Its true. I did keel over from the flu. However, i did manage to down load my personality into an AI so y'all are stuck with me.

That's fine, since the flu virus isn't IP protected (at least, until Disney reads this) -- we've already digitized it and it's being p2p'ed to a critical mass, so your virtual self should be dealt with annnnyyyy moment now...

Live blog on Clinton testifiying on Benghazi


This should be fun to follow.

She behaved like an Exec. I know who raises his voice and tries to shout himself out of a situation that he finds himself uncomfortable. It's quite unbecoming. She's definitely a master of not knowing what's going on at the State Dept.

But your immune system is precisely not the point. The great gains of immunizations are realized collectively, not individually.

An added side benefit of refusing to get the shot.

Wow, even your physiology is a freeloader.

Violent video games are the reason people die, except when they aren't. Don't confuse them with guns, because they're never the reason people die.

After watching much Fox News over the summer I can state without fear of rebuke that guns don't kill people, Mexicans kill people.

After watching much Fox News over the summer I can state without fear of rebuke that guns don't kill people, Mexicans kill people.

Guns don't kill people, goverment run health care kills people!

Apparently the House GOP caucus didn't get their flu shots, because they are once again showing all the symptoms of Surrender Fever - catch it!

Wow, even your physiology is a freeloader.

I almost went there and didn't. And now I get the best of both worlds (snark freeloading rules!).

that must have been some conference. cause there any number of diehards willing at least by word to go to the mattresses on the debt limit

instead they come back from their gop getaway and it's all step away from the ledge action

that must have been some conference

Arms, they were atwisted. Also, I suspect there might have been a few 'Economics 101' breakout sessions for the new TP members.

instead they come back from their gop getaway and it's all step away from the ledge action

Didn't the Big Money make it clear to the GOP it wouldn't sit still for them trashing the economy again? At least, that's what I interpreted from hints dropped by the US Chamber of Commerce and others.

From Huff Post last week

When you've lost the Koch brothers, you've lost the game.

Republicans intent on smashing through the debt ceiling in order to wring some spending concessions out of President Obama are finding themselves awfully lonely these days, but they've kept soldiering on. The latest ally to abandon them may be the toughest to ignore, though.

The president of the group Americans For Prosperity, bankrolled by Charles G. and David H. Koch of Koch Industries, this week said the group wants spending cuts, but warned Republicans that screwing around with the debt ceiling "makes the messaging more difficult," the Financial Times writes. The AFP president also warned Republicans not to be seen as "hostage takers." That's a marked change from the summer of 2011, when AFP objected to a debt-ceiling deal because it didn't cut spending enough, the FT notes.

This is way, way beyond former House Speaker Newt Gingrich telling House Republicans to give up on its debt-ceiling threat, like he did again yesterday. Newt's always rattling on about moon bases and zoos and stuff, so nobody listens to him. And certainly the House GOP doesn't care that Sen. Susan Collins (RINO-Maine) warned them to bow to the inevitable and raise the debt ceiling, as she did yesterday. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-DebtPanicStan) are a little tougher to take, but the cognitive dissonance arising from their debt-ceiling warnings is still manageable.

But the deep-pocketed Kochs are harder to ignore. Similar warnings recently from Tom Donohue of the Chamber of Commerce, along with the Financial Services Roundtable, the Business Roundtable and other job creators, also can't be ignored.

These people have all of the money. And if the economy goes off the cliff, as a new survey of economists strongly suggests it would in a ceiling-breach, then these people will have less money available for campaign contributions. Game over

These people have all of the money. And if the economy goes off the cliff, as a new survey of economists strongly suggests it would in a ceiling-breach, then these people will have less money available for campaign contributions. Game over.

Yes, the Big Money made it clear.

The leash got yanked and the dogs got curbed. Same as it ever was. I hope their opponents make it clear during the next cycle that despite the campaign cries to the contrary, the Tea Party reps have gone native

I've always assumed money ran the show, but the TP has been fighting the good fight. They may lose this battle but I expect there to be some backlash. I doubt there will be the GOP civil war that some hope for (on all sides oddly enough), but there will be some tussling I expect.

Why didn' the Democrats vote for it?

Why didn' the Democrats vote for it?

The debt ceiling thingy? Some did. Most didn't (I hear) because a) Let the GOP deal with their stupid mess, the Dems want a clean bill, b) Pelosi was recommending folks not (for whatever political reason, but did not try I understand too hard), and c) many feal the Congressional pay gimmick is , well a gimmick and likely not constitutional.

If I have the wrong "it" then no idea.

The TP has not been fighting the good fight. It's been fighting a stupid, mindless fight.

So I just got a "newsflash" that the DoD is lifting the bane on women in combat (such as it is in modern combat). Good for them I say.

FTA in [2306]

On the floor, Democrats made Boehner prove he had his conference on his side. Most of them withheld their votes (or voted no) until the roll call cleared the 217 vote threshold for passage.

The TP has not been fighting the good fight. It's been fighting a stupid, mindless fight.

The metaphorical good fight, you know, from their perspective. Hey it is just a turn of phrase, not an acutal evaluation.

Oh, OK.

Most didn't (I hear) because a) Let the GOP deal with their stupid mess, the Dems want a clean bill, b) Pelosi was recommending folks not (for whatever political reason, but did not try I understand too hard), and c) many feal the Congressional pay gimmick is , well a gimmick and likely not constitutional.

Tactically the Dems demured casting votes until the GOP had cast theirs. This basically meant that they refused to play until the GOP was on record one way or the other. If the GOP fails to pass it, then the Dems come in and save the economy with "bipartisan support" against the crazy GOP wings. If the GOP passes it, the Dems can vote no for whatever reasons and run with the GOP's abandonment of principle for the vote.

And it looks like VAWA will be the next stop on the Great Retreat from Wahington. Collins, Ayotte and Crapo will all be Senate co-sponsors.

Hey elections have consequences. I guess the GOP has decided to be Democrat lite* we'll see how that works out for them.

* Yes I am yanking on Joe K's chain, but there is some truth to it. In reality they need to move in some areas and stake out some other areas to fight over.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-DebtPanicStan) are a little tougher to take

Actually Murkowski lost in the 2010 GOP primary but ended up beating the guy backed by Palin in the general, she's still a conservative but has no need to drink the teaper koolaid or fear a teaper insurrection, so she can go off the party reservation at will- and does every now and then.

Hey elections have consequences. I guess the GOP has decided to be Democrat lite* we'll see how that works out for them.

When Boehner was re-elected and essentially ditched the Hastert rule, he basically broke (for now, pending 2014's primaries) the Teaper hold on the House GOP- if he's willing to take a bill to the floor that has less than 50% of the GOP vote- they've been rendered toothless.

The "Hastert Rule" gave a small number of Representatives a tremendous amount of power, akin to the power held by Senators in the Senate, but the Hastert Rule was never even a "rule" in the sense that the Senate has its cloture rules and such. My guess is that after his Plan B was torpedoed by his own party mates, Boehner decided to show them that he'd had enough, get back in line like good disciplined GOPers, or I'm going to deal with the enemy. I think at elast some of the teaper leaners have gotten the message

Today....sensory overload.

Video: Boehner: "I do believe that is their goal – to just shove us into the dustbin of history"

She behaved like an Exec. I know who raises his voice and tries to shout himself out of a situation that he finds himself uncomfortable. It's quite unbecoming. She's definitely a master of not knowing what's going on at the State Dept.

Honestly, I think Obama's gotten *way* too much grief about Benghazi. I think the State Department ###### the whole situation up on several levels and I think Obama's shown very good temperament to not, day after the election, tell every single person even remotely involved in this ####-up to hand in their resignation. No matter what the Republicans are saying, it wasn't Obama's job to micromanage every security arrangement and sort through all the apparently poor info that was coming through.

Gotta give HRC credit for ballsiness. She followed up a declaration of full personal responsibility for the State Department in the situation by declaring that absolutely nothing was actually her fault or and nothing was on her, and shifting the responsibility for the entire situation to everyone *but* her.

Gotta give HRC credit for ballsiness. She followed up a declaration of full personal responsibility for the State Department in the situation by declaring that absolutely nothing was actually her fault or and nothing was on her, and shifting the responsibility for the entire situation to everyone *but* her.

Well she learned from someone who was quite masterful at this

Well she learned from someone who was quite masterful at this

Now if *Bill* was involved, he not only would have deflected blame, he would have convinced everyone that it *was* the YouTube video that set everything off.

Now if *Bill* was involved, he not only would have deflected blame, he would have convinced everyone that it *was* the YouTube video that set everything off.

And nailed some pudgy Libyan ass while he was at it.

GOP blew this Benghazi story, as a political bludgeon, the moment they equated it to 9/11. You know, when 750 times as many Americans died.

And nailed some pudgy Libyan ass while he was at it.

It would be like that scene near the end of "Caddyshack" when Rodney Dangerfield says "We're all gonna get laid."

GOP blew this Benghazi story, as a political bludgeon, the moment they equated it to 9/11. You know, when 750 times as many Americans died.

One problem the GOP has had recently with messaging is that many elements of their base actually believe that Obama is "just like Hitler," when you believe that equating what happened at Benghazi to what happened on 9/11 is just natural,
Obamacare = death panels, etc... The problem is that the top rungs have not been able to contain that stuff to the echo chamber, it flows out and either falls flat, or worse rebounds against them.

The Benghazi attack to me seems to be more akin to stuff like the Khobar Towers bombing, the Kenyan and Tanzanian embassy bombings, going back to 1983 Beirut Embassy bombing (actually the 1983 bombing was likely Shiite/Iranian/proto-Hezbollah in origin- the people behind Benghazi are likely the heirs of, if not some of the same people behind the 1990s embassy attacks (i.e., Al Qaeda/Salafist/Wahabi islamists) - but the Benghazi attack seems less sophisticated in a military sense...

It would be like that scene near the end of "Caddyshack" when Rodney Dangerfield says "We're all gonna get laid."

Bill Clinton would ruin every 80s movie. At the end, he'd land *both* the popular, hot girl and the nerdy, secretly hot girl.

Video: Boehner: "I do believe that is their goal – to just shove us into the dustbin of history"

Sounds like a worthy pursuit to me, at least in its current form. If the GOP would like to transform itself back into a reasonable political party, that would be a different story. Of course, for most Tea Partiers, there's not much of a difference.

Video: Boehner: "I do believe that is their goal – to just shove us into the dustbin of history"
Sounds like a worthy pursuit to me, at least in its current form.

Isn't that pretty much the long term goal of every political party with respect to its [ideological] adversaries?

Bill Clinton would ruin every 80s movie. At the end, he'd land *both* the popular, hot girl and the nerdy, secretly hot girl.

They apparently don't make die with enough sides to roll Bill Clinton's level of charisma.

Isn't that pretty much the long term goal of every political party with respect to its [ideological] adversaries?

"It's not fair, the way they want to play to win!"

]tsh'It's not OK for other people, but it's ESPECIALLY not OK to do it to people with clinical depression. Sort of like how you shouldn't threaten to rape anyone, but it's even worse to threaten to rape someone who's already been raped.'

Worst analogy on this page.

Agreed. Note to BTF posters (and Republican politicians) - if you're thinking about discussing rape, for any reason other than to say what a horrible crime it is, DON'T.

While I'm sympathetic to your point, no. In meetings and forums I've seen and heard too many people inquiring after accurate rape statistics and related information denounced for that as 'rape-loving scum' and the like to be sanguine about your assertion.

I've also known a few too many people badly frightened by phony and conflated statistics, and resources thereby misallocated, to not think it's a real problem. Any time politics (which on this issue is the case from all sides, unfortunately) makes it all but impossible to get accurate information, it is indeed a real problem.

Telling people what they can and can't talk about isn't the way to improve the dialogue, imo.

Speaking of the Inaugural, did someone link to the New Yorker's mock story? It's hilarious.

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Responding to reports that President Obama is considering signing as many as nineteen executive orders on gun control, Republicans in Congress unleashed a blistering attack on him today, accusing Mr. Obama of “cynically and systematically using his position as President to lead the country.”

Spearheading the offensive was Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas), who charged the President with the “wanton exploitation of powers that are legally granted to him under the U.S. Constitution.”
Calling him the “Law Professor-in-Chief,” Rep. Stockman accused Mr. Obama of “manipulating a little-known section of the Constitution,” Article II, which outlines the power of the President.
“President Obama looks down the list of all of the powers that are legally his and he’s like a kid in a candy store,” Rep. Stockman said. “It’s nauseating.”

The Texas congressman said that if Mr. Obama persists in executing the office of the Presidency as defined by the Constitution, he could face “impeachment and/or deportation.”

Noting that the President has not yet signed the executive orders on gun control, Rep. Stockman said that he hoped his stern words would serve as a wake-up call to Mr. Obama: “Mr. President, there’s still time for you to get in line. But if you continue to fulfill the duties of President of the United States that are expressly permitted in the Constitution, you are playing with fire.”


Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/01/republicans-accuse-obama-of-using-position-as-president-to-lead-country.html#ixzz2IqOMjlXW

That story was fake? So hard to tell with this bunch of loonies.

So.... when's the US going to label Japan a currency manipulator? i mean they even STATE where they're going to manipulate the exchange rate to, even China doesn't do that.

They apparently don't make die with enough sides to roll Bill Clinton's level of charisma.

QFT, nerd.

Speaking of guns, a good (old) friend of mine is on CNN (Piers Morgan) now talking about a documentary he produced - called Valentine Road - about a school shooting.

And it looks like VAWA will be the next stop on the Great Retreat from Wahington. Collins, Ayotte and Crapo will all be Senate co-sponsors.

How do you figure? VAWA reauthorization got 68 votes in the Senate last year, and the only movement in the link involves the Dems dropping a provision the GOP didn't like.

The Virgina state Senate is split 20-20 D/R, so while one of the Democratic Senators was at the inauguration, the state GOP redistricted the state.

So a black state senator who was active in the Civil Rights movement takes a day off (a holiday, actually) to attend the inauguration of the nation's first black president, and Republicans seize the opportunity to dilute the voting power of minorities. If that wasn't enough, they adjourn the senate in honor of Stonewall Jackson. I'm really at a loss to understand why republican candidates do so poorly with black voters. It just boggles the mind.

The whole affair puzzles me, though. Where was the Democrat's senior legislative advisor cautioning about this? Where was the awareness that if one of you goes, the other 19 better take off; at least enough of you to deprive Republicans of a quorum for this kind of nonsense?

Speaking of which, what are the chances that Democrats will be able to beat back Republican attempts in the states they control to apportion electoral votes in the next Prez election according to absurdly gerrymandered Congressional districts? No idea how effective a simple appeal to the Constitution's 'one man-one vote' would be in a case like this, and considering the anti 'one man-one vote' precedent the College itself sets there may be no case to be made, but I'd like to think that in the extreme case of a state of ten million voters, having nine CDs include ten voters each with the remaining CD holding 9,999,910 voters would be obviously un Constitutional, then you'd simply argue from there.

Still, you can't blame the GOP. They've seen the desperate need to steal elections coming for decades. They can no more refrain from cheating the vote than John McCain can keep from embarassing himself in a foreign policy discussion.

I didn't find HRC particularly impressive or unimpressive, but I've been watching The West Wing lately, so if she wasn't Leo McGarry in front of a Congressional inquiry I'd probably have been disappointed.

The West Wing

The early seasons were pretty cool.

The early seasons were pretty cool.

Josh totally should have chosen Mary Louise-Parker over Donna!

...oh yeah, and I suppose some political stuff happened on that show too.

totally should have chosen Mary Louise-Parker over

Quoted for eternal truthfulness, regardless of what comes after the "over."