Surviving the Wingnut Family ... again

Thanksgiving is a time for sharing and conviviality, for family, food, and football. And for me, at least every other year, it's a time for trying to survive being the only liberal in a family full of arch-conservatives -- and not the basically harmless, small-government, Goldwater kind but the rabid, Beck-and-Palin-adoring neo-con kind.

If you've been reading this crappy blog for a while, you've seen me mention my own wingnut family on several occasions -- my mother, my aunt and uncle, even my estranged father. Well, once again I made it through another week with the Right Wing Gang, but it wasn't the smoothest sailing the whole time. Before heading north, I vowed to stay away from political discussions altogether ... and I almost did it. Almost.

You see, my ultra-wingnut aunt and uncle were in attendance this year, having moved to spend their winters near my widowed mother, and while I know Mom is a lifelong Republican, I hadn't realized the influence her sister and brother-in-law had been having on her. For starters, I had forgotten that Mom has become a loyal Fox News viewer. Several times I noted that she was watching "the propaganda channel," and each time, Mom retorted that "Fox [News] is the only one that actually does news." This probably comes as a surprise to CNN and, despite their all-criminal holiday weekend, even MSNBC. But when I noted that, she scoffed and said CNN was too "slanted." I think she actually meant slanted left, which is laughable, but I digress....

I also had forgotten that Mom had turned into somewhat of a climate change denier, which still troubles me because I always considered her intelligent. Even though her college degree was in speech, and she earned it in 1954 when, admittedly, science was a tad less advanced, Mom ought to be aware of the scientific basis for climate change, shouldn't she? Naturally, she called it "global warming," which is a classic right-wing misnomer, as it causes them to think it should be sweltering hot year-round or something (as though a blizzard in Buffalo in January is "proof" that climate change is hokum). I patiently explained that when you increase the temperature of any system, whether it's a manufacturing plant or a planet, you don't necessarily see it get hotter but rather more volatile, which Earth's climate undoubtedly is doing. But her Fox News-addled mind didn't grasp that, or didn't want to ....

The coup de grâce, however, was my avowedly wingnut uncle, who on the way to a holiday light display at a local botanical gardens was regaling us in the minivan with the story of how Army Maj. Nidal Hasan, the so-called "Fort Hood shooter," was "a homeland security adviser to the Obama administration." Recognizing a classic wingnut fantasy/talking point when I hear one, I innocently (well, kind of innocently) asked my uncle, "So where did you learn about that?" His response was almost too predictable: "I got an email about it."

So naturally, thanks to the magic of an Internet-enabled Blackberry, I immediately Googled it up and the first hit took me to Snopes.com, the definitive myth-debunking website, which not only had the text of the email my uncle received but all the evidence debunking it. Indeed, plenty of websites, like this one, have the truth -- which, of course, is that Maj. Hasan had nothing to do with the White House or the Department of Homeland Security whatsoever (big surprise there) -- and anyone with half a brain can investigate as quickly as I did and discover that the email in question is bullshit; Maj. Hasan attended a private think tank's task force meeting that was open to the public.

Sadly, though, apparently my own uncle, like so many wingnuts, lacks that half-brain. Odd, given his graduate degrees and having been an Air Force officer and pilot and all .... oh well. The topper, though, was my uncle's response after I read him the salient part of the Snopes post and concluded, "He attended a think tank meeting as a member of the audience!" Uncle sarcastically shot back, "Oh, I guess that's okay?"

Well, yeah, it is, actually.

If, like me, you suffer through a wingnut family, I know exactly how you feel. (You can vent about it in Comments....)

Crist: backpedalling from Obama as fast as he can

I find it difficult, if not impossible, to believe that President Obama was making a two-day trip to Florida and the state's governor didn't know about it. But that's Charlie Crist's story and he's sticking to it:

Gov. Charlie Crist is a busy man, trying to do his job as Florida's chief executive and run for a U.S. Senate seat at the same time.

But it surprised Tallahassee reporters when the governor said he didn't know President Barack Obama was in the state Monday to honor sailors and Marines at the Jacksonville Naval Air Station, less than 200 miles from the Capitol.

"Where was he?" Crist asked Tuesday. "First I've known of it."

While the president was saluting the nation's fighting men, Crist was visiting the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel and Casino in Hollywood for a 40th anniversary celebration with tribal leaders.

[...]

Crist got a second chance to talk about his decision to ignore Obama's visit, but instead said again he wasn't aware of the Jacksonville stop.

"Explain that comment? Is it unclear?" Crist responded after being asked a couple of hours later following a Cabinet meeting. "I didn't know that he was in the state."

Asked a third time, Crist said he was aware that Obama was coming, but didn't know the itinerary.

White House spokeswoman Gannet Tseggai said Tuesday that Crist's office was notified of the president's Florida visit.

Obama was in Arcadia on Tuesday to announce $3.4 billion in spending for the nation's power transmission system to foster new technologies and compared it to the development of the national highway system a half century ago.

Crist said he didn't join Obama because of Tuesday's Cabinet meeting, although he rescheduled an earlier Cabinet meeting to travel 400 miles to join Obama at the February rally in Fort Myers.

Bullshit. Gov. Crist certainly knew the president was visiting the state -- in fact, he contradicted himself when he answered the third question above. And people wonder why Crist is losing ground to Marco Rubio.

The governor is trying desperately to extricate himself from the mess he created for himself with the wingnuts who control the GOP in Florida when he accepted federal stimulus money and appeared with the president in February. But when he pulls stunts like this, it just makes him look petty and equivocal.

Heckuva job, Charlie. You just keep digging, now, y'hear?

Stuff you may have missed

I keep saving little bits of tid to use on the blog and then I manage to let it go because more timely things come up. Please allow me to clear my saved browsers and hit you with some knowledge about, well, how deranged the Right is in this country and this state.

First, everyone should read this op-ed by Neal Gabler, "Politics as Religion in America," from the October 2 Los Angeles Times. In it, Gabler neatly deconstructs why the wingnuts continue to push their destructive agenda even in the face of all factual evidence and sense to the contrary: they don't see it as politics anymore, but as a religion -- they believe the things Rush and Glenn and Sean and related gasbags say as a matter of blind faith:

When politics becomes religion, however, policy too becomes a matter of life and death, as we have all seen.

That is one reason our founding fathers opted for a separation of church and state. They recognized that religion and politics could coexist only when they occupied different domains. Most denominations, which preach and practice tolerance, have rendered unto Caesar what is Caesar's. Religious groups may have found a community of interest with a political party to further their aims; they have not, by and large, sought to convert the political system into a religious one. Until now.

The tea-baggers who hate President Obama with a fervor that is beyond politics; the fear-mongers who warn that Obama is another Hitler or Stalin; the wannabe storm troopers who brandish their guns and warn darkly of the president's demise; the cable and talk-radio blowhards who make a living out of demonizing Obama and tarring liberals as America-haters -- these people are not just exercising their rights within the political system. They honestly believe that the political system -- a system that elected Obama -- is broken and only can be fixed by substituting their certainty for the uncertainties of American politics.

As we are sadly discovering, this minority cannot be headed off, which is most likely why conservatism transmogrified from politics to a religion in the first place. Conservatives who sincerely believed that theirs is the only true and right path have come to realize that political tolerance is no match for religious vehemence.

So, no, it's not you. They really don't care that facts have a liberal bias. They'd rather believe their High Priests of Prevarication.

Meanwhile, here in America's Wang™, our old friend Jeb! Bush recently threw a little hissy fit because those mean American people keep picking on his big brother and they should just stop because he's been out of office for a whole 8½ months (or, as Fox News douchebag host Brian Kilmeade distorted said, "ten months" (emphasis added)):

KILMEADE: It’s been 10 months. Should Leader Hoyer be looking backwards, and is he accurate?

BUSH: I was on the plane coming up to Washington yesterday, and I heard someone complaining that their child’s acne was because of George Bush. Of course, last week the Olympics didn’t come to Chicago — that was my brother’s fault. And at some point, people are going to have to put on their big-boy pants and assume responsibility for the great challenges and opportunities our country has. I don’t know how much longer leaders — responsible leaders in Congress — can continue to say these things.

Well, Jeb!, excuuuuuuuse us if it takes longer than 8½ months to undo the eight disastrous years your brother had to fuck things up. I mean, think of it like the eight years you had to drive Florida into the ground, except we still have to wait another year-plus before our cleanup crew (led by Alex Sink) can get to work. It takes a while, y'know?

No, Jeb!, I guess you wouldn't know. Seriously, it's unconscionable to hear the same people whine "why hasn't Obama fixed the economy yet?" (or whatever the issue may be) and in the next breath speculate whether the Dow Jones hitting 10,000 is indicative of a "Bush recovery." You can't have it both ways, folks.

But it sure is hard to dissuade the religious zealots of the Church of Batshit Crazy.

Playing the race card in Georgia

But he says he's not a racist! Look at his NAACP membership card from 2005, not the mannequin in the KKK costume!

I just have to say that it couldn't have been easy for that reporter to walk into that restaurant, let alone do the interview. Kudos to her, and I hope she's OK.

Finally, because they're just the words I choose to use: Fuck you, Patrick Lanzo.

UPDATE (8:40 am 10/15/09): YouTube took the original video down due to TOS violations. Don't know what happened. I've replaced it this morning, but if there's no video embedded above, here's a direct link to the video on CBSAtlanta.com so you can see this moron in all his glory.

Today's Daily Schadenfreude: Orly Taitz

Sometimes, moronic idiots get what's coming to them.

This may never have been true more than it is today, as Leader of the Birthers Orly Taitz ("J.D.," DDS) has gotten her richly deserved smackdown (PDF) in federal court.

When a lawyer files complaints and motions without a reasonable basis for believing that they are supported by existing law or a modification or extension of existing law, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer uses the courts as a platform for a political agenda disconnected from any legitimate legal cause of action, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer personally attacks opposing parties and disrespects the integrity of the judiciary, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer recklessly accuses a judge of violating the Judicial Code of Conduct with no supporting evidence beyond her dissatisfaction with the judge’s rulings, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law, that lawyer ceases to advance her cause or the ends of justice.

It is irrefutable that a lawyer owes her client zealous advocacy, but her zeal must be constrained within the bounds placed upon her as an officer of the Court and under the Court’s rules. See e.g., Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312, 323 (1981) (though a lawyer “has a duty to advance all colorable claims and defenses . . . [i]t is the obligation of any lawyer . . . not to clog the courts with frivolous motions or appeals”). Specifically, Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure expressly sets forth the outer boundaries of acceptable attorney conduct. That rule prohibits a lawyer from asserting claims or legal positions that are not well-founded under existing law or through the modification, extension, or expansion of existing law. Rule 11 also prohibits an attorney from using the courts for a purpose unrelated to the resolution of a legitimate legal cause of action. Cf., e.g., Donaldson v. Clark, 819 F.2d 1551, 1558-59 (11th Cir. 1987) (en banc) (noting that members of the bar have a “special administrative responsibility in the judicial process” and that monetary sanctions may be imposed for “an unjustified failure to carry out” this special responsibility (internal quotation marks omitted)).

Regrettably, the conduct of counsel Orly Taitz has crossed these lines, and Ms. Taitz must be sanctioned for her misconduct. After a full review of the sanctionable conduct, counsel’s conduct leading up to that conduct, and counsel’s response to the Court’s show cause order, the Court finds that a monetary penalty of $20,000.00 shall be imposed upon counsel Orly Taitz as punishment for her misconduct, as a deterrent to prevent future misconduct, and to protect the integrity of the Court. Payment shall be made to the United States, through the Middle District of Georgia Clerk’s Office, within thirty days of today’s Order. If counsel fails to pay the sanction due, the U.S. Attorney will be authorized to commence collection proceedings.

Oh, SNAP!

A little background: Ms. Taitz, who earned her law degree from an unaccredited correspondence school (only California allows graduates of such "institutions" to take the Bar exam), repeatedly brought motions in federal court to "prove" that President Obama is not a "natural-born citizen" of the United States and thus is ineligible to serve as president ... even though he already produced his birth certificate in an effort to appease whackjobs like Taitz. She was threatened with sanctions last month by the federal district court for the Middle District of Georgia, but a week ago she went ahead and stuck her foot in her mouth again by claiming, through a "client," that the judge was improperly influenced by the White House.

And now she's out 20 large. Couldn't happen to a nicer more batshit crazy person.

But, hey, Orly, at least your twenty grand bought you a coveted award, right? Because today's Blast Off! Daily Schadenfreude is for you!

UPDATE (5:42 pm 10/13/09): Apparently our lawyer-dentist friend has no intention of paying the fine. And she's already talking about appeals.

The problem for her is that discipline of this nature is wholly within the discretion of the district court. And higher courts, be they the federal circuit courts or SCOTUS, generally will not overturn or invalidate such an action by a lower court unless there has been a clear "abuse of discretion." I'd bet my bottom dollar they don't find any abuse of discretion here.

Hope you're ready to fill some cavities, Orly, because I don't think you'll be practicing law a whole lot longer .....

George Will needs a mirror

Conservative columnist and baseball fan George Will is getting some well-deserved heat from the liberal blogosphere for yet another hack job of a column, wherein he takes President Obama and the First Lady to task for -- get this -- using first-person singular pronouns too much in their presentations to the International Olympic Committee on behalf of Chicago's 2016 Summer Olympics bid. Calling it an "ego trip" for the Obamas, Will goes so far as to count the number of times they use "I," "me," "my," and "myself" in the speeches:

In the 41 sentences of her remarks, Michelle Obama used some form of the personal pronouns "I" or "me" 44 times. Her husband was, comparatively, a shrinking violet, using those pronouns only 26 times in 48 sentences. Still, 70 times in 89 sentences conveyed the message that somehow their fascinating selves were what made, or should have made, Chicago's case compelling.

Of course, there's no logical or causal connection shown between the use of first-person pronouns and what Will diagnoses as narcissism, but then, logic has never been a strong point of conservatives or Republicans.

Well, University of Pennsylvania professor Mark Liberman decided to do a little fact-checking, and as it turns out, in comparison to Drunky McStagger and even Bill Clinton, the Obamas actually weren't very self-absorbed at all.

The last time George F. Will trotted out his opinion that president Obama is "inordinately fond of the first-person pronoun" [yes, he's done this before -- Ed.], I did some counts ("Fact-checking George F. Will", 6/7/2009). As I explained:

…since I'm one of those narrow-minded fundamentalists who believe that statements can be true or false, and that we should care about the difference, I decided to check. …

I took the transcript of Obama's first press conference (from 2/9/2009), and found that he used 'I' 163 times in 7,775 total words, for a rate of 2.10%. He also used 'me' 8 times and 'my' 35 times, for a total first-person singular pronoun count of 206 in 7,775 words, or a rate of 2.65%.

For comparison, I took George W. Bush's first two solo press conferences as president (from 2/22/2001 and 3/29/2001), and found that W used 'I' 239 times in 6,681 total words, for a rate of 3.58% — a rate 72% higher than Obama's rate. President Bush also used 'me' 26 times, 'my' 31 times, and 'myself' 4 times, for a total first-person singular pronoun count of 300 in 6,681 words, or a rate of 4.49% (59% higher than Obama).

For a third data point, I took William J. Clinton's first two solo press conferences as president (from 1/29/1993 and 3/23/1993), and found that he used 'I' 218 times, 'me' 34 times, 'my' 22 times, and 'myself' once, in 6,935 total words. That's a total of 275 first-person singular pronouns, and a rate of 3.14% for 'I' (51% higher than Obama), and 3.87% for first-person singular pronouns overall (50% higher than Obama).

As a result of this previous experience, I had a first-person-counting script all ready to go, and it took only a few seconds to check the new transcripts. This time around, Barack Obama's Olympic remarks included 26 first-person-singular words out of 1130, for a rate of 2.3%. This is slightly below his typical rate for presidential press conferences, and a bit more than half the rate of the George W. Bush pressers that I measured earlier (2.3/4.49 = 51%, to be precise).

Naturally, I'm shocked -- shocked!! -- to discover that Will's charge of "narcissism" doesn't stand up to factual analysis. But I thought I'd take it a step further: given Will's well-known affection for baseball (which, at the risk of agreeing with anything having to do with George Will, I share), has he ever been, um, narcissistic himself?

I chose Will's baseball book Bunts: Curt Flood, Camden Yards, Pete Rose and Other
Reflections on Baseball (New York: Scribner, 1998), mostly since I own the book (it was a gift) and it was the first one that came to mind. Also, because my copy of the book is in storage, it was fortuitous that the book has been excerpted, or previewed, on Google Books. So I went to the very first essay therein (for no other reason than it was first), deliciously titled "The Cubs and Conservatism," and I started counting. Two of the essay's pages aren't excerpted online, but there's plenty to make a representative sample.

And what were the results?

On pages 21, 22, and 25, which constitute the portion available on Google, there are 853 words. Of those, Will uses "I," "me," "my," or "myself" 29 times -- 3.4% of the total words. What was President Obama's percentage in Copenhagen again, George? Oh, yeah ... 2.3%.

"But," you point out correctly, "Will was comparing sentences, not total words." Okay, skippy, let's see ... Will tells us the president used first-person-singular 26 times in 48 sentences. That's a ratio of .5417. Meanwhile, in the excerpt of his Cubs/conservatism essay that is available online, Will used first-person-singular 29 times in 49 sentences: a .5918 ratio. And of Will's 49 sentences, six were of four words or fewer -- hardly sentences at all.

The raw numbers aren't all that relevant. I mean, who cares that George Will referred to himself in 59% of sentences from some obscure essay written in 1974 when President Obama pointed selfward in 54% of sentences last week? The point is this: before George Will accuses others of narcissism, he ought to protect his own glass house.

Is Harry Reid becoming a vertebrate?

While watching Democrats from the state House to the White House roll over and play dead in the face of Republican opposition, even when the Dems are a supermajority (I'm looking at you, Congress), I've often wondered whether the folks on the Left (such as it is today ... kind of center-left, but I digress ....) would ever grow a backbone ... especially U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).

Could it be happening now?

First, I read over the weekend that Sen. Reid, a notorious weak link in Democratic leadership (maybe the fact that he's Mormon and anti-choice might have been a clue, Dems?!), came out* in support of next weekend's National Equality March in Washington and elsewhere.

click image for larger version

In all seriousness, it's nice to see Sen. Reid take a prominent stand on something so important. Particularly as rumors swirl about President Obama taking another look at Don't Ask, Don't Tell -- remarkably, also at the behest (in part) of Sen. Reid -- it's time to stop treating the GLBT community as second-class citizens and end what really amounts to the last legally permissible discrimination in America today.

Meanwhile, in the ongoing debate over health care reform, where Sen. Reid also is playing a critical role, there are reports that the president is working hard behind the scenes to preserve a public option ... without which health care reform really is no reform at all.

The Los Angeles Times reports that President Obama is quietly trying to shore up support for some form of a public option. "In the last week, however, senior administration officials have been holding private meetings almost daily at the Capitol with senior Democratic staff to discuss ways to include a version of the public plan in the healthcare bill that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) plans to bring to the Senate floor this month, according to senior Democratic congressional aides. Among those regularly in the meetings are Obama's top healthcare advisor, Nancy-Ann DeParle; aides to Reid; and staff from the Senate Finance and Health committees, both of which developed healthcare bills."

Previously, the Obama administration has relied on a bipartisan group of governors to support his various legislative initiatives; but on health care (in particular Medicaid), he could find bipartisan opposition as state governments worry about how to pay for an expansion of Medicaid.

[...]

[Sen. Max] Baucus [(D-Mont.)] and Reid are “approaching a breaking point” over inclusion of the public option in a final Senate proposal. While Reid “deferred the issue” to Baucus over the summer, the leader indicated last week “that he is prepared to join Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and John Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), who both pushed a public option amendment that failed in a committee vote last Tuesday.”

Reid and Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), also a strong supporter of the public option, indicated that in order to attract centrist Democrats wary of the public option, that they would be open to “[wrapping] the controversial elements of reform in a politically attractive message to the centrists’ conservative-leaning constituents. That could include the addition of provisions aimed directly at problems or issues in each Senator’s state, such as tweaks to state funding formulas for federal programs, aides said.”

The public option ought to be non-negotiable, Sen. Baucus' insurance-company-funded opposition notwithstanding. In short, you only need 51 votes, so Baucus and colleagues Sens. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) and Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) basically can take their votes and shove 'em.

Regardless of what happens from here in these vital issues, it's nice to see Harry Reid finally doing what his office requires him to do: lead the Senate Democrats. Let's hope it continues.

---

* Pun most definitely intended.

More like this, please

With all the crazed rhetoric and selfishness and hate from the right-wing, especially here in America's Wang™ with the radical Christianists and warmongers and racists and just plain stupid people we must endure on a daily basis, it's easy to forget that there once was a group of people we might describe as sensible Republicans. Oh, they still exist -- I even know one or two of them myself, personally -- but they are pretty scarce, browbeaten into submission or silence by the whackjobs in charge of the GOP in this state and the country.

And sometimes, we have to go clear across the country to find them ... all the way to our old friend Huggy Bear's own back yard:

A hundred and sixty-seven Republicans in the U.S. House recently voted that they think it's fine that some Democrat do to the next Republican president what Joe Wilson just did to President Obama?

This is not "just politics."

It is becoming more and more difficult for reasonable Republicans to hold our heads high.

U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson's outburst during the president's speech on health-care reform was an illustration of what is increasingly and correctly seen as the rabid reflex of the radical right.

It was "rabid" because most of us saw no reason, merely "fangs bared" visceral hatred in an unprovoked personal attack. It was reflex because it was preceded by no thought. It was radical because it was miles and miles outside decorum and responsible "discussion."

It was made worse by Wilson's effort to turn the episode into a fund-raising opportunity. It was made a total travesty by the Republicans who voted against a very modest "censure" resolution.

These egregious indignities come on top of the irresponsibility of shouting down anyone who might be offering a differing viewpoint during health-care town halls; the national Republican Party's suggestion that if health-care reform passes, Democrats might try to deprive Republicans of health care; and the astounding opposition to the president intending to tell children to stay in school and study hard.

It has become painfully clear why the Republican Party is not really a relevant force in terms of potential to capture a majority of public elections anytime soon. When your response is little more than rabid reflex, people simply conclude you aren't really interested in being taken seriously and they simply stop listening to you. That's what's happening to the Republicans now. Oh yes, the "base" is energized by this vitriol, but the important point is that the base continues to shrink. Real bright, guys.

It's about time that someone on the GOP side of the aisle said "Enough already!" This missive -- and there's more at the link -- was written by an attorney in Arizona and published in the Arizona Daily Star. More than likely, the author will be shouted down by precisely those whom he was trying to reach with his column. Indeed, it's already happened, dozens of times, in the column's online comments, which rely on the same falsehoods -- the president really did lie when Joe Wilson made his now infamous outburst ... ACORN is being allowed to control American government ... Obama is a socialist, a Marxist, a liberal -- that the column accurately challenges.

Oh, well. It was a nice try, anyway. Back to the pitchforks and torches for the wingnuts, I guess ...

(h/t to FOBO* -- and fellow Sinfonian -- scourtright)

---

* Friend of Blast Off!

Blast Off! Radio today at 4:00 pm EDT: Why do wingnuts still control American discourse?

Considering that the United States is pretty clearly split more or less evenly on ideological grounds, while polls repeatedly show that Americans -- even many right-of-center ones -- favor health care reform, same-sex marriage, and other so-called "liberal" ideas, it's somewhat puzzling to me that the Radical Right still controls so much of what we see and hear on a daily basis. In the past -- the ever-more-distant past -- the minority would be able to state their positions, but more often than not a pat on the head and a "that's nice, dear" would be about the only response needed. In 2009, though, the minority controls nearly every major media outlet and their often-insane rantings (against ACORN, gay rights, and the Scary Black Man in the White House, among others) not only are given credibility, but indeed they get their way far more often than they should (why the President is even giving them the time of day on ACORN is beyond me -- so much for socialism).

So, today on Blast Off! Radio, we'll take another look at the right-wing noise machine, locally and nationally, and talk about how they have turned what once might have been reasonable debate into the hate-and-fear-mongering prevalent today. In a saner time, there wouldn't be any dispute about the constitutionality of a court order banning organized prayer in public schools -- today, it's not only disputed, but the Christianist side is winning. In a saner time, people wouldn't shout in the faces of members of Congress on the issue of providing health care to the less fortunate among us -- today, it's encouraged. In a saner time, nutjob fringe radicals like Glenn Beck would be writing for some underground fascist rag -- today, he's the face of a major cable news network and the cover story in Time magazine. In a saner time, wingnut douchebags (self-loathing and otherwise) who ought to be in jail end up on reality TV game shows or with their own radio talk shows.

I really want to hear your thoughts on this today. Tell me your thoughts and whether or not you think sanity ever can be restored to political discourse in America.

It's very easy to be a part of the show. Here are the details:

TIME: 4:00 pm Eastern TODAY

Click here to listen

Call in number: (646) 716-7543

E-mail: blastoffradio-at-gmail-dot-com

So, please get your thoughts together, on this or anything else that's on your mind, and I'll catch you this afternoon on Blast Off! Radio.

"Post-Racial" America? Yeah, right

I marvel at the people who say things like, "I'm not racist, but ..." and then they go on to say something racist. Never have these human compost heaps been more bold or more loathsome than they've been this past year, though, since the election of America's first African-American president. The racists apparently are acting out in large part because they're just so overwhelmed and aghast at the idea of a Scary Black Man in the White House.

Some good news for those of us fighting against the racist onslaught came through this week as Veterans' Day parade organizers in Homestead, Fla., finally came to their senses and voted not to permit the hate group Sons of Confederate Veterans to display the Confederate flag at this year's parade. (Blast Off! covered this story a couple of weeks ago and drew some, um, colorful comments.) However, on the very same day as the Homestead decision, the outrageous racist beating of a Georgia woman before the eyes of her 7-year-old daughter reminded us that we have far to go.

It certainly seems that the racist roaches aren't scattering when you turn on the lights quite like they used to. But it doesn't always have to be a public display of a symbol of hate or a highly-publicized attack ... no, sometimes the racism is more subtle.

Blogger and doctoral student Roxane Gay reveals some of the more endemic racism she encounters in her humorous yet poignant piece FUNNY WOMEN #2: A Play About Post-Racial America in Seven Acts. The subtitle explains: "Seven Things White People Have Really Said to Me Since November 4, 2008." It's the kind of thing you read and think, "I can't believe people actually said that." Yet they did ... and they do.

A sample:

ACT FOUR

Scene: While watching the inauguration live in the student union, a white colleague I’m sitting with turns to me.

COLLEAGUE: Do you know Elizabeth Alexander?

ME: Why do you ask?

COLLEAGUE: You’re both black writers.

ME: That’s true. We do all know each other.

[...]

ACT SIX

Scene: January 2009, a few days after the inauguration. A grimy auto repair shop. The mechanic and I are engaged in idle, polite chatter while he processes my credit card transaction.

MECHANIC: No offense, but there was just no way I could vote for a colored man even though I hated the other guy. I just can’t see respecting a colored man like that, taking orders from him or nothing like that. Again, no offense.

ME: What year is this?

Wow. I don't know whether the people Ms. Gay encountered and quoted are openly, unapologetically racist -- other than, obviously, the mechanic in "Act Six" -- but this is the kind of subtle, routine racism that happens thousands of times every single day in America. I don't know why people -- that is, white people -- aren't more sensitive to this stuff, except that we don't see it directed at us on a regular basis or, more to the point, I guess many of us just don't care.

But we should. And it shouldn't take a heinous, headline-making assault to make that happen.

A representative sample of the right-wing response to President Obama's speech today

Yeah, I'd say that pretty much sums up the deranged wingnuttery leading up to today's speech. But now that it's over, I only have one question: Is our children socialist?

(Video by Mark, who was a high school classmate of mine. And, yes, he is being satirical.)

Blast Off! Radio today at 4:00 pm EDT: Taking deranged wingnuttery to the next level

In a litany of outrage over the last decade or so, this one may take the prize as the most outlandish, most nonsensical, most hateful campaign of idiocy I've ever seen from the radical right-wing loons. I'm talking, of course, about the rhetorical detritus that is these wingnut protests against President Obama's speech to schoolchildren tomorrow.

Yes, the Right has managed to embarrass the country yet again, this time by a systematic propaganda effort to label a president's speech as "indoctrination" and "socialist" -- they've even demanded that schools seek parental permission to allow children to listen to the president of the United States! And, this being the Wingnut States of America, many schools and districts are caving to the Glenn Beck-led crusade against patriotism and decency, either refusing to show the speech at all or allowing parents to insist that their kids be given an "alternate activity" during the address. Talk about polarizing a student body ....

I never would have believed it if I hadn't seen it myself. And yet, this is the level to which the right-wing in this country has sunk: their abject fear and hatred of the Scary Black Man in the White House somehow makes it acceptable to hinder the entire public education system with their ludicrous claims.

Well, I have plenty to say about this lunacy, and I'll deliver the ranty goods in a truly epic way (if I do say so myself) this afternoon on Blast Off! Radio. And you're cordially invited to partake. Here are the details:

TIME: 4:00 pm Eastern TODAY

Click here to listen

Call in number: (646) 716-7543

E-mail: blastoffradio-at-gmail-dot-com

I want to hear what you have to say about all of this, too -- so please make plans to call in, chat, or otherwise participate. Hell, if you're on the other side of the ideological aisle from me, please feel free to tell me how far off I am on this, and how President Obama is only using this as a way to, à la Hitler, push his destructive agenda on the impressionable minds of our youth. Or whatever.

Oh, we may have time to cover some other topics, but I don't know. I'm feeling pretty ranty. Stay tuned, and buckle up ... this could be a bumpy ride.

(cross-posted at FPC Blog)

Too stupid to breathe: PolitiFact's mailbag correspondents

The St. Petersburg Times' Pulitzer Prize-winning political fact-checker website, PolitiFact, recently took on the right-wing idiots protesting President Obama's upcoming speech to students, and they correctly gave the GOP leadership, notably chief douchebag Jim Greer of Florida, the "Pants On Fire" designation for their lies that the president will "indoctrinate [students with] socialist ideology."

Yesterday, PolitiFact explained that their "mailbag" filled up with the angry responses of the rabid, deranged wingnuts:

Our item on a Republican complaint about President Obama’s upcoming speech to schoolchildren triggered some strong reactions:

"You people (the press) wouldn’t know the truth if it jumped up and bit you in the butt. We have avowed communists and racists in the White House. We have a regime that wants kids to pledge allegiance to Obama. We have a president that wants to destroy the business core of the country so he can redistribute the wealth.

"We have the worst unemployment in decades – and getting worse. We have a guy in the White House who want those that work to pay for those that don’t want to work and you want us to believe that he just wants to tell the kids to stay in school? What for, if they just quit school and do nothing – he’ll make sure they get a house, car, insurance and food. You folks (press) have lost your direction . . .

"Stand up, defend the country, defend the constitution, and defend the values that made this country the greatest country in the history of man. Then people will come back to you – I truly believe this."

I truly believe that whoever wrote this has no idea what the Constitution actually says. I also truly believe that this person gets his or her information pretty much solely from Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. I'd love to ask this brain-dead moron exactly who the "avowed communists and racists in the White House" are ... but, you know, backing up their assertions with actual facts is beyond the limited mental capacity of these degenerates.

The remainder of the unhinged, baseless diatribe basically speaks for itself. All in all, though, it proves beyond any doubt that this person would have been better served by not sending the email at all ... because by doing so, the correspondent demonstrates quite clearly that he/she is too stupid to breathe.

Just when you thought the right-wing couldn't sink any deeper....

....they find a way to do exactly that.

I'm truly outraged by the demented, uninformed, baseless, bigoted, hate-filled ravings of the lunatics on the Right who are opposing President Obama's speech to schoolchildren next week. I just wanted to share a sample of what I've seen with you, so you can see firsthand the slimy detritus that rests where their hearts should be.

First, meet Oklahoma state senator Steve Russell, who fears a "cult of personality," adding, "This is something you’d expect to see in North Korea or in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq." I want you to consider what Russell is saying here very, very carefully: he's saying that a speech to schoolchildren by the president of the United States -- something Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush did with little if any controversy -- is tantamount to the actions of vicious, totalitarian regimes. The minds of all sentient people must boggle at the cognitive dissonance displayed by the pustulent mind of Steve Russell.

Next, let me share a few comments sent my way by an anonymous source ... okay, a friend of mine (from outside of Florida, so don't go thinking you know who it is!) who copied down this idiocy from her Facebook news feed. The names have been omitted to protect the unfathomably stupid and the emphases are mine ... but the spelling and grammar have been left just as they were written originally, to make it painfully obvious what kind of people we're dealing with here:

POLL: Should President Obama be allowed to do a nationwide address to school children without parental consent?
- Yes
- No

[Person A]
Hell - Hell- no!!! The time for the days for public education & schools is over. The country could save a LOT of money ! Talk about the expense of Health Care! Most school work is done at home anyway "homework". Computers are issued at school, cut out busing-save gas & safty issues. No one is exposed to swine flu, don't have to eat school lunches... Read More, sex ed at home all kinds of issues are solved. Teachers salaries, electric, janatorial, buildings - isn't the bottom line to save taxypayers dollars.You can do it all at home - Honest Abe did and by candle lite no less.

[Person B]
Plus, there are many I would rather my daughter not be around and learn all their ignorant ways from!

[Person A]
We could eliminate some durg problems, sex with teachers, video's in the gym plus all the fights on the school buses.We could also save some money on free condoms not to mention abortion pills and abortions without parents consent!

[Person C]
He alone, who owns the youth, gains the Future!
-- Adolf Hitler, speech at the Reichsparteitag, 1935
Critics Decry Obama's 'Indoctrination' Plan for Students - Political News - FOXNews.com
Source: www.foxnews.com

[Person D]
Obama will deliver a national address directly to students on Tuesday, which will be the first day of classes for many children across the country. The address, to be broadcast live on the White House's Web site, was announced in a letter to school principals last week by Education Secretary Arne Duncan. <<>>If my kids were in public school I would have them not participate in that at all! Who is he to think he can do this?? It's getting worse the longer he's in office! We have 3 years to go :(

[Person E]
The more I look at this stuff the madder I get!

[Person A]
Talked to her Dad awhile ago, he didn't know about the school thing! He does now!!! Fred told him he was gonna have to take his gun and guard his plug! LOL!!!

[Person F]
One more reason to homeschool

[Person C]
You are right, [Person F]. I do not want any politician, regardless of political affiliation, to have direct access to the young school children. The content of the speech is less important than the precedence it sets.

[Person G]
..or another reason for Christian school..

[Person C]
True, [Person G] :)

I could spend all day decrying the so-called thought processes of these deranged people, but let me sum up with a handful of key points about some of these imbeciles:

• Person A, besides being completely unable to put together a coherent sentence, would like to eliminate public education altogether. "Hell," "Honest Abe did [it] by candle lite," so it makes perfect sense. ("Honest Abe" also issued the Emancipation Proclamation, a document with which I'm certain Person A would have disagreed vehemently, had she been around in 1863.) She also has a peculiar obsession with sex, "durgs," and violence, although she doesn't seem to care as much about apostrophe usage. Good thing Fred has his gun (but what is "guard his plug?")!


• Person B may wish to review a definition of the word "ignorant." She can begin with a mirror.


• Person C loses automatically. Godwin's Law. Thanks for playing. As a result, we needn't even address her contention that no politician, "regardless of political affiliation," should speak to students; one wonders if she felt, or would have felt, the same when St. Ronnie of Simi Valley spoke to kids about tax cuts.


• To Person D: "If my kids were in public school?" We're all grateful they aren't, and since they aren't, you have no standing to protest and you now are cordially invited to shut the fuck up. Also, "Who is he to think he can do this?? (Extra points for two question marks.) Um ... the president, I think?

Anyway, you get the idea. Truly, the stupid, it BUUUUURRRRNNS.

Obama's speech to kids: the financial burden of the protests

With all the furor about the president's speech to schoolchildren next week, it's easy to lose sight of very basic issues that ought to be taken into account as many schools and districts, regrettably, decide not to broadcast the speech to their students. Sure, the political controversy is important, and the precedent such censorship sets is absolutely abhorrent, but there is a simple reason why those schools and districts are doing a great disservice to their students and parents: the real economic cost of boycotting the speech.

At least among those districts, like Palm Beach County, where the speech will be shown but parents can "opt out," or in other places where organized "keep your kid home from school" protests are taking place, what really is happening, as Momocrats blogger Cynematic points out, is a "one-day systematic de-funding of your public schools and mine."

[The boycott is] promoted by childless right-wing white guys (Beck, Hannity) who apparently are anti-education.

All because some grown ups acting more like babies have lost sight of the common good. Have decided that the Party of No comes before country, or anyone else. Including their neighbors. Including your kids.

So keep that in mind. The kid who sits out of public school on September 8 just took money out of the public pot that all his or her schoolmates use.

Parents who vehemently disagree with what the school curriculum can ALWAYS teach their own values at home. Everyone has that right, if not obligation.

But since when did they start messing with the quality of your kid's education? All those $47/days lost to your school start adding up. Music classes or school supplies, band uniforms or special field trips that are already imperiled because of school budget cuts--and now you'll have to make up the difference, somehow, because someone wants to make a statement.

Your neighbor, your kid's friend's parent, the other people at your school are gonna do you like that?

Illuminating, isn't it?

Spot on, Cynematic.

It's disgusting to me that this is even happening, but it's even worse when you consider the damage to every school system and every school, just because a few wild-eyed wingnut fanatics (several of whom happen to have a national forum through TV or radio) hate the president SOOOOOO much that they would push for this "boycott." It didn't happen with Reagan, it didn't happen with Bush 41, it wouldn't have happened with McCain, but it's happening now.

I can't help but marvel, too, at the irony of parents who will keep their children home from public, government-provided schools because they fear some "socialist" message will be transmitted ... maybe by backwards-masking, blinked Morse code, whatever, I don't know. I've already demonstrated that not only will the president not deliver a socialist message, but he's not even a socialist. But try telling that to the people who have been marinating in the constant anti-American drumbeat from the Becks and Limbaughs of the world.

Maybe those districts that are refusing to show the speech altogether, like Collier and Lee counties in southwest Florida, ought to forgo their federal funding from here on out, since clearly they don't have any need for the federal government. (But I guess that would amount to coercion to broadcast the speech, and we certainly wouldn't want to force anyone to listen to the president!)

Look, I know I can't very well wax indignant about disrespect to the president, because this blog hardly has been respectful to President Obama's predecessor. But I never would have told my son (or my daughter, although she was too young for school when Drunky McStagger was in the White House) that they shouldn't listen to a speech from the president. All parents who keep their children home on Tuesday, and even those who "opt out" and have their kids in some alternative activity during the speech, are delivering a chilling message: education doesn't matter, and the president of the United States ought to be shunned.

And, ultimately, that hurts all of us.

Facebook polls suck: a rant in one act

So there I was, blithely skipping through Facebook for a minute this evening whilst waiting for the dryer to finish, when I came upon this little vomitous, wingnut-induced treat, one of Facebook's ubiquitous poll questions:

Question: "Should the United States President be allowed to do a nationwide address to our children at school, without prior parental consent?"
- Yes
- No
- Maybe

Jesus H. Christ in gym class, are they fucking serious? Who could possibly object to the president addressing students in school? Moreover, what the fuck does parental consent have to do with anything? This isn't a "Puberty And You" filmstrip, for fuck's sake -- it's the president of the United States!!

Oh, wait ... the batshit-crazy wingnuts put this out there. I get it. See, it was all fine and dandy when that hunky he-man Ronald Reagan and his loyal sidekick George H.W. Bush spoke to kids when they were each White House residents ... but now ... well, now things are different, aren't they? And you know what I mean by "different" ... wink, wink, nudge, nudge.

This explains the brief tweets I saw today, which I previously hadn't had time to explore further, about Republican Party of Florida chairman and preeminent douchebag Jim Greer, who proclaimed that President Obama's planned speech to kids is designed to "indoctrinate" students into a "socialist ideology."

Jim, you ignorant slut. Fuck you, you moronic, disingenuous asshole. You wouldn't know a "socialist ideology" if it kicked you in the ass (which, incidentally, I wish it would) -- because you know as well as I do (or you should, if you have even an ounce of sense) that Barack Obama isn't even a liberal, let alone a socialist. Your fear-mongering, sycophantic drooling in response to some shit Glenn Beck spews forth on his pathetic excuse for a television show isn't even worthy of a response, but just in case anyone out there is reading this and thinks that you have even a minute, tiny shred of credibility left, let me disabuse them of that notion:

• Main Entry: so·cial·ism
• Pronunciation: \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\
• Function: noun
• Date: 1837

1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

No matter how much you cretins bluster about "socialism," nothing President Obama or the Democrats in Congress are proposing is anything remotely close to abolition of private property. You must think the American people are a bunch of idiots! Oh, right, you Republicans like it that way.

I'm betting we'll see a veritable army of moronic brownshirt fucks keeping their kids home from school on Tuesday, just so they don't have to be forced to sit through a speech by that ... that ... black guy in the White House. That's okay -- it's not like those kids are likely to learn anything anyway, coming from households where Fox News and Sarah Palin undoubtedly reign supreme.

So, you know, stay classy, Facebook. Thanks for continually reminding us that there are people out there whom I would characterize as "dumb as a box of rocks," except that it would be insulting to boxes of rocks.

A graphical message to all the Obama-hating wingnuts

Yeah, that pretty much sums up my feelings.

(courtesy Printfection.com, where you can get this image on a T-shirt; h/t to Alli via Twitter, who also gave us the immortal phrase, "Abstinence makes the church grow fondlers.")

NASCAR at the White House

Yesterday, President Obama hosted 2008 NASCAR Sprint Cup champion Jimmie Johnson and several other drivers and luminaries of the sport at the White House. The event ostensibly was to honor Johnson's championship as well as NASCAR generally, but I think I know what was really going through their minds:

L to R: NASCAR drivers Carl Edwards, Clint Bowyer, Jeff Gordon, Tony Stewart;
President Obama, Jimmie Johnson
(click image for larger version)

Blast Off! Radio RETURNS today at 4:00 pm EDT: The more things change ....

.... the more they stay the same. I know it's a cliché, but I think it's never been more true than it is right now.

Blast Off! Radio returns today after a summer hiatus of 2½ months, and not only are the right-wing crazies still around (and still getting an inordinate amount of mainstream corporate media coverage), they seem to be more rabid and violent than ever. I didn't even think that was possible ...

A lot has happened since I last inflicted my radical rantings on the webradio waves, and I'm not just talking about the Florida Bar exam. Why, this summer has seen the political seppuku of Sarah Palin, a precipitous and dangerous upswing in violence and hate from the Right (not the least of which is the ridiculous, disruptive displays at congressional health care forums nationwide), and more total disdain for American constitutional law from extremist Christians in northwest Florida. Indeed, it seems that as the temperature has risen, so too have the tempers of the fringe Right, most of whom just can't believe that a black man is president.

Well, I'm back to set things straight, and I hope you'll join me. Today on the show, we'll discuss the health care reform debacle and see if we can figure out why the president seems willing to back down on a public option. We'll also look at the prayer-in-school debate still raging in Santa Rosa County, Florida, as well as the gun nuts who think that a Scary Black Man™ will invade their homes and take away their guns (and, presumably, their masculinity as well ... and that's just the women gun nuts!). All that and more ... plus your calls, chats, and tweets.

How can you listen -- and participate? It's as easy as a click:

TIME: 4:00 pm Eastern TODAY

Click here to listen

Call in number: (646) 716-7543

E-mail: blastoffradio-at-gmail-dot-com

It's good to be back, and I hope you'll plan to be a part of the show this afternoon. There's an awful lot of pent-up ranting in here ...

(cross-posted at FPC Blog)

UPDATE (4:12 pm 8/17/09): The show has been archived here for your listening pleasure. Hope you'll listen -- it was a rollicking good time (although we never got around to talking about much besides health care reform).

Damon Weaver gets his wish

Congratulations are in order once again for Pahokee's favorite budding journalist, Damon Weaver. Yesterday the 11-year-old got what he'd been after for almost a year: an exclusive interview with President Obama.

The 11-year-old's fame is increasing now that he finally scored an interview with President Barack Obama on Thursday. The 12 questions Damon asked, which focused primarily on education, was filmed as part of an education program that will be broadcast to schools around the nation next month.

The talk shows led the news with a typhoon in Taiwan, health care reform and wildfires in California. And soon, it was Damon's turn. His classic interview was mentioned on Good Morning America and the Today Show.

And Damon was all smiles as he talked with The Early Show Weather Anchor Dave Price about the interview he's called a dream come true. Price told Damon it was an honor to speak with him and he asked Damon what he thought about Obama.

"President Obama is so nice," Damon said. "I expected him to be like he was ... the President is a normal person."

He talked about the President like they were friends, and, well, maybe they are. At the end of yesterday's interview, he called Obama his homeboy.

This is fast becoming Damon's shtick: last year, he proclaimed that then-Senator Joe Biden was his homeboy, too.

Anyway, here's Damon's full interview with the president:

Not to be too self-aggrandizing here, but we knew about Damon before you did ... back when Blast Off! was ensconced in Palm Beach County.* We told you he'd get to the White House eventually ... largely on the strength of this video, which Blast Off! brought your way in December:

Nice work, Damon, and congratulations.

---

* Just teasing ya here. :)