Thought this chart from the House Democratic Caucus pretty well summed up the past 7 years of treasury looting and all-around ass-fuckery...
Image from Think Progress.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
No way...
Our co-President wants FISA expanded?
Surely no one could have predicted that...thank goodness he's got Harry Reid in his corner.
Surely no one could have predicted that...thank goodness he's got Harry Reid in his corner.
Go figure...
Bush's smoke and mirrors haven't been able to distract us from reality?
I'm sure they've got a few more tricks up their sleeves to delay the inevitable collapse until he's out of office. I wonder if another cut in the estate tax might just fix everything.
I'm sure they've got a few more tricks up their sleeves to delay the inevitable collapse until he's out of office. I wonder if another cut in the estate tax might just fix everything.
Hey Yoo...
Fuck off already, mmkay?
If there were any justice in this country, you'd spend the rest of your life behind bars being tortured for crimes against humanity with the rest of the Bush cabal.
Excellent rebuttal of John Yoo's entire existence by Scott Horton here.
If there were any justice in this country, you'd spend the rest of your life behind bars being tortured for crimes against humanity with the rest of the Bush cabal.
Excellent rebuttal of John Yoo's entire existence by Scott Horton here.
Well...
It looks like we're getting our Presidential campaign priorities straight finally.
After all, Dancing With the Stars is much more fun than a stuffy debate on the issues...
After all, Dancing With the Stars is much more fun than a stuffy debate on the issues...
Of course, that makes perfect sense...
Much like they have with impeachment, Dems in Congress have decided that pursuing contempt charges against Harriet Meirs and Josh Bolton would distract them from all of the important work they're doing.
Because, as we all know, kissing Bush's ass in the spirit of 'bi-partisanship' has worked out splendidly so far.
Because, as we all know, kissing Bush's ass in the spirit of 'bi-partisanship' has worked out splendidly so far.
But the media says he can't win...
Hell, even Stewart, Colbert and Olbermann don't give him any play.
Ever the pragmatist, how can I justify 'wasting' my vote on the candidate I consider the best and easily the most progressive? As South Carolina focus group members have shown us, it's clearly not enough to win on the issues, to dominate debates, to crush all potential Republican candidates in head-head polling or to single-handedly herd the other Democratic candidates to the left against their will. These things are secondary considerations.
Why, I just heard on for the 6,781st time that he's just not 'viable'. I guess that tears it...he mustn't be 'viable'. WTF can I be thinking to even consider throwing away my vote on the 3rd wheel in what I'm repeatedly told is a 2-person race? I suppose I'll just have to join the millions of Americans who see him as our best hope and vote for someone else then. It's admittedly taken a while for this narrative to drill its way into my head, but I'm slow like that.
Obama and Clinton will clearly make for much more sensational journalistic fodder, and isn't that really what it's about? Shouldn't that ultimately be the criteria that I use to make my decisions? Just think of the months of Clinton dynasty angst or "People say Obama may be a closet Muslim" stories that I'd be screwing the 24-hour media out of. It truly wouldn't be fair...they've got a lot of programming hours to fill and Edwards just isn't that controversial outside of corporate boardrooms and RNC offices.
Hernceforth, I'll be joining all of those who believe that John Edwards would do the most to fight for the issues that matter most to us... poverty, our corrupt corporatocracy, health care, food safety, civil liberties, education, the environment, worker's rights, global trade inequities, engagement with the global community...and vote for the other guy. Because as I said, I'm a pragmatist...and like all of other pragmatists in America who would otherwise cast a vote for John Edwards in their state primary, I think it would really suck to just waste millions of votes like that on someone so clearly non-viable.
Ever the pragmatist, how can I justify 'wasting' my vote on the candidate I consider the best and easily the most progressive? As South Carolina focus group members have shown us, it's clearly not enough to win on the issues, to dominate debates, to crush all potential Republican candidates in head-head polling or to single-handedly herd the other Democratic candidates to the left against their will. These things are secondary considerations.
Why, I just heard on
Obama and Clinton will clearly make for much more sensational journalistic fodder, and isn't that really what it's about? Shouldn't that ultimately be the criteria that I use to make my decisions? Just think of the months of Clinton dynasty angst or "People say Obama may be a closet Muslim" stories that I'd be screwing the 24-hour media out of. It truly wouldn't be fair...they've got a lot of programming hours to fill and Edwards just isn't that controversial outside of corporate boardrooms and RNC offices.
Hernceforth, I'll be joining all of those who believe that John Edwards would do the most to fight for the issues that matter most to us... poverty, our corrupt corporatocracy, health care, food safety, civil liberties, education, the environment, worker's rights, global trade inequities, engagement with the global community...and vote for the other guy. Because as I said, I'm a pragmatist...and like all of other pragmatists in America who would otherwise cast a vote for John Edwards in their state primary, I think it would really suck to just waste millions of votes like that on someone so clearly non-viable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
