Tag: Rachel Maddow

Rachel Maddow has it right.

Rachel Maddow has it right.

The Rachel Maddow Show covered Sandy Hook in crystal clear terms. If you are at all squeamish about discussions over how the students and teachers of the school lost their lives…watch this anyway. She bases her report on an article in the Hartford Courant

The Rachel Maddow Show: March 14, 2013,

First Segment

Don’t want to take the time to watch? Let me save you some time. Here’s the transcript of Rachel’s show, dated March 14, 2013, published on the same site.

This summary of all that Rachel’s report represents, the timeline of the murders (a graphic description of the event and not for the faint of heart, but mandatory reading for anyone who wants to block the efforts to ban high-capacity weapons), including how the Bush Administration’s deconstruction of Senator Feinstein’s law ultimately led to this tragedy, together with the unspeakably snide, condescending, patronizing attack by Texas Senator Ted Cruz leaves me absolutely speechless.

So, frankly, does any pro-gun attack on Senator Feinstein.

I dare anyone–ANYONE–who speaks against Senator Feinstein’s experience in San Francisco, at ground zero for Mayor Mosconi and Supervisor Harvey Milk’s assassination, or in that office building in San Francisco in 1993 to put themselves in her place and still tell me they don’t understand the Senator’s views  about assault weapons.

Let me summarize: It took just over five minutes for the shooter to walk into the school, shoot every one of the teachers and kids in his path and exhaust his four high-capacity cartridges before turning the pistol on himself.

Five minutes.

Here’s an exercise for you.

Look at your clock. The one over the stove, next to the desk, on your computer, on your phone. Whatever.

Don’t look away from the clock. Don’t listen to the radio. Turn off the video and stop reading.

Feel how long five minutes is.



Now imagine.

Imagine the horror of being in Sandy Hook Elementary School as this is happening.

Imagine being six.

Being the only student in your classroom to make it out alive, and then only because you played possum.

Imagine how this experience has changed you.

You’re just six. You have your whole life ahead of you while your classmates are gone.

Blown away.

And then tell me why you need that high-capacity cartridge again.

Because if you can still feel so strongly about the right to promote this carnage, to allow unfettered access to these weapons, you can go find somewhere more appropriate for your exercise of that particular freedom. You do not stand for the right to life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness.

These weapons do NOTHING to support our three basic rights as outlined by the Declaration of Independence.

I don’t particularly want you or your high-capacity guns near me, my friends or family.

Thank you, Rachel, for your perspective.

Returning to reality…

Returning to reality…

When Jon Stewart called Rove out in this episode of the Daily Show (here: The Daily Show with Jon Stewart) he was pointing out a problem with Rove’s math.

All day, when I haven’t been plowing through deadline-driven work or cleaning up a huge backlog of filing, I’ve listened to news stories on NPR and reading articles about the aftermath of Election Day 2012. The news items all fall into roughly two categories of analysis:

1. We knew it was going to turn out this way and how sad it is they didn’t; or: Why it worked out this way and what we/they did wrong.

2. What now? How are we going to fix the mess we’re in, now that the game has changed?

One thing is crystal clear: The GOP miscalculated their margin of viability and they’ve gotten the wake-up call they deserve. Denial is a hard place to be, which is why I’ve thought all day about how to write this post without sounding like a gloating witch. Honestly, in the hard, cold light of day, we’ll get over this.

Rachel Maddow explains the 2012 election and its result in 3 minutes, 13 seconds of glorious truth.

The transcript here, because eventually the YouTube video will vanish again into the Memory Hole of the Internet:

Ohio really did go to President Obama last night and he really did win.

And he really was born in Hawaii. And he really is legitimately President of the United States. Again.

And the Bureau of Labor Statistics did not make up a fake unemployment rate last month.
And the Congressional Research Service really can find no evidence that cutting taxes on rich people grows the economy.
And the polls were not skewed to oversampled Democrats.
And Nate Silver was not making up fake projections about the election to make conservatives feel bad. Nate Silver was doing math.

And climate change is real.
And rape really does cause pregnancy sometimes.
And evolution is a thing.
And Benghazi was an attack on us. It was not a scandal by us.
And nobody is taking away anyone’s guns.
And taxes have not gone up. And the deficit is dropping, actually.
And Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction.
And the moon landing was real.
And FEMA is not building concentration camps.
And UN election observers are not taking over Texas.
And moderate reforms of the regulations on the insurance industry and the financial services industry in this country are not the same thing as communism.


Last night was a good night for liberals and for Democrats for very obvious reasons, but it was also
possibly a good night for this country as a whole. Because in this country we have a two-party system in government and the idea is supposed to be that the two sides both come up with ways to
confront and fix the real problems facing our country. They both propose possible solutions to our real problems and we debate between those possible solutions. And by the process of debate we pick the best idea. That competition between good ideas from both sides about real problems in the real country should result in our country having better choices, better options than if only one side is really working on the hard stuff.

And if the Republican Party and the conservative movement and the conservative media is stuck in a vacuum sealed door locked spin cycle of telling each other what makes them feel good, and denying the factual lived truth of the world then we are all deprived as a nation of the constructive debate between competing, feasible ideas about real problems.

Last night the Republicans got shellacked and they had no idea it was coming

And we saw them in real time–in real, humiliating time–not believe it even as it was happening to them. And unless they are going to secede, they’re going to have to pop the factual bubble they have been so happy living inside if they do not want to get shellacked again.

And that will be a painful process for them I’m sure but it will be good for the whole country, left, right, and center.

You guys we’re counting on you. Wake up! There’s real problems in the world. There
are real, knowable facts in the world. Let’s accept those and talk about how we might approach our problems differently. Let’s move on from there.

If the Republican Party and the conservative movement and conservative media are forced to do that by the humiliation they were dealt last night, we will all be better off as a nation.

And in that spirit, congratulations everybody. Big night.

Since January, in ever-increasing ways, I’ve become thoroughly sick of the radical Right’s rhetoric. I honestly thought, after growing up during the 1968 riots and surviving ten presidents, many race-based assassinations  (I was 16 days old when Kennedy was assassinated so I count his administration, too), that we were past all this thinly veiled racist, misogynistic,  homophobic crap, but there is simply no question about what the GOP in general and the Tea Party in particular expected in this year’s Presidential race.

NPR’s probably got the best lock on the main deciding factors: The “brown” vote, together with a diverse coalition of citizens whose liberal politics and religious beliefs, gave President Obama the edge he needed to win, not just by popular vote but by an Electoral College landslide.

Facebook has images popping up on multiple feeds that compare the “red” states of 2012 to maps showing slavery states in 1860. These remarkable divisions are clear and extremely disappointing. Why aren’t we beyond this by now?

The summary works like this: If you choose to accuse every brown person (African-American, Hispanic, Asian or other) of being part of the 47% who suffer from greed and laziness, failing to tow the imaginary line of strict morality, expecting them to give up rights to healthcare, family planning and legal immigration, you get what you deserve.

Reducing a woman’s access to family planning and abortion, particularly in regard to rape, is going to get you booted out of office. Basing your agenda on abridging basic civil rights, regardless of your opinion over the appropriateness of private behavior isn’t just wrong, it’s reprehensible. And it will cost you a seat in the Senate or the House.

The GOP has barely retained their majority in the House, but they have lost ground in the Senate. Continued shenanigans with filibusters and the looming economic Fiscal Cliff will ultimately cost the Tea Party’s constituents, and there is absolutely nothing standing in the way if President Obama wants to clasp his hands casually behind his back while Sequestration kicks in, meaning GOP leaders will either find a way to compromise or find themselves on the other side of the Capitol’s chamber doors in two years (or less).

It’s game over for the obstructionists of 2010. They no longer have the mandate they once did for doing as they please. While most of the GOP’s supporters remain white, male, and over 50, that number has shrunk sufficiently to tip the balance in favor of those whom the social safety nets protect. Four years down the road, their majority will shrink even further, leaving more progressives in place, in areas with higher populations.

Of all the reactions I read in the last two days, Jim Wright (Stonekettle Station) says it best with this post: Hemlock With A Small Side Of Schadenfreude. I warned my Facebook friends this morning to swallow whatever they had in their mouths before reading this article because Wright is dead on with his analysis, not just of the utter disappointment in Romney’s huge loss, but in the way the world will be now that the election is over.

I’ve posted the articles I found most useful or interesting below.

“We knew it was going to turn out this way and how sad it is they didn’t; or: Why it worked out this way and what we/they did wrong:”

John Scalzi (Whatever): Post-Election Notes For the GOP (Not That They’ve Asked For Them)

Slate: The Five Stages of Fox News Grief

Slate: A Vast Left-Wing Competency How Democrats became the party of effective campaigning—and why the GOP isn’t catching up anytime soon.

NBC News: Karl Rove’s election nightmare: Super PAC’s spending was nearly for naught

“What now? How are we going to fix the mess we’re in, now that the game has changed?”

The New York Times: Back to Work, Obama Is Greeted by Looming Crisis

Politico: The new Senate: More compromise, less filibuster?

In the end, we’re in for an interesting couple of months, while Congress figures out how to pull back from Sequestration, if it happens at all. No matter what, there’s a lot of healing that’s going to have to happen first.

Election 2012: Presidential Debate Number Two and the return of President Obama

Election 2012: Presidential Debate Number Two and the return of President Obama

Unlike the first Presidential debate on October 3, last night’s event was a hands-down smack-down. And unlike the world four years ago, it was wholly possible to follow the minds of friends and the press as they called each candidate out in real time. With the added bonus of fact-checking at the fingertips of savvy and skilled Google-searching and an understanding of the issues at hand, it was possible to track each assertion and cry “Foul” out loud, not just to the television or radio, but to willing listeners tuned in to Facebook, Twitter and elsewhere.

The results: Some of the fastest super-debate connections to reality, at least insofar as we can know it outside the Oval Office.

I hesitate to use the term non-partisan because everyone has an agenda, so I will present the following as a series of what I consider to be reliable sources for gaining insight into the various issues raised last night and how each candidate handled them.

There were only two candidates on view, but one other was involved in a public act of civil disobedience that should be noted here. Dr. Jill Stein and Gary Johnson have both achieved enough ballot placements that they should have been allowed into the debate process, if only to provide a clearer picture of the options available on November 6.

At some future point, I will address the question of our two-party system and what it would take to change our government to a coalition-style more similar to today’s structure in the UK and elsewhere. At the moment, I want to stick to what we saw last night.

FactCheck.org is my first best source for confirming the positions declared and how they relate to the truth. Overall, both candidates made some assertions that have been proved to be either half-truths or misstatements, but the overwhelming majority of false or misleading claims came from Gov. Romney. His often bullying behavior and condescending attitude took away a lot of what I think he hoped to accomplish last night. Several times he was called out, once by moderator Candy Crawley herself, for these misstatements.

Politifact.com calls it their Truth-o-meter, and covers both candidates’ claims with facts that check out from True to Pants on Fire.

Far more liberal-leaning ThinkProgress blogged live with fact-checking links and media through the debate.

But that’s not all. With the speed of lightning, these articles appeared in various places on the Internet, calling out Romney’s game plans (and Obama’s, where necessary).

Slate.com: Five Bad Ideas in Tonight’s Debate and Acts of Terror—or an Error? Republicans twist themselves in knots over the meaning of the word “terror”—and miss the point call out both candidates, but more notably Romney, for failing to talk about the issues raised in the questions they were asked.

NPR: How Obama Got His Groove Back, And Other Debate Takeaways takes the issues and clarifies what did (and did not) happen during last night’s debate.

Huffington Post: Mitt Romney Tax Plan Math Doesn’t Add Up addresses the numbers from several sources, for comparison.

Then there’s the question of how each candidate came off from a personal level. I can take comfort in knowing I’m not the only woman who was offended by Romney’s unbelievable claim that he was presented with “binders full of women” from whom he could choose for his cabinet. Frankly, it’s a wonder he found one he considered suitable for the job. You would think he could have found more if he’d really wanted. Even the Guardian UK noticed how this sounded. Considering Romney’s stellar performance when he visited the UK earlier this year, it’s no surprise they noticed.

In fact, this speaks volumes about the problem with electing Romney to the most visible office in the US. His claims regarding China aren’t just seated in a “say it now, take it back later” method of mendacity. He really seems to believe nobody is listening to him outside of the voters who might (or might not) put him in office. Claiming it’s the administration’s fault that we’re in so deep to China ignores his own role as a job creator in that country. Sensata Technologies is Bain-owned and is destroying an Illinois town right now with a move that is simply reprehensible in today’s awful job market.

Romney’s claim that he led a bi-partisan government in Massachusetts is also patently false. Even the few things he seems to have done right he disavowed last night (particularly with regard to coal and gun control).

Of all these things, Rachel Maddow has it right with this clip from September 26th. Check out Romney’s YouTube channel and you’ll find all the videos Maddow highlights.

I know there aren’t very many Romney supporters reading my posts. I’ve taken it for granted that for the most part I’m preaching to a choir that, also for the most part will either ignore me or forward the things I’ve posted.

I can only hope that if you are still considering voting for Romney, for whatever reason, you will see that the foundation of Romney’s claim that he will find 12,000,000 jobs is falsely based on reports that simply don’t hold up.

The payoff quote: “Greg Sargent added, “Let’s recap what Kessler has discovered here. The plan that is central to Romney’s candidacy on the most important issue of this election — jobs — is a complete sham. This is every bit as bad — or worse — than Romney’s claim to have created 100,000 jobs at Bain, or his vow to cut spending by eliminating whole agencies without saying which ones, or his refusal to say how he’ll pay for his tax cuts.””You still have a little under three weeks to do the research and see what Romney claims are the reports that back his numbers up. Listen closely to all the things he DOESN’T say when you watch the final debate, or if you’ll read the transcript from last night. There are far too many unknowns for us to live with a George W. Bush clone for four years.I have little hope that the House and Senate balance will tip enough to repair the damage of the last four years, but I can say this: Whatever obstructions the GOP have put in the way of progress are still better than anything this vulture capitalist will do to us if he gets into power.

Look up Bainport and see what I mean.

Theme: Elation by Kaira.
%d bloggers like this: