Make Karma a Real Bitch for Repugs

We tried "going high," and it got us a Supreme Court that is going to reverse not just the 20th century, but the entire Enlightenment.

This time, no "looking forward" until we have tracked down every motherfucking traitor and thrown them in Guantanamo.

This time, no more "working across the aisle" until we have eliminated every illegal path to power for the GOP. 

This time, no more pretending voters will vote Democratic if we just act repug enough.

David Atkins:

Bipartisanship is dead.

Susan Collins dealt the coup de grace, armed with a dishonest and partisan speech capping a norm-destroying extremist far-right conquest of the Supreme Court. And upon regaining power in Washington, Democrats will need to behave accordingly.

SNIP

Despite a recent upsurge for Republicans, Democrats are still likely to win the House in November 2018. And it’s a good bet that Democrats will ride a wave of electoral fury compounded by the investigative findings of Mueller’s probe and likely House investigations into a White House victory and a solid majority in the Senate.

If and when that happens, there will be a temptation to attempt to restore a sense of bipartisan normalcy. But that would be a mistake. Republicans, having made their bed as an anti-normative, anti-democratic party of wealthy white male privilege enforced by anti-majoritarian structural advantage seeking, will not become responsible minority governing partners. And Democrats should not treat them as such.

Instead, Democrats will need to embrace their own inner Mitch McConnell. Their leaders will be tempted to immediately move to tackle the enormous legislative priorities their Republican opponents sabotaged or neglected, from climate change to healthcare to economic policy. But it will be just as important to secure structural initiatives that will make it difficult for Republicans to continue thwarting the will of an increasingly progressive majority. That is precisely what McConnell would do if a man of his instincts and temperament were serving the public welfare and society’s marginalized, rather than corporations, the wealthy and the privileged.

SNIP

It is the instinct of many liberals to shy away from such moves as overly partisan or process-focused. But they are essential if democracy is to survive in the face of an opposition determined to hold onto anti-majoritarian power at all costs through illegitimate and socially destructive means.

We start by voting the mother fuckers OUT.  29 Days.  VOTE.

Who Mitch Really Is

This is what he says:

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell condemned white supremacists and racial hatred Wednesday, saying, “Their message of hate and bigotry are not welcome in Kentucky and should not be welcome anywhere in America.” 

This is who he is: He's a lying Traitor in Defense of Slavery, and always has been.

From LGM:

But this is the biggest lie of all.

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/news/local/counties/fayette-county/article167487572.html#storylink=cpyHe's a Traitor in Defense of Slavery, and always has been.

From LGM:

trumpcare Failed Because It Didn't Kill Enough Poor People

Kevin Drum nails it:

Remember: this bill failed because even though it took away health coverage from 22 million low-income people, it wasn’t harsh enough toward the poor. This is what the modern Republican Party has become.

But don't let up on the pressure.  This is exactly what happened in the House:  everybody relaxed and celebrated when the bill died, then woke up the next morning to a revived and passed trumpcare bill.

Mitch McConnell is a devious, cunning motherfucker who still has a slush fund with which to bribe wavering senators.

It's not dead yet.

The Resistance: Confronting Mitch

Protesters outside, sharp questions inside.

From the Herald:

Mitch McConnell expected the protesters outside the Republican-friendly luncheon in heavily Republican Anderson County. He didn’t expect what he found inside the American Legion hall.

The questions from the $10-a-plate crowd, which heard the Senate Majority Leader offer his usual defense of the Trump administration and the GOP-led Senate, were not gentle.

At one point, a frustrated audience member implored him: “Answer the question, Mitch!” after he offered a curt answer to a woman asking about lost coal jobs in Eastern Kentucky.

As he began leaving the event, escorted by state and local law enforcement, a few in the crowd booed. Someone shouted “Do your job.”

Al Cross, the director of the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues at the University of Kentucky and a veteran political reporter, said it’s unusual for McConnell to be put in that kind of position at in-state events.

“Typically, when he goes out and does these town halls, they’re not widely announced,” he said.

This wasn't a town hall.  It was a $10-dollar a plate fundraiser, and the fucking coward brought a battalion of local and state police to protect him from elderly and disabled constituents.

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article134074694.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article134074694.html#storylink=cpy

Down the "War on Coal" Rabbit Hole in Kentucky

Kentucky's own barefoot and progressive blogger Joe Sonka hits the big time - The Nation - with his usual sharp insights on the Mitch'n'Alison Show.

There are some political races in America—though admittedly not many—that are classic examples of a healthy democracy in action. Races where candidates engage in intelligent and thorough policy debates, commonly field probing questions from reporters and answer with great detail, and have face-to-face conversations with voters to hear their concerns. 

Kentucky’s US Senate race between Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell and Democrat Alison Lundergan Grimes has not turned into one of these races, and looks unlikely to join those ranks any time soon.

Though the two candidates have traded barbs since Grimes entered the race last July, they kicked into high gear after McConnell disposed of Tea Party challenger Matt Bevin in the May 20 primary. Or perhaps I should say low gear, considering the absurdity of a campaign that has largely consisted of trolling via press releases and tweets, infrequent and highly scripted public events, dodging reporters’ questions (when not trying to arrest them), and negative attack ads from outside groups—the total of which from all parties is estimated could reach $100 million in little ol’ Kentucky. 

SNIP 

Though Grimes has repeatedly touted her support for raising the minimum wage and equal pay, she has been reluctant to go in depth on many issues and risk giving ammo to McConnell’s seemingly endless supply of attack ad money. She’s banking on being the safe and uncontroversial alternative McConnell, whom several polls have shown is just as unpopular as Obama in Kentucky.  

However, there is one issue that both candidates have talked about ad nauseam, with rhetoric that often borders on the absurd. That issue is coal and EPA regulations of the industry, as both candidates are falling over each other to convince voters that they love Kentucky’s black mineral of heritage the most, and hold the president’s EPA in the lowest regard. 

SNIP 

Right or wrong, the conventional wisdom in Kentucky is that Democrats can’t win statewide elections without pandering to the coal industry—as Governor Steve Beshear did in 2011—and Grimes certainly isn’t eager to test that theory.

Rand Paul Needs to Shut Up About Who's a Real Kentuckian

After wondering why the repugs are so scared of Ashley Judd that they're attacking the non-candidate 20 months before the election, Steve Benen skewers Rand Paul concern-trolling Judd's authenticity:

Soon after, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) added, "When I heard Ashley Judd might run for office I thought maybe it was Parliament since she lives in Scotland half the year." The Republican senator added, "Ashley Judd's a famous actress. She's an attractive woman, presents herself well and from what I understand is articulate. But the thing is, she doesn't really represent Kentucky."

At this point, I have no idea if Judd intends to seek elected office or whether she'd fare well as a candidate if she ran. But when was the last time Republicans freaked out at this level about an inexperienced candidate Democrat in a "red" state more than 20 months before an election cycle?
Post script: I'd be remiss if I didn't laugh a bit at Rand Paul's concerns about Senate candidates who "represent Kentucky." I remember writing a piece in August 2010 about Paul, a self-accredited ophthalmologist who seemed to have almost no familiarity with the basics of the state he was running in.

But in the same interview, Paul said something else of interest. A reporter asked that summer about the significance of Harlan County, Kentucky, which seemed like a fairly easy question for anyone, even those with only passing familiarity with the state. "I don't know," the then-candidate replied. Noting that the town of Hazard is nearby, Paul added, "It's famous for, like, The Dukes of Hazzard." When an aide tries to steer him towards the truth -- Harlan County was home to generations of deadly labor disputes -- Paul ignores him, and says, "Maybe the feuding."

The Lexington Herald-Leader's Larry Dale Keeling noted at the time that Rand Paul "seems to know dangerously little" about Kentucky.

People who "live" somewhere for 17 years will pick up a little knowledge through osmosis even if they don't bother to get out and learn about their surroundings. A person who merely "resides" somewhere is more like the little knickknack that "resides" in the bric-a-brac case hanging on the wall.

A person who has "lived" in Kentucky for 17 years might know how "Bloody Harlan" got its name and that The Dukes of Hazzard was set in the fictional Hazzard (two Z's) County, Georgia, not the Kentucky city of Hazard (one Z).

A person who has "lived" in Kentucky for 17 years might know the community of Fancy Farm is in a dry county and the picnic put on annually by the old folks of St. Jerome Parish is a family affair where no one has to worry about having beer or anything else thrown at them.

Those are just a few items someone who has lived here for several years might know. But there are some things a person who has lived in this state for any amount of time can't help but know.

Adding insult to injury, Paul also said Eastern Kentucky's drug problem is not "a real pressing issue," despite the fact that it's been ravaged by an epidemic. Keeling explained, "Only someone who is totally clueless would say that."

And now Rand Paul feels confident talking about who is and is not capable of "representing Kentucky"? Seriously?

Here's my question: Can Mitch McConnell make the Tribble-Toupeed One shut the fuck up before he guarantees Judd'e victory? Or does Mitchie-poo really think this kind of thing is helpful?

Only One Human Being in Kentucky's Congressional Delegation

And of course it's Congressman Awesome.

Chris Kenning and James Carroll at the Courier:

Saying “doing nothing is not an option,” U.S. Rep. John Yarmuth, D-Louisville, promised Monday to support a comprehensive new package of gun control legislation he believes can pass Congress in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings .

“I have been largely silent on the issue of gun violence over the past six years, and I am now as sorry for that as I am for what happened to the families who lost so much,” he said in Louisville news conference during which he called for “meaningful action.”

But while Yarmuth publicly endorsed greater gun control, other Kentucky and Southern Indiana lawmakers — most Republicans — were reluctant Monday to take a stand, either sidestepping the issue or refusing to comment altogether.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, in a speech on the Senate floor Monday afternoon, said there was “no escaping the fact that the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary stands out for its awfulness.” But the Kentucky Republican did not say whether he believes there is a need for new gun-control measures.

Mitchie-poo's always been a coward, but you'd think the Commonwealth's Tribble-toupeed Teabagger would be shouting libertarian gun-nuttery from the rooftops.

Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul’s spokesperson did not respond to requests for an interview.

I'll bet Ashley Judd would leap at the chance to talk about Sandy Hook.

Reps. Brett Guthrie, Tom Massie and Andy Barr also chickened out of commenting, although Reps. Ed Whitfield and Hal Rogers, whose asses are permanently grafted to their House seats, offered typical weasel words.

It's not as if Kentucky doesn't know the shock, pain and permanent damage of a school shooting. Fifteen years later, Heath High School in Paducah is still kept locked around the clock, and shooter Michael Carneal is still appealing his life sentence on grounds of mental defect.

No fucking kidding, motherfucker.

At least Carneal admits what he did and that it was wrong.  That's more than McConnell, Paul, Guthrie, Massie, Barr, Whitfield and Rogers can say.

Obama Un-Bashing: the Tax Calculator

Kentucky repugs spent Saturday at Fancy Farm bashing President Obama, but failed to step across the line to what Zandar calls Ni-CLANG. I expected more from you, repugs. Somebody's gonna do it before the election, probably live on national TV. Too bad it couldn't have been Mitch yesterday.

House Speaker Greg Stumbo gave a strong speech in refutation, but thanks to the extreme cowardice of most Democratic state office holders, he was vastly outnumbered.

They got little pushback from Democrats who attended the picnic, other than Kentucky House Speaker Greg Stumbo, who took up for Obama and told the crowd of several hundred that “if there was ever a worse American president than George W. Bush, I want to know who he was.”

So to your mouth-breathing, ni**er-mumbling relatives who may be crowing about it today, here's a refutation in the form of a tax calculator to show you how you would fare under Mitt RMoney's tax plan, and how you would fare under President Obama's tax plan.

Best Dem to Beat McConnell Bows Out

Crit taking on Mitch was always a pipe dream, but now she's finally ruled it out.

Kenny Colston, KPR-Frankfort:

Former Auditor Crit Luallen says she will not challenge Republican U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell in 2014. Luallen has long been considered to be among the best-situated Democrats to unseat McConnell. She served two terms as auditor and many political observers credit her with raising the office's profile during her tenure. Luallen also served in former Governor Paul Patton's administration for several years. But the long-time public servant tells Kentucky Public Radio she will not enter the 2014 race.

“No, I’ve stated repeatedly in the last several months when I’ve been asked that the U.S. Senate race is not my interest. My real background experience, where I believe I can make the most difference is state policy and state leadership. So if I run again I’m looking toward the governor’s race," she says.

The governor's race is not until 2015, and the field for that one won't be clear until after the Democratic primary for Senate in May 2014.

Now, somebody talk Ben Chandler into challenging Mitch so Ben can lose by 50 points and then slink off to some no-show job at a wingnut think tank for traitorous dems so we can be rid of the worthless DINO for good.

Mitch: Heads I Win, Tails You Lose

Because repugs can't ever win a straight-up election, they have to cheat. Or at least rig the rules.

Steve Benen at Maddowblog:

For decades, when Republicans made the case against campaign-finance reform, they invariably touted disclosure as the panacea that made restrictions unnecessary. As Fred Hiatt explained, "Republicans always dangled this apple in the most alluring way. Political money will find a path, they would insist. Give up! Give in! We will post every donation on the Web, instantly! We will give you transparency! Sunshine! Accountability! What could be more democratic?"

Except, of course, that the right never really meant it. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a staunch opponent of campaign-finance reform, spoke at the American Enterprise Institute the other day and condemned the Obama administration's efforts to "silence" political speech.

"It is critically important for all conservatives -- and indeed all Americans -- to stand up and unite in defense of the freedom to organize around the causes we believe in, and against any effort that would constrain our ability to do so," McConnell told AEI.

And what are the "efforts" that have McConnell so outraged? The senator "cited a Democratic proposal to require corporations and unions to disclose their spending on political advertising."

Yes, in Mitch McConnell's mind, the DISCLOSE Act is "nothing less than an effort by the government itself to expose its critics to harassment and intimidation, either by government authorities or through third-party allies."

As far as the Senate Minority Leader is concerned, there's nothing wrong with wealthy interests buying American elections -- the real scandal is a proposal to let American voters know who's doing the buying.

In reality, the DISCLOSE Act (Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections) is a fairly modest proposal. In the wake of the Citizens United ruling, Democrats thought it made sense to require corporations, unions, and other interest groups that pay for campaign ads to identify themselves, allowing the public to know who's saying what.

It wasn't even a partisan initiative, at least not completely -- in the House, the proposal even had a Republican co-sponsor.

It would have become law in 2010 were it not for a Republican filibuster. When the bill reached the floor, it had 59 supporters and 39 opponents, which in the broken Senate, means the legislation failed. Proponents only needed one GOP vote, but every Republican in the chamber, including alleged "moderates" like Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Susan Collins (R-Maine), and Scott Brown (R-Mass.) refused to give the bill an up-or-down vote.

But McConnell is still afraid the bill might make a comeback, and has taken a firm stand in support of front groups that keep donations secret. This, as far as the Minority Leader is concerned, makes him a champion of the First Amendment.

Because nothing says "freedom" like secret billionaires quietly buying elections out of public view.

Do Mitchie-poo and AynRand Support KY Farmers?

Then why aren't they co-sponsoring a bill that would bring hundreds of millions of dollars into the Commonwealth?

Raw Story:

In a last minute addition to the Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act of 2012, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) has submitted an amendment that would legalize the production of industrial hemp, a potential new bumper crop for U.S. farmers.

“Industrial hemp is used in many healthy and sustainable consumer products. However, the federal prohibition on growing industrial hemp has forced companies to needlessly import raw materials from other countries,” Wyden said in prepared text. “My amendment to the Farm Bill will change federal policy to allow U.S. farmers to produce hemp for these safe and legitimate products right here, helping both producers and suppliers to grow and improve Oregon’s economy in the process.”

Allowing American farmers to produce industrial hemp, which is different from its more notorious cousin marijuana, would yield significant and immediate profits the first year, according to an analysis conducted in 1998 (PDF) by the Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Kentucky.

Researchers found that farmers in the state of Kentucky alone could see between $220 to $605 in net profits per acre of hemp. Adjusted for inflation using the consumer price index, those 1998 dollars would actually be worth $310 and $854 today, although the study’s authors note that variables in supply and demand for hemp could change that valuation.

Via Zandar.

Shamelessly Lying About Regulation

In case anyone forgot, it was the DE-regulation of Wall Street in 1999 that caused the Great Recession and destroyed 10 million American jobs. Since 1935, the Glass-Steagall Act had protected bankers from their own greed and stupidity by keeping commercial banks out of the stock gambling business. Repealing Glass-Steagall handed the keys of the economy to the drunk, stoned teenagers of the finance industry and let them take off.

Regulations protect not just consumers (clean air, clean water, safe food, safe drugs) but also businesses - especially small businesses who need protection from the corporate behemoths who would otherwise crush them.

Steve Benen:

There’s been a fair amount of work done lately to help demonstrate just how wrong Republicans are about regulations holding the economy back — this paper from the Economic Policy Institute’s Lawrence Mishel is terrific — but folks should definitely take the time to review this piece from Bruce Bartlett.

As Bartlett, an economist and a veteran of the Reagan and H.W. Bush administrations, explained, Republicans have been told to argue that freeing the private sector of consumer safeguards and worker protections will reduce “uncertainty.” Unfortunately for the GOP, from a policy perspective, they’re living in fantasy land.

Evidence supporting Mr. Cantor’s contention that deregulation would increase unemployment is very weak. For some years, the Bureau of Labor Statistics has had a program that tracks mass layoffs. In 2007, the program was expanded, and businesses were asked their reasons for laying off workers. Among the reasons offered was “government regulations/intervention.” There is only partial data for 2007, but we have data since then through the second quarter of this year. […]

As one can see, the number of layoffs nationwide caused by government regulation is minuscule and shows no evidence of getting worse during the Obama administration. Lack of demand for business products and services is vastly more important.

These results are supported by surveys. During June and July, Small Business Majority asked 1,257 small-business owners to name the two biggest problems they face. Only 13 percent listed government regulation as one of them. Almost half said their biggest problem was uncertainty about the future course of the economy — another way of saying a lack of customers and sales.

Surveys from major news outlets, including conservative institutions like the Wall Street Journal, and the National Federation of Independent Business found the same thing: the private sector is concerned about customers and demand, not regulations.

Bruce concluded, “In my opinion, regulatory uncertainty is a canard invented by Republicans that allows them to use current economic problems to pursue an agenda supported by the business community year in and year out. In other words, it is a simple case of political opportunism, not a serious effort to deal with high unemployment.”

An Associated Press analysis published this week reached the identical conclusion: the private sector isn’t being held back by regulations; companies “aren’t hiring because there isn’t enough consumer demand.” Republican economic policies, of course, intend to weaken demand, on purpose, because they simply don’t believe this is the problem behind weak growth.

This is Big Government regulation:

From AP:

CHARLESTON, W.Va. — Federal regulators are seeking comments as they target a hazard in underground coal mines blamed for dozens of deaths.

A proposed rule from the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration addresses systems meant to warn miners when they get too close to continuous mining machines.
The agency is holding a Thursday public hearing for the proposal in Charleston.

Officials say run-ins with these machines killed 30 miners and injured another 220 between 1984 and last year. Most of those killed were operating these huge machines via remote control.

Note that none of Kentucky's Big Coal Apologists, those Brave Defenders of Our Miners Against Job Killing Regulation, Senators Mitch Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul, not to mention Governor Steve Beshear and his challenger David Williams, have anything to say about this blatant horrific Murder of Our FreeDumbs by the commiemuslinkenyanterrist Usurper and his socialist minions in the bureaucracy.

Mitch McConnell: Save Me From the Scary Muslin Men!

I mean seriously - Bowling Green? Population 56,598? University town in the heart of Red Kentucky? Any terrists in that town wouldn't make it past the rifle-bristling pickups at the Food Mart.

But Mitch McConnell is pissing his pants in fear about putting these pathetic bumblers on trial in a state where looking cross-eyed at the local sheriff can get you hard time.

How dare he imply that Kentucky jurors are as cowardly as he is - too afraid to stand up to two Iraqi refugees who couldn't put together a simple plan without tripping the feds?

From the Herald:

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell called on the Obama administration Tuesday to send two Iraqi nationals arrested recently in Bowling Green to the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

The two were charged with helping to plot attacks on U.S. troops.

"Sending them to Gitmo is the only way we can be certain there won't be retaliatory attacks in Kentucky," McConnell said on the Senate floor Tuesday.

"Sending them to Gitmo is the only way we can prevent Kentuckians from having to cover the cost and having to deal with the disturbances and disruptions that would come with a civilian trial. And sending them to Gitmo is the best way to ensure that they get what they deserve. So today I'm calling on the administration to change course — and get these men out of Kentucky."

Waad Ramadan Alwan, 30, and Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, 23, two Iraqi refugees living in Bowling Green, were indicted recently for plotting to send sniper rifles, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, explosives and money back to their home country to be used in attacks on U.S. troops. The men pleaded not guilty.

McConnell has been a strident and vocal critic of the administration's efforts, though stymied, to close the Guantánamo Bay prison.

"I can say with certainty that Kentuckians don't want foreign fighters who've bragged about killing and maiming U.S. soldiers in a combat theater treated like common criminals in their own back yards," McConnell said.

The Department of Justice countered Tuesday that prosecuting the two men in federal court is the most proven method for keeping the country safe.

Since the September 11, 2001, attacks, hundreds of defendants have been convicted in the federal court system of terrorism or terrorism-related violations, said Dean Boyd, a U.S. Justice Department spokesman.

In none of these cases has a judicial district suffered retaliatory attacks, Boyd said. There also has never been a military-commission prosecution of a terror suspect arrested on American soil, he said.

"As the senator acknowledged, everyone involved in this investigation clearly did their jobs and did them well. The successful investigation, arrests, and interrogation in this case show the effectiveness of our intelligence and law enforcement authorities in bringing terrorists to justice and preventing them from harming the American people," Boyd said. "Abandoning those proven methods would do nothing but risk the safety of the American people."

Mitch McConnell is an anti-American, anti-Kentuckian coward who doesn't trust the U.S. Criminal Justice System, doesn't trust the U.S. Constitution, and doesn't trust his fellow Kentuckians to do the right thing and protect their own homes and families.

Or maybe he just doesn't want Kentuckians reminded that the country we spent trillions to invade and occupy with McConnell's bloodthirsty - or oilthirsty - support is a far bigger terrorist threat to U.S. troops now than it was before Mitchie-poo's Excellent Iraqi Adventure.

Global Warming and the Lying Politicians Who Lie About It

Collective yawns greeted this news last week:

The International Energy Agency (IEA) reported that global carbon emissions set a record in 2010, rebounding from the recession to exceed 2008 levels. The EPA found in April that US carbon emissions dipped in 2009, mirroring the rest of the world. But though the recession has recovered in 2010 slowly in the industrialized world, and economic output (which has followed carbon emissions, for obvious reasons) has not reached pre-recession levels, growth in emerging markets pushed emissions up. China and India accounted for most of the increase.

Zandar explains why ignoring climate change is really, really stupid:

Recall how food prices have played a role in the Arab Spring uprisings and those increases were much much smaller. This is why the Pentagon keeps warning that climate change (and its effects on food and water availability) is the number one threat to US security in the future.

And it will only get worse from here.

But wait! There's hope! The Unbearable Whiteness of Being Mitt is defying his party to acknowledge reality:

Forget the individual mandate. Mitt Romney is now breaking with the Republican base on yet another issue. On Friday at a town hall in New Hampshire, Romney told the crowd he accepted the scientific conclusion that global warming is happening, and that man-made emissions are a factor.

Reuters reports:

"I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that," he told a crowd of about 200 at a town hall meeting in Manchester, New Hampshire.

"It's important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may be significant contributors."

At the same time, Romney added that alternative energies alone cannot solve the situation, and that the United States should not simply limit its own industrial activities to the economic benefit of other countries:

"I love solar and wind (power) but they don't drive cars. And we're not all going to drive Chevy Volts," he said referring to electric cars.

The United States can not go it alone in attempting to trim emissions levels and give a free pass to countries such as China and Brazil, Romney said. "It's not called American warming, it's called global warming," he said.

Openly discussing the phrase "global warming" in any positive sense probably won't do much to please the GOP base. By contrast, other candidates have strongly criticized climate change science and activism, or have distanced themselves from their own previous activism on the issue.

For example, Tim Pawlenty has openly declared that his previous position in favor of cap-and-trade was "stupid,". And Newt Gingrich, who once starred in an ad calling for action on climate change alongside then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), now pronounces: "Now, if you were a left-wing intellectual, climate change is the newest excuse to take control of lives, and you want a new bureaucracy to run our lives on behalf of the newest thing."

Wow. Maybe Romney is The One. The Only Rational Republican who will lead his party out of the snowbilly wilderness into .... never mind.

Here's Steve Benen on how Romney is a documented liar bordering on pathological, AND an empty suit willing to say anything for a vote.

Meanwhile, the person who actually decides the fate of any attempt to avoid or mitigate catastrophic climate change made his position clear:

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell accused the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Wednesday of declaring war on the coal industry and blamed Democrats for regulations that he said kill jobs and increase energy costs.

In a speech to the Kentucky Coal Association, McConnell criticized the EPA for changing or reinterpreting long-standing regulations, which he said has threatened the future of some mines and left new projects in limbo.

Attempts by the agency to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from coal plants amount to a “backdoor” energy tax, he said.

We understand that Mitchie-poo is an expert on back doors.

Mitchie-poo Still Lying About Medicare

After forcing the careers of several repug candidates to crash and burn and putting the 2012 reelection chances of every repug in the country in jeopardy, Paul Ryan's Plan to Eliminate Medicare is dead.

But that's not stopping Senator Mitch McConnell from continuing to lie about Medicare every chance he gets.

Why? Because the only hope for the repugs going into the 2012 election is to make Democrats take the rap for cuts in Medicare. And the fastest way to make Democrats sign that particular suicide pact is to repeat, over and over and over again, how the only way to save Medicare is to cut it, and it's the responsibility of Congressional Democrats and President Obama to do so immediately.

But that's so obvious, Democrats would never fall for it. Right? Right?

Blue Girl is all over that lying sack of shit.

Mitch McConnell is continuing with his gig singing backup on the Paul Ryan Roadmap to Ruin tour, telling Fox news Sunday yesterday that Ryan's scheme is "very sensible" and will "save Medicare." He then trotted out the discredited "death panels" BS, saying that the ACA will empower "a board that would ration health care," before adding "Let's just stipulate that nobody's trying to throw grandma off the cliff," alluding to an ad run by an "independent" interest group against Jane Corwin in the recent New York 26th Congressional Districe special election.

Let's unpack what McConnell is asserting, shall we?

McConnell seems to be implying that rationing is not occuring now, when it most certainly is, in every healthcare delivery system, everywhere. For starters, the uninsured are subject to the harshest rationing of all. If they can't pay cash, they don't get healthcare.

People who are insured have been self-rationing as a result of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. So of course the insurance companies are whining that they need rate increases because the day is coming when their policy holders will actually use their insurance is surely looming, and then they won't have record profits any longer.

And of course, everyone who is fortunate enough to have insurance knows that rationing occurs every time you go to the doctor. If you buy insurance and have a pre-existing condition, there is no coverage for that condition for a specified waiting period, if ever. You also know that you can't just walk in and demand procedures. You have to get preauthorization letters to see specialists, who then have to get the authorization from your insurance company before they can perform any procedure deemed necessary and appropriate.

And pity the poor soul who turns up with a serious condition that requires long term or intesive treatment. They will spend all their time and energy fighting for the care they need to survive. What is this if not rationing?

Or consider lifetime caps. A million dollar lifetime cap is pretty standard. Now consider the family whose seven year old child gets cancer. It can easily happen that such a child will reach that cap in two or three years. Then the family that is probably on the hook for 20% of every charge the child has incurred face paying cash for all future care for that child, unless they are so financially wiped out by the disease that the child can get Medicaid. You know Medicaid -- that is the other program they are out to kill.

Do they really want to talk about "death panels" considering the way the system they not only defend, but want to return the worst parts of, works?

Don't forget it's not just McConnell; virtually every repug in Congress voted to kill Medicare, including all four of Kentucky's repug members of Congress. Rand Paul voted against the repug plan only because he thought it didn't go far enough. One step further would be outlawing medical care for seniors altogether.

Read the whole thing.

Mitchie-poo Gets Subtle With the Social Security Lies

Blue Girl catches Mitch McConnell trying to use subtle misrepresentation to spread his Social Security lies.

McConnell's implication is that there is a hair-on-fire emergency and Social Security has to be fundamentally changed because it's doomed to bankruptcy otherwise; when in fact what the trustees presented was an either/or -- either revenues will have to be raised, or benefits will have to be cut decades down the road.

The essential Dean Baker had the best analogy I have seen on McConnell's misrepresentation:

This would be like driving from Chicago to Detroit and determining that at some point you will need more gas to complete the trip. That would mean stopping at a gas station and refilling your tank. By contrast, McConnell's comment implies that the car is about to breakdown and will not make the trip.

SNIP

The reality is there is no Social Security crisis, no matter how loudly the greed-mongers and deficit scolds insist there is.

They can wail and gnash their teeth and rend the cloth from their breast all day long and into the night. That still won't change the fact that Social Security is not only not responsible for our deficit woes, it is independent of the deficit /and/ it is solvent for decades. Period. Full stop.

The trustees report that McConnell misrepresented actually presents the same findings as the CBO report in that last link. Both report that the Social Security trustfund, without changing a thing, will be able to make full payouts through 2030-something -- it should also be noted that the full payout projections have been pushed downward not by flaws in the system, but by the economic downturn of the last couple of years. Both note that those numbers should start ticking back up as the economy recovers, and if that isn't the case, we have a lot bigger problems than Social Security heading our way.

In reality, any projected shortfalls in future Social Security benefits could be easily remedied with either of a couple of easy fixes would not only fill that hole, it would put the program on a sound footing indefinitely. The first option would be to raise the cap. Currently, a person making more than $106,800 pays no Social Security tax on any monies earned over that amount. Removing the cap and taxing all monies equally would put the program on solid footing indefinitely. So would a very modest increase -- 1% or less -- in the amount of payroll tax withheld from the wages of those of us who earn less than $106,800.

I don't know about you, but I would be willing to give up three designer coffees a pay-period now to assure that Social Security will be there when I reach retirement age.

Elected leaders who embrace the "fundamental change is necessary" mantra are either stupid, or lying. In neither instance should they be making decisions that affect millions of Americans. And that goes double for those who parrot the BS knowing full well it's just that...BS.

To paraphrase Mark Twain, there are lies, damnable lies, and lies about Social Security.

Have you talked to your Democratic neighbors today?

Why Are You Paying for Health Care for Rethugs Who Don't Want You To Have the Same?

All six republican members of Kentucky's Congressional delegation voted last month to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Representatives Ed Whitfield, Brett Guthrie, Geoff Davis and Hal Rogers, and Senators Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul all voted to take away from you decent and affordable health care.

And on February 1, all six of them grabbed for themselves the decent, affordable health care they just voted to take away from you.

karoli at Crooks and Liars:

Today is a happy day for many GOP freshmen Congressmen. Why? Because as of today, their government-subsidized health care is in effect. And that health care plan is robust. For starters, no one can be excluded or penalized for pre-existing conditions, regardless of age. Dependents are covered up to age 26, whether they're students or not, and even if they have a pre-existing condition.

But wait, there's more:

Beginning today, a new Republican Member of Congress with high blood pressure, diabetes, or any chronic condition is immediately covered at the same premium cost as 8 million other federal employees. The same is true for his or her spouse and dependent children, regardless of age, gender or prior illness.

So, no pre-existing conditions, no rate hikes, and best of all, the government pays about $700/month for each enrollee. Isn't that nice of them? Let it sink in: Taxpayers are paying $700 per month for Congressmen like Darrell Issa, and Virginia Foxx to have access to quality health care while they go about the business of repealing it through the courts and Congress for the rest of us.

In the this-is-no-surprise category, we have current polls which say a majority of Americans think those who seek to repeal the Affordable Care Act should decline their own government-subsidized health insurance.

Most Americans think incoming Congressmen who campaigned against the health care bill should put their money where their mouth is and decline government provided health care now that they're in office. Only 33% think they should accept the health care they get for being a member of Congress while 53% think they should decline it and 15% have no opinion.

Do you have the gold-plated health insurance plan members of Congress enjoy? Can you afford to pay $700 per month for your anti-ACA repug representative to enjoy the health coverage he/she just tried to deny you?

Call and email your members of Congress to tell them exactly what you think about them making you pay for their health care while they are trying to take yours away.

Have you talked to your Democratic neighbors today?

McConnell, Bunning Owe State $240 Million

That's how much they took away from Kentucky taxpayers Thursday when they refused to allow the U.S. Senate to vote on extending federal aid to hard-hit state budgets.

Gov. Steve Beshear says the state could come up nearly $240 million short early next year if a federal spending bill defeated by a Senate Republican filibuster doesn’t pass.

The spending measure defeated in Washington on Thursday includes a new round of aid to states.

Beshear said Friday that Kentucky is relying on the spending measure for a six-month extension of a higher federal Medicaid match that is to last until year’s end. Medicaid is the state-federal health insurance program that covers about 790,000 low-income and disabled Kentuckians.

Beshear said that having to re-balance the budget to offset the loss of nearly $240 million would be a “horrendous” task. He said virtually every state program would face significant reductions.

The $17.3 billion, two-year budget that takes effect Thursday already included broad spending cuts.

Make no mistake; congressional republicans don't give a flying fuck about the deficit except how they can use it to prevent Democrats from fixing the economic crisis. They want the country to fall into Depression - as long as they can blame it on Democrats in time for the November election.

Local Rand Paul Coverage Day One: Media Lap Dogs Give Repugs a Pass

Okay, y'all, when I said "up your game," I didn't mean "get your panting lap dog on."

Both the Lexington Herald and the Courier-Journal let Kentucky repugs get away with refusing to answer questions from the press.

Really, Jack Brammer and Stephanie Steitzer? How hard did you try? Or were you under editorial orders to lay off the teabagger's almighty god?

Both Brammer and Steitzer are seasoned political reporters. They know how to do this correctly: merciless, relentless badgering, resulting in story ledes like this:

Senator Mitch McConnell, Rep. Hal Rogers and other Kentucky republican elected officials refused multiple times yesterday to address GOP Senate nominee Rand Paul's opposition to the Civil Rights Act, Fair Housing Law, Mine Safety laws and forcing BP to clean up its massive oil gusher in the Gulf of Mexico.

At least eight separate times, this reporter specifically demanded that McConnell, Rogers and the others state whether they agreed with Paul's public positions.

Instead, we get kumbaya headlines like this: "Rand Paul feels the love from GOP at Unity Rally" and "Rand Paul steers clear of controversy at Unity Rally."

Rand Paul's antediluvian positions are no longer the story; how Kentucky's repug officials can support him without explicitly agreeing with those positions is the story.

The fact is that Kentucky repugs and conservadems are going to vote for Paul in November even if he advocated outlawing the horse industry. And bourbon distilleries. They always - always - vote for the republican, no matter what.

The question is whether Paul will get enough overt support from McConnell and the others to overcome legitimate fears about his Bircherism.

Right now, the Kentucky MSM is not making Kentucky's GOP officials pay any price for that support. They have to pin every single republican candidate in the state up against the wall and force them to say yeah or nay on every single racist, misogynist, anti-disabled, anti-veteran, unconstitutional, anti-american word out of Aynrandpaul's mouth, then plaster the answers in 48-point, banner headlines.

Anything less is journalistic malpractice.

Cross-posted at They Gave Us A Republic ....

One Small Bomb Ought to Do It

You will be shocked to hear that BP could have stopped what Rachel Maddow calls the Oil Volcano in the Gulf weeks ago, but is still refusing to use that simple solution because - yes, you guessed it - it would cost them too much.

David Neiwart explains:

Shepard Smith had a fascinating segment on the catastrophic Gulf oil spill today, featuring an interview with a former nuclear-sub captain who argued persuasively that it was time -- past time, really -- to blow up that leaking oil well in the Gulf and put an end to the massive pollution that's resulted from its being open.

Smith originally brought on Christopher Brownfield to discuss the potential for using a nuclear bomb to stop the leak, and Brownfield said that yes, it was decided a viable way to stop it -- it has been done four times previously. But he gave many compelling reasons NOT to use a nuclear warhead for the job -- the biggest one being that the same job could be accomplished with conventional explosives.

So why aren't we talking about doing this? Well, Brownfield explained that too:

Brownfield: If we demolish the well using explosives, the investment's gone. They lose hundreds of millions of dollars, from the drilling of the well, plus no lawmaker in his right mind would allow BP to drill again in that same spot. So basically, it's an all-or-nothing thing with BP: They either keep the well alive, or they lose their whole investment and all the oil that they could potentially get from that well.

As Brownfield explains, "We need to seal this thing off." Desperately. But why hasn't anyone been bringing a complete shutdown of the well to the table?

Brownfield: Yes, I think -- stopping the spill immediately. And the reason why we haven't seen that option is because, frankly, BP is still at the helm. I think President Obama needs to take charge of this, bring all the assets of our military to bear, bring the U.S. Army Corps of engineers, bring the U.S. Navy, and bring in all the private-sector organizations that have the equipment for deep-sea operations to make this happen. Let's explode this, collapse the well, and put an end to it.

I don't know about the rest of you but this story seems like it should be the final straw:

Scientists are finding enormous oil plumes in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, including one as large as 10 miles long, 3 miles wide and 300 feet thick. The discovery is fresh evidence that the leak from the broken undersea well could be substantially worse than estimates that the government and BP have given.

“There’s a shocking amount of oil in the deep water, relative to what you see in the surface water,” said Samantha Joye, a researcher at the University of Georgia who is involved in one of the first scientific missions to gather details about what is happening in the gulf. “There’s a tremendous amount of oil in multiple layers, three or four or five layers deep in the water column.”

The plumes are depleting the oxygen dissolved in the gulf, worrying scientists, who fear that the oxygen level could eventually fall so low as to kill off much of the sea life near the plumes.

If Brownfield is right, BP has had its chance to save its well. The time has run out.

If Brownfield is right, it's time for the president to seize control of the situation and blow this well up.

See the video here

Meanwhile, Mitch McConnell is defending the 35-cent cap on oil company damages.

Heather comments:

Looks like Mitch McConnell is channeling his buddy Lisa Murkowski on lifting the $75 million cap on damages for the oil companies. So let's see if we can follow Mitch McConnell's logic here. He doesn't want anyone to be able to sue the oil companies for more than $75 million in damages because it might put some of the smaller oil companies out of business. I would assume lifting that cap would only put them out of business if they actually they did more than $75 million worth of damage. So I guess that means McConnell would like for small companies to be allowed to do more damage than they can afford to pay for, because putting an unsafe company that did that much damage out of business would be worse than... allowing them to do more damage than they are capable of paying for. The mind reels.

See the video here.