Casual Observation

I’ve got Hardball on my teevee and it has Tom DeLay representing the right and Harold Ford, Jr. representing the left. That seems like an equal match, but I wish Chris Matthews would think for a moment about how neither the left or the right really wants to be associated with either of those a-holes.

20 Comments

BooMan on February 25, 2009 at 5:13 pm

Tom DeLay just revoked David Brooks’ conservative credentials.

Brendan Skwire on February 25, 2009 at 5:35 pm

HAHAHAHA1 that’s awesome!
p-lease show a clip, I’d love to see that.
- BooMan on February 25, 2009 at 5:39 pm
  
  I don’t have that, but I have this:
  - Brendan Skwire on February 25, 2009 at 5:50 pm
    
    I love that video.
    poor bobo, hitting the bottle again. Jindal’s performance probably had him hitting the hardstuf: Robitussin cough suppressant.
    
    Bobo loves his Robo.
RandyH on February 25, 2009 at 7:05 pm

DeLay must have gotten his marching orders from Leader Rush today.

LIMBAUGH: [T]he people on our side are really making a mistake if they go after Bobby Jindal on the basis of style. Because if you think — people on our side I’m talking to you — those of you who think Jindal was horrible, you think — in fact, I don’t ever want to hear from you ever again. … I’ve spoken to him numerous times, he’s brilliant. He’s the real deal.
blksista on February 25, 2009 at 8:28 pm

like black folks who have their black ID cards snatched back, there is such a thing as wingnut ID cards?

Zandar1 on February 25, 2009 at 5:34 pm

Oh great, now I have the image of Harold Ford, Jr. and Bobby Jindal arguing stupidly about Hurricane Katrina stuck in my head.

idredit on February 25, 2009 at 5:35 pm

Oh My.

how many legal blows can Norm Coleman suffer?

this

and now Coleman’s legal team is caught with holding back on evidence and coaching a witness,

TPM

the court ordered the testimony of a key witness struck

blksista on February 25, 2009 at 8:31 pm

This is a Merry Go Round Brokedown.
- idredit on February 28, 2009 at 11:19 am
  
  this is quite a merry.
  
  the court restored the strucked evidence of Coleman’s star witness
  
  but then it was discovered that the coaching of this witness was not inadvertent:
  
  Secret Coleman-Lawyer E-Mails Reveal Intentional Hiding Of Witness — Franken Camp Wants Double-Count Claim Thrown Out Completely
  
  via TPM – February 27, 2009, 12:01PM
  
  All hell just broke loose in the Minnesota courtroom, with Al Franken’s lawyers catching Team Coleman in the act of yet more concealing of evidence — and they’ve now made a motion to totally strike the Coleman camp’s claims about double-counting of ballots, which the Coleman camp has hoped to use to subtract over 100 votes from Franken’s lead.
  
  You might remember that on Wednesday, the Coleman team was caught having withheld notes given to them in early January by Pamela Howell, a Republican election worker in Minneapolis. (Note: Minnesota precinct workers are selected by partisan identification, and then buddied up across party lines to keep it running smoothly and honestly.) The court then struck the witness’ testimony, relating to double-counting of votes — but then turned around yesterday and reversed themselves, after the Coleman team said it had been an honest oversight — that there was no bad faith involved.
  
  more
  
  Oh my. Coleman’s lawyers forgot the principal rule taught on the first day of pre-law 101: “You can’t disappear the written word unless you’re 1000% confident you possess all copies thereof”

BooMan on February 25, 2009 at 5:36 pm

Michele Bachman, still crazy.

Zandar1 on February 25, 2009 at 5:39 pm

That woman is 55 gallons of batshit crazy in a Big Gulp cup, I swear.
- BooMan on February 25, 2009 at 5:46 pm
  
  she’s totally over the rainbow.

Real History Lisa on February 25, 2009 at 7:18 pm

What? DeLay is pretty far right, and Ford is pretty far right too!

Real History Lisa on February 25, 2009 at 7:18 pm

In Ford’s case, relative to our party, etc.

Real History Lisa on February 25, 2009 at 7:20 pm

Btw – most important piece I’ve read today.

From http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-k-black/why-is-geithner-continuin_b_169234.html:

Whatever happened to the law (Title 12, Sec. 1831o) mandating that banking regulators take “prompt corrective action” to resolve any troubled bank? The law mandates that the administration place troubled banks, well before they become insolvent, in receivership, appoint competent managers, and restrain senior executive compensation (i.e., no bonuses and no raises may be paid to them). The law does not provide that the taxpayers are to bail out troubled banks. Treasury Secretary Paulson and other senior Bush financial regulators flouted the law. (The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) are both bureaus within Treasury.) The Bush administration wanted to cover up the depth of the financial crisis that its policies had caused.

Mr. Geithner, as President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York since October 2003, was one of those senior regulators who failed to take any effective regulatory action to prevent the crisis, but instead covered up its depth. He was supposed to regulate many of the largest bank holding companies in the United States. Far too many of these institutions are now deeply insolvent because the banks they own are deeply insolvent. The law mandated that Geithner and his colleagues place troubled banks in receivership long before they became insolvent. Why are the banking regulators, particularly Treasury Secretary Geithner, continuing to disobey the law?

Micheline on February 25, 2009 at 10:48 pm

Does the law state that the Federal Reserve Presidents are responsible for doing these things? If not, then it isn’t Geither’s fault.