Posted: January 24, 2011 | Author: dakinikat | Filed under: The Media SUCKS, the villagers, Women's Rights | Tags: CNN: FIRE ERICKSON, Erik Erickson advocates violence, extemists in the media, RedState extremism |

Where's the blood?
For some reason, the media has decided to respond to right wing outrage for perceived ‘liberal’ biases by allowing access to any one with a half truth to tell or some radical right viewpoint. It’s one thing to air the views of a politician holding a public office–like Michelle Bachmann–whose grasp of reality, history, and science is demonstrably lacking, it’s completely another thing to hire and continually promote some one with extremist views and agendas. This is especially true when it is for no other reason than to air a given view point in some perceived act of fairness when no equally extreme voice on the left exists any where on the network. In fact, no equally extreme leftist voice exists in any media outlet.
Again, I say perceived fairness because there is never a real left wing equivalent out there equal to the likes of Red State’s Erick Erickson. If so, they’d have also hired at least some equivalent of Noam Chomsky or some one who is honestly liberal and honestly left wing. The continued employment of Erick Erickson goes beyond even the lowest standards set by the likes of the Buchanans. He’s about one hyperbole short of Pat Robertson; but just barely. The deal is that this guy is no Bob Novak or George Will conservative. He’s an extremist and radical because he constantly advocates violence and uses revolutionary rhetoric.
Here at RedState, we too have drawn a line. We will not endorse any candidate who will not reject the judicial usurpation of Roe v. Wade and affirm that the unborn are no less entitled to a right to live simply because of their size or their physical location. Those who wish to write on the front page of RedState must make the same pledge. The reason for this is simple: once before, our nation was forced to repudiate the Supreme Court with mass bloodshed. We remain steadfast in our belief that this will not be necessary again, but only if those committed to justice do not waiver or compromise, and send a clear and unmistakable signal to their elected officials of what must be necessary to earn our support.
Size or physical location? WTF kind of demented language is that? This man just made a call for women to be dehumanized into incubators, to have their liberty and privacy removed, and to have their personal religious viewpoints usurped by his own. How can CNN justify maintaining the likes of Erickson without–minimally–giving air time to a Marxist which would be a leftie equivalent. Bet yet, they need to fire him.
Nearly every one who has cracked a legitimate history book and read documents written by the founders knows that the basic ‘state’s rights’ vs. federal government’s rights was about slave ownership. The constitution was crafted carefully so that slave owning states could find enough leeway in the ‘state’s right provision’ to allow slavery. That was the purpose of the entire deal in a nutshell. The 13th amendment was required to close that particular loophole. The descendant’s of those folks that scream state’s rights now and limited constitutional authority support similar devious schemes that prevent key individuals from fully exercising their constitutional rights. They used it for Jim Crow Laws until specific laws and SCOTUS findings closed the loophole. They’ve extended its use to women’s bodies and medical treatment and relationship status for GLBT. Erickson’s terminology of judicial usurpation is justification for involuntary servitude and seeks to deprive certain classes of people of their liberty. That is radical. How can CNN provide a safe harbor for a radical?
Any one who invokes the term ‘state’s right’s’ invariably is evoking the use of state laws to abridge some one else’s liberties and freedoms. Putting Erickson and his arguments on TV is like handing the public airways over to slave owners and folks that rationalized Jim Crow Laws. He’s absolutely no different. His outrageous positions are far out of the mainstream . My guess is that CNN would never hire Noam Chomsky or socialist Brian Patrick Moore a seat for one segment, let alone an ongoing salaried position. But Erickson not only uses radical language, he uses revolutionary language. This makes him an extremist.
Read the rest of this entry »
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
Posted: January 24, 2011 | Author: dakinikat | Filed under: Breaking News, U.S. Politics | Tags: Chicago mayor race, Rahm Emanuel eligibility |
Breaking News:

Rahm Emanuel was thrown off the ballot for mayor of Chicago today by an appellate court panel, a stunning blow to the fund-raising leader in the race.
An appellate panel ruled 2-1 that Emanuel did not meet the residency standard to run for mayor.
Appellate judges Thomas Hoffman and Shelvin Louise Marie Hall ruled against Emanuel. Justice Bertina Lampkin voted in favor of keeping President Obama’s former chief of staff on the Feb. 22 ballot.
“It’s a surprise,” said Kevin Forde, the attorney who argued on Emanuel’s behalf.
Emanuel’s attorneys are expected to use Lampkin’s dissenting opinion to appeal the case to the Illinois Supreme Court.
In today’s ruling, Hoffman wrote: “We … order that the candidate’s name be excluded (or if, necessary, be removed) from the ballot from Chicago’s Feb. 22, 2011.”
Notable Tweets:
ThePlumLineGS Greg Sargent
RT @brianbeutler BREAKING: Chicago fish-markets experience unprecedented Monday sales. #rahm
daveweigel daveweigel
Money well spent, Rahm donors!
daveweigel daveweigel
Can’t Obama just take over the city and make Rahm the Chicago Czar?
@PachacutecVA Pachacutec
Somewhere, Nancy Pelosi is trying not to smile in public #rahm
Update:
Rahm at a just held presser. Some how I think we need a caption contest for this. He looks like the pissed off Staypuft marshmallow man to me
Jessica Yellin at CNN:
Emanuel is expected to appeal the decision to the Illinois Supreme Court, and a federal appeal could follow.
According to a recent Chicago Tribune/WGN survey, 44 percent of the city’s voters backed Emanuel, 21 percent backed former Sen. Carol Moseley Braun and 16 percent backed former Chicago Board of Education president Gery Chico. City Clerk Miguel del Valle received seven percent and nine percent remained undecided.
Emanuel is expected to speak at 2:30 p.m. ET. Moseley Braun is expected to make a statement at 3:30 p.m. ET Monday.
The source close to the Emanuel campaign told CNN his legal team anticipated there was a chance the court would rule against them and they have an emergency appeal already written.
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
Posted: January 24, 2011 | Author: dakinikat | Filed under: Economic Develpment, morning reads, SOTU, Stock Market, U.S. Economy, U.S. Military, U.S. Politics | Tags: Americans undereducation, Davos, Economic Forecast, efficient markets hypothesis, GDP growth, George Akerlof, State of the Unon Address, The Palestine Papers |
Good Morning!
The country is gearing up for the State of the Union Address. We’re going to be live blogging it here. It’s scheduled for Tuesday and my plan is to live stream it from CSPAN. It’s bad enough to watch all that stupidity in one place. I don’t need the echo chamber on top of it all. It’s actually something that’s demanded by the Constitution Article 2, Section 3.
[The President] shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient…
If Senator Dick Durbin is to be believed, part of the speech will contain a New Obama Plan that is “part stimulus”. I still keep hearing David Bryne speak “same as it ever was” over and over again. But, the links at Politico and here’s a taste.
“It’s part of a stimulus. but we’re sensitive to the deficit,” Durbin said on “Fox News Sunday” when asked by host Chris Wallace about the president’s expected plans to call for more spending for infrastructure, education, research in his State of the Union address Tuesday night to a joint session of Congress.
Noting his support for the president’s deficit commission recommendations, Durbin said Congress should be cautious about large spending cuts until the economy is showing sustained patterns of growth.
“They said be careful,” he said citing the report. “Don’t start the serious spending cuts, the deficit reduction, until were clearly out of the recession in 2013. We’ve got to make sure this economy is growing with more jobs, more business success.”
I’m not sure which part of economics 101 and 102 these folks missed–given the took them at all–but the growth we’re anticipating during this ‘recovery’ is not enough to eliminate the current unemployment rate. Mature economies do not grow very quickly. Any growth rate of real gdp from about 1-4% would be healthy and normal for a developed, mature economy. That’s not going bring down unemployment any time soon, let alone within a two year presidential election cycle. Giving tax breaks to corporations that can head to markets over seas where there are actually customers is not going to create jobs here. The only thing that is stopping this Democratic Death Wish is the fact that Republicans are BAT shit crazy and even then, they still managed to recapture the house.
Speaking of the Republicans, they’re all in for taxcuts to Billionaires, but any spending ascribed to help ordinary Americans still will get the wall of no. At least that’s what Senator Mitch McConnell is saying.
Speaking on Fox News Sunday, Mr. McConnell countered that “The American public, as one pundit put it, issued a massive restraining order,” against government spending and excessive debt in November’s Congressional elections.
Indeed, Mr. McConnell seemed at times gleefully sardonic about President Obama’s efforts to depict himself as a centrist trying to find common ground with Republicans. The president, he said, has certainly moved to the enter , but mostly “rhetorically.”
“The president needs to pivot,” Mr. McConnell said. “He seems to be pivoting on virtually everything else, and I don’t put him down for that. I mean he obviously saw what happened in the November election and is trying to go in a different direction. He’s quit bashing business and is now celebrating business.”
“Well it’s about time,” Mr. McConnell added, “because the only way we’re going to get unemployment down and get out of this economic trough is through private sector growth and development. I think excessive government spending, running up debt, making us look like a Western European country is the wrong direction.”
I’m not sure which Western European Country he’s referring to here except maybe Ireland or Greece. Most of the rest of them are growing at about the same level that we’re expected to grow with a few above and a few below. Developed economies don’t really grow rapidly unless they get some kind of boost from a technological advance or something else. Here’s some estimates from the CIA factbook. McConnell just says anything that serves his narrative, I swear.
Even if we do get some ‘normal growth’, I doubt we’ll see anything to kick us up a notch given this kind of education and research and development environment. Wonder where are priorities are?
- U.S. consumers spend significantly more on potato chips than the U.S. government devotes to energy R&D.
- In 2009, for the first time, over half of U.S. patents were awarded to non-U.S. companies.
- China has replaced the U.S. as the world’s number one high-technology exporter.
- Between 1996 and 1999, 157 new drugs were approved in the U.S. Ten years later, that number had dropped to 74.
- The World Economic Forum ranks the U.S. #48 in quality of math and science education.
Here’s some good news that shows all hopes for science and reality may not be lost completely for the US. You’ll see that it doesn’t come from registered Republicans however.
52% of GOP reject evolution; 36% reject creationism

More Americans today believe that human beings developed without any involvement of a higher power, according to a new poll.
Gallup reported that since 1982, the number of Americans believing that humans evolved over millions of years increased by seven percentage points.
The current figure – 16 percent – has trended upwards since 2000.
Since 1982, Americans who believe that humans evolved with God guiding the process haven’t changed (38 percent), while Americans who believe God created humans in present form has decreased four points to 40 percent.
Read the rest of this entry »
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
Posted: January 23, 2011 | Author: dakinikat | Filed under: just because, Populism, right wing hate grouups, Second Amendment, Social Security, SOTU, The Bonus Class, the villagers, U.S. Economy, U.S. Military, U.S. Politics, Voter Ignorance, We are so F'd | Tags: Kevin Drum, leftwing, liberals, libertarians, political ideology, Right Wing |
You know me and my wonky graphs. You also know I blog a lot about rising income inequality and that I think it’s a huge problem. So, this MOJO Power graph and the article it came with piqued my curiosity. It’s from an article by Kevin Drum writing on a Timothy B Lee blogpost on the preemption of ‘genuine left wing voices’ by libertarians. I’m not sure how libertarians could be confused for moderates, liberals or lefties but given that establishment conservatives have an orthodoxy so tight that few fit, I suppose everything else gets to wear the liberal label. But, maybe there’s more to it than that.
We talked about this a little on a thread yesterday. Both Ariana Huffington and Kos used to be Republicans. They left the party when the religious right took over and because, frankly, I don’t think they like the fact that so many blue collar Reagan Democrats had just up and joined their old country club. There’s also the odd phenomenon of tea party populists that don’t seem to know where they are or where they belong either. We’ve seen how a lot of these folks have made their way into policy circles through their support or their horror of the current administration so I think it’s worth viewing three blog writers on that topic. Why are so many people confused about their political identity any more?
Libertarian ‘insight’ used to the butt of jokes at academic cocktail parties where you discussed Utopian moonbattery and even worse fiction. Now there seems to be an industry around producing what they call journals, institutions, and philosophy that is some how running loose in mainstream conversations demanding to be taken seriously. It’s hard to do that because they don’t associate with data and they seem to thrive on passing memes that have no basis in reality. (The ones on the FED just kill me.) They’re in the tea party, they’re all for Rand and Ron Paul, and yet, some of them have made their way to the liberal blogosphere. What’s going on? Plus, what’s the deal with all these solid working class–in some cases UNION folks–heading to tea party rallies? Haven’t they ever heard of Dick Armey?
Drum shows how the worst of the libertarian assumptions they hold up as facts just don’t hold up to the light of day. He starts with a shared assumption from the right wing and libertarians as described by Will Wilkinson. This meme is the mild form libertarianism from the Hayek-Friedman sect.
It’s best to just maximize growth rates, pre-tax distribution be damned, and then fund wicked-good social insurance with huge revenues from an optimal tax scheme.
We’ve got scads of data that show this meme to be a completely false assumption. We’d have a better economy right now if that were true. In fact, the only time we had a decent economy in recent history was when that particular assumption was rolled back during the Clinton years. But, don’t take it from me, read what Kevin Drum has to say. Those assumptions are very wrong.
First, it contains an implicit conviction that libertarian notions of tax and regulatory structures will maximize growth rates. This is practically an article of faith on the right, but there’s virtually no empirical evidence to support it. As it happens, I’d argue that my preferred brand of the modern mixed economy is, on the whole, probably more efficient than a stripped down libertarian state, even one that includes lots of centrally-directed income redistribution. But not by much. Personally, I’d be pretty happy if both sides accepted the notion that within a fairly wide range of modern capitalist systems — from Sweden to the U.S., say — overall growth rates change very little. For the most part, we’re really arguing about other things.
Second, I suspect there’s no feasible path to Will’s state of the world. The problem is that a system that generates enormous income inequality also generates enormous power inequality — and if corporations and the rich are allowed to amass huge amounts of economic power, they’ll always use that power to keep their own tax rates low. It’s nearly impossible to create a high-tax/high-service state if your starting point is a near oligarchy where the rich control the levers of political power.
Third, look at the graph. We’ve had this trickle up to the one percent form of economic nonsense since the Reagan years and all it’s done is made things radically worse. It’s led to this situation where the supply side of the curve completely craps all over the demand side of the curve in product markets. The outright hostility to unions and the abuse and disempowerment of human beings–not human “capital”–have completely shifted income levels and underlying market power to some place where you truly think you’d see some kind of general revolt, strike, or overthrow.
It should be patently obvious now that Wall Street has recovered, bonuses have recovered, and corporate profits have recovered while any one not up at the top of that racket can hardly survive these days. The unemployment rate, the numbers of foreclosures, and the numbers of bankruptcies are tips of the icebergs. We’re not going to see growth rates of GDP that will clear that up too. More frightening is that the powers that be don’t seem to even fake caring.
When you point all these things out to libertarians, they’ll shift the ground on you and say point me where it says in the constitution and mutter something about Wilson and the imperial presidency. This is the place where they firmly intersect the right wing. Look, Wilson is dead. The Bush legacy lives and the Obama legacy is still being written. Still, some of them have crept over and become neoliberals and identified with the left. Why?
Read the rest of this entry »
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
Posted: January 23, 2011 | Author: dakinikat | Filed under: Barack Obama, SOTU, U.S. Economy, U.S. Military, U.S. Politics, Voter Ignorance, We are so F'd | Tags: State of the Union Address |
So, there’s this NYT article up today called ‘Obama to Press Centrist Agenda in His Address’. Here’s the President’s own words on how the State of the Union address is shaping up.
“My No. 1 focus,” he said, “is going to be making sure that we are competitive, and we are creating jobs not just now but well into the future.”
“These are big challenges that are in front of us,” Mr. Obama also said in the video, sent to members of Organizing for America, his network of supporters from the 2008 campaign. “But we’re up to it, as long as we come together as a people — Republicans, Democrats, independents — as long as we focus on what binds us together as a people, as long as we’re willing to find common ground even as we’re having some very vigorous debates.”
So, we’re hearing themes of jobs, bipartisanship and coming together to focus on the future which probably includes spending cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security. Here’s another link for you from the Examiner.com with the headline of ‘Obama’s State of the Union: emphasis on job creation, immigration reform on limbo’.
President Barack Obama delivered his first State of the Union speech which ran for seventy-five minutes emphasizing in job creation, offering very few specifics, and listing a number of ‘accomplishments,’ such as cutting of taxes and preventing a ‘second depression’.
Obama talked Wednesday night about spending freezes as part of the solution to revamp the economy and to repay for the $1 trillion that it took to rescue the economy last year.
Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years. Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be affected. But all other discretionary government programs will. Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice what we don’t.”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but is the State of the Union address just going to be a mulligan for last year’s SOTU except this time he’ll be even more Republican friendly and business friendly while he delivers the same message? One of the criticisms of Obama’s vision thang has been that he continually offers up the same things but just tinkers with the buzzwords because he sees that it’s not the message that’s the problem but it’s the selling methodology that’s faulty.
Take for example his first stimulus which was about 40% business friendly tax cuts that really didn’t accomplish much in the way of job creation. His latest tax cuts are still business friendly and probably won’t accomplish much in the way of job creation either. This time around, however, he’s not going around giving speeches about ‘fat cat’ businessmen and Wall Street bankers. Most of the Treasury Department is filled with left over Goldman Sachs folks. Now, we have the West Wing filled less with politicians and more with fat cats. Other than a few more musical chairs or a few less hostile names in the spirit of pre-election financing needs, how is this any different than what we’ve seen before?
Can he just basically recycle last year’s speech–sans the swipe at the Supreme Court–and still be seen as some change agent or some transitional figure? I’m going to have to watch, but this lead up is sounding a lot like “Can you hear me now?” more than anything else.
And, what does it say that two years later, we’re still getting State of the Union addresses that need to focus on jobs? How about that the stuff they’ve been trying really isn’t working? Will using the buzz word “competitiveness” just be the new frame from last year’s talk on “doubling U.S. exports over the next five years”? Is this just a remarketing of the same five year plan with a few words meant to give Republican Congressmen hard-ons for hope?
The NYT is calling this “political rebranding”. They’re hinting that he’s even going to talk on reforming the corporate tax code. So, that means we get less of everything, they get more and it sounds like the same trickle down economics from the same set of tax cuts that continues to destroy the budget and brings on calls for decreases in “entitlements”. I’m not seeing any real change here. So, it took me a bit to get to the part of the article that raised questions with answers I’d personally like to hear.
While most midterm presidents use the State of the Union to take credit for their achievements to date, Mr. Obama is constrained by the facts that unemployment remains above 9 percent, that his signature domestic achievement — the expansion of health insurance coverage — remains unpopular with nearly half the country, and that prospects for withdrawing many troops from Afghanistan later this year remain uncertain at best.
So, I’m making my list of things I’d like addressed on Tuesday when we watch the SOTU and live blog it here. The first is about this miserable surge in Afghanistan and the 6 month time line for the end. The second is why are corporate profits setting records and the financial markets recovering if we’re so damned uncompetitive now and we have such a screwed up corporate tax policy? How the heck are we going to export more stuff when we really don’t make anything to export? How many copies of old Arnold movies can the developing world order? Why do businesses and insurance companies want to keep HCR so much? Finally, why do you think that more tax cuts are going to create jobs when they haven’t done so to date?
So, that’s my list. What’s on yours?
Meanwhile, Republicans continue to prove they live in an alternate universe with no use for science,math or economic theory.
The Senate’s top Republican, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said on Sunday that his party will vigorously oppose the spending initiatives President Obama plans to include in his State of the Union address on Tuesday because “it’s not a time to be looking at pumping up government spending.”
I’m thinking we might as well change the party names right now. The usual republican suspects are now the leadership of the democratic party. They get to become the Republicrat party. Republicans just may as well change their name to the National Right to Life and John Birch Society Party. Where’s an old style Democratic voter to go?
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
Recent Comments