Nov 192014
 

As the clock ticks down to Barack Obama’s announcement of immigration reform by executive order, Republicans to continue to howl with such vigor that one might think that a democrat might have fed a hungry child.  Between howls they claim they that the President only has the authority to grant immunity from extradition on an individual, case-by-case basis.  See the picture below for the Republican alternative.  First lets see what Senate Democrats have to say.  They we’l1 take a stroll down memory lane.

1119GOPBorder

With the election safely over, congressional Democrats have regained their courage on immigration and are now urging President Obama to go ahead with an executive action on immigration reform. Here’s an excerpt from a letter that several Democratic leaders in the Senate sent today:

1119immigration_letter

The principle behind most of what Obama plans to do falls under the category of "prosecutorial discretion," which means he can decide where best to use the government’s limited law enforcement resources. Just like previous presidents, he can decide that resources should be directed in a certain way, which effectively means that certain immigrants will be free to stay in the country simply because no one will be targeting them for deportation…

Inserted from <Mother Jones>

To bring you recent history of immigration reform by executive action, Rachel Maddow provided superior coverage.

If the video will not load here, try its direct link.  I could not find it on YouTube, but someone may upload it there within a day or two.

There you have it.  The executive action Obama is planning is absolutely no different from the executive actions on immigration by GHW “We wish he’d worn a rubber!” Bush and the patron saint of the Republican Party, Saint Ronnie Ray Gun.  Where were the Republican howls of outrage when they did it?

Share
Nov 152014
 

Wooo Hooo!  Today I get to be a feline Clint  Eastwood and call out the minions of evil challenging them to hasten their own demise through an act of aggression.  I knew, without doubt that not a week would pass before the Republican Reich unleashed the “I” word.  Now its springing up like weeds in May.

FoxFandBAnd so it begins, again. “I believe this is an impeachable offense,” Charles Krauthammer told Fox host Megyn Kelly Thursday night [Faux Noise delinked], discussing President Obama’s planned executive action on illegal immigration. “It is very clear that what he’s doing now […] is a flagrant assault on the Constitution, on the separation of powers.”

Impeachment carnival barker Andrew McCarthy jumped on Twitter [wing-nut delinked] with rauthammer’s pronouncement. So did the excitable and feeble-minded folks at Breitbart [Breitfart delinked]. GOP congress members are likely to follow.

Of course you’ll recall that, back in July, it was Krauthammer who claimed talk of the president’s possible impeachment was “a concoction of Democrats,” [Faux Noise delinked] as he denied any serious Republicans were interested in such a move. “They know that in 1998 the party was saved, the sixth year of an administration, it was saved by impeachment, overreaching on impeachment by Republicans, and this is a good issue, it’s a good way to raise money,” he said then.

Now he’s telling Kelly, one of Fox’s most reliable impeachment trolls, that Obama is about to commit “an impeachable offense.”

It was Kelly, back in January, who asked then-Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell if he would consider impeaching the president (McConnell ducked the question) Late in the summer, though, top Republicans put out the word that impeachment was an overreach likely to rev up the Democratic base and cost the party its coming midterm landslide, so she settled down.

But Kelly brought the charge back election eve, suggesting that any Obama executive action deferring deportation might be designed to “offend” Republicans into impeaching him. Those poor impetuous creatures are slaves to emotion, the Fox host seemed to suggest, and can’t be blamed if they’re baited into political overreach by our amoral, conniving president…

Inserted from <Salon.com>

Rachel Maddow covered the Republican reaction and discussed what she thinks Obama plans to do.

If you can’t see it here, try the direct link to the video.  I could not find it on YouTube.

If Republicans do try to impeach Obama, I can make four predictions:

House Republicans will have no trouble passing a Bill of Impeachment.  Breathing while black is sufficient offense for that.

We will get tons of ridiculous email from a bunch of places, but especially the DCCC, laying on a guilt trip that, unless we give them money, we’ll lose Obama and it will be our fault.  (They copied that tactic from the Republicans, and it really g=has to stop.  I bet it turned off thousands of voters.)

The Senate will not convict.  That requires 67 votes, and although the Republican Reich will goose step in lock step, they won’t be able to peel off enough Democrats.

All the while, the Republicans will behave like bratty two year olds in full tantrum.   They will make such complete asses of themselves, that they will set themselves up for even bigger losses in 2016.

So Republicans, do you feel lucky?  Go ahead!  Make my day!!

TCGun

Share
Nov 142014
 

In more than one spot of late, I have made the comment that I consider the DSCC pulling finding from Mary Landrieu’s runoff campaign an act of cowardice.  I disagree with her in a big bunch of ways, but I still support her candidacy.  However, she has come up with a desperation ploy so costly, that, even if it would work, her job isn’t worth the price.

1114Keystone…This week, though, Keystone XL has become a symbol for moderate Democrats like Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) — a demonstration that they can serve as the bridge between the new Democratic minority and the Republican majority in the next Congress.

"Si se puede!" Landrieu said Wednesday while pushing for the pipeline on the Senate floor, re-purposing another bit of progressive politics (this time from the United Farmworkers) in service of a project that’s not very popular with the left. That’s intentional. Landrieu faces a run-off against Republican Bill Cassidy next month — and is in deep trouble. Seizing upon the pipeline as a way to shift the politics in that race, though, is almost certainly not going to work.

Landrieu was joined Wednesday by other red-state Democrats to advocate for passage of a measure that would side-step the president on granting approval to the pipeline. (Since it crosses the Canadian border, the State Department has the ability to grant or reject a permit for the project — giving the administration an effective veto over it.) The subtext of the election was central to the floor speeches from Landrieu, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), and Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.); Manchin specifically noted how valuable Landrieu’s leadership on the Senate’s Energy and Natural Resources had been, reinforcing the leadership that has been one of the central arguments to her campaign…

Inserted from <Washington Post>

This Hail Mary desperation strategy could not possibly save Landrieu’s seat, and I knew why as soon as I heard it, but Rachel Maddow explains it far better than I could.

If you can’t watch it here, try the direct link to the video.  If that doesn’t work, I found a partial clip on YouTube.

What really irks me is that they have time for this vote, but claim there is no time to confirm Loretta Lynch.  I think Harry Reid is returning to his returning to his Nevada Leg Hound ways in which he humps a few Republican legs, begs, whines, rolls over and plays dead.,  His willingness to waste the lame duck session makes me suspect that he made a “gentlemen’s agreement with Bought Bitch Mitch, under which Harry promised to do nothing and Mitch promised to be nice, just like he has falsely promised so many times before.

There is only one way to achieve even tiny successes, when these Republicans are in power.  Fight tooth and nail for every scrap.  Every time in the last 15 years they have promised quid pro quo, they lied.

Share
Nov 122014
 

I often find myself dumbfounded that the Republican Reich inspires such extreme belief in their sheeple, of whom Bubba Bagger is a hypothetical example.  Now Bubba isn’t the brightest bulb in the pack.   If he were, he might have gotten the idea that something was fishy, when the top item on his Koch Brothers list, which told him what to say, is to say nobody told him what to say.  To fix ideas in Bubba’s small brain, the Reich employs wide disinformation network that keeps lies alive long after the sane have dismissed them and moved on,  Here is a recent example.

1112bubbabagger…Members of the conservative media are attempting to scandalize President Obama’s Attorney General nominee Loretta Lynch by suggesting she was involved in the Whitewater investigations of the 1990s. However, the Loretta Lynch that played a bit role in Whitewater — an investigation into fraudulent real estate deals that did not include any wrongdoing by the Clintons — is a different person than Obama’s attorney general nominee.

According to a November 8 Breitbart.com article by Warner Todd Huston, "few are talking about" the fact nominee Lynch "was part of Bill Clinton’s Whitewater probe defense team in 1992." Huston pointed to a March 1992 New York Times article that "reported that Lynch was one of the Clintons’ Whitewater defense attorneys as well as a ‘campaign aide.’" And in a November 9 article [Breitfart delinked] Huston’s colleague, Breitbart.com Senior Editor-at Large Joel Pollak wrote, "The connection to Whitewater ought to provide additional fodder for Republicans during Lynch’s confirmation hearings":…

Inserted from <Media Matters>

Admittedly Breitfart took the article down, but not before it had been picked up by the disinformation network, where it is still being proclaimed as truth, and will be in perpetuity.  Since Bubba reads, listens to and watches only what the Koch Brothers approve, Bubba is buffaloed.  Everywhere he goes, the same lie is repeated, and if he should hear the truth, the Koch Brothers have thought him that, if he listens to libruls, he might catch Ebola, be beheaded by Muslims, or even worse, a black family might move in next door.

Rachel Maddow devoted an extensive segment to exposing several examples of how the Republican Reich creates and perpetuates such lies.

If you cannot watch this here, try the direct MSNBC link.  While I could not find this elsewhere in its entirety, YouTube does have a part of it.

A political party that dedicates so much effort to buffaloing Bubba with whatever they make up, ought not to exist, but to make that happen we need to become as effective at disseminating the truth as they are at disseminating lies.

Share
Nov 072014
 

I could not help noticing in the statements from the Republican leadership that they hoped to be able to find areas of agreement with President Obama, and that they would work together to compromise.  Is that a realistic expectation?  I think not.  For the last six years, the Republican Party has been cultivating the support from people like the caller in the following article.  Such racists have become their base and most dependable followers.

1107ObamahateA man who called into C-SPAN’s "Washington Journal" Thursday morning referred to President Barack Obama as "that n***er" before getting booted off the air.

The caller, who gave his name as Anthony from San Diego, California, identified himself as a Republican and started out talking about the direction he thinks the new GOP majority in Congress should take.

"I would just like to say, that the Republicans — and I’m a Republican — please do not overreach," the caller began. "I know they’re going to overreach but I’m telling you, if you advocate for the repeal of Obamacare and you get too extreme, then Hillary Clinton will be elected President in 2016."

"This is about race," he added. "The Republicans hate that nigger Obama."…

Inserted from <TPM>

Hard to believe?  Here’s the video.

This is the tail that wags the Republican dog.

Rachel Maddow dedicated two segments to the possibility if cooperation.  In the first, she examines that the Republican bubble machine is saying and what the actual politicians are doing.

If you can’t see it here try this link on MSNBC.

It appears to me that Republicans are feigning congeniality and promising compromise to keep Obama from acting while Democrats still have a Senate majority.  Obama believed them, in 2009 when they were promising compromise on Obamacare.  To believe them now, especially given that sign, would be foolish indeed.

In the second segment, Rachel shows how they have inflamed the public against Obama and how Obama is calling them out to actually govern.

 

If you can’t see it here try this link on MSNBC.

I could not fine either clip on YouTube.

I won’t be holding my breath.

Finally, consider Eric Cantor.  All it took was a hint that he would be willing to compromise to cost him his seat.  Even if some in the Republican majority want to compromise, the threat of being primaried from the right and TEAbuggered out of office will Keep them goose-stepping with the most rabid segments of the base.

Now, both Agent Orange and Bought Bitch Mitch are promising to be nice, but saying that unilateral action from Obama would be like waving a red flag at a bull.  That’s too much bull to resist waving the flag.

Share
Oct 222014
 

Once upon a time, Democrats and Republicans presented their issues to the people, and let the majority decide whose policies would be implemented.  The problem is that now only Democrats are trying to win that way.  Since Republicans can no longer win an honest majority, they are trying to keep the people, whom they have offended through their wars on everyone but the 1%, hate mongers, wing nuts, and people too stupid to pay attention, from voting.  Nothing is too sleazy for them.

GOPvotingAre voting laws requiring photo IDs inherently racially discriminatory, as Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg maintained in her blistering dissent Saturday morning? 

A team of politician scientists from Appalachian State, Texas Tech and the University of Florida took on that question for an article just published in Political Research Quarterly (h/t: Justin Levitt). Their conclusion is that the claims of proponents that they’re just upholding the principle of ballot integrity can be discounted; the photo ID laws aim to disenfranchise Democratic voters; they cite findings that the raised cost of voting imposed by photo ID requires "falls overwhelmingly on minorities." In other words, the answer is yes

…What happened? The GOP, they say, recognized that its homogeneous white, male, older and Southern electoral base was competing against "a racially and ethnically diverse, younger, secular, liberal, and Northern-based Democratic Party." Moreover, the demographic changes bringing more Latinos, African Americans, and Asians into the voting population were working strongly against the GOP and strengthening the Democratic coalition.

The GOP could have evolved to meet these voters on their turf, but chose not to. "Rather than altering issue positions as a means to attract new supporters, the GOP has turned to restrictive voter ID laws to disproportionately deter the participation of current Democratic Party supporters," the researchers write.

In other words, appealing to a racial coalition was beyond the GOP’s capacity, so the party chose instead to disenfranchise the members of that coalition

Inserted from <LA Times>

Had SCROTUS not gutted the Voting Rights Act several of these new restrictions could never have become law, because the racial discrimination is so blatant, not to mention discrimination against workers and students.

Rachel Maddow discussed Ginsburg’s dissent and the effects of disenfranchisement on the election with Emily Schultheis.

If you can’t see it here, try the direct link to the video on MSNBC.  If that doesn’t work, it may still be available on YouTube.

For starters the Dems on Oliver’s Court should have been DemoCATS! I’m amazed Obama didn’t have a Republican poll watcher in his face challenging his right to vote.

The bottom line here is that Republicans are doing their best to sow confusion to further suppress voting. What does it say about a political party when they try to prevent legitimate voters from exercising their right to vote?  It says they are not fit to govern!

Get Out The VOTE!!!

Share
Oct 192014
 

In spite of all the anti-Czar propaganda from the from the Republican Party in 2009, accusing Obama of using Czars to implement totalitarian rule, the Ebola problem, has caused a sudden shift on their part from having always been against Czars to having always been for Czars, accompanied by demands that Obama appoint an Ebola Czar.  Now that he has done so, they are beginning to shift back to having always been against Czars, and accusations that Obama has picked the wrong Czar.  Lets begin with the appointment.

1019KlainPresident Obama has asked Ron Klain, who served as chief of staff to both Vice President Biden and former vice president Al Gore, as his Ebola response coordinator, according to a White House official.

"He will report directly to the president’s homeland security adviser, Lisa Monaco, and the president’s national security adviser, Susan Rice, as he ensures that efforts to protect the American people by detecting, isolating and treating Ebola patients in this country are properly integrated but don’t distract from the aggressive commitment to stopping Ebola at the source in West Africa," a White House official wrote in an e-mail.

Klain, 53, is a longtime Democratic operative who served as Biden’s chief of staff from 2009 to 2011 and as Gore’s from 1995 to 1999. He helped oversee the Democratic side in the 2000 presidential election recount as its lead lawyer, a role that Kevin Spacey portrayed in the HBO film "Recount."

CNN first reported the news Friday morning.

Obama has been under pressure from Republicans for weeks to appoint an "Ebola czar" to oversee the federal government’s overall effort to contain the disease. Thursday night, the president told reporters: "It may make sense for us to have one person, in part just so that after this initial surge of activity, we can have a more regular process, just to make sure that we’re crossing all the t’s and dotting all the i’s going forward."… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <Washington Post>

Personally, I consider this a good decision.  If Republicans and a few Democrats, who fear the NRA, had not kept is without a Surgeon General, the natural point person in such a situation, there would be no need.  Furthermore, the people who have been handling it are certainly qualified, but they have other things to do.  For instance, Obama is busy helping with the midterms, and a Republican takeover of the Senate would cause far more American deaths than Ebola will in the next two years  The Ebola threat requires a person, whose sole job is coordinating our national response. Klain had the organizational experience to coordinate professionals and the political acumen to produce results.

Rachel Maddow covered the Republican record on Czars, the history of Czars in America, what a Czar does, and what qualifies someone to be Czar.

If you cannot watch it here, try the MSNBC direct video link.  If you can’t watch it there, it may still be on YouTube.

One of the premier Republican objections is that Obama’s choice is not a doctor, which Rachel just disproved. 

Republicans, however, actually do have a “doctor”, who is also a Republican "expert" on Ebola. Rachel provided his credentials, after talking about other Republican Ebola scams.

If you also cannot watch this one here, try its MSNBC direct video link.  If you can’t watch it there, it may still be on YouTube.

To Czar or not to Czar?  Who, if anyone, would you prefer taking charge of the threat, Ron Klain, or Idiot, Son of Idiot, Named After Idiot?

Also, should we ban travel to and from Texas?

Share