Democrats begin agitating for media bailouts
A bit of Name That Party, followed by some interesting reactions from various media people. The question becomes, how many GOP Congresscritters are going to cave and go along with the bailout? I also wonder how many Congresscritters will be swayed by the fear of having dirt on them or personal information dug up or exposed by the media?
What I'll really be interested in is what McCain does, does he allow his "all politics is personal" side come out, and oppose media bailouts for their shabby treatment of him during the 2008 campaign? Or will he come crawling back to his main contituency, like the voters in Murtha's district did to Fat Jack (I can't believe you idjit voters in Western PA let Murtha make you his bitch like that).
1Or will he come crawling back to his main contituency...
Hmmm...support conservative principles or get good headlines?
I wonder which McCain will choose?
Posted by: Slublog at December 31, 2008 10:09 PM (p4s1i)
2
Not, not support conservative principles, but if he was holding a personal grudge for his shabby treatment by the media, that just might make him side with conservatives by coincidence.
Posted by: doubleplusundead at December 31, 2008 11:00 PM (D2cBI)
3
I'd like to believe that, but McCain's career hasn't given us much reason to hope.
Posted by: Slublog at December 31, 2008 11:18 PM (p4s1i)
I forget who said it, but we all know what McCain will do:
Spend the next 2-8 years getting back at the people who voted for him.
Posted by: Veeshir at January 02, 2009 10:45 AM (ThMnZ)
5
If you've found a dress and you love it, you should be aware that the manufacturer can discontinue a style at any time (even new collections!)
Posted by: Prom Dresses at November 14, 2011 12:57 AM (Obel+)
6
Mary & her sister Catherine took in this fabulous event in July- and now the collection is here! We hand-picked the best of the line, and we think you'll adore.
Posted by: Prom Dresses at November 14, 2011 12:57 AM (Obel+)
7
Great job on the site, it looks outstanding. I am going to save it and will make sure to check often
Christopher Hitchens basically calling Bill Maher and his audience stupid, then flipping them off:
On an unrelated note, if you tell anyone today that you'll "see them next year," you deserve to be punched in the throat. I've been at work since 1pm (until 9pm) and ten people have used that line. It's not funny. Never has been.
1
I need a quick synopsis since I think I see Bill Maher staring back at me and there is no way I'm subjecting myself to that guy when I'm in a good mood unless he's getting punched in the throat for saying "see you next year" (or, hell, for any other reason).
Posted by: ECM at December 31, 2008 05:05 PM (q3V+C)
2
At least Maher's audience is getting flipped off. That's something.
On a kinda unrelated note, who are the people who make up these studio audiences? I mean, they seem to be able to laugh at any joke, no matter how awful. Are they just really big Maher fans, or are they so happy about their .15 seconds of fame they'll do anything?
Posted by: Daniel Ruwe at December 31, 2008 05:34 PM (9i141)
3
I expect more out of Hitchens than The Bird, however deserving the audience might have been.
Posted by: Sockless Joe at December 31, 2008 05:35 PM (UazZY)
The Official Roland Burris Death ChamberIt's pretty fantastic if you haven't seen it yet. Oh, and in case you were stil in doubt about this man's ego, his children are named Roland II and Rolanda. I'm totally serial.
What is it with these temple-like structures? Obama's acceptance speech backdrop and this guy's monument to himself are just creepy.
I've got 'feed me to cannibals' in my will, just in case anyone gets any ideas after I've croaked.
Posted by: Hermit Dave at December 31, 2008 06:51 PM (WhFvm)
2
Great post from an
expert and it will be a great knowledge to us and thank you very much for
sharing this valuable information with us.
Cataclysm
Dailies
I said Israel will attack any boat carrying doctors and medical supplies--they have turned away the red cross already and all medical and food assistance. Israel is a NAZI state. The Jewish Soul is being tortured in Israel. The destruction of the jews in Israel has been assured with this inhuman attack on civilians in gaza. Hamas is the street gangs---this is equivilent to los angeles attacking and launching war on the people of watts to attempt to kill the bloods and the crips.
But while we're on the wild wide world of scary tour, of course, Israel has started another war. A third straight day of airstrikes on Gaza, the death toll now more than 300 people. Israel says they are doing this to prevent Palestinians from firing rockets into southern Israel. First of all, there's the question of proportionality as to how many people those rockets have killed versus how many people the Israeli bombing has now killed. There's also the issue of effectiveness. In the midst of this massive air assault killing hundreds of civilians in Gaza, a rocket fired from Gaza today killed a man and wounded seven in the Israeli town of Ashkelon. Effectiveness. Three Israelis were also stabbed by a Palestinian in a Jewish settlement in the West Bank today. Is there a military solution to this problem?
Maybe. Maybe not. But when a dimbulb like this is touted as a rising star on a cable network that is nothing more than a broadcast version of the Daily Kos, what does that say?
I don't know but I have a hypothesis. If you consider the cognitive abilities of anyone who actually watches, much less believes what that ditz says, then the businesses that buy ad time during her show are targeting a special demographic -- the idiot sector.
Capitalism rocks!
Posted by: Robert E at December 31, 2008 03:03 PM (13vXO)
2
Here's another take on the disproportionate response:
JOE SCARBOROUGH: You can't blame what is happening in Israel right now on the Bush administration.
ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI: Yes you can.
SCARBOROUGH: You can't. Let's go back to 2000, Dr. Brzezinski. Bill Clinton gave Arafat and the Palestinians everything they could have wanted.
BRZEZINSKI: You know, you have such a stunningly superficial knowledge of what went on that it's almost embarrassing to listen to you.
SCARBOROUGH: Oh, is it?
And later....
SCARBOROUGH: We have another bloc, and I'm very excited aboug that because I'm stunningly superficial. Chief, I look forward to you educating me, and the rest of America, and the rest of the foreign policy community, who have said, time and again, Arafat walked away from the best deal he could have gotten, and that the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to --
BRZEZINSKI: These are not the facts. [They're] your opinions; you're repeating slogans. He did not walk away. What he said was, I'm going to take the proposal to all the Arab capitals and see how they react, because the proposals were controversial . . . The negotiations went on, even after Christmas, where Clinton and Arafat met, and they were going on in Taba in January, after Clinton was already leaving office. And then, the process got aborted. It's helpful to know a little bit about it.
Nuance, thy name is Jimmah Carter's Crew. Thank GAIA these clowns are back in charge.
Hollywood cares
Today's Los Angeles Times had a list of the top ten "moments in 2008 celebrity activism," which—of course—was
heavy on various entertainment-industry figures' support for
Obama. But the following, which was (perhaps fittingly) at the
bottom of the list, caught my eye:
Hollywood is a global
business and no international cause moves quite so many stars quite so
deeply as the ongoing genocide and dislocation of the people in Darfur.
The cool guys from "Ocean's 11-13" were convinced by costars and
friends Don Cheadle and Clooney to make the cause of Darfur their own.
With that crew on your side, it's hard to go wrong, but as more of the
industry educated itself about the situation in western Sudan, it
became the international crisis closest to the film industry's heart.
Fundraising for relief continues, and a surprising number of stars have
taken the extra step of intervening whenever possible with the
governments and international organizations involved. Hollywood's a
town with a notoriously short memory, but don't look for Darfur to slip
off the radar any time soon.
And don't look for their efforts to actually, you know, accomplish anything any time soon, either.
Because, seriously, "The cool guys" from those movies and their
celebrity pals haven't managed to get jack shit done so far, no matter
how much "the industry educated itself" about what's going on
there. And I'm sure that while Don Cheadle and George Clooney
have good intentions, countries like China that are doing business with
the Sudanese government couldn't give a shit when they take "the extra
step of intervening" when they're not otherwise occupied making movies
and banging starlets.
And besides, unless I've missed something, have there been any movies about the situation in Darfur? There sure have been plenty of anti-Iraq war movies, but I don't think Hollywood has made a single dramatic film to help educate the public about this, their most serious cause.
1
The difference is, you can make a documentary about Darfur, as the truth is much more dramatic than anything that Hollywood can make up. Iraq, the truth doesn't fit their talking points. Plus, it's easier to make a fictional story about the military, as it's something familiar enough as subject matter to be able to concoct a story without too much basic research. What's happening in Darfur is far enough off the norm that a lot of research has to be done, and by the time you do all that research you might as well make a documentary.
(There are at least three documentaries out about Darfur. I don't think there have been any fictional movies.)
Posted by: Alice H at December 30, 2008 12:23 AM (jRtPb)
2
Hate to say it, but the aggressors in Darfur are of the religion of pieces, so many in Hollywood are afraid of offending them.
Posted by: eddiebear at December 30, 2008 12:34 AM (r420r)
I agree with Alice -- genocide usually doesn't make for much of a movie (maybe someone will make the equivalent of Schindler's List for Darfur at some point).
Also, black on black violence where huge numbers of people have been killed, and there's no white people close at hand to blame, doesn't exactly fit the narrative.
Posted by: Hermit Dave at December 30, 2008 12:36 AM (WhFvm)
Well there's that, but they won't admit what the Janjaweed is someone to give them a good swift kick in the rear; to get them to stop slaughtering people in Darfur. Plus the inconvenient facts like evangelicals like Sarah Palin (the one they said thought Africa was a country) are at the forefront of the Anti Darfur extermination efforts.
Posted by: narciso at December 30, 2008 12:59 AM (9EG7Z)
5
So far Clooney and pals have raised about $15 million for Darfur relief. I think criticizing them for it is a little out of line.
I'm not sure what you expect out of Hollywood, considering the piss-poor response we've gotten out of our actual leaders on Darfur. It's not like the U.S. government has accomplished much, either. Raising money to alleviate suffering sounds like a praiseworthy activity to me.
No doubt when Hollywood does bestir itself to make a movie about Darfur it will be criticized by African nations, just as the movies about Rwanda were. Some times there's just no pleasing anyone.
Hermit Dave, if you want to watch a film about a black on black genocide in Africa, I encourage you to watch the British film Shooting Dogs. Bring Kleenex.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at December 30, 2008 01:19 AM (rWvvO)
6
And while I'm thinking of Shooting Dogs, another reason to watch it is to see a respectful Catholic priest main character, a rare thing these days.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at December 30, 2008 01:21 AM (rWvvO)
7
Don't get me wrong, Gabriel, I'm not criticizing them for raising relief money or anything like that. It's just that they don't seem to have any ideas about what to do about it, other than...talk. And that's done wonders so far.
Besides, even if people like Clooney were to start calling for troops to be sent in, I think the American public would have a hard time getting behind a troop deployment in an area where we have virtually no national security interests when his ilk have been criticizing the Iraq war basically from the start.
Posted by: Sean M. at December 30, 2008 01:35 AM (rLWHv)
Besides, even if people like Clooney were to start calling for troops to be sent in, I think the American public would have a hard time getting behind a troop deployment in an area where we have virtually no national security interests when his ilk have been criticizing the Iraq war basically from the start.
Thanks to the (insane) response of at least 50% of Americans to a certain genocidal maniac in Iraq, our days of getting involved, militarily, with anyone that doesn't detonate a nuke in NYC/LA are over. So sorry Darfur, Taiwan, Burma/Myanmar, etc.
Posted by: ECM at December 30, 2008 09:22 AM (q3V+C)
Thanks for the tip on Shooting Dogs, Gabe ... looks like it's worth watching.
The main issue I have with raising money to 'alleviate suffering' is that it's often counterproductive. Supplies are intercepted, or the recipients are simply slaughtered and the supplies taken. Much so-called 'relief' ends up helping the aggressors. Spending the money on a few well-placed bombs would be much more effective.
Posted by: Hermit Dave at December 30, 2008 11:23 AM (WhFvm)
12
You got it HD, as Instapundit says, "send guns."
Posted by: Veeshir at December 30, 2008 03:06 PM (zXUuJ)
1
As the BFF would say *HANDS* *HANDS ALL OVER THE PLACE*
Posted by: alexthechick at December 29, 2008 11:27 AM (SHHaV)
2
I can't help but laugh at 'over 9,000'. Especially since it would have taken less typespace to write the exact number. I can't believe they're still open.
In all fairness, the bailout was four years ago, and most of Agriprocessor's legal troubles have occurred in the last year. Harkins hopefully had no idea what he was doing.
Posted by: Alice H at December 29, 2008 12:55 PM (jRtPb)
There are indications that a decision could come soon, sometime before Inaugural Day. But MSNBC president Phil Griffin declined late last week to say whether that’s true or not.
“I’ve talked to Chris. I think he’s going to be here for a long time,” Griffin said. “I want him to be here for a long time.” Griffin said that there would be “clarity” soon.
If true, I guess Matthews doesn't want to give up that $5 million a year to be an unaccountable assclown for shaking hands with the bitter clingers and having to defend his ridiculous comments over the years.
Abandoning grades
Not just the kind of grades you usually hear about in the 'let's make the kids feel better' crap going on in schools - a metro Denver school district is abandoning grades. As in, when Grandma asks your kid what grade he's in, Grandma's going to get a blank stare that's going to have her (maybe rightfully) questioning the value of your child's public education.
1
might be better than social promotion, which I'm guessing is the status quo in a lot of districts.
you could also end up with a bunch of kids clustered around an 8th grade level with no incentive to progress.
Posted by: Sockless Joe at December 21, 2008 11:00 PM (UazZY)
2
It almost seemed like that's the way it is in high school now, at least for math and english classes. The only thing that defined someone's grade level was by what elective and general ed classes they had
Posted by: pajama momma at December 22, 2008 12:55 AM (kWQTL)
random update
I am about to go on a spree due to being stuck in the airport until 11 p.m. and being forced to watch/listen to MSNBC. Seriously, I'm about to take out the television with the power of my miiiiiind.
Update: Someone put the NFL Network on instead so now I am ready for some football. Thank GOD. It's a Saturnalia miracle!
1
I say, do it! MSNBC, what rational person watches that station?
Posted by: mare at December 20, 2008 09:20 PM (X1fsj)
2
Looks like somebody's been watching the Big Bang Theory...
Posted by: Sean M. at December 20, 2008 10:10 PM (rLWHv)
3
Big Bang Theory is my favorite thing on tv right now. I love everything about it.
Posted by: alexthechick at December 20, 2008 10:31 PM (5pQPI)
4
I absolutely love Big Bang Theory too. Partly because my husband and one of his best friends are so much like Leonard and Sheldon. Except computer geeks instead of physicists.
Posted by: Alice H at December 21, 2008 01:17 PM (jRtPb)
Moonbeam has a change of heart
Former (flaky) Governor and current Attorney General Jerry Brown has apparently reversed his position on supporting the will of the state's voters, who approved Proposition 8, banning gay marriage:
Brown, whose job it is to defend state laws and who earlier said he would support the amendment, argued yesterday that the framers of the state constitution never intended "to put a group's right to enjoy liberty to a popular vote."
The court is expected to hear the case in March.
"Proposition 8 must be invalidated because the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification," Brown said in a statement.
Um, I'm sorry, Jerry, but until a bare majority of the State Supreme Court recently decided that same-sex couples could be married, they never had the "fundamental constitutional right" to claim that status. It's been tried in the legislature several times, and it's failed.
And now that the issue has been rejected by the people of the state—ironically, through means pressed through by the Progressive movement—you're working against the will of the people of the Bluest of Blue states.
Our California AG is telling us that democracy is fine, I guess, as long as you get your way. Otherwise...
1
I would like to thank all of these wonderfully tolerant progressives for making it impossible for me to be out since there's no fucking way I want to have to explain that, no, I don't hate religion and, no, I don't support gay marriage and, no, I don't think it's perfectly fine to simply tell people that their votes and use of the democratic process doesn't count.
Thanks so much! It's SO GREAT!
Posted by: alexthechick at December 20, 2008 12:55 PM (/g/DK)
2
Sadly, the courts nowadays seem to throw out legal and constitutional precedence when it interferes with lefties getting their way. This is an example, as was the Toricelli deal in NJ in 2002.
And yet the left has accused Conservatives of "shredding the Constitution".
Posted by: eddiebear at December 20, 2008 01:03 PM (szzJu)
Have you heard about the other preacher at Obama's inaugural?
No? You haven't? I guess that's because he's just your average, run of the mill, mainstream church leader who supports gay marriage and gay priests, and not some extremist like Rick Warren.
Vice President-Elect Joe Biden said the U.S. economy is in danger of "absolutely tanking" and will need a second stimulus package in the $600-billion to $700-billion range.
"The economy is in much worse shape than we thought it was in," Biden told me during an exclusive interview -- his first since becoming vice president-elect-- to air this Sunday on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos."
But you know what will help it? Having the Treasury Department print up $1,000,000,000,000+ out of thin air, which will bring inflation to Carter Administration levels, if not worse. Makes sense to me.
Democrats desperate for excuses to scrap missile defense system
An excuse, any excuse, but they love this "untested" crap line, despite the fact that it's been tested repeatedly and shown to work.
The guys at GayPatriot look at the reaction and collectively ask, "Uh, dudes, what the hell did you think was going to happen? You really believed all that hope'n'change shit?"
First, the far left is in perpetual outrage mode. If you try to satisfy these idiots, you're gonna alienate everyone else. So you just disregard them, as they're never gonna vote GOP anyway.
Second, as many of us have noted on this blog, the majority of the gay community is completely clueless when it comes to who their political allies should be. The black community is one of the least gay-friendly demographics, as the Prop 8 vote demonstrated once again.
They shouldn't be surprised, as you say, but they are because ... well, they're idiots.
Posted by: Hermit Dave at December 18, 2008 10:58 AM (WhFvm)
As are the radical Muslims, but you don't see too many of the "tolerant" ones vandalizing Mormon places attacking mosques.
Posted by: eddiebear at December 18, 2008 11:13 AM (wnU1W)
3
I always recall Lawrence O'Donnell's admission that he won't attack the Jihadis because they will try to kill him, while Mormons won't.
Posted by: eddiebear at December 18, 2008 11:14 AM (wnU1W)
4I always recall Lawrence O'Donnell's admission that he won't attack the
Jihadis because they will try to kill him, while Mormons won't.
That's it! I can never remember who that was.
Obama is against gay marriage. He tries to wriggle out of that by saying he doesn't suppport DOMA and he supports civil unions but he is still against gay marriage on religious grounds. Every time I point that out to my lefty queer friends, they start up with cognitive dissonance so severe that I expect their heads to spin right off.
Posted by: alexthechick at December 18, 2008 12:35 PM (SHHaV)
Posted by: doubleplusundead at December 17, 2008 06:51 PM (D2cBI)
3
The fact that the shoethrower hasn't been executed speaks volumes about the difference between pre-liberation Iraq and post-liberation Iraq. If I were President Bush, I'd consider these shoes a salute to his foresight in invading.
Posted by: Alice H at December 17, 2008 09:10 PM (jRtPb)
Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D) said it
was "un-American" for senators to have voted against approving a
bailout of troubled automakers last night, saying their vote may cause
a recession to become a depression.
"It is unacceptable for this un-American, frankly, behavior of these
U.S. senators to cause this country to go from a recession into a
depression," Granholm said during a radio interview Friday morning.
Standing up against a socialist bailout for the UAW is now un-American. Spectacular. Granholm shouldn't worry, though, because lame duck President Bush is going against the will of the voters and giving out the auto bailout money anyway.
1
Dunno about you, but when I want to know what's un-american, I ask Jenny "In five years, you'll be blown away" Grandstand.
Posted by: leoncaruthers at December 12, 2008 01:21 PM (SHR5S)
2
I'm pretty sure that it would be illegal for Bush and Paulson to use the TARP funds to bail out the automakers. Not that either of them care, as the whole farking thing is unconstitutional to begin with.
Posted by: Hermit Dave at December 12, 2008 01:29 PM (WhFvm)
I don't hold any animosity towards the average UAW member. Sure, they're overpaid, but I don't blame them for taking what the companies were willing to give. It's a legal business transaction.
It's the management of the US manufacturers, the union officials, and the politicians they're in bed with that deserve scorn. It would be refreshing to see a movement within the UAW to kick out the officials and do what's needed to preserve their jobs and help the manufacturers with a viable business model, but I have a feeling anyone who tried that wouldn't be around long.
Posted by: Hermit Dave at December 12, 2008 02:39 PM (WhFvm)
Only ask appropriate questions
It's been noted at Political Punch that questions submitted to the change.gov Open for Questions website are being screened for approved content; most specifically questions about Rod Blagojevich are being flagged as inappropriate. So let's take a look at what has passed muster as an appropriate question:
