Madelyn Dunham, Barack Obama's Grandmother, Dies At 86

Madelyn Dunham, Barack Obama's grandmother, lost her battle with cancer today. She was 86 years old, and one day shy of seeing her grandson elected President of the United States.

The Washington Post:

The campaign released a statement from Obama and his sister Maya Soetoro-Ng this afternoon:

"It is with great sadness that we announce that our grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, has died peacefully after a battle with cancer. She was the cornerstone of our family, and a woman of extraordinary accomplishment, strength, and humility. She was the person who encouraged and allowed us to take chances. She was proud of her grandchildren and great-grandchildren and left this world with the knowledge that her impact on all of us was meaningful and enduring. Our debt to her is beyond measure.

"Our family wants to thank all of those who sent flowers, cards, well-wishes, and prayers during this difficult time. It brought our grandmother and us great comfort. Our grandmother was a private woman, and we will respect her wish for a small private ceremony to be held at a later date. In lieu of flowers, we ask that you make a donation to any worthy organization in search of a cure for cancer."

I wish she could have seen her grandson win the presidency tomorrow. My condolences to Sen. Obama and his family.

"While we live, let us love, for there is so little time."

It's A Bird...It's A Plane...

...no, it's SUPERBARACK! From the Baracky guys--enjoy!



Thanks also to the Jed Report.

Second Suit Filed Against Coleman

Several sources today have reported on a second suit against my favorite corrupt Republican senator, Norm Coleman. The StarTribune reported that a second lawsuit has been filed against Norm Coleman supporter Nasser Kazeminy, again alleging that money was illegally funneled from a Texas company to Norm, through bogus salary payments to his wife, Laurie. This suit, according to court documents, names

News of the second suit was picked up by Politico, which states that "a group of minority investors in Deep Marine Technology are making allegations against Kazeminy and Coleman nearly identical to the lawsuit filed in Houston last week. Politico's article goes on to identify what it calls "the money quote":

The second suit, brought by FLI Deep Marine LLC and Bressner Partners LTD, attributes its allegations to a "confidential source.''

According to the lawsuit, the source was told by Kazeminy in 2007 that "we have to get some money to Sen. Coleman'' because the senator "needs the money.''

Interestingly, the story reads differently on the StarTribune's website when comparing last night to today. MNPublius, covering this story, cited this paragraph from the StarTribune on this second suit:

The lawsuit is very similar to one filed earlier in the week in Houston by McKim. Both actions allege that Kazeminy told executives at Deep Marine that he wanted to provide financial assistance to the Colemans through an insurance consulting arrangement between Deep Marine and Hays Companies. But the second suit cites a “confidential source.” Kazeminy is a longtime friend and campaign contributor to Coleman.

…in a new wrinkle, Deep Marine’s former CEO, McKim, is named as a co-defendant with Kazeminy and several other individuals who were in positions of authority at the company.

However, when you go the story on the Strib's website, those paragraphs are mysteriously deleted. Fortunately, on the Pioneer Press's website, their coverage of this story reiterates the Strib's report, and repeats the information that McKim is named as a defendant in the second suit.

Whether or not the StarTribune is in the tank for Coleman isn't the point, though. What's important is that we've got another suit against Norm making the same allegations--that Coleman illegally received money from Kazeminy. Stay tuned for more.

They're Still Available! Call 1-800-GOP-GTFO

John Scalzi's "The Whatever Blog" has a list of names and occupations that McCain and Palin haven't used yet. Some of them are:

1. Brad the Milkman

2. Sid the Deli Owner

3. Bryan the Surly Indie Music Store Clerk

4. Kim the Overnight Wal-Mart Stocker

5. Hakeem the Halal Butcher

6. Aloysius the Chicken Sexer

7. Carol the Humorless, Cavity-Probing TSA Agent

8. Klaus the Eurotrash A&R Man

9. Craig the Porn Reviewer

10. Markos the Blogger

So Stupid She's Dangerous

Sarah Palin whined today that she feared that her First Amendment rights were being violated by reporters asking questions.

ABC News:

Palin told WMAL-AM that her criticism of Obama's associations, like those with 1960s radical Bill Ayers and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, should not be considered negative attacks. Rather, for reporters or columnists to suggest that it is going negative may constitute an attack that threatens a candidate's free speech rights under the Constitution, Palin said.

"If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations," Palin told host Chris Plante, "then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."

Palin is so stupid she's dangerous, to herself and to the Republic. To start with, the First Amendment guarantees the right of freedom of speech. It doesn't block the right to criticize, and unfortunately it doesn't block the right to say stupid shit in public, either. Palin has it ass-backwards, as usual. The First Amendment gives me the right to say she's an ignorant fool (and why should I miss an opportunity to say so again?), and it gives reporters and columnists the right to question and to criticize her. The First Amendment also explicitly guarantees the right to a free press, and a free press is one that would ask Palin "what the hell are you talking about?" every time she opens her mouth. Fortunately, the media is (mostly) doing that.

Glen Greenwald:

This isn't only about profound ignorance regarding our basic liberties, though it is obviously that. Palin here is also giving voice to the standard right-wing grievance instinct: that it's inherently unfair when they're criticized. And now, apparently, it's even unconstitutional.

According to Palin, what the Founders intended with the First Amendment was that political candidates for the most powerful offices in the country and Governors of states would be free to say whatever they want without being criticized in the newspapers. In the Palin worldview, the First Amendment was meant to ensure that powerful political officials such as herself would not be "attacked" in the papers. Is it even possible to imagine more breathtaking ignorance from someone holding high office and running for even higher office?

I can't WAIT until Tuesday.

Stop Me If You've Heard This One

John Cole:

I received the following email on one of my “conservative” email lists the other day:

"Today on my way to lunch I passed a homeless guy with a sign that read 'Vote Obama, I need the money.' I laughed.

Once in the restaurant my server had on a 'Obama 08' tie, again I laughed as he had given away his political preference—just imagine the coincidence.

When the bill came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept. He stood there in disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to someone who I deemed more in need—the homeless guy outside. The server angrily stormed from my sight.

I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I ‘ve decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy was grateful.

At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn even though the actual recipient needed money more.

I guess redistribution of wealth is an easier thing to swallow in concept than in practical application."

A simplistic argument against socialism, right? The sort of stuff that goes directly to "Trash" in my email account. This particular fable has got some legs, though. This anonymous, fictitious, bullshit conservative story is being spread by wingnuts near and far, appearing on numerous blogs, letters to the editor, and chain emails passed from wingnut to wingnut. I did a Google search for the phrase, "Today on my way to lunch I passed a homeless guy with a sign that read 'Vote Obama, I need the money.' I laughed." I got 14,000 results.

We've seen the coordination between right-wing radio and the Republicans for more than two decades now, that's nothing new. Rush says it, and a thousand idiots repeat it in truck stops, offices, bowling alleys, strip clubs, duck blinds, poorly written blogs warning of the coming Apocalypse, and letters written in crayon and addressed to the editor of the local newspaper. What's new is that now Republican presidential campaigns spew verbatim this wingnut crap that usually travels by email and fax: McCain PR flak Nicole Wallace passed along this story in an NPR interview today.

It's becoming readily apparent that if McCain loses, the Republican party will immediately declare civil war, and spend (hopefully) the next congressional session in destructive and pointless internecine warfare. The signs are already there: Republican intellectuals like Noonan and Hitchens endorsing Obama, saying that the party has lost its way; the dangerous rabble-rousing happening at Pain rallies, and Palin herself tossing her hat in the ring for 2012; the open disdain between the paleo-conservatives, the neo-cons, and the evangelicals.

Cole again:

The McCain campaign, once again, is just a symptom of the real problem- an intellectually incurious and lazy movement in the final ugly spasms of death. The McCain campaign is now, in their interviews with the press, spreading what we can all recognize as wingnut email chains.

We can all hope for a protracted civil war, the better for the rest of us to address the myriad problems facing America today. Let the wingnuts fight over the bones of the Republican party; we've got to begin rebuilding the nation for the 21st Century.

New Heights (Depths?) In Stupidity

Ta-Nehisi Coates has the latest on the newest wingnut obsession:

So the new rumor is that Barack is actually the son of Malcolm X. No seriously. Dude look at the resemblance! And they actually have a very similar speaking style.

Where do these fools come from? And how do we send them back?!