Here Comes That Rainy Day Feeling Again

by Distributorcap

Every now and then I get the itch to poison my computer with a infection by visiting Fox News.  With Hurricane Irene heading straight for New York and the warnings about the potential flooding and damage shutting down the entire city for the day, surfing for yuks at Fox News (or Red State, Michelle Malkin or any number of other deranged websites) can be a "fun" way to get rid of that rainy day feeling.

Then the dark clouds return when you read utter crap propaganda like this: Do We Really Need a National Weather Service? You truly have to read this with a barf bag handy.

Fox News, which never met a profit-over-people person or company it didn't want to tout, promote or force down the throat of its uneducated viewing audience, decided to publish - on the day Hurricane Irene wreaks havoc on 65,000,000 Americans - an editorial which basically says that having a "for-profit company (which will charge users every time they want to access their data) supply data would be a far superior way to report and analyze the weather than the government-run National Weather Service (NWS)."  You actually have to read this article to see how ridiculous, insipid, greedy and ultimately how full of doublespeak the teabag class has become in their never-ending quest to wring every dollar out of unsuspecting Americans.

The authors are Iain Murray and David Bier - both "experts" at the really creepy Competitive Enterprise Institute - a "think tank" organization (a la the Heritage Foundation) that unabashedly proclaims everything in government and the public sector is wasteful, useless and politicized and that everything that corporations and pure capitalism does is of course good, benevolent and noble.  [Murray is the author of Stealing You Blind: How Government Fatcats Are Getting Rich Off of You. - because corporations, now defined as persons by both Mitt Romney and the SCOTUS, are a cadre of altruistic souls].

Who knew that the government reporting of the weather was some sort of subversive plot to brainwash America into liberal zombies whereas corporate for-profit weather reporting is just so philanthropic?  There is truly no low for people like Murray and Bier.

Their insane arguments are so disingenuous and so obviously bent towards money over public good, I don't know even where to begin.  Let's start with this one.

As it stands today, the public is forced to pay more than $1 billion per year for the NWS.  With the federal deficit exceeding a trillion dollars, the NWS is easily overlooked, but it shouldn’t be. It may actually be dangerous.

The figure of $1 billion for the cost of the NWS come straight from the NWS site.  Let's say that is correct.  That means every man, woman and child pays in America about $3.23 per year to get all the weather statistics, forecasts and data that is pumped to cable news, local news, The Weather Channel and private companies like AccuWeather for free or minimal charges.  Three whole dollars per person!  Can you imagine how much is would cost every person (or news organization) if they had to "register" with a private weather stat provider and pay annual fees or per-access charges.  With recent decade of extreme weather (does anyone remember last winter in the Northeast?) and the fact that climate change (another concept I am positive the CEI would like to see disappear with the privatization of weather reporting) will continue to induce strange and excessive weather patterns - one does need to be a Wall Street wizard to see how profitable private weather reporting will become in a very short time

That $1 billion is actually cheap.  There is no doubt the revenue to those "private" companies would rake in would far exceed the $1 billion the government allocates in funds to the NWS today.  But to the teabag libertarian elitists aristocrats at places like the CEI, since everything the government does is horrible (or at least socialist), - even if it is a public service and more importantly - even if it is cheaper and probably better than what a private organization would charge and provide - the folks on the right have no qualms about saying (rather hammering home) that the NWS is just another insidious communist organization out to infiltrate America with weather queens driving Cadillacs.

Of course Murray and Bier go on to trash the government run NWS as inaccurate, inefficient and misleading with an agenda.  Their anti-government arguments are so old, boring and obvious, you would think with all the money the CEI takes in they could get a little creative in their case against the NWS.  The hate-the-NWS talking points are plagiarized straight from any Koch brother or Karl Rove playbook.

But my favorite piece of duplicitous insanity (read utter bullshit) from Murray and Bier is the following gem:

Today the NWS justifies itself on public interest grounds. It issues severe weather advisories and hijacks local radio and television stations to get the message out. It presumes that citizens do not pay attention to the weather and so it must force important, perhaps lifesaving, information upon them.

If I didn't know better, I would have thought Murray and Bier were submitting an essay for The Onion.  You know that the Laurel & Hardy of the CEI have to be comic geniuses because no one can write and actually publish lines like "force important, perhaps lifesaving information ..." without possessing the spirit of both Joseph Goebbels and Tokyo Rose.  I bet it comes as news to many people that the socialistic and now militaristic NWS actually stages some sort of bloodless broadcasting coup and forces 1000+ local stations, all cable outlets, and radio stations to jam such incredibly Marxist information as "buy water and batteries and take in the lawn furniture" down the throats of an unsuspecting public.

Of course the CEI doesn't bother call out how the incredible costs of the US Defense budget and unfunded wars paid for with the issuance of debt are what is really damaging the economic well being of this country.  But why should they - after all, most the $1 trillion spent by the military goes right to the bottom line of some of their best friends at Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Northrup, General Dynamics and other assorted living-on-the-government-largesse corporations.

And finally, what would be a good corporate-loving article without a line like this

The massive bloat in government should not get a pass just because it’s wrapped in good-of-the-community clothing. NWS services can and are better provided by the private sector.

Just like the banks, tobacco companies or the Ford Pinto - companies are always out to make a better product for the good of society.  The folks at the CEI truly want it to be a Jungle out there, even with the weather.

You can just hear the teabag chant "No weather for immigrants" or "Let it rain on their parade" or some other nonsense.  Let's see how much the teabaggers will like paying for their weather if the NWS was defunded.  Back in 2005, our favorite then-Senator, man-on-dog sex, bury-the-fetus, now Presidential candidate Rick Santorum proposed legislation that would have barred the NWS from publishing weather data to the public when private-sector entities, such as AccuWeather, perform the same function privately (for a fee!). Of course, Santorum neglected say that his campaign checks were being signed by Joel Meyers of AccuWeather, whereas everyone else would have had to pony up to companies like AccuWeather for information.

But why let the facts get in the way of a good excuse to make more money for the folks at the CEI, AccuWeather or the pocketbook of Rick Santorum at the expense of public information, safety or blown down trees. Besides a little rain never hurt anyone in a gated community.

Rick Perry's rally

 By Mustang Bobby.

I don't really care if Texas Gov. Rick Perry's upcoming prayer festival is a big hit or not; hey, whatever gets you through the night, right?  But the folks that he's invited to participate have some interesting interpretations of holy writ, including Oprah being a sign of the Apocalypse, birds dying because of the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, the Statue of Liberty is a pagan idol, and the perennial favorite: Hurricane Katrina was divine retribution for New Orleans being a fun place to visit.

This weekend's prayer rally is intended to serve as the overture to Mr. Perry's run for the presidency, which is all well and good because there's no reason that a person of faith shouldn't run for office... any more than a person who doesn't believe in magical sky faeries or Flying Spaghetti Monsters shouldn't run for office either.  After all, the Constitution is clear on the prohibition of a religious test as a qualification for office.  And I don't have a problem with a candidate or an office holder relying on his faith as a part of his daily life in or out of the office.

What I do have a problem with is a governor or a president or a city council member substituting their dogma for reality or proven fact and turning it into law or public policy.  You can believe all you want in the literal interpretation of the book of Genesis, but you don't get to impose that in place of the glaring proof that the universe was not formed 6,000 years ago and that Adam and Eve palled around with triceratops.  You do not get to proclaim that being gay -- or straight -- is a choice because you're obsessed with other peoples' sex lives and you can't get beyond your adolescent fixation with genitalia.  You don't get to assert that some supernatural being has it in for a major American city because too many people are having altogether too good a time at Mardi Gras.  You can't warn the nation about the non-existent threat of the imposition of Sharia law while defending the right to post the Ten Commandments in a court house, and you can't inform the rest of the world about your stunning lack of irony by condemning Harry Potter for being a harbinger of magic while you're on your way to Mass to eat a cookie and sip some wine that has been magically transformed into the body and blood of Jesus H. Christ.  In short, you can't project your own psychological shortcomings onto the rest of society and use your religion as the excuse for your behavior.

Certainly a man of faith can run for the presidency and win.  We all remember the administrations of Presidents William Jennings Bryan, Pat Robertson, and Mike Huckabee, right?  The electorate of America may have its flaws and foibles, but it has so far done well by applying the doctrine of the separation of church and state to candidates as well as the Constitution.

(Cross-posted from Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

"You vote 'yes' if you believe 'yes.'"

By Mustang Bobby.

Via TPM

The House was debating a bill last night that would provide up to $7.4 billion in health care aid to rescue and recovery workers who have faced health problems since their work in the wake of the September 11 attacks. The bill ultimately failed to get the needed two-thirds majority, 255-159, and Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) was not happy about it. Not one bit.

(Cross-posted from Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

Truth in Comics

By Creature


If it's Sunday, it's Truth in Comics.

Disservice

By Mustang Bobby.

There's some kind of karma going on when the Republicans raise a hue and cry over a Democrat being caught in a lie or a misstatement... and it turns out there are several examples of Republicans having done the same thing. The examination of Richard Blumenthal's history while running for the Senate in Connecticut led us to Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL), who is trying to win the Senate seat once occupied by President Obama; it turns out he made some "misstatements" about his military record. And now Gov. Jan Brewer (R-AZ) is doing a little creative writing on her own.

Gov. Jan Brewer said in a recent interview that her father died fighting Nazis in Germany. In fact, the death of Wilford Drinkwine came 10 years after World War II had ended.

During the war, Drinkwine worked as a civilian supervisor for a naval munitions depot in Hawthorne, Nev. He died of lung disease in 1955 in California.

Ms. Brewer's umbrage was triggered by people comparing the new Arizona immigration law to Germany in the Third Reich. While invoking the Nazis for everything is both gauche and trivialized the unbelievable horror of that regime, it's not an excuse to project your late father into the cast of Band of Brothers. That's like me saying my father made the ultimate sacrifice at Pearl Harbor. Aside from the fact that he was in the Navy during World War II, he wasn't at Pearl Harbor (he was fifteen at the time), he never saw combat, and he's still alive. Other than that, though....

The real offense here isn't that candidates are trying to mislead voters about their war record for the purpose of winning an election or shield themselves from criticism. Exaggeration and embellishment is a human flaw, more often than not harmless; "I caught a fish THIS big," and if all the people who claimed they were at Woodstock had actually showed up, there would have been a million of them on Yasger's farm in upstate New York in August 1969. What it does do, in this case, is diminish the service of those who actually did serve in Vietnam or helped liberate Europe on the ground in 1944. The embellishers can't speak for the real service done by those who were really there, and trying to horn in on it after the fact is a disservice to those who really served.

(Cross-posted from Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

‘Obamanomics’ is working

By Creature

"If Obama was a Republican, we would hear a never-ending drumbeat of news stories about markets voting in favor of the President." --Dan Greenhaus, economic strategist.

All those crying socialist should read BusinessWeek's new piece on Obama and the economy. I won't go so far as to say we're out of the woods, but credit must be given and barely any has been given so far.

Your moment of Rachel

By Creature

Maddow destroys the Right, again. Brilliant.

Oh no we can't!

By Capt. Fogg

I know, the worst thing one can do is to feel shame for your community, your country, your fellow man. Patriotism, being the same as dishonest self-promotion and hyperbolic Chauvinism, I'm certainly being unpatriotic by saying that the relentlessly partisan viciousness, the partisan slander and libel and indeed the abuse of political and religious freedom by my own community is shameful. Certainly others who agree with me have been so labeled.

Recently some local students at the Martin County High School Junior Achievement Club put together a website and planned a "Recovery Rally" to bring attention to the unemployment and the high foreclosure and business failure rate which plagues our county. They put together a video with the object of sending it to the President as an invitation to attend. It ended with a proud "yes we can!" Some would call that sort of community spirit and enthusiasm inspiring, others:

COMMUNISM! MARXISM!

Imagine allowing citizens to petition for redress of grievances! Why that's just like Pol Pot or Ho Chi Min! What kind of good ol' cracker conservatives would permit that without a fight? I mean it would have been OK to invite Bush and indeed when he made a five minute appearance after Hurricane Frances flattened several counties; when he disrupted critical activities at the Red Cross and then promptly forgot about us, he was sold as a hero, but then, he wasn't a Marxist, Muslim, Communist, Kenyan Antichrist who pals around with Terrorists and murders old women, you betcha.

Yes I'm ashamed. I'm ashamed at the letters from idiots who write to the local paper. I'm ashamed of people who want to pull their kids out of a school that allows kids to participate in peaceful attempts to attract government interest -- because Government is, by the Gospel of St. Ronald, all evil. Diana Blackard went on Fox last week to howl at the moon about her daughter's future being ruined by having said "yes we can" in public.

“I’m concerned about this turning up 20 years from now when she’s running for political officer [sic] herself, trying to get a high-profile job,”

Certainly it constitutes paling around with terrorists to promote local businesses. It's almost treason to suggest that the people can do anything at all in a democracy without it being communism and Fascism. It's dangerous to respect the president, said another deranged citizen writing to the paper.

"since the dems think respect is given like all their other entitlements."

Hard to know what he means but then insanity is like that, Republican politics are like that.

"I resent dealing with people who believe they can spit on us and burn our flag "

says the dishonest but passionate Fox-Republican of the President of the United States -- without any apparent concern that he's done neither, or anything remotely like it.

"Filled with vile hatred, there is no common ground"

says a writer of all who support any effort to let the government be the government, all who are willing to use the government to serve the people, all those who reject the cancerous, self-hating, self-defeating Fox-Fundamentalist doctrines choking the life out of our country. Unaware like so many of the brown-shirt thugs of Martin County Florida of being a maggot, a vile worm eating away at the heart of America.

(cross posted from Human Voices)

Breaking News: Costa Rican Legislature convenes emergency session to ban Limbaugh

Country united in not wanting right wing hatemonger; OAS sends out advisory calling for similar action

By J. Thomas Duffy

Even though it may not occur for five-years, Costa Rica is not taking any chances, its' legislature convening in an emergency session today, voting unanimously to ban controversial radio clown Rush Limbaugh from entering the country, or, otherwise establishing "any type of domestic residency," as he has stated he may do.



President Óscar Arias quickly signaled his endorsement of the vote, citing "the protection of our citizens from this drug-addict hatemonger is our utmost concern."

The country's Judiciary branch, the Supreme Court, in an unusual, and non-scheduled session, also voted unanimously, that the bill passed by the legislature is valid, and completely legal and, in strongly worded language, stated it would "not entertain any challenges" to the ruling.

Limbaugh, on his radio program yesterday, continuing to bash the pending healthcare reform package in Congress, vowed, if the bill passes, he will leave the country.

Think Progress has the details;

CALLER: If the health care bill passes, where would you go for health care yourself? And the second part of that is, what would happen to the doctors, do they have to participate in the federal program, or could they opt out of it? [...]

LIMBAUGH: My guess in even in Canada and even in the UK, doctors have opted out. And once they’ve opted, they can’t see anybody Medicare, Medicaid, or what will become the exchanges. They have to have a clientele of private patients that will pay them a retainer and it’ll be a very small practice. I don’t know if that’s been outlawed in the Senate bill. I don’t know. I’ll just tell you this, if this passes and it’s five years from now and all that stuff gets implemented — I am leaving the country. I’ll go to Costa Rica/

In a developing related matter, the Organization of American States (OAS) issued an rare advisory to its' member nations, urging them to adopt, and pass, similar legislation as Costa Rica.

In the advisory, Secretary General of the Organization of American States (OAS), José Miguel Insulza stated it should be "our goal to keep this racist, cheeseburger-that-sweats, wind bag out of our hemisphere."

In a flash survey conducted by The Garlic, over 89% of Limbaugh's Dittoheads contacted believed that "Costa Rica" was a "new, discount department store for Illegal Aliens" and over 65% wanted to know of the closest one in their area.


Bonus Limbaugh Riffs

NFL Singing Rush's Tune?

Jesus, It Sounded Like A Violation of the Rico Act!

Top Ten Cloves: Things Overhead While The Nobel Peace Prize Committee Reviewed Rush Limbaugh's Nomination




(Cross Posted at The Garlic)

The terrible shock of reality

By Mustang Bobby.

Steve Benen examines the foolish inconsistency of the right-wing outrage over the plans to put terrorists on trial in civilian courts.

In 2002, the Bush Justice Department put Zacarias Moussaoui, an al Qaeda terrorist often referred to as the "20th 9/11 hijacker," on trial in a federal court near D.C. No one, at the time, said then-President Bush was putting American lives at risk or undermining U.S. national security interests with the trial. Despite the conservative apoplexy of the last week, the Moussaoui trial was simply considered appropriate and routine.

[...]

Likewise, let's not forget that Rudy Giuliani, one of the leading Republican attack dogs on President Obama, said he considered the Moussaoui trial a testament to the strength of our legal system and the American dedication to the "rule of law." Giuliani called the verdict "a symbol of American justice," and said the trial itself might improve America's standing internationally. After Moussaoui was convicted by a civilian jury, the former mayor boasted, "America won tonight."

This gets to the larger point that Jon Stewart made when he interviewed Lou Dobbs: if, as the right-wing talkers are proclaiming, Americans think the country is "out of control" and they're worried about what's going to happen next, why is it that all of this angst and concern is suddenly being expressed when we have a Democrat in the White House? Didn't these issues exist before January 20, 2009?

Of course they did. But the reason the wingers didn't shriek and carry on was because it was their guy who was in charge and to raise any concerns about how he was handling the job or question his motives was disloyal. And no matter how rotten the economy was, no matter how bureaucratic and expensive monopolized healthcare was, no matter badly the education system was crumbling before their eyes, no matter how incompetent the government was at providing disaster relief, and no matter how many people were dying in a war that had been instigated against a nation that never raised a hand to us, they were comfortable in the knowledge that the president was one of them. Even if he was comfortably numb, he was a known quantity, and everything was going to be all right -- it's Morning in America -- so no matter how terrible reality was, it was better than the great unknown: that Other Guy who might not even have been born here will take away your guns, turn your kids gay in the military, and tear down the Jefferson Memorial to replace it with a mosque. Or something; that's what they keep telling them on the radio, anyway.

What's piteously ironic is that if we had had that kind of mindset in 1776, we'd still be a British colony. The teabaggers who think they're emulating the Spirit of '76 by demonstrating against the tyranny of our government are actually trying to maintain the status quo that we had when things were rotten. Picture Lou Dobbs, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck railing against the rabble-rousing John Adams, the agnostic Thomas Jefferson, and that secular humanist Benjamin Franklin who wanted to rebel against the system and replace it with a dangerously experimental form of democracy; talk about a radical socialist plot. No matter how insidiously oppressive the British colonial government was, it was still safe and secure as opposed to the scary adventure of going -- literally and figuratively -- into the wilderness of the New World or, at the very least, trying to make things better for everyone, not just the rich white guys who didn't want to pay their taxes.

The worst thing that Barack Obama did was tell us that not only were things not all rosy, it was going to take some hard work and sacrifice to make things better. After eight years of an artificial high, reality is a terrible shock.

(Cross-posted from Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

A thousand points of blight

By Carl

Much has been made by conservatives about the private sector and solutions to the problems that confront this nation and this world. Indeed, one might sum these positions as "Thousand Points of Light," a phrase coined by Peggy Noonan, renowned drunk and speechwriter for President George Bush the Elder, way back in the late '80s.

Now, this is not a horrible thing to say: it's our community and people ought to take an active interest in helping their fellow man. Every religion and spiritual believe system talks about giving or sharing and indeed, we're taught way back in kindergarten to share.

When it works, that is. When it does not..... mehhhhhh....

It's hard to overstate the crisis facing charitable giving today. So let me just say it as plainly as I can: Much of current philanthropic giving, by foundations and individuals, neither meets the needs of our charitable organizations nor addresses some of our most urgent public needs.

Foundation practices today are too bureaucratic, inflexible and cautious, and too focused on short-term objectives. Too often, the process and procedures of grant making are more tailored to the needs of foundations and their trustees than to the requirements of nonprofits.

At the same time, our depressed economy is exacerbating this crisis—and making it all the more crucial that we address it. A severe reduction in available public and private funds has put many important nonprofit groups, especially at the local level, in grave danger. Cutbacks in their budgets and programs are depriving their clients of essential health and social services.

A number of nonprofit associations and foundations have called on the government to provide more funds and loans to struggling nonprofit organizations. Such aid would no doubt help, but the primary responsibility for maintaining the strength of the nonprofit community should rest with philanthropic institutions and individual donors.

I can sum the cause up in a short phrase: people don't give to what they need to give to, they give to what they want to give to.

Now, again, the free market is invoked here by those on the right: "Well, if cleaning up a river is desirable, then people will clean up the river."

If only charitable giving worked that way, but it doesn't. It does not exist in a vacuum, isolated from the social structure of people's lives. It is intertwined, and in some cultures deeply intertwined, with other social values.

Prestige, for one. If I want to be "seen" in society, I don't give to the river-cleaning charity unless someone higher up the social food chain is in charge and throws a big party. No, I give to the local ballet, or museum so I can be seated in the orchestra or be invited to the gala opening of the Vermeer exhibit.

Personal impact, for another. If I or a family member contracts a disease, I'm probably going to give some of my charitable attention to the foundation fighting that disease.

Indeed, at some levels of society, millions of dollars are given to hospitals to open a (Your Name Here) Prostate Oncology Wing, because (Your Name Here) contracted prostate cancer. Which is hardly charitable giving. In truth, it's making a reservation at the finest table in the restaurant with the chef's (surgeon's) personal attention lavished on you, at the expense of other people who can't afford his services now.

Or to churches. Now, no one is denying the importance of religion in American culture, let's be clear about this. Like it or not, religion is an integral part of our society, and people give the lion's share of their charity to churches.

That's the facts, Jack. Roughly half of individual contributions go to religions. We hope those religions are actively pursuing programs that assist society, but let's face facts: feeding the poor, a noble effort, is not cleaning up a river and very few churches involve themselves in environmental programs.

Despite God's decree that this is the planet we men have been given dominion over. God might be a bit angry at us for our lack of attention.

But note something in the quote I pulled from the article I've linked to. Let me highlight it here: A number of nonprofit associations and foundations have called on the government to provide more funds and loans to struggling nonprofit organizations.

What goes around, comes around on the merry-go-round. If conservatives are so all-fired about personal responsibility, then why is this phenomenon happening? Why are charities begging Obama for money? What happened to those tax cuts that Bush gave back to the rich over the past decade?

You don't think those folks spent it or put it in their mattresses or some hedge fund, do you?

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

A dying screed

By Creature

I haven't weighed in on the Professor Gates, Officer Crowley, and President Obama story yet. I'm slow to react, I think, because, even after all these years, I'm still amazed by the stupid coming out of our media and the Right Wing noise machine that they feed into.

When Lynn Sweet asked the Gates question Wednesday night, my ears certainly pricked up. I was intrigued to see how the president would respond and I was pleased with his answer (and all his answers since, especially Friday's). I think he was right to delve in, despite it being a local matter, despite the potential distraction to healthcare reform. If he, as the first black president, can't answer a question that has race at its core, then who can? Like the man said, it's part of his portfolio.

Meanwhile, the Right in this country are perfectly content to sweep racism under the rug until it serves their own purpose, until they perceive themselves as the victims of it in some perverse reverse fashion. For them, it's all vapors the moment anyone who's actually experienced racism speaks up. And, with a media ready to provide them an uncritical couch, it's hard to see any end. Thankfully, however, there is an end. Not that racism will ever go away, but those on the Right who feel unduly burdened by it (while refusing to see it in themselves) are a dying breed. Their end is about demographics. It's about math and, thankfully, the math is on the side of diversity and, hopefully, tolerance.

Libby lover lands new gig to protest his innocence

By J. Thomas Duffy

What is CNN doing, recomposing The Bush Grindhouse, or, a Reader's Digest-version of the White House Iraq Group (you remember, Andy Card's in-house ad agency charged with selling the lies to invade and occupy Iraq).

And, HER, of all people.



Among other atrocities, the chief fundraiser/letter-writer for the Scooter Libby Defense Fund.

Mary Matalin signs on as CNN contributor

Republican strategist Mary Matalin has signed on to serve as a CNN political contributor, the network announced Thursday.

[snip]

"As one of the best-known and best-connected strategists in the country, Mary will join our line up of top Republican analysts including Bill Bennett, Alex Castellanos, and Ed Rollins," said Sam Feist, CNN political director and vice president of Washington programming. "We are thrilled that CNN viewers will be able to tap into Mary's vast political experience advising candidates and presidents from both inside and outside of the White House."

Matalin, a veteran political commentator, served as a senior White House advisor to both President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. She was a key strategist in President George H.W. Bush's 1988 campaign, and was appointed chief of staff for the Republican National Committee after his successful bid. She was also a key strategist in the 1992, 2000 and 2004 Republican presidential campaigns.

Nearly a year ago, John Mashek, in U.S. News and World Report, called Matalin "worst of the new breed of political consultants";

Matalin learned her politics from the late Lee Atwater, a gunslinger from South Carolina. In this cycle, Matalin signed on first with the presidential quest of then Sen. George Allen of Virginia before Allen imploded in his 2006 Senate race. She then moved over to former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee, who was an early dropout.

This is the same Matalin who was a close adviser to Vice President Cheney in the controversial run-up to the war in Iraq and its disastrous aftermath.

I mean, Jesus, they almost have enough PartyofNoicans to filibuster Obama.

Something Steve Benen also bemoans;

Matalin not only joins the growing list of Republican analysts on CNN's political team (joining Bill Bennett, Alex Castellanos, and Ed Rollins), she's also the latest former staffer in the Bush White House to make the transition to jobs with major media outlets.

It's hard to keep up with them all. Michael Gerson (Washington Post), Sara Taylor (MSNBC), Tony Snow (CNN), Frances Fragos Townsend (CNN), Nicole Wallace (CBS News), Dan Bartlett (CBS News), Jeff Ballabon (CBS News), Tony Fratto (CNBC) and, of course, Karl Rove (Fox News, Newsweek, and Wall Street Journal) have all gone from working for Bush/Cheney to working for the mainstream media.

It was just last Fall, just before the election, that CNN added the #1 Cheney Fluffer to their ranks, Stephen Hayes.

I wonder, if she helps John King with his questions, will he let her play with his Magic Board.

The thing to watch is how often she brings up how completely innocent Scooter Libby was, working him into storylines, and her convoluted answers, of ignoring reality and pumping up the Bush Grindhouse.

One thing, for "the best political team on television" to make this a bit more easier to swallow, if that is, at all, possible.

Use their arsenal of High Tech Hijinks to do something with THAT VOICE of hers.

At least coach her to speak using her mouth, instead of her nose.

Or hire Fran Drescher, to balance it out.




(Cross Posted at The Garlic)