The one that frustrates me is usually done by local news. It’s calling the perpetrator of a crime a “suspect” when the perp is an unknown subject. So they’ll say, “The local 7-11 was the scene of armed robbery that turned deadly. The suspect, a white male, shot and killed the clerk.” I want to yell at the screen, “We don’t have a suspect yet!” Why can’t they just say, “A white man shot and killed the clerk?” If they have to use jargon, at least use the right jargon and say, “The unsub shot and killed the clerk” or “The perp shot and killed the clerk.”

I don’t think I remember ever noticing Simpson Bowles referred to as Bowles/Simpson and then shortened to B-S. But how appropriate. All we need to do is to take the “-” out of “B-S.”

Mellisa Harris-Perry is a cheerleader for the Obama administration and consistently minimizes the Obama’s administration’s bad policies and sell outs to the right.

What is Pelosi talking about? Obama didn’t express concern about provisions allowing indefinite detention of American citizen. He was only concerned that the original version required him to detain, which he opposed because it limited the President’s authority. He had no problem with it authorizing him to detain, he just wanted it to be clear that the President makes these decisions, not a law.

So Pelosi is LYING to make Obama look better.

I’m feeling less alone the more people start to speak out about how empty Obama’s “support” really is.

We may not be an absolute monarchy, but the President is the head of the executive branch and is expected to give orders to his administration.

Clinton was a weasel. He should have just ordered the military to stop discriminating against LGBT people (I included the T on purpose) and taken the heat. Remember what Harry said. But his cowering here was a sign that he would not be the progressive President we needed, but would instead continue America’s arrogant stomping around the world and the Neo-Liberalism of the previous 12 years.

If he’d acted with courage, if he’d vetoed DOMA, if he’d been a real ally, we’d be a lot further along.

So no excuse for Obama here. Sign the order, Mr. Obama.

I agree. I am all for getting rid of the filibuster, even though it means no stopping future Republican majorities. But strikes me as awfully convenient for the forces of regressivism for Reid to now support getting rid of it just months before an election that many predict will give Republicans a slim majority in the Senate. Awfully convenient.

The five big LGBT donors had just threatened to not contribute to Obama’s super-pac. They wanted him to sign the executive order banning federal contractors who discriminated against LGBT people.

This was a cynical ploy on his part. He can mouth the pro-LGBT rhetoric and yet STILL refuse to sign an order that would actually extend rights to us. He is hoping to get the LGBT community to continue to support him while he continues to operate according to what I can only conclude is his personal Homophobia.

This is typical Obama. Talk like he supports us, but act in ways that support the right wing, the corporations, Wall Street, the Oil Companies, the advocates to privatize education and the security state empire.

He will get no praise from me on this. I will give him some praise when he signs that executive order. Until then this is more empty rhetoric.

This is all Neo-Liberal bullshit of tax credits.

The one that really made me angry was the idea of giving further tax breaks to companies who insource. Maybe understood by itself without any context this would seem like a good thing. But in context we realize that it’s part of a process that is sick.

First we had system of protective tariffs that supported American industry and its jobs as well as generating revenue. Then we cut the tariffs drastically so we had no support for American industry and its jobs anymore and less revenue. Now the supposed solution is to give tax credits? So we decrease revenue even more? Plus we know that such a credit if it ever happened would be swiss cheese with so many loopholes that it wouldn’t actually bring anything home, just give companies more tax breaks.

I have an idea! Instead of handing out speeding tickets with fines to keep our highways safe, let’s instead give tax credits to those who don’t speed so much!!!!

All I can say is that we are royally fracked, using the Battlestar Galactaca meaning of the term.

Q. Why is Romney trying to turn Obama into Carter?

A. In hope that doing so will turn him into Reagan.

Q. So will it work, will it turn him into Reagan?

A. No more likely it will turn him into Ford.

The term “Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party” was first used by Paul Wellstone to describe himself. Dean just co-opted it as part of his attempt at convincing progressives he was one of us, when he never really was.

Clinton didn’t help the one candidate because he didn’t endorse Hillary in 2008. The mainline Dem interpretation of all this is that it means Hillary is on the fast track for the 2016 nomination. They don’t see it at all as a rejection of centrist/conservative Democratic pols but as embracing of the Clintons.

What makes you think he’ll be short when he now has 59% of those selected? What makes you think his game is going to fall off as the Party coalesces around him?

There will not be a brokered convention. Romney will have the delegates.

Up until recently Romney had consistently taken 56% of the delegates. Now he has moved up to 59%. He only needed to keep up the same game, but now he has stepped it up. There’s no question he will have the delegates.