Who Killed Grandma?

Nancy Pelosi: Republicans Want to Destroy

DEMOCRAT Nancy Pelosi should be ashamed for making such inflammatory, poisonous remarks about Republicans.

It's unacceptable. It's inexcusable.

Video.



Transcript

NANCY PELOSI: This is an excuse. This budget deficit is an excuse for the Republicans to undermine government, plain and simple. They don't just want to make cuts, they want to destroy. They want to destroy food safety, clean air, clean water, the department of education. They want to destroy your rights. They do not like government.

Good grief.

That sounds crazed even for someone as extreme as Pelosi.

Republicans don't want to destroy. They want to prevent the country from collapsing. They want to protect the future for all Americans, for generations to come.

Pelosi's bitterness is disgraceful. It smacks of desperation.

Jay Carney and Obama's Plan

Jay Carney put on a pathetic performance during the White House press briefing yesterday.

He insisted that Obama has a plan to handle the debt ceiling but he can't quite locate it.

It exists, but where?

What are the numbers?

Video.



Transcript

QUESTION: you basically have this Boehner plan that you say can’t get through the Senate, and you’ve got a Reid plan that the Republicans don’t think you can get through the Senate or the House, and you’re saying we want a compromise, what was the point of giving a primetime address to the nation without an Obama plan and say neither of these other plans can work? Where is -- where is your plan?

MR. CARNEY: I understand that idea that there is not an Obama plan is like --

QUESTION: But there’s not. There’s not one on paper. There’s not one on paper.

MR. CARNEY: -- point number one -- is point number one on the talking points issued by the Republican Party. I get it.

QUESTION: No, no, that’s not a talking point.

MR. CARNEY: Okay?

QUESTION: No, no, show us the plan. It’s not a talking point. That’s unfair. Where is the plan?

MR. CARNEY: We have said from the -- first of all, the President put forward in detail his principles at George Washington University --

QUESTION: Principles, right. That’s not a plan.

MR. CARNEY: -- quite a lot of detail. The President stood before you -- I can’t remember if you were here Friday night. Some of you weren’t because you cut out early, but a lot of you were.

And he put forward in detail with numbers what he’s willing to do. He then referred from the podium to the fact that White House officials will be briefing in detail what our plan is.

Now, the purpose of putting forward a plan on paper -- our interest in this has been to get a compromise, to get a deal. It has not been to politically position ourselves, say, with things that appeal to our base, maybe pieces of legislation that we know can’t pass but it would be greeted warmly by certain constituencies. Our goal, and the reason why the negotiations have been conducted the way they have been conducted, is because we want a result. That’s the way the President has.

And it is simply not the case. The senior members of the House Republican leadership can open their desk drawer, pull out reams of paper that represents the President’s proposals and his counterproposals, and his counter-counterproposals, and his understanding that they need more of this and that he would like more of that. There is plenty of detail.

QUESTION: But even the President gave numbers on Friday night -- White House aides were saying last night he was giving the speech to the nation because most Americans were not paying attention until last night. So even if he gave these numbers on Friday night, they have not -- the American people were not paying attention Friday night, by your own estimation. So why didn’t he say last night, here are the nine things that I support? Here are the numbers, here’s what I want to do on taxes, and just lay it out -- and say, call your congressman with this -- not with this vague --

MR. CARNEY: The point -- I mean, the fact is you address the nation only so often on primetime. The President has been out here with an unbelievable amount of regularity talking to you, talking to the American people throughout this process. He has put forward in great detail -- I mean, if you guys haven’t talked about it on air or put it in your newspapers or online, then you should, because the detail is there.

Secondly, he needed to talk to the American people last night because -- for a good reason -- because they have their own lives to worry about and they count on Washington not always to take care of everything, but to take care of the big things like making sure we don’t default on our obligations. And he needed to talk to the American people, to those Americans who haven’t been paying close attention, to let them know where this stands and why it’s so important and why the risk is there that if Congress doesn’t act -- and we believe it will -- something that has never happened before in our history could happen and it would be very bad, indeed.

That’s why he had to address the country and why he wanted to explain to them his view that compromise is so necessary.

QUESTION: One other quick thing. I think on CBS radio this morning Dan Pfeiffer said that if Congress does not act by August 2nd this could lead to a depression. Is that your position, that we might have a depression in America?

MR. CARNEY: You know what, depression, how you -- what I know, what economic experts have said, is that -- and, again, Republican and Democrat, Jim Baker, Ronald Reagan, all sorts have said that a default on our obligations would produce an economic calamity. How you define that obviously depends on how long it lasts and what the ongoing implications of that would be.

We don’t believe it’s come to pass. Economic calamity is plenty scary and we should not even entertain that.

QUESTION: But over the weekend Democrats were saying there’s going to be a “Boehner drop” if there’s no action. Asian markets are going to crash on Sunday. Didn’t happen. American markets didn’t crash on Monday, and thankfully they have not crashed on --

MR. CARNEY: Ed, I want to move on, but you should go on the air and tell your viewers there’s nothing to worry about. That’s one approach.

Chuck.

QUESTION: Jay, why not release the last offer that Boehner made? I mean, instead of -- if you don’t want to release your own plan, release that plan. If that’s the deal -- if that’s the last offer he made and you guys are willing to go back with a few minor tweaks, release it. It’s the last week -- release it.

MR. CARNEY: I’m not going to -- look, we have shown a lot of leg on what we were proposing --

QUESTION: Where?

MR. CARNEY: From the podium, right here. (Laughter.) And from the Roosevelt Room. Certainly the Speaker of the House can address, or his people can address what they were -- what their last offer was. They claim that they walked away from the table because of the $400 billion --

QUESTION: Why not you do it? If they throw it out there and then you’re --

MR. CARNEY: The President stood here -- Chuck, again, I can’t remember if you were here -- it might have been Kristen -- but the President stood here on Friday night and went into great detail. You should look at the transcript. The President’s people met --

QUESTION: I understand, I’ve seen the transcript -- there’s still nothing out there. Why not just release that plan?

MR. CARNEY: Is it because you -- I mean, look, you need something printed for you, you can’t write it down? There is ample detail --

QUESTION: It’s not a plan. No, it’s not a plan. It was details of the plan, but it wasn’t a plan the same way that we’re getting a plan on the House side or that we’re getting a plan on the Senate side. It’s not.

QUESTION: We don’t know what the Medicare thing is. We don’t know what the Social Security part of this is. There wasn’t -- I mean, there was a lot of missing detail.

MR. CARNEY: We talked in great detail about what’s in Medicare, and you know it.

QUESTION: Why not put it out there, though? You guys went before the American people last night -- and I know that you’re probably getting frustrated because we’re all asking a version of the same question -- but you went before the American people last night and said come -- call your members of Congress and tell them we want a compromise. Well, you had a plan that you were making the case for which sounded like a version of the compromise. Release it to the public. I mean, that’s --

MR. CARNEY: $1.5 to $1.7 trillion in agreed-upon domestic discretionary non-defense savings -- cuts; other savings -- and on the most important stuff, the tough stuff, the stuff that makes it very hard for Democrats to do it but they’d be willing to do it -- important savings on entitlement reform. You know the issues; the President talked about it, other people talked about it, in terms of the kinds of reform that would produce significant savings. Okay? Significant savings in defense -- $400 billion -- significant savings in defense spending. All right? Significant savings in revenue through closing loopholes and tax reform that would produce -- by lowering rates and broadening the base, it would produce significant savings.

There are details -- we can go through details. And what we put forward -- again, this is a fluid situation. The point is, as both parties have said, they were engaged in serious negotiations; we were close to an agreement. One party said they walked away because of an insistence on an extra $400 billion in revenue. We said we could easily talk about that and resolve that issue. And that’s the kind of compromise --

QUESTION: -- $800 billion in new revenue into the Treasury --

MR. CARNEY: That’s correct.

QUESTION: -- coming out of tax reform.

MR. CARNEY: Correct.

QUESTION: And which parts of -- and was entitlement reform going to be cuts upfront and then a condition?

MR. CARNEY: Well, you know how things that had been talked about in terms of the reforms that would obviously be in the entitlements be phased over a certain period of time -- nobody has talked about upfront tax revenues. For example, the President himself said nothing before 2013 -- and how these things would play out. But these were significant savings, real savings -- the kinds of things in terms of entitlement reform that people have talked about for a long time, and Republicans in particular -- the President was willing to do. And he was looking for a partner, and he felt he had one, and he hopes he still has one going forward.

QUESTION: If he comes back with that $800 billion, why don’t you guys just accept the deal, ask a senator to introduce it in the Senate?

MR. CARNEY: We’ll see.

Carol.

QUESTION: Just quickly to follow on Chuck, I mean, the President did say to us on Friday that you guys would open the books and show us the paper. And then when we were in the Roosevelt Room, there was paper that we asked for that we weren’t actually physically handed. So was that -- are you going to give that to us?

MR. CARNEY: The senior people in that room walked you through the numbers, okay? You know -- I mean, we can engage in this, but you know that the reason why we’ve approached it this way is precisely to make it -- to create the optimum circumstances for a compromise. It is -- most of you are veteran Washington reporters. You know how this process works; that if you -- that when you put forward a position, it becomes highly -- on difficult issues, before a compromise is reached -- it becomes charged politically and your chances of actually getting an agreement diminish significantly. That’s how it works. You know that’s how it works.

And it’s for that -- if you don’t, well, you should. Others do. It is precisely because we wanted and believed and hoped that we could reach a compromise that the negotiations were conducted the way they were -- by both sides, by the way.

It is one thing to say that, yes, Republicans put forward plans that everybody knows can’t become law. Republicans were also engaged in quiet, detailed, concrete negotiations to reach a compromise.

QUESTION: Are you worried about activists tearing this -- activists on your side of the aisle tearing it apart?

MR. CARNEY: And theirs. And theirs.

QUESTION: But that’s why you didn’t -- that’s why this hasn’t gone public?

MR. CARNEY: You know how it works.

QUESTION: I understand that, but that is the reason you --

MR. CARNEY: Because we wanted an outcome that if -- as we’ve talked about, we’ve cited Bob Dole and others, you got to hold hands, get in the boat together, okay? That’s why.

Oh, my God.

What an embarrassment!

Listen to the press actually boo Carney:



The guy is a disaster. He lacks control. He isn't quick on his feet. Carney is a lot like his boss.

Paul Ryan 2012 Reelection

The lead story of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel online edition is a "what if" piece by Craig Gilbert.

It's a Democrat fantasy about Paul Ryan struggling to win reelection and the possibility of him losing.

It's a very odd article, something that reads more like Democrat party campaign literature than news.

As the fiscal voice of the GOP and the architect of its plan to scale back Medicare, Paul Ryan is the Republican many Democrats would most like to defeat next year.

A Ryan loss would cost his party a lot more than a seat in Congress. It would deprive it of one of its most influential figures. And it would be a huge blow to its policy agenda, which Ryan has played a central role in crafting.

Could Ryan, often touted as a candidate for Senate or even president, lose a re-election bid for his own U.S. House seat?

That would be a shock. By any conventional calculus, the odds are substantially against it.

At the same time, Democrats are correct in saying this contest won't be a nonevent like Ryan's past campaigns. Wisconsin has been turned upside down politically since the last time Ryan was on a ballot.

"It will definitely be a race he's not used to running," says his likely Democratic opponent, Kenosha County Supervisor Rob Zerban.

In other words, prepare for national money to probably pour into the state again, this time to bloody Ryan.

I'm sure Obama would encourage roughing Ryan up.

Gilbert concludes:

Ryan will enjoy obvious advantages next year (money, the makeup of the district, his own political skills, his electoral history). But there are major wild cards: the political fallout from his Medicare plan, the impact of having Obama on the ballot (and possibly even Walker if there's a successful recall drive next year), and the mad intensity of Wisconsin politics these days.

Gilbert seems to be giving a "you gotta believe" pep talk to Democrats: Stop Ryan. Recall Walker. Reelect Obama.

I think Obama being on the ballot will help Ryan, not hurt him.

This election is going to be a referendum on Obama's policies and his stunning ineffectiveness, especially in terms of the economy.

Obama and Lincoln, Debt and Slavery

Last week, while speaking at a town hall meeting at the University of Maryland, Obama compared himself to President Lincoln.

He stated that the nature of our politics means you don't get 100 percent of what you want.

Obama said he's making compromises in the tradition of our greatest presidents, like Lincoln did with slavery.

Obama asks, "Can you imagine how sort of the Huffington Post would have reported on that? I mean, it would have been blistering, right? You know? I mean, think about it. 'Lincoln sells out slaves.' There'd be protests, run a third party guy."

Not funny.

Video.

David Wu and Nancy Pelosi: Ethics Probe

UPDATE, July 26, 2011: David Wu resigns.
________________

Nancy Pelosi is no longer too busy to comment on the David Wu sex scandal.

Yesterday, Pelosi made time to address the matter.

From USA Today, the Associated Press:

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi Sunday called for an ethics panel investigation of Rep. David Wu following a published allegation that a young woman reported he'd engaged in "aggressive and unwanted sexual behavior."

The Oregon Democrat has been facing calls to resign, but he remained silent Sunday.

In a statement Sunday night, Pelosi asked the "Ethics Committee to initiate an investigation into the allegations against Congressman Wu."

...The Democratic leader says she will send a letter to leaders of the Republican-led House Monday formally asking for the probe.

...A Democrat who has challenged Wu in next year's primary, state Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian, said Wu should see Pelosi's calls for an ethics investigation as a signal to step down immediately.

"An ethics investigation would result in a long drawn-out distraction and prolong the public pain" for the unidentified woman who has accused Wu, Avakian said through his spokesman, Jake Weigler. "For the sake of our community and this young woman and her family, as well as his own family, David Wu should do the right thing and step aside now."

Another Wu challenger in the Democratic primary, state Rep. Brat Witt, said an ethics investigation is needed so "we get to the bottom of the allegations and determine what the facts are."

Wu's only response so far has been a brief statement late Friday: "This is very serious, and I have absolutely no desire to bring unwanted publicity, attention or stress to a young woman and her family."

...Wu has won seven terms. In 2004, he won despite acknowledging a decades-old college incident in which he tried to force a former girlfriend to have sex. Voters said they disliked an opponent's attempt to use that against Wu.

In January this year, seven staffers resigned because of behavior that included sending a photo of himself in a tiger costume to a staff member and an angry public speech. Wu attributed those to a period of mental health challenges that began in 2008 as marital issues led to separation from his wife.

Pelosi really had no choice but to call for an ethics probe.

Her delay, claiming she didn't know what was going on with Wu, was somewhat of an embarrassment.

If Wu were a Republican, I think this story would be receiving dramatically more attention and he'd be forced to resign immediately.

Obama News Conference, July 22 (Video, Transcript)

The debt talks collapsed yesterday.

There are dueling explanations as to what happened.

Here's the full video of Obama's Friday evening news conference:



Here's the transcript of an angry Obama's version of events.

Speaker of the House John Boehner tells a different story.

Here's video of his full news conference:

Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Allen West

Debbie Wasserman Schultz has tried to play the victim in her spat with Allen West.

Turns out Little Debbie's history of attacking West goes back to 2010.

Video, from Breitbart:


__________________

Mark Levin interviews Allen West on Debbie Wasserman Schultz.


__________________

Read more about West and Wasserman Schultz, from the American Spectator: Go Man, Young West.

Wisconsin Recall Elections and Obama

Obama and his political machine are meddling in Wisconsin politics.

Here's an e-mail from Obama's campaign operation:

Friend --

On August 9th, Wisconsin voters will go back to the polls to decide whether six Republican senators have failed to serve the needs of Wisconsin's hard-working families.

Senate Republicans broke the trust of Wisconsinites earlier this year when they forced drastic cuts in funding for schools, seniors, and the disabled to cut taxes for their own contributors.

Since then, hundreds of OFA Wisconsin supporters across the state have spoken up, saying they want to have an impact in the recall elections in August. So in the coming weeks, volunteers will be organizing their networks, working phone banks, and knocking on doors to get the word out about what's at stake on August 9th -- and this Saturday, there's an event in Glendale.

Can you make it? Here are the details:

What: Wisconsin legislative recall event

Where: 6807 N Green Bay Ave
Glendale, WI 53209

When: Saturday, July 23rd
10:00 am

If you can't make that event, find another one near you here.

Six Republican-held seats are up for grabs on August 9th -- and two more held by Democrats are up on the 16th.

While the campaign remains focused on re-electing the President, Organizing for America will provide support to OFA Wisconsin volunteers organizing around Democratic candidates in the recall elections.

I hope you can join the event in Glendale on Saturday. Sign up here:

http://wi.barackobama.com/Wisconsin-Recall-Events

Thanks,

Michelle

Michelle Kleppe
Wisconsin State Field Director
Organizing for America

Clearly, Obama considers Wisconsin to be vital to his own political future. It's no surprise that he's poking around in our state politics.

It's no surprise that Obama is waging class warfare and distorting what Governor Scott Walker and the Republicans have accomplished for Wisconsin's families.

Instead of being divisive and being a big labor hack, Obama should learn from Scott Walker and the Republicans.

"Wet blanket" Obama should observe the successes and reconsider his policies.

Dave Hansen Wins Recall

Dave Hansen, one of the Democrat senators who fled the state and ran to Illinois to avoid permitting the Wisconsin legistlative branch of government to function, has been rewarded.

He retains a seat in the State Senate.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Democratic state Sen. Dave Hansen of Green Bay was the first of nine state senators to face a final recall election, and he easily survived Tuesday.

Hansen won a lopsided victory over his Republican challenger, wind farm developer David VanderLeest of Green Bay, against whom Democrats and their allies have been hammering away on his personal and legal problems.

Watch Hansen and his comrades appear on Ed Schultz's show.

Nauseating.

This is a long, torturous video clip. The Dems appear at 3:15.

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

DAVE HANSEN: I just wanted to say that as a former public employee I really appreciated what labor organizations did for me. I drove a truck for the city of Green Bay sanitation before I became a state senator. And without that we wouldn't have had any pay or any benefits, and that's what they're trying to do. They're trying to remove ANY right to bargain, negotiate, and remove collective bargaining that's been in place for 50 years. It is a sad, sad day, and it's ridiculous what those 18 Republican senators did today. And our Governor should be ashamed of himself.

Good grief.

Hansen retains his seat. That's not an upset given his opponent.

If I were a union hack/Dem, I wouldn't get too cocky.

Jonathan Steitz Wins Primary

Jonathan Steitz will take on AWOL Sen. Robert Wirch in the August 16 recall election.

From FOX 6 News:

Attorney Jonathan Steitz has won a Republican primary in a Wisconsin recall election, and now advances to challenge Democratic state Sen. Robert Wirch next month.

Steitz has 64 percent of Tuesday's vote, with 73 percent of precincts reporting. He defeated Fred Ekornaas,a retired Kenosha County sheriff and current county board vice chairman.

 

Robert Wirch, like his fellow AWOL Democrat senators, revealed that he's not fit to serve in the state legislature.

The first requirement: SHOW UP AND DO YOUR JOB.

Wirch, of course, did not. He ran to Illinois, refusing to fulfill his duty to represent his constituents.

Instead, he did the bidding of Big Labor, and was funded by national Leftist groups.

Back in March, while appearing on MSNBC with the vulgar and crazed and deranged and disgraced Ed Schultz, Wirch compared the passage of the Budget Repair Bill to the attack on Pearl Harbor.

ROBERT WIRCH: This is a day of infamy for Wisconsin workers. Tomorrow, they're second class citizens thanks to the Republicans who took that terrible vote tonight.

Video here.

Very inappropriate.

Wirch has shown he doesn't deserve the privilege of representing the people of the 22nd Senate District.

Jonathan Steitz is by far the superior candidate.

Herman Cain: Pizza and Gospel Music

Rick Santorum and Dan Savage

Dan Savage, founder of the "It Gets Better Project," exposed his hypocrisy when he went on a hate-filled rant during his appearance on Friday's Real Time with Bill Maher.

In addition to asserting, "I wish [Republicans] were all f---ing dead," Savage made some despicable comments about Rick Santorum after Marc Maron had blasted Michelle Bachmann and her husband, Marcus.

Transcript and video.

MARC MARON: I don't want to be crass, but I just hope that Marcus Bachmann takes all that, you know, that rage that comes from repression and denial and brings it into the bedroom with her. I hope he f---s her angrily, because, because that's how I would. And I've thought about it. It's a political statement I'm trying to make.

DAN SAVAGE: Just so you don't get charges of sexism because only Michele Bachmann was involved, I sometimes think about the f---ing the sh-- out of Rick Santorum, just 'cause I think he needs it. It's not just women we're talking about f---ing. It's like, let's bone that Santorum. I'd go for whipping up some Santorum in Santorum.

Do these sound like the sort of comments that would come from someone wanting to spread peace, love, and understanding?

Savage wants everyone to take the "It Gets Better" pledge.

"Everyone deserves to be respected for who they are. I pledge to spread this message to my friends, family and neighbors. I pledge to spread this message to my friends, family and neighbors. I'll speak up against hate and intolerance whenever I see it, at school and at work."

Clearly, Savage does NOT believe in showing respect. He doesn't speak up against hate and intolerance.

To the contrary, Savage is a purveyor of hate.

Yesterday, Rick Santorum was a guest on the Steve Malzberg Show, responding to Savage's remarks.

Here's audio, from NewsBusters, via Breitbart:



Transcript here.

STEVE MALZBERG, HOST: What’s your reaction to this filth?

RICK SANTORUM: It’s just that. It’s filth. It’s, you know, this man has, has gone out there and tried to destroy my integrity. I mean, you’ve heard the whole issue of the Google issue. That’s Dan Savage. You know, it’s, it’s the lowest, you know, debasement of public discourse. It’s, it’s offensive beyond, you know, anything that any public figure or anybody in America should tolerate, and the mainstream media laughs about it. They, they, they kid about it. They write about it. They say, “Oh, Santorum’s got a Google problem.”

And then when you see this kind of even over the top, you know, not even, beyond that, the Google is worse than, than what he said there. They, they laugh about that, too. Why? Because it’s a liberal beating up on a conservative. And that’s okay. Whether it’s Rick Santorum or Michele Bachmann, it’s the Left making fun of someone who believes in the values that built America. It believes in traditional marriage. How outrageous. How bigoted. How hateful that you actually believe that, that, you know, raising children and, and, and families with mothers and fathers is something to be encouraged. That you’re, that, that, just because you hold those opinions, you are subject to the worst form of, of, of, of vulgarity on the internet, on television, and everywhere else, and they get away with, not only do they get away with the mainstream media, but they are applauded by the mainstream media. They are made, they are celebrated by, as you mentioned, in New York, by taking on these, these people who believe in these outmoded virtues, and, the bottom line is I stand and I wear it as a badge of honor that someone as vulgar and as, and as disgusting and as hate-filled as Dan Savage sees me as public enemy number one. To me, that tells me I must be doing something right.

There's no question that a double standard exists in the liberal media.

Leftists like Savage get a pass when it comes to spewing hate.

Dan Savage: Wishes Republicans F---ing Dead (Video)

UPDATE, July 19, 2011: Rick Santorum responds to Dan Savage.
__________________

Dan Savage is the creator of the "It Gets Better Project."

Many LGBT youth can't picture what their lives might be like as openly gay adults. They can't imagine a future for themselves. So let's show them what our lives are like, let's show them what the future may hold in store for them.

Savage seems like such a compassionate guy, doesn't he?

He cares about people. He really cares.

Here's the "It Gets Better" pledge:

THE PLEDGE: Everyone deserves to be respected for who they are. I pledge to spread this message to my friends, family and neighbors. I'll speak up against hate and intolerance whenever I see it, at school and at work. I'll provide hope for lesbian, gay, bi, trans and other bullied teens by letting them know that "It Gets Better."

"I'll speak up against hate and intolerance whenever I see it."

Oh really, Dan?

I think you're a hypocrite. You speak hate. You exhibit intolerance.

On Bill Maher's Real Time, Savage declared his wish regarding Republicans.

DAN SAVAGE: I wish they were all f---ing dead.

Video.



What a horrible thing to say!

Is this appropriate coming from the founder and ultimate moral authority of the "It Gets Better" Project?

Such hate speech reveals Savage to be a serious part of the problem when it comes to achieving peace, love, and understanding rather than part of the solution.

This statement wasn't an unguarded, private moment for Savage. He said this while on a panel of a nationally televised program.

Savage is a terrible role model.

"It Gets Better"?

Bottom line: Savage says don't hate LGBT people, but wish that Republicans "were all f---ing dead."

Disgusting.

What a hypocrite!
_______________

Savage has realized that his ugly, horrible comment has repercussions. It reveals the "It Gets Better" founder to be a fraud.

He wrote an apology on his blog:

I was on Real Time with Bill Maher tonight. I was talking to someone at the party after the show, and they asked me how I thought it went. Okay, I said—and then I told them that I said something really, really stupid, half under my breath, and I was relieved that Bill and the rest of the panel didn't hear it. But folks watching the show at home might have heard it... so... I want to apologize for... um... wishing all Republicans dead.

I don't feel that way. My dad is a Republican. (Well, he says he's an independent, but he hasn't voted for a Democrat since JFK. My dad is a Republican.) I'm fond of Michael Bloomberg and William Weld and Lincoln Chafee, and I wish no harm—save the political variety—on those Republicans I loathe. Even the one Republican I really had it in for once upon a time—Ronald Reagan—managed to outlive my anger.

It was a stupid, rude, thoughtless remark. I regret it and I retract it and I apologize to anyone watching at home—particularly my father (!)—who may have heard me say it. I had a drink before the show—first and last time I've ever done that—but this wasn't a case of, "In vino, veritas."

This was a case of, "In vino, stupidtas."

Why would Savage say something he didn't mean?

I would NEVER say "I wish all Democrats were f---ing dead."

Those words would NEVER come out of my mouth. Absolutely NEVER. Impossible.

It's not about Savage being "stupid" and "thoughtless." You just don't say something like that unless it's in you. It doesn't happen.

It's like Obama's terribly cruel and mocking Special Olympics remark.

It can't happen unless it's in you.

It's good Savage apologized, but you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.
________________

Here's more hate from Savage:

*Warning: EXPLICIT LANGUAGE*



After Marc Maron makes some positively inexcusable remarks about Michele Bachmann and her husband, Marcus Bachmann, Savage follows up with this:

DAN SAVAGE: They're grifters and scumbags - the Bachmanns.

...

MARC MARON: I don't want to be crass, but I just hope that Marcus Bachmann takes all that, you know, that rage that comes from repression and denial and brings it into the bedroom with her. I hope he f---s her angrily, because, because that's how I would. And I've thought about it. It's a political statement I'm trying to make.

DAN SAVAGE: Just so you don't get charges of sexism because only Michele Bachmann was involved, I sometimes think about the f---ing the sh-- out of Rick Santorum, just 'cause I think he needs it. It's not just women we're talking about f---ing. It's like, let's bone that Santorum. I'd go for whipping up some Santorum in Santorum.

Savage didn't issue an apology for this. I guess he stands by these comments.

"It Gets Better" Pledge:

"Everyone deserves to be respected for who they are. I pledge to spread this message to my friends, family and neighbors. I pledge to spread this message to my friends, family and neighbors. I'll speak up against hate and intolerance whenever I see it, at school and at work."

Why would anyone, like the president of the United States, want to be associated with a project headed by Savage?

I fully support the idea behind the project.

Unfortunately, Savage's remarks degrade it.

He reveals that he isn't against hate and intolerance. He foments it.

Obama 'Don't Call My Bluff' Hissy Fit

It's not good when the president of the United States deals with an issue with threats and then just walking out of the room.

Obama is definitely not a great negotiator.

From the Huffington Post:

Lawmakers and the White House had what nearly every party is describing as a "tough" and "testy" meeting on the debt ceiling Wednesday afternoon, culminating in a stormy exchange between President Barack Obama and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.).

It was the fifth straight day of talks, but the first in which attendees, speaking on background, were willing to admit that steps were taken backwards. According to multiple sources, disagreements surfaced early, in the middle and at the end of the nearly two-hour talks. At issue was Cantor's repeated push to do a short-term resolution and Obama's insistence that he would not accept one.

"Eric, don't call my bluff. I'm going to the American people on this," the president said, according to both Cantor and another attendee. "This process is confirming what the American people think is the worst about Washington: that everyone is more interested in posturing, political positioning, and protecting their base, than in resolving real problems."

Obama needs to grow up.

He's not a dictator. He can't just dismiss a branch of the U.S. government and demand that he gets his way.

Obama is so pompous.

"This process is confirming what the American people think is the worst about Washington: that everyone is more interested in posturing, political positioning, and protecting their base, than in resolving real problems."

What's so arrogant is that Obama doesn't include himself in the bunch he accuses of being "more interested in posturing, political positioning, and protecting their base, than in resolving real problems."

Clearly, Obama isn't interested in resolving real problems, and he doesn't know how to lead.

Moreover, he doesn't get that the American people think the worst about Washington is the uncontrolled spending and taxation that's destroying our future.

Someone needs to tell Obama that being president isn't easy. It requires dealing with issues in a mature, measured fashion.

It's more than golfing and romping around on Martha's Vineyard.

Maybe Obama should have tried holding his breath until he got his way.



Obama became "very agitated."

What an embarrassment!

He doesn't seem to understand that there are checks and balances on his power.

GOP: Change Direction 2

Thaddeus McCotter: Budget - Cut, Cap, Balance

Presidential candidate Thaddeus McCotter weighed in on the budget impasse.

He supports the "cut, cap and balance" approach.

That approach entails "not [voting] to raise the debt ceiling unless Congress votes to drastically cut spending, [imposing] a cap on future spending, and [approving] a balanced budget amendment."

Video.

Rob Cowles Threatened

According to an unnamed prominent Green Bay-area business leader, Republican Wisconsin State Senator Rob Cowles was "threatened" by Gov. Scott Walker's office.

Cowles was told that if he didn't vote for the Budget Repair Bill, the administration would run a Tea Party candidate against him.

This was reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Dan Bice, union member.

He tosses out charges against the Governor's office without naming the accuser.

Bice provides quotes from the "prominent business leader" that literally puts words in Cowles' mouth.

Bice makes the case that although he doesn't name the "prominent business leader," he's not anonymous.

The Green Bay-area business leader, who has not given campaign money to Democrats or Republicans, contacted No Quarter last week and spoke on background, meaning the paper knows the individual's identity. But the leader asked not to be identified by name in the Journal Sentinel because doing so would hurt the person's business and industry relationships.

Poor baby!

Being identified would hurt the leader's business and industry relationships.

Then why contact Bice?

The leader probably was confident that Bice would run the story that puts Walker's office in a negative light without expecting the leader to go on the record.

The Journal Sentinel knows the leader's identity.

So what?

Let the public know who is making the accusations or don't run the story. This is just gossip.

Very Bice.
__________________

UPDATE: Cowles fires back at Milwaukee report of intimidation

State Senator Rob Cowles is firing back at a story in the Milwaukee-Journal Sentinel which alleges Governor Walker threatened to put up a Tea Party candidate against him, if he didn’t vote for Walker’s bill to limit public union bargaining.

"There was never any effort by the governor's office to intimidate any of us," the Allouez Republican says. "There were some aspects of the process that some of us didn't like, but there was never any effort to threaten us with any primaries, the whole story is a fabrication."

The paper says Cowles made the remark when he called a prominent Green Bay area business leader to seek support in his recall election next month.

Columnist Dan Bice said the business leader asked to stay anonymous. But the person quoted Cowles as saying “I didn’t like this bill, either … I didn’t like being put in this position … but the governor’s office told us if we didn’t give them our support, they would run a Tea Party candidate against us.”

...Cowles says it's an effort by national unions to smear him to try and defeat him in the August 9th recall election. He maintains his long-time support for the budget repair bill.

"When the private sector has been bludgeoned by this difficult recession, the public sector has to be part of the solution," Cowles says. "That bill brought some fairness between the government sector and the private sector."

Cowles rips Bice's story to shreds.

That's gotta hurt.

Betty Ford R.I.P.

Former First Lady Betty Ford passed away on Friday.



Rest in Peace.
_______________

ABC News video.

Rick Santelli: Less Government Spending

Over two years ago, Rick Santelli touched a chord with millions of Americans when he suggested having a Tea Party.

RICK SANTELLI: We're thinking of having a Chicago Tea Party in July. All you capitalists that want to show up to Lake Michigan, I'm gonna start organizing.

A movement was born.

The revolution lives.

Video, via Breitbart:

RICK SANTELLI: I don't believe in compromise on spending. There's no compromise. Stop spending. Live within your means.

"President Obama, are you listening?"

Obama wasn't listening in 2009. He's not listening now.

Republicans, are you listening?