Wednesday Morning Open Thread

The world is awaiting today's release of the Apple Tablet and President Obama's SOTU address.

Remember John Kiriakou, the former CIA operative who claimed waterboarding worked and caused the detainees to spill their guts after just seconds? Now he says he was wrong (or he made it up, take your pick.)

Dumb idea of the week: Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to outsource California prisoners to Mexico -- in new prisons paid for by the U.S.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< "Shoebomber" Richard Reid Loses Court Bid to Ease Restrictions | London Yemen Conference Begins at 1:00 pm ET >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Short version of the SOTU (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by jbindc on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:16:13 AM EST
    "The State of our Union is strong.  Blah, blah, blah......(applause 27 times that interrupts him with one side of the room standing and cheering and the other sitting on their hands looking like they ate expired dairy products).  Good stuff and good things that have happened - all because of me.  Bad stuff - not my fault. It's the fault of the guy who was here before me.  More blah, blah, blah.  Thank you and God Bless America!  Good night!"

    Bob McDonnell's Republican response:  "Hey!  We're not in power, so it can't be our fault what a mess we're in.  We have amnesia as to the years of 2001-2009, so really it's only gay people and independent-minded women and brown people (who are probasbly here illegally anyway) who created this mess.  Oh yeah - it's also poor people's fault for not pulling themselves up by their bootstraps.  Gosh, I really hate poor people.  Anyway, God Bless America!"

    I just now saved you 2-3 hours of your time tongiht.

    Not bad (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:19:36 AM EST
    I wasn't planning on watching anyway since I've lost any ability to tolerate the sound of the guy's voice.

    Me. too - it's awful. (none / 0) (#22)
    by Anne on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:07:57 AM EST
     And I can even "hear" his voice when I read what he says...it's kind of a curse, really.

    I will probably skim the transcript, which means I can also avoid all the hoopla that accompanies these things.

    I found this interesting (my bold):

    When Mr. Obama presents his first State of the Union address on Wednesday evening, aides said he would accept responsibility, though not necessarily blame, for failing to deliver swiftly on some of the changes he promised a year ago. But he will not, aides said, accede to criticism that his priorities are out of step with the nation's.

    As Mr. Obama navigates a crossroads of his presidency, a moment when he signals what lessons he has drawn from his first year in office, the public posture of the White House is that any shortcomings are the result of failing to explain effectively what they were doing -- and why. He will acknowledge making mistakes in pursuit of his agenda, aides said, but will not toss the agenda overboard in search of a more popular one.


    But advisers to the president said the speech would not contain a laundry list of new programs, suggesting that the message and not the substance would be receiving the largest makeover in an effort to ease the political unrest that has set in across the Democratic Party.

    Translation: A lecture, more words, back to campaign rhetoric.  Not his fault.



    If that is what (none / 0) (#32)
    by lilburro on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:41:20 AM EST
    Obama is going to say, I'll be ecstatic.  His bully pulpit problem is one of my biggest complaints.

    Excellent; now I can go to the gym (none / 0) (#9)
    by Democratic Cat on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:34:38 AM EST
    I'll be pleasantly surprised if he blames the other guy or even Republicans generally. He hasn't done that nearly enough up 'til now. Now if he can just do it in such a way that it doesn't sound like he's lecturing folks. Ahh, a girl can dream.

    Huge vote out of Oregon (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by andgarden on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:23:15 AM EST
    The people willingly raise taxes on the wealthy.

    Memo to Congress and the Administration. . .

    No attention (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by waldenpond on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:33:43 AM EST
    I notice it is getting zero attention.  It doesn't match the teabagger meme.

    what a coinkydink (none / 0) (#34)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:48:12 AM EST
    last there was no mention of the third rate burglary on any of the network news programs.

    Easy to predict (none / 0) (#10)
    by jbindc on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:39:12 AM EST
    The median household income in Oregon is $48,735 (which is below the national average of $50,740), and 25.1% of the population over age 25 has a college degree, so small chance of lots of millionaires living out there.

    It's always easy to vote for a tax increase if it doesn't affect you.


    this does beg the question (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by CST on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:56:46 AM EST
    If it's really so easy - why hasn't it happened once before in the last 80 years?

    Or then again... (none / 0) (#15)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:55:44 AM EST
    ...Not.  28.7/1000, ranking them ahead of such millionaire playgrounds as Texas.  

    Yes (none / 0) (#18)
    by jbindc on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:57:58 AM EST
    23rd in the nation - not tons of them there.

    Thanks for making my point!


    Don't see a "point". (4.00 / 3) (#33)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:43:03 AM EST
    You talk about "millionaires" when it doesn't only effect them.  You talk about it "being easy to predict" without any clue as to the history or culture of taxes or tax increases in OR.  

    Lots of nonsense, but no point.


    Let's see (none / 0) (#38)
    by jbindc on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 12:03:46 PM EST
    Oregon has a history of voting down tax increase measures (as do many states). In fact, they haven't voted for an income tax increase since the 30's.  This year, with lots of budget cutting for state resources, especially schools, and a rising unemployment rate (which means more people are not even close to the individual threshhold of $125,000 or couples' threshhold of $250,000), voters decided to increase the tax on the wealthiest and in a separate measure, up the minumum corporate tax from $10 to $150.

    None of this is surprising, as most people do not make close to $125,000, even in Oregon, so my original point was that it is always easier to vote for a tax increase for someone else if you don't have to live with the results.  Notice I didn't say I disagreed with the results.

    Time for to update those reading glasses, Boo Boo.


    Awww... (none / 0) (#39)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 12:15:22 PM EST
    ...aren't you just soo mature with your Boo Boo's and your 2's.  

    Yep (none / 0) (#40)
    by jbindc on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 12:39:49 PM EST
    Very witty and pithy comeback, btw. :)

    Then doesn't that mean (none / 0) (#68)
    by lilburro on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 04:38:21 PM EST
    that almost 25 other states should have done the same?  Many of which are in the deep South?  Plus the states most likely to lean liberal (or in other words vote for tax increases on the wealthy) are in the top half of the millionaires per person graph you provide below.

    And it should be easy to argue for progressive taxation, especially in times like these.  But apparently it's not.


    Tax the rich... (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:30:55 AM EST
    ...passes in OR (first one approved by a statewide vote since 1930.  What's the underlying message there?

    Yesterday Oregon voters delivered a huge victory for progressives by approving Measures 66 and 67, raising taxes on incomes over $250,000 and large corporations to generate $733 million to close the state's budget deficit. The Oregon legislature had approved the taxes last summer, but a corporate/teabagger alliance organized to put it to voters in a referendum.

    One wonders if the national media will cover this victory at all - much less at the levels of the Massachusetts Senate race.


    Oh, I forgot--not doom and gloom enough for the sky is falling crowd.

    Let us see... (none / 0) (#37)
    by kdog on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 12:01:54 PM EST
    how the Oregonian rich tax the Oregonian non-rich to cover the increase...lay-offs?  pay cuts? price increases?

    Though I do support the effort to balance the budget, I worry for the unintended consequences...might just be the cynicism you don't like talkin', might be all the rich snakes I come across in my business given me a false impression...but I think these cats are rich for a reason, they know how to make the other guy eat it...other guy here being working class Oregonians.


    About lay offs.. (none / 0) (#61)
    by Raskolnikov on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 02:36:07 PM EST
    ...I know a lot of companies, larger ones at least, have done either 10% across the board staff reductions, or in food service, switched to more skeletal staffing.  The fortunate (ha!) thing about this is that there isn't a lot of room for further layoffs.  But you're right, the cost of this will certainly be externalized to some degree, but it will be interesting to see how and how much.  I don't think people will make spiteful business decisions because of taxed personal wealth, but hopefully businesses don't leave Oregon for a better tax rate in a neighboring state.

    I fear in their minds... (none / 0) (#62)
    by kdog on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 02:52:33 PM EST
    it is not considered "spiteful", simply "good business"...my total costs are up so I must cut costs to maintain my profit margin.

    I'm not saying there is never a time to raise taxes...only that before you even think of raises taxes you take a long hard look at the budget...state budgets, and especially the federal budget, never seem to get that long hard objective look...too many cronies on the teet.


    Please, we still have a pitifully low business tax (none / 0) (#69)
    by caseyOR on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 04:47:59 PM EST
    rate here in Oregon. Any business that pulls out of Oregon because of this vote will be acting out of spite and spite alone.

    As others have noted, we have not increased the income tax since the 1930s. And that $10 minimum business income tax was a travesty. Enron, when it owned Portland General Electric, got away with paying just $10 at the height of its earnings.

    The opposition to these measures was fueled by three groups: anti-tax fanatics, the Oregon republican Party, and business organizations who were p!ssed off because the legislature didn't bow down and grovel before them this time. Business opponents of the measures actually talked publically about how they knew the taxes were needed, that they knew Oregon was just half a step behind California in going over the cliff, but those mean old Democrats hurt their feelings.

    We have the shortest school year in the nation; we have one of the highest unemployment rates; we have one of the highest levels of hunger in the country. These measures mean survival, not growth, just survival for many.

    Don't shed any tears for those who will pay the higher tax. They are still doing just fine.


    Selling concern (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by me only on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:34:29 AM EST
    From The Hill

    White House officials acknowledged the freeze wouldn't fix the country's red ink problem but would show the government is concerned about it.

    Wow, from now on I am not actually going to solve problems, I am just going to be concerned about them.  That will be much less stressful.

    Can't tell you all how much (none / 0) (#16)
    by ruffian on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:56:26 AM EST
    I hate the clumsily telegraphed, meaningless, message sending. Reminds me way too much of the Bush's. Message: we care

    Pretty mind-boggling that the (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Anne on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:14:49 AM EST
    WH believes the problems are the result of bad messaging, and their failure to adequately explain themselves - so what we are seeing on the proposed spending freeze is the new and improved message?  Yeesh.

    Memo to Obama: there is more to leadership than messaging.  David Plouffe - or any top-flight advertising agency - can set you up with a good message, but without leadership, it's just words...


    I guess it is better than (none / 0) (#19)
    by me only on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:05:07 AM EST
    Bush, who at times seemed to be saying:

    We are considering caring.


    "I feel your pain" (none / 0) (#23)
    by Cream City on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:08:50 AM EST
    said the same thing, but it sure sounded better.

    And, of course, it came with actions that helped people afford college and buy homes, for example.  I know there were more, but those were two Bill Clinton measures that helped to move the economy; they came too late for me, but that meant that I knew from experience how much they would have helped us -- and I saw how they helped others, which helped us all.  For those reasons, some of Obama's expected proposals along these lines may help again, but this is a far different economy, so -- again -- I doubt that they will help enough.


    And it did not come along with (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by ruffian on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:28:24 AM EST
    press releases that said 'we are trying to send the message that we feel your pain'.  It is the naked obviousness of it that drives me the crazy, in addition to, of course, the lack of meaningful action.

    tablet and sotu (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:53:19 AM EST
    from another of my favorite blogs:

    Today's the day we've been waiting for: the day our Great Leader stands before our Great Nation to take stock of previous successes and announce an inspiring initiative that will rock our world.

    That's right: Steve Jobs introduces the Apple Tablet this morning!

    Oh, and Barry will be delivering the State of the Union address tonight.

    lol (none / 0) (#17)
    by ruffian on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:57:52 AM EST
    I know which leader I follow blindly.

    Yup (none / 0) (#21)
    by nycstray on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:07:05 AM EST
    Can't wait to see the tablet in person.

    me too (none / 0) (#30)
    by ruffian on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:29:34 AM EST
    They sure do a great job of building up anticipation.

    part of me wants him to (none / 0) (#31)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:32:32 AM EST
    walk out on the stage with a spiral bound notebook and a ball point and say something like

    'hahahahah pwned!'


    Live link (none / 0) (#35)
    by nycstray on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:52:03 AM EST
    better (none / 0) (#42)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 12:41:22 PM EST
    16 gig base (none / 0) (#52)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 01:27:57 PM EST


    thats impressive
    can you say windfall profits?


    IPad (none / 0) (#53)
    by CST on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 01:33:28 PM EST

    As someone (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by jbindc on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 01:46:28 PM EST
    on another site said...

    "I thought all iPads came with wings."

    (it really does sound like a feminine hygiene product, doesn't it?)


    I thought (none / 0) (#55)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 02:07:29 PM EST
    they should call it the IMaxiPad

    but seriously (none / 0) (#57)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 02:09:50 PM EST
    830 bucks for the 64 gig 3G.

    they are going to make a lot of money.
    including some from me


    I'm thinking it might be nice (none / 0) (#58)
    by nycstray on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 02:13:48 PM EST
    to tote along with my camera when out and about shooting. Be nice to check images on a larger screen without the bulk and weight of a laptop.

    I never got (none / 0) (#59)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 02:17:10 PM EST
    an IPhone cause all the apps on available dont make a lot of sense to me.  screen is to damn small.
    this totally makes sense.
    I think this is the future.
    particularly the 3G version.

    I don't have the phone either (none / 0) (#60)
    by nycstray on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 02:22:24 PM EST
    and I have toyed with getting a Kindle :) The fact I can use it with my camera is almost sealing the deal for me . . .

    the kindle (none / 0) (#64)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 03:02:20 PM EST
    is now a doorstop

    Thoughts on politics of HCR (5.00 / 3) (#27)
    by CST on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:22:42 AM EST
    There seem to be two schools of thought here on what can be done.  The first school of thought is "the bill is poison, everyone hates it, Dems should kill it or they will get killed in 2010".  The second school of thought is "pass the bill with a reconcilliation attachment that fixes the problems in the senate bill".

    Needless to say, I am in the second camp.  The problem with the first camp, as I see it, is that if you accept the framing that the bill is poison, than it is irrelevant whether or not it passes.  Those Dems who voted for it are out in 2010 regardless.  Based on the fact that they already voted for it, and Republicans will run against that.

    Personally, I think the only reason the bill is poison is because people don't know what is in it, they don't really understand it, and the political optics of the whole negotiation period were terrible.  If they manage to pass the bill, Dems will have something concrete that they can stand up and defend, rather than talking about something they spent the better part of a year trying to pass - and failed at.

    I guess what I'm saying is, if the Dems will lose because of HCR, they've already lost.  Passing it doesn't necessarily mean winning in 2010, but it does mean we get some form of HCR before they are all gone.

    I realize there are many people here who think nothing is better than the something we might get.  I do NOT share that view.  But even if I did, I still think that passing a "fixed" bill would be the politically smart thing to do.

    The Kiriakou story (none / 0) (#2)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:18:08 AM EST
    is being very badly framed by media reports.

    It's absolutely not new information that he didn't have firsthand information about the waterboarding.  He said so at the time in his interview on ABC that caused all the fuss.

    The fact that the media is making a big to-do about this "revelation" now means only that they either weren't really paying attention at the time or that their memories are pathologically short or that a fair number of them have an agenda they're trying to push.

    What he had to say about Zubayda was never really more than mildly interesting because, as he said at the time, he was only repeating what he'd heard, not what he knew.  The only thing that's new now is that he says he no longer has confidence that what he'd heard was actually true.  Big yawn, IMO.

    re: this torture insanity (none / 0) (#12)
    by lilburro on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:49:40 AM EST
    "A former colleague of mine asked him during the conversation one day, 'What would you do if we decided to let you go one day?' And he said, 'I would kill every American and Jew I could get my hands on...It's nothing personal. You're a nice guy. But this is who I am.'"
    [from the abc interview]

    He came up with a lot of "information" considering it was all second-hand.  And I thought these guys were supposed to be professionals anyway -  did he really go on ABC based on gossip and not the notes we were supposed to be using for analysis?

    Either Kiriakou is a major, major @sshole or there is something deeply wrong with the CIA.  Both are probably true.  I'd love to know why the CIA is leading a misinformation campaign amongst its own though.  That would be news.  


    The lesson of Kiriakou (none / 0) (#24)
    by jondee on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:12:54 AM EST
    is how easily an orchestrated disinformation/p.r damage control campaign can be disseminated through the cooperation of 'friendly' channels in the media.

    Carl Bernstein told us about the CIA's use of 'friendly assets' in the media thirty years ago -- an apparently still-in-operation propaganda beast that was built up during the Cold War.

    Cuz we cant handle the truth.


    Healthcare (none / 0) (#5)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:27:02 AM EST
    With HCR looking bleak at best, I decided to see what options were available for me. I'm self employed and not old enough for Medicare.

    I found Illinois has a "Veterans Care" program where I can qualify for insurance through the state at a really low rate. It's part of Medicaid so there is a salary level cap, but it may be useful for some others out there that are in the same boat as I am. I would think other states would have similar programs. It's worth checking out.

    From Wiki re shoe bomber: (none / 0) (#11)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:48:27 AM EST
    Effects on airline security

    Concern about bombs possibly concealed in shoes led to the new requirement of all airline passengers departing from an airport within the USA having to pass through security in socks or bare feet while their shoes were scanned for bombs.[21] However, scanners do not find PETN in shoes or strapped to a person. A chemical test is needed.[citation needed][22]  [Italics added.]

    I want one of (none / 0) (#14)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 10:53:51 AM EST
    Never mind that fish... (none / 0) (#44)
    by desertswine on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 12:49:20 PM EST
    did you see that goal? Amazing.

    that took a minute (none / 0) (#56)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 02:08:44 PM EST
    but yes I did.

    Guy who made the ACORN (none / 0) (#20)
    by ruffian on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:06:46 AM EST
    'pimp' video arrested in Louisiana for trying to bug Mary Landrieu's office. Go to nola.com to read the story. My linky goodness is not working for some reason. This guy is a real piece of work.

    That guy is such a tool... (none / 0) (#48)
    by kdog on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 01:04:39 PM EST
    making it out to be a bad thing to help people who we as a society only want to se chained and caged.

    Though I like it better when he picks on congress-critters as opposed to low-level ACORN employees...funny which pickin' on gets him in the most trouble though isn't it?


    Instant Karma (none / 0) (#49)
    by jondee on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 01:11:48 PM EST
    hit somebody right in the face.

    Gotta love it right?... (none / 0) (#51)
    by kdog on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 01:24:42 PM EST
    that'll teach ya to pick on poor prostitutes and one of the few outfits around who are willing to help them...even if it's Landrieu's name on the forms under "victim".

    Cool photo (none / 0) (#26)
    by jbindc on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 11:15:15 AM EST
    With the right technology (none / 0) (#45)
    by jondee on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 12:50:39 PM EST
    we all become "it's all good" Spinozas.

    Luckily, as the Dude said, I still j*rk off manually.


    Figuratively speaking, of course (none / 0) (#50)
    by jondee on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 01:13:38 PM EST
    its a big button (none / 0) (#41)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 12:40:01 PM EST

    Reasons to oppose... (none / 0) (#43)
    by kdog on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 12:41:51 PM EST
    any and all tax increases in NYC...a couple of examples of where the money goes in today's paper.

    First, the Health Dept. sends out spies to nighclubs to see how well club owners are harassing their customers.  I wonder how much this whole operation cost...if we didn't pay for the suits we at least paid for the dry-cleaning, the drinks, the full salary of the mental giant with the fancy title who ok'd this, etc, etc, etc.

    Another from the DA's office...two exotic dancers with the nerve to refuse to plead to prostitution charges "force" the DA to take it to trial, a rarity in prostitution cases.  The result?  You guessed it, no conviction.

    But yeah, lets raise taxes...its all for own good, pay no attention to where it goes.

    Slush funds? (none / 0) (#46)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 12:53:34 PM EST
    Funding for our "tough on crime", drugs and morality is never wasted money!!!! Politicians on both sides of the aisle trip over themselves to prove just how tough they are on defending the morality of the country. Being a cynic, I have to believe that there must be money in it for someone.

    Oh there is money in it... (none / 0) (#47)
    by kdog on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 01:01:35 PM EST
    damn good money mmc...look at Arnie wanting to outsource Cali's chaining and caging to Mexico...somebody who owns a yacht will make a killin' on that deal I'm sure.

    But if you question any of it you're a rich anti-tax arsehole teabagger, even if you're a broke d*ck who doesn't object to legitimate tax rates to fund a government that provides services of value to the people...key phrase "services of value".


    It's official (none / 0) (#63)
    by jbindc on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 02:53:22 PM EST
    Maybe (none / 0) (#66)
    by jbindc on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 03:44:42 PM EST
    they'll share a bachelor pad?

    Picture it - the leopard print sheets, lava lamps, beads, mirrors on the celing, and funky jazz playing.


    You're joking (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by me only on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 03:55:09 PM EST
    neither one of their egos would fit in an apartment, let alone both.

    STOU drinking game (none / 0) (#70)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 05:18:00 PM EST
    Obama says "let me be clear" - do one shot
    Obama says "change isn't easy" - do one shot
    Obama says "make no mistake" - do one shot
    Obama says "let me be clear, change isn't easy, make no mistake" - he's screwing with you to get you drunk - do five shots
    Joe Wilson yells something - do two shots
    Obama yells back - finish the bottle
    Obama says "jobs" - do one shot, two if you're unemployed
    Obama says "health care" - stop drinking...you will NOT be given a replacement liver
    Nancy Pelosi claps like a seal - do one shot
    Nancy Pelosi becomes a seal - STOP DRINKING, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD
    Optional If Nancy Pelosi appears in a shot WITHOUT Obama, do one shot without using your facial muscles
    Obama mentions Bo - put beer in your dog's water bowl
    Michelle Obama wears a slinky dress - go immediately to the HuffPost Style page for close-ups
    Joe Biden nods off / laughs inappropriately / starts talking before the speech is over - do three shots
    Obama uses the term "Congressional leadership" - do two shots carefully as all that laughing will make it difficult to swallow
    Obama says he's "fighting for you" - do one shot, two if you believe him
    Obama mentions "Haiti" - text "Haiti" to 90999 and donate $10 to the Red Cross

    "The notion that..." (none / 0) (#71)
    by caseyOR on Wed Jan 27, 2010 at 05:35:46 PM EST
    My least favorite Obama go-to phrase. Worth at least 2 shots everytime.