Ed Schultz and MSNBC: You've Got It All Wrong

Ed: There's no need to apologize to Laura Ingraham, except that you mischaracterized her. She's not a "right-wing slut;" sluts do it for free. Ingraham gets paid a handsome sum to spew hatred every day. She's a right-wing whore, not a slut.

MSNBC Management: You need to ask yourselves: are you a news organization, an opinion channel, or just a bunch of cowardly jackasses? Ed didn't need to, and shouldn't have had to offer to apologize to Ingraham, much less take some unpaid time off. The truth may hurt, but that's the way it goes. Every day, Laura Ingraham spews out such hatred and vile lies that it's a wonder she hasn't either been shot down in the streets like the dog she is, or just collapsed before the mike, foaming at the mouth. (She must get the same vaccine that Rush, Beck, Malkin, and others of their ilk receive.) Ingraham tells her vicious lies for a nice chunk of change, and gets nothing but support from her management. She is a whore, a vile, hate-filled, evil whore.

I'm damn sick and tired of hearing lies, insults, distortions, and other such utter bullshit flow from the mouths of right-wing talk show hosts every damn day, with nary an outcry from their management; but let a progressive tell the unvarnished truth about some of these wingnuts, and what happens?--they get suspended, they have to make humiliating apologies to their inferiors, and then they have to receive the opprobrium of the progressive blogosphere, too!

I've been surfing around the progressive blogosphere tonight while writing this piece, and the amount of anger and scorn directed at Ed is frankly amazing. You'd think he spit on Pres. Obama, the way some of my fellow liberals are talking! Granted, it was a poor choice of words for public discourse - and I still think he should have said "whore," not "slut" - but dammit people, grow a pair! Not everyone is as polite and soft-spoken and just fuckin' considerate as some of the people on the left. And you know what?--there's not a damn thing wrong with that! We need people willing to shout from the rooftops, as well as men and women who can argue in the ivory towers. We need people who are willing to shout back in the wingnuts' faces, people who can grab a sword as quickly and easily as they can pick up a pen. What's wrong with a little passion?

And you know, I've been trying to put Ed's words in perspective. I realize that "slut" is an offensive term to women, and I personally don't use it. But I've been substituting "nigger" for "slut" in my head, and I just can't get that upset. Maybe I'm a closet misogynist, or maybe I don't find "nigger" offensive enough. Maybe I'm considering the source. At any rate, if someone were foolish enough to call me that, I'd either laugh in their face, or fire back with something truly vile. Either way, I wouldn't let some stranger's words get to me that deeply.

OK, most of the time I wouldn't....at least, not while witnesses are present!

But I don't think Laura Ingraham, by her own words and deeds, deserves the consideration and defense that I'm seeing for her in the progressive blogosphere tonight, or, indeed, anywhere else on the intertubes. I don't think she deserves any defense at all, and the only offense I think Ed Schultz committed was offending some of his listeners. Ingraham doesn't deserve one damn bit of his courtesy, consideration, or respect.

I promise you this: I don't get paid for this blog, and if I ever were to receive as much as a freakin' dime for it, it would have to be with the stipulation that I can write whatever I damn well please. I will ALWAYS speak my mind, speak the truth as I see it, and damn the consequences.

Keep the faith, Ed, and keep on giving 'em hell!

Hochul Wins NY-26...Listen Up, National Dems!

Kathy Hochul tonight became the first Democrat to be elected to Congress from New York's 26th District, as she won a decisive victory over her Republican opponent Jane Corwin:

TPM:

Democrat Kathy Hochul lead 48-43 with over 83% of the votes counted and her victory looks to be a strong one -- the Associated Press called the race within an hour of the polls closing. Corwin underperformed in key GOP counties while Hochul's margins in Democratic areas were in line with the party's high water mark in the district from 2006, a wave year that swept the Republicans out of the majority in the House and Senate. The district is normally a safe seat for Republicans and has never elected a Democrat..

Hochul's message focused relentlessly on the Paul Ryan budget, which she highlighted in ads, public statements, and debates at every opportunity. Her attacks on its cuts to Medicare benefits and its tax cuts for the wealthy proved impossible for Corwin to overcome, who tried her best to defend the GOP budget cuts before eventually giving in and falsely accusing Hochul of seeking similar cuts while muddying her own position on the plan

National Dems, are you listening? This is the way we can win back the House and rack up larger margins in the Senate. As usual, the Repugs have overplayed their hand, this time with the Ryan budget. End Medicare? Are they kidding? Hochul's district has never elected a Democrat, but mention ending Medicare, and the older white voters who make up the majority of the Republican electorate will switch parties in a flash! And let's face it, who else do the Republicans have?

All that we need to do is emphasize that Democrats won't dismantle Medicare and Social Security, that Democrats are the party that supports the middle class, that Democrats are the true patriots who care about their fellow citizens (Eric Cantor, this means you!). We need to say it and mean it, and we need, as Kathy Hochul showed us, to say long and loudly just how the Republicans are sticking it to their fellow Americans.

Wake up, Dems,.it's time to fight.

It's Right In Front of Your Face

Here are two pictures that explain why NJ governor Chris Christie will never run against Barack Obama for the presidency. These same two photographs explain - in part, at least - why, if nominated, Christie would not win.

Now, picture this guy...

debating this guy:

'Nuff said.

Gingrich HQ, Day 5: "Who Are You Going To Believe, Me Or Your Lying Eyes & Ears?"

Day 5 of the Gingrich presidential campaign, and it's beginning to look like a case of crib death for the former Speaker's chances. Today the Newt declared that if you see any report of him condemming the Paul Ryan Medicare-killing budget plan, don't believe what he said on Sunday, believe what he's saying right now!

Making the obligatory pilgrimage to the Throne of Rush Limbaugh, Newt claimed that he never mentioned Paul Ryan while talking about Paul Ryan's budget plan:

via TPM:

Gingrich to Limbaugh: "It's very straightforward. It's when the government comes in and tells you how to live your life and what you're gonna do -- whether the values that lead it to do that are left-wing values, or the values that lead it to do that are right-wing values," said Gingrich. "I believe in personal freedom. I believe in your right to lead your life. I believe that we are endowed by the Declaration of Independence, by our Creator, with the right to pursue happiness. And I want a government that is much more humble about its ability to tell you what to do, whether it's people on either side of the ideological spectrum.

"And by the way, it was not a reference to Paul Ryan. There was no reference to Paul Ryan in that answer."

To which Limbaugh asked: "Well then what did you apologize to him about?"

"Because it was interpreted in a way, which was causing trouble, which he doesn't need or deserve. And it was causing the House Republicans trouble," said Gingrich. "One of my closest friends, somebody I truly, deeply respect, e-mailed me and said 'Your answer hits every Republican who voted for the budget.'"

"Well, my answer wasn't about the budget. And I promptly went back and said publicly, and I continue to say, I would have voted for the Ryan budget. I think it's a very important step in the right direction, and I have consistently said that from the time that Paul first briefed me on it weeks before he introduced it. And I've been talking with Paul Ryan about budget matters for the last four years."

So why did he apologize to Ryan?  Uhhh...because he criticized Ryan's anti-Medicare plan?

Then later, Gingrich said Tuesday on Faux that "any (Democratic) ad which quotes what I said on Sunday is a falsehood." Here's the clip, from Hardball:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

As Bugs would say, "whatta maroon!"

IMF's Strauss-Khan Resigns

And it's "game over, man!" for embattled IMF executive director Dominique Strauss-Khan, as he tendered his resignation late tonight:

The Daily Beast:

Dominique Strauss-Kahn resigned late Wednesday night as the head of the International Monetary Fund. Strauss-Kahn, who faces seven charges of sexual assault in New York after allegedly attacking a hotel maid, made a statement saying his resignation is with "infinite sadness," but he needed to devote "all my energy into proving my innocence."

The New York Times:

In issuing his resignation Wednesday, Mr. Strauss-Kahn said, "I want to say that I deny with the greatest possible firmness all of the allegations that have been made against me."
News of the arrest produced an earthquake of shock, outrage, disbelief and embarrassment throughout France. 

Though Mr. Strauss-Kahn received generally high marks for his stewardship of the bank, his reputation was tarnished in 2008 by an affair with a Hungarian economist who was a subordinate there. The fund decided to stand by him despite concluding that he had shown poor judgment. He issued an apology to employees at the bank and his wife, Anne Sinclair, an American-born French journalist. 

Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s extramarital affairs have long been considered an open secret. But the legal charges against him - which include attempted rape, forced oral sex and an effort to sequester another person against her will - are of an entirely different magnitude, even in France and elsewhere in continental Europe.

Film and DNA tests at 11.

Life at Gingrich 2012 HQ, Right About Now....

Still gotta watch out for those sneaky Sunday morning alie.....errr, hosts, though!

Life Imitates Art Politics?

The Number 2 story scandalizing the MSM this week is the case of Dominique Strauss-Khan, who right about now probably wishes that Arnold Schwarzenegger had fathered two out-of wedlock children. Strauss-Khan, or DSK, as he's already being referred to, is alleged to have sexually assaulted a Hotel Sofitel housekeeper in his $3,000-a-night suite. Allegations of additional attacks by DSK against a young journalist in France, and another hotel maid in Mexico, are now being brought forth by the women allegedly victimized by the perpetrator. I don't think that Strauss-Khan's nickname, the "Great Seducer," is going to help his case much, either.

Now, I don't know if Strauss-Khan is guilty or not in any of these cases, but I find the whole affair to be a sad reenactment of DSK's day job as the managing director of the International Monetary Fund. The IMF has for decades raped Third World countries, forced them to perform self-mutilating acts of financial and monetary policy that primarily benefit First World countries and corporations.

Naomi Klein outlined all this in her brilliant book The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, which "makes a cogent argument that the Milton Friedman school of economics (which has characterized American and European global economic policy for years) thrives on national economies that are in a melt down or in the midst of crises, many of the latter created as a result of IMF and World Bank policies."


The Shock Doctrine is, in my opinion, one of the most important books written in the last thirty years. And after reading it, I couldn't help but see an eerie parallel between Strauss-Khan's personal acts and public life. The exploitation of a crisis, be it national or individual, to advance an agenda that helps the outsider - agency or individual - profit, seems to be a trademark of "The Great Seducer's" corporate and personal technique.

One might describe it as taking advantage of a poor, defenseless entity, be it a nation or a woman, for professional or personal gain. I almost feel sorry for Strauss-Khan's lawyers.