Shaun (O Mac) Daily former member of the Clinton/Gore 96 National Steering Committee hosts a webcast that is a discussion talk show not a shout and yell talk show that is the norm as of late.

Wednesday at 6pm PST to listen to the show go to www.lvrocks.com click on LISTEN and to join in the discussion click on CAM/CHAT. This is my first, so who knows what I'll say.

Shaun also blogs at Subject to Discussion

PRAYER REQUEST FOR LAURA:

You know I hate Drama Kings or Queens, but I am asking for your prayers today and for the forseeable future. On Friday afternoon, I learned that I have joined the ever-growing group of American women who have been diagnosed with breast cancer. As so many breast cancer patients will tell you, it all came as a total shock...

We may disagree on many things Laura, but be well, good luck and come back soon.

JOURNAL-ISM

via Kevin Drum

I see that the Wall Street Journal is busily cementing its reputation as the most dishonest editorial page in the country. Today they crow yet again about the vast tax burden of the upper classes:... read on

So in 1979 the super-rich earned 3% of the money and paid 5% of the taxes. In 1999 the super-rich earned 10% of the money and paid 11% of the taxes. The Journal clearly has a different definition of "grew more progressive" than the rest of us.

In fact, these numbers might start you wondering. If the income share of the super-rich tripled but their tax share only doubled, doesn't that mean that their tax rates must have gone down? Indeed it does.

So shed no tears for the super rich in America. Their incomes have tripled in the past couple of decades and at the same time their tax rates have decreased by 9 percentage points. That's a pretty sweet deal in anybody's book.

On Scarborough Country, Al Mohler, of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary discussed " Justice Sunday" and eventually shared what he really feels.

Download | play WMP

Mohler: The National Council of Churches is an open embrace of, frankly, almost every leftist idea that‘s passed along for the last 40 years. I believe they disrespect Christianity. They‘re for the right to abortion. They embrace homosexuality and an umbrella of other things that evangelicals find directly repugnant.

So all this bullshit about not condemning other faiths is revealed. Please join us in defeating the filibuster, but after that "get the hell out of my face you disgusting parasites!"

From commentor James (aka Br. SMG of Truth) : It is Bush expressing his love of Tony Blair, set to "Endless Love".

Click here

Quick Note-A blog cruder than the Rude?

Sometimes, even the Rude Pundit must defer to the breathtaking crudeness of others. See this new, possibly one-shot blog.

via Olberman

...Yesterday it was opposed to filibusters. Seven years ago, it was in favor of them. That‘s when Clinton and a then-Democratic plurality in the Senate wanted a man named James Hormel to become the ambassador to Luxembourg. Hormel, of the Spam and other meats Hormels, was gay, as the Senate minority bottled up Hormel‘s nomination with filibusters and threats of filibusters, minority relative to cloture, to breaking up a filibuster.

They did that for a year and a half. The Family Research Council‘s senior writer, Steven Schwartz, appeared on National Public Radio at the time and explained the value, even the necessity, of the filibuster.

“The Senate,” he said, “is not a majoritarian institution, like the House of Representatives is. It is a deliberative body, and it‘s got a number of checks and balances built into our government. The filibuster is one of those checks in which a majority cannot just sheerly force its will, even if they have a majority of votes in some cases. That‘s why there are things like filibusters, and other things that give minorities in the Senate some power to slow things up, to hold things up, and let things be aired properly.”

Hypocrites! I had the video, but it got fried.
There's a Diary on Kos: by lawstudent922 framing the same issue.

David Brinkley did a segment as well.

Download | play -WMP

This is a an article form 99' talking about the problems Clinton had in having his judges confirmed.

..What is unprecedented now is how Republicans in the Senate, under pressure from social conservatives, have blocked the confirmation of judicial nominees almost from the outset of the Clinton presidency. They have waged an increasingly bitter war against his selection of judges ever since they gained control of the Senate following the 1994 midterm elections. They stalled the judicial appointment process in 1995 and, a year later, virtually shut it down in advance of the presidential election.

Embittered and angry over Clinton's reelection, Senate Republicans increased pressure on Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, to hold up hearings on Clinton's judicial nominees. They also pressed Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) to break with tradition by allowing individual senators to place "secret holds" on nominees they opposed, thereby denying them hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Ever since, the GOP-controlled Senate has been stonewalling judicial confirmations, long before the campaign for the presidential election in 2000 kicks into high gear. '

Notably, in the first half of 1999, Hatch balked at holding confirmation hearings on any of Clinton's judicial nominees, some of whom were nominated two to three years ago. Hearings were held only after Clinton agreed to name Ted Stewart to a district-court judgeship in Utah...read on

Making Her Sadly, No! Debut: Linda Kimball

via Sadly, No!

I wasn't gonna blog again today, but I discovered this stunning column by Linda Kimball that simply had to be shared. For your reading enjoyment, I give you... "Who is 'Queering' America and Why?"

Linda's column starts off the way all unimaginative wingnut columns start- by quoting the dictionary: read on