• Facebook
  • Twitter
bito On December - 1 - 2011


The place to post your comments without interrupting the single topic posts. However, be mindful of the strict rules!!

If you find the rules here are too confining, try the Morning Blog.





You know the rules, now follow them! Please?

Every so often I intrude TO/OT with a personal pick of a site that I find important that I feel needs to be shared and not lost in the shuffle of the constant flow of thoughts on The Planet.

And yet with globalization, we seem to have developed a strange apprehension about the efficacy of our ability to apply the innovation and hard work necessary to successfully compete in a complex security and economic environment. Further, we have misunderstood interdependence as a weakness rather than recognizing it as a strength. The key to sustaining our competitive edge, at home or on the world stage, is credibility — and credibility is a difficult capital to foster. It cannot be won through intimidation and threat, it cannot be sustained through protectionism or exclusion. Credibility requires engagement, strength, and reliability — imaginatively applied through the national tools of development, diplomacy, and defense.

The Y Article

A National Security Narrative




A Very Special “Happy Holiday Season”

to All our

Planteers and to our very many Visitors.

May this time of year be a special one, a time to reflect on the past and enjoy time with your friends and family.  Enjoy the foods and drink, and the sharing of it with all including that “grumpy relative,” that one  that has to control the conversation and insist at sitting a the head of the table even though he is a guest.  Maybe especially him or her, their thoughts you don’t get to hear everyday so it maybe  something to be thankful for that you will only have to hear during once during  the holidays!

Please remember the ones that can’t be with us or can no longer be with you due to travel, job placement,  death or illness they need to know that our thoughts are with them.

A wonderful season with a wonderful reason to share because they are in need and with so many in need this year, it’s easy to share even with the simplest of gifts.  A simple five or ten dollar gift card may biggest gift they get this year.  A day volunteering some time  at your local charity or a small gift to them.   Talking to friends this week who volunteer for the favorite  and they are having difficulty with supplying used clothing and shoes.  Over 200 pairs of used shoes were handed out in a few hours last Saturday, used shoes!  Maybe it’s time to spring clean this “very special season” and see what you may be able to donate.

And a wonderful time to enjoy this “very special season,”  by your giving and seeing  precious smile on others, and there is no way easier or more precious than giving to the little ones.  How priceless are the laughs giggles  and screams from their little precious faces?

Or if you forget the last half, there’s always the : “Eat Drink and be Merry…” 😉








American Civic Knowledge Survey

Both the ancient Greeks and Romans valued wise and public-spirited citizens. Let’s see just how wise you really are? Are you a Barbarian, Philosopher King, or something in-between?


Mapping the Measure of America

Written by bito

Was once a handsome frog until kissed by an ugly corporate princess.----- Like a well honed knife, the internet can be a wonderful and useful tool. It can be used to prepare and serve a delicious meal or it can be used to cause harm. peace

13,138 Responses so far.

Click here to leave a comment
  1. Nirek says:

    Here I go again, on a rant.

    Who needs an assault rifle and magazines that hold more than 10 rounds?
    The answer is nobody. Those weapons are used to kill as many people as you can in as short a time as possible. The only use is in WAR which we are trying to get away from.

    No sportsman needs one and no one needs one to protect himself. A 22 caliber rifle or pistol is enough to protect ones self. Any sportsman hunting should be able to bring down its prey with 1-10 rounds. One should be enough if you are truly a sportsman.

    It seems to me that the NRA would better serve their constituents by embracing the banning of semi automatic weapons and high capacity magazines.

    The NRA blames TV and Movies and video games along with mentally ill people. I agree they share some of the blame. But the proliferation of guns and the ease of a criminal attaining them is also a part of the problem. The NRA says no. We have to have more not less guns. That is pure nonsense.

    I feel that if someone commits a crime with one of these guns they should throw away the key. Also those who own them should have to license them every year like we do our cars. If a crime is committed with their gun they should share the blame. They should be responsible for keeping the guns under lock and key.

    I could rant on , but will stop now.

    • kesmarn says:

      Nirek, you probably saw that right during VP Biden’s press conference, there was another school shooting. What will it take to get through to these people?

      Had the school system where this shooting occurred hired an armed guard? Yes, they had. But he wasn’t there today.

      I saw another article today in which it recounted how a prominent pro-gun activist was shot in the head and killed. (I think his name was Keith Ratliff.) He had lots of guns in his house, but was apparently ambushed. He left behind a wife and young son. :-(

      • Nirek says:

        Kes’, yes I saw that story on the news. There are shootings every day somewhere in America but they don’t all get national press coverage.
        As to when people will say enough is enough and do something about guns? Never. Guns are here and we will not get rid of them. We can do some things though. We can make gun owners register their guns every year. Make them responsible for crimes committed with their gun. No matter who did it. Make them have liability insurance for their guns. There are many things that can reduce the shootings.

  2. Nirek says:

    I have to wonder how the teaparty folks can live themselves because they want less government unless they need help. They want lower taxes but they still want to drive their BIG SUV’s and they still want to use electricity and gas and oil. They don’t want to spend money on education, or infrastructure, or anything that helps Americans. They love spending money we don’t have on WARS that only benefit the military industry or oil corporations.

    To me they want the wrong things. I want our children to get good educations, our roads, bridges , and infrastructure brought up to date. Doing that would create jobs.I want our country to invest in renewable energy. That would create MORE jobs and get a handle on the global warming problem.

    I also want PEACE! An end to our WARS and our invading other countries for no good reason.

  3. SallyT says:

    CHART: How The Clinton Surpluses Turned Into More Than $6 Trillion Worth Of Deficits

    At the Democratic National Convention, Bill Clinton famously opined that ‘arithmetic’ was the magic trick that enabled him to be the last President to provide a budget surplus.
    In 2001, the CBO projected that the total Clinton surplus of about $280 billion would balloon to $5.9 trillion worth of cumulative surpluses through 2011, when in reality the accumulated deficits reached $6 trillion at the end of that time period.
    That’s pretty bad arithmetic. So what happened?
    The U.S. Treasury Department recently tweeted this chart, which breaks down the major drivers that turned a small surplus into a massive deficit:


    This chart paints a pretty poor picture of the CBO’s forecasting abilities, which account for well over half of the missing surplus.
    While the ‘other annual appropriations’ category could use a little clarity, this chart also hits the nail on the head when it comes to identifying the major deficit drivers:
    An extremely large tax cut that failed to pay for itself, two wars on the nation’s credit card, an unfunded expansion of an entitlement program, and general overspending turned what could’ve been a cushy surplus into a huge deficit.

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/how-clinton-surplus-became-a-6t-deficit-2013-1#ixzz2HQxxYw2o

  4. Nirek says:

    Friends, I googled Chuck Hagel and found out that he and I have a lot in common. He was born 2 months before me. He was drafted the same year (1967) I was. He served as an infantryman just like I did in Vietnam (an enlisted man like me). He received the Army commendation medal just like I did. He also got two purple hearts (I didn’t) I should have but didn’t try to get it. That’s another story though.

    I like the quote that he was a US Senator Not an Isreali Senator. Don’t get me wrong I support Isreal and so does he. But they don’t own our Senators.

    After reading some of his story;
    Another story has to do with Hagel’s service in Vietnam. In 1967, at age twenty-one, Hagel and his brother Tom were both drafted; they volunteered for the war and ended up serving in the same unit in the Mekong Delta. Hagel later wrote a book in which he described his Vietnam experiences, called “America: Our Next Chapter.”
    I find that even though he is a republican , I respect him. I like that an “enlisted man” could become the Sec. of Defense. The soldiers on the ground will respect him for his experience.

    Over all I support him for the job.

    • SallyT says:

      Nirek, if you like him that makes me like him even more. You can relate to him because of your experience and as you say the soldiers on the ground will respect him for his experience.
      However, I have to add, your experience appears to have made you smarter. He became a Republican and you came out smarter from your experience to become a Democrat. :)

      • Nirek says:

        Sally, thanks for the kind words.
        I think his business experience was why he was a republican. I never had a problem with fiscally conservative people. I am fiscally conservative myself, but socially I’m liberal. I feel strongly that we need to stop getting into WARS. I think Chuck does too. Our experience on the ground in Vietnam was very similar and our views seem to have evolved much the same way.

        On the minus side for Hagel is his comment about gays years ago. However many people have evolved in their feelings about gays. I believe his attitude has evolved also. I bet he served with someone who was gay and did the job just as well. I know I did.

        Over all I think the President has made a good choice of a decent man for the job. I tend to think that if the republicans of today don’t like him then maybe he is the right man.

    • kesmarn says:

      Nirek, I think you and the president are on the same page! I was listening to NPR in the car today and President Obama pointed out the exact same things you did: that Hagel was an enlisted man, was wounded in Viet Nam, and would represent the men/women on the ground. And he also has had business experience.

      That sounds like a sensible combination. Money must be spent on defense, but it has to be spent wisely and with the best interests of the defense of the country in mind — not the maximum level of profits for defense manufacturing corporations and Halliburton.

      I think folks on the left are more apt to take a look at the whole person rather than just the party label.

      And I agree with you on Israel. They’re an ally, but they don’t have veto power over who is named Secretary of Defense in this country.

      • Nirek says:

        Kes, you and I seem to be on the same page as well. Chuck is old school republican , NOT radical far right like Cantor, Ryan or so many of the teaparty folks.

        So much money goes to the defense department that gets wasted. There is a lot of savings that can be found there. I kind of think Chuck will find some substantial savings.

  5. SallyT says:

    I just watched “Zero Dark Thirty” and it was interesting and intense. According to the movie, they didn’t just rush in and shoot and get out. More were shot than I knew. Torture is hard to watch even when it is our guys doing it. But, what really got me is why would we allow a movie out there that shows our special forces and their equipment and their procedures based on an actual event? I mean there are movies about such things but we can only wonder if they really have these things or if it is all make believe. I know James Bond doesn’t really have all those gadgets but they look great in the movie. Somethings need to wait to be shown until years after and we have advanced so much further in techniques that what is shown in the movie is old news. So, if the bad guys are watching, they will be prepared for old and not the new. Just my opinion. It was slow starting but action packed at the end. No President Obama in it, just referred to as okaying after they knew more definite that Bin Laden was there. And, it was a woman that found him and pushed to get him, at least according to the movie.
    Now, I also watched this weekend the movie “Lincoln” and that was great and very historical. War is terrible and especially when we are fighting ourselves! It was impossible to succeed then and it will be now, you Southern States crazies! Congress hasn’t changed and their techniques are mostly the same. Only thing is the parties made a complete switch around! I recommend it and think you will enjoy it.
    That is SallyT’s movie reviews for you all. 😉

    • choicelady says:

      Since I was once a board member of a national organization against torture, it peeves me NO end that this film promotes the idea that torture got the essential intelligence. It did NOT. We followed the trail, worked with interrogators, and know that the only thing they learned they already knew -- couriers were used to transmit info. The REAL intelligence was far more deliberate and diligent, and using this experience as a justification for torture is wrong and misleading to the low info voters who think we should be John Wayne.

      So I’ve not gone to see it because if I’m pissed BEFORE seeing it, I’m not going to like it no matter what.

      What I find fascinating is the lack of deference to Obama in the film AND the silence from Obama’s critics who said he’d committed treason in recounting what had happened in the rescue (which we have always made public -- with the quiet provision that they never tell the whole truth.) But because this film leans toward the Right’s arguments, there is dead silence on its depiction of the events. That leads me to believe much of it is inaccurate.

      I’m tired to the bone of the war of propaganda. The film lost all cred with me over torture -- I know some of the leading experts in the field -- and thus the rest is highly dubious. Feh!

      • SallyT says:

        CL, in truth even in the movie, it is not torture that locate Bin Laden. That is why I don’t understand it shown. What locates him in the movie is this woman’s dedicated to her assignment. Learning and studying members, their names, and using her information when talking to other prisoners. When she would ask them something they would give her an answer and she would say, “You mean…so&so” or “No the guy you described sounds like so&so” so the prisoner figured she knew already and they let loose more info to her. That is more how I understand it happened and they do show that in the movie. The torture was how they started out but it wasn’t working. That is where I think people might misunderstand it.

        • choicelady says:

          Sally -- that IS how the skilled interrogators work! They build a relationship and imply they already know stuff. It never fails. That’s why during all previous wars, we never used torture. Intelligence gathering is harmed, not helped, by its use.

          In a really good but incredibly hard to read depiction of torture in days gone by, the late French philosopher, Michelle Foucault, noted that torture is NEVER about unearthing truth -- it’s about displaying total power and control over subjects and striking fear into those NOT tortured to force them to be compliant with the superior powers. The book is “Discipline & Punish”, and the descriptions are horrific, but his point is essential to our understanding (and no, you don’t have to read it -- I just MADE his point!)

          Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney all knew the use of torture was never about information. They were fine with torture because they were enthralled by massive regression to a kind of “divine right of kings” use of vile force to subjugate people before the ‘shock and awe’ of the US. That is why, at the core of who they are, they were so despicable. Their neo-con/Dominionist minds were willing to abandon every shred of democracy to reinstate absolutism -- US absolutism -- as the prevailing force in the world.

          And the rejection of absolutism by this current administration is why they hate Obama. He stands for democracy, the rule of law not of men, and the rejection of the idea that the US should rule unilaterally and everywhere. Rejection of torture is the rejection of supremacy and the recognition of global humanity.

          Can’t have that in a neo-con/Dominionist world.

    • Hey Sally! From what I’ve seen, the CIA is none too happy about “Zero Dark Thirty.” They say they should have been consulted about some things before it was made. I haven’t seen it yet. I am looking forward to it and “Lincoln,” as well. I have seen a few docs about President Lincoln though.

      • SallyT says:

        KT, I also saw “Skyfall” the new James Bond film. Okay, it is good but I can’t say it is the best ever. If you like James Bond, you will like the movie. My problem is that I can’t see anyone as James Bond but Sean Connery, so, that is my main reason for saying this new movie isn’t the best ever. 😉

      • SallyT says:

        KT, I can see why they are and like I said, I don’t think we should show too much of how we do things and equipment used.
        On Lincoln, you will like it, KT, even if you have seen other programs or movies. It is not so much the war/fighting as much as how Lincoln had to work Congress to get the proclamation through. Also, it shows the humor Lincoln had and the turmoil he dealt with in his personal life. It seems Lincoln had a million stories and jokes that he told. He used that a lot in trying to get to people. I think you will like it.

  6. SallyT says:

    Hey, you 1%, you can always go to Russia! But you have it real good here compared to the French rich. France is rough on their millionaires.

    French actor Depardieu in Russia to meet Putin

    On Thursday, the Kremlin announced that Putin had signed a decree granting Russian citizenship to Depardieu, who objected to Socialist president Francois Hollande’s plan to impose a 75 percent tax rate on millionaires.

    Some of Putin’s critics called the passport move a stunt and pointed out that Putin last month announced a campaign to prevent rich Russians keeping their money offshore.
    Russia has a flat-rate income tax of 13 percent compared to the 75 percent rate that French President Francois Hollande wants to introduce on income over 1 million euros ($1.32 million).
    Hollande’s original proposal was struck down by France’s Constitutional Court in December, but he has pledged to press ahead with a redrafted tax on the wealthy.
    Russia does not require people to hand in their foreign passports once they acquire a Russian one. But it is rare for people from the European Union or the United States to seek Russian citizenship unless they have recent Russian roots.

  7. SueInCa says:

    Hello and Happy New Year Planeteers. I have been sick over the past few weeks, kind of an off and on thing. I almost hate to say I am getting better because I might jinx it. But did want to come by and tell you all happy new year. I also want to drop this little tidbit on you all for consideration. It is one of the best descriptions of what Republicans are trying to hide…..anyway you be the judge.

    Conservatives refusing to pay their own bills

    by David Atkins

    When conservatives inevitably attempt to extract concessions from Democrats in exchange for raising the debt ceiling, it will almost certainly be portrayed in the traditional press as a case of Republicans getting what they want (cuts to earned benefit programs) in exchange for something Democrats want (an increase to the debt ceiling.)

    However, Greg Sargent and Jamelle Bouie do a good job of explaining why that framing of the situation is so unreasonable. Refusing to raise the debt ceiling doesn’t prevent the government from spending money or increasing the deficit. The government won’t shut down as a result. Failing to raise the ceiling simply means that the government cannot pay out on obligations it already took on. Those obligations include not only payments to foreign creditors, but also to domestic bondholders as well. Social Security and Medicare recipients would fail to receive their checks, federal employees would fail to be paid, and the full faith and credit of the United States would be called into question by our own Congress, thereby doing more damage to the economy than any ratings agency downgrade. None of this should be treated as a matter of political negotiation, nor was it ever considered a matter for partisan negotiation until very recently. Failure to increase the debt ceiling doesn’t hurt Democrats or Republicans--it hurts the entire country and the world economy.

    What that in turn means is that when Republicans attempt to extract concessions from Democrats in exchange for raising the ceiling, it won’t be a matter of political negotiating but one of blatant hostage-taking. Worse, it will be hostage-taking in order to enact conservative priorities that just recently failed in the marketplace of ideas that was the 2012 election. Republicans hold the House due to gerrymandering, but well over a million more voters preferred Democratic House candidates. And as a matter of pure politics, the hostage drama takes on an even darker dimension. As with the fiscal cliff deal, it’s entirely likely that whatever regressive legislation makes its way out of the hostage negotiations will be voted down by a majority of Republicans as being inadequately conservative, forcing Democrats to shoulder the burden of cutting Medicare and Social Security. That in turn will be gleefully used by the Republicans to run against those same Democrats in 2014. When the realities are taken together, this situation becomes less a matter of political partisanship than a matter of partisan piracy.

    But even all of this misses a crucial point that Sargent and Bouie don’t directly address: the fact that the spending Republicans already authorized but are unwilling to actually pay for includes federal disbursements made for conservative priorities. After removing the distorting effect of capital cities, Republican Congressional districts received an average of $111 million each from the stimulus. It was Republicans who supported the insanely expensive invasion of Iraq (a majority of Democrats voted against it.) It was the Republicans, obviously, who supported George Bush’s budget-busting tax cuts. It was Republicans who primarily pushed for the radically expensive expansion of the boondoggle-filled homeland security apparatus. One of the many reasons that red states tend to be recipients of more tax money than they pay in is the large numbers of military bases in red states, which are themselves part of a big-government jobs program. Republican states and big ag contributors are the primary recipients of farm subsidy federal largesse, and the same goes for big oil subsidies. It’s also worth noting that the sort of military and big corporate subsidy spending preferred by Republicans (to say nothing of tax cuts) does far less to stimulate the economy than does the stimulative sort of spending on the poor and middle class preferred by Democrats.

    In short, Republicans have already raided the federal treasury for a huge portion of the money they simply refuse to pay the bills for now, choosing to pretend the issue is a matter of Democratic spending. This is not dissimilar to when Ronald Reagan exploded the deficit with tax cuts and military spending, forcing Bill Clinton to take steps to balance the budget while Republicans blamed Clinton for fiscal excess.

    In this respect, the Republican position is to go on a massive spending spree, quit their jobs by decreasing revenue, and then threaten to throw the bills they racked up into fire unless their spouse stops feeding the kids.

    There may be words for that sort of political philosophy, but it scarcely deserves to be called “conservatism.”


    • Nirek says:

      Sue, I’m glad you are on the mend. Happy New Year and I hope you ha d a good holiday season.
      The piece you posted is accurate! I can’t figure how the R’s can not pay the bills they voted for like the unfunded WARS. Those bills have to be paid. The 14th amendment says we cannot NOT pay our bills. Like your article says they voted for all the expenditures so they have to increase the deficit. I believe the POTUS can do it by declaration. Don’t quote me on that but the 14th amendment is on his side.

      Again, get well soon.
      Peace, Nirek

      • SueInCa says:

        Thanks Nirek and I hope your holidays were good as well. Personally I think R’s really believe if they pretend they did not drive up this debt, people will believe it. That is how profoundly ruptured that party is these days. We shall see but I expect the same shenanigans as last time. What they don’t understand is that this is Obama’s last term, he is no longer worried about being re-elected. By being tough, he only strengthens the chances for another dem to replace him.

    • Happy New Year to you and yours Sue. Take care of yourself, we are all thinking of you, it’s safe to say! You contribute so much. 😉

    • SallyT says:

      Sherlock, to put it simple: The Repugs are Assholes!

      Glad to see your fingers are well enough to strike the keys! Now get the rest of you all better! ’cause you know I miss ya! :)

      Happy New Year!

      Dr.Watson is on call.

    • Kalima says:

      Happy New Year Sue, and get well soon. Take care.

      • SueInCa says:

        If I am bagging and counting beads again, I am feeling much better. I just got in a shipment of recycled sea glass beads and I am in the process of bagging and working out different color combos for a new chain maille bracelet I learned to make. Hope your holidays were good.

        • Kalima says:

          Just don’t overdo it, I’ve had bronchitis quite a few times and it takes a long time to recover. Stay warm while you work.

          Our holidays were very peaceful Sue, thank you. Our New Year will be a madhouse with the rebuilding, don’t even want to think about it yet because I break out in a cold sweat.

  8. SallyT says:

    Analysis: Geithner’s planned departure puts Obama in tough spot

    The Treasury Department said Geithner “has previously stated that he plans to be at Treasury until around” the January 21 inauguration.
    The department said it did not plan to make any further announcements about the timing of Geithner’s departure until after his successor is named. Bloomberg News reported that Geithner would leave at the end of January.

    That puts Obama in the tough spot of nominating another Treasury secretary and asking the Senate to approve his choice when lawmakers are in the middle of another budget battle.
    “The confirmation process will be nasty regardless as it will be a referendum on Obama’s economic and deficit plans,” said Chris Krueger, a policy analyst with Guggenheim Partners.

    Obama’s chief of staff, Jack Lew, is widely expected to be chosen to replace Geithner. But a number of key Republicans do not like working with Lew, the former budget director, which could potentially exacerbate the raw relations between the administration and Congress.
    “Geithner’s leadership and expertise would undoubtedly be a tremendous asset to the president and the country as we confront this next challenge,” said Max Baucus, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, which is in charge of vetting the next treasury secretary.
    It is not clear who Obama would choose to lead negotiations for the next set of fiscal deadlines. Vice President Joe Biden, who helped broker the fiscal cliff deal, or Rob Nabors, the White House’s main liaison to Congress, could fit that bill.


  9. SallyT says:

    This Map Shows Where Everyone Is Moving To And From In America




  10. Kalima says:

    Isn’t this exactly what he said in his first acceptance speech? Bloody smarmy hypocrite!

    “The American Dream is in peril so long as its namesake is weighed down by this anchor of debt. Break its hold, and we begin to set our economy free. Jobs will come home. Confidence will come back,” Boehner said. “We do this not just to boost GDP or reduce unemployment, but to secure for our children a future of freedom and opportunity. Nothing is more important.”


    Boehner Re-elected Speaker Despite Dissenting Votes

    As the 113th Congress convened, John A. Boehner weathered some protest votes and was re-elected by a vote of 220 to 192.



    John Boehner’s F-Bomb at Harry Reid Plunges D.C. Civility to New Low



    Tax Deal Shows Possible Path Around House G.O.P. in Fiscal Fights to Come

    Starting bipartisan talks in the Senate to put pressure on the House may become a more formalized process as President Obama and lawmakers grapple with other fiscal deadlines.


    • kesmarn says:

      Kalima, I was just reading another article about the Boehner F-bomb tossed at Harry Reid. How junior-high-school can this man get?

      And he actually bragged about it as though it were a tremendous bon mot — a brilliant witticism.

      The icing on the cake — that shows the level of immaturity at work here — was the comment by none other than “Groveller” (love that nickname you gave him) Norquist:

      “It was all about Reid being completely out of line, and he was slapping him down for his unacceptable behavior. There’s a difference between shooting and shooting back… It will raise up Boehner in his members’ affections. They will feel warm and fuzzy.”

      Fascinating isn’t it? What makes Republicans feel warm and fuzzy?

      They are the laughing stock of the world.

      • Kalima says:

        Hi kes, just thinking of the GOP feeling all warm and fuzzy is enough to give me nightmares, and the ugly “Groveller” is such a dunce. With these guys the lights might be on, but there is nobody home.

        They most certainly are the laughing-stock of the world kes, look at who they picked to run against the President. 😯

  11. kesmarn says:

    We all knew that the GOP/TP wasn’t just going to slink away into the night after their defeat in November. We figured that they would be busy trying to figure out ways to steal the next election — fool-proof ways, since Citizens United didn’t quite work out as planned.

    Here’s their latest: rig the electoral college so that votes are determined by district rather than the popular vote, and make sure only Republican districts are represented in the electoral college.

    In other words — gerrymandering on a national scale.


  12. Kalima says:

    I raise my glass to your President with my one hand, and the middle finger of my other hand to the GOPTP and “Groveller” Norquist. CHEERS!


    Obama signs fiscal cliff to raise taxes on wealthy, delay spending cuts


    You would think that Reuters at least could print a story where they address the president by his official and respectful name of President Obama, but I have given up hoping for equality in your media, they are just frigging rude, and we in other counties are supposed to think of America as number one? When your wayward media and the rest of those who influence start to tell the truth and show some respect, then I might start to believe it.


    Analysis: Republicans start new Congress bruised and divided


Leave your Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to top
PlanetPOV Tweets