letter to C/J, re: Cal Thomas, Repub hack

To the Editor,

Why do you bother printing the opinions of Cal Thomas, Republican apologist? Friday’s entry is typical of his not-so-clever spin doctoring.

In describing the Herman Cain sexual harassment fiasco, Thomas states, “Many in the media wolf pack have already judged him guilty because he updated his initial statement denying the allegations.” Say what? Cain didn’t just “update” his statement, he changed his story repeatedly throughout the days following Politico’s story early this week. At first, a blanket denial. Later, something may have happened, but he just couldn’t remember details. Still later, he remembered something about it, but the settlement (he thought it was just an agreement) was small. But Cain isn’t a flip flopper, he’s an “updater.” (Attention Mitt, new defense headed your way!)

And who can’t love the intentional deceit contained several sentences later, spun into question form: “Is Cain, a relative media novice, expected to have instant and total recall of events that may or may not have happened more than 10 years ago?” How disingenuous is that? As Cal surely knows, Politico contacted Cain 10 days before they ran the story to get his side of it. When does a 10 days heads-up to formulate a response “instant recall?”

All this leads to Mr. Thomas’ conclusion, that its hard to get good candidates to run for office because they don’t want “every mistake or bad decision” aired by the media. I’ll bet the media doesn’t have every mistake or bad decision by Herman Cain reported yet, but the first three harassment claims seem to be a darn good start. And, if true, Mr. Thomas is probably correct that Herman Cain doesn’t want those bad decisions brought to the public view.

Cal’s kind of drivel would be laughable, if it weren’t for his overlooking the pain that his candidate probably caused these women. Mr. Thomas opens by citing the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, but ignores the most obvious difference: that it was between two consenting adults, not a corporate executive trying to prey on women subordinates.

Does Cal Thomas really deserve the editorial space you routinely give him?

"I'm running for office, for Pete's sake!"

If Mitt wins the Republican nomination for president, be prepared to hear the caption repetedly(ha). In a rare display of his true feelings, that was his reply in a debate to the charge that he had hired illegals to work on one of his properties.
When the Boston Globe ran an article about his lawn care service which was employing illegals, he went to them and said they had to quit the practice. Not because it was wrong, not because it was illegal. Rather, because he was running for office, for Pete's sake.
I think it was Michael Kinsley that said a gaffe is when a politician accidentally says what he's thinking.

Who's your daddy?????

This is too funny, turns out the only contributor to the PAC to defeat Gov. Beshear is David William's father in law. He had previously tried to keep his identity secret, but a judge barred the commercials because the donor names weren't disclosed.

FRANKFORT, Ky. -- The father-in-law of the Republican candidate for Kentucky governor is the only contributor to a political group currently facing a restraining order.Franklin County Judge Thomas Wingate issued the order restraining the group from running the ads because no individuals were listed, as is required under Kentucky law.Restoring America responded by submitting a new report to the Kentucky Registry of Election Finance.According to that report, GOP gubernatorial candidate David Williams' father-in-law, Terry Stephens, gave Restoring America $1,365,000 and is the only contributor.The group has spent all the money on ads criticizing Williams' opponent, Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear.In a statement Stephens released Wednesday, he said, "My financial commitment to support the conservative values of Restoring America is in response to the devastation this country and state are experiencing under the leadership of liberals like Barack Obama."With Stephens' name now disclosed as Restoring America's sole contributor, the group has filed an emergency motion to dissolve the restraining order on its ads.Wingate will hold a hearing on the restraining order at 3:30 p.m. Thursday.

Read more: http://www.wlky.com/politics/29540316/detail.html#ixzz1bLHQBZju

Rand Paul: who's a kook now?

Thank God Kentucky elected this visionary! Rand Paul, our own conspiracy theorist senator, has uncovered a dark plot to use the UN to disarm us Americans!
Its all laid out in this Mother Jones article:

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/10/united-nations-small-arms-treaty-rand-paul

9-21-11: overall, not so good.

By most measures, yesterday was not a good day.
First, Troy Davis was executed by the state of Georgia. Convicted of the murder of a sheriff, and no physical evidence other that eyewitness testimony which has since been largely recanted, the justice system failed him. I think it was Justice Scalia that opined that the innocent do not have a right not to be executed, only the right to a fair trial.
Second, and of lesser importance, REM announced it was breaking up after 30 years. My friend Tony Burunoff got me introduced to them about that time and I've enjoyed their music ever since.
The good to come of yesterday included getting my yellow '76 goldwing cured of her mystery ignition miss and timing reset. Once again, she purrs!

The New Yorker on Michele Bachmann

This is an interesting article on Michele Bachmann from a recent New Yorker Magazine issue:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/15/110815fa_fact_lizza

Ten long pages but makes a fascinating read.

Barack Obama-Cave Man

Well, he's done it again! Faced with opposition from a radical right tea party that acted like the insane rogue elephant that didn't care if the economy tanked or not, Mr. Obama threw in the towel and gave the republicans everything they wanted without getting anything in return. He caved.
Maybe its the next step in the game for the shrewdest political thinker ever, a chess grand-master playing 5 steps ahead of everyone else, but I don't think so.
make no mistake, this was not a compromise because, once again, he got nothing in return.
At least in December he got an extension in unemployment benefits, but the republicans learned then that he could be controlled by extortion. And apparently he can.
here's Paul Krugman's take:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/01/opinion/the-president-surrenders-on-debt-ceiling.html?_r=1&hp