DOWNLOADS: (627)

PLAYS: (5319)

Embed

Who knows what finally made Tom Friedman come around.

Maybe it was watching the live stage version of Tod Browning's Freaks -- otherwise known as the 2012 GOP Primary -- for the past year. But he finally stopped writing those "We need a third party that's exactly like Obama's Democratic Party" columns and correctly identified the problem for once:

...when all the Republican candidates last year said they would not accept a deal with Democrats that involved even $1 in tax increases in return for $10 in spending cuts, the G.O.P. cut itself off from reality. It became a radical party, not a conservative one. And for the candidates to wrap themselves in a cartoon version of Ronald Reagan — a real conservative who raised taxes, including the gasoline tax, when he discovered his own cuts had gone too far — is fraudulent.

Until the G.O.P. stops being radical and returns to being conservative, it won’t provide what the country needs most now — competition — competition with Democrats on the issues that will determine whether we thrive in the 21st century. We need to hear conservative fiscal policies, energy policies, immigration policies and public-private partnership concepts — not radical ones. Would somebody please restore our second party? The country is starved for a grown-up debate.

Some of us have been saying this since, oh, about twenty years.

A party that refuses to raise taxes on anyone, ever, when taxes are at historic lows isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that wants to roll back successful programs like Social Security that have been a bedrock of American society for nearly three quarters of a century isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that's openly at war with Progressive Era reforms like unions and child labor laws isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that refuses to make cuts in defense when the U.S. currently spends more than the next 14 countries in the world combined isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that denies the scientific consensus of climate change isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that seeks to repeal a law that was decided by the Supreme Court nearly four decades ago isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that advocates the forced deportation of 12 million immigrants isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that denies basic facts about the deficit isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that wants to pull out of landmark treaties the United States helped write isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that invites white supremacists and fringe organizations like the John Birch Society to its most important conferences isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party whose leaders compare the President of the United States to Adolf Hitler and Stalin on the floor of the House, who threaten impeachment if they don't get their way, and who sow doubt about the President's citizenship isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party whose presidential candidates claim that states should be able to ban contraception and that the Civil Rights Act was unconstitutional isn't conservative, it's radical.

And so on.

You're a little slow on the uptake -- but better late than never, Tom.

“I have that fire in my belly,” Sarah Palin told Fox this week. Apparently she is locked and loaded to defeat “Obama” for the presidency. Or maybe not. Who knows? How much money is in it? How much money is in not being in it?

It is easy to conclude that running for president, much less being president, is way too much work for the eternally bellyaching Palin. An 18-month slog on the campaign trail is potentially way too embarrassing (Is Turkey Asian or European or for Thanksgiving only?) and damaging to her brand (see Donald Trump). And it doesn’t pay all that great. Teasing the media while coaxing new donations from her easily duped minions seems a far more believable sled run for a woman who has already quit her actual government job for the riches of a TV somebody or other.

But what if….

The Republican Party has all but conceded the presidency to the Man who got Bin Laden? What if they realize, like Trump, Christie, Barbour, Jeb and Huckabee obviously have, that no matter whether it’s Romney or Daniels or Bachmann or Pawlenty who carries their Medicare-killing flag, a second term for President Obama looms virtually unavoidable?

There yet will remain a slew of down-ballot races: preserving the GOP House majority, taking the Senate, winning or losing state government majorities all over the nation. The GOKochs understand that all of this matters. Enormously.

And a flawed Romney who doesn’t ignite the GOP’s angry evangelical and Tea Party zealots could hand the House back to Democrats, who likely will turn out in desperate droves to stave off hell by reelecting the president. A bureaucratic Bush soldier like Mitch Daniels, who has spurned Grover Norquist’s “no taxes” pledge, would likely embed a similar ennui into the wild purists and could leave Harry Reid in charge of the Senate.

Enter the crazy conspiracy. Enter the Abominable Snow Snooki. She avoids the GOP dog & pony show for months and months, flinging barbs and “refudiations” from her million dollar throne on Fox. And then, when Romney or Daniels or the logo of Exxon or Anthem Blue Cross sews up the nomination, Palin swoops in as the first Tea Party candidate ever to run for president. She’d stride onto the big stage for an easy few months, spewing venom at President Obama and bathing in the adoration of Valentino blazers and her ardent devotees. Yes she’d lose. Yes it would be wildly fun and horrifying and entertaining. And yes she’d return to Fox more feisty and popular than ever.

Continue reading »

America's Third Parties (and fourth, and fifth, and so on) are too often seen as the crazy uncle that shows up to the Halloween party and pees in the punch. One hopes they could someday be more than that--they could give our Democracy new hope in an era of gridlock and no-nothing activism.

Wouldn't progressive Democrats match up beautifully in a three-way race against a Republican and a Libertarian Party candidate? The possibilities are myriad and stunning to contemplate.

So when--as happened in the recent New York Gubernatorial debate--someone actually shows up and is impassioned, eccentric, and accurate, it kind of takes your breath away. The rent is indeed too damn high, Jimmy. One wanted to shout "thank you" for not worrying about mosques, "socialism," keeping people from getting married, or any of the other crap we're innundated this weird election season.

And thus this video. As his basic message evolved into a meme, we believed he could launch a revolution of people who repeat not only his inexplicable sartorial choices, but his commitment to the rights of the renter in a nation down on its luck. Leaseholders, stand up.

...Or so we'd hoped.

But that bright flame of hope was doused by the sour urine stream of reality: many were troubled to learn that Jimmy may or may not pay rent. (That honestly doesn't bother me that much, broadly speaking rent is still "2" damn high).

But, when it turns out this champion of the underdog has a pathetic Sanchezian tendency to blame problems on...wait for it...Jewish folks, it's time to look for another champion. Well, another potential benefit of a true multiple party system: when one candidate spouts hateful stereotypes there are other options.

Kinda sucks, I'd really wanted to like that guy--it's like finding out that Santa Claus has a weird thing against Puerto Ricans. Which, y'know, would just mean it's time to start celebrating Kwanzaa. Life must go on.

DOWNLOADS: (578)

PLAYS: (1093)

Embed

This is disturbing. KHOU.com's interview with a Houston BP call center employee exposes the empty PR operation that is supposed to be sincerely concerned with ideas for cleaning up the oil spill in the Gulf.

According to the employee, the operators are supposed to take down the information from callers and enter it into a database. Because employees believe the information stops with them, some aren't even bothering to note the information given by callers or enter it into the system.

This call center is not responsible for claims. That responsibility has been assigned to third-party risk manager and claims administrator ESIS, Inc. ESIS has field offices in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, and Mississippi.

The Houston call center's responsibility, according to KHOU.com:

They answer phones from the hotline number designated for the Vessel of Opportunity Program and for cleanup ideas.

I can understand the overwhelming nature of the calls coming into BP from around the globe, but if I were BP, I'd be thinking hard about the wisdom of ignoring calls in about cleanup suggestions and even containment suggestions, given the White House's order to BP to step up their game and stop more of this oil from pouring into the Gulf.

If this operator's allegations are true, it is another nail in BP's strategy to do whatever they please while appearing to care. Might be time for them to actually DO what they pretend to do.

It's quite obvious to anyone paying attention that our two party system just isn't working. I'd love to see a viable third (and fourth and fifth) party to help shake up our electoral process, although I hesitate to push the concept right now as I simply do not trust the Republicans to not manipulate the situation to their advantage and we'd be back where we were in 2000--except with the country in far worse condition.

However, the never-to-be-daunted Ralph Nader is out there again and pushing for third party candidates.

  MSNBC: (Video available on the site)

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg could be the first modern independent candidate to break the stranglehold the two major parties have on the White House, two-time candidate Ralph Nader said Thursday.

Nader predicted in an interview on MSNBC's "Hardball" that Bloomberg would join the race and would immediately start out with the support of at least 15 percent of voters.[..]

At first blush, Nader said, Bloomberg looks pretty good, marrying traditional Democratic positions with hard-headed Republican-style problem-solving.

"I think he's offering a case-by-case judgment," Nader said. "That's the one thing about Bloomberg I like. He doesn't prejudge everything ideologically. He's very problem-oriented. Post-Katrina I don't think would have happened if he was in charge."

But Bloomberg isn't sensitive enough to free speech and economic justice, said Nader, who said that if no candidate emerged to address his progressive, labor-first ideals, he would jump into the race himself. He said he would make a decision "in the fall."

DOWNING STREET DELUSIONS.

via Kevin Drum: The wingnuts are getting desperate. Captain's Quarters, in a nostalgic attempt to recreate the glories of Rathergate, suggests that the Downing Street Memos aren't real. Why? Because Michael Smith, the reporter who got hold of them, had them retyped to protect his source and then returned the originals. Jonah Goldberg feverishly calls CQ's revelations a "must read." ...read on

-----------------------

You know the wingers are desperate when they start banging that drum. I heard CQ on MSNBC say the memo's were from third party sources. As Kevin points out " Mr. Blair did not deny that the meeting took place in July 2002, but he recalled that "subsequent to that meeting, we went the United Nations route," seeking a resolution in November 2002, calling on the Iraqi government to disarm." If the UK can't discredit them during the election, I don't think CQ will be able to. Except of course if they put the pressure on WaPo to say they can't confirm them any more. Then Hugh Hewitts's buddies will start a new website called ConfirmDSNnow.com. This also proves just how afraid the right is of these memos now as the MSM finally jumps on board and starts asking the right questions.

: No doubt this will be the top story on next week's Reliable Sources.

By Dave Astor

Published: January 07, 2005 8:45 PM ET

NEW YORK Tribune Media Services (TMS) today terminated its contract with columnist Armstrong Williams, effective immediately. But Williams told E&P tonight that he plans to continue his feature via self-syndication.TMS' action came after USA Today reported this morning that Williams had accepted $240,000 from the Bush administration to promote the No Child Left Behind education-reform law on his TV and radio shows. E&P subsequently reported that Williams had also written about NCLB in his newspaper column at least four times last year.

In a statement, TMS said: "[A]ccepting compensation in any form from an entity that serves as a subject of his weekly newspaper columns creates, at the very least, the appearance of a conflict of interest. Under these circumstances, readers may well ask themselves if the views expressed in his columns are his own, or whether they have been purchased by a third party." (Full text of the statement is available at the end of this story.)

I thought he wasn't a journalist. Please get your story straight AW.

Roger Ailes (the good Roger Ailes)
In comments, Cybelle asks:

Bill and his lawyers are claiming that there was no "wrong doing". wtf? Sexually harassing an employee and threatening her _is_ "wrong doing". What world do these people live in? Or is that some kind of lawyer speak for "this is over"?

It's lawyer speak for you can buy anything for enough money.
The O'Reilly settlement contains a statement that the parties assert there was "no wrongdoing whatsoever" by any of the parties, which also means that O'Reilly is admitting Mackris and her lawyer were not trying to extort money from him. Which, implicitly, at least, negates the assertion that O'Reilly didn't do anything wrong -- O'Reilly is admitting that Mackris had good reason to demand 60 million (or whatever amount) from him based on his conduct. Or, to put it another way, that every accusation in his complaint was false.
demanded). The irony of this story is that we've finally found one of those frivolous lawsuits the right keeps bitching about. O'Reilly admits that his lawsuit against Mackris and his attorney has no merit -- they did nothing wrong. Perhaps the New York State Bar should look into whether Mr. O'Reilly's (and FOX's) attorneys knowingly filed meritless litigation, particularly since O'Reilly wasted judicial resources -- his motion hearings -- suing people who were guilty of "no wrongdoing." (Of course, that won't happen, because the courts love it when litigants settle voluntarily, and it's hard to imagine any third party who'd have a basis to bring a claim based on a meaningless recital in a private contract.)

O'Reilly claims he did what he did to "protect his family." It's heartwarming to see a man pay millions to deep-six tapes in which he is heard abusing an underling and/or himself -- for the sake of his children. Welcome to the All-Vibrate Zone.

Doubleday, the book's publisher and part of the Random House division of Bertelsmann, said it stood by Ms. Kelley's reporting. The publisher said in a statement that Ms. Kelly met with Ms. Bush for a four-hour lunch on April 1, 2003, where an unnamed third party heard the conversation, and that Ms. Kelley's editor, Peter Gethers, discussed the same material with Ms. Bush over the phone.

Lou Colasuonno, a former publicist for Ms. Bush, confirmed that he was the third party at the lunch and contradicted her denial. "I have not seen the book, I have only seen news reports," Mr. Colasuonno said. "According to what I have seen, what has been reported, I would not dispute that."