Black and Blue Retro Watch wallpaper – “You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.”

retro, vintage, time, tank watch

Black and Blue Retro Watch wallpaper


I’ve mentioned previously an interesting attack and disinformation technique used by the Right. An issue or event makes the news. The Right slants it, commits sins of omission concerning all the facts, forgets to mention they did the same thing and more often, they feign outrage over mole-hills and get deeply Orwellian in new definitions for words, like torture for instance. Not necessarily just liberals and progressives, but people for whom facts matter, shoot down the right-wing spin. The Right waits a few weeks, sometimes months. They retell the same lies with a slightly different spin. They get shot down again. One of the best examples of this is the periodic retelling of Cheney’s version of how great torture is and all the useful information they got, and by the way is not illegal. There has never been any evidence that torture worked where traditional proven techniques would not, and its still immoral, against the law and endangers our troops and intelligence assets. The Right is running the same propaganda recycling scheme on Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan and the reasons why she should recuse herself from ruling on the ACA( health care reform or ObamaCare) case coming before the court. From the far Right’s regular dispensary of disinformation, CNS News – Internal DOJ Email: Kagan Was Brought Into Loop on Mark Levin’s Obamacare Complaint

Internal Justice Department email communications made just days before the House of Representatives passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act show that then-Solicitor General Elena Kagan was brought into the loop as DOJ began preparing to respond to an anticipated legal complaint that Mark Levin and the Landmark Legal Foundation were planning to file against the act if the House used a procedural rule to “deem” the bill passed even if members never directly voted on it.

In another internal DOJ email communication that same week, Kagan alerted the chief of DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel to the constitutional argument that a former U.S. Appeals Court judge was making against the use of this rule.

CNS posted that “breaking” news on Dec. 9, 2011. Referring everyone to e-mails that another right-wing site published on November 10, 2011. So this breathless headline making new news that is so shocking is a month old. Those notorious e-mails have been around for a while and spun so many times they’re looking like jeans that have been through the hot dry cycle about a thousand times. Gosh they must be correct because they cite law,

A federal law—28 U.S.C 455—says that a Supreme Court justice must recuse from “any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned” or if he “expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy” while he “served in governmental employment.”

There is no evidence in those e-mails that Kagan violated that law. As the extreme right-wing George W. Bush former Attorney General Michael Mukasey writes,

  The [law] that potentially relates to Justice Kagan requires disqualification “[w]here [the Justice] has served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel [or] adviser concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case or controversy.“Proceeding” is defined to include all stages of the relevant litigation.

In order to run afoul of that provision, Justice Kagan herself would have had to participate in her official capacity as counsel or adviser in the case at any stage, or expressed an opinion in her official capacity about the merits. Asked during her confirmation proceedings whether she had done so, she said no. Absent evidence to the contrary, there is no reason not to credit that denial. Statements of opinion to friends or former colleagues do not count here.

Before Kagan was appointed to the SCOTUS she was Solicitor General( she represented the entire federal government in business before the SCOTUS). Why calls for Elena Kagan to recuse herself from the Obamacare case are ridiculous.  

The Drudge Report blared Tuesday (with a baffling green photo of Kagan and Obama apparently taken with the aid of night-vision goggles): “Kagan Cheered Obamacare Passage” and broke the news that Kagan sent an e-mail to then-Justice Department adviser Laurence Tribe on the day the House passed the bill, saying: “I hear they have the votes, Larry!! Simply amazing.” Fox News tried to double down on the pretend outrage over Kagan’s astonishment that a law had passed, but even they couldn’t find an ethics expert who agreed, nor could practically anyone else. The rationale for the call for recusal seems to be that Kagan, who did everything in her power to avoid creating a conflict of interest by delegating everything possible to her deputy Neal Katyal, has somehow shown a conflict of interest.

The fallback argument is that her enthusiasm for the legislation somehow represents an “opinion regarding the underlying legal or constitutional issues related to the health care legislation.” Which is a bit like saying that my enthusiasm for wheat toast reflects a constitutional view on Wickard v. Filburn. Take that, plus a healthy dollop of “we haven’t found anything but we’re still sure it’s there,” and you have the full measure of the new crop of biting recusal claims against her.


At no time did Kagan participate in any political strategy or maneuvering in order to get ACA passed. Many of the e-mails CNS and other propagandists have cited as smoking gun evidence are e-mails to and from Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal. To whom Kagan refereed much questions about the actual constitutionality of the ACA because she wanted to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

CNS also pulls a nice little trick in appearances themselves by twisting the constitutionality of the final vote by with Kagan. Surface it to say they are two separate issues. The House did pass the ACA through a process called reconciliation. If reconciliation is unconstitutional, yet once again, conservatives have used the process more than Democrats to pass bills. It is a parliamentary procedure that does not necessitate another roll-call vote on a bill the House has already passed. So if the geniuses at CNS, Judicial Watch, the opinion pages of the WSJ and Fox News get their way, every bill passed b y conservatives using reconciliation will be deemed unconstitutional. As is usually the case CNS and the usual suspects are being both dishonest and disingenuous.

Why isn’t CNS, Drudge and so forth as concerned about the conflicts of interests of Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia,

The outcry over Thomas and Scalia and their attendance at events sponsored or supported by the Koch brothers or partisan political groups is simply not comparable to the claims that Kagan is in looooove with Obamacare. Kagan is being criticized for doing her job before she became a justice. Scalia and Thomas are being faulted for participating in extracurricular activities while they are sitting on the court.

[  ]…My friend Lincoln Caplan made this point when he tried to explain why attendance at the Federalist Society event matters, even when it doesn’t matter: “It does not matter whether the group is conservative, liberal or otherwise. Justices, just like federal judges, are public servants, and should preserve the appearance of impartiality to enhance the public’s confidence in the legal system.”

It is well known that the Federalist Society has more in common with the ideals of Leo Strauss than Thomas Jefferson.

Not everyone is savvy to every bit of technology that is available to us. I’ve read that most iPhone users only know how to use less than half the phone’s functions. Still, when someone tells you to press a button to go into the waiting queue how difficult can that be to comprehend. This one happens to be so simple that my older relatives – who are not fond of automated technology – do it all the time when calling their insurance and other companies. From a conservative called  Datechguy – If you’re a conservative Mitt Romney apparently doesn’t want you / Update Romney Camp cries false

Matt Lewis in the daily caller reports that in an attempt to make the case that Newt Gingrich as unacceptable to conservatives proceeded to insult conservatives by taking no questions from conservatives outlets. Here is the list:


Talking points memo, TALKING POINTS MEMO?

Stupid isn’t the word here. You are trying to make the case you are more conservative than Newt Gingrich and you not only exclude Conservatives from questions but you take questions from flipping Mother Jones and Talking Points Memo? This is an insult to every conservative news outlet, new media site and blogger out there.

And people complained about the way Herman Cain treated friends, but perhaps the Romney Campaign doesn’t consider conservatives friends.

(my note:   MARK HALPERIN, TIME is a far right conservative who tries to pass himself off as non-partisan)

As Romney’s reps politely explained, they answered every call in the queue. Why didn’t this conservative or other conservatives get into the queue to ask their question? Because they did not press one when directed to do so.

I have participated on these media calls with the White House, and I can ask a question and get it answered right between a question from bigfoot reporters from the New York Times and the Atlanta Journal Constitution. You know what I do? I press ‘1’ on my keypad when instructed to do so. It’s amazing!!

Having been made to look foolish for complaining about something that was their own damn fault, Romney’s critics scarcely flinched before going back on the offensive. Here’s Datechguy writing an open letter to the Romney campaign.

I do have some questions:

1. Have you requested a corrected from Matt Lewis of the daily caller. (UPDATE..apparently so)

2. Is the campaign planning on arranging for any conference calls with conservative activists and/or bloggers.

3. Given the Romney campaign’s attack on Newt Gingrich as unacceptable to conservatives to what degree outside of conference calls does the Romney Campaign plan to reach out to conservative activists and bloggers to advance that position?

4. Given that the MSM is likely to actively support the democratic nominee in this election as it has in every other what is the logic in accommodating said media in any way?


Notice how he didn’t apologize for being a dumbass and making a false allegation against the campaign. He just moves on like it never happened. And then his first question is whether or not Romney’s communications guy has asked for a correction from The Daily Caller or only from his shitty blog. How’s that for an inflated sense of self-importance? His second question is whether the Romney campaign is going to arrange a conference call with conservative activists and bloggers. Never mind that the Romney campaign just got done explaining that they had just done precisely that and no conservatives had asked any questions.


Maybe people who are that clueless shouldn’t be allowed to ask questions. Would they be able to understand the answers if they did ask them. Attacks on Newt are unacceptable? Didn’t Romney know you don’t criticize other members of  the Cult of Conservatism.

Elizabeth Warren Slams Karl Rove’s Dishonest Attack Ad As ‘Factually Wrong And Morally Wrong’

Feeling the heat of consumer advocate Elizabeth Warren’s lead over Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA), Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS unleashed an extremely disingenuous political ad that insinuated Warren was responsible for the 2008 bank bailout — a patently absurd claim given that the bailout was a Republican measure and that Warren was later chosen as the head of a panel providing much-needed oversight to the program. In fact, she has been a consistent advocate for greater accountability regarding the bailout funds. Warren blasted Rove for the ad, saying, “I can’t find the right words to describe how wrong that is. Factually wrong and morally wrong.” “Karl rove is not telling the truth,” she added. “I think anyone who is not telling the truth shouldn’t be running ads in this race.”

Rove has no idea what the high road is. He has a sordid history of winning by smears. Since he has no ideas or solutions smears have to be his first and last resort. What kind of evil cretin tries to send an innocent man to jail.


“You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.” –  George W. Bush