Recently in Mean People Suck Category

After the last post, I could not help but laugh at this:

The openly gay teen, who came out to his parents at age 14 and has had a steady boyfriend for the past seven months, said he first began to suspect he might be different last year, when he started feeling an odd stirring within himself every time he passed a church. The more conservative the church, Faber claimed, the stronger his desire was to enter it.

"It's like I don't even know who I am anymore," the frightened teenager said. "Keeping this secret obsession with radical right-wing dogma hidden away from my parents, teachers, and schoolmates is tearing me apart."

I know, I know. I should not laugh at the pain and suffering of others, but no one has slipped on a banana peel in front of me in an age. So, forgive me if I find humor in this poor kid's suffering.

More here.

Once again the world is aflame with much to do about nothing except gossip, gossip, gossip. Then there are the totally disgusting words used by a conservative. Oh wait. Which used disgusting words, and which is conservative?

Basically a whole lot of noise that signifies the total lack of focus currently occurring with the Village Idiots.

Dobbs to leave CNN effective immediately. Do not let the door hit your ass on the way out, you racist, bigoted asshole.

When Mr. Wolcott is writing as a critic, I find his use of $10 dollar words create an image of pretension and arrogance. Most likely this is a result of my issues filtering his content than any actual pretension or arrogance on his part. None-the-less, I ended up discontinuing his RSS feed because of that impression. That, and Vanity Fair screwed up their RSS feeds.

Then listen to the son, and co-founder, of the man who helped build the modern conservative christian movement.

Ian Walsh believes President Obama is just about done being proactive. I agree.

The Republican/conservative brightness before the burn out I keep thinking is happening, only gets brighter and brighter, and not in a good way. As the Birthers, Tea baggers, and generally just mad at the world types, descend upon the town hall meetings, I realize that my imagining of their behavior falls quantitatively short of their capabilities.

Then, Ian had this to say:

They took the lesson of the Clinton administration to be "don't enflame (sic) the fanatics on the right--avoid social issues, and don't slash the military".  They were, of course, wrong: the radical right (and there is hardly a non-radical right left) will oppose Obama no matter what he does and if Obama is unwilling to use to the full might of the administrative apparatus against them, they will simply take advantage of his weakness to escalate.  Tactics which are seen to work, will not be abandoned, to the contrary, they will be used more and more.

don't enflame (sic) the fanatics on the right--avoid social issues

Suddenly, my imagination made a quantum jump that pictured a radical increase in the use of deadly force, with a resultant increase in dead minorities (including gay, lesbian, and transgenders).

Now, I am not about to believe one way or another that President Obama understood this possible scenario. Still, to pick health care as his first major policy push might have been for other reasons besides the time was right. Regardless of whether he recognized it was a policy that could result in the least amount of insanity and violence, in the end, it is what happened.

Ask yourself this; had President Obama picked an African American jurist for the Supreme Court, just what kind of push back do you think would have happened? Unlike health care, an African American nominee to the Supreme Court is a racial element that would have inflamed the radical right even more then the current push for health reform. I don't know about you, but my imagination in this situation includes some serious killings, maybe even a lynching or three.

What? You think that's too far? If there are calls by influential leaders of the radical right for people to bring guns to town hall meetings, my suggestion of lynchings had President Obama attempted to place an African American on the Supreme Court is going to far? Considering how easy it is for the radical right followers to kill gays, lesbians, and transgenders during less politically decisive times, any push to end DADT, or otherwise legislate equal rights for sexual orientation, would suddenly result in a decrease of killings? We are talking about a section of the electorate that thinks it is funny to print out liberal hunting licenses.

So, for whatever reason, President Obama went the path of least resistance. But, Ian is right. No matter what policy the President pursues, the radical right will fight back. And they will use any action they perceive to have already been effective. If the push for health reform does stall, and no bill is forthcoming this year, I too believe the President is dead in the water. He will achieve no further legislative goals. And even if he does pass health care reform, I still believe he's dead in the water, simply because the radical right, already inflamed and instilled with an Armageddon mindset, will simply believe the end is nigh and make a homicidal/suicidal push. They are going to take as many with them as possible.

In my opinion, any further legislative attempts by the President and violence is assured. It is already occurring. If President Obama manages to shove a version of health reform through congress, he's going to be faced with one angry, pissed off radical right. He will pretty much be unable to overcome any further resistance because civil unrest is only going to continue. Chances are, it will take up most of his administration's attention.

So, once he's done with as much of the legislative work he can realistically achieve, I suggest he turn his attention to judicial/legal house cleaning. Unleash the Justice Department and force a searching and fearless constitutional inventory of our government. There is a world of hurt in it, with much latent corruption and incompetence set to cause further decades of pain and suffering, thereby weakening our country. If he truly wants to be seen as an agent of change, the more important task he faces is exposure of the past administration's eight years of malfeasance and criminality. Hell, cleaning up the last 30 years of modern conservative governance is one damn fine legacy, if you ask me.

Now, I do not believe President Obama wants that for a legacy. But most people do not get to choose their destiny, it chooses them.

Seriously, can you be any more ignorant and stupid?

Kilmeade and two colleagues were discussing a study that, based on research done in Finland and Sweden, showed people who stay married are less likely to suffer from Alzheimer's. Kilmeade questioned the results, though, saying, "We are -- we keep marrying other species and other ethnics and other ..."

At this point, his co-host tried to -- in that jokey morning show way -- tell Kilmeade he needed to shut up, and quick, for his own sake. But he didn't get the message, adding, "See, the problem is the Swedes have pure genes. Because they marry other Swedes.... Finns marry other Finns, so they have a pure society."

Did anyone bother to see if he has a swastika drawn in his underwear?

Oh, and other species? Seriously, WTF???????

FiveThirtyEight has a poll up about McCain/Palin and the move away from polarizing politics. Now, let me start right out and admit I'm about as knowledgeable about polls as Palin is about coherent speaking, which is to say; not at all.

None the less, is the country really moving away from the old, vilifying politics of old?

Okay, I admit it. I'm not really trying to argue with Tom Schaller, I just wanted to take a pot shot at Sarah Palin. I'm such a rascal.

If you want proof that the extreme social conservatives are complete idiots, go read this post over at All Spin Zone.

OK, this one shouldn't be surprising. We know, for instance, that the whack jobs on the social conservative extremist end of the GOP spectrum are a bit on the dim side and don't play all that well on the internet. Well, it was last Wednesday that the National Organization for Marriage launched their 2M4M campaign, not understanding that "M4M" is a standard abbreviation in personals for "man looking for man." In other words, their cute slogan reads like a solicitation for group gay sex. Hey, even Rachel Maddow has made fun of it. Today we find that the National Organization for Marriage was so stupid as to not buy up the domain names for their new initiative.

Wait for the punch line.......

www.2m4m.org is now a place of inclusion that stands for civil rights.

Teh stup, it burnzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Editor's note; typing errors from the original site corrected.

I am in a piss poor mood at the moment. In fact, too mad to write coherently about being stopped in River Falls by a cop. Suffice it to say, I believe The GirlFriend™ and I were stopped because of looking poor. You know, poor = criminal = drug addicts.

Yes, I kept my mouth shut about being a chemical dependency counselor. Honestly, I know when someone has made up their mind about me. I run into it all the time. I can see it in their eyes, and hear it in their voice. It's my job. And I do it well.

This dick of a cop pulled us over because he thought he had a couple of drug addicts from Minnesota.

Damn, it really pisses me off.

More later.

Everyone is so focused on Chelsea in this controversy that they are missing the point: Hillary Clinton is being portrayed as so morally reprehensible that she would stoop to whoring her own daughter. Again, this in not about Chelsea, this is about Hillary. Remember this?

Calling Hillary a whore is in keeping with the misogynistic chorus that produced this disgusting piece of political agitprop.
So, did David Shuster deserve to be suspended? Hell Yes!

the things in my head go 'round and 'round

Ignorant wench.

No Namaste here. I don't want my spirit soiled by association.

It struck me as funny.

Canadian Cynic

It's bad to kill a blob of cells with little to no consciousness that even the Bible says has no worth until it's been outside it's mother for a month.

But it's good to let people like Michael J. Fox suffer from Parkinson's disease.

and it's good to keep people like Christopher Reeves confined to a wheelchair.

And that's before he gets good and warmed up.

New York Times: The Caucus

A revolt of Christian conservative leaders could be a significant setback to the Giuliani campaign because white evangelical Protestants make up a major portion of Republican primary voters. But the threat is risky for the credibility of the Christian conservative movement as well. Some of its usual grass-roots supporters could still choose to support even a pro-choice Republican like Mr. Giuliani, either because they dislike the Democratic nominee even more or because they are worried about war, terrorism and other issues.

Is anyone really surprised at this? I never expected the Christian conservatives to stick with the Republican party. It was an uneasy alliance from the start. My parents, both of whom were Republican, conservative, and Christian (dad has moved more towards the middle, with my mom never actually approving of divisive talk), never approved of the narrow focus of that particular segment of the party.

In terms of the Republican party, they pretty much charted a path towards destruction when deciding to take advantage of the political power of the conservative Christians. It was in direct conflict with the corporate arm of the Republican party.

In many ways, It seemed an act of desperation. The major political players in the Republican party could not attract a majority with their policies and stances. Co-opting the divisive and destructive policies of the conservative Christians was a quick fix, towards a quick grab of power.

But it was bound to burn them in the end. Hatred always creates a wall, resulting in isolation. Eventually the hatred, having no target, turns inward and creates self-loathing. This is what we are witnessing with the Republican party -- and the conservative movement. The policies of the last 6 years has caused the once powerful Republican minority to become isolated, with the country moving away from them. All they have left to focus their hate on is each other.

It's one thing to have a combative, competitive discussion, as we see happening in the Democratic party. It's quite another to be actively engaged hate, as we are witnessing with the Republican party. When the Democratic party is done with it's primary, it will pull together and support the nominee. Not so for the Republicans, as can be clearly seen with this threat by the Christian conservatives.

The Agonist

Republican Presidential Candidate Tom Tancredo told a Danish journalist that Europe Should Deport its 20 Million Muslims. This was last night on the first episode of a mini-documentary series on America, Clement in America.

He's as stupid as Bush. What person in their right mind makes an idiotic statement like that? Well, obviously, someone, such as Tom Tancredo, who does not have a mind. What the hell do you say to such stupidity? I can't even imagine his brain has the capacity to keep him breathing. True, he's alive. But what kind of life can you live with a brain that has an apparent maniacal desire to commit political seppuku?

To be honest, I don't want to know the answer.

Think Progress

On September 20, 72 Senators voted for the highly politicized, “bait and switch” resolution that condemned a newspaper ad by MoveOn.org. The amendment, offered by Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), expressly stated that the Senate would condemn “any effort to attack the honor and integrity” of “all members of the United States Armed Forces“:

(b) Sense of Senate.–It is the sense of the Senate–

(1) to reaffirm its support for all the men and women of the United States Armed Forces, including General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq;

(2) to strongly condemn any effort to attack the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the members of the United States Armed Forces; and

(3) to specifically repudiate the unwarranted personal attack on General Petraeus by the liberal activist group Moveon.org.

On his radio show yesterday, right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh attacked the “honor and integrity” of some members of the Armed Forces. Limbaugh attacked troops who hold a different viewpoint than his own as “phony soldiers.” Iraq war vet Jon Soltz writes that Limbaugh’s comments are directed at “the majority of troops on the ground in Iraq” because they “do not back the President’s failed policy.”

For all the Senators who rushed to make political hay over an empty resolution, the spotlight is on them. Will they now enforce their “sense of the Senate” and condemn Rush Limbaugh?

Yesterday, 341 members of the House voted to pass a companion resolution to that of Cornyn’s. They, too, face the same question.

I ain't holding my breath.

Huffington Post

As Media Matters reported today, Rush Limbaugh, on his show said that those troops who come home and want to get America out of the middle of the religious civil war in Iraq are "phony soldiers." I'd love for you, Rush, to have me on your show and tell that to me to my face.

What in God's name is Rush smelling? You don't start calling people who've been in combat in one of the hottest places in the world "phony soldiers." He's got to be popping oxycontin again. And, if he's going to support the troops, then he needs to support their right as American citizens to exercise freedom of speech. Up to, and including, calling for the troops to come home.

Anyway, Jon Soltz has more to say:

First, in what universe is a guy who never served even close to being qualified to judge those who have worn the uniform? Rush Limbaugh has never worn a uniform in his life -- not even one at Mickey D's -- and somehow he's got the moral standing to pass judgment on the men and women who risked their lives for this nation, and his right to blather smears on the airwaves?

Second, maybe Rush doesn't much care, but the majority of troops on the ground in Iraq, and those who have returned, do not back the President's failed policy. If you go to our "Did You Get the Memo" page at VoteVets.org, there's a good collection of stories, polls, and surveys, which all show American's troops believe we are on the wrong track, not the right one, in Iraq.

Okay, it's official. He's back to using. Otherwise, he'd understand that pissing off a member of the Armed Forces is a really, really bad idea.

To steal a routine from Kenneth over at T-Rex's Guide For Living, this is why I am a progressive:

NEW YORK (AP) -- Leona Helmsley's dog will continue to live an opulent life, and then be buried alongside her in a mausoleum. But two of Helmsley's grandchildren got nothing from the late luxury hotelier and real estate billionaire's estate.

Helmsley left her beloved white Maltese, named Trouble, a $12 million trust fund, according to her will, which was made public Tuesday in surrogate court.

She also left millions for her brother, Alvin Rosenthal, who was named to care for Trouble in her absence, as well as two of four grandchildren from her late son Jay Panzirer -- so long as they visit their father's grave site once each calendar year.

Otherwise, she wrote, neither will get a penny of the $5 million she left for each of them.