Blue Gal

GOP Math = Planet 51

2009-11-22T11:55:00.005-06:00

If Republicans want it: fifty votes plus one gets you a big tax cut.

If Democrats want it: sixty votes isn't enough to provide health insurance to every American, plus you have to give Lieberman a pony.

Original image here.

Saturday Song

2009-11-21T08:19:00.000-06:00

Blossom Dearie, Devil and the Deep Blue Sea.

The Donald advises Carrie to become "major porn star"?

2009-11-20T11:10:00.004-06:00

Carrie and "The Donald" take tea while Sean Hannity looks on....

What happened to Carrie is not, as at least one feminist blogger has argued, "sexual assault, " and it does not "perpetuate the rape culture," unless you're saying televised beauty pageants rape our culture, yeah they do. But as Media Matters just pointed out this week, the word "rape" is being used far too often in political discourse, and it denigrates the suffering of those who have actually experienced that crime, the exact same way tossing around "Hitler" denigrates holocaust victims. In future, I hope we can pull it back a notch, and only use the term rape to mean, well, rape.

I would be very inclined to see assault if Prejean's boyfriend had secretly taped her. That has happened in more than one occasion to other models/actresses, and its perps should be thrown in jail, period. But Prejean pressed "record" herself. What she did is akin to getting passed-out drunk at a frat party. She's responsible for the dangerous position she stupidly placed herself in, but not for any violation (and releasing the tapes is a violation) committed against her.

Releasing the tapes was a violation... of her privacy.

Yet note that the one major case that was won on behalf of gay rights, Lawrence v. Texas, was won in part on the basis of due process/privacy of the individuals in the case. Carrie Prejean saw, I think in a spur of the moment on-stage glitch decision, that she could have it all -- sexy image, fame, and in some unfocused dream, "to be taken seriously"--by denying that gay citizens have a right to commit to a relationship that sexually is no one's business but their own. And then her right to "privacy" is taken away.

I don't expect Prejean to see the irony. I do demand the privilege of mocking her for her inconsistency.

And obviously, there is just as much porno about being Miss California as there is to being paid for online dildo sex. The Donald knows what he's talking about, and Prejean calling him for advice shows just where her "career goals" lie. The End.

Wow, Mary Matalin "slaps" Sarah Palin off my front page.

2009-11-20T10:03:00.004-06:00

There are so many ideas flying across my laptop this morning, it froze up.

Suzan sent me what I thought would be the red-meat quote of the day from Cal Thomas (Townhall link):

Palin's optimism is refreshing. If she can sharpen her intellect, in three years she won't be mocked; she will be feared.

So there I am cut'n'pasting the cover of "Whittling is Easy"

into my Photoshop workspace, and somehow my shiny thing locator gets pointed to this pro-Palin article by Mary Matalin, who poo-poos complaints in Palin's book about the rough nasty and foul-mouthed staffers inside the McCain campaign.

Time is the most valuable commodity on a campaign and you just can't waste it thinking about how to choose your words carefully or get your job done more diplomatically. If someone isn't in tears every day, that day wasn't all it could be advancing the campaign. I once witnessed an experienced (big) man slap a professional female colleague across the face over an ad buy... and no one thought anything of it, starting with the woman. In fact, she would have been insulted if anyone told her she should have been insulted.

This, my friends, is why I am no longer involved in political campaign races. Not because it's a hard job full of lots of pressure, long days, and high-stakes high stress decision making. I won't work in politics because many of the personalities attracted to that kind of work are narcissistic, most to the point of tantrums, and more than a few to the point of violence, and think it's no big deal. Matalin isn't just dishing about a specific instance here; she's pimping her insider importance--you bet she can remember just exactly the specific "ad buy" mistake that "deserved" the workplace assault and battery--and contrasting that insider importance to Palin's relative political naivety.

Matalin should be ashamed of herself, her politics, and her profession on a daily basis. That she actually points to an instance of physical assault of a female employee by a male superior as "the way it is in a campaign--get over it" just puts everything that's wrong with presidential campaigns in high relief.

What the Palin-ites are REALLY saying...

2009-11-19T09:52:00.003-06:00

Sorry, any other explanation of what this gal is saying makes my brain hurt:

I wish George W. Bush a long and healthy life....

2009-11-18T09:09:00.002-06:00

...in prison for war crimes.

There's a very "balanced" comment thread in this story at The Christian Science Monitor about conservatives' use of a Psalm in the Bible indicating a shortened term of office for one in power..."may his children be fatherless and his wife be a widow."

Ooh! Stay classy, Religious Right.

In the middle of this thread was made this statement which -- I hate to say this about anything in the Monitor, their journalistic standards are high, etc. -- but it really has the giveaway scent of having been pulled out of the commenter's butt:

13. Bobbi | 11.17.09 It’s interesting that we are concerned that reciting a Bible verse in reference to Obama when, during the G.W. Bush years, people — some in positions of so-called leadership - were calling for his death and writing book on how to assassinate him. Have we deteriorated so far that freedom of speech is only for one party?

My reply, which I posted but which may not be published (paper's choice, and I get that)

Bobbi - please back up this amazing statement with some proof. I am the lefty-est left wing blogger in the history of left wing bloggerdom and I never ever saw a person in a position of leadership with a book on how to assassinate Bush or calling for his death.

Movements such as "turn your back on Bush" during his second inaugural? Yes.

A call to try him as a war criminal? Yes.

A call for his impeachment? Yes.

All of that, guilty as charged. It is amazing to me that right wing commentators not only answer every criticism of Bush with "he's not president anymore" but also make stuff up about how the Left expressed their anger with him. I blogged against that president from Election Day 2004 onward. I called him many names, but never advocated violence against him or anyone in his administration. I do not recall anyone "in a leadership position" doing so. Stop making stuff up when there is plenty of on-the-record evidence in our blog archives from which to draw. Have a ball.

What is happening with Obama is an already long ago disenfranchised lower class white segment of our society is looking at the first non-white president and acting out, with "guns and religion" to quote one of Obama's more unfortunate statements. These low-class whites, who have a LOT to be angry about in this recession, are getting a LOT of help from high powered well-financed astroturf groups to ONCE AGAIN work against their own best financial and other interests and work up a frenzy to oppose health care reform, better rights for unions, and a cleaner environment. The saddest part is, it's easier to do because this president is...Hawaiian.

Yep, Hawaiian is the new black. Or as it is pulled out of certain conservative commenter's butts:

I'm actually kind of afraid Red State or NRO will pick this image up and use it without irony, aren't you?

UPDATE: Great comments in the thread below; anyone wishing to explore the free speech aspect of wishing harm to the president I point to Ben Metcalf's terrific 2006 Harper's article, "On simple human decency".

Spoiler alert? Really.

2009-11-17T07:10:00.000-06:00

I just have to get something off of my chest. Making a JOKE about an episode of a TV show is NOT NECESSARILY a spoiler. Especially when it's a tweet like this one:

Geez #HouseMD writers why don't you have Bobby Ewing get out of the shower and announce the last 3 seasons were a dream?

That is NOT a spoiler. "Oh @Bluegal don't tell! Some people have to Tivo it!" Fuck you. If I told you who has The Ring, who winds up being Luke's father, or what 'Rosebud' is? Go after me. Otherwise eff off.

Salon tonight.

2009-11-16T19:25:00.002-06:00

We're chatting live at Monday's Salon. Click here to join. No registration or special equipment needed, but it does work best in Firefox.

Tex Betsy can't make it tonight; I'll be around as long as I can.

How NOT to get discouraged

2009-11-16T11:03:00.006-06:00

I was on chat with a fellow blogger last night, discussing how it can get really discouraging to be blogging regularly and feel as if you're either (a) shouting into a void or (b) doing this just for vanity's sake. The two are,of course, intricately connected.

It's important that we bloggers and you readers remember on occasion to appreciate EACH OTHER. I can't believe the number of readers I have, people I've NEVER met, you guys are an absolute miracle to me. And I'd like to get to know you BETTER, but I can't if you never comment.

Several HUNDRED people looked at the Carrie Prejean LOLcats yesterday and less than twenty voted. Rule number one in blogging is, "no whining," yet I feel like I must be doing something wrong.

I emailed lots of fellow bloggers late last night about the idea of a delurking week to invite our readers to "break their commenting cherry" so to speak, and one wrote back to ask me about "metrics." Will I quit blogging if people don't de-lurk? Hardly. No metric. This blog is much more my art studio than my exclusive gallery space. It's mine. I can make a mess here. It's very Napoleon Dynamite. "Whatcha gonna blog today BG?" "Whatever I feel like, GOSH!"

There is something discouraging for us bloggers, creating on this old skool, labor-intensive platform, about Facebook and Twitter, particularly Facebook, because even though many bloggers are happy to post links to their blogposts at FB, people can leave comments at FB which do not then get integrated into the blog itself. And nevermind about the mainstream media, particularly the beltway insiders, who can't get enough of the Twitter and who think Huffpo and Daily Beast (and maybe Kos if they feel 'progressive') are the only blogs in the world.

Writing (and photoshopping and video mashing) for one's own blogspot blog in the age of Facebook is like putting up one's work in a gallery with a guestbook prominently available right there, then people who have been to the gallery write about how nice the show was... over at the grocery store bulletin board. I would understand if I put all kinds of barriers to posting comments here, but anonymous commenters are welcome at BG.

And things are discouraging these days for progressives, obviously. I made a difficult decision when I decided not to blog regularly about healthcare reform.

Somehow I think we're hitting a technology wall. I just got an email from a friend I was supposed to meet with this past weekend, he called me but either my answering machine wasn't working or they assumed I would know they were calling via caller id. But I don't pick up the phone when I don't recognize the number, and out of state cell phones mean callers can call from anywhere and be in town, and...

do you see what is wrong with this picture?

Another blogger emailed me back with very helpful advice (he's really a nice guy and very well-informed, this is NOT a criticism of him at all) about beta apps and potential for more integration of comments across multiple platforms...

again, what is wrong with this picture?

And I'm certainly not advocating that everyone just stop it with the Facebook and Twitter and I-phones and such. But we need to recognize that there is some GREAT writing going on back in the blog-world Folger library, where snooty self-congratulating bloggers can be so very Aristotilean:

Blog::Facebook as Shakespeare/Michaelangelo::Wall*E humans

[I can't use that video as a criticism of ANYONE but the person I see in the mirror. And I can't tell you how often I tell myself to close the laptop before I become THAT.]

UPDATE: Another fellow blogger wrote to say he wasn't sure where I was coming from and that he believes in art for art's sake. To which I say amen, and replied:

Here's the basis of all of this:

Yesterday I posted three LOLcats, I know they're stupid, but they're funny. I wanted to know from people which they liked best so I INVITED them to vote in comments and the "winner" will appear tonight at C&L open thread. Not a big deal, it's very low stakes.

I don't require registration or blogger membership to comment.

For some reason, not the least of which is I pimped the hell out of this at Twitter, I had over seven hundred hits in one day. And TWENTY people commented. And I'm not whining and I'm not bitching, I just really wonder what the barrier is to one or two extra clicks and saying "I laughed hardest at the first one."

As I say, I'm not bitching, as I said in the post it's not like I'm going to walk away from blogging if my readers do nothing. If they're reading me via an RSS feed I don't catch their hit counts anyway, so the seven hundred doesn't count those folks who were just scrolling through their feeds (and for whom clicking through and commenting would actually be an interruption, I get that.)

I am just getting to the point where I don't understand why someone would read a blog and either feel afraid of commenting or feel that there is some barrier to doing so. I'm not bitching about it, I truly am grateful and amazed by every hit. But if I'm doing something that stops them from adding their two cents at my own blog, I want to change my behavior and be more welcoming.

I'm going to add this response to my already too long post. Thanks for the question.

PS. Thank you so much to Wonkette and Mock, Paper, Scissors for their early support of me in the Weblog Awards. The nomination process is still on-going, no voting yet, but if you want to help out click the little green plus sign below this comment. That will get me some attention, they tell me. And thanks again.

Vote for your favorite Carrie Prejean LOLcat!!!

2009-11-15T08:40:00.005-06:00

I owe a huge debt to Sandy Underpants for the Eight is Enough idea.

Vote for your favorite in comments and the "winner" will appear at Open Thread sometime this week (probably Monday night). Thanks!

Saturday Song is Delayed So We Can Bring You This Very Special Announcement

2009-11-14T12:43:00.003-06:00

This is what we call a quick and dirty video, (the 'dirty video' hits will keep on coming you betcha!) something that had to be made by somebody so it might as well be me.

I'm also instituting a new policy at Blue Gal:

each time I run my own video I am adding a Paypal button at the bottom of the post, for love offerings for my time and work.

I feel it very necessary to do this not only because I'm broke (aren't we all), but because another liberal website, and I am naming names Democratic Underground, has seen fit to post my videos to their forum and place advertising underneath my work. It's one thing to do that with an Al Yankovic/The Onion/Twix Advertisement, and something else altogether to piggyback without permission or sharing or even a link to my blog, on a fellow liberal blogger who like the rest of us, struggles financially and does not get nearly her worth for entertaining the masses. Douches.

If you like my work, please consider doing the liberal and just thing and throwing a couple bucks into the hat of the person who made the video. I will be very grateful. Thank you.

Damn Right I'm Whining!!!

2009-11-13T10:23:00.007-06:00

But Mom! I don't want to link to Huffpo! I don't want to write about class and pregnancy! I did that very very well back in May! I don't want to post how women in their 20's who have a clue about life planning so often don't have health insurance! I don't want to blog about how when Mika Brezezinski starts her "Don't Forget to Have Kids" article with "When I speak to young women about life lessons and TV career choices" we can stop reading right there because she's only talking to a group of women isolated inside some probably-educational institution that can afford Mika's $15-25 K speaking fee! Geebus, I wrote exactly one week ago about poverty and lack of educational opportunity for public school children. And I don't want to write about class-blindness or plain total class-obstinacy among the media villagers! I don't want to write about Morning Joe's cop-out that anyone who vociferously disagrees with him are "haters," and Mika seems to have caught that bug!

But apparently my alternative is to blog about Hillary Clinton and her interaction with a group whose initials are MILF. So here you go.

Because I stole the above caption from Anne Taintor (goddess) here's a link to her stuff and a totally on-topic image of the real deal:

Who was that whispering to Carrie Prejean on Larry King LIve?

2009-11-12T14:44:00.004-06:00

"Yes, Darling. Your fifteen minutes are up now."

.

"You Were Always A Good Man of Business, Dobbs."

2009-11-12T11:45:00.006-06:00

"Business! Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence, were all my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!"

Marley's Ghost, A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens

Is It Me, Or Does the Rain have a Distinct Scent of Ammonia?

2009-11-12T09:21:00.007-06:00

Dear Real Estate Industry:

Please don't try to tell me that your 4320 square foot, 4 bedroom, 3 1/2 bath, 3 car garage, half million dollar house waaaay out in a brand spankin' new subdivision (And it's got the crown molding, don't forget the crown molding!) will somehow reduce my carbon footprint.

Cuz really, when you do that? The acid rain smells like piss to me.

That said, your bland denial of truth is impressive. Have you considered running for Congress?

Ever met a muckraker? Here's one:

2009-11-11T11:33:00.005-06:00

Rachel Maddow is so awesome, I almost think the Right Wing won't win. Except they have all the lobbying money and campaign contributions.

People around the Left wing are advocating stopping contributions to the DNC and DCCC until they advocate a more progressive agenda. Without comprehensive campaign finance reform, all of that is just empty words.

Congrats on the mention, David Sirota, bet yer glad you didn't quit blogging in spite of discovering that the "hard core political world [was] completely unstimulating."

Dear Glenn Beck and Conservative Bloggers Around the World Wide Web: JOIN ME!

2009-11-11T06:15:00.002-06:00

Okay, brace yourselves. I'm actually going to link to Pammy at Atlas Shrugs, (and show off some pro-Palin panties, natch).

How YOU doin'?

I spent a good bit of time yesterday at this thread at the impetus of fellow blogger Intoxination. Intoxination has all the background on a CBS story regarding an Indiana US Attorney (Bush appointee) who tried in January 2009 to get the IP addresses and other personal info for visitors of the website Indymedia.

Pammy called foul and how dare Obama spy on citizens of the USA. I am not making that up.

Here are excerpts from the comment thread but feel free to go over and check it yourself. I wouldn't want anyone to think I was editing for content*** or more likely, correcting spelling of other commenters.

***why would I? It's comedy gold!

_______________

Jeesh, this is no President, this is a Dictator. Are American citizens going to put up with this?

Posted by: dented_uk | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 11:06 AM

_______________

Thanks to Pamela's brave work in exposing this Banana Republic dictator for the marxist he is we all saw this coming. Now, what to do? Isn't this a job of our congress to see to it the pospotus (pos+potus) and his DOJ doesn't overstep the law? If they are not going to do a damn thing to stop this what can I do to stop it? I contact my senators all the time, that's only half efective, one is the good Sen DeMint the other is the nutjob Lindsay Graham. He is as worthless as tits on a bull. I am open to sugestions, anyone?

Posted by: Blanco | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 11:42 AM

_______________

friends:

buy:
--guns
--ammo
--footstuffs & commodities & staples
--potables
--blankets
--good boots, wool clothing (pendleton & filson & woolrich) & socks.

get:
--a real prickly attitude
--some gumption.

don't:
--pay taxes.

be:
--prepared to fight.
--not ready to piss & moan, but to go to the ditches.

when:
--right now.

john jay
milton freewater, oregon usa

p.s. and, make the decision, "is it real, or is it memorex."

Posted by: jj | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 12:03 PM

_______________

Goebbels would be so proud.

Posted by: Timur | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 12:10 PM

________________

According to the article you linked, this request from the Justice Department happened in June 2008. Obama had not even received the Democratic Nomination at the convention yet.

Seriously, Pamela, I hope you will continue to pursue this, and find out exactly what Michael Mukasey, Dick Cheney, and George W. Bush were looking for, in complete violation of our Constitutional right of privacy.

Posted by: Blue Gal/Fran Langum | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 12:27 PM

________________

Blue Gal- actually it was requested by DOJ on January 23rd 2009 for information accessed on the website June 25, 2008

Oh and Bush isnt president anymore.

Posted by: graysheepdog | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 12:42 PM

_______________

Unless I am missing something, all they are going to get is data that tells them HOW MANY people entered the site and some vague idea about where those people, or their ISP are located. This is because 99% of us have dynamic IP addresses. Only those with dedicated and static IP addresses will have their identity known. This points to the FEDs not really knowing wht they are doing more than anything else. If anyone has any information to the contrary please post to update me on this subject.

Posted by: Floridian001 | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 12:43 PM

________________

graysheepdog that's thirteen days before Eric Holder was sworn in as AG.

Bush isn't President any more but the allegation and request are from a Bush appointee in Indiana. I would love it if this blog and Hot Air would work vociferously for a repeal of the Patriot Act. We could join together on this, left and right. Happy to.

Seriously, I'm in. Let's repeal the Patriot Act.

Posted by: Blue Gal/Fran Langum | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 12:53 PM

_________________

graysheepdog - so are you suggesting that on the third day of being President, Obama found a prosecutor, had a federal grand jury seated and was able to get them to grant this subpoena? If that is the case then he really is "the one".

Sorry to bust your bubble but this case was started under the Bush administration and the decision to go after the subpoena was under Bush and Mukasey. As CBS points out, the AG would have to authorize such a subpoena, and as they wrongly claim that would have to be Eric Holder. That's a good trick since the subpoena was on 1/23/09 and Holder didn't get confirmed until 2/2/09.

Some blame can go to the Obama administration for the case continuing under their watch, but we don't even know the actual details of it. How would the right respond if the Obama DOJ just happened to drop a case against a left leaning site like indymedia without any real reason?

Posted by: IntoxiNation | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 01:09 PM

________________

BlueGal & Intox. Read my post. I was responding to BlueGals incorrect comment of this request being made in June 2008. "this request from the Justice Department happened in June 2008."

Was my response wrong?

Get over yourselves.

Posted by: graysheepdog | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 01:17 PM

_________________

The subpoena (PDF) from U.S. Attorney Tim Morrison in Indianapolis demanded "all IP traffic to and from www.indymedia.us" on June 25, 2008. It instructed Clair to "include IP addresses, times, and any other identifying information," including e-mail addresses, physical addresses, registered accounts, and Indymedia readers' Social Security Numbers, bank account numbers, credit card numbers, and so on.

This is sooooo wrong!

Posted by: dented_uk | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 01:36 PM

__________________

Maybe this has something to do with it. A simple archive search of the site for the day in question.... http://indymedia.us/en/2008/06/32113.shtml

Posted by: graysheepdog | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 02:15 PM

___________________

Okay so the Bush guy in Indiana thought he could subpoena IP addys to find ecoterrorists. Good research, graysheepdog.

The bottom line of this whole argument is the Patriot Act is a violation of ALL Americans' Constitutional liberties. I'm still waiting for a response to my offer that all bloggers left right whatever join in an effort to overturn the Patriot Act. It was wrong when that guy-who-isn't-President-anymore pushed it through, and it's wrong now.

Posted by: Blue Gal/Fran Langum | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 02:53 PM

_______________________

BlueGal the bottom line is, you liberals are like foaming at the mouth heat seeking missils whenever you can scent Bush/Cheney involvement in anything.
I long for Bush/Cheney. Least they weren't decaying the basic rights of this country. Least they weren't anti american. PS Worry about Mr.Holder a little bit. Remember he and Janet Reno set Waco on fire. Remember?

Posted by: En français | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 04:27 PM

________________

The Patriot Act - Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001

hardly the same thing as big brother monitoring regular American citizens visiting a news blog. Remember it was Obama who wanted his minion trolls to report and forward emails to him that he deemed inappropriate and tracking visitors to administration web sites. For what?

Leftards only cry about privacy when it invloves Bush. Not a peep under Clinton or Zero.

I can't seem to find any outrage from fran about flag@whitehouse.gov

Posted by: graysheepdog | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 06:05 PM

__________________

Dang. I guess Ms. Geller didn't bother to read the article. The President had nothing to do with it. In fact, the U.S. Attorney (Tim Morrison in Indianapolis) who requested the information (didn't even serve a subpoena properly) failed to get the prior approval of the Attorney General as is required.

Much ado about absolutely NOTHING. I guess it's easier to sensationalize something if you don't use the facts, LOL! I agree w/the other comments that it would be better to be concerned aboutthe Patriot Act and repealing it.

Posted by: Amber McLean | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 07:59 PM

______________

Actually, I agree with the more left-leaning folks here about letting the sun set on the Patriot Act NOW! But my reasons are different than theirs, more than likely. Under the guy-who-isn't-President-anymore, I did not feel threatened by this Act; George Bush was not interested into digging into the business of most citizens. However under the guy-who-is-president-NOW, well, my inner alarm system has not stopped beeping since early February of 2008.

Posted by: herdzcatz | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 08:28 PM

________________

Excuse me graysheepdog, are you quoting the TITLE of a LAW to say what it MEANS? Really?

The Patriot Act was passed after 9/11/2001. After Clinton, so yeah, there was no possibility of repealing it during Clinton because it wasn't a law.

There is now. And herdzcatz I could not care less whether the President is Republican Democrat Green Party or the Party of No. The federal government does not have the right under our Constitution to SPY on its citizens, except that under provisions of "The Patriot Act - Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001" they DO. And it is CONSERVATIVES who have all of a sudden woken up to just how awful that is.

Why can't you guys see that I'm agreeing with you? NO President should be able to do what Bush did (Google "Telecom Immunity" and see why AT&T wants immunity from prosecution-- they broke the law because the Bush Homeland Security Dept. told them to) and what you say Obama is continuing to do. We must stop him and all future Presidents from taking steps against the citizenry through this act.

If you can't step up to the plate and admit that under Bush, who is no longer President (thanks for the tip), Constitutional rights of the citizenry were taken away and we MUST take them back again by repealing the Patriot Act, get off the stage and out of this thread. I have no time for you.

I'm going to post most of this thread at my blog tomorrow morning. My readers will get a big kick out of it. Thank you.

Posted by: Blue Gal/Fran Langum | Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 08:50 PM

Intoxination has been posting regular updates on the facts behind the CBS story.

My offer to join any right wing blog or pundit, even Glenn Beck, in an effort to repeal the Patriot Act, stands. Yeah you'll have to admit it was written, endorsed, pushed through, and passed under someone who, um, "isn't President anymore."

It's so cute how they think the "Bush isn't President anymore" soap washes the blood and sin, yes I mean it in the Judeo-Christian 'I do believe in a just G-d' way, from their hands.

The second pair of panties are from my real homegirls at the Evil Sluts.

The lyingest lie ad of all lying liar liefests?

2009-11-10T09:08:00.003-06:00

Let's face it, this health care reform debate has seen its share of lies. Death Panels, economy destroyed, veterans want vouchers to buy Blue Cross (really) have all been told and not challenged, not ever, on FOX and other news outlets.

This ad is full of lies, as is pointed out by the Kaiser Foundation far better than I could do.

And nevermind that it "raises the specter of "government-run health care" to increase concerns among both young and old. But at the same time it extols Medicare – which is government-run health care for people 65 and older."

Because that is the ever-living elephant in the room. If only the debate had been based upon "anyone under 65 can buy Medicare at cost plus a percentage" we'd have rioting in the streets in favor of it.

But apart from the statistical lies is a far more pernicious lie about generational politics. The "seniors" appearing in this ad, if they are of the generation they say they are, are older than the average senior. Their "greatest generation" is, sorry to say, dying out. But their legacy [of being really truly entitled to our gratitude for the sacrifices they made from 1929-1945] is being land-grabbed by those lobbyists who think expanding that entitlement will help big insurance and big pharma maintain their hold on profits.

My parents were, like many many seniors, born during the Great Depression. Beaches of Normandy? Mom and Dad were 9 and 5, respectively. Sure they're in their 70's now, receiving government run healthcare and a government sponsored pension as well they should. But they didn't earn that by fighting in World War II. So stop it.

Let's assume that every single soldier on D-Day was sixteen years old. A stretch, but even giving the other side that argument, the seniors this ad extols are 82 and above.

Philip Spooner, an actual D-Day veteran, is 86 and publicly supports gay marriage. There are approximately 45,000 D-Day veterans still alive today. The generations not old enough to be on on Medicare? Every 2.3 days, 45,000 of them lose all, all, all, all, ALL OF their health insurance, not just the Medicare Advantage sop to insurance companies that health care reform advocates cutting over the next several years.

A conservative group calling itself "60-Plus" is consciously and perniciously arguing that "seniors" deserve special treatment because of the tremendous sacrifice they made to our nation in World War II? I'm too young to reap the benefits of being a boomer but my folks are too old: sigh, Dad was an ancient, fully-employed homeowner at 27 when the Beatles came to America.

By the way. 60-Plus is almost entirely funded by the pharmaceutical industry.

Surprise.

Stupak's got yer abortion rider right here....

2009-11-09T14:48:00.006-06:00

Doncha just love it when pasty white guys grab a cold Bud, don their USA star headband antennae, and straddle the bouncy unicorn of righteousness so they can tell women what kind of health insurance they can't buy?

And that they have to PLAN TO HAVE AN ABORTION IN ADVANCE if they want BUY insurance to cover something that may be medically necessary?

Doctor Nancy loves it, too. (I've never seen her or any anchor so angry except for KO.) And she is so right -- this is not about being pro-choice or pro-life. This is about women having to jump a hurdle because they are women. If your doctor determines at any point that your pregnancy is unhealthy, you have to have purchased an abortion rider to have it covered by the policy you pay for anyway? Really.

Good job, Doctor Nancy:

Original unicorn rider found at Ubermilf's.

The creepiest Palin - Reagan montage photos ever!

2009-11-09T12:48:00.004-06:00

Love and kisses to those coming from Wonkette, where the comment thread made me laugh very very hard, also too.

They're from the "Sarah Palin's Accomplishments" blog (Google it yourself) which apparently is not a parody. I can't call Poe's Law on it.

I've been forced by circumstances this weekend to throw my hat into the ring for "Best Individual Blogger" at the 2009 Weblog Awards. Several people used ALL CAPS posts to nominate another blogger who simply cannot be permitted to win. I will not link her blog but you will know her by her Build a Bolton Bear workshop creation:

Allow me to be very frank about this: I am happy to throw my support behind any progressive blogger who can beat Pammikins as Best Individual Blogger. There are considerably few of us doing this blogging thing daily as individual single-shingle blogs. Digby now runs a group blog. Driftglass won last year: that may not disqualify him but personally I would like to see a woman blogger win this time. If Lindsay Beyerstein wants to take over and do the heavy lifting, I'm happy to step aside.

And allow me to say I am not doing this out of personal animosity: Pammy is hard-working and articulate, and her politics is more entertaining than dangerous in my book. She's against peace, uses vicious hyperbole, and routinely and with entirely too many exclamation points, jumps to illogical assumptions about Arabs, Obama, healthcare, the economy, gender relations, plastic surgery, and shoes. And she supports Sarah Palin for President in 2012. As someone who has made a tremendous commitment to bloggers and blogging, I don't want that kind of blogger awarded the "best individual" representation of what I do.

I understand that the Weblog Awards are right wing sponsored, and are not worthy of a lot of our energy, especially with much, MUCH more important votes to fight for. But when we in the blog world have a say in what any given group nominates as "best" among those posting to the internet, we also can't be silent or aloof. If someone wishes to suggest another nominee for these awards, feel free to nominate them there and mention them in comments below.

Salon tonight.

God loves atheists, and how do we out-bless that?

2009-11-08T11:40:00.005-06:00

Adult Sunday School today focused on Jesus asking the fisherman sons of Zebedee to "follow him," and they immediately dropped their nets and did so.

One woman there admitted "I'd want to go home and change clothes first." We all laughed.

I had a really nice exchange with a fellow blogger this week. A group of us were informed that one of us (not me) had an 8 week old niece diagnosed with H1N1. I and some others mentioned that we would pray or get in touch with a church group, etc. etc. BTW I don't claim any credit for me or for God, but baby is doing much much better this weekend and we're all grateful for that.

Another of the group said,

being atheist - I don't have a prayer group. God doesn't listen to me anyway. Must have just been all that non-denominational love radiating through the atmosphere...

Now those of you who know me know my answer to THAT, and I replied immediately, yes, as immediately as the sons of Zebedee dropped their nets:

if there is a God She loves atheists best of all...that's why She made you clever and loving without benefit of clergy....

So often we so-called Christians focus on how we can control people rather than how we can bless them. This abortion bill mumbo jumbo is just the latest example. If I had the money, I'd mail a box of condoms to everyone who voted for that Stupid Stupak amendment and tell them to get back to me when they completely abandon abstinence-only hypocrisy.

Planned Parenthood notes that the cost of an abortion in the first trimester costs between $300 to $900. That doesn't include travel expenses to Atlanta, which for many Southern Baptist college students is the closest place to have their "mistake"... "taken care of." Church-going Daddies and wayward boyfriends do come up with that money all the time, without filing an insurance claim, trust me.

For the women who were unable to get an abortion on Medicaid due to the Hyde Amendment before last night? Life continues to suck, or in the words of our Lord and Master, "the poor you always have with you." Dear Congress: Jesus meant that as an accusation, rather than a statement of fact. Jesus knows what is in your hearts, Congressmen, and that you would send any number of pregnant interns to that Atlanta abortion clinic for the full nine hundred, just to save your fucking job, and many of you likely have.

That said... there is no Savior, or morning-after pill, strong enough for this dude:

Saturday Song (Dear GOP:)

2009-11-07T11:49:00.002-06:00

.

PS. Telling women they can't speak is never a good idea. Did you NEVER have a girlfriend, like, EVER?

Where some see a large group of GOP a-holes attempting to silence women, I see a lovely 2010 Democratic ad spot. Just lovely.

Let me explain "rationing" to the teabaggers.

2009-11-06T10:10:00.006-06:00

[Photoshopped their sign just a lil' bit. Original here.]

Last night I attended an open house for the grade 6-8 magnet school for my children's school district. This is a terrific school. Every single kid in the school gets their own MacBook with their textbooks embedded to take home. The kids, as evidenced by the "student ambassadors" hosting the open house, are well-spoken, confident, learning dynamos.

There were about 250 parents and kids there in the crowded auditorium, being sold on the idea of applying to this magnet school. It's like selling water in the desert. Five hundred fifth-graders are expected to apply for approximately 100 available spots in this school. The sales pitch was completely unnecessary except to provide some eighth-graders with some public speaking "enrichment".

And we all sat there like sheep. No one shouted out in rage that the other option, one many of us fear and four out of five of us will be forced to consider, is sending our kids to the assigned residential school for our address. You know, the MIDDLE school that gets occasional good reviews because the SHERIFF'S DEPUTIES that roam the hall are really nice people.

That access to decent public education, right here in our own community, is rationed by a completely arbitrary lottery.

The children in my school district, a district I expect is typical, are poor and getting poorer by the year:

Crooks and Liars posted a story this week that half of all kids in America are, not will be, on food stamps sometime in their lives (full disclosure: my kids are, and free lunch too), and for black kids the statistic is 90%. This is not based on projections, but on historical evidence collected for a pediatric organization. Pediatricians know that children on food stamps are more likely to be malnourished. It's a national health concern and, memo to John Kyl, should be a homeland security concern as well.

And what comes to my mind as I take the long route home, my hands shaking on the steering wheel, is all this talk about rationing and "hands off my healthcare" from a generation of people who are going to receive a check from Barack Obama for $250.00 in the next year. Am I to assume the teabaggers will be tearing up the check and returning it to the US Treasury with their own stamp, out of concern for the deficits they protested in DC yesterday? Or will they apply that money to their hotel bill from last night, might as well stay an extra day so we can see the Air and Space Museum, seeing as Dick Armey gave us free bus fare into town.

Dick Armey, who considers healthcare reform, but not the Bush tax cuts, "generational theft."

Theft for WHOM, Dick?

Not a photoshop

2009-11-05T09:12:00.003-06:00

Gee, that Midol solves all kinds of problems, doesn't it, Bonnie? [image from a 1966 TV Guide, h/t and thanks to Professor B.R.]

Woke up to find myself linked at Memeorandum, sandwiched between Carly Fiorina and Nina Totenberg...

Yeah, story of my goddamn life. :)

Many, many thanks to everyone for their kind words and good wishes yesterday. I love you too. xo

In bed with Dick Armey has unforeseen consequences

2009-11-04T16:41:00.003-06:00

Yeah, I went there...