Lies and hypocrisy are have always been problematic just in terms of what is practical. Even back when carrier pigeons were the height of technology they also had ye good old-fashioned grape-vine. People know they just told a huge whopper – that they just could not resist telling, just as equally find it almost impossible to keep their mouths shut. They have to tell someone. That someone swears not to tell and gosh, what happens, suddenly you’re at war with the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. Lies and hypocrisy also took a beating and were given a boost by the telephone. Just as news from Asia could reach Europe and North America in minutes instead of days, so could a new fib get a running start. Such are the blessings of technology. That lies come faster than ever and seem to be embraced just as quickly is not a flaw of technology as much as the allegiance of the zealot to his cause, to make the truth and consistency servants to his agenda. So it is with modern conservatives. In the age of the internet their statements, word salads, hypocrisy, falsehoods, pomposity and general lack of moral courage are easily checked and just as easily spread. From what I gather from conservative friends and conservative media, this constant flux of contradiction about facts and the values those facts represent is no big thing. Non-conservatives might find the kind of frenzied mental ping-pong and moral juggling performed by conservatives exhausting just to think about. Sure you’re human and tell your share of little white lies – like every time you laugh at one of the bosses not funny jokes or tell your cousin he looks like he has lost weight, but not big lies that have huge repercussions for an entire nation. Well thoughtful Americans would rather not go there. You have too much on your plate to keep track of the glaring contradictions. Not to mention that having moral boundaries, you find dedicating your life to maintaining a virtual clone machine of untruths, repulsive. Conservatives have no such reservations, Turning On A Dime, Conservative Media Recoil At Obama’s Remarks About “Unelected” Judges
Conservative media are on the attack after President Obama responded to a question about the Supreme Court’s consideration of the Affordable Care Act by pointing out that conservatives criticize “unelected” judges who engage in “judicial activism” to “overturn a duly constituted and passed law.” But Obama is right: for years conservatives have railed against “unelected” judges who overturn laws passed by the people’s representatives.
Obama Reminds Conservatives That They Often Attack “Unelected” Judges Who “Overturn A Duly Constituted And Passed Law.” From President Obama’s April 2 press conference:
OBAMA: Ultimately I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress. And I’d just remind conservative commentators that for years what we’ve heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint — that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, this is a good example. And I’m pretty confident that this Court will recognize that and not take that step. [WhiteHouse.gov, 4/2/12]
A person of average intelligence can tell that the supposedly offensive statement was made within the context of a discussion of the ACA and the imminent ruling of the SCOTUS. Which would also be in context of the high court’s ruling on legislation related to commerce.
…NY Post’s Podhoretz: Obama’s Reference To An “Unelected Group Of People” Was “Unnerving.”
…Tucker Carlson Responds To “Unelected Group Of People”: “This Is What The Supreme Court Does.”
…Fox Nation: “Obama Takes Aim At Supreme Court, Calls Them ‘Unelected Group Of People.’ “
A Democrat criticize the court for possible judicial activism. What conservatives are really pissed about is that President Obama violated the far Right’s copyright over the right to accuse any court of “judicial activism”. You see, conservative own the exclusive rights to complain and the rights to all false outrage when it comes to the nation’s federal courts.
….Romney Criticized Judges Who Struck Down California Same-Sex Marriage Ban As “Unelected Judges” Who “Cast Aside The Will Of The People.” From the Associated Press
…Santorum: “Unelected Judges” Should Not Impose Their Views On Gay Marriage, “The Great Moral Issues Of Our Time,” On Others. From the October 29, 2006, edition of Fox Broadcasting Co.’s Fox News Sunday
….Sen. Cornyn: “Unelected Judges … Have Occasionally Used This Power Conferred Upon Them In The Constitution To Impose Their Own Views.”
Of course President Obama’s observation that it would be strange for the SCOTUS to rule a law passed by Congress concerning regulation of commerce is not an observation. Nor is it even the president engaging in a little bit of calling out the ref before they make a bad call. No, it is an attack. So says the same people who know what and where the WMD are. There are examples of politicians attacking the federal courts, Republicans Threaten Judges. Again.
[ ]…Just weeks after the Tucson slaughter that claimed the life of circuit judge John Roll, Montana Congressman Denny Rehberg(R) responded to a recent ruling by declaring he wanted to “put some of these judicial activists on the Endangered Species list.”
[ ]…Back in 2005, Cornyn was one of the GOP standard bearers in the conservative fight against so-called “judicial activism” in the wake of the Republicans’ disastrous intervention in the Terri Schiavo affair. On April 4th, Cornyn took to the Senate floor to issue a not-too-thinly veiled threat to judges opposing his reactionary agenda. Just days after the murders of judge in Atlanta and another’s family members in Chicago, Cornyn offered his endorsement of judicial intimidation:
“I don’t know if there is a cause-and-effect connection, but we have seen some recent episodes of courthouse violence in this country…And I wonder whether there may be some connection between the perception in some quarters, on some occasions, where judges are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public, that it builds up and builds up and builds up to the point where some people engage in, engage in violence.”
[ ]….Majority Leader Tom Delay. On March 31st, Delay issued a statement regarding the consistent rulings in favor of Michael Schiavo by all federal and state court judges involved:
“The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior, but not today.”
[ ]…When anthrax spores were mailed to the Supreme Court in 2001, Americans could be forgiven for speculating on the ideological persuasion of the culprit. Aided by best-selling conservative author and media personality Ann Coulter, who joked in January 2006, “We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens’ creme brulee,” the right-wing endorsement of retribution against judges increasingly permeates the culture.
[ ]….But when Dick Cheney’s chief-of-staff Scooter Libby was convicted in his court in 2007, Judge Walton received death threats:
“I received a number of angry, harassing mean-spirited phone calls and letters. Some of those were wishing bad things on me and my family.” ( Conservative freaks didn’t bother to check to see that Walton was a Bush appointee)
What kind of ideological leadership within the radical conservative movement would cultivate this kind of toxic language directed at judges? But Saint Reagan Was the Nicest Man! Not Like That Vicious Thug Obama!
And I say that even though court-stripping is frequently proposed by right-wingers, most recently by presidential candidates Michele Bachmann and Newt Gingrich, and even though one of the principal proponents of court-stripping in the Reagan era was a young government lawyer named John Roberts, now the chief justice of the Supreme Court:
Over two decades ago, a young government lawyer named John Roberts tried—and failed—to convince the Reagan Justice Department to endorse a number of radical legislative proposals that would strip the federal courts of jurisdiction to hear cases concerning such issues as school prayer, school busing, and abortion.
Yes, the Reagan administration refrained from endorsing such bills. But it wanted to make sure everyone knew that it would declare them constitutional if someone else put them forward.
Nope, nothing thuggish about that kind of shot across the federal courts’ bow.
With Chief Justice Roberts on the SCOTUS – a position in which he has found no problem with strip searching people stopped for running a red light, holding American citizens in indefinite detention as long as the word terror is included in the suspicion of guilt and who has no problem putting possibly innocent people to death – heck no, President Obama has no reason at all to worry that this court might be ruled more by politics than the law.
Federal Judge Assigns Homework on Judicial Review to Justice Department. This judge is very likely overstepping his authority. The president’s remarks were not made in court or submitted to the court as part of any official statement. Those words were political speech. President Obama did clarify – for conservatives who don’t like to be called dumb, but pretend to be when it suits their agenda – that the remarks were about the commerce clause and Marberry v Madison.
Conservative Steven Hayward writes at the Powerrag blog, Barack Obama, Constitutional Ignoramus. What is the evidence Hayward offers up. That Obama never published any scholarly articles on constitutional law. he did publish one paper in the Harvard Law Review, but lets not let a little fact get in the way of our manufactured outrage. Obama taught constitutional law, but it was only one part of the constitution so that does not count. Hayward makes these deep insights from the perspective of someone who has zero law credentials. Hayward has a tendency to weigh in as an expert on things issues on which he pretends to be an expert, but is not. he seems to think he can make up the difference with spit, paste, omitting inconvenient facts and lying.
Some conservative blog called The Godfather wrote a long post of conspiracy theories regarding Obama threatening the Clintons with terrible consequences if they exposed him as ineligible to run because underneath he is really a lizard person from Planet V.and the Clintons. Sure the incredibly bright conservatives in his comment section ate that stuff up like a starving park duck eats popcorn. One would think a journalist, or someone who wants the world to think of her as a real journalist would not tweet the post to the whole world as meriting genuine thought, Fox News anchor takes heat for tweeting Obama birther conspiracy
The liberal watchdog Media Matters on Tuesday pounced on a tweet sent by Fox News anchor Heather Childers, which linked to an article that claimed Obama’s 2008 campaign staff had threatened to kill Chelsea Clinton.
…“Here’s the thing folks… that ONE topic sure got alot [sic] of you tweeting. Why? I apologize if the article offended anyone. Very interesting,” she tweeted.
Sticking strictly to the Bill Maher Guidelines, I am not outraged. I am thankful that M’s Childer’s family now has time to get her an MRI scan to see if she does not suffer from some kind of brain death.
Federal Income Taxes on Middle-Income Families Remain Near Historic Lows
Federal taxes on middle-income Americans are near historic lows,[1] according to the latest available data. That’s true both for federal income taxes and total federal taxes.[2]
Income taxes: A family of four in the exact middle of the income spectrum will pay only 5.6 percent of its 2011 income in federal income taxes, according to a new analysis by the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center. [3] Average income tax rates for these typical families have been lower during the Bush and Obama Administrations than at any time since the 1950s, as Figure 1 shows. (As discussed below, 2009 and 2010 were particularly low because of the temporary Making Work Pay Tax Credit.)
Overall federal taxes: Overall federal taxes — which include income as well as payroll and excise taxes — on middle-income households are near their lowest levels in decades, according to the latest data from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
It is time for the elite to start paying for their share of the infrastructure that makes their wealth possible. We do have freeloaders in America, most of them are living in McMansions.
The Long Goodbye 