing health-care reform. They accuse you of watching MSNBC if you don’t agree with them. They call you a sheep but expect you to blindly believe everything they tell you, without question.
What to Remember when debating them:
Keep demanding facts from them to back up their assertions until they break down and call you any of the aforementioned names. Ask them to name specific freedoms that liberals have taken away from them. They have a tendency to become violent so watch their hands if you are debating them face to face.
Christian Republicans:
These Republicans are hypocrites. They do everything in the name of Christ, while simultaneously acting as un-Christlike as humanly possible. They support the right to carry assault weapons, are pro-War, and completely ignore the fact that the Bible depicts Christ as a Liberal who was opposed to capitalism and violence. They sincerely believe that this is God’s country and that God loves us more than anyone else in the world. They think that anyone that is not 100% pro-Israel is anti-semitic. They hate everyone that doesn’t agree with them and think the Bible tells them to, and they hate Gay people because they think they are sinners.
The reason why this type of Republican is an idiot:
They do terrible things in the name of their Lord. They think that anyone that doesn’t agree with them is damned to hell or hates America. They believe that we are a Christian Nation even though the Founding Fathers made sure that they did not brand this country as a Christian Nation. The Founding Fathers wanted a country of religious freedom, free from religious persecution, but these Republicans will never admit that.
What to Remember when debating them:
There’s a list on the net of all the quotes that prove our Founding Fathers wanted a Country of religious freedom. Go here. Another thing to remember is that the Christian Right is neither. Start asking them questions like “how would Jesus feel about war?”, “how would Jesus feel about assault rifles?”, or “do you REALLY think that America is God’s favorite country, in the ENTIRE universe?”. And these questions should yield a response that thoroughly proves that they are hypocrites, and continuing to argue with them would be a waste of time.
Tea Party Republicans:
These Republicans are a dumbed-down combination of the previous 2 groups of Republicans. They think Sarah Palin is intelligent and it’s the media filter’s fault that she looks so stupid. They think Reagan was fiscally Conservative even though he tripled the deficit. They watch Fox News religiously, and think Glenn Beck is credible. They don’t understand why people think they’re racist while they’re standing next to people holding racist signs. They protest higher taxes even though taxes have gone down for 95% of working families.
The reason why this type of Republican is an idiot:
They parrot Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin talking points. When you discredit one thing they say they immediately move on to the next subject. Anyone that doesn’t agree with them is a socialist, even though they can’t give you the actual definition of socialism. Many of them are on Medicare while protesting “socialism”. They have never met a socialist, so they have no idea what socialists believe. They think liberals are socialists and socialists are Nazis.
What to Remember when debating them:
They have no idea what they’re talking about. Ask them to prove what they are saying. If you ask them a question and they respond with a question refuse to answer their question until they answer yours. Don’t back down. Remind them that taxes have actually been lowered for 95% of working families. If debating them in public be careful because they are known to carry guns in places they don’t need them, like public parks and bars and churches.
Birther Republicans:
The birthers think that Obama was born in Kenya. No matter how much evidence you present them with that is contradictory to that they will continue to insist that he is not the legitimate President. They are sore-losers because McCain lost the election, and they will never support Obama, even if he paid off the entire National Debt.
The reason why this type of Republican is an idiot:
They think Obama was born in Kenya. They think that Orly Taitz, who grew up in a socialist country, is credible, and that Obama is a socialist. They think that Obama’s birth announcements in Hawaiian newspapers were propagated over 40 years in advance of his election, just so that he could be elected someday.
What to Remember when debating them:
Don’t waste your time. You could wave Obama’s actual birth certificate in their face and they would still say it’s a fake. They are sore-losers and they will never be happy as long as Obama is President. Make jokes asking to see their birth certificates, or Sarah Palin’s birth certificate. This is the best way to get them to go away.
Racist Republicans:
(DISCLAIMER: I am putting this one almost last for a reason. I do NOT think that all Republicans are racists. I have Republican family members who are not racist. This section is only about the small percentage of Republicans that are ACTUALLY racist, because they do exist. I'm not "playing the race card" or "race-baiting" , I'm just describing a small group of racists who also affiliate themselves with the Republican Party)
Racist Republicans hate Obama because he’s black. They think that all Muslims are terrorists. They think Obama is a terrorist Muslim. The think anyone with a name like Obama’s is a terrorist.
The reason why this type of Republican is an idiot:
They’re racist, but they think Obama is a racist. They can’t understand why people call them racists when they post racist pictures or racist comments and then claim not to be racist. Whenever they possibly can they will call you a racist, to hide the fact that they are actually racists.
What to Remember when debating them:
They’re racists. Racists are uneducated bigots. You would have a much easier time convincing an apple tree to start growing oranges.
Extremely Idiotic Republicans:
These Republicans are Republicans because they think it’s cool. They know a Republican in one of the other groups listed, so they think they know what they’re talking about. They have terrible spelling and grammar but they expect you to believe whatever they say because they are saying it to you.
The reason why this type of Republican is an idiot:
It’s hard to tell if they ever made it past the 4th grade. Most of their posts are illegible. They don’t know anything about their position other than what they have heard their friends say. They think that Republicans are fiscally conservative because they say that they are, and call anyone that doesn’t agree with them sheep. They ignore all historical information that is contradictory to what they say. They are 100% blind to facts.
What to Remember when debating them:
No amount of facts or logic will ever convince them that their buddies are wrong. You could be a college professor and they will still think that your opinion isn’t credible. Instead of trying to argue with them try explaining Algebra to your dog. I’m sure it will be much more productive.
I hope that this has been an informative resource for you. I hope you will remember some of the things I have said the next time you are engaged in a debate with a Republican idiot.
http://www.addictin ginfo.org/ 2011/01/07/ the-7-types- of-republican- idiots/The Educated Republicans:
These are the rarest of all Republicans. Occasionally you will run into one in public, or in a public-forum online. These Republicans are the smartest of the Republican idiots. They have learned everything there is to know about their position, from a Republican perspective. They’ve educated themselves on all the reasons why their position is correct.
The reason why this type of Republican is an idiot:
Anyone with the internet and 5 minutes can find something that thoroughly discredits their version of the “facts”. Even when confronted with contradictory facts they will continue to fall back on their original arguments, try to change the subject to something they are more comfortable talking about, or start expressing opinions with no factual merit.
What to Remember when debating them:
Keep them on-topic. Don’t let them ignore your counter-points and then change the subject on you. They’re masters of that, but if you can keep them on topic eventually they will just start expressing opinions to which you can say “do you have any facts to back that up?”
Fox News and Conservative Talk Radio Republicans:
These are one of the angriest groups of Republicans. They watch Fox News or listen to Conservative Talk Radio and they think it makes them an expert on politics. The only knowledge they have of politics is parroted talking points without any facts to back them up. When you defeat them in debate they will resort to calling you names like “Liberal”, or “commie” or “socialist” or “baby-killer” etc. They think all liberals are socialists that want to take their money and give it to people who don’t deserve it.
The reason why this type of Republican is an idiot:
They have no idea what they are talking about. Usually they’re just repeating things they have heard from Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh. They think that liberals want to take away their freedoms and they clearly don’t know what the word “liberal” means, or what liberals have done for our country and freedom. They think President Obama is comparable to Hitler for passing health-care reform. They accuse you of watching MSNBC if you don’t agree with them. They call you a sheep but expect you to blindly believe everything they tell you, without question.
What to Remember when debating them:
Keep demanding facts from them to back up their assertions until they break down and call you any of the aforementioned names. Ask them to name specific freedoms that liberals have taken away from them. They have a tendency to become violent so watch their hands if you are debating them face to face.
Christian Republicans:
These Republicans are hypocrites. They do everything in the name of Christ, while simultaneously acting as un-Christlike as humanly possible. They support the right to carry assault weapons, are pro-War, and completely ignore the fact that the Bible depicts Christ as a Liberal who was opposed to capitalism and violence. They sincerely believe that this is God’s country and that God loves us more than anyone else in the world. They think that anyone that is not 100% pro-Israel is anti-semitic. They hate everyone that doesn’t agree with them and think the Bible tells them to, and they hate Gay people because they think they are sinners.
The reason why this type of Republican is an idiot:
They do terrible things in the name of their Lord. They think that anyone that doesn’t agree with them is damned to hell or hates America. They believe that we are a Christian Nation even though the Founding Fathers made sure that they did not brand this country as a Christian Nation. The Founding Fathers wanted a country of religious freedom, free from religious persecution, but these Republicans will never admit that.
What to Remember when debating them:
There’s a list on the net of all the quotes that prove our Founding Fathers wanted a Country of religious freedom. Go here. Another thing to remember is that the Christian Right is neither. Start asking them questions like “how would Jesus feel about war?”, “how would Jesus feel about assault rifles?”, or “do you REALLY think that America is God’s favorite country, in the ENTIRE universe?”. And these questions should yield a response that thoroughly proves that they are hypocrites, and continuing to argue with them would be a waste of time.
Tea Party Republicans:These Republicans are a dumbed-down combination of the previous 2 groups of Republicans. They think Sarah Palin is intelligent and it’s the media filter’s fault that she looks so stupid. They think Reagan was fiscally Conservative even though he tripled the deficit. They watch Fox News religiously, and think Glenn Beck is credible. They don’t understand why people think they’re racist while they’re standing next to people holding racist signs. They protest higher taxes even though taxes have gone down for 95% of working families.
The reason why this type of Republican is an idiot:
They parrot Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin talking points. When you discredit one thing they say they immediately move on to the next subject. Anyone that doesn’t agree with them is a socialist, even though they can’t give you the actual definition of socialism. Many of them are on Medicare while protesting “socialism”. They have never met a socialist, so they have no idea what socialists believe. They think liberals are socialists and socialists are Nazis.
What to Remember when debating them:
They have no idea what they’re talking about. Ask them to prove what they are saying. If you ask them a question and they respond with a question refuse to answer their question until they answer yours. Don’t back down. Remind them that taxes have actually been lowered for 95% of working families. If debating them in public be careful because they are known to carry guns in places they don’t need them, like public parks and bars and churches.
Birther Republicans:
The birthers think that Obama was born in Kenya. No matter how much evidence you present them with that is contradictory to that they will continue to insist that he is not the legitimate President. They are sore-losers because McCain lost the election, and they will never support Obama, even if he paid off the entire National Debt.
The reason why this type of Republican is an idiot:
They think Obama was born in Kenya. They think that Orly Taitz, who grew up in a socialist country, is credible, and that Obama is a socialist. They think that Obama’s birth announcements in Hawaiian newspapers were propagated over 40 years in advance of his election, just so that he could be elected someday.
What to Remember when debating them:
Don’t waste your time. You could wave Obama’s actual birth certificate in their face and they would still say it’s a fake. They are sore-losers and they will never be happy as long as Obama is President. Make jokes asking to see their birth certificates, or Sarah Palin’s birth certificate. This is the best way to get them to go away.
Racist Republicans:
(DISCLAIMER: I am putting this one almost last for a reason. I do NOT think that all Republicans are racists. I have Republican family members who are not racist. This section is only about the small percentage of Republicans that are ACTUALLY racist, because they do exist. I'm not "playing the race card" or "race-baiting" , I'm just describing a small group of racists who also affiliate themselves with the Republican Party)
Racist Republicans hate Obama because he’s black. They think that all Muslims are terrorists. They think Obama is a terrorist Muslim. The think anyone with a name like Obama’s is a terrorist.
The reason why this type of Republican is an idiot:
They’re racist, but they think Obama is a racist. They can’t understand why people call them racists when they post racist pictures or racist comments and then claim not to be racist. Whenever they possibly can they will call you a racist, to hide the fact that they are actually racists.
What to Remember when debating them:
They’re racists. Racists are uneducated bigots. You would have a much easier time convincing an apple tree to start growing oranges.
Extremely Idiotic Republicans:
These Republicans are Republicans because they think it’s cool. They know a Republican in one of the other groups listed, so they think they know what they’re talking about. They have terrible spelling and grammar but they expect you to believe whatever they say because they are saying it to you.
The reason why this type of Republican is an idiot:
It’s hard to tell if they ever made it past the 4th grade. Most of their posts are illegible. They don’t know anything about their position other than what they have heard their friends say. They think that Republicans are fiscally conservative because they say that they are, and call anyone that doesn’t agree with them sheep. They ignore all historical information that is contradictory to what they say. They are 100% blind to facts.
What to Remember when debating them:
No amount of facts or logic will ever convince them that their buddies are wrong. You could be a college professor and they will still think that your opinion isn’t credible. Instead of trying to argue with them try explaining Algebra to your dog. I’m sure it will be much more productive.
I hope that this has been an informative resource for you. I hope you will remember some of the things I have said the next time you are engaged in a debate with a Republican idiot.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
He's always watching
