CPAC Idiocies and Whackjobberies

Whackjobbery is running rampant at this year’™s CPAC conference. The attendees are laughing at the possibility of Chicago being bombed, are cheering discredited whack job theories about how Obama is not a citizen and elegible for the Presidency, and are being advised by the #1 Republican this side of Sarah Palin, Joe the Plumber.

Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

The Republicans simply can’™t get enough of the whackjobbery, can they? This weekend is the annual CPAC conference at the Omni Shoreham in Washington. They’™ve got the usual suspects speaking, and last night the big stars were John Bolton and Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media. Bolton joked about Chicago getting bombed, garnering big laughs from the intensely patriotic crowd. Yes, laughter. This is what passes for patriotism among Republicans, laughter at the notion of the President’™s hometown getting hit by a nuclear weapon. It is said that Joe Scarborough warned Republicans at the conference that they should work on their tone, but they’™re evidently not listening to Morning Joe.

Cliff Kincaid, who claims to be all about safeguarding Accuracy in Media, decided to peddle the thoroughly discredited notion that Barack Obama is not a citizen. Yeah, there’™s a ton of irony there, that a man who purports to make his living identifying accuracy would be peddling this crock of horse shit. But he knows his audience. Kincaid’™s speech, where he makes the absurd remarks, evidently drew thundrous applause. Kincaid was working the faithful, whack jobs to a man, evidently. Good reaction from the whack jobs at the suggestion that Obama is a communist, too. No, still no sense of shame seen anywhere near the Omni Shoreham this weekend. (Hmm, I’™ve got a friend who works as a bartender there. Hmm!)

Perhaps the biggest act of whackjobbery at the CPAC conference is the presence of Joe the Plumber, now in his role as Joe the Political Advisor. The CPAC folks have Joe the Plumber, incompetent even at finishing his apprenticeship as a plumber, advising young conservatives as a panelist. Maybe he’™s going to advise them how they, too, can become attention whores. No, we’™re not talking about Larry Craig here.

Perhaps the cutest bit is the list of exhibitors on the CPAC web site. Most of those listed seem to be conservative organizations. I’™m thinking this is like a trade show. A whole bunch of conservatives/Republicans, like Joe the Plumber, can’™t seem to make a living without becoming professional attention whores. They are professional whack jobs, having evidently failed at being professional in any other way.

Friday, February 27th, 2009 by Richard Blair |

Santorum Soon to Claim Vatican as his Residence

Rick Santorum writes stupidly. I need a tag of ‘œStupid Santorum’ on these stories, or something like that. This time Santorum implies that he’™s a resident of Philadelphia. While Santorum is the worst writer hired by the right wing Philadelphia Inquirer, even he may know he lives in Virginia. Perhaps he should move to the Vatican.

Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

In a truly insipid column today in the Philadelphia Inquirer, Rick Santorum, the failed Republican and former carpetbagger Senator from Pennsylvania, implied that he lives in Philadelphia, though surely his driver’™s license says otherwaise. Santorum spent many a year claiming to live in western Pennsylvania while actually living int he DC suburbs in Virginia. Now he evidently wants to claim Philadelphia as his residence. It is a simple little line amidst Santorum’™s insipid railing against Nancy Pelosi, a complaint that is far more ‘œmore Catholic than thou’ than it is logical or substantive. In the line Santorum describes Philadelphia’™s Cardinal Rigali with the possessive pronoun ‘œour.’ From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

The pope heads a long list of church leaders who have used the speaker’™s comments to teach the faithful. It includes our own Cardinal Justin Rigali.

I’™m not Catholic, but I could rightly claim Cardinal Rigali with the posessive pronooun ‘œour,’ since I live a mere fifteen blocks from Rigali’™s office. But Santorum lives in Virginia. For Santorum, Rigali is clearly a Cardinal in a different jurisdiction than his. But the guy has long claimed to be of a region he has long abandoned as a resident. I suppose his mostrously oversized ego is at fault here rather than Santorum’™s faults with geography.

Just another episode of Right Wing Pundits Gone Wild. Move along, nothing else happening here.

Thursday, February 26th, 2009 by Richard Blair |

Legislature in PA Gets Gifts, of Expensive Bibles

To honor their swearing in the legislators in Pennsylvania were presented with an expensive bible to keep. Meanwhile schools and parks and empoyees in the state are suffering. The legislature pleads tradition, and I plead that they should let them all find the unemployment line.

Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

Holy Separation of Church and State, Batman! Is there a fiscal revrsal button on my utility belt?

The state of Pennsylvania, undergoing huge budget cuts despite the relief brought by the Obama stimulus package, bought each of its state legislators, get this, a bible. Evidently this is a tradition here, to lavish beautiful gifts on the legislators. Screw them. From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

With the state sinking deeper into a fiscal hole, the Pennsylvania General Assembly bought 220 Bibles and other holy books for legislators as they took the oath of office last month.

And the public paid for them – roughly $13,700 in all.

“Holy Moses,” said Eric Epstein, a Harrisburg activist and founder of, when told about the bulk purchase. “By the time you arrive at this station in your life, you shouldn’t need the taxpayers to pay for your moral boarding pass.”

The House chief clerk and Senate secretary said yesterday that it was a tradition dating back decades for lawmakers to receive a personalized holy book, courtesy of the public, at the start of their terms.

The Pennsylvania has no business buying them bibles or the Aventures of Huckleberry Finn. Frankly, I’d like to see the Senators and House members get a book by Suze Orman, or something like that. Good fiscal responsibility and a bit of alternative lifestyle, to boot.

Thursday, February 26th, 2009 by Steven Reynolds |
Category: Politics - Pa.

“I’m John McCain, and I Never Approved of Squat”

John McCain is denying responsibility for an ad run by the RNC on his behalf last fall. Evidently he did not approve of that commercial, though the judge is not buying it, and is allowing Jackson Browne’™s suit for infringing on his song ‘œRunning on Empty.’ The GOP wankers should have tried using Browne’™s ‘œRosie.’

Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

In last fall’™s election campaign the GOP used an ad in Ohio that ripped off the Jackson Browne golden oldie, ‘œRunning on Empty.’ The point they were trying to get across was that the Obama campaign energy policy would leave us without gas, or something like that. Jackson Browne was offended by the ad, and has sued all of the above, John McCain, the RNC, and etc. Turns out John McCain’™s defense is that he never approved the use of the song. The man helped write the campaign laws, for Christ’™s sake, and he can’™t take personal responsibility for this kind of bungling? Here’™s his defense, from

I was not involved at all in any way in the writing, creation, production, distribution or dissemination of the video, nor do I have any knowledge whatsoever of how this video was written, created, produced or disseminated or who was involved in any aspect of the writing, creation, production, distribution or dissemination of the video. I was completely unaware that this video even existed until I was informed of it after this lawsuit was filed.

The judge didn’™t buy it.

Despite McCain’™s claims of being a hapless dupe for his party, U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner said (.pdf) the RNC and McCain were so intertwined ‘” what the judge called an ‘œagency relationship’ ‘” that McCain stays in the case. The judge wrote that, even if McCain’™s statement were true, ‘œonce an agency relationship is established, the principal is liable for the acts of her agent, even if the principal does not expressly authorize or instruct her agent to take any action.’

The judge also did not agree with the Republicans and McCain that Browne’™s lawsuit was bogus. Among other things, the judge kept the lawsuit alive to give the defendants a chance to demonstrate how using about 20 seconds of the song in the commercial was a fair use.

Yes, persons running for political office are responsible, just like we are, for using and paying for the artistic products they want to emply to back their own ambitions.

In the interest of full disclosure, my son goes to sleep quite well to Jackson Browne’™s ‘œJamaica Say You Will.’ I have not played ‘œRosie’ for him.

Wednesday, February 25th, 2009 by Richard Blair |

Jindal: What Nickname Should He Get? Same Old, Same Old?

Bobby Jindal carried the GOP response to Barack Obama last night, about the only Republican in the country who is not tainted by the last eight years of Republican incompetence and outright corruption. But he spouted the same old tired Republican line, like a puppet, which means he deserves a nickname. Give us one, willya?

Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

Barack Obama made a well-received speech to Congress last night. He appealed directly to the American people, whether they are hurt directly by the recession or know people who are. And Obama was positive about the character of the American people and how that character, with leadership by government, will bring us to new heights. I liked especially how Obama framed the problems we are facing in terms of personal responsibility, and how the urgent needs of our country have been ignored in the last several years. Sure, Obama did not name names, but I’™ll name them. It was the Republicans. More on that later. First a taste of the Obama speech. From the transcript of the speech at the Washington Post:

Now, if we’™re honest with ourselves, we’™ll admit that for too long, we have not always met these responsibilities – as a government or as a people. I say this not to lay blame or look backwards, but because it is only by understanding how we arrived at this moment that we’™ll be able to lift ourselves out of this predicament.

The fact is, our economy did not fall into decline overnight. Nor did all of our problems begin when the housing market collapsed or the stock market sank. We have known for decades that our survival depends on finding new sources of energy. Yet we import more oil today than ever before. The cost of health care eats up more and more of our savings each year, yet we keep delaying reform. Our children will compete for jobs in a global economy that too many of our schools do not prepare them for. And though all these challenges went unsolved, we still managed to spend more money and pile up more debt, both as individuals and through our government, than ever before.

In other words, we have lived through an era where too often, short-term gains were prized over long-term prosperity; where we failed to look beyond the next payment, the next quarter, or the next election. A surplus became an excuse to transfer wealth to the wealthy instead of an opportunity to invest in our future. Regulations were gutted for the sake of a quick profit at the expense of a healthy market. People bought homes they knew they couldn’™t afford from banks and lenders who pushed those bad loans anyway. And all the while, critical debates and difficult decisions were put off for some other time on some other day.

Well that day of reckoning has arrived, and the time to take charge of our future is here.

Yeah, it is a day of reckoning, alright, and what we’™re reckoning with is the swath of destruction the Republicans have left in their wake. Policies of inaction and deregulation and senseless war and wasteful spending and rampant incompetence have left us in this mess. We’™ve got a lot of Republicans to blame, too. Bush, Phil Gramm, Cheney, Mitch McConnell, Bill Frist, Limbaugh, Perle, Boehner, Alberto Gonzales, and on and on and on. These are the architects of the wreckage that is our economy, our world reputation, our civil liberties and our sense of ourselves. Yeah, Barack Obama has an enormous task ahead of him, and the expectations are sky high. But we progressives can take heart that one thing is for sure. The Republicans are going to offer nothing more than do nothing and know nothing as their solution to the crisis. They are going to sit on their hands, neither owning the responsibility they have for the crisis nor offering solutions to fixing the problems.

It is telling that the Republicans put forth Bobby Jindal to deliver their response to President Obama’™s speech. Jindal, at least, is not complicit in the failed war in Iraq, he is not responsible for the Bush deficits, for the Republican march towards deregulation, for the Republican incompetencies, at least at the national level. After the last eight years, getting a McCain or a McConnell or a Bush to deliver the Republican response would be a bad move for the Republicans. so they bring in Jindal, not closely connected to the failures of the Bush years, but what he does is deliver the same tired old message, complete with straw men. How about this straw man, from CNN:

And Jindal rebuked the president for a remark made earlier in this month when Obama warned that without immediate action on the economy, ‘œour nation will sink into a crisis that, at some point, we may be unable to reverse.’

‘œA few weeks ago, the president warned that our country is facing a crisis that he said we may not be able to reverse,’ Jindal said. ‘œOur troubles are real, to be sure. But don’™t let anyone tell you that we cannot recover. Don’™t let anyone tell you that America ‘™s best days are behind her.’

This is the same tired Republican strategy. Take Obama’™s words, twist, then reapply. (Jindal does that throughout his speech, and .) No, Barack Obama never disparaged the American spirit. Jindal is dishonest to imply that. But that’™s the Republican plan, to get a leg up and win politically no matter ethics, honsesty or even what is good for the country. Given that they now whine about deficit spending while supporting it throughout the Bush Presidency, it’™s obvious that what they want is power to spend, and nothing more. (OK, power to spy on Americans, power to limit civil rights, power to . . . you get the idea.)

I’™m wondering at what they must think of Jindal. Hey, he’™s one who was only barely tainted by the Republican scandals and incompetencies of the past, but he’™s taking his marching orders, and they are exactly the stupid stances that Republicans have used all along. They’™ve shown that they are not for small government and not for fiscal responsibility, but Jindal persists in claiming those are Republican values.

Which brings me to the question. Jindal is relatively new to the GOP scene. what nickname can we give him? If Sarah Palin, who also echoes stupid Republican values while pitching the same old same old, is Caribou Spice, could we call Jindal Slumdog Barbie? No, no, Slumdog is much too optimistic for a Republican to steal the label. Let’™s call him Mumbai Gumbo, or something like that. There’™s the Republican support of outsourcing in that nickname, plus Jindal’™s own heritage, but there’™s that hint of Louisiana corruption, too. Now while Jindal seems not at all connected to Louisiana corruption, he’™s trying like HELL to be connected to the Republican Party, and that’™s about as corrupt as you can get. But these are not exactly the most polite nicknames, and I think the readers here can do better.

Wednesday, February 25th, 2009 by Richard Blair |

Yo Repubs? How’s that “Do Nothing” Strategery Working Out?

The polls are in and the Republican strategery of doing nothing about the economy is proving to be wildly unpopular with the people, while Obama remains popular. Hey, and bipartisanship is something the public seems to want as well. Gosh, that means a total of three Republicans are going to get some credit! Massive GOP FAIL!

Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

I just can’™t get over this New York Times poll this morning. Obama is getting the backing of the people of America in far higher numbers than just those who voted for him, and by far they are optimistic about the stimulus. How do they favor the Repubs and their ‘œdo nothing‘ and ‘œknow nothing‘ strategeries? Not so much. From the New York Times:

A majority of people surveyed in both parties said Mr. Obama was striving to work in a bipartisan way, but most faulted Republicans for their response to the president, saying the party had objected to the $787 billion economic stimulus plan for political reasons. Most said Mr. Obama should pursue the priorities he campaigned on, the poll found, rather than seek middle ground with Republicans.

. . .

Americans are under no illusions that the country’™s problems will be resolved quickly, but the poll suggested that they will be patient when it comes to the economy, with most saying it would be years before significant improvement.

A month into Mr. Obama’™s term, with his first big accomplishments, setbacks and political battles behind him, more than three-quarters of the people polled said they were optimistic about the next four years with him as president. Similar percentages said that they thought he was bringing real change to the way things were done in Washington and that they had confidence in his ability to make the right decisions about the economy.

The aura of good will surrounding Mr. Obama at this stage of his presidency is similar to the one that benefited Ronald Reagan as he led the nation out of economic gloom.

With a job approval rating of 63 percent, Mr. Obama is in a strong position to sell his economic policies. Yet the poll also captured skepticism about how effective his plans will prove to be in addressing the deep recession, as well as a strain of populism that could test his ability to retain public support for efforts to prop up key sectors of the economy.

I’™m thinking there is a bandwagon concerning bipartisanship that the Republicans would do well to get aboard. I do not expect them to do so, though. I think they are hard wired right now to oppose anything a Democrat proposes, whether that is the Democratic Congress or Barack Obama. They ignore Obama’™s popularity at their peril.

Tuesday, February 24th, 2009 by Richard Blair |

Buttars Demoted by GOP, Talked Out of Turn

Chris Buttars believes gays are biggest threat since rabid sneetches, and has been dumped from his committee chairmanships in the Utah Senate. As a whack job in a GOP leadership position, he was harming the already tattered Republican brand. They all agree with his whack statements, but even Repubs have limits..

Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

Utah State Senator Chris Buttars has been reprimanded by his state party. (We wrote about this the other day.) The GOP out there in the busy bee state has decided not that Mr. Buttars is wrong in thinking that gays are the most significant threat to the US of A, far worse than armed terrorists, but that he didn’™t raise his hand and take his turn while speaking. No, it isn’™t because they disagree with Buttars. the Utah GOP evidently had an agreement with this numbnut that he’™d keep his trap shut unless he got permission, especially when it comes to gays. From the Salt Lake Tribune:

Senate leaders disciplined Sen. Chris Buttars, R-West Jordan, not for anti-gay comments he made in a recent interview, but because he violated a deal with leadership that he not talk about gay issues, a senator said Saturday.

‘œMost of what Senator Buttars said, I agree with,’ Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, said in a weekly Red Meat Radio program he hosts on K-TALK. ‘œWe as a Senate caucus had an agreement that because Sen. Buttars had become such a lightning rod on this issue, he would not be the spokesman on this issue, and basically he violated that agreement.’

Buttars was under fire for statements he made to a documentary filmmaker in which he compared homosexuals to radical Muslims, called them the greatest internal threat to America and said they had no morals.

Senate President Michael Waddoups, R-Taylorsville, announced Friday that he was removing Buttars from two committees: the Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Committee and the Senate Judicial Confirmation Committee, both of which Buttars had chaired.

In making the announcement, Waddoups said he was trying to ensure the Senate runs smoothly, but also noted that ‘œwe agree with many of the things he said. ‘¦ We stand four-square behind his right [to say what he wants].’

At no time did Waddoups mention that Buttars had actually been told he could not speak on gay and lesbian issues. But it was the breach of that directive that led to the reprimand, according to Stephenson.

I’™m tempted to note that the Republican Party seems to be against free speech here. Let the guy speak, for Christ sake! Of course the reason they don’™t want to let him speak is that even in conservative Utah Chris Buttars comes off as a whack job, and as a committee Chair he then makes the Republicans look, well, exactly what they are in Utah, a party of whack jobs. At least Chris Buttars is honest in his hate.

Tuesday, February 24th, 2009 by Richard Blair |

The Absence Of Angels In America: An Argument For Anarchy?

Philosophers have long debated the question, “How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?”. In these moments of economic peril and in light of our advancing animosity, perhaps the question should be, “Are there any angels in America?”. Better still, “Could today’s anarchists be tomorrow’s angels?”.

Commentary By: Daniel DiRito

At this unprecedented economic juncture, the inertia that accompanies our adherence to accepted, acrimonious, and antiquated algorithms has, by attrition, abrogated the principles of osmotic parity that have the potential to prevent our collapse…a collapse that would undoubtedly be defined by our dogmatic deification of unchecked political capitalism…a lecherous linking that history would likely depict as the opportunistic and incestuous appetite of the “ruling” class to copulate with corporate concubines in order to share in the symbiotic perks of prostitution that permeate the shameless pursuit of power and profit…absent a sufficient appreciation for the ameliorative aspects of altruistic governance and the shared success it should support.

When government is little more than the means to obtain or hold political power, it has become, by its very existence, the prevailing argument for the initiation of anarchy.

The aforementioned dysfunctional formulation of governmental “order” is antithetical to the symmetry oft associated with the social contract defined by our forefathers. As such, one can reasonably argue that our recent and rampant self-serving configuration of capitalism may well precipitate the initiation of anarchy as the means to destroy an unintended and unabated disease.

In this current conflation of chaos…a top of the pyramid chain letter economy powered by a Ponzi scheme psyche…perhaps anarchy (disorder) can actually be the means to “order”…an antidote that purges political prevarication…a virtual vaccine that seeks to supplant a systemic infection whose signature symptom is a seemingly endless urge to usurp utilitarianism.

The virulent nature of this virus leads many to seek the leverage that accompanies the disparate distribution of power and profit. It transforms those it touches into careless arsonists who peevishly persist in passing it on…thus acting as accelerants for an approaching anarchy.

Those in the media who promote political pettiness in order to insure the flow of dollars to the kingpins of corporate capitalism simply serve up the obnoxious oxygen that insures the ignition of inequity. Instead of enabling erudition, their lamentable locution does little more than circumvent any commitment to cerebral acuity or empathic expression.

In its final iteration, capitalism unchallenged becomes the hemlock of homage to the advancement of ad hominem histrionics that serve as a shortsighted and circuitous sheepskin shell designed to disguise the dogged drive for the lion’s share of the spoils…despite the derivable certainty that such shenanigans assure the anarchy that an adherence to such an ideology will undoubtedly advance.

In the 1993 Broadway play, Angels in America, the perilous and poignant promise of Kushner’s millennium is exemplified as a society of individual’s who, despite their awareness of their ailments and the attendant adversity, come to celebrate diversity despite its innate complexity…embrace redemption and reconciliation regardless of their unequivocal elusiveness…and endure their ongoing agony in the hopes of occasional ecstasy. His notion of the future is predicated upon the simple theory that our destination emerges when our dances of deception are dutifully debunked.

Fate is the fallacy of fools. The maelstrom of the millennium no longer approaches…it has arrived. We must shape tomorrow or it will consume us. What began must end. The future is now…or it will never be. Choice is the wisdom and the wherewithal to adopt anarchy when the continuation of the status quo insures its inevitability.

Cross posted at Thought Theater

Tuesday, February 24th, 2009 by Daniel DiRito |

GOP Attacks Pearl Harbor with Robocalls

The GOP is getting blasted for voting against the largest middle class tax cut in history, so they’re launching Robocalls. Among their targets is Neil Abercrombie (D-Honolulu), the Congressman who has known Barack Obama since childhood. Since Abercrombie won 70% of the vote in 2008, this Robocall attack is really aimed at Obama.

Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

Let slip the dogs of war. For Republicans, that means the Robocalls.

Barack Obama just ordered the Treasury to follow through on tax cuts for 95% of all Americans. It’s part of that stimulus package the GOP voted against en masse. Of course, the GOP, after supporting the largest deficits in history during the Bush Administration, think they can play gotcha because the stimulus package involves deficit spending. So they’re taking off after a Democratic Congressman who they think is vulnerable, Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii. They’re setting loose their prime weapon, the Robocalls! Here it is from the Honolulu Advertiser:

The recorded “robocalls” mention Abercrombie’s vote for “nearly a trillion dollars in wasteful spending” but do not say that the reference is to the stimulus legislation.

Paul Lindsay, a spokesman for the committee, says the calls were being made because Honolulu Councilman Charles Djou’s 2010 campaign for Abercrombie’s seat has shown “early signs of success.”

What we seem to have here is a severe lack of judgement. Just four months ago there was an election in Hawaii where Mr. Abercrombie captured 70% of the vote. That’s not the usual statistic that prompts political advisors to think “target.” No, going after Neil Abercrombie makes no sense, not that the Republicans have been oozing competence lately or anything.

So I’m betting this is an attack on Barack Obama back wehre he grew up. You see, Neil Abercrombie holds the distinction of being the only member of Congress to have known Barack OBama as a child. Indeed, Neil Abercrombie knew both of Barack Obama’s parents back in the day. This is, then, the GOP Robocall Pearl Harbor attack on Barack Obama.

Sunday, February 22nd, 2009 by Steven Reynolds |

Scalia, Thomas, WingNutDaily: Is There a Difference?

There’s not much difference between Antonin Scalia/Clarence Thomas and WingNutDaily as concerns supporting partisan divisiveness and whackjobbery. You can see that in the fake controversy and conspiracy theories surrounding Barack Obama’s US citizenship, to which Thomas and Scalia are giving tacit credit.

Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

Last week I wrote about how the right wing pretend news magazine WorldNetDaily was using the phony issue of Barack Obama’s citizenship to bilk its readers. First, they pretend there’s a big issue, then the issue goes to Conference at the SCOTUS, then they ratchet up the need for all their oh-so-concerned readers to send notes to the SCOTUS members, while WingNutDaily makes a profit. The Donofrio case, which had been brought to conference by Clarence Thomas, was turned down for review without comment yesterday. In the meantime, Antonin Scalia has moved another case, Cort Wrotnowski v. Susan Bysiewicz, Connecticut secretary of state, to conference, which, according to Donofrio himself, makes the exact same argument as the Donofrio case, which just got turned down.

Be that as it may, the interesting thing here is not the old news that WingNutDaily is still milking this issue in order to bilk its readers. We know already that WingNutDaily will push any conspiracy theory to serve their need for making money. What we didn’t know is that Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia appear to be in on the act. At the very least, since they brought these bogus cases to conference, it is hard to tell the difference between them and the most extremist and whacked out of the right wing. There’s a little of that frustration peeking out in the reporting by Tampabayonline, but mostly there’s wonderment at the shear whackjobbery of the people who so fervently believe in the conspiracy theories about Obama’s citizenship. Read some of this:

The slim chance the Supreme Court might act on this issue was enough reason for Bredow, 49, an affable Internet publisher, to drive 10 hours from Bethlehem, Ga.

He had received hundreds of thousands of hits and messages of encouragement while questioning Obama’s citizenship on his Web page,, and in a video he posted on YouTube.

“People started pounding on me, saying, –What are you going to do?’ ” Bredow said. “And I said, –Well, okay, why don’t we do a march on the 5th up in Washington?’ And so here we are.”

All 19 of them.

His fellow skeptics included a mom and her teen daughter from Williamsburg, Va., a retired Marine from Virginia, a pilot from South Florida, and Pam, a young black woman from Texas who said she never bought the story that Obama was from Hawaii. “I have never heard him say –Aloha,’ ” she said.

This just goes over the top. Someone born in Hawaii evidently has to prove that fact by saying “Aloha” once in a while? These folks are completely whack. I mean, seriously, look at the reaction from a guy named Bredow, who had traveled from Alabama to the Supreme Court to march with 18 friends before the Donofrio conference the other day. Even though Donofrio was denied without comment, this guy still has hope:

The word came down midmorning Monday: denied. No explanation, no comments.

Bredow got the news back in Bethlehem. He spent a couple of hours reading the court’s rules, in search of an explanation.

“Donofrio wasn’t what you would call a constitutional lawyer. He might have just goofed something up on the application,” Bredow suggested.

Members of Congress still could call for hearings, he said. And he has heard about some anonymous fraternity brothers in Hawaii on the hunt for Obama’s birth records.

“According to these guys – I guess they have to protect themselves legally – but according to these guys, they went to all nine hospitals in Honolulu, and they have not found Obama’s name,” he said. “So there’s still other little things floating around there.”

He stakes his hope on the work of some anonymous frat boys. Of course, he stakes that hope on Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, the two most vocal conservative Justices in a long, long time. Let’s get serious here. The Supreme Court rarely overturns the elected decisions of the people. This election this year was pretty decisive. Of course, the fact of Barack Obama’s mother being a natural born citizen makes him one, too, but besides that, there are seven people on the Supreme Court who do not look at the world through such partisan eyes that they’ll credit such whackjobbery. Only Scalia and Thomas are willing to give this whackjobbery legs.

Which brings us to the question in the title of this post: what’s the difference between WorldNetDaily and the Scalia/Thomas wing of the SCOTUS? Only profit motive. Both WingNutDaily and Scalia/Thomas seek to roil up the whack jobs and undermine our duly elected President. WingNutDaily and Scalia/Thomas seek to ratchet up partisan divisiveness. Sure, we know the role of SCOTUS does not include partisanship, but Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas seem bent on proving us wrong on that score.

Friday, February 20th, 2009 by Steven Reynolds |
Next Page »