Marco Rubio On Twitter: It's A Gas

Anyone who uses or peruses the remarkable social networking tool Twitter finds themselves at once a little awed by its reach while at the same time feeling some trepidations about what it says about the individual using it. The 140 character limitation for each “tweet” really serves as an engine for imagination for one to get across a thought or ideas in such a constrained and tight available script. For some it can lead to thought provoking insight while at the same time lead to curious suggestions about one's thought processes on a somewhat unintentional comedic level.

This brings me to the tea-bagger wanna be and current Republican candidate for Mel Martinez’s Senate seat Marco Rubio and his twitter feed. If one is to make a comparison with his rival, Gov. Charlie Crists’ twitter feed, you get quite a discrepancy between the mundane and the colorful. The interesting thing about Rubio’s tweets is his response to “attacks” from liberal bloggers (ahem…) and lefty Dems. I’m not writing this post to to do a serious piece on Rubio’s thinking process or deconstruct his right wing stances. Whenever he opens his mouth publicly he takes care of that. What I’m looking for is the comedic value. Let’s take a look at what possible comedic possibilities Rubio’s tweets might offer us:

"liberal bloggers and DEM operatives attacking me 4 opposing Obama bank tax "Never mind what haters say ignore them till they fade away #tcot"

Awww…until we fade away? How will that happen? Perhaps the next tweet might give us some insight…

"Will be @ gun show @ Lakeland Center at 12:15 today. Then Tea Party in Citrus County @ Old Ct House in Inverness @ 3. #sayfie"

Guess there is some wishful thinking on his part…at least for those supporters at the event and those tea baggers…and what’s the best way to get connect with these supporters? Why how else…not through the liberal media? No way, better pick some “fair & balanced” coifs to do that…

"Check out my interview w/CNBC's Kudlow: http://bit.ly/8mDlLa 3:35 PM Jan 14th "

"I will be a guest on the Glenn Beck radio show today. You can listen @http://www.glennbeck.com/content/radio/ after 11 a.m. Eastern #sayfie 10:24 AM Jan 14"

"Will be on Kudlow Report at 7:40 on CNBC #sayfie 6:40 PM Jan 12th from Echofon "

"Will be on Fox Biz channel at 6pm with Cavuto. #sayfie"

I’m sorry I missed these. I’m wondering if Beck cried for him on the show. Better yet, wonder if ol’ Beckaroo could get Marco to cry with him…
Ah, yes. Then there is that you tube video from his supporters:

"Heard about youtube video using Hitler. It's offensive & grotesque I ask supporters not to forward & hope msm does not promote it. #sayfie 9:14 PM Oct 27th, 2009 from Echofon"

C’mon Marco! Republican big tent…remember? Oh that’s right, that’s a Crist meme. Can’t be like that. And besides with the # of non-white faces at those tea bagger events you should have no problem fitting everyone under your one size fits all tent.

Yeah, those Rubio tweets are real knee slappers, aren’t they? All that’s missing is William Shatner reading them to music on a late night comedy show, right? Actually, these tweets aren’t funny at all. Not even unintentionally. They are dead serious. No long serious piece needed here or a deconstruction of what Rubio is about and what he stands for. They speak loud and clear for themselves. And he’s going to beat Charlie Crist in the primary.

Wait until those tea baggers get a load of Kendrick Meek. You’ll see a lot more tweets that look like the last one above. Good luck with that Marco. That’s some social networking tool there isn’t it?

The GOP & The Middle Ages: A World View

A couple of years ago a CBS News poll on evolution had a startling revelation: only 30% of registered Republicans believed in evolution. That’s 30%. Registered Democrats don’t get off so easy either where 57% actually believe in evolution that still leaves 40% who do not. That’s still 4 out of ten registered Democrats. Independents were at 61% yes to 37% no. Let me assure you the rest of the western world has moved on from this argument and overwhelmingly embrace Darwinian science. This includes an astounding 85-90% of Chinese.

What prompted this post was Digby’s piece over at Hullabaloo citing FDL’s Blue Texan discussion of Scott Brown’s anti evolution stance in the Massachusetts Senate Race. Back in 2005 Digby wrote a piece about how the GOP was being held hostage by the rank and files’ European Middle Ages’ world view of a literal theological doctrinaire belief of the book of Genesis and its creationists story:

“[…] Ben Adler asked a bunch of leading conservative intellectuals whether they believed in evolution. As far as I can tell only about half of them have any intellectual integritywhatsoever, and only one is definitively honest in my opinion: Charles Krauthamer, if you can believe that. Richard Brookheiser and William F Buckley get honorable mentions.Remember, these are highly educated people. The problem is not that they may believe in God or have a religious view of the origins of the universe. That is quite easily explained. It's the weaselly, mushy way they try to divert the question elsewhere or explain what they know is a ridiculous position. It's as if they are all terribly afraid that James Dobson might read TNR and berate them for not having a religiously correct fundamentalist view. William Kristol, as always, is the slickest guy around.

[…]And these are the people who railed against campus political correctness. What do you suppose it's like to be intellectually held hostage by people who you know for a fact are dead wrong on something? It must be excruciating.”

As a World History and A.P. World History high school teacher I will refuse, if I am ever driven by school board or state policy, to offer the sham view of Creationism in the classroom as an explanation with equal weight as that of Darwinian’s hypothesis of natural selection.

One has to wonder why evolution is still denied by such a large body of citizens in light of the Catholic Church’s record on the denial of scientific truth (i.e. Galileo). If one believes in the literal interpretation of Creation in the book of Genesis then one must also deny Galileo’s view of the universe where the Sun is not the center of the universe where the Earth actually revolves around the Sun and not vice versa. I am appalled that a large percentage of the American electorate still wants to hold these Middle Ages’ beliefs at the expense of scientific advancement (i.e. stem cell research). It just doesn’t seem logical to me to accept these other scientific truths while denying others that are based on the same scientific research methods.

This isn’t even the most bothersome thing about this. Let me conclude with a quote from a commenter on Digby’s post about intelligent design:

“I recall years ago reading some statistic about how like 80% of the Chinese believed in evolution like 40% of Americans.

It's probably more like 95/25 these days.

I await the arrival of our Chinese overlords any day now.”

Amen to that warning brother.

The GOP: the "Party of Life" - With A Price

One of the infuriating things about being a liberal is how we are continuously told we are bleeding hearts in the pejorative as though it is something awful or terrible to be. Imagine being called compassionate and then being pilloried for it. Especially from individuals who feel the Judeo-Christian ethic is sacred. Yes, I know its always used to condemn at the expense of victims in a law enforcement argument but still we are being condemned for soft heartedness and the fact we care for the less advantaged. As an unapologetic liberal let me go ahead and plead guilty as charged. I am a bleeding heart. I feel compassion for my fellow man no matter the circumstances.

This is what makes the health care reform debate even more infuriating. Forget the argument that along with South Africa we were the only two nations left in the world without a national/universal health care system. Now that South Africa finally threw the towel in on that one we’re all that’s left standing. Forget that entire line of argument for it means nothing to the conservative mind. According to the “Party of Life” or the “Party of Family Values” the only good ideas in the world come only from the conservative American mind. So the idea that the rest of the world is on to something isn’t open for discussion. The thing that continues to leave me open mouthed in amazement though is why the GOP or rabid conservative proponent isn’t called for what they are if you take the logic of their argument to its logical conclusion: they are the “Party of Life / Family Values”…with a price. For some reason liberals or progressive will not call them on this with the exception of a lone elected official or two who is immediately labeled as a loon or extreme. Rep. Alan Grayson comes to mind.

If their argument is health care is a privilege and not a right then what they are saying is your life has a monetary price or value affixed. The longevity of your life is based on weather or not you get sick or ill and have the means to pay for care. Otherwise, you are expendable to the community at large. The comical thing about this is the Darwinian view of natural selection based on good health and the means to pay for health care they have in a party that doesn’t believe in evolution. If one would like to connect this to their “pro-life” frame in context of the argument of being anti abortion then it becomes even more insane. Have the baby. Then the Darwinian view of natural selection will kick in. You can live as long as you can afford it medically. In other words your life is a commodity like something you find on a shelf in a mall. That’s some “Party of Life” value they have there.

I’m still trying to reconcile 43 million Americans being without health care and untold millions that have health care coverage that is inadequate and based on a pre-existing condition trapping them in a job that may not pay as well as a job they could be getting putting more money into an economy based on consumer spending. The logic here is insane. Not only that with this many uninsured Americans and people trapped in a catch 22 situation with regards to the flawed coverage they do have how is it the body electorate isn’t feeling the pressure to do something about universal health care. Will it take a larger crisis and a more bankrupt system to move it toward fruition? My only conclusion is yes. But my final question is how many people will have to die unnecessarily before that happens? Apparently, a lot.

Liberals and progressives will continue to try to find candidates to run for office that believe otherwise. Then maybe, just maybe, they will have the wherewithal to finger and label the GOP for what they are: the party that puts a price on human life. Meanwhile us “bleeding heart” liberals will continue to look at human life for what it is value wise: priceless.

Halperin & Heilman’s Excerpts From Game Change Epitomizes A Vacuous Press

The pundit and MSM buzz over Halperin & Heilman’s new book Game Change is expected considering the suggested content to date in the published excerpts. Actually, the buzz has been so great that a recent viewing of Chris Matthews’ Hardball with the two authors in question almost had the effect of making the viewer wonder if the host required an underwear change between segments. For the political junkie, such as myself, there are two fascinating aspects to the suggested substance of what has been made available to the public so far. First, is how much delight their narrative takes revealing to the world the salacious gossip they’ve uncovered from disgruntled campaign workers within the 2008 Presidential campaigns. The second and most glaring aspect is how little work and effort that seems to have gone into constructing this expose of personality flaws and the implosions that followed. Ax grinders have always been an easy source. This kind of easy access though usually comes with a high price: exaggeration and an agenda with slanted or prejudicial views. The only real news that will come out of the excerpts to date is the heavy water usage taking place from all the showers everyone will need if they chose to slog through this trash.

The most unsurprising aspect of what we have been teased with is just how much of a hack both Halperin and Heilmen seems to be. Their writing style comes straight out of the Maureen Dowd School of heavy handed and churlish dependence on a high school worldview of personalities. One can only imagine if Theodore White or Hugh Sidey were still alive today to see the road their profession has taken. They would both be reaching for Kevorkian’s work on painless suicide to escape the pain and crushing disappointment over how the profession they devoted their whole lives to is now pilloried with talentless hacks with juvenile deductive abilities and an appetite for the prurient.

Let’s take a look at two examples we’ve been teased with so far: John & Elizabeth Edwards and Sarah Palin. To be fair about my own prejudices and bias I was an Edwards supporter. He was my first choice over both President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. There is no doubt there is some truth to the assertions Halperin and Heilman make. My question to both of these low life night crawlers is this: how really hard was it to attack and sully Elizabeth Edwards’ public persona? We are presented with a woman who has been handed a potential medical death sentence with the type of cancer she has and this was followed by revelations her husband was a philanderer. I’m not sure how hard it was to dig up dirt on a woman whose life and family are falling apart right before her eyes. How was she supposed to react to all of this? With dignified stoicism and emotionless aplomb? Not everyone is made the same way and we all have different ways dealing with life and death situations when we have been handed one. The question you will never hear from Chris Matthews or any of his ilk is how the deconstruction of the Edwards marriage gives us insight to the political dynamic that leads to electability and/or governing?

As for John Edwards, is it really news that he might have a somewhat phony public persona and isn’t really the humble southern lawyer he presented to the public? For students of the American political process and the junkies that follow this stuff its not news or a revelation that having a certain level of phoniness is inherent to the political profession. One might delve into the degree and level of phoniness the candidate possesses but is it really news? As a supporter of John Edwards I expected two things. First, that he had a progressive agenda he would follow through on if elected. Second, that he be as informed as possible about world affairs with some original ideas and the history of the American political process indicating an awareness of who and what we are as a people. He was fulfilling those requirements I was looking for. When it was revealed that the flaws he is endowed with not only made his electability problematic but would interfere with his ability to govern I was ready to move on. Yeah, I was disappointed and hurt but that’s part of being engaged in the political process and putting an emotional investment in a candidate.

John Edwards’ relationship with his wife isn’t for me to sit in judgment of. Everyone’s marriage is different and personal not open to public approval. These two guys write as though they are two junior high school students delighting and smirking over an intimate personal relationship and the fragile dynamics that take place when they don’t live up to the expectations between the two people involved. Again, writing about this stuff says volumes about who they are and who they want to appeal to.

Then there is Sarah Palin. If one is to take some of the things about the Edwards’ with a grain of salt the same has to happen regarding the right wing Wasilla Queen of the low informed voter. The picture they paint of her as being ignorant of basic American history and the political process is not news. I sure as hell didn’t need these two sewer dwellers to tell me she was the epitome of an incurious amalgamation of right wing cliché’s with little understanding of what they all mean coupled with an uninformed background of basic world affairs. The problem Steve Schmidt found himself with is it didn’t matter how much information they jammed her head with, it was all out of context for her because she never bothered to find out how the world works and how we as a people all arrived to where we are today. This is news? The Katie Couric interview alone revealed all of that in spades. I didn’t need these two dimwits to pile on more evidence. The descriptions reserved for her inside the dynamics of the McCain campaign would be easy to believe for anti Palinistas such as myself. But really, McCain’s campaign came to despise her and we should believe everything that comes out of their mouths?

These two night crawlers are what elements of the MSM want to have representing them? Here is a suggestion if you are even thinking about reading Game Change. Go pick up a copy of Richard Ben Cramer’s What It Takes. Open it to any page and read an excerpt. Once you do you will realize that you wouldn’t even uses the pages from Game Change for toilet paper.

The Decade Of Conservatism

Wow! Digby points us to a killer post by Devilstower over at Daily Kos and then throws in a last punch of her own. This is must read stuff:

"Here's the thing about the naughts: there was nothing magic about the numbers. It wasn't because of a double-zero in the middle of the dates that we launched an invasion that's cost the lives of thousands of Americans, the lives of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and a trillion dollars plus out of the pocketbooks of taxpayers. We launched into that still unresolved idiocy because of bad policy based on the conservative
philosophy of smash things first, think never. We went there because of a extreme version of American exceptionalism, one that views America as above the the rules of law and exempt from questions of morality. A view that says not only if the president does it, it's not a crime, but that if America does it, it can't be wrong.

It wasn't the decade that caused the economy to come down in tatters. It was a conservative approach to the marketplace that views government as the enemy, greed as the only acceptable motivation, and the only solution for disasters brought on by a lack of regulation as still less regulation.

It wasn't the calendar that brought down the banks, or American manufacturing, or American's influence around the world. It wasn't the date that added torture to the list of growth industries while erasing our budget surplus.

Don't forget the naughts, because this decade, no matter what anyone on the right might say, was conservatism on trial. You want less taxes? You got less taxes. You want less regulation? You got less regulation. Open markets? Wide open. An illusuion of security in place of rights? Hey, presto. Think we should privatize war by handing unlimited power given to military contractors so they can kick butt and
take names? Kiddo, we passed out boots and pencils by the thousands. Everything, everything, that ever showed up on a drooled-over right wing wish list got implemented -- with a side order of Freedom Fries.

They will try to disown it, and God knows if I was responsible for this mess I'd be disowning it, too. But the truth is that the conservatives got everything they wanted in the decade just past, everything that they've claimed for forty years would make America "great again". They didn't fart around with any "red dogRepublicans." They rolled over their moderates and implemented a conservative dream.

What did we get for it? We got an economy in ruins, a government in massive debt, unending war, and the repudiation of the world. There's no doubt that Republicans want you to forget the last decade, because if you remember... if you remember when you went down to the water hole and were jumped by every lunacy that ever emerged from the wet dreams of Grover Norquist and Dick Cheney, well, it's not likely that you'd give them a chance to do it again.

And they will. Given half a chance -- less than half -- they'll do it again, only worse. Because that's the way conservatism works. Remember when the only answer to every economic problem was "cut taxes?" We have a surplus. Good, let's cut taxes. We have a deficit. Hey, cut taxes even more! That little motto was unchanging even when was clear that the tax cuts were increasing the burden on everyone but a wealthy few. That's just a subset of the great conservative battle whine which is now and forever "we didn't go far enough." If deregulation led to a crash, it's because we didn't deregulate enough. If the wars aren't won, it's because
we haven't started enough wars. If there are people still clinging to their rights, it's because we haven't done enough to make them afraid.

Forget the naughts, and you'll forget that conservatives had another chance to prove all their ideas, and that their ideas utterly and completely failed. Again."

Then Digby follows up with a little back hand of her own:

"I don't deny that the corporate Democrats are screwed up too. But they didn't invent this political world. As I
quipped before, they just learned to stop worrying and love the money. This world of graft and corruption and unfettered greed was the conservative movement's idea of utopia. And they got it. ."

Now for my own follow up. If you had been a follower of this blog you would know what I've been saying from the outset. The 1920's saw unfettered conservatism run rampant and counter to all forms of regulation ala Teddy Roosevelt and his trust busting progressives. And what followed? A Depression that brought us to our knees. We almost didn't get back up. Yeah, we've been down this road before. And then, as Devilstower has pointed out, we went down that road again. The only difference was in the 1920's we were isolationists. In the naughts we went in shooting just because we could.

There is no doubt conservatives live and breath the "we didn't go far enough" mantle no matter the consequences in the face of overwhelming evidence of the contrary. But there it is. Given a chance they will try it again and again like the insane person doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results. We've been there, done that.

In the name of all that's holy, let's not go down that road again. Ever.

Maureen Dowd: Irrelevance As A Virtue

I'm still wondering how Maureen Dowd, who writes like a juvenile with a thesaurus, manages to keep her paying job at the NYTimes. Her latest article only reinforces the notion she seems to harbor that journalistic irrelevance is a virtue. I thought one of the virtues of journalism was to make the reader more informed after reading the piece, not before it. Her latest on Janet Napolitano has to make one wonder if there are any virtues of having an editor or not at the paper of record. This piece starts out telling us the Dept. of Homeland Security head was hand wringing over the Christmas day terrorist attempt and was somewhat dismayed at the jumbled message she was trying to send about how safe airline travelers were. The piece then ends with us being told that Napolitano is kept awake at night by just such incidences.

Wow. Who knew?

Little Movement In Duval County Registered Voter Gains & Party ID's

Since I'm doing a little blog site cleanup and updating I was taking a look at the number of Duval County registered voter and party ID breakdown from May of 2008 and comparing it to the new year and found the results to be quite unsurprising. This would seem par for the course in light of how both Democratically controlled houses have performed since the 2008 election results.

The poor performance put forth by both houses only reinforces those voters' qualms about politics in general and makes a fine recipe for disaster at the polls this coming November for the Democratic party. Watching the party allowing the likes of Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson to hold them hostage and then employing a strategy of pandering to Olympia Snowe and et al for the construction of a Potemkin village of bipartisanship was mind boggling. Watching this train wreck strategy that could only lead to a perfect storm for electoral disaster for the Democrats in the 2010 midterms was enough to make political junkies like myself along with local and regional political acolytes want to take the gas.

First let's look at the numbers for a comparative breakdown for 01/03/2010 vs. 05/30/2008:

REGISTERED VOTERS As OF 01/03/2010

Democratic: 240,688 (45.43%)

Republicans: 193,103 (36.45%)

Other: 96,023 (18.19%)Total: 529,814

REGISTERED VOTERS AS OF 05/30/2008

Democrats: 216,908 (44.65%)

Republicans: 184,174 (37.91%)

Other: 84,695 (17.43%)Total: 485,777

A 1% gain for the Democratic Party here over this 18 month period is nothing to write home about. In fact if there is any news in this comparative at all, it would be how the Duval County Republican party has managed to stave off disaster by avoiding a tsunami of voter registration discontent and it translating into a widening shift in the gap of party ID and growth. If the last eight years could not drive a widening gap in this regard then I'm not sure its possible to make it happen under any circumstances. George W. Bush by any stretch of imagination was an unmitigated disaster of a President and for Republicans in general. There is not doubt that this led to a loss of both houses for the Republicans but just barely when one takes the time to analyze the numbers for real world impact.

The Democrats still have a lot of work to do to redeem themselves. At this point in the game redemption would only mitigate losses to a minimum, not stop them. Let's hope the Democrats have it in them. Only time will tell.

A Decade With Few Intact Dignities

Is it me or isn't it fairly obvious that the only three American politicians to emerge from the first decade of the millennium with their dignities intact happen to be Democrats? In order they form a formidable trio: Al Gore, Barack Obama and Ted Kennedy. As for what the next decade holds in store for the Nobel laureate Al Gore, President Obama, and the legacy of Edward Kennedy that's to be seen. In the next decade their work is cut out for them as it follows what has to be one of the most disappointing decades in American history since the 1850's where convulsive and extremist political actions and a civil war nearly led us to our demise as a country.

When the mainstream media decided in the first Presidential debate of 2000 that Al Gore's sigh(s) determined the suitability of who would make a better President it turned out the joke was on the voters. Its as if Bush was representative of all the intrusive advertising practices of the last fifty years that Madison Ave. could dream up was forced upon us with an election result that wasn't quite what it seemed. Even though most of us didn't buy the bill of goods that was being marketed to us we still wound up with the lemon. Buyer's remorse for those who bought into the product's promises got the true meaning of what a lemon tastes like. Especially the families of the military who's loved ones were either killed or maimed. As for the Nobel Laureate Al Gore it turns out that he was as advertised: a deliberate intellectual who wasn't the guy you wanted to have a beer with but the guy you wanted running the country. Though the MSM kept pushing the "who would you rather have a brew with" meme as a criteria selection for the leader of the free world I thought it was an odd theme to run with since the guys I do have beers with on occasion would be the very individuals I wouldn't want anywhere near running a government. I'm still looking forward to his contributions for the next decade.

President Obama, who rolled into office with a wagon load of promise still has a long road to travel. Though he was not my first candidate of choice for 2008 I still felt I was casting a vote for the things I was hoping he would do, not for things I was certain he wouldn't do. I am very disappointed so far with his handling of health care reform and his, to date, awkward and lumbering governing abilities. Hopefully, he will regain the graceful stride he showed during the campaign and give me a promising reason to vote for him again instead of casting a vote for for the things I'm sure he won't do.

The legacy of Edward Kennedy is something that will seemingly take care of itself despite the failure of Democrats to enact the reforms Ted Kennedy envisioned. He was the last of a dynasty that literally gave their lives for what they believed.

We need more to hope for than intact dignities. Let's hope the next decade brings it to us.

CNN's Rick Sanchez lowering the bar on journalistic standards

I wanted to add to Digby's rant about Rick Sanchez on CNN this evening. In an earlier post I lamented the loss of jounalistic standards and ethics and Sanchez just made a bid for being its poster boy this evening. There is no doubt Sanchez was proded by some fringe winger of the GOP to get his questions out about Europeans liking President Obama being a liability. This just adds to the lunacy the wingnuttia keeps trying to put in the MSM that somehow the United States is a lone island of morality in a global sea of decadence and socialism. I have Republican family friends that can't say "Europe" or "France" (especially France) without using the word 'Socialist' in conjunction with an utterance of their name.

At first this was inexplicable to me as to why they felt the enmity and hatred was deserved until I realized that Europe (again, especially France) never really cared for Reagan and really hated GW Bush. Funny thing about the effects of that unilaterialism thing. Not only does it show disrepect to your allies, it tells them they aren't as righteous and good as we are (i.e. see Iraq and the Middle East).

Today I was listening to the BBC explain to an American journalist how the U.K. hangs on every action the U.S. takes regarding Anglo-American relations. Every nuance is intensely covered and written about extensively such as the perceived slight toward Gordon Brown during his visit here back in early March over the White House's gift of 25 DVD's. The U.K.'s "special relationship" with the U.S. is taken very seriously and includes a diplomatic dance unlike relations with any other country in the world (including Canada & Mexico).

There is no doubt Sanchez got twittered with that queston to Blitzer. There is also no doubt where it came from either.

Two reasons why the newspaper industry is in decline

I know the reasons for the newspaper industry's troubles have been discussed over the past year by any number of so called experts. Atrios points to the poor business model they used along with Athenae's rant about unchecked corporate corruption. As a former member of the industry itself for over 15 years I have my own explanation. Yes, I agree whole heartedly with both Atrios and Athena but only as it pertains to piling on to the real reason . And that real reason is simple enough: they stopped being journalist and began morphing into dictation machines. No matter who was sourced and/or quoted they were done so without question. It didn't matter what happened in the past or what was said. It only mattered for that moment. This journalistic "whiteout" whereas professional ethics and standards were thrown out the window was done so at the expense of accountability ensuring they were percieved to be "fair and balanced." No matter how ludicrous one side sounded regarding any issue it was treated with equal footing when contrasted with an opposing view. Eventually this practice of acting like cheerleaders for the local, state and the federal government without question comes at a huge expense: your credibility. Now journalist are seen to be no better than used car salespeople for their trouble. What a surprise.

Even now they don't get it. The MSM is still clueless why they are perceived as such. But make no bones about it. It is the reason they are dying. Why listen or read it if it isn't credible? (Like printing rants about weapons of mass destruction without calling them on it for proof or why it is a variable in the equation historically). Add to that the lousy business model as Atrios points out and you have an industry in deep trouble.

I think newspapers are a community necessity. Local government without a watchdog leads to corruption and bad policy. Once that voice and watchful eye is gone the bad times aren't just here to stay, they'll get worse.

NBC Nightly News' Chuck Todd getting it wrong - - again

Earlier this evening NBC Nightly News' Chuck Todd, NBC White House Correspondent, compared President Obama's firing of GM CEO Richard Wagoner (Ok, he insisted he resign) with Reagan's firing of PATCO (Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization). Where do they find these guys? President Obama insisting that Wagoner step down after tanking GM during his decade at the helm is being compared to a union striking for better working conditions, higher pay and shorter working hours in a critical profession keeping our skies safely managed and known for intense professional burnout? What a complete idiot. For one thing, Reagan fired over 11,000 employees and broke a union in the process which was no doubt a wet dream for the right. Part of Reagan's "legacy" is firing and breaking a union where the profession experienced intense professional burnout due to the tremendous pressures of the job.

Chuck Todd seems to be demonstrating on a daily basis he has no clue to the substance of his so called "reports." I used to be impressed with his political analysis. But his skills as a reporter and connecting the dots on what he's reporting is sorely lacking. When you can't fill David Gregory's shoes, you've got a problem. If Gregory was any more of a light weight he'd be floating.

Cornyn & Bachman get their wingnuttia mojo on

Right wing loonies in the GOP seem to be a dime a dozen these days. But Sen. John Cornyn and Rep. Michelle Bachmann seem to be defining the benchmark for wingnuttia in general. While Cornyn proclaims that Minnesota could be years without a Senator while the state supreme court decides on a date to certify Al Franken's 225 vote win for the U.S. Senate you have Bachmann calling President Obama's economic policy nothing more than "economic Marxism." It's as simple as that. What amazes me is not the rhetoric itself but the certainty of her proclamation.

When Barry Goldwater ambled up to the podium at the Cow Palace in San Francisco on July 16, 1964 and uttered his nomination campaign speech's most famous line, "Let me remind you that extremism in the defence of liberty is no vice" I'm sure he never imagined a GOP evolving into what you see today. While Goldwater called out to a nation to adopt a non conciliatory policy tone with regards to defense policy Cornyn and Bachmann are calling for actions that go beyond elected outcomes. One only has to wonder when lines of decency will be breeched before a voter back lash kicks in.