Tea Party Buzz: GOP Candidates Ducking the Birther Question, And a Prediction of the Tea Party Movement's Demise?

Politico.com today has a couple of interesting odds and ends directly and indirectly related to the tea party movement. The first item, at least it seems to me, pertains to the previous polls we've seen reporting that large percentrages of tea partiers and conservatives in general actually believe that Obama is not legitimately the president because he was born in another country (the "birthers"). I think 2010 republican candidates know full well about such polls, and therefore they won't give you a straight answer if you ask them whether they believe Obama is legitimately the president.

The latest example of this rather cowardly refusal to answer that question comes from Sharron Angle, the republican senatorial candidate in Nevada running against dem and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for Reid's seat this fall (first link at bottom). And realize that I'm giving Angle and other repubs the benefit of the doubt when I merely call them cowardly, since the alternative is that they actually believe that Obama is not legitimately the president and want to avoid the question for that reason (as opposed to merely desiring to avoid alienating the birthers).

The second item today centers on the republican that conservatives and tea partiers everywhere love to hate -- Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). Graham tells the New York Times this week (second link at bottom): "The problem with the tea party, I think, is it’s just unsustainable because they can never come up with a coherent vision for governing the country. It will die out." Graham also tells the Times that the tea party movement has driven the repub party too far to the right, such that even "Ronald Reagan would have a hard time getting elected as a Republican today." Ouch. (I think I'd avoid checking that e-mail and voice mail any time soon if I was the Senator).

As to Graham's claim that the tea party movement will "die out," I think that may just be wishful thinking on his part, at least on the short term. I think that as long as we have total far left control of the presidency and the entire Congress -- as we've had since the start of 2009 -- you're going to see Obama & The Dems running amok and doing their loony left-wing thing, with an energized tea party movement still out there in response. Funny how extremists only fan the flames of other extremists on the other side.

And that, frankly, is a damn shame. I'm on record previously in this space about the tea party. This is basically and fundamentally a conservative movement and is predominantly composed of and fueled by staunch conservatives. Graham is absolutely right about the tea party driving the republican party to the right. I think any movement that serves to drive these two BS parties any farther to the left or to the right is not a positive movement since it means that Independents (40% of the country and the deciders of elections) are represented by no one to an even greater extent than is already the case. So Senator, you say the tea party is going to die out? Fine with me, but I just don't see that occurring any time soon. And you know, Senator, you really should consider turning Independent.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39315.html
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39286.html

An Inconvenient EVERYTHING: Cops Reopen Investigation Into Alleged Al Gore Sexual Assault, As His Accuser Goes Public.

Bad, bad and more bad when it comes to the news this week for that esteemed inventor of the Internet, Al Gore. As ABC News reports today: "Portland, Oregon police have decided to reopen the investigation into a 54-year-old masseuse's allegations that former Vice President Al Gore sexually assaulted her in his hotel room in 2006" (I guess the MSM's "He Wasn't Charged" defense is out the window for the time being). And all of this comes after the National Enquirer hit newsstands this week with an interview they purchased from Gore's accuser, who has now gone public with her identity -- Molly Hagerty.

Now, if you thought some of those "crazed sex poodle" allegations she told the cops were bad, the lady is really ratcheting up the ol' rhethoric in her Enquirer interview: "Al Gore is a pervert and a sexual predator. He's not what people think he is - he's a sick man. I want justice served." Ouch-a-rama.

Hagerty also continues to claim that she kept pants from the alleged incident that have stains of Gore's "DNA," for lack of a more radio-friendly term. She's also claiming there is another witness, plus a hotel video surveillance tape, that will help to corroborate her story.

Also new today: Gore somewhat breaks the silence he's maintained since this story broke a week or so ago. Through a spokesperson, Gore says that he "unequivocally and emphatically denies this accusation." And in true politician spin mode, the spokesperson also claims that "further investigation into this matter will only benefit Mr. Gore." Right! The reopening of the police investigation is just want Big Al wanted all along! Please.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-gore-sex-abuse-case-reopened-portland/story?id=11059203
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/new_evidence_gore_sex_scandal_exclusive_interview_masseuse_/celebrity/68913

Episode 4 Tonight of "You're Cut Off" on VH1! The Spoiled Rotten Brats Must Work a Job!

(In case you're not familiar with this hot new reality series, try this primer from Episode 1: http://independentrage.blogspot.com/2010/06/episode-1-tonight-of-hot-new-vh1.html. And read more specifically about the participating Nine Ladies at this link: http://www.vh1.com/shows/youre_cut_off/cast.jhtml).

Important Program Note: "You're Cut Off" is moving to Mondays, and so my coverage will too. The next new episode airs in VH1 prime time this Monday, July 5 at 8:00 p.m. (central).

Nutshell Synopsis of Episode 4: The ladies are forced to work jobs, with Bad Girl Chrissy not even showing up for work and Bad Girl Gia quitting the job halfway through. Bad Girl Erica, who has really taken the brunt of it verbally from Gia and Jessica throughout the series, gets a measure of revenge as she's named Manager on the Ladies' job, and thus gets to boss around Gia and Jessica, who do not respond well! Ultimately, Gia storms off the entire show (will she return?). Meantime, Good Girls Courtnee and Amber actually assert themselves a bit in this episode for the first time, which was awesome to see.

Segment 1: Episode 4 starts with the Beautiful Bad Girl Erica mowing the house yard again with an old-style non-mechanic lawn mower straight outta Leave It To Beaver. Erica likes mowing, because it's exercise. She tells last week's VIP (Very Improved Princess), Leanne, "thanks for letting me mow again. Like, I think a lot of guys will marry me now because I know how to mow the lawn." Inside the house, Bad Girls Jessica and Gia both say they are looking to improve their performances from last week, with Gia actually working for once (making beds, although in a pretty rotten fashion). Ultimate Bad Girl Chrissy (who has not done one redeeming thing in the history of the series, unlike all other 8 Ladies), however, is sleeping in as usual.

Then the group meets with moderator Laura Baron. Chrissy is the only lady late to the meeting, saying that "being the last one, it's all about me, and I come first, and I'm on my own time schedule." Laura informs the ladies that this week they will have to write a resume, go on an interview, and then work a job. Says Houston Miss Priss Erica: "Do we have to type the resume? Normally my daddy's secretary does mine."

Laura informs the ladies that their interview will be with Stephen Viscusi, CEO of The Viscusi Group, a headhunting firm. Gia says that she will refuse to do a resume or go on an interview: "I don't need a job, I'm rich." Anyway, the ladies have 45 minutes to do a resume. Several of the ladies have trouble operating their computers, and Erica helps a number of them with their resumes. Gia is still refusing to partake, stating: "I refuse to use my pretty fingernails and type up a resume for somebody I could care less about." Gia then scurries off to the patio to toke on her beloved hookah.

Segment 2: The ladies head off to interview with Viscusi. First up is Erica, who says that she's going to law school (can you still believe that?) because "I really want to a Judge Judy." Viscusi tells her that Judge Judy put in a lot of time in her career before she ever got on the air. "But I'm prettier than her," spouts Erica. In law school, Erica says that "my focus is all on myself, not in a narcissistic way -- You know what I mean?" Responds Viscusi, "No, I don't, based on what you said, I'm not sure I do."

Chrissy's interview is next. Her quotes say it all: "I'm fortunate to be beautiful and hot." "They say black don't crack, so hopefully I won't have to do plastic surgery [as she gets older]." "I have the best walk ever, and it'll make ya say damn!"

In Pam's interview, she (as in Episode 1) again claims to be an investment banker whereas it's obvious she's not. She struggles to describe what she does, precisely, in such capacity. Jessica's next, and Viscusi finds her to be "lazy." Meantime, Amber struggles to recall if she's had any prior jobs and Leanna admits she hasn't really ever thought about what kind of job she might like to work. Courtnee says that she's just looking for someone to hire her for a job. Jackie breaks into song during her interview, with Viscusi reacting to her shakey voice by saying, "not to sound like Simon, but that's very good, you can sit down now." Viscusi then calls for Gia, but she's back at the house smoking her hookah.

The next morning, Laura Baron wakes up the ladies at 7:30 a.m. The ladies hate waking this early! Gia, who refused to do a resume or interview, nevertheless gets out of bed and says she's willing to try to go work. In stark contrast, fellow (and Ultimate) Bad Girl Chrissy again sleeps in, stating: "I cannot be rushed, I will get up on my own terms and on my own time." Then it's time to leave for their jobs, but Chrissy says she's not ready and still needs 50 minutes to complete her makeup and to do her hair: "Never will I walk out the door if I'm not complete. That's just tacky as hell!" The ladies (somewhat) reluctantly leave Chrissy's ass behind and take off for their jobs by car.

Segment 3: Time to Work! The ladies find out they will be working at Matisse Footwear, which makes high-end women's shoes as well as a more affordable line called Coconuts. Michael Katz, the Matisse CEO, addresses the ladies and (after having consulted with Viscusi) starts doling out the job assignments. Leanne, Courtnee and Pam, thought to be "efficient and organized," are assigned office duty. Jessica and Jackie, allegedly having "good voices," are assigned to sales. Gia and Amber are assigned to warehouse inventory duty (Chrissy was too, but she's back at the house still doing her makeup). Erica is assigned to be Manager of all the ladies: "I'm the manager. I got the best job out of everyone. I knew I deserved it because I'm in law school. There's no real competition when it comes to intelligence."

In sales, Jessica and Jackie have to make cold calls, which they HATE! In the office, Courtnee, Pam and Leanne have to work on sorting papers and stuffing envelopes. The second best line of the episode comes here, as Pam spouts, "This task is so maindune!" (In a true Archie Bunker-type misspeak, Pam obviously confused the syllables of the word, "mundane"!).

OK, so Erica obviously sees her manager role as finally being her opportunity to turn the tables on Gia and Jessica, who so often have ganged up on Erica with their verbal abuse (with the arrogant, yet timid, Erica just sitting there and taking it). Erica struts in to observe the job performance of Jessica and Jackie in sales. Jackie has taken to the task, and is doing a good job. Jessica, however, isn't doing too well on the cold calls, and Erica tells her that "maybe you should be a little bit less abrasive." Erica then forces Jessica to listen to one of Jackie's calls, telling Jessica, "listen to how it's done." Jessica is fumin'!

Out in the warehouse, Gia hates her work, which involves going and finding orders in the warehouse inventory. Erica struts out to check up on Gia's performance. Gia goes off on her: "You're not my manager, go away, get out my f*ckin face!" Then this exchange: Erica: "Ok, well, I'm just going to have to report all of this. You have a terrible attitude." Gia: "Yeah, and you have a flat ass!" Erica walks off, but again starts talking about being named manager because she's in law school. Gia has an angry meltdown: "WHO CARES YOU'RE IN LAW SCHOOL, IDIOT! I WENT TO LAW SCHOOL, I WENT TO LAW SCHOOL, I WENT TO LAW SCHOOL!" Gia also confides that she's "going to have an anxiety attack over this woman."

Erica reports to CEO Michael that Gia's not doing her job and is being "very unprofessional and is using profanities" (Memo to Erica -- the World Hates a Rat). Michael tells her that as a manager, it's her job to find ways to deal with difficult people, and he encourages her to try a different, nicer approach with Gia. Meantime back out in the warehouse, Gia is still ranting about Erica, saying: "Managers are supposed to help out, right -- they don't just sit on their fat asses and make doctors appointments for Botox!" That line actually cracked up Amber, who never gets involved in any of these silly arguments between the Bad Girls of the group. Erica strolls out again and actually seems to take CEO Michael's advice by taking a much more conciliatory tone with Gia. But Gia's havin' nothin' of it! "Just go back to your office! -- I want to hit myself with a shoe," barks Gia.

Erica, obviously having fun, then sneaks up on Jessica and listens in on one of Jessica's calls without Jessica seeing her. When Jessica hangs up the call, she's startled to find Erica behind her: "Oh My God, were you standing behind me the whole time you DEMONSEED!" Then back out in the warehouse, it's Erica and Gia in each other's face with a full-on bickering match, with all the ladies gathering to watch and Jessica joining in on Gia's side. "You're vulturing everyone," screeches Jessica at Erica. Then the funniest line of the episode, and the only one that literally and truly made my Laugh Out Loud: Erica blasts, "I feel like Gia is a Wild Animal and Jessica is a Caveman, and I don't know how to communicate with those kinds of people."

CEO Michael gets in the middle of the 3-way bickering of Erica, Gia and Jessica. Gia says that Erica is not her manager, but CEO dude confirms that she is. With that, Gia quits the job and storms out of the joint.

Segment 4: CEO Michael says that from what he just witnessed from Gia's behavior: "I can't have that here. it's counter-productive." Gia is sitting outside the building, and Jessica heads out there to hang out with her. They share their disdain for Erica.

At the end of the work day, Laura shows up and she and CEO Michael meet with the ladies, informing them that they are about to get paid for their day's work. Each lady gets 70 bucks, except for Gia, who only gets 50 since she quit early. The ladies are not happy with them wages, as they feel they should have received several hundred dollars, at least, for their efforts. Erica comments that she feels she should have gotten more than the other ladies since she's in law school and was the manager.

Back at the house, the ladies get a note from Laura Baron saying that they are being rewarded for their work today by getting to partake in a mobile spa in the backyard, although they will have to pick which services they can afford based on today's paycheck. Jessica and Gia are ecstatic to find that the mobile spa includes a spray tan station; but alas, it costs 70 bucks and Gia can't afford it with her $50! When Gia asks why she can't afford the spray tan, the typically quiet Amber again asserts herself, spouting: "Because you're a broke b*tch!" NICE!

Then Ultimate Bad Girl Chrissy, who skipped today's work session, rolls out looking to participate in the mobile spa. Only problem: She's earned no money to be able to buy any of the spa's services. Here, very hot leggy Supermodel type and Nice But Quiet Lady Courtnee starts (much like fellow Nice Lady Amber) to assert herself, stating: "Chrissy, you didn't do the work, you don't deserve the reward, Period! Point Blank!" Damn right and Good For You, Courtnee!

Even Gia, previously in major cahoots with fellow Bad Girl Chrissy, starts going off on Chrissy for blowing off today's work. Chrissy then storms off: "You're Haters! And You're Jealous! I thought you could have made some type of exception for me!" Erica, Pam and Leanne all comment that they feel good for working a job and getting paid and getting a reward (it's small progress for them, but progress nonetheless). BTW, Erica spent her $70 on a pedicure.

That Night: Erica tries to lament to friend Leanne that she (Erica) just doesn't know how to deal with hotheaded Bad Girls Gia and Jessica (since Erica never gets mad -- it's just not her thing). Of course (this show never has any authority or referees hanging around the house), Gia and Jessica get wind of Erica talking about them and march in and another 3-way bickering match ensues. Gia and Jessica accuse Erica (1) of taking advantage of her management position (true, she very much did) and (2) bullying and torturing them (that's pretty choice, however, since it's mostly been Gia and Jessica trying to bully Erica throughout this series).

Gia and Jessica storm off, but Erica clearly has about reached her limit with their antics. Erica starts to become emotional in front of her friend Leanne, saying that it's very hard for her to deal with those two: "I don't know what to do." Psssst: Erica, you should have done what Jackie has so masterfully done since Episode 1: Avoid Their Asses! But since Erica cannot help herself from flashing her high-brow, arrogant attitude at everyone around her, it's basically impossible for her to take the Jackie approach! She's simply destined to butt heads with your Gia and Jessica-type hothead divas of the world. Simple as that.

The segment ends with Laura Baron pulling Jessica aside for a one-on-one session to try to get at the heart of why Jessica keeps letting her bad temper get the best of her (frankly, why was such a session not also conducted with the rather deranged Gia?). Anyway, Jessica opens up to a decent degree in the session, confiding that she was much more easygoing prior to the premature death of her old man, and that she's become much more combative and temper-prone since his death. Laura implores Jessica to stop putting up brick walls against the world and to work on not taking out her anger on the other ladies of the house.

Segment 5: Now it's time for the end-of-episode Group Session between Laura Baron and all the ladies to see who passed for the week and who failed. Surprisingly, Gia again goes off on her former Bad Girl running mate, Chrissy, about how Chrissy always sleeps in, does no work, and blows off all the ladies' duties. Chrissy's reaction: "I'm hot, I'm fabulous, and honestly they (the other ladies) are not. They need to wait on the star." [Aside Observation: Chrissy REALLY needs to find her way into the over-the-top world of Pro Wrestling, since she would SO MUCH FIT RIGHT IN!]

Laura is "very disappointed" in Chrissy's behavior this week. Meantime, Jessica and Leanne both express that they feel good about working this week and earning money. Erica again starts spouting about law school (BTW, and I know this from personal experience: The ability to get accepted to or even graduate from Law School DOES NOT MEAN $HIT -- it really doesn't!) -- Says Erica: "I feel the fact I'm in law school means I was chosen to be Manager, and some of the girls just don't like that."

So Who Passed and Who Failed??? Courtnee again asserts herself strongly in this episode, proclaiming: "I worked, I'm going to pass -- Gia and Chrissy need to fail for not embracing the program!" You Go, Courtnee! At any rate, Courtnee, Amber, Jackie, Leanne and Pam all pass (no surprises there). Chrissy of course fails for blowing off the whole week and its lesson.

Segment 6: Next up is Jessica, who says to Laura Baron, "Can I say something before you fail me?" Laura says, "NO. Know why? Because I'm passing you this week." Third best moment of the episode right here: With the news of Jessica passing, Amber lets out this huge-ass "HEEE-YOOOOO" like one the Duke Boys flying the General Lee over a river or something! Now, Amber is from Savannah, Georgia, a mere 30 miles away from Hazzard County & Roscoe P CoalTrain, and so I guess this comes as no real surprise. But it was very funny! So I digress. Jessica passed, but Laura warns her to reign in her temper and attitude in the future. Jessica admits, "I'm aware I have a bit of a temper." ("A Bit" -- NOOO!).

Erica: She's failed every single prior week, but this week she passes! Laura was impressed that she took her manager job seriously. Gia: Gia tries to plead her case for passing, saying that she didn't even want to go to work, but yet did go and did work until she quit (with a pitch like that, who needs criticisms, right!?). Laura Baron is unimpressed: "But you quit. So you fail."

Who's VIP, Very Improved Princess? Erica actually wins this! "I'm proud of myself, and I deserve to be VIP," crows Erica. Laura Baron's rationale for this reward: Erica took the lesson and work seriously, helped others with resumes, (allegedly) showed leadership and the abililty to change (she changed her tone with Gia at CEO Michael's behest), and showed great restraint when verbally attacked by Gia (I agree with that). BUT AGAIN, Nice Gals like Courtnee and Amber are completely excluded from this Prize since it involves "improvement," and they have both been very well-behaved and contributing since Day 1! It's a very Loaded Prize, aimed to go to ladies who acted badly the prior week(s), only to get their acts together the following week. For the ladies who have ALWAYS acted positively, like Sweeties Courtnee and Amber, they are left out in the cold. Most Unfair!

As the episode ends, Gia is VERY pissed off! "Erica needs to keep her distance from me, because I'm ready to punch her or punch a wall!" As Erica and the other ladies are then shown partying it up in Erica's VIP suite, Gia is shown crying in her bedroom. Then Gia storms out of the entire house and out towards the street. "GET AWAY FROM ME", she yells at everyone! End of Episode.

Upcoming Episodes: In the next episode on Monday, the ladies get to participate in a photo shoot, which they love, but then they find out they also have to do a photo shoot without any makeup on! A meltdown of monumental proportions ensues, since many of these ladies have a HUGE PHOBIA about ever being seen without their makeup! And Chrissy's antics threaten to have her kicked out of the house! (Big Surprise!). Stay tuned...

Final Thoughts: Bad production/editing: They held out Gia storming off at the end of tonight's episode as a cliffhanger, i.e. will she return or not? Then, in the previews of upcoming episodes, it's made clear that she returned! Sorry, but the producers had a very obvious choice here: (1) Use her storming off this episode, but not at the very end as a cliffhanger finish; or (2) Do not show her in your previews of upcoming episodes! Hello!

Boehner the Boozin' "Bar Hopper"?!

The next time republican House minority leader John Boehner goes on one of his loud-mouthed rants on the House floor, someone might consider telling him to go have another drink. That's what MSNBC's Joe Scarborough is saying, leastways. Today Scarborough (a former Florida republican congressman) charged that Boehner is a bar hopper who's always bustin' out of Congress around 5 o'clock to hit the DC bar scene.

Scarborough also said that Boehner's "not a hard worker" and described Boehner as a "disengaged pol whose work ethic doesn't hold a candle to that of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich." To me, those are the real fightin' words here -- being accused of not even living up to standards of Newt Gingrich!

The response from Boehner's spokesperson was a bunch of largely incoherent drivel (perhaps the spokesperson was drinking too?) about Boehner being from a family of 12 kids and how his old man owned a bar (both, obviously, extremely relevant points to the current accusations). The spokesperson, Michael Steel, also claimed that Boehner's only "around town" in DC for fundraising purposes, i.e. basically the classic non-denial denial.

Scarborough and Boehner served together in the House from 1995 to 2001, and it sounds like the two dudes definitely have some issues between them. Maybe they could have a cage match? Just make sure it's held before 5 o'clock.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/39219.html

Does Obama Have a Petty Bias AgainstGreat Britain Due to Events of the Past?Sure Looks That Way. & Why Hasn't Anyone Ever Asked Him About It?!

I heard a minute today of deranged right-winger Glenn Beck's radio show, on which he was talking about how Obama's grandfather was brutally tortured for two years (circa 1949-1950) by the British in Kenya during that country's fight for independence from British colonial rule. Beck seemed to treat this story as if it is something new, which it is not, but it most certainly begs the question of why Obama has never been asked about it.

Specifically, I have never seen anyone in the media ask Obama what impact his grandfather's torture has had on Obama's British policy and his behavior towards the British. And even before his election, Obama should have been asked the impact this would have on his British policy, given that Great Britain has historically been America's most imporant ally. Did the MSM (mainstream media) simply drop the ball, or was it deliberate? Regardless, they've really screwed the pooch on this one, since it appears very clear to me that Obama's grandfather's ordeal has impacted the way Obama has dealt with Britain. Let's run through the timeline, shall we?

-December 3, 2008: From google searches, it does not appear that the information concerning the torture of Obama's grandfather came out until multiple media outlets (primarily British ones and Fox News) reported it on 12/3/08 -- a full month after Obama was already elected.

-Mid-February, 2009: Three weeks after his inauguration, Obama abruptly sends a Winston Churchill bust packing back to Britain. The bust had been in the White House on loan from Britain since after 9-11.

-First week of March, 2009: British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and his wife travel to DC. Obama tells the Brits at the last minute he wouldn't personally be attending the joint press conference that was planned upon Brown's arrival. In line with diplomatic tradition, Brown during the delegation gives Obama a pen holder made from wood of the famous British warship, the HMS Resolute, as well as the framed commission from that ship. Obama in return dispatches a staffer to Wal-Mart to pick out 25 DVD movies to give to Brown, none of which works in Eurpoean DVD players.

-Flash forward to 2010: A writer for Britain's Telegraph recently described Obama as "the most despised US president since Nixon among the British people." The Telegraph's article complained of the above-listed events as well as Obama's "boot on the throat" campaign against BP ("instead of adopting a constructive, statesmanlike approach") -- a campaign which Telegraph and apparently the British people blame for wiping out half the value of Great Britain's largest company and threatening BP's future as well as the pensions of 18 million British people. And it also hasn't gone unnoticed that just for good measure, Obama has rejected all offers of help from Great Britain (as well as those from other European countries) to help out with the oil spill.

And these are just some examples revealed from a quick google search. I'm sure that further searching would detail other gaffes, slights, and disrespects doled out by the Obama White House towards Britain. The Telegraph concludes that "we are witnessing one of the worst exercises in public diplomacy by a US government in recent memory, one that could cause significant long-term damage to the incredibly important economic and political partnership between Great Britain and the United States." And is that because of or in part due to events that occurred to an Obama ancestor 60 years ago? I think likely so. But we'll never get an answer, now will we, since the MSM -- asleep at the wheel as usual -- apparently will never ask that very relevant question.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1091499/Barack-Obamas-grandfather-tortured-British-Kenyas-Mau-Mau-rebellion.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4623148/Barack-Obama-sends-bust-of-Winston-Churchill-on-its-way-back-to-Britain.html
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2009/03/07/obamas-british-gift-gaffe-not-reported-u-s-media
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100043808/barack-obama-the-most-unpopular-man-in-britain/

Stop the Press! "Kagan Vows to Rule Impartially," Reports Politico.com

And we have confirmation from CNN, which is reporting at this hour that United States Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, on the first day today of her Senate confirmation hearings, "pledges open mind, impartiality if confirmed to Supreme Court." Kagan's vow must come as quite the relief for her dem supporters, since it had been widely anticipated that Kagan might testify today that she intends to take to the bench committed to the principles of partiality, non-objectivity, bias, close-mindedness, and even a touch of unfairness just for good measure. But nothin' doin' on that front!

Be sure to check back here for further summaries of the hard-hitting events from this circus (errrr, hearing). As a tease, currently developing is a new update from CNN reporting that "partisanship marks Kagan hearing." Bombshell!

http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0610/kagans_opening_remarks_81ce5a92-b7e2-4a90-b7ca-5ab2b899d918.html
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/06/28/senate.supreme.court/index.html?hpt=C1

"Supreme Court Strikes Down Chicago Handgun Ban," "Extends Gun Owner Rights Nationwide." Let the Left vs. Right Pissing Match Begin in Response!

Meantime, Independents everywhere yawn.

So, did everyone have a nice weekend? Hotter than a rat in a tin $hithouse in Mississippi? It sure was around here.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/28/AR2010062802134_pf.html

The Great Pornograghy Pickle: USSC Nominee Elena Kagan Is Anti-Smut, But Can Either Repubs or Dems Really Use That to Their Advantage?

With Kagan's Senate confirmation hearings to begin tomorrow, an article in this weekend's Politico.com speaks of Kagan's past writings, statements and litigation track record on the subject of restriction of pornography and other sexually explicit speech, which Kagan would reportedly very much like to restrict through the development of novel new legal strategies aimed at cracking down on that type of content. From my read of the article, a lot of what Kagan has espoused as a young lawyer and more recently as solicitor general gets back to the common theme that she believes that judges should be in the business of making judgments identifying new types of speech -- through a wide-open "balancing" of the speech's costs versus its benefits -- as "low value" or "minimal value," such that the speech could be very freely censored and restricted by the government.

One critic alleges that Kagan really only viewed pornography and obscenity law as a sort of starting point that could then be extrapolated to other forms of speech that Kagan views as being "low value." To me, this line of thinking is potentially very dangerous given what I see on a daily basis in this country from a dem and repub party controlled by their extremes, i.e. members of the far left and far right who have an outright disdain and lack of respect for anyone who disagrees with them on anything. For example, I see a huge potential for restrictions upon political speech, such as political speech coming from the right or center, which a liberal like Kagan happens to disagree with and views to be "low value." And what would likewise stop some right-wing judge from similarly trying to apply a willy-nilly "balancing test" to political opinion coming out of the left? I say we leave the ol' speech "balancing test" in the closet, thank you, ma'am. (BTW, the Supreme Court roundly rejected such a balancing test in a Kagan case in recent years). But I digress.

Back to the question of whether dems or repubs might try to use any of this during the confirmation hearings, specifically in reference to the pornography issue. Dems might well like to get into this because Kagan's anti-smut views (generally consistent with many social conservatives' viewpoints) tend to go against the far leftist label that repubs would like to try to hang on her. But Politico reports that dems will be hesitant to get into an issue that previously caused a near civil war within the American feminist movement (anti-censorship feminists versus anti-pornography ones).

On the repub side of things, many more-libertarian type republicans are sure to be concerned with Kagan's viewpoints in this entire area, while socially conservative republicans really wouldn't want to touch Kagan's anti-smut viewpoints with a ten-foot pole. My guess: You will hear very little about any of this from either side. Congressional hearings are all about face-time, grandstanding and speechmaking rather than taking any type of calculated risks, after all -- even in an area of such vital importance as the First Amendment and our free speech protections.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/39034_Page3.html

He Gets My Vote for Jerkwad of the Month:Joe Biden Calls Ice Cream Parlor Manager a "Smartass" After Manager Jokes About "Lowering Our Taxes."

OK, I'm not going to harp or rant about this one for too long. But suffice it to say, Joe Biden really needs to learn a thing or two about the dignity of the office of the vice presidency, because when Biden isn't dropping F-bombs or saying something incredibly stupid as if we was George W. Bush's long lost twin, then he's off acting all thin-skinned (a very distinct trait of this White House) with an ice cream parlor manager. Here's what went down this weekend, according to television station WISN in Milwaukee (link to video at bottom, which has predictably also been picked up today by Drudge Report and Real Clear Politics):

Biden, who's in Wisconsin to raise funds for dem Senator Russ Feingold, struts into a Kopps ice cream/frozen custard joint for a photo op and treats himself to some frozen custard. Biden asks the joint's manager, "What do we owe you?" The manager tells Biden, "Don't worry, it's on us," and then jokes with Biden, "Lower our taxes and we'll call it even." Biden is very clearly not amused and walks away without making any eye contact with the manager. Then, after what is described as a few minutes later, the two are seen together again, this time with Biden looking at the manager and telling him, in what I believe to be a fairly serious tone, "Why don't you say something nice instead of being a smartass all the time -- say something nice."

WISN reports that Biden would not take any questions from reporters following the ice cream parlor visit, but the reporter was able to get the manager to go on camera. The manager said he believed Biden was not happy with the "lower our taxes" comment, and also said that later Biden told him, "I'm just kidding." Now, whether the "I'm just kidding" was in reference to Biden's "smartass" blast or something else is not clear from the story.

But I think that's really a moot point. Even if Biden is claiming he was only "kidding" about the "smartass" comment, specifically, that's little more than a largely self-serving, non-credible statement given Biden's obviously serious tone in calling the dude a "smartass." But maybe Biden should be given the benefit of the doubt? After all, calling someone a "smartass" is always very fertile ground for humor and comedy -- a veritable barrel of laughs, as they say. Please. But regardless, as stated at the top, I'm not going to rant and rave about this, since there are much worse things a dude can be called than "smartass." But again, I would just implore the vice president to much more routinely start acting like a vice president instead of the result of some demented cross-breeding experiment between a drunken sailor and Dan Quayle. That's not much of a legacy.

http://www.wisn.com/video/24053410/index.html

If This Slime Was My Hero, I'd Hope Someone Would Send Me In For Shock Therapy.

Reuters reports today from Gori in the country of Georgia (first link at bottom): "Authorities removed a towering statue of Soviet dictator Josef Stalin from the central square of his hometown in the dead of the night on Friday, carting away the monument to Georgia's most famous native." Apparently it was necessary to do this under the cloak of darkness because Stalin's statue and his memory hold a certain degree of popularity in Georgia. As one local journalist is quoted: "[The statue's removal] was very unexpected. I think many people will be very angry."

But never fear, all you Stalin-adoring Georgians! You'll still be able to see this statue of your murderous former dictator and favorite native son at a Theater Near U! Specifically, the statue has merely been removed to a local Stalin museum, where it will be publicly displayed in a courtyard.

Wow. A museum, statue, and public sentiment commemorating one of the most evil men to ever walk the earth. Dude was Adolph Hitler's left-wing older brother, responsible for the murder of millions of people through political and ethnic purges (check Wiki link below). Together, Hitler and Stalin serve as important and relatively recent reminders of the absolute extremes to which far left and far right ideology, paranoia and hate can be taken. Stalin and Hitler are never to be forgotten, but they should also never be admired or memorialized.

http://alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LDE65O04Q.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josef_stalin

"Crazed Sex Poodle"?! Watch It There, Missy. This Man Invented the Damn Internet!

As the news has broken in the past 12 hours about allegations from a 54-year-old Oregon masseuse that Al Gore fondled and groped her in 2006, today the details of the woman's report to the police are emerging. Among them: She says that Gore was a "giggling 'crazed sex poodle' " who flashed a "come hither look before pouncing on her in a Portland hotel suite" at the Hotel Lucia.

But the masseuse didn't stop there with her Inconvenient allegations. She also portrayed Gore "as a tipsy, handsy predator who forced her to drink Grand Marnier, pinned her to a bed, and forcibly French kissed her." She also reportedly described Gore as a person "with a violent temper, as well as [an] extremely dictatorial commanding attitude besides his Mr. Smiley Global Warming concern persona." OUCH!

And that's not even the worst of it! As The Smoking Gun reports, "after fleeing Gore's suite, the woman returned home to discover, a la Lewinsky, 'stains on the front of my black slacks.' Suspecting that the stains were Gore bodily fluids, the woman mad sure not to clean them."

The masseuse is so far anonymous, but we know that's not likely to last very long. She's reportedly looking to sell her story, and so I think we'll learn her identity in pretty short order. Stay tuned...

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2010/0624101gore1.html

Episode 3 Tonight of "You're Cut Off" on VH1! The Spoiled Rotten Brats Are Forced to Go Clothing Shopping in a Thrift Shop!

(In case you're not familiar with this hot new reality series, try this primer from Episode 1: http://independentrage.blogspot.com/2010/06/episode-1-tonight-of-hot-new-vh1.html).
(And read more specifically about the participating Nine Ladies at this link: http://www.vh1.com/shows/youre_cut_off/cast.jhtml)

Nutshell Synopsis of Episode 3: The ladies are NOT happy about being forced to participate in a fashion show with only thrift shop threads in tow, as celebrity style peeps Sam Seboura, Perez Hilton and Adrianna Costa all make guest appearances as judges. Plus there is drama galore and near fisticuffs amongst the ladies as the Beautiful Erica serves as her typical lightning rod self for stirring up the emotions of the other bad girls in the group! And did you know that Erica is going to law school!? Lord Help Us All!

Segment 1: The show opens with two of the three blondes -- Erica and Leanne -- starting to strike up a real friendship. This reality series is not poorly put together, and loves the technique of foreshadowing, and we get that right here, as Erica and Leanne resolve that "no matter what, we're friends and are not gonna argue."

Jackie is the VIP (Very Important Princess) from last week and thus is tasked with doling out chores this week, and a note from Moderator Laura Baron reveals that the ladies must complete all their chores within the next 2 hours, or else they will not get their full $200 of grocery money for the week. Bad girls Gia and Chrissy, plus newly formed bad girl Jessica, all refuse to get out of bed to help out with chores.

The 4th bad girl among the 9 ladies -- Erica -- in contrast has no problem doing her chore of mowing the law, which she views as good exercise. She also notes, "No one is a bigger princess than me!" Meantime, bad girls Jess and Gia refuse their assigned chores of garbage detail and scrubbing toilets, with Gia commenting: "My hands are not for working or for anything except looking pretty and wearing diamonds." Fellow bad girl Chrissy likewise refuses her assignment of mopping, saying that such work will get in the way of her getting herself ready for the day.

Refusing to work, Gia and Jessica need something to do, so they sit down and start going off on Erica, and they start working on Leanne in a clear effort to undermine the Leanne-Erica friendship. Erica strolls by, sees that Leanne is not defending her, and gets pissed, requesting that Leanne give Erica back the princess crown that Erica had loaned to Leanne to wear that day (yes, an actual princess crown). Leanne begrudgingly agrees. Then bad girls Gia, Jessica and Chrissy follow Erica back to her bedroom, where they start up some good old fashioned ganging up and verbal bullying, telling Erica that she "needs a lobotomy" and that the bathroom should be her bedroom.

Next all the ladies are driven off to meet with Moderator Laura Baron. She introduces them to celebrity stylist Sam Saboura, who grills the ladies about how much they spend weekly and yearly on clothing, accessories and jewelry. Amber, for example, comments that she spent $70,000 on those items just last year. Bad girl Chrissy rubs Sam the wrong way from the start, ignoring him and looking incessantly into her compact. When Sam comments that he likes to advise his clients to mix up high-end clothes with thrift shop fare, Chrissy blasts, "Is that where you got that suit?" Off camera, Sam comments, "I'd like to go snatch that hair weave off her head and tell her to stop with the act, which is all full of insecurity."

Segment 2: Sam then engages the ladies in a little contest to see if they can tell the difference between an expensive item and an inexpensive one. First up are ladies dresses. Chrissy says, "I cannot be fooled," but yet she (and about half the group) erroneously picks the $50 dress over the $500 one. Then it's champagne, and most of the ladies pick the $35 bottle over the $195 one. Next it's diamond rings. Erica says, "I know my jewelry," but still she and several others choose the $15 fake ring over the $9,000 ring! E is in SHOCK and totally flabbergasted! Up next, it's a Pate tasting, and most of the ladies pick wrong again, choosing the $2 "pureed hot dog" over the $40 REAL Pate!

Now it's Thrift Shop time! The ladies must come up with three outfits at the ol' thrift shop: (1) a daytime Chic look for a lady; (2) a nightime sexy look for a lady; and (3) a hot look for a male model. They are divided into three groups of 3 ladies, each group tasked with picking out all three outfits at the thrift ship on a measly budget of $300 total. The producers strangely avoid teaming any of the bad relationships together (which would have made for great reality TV), instead assigning the rather benign groups of: (1) Team 1: Pam, Erica & Amber; (2) Team 2: Chrissy, Leanne & Jackie; and (3) Team 3: Gia, Courtnee & Jessica. All three teams hit the Crossroads Trading Company thrift shop in LA.

As Team 3 does its shopping, the most down-to-earth lady of these 9, Courtnee (who is also amongst the 2-3 hottest of the group), makes the most impressive remark of any of the ladies at the thrift shop, commenting that they were finding "great things" at the shop and that she would have absolutely no problem going back to the thrift shop in the future for more shopping. Yep, that's Courtnee, alright! Meantime, as Team 2 checks out, Leanne is completely amazed that they are able to buy so much $hit for a mere $72! She spouts, "I really never knew that you could buy shoes that don't cost at least $800!"

Fashion Show Time! It's also surprise time on the fashion runway, as it's revealed that in addition to Sam Saboura, the ladies will also have to endure the judging of fashion journalist Adrianna Costa and celebrity blogger Perez Hilton! Team 1 is first up to present, and their theme involves outfits that can be stripped down more barebones as the night progresses. Erica, however, has a bit of trouble as she tries to remove some of her outfit in accordance with the theme. As Erica struggles with the clothing take-off, Hilton tells her to watch out for laying down a "crotch flash"! But alas, Erica does not get the message, and a Crotch Flash is precisely what she then gives the judges!!!

Segment 3: Team 1 continues with their runway exhibition. The three judges seems to generally like Team 1's presentation. Team 2 then seems to bomb with the judges, despite Chrissy's predictably arrogant rant -- "I know they didn't have nothing to say but DAMN, when they seen me coming!" Like Team 1, Team 3 then comes out and seems to impress the judges.

Then it's time for the grade card from the 3 judges: Team 1 -- The reviews were mixed, with Sam commenting to Erica that "seeing your Beav all over the runway, I don't know about that, but I think the team did a great job." (Hey, I'm just quoting over here!) As could easily be predicted from earlier, Team 2 did indeed bomb, with Perez hilariously telling them, including Chrissy, that they just looked "cheap" over and over. An aside here: From much of what I have previously read from Perez Hilton, I was definitely NOT a fan. But my tune has changed after watching this episode tonight. I may disagree with him on plenty of things, but dude seems very genuine in everything he says. I was impressed. But I digress.

On to Team 3's grade: The judges really liked Team 3, and again more props to Courtnee (the very tall beauty queen from Charlotte, NC, the hometown of The Nature Boy Ric Flair -- WOOOOO!), who garnered the best compliment of the night from these judges, who commented that she walked out totally looking like a bona fide runway model! (Heck, I've been saying that since Episode 1!). So who wins? No surprise there: Team 3 (Courtnee, Gia and Jessica) win the contest, being the only Team in which all three members impressed the judges.

The ladies head back to the house, and it appears that they are gettin' all liquored up! Hello. Jessica takes a pretty bad spill in the hallway, as it looks like she's drunk. Jessica then sits down with Leanne and they continue the Erica-bashing, specifically concerning Erica's story about her dog having a bar mitzvah (you just can't make this stuff up!).

So Erica rolls by, and is again offended by her supposed friend Leanne engaging in talk about Erica behind Erica's back. Then verbal altercation! Erica: "We will never be friends again. You need botox." Leanne: "You need more botox." Erica: "You're fat too." (BTW, none of these 9 hot ladies is "fat" in the least!). Even nice gal Amber is taken aback by that "fat" blast from Erica. Leanne is visibly very upset by the "fat" blast. Then the show suddenly flashes forward a few minutes to find Leanne and Erica on the edge of fisticuffs! Leanne shouts at Erica that she is a "laughing stock in this house."

Segment 4: The next morning, Erica says she feels a bit vulnerable and scared from all the ladies verbally attacking her the previous night. "I always seem to be in the middle of drama, but I feel it's not my fault," she says. And right here, I'll offer an opinion: Most of Erica's problems have been driven by the other bad girls, i.e. Gia, Chrissy and Jessica, who do not like her and frankly are likely jealous of her incredible good looks. That has led them to try to start crap with her whenever they can, and Erica (who is NOT an alpha gal or a fighter) always reacts with her defense mechanism of commenting back with a blast on the other gal's appearance. Erica has plenty of issues, and is extremely arrogant and self-centered, but her being at the center of so many problems on this show has, in my view, been almost exclusively driven by the bad attitudes and jealousy of Gia, Chrissy and Jessica. That's just how I honestly see it.

So back to the show: It's Full Metal Jacket-style Motivation, as Laura Baron penalizes ALL the ladies for the failure of Jessica, Gia and Chrissy to do any chores at the start of the episode. The normal $200 stipend for the week's groceries has been reduced to $125 based on a $25 penalty for each of those 3 ladies refusing to work any chores. To explain this motivational technique: Penalize everyone for the breakdowns of the few in hopes that the majority will then assert a bunch of peer pressure (i.e. emotional abuse and/or physical violence) on the few so that they will get their act in line.

Frankly, having watched Full Metal Jacket several times previously, and then watching this episode, I've become convinced that this particular motivational technique is a lazy load of horse$hit. It's employed by leaders who are so lazy that they would rather task their underlings with bringing people into line rather than truly leading the group themselves. We saw that with R. Lee Ermey's pathetic character in Jacket, and we saw that tonight with Laura Baron's leadership style on this show. Leaders can do better. But again I digress.

So next, Jackie (as VIP) is required by Laura Baron to pick 2 ladies (she picks Pam and Jessica) to go grocery shopping for the week on the reduced budget of $125. It's at the grocery store where we view the hilarious site of Jackie having her first encounter with a supermarket weekly specials circular!: "This food store has, like, this book of coupons. I've never even used one before. I mean, do you have to, like, tell someone you're using it, or do they just automatically know?" Choice Moment: Jessica, who refused to do chores, resulting in the reduced budget for the group, actually complains in the grocery store that they have to purchase cheaper stuff due to their limited budget! Good grief! At the checkout counter, they are over $125 and have to throw some stuff back in order to get under their limit.

Back at the ladies' house: Make up or break up? Erica and Leanne have a sitdown on the patio. Erica says she's very sorry for calling Leanne "fat". Erica says that her reflex when she's attacked is to blast back at the appearance of the attacker. Leanne reveals that she was so sensitive to the "fat" insult because Leanne previously had an eating disorder. Erica reveals that she also previously had an eating disorder. Leanne accepts Erica's apology, and an uneasy truce ensues.

Then the ladies gather for their end-of-the-episode meeting with Laura Baron to see who will get passing grades this week, and who will fail. First, though, come Sam Saboura's opinions on the ladies: He was impressed by Leanne's progress after the thrift shop visit and felt she learned something from it. He was very UNimpressed by Chrissy's behavior of constantly looking into her compact and ignoring him, and also talking over him when she felt like it. Chrissy comments, "he's just a hater." Laura Baron disagress, and chastizes Chrissy for disrespecting Laura, Sam and the entire show through her rude behavior. Chrissy then asks if she can be "excused" from the group meeting -- yet another bit of very disrespectful behavior (although it appears that she never actually left, or at least not for very long).

Segment 5: Laura Baron then takes up with the ladies the issue of all the personal attacks that have been flying back and forth between the four "bad girls," i.e. Gia, Chrissy, Jessica and Erica. Erica remarks again that when she's attacked, she always reacts by insulting the other gal's appearance. And then, in an extremely surprising moment, the ultra-high-strung diva Gia (who had been rather quiet this episode by her standards) breaks down, becomes emotional, and says that she thinks (1) that all the ladies are not acting like they normally would because they have been cut off and stuck in a very abnormal environment, and (2) that she's very much missing her daughter, and that she may well be open to better bonding with her daughter through things like changing diapers (which Gia previously vowed NEVER to do). I actually was impressed with Gia's opening up here and think her emotional missing of her daughter was very genuine.

Bottom line: Who passed, who failed this week? Passed: As you might expect, Amber, Jackie, Courtnee, Pam, and even Leanne (whose spat with Erica was her only controversy this week). Big Surprise Passing: GIA! But as Laura Baron made clear: It was only because GIA totally opened up at this final meeting (a big first step, says Laura).

Failing: (1) OBVIOUSLY Chrissy (horrific attidude -- truth be told, she's perhaps the one person among these nine that you would LEAST ever want to know or meet in real life!); (2) also Erica Fails, which I thought was a bit unfair given that E did her chores and (as commented above) alot of the conflict she garners comes exclusively from the other bad-acting gals who do really seem to gang up on her, with Erica never starting it; and (3) Jessica Fails -- Jessica has gone in 2 weeks from being on the good side of things, to being a middle ground person, to now being a bona fide Bad Girl in this rotten house, with her awful attitude and always losing her temper (she is an "Italian firebrand," after all!).

Segment 6: VIP (Very Improved Princess) of the week goes to Leanne. I have a bit of an issue here. I think it should be Very Impressive Princess, Not Very Improved Princess. Because the criteria of "improvement" from prior bad behavior is going to forever lock Courtnee out of getting this award, since she's been on the straight and narrow from the start of this series. Put another way: She's had the best attitude and has been the best behaved lady from Day 1. And she deserves credit for that. But how the hell is she ever going to win when the touchstone is most "improved" princess? Please.

Anyway, following Leanne's award of VIP, Jessica is AGAIN BESIDE HERSELF THIS WEEK over the VIP honoree, ranting and raving outside to Chrissy. Pretty pathetic stuff right there to end the episode.

Upcoming Episodes: It appears that next week, the ladies will be forced to fill out job applications and actually work a job! That should be fun. And it's revealed that Erica is actually going to Law School! No comment.

Final Thoughts: Courtnee continues to stand out the most in this group (both behaviorally and physically), and yet gets no credit whatsoever, largely because she doesn't go around acting like a jerkwad a$$clown. She's really getting shortchanged on this show, and I'll repeat my sentiment from last week: She's about the only ONE lady on this show that I think a dude would EVER want to meet in real life. Shame on the show for not featuring her more.

U-S-A, U-S-A!!!

They sure know how to make us sweat! Today the United States' Landon Donovan scored the winning goal in the waning moments of second half stoppage time, as the U.S. national soccer team defeats Algeria 1-0 to advance to the second round of the World Cup. Bottom line: If the Americans do not score that dramatic goal, then they would have been heading home today because they would not have advanced to the second round. Talk about your high drama.

http://www.worldcup.cbssports.com/page/NewsDetail/0,,13041~2077324,00.html?tag=coverlist_active;coverlist_photo

Judge Says to Obama's Deepwater Drilling Moratorium: Chill, Baby, Chill!

Today U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman in Louisiana granted a preliminary injunction against the moratorium, effectively halting it. "We will immediately appeal," proclaimed Robert Gibbs at the White House. Said the Judge in his decision:

"The court is unable to divine or fathom a relationship between the findings [of a government report following the recent BP Deepwater Horizon rig explosion & oil spill] and the immense scope of the moratorium . . . The blanket moratorium, with no parameters, seems to assume that because one rig failed and although no one yet fully knows why, all companies and rigs drilling new wells over 500 feet also universally present an imminent danger."

Key words here: "No one yet fully knows why" the explosion occurred. Now, that's funny! I thought it was settled that BP is absolutely to blame, liable and legally responsible for the explosion and the oil spill? I mean, just ask Obama, right? (Nevermind that no such determination has yet been made by any court of law or jury -- you know, that pesky little Due Process thing in the 5th and 14th Amendments?)

After all, Obama decreed from on high that BP is fully responsible and told BP -- lest BP wanted to incur the full wrath of the White House and the Congress it controls -- that BP shall (there was no request involved) set up the $20 billion fund to be controlled by one of Obama's "czars" for payouts to persons allegedly damaged by the spill. Republicans, out of political correctness and with their eyes completely focused on polling data, have followed along with Obama -- lock, stock and barrel.

Well, I'm an Independent, and so I need not worry about polls or someone yanking a cushy committee chair from me. And a lot of what I've been watching go on with this story is rather frightening from an administration (and a complicit republican party) that seems much more focused on playing golf and rushing to judgment to blame people for the spill rather than stopping the leak and cleaning up the damn spill to begin with. As I've stated now a number of times in this space, so many of us Independents really cannot wait to see your party in November, Mr. President (and we're gonna kick some repub incumbents to the curb as well).

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-22/u-s-deepwater-oil-drilling-ban-lifted-today-by-new-orleans-federal-judge.html
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38855.html

"Rahm, U Lie"?

That's Sarah Palin's new Twitter blast to White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, following Emanuel's statements over the weekend on ABC's This Week. After the much criticized "apology" of Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) to the BP CEO last week (in which Barton accused dems and the White House of conducting a "shakedown" of BP), Emanuel on This Week tried to attribute that same sentiment to the republican party at large. Palin's full Twitter retort:

“RahmEmanuel= as shallow/narrowminded/political/irresponsible as they come,to falsely claim Barton's BP comment is 'GOP philosophy'Rahm,u lie.”

OK. Plenty to criticize here all the way around. First, just as I yesterday criticized that old coot in Missouri for trying to sum up democrats everywhere as "parasites," I will also criticize Emanuel for attributing Barton's sentiments (which were widely denounced by many repubs) to republicans everywhere. But does that make Emanuel a "liar" in this instance? Of course not. He's simply expressing an opinion, as misplaced as that opinion might be. So as has become fairly typical of Palin, her rhetoric here is the over-the-top and not really appropriate. (See also the third-grade-style namecalling -- "shallow/narrowminded/political/irresponsible").

And completely leaving aside its substance, what's with that Twitter message? A person who is supposed to have presidential aspirations using "u" for "you" and cramming words together just so they will fit within the 140-character limit for tweets? And an equal sign? Memo to Sarah: If your message won't fit within 140 characters, then divide it into two messages! Many people, including myself, often do precisely what she did in terms of using abbreviations and cramming words together in tweets -- but none of us are public figures of the highest order and/or potential candidates for president someday. I realize that this is the new Twitter/Facebook era of communication in America, but that doesn't mean that all rules are out the window.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/06/rahm-u-lie-palin-tweets-her-pushback-to-white-houses-emanuel-statement-on-republicans-and-bp-compens.html

Look at This Crazy Old Coot in Rural Missouri.

Today’s Kansas City Star reports on the odd saga of one David Jungerman, who owns a farm along U.S. 71 in Bates County, Missouri (about an hour south of Kansas City). The 72-year-old seems very proficient in finding the headlines, and I’ll spare you all of his rather entertaining back story (link to the full story at bottom). The Latest: It seems Jungerman has seen fit to paint and display a tractor-trailer along the heavily traveled highway with the following message: “Are you a Producer or Parasite; Democrats - Party of Parasites.”

Vandals have twice tried to burn down the trailer (which sits on Jungerman’s property), as well as setting fire to an empty farmhouse on the property. Jungerman claims that he’s not even much of a staunch republican, occasionally voting for dems such as Claire McCaskill. He says his message is not aimed at the local “Harry Truman” (more conservative) democrats, but rather dems nationwide.

Now, do I agree with Jungerman’s over-the-top message that lumps together all dems everywhere in one huge swath? Not at all. Frankly, it’s the kind of superficial, sound-bitish, rather mindless type of rhetoric which dems and repubs use all the time and which serves very little constructive purpose. And for the record, I have little doubt that there are plenty of "parasitic" type people to go around in both of our illustrious national political parties.

But that said, Jungerman has every right to express his message and to plaster it on his property. If you don’t like it, then get your own damn trailer and stick your own message on it. Or, you can just be a slimeball like the people who have attacked Jungerman’s property with criminal acts of felony arson. Whatever floats your boat, I suppose.

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/06/19/2029960/missouri-mans-incendiary-sign.html

Bad Times for Big Hugo.

A new Reuters story this weekend details the mounting problems in Venezuela for everyone's favorite deranged socialist dictator, Hugo Chavez. Those problems include:

-"Mountains of rotting food" at government warehouses (some 80,000 tons) that has gone unused through government mismanagement.
-Massive, soaring inflation (food prices are up 41% in the past year alone), which has been hitting hard the state-run supermarkets that Chavez has foisted upon his subjects (errrr, people).
-To replace the putrid, wasted food in the government warehouses and to supply the state-run supermarkets, Chavez's regime has resorted to sending in army troops to raid private wholesalers and to seize their food supplies.
-Chavez is also threatening to next take over the country's biggest private food processor, miller and brewer -- Polar company.
-Amidst all of these problems, he faces criticism of government incompetence from opponents, who allege that these various problems show "the state is a poor and corrupt administator" of a country's food supply (who could have ever imaged that?).

Now, I had been wondering why I hadn't recently seen too many Twitter blasts from ole Chavez (yes, I added him on Twitter just for laughs, although dude always tweets in Spanish and I have to try to translate the crap!). Now, it's clear why he's been more quiet -- he apparently has a lot more important things occupying his time than blasting out propaganda over the Net. But aren't all these calamities almost enough to make you feel a tiny bit sorry for Mr. Roly Poly Man (wink to Donovan Leitch)?

Well maybe not, but Chavez is not left without options down there. Methinks he might consider hitting up some of his Big Hollywood friends to float him a little (actually, a big) loan or donation to help prop up the Venezuelan food stores. After all, I'm almost certain that Danny Glover, Sean Penn and Oliver Stone would be more than willing to buck up for the cause. And if that proves ultimately inadequate, Vladimir Putin and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are always just a phone call (or Tweet, as the case may be) away!

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37786852

I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: Some Fool Paid $1.2 Million for a John Lennon Lyric Sheet!

Actually, this auction item is very cool (pic on left): John Lennon’s handwritten lyrics for one of his most memorable songs, “A Day in the Life” (the final song from The Beatles’ masterpiece album, “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band”; and Paul McCartney contributed the song’s middle eight as well). But $1.2 million? Even the folks at NYC’s Sotheby’s auction house must be shocked, since the pre-sale estimate of the lyric sheet’s value was $500,000 to $800,000.

Likely adding to the lyric sheet’s value, the sheet includes some of Lennon’s edits to the lyrics of the song. Those lyrics include the famous reference to a man who “blew his mind out in a car.” That lyric played a central role in the infamous Paul-McCartney-Is-Dead rumors (along with that ominous hand over Paul’s head on the Sgt. Pepper album cover -- see above). A perusal of this lyric sheet, however, seems to shed no new light on that particular lyric or on the question of whether or not Paul is, in fact, dead.

However, judging from Paul’s recent appearance (or was it an imposter?) at the White House and his rather first-grade-level Bush blasts, I’d say that while Paul does appear to still be alive, and while most of the lights do appear to still be on, I would question whether anyone’s been home for quite some time. But the old man is always good for a new silly love song, right?

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/06/19/2028746/john-lennon-lyrics-fetch-12m-at.html

Exile on Slimeball Street: "Wanted Man" John Edwards Goes Into Hiding, Tries to Avoid the Court System & The Rest of the World.

North Carolina attorney Hoppy Elliot is looking for John Edwards. "Let us know if you find him," says Elliot. "Because we've been looking for him all over the place." Such is the apparent life on the lam that Edwards has been living in recent weeks. Elliot represents former Edwards aide, Andrew Young, who claims to be in possession of a "tawdry sex tape" that catches Edwards and mistress Rielle Hunter (pictured above) in the act. Young has been sued by Hunter over the tape, and Elliot has been trying to serve Edwards with a subpoena that would compel Edwards to appear for a deposition in the case. But Edwards, who may or may not be holed up at his North Carolina estate, has been impossible to catch and impossible to reach by phone.

But some paltry deposition would seem to be the least of Edwards' current problems. Reportedly, also hovering over his head is the threat of a federal grand jury indictment concerning $1 million in presidential campaign funds that Edwards allegedly funneled to Rielle Hunter. Edwards' lawyers (apparently the only people in the civilized world who are able to communicate with him) have been working to try to avoid that indictment occurring.

So as you can see, Edwards certainly has plenty of motivation to make himself scarce these days. It's even being reported that Edwards in recent weeks has stopped his regular trips to local bars The Wooden Nickel and The Saratoga Grill, where Edwards likes to drink white wine (an aristocrat to the last) and hit on the ladies. Gosh, the price of being a wanted man!

Think back a mere three years, before the revelations came to light that Edwards fathered a child with Hunter (a former campaign worker) while Edwards' wife, Elizabeth, was suffering through the horror of breast cancer. Edwards -- a wildly rich and successful North Carolina personal injury attorney -- was to be the far left's "New Kennedy." Just a few years earlier, in 2004, the democrat party had even seen fit to offer us Edwards as the party's vice presidential candidate -- the person one heartbeat away from the presidency.

But then came 2007, with the National Enquirer chasing Edwards around a hotel and Edwards ducking into the $hithouse to try to avoid them. Makes me wonder, what $hithouse is Edwards hiding in now? And can someone let Hoppy Elliot know?

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/Media/john-edwards-passes-lonely-existence-exile/story?id=10945633
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2010/06/18/2010-06-18_hide_and_seek_former_senator_john_edwards_goes_underground_after_affair_scandal_.html

Say It Ain't So, Spaghetti O!

Today brings word of a massive recall of Campbell's Spaghetti O's. This, BTW, is one of my favorite foods. While Spaghetti O's really have no redeeming nutritional value, they are low fat, not to mention inexpensive, tasty and quick to prepare. But alas, they're only low fat if you consume the type without those disgusting little meatballs (Lord only knows what's in those things), otherwise known as "Original" flavor (see the pictured can).

And sure enough, today's recall only applies to Spaghetti O's containing meatballs. Even more specifically, if your can contains meatballs, has "EST 4K" stamped on it, and has a use-by date between June 2010 and December 2011, then it has been recalled. Reportedly, the recall resulted from fears that the meatballs in such cans may have been undercooked in Texas (I've heard of plenty 'a half-baked stuff comin' outta Texas, but this is ridiculous!).

As for the 8-10 cans of Spaghetti O's that I have in my pantry? Safe! Like I said, I don't eat the kind with meatballs. And please give me an ounce of credit over here for not using an obvious and mindless "Uh Oh Spaghetti O" headline for this blog post like every other article and blog today has been using (see, e.g., the link below).

http://www.examiner.com/x-11270-Hartford-Wellness-Examiner~y2010m6d18-Uh-Oh-SpaghettiOs-Recalled

A Truly PATHETIC Display From Congressional Dems and Repubs Today.

Instead of focusing upon the God AWFUL oil spill situation hitting the gulf coast lands right now or ANY effort to actually try to minimize and clean up that disaster, we get congressional dems and repubs GRANDSTANDING and bullying around the BP CEO -- OH BIG MEN, YOU DEMS AND REPUBS! As if that BP fool is going to do anything other than what he did today, i.e. sit there and take it and try to avoid making admissions of legal liability.

PAY NO ATTENTION TO THIS BULLSHIT, folks: This is a dem effort to take attention away from OBAMA'S PATHETIC RESPONSE to this disaster, and a repub effort to do the politically correct thing by joining in the absurdity of beating up on BP rather than calling for a focus on the actual disaster that is unfolding before our very eyes on the gulf coasts. How about the shameful Florida GOPer asking this CEO Buffoon whether today is Thursday? Grandstanding of the highest order, accomplishing absolutely nothing, and completely ignoring the historical disaster that is still occurring down south.

Frankly, I haven't been THIS disgusted and angry since the dems ramrodded through the health care monstrosity against the will of the American people earlier this year. I love how these dems like to spin that the electorate really isn't that angry. Well, WE INDEPENDENTS SURE AS F*CK ARE. AND WE CONTINUE TO LOOK FORWARD TO KICKING EVERY DEM AND REPUB INCUMBENT TO THE CURB THAT WE POSSIBLY CAN COME NOVEMBER. Stick that in your pathetic partisan pipe and smoke it! WE CONTROL YOUR ELECTION OUTCOMES AND WE AIN'T GOING AWAY!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/17/AR2010061705855.html?hpid=topnews