"Only dull people are brilliant at breakfast"
-Oscar Wilde
Brilliant at Breakfast title banner "The liberal soul shall be made fat, and he that watereth, shall be watered also himself."
-- Proverbs 11:25
"...you have a choice: be a fighting liberal or sit quietly. I know what I am, what are you?" -- Steve Gilliard, 1964 - 2007

"For straight up monster-stomping goodness, nothing makes smoke shoot out my ears like Brilliant@Breakfast" -- Tata

"...the best bleacher bum since Pete Axthelm" -- Randy K.

"I came here to chew bubblegum and kick ass. And I'm all out of bubblegum." -- "Rowdy" Roddy Piper (1954-2015), They Live
Sunday, September 02, 2012

Word.
Posted by Jill | 3:29 PM
Melissa Harris-Perry rocks:



Monica Mehta is an asshole. And she deserved every fucking word of the smackdown that MHP gave her.

Labels: , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Sunday, August 19, 2012

Can This Nation Survive This Much Stupid?
Posted by Jill | 10:41 PM
We always knew there were yahoos out there. Us left-wing, communist, Jewish, homosexual pornographers in the Godless Heathen Liberal Northeast especially have always had images of guys with no teeth living in shacks with cars up on blocks in the front yard, a houn' dawg on the porch, and a whole messa guns. Or at least that's what the right thinks we think. They don't bother to explain this:



We expect guys like this to be out there in pockets of the hinterlands where they still refer to the Civil War as the War of Northern Aggression. But in the last few years they've been tempted by the siren song of K Street money and their Christian Crusade and started sending guys just like them to Washington. And as long as there were only a few of them, like Louie Gohmert (otherwise known as The Stupidest Fucking Moron Ever To Sit In Congress), we could point at them and laugh. But now, they're starting to make inroads into the upper house of Congress, and there's a very real chance that Democratic sellout Claire McCaskill may be booted out in favor of this guy:



Would someone please tell me what a "legitimate" rape is?

Labels: , , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Monday, August 06, 2012

NOW can we have a discussion about guns?
Posted by Jill | 5:35 AM
What's it going to take? How high does the body count have to go? What has to happen before we can talk about guns? At what point does the NRA have to concede that rights come with responsibilities? On the other hand, how can we have a discussion when leaders of the political party that refuses to cotton to ANY discussion of ANY kinds of sensible responsibilites of gun owners behaves like a bunch of four-year-olds, stuffing themselves with meat in response to a suggestion that maybe skipping meat one night a week might be a good idea?

Of course these are people who are incapable of having two ideas in their heads at the same time, instead believing that something not forbidden must be mandatory (abortion), and something not mandatory is forbidden (guns). The ideas of "less" or "sensible" never occur to Republicans. It's eather stuff yourself with pig flesh until you can't breathe or be a pussy. It's either own an arsenal that could kill an entire town or be unprotected against unspecified threats.

This morning I wonder just how much the fear of unspecified threats motivates the amassing of these arsenals, and how much amassing these arsenals CAUSES this constant state of fear. We heard about ignorant yahoos beating up Sikhs in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, but haven't heard much lately about violence against Sikhs until yesterday, when a white male decided to kill a bunch of them before being shot to death himself by police.

This happened in Wisconsin, the state that elected Scott Walker and refused to boot him from office. This happened in a state right next door to Minnesota, where one district is represented by Michele Bachmann, who advocates a witch hunt against Muslims in America. Sikhs are not Muslims, but that's immaterial. The modus operandi of Michele Bachmann and other Republicans who have made no secret of their advocacy of an all-white, all-Christian America, cannot be ruled out as an influence on the gunman, despite the delicate treading of the police, who are referring to this incident as "domestic terrorism" (something you ironically never hear when the target of a shooting is a medical practitioner of women's health care).

And once again, "our thoughts and prayers" are with the families of the victimes, blah blah blah. President Obama, who has been vilified as being ready to take guns away from these morons despite the fact that he has never, ever, ever, ever even MENTIONED the word "gun" since taking office, responded with the usual platitudes:
Michelle and I were deeply saddened to learn of the shooting that tragically took so many lives in Wisconsin. At this difficult time, the people of Oak Creek must know that the American people have them in our thoughts and prayers, and our hearts go out to the families and friends of those who were killed and wounded. My Administration will provide whatever support is necessary to the officials who are responding to this tragic shooting and moving forward with an investigation. As we mourn this loss which took place at a house of worship, we are reminded how much our country has been enriched by Sikhs, who are a part of our broader American family.

What a lovely sentiment. How clean, how completely devoid of any sense of the horror of people being mowed down simply because of their religion, or of the fact that their religion requiers them to wear headgear that some ignorant idiot decide made them Muslim, or the general anti-Muslim sentiment that is still pervasive in many communities in America.

Willard Rmoney responded similarly:

"Ann and I extend our thoughts and prayers to the victims of today's shooting in Wisconsin. This was a senseless act of violence and a tragedy that should never befall any house of worship. Our hearts are with the victims, their families and the entire Oak Creek Sikh community. We join Americans everywhere in mourning those who lost their lives and in prayer for healing in the difficult days ahead."

Sound pretty much the same, don't they? Someone right now is probably coming up with a "Presidential Gun Violence Statement Generator" where you can push a button and come up with similar platitudinous nonsense.

Yes, let's talk about how "our hearts are with these people" when they aren't, for if they really were we would DO SOMETHING. Let's talk about how we "pray" for them and their families. Let's just say a bunch of words that mean nothing, and continue to go on just as we have been, insisting that guns had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH people who go out and mow down doctors and movie theatre patrons and Congresswomen and Amish girls and college students and high school students and people attending a Unitarian church. Let's continue to pretend that these guys could do the same thing with a knife, or that turning every one of these into a free-for-all gunfight would be the answer. Let's continue to ignore the big white elephant in the room. Because in our "pro-life" society, the only lives that matter are those of fetuses and people who own guns. The rest of us are just cannon fodder.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
Tuesday, April 03, 2012

How many people have to die before we can start talking about guns?
Posted by Jill | 6:03 AM

Amendment II: A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

I actually agree with this, especially the "well-regulated" part. In fact, I'll narrow it down even further and say I like the "well-" part. Yes, I recognize that it might be a good idea in the abstract for ordinary citizens to be able to arm themselves against a tyrannical government. The problem is that the definition of "tyrannical" has become so debased that there are people in this country who seem to think that encouraging (not mandating, but encouraging) people to eat vegetables, or trying to assure that all Americans have access to health care and a basic standard of living, constitutes tyranny.

You know what tyranny is? It's being a Congresswoman who isn't able to meet one's constituents without being shot in the head. It's being a student who can't go to class without being afraid that today is the day one of your classmates will snap. It's being a young black male who can't walk down the street without being accosted and shot by someone who regards your mere existence as a threat. It's not tyranny-by-government, but it's tyranny-by-gun-anarchy, and that's just as bad. If you can't live your life without fear of someone who's mentally unstable, or just plain angry, taking a shot at you, that's tyranny of a different kind.

The other day a gunman who apparently felt "bullied and teased" killed seven people at a small Christian college in California. Forgetting for a moment that a man of 43 years of age should be able to deal with "feeling teased", this shooting is the fruition of the "But I'm mad NOW!" mindset so brilliantly written by the creators of The Simpsons in this scene where Homer goes to buy a gun:



So what's it going to take? How many college students and Congresswomen and mothers and fathers and children have to die before the so-called "pro-life" Republicans start seeing the incongruity between the mindset that had George W. Bush flying back to Washington to force the continued ventilation of a corpse in Florida and the insistence that anyone -- schizophrenic, terrorist, domestic abuser, anger-management flunkout -- should be able to pack heat at any time, for any reason? How many casualties of the right-wing worship of guns do there have to be before even bringing up the subject stops being politically toxic?

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
Tuesday, March 27, 2012

These people do not deserve this country
Posted by Jill | 7:47 PM
=Sigh=

It is a sick, sick, sick country that has people in it who want to demonize a corpse just to defend a bad law.

Again, Charles Johnson ventured into the fetid swamp of racist hate that is Fox News Nation -- so you don't have to.

In 2016, I want the words of these people to follow Jeb Bush around everywhere he goes. I want the name of Trayvon Martin to be mentioned every time Jeb Bush appears anywhere. He signed this horrific law, he owns it. Let's never let him forget it.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Friday, March 16, 2012

At least we've now pulled the curtain aside from what right-wing men really think about women
Posted by Jill | 5:52 AM
We're just breeders to them -- no different from barnyard animals:

In today’s news about more men who want to control women’s bodies, Georgia’s state representative, Terry England, wants to force us to carry stillborn fetuses to term–just like cows and pigs do, he says. Because, you know, women are just like barnyard animals.

England was speaking on the floor of the Georgia legislature in favor of HB 954, a bill which makes it illegal to obtain an abortion after 20 weeks, which is fine for him to take that stance and many people would even agree with that. However, he was pushing for that law to also apply to women who are carrying a stillborn fetus or one that is likely to die before it reaches term, making it illegal for women to have the dead fetus removed until their bodies do so naturally.

As if that insensitivity wasn’t enough, he then referenced the livestock on the farm where he once worked and how they had to sometimes deliver stillborn animals:

Life gives us many experiences…I’ve had the experience of delivering calves, dead and alive. Delivering pigs, dead or alive. It breaks our hearts to see those animals not make it.


In other words, if a cow or pig can give birth to a dead baby, then a woman should too. So what if it’s just plain cruel to force a woman to carry a stillborn fetus to term and then make her undergo labor. We are no different than cows or pigs, right? Yeah, that’s logic that just makes a lot of sense and is filled with so much compassion and understanding of women.

Video at the link.

The one good thing about assholes like Terry England is that they're showing us exactly what the fetophile movement is about. It's not about human life, it's not about babies, and it sure as hell isn't about God or the Baby Jesus. It's about their own issues with women, and how they want to punish them in the most profound way possible.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Friday, February 10, 2012

First they blamed the black people, and I said nothing because I was not black...
Posted by Jill | 5:36 AM
So here we are again, back where we've been so often during the last thirty years, with Republican politicians grandstanding about dirty whores who won't keep their legs closed and be nice, docile brood mares the way Jeebus intended; and about how Christians are being persecuted right here in Amurrica, oh my; and about how if everyone would just stop having sex unless they wanted babies like that nice man Rick Santorum all our societal problems would just go away. It's amazing to me that anyone still responds to this particular dogwhistle.

Black Americans, particularly the urban poor, made a convenient scapegoat for many years, and that image so deftly crafted by Republicans of the lazy, shiftless black man on the public dole lingers to this day. The reality that those urban men living in poverty found doors slammed in their faces when they tried to find employment was immaterial. "They" looked different from "us", and so it was easy to paint them as completely different, with values that were antithetical to those of the white blue-collar class that elected the worst bigots and racists in our country to higher office.

When I was in my early twenties, I lived in an apartment around the corner from the Ford automobile assembly plant in Linden, New Jersey. Ever day I'd drive past that plant on my way to my underpaid-department-manager job at Bamberger's in the Menlo Park Mall and see the assembly-line workers heading into the plant. Those workers made decent money. They too had houses in the suburbs and color TVs and their kids went to decent schools. They might not have been the brightest people in the world, and most of them were first-generation native-born Americans, but they were able to have their share of the American dream.

But over the last thirty years, that all changed. The jobs went away, and so did the opportunities. Many of these men got their kids through college, and their kids are now the parents of today's twenty-somethings. And those grandchildren of the Ford plant workers are finding a job market that has nothing for them. Some of those men had children who didn't get to college, and they're finding themeselves now retiring without the many benefits their fathers got. Their kids are having an even worse time of it, as the manufacturing jobs their grandfathers had, which gave them job security and benefits and a pension, are gone. For decades, they were told that "the blacks" were at fault for their own plight because they didn't want to work. But now, they themselves find a workplace that's closed to them. They're told that "retraining" is necessary, so they spent money they didn't have and took a tech school course to "retrain" themselves and still find no opportunities. If they're married, their marriages are suffering because their wives, if they can find work, are having to foot the entire bill for the family. They feel useless and their wives feel resentful. The kids are growing fast and need new clothes and it's hard to support a family on one meager paycheck.

And yet they have clung to the belief that if they Just Work Hard Enough, they too will be able to join the ranks of the rich someday, because they've been told that rich guys like Donald Trump and Mitt Romney got where they are because they worked harder than anyone else. It frustrates them that they're not being given the chance to even show how willing they are to work hard.

And still they vote Republican. They vote Republican because they want to believe that their plight is the fault of black people, or of the very women in the workplace who are keeping a roof over their heads because for some reason, female unemployment is less. They want to believe their plight is the fault of illegal immigrants who they think took their jobs from them by being willing to work for peanuts. They want to believe that if those hippies had just kept their mouths shut in the sixties, the world would be like it was for their grandfathers, who worked eight hours in the plant, were home at five o'clock for dinner, had steak once a week for Sunday dinner, and then retired with a full pension and paid retiree medical insurance. They want to believe that this isn't as good as it's ever going to be again. Because the dream dies hard.

For decades, Republicans have been able to play these guys by blamemongering others. But the Republicans are now preparing to nominate a guy for President who was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple, but has been reduced to referring to his automobile company president / Nixon cabinet member / presidential candidate father as a humble carpenter (presumably just like supply-side Jesus...). But lo there have been rumblings in the land about income inequality as these displaced white American guys find it ever more difficult to sustain the illusion that hard work will get them a key to the country club washroom.

This must be stopped.

Herman Cain tried to stop it by suggesting that those who are not rich should blame themselves. Republicans have blamed low-income homeowners for the 2008 financial collapse and blamed the unemployed for being unemployed. The illusion must be kept at all costs.

Except that the costs are high, and now the lives of those guys whose fathers regarded the bigoted TV character Archie Bunker as a hero are finding that their own lives are starting to resemble those of the people Archie and their own fathers decried.

Krugman, NYT today:
something is clearly happening to the traditional working-class family. The question is what. And it is, frankly, amazing how quickly and blithely conservatives dismiss the seemingly obvious answer: A drastic reduction in the work opportunities available to less-educated men.

Most of the numbers you see about income trends in America focus on households rather than individuals, which makes sense for some purposes. But when you see a modest rise in incomes for the lower tiers of the income distribution, you have to realize that all — yes, all — of this rise comes from the women, both because more women are in the paid labor force and because women’s wages aren’t as much below male wages as they used to be.

For lower-education working men, however, it has been all negative. Adjusted for inflation, entry-level wages of male high school graduates have fallen 23 percent since 1973. Meanwhile, employment benefits have collapsed. In 1980, 65 percent of recent high-school graduates working in the private sector had health benefits, but, by 2009, that was down to 29 percent.

So we have become a society in which less-educated men have great difficulty finding jobs with decent wages and good benefits. Yet somehow we’re supposed to be surprised that such men have become less likely to participate in the work force or get married, and conclude that there must have been some mysterious moral collapse caused by snooty liberals. And Mr. Murray also tells us that working-class marriages, when they do happen, have become less happy; strange to say, money problems will do that.

One more thought: The real winner in this controversy is the distinguished sociologist William Julius Wilson.

Back in 1996, the same year Ms. Himmelfarb was lamenting our moral collapse, Mr. Wilson published “When Work Disappears: The New World of the Urban Poor,” in which he argued that much of the social disruption among African-Americans popularly attributed to collapsing values was actually caused by a lack of blue-collar jobs in urban areas. If he was right, you would expect something similar to happen if another social group — say, working-class whites — experienced a comparable loss of economic opportunity. And so it has.

Eighteen years after Charles Murray decided that black people are simply not as intelligent as white people, Murray is at it again, now branding the sons of the people who believed Murray was right in The Bell Curve as being unemployed because they are lazy.

Murray, quoted from David Frum:
Put yourself in the place of a [working-class white] man who is at the bottom of the labor market, qualified only for low-skill jobs. You may wish you could make as much as your grandfather made working on a General Motors assembly line in the 1970s. You may be depressed because you've been trying to find a job and failed. But if a job driving a delivery truck, or being a carpenter's helper, or working on a cleaning crew for an office building opens up, why would a bad labor market for blue-collar jobs keep you from taking it? As of 2009, a very bad year economically, the median hourly wage for drivers of delivery trucks was $13.84; for carpenter's helpers, $12.63; for building cleaners, $13.37. That means $505 to $554 for a forty-hour week, or $25,260 to $27,680 for a fifty-week year. Those are not great incomes, but they are enough to be able to live a decent existence - almost twice the poverty level even if you are married and your wife doesn't work. So why would you not work if a job opening landed in your lap? Why would you not work a full forty hours if the hours were available? Why not work more than forty hours?

Only someone who is paid a handsome salary by the American Enterprise Institute can say with a straight face that $27,860 is enough to live "a decent existence" when $22,350 is the federal poverty level for a family of four.

I wonder how Charles Murray would explain why it is that the wealthiest American individuals and CEOs need even more tax cuts to incentivize them to "create jobs" but low-income workers are supposed to be incentivized by ever-decreasing wages and ever-disappearing benefits.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Sunday, February 05, 2012

Meet your "Pro-Life" Movement
Posted by Jill | 4:45 PM
In Michele Bachmann's home district, human life is sacred....unless it's teenaged and gay. Then no one gives a shit.

Also, too.

Labels: , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Friday, February 03, 2012

Nope, it's not political. Nosirree Bob it isn't. So why is the Komen Foundation also yanking funds for embryonic stem cell research?
Posted by Jill | 5:43 AM
Can we please stop the last vestiges of pretending that the Susan G. Komen Foundation is about saving lives and recognize it for the wingnut cause money launderer that it is?

They can hide behind vague policies about Congressional investigations in regard to Planned Parenthood if they want to (but then where do we get to see them break off their affiliation with Bank of America?), but it seems they've also decided to end their funding of embryonic stem cell research:
In addition to pulling funds from Planned Parenthood for The Susan G. Komen Foundation also decided to stop funding embryonic stem cell research centers making it fully transparent the organization has evolved from non-political non-profit to a partisan advocacy organization.

That means the loss of $3.75 million to the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, $4.5 million to the University of Kansas Medical Center, $1 million to the U.S. National Cancer Institute, $1 million to the Society for Women’s Health Research, and $600,000 to Yale University. That’s a loss of nearly $12 million dollars in research money to eradicate breast cancer this year alone.

This is a new position for the organization which had previously supported all sorts of scientific research targeted at finding a cure for breast cancer and saving women’s lives. It’s new position is that the organization will categorically no longer support any embryonic stem cell research.

Instead of the loud, clumsy announcement Komen made in severing ties with Planned Parenthood, this is a decision they quietly slipped in during November 2011. After all, with this new pro-life branding you would think the Susan G. Komen Foundation would want to crow about it’s policy change since embryonic stem cell research is an issue near and dear to the anti-choice crowd Komen now serves.

Maybe it’s because there won’t be any gory anti-stem cell research ad running during the Super Bowl this Sunday like Randall Terry’s anti-abortion ad. After all, Karen Handel has made it clear she and Terry share an agenda, and the Komen Foundation has under Handel’s watch closely allied itself with Americans United For Life, the zealously anti-choice group that takes credit for pushing Komen directly and through members of Congress, to sever ties with Planned Parenthood.


The more I read about the Susan G. Komen Foundation, the more I come to realize that despite all the pink imagery and the PR about saving women's lives, this foundation and its founder are all about the right-wing war against what they perceive to be the dirty whores -- meaning all women who don't live the way Michelle Duggar does. What many people think is a worthy cause is just another corporation, partnering with other corporations with no regard to their appropriateness towards the stated cause for which Komen professes to stand.

Here is one blogger's experience with Komen Pinkitude:
I hesitated to write on this topic, partly because I had so many blogs turn pink for me in 2010. They did it as a show of support and I appreciated it more than anyone will ever know. However, turning pink in support and following up with virtual and local assistance is not the same thing as the pink-washing that Komen does day in and day out.

I spent a good portion of the last year mortified about the type of cancer I had. I received a pink basket in the hospital (for my original surgery) filled with pink, plastic items that included a poem and a "tiddy" bear. I was supposed to be cheered up by the poem, as it was about another woman and how she received a fabulous new set of breasts. I was also supposed to be thrilled by the junk in the basket. Instead I was mortified. A gift basket of organic fruit would be one thing (and, yes, we did receive those and loved them), but this was just beyond painful. Rubbing the pink-washing in my face once again. The basket just reminded me that because I had this recent blip, I was supposed to become a member of another club. Well, no, thank you.

Please understand that not everything pink disturbs me and I know that many pink ribbons are truly meant as a sign of support. However, Komen is not supportive. Coloring buckets of fried chicken pink is not supportive. Putting pink ribbons on products that we don't need or want is not supportive. In fact, for many of us, it's a reminder of times we'd rather forget. If anything, Komen was extremely unsupportive when I was diagnosed.

Did they come to my house and cook me meals when I was sick? No, but my friends ensured we were had groceries and dinners for months. Did they visit me in the hospital or take care of my kids? No, but my friends and family made sure that happened. Well, what did they do?

They stepped up their efforts to get money from me. It was almost as if my name was on a new high priority list. As though because I had been diagnosed, I suddenly had the ability and desire to give to an organization that, in my opinion, has done little towards their supposed goal. It took three letters from me and three phone calls from Peter to have my name removed from their mailing list.


Over the long haul, this may turn out to be a blessing in disguise, if it gets us talking about, and really looking at, the mega-charities to which so many Americans donate. I used to work for a company that did investment consulting for large nonprofits, and it's astounding the amount of money these groups that send us envelopes filled with greeting cards and address labels and authentic Native American dreamcatchers have to work with. I decided a long time ago that I will not support any organization that sends me swag. I won't succumb to the guilt factor that always accompanies these "gifts", and I also won't support organizations that have this stuff made up to try to guilt people into donating. My donations are small and local. $100 to the ASPCA is just one in a pile of donations that pay for those two-minute-long television ads that plague the airwaves. $100 to one of my local animal organizations pays for inoculations and food. For me to really make a difference, I'm better off donating to charities that serve my local community. It isn't that I don't care about the larger world, it's just that I'd rather make a real difference to ten cats or three people than be just another check.

Here's something else to ponder: If you go over to the Komen Foundation's web site, you have to really search to find "About Susan G. Komen." It's there, but it's in the faint black font at the very top of the page, overshadowed by, among other things, a link to "Shop Komen". Somewhere along the line, the real life of a real woman has been lost a second time.

Labels: , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Thursday, February 02, 2012

Old memes never die, they just get burned into the public consciousness
Posted by Jill | 5:45 AM
Of all the things Ronald Reagan did to bring us to our current state, perhaps his most egregious offense was the manufacture the meme of the welfare queen in the Cadillac.

Here's how Reagan described her (NYT link to abstract, PDF linked from there:
She has eighty names, thirty addresses, twelve Social Security cards and is collecting veteran's benefits on four non-existing deceased husbands. And she is collecting Social Security on her cards. She's got Medicaid, getting food stamps, and she is collecting welfare under each of her names. Her tax-free cash income is over $150,000.

This particular "welfare queen", a figment of Reagan's colorful imagination, was apparently based on one Linda Taylor, who was convicted in 1974 of using an alias to collect about eight thousand dollars in fraudulent payments.

But the myth of someone getting what they don't deserve persists. It's the same mindset that says it's better to disenfranchise millions than risk one person voting who shouldn't. It's the same mindset that says it's better to risk the lives of tens of thousands of women every year than to risk just one having a late-term abortion for a reason other than health. It's the same mindset that says it's better to let a million children go without health care than to risk just one getting Medicaid whose parents make one dollar over the limit. As the middle class gets screwed ever more, the clinging to the idea that the poor are somehow getting away with something persists.

When Newt Gingrich talks about Barack Obama being the food stamp president, he's hearkening back to Ronald Reagan's mythical welfare recipients who dine on foie gras and prime steaks and live in luxury apartment penthouses on the public dole. He probably never even saw the movie, but he's thinking of Mo'nique's devastating portrayal of just such a Republican stereotype in Precious. So I question whether ultimately, Mitt Romney's blithe dismissal of the poor yesterday is going to hurt him all that much with people who would vote for a quarter-billionaire in the first place.

I work in an industry that pays quite well, for those of us fortunate enough to still have jobs in an industry that's rapidly consolidating. Most of my colleagues have some sort of advanced degree, and most are fairly liberal, or at least tolerant of views regarded as liberal. And yet when people talk about public assistance, particularly those who came to the US from other countries, they have this idea that an average food stamp budget buys the same kinds and quantities of food that they purchase from their local Whole Foods; and that Section 8 housing features the requisite granite-and-stainless in safe suburban neighborhoods. The myth dies hard.

Last night Rachel Maddow showed just how Mitt Romney would "fix" the safety net, as he said after he got caught sounding like the preposterously, wealthy out-of-touch, craven panderer that he is:



And yet, the American public is curiously selective about who it regards as "deserving" and "getting something for nothing." Here are Lawrence O'Donnell and David Cay Johnston on how Mittens has been able to pass along $100 million of his money to his children without being subject to the limits for gift taxation that the rest of us are.



I guess if you're lucky enough to be born to a quarter-billionaire, you're entitled to money you didn't earn in a way that those who, due to lack of access to quality education, lack of nutrition, and lack of opportunity aren't.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Thursday, December 29, 2011

Robert Ballard wept.
Posted by Jill | 6:05 PM
I'm sorry, but this is just so wrong:
The owner of the largest trove of artifacts salvaged from the Titanic is putting the vast collection up for auction as a single lot in 2012, the 100th anniversary of the world's most famous shipwreck.

More than 5,500 items including fine china, ship fittings and portions of hull that were recovered from the ocean liner have an estimated value of $189 million, according to Premier Exhibitions Inc., parent of RMS Titanic Inc., the Titanic's court-approved salvor. That value was based on a 2007 appraisal and doesn't include intellectual property gathered from a 2010 scientific expedition that mapped the wreck site.

The auction is scheduled for April 1 by Guernsey's, a New York City auction house, according to filings by Premier Exhibitions with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Results of the auction won't be announced until April 15, the date a century ago the Titanic sank on its maiden voyage after striking an iceberg.

In 90 years, will the 9/11 memorial also be sold off piecemeal?

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Reagan Redux
Posted by Jill | 6:47 PM
And I guess cheese is now a fruit:
Congress wants to keep pizza and french fries on school lunch lines, fighting back against an Obama administration proposal to make school lunches healthier.

The final version of a spending bill released late Monday would unravel school lunch standards the Agriculture Department proposed earlier this year, which included limiting the use of potatoes on the lunch line and delaying limits on sodium and delaying a requirement to boost whole grains.

The bill also would allow tomato paste on pizzas to be counted as a vegetable, as it is now. USDA had wanted to prevent that.

Food companies that produce frozen pizzas for schools, the salt industry and potato growers requested the changes, and some conservatives in Congress say the federal government shouldn't be telling children what to eat.

Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee said the changes would "prevent overly burdensome and costly regulations and to provide greater flexibility for local school districts to improve the nutritional quality of meals."


Because when your ideology decides that REAL Americans load up with junk food, "nutritional quality" is relative. As for the future health care costs? Who cares? No one will be insured anyway. As far as the Republicans are concerned, if low-income kids drop dead at 25 from hardening of the arteries, it's all part of God's plan.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Thursday, October 27, 2011

If an Iraq war veteran can be shot in the head by police with a tear gas canister, what do you think can happen to YOU?
Posted by Jill | 5:57 AM


There's only one group being violent here, and it isn't the Occupy protesters in Oakland, California.

It's sad that Occupy protesters have been pointing out that police whose union is under siege by Tea Party governors are serving their corporate masters instead of acting in solidarity with those who are out there in the streets calling attention to the plight of police officers and fire fighters and teachers, as much as they are calling attention to the massive tossing in the garbage of the American middle class.

What does it say when a young man inspired to serve his country survives two tours of enemy fire and then comes home to be gravely injured by law enforcement in his own country?

Teabaggers are always talking about how they revere the Constitution. They talk all the time about the Second Amendment. But in their loathing for the Occupy movement, they forget the first one:
Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Scott Olsen thought he was going to Iraq to defend the U.S. and its Constitution. How wrong he was.

Olsen's roommate spoke with Keith Olbermann last night:

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Everything that's wrong with the shareholder model of corporate money in one article
Posted by Jill | 7:59 PM
The latest about Apple stock:

Apple today reported revenue of $28.27B for the fourth quarter and $6.62B in net profit ($7.05 per diluted share). These numbers compare quite favorably to $20.34B and $4.31B ($4.64 per diluted share) for the same quarter last year.

Gross margins for Apple during Q4 were 40.3 percent.

During the quarter, Apple sold 17.07 million iPhones (21 percent growth year-over-year), 11.12 million iPads (166 percent growth), 4.89 million Mac computers (26 percent growth), and 6.62 million iPods (27 percent decline)

[snip]

Despite the good news coming out Cupertino today, investors weren't too terribly impressed. Analysts were expecting revenue of $29.69B and earnings per share of $7.39. They also expected quarterly iPhones sales to be in the 18 million to 20 million range.

Apple shares are down over $26 in after hours trading.


Wall Street analysts are like the Critical Parent of the Transactional Analysis model developed by Eric Berne in the 1950's: No matter how well you perform, they always want to know why you didn't do better.

Labels: , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Saturday, October 01, 2011

Saudi Arabia, NY 11215
Posted by Jill | 12:42 PM
First we have a police officer spraying pepper spray at female protesters. Now it seems that in Brooklyn, they're stopping women in the street and telling them to cover up:
In response to a string of at least 10 unsolved sexual assaults in Brooklyn, New York police are reportedly stopping women on the street who are wearing clothing they say is revealing and advising them to cover up if they don’t want to be raped. The Wall Street Journal reports on the disturbing message police officers are allegedly spreading:

Lauren, a South Slope resident, was walking home three blocks from the gym on Monday when she was stopped. The 25-year-old, who did not want her last name to be used, was wearing shorts and a T-shirt when she claims a police officer asked if she would stop and talk to him. He also stopped two other women wearing dresses. [...]

“He pointed at my outfit and said, ‘Don’t you think your shorts are a little short?‘” she recalled. “He pointed at their dresses and said they were showing a lot of skin.”

He said that such clothing could make the suspect think he had “easy access,” said Lauren. She said the officer explained that “you’re exactly the kind of girl this guy is targeting.”



Aside from the sense I have that this is more about the police officers' view of women than it is about keeping them safe, it also shows a profound ignorance of what rape is. It's an act of aggression that takes the form of a sexual attack. It is not an act of uncontrollable lust. If it were, we wouldn't hear about 80-year-old women getting raped in their apartments.

How can any woman who is assaulted in South Slope have any hope of being treated in good faith by the police, when the law acts like mullahs on the streets of Saudi Arabia?

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Wednesday, September 28, 2011

The forgotten American victims of the Bush wars
Posted by Jill | 5:46 AM
And so they are starting to trickle home, these men and women, many of whom enlisted in the military after the 9/11 attacks with the purest of motives -- what they believed to be a fight to both avenge the attacks and to dismantle the groups that made such an attack possible. Those missing legs, arms, and eyes come home as soon as they are well enough to travel after injury. But sometimes there are invisible injuries that are just as serious, and they are coming home to a country whose government offers little to help them, and nothing to help the forgotten new victims of these wars -- the people who love them and now care for them, who, in this Ron Paul paradise in which our veterans live, they have to rely on private organizations (NYT link):
Since Mr. Marcum came back in 2008 from two tours in Iraq with a traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder, his wife has quit her job as a teacher to care for him. She has watched their life savings drain away. And she has had to adjust to an entirely new relationship with her husband, who faces a range of debilitating problems including short-term memory loss and difficulties with impulse control and anger.

“The biggest loss is the loss of the man I married,” Ms. Marcum said, describing her husband now as disconnected on the best days, violent on the worst ones. “His body’s here, but his mind is not here anymore. I see glimpses of him, but he’s not who he was.”

Ms. Marcum has joined a growing community of spouses, parents and partners who, confronted with damaged loved ones returning from war who can no longer do for themselves, drop most everything in their own lives to care for them. Jobs, hobbies, friends, even parental obligations to young children fall by the wayside. Families go through savings and older parents dip into retirement funds.

Even as they grieve over a family member’s injuries, they struggle to adjust to new routines and reconfigured relationships.

The new lives take a searing toll. Many of the caregivers report feeling anxious, depressed or exhausted. They gain weight and experience health problems. On their now-frequent trips to the pharmacy, they increasingly have to pick up prescriptions for themselves as well.

While taking comfort that their loved ones came home at all, they question whether they can endure the potential strain of years, or even decades, of care.

“I’ve packed my bags, I’ve called my parents and said I’m coming home,” said Andrea Sawyer, whose husband has been suicidal since returning from Iraq with post-traumatic stress disorder. “But I don’t. I haven’t ever physically walked out of the house.”

Those attending to the most severely wounded must help their spouses or adult children with the most basic daily functions. Others, like Ms. Marcum, act as safety monitors, keeping loved ones from putting themselves in danger. They drive them to endless medical appointments and administer complicated medication regimens.

One of the most frustrating aspects of life now, they say, is the bureaucracy they face at the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs, from problems with the scheduling of medical appointments to being bounced around among different branches of the system, forcing them to become navigators and advocates for their loved ones.

A variety of care services are offered to the severely injured. But many family members do not want their loved ones in nursing homes and find home health services often unsatisfactory or unavailable.

Despite Ms. Marcum’s cheerful manner and easy laugh, she has started taking antidepressants and an anti-anxiety medication when needed. She has developed hypertension, takes steroids for a bronchial ailment that may be stress related and wears braces to relieve a jaw problem.

“I just saw all of my dreams kind of vanishing,” she said.

Over the past few years, advocacy organizations like the Wounded Warrior Project lobbied Congress to enact a law providing direct financial compensation and other benefits to family caregivers of service members. In 2010 they succeeded, and by mid-September, the veterans agency had approved 1,222 applications, with average monthly stipends of $1,600 to $1,800. Caregivers can also receive health insurance and counseling.

“We know it doesn’t replace full lost income,” said Deborah Amdur, who oversees caregiver support for the agency. “It’s really a recognition of the kinds of sacrifices that are being made.”


Read the linked article, and then think about recent Republican rhetoric about lazy people who don't work, and about how we simply cannot ask the people whose interests these men and women went to protect, to pay even one thin dime more towards their care, and about how the needy should depend on charity instead of the government. What kind of a country are we that we would let these people get away with rhetoric like this, let alone seriously consider them as presidential timber? How can we be proud of a country that uses its young men and women like this and then brings them home and throws them on the trash heap of history while at the same time using the threat of terrorism to justify continued military spending on everything BUT the care of those who actually fight? Where is the yellow ribbon magnet crowd now? Why aren't they clamoring for better care for these people?

Labels: , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Saturday, September 17, 2011

This is what "Let him die" looks like
Posted by Jill | 3:55 PM
Bookmark and Share
Tuesday, September 06, 2011

Where's why there's no money for anything else
Posted by Jill | 5:52 AM
Because we are shoveling cash into bankers' pockets as fast as we can:
For the American economy – and for many other developed economies – the elephant in the room is the amount of money paid to bankers over the last five years. In the United States, the sum stands at an astounding $2.2 trillion. Extrapolating over the coming decade, the numbers would approach $5 trillion, an amount vastly larger than what both President Barack Obama’s administration and his Republican opponents seem willing to cut from further government deficits.

That $5 trillion dollars is not money invested in building roads, schools and other long-term projects, but is directly transferred from the American economy to the personal accounts of bank executives and employees. Such transfers represent as cunning a tax on everyone else as one can imagine. It feels quite iniquitous that bankers, having helped cause today’s financial and economic troubles, are the only class that is not suffering from them – and in many cases are actually benefiting.
Mainstream megabanks are puzzling in many respects. It is (now) no secret that they have operated so far as large sophisticated compensation schemes, masking probabilities of low-risk, high-impact “Black Swan” events and benefiting from the free backstop of implicit public guarantees. Excessive leverage, rather than skills, can be seen as the source of their resulting profits, which then flow disproportionately to employees, and of their sometimes-massive losses, which are borne by shareholders and taxpayers.

In other words, banks take risks, get paid for the upside, and then transfer the downside to shareholders, taxpayers, and even retirees. In order to rescue the banking system, the Federal Reserve, for example, put interest rates at artificially low levels; as was disclosed recently, it also has provided secret loans of $1.2 trillion to banks. The main effect so far has been to help bankers generate bonuses (rather than attract borrowers) by hiding exposures.

More here.

(via)

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Sunday, June 26, 2011

Another reason not to fly unless you have to
Posted by Jill | 3:58 PM
There really is no reason for this:
A woman has filed a complaint with the Department of Homeland Security over how her elderly mother was detained and searched by Transportation Security Administration officers at the Northwest Florida Regional Airport last weekend.

News Herald reported that Jean Weber filed the complaint after her wheelchair-bound 95-year-old mother, who is in the final stages of her battle with leukemia, was asked to remove an adult diaper during a pat down search.

According to Weber, her elderly mother was first taken to a glass-partitioned area and patted down before being taken to another room. As she was waiting outside of the room, officers conducting the pat down told Weber that her mother's Depends diaper would need to be removed because it was soiled and impeding their search.

“It’s something I couldn’t imagine happening on American soil,” Weber said. “Here is my mother, 95 years old, 105 pounds, barely able to stand, and then this.”

Weber took her elderly mother to the bathroom and removed her diaper, then returned to complete the pat down. She said she did not have another clean diaper with her.

A spokesperson for the TSA said that officers must follow the same procedures for everyone to prevent terrorists from finding vulnerabilities in the security check points.


/speechless.

Labels: , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Friday, June 24, 2011

Remind me again why we're supposed to support Democrats
Posted by Jill | 5:38 AM
Here in my little town in Outer Whitelandia, a populace that's been asleep for thirty years is finally waking up to the reality of the one-party rule that's been running the town for the last three decades. The primary intersection in town is a bottleneck every single day at rush hour. There are nights when it can take me twenty five minutes to go twenty miles, and another twenty minutes to go two. This intersection is in a residential neighborhood, but a small gas station on the corner has been grandfathered in, and there is a large catering hall on another corner, owned by a guy who has over the last decade been quietly buying up houses on the main drag and letting them fall apart. For the last five years, the first thing you see when you come into town is a house with boarded-up windows and a hole in the roof. There have been rumors that the catering hall puts up its undocumented workers in these hell houses, but they are just rumors.

Now the owner if the catering hall and the owner of the gas station have simultaneously come up with grand plans to turn the gas station into a Wawa-like convenience store/gas and diesel station complex and the dilapidated houses into a strip mall containing a CVS with a drive-thru, a hair salon, and a coffee shop -- while a quarter mile down the road, there is already a half-empty strip mall with plenty of parking on site that has a Rite-Aid, a hair salon, a Dunkin Donuts, and a bagel shop. And finally the citizenry has awakened, even though the local government refuses to allow the public to talk at the zoning board meetings that are supposed to be where people can be heard.

In 2008, the town held its first contested election in thirty years -- and the sheeple in this town voted back in the same people who had been giviing crony contracts to their friends for years. Part of the problem was that in New Jersey, we vote not office-by-office, but on a giant screen where each candidate is in a party's line. So if you tend to vote Republican, as most people in this town do, you are not going to jump around the ballot. It of course didn't help that the Democratic candidate, who had lived in town barely two years, was the brother of one of the biggest Democratic Party hacks in he state.

It's like that in Democratic Party politics. Not a month goes by when someone doesn't tell me to run for office in town, but believe me, you do not want to touch these people or play their game. Every two years, they either refuse to run a candidate to run for Congress against the odious teabagger Scott Garrett, who was a teabagger long before the Tea Party kooks even existed; or else they run a weak candidate and then refuse to support that candidate with money. The New Jersey State Democratic Party, like the natonal party has been under everyone except Howard Dean, is only interested in fighting battles it knows in advance it can win.

And so the stage is set for the travesty that happened in Trenton yesterday, where Governor Gasbag, Chris Christie, succeeded in getting bipartisan support in the state Assembly for a law to gut public worker benefits and remove their ability to collectively bargain, with the help of Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) and Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver (D-Essex), who had shepherded the bill through the state Senate on Monday.

Everyone knows that the state pension system is dramatically underfunded, after being stiffed for decades by governors of both parties, What most people don't understand is that the police, firefighters and teachers who receive these pensions also pay in. So when politicians decide to gut these benefits, it's money paid out to these workers that's stolen for other needs -- mostly to keep from having to raise taxes on the wealthiest people in the state.

If the Democrats on the national stage won't stand up for people who pay into Social Security and Medicare all their lives and are then told not to depend on it because they stole all the money; if Democrats won't stand up for the rights of all Americans to be the same under the law; if Democrats won't stand up for the rights of workers; then why on earth should we reward them with our votes?

We know what Republicans are -- greedy, venal, hateful, cold-hearted and devoid of empathy. Republicans will do what Republicans do. We know this. Our problem is not them; it is the Democrats -- the party that increasingly pisses down our backs and then tells us it's raining.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share