i m N s h o

My first reaction on hearing that Obama was releasing the long-form version of his birth certificate was that Trump needs to be careful he doesn't pull something, patting himself on the back like that. This was quickly followed by wondering what he and the tea-baggers are going to foam at the mouth about now. I shouldn't have worried. Donald's now off on a rant about Obama's school records (I guess Magna Cum Laude at Harvard Law's not good enough for The Donald). And the birthers have simply shifted from "where's the birth certificate" to "nice forgery, dude". (There's at least one jackhole that's convinced Obama's hidden hints as to his 'real' birthplace in this "excellent forgery".) Which only leaves me with this observation: "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."    --   Henry Mencken

I debated a lot of different titles for this post before settling on the one that most succinctly summed up my reaction to today's reading of "the Constitution" by House Republicans. (Read the Slate article below to understand my quote marks.) What House Republicans left out when they read (parts of) America's founding document. - By Dahlia Lithwick - Slate Magazine Aside from their selective sampling of the Constitution, I'm sincerely impressed by the shear arrogance on display here. After kowtowing to G.W. Bush's abuse of the Constitution (oft-defended by the glib remark "the Constitution is not a suicide pact") it strikes me as more than a little disingenuous to have these bastards trot out a bowdlerized version of the document to put the world on notice that they, apparently, are the keepers of all that is "good" and "decent" in this country. (And I've got to note that it's taken less than 5 days of these bastard...

It's possible Eve was right when she asked me what I was going to rant about after Bush left office. My rate of posting has certainly declined, and most of the time it's been pretty "safe" stuff… I certainly haven't gotten involved in any long debates about "the Digital Macarena", "SyFy" or the "2010/010" question, for instance. Admittedly, I've been stupid busy at work of late, and less inclined to distract myself with blogging in the middle of my lunch break (assuming, of course, that I'm actually breaking for lunch these days). And then there's Facebook and Twitter for those quick WTF kind of posts I've done in the past. But still… Excuses, excuses, right? Which is not to say there haven't been a few things that have piqued my interest lately. To whit… President Obama and the Cambridge Police My first reaction on hearing Obama's "The Cambridge Police acted stupidly" comment was to think how refres...

You know, it's kind of gratifying to hear the President say the same things you've been thinking (and saying) for years. Obama vs. Cheney: Contrasting views on the war on terrorism President Obama: Brutal methods like waterboarding… undermine the rule of law. They alienate us in the world. They serve as a recruitment tool for terrorists and increase the will of our enemies to fight us. As for Cheney's comments, while I make it a rule never to agree with our former VP, I can make an exception in this case. Former VP Cheney: …when the moral reckoning turns to the men known as high-value terrorists, I can assure you they were neither innocent nor victims. The fact that I don't support the use of waterboarding, "enhanced interrogation" or torture doesn't leave me thinking terrorists are victims of anything but the consequences of their own agendas.

A friend of mine took me to task last week for not commenting on the House passage of a bill levying a 90% tax on bonuses granted by companies receiving the Federal banking bail-out funding. I had to admit to him that I hadn't been paying much attention to the news recently, so knew nothing about it till he grilled me about it. But I also opined that, since it was directed at those particular companies, I wasn't too torn up about it. (I've already stated I'm not particularly taken by any of their arguments justifying the massive bonuses being paid out at this time.) He argued 'slippery slope' — "give the government an inch, they'll take a mile." I told him I understood the sentiment behind the bill and, while I might not be 100% behind the idea, I wasn't ready to storm the barricades protesting it. Then I read this in an article from Saturday's LA Times: BONUS BACKLASH RIPS INTO WALL ST. Rep. Brad Sherman (DSherman Oaks) said he was prepari...

Got a little of that "The King is dead, long live the King" thing working here. After yesterday's post, I kinda need a little closure to bring it all full circle. I don't have much to say that hasn't, I'm sure, been said to great length and probably more eloquently elsewhere. I watched the Inauguration this morning; the first time I've ever watched a Presidential Inauguration, I believe. I enjoyed the President's speech, found it gratifying to hear a man with the eloquence to command the English language, to make his points clearly and concisely, to call to action, signal change, and take a stance as the leader of this country. I found his speech moving, inspirational, hopeful. All things you would want at this time. I only hope we can live up to some small part of this hopeful promise, for it was an ambitious speech, and a challenge to us all. For now, it's simply "Welcome, Mr. President. Do a good job. We need the change."

Nothing quite like an inflammatory headline to grab attention, huh? [A quick note on "respect" before I get started. I absolutely agree that the office of the President of the United States is deserving of, and should command respect. But I also, fundamentally, believe that no individual can command respect. No matter who you are and what your office or title, it is your actions and your character that determine the respect you can command. The person inhabiting the office of President may start at an elevated level of respect, perhaps, but then this only shows how far a person can fall when one looks at the Presidency of George W. Bush. Anyone wishing to argue this point with me should ask themselves this question: Can you honestly and truthfully say that you afford the same respect to President Bill Clinton as you do President George W. Bush? I can think of no more polarizing Presidencies in recent history, so unless you can answer "yes" to my above question, I re...

The "Bush Legacy Tour" (as MSNBC has been referring to Bush's appearances since the elections) has been working really hard at the "we never tortured anyone" rhetoric. "We don't torture, we don't condone torture, waterboarding isn't torture…" we've heard all of it for years, but it's a more concentrated message in these waning days of the Bush Administration. (That and "you may not agree with us, but…" and "we're safer now then we were" and "no new terrorist attacks since 9/11!". All of these statements equally debatable — at best — if not outright fallacies.) The Tour got a kick to the groin on Wednesday when the Washington Post ran this story: Detainee Tortured, Says U.S. Official The real kicker here, of course, is who this US official is: The top Bush administration official in charge of deciding whether to bring Guantanamo Bay detainees to trial… So this wasn't one of those damn 'lefty...

Last week on MSNBC we heard the head of the Senate "Bailout Oversight Committee" (or whatever they're called) talking about the questions they're only now getting a chance to ask (such as, how's the money being spent, for instance), and expressing some concern that we may have rushed to get this bailout approved without fully vetting the whole plan. (At least, that's my take on what she was saying… to which I can only reply "gee, you think?"). Later in the week we learned that, due to a cute little loophole in the whole bailout plan, none of the banks and financial institutions that received money are subject to the restrictions Congress attempted to put on outrageous CEO compensation and other potential abuses. Turns out that the only institutions subject to such restrictions are ones that were bought at auction, as this was the original plan for distributing those funds. Instead, the banks were simply handed their bailout money and, apparently, tol...

Let me get this straight… We're okay with writing a blank check for $700 billion dollars to bail out Wall Street, no strings attached (no prohibitions on ludicrous bonuses, no salary caps on multi-million dollar CEOs — who certainly seem to be earning those salaries and bonuses — not even a 'maybe you shouldn't have those executive retreats this year' suggestion). But when it comes to bailing out the Auto industry, keeping those three corporations from going under and taking millions of jobs with them (along with those workers making significantly less than those Wall Street CEOs), well $15 billion is just TOO MUCH TO ASK! Especially with that damn United Auto Workers gunking up the works. Let's face it, nobody's had anything good to say about this Congress, and I'm sure we're almost as ready for a new session of Congress to begin as we are for Obama to take office. (Well, those of us that aren't still freaking out that Obama won, of course). But Sen...

I've been batting the phrase " paradigm-shift " around for a while now. With all the changes we've experienced in the past 20 years, with the changes imminent on the horizon — both for good and ill — the concepts, problems, ideas and beliefs that simply didn't exist 15, 10, even 5 years ago (when did you first hear the word Google?), could we be in the midst of a paradigm shift? (I am HARDLY alone in this thought, as you can see here .) Watching Tuesday's historic election, and listening to the discussions after Obama's victory was declared, I saw another sign of a paradigm shift. A lot can be made of Obama's victory, and it will take time to see if any of it rings true years from now. But I realized that, for all the overblown rhetoric, all the exaggerated emotion, there's a fundamental change that took place last night. Barack Obama is 47 years old. When he was born, there were parts of this country where his father could not have ridden in the f...

Repudiation was something of a minor buzz-word for a couple of weeks after the last Obama/McCain Presidential Debate. McCain took Obama to task for not repudiating inflammatory remarks made by a Democratic senator, then MSNBC took McCain to task every chance they could for his not stepping up and repudiating similar remarks aimed at Obama during campaign stops and other Republican events. As with most campaign moments, this burned itself out fairly rapidly. Watching the election results last night and listening to the commentators speculating as to what this could mean for the Republican party (which, to listen to the reports circulating today, is eating its own tail trying to figure out who to blame and how to bounce back), I found myself coming back to that concept of repudiation. I felt as if the country had stood up and repudiated the past 8 years of Bush/Republican/Conservative control of this country. Eight years of failed economic policy that's led to the worst stock market ...

Well, not so much, really… No candy for Obama fans | Otago Daily Times Online You've almost got to respect that kind of crazy. Or maybe just be afraid of it.  

Is it too much to ask that the woman running for Vice President understand what the job really entails? Palin Claims The Vice President Is ‘In Charge Of The U.S. Senate’ Apparently she's mistaken "President of the Senate" as meaning she gets to be the boss. (Or maybe it's a more ominous example of her latent megalomania coming to the fore.) Whatever the case, I really wish she'd do a little more reading: The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no vote, unless they be equally divided. You know, I've got a little pocket copy of the Constitution I got at a bookstore a while ago. I could send it her way, just in case she hasn't got one. Yeah, that's a donation I could get behind.  

You know, there was a time when I despised the notion of 'small town values' being somehow better, but at least I understood the argument, much as I might disagree with it. But our small minded Republican VP nominee has extended that notion to mean that the only true, real Americans are from small towns. Maybe that's because that's the only place she relates, and is relating to her. Maybe it's some notion that that's her base and by pandering to it, she'll accomplish something. Whatever the reason, I'm with Jon Stewart on this one: Jon Stewart Clarifies Palin Remarks…  

Wednesday's debate, seemingly, was all about Joe the Plumber, some guy I assumed was just a hypothetical that John McCain threw out to question Obama's tax plan. Turns out that Joe was a "real" guy (you'll understand the quotes soon enough), and the media's been all over him ever since. Joe apparently braced Obama at one of his campaign stops, telling him about the business he's worked for and wants to buy, but that he's concerned that, since the company makes more than $250,000 a year, he'll have to pay more taxes. Obama answered his question and moved on. McCain took that answer and ran it up the flagpole at the debate to see who'd salute. Turns out, judging from the polls after the debate that people were only slightly less interested in McCain's Bill Ayers jabs than they were Joe the Plumber, which meant Joe came in somewhere around second to the last in important issues raised at the debate. Media politics being what they are these day...

Masochism, I suppose, is what's prompted me to watch the last couple of debates between John McCain and Barack Obama. It's not like I'm still looking for that magic bullet that will help me decide who I'm voting for, like the undecideds the networks keep trotting out on stage after each debate. (Really, at this point in the election, how the hell can you still be undecided? I can understand not wanting to share that info — especially if you're voting for McCain. But undecided? Really? Ah well.) Anyway, the thing I was struck most by was just how much John McCain must truly despise Obama. The infamous "That one" crack is only the most obvious moments of disrespect shared between McCain and Obama. But at Wednesday's debate, he seemed almost unwilling to say Obama's name during his opening thank yous… pausing nearly a full second before coming out with "Senator Obama". And at the end of the debate, he couldn't even bring himself to do th...

See, look at me getting all biblical (sort of) here. I've spent most of the last week or two watching, with a mixture of horror and amusement, as Sarah Palin showed off her ignorance of things inconsequential ( Achilles' Heel , anyone? Buehller?) to critical (you know, that pesky Constitution )*. But late last week I started seeing videos of Palin's appearances and the crowds she's drawing. Seems that her 'everyman' approach — playing to the 'common citizen', reaching for the Lowest Common Denominator in American politics, as it were — has succeeded in bringing out the worst of the LCD in the body politic… the fearful, the hateful and the terribly confused. Watching one of these videos gives you the feeling that every narrow-minded, NIMBY jackhole in the country is flocking to Palin because they somehow see her as a reaffirmation of their convictions that Obama is the devil. What is horrifying here (and has been commented on repeatedly, from both ends...

Old news by now, but it's taken me this long to even try and get my head around this headline. Tab for financial bailout: $700,000,000,000 Then again, Bush was all over the place yesterday, assuring everyone the sky was falling and we're all going to hell in a handbasket if we don't pass his bailout bill. So I guess I haven't missed my chance to rant. What's truly staggering about this plan isn't the price tag, frightening as that is. It's this little tidbit: But the most distinctive -- and potentially most controversial -- element of the plan is the extent to which it would allow Treasury to act unilaterally: Its decisions could not be reviewed by any court or administrative body and, once the emergency legislation was approved, the administration could raise the $700 billion through government borrowing and would not be subject to Congress' traditional power of the purse. That's right, we're going to give the Treasury Secretary a $700 BILLION b...

Just because I can always appreciate a little hyperbole… McCain-Palin: 15th Century Solutions for the 21st Century. Of course, it doesn't hurt that I agree with the cause.