Global warming denial driven mostly by the Tea Party

Greg Sargent: Some fascinating new findings from Pew Research suggest deep divisions among Republicans over whether global warming is happening:

Two-thirds of Americans (67%) say there is solid evidence that the earth has been getting warmer over the last few decades, a figure that has changed little in the past few years. While partisan differences over climate change remain substantial, Republicans face greater internal divisions over this issue than do Democrats.

Just 25% of Tea Party Republicans say there is solid evidence of global warming, compared with 61%of non-Tea Party Republicans.

Republican voters overall are evenly divided, 46-46, over whether global warming is happening, but this divide is driven by the lopsided difference between Tea Party and non-Tea Party Republicans on the question, with a solid majority of the latter in the global warming camp. “It’s not Democrat versus Republican, it’s Democrat and Republican versus the Tea Party,” Jeff Gohringer, spokesman for the League of Conservation Voters, tells me.

Just another example of how a shrill minority of nutjobs is driving our national conversation in completely self-destructive ways. Gerrymandering isn’t just a cheat, it’s a cancer.

[photo via Wikimedia Commons]

I will oppose any attempt by Sen. Rand Paul to father a moose-baby

Rand Paul is putting his foot down — and hoping the Washington press corps is watching. As the above Politico headline demonstrates, they are. Here’s the gist of things:

Politico: Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul said Friday he will strongly oppose an attempt by President Obama to bailout the city of Detroit.

“I basically say he is bailing them out over my dead body because we don’t have any money in Washington,” Paul said in an interview with Breitbart.com.

Has the White House said they were going to bail out the City of Detroit? Not in so many word, but if you read between the lines, the oh-so subtle word from the White House is "NO!!”

Detroit News: The White House reiterated Friday that no federal bailout for Detroit is in the works, but said the adminstration wants to be helpful as the Motor City restructures in bankruptcy.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said on the issue of Detroit’s insolvency that is “something local leaders and creditors are going to have resolve, but we will be partners in an effort to assist the city and the state as they move forward.” Asked for specifics on what type of assistance might be available, Carney declined to elaborate.

“The issue here of the insolvency and dealing with that is one that Detroit and Detroit’s creditors will have to resolve. We will be of assistance in general, both in terms of policy as well as just being a partner with Detroit as Detroit finds its way and moves forward in the coming weeks, months and years,” Carney said.

And this isn’t the first time it’s come up — Detroit’s been inching toward bankruptcy since the Republican Governor took control of the city’s finances away from city government and placed it in the hands of an “emergency manager," who applied the super-awesome Republican economic policies that totally failed to save the city. This guy and Detroit’s mayor had already gone to the White House to discuss the city’s problems and this was the result, according to the same Detroit News piece (emphasis mine):

White House officials including Obama senior adviser Valerie Jarrett, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan and National Economic Council director Gene Sperling have been in talks with city and state leaders. In April, Jarrett made it clear to Detroit Mayor Dave Bing and Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr at a White House meeting that no federal bailout was forthcoming.

So the White House keeps saying over and over — for months — that they aren’t going to bail out Detroit, which Rand Paul takes as his cue to stand boldly and proudly against any bailout for Detroit.

And that’s why I say I will oppose any attempt by Rand Paul to father a moose-baby. Rand Paul has never actually said he wouldn’t father a moose-baby, which makes my opposition to the attempt more rational than his stand against a Detroit bailout.

Man won’t be charged for accidentally shooting himself in a bowling alley

Raw Story: Police say that a Florida man who shot himself at a bowling alley in Jupiter will not be charged with a crime.

Jupiter Police told WPBF that the man was bowling with a gun in the pocket of his shorts at Jupiter Lanes at around 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday when the incident occurred.

“The guy just stepped up to bowl,” Jim Miller recalled. “I think he hit his leg on his back swing.”

“The ball hit him in the leg, which triggered the revolver,” Mike Martin, who also witnessed the shooting, added.

According to local station WPTV, “Several witnesses said that the gun was in the bowler’s pocket when it went off, terrifying other players.” You’d think they’d be used to this sort of thing, since the bowling alley in Jupiter, FL is obviously such a hotbed of hellish violence that our Second Amendment Hero here considered it madness to enter without packing heat.

And look at how effective his firearm was in keeping Mr. Responsible Gun Owner safe — i.e., total failure.

But hey, at least the man won’t be charged for accidentally discharging his firearm in a place where people gather together for quality family time. These things will happen. And if we start charging people for accidentally shooting themselves at bowling alleys, what’s next? Miniature golf courses? The circus? Chuck E. Cheese’s?

People might get the idea that it’s a little irresponsible to carry loaded guns in places where there are a lot children present. And then who would recklessly endanger those children keep all those kids safe?

[photo by FaceMePLS]

Iranian news agency steals content from embarrassing source

BBC:

A news agency in Iran has published a report by the satirical news website, The Onion, saying rural white Americans would rather vote for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than Barack Obama.

Quoting The Onion word-for-word, Fars states that an opinion poll also found 77% would rather go to a baseball game or have a drink with Mr Ahmadinejad.

A made-up West Virginia resident is quoted as saying: “I like him better.”

The report has not yet been published in Farsi on the agency’s website.

The Fars news agency, which is affiliated with the powerful Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), does not credit The Onion for the report on the survey.

The Fars article is down now, but The Onion piece is available here. Bonus fun: The Onion has added, “For more on this story: Please visit our Iranian subsidiary organization, Fars,” to the end of their article.

No, OWS will NOT be meeting with Ahmadinejad

Buzzfeed:

Occupy Wall Street protesters won’t be powwowing with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when he arrives in New York for the U.N. General Assembly this week.

“Nobody in their right mind would meet with a fascist dictator like Ahmadenijad,” said Shawn Carrié, a longtime Occupy activist, in a direct message. “I think it’s been blown way out of proportion. There were some emails floating around on listservs about going to *protest* his appearance.”

“Anyway, it must be stressed that no one speaks for OWS,” Carrié said. “Any moron can go say they’re gonna go do something, but to say OWS meets with Ahmadinejad? That’s just ridiculous.”

So who’s saying that Occupy Wall Street was going to meet with Ahmadinejad? Conservatives, that’s who. Why would they be saying that? Because conservatives — even the supposedly “deep-thinker intellectual” types — are boobs. Observe (emphasis mine):

The Iranian news agency Fars News, which has close ties to the government, reported that “Ahmadinejad is also set to meet American university students, artists, intellectuals and elites, including Occupy Wall Street anti-capitalist protestors, despite the ongoing efforts made by the pro-Zionist lobbies to prevent direct link between American people and the Iranian president.”

The Weekly Standard picked up the story this afternoon, writing that the Iranian dictator was going to meet with Occupy activists.

Those would be the super-serious smartypants conservatives I was talking about. The neocons (AKA militaristic “Cheney Republicans”). Turns out the neocon clown car is as packed with gullible fools in 2012 as it was in 2001, when they were absolutely certain Saddam had big piles of WMD.

And you would need to be astonishingly gullible, given Fars News’ track record. In 2007, they reported that squirrels were being used by America and Israel to spy on Iran.

I’m sure the people at The Weekly Standard were incredibly impressed by western squirrel technology, just as they were incredibly shocked that OWS would actually meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

On behalf of Americans tired of their shit, I demand rightwing bloggers start using math and logic!

What you’re looking it is one of the more histrionic of the many, many rightwing headlines calling out Harry Reid. Earlier this year, Reid said a Bain investor told him that Mitt Romney had not paid taxes for ten years. Now, Mitt’s released his 2011 tax returns and it turns out he paid almost $2 million that year.

You do see the problem here, right? Yeah, it turns out that 2011 wasn’t a decade-long year. Here’s the specific conversation from the Huffington Post who first reported the charge:

Saying he had “no problem with somebody being really, really wealthy,” Reid sat up in his chair a bit before stirring the pot further. A month or so ago, he said, a person who had invested with Bain Capital called his office.

“Harry, he didn’t pay any taxes for 10 years,” Reid recounted the person as saying.

“He didn’t pay taxes for 10 years! Now, do I know that that’s true? Well, I’m not certain,” said Reid. “But obviously he can’t release those tax returns. How would it look?

“You guys have said his wealth is $250 million,” Reid went on. “Not a chance in the world. It’s a lot more than that. I mean, you do pretty well if you don’t pay taxes for 10 years when you’re making millions and millions of dollars.”

Notice where Reid said which ten years he was told constituted Mitt’s free ride? Yeah, you didn’t because he didn’t. Romney’s release of his 2011 return proves absolutely nothing on this point.

Look, I don’t really believe Reid either. But I’m not going to claim I’ve got proof when any idiot can see that I don’t. This triumphalism is completely unsupported by any fact. This is lazy-assed bullshit and anyone who had any interest in even appearing to be serious would be ashamed to pull this crap.

If you’re a rightwing blogger and you wonder why we all think you’re idiots, look no farther. We’re just taking you at your word when you pretend to be idiots.

At least, I hope for your sake that you’re pretending.

Former GOP frontrunner confuses Thomas Jefferson, Satan

Talking Points Memo:

In a conference call with fellow evangelicals earlier this week, Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) shared his thoughts on the origins of the constitutionally mandated separation of church and state. Rather than tracing the idea to the nation’s founders, Perry warned of a more nefarious source: Satan.

“Satan runs across the world with his doubt and with his untruths and what have you and one of the untruths out there that is driven is that people of faith should not be involved in the public arena,” Perry said during the call on Tuesday, organized by the Rev. Rick Scarborough.

Perry said the separation of religious and civic institutions in the U.S. began with a “narrative” that first took root in the 1960s.

“Somehow or another there’s this, ya know, steel wall, this iron curtain or whatever you want to call it between the church and people of faith and this separation of church and state is just false on its face,” the governor said. “We have a biblical responsibility to be involved in the public arena proclaiming God’s truth.”

Perry’s not quite right about the time frame there. It wasn’t the ’60s, it was in ‘01 — specifically, 1801. In that year, Satan wrote this to the Danbury Baptist association in Connecticut:

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

Except it wasn’t exactly Satan, but Thomas Jefferson, and Rick Perry — one time frontrunner for the Republican nomination to the office of President of the United States — is a ridiculous boob.

Gotta love these “patriots” who don’t actually know jack shit about the founding of the nation, huh?

GOP Break Their "Pledge"

Someone in the Democratic Party still has some brains. As evidence, I give you this video from the Democratic rapid response effort on the GOP and their pledge.

That "We're not going to be any different from what we've been" line is really getting a lot of play lately. And it should, it's an extremely odd thing to say. Polling shows that Republicans are actually pretty unpopular and the only thing giving them an edge is the enthusiasm of Republican voters. What you really want to be doing now is giving Democrats and Independents a reason to stay home on election day, yet here Boehner is, basically saying, "We're going to keep being the dicks you don't like." You really have to wonder what the orange man was thinking.

In the end, it may be that the comment hurts the GOP more than the hypocrisy here. We'll have to see how it plays out.

While we're on the subject of Boehner, check out Tanya Somanader's post at Think Progress. Shorter version: Boehner admits the "pledge" offers no real solutions. Is he becoming gaffe-prone or was he always?

Boneheaded Dem Move had Boneheaded Reason

Why did Democrats decide to pass up a golden opportunity and put off ending Bush's tax giveaway for the wealthy until after the elections? Greg Sargent spoke to some people and found that, while what he calls "politically savvy" dems wanted to go ahead with a sure winner, the fact that it was a sure winner is what sank a pre-election vote.

So why did it fail? According to a very plugged in Senate aide, Senators debating the issue were very aware that the polling was on their side. Yet, paradoxically, this ended up tipping the balance against holding the vote. Senate Dems felt they were already winning on the issue, and in the end they thought a vote risked upsetting a dynamic that was already playing in their favor.

"People felt like, Why rock the boat on a good situation?" the aide tells me. "People weren't sure how how having a vote would effect that dynamic. We would have lost Democrats on certain aspects of the vote. Who knows if the media would cover that as Democrats being splintered? In a way the good polling gave people faith that we dont need to do anything on the issue because we're already winning."

Let me amplify that a little: in the end, Democrats felt the vote was unnecessary because everything is going so well.

If this were a boxing match, I'd be worried that the guy in the blue trunks was taking a dive. But the fact is that, while their policy ideas are better, Democrats just suck at this partisan politics stuff. A lot.

A whole lot.

White House Attacks Barton in Email to Supporters

The White House is making hay with Rep. Joe Barton's apology to BP for the "shakedown" that the $20 billion dollar escrow account negotiated by the White House and BP execs. Here's the email blast being sent out:

Organizing for America
XXXX --

When BP CEO Tony Hayward testified before Congress this morning, many expected to hear him apologize for the disaster his company has caused. Instead, GOP Congressman Joe Barton was the one saying he was sorry -- to BP.

In his opening statement, Barton, the top Republican on the committee overseeing the oil spill and its aftermath, delivered a personal apology to the oil giant. He said the $20 billion fund that President Obama directed BP to establish to provide relief to the victims of the oil disaster was a "tragedy in the first proportion."

Other Republicans are echoing his call. Sen. John Cornyn said he "shares" Barton's concern. Rep. Michele Bachmann said that BP shouldn't agree to be "fleeced." Rush Limbaugh called it a "bailout." The Republican Study Committee, with its 114 members in the House, called it a "shakedown."

Let's be clear. This fund is a major victory for the people of the Gulf. It's a key step toward making them whole again. BP has a responsibility to those whose lives and livelihoods have been devastated by the disaster. And BP oil executives don't deserve an apology -- the people of the Gulf do.

Stand with us to show that the American people support holding BP accountable -- and we won't apologize for doing so.

We support holding BP accountable. And we won't apologize for doing so. Add your name.

Rep. Barton and Republicans like him don't understand that the real tragedy is what's happening to the people in the Gulf Coast. They're the ones who deserve his apology -- not BP.

But big oil knows exactly who its allies are. And if Republicans win control of the House, Rep. Barton could be chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee -- overseeing regulation of the oil and gas industry.

Notably, companies like Halliburton -- the folks responsible for cementing the Deepwater Horizon rig -- are directing their political committees to deliver thousands of dollars to GOP candidates this cycle. Barton himself has received more than $100,000 from the oil and gas industry this election cycle.

Barton should apologize to the people of the Gulf and he should step down as the highest-ranking Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Adding your name to our open letter is one of the best ways you can show him and other Republicans that they weren't elected to defend big oil.

Sign the open letter today:

http://my.barackobama.com/NoApologies

Thanks,

David Plouffe

Barton really stepped in it and Democrats are probably not going to let it go any time soon. The GOP is trying to distance themselves from the comment, but they're going to have a little trouble on that front.

More on this tomorrow.

Oil May Be All Over the Place, But People are Still Dumb

What's a little oil in the water when it's a nice day for swimming?

(h/t Huffington Post)

George Will's Punditry Fail

One of the things that infuriate me to no end is smug, mocking certainty in people who are obviously wrong. You see it all over the net, in comment threads and on twitter, in blog posts and Sarah Palin's Facebook page; people being ridiculed for being right. "Haha! You really think Barack HUSSEIN Obama's a citizen? You libtard!" or "My grandpa's no monkey, you evolution-believing moonbat!" It's one thing to be ignorant and proud of it, it's another to jam everyone's face in your ignorance and mock them for not sharing it.

So you can see why I had a problem with George Will on ABC's This Week:

Steve Benen points out the problem:

As the columnist sees it, the president said the government could solve problems. And since it hasn't yet solved this problem, the disaster "just strikes at the narrative of competence."

I continue to be mystified by this. Blaming the president is unfair, Will conceded, because the president is doing all he can under impossible circumstances. But blaming the president is worthwhile, Will added in the next breath, because we now know government officials can't quickly shut down a gushing oil leak a mile below sea level.

If we were to take Will's point to the next step -- the federal government lacks the wherewithal to fix every problem, so some tasks should be left in the hands of private enterprise and the states -- I suppose the lesson is we should have BP and Louisiana state agencies solve the problem.

That ought to work, right?

The alternative to "big government" is big business -- the private sector. How can George Will possibly walk away from this thinking the lesson to be learned is that the private sector is more competent than government? At every step, BP has done the wrong thing. I don't know about you, but I'm still waiting for the Invisible Hand of the Market to jam its Divine Finger into that leak and solve this whole thing. It may be that at no point in my life has the argument that private industry corners the market on innovation and solutions been so thoroughly shown to be absolute horseshit.

I often find myself wondering how in the hell George Will ever got a reputation as a brainiac -- and never more than now.

How Stupid is Sarah Palin? This Stupid...

Sarah Palin was stumping for former running mate John McCain in Arizona yesterday, in attempt to shore up McCain's wingnut bona fides in his run against teabagger candidate J.D. Hayworth. As always, Sarah brought the dumb:

CBS News:

Palin said that McCain, who has been criticized by some Republicans as insufficiently conservative, fit with the Tea Party movement because he had been "leading the fight against reckless spending for decades." In a reference to McCain's age, she quipped that "some may claim that John was there at that first Tea Party."

Palin said McCain's "maverick" status hasn't won him friends from the "Washington DC elite machine."

Largely reading from prepared comments, Palin criticized President Obama for using a Teleprompter. She said she and McCain believe American soldiers are "are a force for good in this world, and that's nothing to apologize for."

Give her credit, at least she can read.

How FOX News Ruins Minds

OK, so former Saturday Night Live cast member Victoria Jackson is a nut -- and not in a good, zany comedian way. In her, we finally find someone who can out-dumb FOX's Steve Doocy.

Doocy had Jackson on to talk about the tea party movement and found himself talking to the stereotypical teabagger. "Unfortunately, Doocy appeared to be unaware of what Jackson has been up to since she left SNL in 1992," writes Media Matters' Brooke Obie, "you know, how she's said that Obama 'bears traits that resemble the anti-Christ' and shares 'so many similar qualities' with Adolf Hitler (i.e.: 'Obama's current attitude toward Israel is in question. Hitler did not support Jews.')"

But things get extra fun when Jackson insists Barack Obama is a communist.

JACKSON: I am the tea party people. We're beginners at this political activism and it's all new to us and it's kind of cute 'cause we're shy, we hold up our signs like this, you know, despite what they say about us, I have never done anything like this, but we have to because the president is a Communist...

DOOCY: Now, he is not a Communist. But you just pointed out that you hold up signs and stuff like that and people make fun of you. What do you think about how some on the other political side have tried to diminish or, you know, or marginalize the Tea Party people?

JACKSON: Well, I guess they're afraid of the power of our passion and our numbers and, you know, you might not say Communist, but I watch Glenn Beck and he's taught me well. Progressive is the new word for Communist, but it's the same goal as government control of everything and it's very obvious that Obama is trying to do that. And I don't want to brag, but I sort of called it before he was elected and when I was on O'Reilly and I said he was a Communist and I got a lot of hate mail, but I got some that said I was a prescient which means "a prophet."

OK, a few points: One, Victoria Jackson is just squirrely. Two, Glenn Beck is likewise squirrely. Three, Steve Doocy brings up a fact, only to have it trumped by Beck's fearmongering myth, delivered by the squirrely Victoria Jackson. Four, no wonder FOX News viewers have no freakin' idea what the hell is going on -- even when they tell the truth, there's some frootloop on to undercut it. And five, all this confusing mixed messaging makes FOX News viewers squirrely.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry, so I'll go with laughing -- at, not with. FOX News, providing crazy-assed bullshit since 1996.

Classless Conservative Sore-Loserism

Conservative cartoonist Darleen Click, brought to our attention by SEK at the blog Lawyers, Guns, and Money (click image for larger version):



From her blog post:

Oh I know I’m going to get called names on this. But I’m not going to play that game anymore. Like the sign at one of the TEA parties that said “it doesn’t matter what this sign says, you going to call it racist anyway.” When even the lawsuits now being brought by 30 plus state AG’s is considered racist, it is time to stop playing that game.

[...]


Heck, I want to shake them up. This is supposed to be a post-racial era? Then deal with the fact that the President of the United States is the head of a gang that just raped our American principles.

This is the way the right gets away with (and rationalizes) being total assholes; before anyone's even had a chance to chime in on her "cartoon" (in quotes because it's not even close to funny), she lays down the victim card. "No matter what I do, you're going to be mean to me, so I might was well be a complete ass."

There are 45,000 dead every year because of a lack of insurance. 46 million without insurance. Medical bills are the cause of half of all bankruptcies. This is a crisis.

And Click, as well as people like her, proclaim that to be what the founders intended. Never mind that Thomas Paine -- who teabaggers like to dress up as -- argued in favor of a national healthcare system. Apparently, the founders intended a supremely fucked up and unsustainable state of affairs.

I'm not going to call Click racist. I'll leave that to other people. I'm going to call her a fucking idiot. If getting affordable healthcare -- with the elimination of denials of coverage, recissions, and lifetime caps -- makes you feel like you've been raped, then I suggest you self-medicate with drugs and alcohol.

Not that it'd help, it'd just give you an excuse. If you're not drunk or high, I can only assume that you're fuckwitted. You lost a political battle. Unlike the battles liberals lost to Bush, no one's going to die and certainly not by the hundreds of thousands. I guess you could move to some conservative-Libertarian Utopia... Like, say, Somalia.

But, assuming you're going to stick around, try making some sort of an argument, instead of displaying how outraged you are by crudely drawing a Willy Horton-esque pile of idiotic bullshit. Whining isn't going to get you anywhere. Look at the evidence; it hasn't worked so far.

If Healthcare Reform Passes, Limbaugh Threatens to Move -- To a Country with Universal Healthcare

This is just too funny... Rush Limbaugh "threatens" to leave the country if healthcare reform passes:

Think Progress (emphasis theirs):

LIMBAUGH: My guess in even in Canada and even in the UK, doctors have opted out. And once they’ve opted, they can’t see anybody Medicare, Medicaid, or what will become the exchanges. They have to have a clientele of private patients that will pay them a retainer and it’ll be a very small practice. I don’t know if that’s been outlawed in the Senate bill. I don’t know. I’ll just tell you this, if this passes and it’s five years from now and all that stuff gets implemented — I am leaving the country. I’ll go to Costa Rica.

And here's where it gets fun.

InternationalLiving.com:

Costa Rica Offers Good-Quality Health Care

Costa Rica has universal health care, one of the best health systems in Latin America. As always with nationalized health care, expect red tape and long waits, but the quality of Costa Rica's health care is excellent. Private health care is also available, very affordable, and high quality. Many doctors speak English and have received training in Europe, Canada, or the U.S. There are three large, private hospitals that most expatriates use: CIMA hospital in Escazú, Clinica Biblica in San José, and Clinica Católica in San José-Guadalupe.

Nice choice, Rush.

O'Keefe's "Bad Judgment"

Justin Elliott at Talking Points Memo reports that alleged senatorial phone tapper James O'Keefe has been grounded by a judge.

"[T]he judge in the case has now ordered that he reside with his parents until the next hearing," we're told. "Magistrate Judge Louis Moore made the order Tuesday as part of the conditions of release for O'Keefe, 25. (Read them here)"

But here's the part that caught my eye:

It's not clear where O'Keefe, who hasn't said much publicly since getting out jail, is right now. But his father, the elder James O'Keefe, told the AP "I'm confident this was poor judgment ... but not much more." James and Deborah O'Keefe live in New Jersey, the state where Moore ordered the younger O'Keefe to remain while out on bond.

I'm hearing this way too often. Yes, he committed a crime -- but it's just bad judgment... So, to be clear, we shouldn't be too hard on O'Keefe because he's not criminally insane. That there's what you call yer sound legal reasoning.

Would the people making this argument say the same about the ACORN workers O'Keefe taped? Because that's what a congressional report on the organization basically found.

In fact, this could be said of any crime committed by anyone who's not a psycho- or sociopath. "Yeah, he stole a car and caused a pile up on the interstate, but that's just bad judgment. Kids these days and their crazy stunts, huh?"

How bad was O'Keefe's judgment? Pretty bad. According to his bio, "O'Keefe attended UCLA Law School for one year before returning to his investigative journalism career full time." So he knew he was committing a crime and he did it anyway.

That's not "bad judgment," that's criminal intent. And anyone defending him now ought to either admit that or cut every first offender from now on and forever the same slack. The "throw the book at 'em" crowd doesn't get to plead for leniency just because, this time, the criminal is one of their own.

Climate and Weather for Idiots

Over at the Seattle Post Intelligencer, staff writer Joel Connelly writes that global warming deniers don't pop their heads out of their little holes to take a look at the world around them. "Global warming skeptics tend to be a sarcastic, sedentary lot," he writes. "They send out screeds, question the work of scientists, but rarely if ever venture out to look at visual evidence around them." In short, they're sure they're right, they can't be bothered with facts outside their little hate club, and they're real pricks about the whole thing. A bunch of smug -- yet ignorant -- assholes. to be blunt (and when am I anything other than blunt?)

Yet, this isn't entirely true. They do pop their head out occassionally and take a gander around -- but only when it serves their argument. A new screed has been issued from the hole in the ground and this one is making the rounds of the wingnutosphere. Seems that, despite what scientists are saying, weather and climate are the same thing and, if there's an especially cold day, it proves conclusively that there's no such thing as global warming.

Who's the genius who came up with this? "Professional statistician" William M. Briggs. Once again, we have someone who's not a climate scientist bloviating about the topic of climate science. Briggs is, in fact, a corporate whore for the Heartland Institute -- one of the many PR firms masquerading as a think tank. Prior to working on climate change denial, Heartland was involved in the sound and solid science of proving that smoking is harmless. Why anyone listens to these frauds is beyond me.

Anyway, let me take a whack at this whole weather v. climate argument and demonstrate the absurdity of what these morons call "logic." All but the completely loony agree that, in 2008, Barack Obama won the presidential election. He won with an overwhelming number of total votes -- not in dispute. And it's the word "total" that we need to concentrate on here. What deniers are doing when they look at one area and see a drop in temperature is like looking at Alabama's vote total and saying that it's rock-solid proof that Obama didn't win at all.

"Haha, you libtard!" some wingnut troll might say. "McCain took 61% in Alabama, while Obama only got 39%! And you're saying Obama won the election? Get a brain, moran!"

Obviously, the vote count in Alabama doesn't prove that Obama lost the election, any more than a cold week in America proves that global temperatures aren't on the increase. The argument is idiotic on its face.

The fact of the matter is that the years 2000-2009 were the the hottest decade in the recorded history of mankind. In fact, the 20 warmest years on record have all been between 1983 and today. Pointing to a cold snap in one area of the world as proof that global warming isn't happening is just laughable in its absurdity. It's the total we need to concentrate on, not the one example.

Despite Alabama, Obama won. Despite that day you had to get your battery jumped, you just lived through the warmest decade in history. Global warming is happening and anyone who argues otherwise is just throwing logic out the window.

A Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad Decision

The Supreme Court, along its typical sane-to-wingnut vote count, voted 5-4 to strike down limits on corporate and union campaign contributions. As a result, conservatives get to shut the fuck up about "judicial activism" now. This overturns laws going back over a century.

For their part, the White House wasn't happy.

With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans. This ruling gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington--while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates. That's why I am instructing my Administration to get to work immediately with Congress on this issue. We are going to talk with bipartisan Congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision. The public interest requires nothing less.

Meanwhile, the Democratic leadership is doing just that. The ruling wasn't a surprise and they should've had a bill loaded and ready to fire, but these are Democrats, so getting caught with their pants around their ankles shouldn't come as much of a shock.

How bad is this decision? Pretty damned bad. At issue was a "documentary" that was actually a long political ad against then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Talk Radio News Service:

Justice Stevens wrote a lengthy dissent, harshly attacking the bases of the Court’s opinion. He pointed out that the law was not an outright ban, as Citizens United could have used PAC funding, aired the ad earlier, or refused contributions from for-profit corporations. He also noted that the Supreme Court has previously upheld speech restrictions on other groups based on their identities, such as students, prisoners, and members of the armed forces. The majority’s logic, Stevens wrote, “would have accorded the propaganda broadcasts to our troops by ‘Tokyo Rose’ during World War II the same protection as speech by Allied commanders.”

Justice Stevens also criticized the majority for producing a broader decision than was necessary. Citizens United had only asked for a special waiver for its documentary, but the majority chose to take the opportunity to strike down the entire law.

Hope you enjoyed citizen democracy. Unless this gets dealt with, individuals just got bought out of the system. 234 years was a pretty good run, though.

Jon Stewart Rips the Dems a New One

At about 6:30 here, Jon Stewart digs into my brain and manages to express everything I've been thinking.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Mass Backwards
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

"See, it's not that the Democrats are playing checkers and the Republicans are playing chess. It's that the Republicans are playing chess and the Democrats are in the nurse's office because, once again, they've glued their balls to their thighs."