The Economic Toll US Drones Have on Pakistani
Communities

post from Firedoglake on 25 September 2012 10:00:57 PM. © Firedoglake

Does he look like a person the US would target? Is he a militant? Such is the nightmare that is the US drone war. And it enjoys the support of both candidates running for president, especially President Barack Obama himself, who said today in front of[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/firedoglake/fdl/~3/Xmw7lCk-R3A/

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Does This Man Pass the Scott Brown Test

post from Talking Points Memo on 25 September 2012 10:00:42 PM. © Talking Points Memo

Does this man pass the Scott Brown "she don't look Indian" test?Earlier today I noted this very weird line from last week's Massachusetts Senate race in which Sen. Scott Brown flippantly noted that you could tell that Elizabeth Warren didn't have[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/xCFDLJUGmns/does_this_man_p
ass_the_scott_brown_test.php

Digg this

FOX blows the news and the replacements blow a
call.

post from field negro on 25 September 2012 10:00:24 PM. © field negro

You have got to love the folks over at FOX NEWS. Their very own expert on voter fraud debunked their meme that voter fraud is rampant in America. And the gig is up about their reporting on climate change. Sadly for them it turns out that their coverage was 93% wrong on the subject.

Still, I am sure that their followers are hanging in there with them, (although judging from the latest prime time ratings that too might pass) so unfortunately the "ignorance quotient" will continue to rise in America.

Consider the following:

"In a video posted online Tuesday, supporters of Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown are seen at a rally doing tomahawk chops and war whoops in an apparent attempt to mock Democrat Elizabeth Warren, Brown's opponent in a closely watched Senate race.

In the video, posted to YouTube by the BlueMassGroup2012 account, Brown supporters confront Warren backers at a rally near Eire Pub in Boston on Saturday, according to the video's caption. The Brown supporters laugh as they mimic Native American war cries and do the tomahawk chop in the face of Warren's crowd." [Source]

Nice. Let's just go ahead and throw in the Native Americans with the rest of the other groups who have been mocked and marginalize in the GOP's America.

Speaking of being mocked and marginalized. How would you like to be one of these replacement referees working in the NFL these days? Man talk about a rough couple of weeks. The entire country is up in arms over the blown call in the Seahawks -Packers game last night. (A brother was right there, got the call right, and then he allowed "Mr. Charlie" to overrule him.*shaking head*) If only Americans cared this much about their politics.

Anyway, I feel for you Packers fans. It has to be tough to lose a game on a blown call. Especially in the NFL where every game counts. Now there is tweeting, weeping, and gnashing of teeth. Still, we can rest assured that come 1:00 on Sunday the usual suspects will be right in front of the television cheering on their favorite team. My bookie friends in South Philly can relax. We all know that America's number one sport will not miss a beat.

Read The Full Article:
http://field-negro.blogspot.com/2012/09/fox-blows-news-and-replacements-blow.html

Digg this

One question, Richard Cohen: Did Republicans
really WANT a better candidate than the 2012 field offered them

post from DownWithTyranny! on 25 September 2012 10:00:20 PM. © DownWithTyranny!

Former Senate Majority Leader Howard Baker -- now that's talent?
"None of these candidates [i.e., the 2012 Republican presidential field] were remotely qualified for the highest office in the land. Arguably, Romney was the exception -- and that?s the whole point. He won just by showing up."
-- Richard Cohen, in his WaPo column today,
"The Republican brain drain"
by Ken

Before we proceed with today's lesson from Brother Richard Cohen, several caveats:

* About Richard Cohen himself, it's the usual: Although he normally seems to me a Village hack, he hasn't lost all his marbles, and every now and then he can size up a situation like a serious pundit.

* For the purposes of this enterprise we're going to have to accept that latterday Republican politicos like Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Howard Baker, and Bob Dole constitute "talent." For many of us this is quite a considerable stretch, but when you see who these skells are lined up against, I think you'll see the point.

This is the start of Richard Cohen's Washington Post column today, "The Republican brain drain":

In 1980 Ronald Reagan won the Republican nomination. He beat a future president, George H.W. Bush; two future Senate majority leaders, Howard Baker and Bob Dole; and two lesser-known congressmen. This year Mitt Romney won the GOP nomination. He beat a radio host, a disgraced former House speaker, a defeated Senate candidate, a former appointee of the Obama administration, a tongue-tied Texas governor, a prevaricating religious zealot who happens to serve in the House of Representatives and a cranky libertarian doctor. Where did all the talent go?

Until the Republican Party can answer this question, it makes no sense to continue to carp about Mitt Romney and the startlingly incompetent presidential campaign he?s running. His faults as a politician are manifest. He is robotic, unknowable (his own wife asserted at the national convention that ?he made me laugh? and then failed to cite a single humorous moment), ideologically incoherent and severely out of touch with the average American. He is his party?s nominee because, like the one-eyed man in the valley of the blind, he is just the best of the worst.

Okay, so maybe this isn't the most blinding insight you've ever read. But how often do you see it in an Authentic Village Values WaPo column, which is to say one written by someone not named E. J. Dionne Jr., Gene Robinson, or Harold Meyerson? (Those can all be dismissed relatively effortlessly with a wave of the hand and a bemused "Oh, that E.J./Gene/Harold [fill in the appropriate dreamer].")

The list of Republicans who looked at Iowa?s daunting demographics and did not run is more distinguished than those who did. At one time or another, Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain (who was forced to drop out) were front-runners. Can you think of any two people less qualified for the presidency? How about Ron Paul, another front-runner, or Mad Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry, the cement-mouthed governor who would eliminate three Cabinet offices, if only he could remember them? How about Rick Santorum, a fun guy, who actually beat Romney in Iowa, or Jon Huntsman, a decent man with shallow political experience ? and, it seemed, aptitude?

None of these candidates were remotely qualified for the highest office in the land. Arguably, Romney was the exception ? and that?s the whole point. He won just by showing up. He beat a bunch of nobodies. This is how the GOP wound up with such a weak candidate, one who espouses extreme positions he does not for a moment believe.

I know it's easy, but I can still be had with a fresh round of indiscreet bashing of the 2012 GOP presidential "field."

The list of Republicans who looked at Iowa?s daunting demographics and did not run is more distinguished than those who did. At one time or another, Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain (who was forced to drop out) were front-runners. Can you think of any two people less qualified for the presidency? How about Ron Paul, another front-runner, or Mad Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry, the cement-mouthed governor who would eliminate three Cabinet offices, if only he could remember them? How about Rick Santorum, a fun guy, who actually beat Romney in Iowa, or Jon Huntsman, a decent man with shallow political experience ? and, it seemed, aptitude

"Open the window and listen," says our Richard.

You will hear the moans and groans of Republican officials and their trained pundits. But where were these people when their field of oddballs was being assembled? Why were they so silent when Hispanics and women were being told to shove it and the long-dead Darwin was being debated? More to the point, maybe, how come they put up with a primary and caucus system ? Iowa first, New Hampshire second ? that seemingly was designed by a sly Democrat? The answer is that they do not have the courage nor the intellectual integrity to stand up to the know-nothing (dominant) wing of the Republican Party. They have designed a system where, politically speaking, the lowest common denominator wins. We are all the poorer for it.

At the heart of the toxic presidential-choosing system, says our Richard, setting up my favorite line, "is the series of incredibly damaging primaries and caucuses that, in the crucial early stages, produce a candidate who could sweep Bavaria." (Presumably all readers know that Bavaria is known for being the ultraconservative heartland of Germany.)

He recalls the extent of the pandering ("across the board") that Willard Inc. submitted to in Iowa.

A GOP candidate has to oppose same-sex marriage, deny global warming and insist ? against all evidence ? that local control of education is the best. The only way around these positions is to skip the Iowa caucuses entirely. It is no place for a moderate. It is, really, no place for a thinking person.

Okay, now here's where we have to take a relatively dispassionate view of the likes of Reagan and Bush Sr. and Baker and Dole. Do you see what I mean about the caliber of the lineup against which these skells are lined up?

Contrast the candidates of yore with the collection that took the field this year. The Republican Party has had a brain drain so that now its highest intellectual achievement is ? like an infant in the Terrible 2s? simply to say no to everything, especially taxes. To paraphrase Marx, rise up, GOP moderates. You have nothing to lose .?.?. but losing.

Just one thing, Richard. These "GOP moderates" of whom you speak. Where are they again? Because if they existed in any appreciable number, wouldn't you think that a candidate would have found his/her way into the field to give them someone to rally 'round?
#

Read The Full Article:
http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2012/09/one-question-richard-cohen-did.html

Digg this

Nicole Belle Muses on the Family Life of C&L

post from Crooks and Liars on 25 September 2012 10:00:09 PM. © Crooks and Liars

Our own Nicole Belle was interviewed by Matthew Emmer at Messaging Matters this week, and I thought you all might enjoy reading it, especially her thoughts on why she does what she does here:

In terms of becoming active, I was invited to a ?Young Leaders of Tomorrow? conference in high school (which was really a recruitment seminar for the Young Republicans) and ended up angering Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, who spoke to us about American exceptionalism, for challenging his conservative talking points?this was during the Reagan administration?and although the convention organizers shushed me, I took great victory in knowing he knew that I had got the best of him.

Most recently, it was the Bush administration, from his extra-constitutional installation in the White House to 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan that demanded I not stay silent. I saw the conflation the Bush administration made to justify the invasion and the horribly ignorant smearing of Muslims and it enraged me. Not only the politics of hate, but more importantly, that the media enabled the politicians and have never been held accountable. Moreover, I have two kids that I feel obligated to fight for. Everything I do is informed by my desire to leave my daughters a better world than we have now.

There's some inside stuff on why and how she came to be part of the Amato "family", too. Read the whole thing. There's a version at the Examiner too.

Read The Full Article:
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/nicole-belle-muses-family-life-cl

Digg this

Daily Kos Elections Polling Wrap: Comedy ensues
as the GOP frantically try to 'un-skew' the polls

post from Daily Kos on 25 September 2012 09:30:04 PM. © Daily Kos

With just six weeks to go, it is now evident that there is a clear-cut way in which the 2012 election cycle is unique from its predecessors. And not, as it happens, in a particularly good way.

Polls late in the election season have always invigorated those out in front, and to some extent dispirited those running behind. As a result, supporters of the trailing candidate or party have always beseeched supporters to either discount or ignore bad polling, and press on as if the race was a true dead heat.

But, in my two decades of following elections, never have I seen such a broad effort, from the most wacky corners of the blogosphere to people in positions of high authority in the campaign in question, to attempt to smear and discredit pessimistic data. That Republicans have decried media conspiracies in the past is old hat to anyone that has seriously followed campaigns. But it is a bit mournful to see the GOP's war on science extend now to simple mathematics.

More on the rantings of the ~~haters~~ skeptics after the jump. But first, the numbers:

PRESIDENTIAL POLLING:

NATIONAL (Gallup Tracking): Obama 48, Romney 45
NATIONAL (Ipsos/Reuters Tracking): Obama 49, Romney 42
NATIONAL (PPP for Daily Kos/SEIU): Obama 50, Romney 45
NATIONAL (Rasmussen Tracking): Obama 47, Romney 47
ARKANSAS (TalkBusiness/Hendrix College): Romney 56, Obama 35
FLORIDA (Washington Post): Obama 51, Romney 47 (LV); Obama 52, Romney 43 (RV)
NEVADA (Public Opinion Strategies--R): Obama 46, Romney 46
NEVADA (PPP): Obama 52, Romney 43
NEW JERSEY (Monmouth University): Obama 52, Romney 37
OHIO (Gravis Marketing--R): Obama 45, Romney 44; Obama 45, Romney 38, Johnson 11
OHIO (Washington Post): Obama 52, Romney 44 (LV); Obama 52, Romney 41 (RV)

DOWNBALLOT POLLING:

FL-SEN (PPP): Sen. Bill Nelson (D) 46, Connie Mack IV (R) 37
FL-SEN (Washington Post): Sen. Bill Nelson (D) 54, Connie Mack IV (R) 40 (LV); Sen. Bill Nelson (D) 55, Connie Mack IV (R) 37 (RV)
MA-SEN (Rasmussen): Sen. Scott Brown (R) 48, Elizabeth Warren (D) 48
MI-SEN (Rasmussen): Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D) 53, Pete Hoekstra (R) 37
NV-SEN (Public Opinion Strategies--R): Sen. Dean Heller (R) 44, Shelley Berkley (D) 39, David VanderBeek (IAP) 4
NV-SEN (PPP for the League of Conservation Voters): Shelley Berkley (D) 48, Sen. Dean Heller (R) 44
NJ-SEN (Monmouth University): Sen. Bob Menendez (D) 49, Joe Kyrillos (R) 34
OH-SEN (Gravis Marketing--R): Sen. Sherrod Brown (D) 44, Josh Mandel (R) 43
OH-SEN (Washington Post): Sen. Sherrod Brown (D) 53, Josh Mandel (R) 41 (LV); Sen. Sherrod Brown (D) 51, Josh Mandel (R) 39 (RV)
PA-SEN (Susquehanna Research--R): Sen. Bob Casey (D) 46, Tom Smith (R) 41
IA-03 (Benenson Strategies for the DCCC): Rep. Leonard Boswell (D) 45, Rep. Tom Latham (R) 45
IL-08 (PPP for the League of Conservation Voters): Tammy Duckworth (D) 52, Rep. Joe Walsh (R) 38
MA-06 (Stinson Strategies for the NRCC): Richard Tisei (R) 47, Rep. John Tierney (D) 35
NJ-03 (McLaughlin and Associates for the Runyan campaign): Rep. Jon Runyan (R) 51, Shelley Adler (D) 34
NY-11 (Siena College): Rep. Michael Grimm (R) 48, Mark Murphy (D) 38, Hank Bardel (G) 6
PA-04 (Tarrance Group for the Perry campaign): Scott Perry (R) 52, Harry Perkinson (D) 30, Others 8

A few thoughts, as always, await you just past the jump...

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/mcTprphNGYM/-Daily-Kos-Elections-P
olling-Wrap-Comedy-ensues-as-the-GOP-frantically-try-to-un-skew-the-polls

Digg this

This Sounds Legit

post from Talking Points Memo on 25 September 2012 09:01:10 PM. © Talking Points Memo

Ana Alliegro, the woman at the center of the scandal surrounding Rep. David Rivera (R-FL), disappeared just before a scheduled meeting with federal investigators. That was three weeks ago. [...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/A0_Ve48Oz3U/this_sounds_leg
it.php

Digg this

Sheila Bair: HAMP Sucked

There was never any desire to protect homeowners or save their homes, which Sheila Bair says flat out: "HAMP was a program designed to look good in a press release, not to fix the housing market... I don't think helping home owners was ever a priority[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/firedoglake/fdl/~3/NuXtztxWTIk/

Digg this

Obama helps fix the US Patent system

We have two really important pieces of good news for the US patent system today. The first is that the US PTO is finally going to adopt the same principle as the rest of the world and allow (no encourage!) public comment on patent applications. The second is that they chose Joel Spolsky one of the most clueful people in the business to build the site.The US Patent system has been badly broken...

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Americablog/~3/tGf1HctCH1M/obama-helps-fix-us-pate
nt-system.html

Digg this

One question, Richard Cohen: Did Republicans
really want a better candidate than the 2012 field offered them

Former Senate Majority Leader Howard Baker -- now that's talent.
"None of these candidates [i.e., the 2012 Republican presidential field] were remotely qualified for the highest office in the land. Arguably, Romney was the exception -- and that?s the whole point. He won just by showing up."
-- Richard Cohen, in his WaPo column today, "The Republican brain drain"
by Ken

Before we proceed with today's lesson from Brother Richard Cohen, several caveats:

* About Richard Cohen himself, it's the usual: Although he normally seems to me a Village hack, he hasn't lost all his marbles, and every now and then he can size up a situation like a serious pundit.

* For the purposes of this enterprise we're going to have to accept that latterday Republican politicos like Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Howard Baker, and Bob Dole constitute "talent." For many of us this is quite a considerable stretch, but when you see who these skells are lined up against, I think you'll see the point.

This is the start of Richard Cohen's Washington Post column today, "The Republican brain drain":

In 1980 Ronald Reagan won the Republican nomination. He beat a future president, George H.W. Bush; two future Senate majority leaders, Howard Baker and Bob Dole; and two lesser-known congressmen. This year Mitt Romney won the GOP nomination. He beat a radio host, a disgraced former House speaker, a defeated Senate candidate, a former appointee of the Obama administration, a tongue-tied Texas governor, a prevaricating religious zealot who happens to serve in the House of Representatives and a cranky libertarian doctor. Where did all the talent go?

Until the Republican Party can answer this question, it makes no sense to continue to carp about Mitt Romney and the startlingly incompetent presidential campaign he?s running. His faults as a politician are manifest. He is robotic, unknowable (his own wife asserted at the national convention that ?he made me laugh? and then failed to cite a single humorous moment), ideologically incoherent and severely out of touch with the average American. He is his party?s nominee because, like the one-eyed man in the valley of the blind, he is just the best of the worst.

The list of Republicans who looked at Iowa?s daunting demographics and did not run is more distinguished than those who did. At one time or another, Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain (who was forced to drop out) were front-runners. Can you think of any two people less qualified for the presidency? How about Ron Paul, another front-runner, or Mad Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry, the cement-mouthed governor who would eliminate three Cabinet offices, if only he could remember them? How about Rick Santorum, a fun guy, who actually beat Romney in Iowa, or Jon Huntsman, a decent man with shallow political experience ? and, it seemed, aptitude?

None of these candidates were remotely qualified for the highest office in the land. Arguably, Romney was the exception ? and that?s the whole point. He won just by showing up. He beat a bunch of nobodies. This is how the GOP wound up with such a weak candidate, one who espouses extreme positions he does not for a moment believe.

I know it's easy, but I can still be had with a fresh round of indiscreet bashing of the 2012 GOP presidential "field."

The list of Republicans who looked at Iowa?s daunting demographics and did not run is more distinguished than those who did. At one time or another, Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain (who was forced to drop out) were front-runners. Can you think of any two people less qualified for the presidency? How about Ron Paul, another front-runner, or Mad Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry, the cement-mouthed governor who would eliminate three Cabinet offices, if only he could remember them? How about Rick Santorum, a fun guy, who actually beat Romney in Iowa, or Jon Huntsman, a decent man with shallow political experience ? and, it seemed, aptitude

"Open the window and listen," says our Richard.

You will hear the moans and groans of Republican officials and their trained pundits. But where were these people when their field of oddballs was being assembled? Why were they so silent when Hispanics and women were being told to shove it and the long-dead Darwin was being debated? More to the point, maybe, how come they put up with a primary and caucus system ? Iowa first, New Hampshire second ? that seemingly was designed by a sly Democrat? The answer is that they do not have the courage nor the intellectual integrity to stand up to the know-nothing (dominant) wing of the Republican Party. They have designed a system where, politically speaking, the lowest common denominator wins. We are all the poorer for it.

A GOP candidate has to oppose same-sex marriage, deny global warming and insist ? against all evidence ? that local control of education is the best. The only way around these positions is to skip the Iowa caucuses entirely. It is no place for a moderate. It is, really, no place for a thinking person.

Contrast the candidates of yore with the collection that took the field this year. The Republican Party has had a brain drain so that now its highest intellectual achievement is ? like an infant in the Terrible 2s? simply to say no to everything, especially taxes. To paraphrase Marx, rise up, GOP moderates. You have nothing to lose .?.?. but losing.

Digg this