...and I guess the online award for a production such as this one from Jed Lewison of The Daily Kos would be a "Webby"; if so, he certainly qualifies (here)...
...and Rachel Maddow reports on typical Repug opposition to a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency aimed at trying to curb the excesses of our supposed financial wizards, led by Sen. Robert Bennett of Utah (yeah, I don't know about you, but golly, I sure miss that ocean sludge - everyone should listen to every single word that Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Warren has to say)...
I have to admit that I hate to see Chris Dodd step down as the legitimate Democratic senator from Connecticut (his statement is here), but doing so allows that state’s attorney general Dem Richard Blumenthal to immediately enter and take control of that contest over teabagger Rob Simmons, former World Wrestling Entertainment head (with husband Vince) Linda McMahon, and Peter Schiff (here).
Despite some of the cozy business with AIG and Countrywide (made into a media sensation by the Murdoch Street Journal, among others), it’s safe to say that Dodd was one of the best friends progressives ever had (evidence is here).
But of all of the Dodd moments, this video captures one which may be my personal favorite (God, Bill Orally is such a toad - as if anyone is going to "change channels" after his "Oooga Booga!" warning).
Congratulations on a great career, Sen. Dodd – all the best.
(And by the way, for anyone who thinks the sky is falling all over the Dems only, this “Fix” article from Chris Cillizza of The Washington Post reminds us that, as of last Friday, 14 current Repug House seats are in play as opposed to 10 Democratic seats. And in the Senate, as noted here, Dodd and Byron Dorgan are but two Dems leaving, possibly to be joined by Blanche Lincoln based on this, while five Repugs are departing, and they would be Bond, Brownback, Bunning, Martinez and Voinovich.)
And speaking of political races (which will gradually become a hotter and hotter topic), it seems that we have another Repug entering the primary to win the right to run against incumbent Patrick Murphy for the 8th District U.S. House seat (here)…
Ira Hoffman, who runs a financial company, is the fifth candidate to vie for the Republican nomination.
The Solebury Club, a health club in Buckingham, is not the typical place one would announce his candidacy for Congress.
…
During a speech in front of family, friends - and a bunch of workout zealots - Hoffman criticized "the lack of fiscal accountability and the overreach of the federal government that is already threatening our constitutional rights and freedoms" and took aim at Patrick Murphy, the two-term Democratic incumbent.
"Mr. Murphy represents whatever Nancy Pelosi tells him to represent," said Hoffman, a 22-year county resident. "I will represent the people and their interests and not the special interests."
I’m not going to waste my time at this point noting yet again that Patrick has voted against Democratic budgets and also voted in favor of gun rights and expressed support for tort reform, with the latter two being particularly odious staples of wingnut orthodoxy. I’ll just let Hoffman and his playmates thrash each other and focus on the survivor of what is looking like more and more of a debacle every day (with, believe it or not, a probable sixth candidate likely to announce a bid this Saturday, as the Courier Times tells us).
And why stop there, I ask? Let’s make it a “lucky seven.” And I’ve got just the person to run.
How about it, Jay Russell? You managed to royally frack up the Bucks County Commissioners contest back in ’07, as noted here. Why not do the same thing to the Repug U.S. Congressional primary?
Or are you going to pass it up because you won’t be able to do a favor for Jim Cawley and Charley Martin in the bargain?
Update 1/15/10: Aside from the ridiculously benign treatment the teabaggers get in this New York Times article, the "takeaway" for me here is that there are nine Repugs vying for the right to oppose Patrick Murphy (and as noted, it would be 10 if Jay Russell declared also - no word on whether or not Mikey Fitzpatrick was one of the participants).
Finally, while I waited once more in a doctor’s office and/or hospital to tend to my recent medical need, I happened upon the most recent issue of Time Magazine and discovered the latest bit of Beltway punditry from Joe Klein here, castigating those baaad liberal bloggers once more for refusing to settle for three-quarters of a loaf on health care reform and steadfastly supporting the public option instead.
Klein kept beating the drum about how 30 million more people will be covered under the legislation that will hopefully one day emerge from Congress and make its way to President Obama’s desk, but otherwise, he really didn’t bother to constructively address the issues about the legislation raised by Dr. Dean, among others. And since I’ve already posted my brains out about this topic, I’m not really inclined to do that myself, nor will I choose to address yet more moronic faux equivalency by Klein and his pals between right-wing and left-wing bloggers (besides, I have to be cautious about too many keystrokes at the moment).
However, this stunningly idiotic excerpt from Klein really needs to be addressed…
The denizens of the left blogosphere consider themselves the Democratic Party's base. But they are not. For Democrats, as opposed to Republicans, the wing is not the base; the legions of loyal African Americans, union members, Jews, women and Latinos are. In the end, the sillier left-village practitioners are stoking the same populist exaggeration — the idea that Washington is controlled by crooks and sellouts — that conservative strategists like Bill Kristol believe will bring the Republicans back to power. The perversity of this is beyond comprehension.
Really?
Who the hell do you think has been primarily responsible from turning the Democrats into a bunch of perennial election losers into winners (and yes, the groups Klein mentioned definitely do play and have played roles, and Democrats have also been aided in no small way by the impact of incompetent Repug non-governance)?
Do you honestly think we would be where we are if we relied exclusively on accommodationist, triangulationist DLC LOSERS for the past three years or so (and speaking of which, how funny is it that their supposedly ideal candidate is contemplating another run, as noted here)?
Ordinarily I would shy away from “blowing the horn,” so to speak, about what left-wing bloggers overall have accomplished during this time, but given Klein’s insulting remarks, I feel I must do so.
This post from Chris Bowers states that bloggers raised over a million dollars for Dem candidates in ’04, and this states, among other things, that the so-called liberal blogosphere was “spectacularly effective” during the 2006 congressional campaign (the analysis of a conservative site, by the way, the hat tip for which goes to Outside The Beltway, another right-wing site).
And to get an idea of the left blogosphere’s impact in ’08, this tells us that Act Blue raised at least two million dollars (more on Act Blue here). Pretty nice work for a group that doesn’t belong to the Democratic “base,” wouldn’t you say?
We’re not going anywhere, Klein. You and your “brie-and-white-wine, please-pass-the-sweet-and-sour-shrimp” fellow stenographers will eventually grasp that fact.
And you’d better damn believe that our money is as good as yours.
(Also, I keep forgetting to note that I posted stuff here also.)
Update 1/15/10: More nice work by people from '09 who apparently are not part of Klein's Democratic "base" is noted here.
God, I hate it when someone who is actually good leaves government; I didn’t mention Sen. Byron Dorgan much, and that’s because I can’t recall a time when he didn’t do the right thing – as noted here, there is indeed no positive way to spin this (and the clip from 1999 below shows his true prescience, notably lacking among others in that supposedly august body – thanks for all you’ve done, Sen. Dorgan)…
…and here’s a mini “Special Comment” by K.O. on health care reform (he’s covered this previously, but it’s still important stuff)…
Once again, posting is going to be an issue because of my current adventures with our health care system and workers compensation, but I'll do what I can.
And even though it is now 2010, we of course are still preoccupied with health care reform (pretty safe to say that Ezra Klein has forgotten more about this issue than Flush Limbore will ever know...maybe one day, I'll try to put the collective experience I'm now acquiring on this issue into a post or two)...
More General “Terra! Terra! Terra!” New Years’ Nonsense
(By the way, there’s a reason why I’m not a medical professional – my self-diagnosis of a wrist sprain turned out to be incorrect. In truth, I have a broken arm…peachy. For this reason, posting will be highly problematic for a little while.)
As noted here, we learned the following from retired General Thomas McInerney recently (in the matter of the would-be “pants bomber” on Flight 253)…
McInerney: Because I believe that in the next 90 to 120 days, there is danger, a very high probability that a U.S. airliner will come down because of one of these bombers. And so, we've got to go to more than just the normal process that they're talking about now, we have got to go to very, very strict screening, and we have to use profiling. And I mean be very serious and harsh about the profiling. If you are an 18 to 28-year-old Muslim man, then you should be strip searched. And if we don’t do that, there’s a very high probability we’re going to lose an airliner.
Yeah, you know what, Former General Tom? I think we should do more to help al Qaeda in its recruiting efforts, instead of, you know, waging the legitimate war on terror (as opposed to the phony one in Iraq when we blew that country to bits) with common sense and adherence to the rule of law, and by doing so, showing up al Qaeda for the murdering cowards that they truly are.
And I just wanted to remind everyone that, if McInerney sounds familiar, it’s probably because he was one of the generals noted in this Pulitzer Prize-winning story by David Barstow of the New York Times about the military analysts who pontificate on TV about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan under the guise of objectivity, when in fact they run businesses that depend on access to the very Pentagon officials they are tasked to critique (time for yet another blogger ethics panel, it would seem).
As Barstow reported…
Though many analysts are paid network consultants, making $500 to $1,000 per appearance, in Pentagon meetings they sometimes spoke as if they were operating behind enemy lines, interviews and transcripts show. Some offered the Pentagon tips on how to outmaneuver the networks, or as one analyst put it to Donald H. Rumsfeld, then the defense secretary, “the Chris Matthewses and the Wolf Blitzers of the world.” Some warned of planned stories or sent the Pentagon copies of their correspondence with network news executives. Many — although certainly not all — faithfully echoed talking points intended to counter critics.
“Good work,” Thomas G. McInerney, a retired Air Force general, consultant and Fox News analyst, wrote to the Pentagon after receiving fresh talking points in late 2006. “We will use it.”
…
The group (of analysts) was heavily represented by men involved in the business of helping companies win military contracts. Several held senior positions with contractors that gave them direct responsibility for winning new Pentagon business. James Marks, a retired Army general and analyst for CNN from 2004 to 2007, pursued military and intelligence contracts as a senior executive with McNeil Technologies. Still others held board positions with military firms that gave them responsibility for government business. General McInerney, the Fox analyst, for example, sits on the boards of several military contractors, including Nortel Government Solutions, a supplier of communication networks.
And as noted in this prior post, Gen. Marks’ case was particularly egregious since he had been tasked to find the WMD in Iraq prior to the invasion, eventually discovering that they didn’t exist, but he kept hyping the war anyway.
Back to McInerney...
The full dimensions of this mutual embrace were perhaps never clearer than in April 2006, after several of Mr. Rumsfeld’s former generals — none of them network military analysts — went public with devastating critiques of his wartime performance. Some called for his resignation.
On Friday, April 14, with what came to be called the “Generals’ Revolt” dominating headlines, Mr. Rumsfeld instructed aides to summon military analysts to a meeting with him early the next week, records show. When an aide urged a short delay to “give our big guys on the West Coast a little more time to buy a ticket and get here,” Mr. Rumsfeld’s office insisted that “the boss” wanted the meeting fast “for impact on the current story.”
That same day, Pentagon officials helped two Fox analysts, General McInerney and General Vallely, write an opinion article for The Wall Street Journal defending Mr. Rumsfeld.
And by the way, as noted here, McInerney accused liberals and Democrats in general of “aid(ing) and comforting the enemy.”
Well, at this point, I usually respond with some kind of a dig or smartass remark, but instead, I’ll merely give my fingers a rest and embed this appropriate video instead (and yes, that is Richard Branson).
Update 1/5/10: I forgot about this choice item concerning McInerney.
I'm not sure how much I'll be posting over the next few days since I'm mending a bit from a wrist sprain (unless I can figure out how to type with my toes), but for now, I think this speech by Charlie Chaplin from "The Great Dictator" is a nice meditation to kick off 2010, which largely resonates to the moment IMHO (to offer some background, it should be noted that the film was released in October 1940, before the U.S. officially entered World War II, even though the war in Europe was definitely "on" at that point).
I live in the area of Philadelphia, PA, USA, specifically in Bucks County. My blog deals primarily with political matters and current events in the region where I live, my country, and the world (with other stuff thrown in from time to time), and I will comment on all of this as intelligently as I can. I will try to be judicious in my use of language, steering clear of most guttural profanity, but I will respond in what I believe is an appropriate manner to current news and events. My hope is that people across the ideological spectrum will understand that I am trying to see through hypocrisy on as many fronts as possible for the purposes of promoting informed dialogue.
Montana, Idaho, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, Colorado, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and of course, Florida
Profile Note
The reason why I have a photo of the late actor Patrick McGoohan (from the '60s) included in my profile is because the characters he has portrayed often show a strict sense of self-determination and a moral code of sorts as well as an inherent loathing and mistrust of authority. I admire all of that (even though I definitely don't look like him), so this is my small tribute.
Photo Note
Please "mouse over" photo for attribution - thanks.
One More Thing
I am not here to bash people of any particular ethnicity, race, or sexual orientation. If that is what you are looking for, then please look somewhere else. I know these topics push a lot of buttons, but I don't advocate physical violence against anyone (even Ann Coulter, who happily suggests it against the New York Times; Glenn Beck, who wants to kill Michael Moore; and the ever-popular Bill O'Reilly, who wants to decapitate Michael Kinsley), and all I ask is that you keep that in mind. Thank you.
Comment Policy
I probably should have done this awhile back, but I'm doing it now because it looks like I'll be moderating comments for a little while. Here are some guidelines: 1) If you call me a name in a comment, I won't publish it; 2) That it turn does not give me the right to do that to a commenter; if somehow I slip up on that, I'll owe up to it; 3) If you think I've said something ridiculous, I'll give you the opportunity to make your case, but it had better be a good one; I'm not opposed to that sort of thing, as long as the case is made constructively; 4) I'll give a commenter a couple of posts to publicize their own blog...I'm happy to try and and "share the love," but that will be all; 5) If I find that a repeat commenter (and yes, I have had them) is using the comment forum for their personal soap box over and over and not really addressing what I'm posting about, they will be banned; 6) I don't see a reason to use profanity in comments, though if you're quoting someone who dropped an "F" bomb, for example, I will cut you some slack. That's about all the policy-related stuff I can think of for now.
Legalese
OK, here's the deal: Any content I originate on this site is my property. Any content that I link to or show that belongs to someone else is their property. All the rights expressed or implied on either side apply and will be enforced. For more, click here and here. Does that about cover it?
