In response to his pleas, an officer said: "You think we've never arrested somebody that's made national media? ... We deal with the Bengals all the time."
File that under sad, but true! lol
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Bad Reputation
So I am reading this story about a video being released from the arrest of University of Mississippi basketball Coach Andy Kennedy on assault charges over an altercation he had with a cab driver in Cincinatti. For the most part the article wasn't anything special but I just had to post this line from the arresting officer.
File that under sad, but true! lol
File that under sad, but true! lol
Monday, February 2, 2009
President Obama Lied To Us
Remember President Obama said 75% of the spending in his economic stimulus and reinvestment act would be pushed into th economy in the next 18 months? Well according to the new CBO report on his plan thats a bald faced lie! Its actually going to be 78% over the next 18 months.
Suck On That Wing Nuts!!!
(h/t TPM)
Suck On That Wing Nuts!!!
(h/t TPM)
Treason
This is a very disturbing report from Gareth Porter in IPS. If ANY of this is true, President Obama should summarily and expeditiously bring all of these bastards from General Petraeus to General Odeirno to anybody in between and shit can their asses and publicly repudiate them. I will withhold final judgment until this story is more fully vetted but right now I am fucking appalled that anything like this could possibly be going on right now. Just to give you a sample.
snip
snip
snip
I don't know about you but that looks clearly like a plan for out and out treason. Firing their asses would be the least I would advise President Obama to do if this is found to be true. Prosecutions would be and should be on the table. I would love to see what the wingnuts would say if they EVER got wind of this kind of a conspiracy against a Republican President. I would bet the words "drawn and quartered" would enter the conversation.
I would say there were a few bright spots in the article for those who irrationally believe that President Obama is a pushover.
Still this kind of a story demand that some kind of action be taken to get to the validity of it. Hopefully somebody will get to the bottom of it and if its found to be true appropriate action will be taken.
Obama's decision to override Petraeus's recommendation has not ended the conflict between the president and senior military officers over troop withdrawal, however. There are indications that Petraeus and his allies in the military and the Pentagon, including Gen. Ray Odierno, now the top commander in Iraq, have already begun to try to pressure Obama to change his withdrawal policy. A network of senior military officers is also reported to be preparing to support Petraeus and Odierno by mobilising public opinion against Obama's decision.
snip
The first clear indication of the intention of Petraeus, Odierno and their allies to try to get Obama to amend his decision came on Jan. 29 when the New York Times published an interview with Odierno, ostensibly based on the premise that Obama had indicated that he was "open to alternatives".
The Times reported that Odierno had "developed a plan that would move slower than Mr. Obama's campaign timetable" and had suggested in an interview "it might take the rest of the year to determine exactly when United States forces could be drawn down significantly".
The opening argument by the Petraeus-Odierno faction against Obama's withdrawal policy was revealed the evening of the Jan. 21 meeting when retired Army Gen. Jack Keane, one of the authors of the Bush troop surge policy and a close political ally and mentor of Gen. Petraeus, appeared on the Lehrer News Hour to comment on Obama's pledge on Iraq combat troop withdrawal.
Keane, who had certainly been briefed by Petraeus on the outcome of the Oval Office meeting, argued that implementing such a withdrawal of combat troops would "increase the risk rather dramatically over the 16 months". He asserted that it would jeopardise the "stable political situation in Iraq" and called that risk "not acceptable".
The assertion that Obama's withdrawal policy threatens the gains allegedly won by the Bush surge and Petraeus's strategy in Iraq will apparently be the theme of the campaign that military opponents are now planning.
snip
The source says the network, which includes senior active duty officers in the Pentagon, will begin making the argument to journalists covering the Pentagon that Obama's withdrawal policy risks an eventual collapse in Iraq. That would raise the political cost to Obama of sticking to his withdrawal policy.
If Obama does not change the policy, according to the source, they hope to have planted the seeds of a future political narrative blaming his withdrawal policy for the "collapse" they expect in an Iraq without U.S. troops.
That line seems likely to appeal to reporters covering the Iraq troop withdrawal issue. Ever since Obama's inauguration, media coverage of the issue has treated Obama' s 16-month withdrawal proposal as a concession to anti-war sentiment which will have to be adjusted to the "realities" as defined by the advice to Obama from Gates, Petreaus and Odierno.
snip
Keane had operated on the assumption that a Democratic president would probably not take the political risk of rejecting Petraeus's recommendation on the pace of troop withdrawal from Iraq. Woodward quotes Keane as telling Gates, "Let's assume we have a Democratic administration and they want to pull this thing out quickly, and now they have to deal with General Petraeus and General Odierno. There will be a price to be paid to override them."
I don't know about you but that looks clearly like a plan for out and out treason. Firing their asses would be the least I would advise President Obama to do if this is found to be true. Prosecutions would be and should be on the table. I would love to see what the wingnuts would say if they EVER got wind of this kind of a conspiracy against a Republican President. I would bet the words "drawn and quartered" would enter the conversation.
I would say there were a few bright spots in the article for those who irrationally believe that President Obama is a pushover.
Petraeus was visibly unhappy when he left the Oval Office, according to one of the sources. A White House staffer present at the meeting was quoted by the source as saying, "Petraeus made the mistake of thinking he was still dealing with George Bush instead of with Barack Obama."
Still this kind of a story demand that some kind of action be taken to get to the validity of it. Hopefully somebody will get to the bottom of it and if its found to be true appropriate action will be taken.
The Final Word
Remember the post I had last week about the House Republicans being full of shit in their assertion that their economic stimulus plan would create twice the jobs at half the cost of President Obama's plan? Well they based their findings on a paper by Christina Romer, the newly confirmed Chair of the Council of Economic Advisors. Well Romer has her own ideas about the House GOP plan. Lets all say it together now, EPIC FAIL!
If you still believe anything those asshole Republicans in Congress say then you need to do some serious self examination.
Question: The House claims that based on the research of CEA Chair Christy Romer, their plan would create 6.2 million jobs. Isn’t that a more effective way of jumpstarting the economy?
Answer: The Republican House analysis is flat wrong in its claim that the House Republican stimulus is more effective. No matter what your analytical assumptions, as long as they are consistent the plan the President supports would result in substantially greater job creation than the House Republican plan.
Independent groups that have analyzed the President’s plan -- from Macroeconomic Advisors to former McCain advisor Mark Zandi -- have confirmed that the President’s plan will create between 3 - 4 million jobs--twice the number of the House plan. The President supports takes a broad, comprehensive approach. It includes substantial tax cuts – many of which mirror the provisions in the House Republican plan. But it also includes new spending programs that many economists across the spectrum believe will help create jobs and give our economy a kickstart right now.
Question: But doesn’t Dr. Romer’s research show that the economic impact of tax cuts is higher than even the Administration is assuming?
Answer: Dr. Romer’s research suggests that all types of fiscal stimulus, both spending and tax cuts, might well have a larger impact than is typically assumed and is assumed in the CEA's analysis. It would be great if that were so. It would mean more job creation and more economic activity -- which is exactly what we need right now. The Administration has based its analyses on more modest assumptions that are in line with those several independent forecasters – Republican and Democrat alike.
We should have an open discussion about these analytical issues.
We cannot afford to play political games with apples-to-oranges comparisons. Such political gamesw distract our attention from the magnitude of the substantive task at hand.
If you still believe anything those asshole Republicans in Congress say then you need to do some serious self examination.
Liberal And Progressive Concerns.
Many of the talking head crowd are convinced and are trying to convince everyone else that those Dirty Fucking Hippies running both houses of Congress are just out to promote "welfare spending" and the own "pet projects" in the new economic stimulus and reinvestment bill. The Villagers are now clamoring for President Obama to admonish his Democratic colleagues and take the "librul" packages out of te bill. And in the meantime they try to portray the liberal and progressive rank and file as being upset over losing out on our "socialist agenda". But today in his column in his Washington Post article E. J. Dionne pushes back on all of this nonsense and pulls the veil back on what is really going on here, namely the Republicans are simply using this meme of "bipartisanship" to try to remove elements of the stimulus bill that President Obama actually campaigned on. But the end of piece to me really is the most important part because he goes through and illuminates the true concerns of the base of the Democratic party that actually voted for change on Nov 4th of last year.
Those are exactly the questions you will see being asked all around the liberal/progressive blogosphere. We don't have a problem with President Obama extending his hand in the spirit of bipartisanship but at what cost? If the end result of this round of bipartisanship is a watered down bill that doesn't stimulate the economy and doesn't help people who are losing their jobs and their houses everyday then what will he really have to show for it? Any effort to stimulate the economy will have to also backstop the people are getting hit the hardest right now. Otherwise no matter how many tax cuts you include or spending for infrastructure you will continue to have the foreclosure crisis which is the nexus of the problems in the economy and you will still have a downturn in consumer spending which is one of the major factor driving the job losses.
If this bill doesn't work it won't matter how many Republicans voted for it. The failure will be laid at the feet of the Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid and probably most of all at the feet of President Obama. What we need right now as President Obama has said many times is a focus on doing what works. And if the Republicans are going to refuse to vote for a bill that works its time to drop the bipartisanship act and tell them to fuck off. I would rather have a partisan bill that gets the economy going and helps regular people than a bipartisan bill that is an EPIC FAIL and helps to sweep the Rethugs back into office.
The real test is whether Obama will fight for a stimulus bill that achieves some of his larger objectives. The aspects of the House bill that Republicans and conservative commentators have so eviscerated are the very ones that take substantial steps toward the president's own priorities.
Obama placed a heavy bet during his campaign on a promise to reform the heath-care system. To the great consternation of conservatives, the House stimulus bill takes big steps toward broadening the number of Americans government would help to obtain health insurance. Will those provisions be protected in the final bill?
The president has spoken passionately about the inadequacy of our schools and the increasing difficulty that young Americans are having paying for higher education. The House stimulus bill includes a lot of education money. Will students be thrown overboard in pursuit of a nebulous cross-party comity?
Those are exactly the questions you will see being asked all around the liberal/progressive blogosphere. We don't have a problem with President Obama extending his hand in the spirit of bipartisanship but at what cost? If the end result of this round of bipartisanship is a watered down bill that doesn't stimulate the economy and doesn't help people who are losing their jobs and their houses everyday then what will he really have to show for it? Any effort to stimulate the economy will have to also backstop the people are getting hit the hardest right now. Otherwise no matter how many tax cuts you include or spending for infrastructure you will continue to have the foreclosure crisis which is the nexus of the problems in the economy and you will still have a downturn in consumer spending which is one of the major factor driving the job losses.
If this bill doesn't work it won't matter how many Republicans voted for it. The failure will be laid at the feet of the Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid and probably most of all at the feet of President Obama. What we need right now as President Obama has said many times is a focus on doing what works. And if the Republicans are going to refuse to vote for a bill that works its time to drop the bipartisanship act and tell them to fuck off. I would rather have a partisan bill that gets the economy going and helps regular people than a bipartisan bill that is an EPIC FAIL and helps to sweep the Rethugs back into office.
Exposed
Im watching Morning Joe this morning and I keep hearing the same McCain campaign soundbites regurgitated by the whole cast including the quintessetial "dumb blond" Mika as well as the tool that is Mark Halperin. When the best you can come up with is screaming "Socialism" and "giving tax cuts to people who don't pay taxes" it shows that the Republican Party is completely tone deaf. John McCain used both of those memes as the center piece for the end of his campaign and he got his ass handed to him. But the problem is it's the only playbook they know. As was shown in my post the other day its the very same attacks that they launched about Bill Clinton in 2001. And history has shown us how wrong they are. Seriously they better hurry up and get in the lab and update their playbook because this is truly pitiful.
Just to refresh your mind again.
Just to refresh your mind again.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Barn Burner
That ws one helluva Superbowl. Congratulations to the Pittsburgh Steelers.
Key points
1. Darnell Docket showed up tonight. Hopefully now he can get some pro bowl love in the future
2. Santonio Holmes was the man tonight. If he can play at that level consistently he is going to be a great one.
3. If Gandy doesn't get those holding penalties versus Harrison then he probably would have caused at least one fumble on Kurt Warner.
5. The Cardinals abandoned the run a little too early.
6. Biggest play of the game by far that will be overlooked by some is the int for a TD right before halftime by Harrison.
7. Penalties marred the end of the game. When was the last time you saw someone get flagged for running into the HOLDER?
8. Heath Miller played well and honestly I think Big Ben should have looked for him more in the second half. But by getting the ball to him in the first half he did open the field up.
9. If the Steelers had lost because of that last TD to Fitzgerald they would have and should have been sick about it. They called a nonsensical blitz with an inverted Cover 2 look but the guy on Fitzgerald decided not to line up inside and thus he got beat inside which you can't do in that coverage and then Harrison who was supposed to be covering the deep middle was screwing around close to the line of scrimmage trying to guard a quick slant. That was a perfect play call for a defense that was very poorly executed.
10. Though many won't think it a big deal I still have to point out that we now have had 2 black coaches win the Superbowl in the last 3 years after having 40 Superbowls with out having black coach to even be participating. Thats what I call progress folks.
Final thought: I have heard people all week down play Ben Rothlisberger with out much rhyme or reason to their argument. Well I have to say, if you after this game and the way he led his team down the field to win you still don't hold him in high regards then I think thats more of function of YOU than it is a function of him or his abilities.
Key points
1. Darnell Docket showed up tonight. Hopefully now he can get some pro bowl love in the future
2. Santonio Holmes was the man tonight. If he can play at that level consistently he is going to be a great one.
3. If Gandy doesn't get those holding penalties versus Harrison then he probably would have caused at least one fumble on Kurt Warner.
5. The Cardinals abandoned the run a little too early.
6. Biggest play of the game by far that will be overlooked by some is the int for a TD right before halftime by Harrison.
7. Penalties marred the end of the game. When was the last time you saw someone get flagged for running into the HOLDER?
8. Heath Miller played well and honestly I think Big Ben should have looked for him more in the second half. But by getting the ball to him in the first half he did open the field up.
9. If the Steelers had lost because of that last TD to Fitzgerald they would have and should have been sick about it. They called a nonsensical blitz with an inverted Cover 2 look but the guy on Fitzgerald decided not to line up inside and thus he got beat inside which you can't do in that coverage and then Harrison who was supposed to be covering the deep middle was screwing around close to the line of scrimmage trying to guard a quick slant. That was a perfect play call for a defense that was very poorly executed.
10. Though many won't think it a big deal I still have to point out that we now have had 2 black coaches win the Superbowl in the last 3 years after having 40 Superbowls with out having black coach to even be participating. Thats what I call progress folks.
Final thought: I have heard people all week down play Ben Rothlisberger with out much rhyme or reason to their argument. Well I have to say, if you after this game and the way he led his team down the field to win you still don't hold him in high regards then I think thats more of function of YOU than it is a function of him or his abilities.
More Of This Please!
I know he is a busy man, but can we get Barney Frank on more talking head shows to punch the Republicans in the mouth with their own talking points? Sheesh.
The WingNuts' Boogey Man
Josh Marshall points us to this story on George Soros in the Financial Times and I figured I would pass it along. Great background on the man, the myth, the nightmare of the far right about how he came to be the man he is today in the world of finance. There was so much good stuff that I couldn't decide on what to excerpt so rather than that I would just say go and read the whole thing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
