By Laurence Lewis for Daily Kos

The Republican Party needs to be put out of its misery. A functioning Republic needs at least one opposition party, but the current and likely final iteration of the Republican Party is not it. The current iteration of the Democratic Party could be it, should it continue to fail to live up to its greatest history and increasingly mythological ideals, but that would depend on the creation of a legitimately viable progressive party, and for now at least that is not going to happen. But for the Democratic Party to recapture the magic of its greatest history, or failing that for a legitimately viable liberal party to emerge from the wreckage that is our current political system, the Republican Party must be put out of its misery. Whether you are a loyal Democrat, a wavering frustrated Democrat, a progressive Independent, or whether you are dreaming of the emergence of a legitimately viable liberal alternative, the Republican Party must be put out of its misery. All liberals and progressives should be able to unite behind that idea. Because if the Republican Party is put out of its misery, the Democrats no longer will be able to use the Republicans as excuse or foil and will once and for all finally be forced to prove what they are or aren't really about.

The embarrassment of embarrasments that is the Republican presidential field ought to be the final proof that the Republican Party has ceased to serve any valuable role in our political system. The lunatics have taken over. The Republican rejection of science and rationality once served various tactical purposes, but in previous generations it always was a feint to the theocrats whose primary political purpose for the Republicans was to enable the kleptocrats and the neo-Royalists. But while the Republican financial base continues to be those extremely wealthy who lack all conscience, its voting base now is the ignorant and the reality challenged. Most of the current Republican presidential field is not merely playing to this base, it is of it. No serious person can look at Herman Cain or Rick Perry or Ron Paul or Michele Bachmann or Rick Santorum and see a future president. In a less surreal world these would be but cartoon characters. And yet one of them or someone equally absurd still may become the Republican presidential nominee. The base of the party desperately hopes so.

More: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/13/1...

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/siteapps/...

http://www.dpalternatives.org/2011/09/troy...

Good news for us, I guess. Mitt wants a VP just like Cheney. He's lost the independent vote for sure.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/15/m...

Republicans Against Science
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: August 28, 2011

Jon Huntsman Jr., a former Utah governor and ambassador to China, isn’t a serious contender for the Republican presidential nomination. And that’s too bad, because Mr. Hunstman has been willing to say the unsayable about the G.O.P. — namely, that it is becoming the “anti-science party.” This is an enormously important development. And it should terrify us.

o see what Mr. Huntsman means, consider recent statements by the two men who actually are serious contenders for the G.O.P. nomination: Rick Perry and Mitt Romney.

Mr. Perry, the governor of Texas, recently made headlines by dismissing evolution as “just a theory,” one that has “got some gaps in it” — an observation that will come as news to the vast majority of biologists. But what really got people's attention was what he said about climate change: “I think there are a substantial number of scientists who have manipulated data so that they will have dollars rolling into their projects. And I think we are seeing almost weekly, or even daily, scientists are coming forward and questioning the original idea that man-made global warming is what is causing the climate to change.”

That’s a remarkable statement — or maybe the right adjective is “vile.”

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/29/opinion/...

The second part of Mr. Perry’s statement is, as it happens, just false: the scientific consensus about man-made global warming — which includes 97 percent to 98 percent of researchers in the field, according to the National Academy of Sciences — is getting stronger, not weaker, as the evidence for climate change just keeps mounting.

Just landed in Victoria, TX waiting for a cab to take me to Port Lavaca. Fox News is on the television. I asked the attendant here if I could change the channel and watch the Packers vs. Bears. Her response. "This is the only channel we get on this TV". Since I am the only one in the terminal at this time, I tried to just turn it off or at least turn the volume down. Can't do either one!! Please, taxi, get here quick!! I feel my brain cells dying minute by minute listening to this garbage!!! Help me!!

"The Republicans "are going to play to their base for a certain period of time. But I'm pretty confident that they're going to recognize that our job is to govern and make sure that we are delivering jobs for the American people." - Pres. Barack Obama

What planet does our Commander in Chief live on? I'm really losing confidence in him when he spouts off nonsense like this? If he really believes this, then we are truly fucked.

If this is the best of the crop, then we should have nothing to worry about. But I worry all the same. A country that elected Bush in '04 is capable of even more idiotic electoral buffonery!!

CNN: Republicans most likely to support Huckabee
by Jed Lewison
Tue Dec 28, 2010 at 01:40:03 PM PST

Opinion Research Corporation for CNN. 12/17-19. 470 Republicans. MoE 4.5%.
I'm going to read you the names of a few people who might run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012. For each one, please tell me whether you would be very likely, somewhat likely, not very likely, or not likely at all to support them if they decided to run for the Republican nomination in 2012.

Mike Huckabee: 67% likely, 31% not likely.
Mitt Romney: 59% likely, 40% not likely.
Newt Gingrich: 54% likely, 44% not likely.
Sarah Palin: 49% likely, 51% not likely.

(Likely includes "very likely " and "somewhat likely." Not likely includes "not very likely" and "not at all likely.")

In light of PPP's polling on Palin, it seems like Sarah may have one unsurmountable problem when it comes to running for President: people either don't like her (independents and Democrats) or don't want her to represent their party because other people don't like her (Republicans).

Huckabee, on the other hand, is emerging as a formidable threat to win the GOP nomination. I suspect the big question with him is whether he'll be able to overcome the institutional Republican support for Romney's campaign. If he's willing to work hard, that should be doable, and given Romney's big problem -- that he supported not just RomneyCare but also individual mandates -- my end of year prediction for 2010 is that in 2012, Mike Huckabee will be the GOP's nominee.

To be fair to Romney, Huckabee also has some baggage that Republican primary voters might not like: he opposes a government shutdown, he supported cap and trade and believes climate change is caused by man, he supported tax increases to improve education in Arkansas, and he supports the basic ideas behind the DREAM Act. But taken together, those challenges don't amount to this:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/12/...

Good God!! Can this state get any more ignorant?

Arizona Bans Ethnic Studies and, Along With it, Reason and Justice
Tuesday 28 December 2010

by: Randall Amster J.D., Ph.D., t r u t h o u t | News Analysis

While much condemnation has rightly been expressed toward Arizona's anti-immigrant law, SB 1070, a less-reported and potentially more sinister measure is set to take effect on January 1, 2011. This new law, which was passed by the conservative state legislature at the behest of then-School Superintendent (and now Attorney General-elect) Tom Horne, is designated HB 2281 and is colloquially referred to as a measure to ban ethnic studies programs in the state. As with SB 1070, the implications of this law are problematic, wide-ranging and decidedly hate filled.

Whereas SB 1070 focused primarily on the ostensible control of bodies, HB 2281 is predominantly about controlling minds. In this sense, it is the software counterpart of Arizona's race-based politicking, paired with the hardware embodied in SB 1070's "show us your papers" logic of "attrition through enforcement," which has already resulted in tens of thousands of people leaving the state. With HB 2281, the intention is not so much to expel or harass as it is to inculcate a deep-seated, second-class status by denying people the right to explore their own histories and cultures. It is, in effect, about the eradication of ethnic identity among young people in the state's already-floundering school system, which now ranks near the bottom in the nation.

There's a word for what Arizona is attempting to do here: ethnocide. It is similar to genocide in its scope, but it reflects the notion that it is an ethnic and/or cultural identity under assault more so than physical bodies themselves. By imposing a curriculum that forbids the exploration of divergent cultures while propping up the dominant one, there's another process at work here, what we might call ethnonormativity. This takes the teachings of one culture - the colonizer's - and makes it the standard version of history while literally banning other accounts, turning the master narrative into the "normal" one, and further denigrating marginalized perspectives. America's racialized past abounds with such examples of oppressed people being denied their languages, histories and cultures, including through enforced indoctrination in school systems.

As if to add insult to injury, HB 2281 barely makes a pretense to hide any of this in its language and intended scope. A close reading of the law lays bare some of the more stark and sinister aspects of its potential application in a state where Hispanic students fill nearly half the seats in the public schools (the domain to which HB 2281 will apply). In particular, there are three primary aspects of the law that merit further investigation as contributing factors to the ongoing erasure of ethnic identities and the further marginalization of people of color in Arizona.

http://www.truth-out.org/arizona-bans-ethn...

2011: A Brave New Dystopia
Monday 27 December 2010
by: Chris Hedges

The two greatest visions of a future dystopia were George Orwell’s “1984” and Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World.” The debate, between those who watched our descent towards corporate totalitarianism, was who was right. Would we be, as Orwell wrote, dominated by a repressive surveillance and security state that used crude and violent forms of control? Or would we be, as Huxley envisioned, entranced by entertainment and spectacle, captivated by technology and seduced by profligate consumption to embrace our own oppression? It turns out Orwell and Huxley were both right. Huxley saw the first stage of our enslavement. Orwell saw the second.

We have been gradually disempowered by a corporate state that, as Huxley foresaw, seduced and manipulated us through sensual gratification, cheap mass-produced goods, boundless credit, political theater and amusement. While we were entertained, the regulations that once kept predatory corporate power in check were dismantled, the laws that once protected us were rewritten and we were impoverished. Now that credit is drying up, good jobs for the working class are gone forever and mass-produced goods are unaffordable, we find ourselves transported from “Brave New World” to “1984.” The state, crippled by massive deficits, endless war and corporate malfeasance, is sliding toward bankruptcy. It is time for Big Brother to take over from Huxley’s feelies, the orgy-porgy and the centrifugal bumble-puppy. We are moving from a society where we are skillfully manipulated by lies and illusions to one where we are overtly controlled.

Orwell warned of a world where books were banned. Huxley warned of a world where no one wanted to read books. Orwell warned of a state of permanent war and fear. Huxley warned of a culture diverted by mindless pleasure. Orwell warned of a state where every conversation and thought was monitored and dissent was brutally punished. Huxley warned of a state where a population, preoccupied by trivia and gossip, no longer cared about truth or information. Orwell saw us frightened into submission. Huxley saw us seduced into submission. But Huxley, we are discovering, was merely the prelude to Orwell. Huxley understood the process by which we would be complicit in our own enslavement. Orwell understood the enslavement. Now that the corporate coup is over, we stand naked and defenseless. We are beginning to understand, as Karl Marx knew, that unfettered and unregulated capitalism is a brutal and revolutionary force that exploits human beings and the natural world until exhaustion or collapse.

“The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake,” Orwell wrote in “1984.” “We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the oligarchies of the past, in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.”

http://www.truth-out.org/2011-a-brave-new-...

It pains me to say this, but I agree with Caribou Barbie on this one!!

Palin says she couldn’t get away with crying like Boehner

Sarah Palin, making an appearance on "Good Morning America" as part of her new embrace of the mainstream media, says there's a double standard when it comes to politicians crying in public.

In an interview with Robin Roberts of "GMA," the ex-Alaska governor was asked about incoming House Speaker John Boehner's tendency to get weepy. While Palin said she had "respect" for her fellow Republican's emotional side, she suggested he gets a "pass" because he's a man (video courtesy of ABC News):

"I don't know if a woman would be given a pass necessarily. That's one of those things where a double standard is applied. I'm sure if I got up there and did a speech, and I started breaking down and cried about how important it is to me that our children and grandchildren are provided great opportunities, I'm sure I would be knocked a little bit for that."



But Palin said it was OK, since double standards only encourage women in politics "work that much harder" and "be that much tougher."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theticket/20...

This is from a Facebook group I belong to "Join the Coffee Party Movement"

"A democratic government is a privilege and a responsibility. It is currently dysfunctional in part because we see ourselves as consumers, not citizens. That is, we expect service. We don't feel compelled to participate in the well-being of our community or our country.

We, as citizens, like the private and public sectors, have mostly lost the sense of what it means to work towards the common good.

Imagine if President Bush had asked us to serve our country as caring citizens instead of asking us to go shopping soon after 9-11.

Let's change that. Can we work together as citizens for the common good? We can be the model for others - including Congress - to follow."

http://www.facebook.com/coffeeparty#!/note...

http://www.facebook.com/coffeeparty

MSNBC suspends Joe Scarborough for campaign donations
By Joe Pompeo

Just two weeks after MSNBC suspended Keith Olbermann for donating money to three Democratic political candidates, the network has suspended fellow cable anchor Joe Scarborough for making similar campaign contributions.

In a statement, MSNBC President Phil Griffin said Scarborough, host of "Morning Joe," informed him Friday morning that between 2004 and 2008, he had made eight $500 contributions to various local candidates in Florida, where he previously served as a Republican congressional representative.

As a result, the network has suspended Scarborough for two days without pay. He will return to the air Nov. 24.

"In my conversation with Joe two weeks ago, he did not recall these contributions," said Griffin. "Since he did not seek or receive prior approval for these contributions, Joe understands that I will be suspending him for violating our policy. As Joe recognizes, it is critical that we enforce our standards and policies."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thecutline/2...

Dear Miami,
The Saints are coming. And so are we, their loyal, long-suffering and slightly
discombobulated Super Bowl-bound fans.
While there's still time to prepare -- although a few hard-core Who Dats will be trickling in early, most of us won't arrive until Thursday or Friday -- we thought we'd give you a heads-up about what you should expect.
First things first: You need more beer.
Yeah, we know. You ordered extra. You think you have more than any group of humans could possibly consume in one week. Trust us. You don't.
New Orleans was a drinking town long before the Saints drove us to drink. But it turns out beer tastes better when we're winning. (Who knew?) So let's just say we're thirsty for more than a championship; adjust your stockpiles accordingly.
And look. When we ask you for a go-cup, be nice to us. We don't even know what "open-container law" means. Is that anything like "last call"?
It's Carnival season in New Orleans (that's Mardi Gras to you), and we'll be taking the celebration on the road. So don't be startled if we throw stuff at you as we walk past; that's just our way of saying hello.
Oh, and sorry in advance about those beads we leave dangling from your palm trees. We just can't help ourselves.
February is also crawfish season, and you can be sure that more than one enterprising tailgater will figure out a way to transport a couple sacks of live mudbugs and a boiling pot to Miami.
When the dude in the Who Dat 2010 The National Football League All Rights Reserved T-shirt asks if you want to suck da head and pinch da tail, resist the urge to punch him. He's not propositioning you. He's inviting you to dinner.
And if you see a big Cajun guy who looks exactly like an old Saints quarterback walking around town in a dress " don't ask. It's a long story.
We know that crowd control is a major concern for any Super Bowl host city. Our advice? Put away the riot gear.
Reason No. 1: Indianapolis is going to lose, and their fans are way too dull to start a riot.
Reason No. 2: New Orleans showed the world on Sunday that we know how to throw a victory party. We don't burn cars. We dance on them.
Reason No. 3: Even if we did lose, which we won't, leaving the stadium would be like leaving a funeral, and our typical response to that is to have a parade.
Speaking of which: If you happen to see a brass band roll by, followed by a line of folks waving their handkerchiefs, you're not supposed to just stand there and watch. As our own Irma Thomas would say: Get your backfield in motion.
And hey, Mister DJ! Yes, we know you've already played that stupid Ying Yang Twins song 10 times tonight, but indulge us just one more time.
To us, "Halftime (Stand Up and Get Crunk)" isn't just a song; it's 576 points of good memories. It's the sound of a Drew Brees touchdown pass to Devery Henderson, a Pierre Thomas dive for first down on 4th-and-1, a Garrett Hartley field goal sailing through the uprights in overtime.
It's what a championship sounds like. You may get sick of hearing it. We won't. Encore, dammit.
Inside Sun Life Stadium, you may find your ears ringing more than usual. We're louder than other fans. Seven thousand of ours sound like 70,000 of theirs.
Don't believe us? Ask the 12th man in the Vikings huddle.
Some people think it's just the Dome that heightens our volume. But you're about to discover a little secret: We can scream loud enough to make your head explode, indoors or out.
It's not the roof. It's the heart.
Well, OK, and the beer.
Don't be surprised if there are more Saints fans outside the stadium than inside. A lot of us are coming just to say we were part of history, even if we can't witness it up close. The Saints are family to us, and you know how it is with family: We want to be there for them, whether they really need us or not. Because we know our presence will mean something to them, whether they can see us or not.
Come to think of it, seeing as how you're taking us in for the week, we pretty much regard you as family, too. So we're warning you now: If you're within hugging distance, you're fair game.
Hugging strangers is a proud Who Dat tradition, right up there with crying when we win.
Most sports fans cry when their teams lose. Not us. We've been losing gracefully and with good humor for 43 years. Tragedy and disappointment don't faze us. It's success that makes us go to pieces.
Hurricane Katrina? We got that under control. The Saints in the Super Bowl? SOMEBODY CALL A PARAMEDIC!!!
So anyway, don't let the tears of joy freak you out. We're just " disoriented.
OK. Let's review:
Order more beer. Throw me something, mister. Suck da heads. Wear da dress. Stand up. Get crunk. Hug it out. Protect your eardrums. Pass the Kleenex. Hoist the trophy.
See y'all at the victory party.
Faithfully yours,
The Who Dat Nation

THE SAINTS ARE COMING!! U2 and Greenday http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDWndjwEamQ

"Who Dat" trademark holder speaks out NFL
By: Karen Dalton-Beninato

As the Saints march toward the Super Bowl, there's a chill in the midst of the Who Dat Nation. The National Football League has issued cease and desist orders to various New Orleans merchants, including for infractions as small as a fleur de lis in the middle of the "o" in #whodat. When you're covering something this important to our city, you go to the source. As far as trade marks for WhoDat are concerned, that's Sal and Steve Monistere.

Steve recorded the Who Dat chant in 1983, and using that chant, he recorded the original "Who Dat" single with members of the Saints offensive line and singer Aaron Neville (photo of the original single above). Then, together, the Monistere brothers immediately embarked on one of the most ingenious marketing campaigns in sports history. And the Who Dat Nation was born.

Steve Monistere, a founding member of New Orleans party band The Topcats, read about the recent NFL actions regarding the use of Who Dat in my article on New Orleans.com. "I had heard about the cease and desist, and had seen this article," Monistere said. When reading the comments, he mentioned that "the third from the top is right on." (That comment describes the Monistere's hit song and the registration for trademarks of Who Dat).

As far as the intellectual property, Monistere explains that, "Sure, a fleur de lis can belong to the Saints, but in very specific usage, and everybody knows what that is," Monistere explained. "If you go back to 1967, to date, they have registered and used the fleur de lis in a very specific way. They put it on the Saints helmet and on the Saints shield. Its colors are very specific -- they're old gold and black.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/karen-dalton...

Believe me, the "Who Dat" nation is up in arms about this today. The NFL has stirred up a hornet's nest by trying to co-opt unique symbols of New Orleans. The Fleur-de-lis cannot be copyrighted, it is a symbol of France as well as other countries, organizations etc. and has been in use for over 1000 years!!

Subject: Just shut up already!!
Message:
Just Shut Up!

Josh Marshall | January 19, 2010, 8:07PM



Message of the day to all Dems, Coakley, Rahm, Celinda Lake, national Dem committees, Axelrod, whoever, whatever: Shut the *$%& Up! I don't know how else to say it. I'm watching MSNBC and hearing all the key players dumping on each other. As I've said, the Coakley campaign seems to have been run just terribly. And that's just the beginning of it. But really, with all that's at stake, the White House political office left this to Coakley, unsupervised? Really? I just have very little patience hearing all the people who are by definition all to blame have an argument about who's most to blame.

What I'm seeing -- and this isn't just based on public comments but our reporting behind the scenes -- is that there's a lot more energy going into dodging blame for this unforced error of galactic proportions than there is going into the real issue: closing the loop on the health care bill. Which is the only issue in policy terms and political terms. That's it. Everything else is water under the bridge.

And the key is this: this nonsense arguing is very reminiscent of 6 months of chatter and wasted negotiations that prevented this from getting done in the early summer instead of letting it get to this point. Which was n-e-e-d-l-e-s-s.

Jon Chait has this right. The Dems need to relax, get to work, pass the bill and move on.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/... ...



Suck it up and move forward!! This 60 vote supermajority is a smokescreen. Jon Stewart had a great piece on it the other night about Democratic crybabies and how Bush and his Republican majority Congress rammed legislation down the throats of Americans with a simple 51 vote majority in the Senate. If the Democrats want to get any real change accomplished, they'll have to start growing a set and get over it. Work with the majority you have, not the majority you wish you had. Pelosi, Reid etc. will have to start doing their jobs as majority leaders and start playing hardball, get Democrats in line to vote as a bloc and use the House and Senate rules to the majority party's advantage!! Start acting like a majority party for once Democrats!! Otherwise just shut the fuck up!!