Tag Archives: america

Was the Last Season of ‘Til Death a Secret Surrealist Masterpiece?

For most of its existence, the Brad Garrett-Joely Fisher sitcom ‘Til Death was more capable of serving as a punchline to someone else’s joke than providing its own. Perpetually low-rated and critically lambasted, yet renewed for four seasons simply so Fox would be able to pair it with other half-hour comedies (or maybe it was out of sheer malice?), most of America stopped watching ‘Til Death before its series finale on Sunday — that is, if they even started watching. Apparently, though, we all missed something kind of insane.

More:
Was the Last Season of ‘Til Death a Secret Surrealist Masterpiece?

Media-Backed Obama Mortgage Program Flops

Obama’s home loan modification program was talked up by the bailout-friendly news media as a potential “ray of light” for struggling homeowners. But on June 21, Associated Press reported the mortgage assistance program is “falling flat.” The broadcast networks supported the mortgage modification and housing bailout when Obama launched it in 2009, after criticizing Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s plan for not doing “enough” to fix the problem. ABC, CBS and NBC haven’t mentioned the new figures since AP reported them. “More than a third of the 1.24 million borrowers who have enrolled in the $75 billion mortgage modification program have dropped out,” AP said. “That exceeds the number of people who have managed to have their loan payments reduced to help them keep their homes.” The ” ambitious ” Home Affordable Modification Program was supposed to help 3-4 million people. As of last month the number of dropouts (436,000) exceeded the permanent modifications by almost 100,000 (340,000). This was part of the same housing bailout Rick Santelli condemned on CNBC saying “the government is promoting bad behavior.” Santelli’s rant against the housing bailout helped inspire thousands of Americans to protest bailouts and runaway government spending at Tea Parties around the country in 2009 and 2010. But Santelli’s opposition to a bailout was an exception among the pro-bailout news media. As recently as Feb. 18, 2010 ABC’s Robin Roberts was praising the program as “what may be a ray of light for the millions of homeowners struggling to hold on to their piece of the American dream.” Roberts and Bianna Golodryga downplayed problems saying that there had been “hiccups” in the program, but placed the blame for those problems on banks unwilling to work with homeowners, rather than on the government. Golodryga’s report also included an expert who criticized the program from the left saying it was “nowhere near the size and scope of what we need to, to stem this tide.” Golodryga is engaged to White House budget director Peter Orszag , who announced his resignation June 22, 2010. ABC’s Jeffrey Kofman also found left-wing criticism of the program to incorporate in his story. On Feb. 18, 2009, Kofman mentioned concerns “that a $75 billion bailout can’t single handedly turn around an $11 trillion housing market. But they say it is a start.” Roughly a month later, CNBC’s Diana Olick acknowledged that the $75 billion program had “fallen short” of helping the 3-4 million homeowners on “Nightly News” March 26, 2010. At that time, she reported that only 200,000 permanent modifications had been done. But Olick didn’t criticize the Obama administration’s decision to expand the plan to more borrowers. In 2009, when Obama’s two-part mortgage bailout was launched, CBS had no criticism or difficult questions in its “Early Show” segment March 5. The night before, Katie Couric described the plan as “relief for struggling homeowners” on “Evening News.” Now it appears the bailout didn’t work and may jeopardize the economic recovery, according to CNBC’s Larry Kudlow. Kudlow reacted to the latest mortgage modifications data on June 22, saying that “Housing in particular looks vulnerable to that double-dip [recession]. And all these goofy, temporary tax credits and mortgage modifications and other forms of temporary stimulus nearly steal activity from the future and never work permanently, as Milton Friedman argued [years ago].” ‘Controversial’ Program Struggles, Despite Network Support Like other bailouts, the networks favored the mortgage bailout and loan modification program when it was announced in 2009. Now that the program is a failure don’t expect a retraction. So far the networks have ignored the new data Treasury released on June 21. Since the broadcast networks haven’t done much reporting on the problems with the loan modification program, people might wonder why it isn’t working. According to AP, “A major reason so many have fallen out of the program is the Obama administration initially pressured banks to sign up borrowers without insisting first on proof of their income. When banks later moved to collect the information, many troubled homeowners were disqualified or dropped out.” AP also warned that more foreclosures could be ahead as people leave the program. The Washington Post reported that about half of the program dropouts ” received another type of loan modification from their banks.” Only 7 percent have gone into foreclosure, according to CNNMoney.com. The timing of the news was bad for politicians trying to pass another housing bailout – this one $3 billion in loans for homeowners who are out of work. Politicians should be wary given the outrage already directed against mortgage bailouts, since it was the potential housing bailout that angered many and led to tea parties across the country. Santelli’s initial rant condemned the proposed housing bailout and touched a nerve with traders and America at large. “And in terms of modifications, I’ll tell you what, I have an idea. You know the new administration’s big on computers and technology,” Santelli declared . “How about this, (Mr.) President and new administration – Why don’t you put up a web site to have people vote on the Internet as a referendum to see if we really want to subsidize the losers’ mortgages, or would we like to, at least, buy cars and buy houses in foreclosure and give them to people who might have a chance to actually prosper down the road, and reward people that could carry the water, instead of drink(ing) the water.” After traders reacted with claps and cheers, CNBC’s Joe Kernen replied, “Rick, they’re like putty in your hands.” Santelli denied that and continued saying, “This is America! (turns around to address pit traders) How many of you people want to pay for your neighbors’ mortgage that has an extra bathroom and can’t pay their bills? Raise their hand. (traders boo; Santelli turns around to face CNBC camera) President Obama, are you listening?” Networks Back Mortgage Rescues, or Complain They’re Not Big Enough Obama’s mortgage bailout was praised by the many in network news media, after an earlier mortgage rescue designed by former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson was attacked from the left by the broadcast networks because it wouldn’t help ” enough people .” “It sounds as if it doesn’t help anybody who had their mortgage rate increased or got foreclosed in 2007,” ABC “World News” anchor Charles Gibson complained on Dec. 5, 2007. “CBS Evening News” sympathized with a Texas couple who “can’t afford” to keep their large ranch home (complete with horses), supposedly because of the rate increases on their mortgage. CBS also ignored skepticism of a homeowner bailout on April 2, 2008, arguing that since the government had bailed out banks, mortgage holders should get the same assistance. “Now to the foreclosure crisis that has so many Americans worried about losing their homes,” “Evening News” anchor Katie Couric said that night. “After the government helped rescue Bear Stearns, calls grew louder for Washington to help struggling homeowners as well. Today on Capitol Hill, there was at least the promise of some assistance.” In July 2008, ABC’s Golodryga called “a sweeping housing bailout bill” “good news for potential homeowners.”   The networks also endorsed the $700 billion “rescue” package in 2008 that was voted down by 228 representatives including 132 “rebellious” conservatives and 94 Democrats. Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., was one of those who voted against it because “The decision to give the federal government the ability to nationalize almost every bad mortgage in America interrupts a basic truth of our free market economy.” The list of reporters and anchors who championed the first bailout that failed and ultimately the bill that passed on Oct. 3, was long and included CBS’s Anthony Mason, ABC’s Betsy Stark, Bianna Golodryga and Jake Tapper, NBC’s Tom Brokaw and CNBC’s Jim Cramer all called for the government to be the knight in shining armor with taxpayer dollars. Cramer was interviewed repeatedly on NBC and CNBC and even appeared on rival network ABC during “Nightline.” It wasn’t just housing bailouts. ABC, CBS and NBC also promoted the nearly $800 billion stimulus bill. They campaigned for the biggest spending bill in history , picking pro-stimulus speakers more often than opposing speakers and almost completely failed to ask how the enormous bill would be paid for.

WaPo Paints the Spitzer-Parker Show as a ‘Democrat’ and a ‘Conservative’

The Washington Post Style section promised an article on CNN’s new Eliot Spitzer-Kathleen Parker chat show with this front-page blurb: ” Odd couple on CNN: New show pairs a conservative with a Democrat.” Inside, in an article surprisingly shy on her typical snark, TV columnist Lisa de Moraes also described the pairing as the “disgraced/rehabbed former governor Eliot Spitzer, the New  York Democrat” vs. “Pulitzer-prize winning conservative columnist Kathleen Parker,” syndicated by the Washington Post Writers Group (this could explain the lack of snark against Parker, if not Spitzer.) The TV columnist made no attempt to assess whether conservatives felt she was one of them (they don’t). She did see this as a turnabout for “Crossfire”-canceling CNN president Jon Klein, but she reproduced his sales chat without much objection: In an interview with The TV Column, Klein said that Spitzer and Parker “can address an appetite that is not being satisfied now — the 99 percent of the country not watching” the other 8 o’clock cable news shows. “We’d like to begin the long, slow, steady process of reaching the underserved. . . . We think America’s ready for that. . . . I can’t think of two people better suited than these super-intelligent, ultra-opinionated but rational individuals .” Leave it to Klein to make a talk-show sound like a soup kitchen. The cable-news “underserved”? Then, he tops that by making them sound like a super-ultra comic-book pairing, a pundit Wonder Twins? In TV terms, they’re green-as-Shrek rookies, but Klein isn’t bothered:  Klein said he’s not worried that neither Spitzer nor Parker has extensive on-air hosting experience yet are joining forces for a new show in a punishing time slot. “We cast a very wide net, and after looking at scores of potential anchors, Kathleen and Eliot demonstrated they belong at the head of the pack,” he said. I’m sure you could find the same sales talk when CNN acquired Campbell Brown from NBC. That’s pretty empty blather — and at least Brown was a broadcaster, with no vice-squad “buzz.” Actually, Spitzer also had a Washington Post connection to tame the poison tip of the de Moraes pen: Recently, Spitzer has been doing the old phoenix-rising-from-ashes thing as a TV personality, as have so many fallen men before him. He got high marks when he subbed on MSNBC. (Spitzer is also a contributor to Slate.com, which is owned by The Washington Post Co.) Parker made the show sound like it would merge “Crossfire” with “Take 5,”  the hip-friends pundit show they tried with Jake Tapper in 2001. Parker told The TV Column the show’s goal is “to change people’s mind.” To that end, they are rounding up a stable of regular contributors for the show. “We’re looking for the smartest, coolest, hippest, funniest friends.” What she likes about the new show, she said, is that “we are from such different worlds in every way….And, I informed Eliot, there are lot more people like me than him.” This apparently means there are more opportunistic moderates (some who trash popular conservatives to get famous on TV and in the WashPost) than there are partisan liberals with a zipper problem. At least de Moraes rehashed Klein’s old trash talk when he killed “Crossfire” that “CNN is a different animal. We report the news. Fox talks about the news.” Klein told the Post writer “We think Eliot and Kathleen are a can’t-miss show. It’s like your favorite blog — you think, ‘I can’t really understand how to think about what’s going on today until I’ve checked out XYZ blogger.’ We think that’s how their show is going to feel.” Lisa went really, sadly soft here, or an editor slashed some copy: right next to Klein’s “different animal” boasting in the New York Observer in 2005  is his blogger-bashing: He dismissed bloggers as “guys in pajamas” (he coined the phrase while defending Mr. Rather on Fox News) and told NPR that pundit shows on cable news were “crack.” And: “There is always going to be an important role for the guys who grab the cameras and shoot the pictures of stuff that’s actually happening,” he said. “What happens after that in the great repurposing engine that is cable news and the blogosphere is out of our hands.” Already, Mr. Klein’s flip comments had hit the blogosphere. Mickey Kaus at Slate seemed all shook up that former Crossfire conservative Tucker Carlson had been unceremoniously released from service. “Boy, people at CNN do not like Jonathan Klein!” Mr. Kaus wrote. “Doesn’t he realize it’s hard to be a highly unpopular boss in the Web era, especially at a big media enterprise the press will pay inordinate attention to? Ask Howell Raines.” “It’s a little early for Mickey to be rooting for my downfall,” said Mr. Klein, who said he didn’t have time to read blogs. But earlier, Mr. Klein had been happy to compliment the blogs with an easy backhand: “I don’t think that blogging, which is, you know, glorified Web-site hosting — that’s what it is. I had a blog for a while, but I just didn’t have time,” he said. “I don’t think that blogs topple news organizations because of the difficulty of sifting through reliable information and mere opinion. But they certainly have arrived on the scene as a player.”

Read the rest here:
WaPo Paints the Spitzer-Parker Show as a ‘Democrat’ and a ‘Conservative’

War on drugs worse than drugs

I'M CONFUSED. When I walk around busy midtown Manhattan, I often smell marijuana. Despite the crowds, some people smoke weed in public. Usually the police leave them alone, and yet other times they act like a military force engaged in urban combat. This February, cops stormed a Columbia, Mo., home, killed the family dog and terrorized a 7-year-old boy — for what? A tiny quantity of marijuana. Two years ago, in Prince George's County, Md., cops raided Cheye Calvo's home — all because a box of marijuana was randomly shipped to his wife as part of a smuggling operation. Only later did the police learn that Calvo was innocent — and the mayor of that town. “When this first happened, I assumed it was just a terrible, terrible mistake,” Calvo said. “But the more I looked into it, the more I realized (it was) business as usual that brought the police through our front door. This is just what they do. We just don't hear about it. The only reason people heard about my story is that I happened to be a clean-cut white mayor.” Radley Balko of Reason magazine says more than a hundred police SWAT raids are conducted every day. Does the use of illicit drugs really justify the militarization of the police, the violent disregard for our civil liberties and the overpopulation of our prisons? It seems hard to believe. I understand that people on drugs can do terrible harm — wreck lives and hurt people. But that's true for alcohol, too. But alcohol prohibition didn't work. It created Al Capone and organized crime. Now drug prohibition funds nasty Mexican gangs and the Taliban. Is it worth it? I don't think so. Everything can be abused, but that doesn't mean government can stop it, or should try to stop it. Government goes astray when it tries to protect us from ourselves. Many people fear that if drugs were legal, there would be much more use and abuse. That's possible, but there is little evidence to support that assumption. In the Netherlands, marijuana has been legal for years. Yet the Dutch are actually less likely to smoke than Americans. Thirty-eight percent of American adolescents have smoked pot, while only 20 percent of Dutch teens have. One Dutch official told me that “we've succeeded in making pot boring.” By contrast, what good has the drug war done? It's been 40 years since Richard Nixon declared war on drugs. Since then, government has spent billions and officials keep announcing their “successes.” They are always holding press conferences showing off big drug busts. So it's not like authorities aren't trying. We've locked up 2.3 million people, a higher percentage than any other country. That allows China to criticize America's human-rights record because our prisons are “packed with inmates.” Yet drugs are still everywhere. The war on drugs wrecks far more lives than drugs do! Need more proof? Fox News runs stories about Mexican cocaine cartels and marijuana gangs that smuggle drugs into Arizona. Few stop to think that legalization would end the violence. There are no Corona beer smugglers. Beer sellers don't smuggle. They simply ship their product. Drug laws cause drug crime. The drug trade moved to Mexico partly because our government funded narcotics police in Colombia and sprayed the growing fields with herbicides. We announced it was a success! We cut way back on the Colombian drug trade. But so what? All we did was squeeze the balloon. The drug trade moved across the border to Peru, and now it's moved to Mexico. So the new president of Mexico is squeezing the balloon. Now the trade and the violence are spilling over the border into the United States. That's what I call progress. It is the kind of progress we don't need. Economist Ludwig von Mises wrote: “(O)nce the principle is admitted that it is the duty of the government to protect the individual against his own foolishness “

The Deadliest Catch Shows Us What a Televised Death Looks Like [Sad Things]

We knew all season that we would eventually see Capt. Phil Harris die on The Deadliest Catch . Last night America watched the stroke that eventually killed him. It was sad and strange and awful and tasteful. It was death reality-TV-style. More

Restaurant Takes on Double Down with Grilled Cheese Burger Melt

Ah, free enterprise, the right of corporate America to compete to see who can aid and abet the obesity crisis more and who can give you a coronary faster. We have doubled down on KFC’s Double Down , And now offer for your culinary satisfaction Friendly’s Grilled Cheese BurgerMelt , “a thick and juicy 100% Black Angus Big Beef Burger between two whole grilled cheese sandwiches, complete with lettuce, tomato and mayo… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Read the original:
Restaurant Takes on Double Down with Grilled Cheese Burger Melt

Ian Somerhalder on Gulf Oil Spill: It’s Time to Change

On The Vampire Diaries , Ian Somerhalder play Damon Salvatore, an often-scary blood sucker. But in real life, the actor isn’t frightened by garlic or stakes to the heart – he’s simply taken aback by the disastrous oil spill in the Gulf. A native of Louisiana, Somherlader was front and center at the CNN telethon that raised $1.8 million this week. He’s also devoted the last few weeks to doing all he can to call attention to this region and this catastrophe. “You know when something bad happens in your life, or something goes wrong – that weird kind of really uneasy feeling you have in the pit of your stomach? I’ve had that for two months,” he told Zap2It, adding: “Basically, the entire area is shut down. Everyone from the waitress who serves you breakfast to the guy who owns the charter boat to the shrimpers – they all literally rely on the ocean to keep their industry going… Think about how frightening it is when you suddenly, though no fault of your own, can’t feed your children or pay your mortgage.” Somerhalder is especially outraged over how and why this accident took place. “All of this happened due to human error – the error is cutting corners, saving money at the expense of safety measures, and a nonexistent regulatory commission,” he said. “The [U.S. Minerals Management Service] gets royalties from the oil industry. How is that any kind of regulatory body?” It’s a question the admistration most definitely has to answer, as many believe this is the prime to enact a serious climate change bill and convince America that government can – nay, must! – play an important role in the free market. Concluded Ian, who we greatly admire for putting himself out there in this manner: “It’s time to change, and I think this disaster is the game changer. It feels like this is one of those catastrophic events that truly changes the way that we think.”

See the rest here:
Ian Somerhalder on Gulf Oil Spill: It’s Time to Change

Crime Pays: CNN Hires Prostitute-Plying Ex-Gov. Eliot Spitzer to Star in Debate Show with Kathleen Parker

The rumors were true. CNN is without shame. They are hiring disgraced Democrat Gov. Eliot Spitzer, the hypocritical “Sheriff of Wall Street” who hired high-priced hookers, as a talk-show host. Spitzer’s co-host will be pseudo-conservative columnist Kathleen Parker, who won the Pulitzer Prize for being a conservative-basher . CNN’s press release said “she describes herself as a ‘rational’ conservative.” That’s a nice way to endear her to the “irrational” conservatives who might have considered watching this show. It’s set up to be Liberal Lion vs. ‘Rational’ Lamb. Jon Klein, president of CNN/U.S., the man who canceled the long-running left-right show “Crossfire” after Jon Stewart lamented they needed to “stop, stop, stop, stop, hurting America,” has reinvented the format as just the latest liberal-media attempt to rehabilitate Spitzer’s career. Klein said in a statement: “Eliot and Kathleen are beholden to no vested interest – in fact, quite the opposite: they are renowned for taking on the most powerful targets and most important causes.” They’re actually spinning this “unbeholden” Spitzer as a moralist and guardian of the public interest. CNN’s press release suggested that little prostitution thing is hardly a disqualification for such a “well-respected political mind.” They even re-used the ridiculous “Sheriff” moniker: Spitzer, a Democrat who resigned as governor in March 2008 after acknowledging visiting a prostitute, is a well respected political mind and a take-no-prisoners prosecutor who has been often referred to as the “Sheriff of Wall Street.” Parker was required by her new job to kiss Spitzer’s ring: “I’m thrilled by the opportunity to discuss the issues that matter to me — and that aren’t heard often enough on television — in a conversation with one of the nation’s most brilliant, fearless and original thinkers. With Eliot Spitzer as my co-host, Wall Street and Main Street will finally meet. It can’t possibly be boring.” Last year, Parker also felt pain for Spitzer in a column knocking David Letterman for his nasty Sarah Palin joke (ever the balancer): Everyone knows by now that Letterman made fun of the Palin family’s trip to New York last week. He quipped that Palin’s daughter got “knocked up” by Yankees third baseman Alex Rodriguez during the seventh inning. Unable to stop his slide into the gutter, he said the hardest part of the visit was keeping Eliot Spitzer away from her daughter. How will this show cover the next politican sex scandal? Or are they hoping CNN will be the “hot corner” on those stories now?  James Poniewozik at Time has the first boos from the media establishment:  The first is not that Spitzer has been chosen despite his sex scandal. It’s that he seemingly was chosen, at least in part, because of the scandal: that is, because of the short-term blast of notoriety and buzz that he will bring with him. Now, for all I know, CNN genuinely sees special and distinctive broadcasting talent in Spitzer, but if they do, it’s eluded me in his long recent history as commentator and guest-host on CNN and MSNBC, where—to my ears, anyway—he comes off grating and supercilious. If he didn’t come with the name and the headlines, I have a hard time believing he’d been chosen on the basis of ability alone. (As for Parker, I’m not familiar enough to say whether she’s a good choice or not, though her résumé is strong enough. But I do have to guess that—call me cynical—given Spitzer’s history it would have been hard for CNN to even consider pairing him with a man. Not that the underrepresentation of men in cable news is exactly a problem, but the idea that pairing Spitzer with a woman makes his choice any better is just icky.)

Excerpt from:
Crime Pays: CNN Hires Prostitute-Plying Ex-Gov. Eliot Spitzer to Star in Debate Show with Kathleen Parker

Obama Administration Knew About Deepwater Horizon 35,000 Feet Well Bore

President Obama and Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates were informed that BP would drill an unprecedented 35,000 feet well bore at the Macondo site off the coast of Louisiana. In September 2009, the Deepwater Horizon successfully sunk a well bore at a depth of 35,055 below sea level at the Tiber Prospect in the Keathley Canyon block 102 in the Gulfof Mexico, southeast of Houston. During the September drilling operations, the Deepwater Horizon drill penetrated a massive undersea oil deposit but BP's priorities changed when the Macondo site in the Mississippi Canyon off the coast of Louisiana was found to contain some 3-4 billion barrels of oil in an underground cavern estimated to be about the size of Mount Everest. It was as a result of another 35,000 feet well bore sank by the Deepwater Horizon at the Macondo site that the catastrophic explosion occurred on April 20. According to the Wayne Madsen Report (WMR) sources within the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Pentagon and Interior and Energy Departments told the Obama Administration that the newly-discovered estimated 3-4 billion barrels of oil in the Gulf of Mexico would cover America's oil needs for up to eight months if there was a military attack on Iran that resulted in the bottling up of the Strait of Hormuz to oil tanker traffic, resulting in a cut-off of oil to the United States from the Persian Gulf. Obama, Salazar, Chu, and Gates green-lighted the risky Macondo drilling operation from the outset, according to WMR's government sources. WMR learned that BP was able to have several safety checks waved because of the high-level interest by the White House and Pentagon in tapping the Gulf of Mexico bonanza find in order to plan a military attack on Iran without having to be concerned about an oil and natural gas shortage from the Persian Gulf after an outbreak of hostilities with Iran. BP still has an ongoing operation to drill down to 40,000 feet below sea level at the Liberty field off the north coast of Alaska. http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Obama-Administration-Knew-About-Deepwa… added by: Incredulous

Daily Kos on Gen. McChrystal: ‘Ruthless, Bullying Criminal’ Like a ’13-Year-Old Skateboarder’

If the bloggers at Daily Kos can imply that Keith Olbermann isn’t pro-Obama enough for them, you can only imagine what they think of Gen. Stanley McChrystal. The Kosmonaut known simply as “Overlander” relayed that the general has written short stories with plots about presidential assassination, so clearly it’s a “fantasy” of his: I hope the Secret Service strip searches this monstrous thug before his meeting with Obama in the White House Wednesday. For the humiliation, mainly. But you can’t be too careful with this devil. Hastings’ article reveals that sometimes, America’s military is not made up of our best and brightest, but of our sickest and most pathological criminals. Half frat boy, half eighth-grader, half murderer and all evil, McChrystal is a sad remnant of Donald Rumsfeld’s dysfunctional Pentagon who should have been kicked out of the military in West Point rather than be allowed to slouch his way through a brutal career and find his way into the White House. Armed only with an article in Rolling Stone, a magazine that’s been infatuated with every powerful Democrat from Clinton to Gore to Obama, this oracle of Kos knows this immature Bushie must be stripped of responsibility: Obama has allowed McChrystal to write his Afghanistan policy. But McChrystal still whimpers and whines and tosses off junior high insults when talking about the minimal constraints our weak civilian government places on our runaway military. Obama should sack McChrystal because McChrystal is a ruthless, bullying criminal with the emotional development of a 13-year-old skateboarder. This blogger can upbraid a general as an emotionally stunted criminal, but he or she doesn’t even have the guts to sign their name to it. It’s appropriate that Keith Olbermann would rejoin this screed-writing band of self-righteous leftists.

Read the original post:
Daily Kos on Gen. McChrystal: ‘Ruthless, Bullying Criminal’ Like a ’13-Year-Old Skateboarder’