Video now up of MSNBC's Keith Olbermann's take on gay couple in anti-AARP ad

CrooksandLiars.com has the video, of course. Read More......

Homeland Security is putting ankle monitors on immigrants who have committed no crime

Oh, I so wish I were kidding. From NPR. Make sure you listen to the report itself. Homeland Security even lies to NPR about the justification for doing this. Amazingly scary story. Read More......

Evening open thread

So did anyone see Keith Olbermann talking about my guys? I think it went really well. Man, we love Keith. Read More......

Helen Thomas was a high-priced whore, apparently

In addition to being an "old Arab," she apparently is now also a high-priced hooker.

First, I simply love the fact that the most radical right-wing Web sites and rabblerousers are defending a gay male prostitute. We are truly winning the values war in this country when far-right-wingers embrace gay hookers.

Putting that aside, the notion of comparing GannonGuckert's journalism experience to Helen Thomas' is simply bizarre. Gee, let's compare the two.

Helen Thomas: Served 57 years as a correspondent for UPI and as White House bureau chief.

James D Guckert: Worked as a car repairman, as a $200/hour and $1200/weekend high-priced whore, then attended a $50 two-day course in right-wing journalism and waltzed in to the White House, then claims he gets inside information on CIA scandals, the war, the Dan Rather scandal, and the Senate minority leader. Is America a great country or what?

Yeah, I can see how the far-right keeps getting the two of them confused.

Seriously, though, this is a real issue. The far-right is now trying to argue not only that mainstream journalists are all liberals (and we can see by their coverage of this story, or lack thereof, that they are hardly liberal-philes), but now the right is trying to claim that journalism doesn't even exist as a profession. ANYONE can join the fun - be a hooker on a Friday and a White House correspondent on a Monday, and no one should bat an eye.

Well, I bat. I got a writing degree in college. I went to law school and grad school to hone my critical thinking skills. I've had to write in all my professional jobs over the past 16 years, including preparing arms control memos for US Senators. I've worked as a stringer for the Economist, and have had articles published in the New Republican and beyond. I've ghost written articles for people you'd all know and love. That's why I'm confident calling myself a journalist and a writer, and it's why I'm confident in saying that you aren't a journalist just because you call yourself one.

No, I don't think bloggers should be necessarily thrown out of the White House as non-journalists. But let's be clear about two things. First, just because you launch a blog doesn't mean you get automatic daily access to the White House or the president of the United States. To suggest that that's the standard is absurd generally, and in a time of war would be simply bizarre.

Second, GannonGuckert wasn't a blogger. He was nothing. Three months before he waltzed into the White House as a "journalist" he had sex with a very satisfied client for $200/hour, according to his own prostitution solicitation online. He had no apparent writing experience at all (other than a 2-day $50 GOP course) before the White House accepted his request for a journalist's day pass in February 2003. And at the time he got that pass, he wasn't writing for any media outlet, yet still got the pass.

Contrast GannonGuckert's ease of access to another online publication that just so happens to be a REAL publication.

They've been turned down twice now for the oh-so-supposedly-easy-to-get day pass that GannonGuckert got for two years straight. Now, how is it that a publication that actually exists, and has existed for a while, can't get a day pass to the White House press gaggle, but a male prostitute who doesn't work for a real publication and has no experience in the media walks in the door and not only gets the pass, but they give him the same pass repeatedly for 2 whole years.

And getting a day pass repeatedly is a big no-no. To get that kind of repeated access, you need a hard pass, something that requires a 3-month FBI background check (apparently because you're going to be in the White House so often that you could pose a threat to national security). But GannonGuckert never applied for a hard pass, but the White House still let him, giving him the repeated access you only get once you've passed a 3-month FBI background check.

That's called a security breach of the White House during wartime. And that, my friends, is why GannonGuckert is different from Helen Thomas. Helen Thomas didn't breach White House security. Helen Thomas wasn't involved in a criminal enterprise. Helen Thomas was a journalist who got into the White House the old-fashioned way. She earned it.

So the question remains: Why did the White House breach security repeatedly for this one apparently-unknown obscure man? Read More......

Ho Hum, Another Slaughtering Of Innocents

Anyone seen "Hotel Rwanda" recently? The movie is so-so (though Don Cheadle is great) but it does shine a spotlight on the Rwandan massacre which took place over a long period of time while the rest of the world stood by. Bill Clinton says it's one of the most shameful memories he has and everyone, EVERYONE has sworn: Never Again.

Hello, Never Again, as the massacres in Darfur continue and the world watches and doesn't care. NYT columnist Nicholas Kristof interviews an American soldier who is over there right now.

"Every single day you go out to see another burned village, and more dead bodies," said former Marine captain Brian Steidle. "And the children - you see 6-month-old babies that have been shot, and 3-year-old kids with their faces smashed in with rifle butts. And you just have to stand there and write your reports."

Well, I don't know about sending soldiers (do we HAVE any soldiers left to send? Woops, no we don't.) but I can't WAIT to see the Jamie Foxx melodrama "Darfur Daddy" about a concerned American who adopts so Darfur orphans. It should come out in about 2017. Read More......

Democrats Get Backbone On Judicial Nominees? Wonders Never Cease

Can you imagine the Democrats nominating a lifelong lobbyist for Planned Parenthood to be a judge in the US Court of Appeals? The mere idea is absurd. But Bush nominated a lifelong lobbyist for the mining and ranching industries to be a judge in the very Circuit where he would be dealing with so many cases that affect those industries. William G. Myers III was blocked by the Dems -- quite rightly -- and was one of ten judicial nominations (about 5%) that didn't get approved. A 95% approval seems pretty darn high but the Republicans like to pretend that's somehow obstructionist. Ever heard anyone suggest that if you don't do exactly what they want every single time then YOU"RE the problem?

Well, the Republicans -- before launching the nuclear option of ending the long Senatorial history of fillibusters -- decided to reach out the olive branch. How? By simply renominating the same extremist Myers to the same job? What could be more reasonable? Sure, Myers was a senior lawyer in the Interior Department where he drafted rulings that a judge later said perverted the clear mandate of a federal law. Sure he met with mine owners 127 times but refused to meet with Indian tribes even once. But God help us, the Dems -- perhaps emboldened by their success in countering the lies Bush pushed on Social Security -- showed backbone.

The New York Times quotes the Senators who grilled -- and I do mean grilled Myers:

"The most anti-environmental candidate for the bench I have seen in 37 years in the Senate," Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the committee's ranking Democrat, said, according to the NYT. Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, said, "Your record screams 'passionate advocate' and it doesn't even whisper 'impartial judge.' "

USA Today also weighs in with a good story, reminding us that the Senate approved 214 of Bush's judicial nominees and blocked 10. Every time one of them tries to throw that absurd "obstructionist" charge at the Dems, throw those figures back at them. 96% approval? How much more accomodating do they expect the Dems to be?

As for the nuclear option of ending fillibusters, my God, is it too much to ask that 60 Senators are willing to back a Supreme Court Justice? I wouldn't think asking they get 75 of the Senators to support them would be asking too much frankly (that 's about what it was in the early 70s till they changed the rules). What would be the result? Moderate, mainstream justices that BOTH parties could approve of. God forbid. Read More......

Alan Greenspan Decides To Do His Job

Apparently, Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan decided to brush up on Economics 101 since the last time he spoke to Congresss (and certainly since the election). Lo and behold, he's found religion and realized record deficits are NOT a good thing. According to the New York Times,

"Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve chairman, warned today that federal budget deficits are "unsustainable" and urged Congress to consider both spending cuts and tax increases as possible solutions.

In his gloomiest assessment yet about the government's budget outlook, Mr. Greenspan warned that annual shortfalls were "unlikely to improve substantially in the coming years unless major deficit-reducing actions are taken."

Of course, then he insisted his preference was for spending cuts and not tax increases. Sure, irresponsible tax cuts that are weighted heavily towards the radically rich and do nothing to give a jolt to the economy must be sacrosanct, while programs like HeadStart and health care for veterans should be slashed to pieces. How about deciding whether a particular recent, poorly thought out tax break for the super-wealthy was actually a good idea before slaughtering highway programs, education and Social Security?

Read More......

CIA Torturing Prisoners? Nothing To See Here, Keep Moving

The Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee doesn't even want to check into the widespread, highly credible allegations about possible misconduct by the CIA in its treatment of terrorism suspects. Despite literally hundreds of news articles in the last few weeks detailing at length the abuses of the CIA and the government at large, Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas is blocking a full inquiry into "the detention, interrogation and rendition authority" [that's when we ship off prisoners to countries like Saudi Arabia so they can be tortured -- something widely reported but which Bush insists we never do] of government agencies for intelligence purposes, says the New York Times.

Roberts wants to downplay the investigation by only doing the standard oversight and he certainly wants to wait until the CIA does its own investigation of itself...which the CIA says may take a while, don't you know. If you're in Kansas, please give Roberts an earful. Why is he ashamed of the truth? Read More......

MSNBC's Keith Olbermann tonight will cover story of the gay couple used in anti-AARP ad

He'll be interviewing Christopher Wolf, the lawyer representing the couple. As you may remember, the couple is accusing USA Next of stealing their photo from a Web site without their permission, and without the permission of the guy who took the photo. Both big no-nos in copyright land. Not to mention, USA Next then painted them as anti-troops-during-wartime and anti-American. So they also have a libel case.

As you know, I'm working for them as their PR guy, helping them deal with the media. Supposedly, it will be at the top of the show, 8PM Eastern, 5PM Pacific (the show is rebroadcast I think 4 hours later).

You can read more background on this story here and here. Read More......

James Dobson pissed at O'Reilly for defending SpongeBob GayPants

Religious right leader James Dobson is ticked at Bill O'Reilly for ripping him a new one over Dobson's SpongeBob debacle. As you may recall, Dobson publicly worried at an inaugural event that SpongeBob, Dora the Explorer, and many other cartoon characters were actuall members of the gay mafia, out to indoctrinate the children of America into the secret homosexual agenda.

Anyway, O'Reilly got on Dobson's case over this again the other night, and Dobson is spewing venom over it.

Note to Dobson: Stop being a Bible-thumping bigoted Talibanesque control queen and maybe you won't get bad coverage? Just a thought.

Fox News Channel talk-show host Bill O'Reilly used his "talking points" feature on Monday night (Feb. 28) to once again misreport the SpongeBob SquarePants issue, criticizing conservative "culture warriors" for allegedly saying that the popular children's cartoon character is gay.

"SpongeBob is a sponge. He's not cruising the bars in West Hollywood," O'Reilly said. "Culture warriors on both sides have got to get a grip. There's danger in fanatical policy. But paranoia makes a danger harder to illuminate. You won't be taken seriously if you cry wolf too often."

His comments are a thinly veiled swipe at Focus on the Family® based upon comments that have been widely misquoted in the media questioning the use of SpongeBob and other beloved children's characters in a "tolerance" video produced by a group with a history of advocating for pro-gay causes. Although O'Reilly's staff has been informed in writing that the "SpongeBob" controversy is based solely on media spin, the "No Spin Zone" can't seem to get its facts straight.

And feel free to contact O'Reilly and thank him for taking on people like Dobson.

Email: oreilly@foxnews.com Read More......

GannonGuckert reward upped to $20,000

Don't piss off a rich DC socialite...

Reward: $20,000 for Jeff Gannon Sex Evidence

The reward for information on Jeff Gannon's sex life here in Washington, D.C., has increased to $20,000.

We are looking for evidence (photos, phone pictures, locks of hair, DNA on a suit) that Jeff Gannon had any sexual -- or romantic -- relationship with any top-ranking Washington officials.

- Read the original reward post here
- Send tips to: gannoninvestigation@kellyanncollins.com
- See the Jeff Gannon Archive

Read More......

Online publication tries to get White House "day pass," turned down

So, an online publication, that meets all the "rules" that Scott McClellan spelled out for getting a "day pass" to the White House press briefing, gets turned down. Why? No one knows. Perhaps because they weren't prostitutes.

I'm quite serious about this. White House spokesman Scott McClellan said that if you met the criteria you got access. This publication appeared to meet the criteria, yet couldn't get access. They did exactly what GannonGuckert said he did, yet they got turned down. So the question is begged, how did Gannon NOT get turned down, and how did he get access for two years - access that should have required a hard pass, let alone the "easier" day pass that even this publication couldn't get.

And let's remember one thing. When Gannon first entered the White House - the earliest date we know of is February 2003 - he wasn't writing for a publication, he was working for GOPUSA.com, and to the best of our knowledge he'd never written anything in his life. So how and why did they approve of some nobody getting regular access when the WH knew we were weeks away from declaring war on Iraq, i.e., a heightened security environment?

Any REAL reporters out there want to take on this story and demand some answers?

We started planning last week while President Bush was in Europe, enlisting the help of MediaBistro's editor-in-chief and talking with several White House correspondents about how the process for admittance should (in theory) work. According to everyone with whom we talked, MediaBistro, Fishbowl D.C.'s parent, should meet the criteria for a day pass to cover the White House: It is (a) independent and nonpartisan, (b) regularly published, and (c) primarily supported by subscribers or advertising....

We had been told that the more time you give the Press Office to get clearance, the easier it is, so we started yesterday laying the groundwork. We called four times seeking admittance. After the first call to the Press Office, we spent the rest of the afternoon dealing with the Media Affairs Office. (By way of explanation, the Press Office handles the regular White House press corps, and Media Affairs handles internet and local press.)

We first spoke with a very perky intern whose name we didn't catch but who helpfully took down our name, publication, Social Security Number and date of birth. She promised a spokesperson would return the call promptly. Three more calls to the Media Affairs office over the course of the day, up until 6:10 p.m. last night, yielded nothing. Each time we explained what publication we represented and that we wanted to cover the morning gaggle. John, Jenny, and Caroline--the three equally helpful and perky interns with whom we spoke--all promised a call back from an unnamed spokesperson. They said they weren't allowed to give out his name. Finally during the last call last night, we begged to speak with anyone who wasn't an intern. Unfortunately for us, Caroline said, "everyone is in a meeting." ....

Today we decided to try the more direct approach and just show up.

We put on a tie and suit, and with a reporter's notebook in hand, we looked very much the part of a real journalist. At 8:33 a.m. this morning, we showed up at the north gate on Pennsylvania Avenue, where the press enter every morning. (We confirmed today with James "Jeff Gannon" Guckert that this was the same gate he used every morning to enter.) After explaining to the uniformed Secret Service agent at the gate that we were there to cover the morning gaggle, we got buzzed up to the guard house. After presenting a driver's license, we waited while the officer checked against the people cleared for the day. Perhaps not surprisingly, Media Affairs hadn't put our name on the list.

The officer had us call the Press Office from a nearby phone and once again give them our personal information: Name, publication, SSN, DOB. The intern answering the phone promised that as soon as the woman who dealt with clearances showed up, they'd get back to us.

Meanwhile, we leaned on the fence outside the guard house and read John Steinbeck's "Travels with Charley: In Search of America." A steady trickle of reporters passed by, and we spent several minutes chatting with an old friend, AP's Nedra Pickler, as she went in for the day. After about twenty minutes, another officer came out of the guard house and explained that he had just talked with the Press Office: Fishbowl D.C. had officially been denied access for the day. No further reason. He presented us with the Media Affairs phone number scribbled on a napkin. We thanked him and departed.

Read More......

Bob Novak lies about Howard Dean

Like this is surprising? Read More......

Christian bigots want to turn you away from your pharmacy for being a sinner

Read this. It's going to be a big issue soon, mark my words. What the article doesn't tell you is that this part of a larger scam the religious right has been developing for a few years now. Passing state laws, and I'm sure going for a federal one as well, giving pharmacists (and ambulance workers in one state) the right to turn you away for any moral or religious reason they might have.

In other words, the Christian Taliban now say you're oppressing them by going to your local pharmacy and trying to buy birth control pills, condoms, AIDS drugs, Viagra, and anything else that their velvet-dogs-playing-poker sensibilities can't handle. Yes, if some Christian Taliban chooses to be a pharmacist, they want HIM to have the right to turn you away at the drug counter for being a sinner in his eyes.

Now here's a thought. What about a Christian Scientist or someone who doesn't believe in medicine working at a pharmacy? After all, isn't it an affront to God that you don't believe He can heal your cancer for you? How dare you try to get your cancer drug prescription filled at the only pharmacy you have in small town America? Obviously you hate God. Do you have an STD? I'm sorry, God gave you that because you're not married and having sex - next in line. Propecia? Vanity is a sin - next. AIDS drugs? Fag.

In other worlds, Janet Jackson's nipple now invades your pharmacy. These bigoted fundamentalist Taliban freaks want to take over every aspect of our country and every aspect of our lives. It's time for some big progressive group to dump some serious money on fighting back, and hard. Read More......

Participate in the blog survey, please

Blogads, the great folks who run the ad system many of us use on our sites, are conducting another reader survey of folks who visit our sites. The results, which will be released publicly, are quite interesting to see (i.e., what kind of folks visit the blogs), and they're quite useful in helping us get more advertisers, which helps all of us keep providing you with good content :-)

So, if you're in the mood, take the survey, and for Question 16 enter AMERICAblog so I can get a sense of what kind of folks are visiting my blog.

Thanks everyone. JOHN Read More......

Questions the media should be asking Guckert

The DKos gang has put together a series of questions the media needs to ask GannonGuckert:

Questions Posed To James D. Guckert by ePluribus Media volunteers

1. Is James D. Guckert your real name or is it, like “Jeff Gannon,” another pseudonym? Have you used other pseudonyms in any of your other business ventures?

2. Were you paid for any of your work for Talon News or GOPUSA? If so, who paid you?

3. How did you begin your association with Bobby Eberle or GOPUSA? Did anyone contact you, or did you volunteer?

4. Have you ever been associated with GOPUSA in any capacity other than as a reporter?

5. In what capacity did you entertain Tony Blair during his visit on July 17, 2003?

6. How did you learn about GOPUSA.com?

7. At one point, you claimed you saw Talon News, liked it and began submitting articles to them. However, Talon News didn't exist until after you were put in the White House by GOPUSA. Do you wish to clarify this contradiction?

8. You claim in your bio that you served in the military. Which branch? Where and when did you serve? Have you worked for the government in any other capacity?

9. Have you ever been a member of a GOP activist group? If so, which one(s)?

10. Were you politically active as a college student or young adult?

11. When did you attend the Leadership Institute's Seminar for Broadcast Journalists?

12. The minutes of the Standing Committee of Correspondents, which accredits journalists to the Senate Press Gallery, makes reference to the fact that you are or were the Executive Director of the "Free Speech Foundation." Registration information for the Free Speech Foundation's web site reveals that the domain is owned by one "J. Daniels," though that information was later changed to list the owner as "I. Christian." Given that your close involvement with the Foundation was something you had no reason to hide from the Standing Committee, why did you use a pseudonym to register the domain name, since "Jeff Gannon," the name by which you were best-known and which would have generated the most positive publicity for the Foundation among your readers and listeners, was itself a pseudonym, thus protecting whatever privacy you used to enjoy?

13. Given the limited number of publications you had been affiliated with (and both publications boast a decidedly conservative slant), coupled with your fairly unknown status among the press corps, how did you arrange the interview with former Ambassador Wilson?

14. As a novice reporter, how did you learn the procedure for obtaining a day pass to the White House?

15. When did you first apply for a hard pass with the White House Press Corps? Did you apply for it or was it arranged through Bobby Eberle/GOPUSA.com?

16. When did you first apply for a daily pass with the White House Press Corps? Did you apply for it or was it arranged through Bobby Eberle/GOPUSA.com?

17. Did any members of the press question you on how it was that you were showing up regularly, but on a day pass rather than on a permanent pass?

18. You posted on an online discussion group that you have been subpoenaed to testify in the Valerie Plame case. In the same online discussion, you posted that you had seen the memo regarding Valerie Plame. Recently, however, you have suggested that you found out about this matter through the WSJ and that you were interviewed but not subpoenaed regarding the Plame case. Why have your recent responses not been consistent with your past statements? What is the truth?

19. Did anyone in the administration ever give you advanced information on any subject? Did they show you with a copy of the CIA Plame document?

20. Have you ever met Karl Rove? When? Where? How many times?

21. How did you come to find out about the Mary Mapes scoop with respect to the CBS/TANG documents?

22. What other parts of the White House have you seen or been in, other than the White House press briefing room? Who was your host on these occasions and what were the purposes of these visits?

23. Have you ever been to the President's ranch in Crawford, Texas and, if so, on what occasion and for what purpose?

24. You've used fabricated quotes, reprinted press releases and extensively cribbed from writers for other news publications such as the Yankton Daily Press & Dakotan, Arcspace.com, and Newsquest, all beneath your own byline. Did your training in journalism include any coursework on ethics?

25. Legitimate journalists subscribe to a code of ethics, what do you think about those who violate or ignore that code?

26. Do you think working journalists should take money from anyone other than the professional news organization or publication that employs them for pieces they write? Did you?

27. Which falsehoods have been spread about you that you would like to dispell right now? For example, will you go on record saying that you were not running an escort service? We feel that this is relevant because of your past articles accusing others of behavior that you now consider "private, personal" information.

28. Since you've begun your own blog, do you think of yourself as a "blogger" or a "journalist"? Do you think of yourself as a "professional?" Since most people accept that a professional is someone who earns his living functioning in a known career field, how are you earning your living as a professional? Could you characterize how much monetary income constitutes “a living” in your opinion?

Read More......

GOP wants to censor Cable and Satellite Radio now, too

Wow, these Republicans are so obsessed with sex, it is amazing. Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) and Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) want to regulate what you can watch and hear on cable, including HBO, and satellite radio, now, according to Reuters.

Two top U.S. Republican lawmakers on Tuesday said they want to apply broadcast decency standards to cable television and satellite television and radio to protect children from explicit content.

Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens said he would push legislation this year to accomplish that goal and House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton said he would back it if it does not violate free speech rights.

"Cable is a much greater violator in the indecency area," Stevens, from Alaska, told the National Association of Broadcasters, which represents hundreds of local television and radio affiliates. "I think we have the same power to deal with cable as over-the-air" broadcasters.

"There has to be some standard of decency," he said, but noted that "no one wants censorship."

Stevens cited the discussion of masturbation and sex toys during prime time television as one example of content that bothered him. He told reporters he would extend the restrictions to premium channels like HBO as well.

Well, Ted, it is censorship. Remember, they are now talking about regulating the services for which you pay, not the so-called free airwaves of broadcast t.v. "Masturbation and sex toys" freak out Ted Stevens. Get a life.

Now that they have vanquished Janet Jackson, looks likes Senator Stevens is going to lead the charge against Carrie, Miranda, Charlotte and Samantha. "Sex and the City," which the Bush twins joked about during their infamous Republican Convention speech, would fall into his definition of obscene. (Okay, we all know that SATC is ended, but maybe he'll stop the re-runs.)

The Republican's just can't talk enough about sex. They are obsessed. Their obsession is dangerous. Ted Stevens and Joe Barton want to dictate what you pay to watch in the privacy of your own home on Cable, including HBO and Showtime.

This Republican Big Brother thing gets creepier every day. Read More......

Chemical weapons lawsuit starting in US

And we're not talking about Saddam. I was in southern Vietnam during the buildup to the invasion of Iraq and will never forget hearing Bush&Co.; blabbering on every day about chemical weapons in Iraq while I was seeing severely deformed people of all ages including children, suffering from Agent Orange side effects even thirty years after the US left Vietnam. The girl in the photo in this article looks mild compared to many of the victims who often have sticks as legs or their hands and arms look like balloons. For some reasons those words spoken by Bush just rang hollow for me.

Monsanto and Dow are using the old "we were ordered to do it" argument. Hmm, and it worked so well for the German chemical companies after WWII. Read More......

Bush's Plan To Tear Down Social Security? DOA

Yep, no less than Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said we might have to wait a year before voting on the President's "plan" to restructure Social Security. And even then, it might not include the private accounts. So Bush's top priority on his domestic agenda is dead on arrival.

Or at least in very serious trouble.

Imagine. Bush said Social Security was in dire straits and about to go bankrupt. (He also said it would go bankrupt in ten years about two decades ago.) He refused to ever give even a broad-stroked guide to how it might be restructured but insisted it was vitally important. Then he insisted the only way to save it was to create trillions in debt by creating private investment accounts where seniors would switch from guaranteed amounts to hoping the stock market would keep them out of poverty. Then Bush finally admitted that adding tons of risk and tons of debt by creating private accounts would do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to make Social Security more solvent but we needed to do it anyway. And he still refused to give a detailed plan on how to "rescue" SS. Then the media muckrakers behind those lying Swift Boat ads tried to smear teh AARP by calling it pro gay marriage and anti-military. Then Republican leaders went home to their constituents and faced a s*** storm of anger and pointed questions.

In other words, Bush used lies, deception, bait and switch tactics, attack ads and homophobia to push its agenda -- all in a bald-faced, hamfisted, clumsy, transparently mean-spirited and patently untrue manner that flew in the face of logic and common sense. But this time it DIDN'T work.

Someone explain to me why this time was different so we can make sure it keeps happening again. Read More......

It only took Coulter - what? - a week to piss the Middle East off at us even more

So how many more "insurgents" do you think Ann created for us? Hell of a way to show her love for the troops. Read More......