RSS

Monthly Archives: March 2011

Social Security must die so America can be what we want it to be?

OK, it’s time to play guess who said it.

Who said, “I mean, just from the very notion that it said that 50 percent of beneficiaries under the Social Security program use those monies as their sole source of income. So we’ve got to protect today’s seniors. But for the rest of us? For — you know, listen. We’re going to have to come to grips with the fact that these programs cannot exist if we want America to be what we want America to be.”?

If you guessed GOTP House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia you were right. But, in being right you have ask, “say what”?

Just when you think the far right lunatics can’t possibly say or do anything loonier, what do ya know? They do.

What exactly does Cantor mean when he says, “We’re going to have to come to grips with the fact that these programs cannot exist if we want America to be what we want America to be.”?

Is this what the far right means when it says it wants to take the country back? Take it back to pre-1930? Take it back to pre-New Deal? Take it back to when people worked until they died, and if they couldn’t take care of themselves too bad? This is the scary far right stuff, but of course the farther to the right the GOTP goes the father it goes away from the majority of America’s voters, and it’s going to one day catch up and bite them on the butt.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on March 30, 2011 in Economics

 

Tags: , , , ,

Sanders Calls for Shared Sacrifice

Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has alleged while hard working Americans fill out their income tax returns this tax season, General Electric and other giant profitable corporations are avoiding U.S. taxes altogether, and with Congress returning to Capitol Hill this week to continue its seemingly never ending debate on spending cuts, he said the wealthiest Americans and most profitable corporations must do their share to help bring down our record-breaking deficit.

Sanders has renewed his call for shared sacrifice after it was reported that General Electric and other major corporations paid no U.S. taxes after posting huge profits. Sanders said it is grossly unfair for congressional Republicans to propose major cuts to Head Start, Pell Grants, the Social Security Administration, nutrition grants for pregnant low-income women and the Environmental Protection Agency while ignoring the reality that some of the most profitable corporations pay nothing or almost nothing in federal income taxes. And Senator Sanders is absolutely right. It’s time for the GOTP to stop pandering to its far right frantic fringe and start balancing the books by balancing the load.

Sanders has compiled a list of some of some of the 10 worst corporate income tax avoiders.

1)  Exxon Mobil made $19 billion in profits in 2009.  Exxon not only paid no federal income taxes, it actually received a $156 million rebate from the IRS, according to its SEC filings.

2)  Bank of America received a $1.9 billion tax refund from the IRS last year, although it made $4.4 billion in profits and received a bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department of nearly $1 trillion.

3)   Over the past five years, while General Electric made $26 billion in profits in the United States, it received a $4.1 billion refund from the IRS.

4)   Chevron received a $19 million refund from the IRS last year after it made $10 billion in profits in 2009.

5)   Boeing, which received a $30 billion contract from the Pentagon to build 179 airborne tankers, got a $124 million refund from the IRS last year.

6)   Valero Energy, the 25th largest company in America with $68 billion in sales last year received a $157 million tax refund check from the IRS and, over the past three years, it received a $134 million tax break from the oil and gas manufacturing tax deduction.

7)   Goldman Sachs in 2008 only paid 1.1 percent of its income in taxes even though it earned a profit of $2.3 billion and received an almost $800 billion from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury Department.

8)   Citigroup last year made more than $4 billion in profits but paid no federal income taxes. It received a $2.5 trillion bailout from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury.

9)   ConocoPhillips, the fifth largest oil company in the United States, made $16 billion in profits from 2007 through 2009, but received $451 million in tax breaks through the oil and gas manufacturing deduction.

10)  Over the past five years, Carnival Cruise Lines made more than $11 billion in profits, but its federal income tax rate during those years was just 1.1 percent.

Sanders has called for closing corporate tax loopholes and eliminating tax breaks for oil and gas companies. He also introduced legislation to impose a 5.4 percent surtax on millionaires that would yield up to $50 billion a year. The senator has said that spending cuts must be paired with new revenue so the federal budget is not balanced solely on the backs of working families.

“We have a deficit problem. It has to be addressed,” Sanders said, “but it cannot be addressed on the backs of the sick, the elderly, the poor, young people, the most vulnerable in this country.  The wealthiest people and the largest corporations in this country have got to contribute. We’ve got to talk about shared sacrifice.”

Amen.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on March 30, 2011 in Federal Budget

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Santorum claims abortion is to blame for social security woes?

Grand Old Tea Party (GOTP) presidential hopeful Rick Santorum, during his latest trip to New Hampshire, was asked about the status of the country’s social security system in an interview on WESZ-AM. He replied the system would be in much better shape if there were fewer abortions.

While admitting the system has flaws, he says the real reason social security is in big trouble is there aren’t enough workers to support retirees. He blamed the lack of workers on the “nation’s abortion culture”,  claiming it’s that culture, coupled with policies that do not support families; that are denying America what it needs — more people.

Wow. Really Rick? America’s social security is allegedly in trouble because there have been too many abortions? How about maybe there isn’t enough tax being taken from those who can afford it? Maybe the fact the wealthy only pay social security on a small percentage of their income each year and yet draw full benefits when they retire has something to do with it? Why not require the top 2% of the population to pay its taxes, rather than continue to give it tax breaks? But on no, that would be far too easy; instead we have to appeal to the far right religious fanatics of the GOTP, and instead of offering solutions to a perceived problem we have to create excuses. Maybe you can help the GOTP take our country back to that simpler time when woman were men’s property, and were expected to simply stand bare foot and pregnant in the kitchen? Are there no serious conservative contenders for the presidential nomination? No, instead it appears we have another nut ready to be gathered into the Tea Party nest.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on March 29, 2011 in Abortion

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Trump produced an unofficial birth certificate?

Sometimes all the tumblers really do fall into place and the result is a divine comedy. Yesterday, real estate magnate, and aspiring GOTP Presidential hopeful, Donald Trump thought he was poking President Barack Obama in the eye by releasing a copy of his own birth certificate. By doing so, “The Donald” had hoped to show how he could easily obtain, and show proof, of his natural-born citizenship, insinuating of course that the President had failed to do so, at least according to Trump, FOX PAC and those in the Tea Party’s “birther” movement.

But upon closer examination, what do our wandering eyes behold? Not Trump’s “official” birth certificate at all, but one “easily obtained” from the Jamaica Queens hospital where the wee Trumper was birthed. Yes, the birth certificate released to the conservative news site Newsmax – in an effort to harass President Obama – was issued only by a hospital; unfortunately for Trump, “official” birth certificates for New York City are however only issued by the city Department of Health.

As the old German proverb says, “A donkey can wear a lion suit but its ear will still stick out and give it away,” and so as Trump tried to embarrass the President of the United States he has simply come off looking exactly like the self absorbed, pompous, strutting, arrogant little jackass he is. He may be wearing a “lion suit”, trying to court favor with potential right-wing nut jobs, but clearly “his ear is sticking out”.

 

Tags: , , , , ,

GOTP presidential hopefuls hammer health care, have nothing new to offer? Nope not one new idea, just more of the same old tripe they’re always scooping out …

And so, it’s 20 some odd months until Election Day 2012 and a very small group of potentially high-profile Grand Old Tea Party (or the group formerly known as Republican) candidates show up like the early spring honey bee hoping to impress the equally small hundred or so conservative activists Saturday in Des Moines, Iowa that most Americans (that would be GOTP, Independent and the very small smattering of Democratic voters) agree with their particularly odd variation of “values”, and opposition to all and everything President Obama represents, but mostly his socialistic health care overhaul; and that all of this could somehow magically help the GOTP make historic gains in 2012.

One of the most incredible long shots in political history, except for possibly with this year’s gathering of right-wing odd balls and fruit cakes is Michigan Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, who not surprisingly is a huge a tea party favorite, and who – also not surprisingly – got the noisiest reception when she told the “huge” hundred plus crowd gathered that voters are ready to overturn the federal health care law and oust President Barack Obama during next year’s election.

“The ultimate arrogance, in my opinion, is Obama-care,” Bachman said. “That’s why I am so absolutely confident in 2012. Americans have made the decision that we’re going to take our country back.”

Ah yes, the perennial GOTP favorite line, “we’re going to take our country back.” But to where do you want to take it, and for whom Congresswoman? Are we going back to 2008? Back to those happy carefree days of Bush/Cheney when habeas corpus was suspended on a whim if your name had Mohamed in it, or before our military was free from Gays and Lesbos? Or back to the pre-Camelot days before all those pesky Black people dared to eat at the same lunch counter?

Of course the Newt was there, and the deep south’s Haley Barbour and even former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain spoke to add a splash color to the Midwest white bread event as the token conservative African-American, since Justice Clarence Thomas was unable to attend due not being sure how to bill the gathering and still at least try to appear impartial on the bench.

But why Iowa you ask? Is it because it’s a field of dreams, and hopefully Newt, Barbour and company will all walk into the corn and finally fade away? Or is it simply because event organizer, Iowa Congressman Steve King, believes that his home state, the state where the nation’s first presidential caucus will take place, is the proper venue to help conservatives shape the debate as members of the GOTP begin looking for a candidate to run against Obama.

“We need to take this nation to the next level of its destiny,” King told the crowd. “You can shape that destiny.”

Of course with Bachman, Newt and Barbour that “next level of its destiny” can only mean backwards or farther off the cliff of economic collapse started during the last administration.

While Iowa is the traditional launch pad for the presidential nominating season, when one sees the sharply conservative rhetoric from Saturday’s little rally, allegedly reflecting an Iowa GOTP that’s drifted not just to the right, but to the far right, coupled with some polling data from last year showing more than 60 percent of GOTP caucus-goers there are identifying themselves as not only Christians but evangelicals, you have the makings of a gold old fashioned revival meeting, the type where Mormons – such as Mitt Romney – need not apply; of course it’s also then going to be an evangelical crowd that’s going to have a hard time getting its arms around a two time adulterer, or a deep south nominee, which leaves the nomination wide open for Huckleberry, Bachman and Palin. How wonderful.

Interestingly enough Newt insisted that most Americans agree with his conservative values, with the Newtster actually saying the 2012 election would provide a chance to end the “domination of the left and move this country back to the center-right.”

That would be the center right where family values stands for cheating on not just one but two spouses, marrying each mistress in turn and then claiming you couldn’t control your hormones because of your deep seated love of country?

Haley said the GOTP can win next year if their candidates stay focused on key issues — health care and balancing the federal budget — without getting distracted by arguments about personality. Of course by balancing the budget he means zeroing out any progressive programs, while continuing to cut taxes to the top 2% of the nation’s population and allowing defense spending to maintain its unabashed feeding frenzy.

“What is important to us is to have a new president,” Barbour said. “This election needs to be about policy.”

That’s right. It’s all about the policy of taking our country back to a time when uppity folks like foreign born blacks knew their place, isn’t that right Governor? It’s about an America where homos and lesbians weren’t allowed in polite society, and it’s about the America where the term foreign policy meant telling our allies to shut up, sit down and do what we told them to do.

During the “event”, the speakers all focused on criticizing President Obama and the Democratic Party, and the Newter even took the time to say how he “helped balance a budget for four straight years” while House speaker. That of course was due more largely to the efforts to his fellow philanderer President Clinton, than for anything he himself managed to do, between his own affairs while impeaching the President for his infidelity.

But of course, Newty also took the opportunity to attack – yet again – President Obama’s handling of the air strikes in Libya. He ridiculed Obama for consulting the Arab League and the United Nations, but not Congress, before getting involved. The Newt said he wouldn’t have approved the air strikes, even though he pushed for air strikes and a no-fly zone just a week or two before the President implemented that very policy, but said Newt, “once you get involved, you put on the pressure and you win quickly.” As compared to becoming bogged down in not one but two wars with absolutely any exit policy, clear cut goals or objectives.

Cain, who decided to be the one speaker not talking about the federal health care law, said the conservative movement is gaining strength and will help the GOTP “take back the government”.

He does understand that the GOTP’s version of “taking back” the government would mean he’d be serving them the pizza, and driving Miss Daisy around town, doesn’t he? Taking the country back doesn’t mean equality for Blacks, Hispanics, Gays or Lesbians. It’s taking the country back to the happier times of Herbert Hoover before Labor Unions and desegregated class rooms.

Seeming to be oblivious to all of this, and believing the fact that since he’s a wealthy black man meant he shared in the GOTP dream, he said the U.S. has “an entitlement spending crisis” that must be reformed in order to solve the nation’s financial woes. Being the GOTP code for throwing the poor and the elderly out on the street where they belong. Cutting social security benefits to the disabled, cutting WIC and women’s pre-natal and health care, slashing college loan programs to the poor and zeroing public broadcasting, and arts programs.

“We don’t like the radical socialist agenda that is being shoved down our throats,” he said.

And what he wanted to say is we don’t like the idea that the poor can have free health care, and have their standard of living increased, and that we have a minimum wage and child labor laws and the like, and that he could’ve made much higher profits if only he could’ve paid lower salaries or could’ve had five and six your olds slaving away in his pizza kitchens.

Meanwhile, Bach on the farm, the Congresswoman from Michigan steered things back onto the effort to repeal the health care reform law and said that American’s bad feelings for the law had created a strong tide of support for the GOTP positioning itself for next year’s election.

“It’s never gone below a majority of Americans who want to see Obama-care repealed,” Bachmann said. “This is, I believe, the greatest power grab that I have ever seen.”

Really, “it’s never gone below a majority of Americans who want to see Obama-care repealed”? While that might be true of any Rasmussen poll, in the world outside of the FOC PAC bubble the clear majority doesn’t want it repealed, and is happy with the law. And are you really serious when you claim this is the greatest power grab you’ve ever seen Congresswoman? So, one can only assume you either haven’t paid any attention to the whole political coup thing in Wisconsin? Or, you wholeheartedly agree with it?

Bachman exhorted the hundred or so listeners that the stakes in next year’s election are enormous, and that “what we are going to determine together, here in Iowa, is quite frankly whether we will pass the American Dream on to the next generation.”

Of course that’s the American dream of white, Anglo-Saxon, Christian evangelicals. Not the one that includes people of color – except to clean the house, repair the roof, pick the vegetables and maybe collect your garbage. It’s also not the American Dream of any of those darned Muslims and their Mohamed; it’s not the American Dream of religious freedom, unless you strictly uphold to the idea that America is a Christian nation; of course it’s a Christian nation that is largely denying the Christ, and his teachings regarding caring for the poor and the sick among us, and of brotherly love etc. It’s the Evangelical Christian American Dream of the Old Testament where Gays are stoned to death, and only white people get to be President. It’s the American Dream of preemptive warfare and unending tax cuts and never having to pay the bill for the Wild West diplomacy.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

GOTP hopefuls complain but no plans on Libya

Isn’t it amazing how the Bungling Brothers Three Ring Circus, also known as the GOTP hopeful candidates for the 2012 nomination are all being very quick to criticize the President’s handling of the U.N. mandated no-fly zone in Libya, but not one of them has come forward with how they would have handled it. Well, except for Newt, who was for a no-fly zone before he was opposed to one?

And speaking of the Newt, he’s our first performer  in the center ring flip flopping across the ring, “You have a spectator in chief, not a commander in chief,” the Newt grumbled, one assumes meaning he’s for the no fly zone now? Or does he want boots on the ground this week?

At first Newtee very vocally demanded a no-fly zone after the President Obama said Gadhafi needed to be ousted, but then when the President began moving forward and the Newtster saw it was being billed as “humanitarian mission” he quickly decided he wanted nothing to do with that. He also first said in one interview that air strikes would oust Gadhafi and then said jets would not be able to end his rule now that fighting had gone into the cities. Newt’s effectively become the circus’ Push Me Pull You candidate.

Next to perform is Haley Barbour the Governor of Mississippi who is calling the President’s response to the situation “dithering.”

Barbour told a Jackson, Miss., radio station: “we haven’t provided leadership in this administration. In fact, the Obama administration’s position has been to say, ‘You know, we’re just one of the boys. We’re not going to try to be the leader.'”

Yeah, too bad Haley conveniently ignored the fact United States forces led the air strikes over Libya under the auspices of a United Nations resolution authorizing force in the interest of preventing a humanitarian crisis. He offered no opinion on an appropriate U.S. response, just the fact that this response lacked any leadership, as compared to what? The good old days of Sheriff Bush and his posse telling Bin Laden he could run that he couldn’t hide? Newsflash! He’s still out there!

Our juggling act will be performed by the great health care reformist himself, the former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney who said the President has been “tentative, indecisive, timid and nuanced.”

Romney says he supports the mission in Libya. He’s just not a fan of the President who started it or his approach to international affairs. So, he’s saying it’s the right mission, just the wrong guy going to get the credit? He didn’t detail what the Libya policy would be under a Romney administration.

“Thus far, the president has been unable to construct a foreign policy, any foreign policy,” Romney told Hugh Hewitt’s radio show. “I think it’s fair to ask, you know, what is it that explains the absence of any discernible foreign policy from the president of the United States?”

You’re kidding right Mitt? No foreign policy from President Obama?

How about the fact the President has restored strained alliances and friendships around the world? President Obama’s call for partnership, respect for international rules on prisoners, and acceptance of the responsibilities associated with climate change, transformed America from the isolated and lonely superpower of Bush/Cheney often seen as a threat to international order back into a leader in Europe, Asia and the Middle East. The President is pulling our troops out of the nightmare of Iraq, and plans to do the same for our troops in Afghanistan.

No circus would be complete with some Paws, and former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty said President Obama erred by not forcing a no-fly zone more quickly.

“The rebels at that time were on the verge of overthrowing Gadhafi. They had the momentum. They were in position to do it,” Pawlenty told FOX PAC. He said President Obama left the rebels without backup and Gadhafi ready to squelch them. But he didn’t say what he would do differently now. So, if we had President Pawlenty he would have gone it alone to support the rebel cause? Pawlenty isn’t entirely wrong in his assessment. Things could’ve and should’ve moved much quicker. But then what?

And our last performer today is the 2008 GOTP vice presidential nominee and former Alaska governor, Palin the Jungle Girl, who whined, “We’ve received different messages from our president and from his advisers as to what it is that we are doing there and what the mission is.”

And how would Palin have handled the situation, if – “gulp” – we had President Palin? She offered her usual snarky complaints with no plan attached, “certainly there would have been more decisiveness.” So, she would have decisively done what? At some point she will probably release a You tube video decrying how she’s the real victim of the conflict in Libya.

Aside from the whining and complaints, notice anything missing ? Not one of these so-called candidates had anything of substance to say. Not one has offered anything of depth. Not one has said how things would be different if they were the King of the Forest. Well, “there would have been more decisiveness”. No plans, nothing.

The most amusing part of these latest attacks from the GOTP misfits is that they’re coming while U.S. forces are enforcing the no-fly zone over Libya to protect rebels trying to oust Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi – just as the GOTP demanded. Remember that, just as the GOTP demanded.

These “candidates” are all sort of saying President Obama is too slow and too reliant on international approval from the Arab League, the United Nations and NATO. Yes sports fans, what we really need is a President who tells the rest of the world to go jump in a lake while we preemptively invade whomever we darn well please, because that worked so well for the United States during the Bush/Cheney years.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on March 26, 2011 in 2012 Election

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Rush mocks the Obama Administration, Claims it Invented “Ludicrous Term”

During his Friday, 25 Mar 11, broadcast Rush Limbaugh, the self proclaimed spokes bovine of the GOTP decided he needed to “weigh” in – no small feat for Rush – on the United Nations no fly zone in Libya by mocking the Obama administration for using the term “kinetic” to describe the military action, saying the President’s people had “come up with the ludicrous term”.

“We’re not at war. We are engaged in ‘kinetic activity’,” Limbaugh brayed. “Here we have a headline, this is from the DC Examiner, ‘In the last few days the Obama regime — officials frequently faced the question, is the fighting in Libya a war? And for military officers to White House spokesmen up to the president himself, the answer’s been ‘no.’ Well, OK then, what is it?”

Gee Rush, I don’t know? Why don’t we rely on your extensive military service to explain it to us? Oh wait, you never served in the military did you? No, Rush Hudson Limbaugh III a.k.a. “Rusty” never served.

But when has a lack of knowledge and facts, either institutional or educational ever stopped Rush? And so, he attempted his own “expert” military analysis, “At any rate, this guy, the deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes took a crack at an answer said, ‘Well, I think what we’re doing is enforcing a resolution that has a very clear set of goals,” Limbaugh said. “‘Which is protecting the Libyan people, averting a humanitarian crisis, and setting up a no-fly zone; obviously, that involves kinetic military action, particularly on the front end.’

“Folks, this is pathetic. Literally, genuinely pathetic. ‘Kinetic military action, particularly on the front end.’ Kinetic simply means motion. That’s all it means. Depending on movement for its effect, of, relating to, or resulting from motion. So, now we’ve got ‘kinetic military action.’”

There are two things wrong with Rusty’s statement. First, in terms of a military action being “kinetic” – or being set in motion – it would be “depending on motion for its “affect” not “effect”. Maybe you should’ve stayed in school Rusty. Had you done so you would’ve known that you almost always use affect with an “a” as a verb (motion as used here is considered a verb) and effect with an “e” as a noun; once again, so much for being right 99.9% of the time. Second, exactly how is this pathetic, the use of the term “kinetic” when referring to military action? In order for the no fly zone to take “affect” we, the United States and our allies, had to put the Navies and their planes into motion, allowing the no fly zone to be put into effect, thus affecting the air and ground forces of Qaddafi.

Rusty then quoted a statement by Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Tuesday in Moscow as he spoke with reporters about the Libya operation, “I think as we are successful in suppressing the air defenses, the level of kinetic activity should decline. I assume in the next few days.”

Limbaugh went on to conclude, “KMA, kinetic military activity, has replaced WTF. Winning the future — I’m sure you thought it was something else. Kick my — has replaced — what the — kinetic military — OK, so I guess we’re to assume it’s not a protest anymore, it’s a kinetic assembling action. It’s not a riot, it’s kinetic thuggery action. It’s not a vacation, it’s kinetic leisure action. It’s not golf, it’s kinetic ball-striking action. It’s not dancing, it’s kinetic food action. It’s not sex, it’s kinetic Lewinsky. It’s not — I’m not drunk, I’ve been engaging in kinetic adult beverage action. It’s not an election, it’s kinetic voting. It’s not radio, its kinetic Limbaugh action. Whatever. It’s just — kinetic means motion. Military means armed forces, action means motion. Kinetic action, moving motion. And these are the smartest people in the world. Well, the reason they can’t say it is because they don’t want to say what it really is.”

Yeah, that’s right Rusty; the President doesn’t want you to say what it “really is”. OK, whatever that means? So, why don’t you try to explain it for us?

“You know, we all know what it is, but they don’t  want to say it, they don’t want to go on record as saying what it really is because they’re actually trying to pretend it isn’t anything,” Rusty said. “It’s — and it’s not really a military intervention, it’s kinetic military action. That’s why they’ve come up with this ludicrous term. Right, that’s why they don’t want to call it a war on terror because the Muslims don’t intend to occupy us, they just blew up the World Trade Center. Of course, you might get some argument on that from certain people.”

By the way, for the record Rusty, during a Presidential press conference on 11 Oct 06 President Bush used a certain word to describe military conditions in Iraq; do you know what word that was Rusty? Let’s take a walk down memory lane and see.

A reporter asked, “I’m just wondering, two months ago, Prime Minister Maliki was here, and you talked about how we had to be nimble and facile in our approach. And my question is, are we being nimble and facile in the right way? Is what General Casey telling you the most effective advice? Because it would seem in the two months since Prime Minister Maliki was here, things have only gotten more bloody in Iraq.

President Bush answered, “No question, Ramadan’s here. No question, we’re engaging the enemy more than we were before. And by the way, when you engage the enemy, it causes there to be more action and more kinetic action. And the fundamental question is, do I get good advice from Casey? And the answer is I believe I do. I believe I do.” [Federal News Service, 10/11/06, accessed via Nexis]

And guess who else used a certain word Rusty? Why none other than your pal the former Secretary of Donny Rumsfeld during an 18 Jun 03, Defense Department operational update briefing, “Security throughout the country is indicated here. Green is what’s characterized as permissive. That’s not to say perfect, but it’s permissive. The yellow is semi-permissive and the red area in Baghdad and then in the area north towards Tikrit is considered not permissive or semi-permissive. There are now some 8,000 police officers back at work and 2,000 on patrol. And in those pockets, you’ll recall that when President Bush indicated that the major military activities had ended, we said very explicitly that that did not mean that the — that was the end of kinetics; that there would continue to have to be significant efforts to root out the remnants of the regime. That’s been going forward, and it’s been going forward in recent days, particularly, in ways that have been quite helpful. [Federal News Service, 6/18/03, accessed via Nexis]

And oh snap, Donny used it again while discussing Afghanistan during a 6 Feb 04, interview on an edition of FOX PACs’ Special Report, “The bulk of the problems are along the Pakistan border. And that is where the kinetics, for the most part, are taking place,” Don said. “And it is entirely possible that that would be the last sector.” [Fox News, Special Report, 2/6/04]

But wait Rusty, there’s more, in a 5 July 05, interview on Hot Talk with Scott Hennen, Rummy said, “Well sure. I mean to the extent people say things that give encouragement, and if you’re engaged in a test of wills as we are here, this is partly a battle on the ground using kinetics, and partly it’s a test of will as to whether or not we’ll be willing to continue to aggressively help the Iraqi people defeat this insurgency, depends on support from the American people. It depends on support from the international community. It depends on confidence level on the part of the Iraqi people. Which side’s going to win, they say to themselves. Do we want to support the Iraqi government and the coalition, or do we wait and see maybe they’re not going to have the staying power?” [Federal News Service, 7/5/05, accessed via Nexis]

But hey guess what Rusty? Military leaders regularly use that special word to describe military campaigns too; for instance when yours’ and Hannitys’ personal hero GEN Tommy Franks used it during a 15 Aug 02 Defense Department briefing, “What I prefer to do is think about the amount of energy that is devoted to what I call kinetic work in some provinces and places inside Afghanistan, where there is much work left to be done, and then work which is much more humanitarian, if you will, in nature, that goes on across 10 to 12 additional provinces in Afghanistan. [Federal News Service, 8/15/02, accessed via Nexis]

Hold on to your formerly nicotine stained fingers Rusty because Franks isn’t the only military officer to use it. BG Stanley McChrystal during a 23 Mar 03 Pentagon news briefing said, “Well, sir, we can see whether or not we hit targets, in many cases. And we’re still gathering that. But we’re running an effects-based campaign that is partially kinetic, partially non-kinetic, partially information operations. And so what we judge effectiveness by is not just whether there’s a hole in the roof of a building, but whether or not the function that that element did before ceases to be effective. [CNN, 3/22/03, accessed via Nexis]

Are you ready for more, big guy? Are you ready for more proof as to why you’re an idiot? OK then, on with facts.

LG Raymond Odierno used our special word on 17 Jan 08, “”We have not done a kinetic strike in at least six months. It might even be longer than that. I think it’s even longer than that, but it’s been a very long time. I track every one of them and they brief me weekly on that. [Political Transcript Wire, 1/17/08, accessed via Nexis]

Of course non-military types have also repeatedly used the term. Why, as a matter of fact, you – Rusty – withheld from your listeners that Byron York, in the very 23 Mar 11 column you sited said, “Kinetic” is a word that’s been used around the Pentagon for many years to distinguish between actions like dropping bombs, launching cruise missiles or shooting people and newer forms of non-violent fighting like cyber-warfare. At times, it also appears to mean just taking action. [The Washington Examiner, 3/23/11]

From a 20 Nov 02, Slate article, “In common usage, ‘kinetic’ is an adjective used to describe motion, but the Washington meaning derives from its secondary definition, ‘active, as opposed to latent.’ Dropping bombs and shooting bullets — you know, killing people — is kinetic. But the 21st-century military is exploring less violent and more high-tech means of warfare, such as messing electronically with the enemy’s communications equipment or wiping out its bank accounts. These are ‘non-kinetic.’ (Why not “latent”? Maybe the Pentagon worries that would make them sound too passive or effeminate.) Asked during a January talk at National Defense University whether ‘the transformed military of the future will shift emphasis somewhat from kinetic systems to cyber warfare,’ Donald Rumsfeld answered, “Yes!” (Rumsfeld uses the words “kinetic” and “non-kinetic” all the time.) [Slate, 11/20/02]

In trying to drive home his misguided, uninformed, litany to his generally equally misguided and uninformed listeners, Rusty closed with, “All of this is nothing more than one of these intellectual exercises to excuse Obama, give him a pass. It really isn’t war. Democrat presidents don’t like using the U.S. military. If the truth be known, liberals actually are happier when the U.S. military loses.”

Really Rusty, Democratic Presidents don’t like using the military? Which Democratic Presidents would you be referring to? Woodrow Wilson? Franklin D. Roosevelt? Lyndon Johnson? Bill Clinton? Barrack Obama? News flash Rush! They all used the United States military. And what’s wrong with a President not wanting to rush into a war? To not want to place our soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen in harms way? Difference between Democratic Presidents and most of their Republican counterparts is that the Democrats try to use up every possible avenue before the killing and maiming begins, wherein some Republican Presidents have almost gleefully sent our young men and women off to war. So, maybe in that sense you’re right, Democratic Presidents really don’t like “using the military”. But hey Rusty, even a blind squirrel finds a nut every once in awhile.

And WOW Rusty, did you really mean to say this, or is your drug addled mind no longer capable of rational thought? “If the truth be known, liberals actually are happier when the U.S. military loses”? I’m not sure if you’re just plain stupid, or if you’re crazy. You are a certifiable jackass Rusty. You’re no longer the spokes bovine of the GOTP, you’re now the official talking spokes jackass of the GOTP. And you no longer bloviate, now you bray. This is one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heard, and it belongs right up there with comments by progressive commentators who claim Republicans hate the environment. You’re right Rush, Liberals hate America, and want it to fail. Grow up, or move on.

Rusty, the truth (something I’m sure your ten perpetually ham sandwich stained fingers could never find, even with a flash light) is first, this is a military action; an honest to goodness United Nations sanctioned military action, unlike Bush/Cheney’s “war” in Iraq; second, the term kinetic has been used frequently to describe this very type of military action, and is a perfectly suitable word to use here; finally, you Rush Hudson Limbaugh III are either an ignoramus or a charlatan, and probably both. You’re not right 99.9%, but are frequently never right. You hate the President, and I believe a good part of that hatred is due to your southern Missouri upbringing. Yes, Rusty, I think you’re a racist. Your previous comments to African-American callers and about African-American athletes are well documented and stand as a witness. You’re inability to ever base your comments on facts is shameful, and your deliberate misleading of your listeners, whether they’re gullible little sheeple or not is criminal. Rusty, one day in all probability your name will be mentioned in the same breath with Father Coughlin, and Joseph Goebels, not a place any self respecting broadcaster would ever choose to be. But who could ever accuse you of being a self respecting broadcaster?

(Many thanks to hard working folks at Media Matters for supplying the background information)

 

Tags: , , , ,