A million here, a million there, and pretty soon we're talking about real money "In June, Fox News' parent company News Corporation gave a $1 million donation to the Republican Governors Association. This evening, IRS disclosures reveal that News Corporation gave another check, time for $250,000, bringing his total donation amount to $1,250,000. Other donors include Bill Koch, who donated $100,000, Swift Boat-funder Bob Perry, who gave $3.5 million, and right-wing casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who gave $1 million to the Republican campaign group. ... News Corporation chief Rupert Murdoch recently stated that he directed his company's donation in order to help his friend John Kasich, the Republican nominee for governor in Ohio. As ThinkProgress' Ian Millhiser noted, there actually are laws against corporate managers treating a publicly-traded corporation as if it were their own personal bank account."
Yes, food insurance. Food. Insurance. In preparation for the coming Marxist-Progressive-Maoist-Kenyan Pockyclips against white guys with punch-me-faces and flesh-toned hair.
Here he is on his radio show talking about how you'll be sorry if you don't have food insurance: http://www.bobcesca.com/blog-archives/2010/10/glenn_beck_sell.html
Ah, Socialism The 130th bank failure of the year happened today when Security Savings Bank, headquartered in Olathe, Kansas was taken over by the FDIC. All nine branches will be open tomorrow, operating as Simmons Bank of Arkansas. Olathe is one of those places that has achieved wingularity, so we can't help but wonder if any of the wingers whose accounts are safe will feel just a little bit of shame at hating the government that the FDIC is part of the next time they write a check or swipe their card, as if nothing had ever happened? They should. Their peace of mind cost the rest of us over $82 million.
This morning, federal employees who are insured through the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program received an email from Aetna advertising their new pet insurance plans. "In these challenging economic times, it's good to know you can get some financial protection for unexpected illness and injury to your pets," the e-mail reads before listing the many benefits:
So is there anything wrong with being able to insure one's pet? Nope. If an individual can afford the cost, then having the option to purchase pet insurance is wonderful. What is wrong, is this:
…while federal employees can buy pet insurance "in these challenging economic times," LGBT workers are still prohibited from purchasing policies for their partners or spouses by the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) — a federal law which denies federal benefits to legally married same sex couples.
Aetna is not the one to blame here. As easy as it is to rip into health insurers for denying coverage to those who need it most, they are following current government regulations in regards to same-sex partners. The problem is once again the dysfunctional Congress, an institution which couldn't get its act together if the country's life depended on it.
The House and Senate each have bills pending which would grant full benefits to same-sex partners but while they play politics, 30,000 government employees with same sex partners are left waiting.
On the upside, they can now insure Bowser.
###
Uh huh.
###
Republican 'Contender' Dons Duckie Pajamas, Parties With Scantily Clad Women
###
True to form, the Obama administration's response has been to oppose any action that might upset the banks, like a temporary moratorium on foreclosures while some of the issues are resolved. Instead, it is asking the banks, very nicely, to behave better and clean up their act. I mean, that's worked so well in the past, right?
The response from the right is, however, even worse. Republicans in Congress are lying low, but conservative commentators like those at The Wall Street Journal's editorial page have come out dismissing the lack of proper documents as a triviality. In effect, they're saying that if a bank says it owns your house, we should just take its word. To me, this evokes the days when noblemen felt free to take whatever they wanted, knowing that peasants had no standing in the courts. But then, I suspect that some people regard those as the good old days.
Ah yes, a return to the good old days of droight de seigneur, "the lord's right". There aren't any virgins anymore and the Repugs can't get it up anyway, but your home will do. IOKIYAR.
Of course Kilmeade won't be fired. He should be, but that won't happen. He insulted Muslims, and that's cool. You have to insult Jews publicly before you lose your job in broadcasting. Fox News host Brian Kilmeade will soon "clarify" his repeated assertion Friday that "all terrorists are Muslim," but that's not enough for many critics who argue there's a media double-standard in the treatment of reporters who make anti-Semitic comments and those who are perceived to slur Muslims. ... "Not every Muslim is an extremist, a terrorist, but every terrorist is a Muslim," Kilmeade said on his radio show. "You can't avoid that fact. And that is ridiculous that we got to keep defining this -- the people that equate Timothy McVeigh with the Al Qaeda terrorist organization, which is growing and a threat that exists." ... In asserting this, Kilmeade either ignored or was not aware of the long history of terrorism outside of the Muslim world, from anarchist terrorism in 19th-century Russia, to Zionist terrorism in the 1930s and 1940s, to the Irish Republican Army, to the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka (who are considered pioneers of suicide bombing), to right-wing extremists in the US, from the Ku Klux Klan -- considered by many to be a terrorist organization -- to Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, who -- despite Kilmeade's protestations to the contrary -- is largely considered a terrorist."
After the Times calls the Chilean President's decision to push hard to rescue the miners a "extraordinary political calculation", here's Tom Scocca:
It's a foreign concept, sure. Here in the United States, everyone agrees that the job of an elected official is to "spend political capital" to "control the narrative" that will determine whether that official is regarded by the media and the public as a success or a failure, which will determine the result of the next election. This is why, 21 months into the Obama administration, we still have mass understaffing on the federal bench and nobody cares. It's why we can't even go through with digging a lousy railroad tunnel—who will absorb the political damage if there are cost overruns?
So when our horse-race-obsessed, broke, self-pitying nation sees Chile get something difficult done, obviously it must be because the Chilean narrative demanded it. Not because the thing needed to get done.
By the way, Chile's president serves for one term.
(This is via Jay Rosen)
###
Jill: Because nothing says "Great American Patriot" like hoping your country goes bankrupt
Jill: If Obama does this, we'll know he's a Republican plant
###
Chris Coons missed a huge opportunity during his debate with Christine O'Donnell.
###
Real investigative reporting is not dead. It is alive and well and it is going on at Think Progress They have been following the money and finding out the truth - and pissing off a lot of powerful people in the process, and good on 'em for it. They have been relentless on exposing the Chamber of Commerce and Rupert Murdoch as they attempt to buy our government. Now they are exposing an Exxon-Mobile linked religious front group that Beck is citing as he tells Christians not to believe in global warming.
