Goldy has been (mostly) gone for almost two months now. And during this evening’s Drinking Liberally event, the topic of a slight HA re-branding arose. The winning slogan idea was:
The New HorsesAss…Same great flavor, 50% less “fuck.”
What do you think?
(H/T to occasional poster Goldy for contributing the “50% less ‘fuck'” bit.)
Please join us tonight for an evening of polititical discussion, debate and “squirmishes” under the influence at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally. We meet at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Starting time is 8:00 pm, but feel free to join some of us earlier for dinner.
Not in Seattle? There is a good chance you live near one of the 220 other chapters of Drinking Liberally.
I cannot explain why I was drawn to the teaser headline “Vampires make ground in La Push” from MyNorthwest via their Twitter feed. I expected news about a gathering of Twilight fans or something.
When I clicked on the link, this is what I saw:
The only article that mentions La Push is “Quileute tribe asks Congress for help to move out of tsunami danger:”
LA PUSH, Wash. — A Washington state tribe says its answer to the danger of a tsunami is moving its village to higher ground.
Now, the Quileute Tribe is asking for Congressional help with the move.
When members of the Quileute tribe saw a tsunami destroy Japanese cities, their first reaction was horror. The second: that could be us.
Oh? “Sucking off the government teat” to relocate their village to higher ground…is that what they were getting at by “vampires”?!?
Naaa…I refuse to believe that Bonneville Seattle (97.3 KIRO, 710 ESPN, 770 KTTH) has gone full-out, hard-boiled Teabagger on us.
I’m sure it’s an innocent mistake.
There’s no hope for Ted Van Dyk. At least that’s what he says, and I am forced to agree….
On Libya: Defense Secretary Bob Gates, just before the U.S. decision to intervene in Libya, stated that “anyone should have his head examined” who decided to add yet another offshore intervention to those being undertaken in Iraq and Afghanistan, specifically citing establishment of a no-fly zone in Libya as just such an overreach.
Umm…no he didn’t.
Secretary Gates did, indeed, make a statement to West Point cadets on February 25 that included a quip about cranial scrutiny:
But in my opinion, any future defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should “have his head examined,” as General MacArthur so delicately put it.
Even out of context, it is clear that Gates was not making a sweeping claim of the insanity of any type of U.S. intervention. He was explicitly discussing the problem of a “big…land army” type invasion or occupation. This is clear from the statement immediately preceding the money quote:
Looking ahead, though, in the competition for tight defense dollars within and between the services, the Army also must confront the reality that the most plausible, high-end scenarios for the U.S. military are primarily naval and air engagements – whether in Asia, the Persian Gulf, or elsewhere. The strategic rationale for swift-moving expeditionary forces, be they Army or Marines, airborne infantry or special operations, is self-evident given the likelihood of counterterrorism, rapid reaction, disaster response, or stability or security force assistance missions.
And following:
[…] But as the prospects for another head-on clash of large mechanized land armies seem less likely, the Army will be increasingly challenged to justify the number, size, and cost of its heavy formations to those in the leadership of the Pentagon, and on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, who ultimately make policy and set budgets.
[…] The odds of repeating another Afghanistan or Iraq – invading, pacifying, and administering a large third world country – may be low. But in what General Casey has called “an era of persistent conflict,” those unconventional capabilities will still be needed at various levels and in various locations. Most critically to prevent festering problems from growing into full-blown crises which require costly – and controversial – large-scale American military intervention.
In other words, large scale land invasions are too damn expensive. But Gates also asserts the likelihood of “critical” military actions to prevent full-blown crises.
You know what isn’t in Gates’ speech? The expression “no-fly zone” and the word “Libya”. Ted just pulled that notion out of his ass.
Van Dyk continues:
Yet here we are, not only establishing a Libyan no-fly zone but, contrary to early assurances, putting American special-operations teams on the ground to assist Libyan rebels.
Earth to Ted: intelligence personnel have likely been “on the ground” in Libya for years, and covert Special Forces have, no doubt, been “on the ground” for at least weeks. Obama never stated that there would be no covert activities in Syria.
Obama did, however, categorically rule out a land invasion, saying such an invasion was absolutely out of the question1.
Is Ted getting too much of his “news” from Bill O’Reilly? Or has he taken to trusting the Russians over Obama?
Either way, he conducts journalistic malpractice pretending that in-country covert operations are equivalent to a ground invasion.
To be clear, I am not staking an ideological position on our military action in Libya…I have mixed and complex feelings about it that I won’t go into here. The bone I have to pick is with Ted’s sloppy-ass, off-the-cuff journalism and his pseudo-analysis driven by factual inaccuracies.
On the other hand, maybe he’s suffering from, well…something…. I won’t speculate on specifically what without evidence. I’ll only suggest that Ted ought to have his head examined.
1 Obama’s gave a speech while I was editing this post this evening. In it, he confirmed that there would be no U.S. ground invasion.
Another death in the hands of a domestic religious extremist:
A 28-year-old man has been charged with murder after telling police that he stoned a 70-year-old man to death for making homosexual advances toward him, authorities say. […]
Thomas reportedly told authorities that he read in the Old Testament that homosexuals should be stoned to death. When Seidman allegedly made homosexual advances toward him over a period of time, Thomas said he received a message in his prayers that he must end Seidman’s life, according to court documents.
Police say that Thomas struck Seidman in the head about 10 times with the sock of rocks. Thomas left Seidman dead in his apartment, and then threw his bloody clothing and the bloody sock in a dumpster, according to authorities.
…which leads me to ask, when, oh when, will Congress hold hearings on the radicalization of American Christians?
And when will our lawmakers take action against the gathering threat of honor killings via stoning (nip it in the bud, so to speak) by passing legislation forbidding the establishment of Mosaic law in Washington state?
(And rename Moses Lake to something less terroristic sounding, while they are at it?)
The Republican War on Workers:
Liberal Viewer: Glenn Beck’s “China Syndrome” nonsense.
Maddow: Republicans are making it easier for terrorist to get nuclear weapons?!?.
Jon: When reporters attack (via Slog).
Thom with The Good, The Bad, and the Very, Very Ugly.
Spitzer does Bill Maher.
ONN: Patriotic teen fails Spanish.
Running for President:
Republican AZ lawmaker defends racist teacher’s letter.
Newsy: One in six Americans are Hispanic.
Thom with The Good, the Bad, and the Very Very Ugly.
Cenk: Mike Pompeo—The Congressman from Koch.
Thom: Is the US Chamber spying on activists?
Bombs Away:
Young Turks: SD abortion bill becomes law.
O’Donnell: GE paid $0 in taxes!.
Pres. Obama on U.S. and Latin America.
Cenk: Glenn Beck concludes MSNBC is the anti-God network.
Newsy: “Anchor baby” is deported.
Young Turks: Is James O’Keefe broke?
Pap: Right wing militias gaining power in America.
O’Donnell: The NY Indian Point nuclear power plant.
Dan Savage gives college girls orgasms?!?
Health Care Reform at One Year:
Ed: Who will stand up for long term unemployed? (Via Crooks and Liars.)
ONN: CIA’s ‘Facebook’ program dramatically cut agency’s costs.
O’Donnell: Most American Catholics back gay rights in survey.
What do you think of Seattle police officers?
Young Turks: Obama executive order on Miranda rights.
Thom Hartmann with another episode of The Good, the Bad, & the Very Very Ugly.
Last week’s Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza can be found here.
A few events for your weekend:
I’ll be at the festival playing bass with the Flying Blind Blues Band (we’ll be on stage about 5:00 pm).
Enjoy your weekend!
Here were are, just a few months past the great G.O.P. gubernatorial invasion sweep. And we are already seeing evidence of widespread buyer’s remorse:
It’s not like they weren’t warned about overreach.
(This counts as an open thread.)
Under the guise of “budget crisis” measures, anti-worker legislation is popping up all over the country. But this mean-spirited move shows the arrogant contempt with which Republicans hold workers:
Gov. Paul LePage has ordered the removal of a 36-foot mural depicting Maine’s labor history from the lobby of the Department of Labor.
[…]Acting labor chief Laura Boyett emailed staff Tuesday about the mural’s pending removal, as well as another administration directive to rename several department conference rooms that carry the names of pro-labor icons such as Cesar Chavez.
According to LePage spokesman Dan Demeritt, the administration felt the mural and the conference room monikers showed “one-sided decor” not in keeping with the department’s pro-business goals.
Umm… Removing a mural and renaming conference rooms is going to fix Maine’s budget problems?
Pure and simple…this is another salvo in the Republican War on Workers™.
The mural was erected in 2008 following a jury selection by the Maine Arts Commission and a $60,000 federal grant. Judy Taylor, the artist from Seal Cove, said Tuesday that her piece was never meant to be political, simply a depiction of Maine’s labor history.
Why are Republicans threatened by Maine’s history? Let’s examine the threat. From the web site of the artist, here is a selection of captions from the eleven mural panels:
1. The Apprentice: Here, a Cobbler trains his young Apprentice. In the background, are scenes from that era.
Oooooh…cobbler apprentice. Scary. (And, Donald Trump…this doesn’t look good for your presidential aspirations…)
2. Lost Childhood: Child labor was common in Maine. They frequently performed dangerous tasks for long hours.
That is offensive to LePage, who is trying to roll back child labor laws:
A bill sponsored by state Sen. Debra Plowman (R) and “backed by” LePage would roll back the state’s child labor laws…. Her original bill would have removed all protections on the number of hours 16 and 17 year olds could work during the school week, and allow them to work until 11 PM.
[…]In response to opposition from labor and education groups, Plowman revised her bill to cap hours at 32 per week….
3. The Textile Workers: Young women were often sent to the mills by their families, who could not, or would not support them.
Clearly, this is offensive for the same reason as the previous panel. A young woman’s place is in the sweatshop.
4. The Secret Ballot: For the first time, workers were allowed to vote anonymously in 1891.
Yeah…Women’s suffrage still gets under their skin.
“Wait. What? Vote?!? We thought ‘suffrage’ meant something else.”
5. First Labor’s Day: In 1884, Maine celebrated it’s first “Labor’s Day”, a day for the workers to celebrate.
This factoid, no doubt, is a great stain on the psyche of Maine Republicans.
6. The Woods Workers: A member of the IWW or “Wobblies” tries to organize the Maine woodsmen.
History lesson be damned…I’m pretty sure Republicans consider the word “organize” a vulgar obscenity.
7. The 1937 Strike: Scenes from an unsuccessful strike attempt to create better conditions for women workers.
Ewwww…”strike”? “better conditions for women workers?” For the G.O.P., the vulgarity of it all must trump any potential historical interest.
8. Francis Perkins: FDR’s Labor Secretary, and untiring labor activist, a Maine Labor icon.
You can imagine how a mural of the first woman appointed to a Presidential Cabinet could induce in Republicans indigestion, foaming at the mouth, and the heartache of psoriasis.
9. Rosie the Riveter: Maine’s version of WWII women workers participated as ship-builders.
You see…in the eyes of the wingnuts, Rosie the Riveter is the kind of uncomfortable situation that leads to Rachael Maddow.
Hey…you know another leader who took down art that he found threatening?
Hitler.
Today is the one-year anniversary of the contentious health care reform law. How do American’s feel about it? The story you get depends on (1) your media source, and (2) how carefully you scrutinize the numbers.
David Weigel points out that the following two headlines are simultaneously true:
- Most Favor Health Care Law or Wish It Was More Liberal
- Time Doesn’t Change Views on Health Care Law
Headline 2 is from a CNN article about its new poll released today:
Thirty-seven percent of Americans support the measure, with 59 percent opposed. That’s basically unchanged from last March, when 39 percent supported the law and 59 percent opposed the measure.
But that is only half the story:
“In 2010, about a quarter of the health care bill’s opponents disliked the bill because it was not liberal enough – the same as today. That works out to 13 percent of all Americans who oppose the bill because it did not go far enough. Forty-three percent oppose it because it was too liberal.”
The final tally from the poll (pdf here) is that an estimated 50% of Americans want the law or a more comprehensive version of it, and 43% want the law gone. Seven percent have no opinion. The pattern is the same in three previous CNN polls taken over the last year—thirteen percent “disapprove” because the law doesn’t go far enough, and 37%-43% oppose the law as “too liberal”.
One must keep the “liberal 13%” in mind with looking at polls that do not distinguish between those who think the law doesn’t go far enough and those who think it goes too far. So when a Gallup poll with a somewhat different question reports that 46% find the law “a good thing” and 44% find it “a bad thing” (with 10% offering no opinion), I have to wonder what fraction of the 44% wanted universal health care, single payer, a public option, or just think the law is a big giveaway to the insurance companies.
Also, I have to wonder how much of the ~40% who oppose the law do so because they were sucked into the bullshit that it “includes death panels.”
Besides being the one year anniversary of the law, it is also the one year anniversary of the Republicans offering no alternatives. Even Juan Williams has a hard time not noticing:
…House Republicans have not passed a single alternative health care reform bill since they have been in charge but they have passed bills to repeal and defund the law. All of these bills, however, are dead on arrival in the Senate making the whole exercise futile and symbolic.
At a meeting of the nation’s governors last month, President Obama called the GOP’s bluff on health care. He challenged GOP governors […] to come up with their own health care plans that meet the goals of the Affordable Care Act.
He challenged the governors, saying, “I am not open to re-fighting the battles of the last two years, or undoing the progress that we’ve made. But I am willing to work with anyone — anybody in this room, Democrat or Republican, governors or member of Congress — to make this law even better; to make care even better; to make it more affordable and fix what needs fixing.”
That includes not driving up the deficit. So the president opened the door to the states, as what he called the laboratories of democracy, putting their own ideas on the table for reducing costs, increasing access and improving quality.
Since then, the silence has been deafening and the American people are beginning to see that the GOP really doesn’t have any alternative ideas on health care that fit the bill.
A shorter Juan Williams: Republicans…all Repeal an no Replace.
Spring has arrived! And that’s the only excuse you need to join us tonight for an evening of politics under the influence at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally. We meet at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Starting time is 8:00 pm, but feel free to join some of us earlier for dinner.
Not in Seattle? There is a good chance you live near one of the 217 other chapters of Drinking Liberally.
State Sen. Phil Rockefeller (D-23) makes the case for ending some of the 567 special tax preferences on the books in Washington:
Faced with a deep state deficit and deep cuts to vital services we should look first at ending unjustified tax breaks.
Many breaks on the books subsidize a privileged few at the expense of ordinary citizens. The notion of tax fairness, that everyone pays his or her fair share for core services that benefit everyone, has been trampled under the feet of special interest lobbyists.
These tax breaks are conveniently embedded in obscure tax law and routinely ignored, yet they divert billions of dollars into wealthy pockets. As a result, essential public services like education and health care are starved for funding.
Rockefeller admits that passage of I-1053 make the task more difficult. Given the widespread opinion that the 2/3 majority requirement of I-1053 would not pass Constitutional muster, if only we could get into the courts, why not use the budget crisis to force a showdown?
Here’s how it works. Declare that the projected revenue shortfall, following a biennium where spending has already been cut to the bone, makes it impossible for the legislature to pass a budget that lives up to the spirit of Article IX, Section 1 of the State Constitution:
It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex.
The constitutional requirement of “ample provision for education…” simply isn’t happening.
Article IX, Section 3 gives lawmakers broad authority to do what is needed to fund education. If we cannot provide “ample” funding for education via existing taxes, lawmakers should provide short-term revenue for education through the repeal of tax preferences, using a simple majority to pass the legislation.
The mandate and the authority to accomplish it as spelled out in the Constitution trumps a law enacted through the initiative process. If Republicans believe the law trumps…they can sue.
But would they sue? The reality is that I-1053 is most potent when it stays out of the courts. The threat to I-1053 is serious enough that, perhaps, a bill to repeal tax preferences might just get that 2/3 majority as a way to avoid Judicial scrutiny.
As a certain Mayor-elect puts it:
“You don’t ever want a crisis to go to waste; it’s an opportunity to do important things that you would otherwise avoid.”
I didn’t see this in time to put it in this week’s Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza, but here is an interview from NPR”s On the Media with James O’Keefe—you know, that kid who keeps releasing surprising sting videos that later turn out to be misleadingly edited.
At the end of the interview, On the Media has a little editing fun of their own.
The Republican War on Workers:
Red State Update catches up with things.
Going after NPR:
Thom: Rep. Jan Schakowsky’s tax on millionaires and billionaires.
Lawrence O’Donnell: Michelle Bachmann fails history.
Young Turks: New tax rates for the rich?
ONN: Man becomes GOP frontrunner after showing no interest in government:
Liberal Viewer: Daily Show asks if Gitmo is prison or zoo.
Young Turks: Big God, Small Government — Senator DeMint (R-SC).
Libya:
Newsy: Republicans go sour on Sarah Palin.
Pap with Joshua Holland: GOP’s Union Busting is Theft..
The Beauty of Donald Trump:
Lawrence O’Donnell to Glenn Beck viewers on the apocalypse: It’s not happening.
Cenk: Glenn Beck claims “Obama sympathizes with terrorists”.
For those with vaginas:
ONN: Panel of caged average Americans weigh in on economy.
Tragedy in Japan:
TYTUniversity: Wingnutcase David Horowitz ‘Nazi, racist’ Muslims speech & student interview.
Shooting Illegals like Pigs:
Young Turks: Sarah Palin destroyed by conservatives.
Bill Maher: Governing with the G.O.P. is like rooming with a meth addict (via TalkingPointsMemo):
White House: West Wing Week.
Sam Seder: Tim Pawlenty’s amazing vocal stylings.
Ed and Pap: The The Republican court-packing scam.
Young Turks: She’s baaaaaaaak…Sharron Angle runs for congress.
Newsy: Will Hillary Clinton exit the political stage?
Last week’s Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza can be found here.
Remember when the nutcase Republicans were saying stupid shit about the IRS collecting personal health information in order to enforce Obamacare? Take, for instance, this doozy from Fox Nation:
IRS Hiring Thousands of Armed Tax Agents to Enforce Obamacare?
[…]
Under the new law, the IRS is required to fine taxpayers thousands of dollars if they do not purchase health insurance. In order for the government to enforce compliance, tax authorities will need information, for the first time, about people’s health care.
Wow…you can just envision an IRS agent pointing a gun at your head telling you to divulge intimate medical details about yourself. Gosh…that sounds scary.
(I’m only surprised they didn’t claim that Agents would be armed by mass confiscation of guns following passage of Obama’s next legislative assault on America: new gun control laws.)
At least there were no gun-wielding IRS agents in the congressional Republican’s take on it:
A new analysis by the Joint Economic Committee and the House Ways & Means Committee minority staff estimates up to 16,500 new IRS personnel will be needed to collect, examine and audit new tax information mandated on families and small businesses in the ‘reconciliation’ bill being taken up by the U.S. House of Representatives this weekend.
“When most people think of health care reform they think of more doctors exams, not more IRS exams,” says U.S. Congressman Kevin Brady, the top House Republican on the Joint Economic Committee. “Isn’t the federal government already intruding enough into our lives? We need thousands of new doctors and nurses in America, not thousands more IRS agents.”
Of course, the whole thing was a lie manufactured to capitalize on fear of the IRS in order to sway public opinion against health care reforms.
Or was it a lie? (Via MoJo):
Under a GOP-backed bill expected to sail through the House of Representatives, the Internal Revenue Service would be forced to police how Americans have paid for their abortions. To ensure that taxpayers complied with the law, IRS agents would have to investigate whether certain terminated pregnancies were the result of rape or incest. And one tax expert says that the measure could even lead to questions on tax forms: Have you had an abortion? Did you keep your receipt?
Wait…this is just hyperbole invented by MSNBC or spewed by a flawed analysis from a minority party House committee, right?
In testimony to a House taxation subcommittee on Wednesday, Thomas Barthold, the chief of staff of the nonpartisan Joint Tax Committee, confirmed that one consequence of the Republicans’ “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act” would be to turn IRS agents into abortion cops—that is, during an audit, they’d have to detemine, from evidence provided by the taxpayer, whether any tax benefit had been inappropriately used to pay for an abortion.
[…]“Were this to become law, people could end up in an audit, the subject of which could be abortion, rape, and incest,” says Christopher Bergin, the head of Tax Analysts, a nonpartisan, not-for-profit tax policy group. “If you pass the law like this, the IRS would be required to enforce it.”
Keep classy, G.O.P. congresscritters!
The expression may be hackneyed, but…this really is a classic case of Wingnut Projection.
Remember folks…when the Republicans accuse Democrats of something outrageously over-the-top, you can be pretty sure it’s because they are planning to do something similar. (Or are actually doing it already…You know, like Newt Gingrich going after Clinton for adultery.)
And that, oddly enough, leads to my financial tip of the day: If Republicans make gains in 2012 in the Senate or the Executive-branch, then before they are sworn in…take out a big fat live insurance policy on Granny.
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!