Archive for Hardball

Voter Suppression Continues to Confound and Infuriate non-Republicans

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Once in a while old Tweety, aka Chris Matthews, knocks one toward the cheap seats, and Wednesday was one of those episodes of 'Hardball'.

I have the biggest crush on Fugelsang, full disclosure. I married for humor, but hotness was also included.

Here he and Joy Reid helped Matthews with a large and thorny issue,

Then to compliment the Tweety goodness, Ezra Klein subbing for Chris Hayes got the actual author, the hard hitting fellow who did the Voter ID Study that's sweeping to great acclaim. And horror.

From MSNBC:

What are voter ID laws even for?
A new investigation finds just 31 credible incidents of voter impersonation over 14 years and one billion ballot

Well that's post-Tea Party DefCon Amurrika, right thar' … we didn't think we as a country could Go Dumber than we did in 2000 for an endless, ubër-mockable, embarrassing, humiliating, eight years o' Dubbayhah.

We are SO better than this as a country. A democratic country. We supposedly monitor less worthy cow entries elections with a spyglass, but our own citizens face voter impression.

Humiliating, is what these efforts are - embarrassing and shameful also come to mind. It seems our GOP, The Tea Years, is bent on having only old white men and their Stepford Spouses count at the polls. Truly heart-sickening.

michelle obama beautiful smaller

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

"Absence of a strong wave comes as something of a setback for GOP"

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

democracy setback

A report just came out from the Center for the Study of the American Electorate. It confirmed what many of us already knew: that Americans are "staying away from the polls in droves." Not good, not good at all. The prediction is that the midterm primary elections will set record lows in voter turnout. "Who cares?" many of you may be asking. Well, per the Los Angeles Times, that would be a real setback for democracy:

Why does that matter? “It presents a danger to our society insofar as democracy does thrive on the consent and involvement of the governed,” said Curtis Gans, director of the nonpartisan election research center and a decades-long student of voter behavior. “Leadership needs some form of mandate.”

The study says a major factor in the low turnout is a sense of futility: congressional districts consciously drawn to favor one party or the other, which leave many voters wondering why they should bother participating when the outcome is preordained.

Got that? Gerrymandering is a major culprit. Scroll through our many posts on that subject.

gerrymander definition

To repeat, low voter turnout is bad for democracy... and usually bad for Democrats, specifically.

Adjacent to that article was another one about a different kind of setback. It has a somewhat encouraging title (key word: somewhat), No partisan wave building for fall elections, but GOP gains likely:

[F]or now, the absence of a strong wave comes as something of a setback for Republicans, who had hoped earlier this year that the unpopularity of President Obama's healthcare law would guarantee big gains for them.  [...]

The public's dismal view of Congress probably accounts for some of that lack of enthusiasm about voting.

That last sentence is an understatement, IMHO. Our own Sherry Hardy wrote a great post about that here, and I followed up here.

Not a skit, our actual Congress, gaa! Maddow

And from the Timing Is Everything Dep't., Steve Kornacki subbed for Chris Matthews on Hardball and treated us to his own "Let Me Finish" segment in which he opined on the long game for Democrats:

Kornacki:

Right now, at least, it doesn't look like a big Republican wave is building, and it does look like Democrats can at least hold their own this fall. And if they can do that, then it sets up the real battle in 2016...

In 2016, Republicans won't just get to take shots at the White House, they'll have to put up a candidate of their own. They'll have to write a platform of their own, run on an agenda that might not sit that well with most Americans. There could be a huge opportunity for Democrats...

2014 is important to [the Democrats], but 2016? That's the ball game.

You know what to do:

vote  turnout  gotv

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Ann Coulter Abhors Soccer - The Queen of Mean is Just Trolling Now

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

photo
One of my favorite pastimes is the shock therapy that ensues when you hit Fux Noise for more than a minute at a time, it just makes me grateful to be a liberal.

And consistently produces such prime Material.

This week, Tea Party Mean Queen and Unabashed Blonde Bomber of Hate -- Ann Coulter -- took her sights off 9-11 widows, single mothers and most people of color other than 'pale'. Instead, she has turned her eye-beam of loathing on - get ready - the entire sport of soccer. Or 'futball' (again, if you want to sound like a hipster).

FIFA added a whole new level of Wackadoo to hate radio in general, but Coulter, as usual, went for the Fenway Green Monster flyover of outrageous statements.

anncoultermiserable

She was blathering on about the usual Tea Party credo, patriotism, the exceptional nature of all Amurrikans who vote like she does … yadda yadda [incomprehensible xenophobic hate-nation bullshite] yadda. About to shut her off, who can stand that for even 60 seconds, she laid the Golden Egg of Idjit opinion: Soccer is Unamerican.

GOAL!

To my delight, the producers at MSNBC's Hardball thought it inane enough to broadcast. Tweety's seat was being ably manned by Steve Kornacki from Up with Steve Kornacki. Enjoy.

Now when even Forbes Magazine, yes, that Forbes, runs a headline saying: How Ann Coulter Lost Her Mind Over World Cup Soccer, just pause and have yourself a good guffaw -- then get appropriately worried about where the Nation is heading.

If you do talk radio, nothing fuels the phone lines like controversy. This is agnostic of political affiliation. Olbermann figured out how to push the buttons on the left side of the aisle there for a good period of time. Entertainment has no party affiliation.

So when Ann decided to weigh in on the World Cup, you might expect something shocking. It is, after all, Ann Coulter we’re talking about. She’s never happy in her skin unless your jaw is around your ankles.

Image, Clay Bennett, The Chattanooga Free Press

Image, Clay Bennett, The Chattanooga Times Free Press

Oh, and just so you have the appropriate background, Coultergeist claims that she has respectfully refrained from this [ostensibly, in her excuse for a mind] Mandatory Patriot 'Criticism' for the commie pinko librul Eurrap-pee-an slash/African bush sport for  over ten years.

Let's all applaud her decade o' restraint. Now, however, Coulter is the Four Star Mussolini in the imaginary War on Soccer.

When she penned this piece, one can envision her trying to conjure up the most bombastic, most eye-catching, and yes, SEO-laden storyline she could come up with. “The crazier it sounds, the better,” might have been the whisper. So, there it was, “Any growing interest in soccer a sign of nation’s moral decay”

The true sign of 'the nation's moral decay' is that Ann Coulter has any notoriety, much less a filthy pile of lucre from her Regressive hate-propaganda, in the second decade of the 21st century.

cuckoocoulter20005

 

Coulter totally belongs with the hate-crazed horde that was hell-bent on hanging my ancestress, Rebecca Nurse, back in the day in Salem. And there are plenty of soccer slash futball fans who had great great grand-parents living on Native American soil, so Do Proceed to ...

stfu-wheel-of-fortune-wall

 

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Anti-Pot Chris Matthews Rails Against Alcohol And Tobacco, Too

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

MatthewsKennedyw349h222video below at end of post

There's never a time when the unpredictable Chris Matthews isn't opinionated. That's what he's best known for and he's made a niche for himself being just that -- outspoken and oftentimes outrageous -- on his MSNBC show, HARDBALL.  He's so self-inflated in importance he oftentimes loses sight of logic and reason. He's the aging old dog that has been gifted with a relatively meaty bone and doesn't let you get near it with his growling and barking. Even after the bone's been chewed clean of the last hint of anything to eat, even its aroma of past pleasures, he's protective.

Yesterday was a case in point. Now it's a bit unusual for him to disagree, even somewhat reluctantly, with President Obama. He will, from time to time pick around the edges, but as a general rule he allows the President to make his own decisions and justifies them with the Big O's surrounding himself with qualified minions to help him form intelligent choices.

Chris took exception to Obama's coming out publicly and stating what a vast majority of Americans and pillars of the scientific community have been saying for years now. Pot is not good for you in general, but it's no more harmful than alcohol and tobacco.

That wasn't strong enough this time for Matthews. He decided that scientific evidence isn't good enough in this case. So he traipsed out two of the Kennedy clan -- newer generations of the Camelot crew -- Christopher Lawford and Patrick Kennedy. Both recovering addicts -- but not from pot -- from Alcohol and pills.

In Matthews' mind, and perhaps to these fine, brave gentlemen, one addiction is the same as another. And I'm not sure they're wrong. Addictive personalities can be just as harmful whether the vice is drinking, drugs, sex, video games, pornography, eating, et.al. The bottom line is anything can get you high if abused. That's the point of the book that Lawford was really on the show to promote. He wasn't there as an expert, but rather a survivor who was trying to sell his book, which Matthews gladly promoted at the end of the interview. If that makes you know more than someone else, fine. But surviving a 12 step program doesn't make you a counselor.  It makes you a veteran.

So after all was said and done, Chris, who's about as current as last week's expired milk in your refrigerator, made an anti-pot stand. And I'll applaud him for that -- speaking his mind -- or what's left of it. His ability to idolize Ronald Reagan and his former boss, Tip O'Neill while overlooking all the laws these two men broke, shows that he's still got the '70s going on in his mind. But granting him that clouded thinking, he's now going after pot with a similar cloud around his thinking.

His argument is that pot is a gateway to other vices. Maybe it is, but that's like saying drinking milk leads you to over eating chocolate chip cookies or Oreos. They are really not connected, but you could statistically make an argument.

So if Chris wants to take on the 'pot is bad for you' challenge, saying that it is as dangerous as tobacco and alcohol, then why isn't he pushing for tobacco and alcohol being outlawed? Certainly scientifically we can prove these two substances are dangerous, cause deaths and are gateways to all sorts of crimes and misdeeds, not just death.

Or maybe I missed the point. Perhaps that IS what Matthews on HARDBALL was really saying. Using his own argument, that pot can be addictive and lead to dangerous behavior, tobacco and alcohol should be against the law. If what's good for the goose is good for the gander, than he should be taking his soapbox to Capitol Hill and start rallying Congress for a revisit to the Volstead Act as well as banning all tobacco products. They're as dangerous (or as safe) as marijuana.

What? That's not what he meant? Then what was he doing when he chose to argue against legalization where the usage of cannabis products are monitored and quality is checked? Hundreds if not thousands died from bathtub gin and moonshine during prohibition. That's because there were no quality controls of the products. And to get these elixirs, how many were killed in back alleys or gunned down by the likes of Capone and his lieutenants?

Today we're unfairly incarcerating people, outrageous numbers of minorities, all over a little plant that has still not been proven to be any more harmful than legally obtained alcohol and tobacco. So move the soap box to another corner, Chris. Your arguments to outlaw pot are the same ones to make cigarettes and booze illegal. I don't think you'll want to take to the air to defend that. But you did. And here it is:

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare