Glenn Beck is fucking idiot....

On the February 12 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Glenn Beck featured Philadelphia-based conservative radio host Dom Giordano, who claimed that "the mainstream media has dubbed [Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL)] to be African-American" and said, "If you start to, you know, delve around the edges, say, 'Wait a minute, isn't he mixed race? Weren't we told that last year?' Or whatever, biracial. Not allowed to say that anymore." Beck responded by saying "he's very white in many ways," adding, "Gee, can I even say that? Can I even say that without somebody else starting a campaign saying, 'What does he mean, "He's very white?" ' He is. He's very white."

NASCAR rules are clearly stated. Everyone knows the rules so follow them! How hard is that? When Michael Waltrip and crew chief David Hyder decided they did not want to follow the rules they not only hurt themselves, but they hurt the sport as well. I hate to remind you guys but aren't suppose use jet fuel in your car! I am a NASCAR fan its one of two good things that I got out of my first marriage. It completely disappoints me that Michael Waltrip hurt the Daytona 500 in this way. Now instead of talking about the race itself Waltrip's cheating is all NASCAR fans are going to be able to talk about. Its kind of like the wardrobe malfunction at the Super Bowl. Thanks Waltrip for ruining the Daytona 500 for everyone else! You are a dummy!

Yikes, that Fox show is painful. I wonder if conservatives find it funny.

Oh no! We forgot Nekkid Thursday. Anyone want to make it Nekkid Friday?

Can I even say that without somebody else starting a campaign saying, 'What does he mean, "He's very white?"

Well yeah Glenn Beck, I'd like to know what you meant when you said that.

Hmmm...maybe Beck is continuing with the "clean and articulate" line of thought on Obama. These people need to grow up.

There's a pretty good letter in the AJC about the stupid gun bill.
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/printedition/2007/02/16/edletts0216a.html

Who is this Jerry Tyler? He sure sounds smart and thoughtful...

Smart, thoughtful and hot... the good ones are alwyas taken..

Catherine,

V-Day is over, you don't need to suck up anymore.

Well, you know, with roses still on my desk it's hard to resist.

Dang, I didn't even get you any flowers Jules.

Been a while since I saw the banana video. Good times. Good times.

They are kidding about the whole banana thing right? God save us from the stupid people of the world if they aren't. I was LOL over the video.

Congressman Tim Ryan D-17 Ohio on the Resolution debate today. He smacked the snot out of the republicans

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zx463pjcwA

Nope, they aren't kidding at all. You may not have noticed, but that's Kirk Cameron sitting next to the banana guy. Here's a response video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HW06Wz_R74

Well, we've got Jim Marshall not willing to even go with a *non-binding* resolution to rebuke the President's escalation.

Torture, energy, Iraq ... the list is growing.

Odinseye if you've got a better candidate for the 8th district, then I suggest you send him or her money and help them in the Democratic primary next cycle. If you live in the 8th, you can vote for him or her.

But ultimately this is a representative Democracy, and our Congressmen, legislators, etc represent the voters of their district not the activists that make up their party's ranks in the rest of the state/country.

I wish Marshall had voted the other way but until I vote in the 8th district its really none of my business.

*sigh* if only ohio had same-sex marriage. I'd be movin to the 17th.

Chris.
Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit. I am so freaking sick of our elected officials hiding behind this "I have to represent my district" crap. No, we count on elected officials to LEAD us. Torture is wrong. Our energy policy is failing miserably. The war was a mistake from the get-go and now the majority of Americans see that. Congressman Marshall should stand for what is right and what is our American tradition and legacy - and he should be able to explain that to his "district".

Catherine, I don't think he feels that way. I went to the debates in the 8th district, he had some pointed criticisms of the way the war is being conducted and plans for doing it a different way. This resolution isn't about that.

Elected officials don't "belong" to the Democratic Party in the sense that the party owns them and they have to march lockstep. That top down attitude is what ultimately led to the Republicans terrible reign during the 90's and this decade and what finally brought them down. Why do we want to follow that model?

I never suggested that they belong to the Democratic party. I am suggesting that they belong to the human race and should be able to stand against torture. That as humans they should be able to argue the importance of a energy policy that doesn't destroy the environment. That as humans they should be able to understand that diplomacy not war will solve our global problems.

I never suggested that they belong to the Democratic party. I am suggesting that they belong to the human race and should be able to stand against torture. That as humans they should be able to argue the importance of a energy policy that doesn't destroy the environment. That as humans they should be able to understand that diplomacy not war will solve our global problems.

They should be leaders. Leaders in innovative problem solving. Leaders in understanding our weaknesses and our strengths and how to leverage them globally. Leaders in communicating to their districts.

I think one of the most interesting points I've heard made about these non-binding resolutions actually came from a conservative Republican who worked for Reagan and the Heritage Foundation, and very much disapproves of Bush's war management and I think disagrees with the surge -- Bruce Fein. He was on KCRW's To the Point show the other day, and he argued that these resolutions were not just ineffective (and maybe problematic for morale) but downright immoral. He said Congress can, if it has the gonads, put a stop to this, and to say "Well we think you're going to get all those young people killed for nothing but go right on ahead anyway" is totally untenable. If they really think the surge is wrong, they should DO something about it, but if they're not going to stop it, then all these resolutions are just so much hot air.

I don't think they can stop it. What are they supposed to do? We're not ready for impeacghment yet, and short of that, the POTUS has the authority. You can't put Pandora back in the box, or whatever that analogy is.

Chris, "representative democracy" is different from "mob rule". If we were just going to poll the majority of each district, we should go ahead and put Gallup in charge. It doesn't take any kind of leadership to do that. The "representative" part of "representative democracy"are supposed to use their judgement. We choose them because we believe their character is such that they will make the correct decisions most of the time and let us know when we have been led astray. They are teacher, salesman, and counselor, and if they are not, perhaps we need to find someone else.

Why would we elect someone who is just going to take the path of least resistance? That's not leadership, that's cowardice.

Now would be a good time to click on that "Democrats Work" sign in the upper left area of the main page.

I agree with a lot of what you said Shelby. The Senate resolution made some sense in that we'd have to get to 60, with 10 Republicans (Lieberman's procedural vote is probably the last Democratic thing he will do) and also getting those moderate Dems into line. The whole point of that exercise was to build some even tepid level of consensus that it was time for Congress to get the situation under control.

But in the House? We own that place. There could be a vote tomorrow to withdraw funding in six months, no amendments, no debate, nothing.

Now, for the good of the country, it's probably good that we don't embrace the "bend over" school of minority relations in the House. But, it still does not seem that difficult to have the three days' debate on the actual purse-string issue. Well, unless Pelosi just wants to tell the Repubs that they had their time already on the non-binding, and no real time for debate on the funding issue.

Thanks for signing in. Now you can comment. (sign out)