From The Colbert Report:

If pundits want to save America, they have to do what's wrong to prove they're right.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 85

PLAYS: 29

( Survivor of the "Teaching Tour".)

Before the GOP succumbed to the lunatic fringe, becoming a burned out shell of its former self, there was something of a broader definition of who a conservative actually was - and it ran the gamut from staunch isolationist to downright left-leaning. The concept of "the big tent" seemed apt back then. But that was "back then"- 1970. Another whole lifetime ago. Even though the seeds of lunacy were being sown in abundance as early as 1958, they wouldn't make their full-fledged appearance for a few more years.

In May of 1970, NET (forerunner of PBS) had a weekly program called NET Journal where they ran a panel discussion featuring several prominent conservatives of the day, M. Stanton Evans, Russell Kirk, William Rusher and Milton Friedman, a sort of sampling of the gamut. The talk was remarkably civil by today's standards. But even so, you can tell where that freight train was eventually heading.

Santelli's rant is getting a lot of media attention, but listen to him say right before the economy collapsed that he thought it was healthy. Wow, just like his hero John McCain. And you know how that worked out for him.

“The government is promoting bad behavior! Do we really want to subsidize the losers’ mortgages?!!!! This is America!!!!!” (Does anyone recall Santelli screaming like this over the much larger bailout of his Wall Street friends? Or does he only squeal when regular middle-class Americans get some help?) The big question for Santelli is this: Why does this idiot, who talked about how the global economy was “healthy” and America’s soon would be too, still have a job?

On September 2 of last year, just two weeks before the financial markets crashed and we entered this global depression, he was on the same CNBC program, standing in the same stock exchange, saying that the economy is healthy and that the reason there’s talk of recession is just because the business media was itself in a recession.

But suddenly he's a genius that's speaking for all Americans now...Right before the markets and financials collapsed, the majority of stock show talking heads were all saying about the same thing.

I thought Brit Hume was done littering our airwaves with conservative talking points since he gave up his show to Mr. Baier, but no, he's still going to be a lead talking head for FOX. And boy is he ever wanking. With a straight face and not in clown make up, Brit Hume said this:

HUME: That's right. Well, then, the New Deal -- everybody agrees, I think, on both sides of the spectrum now, that the New Deal failed. The debate is over why it failed. People on the left believe it failed because Roosevelt, at the end of the day, really didn't do enough spending, that it simply wasn't spending -- he was not spending, whether deficit spending or not, on a scale grand enough to lift the damaged U.S. economy out of that depression.

There are people on the other side of the spectrum who would say, maybe, but look at this as well. President Roosevelt waged what could only be called a jihad against private enterprise. He prosecuted leading figures in it, Andrew Mellon being a conspicuous example. He prosecuted little companies, butcher shops in New York, as has been laid out in Amity Shlaes' book about the new -- book about the history of the Great Depression.

The problem FDR had was that he got caught up in being more conservative with the budget in '38, which slowed it down---still---the NEW Deal rescued America out of the depression and was so successful that conservatives have been trying to destroy every part of it ever since. Bush's lame attempt at dismantling Social Security was a humiliating defeat for him right after he won reelection in '04. He thought he had all that political capital to spend and he turned his attention on Social Security. There's one thing you can't fool with. That is Social Security benefits. Americans will never take that risk. .

Can you imagine if the people had actually been hoodwinked into believing Bush and went along with the mantra that they should invest their Social Security into the stock market? There may have been an armed march into DC, not by Blackwater type militia's, but by the AARP crowd that would have been screwed by the market meltdown. But it will not stop clowns like Brit Hume from trying to rewrite history about FDR.

I agree with Digby when she says:

...Brit Hume's mendacity is approaching Holocaust denial territory. Talk about intellectual violence.

The conservative elite appear to have decided on a strategy of making Obama's recovery plan fail so that they can blame the Democrats, seize power and start a world war.

I keep thinking I can't be any more shocked by their audacity. But they always exceed my expectations.

There is a famous sign from the French Quarter that immediately comes to mind when viewing the ad for the Clare Booth Luce Policy Institute's new "Conservative Babe" calendar:

Following in the tradition of past calendars from the Luce Policy Institute, Pretty in Mink celebrates smart, conservative women role models ... with flair.

We took some of your favorite leaders of today’s conservative movement on a journey back in time, and made them up into glamorous movie stars of classic Hollywood. Back when the big screen was a little more glamorous, women were a little more feminine, the men a little more charming—and the world a little less politically correct. We’ve saved Clare Boothe Luce herself for the last month of the year; we think you’ll agree that the legacy of this conservative icon makes her an appropriate ending for our calendar. And every single one of the other beautiful women featured in Pretty in Mink is one hundred percent a “Luce Lady.”

I just threw up in my mouth a little. Wanna get a glimpse of those glamour girls?

Continue reading »

DOWNLOAD (23)

PLAY (53)

The Obama Derangement Syndrome officialy has begun. We know the right wing smear machine went into over drive during the general election, but I wanted to kick it off with one of the finest Conservative yes men there is, Jonah Goldberg. He once famously wondered why liberals didn't like Dick Cheney very much.

Anyway, here he is on Hannity and Colmes getting very frothy over Obama's pick of Eric Holder as AG and even the mention of President Lincoln...

Goldberg: I agree I think we should give Obama a chance to spread his wings. We should also give him a chance before we start comparing him to Lincoln. The guy's not even president yet.

Colmes: He's not comparing himself to Lincoln, he's reading the Doris Kearns Goodwin book...

Goldberg: Actually he is. Actually he is. He compares himself to Lincoln quite often in his speeches... (No, he's really not.) Alan, you keep saying that he doesn't, but he does.

Colmes: Newt Gingrich says he's impressed with how Obama is using Lincoln, do you disagree with Newt Gingrich?

Goldberg: I'm impressed with how he's gotten away with it. Yeah, I'm impressed how so many people in the media have completely turned into head past the sphincter suck up to the guy. That's impressive.

Colmes: Newt's impressed with how Obama is utilizing Abraham Lincoln as a role model.

Goldberg: Yeah. I'm impressed with how he's getting away with doing it. I disagree with Newt, uh, that he's actually using him very much as a role model. He's NOT EVEN President yet. And I find this so fascinating, the way the press wants this guy to be Lincoln. Everyone hopes he'll be like Lincoln. You know, Lincoln had to be Lincoln because we were on the verge of a civil war that racked up 600,000 American dead. Seems to me that I don't want to have a Lincoln. I don't need to need to have a Lincoln.

Wow, where to go in this rant. So is he saying that Newt is part of his sphincter club? I think we do need an exceptional president right about now, don't you? Or maybe an FDR. I'll be happy with a good effort by Obama, though. Everyone -- everyone except rabid ideologues like Jonah Goldberg -- wants Obama to succeed because we are in two wars where hundreds of thousands of people have been killed and maimed, our complete economic system is in a perilous state with people losing their jobs like crazy since Bush. And Goldberg is foaming at the mouth because Obama reads about Lincoln.

This is what Conservatives will be doing to Obama all through his presidency. And I say, go for it. They are just looking like children crying that Billy took their Tonka truck away in the sandbox. Americans want real answers, not Insane Clown Posse behavior directed at the man they just elected.

See the Tucker/Goldberg video here from Jun 26, 2007:

Tucker: ....you're apt to see hyperventilation. People hate Cheney on this visceral level. What is so hate-able about Dick Cheney?

Goldberg: I have no, I really ... I truly have no idea. I like Dick Cheney. Love to have a beer with the guy -- I think one of the things that bothers them is that he doesn't care! The opposite of love isn't hate -- it's indifference.

The Doughboy should know that America hates Cheney. That's not me saying it, that's every poll known to man.

As the country begins to turn away from Conservatism and Bush and depression runs deep in their veins, there does seem to be a phrase that lifts up their spirits. Everybody stand up and say "Card Check."

It's also known as the Employee Free Choice Act. And its progress in Congress has every corporate Fat Cat in America leaping into frenzied action. One of them, Home Depot founder Bernie Marcus, is saying that any corporate type who isn't on board in their fight against Card Check should be shot.

It's an obvious attack on unions and we need to be aware of this. Orrin Hatch loves to go on MSNBC, CNN or the National Review and proclaim that there will be no more secret ballots for workers so civilization in America will be destroyed:

In a time when unions are outraged with Democrats for their pro-immigration policies, big labor has launched an unprecedented lobbying campaign to force workers into unions. Labor unions are supposed to protect workers’ rights, yet union bosses want Congress to pass a law that actually robs workers of their democratic right to a private ballot.

That's all you get out of them. I doubt most Conservatives even know what a "Card Check" is, but it really riles them up.

The unions are just trying to make it easier for people to organize.

The Employee Free Choice Act (H.R. 800, S. 1041), supported by a bipartisan coalition in Congress, would enable working people to bargain for better wages, benefits and working conditions by restoring workers’ freedom to choose for themselves whether to join a union. It would:

• Establish stronger penalties for violation of employee rights when workers seek to form a union and during first-contract negotiations.
• Provide mediation and arbitration for first-contract disputes (PDF).
• Allow employees to form unions by signing cards authorizing union representation.

Frank Luntz and his friends are trying to say that unionizing will be all about busting heads like Sylvester Stallone did in his movie called F.I.S.T.. I was talking to Digby about it the other day and we both laughed at this new meme being passed around. But it's a serious one that we should not dismiss out of hand. They are laying the groundwork for average Americans who don't understand what the unions are doing, and will be offended by the "card check" plan for no reason at all other than what they've heard repeatedly on wingnut radio. Digby calls it "Pavlovian talk radio conditioning."

Ted Stevens loses his seat in Alaska? No problem, just yell "Card Check!"

Thomas Frank spells it out for us:

It's Time to Give Voters the Liberalism They Want

During the campaign, you will recall, the debate over card check was supposed to be about principle, about democracy, about the sacredness of the secret ballot. However, as I pointed out a few months ago, union-certification elections often don't meet the most basic democratic requirements. Supervisors routinely hold captive-audience meetings with workers in preparation for elections; management commonly threatens to close up shop if the union wins; antiunion employees are frequently rewarded and pro-union employees are sometimes fired.

So it may not surprise you to learn that democracy isn't really the main concern of card-check's opponents. It's unions themselves. Changing the rules will make it easier to organize them.

Digby writes:

The economic crisis, particularly the Big 3 meltdown, is offering the right what they see as a new opportunity to break unions and destroy any advances workers might have expected under a progressive government. They may be temporarily in disarray politically, but the right never forgets their primary mission --- protecting the wealthy. And they are very good at advancing that agenda whether in the majority or the minority. Under the Shock Doctrine, they have a perfect opportunity to end the union movement in America and they'll certainly do their best to take advantage of the moment.

For weeks the dying Conservatives attacked Obama as being a Socialist when it came to his economic philosophy, but once it became apparent that he was going to win, suddenly he became a Reaganite.

There is a reason why Brent Bozell made it onto my "Irrelevant" list. With Obama we have a chance for some much needed change, with Bozell it's more of the same. The man talks out both sides of his neck constantly.
Check this clip out.

On America's Newsroom, Media Research Center president L. Brent Bozell III claimed that President-elect Barack Obama "ran as a Reaganite" and "won over ... the public as a fiscal conservative." But less than two weeks earlier, Bozell accused Obama of espousing "socialism" throughout the "entirety of the campaign."

Wow, in just two weeks:

BOZELL: But when you go through the entirety of the campaign saying the kind of things that you're saying in the debates, where on, for every question, you've got a redistribution of wealth answer, where you've got socialism, where you've got the government controlling every aspect of life. You don't expect a reporter to ask you, "Is this socialism?" Because the media don't ask that question. Well, some uppity reporter did -- and look what happened, they cancelled her. And, by the way, she won't be going to the ball, either.

BOZELL: No, it hasn't. Look at the exit polling. The number one issue was the economy, nothing came close. The American people are fiscally conservative, and the fascinating thing, Bill, is that Barack Obama ran as a Reaganite and won over the fiscal -- the public as a fiscal conservative. That's what the polling data shows.

BOZELL: Well, number one is that the public is conservative; number two, Barack Obama won as a conservative. That means that Barack Obama does not have the mandate to enact the left-wing agenda he wants to enact. He didn't run on it, he ran from it. So, this is not necessarily bad news for conservatives.

Every time I see this happen I flash on the incredible scene in "Chinatown."

Evelyn Mulwray: She's my daughter.
[Gittes slaps Evelyn]
Jake Gittes: I said I want the truth!
Evelyn Mulwray: She's my sister...
[slap]
Evelyn Mulwray: She's my daughter...
[slap]
Evelyn Mulwray: My sister, my daughter.
[More slaps]
Jake Gittes: I said I want the truth!
Evelyn Mulwray: She's my sister AND my daughter!

His neck has got to be aching right about now. Did he use heat or ice to ease the pain?

Thanks for the memories, but you were all completely "Irrelevant" during the historic victory that Barack Obama achieved during 2008 Presidential election. All your smears failed to change the course of history.

"Irrelevant"

"Irrelevant"

"Irrelevant"

"Irrelevant"

"Irrelevant"

"Irrelevant"

"Irrelevant"

"Irrelevant"

(The list keeps growing. More below the fold.)

Continue reading »

Paul Krugman gets it right.

Instead, the Republican rump, the party that’s left after the election, will be the party that attends Sarah Palin’s rallies, where crowds chant “Vote McCain, not Hussein!” It will be the party of Saxby Chambliss, the senator from Georgia, who, observing large-scale early voting by African-Americans, warns his supporters that “the other folks are voting.” It will be the party that harbors menacing fantasies about Barack Obama’s Marxist — or was that Islamic? — roots.

Why will the G.O.P. become more, not less, extreme? For one thing, projections suggest that this election will drive many of the remaining Republican moderates out of Congress, while leaving the hard right in place. 

{snip}

But the G.O.P.’s long transformation into the party of the unreasonable right, a haven for racists and reactionaries, seems likely to accelerate as a result of the impending defeat.
This will pose a dilemma for moderate conservatives. Many of them spent the Bush years in denial, closing their eyes to the administration’s dishonesty and contempt for the rule of law. Some of them have tried to maintain that denial through this year’s election season, even as the McCain-Palin campaign’s tactics have grown ever uglier. But one of these days they’re going to have to realize that the G.O.P. has become the party of intolerance. 

He's got it perfect. If Obama wins today, the Republican party with the help of FOX and talk radio will be the party of Screaming Zombies that will make the Clinton years look like a walk in the beach.

And as Digby tells us:

And it's obviously a long way from them believing that Americans are tired of conservatism. They will keep fighting.

Now, the villagers are already saying this is a victory for the "center-right" and are becoming apoplectic at the idea that the dirty hippies are coming to town to trash the place, so there will be very strong resistance to anything that doesn't look like centrism and bipartisanship. With the villagers' track record I would hope that a new administration armed with a mandate for change would be smart enough to ignore them.

DOWNLOAD (14)

PLAY (43)

Here's another edition of the BillO Comedy Hour. O'Reilly is very worried that he's one of the only people who will be looking out for the folks if Obama and the Democrats win a strong majority in Congress. This is the talking point that Bill and Newt have been pushing: 'Be afraid of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, so don't vote for the Democrats,' even though Republican/Conservative rule has devastated our country and Iraq.

(rough transcript)

O'Reilly:...is, when you have a collision, say Obama wins the election of a committed left Congress and a committed left President with a committed left media, they all then meld together. I don't think this is healthy for the country. I mean, you're going to have a media that's very sympathetic to whatever Congress and the President does no matter what it is. And you're going to have very few voices, talk radio, this network, some people in dissent. I'm getting a little uneasy here, Juan.

Williams: Well, hold on. You had a Republican President, you had a Republican House and Republican Senate for most of the Bush administration...

O'Reilly: And a liberal media.

Williams: Well, but you know what, most of the media was intimidated, remember the whole idea was that this is a right-of-center country and this is a man in power. There's always deference showed to the President...

O'Reilly: It looks like the stars are aligned. {snip} But Mary Katherine, the collusion of a far left Congress to a far left media to a far left media being sympathetic to them makes me a little uneasy because there's no check and balance there, it all goes out the window. The media is supposed to be the check and balance on the Congress and there isn't any check anymore. They are actively rooting and promoting and that's what we have.

I didn't hear Bill complain when the media rolled over for Bush, allowing him to lie us into war and forgo every single campaign promise he made. You remember his "Compassionate Conservative" routine? And has Bill ever heard of the Blue Dogs? Of course everything Bill says is a complete lie in this clip, but we're used to that here at C&L. But if what O'Reilly says was actually true and the Democratic Party does achieve a solid majority after Nov. 4th then let me break down his argument.

1. Talk Radio: Rush Limbaugh and his followers will attack every single policy Obama tries to put forth that will try to help rescue this nation from the complete disaster that has been caused by Conservatism.

2. FOX News: Is an extension of right wing talk radio and so will also try to disrupt every policy decision Obama makes. And they will use every smear available to them.

3. Liberal media: Typical Conservative talking point that has been successful in intimidating the press from doing their job whenever it benefits Republicans.

4. When has O'Reilly ever worried about checks and balances?

But let's forget that. Why would Bill and the media be in "dissent" over Obama? Aren't they supposed to be covering the news as it happens? Being a watchdog of the government doesn't mean that the press has to disagree with their policy decisions from the outset, it means an eye is kept on them.

And so ends another edition of the Bill O'Reilly Comedy hour. FOX shouldn't feel too bad that The Half Hour News Hour failed so miserably. They already have a comedy show that's been running for a very long time now.

As the election heads to the finish line, the Conservative lunatic fringe are really losing it. Remember when right wing radio talk show host Bill Cunningham viciously attacked Obama as he opened up for John McCain in Cincinnati? McCain had to repudiate him shortly after and then Cunningham attacked McCain in response. The circle jerk just makes one dizzy. Well, in his mind, not only do poor people lack values, morals, and ethics, but they also are fat and flatulent."

JFK:

"You know, people are poor in America, Steve, not because they lack money; they're poor because they lack values, morals, and ethics. And if government can't teach and instill that, we're wasting our time simply giving poor people money." Earlier in the show, Cunningham had stated that "unlike many countries in the world, Steve, we have fat poor people. We don't have skinny poor people. Ours are fat and flatulent."

Our poor people are fat. They are Cadillac Queens that eat great food which is paid for by you and me.

Digby then finds Rush Limbaugh saying that Obama is hypnotizing Americans. No, really.

"I do remember reading that the highly educated are the most susceptible to being hypnotized, so that would put me in the risk group, ladies and gentlemen. And yet, I'm going to watch Obama tonight."

"If you do watch Obama tonight, here's the sign that I want you to make for your TV: 'Do not be hypnotized. You are listening to a socialist.'"

In case you're wondering, the highly educated Rush isn't using "hypnotized" as a metaphor. He means it literally.

It's getting nuttier out there by the second. This will be a long weekend.

Download | play

I know David Neiwert did a post on this segment already, but I had to chime in for a minute. First of all, notice how Wolf fawns all over Joe the Plumber? OK, the real problem I have is this: Why do I have to see Beck on CNN's most serious political show (The Situation Room) at all? What value does he add? His whole purpose was to try and make it seem like Obama is as bad as McCain. They already have segments devoted to ideologues already.

When he stares into the camera to give America and McCain advice it practically burns out my eye sockets.

BECK: Yes. No, I don't think he -- I don't think he did.

I mean, I thought he was good, but he had to be Ronald Reagan. And he's just not Ronald Reagan. And he's not -- look, he needs somebody to be able to look into the camera and be able to say, America, I get it. You don't trust me, you don't trust him, and the reason why is because we've been lying to you the whole time.

This whole government has been telling you half-truths and nontruths for long enough. So look, here's the bad news: Blah, blah, blah. And here's exactly what I'm going to do, and I mean what I say.

If he could have connected with the American audience -- -- and also, neither of them -- you know, the Republicans need to police the Republicans and the Democrats need to police the Democrats. They need to get the bad ones out, the ones who are involved in scandal and double talk and everything else. People need to unite.

CNN, free us from Glenn Beck!

Stop, it hurts!

Download | play   Download | play (h/t Heather for vids)

I had originally planned to focus this post on campaign tactics of Barack Obama and his attempt to stand out from the pack by attacking Hillary on the subject of Social Security, which as the NY Times' Paul Krugman points out, is not as big a problem as Republicans would have you believe--in fact, they hate it because it's not a big problem. That said, I do think that Barack's stance of expanding the income cap is a good one.

But then George Will had to chime in and say something so completely through-the- looking-glass bizarre that I had to change my whole focus.  Watch how Will just proves Krugman right:

Sixty-five days from now, the first of 78 million baby boomers begun (sic) to retire. Most Americans who collect Social Security begin to collect it at age 62, which is absurd. We have the public subsidizing increasingly long and comfortable retirement of people for a third to a half of their adult lifetime. Now. That's why one in four voters in 2004 was over 60 years old. The elderly have the biggest stake in the welfare state, which exists to transfer wealth to them. So this is, politically, a loser.

Um, WTF???  The rules of Social Security have changed...while it's true that you can begin collecting at the age of 62, you won't get as much as if you wait until 65.  And so now George is complaining about subsidizing people for up to half of their lives????  How many 120 year olds do you know, George?  Are you suggesting that we should be making those indolent 75 year olds pull themselves up by the bootstraps and get back to work?  Those lazy seniors...

UPDATE: via John Amato: (In the above video clip) Paul Krugman believes that Obama's new approach to Social Security was a foolish endeavor. I thought the same thing. Social Security was the first real defeat I can remember that George Bush suffered with the help of the netroots after he won re-election and told America:

During the first press conference after his re-election, Bush said, "I earned capital in the campaign, political capital, and now I intend to spend it. It is my style."

We've come to see what his style represents all too well... Duncan Black explains:

It's true that Obama didn't assert that there was some huge crisis. But the fact remains that he put the idea out there that Social Security had a "problem" which needs to be fixed and that any serious presidential candidate needs to address the issue in clear detail.  So what's the big deal?

Beating back George Bush's plan to kill social security was probably the first major victory for the broadly defined netroots movement. I say that not really knowing if things would have been different if blogs and the like didn't exist, but it seemed like a victory...read on