Senate candidate Marco Rubio’s (R-FL) is not serious about deficit reduction.

Rubio Argues For Making Bush Tax Cuts For The Wealthy Permanent: We Must Start ‘Doing It Now’

One of the key planks of Senate candidate Marco Rubio’s (R-FL) campaign is scaremongering about the nation’s deficit and debt. “The United States government spends more money than it takes in,” Rubio said. “It’s as simple as that. You can’t do that for long without getting into trouble.” Rubio has repeatedly called on President Obama to “stop spending money we don’t have.”

However, Rubio’s concern with the deficit seems to evaporate when it comes to tax cuts. Democrats in Congress want to allow the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans to expire on schedule at the end of the year, but yesterday on Fox News, Rubio wholeheartedly endorsed making the cuts permanent and “doing it now”:

RUBIO: I would argue in favor of making permanent the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. And I would argue doing it now, before they recess, so that people have some level of certainty. [...]

VARNEY: You’re arguing economics. I put it to you that, if you suggested that we not increase taxes on the rich on January the 1st, you would be demagogued to death. You would be accused of giving money to the rich at a time of a nasty recession.

RUBIO: Well, the bottom line is that we need folks to create jobs in America. And jobs in America are created by people that have money or access to money.



This proves that Rubio is actually not at all serious about addressing deficits, as the Bush tax cuts are one of the main drivers behind the country’s long-term deficits. As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found, the Bush tax cuts will cause $3.4 trillion in deficits over between 2009 and 2019. The debt-service costs caused by the Bush tax cuts amount to “$1.7 trillion over the 2009-2019 period” and more than $330 billion in 2019 alone.

When is the media going to start holding conservatives accountable for their waffling on economic policy. How hard can it be to ask a conservative for a plan - written down in black and white - that balances the budget and reduces taxes.

There is the Soft Fascism of Conservatism, But No Liberal Fascism

The Scholarly Flaws of Liberal Fascism

Jonah Goldberg tells us he wrote this book to get even. The liberals started it by “insist[ing] that conservatism has connections with fascism” (p. 22). Conservatives “sit dumbfounded by the nastiness of the slander” (p. 1). “The left wields the term fascism like a cudgel” (p. 3). So Jonah Goldberg has decided it is time to turn the tables and show that “the liberal closet has its own skeletons” (p. 22). After years of being “called a fascist and a Nazi by smug, liberal know-nothings” he decides that “responding to this slander is a point of personal privilege” (p. 392).

Feeling oneself a victim is wonderfully liberating. Anything goes. So Jonah Goldberg pulls out all the stops to show that fascism “is not a phenomenon of the right at all. It is, and always has been, a phenomenon of the left” (p. 7). The reader perceives at once that Goldberg likes to put things into rigid boxes: right and left, conservative and liberal, fascist and non-fascist. He doesn’t leave room for such complexities as convergences, middle grounds, or evolution over time. Thus Father Coughlin was always a man of the left, and so was Mussolini (Giacomo Matteotti or the Rosselli brothers, leaders of the Italian left whom Mussolini had assassinated, would have been scandalized by this view). The very mention of a “Third Way” puts one instantly into the fascist box.

That’s too bad, because there really is a subject here. Fascism – a political latecomer that adapted anti-socialism to a mass electorate, using means that often owed nothing to conservatism – drew on both right and left, and tried to transcend that bitter division in a purified, invigorated, expansionist national community. A sensitive analysis of what fascism drew from all quarters of the political spectrum would be a valuable project. It is not Jonah Goldberg’s project.

The bottom line is that Goldberg wants to attach a defaming epithet to liberals and the left, to “put the brown shirt on [your] opponents,” as he accuses the liberals of doing (p. 392). He goes about this task with a massive apparatus of scholarly citations and quotations. But Goldberg’s scholarship is not an even-handed search for understanding, following the best evidence fully and open-mindedly wherever it might lead. He chooses his scholarly data selectively and sometimes misleadingly in the service of his demonstration.

Jonah Goldberg knows that making the Progressives, Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt and FDR the creators of an American fascism – indeed the only American fascism, for George Lincoln Rockwell and other overt American fascist or Nazi sympathizers are totally absent from this book – is a stretch, so he has created a new box: Liberal Fascism. The Progressives and their heirs who wanted to use government to rectify social and economic ills, and who, in Goldberg’s view, thereby created an American Fascism, acted with good intentions, rarely used violence, and had nothing to do with Auschwitz. Even so, they share an intellectual heredity and a set of common goals with the European fascists. So they go into the “Liberal Fascist” box.

Liberal Fascism is an oxymoron, of course. A fascism that means no harm is a contradiction in terms. Authentic fascists intend to harm those whom they define as the nation’s internal and external enemies. Someone who doesn’t intend to harm his or her enemies, and who doesn’t relish doing it violently, isn’t really fascist.

But the problems go much deeper. Pushing Liberalism and Fascism together requires distorting both terms. It doesn’t help that these are two of the most problematical words in the political lexicon. To his credit, Goldberg is aware that the term “liberal” has been corrupted in contemporary American usage. It ought to mean (and still means in the rest of the world) a principled opposition to state interference in the economy, from Adam Smith to Ronald Reagan. Goldberg sometimes refers to “classical liberalism” in this sense, and with approval. Unfortunately he has capitulated to the sloppy current American usage by which “liberal” means, usually pejoratively nowadays, any and all of the various components of the Left, from anarchists and Marxists to moderate Democrats.

Goldberg stereotypes liberals to make them abstract, uniform, robotic. The telltale phrase is “liberals say” or “liberals think” (mostly without anyone quoted or footnoted). For example, “Liberals . . . claim” that free-market economics is fascist (p. 22). Could we please have a few examples of “liberals” who say this? It is a straw man, as is the vast, ghostly “liberal mind” that sounds like a physical reality: “fascism, shorn of the word, endures in the liberal mind” (p. 161). Does this liberal mind have a telephone number, as Henry Kissinger said famously of the European Union?

This “liberal mind” is a very big tent. Goldberg believes that moderate reformists are essentially involved in the same project as radical activists. Bernardine Dohrn, Mark Rudd, Al Gore, Hilary Clinton are all devoted in one way or another to the allegedly fascist project of taking action to make a better world.

The full essay is at the link. Written by real historian and scholar William Paxton.

Obama is The One. What Conservatives Believe

Fox News is BP oil spill misinformation clearinghouse
Myths and falsehoods on the Gulf oil spill

Media Matters for America has compiled a list of myths and falsehoods about the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, all of which have been pushed by Fox News.

Fox News' staunch defense of BP

Myth: Obama waited weeks before responding to the oil spill

Myth: Moratorium is not needed because oil companies are equipped to handle spill

Myth: BP was only drilling "out there" because environmentalists and the federal government "made them" do it

Myth: Obama, unlike Bush, "was off on vacation" during crisis

Myth: "Ridiculous" and "offensive" to blame Bush for spills

Myth: Obama is the "single largest recipient of BP's cash"

Myth: Obama admin turning away foreign aid by refusing to waive union-supported Jones Act

Myth: Obama admin defied Constitution when they "told" BP to create escrow account

Myth: Obama admin unreasonably delayed purchase of Maine company's oil boom

Myth: Obama unnecessarily delayed berm plan

Myth: Coast Guard docked oil-collecting barges for no good reason

This list and the fact checking will matter little to the Obama haters. hate has a tendency to cloud rational thinking.

Dude, Conservatives Are Like, So Honorable and Truthy

Washington Times Features Doctored Photo Of Kagan In A Turban To Claim She’s Subservient To Shariah Law

Six days ago, after Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) absurdly tried to link Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan to “oppressive tenets of Shari’a-type law,” The Wonk Room’s Matt Duss jokingly predicted that anti-Islamic bigot Frank Gaffney would “claim[] that Elena Kagan ‘may still be a Muslim.’” Sadly, Duss’ prediction largely came true this week. In a Washington Times op-ed run alongside a doctored photo of Kagan in a turban (pictured to the right), Gaffney ropes Kagan into a bizarre fantasy involving Shariah law, the Muslim Brotherhood, and, somehow, the beleaguered Troubled Assets Relief Progam:

Dean Kagan had an even more direct connection to the Saudis’ Shariah-recruitment efforts at Harvard. She personally officiated in 2003 over the establishment of an Islamic Finance Project at the law school. The project’s purpose is to promote what is better known as Shariah-compliant finance (SCF) by enlisting in its service some of the nation’s most promising law students. [...]

Shariah-compliant finance dates back to the 1940s, when it was invented by leading figures in the Muslim Brotherhood. This international organization has as its stated mission “destroying Western civilization from within … by its own miserable hand.” [...]

Ms. Kagan’s Islamic Finance Project also has played a prominent role in encouraging the U.S. government to endorse Shariah-compliant finance. Notably, a founding adviser to the project, Harvard professor Samuel Hays III, conducted a “seminar for the policy community” in November 2008. It was sponsored by a former Goldman-Sachs-executive-turned-assistant-treasury-secretary, Neel Kashkari, who at the time was responsible for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). The signal thus sent could not have been clearer, either to Mr. Kashkari’s colleagues in government or to those in the financial sector: At a moment when the very viability of major banks and investing institutions critically depended on this individual’s favor, it would be advisable to embrace Shariah-compliant finance.

Drawing Glenn Beck-like conspiratorial connections between Obama’s judicial nominees and plots to destroy America appears to be a conservative hobby. Both the Washington Times and Sean Hannity called district court nominee Judge Edward Chen “another Obama nominee who doesn’t appear to love America” because Chen correctly worried that the 9/11 attacks would harm race relations and religious tolerance in the United States. During the confirmation of Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a right-wing organization with close ties to Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), John McCain (R-AZ) and Jeff Sessions (R-AL) launched an ad claiming that Sotomayor “led a group supporting violent Puerto Rican terrorists.”

We have nicotine gum to help people addicted to tobacco. Too bad there isn't something that will help conservatives get off their addiction to conspiracy theories that are never supported by the facts.

Right-wing media push Kyl's flatly denied claim that Obama said he won't "secure the border". The same right-wing media that were happy to echo Kyl's bizarre claim doubled down - Right-wing media vouch for Kyl's honesty despite his history of false claims

Right-wing media have vouched for Sen. Jon Kyl's (R-AZ) "integrity" in the wake of a video in which Kyl accused President Obama of refusing to "secure the border" in order to force the GOP to support immigration reform, a claim the White House has flatly denied. However, these media have ignored Kyl's history of making false claims.

...Kilmeade: "Jon Kyl's integrity is beyond reproach." On the June 22 edition of Fox News Fox & Friends, discussing the video of Kyl making the flatly denied claim that Obama said he won't "secure the border," co-host Brian Kilmeade asserted, "Jon Kyl's integrity is beyond reproach."

...KYL FALSEHOOD: Kyl falsely claimed that he did not say Republicans would filibuster immigration reform. According to an April 12 PolitiFact.com post, on the April 11 edition of ABC's This Week, host Jake Tapper asked Kyl, "You said the other day in Yuma, Ariz., that Republicans will use the opportunity to filibuster. Are you going to help with the filibuster of immigration reform?" Kyl reportedly replied: "I don't think I said that, Jake, but what I did say is that the conditions for immigration reform no longer exist.

FACT: PolitiFact rates Kyl's claim "False." PolitiFact rated Kyl's claim that he didn't say Republicans would filibuster immigration reform "False." From PolitiFact:

Kyl's staff told us he only meant that Republicans would filibuster a purely partisan bill, not the kind of bipartisan, comprehensive immigration reform that Kyl put forward with Sen. Edward Kennedy in 2007. That's why Kyl objected to Tapper's premise.

Still, Tapper's question -- "You said the other day in Yuma, Ariz., that Republicans will use the opportunity to filibuster. Are you going to help with the filibuster of immigration reform?" -- remains an fair summary (though not a quotation) of Kyl's town hall remarks. The video showed that Kyl predicted a Republican filibuster. So Kyl's statement -- that he didn't say Republicans will use the opportunity to filibuster -- is False.

KYL FALSEHOOD: Kyl falsely claimed that "most of the jobs created are government jobs" in March jobs report. On the April 4 edition of Fox Broadcasting Co.'s Fox News Sunday, Kyl falsely claimed of the March jobs report, "Most of the jobs created are government jobs."

FACT: Private employers added 123,000 of the 162,000 jobs in March. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that private employers added 123,000 of the 162,000 jobs in March, which was the biggest gain in nearly three years.

KYL FALSEHOOD: Kyl falsely claimed that the Recovery Act had "very little effect." As Media Matters Action Network documented, Kyl claimed on the April 4 edition of Fox News Sunday that "[i]n terms of stimulus, I think what Republicans will do is look very carefully at any more spending plans because, as it turns out, we have spent hundreds of billions of dollars to very little effect."

FACT: In February, CBO stated that Recovery Act "added between 1.0 million and 2.1 million" jobs in the fourth quarter of 2009. In February -- prior to Kyl's claim -- the Congressional Budget Office stated that "CBO estimates that in the fourth quarter of calendar year 2009, ARRA added between 1.0 million and 2.1 million to the number of workers employed in the United States, and it increased the number of full-time-equivalent jobs by between 1.4 million and 3.0 million." CBO added that the Recovery Act "[l]owered the unemployment rate by between 0.5 percentage points and 1.1 percentage points."

KYL FALSEHOOD: Kyl falsely suggests individuals will see premiums "continue to go up" because of health care reform. Media Matters Action Network noted on March 10 that Kyl claimed "that insurance premiums will continue to go up" as a result of health care reform.

FACT: CBO found law will not raise premiums for majority of Americans. CBO estimated that the large group and small group markets make up 83 percent of the insurance market and that premiums in those markets would essentially remain unchanged and could decrease. Further, a January 27 PolitiFact.com analysis labeled the claim that health care reform would cause premiums for most Americans to increase "pants on fire" false and stated, "The CBO reported that, for most people, premiums would stay about the same, or slightly decrease."

KYL FALSEHOOD: Kyl falsely claimed that health care bill "will add to the deficit." As Media Matters Action Network noted, Kyl claimed on March 10 that the Democrats' health care reform bill "will add to the deficit" and that "it isn't deficit neutral."

Kyl should be removed from office for being mentally unfit, dishonoring the Senate and his country and gross unethical conduct. Write your senator and Congressman today and demand that Kyl resign or be removed from office.

Conservatives Fell it is Deeply Wrong to Kill Terrorists

Is National Reviews Andrew McCarthy Secretly A Genius?

Jonathan Bernstein looks at Andy McCarthy's bizarre conspiracy theory that the president is only attacking al-Qaeda to serve the larger cause of Islamic world domination, and senses brilliance:

This isn't stupid; it's genius. McCarthy's plan is foolproof; it covers not only a lucky shot that hits bin Laden, but a complete victory over al-Qaeda. All part of Barack Obama's treasonous treachery. Notice, by the way, that it's only a "vibrant debate in Islamist circles." Nice touch; if by some chance Obama curtails the drone strikes, or is in any way defeated by bin Laden, then that will presumably prove that the "vibrant debate" was decided in favor of al-Qaeda, and Obama acted accordingly.

To assume that this is genius rather than idiocy, you have to assume that McCarthy is proposing this scenario as political strategy and not as, you know, non-fiction. But since McCarthy is the kind of guy who believes Obama might be an Indonesian citizen and draws parallels between Obama and Iranian President Mahmoud Amadinejad because sometimes Obama doesn't wear a tie (cough), and thinks William Ayers wrote Obama's autobiography, the more plausible explanation is that he's a conspiracy theorist laboring to keep pace with the hamster wheel of his own logic.

So conservatives think killing most or all al-Qaeda terrorists is the same as Obama playing right into their clever scheme. Why is it that conservatism is not treated like an inmate who has escaped from an asylum.

Did Barton's brain malfunction? Does Barbour know what "escrow" means? Why does Bachmann hate fishermen? Ask them

Bill O'Reilly Spins and Distorts Gulf Spill Barge Story

Does O'Reilly think protecting barge workers is an "amazing screw-up"?

On his Fox News show tonight, Bill O'Reilly opened his Talking Points Memo by declaring that there had been an "amazing screw-up in the Gulf cleanup." He went on to relay the details of an ABC News report about 16 oil-collecting barges in the Gulf that had been called back to shore because of questions about safety measures aboard the ships. O'Reilly was incredulous:

O'REILLY: So why -- why -- would the Coast Guard shut them down? Ready? Because the Guard wanted to confirm there are life vests and fire extinguishers onboard the vessels, and the Guard couldn't find the people who built the barges to get that confirmation.

Insane? You bet. You halt the cleanup over life jackets?

O'Reilly seemed to do his best to minimize the danger involved in the situation by referring to the cleanup being stopped "over life jackets," and he later said that the barges "never should have been out of action." But as we noted earlier today, the barges weren't grounded simply because it couldn't be confirmed that they had safety equipment -- the ships did, in fact, lack the required equipment, and there were also concerns about their stability.

The Daily Caller's Jonathan Strong reported:

Sixteen crude-sucking barges are back in the Gulf of Mexico working to clean up oil, but the Coast Guard is defending its decision to ground the vessels because it couldn't verify whether there were fire extinguishers and life vests on board.

"The Coast Guard is not going to compromise safety ... that's our No. 1 priority," Coast Guard spokesman Robert Brassel told The Daily Caller.

[...]

Brassel said the barges are now "back in operating order."

On Thursday night, the Incident Commander in Houma, Roger Laferriere, decided with the captain of the port in New Orleans to inspect the barges when they realized the ships did not have a certificate of inspection to demonstrate safety equipment on board. Thursday morning, the ships were inspected and grounded because they did not have the proper fire-fighting and life-saving equipment. There were also concerns about the stability of the barges. During the day Thursday, the problems were fixed, and the barges are back out on the water today.

Eleven people have been killed already by this catastrophe, but Bill would never let the real possibility of a few more deaths keep him and other right-wing pundits from distorting a story and risking lives to get more viewers and readers. Conservatism is not a political movement. It is a bunch of shrill morons that worship money.

The Press Gave Bush a Free Pass on Oil Spill, but Have a Different Narrative for Obama

FLASHBACK: During Exxon Valdez disaster, George H. W. Bush got a free pass from the press

On the night of June 10, NBC’s Nightly News aired one of its many reports about the BP oil spill disaster. In this segment, Lisa Myers examined “what the government knew about how bad the leak could be and how much they told the public,” as Brian Williams put it. The report leaned heavily on the question of whether the Obama administration “leveled with the public” about the severity of the spill.

The rather breathless Nightly News segment, with lots of what-did-he-know-and-when-did-he-know-it implications, perfectly captured the news media’s somewhat odd obsession, virtually from Day One of the oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, with making Obama a central figure, if not the responsible player, in the drama about an oil-industry catastrophe.

No, the government didn’t operate or own the rig. And oil giant BP was obviously the responsible party. Yet the press immediately focused in on Obama.

....Well, not by most. A St. Petersburg Times editorial did condemn the federal government’s “ineffectual” and “almost blithe” reaction to the monster spill. And there were a couple of other media darts thrown Bush’s way. But they were the exceptions. For instance, I can’t find any examples of mainstream outlets suggesting Bush “owned” the Exxon spill. And I didn’t see these kinds of very unsubtle headlines and images, courtesy of the New York Times, used during the Valdez coverage:

During the 1989 man-made disaster, corporate media journalists didn’t obsess over whether or not Bush was showing enough emotion. They didn’t conduct poll after poll to figure out Bush’s “grade” for handling the spill. They didn’t fixate on stagecraft. And they certainly didn’t include the president on lists of people who were “to blame for the oil spill,” the way Time recently included Obama on such a list, blaming him for the Deepwater Horizon rig explosion. (Why was Obama to “blame”? Because “shortly before” the disaster, he proposed allowing for more offshore drilling. And no, that doesn’t make any sense.)

One could call it the media tax. Republicans can lie us into a war and wreck the economy, but the press tells us its all good because is a Republican. A Democrat doesn't wave a magic wand and correct all the problems Republicans created and that becomes the narrative.

Sharron Angle floated possibility of armed insurrection

Sharron Angle floated possibility of armed insurrection

Here's another one that could be tough for Sharron Angle to explain away: In an interview in January, Angle appeared to float the possibility of armed insurrection if "this Congress keeps going the way it is."

I'm not kidding. In an interview she gave to a right-wing talk show host, Angle approvingly quoted Thomas Jefferson saying it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years -- and said that if Congress keeps it up, people may find themselves resorting to "Second Amendment remedies."

What's more, the talk show host she spoke to tells me he doesn't have any doubt that she was floating the possibility of armed insurrection as a valid response if Congress continues along its current course.

So she is gutless, clueless and irresponsible - the average conservative.

Republicans think the average American worker is a lazy drug addict.

Congressional report clears ACORN of wrongdoing — after group forced to disband

John Boehner (R-OH) is a Pathological Liar

Boehner Lies About Bush Tax Cuts and Deficits

"Reagan," Dick Cheney famously said in 2002, "proved deficits don't matter." Until, that is, a Democrat is in the White House. And it so was on Friday, when House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) insisted the Bush tax cuts did not help produce a hemorrhage of red ink from the U.S. Treasury. Of course, the national debt didn't just double during Bush's tenure. As it turns out, the Bush tax cut windfall for the wealthy accounted for almost half the budget deficits during his presidency and the lion's share over the next decade.

As The Hill reported Thursday, Rep. Boehner in his discussion of the deficit conveniently omitted mention of the Republican mismanagement which helped produce it. Claiming increased spending to fight the Bush recession is "scaring the hell out of the American people," Boehner wrongly declared:

"It's not the marginal tax rates ... that's not what led to the budget deficit. The revenue problem we have today is a result of what happened in the economic collapse some 18 months ago."

"We've seen over the last 30 years that lower marginal tax rates have led to a growing economy, more employment and more people paying taxes."

Leave aside for the moment that President Bush authored the worst eight-year economic record of any modern president or that John Boehner like other Republicans is trying to give the GOP credit for the Clinton boom (which also occurred during a time of higher tax rates. John Boehner's myth-making notwithstanding, it was precisely the Bush tax cuts which devastated the Treasury.

More details and charts at link.

‘Dean’ Of Nevada Press Corps Slams Fox And Friends’ ‘Softball’ Interview With Sharron Angle

In a new ad, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) criticizes his Republican opponent, former Reno assemblywoman Sharron Angle, for wanting to privatize Social Security and Medicare. To support this claim, the Reid ad plays a clip of Angle saying, “We need to phase Medicare and Social Security out” in a May debate

Angle is trying to backtrack on his radical stances on Social Security and medicare with Fox's help. Too late she has been caught on tape too many times. Angle is a right-wing smiley-faced fascist that doesn't care about America's most vulnerable citizens, so it makes sense that she got Sarah Palin's endorsement..

Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) is So Much Fun He's Like Sarah Palin

Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) Defends Vote To Block The EPA From Regulating Carbon By Calling It ‘A Non-Governmental Agency’

Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) drives around in his pickup truck.Yesterday, the Senate voted 53-47 to block Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s (R-AK) resolution that would have stripped the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of its power to regulate carbon emissions. Murkowski’s resolution was aimed at overturning the EPA’s scientific finding, mandated by the Supreme Court, that manmade greenhouse gases endanger the American public.

Though he’s considered a potential swing vote on future clean energy legislation and was facing pressure to help block the action, Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) voted in favor of Murkowski’s resolution. In a Cape Cod Times op-ed yesterday, Brown defended his position by claiming that “this action would give an unelected and unaccountable government agency the power to impose restrictive and damaging carbon dioxide regulations that will drive up energy prices and hurt job-creating small businesses in our country.”

Brown took a different position, however, on a local right-wing radio show, claiming that “a non-governmental agency” would be empowered:

CARR: They’ve been, they’ve been advertising, as you probably know, all over the radio and TV, you know, demanding, the liberals, the moonbats, that you vote for this thing. How do you explain your vote against it?

BROWN: Well, I’m looking out for jobs and jobs in Massachusetts and throughout the country. And to give a non-governmental agency the ability to regulate the way that they have the potential to, they can regulate churches and restaurants and drop it all the way down from the big emitters to the very smallest emitters and it’s not appropriate. And, you know, we in Congress should continue to work on this issue and have the authority to do just that. And I would encourage, certainly, the majority party to start to work on a lot of these energy issues right away.


Clearly, as Brown acknowledged in his op-ed, the EPA is a governmental agency in the executive branch. But that’s not the only thing he got wrong in his discussion with Howie Carr. Brown asserted that the EPA could use the Clean Air Act to “regulate churches and restaurants,” ignoring the fact that the EPA has issued “tailoring” rules that would limit regulations to 75,000 tons a year for large emitters. Churches emit around 100 tons a year.

Scott's brain power and values are phenomenal - just like Palin's. They are both aware of the consequences of air pollution I'm sure,

World Health Experts Warn Air Pollution Kills Two Million a Year

NEW YORK, New York, October 6, 2006 (ENS) - Air pollution in cities across the world is causing some two million premature deaths every year, the World Health Organization (WHO) said Thursday, urging nations to adopt stricter air pollution standards. The international health agency's new air quality guidelines call for nations to reduce the impact of air pollution by substantially cutting levels of particulate matter, ozone and sulfur dioxide.

Conservatism is not known as the Conservative Culture of Death for nothing.

Please Stop Blaming Poor Bush

Clinton legacy - $127 billion U.S budget surplus in 2001
Just three years after Bush in office - $374 billion U.S budget deficit in the fiscal year 2003
Under Bush 43.6 million Number of U.S. citizens without health insurance
0 Number of WMD found in Iraq
$59,339 Amount the Bush campaign reimbursed Enron for 14 trips on its corporate jet during the 2000 campaign.
$44m Amount the Bush-Cheney 2000 campaign and the Republican National Committee received in contributions from the fossil fuel, chemical, timber, and mining industries.
31 Number of Bush administration appointees who are alumni of the energy industry (includes four cabinet secretaries, the six most powerful White House officials, and more than 20 other high-level appointees).
50 Percentage decline in Environmental Protection Agency enforcement actions against polluters under Bush's watch
62 Number of members of Cheney's 63-person Energy Task Force with ties to corporate energy interests.

U.S. Budget History
Jan'01: Bush Becomes President
$850 billion SURPLUS

Nov'04: Bush Re-Elected
$415 billion DEFICIT

Jan'09: Obama Becomes Pres.
$1.2 trillion DEFICIT

Republican Debt Legacy
Ronald Reagan (1981-1989)
Started: $1.6 trillion debt
Finished: $3.0 trillion debt

George H.W. Bush (1989-1993)
Started: $3.0 trillion debt
Finished: $4.3 trillion debt

George W. Bush (2001-2009)
Started: $5.8 trillion debt
Finished: $10.8 trillion debt

In October 2008 under Bush , the American economy shed 240,000 jobs, catapulting the losses for the year to 1.2 million. At 6.5%, the unemployment rate hit a 14-year high. The percentage of the adult population now working dropped to 61.8%, its lowest level in 15 years. The Philadelphia Fed survey forecast 222,000 more lost jobs per month through the end of the year. With some analysts now predicting unemployment will hit 8% by the middle of 2009.

Of course, the corollary to skyrocketing unemployment is an explosion of new jobless claims. The Labor Department -Nov. 2008- released figures showing new unemployment claims jumped to 542,000 last week, a 16-year high. First-time jobless claims have now remained above the 400,000 for 17 straight weeks.

Home Foreclosures under Bush as of 2008. While Congress and the Treasury Department debate whether and how to help American homeowners on the brink of foreclosure, the crisis only deepens. In the third quarter, 766,000 homeowners received a foreclosure notice, a staggering 71% increase from the same period in 2007. Overall, nearly a fifth of American homeowners - 7.5 million of them - may now be "under water" on their mortgages, with levels in Nevada (47.8%), Michigan (38.6%), Arizona (29.2%), Florida (29.2%) and California (27.4%) all topping 25%

Patriotic Americans will stop blaming Bush and his hateful malicious ignorant enablers when history stops being true.

Florida Gubernatorial Candidate Rick Scott Profitably Aided Oppressive Regimes

Disgraced Columbia/HCA executive Richard L. "Rick" Scott

Disgraced Columbia/HCA executive Richard L. "Rick" Scott has been in the media lately for spearheading Conservatives for Patients Rights, an organization adamantly opposed to health care reform. In addition to the fraudulent practices of his former empire, Scott serves on the boards of two companies that helped the Saudi Arabian and Iranian regimes suppress their citizens by censoring access to the Internet.
Rick Scott Is Personally Funding Conservatives For Patients Rights

Rick Scott Used His Own Funds To Start The Group Conservatives For Patients Rights. During an interview with the Politico, Rick Scott was asked if he was "providing the only source of funding" for the group, to which he said: "I started by myself, but people have started funding. I did it myself at the beginning because it is what I believe, and I think it is hard to get people to ever ... do something with you if you don't stick your own neck out. So that is what I did, and now I have a lot of support." When asked "who else is funding the organization?" Scott answered: "I told people I am not disclosing their names. But there are lots of people who believe the same way we do." [Politico, 4/21/09]
CyberGuard, 2001-2006
February 2001 - January 2006: Richard L. Scott Served On CyberGuard's Board Of Directors.

February 2001: Richard L. Scott Joined CyberGuard's Board Of Directors. According to the Secure Computing website, Richard L. Scott joined CyberGuard's Board of Directors in February 2001. [SecureComputing.com, accessed 4/8/09]

* Various Reports Of The Length Of Scott's Tenure On CyberGuard Board Have Conflicting Dates. The Secure Computing (now McAfee website) reports that Scott left the CyberGuard Board in March of 2003. However, Business Wire twice reported that Scott was on the CyberGuard Board during the Secure Computing merger in January 2006. [SecureComputing.com, accessed 4/8/09; Business Wire, 8/18/05; Business Wire, 1/11/06, via TheFreeLibrary.com]

* Scott Served On CyberGuard Board From April 2004 Through January 2006. According to Enterpriser.in, a business site in India, "Scott, who was a board member of CyberGuard Corporation from April 2004 to Secure's acquisition of CyberGuard in January 2006." [Enterpriser.in, accessed 5/11/09]

In 2003, Scott Owned 45% Of Cyberguard. The Nashville Post reported: "Scott also has deployed funds to CyberGuard Corp., a Ft. Lauderdale computer security firm. He controls a 45% stake worth almost $50 million." [Nashville Post, 2/1/03]

* Scott Owned A Controlling Interest Of CyberGuard Stock. According to a CyberGuard SEC report filed in July 2004 because of the amount of stock owned by him, "Mr. Scott may be able control the outcome of certain shareholder votes, including votes concerning the election of directors, the adoption or amendment of provisions in our Articles of Incorporation, and the approval of mergers and other significant corporate transactions. This level of concentrated ownership by one person may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in the management or voting control of CyberGuard." [CyberGuard SEC Filing, 7/7/04]

By 2006, Scott Was CyberGuard's Largest Shareholder. Business Wire reported: "Richard L. Scott, CyberGuard board member and largest shareholder said, 'When I initially made my investments in CyberGuard, I felt CyberGuard had superior products in the firewall industry. What was accomplished over the last 5 years is a testament to the management team we put in place and their commitment and focus." [Business Wire, 1/11/06, via TheFreeLibrary.com]
Clientele During Scott's Tenure On Board Of Directors

CyberGuard's Clients Included Saudi Arabian And U.S. National Banking, As Well As The U.S. Department Of Defense. According to Business Wire, CyberGuard has had "security projects in the Asian ISP/ASP markets, Saudi Arabia's National Banking System and in the US on the DOD Satellite Data Project." [Business Wire, 4/5/01]

October 2002: CyberGuard Announced Six-Month Saudi Security Contract. The Miami Herald reported: "Cyberguard, the Fort Lauderdale computer network security firm, reported net income of $931,000 for its first fiscal quarter ended Sept. 30, reversing a loss of $908,000 a year ago...Last week, CyberGuard said it would be providing security for the Saudi Telecom Co., the only communications provider in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The contract with CyberGuard is part of a large data network security project embarked upon by the Saudi company. CyberGuard, which didn't disclose the value of the contract, says the work will last about six months." [Miami Herald, 10/28/02, emphasis added]

* Saudi Telecom Sought To Provide Secure Technology To Its Consumers. Business Wire reported that "Saudi Telecom is a company delivering results for its customers as it evolves to cope with the competition it progressively faces as its traditional markets are liberalized...Saudi Telecom understands that its leading edge network technology (Optical Fiber & ATM backbone), in data, telephone and mobile, and a focus on customer needs is not the end of the story; it also needs a secure business environment where vital information is safeguarded." [Business Wire, 10/22/02]

December 2002: CyberGuard Provided Data Security For Saudi Company. Communications News reported that "CyberGuard Corp., Ft. Lauderdale, FL, will provide firewall/VPN appliances to secure the network infrastructure for the Saudi Telecom's data network security project in Saudi Arabia." [Communications News, 12/2002]

The Saudi Government Utilized CyberGuard's Software To Protect The Banking System. According to an M2 Presswire release, "the Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency (SAMA) has selected CyberGuard's premium firewall/VPN appliances to provide the information security for a new ATM network called the SADAD Project being established in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. SADAD is a nationwide network that will allow citizens throughout the Kingdom to pay utility, phone and other bills securely at ATM machines. The project is a collaboration between all the banks in Saudi Arabia under the sponsorship and supervision of the SAMA." [M2 Presswire, 7/29/04, accessed via Goliath.ecnext.com]

CyberGuard Has Several Saudi Clients. According to an M2 Presswire release, "CyberGuard provides information security solutions throughout the Middle East, particularly within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. In 2002, Saudi Telecom Corp selected - and began deploying - CyberGuard firewall/VPN appliances in high availability configurations to secure their critical customer and consumer backbone networks. Other large CyberGuard customers include Saudi Arabian Airlines, the National Commercial Bank (NCB) in Jeddah, as well as other banks and government agencies in Riyadh." [M2 Presswire, 7/29/04, accessed via Goliath.ecnext.com]
CyberGuard - Secure Computing Merger

Secure Computing Purchased CyberGuard "For About $295 Million." Computer World reported: "Secure Computing Corp. said it has reached an agreement to acquire CyberGuard Corp. for about $295 million in cash and stock." [ComputerWorld.com, 8/19/05]

CyberGuard's Largest Shareholder, Rick Scott, Joined "Secure Computing's Board Of Directors Following The Close" Of The Merger. Business Wire reported: "Richard L. Scott, CyberGuard board member and largest shareholder said, '...Their acquisition of technology and vision for combining these technologies, we believe, will be a significant benefit to all of the combined shareholders of CyberGuard and Secure Computing. I am very proud of what has been accomplished and the team that have been acquired by Secure Computing.' Mr. Scott will join Secure Computing's Board of Directors following the close of the transaction." [Business Wire, 1/11/06, via TheFreeLibrary.com]

CyberGuard Stockholders Received Stock And Cash Windfall In Merger Agreement. The Miami Herald reported: "Secure Computing has agreed to buy CyberGuard in a deal valued at $295 million, based on Secure's closing price of $12.18 Wednesday. The stock closed Friday at $11.18. [...] CyberGuard stockholders will receive a half share of Secure stock and $2.73 for each CyberGuard share. The company yesterday reported revenues for the fiscal year ended June 30 spiked 38 percent over last year, to $66.1 million. Earnings per share decreased to 3 cents from 7 cents in fiscal 2004. Among CyberGuard's shareholders and directors are Broward County Sheriff Ken Jenne and lobbyist William Rubin." [Miami Herald, 8/20/05, emphasis added]

* Prior To Merger, Scott Purchased Nearly 6,500 Shares Of CyberGuard Stock. Business Wire published a RealTimeInsider.com report indicating that "Richard L. Scott, Director of Cyberguard Corp. (NASDAQ:CGFW), purchased a total of 6,478 shares at an average price of $5.96. The total purchase price was $38,639.97. Based on the Form-4 Filing, this appears to be an open market purchase and there were no footnotes or special circumstances described in the filing." [Business Wire, 2/7/05]

Under Scott, CyberGuard Previously Attempted To Absorb Secure Computing In July 2004

July 2004: CyberGuard Attempted To Acquire Secure Computing For $297 Million. The South Florida Sun-Sentinel reported that CyberGuard "made a $ 297 million bid to buy rival Secure Computing Corp....Both CyberGuard and Secure specialize in helping business and government customers with information technology security issues. In a letter sent to Secure on Sunday, CyberGuard proposed a one-for-one stock trade...The final price will have to be negotiated if Secure agrees to the deal. Layoffs could occur at the combined company if the deal goes through." [South Florida Sun-Sentinel, 7/13/04]

* In 2004, Secure Computing Was Reportedly Providing Iran With Censorship Software. Information Week reported: "In a report released earlier this year, [Open Net Initiative] stated that Iran used software from Secure Computing, based in San Jose, Calif. to operate 'one of the world's most substantial censorship regimes' in 2004 and 2005." [Information Week, 10/14/05]

Will Florida Elect Criminal Rick Scott for Governor

Who Is Richard Scott—

How to Build An Empire


Scott’s goal: to lay claim to 25 percent of the nation’s hospitals. He felt the country had too many hospitals, and was hoping for a shakeout that would cut the number in half, leaving Columbia with a larger slice of what was left. To be sure, excess capacity was a problem in some parts of the country, but Scott’s solution was chillingly Darwinian. In his vision of the future, the hospitals most likely to succumb to competition would be “teaching hospitals and children’s hospitals”—institutions where operating costs are highest. His business plan left no room for unprofitable hospitals that nonetheless serve vital needs.
Meanwhile, within HCA Scott was known as a bully. “I never witnessed such an extent of demeaning, debasing and devaluing behavior as I personally experienced at Columbia,” one administrative director told the New York Times.

[ ]....In Scott’s case, that happened a short three years after he became CEO of Columbia/HCA. In July of 1997, the FBI swooped down on HCA hospitals in five states. Within weeks, three executives were indicted on charges of Medicare fraud, and the board had ousted Scott.


The investigation revealed that the hospital chain had been bilking Medicare while simultaneously handing over kickbacks and perks to physicians who steered patients to its hospitals. One can only wonder how many of those patients really needed to be hospitalized—and how many were harmed.

Beck Has No apologies for promoting an anti-Semite Nazi sympathizer

Beck Has No apologies for promoting an anti-Semite Nazi sympathizer

This morning on his radio program, Glenn Beck responded to the general outcry over his approving comments last week for the work of Elizabeth Dilling, a virulent anti-Semite who actively supported Hitler and the Nazis during World War II. Beck's response contained neither an apology nor a disavowal nor any indication whatsoever that he was at all contrite over using his considerable media presence to promote a discredited and hateful woman's writings.

After decrying "criminalizing politics," conservative media falsely claim WH's "garden-variety politics" broke laws

Conservative media have claimed the White House's controversial conversations with Rep. Joe Sestak and Andrew Romanoff -- which have been described by experts as "garden-variety politics" -- constituted criminal activity. But when Bush administration official Scooter Libby was investigated, tried, and convicted, conservative media decried it as "criminalizing politics."
While right-wing media call Sestak, Romanoff controversies illegal, experts call them "trivial," "garden-variety politics"

Right-wing media: White House discussions with Sestak, Romanoff illegal, "impeachable." Numerous right-wing media figures have suggested that the White House's offer to Sestak of a position on a presidential panel if he did not enter the Pennsylvania Senate primary constituted a violation of the law or even an "impeachable offense." Likewise, conservative media have claimed the White House's discussions with Romanoff about possible positions with the administration were illegal.

Experts: Job offers "trivial," "garden-variety politics," "unexceptional." Legal experts have pointed out that the Romanoff and Sestak controversies violated no laws. Moreover, political experts and historians have pointed out that such offers are common. For example, University of Virginia political science professor Larry Sabato called the allegations "garden-variety politics" and "absolutely trivial." He added, "Let's stop criminalizing garden-variety politics, which is what this is." Similarly, historian George Edwards reportedly stated: "There is no question whatsoever that presidents have often offered people positions to encourage them not to do something or make it awkward for them to do it. Presidents have also offered people back-ups if they ran for an office and lost. All this is old news historically." And Ron Kaufman, who served as President George H.W. Bush's political director, reportedly stated, "Tell me a White House that didn't do this, back to George Washington."

Most days conservatism seems to rests it's political agenda on ankle biting from the peanut gallery combined with a stinking truck load of hypocrisy. That could be because at the end of the day conservatism is just a bunch of hateful, spiteful, morally bankrupt twits with personality disorders .

Why Does the Media Pay Attention to Lying Scum Bags Like Andrew Breitbart and James O'Keefe

Why Does the Media Pay Attention to Lying Scum Bags Like Andrew Breitbart and James O'Keefe

Andrew Breitbart and convicted criminal James O'Keefe are promising to unveil another video. In assessing Breitbart and O'Keefe's claims, media should keep in mind their record of dishonest and illegal practices and their failed attempt to show that ACORN was engaging in criminal behavior.

Specifically:

Breitbart's "strategy": Withhold evidence and "deprive" people of "information"

O'Keefe is an admitted criminal

Breitbart and O'Keefe's ACORN scam exposed no criminality

Breitbart and O'Keefe criticized for selective editing and manipulating video

O'Keefe's video methods slammed by former employer

Breitbart and O'Keefe repeatedly misrepresented ACORN tapes

Breitbart threatened to release more tapes during election unless DOJ investigates ACORN

O'Keefe has received significant backing from right-wing funders

Since when did it become good journalistic ethics to act as a megaphone for wacko serial lying political hacks. When did the media stop acting as fact checkers on the loons.

Jon Stewart Debunks Glenn Beck's Claim That He Alone Showed Israeli Flotilla Raid Footage (VIDEO)

Republicans Nearly Kill Civil Rights Enforcement. Obama Revives it

Obama Resurrects DOJ's Civil Rights Division

As the Washington Post detailed Friday, the devastation of the Civil Right Division in George W. Bush's wake was staggering:

Nearly 70 percent of the lawyers had left between 2003 and 2007, a mass exodus that came during allegations the Bush administration was politicizing hiring. Internal watchdogs concluded that the division's former head had refused to hire lawyers he labeled "commies" and had transferred one for allegedly writing in "ebonics," allegations the official denied. Civil rights groups said the unit had lost its traditional civil rights focus.

But now, the Obama administration is resurrecting the agency created in 1957 to protect the Freedom Riders and students trying to integrate public schools. The division has a renewed new focus on the enforcement of employment, disability rights and other anti-discrimination laws, and the resources to go along with it:

Hate crimes and police misconduct are a renewed focus, and several section chiefs from the George W. Bush era have left. More than 30 people have been or are about to be hired as part of an 18 percent budget increase this year, the largest in the division's history. It will bring in 102 new people.

And in recent weeks, the division has taken a leading role in preparing for a possible Obama administration lawsuit against Arizona over the state's new immigration law.

As division chief Thomas E. Perez put it, "We had some healing to do." Perez added:

"We had to restore the partnership between the career staff and the political leadership. And frankly, certain civil rights laws were not being enforced."

Among those laws was something called the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Under President Bush, the Justice Department became an essential tool in the Republican strategy to suppress minority (read "Democratic") voter turnout through unprecedented redistricting, onerous registration hurdles, hyper-partisan prosecutors, polling place chicanery and draconian voter identification laws.


More details at the link. Conservatives only like freedom when it's their narrowly defined brand and even than freedom is only for the chosen few.

Helen Thomas Has Apologized; When Will Huckabee?

Hearst reporter Helen Thomas has rightly received criticism for her offensive comment that Israelis should “get the hell out of Palestine” and “go home [to] Poland and Germany and America.” Though Thomas quickly apologized, issuing a written statement that said “I deeply regret my comments I made last week regarding the Israelis and the Palestinians,” some conservatives are still calling for her to be fired.

Sam Stein reports that one of those critics is former Bush Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, who said in an email that Thomas “should lose her job over this“:

“As someone who is Jewish, and as someone who worked with her and used to like her, I find this appalling,” [Fleischer said.]

“She is advocating religious cleansing. How can Hearst stand by her? If a journalist, or a columnist, said the same thing about blacks or Hispanics, they would already have lost their jobs.”

But are conservatives applying the religious cleansing standard equally? Consider Gov. Mike Huckabee, who has on numerous occasions voiced his opposition to a Palestinian state in Palestine, saying that “the Palestinians can create their homeland in many other places in the Middle East, outside Israel.” Like the most radical right-wing elements in Israel, Huckabee’s conception of Israel includes Palestinian lands occupied by Israeli forces in 1967.

Huckabee has never apologized for any of this, for the simple reason that this is what he really thinks: The Palestinians should be transferred out of Palestine. As far as I know, no conservatives have ever criticized Huckabee for these comments, let alone called on Fox News to fire him. I look forward to Ari Fleischer doing that very soon.

George W. Bush Confesses to War Crimes

Bush's Glib Waterboarding Admission Sparks Outrage

George W. Bush's casual acknowledgment Wednesday that he had Khalid Sheikh Mohammed waterboarded -- and would do it again -- has horrified some former military and intelligence officials who argue that the former president doesn't seem to understand the gravity of what he is admitting.

Waterboarding, a form of controlled drowning, is "unequivocably torture", said retired Brigadier General David R. Irvine, a former strategic intelligence officer who taught prisoner of war interrogation and military law for 18 years.

"As a nation, we have historically prosecuted it as such, going back to the time of the Spanish-American War," Irvine said. "Moreover, it cannot be demonstrated that any use of waterboarding by U.S. personnel in recent years has saved a single American life."

Irvine told the Huffington Post that Bush doesn't appreciate how much harm his countenancing of torture has done to his country.

"Yeah, we waterboarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed," Bush told a Grand Rapids audience Wednesday, of the self-professed 9/11 mastermind. "I'd do it again to save lives."

But, Irvine said: "When he decided to do it the first time, he launched the nation down a disastrous road, and we will continue to pay dearly for the damage his decision has caused.

"We are seen by the rest of the world as having abandoned our commitment to international law. We have forfeited enormous amounts of moral leadership as the world's sole remaining superpower. And it puts American troops in greater danger -- and unnecessary danger."

Bush thus committed war crimes. Also strange that Bush thinks that torture saved lives. There has never been any documentation what so ever torturing any prisoner at GITMO or in Afghanistan saved lives. KLM made lots of confessions, as tortured people usually do. He made most of the stuff up and the little bit of good information he did provide was given before the torture started.

GLENN BECK, SINCERE HUCKSTER-LUNATIC

But I don't think Beck's self-image as a businessman is at odds with his beliefs about religion and politics. He doesn't know enough about the world to understand why his grand-unified theory of a 100-year progressive plot is a laughingstock outside of his own TV and radio studios. I think he actually believes God wants him to make all this money and fight dirty for right wing causes. Does he really believe God is speaking to and through him? I don't know. But in one of his books, he describes Heaven as a place where everybody "can make as much money as they want," and he does believe that God basically wrote the Constitution in 1787.

The mistake Beck's critics often make is to say, "Okay, so if his main self-identity is as a media and entertainment mogul, then everything else is just an act." There's no need to choose just one door. On his worldview's own terms, there's no contradiction between his enormous success, his entertainment toolbox, and his bat-in-the-bell tower politics. What's shocking to me is how completely his fans swallow the "selfless patriot" act.

Super Smart Conservatives Have Found Another Watergate

Republicans have fantasized about a Democratic "Watergate" for decades. Can they still remember the real thing?

The quest for a Democratic Watergate that has preoccupied Republicans for more than three decades may never achieve fulfillment but surely will never end. Impeaching Bill Clinton promised satisfaction only to bring deeper frustration -- which must be one of the many reasons that we now hear politicians and pundits announcing the arrival of " Obama's Watergate" (and also why they never say " Obama's Whitewater" ).

So far, the alleged scandal that supposedly threatens the Obama presidency doesn't amount to much: a verbal mention of a nonpaying advisory post to Rep. Joe Sestak in a conversation with Clinton, and an e-mail mentioning three administration jobs to Andrew Romanoff, the Democratic speaker of the Colorado state assembly, dangled in order to dissuade them from entering primaries against incumbents favored by the president.

If clumsiness were an indictable offense, then the White House officials responsible for those overtures might well be in trouble. But when people compare such ham-handed deal-making with the crimes of Watergate, it can only mean that they don't remember what the country and the Constitution endured under Nixon -- or that they cynically assume nobody else does.

Some of us do, however. And for those who don't, or who never learned the true history of the Nixon era in high school or college, there are several gripping books, including "The Wars of Watergate" by Stanley Kutler, "Nightmare: The Underside of the Nixon Years" by the late Tony Lukas, and of course Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein's classic "All the President's Men." (The latter is also the title of a wonderful movie that outlines the conspiracy but necessarily omits most of the grim details.)

" Watergate" was the place where the president's henchmen staged a "third-rate burglary" of the Democratic National Committee headquarters on a June night in 1972, but its historical definition is the vast gangsterism of the Nixon regime. Watergate involved no political job offers, but a series of burglaries, warrantless domestic wiretaps, illegal spying, campaign dirty tricks, and assorted acts of thuggery by a group of goons whose leaders included G. Gordon Liddy and the late E. Howard Hunt. Watergate meant a coverup of those felonies with more felonies, set up by lawyers and bureaucrats who collected cash payoffs from major corporations and then handed out hush money and secret campaign slush funds. Watergate implicated dozens of perps, from Hunt and Liddy all the way up to the president, his palace guard, and his crooked minions at the highest levels of the Justice Department, the FBI and the CIA.

Joe has it about 99% right. The fact is that Andrew Romanoff inquired about a job with the administration.

New York Times Flubs Coverage of Dartmouth Health Care Costs Story

Glenn Beck pins blame for 9/11 attacks on Saudi Prince, major News Corp. stakeholder

Rupert Murdoch may be getting an unpleasant phone call soon, if it hasn't come already.

That's because Glenn Beck, the Fox News network's popular opinion host, just blamed the world's 19th richest man -- Saudi Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Alsaud -- for the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

As it happens, the Prince is a major investor in News Corporation; at seven percent of the company's shares, he's second only to Rupert Murdoch himself. Fox News is just one piece of the massive corporation. Murdoch, likewise, owns nine percent of the Prince's Arab media empire Rotana.

Most people would call the situation awkward, to say the least.

Oil and Conservatives Do Mix - BP hires Cheney spokeswoman to lead PR effort

BP hires Cheney spokeswoman to lead PR effort

As if the water wasn't deep -- or oily -- enough around British Petroleum's public relations, the company has hired a former spokeswoman for Vice President Dick Cheney to be its public face for the disaster.

Anne Womack Kolton, former head of public affairs at the Department of Energy and Cheney's onetime campaign press secretary, will take the baton from BP this week.

While at Cheney's side, Kolton defended the secrecy of the Vice President's Energy task force, a group which held secretive meetings with energy company executives. When the General Accounting Office -- the research arm of Congress -- sued the Administraton for records relating to Cheney's meetings, Kolton (then Womack) was at his side.

"We are ready to defend our principles in court," she said. "This goes to the heart of the presidency and to the ability of the president and vice president to receive candid, discreet advice."

A blogger at the liberal web site Daily Kos notes that BP was reportedly among one of the companies that Cheney met with.

The BP Horizon well in the Gulf was made during the Bush administration. They never expressed any concerns about requiring a back up shut off valve.

Conservatives Doing Their Best for Arizona

Arizona ‘BUYcott’ organizer: ‘ID-ing everybody’ will make the ‘illegal criminals disappear like cockroaches.’

Today, the Arizona Republic reported that “the exodus of illegal and legal immigrants predicted by some as a result of Arizona’s tough new immigration law is expected to hurt a variety of businesses that directly and indirectly cater to immigrant populations.” If all of Arizona’s undocumented immigrants “disappeared,” the state could lose $26.4 billion in economic activity, $11.7 billion in gross state product, and approximately 140,324 jobs. Rather than worrying about the economic effects of the law itself, Tea Party Nation launched the separate “National Arizona BUYcott” campaign last month at the Winning Back America Conference, which was headlined by Liz Cheney, Fred Thompson, and Sarah Palin. Gina Loudon, the St. Louis tea party supporter who credits herself with coming up the buycott idea, has said “the goal is to render boycotts ineffective.” The personal financing website, mint.com, has estimated that Arizona’s fragile tourism industry has already lost $6-10 million in cancellations since the bill was signed into law.

The rule of law is certainly important - once in a while when it is convenient wedge conservatives find a law of two they like. In this case - during the slow recovery of a bad recession, caused primarily by Republican economic policies that shipped jobs to China and ran up the largest debt in the nation's history - they hand off a bonus prize to Arizona - the loss of almost $12 billion dollars. Yep, these conservatives are patriots all right, we just need to find out what country they are patriots of.

O'Keefe and Breitbart Confess to Crime. ABC News Helps Them Lie

O'Keefe and Breitbart launch Great American Rehab Tour on GMA

In fact, NewsCorpse compares O'Keefe's latest report to reality. As usual, there are pesky little details that expose his bias and tendency to lie yet again, and expose O'Keefe to the possibility of additional criminal charges.

So what we have here is O’Keefe confessing again to a crime. He knowingly signed the time sheet despite his having lied on it about the hours he worked. He knew that it was unlawful to do so, yet he did it anyway. This couldn’t be a more clear cut case. What’s more, there are laws against interfering with the conduct of the census. Since O’Keefe never intended to provide the services to which he agreed upon on employment, he could be liable for additional charges in that regard. And that’s not all. The Washington Post reports that O’Keefe may also have broken laws relating to surreptitiously recording Commerce Department conversations.

Update: Media Matters has an excellent summary, too.

This is the conservative media at work with the help of the so-called liberal media. ABC recites discredited report about ACORN and doesn't question the veracity of a couple of known liars, one of whom is a convicted felon.