IMPALIN’ — Stop Sarah Palin for President in 2012

DES MOINES, Iowa — It’s been six months since voters handed Barack Obama the White House, and in the minds of a lot of Iowa activists that means only one thing: It’s time to start the campaign again. 2012 already? Yes, 2 1/2 years before Iowans gather for their first-in-the-nation precinct caucuses, early presidential campaigning has begun. “We had a brief pause for two or three months when people went somewhere warm, and then it starts again,” said Richard Schwarm, a Lake Mills lawyer and former state Republican Party chairman. “Most of the old war horses hear the bell and start responding again.” Potential Republican candidates who have visited the state include Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who won the GOP caucuses in 2008. More politicians have trips planned, starting with Nevada Sen. John Ensign on Monday, followed by Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour and another appearance by Huckabee. Several other high-profile Republicans thought to be considering presidential runs, including Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, haven’t visited Iowa since the election. Of course, politicians typically say their stops in Iowa aren’t related to any presidential ambitions. Ensign, for example, will speak as part of a conservative lecture series designed to define the Republican Party heading into next year’s congressional elections. Huckabee will be the draw at a fundraiser for Bob Vander Plaats, a likely candidate for governor. Phil Roeder, chief spokesman for the Iowa Democratic Party during the 1988 election cycle, said there’s a long tradition of politicians traveling to Iowa to help others. “It’s the smoke screen,” Roeder said. “Every candidate has to keep the expectations in check and at the same time it’s a great way to make friends in Iowa. If you’re here to help others and not just help yourself, it gives you a good list to go back to when it’s your turn.” Or as Eric Woolson, a GOP strategist who headed Huckabee’s successful Iowa campaign, put it, “That’s the nature of Iowa and the political schedule.” Campaigning for the caucuses begins earlier with each presidential election cycle, but interest among Republicans could be especially strong this time because of last year’s example. That’s when an underdog first-term senator from Illinois patiently built a huge network of supporters in Iowa, then was propelled by a surprising caucus victory toward the Democratic nomination and ultimately the White House. “We only have to look at somebody named President Barack Obama to realize that if you do well in Iowa a lot of other pieces fall into place,” said Republican strategist Bob Haus. “They take their role very seriously, so candidates take Iowa very seriously.” It doesn’t always work that way. In last year’s caucuses, Huckabee emerged with a big triumph. But he never could shake his underdog status and finally quit when it became clear that Arizona Sen. John McCain would gain the Republican nomination. The coming presidential campaign cycle almost certainly will be a Republican show because it’s unlikely any Democrat will challenge Obama’s run for a second term. Obama has visited Iowa once since becoming president and has maintained much of his campaign infrastructure in the state. In his trip Monday, Ensign plans to focus on western Iowa, where Republicans dominate. Ensign, a veterinarian, will tour Trans Ova Genetics, an animal reproduction and cloning company in Sioux Center, and will make a perennial campaign stop, the Wells Blue Bunny Ice Cream Parlor in Le Mars. That evening, he’ll give his speech in Sioux City. “I think he’s a rising star in the conservative movement and I can’t wait to introduce him to Iowa,” said Tim Albrecht, an organizer for the American Future Fund, an Iowa-based conservative advocacy group. Albrecht, a former staffer for Romney during his presidential run, said Iowa is the perfect place for potential candidates to hone their message. Romney visited Iowa repeatedly before declaring his candidacy, then held events in the state almost weekly in the months leading to the caucuses. “You can’t find a more fertile soil in America to begin growing the new conservative movement,” Albrecht said. If it’s obvious why candidates can’t resist heading to the heartland, what about Iowans? Don’t they ever tire of the attention? Apparently not. “I think people genuinely think it’s fun, it’s interesting, it’s exciting,’” said Roeder, now a spokesman for Democratic Gov. Chet Culver. “People take it pretty darn seriously.” Lexi Wornson, a Des Moines business owner, agreed. “A lot of Iowans feel they can not only play a role, but they expect to play a role,” she said. For some, Iowa’s place in American politics means a livelihood for those who run and staff campaigns, as well as businesses that cater to campaign gatherings. “It puts food on the table,” said Democratic activist Brad Anderson. “The reality is, it’s been half a year since the election, they’ve had six or seven months to recover and I think people on the Republican side are ready to start the game again.” Schwarm, the former state GOP chairman, said the state benefits by the never-ending campaigning. “The activists are interested in going out to talk to them and it builds energy and it builds fundraising,” he said. “It’s good for the economy.” Even if they wanted to delay campaigning until, say, a year before the caucuses, Drake University political science professor Dennis Goldford said Iowans wouldn’t have much luck. “Whether or not Iowans get tired of it, the fact remains that Iowa is still first in the nation until one or both parties determine otherwise,” said Goldford. “Politicians certainly have to fight on the terrain they confront. That terrain starts in Iowa.”

Read more here:
Iowa 2012: Campaign Season Has Already Returned

Just out of curiosity and not as a matter of personal interest, do you think there’s any truth to reports in the news media that President Obama is unhappy with his vice president because of his outspoken nature and penchant for sticking his foot in his mouth? J. Biden, Wilmington, DE Dear Mr. Biden: As far as I can tell, there probably is some truth to such reports, but I wouldn’t worry about it as long as Dick Cheney is still around. Just out of curiosity and not as a matter of personal interest, do you think there’s any truth to reports in the news media that Colin Powell is unhappy with me because of some of the things I’ve said about him recently? R. Cheney, address withheld. Dear Mr. Cheney: I can’t imagine why Gen. Powell would be upset with you just because you said he has already left the Republican Party and you don’t know if he is still a Republican. Why don’t you invite him to go hunting with you? I can’t seem to convince people that I wasn’t briefed about the CIA’s harsh interrogation methods at Guantanamo, including such terrible things as waterboarding, when I was a member of the House Intelligence Committee. And now that I am Speaker of the House, the Republicans, and even some Democrats, think I wasn’t telling the truth. What do you think I should say? Nancy Pelosi, Washington DC Dear Madam Speaker: I would suggest you take your cue from what Franklin Roosevelt’s press secretary Steve Early said when he asked FDR what he should tell reporters about a controversial statement he had made in a speech in Pittsburgh. FDR said, “Steve, tell them I’ve never been in Pittsburgh.” I recently gave up a good job in the Senate to become secretary of State, which I enjoy very much. But my husband insists that I take him along whenever I represent the U.S. in my foreign travels. He seems to think that he knows more about my job than I do. Any ideas about how I can gently persuade him to back off? H. Clinton, Washington DC Dear Madam Secretary: Actually, your husband probably does know more about your job than you do, but maybe you could ask President Obama to appoint him as a special envoy to a country like Haiti, where he would never be heard from again. There have been a lot of different proposals about how we can rescue the banking and investment community and the automobile industry, but I haven’t heard anybody suggest a better way thanI have suggested, which is to spend three or four trillion dollars to bail them out. Do you think the American people will go along with this? T. Geithner, Washington DC Dear Mr. Geithner: I’m not an economist or financial expert, but I don’t think I would make Bernie Madoff the poster child for your plan for economic recovery. I am having some trouble adjusting to life in the Senate after running for president last year, and wonder if you have any suggestions about how I can get back in the groove, so to speak? Senator John McCain, R-Arizona Dear Senator McCain: Well, I guess you could begin by admitting that your choice of Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska was a miscalculation the size of Mount McKinley. Ever since I said that Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama’s nominee as the first Hispanic member of the U.S. Supreme Court, should step down because she’s let her ethnicity and experience as a Latina influence her decisions as a judge, I’ve sensed that this is not going over well with most American. Do you think that I should back off? N. Gingrich, Washington DC Dear Mr. Gingrich: Well, as I told you after you shut down the federal government when you were Speaker of the House of Representatives in 1995, you might think twice before going on late night TV talk shows with a live snake wrapped around your neck. After reading about all the problems newspapers and magazine are having trying to survive these days, I’m concerned about the future of print journalism. Do you think Matt Drudge and Arianna Huffington represent the future of American journalism? A. Sulzberger Jr., New York NY Dear Mr. Sulzberger: I wouldn’t presume to advise you on how to compete in the Brave New World of the Internet, but I suggest you might want to think about changing your slogan of “All the News That’s Fit to Print.” I have some nuclear weapons I’m offering for sale in the hope that it will impress the world that my country is important. I wonder if there’s any market for them these days? K. Il Sung, Pyongyang, North Korea Dear Mr. Nut Case: Why don’t you ask the millions of your citizens who are starving if they would like to trade them for food?

See the original post: 
Al Eisele: Answering the mail from HuffPost readers

Bravo announced this week that it is expanding its Real Housewives franchise to the nation’s capital, with its “influential players, cultural connoisseurs, fashion sophisticates and philanthropic leaders.” Have they been here lately? The best-dressed aide on Capitol Hill would horrify the lowest grip at Universal Studios. There are no cultural connoisseurs. Congressional leaders can be dragged to the Kennedy Center once a year for a televised gala, and they leave early. For women, fashion is low heels and the Hillary Clinton pantsuit; for men, any tie that doesn’t have a soup stain. As for philanthropy, there is no Bill Gates or Ford Foundation. The Rockefeller we have is in the Senate, lives quietly and leaves handing out the family fortune to relatives. But we do have influential players, and the most influential of all sells everything from magazines to bobblehead dolls. Barack Obama has made Washington interesting again — young, smart, out and about. He has a beautiful wife, who he appears to be in love with, and two photogenic daughters, who appear amazingly well-behaved. But that doesn’t translate into fodder for Bravo. Let’s face it: Michelle Obama isn’t one of the 25 housewives on Bravo’s short list. And none of the mini-Michelles in the White House — like Sarah Feinberg, the blond and beautiful aide to Rahm Emanuel — would think of taking a call from a reality TV producer. A potential assistant deputy undersecretary of something someday, she’s not taking any risks. To be wild and crazy in the West Wing is to tape a segment for PBS’s News Hour . As for ratings, must-watch TV in D.C. is Timothy Geithner testifying before the House Banking Committee and making the market arrow in the corner of the screen go up — or down — 100 points. See the cameras click as Nancy Pelosi in her sensible suit accuses a CIA briefer of lying. Tune in as Dick Cheney expels former Secretary of State Colin Powell, one of the most admired people in America, from the Republican party on Face the Nation , Washington’s version of American Idol . What’s won the Real Housewives high ratings is in short supply here: obvious wealth, shopping as sport, conspicuous beauty and indulgent husbands. It’s not North Korea’s nuclear bomb and TARP. Squabbles over Sarbanes-Oxley rock our world. In the real Washington, housewives don’t have the discretionary income to be interesting. They are widowed by husbands working on — or living off of — Capitol Hill or the White House, virtually raising the children alone. They try to snatch a few minutes listening to National Public Radio while driving the carpool in a futile effort not to be ignored at the rare cocktail party where someone might deign to talk to them. If they have money, they can’t hire help because their husbands don’t want a nanny problem should they be face vetting as a nominee to run Treasury. Which brings us to another deficit Real Housewives needs to consider: Job lust is the only kind of lust here. We’re too busy for sex, burning the midnight oil reading up on new rules to curb credit default swaps or watching Jon Stewart to see if a colleague is being lampooned. And the morning. Forget it. We’re speed-clicking the remote dropping in on Morning Joe and Today while reading three papers to make sure we can say yes when asked if we saw that piece on land-use planning while at the gym, where we’re working off the slabs of rare roast beef served at not-to-be-missed fundraisers. The only sign of sex is the kind over which politicians lose their jobs. Which brings us to the city’s escort business which as the Emperor’s VIP Club patronized by Client #9 shows is thriving. It’s so vibrant you would think Congress was subsidizing it, like soybeans. To duplicate the drama of the other real wives, Bravo would have to go outside the Beltway where McMansions, day spas, manipulated husbands, spoiled children, frozen smiles and country clubs abound. As a final cautionary note, let me refer Bravo executives to the experience of the most famous Washington housewife, often called the most beautiful movie star in the world, Elizabeth Taylor. In 1976 she made John Warner, a former Navy secretary who would go on to the U.S. Senate, her sixth husband. Even she couldn’t cut through the singular focus of politicians on the make. At parties, she would stand alone as guests proved power is the ultimate aphrodisiac by making a beeline for Henry Kissinger. She knew she was in the wrong town when a photographer aiming his camera at a four-star admiral talking with Warner asked Taylor to step out of the picture. The two divorced in 1982, but not before Taylor complained that she gained 50 pounds watching old movies and eating hot fudge sundaes alone, waiting for Warner to get home. I wish Bravo the best of luck. And I’ll be sure to tune in, as long as it doesn’t conflict with C-SPAN’s Journalist Roundtable. Originally published on Bloomberg News .

Here is the original: 
Margaret Carlson: Real Housewives of D.C. Can’t Beat C-SPAN

Thursday was a fairly busy day on the campaign trail, so let’s get after it: THE BATTLE FOR THE HOUSE: NRCC Targets Candidates on Pelosi Swing State Report tells us that the NRCC is running ads and robocalls in over a dozen Democratic districts castigating Democrats who did not vote to launch an investigation on the Pelosi/CIA “issue”. This move is curious on two ends. For one thing, if there was a public clamoring for an investigation into Pelosi, it’s been a very, VERY quiet clamoring. For another, once again , we see some curious targets on the list: Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin (SD), Vic Snyder (AR), and, in what must be the strangest of them all, Steny Hoyer (MD). It is a bit tough to figure out exactly what the NRCC is trying to accomplish here. Maybe they are trying to match the NRSC for the most creative way to blow through their money . NATIONAL: Right Wing Meme Destroyed, Part 293 Recently, the right wing noise machine has been all atwitter with a grand conspiracy theory that the Chrysler dealerships that were closing were the victims of a political hitjob. The dealerships being shuttered, they argued, were more likely to donate to Republican candidates than Democratic ones. It does not take Nate Silver very long to pop that particular balloon. AK-GOV: Sarah Palin To Get Legitimate Democratic Challenger This is good news for Democrats—one of the strongest political figures in their party up north—Ethan Berkowitz—is signaling that he is going to challenge Sarah Palin for Governor. Palin would start the race as a favorite (this IS Alaska, after all), but this means that she will not have an easy go of it if she seeks a second term in the governor’s mansion. FL-GOV: GOP Dream Of A Cleared Primary Going Away? Paula Dockery, a state senator in central Florida, has not slammed the door shut on a run for Governor . This has to be solemn news for the Florida GOP, who just last week appeared to clear the field for former Congressman and current attorney general Bill McCollum. There is still a chance, however, that Dockery will jump into the open-seat contest in FL-12 (where Adam Putnam is seeking a statewide office). FL-SEN: Rubio Potentially Gets His First Campaign Issue The deepening rift between the center and the right in the Sunshine State may get magnified by this move. Charlie Crist , in his duties as governor, signed a new budget that raised taxes by $2.2 billion. Most of that came from a new tobacco tax. Many Kossacks might applaud that kind of revenue enhancement, but something tells me that you don’t win a Republican primary in Florida by making tax decisions that would be applauded by people at the Daily Kos. More problematic for Crist—he just signed a “no-tax” pledge for Senate candidates earlier this month. IA-GOV: Governor Culver To Get GOP Challenger Soon? Iowa’s Democratic Governor, Chet Culver, has been looking at a raft of potential challengers, but no serious contender had elected to pull the trigger and enter the race. Until now, perhaps: Ballot Box , the election blog for Governing Magazine, is reporting that Christopher Rants, former speaker of the Iowa House, is prepping to get into the race. MI-GOV: Cherry on Top of Two Leading GOP Candidates EPIC-MRA is out with a new poll of the 2010 governors race in Michigan. In a Democratic primary, Debbie Stabenow would be unbeatable. She is unlikely to get into the race, though, meaning that Lt. Gov John Cherry is the betting favorite to be the Democratic nominee. He fares decently against the top two contenders for the GOP nomination, leading attorney general Mike Cox by one (36-35), and Congressman Peter Hoekstra by three (36-33). The only GOP candidate that leads Cherry is Sec. of State Terri Lynn Land (34-35), but she is currently third in the GOP field. NJ-GOV: Just Released Poll On GOP Primary Gives Christie Double-Digit Lead On the same day that the Daily Kos looked at the general election in New Jersey, Rasmussen explored the Republican Primary . Rasmussen has U.S. Attorney Chris Christie with an eleven-point edge (46-35) over Steve Lonegan. NY-GOV: Is Sen. Gillibrand Tipping Someone’s Hand In Governors Race? Ben Smith at Politico makes an interesting catch: last night, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand implied that there would not be a contested primary for the governor’s race in New York. Which begs the question: does this mean that Andrew Cuomo isn’t making a run for the governor’s mansion after all (with a raft of people lining up to replace him as attorney general, according to SSP )?? Or does it mean that Governor Paterson is reading the poll numbers on the wall, and is looking to parachute out? NY-SEN: McCarthy Endorses Bloomberg: Tips Hand on US Senate Race? This could be a case of overthinking , but it would seem that Long Island Rep. Carolyn McCarthy just gave her clearest indication that she is NOT going to challenge Kirsten Gillibrand for her U.S. Senate seat. McCarthy has endorsed Michael Bloomberg, the incumbent who is nominally Independent but will almost certainly have the backing of NYC Republicans, in his re-election bid. Hard to imagine that slighting the eventual Democratic candidate will be a very effective way of getting into the good graces of NYC Democrats, who will be crucial in any statewide primary. This is especially true, given that Gillibrand is likely to lock down the upstate NY vote. (h/t: DC’s Political Report ) PA-SEN: Busy Day In Pennsylvania, Post-Sestak The day after Joe Sestak upset the apple cart and announced his intention to challenge incumbent Democratic Sen. Arlen Specter, there is much to report here. One key item in the news is not so swell for Pat Toomey. Although polling released today showed him gaining on Specter, he apparently will have to wait on an endorsement from the NRSC . Sen. John Cornyn, the NRSC head, said today that any endorsement of Toomey would be premature. I am sure that Marco Rubio fans in Florida were just THRILLED to hear that from Cornyn. Also,  take a quick read at Stu Rothenberg’s smackdown in Roll Call of Toomey ally Brian Wild, who wrote a piece for the newspaper about Toomey’s prospects. Finally, in news that will surprise no one, Greg Sargent reported today that all of the Democrats’ big guns are apparently standing by Specter. PA-07: Rumors Abound In the Newest Open House Seat With Joe Sestak apparently leaving the House seat he occupied for two terms, the speculation has already begun on who will replace him in the suburban Pennsylvania 7th district. Democratic speculation is coalescing around state Rep. Bryan Lentz, an Iraq War veteran who briefly was in the race in 2006 and stepped aside when Sestak got into the race. Republicans, meanwhile, are talking up Steven Welch, a biopharmaceutical executive. PA-07 is a district that seems to be trending Democratic. Republican for decades, it went for John Kerry by six points (53-47) and for Barack Obama by thirteen points (56-43). VA-GOV: Great Analysis of Undecideds, And Potential Trouble For McAuliffe? Two items emerging today on the Virginia governors race, where the primary is now just twelve days away. Tom Jensen at PPP gets linked to again , because he does a splendid analysis today looking at WHO the undecided voters are in the Democratic Primary. Most of the news, for what it is worth, looks good for Creigh Deeds. Terry McAuliffe, on the other hand, gets a spate of bad news from the Washington Post today, where an interview with Ralph Nader leads to an interesting accusation: Nader accuses McAuliffe (who was head of the DNC at the time) with offering Nader money to back out of nineteen key battleground states in the 2004 elections. McAuliffe’s people are chalking this up to Nader’s incessant craving of media attention. The allegations, however, we not specifically denied by the McAuliffe campaign.

See the original post:
Polling and Political Wrap-Up, 5/28/09

The Alaska Personnel Board, clearly frustrated with the pile of ethics complaints filed against Gov. Sarah Palin, wants to publicize the cost of dealing with them. “We’ve spent pretty close to about a third of a million dollars, and it’s getting to be really expensive,” said Al Tamagni, a member of the board. More on Sarah Palin

Read the original:
Palin Ethics Complaints "Getting To Be Really Expensive"

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Another ethics complaint filed against Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has been dismissed. The State Personnel Board on Wednesday dismissed the argument that Palin violated the Executive Branch Ethics Act in furthering her national political aspirations. The complaint alleged that the governor used state staff to publish a press release announcing Palin as John McCain’s running mate and that state resources were used for partisan political purposes. The board, following the recommendation of an independent counsel, threw out the complaint for lack of merit. The governor’s office said it was the 13th ethics complaint filed against the governor or her staff that has been resolved with no finding of a violation of the state ethics law. Bill McAllister, the governor’s spokesman, said Palin was “grateful” the board took a “rational approach to these matters.” More on Sarah Palin

Read the rest here:
Palin Ethics Complaint Dismissed By Alaska Board

In January, I spoke with a member of the Alaska Joint Armed Services Committee. He was really excited about the Memorial Day commemoration being planned; The Decoration of Honor Ceremony. Alaska is only the second state to have such a service, and I was honored to be invited. From the Program: The Alaska Decoration of Honor was created to recognize the Alaskan service members who have been killed in action or in support of combat. The medal is awarded on behalf of the people of the State of Alaska to show our gratitude to the families of those who gave the ultimate sacrifice in serving our state and nation. The USAF Band of the Pacific played. The US Military Color Guard presented flags from all branches of service. The Discovery Theater was packed with families of the last 50 years of Alaska’s fallen soldiers. Their loss was palpable. Their pride was present. Their tears were flowing. The Generals were solemn. Regardless of the branch of military service or what war claimed their lives, the Alaska servicemen and women were honored. Their families were presented with the Alaska Decoration of Honor Medal. Jon van Zyle, a Vietnam Veteran, local and nationally renowned artist, donated his time and talents in designing the Alaska Decoration of Honor medal. It was stunning. “It is an honor to be a part of this ceremony,” Senator Bill Wielechowski, co-chair on the committee said. “All Alaskans should be proud of the sacrifices that have been made by these men and women in service to our nation.” It was a beautiful ceremony, appreciated by the families-touched to even be remembered after so many years, even decades for some. Many had traveled from all over the country to be recognized. Despite several months of notice, the governor didn’t commit to be at the ceremony until the morning of the event-hence her conspicuous absence in the program. Before the program went to the printers, the governor had been given a deadline. Silence. Perhaps she was waiting for Greta’s call. Governor Palin insisted she be sat on stage and demanded time for a speech. She spoke before the invocation and flag presentation as to not be “off program.” It was certainly appropriate for the governor to speak at such a high level ceremony, but her high level maintenance made it difficult for those that planned it. I talked to a Republican lawmaker earlier today and told her how honored I felt to be there. She commented on the governor’s attire. The most somber occasion I have attended, and the governor wore a mini skirt. Neat. Way to comfort the families of fallen soldiers; give them tickets to the “bare legs show.” One side of the auditorium was waiting for the”Basic Instinct” shot, Alaska style. Even Sarah Palin, in full diva regalia, couldn’t ruin the day. She just looked cheap. Senator Wielechowski and Representative Dahlstrom should be proud. More on Sarah Palin

See original here: 
Shannyn Moore: Alaskans Honor Dead As Palin Pulls Diva Card

How smart is this move? How dumb are the true believers on the Republican Right? We shall see. After months of trying to gain traction on something, anything, against the Obama administration, they finally had something going. The closing of Guantanamo problem and, even more effective, the possibility that Pelosi knew a little more, and a little sooner, about water boarding than we would like to believe. That has been hurting, don’t kid yourself. Cheney’s approval ratings are up from about 21% to about 37%. Panicky Democrats, with local polls near 80% against, have been trotting out NIMBY arguments opposed to stashing a couple of dozen terrorists in Supermax prisons anywhere near their constituents. But now? How perfect is Sonia Sotomayor? She may be a red flag inches from a crazy bull’s eyes. Not just because of the couple of things they have on her–the tape where she says stuff about judges making policy and the slightly hairy New Haven firefighter decision. No, not just that. Good old Sonia has a look and style that crypto-racist/sexist elitists hate with a visceral immediacy they may not be able to control. If that happens, they will find themselves attacking an Hispanic woman–probably the dumbest political thing they could do in this political environment. Why would they do that? At the deep pre-policy level, where venom is brewed, this is why: no effort by Sonia to look stereotypically “attractive.” No gesture in clothing or hair style or manner to signal anything approaching the submission to expectations that is the identifying calling card of women hired by Fox and paraded in right wing political and religious venues. Think Sarah Palin, just for one example. No. Good old Sonia doesn’t do half-conscious cultural submission. She just stands up there in all her slightly dumpy glory and says what she thinks. God bless her, the perfect lightning rod. And maybe a good judge as well. More on Sonia Sotomayor

See original here: 
Thomas de Zengotita: Rope-A-Dope: Pelosi Falls Through The Trap Door On The Stage of Public Attention–And Up Pops Sotomayor

Although Michael Steele’s “Change in a teabag” speech ( highlights ) was widely mocked for its signature line (”change is being delivered in a teabag, and that’s a wonderful thing”), Sarah Palin is now saying it was absolutely fabulous. Politico ’s Andy Barr reports : GOP Gov. Sarah Palin weighed in with a statement from Alaska. “Today, we have a friend in RNC Chairman Michael Steele, and his bold and courageous speech defines his leadership goals that will guide us all through this most difficult time for our nation.” Perhaps it should be no surprise that with less than 200 people actually in attendance for Steele’s speech, the person who seems to have enjoyed it the most — Sarah Palin — wasn’t even in the room. But lest Steele’s boosters be too concerned, at least two RNC committeemen who were actually there to watch it thought it was just grand: The speech, noted Mississippi national committeeman Henry Barbour, “was well received and encouraging.” “He’s hitting his stride,” Barbour said of Steele. “He did an excellent job with the meeting, everything was organized and on time,” said Louisiana Republican Party Chairman Roger Villere, who co-chaired former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell’s run against Steele in the RNC chairman’s race. “He gave an excellent speech.” So what’s the lesson here? Simple: the only kind of change Republicans can believe in is change that comes in a teabag.

Read the rest here:
Palin loved Steele’s "Change in a teabag" speech

Even by the standards of cable news, Greta Van Susteren is an outsize personali

Read more: 
Greta Van Susteren Defends Her Husband’s Consulting Work For Sarah Palin

What will endure from the plays of the late twentieth century? Already, the theatre that caused the greatest fuss at the time- the In Yer Face shockers by Mark Ravenhill, Martin McDonagh and friends - look flashy and shallow and strangely dated; only Sarah Kane’s psychological slashing seems to have survived from this flashing pack of playwrights. Yet one genre seems to have solidified as the decades pass into bona fide masterpieces, and will perhaps define that period: the play of ideas. It looks now like the theatre from the 1980s and 1990s that tried to dramatise the great intellectual mudslides and forest-fires of its time has thrived better than any other - from Michael Frayn’s Copenhagen to Caryl Churchill’s ‘Top Girls’ to Terry Johnson’s ‘Insignificance’. Using the old theatrical forms of the comedy or the thriller, they ask the most profound questions - what is human life for, and how it should it be lived? Standing above them all, making the case for the entire genre, is perhaps the greatest play of its time: ‘Arcadia’ by Tom Stoppard. As it is about to have its first major revival in London’s West End since its premiere in 1993 - starring Stoppard’s own son, Ed - the vindication of ‘Arcadia’ seems close at hand. Yet Stoppard compresses so many ideas and guffaws and griefs into less than three hours that any attempt at a summary of the play will sound paradoxical. It is an English country-house farce about the death of the Universe. It is a laugh-filled tragedy about what happens if you take the intoxicants of poetry and science seriously. It is a play where Stoppard turns himself into a clown whose juggling balls are romanticism, classicism, and the meaning of life. It sounds convoluted, yet it unfolds to the audience with the clarity of a cool breeze on a hot day. The play is set in Sidley Park, an English stately home, in two different centuries. It opens in 1809, in the style of an Oscar Wilde drawing room farce. A handsome young science graduate, Septimus Hodge, is living there, tutoring the precocious thirteen year old girl of the house, Thomasina Coverley. Reading through her Latin homework, she wants him to explain what “carnal embrace” means. When he tells her, she is appalled. “Now whenever I do it, I shall think of you!” she rasps. “Is it like love?” He replies: “Oh no my lady, it is much nicer than that.” And he has been demonstrating this conviction: Septimus has just been spotting having “a perpendicular poke” in the gazebo with Mrs Chater, the wife of a visiting poet. The lesson is interrupted by a note from Mr Chater, demanding he receive “satisfaction” for his wounded honour in the form of a duel. Septimus sighs: “Oh, Mrs Chater demanded satisfaction and now you demand satisfaction. I cannot spend my day and night satisfying the demands of the Chater family.” When Mr Chater arrives in a fury, Septmius insists he won’t engage in a pistol-fight to defend the honour of “a woman whose reputation could not be adequately defended with a platoon of musketry deployed by rota.” The play then shifts suddenly to the 1990s, and a more realist style. In the same house on the same set, a historian called Hannah Jarvis - a role written for Felicity Kendall - is delving into the history of Sidley Park with the permission of the Croom family. She is a cool woman who has stripped herself of emotion and stocked her heart with icy frigid air, as she buries herself in piecing together stories from the past. Her work suddenly is interrupted by a braying, patronising English don called Bernard Nightingale who - we soon realise - has discovered the note that Chater wrote to Septimus in an old book, after all this time. Only he is convinced it means something more - something much more. He believes the note was written by Lord Byron, the great Romantic poet, who happened to be visiting that weekend - and that he fought the duel and killed Chater. This would explain his until-now mysterious fleeing to France in 1810. It will be “the literary discovery of the century”, he neighs, turning him into a “Media Don - book early to avoid disappointment.” And so the structure of the play is set. We watch the action unfold from 1809 to 1812, while the characters in the late twentieth century try to figure out what happened using the surviving scraps of their lives. The stories alternate - until, in the final scene, they appear on stage together, stumbling past each other, unseen, unseeable, yet locked in a waltz. Hannah - and Stoppard - are obsessed with the way the garden at Sidley Park was redesigned while Thomasina was swotting and Septimus was shagging, because it represents the intellectual shift that was sweeping Europe at the time. Until 1809 the garden was in the classical style, modelled on Virgil and ancient Greece - ordered and clean and geometrical. As Thomasina’s mother, Lady Croom, describes it: “The slopes are green and gentle. The trees are companionably grouped at intervals that show them to advantage… The right amount of sheep are tastefully arranged - in short, it is nature as God intended.” But then the garden was demolished and remade to conform to the vision of the new romantic craze sweeping Europe - wild and irregular and disordered. Lady Croom exclaims: “Where there is the familiar pastoral refinement of an Englishman’s garden, [there will soon be] an eruption of gloomy forest and towering crag, of ruins where there was never a house, of water dashing against rocks where there was never a spring. My hyacinth dell is to become a haunt for hobgoblins.” Hannah calls it “the Gothic novel expressed in landscape. Everything but vampires.” The idea of what Arcadia - paradise - looks like flipped in one generation, from order to disorder, from classical calm to romantic chaos. Hannah believes she has uncovered - in the crags of the garden’s history - a perfect symbol of this degeneration. When they were carefully constructing their fake wilderness, the gardeners built a fake hermitage - and Lady Croom demanded that the gardeners provide a hermit to live in it. “If I am promised a fountain I expect it to come with water,” she says. The bemused gardeners suggest advertising for a hermit in the newspaper, causing her to retort: “But surely a hermit who takes a newspaper is not a hermit in whom one can have complete confidence.” But a hermit was found - and he is the subject of Hannah’s new book. He spent decades scribbling away in his fake hermit’s hut, unremarked on by the Croom family. When he died at the age of 47, he was discovered to have been writing tens of thousands of pages of incomprehensible equations and Cabbalistic proofs that the world was coming to an end. “He’s my peg for the breakdown of the Romantic Imagination… the whole Romantic sham!” Hannah explains. “It’s what happened to the Enlightenment, isn’t it? A century of intellectual rigour turned in on itself. A mind in chaos suspected of genius. In a setting of cheap thrills and fake beauty… The decline from thinking to feeling, you see.” And so the tension that runs through the play is set up, in the very set itself. It’s the old division that obsessed the eighteenth century. The classical order - which mutated into the Enlightenment - believed the world was ordered and comprehensible and was governed by rules that could be slowly uncovered. The Romantics believed this was a suffocating cage in which humanity was being imprisoned, and sought to overthrow all rules in the name of individual creativity. You make up your own rules as you go along: every man is an artist. There is no order other than the one you invent. Against the backdrop of this transformed garden and the transformed ideas it embodies, a strange story begins to unfold. The young Thomasina is, it soon becomes clear, a genius. Even as she girlishly prances around failing to spot the series of the sexual farces unfolding in her family, she can grasp the implications of the newest scientific discoveries way ahead of any of the adults around her. Septimus teaches her about Newton’s laws of physics. They are clean, clear laws, promising an underlying, predictable order to the universe. Thomasina frets about what becomes of free will in a world where we are all merely atoms moving in line with his laws of motion - and then, suddenly, she spots a series of dark flaws in Newton. She explains to Septimus that in Newton’s universe, equations can run in either direction - forward or back. But there is one equation that runs only one way: heat turns to cold. A cup of tea left to stand will always go cold; it will never spontaneously become hot. The same thing is happening everywhere, all the time: it’s called the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The implications - only just being grasped by the generations after Newton - were plain, and bleak. “It’ll take a while, but we’re all going to end up at room temperature,” says one character. Septimus - sobered by Thomasina’s explanation - adds softly: “So the Improved Newtonian Universe must cease and grow cold.” These are characters who take the implications of their ideas seriously. Septimus and Thomasina are stricken by the realisation that instead of setting up a perfectly ticking and well-oiled machine, Newtonian physics exposed us as living in an irrevocably doomed world. Hannah too says the inevitable end-game of this universe is summarised in one of Byron’s poems: “I had a dream that was not all a dream./ The bright sun was extinguished, and the stars/ Did wander darkling in the eternal space,/ Rayless, and pathless, and the icy earth/ Swung blind and blackening in the moonless air.” In the present day, Bernard the aspirant Media Don scorns all the implications of science. In his struggle to prove Byron was a killer, he thinks gut instinct and aesthetics trump boring old scientific facts. He announces to the scientist who lives at Sidley Park, Valentine: “A great poet is always timely. A great philosopher is an urgent need. There’s no rush for Isaac Newton. We were quite happy with Aristotle’s cosmos. Personally, I preferred it. Fifty-five crystal spheres geared to God’s crankshaft is my idea of a satisfying universe. I can’t think of anything more trivial than the speed of light. Quarks, quasars, big bangs, black holes - who gives a shit?… I’d push the lot of you over a cliff myself. Except the one in the wheelchair, I’d lose the sympathy vote before people had time to think it through… If knowledge isn’t self-knowledge it isn’t doing much mate. Is the universe expanding? Is it contracting? Is it standing on one leg and singing ‘When father Painted the Parlour’? Leave me out, I can expand my universe without you.” Bernard’s romantic passion - laced with a little charlatanry - is in opposition to Hannah’s classical reserve. She is afraid of emotion and passion; Bernard is afraid of sobriety and the nagging sensation that the facts might not justify his flights of fancy. He “just knows” Byron murdered Chater. Meanwhile, nearly two centuries before, Septimus is clearly falling in love with Thomasina, as she ages into a young woman. He is thrilled by her discoveries, not only of the “heat death” implicit in Newton, but of another, deeper flaw in Newtonian physics. Why, Thomasina asks, can Newton’s laws and equations only predictably describe the physics of linear, manufactured objects like squares and cones and pyramids? “Armed thus, God could only create a cabinet… [But] if there is an equation for a curve like a bell, there must be an equation for one like a bluebell, and if a bluebell, why not a rose?” There surely must be a mathematical pattern underlying the things of real life too. She determines to draw these equations. But the audience slowly realise this is impossible - not because she is wrong, but because she is so far ahead of her time. When Hannah finds her old notebooks, she gets Valentine to explain them to her. He is a mathematician living in the house, pining for Hannah, and trying as part of his PhD to unlock the numerical patterns underlying the changing population of grouse at Sidley Park, as recorded in the old game books. He explains: “When Thomasina was doing maths it had been the same maths for a couple of thousand years. Classical. And then for a century after Thomasina. Then maths left the real world behind, just like modern art, really. Nature was classical, maths was suddenly Picassos. But now nature is having the last laugh. The freaky stuff is turning out to be the mathematics of the real world.” It turns out that so much of the world around us - rainfall averages or measles epidemics, say - follow bizarre equations. Valentine explains: “People were talking about the end of physics. Relativity and quantum looked as if they were going to clean out the whole pattern between them. A theory of everything. But they only explained the very big and the very small. The universe, the elementary particles. The ordinary-sized stuff which is our lives, the things people write poetry about - clouds - daffodils - waterfalls - and what happens in a cup of coffee when the cream goes in - these things are full of mystery… because the problem turns out to be different.” How do we understand them? With a new kind of maths, known as chaos theory. Traditionally, scientists expected dynamic systems to settle into stable, predictable behaviour. But actually, tiny variations in inputs can cause huge changes. Simple equations can produce complex patterns. The way to decode them is a process known as an iterated algorithm. This is a piece of algebra where you take the solution to an equation, and plug it back into the start of the same equation, and keep repeating the process, again and again. Out of a simple equation, you get complex patterns. This is precisely what Thomasina was trying to grasp. But the maths is so complex and so time-consuming, it can only be done with computers. It was inaccessible to Thomasina with her pencils and notebooks, except as a glint in the distance. So Thomasina, the audience realizes, glimpsed a truth, centuries earlier than anyone else. “She didn’t have the maths, not remotely. She saw what things meant, way ahead, like seeing a picture,” Valentine says. And she knew that if she was right, she could help us escape from the trap laid by Newton - of a predictable, determined universe shorn of free will, and doomed to freeze. With the day-to-day unpredictability of chaos theory, “determinism leaves the road at every turn,” she says. “The unpredictable and the predetermined unfold together to make everything the way it is. It’s how nature creates itself, on every scale, the snowflake and the snowstorm.” And maybe it, too, offered a form of hope beyond the universal freeze. When it is explained to her, Hannah asks Valentine: “Do you mean the world is saved after all?” He replies: “No, it’s still doomed. But if this is how it started, perhaps it’s how the next one will come.” But what became of Thomasina’s insight? Hannah reveals its fate casually, in the sixth scene. (Skip this paragraph if you want to avoid a plot spoiler.) Thomasina died in a fire on the eve of her seventeenth birthday - a “heat death” of her own, caused by a candle Septimus lit for her. Her insights came to nothing. Then we see her alive again, skipping onto the stage, trying to persuade Septimus to kiss her. It is, we realize, the night of her death. And suddenly, it hits the audience. The hermit in the garden is Septimus, trying to prove Thomasina’s equations, alone and half-mad in the romantics’ garden after her death. His mind and pencil didn’t have the capacity to do what a computer can manage in a few minutes - but he tried, scribbling endlessly, for decades, trying to prove there is hope after all, and it can only be discovered “through good English algebra.” The stale cliché about Stoppard - and about this genre - is that he is a brilliant manipulator of ideas, but with no heart. Yet here - at the core of his best play - is the greatest love story on the British stage for decades. Yes, the characters bond over ideas - but some of the most interesting people in life do just that. That would be enough to make Arcadia a masterpiece - but it is even more than that. The play stirs the most basic and profound questions humans can ask. What is our relationship to the past, and the future? How should we live with the knowledge that extinction is certain - not just of ourselves, but of our species? Ideas and emotions fuse into one in ‘Arcadia’, and the audience weeps for both. How are we, as human beings, determined by the past - of our ancestors, and all the thinkers who preceded us? The play suggests that we are forever re-enacting the patterns of the past with mild variations - or, in other words, that the human heart beats to an iterated algorithm. Thomasina’s distant relatives echo her lines through time, with a word misplaced. When Thomasina weeps for the destruction of the library of Alexandria and all the lost plays of the Athenians, Septimus says: “You should no more grieve for [them] than for a buckle from your first shoe, or for your lesson book which shall be lost when you are old. We shed as we pick up, like travellers who must carry everything in our arms, and what we let fall will be picked up by those behind. The procession is very long and life is very short. But there is nothing outside the march so nothing can be lost to it. The missing plays of Sophocles will turn up piece by piece, or be written again in another language. Ancient cures for diseases will reveal themselves once more. Mathematical discoveries glimpsed and lost to view will have their time again.” The play is both a vindication of this speech, and a repudiation of it. Thomasina’s notebooks are picked up again by Hannah - but what about when the march ends? In our time, science suggests a threat to our ability to survive far more imminent that the frozen universe implied in the Second Law of Thermodynamics: our “heat death” could come under a blanket of our own warming gases. ‘Arcadia’ asks, in part, how do you live with the certain knowledge of extinction - not just your own, but your species’? In the most important speech in the play, Hannah suggests the answer lies in the process of trying to understand, while you can. You find meaning by questing on, even in the face of failure and extinction. She tells Valentine: “It’s all trivial - your grouse, my hermit, Bernard’s Byron. Comparing what we’re looking for misses the point. It’s wanting to know that makes us matter. Otherwise we’re going out the way we came in. That’s why you can’t believe in the afterlife, Valentine. Believe in the after, by all means, but not the life. Believe in God, the soul, the spirit, believe in angels if you like, but not in the great celestial get-together for an exchange of views. If the answers are in the back of the book I can wait, but what a drag. Better to struggle on knowing that failure is final.” And so in the end, Stoppard suggests the division that obsessed the eighteenth century - between romantics and classicists - exists in all of us. Hannah prides herself on her classical reserve, but by the final scene, it is faltering. She finally agrees to dance with Gus, the mysterious, mute young son of the house who seems to have an inexplicable knowledge of the distant past. He is a symbol of all the things that lie beyond her rational explanations - and she embraces him. Septimus is a stern scientist who venerates geometry, but he ends as the most romantic figure of all - a lone hermit in a Gothic garden trying vainly to vindicate the theories of his lost love. Stoppard seems to believe that without both halves of the eighteenth century self - an impulse to understand the rules that govern the world, and an impulse to overthrow them and create ourselves anew - we are not fully human. Indeed, he even seems to present chaos theory - in a sweet irony - as a kind of romantic maths, vindicating the romantics’ belief that nature is wild and disordered, using the classicists’ method of good rigorous algebra. The divisions collapse into one. In the last scene, the characters from the eighteenth century and the twentieth century are on stage together, occupying the same space. They cannot see each other, yet they seem to be speaking to each other all the same, as the implications of Thomasina’s discoveries tumble out. As the music rises, Thomasina and Septimus waltz together for the last time - a dance that is another iterated algorithm, always the same, always slightly different - and Hannah takes Gus’ hand for a dance of their own. The sound of the coming fire slowly rises. The waltzing couples dance in circles past each other, oblivious to each other, and intensely aware of each other, all at once. It’s a moment that shows the power of the play of ideas to fuse together concepts and characters into a theatrical grenade. This final scene is the waltz that takes place inside all of us - of our ancestors dancing with our present, of reason dancing with irrationality, and of hope dancing with despair, as the roaring, crackling sound of the heat-death draws ever closer. Johann Hari is a writer for the Independent newspaper. To read more of his articles, click here You can email him at johann =at= johannhari.com.

See the rest here: 
Johann Hari: Is This The Greatest Play of the Late Twentieth Century?

AP BRONXVILLE, N.Y. — Hard-charging White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel paused for a reflective address at his alma mater Friday, describing the humiliation of being demoted by then-President Bill Clinton and the brutal illness he survived as a teenager. Emanuel told 450 graduates of Sarah Lawrence College that his most important life lessons have come from “a lot of pain, some anguish, and some soul-searching.” Known for sharp elbows and brash words, Emanuel grew emotional, choking back tears as he recalled lying near death in a hospital bed as a teenager, fighting off a blood infection from a cut finger that later had to be partly amputated. “Nearly losing my life made me want to save my life and made me want to live my life,” Emanuel said, advising students, “Don’t be reckless with what’s been given to you.” He also recalled being demoted and nearly losing his role as a top aide to Clinton in 1993. “I probably shot off my mouth a few too many times and I probably picked one too many fights,” Emanuel said. But he also cracked jokes and poked fun at the aggressive reputation that has earned him the tag “Rhambo.” The Daily Beast compiled Emanuel’s best laugh lines : “As chief of staff, I am humbled _ a quality that does not come naturally _ by the incredible array of problems that President Obama confronts on a daily basis,” he said. Emanuel, 49, graduated from Sarah Lawrence in 1981. A ballet student, he attended the college in part for its strong dance program. Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter! More on Rahm Emanuel

The rest is here: 
Rahm Emanuel Cracks Jokes, Gets Emotional At Alma Mater Sarah Lawrence (VIDEO)

Last spring in New Orleans I met a D.C. lobbyist who had read my piece on John McCain’s lack of a visit to New Orleans aside from his private fund-raisers, and we talked about how shortly after that McCain flew down and walked through the 9th Ward. I joked that maybe McCain’s staffers were taking direction from the Huffington Post, and the lobbyist answered, “Actually they have to. It’s the only way to get out in front of the news cycle as it breaks.” Politico just echoed this, quoting Bryan Rogers who had been McCain’s spokesman saying, “HuffPo and [Talking Points Memo] really are the assignment editors for many in the Washington press corps — particularly the cables. That’s not just a Republican hack saying it — that’s speaking as a press guy fielding calls and e-mails daily from the MSM that start with, ‘Did you see this thing on Huffington Post?’ They were effective and they wasted a lot of our time.” You’re welcome. Oil of Delay, McCain Cancels Louisiana Trip after Barge Spill and Rocky Road: Time Defends McCain’s New Orleans Gaffe covered McCain’s eventual ill-fated visit, and Ickies’ Breakey Heart as the Fight Winds Down covered the left side of the aisle. Hillary Clinton’s immediately seizing on Mayhill Fowler’s Guns, God and Religion Barack Obama post (and its 6,000 comments) is an infamous example of the internet driving campaigns. Candidate responses were the gifts that kept on giving, and I was tempted to float a test balloon to see if advisers were actually charting their course with punditry. The test? Whether John McCain would rock a full-on Will Ferrell style perm. First headline: “Why Does McCain Refuse to Get a Perm?” Followup stories would have included: “John McCain Still Spurning Perm: Affront to His Base?” “V.P. Pick Palin: Pro Perm or Lock Blocker?” “Beltway Beauticians Ponder: Is McCain Curl-Worthy?” “Clowns Weigh In on Curlgate” And finally, “Mainstream Media Scoops Up Permanent Campaign” We’ll never know if Rogers could have talked his candidate into curly locks, but to quote Hemingway, isn’t it pretty to think so? The McCains are a web savvy family - Megan McCain is taking on Ann Coulter through the Daily Beast and Cindy could still mix it up with Whoopi Goldberg on Wowowow if they’re into Cindy’s musings. But Huffington Post remains the golden mean with 8.8 million readers in April alone. Politico confirms that the right wing is now jumping through whatever flaming hoops it can for exposure here since RedState’s approach no longer plays in Peoria. Speaking of which, have you gotten a good look at Republican Congressman and Huffington blogger Aaron Schock’s hair lately? It’s like he thinks he’s too cool for curls. Twittered too. More on GOP

Original post: 
Karen Dalton-Beninato: Power of the Post: The Permanent Wave of the GOP

Last spring in New Orleans I met a D.C. lobbyist who had read my piece on John McCain’s lack of a visit to New Orleans aside from his private fund-raisers, and we talked about how shortly after that McCain flew down and walked through the 9th Ward. I joked that maybe McCain’s staffers were taking direction from the Huffington Post, and the lobbyist answered, “Actually they have to. It’s the only way to get out in front of the news cycle as it breaks.” Politico just echoed this, quoting Bryan Rogers who had been McCain’s spokesman saying, “HuffPo and [Talking Points Memo] really are the assignment editors for many in the Washington press corps — particularly the cables. That’s not just a Republican hack saying it — that’s speaking as a press guy fielding calls and e-mails daily from the MSM that start with, ‘Did you see this thing on Huffington Post?’ They were effective and they wasted a lot of our time.” You’re welcome. Oil of Delay, McCain Cancels Louisiana Trip after Barge Spill and Rocky Road: Time Defends McCain’s New Orleans Gaffe covered McCain’s eventual ill-fated visit, and Ickies’ Breakey Heart as the Fight Winds Down covered the left side of the aisle. Hillary Clinton’s immediately seizing on Mayhill Fowler’s Guns, God and Religion Barack Obama post (and its 6,000 comments) is an infamous example of the internet driving campaigns. Candidate responses were the gifts that kept on giving, and I was tempted to float a test balloon to see if advisers were actually charting their course with punditry. The test? Whether John McCain would rock a full-on Will Ferrell style perm. First headline: “Why Does McCain Refuse to Get a Perm?” Followup stories would have included: “John McCain Still Spurning Perm: Affront to His Base?” “V.P. Pick Palin: Pro Perm or Lock Blocker?” “Beltway Beauticians Ponder: Is McCain Curl-Worthy?” “Clowns Weigh In on Curlgate” “Mainstream Media Scoops Up Permanent Campaign” We’ll never know if Rogers could have talked his candidate into curly locks, but to pull from Hemmingway, isn’t it pretty to think so? The McCains are a web savvy family - Megan McCain is taking on Ann Coulter through the Daily Beast and Cindy could still mix it up with Whoopi Goldberg on Wowowow if they’re into Cindy’s musings. But Huffington Post exposure remains the golden mean with 8.8 million readers in April alone. Politico confirms that the right wing is now jumping through whatever flaming hoops it can for exposure here since RedState’s approach no longer plays in Peoria. Speaking of which, have you gotten a good look at Republican Congressman and Huffington blogger Aaron Schock’s hair lately? It’s like he thinks he’s too cool for curly locks. Twittered too. More on GOP

More here: 
Karen Dalton-Beninato: Power to the Post: The Permanant Wave of the GOP

You can understand how disappointing it must have been, especially for the folks who’d dreamed up the idea in the first place. They had to compromise, and compromising is never fun, especially when you really believe in what you’re doing. And these folks certainly believe in what they’re doing. That was the bad news — the compromising, I mean. The good news? The good news is that there are still plenty of other ways for the Republican National Committee to embarrass itself. There they were, assembled in Washington to stick it to the Democrats. The economy may be on life support. The unemployment rate may be heading for double digits, with the banking and credit systems only barely starting to thaw. There’s still a war going on in Iraq, and another one in Afghanistan bleeding over into Pakistan, with the growing danger that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons could fall into the hands of terrorists. So naturally the GOP shock troops figured that this was the perfect time for a resolution that called the Democrats names. “Socialist,” to be precise about it. The GOP resolution was going to officially rename the Democratic Party the “Democrat Socialist Party.” No, really. This was how they were going to spend their time. This was how they were going to try to convince the American people — who’ve been bailing on the GOP in large numbers, and in virtually every demographic category — to return to the fold: by calling the Democrats names. The “Democrat Socialist Party.” Consider it Joe the Plumber’s greatest contribution to political discourse. (And how far has a party fallen when it starts borrowing its strategy from the likes of Joe the Plumber? What’s next? Sarah Palin’s “Discourse on Reason”?) Anyway, cooler — but just barely — heads prevailed. Apparently it dawned on the party leadership (such as it is) that, as former chairman Haley Barbour put it, “Calling people names isn’t useful.” That passing such a resolution could open the Republicans, rather than their intended targets across the aisle, to even more ridicule. So they scrapped it? Not exactly. They “massaged” it. They softened the wording just a tad. Instead of trying to rename the Democratic Party, the revised resolution simply “recognize(d) that the Democratic Party is dedicated to restructuring American society along socialist ideals,” and pointed out the Democrats’ “clear and obvious purpose in proposing, passing and implementing socialist programs through federal legislation.” People who receive radio transmissions from distant planets through their fillings also find many things “clear and obvious.” The rest of us tend to steer clear of these people whenever possible. Where were we? Right — compromise. The reworded resolution carried the day, and the GOP shock troops had to be content with just half a loaf. But all is not lost. Not as long as that bold, brash GOP spirit lives on in the hearts of the faithful. In fact, the meeting may have adjourned, but the opportunities to take the fight to the enemy are still out there, just waiting for someone to give the go-ahead. So get ready for Republicans egging the Democrats’ windows, and throwing toilet paper into Democrats’ trees. Prepare yourself for Republicans ordering lots of pizzas to be delivered to Democrats’ doors. With anchovies! And what if they dismantled a big SUV — or even a truck, you know, like a really big one? — and they took all the pieces into the Democrats’ headquarters late at night when nobody’s around, and then they reassembled the whole thing right there in the lobby? — they’d just freak out!!! And then after that, they could — The Republican Party: Ready to lead. Rick Horowitz is a syndicated columnist. You can write to him at rickhoro@execpc.com . More on GOP

Here is the original post:
Rick Horowitz: Sticks and Stones: Who Says the GOP Doesn’t Have a Strategy?

LOS ANGELES — A couple sued a writer for the CBS show “CSI,” claiming two shady characters on the show were named after them in revenge for a real estate deal gone bad. Real estate agents Melinda and Scott Tamkin on Friday sued writer and producer Sarah Goldfinger for defamation and invasion-of-privacy. They are seeking $6 million in damages, alleging the show hurt their real estate business. Calls to Goldfinger and CBS were not immediately returned. The Tamkins represented the owners of a Los Angeles home that Goldfinger wanted to buy in 2005, according to the lawsuit. Goldfinger pulled out when the sale was in escrow, but there was no indication of any animosity at the time. The “CSI: Crime Scene Investigation” show set in Las Vegas featured a real estate agent named Melinda, who dies under mysterious circumstances, and her husband Scott, a mortgage broker who watches pornography, drinks and is suspected of killing his wife, according to the suit. The characters had the last name Tamkin in an original screenplay and Goldfinger helped cast actors who looked like the Tamkins, according to the lawsuit. The Tamkins claim the characters’ last name was changed to Tucker at the last minute, which they said was evidence Goldfinger borrowed details from their lives. Anthony Glassman, the Tamkins’ attorney, said potential clients looking for their real estate company could have been deterred from contacting them because episode descriptions were online for months before the program aired. ___ CBS is a division of CBS Corp.

Excerpt from:
‘CSI’ Writer Sued For Revenge Naming Show Characters After Real People

It has just gotten awful for the Republicans. Tear-shedding gut-wrenching heart-breaking sad. The party of tough talk and unflappable belief in their version of America — the party willing to send others’ kids to war to prove how tough they are — has just become the most whiny, bitchy, sad little thing you’ve ever seen. Like one of those poodles with a red ribbon and a pedi-pedi and an owner who you just want to hand a sandwich to and beg her to eat, please eat. It’s gotten so bad that Republicans even gave up smashing beer cans against their foreheads to have tea parties for each other. It’s all the fault of someone else. The group who insists we can do it alone and don’t need any help from anyone else and nobody better question us ’cause we know what we’re doing so you better not speak up or we’ll call you un-American anti-apple pie terrorists socialists godless wimps has, well, fallen victim … … poor victims of the media who won’t treat them fair and balanced … poor victims of dweeby little college professors and meek little school teachers who are bent on indoctrinating their kids … poor victims of sad little dictators like Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, and Kim Jung Il who just won’t listen ! … poor victims of the Intertubes & the mean pajama-clad bloggers who won’t leave them alone … poor victims of the American voters who threw ‘em out of power … poor victims of Nancy Pelosi & Rahm Emanuel & Arlen Specter who keep pullin’ the wool over their eyes … poor victims of the mean old French who wouldn’t play with them in their Iraq sandbox … poor victims of the unions who won’t let their executive friends take all the money and run … poor victims of the gays who are ruining their god-blessed marriages Geez. Who wants to follow a Republican Party or conservative movement that sits in a corner, sucking its thumb, and whines about how the world is out to get them and they just can’t do anything about it! ? At least they’ve still got Dick Cheney , Rush Limbaugh , and Newt Gingrich to show us how to be real men . (Or should I say moose-hunting Sarah Palin?) Waaaah! Waaaah! Waaaah! Waaaah! — Donnie Fowler San Francisco More on Sarah Palin

See the original post:
Donnie Fowler: What a Bunch of Whiny Sourpusses

This weekend, Chicago-area parents wondering whether or not to vaccinate their babies, toddlers, school-age kids or teenagers face a tough decision when it comes to expert advice: should they listen to Jenny McCarthy or to their pediatrician? McCarthy is slated to give the key-note speech at the Autism One conference in Rosemont on Saturday. Now don’t get me wrong. I think Jenny McCarthy looks great wearing an orange bikini on the cover of a national magazine this month. Even with air-brushing, I could never look like that. I think that her partner, Jim Carrey, has done some exceptional work in several movies, and that the “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind,” one of my top 10 movies, is totally underrated. But I don’t think that they should be making vaccination policy. I also fervently believe that organizations like Autism One that attempt to make the utterly unscientific claim that vaccines cause autism endanger all of our children. I don’t grace magazine covers, and I have never starred in a movie, but like my daughter’s pediatrician, I studied hard in college, learning a fair amount of science and decision-making skills, worked harder in medical school and harder still in residency training, and I have been taking care of patients for over a dozen years. I am an internist, and I know many important things about vaccinations, but the bottom line is they save lives. And there’s no evidence that they cause autism. It’s really too bad that The Lancet , one the of top five medical journals, once published an article suggesting that the MMR vaccine could increase the risk of autism. They have since retracted the article , publicly apologized for publishing it, and explained that the authors falsified their data. But the mere publication of this wrong-headed theory has helped to fan the flames of the anti-vaccination community intensely. And now babies and kids are not getting their vaccines, and they are getting sick. Some are even dying. I empathize with parents who are raising a child with autism, and find the skyrocketing rates of kids now diagnosed with this disease extremely worrisome, but demonizing vaccines is the wrong answer . Before kids were routinely vaccinated against, say diphtheria or measles, hundreds of thousands of children would contract these diseases every year. Some kids would get a fever and a cough. But many would struggle to breath and some kids would get encephalitis, (which can lead to permanent brain damage or deafness). Some kids would even die. Parents who refuse to vaccinate their kids not only put their own offspring at risk, they also put other children at risk through the well-known phenomenon of “herd immunity.” This means that if almost all kids in a group have been vaccinated against a disease, an outbreak is much less likely to occur. Vaccination not only protects your own child, it also protects the other children in day care or third grade or on the soccer team. My friend K.S., a local pediatrician and the mother of three boys, said that a few years ago, a baby cared for by her practice died of pertussis. The baby had been receiving the appropriate vaccinations, but had not yet reached the age of full immunity, and contracted pertussis from her un-vaccinated teenage uncle. Pertussis had hit local high schools hard, and in this example of a failure of herd immunity, outbreaks that make teenagers miserable with months of coughing but don’t actually kill them put babies at mortal risk. As a result, K.S. and her partners no longer allow children of parents who refuse to allow routine vaccinations into their pediatric practice. So as the recent H1N1 flu outbreak brought infectious disease and the role of vaccines once again to the forefront of parents’ minds, I have some advice for parents who chose to listen to Jenny McCarthy and opt to forego vaccinations: pray, wash your hands a lot and find new playmates, because I will not let your child endanger mine. More on Autism

See the original post here:
Sarah Lovinger: Should a Former Playboy Model Trump an Experienced Health Care Expert? You Decide

I’ve gotten some flack for the "terrortard" label this week, but I’m sticking with it. In fact, ha. That’s right. Ha ha. Facts are stupid things, as Ronald Reagan once said, and the fact here is we’re looking at four terrortards. Is that offensive? Fine. Color me bad. I contend that it’s no more offensive than Terror Brand News (aka Fox News) suggesting that it presents "fair and balanced" reporting. Fox’s Sarah Bernhardt School of Reporting has infected all the big news sources when it comes to terror (the breathless gasp, pant, panic ("We’ll be right back after this commercial break") approach). Is that not offensive? Here’s what we know: one of the "plotters" was deemed too crazy to deport to Haiti (what?) and all of them were garden-variety jailbirds for crimes like small time drug-dealling and purse-snatching and, one might surmise, littering. The ringleader told a judge that he’s a daily wake-and-bake pothead. These mentally diminutive men would have a hard time finding a synagogue (much less blowing one up). They do not qualify as "chilling" criminals. These are not great criminal minds. These are barely functioning minds that use what little capacity they have for feelings of victimization, petty resentment, and kitchen-table prejudice. The rest was imported courtesy the FBI. As Air America’s Ron Kuby pointed out in his debate with Marc Maron yesterday, there was an FBI informant who made money off this "bust." Facts are indeed stupid things. There are a lot of malcontents out there and the catalog of things they hate is endless. The anger that informed these half-wits was turned into a story by opportunistic third and fourth parties to that anger. I’ll say it again. The brainless anger and hate native to the Newburgh Four was taught a plot and enabled by a third party who was working for the FBI; it was facilitated in a way that made a story where before there was no story because the four men involved could not think their collective way out of an open door. The end product was a story. It was used to prove a point: that we are being protected from terrorism. Terrorism that never would have left the barstool were it not for proactive, entrapment-like "police work." This is what Fox News begat with it’s warped coverage on terrorism. This is the evil seed of Dick Cheney’s flashlight-under-the-chin brand of politics. Witness the cottage industry of terror-as-entertainment. It’s here, and it’s really stupid. More on Fox News

See the original post here: 
Beau Friedlander: New York Terrortards: Purse-Snatchers, Potheads, ‘Intellectually Challenged’, And Brought To You By Fox News

NEW YORK — Sarah Palin has picked a collaborator for her memoir. A spokeswoman for SarahPAC, the Alaska governor’s political action committee, says that Palin has selected Lynn Vincent, an author and features editor for World magazine, a conservative Christian publication. Palin’s book, currently untitled, is scheduled for release next year by HarperCollins. Vincent, a San Diego resident, has written or co-written several books, among them “Same Kind of Different As Me,” “The Blood of Lambs” and “Donkey Cons: Sex, Crime and Corruption in the Democratic Party.”

Original post:
Lynn Vincent Picked To Be Palin’s Memoir Collaborator

On a day when most of the attention (rightfully) has been on the President’s speech in DC, there is a little bit of campaign and polling news waiting for us. So, on that note, let’s wrap up this Thursday on the campaign trail. NATIONAL: Is Anyone Still Willing To Admit to Being A Republican? Pew Research has been tracking voter self-identification, and they find the Republican Party at an incredibly low ebb– 23% . They also see a rise in Independents (36%), with Democrats holding reasonably steady at 35%. NATIONAL: Obama Leads GOP Pack With Only 42 Months To Go Until Election Day!! Always good to get early data, but PPP might be engaged in a bit of overkill. The boys at PPP poll Election Day 2012 , with President Obama stacked up against a quartet of potential GOP rivals. The bottom line: landslides all the way around. Obama leads Mike Huckabee by thirteen (52-39), Newt Gingrich by seventeen (53-36), Mitt Romney by eighteen (53-35), and Sarah Palin by nineteen (56-37). Interestingly, they also polled approval ratings: once-and-apparently-future GOP spokesman Newt Gingrich was at the bottom, with 30% favorability. CO-GOV: Democratic Governor Gets His First Serious Opponent Scott McInnis , a former Congressman who has been oft-mentioned over the years for statewide office, will challenge Governor Bill Ritter (D) in next year’s election. He has already walked into some controversy–apparently, you cannot raise money for your campaign or formally announce your campaign until you file with the Secretary of State. A watchdog group is claiming McInnis did just that. FL-GOV: Florida GOP Appears To Clear The Field For McCollum Bowing to pressure from the state GOP chairman, state agriculture commissioner Charlie Bronson has elected to forgo a bid to be elected governor next year. However, he did hedge his bets a bit, beginning his declaration of non-candidacy with three crucial words: “At this time.” This apparent decision makes it almost certain that the 2010 Florida governors race will be between GOP attorney general Bill McCollum (a former Orlando-area Congressman) and Democratic state chief financial officer Alex Sink. A poll released earlier this week by Mason Dixon gave McCollum a nominal six-point edge. MN-GOV: Pawlenty No Shoo-In For Re-Election, Says SUSA SurveyUSA , in their latest Election 2010 polling, have paired up Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty with practically every possible candidate for the office in 2010. Three of them actually manage to keep the incumbent under 50%. The closest race would be against former Democratic Senator Mark Dayton, who holds T-Paw to just a four point lead (47-43). Also holding the incumbent to a lead within the margin of error was Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak, who trails Pawlenty by just five points (47-42). St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman also holds Pawlenty under the magical 50% threshold, but the lead is considerably wider (48-37). NY-SEN: Yet ANOTHER Democratic Rep. Whispering About A Senate Bid?? Give Crisitunity over at Swing State Project the award for the best analogy of the week. Discussing today’s news out of New York, where we learn that longtime Bronx Congressman Jose Serrano is talking about running for the Senate, he compares the flurry of Democratic members of the House hinting at Senate bids to a giant game of Whack-A-Mole. Gillibrand, however, did pick up three key delegation endorsements (Arcuri, Hall, Murphy). Also, diarist devtob reports that the director of the Marist poll is also bullish on Gillibrand’s chances. PA-SEN: DSCC Poll Shows Specter Dominant in Potential Dem Primary Taegan Goddard reported earlier today that the DSCC commissioned a poll on a potential Democratic primary in the PA-Senate race. The poll, conducted by Garin-Hart-Yang, found Arlen Specter up on Joe Sestak by a 56-16 margin.

The rest is here: 
Polling and Political Wrap-Up, 5/21/09

Gov. Sarah Palin dropped the hammer today on $80 million from the state budget. Her cuts include the $28.6 million in federal stimulus money designated for energy relief. Even though Juneau, Fairbanks and Anchorage municipalities are already complying with the federal building codes, Palin turned money down for weatherization and energy assistance to avoid the building requirements statewide. The governor of Missouri, Jay Nixon, negotiated taking the money without a statewide code. Alaska has the highest energy costs in the nation. Alaska has two seasons; winter and construction. Now would be the best time for window replacement, weatherization, etc. In a “bring it on” move, Palin dared the legislature to over-ride her veto. I just spoke to a state legislature about the chances of a special session being called. It is possible, if not, the next session is January 2010. Last fall, Governor Palin allocated $740 million in one time “energy bail-out” checks to every citizen in Alaska. This year, $28.6 million is turned down. Alaska loses. More on Stimulus Package

View original post here:
Shannyn Moore: Palin Says Thanks But Not Thanks To Stimulus Money

When SarahPAC sends out “Governor’s Statements”, I cringe. Sarah Palin is as predictable as Alaska weather; random, erratic, and dangerous. Her full run embrace of RNC Chairman Michael Steele must be in response to his statement, “We have turned the page. We have turned the corner. No more looking in the review mirror.” Palin translation? “Enough about Reagan, what about ME?!” Alaskans know if you lick steel in the cold, your tongue sticks. As Governor, Sarah Palin has passed the largest budgets in state history. Her “Alaska energy bailout” last fall, on top of the Permanent Fund Dividend checks, was $740 million. Her political ambition has denied Alaskans $28.6 million in federal stimulus funds for weatherization and energy assistance despite bi-partisan pleas to accept the money. Palin’s criticism of President Obama’s “unprecedented reliance upon foreign countries” is rich. She has continually held up her Alaska Gas line Inducement Act (AGIA) as a star in her governor’s pageant crown. She selected TransCanada to build the Alaska gas line, and “induced” them with $500 million. Not only are we relying on a foreign company for essential delivery of energy infrastructure, WE ARE PAYING THEM HALF A BILLION DOLLARS TO DO IT! Sarah Palin’s response to starving Western Alaska villages was a photo-op fly-in with the Rev. Franklin Graham. “Jesus loves you, and I do too! Also!” She baked them cookies . Really. Alaska does not have a friend in Michael Steele. We do have a governor who is the first in Alaska history not only to be absent at the Juneteenth Celebration (the national celebration of the end of slavery), but to be mute. Sarah Palin refused to retroactively sign the Juneteenth Celebration Proclamation and is now being sued. The platform used to bash Obama and blow smoke up the skirt of the RNC Chair could have been used to help Alaskans rather than forward her personal political agenda. Palin could have talked about the worst flooding in Alaska history along the Yukon River this month. The Yukon River divides Alaska in half. The headwaters originate in Canada and it empties into the Bering Sea 2,300 miles west. As a result of widespread flooding, Ebola is growing in the basements of destroyed homes; diesel fuel is covering the belongings of flood victims and contaminating an already crippled ecosystem. Critical fishing runs crashed last year. As a result, the state and feds cut subsistence fishing 50% on the Yukon River this year. No telling what havoc will be wreaked on fragile spawning habitat. There is a long list of major concerns Sarah Palin could spend her political capital on to help our state. Instead, she squanders it on the likes of Michael Steele, bashing Obama, and her great defense (and misguided understanding of the first amendment) of Miss California, Carrie PreJean . Statement from Governor Sarah Palin The transition from Candidate Obama to President Obama has been as predictable as Alaska’s winter snow. We are now witnessing actions that will lead to a monumental shift away from free market capitalism and the strong work ethic that built this great country. ‘Change’ in this administration has meant rapid movement toward massive government growth, huge tax burdens on future generations, and an unprecedented reliance upon foreign countries. Today, we learned that Obama’s decisions continue to impact Alaskans; while we as taxpayers now own General Motors, Obama closes another dealership - this time in Soldotna as more of Alaskans’ hard-earned money and jobs are lost to big government. Government should not be in the auto industry business. In Alaska, we have also seen a shift in federal priorities that threaten the loss of subsidized village health care services under the same candidate who led you to believe he’d insure all Americans. The inconsistent messages and actions are unsettling. But we have another voice in Washington, DC - a man who understands what Alaskans believe: less centralized government control, restrained budgets, more opportunity for development, and fewer taxes. Today, we have a friend in RNC Chairman Michael Steele and his bold and courageous speech defines his leadership goals that will guide us all through this most difficult time for our nation.” Governor Sarah Palin More on Miss California

Read the original post: 
Shannyn Moore: Palin Pimps Steele; "Snows" Obama

Phil Mickelson’s wife, Amy, has been diagnosed with breast cancer, and the three-time major champion said Wednesday he will suspend his PGA Tour schedule indefinitely. According to a release from Mickelson’s management company, his wife was to have more tests but begin treatment with major surgery as early as the next two weeks. Mickelson, the No. 2 player in the world with 36 career PGA Tour victories, was to play the Byron Nelson Championship this week before defending his title next week at Colonial. It was not certain if he would return in time for the U.S. Open on June 18-21 at Bethpage Black, where he was the runner-up to Tiger Woods in 2002 and is beloved by golf fans in the New York area. “Elin and I are deeply saddened to hear the news about Amy,” Woods said. “Our thoughts and prayers are with her, Phil, the children and the entire Mickelson family.” Amy Mickelson is among the most visible wives on the PGA Tour, a former Phoenix Suns cheerleader who regularly walks during the rounds and mingles easily with the gallery. They met in 1992 when Mickelson was a senior at Arizona State, a year after he won his first PGA Tour event as an amateur. Amy knew nothing about golf at the time. “I grew up in a tennis family, and when he told me he was a pro golfer, I thought he worked in the shop at a golf course,” she wrote in Mickelson’s book, “One Magical Sunday,” after he won his first major at the 2004 Masters. They were married in 1996 and have three children: Amanda, 9, Sophia, 7, and Evan, 6. Their first child was born the day after the 1999 U.S. Open at Pinehurst No. 2., where Mickelson carried a pager and promised to leave if his wife went into labor. Contractions began on Sunday, but she decided not to tell Mickelson as he tried to win his first major. He lost by one stroke when Payne Stewart holed a 15-foot par putt on the final hole, and Mickelson arrived home in time for the birth. Sarah Strange, a breast cancer survivor and wife of former Ryder Cup captain Curtis Strange, said Amy Mickelson’s ongoing personality would play a big part in her recovery. “She such an upbeat person, and I think she’ll approach this in the same way, moving forward with confidence,” Sarah Strange said. “I’m sure she’s getting the best treatment they can find. An upbeat attitude plays such a key role in this, her own and those around her. I’ll certainly be extending any experiences I’ve had, any questions she could ask me to keep upbeat. “She was so supportive of me being a captain’s wife,” she said. “In return, she will feel that support from others.” More on Sports

Here is the original post: 
Phil Mickelson’s Wife Cancer Diagnosis: Will Suspend PGA Tour Schedule Indefinitely

Phil Mickelson’s wife, Amy, has been diagnosed with breast cancer, and the three-time major champion said Wednesday he will suspend his PGA Tour schedule indefinitely. According to a release from Mickelson’s management company, his wife was to have more tests but begin treatment with major surgery as early as the next two weeks. Mickelson, the No. 2 player in the world with 36 career PGA Tour victories, was to play the Byron Nelson Championship this week before defending his title next week at Colonial. It was not certain if he would return in time for the U.S. Open on June 18-21 at Bethpage Black, where he was the runner-up to Tiger Woods in 2002 and is beloved by golf fans in the New York area. “Elin and I are deeply saddened to hear the news about Amy,” Woods said. “Our thoughts and prayers are with her, Phil, the children and the entire Mickelson family.” Amy Mickelson is among the most visible wives on the PGA Tour, a former Phoenix Suns cheerleader who regularly walks during the rounds and mingles easily with the gallery. They met in 1992 when Mickelson was a senior at Arizona State, a year after he won his first PGA Tour event as an amateur. Amy knew nothing about golf at the time. “I grew up in a tennis family, and when he told me he was a pro golfer, I thought he worked in the shop at a golf course,” she wrote in Mickelson’s book, “One Magical Sunday,” after he won his first major at the 2004 Masters. They were married in 1996 and have three children: Amanda, 9, Sophia, 7, and Evan, 6. Their first child was born the day after the 1999 U.S. Open at Pinehurst No. 2., where Mickelson carried a pager and promised to leave if his wife went into labor. Contractions began on Sunday, but she decided not to tell Mickelson as he tried to win his first major. He lost by one stroke when Payne Stewart holed a 15-foot par putt on the final hole, and Mickelson arrived home in time for the birth. Sarah Strange, a breast cancer survivor and wife of former Ryder Cup captain Curtis Strange, said Amy Mickelson’s ongoing personality would play a big part in her recovery. “She such an upbeat person, and I think she’ll approach this in the same way, moving forward with confidence,” Sarah Strange said. “I’m sure she’s getting the best treatment they can find. An upbeat attitude plays such a key role in this, her own and those around her. I’ll certainly be extending any experiences I’ve had, any questions she could ask me to keep upbeat. “She was so supportive of me being a captain’s wife,” she said. “In return, she will feel that support from others.”

View original post here:
Amy Mickelson Diagnosed With Breast Cancer

LOS ANGELES — Sarah Jessica Parker says she’s concerned for the safety and well-being of the surrogate through whom she and husband Matthew Broderick are expecting twins. The “Sex and the City” star tells “Access Hollywood” that the attention has led to an invasion of the surrogate mother’s privacy. Parker says she worries about her “and the safe delivery of our children.” The 44-year-old says in an interview airing Tuesday on NBC that the surrogate’s telephone and computer have been hacked into, and she’s received threats. Parker says it hasn’t ended there: “She’s had friends threatened and family threatened and she’s had family of friends threatened.”

More: 
Sarah Jessica Parker Concerned For Safety Of Surrogate

New Jersey Republican gubernatorial candidate Chris Christie apparently wants to join his party’s League of Extraordinary Gentlemen: Transcript : HANNITY: What do you think of some of these governors who aren’t taking some stimulus money? Governor Palin, Sanford, Bobby Jindal, Rick Perry. What do you think of that? CHRISTIE: I think it makes sense. If they’re going to put strings on that money, then they’re going to tie your hands and make you expand programs. And not be able to have the freedom of choice that people elected you for. Then you shouldn’t take the money. Jed (who pulled together this clip, natch) observed that it seems as though Christie isn’t just defending the governors who’ve made noise about rejecting stimulus money. Rather, he’s making it sound like if he doesn’t have complete disrection to spend the funds however he wants, he’d reject the stimulus cash outright himself. That’s $2 billion he’d be spurning, including $60 million in law enforcement funds. Christie, by the way, is a former US Attorney. (Hat-tip: Reader mariah10)

Originally posted here:
NJ-Gov: Christie Says It "Makes Sense" to Reject Stimulus Money

The worst thing the left can do is “misunderestimate” the GOP. While some of them may be busy trying to figure out how to match Biblical passages to their stock portfolio, or soften their image with the younger generation by changing the party’s name to something like the GAP, there are those conservatives who figured out how to swiftly turn a democrat’s military experience into a campaign liability and they stay up all night headhunting for the next pseudo luminary to dethrone the Obamighty. Enter the Trinity Stooges, Palin, Cheney, and Limbaugh. While the republican party plays twister with their egos these three visionary impaired blowhards serve as the perfect decoys. When the opening act is weak, it only makes the headliner seem that much better. More on Sarah Palin

Original post: 
Buddy Winston: Dick Rush for Sarah

In an unusual attempt to forge an alliance between two of the most prominent political families in American politics, John Coale, a Washington-area Democratic donor and onetime adviser to Sarah Palin, urged the conservative Alaska governor to use her political action committee to help retire the presidential campaign debt of Hillary Clinton. More on Sarah Palin

See the original post here:
Palin Clinton Alliance Eyed By Former Adviser

First I worried that Obama was foolhardy to put Goldman Sachs alumni and other Wall Street geniuses in charge of fixing the mess that they’d made in the first place. But then I bought the pragmatic argument that these masters of the universe were the only people with enough inside experience to understand the derivatives con game well enough to shut it down. Then I was afraid that Obama was naïve to court Republicans who kept stiffing him on vote after party-line vote. But then I convinced myself that a majority of Americans wanted him to persist at bipartisanship even though House Republicans unanimously preferred warfare to finding common ground, and that being gracious to kneejerk obstructionists gave him enough political cover to get enough Republican Senators to block a Republican filibuster. Then I thought Obama and his Justice Department were being wussy to oppose calls for hearings about torture and for giving a pass to the supine Bush appointees who concocted a “legal” rationale for waterboarding. But then I bowed to the notion that health care and energy and the rest of the reform agenda would die if torture took up all the oxygen in Washington. Then I was troubled that we were ramping up in Afghanistan without an exit strategy, and that rendition and military commissions would continue, and that withholding promised torture photos would lead to the very enemy propaganda victory that the policy reversal was meant to avoid. But then I had to acknowledge the national security and realpolitik props it was winning him from columnists, from the military establishment and from Republicans, and the political upside of being willing to alienate civil libertarians like me. Then I was concerned that the single-payer option doesn’t have a seat at the Administration’s health policy table, and that the White House didn’t lobby the Hill for an interest-rate cap on usurious credit card companies, and that giving laborers a reasonable chance to organize their workplaces isn’t a legislative priority, and that ending “don’t ask, don’t tell” has become don’t-go-there. But when I recalled that Obama has already reversed Bush’s ban on stem cells, and cancelled Bush’s last-minute rule permitting mountaintop mining waste to be dumped near streams, and signed a law extending the statute of limitations on equal-pay lawsuits, I remembered how hostile the last White House was to just about everything I believe in. Throughout the campaign, candidate Obama refused to take the advice I shouted at my television. During the debates, when I pleaded with him to counterpunch at McCain more aggressively, he instead kept calmly saying, “I agree with John….” When I urged him to respond ferociously to Sarah Palin’s poisonous charge that he was “pallin’ around with terrorists,” he coolly ignored me. When I begged him to replace his let’s-look-forward-not-backward rhetoric with a promise to hold Bush lawbreakers accountable, it seemed like he didn’t even hear me. And since his strategy clearly worked, it turned out to be a good thing that he blew me off. I don’t think that President Obama is in a policy bubble, that he’s not doing what I want him to do because there’s no one in the White House forcefully making my case to him. On the contrary, I’m pretty sure that in every decision he makes, the political, moral and policy pros and cons are all starkly in front of him. Nor is it plausible to me that he lacks the smarts and values to know the right thing, or the courage to do the right thing, or that he’s become a captive of the Washington insider/corporate media establishment, or that he’s a bait-and-switch President who ran as a Democrat but governs as a post-partisan. On the other hand, I don’t have to agree with Obama all the time. In fact, it’s my responsibility to be loud and clear when he lets me down. During the Bush years, I was astonished by the ability of Republicans to walk in lockstep, to justify everything the Administration did, to bend themselves into a pretzel in order to claim that night is day and black is white. On the Hill, among the interest groups, in the right-wing echo chamber, there was no lie too blatant or hypocrisy too appalling to be saluted as sweet reason. Obama doesn’t get that kind of treatment, nor should he. There’s no reason his supporters on the left should suck it up and defend him when we disagree with him. Tough love for him is a sign of respect. Sure, vocal dissent runs the risk of propagating a media meme: “Obama’s in trouble with his base, but where are they going to go?” But so what if criticism plays into that narrative? After eight years of dissent being demonized as unpatriotic, it’s a relief to be mixing it up again. This is my column from The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles . You can read more of my columns here , and e-mail me there if you’d like.

Read more here:
Marty Kaplan: It’s Tough Love Time for Obama

For years, it has been an article of faith that national elections in America are competitive for three reasons: the urban areas are heavily Democratic, the rural areas are heavily Republican, and the two parties come reasonably close to splitting the difference in the suburbs. This type of regional analysis have elevated the suburbs to the kind of “make or break” political entity that has been alternated between “soccer moms”, “NASCAR dads”, and whatever other demographic subgroup the analysts on the various cable networks elevate to relevancy in any given election year. The difference, of course, is that the suburbs really DO matter. According to the 2008 exit polls after the presidential election, 49% of the American electorate live in suburbs. This compares to 30% that live in urban areas and an ever-declining 21% of U.S. voters that live in rural areas. The near-majority of voters emanating from the suburbs is a new phenomenon. Even as recently as 2000, only 43% of voters hailed from the suburbs. It has been a steady increase in vote share throughout the decade. Furthermore, the growth of suburban voters has come entirely out of the rural areas where Republicans try to run up the score. Consider the following distribution of voters by region over the last three presidential election cycles ( Source Here ): Year    Urban   Suburban  Rural  2000     29       43       28  2004     30       46       25  2008     30       49       21 Barack Obama’s historic and decisive victory in 2008 has a million fathers, but one of them was the simple fact that the Republican base, geographically speaking, appears to be on the wane. This can be read in two ways: first off, the GOP base is on the wane because Democrats are doing better in rural areas. But it can also be read that the rural areas that the GOP relies on (Sarah Palin’s “Real America”) is becoming an ever-smaller share of the electorate. Consider the following: in 2000, the exact scenario I outlined in the first sentence of this piece came to pass: Gore and Bush held serve in their “home regions” whereas Bush just edged Gore in the ‘burbs. By 2008, Obama’s zone of strength is now 50% larger than McCain’s zone of strength. Obama did not even need to win the suburbs to be a likely winner overall. Yet, exit polls show that he DID win the suburbs, albeit by a narrow edge. Unlike 2000 (when the GOP candidate won the suburbs 49-47) and 2004 (when the GOP candidate won there 52-47), the 2008 exit polls showed Obama edging McCain 50-48. And…still…the exit polls don’t tell the whole story. Obama’s march through suburbia was even more impressive than the modest lead in the exit polls would imply. A few months ago, using an excellent online resource ( Dave Liep’s Atlas of U.S. Elections ), I compiled a list of sixty-seven counties that I classified as “suburban” counties. Skeptics will want to stop me right there. Indeed, there are a number of ways to define what IS a suburb. In exit polls, presumably, voters self-identify, which will no doubt skew their numbers. Indeed, some election analysis avoids any discussion of suburbs at all, lumping most suburban areas in with rural areas, and classifying the two other community forms in America as “exurban” and “rural.” The bottom line–there isn’t a true consensus on what is a suburb, for these kind of political purposes. Therefore, my criteria was arbitrary, to be sure, but not without some logic. I chose counties which had vote counts over a predetermined level (I won’t lie to you, dear reader, I can’t remember if I chose 125,000 or 150,000 voters), and it had to be directly adjacent to a major urban center. The simplest analysis is interesting, nonetheless: for the first time since Bill Clinton cruised to victory in 1996, a Democrat won the majority of these suburban counties: Year    Dem Wins   GOP Wins  1996     37       30  2000     31       36  2004     29       38  2008     44       23 A more sophisticated analysis is more telling. The flaw in just taking straight vote totals is that it ignores national trends in elections. To put it more simply, we’d EXPECT Barack Obama to do better in the suburbs than John Kerry. One was victorious in his election by 7.2%, the other was defeated by 2.5%. So, what happens if you look at how the counties voted AHEAD or BEHIND the national margin?? Here, you see an even more positive conclusion for Democrats. In the last four election cycles, we have seen a steady increase in the number of suburban counties where Democrats out performed their national margins. Year     Ahead of Nat’l     Behind of Nat’l  1996        22                45  2000        31                36  2004        32                35  2008        40                27 That’s right, when you are not looking for raw winners and losers, but rather playing these counties “against the spread” of how the candidates performed nationally, each successive Democratic candidate has gained counties in suburbia, culminating in Obama winning nearly 60% of them this year. Other conclusions that can be drawn from this analysis of the suburban counties of America: 1. CLAIMING NEW GROUND: Among Obama’s many notable electoral achievements in 2008 was this one: nine of the 67 counties in the study had not seen the Democratic candidate carry that county until Obama managed to do it in 2008. In the interests of full disclosure, two of those counties were in Illinois’ collar counties. That said, others were in pivotal swing states like Colorado (Arapahoe and Jefferson Counties) and Virginia (Henrico and Prince William). Indeed, Prince William county in Northern Virginia might have represented the most impressive transformation: after Democrats lost the county by margins ranging from 7-8 points, Obama claimed victory there by 15 points. 2. A NATIONAL PARTY NO MORE: Anyone who read Zell Miller’s angry little tome attributing that phrase to the Democratic Party (no available at fine car wash cut-out bins everywhere) has to get a laugh at how true that phrase has become…of the Republican Party. Of the ten best Republican suburban counties in America, seven of them are in the South. And even some of THEM are shifting. Williamson County, near Austin, had gone for Bush by margins of 41 and 43 points. McCain won there by just 13 points. I’ll be the first to admit that the home-state factor accounts for some of that variance, but 30 percentage points??!!?? 3. IT’S NOT (JUST) ABOUT RACE: To be sure, Obama cleaned house in those few suburban counties (like DeKalb in Georgia) which have substantial black populations. But soaring support for the Democratic ticket expanded well into suburban counties with few black and brown faces. San Mateo County in California has a black population below 4% (a bigger Latino population, though). It is historically well left of center, but it gave Obama far greater margins than Clinton, Gore, or Kerry enjoyed. The same is true for Washington County, which lies southwest of Portland, OR. It is neither heavily black (1.2%) nor particularly liberal (Democrats won here by margins of 3-7% between 1996 and 2004). Obama won here by a whopping 59-37 margin. Now, I will be the first to admit that the analysis has some limitations–starting with the one I already called on myself. It might be easy to delineate between a rural county from the other categories. But getting a universally accepted definition of a suburban county is going to be a tough one. Furthermore, this is at the mercy of things like campaign targeting. The excellent Obama performance in the suburban counties of Colorado could be owed to the fact that the Democrats held their convention in Denver, or to the fact that Team McCain seemed to see the inevitable there by October, and pulled their resources elsewhere. Also, no Democratic candidate in recent history made the effort that Obama made in Florida, therefore it should be no surprise that he gained some yardage over Kerry and Gore in that state’s suburban counties. That said, there are trends here that have to be heartening for Democrats, and depressing for the GOP. It is important to note that, by and large, this is a trend that was already developing before the recent epic electoral failures of the Republican Party. Using the “beat the spread” math that I did on the third table up above, we see that the Republicans have been steadily falling behind expectations in the suburbs. As the suburbs grow in political stature (one has to assume that suburban voters will be a majority in 2012), they are going to have to dramatically re-tool their message politically. What they had in 2008 clearly did not work in much of suburbia. Fortunately for the Democrats, and given recent events, that seems unlikely.

The rest is here: 
Did The Road To Democratic Hegemony Go Through The Suburbs?

At a town hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, this week, President Barack Obama was asked why he has taken single-payer health care off the table. It’s a great question. Not only have the Obama administration and top Democrats taken the option off the table, they are excluding single-payer advocates from the official forums on health care reform, while advocates of the for-profit medical system turn up and have their say. This in spite of the fact that President Obama has repeatedly admitted that single-payer is good policy. (Single-payer health care is a system, like Canada’s, in which the government provide health insurance for everyone. It is simple, straightforward, much lower cost, and it works.) The Obama administration believes they have a good plan. It includes an option for public coverage so that families can opt for a public health care coverage if they are uninsured or not satisfied with the private insurance they now receive. At a conference in Washington earlier this year, I asked Jacob Hacker, one of the architects of the plan, why they were not advocating single-payer health care, a system that has proven successful in other industrialized countries, as we showed in a special YES! issue on health care options. Hacker’s response was similar to Obama’s response in Rio Rancho. People are afraid to give up their employer-provided plan. Although single-payer may be a better system, the private/public plan is more likely to escape the “Harold and Louise” treatment, and is more likely to get adopted than single-payer health care. It could be that Obama and Hacker are right. But here’s the thing. Right now, the medical-industrial complex is working hard to eliminate the public option. That way, there wouldn’t be a public system to compete with them and set a standard for good quality, non-bureaucratic health care. Why would they want to compete? It’s great having a monopoly on our health-care dollars. Since the private insurance lobby is at the table every day, pushing to eliminate the public option, wouldn’t it be smart to allow people on the other side — the single-payer advocates — to come to the table, too? Then the Obama plan can take the place it belongs, as a centrist compromise. Allowing people to the left as well as to the right of the Obama position into the discussion is good strategy. And doing so would recognize two important facts — that single-payer happens to be great policy and it has support from a large number of Americans — maybe even a majority . In a healthy democracy, a good policy with widespread support should be part of the debate. Sarah van Gelder is Co-Founder and Executive Editor of YES! Magazine . She edited YES! Magazine’s special coverage of the health care reform debate .

Original post: 
Sarah van Gelder: Single-Payer Health Care Advocates Deserve a Place at the Table

“New York Magazine” prepared for this week’s impending finale of “Saturday Night Live” by breaking down season into statistical categories including “Total Sketch Appearances By Cast Member,” “Most Frequently Impersonated Celebrity,” and “Guest Appearances In Skits.” Unsurprisingly, Kristin Wiig ruled the school, appearing in the most sketches per episodes and overall, besting the next most popular comedian (Jason “Floyd” Sudeikis) by 25 sketches over the year. Amy Poehler and Seth Meyers pulled up the rear only because “Weekend Update” takes almost all of their time. Also unsurprisingly Obama, McCain, Biden and Palin were the most impersonated people; Palin the least because she’s the only character played by a guest rather than a full-time SNL-er. Which brings us to the most frequent guest star: Tina Fey. READ THE WHOLE PIECE HERE, INCLUDING FULL STATS. More on SNL

See original here:
SNL Season 34: By the Numbers

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin re-appeared on the national stage tonight, jumping to the defense of a beauty pageant contestant who has been at the center of a media feeding frenzy in recent days. More on Miss California

More: 
Palin On Prejean: "The Liberal Onslaught Of Malicious Attacks… Is Despicable"

Arlen Specter’s recent decision to switch parties was viewed by many Democrats as a great victory. It moved the Democratic Party closer to the magic number of 60 Democratic senators which would mean a filibuster proof majority. It also further demonstrated that the Republicans have not yet finished the downward spiral which really began with the 2006 midterm elections. If a center right Republican like Arlen Specter feels compelled to leave the party because he believes it has been taken over by the extremists, then the Republicans still have a ways to go before becoming relevant again. Certainly Specter’s abandonment of the Republicans is bad news for that party and, at least, in the short run helps the Democrats, but it also is a harbinger of challenges that may arise for the Democratic Party if this period of dominance continues. If the Democrats entrench themselves as the dominant partying American politics, there will be more politicians who, like Arlen Specter, will switch parties, not due to strong affinity with the vision and platform of the party, but out of political necessity or convenience. However, as we are already seeing with Specter, once these people join the party, the party leadership has very little leverage over them with regards to important issues where there support is needed. Specter’s statements about the Minnesota senate race are a good example of this. The Democratic leadership does not need to have “Democratic” senators saying that Norm Coleman should retain his seat. In periods of one party dominance, perhaps ironically, the dominant party can encounter troubles passing their legislative agenda, and governing more generally, precisely because the party is so large. Democrats like Specter, driven largely by their own need to survive politically, will provide votes to the party on some of the major issues, but will not be reliable supporters of the party leadership, nor will they be likely sources of progressive ideas to drive the Democratic agenda. Additionally, if the faction of moderate Republicans becomes more powerful within the Democratic Party, as very well may happen, they will begin to gain power and seniority, potentially taking power away from more progressive leadership of the party. Thus, if Democratic Party dominance, based largely on the inability of the Republican Party to grow beyond its limited base, continues, the Democratic Party will be pulled in too many directions to function effectively. As more politicians like Specter switch parties, a likely development, voters in places like Pennsylvania will soon follow because the Democrats will increasingly become the only relevant political party in their state or area, making Democratic primaries the most important elections as already is the case in many big cities. Implicit in Specter’s message that he did not want to be judged by the far right voters who make up Republican Primary electorates, was that moderate and center-right voters in Pennsylvania should leave the Republican Party as well because their voices can no longer be heard in that party. While this may be a good indicator of Democratic victories to come in Pennsylvania, it also can lead to a Democratic Party that represents such a breadth of views and ideas that it loses any real cohesion. While one cannot really blame Specter, and others who will, perhaps more quietly, follow for making individual decisions to save their political careers, the political system, and to a real extent the Democratic Party as well, would be better served if these Republicans committed themselves to the more difficult task of taking the Republican Party back from the Limbaugh-Fox News-Palin faction and building a competitive 21st century party. The notion that our country needs at least two competitive parties is not just a platitude, nor is it necessary solely to hold the dominant party accountable. The presence of a reasonable alternative allows the majority party to have an identity and to stand for something. Without this alternative, the dominant party soon becomes too big and inevitably falters as it cannot be everything to everybody. We see this in many big cities which are dominated by the Democratic Party, but where the Democratic Party seems unable to govern well or to enact a meaningful progressive agenda. If the Democratic Party continues to draw people, as it has over the last several years, particularly during the Obama campaign, because of a shared vision of progressive change or even because of a shared outrage and the disastrous policies of the Bush administration, the Party can continue to play a useful and progressive role. Once it reaches a tipping point and draws people because it is the only political game in town, the Democratic Party will begin to stand for nothing. If this happens it is only a matter of time before the wheel turns again and the Democrats find themselves where they were in 1994. More on Arlen Specter

More:
Lincoln Mitchell: Arlen Specter and the Peril of Democratic Party Dominance

Over the past two weeks, we’ve watched as the latest Eric Cantor brainchild to rebrand the Republican Party, the National Council for a New America, was launched , and then crashed and burned . And today, Roll Call raises some interesting points about who paid for this failed effort: As Roll Call reported on Monday, Cantor staff and GOP ethics attorney Jan Baran have walked a very fine line to comply with House rules in funding, publicizing and staffing the new organization.   The NCNA’s original launch letter carefully — though disingenuously — declared “this is not a Republican-only forum.” Disingenuous indeed. The National Council for a New America (NCNA) is a veritable who’s who of the Republican Party; Eric Cantor, Mitch McConnell, John McCain, Jeb Bush, Bobby Jindal and Sarah Palin, to name just a few. To date, there are no Democrats or Independents involved whatsoever. And the NCNA’s first event, an all-Republican forum where the Democratic Party came under fire: The Arlington event, properly, was paid for from Cantor campaign funds. But, as Roll Call reported, leadership aides on Cantor’s House staff, paid by taxpayers, do the lion’s share of the organization’s work. The NCNA’s Web site, WeThePeoplePlan.org, was designed by a House staffer and directs visitors immediately to Cantor’s leadership Web site — all taxpayer-funded. Baran and Cantor’s deputy chief of staff, Rob Collins, say the NCNA is organized as an “informal caucus” of House and Senate Members that is permitted to use House resources because “this is not the sole function of anyone in [Cantor’s] office.” So, a group that is made up entirely of Republicans, whose purpose, according to Eric Cantor’s office, is to improve the GOP’s electoral prospects: In the last two election cycles, we haven’t done that great, to say the least. So we need to both put forward where we stand and be an intake vehicle. This is part of that process. … is largely being paid for by taxpayer money because Eric Cantor & Company call it a bipartisan effort. On one hand, it’s infuriating to know that our money is paying for the latest attempt by GOPosaur to regain power. On the other, it’s been such an abject failure that we may want to consider it money well spent.

See original here:
Who Is Paying for Eric Cantor’s Effort to Rebrand the GOP?

There is no doubt that this will be a fair and balanced look at the life and times of Sarah Palin: Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will be publishing a memoir in spring 2010 that chronicles both her political and personal life, publishing sources said.   The book will include her reflections on balancing her time as a working mother, recognizing the war’s impact with her son serving combat in Iraq, having a child with a disability, and supporting her teenage daughter through an unplanned pregnancy. The title is not yet decided, the sources said. Let’s help her out … what should the title be?

Original post:
Name That Book

Governor Sarah Palin has signed a book deal with Harper Collins for a memoir due out in the Spring of 2010. Her fee has not been disclosed. She doesn’t want the money to distract from the content. Palin said, “The idea is to focus on the content of the book and what’s coming in terms of me being able to tell my story unrestrained and unfiltered.” “It will be nice to put my journalism degree to work on this and get to tell my story, Alaska’s story. There have been so many unauthorized books and publications that have spoken to somebody else’s opinion of who I am, what my family represents and what Alaska is all about,” Palin said in an interview earlier today. It was reported she was getting an $11 million advance. She denied the amount. It flies in the face of having a legal defense fund. With last weeks poll number showing a slide and disconnect from Alaskans, Sarah Palin may have to do some journalism to really get to the heart of “Alaska’s story.” You betcha! Any guesses for a title? Alaska law is clear about outside employment of public employees: “A public employee may not render services to benefit a personal or financial interest or engage in or accept employment outside the agency which the employee serves, if the outside employment or service is incompatible or in conflict with the proper discharge of official duties.” Harper Collins will pay her more than the governor’s paycheck. Which one will she pick? More on Sarah Palin

Here is the original post: 
Shannyn Moore: Sarah Palin Signs Book Deal

Hey Michael, I’ve been pleased as punch at your first 100+ days on the job. Your efforts to sabotage the GOP have been a stunning success. It was hilarious when you came right out of the gate proclaiming that women could make an “individual choice” on abortion. People were like, “woah!” Republicans were not amused, heh heh. Then you quickly followed up with your fantastic attack on Boss Limbaugh, telling a (black) host that Rush’s words were “ugly” and “incendiary”. Damn that was good! A solid 1-2 punch. Sure, you had to “apologize” and “clarify” almost immediately after both those incidents, but pretending to be sorry bought you time for further mischief, like saying Mitt Romney couldn’t win because he was a flip flopper and could never get past the bigoted GOP base. I was saying the exact same thing a year ago! It’s fantastic hearing an RNC chairman echo what we write at this site. Truly genius. But let’s be serious here, I think they’re on to you, and your days as a Republican chairman are numbered. They’ve taken away your spending powers, and the behind-the-scenes sniping is incessant. Your frequent apologies are buying less and less time. And while you’ve been pretty good about staying in character, getting caught laughing at Wanda Sykes’ Palin joke sort of blew your cover. So you’ve done what you could. Get out now, before it gets too dangerous! There’s at least one southern segregationists hovering around you like a vulture, and, well, I’d be a little nervous about that if I were you. Hugs and kisses, kos

Excerpt from: 
To Michael Steele, RNC Chairman

Originally published on Youthradio.org , the premier source for youth generated news throughout the globe. By: King Anyi Howell

Read more here:
Youth Radio — Youth Media International: Hypocrisy Lessons from Bristol Palin

Being from Chicago, when I hear, “You can’t expect a well-oiled Chicago political machine to understand conservation’s importance in salvaging the environment,” I take it badly. So here’s a test, and a big one. How fast can President Obama say, “Yanking endangered species protection from wolves and polar bears was a huge mistake. It’s fixed. Sorry ’bout that.” While I’m skeptical, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that Interior Secretary Salazar’s terrible decision early in the week to deny gray wolves protection as endangered species was a stupid “rookie” mistake. After all, he’s from Colorado and cynical pals from the “West” could have schnookered him. But stripping BOTH wolves AND polar bears of their status, precisely the way the Bushites proposed to do? That smells intentional. And it’s just as dreadful now as when Bush and his cronies pushed so hard for it. The Obama Administration’s abandonment of two vital keystone species to a handful of irresponsible killers makes it hard to choose between appalling and outrageous. So I won’t. If anything, this egregious failure of responsibility for two vital species that should be naturals for protection is at least as important for a.) the Obama Administration, and b.) humanity, as it is for the wolves and bears themselves. Contrary to our inflated sense of ourselves in the great scheme of things, humans are NOT in charge in the real world. And we’re NOT the top predators, even though we make it our business to be the top killers. Cooling my jets just a tad, let’s take this one at a time. First, the wolves. The Sarah Palins of the world have made it clear that they want their way with wolves: Kill ‘Em, Kill ‘Em All … preferably just for the fun of it from the safety of an airplane after you’ve run them to the ground, exhausted. Compassionate conservatism at it’s best. This clearly is not about economic interests. Far more domestic dogs kill ranchers’ livestock than wolves do. And when it is wolves who are responsible? Ranchers are monetarily compensated by environmental groups. So forget the profit motive. To say that wolves have “recovered” from the near extinction to which we drove them is as wrong-headed as it is to drive them back to that brink. What this IS about is grown-ups who mistake themselves for “Little Red Riding Hood,” the “Three Little Pigs” or faux-macho Sarah Palin wannabes. Perhaps we should award these diseased souls the scat-wit merit badge or a one-way ticket to Pakistan’s Swat valley. Even Romulus and Remus knew better than to swallow the poisonous swill Aesop dished out about wolves. To date, there are no recorded instances of wolves killing humans in the U.S.A. Maybe it’s time to give the guns to the wolves. It appears they would use them more responsibly than we have. Add hard-boiled reason to my own acknowledged biophilia. America has already been down this disastrous road with gray wolves. We wiped them out in Yellowstone National Park and got a stark lesson in return: destroy wolves and the entire ecosystem teeters. While it’s a much longer (and VERY interesting) story, suffice it to say: When there were no wolves, elk completely over-ran the place and the entire ecosystem suffered, terribly — plants, animals, water, soil, the whole place. Even the ditziest tourist knew something was wrong and acted accordingly. And polar bears? They are lightyears beyond being either coca-cola cute, or if you want to slick that up, charismatic megafauna. Polar bears, like us, are at the heart and soul of the terrible consequences of global climate change. Whither goeth the polar bear, there go we — no habitat, no life. Protecting polar bears in every and all ways has “self-interest” written all over it. Pay attention to them and we also have a chance for the survival of life-as-we-know-it on earth. It’s a stretch, but think of polar bears as canaries-in-the-ice; they’re a lead indicator. Leave them to chance and we’ll go down with them. What was all that talk from Candidate Obama, now President Obama about taking global climate change seriously? Tell that to the polar bears who desperately — DESPERATELY — need protection. So here’s the deal. Every authentic hunter and outdoors person, every owner of a “Bo” or “Muffy” or “Buster” (every dog in the world, whatever the pedigree or lack thereof, is a direct descendant of wolves) in the land should be howling along with me, in every parlor from the White House to Your House. Every one of us who has a lifetime allegiance to the bear in our own beddy-by; each of us who’s ooo’d and ahhh’d when a commercial venture enlisted the iconic polar bear in an attempt to overcome our sales resistance; and anyone who’s had to explain to a worried kid looking at a very real photo of a polar bear stranded on a tiny patch of ice needs to be heard. It’s not that they’re cute. They are meat-eaters; they kill to survive, as humans do. They are essential species in the ecologies of which they are a part. We, the sovereign American people saw to it that the Endangered Species Act was enacted way back in 1973. President Obama, if Ken Salazar isn’t up to the job of using that Act on behalf of us all — and that includes the species with whom we share the land and sea the United States claims — get someone who is. Before it’s too late. U.S. Secretary of the Interior Salazar, why kill a wolf? why drown a polar bear? I’m sure Secretary Salazar would like to hear from you as well, as would the President. Do either want to be characterized as a “wanton predator”? Fortuitously, on Thursday we recorded a program with the President of the indomitable Defenders of Wildlife, Rodger Schlickheisen, focused on wolves and global climate change. We’ll have the program up on our “Paula Gordon Show” website and the sunlight/oxygen “YouTube” site shortly.

More: 
Paula Gordon: Wanton Predator?

As you can see from this brief reaction shot broadcast on C-SPAN, Wanda Sykes’ joke about Sarah Palin and abstinence brought a smile and chuckle to Michael Steele’s face: Queue up the apology machine!

Read more from the original source: 
Will Michael Steele have to apologize for this?

There are plenty of celebrities and politicians who make bad decisions as parents but take a public position that they are actually role models. The latest and perhaps most unfortunate example is Bristol Palin, the mother of a 4-month-old boy who is now taking on the role of spokeswoman to prevent teen pregnancy.

See the rest here:
Columnist: Bristol Palin Should Stop Promoting Abstinence

Tonight was the first White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner to take place during the new Obama Administration. As with all WHCADs, the mix of Beltway media personalities and Hollywood types was jarring but fun. Here are some snapshots. Your own hostess with the mostest, Arianna Huffington, was there, and makes an appearance in my photos… Lots of SUVs and limos and stuff… You can barely see it, but the Code Pink ladies were protesting the whole thing… The view up Connecticut Avenue from Florida Avenue, while having some eggrolls before the shenanigans began… Alaska’s “First Dude,” Todd Palin…. Warren Buffett… Another deadender, not sure why they all showed up… Don Rumsfeld… Stevie Wonder… Chris Matthews… The tourists and stuff watching the red carpet show… Felicity Huffman… My friend Sarah with Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, a real gentleman… Amy Poehler, whose husband Will Arnett had just walked by with Jason Bateman, but my camera’s too slow… Christian Slater, very short… I and David Shuster of MSNBC… Keith Olbermann… David Gregory, so very tall… Kyle MacLachlan… I and Arianna… David Brock, Rick(y) Schroeder (!!!)… David Corn, Richard Belzer, Sarah Chamberlain… Glenn Close… Colin Powell… David Axelrod… I and fellow Scorpio Whoopi Goldberg… Your boyfriend, Michael Steele… More on Chris Matthews

Here is the original post: 
Scott Shrake: 1st Snapshots from 1st Obama WH Correspondents’ Dinner

Wanda Sykes, the featured entertainer at tonight’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner , aimed one of her dirtier jokes at Governor Sarah Palin. Sykes noted that Palin had been scheduled to appear but then pulled out at the last minute. Sykes then remarked: “Somebody should tell her that’s not really how you practice abstinence.” WATCH ,center> More on Video

See the original post here: 
White House Correspondents’ Dinner: Wanda Sykes Knocks Sarah Palin Over Abstinence

More coverage of the White House Correspondents Association dinner: watch complete speeches by President Obama and Wanda Sykes , and see a slideshow of celebs and politicos . Wanda Sykes, the comic featured as tonight’s entertainer at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, took a couple of shots at Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. She speculated that Limbaugh was actually the 20th hijacker on 9/11 and derided Hannity for not living up to his pledge to be waterboarded for the troops. WATCH Related: WATCH: Wanda Sykes Knocks Sarah Palin Over Abstinence Related: WATCH: Obama Pokes Fun At Michael Steele And His Love Of Street Slang More on Video

Excerpt from: 
White House Correspondents Dinner: Wanda Sykes Knocks Limbaugh, Hannity

Gallup has run a series of polls that complement what we already know: no one wants to be a Republican (corollary: leaving the GOP makes you an independent.) To set the table, let’s look at pollster.com’s party ID graph (we are not using the “sensitive” setting for this topic; the standard setting probably paints a more accurate picture due to the small number of available polls): Gallup defines that a bit more : Polls conducted in the first quarter of 2009, from January through March, find an average of 35% of Americans identifying themselves as Democrats and 28% as Republicans. The seven-point gap is similar to what Gallup has found since 2006, when the political tide turned in the Democrats’ favor. In fact, there has been no change in national partisanship since the last quarter of 2008, when 35% of Americans identified as Democrats, 28% as Republicans, and 35% as independents. That means the Democratic Party’s advantage has neither expanded nor contracted since Barack Obama took office and began to pursue a largely Democratic legislative agenda. So, no gain for the GOP in any of this despite their “just say no” philosophy. And the details are rather grim for the GOP if you look to future growth: Republicans Face Steep Uphill Climb Among Women Men increasingly identifying as independents, drifting away from GOP At various times over the past decade, the plurality of male partisans have shifted between Republican and independent identification, with no more than 31% of men identifying as Democrats in any quarter. Since late 2006, however, the gap between the percentage of men identifying as independents and the percentage identifying as Republicans has grown, and independent men have outnumbered Republican men for the last two years running. Over this time, Republican identification among men has largely been on par with Democratic support, a clear negative sign for the GOP given the solid support the Democratic Party has among women. Democrats Do Best Among Generation Y and Baby Boomers Republicans do better among Generation X     Although Democrats currently enjoy a party identification advantage over Republicans among Americans at every age between 18 to 85, the Democrats’ greatest advantages come among those in their 20s and baby boomers in their late 40s and 50s. Republicans, on the other hand, come closest to parity with Democrats among Generation Xers in their late 30s and early 40s and among seniors in their late 60s. This doesn’t make the party ID a lock for Democrats. On the other hand, there’s simply no evidence that the asinine approach to governance currently being pushed by Republicans (aka ‘just say no”) is working with anyone other than their brain-dead base (and a few pundits who can’t interpret either polls or election results.) But hey, it’s a free country. If they want to be the party of Terri Schiavo fundamentalist, anti-science, anti-evolution, “just say no” dinosaurs, more power to them. Nate Silver also peeks at the age thing via Gallup’s data, and finds Bush to be the albatross around the GOP’s neck that we saw during the election : George Bush’s disastrous job approval remains the albatross around McCain’s neck. No one will vote for anyone associated with him. This joins CBS (22 approval) as the lowest ranking yet, putting Bush squarely in Nixon-Truman territory. The implications at the Congressional level are obvious. The fact of the matter is they still haven’t come to terms with how much being in the pocket of the social conservatives have hurt them with the majority of the American people (see the attention Sarah Palin still gets despite being the other disaster in 2008 besides Bush - 60% thought her not qualified for president in the 2008 exit polls , something the media forgets.) Until they do, they’ll never be the majority party again in anyone’s lifetime. But that’s their problem. For the rest of us, no one wants to be a Republican, and they aren’t going anywhere nationally, no matter how hard it is for the DC pundits, accustomed to Republican rule, to accept.

Read the original post: 
Gallup: Party ID And Future Voters

Our nation celebrates mothers on May 10th. Amidst the joy that we will share with our loved ones sits the reality that too many women and children in certain parts of our planet face the cruel, unrelenting challenges posed by malaria. Without question, malaria’s pain extends far and wide, infecting one quarter of one billion people each year and taking nearly one million lives on an annual basis. Africa not only suffers 90 percent of the world’s malaria-related fatalities, but, as a consequence of its high disease burden, loses billions of dollars in economic productivity, ensnaring generations in a vicious cycle of poverty. Malaria truly moves without a conscience, devastating young and old, male and female, leaving everyone in endemic regions at risk. On Mother’s Day, though, the unique burden shouldered by women enters into sharper and sadder focus. The disease strikes infants, children under five and pregnant women in astonishing disproportion, as these segments of the population account for 90 percent of malaria deaths. Given the dual role of women as both victim and primary protector of victims, malaria clearly belongs under the umbrella of traditional women’s health issues. It deserves particular attention as a priority in maternal health, which the World Health Organization defines as pregnancy, childbirth and the six-week postpartum period. Poor health and even death stalk the early stages of motherhood in Africa, where one-in-five newborns will not reach their fifth birthdays. Mothers confront an endless series of menaces, from malnutrition to dehydration, but nothing raises a fiercer specter to the well-being of their children than malaria. Those children who manage to survive the disease often face lifelong hardships, as malaria depletes nutrients at an early age essential to the development of their brains and bodies. Maternal health, in particular, endures the ravages of the disease. Pregnancy in Africa carries an inherent risk for mothers, too frequently resulting in maternal fatality. The contraction of malaria by a pregnant woman only elevates the danger she will encounter. Those pregnant women afflicted by the disease deal with a greater chance of delivering low-birth-weight babies, a major cause of infant mortality. On this Mother’s Day, as some families rejoice, others grapple with the dispiriting consequences of an existence marred by malaria; however, on this Mother’s Day, signs of hope appear. We draw hope from the knowledge that we can prevent deaths from malaria among women and children through the application of proven interventions, especially by having them sleep under a long-lasting insecticidal mosquito net (LLIN). We see hope in the collective global will and resources we have harnessed to turn the tide against malaria, including over $3 billion in funding, the commitment to cover all those at risk with lifesaving interventions by December 2010 and the declaration that we will end deaths from the disease by 2015. We discover hope in the data revealing that LLINs now have been distributed to more than 45 percent of the population in endemic African nations and that 140 million LLINs have been distributed over the past three years, offering protection to nearly 300 million people. We find hope in the efforts of the United Kingdom’s Sarah Brown, who has brought to the issue of maternal health unparalleled attention and transformative action. Her understanding of the link between malaria and maternal mortality promises to yield dramatic results not only in the malaria sphere, but across the entire landscape of sub-Saharan Africa. On this Mother’s Day, when we express our most profound appreciation of the women who gave us life, we glimpse a future where malaria no longer denies so many mothers the happiness, gratitude and fulfillment they so richly deserve. More on Africa

Read more from the original source:
Ray Chambers: Remembering the Burden of Malaria on Mother’s Day

WASHINGTON — It’s a chance for President Barack Obama to jab at the Washington establishment and perhaps chide his critics. The forum is the White House Correspondents’ Association’s annual black-tie dinner Saturday night, which attracts a mix of politicians, celebrities and journalists. The president isn’t the only one telling the jokes. Tart-tongued comic Wanda Sykes, who first made a name on TV with stints on “The Chris Rock Show” and “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” was booked as this year’s dinner entertainer. She has said it’s her job to “poke fun and ridicule,” and even a popular figure such as Obama isn’t off limits. Proceeds from the dinner will help feed the hungry and fund journalism scholarships. The association will donate more than $23,000 to the charity So Others Might Eat, including money raised by skipping formal dessert for guests. First lady Michelle Obama planned to present scholarship awards at the event. The $200-per-ticket dinner attracts plenty of VIPs from outside the Beltway. Among those expected to attend were Ben Affleck, Jennifer Garner, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Eva Longoria Parker, Ashton Kutcher, Alicia Keys, Jimmy Fallon, Samuel L. Jackson and Jon Bon Jovi. Pilot hero pilot Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger was expected, too. Look for Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel; former House Speaker Newt Gingrich; former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales; and Todd Palin, whose wife, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, canceled due to flooding in her state. To be honored at the dinner are several journalists: _Sandra Sobieraj Westfall of People magazine and David Greene of National Public Radio, the Merriman Smith Award for presidential coverage under deadline pressure. Westfall won for her election night reporting. Greene won for digging into candidate Obama’s speech that addressed the country’s racial divide. _Michael Abramowitz, formerly of The Washington Post, the Aldo Beckman award for his coverage of the final days of the Bush administration. _Michael J. Berens and Ken Armstrong of the Seattle Times, the Edgar A. Poe Award for excellence in coverage of news of national or regional significance, for a series exposing the failure of Washington state hospitals and others to handle the rise of the MRSA staph infection. The White House Correspondents Association was formed in 1914 as a liaison between the press and the president. Every president since Calvin Coolidge has attended the dinner. ___ On the Net: White House Correspondents’ Association: http://www.whca.net More on Barack Obama

Read more:
White House Correspondents’ Dinner: Obamas To Attend Tonight

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. — A cool sea breeze and thick morning fog provided some relief Saturday for crews battling the wildfire that has destroyed scores of homes along the California coast and forced thousands to evacuate. There was still a threat that dry inland wind could return to stoke the flames again. The fog rolled in from the ocean early Saturday and blanketed the lower elevation areas of the fire. “It wasn’t expected,” said Sarah Gibson, Santa Barbara county public information officer. “It was a nice, thick, wet flow.” However, the fog was expected to burn off by midmorning, and the National Weather Service issued a wind advisory warning that wind could gust to 20 to 25 mph in the Santa Ynez mountain range. Humidity is expected to remain low in the higher slopes although not as low as in previous days. “It’s better than before but it’s still of concern,” Gibson said. More than 30,000 people have left the area and authorities urged 23,000 others to be ready to leave at a moment’s notice. The blaze was only 10 percent contained as of Friday night, after charring more than 13 square miles and destroying about 80 homes as it menaced this celebrity enclave and other coastal towns. The blaze has been fanned by the area’s “Sundowners,” fierce local wind that sweeps down the mountain slopes from north to south and out to sea. “When the air is coming off of the ocean the humidity is fairly high and it pushes the fire back away from the community,” Santa Barbara County Fire Chief Tom Franklin said. “But the (sundowner) prediction is still there. The winds could surface, change back around and blow the fire back downhill.” The weather service said the sharp north-to-south pressure gradient creating the wind was expected to weaken but remain strong enough to produce gusts through Saturday, and possibly until Sunday morning. The fire was raging along a five-mile-long front above normally serene coastal communities. “There will be a point in the incident when I will have cautious optimism but I’m not there yet,” Joe Waterman, the overall fire commander from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, said Friday. About 80 homes have been destroyed in neighborhoods on ridges and in canyons that rise up the foothills above the north edge of Santa Barbara. The city and adjacent communities are pinched between the coast on the south and the rugged mountains on the north, putting them in the path of the sundowner wind. The Santa Barbara area has long been a favorite of celebrities. Oprah Winfrey has an estate in Montecito, where Charlie Chaplin’s old seaside escape, the Montecito Inn, has stood since 1928. A ranch in the mountains that Ronald and Nancy Reagan bought became his Western retreat during his presidency. Some 3,500 firefighters were on the scene along with 428 engines, 14 air tankers and 15 helicopters. A DC-10 jumbo jet tanker capable of dumping huge loads of retardant began making runs on the fire Friday afternoon. Officials said 11 firefighters had been injured to date, including three who were burned in a firestorm Wednesday. They were reported in good condition at a Los Angeles burn center. The cause of the blaze, which broke out Tuesday, remained under investigation. ___ Associated Press writers Amy Taxin and Jeff Wilson contributed to this report.

Excerpt from:
Morning Fog Brings Relief For California Fire Crews

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. — A cool sea breeze and thick morning fog provided some relief Saturday for crews battling the wildfire that has destroyed scores of homes along the California coast and forced thousands to evacuate. There was still a threat that dry inland wind could return to stoke the flames again. The fog rolled in from the ocean early Saturday and blanketed the lower elevation areas of the fire. “It wasn’t expected,” said Sarah Gibson, Santa Barbara county public information officer. “It was a nice, thick, wet flow.” However, the fog was expected to burn off by midmorning, and the National Weather Service issued a wind advisory warning that wind could gust to 20 to 25 mph in the Santa Ynez mountain range. Humidity is expected to remain low in the higher slopes although not as low as in previous days. “It’s better than before but it’s still of concern,” Gibson said. More than 30,000 people have left the area and authorities urged 23,000 others to be ready to leave at a moment’s notice. The blaze was only 10 percent contained as of Friday night, after charring more than 13 square miles and destroying about 80 homes as it menaced this celebrity enclave and other coastal towns. The blaze has been fanned by the area’s “Sundowners,” fierce local wind that sweeps down the mountain slopes from north to south and out to sea. “When the air is coming off of the ocean the humidity is fairly high and it pushes the fire back away from the community,” Santa Barbara County Fire Chief Tom Franklin said. “But the (sundowner) prediction is still there. The winds could surface, change back around and blow the fire back downhill.” The weather service said the sharp north-to-south pressure gradient creating the wind was expected to weaken but remain strong enough to produce gusts through Saturday, and possibly until Sunday morning. The fire was raging along a five-mile-long front above normally serene coastal communities. “There will be a point in the incident when I will have cautious optimism but I’m not there yet,” Joe Waterman, the overall fire commander from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, said Friday. About 80 homes have been destroyed in neighborhoods on ridges and in canyons that rise up the foothills above the north edge of Santa Barbara. The city and adjacent communities are pinched between the coast on the south and the rugged mountains on the north, putting them in the path of the sundowner wind. The Santa Barbara area has long been a favorite of celebrities. Oprah Winfrey has an estate in Montecito, where Charlie Chaplin’s old seaside escape, the Montecito Inn, has stood since 1928. A ranch in the mountains that Ronald and Nancy Reagan bought became his Western retreat during his presidency. Some 3,500 firefighters were on the scene along with 428 engines, 14 air tankers and 15 helicopters. A DC-10 jumbo jet tanker capable of dumping huge loads of retardant began making runs on the fire Friday afternoon. Officials said 11 firefighters had been injured to date, including three who were burned in a firestorm Wednesday. They were reported in good condition at a Los Angeles burn center. The cause of the blaze, which broke out Tuesday, remained under investigation. ___ Associated Press writers Amy Taxin and Jeff Wilson contributed to this report.

View original here:
Morning Fog Brings Relief For California Fire Crews

Marci Klein, senior producer of “Saturday Night Live” and executive producer of “30 Rock,” recently sat down with host Julie Menin for her NBC New York show “Give and Take.” Klein spoke about everything from Sarah Palin’s firm handshake to Hillary Clinton’s anger over sketches about Chelsea to how she discovered Will Ferrell. In the wide-ranging interview, which airs on NBC New York as well as streams on JulieMenin.com, Klein — who recently booked her father Calvin for a guest spot on “30 Rock” — also discusses infamous moments in “SNL” history, like Sinead O’Connor ripping up the pope photo and Ashlee Simpson storming off-stage in the middle of her set. “Give and Take,” a new show about current events and women’s issues, launched this week and “will provide a unique place for leading women from different disciplines to talk about their lives and the issues important to them and other women,” says the host ( who is also a Huffington Post blogger) . In addition to Klein, upcoming guests include CNBC anchor Maria Bartiromo, Mayor Bloomberg’s longtime girlfriend Diana Taylor, Tru TV anchor Jami Floyd, and Caroline Hirsch, owner and founder of the legendary Caroline’s comedy club. The interview with Klein was cut into five clips, rolled out individually this week on JulieMenin.com. Parts III and IV are below. For Part I, in which Klein talks about meeting Lorne Michaels, and Part II , in which she discusses how she knew Will Ferrell would be a star as soon as she saw him, visit JulieMenin.com . Part III : Klein talks all about the politicians that “SNL” has hosted over the years. She says John McCain has a “great sense of humor” and that Sarah Palin was one of the most confident people she’s ever met. “I actually was the first person to meet her,” Klein said of Palin. “I was standing there, and I thought, ‘Oh my God, she looks just like Tina!’” Klein said Palin had an “incredibly strong handshake” and that she was overwhelmed by her resemblance to Tina Fey. “A lot of people come to our show — actors, musicians — and they’re nervous…she was not nervous. I thought, this is the most confident person I’ve ever met.” Part IV : Klein discusses the influence of “SNL” on “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report,” and talks about the way the media, and “SNL” specifically, treated Hillary Clinton during the campaign. “Personally, there were moments between dress and air where I’d say, ‘Can we be nice to her? Why does everyone hate her so much?’” she said. Klein added that over the years Clinton has weighed in on the show’s treatment of her, in particular its treatment of Chelsea. More on SNL

See the original post here:
Marci Klein, SNL Producer, On Sarah Palin’s Handshake, Writing Hillary Clinton Sketches, Discovering Will Ferrell & More (VIDEO)

Marci Klein, senior producer of “Saturday Night Live” and executive producer of “30 Rock,” recently sat down with host Julie Menin for her NBC New York show “Give and Take.” Klein spoke about everything from Sarah Palin’s firm handshake to Hillary Clinton’s anger over sketches about Chelsea to how she discovered Will Ferrell. In the wide-ranging interview, which airs on NBC New York as well as streams on JulieMenin.com, Klein — who recently booked her father Calvin for a guest spot on “30 Rock” — also discusses infamous moments in “SNL” history, like Sinead O’Connor ripping up the pope photo and Ashlee Simpson storming off-stage in the middle of her set. “Give and Take,” a new show about current events and women’s issues, launched this week and “will provide a unique place for leading women from different disciplines to talk about their lives and the issues important to them and other women,” says the host ( who is also a Huffington Post blogger) . In addition to Klein, upcoming guests include CNBC anchor Maria Bartiromo, Mayor Bloomberg’s longtime girlfriend Diana Taylor, Tru TV anchor Jami Floyd, and Caroline Hirsch, owner and founder of the legendary Caroline’s comedy club. The interview with Klein was cut into five clips, rolled out individually this week on JulieMenin.com. Parts III and IV are below. For Part I, in which Klein talks about meeting Lorne Michaels, and Part II , in which she discusses how she knew Will Ferrell would be a star as soon as she saw him, visit JulieMenin.com . Part III : Klein talks all about the politicians that “SNL” has hosted over the years. She says John McCain has a “great sense of humor” and that Sarah Palin was one of the most confident people she’s ever met. “I actually was the first person to meet her,” Klein said of Palin. “I was standing there, and I thought, ‘Oh my God, she looks just like Tina!’” Klein said Palin had an “incredibly strong handshake” and that she was overwhelmed by her resemblance to Tina Fey. “A lot of people come to our show — actors, musicians — and they’re nervous…she was not nervous. I thought, this is the most confident person I’ve ever met.” Part IV : Klein discusses the influence of “SNL” on “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report,” and talks about the way the media, and “SNL” specifically, treated Hillary Clinton during the campaign. “Personally, there were moments between dress and air where I’d say, ‘Can we be nice to her? Why does everyone hate her so much?’” she said. Klein added that over the years Clinton has weighed in on the show’s treatment of her, in particular its treatment of Chelsea. More on SNL

See the rest here:
Marci Klein, SNL Producer, On Sarah Palin’s Handshake, Writing Hillary Clinton Sketches, Discovering Will Ferrell & More (VIDEO)

Hey, anybody remember that whole thing where the Bush “administration” US Attorneys were illegally politicized by, among others, Karl Rove, who never answered his subpoena from either the House or Senate Judiciary Committees on the subject? Yeah, me too. And I know that everyone’s got their eye on the issue of Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) just being a straight-up racist. (That perhaps gets easier to fathom when you realize that cute-’n-cuddly “Jeff” Sessions’ full name is actually Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III .) But here’s something that I think is being overlooked in that. It’s definitely a seminal part of the record on the accusations of racism, but there’s a more salient point to be gleaned from it, in my opinion: Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III is one of the original politicized Republican US Attorneys, present at the creation of the still-active conspiracy to use partisan-driven, trumped up “voter fraud” charges to suppress traditionally Democratic African-American voter turnout. Sarah Wildman, in her Dec. 2002 New Republic article, explains: Sessions was U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Alabama. The year before his nomination to federal court, he had unsuccessfully prosecuted three civil rights workers–including Albert Turner, a former aide to Martin Luther King Jr.–on a tenuous case of voter fraud. The three had been working in the “Black Belt” counties of Alabama, which, after years of voting white, had begun to swing toward black candidates as voter registration drives brought in more black voters. Sessions’s focus on these counties to the exclusion of others caused an uproar among civil rights leaders, especially after hours of interrogating black absentee voters produced only 14 allegedly tampered ballots out of more than 1.7 million cast in the state in the 1984 election. The activists, known as the Marion Three, were acquitted in four hours and became a cause célèbre. Civil rights groups charged that Sessions had been looking for voter fraud in the black community and overlooking the same violations among whites, at least partly to help reelect his friend Senator Denton. Sound familiar? (It should. The Bush White House was targeting US Attorneys for firing if they didn’t get with the Sessions program .) The US Attorneys scandal is still fresh in mind, and among the various possibilities for probes into the Bush/Cheney “administration’s” misconduct, an investigation into the “possible attempts to use [the] Justice Dept. for political purposes” actually evidenced the most support of the issues polled — 71% supporting either criminal probes or investigation by an independent panel. Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III may or may not be an old school racist. But there’s little doubt he’s an original gangster Republican US Attorney. And with Judiciary Committee subpoenas still outstanding for testimony in the Bush/Cheney White House’s outrageous escalation of this campaign, and strong public support for getting to the bottom of it, it seems more than a little ridiculous for the ranking member of the Committee to be a guy who actually made his political bones committing the very same political subterfuge they’re (supposed to be) investigating. That he’s also going to be the face of the GOP as he sits in judgment of President Obama’s judicial nominations only makes things worse. They may be out of office, but as they continue to ignore Congressional subpoenas and now elevate a co-conspirator to the ranking member’s position, it’s clear Republicans are both unrepentant about their crimes, and fully intent on continuing them.

Excerpt from:
Sen. Sessions: Original Gangster

This week, appearing in a Town Hall-styled press event, Bristol Palin debuted as a teen “ambassador” for the Candies Foundation, the philanthropic arm of the Candies shoe brand that raises awareness of the teen pregnancy crisis. It was an unsteady first step, which pleased those cynical about former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s politically expedient version of her daughter’s pregnancy: Remember? Bristol and boyfriend Levi are in love and will marry soon after the election. Bristol and Levi are now broken up and seem to be doing much of their communicating, even seem to subtly be negotiating custody/visitation arrangements for their son Tripp, on prime time TV. Now that no one any longer has to pretend that the pre-election fictions are true, there is a valuable lesson to learn. And, oddly, the quiet girl thrust into the public spotlight as a result of a most private mishap might just help teach it. That is if Levi is invited along. Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News , World News , and News about the Economy On the morning of the Town Hall appearance, Bristol also appeared on ABC and NBC, broadcasting maddeningly mixed messages about teen pregnancy prevention on the nation’s most widely watched news shows. She seemed to emphasize the abstinence-only approach to pregnancy prevention on Good Morning America (”It’s important for me to get involved just to advocate and promote abstinence and send my message out…abstinence is a hard choice but it’s the safest choice and the best choice”) only to appear on the Today show minutes later to admit that abstinence can be unrealistic for some teens and they should use contraception (”If you’re going to have sex I think you should have safe sex.”) I recognize I’m trained to listen for nuances in the sex ed debate. I’m also twice Bristol’s age. And so it’s easy for me to slip into the Simon Cowell role. No, she’s not polished. Hers is a kind of witness-cross-examined-style speech–short statements which leave you wondering what she isn’t saying. I’m not even sure Bristol realizes that she’s been contradicting herself. So at first listen, her message sounds way off-key. On a second closer listen though, I started to hear something else. It sounded more like a new, albeit unrehearsed and out-of-the-studio, style. In truth, if her televised appearances this week are cobbled together, there is definitely a message worth listening to. Even comprehensive sex ed proponents should be fine with what she’s actually saying. People who favor comprehensive sex ed have reflexively shunned her. She has seemed at times brainwashed by the group which still believes abstinence is the only direction a teenager needs to get. But in her roundabout way, Bristol is in fact voicing the core message of comprehensive sex ed which is: there’s no better protection against pregnancy and disease than abstinence, teens should postpone becoming sexually active, but those that are having sex need to use to protection. But prevention is not Bristol’s area of expertise (for sure.) Bristol is much more interested in warning teens about premature parenthood than putting herself forth as an expert on teen pregnancy prevention. That, I think, is part of the reason why she sounds confused when discussing what teens should or should not be doing. Being a teen mom is her new expertise. This is where she becomes clear: she wants to use her experience to help other teens avoid the same fate. She explains, “If I can prevent even one girl from getting pregnant, I will feel a sense of accomplishment.” It’s on this point where Bristol and the Candies Foundation (which supports both abstinence and safe sex approaches) have a truly shared perspective, one that gets overlooked by the traditional teen pregnancy prevention messengers. Bristol’s and Candies’ shared message to teens is: you don’t want to become a teen parent. The traditional pregnancy prevention messages have often missed this. They have assumed teens don’t need convincing on that issue. They assumed teens just need to know how not to get pregnant. But statistics provided by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy indicate that about one in five pregnant teens was trying to conceive. For this demographic, messages about abstinence and/or contraception are useless. And so Bristol may be reaching an emerging demographic. Candies may have found a powerful messenger in her. And let’s give her credit, hers is possibly the most difficult of messages to impart. She loves her baby, Tripp is a blessing in her life, though if she could have done it over she would definitely have waited to become a parent–it would have been better for her and her son. There are difficult emotional acrobatics here, seeming contradictions that, to her credit, she manages to present in a way that feels honest and understandable. But there is one thing very important missing from the Candies campaign. Lucky for them, the opportunity to fix that is standing right before their eyes. What their campaign needs is Levi Johnston. And Levi has something to say. Few have noticed that Levi has been trying to get in on this important conversation. It may seem like he is just trying to spoil Bristol’s day now that he is persona non grata in the Palin household. Whenever Bristol is backed into pushing abstinence, Levi pops up with a wry smile and a disclaimer: “It’s unrealistic.” Levi has been taking to the airwaves himself. In fact, on the morning of the Town Hall he got himself on the Early Show, in an unofficial capacity, to discuss their unplanned pregnancy. He quite diplomatically praised Bristol for encouraging teens to abstain but, based on his first-hand experience, he encouraged consistent condom use. Watch CBS Videos Online What this national conversation desperately needs is for teen boys, like Levi, to be involved. How can we expect them to take responsible steps to prevent teen pregnancy if we act as if they play no part? Levi brings with him a great chance to make boys the stakeholders they inevitably are. He also offers a unique perspective on the difficulties of being a teen father, one that will resonate with boys in a way Bristol’s point of view will not. It’s also worth noting that Levi is as sought-out by the media as Bristol. He has the same humble, and winning, way of delivering a simple message. He can balance out Bristol’s warnings about Saturday nights changing diapers with a pragmatic strategy for avoiding that fate. And, let’s not forget, he needs a job. He’s also handsome enough (New York Magazine calls Levi, a hockey player, “sex on skates”) to get girls to pay attention to his pro-protection message. These two are never gonna be slick, media trained, celebri-teens with talking points and agents (Bristol’s entourage in New York was her aunt, baby and Dad.) No doubt, Candies is taking a risk with Bristol and would extend that risk even further by giving Levi an equal voice in the discussion. But with great risk comes the possibility for great gains too. The United States is suffering from a teen pregnancy scourge–we have the highest teen birth rate of any other developed country, and by a long shot. Teen parents are less likely to complete the education necessary to qualify for a well-paying job — in fact, parenthood is the leading cause of school drop out among teen girls. College then becomes the remotest of possibilities. Less than two percent of mothers who have children before age 18 complete college by the age of 30. Too often heartbreaking sacrifices are also foisted on the children of teen parents. These children are more likely to be born prematurely at low birthweight compared to children of older mothers, which raises the probability of infant death and disease, mental retardation, and mental illness. Children of teens are 50 percent more likely to repeat a grade and are less likely to complete high school. The children of teens also suffer higher rates of abuse and neglect (two times higher). Teen parents and their children are not the only ones paying dearly. Premature parenting in the United States costs taxpayers (federal, state, and local) approximately $9.1 billion each year. Most of the costs are associated with services to address the negative consequences detailed above. Bristol and Levi are bravely offering their intensely personal misstep up for others to learn from. They may be at odds with each other (another statistical likelihood they realized) but they are united in their message about the not-so-glamorous life of teen parents. For breaking news on threats to birth control access and information visit birthcontrolwatch.org More on Sarah Palin

Read the rest here:
Cristina Page: Why We Need Bristol (and Levi)

Full disclosure: I have a hard-on for Bristol Palin - and I don’t mean the good kind. If you’ve read anything I’ve written, this isn’t a huge surprise. Yesterday morning I woke up to Bristol spewing messages of abstinence on the morning news shows. On The Today Show, she talked to Matt Lauer while she sat next to her father and rocked her baby. (Levi wasn’t there. Big surprise.) On GMA, she talked to Chris Cuomo, alone. Why, you ask, was Bristol all over the media? Because she is the official teen ambassador for The Candie’s Foundation, an organization that advocates for the prevention of teen pregnancy. Worthwhile cause? Absolutely. Good choice in teen advocate? You have got to be kidding. About seven years ago, I met with the Candie’s Foundation to talk about potential partnerships. It’s not as if I don’t support their cause. I do, wholeheartedly. But the news of Bristol Palin becoming the voice of reasonable sexuality education is all too much for me to handle. So now, I can add Neil Cole (founder of the Candie’s Foundation and CEO of Candie’s) to my WTF list. Neil, since when has abstinence been the only realistic option for teens? Neil, hasn’t research shown that abstinence only sexuality education is ineffective, often biased, and medically inaccurate? Neil, isn’t putting a teen mother who has yet to practice what she (or her mother) preaches simply hypocritical? Neil, do we honestly think that if Bristol were involved in a new relationship that she would practice abstinence indefinitely? Perhaps we don’t remember that only a few months ago, Bristol Palin told Greta Van Susteren that teen abstinence was “unrealistic.” I remember it, because I watched her say it. So the fact that she is now getting paid to wave the abstinence flag is appalling. There is no question that for many teens, abstinence is the best option. However, there are plenty of adolescents who make smart decisions about sex; there are plenty of adults who make poor ones. Nonetheless, instead of insisting on abstinence, how about teaching teens how to evaluate decisions about sex, how to negotiate with their partners, how to communicate with their parents about sex and relationships, and how to protect themselves if they choose to engage in sexual behaviors? These missions make sense to me. Hiring a pseudo-celebrity who has been hypocritical and inconsistent in her messaging about sex does not. The Candie’s Foundation blew it this time. This is not the way to get teens to join the cause. However, on a positive note, President Obama announced his 2010 proposed budget, and unlike Bristol Palin, he is supporting comprehensive, evidence-based sexuality education! More on Sex

Originally posted here:
Dr. Logan Levkoff: Bristol Palin as Non-Profit Sex Educator? WTF!

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will miss a chance to chat up President Obama this weekend because she’s cancelling plans to attend the White House Correspondents’ dinner, but she’s got a good excuse. Palin on Wednesday declared a state of emergency because of record flooding in Eagle, Alaska. “It’s basically wiped out a town,” Bill McAllister, Palin’s communications director, told CNN. More on Sarah Palin

Continued here:
Palin Pulls Out Of White House Correspondents Dinner

NEW YORK — With Mother’s Day just days away, there are plenty of options left for procrastinators, but most involve shelling out major bucks. This year, though, as retailers chase dollars amid the recession, some low-price options are available. Here’s how to get deals on five classic gifts: 1. Flowers. The date to get free shipping offers has passed. But you can still find deals at 1-800-flowers.com and FTD.com, both of which have arrangements starting at $19.99 _ which can help offset the last-minute shipping costs. 1-800-flowers.com is also offering 30 Mother’s Day gifts for $30 until Saturday. 2. Chocolate. Inexpensive chocolates can be found at drug stores and grocery stores of course, but for more discerning moms, Godiva is offering free brownies with an in-store purchase of $25, and a 10-piece treat bag with an in-store purchase of $45, through Sunday. 3. Brunch. Several chain restaurants are offering enticements for Mother’s Day brunchers. At T.G.I. Friday’s and McCormick & Schmick’s, moms will get a free desert. For Japanese cuisine-loving moms, Benihana is taking a different tack: Mothers will receive a complimentary signed souvenir photo taken with her personal chef. For after-brunch treats, TCBY will offer moms a free frozen yogurt and some Dunkin’ Donuts are giving out a free small latte. 4. Electronics. Through Saturday, Target is offering a free bath gift set worth $25 from Soap & Glory _ the lower priced line of Bliss spa founder Marcia Kilgore _ when you purchase one of three electronics: a $129 Kodak Zi6 camcorder, a $146 TomTom One 140 GPS system or a $146 8GB iPod Nano. Shoppers can decide if mom gets the gift set, the electronic, or both. A less-expensive choice for electro-savvy moms is a $10 digital-picture key chain that holds up to 50 pictures. 5. Perfume. Amazon.com is offering $10 off orders of perfume for $59 or more, including Euphoria by Calvin Klein and Lovely by Sarah Jessica Parker, through Saturday. Buy.com and PayPal are offering $5 off perfume purchases of $50 or more through Monday. Another option: Though known mainly for deals on clothing and accessories, off-price retailers such as T.J. Maxx and Filene’s Basement offer a wide variety of perfume at a discount.

More here: 
Last-Minute Deals On 5 Classic Mother’s Day Gifts

In retrospect, we knew we were done for the night Johnny Carson said George McGovern sounded like Liberace. Those of us working on McGovern’s 1972 presidential campaign staff had seen some highs and lows: the extraordinary campaign of primary victories that won him the Democratic nomination; the screwed-up party convention and crash dive when his vice presidential candidate Tom Eagleton was forced to withdraw after revelations of electroshock therapy. But Johnny Carson making that joke on “The Tonight Show” was the final nail in the electoral coffin. On top of everything else, he was right–George did sound like Liberace. It wasn’t the first time TV comedy had an impact on the nation’s politics. Four years earlier, Richard Nixon had emitted an incredulous “Sock it to me?” on the hit show “Laugh In.” Millions of Americans thought this proved he was a regular guy — enough, perhaps, to have provided his narrow margin of victory (Hubert Humphrey, foolishly, had turned down a similar invitation from “Laugh In.” Of course, in those days, he still referred to our medium as “the television.”). Now we see Jon Stewart serving up Jim Cramer and the rest of CNBC as rotisserie chicken for their coverage of the financial crisis, David Letterman taking revenge after John McCain cancels an appearance to do an interview with Katie Couric (and lies about it), Tina Fey perfecting a spot-on imitation of Sarah Palin. All of these impacted politics, too. What’s different today is that not only is TV comedy commenting on and affecting the news it has become a source of news. So what does comedy tell us about the truth that the news can’t? That’s what we’re talking about in Washington Friday evening. Stay tuned. See the show “Writers Speak! A Potentially Regrettable Evening with WGA Comedy Writers,” this Friday May 8th, 7:00 pm - 9:30 pm at Washington DC’s Newseum. More WGA blogs about the event available here . More on Political Humor

Read more:
Michael Winship: How Comedy Impacts Politics

This week, the House Republican’s #2 leader, Minority Whip Eric Cantor (Virginia) said he wants to start a national “listening tour” because he still is not sure what the Republican Party stands for. What’s he gonna find out? That only about 25% of Americans even want to say they are Republicans ? That yes, indeed, a clear majority of the American people voted for Barack Obama and against the last eight years (six of which were one-party conservative government)? That the public still strongly supports our new president and believes the Republicans aren’t doing anything to clean up the mess they caused? One thing Congressman Cantor is going to find out is that the three most influential and high-profile Republicans today are none other than Dick Cheney, Newt Gingrich, and Rush Limbaugh. Yes, Cheney, Gingrich, and Limbaugh. Name another high-profile, influential Republican. Go ahead. OK. Yes. Sarah Palin. ( And what a blessing she is. ) The dominance of the three old men prove 20-something Meghan McCain right when she said a few weeks ago that the “Old School Republicans are scared sh**less of the future.” But no one’s gonna knock El Rushbo from his catbird seat if he has anything to say about it. The man who credits his success to “talent on loan from God” hollered at Cantor about his ill-conceived tour, “We do not need a listening tour. We need a teaching tour.” Truth is, the waning conservative movement and the GOP needs a learning tour … and some folks who don’t already have chapters in 1970s, 80s, and 90s political history books. — Donnie Fowler San Francisco

Read more here: 
Donnie Fowler: The Big Three Fight On: Cheney, Gingrich, & Limbaugh

After the last six weeks of watching the Palin train cars derail one by one, in what can only be described as agonizing political slow motion, we’ve been waiting with curiosity to see what would happen when the latest Hays Research poll came out. The last poll numbers we had showed Palin’s approval rating at 59.8% (sum of very favorable and favorable ratings) and her approval index (very favorable minus very unfavorable) at +14. Bear in mind that at one point, before people started paying attention, her approval rating hovered a hair under 80% and her approval index was an unheard of +40. Let’s take a look at what those numbers looked like last July before the nomination. (whistles) No wonder the GOP was impressed. Little did they know about that “Alaskans not paying attention” part. I’ll cut Alaskans a little slack, though. We were coming off a bad relationship. Former governor Frank Murkowski was such a disaster, Palin cleaned up on the “anyone but Frank” vote. He was an incumbent who got slayed in the primaries with only 19% of the vote. We wanted anyone but Frank, and that’s what we got. Be careful what you wish for, as the saying goes. But her heretofore astronomical approval rating goes to illustrate a very important point. The idea of Sarah Palin got an 89% approval rating in this very red, very down-to-earth, very mavericky state. It’s when we started learning about the real her that the bloom was off the rose. And now, by the look of things, the petals are dropping fast. Here are the latest numbers from Hays research. Approval rating 55% and Approval index at +6. Ouch. And that, my friends, is what a crash in progress looks like. And now we ask the question, “So when does the burning start, and where are the marshmallows?” The graph you see is the reflection of six weeks that included three ethics complaints , a disastrous and inappropriate pick for Attorney General, a petulant “appointment war” with Senate Democrats, rejecting and then accepting and then still rejecting part of the stimulus money, asking a sitting US Senator to step down and then denying it , flying out of state for a right to life dinner party during the last 3 days of the legislative session, and a host of other things including airing family dirty laundry and smacking down a teenager in the national media . And let’s not forget blaming bloggers for everything from ethics complaints to the rejection of her Attorney General pick… I could go on. Really, I could. Those were just the highlights. Meanwhile, another Alaskan Republican woman in high office has been in the spotlight lately too. What happens when one of those go-getter feisty Alaskan political women has a sharp mind, a good work ethic, moderate political views, an ability to work with people, and acts like an adult? Check it out. Yes, that would be a 76% approval rating for Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski (daughter of the loathed and previously mentioned ex-Governor Frank Murkowski), and an approval index of +27. Alaska may have a golden girl, but it’s not the governor. [Full survey results from Hays Research available HERE ] More on Sarah Palin

See original here: 
AKMuckraker: Sarah Palin’s Approval Rating in Alaska is Crashing. When will the burning start?

So a lot of people have been giving poor little Miss (not Mrs. mind you) Bristol Palin flack for actively advocating abstinence as a realistic option for the disaffected, hyper-sexualized MTV Generation (not by example but by hypocrisy ). To be fair, she is not alone. A good share of public personages have recently taken unexpected stances on major issues of the day. Here are ten of them: 1. George W. Bush for RIF (Reading Is Fundamental). He’s is not just the former president, he’s a client. 2. John and Elizabeth Edwards to host Parents Without Partners mixers. In hopes of finally pairing off party-girl Rielle Hunter and her illegitimately conceived offspring. They’re waiting till after the Oprah appearance, though, as ongoing rumors of the not-so-immaculate conception will no doubt boost book sales (Oprah’s Book Club? Fingers crossed!). 3. Dick Cheney to head Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence . Why shoot someone solely in the head when you and your compatriots can waterboard him 183 times? Bullets are for p*ssies!… or close friends in the woods. 4. David Duke becomes major supporter of NAACP . Advocates new “no Colored or Jew” membership plan. 5. Wilbur (of Charlotte’s Web fame) named new spokespig for Tourism in Mexico. Claims Swine Flu Pandemic to be anti-Mexican media driven conspiracy and that the Mesoamerican hot spot is actually “some”, “terrific”, “radiant”, “humble” country. Offers free buttermilk baths to first 100 people to book a flight. Still continues to cross-promote his international crusade against arachnophobia. 6. Nadya Suleman argues for hysterectomies. As long as all removed uteruses are implanted within her body (AKA the “Baby Factory ” ). 7. Ron Paul makes the case for the Somali pirate’s plight . Proposes we contract them as an independent militia to overthrow our over-bloated federal agencies and restore the gold standard, starting with the doubloon (YouTube video coming soon–currently being transferred from his Betamax machine). 8. Noam Chomsky becomes the new face of the WTO (World Trade Organization). Points out that while it is simply a tool to enforce hegemonic obedience to U.S. interests and rationalize our intervention across the globe, it sure is fun to run. Overheard to say: “Wow, what a rush! Suck it, Nader!!!” 9. Rick Santelli starts up Tea Baggers for Taxes . Abandoning all previous qualms with Obama’s economic policies, he now calls on all citizens to send packages of Earl Grey, Orange Pekoe, Green , Oolong, and Darjeeling tea to both congressmen and senators who advocate not only for the mortgage bailout but universal healthcare, public works projects and education reform. His bizarre behavior is rumored to be related to recent unconventional glaucoma treatments received in California. Has also been seen doing shots with Rielle Hunter (currently searching for a step-baby daddy–she gets around), who’s allegedly working on sweet talking him into producing and starring in a re-make of Network for TBS . 10. Levi Johnson for Planned Parenthood . Perhaps the best reason to support a woman’s right to choose. More on Swine Flu

Original post: 
Warren Holstein: Top Ten Worse Spokespeople Than Bristol Palin

Virginia Republican Eric Cantor, the House Minority Whip (whip it good!) fancies himself the present and future of the Republican Party, especially since according to polls (such as ours), his boss John Boehner is the most unpopular politician in the United States of America . So he’s been going around merrily helping to spread the rumor that he, Eric Cantor, was on the short list of vice-presidential nominees for former presidential nominee John McCain. The amount of truth to this assertion is approximately nil , according to McCain’s people (emphasis added): “The notion that Eric Cantor was somehow a high profile candidate for vice president is a complete and total joke,” a source close the top former leadership of the McCain campaign told me. ” He was never on the short list. Never vetted. But if you read the press today you would believe that Eric Cantor ever so close to being vice president. This was created by Cantor’s PR people. He’s got a ton of them.” Heck, why stop with vice-president? Psst! Eric Cantor was on the short list for Pope back in 2005! He turned it down! Pass it on! It’s pretty embarrassing when former McCain staffers are laughing at your ineptitude, but that is just what’s happening to Cantor: Cantor’s shameless self promotion is the source of bitter jokes among McCain veterans. “They just laugh about it,” says the source, who has long been a close observer of Cantor’s career. “When Cantor’s asked about it, he won’t comment directly about the vetting. He just hints and struts. It’s very revealing. Its’ the old politics: You get ahead by courting the spotlight without doing anything necessarily different or interesting. There’s nothing there.” Perfect description not only of Cantor, but of the entire slate of Republican leaders today…full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

See more here: 
McCain Camp: Cantor’s No Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin is no longer the most popular governor in the country. That title now belongs to Connecticut Republican Governor M. Jodi Rell. Rell has a 70% approval rating (4.10.09). Connecticut has seven times the population of Alaska. Sarah Palin is no longer the most popular politician in Alaska. Senator Lisa Murkowski is. She is polling at a combined approval of 76.3%. Lisa Murkowski avoids drama. Alaskans, while not always agreeing with her, agree she is, unlike Sarah Palin, at work. In March 2008, Sarah Palin’s combined positives were 85%. Her combined negatives were 12%. In July of 2008, according to the same polls, if you walked into a bar with 100 people, 12 people didn’t approve of the job Sarah Palin was doing. Good luck getting a drink. Last September, Sarah went on tour…and stayed on tour-like an old Aqua Net 80’s band that ought to stick to playing local bars and count their iTune downloads. Sarah Palin consistently ignored the needs of Alaskans. As a result of her job abandonment, her approval rating suffered. The new Hayes Research polls show the governor at 54% combined approval and 41.6% combined disapproval. 30% of her former fans now boo her. Love can be fickle. Alaskans are starting to get it. Palin’s job approval numbers have dropped consistently since she came back from the Straight Talk Express tour. Neglect doesn’t play well here. Since these poll numbers were released, Sarah Palin has dug her naughty monkey heels in; she is selfishly refusing $28.6 million in State Energy Program stimulus funds. Alaska has the highest energy costs in the country. Newsflash: it gets cold here! The money would be used to winterize homes, which in turn, would reduce energy consumption and costs, while…ding ding ding…providing local jobs and STIMULATING a sluggish economy!!! Palin said she doesn’t want to be part of “growing the national debt.” If she were truly concerned, she would accept the stimulus package in its entirety and then write the federal government a check. The $28.6 million she is rejecting will go to another state-probably California. In a bipartisan plea to the governor, Senators Bill Wielechowski-D, Anchorage, and Lesil McGuire-R, Anchorage, asked Governor Palin to accept the money to help with urgent and important state needs. Our state budget is almost a billion dollars in short fall, and the $28.6 million would help with long range costs. The state budget prioritizes energy assistance to the tune of $100 million annually. What a concept. The stimulus money would fund more energy auditors, contractors, and tradesmen in the short term. Families struggling to pay high heating costs would benefit in the long term. Those families will spend it-thus the stimulus. Last year, the governor, in a sweeping “love me long time” gesture, spent $740 million in an “energy assistance rebate.” It came in the form of a one time payment of $1,200 to every man, woman and child in the Alaska. You should have seen the line at Best Buy that day. The checks evaporated like Palin’s approval ratings. The governor is, once again, pandering to her disappearing base and prioritizing her dream of a 2012 presidential run ahead of the real needs of Alaskans. Not accepting this money makes her a “conservative?” Her position contradicts the truth. Her own state agency, the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation, stated they already have requirements on buildings to insure they meet national energy standards. The federal requirements apply to towns larger than 2,500 people. Granted, most of the state’s population lives in larger towns, but the majority has energy codes already in place. So, in fact, Palin could use the funds for projects already under the federal codes. It’s crap. Sarah’s excuse is crap. Her actions are as erratic as her reasoning. Rush “Boss” Limbaugh thinks Sarah is fabulous. Boss thinks she’s the new face of the party-the party that “won’t attract liberals…thank God.” Well, Rush lives in Florida. Rush hasn’t spent up to $11 a gallon for heating fuel. Rush hasn’t spent three months in sub-zero temperatures. Rush hasn’t lived where the sun doesn’t rise for a month. Rush should shut it. He reminds of a guy full of fishing stories who probably can’t bait his own hook. Sarah can feel pretty good about her endorsement from the real leader of the GOP. Sarah Palin is sacrificing Alaska for Boss Limbaugh’s affection. If the governor doesn’t step up and help the state with some financial energy relief by May 12 th , her next polls will drop even lower. Alaskan’s don’t consider heat a luxury. More on Sarah Palin

The rest is here:
Shannyn Moore: Palin Popularity Plunging in Polls

Taking advantage of the latest internal squabbling and insecurity of the GOP, the Democratic National Committee put out a new web ad Tuesday evening comparing the lot of prospective leaders in the Republican Party to a theoretical cast of the hit show Survivor. Entitled “Survivor: GOP,” the clip makes its point in images rather than words. Starting with a worried quote about the state of the party from Sen. Olympia Snowe (the “Last of the Moderates,” to continue with the tribal theme), the ad goes through 16 Republican tribe members vying “for the heart and soul of the GOP.” Mitt Romney, John Boehner, Sarah Palin, Karl Rove, Mark Sanford, Jeb Bush, John McCain, Bobby Jindal, John Cornyn, Mike Huckabee, Dick Cheney, Mitch McConnell, Michael Steele, Newt Gingrich, and Rush Limbaugh all make brief cameos. Replete with a mock Survivor emblem — “Outwit. Outplay. Outlast. Survivor: GOP Edition” — the ad represents a new crest of DNC mockery about the search for leadership and message in the Republican Party. Instead of official titles, each figure is referred to simply by their first name (or in Cornyn’s case, “Big John”). At one point, the shot turns to a helpless little elephant running through the mud. Certainly, the DNC hasn’t lacked useful material. This past week Romney clashed with Palin’s camp, Limbaugh ridiculed the Cantor-led rebranding effort, Steele remained seemingly on thin ice (save with Gingrich), the party lost a Senator to the Democrats, and a poll showed only 21 percent of the public identifies with the GOP. Asked if they would keep hitting on the Survivor theme in weeks to come, a DNC official said they were “exploring the idea.” Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter! More on Michael Steele

See the rest here: 
DNC Survivor Ad Mocks Republicans As Hapless Castaways

Now it’s Bristol turn. Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s daughter Bristol will appear on “Good Morning America” Wednesday morning in her first television interview since her former-boyfriend Levi Johnston broke his silence about their break-up. Should you want to refresh your memory on Levi’s previous appearances, you can read about him talking with Tyra , CBS’ “Early Show” and Larry King .

Read the original post:
Bristol Palin On "Good Morning America" Wednesday

Romney in People’s Most Beautiful Issue First, Mitt Romney (aka Ken) tried to diminish Sarah Palin (aka Barbie) as just a pretty face . Then, we were reminded that People Magazine named Mitt Romney one of the world’s most beautiful people in 2002. And now (via Ben Smith ), Sarah Palin’s allies are firing back at Mitt Romney with perhaps the strangest web ad you ever did see, portraying Romney as a fearful jogger being chased by a bear…until he’s saved by Palin, who shoots the bear dead in its tracks. Watch:

More:
Ken vs. Barbie: Goposaur 2012 battle begins

The only thing to be said about the Republican Party these days is, if they weren’t failing at something, they wouldn’t be getting anything accomplished. Take their latest effort, the National Council for a New America (NCNA), designed to mark: … a new phase in the Republican Party’s effort to remake itself: A formal acknowledgement by top congressional and national leaders that the GOP needs to change its pitch and its ideas. … which has been a comedy of errors since it was launched less than a week ago. Their open letter to announce a series of forums around the country, where they would hold “conversations” with Americans about important issues, left out same-sex marriage, immigration and abortion. And one other missing wedge issue? Sarah Palin.     And after spending most of the next few days explaining how they’d welcome Palin into the group if they could ever get a hold of her, they had their first forum to get “ideas from outside the Beltway,” which, by the way, they held inside the Beltway, and Mitt Romney promptly took a swipe at Sarah Palin’s influence within the Republican Party. Uh oh, you know what that means … Rush Limbaugh weighed in ; Something else you have to understand is these people hate Palin too. They despise Sarah Palin, they fear Sarah Palin, they don’t like her either. She’s, according to them she’s embarrassing … Clearly, in last year’s campaign, the most prominent, articulate voice for standard, run-of-the-mill, good old-fashioned American conservatism was Sarah Palin. Now, everybody on this [NCNA] Speak to America tour has presidential perspirations [sic]. Mitt Romney there, he wants to be president again. Jeb may someday. Eric Cantor, some of the others, McCain — I don’t think he does, but you never know. So this is an early campaign event, 2012 presidential campaign, primary campaign, with everybody there but Sarah Palin. And a few hours later, Eric Cantor announced that Palin would be joining the NCNA’s “panel of experts.” Once again, Rush Limbaugh says jump and the Republican Party asks how high. So much for that change.

More:
New GOP Group Takes Their Marching Orders From Rush Limbaugh

So the latest tempest raging inside the seemingly endlessly fractious teapot known as the GOP involves one-time Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney and former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, and naturally, it involves something very, very, very, very shallow. See, last week, Sarah Palin was honored with inclusion on the list of the “Time 100,” Time magazine’s annual list of people they find to be “influential.” Well, when asked about the matter by CNN’s John King, Romney dissed the list, and Palin. Ben Smith chronicles Romney’s epic putdown : KING: As you launch this effort, anyone who picks up Time magazine this week and sees the 100 most influential people, will see two Republicans in that magazine. They’ll see Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh. Is that helpful, hurtful, indifferent? CANTOR: You know, they are two individuals that have a lot of ideas, and our party should be about ideas. That’s what this effort is about and the National Council for a New America, and that is what they’re about. So I don’t think any of us should have any monopoly on the ideas. And I know that there are some who like to make it all about personalities, but it’s about ideas. It’s about how we take this country forward. ROMNEY: John, I’d like to have a lot more influential Republicans. I think there are a lot more influential Republicans than that would suggest. But was that the issue on the most beautiful people or the most influential people? I’m not sure. If it’s the most beautiful, I understand. We’re not real cute. Oh yeah! Take it from Mitt Romney, second-place finishing fraudbot extraordinaire — he’s a super-serious, not-cute Republican that would rather be thought of as influential than pretty! Of course, it wasn’t long ago that Romney was being honored for listicle inclusion himself: From the People Magazine ’s 50 Most Beautiful People issue, May 13, 2002 : If you ever meet Winter Olympics organizer Mitt Romney, feel free to praise him for helping to rescue this year’s Games from a bribery scandal and a deficit of nearly $400 million. Just don’t tell him he’s arrestingly handsome. “Nothing embarrasses Mitt more than when someone says he’s good-looking,” says Cindy Gillespie, a colleague on the Salt Lake Organizing Committee. Yet now that Romney, 55, who lives in Belmont, Mass., is the GOP candidate for governor of his home state, it’s hard not to notice his blinding smile. Says Olympic skeleton gold medalist Jimmy Shea, 33: “I’d be really excited to look like him when I get to be his age.” Political critics like to paint the 6′2″ Mormon as a too-perfect Ken doll. The son of former Michigan governor George Romney amassed a multimillion-dollar fortune as a venture capitalist at Boston’s Bain Capital and has been married 33 years to his high school sweetheart, Ann, with whom he has five sons. But childhood pal Tom McCaffrey insists that while Romney’s “family looks like a Gap ad, which makes us all a bit cynical,” he is a man of “immense credibility and character–which shows in his face.” OMG! Romney must have been SO EMBARRASSED when this issue with the photoshoot he willingly participated in came out and hit the newsstands! How will we ever feel his influence if we cannot stop ourselves from noticing his “blinding smile” and telling him for “arrestingly handsome” he is! Anyway, this video, via Wonkette , should settle the issue: [Would you like to follow me on Twitter ? Because why not? Also, please send tips to tv@huffingtonpost.com -- learn more about our media monitoring project here .] Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter! More on Sarah Palin

Continued here:
Romney Cracks Joke About Palin Beauty — But He Made People’s "Most Beautiful" List

In many ways, the discussion of race in America — particularly as it relates to today’s issues (the economy, health care, education) — brings to mind the parable of the blind men and the elephant . Different people have a firm grasp on part of the truth in the middle of the room — be it the tail, the trunk, an ear, or a leg — but no one seems able to look at the thing itself. Three examples of a similar phenomenon reveal some of the difficulties in our national discussion on race. During the press conference concerning his first 100 days in office, BET reporter Andre Showell asked Obama about African American unemployment . As the entire nation tries to climb out of this deep recession, in communities of color, the circumstances are far worse, the black unemployment rate, as you know, is in the double digits. And in New York City, for example, the black unemployment rate for men is near 50 percent. My question to you tonight is: given this unique and desperate circumstance, what specific policies can you point to that will target these communities and what’s the timetable for us to see tangible results? And in his answer, Obama reached out and firmly grabbed hold of one part of the elephant in the room. When we put in place additional dollars for community health centers to ensure that people are still getting the help that they need, or we expand health insurance to millions more children through the Children’s Health Insurance Program, again, those probably disproportionately impact African-American and Latino families simply because they’re the ones who are most vulnerable. They have got higher rates of uninsured in their communities. So my general approach is that if the economy is strong, that will lift all boats as long as it is also supported by, for example, strategies around college affordability and job training, tax cuts for working families as opposed to the wealthiest that level the playing field and ensure bottom-up economic growth.   And I’m confident that that will help the African-American community live out the American dream at the same time that it’s helping communities all across the country.” His answer echoed and expanded upon his video-taped message to the State of Black America forum a month earlier. He’s not entirely wrong, though it depends on what one means by a strong economy. As pointed out in the State of Black America report , the “rising tide” of the so-called recovery during the Bush years did not lift all boats. Most yachts, yes. But all boats? Not by a long shot. But an economic program focused on improving the circumstances of all Americans is likely to improve the lives of many African-Americans, because we live with the same overall economic realities. (A fact missed during the campaign, when it seemed working class whites lived in a completely different economic universe, where rising prices, stagnant wages, job loss, foreclosure, etc., weren’t happening to anyone else, or anyone else that mattered.) There is hope, however that stimulus funds, though not specifically targeted to African-American communities, will help. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, in response to an inquiry by the editor of The St. Louis American , outlined how portions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. General: The majority of the provisions in this recovery and reinvestment plan will assist African-Americans, who have been dramatically impacted during these tough times, in making it through this period with tax cuts for 95 percent of families, programs including extension of unemployment benefits, COBRA healthcare benefits, and food stamps and temporary assistance for needy families (TANF), while also preparing them for new opportunities with training for new jobs in existing and emerging industries. Tax Cuts: This plan seeks to put money in the hands of consumers as quickly as possible through tax cuts for 95 percent of families. This is especially important for African- Americans who have experienced a reversal of fortune in the gains in wages and salary reached during the 1990s compared to others in the workforce. This immediate infusion of resources will not only allow them to purchase the items they need for their families, but also help rebuild our economy. Job Creation: The unemployment rate for African-Americans was 12.1 percent and had risen to 12.6 percent when new job numbers were announced Feb. 6. This plan will create jobs with its investments in rebuilding roads and bridges and retrofitting government buildings while also working to help prepare job seekers for the 21st century economy with training for new “green jobs” and other emerging industries. The key is ensuring that African-Americans have access to information about all of these opportunities. Education: Right now 95 percent of African-American children rely on public schools in America, yet a great number of these systems lack the funding they need to deliver the education that our children deserve and the facilities themselves are generally inadequate. This plan makes a historic investment in school modernization sufficient to renovate and modernize 10,000 schools, which also saves or creates jobs. Healthcare: African-Americans suffer from higher percentages of chronic diseases such as heart disease, kidney disease and diabetes while also suffering from a lack of access to quality care. Therefore during a time when many who rely on receiving healthcare through their employers are losing jobs, access to quality healthcare is an even greater concern. This plan offers a new tax credit to help families keep their health insurance through COBRA as well as a new option in Medicaid for low-income people who lack access to COBRA. Adjustments will also be made in funding formulas for state Medicaid programs so that Medicaid and SCHIP are not impacted by state budget shortfalls, protecting 20 million people whose eligibility might be at risk. Public Services: Local governments are threatened with budget cuts that could impair services, including support from police and fire departments. No community that relies on these services to protect them should have to endure cuts in these areas. This plan invests $4 billion for state and local law enforcement funding. In addition, the stimulus would provide help to historically black colleges and universities hit hard by the economic downturn , in the form of funding for infrastructure projects on HBCU campuses, technology improvements, and increased federal grants for students from low income families. Yet, even as the stimulus funds begin to flow into communities across the country, the governors of several southern states are rejecting or attempting to reject stimulus funds funds . Governors across the country are clamoring for a piece of the stimulus, eager to avoid laying off state employees, hoping to put their unemployed citizens back to work and trying to avoid widespread furloughs as budgets bleed red ink. They know that their citizens want to keep libraries open, teachers in the classroom, cops on the beat and firefighters ready to protect people and property. Except in the South. Southern governors–Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Mark Sanford of South Carolina, Haley Barbour of Mississippi–have been pressing the case that the federal stimulus bill is a mistake ; they argue the emerging Republican orthodoxy that tax cuts are the only effective way to pull the country out of an economic black hole. With 11 percent unemployment, South Carolina trails only hard-hit Michigan. Nonetheless, Governor Sanford plans to reject funds that would extend unemployment insurance, not to mention federal fiscal stabilization monies slated for schools and public safety, unless he receives assurance that he may use it instead to pay down the state’s debt. As ProPublica reports, the state is about to lay off teachers in large numbers as a consequence. This hardhearted pattern is not new. It is a replay of the Southern rejection of Roosevelt’s New Deal. During the bleak years of the Depression, politicians below the Mason-Dixon line refused to provide relief to the poor and rebelled against federal intrusion into social policy. When most state governments were hemorrhaging, local and state governments across the South actually ran surpluses. How? They fired government workers and slashed funds for education and healthcare.   Their reasons, stemming from political philosophies and/or fiscal priorities, are perhaps not specifically related to race (at least not publicly). But according to census data , these states are among those with the largest African American populations. Louisiana, South Carolina, Mississippi and Georgia (where the governor has considered rejecting some stimulus funds , though his state would gain 106,000 jobs in the bargain) are all among the states with an estimated African-American population of 1 million or more. They also make the lists of states with the highest percentage of African-Americans in the population, and where blacks are the largest minority group. In terms of joblessness , among the states in question, South Carolina had the highest unemployment rate in November 2008 at 8.9%, followed by Georgia (7.5%), and Mississippi (7.2%). All three were among the 20 states with the highest unemployment rates, with only Louisiana (5.3%) failing to make the cut. As of March 2009 , South Carolina still held the lead with an unemployment rate of 11.4%, followed by Mississippi (9.4%), Georgia (9.2%) and Louisiana (5.8%). Census data on poverty , reunites all four states in the top twenty, with Mississippi in the number one position with the largest percentage of people living below the poverty level (20.5), followed by Louisiana (18.6) in the number two spot, South Carolina (15.0) at no. 12, and Georgia (14.3) at no. 13. Breaking state poverty data down by ethnicity , reveals higher poverty rates among blacks than among whites in all four states. In Mississippi, the rate of poverty among African-Americans is 43.6%, compared to 16.1 % for whites. In Louisiana it’s 42.1%, compared with 13.1% for whites. In Georgia it’s 31.3%, compared with 10.7% for whites. In South Carolina it’s 30.6%, compare with 12.5% for whites. Taken together, the data suggests not only that southern Republican governors’ refusal of stimulus funds (not to mention Republicans’ opposition to and efforts to kill the stimulus ) would have a devastating impact on the growing ranks of the unemployed and those living in poverty, but that African-Americans are likely to be disproportionately represented among in both categories, and therefore disproportionately impacted. And African-Americans in these states know it, and experience a lot of anxiety as a result. Almost two of every three black Southerners are worried they could lose their jobs this year in what they see as a deteriorating economy, according to a Winthrop University/ETV poll. Just under 62 percent of black Southerners polled Feb. 6-22 in South Carolina and 10 other Southern states said they were very or somewhat concerned about the possibility of losing their job in the next year. That concern is far higher than in the U.S. population as a whole. …South Carolina’s unemployment rate was 9.5 percent in December, the most recent month for which figures are available. The state’s unemployment rate is the third-highest in the country. In 2008, South Carolina’s monthly unemployment rate averaged 6.7 percent. The black unemployment rate was higher, averaging 10.1 percent. In each of the 11 states polled, the black jobless rate was significantly higher than the unemployment rate of the state as a whole. From their communities, they hear America’s economy coughing and sneezing, and know that whatever is ailing the overall economy, they’re likely to catch it too — only much worse. Despite all of the above, when Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) grabbed a handful of elephant , people were somewhat shocked when he announced that the huge, unseen/unrecognized creature in the room might be an elephant. The highest-ranking black congressman said Thursday that opposition to the federal stimulus package by southern GOP governors is “a slap in the face of African-Americans.” U.S. Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., said he was insulted when the governors of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and his home state , which have large black populations, said they might not accept some of the money from the $787 billion stimulus package. Texas Gov. Rick Perry said Wednesday he would accept the money, and none of the others has rejected it outright. The Republican governors of Idaho and Alaska also said they had reservations about whether the money would come with too many strings attached, but Clyburn said he was particularly taken aback by southern governors who said they might decline it. ” These four governors represent states that are in the proverbial black belt,” Clyburn said.   The response, predictably, was swift. A spokesperson for South Carolina’s Republican governor accused Clyburn of “playing the race card,” which was followed similar responses from the governors of Mississippi and Louisiana (the latter, Bobby Jindall, is the son of Indian immigrants), that their opposition to the stimulus was not racially motivated. Other conservatives pointed out that Idaho governor Butch Otter and Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, both states with very small African-American populations, refuted Clyburn’s “black belt” statement. Finally, Clyburn himself found it necessary to walk back from his earlier statements, telling the media (through a spokesperson) that he didn’t mean that the governors’ decisions were racially motivated, but that their opposition to the stimulus would hurt African-Americans in their states. But Clyburn wasn’t wrong. African American residents in those southern states are likely to be among those most in need of the services and opportunities stimulus funds might provide. The governors’ decisions to refuse stimulus funds is to abandon both poor and African-American residents of their states in the face of an economic downturn that hits them harder than the general population, in the same way that victims of Katrina were abandoned in the hurricane’s aftermath. The decisions of those southern governors, may not have been directly motivated by race, but it’s doubtful that those governors are completely ignorant of the data on race, joblessness, and poverty in their states, or the impact of their decisions on poor and African-American residents in their states. (Though a now-former Republican governor of Texas managed to remain unaware of, and to even deny the reality of hunger statistics in his state.) And their decisions are in keeping with a history of southern state governments’ policy-making in matters just like the economic downturn and the stimulus, that — due to the demographics of their states — would have negative impacts on many African-Americans residents. Not just that, but their decisions extend and perpetuate conditions that have deep, but too often unacknowledged, roots in the history of race in their states and in this country. And that’s what Clyburn came dangerously close to addressing too openly. Someone has been lifting their blindfold. You see, in some versions of the parable above, the men are not truly blind, but blinded , or blindfolded by their teacher before encountering the elephant. They need only remove their blindfolds to see it clearly. But when the elephant in the room is race, our blindfolds usually stay pretty firmly in place. They had better , as another public figure found out when he grabbed a handful of elephant himself, and attempted to lift not just his blindfold, but everyone else’s too. More on Barack Obama

See the original post: 
Terrance Heath: 390 Years Minus 100 Days … And Counting

The two most successful modern presidential campaign gurus sparred on Monday night on topics ranging from the quality of each other’s books to the size of their bosses’ respective tax cuts. David Plouffe, who ran Barack Obama’s campaign and Karl Rove, who was chief adviser to former President Bush’s two winning efforts, sat down at the Panetta Institute in Monterey, California for a conversation on bipartisanship. They did not exactly lead by example. At one point, as Rove kept badgering Obama for perpetuating (in his words) “this myth” of a president “who is committed to bipartisanship and post partisanship,” Plouffe acidly replied: “This is like getting interview lessons from Sarah Palin — a lecture on bipartisanship [from Rove].” Later in the session, moderated by CNN’s Frank Sesno, the two strategic minds playfully squabbled about their respective forthcoming books. Rove started the banter innocently enough by reminding the audience, for the second time, that his book was available for “$29.95 on Amazon.com,” before noting that Plouffe’s book would be released earlier (November) and for less ($24.95). “But mine will be in the non-fiction section,” Plouffe interjected. To which Rove, who feigned being stabbed in the heart and unable to help himself, replied: “His will be the one with lots of pictures in it. And it comes with a little box of crayons so you can do it yourself.” Even when policy was broached during the nearly hour-and-a-half-long event, it was from the vantage point of diametrically-opposed political figures, with Rove usually playing the role of antagonist. For example, in defense of the Obama administration’s efforts at bipartisanship on the stimulus package, Plouffe noted that the bill provided “the biggest middle class tax cut in American history.” “Go back and look at the 2001 tax cuts,” countered Rove. “[We] cut the lower brackets by 50 percent for the lowest and a third for the second lowest. It dwarfs [Obama's] tax cuts.” Addressing the birth of the “permanent presidential campaign,” Plouffe insisted that Obama was not crafting policy with an eye towards reelection. “Nothing could be further from the truth,” he said. “Having run his campaign, I can assure that what is happening right now is not a campaign mindset.” To which Rove insisted that Obama was much more politically motivated that his former boss, a response which prompted snickers and then laughter from the audience, “Every White House remains in a campaign mode,” he said. “Sure, absolutely, [we were too]. But not to this degree. I mean, these guys run so many polls that they have a Wednesday night meeting to review each week’s polls and focus groups… We met every couple of months to review polls.” Later, Rove described the Obama policy on restricting the access and influence of lobbyists as “window dressing” — a noble intention that would have little practical impact. “Mark my words,” he said. “I appreciate what President Obama is attempting to do by limiting lobbyists. But there will be more lobbyists registered in Washington the day he leaves than the day he got into office.” Plouffe was left to reply that he did not “think this is window dressing” at all. “I mean lobbying is a profession that may be one of the few sectors that is growing in Washington. But [there is] a big change,” he added. “[The] revolving door has been shut, and it is going to be much harder for the next president, whoever they are or whatever party they are from, to rescind that.” The areas of friction did not end there. On topics ranging from the controversial advertisements Republicans ran against former Sen. Max Cleland in 2002 and the actual number of people identifying themselves as Republicans, to the current president’s take on bipartisanship (”Frankly,” declared Rove, “I’m troubled by the attitude of the administration in reaching out to Republicans”), the two butted heads. In fact, the one and perhaps only area of agreement came when Rove and Plouffe talked about their mutual disdain for the news media. A less-than-substantive conversation turned into a denunciation of the press for failing to focus on substance. “The media really is focused on process more than it is substance,” declared Rove. “And it is focused more on controversy than it is substance. And it is focused more on the side conflicts than the central drama.” Added Plouffe: “A lot of the coverage emanating out of Washington… is centered around conflict and kind of who scored today and who didn’t. And I think the substance sometimes suffers in that.” Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter! More on Karl Rove

View original here:
Rove, Plouffe Do Battle Over Obama, Their Own Books, And More

Politico : In the latest instance of a high-profile GOP member taking a passing swipe at the party’s 2008 vice-presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Governor and GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney jokingly dismissed Sarah Palin’s inclusion on Time’s list of influential people in an interview broadcast Sunday. He asked, was “the issue on the most beautiful people or the most influential people?” It’s like watching Ken attack Barbie for being plastic. Watch:

Read more: 
Romney takes swipe at Palin’s attractiveness

Yusuf - Roadsinger Ever since Cat Stevens changed his name and embraced Islam, the West (more specifically, the U.S.) has been clueless when it comes to accepting the former superstar/singer-songwriter and his faith. But an attentive listen to his latest release, Roadsinger , is a good start in rebuilding that emotional bridge to the pacifist who created the gentle Tea For The Tillerman and Teaser And The Firecat , the overtly spiritual “Morning Has Broken,” and the ever-relevant “Peace Train.” Yusuf’s new album does not pick up where his last project, An Other Cup , left off. Instead, it could be considered the followup to Teaser And The Firecat , as if all the albums since were in Pam Ewing’s pre-Bobby-in-the-shower dream (not that we’d want that, there were some pretty good LPs in that propsed imaginary batch). There is some spiritualism scattered about his new songs, but remember, Cat Stevens heavily peppered his A&M records with it ( Buddha And The Chocolate Box anyone?). Our fresh start begins with “Welcome Home,” its lyrics, “Never did I imagine what a dawn could be ’til I opened my eyes to see it was welcoming me,” summarizing its message best. Next, it’s time for a love song with “Thinking ‘Bout You” in which Yusuf sings, “No matter what they say, no matter what they do, I’ll always love you,” as sweetly and simply as his innocent “How Can I Tell You.” In the Tracy Chapman-ish “Everytime I Dream Of You,” the artist gets a subtle horn section to emphasize its bluesy melody and lyrics. Accompanied by a dramatic string arrangement reminiscent of “Sad Lisa,” “The Rain” talks about creating a new world while briefly discussing that little matter of building a modern ark. That intensity continues through “World O’ Darkness” (”Some sons dream of leaving while they’re young at heart, a few choose the path to war, it’s the land beyond the dark”), and also through “Be What You Must” whose intro cops, note-for-note, Catch Bull At Four ’s “Sitting.” Right before its children’s chorus and piano solo start, Yusuf informs us, “On this boat called Near & Far, to be what you must, you must give up what you are.” The brief “This Glass World” starts off like “The Wind,” then evolves into a sing-along that seemingly grabs passersby (like Gunnar Nelson and The Hollies’ Terry Sylvester) to help emphasize lines. And in the title track, Yusuf spins an adult fairytale that ponders where children will go to avoid a dark world in a kind of updated “Where Do The Children Play?” “All Kinds Of Roses” addresses diversity, and the last track, “Shamsia,” is more of a poem set to minor keyed-strings that completes his Roadsinger ’s journey. When you think about it, that journey started years ago when a young man named Cat Stevens was “On The Road To Find Out.” Decades later, a more mature Yusuf resurfaced with knowledge about that road and the world it led to. As the ending of the song “Welcome Home” reminds us, “Time rolls on, ain’t no time to sit and moan…” Tracks: 1. Welcome Home 2. Thinking ‘Bout You 3. Everytime I Dream 4. The Rain 5. World O’ Darkness 6. Be What You Must 7. This Glass World 8. Roadsinger 9. All Kinds Of Roses 10. Dream On (Until…) 11. Shamsia Ben Harper and Relentless7 - White Lies For Dark Times Not everything on Ben Harper’s latest will hit you like the blues-rocker, “Lay There And Hate Me.” That’s not to say the album fails in any way…actually, it’s pretty good. But with a new band in tow, there could have been more musical twists and turns in Harper’s latest than a seventies classic rock sound with Lenny Kravitz meets early Steve Winwood affectations. White Lies For Dark Times definitely will please older demo Harper fans that admire Steve Miller and ZZ Top, and a younger skew that prefers Dave Matthews and a more rocking Chris Cornell. And although the standard logic is to put your strongest singles up front when sequencing, delivering a one-two-three punch with the rockers “Number With No Name,” “Up To You Now,” and “Shimmer And Shine” sets up a more casual listen than this artist deserves. Like on every past album, there’s lyrical depth on many songs such as the confessional “Skin Thin.” Harper sings Cat Stevens-style, “Now that you’ve grown up, you can finally learn to be a child…we made it to the end of the world, but we’ll never make it out alive,” and the track “Fly One Time” revisits the melodic, anthem-spouting Ben Harper jangle of albums past. While “Boots Like These” (as in “you gotta live my life to get boots like these…”) grooves along with a refreshing fratty chaos, “Keep It Together” gets a bit too jam-band-y to be taken as seriously as the lyrics suggest. On one of the album’s best tracks, “The Word Suicide,” we’re dreamily waltzed to the chorus’ hook “love is a lonely room,” and its moodiness perfectly sets up the beautiful acoustic closer, “Faithfully Remain.” The song tells us, “Some things you have to let be lost,” which, of course, is a beautiful sentiment–that is, as long as it doesn’t coincide with Harper’s perfected honest intimacy, something that’s a little lacking on White Lies For Dark Times . But the album is solid, and for those left wanting more, perhaps the deluxe CD/DVD version containing live and interview footage in its Keep It Together documentary, a photo gallery, plus the video for “Shimmer And Shine” could do the trick. Tracks: 1. Number With No Name 2. Up To You Now 3. Shimmer And Shine 4. Lay There And Hate Me 5. Why Must You Always Dress In Black 6. Skin Thin 7. Fly One Time 8. Keep It Together (So I Can Fall Apart) 9. Boots Like These 10. The Word Suicide 11. Faithfully Remain Conor Oberst and the Mystic Valley Band - Outer South After releasing a truckload of albums and EPs as both a solo artist and band participant, after co-founding the indie label Saddle Creek Records (originally called Lumberjack Records) with his brother Justin, and after becoming the flagship of what has been classified as the “Nebraska” sound, Conor Oberst has the chutzpah to sing, “Potential, well, you’re a loaded line, the veil between the world and a faceless bride,” on the semi-slacker anthem, “Slowly (Oh So Slowly).” Though it obviously doesn’t apply to him personally, that’s one of many lyrically rich songs Oberst and his previous album’s entourage traverse across Outer South –his new collaborative effort with returning guitarists Taylor Hollingsworth and Nik Freitas, bassist Macey Taylor, keyboardist Nathaniel Walcott, and drummer Jason Boesel. Outer South ’s sixteen Americana-driven original songs (with contributions by Mystic Valley’s Freitas, Hollingsworth, and Boesel) have a bit more reflective fun than our usual Bright Eyes or Conor Oberst outing, especially on the fully fleshed-out quickies “Air Mattress,” “Cabbage Town” (with its slight Elvis Costello snarl), and “Nikorette” (that nips a bit from “Willie And The Hand Jive”). On the other hand, the sparse track “Ten Women” finds Oberst in Dylanland, with a chord structure and phrasings that would make the master proud. The band approaches “Difference Is Time” like The Band crossed with The Wallflowers and an end vocal section that might as well have been arranged by fellow Nebraskan, Matthew Sweet. “Bloodline” has the best shot at “hit single” (if it can muscle past pitch-corrected chart competitors), but the finest track is the emotionally-wrought, cavern-echoed “White Shoes” that demands repeated listens to make sure one doesn’t miss a moment of either the lyrics or delivery of this stellar offering. Another emotionally-charged song (complete with references to Hunter S. Thompson, Ernest Hemingway, and Omaha Beach) is the acerbic, political rant, “Roosevelt Room,” that takes machine gun aim at politicos, especially during its biting chorus, “What good, what good are you!” It’s like the spiritual love child of an immediately post-Buffalo Springfield Neil Young, a youthful, angrier Bob Dylan, and a punk of your choice. Extremely prolific and often profound, Conor Oberst is very much a forward thinker, so it’s ironic to hear him sing lyrics in “Slowly (Oh So Slowly)” that state, “My mind keeps slippin’ back into the past, I hope someday that I can get it back.” What’s more appropriate is his line in “To All The Lights In The Windows”: “That’s the thing about charisma–it makes everyone believe.” Over the last few years, Oberst has elevated his critical status (while approaching critical mass) by delivering an endless stream of quality projects as Bright Eyes (especially Cassadaga ), an enlightening “Oberst” album, and now this collaborative group effort. Though his recording “Lua” still is a college classic, Outer South ’s more “commercial” band approach may deliver that big radio acceptance and extended tour that will help Oberst introduce his multi-faceted story to what’s left of the masses still unfamiliar with his work. If you’re in that category, this is the album to come in on, but you’ll want more, so get Conor Oberst next, then Cassadaga . And regardless of whether or not Outer South sells millions, this artist’s future releases always will sound like they’re the next big thing. Tracks: 1. Slowly (Oh So Slowly) 2. To All the Lights in the Windows 3. Big Black Nothing 4. Air Mattress 5. Cabbage Town 6. Ten Women 7. Difference Is Time 8. Nikorette 9. White Shoes 10. Bloodline 11. Spoiled 12. Worldwide 13. Roosevelt Room 14. Eagle On A Pole 15. I Got the Reason #2 16. Snake Hill New York Dolls - ‘Cause I Sez So The proto-punkers are back! Kind of. Todd Rundgren has reunited with his glammy chums of yore to produce their best time-warping romp since their ‘73 debut, New York Dolls . Right off the bat, lead singer David Johansen–sans his Jagger swagger–spews lines such as “I’m gonna kick your ass” (”Better Than You”), “I give the finger to the eye in the sky” (”‘Cause I Sez So”), and “Heirs of the flagellants spreading that joy around” (”Muddy Bones”) like he was spitting punched-out teeth. Of the original members, only David Jo and guitarist Sylvain Mizrahi attend the reunion that includes Rundgren-retrofied rockers (the above-mentioned tracks), mid-tempo visits to the mid-’6os (”Lonely So Long,” not The Rascals’ version), bluesy graveyard shuffles (”This Is Ridiculous”), J. Geils Band impressions (”Nobody’s Got No Bizness”), rock romps ala The Animals (”Drowning”), and latin-laced Morricone marches (”Temptation To Exist”). Guitarist Steve Conte, bassist Sami Yaffa, and drummer Brian Delaney fill-in nicely for past members (except for the irreplaceable founding member, Johnny Thunder) as everyone scoots along Memory Lane. As the album winds down, the re-record of “Trash” revisits the band’s classic track with a detour through Jamaica, and the album closer, “Exorcism Of Despair” rocks as hard as the old days, when five androgynous founding fathers in makeup and platform shoes glam-punked their way into the music books. Tracks: 1. ‘Cause I Sez So 2. Muddy Bones 3. Better Than You 4. Lonely So Long 5. My World 6. This Is Ridiculous 7. Temptation To Exist 8. Making Rain 9. Drowning 10. Nobody Got No Bizness 11. Trash 12. Exorcism Of Despair Paul Potts - Passione In “The First Time Ever I Saw Your Face,” its composer, Ewan McColl, continued that title’s sentiment with the lines, “I thought the sun rose in your eyes, and the moon and the stars were the gifts you gave to the dark and the empty skies, my love.” To many, these lyrics were poetry, especially when seductively phrased by Roberta Flack in her career-igniting hit of the seventies. But that song’s melody communicates an equally poetic message, and Paul Potts’ lushly-orchestrated Italian translation on his latest album, Passione , spotlights the song’s extremely romantic nature while wringing emotion out of each phonetic regardless of its national origin. That mission is continued across this project’s ten tracks (pared down from sixty potential candidates), the result being a mix of classical works and American and English pop songs that were converted into operatic Italian. Expanding on the direction of his previous album, One Chance , this project’s recordings are structured around the ‘07 winner of Britain’s Got Talent ’s exploration of each song’s true romantic nature. “The whole philosophy behind this album is about passion ,” says Potts, explaining the collection’s title. “I wanted to make sure it was an album about passion, and not simply a ‘love’ album or an ‘arias’ mix which have been done a lot. I wanted to make sure it was an album that showed different sides of me, and showed different sides of music.” “There are many sides to passion,” Potts adds about his disparate choices in material. Unified under its theme, Passione reinvents and translates such pop hits as Procol Harum’s “A Whiter Shade Of Pale” (his father-in-law’s favorite song of all time), Nina Rota’s “A Time For Us” (featured in ’68’s Franco Zeffirelli-directed Romeo & Juliet ), and even Andrew Lloyd Webber’s Cats highlight, “Memory,” turning them all into modern arias. A particularly intriguing conversion is his duet with 22-year-old Hayley Westerna on their cover of the Josh Groban/Sarah Brightman collaboration, “There For Me.” His assertive vocals, Westerna’s warm set-up and vocal replies, the perfect blend of their unison lines, plus the song’s translation into Italian surprisingly outshines the original with a broader emotional appeal. “I think it’s good when people realize that classical music, or any music, isn’t just for select groups of people,” says the singer. “It’s there for everyone to enjoy…it’s all about what makes people feel good.” But as well as these pop makeovers work, tracks such as “Tristesse” and “E Lucevan Le Stelle” suggest that a serious arias album–despite that being too stereotypical as Potts suggests–might be an eventual wise career move since he has the pipes, and it could be an impressive, challenging next step for him. “It’s something I’d love to do at some point,” Potts reveals, “but only when I’m ready. I continue to work on my technique, to challenge myself to perform better. I’m my own harshest critic.” So, for the moment, the contest winner turned cultural icon is growing as an artist, treading smartly on his preferred creative path as he is continuously supported by his loving wife, Julie-Anne, who he credits for energizing him as she stood by his every past endeavor to pursue music. He also is well aware of his audience’s passions and its tastes. “I’m only doing what I’m doing because people have been good enough to support me,” he acknowledges. “They’ve gone out and bought the albums, and watched me perform. Without them, I don’t have a career, and that’s something I’ll never forget.” Tracks: 1. La Prima Volta (The First Time Ever I Saw Your Face) 2. Sei Con Me (There For Me) - featuring Hayley Westernra 3. Un Giorno Per Moi (A Time For Us) 4. Il Canto 5. Senza Luce (A Whiter Shade Of Pale) 6. Piano (Memory) 7. Mamma 8. Tristesse 9. Bellamore 10. E Lucevan Le Stelle

Continued here: 
Mike Ragogna: New Tunes On Monday: Yusuf (Cat Stevens), Ben Harper and Relentless7, Conor Oberst and the Mystic Valley Band, New York Dolls, and Paul Potts

When the Dalai Lama comes to New York this week, he will be flooded by an onslaught of Buddhists and spiritual seekers. His popularity, and the interest in Buddhism, has grown exponentially since the 1960’s through an overwhelmingly liberal excitement over non violence and spiritual exploration. But the Dalai Lama is in many ways an orthodox religious figure: he is celibate, has taken a vow against any form of inebriation, and understands the act of abortion to be a form of killing. There is nothing surprising about these facts, they are stated plainly in Buddhist scripture, and it is the Buddhist party line. Monks must remain celibate because they are to concentrate on reaching enlightenment; drinking alcohol leads to an unclear mind — the worst possible state for a practicing Buddhist; and non violence is essential because of the Buddhist understanding of Karma. Westerners are either befuddled or enamored by the law of Karma and non violence: the Dalai Lama’s peaceful response to the Chinese invasion, Thich Nhant Han’s critique to both sides of the Vietnam conflict, and Aung Sang Su Ki’s non violent stand against the Burmese Junta all demonstrate the enactment of an extreme principle. But from a Buddhist point of view the reason not to kill, or have an abortion, is technically the same: killing a person gets you very bad Karma. For Buddhists, the moral law of Karma is the way that the universe operates. It is not controlled by God or constructed by humans. It is more like the law of gravity — it is what it is. According to tradition it was first understood and explained in our world by the Buddha 2,500 years ago, and while philosophically subtle and complex, one thing is clear: negative actions have a negative reaction to the actor, regardless of circumstance. If one hurts or kills, one is likely reborn as an animal or hell being. One’s intention, in this case ones intent to kill, does increase the negative karmic response, because of the Buddhist belief that the each person’s mind triggers their Karma. In the west this Buddhist principle is wielded by social justice liberals when arguing against war, capital punishment, and torture. It tends to be twinned with meditation, the Buddhist activity for reaching a peaceful state of mind, which makes one less violent, and therefore less likely to produce bad karma. But here is where liberals take what they want from a tradition, and leave out the over arching logic. According to Buddhism, a fetus is a human. There is no distinction either in definition or in karmic punishment. In this way Buddhism is far more confident about when life begins than say Catholicism, which leaves this answer as a mystery. Buddhism is deadly serious about non violence, because karma has serious consequences. Morality is never about a person’s right to choose, but about understanding the consequences of ones actions. Or put another way, moral action is entirely about what one chooses to do — and one must suffer the consequences. The rules in Buddhism are really vows, not set up to please God, but to protect people from being reborn into unseemly realms. Buddhists who take Karma seriously do not believe that other moral choices, which may be socially or personally legitimate, neutralize the karmic reality of the universe. Karma is a physical law, in this way. For example, in the 17th Century a Korean Buddhist monk led his monks into battle against the invading Japanese army. Afterwards he thanked them, but made it clear that they would still suffer the karmic consequences of their actions. In another case that demonstrates the same belief, I once knew two Tibetan women who lived in a cockroach infested apartment, but they refused to use roach traps for deadly fear of the karmic response. Do these insights mean that Buddhists are conservative after all, and should be lining up behind Sarah Palin? Arguing that a faith backs this or that political party is treacherous because principles, in this case non-violence, can play out in ways that crisscross our contemporary party lines quite unexpectedly. This might say as much about our way of doing politics as it does about the principles themselves. Accepting a moral principle, though and following it through does seem to take courage. The day after 9/11 the Dalai Lama wrote to President Bush, his most important political ally, warning him about the danger of responding to violence with violence. He also defended the Pope’s view on abortion. Religious principles can unexpectedly alienate. The unexpected is rarely easy. But then moral choices never were.

Read more from the original source:
Matthew Weiner: Unexpected Karmic Consequences

WASHINGTON — They’re furloughing many city workers for eight days this summer. They’ve cut staffing by about 5 percent. Now officials in Tracy, Calif., are trying another way to help make ends meet in these tough economic times: They’ve hired a Washington lobbyist. It’s an idea that seems to be spreading. Senate lobbying records show that dozens of cities and counties signed up with lobbying firms in the three months of this year. Their goal is to get a greater share of the money flowing out of Washington, from a record federal budget to the $787 billion economic stimulus package. Some of the communities hiring lobbyists have done so before and are simply shuffling their lineup or adding to it. But others are getting into the lobbying game for the first time. “This is a new venture for the city. This is a relatively conservative community and has a high degree of self-reliance, but we also understand there’s also a great opportunity for all communities, Tracy included” said Leon Churchill, city manager for the suburban community about 60 miles east of San Francisco. “The opportunity was too immense to bypass.” The city paid $10,000 to Patricia Jordan and Associates in the first quarter. Disclosure reports filed with the Senate show the firm lobbied lawmakers and the Federal Highway Administration on a highway spending bill. It also lobbied the Federal Emergency Management Agency for “emergency management” money. The stimulus bill provided the agency with hundreds of millions of dollars for grants to firefighters and improved transit and rail security. The city of Baytown, Texas, also hired a lobbying firm. While there was some concern from city council members that such action encouraged more federal spending, City Manager Garry Brumback argued that the money was going to get spent regardless and that Baytown should get its share. “The idea that they’re going to lower your taxes if we don’t accept any money is a little bit ridiculous,” Brumback said. The city will spend $40,000 for federal lobbying and $25,000 for lobbying at the state level. Expectations for the return on that investment are high. “If you’re not getting at least 10-to-1, you’ve hired a bad lobbyist,” he said. Lobbyist filed new registrations this quarter on behalf of major metropolitan areas such as Cook County, Ill., St. Louis and Seattle. But they also went to bat for scores of small towns as well. For instance, the village of Deer Park, Ill., with a population of 3,200 and a budget of about $3.5 million, hired a lobbying firm to help it get money for road and drainage projects. “We were looking for a way to make up some of the shortfalls we see for the next couple of years until we get out of this recession,” said Scott Gifford, president of the village’s board of trustees. In all, the community will spend about $60,000 this year on lobbying. “The vote was 4-2 but the majority of the board felt it was worth the risk of spending $60,000 to potentially bring in $1.3, $1.5 million,” Gifford said. The city of Hartford, Conn., has used Washington-based lobbyists before, but decided to spend its money elsewhere in 2008. This year, it’s back in the game. “That’s where the money’s coming from right now and we need to get our piece of the pie,” said Sarah Barr, director of communications for the city. Cities and counties hiring lobbyists tend to spend in the tens of thousands per year, about what they would spend for hiring one employee. For that money they get a team of lobbyists, each of whom serves multiple clients. The team can include lawyers, former congressional aides and even former lawmakers. For example, former Rep. Nancy Johnson, R-Conn., is one of three lobbyists looking out for Hartford. Former Rep. Bill Brewster, D-Okla., is a lobbyist for the town of Glenpool, Okla. Former Rep. Bob Livingston, R-La., is one of the lobbyists working for the state’s Morgan City Harbor and Terminal District. The stimulus legislation called for an extra $787 billion in spending, but President Barack Obama also put strict rules on what lobbyists can do to steer money their clients’ way. Lobbyists cannot converse with federal officials or meet with them about specific stimulus projects. They can submit written statements advocating specific proposals for stimulus spending, which federal agencies must post on the Internet within three days. Still, with Obama proposing spending $3.7 trillion for the budget fiscal year, local governments sense plenty of opportunity to secure federal money for their clients. H. Stewart Van Scoyoc, president and chief executive of Van Scoyoc Associates, said he’s definitely noticing more interest from local governments in hiring lobbyists. “They’re actively, aggressively looking for outside funding sources to help relieve the pain a little bit,” Van Scoyoc said. The change in administrations has spurred interest, too. The Bush administration was viewed as less supportive of aiming federal tax dollars at local initiatives. Cities and counties now believe they have a better shot at securing federal money. “It’s pretty much an unprecedented level of spending, a lot of it targeted toward state and local governments,” Van Scoyoc said. “I think everybody is struggling to understand exactly how to react to it, how to access it and how to then effectively implement spending and go through all the auditing the feds are putting in place.” ___ On the Net: Senate lobbying records: http://tinyurl.com/djbc2e More on The Recession

Go here to read the rest: 
Lobbyists Prosper During Recession

Like a magic bullet, Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) defied the laws of physics on Tuesday, moving back and to the left . In doing so, he delivered what might have been a fatal blow to the GOP, were it not for a team of highly-skilled spin doctors . They have the technology . They have the capability to make the world’s first monochromatic party. The GOP will be that party. Better than they were before. Better . Stronger . Faster .

Read more here:
Sunday Talk - That’s Gonna Leave a Mark

The latest effort by the Party of No to remove the “taint” from the GOP has already failed , but there’s certainly room for further mockery of the new faction of the Republican Party; The National Council for a New America. Let’s start with a little background ; The NCNA is, according to Eric Cantor: … a forward-looking, grassroots caucus …  [that] will engage in a conversation with America that seeks to remove ideological filters So, who are just some of these non-ideological, regular folks? Besides the House Minority Leader, the Minority Whip, the Senate Minority Leader and last year’s Republican presidential nominee? Mitt Romney (R), Bobby Jindal (R), Haley Barbour (R), John Cornyn (R), and … wait for it … Jeb Bush (R). That practically screams bipartisan grassroots, doesn’t it? And what’s the group’s reason for being? We do this not just to offer an alternative point of view or to be disagreeable. Instead, we want to ask the American people what their hopes and dreams are. In my country, we call this an election . But this my favorite part: The council marks a new phase in the Republican Party’s effort to remake itself: A formal acknowledgement by top congressional and national leaders that the GOP needs to change its pitch and its ideas. So, what’s the first change? The National Council for a New America launched with an open letter that’s notable for what it leaves out: The issues that a large segment of the party’s base are most passionate about. The letter, signed by 14 congressional Republican leaders, makes no mention of same-sex marriage, immigration — legal or otherwise — or abortion. Yes, they’re throwing the “values voters” under the bus, which one assumes is the reason they were: … unable to reach Palin to ask her if she would like to join the group. It seems that the marginally less insane faction of the Republican Party is attempting a coup. This should be fun.

See more here: 
The National Council for a New America (aka GOP loses election)

Here’s some good automotive news for a change: The Danica Patrick IndyCar racing juggernaut keeps rolling along. And just in time for the biggest auto race of the year. Time magazine, relying on an Internet poll to determine its third annual list of the top 100 most influential people in the world, named race car driver, advertising icon, Midwest fashion plate and the generally hot Patrick to position #93. The only woman to ever win an IndyCar race (at Motegi, Japan, 2008) outpaced NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Queen of All Media Oprah Winfrey, FOX’s Bill O’Reilly (maybe racing can save the world) and Prince (who, physically, is about the same size as Patrick). Patrick received 523,545 votes. The magazine noted this is Patrick’s first appearance in their Top 100 list. This past week, Patrick unveiled a new black/orange paint sheme on her #7 Honda/Dallara IndyCar racer, just in time for the upcoming Indy 500 In the PR statement she didn’t write, Patrick’s people said: “I’m humbled and honored to be on the list with so many other amazing people. I’m grateful to have wonderful people around me that keep me grounded and in the moment. I know I don’t say it often enough, but thank you for helping me achieve my goals and dreams while allowing me to be myself in the fast-paced lifestyle I lead.” Why do sponsors always think these drivers have to sound so damn homogenized? I wish the PR people would get out of the way and let … racers be racers. Racers don’t say things like, “the fast-paced lifestyle I lead.” They say, “Get out of my way or I’ll put you in the wall and kick your freakin’ ass.” And then they do. And with the Indy 500 coming up May 24th (which will celebrate the 100th anniversary of the circuit itself, the world’s first purpose-built race track; the race’s 100th birthday comes in 2011), attention on the sport and its drivers is reaching, well, if not exactly a fever-pitch, we can say that for the first time in over a decade, an American racing series besides NASCAR is getting some attention in the nation’s general interest media. (On KCRW radio’s “Left, Right and Center” broadcast Friday, co-host Robert Scheer opined that the Republican Party has become a solidly Southeast-based group with little membership outside that part of the country. “Aha! Just like NASCAR!” I thought). Patrick in the 2008 Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition And right now, the 28-year old Patrick is the uncontested most-popular (and most-interesting and certainly best-looking) driver in open-wheel or any other kind of racing. Smart, skilled, built tighter and sleeker than any race car she drives and with a non-stop and sometimes snarky mouth which her team owners (including Michael Andretti) find tough to control, Patrick simply is IndyCar. As always, the world press and racing fans see Indy as “the” event of the racing year, surpassing any NASCAR or even Formula 1 race for prestige and excitement. Even F1’s signature event, the elegant, somewhat inbred and royal-tinged street race through the principality of Monaco, can’t hold a candle to Indy and its legendary American action and kitsch, with Jim Nabors kicking-off the race festivities by singing “Back Home in Indiana,” its celebratory swig of milk for the winner, its row of bricks at the start-finish line, bricks having originally made-up the entire 2-1/2 mile oval and the sheer, vast number of spectators who make the Indy 500 the largest single-day sporting event of any kind in the world. Patrick’s win at Motegi, Japan in 2008 was the first victory for a woman in a major open-wheel racing series And, oh yeah, there are those 33 cars and their crazed drivers hitting speeds approaching 240 miles per hour on the track’s near-one-mile long front straightaway. Other sportspeople on the Time list included Kobe Bryant (my man) of the Los Angeles Lakers (#9!), Spanish tennis star Rafael Nadal, who at #60 got the ad over Buddhist star Dalai Lama (#61) and Olympic swimmer and conservative target Michael Phelps. Tiger Woods was in there, too, but I couldn’t quite figure out where he ranked. That’s because the poll and its results are pretty confusing, maybe intentionally so, to help spread the glory around as many people and categories as possible.. There were categories (Leaders & Revolutionaries, Builders & Titans, Artists & Entertainers, Heroes & Icons, Scientists & Thinkers) and because the voting was done on the Web, one Time editor wrote that, in essence, the results should be taken with more than a grain of salt; in fact, perhaps a mine-full. President Barack Obama finished in 37th place (one behind good ol’ boy Rust Limbaugh, four better than Miley Cyrus) and Our Own Arianna Huffington took 87th, one position better than White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and within ten places of Pope Benedict XVI, Jim Cramer, Sarah Palin, Bernie Madoff and John McCain. Quite a gang, anyway you look at it. Patrick is everywhere - this is the cover of next month’s SHAPE magazine; it’s all in preparation for the Indy 500 and keeping her Big Momentum going The top vote-getter was moot — the 21-year-old college student and founder of the online community 4chan.org, whose real name is Christopher Poole. He received 16,794,368 votes. Danica Patrick, who just this week introduced a nifty new orange and black almost-Halloween style paint job on her Honda-powered Dallara race car, has as good a chance of winning the pole position and this year’s Indy 500 as any other driver on the track. Le Force Danica heads now for what should be the biggest race of her life, May 24’s Indianapolis 500, and with the imprimatur of Time magazine to boot. Go Black/Orange 7! Join us LIVE this weekend on www.TalkRadioOne.com at 5pm Pacific Saturday for The Car Nut Show and Sunday at 5pm Pacific for our exclusive World Racing Roundup! Special guests, your phone calls and all the latest in the world of cars, trucks, motorcycles and motor racing! More on Jim Cramer

View post:
Steve Parker: IndyCar’s Danica Patrick makes Time’s 100 Most Influential People

Hooray for the New York Post , which wrote an open letter to our Vice President of Panic Joe Biden on page five of the paper this morning. On behalf of the straphangers of NYC, they told him off for his wildly clueless remarks warning American citizens to stay off of public transportation–trains, planes, and subways. “I would not at this point–if they had another way of transportation–suggesting they ride the subway,” he said referring to the advice he’d give his own family members now. Thanks Joe for joining in the swine flu hysteria. How nice that you and your family have the luxury of riding in the protective bubbles of Air Force Two and the Vice Presidential motorcade. Most of us average folks are stuck with regular modes of transport to get to work–yes those public buses, subways, trains and planes. Exactly what were you saying when you told us that you wouldn’t go anywhere near confined spaces right now? That New Yorkers and other residents of urban areas mostly served by public transportation should stay home and grind our economy to a halt because there have been 100 cases of mostly mild flu throughout the country? As VP, can I remind you that you’re supposed to be a grownup, a leader? You’re supposed to calm citizen’s fears, put crises like potential pandemics in perspective, not imply that people should hide in their homes, with medical masks on, preferably under their beds. What kind of wussy are you–just one heartbeat away from the Oval Office. Not one that I, and I bet 8 million New Yorkers, feel the least bit safe with now. Come on, Joe, where’s your inner Churchill, inspiring us to hang tough in our darkest hour? One of the reasons John McCain lost the election was because Americans felt his VP pick, Sarah Palin, was so ill qualified to be president. They couldn’t elect him for fear of what might happen if she by chance had to step into his shoes. If I were Obama, I’d sack you ASAP for those irresponsible comments spreading “a culture of fear,” as one New York commuter, Brian Zwolinski. Besides, if Joe Biden is saying he’s afraid–he is afraid. What’s going to happen when there’s a true national emergency–a future repeat of 9/11 or, speaking of swine, what if there were–horror of horrors–a future nuclear Bay of Pigs standoff? Is Biden going to be quivering in his shoes as he runs this time for a confined space–the White House bunker? President Obama–the writing is on the wall. You need a VP with unflappable courage by your side. Dump Biden right now. And I can tell you where to look for a new candidate–in the New York City subway. Any one of those straphangers fearlessly riding underground despite the fact that they might contract the new flu, has more backbone than Biden! For more on the swine flu panic follow Bonnie Fuller at twitter.com/bonniefuller More on Swine Flu

Original post:
Bonnie Fuller: President Obama: Dump Joe Biden, Your Vice President of Panic, Right Now!