A Killer Quote for the Militants on Both Sides To Ponder

 "Dogma is not only the enemy of science, but the enemy of humankind."......Author unknown.

The Pacman Reaketh

Boy, does that Karl Rove ever have chutzpah. The guy is bitching and moaning now about how President Obama is supposedly using official trips to do campaigning. Sounds like a legitimate criticism, you say? Well, clearly, if somebody else was making it! I mean, just look at the frigging numbers, for Christ. Back in 2004, then President Bush had actually taken more campaign trips on the taxpayer dime than Obama (I think that CNN had it 34-26 in "favor" of Bush). Look, we obviously DO need some serious reform here (this, in that the taxpayers are absolutely picking up way too much of the tab for this). But to have some loathsome partisan weasel like Karl Rove be the spokesperson for it is borderline laughable (and, no, not even Bill O'Reilly was buying this shit).

On Me and Affirmative Action

I may have given the impression over the past several posts that I'm completely opposed to affirmative action. I'm not (though, yes, I personally prefer to refer to it as "outreach" and/or "diversity"). And let me give you an example here.......................................................................................Let's say that I'm the Dean of Admissions at Penn, Amherst, Carnegie Mellon, or any other institution of higher learning, and I'm down to my final slot. And my final two applicants are a) a white student from Marblehead Neck MA with an SAT score of 2125 and a GPA of 3.85 and b) a black-Hispanic person from the Bronx NY with an SAT score of 1990 and a GPA of 3.60. Me - I would probably (depending, of course, upon the interview and other factors) select the black-Hispanic student from the Bronx NY. And the rationale, of course, would be that the black-Hispanic individual from the Bronx probably had to work harder and overcome more things to achieve what he/she achieved than did the white student from Marblehead Neck MA...........................................................................................Now, does this in any way constitute "reverse discrimination"? I would argue not necessarily. I mean, it's not like I'm making allowances for an upper middle-class individual here; a person who, more than likely, wouldn't have needed the preferential treatment. That, in my opinion, is a mega distinction.

Diana Rigg ("On Her Majesty's Secret Service")

What would be my answer to the question, "So, who's your all-time favorite 'Bond Girl'?"

Put THIS on the Roof of Your Car

  For all of my colleagues who want to rag on Romney for that admittedly boneheaded move of putting his dog on the roof of the car, allow me. The treatment of livestock on factory farms (some of the most brutal treatment of living creatures on the face of this earth) makes that little faux pas look like a frigging all expense paid trip to doggy nirvana. So, unless you're a vegetarian, or you plan from now on to only eat meat from non-factory farms, you just might want to stuff that smugness and self-righteous indignation - at least for a tad, O'm saying......................................................................................P.S. That being said, no, Mr. Romney clearly WASN'T thinking on that one. I'm just looking for some damn perspective, that's all.

Note to Rachel "Bunny" Mellon

I do take checks.

In the Interesting/Did You Know? Category 4

That, according to the U.S. Bureau of the Census ("Household and Family Characteristics: March 1980"), college-educated black married couples actually earned slightly MORE than college-educated white married couples?...Holy shit, not even this blogger expected that one.

William Poole on Free Trade (Heady but Illustrative)

"The economist's case for free trade rests primarily on the fact that imposing or removing trade restrictions invariably in·var·i·a·ble
adj.
Not changing or subject to change; constant.

---

in·vari·a·bil
..... Click the link for more information. helps some firms and people and hurts others but with a positive net benefit for the country as a whole from moving toward freer trade. As I emphasized in a speech in November 2003, a key reason why the general public is reluctant to embrace free trade is that many do not understand the benefits. (9) And the reason people do not understand the benefits is that they do not understand the interactions and connections across markets. For one example, people may see the genuine costs imposed on workers who lose their jobs to imports, but fail to see the benefits to consumers of lower-priced goods from abroad..........................................................................................Economists are trained from their first course in the subject to understand the interactions across markets. The interactions are numerous and sometimes remote from the initial disturbance that sets off a chain of such interactions. It is usually possible to explain the nature of these effects to noneconomists, and formal statistical studies can often yield estimates of the magnitude of effects.............................................................................................Sometimes, an interaction is pretty obvious and it may not be difficult to convey the point. For example, restricting imports of a raw material will have positive effects on domestic producers of the raw material, and their employees, but will hurt domestic users of the raw material. Indeed, by forcing up the price of the raw material, domestic producers of the finished product may find themselves at a competitive disadvantage to foreign companies with a cheaper source of the raw material. Thus, saving jobs in the industry producing the raw material comes at the cost of reduced jobs in industries using the raw material and higher costs to consumers of the finished product.............................................................................................Most journalists want to smoke out all sides of a story. In the case of a story involving a trade dispute, smoking out the indirect effects is critical to explaining all sides of the story. Understanding the simultaneity principle leads immediately to questions about possible indirect and remote effects of trade restrictions. Those questions need to be addressed to economists and industry experts who can uncover the connections across markets and the indirect effects of trade restrictions."

In the Interesting/Did You Know? Category 3

That the period of greatest economic growth for African-Americans WASN'T the 1960s and '70s but the 1940s and '50s, prior to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and certainly prior to any formal affirmative action? I cite specifically the fact that the poverty level dropped from 87% in 1940 to 47% in 1960, a stunning 46% drop-off..................................................................................And, NO, I'm not saying that the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act weren't important. They were extremely important. I'm just saying that the ECONOMIC progress that occurred during the previous century wasn't solely contingent upon various government edicts/policies. Big difference.

In the Interesting/Did You Know? Category 2

 That Arabs have enslaved more black Africans over the centuries than Europeans/European-Americas have (14 million to 12 million)?............Sources; "The Atlantic Slave Trade: A Census" Philip D. Curtin 1997, "The Slave Trade: The Story of the Atlantic Slave Trade" Hugh Thomas 1999, 2 others available upon request.

On Sharpton's Idiotic Claim that Black Africans Were the True Ancient Egyptians

I'm sorry, folks, but the real "dope" here is Sharpton himself. I mean, where in the hell did he think that the Arabs came from? Persia? Outer Space? And then they did WHAT exactly, push these sophisticated black Africans all the way to the sub-Sahara (and in a manner, no less, that caused them to completely lose their language and culture)? Where in the hell is the frigging history of this, damn it? There isn't any...................................................................................Look, I understand that history has largely been told from a Eurocentric perspective. I get it. But to replace this one set of biases for another more politically correct (and this instance, inaccurate) set accomplishes shit. What do you people say that we put EVERYTHING on the table and develop a critical thinking skill or two? I mean, don't you think that that would help a young African-America student a hell of a lot more than rah-rah-sis-boom-ba!?

Fox Vs. MSNBC - The Prime-Time Reasonableness Edition

1) 5PM - Chris Matthews versus "The Five". This is about a tie, folks (and, no, not in a good way, either). You've basically got one partisan ramrod (who's occasionally reasonable), Matthews, versus a conservative cabal and one token liberal (the oft-times all too agreeable, Bob Beckel).............2) 6PM - The Reverend Al Sharpton versus "Special Report with Bret Baier". The advantage here goes to Fox. While, yes, Mr. Baier probably does tilt to the right (though, no, you'd never know it with certitude based upon his recent dressing down of Romney), he's certainly more palatable than the camera hugging and divisive Mr. Sharpton. That, and Mr. Baier does in fact feature SOME liberal commentators.............3) 7PM - Matthews again versus Shepard Smith. This is a solid victory for Fox. Mr. Smith is SUCH a fair-minded fellow that even the rabid left-winging "Rolling Stone" spared him.............4) 8PM - Ed Schultz versus "The O'Reilly Factor". I'd have to give the slight edge here to Fox again. I mean, yeah, O'Reilly continues to be obnoxious and biased to the right and all but at least he's occasionally tolerable. Schultz, I literally have to force myself to watch him.............5) 9PM - Rachel Maddow versus Sean Hannity. Honestly, folks, while I can't really stand either one of them, I'd probably have to give the slight edge here to MSNBC. a) Maddow is smarter and b) her snarkiness is at least somewhat more palatable Mr. Hannity's much more brazen nastiness.............6) 10PM - Lawrence O'Donnell versus Greta Van Susteren. This is a hard one, people. While Ms. Van Susteren is probably a little less partisan, this O'Donnell guy does have a certain level of charisma that, even if you don't necessarily agree with him all the time, it does make for some interesting viewing (and, yeah, I probably WOULD have a beer with him). Oh, what the hell, advantage here, MSNBC.............Final score Fox 3 MSNBC 2 1 round even. Fox wins. Ha ha ha ha ha.

On the Late Kim Jong-Il

I still wouldn't have minded seeing his vast porn collection/sampling his cognac.

Channeling Louie DePalma

It takes a big man, Reiga',....to share a woman....with his own....FATHA'!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Richard J. Daley

Tough customer. Flawed human-being. Excellent mayor. American original.

Thomas Sowell on Central Planning

".....in political rhetoric is the government's suppression of other people's plans by superimposing on them a collective plan, created by third parties, armed with the power of government and exempted from paying the costs that these collective plans impose on others."......Yeah, I think that that (especially as it pertains to such destructive policies as eminent domain, zoning laws, building restrictions, etc. - all of which have disproportionately harmed the poor and working-class folks) just about sums it up, folks.

I Hate the Phillies

That's it/no biggie. As a Mets fan, I just need to say it every once in a while.

In the Interesting/Did You Know? Category

That, during the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries, the Barbary Pirates of Northern Africa enslaved in excess of one million White-Europeans and that, even after the release of Africans from enslavement in North and South America, the slave-trading of  these White-Europeans continued for several decades longer? Youza, huh?......Robert C. Davis "Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters" 2003

On the Influential Assertion That Poorer Living Conditions Invariably Lead to Higher Crime-Rates 4

My colleagues are right about one thing, though. People in a state of abject poverty/powerlessness are far less likely to engage in a full-bore rebellion (though, no, even here it isn't absolute - world history is spattered with examples of slave rebellions, for example) than those who've ultimately achieved a modicum of success (this point was brilliantly articulated in Eric Hoffer's seminal, "The True Believer") . But it can also be said that a lot of these populations have in fact gone through a similar trajectory; the Chinese folks in America, the West-Indian Blacks in America, African-Americans, the Chinese minority in Burma, the Armenian minority in Turkey, etc. and that it's only been the African-American minority in America that has shown a sharp downward spiral in overall achievement. I don't know, folks, I think that we really need to examine this issue a little more thoughtfully and NOT frigging jump all over Bill Cosby whenever the poor bastard opens his mouth.

On the Influential Assertion That Poorer Living Conditions Invariably Lead to Higher Crime-Rates 3

 Gee, I wonder if those Japanese-Americans who were sitting in internment camps in the early '40s were ever "perceivers" of THEIR inequality. Methinks that, yeah, they probably were.

On the Influential Assertion That Poorer Living Conditions Invariably Lead to Higher Crime-Rates 2

It appears that some of my colleagues didn't like the Chinatown example. Hm, perhaps the Armenians in Turkey example will prove a little more illustrative. As I think that most people are cognizant, the Turks actually tried to exterminate the Armenians prior to and during World War 1 (yeah, methinks that the Armenians did in fact "perceive" this modest level of inequality). And even after the war, these hostilities remained and, yes, even in spite of this, the Armenian population eventually achieved a level of economic attainment that actually superseded that of the average Turk. Once again, I submit to you people that there is far more to criminal behavior than simply being the lowest group on the economic and social totem-pole (the Chinese minority population in Burma being yet another example).

On the Influential Assertion That Poorer Living Conditions Invariably Lead to Higher Crime-Rates

"During the 1960s, one neighborhood in San Francisco had the lowest income, the highest unemployment rate, the highest proportion of families with incomes under $4,000 per year, the least educational attainment, the highest tuberculosis rate, the highest percentage of substandard housing of any area of the city. That neighborhood was called Chinatown. Yet in 1965, there were only five persons of Chinese ancestry committed to prison in the entire state of California."......James Q. Wilson and Richard J. Herrnstein, "Crime and Human Nature" 1985............Clearly there are some other factors/pathologies at work here, people.

On Ed Schultz, Mike Malloy, Michael Savage, and Bill Cunningham

I prefer my pundits to be of the non-foaming at the mouth variety, thank you very much.

Punditry Royalty - Left, Right, and Center

Not that I agree with any of these guys 100%, mind you, but they're always interesting, thought-provoking, and civil. What do you say that we all give it up for Jeff Greenfield, George Will, and David Brooks, folks?

Biting the Hand that Fed Him, And Well

Did you hear the latest? Newt Gingrich is apparently most unhappy about Fox News's coverage of him. Can you say "I've essentially heard it all now, folks"? I certainly can.

I Can't For the Life of Me

For decades now the pro-life and pro-choice factions have basically been talking past each other. And, yes, folks, it's obviously been the extremes who've been the loudest here. On the far right you have some folks so extreme that they actually consider the morning-after pill synonymous with abortion. And on the far left you have other people so extreme that they think that a woman should be able to abort a fetus LITERALLY 24 hours prior to the due-date. You'd think, wouldn't you, that the saner folks in society could eventually push these people to the side and come up with a far more rational approach? I mean, I know that this has largely become an emotional issue and all but, please, can we plainly just knock it off with all of these battle-lines....at least for a minute or two?

On Ann and Mitt Romney

More Ann, less Mitt, please.

Slow-Pitch Cities

Ed Schultz the other night referred to (quite rightly, in my estimation) Sean Hannity's interview with George Zimmerman's father as a "softball interview". Fair enough. The only problem here is that several days after this comment, Mr. Schultz conducted an interview with Vice President Biden and practically performed oral sex on the fellow.......................................................................................The way that I see it, folks, maybe we should just leave these interviews to the professionals like Anderson Cooper and Wolf Blitzer (hell, even Fox News's Bret Baier is half decent), and simply let these ramrods like Hannity and Schultz continue to drool, foam at the mouth, etc.. The country, I think, would be infinitely better served by it.

Blue-Laced Agate, Botswana Agate, Yellow Jasper, Black Jade, and Snowflake Obsidian

What would be my answer to the question, "So what are your top 5 all-time favorite semi-precious stones?"

Good Night and Good Grief

Alright, let's take a look at this again, folks....All throughout prime-time, Fox and MSNBC have literally peppered their prime-time lineup with partisan, ramrod ideologues. And all throughout these "broadcasts", these very same ideologues are cavalierly tossing around such journalistic terms as "news", "coverage", "reporting", "investigations", "uncovering", "story". To say that these ideologues (all of whom are operating on a cable NEWS station) are NOT trying to have it both ways (i.e., constantly trying to cloak their opinions in this journalistic wrapping) is absolutely ridiculous. These people OBVIOUSLY think that they are engaged in some form of journalistic enterprise.............................................................................................Now, I will agree with you that this type of journalism (advocacy journalism, opinion journalism, etc.) is an exceedingly shitty form of journalism, and that I personally wouldn't want to rely on it for my information. But that, I'm saying, would be an entirely different question, now wouldn't it?

Gee, Keithy, That's a Dirty Rotten Friend You Got There in GE (With a Nod, Quite Obviously, to the Beave)

You'd think, wouldn't you, that a company like GE, which sends thousands of its jobs overseas, which paid literally not one penny in taxes last year, and which continued to do business with a country like Iran, even when they were supplying weaponry to our enemies in Iraq, would be the EXACT type of company that a principled individual like Keith Olbermann (sarcasm exceedingly dripping here) would want to avoid like the plague? Hm, could it possibly simply be nothing more than yet another individual pursuing his own rational self-interest? A possibility?.........................................................................................P.S. And as far as Mr. Olbermann "earning" this money, even that, folks, is a frigging stretch. I mean, the guy got beaten like a a cheap set of bongos nightly by O'Reilly, for Christ.

On the Reverend, Al Sharpton (And With a Nod to My Good Friend, Marcus)

Sharpton's a tool.

Note to Rush/Douche-Bag Limbaugh

Yeah, I suppose that any government of any country could technically be called a "regime". But when I hear the term, I have much more of a tendency to think of individuals such as Saddam Hussein, Augusto Pinochet, Pol Pot, Roberto D'Aubuisson, Benito Mussolini, the Hamidian reign of holy terror in Turkey, Hafez and Bashir al Assad, the Shah of Iran, Slobodan Milosevic, Idi Amin, the Saudi royal family, Fidel Castro, Omar al Bashir, Muammar Gaddafi, Jerry Falwell (just wanted to see if you were paying attention), and, of course, Hitler and Stalin (please, feel free to fill in whoever I've forgotten). I don't think of a duly elected President of a Western democratic country.........................................................................................I mean, please, don't get me wrong here, bud. Mr. Obama could and probably SHOULD be criticized, but for you to be going around using hyperbolic innuendo like this - all that that's going to do is marginalize you (yeah, yeah, I know, you have a shitload of listeners - bit in the world of sanity, I'm saying) EVEN MORE (not that you necessarily want to be taken seriously, obviously). You really might want to reconsider this one.

On the Republican "War on Women"

I thought that we weren't supposed to use militaristic language anymore.

On Rational Self-Interest and Compassion

THEY'RE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE! I mean, I know that we have a lot of hard-core ideologues on the right (Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity) and on the left (Olbermann, Schultz, wd) who seemingly think that everything is some sort of either/or proposition and all but, COME ON! Think a little for Christ sakes!

Da' Bulls, Da' Facts

Here it is, folks; real disposable income over time. Yes, it did dip somewhat in 2009 but the overall trajectory has been upward since 1969. I mean, I'm sorry but there it is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5tqH7UrzOw

I'd be VERY curious to see how my compassionate, non-greedy progressive colleagues would handle THIS.

Things That the 99%ers Apparently Don't Know

1) That the top 1% only made 16.9% of the adjusted gross income for 2009.............2) That the percentage of the overall pie going to the top 1% actually went down from 20% in 2008 to the just mentioned 16.9%.............3) That the top 1%, even though they only made 16.9% of the AGI, payed 36.7% of all federal income taxes.............4) That a full 57% of the people in the bottom quintile in 1996 had actually made it to a higher quintile by 2005.............5) That the top 1% controlled 42.9% of country's total financial wealth in 1983, and that that number actually went down a smidge to 42.7% by 2007.............6) That, while, yes, the top 1%'s percentage of the income pie did go up 11.7% from 1988 to 2009 (from 15.16% to 16.93%), their percentage of the total federal income tax went up at a significantly higher rate; 33.2% (from 27.58% to 36.73%).............7) That 46% of Americans pay ZERO federal income tax.............8) That a person who graduates high school and who doesn't have a child out of wedlock has but a 7% chance of living in poverty (this, as opposed to a 64% chance for those who do just the opposite.............9) That the United States spends (err, I mean, invests) more on K-12 education than any other country on the planet (not named Switzerland) - this, despite the fact that the outcomes continue to deteriorate.............10) That African immigrants achieve the highest educational attainment rate of any immigrant group in the country and that they also achieve at a significantly higher rate than Caucasian-Americans.............11) That social spending increased markedly from 2000 to 2010. Here, folks, are the respective increases (adjusted for inflation) from specific areas; Medicaid and SCHIP 87%, Veteran's benefits 107%, Welfare and other income security programs 91%, Education 155%, Health resources and regulation 69%, Natural resources and the environment 47%, Unemployment compensation 559%, Medicare 81%, Housing assistance 108%, Food assistance 139%, WIC 52%, Child nutrition 47%, Child tax credit payments 2,155%, and the Earned Income Tax Credit 48%.

On Greed and Compassion

I quite resent this notion that the American people are somehow a greedy lot, and that they're only concerned about themselves. It certainly doesn't mesh with the world that I see and it doesn't mesh the data, either. According to the Charitable Aid Foundation, the United States is THE most generous country on the planet (65% of its citizens donate money, 43% donate personal time, and 73% help out strangers). And to think that this type of charity would somehow shrink up if in fact the government did decide to cut back a little is both ridiculous AND insulting..............................................................................................I also deeply resent the demonization of wealth and achievement in this society. It was, folks, the industrialists and business visionaries of the United States who truly made it the great place in which literally every frigging immigrant on the planet wanted to come to FOR DECADES. And even when these people like John D. Rockefeller (Jr. and Sr.), Andrew Carnegie, Andrew Mellon, and Walter Annenberg weren't busy creating wealth, they were even busier giving it away. Hell, folks, even Cornelius Vanderbilt, who admittedly was somewhat skinflint during his life, donated (in 2012 dollars) $260,000,000 toward the creation of Vanderbilt University. Compare this, I ask you, to the bullshit ways in which Hoover and FDR frittered away taxpayers' money and, yes, it even becomes more of an outrage to demonize these great men.........................................................................................Of course, the thing that probably pisses me off the most is this idiotic notion that only liberals are capable of compassion - that they've essentially cornered the God-damned market on it, if you will. I mean, to me, the very concept of trying to solve, literally, EVERY PROBLEM with taxing the well-to-do and then creating yet another layer of bureaucracy isn't just a hackneyed approach. It's also a dangerous one in that it all too often hurts the very people that you're allegedly trying to help (rent controls - perfect example)..............................................................................................The bottom-line here, folks, is that we really, REALLY, need to work together and knock it off with all of this demonization bullshit. Both sides.

On Bill O'Reilly and Keith Olbermann

They're both dweebs and shits. One of them just happens to be successful.

And Then There Were None - R.I.P. Mike Wallace

First we lose Russert and now we lose Wallace. What's left? Keith Olbermann? Bill O'Reilly? Please.

Note to Rick Santorum

You know something, Rick, you're right, it kinda is "half-time". But I also need to tell you that the score at this particular half-time is 600-234, and, unless you've got a whole hell of a lot of "hail Mary's" in that arsenal of yours, I'm not exactly seeing a major comeback brewing here. I mean, if I were in your situation (and I'm seriously thankful that I'm not), I would get out and get out soon. The last thing that you need is for you to get your frigging ass handed to you in your own home state of Pennsylvania. That, me-bucko, would more than likely ruin you and any future endeavors. I mean, you are in fact thinking toward the horizon, no?

On a Single-Payer Health-Care Model For America

I consider it a Kafkaesque piece of crap that's been constructed strictly to pacify a bunch of marginal collectivists who are fearful of true freedom, and who wish for the rest of us to descend to their level and lack of initiative.

For a Smart Guy He Does Say Some Rather Dumb Things

Obama, April 2: Ultimately, I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress............................................................................................Wow, huh? I mean, this sucker is a doozy. Unprecedented? For Christ sakes, any frigging college sophomore knows that the Supreme Court has struck down numerous pieces of legislation throughout our history. Hell, if anything is unprecedented here, it's the fact that we have a President politicking DURING an actual proceeding..............................................................................................And as my other colleagues have also pointed out, 219-212, with 34 members of the President's own party voting NO, it's really hard to be magnanimous to the President regarding his other assertion, too; i.e., that the law was passed by a "strong majority of a Democratically elected Congress". Thankfully here, the President has walked it back a little (still not admitting that he was wrong), but can you even begin to imagine if a Republican had uttered a statement quite this imbecilic? Yeah, huh? Prepare yourselves for the spin................................................................................................P.S. Please, this is in no way an endorsement of the way that Republicans have behaved, either. They have obstructed and demonized a bill which, while, yes, was very shitty in many regards, was essentially THEIR BILL from 1993. Instead of trying to torpedo it, they could have just as easily tried to work across the aisle and improve the sucker. They didn't, though. Too busy trying to defeat Obama FOUR YEARS OUT!

On the General Services Agency Spending $3,200 For a Mind-Reader

I'd have done it for half that (plus some beer, of course).

Reasons to Vote For Obama Over Romney - My Perspective

a) Romney would probably be an even bigger crony capitalist.............b) Court appointments - While I doubt that Mr. Romney would throw another Antonin Scalia at us, I also doubted that Bush 1 would throw a Clarence Thomas at us. You just never know, essentially.............c) Mr. Obama is significantly stronger on gay rights (it took him a while but he eventually got there).............d) While both men are reckless internationalists, my suspicion is that Mr. Obama is a little less reckless.............e) While I'm not completely sure that I trust either of these fellows, again, I give the slight edge to Obama.............f) An overall Republican tendency to treat the defense budget as a sacred cow.............g) A seeming unwillingness on Romney's part to even look at revenues.............h) The fact that Mr. Romney will seemingly do or say anything in order to get people to like him.............i) I'd rather have a beer with Mr. Obama.

Can You Sat Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Dee?

I knew that ya' could.......Seriously, though, these two damned imbeciles should really do a show together. I'd watch...AND LAUGH!

Shelby Steele, Thomas Sowell Being Too Much of a Hawk

What would be my answer to the question, "So, who's your all-time favorite black conservative?"

On Douche-Bag Limbaugh

He's the Alexander Graham Bell of asshole punditry. And I don't just hold him responsible for the garbage that he's been muttering over the years. I also hold the asshole responsible for the creation of every other asshole pundit who has LITERALLY crawled out of this burgeoning morass that he has so moronically created; every frigging stooge from Michael Savage and Mark Levin to Markos Moulitsas. Look, I don't necessarily wish these assholes ill or anything but do we really and truly have to listen to this shit, 24/7? I mean, seriously, folks, do we?

A True Libertarian Wouldn't Have Even Taken the Job (i.e., Fed Chairman)

What would be my response to a person trying to tell me that Alan Greenspan (a person who's been vilified by virtually every living Libertarian over the past several years) isn't really a Republican, that he's actually a staunch Libertarian?

On the Corporatist NAACP and Urban League

http://griid.org/2011/08/11/corporate-funding-of-urban-league-naacp-civil-rights-orgs-has-turned-into-corporate-leadership/

Miscellaneous 126

1) On CNN last night, they had yet another audio expert examine the 911 tape of George Zimmerman and after a far more resolute examination of it, it now appears that Mr. Zimmerman was muttering, "fucking cold" and NOT "fucking coons". Not that this necessarily changes any potential murder or manslaughter charges, mind you, but it does in fact mitigate the hate-crime component greatly, I think.............2) And tonight, YET ANOTHER audio expert has since said that the phrase in question is, "fucking punks". Will we, folks, ever truly know what this frigging idiot said?............3) Not that I know all of the facts of this case, mind you. But at least from what I can glean up to now, there does appear to be a sufficient amount of evidence for a solid manslaughter charge. a - Trayvon Martin wasn't doing anything illegal. b - George Zimmerman had no right to be following the kid (if in fact he felt that Trayvon was suspicious, all that the dude really needed to do was call the police). And c - Mr. Zimmerman clearly didn't need to use lethal force (if by chance he did feel threatened, he could have just as easily shot him in the arm or the leg).............3) Joy Behar went on Dr. Drew's show last night and right on cue started drilling Palin. "Why in the hell are we still listening to her?", she put forth rhetorically....and it was like (and, yes, this is me holding court now), "Probably for the same reasons that we're still listening to you; because we really like listening to dullards with a sub-100 IQ babbling incessantly."............4) Her and frigging Sarah Palin, what a frigging pair, huh?

Miscellaneous 125

1) I'll admit it. I'm still somewhat ambivalent on Obamacare. On the one hand, I defend it by pointing out to my conservative colleague that the plan is essentially a knockoff of the 1993 Republican plan, a Heritage Foundation paradigm, Romneycare, and the 2007 bipartisan Wyden-Bennett proposal. And on the other hand, I criticize it to my liberal colleague for the plethora of inconsistencies in it; the fact that the penalty isn't nearly sufficient enough to ensure compliance (it essentially allows individuals to simply pay the fine and then buy insurance only when they get sick), the hundreds and hundreds of waivers that have up to now been granted it (multiple chapters of the SEIU, for instance - a group that has donated heavily to Mr. Obama).............Right now, I myself am leaning some toward health savings accounts (with subsidies for those who can't afford it) and only having insurance for catastrophic illnesses. That way, the people will be a little bit more prudent and make these SOB providers actually compete for our services for a change.............2) Black music has essentially gone from Miles Davis, John Coltrane, Charles Mingus, and Thelonious Monk to Nicki Manaj and some idiot who simply goes by the name of "Common". I mean, I know that the concept of "progress" can be measured in a great many ways and all but this to me is just flat-out REGRESS (and, yes, I understand that there is more to black music than simply these two numb-nuts but, in the mainstream, I'm saying).............3) I call President Obama a corporatist and a crony capitalist and I get accused of "bashing the President". Some individual by the name of Cenk Uygur essentially says the same thing and suddenly this becomes an insightful criticism. Only in America, folks. Only in America.............4) I criticize President Obama for his (what I consider to be reckless) foreign policy and I get accused of "bashing the President". Noam Chomsky accuses President Obama of war crimes and says that the man should be dragged in front of a Nuremberg caliber tribunal and CRICKETS!. Wow, huh? And to think that the hard-left (the Olbermanns and Schultzes of the world) still frigging wonder why we hate them so.

Swit (With Apologies to Bridal)

What would be my answer to the question, "So, who's your all-time least favorite Loretta?"

Lynn (With Apologies to Young)

What would be my answer to the question, "So, who's your all-time favorite Loretta?"

No, But I'm Sure that They'll Flat-Out Expire Tryin'

What would be my answer to the question, "So, is there any way that the progressives can pin 'Operation Fast and Furious' on former President, George W. Bush?"

Miscellaneous 124

1) Gingrich has finally given some hints that he will in fact ultimately support Mr. Romney. Can you folks say, awkward? I mean, think about it, what's he gonna frigging say, "You know, for a 'maniacal liar and vulture capitalist', he really isn't all that bad of a fellow."? I'm telling you, people, if I were Mr. Romney, I would tell him to stuff it - big time.............2) Not that a lot of the other Romney "endorsements" have been all that full-throated, either. I mean, did you happen to get a gander at that one from Senator Inhofe? I mean, it was practically a dis, for Christ....Damn, I'm actually starting to feel sorry for Romney.............3) Oh well, I guess that at least one of those ambiguities pertaining to the Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin case has been settled. According to several forensic voice experts, the odds of that scream being that of George Zimmerman's is approximately 100-1 - not good, not very good at all. I'm beginning to think that those who've been clamoring for an arrest in this case are likely to be vindicated and soon.

Soupy "Take no Prisoners" Hart

So, Newt Gingrich is charging people $50 to have their picture taken with him now? That's a little bit steep, no? Me? I'm telling you here, folks, the only way that I would pay that much is if it was me throwing a coconut cream pie in his face. And I'm not even so sure about those conditions (he, on the other hand, needing moolah, would more than likely consent to them) .