via Ezra.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Friday, August 13, 2010
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Quote of the Day, Paul Ryan edition
by folkbum
Also, a chart:
Click it for an explanation.
He’s saying: ‘Eat your broccoli. And then maybe you don’t get to eat at all for a few days. You don’t get steak--ever.’ ” - Jeb BushThey always did say Jeb was the smart one.
Also, a chart:
Click it for an explanation.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
What If?
By Keith R. Schmitz
Imagine how many of the 160,000 laid off teachers would have been pissed off enough to work for the Democrats during the midterms if the GOP would have blocked the state aid package passed yesterday. They would have had a lot of time on their hands and Democratic campaigns would have been happy to give them something to do with it.
That could have tipped many congressional and perhaps senatorial/gubernatorial elections.
Imagine how many of the 160,000 laid off teachers would have been pissed off enough to work for the Democrats during the midterms if the GOP would have blocked the state aid package passed yesterday. They would have had a lot of time on their hands and Democratic campaigns would have been happy to give them something to do with it.
That could have tipped many congressional and perhaps senatorial/gubernatorial elections.
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Proving my point
by folkbum
The right-o-sphere was shocked, just shocked!, that I would point to them as a reason why a political candidate (Russ Feingold) might want to use a fake name ("Elizabeth Ackland") in an ad. They just could not believe, despite knowing well their history of libel and harassment, that someone would suggest that they might engage in, you know, libel and harassment of an innocent volunteer in a commercial.
Just shocked.
But here, ladies and gents, is a comment found floating freely on the comment boards of one of those who was shocked. I will not link to it (there are enough clues for you to know it's real) and I have fuzzied out the name of the target of the smear to protect him, but suffice it to say the target is a real person using his real name who disagrees politically, though respectfully, with the owner of that blog:
A caveat, but one which I think does not diminish the point: I am not a believer in "nutpicking," so please do not consider this to be my accusing the blog owner of believing this. I am sure he doesn't, and I hope that he removes the comment to prove that. (AFTERNOON UPDATE: It's gone now, though it was visible for more than eight hours.) However, I took this screenshot four hours after it was posted; maybe the blog owner hasn't had time to remove it, though four hours is a long time to leave something like that up. And no doubt it's plenty of time for the real target to have seen the comment.
But here's why that does not diminish the point: These people are out there, and they are reading the righty blogs in this state, and they are making these comments even though (if) they get deleted. Imagine that the "Anonymous" who made that comment hadn't been reading a post about Six Flags but instead had read a post about a real Elizabeth Ackland, posting perhaps information about where she works, or a link to her facebook profile page, or the city she lives in. What might "Anonymous" have said or done about "Elizabeth Ackland"?
That is my point. And the right just proved it, again.
UPDATE: And they're at it in Alaska, now--someone dared confront Ste. Sarah de Wasilla..
The right-o-sphere was shocked, just shocked!, that I would point to them as a reason why a political candidate (Russ Feingold) might want to use a fake name ("Elizabeth Ackland") in an ad. They just could not believe, despite knowing well their history of libel and harassment, that someone would suggest that they might engage in, you know, libel and harassment of an innocent volunteer in a commercial.
Just shocked.
But here, ladies and gents, is a comment found floating freely on the comment boards of one of those who was shocked. I will not link to it (there are enough clues for you to know it's real) and I have fuzzied out the name of the target of the smear to protect him, but suffice it to say the target is a real person using his real name who disagrees politically, though respectfully, with the owner of that blog:
A caveat, but one which I think does not diminish the point: I am not a believer in "nutpicking," so please do not consider this to be my accusing the blog owner of believing this. I am sure he doesn't, and I hope that he removes the comment to prove that. (AFTERNOON UPDATE: It's gone now, though it was visible for more than eight hours.) However, I took this screenshot four hours after it was posted; maybe the blog owner hasn't had time to remove it, though four hours is a long time to leave something like that up. And no doubt it's plenty of time for the real target to have seen the comment.
But here's why that does not diminish the point: These people are out there, and they are reading the righty blogs in this state, and they are making these comments even though (if) they get deleted. Imagine that the "Anonymous" who made that comment hadn't been reading a post about Six Flags but instead had read a post about a real Elizabeth Ackland, posting perhaps information about where she works, or a link to her facebook profile page, or the city she lives in. What might "Anonymous" have said or done about "Elizabeth Ackland"?
That is my point. And the right just proved it, again.
UPDATE: And they're at it in Alaska, now--someone dared confront Ste. Sarah de Wasilla..
One step closer to Donovan's dream panopticon
by folkbum
Can we attach a Bob Donovan campaign poster to this thing? "A chicken in every pot and a surveillance van in every driveway!"
More importantly: Does this truck have a fax machine from which Donovan can send his daily press releases?
Can we attach a Bob Donovan campaign poster to this thing? "A chicken in every pot and a surveillance van in every driveway!"
More importantly: Does this truck have a fax machine from which Donovan can send his daily press releases?
Monday, August 09, 2010
McIlheran Watch: Ignorance of the Dumb
by folkbum
I thought perhaps we could just play "simple answers to stupid questions":
Let's kind of give McIlheran credit, though: Those paragraphs offer the correct implication, that while Democrats will let Republican policy take effect and sunset the Bush tax cuts, they will offer new tax cuts for those earning less than $250,000 a year--those who in his parlance are the ones Democrats think "have too much money." I prefer of course to think of them as "the only people who have seen growth in their income in the last thirty years," but he makes the big bucks down there to the newspaper and I'm just a schlub with access to google, so he gets to define the terms.
McIlheran can't bring himself to say that explicitly, that the only people who will see their effective federal taxes increase are the ultra-wealthy. He can't do it because he needs to play ignorant, and keep his readers ignorant, to make the remainder of his points. First, majorities of Americans are in favor of letting all the tax cuts or the tax cuts for the wealthiest expire on schedule. It's hard to gin up populist anger when the popples are not on your side, unless you play ignorant.
Second, the rest of that blog post is all about "how the repeal of those Bush tax cuts would hit middle-income families." In reality, the Democrats' proposals would have zero hit on middle-income families. Period. There would be no change. So the whole rest of that post is worth exactly nothing. Every word of it is moot, every sentence is a lie.
Is that something McIlheran will ever admit? No. See, the right is counting on you to stay ignorant, because if you knew what you were really getting with a Republican agenda, you'd never agree to it.
(Updated to add the graphic again that originally appeared here in this post.)
(Updated again with mad props to JimSpice, who comments here often, too: "Why on earth would a conservative try to sway the opinion of liberals by sending them to the Heritage Foundation. That's as useless as convincing a conservative by quoting a scientific journal.")
I thought perhaps we could just play "simple answers to stupid questions":
My Sunday Journal Sentinel column looks at all the excuses the left is offering to let the term-limited 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire.Um, Article 1 section 8? "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes." Done, right? No, sadly, he doesn't stop there where the simple answer would suffice.
Mainly, I write, it comes down to wanting to increase taxes on some people--the ones they think have too much money. Only, just where in the constitution does it say our leaders have the right to decide who has too much money, much less to, um, remediate that?
Let's kind of give McIlheran credit, though: Those paragraphs offer the correct implication, that while Democrats will let Republican policy take effect and sunset the Bush tax cuts, they will offer new tax cuts for those earning less than $250,000 a year--those who in his parlance are the ones Democrats think "have too much money." I prefer of course to think of them as "the only people who have seen growth in their income in the last thirty years," but he makes the big bucks down there to the newspaper and I'm just a schlub with access to google, so he gets to define the terms.
McIlheran can't bring himself to say that explicitly, that the only people who will see their effective federal taxes increase are the ultra-wealthy. He can't do it because he needs to play ignorant, and keep his readers ignorant, to make the remainder of his points. First, majorities of Americans are in favor of letting all the tax cuts or the tax cuts for the wealthiest expire on schedule. It's hard to gin up populist anger when the popples are not on your side, unless you play ignorant.Second, the rest of that blog post is all about "how the repeal of those Bush tax cuts would hit middle-income families." In reality, the Democrats' proposals would have zero hit on middle-income families. Period. There would be no change. So the whole rest of that post is worth exactly nothing. Every word of it is moot, every sentence is a lie.
Is that something McIlheran will ever admit? No. See, the right is counting on you to stay ignorant, because if you knew what you were really getting with a Republican agenda, you'd never agree to it.
(Updated to add the graphic again that originally appeared here in this post.)
(Updated again with mad props to JimSpice, who comments here often, too: "Why on earth would a conservative try to sway the opinion of liberals by sending them to the Heritage Foundation. That's as useless as convincing a conservative by quoting a scientific journal.")
The best defense against radical Islam
by folkbum
. . . is moderate Islam:
. . . is moderate Islam:
A two-year study by a group of academics on American Muslims and terrorism concluded that contemporary mosques are actually a deterrent to the spread of militant Islam and terrorism. The study was conducted by professors with Duke’s Sanford School of Public Policy and the University of North Carolina. It disclosed that many mosque leaders had put significant effort into countering extremism by building youth programs, sponsoring antiviolence forums and scrutinizing teachers and texts.Remember that Osama bin Laden wants the Cordoba Initiative to fail just as much as Sarah Palin does.
Radicalization of alienated Muslim youths is a real threat, [Ihsan Bagby, associate professor of Islamic studies at the University of Kentucky] said. “But the youth we worry about,” he said, “are not the youth that come to the mosque.”
Sunday, August 08, 2010
YOU are the reason
by folkbum
(SEE ADDITIONAL UPDATE BELOW. Special update for those of you joining us via BadgerBlogger: Please note that one commenter here has personal experience with the kind of harassment I'm talking about in this post, perpetrated by regulars from BadgerBlogger itself. See John Foust's comment below. [JOKE REDACTED TO MEET GOOGLE'S POLICIES.] Thanks!)
The latest mini-dustup on the right half of the Cheddarsphere is that in Russ Feingold's new commercial, there's a fake name on a nameplate. The ad's about job creation, you see, and the righties are now convinced that this fake name is Feingold's tacit admission that government stimulus hasn't created any real jobs. This is merely desperate ideology in search of confirmation when faced with the overwhelming fact that they're wrong. And, clearly, that is not the reason why Feingold used a fake name.
Consider: How do we even know it's a fake name? Because as soon as the ad appeared, the right-wing smear machine flew into action to see if they could find this "Elizabeth M. Ackland." Google searches, Lexus-Nexus searches--Charlie Sykes even went so far as to search cemeteries. This is not just a casual "I wonder who that is" curiosity. This is obsession. So if you want to believe that the motives of people like Charlie Sykes in digging obsessively for information about Ackland were entirely pure, be my guest. But you have to ask yourself: Why were the right wingers so hell-bent on finding Ackland, if she were real? Of what possible use to them would the information be about where she worked? Where she lived? Where her children went to school?
Yeah, scary. When you consider the way that the Charlie Sykes stormtroopers (not a Nazi thing--they embrace that for themselves) treat the personal and professional lives of those of us who are real and do attach our real names to what we do and our support for candidates, it would have been irresponsible for Feingold to subject an innocent person and her family to the hell that was sure to follow.
Seriously: You, my friends and neighbors in the right blogosphere, you are the reason why Feingold used a fake name there. Think, and think honestly, though sometimes I imagine that's hard for you, think about what you would have said, done, and advocated if and when the real Elizabeth Ackland were revealed. That's it right there. That's the reason.
(Illy-T reminds us of the rabid right's history of doing exactly that, and points us to a reminder that Charlie Sykes's BFF Scott Walker uses fake people himself, a post which itself references Mark Green doing the same thing.)
UPDATE: The Chief points out that in Ron Johnson's recent "Tipping Point," Johnson used stock footage of a "family" packing up and driving away, rather than a real Wisconsin family as Johnson's voiceover would have you believe.
(SEE ADDITIONAL UPDATE BELOW. Special update for those of you joining us via BadgerBlogger: Please note that one commenter here has personal experience with the kind of harassment I'm talking about in this post, perpetrated by regulars from BadgerBlogger itself. See John Foust's comment below. [JOKE REDACTED TO MEET GOOGLE'S POLICIES.] Thanks!)
The latest mini-dustup on the right half of the Cheddarsphere is that in Russ Feingold's new commercial, there's a fake name on a nameplate. The ad's about job creation, you see, and the righties are now convinced that this fake name is Feingold's tacit admission that government stimulus hasn't created any real jobs. This is merely desperate ideology in search of confirmation when faced with the overwhelming fact that they're wrong. And, clearly, that is not the reason why Feingold used a fake name.
Consider: How do we even know it's a fake name? Because as soon as the ad appeared, the right-wing smear machine flew into action to see if they could find this "Elizabeth M. Ackland." Google searches, Lexus-Nexus searches--Charlie Sykes even went so far as to search cemeteries. This is not just a casual "I wonder who that is" curiosity. This is obsession. So if you want to believe that the motives of people like Charlie Sykes in digging obsessively for information about Ackland were entirely pure, be my guest. But you have to ask yourself: Why were the right wingers so hell-bent on finding Ackland, if she were real? Of what possible use to them would the information be about where she worked? Where she lived? Where her children went to school?
Yeah, scary. When you consider the way that the Charlie Sykes stormtroopers (not a Nazi thing--they embrace that for themselves) treat the personal and professional lives of those of us who are real and do attach our real names to what we do and our support for candidates, it would have been irresponsible for Feingold to subject an innocent person and her family to the hell that was sure to follow.
Seriously: You, my friends and neighbors in the right blogosphere, you are the reason why Feingold used a fake name there. Think, and think honestly, though sometimes I imagine that's hard for you, think about what you would have said, done, and advocated if and when the real Elizabeth Ackland were revealed. That's it right there. That's the reason.
(Illy-T reminds us of the rabid right's history of doing exactly that, and points us to a reminder that Charlie Sykes's BFF Scott Walker uses fake people himself, a post which itself references Mark Green doing the same thing.)
UPDATE: The Chief points out that in Ron Johnson's recent "Tipping Point," Johnson used stock footage of a "family" packing up and driving away, rather than a real Wisconsin family as Johnson's voiceover would have you believe.
Saturday, August 07, 2010
What's outrageous?
by folkbum
Since I started teaching for the Milwaukee Public Schools full-time in the fall of 1999, about half of my first days of school were done under an expired contract. It is looking more and more like this year's first day will be another, making two in a row. (Three in a row is the record--2003, 2004, 2005.)
Why is this? Is it because MTEA, my union, is a bunch of hardened bastards who refuse to negotiate, who won't make concessions, whose only concerns are gimme, gimme, gimme? No.
In fact, every one of those expired-contract first days has been because the district's negotiators have delayed, stalled, demanded arbitration, withheld critical information from the union, and bargained in the media rather than at the table.
Indeed, in the current round of negotiations, the union has been ready for two years to get a settlement, and the district has gone months at a time, literally, before returning to the table with new or adjusted offers. Late last winter, for example, when the media campaign ramped up about teachers' health care plans (this following months of ignoring union requests to bargain), MTEA requested utilization data in order to help craft a revised proposal. Those data were delivered just a few weeks ago, long after the superintendent released his draft budget proposing to lay off hundreds of employees, long after the layoff notices were sent. In the intervening months a solution could have been achieved, except the district delayed because it is their strategy to fight these things in the media and make the union look like the bad guys.
All of this is outrageous, right? A public entity negotiating in bad faith with its employees and spreading lies in the media, this should cause all good people to stand and demand better accountability. But no. What is it, really, that spurs outrage?
Viagra.
(I am anxious to see what google ads appear in the sidebar after this.)
For some reason--I cannot say for sure, but I am guessing the AP was tipped off by district officials--a long-running legal battle over whether the district's prescription formulary can offer female sexual dysfunction treatments but deny coverage for male sexual dysfunction treatments made the news this week. After all, it had been a few weeks since any news had broken about the status of contract (non-)talks and whether there were any breakthroughs that might have saved some teachers' jobs. So someone felt the pot needed stoking, and then the AP offered its story. Viagra is, literally, a much sexier story than the way the district conducts its negotiations.
And, of course, outrage. Jason Fields, reliably anti-MPS Milwaukee legislator: "You've got to be kidding me. [. . .] What are our priorities?"
I expect more soon, and perhaps even renewed calls for state intervention. One state legislator wrote to me, "[This] is exactly what nauseates me and 99% of Milwaukee when it comes to teacher compensation. MTEA has not done anything creative since they were created."
Again, outrage. And for false reasons, too: MTEA has been incredibly creative in trying to find solutions. In 2005 for example, when the contract went to arbitration (an arbitration that was settled after, technically, it had expired), the union offered to have every teacher pay 1% of salary, on top of out-of-pocket costs, to health care costs. This plan would have saved taxpayers money compared to the district plan the arbitrator settled on--in fact, it would have been much more expensive for me at the time, I wrote. Yet it was only long after the arbitration that the media, who were allies with the district in its public negotiating, finally admitted that maybe the teachers had a point. This should be outrageous. But it's not--viagra is.
More recently, the Board proposed a way to offset health care costs: a two-day furlough for all teachers ... equivalent to about 1% of salary! That the district took so long to come around to the idea should also be outrageous. But it's not--viagra is.
MTEA had to drag the district kicking and screaming into adopting a wellness plan that has saved the district tens of millions in costs and has meant that MPS's health cost inflation has been lower than the regional and national average. The union got in changes to retiree health care that had those costs decreasing for several years. That the union is still blamed for out of control health spending despite its creativity and success should be outrageous. But it's not--viagra is.
MTEA has also designed one of the most innovative programs to identify, mentor, and if needed fire underperforming teachers, but you wouldn't know that from the way people talk about the union protecting bad teachers. The way the media attacked MTEA for letting young teachers be laid off rather than some undefined, non-specific, theoretical group of "bad" teachers certainly seemed to me like it should be outrageous. But it's not--viagra is.
Beyond that, the fact still remains that MPS teachers are just about the lowest paid in SE Wisconsin, and even counting our benefits we are average in total compensation compared to peer districts. You don't know this because it's not, apparently, important for stories about MPS to include context. It's not, apparently, a priority to make sure that the people who choose to work with the most difficult students in the region get rewarded for their service. This, too, should be outrageous. But it's not--viagra is.
So go ahead. Have your viagra outrage orgy. (Now I'm just asking for trouble with the google ads.) Get it all out of your system, make your comments about how this will make it easier for teachers to molest students or whatever else it is you feel you need to say. Believe me, I've seen that and worse in many places the last couple of days, sick as it is. Because in a few days I head back in to school to do what none of the rest of you seem to care about: Actually helping the children of Milwaukee have a better life than what they see around them every day. Your outrage does squat to change that.
Since I started teaching for the Milwaukee Public Schools full-time in the fall of 1999, about half of my first days of school were done under an expired contract. It is looking more and more like this year's first day will be another, making two in a row. (Three in a row is the record--2003, 2004, 2005.)
Why is this? Is it because MTEA, my union, is a bunch of hardened bastards who refuse to negotiate, who won't make concessions, whose only concerns are gimme, gimme, gimme? No.
In fact, every one of those expired-contract first days has been because the district's negotiators have delayed, stalled, demanded arbitration, withheld critical information from the union, and bargained in the media rather than at the table.
Indeed, in the current round of negotiations, the union has been ready for two years to get a settlement, and the district has gone months at a time, literally, before returning to the table with new or adjusted offers. Late last winter, for example, when the media campaign ramped up about teachers' health care plans (this following months of ignoring union requests to bargain), MTEA requested utilization data in order to help craft a revised proposal. Those data were delivered just a few weeks ago, long after the superintendent released his draft budget proposing to lay off hundreds of employees, long after the layoff notices were sent. In the intervening months a solution could have been achieved, except the district delayed because it is their strategy to fight these things in the media and make the union look like the bad guys.
All of this is outrageous, right? A public entity negotiating in bad faith with its employees and spreading lies in the media, this should cause all good people to stand and demand better accountability. But no. What is it, really, that spurs outrage?
Viagra.
(I am anxious to see what google ads appear in the sidebar after this.)
For some reason--I cannot say for sure, but I am guessing the AP was tipped off by district officials--a long-running legal battle over whether the district's prescription formulary can offer female sexual dysfunction treatments but deny coverage for male sexual dysfunction treatments made the news this week. After all, it had been a few weeks since any news had broken about the status of contract (non-)talks and whether there were any breakthroughs that might have saved some teachers' jobs. So someone felt the pot needed stoking, and then the AP offered its story. Viagra is, literally, a much sexier story than the way the district conducts its negotiations.
And, of course, outrage. Jason Fields, reliably anti-MPS Milwaukee legislator: "You've got to be kidding me. [. . .] What are our priorities?"
I expect more soon, and perhaps even renewed calls for state intervention. One state legislator wrote to me, "[This] is exactly what nauseates me and 99% of Milwaukee when it comes to teacher compensation. MTEA has not done anything creative since they were created."
Again, outrage. And for false reasons, too: MTEA has been incredibly creative in trying to find solutions. In 2005 for example, when the contract went to arbitration (an arbitration that was settled after, technically, it had expired), the union offered to have every teacher pay 1% of salary, on top of out-of-pocket costs, to health care costs. This plan would have saved taxpayers money compared to the district plan the arbitrator settled on--in fact, it would have been much more expensive for me at the time, I wrote. Yet it was only long after the arbitration that the media, who were allies with the district in its public negotiating, finally admitted that maybe the teachers had a point. This should be outrageous. But it's not--viagra is.
More recently, the Board proposed a way to offset health care costs: a two-day furlough for all teachers ... equivalent to about 1% of salary! That the district took so long to come around to the idea should also be outrageous. But it's not--viagra is.
MTEA had to drag the district kicking and screaming into adopting a wellness plan that has saved the district tens of millions in costs and has meant that MPS's health cost inflation has been lower than the regional and national average. The union got in changes to retiree health care that had those costs decreasing for several years. That the union is still blamed for out of control health spending despite its creativity and success should be outrageous. But it's not--viagra is.
MTEA has also designed one of the most innovative programs to identify, mentor, and if needed fire underperforming teachers, but you wouldn't know that from the way people talk about the union protecting bad teachers. The way the media attacked MTEA for letting young teachers be laid off rather than some undefined, non-specific, theoretical group of "bad" teachers certainly seemed to me like it should be outrageous. But it's not--viagra is.
Beyond that, the fact still remains that MPS teachers are just about the lowest paid in SE Wisconsin, and even counting our benefits we are average in total compensation compared to peer districts. You don't know this because it's not, apparently, important for stories about MPS to include context. It's not, apparently, a priority to make sure that the people who choose to work with the most difficult students in the region get rewarded for their service. This, too, should be outrageous. But it's not--viagra is.
So go ahead. Have your viagra outrage orgy. (Now I'm just asking for trouble with the google ads.) Get it all out of your system, make your comments about how this will make it easier for teachers to molest students or whatever else it is you feel you need to say. Believe me, I've seen that and worse in many places the last couple of days, sick as it is. Because in a few days I head back in to school to do what none of the rest of you seem to care about: Actually helping the children of Milwaukee have a better life than what they see around them every day. Your outrage does squat to change that.
Friday, August 06, 2010
Thursday, August 05, 2010
And people complain about the people I have writing for me
by folkbum
Andrew Breitbart, professional smearer and failed bringer of the Breitbartocalypse, sought out and hired a racist, bamboozling sock-puppeteer. If my credibility is shot because capper read jsonline at work one day, what do you say about those ACORN tapes now?
Andrew Breitbart, professional smearer and failed bringer of the Breitbartocalypse, sought out and hired a racist, bamboozling sock-puppeteer. If my credibility is shot because capper read jsonline at work one day, what do you say about those ACORN tapes now?
Damn Those Activist Judges!
by krshorewood
Appointed by Ronald Reagan.
UPDATE by folkbum: The AP is wrong on this. The judge was a Bush I appointee.
Appointed by Ronald Reagan.
UPDATE by folkbum: The AP is wrong on this. The judge was a Bush I appointee.
Wednesday, August 04, 2010
Stupid Hippie
by folkbum
This guy could never get nominated today:
This guy could never get nominated today:
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 a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.
Tuesday, August 03, 2010
Why does Michael Bloomberg hate New York?
by folkbum
If you cut him, I bet he does not bleed, because no real 'Murcan talks this way.
</sarcasm> <--tag added for clarity (also)
Alternatively, I could ask why all the local righties, who howled and moaned about "private property rights" during the smoking ban debate, have sided against property owners in this case. I won't link to their hate blogs, to borrow a phrase, but I'm guessing you know who they are.
If you cut him, I bet he does not bleed, because no real 'Murcan talks this way.
</sarcasm> <--tag added for clarity (also)
Alternatively, I could ask why all the local righties, who howled and moaned about "private property rights" during the smoking ban debate, have sided against property owners in this case. I won't link to their hate blogs, to borrow a phrase, but I'm guessing you know who they are.
A little slow on the uptake
by folkbum
Dear editors:
A lot of us figured out a long time ago--after the ACORN tapes, after the Anita Dunn smearing, after the Van Jones Lyncing, and certainly last week after the Shirley Sherrod matter--that the right has no argument but false theater.
Sincerely,
yr hmbl folkbum
Dear editors:
A lot of us figured out a long time ago--after the ACORN tapes, after the Anita Dunn smearing, after the Van Jones Lyncing, and certainly last week after the Shirley Sherrod matter--that the right has no argument but false theater.
Sincerely,
yr hmbl folkbum
Monday, August 02, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)