World News Korner

Gang Attack: Chris 'Birther Before Me' Matthews Demands Obama Stick It To Birther Enemies...

The Birther issue really drives Chris Matthews over the edge. He actually says Obama should form a gang to attack Birthers ignoring the fact he reported Obama has an Islamic background and was born in Indonesia.






Source

Obama Acquaintance: Documents Turned Over To Team Arpaio; Soetoro Known Foreign Student...

Mia Marie Pope appeared on the Pete Santilli show and let loose on what she knows about Soetoro. Pope says she was shown a police database showing Obama with multiple fake addresses and social security numbers. She reiterated her claim that during high school Obama was an avid pole smoker and coke smoker.


Lots of juicy stuff! Pope says she'd take a polygraph test. I wonder if Obama AKA Soetoro would do the same?




Source

Source

Courtesy of Rolling Stone:

As the nation recovers from the Republican shutdown of government, the question Americans should be asking is not "Why did the GOP do that to us?" but "Why were they even relevant in the first place?" So dramatically have the demographic and electoral tides in this country turned against the Republican Party that, in a representative democracy worthy of the designation, the Grand Old Party should be watching from the sidelines and licking its wounds. Not only did Barack Obama win a second term in an electoral landslide in 2012, but he is also just the fourth president in a century to have won two elections with more than 50 percent of the popular vote. What's more, the party controls 55 seats in the Senate, and Democratic candidates for the House received well over a million more votes than their Republican counterparts in the election last year. And yet, John Boehner still wields the gavel in the House and Republican resistance remains a defining force in the Senate, frustrating Obama's ambitious agenda.

How is this possible? National Republicans have waged an unrelenting campaign to exploit every weakness and anachronism in our electoral system. Through a combination of hyperpartisan redistricting of the House, unprecedented obstructionism in the Senate and racist voter suppression in the states, today's GOP has locked in political power that it could never have secured on a level playing field.

Despite the fact that Republican Congressional can didates received nearly 1.4 million fewer votes than Democratic candidates last November, the Republicans lost only eight seats from their historic 2010 romp, allowing them to preserve a fat 33-seat edge in the House. Unscrupulous Republican gerrymandering following the 2010 census made the difference, according to a statistical analysis conducted by the Princeton Election Consortium. Under historically typical redistricting, House Republicans would now likely be clinging to a reedy five-seat majority. "There's the normal tug of war of American politics," says Sam Wang, founder of the consortium. "Trying to protect one congressman here, or unseat another one there." The Princeton model was built, he says, to detect "whether something got pulled off-kilter on top of that."

Did it ever. In Pennsylvania, Democratic candidates took 51 percent of the vote across the state's 18 districts, but only five of the seats. In Wang's model, the odds against Democrats emerging at an eight-seat disadvantage are 1,000-to-1. And Pennsylvania was not alone. According to the Election Consortium analysis, gerrymandering helped Republicans secure 13 seats in just six states – including Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Virginia and North Carolina – that, under normal rules of engagement, Democrats would have won.

This tilting of the electoral playing field was the result of a sophisticated campaign coordinated at the highest levels of Republican politics through a group called the Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC) – a Super-PAC-like entity chaired by Bush-era RNC chairman Ed Gillespie and backed by Karl Rove. Shortly after President Obama's first election, the RSLC launched the Redistricting Majority Project (REDMAP) with an explicit strategy to "keep or win Republican control of state legislatures with the largest impact on congressional redistricting." The logic was simple. Every decade following the census, the task of redrawing federal congressional-district boundaries falls (with some exceptions) to the state legislatures. If Republicans could seize control of statehouses – and, where necessary, have GOP governors in place to rubber-stamp their redistricting maps – the party could lock in new districts that would favor Republican candidates for a decade. As Rove wrote in a Wall Street Journal column in early 2010: "He who controls redistricting can control Congress."

You know the problem with Democrats, as well as our President, is that they thought, until recently of course, that they were dealing with public servants of a slightly different ideological bent who were simply trying to serve their constituents in the best way that they could.

Instead they are dealing with power mad terrorists who will stop at nothing to win elections, and undermine their opposition at every turn.

What was it Alfred Pennyworth said in "The Dark Knight??

"Some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn."

Source

Courtesy of The Chronicle of Higher Education:

Anti-intellectualism and ideological dogmatism in the guise of parental involvement is a significant concern in education today, and parents and other noneducators have lately stepped way out of line in their pursuit of more control over the education systems in this country. The most recent obvious example of the phenomenon is the debacle in North Carolina in September, when a Randolph County school board voted to ban Ralph Ellison’s landmark novel Invisible Man following a 12-page diatribe against the book by Kimiyutta Parson, the mother of an 11th grader (who referred to high-school students as “young children” in her letter).

Parson objected to, among other things, the sexual content of the novel, which I find amusing considering that in recent years the teen birth rate in Randolph County, N.C., was almost twice the national average, with teen pregnancy accounting for 60 to 80 per 1,000 births. Something tells me that the teenagers in that county have more than a passing familiarity with sexual themes, and don’t need to read Invisible Man for tips.

What I do not find amusing, however, is that a single parent and unqualified board members felt that they could pass judgment on literature without any significant experience in literary criticism, curriculum development, or, even, apparently, basic critical thinking. For example, one board member, Gary Mason, said that he could not find any “literary value” in the text. I have scoured the journals and the Internet, but I can find no record of Gary Mason’s credentials as a literary critic. He’s certainly entitled to his opinion, but should uninformed opinion be the basis of public-education policy? Absolutely not—unless you think it’s OK for someone who has opinions on medical care but no education or training in it to conduct delicate brain surgery.

Such interference in elementary and secondary education is a crucial issue for college instructors because we rely on a successful and well-managed public-education system to prepare students for higher education. I need my students to have a certain background—to be exposed to such challenging material as Invisible Man, for example—before they reach college, so that I can actually teach at the college level.

But when students are not allowed to read, explore, and engage with different kinds of course content due to the ideological, anti-intellectual practices of many parents and school districts, they arrive unprepared for and unable to succeed in college courses. We should not wonder why so many students struggle in college. They are simply not intellectually prepared.

Certainly anti-intellectualism is nothing new in American life. Richard Hofstadter noted this as far back as 1963 in his Pulitzer Prize-winning study Anti-intellectualism in American Life. Susan Jacoby’s more recent examination, The Age of American Unreason (2008), asserted that the nation’s current “strain of intertwined ignorance, anti-rationalism, and anti-intellectualism” is damaging our democratic process and cultural development. In its review of Jacoby’s work, The New York Times noted that “conservatives have turned the term ‘intellectual,’ like the term ‘liberal,’ into a dirty word in politics.”

Sadly, this anti-intellectualism has made our culture abandon the respect it once had for educators. It has also created a generation of college students who shrink from real intellectual engagement, who are so influenced by our current partisan culture that any significant opportunities for rigorous and honest classroom debate are rapidly disappearing. In fact, it’s not uncommon for today’s college students to mirror their parents’ disdain for college professors; for example, after failing an examination, a student once told me, “Just because you have a Ph.D. doesn’t mean you know more about American history than I do.”

I was sad for that student because he was missing out on the opportunity to learn more, and more different things, to add to his own knowledge. This is the most heartbreaking result of the current influence of social and cultural anti-intellectualism in education: It is creating missed opportunities for students.

Personally I think all of this is purposeful, and part of an organized effort by religious conservatives to protect their interests and keep the youth of America dumbed down enough to continue buying into their bullshit.

After all how better to keep church attendance up, and hang onto Republican voters than to keep Americans ignorant, frightened, and easily manipulated?

And they could not care less what kind of damage is done to the country in the process.

Source

Courtesy of TMZ:

Sarah Palin has no love for the daddy of her grandson ... because she just barked out to TMZ that Levi Johnston is a 'deadbeat dad.'

Screw all of these interviews full of softball questions, THIS is the real Sarah Palin.

Slamming the father of her grandchild, and bitching at the paparazzi, that about sums her up.

Update: Here is how US Weekly reported this confrontation:

The politico, in town for a one-on-one Today show interview with Matt Lauer on Monday, Nov. 11 to discuss her new book, was interviewed outside Rockefeller Center in NYC when the offending question was posed: "Do you think Levi [Johnston] should have custody of the baby?" the cameraman inquired -- a question that actually stopped Palin dead in her tracks. "What?" she retorted.

"Don't listen to him," her publicist advised. He then repeated the question, to which the Palin family matriarch responded, "That is the stupidest question I've ever heard!" As previously reported by Us Weekly, 23-year-old Johnston, the former on-and-off again fiance of Bristol Palin, recently filed a petition seeking equal custody of their 4-year-old son Tripp.

"Yeah deadbeat dads, more power to 'em," said the one-time vice-presidential candidate, 49, on Monday as she rolled her eyes and entered the building. "Get a clue," she suggested. Johnston, now married to Sunny Oglesby, with whom he has a 12-month-old daughter, allegedly owes over $66,000 in child support as of Oct. 15.

I have read a couple of different takes on this now, and ALL of them make Palin look like a total bitch. In other words, it reveals her true nature without teleprompters and softball questions around to make her appear less crazed.

Update 2: Here is her interview from this morning with Cathy Lee and Hoda, where she further mythologized the incident when Bristol came to her and admitted she was pregnant.

It may be of some interest but it pales in comparison to this TMZ video, which I think captured her pure unadulterated essence of evil.

Source

Courtesy of Time Magazine:

Hawaii’s house of representatives approved a bill to legalize gay marriage on Nov. 8, and the state senate will address it this week. Approval is a given — they already passed a similar bill and only need to vote again because of an amendment to the house version. Governor Neil Abercrombie is expected to quickly sign the measure into law — which could potentially leapfrog Hawaii ahead of Illinois in the history books. Whenever that happens, many Hawaiians will have reason to celebrate: 5.1% of the population identifies as LGBT, a higher proportion than any other state with same-sex marriage legislation pending, according to Gallup. (Washington, D.C., where gay marriage is already legal, has the highest proportion of LGBT residents.)

This will bring Hawaii full circle in some ways. The state supreme court ruled 20 years ago that Hawaii’s statute limiting marriage to heterosexual couples was discriminatory and unconstitutional. But in 1998, voters in Hawaii voted for an amendment to limit marriage licenses to same-sex couples. “Hawaii legalizing same-sex marriage will bring an end to a 20-year ordeal,” Wolfson said.

Yeah good luck with that now that God has been notifed as to what you people are up to!

Gotta love Christians who spend their time praying that other people will not be happy or have the same rights that they enjoy.

Source

Here are the lowlights courtesy of the Today Show:

Sarah Palin had harsh words for Obamacare on Monday — and the GOP's chances in 2016 didn't fare much better in her opinion.

“I would never put my faith and hope in any one individual politician,’’ Palin said after Matt Lauer asked her about New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, a favorite in the field, on TODAY. “Not any of them. There is no Ronald Reagan on the scene today. If he were on the scene, that’s who I would put my faith in. (Wrong! IF he were on the scene today she would call him a RINO.)

"New Jersey, a blue state, has a Republican governor. Right on; it beats the alternative.”

Last week in an interview, Christie called the federal government shutdown engineered by Republican Senator Ted Cruz and members of the Tea Party “a monumental failure.”

“When you stand in the middle of the road, you’re going to get hit on both sides of the road,’’ Palin said. “We need to take a stand, especially on this Obamacare, and support those who are just fulfilling their campaign promises. So many politicians ran for reelection and for election saying they would do anything in their power to de-fund the state of socialized medicine program called Obamacare. Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, some of these guys were actually fulfilling their campaign promises and they ask for debate. That’s why they stood up. They took the stand, (and) fought for us to debate the issue of Obamacare.” Lauer asked Palin about President Barack Obama’s apology at the end of last week after it was discovered that five percent of Americans can't keep their existing policies because they don't meet the standards of the new healthcare law.

“What apology?’’ Palin said. “He kind of acknowledged a bit that there’s a broken website. The broken website is the least of America’s worries. This broken website I think is symbolic of a broken administration. Take over one-sixth of our economy and the socialized medicine (Oh, if were ONLY so lucky as to have socialized medicine.) that’s being crammed down our throat, that’s what’s broken.

“Where do you get this five percent?’’ she said. “It’s not five percent. It’s most Americans will not be able to keep the healthcare policy and programs that they had desired. (It really pissed me off that Lauer did not call her out on this statement.) The new programs that are being forced down our throat are unaffordable. Some of them are still being told, ‘Well if you like that insurance policy and that coverage, you still will be able to keep it, it’s just going to cost you a little bit more.’ That’s the point. If it’s going to cost you more, then it’s not the same policy.”

Lauer asked Palin about the Tea Party’s alternative.

“The plan is to allow those things that had been proposed over many years to reform a healthcare system in America that certainly does need more help so that there’s more competition, there’s less tort reform threat, there’s less trajectory of the cost increases,’’ Palin said. “Those plans have been proposed over and over again, and what thwarts those plans is the far left. (That's total bullshit. The Republicans have done nothing on health care unless they were trying to thwart a Democratic plan.) It’s President Obama and his supporters who will not allow the Republicans to usher in free market, patient-centered, doctor-patient-relationship leaps to reform healthcare.” (Also bullshit.)

Palin was coy about any of her own future political aspirations, including a possible run for the Senate out of Alaska. (Palin does not "play coy" if she were going to run she would be telling everybody! The fact is that she is never running for office again and journalists should realize that.) In her book, she writes about a saying posted on her kitchen cabinet that reads, “Do today what others won’t, so you can do tomorrow what others want.”

“Sometimes you do have to make sacrifices today in order to progress those around you to create a better environment for all, so making sacrifices today, perhaps doing what you don’t necessarily really, really want to do today, but it pays off in the end,’’ she said. “I don’t know if that necessarily applies to political office though, because people can make a difference without a title, without an office, and we’re proving that.”

In her new book, Palin steers away from politics (The hell she does!) to write about the Christmas holiday. She believes Christmas is under assault from atheists and secular liberals. (See!)
“What I’m saying is, we need to protect the heart of Christmas and not let an angry atheist armed with an attorney, a Scrooge, tell us that we can’t celebrate traditional faith in America,’’ she said. “We have a constitutionally-protected right to celebrate faith, and Christmas is a part of that.”

Apparently Palin brought her own Wig wrangler to the Today Show with her.

God two interviews in two days, what did we all do to deserve this?

If Palin keeps this up, and continues to give these crappy interviews, she is going to destroy her ability to fool even the tiny remaining group of people who still give her the benefit of the doubt and fail to realize that she is a giant fraud, and colossal moron.

So let's hope for many more of these, shall we?

Source