HILLARY & BILL'S WORST NIGHTMARE

The gentleman in the picture is Hillary and Bill Clinton's worst nightmare.

But only if he chooses to run for President of the United States. Senator Barack Obama is the new rising star of the Democratic Party, and virtually the coming of the leader we civil rights and progressives have been waiting for since MLK caught that bullet in Memphis, Tennessee in April 1968.

From Taegan Goddard's Political Wire, via Insight Magazine:

“On paper, this man [Obama] should not be any threat,” a political strategist regarded as close to Ms. Clinton's team said. "He is too young and inexperienced. Yet, he exposes Hillary's weaknesses in a way that has people worried.”

The strategist said Mr. Obama could exploit several of Ms. Clinton’s weaknesses—Iraq and her profligate campaign spending. The strategist pointed to Mr. Obama's early opposition to the Iraq war while Ms. Clinton supported the U.S. invasion.

Political Wire also states that Obama's worrying Hillary because he can snatch a godly amount of votes from the Democrats' base (progressives, liberals and ethnic groups). Personally, I agree with the assessment that Obama's inexperienced. His age shouldn't matter; wasn't John F. Kennedy a "youth" at 43 years of age, when he got the Oval Office?

Obama hasn't been in the Senate long enough to establish himself or any meaningful legislation. And though he has rock star status, he needs to spend less time with Jay Leno, or going on book tours, and more time attending to his duties as a United States Senator. Yeah, he's charismatic and whatnot, but I'm like his wife, Michelle, who, when observing the public response to her husband, her comment is usually, "I'll be glad when he does something to really earn the accolades he's getting."

Smart woman. And, I think she will be the one who helps him to determine whether or not he actually runs for office, not some gasbags filling his head with delusions and yet, ready to sling him under the bus if he puts a foot wrong.

At the CBC Legislative Weekend back in 2005, I remember Hillary and Obama showing up together at the Town Hall meeting, and as usual, Hillary tried to pull her usual schtick about the importance of passing the renewal of provisions in the Voting Rights Act, and other nonsense that would appeal to people of color (Dennis Kucinich got a warmer reception than Hillary). But when Harry Belafonte got to the mike, he basically told Hillary to drink a can of STHU, as well as "Talk to the Hand". He also sent a subtle warning to Obama indicating "We're not going to support you on the basis of your skin color. Do some work in the office we elected you to before you even think of advancement to another political office, because they gravy train for Black politicians has left the station, and is not coming back."

I swear, Obama didn't want to speak after Belafonte clocked Hillary and by fiat, pimp-slapped him to let him know what is really at stake here. "No room for showboating" is basically what Belafonte was telling Obama.

One year ago, Hillary and Obama were virtually joined at the hip. Now that he's become a reason for concern about her own Presidential ambitions, look for Carville to crawl out from under that rock that he hides under with that hag of a wife of his, and spew the same crap about Obama that he did about getting rid of Howard Dean as DNC chair after Dean proved his 50-state strategy was largely responsible for the Democratic sweep of both houses of Congress.

Hillary should be worrying. She's demonstrating that she will say and do anything to accomplish her own ambitions and advance a non-existant agenda for the DLC.

And we all know what time it is for the DLC. They need to be eviscerated, and that's why this blog is so named.

BLACK REPUBLICANS IN RECOVERY

My friend, Steve Gilliard, nails it. 'Nuff Said.

Recover from being a black Republican`

Go from this....................




To this




I know, I know, all your sacrifice for the GOP came to naught. You thought this was your year, that you would finally get the respect you deserve.

The problem is that IS what you got.

Let's be frank. It isn't that being Democratic is being black, it isn't, but being a Republican means you're a grovling Uncle Ruckus, always seeking to diminish black people for the sake of whites.

Doubt it?

Who aired radio ads claiming that the Dems founded the Klan and the GOP was the party of Lincoln. When the NRO's house negro Deroy Murdock tried that, he looked every inch the fool he was. When you tried to convince black Marylanders of that, they were offended. You try to talk down to black people and it pisses them off.

Then you have the grovelling of Michael Steele, too stupid to conceed when it was clear black people would no more vote for him than Frank Rizzo. He had based his entire campaign on blaming black people and acting the fool.

He won't ever admit he slandered the students of HBCU Morgan State and created the flying oreo incident to gain sympathy from whites. He won't ever admit his cowardice in refusing to confront Bob Erlich about anything. He was a coward and a shame to the race from the minute he entered public life. Tomming and shucking for the white folks and a lot of them forgot to vote
for him anyway.

He thought black people were so stupid that he thought they would think he was a Democrat.

But he's not the worse. That's Ken "I ain't no negro" Blackwell. He did his master's bidding by denying blacks the right to vote in 2004, thinking his white masters would be so pleased. Sitting up in his big willie chair, with a cigar in one hand, talking like the white folks would let him run the show. They could trust him, he'd done what they'd asked, he'd kept them coloreds away from the polls, now he'd be on the way to the White House. First, a stop in Columbus, then in a few years, he'd be running to be the first black president.

Yeah, right. They used your silly, football playing ass to keep your people down and then let you think you could run for something. Sure, you were on the team. Until they had to do something for you.

You even got that mega church lunatic Rod Parsley to back your play. Too bad most of his parishoners would no more vote for your black ass than root for Michigan. They didn't care if you were a Godly man, you were a nigger, and that mean you wouldn't get their vote. No matter how much they smiled in your face.

What? You think black people would forget your junior grade Bull Connor antics? No, fuck no.
You lost in a landslide and took Mike Dewine with you. Now, Ohio has a Senator it can be proud of again. Thanks to you.

If you're a young black Republican, see these examples and be warned. Down the path of the GOP lies on contempt and scorn. You don't want to wind up defending a gambleholic like Bill Bennett, and have people laugh at you. You don't want to be accused of placing your career ahead of your people.

Just because they smile in your face and talk about Jesus, you will pay a fearsome price for going down that road, the scorn and contempt of your fellow men and women. Nothing is worth that.

So, you've been experimenting with being a Republican, and you find some of their ideas appealing.



Keep this picture in your mind. That really is former Sen. George Allen in a confederate uniform and he really, really hates black people. No, really. The rest is photoshopped, but that is him.

And they thought he would run for president. He always seemed like an idiot to me, but he was popular.

Until he called someone macaca, which translates to nigger. A word Allen likes.

And that's pretty much what they think about you.

Republicans like to use you, but they will not sacrifice one thing a white person needs to help you along. Not one.

So what to do?

You need to regain your pride.

First, you can stand on your own. You don't need white patrons to pay your way, then tell you how to think. A proud black man or woman can do on their own. When they offer you a lot, they expect a lot. And if you get in trouble, they won't know who you are,(see, Williams, Armstrong, Allen, Claude)

Second, don't let their appeal to religion fool you. They say God, but they mean votes. As long as you vote for them, they will tell you what you want to hear.

Third, don't let them use your bitterness against you. Just because you have an issue with this leader or that, don't let them encourage you to run them down. They are just using you to gain credibility

Fourth, don't be ashamed of being black. I know many of you secretly hold that in your heart, that life would be easier if you were white. That black people never do anything right. That isn't true. Throw away the Alice Walker and embrace reality. Every day, strong black men and women contribute to America. They work, they raise families, they love their country. And they don't have to grovel or embarass themselves to do so.

Never forget that black people built this country, as slaves and as free men. Even when we were treated as less than people, even when they hung us from trees. Take pride in your heritage. Do we have poor, ignorant people? Sure, but so does everyone else. Don't let those few make you renounce your birthright and history.

Once you have done that, you can place yourself on the road to recovery.

Listen to the music which made this country, Robert Johnson, Charlie Mingus, James Brown. Throw the junk you've been listening to away. See what we can create. Say it loud isn't a song, but a way to live.

Read about our heroes, flawed and imperfect, and the odds they overcame. From the heroes who fought at New Market to the freedom riders, the brave black men and women who challenged their degredation and disrespect.

Then finally, embrace you, and all around you. Don't think you have to be someone else to be a better you.

You don't have to wear a beret and sunglasses to be proud of your heritage. All you have to do is hold that pride in your heart.

AS A BLACK WOMAN, I DO KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT

My Rant with my "family" over at the Pesky Fly. Just in case it disappears from that site.

The following is my response to your expressed skepticism from the Booker Rising post. Read it, dissect it, and be ready for constructive discussion, please.

This is the one subject that few African-Americans will speak up on; interracial dating.

I have girlfriends whose sons married white women, and their worry was about how their sons would be treated by society (read lynching or beatings).

One of my best girlfriends, a staunch Christian, in the "Love Thy Neighbor" mold, actually confessed to me that she didn't like the idea of her son marrying a white woman. Only prayer got her to the point of acceptance, as well as unconditional love of her son to the point she would rather welcome the white woman, than risk alienating him.

The reality is, when Black women (especially mothers) see their sons grow up and marrying white women, they start questioning themselves, because it's considered a reflection as to whether or not Black women (and by succession, themselves as mothers) are good enough for their sons. But if their sons are happy, they soon progress to acceptance, because I've seen it in my own family. I have two first cousins married to white women, both of them for more than 30 years.

Their mothers disowned their ass. One actually died, never talking to her son, or seeing her beautiful grandchildren, ever.

My mother, the surrogate mom to both cousins, did something way ahead of her time.

She asked the question point blank: "Why couldn't you find a good Black woman to marry?"

My cousins response - one had tried marriage twice to Black women and they were nut cases (especially the second one. She was so jealous that he remarried; she managed to alienate him from their daughter - and told us horrible lies about him molesting their daughter. Only a court appearance where he sued for slander, was she forced to publicly apologize and said she was lying.) The other one had numerous relationships with Black women, one financially ripped him off, and with such heartache, he was looking to spend the rest of his life alone, when his wife's parents actually introduced him to their daughter, because they got tired of her bringing home loser white men who abused her.

After hearing their explanations, she embraced these women into the family, and set the example for my brothers and me to do likewise.

It is not about not wanting people to find love wherever and with whomever they find it. It's about the message a Black man sends to Black women when he achieves success, celebrity and material wealth, that a Black woman is not worthy enough to share that success with - and a white woman is.

Tiger Woods dated Tyra Banks when they both attended Stanford University. Tyra was not a stupid woman - she had to seriously hit the books to get in to that University. She's also proven herself to be a very savvy business woman and is very wealthy.

Tiger goes and marries the blond nanny to other golfers' kids. So was he is saying that an undereducated nanny is more worthy to share in his success than Tyra Banks was? Or any Black Woman?

This underscores part of the theory as to why Harold Ford lost the election for the U. S. Senate. It's not like he couldn't find a quality, educated sista; in fact, five years ago, he was engaged to one; a corporate attorney for AOL here in DC. My speculation is that he probably expected girlfriend to give up her $350,000 a year job and follow him around as a dutiful politician's wife.

Jennifer Baltimore said she'd take a pass on marrying with that type of expectation.

I may hate Harold's politics, but as a woman, I say he should be able to date who he wants, if he's going to become a private citizen. But since he's an ambitious politician, my advice to him, as was Shay's, was not to hand Bob Corker and the ReThugs ammunition to shoot him with.

Barney Frank got elected, and keeps getting re-elected, as an openly gay man. I'm not saying it couldn't work in Tennessee, it's just that more work has to be done in the area of tolerance and acceptance.

Barack Obama stated in his autobiography that he had his heart broken by white women as well as sistas. Yet, to do the mission he was to do, he knew that only a woman who knows what he faces and what he fears as a Black Man, was going to be the mate he needed. Michelle Robinson Obama is an accomplished sista; she is an attorney and a Director of a Community Development Center in Chicago. Obama didn't ask her to give all that up; in fact, he encourages it, so that Michelle is not just known as "Obama's wife." That takes complete acceptance of yourself as a man, and confidence in your woman to the point you don't need to control her.

When the theories shake out, maybe dating white women isn't what cost Harold Ford the election. But it sure had a hell of an influence on the outcome.

You gents advertise yourselves as being progressive in your thinking. So why are you so quick to dismiss this theory out of hand, saying you need poll numbers before you will accept that a sista knows what she's talking about? Right now, I'm thinking that because I'm speaking pretty bluntly on this issue, you'd rather dismiss it because it's in keeping with your concept of color-blindness, rather than engage in a discussion which actually takes into account the perspective of an African-American female. Tell the truth, and don't sugar-coat it, please, because I'm a big girl and I know how to disect an argument before I scream race.

I was born during the Civil Rights Movement at it's peak (so I just gave you a hint about my age, LOL)with parents who were more activist than Condoleeza Rice's parents never were. I have various family members who were dog-bit, water-hosed by Bull Connor's thugs, jailed and yes, lynched, just because they got called "Nigger" one too many times before they snapped under the weight of their dignity being trashed, and swung a right hook knocking out some teeth of the white guy who spewed it. So don't you dare try to tell me or any other Black woman that their theory is in left field, because you're not a Black woman.

I will accept your apologies or clarifications with gift certificates to Starbucks, thank you.

BOOKER RISING NAILS IT

I'm keeping this short and dirty today. Read an interesting and accurate analysis of why Harold Ford lost his Senate Race here:

http://bookerrising.blogspot.com/2006/11/how-harold-fords-impulsive-love-for.html

She and TBogg seem to be kindred souls.

THE MORNING AFTER...

There's always a morning after a main event, like yesterday's election. As we bask in the afterglow of the Democrats actually bringing a gun to a gunfight instead of the usual knife, the result of their willingness to stand their ground and bark back at the ReThug bullies, is a 27 seat majority in the House of Representatives.

DING DONG THE WICKED WITCH IS DEAD! AND IT'S NAMES WERE SANTORUM, CHAFFEE, KERRY HEALEY, MARK FOLEY, DON SHERWOOD, CONRAD BURNS, KATHERINE HARRIS, NANCY JOHNSON...SHOOT THEY'RE TOO NUMEROUS FOR ME TO NAME!

What sent them to their defeat was hitching their wagons to this guy:



I'm not banking on the Senate yet. While Fighting Jim Webb is ahead by 8000 votes, the provisionals haven't been counted yet, but it's looking good for him, since those votes are coming out of Fairfax, Loudon and Prince William Counties.

In other words, NORTHERN VIRGINIA, which is ecstatically BLUE.

As far as Tennessee goes, I thought Harold Ford Jr., had a good chance of pulling it off. But Corker got the nod, and the people of Tennessee have spoken.

They don't want a Bible-Thumping, Ten Commandments quotin' Playa representing them in the U. S. Senate. God don't like it when you try to pimp Him for personal gain. As the Christian Progressive Liberal, if anything cost Harold that Senate seat, it was shooting a campaign ad in a church, and on the same breath, defending partying at the Playboy SuperBowl Party in Jacksonville last year.

That "Fancy Ford" website was the first shot fired over the bow. Harold was put on notice, given his "You're still a Negro" memo which he didn't bother to read, and basically tried to out redneck Bob Corker. Those issues, not some white woman telling Harold to "Call me", cost him the election. Running away from his party and relevant issues is what cost him this Senate race. Ignoring the demographics of Tennessee on a racial, cultural and economic level, cost him this race. I'm not saying that the ad didn't do some damage, but it put Harold on the defensive, where he ran from that point on.

Crashing Bob Corker's press conference and towering over the older man like a bully didn't help him, either. It made him look as thug-life as his brother Jake, who also was shown the door last night.

I'm not going to rub Ford's face in it - he probably is looking for someone to take out his frustration in losing by breaking out a can of whip-ass on them at this moment. But, like my friend Derek said over on the Pesky Fly, I hope Harold uses the next two years to take inventory of himself, learn what life is for those like you and me so he can really emphatize with them and not pay lip-service, and not be so ready to blame his loss on the "Call Me, Harold" ad, or any other dirty trick pulled by the ReThugs. That "Fancy Ford" website that appeared shortly after he announced he was running should have been his clue that the race was going to get dirty. This was not a good year for ReThugs to be running for re-election, anyway,with Dear Leader's approval rating being in the toilet. Charlie Crist managed to win the chance to be Florida's next loony governor because he eschewed Bush campaigning for him.

When suffering major defeats in our lives, instead of assigning blame, it's time to take stock and learn from your defeat; in fact, it could be the best lesson you will ever learn about life, love, who your friends are, and most of all, facing yourself - the good parts and the bad parts. The good parts you keep; the bad parts you try to change for the better.

Ford says he'll be back in 2008 to take on Lamar Alexander. Well, I would have preferred to see if he would have become a true Democrat in the House, with membership in a Majority party for a change, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

Don't count out Harold Ford. He may be the next Phoenix to rise from the ashes, and maybe, he'll finally learn how to be his own man, truly independent of his father and his wanne-be thug brothers.

PAUL WALDMAN CONFIRMS WHY THE GOP GETS NO LOVE FROM BLACK PEOPLE

Over at Alternet, writer Paul Waldman confirms in articulate detail why the GOP gets no love from Blacks, Jews, or Gay People. Here's an excerpt:

We can look on the bright side and say that what's bad for Ford may in general be good for Democrats. Ford, currently locked in a dead heat, is depending on the willingness of the good people of Tennessee to rise above their past and elect the first African-American senator from the South since Reconstruction. Elsewhere, black Republicans are finding that they have a lot of trouble convincing African Americans that the GOP has mended its ways, and the attention the Ford race has gotten isn't helping. Kenneth Blackwell in Ohio, Lynn Swann in Pennsylvania and Michael Steele in Maryland have all been unable to bring significant numbers of African Americans to their side, and look headed for defeat.

In my opinion, as an African-American woman, this article confirms what Steve Gilliard and I have been saying for the past two years: Black People don't drink the "Candidate is Black" Kool-Aid as often as the racist elements of both the Democratic and Republican party leaders tend to think. We are very able to discern a Black candidate's motives for seeking higher office, espeically when the candidate has conducted himself/herself as a modern-day Stepin' Fetchit or Mammy. My parents' generation didn't need a political pundit to tell them how they should think or feel about political candidates - they had the gift of discernment to determine if a candidate was on the real, or faking his butt off. Black Pastors I sat under in church began saying to political candidates "Yes, you can come here to speak, but it means staying for the entire worship service."

In other words, gracing the church, town hall, school or waterfront with your mere Black/Jew/Gay presence no longer cuts it. Those very voters that Harold Ford, Michael Steele, Lynn Swann and Ken Blackwell are working so hard to court - well, gentlemen, they have already made up their minds about you. Yes, I know your ethnicity and skin color should not matter, but even in the 21st Century, it does. No matter how much evidence is placed out in the public to educate people about African-Americans, there are some that have that element of hate so deeply rooted, it is damned near hopeless to think that those individuals can change their mindset, short of having a personal epiphany, or near death experience where one's life is saved by teh Black person, or teh Gay, or teh Jewish person.

Harold Ford just got the memo reminding him he's still African-American, and he's considered an uppity Negro, to boot. The fact that Swannie and Blackwell are trailing their Democratic opponents by double-digits in the polls are basically communicating that they got that same memo, but refuse to read it, and therefore, are left wondering why after all the butt-kissing of white GOP voters they have done, why those same GOP voters are going to cross party lines and vote for the white guy.

Mike Steele has two things going for him: he loves puppies and the endorsement of a graft artist and his thug, rapist ex-brother-in-law:





Is Massachusetts the only Commonwealth that is progressive enough to see past a person's race, sexual orientation or religious belief to give the job to the best person for it? They are saying so by their willingness to vote for an African-American, Deval Patrick, over the white Female candidate, Kerry Healey, whose campaign tried to run similar ads to the ones the ReThugs ran on Ford.

She was already trailing double digits behind Patrick - after those "Willie Horton" type ads ran, her trailing behind Patrick increased, to where he's all but handed the state House in Boston.

As Cornel West says "Race Matters". So does ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and religious belief. How does a candidate over come such odds?

One person at a time. And the time is NOW.

J. C. WATTS: STOP DRINKING THE KOOL-AID!

Memo to former Rep. J. C. Watts (R-OK):

STOP DRINKING THE GOP KOOL-AID, BRUH!

I mean, it's not like you work on the Hill anymore, unless you're a lobbyist trying to stay in good with the boys in the House. With the scandal swirling around Rep. Mark Foley (R-Pervert), you think those boys are going to be good clientele for you to be boasting about?

You made your point as a 2% Negro for Rent in the GOP; hell, you had the fourth highest position in all of the House, until the Bugman, Tom DeLay (R-Thug)came on board as House Leader and pretty much telegraphed your horses' ass that you would be no more than glofied water boy totin' water for the GOP Massas on his watch.

What did you do? You got the hell out of Dodge, dude, and by the looks of things, it was a smart move, too.

So why do you feel the need to say this crap?

Former Republican congressman JC Watts just said on CNN that it was okay for Denny Hastert and congressional republicans to do nothing in the face of evidence that ex-congressman Mark Foley was preying on kids. Why? Because they were "respecting the rights of the parents." Supposedly the one kids' parents didn't want to make a public stink.

Would you feel that way if Foley had preyed upon and molested one of your kids? Hell, no, and be honest, you'd settle the matter in street fashion, too. You'd get some of your boys named Ray-Ray, or Earl and Scooter, a couple of tire irons and take Foley out in a cornfield, ala Joe Pesci-style in "Casino" and beat the snot out of him, as well as bust both his kneecaps, so don't front off that you would have meekly gone along with the deal as that kid's parents did, and also say that it's OK for Hastert, Shimkus and Boehner to be derelict in their duty as lawmakers in the House.

Why do you feel the need to defend the GOP leadership that virtually enabled Mark Foley to prey upon kids on the Hill? Kids entrusted by their parents to your collegues to gain an educational experience of working in the highest halls of Government, not be procurers of pulcritude for salacious elected officials who can't keep it in their pants, or because they're drunk on power and use sex as a means to exercise that power.

You make me sick. In fact, all GOP House Negroes like you are a disgrace to the human race, and don't get me started on being ethnic because you were never there, boyfriend. What does the Grand Old Perverts have on you or your family, that CNN knew they could call you for defensive commentary on the air?

I guess I'll know how low we've sunk if Clarence Thomas weighs in on this, because his pubic hair on a Coke can is almost tame compared to Foley's emails in which he was obviously engaging in his own form of virtual sex with teen-aged boys.

I don't want you trotting out Bill Clinton or Monica Lewinsky as justification for Hastert's dereliction, either. While being stupid, they were consenting adults who could give consent to be stupid. But providing cover for a known pedophile? Get real.

If your own father is quoted as saying, "A vote for a Republican is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders" then why, oh why, are you stepping in to provide cover for the ReThugs and their enabling of a pervert? You must be drunk on the GOP kool-aid, and can't stop drinking it.

You need to get to a rehab as fast as Foley did, if you ever wish to retain what little credibility you have left.


HE CALLED JESSE JACKSON A "RACE-HUSTLING POVERTY PIMP". BUT, WHAT DOES THAT MAKE WATTS, WHEN HE PROVIDES COVER FOR A KNOWN PEDOPHILE?

GOP = GRAND OLD...PERVERTS?

Well, since I mentioned Mark Foley, let's just say that those ReThugs of the Bible Belt variety, (holla, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and "Mulla" James Dobson) are so quiet on this issue of Rep. Mark Foley (R-Florida) getting caught sending emails to Congressional pages, you can hear mice pissing on cotton.

IOKIYAR. God, I hope not. I hope some in the ReThug party sobers up off the GOP kool-aid to be willing to take out some of their own on this issue. While we have graft, corruption, those willing to be bribed, whoremongers (even those who put a chokehold on their mistresses), somewhere in this perverted world, there seems to still be a line that says children are off limits.

The Democrats took down "Dollar" Bill Jefferson (D-Louisiana)for having $90K in his freezer. So if they had a pedophile among them, they would be toast. Why can't the GOP do the same thing? I mean, what hubris and arrogance to have this guy actually chairing a committee that wrote legislation that facilitated better alert systems when a child is snatched off the street, and yet, because he wrote those laws, he probably knew how to break them and not get caught.

More than predatory acts, we're also talking about sexual harassment as well, because when a person uses their authority to solicit sex acts in exchange for favorable treatment, sex has become a condition of their employment, and that is illegal. Foley was a lawyer by profession - you would think he'd remember this from second or third-year law school.

Law schools...they churn out perverts like Foley, Clarence Thomas, Roberts and Alito, haven't they? So, I'm no longer impressed if you tell me you're a Harvard or Yale Law Grad - they put something in the water to make CBC members like Artur Davis, Mel Watt and others think they can play nice with the GOP and not get burned, anyway.

Mark Foley is a predatory pedophile. Repeat, rinse and spit, please. And this is not the time for Grandmothers in Congress, like Nancy Pelosi or Jane Harman to keep their yaps shut in playing nice; they should be encouraging their peers to hang this around the GOP's neck like an anvil for the next five weeks.

Ads should be reading like this:

"Do you support a Congressional member who knowingly exposed his pedophile colleague to congressional pages? If you do, go ahead and vote Pedophile...!"

No, children, this is not an October surprise. But it comes close.

And the ReThugs can't say "Well, Democrats do it, too!" Drink your cans of STHU, and break out your cans of Whip Ass on all of the GOP leadership, starting with Hastert, for covering this crap up. He's a teacher, by profession. Even when I taught community college, the same law applies; if you find out that a student may be being subjected to molestation or harassment by a faculty member, you were duty-bound by law to make a report, or you were toast if it surfaced and it's discovered you knew about it, but did nothing. So, if that standard applied to me as a community college instructor, it also applied to Hastert, even as a former school teacher, despite the fact he's in Congress at this point.

Which is why I say that those who had any dealings with Mark Foley better come clean. To me, this is like the scandal with the Catholic Priests. You think the priests who are truly trying to do what they were called to do; that they're not cussing Bernard Law under their breath for placing them in a position of being an automatic suspect, especially if they dropped dime on their pedophile bretheren of the Cloth, and all he did was transfer them somewhere else?

The Catholic church is going bankrupt behind this scandal, paying out millions of dollars in damages to the victims and their families. Who's going to donate money to the Church if it's going to be used to cover up predatory pedophile priests?

Same standard applies here. Why should you donate to the GOP if they're going to provide cover for pedophiles? Ever watch the movie, "Bastard out of Carolina"? I watched it recently and what I remember most was when Bone's uncle Earl found out that her stepfather was beating, molesting and raping her, Earl and a few of his boys got the guy in a circle (during a funeral of Bone's grandmother or aunt) and kicked the living crap out of that guy. And this was in rural South Carolina during the 1950's. These guys would probably be part of the NASCAR crowd today that the GOP relies on during election time. If raping or molesting a child didn't play well back in the 1950's in Carolina, how did Denny Hastert, Roy Shimkus, probably even Tom DeLay, think it would play out in 2006?

Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Connecticut), one of the few GOPers I refer to as a Republican and not a ReThug, has already slung the entire GOP leadership under the bus for this one. Many more to follow. Pay attention to a comment from a blogger over at Steve Gilliard's:

astounding < disgusting.

I'm all for cronyism and circling the wagons... but this is sick, cult-like, sh--.

I feel tainted even having my views associated with these f'king sickos.

Gawd.

Turning a blind eye to f--king pedophiles.

Every single one who knew anything should be investigated and resign if they were involved or knew of anything. I don't even care if they thought they were just inappropriate emails... after the Clenis spectacle they have no business acting like it was his personal sexual whatever-the-f--k.

F'ing disturbing.

I hate our society.
ether | 10.02.06 - 3:30 am | #

Ether feels very strongly about this. I had to edit, because I didn't want to offend with the swear words, but his post says he's a Republican who's sickened by the degree of party loyalty being sworn here. Another poster suggested that the reason the DLC continues to try and play footsie with the ReThugs is because KKKarl Rove may be channeling J. Edwina Hoover and compiled files on them like Hoover did on Malcolm, Martin and Medgar. Hmmmm...

Memo Warning to Harold Ford - Still want to build bridges to a group of politicos that knowingly aide, abett and provide comfort to child predators? I hope your political ambition isn't to the extent that you feel the need to say "yes"...

GOP = GRAND OLD...PERVERTS?

Well, since I mentioned Mark Foley, let's just say that those ReThugs of the Bible Belt variety, (holla, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and "Mulla" James Dobson) are so quiet on this issue of Rep. Mark Foley (R-Florida) getting caught sending emails to Congressional pages, you can hear mice pissing on cotton.

IOKIYAR. God, I hope not. I hope some in the ReThug party sobers up off the GOP kool-aid to be willing to take out some of their own on this issue. While we have graft, corruption, those willing to be bribed, whoremongers (even those who put a chokehold on their mistresses), somewhere in this perverted world, there seems to still be a line that says children are off limits.

The Democrats took down "Dollar" Bill Jefferson (D-Louisiana)for having $90K in his freezer. So if they had a pedophile among them, they would be toast. Why can't the GOP do the same thing? I mean, what hubris and arrogance to have this guy actually chairing a committee that wrote legislation that facilitated better alert systems when a child is snatched off the street, and yet, because he wrote those laws, he probably knew how to break them and not get caught.

More than predatory acts, we're also talking about sexual harassment as well, because when a person uses their authority to solicit sex acts in exchange for favorable treatment, sex has become a condition of their employment, and that is illegal. Foley was a lawyer by profession - you would think he'd remember this from second or third-year law school.

Law schools...they churn out perverts like Foley, Clarence Thomas, Roberts and Alito, haven't they? So, I'm no longer impressed if you tell me you're a Harvard or Yale Law Grad - they put something in the water to make CBC members like Artur Davis, Mel Watt and others think they can play nice with the GOP and not get burned, anyway.

Mark Foley is a predatory pedophile. Repeat, rinse and spit, please. And this is not the time for Grandmothers in Congress, like Nancy Pelosi or Jane Harman to keep their yaps shut in playing nice; they should be encouraging their peers to hang this around the GOP's neck like an anvil for the next five weeks.

Ads should be reading like this:

"Do you support a Congressional member who knowingly exposed his pedophile colleague to congressional pages? If you do, go ahead and vote Pedophile...!"

No, children, this is not an October surprise. But it comes close.

And the ReThugs can't say "Well, Democrats do it, too!" Drink your cans of STHU, and break out your cans of Whip Ass on all of the GOP leadership, starting with Hastert, for covering this crap up. He's a teacher, by profession. Even when I taught community college, the same law applies; if you find out that a student may be being subjected to molestation or harassment by a faculty member, you were duty-bound by law to make a report, or you were toast if it surfaced and it's discovered you knew about it, but did nothing. So, if that standard applied to me as a community college instructor, it also applied to Hastert, even as a former school teacher, despite the fact he's in Congress at this point.

Which is why I say that those who had any dealings with Mark Foley better come clean. To me, this is like the scandal with the Catholic Priests. You think the priests who are truly trying to do what they were called to do; that they're not cussing Bernard Law under their breath for placing them in a position of being an automatic suspect, especially if they dropped dime on their pedophile bretheren of the Cloth, and all he did was transfer them somewhere else?

The Catholic church is going bankrupt behind this scandal, paying out millions of dollars in damages to the victims and their families. Who's going to donate money to the Church if it's going to be used to cover up predatory pedophile priests?

Same standard applies here. Why should you donate to the GOP if they're going to provide cover for pedophiles? Ever watch the movie, "Bastard out of Carolina"? I watched it recently and what I remember most was when Bone's uncle Earl found out that her stepfather was beating, molesting and raping her, Earl and a few of his boys got the guy in a circle (during a funeral of Bone's grandmother or aunt) and kicked the living crap out of that guy. And this was in rural South Carolina during the 1950's. These guys would probably be part of the NASCAR crowd today that the GOP relies on during election time. If raping or molesting a child didn't play well back in the 1950's in Carolina, how did Denny Hastert, Roy Shimkus, probably even Tom DeLay, think it would play out in 2006?

Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Connecticut), one of the few GOPers I refer to as a Republican and not a ReThug, has already slung the entire GOP leadership under the bus for this one. Many more to follow. Pay attention to a comment from a blogger over at Steve Gilliard's:

astounding < disgusting.

I'm all for cronyism and circling the wagons... but this is sick, cult-like, sh--.

I feel tainted even having my views associated with these f'king sickos.

Gawd.

Turning a blind eye to f--king pedophiles.

Every single one who knew anything should be investigated and resign if they were involved or knew of anything. I don't even care if they thought they were just inappropriate emails... after the Clenis spectacle they have no business acting like it was his personal sexual whatever-the-f--k.

F'ing disturbing.

I hate our society.
ether | 10.02.06 - 3:30 am | #

Ether feels very strongly about this. I had to edit, because I didn't want to offend with the swear words, but his post says he's a Republican who's sickened by the degree of party loyalty being sworn here. Another poster suggested that the reason the DLC continues to try and play footsie with the ReThugs is because KKKarl Rove may be channeling J. Edwina Hoover and compiled files on them like Hoover did on Malcolm, Martin and Medgar. Hmmmm...

Memo Warning to Harold Ford - Still want to build bridges to a group of politicos that knowingly aide, abett and provide comfort to child predators? I hope your political ambition isn't to the extent that you feel the need to say "yes"...

FROM THADDEUS MATTHEWS...

A picture or poster can often say a thousand words. The following poster about Harold Ford, Jr.'s Senate Campaign says volumes about the type of Senator he may be if he gets that Senate seat:



It seems that Rep. Ford has what I call a "Michael Jackson" Problem; he can't tell if he's Black or White.

With all the pressures of campaigning, my only hope is that his campaign doesn't get tied to the current sex scandal going on with Rep. Mark Foley of Florida. I say that because Harold so aspires to be like his GOP bretheren rather than be a true Democrat.

And the irony of it all is, Corker's still running ads painting him as a liberal Democrat, and Harold can't challenge him on it because Corker would have to admit that Harold votes the ReThug ticket as well as Corker does...

Ah, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive...those in East Tennessee that you're a ReThug in Democrats' clothing.

Hat tip to Thaddeus Matthews for the photoshop poster...

DEAR CHRIS JACKSON...

Dear Chris Jackson:

For many months, you have been seen on most political blogs, and even started one of your own, extolling the virtues of the Representative of Memphis' 9th District, one Harold Eugene Ford, Jr.

You've even exhorted those of us in Blogsovania to put aside our differences and agree on common ground to make sure he wins Bill Frist's Senate seat in November.

However, since he's one of 40 Democrats that said with their vote yesterday that torture is a good idea, please tell us again, why, "a few of his votes" should not matter in the overall goal of getting him elected? Please tell us why we should overlook that he has voted like a card carrying ReThug for the last four years.

Please tell us what is so virtuous about Harold Ford that he can stand in a church and film a campaign ad, extolling his Christian faith, and then turn around and vote for a bill that Jesus wouldn't condone. Where's the consistency between talking about his faith, and actually living it?

You seem to really know the man - why don't you come on this board again, and tell us why we should get behind this modern-day eqiuvalant of Judas? If you read your Bible, you know Judas was an original disciple of Jesus, but when Jesus didn't bring an earthly kingdom into being like Judas wanted, he sold Jesus to the Jews to be executed for 30 pieces of silver. Afterwards, realizing that he had betrayed God's only begotten Son, Judas, at least, had the conscience to realize the magnitude of his actions, and because that magnitude was so great, he went to a field and killed himself, rather than live with the shame of what he'd done, even though I believe if he'd confessed, God would have forgiven him, even then.

Yes, I call myself the Christian Progressive Liberal. Because my ideology, my values, my beliefs and life lessons have moulded me in that way. Yes, I have slung a couple of words that may cause people to question my faith, but that's baby Christians who would question the swear words I drop every now and then. Doesn't mean my faith and belief isn't real, because to me, it IS. Real Christians, mature ones; there are things so frustrating, so beyond the pale, so mind-boggling - that either we sling an epithet or take action that would really contrast what we believe against what we actually do as Christians.

I'm raising these questions because your candidate says he's a Christian. He even taped a campaign commercial in a church to send this point home, and to score votes with those in the Bible Belt. The Bible actually puts it this way: "Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them." (Matthew 5).

We who are observant are beginning to recognize the fruits of Harold Ford Jr.'s labor. Actually, we've been recognizing it for some time, but as of yesterday's vote, he can't sink any lower than a snake's belly, can he?

Galatians 5:22-23 tells us that these are the fruits of the Spirit:

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,gentleness and self-control.

Your belief in Harold's ability to be a United States Senator seems to know no bounds. Given that I've actually quoted some Bible passages for the two of you to chew on, can you answer me the following questions:

Where is the love for his district in his votes for economic legislation, like the BK bill, Estate Tax repeal, and consistent votes to keep pouring money into Bush's black hole, better known as the Iraq war?

Where is the peace and patience required in dealing in matters of foreign policy, rather than cavalierly voting to hand over authority to the President to bomb, maim and yes, now, TORTURE anyone this government chooses to detain because they can?

Where's his kindness, goodness, gentleness and self-control when he deals with people like me, Pesky, Autoegocrat, Jeff, Kibbitzer, Thaddeus Matthews, or any other blogger who calls him out on his actions and his response is to lobby snark or snakey remarks because we're not singing his praises and overlooking his pecadilloes?

A mature politician knows the art of self-control. Harold's response to those of us actually challenging him to provide direct, concise, concrete and comprehensive explanations, responses, statements to anything he does that contradicts what he purports to represent, has shown us that not only has he not acquired this maturity, he's decidedly lacking.

Get past your hero worship of the man and look at his voting record. Examine what his votes actually mean. They mean to torture people; they mean to leave them physically, mentally and emotionally bankrupt. They promise to deliver a prehistoric time that the forefathers of this country ran away from England from, because they decided that they didn't want to live like that again, EVER.

They promise not to educate our kids. Tell me how a voucher is going to do that, when an economically strapped family still has to pay to send his kid to St. Albans, even if he gets a voucher; it only pays a portion of it, and the family still has to cough up the rest of the tuition.

They promise to limit whether or not you can send your child to college; or a person buy their own home, or start businesses, or keep sending 18-year olds off to fight in wars that they are ill-trained, ill-equipped and psychologically not mature enough to handle.

I'm not demanding you answer me, Chris. In light of how Harold has voted, I'm begging you to answer my questions, and don't be flippant about it, either. The vote on a bill that literally authorizes the President of the United States to engage in a campaign of fear and physically torture whomever the hell he wants, at his whim, without any proof of collusion or treason, is a threat to all Americans, and his vote essentally indicates a decided unwillingness to do his job as a United States Congressman to engage in oversight and the concept of Checks and Balances upon which the very fabric of this Government and this country were founded.

Please, please, please tell us why Harold Ford should become the next Senator in the United States Senate, when his votes have consistently demonstrated either a naked ambition that rivals Lucifer, or a lack of knowledge, skills and ability to interpret and actually apply the tenets of the Constitution he swore to uphold when he took office.

In case you're wondering who Lucifer is, according to Isaiah 14:12:

How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

Lucifer is now known to many of us as Satan. He was thrown out of Heaven when he aspired to be like God, the One who created him. Does Harold have similar aspirations? He may be cast out of the political mix just like Lucifer was cast out of Heaven, for trying to ingratiate himself with those who would just as soon ask him to fetch their cars at the local Country Club, rather than vote for him to be Tennessee's next Senator.

And yeah, Hugo Chavez told a truth many of us have longed to hear, and have been waiting on Congress to make the same charges (that our President is a devil), but remained mute, silent, and are astonished that we're Mad as Hell and we're not taking it anymore!

I'll be waiting on your answers, Chris, because Memphians, Tennesseans, and most of all, Americans, deserve one. May God bless you and give you the words to say when you answer these questions, if you choose to do so.

THE INTELLIGENCE SQUAD STRIKES AGAIN

And it's a good smack down and run down of one George Felix "I ain't no Jew" Allen.

Here's the part that has me ROFL:

Even more exciting, he is officially the leading contender for 2006 Strommy Award, our award recognizing the elected official displaying the most distressingly backwards attitudes and behaviors on matters of race for the year. The award is named after Strom Thurmond, the late US Senator from South Carolina who set the American record for Senate filibusters of 24 hours, 18 minutes in an effort to block passage of a 1957 civil rights bill. Previous winners have included Trent Lott, John Ashcroft, and George W. Bush.

So head over to my friend Tom Grayman's blog and show him some love, please. The man is the African-American Keith Olbermann...

KERRY LAYETH THE SMACK DOWN ON LIEBERMAN

And it's about friggin' time, too.

Listen, I still haven't forgiven Kerry for his 2004 cave-in on the stolen election; nor have I forgotten that when it came time to challenge those Ohio election results in January 2005, his behind was in Switzerland talking like he was big-ballin', and sayin' nothing, while Barbara Boxer obeyed her conscience and did the right thing.

But, over at DKos, Kerry laid the smackdown on Lieberman about his position on Iraq in the most direct (for Kerry, anyway) manner possible.

Here's a tidbit:

"Iraq has been a national security disaster and a terrible set-back in the war on terror. As Robert Kennedy said of Vietnam, there is enough blame to go around. We must all accept our responsibility to change course. We don't need misleading speeches. We don't need slogans. We need leaders who will tell it straight and stand up to this administration and say it's time to change course. Ned Lamont is providing that kind of leadership..."

Kerry even looks Presidential:



If only Kerry had stuck to his guns two years ago, he could have ended this nightmare. But, then again, his not getting elected was probably a blessing in disguise, because remember, Dear Leader has already gone on record saying that the Mess'o'potamia we now see will be for the next President to clean up...

SINCE WHEN???

Since when did Reps. Charlie Rangel and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi become the Democratic apologists for George W. Bush?

I'm sorry, but if Venuzualan President Hugo Chavez stood up at the United Nations and called the President the "Devil", I'm not going to argue with the Truth.

Has KKKarl Rove and crew so intimidated the Democratic Party that Rangel and Pelosi are compelled to start the fine art of sucking up to Dear Leader? After all, Chavez is a man who overcame a rigged election (done by the United States) and survived an assassination attempt (also done by the United States). Even a good ol' Christian boy like Pat Robertson was on the 700 Club, talking about "taking out Chavez" and so horrifying his sidekick, Ben Kinchlow, to the point that the brother couldn't mask that horrified look of realization that maybe it was time to put Rev. Pat out to pasture.

Why are you going to say that no one can come here and diss Bush, but Bush can go into anyone's country and look like a friggin idiot:



We ought not to dish it out if we can't take it. Maybe that's been the problem...

And, I said, for my money, Merkel should have slugged Bush for invading her personal space that way. It was clearly more embarassing for the leader of the Free World to embarass the United States with his frat boy behavior and the obvious indication that he never learned the meaning and importance of boundaries. So, if I'm in agreement with Chavez's statement that "the smell of sulfur is still in the room", will I be arrested for agreeing with the truth than trying to prop up a President who's clearly in the wrong and got called out on it?

Next week, if Champagne Charlie takes the floor to denounce Bush, I'm going to tune out because that vision of his speech, and hearing his voice denouncing Chavez for telling the truth, is going to superceede anything worthwhile he or Pelosi have to say.

THE DEMOCRATS. The only political party in town who can hit a triple and the batters behind them hit into a triple play without the winning run scoring...

THIS IS FRIGGIN' SCARY

Why have people buy health insurance if they're going to take your money and pull crap like this:

“When Steve and Leslie Shaeffer’s daughter, Selah, was diagnosed at age 4 with a potentially fatal tumor in her jaw, they figured their health insurance would cover the bulk of her treatment costs.” But “shortly after Selah’s medical bills hit $20,000, Blue Cross stopped covering them and eventually canceled her coverage retroactively.”

HAT TIP: Egalia and crew over at Tennessee Guerilla Woman. I recommend you head over to Egalia's place to read the rest of the Insurance Coverage Horror Stories - where the insurance company essentially takes your money and don't give you coverage if it's going to be costly.

Now, we should be putting on our thinking hats and wondering who the hell in Congress is taking payola from the HMOs to make sure there's no effective legislation on record to combat this crap? One person comes to mind...



For my money, I wish they would take the phrase "Honorable" away when addressing Mr. Wynn. He's as Honorable as...Jack Abramoff.

And, since he now appears to have to steal elections in order to continue sitting in the House and doing jack regarding his constituents except sell out their interests to the highest bidder, my fondest wish is that he spends the next two years with the FBI breathing down his back, and progressives watching his voting record like a fly on stink. Every vote against his district's interests is going to fall into Donna Edwards' arsenal in 2008 and I hope she clobbers him with it. Even if he's gotten his seat back, just how much influence do you think Wynn has for the next two years? He's going to look like a sick horse that needs to be put down. Donna Edwards is going to be back with a vengence, but for now, I hope she's readying her attorneys to fight the election results, because they appear to be tainted and maimed, and Wynn has the blood on his hands, especially after being fool enough to actually brag about it.

Here's a tidbit. Hat tip to Matt Stoller at MyDD

BARTON: Down in Texas, we had a Democratic primary about 50 years ago that Lyndon Johnson won by 54 votes. And he got the nickname "Landslide Lyndon." We have Mr. Wynn next. He had a little bit of a tussle last week, but he did win. And so, I want to recognize "Landslide Wynn" for any opening statement that he wishes...
WYNN: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. In fact, they're still counting, but we're quite optimistic. And I did take a couple pages out of Lyndon's book, so if I win, it can be attributed to Texas know-how.
(LAUGHTER)
(UNKNOWN): Did you (inaudible)?
BARTON: I hope not. I hope you win fair and square.
(LAUGHTER)
WYNN: A win is a win.

I don't know about you, but anytime the oil-soaked Joe Barton is giving you props, you are a suspect DLCer and bipartisanship be damned. Even the hapless Harold Ford, Jr. is smarter than Wynn to gloat about what he's doing to win the Senate seat in Tennessee and I actually respect that. Albert Wynn is worse than Joe Lieberman, and his narcissism knows no bounds. But I hope that we in the progressive blogsphere can make his term a living hell.

THE BEGINNING OF THE END OF THIS WEBSITE

Is starting with the DLC losing their tax-exempt status. They lose it because they don't want to reveal who is that masked man who's been spouting that schtick that the Democratic Party should become more like Corporatists.

From Steve Gilliard's blog:

Via correntewire from Forbes Magazine (where it's behind a membership firewall) comes this inspiring human interest story about our poor, beleagered friends over at the Democratic Leadership Council losing their tax-exempt status for being too, well...partisan.

Will wonders ever cease? Join me after the flip.

Now, in a previously unreported action, the Internal Revenue Service has revoked the DLC's tax exemption on the grounds that it primarily benefited a private group--Democrats, and particularly "New Democrats" running for or holding office--rather than the community at large. The DLC has sued in federal court to overturn the decision;

Of course, no true sob story would be complete without a tragic helping of irony. For little did we know, "benefit" is now a synonym of "contaminate." But perhaps the sordid details of this plot will reveal where we, as a society, with our labyrinthine tax laws, went so horribly wrong that we allowed ourselves to do a grave injustice to that little lamb of God, Al From:

The DLC isn't a 501(c)(3) charity like the United Way. It won exemption in 1986 under section 501(c)(4) of the code, covering civic and social welfare groups. Contributions to civic groups aren't deductible. But 501(c)(4)s are allowed to lobby more than charities and to even get involved in partisan politics. The National Rifle Association, MoveOn.org, Planned Parenthood and the National Right to Life Committee are all 501(c)(4)s.

What's the practical value of a (c)(4) designation if it doesn't generate writeoffs for its donors? A (c)(4) isn't taxed as a for-profit business would be and doesn't have to disclose its donors, as a political action committee does.

For their next trick, the DLC will demonstrate how they have been true Democrats all along...

OKAY, I HAD TO POST THIS

Because if you've ever dealt with family dynasties, you'll also know they will go to any lengths to preserve said dynasty. This bunch is the mob equivalent of the Sopranos in how far and how long they will go to preserve Harold Ford, Sr's legacy.

Too bad his sons are screwing it up for everyone else. My blogging pals at the Freedonian and Left-Wing Cracker has their opinions on this issue...

THIS IS WHAT A CAN OF "WHUP A--" LOOKS LIKE...

CAN OF WHUP A--. NOW, WE KNOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE

Progressives intend to clean house in the House of Reps as well as the Senate in November. And thanks to Memphis Blogger Thaddeus Matthews, every Vichy Democrat will now know what a can of whup a--s looks like, before, during and after it's been broken out on them.

Thaddeus, thanks for making my day with this.

YOU GOTTA DANCE WITH THEM THAT BROUGHT YOU...

HAROLD FORD'S DANCE WITH THE DEVIL...

Molly Ivins has said that "You have to dance with them that brought you." From the photoshop pic above, truer words were never spoken.

While we need to pick up that Senate seat that Bill Frist is vacating, I don't think it's needed as badly as Harold Ford is willing to prostitute himself in order to get it. Besides, if Traitor Joe Lieberman actually succeeds in telling Democrats to go piss on themselves and wins as the GOP tool he has now become, Ford winning that Senate seat does not mean he's going to vote Democrat. In fact it means that the Democrats go from 44 seats and 1 Democratic-leaning Independent (cause Bernie Sanders is going to win)to 43 seats and 2 Democratic lite tools for the GOP.

Unless they both turn ReThug, then you only have a greater majority for BushCo to continue decimating the country at warp-speed.

TOLD YOU SO, JOE

THE FACE OF TREASON

Many of us in blogsovania tried to warn Joe Lieberman about cozying up to George Bush.

As usual, Holy Joe told us to go piss on ourselves.

Now, since the Connecticut voters said they want a change, Holy Joe's telling them again to go piss on themselves; they will have him representing Connecticut, whether he wants them to or not!

Well, seeing as I'm from California, I've already experienced that with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger - when the citizens of Cali had a Gubenatorial recall of a democratically elected governor (Gray Davis), and all of his pronouncements have turned out to be correct, and that he really was doing the job we elected him to do. Espicially going after Enron for goughing the state during the winter of 2001 - one month my energy bill was $60 - the next month, it was $600!

Yet, we in the Golden State got Ah-nold as Governor - whether we wanted him or not.

But how long are we going to allow elected officials to tell us to go piss on ourselves when we tell them "You're Fired"? And even though I don't live in Connecticut, like I said, I came from a state where the democratic process was turned on its ass because a few people, in an emotional anger against Gray Davis, sent him packing. And the result was the Gropinator alienating the organizations that replaced Davis with him: the Law Enforcement Groups, the Teachers Associations, and the Nursing Associations.

Now, they can't wait to try to get rid of him. Oh, well.

So, I watched the Connecticut primary with great interest, because it reminded me of what happened in California, and how the democratic process can and will be circumvented by the few who can make it happen, and against our will.

We told you so. We told Joe Lieberman so as well. And he needs to be cut off in November - he's already become the de-facto Republican nominee. How do we know this?

Because the GOP is refusing to endorse their own GOP candidate, that's how we know.

And if we don't take hold of this development and send Joe back to the citizens of Connecticut, as opposed to allowing him to remain here in DC, contaminating Capitol Hill with his Droopy Dog presence, we'll have the likes of Anus In The Morning dictating political
discourse.

More from Alternet

Lieberman himself was the most shameless: speaking on the day the British terror-plot story broke, which came just 36 hours after his loss, he said that if Lamont's Iraq plan is implemented, "it will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes." Dick Cheney held a press teleconference to comment upon the Lamont election -- an incredible step for a Vice President to take on the occasion of an opposition party primary result -- and suggested that "al Qaeda types" were encouraged by the Lamont election. And Ken Mehlman, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, quickly reacted to the Lamont win by calling the Democrats the "party of defeat and retreat."

A SUPREME DISGRACE

THE SUPREME DISGRACE - NO WOMEN AND NO PEOPLE OF COLOR. SO, HOW CAN THEY RULE EFFECTIVELY ON CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES?


Yes, it is a supreme disgrace that the Democrats had no spine and as a result, America will have to endure John Roberts and Samuel Alito on the Bench for at least the next 20 years. Expect to see full attempts to roll back everything to pre 1960s when the good ol' days weren't that good for people of ethnicity, women and religious groups.

What's pissing me off is that Sen. Ted Kennedy is now crying into his beer in an essay published in WaPo today regarding the reich-wing tilt of the Supreme Court. He basically says they lied to get on the bench by promising not to bring their anti-civil rights ideology to the job if confirmed. While Roberts really didn't leave a paper trail to get "Borked" on, Alito did, and I personally believed when they should have filibustered his behind, all the Democrats caved in at the memory of Martha Ann Baumgardner (aka Mrs. Sam Alito)fled the room in tears because she didn't like how Sen. Russ Feingold was questioning her hubby about his qualifications for the job. If more democrats had spoken up like Feingold did, and if they didn't have to be dragged to vote cloture (hello, Sen. Barack Obama), you wouldn't have Alito on the Bench, and Roberts would have been neutralized to an extent.

From the Last Chance Democracy Cafe:

The confirmation process became broken because the Bush administration learned the wrong lesson from the failed Bork nomination and decided it could still nominate extremists as long as their views were hidden. To that end, it insisted that the Senate confine its inquiry largely to its nominees’ personal qualities.

The administration’s tactics succeeded in turning the confirmation hearings for Roberts and Alito into a sham. Many Republican senators used their time to praise, rather than probe, the nominees. Coached by the administration, the nominees declined to answer critical questions. When pressed on issues such as civil rights and executive power, Roberts and Alito responded with earnest assurances that they would not bring an ideological agenda to the bench.

After confirmation, we saw an entirely different Roberts and Alito — both partisans ready and willing to tilt the court away from the mainstream. They voted together in 91 percent of all cases and 88 percent of non-unanimous cases — more than any other two justices.

Yeah, they will be on the bench because of their willingness to lie, and the willingness of Joe Lieberman and other Vichy Dems to provide them cover for their lies because they're too chicken to call them on their crap.

Who's Missing from this Picture?

WHO'S MISSING FROM THIS PICTURE?

Try most of the Black and Latino Caucus Members who supported or sponsored the renewal of provisions of the Voting Rights Act.

Thank you, Nancy Pelosi, Mel Watt and Dennis Hastert for playing. We will have some lovely parting gifts for you in November.

WHY THE GOP GETS NO LOVE FROM BLACK PEOPLE

"GEORGE BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE..."

Those seven words uttered by Kanye West in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, almost got that brotha lynched by the press. You don't say that about the President of the United States. Even if it's the truth, and he is a walking embarassment everywhere he goes. I wince when I see him abroad in Europe and his behavior at the G8 Summit reminded me of a spoiled, petulant child whose parents have not taught him about the importance of boundaries.

But what's more important is why George Bush and the GOP continues to try and court African-Americans into their base. Their history with Blacks have not shown that we would be welcomed amongst their ranks; just token representation and photo ops. J. C. Watts finally got the memo on that, and former representative Gary Franks hasn't been seen nor heard from since he got tossed out on his arse back in the day. Watts left Congress because he knew Tom DeLay wasn't going to allow him to be anything in the GOP caucus except water boy totin' for Massa.

Yet my friend, who is the Minister of Intelligence, wrote a very insightful piece that expresses more clearly than I could ever say, why George Bush won't get any love from Blacks, except those who are in the "2% Negroes for Rent" crowd. Here's an excerpt:

That the GOP's top elected official thinks that "looking" at black people is testament to some sort of committment to civil rights explains why, as a recent New York Times article points out, that party's efforts to woo black voters has been a long-term failure of colossal proportions. Bush, as we all know by now, is of the belief that leadership is composed mostly of being photographed in the presence of certain people or giant signs trumpeting the triumphant slogan du jour. Remember that the man spent more time in his first term being seen surrounded by black children than a public school teacher on the south side of Chicago. (Notice he doesn't do that any more? Probably because after hurricane Katrina, you couldn't gather a crowd of black kids that close to Bush without one of them wanting to cut him.)

So in his speech before the NAACP (which was delivered in a strange shouting mode, sort of a lame impersonation of a black preacher), Bush treated the group to a brief review of the history of American discrimination against blacks. He made the inevitable, and by now completely pointless, reference to Republicans as the "Party of Lincoln." He bragged about increases in college grants and his efforts to fight what he famously refers to as "the soft bigotry of low expectations" -- those efforts being standardized testing and school vouchers.

And since the "2% Negroes for Rent" consists of Condi Rice, Colin Powell, the now disgraced petty thief Claude Allen,"Stepin' Fetchit" whiz kid HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson, Ohio Secretary of State (and Diebold voting thief) Kenneth Blackwell, the illusional candidate for Pennsylvania governor Lynn Swann, and the equally illusional Maryland Lt. Goveror Michael "those kids threw Oreos at me" Steele", we should pay them no mind, because they don't have one, and they sold their souls to the devil years ago when intervention would have been useful.

Until they put away the hood and burning cross, and as long as GeeDubya is the leader of the GOP with his simple good ol' boy ways that has fast become a global embarassment, the GOP will never get any love from African-Americans until they make a conscious decision to stop perpetratin' the funk and come at us on the real.

BITING THE HAND THAT FEEDS YOU

THE LAST TIME THE NYT WAS CONSIDERED A LEGITIMATE SOURCE OF NEWS BEFORE IT BECAME A WHORE FOR THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION.


So, I'm visiting DKos, right? And I stumble upon this ironic post:

I think the NY Times should be condemned
by Congress.

But not for what the republicans want to condemn them for. They ought to be condemned for lying and manipulating stories in order to sell the Iraq war for the administration. It shows you how loyal republicans are. They want to beat up the same institution that helped them sell the war to the American people. Shows you not to do them any favors, doesn't it?

by tazz on Wed Jun 28, 2006 at 06:22:11 AM PDT

How ironic that the paper that used Judy Miller to lie, cheat, and slut around to sell the American People this war - the U. S. Congress wants to waste the tax dollars you and I pay them to draft real legislation, and in essence, do their friggin' jobs - to go after the New York Times by drawing up resolutions to condemn them for leaking the truth that Bush is spying on "Amuricans" he dearly loves and fights the "terrarists" to protect us from.

The Times is a rag, and has been since the Jayson Blair incident. After slinging him under a journalistic bus, it seems they still don't get it, with regards to reporting the truth.

They can rail about the blogsphere all they want, but you know what? I'd rather get my news from Kos, Gilliard, Atrios and the Rude Pundit before I turn on CNN or Faux Network. With the exception of Olbermann, MSNBC has also become a joke as well as any news organization who allows their news anchors to spew political opinions rather than report the plain, unvarnished truth, like Cronkite and yeah, Dan Rather used to do back in the day.

Talk about biting the hand that fed you. I wonder if they NYT will cave in or stand up for protection of their industry and First Amendment rights? Or are they so beholden to the Bush juggernaut, and drunk on its kool-aid to the point they have been rendered immobile?

Anything for a Photo-Op

Does this picture disgust you? I'm disgusted by it, because a "Christian" President is seen jogging with a man who went to fight in his unnecessary war, lost his legs in combat, and GeeDubya decides to demonstrate his support for the troops by going on a jog with a guy who left his legs on the field in Baghdad.

This is the President that Junior Ford "loves" and considers "a nice guy".

I'm sorry, but anyone who can be responsible for such injuries, refuse to visit the wounded over at Walter Reed, yet highlights their injuries for "photo-ops"...I'm getting migraines by continuing to ask myself "What kind of man is the President of the United States?"

Any anyone running for a Senate seat who would condone this, I have one name for you:

MAX CLELAND.

Remember him? The same senator from your neighboring state of Georgia, a Vietnam-era vet who left three limbs in some rice patty and got swift-boated and slimed by the Bush-Rove machine for his trouble. He was replaced in the Senate by a maggot who didn't even go serve his country; some piss-ant named Saxby Chambliss.

Everytime I see pictures like the one I posted, I'm reminded of people who went and fought wars necessary and unnecessary. Their mental and physical conditions when they returned and tried to settle back to whatever is considered "normal". It's easy to vote for a war when you're not going to fight in it. It's easy to not vote to increase the minimum wage, while voting to give yourself a raise every year for the last nine years. It's easy to vote for legislation that you know is never going to impact you; vote judiciary and render all gains under civil rights and liberties dead, because you just don't give a damn about another human being, or the impact that your votes and representation will have on other human beings.

To care for other human beings require that you become human; vulnerable and caring, too. Traits which I try very hard to ascribe to your Democratic candidate for United States Senator, and I continue to fail at doing so because he makes it virtually impossible.

Anything for a photo-op. How long will it be before we see the current representative of the 9th District doing the same damned thing as his beloved President?

At Your Own Peril

A blogger at Kos' place (WBReeves) posted the following response to the CBC's stubbornness in wasting what little political capital they have in circling the wagons around William Jefferson (D-Cold Hard Cash). It is also a subtle reminder that Democrats outside of African-American circles shouldn't be quick to throw up comparisons to OJ Simpson in comparing the willingness of a few African-Americans to cover for a crook. Most of us will throw the book at one of our own, because we already feel his/her bad actions provides further negative representation of the race.

Let's Have Some Straight Talk (2+ / 0-)

What this thread is illustrating is the Achilles heel of the Democratic electoral coalition. The growing divide between White Democrats and Black Democrats. The Gulf isn't absolute. There are Democrats of all colors on both sides but in democratic politics what counts is which positions are most representive of constituent opinion. Who is willing to argue that the CBC's insistence on rigid formality is out of sync with their constituents?

This is real 800 lbs gorilla in the room. African-Americans generally view the Jefferson case from a starkly different perspective than those outside of their community. Superficially, this mirrors the difference's in perspective that one finds in any political interest groups, from farmers to women, to Gays and Lesbians.

This easy equation is misleading. It ignores the fundamental difference that distinguishes the African-American community from every other constituent interest. Blacks have been the perenial whipping boy and sacrificial offering of U.S. politics since the inception of the republic.

When it comes to the African-American community, the history of the U.S. is a series of murderous oppressions and betrayals in which no political faction has clean hands. Expecting Black elected officials to behave as though this were not so is rather like expecting Jewish people to rely on the enlightened good will of Europeans in dealing with anti-Semitism or that Armenians should swear eternal friendship with the Turks.

There will be snow in Hades before the CBC or any representative African-American organization will agree to deprive any Black elected official of any office by informal agreement. This is a survival instinct based on a solid appreciation of the fact that African-Americans were driven from politics by force and fraud in the past, while their erstwhile allies averted their eyes.

Now I'm sure that some folks reading the above will shrug their shoulders while muttering "That's all ancient history. They should get over it." I've a question for such people. If the increasingly desperate Liebermanites began to deploy acusations of anti-Semitism against Lamont supporters, are you going to say that Jewish folks should "get over it?"

No, of course not. No one will question concern over anti-Semitism as a well founded defensive reflex. To the contrary. All efforts will be bent to debunking the charge and convincing Jewish voters that they can trust Lamont. A perfectly reasonable response, considering history and the importance of Jewish Voters to the Democratic Party's prospects.

Contrast this to the incomprehension and, yes, anger that greets the CBC's defensive reaction. Someone above argued that the CBC's attitude is identical to the mindset that acquited O.J. Simpson. Whatever Jefferson's sins, I doubt they rise to being accused of butchering his ex-wife and a hapless witness. Excuse me but this is waving the bloody shirt with a vengence.

What's the purpose of raising such a false comparison? To insinuate that the CBC would defend murderers as long as they were black? To suggest that Jefferson is the moral equivilant of a slasher? Or perhaps the poster is under the false impression that the jury in the Simpson case was uniformly African-American as is the Congressional Black Caucus. Of course, since that wasn't the fact, the entire jury can't be accused of acting from racial bias or animus. Some, at least, simply didn't buy the prosecution's case.

I've spent time on this bit because I'm afraid it's all too representative of attitudes found in Democratic Circles outside the Black community. Whereas every other constituency is at least lent a respectful, sympathetic ear, African-America's Representatives are constantly hectored to pipe down and get with the program, when they're not being ignored altogether. Currently, the Black community is being treated in the same fashion that the GOP has, in times past, treated it's Religious Right base: as a constituency with no place else to go. There's a moral pertinent to this sort of political cynicism embedded in the GOP's present floundering. Don't imagine that African-Americans will put up with such contemptuous treatment indefinitely.

People need to consult electoral reality. The African-American electorate is a key component of the Democratic Party's electoral coalition. Without it, there is precious little chance of a national Democratic resurgence on anything more than an agenda of Republican Lite. The African-American Community is not going to play the part of the disgraceful relative who's shunted off to the attic whenever polite company comes to visit. You may find this both inexpedient and inconvenient but it is a political fact of life. You ignore it at your peril.

ONE SNEAKY S-O-B...

ONE SNEAKY S-O-B...ENGAGE AT YOUR OWN RISK

My father used to say that it was better dealing with a rattlesnake as opposed to a water moccasin. The rattler lets you know he's going to strike by rattling his tail. You have a choice to engage said rattler, or avoid getting bit.

On the other hand, the water moccasin would creep up on you, not making any sound, and the next thing you know, you're bitten and being hopefully rushed to the nearest hospital. The bottom line is that in both instances, you've engaged in dealing with poisonous snakes; the difference is in how you chose to deal with 'em.

It's appropriate to use snake anologies here when referring to the one member of the Congressional Black Caucus, card-carrying DLC member and AIPAC water boy, Rep. Artur Davis (D-Alabama). This guy's flying low as a snake, but is twice as deadly, and three times as cunning in his political ambition.

Davis came on the scene in 2002 when he defeated longtime representative Earl Hilliard, largely on the strength of AIPAC financing. This is also about the same time AIPAC engineered a similar take over in the 4th District of Georgia and deposed Rep. Cynthia McKinney with former Rep. Denise Majette. Poor, Ms. Majette; she should be forgiven for not realizing that if you dance with a snake, sooner or later the snake resorts to its nature of turning on you and biting you. In Majette's case, she didn't quite do what the AIPAC gang wanted and pissed them off by deciding to run for the Senate seat vacated by Zig Zag Zell Miller. At last instance, AIPAC demanded Majette refund their contributions they spent to oust McKinney by getting her elected.

Davis, for his part, has towed the AIPAC line, even though it's not always visible by his voting record (or maybe it is, since the CBC Monitor gave him a failing grade and labeled him as a "Derelict" of the Caucus). So now that you have the ever-growing mess of what to do about Rep. William "Dollar Bill" Jefferson, the fact that when the CBC had their confab about Jefferson, Davis was conspicously absent from the meeting. It was later reported in the Congressional newspaper, "The Hill", that Davis was absent because he's angling for Jefferson's seat on the coveted Ways and Means Committee, even if it means he leapfrogs over another CBC member (and fellow derelict) Rep. Sanford Bishop of Georgia, to get that position.

Mr. Davis is very likeable, far more than the hapless and hopeless Rep. Harold Ford, Jr.(D-TN), and very engaging. He's articulate and has a good command of law, regulations, historical perspective and factual evidence; after all, his previous profession was that of an attorney. He's a Harvard Law Grad, which really explains how he's able to present himself as a working congressman. What is a grave concern to me as a DLC watcher, is that this guy's flying under the national radar, while being positioned to do major damage to the Democratic Party that hasn't been completed by Nancy Pelosi and her ilk.

Of course, Ms. Nancy may have her hands full, fighting off that shiv that Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) continues to attempt to stick in her back on an almost daily basis, not to mention pissing off the rest of the Congressional Black Caucus before the Jefferson fiasco, when she ordered Mel Watt (D-NC) to scrub 20 CBC members off the Voting Rights Amendment as co-sponsors. So, Davis flies under the radar, and while doing so, he's quietly amassing clout within the Democratic caucus as a Vichy Dem.

Rahm Emmanuel (D-IL) gave him the responsibility of recruiting Dems to campaign for Congressional seats, and direct campaign funds to their efforts. Usually, such responsibility would go to someone who's been in Congress at least five terms or more, but Davis is campaigning for a third term this year. You have to ask: "What does he know, or what did he promise in exchange for such a responsible position within the Democratic caucus that's not being entrusted to members with longer tenure?" He's short of being the actual bag man for the DLC. What gives here?

A seat on the Ways and Means Committee means a seat for AIPAC to govern over all things Congressional in the House of Representatives. The Democrats are in enough trouble trying to be Democrats, while having to deal with this internal fracture among their leadership. The DLC has done nothing except infect the party with corporate cash, and facilitating 30% or more of them in becoming slaves to their Corporate masters, while weakening the entire caucus with their continuous "caving in" to ReThugs in order to maintain civility and decorum.

That might work at a tea party, but not when your fighting for the life of democracy and a government "of the people, for the people, and by the people".

Artur Davis is one DLC who's flying under the radar. Which makes him one very sneaky S-O-B.