Currently viewing the tag: "Greatest"

(CNN) - It’s official: Donald Trump is a “birther.” But he’d prefer you don’t use that term.

Speaking to MSNBC Thursday, the business mogul and improbable presidential candidate reiterated much of what he has said in the last several days when it comes to doubting President Obama’s birthplace, declaring, “I am embracing the issue, and I’m proud of the issue. I think somebody has to embrace it.”

Trump, who in the last two weeks has raised the debunked issue on several programs, added he finds the term “birther” downright insulting.

“I don’t like the name birther,” he said. “I think it’s very unfair and derogatory to a lot of good people that happen to think there is a possibility that this man was not born in this country.”

Trump added he will continue to press the issue because, “If it were true, it’d be the greatest scam in the history of this country.”

CNN Political Ticker

Tagged with:


Not our usual fare but I cannot be silent. How can Forrest Gump be the greatest character of all time when he’s not even really a character? He’s a pure plot device, a Christmas tree on which to hang gimmicky little zeitgeist ornaments for the baby-boomer audience to ooh and ahh at in recognition. Good [...]

Read this post »

Hot Air » Top Picks

Tagged with:


To cleanse the palate. I used to think this guy was the greatest of all time, but now I don’t know. Watching the two clips in sequence is like watching a highlight reel of Jordan when he was on the Bulls followed by one of Kobe when he was in high school. The skill levels [...]

View the video »

Hot Air » Top Picks

Tagged with:


To cleanse the palate. I used to think this guy was the greatest of all time, but now I don’t know. Watching the two clips in sequence is like watching a highlight reel of Jordan when he was on the Bulls followed by one of Kobe when he was in high school. The skill levels [...]

View the video »

Hot Air » Top Picks

Tagged with:

Fox News
Bruce Pearl Fired; Tennessee Basketball Fans Remember Coach's Greatest Hits
SB Nation
With Bruce Pearl fired and the University of Tennessee looking for a new basketball coach, you might think folks in Knoxville want to forget their Pearl relationship ever happened. But Vols fans aren't ready to forget why they loved him in the first
Did Bruce Pearl know he was getting axe?Sportsrageous
Tennessee Fires Bruce PearlWKRG-TV
What Finally Got Bruce Pearl Fired?Wall Street Journal (blog)
San Francisco Chronicle -Los Angeles Times -USA Today
all 582 news articles »

Sports - Google News

Tagged with:

“Look for the good days. Keep your chin up.” Plus: Bully speaks too!

A serious, and surprisingly affecting, end to last week’s palate-cleansing saga. It’s Casey Heynes, bullied schoolboy turned cherubic, 16-year-old Aussie avatar of revenge for millions worldwide. He’s … exactly how you imagined him to be. Intelligent, soft-spoken, and driven to such despair by his daily nightmare that he cops to having considered suicide last year. [...]

Read this post »

Hot Air » Top Picks

Tagged with:

What is the greatest moral danger in the US?  Hint; it’s not the dirty [email protected] hippies.  A few days ago my friend Shaun Mullen explained why the Catholic Church has no moral authority.  PZ Myers explains how that applies to the Republican Party in this must read post.

Today is my wedding anniversary. I’ve been married to the same woman for 31 years, without ever straying. Newt Gingrich has been married 3 times, divorced one wife while she was recovering from surgery, and has had extra-marital affairs.

Guess who is considered the defender of traditional sexual morality?

It’s a strange situation where the political party with more ex-wives than candidates, that houses and defends a disturbingly amoral network of fundamentalist operators is regarded as the protector of the sanctity of the family. They’re anything but.

The Christian fundamentalists that make up a large share of the Republican base are slaves to an ancient middle eastern tribal document, The Old Testament,  not unlike the Islamic fundamentalists they love to hate.  PZ Meyers again:

Now look at those dirty rotten hippies, like me. We say the ties between a couple should be made with respect and affection, not the strictures of law and precedent; letting gays marry, for instance, strengthens the public approval of our kinds of bond, while weakening the authoritarian bonds. Our ideal is a community of equals, while theirs is a hierarchy of power, a relic of Old Testament values in which marrying a woman was like buying a camel, a certification of ownership, and nothing must compromise the Big Man’s possession of properties.

If we strip marriage of the asymmetry of power, as we must if we allow men to marry men and women to marry women, then we also strip away the man and wife, dominant and submissive, owner and owned, master and servant relationship that characterizes the conservative view of marriage. This is what they want to preserve, and this is what they are talking about when people like Gingrich echo those tired phrases about “Judeo-Christian values” and complain that their “civilization is under attack”. And it is, when we challenge their right to treat one partner, so-called, as chattel.

The family values as preached by the religious fundamentalist of the Republican party is little more than an attempt to maintain the male dominance of the Old Testament and it’s not new but what the Catholic Church was all about from the very beginning.  Not really that much different than the Sharia Law they love to condemn.

The Moderate Voice

Tagged with:
Thunder: Durant played his greatest game (blog)
The Thunder beat the Heat for many reasons. Kendrick Perkins' defensive mentality and presence. The new and improved Serge Ibaka. Nick Collison, Nazr Mohammed and Thabo Sefolosha showing the Heat how role players are supposed to fit in.
Oklahoma City defense helps put Miami on iceSan Francisco Chronicle
Perkins makes Thunder a credible threat in no
Kevin Durant leads Thunder over Heat at MiamiLos Angeles Times
Boston Herald -Reuters
all 396 news articles »

Sports - Google News

Tagged with:

The greatest energy-related health risks to Americans clearly come from fossil fuels.

The gravest immediate risk is the traditional air pollution that comes from the combustion of coal, oil, and natural gas, which kills 20,000 or more Americans a year, and impairs the health of hundreds of thousands (see Life-cycle study: Accounting for total harm from coal would add “close to 17.8¢/kWh of electricity generated” and Burning fossil fuels costs the U.S. $ 120 billion a year — not counting mercury or climate impacts).

The gravest risk in the coming decades is from unrestricted greenhouse gas emissions, primarily from the combustion of coal, oil, and natural gas, which threatens multiple simultaneous catastrophes whose combined impact would very likely harm all Americans and all of humanity severely and irreversibly for many centuries (see “A stunning year in climate science reveals that human civilization is on the precipice“).

But we also live in a world of finite resources and finite investment dollars, which is precisely why we can’t afford to make big mistakes in energy policy, as we have with, say corn ethanol.  Right now, it appears that a major push towards new nuclear power would be such a mistake.

Fundamentally, we need to focus on the energy technologies and strategies that meet the combination of low cost (including all environmental and health costs), practicality, and scalability.

Nuclear fails the key tests not because Japan shows nuclear power is inherently unsafe.  Nuclear fails the test because it is wildly expensive, and Japan makes clear there is a good reason for that.  As Richard Caperton and I wrote in our CNN piece:

New reactors are intrinsically expensive because they must be able to withstand virtually any risk that we can imagine, including human error and major disasters. Why? Because when the potential result of a disaster is the poisoning — and ultimately, death — of thousands of people, even the most remote threats must be eliminated.

Nuclear power wasn’t going anywhere in this country before the earthquake and tsunami (see  Exelon’s Rowe: Low gas prices and no carbon price push back nuclear renaissance a “decade, maybe two”).  It is just far too expensive:

Clearly, we shouldn’t be trying to accelerate the permitting process or reducing safeguards.

Insurers know that the results of a nuclear catastrophe would be ruinous on a scale that would overwhelm any private company, which is why they won’t insure nuclear plants. Instead, the U.S. government — which is to say taxpayers — takes on the liability for nuclear reactors.

If one of the 104 nuclear reactors in the U.S. experiences a catastrophic failure, taxpayers will be on the hook to pay for the damages.

Taxpayers aren’t just bearing the risk for operational and environmental disasters, they are also on the hook for financial disasters. No bank will finance a new reactor without a loan guarantee from the federal government, which says that if the power company can’t pay the loan, the government will step in and pay it for them.

Let’s be clear: If something goes wrong with a U.S. nuclear reactor, the American public will be in double jeopardy — we’ll suffer the health consequences and then also have to pay for it.

Because taxpayers have so much to lose in a nuclear disaster, the government has a responsibility to take every precaution to minimize that risk.

Right now, energy efficiency and demand response are vastly cheaper than new nukes.  Increasing the capacity utilization of combined cycle natural gas plants can replace coal for the foreseeable future as new baseload power (in the few places where that is needed and that are too uninformed to be pursuing efficiency).

Even solar power can apparently meet many critical aspects of utility needs cheaper than new nukes — and unlike the nukes, both solar photovoltaics and concentrated solar thermal power are coming down steadily in price.

Nuclear needs to get its act together in this country if it is to see significant growth.  The industry had decades to agree on one or two moodular designs that would have streamlined permitting, reduced construction costs and bottlenecks, simplified training, improved oversight, and increased safety.  The ONLY reason not to have one or two designs is, supposedly, that multiple designs  improve competitiveness and thus lower total costs.  #FAIL.

So let’s hit the pause button on new nuclear power plants.  Let’s figure out what we’re going to do with the waste and if we can’t get a central repository, then we must figure out how we’re going to make the spent fuel as safe as possible.  Let’s get one or two modular designs and see if we can develop a process that gets nukes on a declining cost curve, rather than an increasing one.

It may be that nuclear power won’t be a substantial contributor to solving global warming in this country.  There is certainly no intrinsic reason why it should be and there are many plausible alternative pathways, one of which I just posted (see “a practical, affordable (and safe) clean electricity plan“).

For the foreseeable future, we’re certainly not gonna be building any new nukes that the taxpayers aren’t guaranteeing — and since the president and Congress seem to be committed to austerity, nuclear subsidies certainly aren’t going to be dramatically increasing (see Wall Street Journal poll: Most popular spending cut is to subsidies for new nuclear plants).

Right now, the country simply isn’t serious about global warming, but come the 2020s, we’re going to be desperate — and we will engage in a WWII-scale effort to deploy every practical and affordable low carbon technology available.  Right now, it doesn’t seem like nuclear will be a big part of that deployment in the United States.  If the industry and policymakers want to change that assessment, then they will have to completely rethink what they are doing.

If not, here’s what will do the heavy lifting:

Climate Progress

Tagged with:

As NewsBusters has been reporting for over a week, America's media have been widely attacking House Homeland Security chairman Peter King (R-N.Y.) for conducting hearings about the threat of homegrown Muslim terrorists.

On Friday's "Real Time," host BIll Maher, in an interview with Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), called the Koran a "hate-filled book" while claiming "the threat potentially from radicalized Muslims is a unique and greater threat" than from "right-wing militias and Timothy McVeigh types" (video follows with transcript and commentary):

BILL MAHER, HOST: So let me get to the part where I think you may not agree with me which is I do agree that there are other groups that pose a terrorist threat to this country. There are right-wing militias who are nutty and the Ku Klux Klan and abortion bombers and Timothy McVeigh types. I would say that the threat potentially from radicalized Muslims is a unique and greater threat. It is the greatest threat.

Let me give you the reasons why I jotted down why. One, it's been going on a thousand years this problem between Islam and the west. We are dealing with a culture that is in its medieval era. It comes from a hate-filled holy book, the Koran, which is taken very literally by its people. They are trying to get nuclear weapons. I don't think Tim McVeigh would ever have tried to get a nuclear weapon because I think right-wing nuts they think they love this country and they are not trying to destroy this country. They want to get it away from the people they see as hijacking it. That’s different than Muslim extremists who want to destroy it. And also, it's a culture of suicide bombing, which is hard to deter from people who want to kill themselves.

REPRESENTATIVE KEITH ELLISON (D-MINNESOTA): Well, I’ll tell you, Bill, I think you should investigate this issue a little more because I think that you're lumping together things that shouldn't be lumped together and you're casting a very wide net and therefore coming to the wrong conclusions. First of all, when you talk about they're trying to get nuclear weapons, are you referring to Iran? Who are you talking about? Al Qaeda?

MAHER: I think anyone who is influenced by al Qaeda and the statements of Osama bin Laden, and that’s…

ELLISON: Yeah, but Muslims aren't. I mean, there is 1.4 billion Muslims in the world.

MAHER: Of course. No one is disputing that the vast, vast, giant majority of Muslims are not the problem. We're talking about a very small percentage, but it just takes one. That's what we're talking about when we're talking about terrorism, and obviously there is something that is going on that they're getting from the Koran.

Maher here was almost sounding like a conservative. Shouldn't he be attacked for it?

MAHER: Have you read Sam Harris’s book “The End of Faith?” He says…

ELLISON: They’re not getting it from the Koran. You know Bill, I’m glad, let’s use this point for a moment, because as you know, as a student of religion, you know, you could there, books are complex, they’re compiled, and taking them out of context is a very easy thing to do.

MAHER: I've heard this many times and I don't buy it. I’m sorry. Sam Harris says, “On almost every page the Koran instructs observant Muslims to despise non-believers.”

ELLISON: That’s absurd. Ridiculous.

MAHER: And he quotes it. Am I getting the wrong translation? Because that’s what every Muslim always tells me.

ELLISON: No, you must be.

MAHER: A lot of bad translations then.

ELLISON: Well, why don't you read the part where it says that anyone who takes a life it’s as if he killed the whole world, and anyone who saves a life it's as if he saves the whole world? What about the one where it says let there be no compulsion in religion, and that it’s literally wrong to impose…

MAHER: So then where are terrorists getting their instructions from? They’re getting it from something else.

ELLISON: Like any ideologue, they will take things out of context to do what they want to do. If you listen to terrorist rhetoric, Bill, what they do is they cite politics, they cite political grievances. They don’t really use too much religion. As a matter of fact, when you find Muslims who reject terrorism as I do and almost everyone does, it often is for spiritual and religious reason and moral reasons, but when people want to justify it they justify it on political reasons. This is well-documented. Check out the Gallup poll, check out people who have studied this stuff. One of the things I think we can do to undermine terrorist ideology is actually to use people who know the Koran and to go after people like Anwar al-Awlaki who misquote it, misuse it, and don't really understand it.

MAHER: Okay, I hope that happens. Alright, thank you for joining us, Congressman. I appreciate your time. Okay, let's join our panel. Oh, there I am getting in trouble with the liberals again.

Notice at the end Maher said, "Oh, there I am getting in trouble with the liberals again."

But will he?

When you consider the universal excoriation Rep. King has gotten in the past couple of weeks for holding hearings about basically this same issue, or what happens whenever any conservative makes similar points as to those Maher did Friday evening, shouldn't media members go after Maher's obvious "Islamophobia?"

Or will this be another instance of liberals not caring when one of their own exhibits what certainly would be considered "hate-speech" if it came from a conservative? - Exposing Liberal Media Bias

Tagged with:

Lost And Found: 50 Of The Internet’s Greatest Missing Posters
What’s Going On At Uproxx

Tagged with:

What about this chart says to you “Eurozone demand is too high, I need to tighten policy”?

Maybe you can see something in this chart to indicate that inflation is out of control in the Eurozone?

On some level, I think Europe is paying the price for France’s desire to have a Frenchman run the ECB. He’s acting like a cartoon version of a German inflation hawk. I can imagine an alternate universe in which a German runs the bank and finds himself bending over backwards to dispel suspicion that the Euro contraption is being run for the benefit of German bondholders and totally ignoring the welfare of the majority of Europe’s citizens.


Tagged with:

Impossibly efficient bureaucracies:

Ezra Klein explains the reality:

I can't believe in guys in suits with the ability to plan things.

That's the main thing I've learned working as a reporter and political observer in Washington: No one can carry out complicated plans. All parties and groups are fractious and bumbling. But everyone always thinks everyone else is efficiently and ruthlessly carrying out complicated plans. Partisans are very good at recognizing disarray and incompetence on their side of the aisle, but they tend to think the other side is intimidatingly capable and unburdened by scruples or normal human vulnerabilities. And there's so much press interest in Svengali political consultants like Karl Rove or David Plouffe, all of whom get built up in the press as infallible tacticians, that the place just looks a lot more sophisticated than it really is.

Bernstein couldn't agree more. By the way, Orr's review of The Adjustment Bureau is here.

Email this Article
Add to digg
Add to Reddit
Add to Twitter
Add to
Add to StumbleUpon
Add to Facebook

The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan

Tagged with:

Not a parody:

This seems to have been posted on Rumsfeld’s website (PDF) in order to help Barack Obama re-connect with disgruntled liberals.


Tagged with:

By David Boaz

A new Gallup Poll shows that Americans are most likely to say that Ronald Reagan was our greatest president. Reagan had many good qualities, but this is not plausible. Following Reagan in the poll was Lincoln, who despite a devastating war and a vast expansion of government, did end slavery and preserve the union. Then come Clinton and Kennedy, about whom one can only bemoan the historical illiteracy of the voters. They were actually the top two picks among Democrats, followed by Obama.

Only in fifth place do we find George Washington, the man who led the revolution that created the United States and then ensured that it became an enduring republic. Washington’s accomplishments are the subject of my weekly column at the Britannica blog:

Had he been a Caesar, a Cromwell, a Napoleon, we know what he would have done. A French officer who wrote a book about the new country of America told us what he in fact did: “This is the seventh year that he has commanded the army and that he has obeyed the Congress; more need not be said.” But one more thing was said: The Commander in Chief traveled to Annapolis, where the Continental Congress was meeting, returned his commission, and said, “Having now finished the work assigned me, I retire from the great theatre of Action; and bidding an Affectionate farewell to this August body under whose orders I have so long acted, I here offer my Commission, and take my leave of all the employments of public life.” And he created a new order for the ages.

It is appropriate that we still celebrate the birth of George Washington — and in fact the actual federal holiday on the third Monday in February is Washington’s Birthday.

Honoring Our Greatest President is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog

Cato @ Liberty

Tagged with: