November 28, 2012

Spritual vibes SPIKE!1 Not the Mayas, it's Laura INGRAHAM *off* the air (alas, temporarily)

I'm no authority on religion, but I thought that Xtianity was supposed to be about turning other cheeks, hanging with the oppressed, peace, etc., despite a couple of thousand years of bloodshed in its name, so when one Laura INGRAHAM coverted to Catholicism back when a wave of FBI and NOVAKula also did, possibly all going into an Opus Dei cell, I thought she would be transformed into a gentle, loving, spiritual being, although lifelong Catholics O'LOOFAH, HANNITY, and the BUCHANANs show how a single monk's vitriol kicked off the Crusades. Bah, how gullible could I be?!1 Absolutely NO difference in her viciousness was detectable post-conversion. I even contacted the Little Sisters of the Poor to ask about their being her personal charity, and a dear Mother Superior replied that she has never heard of this person, so either Mother is sheltered or INGRAHAM is, one or the other.

What is the scuttlebutt on this Brit paper, Examiner, which provides this florid St Valentine (in keeping with the theme of sainthood and gore)?!1

*************QUOTE*************

http://www.examiner.com/article/laura-ingraham-dumps-talk-radio-for-modern-dance-and-xylophone

[font size=5]Laura Ingraham dumps talk radio for 'modern dance' and 'xylophone'[/font]

Tuesday, one of the most popular and entertaining conservative talk radio hosts of all time, best-selling author Laura Ingraham, announced with her signature tongue-in-cheek style that she was not renewing her contract with Talk Radio Network. After nine years of week-day broadcasts, Laura teased she was off to pursue her "first loves, modern dance and the xylophone." Ingraham promised, "In the highly unlikely event that these efforts do not prove fruitful; I intend to return to radio."

Following an article which announced her intentions by Associated Press, Ingraham quickly came through with additional and far more personal information on the "Shut up & Blog," feature of her home site. It was the perfect venue because it is a favorite, always chock-full of nuggets of conservative wisdom, under the subtitle, "Laura Unleashed." Everyone familiar with Laura's inclination to make great fun of herself, rolled their eyes, smiling, and continued to read to find out what Ingraham's serious plans were.

In a heartbeat, Laura followed with an exciting explanation that she was going to take advantage of an opportunity to explore expansion of her radio program, the "Laura Ingraham Show," previously carried by over 300 stations. In lieu of simply signing on to a new contract of the same ol', same ol', Laura was going to rethink and retool. ....

Followers who also are keen on Greta Van Susteren may have their fingers crossed that Fox recognizes another original in Laura, and comes up with a just-right format suitable to showcase Laura's natural vivacity, not simply a rehash of an old been there done that format, once tried. If so, it must include a team that mirrors Laura's intense drive for perfection. She's no shirker; and any team that supports her would need to be similarly driven. ....




http://www.lauraingraham.com/p/Jewelry/4-Way-Cross-Necklace/23125.html?dispid=214

59.95
This is a replica of the one Laura wears.
All net proceeds go to support the work of The Little Sisters of the Poor.
Yearly Premium Member's Price: $53.96
(A savings of $6.00)

*************UNQUOTE*************

November 14, 2012

The PETRAEUS twist on "War is a racket." Never should have been in Iraq; should been out Afg FAST

Soon after the Iraq attack took hold suddenly there were reports of missing millions and contracts with private "security" companies, mercernaries, then cute music videos of military personnel dancing in general foolishness, and all of it was swallowed under the guise of "patriotism" and blowing off steam for all the sacrifices.

Now that PETRAEUS has knocked himself off his pedestal, reports of how he was the perpetrator of the WMD mobile trailers stories have surfaced, barely, and not enough about what else his supposed "brilliance" and "genius" fueled the chickenhawks' voraciousness. Besides Abu Grahib and the several war crimes by others, his now questionable judgment has illustrated what has always been a serious defect in how the military works, an organizational flaw always potentially breaking out: How the military brown-nosing system can elevate incompetent jerks into positions, at all levels, of power over others, and at his level, melding with the political kind of ass-kissing feeding into one another.

Iraq should never have happened, but as soon as those music videos surfaced the thought was, "If they have time for that, they shouldn't be there." So now with PETRAEUS and the various people involved in the whole thing: If they had time for hours of jogging and doing book interviews and cocktail socializing, they never should have been in Iraq and Afghanistan should been over, like, 9 1/2 years ago and whatever is next needs to be VERY necessary and very surgical.

Not that civilian politicians are that good at much, but at least the military has *some* kind of civilian control over it.

November 10, 2012

Note to media yakkers: The Rethug party canNOT be re-made to appeal to minorities

The great Lesson of the election results according to the yakkers is that the Rethugs have to reach out to minorities and become inclusive. This is a variant on the Third Way imbeciles.

What is the point of having two parties that are "no difference"?!1 The Rethug Party of today exists for the purpose of representing Old, White Males, that is all.

If it were miraculously to include Choice, secularism, equal rights for all, etc., the racists and fundies would simply eject themselves to reassemble into another party for themselves.



The only minorities the Rethugs appeal to are new immigrants who already were wingnuts and/or oligarchic in their original countries (like Cuba) and/or what their latest buzzword is, "aspirational," meaning they are starved for material and social "success" in the Robber Baron sense.

November 7, 2012

My personal, misc. housekeeping post-election: First, RIP Seamus.

#1 item is retiring the signature line, "*I* am Seamus!1 We're ALL Seamus now!1" that I have been using since it became clear that Mittens would be the opponent. (And the "I Voted" avatar.)

Once last night's victory was done, I made it a point to surf past the networks and MSNBC and monitored Faux and Faux-Business, where CAVUTO and IMUS were on, then stayed up for the main event, Mittens' concession. Long live Seamus!1

I was thrilled with MacCASKILL and WARREN and in the thrill of things posted "MacCASKILL-WARREN 2016" and was promptly "rewarded" with a post saying, "MacCASKILL?!1 Have you seen her voting record?!1" to which I replied, "It takes a Conservative Dem to make inroads into Red territory." We need ALL Dems.

This morning I continued gathering nuggets, usually from the opposition, but on Morning Scabs, Danny DEUTSCH said that the Rethug brand is hostage to the TeaBaggers and needs to ditch the Old White Males direction and readjust to Hispanics, and that naming window dressing Cubans RUBIO and Ted CRUZ won't cut it for them.

But the hateful (to me) Don IMUS, whom I've happily ignored since he got kicked off MSNBC and replaced by Morning Scabs, has actually in the past couple of months been REFRESHING compared to Joe SCABS. Actually, despite his indisputable wingnutism, the line always applied to whassername Maureen DOWD from the NYT, "She hates everybody," applies also to him. And this morning he and his stooges were laughing their asses off at KKKarl, Dick MORRIS, and other wingnut yakkers and pollsters they named, but his mocking of MORRIS was particularly delicious. They brought up the toesucking, then said that "since he enjoys being ABJECTLY HUMILIATED so much he's probably ENJOYING" how wrong his predictions (continue) were.

And then, without a mawkish introduction, he played "I'll Stand By You" by The Pretenders as a consolation to wingnuts.



This morning, the horrible wingnut Don IMUS played this song as a consolation to wingnuts for their loss. I’m looking it from the other side, which is that I am not a personality cultist, so it’s not about OBAMA, it’s about the Democratic agenda, and it was Hispanics, Blacks, women, unions, and Gays who gave him the win and Hispanics above all have gotten less than anybody else, with unions close behind. Except for health care, Gays with the military and marriage have gotten more than anybody, not entirely with his whole support. The biggest potential victory is for the Supreme Court, although the likely vacancies will only be replacements for the Lib side, so the stalemate is likely to stay. Actually, Hispanics were Bill CLINTON’s biggest supporters during the fake impeachment, yet got little from him either, although he and Hillary have passed by my house at least four times over the years picking up cash from the local construction dude, sometimes without their stopping to give speeches to any crowd. So these four years, OBAMA needs to be living up to this song for all of us, some more than others.

*************QUOTE*************

[font size=5]I'll Stand By You lyrics © EMI Music Publishing[/font]
Songwriters: HYNDE, CHRISTINE / KELLY, THOMAS / STEINBERG, BILLY

Oh, why you look so sad?
Tears are in your eyes
Come on and come to me now
Don't be ashamed to cry
Let me see you through
'cause I've seen the dark side too
When the night falls on you
You don't know what to do
Nothing you confess
Could make me love you less

I'll stand by you
I'll stand by you
Won't let nobody hurt you
I'll stand by you

So if you're mad, get mad
Don't hold it all inside
Come on and talk to me now
Hey, what you got to hide?
I get angry too
Well I'm a lot like you
When you're standing at the crossroads
And don't know which path to choose
Let me come along
'cause even if you're wrong

I'll stand by you
I'll stand by you
Won't let nobody hurt you
I'll stand by you
Take me in, into your darkest hour
And I'll never desert you
I'll stand by you

And when...
When the night falls on you, baby
You're feeling all alone
You won't be on your own

I'll stand by you
I'll stand by you
Won't let nobody hurt you

I'll stand by you
Take me in, into your darkest hour
And I'll never desert you
I'll stand by you
I'll stand by you
Won't let nobody hurt you
I'll stand by you
Won't let nobody hurt you
I'll stand by you

*************UNQUOTE*************

November 3, 2012

Hah!1 The local radio wingnut was CONCERNED about how polarized we are!1 My e-mail to him

(This dude's family used to own the station and he used to have a wingnut firebreathing show. They eventually went all LIMBOsevic, O'REILLY, HANNITY, SCHLESSINGER, INGRAHAM, BecKKK, etc.)

******* My e-mail to him: ******

Your theme on Thursday when I monitored your radio carnival was: “Why have we gotten so polarized?!”

This is rich on quite a few levels. But for starters, I can put a precise date on the polarization, which is: When LIMBOsevic went national. I mean, these things are cyclical and have happened before, like when GOLDWATER was a firebreather before his mellowing, and the BIRCHers, and before them Father COUGHLIN firebreathing on FDR, and on and on.

But I remember the “good” old days of K***, good with the exception of you in your firebreathing incarnation. Yaaas, you personally have toned yourself down because ****** replaced you and unexpectedly surpassed you in virulence (and you’re getting OLD?). The rest of the day was the mild doctors Joy BROWN, Dean EDELL, and David VISCOTT, although VISCOTT did have a bit of an EDGE on him.

I remember the SHOCK of even the theme song of LIMBOsevic’s, then his first six weeks of spelling his name, and his totally focused strategy of excising ALL “FRINGE” and WACKO callers with his purpose of making Wingnutism RESPECTABLE. Even you, wingnut that you are, were TIMID about swinging your whole line-up over to him, finally taking the decision to run him LIVE for the whole three hours and deleting the local Noon reporting. In the next few years all the MILD yakkers were ditched in favor of the whole wingnut enchilada.

So the first level of JOKE coming from you is NOW whining about how POLARIZED we are, when you and your outlet locally have done all you could (with your 50 audience) to MAKE IT SO. Your picayune outlet is a microcosm of the national polarization. That was the late ‘80s. Then LIMBOsevic (again) was instrumental in inflicting GINGRICH and his bloodthirsty horde on the country.

LIMBOsevic is all about SCORCHED EARTH, NO compromise, all or nothing. You have said before that you don’t agree with EVERYTHING he says and that GINGRICH’s personal immorality repels you, which is the slimmest reed that I give you credit for. But your dulcet tone and telling callers to be NICE and RAYGUN’s SMILE are the lipstick on the pig: Your ideology is HORRENDOUS for people and pretty facades are POTEMKIN.

November 2, 2012

A question regarding Single Issue voters, for a segment called "Ask the Wingnut Wizard"

Here’s a question: Single issues are a big wingnut wedge. Like, the Catholic church might well share social justice and social welfare issues totally with the Dem agenda, but the SINGLE ISSUE of Choice sways a fair number of them into the Rethug column. Wingnuts often guilt that Catholics ought to be TOTALLY anti-Choice or else not pretend to be Catholics.

But this election cycle wingnuts have been trying to debunk the Lib strength with women by claiming that women are NOT so simple as to be swayed by the single issue of “women’s (contraception; reproductive rights)” but instead are MULTI-FACETED, are household budget managers, concerned and affected by the economy, work, etc.

So, Wingnut Wizard, which is it, manipulate and exploit the single issues gambit or NOT? I'm SO confused!1

November 1, 2012

I'm posting this in all the threads like this I see (about 1/2doz so far). Here:

Sunday, John Mc5PLANES (McCAIN who crashed about 5 planes) was whining that the requests for security were so known that the ambassador had "even" told HIM about it, so it stands to reason that Mc5PLANES did NOTHING!1

And the key meme of the day is: "Somebody told me this is as bad as Watergate, well, nobody DIED in Watergate."

I don't know why Mc5PLANES and GINGRICH are seen as desirable guests for media yakking.


Wingnuts are pinning their hopes on PETRAEUS, but PETRAEUS has Romnesia!1

Wingnut outlets are aflood with hopes that PETRAEUS is “throwing OBAMA under the bus” and that he says “It wasn’t me” (who supposedly denied requests for help.

Well, that wasn’t what he was saying when he sent early briefings to Congress critters or when he testified, and a Rethug critter says there was no daylight between what he and what the Administration were saying at the time.

But the backdrop for all of their faux outrage is: TeaBagger congress critters blocked funds for State security since 2010. RAYGUN cut and ran when 299 marines & other personnel were bombed in Beirut; should he have FORESEEN it or responded in kind within an HOUR?!1 Besides that he negotiated with and armed terrorists. The Cuban 1st generation Exiles/CIA-ers hated JFK/Dems for their claims for military air support. VFW bars were frequent scenes of ground combat vets griping against Air Force vets for generically/anecdotally not providing air support upon IMMEDIATE demands.


*************QUOTE**********

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57535773/cia-saw-possible-terror-ties-day-after-libya-hit-ap/

CIA saw possible terror ties day after Libya hit: AP (my/UTUSN edit:: “But...”)

AP/ October [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]19[/FONT], 2012, 5:18 AM

.... Such [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]raw[/FONT] intelligence reports by the CIA on the ground would normally be [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]sent first to[/FONT] analysts at the headquarters in [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Langley[/FONT], Va., for vetting and comparing against other intelligence derived from eavesdropping drones and satellite images. [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Only then[/FONT] would such intelligence generally be [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]shared with the White House and later, Congress[/FONT], a process that can take [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]hours, or days[/FONT] if the intelligence is coming only from one or two sources who may or may not be trusted.

U.S. intelligence officials say [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]in this case, the delay[/FONT] was due in part to the time it took to analyze various conflicting accounts. One official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to discuss the incident publicly, explained that it "was clear [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]a group of people gathered[/FONT] that evening" in Benghazi, but that [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]the early question was "whether extremists took over a crowd or they were the crowd."[/FONT] ....

[FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]"The early sense from the intelligence community differs from what we are hearing now[/FONT]," Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said. "It ended up being pretty [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]far afield[/FONT], so we want to figure out why ... though we don't want to deter the intelligence community from sharing their best first impressions" after such events in the future.

[FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]"The intelligence briefings we got a week to 10 days after were consistent with what the administration was saying,"[/FONT] said Rep. William Thornberry, [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]R[/FONT]-Texas, a member of the House Intelligence and Armed Services committees. Thornberry would not confirm the existence of the early CIA report but voiced skepticism over [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]how sure[/FONT] intelligence officials, including CIA Director David [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Petraeus, seemed of their original account[/FONT] when they briefed lawmakers on Capitol Hill. ....

Two officials who witnessed Petraeus' closed-door testimony to lawmakers in the week after the attack said that during questioning he acknowledged that there were some intelligence analysts who disagreed with the conclusion that an unruly mob angry over the video had initiated the violence. But those officials said [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Petraeus[/FONT] did not mention the CIA's early eyewitness reports. He did [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]warn legislators that the account could change as more intelligence was uncovered[/FONT], they said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the hearing was closed. ....

********UNQUOTE*******