For those of you in central VT looking for something fun to do this Halloween, come get down at the Langdon St. Café in Montpelier to the throb of my band Lingo Mungo, on Wed., Oct 31st. Wear a costume, a splendid time is guaranteed for all.
Gawd, I feel like I’m saying this one too many times, but jeez, problems arise when you try to be all things to all people, compounded when many of your most enthusiastic supporters are more excited about you because of what you say than by anything you’ve done. Even moreso when you’re trying to “bring together’ people with diametrically opposed world views.
The Obama “Audacity of Homophobia” (as Atrios calls it) may just be that turning point for the break with Obama and progressives. Well, that and his nutty decision to take on Hillary .. about “fixing” Social Security. Way take on that right wing frame as your own, Barack. The man seems to really be getting bad advice.
This looks like Obama is giving a wink and a nod to bigots. And that’s consistent with campaigns that do not empower progressives at the top level; this concert should have been killed a month ago in meetings of staffers where the progressive got up on the table and screams no. It should have been killed on Monday when that advisor could have talked to Aravosis and asked ‘how big a deal is this’, and brought that feedback into the campaign. But that advisor doesn’t exist, and so the South Carolina consultant who thinks that McLurkin is the route to votes in the state won by defaut. That may or may not be true about McLurkin’s electoral appeal, but no one in the campaign considered how it would knock Obama off message for a week or hurt him with progressive primary voters elsewhere. Obama just didn’t empower a person in the campaign at a high level who would understand this.
Now, I’ve been particularly harsh on Obama, especially in a few back-and-forths with one of his biggest VT supporters over at GMD. But it’s not like I have a grudge against the guy, or an agenda against him. I think they’re all corporatist hacks to varying degrees, and I don’t have a horse in this race. It’s just that I’ve got a pretty good bullshitometer and I just couldn’t figure out what the hell people were getting so excited about all this “politics of hope’ crap for. It’s incredibly naive, and it’s just talk. Obama has had very little action to back it up, and seems to play it safe to the point of wondering if he has any real fight in him at all. I don’t think it’s gonna matter in a few more months anyways.
Ok, well this is news to me at least, being one who loves foods that inflict pain on the way in and out. From LiveScience:
Researchers at New Mexico State University have discovered the world’s hottest chili pepper. It’s called the Bhut Jolokia, a variety originating in Assam, India.
In tests that yield Scoville heat units (SHUs), the Bhut Jolokia reached 1 million SHUs, almost double the SHUs of former hotshot Red Savina (a type of habanero pepper), which measured a mere 577,000. The result was announced today by the American Society for Horticultural Science.
I might have actually had these once. They look like a pepper called a Paper Lantern Pepper, I’m not sure if it’s the same thing.I’m going to have a small garden next year, I’ll try these out and let you know how painful they are.
Also, if your’e a hot foods junkie, be sure to look at The Hot Zone Online for lots of good stuff. And bring plenty of toilet paper.
Barack Obama and Hiilary Clinton have finally finished consulting with their focus groups and have offered lukewarm support of filibustering FISA if the telco immunity provision stays intact, as Kos is reporting. Clinton hasn’t even read the bill yet, but promises to “study it very hard.”
The Obama campaign issued the following statement:
“Senator Obama has serious concerns about many provisions in this bill, especially the provision on giving retroactive immunity to the telephone companies. He is hopeful that this bill can be improved by the Senate Judiciary Committee. But if the bill comes to the Senate floor in its current form, he would support a filibuster of it.”
Clinton said:
HRC: I am troubled by the concerns that have been raised by the recent legislation reported out of the Intelligence Committee. I haven’t seen it so I can’t express an opinion about it. But I don’t trust the Bush Administration with our civil rights and liberties. So I’m going to study it very hard. As matters stand now, I could not support it and I would support a filibuster absent additional information coming forward that would convince me differently.
Now, of course it’s a good thing that they’re finally on board and let’s give ‘em props on that, but more strongly worded statements would certainly inspire more confidence on the actual occurence of some follow through, And the fact remains that as ‘front-runners”, they should have been running to the front on this issue instead of following Dodd and (gasp!) Biden.I suspect that if/when the filibuster occurs, they will both offer rather muted support. We shall see.
…or yet another Right-wing Idiot Who Will Never Be President. Mike Huckabee, Baptist minister, wingnut extraordinaire. Jump below for the goods…
I try not to pay too much attention to the GOP roster.. it’s continuously a panderfest to the lowest common denominator and all of the ugly things about our nation. But last week, Charity at “She’s Right” posted (and not surprisingly, admired) this YouTube clip of Huckabee from a recent debate:
Now, Charity was lamenting the idea that this is some sort of ‘religious test’, in that Huckabee was asked if he believed in the literal interpretation of Biblical creation. Sorry gal, that is an important question. Now, Huckabee kinda tiptoed around the answer, but anyone who would answer an unequivocal “yes” is most certainly not up to the job of being President. It’s bad enough we have a president that embarrasses us the world over for his many thoughts and actions. To have another president whose beliefs are so detached from reality (such as the creation myth) with a viewpoint that would yet again make us the laughing stock of much of the civilized world, is something we should be moving away from, not towards. We have already seen the perils of a leader who ignores science, whether it be stem cell research, global warming, or a host of other issues. Do we want yet another one?
Nothing screams “anti-science” more than the belief that the Sky Fairy created the world in 6 days, about 6.000 years ago. So it certainly does matter. I want to know how far my president’s head is up his ass. Being a Biblical literalist is usually a solid indicator. And as far as religious tests go, how many righties would vote for an atheist? Huckabee is full of shit when he says ‘we have plenty of choices to vote for if we want someone who doesn’t believe in God’. Really? Who? Did I wake up in some alternate reality where things actually make sense? But it gets worse. Huck’s been the subject lately over at my New Favorite Blog, The Right’s Field. He’s taken the lying to a new level…
During the Republican debate, Mike Huckabee said he believes one of the defining issues facing the country is the sanctity of human life. Arguing that the issue is of historical importance, he invoked the Declaration of Independence’s rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and said that most of the signers of the declaration were clergymen.
Not even close.
Only one of the 56 was an active clergyman, and that was John Witherspoon. Witherspoon was a Presbyterian minister and president of the College of New Jersey (now Princeton University).
This is part of that whole “America is a Christian nation” zombie lie, and any argument they can use to further that is fair game. In fact, a good portion of the Founders were deists, believing vaguely in a spiritual being on a philosophical level but not identifying with a specific sect, and CERTAINLY not as clergy.
Of course, as we all know, the kinds of people who would be receptive to that kind of statement aren’t exactly up with checking facts and other pleasantries that involve Things That Actually Happened. And speaking of logically challenged, well, Huck somehow manages to tie abortion, illegal immigration and the Holocaust into one tidy package. From Krugman:
“I gather that the press corps really likes Mike Huckabee. This in itself should scare you: in 2000 they really liked George W. Bush, too (and hated Al Gore.) But if that doesn’t scare you, this should:
Speaking before a gathering of Christian conservative voters, GOP presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee said legalized abortion in the United States was a holocaust.
Sometimes we talk about why we’re importing so many people in our workforce,” the former Arkansas governor said. “It might be for the last 35 years, we have aborted more than a million people who would have been in our workforce had we not had the holocaust of liberalized abortion under a flawed Supreme Court ruling in 1973.”Aside from the equivalence between abortion and Nazi death camps, the idea that Roe v. Wade is responsible for immigration – the mind boggles.
Boggling, indeed.
Now I will say that Huckabee deserves some credit for actually talking about poverty. Unlike most in the GOP, he probably doesn’t step on the homeless, he steps over them. But that’s not enough to undo the holy B.S. that comes spewing forth every time he opens his mouth. Hey, at least washed-up action star and wingnut WorldNut Daily columnist Chuck Norris thinks Huck is the real deal. Huck very might well draw the diehard fundie votes away from Giuliani, but it’s not really going to matter. Most of them wil be crapping their pants at the idea of Hillary in the White House, so you know they’ll fall in line with the GOP when it comes down to it. Problem is (for them), when that happens, it’s going to show how they matter less and less as time goes on and society continues to be more liberal, and they take on the ‘crazy uncle’ role of the GOP.
If you’re so inclined, there’s going to be a sit-in at Congressman Peter Welch’s office this Monday in Burlington. Broadsides has the details.
I was downtown hanging up flyers for my upcoming Halloween show, when walking by a bunch of newspaper machines, this USA TODAY headline caught my eye: “Technology makes porn easier to access at work”. Hmmm, I’ll have to go home and read that one. So I did, and yep, apparently quite a few people are looking at porn while at work:
About 16% of men who have access to the Internet at work acknowledged having seen porn while on the job, according to a survey for Websense by Harris Interactive in 2006. Eight percent of women said they had. But of those who acknowledged viewing porn sites at work, only 6% of men and 5% of women acknowledged that they had done so intentionally.
But it had me scratching my head. I don’t have a problem with porn, although I do think that with rare exceptions, most internet porn is pretty lame. But who the hell wants to look at porn at work, fer Chrissake? Sure, there may be something to be said for that sneaky little romp with a co-worker in the broom closet if you’re lucky enough to find yourself in that situation (and get away with it), but looking at porn in the office? [smacking forehead]. Besides, when you think about the other thing most people do when looking at porn, are you really going to do that in your cubicle or conference room? Or are they just looking at it so they can pop off a round on the way home in the car while remembering it or something? 20 years ago, would these people have been sitting at their desk with a copy of Hustler behind that copy of Forbes? I’m not denying these statistics or anything, I just don’t get it. And I hope that no one else uses their computer keyboards, either.
Funny story for you all. In the city council election in Hialeah, Florida, there’s a candidate known for his humorous rhyming one liners named Jose ”Pepe” Caragol. Apparently, Jose is in a bit of controversy right now because of his latest campaign slogan playing on Spanish language televison – “Si te gusta el sexo oral, vote por Caragol por consejal,” which translates to `If you like oral sex, vote Caragol for council.” I’m not making this up.
Yeah, it’s funny as hell, but I’m a bit confused. I like oral sex as much as the next person, but if I voted for him, would he personally come and service me or would he send some campaign staffer hottie to do the deed? I’m not really interested in the first option.
As you’ve probably noticed, I’ve stepped up my vitriol for the right-wing lately. This stems from my belief that when your opponent is down, you don’t let up; you try to kick their teeth in through the back of their skull. Anyways, to help me with the ever-increasing need for more scrutiny and mockery (more important now that FBC 3.0 is in the works), I’ve taken on another blogger to help me with the duties, a Mr. Stanton Purdie, also from central Vermont. It was hard screening out the applicants, but I needed someone with the right amount of viciousness, and more importantly, someone with the incredible intellectual capacity, not just to report on, but truly relate to the complex piece of moldy fruit known as the ‘conservative brain stem’. Jump below the fold for more.
Every now and then I read something so succinct that really nails it, that I wish I could just reprint the whole damn thing here. Today it’s Paul Krugman’s latest, “Gore Derangement Syndrome”, which really lays out some serious insight into why the wingers get their panties in a wad about Al Gore, as well as the broader aspect of why they’re so in denial about global warming.
Partly it’s a reaction to what happened in 2000, when the American people chose Mr. Gore but his opponent somehow ended up in the White House. Both the personality cult the right tried to build around President Bush and the often hysterical denigration of Mr. Gore were, I believe, largely motivated by the desire to expunge the stain of illegitimacy from the Bush administration.
And now that Mr. Bush has proved himself utterly the wrong man for the job – to be, in fact, the best president Al Qaeda’s recruiters could have hoped for – the symptoms of Gore derangement syndrome have grown even more extreme.
And as Krugman notes, this vitriol is escalated by the fact that Gore keeps being right (as in ‘correct’). But the larger, underlying point that Krugman points out is that they fear the policy implications of taking climate change seriously, in that they’re going to have to change the way they do things, and laissez-faire free market capitalism simply will not work:
“We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals,” said F.D.R. “We know now that it is bad economics.” These words apply perfectly to climate change. It’s in the interest of most people (and especially their descendants) that somebody do something to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, but each individual would like that somebody to be somebody else. Leave it up to the free market, and in a few generations Florida will be underwater.
Everything I’ve just said should be uncontroversial – but imagine the reception a Republican candidate for president would receive if he acknowledged these truths at the next debate. Today, being a good Republican means believing that taxes should always be cut, never raised. It also means believing that we should bomb and bully foreigners, not negotiate with them.
So if science says that we have a big problem that can’t be solved with tax cuts or bombs – well, the science must be rejected, and the scientists must be slimed. For example, Investor’s Business Daily recently declared that the prominence of James Hansen, the NASA researcher who first made climate change a national issue two decades ago, is actually due to the nefarious schemes of – who else? – George Soros.
Which brings us to the biggest reason the right hates Mr. Gore: in his case the smear campaign has failed. He’s taken everything they could throw at him, and emerged more respected, and more credible, than ever. And it drives them crazy.
Yeah, I know, I paraphrased almost half the article, but it needs to be read. And I’ve said it before… if we sit around and wait for “consumer choice” to dicatate positive environmental change, it’ll be too late, because Americans are more concerned aobut comfort and convenience that making a sacrifice that entails doing the right thing for the good of the planet.
