Russia Admits Continuing Contact with Trump Campaign

Nobody will read this post (or those like it), or watch this video who should. And if you could force them to, they'd play it off like it's no big deal. But if they were being honest, if we all were, we know the answer to Rachel Maddow's hypothetical "Storytime." If the Russians were meddling in the McCain/Palin campaigns affairs, meddling in the outcome of the election, and it was discovered that the Obama campaign was in cahoots? The outrage from the right (and from many other quarters) would be deafening.
 [Story continues below]




I'll go further than that. If the scenario had played out that way, Republicans would have done everything in their power, would have used every tool in their toolbox to prevent the inauguration of Obama. Failing that, they'd have spent the next weeks, months and years investigating the connection, making hay of it in the news, and probably at best attempting to impeach, and it's not too far fetched to imagine them looking toward charges of treason. Does anyone really doubt that? 

Everyone's hair should have been on fire over the near certain Russian involvement in Wikileaks' hacking and distribution of Clinton campaign emails. It was a bigger story than the gossip contained therein. And when the circumstantial ties to Russia and Trump operative Paul Mannafort (and others) are also known, a narrative isn't hard to form. This should have been the focus of the "October surprise."

Here's hoping that more people than Rachel Maddow are staying on top of this story. But as long as she is, maybe she'll have the same success she had getting the Chris Christie Bridgegate story into the mainstream.

Should President Obama Pardon Bush/Cheney for War Crimes?

Image found at TrueActivist

Every so often, in politics, there is a really interesting play on the table. Something you didn't expect. Something that may accomplish part of a long-held goal, but possibly in a roundabout way. That's happening right now, though the odds are long that it would ever happen.

Just about everybody agrees that the George W. Bush-Dick Cheney administration authorized "enhanced interrogation techniques" in the years following September 11, 2001, and that they were. . .extra-legal. Most people agree that these techniques went over the line, and I'd be willing to guess that a majority consider them outright torture. Where a partisan divide appears is in whether or not we care that we tortured people.

One could argue that a patriot should care. The United States of America is not supposed to commit war crimes with impunity, torture with no oversight, or imprison without due process. Especially at times when we're burning for vengeance, or just plain scared. Those are the times when our laws, our treaties, our moral compasses, our humanity and our Constitution need to be vigorously defended and adhered to. If not, exactly what are we defending?

Image from the (hopefully ironically titled)
WeMeantWell.com

So, while we quibble about how much over the line GWB & Co. went, we know they crossed it. Many of us think of them as outright war criminals. But we're also aware that--even though the other side can impeach a sitting president for lying about a trifle--there is no political stomach for trying and convicting any of those involved for said crimes. Which gives zero incentive for future presidents to follow even the most serious of laws. And the clock is running. Can we really expect the next president, or the next, to act on something so far in the rear view?

And act how? No way there's a trial or trials. It's just not going to happen. But someone has come up with a novel solution: Have President Obama pardon them all. It's a radical solution. It lets everyone off the hook. There might even be international blowback just for that. But it also brands them all as war criminals. Exonerated, but criminals, nonetheless. It's an asterisk that will be in every history book. And it would potentially act as a deterrent from a future president from crossing that line. Every person who wants to be president has an outsized ego. They do not want to be branded a war criminal, no matter how power-hungry they are.

All of that said, I think there's close to a zero chance that Obama would do it. I think personally, he'd love to. But I'm not sure the political will of the party apparatus is even there for that. Which is a pity. But think about this: should the GOP follow through with their "Operation: Kill Obama's Legacy" plan in the next two years, this could be in his back pocket.

[Excerpt]
 

Maddow: Pardon Bush for Torture To "Make It Clear Crimes Were Committed"



RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC: Tonight, the head of the national ACLU has just published this op-ed in the New York Times. It calls for President Obama to issue a pardon to former President George W. Bush and former Vice President Dick Cheney and other senior Bush administration officials for overseeing torture as the U.S. policy for years. . .

Read more at: Real Clear Politics

President Obama Announces His Immigration Plan

Image from source, USAToday

I really can't see what everyone is so worked up about. This sounded logical, reasonable, and fair to me. Truly, I sometimes think conservatives view the world through some sort of distortion lens.

[Excerpt]

First take: Echoes of Bush in Obama's immigration speech

The immigration speech President Obama gave a week before Thanksgiving was the one he was supposed to give before Labor Day. But Obama punted until after the election. "I want to spend some time, even as we're getting all our ducks in a row for the executive action, I also want to make sure that the public understands why we're doing this," he said on Meet the Press in September. . .

Read more at: USA Today
 

US Facing Ebola with No Surgeon General

Why don't we have a Surgeon General to shepherd us through a medical crisis like Ebola? Three guesses. . .

ObamaCare is Dead! ObamaCare is Alive! Long Live ObamaCare!

So confusing! First a Circuit Court says that ObamaCare--at least the ability to fund it, in states without exchanges--was invalid, due to a literal reading of the law. See, the law was written with the assumption of 50 state exchanges, and the GOP thwarted that. So, the language is off by a couple of words. Intent? Phooey! We want to ditch this thing!

Then, just a couple of hours later, a different Circuit Court ruled exactly the opposite. It's just as well, Right Wing World was going to hurt itself if it did anymore cartwheels and back handsprings. So, very likely, this is going to go to the Supreme Court. Again. And who the hell knows what they'll do, really.

But I've got to think this has a heavy downside for the right. They're on record for being absolutely focused on eliminating or castrating ObamaCare from the beginning. Everyone knows it, and the case, of course, was initiated for that very reason. So, suppose SCOTUS rules that this part of the ACA is to be tossed out. And suddenly, affordable care is out the window. Poor people, who have had access to insurance for the first time, will be thrown off it. Something like 4.7 million people. I can't see how this is good for Republicans, if it comes down to that.

The amazing part is, conservatives aren't probably really against the ACA itself. It's the Obama part of ObamaCare they hate. They will do anything and everything to rob him of having that as his legacy, even while they trash the thing out of the other side of their mouth.

[Excerpt]

Appeals courts differ on Obamacare; Supreme Court case likely

It was a tale of two rulings -- the best of times and the worst of times for Obamacare in the federal appeals courts. First, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit court of appeals ruled Tuesday against a key component of the law -- the federal subsidies for millions of people who signed up for health coverage. . .

Read more (with video) at: CNN

Yes, Obama's Approval Rating Is Down. . .But Not as Much as Everyone Else

Amongst friends, I've openly pondered, why are President Obama's approval ratings so low? All things considered--and that would be the relentless and constant opposition from Republicans in and out of elected office--I think he's doing a pretty good job. I don't agree with everything he's done, and some of the stuff that sort of carried over from Bush? Yeah, I could do without a bunch of that. But on balance, I think he's been a pretty good president. Certainly better than anyone who ran against him.

 

Image from source, NewsCorpse

But I get it that Right Wing World hates him. Hates. Him. That would be somewhat understandable, if it was simply a response to his policies, but it's been like this from Day 1 (or earlier), and hasn't dissipated, it's only gotten worse. And they hate him even for things that they used to be for. It's transparent, naked hatred (and I don't know if you happened to notice, but he's black). So, anyway, I'd get it if his approval ratings were hovering around 50%. That would make sense. But in the 40s?

I'd chalk it up to a fickle, easily distracted, easily led, not particularly interested public, except for the fact that Obama's ratings are among the best of the rest of our elected officials! 'Course, people could still be disconnected and hate 'em all, I suppose. But before the Boehners and McConnells and the rest get too overjoyed about Obama's predicament, they should look at their own numbers. And before the completely sell their souls to the Tea Party, they should look to see who is at rock bottom.

[Excerpt]

GOPee Yew: What The Media Isn’t Telling You About Obama’s Poll Numbers

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll (pdf) has some decidedly bad news for President Obama. The American people, according to this survey, are losing patience with the President and expressing it with low opinions of his job performance, foreign policy, and leadership. It is a distinct concern for him as his administration heads into its final two years. That said, the news isn’t all bad. But far be it for the media to put the results in context so that people get a balanced perspective of the nation’s mood. In addition to the floundering numbers, there are some areas that ought to produce some optimism for the President and those aligned with his policies. First among them is the fact that, while Obama’s numbers are nothing to write home about, his political rivals are doing so much worse that may want to run away from home. . .

Read more at: NewsCorpse

Sarah Palin Derps Some Racism Again

I almost didn't use this image (from Wonkette)
since the beyond awesome Lynda Carter
does not like Sarah Palin. But I figure
this his how Palin sees herself.

I'm always torn about writing a Palin post. She's a pointless, ridiculous political celebrity, and she thrives on attention, even negative attention. Kinda like Ann Coulter. But the she-beast of the north has gone and blown--not a dog whistle--just a regular loud, racist whistle. Again. So, the only way I can handle her today is by finding a funny write-up about it. This fits the bill.

[Excerpt]
 
World’s Laziest Half-Term Governor Says Obama Killed All Those Vets Because He Is So Lazy, Also Too The Media

Oh em gee, you guys, the ghost thinker for Sarah Palin’s brain has informed her that she is SUPER empissened about the just discovered BREAKING news that America does not treat its veterans so good, actually. . .

Read more at: Wonkette

Lawrence O'Donnell on "The Handshake Seen Around the World"

Lawrence addresses the ludicrous non-troversy of President Obama shaking Raul Castro's hand during Nelson Mandela's funeral. And he shows a goodly number of other presidents and officials essentially doing the same thing. Can no one on the right do a little research before having a knee-jerk reaction?
 

Why The GOP Followed Ted Cruz to the Cliff

He can't be the Anti-Christ, he's not likable enough. But good LORD
this man takes a creepy picture. Image from ThinkProgress

Oh Papa Tooney. We've got a Looney. Ted Cruz and his followers are apocalyptic nuts. I mean, that's not entirely a surprise, but to see it all laid out like this. . .

[Excerpt]

Read This One Document If You Want To Understand Why Republicans Followed Ted Cruz Off A Cliff

“These are extraordinary times,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) told the Values Voters Summit on Friday morning, and “the challenges facing this country are unlike any we have every seen.” He was speaking to a relatively small group of religious conservatives, but he might as well have been speaking for the two dominant wings of the Republican Party base. Indeed, understanding the siege mentality that’s captured both of these wings of the GOP is the key to understanding Cruz’s success in shutting down the government. . .

Read more at: Think Progress

Facepalm: Ann Coulter's Islamophobia and Racism

UPDATE: I should have stopped with the first piece, as it would seem that the second here is originally from The Daily Currant, which is a parody site that is very, very good at writing believable stories. The source was obscured, and I missed it. Totally my bad, but it should be acknowledged that it is also entirely believable that Ann Coulter would say such a thing. Apologies. The first piece? Totally true.


Harpie's Bizarre, image from Mediaite

It's just. . .I mean I can't. . . This is just so. . .

[Excerpt]

Ann Coulter to Hannity: Putin Is Making a ‘Monkey’ Out of Obama on Syria

Ann Coulter joined Sean Hannity on Monday night to bash President Obama for a failure of leadership on Syria. Hannity called Obama “confused” and “wimpy,” while Coulter derided the White House for thinking this is a simple Aaron Sorkin monologue away from being solved, adding that she believes Vladimir Putin has made Obama into a “monkey” on Syria. . .

Read more at: Mediaite



The following is redacted because it has been found to be originally from a parody site, as noted above.

[Excerpt]

Ann Coulter On Syria: ‘Why is Gassing Arabs a Bad Thing?’

Conservative commentator Ann Coulter generated fierce criticism today for suggesting that the gas attack in Syria last month was good for the United States. In an interview with Fox and Friends this morning, she argued that since the victims were Arabs such attacks would reduce the number of future terrorists and that therefore president Obama shouldn't intervene to stop them. . .

 

Read more at: Codewit

Sausage Being Made: From Karl Rove to GOP to FOX

He's a prize, ain't he? Image from source, Media Matters

This is how it's done, folks, it's just not always quite as easy to follow.

[Excerpt]

From Karl Rove's Mouth, To A GOP Talking Point, To Fox's Ear 

Fox contributor Karl Rove lobbed a line of attack at President Obama during a Fox News Sunday appearance that quickly found its way into a Monday morning Republican press release. While the release was being distributed, Rove returned to Fox to repeat the talking points -- the latest example of Fox News' role as the communication arm of the Republican Party. . .

Read more at: Media Matters

SYRIAsly, Can We Not Get Into Another War?

Image from Wikipedia. Did you know for sure
where Syria was?

We're in the last week of what is usually the "dog days of August," when the news is boring and nothing noteworthy seems to happen. Kids are going back to school, so for them the world is school this week, and the last three weeks were the summer careening out of control and crashing into school. I suppose parents of those children have a bit of a lift this week, but for the rest of us, late August is meh.

And blogging has been, even further back into the summer. Yes, stuff happened, but not a lot that I was eager to write about. Fortunately, summer gives a blogger some cover: nobody is writing quite at full strength in the summer, certainly not as stridently as usual. But here we are, with Syria. A deadly serious, deeply complicated, morally gray (as in, not knowing exactly who to support), politically gray (as in, Rand Paul and John McCain on opposite sides) fuster cluck.

I've already said in a previous post that Syria is past my pay grade (particularly since this is a hobby, and I don't get paid). Frankly, any Mideast crisis is out of my wheelhouse, and my deep personal interest. I'm not Jewish, I'm not fundamentalist Christian, I'm not Muslim. . .so, I have no emotional tie to Israel. I had to look up Syria on a map today (I was right about where it was, but I wasn't sure). I'm smart enough to know that there are implications that tie into relations with Russia and with China, and pissing them off is problematic. And I know that while President Obama has a number of options on his plate, none of them are good options.

Imagine having his job. Half a dozen shitty choices, none with clean outcomes, and all of them bound to draw fiery criticism from the right and the left. The left because they're already weary of war, and many are convinced that Obama is far further right than they thought they were getting. The right because they hate everything the President does from how he ties his shoes to how he licks stamps. The only thing almost everybody agrees on: "We've got to do something."

You know what troubles me about that? Those are the exact words my mother used, years after the Iraq War was started, as an answer to me about why we were in Iraq. As a Bush voter, and staunch Republican, she said that after September 11, we had to do something. I pointed out that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and that there were no weapons of mass destruction. Didn't matter to Mom, we had to do something. Apparently, even if "something" is just blowing some shit up in the general area of the perceived problem.

I have a reputation for being irreverent, callous and blunt. But I don't mean to give short shrift to the suffering of the Syrian people, particularly the children. I suppose it's the fact that the Syrian government was already killing them indiscriminately before last week, that's got me wondering why now. Is it the President's "red line" statement from a while back, and that the Syrians apparently crossed it? Also, truth be told, kids and adults are being killed in lots of countries around the world. Is it only if they're poisoned that we have to send in the military?

Anyway, for someone who feels ill-equipped to really blog about this topic, I've managed to ramble on at length. I guess I just wanted to put my thoughts out there for anyone who happened by. And to explain why there may not be a heavy coverage of the topic on the blog. I suspect that when Right Wing World really gets cranked up on the topic, there will be an opportunity to at least pick apart the details, and maybe flesh things out a little. The nuts at Free Republic (for example) can be so clearly wrong about something, that it can crystalize what is right. . .or rather, correct.  See? They're good for something!

[Excerpt]

Military strikes on Syria 'as early as Thursday,' US officials say

The U.S. could hit Syria with three days of missile strikes, perhaps beginning Thursday, in an attack meant more to send a message to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad than to topple him or cripple his military, senior U.S. officials told NBC News on Tuesday. . .

Read more at: NBC News

The Birther Dilemma: Ted Cruz, Canada, Cuba and "Natural Born Citizen"

What kind of goofy shit is this? Heh. Image from
ObamaConspiracy.net

Birthers and tea baggers (two groups with considerable crossover) have a huge problem looming with the probable presidential run of Senator Rafael Edward "Ted" Cruz (R-TX). Unlike the fanciful, self-contradictory conspiracy theory that posits foreign birth for President Obama, we know that Ted Cruz was born in Canada. Further, we know that his foreign-born father was born in Cuba. This puts Cruz's nativity story on almost precisely the same ground as the partially invented one the birthers have foisted upon Obama.



Same Question. Image from Wikipedia

Only it's worse. See, Barack Obama Sr. was from Kenya, a country with British ties. Though Cruz's birth country also has British ties, his Dad's birth country is actually considered an hostile to the United States. I don't think even the most rabid birther has tried to assert that Kenya is any kind of enemy. Of course, Obama's real story is even better than Cruz's anyway because he has been confirmed to have been born in the United States, making him unquestionably "Natural Born," no matter how you slice it (fringy, goofy birther tangents don't even rise to asterisks here).

But it's funny, now that Cruz has publicly "renounced" his Canadian citizenship and released his birth certificate, if the birther bunch wants to be consistent, they really need to dive in to Cruz birtherism. Because a great number of the problems they had with President Obama's birth certificate are true for this one as well, along with some other problems. Here is a comment from the great ObamaConspiracy.net, the resource that has effectively debunked every single conspiracy tangent.

 . . .what they will make of these other “issues”:

* “Certificate of Birth”, not a birth certificate
* Record number does not match stamp on the bottom
* No witnesses of birth named, nobody attested to place of birth
* That red blob supposed to be a seal?
* The “E” and “e” in “Eleanor” are not on the same baseline as the rest, unlike in all other words using those letters (“RAFAEL”, “Delaware”)
* When did he ever legally change his name from “Rafael” to “Ted”? Proof?

These are the types of nits that birthers picked with both Obama's "short form" and "long form" birth certificates. It was all nonsense, all of it. I even did my own de-bunking here. Let me be clear, I have no issue with Cruz's place of birth or questions about his citizenship. But I find it very, very amusing that birthers are in this trick bag.

Read more (lots more) here: ObamaConspiracy

Points for Consistency: Orly Taitz Thinks Ted Cruz as Ineligible as Obama

Ted Cruz and his full-body frown, image from USNews

There is a bit of hilarity in the fact that Ted Cruz--Texas tea bagger extraordinaire--has designs on the presidency, but shares almost exactly the "disqualifying" parentage that said tea baggers assign to President Obama. Or rather, the "birther" variety of tea bagger imagines that President Obama is foreign born, and we already know that Cruz is foreign born.

Both men had mothers who were American Citizens, which would be enough in a sane world to be qualified for the presidency. Obama has the distinction of actually not being foreign born--unless you consider Honolulu, Hawaii to be "foreign"--making the whole birther genre to be rather laughable and stupid. But I wondered what the hardcore birthers would make of Cruz, a guy who is totally the bat in their belfry. My guess was that they'd do a bit of handwringing about his ineligibility, and then say that the point is now moot because of President Obama filling out his terms.

Orly Taitz, the hardest core of the hardcore birthers didn't disappoint me. She's basically done exactly that.

[Excerpt]

'Birther' Orly Taitz: Ted Cruz Has 'Basically the Same Issue as Obama'

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, a likely candidate for president in 2016, released his Canadian birth certificate over the weekend, but that's unlikely to end discussion about whether he meets the Constitution's ill-defined standard of natural-born citizenship. . .

Read more at: USNews

GOP Charges Obama with "Court Packing" for Attempting to Fill Seats

Two out of three look like cartoon characters. From Huffington Post.

I'd like to tell you that my reason for passing this story along is that I'm outraged that the Republicans in the Senate are misusing terminology, lying, and blocking the president's nominations all for political reasons, and showing a complete disregard for and lack of respect for the office of president.

And I am. But the real reason this inspired me was the hilariously turtle-like picture of Mitch McConnell. I mean, we've been calling him a turtle for years, but does that say it, or does that say it. Anyway, I know that's silly but there you go. It's no sillier than what the GOP is alleging here.

[Excerpt]

Republicans Charge Obama With Court-Packing For Trying To Fill Empty Seats 

Republican senators are fuming about President Barack Obama's attempt to fill empty seats on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, charging him with "court-packing" and alleging that his push to confirm nominees is all politics. But not only is Obama not "court-packing" -- a term describing an attempt to add judges to a court with the goal of shifting the balance, not filling existing vacancies -- but Republicans' efforts to prevent Obama from appointing judges amount to their own attempt to tip the scales in their favor. . .

Read more at: Huffington Post

Meanwhile, on Facebook: Enough with the Umbrella-gate

The moment I smelled the first whiff of "Umbrella-gate," I knew it was ridiculous. The more I saw about it, the more evident it was that this was nothing more than naked racism and/or full-blown Obama Derangement Syndrome. It's nothing short of ridiculous. Let this photo, currently floating around on Facebook, be the last word on it, all right? Okay then.

President Obama's Angry Response to Senate Filibusters on Gun Laws

The President wasn't thrilled with the Senate's decision to do nothing about gun control legislation. I wasn't either, but the Blogger software ate my entire post, so here's the video. I'm tired.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Don't Fall for "Gas Was Cheap" When Bush Was Prez

See where it craters? January 2009: Obama's Inauguration. Source: MotherJones.com.

Dishonesty bugs me. I try never to be dishonest, because frankly, lying requires too much remembering. If you tell the truth, you don't need to try very hard to remember things. Plus, you know, being honest is just the right thing to do.

So, it really pisses me off that there are a bunch of Republicans running around talking about how cheap gasoline was when George W. Bush was president. Man, things were sweet in the waning days of 2008, weren't they? The economy was rosy, the world was shiny and new, and then that [black] fellow took over, and everything went all to hell! Of course this is a fiction. The economy was tanking, the financial world was reeling, the stock market was crashing and. . .gas prices cratered.

Yes, it is true--but highly misleading--to say that when President Obama was inaugurated, gasoline was $1.78 per gallon. Misleading, why? Because the price hadn't been holding steady there, it had crashed there. Recently. Prior to that--in the summer of 2008--gas prices were at an all time high, a price that hasn't been topped (or if it has, only barely). So, this is just one more example of missing context and deliberate misdirection on the part of conservatives. I love the smell of desperation in the morning!

Republicans Suck at Math, and Hate the Chevy Volt

Obama in a Volt, or, "Evil in a Failure!" Image from
Wonkette.

I remember when the movie Superman Returns came out, and from the beginning the reports were that the movie would have to make more than $200 million in order to make up its development costs. The movie did clear that hurdle, but was still widely considered to be a failure for not reaching Iron Man or Avengers-level money, in order to make money on top of its investment. Well, it was also derided because people didn't like it (I did, but I'm in the minority). But it was saddled with all of the money wasted on early drafts and hired-then-fired cast and crew from aborted earlier treatments.

The Chevy Volt is getting a bit of that seemingly unfair treatment at the moment. First, it had a lot of development costs. Second--for some reason--conservatives, led by Rush Limbaugh despise the car.* So, just like conservatives will believe just about anything that makes President Obama look bad, no matter how far-fetched, the calculations about just how much each Chevy Volt is losing is a bit of a stretch. When I heard Limbaugh bloviating about it today on the radio, I knew there had to be more to it. There always is. The bad math comes from assuming there will never be another Volt (or derivative), and dividing the development and production costs between each existing model. Which isn't very honest.

It would be at this point that I should point out that Rupert Murdoch lost millions of dollars on FOX "News" for years, and years, before it posted a profit. Sometimes you have to pump money into a project for a while before it bears fruit. Hopefully, General Motors produces less rotten fruit, though!

[Excerpt]

No, GM Is Not Losing $49K On Every Volt; Reuters Just Fails at Basic Business Math

If there’s one characteristic that distinguishes conservatives from liberals, it’s business acumen, right? Libruls may occasionally be able to sell some patchouli-scented hemp-based iPod cozies at the Lesbian Sisterhood crafts fair, but conservatives are the folks who REALLY understand how Bidness works! That’s pretty much the premise of every Republican campaign in the last 30 years, after all. So how is it that when a journalist made a pretty obvious error in a story, the supposedly business-savvy folks in the right-wing blogosphere went nuts passing on the story’s erroneous conclusions? . . .

Read more at: Wonkette


* Obviously, conservatives dislike anything Obama has done, even if he was enacting conservative ideas. Everything. And even thought the Volt--as the story above mentions--was started in 2007, they link its perceived failure with Obama. But doesn't it bother anyone that Limbaugh is leading the parade of hatred not just against our President, but against an American institution like GM?

What Happens in Vegas: Oscar Goodman Uses Obama to Make a Buck

I was highly irritated the other day, when I heard former Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman still squawking about President Obama "insulting" Las Vegas. This time, he's using the dubious charge to make a buck, selling the "No-Bama" Cocktail. How original.

Why is this irritating? Because--as usual--the whole complaint is based on quotes that--in context--were never intended to be insulting to anybody. They're common sense--dare I say--conservative ideas that mention Las Vegas. Could they have helped damage the valley economy? Yes, possibly, inadvertently. But tell me this, should bailed-out banks be taking junkets to Las Vegas on the taxpayer dime? Should families trying to scrape by, take a trip here, and blow their wad? No and no. You could argue that it was inadvisable for a seasoned politician to single out an American City as an example, but when did that ever stop Republicans? "Chicago thug-style politics." "San Fran-sicko." And on, and on.

I created this graphic for use on Facebook. I figured I might as well use it for this story. (Click to embiggen)

Oscar is only doing this--has only ever been doing this--for the attention. He loves, loves, loves attention. And you can tell, because he rarely dissuades anyone from the notion that "Las Vegas" the city does not include the Las Vegas Strip, The Hard Rock Hotel, The Rio, The Palms, The M or most of the other tourist attractions here. He was the Mayor of Downtown and the Stratosphere. Whoop-de-do. Go away, Oscar, let your wife have her time to shine.

[Excerpt]

Oscar Goodman toasts conventions with ‘No-Bama’ and ‘Romney’

The major political parties are meeting this week in Tampa, Fla., and next week in Charlotte, N.C., but at least one Las Vegas venue wants its patrons to be able to partake in the atmosphere of the Republican and Democratic National Conventions — at least in spirit. . .

Read more at: Las Vegas Sun