The New Head of the Republican Party

Once upon a time, party leaders- both Democratic and Republican- were chosen from their own ranks. In other words, either current or former politicians. Presidents are the usual choice, naturally (Barack Obama is the leader of the Democratic party at the moment obviously).

But sometimes you turn former Presidents for your leaders, for example: Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan were their party leaders even while out of office. Other choices include party chairmen like, say Howard Dean. Or House Speakers, a la Newt Gingrich. But they are always chosen from inside the ranks of the party.

Until this year. Now, ladies and gents, meet the Official Leader of the Republican Party: Rush Limbaugh.

He owns them. He dictates their message from on high. Right-wing politicians dare not incur his wrath. He is the power and the glory. And he is taking his show on the road.

My reaction to this new development?

Thank. God.

This is who we want leading their party. In our wildest dreams, we could not have chosen a better guy for them. (Okay, maybe Sarah Palin, but still...) He is perfect. Why?

Because he epitomizes the Right. He is bullheaded. Consistently wrong, and proudly so. A racist, narcissitic (yet self-loathing), hypocritical, drug-addled blowhard. Hell, he is the Republican party!

So...please join me in welcoming him. Long live King Rush! Huzzah!

Revenge of the Republican Jackasses

Hard to believe the strategy plays well in Peoria, but the GOP has made their decision about how they are going to treat Barack Obama and they are sticking with it. The plan: obstructionism. At every opportunity. Do not propose actual solutions. Just block, block, block and hope it makes Obama look bad.

The latest, and most devious, of these plans is one that seizes on a small portion of the Congressional Budget Office's Budget and Economic Outlook for 2009-2019 to declare that the recession will end at the end of this year even without the stimulus package.

And, after all, who is better at predicting the future than the Congressional Budget Office? Here, for instance, is their January 23, 2008 prediction for what would happen in the 2008-2009 year:

The slowing U.S. economy is unlikely to sink into an election-year recession and an economic rebound could begin as early as next year as housing and financial market turmoil fades, the Congressional Budget Office forecast on Wednesday.

And we all know how well that turned out.

But, see, the real reason the GOoPers are grabbing at this issue is fairly simple: it's win-win for them. If the economy actually DOES recover in the next 12 months (even if Barack passes the stimulus package), they can say "So what? It was going to end on it's own regardless and the stimulus was just a big waste of money."

On the other hand, if the economy slips further downhill, they can really have some fun, saying "Obama caused things to get worse! If the stimulus hadn't passed, the trouble would have ended all on it's own! Now we're screwed....because of Barack Obama!"

Nobody ever said they weren't clever on the other side of the aisle.

Evil, maybe. But clever? Absolutely.

Plan B: Roll Over the Bastards

Clinton promised bipartisanship, look where that got him.

Bush promised bipartisanship and lied through his teeth.

Obama promised bipartisanship and actually attempted it. His reward?

He got kicked in the face. His new GOoPer buddies went on the floor of the House and Senate and ridiculed him. They spread out across the blogosphere, the networks, the newspapers. They trashed his stimulus plan and offered nothing on their side but the same old bullshit that got us into this mess.

Now, Obama is learning the hard way that there is only one way to treat these animals: you get in your tank and you roll right over them.

He's got the votes to pass whatever measure he wants. Even in the Senate, three moderate (read: sane) Republicans have joined with him to put him over the much-needed 60-vote mark.

So my advice is: Do it. Do it without them. Hell, do it without their input. Capitulate in no way. They show you the finger, kick 'em in the ass. They put one of yours in the hospital, you put one of theirs in the morgue.

That's the Chicago way, Barack. Go get 'em.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Quite a whirlwind week in the White House, wouldn't you say? We've got all kinds of news and, as we've been lax in our posting, a lot of ground to cover. So let's see...

Obama's honeymoon came to a crashing end with the disclosures that three of his new appointees, Geithner, Daschle and Killefer, had a little problem paying the tax man. These were simply stupid mistakes, as Obama was quick to point out, and it gave him his first real black eye. Typical Republican response: "Of course Democrats want higher taxes. They don't pay them!" Har-dee-har-freakin'-har. Thanks for the punch line, Tim, Tom and Nancy.

This is especially galling in Daschle's case, as his former TV ads touting him as a "man of the people" going so far as to brag about him "driving his own car" became unintentionally high-larious when it turned out that his tax bill was due to his receipt of a chauffer wherever he went. Cute.

In the meantime, however, all kinds of good stuff happened. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was signed. Hoorah! The stimulus bill- imperfect though it may be- got through the House. Boo-yah! Despite some Republican grumbling, Geithner and Eric Holder were confirmed as, respectively, the Treasury Secretary and the Attorney General. Schweet!

Plus, as previously mentioned, no more Global Gag Rule on funding for family planning services overseas, an appeal to the EPA to allow California to make it's own emissions rules, an Executive Order limiting executive pay for those companies receiving bailouts...on and on and on.

Clearly the good news is far outweighing the bad. But the bad is...well, it's just embarassing.

The Stupid! It Burns!

Okay, so once again it is freezing cold here in Chicago. Another in what seems like a wave of Arctic cold fronts is sweeping through my fair city and we all know what that means, don't we?

That's right: Letters to the editor about how the cold weather proves that there is no such thing as "global warming."

If you read a paper, you've seen them. Generally, they go something like this: "I'm glad Mr. Gore won his Nobel Peace Prize, but if he had to take out the garbage at my house he would know: there's no global warming in my back yard! It's freezing!" And presumably we're all supposed to go, "Gee, that's right! How can we believe in global warming when it's so bleedin' cold outside? Shouldn't we all be in Bermuda shorts? Why, it's all a lot of hokum!"

Which is why stupid people should not be allowed to use a computer.

Okay, they can use a computer, fine. After all, somebody's got to play Minesweeper. But newspaper editors should show better judgment than to print these nimrods. And yet...every year, it's the same thing. Over and over again.

To be clear: we are partly to blame, we on the correct side of this argument. Why? Well, because we chose the wrong expression. It isn't "global warming." It's really "global climate change." If you ask someone if they believe in global climate change when it's five degrees outside for the eighth day in a row, you're probably going to get a better answer than you would if you ask them about global warming. So really, we should have done better.

But please, can we just stop printing letters from the moron gallery? Please?