Greenwald’s latest post is a love song for Dennis Kucinich. Essentially, Greenwald argues that Kucinich has been a staunch advocate against executive power, drones, and secret wars, and that “establishment Democrats” ignore these principled stances in favor of mockery, derision and scorn for Kucinich’s New Age/alien talk.
I suppose that’s one way to look at it. But here’s another way: Kucinich’s voting record stinks and he’s a terrible Democrat.
Personally, I don’t care about the alien/New Age talk (except to the extent that such talk made him unelectable by the public at large). What I care about is his record on reproductive rights — it’s terrible. Ultimately, Kucinich is a pro-life Catholic who flip-flopped to pro-choice in order to win elections, and I’m simply not cool with that.
From PBS Newshour:
I identify fairly strongly as a liberal (although this was not always the case), so perhaps it’s not a huge surprise that one of the most frustrating phenomena I experience as a politics junkie is watching liberal leading lights latch on to stupid ideas. Today, for instance, whoever was running the Mother Jones Twitter account sent out this:
The link points, as you can see, to Adam’s Serwer’s latest piece, When the US Government Can Kill You, Explained. His lede:
On Monday, the Obama administration explained when it’s allowed to kill you.
The piece, which discusses Attorney General Eric Holder’s speech Monday on the legal reasoning behind the administration’s national security policy, is accompanied by a stock photo of U.S. Air Force “Reaper” drone armed with guided HELLFIRE missiles — the sort used to kill the American-born al Qaeda propagandist Anwar al-Awlaki.
When GOP SuperPACs are using the Puritopians’ message against us…
For all the readers out there who like to complain that Barack Obama is a tool of the wealthy, congratulations! The American Future Fund is spending $4 million in SuperPAC ads in nine swing states this month to push that exact message to help the Republicans.
The AFF offensive highlights Obama’s claim – in a2009 interview – that he didn’t “run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers.” The conservative group points out in its new ad that the Obama administration has included a lineup of veterans of the financial services industry, including White House chiefs of staff Rahm Emanuel, Bill Daley and Jack Lew.
“His White House is full of Wall Street executives,” the spot says. “Now, Obama’s flush with cash, returning to Wall Street for more glitzy fundraisers … Obama won’t admit to supporting Wall Street, but Wall Street sure supports President Obama.”
The AFF television ads will run on cable in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia. That’s real money going onto the airwaves in real states from a group that spent heavily in the 2010 midterms, but which has yet to fully ramp up for the 2012 general election.
Once upon a time, I claimed I would do link round-up posts every day. We all know how that turned out. So what I’m going to do instead is link posts “whenever the hell I feel like it.”
Today (so far), it’s just one link. I’ve got a case of the grumpies and I’m having a hard time caring about anything.
I’m a bit less grumpy than I was a few hours ago, but grumpy all the same:
Oh for fuck’s sake.
Jon Walker, who has been desperately searching for material with which to bash the Obama Administration, is apparently not having much luck. Last week, he dredged up the thoroughly-debunked “Obama killed the public option” narrative.
This week, he’s decided to gloat that a Kaiser Family Foundation poll shows that favorability for the bill has dropped from 44% to 37%. Hooray! Right, y’all?!
Nerves of Steel
Last night before delivering the State of the Union address, cameras and the mic pool picked up President Obama telling Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, “great job tonight.”
Late Tuesday night, the news broke on Twitter that President Obama had ordered the rescue of two hostages being held captive by pirates in Somalia:
…that a straitjacket and a lot of alone time in a padded cell wouldn’t help.
Basically, if you thought Cenk jumped the shark with that hilarious “RAWR! FEEL THE WHINY WRATH OF ME, OBAMA!” rant at the Huffington Post, our boy is here to tell you: you ain’t seen nothing yet.
It seems that if there’s something the Clown Car Right and the Manic Progressive Left can agree on, it’s how much they dislike Michelle Obama behind the scenes.
Republican First Ladies are all saints, and Democratic ones are all cast iron bitches, apparently. Two stories indicate that 2012 as an election year means Michelle Obama is fair game. First, we get one step closer to the n-word…
Kansas House Speaker Mike O’Neal on Thursday apologized for an email that made fun of first lady Michelle Obama’s hair style and mockingly called her “Mrs. YoMama.”
The emails featured pictures comparing Mrs. Obama to the Grinch, a Dr. Seuss character, because of their similarly wind-blown hair.
“Sorry, just had to forward this latest holiday message,” O’Neal reportedly wrote in the email he shared with fellow Republican lawmakers. “I’ve had worse hair days, but this is pretty funny.”
According to The Lawrence Journal World, O’Neal forwarded from his personal computer the email that said, “I’m sure you’ll join me in wishing Mrs. YoMama a wonderful, long Hawaii Christmas vacation – at our expense, of course.”
Boy, I remember all the horribly racist emails about Laura Bush. Oh wait, never happened. And they’ll keep doing it and apologizing only when they get busted as long as they can keep getting away with it. Continue reading
[Here's a guest post from Jason Sparks aka @sparksjls. I meant to post this before the Iowa Caucus but -- SQUIRREL!! Oops. The points are still salient, and so you should still read it. Cheers! -ABLxx]
Cenk Uygur, late of MSNBC, now of Current, is featured in a new Huffington Post opinion piece urging Democrats to vote against President Obama in the Iowa caucuses. To support his underlying aim, Uygur cherry-picks a handful of issues on which he disagrees with the president’s actions, and in the process either purposefully misleads or, alternatively, has conducted so little research as to unintentionally mislead. Either way: He misleads. Let’s look at what he’s arguing.
Uygur opens his HuffPo piece with a screed about the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA); he takes issue with the final language contained in the NDAA sections pertaining to the detention of al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorists. Uygur asserts that the NDAA allows for “the indefinite detention of US citizens by the military inside the US.” To bolster this frightening claim, Uygur links to this Glenn Greenwald post on Salon.com, in which Greenwald makes the same assertion: that the NDAA is the “indefinite detention bill.”
So, is it? How can we determine if the NDAA is the “indefinite detention bill” Uygur and Greenwald (to name just two) claim it is? How about if we look at the legislative language? The pertinent detention section of the NDAA is Sec. 1021/1022. Here’s the final language that came out of the House/Senate conference committee (the NDAA went to conference because the House-passed and Senate-passed NDAAs differed in key aspects, as we’ll discuss below.) I’m clipping at some length the key provisions at Sec. 1022, and have taken the liberty of bolding certain sub-sections:
Posted in Our Pundits of Perpetual Disappointment, Puritopians, Ratfvckery, Submissions from Readers
Tagged @sparksjls, Bush Tax Cuts, Cenk Uygur, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Dodd-Frank, Glenn Greenwald, Huffington Post, indefinite detention, NDAA, President Obama