Elephant political party throws shit in America’s face
Elephant political party throws shit in America’s face
Over the Line, Smokey! has never had anal oil leakage but sympathizes with those whose drawers may have suffered such an insult.
A whopping 84% of ‘white tuna’ was actually escolar, the snake mackerel fish that causes oily anal leakage and was banned by the FDA until 1992. It is still banned in Japan, Italy, and requires warning labels regarding the leaky discharge in Canada, Sweden, and Denmark.
I hope our horrified readers will vote to support and strengthen the important government agencies that should be protecting us from these sorts of things, but of course these are the agencies that the richest of the rich are trying to eliminate. You know, Mitt Romney et al doesn’t eat white tuna from a can. Of course, he also doesn’t give an oil about our libraries, fire protection, post office, roads, mass transit, gun control and other things that the commoners use. Republicans want to weaken all government agencies so they can sell more stuff that ruins our underwear, without interference from the law, the truth, accurate labeling or common sense. Over the Line, Smokey! simply asks Americans to WAKE THE FUCK UP!
The USPS is going bankrupt because in 2006 the Republicans in Congress snuck through a bill forcing the USPS to fully fund future pensions, a requirement not faced by other branches of government or the private sector. The object was and is to bankrupt the Postal Service and put them out of business. Rich people, unlike the great majority of citizens, don’t need or want the Postal Service or its home delivery or the many services offered at the post office. And, privatization of delivery services will enrich our already rich corporations like UPS, and convert decent career postal jobs into frantic lowpaid delivery boys racing brown trucks around our neighborhoods. It is just another variation on the privatization of our prison system (which as a private enterprise now lobbies legislatures and Congress to imprison more people for longer periods.) And of course all across the country, these “conservatives” are trying to cut library funding, fire fighting capabilities, and other community services and infrastructure that rich people don’t need. It’s the reverse of the process of building civilization and communities that our ancestors worked so hard for.
David Atkins at Hulaballoo deconstructs what “freedom” really means to Republicans. After reading it, google “fascism”:
… when Republicans speak about “freedom” as their leaders did last night, they mean only two things: 1) the “freedom” of the super-rich to tilt the deck even farther in their favor while contributing nothing to the social supports that made them rich; and 2) the “freedom” of religious bigots to enforce their version on morality on everyone else. When they argue that President Obama is removing their freedoms, they refer not to his actual infringements on American freedoms, but rather his innocuous efforts at universal health insurance and 1990s era tax rates on the wealthy.
American conservatives don’t care about individual liberty. They arguably never have. The care only about preserving the right of private wealth and religious authority to abuse and oppress the rest of us without interference or intervention. The federal government is the ultimate restraint, elected by the people of this country, placed on their otherwise absolute authority, and they want it gone. They want the freedom to employ anyone they choose at any wage and at any age that they wish, and then cast them aside once they’re no longer useful. They want the “freedom” to stuff women back into the kitchen, minorities back into shantytowns, and gays back into the closet. That’s “freedom” to the conservative mind.
“Freedom” for them isn’t about everyone in this country having the opportunity to live life as they see fit. It’s about making sure that the most powerful private individuals, be they CEOs or church leaders, get to make the rest of us live the lives they see fit.:
I might add “freedom” to them is for corporations to be free to degrade and pollute our living spaces and our planet, achieved by starving our government through tax cuts.
The guy Richard Cebull is a Republican, I take the racism as a given.
But the fact that he hates Obama’s policies so much that he was willing to jeopardize his job, tells me that he shouldn’t be hearing cases that involve Obama’s policies. Obama is the president, and his policies and his law enforcement policies are important factors in many federal cases, if not all of them, particularly when such hostility is present.
Oh wait, this guy is a federal judge.
Are we clear?
is he going to recuse himself from all federal cases? how would that work? all his cases are federal.
In the letter, he says he doesn’t know what more he could do, aside from referring the matter to his Republican pals who will obviously giggle and do nothing…Here’s what more he can do:
Step the fuck down, assclown. Get yourself a real job, like a good Republican who deigns to suck off the federal teat.
DETROIT—When Mitt Romney regaled a Michigan audience this week with childhood memories of a landmark moment in Detroit history, it was a rare instance of emotional candour.
And, perhaps, an even rarer example of time travel.
Romney recalled he was “probably 4 or something like that” the day of the Golden Jubilee, when three-quarters of a million people gathered to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the American automobile.
“My dad had a job being the grandmaster. They painted Woodward Ave. with gold paint,” Romney told a rapt Tea Party audience in the village of Milford Thursday night, reliving a moment of American industrial glory.
The Golden Jubilee described so vividly by Romney was indeed an epic moment in automotive lore. The parade included one of the last public appearances by an elderly Henry Ford.
And it took place June 1, 1946 — fully nine months before Romney was born.
a reader at Andrew Sullivan observes:
Here’s an interesting question re: exposing the partisanship of the Bishops. So, at the most recent debate, Romney stated that it was completely voluntary as to whether Catholic hospitals in Massachusetts had to provide emergency contraceptives to rape victims. Yet, it appears that it isn’t voluntary, that there is no conscience exemption. So, this raises two important questions that speak directly to the partisanship of the Bishops, and in this case, specifically of Cardinal O’Malley in Boston:
Why would O’Malley not express the same outrage toward Romney’s policy in Massachusetts as he has toward Obama’s policy at the national level? And why wouldn’t O’Malley feel required to correct the public record re: Romney’s statement, since that statement leaves the impression with voters that it is Cardinal O’Malley who is choosing to provide emergency contraceptives?
It appears that he has done neither to date. It seems that there’s no answer to these two questions except the political partisanship of the Cardinal.
then there’s this:
Mitt Romney misled a voter in Shelby Township, Michigan about President Obama’s rule requiring insurers and employers to provide contraception coverage to employees during a town hall Tuesday afternoon. Romney grossly misrepresented the measure, claiming that under the new requirement, “the Catholic Church had to provide for insurance that provided contraceptives, sterilization, morning after pills to the employees of the Church.” But as Romney himself has previously admitted, both the original provision and the modified language specifically excludes houses of worship and nonprofit organizations that primarily employ people of the same faith from providing birth control coverage.
Commander in chief material? I don’t think so.
The effect of it today is to place people like Randy Thompson on an unfamiliar side of the divide between conservatives and environmentalists; and business and liberal political activists. He even testified this month against TransCanada as a witness for Henry Waxman’s minority on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
“I’m a little ashamed to say that maybe if it hadn’t come across our land, I wouldn’t have gotten involved,” he told me. “I’ve gained a great deal of respect for people who do care about our environment I’ve become much more aware of environmental issues. I have to admire them for being concerned about our environment.”
“Republicans,” he said, by contrast, “could give a rats ass about the people out here.”
Importantly, Thomas seems willing. According to Winkler,
The idea of Thomas running for president was floated two years ago by two legal bloggers, David Lat and Kashmir Hill. They noted that when Thomas was first nominated to the bench, he expressed hesitation about the solitary, sedate environment that comes with the black robe. “I can’t see myself spending the rest of my life as a judge,” Thomas said.
I think a lot of Americans would agree with that sentiment.
Most importantly, Thomas comes cheap:
ThinkProgress uncovered three briefs that AEI filed in Thomas’ Court after Thomas received their $15,000 gift. Thomas recused from none of these three cases, and he either voted in favor of the result AEI favored or took a stance that was even further to the right in each case:
Riley v. Kennedy: AEI filed a brief asking the Supreme Court to reverse a lower court decision preventing a change in Alabama’s voting law from going into effect. Justice Thomas did not recuse, and he joined the Supreme Court’s decision reversing the lower court.
Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1: AEI filed a brief asking the Supreme Court to reverse a lower court decision upholding a local school district’s desegregation plan. Thomas joined the majority opinion reversing the lower court’s decision, and he filed a lengthy concurrence defending that result.
Whitman v. American Trucking Association: AEI joined a brief asking the Supreme Court to allow the EPA to consider the costs of implementing new air quality standards before it issued them. Thomas’ concurring opinion went much further than AEI asked him to go, suggesting that the law authorizing EPA to issue these standards is unconstitutional.
Turns out that was the tip of the cashberg:
Thomas appears to have “knowingly and willfully” filed falsified Financial Disclosure Forms which withheld disclosure of nearly $700,000 his wife received from the rightwing Heritage Foundation for the better part of the last 20 years. Only once it was pointed out publicly this year did Thomas bother to file “self-initiated amendments” to the forms he had signed just above the legal warning in bold and all caps which reads: “NOTE: ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO KNOWINGLY AND WILLFULLY FALSIFIES OR FAILS TO FILE THIS REPORT MAY BE SUBJECT TO CIVIL AND CRIMINAL SANCTIONS (5 U.S.C. app. § 104)”
In short, Clarence Thomas is the perfect GOP candidate for President of the United States.
Maybe the backward flag represents the Republican wish to go back in time to the ’50’s, before the pill, the internet, civil rights, gays coming out, Hawaiian statehood, and George W. Bush. Maybe Romney just wanted to fire something, and the American flag was close at hand.
Anyway, I’m in favor of it. I like a man with ideas.