I really can't get worked up over whether or not these people screwed up their taxes, but why the hell can't politicians just make sure they do it right? Sheesh.
Preaching to the American public that they need to roll up their sleeves/bite the bullet/whatthefuckever is going to start to fall on deaf ears when you've got folks in high places who don't even pay their own taxes.
I'm sure a lot of people in high profile positions are going to think twice about using Turbo Tax next time. If you hire a good accountant and they screw up at least you have someone to blame.
Although, even an accountant can't help people like Daschle when they conveniently forget about taxable income.
Nancy Pelosi said on two occasions that every month that Obama's recovery package isn't passed, 500,000,000 jobs will be lost. What a dope!
__________________
Humans clearly attend closely to status, an important part of status is dominance, and a key way we show dominance is to tell others what to do. Whoever gets to tell someone else what to do is dominating, and affirming their own status. But we are also clearly built to not notice most of our status moves, and so we attribute them to other motives. And as long as we are making up motives, we might as well make up the most admired of motives, altruism. --Robin Hanson
__________________
Humans clearly attend closely to status, an important part of status is dominance, and a key way we show dominance is to tell others what to do. Whoever gets to tell someone else what to do is dominating, and affirming their own status. But we are also clearly built to not notice most of our status moves, and so we attribute them to other motives. And as long as we are making up motives, we might as well make up the most admired of motives, altruism. --Robin Hanson
By BRIAN BAKST, Associated Press Writer Brian Bakst, Associated Press Writer 2 mins ago
ST. PAUL, Minn. – A Minnesota court confirmed Monday that Democrat Al Franken won the most votes in his 2008 Senate race against Republican Norm Coleman, who immediately announced plans to appeal the decision.
Coleman has 10 days to appeal to the state Supreme Court. Once the petition is filed, it could further delay the seating of Minnesota's second senator for weeks.
"It's time that Minnesota like every other state have two" senators, a jovial Franken said outside his Minneapolis townhouse with his wife Franni at his side. "I would call on Senator Coleman to allow me to get to work for the people of Minnesota as soon as possible."
After a statewide recount and seven-week trial, Franken stands 312 votes ahead. He gained more votes from the election challenge than Coleman, the candidate who brought the legal action.
The state law under which Coleman sued required three judges to determine who got the most votes and is therefore entitled to an election certificate, which is now on hold pending an appeal.
"The overwhelming weight of the evidence indicates that the November 4, 2008, election was conducted fairly, impartially and accurately," the judges wrote. "There is no evidence of a systematic problem of disenfranchisement in the state's election system, including in its absentee-balloting procedures."
In its order, the judicial panel dismissed two attempts by Coleman to subtract votes from Franken over allegations of mishandled ballots in Minneapolis.
The judges also rejected Coleman's argument that a state board improperly made up for a packet of ballots lost between the election and the recount. His lawyers contended that the ballots' disappearance rendered them invalid and that Coleman was entitled to review all ballots as part of the recount.
Coleman's lawyers claimed dozens of ballots were double-counted when their originals couldn't be fed into optical scanning machines on Election Day. They said it was possible that originals and duplicates were included in the recount.
The ruling diminishes Coleman's chances of retaining a seat that he won in dramatic fashion in 2002, when he narrowly defeated former Vice President Walter Mondale. Democratic incumbent Paul Wellstone died in a plane crash with two weeks to go in the campaign.
Franken, a former "Saturday Night Live" comic, entered the Senate race more than two years ago. A third-party candidate's strong showing left Coleman and Franken virtually deadlocked on Election Night, triggering an automatic recount of 2.9 million ballots. Coleman led by about 700 votes before routine double-checking of figures trimmed his edge to 215 votes heading into the hand recount. By the recount's end in January, Franken had pulled ahead by 225 votes.
Coleman's trial began in January and his appeal could push the race into May or beyond.
Coleman's lawyers have said their appeal will mostly center on violations of the constitutional guarantee of equal protection, arguing that counties had differing standards in treating absentee ballots.
Franken's attorneys argued that no election is absolutely precise and that all counties operated under the same standard.
In addition to the appeal, Coleman can also initiate a new action on a federal level. Either side can appeal an eventual state Supreme Court decision to the U.S. Supreme Court or throw the disputed election before the U.S. Senate, which can judge the qualifications of its members.
AWESOME news
Last edited by GoodSpeak; April-13th-2009 at 10:11 PM.
Congresswoman Waddles Into Israeli Spy Storm (Gawker)
By John Cook, 10:57 AM on Mon Apr 20 2009,
How many hot-buttons does the news that the NSA wiretapped Congresswoman Jane Harman involve? Let's count: 1) public corruption, 2) "Israel Lobby" espionage, 3) intelligence agencies spying on lawmakers and 4) Bush's hyper-politicization of everything.
The National Security Agency eavesdropped on a telephone conversation Harman had with a "suspected Israeli agent" in October 2005, in which Harman agreed to try to quash an investigation into an Israeli lobby.
At the time, the Justice Department was pursuing an espionage case against two lobbyists for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the powerful Israeli lobbying group. According to CQ's Jeff Stein, the NSA was listening in on an Israeli operative's calls when they picked up a conversation between the target and Harman in which the congresswoman promised to "waddle in" to the AIPAC case "if you think it'll make a difference."
In exchange, Stein reports, the Israeli operative promised to use his (or her) influence to help Harman land the chairmanship of the House Intelligence Committee. In October 2005, the Democrats were heavily favored to win the mid-term election; the wrangling for committee assignments had already begun, and Nancy Pelosi, who was expected to be named Speaker, was signaling that Harman was not a candidate for the Intelligence Committee.
This is the second report that the NSA was spying on members of Congress to come to light in recent weeks; last week the New York Times reported that the agency tried to tap the phone of an unidentified congressman in late 2005 or early 2006 (the tap never happened). The Harman wiretap, according to Stein, was approved by a court.
According to Stein, Harman ended the quid-pro-quo negotiation by saying, "This conversation doesn't exist."
Nothing came of the conversation, because a) Harman didn't get the intelligence committee, and b) the Department of Justice continued with it's case against the AIPAC staffers. (So much for the all-powerful Israeli lobby!)
Allegations that Harman was in unseemly cahoots with AIPAC are not new; the FBI launched an investigation into Harman's relationship with the lobby back in 2006. But the wiretap is the first report of solid evidence that the FBI was on to something.
According to Stein the FBI was on the verge of officially opening a case against Harman based on the wiretap, but the White House scuttled it:
But that's when, according to knowledgeable officials, Attorney General Gonzales intervened.
According to two officials privy to the events, Gonzales said he "needed Jane" to help support the administration's warrantless wiretapping program, which was about to be exposed by the New York Times.
Harman, he told Goss, had helped persuade the newspaper to hold the wiretap story before, on the eve of the 2004 elections. And although it was too late to stop the Times from publishing now, she could be counted on again to help defend the program
He was right.
On Dec. 21, 2005, in the midst of a firestorm of criticism about the wiretaps, Harman issued a statement defending the operation and slamming the Times, saying, "I believe it essential to U.S. national security, and that its disclosure has damaged critical intelligence capabilities."
[...]
And thanks to grateful Bush administration officials, the investigation of Harman was effectively dead.
Harman is in deep trouble. Through a spokesperson, she told CQ that the allegations are an "outrageous and recycled canard, and have no basis in fact."
The most interesting question is: Who was the "suspected Israeli operative"? Harman was the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, so it's not like she was palling around and making deals with just any old spy off the street. Whomever she was talking to was likely a powerful person in Washington. And a spy.
Rep. Jane Harman denies wiretap report
The congresswoman from Venice says she didn't lobby the Justice Department on an espionage case, as reported by Congressional Quarterly.
By Greg Miller (LA Times)
April 21, 2009
Reporting from Washington -- Rep. Jane Harman denied Monday that she had contacted the Justice Department to seek leniency for employees of a pro-Israeli lobbying organization under investigation for espionage.
The Venice Democrat also said that she has never been told that she was involved in the FBI's probe of former officials of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee.
Harman's statement came in response to a report in Congressional Quarterly that she had been recorded on a federal wiretap offering to lobby the Justice Department to reduce espionage-related charges against AIPAC officials. Today, the New York Times reported on its website that three anonymous sources had confirmed the existence of the recording. One source told the Times that she appeared to agree in exchange for help becoming chairwoman of the House Intelligence Committee.
The New York Times reported the caller told Harman that Californian Haim Saban would threaten to withhold campaign contributions from Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) unless Harman became committee chairwoman. Pelosi had no comment, the Times said, and Saban did not return phone calls.
In her written statement, Harman said the claims "have no basis in fact. I never engaged in any such activity."
The case centers on allegations that a former Defense Department analyst disclosed classified information to two AIPAC officials in 2003.
The two officials, Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman, were indicted in 2005 and face prosecution on espionage-related charges. The analyst, Lawrence A. Franklin, pleaded guilty and received a prison sentence of more than 12 years.
Harman, then the ranking Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, has acknowledged that AIPAC supported her unsuccessful bid to become chairwoman in 2006.
The Justice Department and the FBI declined to comment. David W. Szady, head of counterintelligence for the FBI from 2001 to 2006, said he was not aware of any improper contacts from Harman.
"She was circumspect and professional and never tried to influence me or the FBI in any way," said Szady, who routinely briefed Harman and other senior congressional officials on espionage cases.
Blue Dog PAC Starves During Public Option Fight
By: emptywheel Tuesday October 27, 2009 10:15 am
This is interesting. Funding for the Blue Dog’s PAC (as distinct from Blue Dogs themselves) has dried up even as Blue Dogs have attempted to gut health care reform.
Our analysis of the fiscally conservative and increasingly influential Blue Dog Coalition and its funding noted that the group’s political action committee had averaged more than $176,000 in receipts from other PACs over the first half of 2009. Their monthly haul dropped to a surprisingly low $27,000 in July, rebounded somewhat in August, and but then dropped again to just $12,500 in September.
[snip]
After raising $1.1 million from January to June, the committee raised less than $87,000 between July and September — less than it brought in during any one of the preceding five months. And in just three months, the Blue Dog PAC’s monthly fundraising average dropped by more than $50,000 — probably not the sort of fiscal conservatism the 52-member coalition was hoping for.
Now, that’s the group’s PAC. Individual members seem to be doing just fine. For example, here are some August and September donations to Allen Boyd, who remains opposed to the public option.
American College of Radiology PAC, $4,500
American Dental Association PAC, $2,500
American Osteopathic PAC, $2,500
SmithKlineBeecham, $3,500
(Interestingly, Amgen took back $1,000 from Boyd during this period.)
And here’s some PAC donations to Mike Ross.
American Medical Association, $1,000
American Medical Group, $1,500
American Optometric Association PAC, $2,000
American Society of Health System Pharmacist, $1,500
Assurant, $1,500
Fresenius Medical Care, $2,500
Healthcare Distribution Management, $2,500
RiteAid, $2,500
Both of these men, at least, are still getting a chunk of change from health care companies, even while the Blue Dog PAC is getting nothing.
Obviously, this is not just about health care–Blue Dogs suck at the teat of a range of onerous business interests. But at a time when Blue Dogs might be exercising maximum influence, they’re not getting any return as a group. I wonder if that stems from a lack of leadership as a block–particularly Stephanie Herseth Sandlin’s repeated embarrassment as Raul Grijalva repeatedly out-whipped her on the public option.
“Yes, I think there’s momentum, “ said Blue Dog leader Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-S.D.). “They don’t have the votes for a public option with Medicare rates.”
But Grijalva noted that 46 members recently signed a letter pledging to vote against the centrist plan. In the numbers game of the House, that is significant, because Republicans are expected to unite against the healthcare bill. So if 39 Democrats oppose the plan, it wouldn’t get the 218 votes needed to pass. There are 52 Blue Dogs, as well as many other centrist members not in the coalition.
“With negotiated rates, you lose votes on the left,” Herseth Sandlin said. “ I don’t know that either public option can get 218 votes.”
Not to mention by Herseth Sandlin’s own squishiness on the public option?
Obviously, this is just two or three months data. But it raises the possibility that the Blue Dogs, as a block, are losing some of their clout.
Another "suck off a corpse for a cheeseburger" Democrat bites the dust.
My degree of contempt for this depends entirely on whose corpse it is, and the degree of decomposition.
Also, on a physiological level, it would be quite a feat to accomplish - perhaps Guinness Book of Records should be informed if successfully achieved?
__________________
‘Perhaps it doesn’t understand English,’ thought Alice; ‘I daresay it’s a French mouse, come over with William the Conqueror.’
October 30, 2009
Ethics Inquiries Into Lawmakers Surface via Security Breach
By ERIC LICHTBLAU and ERIC LIPTON
WASHINGTON — The House ethics committee announced Thursday that it would begin full investigations into two House members, Maxine Waters and Laura Richardson, but a security breach threatened to make public the names of many other members facing ethics inquiries.
The separate investigations into private financial matters of Ms. Waters and Ms. Richardson, both California Democrats, suggest a stepped-up effort by the ethics committee at a time when it has faced criticism for the slow pace of its work.
New York Gov. David Paterson (D) "secretly solicited five free tickets to last week's World Series opener, in apparent violation of the state ethics law, even while publicly claiming it was the Yankees who had 'invited' him to the game," reports the New York Post.
"When initially asked about the freebies, Paterson spokesman Peter Kauffmann said the governor was personally offered the tickets by Yankee President Randy Levine, with whom he had appeared on a CNBC show a few days earlier."
However, Levine shot back, "He's a liar. I never talked to him."
__________________
Humans clearly attend closely to status, an important part of status is dominance, and a key way we show dominance is to tell others what to do. Whoever gets to tell someone else what to do is dominating, and affirming their own status. But we are also clearly built to not notice most of our status moves, and so we attribute them to other motives. And as long as we are making up motives, we might as well make up the most admired of motives, altruism. --Robin Hanson
Last edited by Gordon B; November-3rd-2009 at 12:09 PM.
"When initially asked about the freebies, Paterson spokesman Peter Kauffmann said the governor was personally offered the tickets by Yankee President Randy Levine, with whom he had appeared on a CNBC show a few days earlier."
However, Levine shot back, "He's a liar. I never talked to him."
The Post's Fred Dicker reported that the governor's spokesperson Peter Kaufmann said that Yankees president Randy Levine personally offered the tickets as a gift, but—perhaps because the Post and Yankees share a spokesperson—Levine said, "He's a liar. I never talked to him [Paterson]." Then the spokesman "offered two other stories."
First, he claimed that another Yankee official, Chief Operating Officer Lonn Trost, offered the tickets to Paterson.
But after Levine, a former deputy mayor under Rudy Giuliani, shot that down as false as well, Kauffmann conceded that Trost had actually offered the governor playoff tickets, not Series tickets, many weeks ago.
A third story then came from a senior Paterson administration official, who told The Post that the tickets were solicited from the Yankees' top management at Paterson's direction by David Johnson, the governor's personal aide.
"The governor didn't want to pay," the official said.
__________________
Humans clearly attend closely to status, an important part of status is dominance, and a key way we show dominance is to tell others what to do. Whoever gets to tell someone else what to do is dominating, and affirming their own status. But we are also clearly built to not notice most of our status moves, and so we attribute them to other motives. And as long as we are making up motives, we might as well make up the most admired of motives, altruism. --Robin Hanson
Only if he gets to fly around the park at 90MPH in his SUV without wearing his seat belt.
__________________
"The main vice of capitalism is the uneven distribution of prosperity. The main vice of socialism is the even distribution of misery." --Winston Churchill
He'll find some other toy. If he can't have a state, with his $400 million he could find an island -- or a theme park, like Monte suggests -- to turn into his sandbox.
A piece penned by the Goodspeak on the other end of the political spectrum.
Election 2009: Change I Can Believe In!
Ann Coulter
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
MSNBC, Aug. 31, 2009, Keith Olbermann on Robert F. McDonnell, Republican candidate for governor of Virginia:
"In (McDonnell's master's thesis), he described women having jobs as detrimental to the family, called legalized use of contraception illogical, pushed to make divorce more difficult, and insisted government should favor married couples over, quote, 'cohabitators, homosexuals or fornicators.' Wow. When did he write this? 1875? No, 1989. Wow, 1989.
"Goodbye, Mr. McDonnell."
MSNBC, Sept. 22, 2009, Rachel Maddow also on McDonnell:
"And here's where the conservative movement and the Republican establishment smash into each other like bumper cars without bumpers. Here's where Republican electoral chances stop being separate from the wild-eyed excesses of the conservative movement.
"Part of watching Republicans try to return to power is watching ... the conservative movement eat the Republican Party, eat their electoral chances over and over and over again."
On election night, conservatives-eating-Republicans resulted in an 18-point landslide for McDonnell, who beat his Democratic opponent 59 percent to 41 percent -- winning two-thirds of all independent voters and ending the Democrats' eight-year reign in the Virginia governor's office.
Republicans swept all statewide offices for the first time in 12 years, winning the races for lieutenant governor and attorney general, as well as assembly seats, garbage inspector, dog catcher and anything else Virginians could vote for.
To paraphrase a pompous blowhard: Goodbye, Mr. Democrat.
And that's not the most exciting news from election night! Astoundingly, Jon Corzine, the incumbent governor of heavily Democratic New Jersey -- a state that Barack Obama won by 16 points just a year ago -- lost by 5 points.
At 49 percent for Republican Chris Christie versus 44 percent for Corzine, the election wasn't even close enough to be stolen by ACORN. (Although Corzine did extremely well among underaged Salvadoran prostitutes living in government housing.)
The biggest winner election night was pollster Scott Rasmussen, who -- once again -- produced the most accurate poll results.
New York Times poll: Corzine 40, Christie 37;
Quinnipiac poll: Corzine 43, Christie 38;
Rasmussen poll: Christie 46, Corzine 43.
The biggest loser was President Obama, who campaigned tirelessly for Corzine, even giving up golf on several occasions and skipping a quarter-million-dollar "date night" with Michelle to stump for the Democrat.
Just two days before the election, Obama was at a rally in New Jersey assuring voters that Corzine was "one of the best partners I have in the White House. We work together. ... Jon Corzine helped get this done."
Except the problem is that voting for Obama a year ago was a fashion statement, much like it was once a fad to buy Beanie Babies, pet rocks and Cabbage Patch Kids. But instead of ending up with a ridiculous dust-collector at the bottom of your closet, the Obama fad leaves you with higher taxes, a reduced retirement fund, no job and a one-year wait for an MRI.
That is why Corzine's defeat sounded the death knell for national health care.
The good news: Next time Corzine is in a major car accident after speeding on the New Jersey Turnpike, he'll be able to see a doctor right away.
The media will try to rescue health care by talking about nothing but the 23rd district of New York, where the Democrat won Tuesday night. Congratulations, Democrats -- you won a congressional seat in New York! Next up: A Catholic elected pope!
Far from an upset, the Democrats' winning the 23rd district was a long-term plan of the Obama White House. That's why Obama made John McHugh, the moderate Republican congressman representing the 23rd district, his Secretary of the Army earlier this year. The Democrats thought McHugh's seat would be easy pickings.
Only in the last week has everyone acted as if a Democratic victory in the 23rd district would be a shocking surprise -- an upset victory caused by puritanical Republicans staging inquisitions against "mainstream" Republican candidates like Dede Scozzafava, the designated "Republican" candidate in the special election.
This is preposterous -- there was absolutely nothing Republican about Scozzafava. As a supporter of partial-birth abortion, card-check union schemes and massive government spending programs, she was less Republican than John McCain.
Even Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos called Scozzafava the most liberal candidate in the race -- which may explain why she was the choice of George Soros' Working Families Party and why she promptly endorsed the Democrat after withdrawing from the race last weekend.
Conservative opposition to Scozzafava hardly suggests that they plan to impose litmus tests on every Republican candidate in the 2010 elections.
Speaking of litmus tests, on MSNBC recently, liberal blogger Jane Hamsher said of the possibility that a blue dog Democrat would oppose national health care: "I dare Blanche Lincoln -- I dare Blanche Lincoln to join a filibuster. She'll draw primary opponents so fast it would make your head spin."
While I'm sure an out-of-touch liberal blogger from Hollywood knows more about Arkansas than an elected senator from that state, Hamsher's threat sounds more like an intra-party civil war than conservatives opposing a George Soros-supported Republican candidate in a New York congressional race.
Not only do conservatives not pick insane fights -- such as staging a 2006 primary fight against a recent vice presidential candidate because he supported the war in Iraq -- but conservatives are more popular than Republicans.
By contrast, liberals are less popular than Democrats. When conservatives take control of the Republican Party, Republicans win. When liberals take control of the Democratic Party, Democrats end up out of power for eight to 12 years.
__________________
"The main vice of capitalism is the uneven distribution of prosperity. The main vice of socialism is the even distribution of misery." --Winston Churchill
There are a lot of bad owners in sports but Donald Sterling is the worst.
__________________
Humans clearly attend closely to status, an important part of status is dominance, and a key way we show dominance is to tell others what to do. Whoever gets to tell someone else what to do is dominating, and affirming their own status. But we are also clearly built to not notice most of our status moves, and so we attribute them to other motives. And as long as we are making up motives, we might as well make up the most admired of motives, altruism. --Robin Hanson
__________________
"The main vice of capitalism is the uneven distribution of prosperity. The main vice of socialism is the even distribution of misery." --Winston Churchill
Linear Mode
