In escalating war of words leader of North Korea calls Donald Trump a “mentally deranged U.S. dotard.”

Courtesy of New York Times:  

Responding directly for the first time to President Trump’s threat at the United Nations to destroy nuclear-armed North Korea, its leader called Mr. Trump a “mentally deranged U.S. dotard” on Friday and vowed the “highest level of hard-line countermeasure in history.” 

The rejoinder by the leader, Kim Jong-un, who is about half as old as Mr. Trump, 71, added to the lexicon of Mr. Kim’s choice of insults in the escalating bombast between the two. 

“A frightened dog barks louder,” Mr. Kim said in a statement, referring to Mr. Trump’s speech at the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday in which he vowed to annihilate North Korea if the United States were forced to defend itself or its allies against it. 

“He is surely a rogue and a gangster fond of playing with fire, rather than a politician,” Mr. Kim said.

Damn I hate to agree with a deranged North Korean lunatic, but that is a fairly accurate description.

Of course the problem is that we expect this sort of name calling and childishness from the life size Weeble dominating the people of North Korea, but now we have our own man-child egging him on by flinging his own preschool level epithets, like Rocket man, in Jong-un's direction.

And all of this might simply be good theater, if it did not potentially devastating real life consequences.

Courtesy of US News: 

Hawaiian officials are reportedly preparing for the possibility of a nuclear attack, and they're doing it quietly. 

The Honolulu Civil Beat reported earlier this week that Hawaii lawmakers attended a closed-door briefing Tuesday by emergency officials on the topic of such an attack from North Korea. Officials reportedly viewed slides on the potential fallout from a nuclear attack that included information on where an attack might target and the fatalities that could result.

That's right we now have American citizens now terrified of being decimated by a nuclear bomb.

Only nine short months ago there was no such fear.

And there are no signs that the rhetoric will come to an end any time soon.

Kim Jong Un of North Korea, who is obviously a madman who doesn't mind starving or killing his people, will be tested like never before!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 22, 2017

In actuality Trump is simply increasing sanctions: 

President Trump ordered a widening of American sanctions on North Korea on Thursday to further choke off its trade with the outside world, in what some experts described as perhaps the most sweeping set of punitive economic measures enacted by the United States in many years. 

A new executive order signed by Mr. Trump aimed to cut North Korea out of the international banking system while targeting its major industries and shipping. The move suggested that for now, at least, the president was still committed to applying economic pressure rather than military action, despite his vow this week to “totally destroy North Korea” if the United States were forced to defend itself or its allies.

That may have some effect if others were not trying to remove themselves from the line of fire if this thing escalates any further.

Courtesy of CNBC: 

South Korea on Thursday approved $8 million worth of humanitarian aid for Pyongyang in a move likely to muddle international efforts aimed at isolating the nuclear-armed state. 

The package will include $4.5 million in nutritional products for children and pregnant women through the World Food Program in addition to $3.5 million worth of vaccines and medicinal treatments via UNICEF. The timing of the delivery has yet to be confirmed.

The news indicates South Korean President Moon Jae-In isn't backing down from direct engagement with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un even as other major players in the long-simmering crisis push for a tougher approach.

Yeah, that is because South Korea realizes that the minute somebody decides to call the other's bluff it is their asses which get fried first.

There is a reason that voters are supposed to choose the most sober, experienced, and mentally stable candidate to the President of the United States.

Oldest online website for white supremacists shut down for promoting hate speech and violence.

Courtesy of the AP: 

The founder of the internet’s oldest white supremacist site said he was trying to get back online Monday after a company revoked its domain name following complaints that it promotes hatred and is linked to dozens of murders. 

Don Black, a former Ku Klux Klan leader who has operated stormfront.org since 1995, said he didn’t receive any warning before Network Solutions blocked the use of the stormfront.org name on Friday. 

Stormfront.org had more than 300,000 registered users, Black said, with traffic increasing since a violent white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. Popular with the KKK and neo-Nazi groups, the site included forums where users sometimes promoted white power events.

Black, the founder of the site, thinks he can get the website up again under another domain, but fears that will just be shut down as well.

Other neo-Nazi or white supremacist websites have recently suffered a similar fate.

All things considered the events in Charlottesville have proven to be a real problem for certain hate groups. 

According to the folks who filed the complaint users of Stormfront.org have been connected to over a hundred killings including the 77 people slain by neo-Nazi Anders Breivik at a camp in Norway in 2011.

Here's hoping that they NEVER get back online. 

Editor called to testify in Sarah Palin defamation lawsuit says that article wanted to illustrate charged political rhetoric's connection to violence, not accuse Palin of directly influencing the shooting of Gabby Giffords.

Courtesy of the New York Times:  

The editor of The New York Times editorial page testified on Wednesday that he did not intend in an editorial to blame the former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin for a 2011 mass shooting, but was instead trying to make a point about the heated political environment. The editorial is the focus of a defamation lawsuit brought by Ms. Palin against the news organization. 

The editor, James Bennet, said he had wanted to draw a link between charged political rhetoric and an atmosphere of political incitement after a gunman opened fired in June on a baseball field where Republican congressmen were practicing, injuring several people including Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana. But Mr. Bennet said he was not trying to make a direct connection between a map of targeted electoral districts that Ms. Palin’s political action committee had circulated and the 2011 shooting in Arizona by Jared Loughner that severely injured Representative Gabby Giffords. 

“I did not intend and was not thinking of it as a causal link to the crime,” Mr. Bennet said. During cross-examination, he said he did not know if Mr. Loughner had seen the map and “did not know if the map incited him to his conduct.”

I think that what Mr. Bennet wrote is a valid observation on the effects that violent rhetoric has on the behaviors of certain individuals.

We just saw that same thing take place in Charlottesville, where people reading White Supremacist postings online showed up ready to incite violence and kick ass.

We have seen this happen time and time again, what SarahPAC did with that map is nothing new, but it DID help to create an atmosphere of hostility that could be tapped into by people with certain violent tendencies.

The judge is still considering the idea of throwing this whole thing out, and if he does I really hope the Times counter sues Palin for everything she still has left.

Day after white supremacist runs down and kills female protester Donald Trump retweets cartoon of train running over CNN reporter.

Trump RT'd this pic showing a CNN journalist hit by a train days after a white nationalist ran his car into activists, killed Heather Heyer. pic.twitter.com/tWjdoE70AS

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) August 15, 2017

Courtesy of TPM: 

President Donald Trump retweeted a cartoon showing a metaphorical “Trump Train” ramming a cartoon person topped with a CNN logo on Tuesday morning. 

The cartoon was as an ill-timed jab at the news network just three days after a woman was killed after a car barreled into counter-protesters at a white supremacists rally in Charlottesville, Virginia.

But before everybody gets all bent out of shape, you should know there's an excuse:  

An unnamed White House official later told NBC’s Kristen Welker that Trump had “inadvertently posted” the graphic, and that it was “immediately deleted” once noticed.

I didn't say it was a GOOD excuse.

So Donald Trump tweets and retweets terrible, incendiary things while his staff, who are too ashamed to use their real names, tries to cover for him with the press.

Who are often the subject of his tweets and retweets.

That about right?

Hey remember when Ted Nugent wanted everybody to be civil with each other? Yeah, that's over now.

Courtesy of The Kansas City Star: 

Nugent is a notorious provocateur, one who has attracted some infamous attention for his profane insults and bald-face threats to his political enemies. In June, however, after the shootings of Louisiana Congressman Steve Scalise and others at a baseball practice in Virginia, Nugent told a radio station that his wife had convinced him to stop with the “harsh terms” and “I encourage my friends/enemies on the left and in the Democrat and liberal world that we have to be civil to each other.” 

He kept his word for most of the show. Much of his carnival-barker-style rhetoric and sloganeering touted freedom, hunting, barbecue and his support for the military. He also assured the crowd several times that like every other show, he was treating this one as “the most important show of my life.” 

However, before the salacious “Wang Dang” song, he took an odd swipe at country music: “I was going to play a country song but I still have a (penis) so I can’t do that.” And before “Dog Eat Dog,” he praised the president and then told members of the military he was sorry they’d had to serve eight years under his predecessor, a commander-in-chief who was an “absolute piece of s***. … And if that offends you, you’re a piece of s***.” So much for civility.

So June 18th to just about the end of July. What is that, just a little over a month?

Way to stick it out there Captain Poopypants.

Let's face it once an attention seeking POS, always an attention seeking POS.

And these three will never stop spreading hate and divisiveness everywhere they go.

In fact that one on the left is working hard right now to overshadow the other two.

Sarah Palin will not appear at the opening day of her defamation case against the New York Times.

Courtesy of the New York Daily News: 

Conservative activist Sarah Palin won’t be attending the first court proceeding in her defamation case against The New York Times, according to her lawyer. 

The former vice presidential candidate and Alaska governor filed a lawsuit on June 27 alleging The Times ran a “fabricated story.” The initial conference in the case is set for 11 a.m. Friday. 

Asked Thursday whether Palin will be in the courtroom, her lawyer, S. Preston Ricardo, replied “No” in an email to the Daily News.

"Conservative activist?" Well I guess that sounds better than "failed reality show performer," or "political has been."

I love this part of the article: 

Palin wants The Times to pay up for “falsely stating to millions of people that she, a devoted wife, mother and grandmother, who committed a substantial portion of her adult life to public service, is part of a pattern of ‘lethal’ politics,” the suit contends.

"Devoted" wife, mother, and grandmother? 

If the court will indulge me I'd like to make an objection. Or vomit in my mouth, whichever is the more convenient.

And who is she kidding with this "committed a substantial portion of her adult life to public service?"

The only public that Palin ever served was her the public that looked back at her from a mirror every morning.

Remember this case is only seeking $75,000 in damages.

And since the Times has declared they are planning to aggressively fight this thing Palin could end up with hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees.

Sarah Palin really wants to prove to the naysayers that she WILL sue the New York Times. I'm a naysayer, and I say no she won't.

.@SarahPalinUSA suing @nytimes for editorial suggesting she incited Loughner attack on Gabby Giffords -- pic.twitter.com/xwJqNECW4H

— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) June 27, 2017

Courtesy of the New York Times:

Sarah Palin, former vice-presidential candidate, filed a defamation lawsuit against The New York Times Company on Tuesday, saying the newspaper had published a statement about her in a recent editorial that it “knew to be false.” 

In the lawsuit, which was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Ms. Palin contends that The Times “violated the law and its own policies” when it linked her in an editorial to a mass shooting in January 2011.

The article points out that it issued a correction both online and on Twitter, however apparently that is not good enough for the attention whore.

Ms. Palin said in the lawsuit that The Times’s response “did not approach the degree of the retraction and apology necessary and warranted by The Times’s false assertion that Mrs. Palin incited murder.”

Aww, poor baby. So upset that somebody called her out for her inflammatory rhetoric.

However perhaps Palin and her attorney should carefully read the end of this Times article: 

In a statement, a spokeswoman for The Times said, “We have not reviewed the claim yet but will defend against any claim vigorously.”

I would contend that the Times has vastly more legal resources at their disposal than does this dried up has been. 

And if she thinks they will settle with her, then she probably does not realize that the Times is engaged in almost constant litigation for one reason or another, and does not make a habit of settling.

It would take literally no time at all, in fact I volunteer my services as a resource, for the Times to establish a pattern of Sarah Palin inciting violence against others.

I know there are multiple folks in Alaska who would be willing to testify, as would the family of the now deceased Joe McGinniss who were harassed to aggressively they were forced to change their contact information.

Hell, one of her supporters even threatened to shoot me at the school where I worked.

And let's not forget that she even fomented violence within her own family, which led to a brawl on the streets of Anchorage and her son brutalizing his fiance while waving a gun around.

No the truckloads of evidence available to paint Sarah Palin as an individual who aggressively fanned the flames of hatred and inspired death threats and even acts of violence all across the country will prove insurmountable to any legal team that Palin could afford to put together.

Having said that I actually hope that she calls my bluff and goes for it.

I have been writing about the lunacy surrounding Donald Trump for far too long now, and I welcome the opportunity to write about Sarah Palin getting her ass handed to her yet again.

Donald Trump says that due to Hillary Clinton's stance on gun control that her Secret Service agents should be stripped of their guns.

Courtesy of NBC News: 

Donald Trump mixed policy with intimations of violence in Miami on Friday, reversing his position on re-engaging with Cuba and pushing for Hillary Clinton's security to disarm because of her proposed firearm reforms. 

Trump represented Clinton's position on gun rights as wanting to "destroy your Second Amendment" and said that her bodyguards should no longer carry firearms in light of her policy stance, which includes expanded background checks for gun sales. 

"She doesn't want guns, take their — let's see what happens to her," Trump said. "Take their guns away, okay? It'll be very dangerous."

It appears that it is not good enough for Trump to rile up his "basket of deplorables" to attack Muslims and minorities in this country, he is also trying to agitate 2nd Amendment folks into possible aggression against his Democratic opponent.

And it is not the first time either: 

In May, at a National Rifle Association conference, Trump called Clinton a "heartless, hypocrite" who wanted to take guns away from Americans when her own body guards used them for her protection. 

"So I think that, in addition to calling for them to name judges, we'll also call them and let their body guards immediately disarm. OK, no they should immediately disarm and let's see how good they do. Let's see how they feel walking around without their guns on their bodyguards." 

Trump has intimated violence against Clinton in the past, joking at a rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina last month that if Clinton wins and gets to pick Supreme Court justices there's nothing that can be done for proponents of the right to bear arms. "Although, the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

I'll say it again, if there is ever an attack against Clinton I think Trump should be charged with  inciting violence.

I also think that his rhetoric disqualifies him from ever being the President of the United States, and hopefully the American people recognize that as well.

Donald Trump supporter found with an explosive device in his home amid charges that he planned to attack Muslims. Well, it really was only a matter of time.

Courtesy of TPM: 

Police found an explosive device Sunday in the home of a 55-year-old Richmond, California man who allegedly threatened to harm the local Muslim community, according to a local report. 

Police evacuated William Celli's neighborhood when they found a device at his home on Sunday and detonated it, Bay Area TV station KPIX reported. Celli was arrested and booked into county jail on Sunday afternoon, according to the report. 

KPIX reported a tipster told police Thursday that a man was making devices and threatening to harm Muslims. But while law enforcement said Celli's statements attracted their attention, police wouldn't elaborate on the threats, according to the report. 

"We thank law enforcement authorities for their swift action and we will monitor this alleged case of domestic terrorism closely as it moves through the legal system," said Zahra Billoo, executive director of the San Francisco Bay Area chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

Celli often expressed his feelings about Donald Trump and Muslims on Facebook.

Donald trumps on again I'm happy leaders okay but this guys a great point man I'll follow this MAN to the end of the world
Posted by William Celli on Wednesday, October 21, 2015

Surah 47:4 When ye encounter the infidels strike of their heads. And I' m the bad guy., And our progressive leaders want...
Posted by William Celli on Sunday, October 25, 2015

Donald Trump's on again I'm feeling good about myself
Posted by William Celli on Wednesday, October 28, 2015

So to be clear if we catch ISIS leaders spreading hateful rhetoric among American Muslims and they threaten harm against Christians in this country we arrest them right?

So what do we do with a presidential candidate who spreads hateful rhetoric among Christians that results in threats of harm against Muslims in this country?

Hmmm?

The real violence from which we need to shield our children.

There really is no other way to phrase it, the response from the Right to the Charleston church shooting has been...well it's been disgusting.

So here we are on the third day after this horrific shooting and both sides of the political spectrum are firmly entrenched in their positions.

On the Left there are calls for more gun control and a serious discussion about racism in this country, and on the Right there are calls for arming pastors, and an aggressive attempt to deflect any blame for the violence from one who is clearly on their side of the ideological fence.

Here are some responses from those Republicans who claim to want to lead this country.

Chris Christie: 

“Laws can’t change this.” 

“This type of conduct is something that only our display of our own love and good faith that’s in our heart can change,” he said.

That of course it completely untrue.  As can be proven by looking at the example set by Australia.

Jeb Bush (Same article):  

“But I do know what was in the heart of the victims,” Bush said. “They were meeting in brotherhood and sisterhood in that church. … They were praying. They were learning and studying the word of the Lord, to find grace in his kingdom, to fill his house with love.”

Actually we DO know what was in the shooter's heart. Hatred for black people:  

"You all rape women and you're taking over our country."

Not only that but like all sociopaths it appears he has written a manifesto, which comes complete with pictures, angry rants, and tons of racism:

Couldn't be much clearer than that.

Here is what Mike Huckabee, a Christian pastor himself, had to say: 

“All the proposals this president and others have put forward on gun control would not have stopped this shooting anymore than it would have stopped Sandy Hook,” Huckabee said. “The one thing that would have at least ameliorated the horrible situation in Charleston would have been that if somebody in that prayer meeting had a conceal carry or there had been either an off duty policeman or an on duty policemen, somebody with the legal authority to carry a firearm and could have stopped the shooter.”

In other words we can do nothing to keep ourselves safe except prepare ourselves to return gunfire if fired upon. 

Which unsurprisingly is essentially the opinion of Charles Cotton, a board member for the NRA: 

Cotton, who did not return a message left at his Houston-area law firm, pointed out on a Texas gun forum that Pinckney was a state senator who had voted against a law allowing gun owners to carry concealed weapons without permits. 

“Eight of his church members who might be alive if he had expressly allowed members to carry handguns in church are dead,” Cotton wrote. “Innocent people died because of his position on a political issue.”

So apparently these people deserved to die because they were not  prepared to take a life in a place where they felt safe and were learning about love and compassion. Good to know.

No in the Right Wing bubble all gun violence is the result of mental illness, ill prepared victims, or radical Islamist terrorists from who the President is failing to protecting us.

However about that mental illness thing:  

We do have statistics showing that the vast majority of people who commit acts of violence do not have a diagnosis of mental illness and, conversely, people who have mental illness are far more likely to be the victims of violence than the perpetrators.

(As somebody who works with the mentally ill, I can concur that most of what we do is to protect them from others, not protect others from them.)

Personally I think that this recent Rolling Stone article really hit the nail on the head:

The fact is, this is political because American movement conservatism has already made these kinds of killings political. The Republican Party has weaponized its supporters, made violence a virtue and, with almost every pronouncement for 50 years, given them an enemy politicized, racialized and indivisible. We can't afford to allow political discussions of these events, because if we do, we might notice what's already there, wracking the body politic like gangrene. 

Movement conservatives have fetishized a tendentious and ahistorical reading of the Second Amendment to the point that the Constitution itself somehow paradoxically "legitimizes" an armed insurrection against the government created by it. Those leading said insurrection are swaddled by the blanket exculpation of patriotism. At the same time, they have synonymized the Democratic Party with illegitimacy and abuse of the American order. This is no longer an argument about whether one party's beliefs are beneficial or harmful, but an attitude that labels leftism so antithetical to the American idea that empowering it on any level is an act of usurpation. Leftism no longer constitutes a debatable misuse of American power, but theft and governmental overreach. 

In other words as the Right Wing sees their power diminishing as a more diverse population begins to outnumber their base, they start to talk about "protecting our rights," "2nd Amendment solutions," and "retaking our country," and ALL of that is the kind of rhetoric that leads to people being shot to death in their own house of worship.

What could have been done to protect these nine people in South Carolina?

Well making it much, much harder to get a gun would be a nice start, but also making people like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and Sarah Palin shut the fuck up would certainly make a vast difference as well.

Which of course is why Bill O'Reilly became so defensive when a guest made a similar point: 

“You’re equating what Dylann Roof did in that church to our commentary?” he asked. “Are you saying that Fox News justifies brutal crimes against black Americans?”

Yes, yes I am. 

Don Imus of Fox News apologizes to the Satanic Temple for comments suggesting their members "should be shot." Wait, is this a trick?

Courtesy of Philly.com:  

Radio personality Don Imus and his program's executive producer emphatically apologized to a group of Satanists on Imus' show Tuesday morning for the producer advocating the group "should be shot" during an on-air segment last Thursday. 

The apologies by Imus and producer Bernard McGuirk came one day after philly.com and other news websites reported that a group called The Satanic Temple, which has proposed erecting a statue of Satan outside the Oklahoma Statehouse, demanded an apology from McGuirk. 

"They should be able to put the statue up and then they should be shot right next to it," the commentator, Bernard McGuirk, said on the Imus in the Morning show that aired last Thursday. "And then we take it down." 

The group also demanded a response from Fox Business, which airs the show on the television channel each morning. 

McGuirk, who made the initial remarks during a segment with Imus called "Mensa Meeting," also retracted his comments that attributed Satanism to evil. 

"My comments were rooted in ignorance. Satanists, they do not promote evil, a la Charles Manson or Hitler," McGuirk said. "Regardless, I don’t want to see anyone shot. That’s the truth of the matter. So I do apologize unequivocally." 

If I were a member of the Satanic Temple (And I'm not despite what others might think) I would not hold my breath waiting for Fox Business to apologize to them. 

However having said that I am pretty impressed that Imus and this McGuirk guy did so.

Of course in the case of Imus he has already been burned once by comments he made back in 2007, when he referred to the Rutgers Women's Basketball Team as "nappy-headed hos."

Well good for the Satanic Temple for standing up for themselves and getting an actual apology from somebody associated With Fox. And you thought simply walking on water was miraculous.

Good news for civil discourse in this country as Rush Limbaugh is currently losing about ten advertisers a day.

Hey has anybody seen my advertisers?

Courtesy of the Daily Kos:

In one month, over 300 more sponsors have pulled ads, now totaling over 2,500. (This does not count the 800 or so who have 'left quietly') Limbaugh now averages a loss of 10 sponsors per day. To make up for these sponsorship losses, it is known he has been subsidized by outside sources including FreedomWorks (backed by the Tea Party). And I'm betting he is having to subsidize himself, to stay on the air.

You know occasionally I hear a bit of Limbaugh's show and I have been struck by the fact that it seems there are always just the same advertisements repeated over and over, and that it seems all of them have something to do with internet security, home security, or some company selling blinds.

I knew he had been hemorrhaging advertisers but even I did not know it was so many. That is awesome news!

If you want to help you can sign a petition to do so here.

First Rush Limbaugh, and next Fox News.

Shoot first and attempt to understand the 2nd Amendment later proponent, James Yeager, did an interview to explain himself. It did not go well.

WSMV Channel 4 Courtesy of WMSV:

Yeager said he knows he's considered a radical in his views, but he's is not backing off comments that he will defend his right to bear arms in spite of getting death threats by email.

"It will be time to shoot people when the Constitution is set on fire," he told Channel 4 News. "If somebody comes to take my guns, I will shoot them." 

According the Tennessee Department of Safety, Yeager is not a certified instructor. When asked about that, he said he allowed his license to expire. 

The state also said Tactical Response is not a department-certified school.

What would George Washington do?

I'm pretty sure he would NOT shoot law enforcement officials, acting on laws passed by duly elected representatives, for doing their jobs.

I am not an expert on Washington, but that seems a reasonable assumption.

You know these guys are REALLY only helping those of us who want stricter gun laws make our case. I mean the very idea that they are building an arsenal in order to kill law enforcement personnel that they fear might come to take their guns is, in and of itself, more than enough reason to limit the number and types of weapons that they have access to.

After all for what purpose does an individual like this purchase armor piercing bullets and high caliber weapons if not to render the bulletproof vests of law enforcement officials useless?

Are they concerned that the local deer population has access to Kevlar?

But hey you gun nuts, you keep on talking. You are changing the possibility of passing stricter gun laws from impossible, to incredibly likely.

Thanks. the more level headed among us are in your debt.

Rupert Murdock gets pwned on Twitter.

I believe that someday future historians will looked back on this time in America's history and lay much of the blame for societies ills, and the break down of journalism, and political cooperation on the advent of Fox News, and will identify Rupert Murdoch himself as one of the most evil men in history.

Anybody disagree with that assessment?

(By the way for any of my less than internet savvy visitors "pwned" is internet speak for "owned.")

Ted Nugent might need to get his medication adjusted.

Courtesy of MSNBC:

“I feel sorry for liberals who can be that brain-dead to take a clear statement of fear on my part and turn it into a threat on somebody else,” Nugent told Glor. “I don’t think their [Secret Service] concern was that I threatened someone, I think their concern is that someone claimed I threatened someone. In fact, I got to tell you, and I don’t mean to put any professionals on the spot, but -- and I don’t have the greatest hearing in the world -- but I thought I heard something to the point of, ‘I didn’t think so.’” 

Nugent described his “35-40 minute” meeting with the government officials in Oklahoma as “adorable,” and said he told the officials they were “responding to complete idiots,” and that “you should be investigating them.”  

Moments later, Glor talked briefly with Nugent about his spread in the April headlines, referring to it as “one of the more interesting months you’ve ever had,” though Nugent felt otherwise. The reporter further probed the Republican activist about his support of the Romney campaign, whether or not they disproved of his outspoken candor when it came to the commander in chief, and how they will meet their requisites to obtain the moderate vote. 

Here’s where Nugent lost it. 

“You are many things, you are not moderate,” Glor pointed out. 

After a defensive aside related to his charity work, Nugent’s temper rose and he began to yell at the reporter. “I’m an extremely loving, passionate man, and people who investigate me honestly, without the baggage of political correctness, ascertain the conclusion that I’m a damn nice guy. And if you can find a screening process more powerful than that I’ll [BLEEP], [BLEEP], [BLEEP], [BLEEP].” 

A momentary pause ensued before Nugent directed his focus off-screen, “Or [BLEEP][BLEEP][BLEEP] -- How’s that sound?” 

Noted Glor, this last statement was aimed at a female CBS news producer off camera.

Wow! No wonder Mitt Romney was so anxious to get Nugent's endorsement.

He is certainly a shining example of the Republican party as it is today.

Now isn't he?

And WHO is it that he pals around with again?

Oh, that's right.

In November 2008 e-mail Ted Nugent explains that Palin lost the election because she was "TOO American, and TOO good." No, I am NOT kidding!

After the excitement of Game Change started to taper off I decided to take another look at those Palin e-mails.  I immediately stumbled onto this one:

From: Nizich, Michael A (GOV)  
Sent: Friday, November 7, 2008 6:10 PM 
To:Palin, Sarah (GOV sponsored)  
Subject:FW: NUGENT FAMILY 

FYI 

From: SNugent318@aol.com [mailto:SNugent318@aol.com] 
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 2:34 PM 
To: Nizich, Michael A (GOV) 
Subject: NUGENT FAMILY 

A glowing all American Spirit of the Last Frontier SALUTE to the great AK Governor Sarah Palin & family. We the productive people of goodwill and decency of America stand with Sarah & everything she stands for. She did one hell of a fine job day in & day out throughout the campaign & represented the best Americans perfectly. She lost because she is too American & too good. STAND! Be proud. We are. 

Godbless & Godspeed, carryon, AK BloodBrothers, Ted Nugent & family 

Wow, leave it up to one of this country's premiere political pundits (As evidenced by his NUMEROUS appearances on Fox News programs to provide political analysis) to immediately determine that the ONLY reason that Sarah Palin and John McCain are not, right now, sitting in the Oval Office blaming each other for starting World War 3, is that Sarah Palin was TOO American to be elected Vice President, in America.


Brilliant.


It certainly had NOTHING to do with the fact that she has the mental acuity of rutabaga, or that she is a divisive, nasty, mean spirited phony, who fanned the fires of racism and hatred in this country in order to, not only defeat, but destroy the reputation of the first African American to EVER get the Democratic nomination.


No clearly the problem was that she was just too damn American to be elected in a country that was determined to elect a secret socialist Muslim, who liked to "pal around" with domestic terrorists. Right?


And how could ANYBODY doubt the carefully weighed analysis of a man who so succinctly expressed his opinions of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton onstage in 2007.

You know, and this may be true for all of you as well, the more I learn about the 2008 election, and Sarah Palin, and her supporters, and what the Republican party has become these days, the more inspired I am to send money to President Obama's reelection campaign in order to make sure that NONE of them, or their ilk, ever get anywhere near the White House.


I used to think there was nothing worse for this country than George W. Bush, and the neocons that supported him.  I was wrong.

Atlantic reporter shocked at hate toward Muslims boiling over on Sarah Palin's Facebook page. Really? Where have you been these last three years?

Palin-bots/Teabaggers/racists is there really any difference?

Courtesy of the Atlantic:

As Sarah Palin Facebook missives go, her latest isn't particularly provocative or even objectionable: "Obama apologizes for the inadvertent Koran burning this week," she wrote. "Now the U.S. trained and protected Afghan Army can apologize for killing two of our soldiers yesterday." 

What's noteworthy is the response to the post. Almost 20,000 people have "liked" it. They've left 2,238 comments. It wouldn't be fair to credit or blame former governor Palin for their content, or to take them as representative of what conservatives think about the War in Afghanistan. But the comments shed light on how one faction in the conservative movement, fervent Palin fans, are reacting to the ongoing presence of American troops in a Muslim country. 

Some are completely unobjectionable. But explicit xenophobia is alarmingly common, characterizing comments on both sides of a significant divide. On one hand, there are Palin fans who think we ought to bring all our troops home immediately, that interventionism doesn't work. There are, at the same time, voices urging America to fight more aggressively; some even urge mass murder and other atrocities. After reading through every comment that appeared, I concluded that a powerful argument for bringing out troops home is that waging war abroad is having a corrosive effect on the character of some Americans, whose worst impulses are being stoked. 

Like I said where has this guy been all of this time? We have been talking about the hate that Sarah Palin inspires for years now.

Still he has a point about just how frightening a visit to Palin-land can be fore the uninitiated,

If you have the stomach for it you can read below the fold to see just how disgusting these so-called "patriots" really are when the flames of their hatred are fanned by the likes of the Grizzled Mama. 

Is this an indication of just how ugly politics will be this election year?

Ken Aden Arkansas democrat running for Congress

Courtesy of the Ken Aden for Congress website:

On the heels of a weekend of positive news coverage for the campaign of Democratic Congressional candidate Ken Aden, Aden’s campaign manager returned home to find his family pet slaughtered, with the word “liberal” painted on the animal’s corpse. 

The Russellville Police Department is investigating, and a report will be made to the Federal Bureau of Investigation Monday morning. 

Jacob Burris, who has served as Aden’s campaign manager since late October, arrived home with his family Sunday evening, and his four children discovered the gruesome scene as they exited the family vehicle to enter their home. 

The family pet, an adult, mixed-breed Siamese cat, had one side of its head bashed in to the point the cat’s eyeball was barely hanging from its socket. The perpetrators scrawled “liberal” across the cat’s body and left it on the doorstep of Burris’ house. 

“To kill a child’s pet is just unconscionable,” Aden said Monday morning. “As a former combat soldier, I’ve seen the best of humanity and the worst of humanity. Whoever did this is definitely part of the worst of humanity,” he said. 

“It is one thing to engage in civil political discourse, and for Republicans and Democrats to disagree with each other, which is an expected part of the political process. Taking it to this level is beyond unacceptable,” Aden said.

This is the outcome when certain cable news stations, and right wing radio shock jocks, vilify those on the other side the of the political aisle to such a degree that they no longer seem human. To these people "liberals" are in the same category as "commies," or "terrorists," or any other epithet you an imagine which conjures up visions of anti-Americanism.

I guess it could be worse, at least nobody was shot.

Oh wait....

(If you would like to send a message to the assholes who thought that murder of a family pet would stop this brave veteran's campaign, you can do so by contributing here.)

Today is the first anniversary of a day that will forever live in infamy.

To this day nobody knows what Jared Loughner cites as the reason for his shooting spree.

But we do know who put those crosshairs over Gabby Giffords district, and who was the MOST responsible for the violent rhetoric that we were hearing leading up to that terrible day.

Don't we?