Why is this all goofy looking? Probably because your browser doesn't support stylesheets or you have an old stylesheet. Try hitting reload or upgrade your browser today.
fatmixx iconFatMixx Logo
Check out Coolspotters!
Advertising
Latest Featured Video

This clip has been making the rounds on the Internet, so odds are you’ve seen it. If you haven’t, you should watch it, preferably in HD at Vimeo. At the very least, click the title of this post to see it full size. :)

The premise is simple: Matthew Harding took a trip to 42 countries to film short clips of him doing a silly dance, sometimes alone, sometimes with lots of local folks, often in beautiful locations. The result is this 4:28 video.

I’m proud to share the fact that this guy is from Connecticut. They don’t call us nutmeggers for nothing.

Update: The song is (called Praan) is available at Amazon’s MP3 store. The web site for the project is, appropriately, wherethehellismatt.com, where there are more videos and maps.

6:59 pm | leave a comment
Donate

Goal Thermometer

ad for kiva.org which facilitates microloans to small businesses around the world
Support CC - 2007
join EFF!
Advertisement

Via Kevin Drum, we have this interesting data that shows:

What it shows is the difference that the President’s party affiliation makes to the distribution of income during the four years of the president’s term. (The distributional outcomes are shown with one year’s lag.) When a Republican president is in power, people at the top of the income distribution experience much larger real income gains than those at the bottom–a difference of 1.5 percent per year going from the bottom to the top quintile in the income distribution. The situation is reversed when a Democrat is in power: those who benefit the most are the lower income groups. If you are in the bottom quintile, the difference between having a Democratic or a Republican president in office is an income gain (or loss) of more than 2 percent per year! Strikingly, compared to Republicans, Democratic presidents generate higher income gains for all income groups (although the difference is statistically significant only for lower income groups).

The series is from 1948-2005, so it’s not just limited to the last 8 years or the last 2 Presidents. It’s interesting, and a point raised repeatedly in several different studies. Focusing on employment, basic social safety nets, and those core Democratic issues seem to make a difference.

3:22 pm | leave a comment

(cue Nelson voice) Ha Ha!

2:41 pm | leave a comment

The funniest quote I’ve read in a while:

Every class has one of those kids who opens his mouth and says what everyone else is thinking. The GOP has Bill Kristol.

“[Obama's] riding a wave of euphoria. She [Clinton] needs to puncture it. The way you puncture euphoria is reality, or to be more blunt, fear. I recommend to Senator Clinton the politics of fear.”

I sincerely promise to stop pointing out that Republicans and terrorists want exactly the same thing (you, scared sh**less) as soon as it stops being so blatantly true.

So true. So, America, do we want to stop being afraid? Turn your state blue if you do.

1:35 am | leave a comment

This has been bugging me for a while. Given any of the Republican candidates, I can give you reasons why I wouldn’t vote for them, why some of them would’ve been bad for the country, etc. But I don’t hate any of them the way that people seem to hate Hillary Clinton.

So, help me out here… what’s the reason? Is it simply Clinton Derangement Syndrome (i.e. irrational hatred of people named Clinton?) Or is there something she did that I’m forgetting that makes her the second coming of Satan for Republicans?

1:14 pm | leave a comment

Kevin Drum is on a roll today. Here’s the money point:

That’s about the size of it. Today’s New York Times explains Mitch McConnell’s “nyet” strategy for making sure that nothing gets done

But why does the media have to play along? It’s nice that the Times ran this story, but it would be nicer if the media simply reported what was happening on a regular basis. I’m not asking for special treatment, just headlines that tell us what’s really going on. If Republicans have adopted a strategy of simply blocking every piece of legislation that makes it to the floor of the Senate — and everyone agrees that they have — then we should be regularly seeing headlines that say “Republicans Block ______ ” There’s nothing partisan about this, it’s just a description of what’s happening. If Democrats block things, they can say that too. But unless the press reports this stuff accurately on a regular basis, the public simply has no idea why nothing is getting done.

The Times story relates the tale of one bill where the Democrats gave up and gave the Republicans what they wanted on that legislation and the Republicans reflexively blocked it before realizing what they did. That’s the state we’re in, but you wouldn’t know that from watching the news or reading the paper.

4:47 pm | leave a comment

The short answer is no, and the longer, complete answer is that they never will. It’s ingrained.

7:43 pm | leave a comment

What’s even more ridiculous is that I can’t even think of a conceivable reason for these oaths. Voting is a fundamental part of civic life, it shouldn’t require a party oath.

8:12 pm | leave a comment

Proving once again that Republicans don’t actually give a crap about governing our great nation. They’d rather name call by passing resolutions all day.

5:51 pm | leave a comment

NYC 17 asked an important question in the comments of the voting laws post, so I feel somewhat compelled to clarify a few things.

I would never and have never considered members of the Republican party to be “bad” people. I used to be one. So, when I say something like “Republican abuses” I am talking about the leadership of the party, though I might be talking about the national, state, or local organizations.

That being said, I also mentioned that Republicans that follow the national playbook on electoral politics and strategy are complicit in the lies and abuse. When your leadership lies to raise funds, and you use the funds to win your local elections, you’re part of the problem. Leadership means standing up to people who perpetually lie to boost your chances at the poll.

There’s an interesting debate on why the Democrats can’t compete with Republicans on messaging. Here’s the money quote from Duncan Black (aka Atrios):

… it just seems like the Democrats really don’t know how to work the media on these issues. It is true SCHIP has the advantage of being easy - “Bush does’t want kids to have health care” - and the Democrats have been better at their media push than usual.

I get the sense that Democrats craft these things behind closed doors, try to come up with palatable bipartisan agreements, and then show up on the teevee the day of the vote and announce that they passed it. That’s wonderful, if it’s a good bill which actually passes and gets a veto override if necessary. What isn’t wonderful is if they do all that and it doesn’t get enacted into law.

The Republican version would’ve been to spend 6 months telling people that kids are GOING TO DIE RIGHT NOW UNLESS THIS BILL PASSES and beating the Democrats into submission. That isn’t how our team works. Which is fine, if it achieves something. Not fine if it doesn’t.

He’s absolutely right, and the depressing thing is that while I want the Democrats to win, I don’t really like the idea of blowing every issue out of proportion in order to get the public to support you. It’s insanely dishonest, and it’s why we have such polarized politics.

Republicans are always going around warning of how Democrats are out to get you. It’s the party of scaring people. If Democrats pass changes to the Patriot Act, or bring the NSA and CIA back into FISA compliance, terrorists will attack you in your home tomorrow. If the Democrats want to bring troops home, they aren’t supporting the troops. If they criticize a general whose activity is entirely political, they scream about how Democrats don’t support the troops. Every potential vote or resolution that might be politically inconvenient for Republicans WILL KILL YOU.

Or, make you gay. Or destroy your family. You get the idea.

Stand up, sensible Republicans. You must exist, but you’re happy to be silent when your team is winning. That’s pathetic.

PS. One clarification on my politics moratorium. It’s not that I won’t post links to political topics or stories, but that I’m not going to do long form original commentary like this. I just get worked up and it’s not really good for my concentration or general sanity. This country is in trouble, and it stands at the feet of the Republicans who lie to win, consequences be damned, and Democrats who can’t figure out how to win even when the truth is on their side. At least one side is trying to be honorable, but it seems in this day and age that’s simply not enough.

So, commentary like this is generally out. Besides, as I said before, I don’t think my thoughts are original, so go read the smarter folks out there. :)

Update: Gosh, I forgot the most obvious example of lying imaginable, President Bush’s claims in 2003 that he hadn’t made up his mind to go to war. It was garbage then, as the transcripts of his conversation with Aznar show. It’s been reported in books and newspapers before, but it doesn’t matter. He lied. No Republican will criticize this and no media outlet will make a big stink about it. Indeed, media organizations like CBS, The Times, and others have actively suppressed stories critical of the administration. There’s something to be said for over-consolidation in the news media, but honest Republicans can also stand up and speak truthfully about these things.

1:03 am | leave a comment

And the Republican abuses go on…

4:01 pm | 5 comments

Josh Marshall expands his thoughts on yesterday’s GOP debate. I’m not sure I agree with him on all of this. Mitt Romney, for his plastic behavior and weird dog stories, is actually a sound politician with good political skills. Like Hillary Clinton, he has calculated his rise precisely and on schedule and it’s folly to underestimate his candidacy.

1:02 pm | leave a comment

Key takeaway: last time Congress voted on a contempt citation, it was during Reagan’s term. Then, the House voted 413-0 to cite a former EPA official for not honoring a subpoena. This time, the committee split 22-17 to allow the full House to vote. 22-17. That’s disgraceful. Read the rest of the original post, you’ll be pissed after you do.

2:23 pm | leave a comment

McClatchy puts Republican tactics in pictures:

repub obstructionism pace

Read the article, and read Kevin Drum’s post, where I found this:

It’s also worth noting why Republicans are filibustering everything in sight. It’s not because it’s the only way they have of blocking legislation they dislike. After all, a Republican is president. The real reason is a desperate desire to kill popular legislation quietly (the press doesn’t spend much time reporting on routine filibusters) rather than force President Bush to kill popular legislation in full public view (the press does report on presidential vetoes). The problem is that the public tends to be on the side of Democrats when domestic issues actually get some attention, so Republicans benefit by keeping their disagreements as low key as possible. The last thing they need is a bunch of high-profile vetoes that would make it crystal clear exactly what they’re fighting against.

In fact, the only way Democrats could get the press to report the obstruction tactics was to hold that all night session. This has been going on for months and that session was the first thing that prompted stories like this. It’s worse than you realize, because this stuff WILL be campaign rhetoric come next November. A typical example comes from my home state, where Republicans used a threat of filibuster to kill a bill by freshman Rep. Joe Courtney because it might’ve helped his re-election chances come 2008.

This is dysfunctional government and it’s the result of Republicans more interested in keeping their jobs and making money than the health of the nation and good policy. They have to be punished for this, and the only way to do that is to put a few more Dem senators in Congress.

I think a small version of this image will become a permanent addition to FM.

2:12 pm | leave a comment

I don’t have time, unfortunately, to really rip into this, but the Republican continue to demonstrate amazing hypocrisy by fillibustering EVERY bill they dislike even a portion of. It’s insane. Even more insane is that fact that I haven’t read about this on CNN.com or NYTimes.com. There isn’t one story about this on the Times’ political page or on CNN’s political page. Not one story! When the Democrats considering filibustering one judicial nominee, it was the end of the world. Nuclear option! Obstructionist! Apparently, It’s OK If You’re a Republican.

Fortunately, at least there are bloggers covering this story so we can get some word out. Hilzoy has the best rundown of the tactics that Republicans are using. Read it. They’re not only filibustering bills, but they’re stalling on conference appointments*. This is egregious and beyond any reasonable interpretation of how a minority party should behave.

I also agree with Hilzoy and others who would ask Reid to cancel the August recess if the Republicans want to filibuster. Let them talk, just keep them there until the bills get to a vote. I’m going to write Dodd, Lieberman, and Reid this weekend on this issue. Please send them a note, too.

(and keep your eye out for the Republican talking points about how Democrats can’t accomplish anything in Congress… it’s sure to be on CNN soon, since they don’t seem to report anything that isn’t in a RNC memo.)


* bills passed by the House and Senate often differ, and a conference committee is formed with members of both parties from both houses to reconcile the two bills. The bill isn’t law until they reconcile these. Wikipedia has more on conference committees.
9:30 am | 1 comment

While it sometimes seems like I’m a hyperpartisan Democrat, I’m really not… I just believe that the Republicans have lost their way, completely and utterly. Von, a conservative writer at Obsidian Wings, hits the nail on the head:

VIOLATE THE LAW, get a reduced penalty?  Scamnesty!  How dare you disrespect teh rule of law!  Blah blah blah.

VIOLATE THE LAW, get a reduced penalty? Hooray!  It’s not a real crime anyway! Blah blah blah.

Yup, it totally makes sense for the party of small government to punish workers and praise perjurers.  You see, we don’t want a path to citizenship for workers, but we do want more convicted perjurers.  Because perjurers are, like, completely oppressed and stuff by massively unfair partisan witchhunts — even partisan witchhunts undertaken by the convicted perjurer’s own partisans!  (How frightfully rude of them.)

Grownups:  Please come back.  The party misses you.

The rest of the nation misses you, too.

5:23 pm | leave a comment