I Am in Overbite Heaven
Courteney Cox and Felicity Huffman, this middle-aged man's penultimate dream threesome. Politics WHO?
What This Particular Blue-Dog Independent Would Do (King For a Day)
The western mind, both individually and collectively, is a damned curious thing. Whenever something isn't working, we either double down and try the same thing harder, or we do a complete 180. We never seem to want to make minor adjustments. Yes, peeps, I'm thinking specifically about this budget situation. You see, to me, we have an extremely delicate situation here. On the one hand, we have a humongous deficit and debt (worse as a percentage of the GDP than even the Depression era). And on the other, we have an extremely fragile recovery from what was probably the worst economic downturn since the Depression. The real challenge here, I think, is to reduce the deficit but to do it in a way that doesn't put a blanket on the recovery. Here are some of the things that I would do that a) would in fact reduce the deficit but b) wouldn't do it in a way that would stymie the recovery..........................................................................................................1) Allow the Bush tax-cuts to expire on everybody making $400,000 or more (I raised it form $250,000 to take away the Republican talking point pertaining to small businesses getting hit). This I believe would add a good 40-50 billion a year to the treasury and have minimal effects on investing............. 2) I would reduce the cap on mortgage interest deduction from its current level of one million a year to somewhere between $500-900,000 a year (depending upon what the CBO told me). This would undoubtedly add at least another 10 billion a year to the treasury............. 3) I would have the Federal government bargain directly with the pharmaceutical companies - this, for Medicaid and Medicare (as it already does for the V.A.). This would net the treasury somewhere between 15-25 billion a year............. 4) I would have wealthy retirees pay an extra 10% for their Medicare (Medicare is already somewhat means-tested but I would graduate it even more). I don't have a figure but I'd be astonished if it netted less than 5 billion a year............. 5) I would means-test Social Security to the tune of wealthy retirees getting 10% less (so, instead of an $1,800 check - or whatever the max is - they get a $1,620 check). Again, I'm thinking of at least 3-5 billion a year coming form this............. 6) I would close at least a dozen foreign military bases (starting with the one in Aruba) and hopefully net the treasury another 5-10 billion............. 7) I would modestly expedite our withdrawal from Afghanistan and gradually transform our mission there to an anti-terror one. This will ultimately net the treasury tens of billions over time (we're presently spending approximately 100 billion a year there now)............. 8) I would raise the retirement age 6 months. People are living much longer and the demographic nightmare that is bearing down on us is immense. The savings here I approximate to be 3 billion a year............ 9) I would raise the cap on Social Security Taxes by $5,000. I have no idea how much revenue that this would raise but it would definitely extend SS............. 10) I would institute Bob Gates' proposed defense cuts. 20 billion a year over the next 5 years............. 11) I would institute a one year federal wage freeze. The rest of the country has taken hit and it's only fair that the federal work force does as well. That would save the treasury 3 billion a year over the next 10 years (don't ask me why/how)............. 12) I would eliminate ALL federal funding of NPR and public television. Yeah, it's only a half billion a year BUT, in the words of Mr. Schwarzenegger, "it is time."............ 13) Reduce foreign aid by 10%. That would save the treasury 5 billion a year............. 14) Reduce farm subsidies by 20%. This would net the treasury 6 billion dollars. The final tally - somewhere between 150-200 billion (1.5-2 trillion over 10 years).....................................................................................................P.S. I know that I've done a post similar to this in the past. I felt that it was worth repeating, though. You know, what with these idiots in Washington flailing and all.
The Ever-So Predictable Decent of Yet Another Douche-Bag Congressman
It has come to my attention that this recently emerging tea partier/firebrand Congressman, Joe Walsh, is presently $117,000/then-some in arrears on his child-support (he, of course, disputes these figures). Hm, I guess that Congressman Walsh actually thinks that sometimes debts are acceptable (some of them more-so than others, obviously).
Maxine Waters 2004
"We were trying to fix something that wasn't broke. Mr. Chairman, we DO NOT have a crisis at Freddie Mac and, in particular, at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Mr. Frank Raines."............I'm sorry, folks, but this woman doesn't deserve to be anywhere near the U.S. capitol. She took what was obviously an important hearing and turned it into a God damned mockery (replete with playing the race-card). The way that I see it, this lady couldn't get elected dog-catcher in any other district in the country.
John McCain 2005
"Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.
The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie
The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.
For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.
I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.".............Wow, yet another doltish Republican talking sense. Incredible!!
Alec Baldwin (!!!!!) on "Real Time with Bill Maher"
"The thing we have to remember, a friend of mine who is very close to the financial community in New York pointed out that Democrats have a lot of the responsibility for this as well. I mean, it was Clinton who killed the Glass-Steagall, and it happened under a Democratic president. Barney Frank and his committee, they, they kept propping up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac saying everything's fine, everything's fine, everything's good. And it was his job to know everything wasn't fine. And Barney Frank let you down and let us down as well. And so, but I want to say there's blame to go both ways. But I will say, I want to, I maybe keep beating this to death, but I still think anyone in this Congress who voted to add $140 billion to that bill, they should be ashamed of themselves. That is a disgrace. It's a disgrace. This Congress is a disgrace, Democrat and Republican."............WOW, huh?
Alan Greenspan 2005
"If Fannie and Freddie continue to grow, continue to have the low capital that they have, continue to engage in the dynamic hedging of their portfolios, which they need to do for interest rate risk aversion, they potentially create ever-growing potential systemic risk down the road. We are placing the total financial system of the future at a substantial risk.''............While Mr. Greenspan may indeed have been major clueless in certain respects, he kind of sounds omniscient here, doesn't he?
To Those Who Think That the Country Needs Another FDR Type Progressive as President
THIS............"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong...somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot."............Henry Morgenthau, Jr. FDR's Secretary of the Treasury to his fellow Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee May 9th 1939
Note to Sean Hannity 2
Here's yet another thing about you that bugs me. Whenever somebody even remotely suggests that we cut the defense department, you always have to refer to that as "gutting defense". It's like, come on, dude! There's a massive amount of waste in the defense budget; weapons that are obsolete, overseas bases that do nothing more than stimulate other country's economies. Hell, Sean, even Bob Gates said that we could cut defense spending by tens of billions a year. Are you going to try and tell us here that Bob Gates, a man who's dedicated his entire adult life to trying to make this country safer, is also trying to "gut" the defense department? I think that we're just going to have to face it here, fellow. You're nothing but a weaselly little partisan stooge who seemingly can't adjust his thought process to save himself....I really kind of feel bad for you in a way.
Posted by Will "take no prisoners" Hart at 1:40 PM 1 comment:
Dude, you do realize, don't you, that if in fact we had a balanced budget amendment (and, no, I'm not necessarily arguing for or against it here one here), President Bush wouldn't have been able to ram through those highly expensive tax-cuts 10 years ago. And, neither, Sean, would he have been able to start those 2 wars without paying for them, either. Something to ponder about, no?..............As for the debt-ceiling situation, don't worry, it'll get raised. There are still too many (relatively) sane people in Washington (non-Sean Hannities, in other words) to muck around with it. Mark my word here.
Posted by Will "take no prisoners" Hart at 10:14 AM 3 comments:
For Those of You Who Only Know Helena Bonham Carter in Her Current, Somewhat Frumpier State
THIS!!!!!!!
Deeper, Alright
O'Reilly put up this graph that showed how Mr. Obama's daily contribution to our national debt has greatly exceeded that of his predecessors; Bush 2 and Clinton. Assuming that the data is accurate (and it probably is), it would have also been nice if Mr. O'Reilly (not so much to make excuses for Mr. Obama but for some "fairness/"balance") had pointed out that a) Mr. Obama inherited the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression and b) made a concerted effort to salvage a war in Afghanistan that his predecessor, Mr. Bush, had majorly neglected. Not that these two factors alone would have been sufficient in explaining this admittedly massive discrepancy. But it at least would have explained a modicum of it....And this, folks, right after Mr. O'Reilly claimed to his HUGE audience, "We always dig a little deeper here at 'The Factor'."
The Latest "Finger in the Eye"?
There always seems to be at least one "mavericky" Republican out there. First it was McCain. Then it was Chuck Hagel. Lincoln Chafee, too - he'd probably have to be thrown into the mix. The closest thing to a maverick currently out there (and, yes, keep in mind, the Republicans, as a whole, have majorly drifted right) would probably have to be Alaska's Lisa Murkowski. Not, mind you, that the woman was ever a hard-core rightie (her American Conservative Union voter rating of 68% is considered inadequate by most conservative organizations) but ever since that tea party challenge/her emergence as an independent Republican, she has voted to a) repeal don't ask/don't tell, b) in favor of the President's nuclear arms control treaty, c) against ethanol subsidies and the defunding of Planned Parenthood, and d) for the Dream Act, an expansion of SCHIP, and the the Offshore Product and Safety Act. Yes, she did vote against repealing the oil subsidies (special tax breaks is probably a more accurate description) and in favor of repealing Obamacare but, as a person overall that the Democrats can work with (and, yes, maybe even convert someday) from time to time, Lisa Murkowski looks like at least a semi-reliable candidate...................................................................................................P.S. And she obviously doesn't like Sarah Palin. That alone would seem to be sufficient to some of these folks.
Simple Hannity Says
It isn't so much that Sean Hannity criticizes the President. Presidents, folks, SHOULD BE CRITICIZED, scrutinized, challenged, etc.. It's the fact that he a) demeans and ridicules him and b) lies his frigging brains out while doing so. Just take the other night, for instance. He stares into the camera and says (to the effect), "The 'anointed one' wants to raise your taxes."...And the fact that he never gets called on any of this!! a) Nobody's ever there to tell him that the President wasn't anointed but elected and elected decidedly. b) Nobody's ever there to tell him that the President only wants to raise taxes on the top 1-2% of Americans. c) Nobody's ever there to tell him that Mr. Obama has repeatedly shown a willingness to compromise on this and a whole host of issues (I, along with David Frum and others, still say that the Republicans should have taken Mr. Obama's bluff - if in fact it was a bluff - on that $4,000,000,000,000 package, 3-4 to 1 in favor of spending cuts). Nada. Nada, folks. And all of this, of course, while Mr. Hannity's incredibly gullible audience continues to dully lap it up. Unbe-frigging-lievable.
Infinite Talent, Timeless Beauty
Considering that Bette Davis, Katharine Hepburn, Greta Garbo, Marlene Dietrich, Joan Crawford, Louise Brooks, Barbara Stanwyck, Gloria Swanson, Jean Harlow, and Carole Lombard all made their initial splashes in either the late 1920s or early 1930s, it's sometimes easily forgotten that the biggest female star of all during that era was Norma Shearer. Shearer, folks, was the "it-girl" back then, the very first super-star at MGM, and, along with Ms. Garbo, one of the very few actresses of that generation to make the quantum leap from silent features to talkies. The women received a total of six Oscar nominations and won the Oscar in 1930 ("The Divorcee"). Shearer was also one of the very first famous women to ever pose naked. Bada-bing-bada-boom, in other words.
Posted by Will "take no prisoners" Hart at 9:19 AM 3 comments:
The (Strong) Medicine Man
I just thought of another "hero". And this one, folks, IS a politician; former New York City mayor, Ed Koch. Koch, at least in my estimation, was EXACTLY what New York City needed in 1977. At a time when the city had such things as "snow days", when it paid its huge municipal workforce to stay home when it snowed and paid those that did come in time and a half, at a time when other politicians such as Mario Cuomo, Bella Abzug, and incumbent Mayor Abe Beam gave mealy-mouthed responses to the 1977 power outage rioting, Mr. Koch came along and kicked majorly some butt. Now, did this fellow eventually wear out his welcome/deserve to be "retired"? Sure, probably (you could say that about most U.S. politicians, no?). But for at least a fairly large chunk of his tenure, Ed Koch was a pretty damn good mayor, I think.
Too Long at the Hope-Fair
Hindsight is always 20-20. But I'll bet that President Obama really wishes now that he had more fully embraced the findings/solutions of his own debt commission. My suspicion here is that he probably thought that the economy (either through the stimulus or the previous budget agreement that a) sustained the tax-cuts, b) provided additional unemployment relief, and c) included a payroll-tax holiday) would be chugging along by now and that maybe he could skate a trifle on some of these tougher choices. He miscalculated, in other words..................................................................................................As to why this (an embracing of the commission's findings/conclusions) might have been a good thing, I posit. a) It would have made the President look serious and proactive (GONE, that Republican talking-point). b) It might have gone a good distance toward placating the business community. c) He would have avoided the charge that he hasn't been specific. d) The country as a whole might have been farther down the road to solving this mess......................................................................................................Now, granted, there would have been some loudmouths on both sides of the political spectrum (Maxine Waters, Michele Bachmann, this recently emerging Walsh blowhard) who would have criticized Mr. Obama for making such an emboldened move (I've heard that some of the tea partiers are already pissing on the "gang of six"). But, overall, I'm thinking that the public would have largely been behind him (I know that I would have been).
Posted by Will "take no prisoners" Hart at 8:18 AM 23 comments:
A Pretty Damned Good Pretty Actress
Not only was Gene Tierney one of the beautiful women in Hollywood, damned if the damsel wasn't one hell of a damned good actress to boot. Her performances in "Laura", Leave Her to Heaven", "Heaven Can Wait", and "The Razor's Edge" are, IMHO, amongst the very best of that time period....Of course, if it wasn't for that God damned overbite......
The Alan Alda in Chief
I've always considered Howard Dean to be pretty much of an oddball. The fact that the guy did as well as he did in 2004 is absolutely staggering to me. But, I also have to tell you here, what Mr. Dean said several weeks ago on MSNBC might have been his most off-the-charts utterance EVER. He actually told Lawrence O'Donnell (or whoever the hell it was) that the reason he supported President Obama's 2009 "surge" in Afghanistan was to further protect women's rights in that country....Come again!................................................................................................I mean, don't get me wrong here. I'm as pro-women as the next fellow (pro-choice on abortion, supportive of women in the military, etc.) out there. But that, folks, isn't the role of the United States military. I mean, it was bad enough when we had George W. Bush getting us going us going on nation-building and shit. We certainly don't need to be adding NOW caliber policies on top of it.
Duh, Winning!
I guess that winning a national championship just wasn't sufficient for Jamal Coombs McDaniel. Yeah, that's right, folks, UConn's once promising wing-man (a Rivals top 50 recruit in 2009) has recently decided to transfer/"take his talents elsewhere" (I'm assuming that it had something to do with playing-time). Hm, to each his own, I gather.................................................................................................P.S. Just to prove that there aren't any hard feelings here, I've decided to give Mr. McDaniel a little free advice, "Jamal, dude, you want to get on the court a little more, TRY SHOOTING A HIGHER PERCENTAGE!! And, yeah, enough already with those frigging bricks!!"
Reading Between the Tea-Leaves
I kept on telling Leeds, "It ISN'T Mandarin. It isn't even Mandarin caliber, dude." But just as he seems to do with everything (at Sassy's), he zigged when he should have zagged and staggered. Add to that the fact that he continues to have this irrational fear of protocol, some idiotic notion that his is the premium charity, etc., and, yeah, you really do have to wonder it he's sentient AT ALL. It's just kind of too bad that the deity at Sassy's now has to suffer - him/her obviously having had a hand in the creation of this lemon.
Posted by Will "take no prisoners" Hart at 10:07 AM 1 comment:
Austria's Greatest Export - BY FAR!!!
Hedy Lamarr, boys and girls. And a much needed break from politics.
A REALLY Rocky Picture
As for Slade Leeds and his metaphysical certainty (clarity, I believe that HE referred to it as) - that, folks, was nothing more than a stoned man living in a quarry. And the fact that the son of a bitch couldn't even dress himself (nicely), for Christ, damned, I'm saying, if his turning into stone alone wasn't sturdy....There, now if we could only put his smarmy/neutered face on a statue of sorts......
I'll Put One of My Best Guys On It
I have another undercover assignment for Ms. Steinem. I just got a call from Claude Rains and he wants to know if there's gambling going on in the casinos.
Blogospheric Flatus Interruptus
All that it takes is for one crazy mother-fucker to go off; as in, to put on full display his or her paranoiac rantings, etc.. And while I may never be metaphysically certain who in the hell this miscreant is, that doesn't really matter all that much, now does it? The holding of a grudge for years and years is the holding of a grudge for years and years/it doesn't matter one iota which way the stench is blowing........................................................................................................P.S. Neither, apparently, does the miscreant seem to understand censorship. Yes, folks, we DO live in a free society. And, yes, we're also entitled to say basically anything. But we can't frigging say that "anything" wherever or however we want. I can't, for instance, go over to my neighbors house and stand under her window yelling, "Fucking bitch (this, in retaliation for her loud music, inability to scoop up dog-crap, etc.)!!!" Nor, folks, am I ever allowed to take a dump on her living room floor. I mean, I know that this is basic stuff and all but......
"Detecting" the Obvious
Gloria Steinenm's first big splash came in the '60s. It was when she posed (as a reporter for Huntington Hartford's "Show" magazine) as a Playboy bunny and infiltrated Mr. Hefner's "empire". So, what were the young woman's landmark findings pertaining to "Playboy"? She ultimately concluded that Playboy Inc. was a sexist organization....Hm, she actually had to go undercover to figure that out, huh? So much for HER being the intellectual leader of the women's movement.
Throw Out the Little Ones, Pan Fry the Big Ones (Apologies to Steely Dan)
Earlier this summer, Connecticut's new Governor, Dan Malloy, and the leaders of the state employees union got together and agreed to bell-ringer/landmark deal. The new Governor was actually able to extract 1.6 billion in concessions from the unions and, along with some other tough measures (additional cuts and SOME revenue increases), was essentially able to close Connecticut's 3 billion dollar budget shortfall (that's a huge deficit for a small state, folks). It was absolutely incredible and, yes, for the first time in a long time, I was proud to be a nutmegger (I mean, really, other than the UConn men and women......)...............................................................................................It kind of sounds too good to be true, doesn't it? Yeah, well, guess what - it was!!!!! When the measure was put up to a vote by the union rank and file, the rank and file voted it down. Yep, that's right, folks, the state employees union of Connecticut told the rest of us that they simply wouldn't sacrifice - PERIOD!! THAT, they said, would be for the rest of us poor slobs to do. The next step for Mr. Malloy? The poor bastard has to now lay off over 6,000 state workers. Hot fun in the summertime, huh, me-bucks?.......................................................................................................P.S. As a former state employee myself, I know exactly what happened here. The 20-30 year workers (and, believe me, there are many) decided that they didn't want to lose any of their cakey pay and benefits. They decided instead to throw all of their younger (and, yes, for the most part, more productive) "friends"/colleagues under the buss. It's what they basically do every time.
Some Facts About Medical School Accredidation
1) There are currently 134 medical schools and 28 osteopathic schools in the country.............2) There are also 18 chiropractic programs, 17 optometry programs, 8 podiatry programs, 63 dental programs, and 132 pharmacy programs (a PhD is now required by most states in order to be a registered pharmacist).............3) Medical school accreditation is currently overseen by the LCME, the Liaison Committee on Medical Education, osteopathic school accreditation by the American Osteopathic Organization.............4) The LCME is made up of 17 individuals; medical educators, administrators, practicing physicians, public members, and medical students.............5) 6 of the individuals on the LCME are from the AAMC, the Association of American Medical Colleges. 6 additional members are from the AMA's Council on Medical Education.............6) Most state boards of licensure require that U.S. medical schools be accredited by the LCME as a condition for licensure of their graduates.............7) Accreditation by the LCME is a 5-step process; application school status, candidate school status, preliminary accreditation status, provisional accreditation status, and full accreditation status.............8) The U.S. Department of Education recognizes the LCME for accreditation of programs of medical education leading to the degree of M.D. in the U.S..............9) Eligibility to take the USMLE, the United States Medical Licensing Examination, requires LCME accreditation of the applicant's school.
Posted by Will "take no prisoners" Hart at 12:09 PM 7 comments:
On This Movement Toward the Right
1) I don't mean to be rude here, but if Michele Bachmann and her Bible-thumping/counselor husband still think that you can actually counsel and/or "pray away the gay", then, yeah, that is a level of idiocy that ALL rank and file Republicans really need to be wary about. I mean, the saner ones have to realize that the farther in this wacked-out direction that they, as a party, gravitate, the better and better that Mr. Obama starts looking to us. I'm telling you here, folks, if I were Mr. Boehner, I'd be pulling this lady aside and reading her the riot act, telling her that if she ever wanted to see the light of day on any committees, etc..............2) Speaking of the wacky right, I just saw this press conference that had, not only Bachmann in it but Steve King and Louie (we'll soon be overridden by terrorist babies) Gohmert as well. I mean, come on! How in the hell is THAT an example of putting the Republicans' best foot forward? Just the mere fact that these people get elected is scary enough. Add to that the fact that the leadership gives them additional power. Yikes, huh?............3) His hard-core partisanship aside, I had always considered Sean Hannity to be a fairly affable fellow. a) He seemed to have a sense of humor and b) he would at least on occsion let his guard down. Lately, though, he is as riveted to his message as Wile E. Coyote was to the Roadrunner.............4) And he's getting frigging bad-assed, too. For instance, he will never, EVER, refer to Secretary Geithner without prefacing his name with "tax-cheat Tim"; Tax-cheat, Timothy Geithner. I mean, I suppose that, if in fact you're a hard-core conservative/Republican partisan, this type of stuff is flat-out gravy-train for you. For the rest of us (saner folks), though, it's borderline unwatchable.
1) Note to all progressives - not every year is 1932.............2) Note to all Tea Partiers - not every year is 1980.............3) I hate to age myself here, but I can actually remember back to a time when Republicans didn't genuflect to tax-cuts/the concept of never, EVER, raising them. Now, this isn't to say that they wouldn't try to tighten the belt a little bit prior to raising them. But, folks, I'm telling you here, if Howard Baker, Gerry Ford, Bob Michael, etc. ever had to choose between raising taxes and having the deficit mushroom, they'd flat-out raise those taxes every time....They believed in paying the bills, I guess is what I'm saying.............4) I have no idea how many of those recorded jailhouse visits between Casey Anthony and her parents that the jury ever saw. BUT, if they saw the ones that I saw....and still gave credence to that cockamamie defense explanation that the father disposed of the body, then, yeah, those frigging jurors are flat-out imbeciles. That poor bastard had NO IDEA where his little granddaughter was. I mean, yeah, common sense and his experience as a law enforcement officer were probably pushing him hard in a scary direction, but for the defense to say that he himself was involved - that, in my opinion, was defense attorney lawyering at it's very worst.............5) And now we have some of these jurors speaking out. One of them the other day said that she couldn't convict because she didn't know the exact mode of death. I mean, what, she wanted a videotape or something? First of all, in a lot of murder cases/convictions, we DON'T know the exact mode of death (Scott Peterson, for example). Sometimes they don't even have a frigging body I hear. Of course, if these if these same jurors wanted a more detailed narrative, hows about this one? Casey Anthony a) chloroformed the kid (either to intentionally kill her or to put her to sleep and she died accidentally), b) put the damned duct tape over her nose and mouth, c) put her in the trunk, and d) dumped her lifeless body in the swamp.............6) Well, either that or Zanny the Nanny did it.............7) What probably pisses me off more than anything, though, is the fact that Ms. Anthony and her attorney BOTH know knew that that child's body had already been disposed of - a) while all of the searching for her was taking place and b) while Casey was giving her parents the major run-around. That, folks, to me, is pretty close to evil. Hopefully here, any money that the woman gets will be taken from her in court.
Pledge You, You Motherpledger
I want all the candidates (Presidential and otherwise) to sign MY pledge. What's my pledge, you ask? Simple; DON'T SIGN ANYMORE FRIGGING PLEDGES!!!!! Yeah, that's correct; no more marriage pledges, no more abortion (pro-life OR pro-choice) pledges, no more union pledges, no more tax pledges, nada, zero, nil, bubkas. Enough is enough already!
1) The validity of such a concept (i.e., the Laffer Curve) is entirely possible. In fact, I actually think that Mr. Keynes himself posited something quite similar. The question is, is the optimal level that Mr. Laffer posited the actual optimal level. Based upon the fact that there were huge budget deficits under Reagan (coupled with the additional fact that people like Alan Greenspan and Bruce Bartlett are now saying that tax-cuts in fact DON'T pay for themselves), my suspicion is that this optimal level set by Mr. Laffer might indeed be a trifle low (though, yes, I'm clearly open to being persuaded).............2) Since when has means-testing the wealthy for Social Security (having the wealthy get 10% less) and Medicare (having the wealthy pay 10% more) ever been considered a conservative position? I'm telling you, folks, I must have totally missed the memo on that one.............3) President Obama recently offered up a budget-reduction proposal of four trillion dollars. The proposal contained upwards of three trillion in budget cuts and only one trillion in increased revenues. Majority leader Cantor's response to this rather bold proposal was to walk out of the room. How ANYONE at this point can say that the Republicans are even remotely serious about this crisis is beyond me. Obama - he's the one who's being serious and taking on his base, not frigging Boehner and Cantor. Look, folks, I try and call it down the middle as often as possible (and, yeah, I've totally got the scars to prove it). But when these Republicans are so much as afraid to say boo to the Tea Partiers, at that point there really isn't all that much of a middle left.............4) Michele Bachmann is now officially on the record as saying that she will NOT support an increase in the debt-ceiling. Hm/gee, I wonder which of those 80 million government checks that go out every month she's preparing to put a "stop" on. Hey, I've got an idea; how 'bout her own?............5) Not that I'm endorsing Mr. Laffer's (or anybody else's, for that matter) curve here, mind you. But his theory kind of does make sense in this regard. At some point in ANY taxation process, you in fact DO reach a point of diminishing returns. Take the progressive's position of a 70% top rate. When you combine that with the 7.65% FICA tax (they also want to eliminate the cap on that tax), the top state income tax rate in NY of nearly 9%, sky-high property taxes there, all of the other taxes such as sales, gas, sin, luxury, etc., you are, folks, for all intents and purposes, taking it all. And, yes, when you in fact do take it all, nothing/zero/bubkas is no doubt what you're ultimately going to get (this, in that most people will simply stop trying to make above and beyond that amount). Duh, huh?............6) But, hey, what's one more landmark invention, right?
Bleeding Coverage
I consider myself an American who wants the country to succeed no matter which party is running it. And I want President Obama's health-care bill to succeed as well. I just find myself a little bit concerned by several aspects of it...............................................................................................I've already mentioned the huge number of exemptions and the fact that the penalty simply isn't stiff enough to secure compliance. Another potential problem is the fear that a lot of these 30 million new folks being covered (and possibly many more currently on private coverage - this, in that their employers may ultimately end up dropping them and agreeing to pay the penalty instead) may eventually end up on Medicaid, easily the crappiest insurance coverage in the country (I mean, yes, it's better than nothing but, still, 50% of doctors today don't even accept it)...............................................................................................I'm also disturbed by some of the surveys that I've seen. According to Business Investors Daily and the Medicus Group, upwards of 45% of physicians say that they would consider leaving the profession and/or retiring early. Granted, they may simply be blowing smoke here but, still, in a country that already has a major doctor shortage (not specialists - we clearly have plenty of them - G.P.s, I'm saying), there simply may not be enough of them to go around. Sadly.
Creedence Clearwater Revival's "Bad Moon Rising"/"Lodi" (With Apologies to the Beatles' "Hey Jude"/"Revolution")
What would be my answer to the question, "So, what's your all-time favorite two-sided hit?"
Incorporate This
Just for the record, folks, you can't tax a corporation. You can only tax PEOPLE. And, yes, according to William Gentry's paper for the Treasury Department, it's labor (you know, actual flesh and bone workers - the people that progressives are supposed to care about) that tends to bear the biggest burden of the corporate tax. Couple that with the fact that a) the corporate tax doesn't really raise all that much money, b) it encourages firms to waste valuable resources on tax avoidance, and c) it's a major factor in lobbying and, yeah, you are kind of forced to see the clumsiness of it............................................................................................My proposal, folks (and, yes, I was glad to see that Megan McCardle of "The Atlantic" essentially has the same one), is to eliminate the corporate income tax completely BUT, in addition, eliminate also the special treatment of capital gains. Have it taxed as regular income, in other words. American companies will no doubt flourish (hell, we might even be able to get a few foreign companies to switch on over) and, AND, we'll still be able to stick it to the fat-cats. I mean, really, who in the hell loses here? I don't see anybody who loses.................................................................................................Oh, and, if you think that it's only right-wingers and "corporatists" who support the elimination of corporate income taxes, think again. One of the articles that supports such a move I actually derived from the progressive blog, "Firedog Lake" (firedoglake.com/newbroomparty/2010/09/29/why-progressives-should-eliminate-the-corporate-income-tax). What do you think about that?........................................................................................................P.S. Just for full disclosure here, the Firedog Lake proposal had as its trade-off a sort of import tax. I myself much prefer Ms. McCardle's proposal of raising the capital gains tax instead. Her article can be had at theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/10/why-we-should-eliminate-the-corporate -income-tax
Hey, I Love Kids, Too, But, Come On!
Bill O'Reilly recently (in one of his talking points memos) referred to the acquittal of Casey Anthony as "a dark day in American history". Dark day in American history? 9/11 - THAT was a dark day in American history. Pearl Harbor was a dark day in American history. Hurricane Katrina was a dark day in American history. The assassinations of Lincoln, JFK, RFK, and MLK were dark days in American history. Every single day that we were bogged down in Vietnam was a dark day in American history. Antietam was a dark day in American history. The day that the stock market crashed in 1929 was a dark day in American history. The two San Francisco earthquakes were dark days in American history. The Exxon-Valdez and BP oil spills were dark days in American history. The Timothy McVeigh/Oklahoma City bombing was a dark day in American history. The day that the Dred Scott decision went down was a dark day in American history. The Bay of Pigs was a dark day in American history. The Galveston hurricane of 1900 was a dark day in American history................................................................................................The Casey Anthony verdict?...I don't know. I mean, yeah, it was a disappointment and maybe even a miscarriage of justice. But a dark day in American history? I think that Mr. O'Reilly should probably save a little bit of that outrage for the next "trial of the century".
5....4....3....2....
Ed Henry, one of the finest White House correspondents in the business, has apparently decided to make a move from CNN to Fox (and, yes, kudos to Fox for hiring him). Whether this represents a good move by Mr. Henry or not, obviously, only the calender will know for sure. Significantly more predictable here is the reaction that Mr. Henry is going to get from the oft-time vicious progressive blogosphere. THAT, me-buckos, you can pretty much set your clock by, for Christ.
MY Heroes
Greta Garbo, Montgomery Clift, Burt Lancaster, Barbara Stanwyck, Jean Simmons, Elia Kazan, Edouard Manet, Frank Weston Benson, John Singer Sargent, Margaret Fitzhugh Browne, Jean Baptiste Camille Corot, Georges Rouault, Berthe Morisot, Van Morrison, Neko Case, Gram Parsons, Uncle Tupelo, Ralph Towner, Jan Garbarek (his stuff from the 70s more notably so), Bedrich Smetana, Modest Mussorgsky (for his music AND for his drinking!), Carrie Newcomer, Carson McCullers, Flannery O'Connor ("The Violent Bear it Away" is a nearly perfect book, in my opinion), Andre Gide ("Isabel" is nearly a perfect book, in my opinion), Samuel Beckett ("End Game" is nearly a perfect play, in my opinion), Samuel McIntire (just take a stroll down Chestnut Street in Salem MA, I invite you), Jackie Robinson, Roberto Clemente, Mort Sahl, Steven Wright (comedian - the son of a bitch makes me laugh), Robert F. Kennedy, Mahatma Gandhi.......Perhaps there are more. I cannot think of them now, though.
Betty Ford 1918-2011
R.I.P. One of the bravest people and classiest first-ladies ever. The world was definitely better for having her in it.
Groucho "take no prisoners" Hart
Remember that old Groucho Marx joke, "I wouldn't join any club that would have me as a member"? Yeah? Well, THAT, and I'd like to raise him one. I wouldn't join any club that would have Haddam Husein, Muammar Gaddafi, Hafez al Assad, Yasser Arafat, and the Iranian mullahs as members, either. Nor in fact would I ever trust a club like that....EVER!
Kenny Wheeler
What would be my answer to the question, "So, who, in your opinion, is the most under-appreciated jazz trumpeter of all time?"
The Great Black Colms
I have no idea what MSNBC is paying Michael Steele (the interesting albeit hapless former RNC chair) as an analyst. But, I'm telling you here, whatever it is, it ain't even remotely sufficient. I mean, have you seen him over there lately? That poor bastard is taking it squarely/up the poopshoot. The combination of the Republicans being in disarray and MSNBC's liberal hosts dictating the story line over there, I swear, is almost enough to make you feel sorry for the guy...............................................................................................Let me give you one example here. On Rachel Maddow's show, he actually had to defend the Republicans' handling of the David Vitter controversy - four frigging years after it happened! Talk about the need for some frigging battle pay, huh?...............................................................................................Actually, I DO have to give him some credit. Even beyond his ability to take a body-blow, the guy is nothing if he hasn't been honest (perhaps a little TOO honest, if in fact you're a Republican watching). If the Republicans are being hypocritical or stupid about something, he'll admit it. It would just be kind of nice if he could get a shot of his own in every once in a while.
Note to Tito Jackson
I heard you the other day, bra. You said that there'll never be another Michael Jackson. I tend to agree. But I also have to ask you here, is that necessarily such a bad thing (you know, with all of that bad music, child molestation, etc.)?
I Reiterate
(And, yes, I apologize to the higher-ordered people out there for repeating myself) 1) I am FOR allowing Mr. Bush's tax-cuts on the upper income earners to expire (I'm even willing to round it up to 40%). 2) I am FOR taxing capital-gains at the same rate as regular income (possibly indexed for inflation). 3) I am FOR reducing the cap on mortgage interest deductions from $1,000,000 to $500,000. 4) I am FOR public financing of all elections. 5) I was FOR extending unemployment compensation last year (I may have even pissed Rusty off on that one). 6) I am FOR a health insurance plan that covers 100% of Americans and makes it illegal for them to discriminate against people with preexisting conditions (the author of the plan, a former Obama adviser) .....................................................................................................Now, if, in spite of all this, you still want to call me a corporatist for wanting the corporate income tax to be reduced (a tax, quite frankly, that numerous people smarter than anyone here have said hurts the working and middle class more than it does the rich folks), go ahead, I guess, call me a frigging corporatist. Just be prepared to be called a paranoiac partisan stooge in return....................................................................................................P.S. Hopefully I haven't alienated all of my conservative colleagues now. Probably not. Most of them seem to be a little bit more tolerant of dissent these days. More open-minded, too.
Could You Please Pass the Fifties, Sir/Ma'am
Michael Moore is constantly referring to "our wealth", "our resources" (yes, folks, he's speaking of cold, hard cash here), the fact that the country isn't broke, etc.. I mean, it's almost as if this fellow thinks that we're living in a commune or something. Can somebody out there please explain to this blankety-blank the difference between public and private property. At least from what I can gather here, he doesn't really grasp it (well, save except for his own huge portfolio) very well.....................................................................................................Now, this isn't to say that the rich SHOULDN'T be paying more in taxes (I personally would like to say the top rates go back to 40% - preferably for deficit reduction). But that, folks, is a decision which is made via the political process. It isn't arrived at via the musings of some heavily (no pun intended) ideological/hypocritical film-maker.....................................................................................................P.S. And, neither, either, is it (the raising of somebody's taxes) something that we should ever do lightly - as if in fact it WERE our money.
We Need to Close More Than Loopholes
If the progressives want to eliminate all corporate tax loopholes (or try to anyway - I'm sure that the tax attorneys are already one step ahead of them), I say fine. Have at it, big fellows. But, if they end up closing all of the corporate tax loopholes AND keep the top corporate tax rate at 35%, that I think would be very disastrous. The rest of the world is reducing their corporate income tax, and if we don't at least try and keep up with them, not only will our corporations continue to outsource, they'll possibly move their entire operations overseas. It's a little something called the law of unintended consequences, people.
Right (As in Correct) to a Point
I consider myself the nuanced guy. You might even say that I live for ambiguity. But on this particular set of topics, folks, I am prepared to be quite crystal clear. President Bush was RIGHT to go after al Qaeda. He was RIGHT to not give the Taliban evidence pertaining to Mr. bin Laden's guilt. And he was VERY RIGHT to not agree to turn bin Laden over to an organization presided over by people such as Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, and the Iranian mullahs.....................................................................................................Of course, after having uttered THAT, this same President Bush was WRONG (as in negligent) in allowing Mr. bin Laden to escape to Pakistan/Jalalabad. He was WRONG in turning this Afghanistan mission into a nation-building/counter-insurgency enterprise. And he was certainly WRONG in going to war in Iraq. Hm, what was the lyric from that old Kenny Rogers song, "You gotta know when to hold, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away, know when to run......" Mr. Bush, in my opinion, was very good at holding them. He just didn't know when to fold 'em/walk away. One could even conceivably call that his legacy.
On Bernie Sanders
Well, I guess that it did take SOME courage to be on the losing side of that 518-1 vote. I DO have to give him credit for that. But, as far as the country being "better off" if only it were under Mr. Sanders's seemingly pure brand of socialism, I vociferously disagree with that (can you folks say Greece on frigging steroids?). I mean, yes, we need to have a strong government (we also need to pay for it - something that the Republicans apparently HAVEN'T learned). But to have the ENTIRE ECONOMY (or certainly large chunks of it anyway) so centrally run out of Washington D.C., that, I'm afraid to say, would be an abject disaster..........................................................................................................I mean, think about it here. Do you really want the same idiots who run the Pentagon, Amtrak, the post office, the authors of that idiotic cash for clunkers idea/ethanol subsidies, an entity that set up a bunch of entitlement programs that are presently running dozens of trillions of dollars in unfunded liability, etc. to take over the entire economy? Me - I personally would be a little bit hesitant about it.
Negotiating Shit WITH Shit
Sometimes, folks, you can hate a little TOO MUCH. Take, for instance, my colleague, wd. He hates George W. Bush so much that he is willing to criticize him forrrrrrrrr (drum-roll, please) NOT NEGOTIATING WITH THE TALIBAN!! Yeah, that's right, folks, the Taliban, one of the nastiest and most repressive regimes on the planet; a regime that treats women like chattel, a regime that frigging stones people to death, a regime that blows up ancient statues of the Buddha, a regime that makes being a Christian or Jew a criminal offense. And get this, not only does he think that President Bush should have negotiated with them, he also thinks that we should have caved in and provided these lunatics with "evidence" of Mr. bin Laden's guilt; evidence, folks, that no doubt contained important operational information on al Qaeda, information that the Taliban could have easily given back to, HELLO, al Qaeda! I'm sorry, but this is absolute insanity..............................................................................................Oh, and, yes, it gets even better. wd also criticizes Mr. Bush for not being willing to hand Mr. bin Laden over to something called the Organization of the Islamic Conference, an organization that included at the time such stalwarts of justice and democracy as Iraq (Saddam Hussein's Iraq), Syria, the Palestinian Authority, Lybia, Iran, Somalia, and Saudi Arabia (the country where 15 of the 19 hijackers came from). Those, folks, were the people that wd thinks should meted out OUR justice after 9/11.......................................................................................................Look, folks, I have criticized Mr. Bush on a whole host of foreign policy and security issues; from his not being able to prevent 9/11 to Iraq to not being able to get Mr. bin Laden. But to criticize him over stuff like this is absolutely outrageous and, yes, hopefully Mr. wd will duly reconsider here. I mean, really, what in the hell can he accuse him of next, framing O.J.?
The "Idiocy" of the Far-Left's Perception of "Moderation"
Ann Coulter and wd actually DO have one thing in common. They both have this cartoon-like/stereotypical mindset of what it is to be a moderate. They both, for instance, see moderates as wishy-washy and considerably absent of conviction. They also apparently see us as moderate on literally EVERY SINGLE ISSUE! Talk about pretty disturbing, huh?......................................................................................................I mean, just look at me. I'm decidedly pro-choice, pro-gay-rights, and was totally opposed to the Iraq War FROM DAY ONE (I even once said that a boxed-in Saddam Hussein was actually a slight net-plus!). I also opposed Mr.Obama's surge in Afghanistan. Yes, on some of the more monetary and energy issues, I do tend to be a little more skin-flint, preferring instead to look both ways PRIOR to "indulging"....................................................................................................But I am open-minded and willing to change my mind (I was, for instance, initially against raising taxes on the wealthy, but, after studying economic trends and listening to fellows like Greenspan, I ultimately changed my mind on it). You just have to convince me via reasoned arguments and evidence, that's all (and, no, I'm not at all referring to the partisan drivel from "Daily Kos", the "Weekly Standard", etc.)......................................................................................................P.S. Yes, I stand by my argument that ad hominem attacks such as "worthless piece of excrement" and "media whore (no, putting the word, media, in front of whore doesn't make it any less offensive)" have zero place in legitimate political discourse. And I'd be saying that same exact thing if the object was a Democrat OR a Republican. You see, folks, that's yet another characteristic that us "moderates" have; consistency.
Sacred Cattle-Prods
My main problem with the Ryan bill isn't so much the Medicare component (I think that that could possibly be salvaged with a catastrophic care stipulation) or the tax component (though, yes, I, too, would like to hear more about these proposed loopholes that he plans on closing). It's the fact that he apparently cuts bubkis from our massive military budget. I mean, I don't know about you, folks, but I can think of tens (possibly hundreds) of billions of dollars in deficit-reducing savings here; closing some of these foreign military bases (why, pray tell, are we stimulating the economies of other countries?), modernizing our weapons systems to match our current needs/threats, transforming our mission in Afghanistan from that of a counter-insurgency one to a counter-terrorist one, etc...............................................................................................The time has clearly come here, folks. Not only is a stupid idea that we be the policeman of the planet. It's also quite frankly an unaffordable one.
The Dickness Scale 0-10
Bill O'Reilly - 7, Sean Hannity - 9, Glenn Beck - 10, Keith Olbermann - 9, Ed Schultz - 9, Michael Savage - 10, Neil Cavuto - 4, Rush Limbaugh - 9, Shepard Smith - 1, Lawrence O'Donnell - 2, Nancy Grace - 10, Rachel Maddow - 8 (a 10, though, on the smarminess scale), Laura Ingraham - 10, Monica Crowley - 10, Al Franken - 8, Anthony Weiner - nope, not even going there, Mitch McConnell - 8/9, John Boehner - 8, Nancy Pelosi - 8, Joe Scarborough - 3, Anderson Cooper - 0, John King - 0, Donald Trump - 9 and some change, Michele Bachmann - 8, Barney Frank - 7, Ann Coulter - 8 (she does make me laugh once in a while), President Obama - 4, Joe Biden - 4, Mitt Romney - 7, Sarah Palin - 9, Newt Gingrich - 9, Al Gore - 8, Bill Clinton - 5 (sorry, I just can't hate the guy), Mike Huckabee - 8, Hillary Clinton - 5, John McCain (2000) - 1, John McCain (2008-2011) - 9, Mike Malloy - 10, Bob Gates - 1, Dick Cheney - 11 (sorry), George W. Bush - pass, for now, Markos Moulitsas - 9, Bill Maher - 7, Colin Powell - 2, Donald Rumsfeld - 9, Chris Matthews - it depends on a) the day and b) my mood, Michelle Malkin - 9, Jon Huntsman - 2 (SO FAR)
Heads or Tails, Obama-Style
As he tends to do with a lot of things, Mr. Obama seems to have split the difference on his "phased withdrawal from Afghanistan". He's not exactly staying the course like a lot of his critics on the neocon right clearly want him to. But, then again, neither, either, is he putting forth an aggressive enough withdrawal plan to please his critics on the left (and some of the more libertarian members of the right). As someone who saw his initial surge strategy through a somewhat cynical lens (the fact that he boxed himself into a corner on the campaign - Afghanistan, the good war, yada yada), I'm not at all surprised by this. As for my opinion on it, if it were up to me, I'd have gotten the bulk of the troops out of there by mid-2003. So, no, Mr. Obama's timetable isn't even remotely fast enough for me....And, yes, me-buckos, screw that dink/son of a bitch, Karzai, too - frigging douche-bag.
The Dumbing Down of Affluence
One of the things that the "People's Budget" (a plan recently put forth by the House's progressive caucus) does is remove the cap on social security taxes. Hm, I guess that the progressive caucus doesn't think that people making over $106,800 a year meet the definition of people........................................................................................................Seriously, though, I don't like this plan at all. Yeah, maybe raise the cap $5-6,000 or so but to not have any cap AT ALL is flat-out crazy. I mean, just take a look at what this provision would do to a guy/gal making $200,000 a year. That person, folks, would end up paying the government an extra $7,130 a year, every year for the rest of his or her life. That's a lot of money. And I hate to tell you here but $200,000 a year isn't necessarily rich anymore. I mean, think about it. This person probably has a stout mortgage, a massive student loan, and a couple of kids that he/she would probably like to put through college someday. The last thing that these people need is to be singled out and plundered like this, especially when it's somebody else that's probably going to bear the fruit of it..............................................................................................................P.S. Just for the record, this is in no way meant to imply that I reject the "People's Budget" completely. There are actually some particulars in it that I DO like; the sharp reduction in defense spending, for example. I just didn't particularly care for this one provision.
1) It's obvious that Bill O'Reilly doesn't like San Francisco; the fact that it's a "sanctuary city", the medical-marijuana capitol of America, is supposedly this anti U.S. military mecca of sorts, etc., etc.. I get it, folks. I get it! But I ask you - did he really have to send his flunky/producer there to dig up every frigging miscreant that he could find? I mean, come on, there's got to be at least a couple of people in that city who bathe and who aren't totally stoned 24/7. Yes, folks, methinks that there might have been some editing involved.............2) I'll admit it here. The list of sane Republicans at this stage is pretty small (with most of them being out of power; Alan Simpson, Joe Scarborough, David Frum, Chuck Hagel, Peggy Noonan, etc.). Well, guess what. We can finally add a new name to it. Bruce Bartlett, a former adviser to Reagan and the first George Bush, has apparently added his name to the cadre of folks who doesn't think that tax-cuts pay for themselves/always stimulate economic growth. And get this. He also thinks that revenue (especially in the form of tax expenditures) absolutely has to be a part of the upcoming budget compromise (relative to the debt-ceiling)....It's encouraging, no? Of course, it also makes me wonder aloud. HOW, pray tell, did it ever come to be that sane individuals like Mr. Bartlett became piranhas? If in fact you're asking me here, this isn't just bad thing for the Republicans. It's a bad thing for the country as a whole.............3) There's this new reality show on now called "Toddlers and Tiaras". It's about kids and beauty contests (just in case you couldn't figure it out from the title). And, I'm telling you, folks, it's disturbing. I saw this one clip in which a young girl was having her eye-brows plucked (and, yes, she was sobbing)....I mean, isn't that child abuse? It sure as hell looked like child abuse.............4) I just saw a clip in which Michele Bachmann's husband refers to gay people as "barbarians". And just when I thought that the independents couldn't get any MORE alienated....Youza, huh?
Browsing/Touring/Vacationing is Believing
Bank Street in New Milford (CT) and Main Street in Essex (CT) are two of the more upper-crust streets in America. And I'm telling you here, folks, I have actually seen some empty storefronts on both of them this year. For anybody to say that this recession hasn't been a bad one (and I seriously doubt that there are still people who would) is nuts!...................................................................................................P.S. Some of the more hitting-home casualties for me; one of my favorite Indian restaurants (Poughkeepsie NY), one of my favorite Italian restaurants (Gloucester MA), and one of my favorite art galleries (Essex CT). Shit the frigging bed - each and every one of them.
What This Particular Blue-Dog Independent Would Do...
The Ever-So Predictable Decent of Yet Another Douc...
Alec Baldwin (!!!!!) on "Real Time with Bill Maher...
To Those Who Think That the Country Needs Another ...
For Those of You Who Only Know Helena Bonham Carte...
Throw Out the Little Ones, Pan Fry the Big Ones (A...
Creedence Clearwater Revival's "Bad Moon Rising"/"...
The "Idiocy" of the Far-Left's Perception of "Mode...