Your weekend open thread

We are away from the computer most of this weekend. Here is an Open Thread for you to discuss George Zimmerman, The War on Women, The War in Afghanistan, the Presidential race, the Governor's race,  the Mariners, the chance that the Sonics could return to Seattle, the next Rock 'n Roller who's gonna go to the big jam session in the sky, Rush, a rash, the weather--you get the idea. Have a good weekend.

Comments

[Kolchak]

Stupid topic.

[Truth-seeker]

Another stupid topic: pink slime and Republicans

[sparky]

I am listening to "This American Life" on KUOW ... Dan Savage is telling the story surrounding the death of his mother last spring. It is a very touching narrative, especially since his voice breaks often, even though parts of the story are funny as well.
If you go to ThisAmericanLife.org, the MP3 of the entire show will be available after 7 pm tomorrow (Sunday). The other writers they feature are really good as well.

[Mary]

I've got my Sam on Ring of Fire. Talking about the Koch Brothers and how ALEC buys politicians. Interesting. I'll listen to Savage online. Thanks.

[Bill Wippel]

On April 26th, noon, is the annual Broadcasters' Luncheon at the 125th St Grill, on Aurora Ave. N.20 buffet which includes tip) We have 21 signed up including Frosty Fowler, Bob Adkins, Don Riggs and Randy McMillan to name just a few. Please email your reservations by the end of April 23rd at bill@billwippel.com. Thanks, Wip

[Runner]

Keith Olbermann is going to host This Week tomorrow morning. I must admit, I do like Keith. I know he has an ego the size of a small planet, but,when the man's correct, he's correct, and I will give him his due and kudos, especially about war crimes and high crimes and misdemeanors and unconstitutional laws passed by Congress after Bush and/or Cheney threw some pretty snotty temper tantrums for eight years to put the cost of their illegal wars on credit cards and borrowed money. Olbermann often discussed those issues with Jonathan Turley, and I loved those detailed discussions and wished they could go on.

As long as Keith keeps on being correct in his assessments of certain lying war criminals and other issues regarding our non-functional government that no one else is willing to talk about, I'll forgive his ego, even put up with it and cater to it, for the simple reason that it's about damned time someone in media talk about relevant topics and the continuation of Bushista policies carried out by the Obama administration, especially when they add their own variant with drones and bombs (which I consider the stupidest way to start and/or get involved in another illegal and unconstitutional war with yet another country). Bring Keith Olbermann back to MSNBC or other non-cable public outlets and let him talk about topics that are relevant, important, substantive, and things we need to know for our own health and well-being. We need to be fully informed (especially before election day) about what's going on in DC, what our idiotic politicians are doing, and the major networks are most assuredly not doing their jobs!

I notice there are a lot of happy YouTube videos playing on some morning shows now, lots of music spots for really bad musicians/bands, lots of celebrity gossip about really boring people who are famous for being famous but have accomplished nothing, lots of fashion talk, lots of irrelevant gossip about politicians but nothing important, lots and lots and lots of stupid commercials, and et cetera and so on and so forth, but nothing of any particular important substance on the morning shows or the evening news. Just lots of crappy gossip about everyone and everything.

I think right now Keith's also still suffering the effects of losing his parents so close together, so part of his pissantedness is the anger that comes with the grieving process, and his is doubled.

[KS]

They may have to put the short leash on Olby if they want this show to not be ridiculed big time.

This Week tomorrow will be hosted by Georgie (the Democrat operative) S. not Keith Olbermann (the promos showed both Olbermann and Stephanopolous).

[KS]

Another stupid topic: pink slime and Republicans

Posted by: Truth-seeker | April 21, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Bill Maher is full of dog squeeze just like the dude he contributed $1M for his reelection is - it figures.

[Puget Sound Blathers]

Which Olberman will show up, Good Keith or Bad Keith?
With him, you just don't know.

He is going to be on:
"ABC’s This Week: Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME); Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX); Keith Olbermann; George Will, ABC; Donna Brazile, political strategist; Matthew Dowd, political strategist; Peggy Noonan, Wall Street Journal"

[KS]

The sedated Olbermann showed up, tolerable but not necessarily good. His contributions still showed a few of his misguided progressivist views that got out. He needs his own forum to enable him to be unhinged and to be Olbermann the bad and This Week is too tightly wound to permit that.

I liked what Matthew Dowd had to say - he seems to have his finger on the pulse of the body politic. He worked in the Bush-41 administration.

[Truth-seeker]

Jon Huntsman's wife: She said if you pandered, if you sign any of those damn pledges, I’ll leave you,” Huntsman said. "So I had to say I believe in science -- and people on stage look at you quizzically as though you're ... an oddball."

Their best candidate. What fools they be.

[Puget Sound Blathers]

lots of foolishness to go around and rarely a one way street Truth-seeker:

"Representative Anthony Weiner (D-NY) gets a pension and other benefits for the rest of his life, despite resigning in disgrace...
Senator David Vitter (R-LA) was busted for solicitation, but never spent time in jail. He will get a pension and other monetary benefits, same as Weiner."

But if you are in the military and retired you would not get your pension if soiled it with a dishonorable discharge or even a general discharge. Why can't we hold our politico's to the same standard?

That should be something that everyone could agree on, right Truth-seeker?

[Truth-seeker]

What's that got to do with Hunstman? Always redirecting. Always circling.

[Puget Sound Blathers]

open thread, my friend. you talked about foolishness, i followed up with some bi partisan foolishness and then offered up some truth that most folks are unaware.

[Truth-seeker]

I'm not your friend. And foolishness is for fools. So that fits I guess.

[Puget Sound Blathers]

interesting.

[KS]

Huntsman was a good candidate but not seasoned enough to run for President this time - think there's a chance he'll be back in 2020 or maybe 2016 - I liked him before he dropped out, He endorsed Romney yesterday though - game over. Keep circling the wagons, TS.

[Puget Sound Blathers]

careful KS, TS is very touchy. he ain't no one's 'friend' and won't appreciate the 'circling the wagons' analogy as being a shot at the fact he may have had toy wagons once as a child and he is now a grown man -thank you very much!

huntsman was my candidate but he has no chance with the tea party element. third party third party third party. both dem and repub have extremes that are beyond the pale. a centrist third party is the way to go.

[KS]

Huntsman won't be running as a 3rd party candidate, although MSNBC likes to float rumors like that to help their propaganda master, Obama. A centrist 3rd party would be good AFTER this election. The problem with centrists is that they have difficulty getting a consistent platform.

Tea partiers are of different strains they need to be taken at face value by what they say - their idea about smaller, limited government is fine - it is needed, but many of them don't seem to get the fact that the downsizing of government cannot be done all at once - that is unreasonable - nearly as unreasonable as the ideas from far left Occu-poopers and Van Jones type revoluntionaries. A majority of people would not want that. The downsizing of Federal Government must be phased in a step by step process, using a road map process, like Paul Ryan has already outlined. If this is not done, there will be dire economic consequences, no doubt about that.

Yeah, fine if TS isn't my friend. However, his comments do not endear him to being a friend of mine. Respect begets respect, etc...

[Preston]

Respect begets respect, etc... "far left Occu-poopers",

Posted by: KS | April 26, 2012 at 09:29 AM

Ok KS,

[KS]

You came running out of the woodwork. Do you happen to be an occupier ? They are not respectful toward the rest of us, right ? As I said; respect begets respect.

[teaparty waste watcher]

Man, your lunch hour on the computer goes on and on....

[Truth-seeker]

Watched Paul Ryan at Georgetown Univ. today trying to defend his Ayn Rand survival-of-the-fittest rich person theory of economics. He wants to go back to that time when people looked out for each other and individuals were on there own to do great things. Remember that time? Wasn't it called the gilded age?

He said we never had a problem until spending got out of control. I guess he forgot about the tax rate under Eisenhower. He sounded so sincere. I don't know if he doesn't know his history or if he's just a really good liar.

One person gave him a standing ovation. Only one out of a hundred maybe two hundred? It is going to be repeated at 9:30 on Cspan - watch on computer or TV. Or watch it right now here: http://www.c-span.org/Events/Rep-Ryan-Defends-Budget-at-Georgetown-University/10737430203/

[teaparty waste watcher]

I vote for " he is a really good(or bad)liar.

[KS]

That shows your economic aptitude, TS - freakin' genius. What about the tax rate under Eisenhower - what does that have to do with anything ? Name anyone in DC who has a better plan than Ryan. Oh, that's right, he's the only one with the courage to craft one. (I'm anticipating a rebuttal from Paul Krugman- LOL - the economic lightweight). Never mind the fact that it is just a starting point, but he has the right idea if this country is to avoid become Spain, Greece or Portugal or the EU. Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Geez, no wonder this country is slouching toward Greece. Do you think that's cool ?

[teaparty waste watcher]

Um, the greeks don't want no freaks, like Wall Street, ya know? Now who's slouching?

[Jerry Wallace]

From the Washington Post:
Ryan’s savings all come from cuts, and at least two-thirds of them come from programs serving the poor. The wealthy, meanwhile, would see their taxes lowered, and the Defense Department would escape unscathed. It is not courageous to attack the weak while supporting your party’s most inane and damaging fiscal orthodoxies. But the problem isn’t just that Ryan’s budget is morally questionable. It also wouldn’t work.

Don’t take it from me. Take it from Robert Reischauer, who directed the Congressional Budget Office from 1989 to 1995 and now leads the Urban Institute. “If this is a competition between Ryan and the Affordable Care Act on realistic approaches to curbing the growth of spending,” Reischauer says, “the Affordable Care Act gets five points and Ryan gets zero.” But Ryan would repeal the Affordable Care Act and replace it with his own wishful plan. In doing so, he makes it harder, not easier, for us to balance the budget.

From Bloomberg: Ryan was denounced by some Catholics after he told the Christian Broadcasting Network this month that his Catholic upbringing was reflected in his budget plan, which calls for substantial cuts in food stamps, the Medicaid health-care program and other types of assistance to the needy.

The criticism illustrates the political risk Republicans face with their proposal for reducing the government’s $1.2 trillion budget deficit. Much of the spotlight is on Ryan, the plan’s primary author, who has been cited as a potential running mate for Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

Turn Fox News off and read a newspaper.

[Finis Hominis]

KS, I case you don’t know, there is the Ryan plan; which will cut subsidies to the poor and increase tax cuts for the rich, and then there’s the Obama plan; which will level taxes among the rich to the amount paid by the middle class.

[Finis Hominis]

You beat me to it, Jerry.

[Truth-seeker]

Jerry, that's why he went to Georgetown. To answer the call on his version of being Catholic.

I missed the first part the first time and am watching again. He just said the war on poverty didn't work. He said the last generation knows more poverty than ever before.

Umm, do you hear the lack of logic behind that statement? The war on poverty was waged by Johnson in the sixties. Reagan ended that war big time. And the last generation which knows such extreme poverty is the result of the Republican war on the middle and lower classes. Reagan to Bush with an eight-year upspike under Clinton who did his own hit job on alleviating poverty with a program called workfare.

That he can't hear his own misinterpretations of history supports my opinion he's got no business trying to manage the American economy. I hope we survive him. Honestly, people's infatuation with rightwing idiots is beginning to bug me.

[Truth-seeker]

He said one more thing of note: our rights come from nature and God. I wonder if he's heard of the Constitution?

[KS]

TS, stop being a hypocrite - you believe the Constitution is a living document - WRONG ! What did Ryan lie about ? (the person who accused him of lieing is likely a liar themselves) You have no substance to your rant so you resort to name calling. Al Sharpton has no edge on your divisive arguments - LMAO...

The Ryan plan gets us to a balanced budget in 8 years and the Obama will NEVER bring a balanced budget. I am surprised that you leftwingnuts don't get that. Or is it that you are haters of the right and just don't care ? Keep coming with the smoke and mirrors - it's rather entertaining. People's infatuation with the Occupy movement's talking points is beginning to make my skin crawl.

[KS]

According to the progressive left, we can't afford to cut anything out of the budget - never mind the $1.6 Trillion deficit looming large in 2012 and largere beyond to be added to the $15T debt - call it economic terrorism or the road to Greece.

Some suggestions that would keep the USA from being financially insolvent. The constitution has been temporarily rendered ineffectual as long as we keep the same politicians in power

[Puget Sound Blathers]

Ok, maybe you can answer it.
Go ahead TS. What did Ryan lie about?

[Truth-seeker for all of us who will gieve the death of facts]

Here's a tribute to you, KS:
To the shock of most sentient beings, Facts died Wednesday, April 18, after a long battle for relevancy with the 24-hour news cycle, blogs and the Internet. Though few expected Facts to pull out of its years-long downward spiral, the official cause of death was from injuries suffered last week when Florida Republican Rep. Allen West steadfastly declared that as many as 81 of his fellow members of theU.S. House of Representatives are communists.

Facts held on for several days after that assault — brought on without a scrap of evidence or reason — before expiring peacefully at its home in a high school physics book. Facts was 2,372.

"It's very depressing," said Mary Poovey, a professor of English at New York University and author of "A History of the Modern Fact." "I think the thing Americans ought to miss most about facts is the lack of agreement that there are facts. This means we will never reach consensus about anything. Tax policies, presidential candidates. We'll never agree on anything."

Facts was born in ancient Greece, the brainchild of famed philosopher Aristotle. Poovey said that in its youth, Facts was viewed as "universal principles that everybody agrees on" or "shared assumptions."

All of us, save the obvious outliers on this blog, will grieve the death of facts.

[KS]

Appropriate obit - prompted by the current President who never lets facts get in the way by a Chicago newspaper - they should know.

He has a good side like when he is on Jimmy Fallon or Jimmy Kimmel's show or when he sings, but has a bad side that has become more noticeable when he campaigns--when he boasts about giving the order to kill OBL, but doubts if Romney could in a political ad- that pulled that out of his orifice like a pompous ass, the rich paying their fair share - the Buffett Rule (what a sham !) and calling out the SCOTUS with his void of facts demagoguery about repeal of the individual mandate in Obamacare. That secretes arrogance and drill deeper and it shows as corruption. Yes, facts is dead for now - will they be reincarnated ? stay tuned. When you have to read European newspapers to get the truth in America because the media is nothing more than a anti-conservative propaganda machine, the facts have died.

No word of what Rep. Ryan lied about - still waiting.

[Puget Sound Blathers]

All of us, save the obvious outliers on this blog, will grieve the death of facts.

Posted by: Truth-seeker for all of us who will gieve the death of facts | April 27, 2012 at 07:48 PM

better have an alibi, facts were last seen missing from your post on Rep Ryan. Just give us the facts about Ryan lying on the budget.

[Puget Sound Blathers]

The Parents of Facts, Accuracy and Justice, have issued an Amber Alert for their son, Facts.

"Please return our son Facts. He is very important to us. He was last seen in the company of TS driving a 'Dodge' who promised to bring him back after posting."

You can run TruthSeeker, but at some point you gotta come back with Facts on Rep Ryan or face the consequences.

[Walt]

Be very afraid Truth seeker!
Puget's "consequences are severe!

[Puget Sound Blathers]

LMAO

[Truth-seeker]

It's more fun watching Puget Sound dangle in the wind, Walt. Keep on begging, PS.

[Puget Sound Blathers]

More from the parents, Accuracy and Justice:

"Our son Facts was last heard yelling 'Stranger - Danger' as TS hustled him into his yellow 'Dodge."

Return Facts, TS. You can't go far...

[Truth-seeker]

Keep twisting. :)

[DontWorryBeHappy]

Seems to be pretty apparent who is really twisting.

[KS]

Once again, Walt and TS are twisting in addition to chasing their tails trying to capitalize on the alleged death of facts. Buh-bye

[David Carruthers]

Ryan? A genuine guy alright. A genuine jerk and a genuine liar:

From http://nymag.com/print/?/news/features/paul-ryan-2012-5/

"In 2001, Ryan led a coterie of conservatives who complained that George W. Bush’s $1.2 trillion tax cut was too small, and too focused on the middle class. In 2003, he lobbied Republicans to pass Bush’s deficit-­financed prescription-drug benefit, which bestowed huge profits on the pharmaceutical and insurance industries. In 2005, when Bush campaigned to introduce private accounts into Social Security, Ryan fervently crusaded for the concept. He was the sponsor in the House of a bill to create new private accounts funded entirely by borrowing, with no benefit cuts. Ryan’s plan was so staggeringly profligate, entailing more than $2 trillion in new debt over the first decade alone, that even the Bush administration opposed it as “irresponsible.”

When Democrats took control of Congress in the 2006 elections, they reimposed a budget rule requiring that any new spending or tax cuts be offset by new revenue or spending cuts. Ryan opposed it, preferring to let new spending or tax cuts go on the national credit card.

“He seems very straightforward,” he tells me. “He doesn’t seem cunning. He seems very genuine.”

"Seeming genuine is something Ryan does extraordinarily well. And here is where something deeper is at play, more than Ryan’s charm and winning personality, something that gets at the intellectual bankruptcy of contemporary Washington."

Some deficit hawk.

[Puget Sound Blathers]

NEWSFLASH: "Accuracy and Justice wish to announce that Facts has been released unharmed and unscathed."

Thank you David for at least bringing some facts to the table. What a refreshing change.

[Puget Sound Blathers]

Next up, 'Context'

[KS]

Ryan’s plan was so staggeringly profligate, entailing more than $2 trillion in new debt over the first decade alone, that even the Bush administration opposed it as “irresponsible.”

Most people here would believe that Bush was the pot calling the kettle black about being irresponsible. That occurred 9 years ago and has Ryan been asked about this recently ? His budget plan is certainly not as radical as the proposed Bush tax cuts were. Too bad that Ryan apparently overlooked Federal spending then, which was the real problem. He doesn't overlook that now and don't believe he would with a GOP president, but of course the liberal progressives will whine about that all day long.

"When Democrats took control of Congress in the 2006 elections, they reimposed a budget rule requiring that any new spending or tax cuts be offset by new revenue or spending cuts. Ryan opposed it, preferring to let new spending or tax cuts go on the national credit card."

It seems like whoever wrote this piece was not curious enough to find out why Ryan opposed offsetting spending cuts and the Dems have selective amnesia about saying that in 2006. Could it be the Ryan did not go for this because we were involved in two wars at that time ? Seems like a plausible reason. Also, now that a Democrat POTUS is in power, they have no concern about offsetting spending cuts - sounds like hypocrisy from the left .

Yup, Time for a discussion on "Context".

[Puget Sound Blathers]

Not to worry KS, we got an ankle bracelet on Truthseeker so he won't get far if he tries to run off with 'Context.'