Fine Young Cannibal

Rep. Joe Kennedy (D-MA) announced his bid for the Senate seat now held by fellow Dem Sen. Ed Markey, setting up a primary challenge for progressive lion Markey. While Kennedy has the right to run for the occupied seat against a fellow Dem who has strong progressive credentials (especially when it comes to climate change), he will end up weakening the eventual Dem candidate in 2020 and siphoning off funds needed to keep the Massachusetts Senate seat in Dem hands.

Kennedy, the grandson of Robert Kennedy, is focusing his campaign on a "new generation" theme aimed at sweeping away "outdated structures and old rules," according to an email sent to supporters. The reaction to him challenging a solid Dem Senator has been decidedly mixed:

"However, some in Massachusetts and the national Democratic Party see his candidacy as damaging. They argue: Why challenge a successful Democrat with nearly identical policy positions at a time when the real focus needs to be on defeating Republicans. [snip]

Environmental activists in particular seemed upset by Kennedy’s decision because Markey has long championed issues they care about and has co-sponsored the Green New Deal, legislation that would address climate change and economic inequality."

The answer seems to be ambition for the 38 year-old Kennedy, and again we don't begrudge him his right to run. At the end of the 6-year term starting in 2020, Kennedy would be 46 in 2026, while Markey would be 80 and likely set to retire. Why go through the disruption and damage of a primary when there's virtually no ideological difference between the two, when 2026 is doable for a young Kennedy to wait his turn?

New York AG Resigns After Sexual Assault Reports

More proof that though your politics may be good, you can be a hypocritical, horrendous person:

Eric T. Schneiderman, the New York State attorney general who rose to prominence as an antagonist of the Trump administration, abruptly resigned on Monday night hours after The New Yorker reported that four women had accused him of physically assaulting them. [snip] 

Two of the women who spoke to the magazine, Michelle Manning Barish and Tanya Selvaratnam, said they had been choked and hit repeatedly by Mr. Schneiderman. Both said they had sought medical treatment. Another woman, a lawyer, said she was slapped violently across the face. A fourth woman said she had similar experiences. All the women in the article, who had been romantically involved with Mr. Schneiderman, said the violence was not consensual. [snip]

Since 2017, Mr. Schneiderman had raised his profile nationally by taking on President Trump’s agenda repeatedly in the courts. He was pushing to change state law so that his office could prosecute Mr. Trump’s aides even if the president pardoned them; his resignation makes the status of that effort less certain. 

Women’s issues had also been a focal point for Mr. Schneiderman, who had announced, for instance, a lawsuit against the company once run by the former filmmaker Harvey Weinstein, who was accused of decades of sexual misconduct. “We have never seen anything as despicable as what we’ve seen right here,” Mr. Schneiderman said then.

 What a sad, depressing spectacle.

Don't Assume Elected Dems "Get It"

Just watched a short clip of passionless Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) dutifully peering over his glasses and reading from a piece of paper in a monotone about how bad the Republican wealthfare tax bill is.  It quickly brought to mind several pronouncements in recent days by Virginia Democratic Gov.- elect Ralph Northam and Alabama Senator- elect Doug Jones. If you're not sure what this is about, here's some background:

Political conditions are looking extremely favorable for Democrats. In special and off-year elections across the country, they have drastically improved on Hillary Clinton's margin almost everywhere — most astoundingly in Virginia, where Ralph Northam won the governorship by a comfortable 9 points, and in Alabama, where Doug Jones knocked off Roy Moore for the open Senate seat. 

But over the weekend, both victors revealed the danger of milquetoast centrist liberalism at this moment in history. In an interview with The Washington Post, Northam seemingly discarded his campaign promises to push for the ObamaCare Medicaid expansion, suggesting that it needs to have Republican-style means tests and work requirements instead. Jones, meanwhile, suggested that he might vote with the GOP, and said that it was time to put President Trump's numerous sexual harassment and assault allegations behind us.  [snip]

Northam justified this by vapid knee-jerk centrism. "Virginians deserve civility," he told the Post. "They're looking for a moral compass." Actually, what they're looking for is the Medicaid expansion, which is supported in the state by 69 percent of voters, according to a recent poll. Health care was rated as the most important issue by a 39-percent plurality of voters in exit polls — and that group broke 77-23 for Northam. As for a "moral compass," one could do worse than an all-out attack on the party that just finished running a viciously racist, conspiracy-mongering campaign for governor. 

We need to keep an eye on this, and Virginia Democrats -- whose energy propelled Northam into office in a landslide -- apparently need to keep him from going squishy right off the bat.

Ed Burmila at Rolling Stone sees the same pattern:

... Democrats have developed a habit over the last four decades of trying to get their voting base fired up during elections without delivering a whole lot once in power. They think Americans, and liberals in particular, want to see bipartisanship – lots of hand-holding and playing nice. By the time they wake up from that fantasy, it may be too late.

After dispensing with Northam's self- inflicted wound, Burmila has this to say about Jones:

Doug Jones, meanwhile, flubbed a softball question by saying it's time to "move on" regarding accusations of sexual assault and misconduct against Trump. A more forceful, even if noncommittal, answer would have been so simple: I look forward to hearing what these women have to say. Donald Trump is remarkably unpopular right now. What could Jones gain by being gentle? If ever there is a time to score points by taking a whack at Trump, this is it. 

Democrats like Jones depend heavily on the support of women, especially African-American and Hispanic women. It's not fair to make too much of a single comment, but we can forgive some of the people who worked hard to elect him if they take it as a bad sign. 

This pretty well sums up our thoughts in this time when our country is threatened as at no other time since the Civil War, and one party is hellbent on holding onto power at any cosrt:

The Democrats, of course, have accomplished some things while in power; health care reform in 2009 is an obvious example. But they are maddeningly stuck on the idea that taking the high road and extending an olive branch to Republicans – who have no intention of compromising – is what voters want. 

What Democratic voters would like to see from their party are results. A lot of Americans are working their asses off to fight back against Trump. If it's too much to ask for elected officials who will do the same, the Democratic Party in 2020 will once again be scratching its head and wondering why the voters it relies on most heavily didn't show up. 

Once more, elected Democrats: these are not normal times. The opposition went around the bend and over the cliff a long time ago.  They're now well underway in the process of deconstructing America and obstructing justice. If you can't wake up and find your footing even at this late stage, we're all in for a sh*tload of trouble.  That's why it's so important for us to not assume the fight is over when Democrats win.  In these instances, the fight's only begun.

Senate Democrats' "Reasonableness" Will Get Us All Screwed

Senate Democrats bringing knives pillows to a gunfight, as usual:

... Less than a week into the new administration, these Democrats are concluding that the best path back to power is not necessarily through steady opposition but through picking specific, fruitful fights. 

“We can’t very well be at a fever pitch on everything,” said Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii). “The door swings both ways in Washington. At some point we’re going to want a Democratic president to stand up a Cabinet. So we’re trying to be reasonable when the nominees are reasonable.”  (our emphasis)

"The door swings both ways in Washington"?  It mostly hits Democrats in the ass, Senator. Where have you been for the last 8 years of total obstruction?  And who's a "reasonable" nominee that 15 Democratic Senators voted to confirm (including, we're sad to say, Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Sherrod Brown)??  "Benny the Blade" Carson - who correctly admitted months ago he wasn't qualified for a Cabinet position!

Rather, we fully endorse the Golden Rule, McConnell corollary:  Do unto others as they have done to you for the last 8 years: Resist!

This is how you demoralize your base.  This is how you lose turnout. This is not reasonable behavior given the historic, existential challenge to our democracy posed by the Russo- Republicans. We're less than a week into Dystopia, and they're happy to play patty- cake with the thugs in the deluded hope they'll play nice if the tables are ever turned. In their cosseted Senate world, what will it take to get them to understand it's not business as usual when you're dealing with a deranged authoritarian whose agenda to dismember decades- old progressive achievements is well underway? If three million people in the street doesn't give these clueless people a spine, we're not sure what will.

Democratic base: Emergency, resist, hit the streets.
Elected Democrats: Whoa, let's not look unreasonable here.

— Schooley (@Rschooley) January 25, 2017

BONUS:  Jennifer Bendery has a good read on how the base is moving past a slow- footed Democratic leadership.

No, Bernie, No (Cont.) -- UPDATED

Without rehashing the disturbing events at the recent Nevada Democratic State Party Convention (you can read an account about it here, if you are unfamiliar), what's getting at least as much attention is the reaction of the Sanders campaign, and the candidate himself, to the violence, chaos and misogynist harassment that followed.  First, please read Sen. Sanders' statement in response to the incidents in Nevada.

Now, let's hear from three of Sanders' supporters about that response.

Markos Moulitsas:

So to recap, your supporters create so much havoc at the state party convention that convention hall officials shut down the event out of security concerns. Sanders responds with 1) stump speech and then more stump speech, 2) arguably valid point about painting too broad a brush about his campaign, 3) condemnation of poor behavior!, but 4) unfounded insinuation that other side started it with acts of violence against his campaign, 5) a litany of debunked claims about what transpired at the convention, and 6) the end. It’s everyone else’s fault, so while such violence is wrong, well, who could blame them? 

... Honestly, all this confusion and even attempts at mischief-making [from caucus and party rules] could be avoided with a saner system. BUT, that’s all a separate argument, apparently for a different time. Because right now, we can’t even get a clean, unmitigated condemnation of violent rhetoric, actions, and harassment from Bernie Sanders!

Harold Meyerson:

But now, what is arguably the most successful left campaign in the nation’s history stands in danger of being undone by an infantile fraction of its own supporters. The threats of violence, the shouting down of such lifelong liberals as Barbara Boxer, and the growing desire of some in the campaign, both on its periphery and at its core, to walk away from the real prospect of building left power by refusing to work with allies and potential allies in the Democratic Party—all these now threaten the campaign’s potential to bring lasting change to American politics. [snip]

... Threats by texts and by tweets will only cost Bernie votes in California and weaken him going into the convention. The perception that the Sanders campaign itself is indifferent to this kind of idiocy will hurt it even more.

So, Bros—do Bernie a favor. Grow up.

Martin Longman (BooMan):

... Sanders needs to inject some realism into this process. His supporters are fighting like hell for him, which is good. But they seem to think the stakes are still for the nomination. If they’re so riled up about a small handful of delegates that some of them are hurling chairs, shouting down senators, and issuing death threats, they need to hear from Sanders that all that nonsense isn’t going to accomplish anything and it needs to stop. 

Well, as Sen. Sanders' statement reveals, he's not ready to yank the Bernie Bros' chains quite yet.  That's not what we thought we were getting with Sen. Sanders who, rather than leveling with his supporters about the rules and procedures that have governed the primaries, seems eager to trash the Democratic Party as dishonest and corrupt.  As progressive Democrats for 46 years longer than Sen. Sanders has been, we deeply resent that tack.  It not only smacks of Naderism, but plays right into the hands of neo- fascist demagogue Donald "Rump" Trump, who's the real danger here.

So, yes, let's have some realism from the Sanders camp, not conspiracy theories and wild accusations that drive people away from the party.  The stakes are far, far too high.

BONUS:  Josh Marshall fingers the ultimate culprit.

BONUS II:  Steve M. draws an invidious comparison.

BONUS III:  Joy-Ann Reid says it's time to level with the Sanderistas, Bernie.

BONUS IV:  Paul Campos on letting go.

BONUS V:  Wonkette has had it with the misinformation.

UPDATE:  VP Joe Biden commented yesterday:

“That’s not Bernie,” Biden told reporters in Columbus, Ohio. “And what Bernie’s going to have to do if that happens again — he’s going to have to be more aggressive in speaking out about it.”

Sanders didn't acknowledge that, in and of themselves, separate from whatever unconnected violence happened months ago, the violent, sexist language and explicit threats ("someone will hurt you") are fucked up. That's goddamned disheartening and, really, a missed opportunity to talk about the meaning of non-violence. Instead of strong condemnation, Sanders gave his worst voters a pass. - See more at: http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/#sthash.Qhj9c7az.dpuf

Sanders didn't acknowledge that, in and of themselves, separate from whatever unconnected violence happened months ago, the violent, sexist language and explicit threats ("someone will hurt you") are fucked up. That's goddamned disheartening and, really, a missed opportunity to talk about the meaning of non-violence. Instead of strong condemnation, Sanders gave his worst voters a pass. - See more at: http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/#sthash.Qhj9c7az.dpuf

Yes, Bernie, Yes

Two days after the dust- up about whether Sen. Bernie Sanders believes Hillary Clinton is qualified to be President, Sen. Sanders was asked point- blank by NBC Today Show's Savannah Guthrie if, knowing what he now knows about what Clinton actually said, he wanted to revise his comments (with video embedded):

Guthrie asked Sanders if he overreacted to what Clinton said.

"Here’s the truth: I’ve known Hillary Clinton for 25 years. I respect Hillary Clinton. We were colleagues in the Senate," he responded. "And on her worst day, she would be an infinitely better president than either of the Republican candidates."

"She’s qualified?" Guthrie asked.

"Of course," Sanders replied.

Note to both the Sanders and Clinton campaigns:  It's over, so don't let your low- boil campaign staff, loose cannon surrogates or the malicious corporate media drag you back into a campaign that is more befitting of the Republican/ New Confederate/ Stupid/ Shooter's Party, K?

No, Bernie, No

Last night at a rally in Philadelphia, Sen. Bernie Sanders made a surprising declaration:

“Secretary Clinton appears to be getting a little bit nervous,” Sanders told a crowd of thousands at a rally at Temple University in Philadelphia Wednesday night. “She has been saying lately that she thinks that I am quote unquote, not qualified to be president,” Sanders began before ticking off a list he claimed actually made Clinton unqualified for the office — an attack both candidates had previously avoided.

“Now, let me, let me just say in response to Secretary Clinton, I don’t believe that she is qualified, if she is, through her super PAC, taking tens of millions of dollars in special interest donations,” Sanders said. “I don’t think that you are qualified if you get $15 million from Wall Street through your super PAC.” [Ed. note: by this standard, President Obama is unqualified to be President, too.]

Bernie then went on to tick off several other "reasons" why Hillary Clinton is not qualified to be President.  Setting aside the merits for a moment, there was one basic flaw in Bernie's statement:  Clinton never "quote unquote" said he was unqualified to be President.  Perhaps he or his staff believed the headline in the ratf*cking once great Washington Post Bezos Bugle that claimed "Clinton Questions Whether Sanders Is Qualified To Be President", a meretricious headline if there ever was one.  But the Clinton appearance that story "reported" on was an interview on the Squint and Meat Puppet MSNBC show.  Here's what really was said:

“I think he hadn’t done his homework and he’d been talking for more than a year about doing things that he obviously hadn’t really studied or understood, and that does raise a lot of questions,” she said, getting a swipe in over Sanders’ confused New York Daily News editorial board meeting while avoiding host Joe Scarborough’s language of qualifications. “Really what that goes to is for voters to ask themselves can he deliver what he’s talking about.”

“I think he himself doesn’t consider himself to be a Democrat,” Clinton responded after Scarborough pressed her about Sanders’ qualifications as the party standard-bearer. “You know, look, he’s raised a lot of important issues that the Democratic Party agrees with, income inequality first and foremost. But it’s up to the Democratic primary voters to make that assessment.”

Catch that?  At worst, Clinton questioned Sanders' qualification as a Democratic Party leader, a fair point, since there is an issue of whether or not Sanders has a commitment to the Democratic Party as an institution, given his (and apparently some of his followers') disinterest in helping downballot Democrats (and, no, it's not "buying" superdelegates, it's building the party at the State and local levels).  In the meantime, Sanders is doubling down on yesterday's comments.

As far as being qualified to be President, we can think of no other candidate in recent memory that is more qualified by virtue of over 25 years in the public arena at the State, national and international levels than Hillary Clinton.  You can dislike her, you can question or oppose her positions or votes in the past, but "unqualified?"  Um, nope.

This is not a time to be blowing up the party you aspire to lead.  This is a time to keep the debate to issues that affect people, not to be making disingenuous attacks on your opponent.  By the way, we criticize Clinton and her campaign for this, too.  As an example, wouldn't it have been better for Clinton to respond this way rather than give the ratf*cking media a chance to make something out of nothing:

"On our worst day... We are one hundred times better than any Republican candidate" -@BernieSanders #DemDebate pic.twitter.com/SG8msqGHB6

— Mashable News (@MashableNews) February 5, 2016

UPDATE: Looks like Hillary did just that (a day late).

Decided You Won't Vote? Here's Who Will Thank You (UPDATED)

Memo to any self- proclaimed "liberal" or "progressive" or "Democrat" or just any sentient human being who claims they won't be voting in November if (pick one) Hillary/ Bernie is the nominee, here's who'll be voting instead of you:

David Duke, a white nationalist and former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard, is urging the listeners of his radio program to volunteer and vote for Donald Trump.

“Voting for these people, voting against Donald Trump at this point is really treason to your heritage,” Duke said on the David Duke Radio Program Wednesday, referring to Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. “I’m not saying I endorse everything about Trump, in fact I haven’t formally endorsed him. But I do support his candidacy, and I support voting for him as a strategic action. I hope he does everything we hope he will do.”

Duke then urged his followers to call Trump’s campaign headquarters to volunteer.

“And I am telling you that it is your job now to get active. Get off your duff. Get off your rear end that’s getting fatter and fatter for many of you everyday on your chairs. When this show’s over, go out, call the Republican Party, but call Donald Trump’s headquarters, volunteer. They’re screaming for volunteers. Go in there, you’re gonna meet people who are going to have the same kind of mindset that you have.”

While the Boys in the Hoods and their like are out casting ballots this fall, anyone to the left of Willard Romney who decides to sit this one out in a fit of misguided pique or blinkered sense of ideological purity is a childish, privileged ass.  You'll be committing an act of unforgivable indecency, abandoning your birthright as a citizen and thereby empowering the David Dukes, the Sarah Palins, the Jerry Falwell, Jrs., the Phyllis Schlaflys, the Ted Nugents and all those knuckle- dragging thugs Stormtrumpers who beat up protesters at Trump rallies to determine the future course of America.

This isn't going to be a Tweedledee/ Tweedledum election.  It's going to be the most clearly defined, significant election in modern American history.  The outcome's going to affect millions of Americans and people around the world who aren't as privileged as you, who would suffer the consequences of a Rump presidency.  Declining to participate when the stakes are so high is an act of intellectual bankruptcy and moral cowardice.

And David Duke will thank you.

UPDATED:  Of course, Rump won't disavow DuKKKe's endorsement.

(Photo:  David Duke, "Wizard," former Republican candidate for Louisiana Governor, Senator and House of Representatives - and current Stormtrumper.)

Craven Democrats Join Despicable Republicans, Pass House Bill Discouraging (Muslim) Refugees

(click on image to enlarge)

(Rob Rogers, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)

You can amend that logo on Rob Rogers' lifeguard chair above, because there are despicable, craven Democrats playing into ISIS' hands, too:

Forty-seven House Democrats broke with the White House on Thursday to vote for a bill aimed at pausing admittance of Syrian and Iraqi refugees by adding requirements to an already lengthy screening process, and putting pressure on intelligence, law enforcement and homeland security officials to act with caution.  [snip]

The bill passed 289-137 --  with enough support to override a veto, should there be one.

Makes you proud.  Another reason we don't contribute to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee - you might actually help one of these unprincipled cowards get re-elected.

(In case you missed the connection, here's the tragic picture the cartoon was based on.)

UPDATE:  Here are the 47 (in italics).

Sen. Charles Schumer: Profile In Cowardice

Last night, New York Sen. Charles Schumer (?-Wall Street), in line to be the next leader of the Democrats in the Senate, stuck a knife in the back of his President:

Sen. Charles E. Schumer announced his opposition Thursday night to President Obama’s nuclear pact with Iran, becoming the most senior Democrat to break ranks with the administration.

The likely next leader of Senate Democrats, Schumer (N.Y.) said his three-week reading of the proposal left him unconvinced. “There is a strong case that we are better off without an agreement than with one,” he said, referring to the nuclear pact.

Normally, Schumer would want maximum publicity for himself (after all, it's said the most dangerous place in Washington is between Schumer and a TV camera).  But, because he's a coward, he chose to release his announcement while attention was diverted to last night's Republican debate cattle show, whose politicians he is now in league with.

 In a better world, this act of treachery would disqualify Schumer from any further consideration as Sen. Harry Reid's successor;  in fact, in a better world, Schumer would never have been considered a candidate to represent the Democratic Party in the Senate leadership to begin with.  But, it's well known why Schumer got the nod instead of the more reliable Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) -- he's an effective shake down artist fund raiser for fellow Senators, gathering big checks from the Wall Street millionaires that he then feels obliged to protect whenever he can.

This is a betrayal on a matter of the highest national security and the security of the region.  This is a betrayal that is not based on "principle" but on craven calculation.  This is a betrayal that should not be countenanced by Senate Democrats ... but it will be, because they find it extremely hard to bite the hand that feeds them. And that, perhaps, is the worst betrayal of all.

UPDATE:  MoveOn is pushing to have Schumer defeated for party leader in the Senate.

UPDATE II:  Here's part of what Carol Giacomo at the New York Times had to say:

New York’s senior senator, Chuck Schumer, has cast his lot with Republican presidential candidates, other hardliners and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in declaring his opposition to the nuclear agreement that President Obama and five other world leaders negotiated with Iran. Given Mr. Schumer’s wrong-headed and irresponsible decision, Democrats may want to reconsider whether he is the best candidate to be their next leader in the Senate, a job he desperately wants.

(Photo:  Sen. Schumer - "Have I not got a deal for you!")

Congressman Fattah Indicted

We would be remiss if we didn't note the following:

The U.S. Justice Department announced Wednesday that Rep. Chaka Fattah (D-PA) and four of his associates were indicted on federal corruption charges in connection with an alleged racketeering scheme.

Fattah was charged with bribery, fraud, and money laundering, among other crimes, in a 29-count indictment. Fattah's congressional District Director Bonnie Bowser, his former aide Karen Nicholas, campaign contributor Robert Brand and lobbyist Herbert Vederman were also charged in the indictment.

Just a reminder that, despite evidence to the contrary, no party has a complete monopoly on bad behavior.

Answer: Wall Street

Last night's vote in the House of Representatives on the so-called "cromnibus" -- for continuing resolution and omnibus appropriation bill -- was ostensibly to keep the government running beyond midnight.  But it represented all that is foul about our political system that is awash in special interest money and influence.  One of the provisions attached to the bill was pushed by the banking and finance industry, and it demolishes a key regulatory reform relating to banks using taxpayer money to make risky financial deals known as "swaps."  It was one of the provisions of the Dodd-Frank legislation that passed after the Wall Street meltdown in 2008, and which infuriated the high rollers on Wall Street.

Sadly, enough Democrats -- at the urging of the White House -- joined eager Republicans to pass the legislation with the big favor to the investment banks.  JPMorgan CEO Jaime Dimon personally lobbied House members to vote for the "cromnibus" with the gift to his industry included.  Many Dems were furious at the White House and other Dems for what Sen. Elizabeth Warren called "a vote for future taxpayer bailouts of Wall Street."  House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi added that she was "enormously disappointed" at the White House's decision not to fight the bankers' power play.  As Sen. Warren asked of her colleagues on the floor of the Senate this week, "Who do you work for—Wall Street or the American people?"  We have the answer.

BONUS:  Andy Borowitz frames it perfectly: "Citigroup To Move Headquarters to U.S. Capitol Building."

Villains Aren't Always Republicans

Frequent blind squirrel Dana Milbank has a look at someone who truly rates as a villain in the Darren Wilson/ Michael Brown shooting non-indictment:  St. Louis County District Attorney Bob McCulloch, a man who clearly has no business being in the business he's in:

As has been repeated often in recent weeks, a grand jury will indict a proverbial ham sandwich if a prosecutor asks it to. Alternatively, McCulloch could have brought charges through a judicial hearing; he chose not to do that, either. 

Asked Monday night whether he had any regrets about the way he handled the case, McCulloch replied, “No, not at all.” This shouldn’t be a surprise, given McCulloch’s history. That his father, a police officer, was killed by a black suspect doesn’t by itself disqualify him, but his record should have: not a single prosecution of a shooting by police in his 23 years on the job. Four times he presented evidence to a grand jury in such a case and didn’t get an indictment; now he can add a fifth.

It's appalling and rather sickening to note that McCulloch has run for office as a Democrat.  Another small-bore villain would be the shit-mountain conservaDem Governor of Missouri Jay "I'm The Schnook, Not The Crook" Nixon, who declined early on to name a Special Prosecutor to take the case out of the corrupted hands of McCulloch.  If these are what pass as Democrats in Missouri, we're afraid to look in that compost heap for what constitutes a Republican. Shame on them and shame on the rotten system they inhabit.

Today's Cartoon - The Ghost of Christmas Present

(click to enlarge)

(Drew Sheneman, via gocomics.com)

As they left Washington, Social Darwinist / Ayn Rand Republicans in the House of Representatives made sure to not extend unemployment benefits for 1.3 million long-term unemployed.  Because INCENTIVES!  Also FREEDUMB!  (To be honest, once again Democrats did not cover themselves in glory on this =cough=spineless=cough=.)  God bless help us, everyone.

Circular Firing Squads

There will always be a certain amount of second-guessing after an election defeat, and we certainly aren't immune from that impulse. Kevin Drum vents his frustration at statements by Dems offering their take on the Dems' recent losses. One might also look at what's going on on the Rethug side, with newly-elected teahadists making noise about not playing with the Rethug establishment. Teahadist fave Rep. Michele "I See Commies" Bachmann (Loon-MN) has already been snubbed by the House Rethug leadership in favor of nearly-as-mad (but more presentable) Rep. Jeb "Snarlin'" Hensarling (Rethug-Texas Republic) to transition incoming freshmen. Other Rethugs are blaming Winky You Betcha for the Rethugs' missed opportunity to take the Senate. So, it seems circular firing squads come in all political shades, though you won't be hearing this in the "liberal" mainstream media.

Bloomin' Tales

The New York Times has a disturbing report on Dem Senate candidate Richard "Bloomin' Tales" Blumenthal, who is running for the Connecticut seat being vacated by Sen. Chris Dodd. In essence, Bloomin' Tales has been neglecting to mention that he received several deferments during the Vietnam war, while portraying himself as having served in Vietnam when he actually served stateside in the Marine Reserves while the war was winding down. It's apparently more than just "misspeaking;" it's outright lying, if you read the NY Times account.

It's a shame that he thought he had to spin false tales to appeal to the public. Now he's faced with the task of walking back his military story and trying not to appear as another lying politician. It's astounding that in this age, Bloomin' Tales thought no one would check his background and statements for accuracy. Maybe these guys really do believe they're untouchable.

34 Dems No More

Here's the list of the 34 Democrats- in- name- only who sided with the lying Rethugs and voted against health insurance reform: Adler, Altmire, Arcuri, Barrow, Berry, Boren, Boucher, Bright, Chandler, Childers, A. Davis, L. Davis, Edwards, Herseth-Sandlin, Holden, Kissell, Kratovil, Lipinski, Lynch, Marshall, Matheson, McIntyre, McMahon, Melancon, Minnick, Nye, Peterson, Ross, Shuler, Skelton, Space, Tanner, Taylor, Teague.

Until such time as they can be voted out of office, no self-respecting Democrat should allow them to hold any chairmanship or position of authority, nor should they receive any campaign support - financial or otherwise. Why so harsh? On the defining issue for Democrats this year (or any other year), on the issue that was make- or- break for their Democratic president, on the issue that has been in the party's platform for 50-plus years, on the issue whose lines were drawn between what was right for the American people and what was right for the Rethugs and their insurance industry allies, these 34 dwarfs were on the wrong side of history. May they be the first to pay for their betrayal.

Dems Gone Wild

It hasn't been a good weekend for Democratic pols. First, we have NY Gov. David Paterson rumored to be on the verge of resigning his office over new allegations of sexual misconduct (noodling in public with a woman not his wife). Next, we have the Democratic nominee for Lt. Gov. of Illinois, Scott Lee Cohen, dropping out of the race less than a week after being nominated in the Democratic primary, after a history of sexual abuse and threatening a former girlfriend with a knife surfaced.

We hold Democratic politicians to a high standard simply because the Democratic Party is the party of government. (The Rethugs? How can nihilists be a party of government?) So, when Democrats in politics abuse the public trust, it's particularly disturbing and disheartening.