"B Crew" Sunday...?

First no Bloodlust Billy Kristol on Fucks News Sunday: I was worried he got fired for making sense the past few weeks. Now there's no Snuffulupuloof. Maybe Chris Wallace is a loser with no place to go...?

Sherrod Brown's upset at how the bailout money's being thrown around. Oh yeah, right. Something about how the bill was passed requiring strict oversight. Just wasn't written into it.

Fucking Dems better get their shit in a pile and pronto; they better stop passing toothless bills because theyre afraid of what Dubya and the refucks might say about them. They need to grow a pair, and I don't mean tits. (They don't do Nancy any good. (in relation to doing her job) (running the House) And they didn't help get Palin elected.) If they don't, good bye majorities.

Interview with the new Press Secretary. I'll miss Dana Perino. The "Lying Sack of Cute," as Stephanie Miller calls her. Maybe we'll get some good bikini shots of her as she vacations in the coming years. We got the Hill&Bill bathing suit dance video.

The Roundtable: No George F Will. So who's the designated conservatard? Oh fuck... Caroline Kennedy. Like Bill Ayers, Rev Wright, flag lapel pins... I wish this story would just go away. Fucking 'tards... trying to compare her to Palin. Although... She doesn't seem to be doing to well at differentiating herself from Palin. Other then the fact that she's no "ilf."

I like it without Will. No pontificatious bull shit.

Give a Man a Fish,

and you feed him for a day.

Teach a man to fish...

Can't do that. No rivers in Afghanistan. So,

Teach a man to fuck, or, since he already knows how, give him little blue pills so he can fuck and he feeds you useful information.

Talk about enhanced interrogation.

Watching Alex Witt report on this (a day after it appeared on C&L) ... never mind.

Condoms? Diaphrams? IUDs? Pills? Anything to help prevent women from getting preggers as a result?

Not a peep.

----

And on a totally unrelated note: If anyone of my loyal dozen or so readers can tell me why blogger doesn't put the spaces in after my punctuation, it would be greatly appreciated. I'm tired of looking like an illiterate doof. I'm not a world champion grammarian, but I do put them in when I compose. I also try not to misspell things incorrectly.

DCup, Thank you Dear, tried to help by suggesting I use Firefox as my browser, but I already do, so... Is it a setting in blogger? ???

Merrrrrrry Christmas

That took a lot. No "X-mas." No "effin'" or "fuckin'" in the middle. I must be firmly entrenched in the spirit, eh? Singing the Twelve Days errr, Twelve Snows of Christmas? Well not exactly.

Dick "cuzz he is one" Warren, is plastered all over the teevee this morning talking about the true meaning of Christmas. Just what would that be Dick? The spirit of giving? Sure, just as long as we don't give out rights. Better that we take them from a, shall we say, "less than universally accepted social group," and thereby set the precedent for taking rights from other groups.

I don't think I really hit the point I was trying to make last Sunday: Obama's contemptible endorsement of Warren's gangrenous, pustulous views on (gays,) (marriage and) human rights.

Conservatard refuckyoucans love to talk about slippery slopes, while asking, "Where do you draw the line?" Their slippery slope is something like: If we allow gays and lesbians to marry, we'll have incestuous and pedophilial marriage and people marrying their pets.

Right. And Donald Duck registered and voted.

No. The true slippery slope is this one: If we can deny (take away) gay people the "right" to a church wedding, then we can deny (take away) their right to the civil contract of marriage. And if we can deny (take away) their right to that contract, then we can deny (take away) their rights to other contracts as well: Inheritence? Obviously. Adoption? Way double obviously. Home ownership? Business partnerships? And if we can deny those rights...

Apartheid anyone?

THAT is the slippery slope.

As I was slipping and sliding around on my way to work the other day, I was listening to an ongoing debate guest hosted by Frangela, on the Stephanie Miller Show. The topic was Obama's choice of Warren as invocationator at his inauguration and whether or not protesting at the event would be disrespectful to Obama, his election and/or the office of the presidency. Although it was pretty much a given that there would be protests, opinions were mixed asto whether there should be. Opinions were also mixed as to whether this would be disrespectful.

My opinion? Yes, of course I have one. Duhhh. Fuck all that.

Disrespect is not the issue. That train left the station when Obama chose Warren and he increased its speed when he defended that choice. Protests MUST happen. It's a matter of principal on several levels, but on this one in particular: We as democrats must not become what we've railed against for the past 8 years. We must NOT become the same rubber stamping water carrying morons we've witnessed approving all things Bushian.

One promise I make here and now:

I will NOT give my approval to Obama, when he fucks up.
I will bitch.
Hard and Loud.

I have no sense of blind loyalty to Obama. Remember he was down on my list from the get go. And when he committed treason voting for the FISA give away, I said so. So...

To paraphrase (I believe it was) Thomas Jefferson: When a government of the people, no longer represents the people, it is the duty of the people to oppose/overthrow that government.

If nothng else, when Warren stands and addresses the crowd, the crowd should turn their backs to him.

Got a Minute? Need Some Billions?

Seriously. A minute is about all it would take to fill out the form these fucking rip off artists... aw fuck. Here's the damn form. (You can find it here in it's original form.)

(Instructions, Introduction, Gov't Bullshit)

Application Guidelines for TARP Capital Purchase Program
This application is used to request participation in the Treasury Capital Purchase Program (CPP).
Under the CPP, the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury) may purchase qualifying capital
in U.S. banking organizations.
The application must be submitted to the appropriate Federal banking agency (FBA) for the
applicant. If the applicant is a bank holding company, the application should be submitted to
both the applicant's holding company supervisor and the supervisor of the largest insured
depository institution controlled by the applicant. All inquiries regarding preparation of the
application should be directed to the appropriate FBA for the applicant. All applications must be
submitted no later than 5pm (EST), November 14, 2008.
More detailed information, including submission instructions, can be found at the applicable
FBA’s website:
1. For the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: www.fdic.gov
2. For the Federal Reserve: www.federalreserve.gov
3. For the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency: www.occ.treas.gov
4. For the Office of Thrift Supervision: www.ots.treas.gov
The terms of the CPP are described generally in this application. However, this description is
not binding on the Treasury and is intended to provide general information only. The actual
terms and conditions of the CPP are contained in documentation that will be available from the
Treasury Department on its web site at http://www.treas.gov/initiatives/eesa/.
Eligible Institutions
The CPP is available to bank holding companies, financial holding companies, insured
depository institutions and savings and loan holding companies that engage solely or
predominately in activities that are permissible for financial holding companies under relevant
law. To qualify, the applicant must be established and operating in the United States and may
not be controlled by a foreign bank or company.
Institutions must consult with their appropriate FBA prior to submitting this application.
Certain Conditions for Participation in the CPP
To be eligible for the CPP, the applicant must receive the approval of the Treasury. In addition,
the applicant must agree to certain terms and conditions and make certain representations and
warranties described in various agreements prepared by the Treasury and available on Treasury’s
website. A summary term sheet is currently available on Treasury’s website and a detailed
investment agreement and associated documentation will be posted soon. Each applicant must
obtain and review a copy of these agreements and agree to all of the terms and conditions,
including representations and warranties, contained in these agreements. In the event the
applicant files an application with the appropriate FBA prior to the availability of the investment
agreement, the applicant must file an amended application which includes updated responses to
any items in the application that required prior review of the investment agreement.
In the event that an applicant cannot, by November 14, 2008, take action to be in compliance
with all of the terms and conditions, including the representations and warranties, contained in
the Treasury agreements, the applicant must provide an explanation of the condition or
conditions that cannot be met and the reasons the condition or conditions cannot be met. This
explanation must be attached to the application. Failure to agree to all terms and conditions may
result in disqualification from the CPP.
If the applicant receives preliminary approval to participate in the CPP from the Treasury, the
applicant will have 30 days from the date of notification to submit the investment agreements
and related documentation.
Among the conditions to participation in the CPP is the requirement that, for so long as the
Treasury owns shares or warrants in the applicant, certain senior officers of the applicant meet
standards established by the Treasury for executive compensation in certain circumstances.
These standards are explained on the Treasury web site at:
http://www.treas.gov/initiatives/eesa/executivecompensation.shtml.
For the first three years that the Treasury owns shares or warrants in the applicant, the applicant
may not increase its dividend payments on common shares without the permission of the
Treasury. In addition, the applicant may not repurchase or redeem any junior preferred shares,
preferred shares ranking pari passu with the Senior Preferred, trust preferred, or common shares
(other than in connection with certain employee benefit programs) during the first three years of
the investment without the permission of the Treasury.
Form of Capital Qualifying for Purchase
All capital purchases will occur at the highest-tier holding company in cases in which the
banking organization has a bank holding company or a savings and loan holding company. In
these cases, the capital eligible for purchase by the Treasury under the CPP is cumulative
perpetual preferred stock of the highest tier holding company. The shares must be pari passu
with the most senior preferred shares available by the applicant.
In the case of an insured depository institution that is not controlled by a company, the capital
eligible for purchase by the Treasury under the CPP is non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock
of the insured depository institution. The shares must be pari passu with the most senior
preferred shares available by the applicant.
The maximum amount of capital eligible for purchase by the Treasury under the CPP is the
lesser of (i) an amount equal to 3 percent of the Total Risk-Weighted Assets of the applicant or
(ii) $25 billion. The minimum amount eligible for purchase under the CPP is the amount equal
to 1 percent of the Total Risk-Weighted Assets of the applicant. All measurements will be based
on the information contained in the latest quarterly supervisory report filed by the applicant with
its appropriate FBA, updated to reflect events materially affecting the financial condition of the
applicant occurring since the filing of such report.
The shares purchased by the Treasury will have a dividend rate of 5 percent per year until the
fifth anniversary of the date of the investment and a dividend rate of 9 percent per year
thereafter. Dividends not paid must cumulate over the life of the investment in the case of shares
purchased from a holding company for an insured depository institution. Shares may be
redeemed by the applicant during the first three years following the investment only from the
proceeds of a qualifying stock issuance by the applicant.
In all cases, the Treasury also must obtain warrants for common stock of the applicant. The
terms of the warrants are explained in the Treasury agreements available on the Treasury web
site. In general, the warrants must be convertible into an amount of common stock of the
applicant equivalent in value to 15 percent of the amount of the capital purchased by the
Treasury from the applicant under the CPP, calculated based on the average of closing prices of
the common stock on the 20 trading days ending on and including the last trading day prior to the
date of execution of the Purchase Agreement.
Other Information
The applicant must identify and describe any mergers, acquisitions, or other capital raisings that
are currently pending or are under negotiation and the expected consummation date.
Confidentiality
Any applicant desiring confidential treatment of specific portions of the application must submit
a request in writing with the application. The request must discuss the justification for the
requested treatment. The applicant's reasons for requesting confidentiality should specifically
demonstrate the harm (for example, loss of competitive position, invasion of privacy) that would
result from public release of information (5 U.S.C. 552). Information for which confidential
treatment is requested should be: (1) specifically identified in the public portion of the
application (by reference to the confidential section); (2) separately bound; and (3) labeled
"Confidential." The applicant should follow the same procedure when requesting confidential
treatment for the subsequent filing of supplemental information to the application.
The applicant should contact the appropriate regulatory agency for specific instructions
regarding requests for confidential treatment. The appropriate regulatory agency will determine
whether the information will be treated as confidential and will advise the applicant of any
decision to make available to the public information labeled as "Confidential."
Application for TARP Capital Purchase Program (CPP)
Please complete the following information and follow the submission instructions as described
on your Federal banking agency’s website. In addition to completing the information on this
form, please provide a description of any mergers, acquisitions, or other capital raisings that are
currently pending or are under negotiation and the expected consummation date (no longer than
1 page).
In the event the applicant files an application with the appropriate Federal banking agency
prior to the availability of the investment agreement, the applicant must file an amended
application which includes updated responses to any items in the application that required prior
review of the investment agreement.

(The app itself, page 1)

Institution Name:
Address of Institution:
Primary Contact Name:
Primary Contact Phone Number:
Primary Contact Fax Number:
Primary Contact Email Address:
Secondary Contact Name:
Secondary Contact Phone Number:
Secondary Contact Fax Number:
Secondary Contact Email Address:

(page 2)

RSSD, Holding Company Docket
Number and / or FDIC Certificate
Number, As Relevant:
Amount of Preferred Shares
Requested:
Amount Of Institution’s Authorized
But Unissued Preferred Stock
Available For Purchase:
Amount Of Institution’s Authorized
But Unissued Common Stock:
Amount Of Total Risk-Weighted
Assets As Reported On The
Holding Company’s Or Applicable
Institution’s Most Recent FR-Y9,
Call Report, Or TFR, As Relevant:
Institution Has Reviewed The
Investment Agreements And
Related Documentation On
Treasury’s Website (Yes/No):
Describe Any Condition, Including
A Representation Or Warranty,
Contained In The Investment
Agreements And Related
Documentation, The Institution
Believes it Cannot Comply With By
November 14, 2008 And Provide A
Timeline For Reaching
Compliance(1):
Type of Company(2):
Signature of Chief Executive
Officer (or Authorized Designee):
Date of Signature:

1 May be provided as an attachment, no longer than 1 page
2 Publicly Traded Stock Company; Stock Company Without Publicly Traded Shares; Other (please specify)

Fuck. I don't have a fax machine. Guess I can't apply. Even though I AM a bank. I've lent the step daughter money. That I will NEVER see again.

Notice how they're obsessed with brevity: End note 1. Heaven forbid they'd have to actually process information in their pointy little heads. The money's not going to preserve jobs for serf people... I don't know why these guys should even have to fill anything out.

Doofulupugus and the Nights of his Round Table

Rick Warren this, Rick Warren that.

In a lot of ways I really couldn't give a flying fuck about what Dick Warren has to say. Or about what. Or about whom. As to him speaking at Obama's inauguration, I've been thinking I have nothing to say. That I don't have a dog in the fight. I'm straight, so even though I have relatives, friends and neighbors who are gay, why/how, would/should/could I have anything to say about Obama choosing him?

Is there an issue here, and if so, why? What is it?

First things first: Yeah; there's an issue here. Obama's chosen a misguided hate monger here to give the invocation, basically the kick-off prayer, to his presidency. "His?" presidency? ??? This may get into another issue before I intend to do so, but WTF? We've put up with a dipshitulous fake cowboy who's lived and ruled for the last 8 yrs as if the country really fucking was "HIS." We don't need another fucking minute of that shit. But Warren...

They key word in all this is: "Chose." Obama chose him. No one elected him and/or forced him on Obama in any way. This is a totally voluntary action on Obama's part. He therefore represents something that resides in Obama's thought process, his soul if you will. Obama thinks, for some reason, that this guy and his views -- you can't take "him" without his "views" -- are acceptable and deserving to be put on the worldwide stage of the millennium.

So, Why? This was the election about change, and while there's no doubt that we needed things to change, there lots of arguing going on about change from what, to what? Conservatives, of course, always want to look back, go back, remove, restrict... return to the good old days. Apparently they think the 1920s/30s were the good old days, but again, that's another issue. Liberals like to look forward, move forward, reach outward, embrace the new. When we encounter something we don't understand, we try to figure it out; conservatives declare a war on it. back to the question...

One of the big issues, was that McShame was the guy who could reach across the aisle, stand up to his party, etc. So Obama, it seems, is trying to reach out to Warren's followers: Conservative evangelicals. While there's this nonsense going about that these people are enlightened somehow, their spokesperson is someone who puts a man who loves another man on the same level as a man who molests little children. He puts a woman who loves another woman on the same level as a woman who would want to marry her brother. Or her father. In other words,

He's one collosally dumb-assed motherfucker. He hides his intolerance behind a teddy bear persona. These are not even apples and oranges; these issues don't exist in the same dimensional plane.

As I've asked before: Why this fascination with "reaching across the aisle"? What the fuck is over there besides a garbage dump of destructive ideas? ???

We JAIL child molesters. If Warren sees molestation and incest on the same level as gay love, does he also believe gays should be jailed? We may not hear him say so, but in Fucks News, Sean Hannshitty tradition, we need to ask the question.

Even if you look at gayness as a disease, the disease isn't being gay. The disease is the (Judeo)-Christian male homophobia that turns reason into fear and hatred. And it IS male driven. Lesbo-chique; 'nuff said. Now having said all this...

Forget it. None of it is "the" issue in the Warren case.

The issue is:

RIGHTS
and

What are they?

and

Who gets them?

Rick Warren can run his church any way he sees fit. Just like Ted Haggard can see male hookers and snort meth off their scrotes, Warren can keep gays and anyone else he sees fit, out of his church. He doesn't have to marry them; he doesn't have to acknowledge they exist. In other words, he can live in his dark little corner of his dark little intolerant world and be happy as a mushroom.

And he needs to fucking STAY THERE !!!!

I don't intend to say that ANY church should be forced to marry gay couples, BUT...

There are basic and fundemental rights that heterosexual couples have, but gay couples are denied: Inheritance and other family rights. But the Warren issue goes beyond gay/lesbian rights.

It goes to HUMAN rights. And that's MY dog that's in this fight.

Gay and Lesbian... those words get thrown around like, I don't know... they shouldn't carry any more weight than words like blonde, or brunette when talking about people. They're mere descriptors of traits, and they get used like they summarize a person's totallity. I've done it, I do it, but it's bullshit, and somehow or other, it fucking needs to stop.

They are people. They are human. Just like black people. Just like white people. Just like ALL people.

And they deserve EVERY right that EVERY "other" person in this world deserves.

Peri-fucking-od.

Speaking (or should I say, rambling?) of a compromise with something to piss off everyone...

I don't know who you should pick in his place, Barack, but you need to dump this pustule of intolerance, and dump him right fucking now.

Like Every Broad Compromise...

it really has something in it to upset just about everyone.

so said the talking head to Alex Witt this morning on MSNBC.

And yeah, as a union member having to listen to this fucktardulent fraud -- the Harvard MBA who can't balance a check book -- lay out his demands, I'm pissed. Of course he had to lift his leg put his stamp on it. Let's see:

It started out as a request for $25 bil, then went to $34 bil, then $17 bil, before congress fucked up on giving them $14 bil. Now King-wanna-be Dub the Clueless proposes to give them no, he's giving PAULSON $13.4 bil. And I'm SURE he knows eggzaktly why it should be $.6 bil less than the last proposal. Not .5 less; not .7 less, but punto seis. And lets bow down to the whizdom of giving the money to Panky Hanky; I mean who knows what the auto exec bats would do with it. Fuckers might give it to line workers and not the poor starving investors sitting on their asses chewing their fucking fingernails down past their knuckles waiting and worrying about their dividends.

God damned ungrateful bastards, making more than the scabs down in Alliebammy and Tennesshoe working for peanuts, while their state governments give tax breaks away by the traincarload. What gives those UAW fucks the right to make enough to pay their bills and send their kids to college? Fuckers probably think emergency rooms are too good for them; that they should have a family doctor. And don't get me started on union pensions. If these bastards had just let Dubya privatize their social security so Wall Street brokers could use it to buy mortgages and credit defaults, we wouldn't be having to go through this crash and burn shit to give them their money. Like they have some right to better their lives.

Fuckin serfs.

It's all their god damned fault those underpayed, underbonused penthouse dwellers have to give up their company owned private jets.

Ooooooo...... I see the proposal is $17.4 Billion, now. Four more billion? Brokerage fees? Part of the $200 bil just approved, part of which will go to hedge funds ??? Once they grant concessions... wait... no concessions needed. Hedge funds don't deal with unions.

OK OK Okayyyyy... Call me jaded, cynical, infected by Bush Derangement Syndrome, but come one. This is Bush. He NEVER does anything right or good. After 8 years of non-stop disaster and destruction, he's going to help the country...? That's like thinking a President would be off somewhere singing Happy Birthday and raising cash while a city drowns during a hurricane.

Latest Poll: 29% still approve of the job he does? ??? Where the fuck do they find such clueless assholes? ??? It never seems to go below that number. I swear this motherfucker could squat and shit on the presidential seal on live TV and the number would STILL not move.

The Magical History Tour

h/t to the inestimable Ms Rachel Maddow for the title.

As Dub takes us all on a last spin around the dance floor, attempting to baffle us with his bull shit, since he has no brilliance with which to dazzle us...

Oh fuck...

Who's trying to kid who here? It's allllllllll about the shoes. It will forevvvvverrrrrr be about the shoes.

The fucking irony: Here's the fake cowboy, with his fake ranch and his fake diplomacy, that resulted in all too real death and destruction, trying to bask in some sort of warm afterglow of re-written historical sunshine, and instead he's ducking some guy's shit stompers. As my brother described it:

My congratulations to the standing president of the United States on his excellent 1^st set during the Olympic qualifying rounds of dodge ball; ahh err dodge shoe..... He showed great composure, deft ducking ability, gave an excellent head fake, and kept his eyes fixed on his opponent while preparing for a much easier 2^nd duck. He got a bye round during the 2^nd set in Afghanistan and will proceed on out of the round robin – into the quarterfinals. He will probably be given a well deserved first seed in the London Olympics.

A little more polite and deferential, but then my brother's not... well... he sent that to my mom so... He's also got kids so... Oh hell I can't explain why he's so nice. Now me on the other hand...

I cannot find words that convey the depths of the disgust and negativity of my feeling toward this...this... Somehow even words like fucktard and douchenozzle just don't do it. I've yet to refer to Bush as a man, because I don't believe he is one. He's some undefined "it" that has no redeeming quality whatsoever.

"So someone threw a shoe at me; so what?" So what? You ass wipe. You supposedly represent this country, and you say, "So what?" You are worth less than worthless.

Only 34 fucking days of this ass wipe's reign of error left, but it seems like 34 forevers. Just shut the fuck up and go the fuck away. If Paraguay will still accept your sorry ass.

I was going to throw up the old Michael Jordan-Spike Lee Nike add: It's the shoes, but talking about Bush just saps the humor out of everything in this life.

So who do I see about getting a poster or t-shirt with this guy on it? And No, I don't mean Bush.

So what did we learn this morning? UPDATED

Geez. What are those morons thinking.

I swear "Morning Joe," must be run by a bunch of perpetual teenagers. Scar running off to shop online during a commercial break and coming back late. Mika taking cell phone calls during the show. Courtney Hazlett... they're still trying to figure out how to make her look less squirrely. This time it was glasses.

The woman looks like a fucking squirrel, you morons. With her cheeks chock full of acorns. Short of some major surgery to rearrange her face and jaw, that's just the way it is.

Erin Burnett is still hot enough to make me keep watching though.

UPDATE:

I found it fascinating to hear Erin talk about Goldman Sachs. I'm not sure of the long term significance, (and it sounded like neither was she) but she seems to believe that Sachs will no longer exist in its/their present form. I heard similar things in the past few days regarding Sachs, Citicorp or both, I can't remember. Apparently, Sachs has reached the end of their ability to leverage funds. Basically, they're out of smoke and mirrors. It was kind of strange listening and watching her, as if there were things she wanted to say, but couldn't. Because they were opinions, not facts? because they could have been construed as financial advice and would have opened her up to liabilities? Because she was shocked into silence?

I don't know, but I'm betting on the last. I think she's sitting on a bombshell like say.... Sachs is going to become some sort of de facto Federal Reserve. "THE" national bank of the US.

Makes sense, in a "safe suspicion" sort of way. Paulson's a Sachs boy; he's the Fed Chairman; he's hiding the truth about where he's spending our billions. We know that shitloads are going to those who owe Sachs, but we don't know how much.

Just curious.

Do Parallel Universes Exist?

Or did someone kidnap Blood-lust Billy?

This is the second week in a row that he seems to defend the workers who are getting refucked up the ass -- they made major concessions during the negotiations over the Chrysler loan guarantees, only to NOT see their efforts reciprocated by management, who got their raises and bonuses -- in the fight over loans to the automakers. Billy says that labor only accounts for 20% of the cost of making a car, so the proposed refuckyoucan fuckover of the UAW would only save about 2% per car.

His history of being wrong with virtually every fucking statement -- there's the possibility he could have been right about something, somewhere, sometime -- he ever made about Iraq, leaves me a bit skeptical regarding the content and intent of his statements. Sorry.

Thank Geeawwduh that John McShame can set us straight by reassuring us all that if we just outlaw earmarks and stop pork barrel spending, that all problems will be solved. They're the reason Boigobitch is so corrupt as well. Right; he's an alter boy at heart.

George F Will must just HATE it when Paul Krugman gets invited on by Steffulupugous. Krugman just shuts him up through being correct and sensible. He has to chew on his own tail by objecting to Bush ignoring Congress and the rule law (8 yrs too late) by possibly grabbing money that "should" go to the ban-sur-vest companies. Without questions being asked, no doubt.

Finally, FINALLY... thank you Gwen Ifill, for talking about unemployment in its real, correct terms: As those people who are not employed, and not merely as those who are collecting unemployment checks. Ten Million according to her -- up by three million from year ago -- have been unemployed for so long that they've given up looking. Yeah Baby. Kepp those unemployment number low: Do away with unemployment payments... out... to people.

You Just Can't Redefine Horseshit

and turn it into ice cream.

There is one fact, and one fact only, that you need to know when considering why the refucks scuttled the auto industry aid package: The refuckyoucans want to redistribute restrict deny wealth.

They can talk all they want about leveling the playing field, equalization, competitiveness, but what THEY mean when they say those things, is not what liberals, ie sensible people mean. They want to invite/allow foreign companies to come to this country and redefine OUR wage standards to align with theirs. For all of the Hannities and O'Reillies and Dobbses ranting and railing against Obama and progressive democrats trying to Europeanize and socialize this country, THEY want to allow the foreign automakers' business practices to become ours.

Although this only.... ONLY applies to wages.

Our workers will not get healthcare.

Our workers' children will not receive free (college) education.

Our retired workers will not receive a pension.

And OF COURSE

Our workers will not be allowed to bargain collectively.

A rising tide lifts all boats? Yeah maybe in the ocean, or as an election slogan, but in real peoples' working lives..? The idea is to LOWER all boats to the lowest level possible.

Heaven forbid the foreign automakers in the south be pushed to raise wages or benefits. That sends wealth in the wrong direction. Since Reagan, the Republican party has been ALL about fucking the little people. Hence, they are refuckyoucans. Reagan, Bush Sr and this last little fucktard faker, have been ALL about redistributing wealth. They want it to go UP the food chain. And I shall include the fact that Bill Clinton did very little, if anything, to slow the flow.

Saving the automakers, sends money in the wrong direction. Down. To workers. To little people. If we starve, refucks don't care. As long as they get more in the process.

What REALLY broke this deal was the UAW's demand/request/desire that ALL employees at ALL levels come to the table to have their wages and benefits renegotiated. That would have meant execs losing out: No golden parachutes and bonuses for being total douchebag managers. That would have meant investors losing out (possibly): No dividends.

Don't kid yourself. This IS class warfare.

A Sequel

The original: Who Killed the Electric Car.

The sequel: Who Killed the Rest of the Cars.

I wonder if the stock market losses will hit four figures today?

Heaven forbid union-member auto workers in Detroit make a living wage. Fuck no; can't raise the non-union/southern auto worker wages. That would destroy the serf class. I told you there would be no help for Auto makers unless it broke the unions.

What they really fear is a repeat of the labor movement in eastern Europe that brought down the Soviet Union, the Iron Curtain and the Soviet Bloc. Oh...? That was Reagan's bluster that did that? Not Lech Walesa? Refuckyoucans FEAR organized labor.

The idea that unions are antiquated, that "we don't need them anymore," that they've "served their purpose...." Get your head out of your ass. In the meantime... AIG...

Isn't giving "bonuses" anymore. No. They call them "retention payments." Un-bonuses to keep their "key people" in place. Those key people who... Ran them into the ground..?

The Sun Just Rose in the West

Billy Blood-luster Kristol, just "defended" the auto makers and working "little people," wondering why they get grilled for asking for $34 billion* when the ban-sure-vest companies^ get their billions without a peep. Charles Scrotehammer -- doesn't he look like the bad guy in "the Mask?" When the bad guy wears the mask? ???-- leads the rest in spewing the usual refuck/conservative/Fox points of letting them go bankrupt.

* $34 Billion? They "compromised" by giving lending them $17 billion, amounting to parents buying their kids one shoe rather than a pair.

^ There are no such things as banks, insurance companies or investment brokerage houses anymore. Deregulation has blurred/erased the lines between them for the sake of efficiency. Plus we all know that business can regulate itself, right?

Putting "Forbes" in the Title.... w/ UPDATE

Doesn't take the "tard" out of Foxtard.

The 'tards of "Forbes on Fox" think that tax cuts create jobs. Come on.... stop laughing. or are you crying...?

If that were true, then these record job losses this past year are due to...? ???

Seven years and ten months of living on borrowed home equity buying shit made in China and these fuckers want more of the same smoke and mirrors?

And what's with the squinty broad? ??? Ditch the Palin glasses.

Oh fuck. Now THERE's a way to sell your bull shit as believable: Spout off while you show lingerie models clumping around like crippled three legged horses on the other half of your split screen.

Next week, "Nailin Palin?"

UPDATE: I think I may have figured out why the idiot broad squints so much: It's from the smell of her bullshit when she lies.

The Dub Years Continued, eh?

In a comment, Dale asks:

Just out of curiosity, since you and I have discussed this shitloads of times in the past few years, do you still think W will find a way to stay in office?

Yes, I've said I believed Dub would figure out a reason that would give him a way to stay in office beyond his term. I've said it many times, and I've meant it. Has anything happened to change my mind?

wellllll.... He doesn't seem do be standing in Obama's way of forming his new cabinet, but then to do so would be too obvious. He Has said that he wants to ensure a smooth transition; allow Obama and his team to come in and hit the ground running.

Obviously, I don't believe a god damned single fucking thing Dubya has to say. I haven't trusted the government since the days of Nixon, but Dubya's words and actions have pushed my distrust to new heights. He's developed an efficiency to his lying, that's almost mind boggling.

Behind this fucker's actions and words lies an unshakable belief in his "rightness." NOTHING shakes him, not reason, logic or even results. "The American people need to understand..." HE, and it seems he alone, knows what's right for the country and the world. Fuck the experts: The Iraq Study Group, the 911 Commission, etc. Charlie Gibson asks him about a do-over and his example is what THOSE guys could do over: Get the intelligence right on Iraq..?

THEY had it right;YOU didn't/wouldn't believe it. Or you did and ignored it. Whatever... the point is that he's NEVER admitted to a mistake. And to step aside and allow someone to undo what he's done would be the ultimate admission.

For the third time he's brought Karen Hughes out of mothballs to do PR work; this time to work with Turdblossom on "ensuring his legacy." As the country crumbles and the world spins off its axis, what the fuck are they going to do, short of a complete government take over of ALL arms of publishing, to put a positive spin on this disaster otherwise known as the Dubya administration?

Remember when the prospect of a Jeb presidency was mentioned? "I think he would make a great president "too." " Too as in "also," as in "like me," as in "I am a great president." He's sheltered his fragile, hollow ego in a house of cards, and I see no end to which he won't go to protect it.

What scares me is that he's not the only on who still thinks he's right. And that's not just the usual crazies like Grover Norquist and the "let's drown government in red ink the bath tub" crowd. Congress is ALSO concerned about lending money to help keep workers working, proposing to lend the automakers only HALF of what they requested. Did they propose reducing dividends? or bonuses? Why the scrutiny? Why not the free ride the ban-sur-vest companies are getting?

They could do a "de-facto" impeachment and ignore the fucker and turn to Barack and ask, "What do we do? What do you want?" but they don't. They could do things now to change the course of this country, but they don't.

Why?

They "should" have nothing to fear, but... enemy combatant status...?

So, Yes, I still think he's going to stay.

How He Lies; Let Me Count the Ways (Updated)

I am concerned... There's lie #1.

...about taxpayer money... Lie #2.

...being spent... Lie #3.

...on corporations... Lie #4.

...that may fail. Lie #5.

And I say this because...?

Of the last seven years and ten months.

Update: You could actually break Lie #2 into two lies:

#2a: ...about taxpayer(s)...

#2b: ...money..."