Member since: Tue May 13, 2008, 03:07 AM
Number of posts: 7,911
Number of posts: 7,911
- 2014 (429)
- 2013 (731)
- 2012 (726)
Hmmm,.....reTHUGS eating their OWN........Crunchy Tummy Ache!!...................
Well. That was awkward.
Right after Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) vehemently denied that he was gunning for impeachment with his lawsuit against the President, Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC) insisted that Boehner should stop the “theater”, calling his lawsuit a “show” that will waste millions of taxpayer funds. No, it’s not that Jones is against a partisan witch hunt. It’s not that Jones is pulling for his party to find some measure of sanity. Oh, no. His suggestion is that Boehner should just impeach the President.
According to The Hill, Jones said,
“Why not impeach instead of wasting $1 million to $2 million of the taxpayers’ money? … If you’re serious about this, use what the founders of the Constitution gave us.
This came out on the day that Republicans are voting on their “lawsuit” (aka, Get Out the Vote project), which the Republican lawmaker from North Carolina has just made sure you know is going to cost you between $1-2 million dollars. Jones used to be a Democrat when he was first elected back in 1982. He switched parties in 1994 and used a picture of his opponent jogging with Bill Clinton to rile up the anti-gay sentiment at the time. Just yesterday Boehner said it was a scam for Democrats to claim Republicans wanted to impeach the President. And yet, as I detailed yesterday, there has been a steady drumbeat by Republicans for impeachment and it comes from the same folks who managed to get the Republican Party to shutdown the government. It’s not as if they aren’t running the show.
Furthermore, PoliticusUSA’s Jason Easley busted Boehner in a massive lie as he made the “scam” charge:
Rep. Boehner claimed that the impeachment talk was started by the president and Democrats, only it wasn’t. Back in January, Boehner hinted at impeachment, “We’re just not going to sit here and let the President trample all over us. This idea that he’s just going to go it alone, I have to remind him we do have a constitution. And the Congress writes the laws, and the President’s job is to execute the laws faithfully. And if he tries to ignore this he’s going to run into a brick wall.”
In May 2013, Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) claimed that President Obama could be impeached for Benghazi. During an August 2013 town hall, Rep. Blake Farenthold admitted to constituents that House Republicans are aching to impeach the president. In October 2013, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) threatened to impeach the president if the country defaulted. In June 2014, the South Dakota Republican Party passed a resolution that called for Obama to be impeached. Sarah Palin claimed that God wants President Obama impeached.
The list of Republican calls for Obama impeachment is endless, so it is a ridiculous lie for Boehner to claim that Democrats are behind the impeachment talk.
Poor John Boehner. He can’t even control the press his caucus gives, let alone the bills they kill or their government shutdowns. Here’s an idea for the Republicans. Instead of wasting $1-2 million on a meritless lawsuit against the President and instead of trying to impeach him for acting like he’s president, why don’t Republicans actually do something that will give them something to run on – give people a reason to vote for them besides hate.
Posted by Segami | Wed Jul 30, 2014, 03:36 PM (5 replies)
In what has to be the craziest thing to have emerged from the radical fringe, a call for the Democratic members of congress to file the motion to impeach the president. Yes, you read that right. In his piece titled “Why the Democratic Party Will Die Unless a House Democrat Introduces a Resolution to Impeach President Obama,” author Eric Zuesse lays down his case that the only way in which Democrats stand a chance in November is for them to impeach, and remove, President Obama. His case begins with the understanding that establishment GOP leaders are actively working to prevent impeachment. Then moves on to claim that the GOP will take the senate and hold on to the house, and that the president would become a rubber stamp with any vetoes overturned without any difficulty.
His going into detail on polling also demonstrates a demand for validation. His purposeful misrepresentation of a Gallup poll is absolutely shameless. He points out an overall popularity rating not against presidents at the same point in their administration, but against presidents after they are out of office. He also uses a total aggregate instead of paying attention to the numbers, which find that Democrats have a 90% approval rating for the president. His case hinges on the Democrats being disillusioned with the president, when the polls state the opposite. Instead, the piece is not about “saving the Democratic party” but instead is about destroying it. It is no different from the tactics employed by the GOP during the 1990′s, where they successfully framed arguments in order to have the Democrats “shoot Santa Claus” as the late GOP strategist Jude Wanniski put it.
It appears that Eric Zuesse is still attempting to convince the Democrats to shoot Santa Claus. The president is a motivator, and is helping to get people out to the polls. If the Democrats impeach him, or even file the motion to, it would cut off his ability to campaign. This would in turn hurt fundraising needed to overcome the billionaire backers of the GOP. In addition, it would demoralize the Democratic base, who do approve of the president, who then would not turn out in November. This is a single act to destroy the Democratic party. And why? Going over his history, the writer is found to be all over the map, doing everything from writing an article for noted libertarian magazine Reason which argued to let chemical companies dump waste onto publicly owned land to claiming that Obama has sent US soldiers wearing Nazi symbols into the Ukraine. It almost appears as if he seeks out excuses to blame whomever he has picked as a target, in this case the president.
His piece is now making its way around the conservative blogosphere, who proclaim that the man who wrote for the libertarians is a Democrat. This is likely what he anticipated when he wrote it.
Posted by Segami | Tue Jul 29, 2014, 03:19 PM (5 replies)
If anyone,...this orange weasel is an expert on 'SCAMS'..................
Republicans have no plans to begin impeachment proceedings against President Barack Obama, House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner declared on Tuesday, putting the blame on Democrats for stirring up pre-midterm election tensions in Washington. Boehner is, however, hoping this week to pass Republican legislation that would authorize a lawsuit, claiming Obama overstepped his powers in ordering unilateral changes to his landmark healthcare law known as “Obamacare.” Any such lawsuit could take years to wind through the court system.
Meanwhile, Obama is weighing whether to take executive action to scale back deportations of some undocumented residents, a move that would further rachet up tensions with Republicans, who have blocked comprehensive changes to U.S. immigration law, insisting the president take stronger action to stop the flow of illegal migrants. “We have no plans to impeach the president. We have no future plans,” Boehner said in response to a reporter’s question.
He noted that it was the Democrats themselves who have been raising the notion of a Republican impeachment effort, using it to incite liberal voters and win campaign contributions for Democratic candidates running for re-election to Congress in November. “It’s all a scam started by Democrats,” Boehner said.
Last week, White House adviser Dan Pfeiffer told reporters that unilateral action by Obama on immigration reform “will certainly up the likelihood that they (Republicans) would consider impeachment.” Since Obama’s first term, some conservative Republicans have mused about impeachment, which would be the initial step in a two-step process that allows Congress to remove a sitting president.
Posted by Segami | Tue Jul 29, 2014, 02:34 PM (1 replies)
"..Video has surfaced of a Maryland Republican nominee for Anne Arundel County Council singing "Dixie" as the national anthem at a secession conference in Alabama..."
Video has surfaced of a Maryland Republican nominee for Anne Arundel County Council singing "Dixie" as the national anthem at a secession conference in Alabama. Over the weekend, Grove City College psychology professor and blogger Warren Throckmorton uncovered video of Michael Peroutka speaking to the 2012 League of the South national conference in Wallsboro, Alabama. Peroutka generated controversy after winning the GOP nomination because he believes that the current U.S. and state governments are no longer valid, and should be destroyed by secession or other means.
"You need to secede and then you need to have the biblical understanding of law and government, and make the applications," Peroutka told the League of the South in 2012. "So we need to take the biblical understand of law and government into account no matter what the outcome is with respect to the crumbling of the current regime."
"We're going to have to have this foundational information in the hearts and the minds of the people or else liberty won't survive the secession either," he explained. "I'm saying this because I don't want people from League of the South to think for one minute that I am about reforming the current regime, and studying the Constitution is about reforming the regime. I, like many of you and like Patrick Henry, probably have come to the conclusion that we have smelled a rat from the beginning."
At the conclusion of his nearly hour-long talk, Peroutka asked the audience to rise and sing the "national anthem." But instead of "The Star-Spangled Banner," Peroutka led them to sing "Dixie," the de facto anthem of the Confederacy during the Civil War. The song tells the story from the point of view of a freed slave who wishes to return to the plantation where he was born. Last week, Steve Schuh, the GOP candidate for county executive, called on Peroutka to cut ties with League of the South.
Posted by Segami | Mon Jul 28, 2014, 09:03 PM (14 replies)
Republican dishonesty, not only about what they do and what they would like to do, but about the world we live in, are endemic. And the situation is getting steadily worse as Republicans daily seem more unhinged, leaving liberals and progressives shaking their heads in dismay. Do you remember last year when Public Policy Polling revealed that more Louisiana Republicans blame President Obama for the mishandling of Katrina relief efforts than blame President Bush? It is a matter of public record that Barack Obama was only a freshman senator then, while Bush had been president for half a decade. Almost half of Louisiana Republicans didn’t know who to blame.
Of course, Republicans have also blamed Obama for the Iraq War and routinely pretend that there were no terrorist attacks on U.S. soil while Bush was president (9/11 anyone?). Not only that, but Fox News has excised any subsequent Bush-era terrorist attacks from public memory. Republicans have also conveniently forgotten that Bush presided over the economic collapse of 2008. Obama wasn’t elected until November 4 of that year and did not take office until the following January. Of course, President Obama is currently being blamed for the immigration crisis at the border that Republicans are responsible for. Bush signed the law; Obama gets blamed. Republicans attack President Obama for taking too many vacation days. In reality, as Al Sharpton pointed out on August 9, 2013,
"...Obama] has taken 92 days of vacation since he was sworn in. How many did President (George W.) Bush take by the same point in his presidency? Three hundred and sixty seven. Yes, more than a full year of vacation..."
PolitiFact has rated this statement “mostly true” in that Bush spent some working vacation days at his Texas ranch. I remember Bush being on vacation all the time; Republicans don’t even remember Bush. Republicans want to sue and impeach President Obama for signing executive orders, even though he has issued far fewer executive orders than President Bush, whose executive orders were not the object of Republican complaint. For example, on September 25, 2012, FactCheck.org pointed out that “Obama has issued 139 executive orders as of Sept. 25 …Bush issued 160 executive orders through Sept. 20, 2004, a comparable amount of time.” As of June 20, 2014, Obama had signed 182 executive orders. Bush signed 173 in his first term alone, and 291 during his entire presidency. Again, if you want to count executive orders you can do so; it’s a matter of public record and the University of California Santa Barbara helpfully tracks them by year and president. Republicans prefer just making stuff up because the facts do not agree with the fantasies they want to push.
Republicans have claimed Obama is adding to the deficit (while they add to it themselves via tax breaks for their rich owners) when in fact he has been steadily reducing the deficit. In fact, last year, Obama shrank the deficit to a 5-year low. And as Paul Krugman points out, there was never a crisis in the first place. As with all their other scandals, it was manufactured by conservatives to advance their anti-Social Security and Medicare agenda. Democrats like to believe that when they engage the Right in debate that they do so on more or less equal terms. Both sides are, after all, comprised of sentient human beings. But Republicans have given substance to the old childhood taunt, “I am rubber, you are glue, words bounce off me and stick to you.” They are literally impervious to facts. And not only is President Obama magically to blame for all Bush’s manifest misdeeds, he is somehow also to blame for every misdeed committed anywhere in the world. Everything that happens is somehow Obama’s fault and John McCain has turned himself into Chuck Norris, able to strangle the butterfly that flapped its wings in Siberia to prevent a typhoon hitting the West Coast. Only John McCain, who voted for the Iraq War, could have stopped the Iraq War. This must make sense only to Republicans, who nod their heads sagely. If only they could do so in strait jackets, which is arguably where they belong.
Posted by Segami | Tue Jul 22, 2014, 09:51 AM (18 replies)
Dictators never seem to have much of a sense of humor, and North Korea's Kim Jong Un is no exception. Kim is trying to get China to pull the plug on a satirical video that, with some not-so-subtle digital trickery, shows him dancing, running, getting poked in the butt by a rocket and more, all set to catchy music. He also gets repeatedly pranked -- often by President Barack Obama.
North Korean officials say the clip "seriously compromises Kim's dignity and authority," South Korea's Chosun Ilbun newspaper reports. Naturally, China has been unable to help because once something is online, it's online forever. And Kim doesn't seem to know Rule 19 of the Internet: The more you hate it, the stronger it gets.
This is not the only video that has Pyongyang going ballistic. The nation recently threatened a "resolute and merciless response" over the upcoming Seth Rogan/James Franco film, "The Interview."
Posted by Segami | Mon Jul 21, 2014, 08:51 AM (36 replies)
.......George Takei never disappoints!...........
July 18, 2014 - One of the saddest facts about the original Star Trek cast is that actors George Takei (Hikaru Sulu) and William Shatner (Cpt. James T. Kirk) can't stand each other in real life. No matter how many times Trekkies hear about the feud, it never seems to feel right or make sense. During his appearance on Real Time, Takei was grilled by Bill Maher on that never-ending feud that reminds millions of Americans of the time members of their favorite band didn't get along. "You just want to go, 'Come on, Bee Gees, just get along!'" the host joked.
"Well, we're human," Takei explained, with Maher expressing confusion that someone from our northern neighboring country couldn't get along with someone else.
"Canadians have a certain image of being even-tempered and friendly and all that," Takei continued. "Well, he is a person who is that way with himself. He is very self-centered."
After a hearty laugh, the geek celebrity-turned-Internet-sensation said, "We work together. We're professionals. We get the work done, but, it's with a lot of difficulty." He joked with Maher that the temptation is sometimes there to just "drive the starship into a death star" just to spite Shatner (weird mix of geek references, eh?).
The feud came up again when Takei talked about how his cast-mates all knew was gay except for one. "It went right over his head." The obvious answer: William Shatner.
Posted by Segami | Sat Jul 19, 2014, 11:31 PM (37 replies)
A stridently pro-life woman is suing a family planning clinic for not hiring her because she wouldn’t work with birth control – despite that being a major part of the job. Sara Hellwege was turned down for a nursing job at the clinic after she admitted to her prospective employer that she was morally opposed to doing any part of the job which required her to administer or assign birth control to women who came in. This posed a pretty serious problem with regards to her capacity to do the job given the fact that this was a clinic which primarily served as a resource for men and women looking for contraceptives and birth control.In a series of emails (published here), Hellwege converses with Chad Lindsey, the human resources director of Tampa Family Health Centers. After asking about her qualifications and other administrative issues, Lindsey notices that on her resume, Hellwege listed her membership in the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists. He asked if her pro-life beliefs would affect her ability to work at the clinic, citing its Title X status explicitly making it a facility which provides contraceptive services.
Hellwege’s response is enough to immediately make it clear that she is a terrible fit for the job:
Hi Mr. Lindsey,
Thanks for such a timely response. Yes, I am a member of AAPLOG. Due to religious guidelines, I am able to counsel women regarding all forms of contraception, however, cannot it unless pathology exists – however have no issue with barrier methods & sterilization.
She then asks if there are any positions available in other areas which wouldn’t require her to work around her religious issues with birth control. Lindsey politely sends her a final email which explains that given the clinic’s focus, there didn’t seem to be a way to feasibly hire her considering her moral objections. He also notes that some of the other jobs she was after were already filled and so employment wasn’t a possibility. Rather than move on to other applications, Hellwege decided to wage war against the unfair treatment she thinks she received from the clinic. According to her reasoning, anything less than hiring her and working around her moral objections to the job was tantamount to religious persecution. Hellwege lawyered up and filed a lawsuit against the clinic for religious discrimination. Her defense team is made up of members of the Alliance Defending Freedom. The group describes itself as “an alliance-building, non-profit legal organization that advocates for the right of people to freely live out their faith” and also “a servant ministry building an alliance to keep the door open for the spread of the Gospel by transforming the legal system and advocating for religious liberty, the sanctity of life, and marriage and family.”
According to a press release from the ADF announcing Hellwege’s lawsuit:
The lawsuit, Hellwege v. Tampa Family Health Centers, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division, explains that “TFHC’s refusal to consider Ms. Hellwege’s application for employment on the basis of her religious beliefs and association with the pro-life group AAPLOG violates multiple federal laws.”
The lawsuit also explains that “Florida law shall not require ‘any person to participate in the termination of a pregnancy, nor shall…any person be liable for such refusal.’” Moreover, “Ms. Hellwege has the right to refuse to prescribe abortifacient contraceptives where such actions violate her religious beliefs or moral convictions.”
Posted by Segami | Sat Jul 19, 2014, 10:34 PM (18 replies)
Friday morning, Sen. Elizabeth Warren rocked the Netroots Nation 2014 crowd with a rousing speech about what it means to be a Democrat, what we believe in.
"The game is rigged. And the rich and the powerful have lobbyists and lawyers and plenty of friends in Congress. Everybody else, not so much. So the way I see this is we can whine about it, we can whimper about it or we can fight back. I'm fighting back!"
Warren ran through a list of progressive policy positions, asserting that "we believe" in tougher rules for Wall Street; science; net neutrality; raising the minimum wage; a livable wage for fast food workers; making sure students aren't burdened by crushing debt; protecting Social Security, Medicare and pensions; equal pay for equal work; equality; immigration reform and the fact that corporations are not people.
That's good red meat for a Democratic base that needs to be activated for November, the speech she's been giving to mobilize the base around the country. So where was the DNC this week, in Detroit, backing up Warren? Nope. DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was hanging out with the Third Way.
Yeah. That would be the Third Way that attacked Sen. Warren for her economic populism, the Third Way whose board of directors is completely stacked with CEOs and investment bankers. Maybe Third Way puts out a better breakfast spread than Netroots Nation. But the DNC has to consider this. When the chips are down this fall, who are they going to be asking to make GOTV calls and go door to door? Who is running their voter registration drives? And just which Democratic senator is out working the crowds in the red states for a Democratic Senate in 2014?
DNC Chair Wasserman Schultz might want to reconsider the kind of crowd she's hanging with.
Posted by Segami | Sat Jul 19, 2014, 05:46 PM (30 replies)
Joan Walsh sent one sailing into the air and nailed Senator 'Grumpy' John McCain right between the eyes with this one.
Hey Johnny,....can't wait to see you try making yourself relevant on ALL the Sunday morning shows........
During an appearance on MSNBC’s PoliticsNation with Al Sharpton Friday evening, Salon columnist Joan Walsh took on Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) for laying blame on President Barack Obama for yesterday’s shot down Malaysia Airlines passenger jet. McCain called Obama “cowardly” for refusing to intervene in Ukraine, but Walsh turned that word around on him.
“It’s just been cowardly,” McCain said on Fox News’ Hannity last night. “It’s a cowardly administration that we failed to give the Ukrainians weapons with which to defend themselves,” he continued, suggesting that the Russian separatists who allegedly shot down the plane “may not even have occupied and had access to these weapons” if the U.S. had aided the Ukrainians with weapons and troops.
“You don’t say that about the commander-in-chief,” Walsh told Sharpton today. “This is a man, I respect him for his service, but if we’re going to talk cowardly, somebody tried to put Sarah Palin a heartbeat away from the presidency so that he hoped to hold onto his right-wing base. Somebody that has a lot to atone for and a lot to think about shouldn’t be tossing around words like cowardly.”
Posted by Segami | Sat Jul 19, 2014, 02:18 PM (22 replies)