Privacy and the Private

Image from PlanetPOV.
I guess I have to say a couple of words about PFC Manning and his conviction on theft and espionage charges, but I'd rather wait until the sentencing to make it anything final. It's only today, as that phase begins, that we learn that the disclosure of the Afghan War Logs failed to produce any of the ghastly harm that was predicted, of identifying the Friends of America so that the Terrorists would be able to murder them all (there was one guy the Taliban killed, because, they said, of Wikileaks, but they were lying—he wasn't mentioned in the files). The worst General Robert Carr could say was:
Discussing the Guantanamo Bay Detainee Assessment Briefs (DABs), Carr suggested that the release of these documents was detrimental to the United States’ efforts to close the detention center, though he explained on cross-examination that the DABs could reveal that what the U.S. says publicly to some countries regarding transferring detainees back to their home countries and what we say to them privately could differ, obstructing that process. He testified, though, that he couldn’t speak to whether transferring the detainees was an administration priority.
Thanks, General Carr, for revealing to the opponents of closing Guantánamo what they need to do to slow that process down, if there's any way it could be any slower than it already is, because Manning and the Guardian didn't really make it clear. Now because of you Senator McConnell will be poring through the Guardian's database looking for evidence that he can use, and then calling the president of Yemen: "Mr. President, do you realize that what President Obama says in public about repatriating Yemeni prisoners is somewhat different than what he tells you in private?" What a massacre! We're putting you away for life, kid!

I just realized, if being detrimental to US efforts to close Guantánamo is harming our national interests, Senator McConnell must be one of the secret enemies that Manning allegedly helped out. Curiously enough, he's one of my enemies too. May I arrest him, please?
Image by TheSkunk.
Anyway, I'm in an awkward position, as I believe on the one hand that Manning performed a service to the country that, while it broke the law, deserved to be punished a whole lot less than it already has been and doesn't need to be punished any further; and on the other that this doesn't make Obama a war criminal. I'm starting to feel a little like one of those Evan Bayh types with the "Now just stop that, both of you!" Also I'm pretty sure that the whole discussion is a lot less important than poverty and injustice, and yet I feel like being in it all the time. Huh.
LIMBAUGH IS A TROLL, BUT SOME OF THE PEOPLE HE'S TROLLING THIS WEEK DESERVE IT

I spotted this yesterday at World Net Daily:
The next presidential election is still three years away, but top-rated radio host Rush Limbaugh is already making a bold prediction about who will be the likely nominee for the Democratic Party.

"I think it’s going to be Chris Christie," Limbaugh said on his national program Tuesday.
This isn't the first time Limbaugh has talked this way:
... On June 5, Limbaugh first brought up the possibility of Christie looking to lead the Democratic ticket, saying at the time: "I'm not predicting it officially here, but I will not be surprised, if when 2016 rolls around and Governor Christie is seeking the presidency, I won't be surprised if he seeks the Democrat Party nomination."
Limbaugh's doing some multi-target trolling here. Obviously, he's aiming this at Christie himself, because Christie consorts with Antichrist Obama. Limbaugh's also targeting Hillary Clinton, because he hates women, Hillary in particular. (He said yesterday, "I don't think it’s gonna be Hillary.... I've always said she's not this brainiac that her conventional wisdom says. She messed up so much that the Clinton administration gave her.... She's not the smartest woman in the world.")

But Limbaugh's snark is also presumably based on this:
Last month, the Star-Ledger of New Jersey reported Christie was "cashing in donations from top Democratic fundraisers and other traditionally liberal donors across the country, even nabbing the support of a handful of rainmakers aligned with President Obama and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel."

"While I do not agree with his stance on every issue, he is one of the best political leaders I have talked to in a long time," Ken Rosen, a UC-Berkeley professor who cut a $3,800 check to Christie after chatting with him at two events, told the paper. "He is willing to take on tough issues such as pension reform, education reform, mental-health issues, even if his views are not politically correct."

Meanwhile, a Gallup poll in June found Christie was actually given a higher net favorable rating among Democrats than among Republicans.
I don't know what's wrong with these people if they feel this way about Christie and consider themselves Democrats. (Well, in some cases I do know. Among the donors mentioned in the Star Ledger story are an investor, a venture capitalist, and five executives at a hedge fund -- one founded by, of all people, George Soros, not that that matters. Christie is very, very favorably disposed toward the money power, as they used to say.)

I'd just like to add this: I can imagine Hillary Clinton choosing not to run in 2016, or being unable to run for some reason such as health. I think the Democratic field will be weak if that happens. Alternately, I can imagine her running a fine campaign, but hitting a rough patch now and then. If she's not in the race, or there's a moment when she and the rest of the field seem to be struggling, I can very, very easily imagine that David Broder wannabes in the punditocracy will start penning column with titles such as "Democrats: Why Not Christie?"

Right? Don't you think at least one mainstream-media idiot will write a column like that?

Limbaugh will smirk. And for once he'll have a right to.
TED CRUZ KNOWS THAT THE GOP'S CRAZY BASE DOESN'T LIKE THE PARTY THAT MUCH

It's obvious that Ted Cruz wants to run for president in 2016, so this would seem to be a bad career move:
Ted Cruz is taking his hardball tactics to a whole new level.

The Texas freshman senator and his senior aides are unleashing a barrage of attacks on their fellow Republicans for refusing to support their plan to choke off Obamacare as a condition for funding the government. Cruz's chief of staff is lambasting fellow conservatives like Oklahoma's Tom Coburn for serving in the "surrender caucus." His top political strategist has compared Mitch McConnell to Barack Obama. And the senator himself has said many Republicans are "scared" to wage this fight.

... Cruz's strategy is a departure from the usually clubby chamber, as he's grown increasingly alienated from his caucus....
Yes, it seems like a bad career move -- but notice what's been going on in the polls for a long time now: Voters hate the Republican Party, according to polls, and really hate congressional Republicans.

The reason the GOP's poll numbers are much worse than the Democratic Party's is that Republicans, unlike Democrats, tell pollsters they don't like their own party. See, for instance, the recent Marist poll (PDF), in which 68% of Democrats said they approved of the Democrats in Congress, but only 35% of Republicans approved of congressional Republicans.

None of this, mind you, prevents disgruntled Republicans from voting Republican. There's a simple reason for that. Republicans may dislike their party, but the majority of them dislike it because it's not right-wing enough. So, come Election Day, they're obviously going to vote for the most right-wing major party on the ballot, even though it falls short of their conservatively pure standards.

A Pew poll just released today confirms this: 67% of Republicans say they think their party "needs to address major problems" within the party, and a majority -- 54% -- think party leaders need to move in a more conservative direction.

And the folks who really think the GOP has gone wobbly are the teabaggers: 53% of tea party Republicans say the party has compromised too much with Democrats.

And teabaggers overrepresented in the Republican primary electorate, according to Pew:
Tea Party Republicans have influence in the GOP partly because of their high level of political engagement. Overall, they make up a minority (37%) of all Republicans and Republican-leaning independents nationally. Yet this group is more likely than other GOP voters to say they always vote in primary elections; as a result they make up about half of the Republican primary electorate (49%).
So, to sum up: In general, Republicans dislike their party, even though they vote for it. Teabaggers in particular see the party as a sinkhole of appalling squishiness -- and they vote more than non-teabaggers.

So, yeah, it's smart for Cruz to bash his own party.

That's Why He Gets Paid the Big Bucks

Neal Boortz:
So … what has me so exercised this time? Yesterday it was a woman with a baby demanding that McDonald’s pay her not what she was actually worth to her employer, but what she believes she needs to properly raise her spawn … a child she cannot afford.
The world would be an awful place if you could raise a child in it.
This time it’s the learned opinion of the UK undergrad who believes that McDonald’s can double the income of every employee – including the CEO – by raising the price of the Big Mac from $3.99 to $4.67. Yup! You got it! Just increase all prices of McDonald’s products by 17% across the board and you can double everyone’s salary!
There follows an amusing list of nine perfectly logical consequences, including:
3. Workers at other fast food companies quickly abandon their jobs to travel across town so they can work for twice the bucks at McDonald’s!
Why that would be terrible, and it would be awfully nice of McDonald's to instantly open enough outlets to take in those workers, and nobody else needs jobs at those other places anyway.

Being an Aunt

I've mentioned a few times on this little blog that I love being an aunt pretty much more than anything in the world. My oldest niece is 2 and a half. And while she can be a bit of a handful sometimes, she is absolutely the best thing in my life. I have loved watching her grow up and spending so much time with her. I love how she yells "MARGY! DOUGY!" when we walk into the room. I love her big hugs when we leave.

From the bald little baby to my adorable, favorite redhead.
 My second niece is 7 weeks old. She is also the best thing in my life. Watching her develop and grow is crazy. Every week she is getting bigger and bigger. And spending more time awake. Yesterday I got my first little grin from her and it was the best.

Fricken adorable little nugget
I'm so grateful for these two perfect little girls in my life. I'm grateful I live only a 2 minute drive from them. I'm grateful I am an aunt. 


Insert Classy Here - Gratitude
photo signature_zps9507e200.jpg
PLEASE DON'T SPOIL THIS MAGIC MOMENT, MAINSTREAM MEDIA

Last night I actually saw people on Twitter defending Barbara Morgan, the spokeswoman for the Anthony Weiner campaign. The argument was: So you've never said anything like this about anyone? And my answer is: Well, yes, I have -- but my job isn't to handle public communications for a person running for a high-level office. This is just a sign that Weiner is not only personally embarrassing, he's assembled a campaign that is to campaigning what the '62 Mets were to baseball. Which is actually fun to watch, so I really hope he doesn't drop out of the race (and I fully expect he won't):
... The [Weiner] campaign staff awoke [yesterday] to see their former intern, Olivia Nuzzi, on the front cover of the Daily News. Inside the paper was an article bylined by Nuzzi in which she told a rather unflattering tale of her experience working on Anthony Weiner's mayoral bid.

Now, Team Weiner is firing back. TPM called Weiner's communications director Barbara Morgan to discuss an unrelated story Tuesday and she went off on a curse-filled rant about Nuzzi....

"Fucking slutbag. Nice fucking glamour shot on the cover of the Daily News. Man, see if you ever get a job in this town again," said Morgan....

"It's all bullshit," she said. "I mean, it's such bullshit. She could fucking -- fucking twat." ...

Morgan also expressed disbelief that Nuzzi criticized her credentials.

"And then like she had the fucking balls to like trash me in the paper. And be like, 'His communications director was last the press secretary of the Department of Education in New Jersey," Morgan said. "You know what? Fuck you, you little cunt. I'm not joking, I am going to sue her." ...
Morgan says she thought the conversation with the Talking Points Memo reporter was off the record. Josh Marshall of TPM insists that it wasn't. But sorry -- if your job is to talk to the press in a professional manner, and your previous jobs required the same skill, shouldn't you have the sense not to talk like this to a reporter?

****

Enough finger-wagging from me -- it's fun to watch, and I think we're going to have a lot more of this kind of fun from the Weiner campaign, which is starting to look like the Spinal Tap tour.

Now, please don't spoil it, mainstream media pundits.

I know what some of you are going to do: you're going to start talking about the nutjobs who run for office as Republicans -- the Christine O'Donnells and Carl Paladinos and Sharron Angles and Joe Millers and Todd Akins -- and you're going start telling us that Both Sides Do It!, because Anthony Weiner. See? you'll say. This is a problem both parties have! The GOP is no crazier than the Democratic Party!

The difference, of course, is that Anthony Weiner's actual policy ideas -- read 'em in this PDF -- are an utterly mainstream mix of liberalism and centrism. Some samples:
2. Pay Master Teachers More for Taking Tough Assignments.
18. Install Cell Service on Every Subway Platform.
24. Streamline the Business Improvement District Process (BID).
59. Lower the Tax Burden for Outer Borough Job Creation.
Wow, radical, hunh?

And yet when a few crazy teabaggers win Republican primaries in 2014 with rants about IRS abolition and sharia-law bans and letting states nullify federal laws, I bet the press will say, "Democrats, too, have had their share of embarrassing candidates. Anthony Weiner..."

Sorry -- no comparison. Weiner's campaign is a clown car. Personally, he needs help. But a sane politician with his platform would be a perfectly credible candidate.

West of Eden: Washington

Image from Greenmarc Farms.
Why we hate the New York Times:

Article by Michael Gordon and Isabel Kershner with the headline,

Talks Begin on Mideast, to Doubts on All Sides

and then the doubts, for the first 16 paragraphs, are represented by a single source, convicted criminal Elliott Abrams. After which some other voices from "all sides" are heard, but none of them quite as doubtful as that. Abrams seems to think the purpose of the negotiations is [jump]
to get everybody through the next session of the UN General Assembly without any applications for Palestinian statehood (or the next two sessions, judging from the curious stipulation or prophecy that the talks will last nine months, or a Friedman unit and a half). He may well be right at that, at least on Netanyahu's purpose, but I still wouldn't lower myself to quoting him if I were a journalist.

I personally want to say that I have no idea what is going on. I can't imagine Binyamin Netanyahu agreeing to anything that the Palestinian side would be able to accept—not because his principles or the stern ghosts of Benzion and Yonatan Netanyahu won't let him (I imagine poor Yonatan, having died as an actual warrior, would favor peace), but because his governing coalition won't. These are some truly bloodthirsty and evil mothers.

Mondoweiss:
Yesterday, on July 29, 2013, Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot reported that the leader of HaBayit HaYehudi, Israel's Minister of Industry Trade and Labor and of Religious Affairs Naftali Bennett said, "I've killed many Arabs in my life and there's no problem with that." Asked to clarify his statement, Bennett's spokesperson told 972 Magazine that he was speaking not of all Arabs, but of Arab militants who are captured -- in other words, prisoners of war.
Today, July 30, 2013, the ultra-Orthodox website BeHadrei Hadarim reported that David Lau, who began a ten-year term as the Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of Israel less than a week ago, castigated Jewish youth for watching sports broadcasts, since the players are just "niggers". News site Maariv NRG uploaded a YouTube video that contained an audio file of Lau making the racist statements.
The first English-language Israeli news site to run the story, Ynet, completely buried the lead of the story -- the rabbi's revolting racism - and focused instead on his aversion to sports. Worse still, they intentionally mistranslated the word he used, "kushim", which means niggers, as "black men", which in Hebrew is actually "shchorim", or "anashim shchorim".
Bennett saw fit to respond to Lau's statement over Facebook, not condemning him for saying them, but rather condemning "the media" for "hounding" Lau. Bennett termed the comments "jovial", "marginal" and "insignificant" and announced his support for Lau.
Is he planning to throw them all under the bus and start his own new party the way Sharon did? Something tells me he hasn't got the gravitas, heh-heh.

Anyway, if you want something to cheer up about, here is a sweet piece from the Forward on John Kerry's Jewish hippie background (Via @lrozen). Says Obama has no faith in the so-called peace process but Kerry really believes. That could kind of make them an effective team.
INSTAPUNDIT: THE LESSON OF THE BRADLEY MANNING STORY IS THAT OBAMACARE SUCKS

Wow, Glenn Reynolds packs a lot of stupid into this post of exactly one hundred words:
MANNING IS ACQUITTED OF "AIDING THE ENEMY," convicted of a bunch of other stuff. The "aiding the enemy" charge was always weak, since Obama doesn't seem to think we're at war with anybody. Manning isn't really a "whistleblower," though, since he didn't even know what was in a lot of the stuff he turned over to Wikileaks, and when he did know, it was often stuff like troops' personal information.

The most damning piece of news he got out was that we entrust secrets to idiots like him. I'm sure they’ll do better with your healthcare information....
I love that first part: apparently the years of ongoing war and all those drone attacks -- not to mention the killing of bin Laden -- are signs, to Insty, that "Obama doesn't seem to think we're at war with anybody." Yes, he's just ordering the troops to kill people at random, for the thrills.

I'll skip over the whistleblower bit and go straight to the end: someone in the military leaked classified information, therefore government sucks (yes, because we all know our Galtian overlords in the private sector never misuse our private data), and thus Obamacare should be repealed. Or maybe the military should be completely privatized. Or maybe the point is that Obama sucks because Manning got a security clearance in ... um, 2008, back when George W. Bush was still president. Yeah, that must be it.

You Win, Athens.

So after four days off, a bachelorette party, a bridal shower and a large number of hours spent driving- by the time I got home yesterday, I was in a complete daze. This was one of those weekends that make every other weekend look lame. But that I also need a full weekend off to recover from the weekend I just had! I know, serious #firstworldproblems.

We headed down to Athens on Friday late afternoon, and got down in time to wander a bit up town and grab a few drinks. 
Our Friday night group
Saturday morning meant more wandering Athens, devouring pizza (and of course a few pitchers) at Courtside, shopping our way down Court Street and getting ready for the evening.

All the girls. We got matching OU shirts with a white one for the bride
and put iron-on letters on the back. We only made it back to the hotel with about half the letters.
 The bride had a "no penis" rule...but she did not stick to that as strongly as I did. Hence the multiple penis glasses in the next set of photos. It did make for a seriously hilarious evening though!

The bride's little brother is still living in Athens and
was 'morally opposed' to the penis glasses.
Especially on his mom and sister!
Always love running into random people in Athens.
A friend from home and the daughter of close friends of my parents!
The Bobcats of the group- back in our old stomping grounds
It was a fantastic two days in Athens. I don't get down there nearly enough. But everything about that town and OU puts a smile on my face! On Sunday, we headed home, but I wasn't quite heading back to Cleveland. Instead I ended up in Holmes County for another close friends bridal shower. 

She was another of my bridesmaids; which is one of 11 weddings she has been in! The shower was held at the renovated one screen movie theater in my hometown. We actually ended up watching 27 Dresses! In honor of the movie, all her bridesmaid dresses were displayed out front. How fricken cute!





Instead of driving back to Cleveland on Sunday, I stayed at my parents house. We enjoyed a margherita pizza with fresh tomatoes and basil (their garden is going wild), enjoyed a few glasses of wine on the porch, and I passed out by 10. And slept until 9:30. Yep. I finally rolled back into Cleveland around 4:30 and spent the rest of the evening lying on the couch, watching TV with the husband and drinking wine. 

And then worked out this morning and almost passed out. Like literally, I left class halfway through because I was so dizzy. Too much boozing and shitty eating this weekend. Damn you Athens, you win again. And I'm ok with it. 


photo signature_zps9507e200.jpg

Intake of Seamen

Centro de Instrução Almirante Graça Aranha:
INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE FOREIGNERS’ MARITIME PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMME (PEPME)

• Deck Officer (FONT)
• Engineering Officer (FOMQ)

BEGINNING AND DURATION

Beginning: January
Duration: 8 semesters (Deck); and 7 semesters (Engineering).

VACANCIES OFFERED

Defined by the Directory of Ports And Coast

QUALIFICATIONS AND DEMANDED REQUIREMENTS

a) be between seventeen (complete) and less than twenty four years old;

b) be single and never get married during the course;
All right, it's the MERCHANT MARINES. Not that mysterious to demand singles. But:
teeth: minimum of 20 natural teeth healthy or treated, ten on each arcade; normal articulation and healthy soft tissues;
I was under the impression that you could get away with possessing fewer teeth.
LIZ CHENEY: THE BOSS'S DAUGHTER

Alex Roarty of National Journal tries to figure out why Liz Cheney didn't just run for Senate from Virginia, where she lived until recently -- and doesn't come up with much:
... Her reputation as a hawk and stalwart supporter of the military would appeal to [Virginia]'s significant population of veterans and its large defense industry, and her more-moderate positioning on divisive cultural topics such as gay marriage is tailor-made for swing voters in the Washington suburbs....

Instead of trying to translate her anti-Obama message against a Republican, the message would make more sense against [Senator Mark] Warner, who has been a reliable ally of the Obama administration. Even if Warner looks unbeatable, Republicans could use a qualified candidate in Virginia....

But Cheney never seriously considered running in Virginia....

To be sure, Cheney would begin her hypothetical matchup with the state's former governor as the race's heavy underdog. A robust 61 percent of voters approve of the incumbent's job performance, according to a mid-July poll from Quinnipiac University....

But it's not as if her odds are much better against a popular Republican senator in Wyoming, either.... The Republican automated polling firm Harper Polling found the incumbent [Mike Enzi] leading Cheney 55 percent to 21 percent. There's no ideological divide for Cheney to exploit.... Enzi holds one of the most conservative voting records, according to National Journal's most recent vote ratings. And Cheney hasn't yet received the support from outside conservative groups that often comes with insurgent primary campaigns....
Allow me to speculate.

Liz Cheney, of course, is her father's most prominent apologist, and his biggest fan. What has Dick Cheney done with his life in the periods when he wasn't in Congress or serving a Republican president.

He was a CEO of a very large multinational company.

What do CEOs of very large multinational companies do to small, underfunded regional competitors?

They use money and influence to crush those competitors.

That's precisely what Liz Cheney -- plugged-in, nationally prominent, Northeast Corridor-based Liz Cheney -- decided she could do to local yokel Mike Enzi. (It's been reported that Papa Dick has "talked up his daughter's candidacy in meetings with wealthy Republican donors in New York.")

There are a few other things going on here -- Cheney's candidacy is meant to ensure that Enzi won't compromise with President Obama and the Democrats on anything between now and the 2014 primary, which Liz and her pals will regard as a win even if he defeats her -- but apart from that, this isn't a primary challenge.

It's an attempt at a hostile takeover.

****

(National Journal story via Memeorandum.)
POPE FRANCIS: GOOD COP

I guess I'm supposed to be impressed that Pope Francis said something about gay people that wasn't hostile, but in comparison with Pope Benedict, Francis still sees the same sex acts as sinful, so he's just playing good cop to Benedict's bad cop:
Never veering from church doctrine opposing homosexuality, Francis did strike a more compassionate tone than that of his predecessors, some of whom had largely avoided even saying the more colloquial "gay."

"If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?" Francis told reporters, speaking in Italian but using the English word "gay."

Francis's words could not have been more different from those of Benedict XVI, who in 2005 wrote that homosexuality was "a strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil," and an "objective disorder." The church document said men with "deep-seated homosexual tendencies" should not become priests.

Vatican experts were quick to point out that Francis was not suggesting that the priests or anyone else should act on their homosexual tendencies, which the church considers a sin.
Right -- the church thinks homosexual acts are sinful, and that if you're gay you should just stop engaging in those acts, and there's nothing here to indicate that Francis is deviating from that doctrine. Here's a slightly longer version of the quote from National Catholic Reporter's John C. Allen. The pope was responding to a question about whether there's a "gay lobby" in the Vatican:
"When I meet a gay person, I have to distinguish between their being gay and being part of a lobby. If they accept the Lord and have goodwill, who am I to judge them? They shouldn't be marginalized. The tendency [to homosexuality] is not the problem ... they're our brothers."
Right -- the church believes you can have the tendency all you want -- just don't act on it, ever.

See this National Catholic Register story about a group called Courage:
The Courage apostolate's upcoming annual conference seeks to strengthen the faith and the confidence in Christ of Catholics who have same-sex attraction, helping them to live their call to chastity.
Yup -- if you're gay, you have a "call to chastity."

And maybe you're not gay at all. Father Paul Scalia -- son of Antonin and an ally of Courage -- has written about this:
... Scalia goes on to claim that many people have "have found freedom, to varying degrees, from homosexual attractions" and deny that people have sexual orientations: "Homosexual tendencies (to use a term from magisterial documents), do not constitute a fixed, unchangeable aspect of the person and therefore should not be considered an "orientation"..."
I don't see how anything Francis said changes this view, except he's saying it in a sunny, smiley way. The Catholic Church never yields on doctrine. (See what Francis said about the priesthood for women, in the same set of remarks: "On the ordination of women, the church has spoken and said no. John Paul II, in a definitive formulation, said that door is closed.") This is the same old same old, with a human face.

Simple answers to simple questions

Was a fetus before it became mainstream. Via. 
 Katy French for the Washington Examiner:
A baby is wanted. A "pregnancy tissue" isn't. But is the longing or lack thereof of one's mother truly an acceptable basis on which to confer or deny humanity?
Yes. 
DEAR POLITICS JUNKIES: YOU WOULD KNOW WEINERGATE IS NO THREAT TO HILLARY IF YOU KNEW ANY NORMAL PEOPLE

Excuse me, but why are we paying attention to this story, from Frederic Dicker of the New York Post? And if the unnamed sources quoted in the story actually exist, and are accurately reproducing the sentiments of Bill and Hillary Clinton, why are they (the sources and the Clintons) so worked up?
Bill and Hillary Clinton are angry with efforts by mayoral hopeful Anthony Weiner and his campaign to compare his Internet sexcapades -- and his wife Huma Abedin's incredible forgiveness -- to the Clintons' notorious White House saga, The Post has learned.

“The Clintons are upset with the comparisons that the Weiners seem to be encouraging -- that Huma is 'standing by her man' the way Hillary did with Bill, which is not what she in fact did," said a top state Democrat....

In the view of many Democrats, the Weiners have also alluded more subtly to the Clintons.

For instance, Abedin, with her husband at her side, declared last week, "Our marriage, like many others, has had its ups and its downs."

"Who didn't think Huma was referring to the Clintons when she said that?" asked another prominent Democrat.

Worried about the potential impact on Hillary's likely run for president in 2016, the political power couple has begun aggressively distancing itself from the crippled mayoral contender, according to sources.

Meanwhile, at least one prominent Hillary Rodham Clinton political operative was described as close to "going public" with a sharp criticism of Weiner -- in order to send the message that the Clintons, fearing longtime damage to Hillary, want him out of the mayor's race. (That would be someone other than former Clinton White House Press Secretary Dee Dee Myers, who said yesterday that she was sure the Clintons wanted Weiner out of the race.)...
Hello? Everyone?

Please chill the hell out.

Anthony Weiner is not going to win the New York mayor's race. Anthony Weiner is not going to finish first or second in the Democratic primary and make it to a runoff. That means that this entire sorry episode is going to end on September 10, 2013 -- three years, eight weeks, and three days before Election Day 2016, when we will (presumably) decide whether Hillary Clinton will be the next president of the United States, and more than two years before the 2016 Iowa caucuses. That is, unless Weiner drops out before September 10, which could also happen.

Here's the thing: people like us who pay attention to politics know about Hillary Clinton's ties to Huma Abedin. But the vast majority of Americans simply don't follow politics that closely. They know about Weiner from late-night comics. They think he's a jerk. They may think his wife is exercising bad judgment. And maybe they're vaguely aware that his wife was a Hillary aide. But to expect people whose lives don't revolve around politics to focus on Huma Abedin and dislike her as much as they dislike Weiner, then extend that distaste to Hillary, and to sustain that distaste for years, well into a distant future when we know Weiner will be the answer to a trivia question, is just ridiculous. Ordinary folks just aren't as politics-obsessed as political pros and mavens.

Those of us who do care about these links already have a lot of data points in our heads about Hillary -- the vast majority of us knew a long time ago whether we'd vote for her in 2016, based on a great deal of history and a lot of thoughts about her and the state of American politics. We're certainly not going to make up our minds about 2016 based on Anthony Weiner.

Well, no one is. The rest of the public will start focusing on 2016 a long, long time from now. They're no more likely to deprive Hillary of a vote because of Weiner than right-wingers are to shy away from voting for whoever the GOP nominates because of Christine O'Donnell.

I Endorse George Gollin

Some regional news:
University physics professor George Gollin announced his intent to run for Congress Tuesday afternoon at the Champaign County Fair. Gollin will seek the Democratic nomination to run for the 13th Congressional District, a seat currently held by Republican Rodney Davis.

“Washington has plenty of lawyers, I’m a teacher and a scientist,” Gollin said in his campaign announcement. “Certainly law is an honorable profession, but as a scientist, I was trained to discover the facts, and act on them. Lawyers, on the other hand, are trained to argue about the facts. I think we have enough argument in Washington already, and need more facts.”

To broaden on his reasons of running, Gollin said that he got involved in higher education policy back in 2003 when he learned of “diploma mills,” which are criminal organizations that sell fake degrees. He had started to help with federal legislation on this, and when this bill reached the senate, Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyoming) had “tanked” most of the legislation.

“This was meant to stop people (from) selling fake medical degrees across state lines, so I was very distressed with that,” Gollin said. “Once the bill got out of a position where I was no longer able to influence it, politics and dirty money got in the way.”
Gollin was pretty much responsible for ending a diploma-mill operation some other gentleman with a completely different name mentioned long long ago. The link to the list of bad bad people no longer works, but this one does.
WHY THE HELL DO THE KOCH BROTHERS CARE ABOUT PENMANSHIP?

Spotted this at Twitter this morning:



The link goes to this McClatchy story (emphasis added):
Six months ago, top Republican state lawmakers met with conservative allies to preview their strategy for the legislative session.

The party controlled the entire lawmaking process in North Carolina for the first time in more than a century, and top legislators made their ambitions clear. Big changes were coming.

The leader of a conservative political organization left the meeting calling the agenda "breathtaking."

After the session, the description seemed like an understatement....

Once the new laws take effect, the new North Carolina will require photo identification at the polls, levy a flat income tax that reduces rates for many, make it harder to get an abortion, offer less generous unemployment benefits, require cursive-writing education in schools, give low-income families vouchers for private schools, require fewer government regulations on businesses, resume executions for capital crimes and allow concealed handguns in bars and restaurants....
I understand the others -- they're high on the wish lists of right-wing billionaires and/or the angry right-wing base.

But cursive writing? Seriously?

Back in April, NC Policy Watch found that special interests really are interested in this (emphasis added again):
... When Rep. [Patricia] Hurley introduced the bill, her stated justification to mandate cursive writing instruction included the claim that PET scans show that your whole brain works when you're doing cursive, but that "only half" of your brain works when you are doing manuscript, and that your brain "doesn't work" when you are keyboarding.

A handwriting instructor, Kate Gladstone, became curious as to what kind of research supported Rep. Hurley's claim. Upon inquiring with Hurley's office, legislative assistant Deborah Holder sent Gladstone this article, MJ12 Berninger_NAESP Article_May2012 -- which, in fact, does not support Hurley's claims and even notes possible benefits to keyboard instruction in early grades.

Hurley mentioned during her introduction of the bill that ALEC supplied her with background information with regard to cursive writing instruction. Pressing further, Gladstone asked Hurley's office how she obtained research relevant to the bill, and Holder explained that they had received a lot of information from a "source in South Carolina."

Upon further inquiry, that source turned out to be a sales rep from Zaner-Bloser, a for-profit company that promotes cursive writing and sells handwriting instructional materials. Incidentally, the South Carolina legislature is considering an identical bill to mandate cursive writing instruction, no doubt after having received the same research pushed to them by the Zaner-Bloser sales rep....
I get it, but I don't get it. Zaner-Bloser is a privately held company from Ohio. Its CEO, Robert Page, doesn't seem to be a big deal on the right (I don't see any contributions at all to Republican pols from a Robert Page or Bob Page in Ohio when I search).

When I see multiple states pushing identical legislation that can be construed as right-leaning, that tells me ALEC is at work. And, of course, one of the supporters of this bill says she got information on it from ALEC.

But why? To help one little company? Wouldn't that money otherwise just go to another company taking another approach to the subject? Why wouldn't ALEC be just as happy to champion a company teaching a different way?

I just think ALEC is willing to get behind anything that offers even a slight opportunity to stir up conflict between Evil Liberals and Real Americans who support "traditional values." A writer at National Review's Corner, straining to find a pro-cursive argument, came up with this: "Students should be able to read the script of this country's historical documents." But how does that help students understand those documents? What can you possible learn from the script version of the Declaration of Independence that you can't learn from the printed text? And does mean that you're not a real Christian if you can't read Aramaic, or can't read the lettering of the original King James Bible?

To me this is just a Koch brothers group looking for a new issue to divide Americans with or engaging in right-wing social control. I wish these SOBs would stick to naked greed.
YES, TED CRUZ IS THE GOP BASE'S #1 CRUSH

It's official: they love the big lug (in fact, they love pretty much every Republican sane people regard as crazy):
Sen. Ted Cruz hasn't said whether he has presidential ambitions, but Sunday he won one of the first straw polls for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.

The Texas Republican captured 45 percent of the 504 votes cast by attendees at the Western Conservative Summit, a day after drawing several standing ovations during his luncheon speech at the fourth annual conference....

Placing second was Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who delivered the keynote address Friday at the three-day summit, with 13 percent of the vote.

Tied for third were Sen. Rand Paul, Kentucky Republican, and former Rep. Allen B. West, Florida Republican, with 9 percent each....

Perhaps the most surprising finish was registered by Dr. Ben Carson, a conservative columnist and retired neurosurgeon, who wasn't a conference speaker but logged 7 percent of the vote....
It's not looking good for some of the big names:
Other prominent Republicans seen as potentially strong presidential candidates didn't fare as well in the straw poll. Bringing up the rear were Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsn, former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, and Texas Gov. Rick Perry.
The old saying is "Democrats fall in love. Republicans fall in line." This time around, I'm not sure that's going to hold.

On the other hand, there was one of these summits in 2011 (they take place at Colorado Christian University) and the winner was ...
um, Herman Cain, with 48%.
Second place, with 13 percent, went to Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who has not formally announced his presidential campaign but addressed about 1,000 people at the conference Friday.

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who addressed the group Friday, got 10 percent. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, won Colorado's Republican presidential caucuses in 2008, also got 10 percent. Nine other Republicans split the rest of the votes.
But Cain and Romney did top the polls at various times in 2011 before succumbing to self-inflicted wounds, and Santorum was the last guy standing against Romney. So I'm not sure we should dismiss that 201 result.

For 2016, it's hard to know who if anyone would be the "respectable" candidate with the money and killer instinct to destroy crazy-base challengers, the way Romney destroyed Santorum and Gingrich. So I think 2016 could be the year when the dam bursts and the party rejects the safe candidate, though it's way too early to tell.

And just to follow up on the post last weekend in which I said that Ted Cruz can't possibly tack to the center, let's look at what he said at the summit:
In his summit speech, [Cruz] unveiled the launch of Don't Fund It, a national campaign aimed at killing Obamacare by removing its funding from the Sept. 30 budget resolution. He also called for the elimination of the Internal Revenue Service, which he said would be possible by simplifying the tax code.
I rest my case. He's not going to tack to the center. Ever.

Foxy Lazy

Via Owen Greaves.
The Fox News religion correspondent, Lauren Green, stared with suspicious bewilderment at her interview subject, the historian Reza Aslan, on their air to promote his new book, Zealot, a study of the historical Jesus. "Why," she said, "would a Muslim want to write a book about Jesus?" As if it were an inexplicable perversity, something he couldn't possibly have thought up on his own.

He immediately went a little prickly but maintained his kind smile and even tone of voice, informing her that he was actually not simply a Muslim but a qualified scholar, with several degrees and an intimate familiarity with New Testament Greek, etc., etc., and that it [jump]
was his job to perform such tasks. But for the next ten minutes he could not budge her from her deep stupidity. "But isn't your interpretation different?" she said accusingly, and so on, for nearly ten minutes, although she had clearly scarcely looked at the book or its hundred-odd pages of endnotes. "Shouldn't you acknowledge your religion?" she wondered. Apparently he does, on page 2, or ii.

It's an extraordinary piece of video, embarrassing and compelling.


I fired off some outraged Tweets:


Dr. Aslan generously retweeted, and before long I was starting to feel like a Thing, as we twitterates call it. Note that the one that got the most attention was the least satirically pointed. By this afternoon there really was a Thing, with its own hashtag #foxnewslitcrit:




Alas, my own efforts had stopped really taking off. So I'm recycling them here, if you don't mind.

BUT ROSS, THERE REALLY IS NO "LIBERTARIAN POPULIST" WING OF THE GOP

In today's column, Ross Douthat invokes Bolingbroke's notion of politics being divided into a "court party" (which governs in the interest of the elites) and an opposition "country party." Douthat tells us about the exciting new strain of Republican thinking that's struggling to be born:
... it's [Bolingbroke's] civic republican ideas, repurposed for a new era, that you hear in the rhetoric of new-guard Republican politicians like Rand Paul and Mike Lee, in right-wing critiques of our incestuous "ruling class," and from pundits touting a "libertarian populism" instead.
Douthat says that elitists run everything for themselves, old-guard Republicans and Democrats endorse this state of affairs -- and nouveau Republicans are the ones who think the whole system is rotten to the core and who'd like to change it for the benefit of the average Joe.

That last bit is where he loses me.

Douthat puzzles over the fact that the nouveau Republicans can't quite translate their pro-regular-folks agenda into action, with the result that voters reject the GOP (at least in presidential elections):
The problem for conservatives isn't their critique of this court party and its works. Rather, it's their failure to understand why many Americans can agree with this critique but still reject the Republican alternative.

... while Republicans claim to oppose the ruling class on behalf of the country as a whole, they often seem to be representing an equally narrow set of interest groups -- mostly elderly, rural (the G.O.P. is a "country party" in a far too literal sense) and well-off. A party that cuts food stamps while voting for farm subsidies or fixates on upper-bracket tax cuts while wages are stagnating isn't actually offering a libertarian populist alternative to the court party's corrupt bargains. It's just offering a different, more Republican-friendly set of buy-offs.
It never seems to occur to Douthat that maybe this isn't a failure to translate populist ideas into a workable approach to governance, despite the best of intentions -- the far more likely explanation is that the libertarian-populist rhetoric is utterly phony, a cheap cover story meant solely to get voter consent for the real GOP agenda, which is the tossing of a few crumbs to rural whites and the rest of the boodle to the rich. (And yes, this is as true of the Paulistas as it is of the rest of the GOP -- they're more than happy to see heroic capitalists hoard all the wealth while the unworthy suffer.)

It also never occurs to Douthat that cooking up elaborate pseudo-intellectual justifications for shoveling all the money and poser to the already rich and powerful is what Republicans do, and have done for forty years, ever since the first flowering of right-wing think tanks forty years ago, and especially in the Fox News/talk radio era.

Sorry, Ross -- you and your fellow "libertarian-populist" pundits may think this is an intellectual flowering, but it's just old bunkum in new bottles, with the formula slightly tweaked.

Threats to Power

Bookslut:
True crime at its best highlights the tensions within an afflicted society -- or as Joyce Carol Oates describes in her essay on the murder of JonBenet Ramsey, the “profound and disturbing disequilibrium provoked by the commission of a crime.” In this month’s issue, David McConnell discusses his new book, American Honor Killings, which deals with murders committed by men and boys who believed their masculinity somehow threatened by their victims’ homosexuality. American Honor Killings examines the common thread that runs through each of the sometimes bizarre-sounding, seemingly disparate hate crimes discussed in the book: the ways in which homophobia in America is deeply concerned with masculinity and power.

For more on the relationship between masculinity and violence, here are some indispensable readings:
Head there to read those links.
THIRD-WORLD TEXAS?

Juanita Jean spots this, which is happening despite the booming Texas economy Rick Perry is always bragging about. Or is it happening because of the booming economy?
TxDOT Plans to Convert Some Roads to Gravel

Citing a funding shortfall and the impact of a historic oil drilling boom, Texas Department of Transportation officials on Thursday announced plans to move forward with converting some roads in West and South Texas to gravel.

Approximately 83 miles of asphalt roads will be torn up and converted to "unpaved" roads, TxDOT Deputy Executive Director John Barton said. The speed limits on those roads will probably be reduced to 30 mph....

All of the affected roads have been so heavily damaged by truck activity related to oil and natural gas exploration that they have become safety hazards, Barton said....
"Citing a funding shortfall"? But I thought Texas was swimming in money! Governor Perry's always telling us that, isn't he? But I forgot -- the state is swimming in money, but it's his mission in life (when he's not restricting abortion) to make sure that as little of that money goes to the goldurn gummint.

People who study less-developed countries talk about the "resource curse" -- the tendency of poorer countries not to become generally prosperous when their economies become start to be focused on extracting valuable commodities like oil. This is usually seen as a third-world problem:
Africa is cursed -- with riches. In an era of rising petroleum prices, African oil is drawing new interest from major companies around the globe, says John Ghazvinian, author of Untapped: The Scramble for Africa's Oil....

But most Africans are seeing little benefit from this influx of oil drillers and investment. In fact, because of an economic paradox known as the "Resource Curse," they are often hurt by exports of their countries' oil....

... oil money tends to corrupt politicians. They end up vying to pocket a share of the finite petroleum riches, rather than looking for ways to invest in their country's long-term prosperity. "The governments aren't dependent on income taxes and therefore don't have to do what the citizens want," he says. "The state isn't an engineer of economic growth, but a gravy train. None of the money gets down to the people."
I don't think that's just a third-world problem. I think Rick Perry has set Texas on a course to become the Gabon or Nigeria of America -- a place where large amounts of money are generated by resources and as little as possible trickles down to the public. Freedom!

*****

UPDATE: Typo fixed.

The new party is the Surprise Party

Via The Inspiration Room.
News from Bernard Sanders (I-VT):
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Friday provided suggestions for tax reform to the Senate Finance Committee, Politico reported. Chairman Max Baucus and ranking member Orrin Hatch had asked for member input and offered to keep any suggestions secret for 50 years. Sanders declined the offer of secrecy, The Hill reported online. “Given the fact that my suggestions represent the interests of the middle class of this country and not powerful corporate special interests, I have no problem with making them public,” he said. LINK, LINK
 This is kind of amazing. As Bloomberg Businessweek remarks,
Tax negotiations, then—Congress’s basic constitutional responsibility—are to be held to the same standard of secrecy as the investigation of the Warren Commission.... [jump]
Senators are scared. Some tax loopholes are just indefensible to voters. There is no way to pretend that they help our kids, or jobs. They just go to people and companies that donate money. That’s what this secrecy is for. The only possible reason for it to exist is to prevent senators from having to defend their choices to the public.
Of course it could be the other way around: maybe the senators want to make proposals that the donors wouldn't like—carbon taxes, inheritance taxes, raised caps on social security and medicare contributions—one can think of lots of things. Maybe Senator Baucus, before he makes his own move to quietly sumptuous digs on K Street next year, wants to give his colleagues a chance to do something for the voters without letting the lobbyists know about it. Maybe he'll buy me a pony, too.
Ahead was a mounted policeman in khaki directing traffic. He raised his baton. The car slowed suddenly pressing Brett against me.“Yes,” I said. “Isn’t it pretty to think so?” 
The Vision of Ezekiel. From Cowpatty Patty.

Speaking of secrets,
Prosecutors accuse [Bradley Manning] of “aiding the enemy,” and three in particular: al-Qaida, al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula and a “classified enemy” referred to by a Bates number, which is a form of legal document identification. Three professors of military law – Yale Law School’s Eugene Fidell, Duke University School of Law’s Scott Silliman and Texas Tech University School of Law’s Richard Rosen – told Courthouse News they had never heard of a case involving a “classified enemy.” After being informed that the phrase stumped the professors, a military spokeswoman insisted that the confusion stemmed from a misunderstanding, because “who the enemy ‘is’ is not classified.” “What ‘is’ classified is that our government has confirmed that this enemy is in receipt of certain compromised classified information, and that the means and methods of collection that the government has employed to make that determination are classified,” the spokeswoman said in an email. - (Emptywheel)
If you have a hard time understanding how Bradley Manning's Wikileaks disclosures could have "aided the enemy", keep in mind that we have enemies we're not allowed to know about, or rather whose emnity we are allowed to know about, but whose ability to access the Wikileaks files is a secret. Hm.

I'm guessing it's the FBI. We know Federal employees aren't or weren't permitted to read the Wikileaks documents, and we know the FBI has had some serious computerization issues in the past, so it might be a secret that they're able to access the information. As to being the enemy, it's no secret that most apprehended terrorists in the past decade have been closely associated with the FBI. I didn't realize we were supposed to know that the FBI is the enemy, but perhaps we're meant to believe it's a secret when it isn't, if you know what I mean. Wheels within wheels.

PAT BUCHANAN: A VOTE FOR WEINER AND SPITZER IS A VOTE FOR LEGALIZED PEDOPHILIA

In his latest column, available at Townhall, Pat Buchanan explains that the candidacies of Anthony Weiner and Eliot Spitzer have us on a slippery slope to legalized sex between adults and children:
... Weiner's conduct does seem weird, creepy, crazy.

But it was not illegal. And as it was between consenting adults, was it immoral -- by the standards of modern liberalism?

In 1973, the "Humanist Manifesto II," a moral foundation for much of American law, declared: "The many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be considered 'evil.' ... Individuals should be permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue their lifestyles as they desire."

Is this not what Anthony was up to? Why then the indignation?

... the front-runner in the New York mayor's race today quit Congress as a serial texter of lewd photos to anonymous women. The front-runner in the city comptroller's race was "Client No. 9" in the prostitution ring of the convicted madam who is running against him.

Weiner's strongest challenger for mayor is a lesbian about to marry another lesbian. The sitting mayor and governor are divorced and living with women not their wives. The former mayor's second wife had to go to court to stop his girlfriend from showing up at Gracie Mansion.

Weiner looks like a mainstream liberal.

... Once we cast aside morality rooted in religion -- as the "Humanist Manifesto II" insists we do -- who draws the line on what is tolerable in the new dispensation?

... Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Sen. Hillary Clinton marched in gay pride parades with the North American Man/Boy Love Association. Anyone doubt that NAMBLA will one day succeed in having the age of consent for sex between men and boys dropped into the middle or low teens?

The Federal Drug Administration has approved over-the-counter sales of birth control pills to 11-year-old girls. High schools have been handing out condoms, pills and patches to students for years.

If sex among teenagers is natural and normal, and homosexual sex is natural and normal, upon what moral ground does liberalism stand to deny teens the right to consensual sex with the men and women they love?

Is denying this not age discrimination? What liberal can be for that? ...
Um ... right. That follows as night follows day.

And "Humanist Manifesto II"? I had no idea it was so influential -- in fact, even though I'm one of those immoral liberals Pat's so upset about, I'd never heard of it (or Manifestoes I and III). I had to take a quick Wikipedia break to look them up.

But, in fact, Manifesto II does express disapproval of many kinds of sex, and wants sexual freedom limited to adults (emphasis added below):
While we do not approve of exploitive, denigrating forms of sexual expression, neither do we wish to prohibit, by law or social sanction, sexual behavior between consenting adults. The many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be considered "evil." Without countenancing mindless permissiveness or unbridled promiscuity, a civilized society should be a tolerant one. Short of harming others or compelling them to do likewise, individuals should be permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue their lifestyles as they desire. We wish to cultivate the development of a responsible attitude toward sexuality, in which humans are not exploited as sexual objects, and in which intimacy, sensitivity, respect, and honesty in interpersonal relations are encouraged. Moral education for children and adults is an important way of developing awareness and sexual maturity.
So Buchanan declares that this document that few of us have ever heard of was key to the development of the liberal worldview, and then he misquotes it. Try again, genius.

Sixteen Scandals: Missouri

If you Google something like "Central Missouri College Republicans Obama" you will get a lovely kind of picture of the right wing outrage wind machine getting into gear: [jump]
starting sometime yesterday, I guess, at The College Fix, and worming its way through the usual organs—your Townhalls and Daily Callers—until it reaches the actual commercial media, Fox and the New York Daily News.

By which point it's become clear that it didn't actually happen. Namely, when President Obama went to the University of Central Missouri at Warrensburg, MO on Wednesday to deliver a speech on the subject of the economy, these members of the local College Republicans were there to protest:
KOMU News.
Afterwards, when they took their tickets to the rec center to watch the speech they were turned away, ten of them, as evident security threats, according to the treasurer of the state-level College Republicans, one Courtney Scott. Obviously Oh-Bummer was frightened at the prospect of having them in the same room with the other 2500 students, deftly parrying his stupid arguments and swiftly turning him into an object of mass derision.

I'm pretty annoyed because when I looked through the UCMRCollegeRepublicans Twitter feed trying to find a reference to the massacre, there wasn't one. Not one. Nothing but a statement from the college:
The University of Central Missouri has thoroughly reviewed claims of individuals being inappropriately denied admission to President Barack Obama's speech on campus July 24, 2013. These reports are unfounded. No one who presented a ticket was turned away prior to all doors being locked in accordance with Secret Service procedures. We have confirmed everyone who presented a ticket prior to that time was admitted.
In fact, as the Daily News points out, being evidently the only news organization covering the story who bothered to speak to more than one source, the College Republicans simply got there late.
Kailea Bogner, the UCM College Republicans chairperson, added that it wasn’t just College Republicans who were turned away. She did say a security guard, not affiliated with the school, did make a “snarky comment” about the GOP students, implying they didn’t value the importance of Obama’s security. The protesters were shown to a live viewing station to watch the speech at the college’s student center instead.
Not Fox, though. They're kind of one-and-a-halfing down on the original story, reporting the Secret Service denial but following it with a whine from little Courtney:
"We followed all the rules," she said.
And of course their commenters are all sure the Secret Service is lying. So my guess is the "scandal" continues to grow. And McCain will serenely continue thinking that Obama is as scared of a critical audience as—well, as Mr. Disingenuous Outrage.
There's a Courtney here, and a Scott, but not in the same person, and all these expensive honeys (caught at CPAC 2012) go to Washington College in Maryland.
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...