Saturday, October 4, 2014

John Cleese on Monty Python’s John Cleese Nails Just How Stupid Fox News Really Is (VIDEO) Fox News

If you’ve ever happened upon a particularly mind-numbingly stupid edition of a Fox News show — be it the time Eric Bolling mocked a female fighter pilot by asking if she could be considered “boobs on the ground” or when Sean Hannity claimed Halloween was a liberal holiday because it teaches children to “ask for handouts” — and asked yourself “How is this level of stupidity possible?” Actor and Monty Python alum John Cleese has a simple, yet startlingly accurate assessment: Fox News hosts are so dumb, that they aren’t even smart enough to recognize how dumb they are.
In a video circulating the web, Cleese is asked about stupidity in the world. Here’s the video:
John Cleese on Stupidity
He says the problem with stupidity is that it breeds further stupidity.
“If you’re very, very stupid,” he explains, “How can you possibly realize that you’re very very stupid? You’d have to be relatively intelligent to realize how stupid you are.”
He then backed up this claim with some actual scientific data by a researcher named David Dunning at Cornell (if Sean Hannity is reading this, “scientific data” are those number-y things that make you angry). According to Dunning, knowing how good you are at something “requires exactly the same skills” as it would to actually be good at that thing. To put it another way, you could call it the “it takes one to know one” effect.
Interestingly, the philosopher Socrates made this very same point in ancient Greece, when he discovered to his dismay that he was the smartest person in Athens merely because he, and he alone, recognized how ignorant he was.
For Cleese, this finding is extremely powerful. It poses a serious problem for those who want to enlighten others about their ignorance, because that same ignorance is preventing them from realizing that they don’t know anything.
“And this explains not just Hollywood,” Cleese concludes, “But almost the entirety of Fox News.”
So the next time — probably today — you see that Fox News has someone spouting utter idiocy into the cameras, pity them. They know not what they do — they’re simply too stupid.

Wednesday, July 16, 2014

AZ Republican mistakes campers for immigrants

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

KY Climate Change Moron!!!

Accused of teaching hate

The Real Danger of Toy Guns

Smoking Gun in Texas

More "Heartless Dick" Chaney

Tea Party prophet smacked down

Colbert smacks down racist GOP

Wednesday, July 9, 2014

Guns don't kill people, Republican's do!

Monday, July 7, 2014

Walker's Thugs brutalize old woman

Sunday, July 6, 2014

Hobby Lobby opens door for terrorists

Zimmerman busted again

What Would Thomas Paine Say If He Were Alive Today?

Who Was Thomas Paine?

According to Wikipedia

Was an English-American political activist, philosopher, author, political theorist and revolutionary. As the author of two highly influential pamphlets at the start of the American Revolution, he inspired the Patriots in 1776 to declare independence from Britain. His ideas reflected Enlightenment-era rhetoric of transnational human rights. He has been called "a corsetmaker by trade, a journalist by profession, and a propagandist by inclination. Moreover, he promoted reason and freethinking, and argued against institutionalized religion in general and Christian doctrine in particular.

With that said, what would the Britain born political activist of his day have to say about America Today? What would his views be on Corporations as people, and money equaling free speech. Would he approve or is he turning over in his grave? Would the recent Hobby Lobby case cause him to take the stump and pen to paper or would he affirm the decision? Based on this writers research the answer to these questions would be an emphatic no. Paine's early activism caught the eye of then statesmen Benjamin Franklin. Ironically, Paine's early activism centered around better pay for the working class in his home country of Britain. Thomas Paine moved to America was mainly because he was a failure at many of his endeavors in Britain and America offered him a fresh start. Once getting to America he began working as a journalist. The breakout of the American Revolutionary war gave Paine the chance to define in print the purpose of the war which to many had remained ambiguous. This condition of not really knowing what the American colonies were fighting for inspired his most famous literary work entitled " Common Sense."  

In this writers view, Common Sense was the first litmus test on how political activism and journalism could co-mingle themselves not only to educate the unknowing masses, but to actuate change in public thinking which resulted in changing public policy which in this case led to the American Revolutionary war. What to this day is a little known fact is that only a third of the organizers of the rebellion in America were for total independence. It was not until the publishing of Common Sense that the tide swung and what resulted was the Declaration of independence.

I offered nothing more than simple facts, plain arguments, and Common Sense. [Thomas Paine, 1776]

It was this pamphlet that stirred the public discourse to such a point that it brought about the desired recourse for We The People. 
George Washington  was quoted

" The American people owe their liberty to Thomas Paine more than any other man."
One of Thomas Paine's most famous quotes:
'There are times that try men's souls.' Are we not living in such times today? We have a high court that places more regulations on a female's vagina than on weapons of mass destruction in the hands of mental incompetents. In addition, we have a high court through judicial over-reach totally ignores the separation of church and state doctrine  in our constitution. In fact, the behavior of the U.S. Supreme Court mirrors very much the actions of the British monarchy of Paine's time. We have an attack of the rights of workers in this country that was the genesis of Paine becoming politically active in the first place. What was a British monarch in 1776 has become a corporate monarch of 2014. With everyday citizens losing rights on a daily basis to corporate bought legislative tactics such as "right to work," "voter ID laws," and gerrymandering just to name a few these are truly times that can try a man's soul.

Just like today, conservative thinkers of Paine's time found him bothersome. John Adams called Thomas Paine a mongrel. Just like today, when you have politicians like Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and Christian zealots applauding the Hobby Lobby decision  for upholding so-called religious liberty at the expense of everyone else we see our present condition here in America reverting back to a truism this writer holds dear," history does repeat itself." Conservatives of Thomas Paine times are no different than modern-day conservatives. They fear change. In closing, the important thing and example that Thomas Paine's story teaches us is that we must as individuals make a mark for ourselves on what we stand for and believe. No matter how insignificant you may feel your voice crying in the wilderness might be it's the collective voices crying together that can become a roar and effect change. What would Thomas Paine say if he were alive today? Rise America, participate in the process these are times that try men's souls use your common sense with reason.



If the founding fathers were all Christian

Thursday, July 3, 2014

FCC Political TV Ads: New Rule Allows Anyone to Track Spending Online

FCC Political TV Ads: New Rule Allows Anyone to Track Spending Online

Thursday, 03 Jul 2014 12:04 PM
By Clyde Hughes

Exactly who is funding political ads has always been public information, but interested citizens used to have to physically travel to each television station to get it. Under the new rule, political ad buys will be available online from about 1,000 broadcasters around the country, Dennis Wharton, a spokesperson for the National Association of Broadcasters,told The Washington Post.

"Suppose you're running a political campaign. Beginning now, you're going to be able to sit at your computer and find out where your competition has been taking out ads, when they got them for and for how much money," The Post reported. "That kind of information may have always been accessible if you were willing to travel to get it, but now you — or any citizen, for that matter — can find this stuff out from your computer."

Nonprofits like the Sunlight Foundation, which tracks political spending, said the new rule is a victory for transparency in political advertising.

"The expanded online access comes just in time," wrote Kathy Kiely for the Sunlight Foundation blog Monday. "At least six of this year's most hotly contested Senate races — which will likely determine control of the closely-divided chamber — are taking place in states that don't have a top-50 television market: Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Louisiana, Montana, and West Virginia. In addition, the public will now be getting online access to the political ad files of important stations that aren't affiliated with the big four broadcast networks, including Spanish-language stations."

The Post said the new rule, though, does not cover cable and satellite television companies not under FCC rule.

"We think there's a fundamental unfairness in that exception," Wharton told the Post.

The top four stations in the top 50 markets have been under the new rules since August 2012 and the Sunlight Foundation has filed a complaint with the FCC against 11 stations for not complying with them, according to Broadcast & Cable.

Monday, May 19, 2014

Vote No 2 ALEC

Check out @OutFOXedNEWS's Tweet:

Tuesday, April 1, 2014

How Dark Money Flows Through the Koch Network

How Dark Money Flows Through the Koch Network

By Al ShawTheodoric Meyer and Kim Barker, ProPublica
Feb. 14, 2014
Fundraising by the libertarian billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch supports a tangle of nonprofits, sometimes referred to as the Kochtopus, all aimed at advancing conservative causes. Two groups, the Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce and TC4 Trust, handed out almost $264 million from mid-2011 to October 2012 to 30 other nonprofits. Almost half of that went to the Center to Protect Patient Rights, which then funneled millions to a constellation of dark money groups, some of which also received money from Freedom Partners and TC4 Trust. Groups that got significant amounts of money from the Center, Freedom Partners and TC4 Trust reported political spending of more than $75 million in 2012. Much of the money flowed through what are known as “disregarded entities” — limited liability companies, or LLCs, that some of the groups have set up. TC4 Trust has folded and the Center to Protect Patient Rights no longer plays a central role in the Koch network, but many of these groups will be active in the 214 election. |Related story »
Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce
TC4 Trust

Center to Protect Patient Rights
Americans for Prosperity
American Future Fund
Americans for Job Security
Americans for Responsible Leadership
EvangChr4 Trust
The 60 Plus Association
American Commitment
Small Business Action Committee
Themis Trust
Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee
Generation Opportunity
Public Notice
National Rifle Association of America
California Future Fund for Free Markets
Center for Shared Services Trust
The LIBRE Initiative Trust
Public Engagement Group Trust
U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Citizen Awareness Project
American Energy Alliance
Concerned Veterans for America
National Federation of Independent Business
Americans for Limited Government
National Association of Manufacturers of the United States of America
The Taxpayers Protection Alliance
West Michigan Policy Forum
National Right to Work Committee
No New Taxes, No on Prop 204 II
Republican Jewish Coalition
Coalition to Protect Patients' Rights
The Hispanic Leadership Fund
State Tea Party Express
NFIB The Voice of Free Enterprise
Save Our Vote Opposing Prop 121
Americans for Jerusalem
Ending Spending
Morning in America
Coalition for American Values Action
Heritage Action for America
Partnership for Ohio's Future
The Progress Project
Club for Growth
Coalition for American Jobs
Susan B. Anthony List
Americans for Tax Reform
Arioch Project
American Values Action
Tea Party Patriots
Emergency Committee for Israel
Citizen Media
Fair Arizona Independent Redistricting Trust
Common Sense Issues
GOPAC Education Fund
American Principles in Action
Freedom Vote
Policy and Taxation Group
All Votes Matter
American Tradition Partnership
King Street Patriots
AUL Action NFP
Empower Texans
Generation Joshua, a project of the Home School Legal Defense Association
Council for Citizens Against Government Waste
American Action Network
New Hampshire Advantage Coalition
Hampton Roads Tea Party
New Mexico Business Coalition
Arizona Public Integrity Alliance
Citizens for Community Values Action
Smart Girl Politics Action
Ohio Voter Integrity Project

Tuesday, January 7, 2014

The right’s latest freakout — and why they’re crying “communism”

The right’s latest freakout — and why they’re crying “communism”

Conservatives' overreaction to one progressive writer speaks volumes about their ongoing war against the safety net

The right's latest freakout -- and why they're crying Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz (Credit: AP/Timothy D. Easley/Reuters/Adrees Latif/AP/Tony Gutierrez)
Prior to Barack Obama’s presidency, healthcare access was the gaping hole in the country’s tattered, patchwork safety net. If, for instance, you made too much money to qualify for Medicaid, weren’t old enough to qualify for Medicare, never served in the military, and didn’t work for a large employer, you probably had to pay for your own insurance. If you were low- or middle-income, or you had a preexisting condition, there was a decent chance you were uninsured, unable to obtain routine care and at constant risk of financial ruin.
Add ‘em all up and we’re talking about upward of 50 million people.
Part of the reason conservatives fought the Affordable Care Act so relentlessly, and continue to fantasize about its demise, is that it will ultimately fill that hole. Though flawed and inadequate in key ways, the safety net will now lack major structural gaps it just had. When conservatives warn that Obamacare will turn the United States into a European welfare state, they’re being histrionic, but they’re not being entirely disingenuous.
The extraordinary but ultimately failed efforts Republicans undertook in 2011 and 2012 to win back Congress and the White House — the direct assault on public sector unions, systematic disenfranchisement of minority voters, legislative sabotage on Capitol Hill — are perhaps best thought of as rearguard actions to prevent Obamacare from ever taking effect. To keep America from becoming Europe.
Obama’s reelection was Game Over. GOP leaders understood this, even if rank-and-file Republicans and millions of Republican voters remain in denial about it.
But just because the American welfare state no longer lacks the linchpin of a healthcare guarantee doesn’t mean the programs that compose it will lumber along in their current forms unchanged. In other words, the grueling ideological struggle over the shape and generosity of U.S. social programs will continue for years to come.
Enter a snarky, unconventional but ultimately innocuous Rolling Stone article by Jesse Myerson. In it, he proposes five reforms that are pretty far-reaching relative to the country’s existing social and economic regime, and would in fact dramatically alter the balance of economic and political power in America.
When you strip away the comedic framing, though, they’re a fairly straightforward mix of progressive and radical-centrist reforms. (See Matt Yglesias for a complete breakdown.)
But conservatives went absolutely apeshit. So severe was the apoplexy that they failed to recognize that included in these ideas were a bunch of things conservatives like — replacing income taxes and replacing paternalistic welfare programs with cash transfers — and that already exist successfully in the non-communist world. It was amazing.
In their rendering, Myerson hadn’t sketched out a road to serfdom. He’d planned a massive frog-march to Siberia for our society.
Part of this was emotional affect. Myerson’s Twitter bio is satirically hashtagged #FULLCOMMUNISM. Combine that with the article’s hyperbolic framing and many conservatives reacted tribally.
Some of Myerson’s antagonists were smart enough to see past the cultural identity stuff but too weak-minded not to respond with shallow, reactionary nonsense. Sean Davis thinks Myerson’s ideas are discredited because they all appear in the USSR’s constitution (they don’t really). Even if you assume, for the sake of argument, that this rebuttal isn’t historically illiterate, you can’t get past the juvenile reasoning. Even if you assume Soviet leaders rigorously adhered to a constitution, Davis is making an inductive fallacy.
If he’d clicked on the link in his own piece, he’d have seen, right up top, that “women and men have equal rights in the USSR.”
Exercise of these rights is ensured by according women equal access with men to education and vocational and professional training, equal opportunities in employment, remuneration, and promotion, and in social and political, and cultural activity, and by special labour and health protection measures for women; by providing conditions enabling mothers to work; by legal protection, and material and moral support for mothers and children, including paid leaves and other benefits for expectant mothers and mothers, and gradual reduction of working time for mothers with small children.
Here the U.S. was a bit behind the times, but by Davis’ standard we have now largely embraced this particular form of murderous evil. The Soviet Union also guaranteed free provision of higher education. Here in the United States, we limit that to secondary education, which I suppose means we’ve escaped one of the chains of Soviet bondage.
Smarter conservatives both understood that Myerson’s list isn’t communism, but nevertheless had a visceral oppositional reaction to it. Which brings us back to the right’s losing bid to unseat Obamacare and the evolving debate over social policy in the U.S., post-Obamacare.
I don’t think the ongoing freakout over the Rolling Stone article is simply a reflection of cultural anxieties. It also reflects an effort to limit the scope of that debate, so that progressive ideas fall outside of the sphere of acceptability. A basic cash income wouldn’t destroy America, and actually enjoys the support of conservative heavyweights, now and in the past. But it isn’t exactly compatible with significant tax cuts for wealthy people. And it preserves the federal government’s role as the purveyor of public welfare. One way to marginalize ideas like that is to call them communism.
A lot of conservatives just don’t know any better. But for the rest, this is as much about keeping the endless debate over social welfare anchored around shrinking government and privatizing services as it is an ignorant cultural reaction to a writer from New York who made a #joke about #communism on the Internet.
Brian Beutler Brian Beutler is Salon's political writer. Email him at and follow him on Twitter at @brianbeutler.