Archive for: November, 2012

Stand Up and Shut Down the GOP Obstruction Machine by Demanding Filibuster Reform

Nov 30 2012 Published by under Featured News

Old Mitch McConnell had a plan in his failed attempt to make Barack Obama a one-term president.  Here a filibuster, there a filibuster, everywhere a filibuster in the name of obstructing the Senate’s business to make Obama a one-term president.

Filibuster usage used to mean that those seeking to filibuster actually had to be in the legislative body, speaking endlessly in the name of preventing a vote, seeking to add amendments to a proposed legislation or simply extending debate.  Under the current rules, one can call it in without any personal inconveniences, such as having to be in the Senate, or talking non-stop, a la Jimmy Stewart in “Mr. Smith goes to Washington.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, with support from President Obama wants the filibuster to return to the days of Mr. Smith. According to Huffington Post/YouGov poll,  the people are all for filibuster reform.

THE HUFFPOST/YOUGOV POLL

Should senators who filibuster a bill need to participate in debate for the entire filibuster, or should they be able to filibuster a bill without being physically present?

They should participate in debate for the entire filibuster
They should be able to filibuster without being physically present
Not sure

Naturally, Mitch McConnell opposes the rule changes because, “The American people sent us here to be their voice. They understand that those voices can at times become loud and argumentative, but they also hope we can disagree without being disagreeable.”
McConnell continued,

What they do not expect is for one party, be it Republican or Democrat, to change the rules in the middle of the game so they can make all the decisions while the other party is told to sit down and keep quiet. The American people want less partisanship in this town, but everyone in this chamber knows that if the majority chooses to end the filibuster, if they choose to change the rules and put an end to democratic debate, then the fighting, the bitterness and the gridlock will only get worse.

Mr. McConnell, 65 percent of Americans believe senators should “participate in debate for the entire filibuster,” so you can rest assured that filibuster reform is not about suppressing your voice or those of the people you purport to represent.  We want you to speak all the way through the filibuster.  Speak all you want, whether it’s the phone book, the bible, or Grover Norquist’s pledge. The point is if you want a filibuster you must speak, which is the polar opposite of being told to sit down and keep quiet.

If you are going to stop the nation’s business, you better have a reason beyond partisan gamesmanship and you better be prepared to participate in the filibuster that you wanted.

Seventy-nine per cent of American voters want those who call for filibuster to be present and participate in the filibuster debate, vs. calling a stop to the nation’s business on everything from important legislation like the Dream Act, to routine of the Senate’s business.   since some of those voters voted for Republican senators, there is room to suggest that perhaps they feel it is more an affront to them to stall the nation’s business for partisan reasons.

In a desperate attempt to oppose the rule change, McConnell actually tried to argue that a rule requiring participation in a filibuster debate is about silencing voices, notwithstanding the fact that his abuse of the filibuster had that very effect.

Let’s be clear: The rules change that’s being proposed is not an affront to me or to the Republican Party. It’s an affront to the American people,” McConnell said. “It’s an affront to the people who sent me and the other 46 Republicans here to represent them in the Senate, but whose voices would be shut out if the majority leader and this cohort of short-sighted Senate sophomores have their way and permanently change this body.

Seriously?  How does requiring those who want a filibuster to speak silence them?  More to the point, with 79% of voters favoring reform, people who voted for McConnell and the other 46 Republicans want them to put their mouth where their filibuster is.  If anything is an affront to the people, it the Republican desire to bring the nation’s business to a screeching halt without putting any effort in to defend or justify their actions.

It’s worth noting that voting Americans support continued use of the filibuster, but not the abuse we have witness for years.  These rule changes have everything to do with a reasonable expectation that if you are going to call for a filibuster, then perhaps you should be present and participating during the debate.

You can sign the petition to support filibuster reform here.

Image from The New Mexico Independent

 

Comments are off for this post

The Republican Obsession With Obstructing Obama is Endangering the Country

Nov 30 2012 Published by under Featured News

The spectrum of behaviors characterized by abnormal mental or behavioral patterns manifest as violations of normalcy, including a person becoming a danger to others, is a broad definition of insanity. Albert Einstein defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results,” and his definition aptly describes the Republican Party for the past thirty years. However, since President Obama won re-election three weeks ago, members of the GOP in Congress have gone off the rails, and the consequences to the government, and 98% of the people, represents a clear danger to the nation’s fragile economic recovery. Even though the election proved voters rejected Republican obstructionism and loyalty to the wealthy, they are digging in their heels and threatening tactics they used over the past four years as if the people demanded they continue making government unmanageable.

When S&P downgraded the country’s credit rating last year, they saidAmerica’s governance was becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable,” and blamed Republicans for using “the statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default as political bargaining chips to resist any measure that would raise revenues.” S&P recognized that sequestration leading to the so-called fiscal cliff was “a fallback mechanism designed to encourage Congress to embrace a more balanced approach to deficit reduction,” but they understood Republicans were intent on letting the “2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place.” The Republican proposals beginning the day after the election informed that S&P recognized what many Americans have witnessed for the past four years and that is the Republicans will continue obstructing any attempt to increase revenue that includes raising taxes on the rich. In fact, they are still pushing Romney’s tax plan for fiscal cliff negotiations that include reducing tax rates for the wealthy and closing tax loopholes for the middle class.

In an effort to unblock the logjam in the Senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid is proposing changing filibuster rules to disallow Republicans from obstructing bills from even coming up for discussion, and it prompted Speaker of the House John Boehner to pre-condemn a change to the filibuster by threatening that, “Any bill that reaches a Republican-led House based on Senate Democrats’ heavy-handed power play would be dead on arrival.” However, there have been bills that did pass the filibuster prone Senate Republicans, like keeping tax cuts for 98% of Americans and 97% of small businesses, that House Republicans refuse to bring up for a vote, or discussion. Republican obstructionism is not dependent on Senate procedures, but on giving preference to the wealthy and opposing any Administration or Democratic measure regardless if it helps create jobs, boost the economy, or reduce the deficit.

Yesterday, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner presented President Obama’s proposal for avoiding the fiscal cliff Republicans voted for last year, and Republicans dismissed it with extreme prejudice because it is not austerity with more tax cuts for the rich. The President’s proposal adheres to the kind of broad framework of the deal Boehner wants with an upfront deficit-reduction “down payment” that cancels automatic tax increases and spending cuts while still signaling seriousness on the deficit, and a second stage giving Congress the opportunity to work on overhauling the tax code and social programs to secure more deficit reduction next year. Still, it does not include reducing taxes on wealthy and corporations’ while drastically cutting social safety nets and spending on infrastructure. Boehner said, “The Democrats have yet to get serious about real spending cuts,” and that “no substantive progress has been made in the talks between the White House and the House over the last two weeks. Listen, this is not a game, jobs are on the line, the American economy is on the line. And this is a moment for adult leadership.” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said, “They took a step backward, moving away from consensus and significantly closer to the cliff,” which is simple code for not proposing severe austerity to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy that, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), will not reduce the deficit.

In the CBO’s Budget and Economic Outlook for Fiscal Years 2012 – 2022, it says if Bush-era tax cuts are allowed to expire at the end of the year, then the projected deficit will shrink from $1.1 trillion to $196 billion; an 82% reduction over the next six years. As a result, an increase in tax revenues combined with spending cuts will nearly halve the deficit in 2013, reducing it to $585 billion. They also claim that because the Bush-era tax cuts were never paid for, they will remain 60% of the deficit through 2019 because the country is still paying on borrowed money to benefit the wealthy.

There are signs that some Republicans realize the election was a repudiation of Republicans and their persistent obstructionism and refusal to help all Americans, but the majority are still of the mindset that preventing economic progress will “make President Obama a one-term President.” The Republican hatred of President Obama transcends economic policy and permeates their entire reason for living. The recent statements by some Senate Republicans that they will not confirm anyone the President nominates to replace Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State has nothing to do with the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans and everything to do obstructing President Obama. Their opposition to any Administration proposal is not founded in sound economic or foreign policies, but their insane obsession with preventing the President from working for the American people.

Last year’s S&P report was correct in its appraisal that Republicans have made governance less stable, less effective, and less predictable, and one may have thought the election signaled that their intransigence on balanced deficit reduction was not acceptable, but they learned nothing whatsoever. In fact, they immediately trotted out Willard Romney’s tax plan, made Paul Ryan point-man on fiscal cliff negotiations, and assailed the President for not putting the Affordable Care Act on the table as a means of deficit reduction; anything to prevent raising tax rates on the wealthiest 2% of income earners. Their obsession with protecting the rich is more than just a form of mental illness; it is hazardous to this country’s economic health the American people cannot survive as long as they continue making governance less stable and effective.

President Obama gave Republicans a proposal that cuts the deficit, cuts spending, creates jobs through infrastructure improvements, and preserves tax cuts for 98% of the population and 97% of small businesses. Republicans countered with Romney’s austerity plan and greater tax cuts for the wealthy, and they show no signs of relenting despite the looming fiscal cliff. Americans cannot tolerate another four years of Republican obstructionism just to benefit 2% of the population, or Draconian cuts to social safety nets that tens-of-millions of Americans depend on for basic survival. It has come to the point that Republicans are not doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, because they are doing the same thing they have for the past four years and expect the same results of making governance impossible, and unfortunately for America, their insane obsession with obstructing the President is a danger to economic recovery and 98% of the population.

 

Comments are off for this post

Rush Limbaugh Demands to be Named Time Person of the Year Because He Made Sandra Fluke Famous

Nov 30 2012 Published by under Featured News

After Sandra Fluke made Time’s short list for Person of the Year, Rush Limbaugh demanded that he be named person of the year, because he made Fluke famous.

Here is the audio from Media Matters:

Transcript from Rush Limbaugh:

LIMBAUGH: The one thing that Obama is known for, this War on Women. If they want to claim a mandate, I guess they could on that, but giving away free contraception — Snerdley, have you heard this? TIME Magazine puts out their short list for Person of the Year. And among the people on it is Sandra Fluke. Now, not something I’m proud of here, folks. I must be blatantly honest. Nobody would know who she is if it weren’t for me. If anybody is gonna be named Person of the Year on that basis, it ought to be me. It’s not an honor that I would appreciate because it represents a little bit of a screw-up, but the fact of the matter is that she’s even on the list.

You go back and you look at some of the TIME Magazine people of the year from way back, I mean they were really substantive, serious people. You look at the short list, and what’s happened is that TIME Magazine and the rest of the media, the world now revolves around them and their potential people of the year all happen to be media types one way or the other. It is the most narcissistic bunch of people that you can run into, outside of Obama and his acolytes. Yeah, Jon Stewart’s on the short list, too. Oh, it’s the pop culture. It’s what I’m telling you. If there’s one area where we don’t exist, it’s there. It’s why I keep saying that our comeback is not just gonna be political; it’s gonna have to be cultural as well.

Rush Limbaugh wants to be rewarded for slandering Sandra Fluke repeatedly on his radio show. He is still at it to this day. The only difference now is that he uses subtler and shorter jabs. While Limbaugh is at it, maybe he would like credit for losing the 2012 presidential election for the Republican Party?

It can be argued that Mitt Romney had zero chance of winning with female voters after he refused to take a stand against Limbaugh’s remarks. Who can forget Romney’s weak kneed not language I would have used answer? By attacking Sandra Fluke, Rush Limbaugh confirmed existence of the War on Women. Before Akin and Mourdock, there was Rush Limbaugh attacking Sandra Fluke.

Getting on the Time shortlist had nothing to do with Limbaugh slanderous attacks, and everything to do with how Fluke has turned such a negative event into a platform for important issues.

Rush Limbaugh is a lot of things, but person of the year definitely isn’t one of them.

Comments are off for this post

Obama's Gets Payback For 2010 Bush Tax Cut by Using Christmas to Pressure the GOP

Nov 30 2012 Published by under Featured News

Remember in 2010 when House Republicans used the threat of throwing millions into poverty at Christmas in order to get the Bush tax cuts extended? President Obama does. In 2012, he is getting payback.

Here is the video from NBC News:

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

During his remarks the president admitted that he missed being on the campaign trail, and having a conversation with America. Obama repeated his belief in the middle class, and when people can get ahead through hard work. Obama, “I want to reward manufactures and small businesses like this one that create jobs in the United States.”

The president said the fiscal cliff is not some run of the mill debate. The president laid out two paths for the fiscal cliff debate. Congress does nothing and taxes go up on families and business. Obama said, “If Congress does nothing, every family in America will see their taxes go up on January 1. Every family, everybody here, you’ll see your taxes go up on January first. I’m assuming that doesn’t sound to good to you. That’s sort of like the lump of coal you get for Christmas. That’s a Scrooge Christmas.”

Obama argued that because people would see a huge tax hike, businesses would have fewer customers, and the economy would stall. The second path was Congress extending the tax cut for 98% of Americans and 97% of small businesses. He reminded everyone that people making more than $250,000 would still get a tax cut on their first quarter million dollars earned. The president repeated his message that the American people need to urge Congress to pass the middle class tax cut extension.

The president asked the American people to tell Democrats and Republicans not to get bogged down in partisan bickering. Obama wants the American people to tell Congress to get this done. He said it doesn’t make sense for Republicans to hold middle class tax cuts hostage, because they don’t want taxes to go up on the wealthy.

President Obama has completely turned the tables on the House Republicans who held the threat of cutting off unemployment benefits for millions of Americas to get the Bush tax cuts extended. At the time, Republicans thought they had won. It turns that take the unemployed hostage gambit was setting the stage for a huge loss.

David Corn has already debunked the myth of the 2010 cave. What the left saw as a cave was actually an elaborate move to set up this exact situation. Obama was thinking about 2012 in 2010, and he has successfully cornered the Republicans. This time it is the president using Christmas as leverage against the Republicans.

All the pressure currents sits on the shoulders of the Republican Party. Of course the president doesn’t want the country to go off the fiscal cliff, but if it happens he won’t be the one getting blamed. The president holds the winning hand. He has the popular support for his position.

In 2010, Republicans were playing checkers while Obama was playing chess. House Republicans are running out of moves, and they are about to be checkmated.

Obama hasn’t forgotten 2010, which is why Republicans are going to pay a heavy price in 2012.

Comments are off for this post

Bo Obama Steals America's Heart While Inspecting the White House Holiday Decorations

Nov 30 2012 Published by under Featured News

After a bruising partisan presidential election, the White House has posted a video that everybody can enjoy. Watch Bo Obama amp up the First Dog cuteness factor as he inspects the holiday decorations.

Here is the video:

After becoming the First Dog officially in April of 2009, Bo has largely grown up outside of the media spotlight. His 2012 star turn has taken the Internet by storm. The best part of the video is Bo’s confusion over meeting a larger than life decoration replica of himself. It was a tough election year, and videos like this give everyone a break and a chance to smile.

However, it seems that some people are never happy with anything. Sixty nine people actually have disliked this video on the White House YouTube page. Those unhappy 69 people either hate the holidays, or have an allergy to cute.

The country is going to be consumed the fiscal cliff fight from now until Christmas, but for today, let’s all take a couple of minutes and be charmed by the cuteness of Bo Obama.

Comments are off for this post

An Explanation of the Fiscal Cliff that's so Simple Even Republicans Can Get It

Nov 30 2012 Published by under Featured News


Sixth grader Noah Williams-Morrill has earned himself a meeting with President Obama today with a video explanation of the fiscal cliff that’s so simple even Republicans can get it.

Here is a sixth grader explaining the fiscal cliff in just 60 seconds:

Noah’s explanation was simple, “The fiscal cliff means at the beginning of the year the government won’t have enough money to pay for these things. Do you care about education? If the government doesn’t have enough money, over the cliff. Medicaid for nursing homes, healthcare for kids, Sesame Street, tax breaks for middle class taxpayers, spending for our roads and bridges, protecting clean water and clean air. This doesn’t have to happen. We can make sure we have enough money for all these things. The biggest thing we can do is raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans by only 4.6%.”

Mike Morrill of Keystone Progress announced via press release that the sixth grader is going to get to meet the president today, “Immediately following President Obama’s visit at 12:00 Noon to the Rodon Group manufacturing facility, Noah and two other young people, who are part of a nationwide community movement to urge Congress to restore tax fairness, will discuss their meeting with President Obama earlier in the day.”

House Republicans are gambling that the American people will blame President Obama if they refuse to raise taxes, and let the country go over the cliff. This is a tactic that they have tried many times before. House Republicans had to cave on the payroll tax extension at this same time last year, when it became obvious to them that the nation was not going to blame Obama. Having learned nothing from their year of failed bullying since, these same ideologues are once again resorting to their go to move of just saying no.

Congressional Republicans seem completely oblivious to the fact that Obama owns the bipartisanship message. He has successfully beaten that drum for more than four years now. This president was reelected in part, because voters saw him as the candidate most likely to cooperate with the other side. If the nation goes off the fiscal cliff, the court of public opinion will not convict President Obama.

If you know anyone who doesn’t get why the fiscal cliff is so important, share this video with them. Noah Williams-Morrill has made it so simple that even Fox News watching ideologues can get understand it. Of course, if Fox News viewers watch the the video, they are likely to come away from it calling Noah a socialist and a victim of Obama’s plot to indoctrinate our youth.

But we’ve all got to start somewhere, right?

Comments are off for this post

Fox News Has a Holiday Wish List but Governor Chafee Can't Have a Holiday Tree

Nov 30 2012 Published by under Featured News, Issues, Republican Party

“All I want for Christmas is to kill it,” seems to be the song conservatives think liberals sing each and every holiday season. Fox News has made a lucrative living pushing a nonexistent war on Christmas, seizing on every example of religious pluralism in this country  – that is, the right of people to believe whatever they wish, including nothing at all – and making it seem anti-Christian.

Media Matters reports on an example  of this from Fox & Friends. You see, Rhode Island Govenor Lincoln Chafee used the term “holiday tree” instead of “Christmas tree” (the correct identifier would be “Yule” tree, since it’s a very Pagan emblem of the season). And then, not only did he call it a holiday tree, but he didn’t make any big deal about lighting it up for the season.

Well, how dare Governor Chafee recognize that there are non-Christians in Rhode Island! As Media Matters relates, “On Fox & Friends First, co-host Heather Nauert claimed Chafee made the ‘decision to kill Christmas,’ alluding to a decision by the governor not to host a tree lighting ceremony at the statehouse this year.”

Of course, during those halcyon days of Puritanism our Religious Right pretends to yearn for, Chafee’s decision would have been hailed by religious authorities, given that the Puritans recognized the Pagan origins of the tree.

Even the Christian Science Monitor recognizes the historical context of Christmas in Rhode Island, pointing to the fact that “Roger Williams founded the Providence colony and called for a complete separation of church and state.” Rhode Island thus became a refuge for Jews and Quakers.

It cannot, apparently, be a refuge for those who don’t want to say “Merry Christmas.”

But then, according to conservatives, there can be no such refuge anywhere on these shors. And tomorrow, the world.

But what is funny in this particular instance is that moments later, Fox aired a “Holiday Wish List” rather than what should have been promoted, for consistency’s sake (not to mention hypocrisy’s), a “Christmas” wish list. Media Matters pointed out that “This is not the first time that Fox’s “War on Christmas” them has been undermined by the channel’s own use of the word holiday rather than Christmas” but with conservatives in general and Fox News in particular, it has always been a case of “do as I say” rather than “do as I do.”

How else to explain the illicit drugs, prostitutes, and girlfriends (sometimes, boyfriends) the wife doesn’t know about?

As far as the War on Christmas goes, it is hilarious that Fox News and conservatives would make sport of the War on Women as some imaginary thing while promoting a War on Christmas. The War on Women is amply documented. There are literally dozens of pieces of legislation both state and federal promoted by Republican legislators, including a record number of anti-choice bills, dating from 2010.

There are exactly zero laws targeting Christians and the practice of their religion.

World Net Daily is claiming that half of Americans are at war with God. The obvious problem with this is the underlying insistence that all Americans should be recognizing the God of Abraham, not only as a god but as the only god.

The Constitution does not require this. The Constitution, as it happens, forbids the government to promote this idea by banning the establishment of a state religion.

Only a monotheist could throw a tantrum because not everybody worships their god. Seriously. As problems go, this is not one.

Of course, I am a polytheist. For me, all gods exist, even the god of Abraham, though I see him as a god of northwestern Arabia, a desert god for desert folk.

I haven’t lost anything in Sinai. If folks of European descent want to worship a religion Arabian god, that’s their business. I don’t care. I could not care less if anybody recognizes my gods. They’re my gods. Why would it matter if they’re anybody else’s?

Well, we don’t need to get into the whole “revealed” religion thing here where we all stand surety for humankind’s good behavior so the God of Abraham doesn’t swat us all down, a pretension for which, to my polytheist eyes, the other gods would have a good laugh, if nothing else. Thor wards me. YHWH can take a swim.

My point is that, under the Constitution, my viewpoint is as valid under the law of the land as World Net Daily’s or Heather Nauert’s or an atheist who thinks the whole god thing is a bunch of hooey. Thomas Jefferson said so, famously saying in his Notes on the State of Virginia (Query XVII) that “The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”

I feel the same. And it’s a healthy outlook to have. Worry about your own pursuit of happiness and don’t feel that your own requires them to share yours, even if you have to coerce them.

But authoritarianism loves obedience and apparently it is required by the Bible (so they insist) that we all obey and celebrate Christmas, even if it is nothing to us. Even if the Constitution, which is the law of the land while the Bible is not, says that we don’t have to.

Craig McMillian at WND says that we’ve all become stupid, that we missed some classes in college or “were too busy enjoying the enforced coed dorms and subsidized abortions at our nation’s most prestigious educational establishments.” He even suggests inbreeding may be to blame for wanting change (I mean, who could possibly want change unless they were the victims of inbreeding?), an event which “dumbed us down.”

It’s all about tantrums here. There is no war on Christmas. There are, however, growing numbers of people who do not share with any great enthusiasm Christian doctrine, or do not share it at all. People like Heather Nauert and Craig McMillan think we’re being anti-Christian by refusing to be Christian and thinks that we all ought to help Christians celebrate Christmas whether we want to or not.

I personally think the God of Abraham, assuming he is the same guy who sent Jesus, would recognize all the stolen Pagan trappings when he sees them (I mean, a God would have to, right?) and probably laud folks for not falling into Heathen ways.

Åsgårdsreien by Peter Nicolai Arbo (Norway 1831-1892)

The God of Abraham would certainly recognize that Jesus was not born on December 25, though a lot of Pagan gods were celebrated or born at that time of the year, including my own Odin, who soon will be taking to his eight-legged horse Sleipnir to lead the Wild Hunt across the skies, much like the later Santa.

You see the connection. Odin = Santa.

Look, there is nothing new under the sun, including Christmas. It’s all been done before by somebody else and for different reasons and to different gods.

Apparently, because we liberals are in touch with actual facts, and recognize these things, we are victims of inbreeding, but then you’ve got to consider the source. I mean, who knows stupid like WND and Fox News?

I’m not sayin’. I’m just sayin’.

Oh. And Happy Holidays.

Comments are off for this post

The Sons and Daughters of Liberty: Anonymous

Nov 29 2012 Published by under Featured News

As technology rages on, every part of our lives are dependent upon codes written by programmers who ship vital programs such as food, water, medical, educational and other vital programs.These programs are dependent upon technology in our daily lives. Our rights are even dependent upon the technology we have. Voting has become dependent upon technology as an enforcement of our rights.

Right now the use of the Internet is at its infancy and is steadily growing around our everyday life. Yet there are those who would use technology to skew it to their individual greediness. We saw this during the elections as when Karl Rove thought that Governor Mitt Romney took Ohio. Then the hacktivist group Anonymous said that they prevented the same digital flub like in 2004.

So who are these people that they call Anonymous? Who are these new patriots who don’t carry a rifle and scream the British are coming? To all intents and purposes they are our safety mechanisms. These are our checks and balances by which they thwart evildoers like the puppet corporations that took control of the Republican Party.

Checks and balances are the eyes and ears of free election as well as freedom which Karl Rove may have discovered the night of the Presidential election. First the warning to Karl Rove then the response just after the election:

Photo Courtesy of Wonkette

There are many who are saying Anonymous had nothing to do with the voting system for the Presidential election of 2012. In my opinion as of writing this piece, Karl Rove seemed to slink back into the darkness. If Anonymous did this could there be other actions they are interested in?

After combing through chats and message boards; it seems that Anonymous has their eyes on Israel which could lead to a possible attack on Iran. The neo-conservatives in Israel may decide to attack Iran because of their nuclear power plants. If this happens neo-conservatives in Israel, Anonymous or some group similar to them will attempt to end this. What is Israel doing? According to Haaretz:

Israeli hackers bring down Saudi, UAE stock exchange websites

Apparently the Israeli military is preparing to counter any cyber-attack upon Israel and proceed with their plans. But their plans may have holes. According to Anonymous, they have hacktivists in every continent on this planet. There are hacktivists in Asia, Africa, Europe, Australia and the Americas as well as hacktivists in every branch of government.Israel also has it’s hacktivists too. It is unknown if there are hacktivists in Antarctic.

They are willing to take down the military infrastructure to prevent war between the two nations. This will clog up their systems so no one dies. Many of the hacktivists are also from Israel and feel that any potential war between both countries will end in casualties of innocent lives.

No one, according to various hacktivists are immune to Anonymous. Any country who may preemptively attack any nation without cause according to posts and blogs will collectively put an end to it.

Many are keeping an eye on what is happening between Anonymous and Israel. If war does break out it would be interesting to see how the end-result will turn out. My advice? Try peace.

Comments are off for this post

Rush Limbaugh Claims the Fiscal Cliff is an Obama Plot to Wipe Out the GOP

Nov 29 2012 Published by under Featured News

The Democratic position of strength is bringing out a special brand of crazy on the right, as Rush Limbaugh is claiming that Obama is using fiscal cliff as a tool to achieve his goal of wiping out the GOP.

Limbaugh was warning Republicans not to negotiate with Democrats on the fiscal cliff. He was warning Republicans that Obama’s plan to reduce the deficit will lead to economic disaster, so they should not have anything to do with it.

It was all standard Limbaugh stuff until he said this,

The Republicans lost. Now, they still control the House of Representatives. Boehner still runs the show there. But the only leverage that I can see that they’ve got is to back out of this and make sure that whatever happens, they don’t have any fingerprints on it. I know what you’re saying, and you’d be right. You’re saying, “But, Rush, but, Rush, no matter what the Republicans do, they’re gonna get blamed for it.” Yes, totally true. No matter what happens. If there is a reported recession, in fact, it will be said to be the Republicans in the House fault. No matter what happens, that’s going to be said, and no matter what happens, as we sit here now, the American people, the majority of whom, are gonna believe that.

So back out of this and make sure you don’t have any fingerprints on this at all. “But, Rush, but, Rush, aren’t your fingerprints going to be on it if you back out? Couldn’t the case be made that Republicans backing out and letting Obama have his way is, in effect, allowing this transformation to happen, can’t you say there would be fingerprints there?” Yes. But I’m telling you there’s another aspect to this that Obama is attempting to pull off here, and if the Republicans aren’t careful, it’s going to happen. Not only is he not worried about a recession in the second term, ’cause even if there is one, it will not be reported as such.

Part of Obama’s transformation of America is wiping out the Republican Party. And anyone who fails to understand that that is also part of Obama’s agenda at this moment, anybody who fails to understand that is really not paying attention and is too caught up in traditional conventional wisdom about, “Well, it was just another election. Well, yes, Obama won. Yes, we marshaled our forces, but we need to stand for pro-growth policies and all that rotgut.” Yes, we do. There’s no way we’re ever gonna be tied to pro-growth policies if our fingerprints are on this coming disaster.

In Rush Limbaugh’s mind, the fiscal cliff that the Republicans created as a tactic to be used to defeat Obama is actually an Obama plot to wipe out the Republican Party. The only way that Republicans can avoid falling into Obama’s trap is to not negotiate or deal with the president at all. Limbaugh made this argument despite the fact that more Republicans oppose their own party’s plan than support it and the American people are ready to lay the blame on congressional Republicans if a deal doesn’t get done.

In short, Rush Limbaugh is urging Republicans to not fall for Obama’s devious plot that they created to destroy Obama.

Limbaugh is suggested that Republicans ignore what the voters said they wanted on Election Day (both parties to work together), and continue their obstructionist ways. I guess the voters’ desire for more bipartisanship and their rejection Republican policies are also part of the Obama conspiracy to destroy the GOP.

The truth is that it’s Rush Limbaugh, not President Obama who is destroying the Republican Party. If Republicans would at least be open to the president’s offers of cooperation and meet him halfway, they could be a lot more popular with voters.

The public reaction to the fiscal cliff isn’t an Obama conspiracy, but a rejection of the type of extremist right wing ideology that Rush Limbaugh preaches everyday.

The only way that the Republican Party will be wiped out is if they continue to listen to, and be directed by, Rush Limbaugh.

Comments are off for this post

Jon Stewart Outs John McCain as a Bitter Old F**k Who Can't Let 2008 Go

Nov 29 2012 Published by under Featured News

Jon Stewart went to the root of John McCain’s opposition to Susan Rice, and concluded that McCain a crotchety old f**k who is completely unable to get over his loss to Obama in 2008.

Here is the video from The Daily Show:

Jon Stewart took apart Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham’s statements after their meeting with Susan Rice and said, “Here’s the deal. They may be right, but on the scale on public misstatements Rice’s comments seem to fall more towards the embarrassing evidence of institutional disorganization at the end of the scale. But here’s the thing, these two don’t get to be the ones to self righteously get angry about this. They’re upset that she might have passed bad intel willingly or un to the American people. Remember these two from a decade ago?”

(Clips of McCain and Graham touting the Iraq WMD intel).

Stewart continued, “I remember all that from their hit blog, Sh*t Old Guys Who Unnecessarily Get Us Into Wars Say. Of course, that’s not a one to one comparison. It’s not really a fair comparison. Because while Susan Rice admitted to the error within weeks, these two still refuse to acknowledge that invading a country based on information from a source named Curveball was actually considered a pretty sh*t idea by many at the time. If only we had a more direct comparison to make here. Sort of a one to one. Like another high ranking government official passing what they knew at the time was misleading intelligence to the American public. On a Sunday news show. Also in line to become Secretary of State, and was African American, and woman, and let’s say her name was also Rice. That’d be something.

(Video of Condi Rice’s infamous Iraq nuclear program statements.) Stewart continued, “She know that was bullsh*t at the time. What would a John McCain or a Lindsey Graham say about a woman like that’s qualifications for Secretary of State? (Video of Graham and McCain defending Rice’s character and qualifications.)

Stewart played a clip of McCain blaming lingering bitterness from the 2000 campaign for the criticism of Rice, and then asked, “Oh, I’m sure it will. What kind of crotchety, Gran Torinoish old f**k would be completely unable to get over a simple election loss?”

There have been a lot theories floated as to why Republicans are going after Susan Rice so hard. Everything from they are looking for a scandal to derail Obama’s second term with to they want John Kerry to be Secretary of State so that Scott Brown can run in, and most likely win, another Senate race in Massachusetts has been suggested as a possible reason why the GOP is working so hard to make something out of nothing.

But when it comes to Graham and McCain, I think Jon Stewart nailed it. McCain has never been able to get over losing the 2008 election to Obama. He is carrying a grudge, and in the process making a total ass of himself in order to prove to the country that they should have elected him in 2008. Sarah Palin has caught a lot of flak for this same type of behavior, while the mainstream media has let their darling McCain off the hook.

John McCain is trying to sabotage a qualified potential nominee for Secretary of State, because he is still pissed that enough of you didn’t vote for him in 2008.

Mitt Romney’s loss appears to have sent John McCain into fit of Obama hate PTSD, and people are starting to catch on.

Comments are off for this post

Older posts »