When the History of What Was the United States of America is written, the Final Chapter Will Read:

While they slept – either comatose from the L-Tryptofan of Iraq War (profiteering) engorgement and the oxycontin of trickle-down christianist sham economics that harmed the very disenfranchised white supremacists it had been sold to as a cure for all ills, or latently anencephalous via ‘reality’ television tales of fake lives grounded in substanceless nonachievement – the bear that Ronald Reagan had warned them about entered their homes and devoured them all. But it was not a communist bear; instead, aided by the most diseased monster that multiple American immoralities could cobble together into one clown, it was a bear amped up on the very capitalistic economic steroid that Reagan died believing saved the world by selling…

to a Russian bear.

I Dare Call This Treason

“As a matter of constitutional law, the Senate is fully within its powers to let the Supreme Court die out, literally,” wrote the Cato Institute’s Ilya Shapiro in a column Wednesday on The Federalist.

Any questions?

Everything You EVER Needed to Know about Donald Trump (and, for that Matter, Ben Carson) in One Soundbite

On this morning’s Morning Schmoe (though, to be fair, he seems to be one of the reality-based ones here), Token Ben exhibits the white male privilege he thinks Donald Trump will confer upon him during the Fourth Reich:

SCARBOROUGH: No, no. It’s a simple question. Yes or no? Do you believe these women are lying or not? Nobody’s trying to paint you as a bad guy. We just want an answer, straight talk.

CARSON: It doesn’t matter whether they’re lying or not.

KAY: Of course, it matters.

CARSON: Listen, it doesn’t matter whether they’re lying or not.

Token Ben then veers off into his own version of Trump’s neo-Trilateral Commission rant of yesterday – but, for Token Ben, the CONSPIRACY involves anyone and everyone who has dared not to adhere to whatever he says THE WORD OF GHOD is at any given moment.

But put Token Ben’s christianism aside for a second and go back to the main chunk o’ apologia.

Remember Cassie Bernall?

One of the victims of the Columbine massacre?

The one whose murder her family tried to cash in on via an eagerly-accepted-by-mainstream-media story which asserted that one of the killers asked her if she believed in Jesus – to which ‘she said yes’ – prior to killing her?

It was a Mountain Time Zone insta-canonization.

Except that, soon, accounts by the survivors of the massacre called into question whether the ‘she said yes’ scenario could have happened as it was being portrayed.  No one (including me) has ever questioned Bernall’s faith post mortem – after all, it wasn’t Cassie Bernall who was pushing the story and trying to sell books based thereon.  It was her family.

From Salon:

[C]ooperative sources quickly clammed up when questioned about the most celebrated Columbine story of all, immortalized this month in Misty Bernall’s bestseller, “She Said Yes: The Unlikely Martyrdom of Cassie Bernall.” “This is just too sensitive,” a key source said, insisting on anonymity even for that statement. According to Misty Bernall’s book, which has energized Christian youth movements around the world, the killers put a gun to her daughter Cassie’s head and asked if she believed in God. When she said yes, they blew her away.

But while no one would go on the record, key investigators made it clear that an alternate scenario is far more likely: The killers asked another girl, Valeen Schnurr, a similar question, then shot her, and she lived to tell about it. Schnurr’s story was then apparently misattributed to Cassie.

“Many of the kids were actually hiding under desks and hearing only bits and fragments of the conversation,” one investigator explained. “It appears that exactly who they taunted, what questions were asked and who replied what may never be crystal clear.” And even if it is clear, investigators clearly don’t intend to tell. They cited the tense political climate around the story in this heavily evangelical community, as well as the potential embarrassment to Cassie’s family, uniformly describing the Bernalls as sincere victims who may have been misinformed “through no malicious intent.”

Seems like a plausible mistake scenario, yes?

Also from Salon:

Emily Wyant knew from the beginning: Columbine “martyr” Cassie Bernall never said “Yes.”

Wyant, who survived the Columbine massacre April 20, told the FBI months ago that the famous “unlikely martyrdom of Cassie Bernall,” immortalized in a best-selling book by Cassie’s mom, Misty, never happened. She told Misty and Brad Bernall, Cassie’s parents, the same account, and she also told the Rocky Mountain News.

But it wasn’t until Sept. 24, one day after Salon News broke the story that investigators doubted Bernall’s famous gunpoint declaration of faith, that the News printed a long story detailing Wyant’s account.

How did the paper react so quickly, with a detailed, never-before-public account of Bernall’s death, a day after the new revelations? Sources at the paper confirm that the details weren’t actually new at all: They’d been sitting on the story for quite some time. The News ran the article nearly five months after obtaining the true story from Wyant, and two weeks after running news stories promoting the release of “She Said Yes: The Unlikely Martyrdom of Cassie Bernall” — news stories that presented the account of Bernall’s martyrdom as fact.

Now, from Skeptic Magazine:

One spectrum of debate in Denver this week is whether the truth matters or not. The argument goes like this: It doesn’t matter if it happened or not, it’s a wonderful and heartwarming story that makes people feel good so just let it go. That is, in fact, what probably happened to the Denver media until the Salon story broke. But now that the truth is coming out (which it inevitably does despite best intentions), I fail to see how such blatant mythmaking and commercialism (the book is just the beginning–audio and video tapes are already being released) can help anyone involved in this tragedy come to grips with their loss and grief.

I even recall one of Bernall’s parents (sadly, I’m blanking as to which one, but I think it was her father) explicitly saying that it didn’t matter.

As Skeptic makes clear, christianist family or not, you’d have to be a heartless bastard not to sympathize with the Bernall family over the loss of Cassie.  She didn’t have it coming.

But it also quickly became clear that, even if the ‘she said yes’ conversation happened, it very likely did not involve her.

That’s certainly not a sin on her part.

But saying that it didn’t matter whether or not a martyrdom tale that her family was pushing was actually true was – and is…

which brings us back to Token Ben.

According to Token Ben, “it doesn’t matter whether [Trump’s accusers are] lying or not.”

Yes, Token Ben, it damn well does.  Trump’s own words make him guilty of being a sleazeball – but by themselves they don’t make him guilty of sexual assault any more than Jon Mark Karr’s ‘confession’ by itself makes him guilty of the murder of JonBenet Ramsey.

The facts underlying the accusations matter.

Token Ben’s spin crass is the Cassie Bernal canonization process writ large….

for Weimar America.

Don’t buy what he’s shilling.

So…Dinesh D’Felon Wants to Hang Out in Women’s Dressing Rooms?


The Donald Trump Story


Clearly, Donald Trump Has Passed Some Time by Playing a Little Solitaire

Wake up people! I’ve been dead for 40 years and even I can see that Donald Trump is the real Manchurian Candidate. Some people felt sorry for Raymond Shaw. Trump? He’s Mrs. Johnny Iselin – without the warmth.
– The Ghost of Laurence Harvey

You Want Tradition? Try Republican Hypocrisy

Antonin Scalia dies while Obama has over eleven months remaining in his second term as president.

Somewhat surprising despite Scalia being 79.

Even an originalist like Scalia would have to agree that the constitution confers upon the president the power to appoint Supreme Court justices subject only to the advice and consent of the Senate but without limitation as to the president’s proximity to the end of his time in office.

Barely an hour after the news broke Saturday of the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) made it clear that he has no intention of letting President Barack Obama replace the conservative icon.

Obviously, today’s right wing Republicans want Scalia-style originalists on the court – but they also apparently want a McConnellist interpretation of the constitution to control the process to replace Scalia.


If there is but one constant in the universe, it is right wing Republican hypocrisy:

If McConnell plans to spend the next year blocking every potential Supreme Court nominee that Obama puts forward, it would be a major break from tradition — since 1975, the average number of days from the nomination of a Supreme Court justice to a final Senate vote is 67, per a Congressional Research Service report.

It would also represent a break with McConnell’s personal history: In 1988, he voted to confirm a Supreme Court nominee when it was a Republican president’s final year in office.

Sorry, Yertle…

“The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice,” McConnell said in a statement. “Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”

But according to principles of Dick Cheneyism – invoked by Darth whenever, after November 2, 2004, there was any suggestion that the people should have a say as to whether The War of Halliburton Profiteering should continue – the people had a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice.

On November 6, 2012.