The Baltimore Hating Continues at Red Maryland

The new hater over at backwoods Maryland is yet another concerned citizen, Chet Dembeck. He is terribly upset that "gentrified" areas of Baltimore, like (get this) Locust Point and Hampden will be "hurt" by the election of Mayor Dixon.

First, Hampden is GENTRIFIED? Ok then, I suppose I will continue, though I once again doubt whether this critic of Baltimore has actually entered the city.

Of course there is the not so subtle endorsement of Keiffer Mitchell because he has uttered the words "zero tolerance." Crime policy that leads to the illegal arrest of thousands of (black) citizens is like candy to GOP'ers. Despite the policy barely affecting murder stats in the city, and the faced with a police department that is known for fudging numbers, I have less faith in zero tolerance than our unknown critic, Last Reporter. It might also be good to point out, that despite his support of zero-tolerance policing and the civil rights violations it causes, Last Reporter DESPISES it's Maryland architect, Martin O'Malley, as well as his surveillance plans. Seems to me that citywide surveillance is all part of the police state Last Reporter so gleefully advocates.

Really though, how can you tear down the idea of "strong government" in on paragraph and advocate authoritarian police strategies in the next? I would posit that it is because Last Reporter cares nothing about Baltimore City beyond making political points about Democratic policy in general.

Finally, as my previous post shows, there is absolutely nothing that will stop the violence caused by drug prohibition besides legalization in some form. The people who advocate zero tolerance policing are the farthest from affecting any real change in Baltimore. They are much more concerned about protecting "gentrified" (white) Baltimore, than actually saving the whole city.

Greenwald: Fred Thompson far from a Regular Conservative Guy

Greenwald as usual, is right on target.

There is nothing in Fred Thompson's life that he has actually done that makes him "a tough guy" in the sense Fineman means it, nor is there anything that makes him a "cultural conservative." If anything, what his life actually is -- his behavior in reality -- seems to negate those characterizations.

But the illusion of manliness cliches, tough guy poses, and empty gestures of "cultural conservatism" are what the Republican base seeks, and media simpletons like Fineman, Halperin and Matthews eat it all up just as hungrily. That's how thrice-divorced and draft-avoiding individuals like Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh become media symbols of the Christian "values voters" and "tough guy," "tough-on-defense" stalwarts.

And it's how a life-long Beltway lobbyist and lawyer who avoided Vietnam, standing next to his twenty-five-year-younger second wife, is held up by our media stars as a Regular-Guy-Baptist symbol of piety and a no-nonsense, tough-guy, super-masculine warrior who will protect us all.

Read it all.

Ann Coulter Displays some GOP Humor

video at thinkprogress. Disgusting woman, really.

Employee Free Choice Act: Maryland Votes Down Party Lines

On occasion, Republicans Rep. Bartlett and Rep. Gilchrest vote with Democrats in the house. Maryland's unified vote against the Torture bill was a great example of this phenomenon.

Today that was not the case, and Maryland's two Republican Reps voted against working people and against the Employee Free Choice Act. All of Maryland's Democratic House members voted for the Bill. For a better analysis of the issue than I can give here, check out this mydd post.

Generally, I stand with unions. I find it much more easy to believe that big business is more actively involved in subverting workers rights than unions. I fear much more the lack of an ability to organize than workers being forced to do so.

Plaid Adder at DU: Funny Like A Fox

Check out this well written article analyzing the "humor" behind "The 1/2 Hour News Hour."

In case you are unaware, this is the Conservative response to the Daily Show, created by the torture mongers who brought you 24. I can't wait for the water boarding jokes!

a good bit:

"The 1/2 Hour News Hour" has taken "false wit" to a brand new place. Apart from one setup joke about Obama's rock-star popularity and a random fart reference, all the jokes in this segment rely for their meaning on arbitrary coincidence--most particularly the arbitrary coincidence of skin color. Almost all the jokes in that segment work by drawing a connection between Obama and another well-known and (to FOX's audience) sinister figure who has little in common with Obama except for not being white. For instance, the punchline to the revelation that Obama has admitted to cocaine use in adolescence is an endorsement from Marion Barry--a corrupt African-American Democratic politician with widely publicized drug problems. The next gag is a reminder that Obama's middle name, "Hussein," is the same as the last name of the Middle Eastern dictator we just executed--which carries in it the embedded reminder that Obama's last name is only one letter away from the first name of the Saudi Arabian terrorist we still haven't tracked down. This leads into an ad for "BO Magazine" (again, the joke is based on the arbitrary coincidence between Barak Obama's intitials and the playground acronym for "body odor") which is a parody of Oprah's "O" magazine--Oprah being, of course, another African-American public figure wildly popular with white middle-class Americans. One of the fake articles that flashes during the voiceover is titled, "Obama or Tiger Woods--Which Is More Diverse?", another comparison based on the apparently endlessly amazing fact that, like Woods, Obama is African-American.

I guess I can sort of see how this string of coincidences plays on the latent xenophobia and racism of your assumed target audience in order to demonize Obama...but even so, how is it funny? There's no element of surprise, there's no revelation, and it doesn't actually say anything about either Obama or the media's Obamania. All it says is, hey, Obama's black, just like these people. And he's also a Democratic front runner. And he's popular with the media. Isn't that HILARIOUS?

Uh...no?

White House meets with Terrorist who Lauded the Deaths of US Troops in Iraq

Via Thinkprogress:

So the White House recently met with and hosted Walid Jumblatt, a Lebanese Racist, anti-semite, and for all intents and purposes, a terrorist who cheers the death's of American troops in Iraq. He was at the White House asking for US led regime change in Syria. Terrible ideas such as that aside, the White House needs to answer for consorting with this complete POS.

Some of Mr. Jumblatt's greatest hits:

– “We are all happy when U.S. soldiers are killed [in Iraq] week in and week out. The killing of U.S. soldiers in Iraq is legitimate and obligatory.”

– “The oil axis is present in most of the U.S. administration, beginning with its president, vice-president and top advisers, including (Condoleezza) Rice, who is oil-colored, while the axis of Jews is present with Paul Wolfowitz, the leading hawk who is inciting (America) to occupy and destroy Iraq.”

– “In November 2003, the United States revoked Jumblatt’s diplomatic visa for wishing out loud that Wolfowitz had been killed in a Baghdad rocket attack.”

This man received a standing ovation from the conservative American Enterprise Institute. This man sat comfortably in the White House prescribing strategy to our Commander in Chief. Disgusting.

Truth Check: 42% of our Active Duty Soldiers are against the Iraq War Policy

It is completely disingenuous to claim that only .04% of American troops are against the Iraq War. Since the comments don't seem to work over at the Baltimore Reporter, I will respond to the article here.

All one needs to do is look at the Military Times poll from Dec 2006. Now, I agree with the article at the Baltimore Reporter that the 60 minutes piece may paint a more negative troop outlook than is the reality, but claiming that only .04% of American troops are disagree with the war and the war policy is just as misleading, if not more.

Just look:

1) Are you on active duty?

NOTE: Only active-duty responses were counted in remaining results.
Yes
100%
No
0%

10) Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation with Iraq?
Approve
35%
Disapprove
42%
No opinion
10%
Decline to answer
12%

11) Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president?
Approve
52%
Disapprove
31%
No opinion
6%
Decline to answer
10%

12) Do you consider the war in Iraq to be part of the war on terrorism that began Sept. 11, 2001, or do you consider it to be an entirely separate military action?
Part of the war on terrorism
47%
Separate military action
47%
No opinion
5%

The active duty military is even more evenly divided on Iraq than the American Public. Recent polls show American's disapproval for escalation is at 63% (which I admit is down from 70% a month ago).

Article's like the one linked earlier have one main goal, to silence dissenting opinions by making them look "out of the mainstream." The problem Curt from Flopping Aces, has is that he ignores the truth. Opposition to the Iraq War and the President's escalation policy are widespread in the public sphere and growing in the military one. The more difficult opposition becomes to ignore, the louder and bolder the lies become.

Redstate: BREAKING: Unsubstantiated Rumors and Heresay are Awesome

So much for proof. Its amazing the lengths that the right will go to support their "stay in Iraq forever or we all die" meme. Reality isn't important at all in GOP rumor mill.

Original Source Many comments on the post express the same sentiment, this Congresswoman is a wing-nut of the first order.

John Howard Should Keep His Mouth Shut

Sorry, but I could really care less how Mr. Howard feels about Barack Obama or any American Politician. Glenn Greenwald points out the audacity of Mr. Howard's recent comments where he claimed that an American Senator and Citizen has the support of "terrorists".

Not be overly patriotic or anything, but I could really care less what any world leader thinks about our Presidential candidates, or any American for that matter. Even when European leaders collectively freaked over the second election of George W. Bush I felt it was in bad taste. This is our country, and those who don't live here would do well to stay out of our domestic politics.

What makes Mr. Howard's statements worse is that he is known ally of Republicans and specifically the President. How dare he make such an unsubstantiated, partisan attack on a Presidential Candidate? How dare he insert himself so blatantly into a political process in which he has no stake?

I would hope that Americans, political affiliations aside, will collectively tell Mr. Howard to STFU. However, as Republicans across the country praise Mr. Howard, a foreigner with nothing to lose in regards to our political future, for butting his way into our electoral politics, for linking an American Senator to terrorists, I fear this will not happen. Instead, Republicans will enable a partisan foreign political attack on on of our own.

Update: Obama Responds:

Mr Obama, who has described the Iraq war as "tragic", said he was "flattered" by Mr Howard's statement.

He said: "I think it's flattering that one of George Bush's allies on the other side of the world started attacking me the day after I announced.

"I would also note that we have close to 140,000 troops on the ground now, and my understanding is Mr Howard has deployed 1,400, so if he is (ready) to fight the good fight in Iraq, I would suggest that he calls up another 20,000 Australians and sends them to Iraq."

"Otherwise it's just a bunch of empty rhetoric," he added.

Senator Obama is already a master at handling these scandals. He refers to it quickly, then goes on the attack. He did the same during the FOX/Madrassa incident.

Compared to the somewhat mishandled Edwards/Blogger controversy, mostly the lack of a quick response that let the story germinate and spread, Obama looks like a pro. Good news for Obama, because this helps put to bed claims that he might crack under the pressure of a general election race. Obama is at least ready for the "big time" when it comes to spin control and right-wing noise machine containment.

Right-wing Attack on Bloggers Hurts Both Sides

Nice try at humor though. And yes, right-wingers really find this stupidity to be hilarious.

Way to denigrate and reduce the power of the whole political blogosphere. Michelle Malkin is a complete idiot, and the controversy over John Edwards' bloggers' bad language is both short sighted and anti-speech.

In a world where the MSM is on constant patrol for a story with which to beat the blogosphere over the head with, Malkin and her ilk are giving them firepower. Every blogger makes principled stands for unpopular issues at some times. Those that do not aren't worth their weight in digital ink.

So to go after Edwards and his bloggers over their "paper trail" of personal opinions is working against us all. Now every candidate for '08 will think harder about how they control and censor their campaign bloggers. It will lead to a lot of quality bloggers missing out on job opportunities, and the hiring of a lot of boring consultants to do their job instead.

Yeah, its an attack strategy that is working for the GOP, but it will come back to bite us all in the ... errr... "behind".

Conservatives "Regroup" in Baltimore

Republicans have finally decided to come together to discuss how to regroup after their losses in 2006. Its a very important event for the party:

The retreat comes amid a widening split between conservatives and moderates within the Republican Party, with each side blaming the other for election losses in November. Conservatives say the party lost touch with the voters when it lost touch with its basic tenets: keeping government small and spending limited.

"As conservatives, we must get back to basics and begin to thoughtfully communicate our vision and core principles," Rep. Jeb Hensarling, the Texas Republican who chairs the 90-member Republican Study Committee, said in a statement. "Gathering some of the best minds in the conservative movement together with conservative leaders in Congress provides an opportunity to strategize and develop a solid foundation."

Obviously, conservatives have gotten off track. They recognize that they must return to their original values, especially if they plan on taking the presidency in 2008.

Too bad only one of the GOP front runners showed up.

Romney will address the congressmen Friday. Sen. John McCain of Arizona and former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani also were invited to the retreat in Baltimore, where the same group met last year. Giuliani told organizers he had a scheduling conflict, they said. McCain did not respond.

Hilarious. Giuliani and McCain are the standard bearers of the GOP for '08. Romney is a long shot at best. This non-attendance is key.

The retreat comes amid a widening split between conservatives and moderates within the Republican Party, with each side blaming the other for election losses in November. Conservatives say the party lost touch with the voters when it lost touch with its basic tenets: keeping government small and spending limited.

Seems like the conservative wing of the GOP has lost touch with their presidential candidates.