Daily Kos Radio at the DNC

Daily Kos Radio logo

David Waldman and I are now in Charlotte for the 2012 Democratic National Convention. I'll be with Kagro on the Kagro in the Morning show, from 9-10 a.m. ET

Then from 12-2 p.m. ET, catch us on Daily Kos Radio LIVE on the SiriusXM Convention Radio channel. That's channel 123 on Sirius, and channel 142 on XM. We'll also air at the same time on SiriusXM Internet Radio on SiriusXM Left Plus, channel 853. You can even listen in online with a free trial. Listen on your iPhone, iPad or iPod, or your Android-y thing. Want in on the action? You can call the SiriusXM listener line at: 888-971-0896. And if you miss our SiriusXM shows, they'll repeat later in the day, from 4-6 p.m. ET on Tuesday and Wednesday, but on Thursday, just our second hour will repeat, from 5-6 p.m.

Remember that the "Kagro in the Morning" show is now available via Stitcher.com, meaning you can download their free app on your desktop or on your mobile device, and listen to our podcasts on demand.
You'd be doing us a big favor it you'd download their app on your phone, search for the show, "favorite" it and help us take over the world. Also new on the tech side is our change in podcasting platforms, which brings with it an easy-to-use RSS feed, which enables you to download podcasts automatically, directly to iTunes. Like us on Facebook.
< Good Morning, Charlotte | DNC Tuesday Night: Michelle Obama >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    You guys are getting free Fat Tire? (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:45:59 AM EST
    Aaaaargh!!!!   I can't even get Fat Tire in Alabama!!!!!!

    me neither - miss it so much! (none / 0) (#6)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 12:31:50 PM EST
    And Avalanche even more.

    That will be the central plot line in... (none / 0) (#13)
    by magster on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 02:07:33 PM EST
    Smokey and the Bandit part XVII.

    Hey BTD... (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 11:09:58 AM EST
    if ya see Kal Penn in Charlotte, tell him he should be ashamed of himself, doing an ad for Obama in character as Kumar of "Harold & Kumar" fame.  Insulting.

    Unless the October Surprise is proposing repeal of marijuana prohibition, this sh*t ain't right.  Leave the modern day Cheech & Chong out of it...we're all criminals, remember?  Don't count on us until we can count on you to restore our inalienable rights.

    Dude (none / 0) (#3)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 11:53:00 AM EST
    I know I'm not supposed to Tread on the Teapublicans, but now I can't kick the dog?

    Seems kinda off (none / 0) (#4)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 12:17:19 PM EST
    stoners and junk food eating?

    And Obama's Failure... (none / 0) (#5)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 12:31:50 PM EST
    ...to close GITMO.

    kdog, being a little dramatic today, while I agree with you, we aren't all criminals, and event the ones who are, the punishment is a little more than a speeding ticket.


    Depends on your jurisdiction... (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 01:04:16 PM EST
    I was once chained to a bench for two roaches my brother...talking .001 grams of reefer mixed with burnt paper.  The motherf*ckers actually wanted me to post bail...I refused, eventually they relented and ror'd me.  $750 dollars later for a lawyer to utter three sentences in court, and I got a probationary dismissal deferred prosecution thingy.

    Some states/localities are more civilized, sure, but it's still a crime in all 50. Is what it is, a joke, we know it...but I find it insulting for a presidential campaign to treat it like a joke...thats a bit too much to bear.  The war on marijuana does jam people up every damn day....the fact that a very small percentage of users get jammed up is small consolation, one is too many.

    Obama, Romney, Congress, the DOJ, the DEA...they're the f*cking joke.


    I'm in $100 fine or less (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 01:28:35 PM EST
    jurisdiction and no chains :) Keep telling' ya to come on out!!!

    Tempting as always... (none / 0) (#11)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 01:45:22 PM EST
    just for the quality and falling prices, nevermind the more civilized local laws, if not quite civilized enough.

    Maybe I'll hold out for the first state to flip the big bird at the feds and legalize recreational use outright...maybe CO, go crash on MileHi's couch till I find a yob;)


    The sofa? (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 10:50:43 PM EST
    I'm not running a flop house here, Mister!  I'll have you know I have a proper futon in the guest room.

    Horrors kdog (none / 0) (#8)
    by fishcamp on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 01:21:49 PM EST
    those kinds of teensy mistakes down here 90 miles from the dreaded Commie Cuba can get you on the terrorist list manned by Homeland Security with their 38' magnum boats with four 350cc Yamahas.  I don't think they can go four times faster but I bet they can burn four times more fuel.  You can tell when there's a load floating out there because the Coasties Lear jet flies by slower than you've ever seen and there is a big ship on the horizon with smaller sizes close to shore with 18 year olds with guns checking you out while you're fishing.  They have spotters at every bridge waiting for bad guys like you.  We're trying to keep the fish safe.  Once again it's the DOJ and their alphabet henchmen.

    Be careful... (none / 0) (#10)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 01:42:58 PM EST
    fishing in the jungle fishcamp!

    Good in the jungle (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by fishcamp on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 01:49:59 PM EST
    down here...it's the open water bringing back a load of Cuban baseball players that gets tricky.

    The ballplayers (none / 0) (#14)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 02:23:15 PM EST
    never take the 90 mile route. They always appear in a different country so they become free agents. Funny how a ballplayer's "raft" never goes the same direction as the other rafts.

    That's why I would imbibe at home. (none / 0) (#16)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 02:55:28 PM EST
    The penalties in the islands aren't too bad, but still, even though I can no longer partake of the delectable herbage because of my now-chronic asthma, I'd keep it at home, and not take it on a road trip. You only have to get caught once, and the subsequent legal grief is really not worth it.

    Alway preferable... (none / 0) (#17)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:00:47 PM EST
    but thanks to the Supreme Court, all it takes is a pigs snout to catch a whiff from down the street and a warrant is obsolete...I wish we were truly safe in our castle, but it ain't so.

    And I'm not sure I can convince all my favorite bands to play shows in my living room;)

    This "comedic" ad reminds me of G-Dub joking around looking for WMD's under the coffee table...it's a slap in the face to every casualty of their wars.  


    They can if you watch PBS ... (none / 0) (#18)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:09:58 PM EST
    kdog: "And I'm not sure I can convince all my favorite bands to play shows in my living room;)"

    ... during Pledge Week, and make a sufficiently large donation to qualify for one of their concert DVDs.



    From our "Good Catholics" file: (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 02:50:28 PM EST
    Paul Ryan is so full of it. After a week of severe critical blowback following his blaming of President Obama for the 2008 closure Janesville's  GM plant, he's now claiming that HE'S the victim of mischaracterization.

    Sorry, but even Mrs. Alan Greenspan, MSNBC's First Lady of False Equivalency, fully agreed today with Karen Tumulty's statement that Ryan at last week's Repubican convention "knowingly and willfully mischaracterized" the actual events surrounding the 2008 Janesville GM plant closure --and further, she dismissed any attempts to revise his storyline today, noting that his credibility as a straight talker took a substantial hit.

    And when you've lost even a Beltway doyenne like Andrea Mitchell, you should realize that you've now got serious credibility issues.

    Many thanks to Paul Ryan (5.00 / 3) (#29)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:34:38 PM EST
    With the introduction of the Ryan Honesty in Running Plan, I can now cut 35 minutes off my fastest half marathon time. I'm now at 59 minutes 25 seconds as a personal best for 13.1 miles. God bless you Paul Ryan. Olympic Marathon here I come.

    I also thank Paul Ryan (5.00 / 3) (#43)
    by shoephone on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 04:09:59 PM EST
    Now I can tell people I weigh only 105 lbs! (I don't actually have to prove anything, do I?)

    And I can (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 04:12:45 PM EST
    shave ten or so years off of my age!  This is great!  We'll just call it the New Ryan Reality.

    Well, I believe both of you, and ... (none / 0) (#46)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 04:17:17 PM EST
    ... I'll happily denounce anyone in the lamestream media who dares to insinuate otherwise.



    That's Nothing.... (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 04:23:59 PM EST
    ...I'm running one right now while formulating a workable equation for cold fusion using CO2 emissions, and it just hit me, THE cure for cancer. Goota go, I just the halfway point, and need to break my all time bestest record of 58 seconds.

    Keep working at it, and ... (none / 0) (#77)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:02:50 PM EST
    ... you may even beat my personal record of just under 55!

    In My 20 Year Plan... (none / 0) (#95)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Sep 05, 2012 at 09:46:42 AM EST
    ...I will finish so quick I will actually go back in time, like superman.  I could probably do it now, but there are these time/space paradoxes I need to work out.  The main problem: how do I prove to the American people I ran a marathon if I finish before I started ?  They will just think I'm lying, but fear not, the great Paul Ryan is having a similar time/space issues.  Together we will solve this problem.

    Amazing isn't it? (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 05:31:35 PM EST
    I did 20 miles on the elliptical this morning.  I would give you a time, but I didn't bother looking because I hadn't broken a sweat.  I only log my time if it makes me sweat.

    I read somewhere today... (none / 0) (#20)
    by magster on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:16:52 PM EST
    that Ryan's stock has fallen so far from his lyingpalooza that he'll be in detention at the Hague by January.

    From our "Your Ryan Eyes" file: (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:18:08 PM EST
    "Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much."
    -- The Gospel According to St. Luke, Chapter 16, Verse 10

    A GOP campaign spokesperson has now confirmed that Paul Ryan's recent claim on the Hugh Hewitt Show to the contrary, in which he said that he ran "marathons" and had a personal best of "2:50-something," the Republican vice presidential candidate actually only ran one marathon in his life -- the 1990 Grandma's Marathon in Duluth, Minnesota, where Ryan (then 20 years old) is listed as having finished in 4 hours, 1 minute, and 25 seconds.

    Humorous sidenote: (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:20:12 PM EST
    Sarah Palin's documented personal best time for a marathon race is 3 hours, 59 minutes.

    Mr. Man, hunky dude beaten by a girl? (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by magster on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:21:53 PM EST
    Ryan now claims that he ... (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:25:25 PM EST
    ... confused his time with the personal best which was run by his brother.

    This guy is so full of crap, he and Mitt Romney make the perfect political couple.


    How on earth (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by jbindc on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:30:08 PM EST
    would anyone think they wouldn't get caught with something like that?  Runners are very proud and many talk all the time (with other runners) about their times.  How would you confuse your time with someone else's, unless maybe they were 100th of a second different?

    Let alone a differential of ... (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:41:37 PM EST
    ... one hour and ten minutes!

    How on earth? (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by Dadler on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:45:23 PM EST
    Sociopathic tendencies. Almost a prerequisite for national office.  Did I say almost?  Seriously, Ryan is the kind of guy who thinks if there's a million bucks in the street and a dying person, you save the money first.  He might deliberate a little longer over a beloved pet.

    Did I say a million bucks? (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Dadler on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:46:53 PM EST
    Maybe a few grand minimum.

    Well, duh (none / 0) (#35)
    by jbindc on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:47:45 PM EST
    The dying person isn't going to need the money anymore.



    They Can't Help Themselves... (none / 0) (#30)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:36:29 PM EST
    ...this isn't politics where everything is bent and twisted, this is stuff they offer up without prodding.  As in this __ proves I am this or that, and ends up proving they can't differential between reality, who they are, and dreamland, who they want to be.

    I shocked he didn't blame the the 'incorrect' time on Obama and demand a call for the truth to come out.


    That Running Shoe (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:31:40 PM EST
    he keeps putting in his mouth can't taste very good.

    And Ryan's been called out again. (none / 0) (#31)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:38:24 PM EST
    And considering this particular source of accusation, I'd say the guy has managed to develop a real credibility problem with the media in a rather remarkably short period of time:

    New York Daily News | September 2, 2012
    Yes, Paul Ryan lied, and yes, it matters - "If a politician says he ran a marathon in just under three hours when he actually ran it in four hours, does it matter? Ordinarily this wouldn't be a question of much political significance, but in light of the fact that the fibber in question is Republican Vice Presidential nominee Paul Ryan, it merits some explication. The reason is hard not to figure out: In his brief period on the national stage, Paul Ryan has demonstrated an uneasy relationship with the truth. His acceptance speech on Wednesday night was one of the most dishonest political speeches in recent U.S. political history. While some like Ben Smith at BuzzFeed call Ryan's flights of factual fancy 'policy differences' with President Obama, this misunderstands what actually is a policy difference and what is a lie - and why Ryan's incessant lying, including about marathon times, is actually pretty important."

    And yet again. (none / 0) (#40)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:55:03 PM EST
    Jonathan Chait offers that Paul Ryan must be completely bewildered about the sudden turn of events -- and justifiably so, since he's been spewing the same bull$hit for the better part of several years now, and far from calling him out at the time, the mainstream media instead coddled him:

    New York Magazine | September 4, 2012
    Since When Did Paul Ryan Become a Liar? - "A week ago, Paul Ryan's political assets included -- alongside his chiseled torso, plainspoken Midwestern demeanor, and the unshakable loyalty of the entire Republican Party -- a firm reputation for honesty among the mainstream media. That reputation has suffered a massive, swift erosion. News stories about his speech at the Republican National Convention focused on its many rhetorical sleights of hand. Over the weekend, the revelation that he dramatically misstated a marathon time added a crucial, accessible piece of evidence to the indictment. Now liberals are calling him 'Lyin' Ryan' -- a nickname that, a few weeks ago, would have seemed silly, like 'Wimpy Palin.' Now mainstream pundits are defending Ryan with versions of the 'well, all politicians fib' defense. Given that this constituency was once portraying Ryan as unusually honest, this represents a huge retreat for his political brand. What happened?"

    it's the press corps own dmn fault (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by DFLer on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:18:43 PM EST
    as per your coddling remark and  Somerby
    At the time, the mainstream press corps was in Year 7 of a very dumb serial novel. In this amazingly stupid novel, major Democrats were cast as Big Liars ("just like Bill Clinton").

    People who opposed those Democrats were cast as The World's Most Honest Men. So was any major figure who posed as a "budget hawk."

    The press corps has been typing this novel for the past twenty years. By the rules of their stupid game, Paul Ryan was the world's most recent Most Honest Man, even though the things he said never made any real sense.

    As recently as last year, even "liberals" like Ezra Klein were playing this game of behalf of bold honest truthful Paul Ryan. But in the last week, the truth about Ryan emerged with such force that even the press corps took notice.

    That's pretty much what Chait argues: (none / 0) (#70)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:43:09 PM EST
    "Ryan seems to have fallen victim to circumstances he didn't quite foresee. The Romney campaign has spent the last several weeks practically daring the national press corps to call out its lies. Well beyond the usual exaggerations of a national campaign, Romney has built its entire message around two accusations -- 'you didn't build that' and 'just send them a check' -- that are obviously false. A day before Ryan's speech, a Romney adviser told reporters, 'We're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.' The media that had spent the last two and a half years nuzzling gently in Ryan's lap had been prodded with sharp sticks and reacted in the predictable fashion, though probably not predictable to Ryan himself." (Emphasis is mine.)

    She probably perfected (none / 0) (#89)
    by the capstan on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 09:17:53 PM EST
    her stride running from a grizzly or a moose.

    Now that... (none / 0) (#91)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 10:48:28 PM EST
    I would pay to see.  

    So Stupid... (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:48:24 PM EST
    What, is one 4 hr marathon not good enough, doesn't project enough masculinity for Ryan ?

    I have a friend who is like this, if we go on vacation for a week, it turns into 10 days.  If he is getting paid X, he has to tell people X + Y.  Everything is embellished, and over time, it graduates to lies.  

    I think it's a self esteem issue with my friend, he never thinks anything he does is good enough, but I don't know for sure.  And I've known him long enough that my mind can easily compensate his embellishments.


    Poker players... (5.00 / 3) (#39)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:53:05 PM EST
    are notorious for it.  If they say they won big, they won a little.  If they say they won a little, they broke even.  If they say they broke even, they lost.  If they say they lost, they got taken to the cleaners.

    Frankly, just finishing a marathon ... (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 04:00:05 PM EST
    ... should be accomplishment enough, regardless of one's age and time. Hell, the vast majority of Americans nowadays would have trouble going 26.2 miles on a bicycle, never mind running that distance!

    I would suggest (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 04:29:43 PM EST
    that Ryan had more meaning by choosing "under 3". In 1990 a sub 3:00 Marathon time for his age group would qualify him to run in Boston. Qualifying for Boston (even if you never run Boston) is a huge goal for any distance runner.

    By choosing "under 3:00" he elevated himself into a a highly recognized class of runner. Since his brother has qualified for and run in Boston, Ryan knew exactly what he was doing.


    interesting :) thnx! (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 04:36:58 PM EST
    To me the lie about the time is (5.00 / 3) (#42)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 04:02:39 PM EST
    not as bad as the lie about being a marathoner in general, when he is not, having only run one 22 years ago. That is a lie about who you are, not some metric.

    Wow, did the RNC have these great videos? (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by magster on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 06:52:53 PM EST
    I've seen 3 already today, including this last one that is a tribute to Sen. Kennedy that is terrific.

    Made me cry (none / 0) (#60)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:03:52 PM EST
    But doesn't matter because as Fox News said, there will be no convention bounce for either party this year.

    ... that Democrats are invoking the name of the late Ted Kennedy at their political convention, and using clips of his 1994 debate with Mitt Romney to attack the GOP presidential candidate. Have they no shame?

    I guess not. Good for them.


    I am trying to watch it on Current (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:10:34 PM EST
    because I like their commenters - Al Gore, Jennifer Granholm, Cenk Uygar, Eliot Spitzer....but they are so modern they see fit to take up fully 2/3 of the TV screen real estate with their various twitter feeds.  Soooo annoying.  I am going to figure out how to use their sound and someone else's video. I can have the sound piping in from  the TV in the bedroom instead.

    And yes I did tweet to them to stop it, but they do have tweet screeners....

    CSPAN is pundit free (none / 0) (#66)
    by DFLer on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:19:45 PM EST
    Don't want to go that far..... (none / 0) (#68)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:26:59 PM EST
    I like  Al and Jennifer .

    Let's not overlook Jon Fugelsang (none / 0) (#87)
    by brodie on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:56:04 PM EST
    who is quick sharp and witty.

    Agree about twitter screen clutter -- its too much verbiage taking up too much space and detracts from the almost too many pundits.


    I suppose that's why ... (none / 0) (#72)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:47:33 PM EST
    ... I keep nodding off -- there's nobody shouting over each other loudly enough to keep me awake.

    Agreed. (none / 0) (#73)
    by KeysDan on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:54:26 PM EST
    The full screen for speakers and commenters is lost to tweets that are vapid and content-free.   If they insist on being 'thoroughly modern Millies' they could, at least, have a crawl or read an occasionally interesting tweet.  

    Yes- if they are worthy readiing I would not (none / 0) (#80)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:15:51 PM EST
    Mind as much. 'xxxx just took the stage'....we need to read that when we can see it?

    $16 Trillion (1.00 / 7) (#19)
    by Slado on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:16:15 PM EST
    US just passed the $16 Trillion mark in Federal Debt.

    USA! USA! USA!

    I'm troll rating you... (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by magster on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:18:52 PM EST
    on the assumption you have no intellectual honesty to accept blame for the Bush tax cuts or the wars Bush started for the ballooning deficit.

    What wars? (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:21:49 PM EST
    I didn't hear Republicans mention any wars last week, nor did I hear them mention George W. Bush by name.



    5.4 Trillion added since 2009 (2.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Slado on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:12:18 PM EST
    Last time I checked this president kept kept the cuts and doubled down in Afghanistan.

    This president has added 1/3 of the current debt to the books.

    According to his budget (which nobody in the Senate voted for) it will be 21 Trillion by the time he leaves office.

    That means this president plans to double the deficit in 8 years.   A deficit it took this country 200 plus years to build before him.

    At least you can say this president is ambitious.


    Ronald Reagan tripled the national debt ... (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:36:24 PM EST
    ... on his watch ($909 billion to $2.8 trillion), and his immediate successor George H.W. Bush nearly doubled it, although to his credit he did agree to raise taxes to staunch the flow of red ink. Under Bill Clinton, the federal government begam runnig a surplus.

    But then along came George W. Bush, who more than doubled the national debt while Vice President Dick Cheney lectured then-Treasury Sec. Paul O'Neill that "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter."

    All told, you Republicans have ABSOLUTELY NO CREDIBILITY when it comes to talking about national debt and federal deficits. Even now, the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the proposed Romney-Ryan federal budget would increase deficit spending at a far greater rate than is currently being incurred.

    You white-wing clowns are like a bunch of binge-drinking alcoholics trying to lecture the rest of us on the virtues of sobriety and temperance. When you first start practicing what you preach, then we can talk.

    But until such time, you can shove off.


    Excuse me?! (none / 0) (#67)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:20:19 PM EST
    This President wants the Bush tax cuts to expire for the rich.  I have no idea where you got this other plan from.  Are you secretly Paul Ryan?

    You Forgot the Bush Tax Cuts... (none / 0) (#37)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:49:43 PM EST
    Scratch That (none / 0) (#38)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 03:50:13 PM EST
    Slado was watching Fox (none / 0) (#53)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 05:27:58 PM EST
    I had to watch Fox while waiting for Josh's P.T. to start around 4:00ish CST, while I sat there I guess the Republican debt clock went off and Fox went ballistic about this and about how the Democrats are busy having a party and seemingly don't care.

    I'm not sure why FOX (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 05:41:28 PM EST
    cares about the national debt.

    "Reagan proved deficits don't matter."


    They only matter (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 06:13:43 PM EST
     if the President is a Democrat.  They don't matter if the President is a Republican.    ;-)

    I prefer to call it ... (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:04:55 PM EST
    ... the "Bush Tax Cuts Clock," which constantly gives us a timely update on the ever-escalating cost of that windfall for the wealthy.

    You should have seen how rabid (none / 0) (#59)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:01:48 PM EST
    Fox News was 3:00 pm EST.  They were certifiable, they were psychopaths.  By the way, did you know that neither convention will get a convention bounce because the conventions are being held so close together this cycle?  I did not know this fact until I saw it on Fox News this afternoon.

    You learn something new all the time, ... (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:13:33 PM EST
    ... particularly when you watch Fox News.

    And did you know that you're better off today than you were four years ago? Why, we never had it so good, as when the stock market lost nearly half its value, the national economy was contracting at a 9%-plus annual rate and the jobs market was hemmorhaging positions at an 800,000-per-month clip.


    Like how the DNC is starting.... (none / 0) (#44)
    by magster on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 04:12:33 PM EST
    I'm expecting a nice bump to the July numbers after this party is over, and Romney having to score on a Hail Mary to win the election.

    Michelle Obama (none / 0) (#47)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 04:21:07 PM EST
    is scheduled to speak somewhere between 10 and 11 ET time tonight (I would guess closer to and ending at 11)

    Corey Booker giving a nice speech... (none / 0) (#51)
    by magster on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 05:10:15 PM EST
    ... too bad he scr@wed the pooch with his defense of Bain like companies or he might have a future.

    Like how they are embracing the DNC platform... (none / 0) (#52)
    by magster on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 05:13:23 PM EST
    ... instead of ignoring it and pretending it doesn't exist or apply.

    Chris Matthews is all in for reelection... (none / 0) (#57)
    by magster on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 06:46:45 PM EST
    he sounds like Biden.

    Ooops! My husband calls bullshit (none / 0) (#71)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:46:51 PM EST
    On Duckworth.  She was not one of the first women to fly combat missions in Iraq.  They flew them in the first gulf war too and one was shotdown and tortured.  That female pilot leads the controversial program about soldiers being able to strengthen themselves mentally to fight mental trauma.  He respects that she is wounded, he respects her service, but he says you can't take credit for what other people did soldiering.  It isn't right.

    Do not understand. (none / 0) (#79)
    by KeysDan on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:09:10 PM EST
    Tammy Duckworth said that she was "one of the first Army women to fly combat missions in Iraq."   Is that statement untrue?   She did not claim to be one of the first women to fly combat missions.

    The first gulf war was in 1991 though (none / 0) (#82)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:22:45 PM EST
    And we had women flying combat mission then in Iraq.  That is when the female pilot I speak of was shot down, captured, raped, tortured, the whole bad scene.

    Was she Army? (none / 0) (#93)
    by unitron on Wed Sep 05, 2012 at 02:35:07 AM EST
    Or Air Force?

    Oh for Christ sake...Google (none / 0) (#94)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Sep 05, 2012 at 07:44:11 AM EST
    This topic, look at some of the boards that have addressed this.....who were the first women to fly Army combat missions.  The Army had many female helicopter pilots that flew in Iraq during the first gulf war.  My husband knows this firsthand though because he served with them.

    MT (none / 0) (#83)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:33:25 PM EST
    Women didn't fly helicopters in combat missions until 1993 at the earliest and I think Tammy became a commissioned officer in the Army Reserve in 1992. I would say that still puts her in a classification of one of the first. I'm not going to get too picky unless she lays claim to being the first.

    My husband said define combat mission (none / 0) (#84)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:40:17 PM EST
    He considers a medivac bird flying in to rescue soldiers a combat mission and so does most pilots.  Those are extremely dangerous missions.  If you are talking about flying attack helicopters then fine, 1993.  But Duckworth was not flying an attack helicopter.  She was flying a Blackhawk too, just like all the female pilots flying in the first gulf war were.  So Duckworth also thinks that flying a Blackhawk in the war zone is also flying combat.

    I yield (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:45:59 PM EST
    to Mr MT :)

    He said it is differing terminology that (none / 0) (#86)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:48:20 PM EST
    evolved between 1991 and Dubya's Iraq War.  Not anybody's fault.

    In the ground offensive that ... (none / 0) (#88)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:56:37 PM EST
    ... ended the 1991 Gulf War, a fair number of female helicopter pilots airlifted the 82nd and 101st Airborne Divisions deep into Iraq itself, as part of a successful effort to outflank the bulk of Iraqi forces garrisoned in Kuwait.

    At the time, it was the largest single helicopter airlift in the history of warfare, and it was estimated that women probably accounted for nearly 20% of the pilots involved.

    As you noted, the ban on women flying in combat was not lifted until President Clinton lifted it by executive order (in 1994, actually), so while those women in the Gulf War might have found themselves under fire, they were technically never ordered into combat.

    (It's like when my father was killed in Vietnam. Technically, our entry into Vietnam conbat operations dated from the congressional adoption of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution in August 1964, but since my father died in February of that year, he was not eligible for any of the commendations that were usually awarded during recognized periods of active hostilities with enemy forces. Not that he was in any position to object at the time, obviously, but still ...)

    Five Navy and Air Force women made history in December 1998 when they flew combat jets in air raids on Iraq during Operation Desert Fox. In the Iraq War, Tammy Duckworth was one of the first female Army pilots to be formally ordered into active combat operations.


    Wow Donald what a ripoff (none / 0) (#90)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 10:12:24 PM EST
    Those in uniform who are of honor do not need to attempt to gain extra honor through technicalities.  I take that back, some in uniform do and they get labeled working the system for their own enrichment. Duckworth knows full well she's slightly full of crap on this and she's going to take a hit on this via the military. I can almost promise it. She has enough to be proud of, she doesn't need to short change her sisters trying to drape herself in additional technicality glory.  And I won't even mention how disgusting my husband thinks it is that people so willfully want to drape themselves in honors of technicalities.

    Stacey makes both parents in this house cry (none / 0) (#74)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:57:56 PM EST
    But remember, there will be no convention bounce for Democrats

    Oh, c'mon! Not even a ... (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:00:41 PM EST
    ... Dead Mitt Bounce?

    I imagine Stacey Lihn (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:07:21 PM EST
    did that to quite a few households.

    She was terrific. I was misty too (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:17:14 PM EST
    The Sirius XM free trial does not require (none / 0) (#96)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Sep 05, 2012 at 11:43:53 AM EST
    a credit card.  I wish I had checked earlier.  I avoid free trials because they always want my credit card number.  Just need an email address for this, but my free trial is not being immediately processed.  I will have to wait before I can listen to BTD on the free trial.  Don't know how long that will take.

    MT, get my email address from Jeralyn (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by ruffian on Wed Sep 05, 2012 at 12:06:29 PM EST
    I'll help you out.

    It went through finally (none / 0) (#98)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Sep 05, 2012 at 12:14:53 PM EST
    But the channel 853 was not them.  After several searches, I ended up finding them under the search "DNC" at channel 781.  Thank you for offering to help me muddle through it though!!!!  

    Even a Dead Guy Can Slam Mitt (none / 0) (#99)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Sep 05, 2012 at 02:13:40 PM EST
    Last night they showed to Senate race tally between Mitt and E Kennedy during the Kennedy tribute, which included this quote:
    On the question of the choice issue, I have supported the Roe v. Wade. I am pro-choice. My opponent is multiple choice.

    Boom goes the dynamite from the grave of a Kennedy.