Chait exposes Bill Kristol’s crap:
Here’s Pelosi’s actual statement:
We see it as an entrepreneurial bill — a bill that says to someone, if you want to be creative…
Notice the part Kristol omitted? “An entrepreneurial bill.” Kristol paints the line as an encouragement to people to quite their jobs and becomes wards of the state pursuing their passion. But that of course is not what she said at all. The health care system prevents individuals from starting their own business or working for themselves because affordable individual health insurance is frequently unobtainable. One purpose of health care reform is to remove health insurance as the determining factor for individuals choosing between working for an employer or working on their own.
Chait continues on but ends addressing the transparency robocops:
Obama did promise transparency. He did not promise to reveal the contents of every conversation he or any member of his administration had with anybody for any reason whatsoever. Dickerson’s idea that the “stone wall” is all that matters, not what the wall is hiding, is a reductio ad absurdum of this idea. I demand to know the contents of the last five conversations Obama had with Olympia Snowe. I don’t care if Robert Gibbs promises they didn’t plan anything illegal — I need to hear it for myself! Also I need to know what, if anything, they ate when they met.
Chait stands strong on his “Sestak-gate” view:
A job offer is not a quid pro quo to get somebody out of a race. It is getting somebody out of a race. Accepting one job means you cannot run for another. It happens all the time — the White House appointed John McHugh Army Secretary in part to get him out of New York’s 23rd Congressional District. It offered Judd Gregg a cabinet slot in order to get him out of the Senate. This is completely routine, neither illegal no immoral nor especially unusual. Can’t we wait to appoint a special prosecutor until there’s at least some possibility of underlying illegal behavior?
A story about Mohammed Hassen who has spent 30% of his life in a Guantanamo cage.
Greenwald goes strong as always:
In other words: of course we’ll provide a fair tribunal for proving your guilt — as long as we’re certain we can convict you — otherwise, we’ll just imprison you indefinitely without charges. All this even though 72% of Guantanamo detainees have been found to be wrongfully held since the Supreme Court compelled habeas hearings in 2008. And then there are the numerous Yemeni prisoners who have been cleared for release but who will be kept in a cage anyway because we arbitrarily decreed that we’re not going to release even innocent prisoners back to Yemen.
This raises good discussion about the ability of Gitmo to even do what it was meant to do, and in case you forgot, it was to imprison terrorists without any due process.
The trailer, circa 1985.
As told by a lesbian Army officer:
I know exactly how hard it is to serve knowing that my career could end at any moment if someone were to find out about my sexuality. I have never gawked or looked at a woman inappropriately whom I serve with. That is not out of fear of being caught, it’s out of respect for other women. I would never want someone gawking at me while I change, so I don’t do that myself.
Have a great holiday weekend, ya’ll. I am getting the hang of this blog. It has been some time since I have worked with HTML and websites. Catch you on the flip side.
Megan has little interest in politics compared to me. As we watched Glenn Beck’s pontificating “chalk board lesson” yesterday, Beck worked in his mind to connect the dots for those watching – that progressive’s had done “horrible, evil things” in the past, with no problem finishing his segment painting all progressives the same. Megan said a few times: he isn’t making sense. Across the board, his comparisons of wartime decisions under Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Obama didn’t comparatively line up or give any differing opinion (warrant-less wiretaps, the beginning of the Stimulus package, two wars begun, one under a false guise – anyone remember this Republican guy?)
Glenn Beck decried Obama’s suggestion for us to read the Huffington Post, a scary liberal intelligentsia to those watching Fox News. What Obama actually said was
“If you’re a fan of Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh, try reading a few columns on the Huffington Post website.”
At the University of Michigan commencement. Not a direct order to the public by totalitarian liberalist tyrant Barack Hussein Obama. But a suggestion to Beck and his ilk to expand their horizons, much to the contrary of his wanna-be professor-like “show”.
Damien Cave writes on the ideological gap between those born after the Civil Rights era (me!) versus the Baby Boomers:
Those born after the civil rights era lived in a country of high rates of legal and illegal immigration. In their neighborhoods and schools, the presence of immigrants was as hard to miss as a Starbucks today.
In contrast, baby boomers and older Americans — even those who fought for integration — came of age in one of the most homogenous moments in the country’s history.
Good looks: DBT
Jim Wallis speaks on the beliefs and ethics behind libertarianism:
The Libertarian enshrinement of individual choice is not the pre-eminent Christian virtue. Emphasizing individual rights at the expense of others violates the common good, a central Christian teaching and tradition. The Christian answer to the question “Are we our brother’s keeper?” is decidedly “Yes.” Jesus tells us that the greatest commandment is to love God and love our neighbor. Loving your neighbor is a better Christian response than telling your neighbor to leave you alone. Both compassion and social justice are fundamental Christian commitments, and while the Christian community is responsible for living out both, government is also held accountable to the requirements of justice and mercy. Both Christians on the Right and the Left have raised questions about Libertarian abandonment of the most vulnerable — whether that means unborn lives or the poor.
See also James 1:27 –
Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.
Virginia Klipstein speaks to the anonymous vitriolic tweeting against Tom Corbett:
The writer of the letter “Identify yourselves, cowardly tweeters” on Wednesday, who is an admitted supporter of Tom Corbett, Pennsylvania attorney general and gubernatorial candidate, complains about the anonymous tweeters who have criticized Corbett. The writer says, “The First Amendment suggests that freedom of speech comes with a responsibility to stand behind your words.” Really?I thought all the First Amendment said was that Congress is barred from “abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” Taylor finds anonymous criticism of public officials villainous. What would he say to Thomas Paine, Ben Franklin, or John Adams, who all wrote extensively – anonymously?
This topic can strike up an interesting conversation. Do some people need to hear certain things from an anonymous author? Or in a free speech country, do you need to then be open to hearing rebukes or responses to your words?
Bill McLaughlin muses over the government response to the BP spill. An intriguing viewpoint:
While I can understand the frustration of the people of Louisiana over the BP oil spill disaster, I find it remarkable the number of conservatives who are deriding the administration for not doing more and doing it faster. These are the same people who most recently were deriding the administration for too much regulation of industry, and taking over the auto industry and the banks to prevent future financial disasters. Now they want the government to take over responsibility for stopping the leak and cleaning up the mess. I’m sure BP would like nothing better!What makes these people think the government has access to better experts than the oil companies and drillers? On top of that, these conservatives are blocking legislation that would increase the liability limits on oil companies for this kind of disaster. For all of BP’s talk of paying for the mess it made, people should review what Exxon didn’t have to pay for the Valdez disaster. In the end, I’m quite sure we will be the ones who get handed the bill.