Juan Williams; No Mulligan Given For His Words

"Thinking aloud is the source of most of the world's problems". Benjamin Franklin to John Adams and Thomas Jefferson in the HBO series John Adams

Most of the world has heard the statement former NPR commentator and FOX News contributor Juan Williams made on The O'Reilly Factor this past Wednesday.....but if you didn't, here's what was said;

"When I get on a plane....I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."

This was in response to O'Reilly's appearance on The View in which Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar walked out after being offended to O'Reilly's comments about Muslims and terrorism.

And in the aftermath of those words, Williams was fired by NPR CEO Vivian Schiller- who later made a wisecrack (since apologized for) about Williams' sharing private thoughts with a publicist or psychiatrist, and stood her ground on Williams' firing.

Then the Right chimed in....O'Reilly, Palin, Gingrich, Huckabee, Cantor, Boehner, some of whom called NPR a left wing organization that should have it's whooping 2% of it's federal funding pulled for silencing Juan Williams. In a word, this was more out of control political correctness. And the Left, through voices such Eugene Robinson and EJ Dionne, defended Williams and spoke out against his firing as an overreaction, and felt that Williams should have been allowed to explain himself publicly.

Now, anyone who follows this blog knows, I am a slightly left of center Democrat, a liberal, a progressive if you will. But what was "liberal" (ie, "tolerant") in the way Williams was fired....for remembering an honest reaction he had, but not having the good judgment to keep those thoughts- which could be misinterpreted- to himself?

Let's bottomline this.

Is there anyone reading this who has never had a reaction to being in a situation where there are people who look different from you, or who speak another language, or are of another ethnic or religious background, and you don't feel entirely comfortable in their company, either consciously or unconsciously? It's usually something totally irrational, a fear of someone or something perceived as strange or unknown. And once rationality kicks in, openness will follow.

Progressives may not like Juan Williams for his appearances on Fox News, where he has signed a multi-million dollar a year contract post firing from NPR, and has now become the Righties on Fox latest cause celibre. Juan Williams is now Exhibit A for the Right in it's cultural war against "the intolerance of the Left". They may have a point in this case.....but for conservatives to wag fingers in the faces of progressives, well not so fast, ladies and gents.

Just this past week Meghan McCain took heat from Republicans and Tea Partiers for her criticism of Republican candidate for the US Senate from Delaware Christine O'Donnell for being unqualified for the job. And has any current Republican office holder ever shown the guts to call out Limbaugh or Beck when they make outrageous and divisive comments about those they see being threats (read "Democrats, liberals, progressives, et al")?


Yes, the Left does have a form of orthodoxy, and sometimes it does manifest itself in situations like the Williams/NPR affair....and it isn't right.

But the opposite side of the aisle is loaded with people who adhere to a written script and agenda.....and their 11th Commandment is "Thou Shalt Not Diss A Fellow Republican, No Matter How Crazy, Stupid, Or Unqualified For Office They May Be".

There's enough hypocrisy on both sides to go around.

Christine O'Donnell- "I Am Not A Witch"; (But Can She Float?)

Flash!

Hot off the presses and into cyber space.....


Delaware Republican Senatorial candidate Christine O'Donnell has told the world....

"I am NOT a witch!

But through our very thorough search of YouTube (so it must be true) we found this O'Donnell ad with proof of the contrary.



I dunno. Maybe it's a Halloween thing. Anyway, it's back to YouTube. Here's a tried and true method to determine if Ms. O'Donnell is, indeed, a witch.....courtesy of Monty Python and the Holy Grail.



If she can float.....she must be made of wood. And if she's made of wood....she can float like a duck. And if she weighs more than a duck.....

One more question.....is she responsible for turning this guy into a......

And he never got better?

Richest Americans Will Save Tax Cuts Rather Than Spend It (Moody's)

For weeks and months the American public has been told time and time again by Republicans that letting the Bush era tax cuts for the wealthiest citizens lapse will only do additional harm to an economy that has been been struggling. In theory the richest Americans would spend the money or reinvest it in America.

But in a report appearing at Bloomberg.com there appears to be evidence that most of the money the rich save in tax cuts never channels back to the economy. Instead, as Moody's Analytics Inc has determined, the money from those tax cuts will be saved rather than spent.

The following appears at Bloomberg.com.

Tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 under President George W. Bush were followed by increases in the saving rate among the rich, according to data from Moody’s Analytics Inc. When taxes were raised under Bill Clinton, the saving rate fell.

The findings may weaken arguments by Republicans and some Democrats in Congress who say allowing the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans to lapse will prompt them to reduce their spending, harming the economy. President Barack Obama wants to extend the cuts for individuals earning less than $200,000 and couples earning less than $250,000 while ending them for those who earn more.

So, when Mitch McConnell and John Boehner and the rest of the Republican leadership in Congress go before the cameras and wag their fingers telling all who will listen that the extension of these tax cuts for the wealthy are necessary for economic recovery.....that may hardly the case.

More from Bloomberg

When the first Bush tax cuts were signed into law in June 2001, pushing the top rate down to 35 percent, the wealthy boosted savings. The saving rate climbed to 2.8 percent in the first quarter of 2002 from minus 2 percent in the second quarter of 2001. The increased savings coincided with a 1.1 percent decline in the S&P 500 index.

Second Round

After the second round of Bush tax cuts in May 2003, the rich also increased their saving, with the rate climbing to 7.6 percent in the first quarter of 2004 from 2.2 percent in the second quarter of 2003, the Moody’s data show.

The analysis found some similarities across income levels in the 2001 and 2003 data. The wealthy and the remaining 95 percent of Americans both saved more of their incomes after the Bush tax cuts. The saving rate is defined as personal savings as a percentage of after-tax income,

Read More...........

Keith Olbermann's Special Comment- The GOP May Have Met Its Waterloo

Between watching some news, some basketball, and catching up on the latest episode of DAMAGES I did catch the return of Keith Olbermann to COUNTDOWN.

He gave a SPECIAL COMMENT worthy of the attention of all, but particularly by conservatives and Republicans, and their failure to "smell the coffee".

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Keith Olbermann,COUNTDOWN,Keith Olberman Special Comment March 22 2010, Republicans,conservatives,Tea Party,Republican Waterloo,Healthcare Reform

Regressive Is The Opposite Of Progressive

Commentary....and Some Necessary Ranting

I just got done listening to the latest rant of a particular commentator on that news network that sounds like "lox"....you know, the crazy guy who's last name rhymes with "______ wreck" (insert "train" in the blank) and his latest salvo against "the progressive agenda". I used to get angry about this stuff, but instead, I had an eureka moment.

To be against something or a particular concept, it stands to reason that an individual must stand for the polar opposite, or forever hold his piece.

I got this idea from watching an old episode of THE TUDORS, from the trial of Sir Thomas More. Rather than take an oath making Henry VIII the head of the church in England, More maintained silence, neither for or against. His silence, More maintained, implied his consent rather than making him take an oath that he believed would have condemned his soul to hell.

Forget that it really didn't work out for Sir Thomas....he was found guilty anyway and beheaded (if the jury found More innocent they would have all been drawn and quartered at Henry's behest). It was a brilliant concept employed by More.

Silence would indicate "just go with the flow"....things are just great, thank you. No need for a change.

However, to be vehemently and vocally opposed to a certain movement, theory or doctrine should indicate that the protester has must have a better idea; as going in the other direction.

Therefore, to be against "Progressivism" one must therefore be in favor of "Regressivism".....going backwards instead of forward. If you desire neither "regression" or "progression", one must maintain silence to imply consent to the status quo- you believe things are alright the way they are.

By extension....opponents of Progressivism who merely like things the way they are should just shut up. And those who view Progressivism as a "cancer to the moral fiber of this nation" and want it destroyed must stand for its polar opposite....let's go backwards.

(Readers....if a certain commentator can get on the air with a chalkboard to sell his theories of the evils of progressivism with circles, arrows, pictures and his peculiar stream of consciousness thoughts, just bear with me....OK?).

So....that being the case, Tea Party protesters who see Progressivism as a danger and must be stopped must be in favor of going in the opposite direction; they are indeed true Regressives.

So....what do these Regressives really want?

Well...here's what I think....

THE REGRESSIVE AGENDA!!!!!

They still want to have 500 channels on television- but would demand all stations be in black and white instead of color.

And speaking of "black and white".....why should the government spend money on those pesky inner city schools?

They want what Herbert Hoover wanted for America, with a twist...."A chicken in every pot....and a 44 Magnum under every pillow". You can't be sure when a deer, bear, or some kind of wildlife might break into your home. Or maybe even somebody who's name ends in a vowel.

All males who do not wear an American flag pin will be exiled to San Francisco.

Every school in America will have the official photograph of Jesus writing the Constitution of the United States. To say that photography didn't exist in those days is another progressive lie.

Ronald Reagan will be pictured on the $100 bill....and also on the $1, $2, $5, $10, $20 and $50. FDR, JFK, LBJ....on the nickel, dime, and quarter. Small change. An American Indian returns on the penny, and an oil derrick will be on the silver dollar- however, it would now be worth 99.9 cents.

There will be no more talk of gay marriage....nor of civil unions. Or any unions at all, for that matter. Who needs them? Unions I mean.


Global warming? With all of these snow storms this winter....in The South? Are you kidding me?

All pubescent girls will be encouraged to attend one of President Palin's Abstinence Camps.

Olbermann, Maddow, Moor, and Letterman....subject to "reprogramming" (See A CLOCKWORK ORANGE).

Healthcare reform....take you vitamins, wash your hands, avoid too many SNICKERS...above all, don't get sick.

Military service.....Regressives have better things to do than serve in the armed forces, like complain about taxes, and hip hop, and those Godless Progressives. There's enough high school dropouts and minorities out there... let them deal with deserts, road side bombs, Stop-Loss, and the apathy of too many of our citizens.

Taxes....Regressives prefer a flat 10% income tax. But they really DON'T want a tax at all. Jesus never talked about taxes when He wrote the Constitution. I know that's true; because the Bible- and Pat Robertson- told me so.

If you've read all of the above and got mad as hell....you've just been punked! But if you laughed, you just may be a Democrat.

There may be one or two of you who read this schtick so far and don't "get it"....well, its just my way of trying to make a point. When the Becks, Hannitys, Limbaughs, Bachmans, and Palins of the world rail against this imaginary "progressive agenda" to destroy America, its just as ridiculous and laughable as the stuff I said about conservatives, Tea Baggers, and "Regressives"....its painting "The Others" with a broad brush and making them the enemy. That's what people like them do to maintain power and control.

They use division and the hatred of their audience towards individuals or concepts to exercise power. Its as American as Joe McCarthy- and what makes what these people are doing worse is the tacit endorsement from the power structure that employs them, the Republican Party or Fox News.

It wasn't always that way....when Joe McCarthy went on his Red baiting witch hunts in the 1950's he had people in his own Republican party who stood up to him- namely Senator Margaret Chase Smith of Maine, and President Eisenhower, who despised McCarthy for his attacks against his comrades in the Army. When McCarthy went after General George Marshall, Ike started working behind the scenes to expose McCarthy...and Edward R. Murrow of CBS News ultimately took him down on an episode of SEE IT NOW.

Maybe I'm just getting older...but putting on the tube everyday and watching otherwise good people going crazy because some irresponsible political or media demagogue has them whipped into a frenzy in order to maintain their little fiefdom of control is starting to wear on me a bit; probably more so than at any time in my life.

Maybe the only way to fight that kind or recklessness is to mirror it, and throw it back it the faces of those who dished it out.

A heavy doses of irony is their just desserts.