Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

You don’t get to peddle hatred on saturday and offer condolences on sunday.

Books are my comfort food!

Disagreements are healthy; personal attacks are not.

Fear or fury? The choice is ours.

It’s all just conspiracy shit beamed down from the mothership.

The republican caucus is covering themselves with something, and it is not glory.

Let’s not be the monsters we hate.

Not all heroes wear capes.

You would normally have to try pretty hard to self-incriminate this badly.

“The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits.”

This isn’t Democrats spending madly. This is government catching up.

Just because you believe it, that does not make it true.

Shallow, uninformed, and lacking identity

The words do not have to be perfect.

Nothing worth doing is easy.

Hey Washington Post, “Democracy Dies in Darkness” was supposed to be a warning, not a mission statement.

Giving in to doom is how we fail to fight for ourselves & one another.

This really is a full service blog.

If you are still in the gop, you are either an extremist yourself, or in bed with those who are.

The Supreme Court cannot be allowed to become the ultimate, unaccountable arbiter of everything.

I desperately hope that, yet again, i am wrong.

We will not go back.

Wow, you are pre-disappointed. How surprising.

They want us to be overwhelmed and exhausted. Focus. Resist. Oppose.

You are here: Home / Archives for 2008

Archives for 2008

First Day With The New Tongue?

by | 37 Comments

This post is in: 

Ashcroft has a slip of the tongue:

Ashcroft was talking about the patriot act, which he wrote, when he referred to Senator Barack Obama.. as Osama. He quickly apologized for the error. People interviewed after the speech say they felt he skirted most of the issues brought up.

That sure looks like an innocent mistake to me, the kind I make all the time. I know I have written Osama when I meant Obama and vice versa, and fortunately caught the mistake before posting. He looked mortified the minute he said it, looked like he was really uncomfortable, and then apologized. It would be really unfair to try to use this against Ashcroft.

Somewhat related, I am in the PA ad market, and I am seeing a ton of Obama commercials. The one that I have seen the most includes a line about Obama organizing in conjunction with Christian churches, so it is safe to assume his campaign is still dealing dealing with the Muslim issue (and most likely still will be in his second term, should he win).

First Day With The New Tongue?Post + Comments (37)

Talking To Bush Didn’t Work

by | 32 Comments

This post is in: 

…so now military leaders are talking to the press.

Army leaders are expressing increased alarm about the mental health of soldiers who would be sent back to the front again and again under plans that call for troop numbers to be sustained at high levels in Iraq for this year and beyond.

Among combat troops sent to Iraq for the third or fourth time, more than one in four show signs of anxiety, depression or acute stress, according to an official Army survey of soldiers’ mental health.

Some days I imagine a world where Serious People on my TV realize that staying in Iraq is (1) unsustainable and (2) as damaging as any of these terrible hypothetical consequences of leaving that I keep hearing about. Then I’m swimming from a shipwreck, and suddenly I’m flying around in gold underwear and fighting bears. I have pretty weird dreams.

Talking To Bush Didn’t WorkPost + Comments (32)

Compare And Contrast

by | 39 Comments

This post is in: ,

#1: No doubt because everybody but the Kagans understands now that brutal deployment schedules are ruining the army, punishing 15 month combat tours will be dropped back to 12 months.

The Bush administration plans to announce next week that U.S. soldiers’ combat tours will be reduced from 15 months to 12 months in Iraq and Afghanistan beginning later this summer, The Associated Press has learned.

The decision, expected to get final, formal approval in the days ahead, comes as Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, prepares to deliver a progress report to Congress next week on the improved security situation there. He is also expected to make recommendations for future troop levels.

#2: Bush pledges to boost our force in Afghanistan.

President Bush told a NATO summit that the United States would increase its number of troops in Afghanistan, administration officials said yesterday, even as reports surfaced that the administration would reduce U.S. soldiers’ combat tours from 15 months to 12 months.

#3: The president rules out drawing any more troops out of Iraq.

President George W. Bush will signal next week that he will pull no more troops out of Iraq while he is president, once his troop surge ends in the summer.

His senior Iraq commander General David Petraeus will use his testimony to congress on Tuesday and Wednesday to argue for continuing political support for the tactics of the surge strategy even after a planned drawdown of troops.

#1 will effectively reduce our available forces by 20% at the same time that attrition, particularly among officers, has become an epidemic. #2 would usually pull troops from our reserves, but we don’t have reserves. All of our available forces are deployed. That means that #1, #2 and #3 cannot all be true. Even two out of three seems unlikely.

For a fun exercise, let’s compile all of the times that Bush has formally made a pledge to win some minor advantage then ignored it. I can think of any number of instances when Tony Blair got burned by Bush promises over Iraq, but we all know that the list goes on much longer than a busy blogger wants to compile on a balmy Saturday. Throw out examples that come to your mind, preferably with links, and I will compile them later into a post.

Compare And ContrastPost + Comments (39)

Through the Looking Glass

by | 78 Comments

This post is in: ,

This gem from Talk Left is a perfect example of the kind of crazy that seems to be whipped up by the Clinton campaign. Apparently, Jeralynn has run the numbers, and if you include Florida and Michigan’s numbers into the popular vote tally (and remember, Obama was not on the ballot in Michigan), throw out the states in which there were caucuses, and do a couple of other things that Jeralynn does that she has detailed in her “methodology,” then you can state, with a perfectly straight face, that Clinton and Obama are tied in the popular vote.

In other news, if we had found WMD in Iraq, the whole thing might have been worth it! If we had only gone into Iraq with more troops and a coherent strategy and a plan to rebuild, things might be a success today! If the last eight years had not been a total disaster, Bush would have been the best President ever! If only I had tried harder as a kid, I might have made it into the NFL!

Also, if my Aunt had balls, she would be my uncle.

I can’t be the only person to recognize this odd and troubling detachment from reality that seems to be gripping both the Clinton campaign and her supporters, and it is truly bizarre. Meanwhile, the rascals at Rasmussen seem to want to play along:

If the Democrats were to allot their current state delegate totals in a winner-take-all format, Clinton would actually have a significant delegate advantage. Despite having won only 14 recognized contests to Obama’s 30, Clinton would currently have a 120 (1738 to 1618) total delegate lead and a remarkable 167 (1427 to 1260) pledged delegate lead. These numbers give Texas’ “prima-caucus” delegates to Clinton and do not include Florida, Michigan or the 693 total delegates and 566 pledged delegates still to be won in the next few months.

This, of course, assumes two things. First, that the system is completely overhauled and turned into the winner-take all system. Second, it assumes that with a different system, the Obama campaign would have done nothing differently. Since neither is the case, this is a great talking point for the Clinton camp to use on the addle-minded, but it won’t persuade anyone who can tie their shoes. The rules were clear when the campaign began, and you don’t choose your nominee by asking “What if” at the end of the race.

Through the Looking GlassPost + Comments (78)

Timing, Two-Timing, And Truthiness

by | 57 Comments

This post is in: ,

The Clinton campaign probably thought they were being clever with the Friday afternoon document dump of Hillary’s IRS returns, but all they have done is give the media a taste and 48 hours to sift through them. Expect this story to still be active and raging on Monday. Not to mention, this juxtaposition of stories at the NY Times is exceptionally unfortunate:

Those are the kind of side by side comparisons that simply can not help Hillary with the blue-collar vote she so desperately needs. Did no one check the web to see whether today was really the day they wanted to release the returns? At any rate, while the clinton campaign seems to suffer from chronic bad timing, at least portions of the campaign have no problem two-timing the Senator from New York:

Mark Penn, Hillary Clinton’s top political strategist, apologized yesterday for meeting with Colombian officials to advocate for a trade agreement that Clinton opposes.

“The meeting was an error in judgment that will not be repeated, and I am sorry for it,” Penn said in a statement released by the campaign. “The senator’s well-known opposition to this trade deal is clear and was not discussed.”

Penn met with Colombia’s ambassador as recently as Monday to discuss how to get a bilateral free-trade agreement passed between the South American nation and the United States. Campaign officials said the meeting was done as part of Penn’s separate job as chief executive of Burson-Marsteller, an international communications and lobbying firm.

The incompetence of it all is staggering, as if they had a checklist for pissing off blue collar voters. The fact that Penn is still with the campaign is simply inexplicable, as Marc Armbinder notes:

One of the toughest tasks for a political journalist these days is to try and find someone in Clinton world who is willing to defend Mr. Penn or his sense of political optics.

Incidentally, Penn has said that he has time for only two clients: Clinton and Microsoft. Now, perhaps, he has three.

Obama aides had nothing to say. (Indeed — can you blame them for wanting to allow this story to unfurl without any help?)

Meanwhile, as if all of this was not enough, Clinton’s credibility problem is going to re-emerge next week as a full-time story with this example of truthiness:

Over the last five weeks, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York has featured in her campaign stump speeches the story of a health care horror: an uninsured pregnant woman who lost her baby and died herself after being denied care by an Ohio hospital because she could not come up with a $100 fee.

The woman, Trina Bachtel, did die last August, two weeks after her baby boy was stillborn at O’Bleness Memorial Hospital in Athens, Ohio. But hospital administrators said Friday that Ms. Bachtel was under the care of an obstetrics practice affiliated with the hospital, that she was never refused treatment and that she was, in fact, insured.

“We implore the Clinton campaign to immediately desist from repeating this story,” said Rick Castrop, chief executive officer of the O’Bleness Health System.

Linda M. Weiss, a spokeswoman for the not-for-profit hospital, said the Clinton campaign had never contacted the hospital to check the accuracy of the story, which Mrs. Clinton had first heard from a Meigs County, Ohio, sheriff’s deputy in late February.

A Clinton spokesman, Mo Elleithee, said candidates would frequently retell stories relayed to them, vetting them when possible. “In this case, we did try but were not able to fully vet it,” Mr. Elleithee said. “If the hospital claims it did not happen that way, we respect that.”

It seems like calling the hospital would have been an easy first step, and in fact, let’s compare and contrast. When your average right-wing blogger wants to prove or disprove something, generally the first thing they do is CONTACT the people in the middle of the situation. Think about that. Either the Clinton campaign didn’t care if the story was true or not, and just wanted to keep telling it, or they are less equipped to get at the truth than your average citizen journalist.

What this all boils down to is a question of competence. It has become increasingly clear that despite their claims about passing the CinC threshold and despite their claims of superior judement, the Clinton crew cares little about actually getting things right. Loyalty, however, is a cherished value. Competence, not so much.

Where have I seen that poisonous combination over the past eight years? Does the country need four more years of rule from an arrogant and incompetent administration that places a priority on loyalty and secrecy?

I think not.

Timing, Two-Timing, And TruthinessPost + Comments (57)

Friday Beer Blogging: Sam Adams Irish Red

by | 46 Comments

This post is in: 

Samuel Adams Irish RedI have a friend who thinks Mich Ultra is an exceptional beer. I nearly get sick from even thinking about drinking it. So you can imagine how I took his recommendation to try Sam Adams Irish Red. I didn’t even know they MADE an Irish Red, so I decided to give it a try. My friend thinks it was his recommendation, so he’s proud of himself!! Beer Advocate gives it a B+. I’m giving it an A. Totally in agreement with the commenter:

Poured this beer into a beerclean glass and marveled at the appearance. Great translucent amber red with copious head and brussels lacing.

The aroma is one of maltiness. Toasty maults of toffee and caramel are the strongest. A tinge of hops hit late.

The same toffee and sweet caramel malts come through moderately in the taste. The mouthfeel is only a surprisingly moderate to thin. The beer does not have strong flavors but is quite flavorful, smooth and creamy.

I can honestly say that, other than Rickards Red (a Canadian brew that inexplicably gets a C+ from Beer Advocate) I haven’t tasted a better Irish Red. I drink it out of a flute glass, which enhances the flavor, in my opinion. I have a set of Samuel Adams glasses, but they’re more for marketing than anything else.

A very nice flavor. Wet the glass before pouring though to release the bubbles and the flavor. In fact, do that with any beer you drink. I’m certainly no beer expert, but I know this does enhance the flavor.

Note: If you want your beer to taste better, invest in some quality glasses. Most of you probably know this, but when good beers are brewed, chances are, the brewmaster will also develop a glass to go with it (that’s my experience with Belgian Ales, anyway.) They’re usually around $2.99 apiece at your better beer retailers. I have 16 beer glasses, all different, and all geared toward different styles of beer. But if you don’t have the budget to buy ’em, you can’t go wrong by using a champagne flute. Those suckers can almost make Budweiser palatable!

Friday Beer Blogging: Sam Adams Irish RedPost + Comments (46)