Enters the Senator From Massachusetts

Multiple sources tonight say that in all likelihood the hedge fund loophole (known as a 'de minimis exemption') will be included in the offer that the conference committee considers this week.

Senator Loophole. Great

"I think Senator Dodd's doing a wonderful job," Brown said tonight. "We're trying to address everybody's concerns. Obviously it's important...for Massachusetts businesses, and businesses throughout the country to continue to operate as they have as many many years."

By all means, let's keep doing business like we have for "many many years"

via tpm

Today's Wingnut Moment of Zen

The presumptive GOP nominee for Minnesota's upcoming governors race pulls the "tenther" card.

Minnesota state Rep. Tom Emmer, the presumptive Republican nominee for governor, has further expounded on his theories of nullification, declaring that states have the power under the Constitution to undo federal legislation.

Of course these vapid supporters of the constitution, and blasters of the Obama cult of tyranny in shredding the constitution haz them a wee problem.

There's one problem that Emmer and other nullifiers -- or to use a modern term from the blogosphere, "Tenthers," after the Tenth Amendment -- would face: State nullification of federal laws has consistently been found to be unconstitutional throughout this country's history.

I suppose all those federal judges over he centuries must have "liberal Activists" and a quick processing through the wingnut alternate truth machine should wash all that marxist yackety yak out and bring us some God sanctioned republican truth.

Via/TPM

Interesting Tidbit

On the way out of work today, I noticed a small magazine -- mostly ads -- geared towards college students. One small column said that a student will spend approximately $3,000 on textbooks during their college years. It went on to tell us what else the money could be used for -- a down payment on a car, a trip to Europe, a flat-screen TV. The column went on to advocate for E-readers as a cheaper alternative.

I thought about this on the way home. First, $3,000 over four years is not a lot of money. Granted all textbooks are not of equal quality -- and many students won't pick up them up again after the class ends -- but books to me have more value, potentially life long value, than a car payment or a trip. I guess I just don't understand the comparison.

Second, I love books. I still have books from college that not only have moved with me through the years, but also have followed through all my years living abroad. They have notes in the margins, which I periodically look back on, and these scribbles remind me how my thinking has grown and changed as my experiences have accumulated. I have shared my books with colleagues and friends, both in the US and abroad, and have had books given to me by people from other countries that I still cherish.

While I was in Peace Corps in Liberia, where I didn't even have electricity for two years, it was a common practice that books sent to us were put in our main office library when we finished them. Then each time we traveled to Monrovia, the first stop for most of us was to the "library" to drop off our finished books and happily re-fill our packs with new books for those long hours of village life, where reading by candle light was a huge treat.

I understood the value of having a reader. I even have one. It does make travel easier -- you can carry a lot of novels in a case that fits easily in your briefcase. But, you cannot make notes in the margin, you cannot go back and re-think your assumptions and thoughts, and you cannot share them with others. For college students, who are just starting to explore their worlds and potential futures, books -- the old fashioned kind have value.

It Isn't Easy Being Obama

Some remarks on the latest nonsense coming out ot the pundit class, both MSM and on the Blogs, concerning he situation with General Stanley McChrystal and his insubordinate remarks made in an ill considered expose in Rolling Stone. Being a vet, and for all the vets out there, it is an easy call to state that this General not only crossed over the line, but turned around and spat on it. The chain of command in the military is like reverence to Jesus, and when you break that vow of disrespecting those who outrank you, especially at the level of POTUS and top field commanders, then something must be done

It goes to the heart of our separation of military from our civilian political leadership that is crucial to separate us from military juntas and the like. The constitution is clear that the military is subordinate to the whims and orders of the POTUS. No exceptions, ever. Historically, when commanders disagree to such a degree they cannot carry out POTUS commands or feel they need to criticize them publically, they resign, and then exercise their free speech rights as a civilian. These things cannot be tolerated in this society. The most famous example of this sort of breach of our constitution, was Harry Truman sacking General MaCarthur over Korea.

Obama does not have to remove, or accept McChrystal's resignation, but the general must submit it, and Obama will have to weigh the need, or relative critical need to maintain operational momentum in the Afghanistan theater of war we are currently bogged down in, and how the general's departure would effect that, and to troop morale.

But of course this is not the first time this general has pulled such a stunt, running his mouth in public concerning the Obama Administration and individuals in it. There is a pattern, and also McChrystal apparent role in the Pat Tillman cover up of the army putting out lies concerning the nature of Tillman's death in Afghanistan. For me, this should have kept him from ever being put in such a high command position  in the first place.

But on to Obama's no win decision in this problem, and his eternal political trap that has even military personnel matters polarized politically. On the one hand, he has a liberal activist base, mostly on the internet that hates us still being in Afghanistan, and many who thought we should have never gone, being reactionary and demanding McChrystal's sacking, mostly as a matter for objection to the war itself, and getting a scalp to further their cause. Then there are the wingnuts and neocons, who adore this particular general as being some kind of military wunderkind that can do no wrong. And if Obama cans the general, will cry that Obama and liberals hate the military, and it's mission. The cable teevee pundits will flop back and forth and stoke the controvery between these political tribes, all the while fanning the flames of partisan warfare for the drama that attract viewers.

I do not have enough info on the decision Obama has to make, but my instinct is that this guy needs to go. There is a principle here, that outweighs all the other considerations pro and con. And that is the sanctity of the military doing the bidding of our civilian leadership. There is pattern that has developed with Gen. McChrystal, and he has had his second chance, and maybe a third.

You Can't Make This Shit Up

Former Rep. JD Hayworth is making a pretty strong run against Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) as a True Conservative, Tea Partying stop-all-the-government-spending insurgent. But it turns out that right after he got bounced from Congress back in 2006 he signed on as a celebrity endorser for one of those late-night You Too Can Get Free Money from the Government informercials.

The hypocrisy, it burns.

Stay Classy Mike Huckabee

"The only thing worse than a torrid affair with sweet, sweet Nancy would be a torrid affair with Helen Thomas. If those were my only options, I'd probably be FOR same-sex marriage!";

He's just a Gawd fearin' good ole boy from Arkansas

via - Political Wire

It's hard to keep up

Charlotte Hays, a conservative, from something called the Independent Women's Forum, wrote a little blip on June 18, 2010 on an event she attended at the Hudson Institute. Apparently what she heard was SO profound that she had to write 2 blips. She wrote:


"One of the panelists...made the point that it is not enough that politicians have a commitment to the Constitution and small government, though that is important. And it is not sufficient that they get elected, though that is essential. They need to be prepared to govern."


OMG....Elected officials elected to govern need to be prepared to govern. Wow!


Not to rain on her parade, but I would point out to Ms. Hays that Republicans in Congress are governing...Being an elected official in Congress is being part of the governance structure. That the Republican approach to governance under the Obama administration has been nothing but obstruction, smears, etc., seems lost on Ms. Hays. The Republicans ARE prepared to govern. It is not their preparation that is the problem -- it is what they deliver.