McCain and King celebrate a Pres. McCain victory

TPM notes a charming headline that CNN had up on its site yesterday.

Obama off to bad start...

So says Senator, and two time presidential run loser, John McCain. Yeah, getting the presidency, getting the stimulus through, passing SCHIP, etc. What a loser. YEESCH!

But not to worry. Not to worry. John King was there to help...McCain.

Crooks and Liars:

...

KING: Well, if it’s the old business as usual, didn’t President Obama promise a new way of doing things in Washington? You say it was a terrible start. Are you sitting in your office these days saying, "I told you so"?

This from the man who warned Obama about being too liberal.

Forehead, meet keyboard. What I wouldn't give to see an intellectually honest discussion of the stimulus bill...obviously, it will not be found on "State of the Union".

Yeah, thanks King and CNN. And I noticed a segment title last night on CNN. Apparently since Obama is going to Denver to sign the stimulus into law, he's "snubbing" Washington.

...snubbing? So every time a President goes out into the world to sign a bill, like a national park, they have just snubbed Washington. After the work Obama has begun to connect political Washington to that place people actually work and live...snub? CNN, how full of shit can you be?

Sex...in...Space

I know officially Valentine's Day is over. But for some of you...[wink]

So be sure to check out for your further education...


Smartaxe and Sex in Space.

Don't worry the beltway pundits are in the know.

TPM has noted the dissonance between the polls and opinions of people across the country and what pundits and the news people in Washington and NYC think. Seems the country is more than willing to trust Pres. Obama for now and let him work, and applaud his attempts at bipartisanship, and hold the Reps accountable for their actions. But that ways so lightly on the pundits and MSM.

"It's eerie -- I read the news from the Beltway, and there's this disconnect with the polls from the Midwest that I see all around me."

That's from Ann Seltzer, the Iowa pollster who's an expert on public opinion throughout the midwest, as quoted by Ben Smith.

It really is the big story of the first weeks of the Obama administration. In Washington, it was a battle royale between the new president and an emboldened Republican minority. At times they seemed to have him on the ropes. And yet in the country at large, Obama remains super popular. And the GOP is wildly unpopular.

...

But there's a very big problem with this strategy above and beyond the absurdity of the argument. "Congress" may be really unpopular. And the Democrats now control Congress. But politics is a zero sum game. At the end of the day, in almost every case, you've got to pick a Republican or a Democrat when you vote. And if you look at the numbers, congressional Democrats are pretty popular. And congressional Republicans are extremely unpopular. If you look at the number, the Dems are at about 50% or higher in most recent polls, while the GOP is down in the 30s.

The city remains wired for the GOP. Not that it's done them a great deal of good of late. But it remains a key part of understanding every part of what is happening today.

More from TPM:

So John McCain says that Obama needs to work on bipartisanship, which is about par for the course from McCain and for other Republicans these days. I just heard a reporter on MSNBC say that the Republicans have emerged from this battle with their reputation for fiscal discipline strengthened while Obama has had his reputation for bipartisanship tarnished.

As annoying as it is to hear this stuff, I can't say I'm losing a lot of sleep over it. Because in addition to being nonsensical on its face, I really don't think most people around the country are seeing any of this that way. The primary aim of this is to work the refs, the refs being DC political reporters, who are usually pretty easy to work. And they seem to be so in this case. But I don't think this is what most people see. I think the number of people who are into bipartisanship is greatly overstated. However, the number of people who are into it are heavily correlated with those who are politically gettable. So it's not nothing. But Obama has made repeated overtures to Republicans and included probably more of their goodies than I'd like in his bill. And he's been greeted by a phalanx of opposition, nonsense and trash talk.

It's true that many voters without strong partisan attachments want to see politicians 'get some things done' and not just get into political fights. I think what most people see here is one side of equation trying to put together a bill with big majorities, which means necessarily ones that wouldn't be his own parties wish list. The other party has used the overture exclusively as a vehicle for scoring political points and, more poetically put, being dicks.

For my part, I don't think there's any problem with having party line votes where both parties really fundamentally disagree on the policy question at hand. But to the extent that there's a question of who's making an effort to operate in a bipartisan manner, this one is really not even close. Reporters' idea that the entire 'bipartisan' enterprise is Obama's responsibility, as though Republicans, in their depleted state, actually get to dictate the content of bills -- I don't think people buy that. Which is probably why Obama's still really popular and congressional Republicans are extremely unpopular.

And I do love that, "I just heard a reporter on MSNBC say that the Republicans have emerged from this battle with their reputation for fiscal discipline strengthened while Obama has had his reputation for bipartisanship tarnished." Really? I love the one sided read. Global warming and evolution, they want to have both sides heard. But on the president's endeavors, they just need the talking points. Why is that?

They'll just be happy in private.

Looking at Crooks and Liars, it seems that a number of Republicans weren't as resolute in opposing the stimulus bill. They know what is best for their populace and the country, they just won't vote to do it. That is today's Republican party.

HuffPo:

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), who broke with his party to support President Obama's stimulus package last week, said before the final vote Friday that more of his colleagues would have joined were they not afraid of the political consequences.

"When I came back to the cloak room after coming to the agreement a week ago today," said Specter, "one of my colleagues said, 'Arlen, I'm proud of you.' My Republican colleague said, 'Arlen, I'm proud of you.' I said, 'Are you going to vote with me?' And he said, 'No, I might have a primary.' And I said, 'Well, you know very well I'm going to have a primary.'"

...

"I think there are a lot of people in the Republican caucus who are glad to see this action taken without their fingerprints, without their participation," he said.

...

Gutless, gutless wonders....they allegedly agree on the need for the stimulus, but are afraid to stand up for what's right. Ladies and gentlemen, once again, I give you today's GOP. Explain to me why Democrats keep expressing the need for bipartisanship...

...

Critiquing Olbermann

Orac and some others have noted a bothersome misstep from Keith Olbermann on Countdown this last week.

Now have have to disagree with Orac's opinion of Olbermann. He has been looking at him a lot like Limbaugh and now seems to have a lower opinion. Now it seems he sees Limbaugh as a fool and worth a laugh over an afternoon. I can't see it that way. Let's just say, "I hope he fails." Okay. Olbermann has been willing and eager to go after Bush and criticize, but, unlike Limbaugh, it isn't about trashing the country to just win a fight (over being more right than others). Rush is a mean fool who takes pleasure in building himself up on the misfortune of others. Ridicule of the poor, the ill, the unfortunate is par for the course. So to even trying to put him on par with Olbermann, even if you consider him all ego and bragger, is insulting and dubious. And knocking his sense of humor was cheap, though a matter of an individuals opinion.


But Olbermann has been drawn in to do anti-vacc dirty work. Last week he pointed to reports of how work of one of the main opponents of vaccination was in question, it looked to be fake. Big news. Then his people got a word that the one reporting on the story was suspect. He reported this as well. But the reality of this idea is not true. So Olbermann is in the wrong. Pushing forward a claim without merit.

Keith Olbermann: Played for a fool by the antivaccine movement

...

Too bad tonight Olbermann let himself be played like a fiddle by antivaccine propagandist David Kirby, the man who, with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., was instrumental in launching the American version of the MMR scare, namely the thimerosal/mercury scare that roared into the states in 2004 and is now maintained by Jenny McCarthy--still aided and abetted by David Kirby. No, Kirby played Olbermann like Itzhak Perlman playing a goddamned Stradivarius. Indeed, Kirby played on Olbermann's hatred of Rupert Murdoch...

Brian Deer responds to Keith Olbermann


Olbermann needs to make amends admit to the mistake and call those who played him out for yet another of the denier's games.

New Skeptics' Circle

Time for another skeptics' circle.

Skeptics’ Circle #105: The Shakespeare Edition

...

In honor of the 105th edition, we’re going to take a look at William Shakespeare’s Sonnet 105. Although of course it’s actually about the beauty, gentleness, and loyalty of one’s beloved, I think we can give it a skeptical reading if we try hard enough. And with Valentine’s Day right around the corner, a love poem seemed appropriate. So let’s get right to it!

...

Judging vaccs

Dr. Novella:

Autism Court Ruling - Vaccines Didn’t Cause Autism

The much awaited decision on the first test case of the Autism Omnibus was just announced - and it’s good news. They have found that the petitioners failed to make their case that vaccines caused their children’s autism, and that therefore compensation was not appropriate.

...

Oh no! Bipartisanship!

AMERICAblog:

I told Joe half an hour ago that some knucklehead in the media would claim that this was another sign of how not-bipartisan Obama really is. And here you go, from Politico:

New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg has abruptly withdrawn as President Barack Obama’s nominee to run the Commerce Department, another blow to an administration trying to build a bipartisan cabinet.

...

Ah, Politico. Trying so hard to be wrong.

...

Yes, after Gregg pulls out, Obama "only" has two remaining Republican members of his Cabinet. I believe that would be a historic high for opposition members serving in a presidential cabinet (the usual number is "one"). Does Obama get credit for trying to add a THIRD Republican, putting him at 300% of the usual members of the Cabinet one chooses from the other side? Hardly. And when Gregg decides to pull out, apparently because Obama wouldn't just hand the entire stimulus bill over to President Gregg, he grabs his marbles and goes home. And somehow, this is a "blow" to Obama's efforts to be bipartisan - that Judd Gregg is a spoiled brat, and as a result, President Obama is stuck with "only" 200% of the normal number of opposition members in his Cabinet. Uh huh.

And this has been a call from so many corners of the media. Republicans don't like a bill, where is Obama's promise? Obama calls Reps on be obstructive, why is he so unbipartisan? Obama won't do what Reps tell him, why's he such a meany?

Apparently trying to work with the opposition means you're always in the wrong.

Judd Gregg

Andrew Sullivan has an interest look at this affair, with the whole hockey pokey in Commerce.

Gregg Was Pwned

It gets clearer. When Judd Gregg approached the Obama administration to see if he could be a part of it, he was assuming that his own party wasn't going to adopt a policy of total warfare against the newly elected president in a time of enormous economic peril. Between that moment and the current all-out ideological assault on Obama, his position became untenable. His recusal on the stimulus package provoked fury at home (check out the comments here) and dyspepsia among the GOP who are intent on responding to an open hand with a clenched fist.

...

Gregg And The GOP's War On Obama

Ambers and I discuss the Gregg pull-out, under partisan Republican pressure not to cooperate with the president...

The Census Canard

Again, this is not a real issue. It's an issue driven by the paranoid GOP base. The census has not been removed from the Commerce Department's purview, as Ambers explains below. And past censuses have long been conducted with coordination from the White House staff...

...

This issue was championed by Republicans for the usual "the-darkies-are-taking-over!" reasons. And Gregg's broad support for the kind of stimulus bill Obama has just got through the conference is a matter of public record. So the real reason for Gregg's departure is that he simply couldn't handle the backlash from his own party for providing bipartisan cover for Obamanomics. I guess they believe that assaulting the new president as he tries to reach out is their ticket for future relevance. Hello to all this ...

So to sum.

The GOP Has Declared War On Obama

This much is now clear. Their clear and open intent is to do all they can, however they can, to sabotage the new administration (and the economy to boot). They want failure. Even now. Even after the last eight years. Even in a recession as steeply dangerous as this one. There are legitimate debates to be had; and then there is the cynicism and surrealism of total political war. We now should have even less doubt about what kind of people they are. And the mountain of partisan vitriol Obama will have to climb every day of the next four or eight years.

He said Darwin...5 points

PZ Myers was nice enough to link to the video of Pres. Obama at the Lincoln dinner last night.

One thing that was a surprise last night was that Pres. Obama was actual able to, willing to, and eager to segue for a moment to one Charles Darwin, which I can't remember other presidents doing (not segueing from Lincoln to Darwin, but just talking Darwin...I was afraid it was in that taboo area you find Taiwan and Israeli nukes).

But this is the trend following on his continued references to nonbelievers in religious conversations and comments. Atheist have been leery of getting caught up just because the president is willing to acknowledge them as citizens and relevant. Though it was interesting to see some comments that nonbelievers wasn't the ideal term, then some suggested the term humanist, which was followed a short time later when the president used that term (again, something you just never hear from presidents). It is nice to hear, and as with the mention of Darwin it was meant to acknowledge him and hive accolades to the importance of science for the nation. It seems he is eager to support it. Real science. And while he has supported faith based initiatives, the president has also made comments about the value of secular charities and their place in this process, which I hope leads to this concept being expanded to incorporate the far wider selection of charities in this program.

Perhaps we can end up with a country where the occasional shout out is unimportant, as we are inundate with good science and a more secular society. But I'm not an optimist so I won't be saying it.

ADDED:

Some video that PZ Myers is pointing to.

Oh, Dianne...

Crooks and Liars is taking note of Sen Dianne Feinstein's work to add a little something to the Stimulus package.

Is Diane Feinstein trying to sneak draconian internet control legislation into the stimulus bill? It sure looks that way.

The Register:

US Senator Dianne Feinstein hopes to update President Barack Obama's $838bn economic stimulus package so that American ISPs can deter child pornography, copyright infringement, and other unlawful activity by way of "reasonable network management."

Clearly, a lobbyist whispering in Feinstein's ear has taken Comcast's now famous euphemism even further into the realm of nonsense.

According to Public Knowledge, Feinstein's network management amendment did not find a home in the stimulus bill that landed on the Senate floor. But lobbyists speaking with the Washington DC-based internet watchdog said that California's senior Senator is now hoping to insert this language via conference committee - a House-Senate pow-wow were bill disputes are resolved.

...

Anniversaries - NAACP

Today is the 100th anniversary of the creation of the NAACP, in the aftermath of a race riot.

100 years of hard work. Happy anniversary.

Anniversaries - Abraham Lincoln

Today is the 200th Birthday of Abraham Lincoln's birth.

Happy B-Day.

Anniversaries - Charles Darwin

Today is the 200th Birthday of Charles Darwin's birth.

Happy B-Day.

It's global cooling...cause I hand picked a bunch of people to support me.

SCIENCE!

Politico has run a story, unsurprisingly, just going along with the RNC talking points. Apparently, global warming/climate change, particularly the man made bit, is totally suspect and not worth much. As their article suggest, the evidence of global cooling IS MOUNTING. Climate change is growing SHAKY...in particular in the way it supports capping business pollution output (Should have figured that would be in there.). As is fun to notice with climate change deniers is how like the creationist they do sound (the evidence against is mounting, the prevailing opinion is on the way out).

But is just so nice to see that they are so open to support the attack on science. Of course...

...

More than 31,000 scientists across the world have signed the Global Warming Petition Project, a declaration started by a group of American scientists that states man’s impact on climate change can’t be reasonably proven.

...

Again, how many like petitions of "scientists" are out there in opposition to Evolutionary Theory.

They make some try at balance after quoting CATO, the Reps, and an alphabet of right wing groups.

...

Despite the growing science, the world’s leading crusader on climate change, Al Gore, is unconcerned.

“Climate deniers fall into the same camp as people who still don’t believe we landed on the moon,” said the former vice president’s spokeswoman, Kalee Kreider. “We don’t think this should distract us from the reality.”

Note they go in claiming "the growing science" should be swaying him.

TPM also interestingly notes that some like Fred Barnes are building there arguments to attack the prevailing science through...the former producer for Rush Limbaugh. He is the point person for the deniers in pumping out every misleading piece of info that can be accessed and spread.

Expect a rife and shit filled argument in Congress on climate change. Who is helping get good science into the hands of Congress?

Being a professional dick

Crooks and Liars looks at Alex Castellanos latest dickish behavior, in particular the fact that Nobel prizes are a joke as people like Krugman and Gore have dared not to mouth Republican talking points. How whiny.

...

Digby reminds us what type of man Catellanos is :

You remember Castellanos. He's the guy who made Jesse Helms' infamous "Hands" ad. He is, in fact Karl Rove's biggest rival for most negative campaigner in the GOP, which is quite a feat.

This person was on CNN throughout the presidential campaign, which makes some sense since he was in the capacity of "Republican campaign consultant." But he has no business being on television commenting on anything but dirty campaign tactics, which is where his expertise lies. He is a professional liar who admits to doing anything necessary to back his team and who even village "polite society" is squeamish about cable.

Why is CNN still giving this jerk a platform from which to do this kind of dirty work for the GOP? He should be on Fox where he belongs, alongside the other creepy political sociopaths.

I agree completely. As Glenn Beck turns creepier every day on FOX I think Alex needs to join him in a segment where they both can cry over the economy to the song "The Tears of a Clown."

Gibbs jab

I have to like the light jab Press Secretary Robert Gibbs gave the White House reporters.

...

Case in point: White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, on the presidential plane today, directly targeted cable news as out of touch with America when asked about polling on the stim package. From the White House transcript:

I think it’s illuminating because it may not necessarily be where cable television is on all of this. But, you know, we’re sort of used to that. We lost on cable television virtually every day last year. So, you know, there’s a conventional wisdom to what’s going on in America via Washington, and there’s the reality of what’s happening in America.

That’s not all. In response to another question about Obama’s scheduled rally today in Elkhart, Indiana, Gibbs directly attacked the White House press corps. “We’ll get to measure whose questions were better over the course of the day — the voters of Elkhart or the reporters of Washington,” Gibbs says.

There’s still more. According to the pool report, senior Obama adviser David Axelrod ran with this ball on the campaign plane, too, saying that the new Gallup poll proves how out of touch Beltway insiders are.

...

It is nice to see the light, but pointed, points to the media. Even last night some reporters seems to show that they do not get it. Baseball steroids? Consumers are to blame for this trouble? But hey, Ed Schultz lucked into a front row seat by Helen Thomas. I noticed that some reporters are peeved at having to effectively draw straws for seating, and...having to allow the likes of Huffington Post. I don't recall much interest in the old days when Gannon was in the scrum with them. Eh.

...tax cut?

PZ Myers looks at a funny comic about the path of Republicans.



If you have watched Republican talking points over the last decade and earlier it is amazing how consistent the call is. Whether in or out of power, in a boom or bust, with surpluses or deficits. The same damn choice offered. That, and increased military spending.

Measle mania

As certain groups seek to attack and avoid the critical need for vaccination, trouble brews around the world.

Dr. Plaitt:

...

However, for the outbreak in Switzerland, it does look like antivaccination insanity is to blame:

Switzerland has been affected by measles outbreaks more than other European countries in recent years because of the relatively low level of vaccinations and the presence of educational and religious communities that decline vaccination.

The outbreak described here indicates that anthroposophic communities are an at-risk group, because many parents in these groups choose not to vaccinate their children with the MMR [measles, mumps, rubella] vaccine. Anthroposophy, based on the writings of the social philosopher Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925), combines human development with an investigation of the divine spark found in all of nature. Anthroposophical doctors emphasize nature-based therapies that support the body’s innate healing wisdom.

Antivaxxers. For whatever reasons they believe what they do, they’re wrong. A previously healthy 12-year-old girl died of measles-induced encephalitis in a Geneva hospital last week. In 2008, a child in Minnesota died due to a disease that was preventable through a vaccine. Measles is on the rise in the UK. And some people are all too happy to spread the lie that the vaccines are causing all sorts of health problems, when it’s been shown pretty conclusively that they aren’t.

...

I see a horoscope in your future.

Dr. Plaitt takes a further look at the hooey of horoscopes.

Apparently there has been attempt to prove its validity through the Amazing James Randi.

Randi had thoughts on all this.



EDIT: To note, the horoscope part starts around the 5 minute mark, according to Plaitt, but the rest of the video is good, if you are a fan of Randi or the topics he commonly covers.

Brain dead, but good to go.

Feministing and PZ Myers have noted a troubling stand in Italy (well, one of many).

Italy is experiencing its own version of the Terry Schiavo case. A woman, Eluana Englaro, was in a car crash 17 years ago that caused catastrophic brain damage — she's been in a vegetative state ever since, and the family has been engaged in a legal fight for many years to pull the plug and allow her to die with a little dignity. They finally won that battle recently, and are easing her off life support and a feeding tube.

Cue the right wing. Silvio Berlusconi, Bush-like Prime Minister of Italy, has rushed to impose an emergency decree blocking the suspension of life support, a decision made after consulting with the Vatican. Here's a good rule: never consult the priesthood of a death cult before making a life-and-death decision. They always give stupid and evil advice.

...

Ah, Berlusconi stepping in and forcing his opinions yet again. Seems he and the Church are in agreement, if you can make use of a woman's body to produce children...she's good to go. But this is the church, what other use to they really ever see in women?

... The fact that the Italian Prime Minister (after consulting the Vatican, which was obviously a terrible idea) is using her reproductive capacity as a reason to deny her the right to die is absolutely absurd. This kind of logic really makes me wonder if more people than I'd previously thought really do see women as fetal containers.

Making nice with deniers.

As you may have seen the Pope wants to make nice with a sect of the church that was pushed aside in the past for various issues, including denying the holocaust. Yup, priests who refuse to accept fault on the part of Nazi for the deaths of Jews, and others, in those chambers in those camps.

After pressure it seems the Vatican is demanding a recanting of the claims. The response, he'll look into it. Can't even lie about his bigoted beliefs. He's dedicated, to being asinine. And he will take his time...to look at the evidence...you really don't hear about this type looking at or being shown this evidence and actually changing their minds, it's already well set. And now he is given a huge platform to spread his position and piss poor arguments. Great.

But Ratz wants to be inclusive...to all but the secular world. They he wishes to Hell. To bad it doesn't exist.

Obstruction

What does the whole of the Republican party want at this time. Mainly, POWER. Obama is in the way, so they attack. They lack a congressional majority so they clog the works. Reality is not on their side, so the try and clog the airwaves.

To this end, they try and scare any moderate from working for solutions, as bad as the solution may look from the left end.

Calling them wusses. Top GOP Strategist: Saving the economy through bipartisanship is for "wussy Republicans"

Turning to talk radio and Rush's army to do the dirty. The RNC begs for help on right wing talk radio

Plus they have got their new chairman out saying stupid things. Steele Address: Cut Taxes, Don't Spend, To Stimulate The Economy. Yeah, great idea. Keep using our ideas until things go bad. Then keep using our ideas until things are better. See our ideas are the right ones. Rinse and repeat.

Followed by the twit McConnell and his vow.

Mitch McConnell has released a statement saying that while he hasn't seen the full compromise plan, he has seen enough to say that Senate Republicans will still oppose it. ...

But now something more palatable.



AMERICAblog:

An excerpt on jobs creation, noting what's going to happen in different states:

From the beginning, this recovery plan has had at its core a simple idea: Let's put Americans to work doing the work America needs done. It will save or create more than 3 million jobs over the next two years, all across the country – 16,000 in Maine, nearly 80,000 in Indiana – almost all of them in the private sector, and all of them jobs that help us recover today, and prosper tomorrow.

Jobs that upgrade classrooms and laboratories in 10,000 schools nationwide – at least 485 in Florida alone – and train an army of teachers in math and science.

Jobs that modernize our health care system, not only saving us billions of dollars, but countless lives.

Jobs that construct a smart electric grid, connect every corner of the country to the information superhighway, double our capacity to generate renewable energy, and grow the economy of tomorrow.

Jobs that rebuild our crumbling roads, bridges and levees and dams, so that the tragedies of New Orleans and Minneapolis never happen again.

Stein the Martyr

The Chronicle of Higher Education has an article on Stein's ouster from speaking in Vermont.

The commentary is almost funny, if not so sad. This is a academic journal about academia, but the comments seem to have amazingly quickly devolved into a the big mean evolutionist and elite liberals pout fest. Apparently Dr. Fogel of the university is one of the main villains.

You sometimes forget the reach of ignorance.

Where is support for the package now?

Pollster.com has been looking at polling on support for the Stimulus package. Newsreaders and conservative pundits have been harping on a drop in support. Though the Gallup poll has remained steady, but that one isn't fitting the media narrative.

Of note:

...

Second, notice that both CBS and Gallup changed the dollar amounts, Gallup on their second of three surveys and CBS this week. Perhaps more important: CBS also made a subtle change in their verbiage. The old CBS question references a "775 billion dollar economic stimulus package." The new question calls it an "economic stimulus bill costing more than 800 billion dollars" (emphasis added). They needed to change the amount, but why change the sentence structure? And more important, does adding "costing" make some respondents realize that proposal is not a government giveaway but rather something they might have to pay for someday? Without a split-form experiment, it is hard to know for certain.

...

... Thanks to the reader who caught something I missed. Rasmussen also changed the wording of their stimulus question. In their first test in early January, the question identified only "Barack Obama" as the sponsor. Beginning with their 1/27-28 survey, that changed to "Barack Obama and the Congressional Democrats" (emphasis added). I have corrected the table above to reflect the changed wording

That change is important: While "congressional Democrats" are earning slightly better ratings than their Republican counterparts, their numbers are nowhere near as positive as Obama's. On the CBS survey, or example, Obama 62% approve of his performance as president, but only 48% rate the "congressional Democrats" favorably. Nancy Pelosi's favorable rating, using the tougher CBS format (that encourages respondents to report when they are unfamiliar), has dropped to just 10% favorable, 30% unfavorable).

...

Trouble in AntiVac world?

Dr. Plaitt is noting indicators that that godfather of the anti vaccination hysteria may not be so clean. I say that, but of course the research before and since his has already shown the fault in the opinions he's put forward. But it seems to be one more damaging point against them of the No pointy and No ouchies sect.

On the plus side for them it gives the nutters a new fact to deny and/or ignore.

Go! Barbara! Go!

With all the two faced whiny episodes with Lindsey Graham and others we just need to be so happy we have people with gumption like the grand Barbara Boxer. She calls out all the theatrics.

...

Imagine. After six years of Democrats being shut out of conference committee meetings, Lindsey has the audacity to clasp his bosom and clutch his pearls. (Here's the smelling salts, Lindsey!)

On Hardball, he was also crying to Tweety that the American people were opposed to this bill - as if, you know, the right-wing talk radio demigods didn't whip people up into a frenzy for that specific purpose.

So I really enjoyed watching Barbara Boxer call him "theatrical" and remind him of how few objections he had when George Bush sent enormous bills to the Senate, calling for a same-day vote.

"I will put my ability to speak my mind to my party up against anybody," Lindsey retorted, "including you, Senator. I have been up on this floor many times about policies I disagreed with."

Well, here's the thing. Much like my own Senator, Arlen Specter (R-Self Interest), Graham is most famous for his posturing on the floor, his principled indignation in front of the TV cameras - and his very reliable vote for the very legislation that seemingly so troubled him.

Painting himself as a "moderate, reasonable" Republican is his schtick!

So yes, Barbara Boxer is right when she calls his tactics "theatrical." That's the Republican game. It's never because they're obstructionists, it's that the Democratic bills are always without merit. They're not opportunists, it just so happens that they'd love to work on legislation with the Democrats - as long as they don't include anything that isn't a tax cut.

...

What makes me sicker the patent lies and fakery of Reps these days, or watching the likes of CNN and MSNBC newsreaders sopping the crap up like a fine sauce.

Setting the stage

It has been annoying seeing the media pushed seemingly willingly to embrace a conservative opposition of the stimulus package and economics in general. But to start to take on a Dick Cheneyesque approach to our defense is getting to be a bit much. Politico, looking for easy stories and having a former VP down the hall seem to be in hog heaven.

As Glenn Greenwald notes for Maddow, it seems to be about laying out an argument for why Obama is a failure in the aftermath of a potential terrorist attack. Now, GW wasn't after 9/11 for some reason, he even gets some strange cred for it, but the argument is being made preemptively against Obama. Really that is SO Dick Cheney.

Beck continues being a mad clod.

Glen Beck is a twisted jerk wad. He has given us all plenty of examples of it. And he has been trying to build a goofy little point of the socialist/communist ends of Obama's plans. But now he has veered back over to Stein territory, the Nazi's are back. And they are Al Gore.

Al Gore is creating another Hitler Youth, Glenn Beck feverishly warns

Gore has a gain went to kids to improve the world, go out and be active. To Beck this is mind control and Orwellian...asking kids to get active. You may know that this is a motif of Gore's going way back. He likes to talk at schools at inspire the young to know they have a voice and an impact.

Now when Rick Warren blantantly says he wants to have youth rise up exactly like those in Nazi Germany or Mao's China, nothing, no comment. But Gore is apparently evil.

Blair explains it all

In AMERICAblog, they have taken note of Tony Blair's "great advise to the world. Bring More Religion.

...

Tony Blair gave an extraordinary speech about the global importance of religion yesterday, telling an audience which included the newly-inaugurated President, Barack Obama, that faith should be restored "to its rightful place, as the guide to our world and its future."

...

Yeah, more religion. More prevention of family planning, more ignorance of disease control and prevention, more stoning people for defying religious commandments, more blasphemy laws, etc. Yeah, Tony, sharp thinking.

New Deal/Big Deal

Crooks and Liars looked at the continued claims being made against the FDR era New Deal. It deals often with a claim that they spent all that money back then, and it did nothing.

But as noted it is not so. Roosevelt was convinced to cut back on spending, to our lament.

...

You can read the mandatory rebuttal from Paul "Unlike Right-Wing Hacks, I Actually Won A Nobel Prize for Economics" Krugman here (I know, it's silly and old-fashioned of me to think Krugman might actually know more about the subject matter):

Net stimulus of around 3 percent of GDP — not much, when you’ve got a 42 percent output gap. FDR might have been more of a Keynesian if Keynesian economics had existed — The General Theory wasn’t published until 1936. Note in particular that in 1937-38 FDR was persuaded to do the “responsible” thing and cut back — and that’s what led to the bad year in 1938, which to the WSJ crowd defines the New Deal.

Implications for Obama: be inspired by FDR, but don’t imitate him slavishly. In particular, your economic policy should be bolder, not more cautious.

...

Bothersome is that a number of skeptics agree with this misread of history. People like Michael Shermer, who I generally find myself in agreement with, have a certain strange streak that leads them to be critical here and more partial to an embrace of just stepping back and letting the invisible finger and the mysterious forces of mercantilism make things right. It is odd. Reminds me of hearing Hitchens talk wittily about the flaws of religion and then segue into Middle East politics, he just veers into madness.

The conservative voice

Bernard Goldberg, has chosen to be a crank for a number of years now. He's been making the right wing rounds. The outright manipulation in his books have been noted, though not on these shows he visits. But he looked to be ready to go to talk to an actual media critic, Howard Kurtz, on CNN's Reliable Sources. Then he cancelled. Crooks and Liars looks at Kurtz's sharp reaction and challenge (Bonus points for adding Lou Dobbs to the list of conservatives that Goldberg feels safe with.).

Then you have Dick Army, who is noted now for his nasty demeanor to a female opponent. Are conservative so dried out of ideas they just have the cheap shots. What a Scarborough.

Having clout

Recently the University of Vermont announced that Ben Stein would be the Commencement speaker. This displeased a whole lot of people. Not because of his dilly economic opinions, or bashing of Obama. No, it was Expelled, and the all the bad science and bad attitudes he worked damn hard to spread. So scientist on campus and around the country complained. But it seemed to be of no avail.

But PZ Myers has noted a change of heart. Incredibly it may be that one voice in particular had an impact, Dr. Richard Dawkins. He sent a letter of complaint, explaining the concerns so many have with Stein, a staucn opponet of science recently, and he got a response back apologizing and conceding. Apparently, he had to bad out. We owe a big thanks to him. As well, we have to marvel that there are still places in this country that esteemed, sharp, and witty people have some sway. Ironically, in a different speech Stein occasionally likes to give I think he would applaud that idea. Then again, maybe not.

Anyone have a conspiracy?

Brian Dunning on skepticblog looks at the latest of conspiracies. In this case involving the flight that went down in the Hudson River.

In looking at it you can see the classic claims placed on a somewhat commonplace moment, an emergency landing. As it is the plane went down, and a competent pilot and crew kept it in one piece, and then ushered everyone off admirably, then local rescuers and boats swooped in with due diligence. It isn't a miracle, and, so far, no evidence shows a mystery.

Yet people will have you believe it is a lie, it is a trick, and it didn't happen. Why? Not to worry that will appear. Really, if you look at conspiracies they build up in amazingly twisted ways.

It is sad.

Getting it right on Darwin.

I was in Barnes and Noble the other day and noticed the cover of National Geographic.

Unlike New Scientist, NGM actually gets it right.

What Darwin Didn't Know

Says it all? Darwin had limited access to data, and resources in his time. And he did not have his and other contemporaries work to start from. What a measured approach. Learn something New Scientist, hmm?

Submit...Submit....No, just the women.

Kathryn Joyce on Alternet has taken a look at a creepy new movement to "make things right" in our culture.

This October, more than 6,000 women gathered in Chicago for the True Woman Conference ’08: a stadium-style event to promote what its proponents call “biblical womanhood,” "complementarianism,” or -- most bluntly -- “the patriarchy movement.”

...

The Associated Baptist Press explains the relationship of biblical womanhood to feminism, highlighting an ambitious initiative that arose from the meeting: a signature drive seeking 100,000 women to endorse its “True Woman Manifesto,” which, the ABP writes, aims “at sparking a counterrevolution to the feminist movement of the 1960s.”

To outside observers of the patriarchy movement, the starkness of the calls for gender hierarchy often seem amusingly outdated (not to mention historically misleading: feminist blogs Feministing and Pandagon have deftly dismantled some of the speakers’ Leave it to Beaver idealizations of the 1950s as a time when women were universally protected).

Though only just under 3,000 women have actually signed the document since its unveiling on October 11, the fact that it exists, and the campaign to gather such a large showing of public support, reveals something important about this movement: that its followers don’t view themselves simply as a remnant of polite, churchy women, holding out against a crass culture, but rather as a revolutionary body waging “countercultural” rebellion against what they see as the feminist status quo.

...

The terms of the manifesto (downloadable here) serve as a good shorthand description of the aims and principles of the submission and patriarchy movement. Signers affirm their belief that women and men were designed to reflect God in “complementary and distinct ways”; that today’s culture has gone astray distinctly because of its egalitarian approach to gender (and that it’s “experiencing the consequences of abandoning God’s design for men and women”); and that while men and women are equally valuable in the eyes of God, here on earth they are relegated to separate spheres at home and in the church.

The “countercultural” attitudes that signers support include the idea that women are called to affirm and encourage godly masculinity, and honor the God-ordained male headship of their husbands and pastors; that wifely submission to male leadership in the home and church reflects Christ’s submission to God, His Father; that “selfish insistence on personal rights is contrary to the spirit of Christ”; and, in a pronatalist turn of phrase that recalls the rhetoric of the Quiverfull conviction, their willingness to “receive children as a blessing from the Lord.”

Finally, in a reference to the importance of woman-to-woman mentoring within the conservative church, they affirmed that “mature Christian women” are obliged to disciple the next generation of Christian wives, training them in matters of submission and headship, in order to provide a legacy of “fruitful femininity.”

...

And with that I am skeeved out. I can't help but imagine the guys in this church being big time fans of Gor.

And the business of women having there own, separate, place in the church should bring a smile to Rick Warren's face.

And some people claim feminist speaking out is unnecessary.

FINALLY, returning to the fight

Atheist Experience:

The first step in de-moronizing the Texas State Board of Education has begun. In past years the Democrats have ill-advisedly ignored the SBOE, preferring more high-profile races in Texas politics. But with the current board overrun by anti-science creationist wackaloons who are turning the entire state into fodder
for late-night comedians, the Dems are finally extracting craniums from rectums and realizing that the neocon theocrats cannot be allowed to gang-rape the education of an entire generation of Texas students.

...

So at long last Dem's are returning to take on the duties of fixing TX education. It is long overdo. There is a need for better leadership in decisions for books, courses, etc. Time for Texans to act and get these people on the board...for the children.

It's good to be the reverend

We have heard a lot of Warren and Haggard. They have been put down. But look what else they get. Haggard was caught with meth and a male prostitute and eventual lost his position. But his church covered as many of his sins as they could, including paying off a young man who Haggard had a relationship with.

For Warren, while he keeps women in there place and bars homosexuals from his church, he has had trouble with taxes. Now, for some reason, the clergy of America keep to deduct their housing expenses from taxes. But it is limited. This offended Warren, why should he have a limited tax deduction. Fair market value, pfffft. No he wanted to be given his whole salary as a housing expense, plus mortgage deductions beside, not internal to that. So he fought, bravely mind you. And he won. When the IRS went to appeal, things looked bad. The ninth circuit would even look at the validity of any tax break for clergy housing.

As noted in The Nation:

...

Seeking arguments on the constitutionality of the "parsonage exemption," as it was called, the Ninth Circuit panel appointed Erwin Chemerinsky as a friend of the court. At the time, Chemerinsky was teaching law at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles; today he is dean of the law school at the University of California, Irvine (and thus my colleague). Chemerinsky observed that the housing tax exemption applied only to "ministers of the gospel"--not to leaders of secular nonprofits engaged in humanitarian work. He noted that the rule was established in 1954, at the height of the cold war, after a Congressman argued that "in these times when we are being threatened by a godless and antireligious world movement we should correct this discrimination against certain ministers of the gospel who are carrying on such a courageous fight against this foe." Chemerinsky concluded that the exemption represented an intentional government subsidy of religion, and thus it violated the First Amendment's establishment clause.

...

But Congress raced in and unanimity enacted the The Clergy Housing Allowance Clarification Act of 2002. This put down better rules to help the clergy and ended the case and the potential risk to clergy. Thanks Congress. So..in 2002 this was a priority?

...

Religious denominations from Reform Jews to Southern Baptists expressed their support for the exemption. But their goal was preserving their own exemptions in the future, not defending Warren's past tax returns. The bill could have established the "reasonable" standard the IRS sought for the exemption without letting Warren off the hook. Or Congress could have waited to see what the courts would decide about the constitutionality of the exemption before acting on it.

...

So a famous pastor gets in a bind and the whole of Congress acts. For a guy who was looking to sneak as much money passed the IRS. If a rich guy like him did that on Wall Street we would boo. We should boo Warren to, as well for all the other crap he flings.


America's religious leaders.


EDIT: I somehow had then renamed Haggard. It is fixed now.

Family Planning and Stimulus

It has been interesting to watch the hissy fits over the stimulus bill and family planning. As mentioned earlier Christopher Matthews followed the Christian Defense Coalition line about it taking lives away and making us like China. Others asked why it was there? This is a bill to spur jobs. And while it will do it to an extent, it is not as critical as others. So wile some have criticized newsreaders for questioning it, I was not as sure. That seems to be the narrative winning out in the MSM. This bill is for jobs, and that is it. Period. Really. Despite the fact the president has said repeatedly that it is not...That in a moment.

First, it is annoying to note how we are measuring job creation, "infrastructure." Nice word. What does it mean? To a lot of people it is the image of the road crew, out jack hammering, digging, and layering cement or asphalt, in your mind how many women do you see? When we are talking about putting America to work, do we just mean one part of it? If you look back to the New Deal, there were jobs to go around to men and women, to people of different skills. But we say infrastructure and a lot of people how only a certain group of people in mind. Women, white collar, tech sector, as well need to be put to work. But for some like Matthews it may just not stir the leg enough.

Back to family planning. They put up a fight on the grounds of job growth, but if you do listen and read to the presidents words, he is interested in hitting a number issues beyond jobs, including offering assistance to those that are struggling through this period. And that is where family service is invaluable. But they see it as a harm, they even have Limbaugh mocking Pelosi to further their point, not that that is new. Dem's have conceded on this, so it came out.

People are mad about this. But the president has tried to reassure people. It isn't over. Perhaps as early as next week we should see another bill dealing with health care that will include it. The fight continues and their chief argument will be gone, and they will have to fallback to their old ones.

SCHIP

Feminsting notes the SCHIP expansion. It has passed finally in the Senate. Took long enough, thanks to Bush.

Of course this is also an example that Republicans are trotting out now of how those mean Democrats won't let them get into some bills and turn them into pig;s brunches before voting on them. I mean, how unfair. How else are they going to sabotage health care for children, or support for those suffering in this economic wilderness we are in? Meanies.

Steele at the RNC

Michale Steele is the new head of the RNC. So a guy who onced pretended he was a Democrat to try and get votes is in charge of the RNC. Good for them.

Ce-le-brate

Since voting against stimulus for the country the Republicans seem determined to party. Apparently trying and failing to block aid, while offering up mist and vapors as an alternative is great. And I do mean that, as TPM notes the numbers they are using to attack and claim a better plan is ridiculous. And I have enjoyed the idea that some have pointed to apparent tax hikes in their plan. Yeah, celebrate a crappy plan of your own and general inaction and whining. I have a feeling inaction and whining are going to be growing traits for you.

Bipartisanship means not having to admot your not in power.

What is it about losing an election that has no bearing on Republican attitudes. Heck, they get worse. The president adds tax cuts, and they complain that there is too much spending and not enough tax cuts. Then he pulls out some spending they oppose and they complain and also mention the lack of tax cuts.

But the media is no help, to the president. Halperin who is too in love with the Republicans ideas, seems to see the president as a failure and far too partisan. Apparently not bending over backwards to kiss his own backside is a sign of being too rigid for Halperin, and others in the media. As John King and Chuck Todd have implied that the president needs a huge level of Republican consent to lead, or else.

I have to agree with the thinking on Crooks and Liars:

...

President Obama and the entire Democratic Congress were elected by the American people to change the direction our country is headed since conservatives have ruined our economy and most everything else under George Bush and the Republican led Congress. Villagers always fall back to their favorite term to smear liberals with. "Centrism." Only Democrats are supposed to be centrist in the minds of many Villagers, but never Republicans. Conservatives are the grownups and the left are dirty f*&king hippies who just want to trash the White House.

Listening to Mark Halperin in this clip should explain why blogs like C&L have gotten so popular. The Villagers are going to destroy this country. They helped Bush get elected over Gore, they led cheers for the Iraq war, and now they are supporting the Republican party at a time when this country faces a tremendous crisis.

Time and again. Dems need to concede on security, the military, the economy, leadership. Again and again, the presumption put forward by the media is that Dems don't know what they are doing and need the dad's in the Rep to lead and show the way. What is wrong with the media?

Obama wants the Republican input, to consider a range of ideas. But much of the media seems intent on selling the Republican approach. Bad media.

Not helping the debate.

As PZ Myers has noted, New Scientist has a new cover out.

It isn't helping anyone...that isn't a creationist.

This cover is going to be crowed over, copied, and sent around.

So, thanks New Scientist.

Still, if one actually reads the article it, as should be obvious, points to the need and reality that Darwin's work has been, challenged, changed, corrected, and surpassed in the years since, now, and in the future. It may well be worth the read for you, but the cover is going to give us all headaches for years to come.

Ledbetter

Hard not to be pleased to have the Ledbetter Act finally passed and signed.

Oh, the media

Some have noticed that the media been getting a bit more pissy. When they weren't allowed in CNN acted as if there was no media coverage of the second swearing in. This in spite of the camera and four newspeople allowed in. But they weren't there, nor was a video camera, so it doesn't count. And as the fight about stimulus has grown the media is strangely enamored of the Republican argument, one reader on CNN in the morning seemed to be getting downright livid about the state of tax cuts.

What's worse Matthews seems to be suffering relapses. As has been cited, he noted for two days how horrible family planning was.

Matthews: I don't know. It sounds a little like China. I, Congressman Gingrey I think everybody should have family planning. Everybody believes in birth control as a right. I'm for abortion as a right and all that. It's all right. But why should the federal government have a policy of reducing the number of births? I don't know why the federal government has an interest in that. They have an interest in freedom and people making choices but I just heard a case made by Congressman Wexler that it was in the national interest to have fewer kids. I don't understand that. (crosstalk) What did you mean by that? What did you mean by that? Why is it an economic stimulus...why are we talking about family planning as an economic stimulus program...(crosstalk).

Wexler tries to talk about education and assistance to families in need of information and help and all Matthews sees is baby killers...not that he is opposed to birth control or abortion rights...no. It's just family planning...kills babies... And what really annoys me is that they were in a discussion of spending and he jumped on this bit and would not let it go, then came back to it the next day. As was noted, the line about China comes write out of the works of the Christian Defense Coalition, who have decided that this topic is both racist and elitist. Way to pick sources Christopher.

None of this is helped by the notable lack of Democrats on the news. The trend has been to have Republicans and conservative thinkers and pundits on in far greater numbers. So when the R's ruled they were on the air, when the D's rule...why change things. Nice.

And sadly the rule of the hissy fit reigns, so the Republicans must be listened to and be right, so says too much of the MSM. Couldn't the newsreaders at least go on air without memorizing and using the latest Republican talking point fax? Come on. Particularly when it is easy to see how many of there numbers are being pulled from their collective ass.

Being on the left.

Juan Williams often is called one of the leftist voices on FOX News.

Feministing looked earlier at some comments he made about Michelle Obama.

WILLIAMS: -- she's got this Stokely Carmichael-in-a-designer-dress thing going. If she starts talking, as Mary Katharine suggested, her instinct is to start with this "blame America," you know, "I'm the victim." If that stuff starts to come out --

That is the liberal thought on FOX...so, can we all agree Juan Williams is not a liberal voice. I liked him back in the NPR days, he was pleasant to listen to on Talk of the Nation, but since he has been on FOX, he's not sounding so sweet. He's gotten shriller and almost seems to parrot O'Reilly. But a lot of people seem to go to FOX and it just does not have a positive affect on them.

I ain't afraid of no ghost...oh yes I am!!!

Dr. Novella looks at an interesting point that has long bugged the hell out of me.

As far as I know the mortality rate due to ghosts is zero. There are no credibly documented cases of anyone being injured or killed by a ghost. Besides - they are supposed to be immaterial, so how could they harm you? They might make you a bit chilly, or give you a severe case of the willies, but that’s it. I suppose they could frighten a weak-hearted person to death, in which case all we have to fear is fear itself.

...

And this is a common thing seen in the TV "reality" shows about ghosties. I understand the average person being jumpy with they saw something odd, it is a surprise, unexpected. But these shows...they jump, scream, and run. Granted they don't do it as much on Ghost Hunters, but it happens a little (Especially it was notable when they were in Europe with that Irish idiot, who was always running around panicked.). But on most shows they scream and run all over the place. They are trying, allegedly to gather evidence, and delve into the mystery, yet when their is a "physical manifestation" they bolt (I am looking you Ghost Adventures, bug brave guys yipping over bumps in the night, snakes, and prairie dog holes.). The moment they may be on the cusp of success they just quit it.

It comes off as kids playing pretend and getting themselves overexcited. Kids telling stories by flashlight, or by a fire. They try to act like adults, but... Maybe that is why I can almost find Most Haunted amusing. It is so ridiculous, it is hard to believe they want you to take it serious. But it is a silly. A video error is a ghost, a speck of dust is a ghost, a crack on an audio recording...a ghost!!!

As Novella notes, their is one hospital that has people claiming it is haunted and an exorcist is being called in. A place of medicine and science doing this. So psychologist around they could talk with? But we see this again and again, like in New Orleans after Katrina, the military brought in priests, for the buildings.

Buh...bye

New era

As has been noted on some sites. Check out the updates to Whitehouse.gov.

Change has come. Revitalizing. Welcome. It's a new era, with new images and ideas.

Sworn in and speaking up

(from CNN)

He's taken the oath. We know have a new president, Pres. Barack Hussein Obama, the 44th executive of these United States.

And he has spoken to the nation, and we have troubles, and we have work to do.

...

Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding documents.

...

TPM has the speech up for reading.

New Day

It is a new day. Just one hour until the United States has its next change of leadership, the next presidency will begin. The city is filling up as a write this, and the mall is packed, the stars are in, and the President-Present and President- Soon-To-Be are walking into the capitol.

It is a new day. And hope and eagerness is in the air.

A lot of hard work will be needed. But today we all get some excitement and joy. Along with some long needed relief and contentment that some bad things have passed.

The first address

President-Elect Obama gives his first radio address, and his team has the video on YouTube.

Nader stays true

Yeah. Much as he has been doing for the past several years Ralph Nader seems to be more and more of a crank. Years of do gooding, and now this is what he choses to be at the end.

As Crooks and Liars (w/vid), and others have noted, Nader has chosen to unapologetically call Obama a potential Uncle Tom, if he doesn't do as Nader wishes. And he continued to hold to it on FOX News, leading Shepard Smith to actually stand up for President Obama. Smith has found himself in this role more and more, as McCain's camp has become harsher and more off kilter. And now this. Must be weird for Smith. But he might be getting a taste for it, and, maybe, he will continue into next with it...Maybe.

Krugman and the Monsters

Crooks and Liars points to a great piece by Paul Krugman on the Monster Years. Ah, those years of reality shaping.

I got chills reading this brief, but very truthful op-ed from Paul Krugman at the New York Times. Barack Obama's win last night was just one step into the future, lets hope Krugman's words ring loud and clear for future generations - Beware the Monsters...

Last night wasn’t just a victory for tolerance; it wasn’t just a mandate for progressive change; it was also, I hope, the end of the monster years.

What I mean by that is that for the past 14 years America’s political life has been largely dominated by, well, monsters. Monsters like Tom DeLay, who suggested that the shootings at Columbine happened because schools teach students the theory of evolution. Monsters like Karl Rove, who declared that liberals wanted to offer “therapy and understanding” to terrorists. Monsters like Dick Cheney, who saw 9/11 as an opportunity to start torturing people.

And in our national discourse, we pretended that these monsters were reasonable, respectable people. To point out that the monsters were, in fact, monsters, was “shrill.”! Read on...

Celebrating

Ever see the end of Return of the Jedi? The celebration on Endor in the original version feels like the way these election night parties usually go. The updated ending they have since added, with parties breaking out across the galaxy is the feel that exploded out last night. People were partying across the country and globe.

Crooks and Liars has video and pictures from Atlanta to Seattle. Parties sprung up everywhere, including on Pennsylvania Avenue. Fun times last night.

The Speech

A Victory Speech for '08

Yes we can.

It is odd. I have been watching politics since Carter. I have seen too many close runs to not be skittish. Carter, Mondale, Dukakis. Then Clinton came, but Perot had an impact. Then I saw Gore have it taken away, and Kerry lose it and walk away.

So tonight. Democrats, liberals, progressives, and those hopeful of change, have a clear win. Someone who gives us a reason to be optimistic. And a surge in Congress to help.

Time for a good nights sleep and ready for the days, weeks, months, and years to come. Republicans have already been taking their shots and declaring failure for Democrats. Time to counter this. And it is time to prove them wrong.

Nite.

44

Well after nearly two years, it is over.

Sen. Barack Obama has been elected. The threshold was crossed, and his count is continuing. McCain has conceded, though his audience was surly (I wonder why?).

But now we wait for Obama, President-Elect of the United States of America, to speak to America and the world.

Also the media has noted crowds are massing outside the White House. Ah, the neighbors. I think they want to help the Bush's pack.

A historic day.

I VOTED

And you can to.

Early voting is on, and hopefully everyone is registered and raring to go.



My Little Story, from earlier today.

Here is the county courthouse.

Here is the front door, inviting early voters in.

Here is me voting for change. Oh hell ya!

Get out and vote, when the polls are open next week.

This needs to be discussed more.

Crooks and Liars looks at Rachel Maddows interview with IAVA over McCain's abysmal support for veterans, for all of his talk.

Includes video.

Obama called it.

Here's a video showing Obama in July calling the Republicans on what they are doing now. Plus the McCain footage is spliced in at key points in Obama's speech tp punch the point home.

More from McCain's base

In PA, at a McCain rally. Feel the love.

Muslim! Commie! Terrorist! European!

I have finally heard someone ask it.

(So kudos to Matthews for questioning claims about Palin.)

Is Sarah Palin an energy expert? Well? McCain and his cohorts claim she is. But I have never heard support for it, except she is the governor of an oil producing state and been on a board dealing with oil production.

But is that make it takes to be an expert? Would you ask the CEO of IBM to fix your computer? Or someone on their board of directors? No. They have experts to do that. Plus, oil? If you know oil, you know energy. Does not compute.

So while McCain and Obama have actually spent years on these issues, which I would argue should make them informed, Palin can't claim this. But again. McCain has chaired a commerce committee in the Senate, and I have yet to find him all that informed on commerce.

Of course at this point Palin and McCain are standing on such a huge pile of BS that will anyone really notice this turd?

ACORN

Have you seen the scary stories about ACORN? Voter fraud?

Josh Marshall of TPM gives you the gist of what is really behind the story, and its long history of being used to bludgeon Democrats in an election year.

McCain-Palin base

Andrew Sullivan has been pointing to some interviews on YouTube, talking to Americans about Obama. They are instructive in showing just why they want to shout and repeat Obama's middle name, Hussein. And why they want to see him as mysterious. It sells to their base.

From a McCain-Palin rally.


I voted for Hillary Clinton!
He's an A-Rab.



This is not all of America, or, I hope, most of it. But whay portion of the populace is entwined in the thinking of either of these vids? How many of us stay uninformed, disconnected, and recessed in our little niches?

Double Points

David Gergen was speaking on CNN and seems to think that McCain deserves some credit for not bringing up Ayers during the debate.

Does he? He couldn't do it to Obama's face, not that he could bear looking at Obama much. And not like the polls the RNC was running didn't show that it was actually hurting him on the stump.

How about going on afterwards with Hannity to do it? Does he get double points for waiting to attack Obama with cheap shots until he got to the FOX news studio?

WTF is going on with McCain-Palin

You have no doubt heard or seen the dipsy duo of conservative failure stoking audiences in the last week. They have been trying to imply and now outright say that Obama is...bad...evil...a threat to America. And in response the anger they have played on has risen to screams of "terrorist" and "kill him."

And now...

TPM:

From NBC's FirstRead ...

As seen at recent McCain events, this afternoon's crowd was vocal in their support for McCain and their anger with Senator Obama. At one point one man could be heard yelling, "Off with his head," when McCain spoke about Obama's tax plan. That enthusiasm was even more present during Palin's remarks, and as other observers have reported in the past, today there was a sizeable number of people making their way towards the exit after McCain's running mate left the podium.

Like I said, I think it's going to take a few burning in effigies to catch people's attention at this point.

What are they trying to build to? What is McCain trying to wrought? Does he even care, if he gets a shot a winning? And where is the media at describing what these rallies are starting to now become? What is remotely pleasant, or positive? Is it not important to talk about? They are going after the media, and minorities in the media (shouting slurs at a black cameraman). Shouldn't they take a stand (Like in cases where news people are attacked in war zones. They complain and talk about it.)?

Palin on

As the election proceeds, Palin and McCain seem to have decided to that it is best for her to not face the press. Some people think it would be best for her to head back to Alaska, but who's listening to that. But it is interesting to see that is the path they have chosen to take.

As Andrew Sullivan notes:

This is how Putin behaves. It is anti-American. It has never been tried in modern times before. It is a chilling attack on an open society and the accountability of its leaders to the people they serve. The press has a duty to stand up against it - and to care more about the process than its own precious reputation in the mouths of Hannity, Steyn, Palin and the rest of them.

And as many have noted, why does the media acquiesce? They give her full and unvetted coverage when ever she speaks. What more pressure is there on her?

But Palin is nice enough to have a history and connections ripe enough to weave dandy conspiracies.