Nancy?

I can’t help but think a portion of the punditocracy is taking it under the table. Mark Halperin in particular, but I wouldn’t rule out Broder either. Their sense of the American pulse is so off that in any business environment they’d be long gone.

Veritas78 @
1

Nancy?

Jane and Nancy

In case anyone is wondering, the “Cox” in the Somerby quote is Swampland Idiot #3, the terminally vacuous Ah-nah Marie Cox.

All that and a bag ‘o chips, Jane!

You can’t fool all the people all of the time, but Republicans have managed to fool the elite punditocracy with an alarming frequency.

is that ’cause the pundits are as clever as a bag of servile rocks?

But he’s 45, and he had a long, big-bucks career ahead—in political and corporate work.

Fixed Bob’s typo.

I won’t concede that such spin-sters were savants. A lot of it had to do with rampant credulity and sloppy reporting these last ten years or so.

If Dowd is so sincere about his repudiation of Bush, is he going to tell us where the bodies are buried?

Thomas @ 6

I won’t concede that such spin-sters were savants. A lot of it had to do with rampant credulity and sloppy reporting these last ten years or so.

If the media was eager to report uncritically on every goddamn thing I told them, I’d be a fucking genius too.

neurophius @ 7

If Dowd is so sincere about his repudiation of Bush, is he going to tell us where the bodies are buried?

No.

This has been another edition of Simple Answers To Simple Questions.

(Besides, that wouldn’t be “gentle”)

I can’t help but think a portion of the punditocracy is taking it under the table.

With or without Astroglide? Had to ask.

Yes, I meant Jane and Nancy! I was so astonished that I blanked!

And by “taking it under the table” I of course meant accepting bribes. That little practice disappeared from view quite quickly, didn’t it? But I can see this crowd shovelling seriously-big money to the name pundits.

I don’t think pundits & pols who suck up to power need to be bribed. It’s the magnetic attraction of power for authoritarians. Some do it consciously & some do it subconsciously.

I’m willing to put up with self-surviving hypocrites abandoning Bush/Cheney and criticizing them on the way down the ship’s ropes. More please. I don’t have to invite them to dinner.

epu-d from last thread, for Hugh if he’s still with us:
Hugh @ 96

eCAHNomics @ 88

See mine @78. You were typing while I was posting. I’m much more negative than you. Petreaus is baffling with bulls**t, and Lehrer is being his usual dopey self.

I dunno. I’m pretty negative on Petraeus. Scarecrow just mentioned the military being in denial about defeat in Iraq. I would add what I refer to as a poisonous can-do attitude, a persistence to address the wrong problem with the wrong solution.

I have a sample of 1 army major efriend who works in the Pentagon. He sez the army HATES the Iraq war and can’t wait to get out. I think the denial comes above his pay grade and it’s not denial but mostly self interest.

Before getting to the self-interest, the military is genuinely inculcated with the idea of civilian leadership, so the urge to do what their told, all the way up the chain, is very strong. Even so, W had to fire several generals before he could find one to do his bidding.

As for self-interest, the more toys they destroy in Iraq, the better their pay will be when they retire & go to work for the toys manufactuers.

The combination of a warmongering president and financial incentives is irresitible to most generals. So I don’t think it’s denial at all.

Veritas78 @ 11

Yes, I meant Jane and Nancy! I was so astonished that I blanked!

And by “taking it under the table” I of course meant accepting bribes. That little practice disappeared from view quite quickly, didn’t it? But I can see this crowd shovelling seriously-big money to the name pundits.

Hmm.

Do searches of property deeds and mortgage holders reveal the mortgage terms? Be interesting to see if the poo-bahs were getting oddly low purchase prices (or mortgage rates/terms).

eCAHNomics @ 12

I don’t think pundits & pols who suck up to power need to be bribed. It’s the magnetic attraction of power for authoritarians. Some do it consciously & some do it subconsciously.

I think there is implicit and explicit pressure from corporate management to put the most favorable Republican spin possible on every story and column.

The pundits like the ride..after all Tweety is fond of saying…
“Spin well spun is better than the truth

I think right-wing tools and uncritical stenographers have a better chance of getting hired and promoted, too.

I think it is time to stop using elite and pundit in the same sentence.
Other words to avoid using with pundit would be:
insightful, objective, important, significant and important.
Waste of oxygen, out-of-touch and gone-to-seed are all acceptable.

Mack @ 19

I think it is time to stop using elite and pundit in the same sentence.
Other words to avoid using with pundit would be:
insightful, objective, important, significant and important.
Waste of oxygen, out-of-touch and gone-to-seed are all acceptable.

The irony is that the Republicans accuse *us* of being elitists.

Eli @ 17

eCAHNomics @ 12

I don’t think pundits & pols who suck up to power need to be bribed. It’s the magnetic attraction of power for authoritarians. Some do it consciously & some do it subconsciously.

I think there is implicit and explicit pressure from corporate management to put the most favorable Republican spin possible on every story and column.

Yes, power is an important ingredient, but it’s not the only motivator.

The trouble the left has in expressing the power of the corporate press on the worker bees is that it is all unspoken. Nobody who has graduated from kindergarten needs to be told to do what his masters want his to do. So you’ll never get any evidence of overt pressure.

Hey, I was looking for a thread where I could post my comments on Bush’s presser yesterday. It looks like it will be this one. These were written shortly after the presser, but I couldn’t find a place for them until now. So give me a minute here to pull them out of my back pocket . . .

No Dowd about it… This recess appointment

Susan E. Dudley, of Virginia, to be Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the Office of Management and Budget

is transparently and flagrantly offensive.

Dudley headed a free-market think tank — the Mercatus Center at George Mason University — that is supported in part by Koch Industries, whose chairman sits on the board.

The Ralph Nader -founded Public Citizen uncharitably calls Mercatus a “wholly-owned subsidiary of Koch industries and other corporate interests.” Koch (pronounced “coke”) has given many millions to Mercatus, but other companies also have contributed a bit as well.

Where’s the Mainstream MisLeadediya on this little detail?

Think Progress has Novak now attacking Dowd for being, at heart, a “partisan Democrat.” Apparently the “emotional” spin wasn’t mean enough.

So what kind of incompetent administration allows a “partisan Democrat” to sneak into their inner circle and actually run their campaign? Perhaps there’s a fifth column within the White House itself? Time for loyalty oaths, all around—and waterboarding!

Ma and Pa Kettle take Baghdad!

coming soon to a theatre near you!

Will el Sadr’s militia find the ‘old still pumpin’ out moonshine’ in the back woods?
Will Ma Kettle escape the consequences of wearing no head scarf?
Can Pa fool the Sunni insurgent into thinking he’s ‘one of us?’

Will the President accept their invitation to ‘come on over for Sunday supper?’

The Bush Presser Part I

Today Yesterday, Bush held a presser that was unusual even for him in its lying, hallucinatory quality.

It has now been 57 days since I requested that Congress pass emergency funds for our troops. Instead of passing clean bills that fund our troops on the front lines, the House and Senate have spent this time debating bills that undercut the troops, by substituting the judgment of politicians in Washington for the judgment of our commanders on the ground, setting an arbitrary deadline for withdrawal from Iraq, and spending billions of dollars on pork barrel projects completely unrelated to the war.

It is not so much that Bush departs from reality, it is that he never comes close to it. 57 days for a bill to be sent, for hearings to be held, for debate, and for votes, is fast. Things could be speeded up more, of course, if we lived in a tyranny. The king could just issue a decree. The other thing you have to realize about this is that even the Republican Congress had been pressing the White House to include the total cost of its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the regular defense appropriations bill. That bill was passed September 29 of last year and signed into law the same day. So if Bush had been oh so verklempt about the troops he could have had an appropriations bill months ago, and even passed while the Republicans were in control. But he didn’t want to, and his reasons had nothing to do with the troops. He didn’t want to make his deficit (and defense spending) look bigger, especially in an election year. He didn’t want to put all the funding in the regular appropriations bill because it would be an admission that our involvement in Iraq was without any foreseeable end. And if the Republicans were in control, the supplemental would be laden with good Republican pork, and not the dreadfully irresponsible (and mostly troop related) pork the Democrats wanted.

And, of course, the “commanders on the ground” he’s referring to are Admiral Fallon and General Petraeus who support Bush’s policy of escalation and share his denial of an Iraq already lost. In choosing them, Bush substituted his political judgment for that of his previous generals who opposed escalation and favored a drawdown of troops. But we are supposed to act like we don’t notice this, just like the little girl in the Emperor’s New Clothes.

Moving along,

In a time of war, it’s irresponsible for the Democrat leadership — Democratic leadership in Congress to delay for months on end while our troops in combat are waiting for the funds. The bottom line is this: Congress’s failure to fund our troops on the front lines will mean that some of our military families could wait longer for their loved ones to return from the front lines. And others could see their loved ones headed back to the war sooner than they need to. That is unacceptable to me, and I believe it is unacceptable to the American people.

You can always tell when Bush is in one of his Mr. Pissypants moods when he reverts to using Democrat for Democratic. He does catch himself here but he still uses the pejorative form elsewhere.

Now it is difficult to qualify this passage as anything other than a deliberate, bald-faced lie. The versions of the supplemental which have passed in both the House and Senate fund the troops. It is Bush’s veto that would not.

This is followed up by the vicious and totally illogical canard that Democratic timetables which force him to bring troops home to their families sooner will somehow keep the troops “on the front lines” longer. You see, Mr. President, when you knowingly say the opposite of what you know to be true, that’s called a lie. I know you have been doing this all your life and you are used to getting away with it, but that’s what it’s called.

Hey, everybody. Coming to the party late and O/T. Just heard KO mention Bush’s speech today in Fort Irwin and an absence of applause.

Just looked up the transcript and…garsch!

http://www.standardnewswire.com/news/23131885.html

This is the first I’ve heard of it. Anybody else been talking about it?

When I used the word “hallucinatory” above, this is what I meant.

And General Petraeus, who is a reasoned, sober man, says there is some progress being made. And he cites murders and — in other words, there’s some calm coming to the capital. But he also fully recognizes, as do I, it’s still dangerous. In other words, suiciders are willing to kill innocent life in order to send the projection that this is an impossible mission.

Ah, the Freudian slips and slides of life, and death. The calmness of corpses, the silence of the murdered, but it’s not his fault. It’s not the Deciderer’s fault. It’s those blasted suiciderers. Tricky, tricky suiciderers, and their secret weapon: the projection. They make you think that Iraq is violent by blowing things up, but do not be deceived. Well, all I can say is I’m not buying it here, George. And besides, don’t you need to have a mission before the question of whether it is possible or not arises? By the way, if you didn’t recognize it, this is a reprise of the old meme that things are going so well in Iraq that we can expect an upsurge in violence.

Q So I wonder, in your own mind, how does that vision play out? How do they follow us home? Because we’ve spent so much money and put so much resources into making this country safer.
THE PRESIDENT: Ed, I’m not going to predict to you the methodology they’ll use. Just you need to know they want to hit us again. We do everything we can here at the homeland to protect us. That’s why I’ve got a Homeland Security Department. That’s why we are inconveniencing air traffickers, to make sure nobody is carrying weapons on airplanes. That’s why we need border enforcement, with a comprehensive immigration bill, by the way, to make sure it’s easier to enforce the border. I mean, we’re doing a lot. That’s why we need to make sure our intelligence services coordinate information better.

I think Ed whoever Ed is nails it. So much of this occurs in Bush’s mind, and Bush’s mind is a dangerous place to be. I have this vague memory that neologisms are a sign of mental illness. “Suiciders”? “Projection”? “Air traffickers” (i.e. air travelers, and not people buying and selling stolen air)? But it says a lot about Bush’s deteriorating mental processes that “border enforcement” naturally morphs into “enforce the border”. I suppose by a similar logic (and I use that term advisedly here) drug enforcement would become “enforcing drugs”. Perhaps that’s the problem. Perhaps Bush hasn’t been enforcing his drugs or maybe he’s been enforcing too many.

Well all things (even disasters) must come to an end.

Iraq is a very important part of securing the homeland, and it’s a very important part of helping change the Middle East into a part of the world that will not serve as a threat to the civilized world, to people like — or to the developed world, to people like — in the United States.

Yes, that’s the note he ended on, the White Man’s burden. Even so, Bush really does care about the Iraqis. They may not be civilized or developed, but he does care for them because gosh darn it, that’s the kind of Presidentiary guy he is.

And we have only 21 more months of this, although who knows how many more years it will take to clean it up.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news…..70403.html

he’s getting reality mixed up with Heinz 57 sauce that’s all.

Hugh @ 25

This is followed up by the vicious and totally illogical canard that Democratic timetables which force him to bring troops home to their families sooner will somehow keep the troops “on the front lines” longer. You see, Mr. President, when you knowingly say the opposite of what you know to be true, that’s called a lie. I know you have been doing this all your life and you are used to getting away with it, but that’s what it’s called.

That was the non sequitur that gave me the biggest double-take.

mrsmarks @ 28

Hey, everybody. Coming to the party late and O/T. Just heard KO mention Bush’s speech today in Fort Irwin and an absence of applause.

Just looked up the transcript and…garsch!

http://www.standardnewswire.com/news/23131885.html

This is the first I’ve heard of it. Anybody else been talking about it?

Didn’t hear about it anywhere else. Also like guest’s making the point about W using the troops as political props. If we could that meme more widespread, it would really piss off ordinary folks.

Betcha a dollar he goes to work for Hagel as repackages himself as the UnBush.

KO pointing out that the Commander in Chief spoke to troops at Ft Irwin, site of desert training. The training that other troops will not get because of their accelerated redeployment schedule.

Eli,

You know a policy is bad when its proponents can’t open their mouths about it without lying.

Hugh @ 32

Eli,

You know a policy is bad when its proponents can’t open their mouths about it without lying.

That would be all of them.

Veritas78 @
12

Yes, I meant Jane and Nancy! I was so astonished that I blanked!

And by “taking it under the table” I of course meant accepting bribes. That little practice disappeared from view quite quickly, didn’t it? But I can see this crowd shovelling seriously-big money to the name pundits.

I don’t think they’re taking bribes, I think they’re in a self-perpetuating bubble where they only talk to each other and reinforce each other’s biases.

thanks for linking that mrsmarks. whew– it’s a stinker all right! From the speech.

Just as the strategy is starting to make inroads, a narrow majority in the Congress passed legislation they knew all along I would not accept. Their bills impose an artificial deadline for withdrawal from Iraq. Their bills substitute the judgment of Washington politicians for the judgment of our military commanders. Their bills add billions of dollars in pork barrel spending, spending that is unrelated to the war that you’re engaged in. Then, instead of sending an acceptable bill to my desk, they went on spring break.

(snip)

Soon Congress will return from its break. I urge them to work on legislation to fund our troops, but that does not tell our military how to conduct war and sets an artificial timetable for withdrawal. The enemy does not measure the conflict in Iraq in terms of timetables. They plan to fight us, and we’ve got to fight them, alongside the Iraqis. A strategy that encourages this enemy to wait us out is dangerous — it’s dangerous for our troops, it’s dangerous for our country’s security. And it’s not going to become the law.

There are fine, fine people debating this issue in Washington, D.C. They’re patriotic. They’re people who have got passionate points of view about this war. And I understand that. Yet, we cannot allow honest differences in Washington to harm our troops in battle, or their families here at home. Members of Congress have sent their message; now they need to send me a war-spending measure that I can sign into law, so we can provide our troops and their families with the funds and support they deserve and they need.

(emphasis mine)

Verbal flatulence.

My question about W’s speech is that if no major news media covered it, did a tree fall in the forest & make no sound? Or was it just too late for today’s deadlines & media will cover it tomorrow?

Eli @
9

Thomas @ 6

I won’t concede that such spin-sters were savants. A lot of it had to do with rampant credulity and sloppy reporting these last ten years or so.

If the media was eager to report uncritically on every goddamn thing I told them, I’d be a fucking genius too.

But you are a genius, Eli, media suck-ups or not.

Jim Moore, co-author of Bush’s Brain, on Dowd:

More Craven Than Karl

Moore also goes after Mark McKinnon, Bush’s old ad / marketing guy. Nice. (Recall he’s the boss of Yvette Lozano, who ended up doing time for the mailing of those Bush campaign docs to the Gore campaign. Can you say “fall guy”? IMHO, there is NO WAY this administrative employee wasn’t completely put up to this).

eCAHNomics @ 39

My question about W’s speech is that if no major news media covered it, did a tree fall in the forest & make no sound? Or was it just too late for today’s deadlines & media will cover it tomorrow?

Apparently there were no applause during the “applause” breaks. No hooo ahhh’s!

You can’t fool all the people all of the time, but Republicans have managed to fool the elite punditocracy with an alarming frequency.

I don’t think they’re being fooled, they are doing the bidding of their billionaire masters, the people (and corporation-persons) that own the mainstream media.

See Phil Donahue being fired, in spite of his show being quite popular. See Glenn Beck still hired, in spite of the reverse.

See Robert Scheer, fired. The Doughy Pantload, hired.

Bob Somerby thinks this is the consequence of a millionaire pundit/journalist class. I think this is a symptom. The problem is too much media power has been concentrated in too few hands. The ‘free market fairy’, running amok again.

Good insights from Swopa, discussing Bob Geiger:

I wrote on various occasions last fall (in fact, as long as two years ago) about the need to dismantle the “strong daddy” image that Republicans seek to promote in their presidents/candidates — and that the way to do that was to shift the comparison from strength/weakness to responsibility versus irresponsibility. Geiger gets it dead right with his comparison.

Not only is Dubya not America’s strong daddy; he’s not even a parent at all… he’s a tantrum-prone child pretending to do an adult’s job, but failing badly. The tone Democrats should take in explaining their actions isn’t angry rebellion, but the sober determination of responsible adults stepping in to clean up a mess that can no longer be tolerated.

In a related story, Mark Halpirin is no longer at the Note which I think is a case of ABC News leaving the foundering vessel, more than Halpirin, who will probably take years, if ever, to learn his lesson. Poor man. A few months after his The Way to Win came out, it looked more like the way to lose.

Besides, the only people who don’t leave the sinking ship are the captain and those too dumb to either realize that the ship is sinking or find a lifeboat.

Another observation on W’s speech. W to troops: Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid. Those nasty Ds will take away everything you need.

Lack of applause suggests the messgae didn’t sell to the troops. Do you suppose C-SPAN will post it so we can see W’s facial expression & body language?

Over at dailykos, apparently Hatch went on Limbaugh & perpetrated the same lies about Lam as he did on MTP.

Remember that gigantic telecom bill that was passed a few years ago? I’ve oft wondered whether there was a quid pro quo.

In addition, the rubberstampers, as I recall, budgeted 1 billion for “pr” last budget…that would buy a large steaming heap o’ pundits.

Of course, one need not be terribly paranoid to realize that the media organs are owned by oligarchs with their own particular irons in the fire. Not sure how to break their grasp on the neck of the populace, save for doing what we are doing and disseminating news and views the old-fashioned way.

This is OT but the recess appointment of Andrew Biggs at Social Security makes it look like there’s privatization (i.e., windfalls for fat cats) in the works.

this guy is gay and he was a bushie?

why didn’t he know before now that bush was crazy and mean and stupid?

cassie

mayan @ 45

Of course, one need not be terribly paranoid to realize that the media organs are owned by oligarchs with their own particular irons in the fire. Not sure how to break their grasp on the neck of the populace, save for doing what we are doing and disseminating news and views the old-fashioned way.

This is a difficult and critical nut to crack. I’m not sure the media *can* be fixed from the outside – I think our best chance is to expose and discredit them, but that’ll be difficult when we’re at opposite ends of the megaphone.

Our voice is getting a lot louder, but it’s still not close.

brownandserve @ 49

This is OT but the recess appointment of Andrew Biggs at Social Security makes it look like there’s privatization (i.e., windfalls for fat cats) in the works.

LOL. Go for it. Would be great for Ds in 08.

eCAHNomics @ 46

Another observation on W’s speech. W to troops: Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid. Those nasty Ds will take away everything you need.

Lack of applause suggests the messgae didn’t sell to the troops. Do you suppose C-SPAN will post it so we can see W’s facial expression & body language?

It was mostly that punk-ass sneer.

Robert Kennedy has a post up with the text of one of his father’s speeches from 1968 up at HuffPo.

It’s amazing.

“You are the people, as President Kennedy said, who have “the least ties to the present and the greatest ties to the future.” I urge you to learn the harsh facts that lurk behind the mask of official illusion with which we have concealed our true circumstances, even from ourselves. Our country is in danger: not just from foreign enemies; but above all, from our misguided policies–and what they can do to the nation that Thomas Jefferson once told us was the last, best hope of man. There is a contest on, not for the rule of America, but for the heart of America. . . . I ask you to go forth and work for new policies–work to change our direction–and thus restore our place at the point of moral leadership, in our country, in our hearts, and all around the world.

much more here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..45025.html

Hugh @
27

The Bush Presser Part I

Today Yesterday,…

[snip]

Dude, you should start your own blog.

Morris Sheppard @ 45

In a related story, Mark Halpirin is no longer at the Note

I always thought it was really funny (in a sort of throw things at the television sort of way) when Charlie Rose would have on Mark Halperin and Adam Nagourney to objectively talk about politics. I suppose it was Rose’s idea of a broad spectrum.

Cassie @ 48

this guy is gay and he was a bushie?

why didn’t he know before now that bush was crazy and mean and stupid?

cassie

This is a really good question. My guess is that a “bushie” is by definition someone who doesn’t understand or care that “bush is crazy and mean and stupid.” I can’t think of any other explanation.

angie — the RFK speech is/was awesome — and timeless.

And Eli has a new thread.

Scarecrow @ 44

Good insights from Swopa, discussing Bob Geiger:

I wrote on various occasions last fall (in fact, as long as two years ago) about the need to dismantle the “strong daddy” image that Republicans seek to promote in their presidents/candidates — and that the way to do that was to shift the comparison from strength/weakness to responsibility versus irresponsibility. Geiger gets it dead right with his comparison.

Not only is Dubya not America’s strong daddy; he’s not even a parent at all… he’s a tantrum-prone child pretending to do an adult’s job, but failing badly. The tone Democrats should take in explaining their actions isn’t angry rebellion, but the sober determination of responsible adults stepping in to clean up a mess that can no longer be tolerated.

I think that is exactly what Nancy is doing.

Scarecrow @ 55

And Eli has a new thread.

Oh yeah! I completely forgot!

About the youth site:
Cassie and the others: my comments are at the end of the last blog.

eCAHNomics @
39

My question about W’s speech is that if no major news media covered it, did a tree fall in the forest & make no sound? Or was it just too late for today’s deadlines & media will cover it tomorrow?

actually Milbank had a pretty good column about it in today’s ComPost. I can’t quite get a handle on Milbank…..sometime he’s right on and sometimes he totally pisses me off.

oddmommy @ 59

actually Milbank had a pretty good column about it in today’s ComPost. I can’t quite get a handle on Milbank…..sometime he’s right on and sometimes he totally pisses me off.

I think Milbank’s gimmick is to act like *both* sides are idiots.

I think Milbank’s gimmick is to act like *both* sides are idiots.

Yes, I think that’s true. Come to think of it, there’s a strong correlation between when I like him versus when I think he’s full of sh*t, and which side he’s making fun of that day.

Ah, that jaded Washington humor……lived here almost 20 years and it still eludes me.

Sorry to be OT … but does anyone realize the significance of today in history?

eyesonthestreet @ 61

About the youth site:
Cassie and the others: my comments are at the end of the last blog.

I am 15 and I am the youngest. I think the oldest is 19. I am in 9th grade. Daniel and Brendon are both in 10th. Ava is in 11th. One of the Emily’s is out of high school, and I do not know the others yet. Today is our third day blogging. I have been promoting the site here, at HORN chat, and at HARTMANN CHAT. Also on my own blog: Political Teen Tidbits. But now I will stop and JUST talk about the real topic of the post.

All the bloggers are teenagers but adults can comment, and we won’t kick anyone off if they turn 20.

I just wrote this whole long comment explaining who all of the teen bloggers are and how we all blog there but adults can comment, and explaining where I am advertising the site at and why. But then I took too long writing it and the internet ate my post. ARGH! So …. here is the site for the last time and after this I promise to just stay on topic and not try to advertise.

YouThinkLeft

I am 15, the youngest in the group, but I have had my own blog for a while. I am also the only 9th grader.

I Love Jane Hamsher @ 65

Sorry to be OT … but does anyone realize the significance of today in history?

April 4th in History
1541: Ignatius of Loyola becomes first superior-general of the Jesuits
1581: Frances Drake completres circumnavigation of the world, proving the earth is not flat
1818: Congress decided US flag is 13 red and white stripes and 20 stars
1949: The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation ‘NATO’, formed in Washington USA
1968: Civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. assassinated in Memphis, Tennessee.

April 4th birthdays
1896: Tristan Tzara, French poet
1899: Duke Ellington, American band leader
1914: Marguerite Duras, French writer
1915: Muddy Waters, Chicago blues singer
1928: Maya Angelou, American poet
1932: Anthony Perkins, American actor

It is the day MLK died. :

I really don’t think it’s stupidity. I think it’s a form of economic calvinism – if you’re successful, it’s because you’re Good, and if you aren’t successful (or can’t afford to put food on your family) you aren’t Good.

I think people who have, out of pique or snobbishness or the need to prove they aren’t one of Those or sheer tunnel-vision ambition, to the world we live in now where simple human decency is considered to be fuzzy-brained socialism increasingly need desperately to believe that this is true, because if it isn’t, then they have to take a look at what exactly they’ve been paid to do all these years.

I think that’s why they’re such incredible suckers for “religious” bullies. There, they’ve promoted whatever that values thing is. They’re good people. Besides, it keeps the poor people quiet and voting sensibly.

And in the final analysis, if they decided to break with the system that’s been so very good to them, there’s a risk that their children will have to live in the world they’ve built.

my thoughts on dowd exactly.

he switched sides to work for bush – to have a
little more influence and make a little more money –

and now he’s switching sides again, as the power balance shifts.

when you think about it, he’s quite a politician – sort of the john mccain of the campaign strategists.

brownandserve @ 49

This is OT but the recess appointment of Andrew Biggs at Social Security makes it look like there’s privatization (i.e., windfalls for fat cats) in the works.

Not a chance. That authority can only come from Congress.

This was just the shrub having another tantrum.