He just has a racist way of showing it.
I ask of Rick Santorum and his supporters only two things: One, please stop saying “Santorum Surges From Behind“; two, please stop saying “Santorum Surges From Behind.”
Oh, and by the way? Mr. Santorum? Not all black people are on welfare or food stamps. Not all black people are on drugs. Not all black people are in prison. So when you say stuff like –
“I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money… I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money and provide for themselves and their families.”
– it makes me want to slap you upside the head a little. Continue reading
Charlie Savage’s front page story in the December 30, 2011 New York Times asks the Republican presidential candidates about their views on executive power in what is essentially a sequel to his own interview with candidate Obama in 2007 when Savage worked for the Boston Globe. As soon as the Obama administration began to provide air support to the Libyan rebels seeking to overthrow the Libyan dicatator and terrorist Gadaffy, Savage began to misrepresent his 2007 interview with then Senator Obama as some kind of Pulitzer-worthy “gotcha” moment.
While the December 30 article purports to be about the Republican candidates’ views on executive power, its primary focus is to reaffirm Savage’s broader narrative of President Obama: that he is just like Bush when it comes to civil liberties in the era of global terrorism. What this October 30th article helps reveal, however, is the theory of executive power that Savage is holding Obama up against is a discredited libertarian notion of weak executive power shared by Ron Paul and Glenn Greenwald views which have no support in constitutional law jurisprudence. Savage also sets up the presidency of George W. Bush as the sole baseline by which to judge the Obama administration’s use of executive power, while ignoring all of Bush’s recent predecessors. Continue reading
Long-time Balloon Juice commenter (and friend of ABLC) TVHilton is guest blogging over at No More Mister Nice Blog, and he penned a post that is well worth reading:
Last week Glenn Greenwald won the Dumbest Tweet of the Week award with this beauty, about Ron Paul:
Of course, this is laughable to anyone familiar with Paul’s positions on, say, abortion, or the Civil Rights Act (Dave Neiwert has a great piece on this). It’s also ridiculous in the light of the vicious racism in Ron Paul’s newsletters. Greenwald’s response on the former was to point to his terribly-clever1 use of the weasel word “many”; the latter, he dismissed with an airy “they all have serious flaws”.
Greenwald has since doubled down on his tweet, describing Paul as “the only candidate in either party now touting” the “foreign policy and civil liberties values Democrats spent the Bush years claiming to defend”. All of which says much more about Greenwald’s extremly narrow (Libertarian-friendly) conception of “civil liberties” than about either the President or Ron Paul. Continue reading
Also? He’s racist.
If this video from Think Progress doesn’t have you laughing at the end, then there’s something wrong with your brainspace: Continue reading
I first saw an American “Hellfire” missile while covering a U.S. Army training exercise near the DMZ in South Korea*. It was loaded on an Apache AH-64 attack helicopter, which was bristling with weaponry that also included a pod of 2.76” Hydra rockets and a vicious-looking, swivel-mounted chain gun under its nose, which I was informed fired explosive 30-milimeter rounds and was “linked” to a monocle attached to the gunner’s helmet – meaning that the gun always pointed at exactly what the gunner was looking at.
These were details I learned after being nearly tackled by the sergeant in charge of the refueling point – I had innocently wandered around the front of the aircraft, hoping to get some usable file photos of the division’s Apaches up close. A rule I hadn’t yet heard held that under no circumstances should anyone ever walk in front of that chain gun.
“It’s bad juju,” the NCO told me, as I dusted off my BDUs.
This story has already developed into two distinct lines of inquiry. One pertains to the individual who appears to have posted the threat, the other to bizarre developments I unearthed when I looked closer at the article which provoked his outburst.
To reduce any confusion, I am separating these stories into two separate developing blog posts. This one will concentrate on Mr. Manson, the other will consolidate everything I’ve discovered about unelected.org. When I have further updates for either post, I will post them at the top for your convenience. Stay tuned. – Allan
Jules Manson’s Facebook page features a status update describing his visit from Secret Service agents; Manson resumes being a putz.
Manson then resumes being a putz by posting random annoying stuff about race, movies, marijuana and FREEDUMB, including this “announcement” as a candidate for the California Senate.
Har-dee-har. Your fifteen minutes are up.
Since this story was initially posted and updated, Mr. Manson responded via Facebook to the Examiner.com story about his threats to President Obama and his children, which then posted to his Facebook page.
For a time, the Examiner.com story was down, causing some to wonder about its legitimacy. We’ve written in the past about the trustworthiness of content on that site, which publishes the contributions of “citizen journalists” who are compensated by the click for their work. Since then, it has been reinstated to the site and can be reached via this link, and I have taken a screenshot for future reference. Continue reading
Posted in Allan, Criminally Stupid, Libertarian Lunacy, Now That's Some Racist Bullsh*t, Our Pundits of Perpetual Disappointment
Tagged assassination threat, Josh Harkinson, Jules Manson, Mother Jones, President Barack Obama, President Obama, unelected.org
Andrew Sullivan endorses Ron Paul.
If you are an Independent and can vote in a GOP primary, vote Paul. If you are a Republican concerned about the degeneracy of the GOP, vote Paul. If you are a citizen who wants more decency and honesty in our politics, vote Paul. If you want someone in the White House who has spent decades in Washington and never been corrupted, vote Paul.
Just returning the favor, Andrew.
See David Frum for the best response.
Paul has had an outsize appeal to writers and intellectuals dissatisfied with the present state of Republicanism. Continue reading