Come for the politics, stay for the snark.
I think we are going to steal Sully’s idea and roll with our own view from your la-z-boy/couch theme for a while. Two rule:
1.) Picture must include elevated feet.
2.) No porn on the tv (Punchy, I’m looking at you, boss).
Email ’em in. Here is our first entry:
I’m feeling very lazy tonight, myself. It feels like someone sucked all the motivation out of me (and no, I did not get married today). Probably watch the Pens and the Dogs 101 on Animal Planet.
It is that time of year again, folks. We are coming up on the end of December, so time to start nominating comments for the comment of the year. Here are some early nominees from yours truly.
The whole concept of the much hyped “Big Hollywood” blog is mind blowing. Change the politics of Hollywood with a blog composed of 3rd rate conservative blowhards? Uh, okay. Sure. And I’m going to change NASA through interpretive dance.
CNN is reporting a tentative deal with dems and Susan Collins for getting her support. No details but would trim the bill to 780 billion. I must say, I feel so much better now that Sue Collins is the lynchpin in getting this and future bills passed. It’s like Daffy Duck goes to Washington and saves the democrats from jaws of doom.
Seriously, the Republican nomination race in ‘08 was a metaphorical lineup of oiled posers at Venice Beach flexing for the lunatics passing by.
Bret:
All you have to do is waterboard the XP box, and it’ll give you all the data it has.
Yeah, this Michael Jackson coverage is way over the top.
You’d think we lost Tim Russert or something.
If you have a nominee, throw it in the comments. I need the name of the commenter, the comment, and if at all possible, a link.
Have fun.
Comment of the Year 2009- Early NominationsPost + Comments (132)
Finally got around to reading Taibbi’s RS piece, and while of course it is a polemic and written in Taibbi’s trademark style, I’m having a really hard time figuring out what so many folks find so objectionable about it. Sure, there are some mistakes and some areas that a bit over-wrought, but how can anyone deny the basic point he is making? Is there any real argument that the FIRE boys are running the show in Washington, regardless of which administration is in charge? Can anyone name one instance in which the bankers have really taken a hit?
I think too many people are interpreting this as an assault on Obama, and just circling the wagons in blind defense. I’m really not seeing anything that objectionable in the Taibbi piece, and if you recall, folks like Daniel Larison were pointing out that Obama was the Wall Street candidate all last year. And even so, it is clear he was still the best option. I’ve remarked in the past that the only people who seemed to think that Obama was a hard left progressive are the right wing nutjobs and the lefties who wanted him to be a hard left progressive.
If what Taibbi says pisses you off, maybe you should be more pissed off about the fact that all those people are where he says they are, doing pretty much what he says they are doing. And for that matter, I’m not sure what all could be done to change things, as we are about to watch all the fiscal conservatives and “moderates” in the Democratic Senate rape the regulations bill that just came out of the House. It just is what it is. You just watched the “liberal” house vote down “cramdown” again, right? It is infuriating, the situation we are in and the power these guys have, but it is just insane to be mad at Taibbi for pointing it out in his own sometimes flawed way.
Go Army! Beat Navy!
Apparently President Nelson, who had no Plan B, if you recall, is back to Plan A- making threats:
Even if all other issues on the health bill are resolved, abortion remains the hardest for Nelson. Regardless of the wording, he demands one result: no federal abortion funds.
“If I don’t get it, I can’t support cloture [ending the filibuster] on the next round,” he said.
The entire thing is nothing but a nauseating puff piece, replete with syrupy odes to Nelson’s conscience and his moral dilemma, and quite honestly was the kind of thing that makes me want to kick puppies. Oh, and the author is DougJ’s good buddy Paul Kane.
On the upside, you do have to appreciate that our elected officials have all the sophistication of the underpants gnomes:
Step 1- Make Threats
Step 2- ????
Step 3- Profit!
What a clown.
Drama Queen Needs Attention, WaPo Provides ItPost + Comments (127)
This is too funny:
A Christian civil liberties organization on Thursday asked centrist Virginia Rep. Tom Perriello (D) to move his home district office to a location more favorable to protesters.
The Rutherford Institute, which was founded by conservative constitutional lawyer John W. Whitehead, penned a letter to the freshman Perriello citing the concerns of a local tea party group and the University of Virginia College Republicans that the location of his Charlottesville office interferes with their right to protest there.
Again, you can’t make this stuff up. They want him to move his office to a location that provides more space for them to harass him.
On the other hand, poking around the Rutherford Institute’s site, it seems like they were on the side of angels regarding torture.
Several of you wanted a breakdown of the House vote yesterday on regulations, and CQ does the dirty work.