Even More Rand Paul Nonsense

This is not a new Rand Paul slip-of-the-lip but it's just too insane not to talk about. It's just another reminder of why Paul's handlers are saying he'll only answer questions that are submitted in writing. They know if they continue to allow him to do on-the-spot interviews, he'll continue to talk without engaging his brain. This way they can check his answers before the media gets them and hopefully head off further embarrassment.

A few years ago the Republican governor of Kentucky, Ernie Fletcher, was charged with devising "a scheme to illegally award state jobs to political contributors." After a two-year investigation by the state's attorney general, Fletcher signed an agreement admitting there was "wrongdoing by his administration. In return all charges were dropped.

But that wasn't good enough for the kooky Rand Paul. He wrote an op-ed piece for the Kentucky Post (in 2006) where he took the governor to task for mishandling the whole situation. Paul then relates how he would have handled the situation if he had been the governor. He said:

"What would I do if I were governor?

First, I’d have pardoned myself and everyone included nearly a year ago.Without a pardon the case goes on and on. Fletcher has gotten no kudos whatsoever for not pardoning himself."

What a ridiculous idea. Paul is not worried at all about one of his Republican brothers breaking the law (and admitting it). For him, breaking the law is not nearly as important as finding a way out of the trouble -- even if it would up making the governor look even worse than he already did. You can imagine what voters would think of someone who pardoned himself.

And I have to wonder if it is even legal for a governor to give himself a pardon. Could he pardon himself for an even more serious crime like theft, rape, child sexual abuse or murder? How about serial murder? This would be an interesting question for the Supreme Court to answer. I suspect that there is only one person in the state that the governor cannot pardon -- himself. It would violate all the tenets of justice to allow anyone to pardon himself (or herself).

But then Rand Paul seldom thinks things through before he sounds off (or even writes something). His handlers have a massive job in front of them, because they must check everything he says or writes for the next four months. Failure to do that will surely lead to further embarrassments.

Masters Of The Shakedown

Political Cartoon is by Jim Morin in the Miami Herald.

Republican Jesus Turns A Profit

From the satirical pages of Jesus' General.

Another Lie From A Top Republican

Much like Sarah Palin, one gets the feeling that Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele doesn't spend much time in the vicinity of the truth. I'm not sure whether he just doesn't care about the truth or whether he's just too stupid to know the truth. Either way, it certainly doesn't bother him to say anything he wants (mainly falsehoods) to try and make Republican policies look better than they really are.

Steele appeared on CNBC yesterday morning bashing President Obama's efforts at job creation. He told the interviewer that we need to return to the policies of George Bush because, "George Bush created a lot of jobs." That was an outrageous lie.

In the last month of Bush's administration, the Wall Street Journal (certainly no liberal media source) printed a story saying the Bush administration had created only 1 million jobs during his two terms in office. That is pitiful when compared to the last two Democrats in office. Carter created 10.5 million jobs in only one term in office, and Clinton created a whopping 23 million jobs during his years in office.

Making Bush look even worse is the fact that President Obama is on-target to produce more than 1 million jobs just in 2010. Add this to the fact that the Bush policies contributed to the largest recession since the Great Depression, and you have the perfect picture of absolute incompetence in economic affairs. Just in his last four months in office George Bush lost more than 2 million jobs for this country (see above chart).

Looking at these numbers, it is amazing to me that anyone (especially someone as high up as the chair of the RNC) could suggest a return to the policies of the Bush administration would be anything other than disastrous. It is ludicrous that Republicans hold thenselves up as better guardians of the economy than Democrats.

Democratic policies may not be the best for the rich bankers of Wall Street, but they produce a whole lot more jobs for the people on Main Street -- and that's what the country needs right now.

Back-Pedaling

Political Cartoon is by Mike Keefe in USA Today.

Judge's Decision Feathers His Own Nest

When BP's shortcuts caused an oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, President Obama made what I think was a good decision to impose a moratorium on deep-water off-shore drilling. Now that it's months later and the damaged BP rig is still pouring millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf, Obama's moratorium looks even more like the right decision.

But a Louisiana company, Hornbeck Offshore Services, didn't like the moratorium and sued to have the decision overturned in court. Yesterday U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman agreed with the drilling company and ruled that the moratorium was illegal. He said the moratorium was "arbitrary and capricious" and would have an "immeasurable effect on the plaintiffs, the local economy, the Gulf region, and the critical present-day aspect of the availability of domestic energy in this country."

You may be asking yourself why the judge would make such a questionable decision in the midst of the current oil disaster. I know I was. But it begins to make some sense when you look at the judge's financial holdings. The judge owns stock in at least 21 different energy companies, including Halliburton and Transocean. He also owns stock in J.P. Morgan Chase (which holds 28.3% of BP's stock). Here are the other companies that the judge holds stock in:

BlackRock
Ocean Energy
NGP Capital Resources
Quicksilver Resources
Hercules Offshore
Provident Energy
Peabody Energy
PenGrowth Energy
RPC Inc
Atlas Energy Resources
Parker Drilling
TXCO Resources
EV Energy Partners
Rowan Companies
BPZ Resources
El Paso Corp
KBR Inc
Chesapeake Energy
ATP Oil & Gas

This judge obviously had no business making any decision in this case. He should have recused himself from the case. If he had decided in favor of the government, he would have suffered financially from his energy holdings. By deciding for the drilling company, he protects the oil investments that he has and his own financial well-being. How can we trust that he made a fair and impartial decision in this case? Answer -- we can't!

Fortunately, the White House is appealing this ridiculous decision to the 5th Court of Appeals (and the Sierra Club is joining in the appeal). But it is questionable whether they will get a fair hearing there either. Just last month, in a case against energy and chemical companies, so many of the 5th Court Appeals judges recused themselves for ties to these companies that there weren't enough judges left to hear the case.

Are there any judges left out there that aren't owned by the oil companies?

Ultimate IED

Political Cartoon is by David Horsey in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

The Apology

From the thought-provoking blog Republican Dirty Tricks.

"The Apology" Was Just Basic Republicanism

I'm sure you have probably heard about Rep. "Smoky" Joe Barton (R-Texas) and his little faux pas by now. The corporate-owned congressman apologized to BP for getting "shaken down" by the Obama administration (because the president convinced them to put $20 billion into an escrow account to pay for damages caused by their disastrous oil leak). He thought BP was being mistreated because the president wanted them to pay for the damages they caused to the Gulf and its coastline.

Frankly, this "apology" didn't surprise me at all. The Republican Party has always sided with the corporate interests against ordinary Americans. They defended the huge insurance and pharmaceutical companies during the debate over health care. They are currently defending the big Wall Street banks and trying to defeat the re-regulation of Wall Street. It only makes sense that they would leap to protect the big oil companies during the current crises in the Gulf.

But this time they got called on their defense of corporate interests over citizen interests because the American people are paying attention to the Gulf's destruction by Big Oil. And it didn't take them long to realize they had a publicity nightmare on their hands. A huge majority of Americans are in no mood to let BP off the hook or listen to any apologies to them by politicians. Americans rightfully want BP to pay for the damage they have caused.

So the Republicans are now trying to back-pedal. Their leadership got "Smoky" Joe (pictured) to apologize for his apology and now they are trying to act like this was just a mistake by one Republican and not a position of the party (or at least a majority of the party). But that is just not true.

The fact is that the Republican Study Committee (the conservative caucus of House members) actually took this position before Barton's ridiculous apology. Barton may not have phrased it well, but he was just touting the party line. Here is what the Republican Study Committee said:

BP’s reported willingness to go along with the White House’s new fund suggests that the Obama Administration is hard at work exerting its brand of Chicago-style shakedown politics. These actions are emblematic of a politicization of our economy that has been borne out of this Administration’s drive for greater power and control. It is the same mentality that believes an economic crisis or an environmental disaster is the best opportunity to pursue a failed liberal agenda. The American people know much better.

And don't think this is a position taken by a small group of Republicans. There are at least 115 Republican House members in the Republican Study Committee and they all agreed to the release of that statement. That sounds like a clear majority of Congressional Republicans to me. Here is a list of those 115 House members.

Addiction

Political Cartoon is by Brian Fairrington at caglecartoons.com.

Texas Republicans Have A Platform To Fear

The Texas Republican Party held its convention a couple of weeks ago in Dallas. To say the Texas branch of the Republican Party is right-wing is a vast understatement. They make Attila the Hun seem like a bleeding-heart liberal. It'll probably give you some idea of where they stand to know that one of the main speakers at their kick-off dinner was Rep. Michele Bachmann, the extremist right-winger from Minnesota.

But to really get the feel of how extreme the Texas Republicans are, one needs to read theTexas Republican Platform. Here are just a few of the things in that platform that these Republicans would like to see (and the comments in parentheses are mine):

* Want deep-water drilling to continue in the Gulf of Mexico and other places. (a crazy notion in the midst of the current oil disaster, and one that is at odds with the majority of Americans.)

* Want to abolish the Energy Department. (makes no sense in light of global climate change and our need to find and develop alternate energy sources.)

* Wants to abolish the Education Department. (this would give fundamentalist-controlled local school boards even more power - creationism anyone?)

* Wants to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and institute a national sales tax. (to protect the rich and put a greater percentage of the tax burden on the poor, working and middle classes.)

* Want to withdraw this country from the United Nations. (with a military budget like the U.S. has, who needs diplomacy?)

* Opposes the establishment of time-frames for withdrawal from Iraq or Afghanistan. (because eternal war is good for business and the dead soldiers are mainly poor, working class or minority.)

* Supports the "democratically-elected" governments in Afghanistan and Iraq. (they may be corrupt puppets, but they are our corrupt puppets.)

* Want to abolish Affirmative Action. (because the white power structure must be maintained.)

* Wants to eliminate the Endangered Species Act. (our grandkids wouldn't want to have those animals around taking up space that can be used by Big Business.)

* Want to outlaw driver's licenses for undocumented immigrants. (will we be safer if all these drivers are unlicensed and uninsured?)

* Want to let religious organizations engage in politics without fear of losing their tax-exempt status and want to eliminate the separation of church and state. (because a theocracy is much better than a democracy.)

* Want to eliminate the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. (because business should be able to discriminate against anyone they want.)

* Want to abolish Supreme Court jurisdiction in abortion, religious issues and the Bill of Rights. (because rights are only for white christian males.)

* Want to require a presidential candidate to submit a birth certificate before they can be placed on the state's ballot. (the "birthers" are alive and well -- and Republican.)

* Want English adopted as the official language. (even though Spanish was spoken for hundreds of years in Texas before English was.)

* Want to abolish "no-fault divorce" laws. (because it should be difficult for a person to get out of an abusive marriage.)

* Want to ensure marriage can only be between a "natural man and a natural woman". (because equal rights shouldn't apply to all citizens.)

* Wants to re-institute sodomy laws and deny the Supreme Court the right to review the law. (in spite of the fact that both of these would be unconstitutional.)

* Want to make it a felony crime to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple. (if they have to force discrimination they are willing to do it.)

* Want all human life respected from fertilization to natural death. (a fancy way of saying a woman should not have the right to control over her own body.)

* Supports the death penalty and want to extend it to rape cases. (what happened to respect for human life until natural death?)

* Want to outlaw the sale and use of RU-486 and any other "morning-after pills". (but you can bet they'll oppose the government taking care of the unwanted babies this would cause.)

* Want to eliminate social security and the social security tax and transition to "private pensions". (because retirement should only be for those who can afford it -- not poor or working class folks.)

* Want to "defund, repeal and reject" the health care act passed by U.S. Congress and signed by President Obama. (because health care is a privilege for the rich -- not a right for everyone.)

* Oppose government mandating the vaccination of children. (because a plague every now and then is a good thing.)

* Oppose pre-school, kindergarten and any government programs dealing with early childhood development. (wouldn't want kids to actually be ready for school or they might learn to think for themselves.)

* Support "open carry" laws and oppose "Gun Free Zones". (because everyone should always be armed, especially in schools, bars, churches and courthouses.)

* Supports the formation of an armed state militia. (because you just can't have too many nuts carrying guns.)

* Want the Minimum Wage Law to be repealed. (because workers and families don't really need to have a decent standard of living.)

* Opposes the Fourteenth Amendment which gives citizenship to anyone born in the U.S. (especially brown people who may soon make whites a minority.)

* Opposes a Palestinian state being carved out of "historical Israel". (because that would lead to a two-state solution and peace in the Middle East).

These are just a few of the nutty ideas proposed in the Texas Republican platform. Does this sound like the kind of America you want to live in and leave for your children? I urge you to go read this very scary document in its entirety. The America these people want to create would be a terrible place for anyone not white, male and rich.

The Republicans don't just want a return to the 1950s -- they want to go all the way back to the 1850s. Is there any remaining doubt that the Republican Party in Texas has been taken over by right-wing extremist fringe elements?

A Suggestion

Political Cartoon is by Daryl Cagle at msnbc.com.

Burden Of Proof

I couldn't agree more. From the science blog called Pharyngula.

Softball, Religion And Stupidity

When most of us think of softball (or even sports in general) we think of a fun and non-discriminatory activity. It simply doesn't matter what age, color, sex, ethnicity, religion, political persuasion or sexual preference you are. You can either hit, throw, catch and run well, or you can't. Softball, like all sports, respects only ability and not the silly differences that mankind has invented to keep us apart.

On a professional or world-class level ability is everything. But sports are played on many levels and for most of us without a lot of ability, softball and other sports are just a fun activity -- a way to socially interact and have fun with our fellow humans. This is a good thing because for a little while it lets us forget our differences and just have a good time getting along with each other.

Well, that's the way it is for most of us. But some religious fundamentalists have a different view. They think they must inject their religious world view even into an innocuous sport like softball. For them, there are some of us who just aren't good enough to participate in a friendly game of softball.

All across America many churches create and manage softball leagues every year. Even though I am an atheist, I think this is generally a very good thing. The church leagues are not used to proselytize but just to give kids and adults a decent, fun and safe activity to engage in. But sadly, there are exceptions to every rule -- like the Bellevue Baptist Church in Memphis, Tennessee.

This church decided to create a women's softball league and advertised the league was open to everyone who could pay the entrance fee whether they were Baptists or not. Jana Jacobson, who coached a girl's team looking for a league to play in, took Bellevue Baptist up on their offer and paid the $350 team fee. She attended the pre-season organization and rules meeting and got ready for a season of fun and competition for her team.

But then she got called to attend another meeting -- this time with church ministers and leaders. It seems they had found out that she was a lesbian and because of that they decided to ban her team from competing in the league. They told Ms. Jacobson that her team could not compete "because it would send a message to their congregation that they condone our lifestyle."

That is so ridiculous that it almost leaves me speechless. Do they really think that banning this team will clear their league of all lesbians? And why should it even matter? What if the coach was an atheist (or Democrat, Catholic, liberal, Moslem, socialist, etc.)? Would they ban the team in that instance to keep their congregation from thinking they condoned those things?

Softball is just a sport and participation in it condones nothing except fun, competition and sportsmanship. Letting this team play would in no way have condoned the lesbian lifestyle, but banning them absolutely condones bigotry and discrimination. These small-minded people are just wrong and the lesson their actions teach has no basis in morality or ethics. Whatever happened to "love your neighbor" and "judge not lest you be judged"?

Making matters even worse the church has refused to refund the teams $350 entrance fee. This is the type of "christian behavior" that drove me out of the church (and religion in general).