Wingnut Butter: X-tra Creamy

Via atrios:
Now we know where Rep. Sam Johnson (R-Texas) thinks the weapons of mass destruction are buried: in Syria, which he said he’d like to nuke to smithereens.

Speaking at a veterans’ celebration at Suncreek United Methodist Church in Allen, Texas, on Feb. 19, Johnson told the crowd that he explained his theory to President Bush and Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas) on the porch of the White House one night.

Johnson said he told the president that night, “Syria is the problem. Syria is where those weapons of mass destruction are, in my view. You know, I can fly an F-15, put two nukes on ‘em and I’ll make one pass. We won’t have to worry about Syria anymore.”

Awhile back the Onion ran an article accussing Syria of harboring 15 million known arabs. It is very disturbing that we are getting to a point where that is no longer satire. Since this lunatic congressmen claims to have shared his depraved views with President Bush (in addition to advocating a crimes against humanity in a church), I wonder what our how our Commander-in-Chief responded. This kind of insanity needs to be dealt a crushing blow. Johnson ought to be censured by his colleagues and the President ought to vigorously denounce this man's remarks.

Open Season

Now, I am against re-districting in theory, but I do like the sound of this:

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) has spoken with several Democratic governors in recent weeks about the possibility of revisiting their states' Congressional lines in response to the ongoing Republican-led redistricting in Georgia, according to informed party sources.

Faced with the prospect of Republicans redrawing Congressional lines in a third state since the initial 2001 round of redistricting ended, a faction of national Democrats is urging an aggressive strategy aimed at striking back at Republican House Members in states like New Mexico and Illinois.

Re-disticiting is another key reason why the Democrats must consolidate their power in the Blue states. Too many Democratic states, New York and California for example, have Republican governors. We need to destroy the Republican Party in these solidly Democratic states (just as the Democrats have been ruined in the South) and use them to gain control of the federal government. With new Democratic governors in these states we could probably cancel out any redistricting by the Republicans and maybe even make a net gain in the House of Representatives.

Wild Speculation

Another smashing victory in for nuclear non-proliferation:
Russian President Vladimir Putin, rejecting U.S. concerns that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons, said Friday that Russia would continue to assist the Islamic Republic with nuclear and military projects....

Putin's comments, made less than a week before he and President Bush are due to meet in Bratislava, Slovakia, threaten to complicate Bush's efforts to get an international consensus on how to deal with Iran's nuclear program, a key goal of his European trip that begins Sunday...

In Washington, Bush and his senior aides offered a muted response to Putin's assertions.


Let's hope that our chips weren't cashed for the benefit of Bush's re-election when Putin quite bizzarley announced that he had warned the US about planned Iraqi terrorist attacks or when he declared that Bush's electoral defeat would be a victory for terrorism. Then again, maybe the White House isn't all that interested in halting Iran's weapons program through preventitive diplomatic action. After all, if they did that then they wouldn't get have Super War: Iran

An "E" For Effort

Powerline's John H. Hinderaker makes a sporting effort to mislead his readers about the nature of Bush's social security proposal in this post, but makes the fateful mistake of linking to an article from the Washington Post that contains actual facts. Hinderaker writes:

I'm one of the worst investors in the history of the world, and every decision I make about stocks turns out to be wrong. But, you know what? I still do far better saving for myself than I could ever do through Social Security. But that's OK, because the one fact that the Post somehow avoids mentioning is that the Bush administration's private account plan is entirely voluntary. That's right: If you're convinced that every investment you will ever make, no matter how conservative, will somehow turn out worse than burying cash in your back yard, not to worry: you can stay with the good old, impossibly lame, Social Security program forever.

This is a complete mischaracterization of the President's Social Security plan. Hinderaker makes it seem as if private accounts are a cost-free bonus that mean-spirited Democrats and America hating liberals are opposed to. What he completely ignores is the rather important point is that these private accounts are not cost free. Since these accounts would come from payroll taxes, they would weaken the entire social security system. Furthermore, to pay for the accounts the guaranteed benefits of the "good old, impossibly lame Social Security program" would be cut. As the Post notes:

Bush envisions the personal accounts generating enough profit from investments in stocks and bonds to offset future reductions in guaranteed benefits.

So, according to George W. Bush, the way to avoid having your living standards lowered by his plan is to invest in a personal account and hope that your investments work out. Yeah, that sounds pretty voluntary to me.

Not only does Hinderaker not bother with getting the facts of Bush's Social Security proposal right, but he also did not bother reading the article he linked to carefully. In an update to his original post he says:

Several readers have pointed out that, in its next to the last paragraph, the article does quote a White House official saying that "'no one is exposed to risk that does not want any risk' because the program is voluntary." But the rest of the article is premised on the idea that workers will be forced to assume risk...

Hopefully in the near future he will add another correction that recognizes the fact that Bush's program actually basically does force workers to assume more risk. If the Fearless Leader is willing to acknowledge this, why can't Hinderaker?

Latest and Greatest

The following are the results to a gallup poll that asked respodent who they thought was the greatest American president:

1) Ronald Reagan
2) Bill Clinton
3) Abraham Lincoln
4) Franklin D. Roosevelt
5) John F. Kennedy

Reagan's rise in the rankings is a recent development. In previous polls Ronald Reagan was consistently outpolled by Abraham Lincoln. There is more unsetteling news in this poll besides Ronald Reagan's rating as the greatest president. Reagan's ascendence shows just how effective the conservative campaign to promote Reagan has been. Reagan was not all that popular while he was President of the United States and in the first few years after his presidency he was less popular than when he was President. Though he was not ranked among the top ten, George W. Bush did beat Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt and George Washington.

Election Reform

Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and other Democrats have come out in favor in some major changes regarding elections in this country. In addition to creating a federal holiday for voting, the bill would:

_Require paper receipts for votes.

_Authorize $500 million to help states make the changes in voting systems and equipment.

_Allow ex-felons to vote. Currently an estimated 4.7 million Americans are barred from voting because of their criminal records.

_Require adoption of the changes in time for the 2006 election.

These measures would increase the number of people who could vote and would vote in future elections and make election results more accurate and trustworthy. In addition to this bill being good policy, it is also good politics. Elections reform is probably a winning issue and by putting forth a policy agenda during non-election years, the Democrats help to build public awareness of the party's identity and principles.

Slander!

Via atrios I have come to learn that Time Magazine's "blog of the year", Powerline has made a truly shocking discovery:

Jimmy Carter isn't just misguided or ill-informed. He's on the other side.

How did the star spangled-men of Powerline learn of the treasonous tendencies of America's most active ex-president? According to Powerline it was quite elementary, he failed to praise President Bush sufficiently for the elections in Iraq and expressing concern in September about the threat the security situation in Iraq posed to the elections. If mild skepticism is enough to make someone a fifth columnist, then the Powerline Patriots must be enraged by the President's well known hostility towards elections in Iraq and his entirely unnecessary delay of the Iraqi elections. Then again, Bush's attempt to thwart democracy from coming to Iraq was literally months ago and anyway, as Commander-In-Chief he has the constitutionally granted power to define reality.

Slander!

Via atrios I have come to learn that Time Magazine's "blog of the year", Powerline has made a truly shocking discovery:

Jimmy Carter isn't just misguided or ill-informed. He's on the other side.

How did the star spangled-men of Powerline learn of the treasonous tendencies of America's most active ex-president? According to Powerline it was quite elementary, he failed to praise President Bush sufficiently for the elections in Iraq and expressing concern in September about the threat the security situation in Iraq posed to the elections. If mild skepticism is enough to make someone a fifth columnist, then the Powerline Patriots must be enraged by the President's well known hostility towards elections in Iraq and his entirely unnecessary delay of the Iraqi elections. Then again Bush's attempt to thwart democracy from coming to Iraq was literally months ago and anyway, as Commander-In-Chief he has the constitutionally granted power to define reality.

Self Promotion

The radio show I share with my hallmate will premier this thursday at 3 AM. You can listen here.

So sin-surr

North Korea now claims that it is a nuclear power and has withdrawn from disarmarment negotitations. The Bush Administration has decided to continue with its policy of steely eyed moral clarity and diplomatic calamity and has refused to make any concessions to North Korea. Instead the White House believes that the DPRK can be pressured into agreeing to American demands for a return to six party talks by cracking down on illegal activities being carried out by the North Koreans. Tremendous casualties didn't break them during the Korean war and millions of famine deaths during the 1990's did nothing to dent the determination of North Korea's government, but maybe after hearing the President's strongly worded and idealistic inaguaral address the communists have gone soft. There is a chance that for some reason George W. Bush's potent combination of tough talk and dithering might not lead North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons program. In that case, we can count on our foolproof national missile defense system to protect us.

Deanmania

Check out Dean Friedman's latest creation, a flash cartoon set to his new song four more years". It is like a bitterly partisan jib-jab.

The West Is Red

Poll: Tap wealthy on Social Security
Most Americans are willing to endorse painful steps to ensure Social Security's long-term solvency — steps that nick the rich, that is.

Two-thirds of those surveyed by USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup last weekend say it would be a "good idea" to limit retirement benefits for the wealthy and to subject all wages to payroll taxes. Now, annual earnings above $90,000 aren't taxed.

Class warfare: It works!

NY To Join The League of Satan

Same-Sex Marriage Case Wins in New York City
Today, a New York trial judge handed down an unprecedented ruling that says the state must grant gay and lesbian couples the right to marriage. The court's decision, stemming from a case filed by Lambda Legal, a national LGBT civil rights organization, on behalf of five plaintiff couples, says that the state's constitution guarantees gay men and lesbians the same basic freedoms available to straight couples.
If these activists judges keep taking terms like "equality" so literally instead of realizing that they don't apply to unpopular minorities something will have to be done! More decisions in favor of gay marriage/civil unions at the local and state level will keep the issue alive and will likely put pressure on the Republican leadership to have another go at trying to pass the dreadful Federal Marriage Amendment. If they don't they risk alienating a significant portion of their base, but if they do they will have less political capital to expend on their favored projects. I am not sure that is a pickle they want to be in.

Anti-Western Leftism Conquers The Western World

Certain conservatives, like the infamous Instapundit have taken to claiming that there exists a faction within in the West that is opposed to Western values and cite Ted Kennedy's suggestion that the US prepare a timetable to leave Iraq and some loathsome professor as examples of this threat to our civilization. Matthew Yglesias offers an clever critique of this view that pretty much demolishes such claims.

ITEM!

The White House Maybe Being Less Than Forthright In Its Dealings With the Press
The Boston Globe reports:
The Bush administration has provided White House media credentials to a man who has virtually no journalistic background, asks softball questions to the president and his spokesman in the midst of contentious news conferences, and routinely reprints long passages verbatim from official press releases as original news articles on his website.

Jeff Gannon calls himself the White House correspondent for TalonNews.com, a website that says it is "committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news coverage to our readers." It is operated by a Texas-based Republican Party delegate and political activist who also runs GOPUSA.com, a website that touts itself as "bringing the conservative message to America."

...Now, the question of how Gannon gets into White House press conferences is coming under intense scrutiny from critics who contend that Gannon is not a journalist but rather a White House tool to soften media coverage of Bush. The issue was raised by a media watchdog group and picked up by Internet bloggers, who linked Gannon's presence in White House briefings to recent controversies over whether the administration manipulates the flow of information to the public.

Creating a fake publication that is nothing but a front for a Republican PR operation? How underhanded! What is next? Bribing journalists with federal funds?