glad you asked

a newt gingrich presidency

2012-01-24T13:20:00.000-05:00

because we know he can never have just one ...

see also:
"a rick perry presidency"
"a michelle bachmann presidency"
"a herman cain presidency"
"a mitt romney presidency"
"a rick santorum presidency"

visual of the day

2012-01-24T09:57:00.000-05:00

speaker of the house john boehner (r-OH) addressing anti-abortion demonstrators yesterday at the nation's capitol, on the 39th anniversary of roe v. wade, speaking into a microphone that looks like ... wait for it ... a coat-hanger.

ill adjudication

2012-01-17T20:59:00.000-05:00

in a surprise to no one but a birther, alabama tells a "tired old man" not only that the kenyan usurper will stay on the state primary ballot but also that everybody's day in court will be on his dime:
judge in obama citizenship lawsuit orders man who sued to pay democratic party's lawyer, court fees
birmingham, alabama — the jefferson county judge who dismissed a luverne man's lawsuit to block president obama from alabama ballots today also ordered him to pay the state democratic party's court costs and lawyer fees within 45 days.
lawyers for mark kennedy, the state party chairman, sought the sanctions in a motion his lawyers filed last week filed last week in the suit filed by harold sorensen. but one of the lawyers said during a hearing today that party officials would not try to collect if sorensen does not file any similar lawsuits during the 2012 election cycle.
"the democratic party has no desire to chase after a retired military man to collect," barry ragsdale, one of kennedy's lawyers, told circuit judge helen shores lee.
ragsdale then turned to address sorensen. "but if i read you're bad-mouthing the court and this decision, you will feel the full wrath of me."
sorensen told lee he cannot afford to pay the court-ordered costs.
ragsdale said sorensen's suit in jefferson county is the second one he has filed challenging obama's citizenship and right to serve as president. a montgomery county judge in 2009 dismissed the other sorenson suit, which also challenged then-republican nominee john mccain's citizenship.
"this needs to stop, mr. sorensen, and it needs to stop today," ragsdale said during the hearing.
ragsdale also criticized a request sorensen filed last week asking lee to step aside from his case. the motion, which sorensen filed without counsel, cited "racial bias, lack of judicial discretion as well as lack of knowledge of the u.s. constitution, article ii, section 1, clause 5," court records show.
"this is scandalous," ragsdale said to sorensen during today's hearing. "it's uncalled for and you owe this court an apology."
sorensen apologized. he told lee he did not seek a new judge because of the black judge's race.
"after watching you in court and observing you last week, i felt i would not have a chance with you in court," he said.
sorensen was referring to a hearing last week in which lee dismissed a similar lawsuit filed by birmingham resident albert e. hendershot.
the suits contended obama is using a forged birth certificate and fake social security number. they said he is not a natural-born citizen and is not qualified to run and serve as president.
lee explained in detail to sorensen today why she dismissed his suit, citing the state law that strips courts of jurisdiction over election-related challenges unless another law specifically grants the courts that power.
"the court has no jurisdiction to hear this matter," she said.
sorensen, who sought to have his case dismissed before tuesday's hearing, said he was trying to exercise his rights and duties as a citizen.
"i just want to go back home and go to bed," sorensen told lee. "i'm done."
more to read: the hendershot lawsuit
motion to dismiss suit
judge's ruling dismissing hendershot suit

attorney barry ragsdale, in an as yet unsourced report:
the hearing was mostly a non-event. sorensen filed a motion to dismiss his case (without prejudice) first thing this morning and was planning on skipping the hearing. judge suggested he stick around.
judge lee then announced that after reading all the motions, she was dismissing the case, not on sorensen's motion, but on our motion under the "jurisdiction stripping statute." she indicated, however, that the dismissal would be WITH PREJUDICE and that she was awarding us all costs and attorney's fees to be paid within 45 days. i thought sorensen was going to pass out and he was audibly distressed when she awarded us fees. i was actually afraid that he would have a stroke.
sorensen then told that judge that he was "a retired senior citizen, who has no money." i then reminded the judge that mr. sorensen had filed a motion for recusal which i thought needed to be addressed on the record. the judge asked sorensen to stand and explain his recusal motion. sorensen said that he was "not feeling very well" so judge let him speak seated at the table. sorensen said that the recusal was "certainly not about race" but was based on his observation of judge lee during the hendershot hearing. he said that after watching judge lee, he knew that he "didn't stand a chance" if she was the judge. he also said that he was just "an old man" who was tired of all of this and wanted to go home and never deal with this again.
i then said a few things. i demanded that sorensen apologize to judge lee for his recusal motion, which he did (albeit, accompanied by a short speech about why the citizenship of the president's father meant that the president was not a NBC). i also said that if mr. sorensen was truly sincere about quitting this nonsense, that we would forego attempting to recover fees and costs, but if he filed another case or even collaborated with the filing of another case, or even got on the internet and complained about judge lee or how she handled this case, then we would come after him for the full amount. judge lee will enter a formal order later today.

from sorensen's motion for recusal directed against judge lee:
harold sorensen ... respectfully believes that circuit [judge] helen shores lee recuse herself from this case on the following grounds: due to racial bias, lack of judicial discretion as well as lack of knowledge of the U.S. constitution ... additionally, judge has violated her oath of office under the alabama constitution ...
"respectfully" ... heh.

[1] actually, almost 100 cases, for a birther batting average of .000

a rick santorum presidency

2012-01-07T00:59:00.000-05:00

see also:
"a rick perry presidency"
"a michelle bachmann presidency"
"a herman cain presidency"
"a mitt romney presidency"
"a newt gingrich presidency"

much more than flesh and blood

2012-01-05T04:51:00.000-05:00

prayer war•ri•or |pre(ə)r 'wÃ´rēər|
noun
a person who thinks that sitting at home wishing really really hard for rainbows and ponies and a white christian republican president deserves more honor and respect than those who actually serve, suffer and die on a battlefield.

the most critical people of all are the prayer warriors, IMHO. our battle isn't against flesh and blood, and we're going to need much more than just flesh and blood (or brains and stamina) to stand against that giant.

the art of the backdown

2012-01-03T02:17:00.001-05:00

gop presidential hopeful newt gingrich, riding the tiger on dec. 1st:
i’m going to be the nominee ... it’s very hard not to look at the recent polls and think that the odds are very high i’m going to be the nominee.

dec. 12th ...
i'm now, i think by a big margin, the front-runner.

dec. 22nd ...
i never said i’d come in first in iowa.

jan. 2nd, on the eve of the iowa caucuses:
i don’t think i’m going to win. i think you look at the numbers.

quote of the day

2011-12-09T21:05:00.001-05:00

via twitter:
PIGS Y U NO FLY? AWESOME SHIT WILL HAPPEN WHEN U FLY.

one-way trip

2011-12-07T23:40:00.001-05:00

from dc comics' wasteland #1 (1987), artist david lloyd, who, with writer alan moore, gave us "v for vendetta" and who will literally blow your mind with the dopest dope you'll ever toke ...
... or so they say.
(story by john ostrander and del close, art by david lloyd, color by lovern kindzierski)

the art of the backdown

2011-12-05T00:53:00.001-05:00

(former) pastor melvin thompson:

the parents wanted to know exactly who had a problem with their future son-in-law.
"me, for one," thompson replied. he added, "the best thing [stella] can do is take him back where she found him."

i do not believe in interracial marriages, and i do not believe this [ban] will give our church a black eye at all.

an eastern kentucky church under a firestorm of criticism since members voted to bar mixed-race couples from joining the congregation overturned that decision sunday ...
... thompson has said he is not racist and called the matter an "internal affair."

thompson has since been replaced with a new pastor who said that everyone was welcome at the church.

see:
"kentucky church votes to ban interracial couples"
"ky church overturns ban on interracial couples"
"pastor nullifies church ban on interracial couples"

enemy of the taitz

2011-11-27T00:00:00.001-05:00

this assistant sec of state, attorney general, sec of state and 5 appointee puppets on the committee are nothing but lying traitorous scum, which will be standing trial for fraud, forgery and treason. as a reminder, penalty for treason — is life in prison or death penalty. that what all of them deserve together with obama, pelosi, onaka, fuddy and a few corrupt judges.
— birther "queen" orly taitz
(malware warning)
birtherism died, along with donald trump's always-dubious presidential ambitions, a very public death on the last week of april 2011, when a visibly-irritated president obama made public his "long-form" birth certificate, quelling pesky doubts about his right to hold office. birtherism's coffin was sealed days later with obama's announcement of the dramatic death of osama bin laden, firmly establishing without further question who indeed was wearing the pants in washington.
so if birtherism is dead, why are we talking about it? well, i'm glad you asked ...
on friday november 18, the new hampshire ballot law commission entertained a challenge to obama's inclusion on its primary ballot from none other than moldovan energizer birther "queen" orly taitz. given that birthers have never won anything but ridicule in their three years of tireless and tiresome attempts to unseat the kenyan usurper, the commission's ruling against the worst lawyer on the face of the planet was of course a foregone conclusion — as was, to those who've been keeping score, the birther reaction, captured in rare public display:
"traitors!" shouted one woman. "spineless traitors!"
"saying a treasonous liar can go on our ballot?" yelled state rep. harry accornero, a republican from laconia. "you're going to have to face the citizens of laconia. you better wear a mask."
... [the commission's] response to the testimony during the hearing angered many of those in the room, including state representatives.
"unbelievable," fumed state rep. susan delemus, a republican from rochester, walking around the room during a break in the hearing, before the commission took its vote.
"let's just bury the constitution now and have a funeral," delemus said. "it just makes me want to throw up."
the situation was "getting ugly," mavrogeorge said, so he suggested to his client, assistant secretary of state karen ladd, that they walk to the state house to prepare for the subsequent hearings. but mavrogeorge said they were stopped in the hallway by delemus and rep. harry accornero of laconia, who promised to follow them across the street because accornero said they were "demanding answers to why this liar was being allowed on the ballot."
"at this point i knew there was no way that we were going to be able to leave the legislative office building without having an angry mob following us to the state house," mavrogeorge wrote.
looking to his left, mavrogeorge said rep. al baldasaro of londonderry was silently "staring at me with an angry look on his face."
"i did not know what these people were capable of in the state of mind that they were in at the time," mavrogeorge said.
mavrogeorge recalled ducking into a nearby room with ladd and calling delaney's office and state house security for help. members of the crowd yelled and banged on the door, he said."
... "they showed a complete lack of respect for me as an assistant attorney general and as a human being," he wrote. "yesterday was the first time in my professional career that i felt that my safety was in danger."
colin manning, spokesman for gov. john lynch, said the "disgraceful" conduct at the hearing deserves investigation.
"a line has been crossed in terms of civility and decorum that cannot be tolerated," he said."
... rep. al baldasaro, an o'brien leadership team member, is visibly amused and comfortable with the proceedings documented in the video, and in fact goes on to highlight how he and other birthers can work with the speaker to pass legislation barring president obama from the ballot.
birthers behaving badly after losing badly ... again. so what? birtherism is still dead. who cares? well, i'm glad you asked ...
after the 2010 midterm "tea party revolution" a soon-to-be-discovered number of sore losers and obsessed crackpots gained elective office across the country and they are committed to preventing the marxist muslim imposter from stealing another term in their white house. new hampshire was only the first salvo:
the OBAMA STATE BALLOT CHALLENGE 2012 is what is going to stop obama from taking office again in 2012. obama’s name on the ballot will be legally challenged in every state. the evidence of a forged birth certificate on whitehouse.gov and the evidence that he is using a connecticut social security number that does not belong to him, will be submitted in each court. ... this is where you come in. we need people to contact their states secretary of state and find what the rules are for challenging a candidate ...
so get ready for a bit of loud, pointless, protracted and divisive mischief coming soon to a state legislature near you, inspired by orly taitz, tireless defender of the freedom to persecute anyone and everyone that gets in her way: (malware warning)
i am in process of writing to the speaker of the house of representatives of NH as well as the supreme court of NH, seeking emergency hearings. house of representatives can recall the sec of state who is committing elections fraud and treason. supreme court can stay the designation on the ballot. we have to fight for every inch of the terrain. we can’t let thugs rule. keep in mind, you are fighting not just for yourselves, but also for your children and granchildren against this criminal enterprise, that took over this nation. sooner or later we will try for elections fraud, forgery and treason all of the involved individuals, all of the corrupt officials and all of the corrupt judges, who are involved.
will you be the next enemy of the taitz?

the republican problem

2011-11-21T17:10:00.001-05:00

as framed by nobel prize-winning economist paul krugman:

i have a structural hypothesis here: you have a republican ideology, which mitt romney obviously doesn’t believe in. he just oozes insincerity, that’s just so obvious. but all of the others are fools and clowns. and there is a question here: maybe — my hypothesis is maybe this is an ideology that only fools and clowns can believe in. and that’s the republican problem.

can't be too picky

2011-11-06T10:00:00.001-05:00

i'm hopeful that this entire scandal will fade, but i'm also braced for the worst: i don't care much about any kind of sexual misdeeds myself at this moment:

STOP THE RAPE OF THE TAXPAYER! STOP THE RAPE OF THE BORDER! STOP THE RAPE OF OUR HEALTH CARE SYSTEM!

i don't think perry or romney are all that concerned about the BIG rapes of our entire freaking NATION! so even if cain were a serial rapist, i'd still support the man. heck! no brainer so far as i'm concerned. we can't afford to be too picky when 90% of our political pros prostitute themselves.

quote of the day

2011-11-05T10:21:00.001-04:00

via hardcore conservative watering hole free republic, "attorney for cain accuser says ‘series’ of incidents prompted complaint":
every male i've ever worked with could have a sexual harassment suit filed against him. Every Single One....
except me....

can't believe this is happening

2011-10-17T22:53:00.001-04:00

horrifying footage of a 2-year-old girl in china being run over by two separate vehicles and left to die by passersby has stirred outrage throughout the country, with CNN reporting that security footage of the incident has led the nation of 1.3 billion people to do some collective soul-searching.

according to shanghaiist, the two-year-old, who has been identified as yueyue, was run over on thursday outside of a hardware market in foshan in southern china's guangdong province. the driver of the vehicle then backed up over the girl a second time and drove away.

the following video shows more than a dozen passersby walk, ride motorbikes or drive past the young, bleeding girl without stopping to help. they clearly notice the badly injured child, as some motorists swerve to avoid her body. after three people walk past, a different truck runs over the young girl again.

shanghaiist reports that seven grueling minutes passed before a trash collector picked up yeuyue's body and alerted her mother so that she could take the child to the hospital.

... "many people are discussing what they perceive as a loss of morality in chinese society," [CNN's enuice yoon] said to erroll barnett. "... some observers have been pointing out that china education system really has failed here, that it's failed to emphasize and reinforce the need to respect human life at a time when 1.3 billion people all clamoring and rushing to climb up the economic and social ladder."

... [the telegraph's peter foster wrote] "others blamed china's compensation culture for the apparent show of callousness, recalling a famous 2006 judgment when a good samaritan who helped a woman get to hospital was wrongly ordered to pay her compensation.

"they didn’t ignore the girl, they just didn't dare help her," said one comment among many that said that chinese law had helped create a fear of intervening.

[continue reading ...]

a failure of morality? poor education? economic pressure? a fear of lawsuits? i'm not so sure, especially when so many are ready to paint an enormous country with such a sweeping brush. i'd rather hear from the passersby themselves about why they ignored the little victim, if we ever get the chance to. their stories might shock us, but not, i suspect, in the direction that the media is driving the narrative.

i have my own theory. a few years back, i was discussing one of those awful church shootings that periodically grips the attention of the nation. a friend was having a hard time trying to understand why the victims took so long to react to the crisis. i suggested that most of them probably couldn't even believe what was happening. they probably refused to believe it. i suspect that, in an uncertain or puzzling or unfamiliar situation, most people will not immediately jump to the worst conclusion. especially when, in most cases, we're relieved to find out that it's not. so when those first shots went off, instead of running for the doors, i suspect most people first tried to find a safe explanation for them: "is that a car backfiring?"; "are those firecrackers ... balloons?"; "a television?"; "those can't be gunshots ..."; "i don't want to look like a fool ..." i don't think the reality of the situation dawned on anyone until the screaming started. then it could no longer be denied. who wants to believe that a homicidal maniac is in the building? who wants to put themselves in the middle of that?

so, excepting the inital driver, who was either blind, scared or depravedly indifferent, i believe that we're dealing with a suspension of belief, in a way that helps us avoid getting sucked into a horrible situation that might be unfolding in front of us. and if we don't see panic or alarm coming from anyone else around us, it can only help us in our denial. no one in the video becomes alarmed — a reaction that was probably self-reinforcing: "that's not a child lying injured in the street; it's just a discarded doll, perhaps even a toddler-shaped pile of rags ... besides, no one else seems to be reacting as if it's an injured child ..."

if no one else is panicking, then we can assume that everything is perfectly normal. nothing to see here, folks. we can therefore go about our lives as normal. because if what we most fear is true, then our safe routines are gone. we find ourselves forced to be a victim of horror, or perhaps something worse, a witness to horror, in this case burdened with the responsibility of saving a child's life.

the patriarchy has you

2011-10-12T15:28:00.000-04:00

wake up, colluders!
(art by tatsuya ishida, h/t pz myers)

steve jobs, r.i.p.

2011-10-06T00:01:00.000-04:00

over nearly thirty years, every computer i've ever owned was made by apple. as a computer-curious artist, steve had me with macpaint. i still have a copy of the program and a working mac plus to run it on ...

macpaint (1984)

apple iic (1984), something of a novelty item

macintosh plus (1986), my first art computer

performa 600 cd (1992), color! with built-in cd drive

power mac 8500 (1996), my first video-capable unit

powerbook lombard (2000), my first laptop

powerbook g4 line (titanium, 2001 & aluminum, 2005)

ipod g3 (2003)

ipod g5 video (2005)

macbook pro (2010)
see also:
computer comix v1.0
computer comix v2.0
computer comix v3.0

bi-Zarro bat-Man

2011-09-30T20:25:00.000-04:00

as a fan of all things batman, i couldn't resist chip kidd's and tony millionaire's 2001 homage to creator bob kane's original concept — here two ever-so-slightly warped send-ups which, despite their intended seediness, successfully evoke the distinctively creepy atmosphere of our grim hero's world.

"the mad monk returns"
(stories by chip kidd, art by tony millionaire, cover by matt groening, color by jim campbell)

a mitt romney presidency

2011-09-27T20:00:00.000-04:00

see also:
"a rick perry presidency"
"a michelle bachmann presidency"
"a herman cain presidency"
"a newt gingrich presidency"
"a rick santorum presidency"

arrested development

2011-09-27T01:20:00.000-04:00

when we last saw daryn j. moran, he'd gotten himself discharged from the air force for various patriotic reasons, but he especially wanted everyone to know he wasn't interested in taking orders from a usurper any more.

turns out that was just the warm-up.

today mr. moran's geting serious:

hello everybody, my name is daryn john moran in omaha, nebraska. it's about 3pm on monday, september 26th and today's video, the purpose, is to let everybody know, uh, what needs to be done.

um, as a result of nobody fulfilling their responsibility to enforce the law and arrest the president for his crime of a forgery, which is proven fact, um, i've decided that i must do it myself.

what do i mean? i'll gas up the car, drive in my vehicle to washington, dc, knock on the president's door and tell him he's comin' with me.

now along the way, obviously, if you're still listening and not just laughing, somebody's gonna have something to say about that and that's what we need, we need a confrontation. not a violent one — i'm not comin' with a shotgun, i'm not comin' with a knife. i'm comin' with the constitution in my hand and the bible and the fact that he's a criminal and a known forger.

just like in the ol' wild west when men would walk into town with wanted posters hanging on the do— on the walls, ah, they only came with their cronies on their horses so they could escape in an' out ...

president obama gonna be on the run for the remainder of his days, until he gets right or til he leaves otherwise. but he's gonna be held accountable.

so, to the mayor's office in omaha, who has not responded to me, when i went and put in a request to see the mayor of omaha, jim suttle, no response, i'm gonna do your job. to the county sheriff who i spoke to, captain torres, supposed to pass my flyer on. to tim dunning, the sheriff in omaha, nebraska, i'll do your job and arrest, ah, put out a warrant out for the arrest of obama, i'm gonna do your job. to the city council that was protected by your guardian warren weaver, who said "i dunno why you're actin' this way and you can send a letter to the city council", and took the receptionist's message, my name and phone number and gave it back to me, i'm doin' your job. this is not just a federal issue, this is a national issue, down to everybody everywhere.

so, there ya have it. i dunno what'll happen next, i dunno which americans will stand by me. i'm not the one, i'm not the stupid person. my wife comes from mexico and she says what separates america from the third world countries? the third world countries don't have anybody enforcing the law. and here the constitution is being overthrown daily.

i just heard from a friend: walter fitzpatrick was arrested again. this poor man's been fighting by himself for three years against this illegal president. it's time the rest of us followed his example, the wisdom of the gray head of walter fitzpatrick, a retired navy officer.

and to the military out there, STOP HIDING OBAMA. STOP PROTECTING HIM. HE IS A CRIMINAL.

i was in the marine corps from '91 to '95. i was in the air force from 2002 to 2011. before gays were allowed in the military — now i'm not against a gay man or a woman: I'M AGAINST YOUR ACTIVITY. i'm against you pro-, promoting your lifestyle to families, and literature and education system. BEIN' A GAY IS A SIN IN THE BIBLE WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT. IT'S A SIN.

so, i was in the military BEFORE the gays were in. when we knew it was a sin. whu-when it was a shame to say that openly. and general mullen's comments that the military is stronger and has more tolerance? more tolerance for what, general mullen? more tolerance for sin? yeah, are you even a christian? do you know the bible? IT IS FOOLISH AND IGNORANT TO IGNORE GOD AND IGNORE THE SCRIPTURES IN THE BIBLE WHEN YOU'RE MADE AWARE OF IT.

now, the islam religion and muslims, who barack obama knows the prayers, knows the calls, knows the words and all his best buddies are muslims, they wanna chop off our heads if we claim we're a christian. i saw a video of the new director of transportation saying they're identifying christian identity people as the new terrorists. well, what in the world is he talkin' about, another czar of obama?

so the real americans out there are gonna hear me and when they come to your houses to arrest you too and ask you whether you support me or email me or walter fitzpatrick? we need to arrest you too? i dunno if you're gonna load your guns with weapons and defend yourself and your family or your children or not. like i said, today or tomorrow when i leave i'm not goin' with a shotgun, i'm not goin' with a knife ‐ it's not about threats. i'm just comin' to knock on obama's door, say you're comin' with me, your time is up. he's gonna spend the remainder of his days on the run like a common criminal. those of you that support him: that's your mistake and your foolishness. the majorty of americans DO NOT SUPPORT BARACK OBAMA. he has no proof of his birth, anywhere, any day, any time. and the proof that they've offered, it's a lie, it's a forgery; it's been proven so by multiple americans over and over and over again.

if i sound angry, it's because i am. it's because the military's had a coup. it's been taken over by a false commander-in-chief. and this flag ... it— what does it mean anymore? where's the constitution? where are our so-called leaders in the congress and supreme court? YOU'RE NEXT! first is the president. COMIN' FER YOU, BARACK OBAMA! COMIN' FER YOU! the supreme court and the congress is next. BUT I'M COMIN FER YOU BARACK OBAMA, SO CALL YOUR SECRET SERVICE &MDASH; COWARD! you wouldn't even do an arm wrestlin' match with me if i asked ya. you probably wouldn't do a forty yard dash. WIMP! COWARD! ... COWARD!

and the supreme court and the congress is next. CALL YER FBI, CALL YER SECRET SERVICE, PUT ALL THE CUFFS ON ME THAT YOU WANT, GIVE ME A BLACK AND WHITE STRIPED SUIT AND THROW ME IN JAIL! COWARD! you have no proof of who you are. i mean it's time for americans to stand up a tell you the truth: WE DON'T WANT YOU HERE, WE WANT YOU OUT OF THE OFFICE, WE WANT YOUR CRIMES TO STOP. that's what i'm gonna do. this is public information. this is youtube. my address is [redacted]. my cellphone is [redacted]. i have a public email address as well. i'm here, but i'm leavin' and i'm gonna gas up the car and go to washington dc and arrest the president.

it's time for confrontation. ya, you think yer gonna win. ya, you do, you think so. you think all that money flowin' from all yer muslim buddies and social communist democratic buddies is gonna save you. IT'S NOT GONNA SAVE YOU. there's real americans out there who're gonna hear me and i'm not gonna go ta jail, you're not gonna throw away the key and have me in jail fer life, you're not gonna get away with it, it's not gonna happen. not gonna happen.

so first, barack obama, start runnin'. START RUNNIN'! yu-you're sand is comin'-drippin' out the hourglass. WE'RE COMIN' TA GETCHA! ya! laugh it up, too! laugh it up! you ain't gonna be laughin' when we're in yer face! when the cuffs are 'round yer hands, you ain't gonna be laughin'! ooh! threat! threat'nin' the president! woohoo! threat'nin' the president! send the congress! send the supreme court! us americans, we're so scared! ... [continues]

update via ohforgoodnesssakes.com:

daryn moran tells [birther seditionist online rag] the post & email that "two secret service men came at 3:00 or 3:30 this morning. they were escorted by a county sheriff." [would-be birther torchbearer] dean haskins at obama release your records had a phone conversation in which moran said the authorities had first visited his parents; and "he is not, presently, driving to dc to arrest obama."

from what i gathered from our conversation, they explained to him that he can go to DC, he can have meetings about his beliefs, he can state what he believes, but he cannot threaten the "president." they also explained that stating that one is going to arrest the president is a form of threat, so he is not allowed to do that.

since moran's tirade was about his being prepared to gas up the car and, come what may, pursue obama "for the remainder of his days" ... will a simple dressing-down by the usurper's protectors take the tiger out of his tank?

a herman cain presidency

2011-09-25T18:33:00.000-04:00

see also:
"a rick perry presidency"
"a michelle bachmann presidency"
"a mitt romney presidency"
"a rick santorum presidency"
"a newt gingrich presidency"

no true scotsman

2011-09-23T21:00:00.001-04:00

if conservative republicans worry that they may have come out smelling less like roses and more like cavemen after three closely-watched debates in the national spotlight, they shouldn't be: those weren't real republicans™ we were watching after all:
i don't know what small group in the crowd did it — but conservatives DON'T boo soldiers. booing soldiers is a progressive thing, not ours. i don't give a damn what sexual orientation he is. it was a horrible demonstration, that will be used against our side in worse ways than the cheering at ron pauls "let him die" reply from the 2nd debate or the jerry springer audience that snuck in and loudly cheered executions ...
by navyCanDo
for all we know the booing could have been done by [democratic national committee] plants because the leftmedia is using it to validate their vicious lie that 'republicans hate gays' (and, as they often add, anyone not white, heterosexual and christian). since i doubt the election will turn on who gets the homosexual vote this is not terribly important but it demonstrates the abject fear the left has of the tea party. they are pulling out all the stops to defame the tea party folks and convince americans they are a bunch of KKK-style haters that want to shove christianity down the throats of americans. that is insane and a palpable lie but the left is getting desperate as they see the nation slowly turning on obama and threatening to dismantle the socialist structure the left has carefully built over the past 70 years. look for lots of this 'republicans hate...(fill in the minority group) rhetoric in the weeks to come.
by jim scott
maybe so ... maybe real republicans™ don't really hate anybody (at least not "KKK-style") ... but unfortunately "navyCanDo" and "jim scott" seem to be two of the few true scotsmen on that page:
i was booing the policy and the question.
by buddhaBrown
he is doing [nothing?] but causing problems for the real Men that are serving My Country.
by easternsky
he didn't need to say he was gay,
he sure didn't.

it was quite obvious that he was a poofer.
by retired greyhound
the soldier had to make the point that he was a fag. why?
i wish there had been a candidate who told him off for wearing his perversion on his sleeve.
by buccaneer81
... he didn't have to mention that he was gay. he could have just asked the question. if you want the audience to shut up and not react, perhaps he should have shut up and not announced it. that works both ways ...
by netizen
... the question had no purpose other than to be another homosexual "in your face" moment. the boo was justified.
by throwback
"throwback" ... heh.
gays in the military is an incremental step in destroying the family, and implementing state control of how children are raised. read the communist manifesto ...
by clock king
the soldier had to make the point that he was a fag. why?
because exhibitionism and recruiting and brainwashing the youngsters are the top goal of all homosexuals.
by geronL
persoanlly, i could care less if people want to boo an activist faggot soldier.
by lancey howard
kind of a dilemma, a soldier defending america who is hellbent on destroying it.
by upsdriver
a dilemma for morons, yes.
it's irrelevant what the fag said. let him throw out his san [fran] lib BS and let the candidate handle it. i don't see the need for the audience to react like we are all in harlem watching a movie in the theater ...
by lazlo in PA
hmm ... i can't tell if that last one was a scotsman.

bonus quote, via talkingpointsmemo:
back in orlando, TPM asked gary johnson — who scored his first slot on a debate stage in quite a while thursday — if the crowds at the GOP debates were meaner than he's seen before. past audiences have given raucous applause to the concept of 234 executions and praised the idea of letting the uninsured die.

johnson, who is not a social conservative, opposes the death penalty and supports the repeal of don't ask, don't tell, said that the angrier members of the audiences at the debates are not the whole of the GOP.

"in my opinion, when you have booing this is not indicative of republicans," he said. "this is not the republican party that i belong to."
(h/t john cole @ balloon juice)

today's punchline

2011-09-20T12:02:00.000-04:00

sheriff joe arpaio inquiring into president obama's birth certificate
by crystal cruz
posted on september 19, 2011 at 9:20 pm

PHOENIX — on one of the latest covers of globe magazine the headline read, 'cops probe obama'. also on the cover, front and center was a picture of sheriff joe arpaio.

"he should focus on something that matters," said julie german.

german said the authenticity of president barack obama's birth certificate was already proven.

"i believe that he was born in the united states," said german.

in april, the white house released obama's original long-form birth certificate.

even so, sheriff arpaio said nearly 300 people have asked him to do some digging.

"i'm listening to my constituents; they asked me to look at it. when i get complaints on anybody whether politicians or anyone else, i don't throw it in the waste basket," said the sheriff.

arpaio said his cold case posse of volunteers are not investigating, but inquiring.

"they're looking into it to see if there is any smoke there," he said. "once they're done i'll look at it and see if there's any jurisdiction that i have, as a county sheriff. if i feel there isn't, maybe i'll give it to other authorities in the state."

3TV asked the sheriff if he believes the president's birth certificate is fraudulent.

"i don't know because i haven't looked at it," arpaio said. "i'm not going to spend hours and hours looking at volumes of information. give it to them, they're not being paid, they're doing it for nothing."

german said arpaio should find better ways to use his volunteer posse.

"have them picking up the trash is more productive than the birth certificate issue," said german.

arpaio didn't have a specific date the inquiry would wrap up.

ok ...

ok ...

wait for it ...

the sheriff said the inquiry could take up to five years to complete.

that rimshot you just heard was the sound of "an inquiry" hitting the circular file.

heh ... good one, joe!

y'know, the more i think about it, that punchline's quite a tell all by itself:

shurf joe, "america's sheriff" and darling of right-wing extremists, thinks obama's going to be reelected.

orange alert

2011-09-10T22:31:00.000-04:00

with election day 2012 just around the corner, america's enemies just seem to grow bolder:

'credible threats' made to US government
homeland security studying two-hour video from wednesday night

WASHINGTON (the borowitz report) — the department of homeland security said today that it was studying several "credible threats" made to the united states government in a two-hour broadcast wednesday night from a location believed to be the reagan library in simi valley, california.

homeland security spokesman harland dorinson said that the department did not want to alarm the american people, "but whenever you have a group of individuals threatening to dismantle the US government piece by piece, it has to be taken seriously."

in reviewing the two-hour tape, homeland security officials said they found threats to some of the most essential functions of the US government, from social security to the federal reserve.

while stopping short of saying that the speakers were engaged in some sort of jihad, mr. dorinson did note that a tone of religious extremism dominated the video.

"one speaker in particular, seemed bent on rolling back the advances of science and plunging america back into the dark ages," he said.

but the most terrifying moment in the tape came when that same speaker received thunderous applause from the audience after threatening to execute people.

"we're posting pictures of this individual on our website," mr. dorinson said. "hopefully he will be captured before he can carry out any of his plans."

the eternal triangle

2011-09-09T17:55:00.000-04:00

one of america's earliest and most respected newspaper strips (b. 1913), faithfully and lovingly realized in 3d:

considering the distinct and surreal draftsmanship of the strip's creator george herriman, i'd say director derek mogford hit this one on the head. (pun intended.)

jonah and the beast

2011-09-06T01:27:00.000-04:00

jonah escapes the belly of the beast, with a message for cap'n ahab ...

goodbye to all that:
reflections of a GOP operative who left the cult
by mike lofgren, retired GOP congressional staffer

barbara stanwyck: we're both rotten!
fred macmurray: yeah — only you're a little more rotten.
"double indemnity" (1944)

those lines of dialogue from a classic film noir sum up the state of the two political parties in contemporary america. both parties are rotten — how could they not be, given the complete infestation of the political system by corporate money on a scale that now requires a presidential candidate to raise upwards of a billion dollars to be competitive in the general election? both parties are captives to corporate loot. the main reason the democrats' health care bill will be a budget buster once it fully phases in is the democrats' rank capitulation to corporate interests — no single-payer system, in order to mollify the insurers; and no negotiation of drug prices, a craven surrender to big pharma.

but both parties are not rotten in quite the same way. the democrats have their share of machine politicians, careerists, corporate bagmen, egomaniacs and kooks. nothing, however, quite matches the modern GOP.

to those millions of americans who have finally begun paying attention to politics and watched with exasperation the tragicomedy of the debt ceiling extension, it may have come as a shock that the republican party is so full of lunatics. to be sure, the party, like any political party on earth, has always had its share of crackpots, like robert k. dornan or william e. dannemeyer. but the crackpot outliers of two decades ago have become the vital center today: steve king, michele bachman (now a leading presidential candidate as well), paul broun, patrick mchenry, virginia foxx, louie gohmert, allen west. the congressional directory now reads like a casebook of lunacy.

it was this cast of characters and the pernicious ideas they represent that impelled me to end a nearly 30-year career as a professional staff member on capitol hill. a couple of months ago, i retired; but i could see as early as last november that the republican party would use the debt limit vote, an otherwise routine legislative procedure that has been used 87 times since the end of world war II, in order to concoct an entirely artificial fiscal crisis. then, they would use that fiscal crisis to get what they wanted, by literally holding the US and global economies as hostages.

the debt ceiling extension is not the only example of this sort of political terrorism. republicans were willing to lay off 4,000 federal aviation administration (FAA) employees, 70,000 private construction workers and let FAA safety inspectors work without pay, in fact, forcing them to pay for their own work-related travel — how prudent is that? — in order to strong arm some union-busting provisions into the FAA reauthorization.

everyone knows that in a hostage situation, the reckless and amoral actor has the negotiating upper hand over the cautious and responsible actor because the latter is actually concerned about the life of the hostage, while the former does not care. this fact, which ought to be obvious, has nevertheless caused confusion among the professional pundit class, which is mostly still stuck in the bob dole era in terms of its orientation. for instance, ezra klein wrote of his puzzlement over the fact that while house republicans essentially won the debt ceiling fight, enough of them were sufficiently dissatisfied that they might still scuttle the deal. of course they might — the attitude of many freshman republicans to national default was "bring it on!"

it should have been evident to clear-eyed observers that the republican party is becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult, or one of the intensely ideological authoritarian parties of 20th century europe. this trend has several implications, none of them pleasant.

in his "manual of parliamentary practice," thomas jefferson wrote that it is less important that every rule and custom of a legislature be absolutely justifiable in a theoretical sense, than that they should be generally acknowledged and honored by all parties. these include unwritten rules, customs and courtesies that lubricate the legislative machinery and keep governance a relatively civilized procedure. the US senate has more complex procedural rules than any other legislative body in the world; many of these rules are contradictory, and on any given day, the senate parliamentarian may issue a ruling that contradicts earlier rulings on analogous cases.

the only thing that can keep the senate functioning is collegiality and good faith. during periods of political consensus, for instance, the world war II and early post-war eras, the senate was a "high functioning" institution: filibusters were rare and the body was legislatively productive. now, one can no more picture the current senate producing the original medicare act than the old supreme soviet having legislated the bill of rights.

far from being a rarity, virtually every bill, every nominee for senate confirmation and every routine procedural motion is now subject to a republican filibuster. under the circumstances, it is no wonder that washington is gridlocked: legislating has now become war minus the shooting, something one could have observed 80 years ago in the reichstag of the weimar republic. as hannah arendt observed, a disciplined minority of totalitarians can use the instruments of democratic government to undermine democracy itself.

john p. judis sums up the modern GOP this way:

over the last four decades, the republican party has transformed from a loyal opposition into an insurrectionary party that flouts the law when it is in the majority and threatens disorder when it is the minority. it is the party of watergate and iran-contra, but also of the government shutdown in 1995 and the impeachment trial of 1999. if there is an earlier american precedent for today's republican party, it is the antebellum southern democrats of john calhoun who threatened to nullify, or disregard, federal legislation they objected to and who later led the fight to secede from the union over slavery.

a couple of years ago, a republican committee staff director told me candidly (and proudly) what the method was to all this obstruction and disruption. should republicans succeed in obstructing the senate from doing its job, it would further lower congress's generic favorability rating among the american people. by sabotaging the reputation of an institution of government, the party that is programmatically against government would come out the relative winner.

a deeply cynical tactic, to be sure, but a psychologically insightful one that plays on the weaknesses both of the voting public and the news media. there are tens of millions of low-information voters who hardly know which party controls which branch of government, let alone which party is pursuing a particular legislative tactic. these voters' confusion over who did what allows them to form the conclusion that "they are all crooks," and that "government is no good," further leading them to think, "a plague on both your houses" and "the parties are like two kids in a school yard." this ill-informed public cynicism, in its turn, further intensifies the long-term decline in public trust in government that has been taking place since the early 1960s — a distrust that has been stoked by republican rhetoric at every turn ("government is the problem," declared ronald reagan in 1980).

the media are also complicit in this phenomenon. ever since the bifurcation of electronic media into a more or less respectable "hard news" segment and a rabidly ideological talk radio and cable TV political propaganda arm, the "respectable" media have been terrified of any criticism for perceived bias. hence, they hew to the practice of false evenhandedness. paul krugman has skewered this tactic as being the "centrist cop-out." "i joked long ago," he says, "that if one party declared that the earth was flat, the headlines would read 'views differ on shape of planet.'"

inside-the-beltway wise guy chris cillizza merely proves krugman right in his washington post analysis of "winners and losers" in the debt ceiling impasse. he wrote that the institution of congress was a big loser in the fracas, which is, of course, correct, but then he opined: "lawmakers — bless their hearts — seem entirely unaware of just how bad they looked during this fight and will almost certainly spend the next few weeks (or months) congratulating themselves on their tremendous magnanimity." note how the pundit's ironic deprecation falls like the rain on the just and unjust alike, on those who precipitated the needless crisis and those who despaired of it. he seems oblivious that one side — or a sizable faction of one side — has deliberately attempted to damage the reputation of congress to achieve its political objectives.

this constant drizzle of "there the two parties go again!" stories out of the news bureaus, combined with the hazy confusion of low-information voters, means that the long-term republican strategy of undermining confidence in our democratic institutions has reaped electoral dividends. the united states has nearly the lowest voter participation among western democracies; this, again, is a consequence of the decline of trust in government institutions — if government is a racket and both parties are the same, why vote? and if the uninvolved middle declines to vote, it increases the electoral clout of a minority that is constantly being whipped into a lather by three hours daily of rush limbaugh or fox news. there were only 44 million republican voters in the 2010 mid-term elections, but they effectively canceled the political results of the election of president obama by 69 million voters.

this tactic of inducing public distrust of government is not only cynical, it is schizophrenic. for people who profess to revere the constitution, it is strange that they so caustically denigrate the very federal government that is the material expression of the principles embodied in that document. this is not to say that there is not some theoretical limit to the size or intrusiveness of government; i would be the first to say there are such limits, both fiscal and constitutional. but most republican officeholders seem strangely uninterested in the effective repeal of fourth amendment protections by the patriot act, the weakening of habeas corpus and self-incrimination protections in the public hysteria following 9/11 or the unpalatable fact that the united states has the largest incarcerated population of any country on earth. if anything, they would probably opt for more incarcerated persons, as imprisonment is a profit center for the prison privatization industry, which is itself a growth center for political contributions to these same politicians.[1] instead, they prefer to rail against those government programs that actually help people. and when a program is too popular to attack directly, like medicare or social security, they prefer to undermine it by feigning an agonized concern about the deficit. that concern, as we shall see, is largely fictitious.

undermining americans' belief in their own institutions of self-government remains a prime GOP electoral strategy. but if this technique falls short of producing karl rove's dream of 30 years of unchallengeable one-party rule (as all such techniques always fall short of achieving the angry and embittered true believer's new jerusalem), there are other even less savory techniques upon which to fall back. ever since republicans captured the majority in a number of state legislatures last november, they have systematically attempted to make it more difficult to vote: by onerous voter ID requirements (in wisconsin, republicans have legislated photo IDs while simultaneously shutting department of motor vehicles (DMV) offices in democratic constituencies while at the same time lengthening the hours of operation of DMV offices in GOP constituencies); by narrowing registration periods; and by residency requirements that may disenfranchise university students.

this legislative assault is moving in a diametrically opposed direction to 200 years of american history, when the arrow of progress pointed toward more political participation by more citizens. republicans are among the most shrill in self-righteously lecturing other countries about the wonders of democracy; exporting democracy (albeit at the barrel of a gun) to the middle east was a signature policy of the bush administration. but domestically, they don't want those people voting.

you can probably guess who those people are. above all, anyone not likely to vote republican. as sarah palin would imply, the people who are not real americans. racial minorities. immigrants. muslims. gays. intellectuals. basically, anyone who doesn't look, think, or talk like the GOP base. this must account, at least to some degree, for their extraordinarily vitriolic hatred of president obama. i have joked in the past that the main administration policy that republicans object to is obama's policy of being black.[2] among the GOP base, there is constant harping about somebody else, some "other," who is deliberately, assiduously and with malice aforethought subverting the good, the true and the beautiful: subversives. commies. socialists. ragheads. secular humanists. blacks. fags. feminazis. the list may change with the political needs of the moment, but they always seem to need a scapegoat to hate and fear.

it is not clear to me how many GOP officeholders believe this reactionary and paranoid claptrap. i would bet that most do not. but they cynically feed the worst instincts of their fearful and angry low-information political base with a nod and a wink. during the disgraceful circus of the "birther" issue, republican politicians subtly stoked the fires of paranoia by being suggestively equivocal — "i take the president at his word" — while never unambiguously slapping down the myth. john huntsman was the first major GOP figure forthrightly to refute the birther calumny — albeit after release of the birth certificate.

i do not mean to place too much emphasis on racial animus in the GOP. while it surely exists, it is also a fact that republicans think that no democratic president could conceivably be legitimate. republicans also regarded bill clinton as somehow, in some manner, twice fraudulently elected (well do i remember the elaborate conspiracy theories that republicans traded among themselves). had it been hillary clinton, rather than barack obama, who had been elected in 2008, i am certain we would now be hearing, in lieu of the birther myths, conspiracy theories about vince foster's alleged murder.

the reader may think that i am attributing svengali-like powers to GOP operatives able to manipulate a zombie base to do their bidding. it is more complicated than that. historical circumstances produced the raw material: the deindustrialization and financialization of america since about 1970 has spawned an increasingly downscale white middle class — without job security (or even without jobs), with pensions and health benefits evaporating and with their principal asset deflating in the collapse of the housing bubble. their fears are not imaginary; their standard of living is shrinking.

what do the democrats offer these people? essentially nothing. democratic leadership council-style "centrist" democrats were among the biggest promoters of disastrous trade deals in the 1990s that outsourced jobs abroad: NAFTA, world trade organization, permanent most-favored-nation status for china. at the same time, the identity politics/lifestyle wing of the democratic party was seen as a too illegal immigrant-friendly by downscaled and outsourced whites.[3]

while democrats temporized, or even dismissed the fears of the white working class as racist or nativist, republicans went to work. to be sure, the business wing of the republican party consists of the most energetic outsourcers, wage cutters and hirers of sub-minimum wage immigrant labor to be found anywhere on the globe. but the faux-populist wing of the party, knowing the mental compartmentalization that occurs in most low-information voters, played on the fears of that same white working class to focus their anger on scapegoats that do no damage to corporations' bottom lines: instead of raising the minimum wage, let's build a wall on the southern border (then hire a defense contractor to incompetently manage it). instead of predatory bankers, it's evil muslims. or evil gays. or evil abortionists.

how do they manage to do this? because democrats ceded the field. above all, they do not understand language. their initiatives are posed in impenetrable policy-speak: the patient protection and affordable care act. the what? — can anyone even remember it? no wonder the pejorative "obamacare" won out. contrast that with the republicans' patriot act. you're a patriot, aren't you? does anyone at the GED level have a clue what a stimulus bill is supposed to be? why didn't the white house call it the jobs bill and keep pounding on that theme?

you know that social security and medicare are in jeopardy when even democrats refer to them as entitlements. "entitlement" has a negative sound in colloquial english: somebody who is "entitled" selfishly claims something he doesn't really deserve. why not call them "earned benefits," which is what they are because we all contribute payroll taxes to fund them? that would never occur to the democrats. republicans don't make that mistake; they are relentlessly on message: it is never the "estate tax," it is the "death tax." heaven forbid that the walton family should give up one penny of its $86-billion fortune. all of that lucre is necessary to ensure that unions be kept out of wal-mart, that women employees not be promoted and that politicians be kept on a short leash.

it was not always thus. it would have been hard to find an uneducated farmer during the depression of the 1890s who did not have a very accurate idea about exactly which economic interests were shafting him. an unemployed worker in a breadline in 1932 would have felt little gratitude to the rockefellers or the mellons. but that is not the case in the present economic crisis. after a riot of unbridled greed such as the world has not seen since the conquistadors' looting expeditions and after an unprecedented broad and rapid transfer of wealth upward by wall street and its corporate satellites, where is the popular anger directed, at least as depicted in the media? at "washington spending" — which has increased primarily to provide unemployment compensation, food stamps and medicaid to those economically damaged by the previous decade's corporate saturnalia. or the popular rage is harmlessly diverted against pseudo-issues: death panels, birtherism, gay marriage, abortion, and so on, none of which stands to dent the corporate bottom line in the slightest.

thus far, i have concentrated on republican tactics, rather than republican beliefs, but the tactics themselves are important indicators of an absolutist, authoritarian mindset that is increasingly hostile to the democratic values of reason, compromise and conciliation. rather, this mindset seeks polarizing division (karl rove has been very explicit that this is his principal campaign strategy), conflict and the crushing of opposition.

as for what they really believe, the republican party of 2011 believes in three principal tenets i have laid out below. the rest of their platform one may safely dismiss as window dressing:

1. the GOP cares solely and exclusively about its rich contributors. the party has built a whole catechism on the protection and further enrichment of america's plutocracy. their caterwauling about deficit and debt is so much eyewash to con the public. whatever else president obama has accomplished (and many of his purported accomplishments are highly suspect), his $4-trillion deficit reduction package did perform the useful service of smoking out republican hypocrisy. the GOP refused, because it could not abide so much as a one-tenth of one percent increase on the tax rates of the walton family or the koch brothers, much less a repeal of the carried interest rule that permits billionaire hedge fund managers to pay income tax at a lower effective rate than cops or nurses. republicans finally settled on a deal that had far less deficit reduction — and even less spending reduction! — than obama's offer, because of their iron resolution to protect at all costs our society's overclass.

republicans have attempted to camouflage their amorous solicitude for billionaires with a fog of misleading rhetoric. john boehner is fond of saying, "we won't raise anyone's taxes," as if the take-home pay of an olive garden waitress were inextricably bound up with whether warren buffett pays his capital gains as ordinary income or at a lower rate. another chestnut is that millionaires and billionaires are "job creators." US corporations have just had their most profitable quarters in history; apple, for one, is sitting on $76 billion in cash, more than the GDP of most countries. so, where are the jobs?

another smokescreen is the "small business" meme, since standing up for mom's and pop's corner store is politically more attractive than to be seen shilling for a megacorporation. raising taxes on the wealthy will kill small business' ability to hire; that is the GOP dirge every time bernie sanders or some democrat offers an amendment to increase taxes on incomes above $1 million. but the number of small businesses that have a net annual income over a million dollars is de minimis, if not by definition impossible (as they would no longer be small businesses). and as data from the center for economic and policy research have shown, small businesses account for only 7.2 percent of total US employment, a significantly smaller share of total employment than in most organisation for economic co-operation and development (OECD) countries.

likewise, republicans have assiduously spread the myth that americans are conspicuously overtaxed. but compared to other OECD countries, the effective rates of US taxation are among the lowest. in particular, they point to the top corporate income rate of 35 percent as being confiscatory bolshevism. but again, the effective rate is much lower. did GE pay 35 percent on 2010 profits of $14 billion? no, it paid zero.

when pressed, republicans make up misleading statistics to "prove" that the america's fiscal burden is being borne by the rich and the rest of us are just freeloaders who don't appreciate that fact. "half of americans don't pay taxes" is a perennial meme. but what they leave out is that that statement refers to federal income taxes. there are millions of people who don't pay income taxes, but do contribute payroll taxes — among the most regressive forms of taxation. but according to GOP fiscal theology, payroll taxes don't count. somehow, they have convinced themselves that since payroll taxes go into trust funds, they're not real taxes. likewise, state and local sales taxes apparently don't count, although their effect on a poor person buying necessities like foodstuffs is far more regressive than on a millionaire.

all of these half truths and outright lies have seeped into popular culture via the corporate-owned business press. just listen to CNBC for a few hours and you will hear most of them in one form or another. more important politically, republicans' myths about taxation have been internalized by millions of economically downscale "values voters," who may have been attracted to the GOP for other reasons (which i will explain later), but who now accept this misinformation as dogma.

and when misinformation isn't enough to sustain popular support for the GOP's agenda, concealment is needed. one fairly innocuous provision in the dodd-frank financial reform bill requires public companies to make a more transparent disclosure of CEO compensation, including bonuses. note that it would not limit the compensation, only require full disclosure. republicans are hell-bent on repealing this provision. of course; it would not serve wall street interests if the public took an unhealthy interest in the disparity of their own incomes as against that of a bank CEO. as spencer bachus, the republican chairman of the house financial services committee, says, "in washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated and my view is that washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks."

2. they worship at the altar of mars. while the me-too democrats have set a horrible example of keeping up with the joneses with respect to waging wars, they can never match GOP stalwarts such as john mccain or lindsey graham in their sheer, libidinous enthusiasm for invading other countries. mccain wanted to mix it up with russia — a nuclear-armed state — during the latter's conflict with georgia in 2008 (remember? — "we are all georgians now," a slogan that did not, fortunately, catch on), while graham has been persistently agitating for attacks on iran and intervention in syria. and these are not fringe elements of the party; they are the leading "defense experts," who always get tapped for the sunday talk shows. about a month before republicans began holding a gun to the head of the credit markets to get trillions of dollars of cuts, these same republicans passed a defense appropriations bill that increased spending by $17 billion over the prior year's defense appropriation. to borrow chris hedges' formulation, war is the force that gives meaning to their lives.

a cynic might conclude that this militaristic enthusiasm is no more complicated than the fact that pentagon contractors spread a lot of bribery money around capitol hill. that is true, but there is more to it than that. it is not necessarily even the fact that members of congress feel they are protecting constituents' jobs. the wildly uneven concentration of defense contracts and military bases nationally means that some areas, like washington, DC, and san diego, are heavily dependent on department of defense (DOD) spending. but there are many more areas of the country whose net balance is negative: the citizenry pays more in taxes to support the pentagon than it receives back in local contracts.

and the economic justification for pentagon spending is even more fallacious when one considers that the $700 billion annual DOD budget creates comparatively few jobs. the days of rosie the riveter are long gone; most weapons projects now require very little touch labor. instead, a disproportionate share is siphoned off into high-cost research and development (from which the civilian economy benefits little); exorbitant management expenditures, overhead and out-and-out padding; and, of course, the money that flows back into the coffers of political campaigns. a million dollars appropriated for highway construction would create two to three times as many jobs as a million dollars appropriated for pentagon weapons procurement, so the jobs argument is ultimately specious.

take away the cash nexus and there still remains a psychological predisposition toward war and militarism on the part of the GOP. this undoubtedly arises from a neurotic need to demonstrate toughness and dovetails perfectly with the belligerent tough-guy pose one constantly hears on right-wing talk radio. militarism springs from the same psychological deficit that requires an endless series of enemies, both foreign and domestic.

the results of the last decade of unbridled militarism and the democrats' cowardly refusal to reverse it[4], have been disastrous both strategically and fiscally. it has made the united states less prosperous, less secure and less free. unfortunately, the militarism and the promiscuous intervention it gives rise to are only likely to abate when the treasury is exhausted, just as it happened to the dutch republic and the british empire.

3. give me that old time religion. pandering to fundamentalism is a full-time vocation in the GOP. beginning in the 1970s, religious cranks ceased simply to be a minor public nuisance in this country and grew into the major element of the republican rank and file. pat robertson's strong showing in the 1988 iowa caucus signaled the gradual merger of politics and religion in the party. the results are all around us: if the american people poll more like iranians or nigerians than europeans or canadians on questions of evolution versus creationism, scriptural inerrancy, the existence of angels and demons, and so forth, that result is due to the rise of the religious right, its insertion into the public sphere by the republican party and the consequent normalizing of formerly reactionary or quaint beliefs. also around us is a prevailing anti-intellectualism and hostility to science; it is this group that defines "low-information voter" — or, perhaps, "misinformation voter."

the constitution to the contrary notwithstanding, there is now a de facto religious test for the presidency: major candidates are encouraged (or coerced) to "share their feelings" about their "faith" in a revelatory speech; or, some televangelist like rick warren dragoons the candidates (as he did with obama and mccain in 2008) to debate the finer points of christology, with warren himself, of course, as the arbiter. politicized religion is also the sheet anchor of the culture wars. but how did the whole toxic stew of GOP beliefs — economic royalism, militarism and culture wars cum fundamentalism — come completely to displace an erstwhile civilized eisenhower republicanism?

it is my view that the rise of politicized religious fundamentalism (which is a subset of the decline of rational problem solving in america) may have been the key ingredient of the takeover of the republican party. for politicized religion provides a substrate of beliefs that rationalizes — at least in the minds of followers — all three of the GOP's main tenets.

televangelists have long espoused the health-and-wealth/name-it-and-claim it gospel. if you are wealthy, it is a sign of god's favor. if not, too bad! but don't forget to tithe in any case. this rationale may explain why some economically downscale whites defend the prerogatives of billionaires.

the GOP's fascination with war is also connected with the fundamentalist mindset. the old testament abounds in tales of slaughter — god ordering the killing of the midianite male infants and enslavement of the balance of the population, the divinely-inspired genocide of the canaanites, the slaying of various miscreants with the jawbone of an ass — and since american religious fundamentalist seem to prefer the old testament to the new (particularly that portion of the new testament known as the sermon on the mount), it is but a short step to approving war as a divinely inspired mission. this sort of thinking has led, inexorably, to such phenomena as jerry falwell once writing that god is pro-war.

it is the apocalyptic frame of reference of fundamentalists, their belief in an imminent armageddon, that psychologically conditions them to steer this country into conflict, not only on foreign fields (some evangelicals thought saddam was the antichrist and therefore a suitable target for cruise missiles), but also in the realm of domestic political controversy. it is hardly surprising that the most adamant proponent of the view that there was no debt ceiling problem was michele bachmann, the darling of the fundamentalist right. what does it matter, anyway, if the country defaults? — we shall presently abide in the bosom of the lord.

some liberal writers have opined that the different socio-economic perspectives separating the "business" wing of the GOP and the religious right make it an unstable coalition that could crack. i am not so sure. there is no fundamental disagreement on which direction the two factions want to take the country, merely how far in that direction they want to take it. the plutocrats would drag us back to the gilded age, the theocrats to the salem witch trials. in any case, those consummate plutocrats, the koch brothers, are pumping large sums of money into michele bachman's presidential campaign, so one ought not make too much of a potential plutocrat-theocrat split.

thus, the modern GOP; it hardly seems conceivable that a republican could have written the following:

should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. there is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. among them are h.l. hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other texas oil millionaires and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. their number is negligible and they are stupid.

(that was president eisenhower, writing to his brother edgar in 1954.)

it is this broad and ever-widening gulf between the traditional republicanism of an eisenhower and the quasi-totalitarian cult of a michele bachmann that impelled my departure from capitol hill. it is not in my pragmatic nature to make a heroic gesture of self-immolation, or to make lurid revelations of personal martyrdom in the manner of david brock. and i will leave a more detailed dissection of failed republican economic policies to my fellow apostate bruce bartlett.

i left because i was appalled at the headlong rush of republicans, like gadarene swine, to embrace policies that are deeply damaging to this country's future; and contemptuous of the feckless, craven incompetence of democrats in their half-hearted attempts to stop them. and, in truth, i left as an act of rational self-interest. having gutted private-sector pensions and health benefits as a result of their embrace of outsourcing, union busting and "shareholder value," the GOP now thinks it is only fair that public-sector workers give up their pensions and benefits, too. hence the intensification of the GOP's decades-long campaign of scorn against government workers. under the circumstances, it is simply safer to be a current retiree rather than a prospective one.

if you think paul ryan and his ayn rand-worshipping colleagues aren't after your social security and medicare, i am here to disabuse you of your naiveté.[5] they will move heaven and earth to force through tax cuts that will so starve the government of revenue that they will be "forced" to make "hard choices" — and that doesn't mean repealing those very same tax cuts, it means cutting the benefits for which you worked.

during the week that this piece was written, the debt ceiling fiasco reached its conclusion. the economy was already weak, but the GOP's disgraceful game of chicken roiled the markets even further. foreigners could hardly believe it: americans' own crazy political actions were destabilizing the safe-haven status of the dollar. accordingly, during that same week, over one trillion dollars worth of assets evaporated on financial markets. russia and china have stepped up their advocating that the dollar be replaced as the global reserve currency — a move as consequential and disastrous for US interests as any that can be imagined.

if republicans have perfected a new form of politics that is successful electorally at the same time that it unleashes major policy disasters, it means twilight both for the democratic process and america's status as the world's leading power.

[1] i am not exaggerating for effect. a law passed in 2010 by the arizona legislature mandating arrest and incarceration of suspected illegal aliens was actually drafted by the american legislative exchange council, a conservative business front group that drafts "model" legislation on behalf of its corporate sponsors. the draft legislation in question was written for the private prison lobby, which sensed a growth opportunity in imprisoning more people.

[2] i am not a supporter of obama and object to a number of his foreign and domestic policies. but when he took office amid the greatest financial collapse in 80 years, i wanted him to succeed, so that the country i served did not fail. but already in 2009, mitch mcconnell, the senate republican leader, declared that his greatest legislative priority was — jobs for americans? rescuing the financial system? solving the housing collapse? — no, none of those things. his top priority was to ensure that obama should be a one-term president. evidently senator mcconnell hates obama more than he loves his country. note that the mainstream media have lately been hailing mcconnell as "the adult in the room," presumably because he is less visibly unstable than the tea party freshmen

[3] this is not a venue for immigrant bashing. it remains a fact that outsourcing jobs overseas, while insourcing sub-minimum wage immigrant labor, will exert downward pressure on US wages. the consequence will be popular anger, and failure to address that anger will result in a downward wage spiral and a breech of the social compact, not to mention a rise in nativism and other reactionary impulses. it does no good to claim that these economic consequences are an inevitable result of globalization; germany has somehow managed to maintain a high-wage economy and a vigorous industrial base.

[4] the cowardice is not merely political. during the past ten years, i have observed that democrats are actually growing afraid of republicans. in a quirky and flawed, but insightful, little book, "democracy and populism: fear and hatred," john lukacs concludes that the left fears, the right hates.

[5] the GOP cult of ayn rand is both revealing and mystifying. on the one hand, rand's tough guy, every-man-for-himself posturing is a natural fit because it puts a philosophical gloss on the latent sociopathy so prevalent among the hard right. on the other, rand exclaimed at every opportunity that she was a militant atheist who felt nothing but contempt for christianity. apparently, the ignorance of most fundamentalist "values voters" means that GOP candidates who enthuse over rand at the same time they thump their bibles never have to explain this stark contradiction. and i imagine a democratic officeholder would have a harder time explaining why he named his offspring "marx" than a GOP incumbent would in rationalizing naming his kid "rand."

help us obi-wan, part trois

2011-09-01T17:06:00.000-04:00

i think CNN may be trying to kill us. they have announced who has been invited to their september 12th debate, and it includes, rather inexplicably, two "candidates" who aren't currently even running for the office:
in a statement, CNN announces its line-up for the september 12 tea party express co-sponsored debate in tampa: gov. rick perry, rep. michele bachmann, gov. mitt romney, rep. ron paul, newt gingrich, herman cain, rick santorum, and jon huntsman. the network adds that rudy giuliani and sarah palin were invited: "giuliani declined the debate invitation, while a palin representative has yet to respond to it."

you've got to be kidding me, right? we're still pretending rick santorum is somehow worthy of inclusion over, say, gary johnson or buddy roemer, but somehow CNN is still so hard up for slots that they're inviting two republicans who aren't even running? are we all that hard up for sarah palin news, that CNN is desperate to generate some whether she's running or not?

she loves teaching

2011-08-30T09:23:00.000-04:00

while i'm always eager to learn ...
(story and art by vanessa davis)

help us obi-wan, part deux

2011-08-25T17:40:00.000-04:00

when we last looked on the GOP's slate for 2012, hope seemed all but completely lost. but what a difference a day makes!
... the man known as "joe the plumber" is back, and may run for congress.
"i'm not ruling anything out," wurzelbacher told the ticket in an interview thursday. he added that he thought it was an "interesting idea" and that people have been asking him to run for office since he confronted obama four years ago. he's spent much of his time since then on the speaker's circuit, he said, encouraging others to run for office.
"i like the idea of it — just regular americans running. if a regular guy runs, right away the media's going to attack him," wurzelbacher said. "what kind of education does he have? what does he know about this? my answer to that is, regular americans aren't experts, but dammit, look where the experts have gotten us. maybe we need some regular guys in there. that's what i've been doing the past two and a half years, just encouraging regular americans to run. tell the liberal media to go to hell and i don't care what you guys say about me, i'm going to try to fix this country."
jon stainbrook, chairman of the lucas county republican party, told the blade he's hoping wurzelbacher jumps in.
"he would make a fantastic candidate," stainbrook said.
~~marco rubio~~
~~paul ryan~~
~~tim pawlenty~~
~~chris christie~~
~~mitch daniels~~
~~donald trump~~
mike bloomberg
rudy giuliani
jeb bush
sarah palin
"joe the plumber" wurzelbacher

help us obi-wan

2011-08-25T01:05:00.001-04:00

... and the search for the savior continues:
"i have no interest in serving as vice president for anyone who could possibly live all eight years of the presidency," rubio said, drawing laughter from crowded room.
... what happens in politics is the minute you start thinking there's something else out there for you, it starts affecting everything you do," he said. "all of a sudden, maybe you're afraid to take a position on a certain issue because it imperils your opportunity to do that something else. so the reality of it is, i'm not going to be the vice presidential nominee. but i look forward to working for whoever our nominee is."
~~marco rubio~~
~~paul ryan~~
~~tim pawlenty~~
~~chris christie~~
~~mitch daniels~~
~~donald trump~~
mike bloomberg
rudy giuliani
jeb bush
sarah palin

this is my hole

2011-08-22T00:53:00.000-04:00

what if rod serling had produced manga?

(remember — the panels on each page read from right-to-left)

p10

p11

p12

p13

p14

p15

p16

p17

p18

p19

p20

p21

p22

p23

p24

p25

p26

p27

p28

p29

p30

p31

p32
(story and art by junji ito, 2002)

a michelle bachmann presidency

2011-08-15T20:22:00.000-04:00

see also:
"a rick perry presidency"
"a herman cain presidency"
"a mitt romney presidency"
"a rick santorum presidency"
"a newt gingrich presidency"

a rick perry presidency

2011-08-15T20:06:00.000-04:00

see also:
"a michelle bachmann presidency"
"a herman cain presidency"
"a mitt romney presidency"
"a rick santorum presidency"
"a newt gingrich presidency"

crazy but not insane

2011-08-13T23:45:00.002-04:00

he's "slow", according to those who know him.

he's "hearing voices", according to his lawyers.

his crime is inarguably heinous, but does that mean levi aron's insane?

not according to the law.

in his own words:

aron says he brought [8-year-old leiby kletzky] into his house with the intentions of taking him back to his home the next day, but when he saw the missing [person] flyers he panicked.

"that is when approximately i went for a towel to smother him — in the side room. he fought back a little bit until eventually he stopped breathing. afterwards i panicked because i didn't know what to do with the body," aron said.

now if aron had said he killed leiby because either:

"my toilet told me to ..."
"i am abraham and was told not to spare issac ..."
"i needed something to go with my fava beans ..."

... then he would have something on which to hang an insanity plea: a senseless motive.
but committing murder to evade getting caught for a crime is not senseless. the attempt to destroy evidence — nothing could be more pedestrian. it clearly demonstrates some understanding of right and wrong, a key benchmark when determining the appropriateness of an insanity defense.

at his arraignment psychiatrists determined that he is mentally competent to stand trial and that he understands the charges against him, but his defense team said it may still go with an insanity plea, reports cbs station wcbs.

the defense surely recognizes the weak tea they've been served. perhaps they think they can squeeze a plea of temporary insanity out of the word "panicked", but aron's panic led only to a horrible decision — not an insane one. so, unless they can get aron's confession tossed completely, aron's own words will convict him, easily.

a debt ceiling carol

2011-08-07T17:53:00.000-04:00

now that all the shouting's over — for a few hours at least — i believe it's time in the program for our musical number ...

the undefeated*

2011-07-27T00:16:00.004-04:00

and the reviews are pouring in ...
richard corliss, time magazine:
"divine"
[director stephen k.] "bannon applies so much idolatrous airbrushing to his portrait of the divine sarah that the movie might be called going rouge."
"may tempt even the most ardent conservatives to emulate their idol"
"the movie may tempt even the most ardent conservatives to emulate their idol's tenure as governor and walk out halfway through."
"the michael moore
of the hard right"
"bannon could be the michael moore of the hard right — if he had some saving sense of humor and if anyone paid to see his movies."
anna merlan, the village voice:
"glowing"
"the movie, which charts her career as mayor of wasilla and governor of alaska, is less a documentary than a glowing two-hour infomercial for sarah palin, presidential candidate to-be."
"without blemish"
"this cartoonish version of real life is paired with a just-as-caricatured view of palin, who in this retelling is entirely without blemish, physical or political, and incapable of missteps."
"honest"
"in one stump speech shown near the end of the undefeated, palin exclaims brightly, "there’s nothing wrong in america a good ol'-fashioned election can't fix!" that's about as honest as this piece of propaganda."
robert abele, los angeles times:
"dizzying"
"a troop-rallying campaign infomercial as imagined by michael bay: hero-worshipping, crescendo-edited at a dizzying pace, thunderously repetitive and its own worst enemy as a two-hour, talking-points briefing."
"a real person"
"visually, she comes off less like a real person and more like a feisty, smiling, news-clip spirit, thumping the walls via press conference/stump speech footage, minus the on-air moments, such as her gaffe-riddled katie couric interview ..."
"from-the-heart"
"... sound bites come off like well-rehearsed testimonials rather than from-the-heart tidbits from intimates and confidantes."
todd mccarthy, the hollywood reporter:
"a must-see"
"nothing about the film earmarks it as a must-see anywhere other than in the living rooms of die-hard loyalists."
"meaningful"
"once you realize the film is just going to be a string of encomiums against a backdrop of frantically edited archival material in which few shots are allowed to stay onscreen longer than three seconds, it's clear that no meaningful analysis of the woman's career or political agenda will be forthcoming."
joe leydon, variety:
"a history lesson"
"faster than the speed of thought, "the undefeated" is a history lesson designed for students with minimal attention spans."
"undefeated"
"political junkies eager to know more about palin's vice-presidential campaign are similarly out of luck. "the undefeated" gives the 2008 election only cursory treatment — maybe because she was, you know, defeated in that one ..."
* with apologies to mad magazine ...

gene colan, r.i.p.

2011-07-02T12:06:00.009-04:00

award-winning hall-of-fame comic art methuselah gene colan passed away at the age of 84 on june 23th, ending an amazing 65-year career in the business. gene was a master of layout and shadow, who kept his style loose and flowing and his characters nimble, ready to spring (or ooze) off the page at the first sign of trouble.
stan lee:
gene (the dean) had been with us for many years, illustrating anything that needed an artist's deft touch and a movie-maker's eye. gene has long been one of our most cinematically-influenced artists. virtually every panel he draws gives you the feeling that you're watching a scene from a movie. a master photographer himself, gene colan is likewise a master at employing the photographer's art and translating it into the art of comicbook illustration.
... one other talent which gifted gene possesses in great abundance is the ability to make a quiet, static situation look alive and fraught with excitement. years ago, in the bullpen, we used to joke about one panel the genial one had drawn — i can't even remember which strip it was, although it may have been in a daredevil story — in which he merely showed a man's hand holding a doorknob, about to open the door. that's all it was — a hand on a doorknob. yet, because of the exotic lighting he gave to the panel, because of the perspective — the angle at which the hand was seen clutching the knob — because of the modeling of each finger that he drew, gene had made that panel as dramatic and as interesting as any other in the story. like i always say, if you've got a need for a hand clutching a doorknob, colan's your boy!
— son of origins of marvel comics, 1975
creepy #10, "thing of darkness" (1965)
eerie #4, "hatchet man" (1966)
(art by gene colan, stories by archie goodwin)

gene & adrienne colan:
tom: what do you remember fondly about your time at marvel?
gene: the beginning with stan, when we were allowed such unprecedented freedom ... that's what i remember. i'd talk with stan about a plot over the phone, and i'd tape record his whole idea — it'd just be a few sentences. "this is what i want in the beginning, the middle, and what i want in the end ... the rest is up to you." i had all the characters work for me, what they looked like was up to me — except those that were already established. but whatever i did, i could do. the one time stan tells about at conventions, because it's laughable, is when i drew a whole page of a hand opening up a door. i did it to expedite matters, [laughs] so i could get through with it, but he didn't like it, he thought i was ...
adrienne: remember, he called, he says, "what are you doing?"
gene: "what are you doing — a hand opening up a door? where's the interest in that?"
adrienne: but stan loves to tell that story at conventions, and we've been there to witness him on panels, telling that story. he always says, "however, if there's anyone who can draw a hand opening up a door, and capture your attention for a whole page, [it's gene]," which is very sweet of him to say. and that's kind of ... that's what made that time very sweet for gene, because stan was wonderful to gene in that way. there was no fear; he didn't use that kind of tactic, even when gene was constantly destroying the pacing of plot. only on occasion would stan call and say, "gene!" it was kind of like that, like a brother begging another brother, "please! please!" but not with the idea like his job was at stake, or, "you don't know what you're doing."
— comic book artist magazine, 2001
daredevil #47, "brother, take my hand" (1968)
colan on "daredevil":
the idea was to choreograph his acrobatics ...
— comic book artist, 2001
(art by gene colan and george klein, story by stan lee)
colan on "captain america":
... the kind of man, like a gary cooper type, where you wish you could be like him, wish you knew him. that's how i looked at him, like someone i would've liked, or would have liked to have had the principles he stood for. i wanted to be like him.
— comic book artist, 2001
capt. america #601, "red, white & blue-blood" (2009)

(art by gene colan and dean white, story by ed brubaker)

ridicule is all they need

2011-06-29T02:11:00.001-04:00

ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.
— thomas jefferson
under the classical definition of dramatic irony, the victim of this literary device remains completely unaware of his own victimhood. irony is intended for the audience to savor ...
Ridicule Is All They Have
AS BLOGGERS AND ALTERNATIVE MEDIA CONTINUE TO UNCOVER THE TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA
by Dean C. Haskins, ©2011
(Jun. 27, 2011) — "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage." — Saul Alinsky
My friend Gary Wilmott called me yesterday, mostly just to vent. He had just called Tom Sullivan's Radio Show, wanting to discuss what was on his mind. When Sullivan's call screener came on the line, Wilmott asked, "Why are you discussing Obama's failed public policy in Libya and ignoring the number one issue in this country?" The screener gruffly responded with, "Oh? What's that?" "The fact that Obama released a forged birth certificate to the American people," Wilmott replied. The only response the screener could muster was, "Have you been in a coma for the past two months?" The conversation eventually ended with Wilmott promising to email him some of the mountains of evidence, which I'm sure Mr. Screener will studiously and impartially consider.

Is there any evidence that this document is authentic?
The media appears to have done their job so well. They have worked overtime to condition everyone in this country they can to believe that the first, and only, response to any valid question about Barack Obama's eligibility is ridicule. And, the shallow-minded sheeple have fallen into line. As Saul Alinsky pointed out, "It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule," however, we must embrace one word in that statement: almost. About the only thing short of physical violence that defeats ridicule is truth — and that's the one place where these folks don't want to go, for they know they have no defense against the facts. That's why they invariably attack the messenger — they know that they have no substantive argument against the facts.
Recently, I posted a letter I had written to two public officials, in response to their statements that demonstrated that very line of reasoning — that ridicule can somehow defeat the truth. I had planned to leave these arrogant fools, and move on to the next batch of buffoons, but a response I received from the official in Montana was so blatantly denigrating and pompous that my wife insisted that the world needs to see this person for who she is. I thought about it, and decided that everyone needs to be reminded how these non-arguments work, and how to combat them. Oh, and when your wife insists ...
Before we get to the more serious of the two offenders, let me share how it went with the more benign Arkansas character.
Subject: RE: your emails
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 15:33:31 -0500
From: [AR State Senator Jimmy Jeffress]
Dean,
I unsubscribed to not have to read this drivel ... now, you are still e-mailing me with it.
Please drop my name from your address book.

To: [AR State Senator Jimmy Jeffress]
Subject: RE: your emails
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 20:00:27 -0400
Senator Jeffress:
This is me not writing back to you.
Please rest assured that you are not, nor have you ever been, on any of my email lists. I simply emailed you directly because of your insipid commentary on my article that was emailed to you by somebody else.
Ignorance is sometimes an unavoidable consequence of circumstances; however, willful ignorance is purely volitional. You now have a choice. The evidence I have provided you (and, believe me, there is much, much more available) is irrefutable. You may no longer claim circumstantial ignorance, as the truth has been shared with you. If you choose to be willfully ignorant about this matter, then that will be nothing less than shameful.
Choose not to be a disgrace, Senator Jeffress.
For our Constitution,
Dean C. Haskins
P.S. Oh yeah, you might enjoy this: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/37864

Subject: Re: your emails
From: [AR State Senator Jimmy Jeffress]
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 19:09:11 -0500
Dean,
The reason I am even responding to this is to tell you and anyone else who have written articles and sent me e-mails is that as a state-level legislator in Arkansas, I have zero input on being able to have any impact on the situation. For anyone to think otherwise is the height of ignorance. Now leave me alone, please!

To: [AR State Senator Jimmy Jeffress]
Subject: RE: your emails
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 20:16:54 -0400
Senator Jeffress:
You're obviously not familiar with a little thing called the Constitution, then, for your statement is erroneous — especially in light of the Supreme Court's recent ruling on the 9th and 10th Amendments: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-1227.pdf.
Also, the criminal code I cited applies to every citizen equally, and that includes state-level legislators in Arkansas.
So, I don't think I've yet reached the specific "height" you referenced. Do some reading, and maybe you won't either.
For our Constitution,
Dean C. Haskins
[snip]
Subject: Re: your emails
From: [AR State Senator Jimmy Jeffress]
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 20:53:00 -0500
Do you always believe everything you read? Please slink back into your cave and do whatever it is that you do whenever you are lonely. I'm tired of your little game. I actually have a life ... a wife and family and I plan to spend the week-end in uninterrupted bliss with them. Your e-mail address is in the process of being permanently blocked from my receiving it. Good night.

To: [AR State Senator Jimmy Jeffress]
Subject: RE: your emails
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 23:08:55 -0400
Do you even read? Why are you so afraid of the evidence? Do you believe Major General Paul Vallely should slink back into his cave as well? How about the experts who have proclaimed the piece of trash computer image to be a forgery?
Only an imbecile would reject evidence before examining it.
Of course, I had a difficult time sleeping last night knowing that my email address was being permanently blocked from this Einstein's inbox. But, let me ask, do you see anywhere in his communication that he was willing to have a frank conversation about the evidence? Oh, sorry. He's probably reading this, and the word "frank" invariably makes him think about Anthony Weiner, and it brings a tear to his eye.
And now, on to the other brainwashed liberal elitist. It's so amusing that they consider themselves to be so intelligent, but are not capable of discussing something as elementary as evidence.
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:36:59 -0600
From: [MT Rep. Robyn Driscoll]
To: dean@deanhaskins.com; [AR State Senator Jimmy Jeffress]
Subject: Re: your emails
You and your ilk are, as my much beloved Governor would say, "bat-**** crazy." If you would spend as much time on the deep issues facing our country as you do on your loony ideas and so-called "proof" of your utter nonsense, you could quite possibly make a difference. Ever gone to a school housing our low-income students and volunteered to help them with their reading skills? Ever participated in a fundraiser for people with severe illness who can't afford medical care? If you weren't so pathetic, you would be every bit as laughable as you find me and the Honorable Senator Jeffress. Take your energy (and obvious fabulous research skills ... yeah right) and put them to use in positive, progressive ways. You will feel much better about yourself and others may begin to look at you as a legitimate member of society. I'll look forward to hearing from you after your first growing experience.
Robyn

To: [MT Rep. Robyn Driscoll]; [AR State Senator Jeffress]
Subject: RE: your emails
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 21:33:29 -0400
Representative Driscoll:
It's so amusing to see one vacuous liberal show that another vacuous liberal is an equally "deep thinker." Why am I not surprised that Governor Schweitzer's class reaches no higher than yours?
Apparently, to socialists like you, the Constitution doesn't qualify as a "deep issue," however there are multitudes of us out here who still regard it as the highest law in the land, and about the only thing that we have to try to keep political miscreants (read: liberals) from destroying our country. Barack Obama and his congregation have broken that law, and we will not be handily dismissed by anyone, let alone someone like you.
It is always so clear when someone is faced with evidence they cannot refute, for they will invariably attack the one who has presented the evidence to them. Let me reiterate — the evidence I presented you is irrefutable, regardless of the lies that you allow to lace your thought processes. But then, you wouldn't be a liberal if you didn't do that.
Your lofty sounding rhetoric sounds honorable, until one realizes that those "low-income students" are there largely because of tax and spend liberals like you; and, the moronic, unconstitutional health care legislation that was passed in the dark of night last year will simply make medical care that much harder to obtain for those "people with severe illness."
I do want to point out a glaring error in something else you said. Politically speaking, "positive" and "progressive" are actually mutually exclusive. Moreover, the rule of law in this nation is not based on how anybody feels about himself; and, I was born in this country to citizen parents, so I am a natural born Citizen, and that sufficiently makes me a legitimate member of society. Your warm and fuzzy feelings about me do not determine that.
As I just wrote Mr. Jeffress, "Ignorance is sometimes an unavoidable consequence of circumstances; however, willful ignorance is purely volitional. You now have a choice. The evidence I have provided you (and, believe me, there is much, much more available) is irrefutable. You may no longer claim circumstantial ignorance, as the truth has been shared with you. If you choose to be willfully ignorant about this matter, then that will be nothing less than shameful." I also urged him to choose not to be a disgrace.
However, it certainly appears that you are not only willfully ignorant, you are proudly ignorant, which makes you already a disgrace. I pray your political career is as insignificant as the depth of your intellect.
For our Constitution,
Dean C. Haskins
P.S. I shared this with your liberal friend, and you should enjoy it as well: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/37864
Just like her Arkansas counterpart, she never once actually discussed the evidence, other than to ridicule the thought of it. Of course, when ridicule is met as the first response, it's sometimes fun to fight fire with fire, and reply in kind. However, we need to make sure that we only pepper the facts with ridicule, and not allow ridicule to be the entire basis of our argument; otherwise, we will be reduced to their incipient level.
When you're faced with this type of argument, keep these things in mind:
Consider the source (it's not personal — they hate the truth in this)
Always present the facts (there are innumerable resources available)
Trust in the truth (in the end, the truth must prevail for America to exist)
By the way, I have purposely included the email addresses of Jeffress and Driscoll. Their comments were not directed primarily to me, for they don't know me. They were leveled at you as well. You might want to take a moment and let them know how you feel about being called "crazy idiots." I have a feeling they might not be so quick to respond the next time.
Dean Haskins is a freelance writer, professional musician/producer, and the former chairman of Restore the Constitutional Republic, one of the original "birther" organizations. He can be reached at dean@deanhaskins.com, and his blog is here.
© 2011, The Post & Email.

(emphases and redactions mine)

photoshop disaster

2011-06-21T07:44:00.001-04:00

screenshot from this morning's new york times website:

yes, i'd be horrified too if the top and side of my head were blown away by some overworked intern ...

birthers on books

2011-06-12T12:53:00.002-04:00

who says birthers can't read? ^[1]
concerned citizen youtuber LoneStar1776, who provided some post-conviction pizzazz to the wrap-up of december's birther court-martial, has returned to the limelight (as a federal "person of interest", most likely) with a review and a question for preemptively debunked conspiracy author jerome corsi:

alright — hey guys, i hope everyone is doin' well. this is rudy.
hey, uh, see this book here? where's the birth certificate by jerome corsi? y'see that? ok, um, i've started to read it, i haven't read the whole thing yet. um, one thing i noticed, is that, uh, i looked in the index — i don't see lt. col. terry lakin's name. i don't see pastor james david manning's name. i don't see walter, ah, fitzpatrick, cmdr. walter fitzpatrick. i don't see cmdr. kerchner. i do see orly taitz and phil berg, which are two, uh, lawyers and so that's a good thing and i'm not here to get on jerome corsi's case, but ... y'know the title of this video is are you willing to die?, right, and that's what it's gonna take and so i hope jerome corsi is willing to die. because that's obviously what's it's gonna take to bring the tu— truth out in the atmosphere that we have today.
and a lot of people have asked me and i know a lot of you people, uh, like trump and quite a few of you people don't like trump. and so, you have to ask yourself, y'know — trump pushed the issue — he obviously released a forged, fraudulent piece of crap. anybody that knows anything about computers knows that that, uh, adobe pdf document is not a scan of a real document, that it's a computer-generated fraudulent piece of junk, right? but people have asked me what do i think about trump? well, trump did push the issue and he was very bold so there's only, there's one of two things: either he was in on it, right — that's one possibility, i dunno the man's heart — one possibility is that trump was in on it and that, uh, y'know, he's been promised some big payoff like he gets to built his casino somewhere, y'know, he gets some kind of government, uh, okay or whatever. i don't know what the big deal is with buildin' a casino somewhere, but let's just say that that was a possibility, that he was in on it and now he gets to build a casino.
the other option is — that they threatened him, right? that he actually was threatened. okay, either one of those options. either one of those options, whether he was in on it, right, or he was threatened ... i don't like donald trump. the reason i don't is, when he pushed the issue, to the point, uh, y'know, and, and got, and he took, took up the mantle and he stood on the backs of giants. he stood on the back of pastor james david manning. he stood on the back of lt. col. terry lakin. he stood on the back of orly taitz. he stood on the back of phil berg and he became, uh, the flag-bearer, for the birth certificate and the constitutional eligibility bearers. when donald trump did that, he shoulda been willin' to die. and if he was threatened and he backed off, then he's no leader of mine.
so, if he, if he's in on it, he's total scum, he needs to be hung, until dead, from the nearest tree, and if he was threatened and he backed off, he's still scum, because he shoulda been willin' to die.
now many of you people will say, "well, it's easy for you to get behind a youtube camera and to play mr. tough guy." and i would agree with you. it's easy for people to get behind youtube cameras and to play mr. tough guy. uh, but i would just offer for your consideration: it's up to you to discern whether somebody's bein' truthful or not. and i would offer that pastor james david manning has been at this for three years and i know, just from my association with him and following him that pastor james david manning is willin' to die and i would feel a whole lot more comfortable with pastor james david manning being the flag-bearer for the constitutional eligibility issue and also the, uh, birther issue. i would feel much more comfortable with him in the driver's seat, rather than this corsi guy.
is, is corsi a good guy? is he willin' to die? uh, i hope he is, because that's what it's gonna take. has he wroten a book and prost — and uh, progressed the issue? yes, and i thank doc, uh, dr. jerome corsi. i thank him for that. right? but i ain't gonna bow down to him if he's not willin' to die.
uh, we got people that are being deployed by a, uh, leader and a, ah, leader and thief, right? a constitutionally ineligible president that is the head of our military. that's deployin' our military around and engaging them in activities, and he's not even constitutionally eligible to be president. and, and, and, when you go, uh, address somethin' like that, you better, you better have it fixed in your heart and you better know with 100 percent certainty that you're right and you better be willin' to lay your life down.
and if you're not willin' to lay your life down, then get the hell outta the way and let somebody step up to the plate who is willin' to do what it takes and to risk what it takes, and to put their life on the line to do what's right! that's what i gotta say about that!
and if jerome corsi, if he's gotta, if he's got the heart for it, and he's, he's, and he's willin' to fight the fight, then i applaud him and i thank him. but if he's gonna back down when they threaten him, or if they threaten his family, then i'm asking jerome corsi to get the hell outta the way! GET THE HELL! OUT! OF! THE WAY! AND LET SOMEBODY GET UP TO THE MICROPHONE THAT'S WILLIN' TO DIE! THAT'S WILLIN' TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT! THAT'S WILLIN' TO, UH, TO RISK ALL THEIR TREASURE! ALL OF THEIR LIFE! ALL OF THEIR FRIENDS! TO BE RIDICULED IN THE MEDIA AND TO TELL THE TRUTH! AND JEROME CORSI, IF YOU'RE THAT MAN, I WILL APPLAUD YOU AND I WILL THANK YOU! BUT IF YOU'RE NOT THAT MAN, GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY AND LET PASTOR JAMES DAVID MANNING UP TO THE PLATE! LET CMDR. KERCHNER UP TO THE PLATE! LET, LET, LET LT. COL. TERRY LAKIN UP TO THE PLATE! BECAUSE THESE MEN WILL RISK EVERYTHING THEY GOT! AND I HOPE JEROME CORSI IS THE MAN OF HEART AND OF COURAGE AND OF TRUTH! AND IF HE'S NOT, THEN I WILL SPIT ON HIM BECAUSE HE IS A PIECE OF SHIT!
that's all i gotta say about that! god bless every one of ya and my question, my question to jerome corsi is: are you willin' ta die?
[1] ok, like most folks, i may have said as much, to someone, somewhere ... somewhat often.

waiting for OMGodot

2011-06-06T01:46:00.007-04:00

dedicated to "squeeky":
i listened to the interview and it was certainly interesting. but i am starting to get that feeling i get when i watch destination truth or ghost hunter on TV. you know when they are out looking for werewolves in minnesota and right before the commercial somebody hollers OH MY GOD!!!
then you stick around through the commercial to see if they found the werewolf or big foot or whatever they are hunting for and when it comes back on, somebody tripped over a log or something or there was raccoon in the bush.
or if it’s ghost hunter the "spirit orbs" turns out to be dust reflecting lights. sooo, i hope if corsi* has something good, he gets it out in a hurry and doesn’t make this last through another few books or something. because i am not sure my heart can take all this.
* jerome corsi, shameless peddler of stillborn expose where's the birth certificate?
and acknowledgments to ray bradbury, whose title i stole from his 1951 short story about existential doubt — an astronaut loses his confidence in evidence or memory, his sense of object permanence, his belief in his own existence and, ultimately, his life:
i don't believe in anything i can't see or hear or touch. i can't see earth, so why should i believe in it?
... when i'm in boston, new york is dead. when i'm in new york, boston is dead. when i don't see a man for a day, he's dead. when he comes walking down the street, my god, it's a resurrection. i do a dance, almost, i'm so glad to see him. i used to, anyway. i don't dance any more.
... you have no mental evidence. that's what i want, a mental evidence i can feel. i don't want physical evidence, proof you have to go out and drag in. i want evidence that you can carry in your mind and always touch and smell and feel. but there's no way to do that. in order to believe in a thing you've got to carry it with you. you can't carry the earth. or a man, in your pocket. i want a way to do that, carry things with me always, so i can believe in them.
... there was always that gap of proof. that gap between doing and having done. what is done is dead and is not proof, for it is not an action. only actions are important. and pieces of paper were remains of actions done and over and now unseen. the proof of doing was over and done. nothing but memory remained, and i didn't trust my memory. could i actually prove i'd written these stories? no. can any author?

however, unlike the doomed astronaut, birthers aren't actually sincere in their endless demands for "evidence"; they simply hide behind such claims in order to deny the results of the 2008 election.

a day in june

2011-06-01T01:35:00.015-04:00

as enjoyed by howard cruse in the june 1984 edition of heavy metal magazine:

celebrity psychology

2011-05-10T02:09:00.006-04:00

1) pro•jec•tion |prō'jek SH ən|
a psychological defense mechanism where a person unconsciously denies his or her own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, such as to other people. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting the belief that others have those feelings.
2) ex•ag•ger•a•tion |ig'zajərā SH ən|
the grandiose sense of self-importance observed in narcissists also uses exaggeration to thwart any recognition of fallibility ...
3) vic•tim•i•za•tion |viktəmə'zā SH ən|
a way of dealing with the cognitive dissonance that results from inconsistencies between the way they treat others and what they believe about themselves; a way of escaping harsh judgment or condemnation they may fear from others.

the (com)passion of the donald?
"when it comes to racism and racists i am the least racist person there is. and i think most people that know me would tell you that. i am the least racist. i've had great relationships. in fact, randal pinkett won on the apprentice a little while ago, a couple years ago, and randal's been outstanding in every way. so i mean i am the least racist person. but [van jones] is a guy trying to get some publicity for himself by attacking donald trump. but that's OK 'cause a lotta people do that."

ceci n'est pas en couleur

2011-05-03T20:13:00.000-04:00

(story and art by bill watterson, 1989)

and a meme is born

2011-05-03T18:53:00.000-04:00

for the record

2011-05-02T17:39:00.008-04:00

via steve benen @ the washington monthly:
IF CANTOR REALLY WANTS TO GO THERE.... house majority leader eric cantor (r-va.), shortly after president obama's remarks on [the death of] osama bin laden, issued a related statement. it included this gem:
"i commend president obama who has followed the vigilance of president bush in bringing bin laden to justice."
there's a fair amount of this rhetoric bouncing around this morning, and it's not especially surprising — republicans aren't going to credit president obama, regardless of merit, so it stands to reason they'll try to bring george w. bush into the picture.
if this is going to be a new gop talking point, we might as well set the record straight.
in march 2002, just six months after 9/11, bush said of bin laden, "i truly am not that concerned about him.... you know, i just don't spend that much time on him, to be honest with you."
in july 2006, we learned that the bush administration closed its unit that had been hunting bin laden.
in september 2006, bush told fred barnes, one of his most sycophantic media allies, that an "emphasis on bin laden doesn't fit with the administration's strategy for combating terrorism."
and don't even get me started on bush's failed strategy that allowed bin laden to escape from tora bora.
i'm happy to extend plenty of credit to all kinds of officials throughout the government, but crediting bush's "vigilance" on bin laden is deeply silly.
update: donald rumsfeld added this morning that obama "wisely" followed bush's lead. he either has a very short memory, or he's lying and hopes you have a very short memory.
meanwhile, from every birther's favorite faux-wingnut talking hairpiece:
i want to personally congratulate president obama and the men and women of the armed forces for a job well done. ... i am so proud to see americans standing shoulder to shoulder, waving the american flag in celebration of this great victory.
we should spend the next several days not debating party politics, but in remembrance of those who lost their lives on 9/11 and those currently fighting for our freedom.
god bless america!
after months of flinging racist birther-poop at obama, the donald once again demonstrates, through well-timed magnanimity, that he knows how to separate himself from the crowd.

would'ja believe ... ?

2011-04-30T19:49:00.001-04:00

voltaire, 18th-century philosopher:
qui est en droit de vous rendre absurde est en droit de vous rendre injuste.
[those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.]

william craig lane, 21st-century christian moralist:
if we believe, as i do, that god's grace is extended to those who die in infancy or as small children, the death of [the canaanite] children was actually their salvation. we are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven's incomparable joy. therefore, god does these children no wrong in taking their lives.

whom does god wrong in commanding the destruction of the canaanites? not the canaanite adults, for they were corrupt and deserving of judgement. not the children, for they inherit eternal life. so who is wronged? ironically, i think the most difficult part of this whole debate is the apparent wrong done to the israeli soldiers themselves. can you imagine what it would be like to have to break into some house and kill a terrified woman and her children? the brutalizing effect on these israeli soldiers is disturbing.

p.z. myers, 21st-century biologist and atheist:
it's always interesting when some god-walloper honestly follows through on the logical implications of his beliefs — he basically is compelled to admit that if you worship a tyrannical monster, you have to end up rationalizing monstrous tyrannies.

i don't think william lane craig is an intrinsically evil human being. but this is a case where it is clear that religion is a tool that allows good people to bypass decent moral positions and find justification to do evil.

'scuse me while i whip this out

2011-04-28T12:05:00.002-04:00

james fallows:
"and you know it."
the "affably" acid comments in the first 20 seconds of this clip (from the white house) almost justify the whole birther extravaganza. well, actually, they don't — and don't even come close. but the hyper-controlled obama's decision to let out that bit of bile about how the press works, including dropping the affable mask for a few seconds with the punchline "and you know it," reveals the real feelings of every politician about the instincts and workings of the press. ... it's fascinating to see how obama instantly, perhaps instinctively, lightens the mood again with a heartier-than-needed laugh, and his super-radiant smile, at a mild witticism someone calls from the crowd. but that doesn't take away the edge of the way he began.

free republic:
obama was supposed to produce HIS birth certificate, the one mama gave him. one that he is supposed to have in his possession since birth, like everyone else does. original, authentic, used, wrinkled.
instead the President of mighty USA has to send the clerk to hawaii, to buy a copy, certification, (another forgery?), all of two copies for $10 and $4? let us see one his mama gave him, not another photoshoped "certification"!

the whole thing reeks. i realized six months ago that the well had been poisoned: that any document he released confirming what he has been claiming could not be trusted and would not be. the window of opportunity to come clean (even if this document is authentic) expired over a year ago. this will never be resolved.
we are reaching that point with the college transcripts. life is not a john grisham novel.

today was a victory for those of us who have been fighting to see the constitution matter.
obama has taken a baby step in addressing the real issue of his concealment of ALL past records.
... we are starting to see the lies that have been told on this issue unravel. now we know that we could see ALL of the past records of obama's life if he and the left-wing will permit it.
so will obama's records continue to be concealed or will he release them ALL???

at long last, barack obama jr. released his long form birth certificate today, clearly proving he is NOT a natural born citizen. so, why has there been virtually no call in the senate to begin impeachment proceedings? and why are so many news reporters acting as if all obama needed to substantiate he was a Natural Born Citizen was to prove he was born in the U.S.A?

terry lakin action fund:
after more than two years of concealment and obfuscation, this document must be submitted for forensics testing to determine its authenticity. similarly, the kenyan birth certificate that has been widely circulating on the internet and on capitol hill — should be tested.
had the obama administration agreed to allow the document unveiled today and other related documents as requested for discovery in terry lakin's first pre-trial hearing, the matter would have been resolved and soldiers assured their military orders were lawful, given by a lawful commander-in-chief.
... the terry lakin action fund is calling for a full and complete presidential pardon for ltc terry lakin including restoration of pay, benefits, and service. terry holds no malice towards barack obama nor did he when he chose to bring the issue to a court martial. terry simply wanted confirmation of obama's eligibility, a process that has finally begun in earnest.

daily kos:
that the birthers aren't satisfied with the release of the long form birth certificate isn't surprising. birthers aren't satisfied because no matter how many documents barack obama releases it will never be enough, because there isn't a document in the world that will turn him white.

dear jonah goldberg: obama did not sucker you guys into becoming birthers.

matthew yglesias:
if it's true that barack obama couldn't get into college without a boost from affirmative action, then the fact that he later went on to become President of the United States of America would surely go to show that affirmative action is a good idea! the concern that super-talented people were getting locked out of opportunities is exactly the sort of thing affirmative action is supposed to resolve.

here

2011-04-21T18:18:00.001-04:00

on a large enough timescale, the ephemera of each corner our lives becomes simultaneous. "here" is richard mcguire, appearing in raw magazine, the '80s comics anthology published by art spiegelman, of "maus" fame:

(story and art by richard mcguire, 1989)

the great debater

2011-04-20T01:47:00.008-04:00

during a debate trump will toss all kinds of stuff at obama and he will not be able to rehearse enough to prepare for answers. he will be thrown off his great debate trait ... and in a debate with someone who is as rehearsed as obama you are going to need to take risk and just throw things at him. trump takes risks, that is why he is so successful and will beat obama.

a palin/obama debate would likely be termed a toss-up, while a trump/obama debate would leave obama a weeping pile of goo on the stage. again, i'd REALLY like to see that.

donald trump wouild chew up obama in a debate and spit out the pieces as far as chicago — WITHOUT a teleprompeter.

trump will destroy the boy king in a debate.

a debate between obama and trump would be a debate to watch!
obammy crying!

trump could tell him he's fired.

in open debate i suspect trump could crush obama. putting the birth certificate aside, trump would kill him on china, the handling of iraq and now libya, obamacare, and on and on. trump is very smart and i am sure can argue all sides of an argument effectively. his tendency to be very direct is clearly a byproduct of his new york life.

meanwhile, back on planet earth ...
trump: when you see what china is doing to us, where we're gonna lose this year, three hundred billion dollars to china — and they're taking all of our jobs — they're doing it through manipulation of their currency —
guthrie: well, it is a sovereign nation — you can't tell china not to manipulate its currency.
trump: if you have the right messenger, they won't be doing it for long. let me just tell you something —
guthrie: seriously, you think you could just tell them —
trump: we have the cards. yeah, they don't have the cards, we have the cards. my policy is very very simple. i would tell china, very nicely, fellas, you're my friend, i like you very much — i've made a lot of money with china, by the way, a lot of money with china. i would say we're going to put a 25% tax on all your products coming in and that's gonna do a number of things ... number one, as soon as they believe it's gonna happen, they would behave so nicely, because it would destroy their economy.

guthrie: the, um, debt ceiling vote, the republicans are saying they don't think the debt ceiling should be raised. businesses have warned there could be dire consequences.
trump: i don't care. i wouldn't raise it.
guthrie: and you know most economists say that would send the us economy back into a recession?
trump: what do economists know? most of them are not very smart.
guthrie: you don't think if —
trump: excuse me, excuse me ...
guthrie: — the US defaults on its obligations it would be grave for the economy?
trump: i don't think we'll have to default. you'll have to make a deal someplace. you might as well do it now. because if you keep raising it and raising it, let's keep raising it, you'll go ten years, let's keep raising the debt ceiling. i'd stop it right now. i'd go out, negotiate, i'd make deals ...
guthrie: who's the deal to be made with?
trump: well, the president should be leading the deal, but i don't think he's capable enough to lead the deal. instead you have the republican here, the democrat —
guthrie: are you talking about a political deal?
trump: well, ultimately, it's all political when you get right down to it, isn't it savannah?

guthrie: is there a right to privacy in the constitution?
trump: i guess there is. i guess there is ...
guthrie: so ...
trump: why do you — why, just out of curiosity, why do you ask that question?
guthrie: well, i'm just wondering how that squares with your pro-life views?
trump: well, umm, it's a pretty strange way of getting to pro-life. i mean, it's a very unique way of asking about pro-life. why are you — what does that have to do with privacy? how you are ... how are you equating pro-life with privacy?
guthrie: well, you know about the roe v. wade decision ... ?
trump: yes, sure, look, i'm for pro-life ... i'm pro-life. i've said it. i'm very strong there and i'm strong on pro-life ...

giddy-ap (updated* yet again)

2011-04-19T02:09:00.008-04:00

the donald is trumping his GOP competitors.
the billionaire real estate mogul has taken a rather shocking nine-point lead in a national poll of the hypothetical republican presidential field, according to a new survey by public policy polling ...
(us news and world report)
congrats to the billionaire toupee life-support system and born-again birther (and apologies to isaac asimov):
"there is an old fable," said hardin, "as old perhaps as humanity, for the oldest records containing it are merely copies of other records still older, that might interest you. it runs as follows:
"a republican horse having a democratic wolf as a powerful and dangerous enemy lived in constant fear of permanent minority status. being driven to desperation, it occurred to him to seek a strong ally. whereupon he approached a birther, and offered an alliance, pointing out that the wolf was likewise an enemy of the birther. the birther accepted the partnership at once and offered to kill the wolf immediately, if his new partner would only co-operate by placing his greater speed at his disposal. the horse was willing, and allowed the birther to place bridle and saddle upon him. the birther mounted, hunted down the wolf, and killed him.
"the horse, joyful and relieved, thanked the birther, and said: 'now that our enemy is dead, remove your bridle and saddle and restore my freedom.'
"whereupon the birther laughed loudly and replied, 'the hell you say. giddy-ap, dobbin,' and applied the spurs with a will."

(* see "giddy-ap" from january 2008 and "giddy-ap upated" from september 2010)

predictions

2011-04-09T14:27:00.004-04:00

but who's keeping count ...?
CNN: with a short video on barackobama.com, the sitting president of the united states has launched his bid for re-election.
using what apparently will be one of his campaign slogans, "it begins with us," the campaign has told supporters that the kickoff of the campaign has started and that means the race for contributions is on.
the familiar-looking blue "o" over red and white stripes is back again for 2012. and at the bottom of the website, the candidates' names are clearly identified: obama-biden — for vice president joe biden. [apr 2011]
as i posted many times, 0b0z0 won't be running for reelection, precisely because of the fear of being "REQUIRED" to prove his eligibility.
to make certain of ousting 0kaka, an accented, naturalized american should run for POTUS in '12. if he/she is thrown out as he/she should be, then he/she WILL HAVE STANDING to sue for proof of ALL other candidates' eligibility!
this is why i believe that 0b0z0 will never dare to run for reelection
by melancholy [mar 2010]

i'm here to tell you right now.
hillary will be VP early next year. the zero will be forced from office 3+ months later.
same story with agnew, nixon and gerald ford.
by imJustAnotherOkie (zerogottago) [mar 2010]

here's the scenario i see being played out where BHO is concerned. he will be allowed to serve one term as POTUS ... he will announce the fact he won't run for president for a second term sometime early in his fourth year. it is indisputable BHO is ineligible to be POTUS ... he will be allowed to serve one term simply because removing him from office would roil political & economic conditions in this country that would have enormous consequences, both here and abroad. he will be allowed to walk away with the distinction of being the first black president. if he refuses, and runs for office again, he will be defeated ... because his ineligibility will be front and center. better to leave with a modicum of dignity then have your reputation besmirched by the ineligible issue.
by bluH2o [dec 2009]

2010 leads to a massive GOP victory in both houses, even with dem voter fraud. the dems will then try to shove every socialist bill they can through between the election and swearing in of the new congress. they will use every underhanded technique they can because this is their last chance. once obama loses the ability to pass his agenda he because useless to the socialist cause. that is when a perfect storm of the blago [disgraced former IL gov. rod blagojevich] trial wake, his eligibility and a closer look at the impact of his nationalization efforts will intersect. he will then be removed either through impeachment or illness claim. biden will be left in charge and to really muck things up for the 2012 election where the GOP is surely to win. however, the dems will have tried to damage the country so much through cloward-piven that it will take a reagan time 10 to fix it all.
one good thing that has come of the obama presidency is that we now know who and where many of the power communists are and have been hiding. it will be easier to clean house.
by dutch boy [jul 2010]

here's the bet: he resigns before 2012 or doesn't run for second term.
by 1234

my bet is no elections in 2012.
by ml/nj

i’m in on that bet. i’ll go so far as saying there will be no elections this fall.
by vanilla swirl [jul 2010]

i think the LBJ scenario is the most likely. and obama will need to claim it has nothing to do with the eligibility issue which means he will have to make the announcement sometime this year before there is any ballot qualification unpleasantness.
by menehune56 [feb 2011]

by now, all those politically motivated to question obama should be confident that he is never going to release it under any circumstances. i believe he will not even seek re-election as president if forced to prove his eligibility by showing his long-form birth certificate.
by joe farah, publisher, world net daily [sep 2010]

i am so confident about the eventual outcome now that i am increasingly persuaded that barack obama will not even seek re-election.
that will be the tipoff that our suspicions about obama's eligibility and/or life story were correct all along.
by joe farah [feb 2011]

send off the clown

2011-04-08T19:44:00.002-04:00

somebody haz a sad ...
the negotiations that led glenn beck to announce his departure from the fox news channel on wednesday ended with an expression of "let's part as friends," according to several people with knowledge of the talks. but behind that moment was a torrent of acrimony that underscored just how fractious the relationship between mr. beck and the network had become during his three-year run on fox.
... from fox's perspective, the facts about mr. beck's run on the network have been public and indisputable. among those were the refusal of hundreds of fox advertisers to allow their commercials to be placed on mr. beck's program, and a history of incendiary comments that attracted harsh backlash, including one where the host called president obama a racist and another where he compared reform judaism to radical islam. (he later apologized for both comments.)

computer comix v3.0

2011-04-07T12:05:00.001-04:00

while 1988 saw prometheus steal color, 1990 gave him painting.
less than five years after 1985's "shatter", the first entirely computer-generated (cg) comic series and less than two years after 1988's "crash", the first full-length cg graphic novel — featuring marvel comics' invincible iron man — artist pepe moreno, still a relative newcomer who'd assisted in illustrating "crash", brought the ever-accelerating desktop computing revolution to one of the biggest properties in mass-market comics:
between 1937, when the first all-original comic book come out, and the release of the first computer-generated comic in 1984, the tools used in the creation of comic art remained fairly stagnant.
that all changed with the introduction of the first affordable graphics-oriented computer. all of a sudden, we had a machine that could do anything. most miraculously, that bottomless box of microchips and cathode rays has allowed our medium to grow — from the standpoint of technology — more in the ensuing five years than it did in the preceding forty-seven.
— mike gold, editor, dc comics

faster chips, more memory, bigger drives and falling prices brought with them higher resolution and a vastly expanded color palette: pixelization, "jaggies" and color-banding were beginning to give way to a richer and smoother result approaching traditional oil or airbrush and less harshly cg.
like its predecessors, "digital justice" explores the consequences of all this brave new technology as gotham city, having once again succumbed to corruption "sometime in the next century", erupts in a cyber-showdown between two rival a.i. systems covertly left behind by their now-dead creators: a malignant "joker" virus and a no-longer silent "batcom" surveillance program.
a couple of old friends, peter gillis and mike saenz, showed me some rough printouts of a story that was produced entirely on a 128k apple macintosh computer, using but one disk drive. the artwork was chunky and brittle: it looked like some amphetamine addict had been given a box of zip-a-tone that suffered from a glandular disease. but the look was totally unique to comics. within several months, we refined the look and the resulting effort — shatter — was one of the best-selling comics of the year. it completely astonished the folks over at apple computer, inc., who never perceived such a use for their hardware.

we've come a long way in the past five years: the book you are now holding was produced on a macintosh computer that has 64 times the internal memory, 400 times the storage capacity, about 8 times the speed, and hundreds of software packages. more important, digital justice takes advantage of different devices that, five years ago, were barely dreamed of for the home or studio: computer-aided design, 3-d imaging programs, high-resolution and direct-to-film printers, graphics scanners, and color. a whole lot of color. in fact, there's the potential for more than 16 million colors.
back then, naysayers and technophobes looked at the end result and, seeing only its shortcomings, declared the computer useless in the creation of comic art. since that time, that bottomless box has become so useful it is now almost invisible: artists have been using their machines to generate special effects, designers have been doing their design work online, letterers have been creating their own fonts, and craftspeople have been coloring comics with a palette (and the resultant special effects) heretofore unknown in the medium. dc comics even has its own in-house computer coloring department.

pepe wanted to turn cold computer technology into a warm "product" and to make the computer invisible. this is a formidable goal; there is a certain point an artist can reach wherein the end result no longer appears to be computer generated; at that point, the project will appear to be self-defeating.
his early experiences with the commodore amiga computer and primitive art programs gave pepe a head start on the color macintosh ii. in creating the movie-like look of digital justice, pepe conceived and executed his work directly on the monitor with the electronic medium in mind. he used a wide variety of tools to bring the book to life: cad programs, vector illustration, 3-d modeling, text effects, and such paint programs as image studio, studio/8 and photoshop.
pepe then arranges these images into panels, and then, using quark xpress, the panels are assembled into pages, and finally, balloons, text and sound effects are added: the completed work ultimately is sent out so that printing negatives can be made directly from over 200 megabytes of computer files. no "physical artwork" is produced. indeed, the full color digital separations in digital justice represent a genuine technological breakthrough.

(story and art by pepe moreno)
see also:
computer comix v1.0
computer comix v2.0

what nature may have neglected

2011-04-05T13:41:00.001-04:00

a "fashion first" from the village voice, circa july 16, 1991:

little boy blue

2011-03-25T09:11:00.000-04:00

japan's ongoing nightmare, the kiddie version:

quote of the week

2011-03-12T17:11:00.002-05:00

rare candor from 91-year-old nazi-sympathizer and freshman martin harty (r-of course):
i'm a new hampshire republican representative. got slid in during the republican landslide last fall. so far i really don't know what i'm doing. the whole process is so alien to anything else. a new rep really needs a coach along with him at first but there is no room for anyone to sit with him, and no way they could holler at him in a committee meeting.
am learning the hard way. little by little. i think that a few of the other first time reps must be in the same boat with me. we're all sort of bluffing it out. the few votes i've made so far i really didn't know what i was voting for or against. just looked at the people around me and went along with them.
there is so much pomp and circumstance connected with the legislature. you have to separate the real doings from all the fluff. people who obviously are making very generous salaries come and go as witnesses before the various committees with tidbits of usually self-serving information. you wonder where the money is coming from to pay these people.
yes, slowly if i keep my health, i'll master this trade and hopefully be of some use to the state. i like to write about things and applied for this job mostly to have the opportunity to write about politics from the inside. they say the pen is mightier than the sword but you've still got to get your scribbling read by the people.

quote of the day

2011-03-03T22:50:00.000-05:00

courtesy of pz meyers, one-man walking existential threat to church ladies everywhere:
i have zero sympathy for intelligent people who stand before a grandiose monument to lies, an institution that is anti-scientific, anti-rational, and ultimately anti-human, in a place where children are being actively miseducated, an edifice dedicated to an abiding intellectual evil, and choose to complain about how those ghastly atheists are ruining everything.
those people can just fuck off.

domino theory

2011-02-22T14:00:00.001-05:00

birther pangs

2011-02-21T14:38:00.015-05:00

longtime usurper family crony and newly-installed hawaii governor neil abercrombie may just have been crazy like a fox when in december he very publicly took it upon himself to "put this particular canard to rest" — referring of course to lingering birtherism — by finding "ways to change state policy to allow him to release additional proof that the president was born in honolulu in 1961."
hoocoodanode that the governor's shocking abandonment of his quest barely a month later would bring the ever-vigilant birthers roaring out of the deep funk they'd been stewing in since the bruising guilty plea and jailing of their hero and now former army ltc terry lakin, the usurper's latest political prisoner?
AND OBAMA SURE ISN’T GOING TO REQUEST THE BC BE MADE PUBLIC.
ZERO KNOWS ONLY HE CAN GET THE BC MADE PUBLIC.
HE REFUSES TO REQUEST THE BC, BECUASE IT DOESN’T EXIST.
THANKS GOV ABERCROMBIE.
by marty62

the surprise metastasizing of the still-ain't-quite-dead movement did not escape the notice of the lamestream media — its natural enemy — which was finally forced to admit, via ppp and cnn polls, what every real american™ always knew: that birthers rule! (well, at least in the gop ...)
... i wear the "birther" title proudly, just as i wear the "vexatious requester" title proudly.
someday i'm gonna sing, "i was ‘birther' when ‘birther' wasn't cool." lol
they've thrown all the rotten tomatoes that they have at us and we've come out of it unscathed. what are they gonna do now - bleed on us? wave their privates at our aunties? taunt us a second time? lol.
we are the little bunnies they ridicule but in the end they will be the ones soiling their armor. lol. the only question is whether they, in their figurative death throes, will bother to write out, "aaaaaaaaaaagggggggggghhhhhhh" (with a gutteral sound, in the back of the throat). lol
by butterdezillion
so now — with last november's return of congress' lower chamber into its rightful hands; with the oversight committee in the hands of darrell issa, from whose belt already proudly dangles the scalp of a onetime governor; with the ship of state's sails filling with a now-impossible-to-ignore whirlwind sweeping straight off the plains of central birfistan — elected and unelected officials no longer need tiptoe around the most important constitutional crisis in world history. birthers can therefore expect congress to stand with them arm-in-arm and heads held high as they launch those long overdue impeachment hearings ...
john boehner: "it's not my job to tell the american people what to think ... the state of hawaii has said he was born there. that's good enough for me ... the president says he's a christian. i accept him at his word."
eric cantor: "i don't think it's an issue that we need to address at all ... it is not an issue that even needs to be on the policy-making table right now whatsoever."
tim pawlenty: "i’m not one who questions the existence of the president’s birth certificate."
mike huckabee: "the idea that he's not a citizen, to me, y'know why that's nonsense? because if there was any shred of truth to it, hillary clinton and her wonderful investigative opposition research machine would have found it and would have used it and for republicans to even be bringing it up, i think it's a waste of energy and time. let's focus on the issues with which we have disagreement, not on, really, the extraneous personal things that are immaterial."
michelle bachmann: "it isn't for me to state; that's for the president to state ... when the president makes his statements, i think they should stand for their own."
sarah palin: "it’s distracting. it gets annoying. let’s stick with what really matters."
darrell issa: "mine is not the committee that asks where the president was born ... it doesn't ask what ministers that he went to think. all that stuff is a distraction. i'm not the overseer of the president."

... or maybe not.
annoying?
she's starting to annoy me.
by little jeremiah

i got a fundraising call today from someone claiming to be calling on behalf of john boehner. i let the poor girl have it. i told her that i had no respect for boehner and all the republicans who are so timid that they are afraid to demand that they see obama's birth certificate, and then suggested that she call me back for a contribution after boehner grew a pair, and did the right thing.
by ml/nj

this may explain obama’s refusal to resolve this issue. the progressives are using birtherism as a divide-and-conquer tool.
this explains why the sudden interest in whacking pubbies with ambush questions about obama’s birthplace.
the media can then sort people by this characteristic, and can safely ignore anyone tainted by the birther brush.
by dbrow

well of course that’s the media's strategy. the question is are we stupid enough to fall for it. the answer is probably. just look at the vitriol aimed at bush and romney on this board. hey, romney is not my choice and bush could have done a lot of things differently but i would crawl across broken glass to support romney, chuckleberry, gingrich or really anyone on the GOP side (well not sure about paul) if it means getting rid of the disaster we have now.
by marlon

you sir are a GOP kool-aid drinker. romney’s wothless, and elmer gantry’s [huckabee] a fraud. if any of them are the nominee, i’m staying home election day 2012. if the usurper is re-elected, we’ll deserve it for not running a true constitutional conservative.
by emperor palpatine

well...there goes the perception of [bachmann's] strength and integrity. and, i rather liked her, too.
overlooking what may well be one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated on the american people is no way to win hearts and minds among the populace.
by publiusmm

michelle bachmann did not dismiss or diss birthers....she handled the situation as best as she could.
palin said for the "GOP to distance itself from birthers" (words to that effect). palin dismissed the issue and the birthers....bachmann did not.
its time for the palinStinians to get real. sarah palin is a liberal RINO...and this is not the first time she has gone RINO. the palinStinians would still support and propagandize for palin if she joined al-qaeda.
by ucfroadwarrior

a good lawyer knows that you never ask a question unless you already know the answer.
any republican who sides with the bither "theory" would be lambasted until they could prove their assertion.
since there is currently no definitive proof one way or the other regarding obama's birth status, prominent republicans should stay neutral on the subject until there is.
as for me, i will be convinced about obama's status when i see the proof. until then, he is just another kenyan usurper gangsta with a karl marx fetish.
by kickass conservative

i know every conservative candidate will be asked if obozo is a citizen. my vote will go to the one who has the metal to say: whether he is a citizen or not, i do not know; but i know he is not a natural born citizen and therefore is a fraud and usurper; who is not eligible to be president; and so he should be impeached; prosecuted and imprisoned.
by polosec

america is doomed.
conservatives are heading in so many directions that there will never be a unified voice amongst us....
and no where has that been more obvious that right here at freepers.
not once has a freeper backed candidate made it to the white house.
why is that?
by halgr

the most powerful man in the world, operating out of the most powerful office in the world, situated in the most powerful nation in the world, and he can’t produce the most believeable fake in the world?
don’t bet the next election on it. obama’s been playing with this issue, he’s been loving it.
if he needs a BC, one will be fothcoming.
by balding_eagle

while i'm in no position to know if our marxist muslim overlord is "loving it" or not, i can admit that i most certainly am.
like the birther said: THANKS GOV ABERCROMBIE.

the evolution of a revolution

2011-02-04T08:22:00.000-05:00

(story and art by vadillo, 1972)

good question

2011-01-28T10:06:00.002-05:00

ed quillen @ the denver post:
have you ever heard of any campaigning politician, in any other industrial democracy, promising to provide "an american-style health-care system"?

so long, jack

2011-01-24T21:08:00.001-05:00

the original tv fitness guru, jack lalanne, dead at 96:
would you get your dog up every day, give him a cup of coffee, a doughnut and a cigarette?
hell, no — you'd kill the damn dog!

488 days ago

2011-01-14T01:06:00.004-05:00

... but who's counting?

a question for sharron angle

2011-01-12T09:28:00.000-05:00

from seneca doane @ daily kos:
i'm tired of beating around the bush arguing about evidence of whether jared loughner was or wasn't motivated to assassinate rep. gabrielle giffords last saturday by far-right-wing craziness. of course the republicans can disavow him — his being "crazy" and a "lone wolf" and all — as quickly as they like.
my interest is: can they disavow his actions — categorically? is what he did fundamentally wrong, in their eyes? or did he just choose the wrong target? the wrong time? the wrong place — what with all those people around? they're sorry, they're sorry, they're incensed at being presented as in some way sympathetic to these actions — but why?
if you want to keep a rifle in your house in case the oppressive government comes after you, then i think i understand what you mean by a "second amendment remedy." but we're not talking about home defense here; we're talking about guns in public, about shows of force. what i want to hear from republicans (and others who favor the NRA line) is: why in their opinion was what jared loughner did not a legitimate appeal to a "second amendment remedy"?
that's a question i'd love to see answered.
is it because "it's polling poorly"?
due to work, i've missed full coverage for the past two days of the festering counter-reaction to this weekend's righteous rejection of the rhetoric of death, so maybe others have already started asking this pointed question: why is what jared loughlin did wrong?
it's not because it's murder. a "second amendment remedy" will inherently involve murder — or at least killing someone, under an attenuated theory of self-defense. it's not even because bystanders were killed as well — these things happen in a revolution. had he shot rep. giffords and then threw down his gun, does anyone want to say that their reaction would be otherwise? (let him or her speak up, if so. i'd like to be forewarned.)
in fact, the problem with "second amendment remedies" is that this is what they look like.
here, listen to sharron angle:
you know, our founding fathers, they put that second amendment in there for a good reason and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. and in fact thomas jefferson said it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years.
i hope that's not where we're going, but, you know, if this congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those second amendment remedies and saying my goodness what can we do to turn this country around? i'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take harry reid out.
well, wasn't jared loughner fighting against a "tyrannical government," as represented by rep. gabrielle giffords — who at a similar 2007 event had had the temerity to reply to his question about the government's using language for mind control by replying to him in spanish?
don't we get to decide for ourselves what constitutes "tyranny," under this theory? surely we don't have to wait for the government to say "we're officially tyrannical now, so as a matter of constitutional law it's ok to start shooting at us."
well, jared loughner was more convinced that the government was tyrannical than most of us will ever be convinced of anything! so, why was his acting on that belief illegitimate, second amendment supporters from the republican and tea parties? because we disagreed with his judgment?
did he look around and say "my goodness, what can we do to turn this country around?" well, he probably didn't say "my goodness." but let me ask you, those of you who think that this wasn't "political" — do you think he would have shot gabrielle giffords and all these others if she had lost rather than won this past election by 1% of the vote? do you think he would have gone to find her at her old family tire store and shot her there? i highly doubt it (and not just because they sold it to goodyear.)
"i'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take harry reid out," is what sharron angle said — and the first thing loughner thought he needed to do was to take gabrielle giffords out.
isn't this what it's all about, fans of violent rhetoric? in what sense was his action not legitimate — by the standards of what those who blather about being "armed and dangerous" and who shoot up pictures rather than people and who pointedly remark about murder as a conceivable alternative to political victory?
please explain! please do explain — the children are listening. i'm sure they'd like to understand the distinction.
i don't have to explain why i think what he did was morally repulsive. i don't talk about "second amendment remedies" because i know that when we enter the arena in which logic and civility are no longer the means to victory, i've lost my advantage. i'll fight in the gutter if dragged into the gutter, but the gutter is not where i want to be.
is the real problem that republicans and tea partiers have with jared loughner is that he, unlike them, turned out not to be a poseur? that he actually went and did something that was only supposed to be threatened?
if so, then they need to do a better job of explaining "the rules" to those whom they influence with this sort of talk.
so in the meantime, if no one has already had the chance to do so, i'd really like to see someone ask sharron angle and sarah palin and michele bachmann and whoever else why jared loughner's "second amendment remedy" — his attempt, frankly, to overturn the results of an election with the bullet when the ballot didn't work — is illegitimate.
i don't even want to hear it — assuming they'll have a coherent answer — for my own benefit. but i sure would like the alienated 22-year-olds — who are watching jared loughner, head like a clenched fist, in the wake of this massacre and silently thinking "well, he sure went and did it. he had the courage of what he believed, what i say i believe" — to hear it.
explain to them, please why — believing in second amendment remedies in a political culture such as ours, as opposed to that of nazi germany or communist czechoslovakia or such — why what jared loughner did was wrong.
i know what i think it was wrong, but those sorts of kids won't listen to me.
they'll listen to you, maybe. so please, sharron angle and others, explain why this "second amendment remedy" was wrong.

at the movies

2011-01-02T12:21:00.002-05:00

speaking strictly for myself, i know, upon seeing a madman charging headlong at me with teeth grit, nostrils flared and extreme prejudice in his eye, that my first impulse wouldn't be ... to charge headlong at him.
which is probably why i'm not an action hero:

on the other hand, who hasn't savored all the little emotions flitting across your opponent's face, as he slowly comes to the cold realization that you've just defaced him — literally:

a new year's guarantee, revisited

2011-01-01T00:58:00.006-05:00

exactly one year ago birthers promised me a few healthy giggles for the new year:
the 2010 new year's resolution of all good conservatives should be to achieve the goal of restoring the u.s. constitution this year. if the kenyan usurper is still in office a year from now, we will have failed.

yes, that was way too easy, but i'll get my yucks in where i can ...
♦ ♦ ♦
update: leave it to the birthers to never disappoint. i'll be looking forward to reposting next year these resolutions for 2011:

... i have up here a few resolutions, just a few, but i hope we can all agree on them.
number one — i think we can all agree on this: defend and obey the u.s. constitution. we have — don't have that, we have nothing. no order, no rule of law.
number two: hold congress accountable. they're starting to listen, we voted a lot of them out, we can vote these — wonderful people — out as well.
number three, and almost as important: hold the media accountable. and that includes fox news. that's one of the reasons i'm standing up here right now, on new year's eve.
[number four:] free the patriot [former] lieutenant colonel terry lakin. he put it all on the line for his country. a true patriot. we must stand behind him and free him — with honor.
number five falls in line with all the above: expose the truth about barack obama. one of the catalysts for me standing up here right now — aside from glenn beck, as you all know — is [fox news reporter] megyn kelly and the ludicrous, asinine news show she has. where she covered abercrombie, neil abercrombie, the governor of hawaii, and used as a forum to insult concerned americans. was she fair and balanced? well, i don't think so. uh, megyn ... ? call me!
and that leads me to the last one: if necessary — and this is not something i necessarily wanted to do — glenn beck, are you listening? a new internet and/or tv news show. we need a real news show and — not entertainment, not megyn kelly showing her cleavage, making fun of concerned americans. real news. real fair and balanced news. and if necessary, i'll be involved in it. this may be the first show ...

... giggles guaranteed.

a message to you, rudy

2010-12-31T00:52:00.001-05:00

it is a dog-bites-man story. the military justice system proceeded in a way that was not merely predictable but predicted. the case makes our top-10 list largely because the dog was barking-mad and there was a three-ring flea circus performing on its back.
— JAG dwight sullivan, CAAFlog
i'm not gonna mince words, rudy: we told you so.
we told you so from the very beginning and at key steps along the way, but you refused to listen and you continued to insist you were right, in the face of folks actually paid to know what they're talking about and in the face of your perfect 0-70+ record for being wrong — though if you were the type to listen, you'd never be a birther, now would you? and as a birther, you thought that this was the case that was somehow gonna be different.
well, rudy, as it turned out, you were right: terry lakin's court-martial was in fact different. your hero and would-be martyr pulled an about-face on you, chose not to carry your cross and entered a guilty plea. i know that had to hurt, rudy.
as you jeered from the sidelines of previous court thrashings you could always find yourself some space where you could pretend you'd won something. you could always find some rickety perch where you could self-righteously puff yourself up (often just over the effort of getting into a courtroom) in preparation for the usurper's demise, where you could ignore all your previous losses and crow and spin and dive feet-first down the throat of anyone rude enough to point that out.
but not this time, rudy. because this time you were up against the u.s. military and like an efficient, well-oiled machine, they took your nonsense and checked it at the door, leaving you nothing to salvage from this trial, nothing to take home and proudly show off to momma:
no obama, no birth certificate, a guilty plea, a lengthy, thorough and painful allocution by the accused rejecting birthers and everything you claim to stand for, real punishment, no throngs of supporters or admirers or protestors and no military rebellion as a consolation prize.
and last but not least of all, the knowledge that just about every turn of the case was predicted, weeks in advance, by everyone you love to hate. clearly that proved just a bit too much for your bloated ego to take:

... as my friends fall away, and as my social circle of friends gets smaller and smaller ...
i guess sacrificing friends and family is a small price to pay for your country and constitution, but on this trial you bankrupted yourself thinking that the outcome was ever in doubt or could be spun any other way.

computer comix v2.0

2010-12-06T21:16:00.002-05:00

we are currently seeing the business world transformed by a microcomputer implementation called desktop publishing. ... it can be likened to having your own little printshop right on your desk.
— mike saenz, 1988

color. vector drawing tools. page layout. 3d modeling. less than three years of rapid advances in technology allowed artist and graphics software pioneer mike saenz to follow up 1985's "shatter" — the first comic series created entirely on computer — with 1988's "crash", a full-length 63-page graphic novel featuring marvel comics' high-tech hero, the invincible iron man.
... however, today's off-the-shelf tools are still evolving and are not yet suitable for my own specific need: the ability to create professional quality film for color offset lithography. that capability is a tall order. but it can be done. crash is proof.
... the macintosh ii was forthcoming from apple at that time. it was generally known that the mac ii was a powerful, color, open architecture machine. this was vital to the concept. only with the emergence of the mac ii in the early summer of 1987 could i enlist the help of fellow associate william bates of knowledge engineering.
... i presented bill with a written and illustrated wish list of the program that i wanted for crash. from there, bill coupled my ideas with his and code that he'd developed over the course of two years. bill called the resulting program lithographer.
also, i enlisted the help of michael miller ... of umecorp ... a diversified research and development company which has developed such products as high tech toys to real-time expert system shells — the kinds of things tony stark would use. mike functioned as a technical consultant on the character iron man.
... finally, i enlisted the help of fellow comic artist pepe moreno. pepe is well known throughout europe and the u.s. his books, rebel, zeppelin, joe's air force and gene kong are much acclaimed.

rounding out saenz' software arsenal was a new type of drawing program called illustrator '88 and a dimensional modeler called pro 3d. the results were a futurist's wet dream narrated in glorious techobabble.

working in a commercial program that i co-developed called comicWorks (mindscape), i was able to create the 10 megabytes of bitmaps that compose a good 75% of crash. while comicWorks was designed to create black and white, low resolution comic art pages, it was used on crash as a dedicated bitmap editor/creator. using a selection of graphic tools that i designed into that program, i was able to do just about everything required for raw black and white bitmap entry. once imported into lithographer, we could color them.
... lithographer was written as a 32-bit program, stepping beyond the 256 color limit of color quickDraw (apple's graphic system for drawing color images on screen) and utilizing the full range of the mac ii's color capability for display: 16.8 million colors. lithographer can process black and white images into 24-bit color and allow the user to blend the images.
the resulting graphics are free of the jaggy-edged quality of low res bitmaps. the higher resolution and greater range of colors can fool the uninitiated into thinking that parts of crash were created by conventional means. this process can be seen on many pages in crash. it looks like oil painting.

a much more precise and memory conserving method of creating complex graphics is to use computer drawing tools. computer drawing involves designating points, lines and curves without being forced to render all of the bit data in between points. for the mac, adobe illustrator is such a program.
using illustrator, i was able to create the crash cover, recreate marvel's S.H.I.E.L.D. logo (designed by bill sienkiewicz) and other graphics throughout crash. the result is black and white artwork with smooth and precise bezier curves and lines. ... while the results were very satisfying, due to the inherent time limitations of computer drawing input and output, i could not use this technique to create more graphics in crash.

using pro 3d (enabling technologies) for the mac, i built all of the 3d models required for the book. fury's osprey, stark's limosine, the robots, the shield levicarrier and others were created with pro 3d. using pro 3d's tools — which resemble a carpenter's lathe and jigsaw tools on screen — i was able to fashion the models and take "snapshots" of their various positions in a postscript file format. the pro 3d data was black and white so bill wrote code in lithographer that could import the data, display it, and allow me to compose it on the page and assign colors to it.

finally, lithographer automatically created 4 files for each page, one for each process color (cyan, magenta, yellow and black) and downloaded them to a linotronic 100 machine. the lino is a laser raster imaging device. it uses a small helium-neon laser to image and expose all of the millions of tiny dots directly onto black and white film. after proofing the film on a color proofing system, we could tell, and marvel's printer could tell, just how well the color separations came out.
there really is no "original art" created for the production of crash. the entire book exists as magnetically encoded data on floppy disks. to my way of thinking, this is an advantage. that data is flexible and could be useful again some day.

(story, art and software design by mike saenz; art assist by pepe moreno; programming and software design by bill bates)
see also:
computer comix v1.0
computer comix v3.0

computer comix v1.0

2010-12-06T01:30:00.005-05:00

back in a galaxy not too far away, back before photoshop, back before color even, back when there were only two programs, called macpaint and macdraw, and back when only a few guys actually knew how to use them^[1] ...
as first comics managing editor mike gold wrote in december 1985:
well, of course it had to happen.
when we released the first shatter special last february, we thought it would do well — after all, nobody had ever done an entire comic book on a computer before.
but curiosity value wears thin pretty fast. we took a chance with the shatter special and printed higher than our distributor's orders might indicate — something that is very, very rare for first comics (when our books are gone, they're gone; we're not in the back issue business and nearly all of our comics "sell out.")

those extra copies sold out very, very quickly. the distributors could not keep the book in their warehouses. in fact, we were under a lot of pressure to do a second printing.
"what the hell," we figured. "it's not a regularly published comic book, let's do a second printing."
that second printing "sold out" four days before it shipped from the printer — every copy we had was committed to the various distributors' warehouses all across north america and england.
so as we were thinking about doing a third — and final — printing on the shatter special, mike saenz and i started talking about what we'd do about shatter after our experimental six-issue back-up series in jon sable, freelance. we couldn't stay there — mike grell wanted his book back!
... actually, there was only one possible solution: shatter would have to appear in his own book.

the only question was how we would approach the project. we learned a lot from our six short experiments, and computer technology — particularly as it relates to apple's macintosh — evolved quite a bit since we started working on shatter.
what you are seeing in this issue is a far cry from what you saw in the shatter special. the library of type fonts has expanded greatly, so the words in the balloons should be a lot more readable. we learned when to use digitizers and special effects, and — just as important — when not to use them.
apple came out with two giant leaps forward: they perfected macdraw, a new graphic arts program that can be used along with their macpaint. macdraw is fantastic: among other things, it allows mike to draw each object as a separate entity which he then can place behind or in front of other objects. shatter is no longer simply dots on paper.

better still, apple came out with their laserwriter, an unbelievable printer that produces crisp, sharp printouts of mike's work. for graphic art reproduction, the difference between the laserwriter and traditional dot-matrix printers is like the difference between glossy coffee table art books and paintings on cave walls.
and even better still, the folks up at apple gave us a laserwriter. that sucker isn't exactly cheap; it's nice to know you're appreciated. thanks, apple!

(story by peter gillis and art by mike saenz)
see next:
computer comix v2.0
computer comix v3.0
[1] in fact, when artist saenz left the series after only a few issues, the book temporarily returned to traditional production methods since no one else knew how to use the computer equipment!

life imitating art

2010-12-01T23:28:00.006-05:00

art:

life:

actually, allow me to set the record straight: birthers aren't imitating cartoons — birthers are cartoons ...

the friendly skies

2010-11-24T23:13:00.000-05:00

(photo by m. trombly)

quote of the day

2010-11-20T21:02:00.000-05:00

john cole @ balloon juice:
why the hell do we even make pilots go through security screening in the first place? if they want to bring a plane down, they don't need nail clippers, a lighter, four ounces of hand lotion, or the rest of the stupid shit the TSA morons confiscate from the rest of us. all they need to do to bring a plane down is to ... point it down.

thank you for your concern

2010-11-13T22:19:00.007-05:00

con•cern troll |kən'cərn trōl|
noun
a creature out of greek mythology; a pretend pal, notorious for bearing gifts of dubious merit:
one and done: to be a great president, obama should not seek reelection in 2012
president obama must decide now how he wants to govern in the two years leading up to the 2012 presidential election.
by douglas e. schoen and patrick h. caddell
the washington post
in recent days, he has offered differing visions of how he might approach the country's problems. at one point, he spoke of the need for "mid-course corrections." at another, he expressed a desire to take ideas from both sides of the aisle. and before this month's midterm elections, he said he believed that the next two years would involve "hand-to-hand combat" with republicans, whom he also referred to as "enemies."
it is clear that the president is still trying to reach a resolution in his own mind as to what he should do and how he should do it.

glad you asked, mr president! we just happen to have a great idea you're just gonna love ...
this is a critical moment for the country. from the faltering economy to the burdensome deficit to our foreign policy struggles, america is suffering a widespread sense of crisis and anxiety about the future. under these circumstances, obama has the opportunity to seize the high ground and the imagination of the nation once again, and to galvanize the public for the hard decisions that must be made. the only way he can do so, though, is by putting national interests ahead of personal or political ones.
to that end, we believe obama should announce immediately that he will not be a candidate for reelection in 2012.

that's right! quit — for the sake of the country! look how happy everyone is after sarah palin quit!
if the president goes down the reelection road, we are guaranteed two years of political gridlock at a time when we can ill afford it. but by explicitly saying he will be a one-term president, obama can deliver on his central campaign promise of 2008, draining the poison from our culture of polarization and ending the resentment and division that have eroded our national identity and common purpose.
we do not come to this conclusion lightly. but it is clear, we believe, that the president has largely lost the consent of the governed. the midterm elections were effectively a referendum on the obama presidency. and even if it was not an endorsement of a republican vision for america, the drubbing the democrats took was certainly a vote of no confidence in obama and his party. the president has almost no credibility left with republicans and little with independents.

... and no one cares what democrats think!
the best way for him to address both our national challenges and the serious threats to his credibility and stature is to make clear that, for the next two years, he will focus exclusively on the problems we face as americans, rather than the politics of the moment — or of the 2012 campaign.
quite simply, given our political divisions and economic problems, governing and campaigning have become incompatible. obama can and should dispense with the pollsters, the advisers, the consultants and the strategists who dissect all decisions and judgments in terms of their impact on the president's political prospects.
obama himself once said to diane sawyer: "i'd rather be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president." he now has the chance to deliver on that idea.

no need to thank us, obama ... this was all your idea! really!
in the 2008 presidential campaign, obama spoke repeatedly of his desire to end the red-state-blue-state divisions in america and to change the way washington works. this was a central reason he was elected; such aspirations struck a deep chord with the polarized electorate.
obama can restore the promise of the election by forging a government of national unity, welcoming business leaders, republicans and independents into the fold. but if he is to bring democrats and republicans together, the president cannot be seen as an advocate of a particular party, but as somebody who stands above politics, seeking to forge consensus. and yes, the united states will need nothing short of consensus if we are to reduce the deficit and get spending under control, to name but one issue.

because, after all, we can't — and shouldn't! — expect republicans or anyone else to rise above politics!
forgoing another term would not render obama a lame duck. paradoxically, it would grant him much greater leverage with republicans and would make it harder for opponents such as senate minority leader mitch mcconnell (r-ky.) — who has flatly asserted that his highest priority is to make obama a one-term president — to be uncooperative.

and why would the GOP back down? duh! because we say so, that's why!
and for democrats such as current speaker nancy pelosi (calif.) — who has said that entitlement reform is dead on arrival — the president's new posture would make it much harder to be inflexible. given the influence of special interests on the democratic party, obama would be much more effective as a figure who could remain above the political fray. challenges such as boosting economic growth and reducing the deficit are easier to tackle if you're not constantly worrying about the reactions of senior citizens, lobbyists and unions.
moreover, if the president were to demonstrate a clear degree of bipartisanship, it would force the republicans to meet him halfway. if they didn't, they would look intransigent, as the gop did in 1995 and 1996, when bill clinton first advocated a balanced budget. obama could then go to the democrats for tough cuts to entitlements and look to the republicans for difficult cuts on defense.
on foreign policy, obama could better make hard decisions about iran, north korea and afghanistan based on what is reasonable and responsible for the united states, without the political constraints of a looming election. he would be able to deal with a democratic constituency that wants to get out of afghanistan immediately and a republican constituency that is committed to the war, forging a course that responds not to the electoral calendar but to the facts on the ground.
if the president adopts our suggestion, both sides will be forced to compromise. the alternative, we fear, will put the nation at greater risk. while we believe that obama can be reelected, to do so he will have to embark on a scorched-earth campaign of the type that president george w. bush ran in the 2002 midterms and the 2004 presidential election, which divided americans in ways that still plague us.

and why would anybody else back down? duh! because everyone loves a quitter, that's why! (and because we say so!)
obama owes his election in large measure to the fact that he rejected this approach during his historic campaign. indeed, we were among those millions of democrats, republicans and independents who were genuinely moved by his rhetoric and purpose. now, the only way he can make real progress is to return to those values and to say that for the good of the country, he will not be a candidate in 2012.
should the president do that, he — and the country — would face virtually no bad outcomes. the worst-case scenario for obama? in january 2013, he walks away from the white house having been transformative in two ways: as the first black president, yes, but also as a man who governed in a manner unmatched by any modern leader. he will have reconciled the nation, continued the economic recovery, gained a measure of control over the fiscal problems that threaten our future, and forged critical solutions to our international challenges. he will, at last, be the figure globally he has sought to be, and will almost certainly leave a better regarded president than he is today. history will look upon him kindly — and so will the public.

and everyone gets a pony!
it is no secret that we have been openly critical of the president in recent days, but we make this proposal with the deepest sincerity and hope for him and for the country.

[snicker]
we have both advised presidents facing great national crises and have seen challenges from inside the oval office. we are convinced that if obama immediately declares his intention not to run for reelection, he will be able to unite the country, provide national and international leadership, escape the hold of the left, isolate the right and achieve results that would be otherwise unachievable.
patrick h. caddell, who was a pollster and senior adviser to president jimmy carter, is a political commentator. douglas e. schoen, a pollster who worked for president bill clinton, is the author of "mad as hell: how the tea party movement is fundamentally remaking our two-party system."

ok, everyone can stop laughing now.

395 days ago

2010-10-14T00:58:00.000-04:00

... but who's counting?

it isn't a costume

2010-10-11T23:02:00.004-04:00

rich iott, ohio teabagger, republican congressional candidate and goose-schtepping playboy, inspires yet another winning untergang redub:

she who denied it, supplied it

2010-10-06T02:14:00.008-04:00

there is an apocryphal story that is told about former president lyndon johnson, who built his reputation as the most effective majority leader in the senate's history on his no-holds-barred style of political warfare. the tale is placed during his first congressional race, when he purportedly directed one of his aides to spread rumors about his opponent that alleged a too-familiar knowledge of barnyard livestock. the aide balked at the assignment, protesting that no one would believe the stories, to which johnson countered: "i know that, but i just wanna hear the s.o.b. deny it!"
... which brings us to connecticut teabag darling christine o'donnell and her first television ad in her long-shot senate campaign:
"i'm not a witch ..."

o'donnell's problem is, of course, that the charges of witchcraft she's now forced to publicly deny can't be blamed on shameless political opponents.

an occurrence on owl creek

2010-10-04T01:44:00.003-04:00

over the weekend birther soldier terry lakin, who invited his own court-martial by refusing to report to duty until the kenyan usurper in the white house shows him a birth certificate, seems to have decided on a change of strategy:
there’s been or is about to be a change of counsel in the lakin case with the highly experienced military justice practitioners from puckett & faraj, P.C. entering the case as LTC lakin’s counsel.

lakin's dog-bite attorney paul rolf jensen, whom we met on anderson cooper's show, appears to have been consigned to the dog house, along with lakin's birther cheerleading and fundraising squad:
"safeguardourconstitution.com" was the official lakinista website. it’s gone. go to that link now, and you are transferred to the american patriot foundation’s homepage.
and paulrolfjensen.com was a website tied to mr. jensen’s representation of LTC lakin. in fact, it included what appeared to be pictures of mr. jensen assisting LTC lakin in making his youtube video announcing his intention to disobey all orders. that link now takes one to the jensen & associates APC homepage.

ever since he was first charged, LTC lakin must have been experiencing something like what occurred with larry in animal house. remeber the scene where larry was in bed with the mayor's daughter and the devil popped up and said — well, we all know what the devil said. and then the angel popped up and gave contrary advice. that must be what it's been like for LTC lakin with mr. jensen playing the role of the devil and MAJ kemkes, his detailed defense counsel, playing the role of the angel. the angel finally won the argument in animal house. maybe MAJ kemkes finally prevailed with LTC lakin. or maybe the realization that he was about to say bye bye to his military retirement and be shipped off to the USDB caused LTC lakin to flinch. whatever the reason, LTC lakin will now be represented by counsel who will see their duty as zealously representing their client's interests rather than advancing a dubious political cause.
so we've probably seen the last of the guano crazy in the lakin case. the case is now likely to become an exercise in controlling the damage caused by LTC lakin's and his previous defense counsel's decision that it would be a really good idea to make a video of LTC lakin asserting his determination to disobey orders and placing that video on youtube, then carrying through on his promise (including by refusing an order to report to his medal of honor recipient brigade commander in arlington, virginia as ordered). it will still be interesting to see how the case unfolds and concludes, but it will now be much more of a dog-bites-man story than the man-bites-dog story it's been to this point.

it's of course possible that lakin actually thinks his highly competent new counsel will be able to get him what jensen could not — obama's birth certificate — but if he believes that for even a second, there's a bridge on owl creek that i'm sure i can sell him:

barbara stanwyck:		we're both rotten!
fred macmurray:		yeah — only you're a little more* rotten.*

"double indemnity" (1944)

gene & adrienne colan:
tom:	what do you remember fondly about your time at marvel?
gene:	the beginning with stan, when we were allowed such unprecedented freedom ... that's what i remember. i'd talk with stan about a plot over the phone, and i'd tape record his whole idea — it'd just be a few sentences. "this is what i want in the beginning, the middle, and what i want in the end ... the rest is up to you." i had all the characters work for me, what they looked like was up to me — except those that were already established. but whatever i did, i could do. the one time stan tells about at conventions, because it's laughable, is when i drew a whole page of a hand opening up a door. i did it to expedite matters, [laughs] so i could get through with it, but he didn't like it, he thought i was ...
adrienne:	remember, he called, he says, "what are you doing?"
gene:	"what are you doing — a hand opening up a door? where's the interest in that?"
adrienne:	but stan loves to tell that story at conventions, and we've been there to witness him on panels, telling that story. he always says, "however, if there's anyone who can draw a hand opening up a door, and capture your attention for a whole page, [it's gene]," which is very sweet of him to say. and that's kind of ... that's what made that time very sweet for gene, because stan was wonderful to gene in that way. there was no fear; he didn't use that kind of tactic, even when gene was constantly destroying the pacing of plot. only on occasion would stan call and say, "gene!" it was kind of like that, like a brother begging another brother, "please! please!" but not with the idea like his job was at stake, or, "you don't know what you're doing."
— *comic book artist* magazine, 2001

trump:	when you see what china is doing to us, where we're gonna lose this year, three hundred billion dollars to china — and they're taking all of our jobs — they're doing it through manipulation of their currency —
guthrie:	well, it is a sovereign nation* — you can't tell china not to manipulate its currency.*
trump:	if you have the right messenger, they won't be doing it for long. let me just tell you something —
guthrie:	seriously, you think you could just tell them —
trump:	we have the cards. yeah, they don't have the cards, we have the cards. my policy is very very simple. i would tell china, very nicely, fellas, you're my friend, i like you very much — i've made a lot of money with china, by the way, a lot of money with china. i would say we're going to put a 25% tax on all your products coming in and that's gonna do a number of things ... number one, as soon as they believe it's gonna happen, they would behave so nicely, because it would destroy their economy.

guthrie:	the, um, debt ceiling vote, the republicans are saying they don't think the debt ceiling should be raised. businesses have warned there could be dire consequences.
trump:	i don't care. i wouldn't raise it.
guthrie:	and you know most economists say that would send the us economy back into a recession?
trump:	what do economists know? most of them are not very smart.
guthrie:	you don't think if —
trump:	excuse me, excuse me ...
guthrie:	— the US defaults on its obligations it would be grave for the economy?
trump:	i don't think we'll have to default. you'll have to make a deal someplace. you might as well do it now. because if you keep raising it and raising it, let's keep raising it, you'll go ten years, let's keep raising the debt ceiling. i'd stop it right now. i'd go out, negotiate, i'd make deals ...
guthrie:	who's the deal to be made with?
trump:	well, the president should be leading the deal, but i don't think he's capable enough to lead the deal. instead you have the republican here, the democrat —
guthrie:	are you talking about a political deal?
trump:	well, ultimately, it's all political when you get right down to it, isn't it savannah?

guthrie:	is there a right to privacy* in the constitution?*
trump:	i guess there is. i guess there is ...
guthrie:	so ...
trump:	why do you — why, just out of curiosity, why do you ask that question?
guthrie:	well, i'm just wondering how that squares with your pro-life views?
trump:	well, umm, it's a pretty strange way of getting to pro-life. i mean, it's a very unique way of asking about pro-life. why are you — what does that have to do with privacy? how you are ... how are you equating pro-life with privacy?
guthrie:	well, you know about the roe v. wade* decision ... ?*
trump:	yes, sure, look, i'm for pro-life* ... i'm pro-life. i've said it. i'm very strong there and i'm strong on pro-life ...*