Friday, May 13, 2011

Friday Stuff

Because of the recent Blogger kerfuffle, I’ve now got a bunch of stuff in my “in” box that I’ll try to get to as soon as I can.

In the meantime, to help keep this ad on the air, click here…

…and good for Jon Stewart; as “values” issues go, this one is particularly stupid (and as Think Progress notes here, Dubya once hosted a “Russell Simmons Def Comedy Jam” at the White House full of people who hated the Iraq war, and what did we hear from the wingnutosphere? Cue the sound of crickets…again.)…

…and yep, keep turning up the heat on the Koch Brothers (and kudos to Reverend Billy...more here)…

…and gee, just a little retro, huh (in the look, anyway).

At Long Last, Baby Newton Leroy Enters The Fray

(Note: I will attempt to regenerate this from yesterday…love and kisses to Blogger for crashing and blowing up this post…)

I have to admit that I was a bit surprised by the news that disgraced former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich finally decided to go “all in” for the Repug 2012 presidential nomination, but based on this, he has (I mean, I thought he was doing so well in his role as pundit/consultant/right-wing media personality…a move like this will only dredge up a whole bunch of stuff that will remind voters how truly awful Gingrich was when he held public office).

And as part of that effort, I hereby offer the following:

As noted here…
Gingrich dismantled the committee system that had evolved in the decades following the revolt against Speaker Joe Cannon in 1911. He reduced committee staffs, diminished the authority of committee chairs, and reached around ranking Republican committee members to promote his loyalists, ignoring the established seniority system. The chairs he put in place were required to take loyalty oaths, making them an extension of the leadership office. Gingrich also reserved a large number of desirable committee appointments for freshman he helped elect in 1994. The result was a shift from a “committee-based process” to a “partisan leadership-based process.” Power that had been diffused among committee chairs was and remains concentrated in the leadership.
  • Here, he waited for the voters to come to him in 2008 asking him to run (they didn’t, as it turned out…the post tells us more on the fundraising tactics of Gingrich that are now boilerplate for the Repugs as a party).

  • Here, he said we need “a different set of rules” to fight terrorism, uttered the mindless tautology “Real Change Requires Real Change” and advocated for funding science and R&D even though he proposed funding cuts in those areas during his ruinous term as House Speaker.

  • Here, he “quoted poetry, studies, historians, Greeks, (and) the moderns” over dinner with Paul Wolfowitz while Rummy aide Steve Herbits tried to get Newt and Wolfie to come up with a way to convince Dubya in’04 that “deadlines have their virtues” when it comes to our troops in Iraq here (from “State of Denial” By Bob Woodward…made even more ridiculous when you realize that he bailed on serving our country here).

  • Here, he called for a “space-based, air traffic control system” along with other stuff like redirecting oil from the strategic petroleum reserve, cutting the census budget, establishing national “right to work” legislation and making English the official language…and speaking of language, Gingrich referred to Spanish as “the language of living in the ghetto” here.

  • He was promoted as an “idea factory” by Matt Bai of the New York Times here and here (notice the story doesn’t say good ideas).

  • Here, he said he thought he was “closer to Benjamin Franklin than George Washington” (not lacking in the ego department, of course).

  • Here, he blamed the 2009 Virginia Tech shootings on “liberalism” (what a creep).

  • Here, he wanted to “cut the corporate tax rate from about 35 to 12 percent, eliminate the estate and gains taxes (of course), and implement a two-year, 50-percent payroll tax reduction.”

  • He said we should “repeal health care” here.

  • He said Obama “cares more about protecting the rights of terrorists than Americans” here (uh huh, and that’s why he was the president who got bin Laden instead of Dubya or Bill Clinton).

  • He originally proposed only two months of welfare for women and children who qualified for assistance here (so much for the Beltway mythology that he and Bill Clinton crafted some kind of solution on this way back when…basically, “The Big Dog” had to drag Newt kicking and screaming, as per usual).

  • Oh, and while Flush Limbore screamed about the so-called “Slaughter solution” for passing health care reform under a “deem and pass” measure through a self-executing rule, it should be noted that, while Gingrich was House speaker, Republicans “soon lost their aversion to self-executing rules (when they took power in that body in 1995) and proceeded to set new records under Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.). There were 38 and 52 self-executing rules in the 104th and 105th Congresses (1995-1998), making up 25 percent and 35 percent of all rules, respectively (here).

  • Here, he described the 2010 election as an ideological battle between “paychecks and food stamps,” totally forgetting of course that, at this point, one in eight Americans receive food stamps (and if that isn’t a depressing economic indicator, I don’t know what is).

  • He said “the world” was happy with the GOP election result in 2010, when in reality, quite the opposite is true here.

  • As noted here, James Cole, the deputy U.S. AG who received a recess appointment by President Obama (who I recently posted about here) was the guy who unraveled the hidden, interlocking network of non-profits used by Gingrich (popularly referred to as "Newt, Inc.") to finance a jet-setting political lifestyle that, once revealed, forced him from office and brought down a $300,000 fine on his head.

  • Gingrich said Obama has “diminish(ed) churches and charities,” even though the Murdoch Street Journal, of all places, said here that “President Barack Obama's willingness to keep Bush-era policies on government-backed religious charities opposed by many liberals is helping to woo traditionally Republican evangelical leaders who can influence key blocs of voters.”

  • He wants to abolish the EPA, as noted here.

  • He said the U.S. should “go to war with Libya” because NATO “won’t bring much to the fight” here (not surprising I guess for someone who was able to escape military service as noted above).

  • He called for a ban in response to the imaginary threat of Shia law here.

  • Gingrich is being bankrolled by Sheldon Adelson, “a casino mogul with legal woes,” as noted here (Adelson is actually a lot more than that; among other things he was the “sugar daddy” behind Freedom’s Watch, a group of Iraq war cheerleaders that also included Ed Snider of Comcast and the Philadelphia 76ers/Flyers).
  • As an exclamation point of sorts (and perhaps as a bit of a mea culpa for its fawning coverage), the New York Times also took the proverbial stroll down memory sewer with the recently-declared-for-president nominee here.

    It really tells you something about how pitiful the executive field is for the “loyal opposition” and the party currently in charge of the U.S. House that someone with Gingrich’s toxic history is actually taken seriously, but that is where we are. And I’m sure we can look forward to at least another year of bombastic propaganda and self-serving faux moralism from this (among other things) serial philanderer (and here and here are updates from yesterday).

    God, I hope he wins the nomination!

    Update 5/14/11: Keep digging that hole, Newt.

    Update 5/15/11: WAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

    Update 1 5/17/11: WAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Update 2 5/17/11: Just say "oops" and get out, Newt.

    Wednesday, May 11, 2011

    Wednesday Stuff

    Not sure about posting today, so here are a couple of videos instead (drink up, fellow citizens of our beloved commonwealth, while you can - more here)...

    ...and yeah, I was wondering if someone in our media was going to react to this too - fortunately, Jon Stewart did here (as usual, waay too much non-pushback against the Bushco cretins).

    Tuesday, May 10, 2011

    Tuesday Stuff

    Oh, and concerning the Repug candidates debate, it looks like we didn't miss much (and just once I'd like to see one of these nitwits called out for claiming that "gumint" is in the way of our wonderful, job-creating private industry machine, which really isn't doing much these days)...

    ...and happy 65th birthday to Dave Mason - sorry, no video.

    Tuesday Mashup (5/10/11)

  • I give you the following from Fix Noise here…
    President Obama's nominee to be Attorney General Eric Holder's top deputy at the Justice Department crashed into a Republican roadblock in the U.S. Senate on Monday, garnering just 50 votes, 10 short of the number needed to break a GOP-led filibuster. Dick Lugar of Indiana was the lone Republican to support the nomination. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., switched his vote at the last minute to 'no' in order to have the vote reconsidered at a later date.

    James Cole, a veteran Washington attorney nominated in May, had been serving in the position since late December courtesy of a presidential recess appointment, one that expires at the end of the current session of Congress. And despite the bipartisan support of eight former attorneys general, Republicans remained steadfast in their opposition, though nothing about Monday night's vote changes Cole's temporary job status.

    GOP problems with the deputy attorney general are two-fold. Not only is there concern about Cole's tenure as an independent consultant to insurance industry giant AIG prior to the company's near-collapse in 2008 and its subsequent government bailout, but Republicans also voiced strong concern about what they believe to be his soft-on-terrorism stance.
    Oh yes, how dare that dastardly James Cole favor trying terrorists in civilian court as opposed to military commissions. What, is he actually trying to convict these people instead of making political hay?

    I realize that a well-connected individual like Cole really doesn’t need me to plead a case for the job of deputy AG that he’ll probably get as a recess appointment once more. And I suppose you could argue that he could’ve blown a whistle or two on AIG but didn’t do so. However, I think it’s laughable to hear Grassley carry on against AIG when, as noted here, he voted against the financial reform measure that at least represents something to try and head off the next “bubble to bust” economic cycle that would no doubt reap more millions for AIG and their fellow crooks.

    As noted here, though, concerning another Obama recess appointment…
    Chuck Grassley’s press release Monday afternoon decrying the recess appointment of Undersecretary of Treasury Jeffrey Goldstein is a case of the Republican’s intentional stalling of the cleanup of Wall Street because of his lifelong commitment to deregulation.

    President Obama nominated Jeffrey Goldstein as Undersecretary of Treasury for Domestic Finance to clean up the Wall Street mess caused by Chuck Grassley’s lifelong commitment to deregulation. Mr. Goldstein had been waiting to have his nomination voted out of the Finance Committee for 248 days when the President made the recess appointment.

    By contrast Ronald Reagan’s nominee for Undersecretary of Treasury Roger W. Mehle, Jr., who vigorously pursued the deregulation of Wall Street, was nominated on March 3, 1981, testified before the Senate Finance Committee on April 23 and 28, 1981, and was confirmed on July 13, 1981, for a total of 132 days. The Finance Committee finished its hearings on Mehle in 56 days.

    Chuck Grassley as a freshman U.S. Senator voted to confirm a disciple of Wall Street deregulation in 132 days, but couldn’t even finish vetting the person nominated to clean up the mess in 248 days. Chuck Grassley’s slow pace in vetting and confirming Jeffrey Goldstein is proof that he doesn’t want to clean up the Wall Street mess caused by his lifelong commitment to deregulation.
    Also (from here)…
    If the controversy over Cole were simply about the large AIG stain on an otherwise distinguished career, we might consider this as just another case of “failing upward” in our nation’s capital. But the fact that the man appears to have his head screwed on straight in War on Terror terms is quite remarkable. I don’t believe there’s another example of an anti-Terror Warrior at this level in the Obama administration. How’d he get by the personnel vetters in the White House? Cole and Holder must be some pals. And Holder is likely out of chits with the President for the foreseeable future. The progressive media might seek Cole out for his views on germane topics. He might become a regular on “Democracy Now!” If Cole adds even a little sanity and balance to an Obama Justice Department heretofore determined to wage the War on Terror nearly as furiously as The Decider, the recess appointment will have been worth it.
    And as noted here, Grassley has no problem smearing those who would see justice done even on behalf of some of the most execrable people on earth (besides AIG, I mean).

  • Next, Repug U.S. House Rep Lamar Smith of Texas (natch) opines as follows here…
    A recent editorial, “The fight for the DREAM Act: Faltered but not fallen,” tells only one side of the story.

    It’s easy to be sympathetic to illegal immigrant children who were brought here by their parents. Because their parents disregarded America’s immigration laws, they are in a difficult position. But by granting citizenship, the United States would actually reward their illegal immigrant parents who knowingly violated our laws.

    The DREAM Act perpetuates the problem it claims to solve and penalizes citizens and legal immigrants. Once they become citizens, illegal immigrants could petition for their parents to be legalized. The parents could then bring in others in an endless chain.

    This would undoubtedly encourage more illegal immigration.
    In response I give you this (here)…
    The DREAM Act would have made eligible for citizenship immigrants who were brought to the country illegally before age 16 and served in the military or went to college for two years.

    If the so-called DREAMers met all the requirements for eventual citizenship, they would be awarded conditional residency for a period of 10 years, during which they had to complete the college or military service requirements and stay out of trouble.

    After becoming a permanent resident, an applicant would have to wait an additional three years before applying for citizenship.

    Once U.S. citizens — which could be 15 to 20 years after they first applied under the act — DREAMers could petition for parents or siblings to gain legal status.
    So sure, maybe after 15-20 years, those who would have completed their college degree or military service could petition to obtain legal status for their parents. However, if they were to meet those requirements, I personally would not have an issue with that.

    Smith also tells us that…
    The president wasn't able to pass the DREAM Act when he had large Democratic majorities in the House and Senate because of bipartisan opposition. And American families opposed it, too.
    Well, that doesn’t square with the Gallup polling results noted here from last December, in which a “slim majority” approved the DREAM Act.

    This is typical for Smith who, as noted here, wants to end “birthright citizenship” altogether (though doing that kind of flies in the face, as it were, of the U.S. Constitution those zany teabaggers courted by Smith claim to love). Also, as noted here, Smith once claimed that border violence took 28,000 lives, which Politifact said was a lie (the number was closer to 12,000…also, a good response to The Orange One on that issue is here).

  • Finally, in local area political stuff here in Bucks County, I give you the following…
    I keep hearing about Better Pennsbury, the special interest group that brought us Simon Campbell and Allan Weisel. These two school board members were recently responsible for derailing a meeting with a state mediator between negotiators for the school board and the teachers union.

    Well, they are offering us a new slate of candidates. I have been skeptical of this group since receiving a slanted email warning me of the impending doom facing our school district if action was not swift and immediate. I visited their website to see what positive actions they recommend for making a Better Pennsbury. To my dismay, this is what I found:

    Home page: Six articles attacking the teachers union and none on improving education, providing rewarding experiences for students, or anything actually related to the education of children.

    Issues page: Five topic areas devoted to misleading tax fears and anti-union rhetoric. Again, none on improving education, providing rewarding experiences for students, or anything actually related to the education of children.

    Salaries page: An entire page devoted to providing public information that is already public, and making it seem like it was being kept secret from the poor unsuspecting taxpayer, adding an attack on teachers as a bonus.

    What's New page: Once again providing public information, that is already public, and again leaving the underlying message that this information has been kept from the poor unsuspecting taxpayer in the past. And surprise, surprise, more anti-union rhetoric.

    It seems to me that this group, and the candidates they support, have only one suggestion to create a Better Pennsbury ... get rid of the union. Now I know many of us have differing opinions about the value of unions and what they have meant to the American workforce, but we can all agree that they are not the root of all evil. Eliminating the unions will not right any shortcoming in the American education system. It is not the silver bullet that will forever take away the concern of higher property taxes.

    Fooling us once by hiding your one-goal agenda under a name like Better Pennsbury, shame on you! Fooling us again by getting us to vote for your one-goal candidates, shame on us! Let's tell this vocal minority, we won't be fooled again. Vote on May 17 for candidates who are truly interested in taxpayers and education.

    Region 1: Gene Dolnick.
    Region 2: John Palmer, Jacqueline Redner and Gary Sanderson
    Region 3: Linda L. Palsky

    Kevin Kopp
    Lower Makefield
    One of the individuals running for the Pennsbury school board from “Better Pennsbury” is Steve Kosmorsky, someone who pretty much was recruited by Campbell and Weisel to be their rubber stamp in pursuit of a teacher’s strike (which is Better Pennsbury’s ultimate goal). Kosmorsky actually visited Le Manse Doomsy a month or so ago, and I’ll give him credit for making a professional appearance. However, I later checked his information on teacher salaries and benefits for the school district and found out that they were pretty much BS for anyone who was either new or had about 5 or so years of experience in the field. Kosmorsky also stressed the urgency of reining in the supposedly grandiose salaries and perks being awarded to Pennsbury teachers because of Harrisburg’s money troubles, and I said that the troubles in Harrisburg wouldn’t be what they are if Tom “Space Cadet” Corbett hadn’t shoveled money out the door to his pals with tax cuts; in response, Kosmorsky ignored what I said and continued with his spiel.

    On top of the school board elections, I would remind anyone out there in Lower Makefield that we’re going to be voting for three township supervisors on May 17th also, and we really need to get behind Ken Seda and Ron Schmid, and Ron Smith running for re-election as an independent. We’re already seeing the effects of majority Republican rule in our township (crumbling roads – and yes, I know local economies have it tough all over – and zero funding for preserving open space); I remember what it was like the last time Republicans ruled our board for an extended duration (hell, we wouldn’t even have been able to watch the proceedings had it not been for Dem Steve Santarsiero), and I don’t want to see that again.
  • Monday, May 09, 2011

    Monday Stuff

    Suffer the snotty-nosed little children, with their J Crew, their Google Droids and their Lexuses (Lexi? Hat tip to

    ...and I don't know if this fits the video above or not, but it's not too often you see a cello in a rock song like this.

    Monday Mashup (5/9/11)

  • Lurita Doan is back to inflict the following here at today…
    It's déjà vu all over again. Democrats in congress have re-introduced a small business –jobs bill that has no hope of helping small business. Pandering to labor union interests, filled with Democrats’ flawed understanding of what creates private sector jobs, and crammed full of recycled regulations from the failed Waxman-Markey Energy bill, H.R. 870 is dangerous legislation that uses buzz words rather than sound business principles to encourage small business growth and job creation.
    And here is more “buzzword bingo” from Doan, as long as she “went there”…”tired, failed policies of Democrats’ left-wing, extremist base,” “failed Democrat legislation” (typical for a “Republic” Party flunky like Doan), “socialism” (of course), “ACORN” (of course), “hubris and delusions of innovation,” etc., etc. (and by the way, nice touch for Doan, an African American, to accuse Obama of “enslaving” a younger generation and their children – to what, it is not made clear).

    As Doan notes, the subject of her ugly (and typically incorrect) rhetoric is indeed H.R. 870, a bill sponsored by Dem John Conyers of Michigan, as noted here; the Common Dreams article also tells us the following…
    We can create a society with plentiful jobs and equitable taxation. And H.R. 870 is a good place to start. But we need more members of Congress to cosponsor and loudly endorse the bill.

    Unlikely to get through Congress? Sure -- if we don’t fundamentally reframe the national debate. That means going where few elected officials, especially President Obama, have dared to tread.

    Jobs are a human right . . . and no one has a right to rip off our society to make themselves filthy rich through speculation and fraud. It’s time for Wall Street to pay.

    “If this financial crisis taught us anything,” Obama declared on the night he was elected president, “it’s that we cannot have a thriving Wall Street while Main Street suffers.” But in 2011 we have a thriving, even bloated Wall Street -- while many can’t find a job.
    As Doan snidely notes, the bill is paid for by “a modest tax on Wall Street stock and bond transactions,” which makes it deficit neutral (of course, Doan would still complain if the bill did not contain the tax, accusing the “Democrat” Party of running up the deficit – the Conyers bill, by the way, is an update to the Humphrey-Hawkins bill signed into law by President Carter in 1978).

    For Doan to yammer about good government anyway is beyond a joke, considering how she politicized the GSA when she ran it under our prior ruling cabal (here). And besides, somebody in government has to act like adults and try to pass a jobs bill (the Dems by default), because, as noted here…

  • And continuing with jobs and the economy, former Bushco econ “guru” N. Gregory Mankiw of the New York Times opined here yesterday as follows on the economy (and three guesses who gets blamed)…
    Economists will long debate whether President Obama’s policies are to blame or the patient was just sicker than his economists realized. But there is no doubt that the pace of this recovery will come nowhere close to matching the one achieved after the last deep recession, when President Ronald Reagan presided over a fall in the unemployment rate from 10.8 percent in December 1982 to 7.3 percent two years later.

    Looking ahead, an open issue is whether the recession will leave scars that prevent a return to jobless rates that were considered normal just a few years ago. A striking feature of today’s labor market is the rise of long-term joblessness. The average duration of unemployment is now almost 40 weeks, about twice what it reached in previous recessions. The long-term unemployed may well lose job skills and find their future prospects permanently impaired. But because we are in uncharted waters, it is hard for anyone to be sure.
    Yes, we are in “uncharted waters.” And a big part of the reason why is because of the accelerated pace of offshoring, which Mankiw once called "just a new way to do international trade” here and “a plus for the economy in the long run” (I wonder, then, if telling all of our corporate media know-it-alls like Mankiw that opinion columns will now be published only from Mumbai, Bangalore and Guangzhou would be “just a new way to do corporate media punditry”?).

    And as noted here…
    …if one averages the total 2.9 million jobs lost in the U.S. over 10 years, and assumes an average pay of $43,000 a year over the decade, assuming further an average 20 percent personal income tax rate, the 2.9 job loss equates to an average annual loss in total income in the US Treasury of around $25 billion a year. That’s a total revenue loss of about $250 billion over the past decade alone.

    That total does not include the loss of additional state and local tax revenue, or the additional federal revenue sharing with the states that was required the past decade by the federal government to make up for the state-local tax revenue loss.

    For the coming decade, 2010-2019, the ‘lost tax revenue tab’ for the U.S. Treasury would be significantly greater still, as even more jobs will likely be offshored and the average annual money income will be slightly higher than $43,000. The amount for the decade ahead would be easily in excess of $300 billion more.
    And what did Mankiw say, by the way, when he was busted for his crass endorsement of wrecking our economy, as Brad DeLong tells us above?
    "I wish I had been more clear at the press conference; any loss of jobs is regrettable. If I suggested otherwise, I failed to communicate."
    Gosh, I could’ve figured out that one, and I don’t even have a Ph.D. from MIT (God forbid that a Bushie would apologize for anything).

  • Finally, former Repug Senator Judd Gregg has too much time on his hands, I guess, and concocted the following here…
    Class warfare as leadership is a hard sell. It seems that this fact has not yet found resonance in the Obama White House.

    In a historical context, there have been governments formed on the basis of class warfare. Their success rate as a form of governance, however, is highly suspect. It is simply difficult to build prosperity based on envy.

    Of course, if you are conditioned to the ideology of the left and especially to the experiences and purposes of a community-organizer mentality, class warfare is perfectly justifiable not only as a political tool but as an actual purpose.
    Oh blah blah blah freaking blah, former Senator.

    To the extent that Gregg actually has a point to try and make, I suppose it is to strut his “deficit peacock” bona fides, though he really intends of course to layer on more red meat about that “Kenyan socialist Muslim” and “wealth redistributor.”

    Besides, I don’t know what supposedly makes Gregg an expert on anything, really, when you consider the following:
  • He basically said, “We’re not Europe; let the unemployed suffer” here.

  • He had a meltdown when asked by two MSNBC hosts what he would cut from the budget here.

  • He opposed reconciliation for HCR when, as Ezra Klein tells us, Gregg voted for it every time it was used while Dubya was president here (second bullet).

  • He lobbied for the job of commerce secretary, received an offer from Obama, then bailed on it, and in the process, made himself look like a traitor to his own party, and he’s been trying to worm his way back into their good graces ever since here.

  • He falsely compared debt levels in the U.S. and the E.U. here.

  • He falsely claimed that Obama’s tax proposals would increase taxes on small business here.
  • I suppose the reason why people like Gregg and Lurita Doan feel particularly compelled to lay on the invective concerning Obama is to make absolutely sure that whatever “bounce” Obama receives for the killing of bin Laden is minimized as much as possible (I suppose it’s Obama’s fault that he didn’t “follow the script” and went out and got the bastard instead of letting a Repug president do it, who no doubt would be honored with congressional resolutions by now, to say nothing of someone trying to pass a bill enshrining a federal holiday in his honor, or maybe renaming an airport; hey, if someone can come up with the idea of trying to chisel the face of The Sainted Ronnie R. onto Mount Rushmore…).

    And by the way, as long as we’re on the subject of Obama getting bin Laden, can we please dispense with “analysis” of this photo? I mean, really people, who the @#!$ cares??!!

  • Update 5/11/11: You know, if Cantor doesn't want to praise Obama, that's one thing. But to not praise the Navy SEALs who got bin Laden is something wholly other (here).

    Sunday, May 08, 2011

    Sunday Stuff

    OK, so let me get this straight…first, Mikey The Beloved decides to hold a “tele” town hall (which he called out Patrick Murphy for last year…I know, because he called our house asking us to participate – I declined because I was given no advanced notice, and calling at 7 PM unannounced is a sure way not to become my friend), then last Friday, he visited a senior center in Plumstead Township at 2 PM in the afternoon (when most everyone else was working, or looking for work) to discuss his favorite talking points, and now, he’s decided to have an “online” town hall, with the full participation of his publicity service, otherwise known as the Bucks County Courier Times (who of course offer not one word of reproach for Mikey trying to avoid an actual “town hall” for real in front of a large crowd, at least some of whom would be angry no doubt for Mikey’s recent votes, including his support of “Ryan Care”).

    Mikey, Patrick Murphy was right in 2006 when he called you a liar and a coward. That was what you were, that is what you are, and that is what you always will be.

    …and this goes out to our PA-08 U.S. House representative.