Oh No! Michelle Obama Is At It Again!

First Lady Michelle Obama is at it again!  She is continuing in her socialistic, communistic, Marxististic goal of... gasp... getting children to eat healthy and be active!

Look at this despot... encouraging things like activity... health... fun... 

Well now, this socialist has partnered with that bastion of liberalism, SUBWAY FOODS!  She is attempting to combat every American's right to be a fat tub of goo by asking this corporation to join her in her fight against childhood obesity.  Why does she insist on taking away an American child's right to scarf down Taco Bell Grandes with 2 liter Pepsis like a normal American?  

Why doesn't Michelle advocate THIS for school lunch menus?  SOCIALISM, that's why!

What's next?  Is she going to put together a campaign to do something even more insidious, like DRINK WATER?  Perish the thought.  But at least Real Americans (tm) can rest assured that her husband, President Barack Obama, won't do something completely dictatorial about it.

We can rest assured that when it comes to physical fitness, President Obama won't do something that only a tyrant would, like issue an Executive Order advocating and promoting physical fitness... because that's only something that a terrorist, socialist, Muslim, Marxist person that HATES America would do.  Right?

...Riiiiiiight.

A Shut'cherGobbige Mowf Two-Fer... Self Congratulations And Ted Nugent (but not what you think)

"Do I detect a bit of the self-congratulatory in your tone?"

Very observant, Detective Pembleton.  And why am I patting myself on the back, and why am I updating this for the first time in months?

It's because a tweet of mine got quoted nationwide.  Everyone knows the story of Antoinette Huff, the bookkeeper who talked an armed gunman out of shooting up an entire school.  I tweeted that her unmistakable act of bravery forever rendered NRA Vice President Wayne LaPierre's argument null and void.  His argument was that the only way to stop a bad man with a gun is with a good man with a gun.  Ms. Huff, armed with only her faith in God (which is a powerful weapon in its own right), spoke to the assailant and got him to surrender to the police.

Recently, The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell did a segment where Antoinette Huff answered Twitter questions.  And at the 1:05 mark, Richard Wolff begins to introduce my tweet.  Here it is in all of its glory:

"See?  Toldja."

So, for this fleeting moment, something I wrote was featured on a global scale.  On the Last Word FB page, I was even mentioned by name (as a viewer of "The Last Word", which I am).  This teeny bit of recognition sparked me to get off my duff, metaphorically speaking, and do one of the things that I do well, which is telling people to SHUT THEY GOBBIGE MOWFS...

I Don't Want You... I Want Who Vouched For You...

...which brings me to today's point.

It is no secret that Ted Nugent is a reprehensible coward and a pseudo-patriotic gun nut.  It's also no secret that he crapped his pants and went through an elaborate scheme to avoid military service, and yet he acts as if he was on the front lines of every American conflict since the Revolutionary War.  The Right-wingers lap up every racist, sexist word as if it were candy.  He has made comments against Hillary Clinton, and President Obama continues to be a favorite target of his.  Nugent went beyond the pale for even Nugent when he called President Obama a mongrel and a chimpanzee, and commented that Hillary Clinton has testicles to spare.  As vile and as disgusting as Nugent's words are, he's not my primary target.  

My primary target is Congressman Steve Stockman.  Why?  Because last year, Congressman Stockman invited that racist coward Nugent to the 2013 State of the Union address.  When Congressman Stockman did that, he vouched for Nugent.  He basically co-signed every hateful, misogynistic, racist comment that Nugent ever uttered.  As an elected official, Stockman decided that Ted Nugent was just the kind of American to take America back from the hands of the Black man.  

This has me thinking:  How does Stockman feel about Ted Nugent's comments?  Is he going to repudiate them, distance himself from them?  Or is his silence a sign of approval for Nugent?  Imagine if a liberal pundit said something disgusting about former Secretary of State Condeleeza Rice.  And imagine if a gun nut talked about taking the White House (and the country) back from the hands of President Bush, by force, if necessary.  People like Stockman would have their undies in a bunch about "traitors" and disrespecting the office of the Presidency.  When Stockman invited Nugent to the White House, he showed that he does NOT respect the office of the Presidency.  He does not respect decorum, or adult conversation.  

By the way, I posted the following comments on Steve Stockman's Facebook page.  See it before it gets deleted.

It's a lot better than your last guest, Congressman. By the way, do you share that coward Ted Nugent's comments about President Obama being a chimpanzee and a subhuman mongrel? Do you believe that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has extra testicles?

When you invited that racist scumbag to the State of the Union address, you vouched for him. You co-signed every hateful, racist, misogynistic word that was ever uttered by this draft-dodging pseudo patriotic coward. It's one thing to disagree with the President. But by inviting Nugent to the State of the Union Address, you have shown that you don't even respect the OFFICE of the Presidency, regardless of who the President is.

Do you feel the same way about women and minorities as Nugent? If not, then I haven't heard you condemn YOUR State of the Union Address' guest on his unmistakably vile and disrespectful comments. I don't expect much from a man who deliberately crapped his pants to avoid military service (and yet he's praised as some sort of patriotic hero... go figure). But I would expect at least a MODICUM of decency from an elected official.

Mr. Stockman, the ball's in your court.

 It will be interesting to see how long this comment lasts.  And for every one of the Right Wing that doesn't stand up against the putrid garbage that spews from Nugent, the same applies to them.  Nugent is low-hanging fruit.  Elected officials, you need to either stand up and condemn NRA BOARD MEMBER Ted Nugent once and for all...

...or shut'cher gobbige mowfs.  The whole lot of you.

Rush Limbaugh Leads The Discussion On Race

Three Ways To NOT Honor Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is a civil rights icon.  His birthday is January 15, and the national holiday that honors him is Monday, January 21.  During the holiday, there will be many events taking place that will honor  Dr. King and his sacrifices for the sake of civil rights and equality.  Choirs will sing classic hymns, including "We Shall Overcome."  Preachers will preach.  Speakers will speak. Dancers will dance liturgical dances.  And somewhere, someone will be doing a spot-on rendition of Dr. King's speeches, including the "I Have A Dream" speech and Dr. King's on eulogy speech.   And in Chicago, at least one radio station will play Dr. King's speeches over house music.  Yes, there will be many ways to honor Dr. King.

But some people just don't want to do right.  They want to "honor" Dr. King by shoehorning him and his image into their own agenda.  That's not to say that Dr. King is a deity, but there should be a modicum of respect for the man and what he stood for.  The following people do NOT have that modicum of respect.

Free At Last, To Shake Your A**, Thank God Almighty, We Are Free At Last...

According to the site that hosts this image, this was a real flyer.

We've all seen flyers like this before.  Some of us may have gone to the "King Holiday Weekend" parties in our own club-hopping days.  But to use Dr. King's image for these parties is just ridiculous.  There is no reason to do this.  The Boondocks summed all of this up nicely in their "Return of the King" episode.  If we're going to honor Dr. King, we don't need to deify him.  But at the same time, we don't need to put him on pluggers and flyers for parties that have absolutely nothing to do with who he was and what he stood for. When I think of these kinds of flyers, I think of a great line from Public Enemy's "Rightstarters", from their debut album "Yo Bum Rush The Show":

Just growin'/not knowin about your past/now you're lookin' pretty stupid while you're shakin' your a**...

Very stupid, indeed.

We Honor King By Bragging About Guns!!

Pictured:  Tone-deaf gun nut

Larry Ward is the chairman of, and is promoting Gun Appreciation Day.  He is also convinced that Dr. King would have appreciated "Gun Appreciation Day."  Yes, because of there is anything that a nonviolent activist, one who promoted non-violent protests even in the face of naked hostility, would appreciate, is the power of the gun.  Who else but one who was ASSASSINATED BY A GUNMAN would appreciate what guns mean to this country?  If anyone knew anything about Dr. King, they would imagine that the last thing that he would appreciate would be a day that recognizes an instrument of death.  That's like saying that Mahatma Gandhi would appreciate "MMA Appreciation Day" or that Lady Gaga would appreciate "Chick Fil A Appreciation Day."

Dr. Martin King Was A Republican, So You Should Be A Republican!

Yeah, um... no.

This is the one that grinds my gears (tm - Peter Griffin) the hardest.  The Republican Party of today, as well as their Pet Negro Apologists (like the National Black Republican Association, the guys who parrot this drivel) insist that Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King would have been a Republican.  While it is obvious that Dr. King would not have been a Democrat at that time, there is no evidence that states that Dr. King was a Republican, or aligned himself with any political party.

And please understand that the Republicans of the Civil Rights Era are NOT the Republicans of today.  The Republicans at that time were the progressives, while the Democrats were the conservatives.  And in today's Republican party, you have accusations of voter suppression, the harboring and support of racist politicians, and the outright racist attitudes towards the first Black president.  Does anyone actually believe that the party that welcomes Patrick Buchanan and David Duke and Sarah Palin would be the kind that would attract a Dr. King?  The Republicans of today have called Barack Obama "uppity", and continue to question his citizenship.  The Republicans of today have called Barack Obama a "Food stamp President", and they insist that anyone who supported him only does so because they want free stuff, or they have the same skin color.

"You are correct, sir."

The Republican party wants to co-opt the image of King, by cherry-picking and quoting their favorite part of Dr. King's speech, which includes the statement about the content of one's character.  But they conveniently ignore the content of character of those who disagree with them.  And they CERTAINLY ignore the content of character of those within their ranks, like Boss Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Michelle Malkin, ad nauseum ad infinitum.  

And finally, remember where Dr. King was, and what he was doing, when he was assassinated.  He was in Memphis, Tennessee.  He was supporting the striking sanitation workers there.  He was there to support union workers.  And we know that to this day, the Republican Party is trying its outright best to DESTROY the unions, both in the public sector and the private sector.  This is the complete antithesis of what Dr. King stood for.

So, if the Republicans want to claim Dr. King as one of their own, then they ought to pay attention to what Dr. King supported, and did not support.  And until the GOP begins to operate against discrimination, against voter suppression, and against outright racist propaganda directed towards President Obama, and operate in favor of worker rights, fair treatment in the workplace, civil rights for all, and everything else that Dr. King stood for, they need to have several seats.

Yes, the dunce cap is assigned to you too.

It's Chicago Political Circus Time!

Artist's rendition of the 2nd Congressional District Congressional Seat

It's official.  Jesse Jackson Jr. has resigned from his seat as Congressman of the 2nd Congressional District.  This came as an absolute shock to no one with a pulse and a brain stem.  Yes, you hear people like Danny Davis and Bobby Rush and others display a sense of disappointment and maybe even faux outrage at how all of this went down.  But please believe that very little in politics comes as a surprise.  The handwriting was on the wall during all of the events leading up to Jackson's resignation, including his non-campaign campaign in which he won handily.  You know that his campaign staff was working hard to assure that he overcame any general election challenges.

Don't mind us.  We're mobilized and waiting for orders from Congressman Jackson.

Now that Jesse Jackson, Jr. was easily reelected to another term as Congressman for the 2nd Congressional District, he did what any self-respecting politician would do.

He stepped down.  In his resignation letter (click on the link, and there's another link to the actual letter), Jackson cites his illness as part of the reason why he's stepping down.  And in a rare moment of political candor, he acknowledges his mistakes and plans on dealing with the responsibly.  And we wish (former) Congressman Jackson all the best in his recovery, as well as his legal shenanigans (side note:  His wife Sandi is an alderman... does she even represent her ward?  Ah, that's a question for someone else, I suppose).

What does this mean for voters of the 2nd Congressional District?  It means that for the second time in a row, this seat was vacated because the Congressman resigned.  Meet Mel Reynolds, Jackson's predecessor.  And pay attention, because his name will come up again.

Remember me?  I kinda hope you don't.

What this also means is that a special election will have to be held to replace Congressman Jackson.  For what it's worth, the law requires that unlike a senator, a new Congressman can't be appointed to his seat.  Had this law applied to the Senate, who knows how things would have turned out? 

'Sup.  Still no word on my appeal?  No worries... as Rudyard Kipling once said... 

ANYWAY, I digress.

A special election will have to be held, and already, some potential candidates are starting to stake their claims.

Debbie Halvorson

This is Debbie Halvorson.  As of yesterday, during an interview on the radio, she stated that she is not running for Jackson's seat.  However, it's still early on.  She was Jackson's most serious primary challenger, and she entered the race when the 2nd Congressional District lines were redrawn.  One of the things that I remember about this campaign was the idiocy of the ads.  Both camps must have found actors from the Tyler Perry Theatrical Academy, because the ads were horrible.  A typical Jesse ad had what sounded like old people saying "She voted against President Obama 88 times?"  Now, to get the full effect of how bad it sounded, imagine that in a Florida Evans voice.

You're welcome.

Her ads were no better, with ads featuring women that called him "Junior" in a derisive tone.  And they focused on Jesse Jackson Jr.'s pet project, a third airport in Peotone, IL.  And again, they sounded like graduates from the Tyler Perry Theatrical Academy.

If she does run, she has a bit of name recognition in her favor, and she also has the honor of giving Jackson his stiffest challenge in a primary in a long time.

Marcus Lewis

This is Marcus Lewis.  Not much is known about Mr. Lewis, except for the fact that he ran against Jackson as an Independent during the general election.  I never heard an ad from Mr. Lewis, and I discovered his Facebook profile after the election.  However, the fact that he was running as an independent was enough to earn my vote this time.  I couldn't vote for Jackson, and I CERTAINLY couldn't vote for the Republican.  Yes, Mr. Lewis was a long-shot, but in a vote guided by conscience, Mr. Lewis was the clear choice.  Since he has declared his candidacy, he should be able to mount a campaign to gain name recognition and to list his  plans for this district.

I'm sure that there are others who will stake their claim, especially once the date for the special election is announced.

But we are not finished yet.  There are some more candidates who are considering this seat, and here is where hubris and Chicago Style Politics come in to play.

Todd Stroger

This is Todd Stroger.  AKA The Toddler.  He was an alderman who became President of Cook County in a game of political switcheroo that typifies Chicago-style politics.  Stroger is the son of former Cook County President, the revered and late titan of Cook County, John Stroger.  John Stroger was gravely ill during his last election, and still managed to win.  Sound familiar?  When John passed away, Todd was appointed to his father's seat.  It is apparent that Todd was appointed to maintain the power base in Cook County, with Todd being a figurehead for the power brokers behind the scenes.  Todd was in over his head, and in the next election, he was easily defeated.  I distinctly remember seeing Todd at the train station on 95th street on election day.  He wasn't glad-handing like most of the other politicians that were there.  He looked almost like a commuter, hoping that this race would end and he can get back to his normal life.

Let's be serious for a minute.  NO one is going to look at Stroger and say "Hey, you know who can best represent my needs in Congress?  THAT guy!"  He was an ineffective President of Cook County, and his legacy of ineffective leadership should be remembered come Election Day.  Stroger shouldn't even make it out of the primaries.

But not to be outdone, I bring to you the Grand Champion of Political Cajones, Mel Reynolds.  As mentioned before, Mel Reynolds is Jackson's Congressional predecessor.  Reynolds resigned because he was convicted of sexual abuse charges, child pornography charges, and 15 unrelated counts of bank fraud.

I was hoping that you wouldn't remember that.

Even though he was pardoned by President Clinton, and even though people deserve a second chance in a lot of ways, you don't get to earn a second chance in elected office if your first chance in elected office ended in disgrace.

"You're kidding, right?  Riiiiiiiiiiiiight."

Reynolds has also expressed interest in Jackson's seat.  But there is no way that someone with HIS political baggage makes it out of the primaries.

I know that even now, the power brokers behind the scenes are looking to see who they will support.  And there is no way that the same brokers that supported Jackson will support the likes of Reynolds and Stroger.  Even though their ascension to the Congressional Seat of the 2nd District seems very unlikely, it WILL be kind of fun to watch it all unfold... the campaign ads from the Stroger and Reynolds camps should be VERY interesting.

Dear Jesse Jr... An Open Letter To Jesse Jackson Jr...

Hey Jesse.  Can I call you Jesse?  No?  Junior?  No, that's WAY too familiar.  Congressman Jackson.  Yes, that's it.  I don't know you well enough to call you Jesse, Junior, 3J, or Son of Jesse.

'Sup.

At any rate, it's me.  One of your constituents.  One of the guys that voted for you ever since you first became a Congressman.  In fact, I almost didn't vote for you the first time out, because of spite.  What happened was that your dad, Al Sharpton, and others were at the 95th Street El stop, shaking hands and whatnot.  I asked one of the guys there why should I vote for Jesse Jr.  He said "Go over there and shake Jesse's hand."

Ummm... seriously?  That's how you respond?

I almost walked away, determined to vote for anyone BUT you, Congressman.  However, I stepped over to Rev. Al Sharpton.  I asked him the same question.  He actually gave a reasonable, responsible answer about giving you a chance.  So, I dismissed the Old Guard response that a handshake from Jesse Sr. should be enough for me to vote for Jesse Jr.

Since then, I have supported you in every election.  I'm even giving you the benefit of the doubt with regards to whatever role you played (or not) in the whole Obama Senator Seat thing.  That was an unmitigated disasterbacle of epic proportions.  Gov. Blagojevich is stewing in prison as a result of those shenanigans.

'Sup.  How's my appeal coming?

But then, something happened.  

More allegations started to pour in, more investigations started to pop up, news about an affair leaked.  But that wasn't my biggest concern.

My biggest concern was that you went AWOL.  No one knew where you were.  It was as if we were suddenly playing a game of "Where's Jesse?"  The Congressman that I voted for was missing in action, and we had no idea what was going on.

Then, news started to leak, drip by drip.  You had (have?) medical conditions, and you had (have?) to seek treatment at places like the Mayo Clinic.  Now, don't get me wrong.  If there is something wrong with you physically, mentally, or spiritually, you SHOULD get help immediately.  No one is doubting that.  In fact, I'd wager that a huge majority of your constituents are praying Christians, who pray for your recovery and your return to work.  My issue wasn't that you were, or are ill.  My issue is the way in which it was handled, and the way the news was delivered to the public.

It may not be the actual case, but every time there was news released about your condition, it coincided greatly with political deadlines.  It gave the impression that you wanted to hold off on releasing anything, so that your seat can be kept warm until after the election.  And speaking of which, no one was asking you to hurry up and return to work.  And when your surrogates say that you're the Derrick Rose of Congress, it was insulting.  They also tried to compare your condition to that of Sen. Mark Kirk and Congresswoman Gabby Giffords.  One of them even tried to compare your return to work to a radio host who had some sort of brain injury/stroke or something.

These are completely different issues.  The Don Wade (the aforementioned radio host) is completely off the wall, because he's a radio host and not an elected official.  The other two are elected officials.  But here is the deal.  They kept everyone abreast of their issues.  Sen. Kirk even posted a video of him going through his remarkable recovery.  As for Congresswoman Giffords?

She resigned.

She didn't hold up her Congressional seat while her recovery continued.  She stepped down and allowed someone else to be appointed to that seat.  Even if you argue that those moves are politically motivated, the fact of the matter is that she DID step down.

Congressman Jackson, if your condition is so severe that doctors are telling you not to return to work until they give the say so, then you owe it to us as your constituents to make sure that we have representation in Congress.

Even if that representative is NOT named Jesse Jackson, Jr.  And we need to make sure that we're not getting a John Stroger/Todd Stroger bait-and-switch game getting run on us.

It bothers me that you did not campaign for your seat, because it gives credence to the thought that the Democratic Party takes the Black vote for granted.  In an election where President Obama needs all of the support that he can from the Legislative Branch, you didn't feel that it was worth your time (or recovery) to tell us why YOU should continue to be the voice of my legislative district?  Did you feel that your seat is so secure that you would be able to coast through Election Day and then make a decision about your status afterwards?

Sadly, this may be the case.  You may well coast into another victory, without campaigning for your right to do so.  

But at least I can say that if and when you do win, it won't be because of me.  I voted because I need representation in Congress, and not a place-holder and a Congressman to be named later.

Get well soon and be blessed.

And when you're ready to get back into the fight, let us know.  We'll be waiting.

Of Bayonets And Business... Why Romney's Navy Assertion Makes Even Less Sense

In last night's debate, Gov. Mitt Romney stated this about the readiness of the U.S. Navy:

"Our Navy is smaller now than at any time since 1917... The Navy said they needed 313 ships to carry out their mission. We're now at under 285. ... We're headed down to the low 200s if we go through a sequestration. That's unacceptable to me."
Romney also said the U.S. Air Force is "older and smaller" than at any time since it first flew in 1947. 

President Obama responded with a level of snarkiness and sarcasm that is rarely seen from this President.  

"You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military's changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines.
"And so the question is not a game of Battleship," Obama continued, "where we're counting ships. It's what are our capabilities."

In other words, the President completely roasted Mitt in this regard.

Artist's rendition

But here is why Governor Romney's assertion, and his desire to increase the military budget by giving the military $2 trillion that it does not need.  As President Obama succinctly pointed out, our military needs have changed over the past several decades.  Our warfare tactics have changed considerably.  When I was in the Army, I was a "Combat Signaler."  What this meant is that I helped to run communication wire from one point to another, so that units can talk to each other.  Shortly after I left, this job was merged with another one, because technologies changed.  We live in a world where we can communicate effortlessly across the globe withOUT wires, so there is no longer a need to string wires across the wilderness (or desert).

The point is that Mitt equates throwing extra money at the military and building extra ships equates to military readiness.  Mitt also champions himself as a savvy businessman.  Has anyone ever seen a businessman run an operation by continuing to throw money at the problem?  Say what you will about Romney's business dealings (and there IS lots to be said about venture capitalism and how it can treat the most vulnerable in the workforce), but no venture capitalist has ever -- at least to my knowledge -- decided that what a company needs to do to become more profitable is to give it more equipment than it needs or demands.  Looking at the auto industry, Romney's business instincts led him to pronounce that Detroit should go bankrupt.  He did not analyze the auto industry and decide "What Detroit needs to stay alive is for the government to build more plants and give GM even more money than it's asking for."

Yet, here is Mitt, saying that the best way for the U.S. to maintain its military might is for the President to give the Pentagon more money, above and beyond what it's asking for.  He's also doing this without regards as to how it will be paid for.  As President Obama stated, our military might is not determined by how many ships we have.  It's determined by how we use the resources, the technology, and the personnel that we have.  Streamlining and being efficient with equipment seems like a good way to manage a business.  Isn't it odd that Mitt isn't applying these same principles to this country's defense budget?

Now, don't get me wrong.  I firmly believe that you can't run a government in the same way that you run a business, because a business' goal is to be profitable.  And in lots of cases, those profits may come at the expense of people.  I just find it unusual that Mitt (while almost totally agreeing with Obama on every point) would run the rest of the government like a business... except for the military, which he wants to give plenty of hand-outs.

It doesn't make for an effective Commander-in-Chief.