Contest announcement for Photoshop experts.
Try adding a simple cape and fangs to this photograph of presidential candidate Ted Cruz.
If you manage to make him look sufficiently like Vlad The Impaler, you win a trip to Imgr to post your image and one upvote.
Add your entry to the comments and help me to implement Obamacare For My Kos Thread 2016.
Thanks to all entrants and remember to post your entry to social media, like one of those really easy quizzes that everyone earns a perfect score on, because it is incredibly easy.
I received an email from Danny Glover on behalf of MoveOn.org, asking me to sign a petition through SignOn supporting the nomination of Pulitzer Prize winning economist Paul Krugman for Secretary of the Treasury.
I wondered why I would want to give my personal information to MoveOn and SignOn, when I already gave that information to whitehouse.gov when I signed the petition to boot Texas and Louisiana's crybaby asses out of the country after this past election. PS I am from neither of those states.
So I just went to The White House's petitions web site and created the petition. As you likely know, if it gets 25,000 signatures, they will respond to it.
You can find it here. Tell your friends.
I sometimes wonder about our priorities as an electorate.
I can deal with compromise. I won't complain too loudly that we extended the Bush Tax Cuts to get an extension of unemployment. How the president managed to negotiate a 13-month unemployment extension for a two-year tax cut is another matter, but still, I won't belabor that sore subject.
What I don't understand is why we allow our elected leaders to continue to run a government that cannot function.
I have long believed almost all conservatives hopelessly naive. Sadly, I have been coming across liberals who are even more so.
They speak of defeating Obama for not fulfilling the promises he never made. They want to see Romney ascend so that they can "better mobilize" against him.
They seem to be more interested in the fight than the prize.
It's fun to laugh and poke fun at republican candidates, and I encourage everyone to do so. Just keep in mind that some of us are old enough to remember all the way back to Richard Nixon and beyond: a freaking cavalcade of inept clowns.
Yet they often win, and this time they have near unlimited access to corporate funding.
Don't underestimate them.
So now rich people are "job creators," and if we cut their taxes the rest of us will be rewarded with jobs? It seems only yesterday that rich people were "the economy," and if we cut taxes we would improve "the economy."
Where is the democratic leadership on this? Trickle-down economics is a discredited theory, time and again.
This should be simple.
Clinton era - taxes on the rich went up, many jobs created.
Bush era - taxes on the rich went down, unemployment climbed.
What is so difficult about pointing this out, repeatedly?
The only way a democrat can win the White House is by using uplifting and inspiring rhetoric. Fear-mongering and smears work well for the reactionaries because they suck the enthusiasm out of more moderate voters. If the conservatives do their job well, discouraged liberals stay home on election day.
Unfortunately, democratic, divided government inherently requires compromise. When our president compromises, his disappointed former supporters decide their president is a hapless failure, and anything else would be better than he. They stay home on election day.
The president's former supporters forget that, as PJ O'Roarke so eloquently stated, "the Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then get elected and prove it."
The only way the democrats can win back the White House is with inspiring rhetoric that creates lofty expectations.
As most of you likely know, the president has recently met with Chinese President Hu Jintau.
However, you might not be aware of his upcoming meeting tomorrow with US Representative Mel Watt (D-NC) ...
... followed by his reception of French Assemblyman Yves Deniaud.
So, just so we have it straight ...
Hu is on first, Watt is on second, and Yves Deniaud is on third.
"Republicans can't do math," I told my friend. "How do they think government revenues are going to go up when they keep wanting to cut taxes? It doesn't add up."
"I don't know, Matt," he replied, "revenues were on their way up in 2006 after all of those tax cuts, just before Nancy and the democrats took over congress! Then the deficit went wayy up!"
I was a bit taken aback. I was unaware of this, but my republican friend was right. This time, his claim could be backed up by the Congressional Budget Office, i.e. the chart below.
From the Financial Times:
“Over-consumption and a high reliance on credit is the cause of the US financial crisis,” [Zhou Xiaochuan, governor of the Chinese central bank] said. “As the largest and most important economy in the world, the US should take the initiative to adjust its policies, raise its savings ratio appropriately and reduce its trade and fiscal deficits.”
I wonder how we're going to pay for all of these bailouts.
I know the democrats want to pass the bailout, so they're not going to say this, but I'm a pain in the ass, so I will say anything that's on my mind.
If the republicans vote to hand over hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars over to private enterprise, they've lost.
Isn't this obvious? See it?
I don't care who wins next month. The republicans, by voting for something that's against everything they claim to believe about small government, frugality, free enterprise and capitalism, about keeping government small and out of the way of business, everything they say against the nanny state -- they are voting to affirm that everything they said in the past is a lie.
Any time the government has to rush a big spending bill to approval, watch out.
I've been looking for information about what kind of benefit the government expects the bailout to yield. I haven't found much.
Apparently some think not bailing out the banks will lead to big job losses in the financial markets and an even tighter credit crunch. I'm not convinced a bailout is going to change the inevitable. Why is the government hiring bank tellers and not doctors? What about all of the people who have been laid off throughout history because there was no need for their jobs any more? Or in the first place? (jump!)