DNC Candidate Ben Tribbett on Using Social Media to Enhance the VAN

As you may know, Ben Tribbett is running to become one of Virginia's members on the Democratic National Committee (the election's on June 2). As Ben explains, "I am running because I believe the DNC is important and that grassroots members of the Democratic Party and particularly those from swing states like Virginia need the party to work better." You can say that again! Anyway, I had a chance to interview Ben about his candidacy a few days ago. We were at the Silver Diner in Arlington, and it was a bit noisy, but the audio quality is good. Also good, in my view, are Ben's thoughts on a number of subjects, including this excerpt on how to enhance the Voter Activation Network (VAN) - the crucially important "database containing information on voters for the purpose of assisting a political party or an individual politician, in their Get out the vote (GOTV) efforts and other areas of the campaign" - using social media. What Ben talks about in this part of the interview is, I'd argue, a big reason to consider supporting him for DNC. Namely, that he would add important expertise to the DNC that largely isn't there now. That matters a great deal, because of course the Republicans aren't standing still, and if the Democratic Party doesn't stay on the cutting edge of modern-day communications technologies and methods, we will fall behind the "red team" in our ability to communicate with voters. That's obviously not an outcome we want, and that's where Ben Tribbett's presence on the DNC would be very useful, in helping the "blue team" come out on top in the area of social media. P.S. I'll post several more portions of the interview in coming days.

Republican Propagandist Frank Luntz Fosters "Myths about conservative voters." Here are the Facts.

This weekend's Washington Kaplan Post has another in its ongoing "Five Myths" series, this one by arch-Republican propagandist and Big Liar Frank Luntz, of all people. Yes, this is probably THE LAST person on earth you'd ever want writing a column about myth busting, but remember, this is the Kaplan Post we're talking about - where journalistic standards are totally optional, if ever thought about at all!In Luntz's propaganda piece masquerading as "myth busting," he argues that conservative voters actually: 1) "don't want a reduced government so much as one that works better and wastes less"; 2) "don't want to round up all the illegal immigrants and deport them;" 3) are not "a bunch of greedy Gordon Gekkos;" 4) they don't want to "slash Social Security and Medicare," only for them "to work;" and 5) they care about income inequality. Now, I could just say something snarky like, "if you believe any of this, I've got a nice bridge in Alaska to sell you," or whatever. But we can do better than that, just utterly demolish Luntz's lies one by one. Here we go. 1. Republicans absolutely DO want to reduce the size of government - and not in a constructive manner, either! Per PollingReport.com, we've got a Newsweek poll with Republicans overwhelmingly (67%-24%) saying they want "a smaller government providing less services." Can't get much clearer than that. We also have aGallup poll which finds that Republicans "in particular are displeased with the size and power of the federal government, with 16% satisfied and 84% dissatisfied." And guess who Republicans vote for? That's right, over and over again, they vote for candidates who call for slashing government programs, who do whatever Grover "drown government in the bathtub" Norquist tells them to do, who pledge never to raise taxes (and therefore government), etc, etc. Then there's that whole "Tea Party" movement, whose rallying cry is basically to "stop the spending" (except on the Social Security and Medicare benefits they receive, plus the military, which of course make up most of the federal budget). In sum, Frank Luntz is full of crap that "conservatives don't want a reduced government so much as one that works better and wastes less." In fact, conservative voters most certainly do want "a reduced government" (except for their own benefits, of course, making them total hypocrites). Shocker, huh?

lowkell :: Republican Propagandist Frank Luntz Fosters "Myths about conservative voters." Here are the Facts.

2. Conservative primary voters most definitely want to get tough on illegal immigration. For instance, in Alabama, Republican primary voters this year overwhelmingly supported that state's harsh, draconian, "round 'em up" new immigration law. Also, per PollingReport.com, polls show that Republicans strongly oppose the Justice Department challenge to Arizona's own "round 'em up" immigration law, with 3 times as many Republicans saying it didn't go "far enough" than that it went "too far." Finally, 42% of Republicans say that illegal immigrants should be deported, with just 23% favoring a path to citizenship (another 23% of Republicans support a "guest worker" program). That's a lot more than the "tiny fraction" of conservatives Frank Luntz claims "would support a shortsighted (and fiscally unfeasible) blanket policy of deporting the illegal immigrants already here." Once again, Luntz=LIAR.3. Conservative voters most definitely have NOT been critical of Wall Street. In fact, a Public Policy Polling poll finds that, among Republicans, 36% blamed Congress for the economic meltdown in 2008/2009, compared to just 25% who blamed "Wall Street/Corporations" (36% of Democrats blamed "Wall Street/Corporations). As for who is "best suited to fix the economy," 34% of Republicans said - you guessed it - "Wall Street/Corporations," compared to just 11% of Democrats. Also, according to PPP, Republicans hate the "Occupy Wall Street" movement, with "very conservative" voters favoring the corporate-funded Tea Party over the Occupy movement by a 12:1 margin (84%-7%). Yeah, those conservatives, they're really critical of Wall Street alright! Ha. 4. Conservatives want their Medicare and Social Security, but they vote for people who will trash those programs. Here's a case where Luntz may actually be onto something. Here, even Tea Partiers strongly oppose major cuts to Social Security and Medicare. The problem is, they strongly support - and vote for - politicians who DO want to slash Social Security and Medicare. For instance, check out this Gallup poll, which indicates OVERWHELMING Republican support (82%) for the Paul Ryan budget plan, which would destroy Medicare as we know it. And, of course, conservatives are the ones who put the Tea Party in charge of the House of Representatives back in 2010, allowing them to vote almost overwhelmingly as a bloc for the Ryan plan to trash Medicare. So, again, what the heck is Frank Luntz smoking to believe that it's a "myth" that conservatives want to "slash Social Security and Medicare?" 5. Conservatives are schizophrenic on income inequality. I've already referred to polling that shows Republicans as hating the Occupy Wall Street movement and being highly favorable towards Wall Street. On the other hand, polling indicates that "Fifty-three percent of self-identified Republicans back an increase in taxes on households making more than $250,000, a sentiment at odds with the party's presidential candidates." On the other hand, Republican candidates continue to get applause by charging President Obama and Democrats generally with "socialism" for wanting the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share. Thus, the GOP bashing of the Buffett Rule. Meanwhile, a recent Faux "News" poll found that Republicans by a nearly 3:1 margin felt that "raising taxes on wealthy Americans will...hurt the economy." Also, 84% of Republicans called the "Buffett Rule" proposal nothing more than "an election-year gimmick to avoid cutting government spending." Sorry, Frank Luntz, but these poll results do NOT indicate that Republicans care deeply about income inequality, certainly not enough to DO anything about it. #FAIL OK, so Frank Luntz is a lying liar, a Republican propagandist as he's been for decades. Remember Newt's heinous "Contract ON America?" - that was Luntz all the way. For more on Luntz, including his "reframe" of global warming to the less-"threatening" "climate change," his recommendation to describe Democrats and Democratic policies using words such as "corrupt," "devour," "greed," "hypocrisy," "liberal," "sick," and "traitors," etc. - see here. It's utterly appalling, possibly even more so knowing that this is an utterly amoral guy who does it all for $$$$. Yeah, it's disgusting. Given all that, the question is, why have I actually seen a couple of Democrats comment that they found Luntz's thoughts to be interesting? More accurate are some of the comments on the Post, including the following. Enjoy, and with that, I'm going to watch some NHL playoff hockey, where, unlike in politics, you have referees who can call penalties for flagrant violations of the rules! :) "Nice try, Frank. I know that you work all day to make excuses for Republicans and conservatives, and you are very good at your job, but that doesn't mean that any of the rest of us have to believe your prevarications.""Judging conservatives by the legislation they actually initiated after their big wins in 2010, their major objectives are to limit reproductive choice, attack Planned Parenthood and get rid of worker's unions. Across the country in states with Republican majorities, legislation was advanced to force women to undergo unnecessary ultrasounds before an abortion. Personhood measures were put on ballots. The cons strove to defund Planned Parenthood which prevents millions of unwanted pregnancies and abortions . None of this was related to the jobs, cons promised. Judge individuals, particularly pols, by what they do not what they say." "This survey makes conservatives seem like respsonsible people. If so, why are they being led by the far rightwing yahoos who seem to want to kill whatever good these conservatives espouse, When do you hear any of these conservatives rip their representatives for not working with the Democrats on sensible solutions instead of the help the rich get richer programs? Until I see more of those conservatives, I will beleive they myths that prevail because I don not see much of anything the author speaks of." "If Frank Luntz's claims were anything close to being accurate, the sociopathic Teatotalitarians would not have taken control of the House of Representatives, reasonable republicans (reasonable for Republicans, anyhow) like Richard Lugar and Orrin Hatch would not now be finding themselves fighting for political survival, either Tim Pawlenty or Jon Huntsman would likely be the Republican nominee, and sick sociopaths like Paul Ryan would find themselves even more marginalized than Ron Paul. Also, of course, Barack Obama would have succeeded Al Gore, or alternatively John Kerry would have been concluding his second term. I can't believe that Frank Luntz believes the garbage he vomits. Very clearly the individuals running for the Republican nomination didn't. Either that, or none of the people whom Luntz describes bothered to show up for the Republican primaries and caucuses."

Finally! "Let's just say it: The Republicans are the problem."

It's about freakin' time we see the truth be told in the mainstream media about the nutjob Teapublicans. We have been studying Washington politics and Congress for more than 40 years, and never have we seen them this dysfunctional. In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted. Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party.The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition. When one party moves this far from the mainstream, it makes it nearly impossible for the political system to deal constructively with the country's challenges. The authors continue, explaining how it's NOT "both sides doing it," how the Democratic Party might have shifted slightly to the left ("from their 40-yard line to their 25"), but the Republican Party has gone completely off the deep end ("from their 40 to somewhere behind their goal post"). I mean, hasn't all this been obvious to any sane, sentient observer of American politics the past few years? Why has it taken so long to see an analysis like this, from two major political analysts (one from Democratic-leaning Brookings, one from Republican-leaning AEI), in the corporate/mainstream media? Is that why so many Americans continue believe, erroneously, that we have two normal political parties in this country, one "center left" and one "center right," when in fact we have one "center left" (actually, I'd say today's Democrats are more "center" or even "center right"), and one far, far, far right, basically the John Birch Society combined with the KKnow Nothings and perhaps one of the ultra-nationalist/authoritarian parties of Europe.

lowkell :: Finally! "Let's just say it: The Republicans are the problem."

I've pointed this out many times before, but to illustrate how far the Republican Party has lurched to the extreme right, just look at their vicious opposition toideas they themselves developed and championed for years - "cap and trade," the "individual mandate," marginal tax rates at historic low levels (as we had during the Clinton years, and which now are seen as socialistic by these nutjobs), etc.How did this once-great, optimistic, sane party of Teddy Roosevelt (a Bull Moose Progressive), Dwight Eisenhower (Mr. Moderation personified), Richard Nixon (established the EPA and detente with the Soviet Union), and even Ronald Reagan (raised taxes many times, signed a mass amnesty for "illegal immigrants," grew government big time, etc.) become a collection of rabble rousers, theocrats, warmongers, cranks, tinfoil hat wearerers (e.g., the "birthers"), xenophobes, homophobes, Islamophobes, misogynists, and people who apparently believe that compromise on anything, let alone working with Democrats - as Ronald Reagan did all the time, with liberal lion Tip O'Neill and others - is evil? Personally, I blame the toxic effect of Faux "News," far-right-wing hate radio (Rush et al), far-right-wing hate TV (Hannity, Beck, etc.), far-right-wing hate blogs (too many to list, but check out Michele Malkin or The Gateway Pundit - I refuse to link to either - for example). I also blame the toxic effect of hundreds of millions of dollars pouring into the system with zero accountability -- see the Koch brothers, Karl Rove, Richard Mellon Scaife, and many others for the horrible results. Then there's the corporate media, which has abdicated its duty to tell the truth, to call out lies, to not treat insanity as sane or even as entertainment (see the corporate media's disgraceful coverage of the Tea Party movement back in 2009 and 2010), and not pretend that there are two equivalent "sides" to everything (as Ornstein and Mann put it, "a balanced treatment of an unbalanced phenomenon distorts reality"). Finally, something's clearly gone wrong with the American education system, as it's apparently churning out masses of people who can't think critically, who don't respect science or empiricism, who don't understand how the economy or our government work, who don't seem to comprehend complexity or nuance, and who generally can't seem to cope with the rapidly changing, globalized, diverse, 21st century world we live in. Other than that, we're doing great! Anyway, read the article, forward it around to everyone you know, urge them to read it too, then make sure you tell everyone you know to get to the polls in November and vote for anyone but Republicans up and down the ballot.

Report: Brian Moran's For-Profit "Education" Group Works Closely with ALEC, House Republicans

(UPDATE: President Obama is going after these scumbags. - promoted by lowkell) Based on this new report, and also the voluminous information we already have about APSCU -- the leading for-profit "education" trade association where DPVA chair Brian Moran works as a top lobbyist, strategist, and (recently) acting president -- Moran needs to be fired as DPVA chair immediately. As in, yesterday. As in, this minute. Check this out. Republic Report has learned that the Washington Post Company's Kaplan for-profit college division, was, last year, a member of the controversial business advocacy group the American Legislative Exchange Council. Other major for-profit education companies also joined ALEC. Republic Report has obtained a July 2011 document showing Kaplan Higher Education and other for-profits as members of ALEC's Education Task Force......APSCU, the for-profit schools trade association, which hires expensive lobbyists like former Senator Trent Lott to pressure Congress, and works hand-in-hand with theHouse Republican leadership on bills to prevent bad actors in the industry from being held accountable for waste, fraud, and abuse. APSCU members include DeVry, ITT, ATI, Education Management Corp., Career Education Corp., and Mitt Romney favorite Full Sail University, as well as Kaplan, Bridgepoint, and Corinthian. These affiliations between for-profit colleges and ALEC raise some serious questions. Not surprisingly, "Bridgepoint, Corinthian, and APSCU did not respond to our requests for comment."Clearly, it's unacceptable for the head of the Democratic Party of Virginia (DPVA) to simultaneously work as a top officer in the leading lobby group for the for-profit "education" industry. It's even worse that the DPVA is busy denouncing ALEC, at the same time that the head of the DPVA works closely with ALEC. Or, that DPVA is busy attacking George Allen on higher education student loan interest rates - as it did yesterday in a press release - when the head of the DPVA is busy advocating for an industry which saddles veterans, minorities, and many other students with huge student loan debts and degrees of questionable worth. At the minimum, this undercuts the very message DPVA is putting forth on an extremely important, indeed core, issue to the Democratic Party -- EDUCATION

Here's the thing: it's not like Brian Moran is indispensable to DPVA and can't be replaced. To the contrary, about the best you could possibly say is that Moran has not presided over the Titanic going completely under, although we've now suffered three straight horrendous years at the polls in Virginia, with the only turnaround in sight thanks to President Obama's and Tim Kaine's campaigns this year, neither of which is counting on DPVA for much of anything (because they're smart and they don't want to go down with the Titanic).Meanwhile, the metaphorical Virginia Democratic "decks" remain awash, the metaphorical "iceberg" continues ripping into the state party's hull, and the metaphorical "lifeboats" are full of Democrats desperately fleeing the ship. The question is, when are we going to finally say, "enough is enough" on the moral, ethical and political disaster that is Brian Moran? When are reporters going to start asking Moran about this at every opportunity, and stop throwing him softball after softball, apparently terrified to do their jobs as journalists? Finally, when are Brian Moran's enablers - including the nearly 30% who have indicated in our Blue Virginia poll a lack of willingness to change "captains" - going to stop enabling him and call for him to step aside? Time's a wasting, the "Titanic" is sinking steadily...

RPV Outpacing the DPVA?

by Dan Sullivan

The Republican Party of Virginia has spent most of this century chasing its transformation tail. Now it is mimicking the Organizing for America strategy with VA Victory. There was something of a rollout at Shad Planking, but it was not ubiquitous. No threat to Obama, it does threaten the DPVA. VA Victory is taking an “all of the above” approach including t-shirts and stickers with QR codes and using mobile payment systems with smartphones to take donations. On the face of it, the Republican demographic does not seem poised to embrace all such innovation, though the donation ready smartphones fit. The rubber meets the road energizing social media and that too appears incongruous with the party still mired in the age of Lincoln, only on the opposite side. Whether their intent is to attract followers then use a shotgun approach to contact or to organize leads in the manner Ben Tribbett suggests will determine how much progress they will make this year. Nevertheless, it leaves Republicans a leg up for 2013 as the Democratic Party of Virginia (DPVA) takes a breather year, relieved of responsibility for any substantial grassroots effort. While the Obama campaign has a well established and proven record of using technology and social media to its advantage, it won’t leave any residual, other than a voter list, for the DPVA. Remember 2009. Once Democrats snidely watched the bumbling RPV efforts to master technology, entertained by the results. It may be time to take a look over the shoulder. There is no reason to think that there will be any trace of the Obama infrastructure remaining after this November, but VA Victory is designed to stay, independent of Romney’s fortunes. It seems like a quasi PAC, potentially independent of personality and party, success and failure. Predictably, most Obama supporters will melt back into the anonymous electorate even if he wins; and possibly disappear forever if, heaven forbid, Romney unseats him. That is, unless the DPVA heeds the Tribbett message and sidles up to and works closely with Obama for America this year to organize for the future. As a footnote, it is instructive to review the photographs featured on the VA Victory Shad Planking webpage. Nice, sanitized depiction of the event. Clean cut lads and lasses, patriotic Americans all, and a puppy thrown in for good measure. Nary a star or bar to be seen, on a day when they were a ubiquitous feature of the event. Too bad they missed the kid goat.

Virginia environmentalists voice opposition to offshore seismic air guns

by Eileen Levandoski

[Norfolk, VA - April 24, 2012] - Virginia environmentalists responded with their opposition to the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) call for public comment on a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for offshore seismic studies in the Atlantic.  They spoke in favor of an alternative that only allows study to support renewable energy development and stood in opposition to alternatives supporting exploration for oil and gas."This seismic study is completely unnecessary when it comes to supporting Virginia's offshore wind development," said Eileen Levandoski with the Sierra Club. "Such geological and geophysical studies are already covered by the programmatic Environmental Assessment that BOEM has already approved for the mid-Atlantic wind energy areas which includes Virginia." Secretary of Interior Salazar and others contend that seismic testing will not only reveal how much oil and gas may be on the outer continental shelf, but will also benefit research for the offshore wind industry. However, it's "dynamite vs. a hammer" when comparing the level of seismic study necessary for oil and gas vs. that for offshore wind. "The oil and gas industry wants to know what is hundreds and thousands of feet below the sea floor; to get information from that far below the ground, they use extremely loud air guns," continued Levandoski.  "But the renewables industry only wants to know what's on the seafloor and just below it, so they use echo-sounders and sub-bottom profilers that are generally many orders of magnitude quieter than air guns."

Eileen Levandoski :: Virginia environmentalists voice opposition to offshore seismic air guns

"The type of seismic study used for oil and gas exploration involves huge arrays of air guns blasting repeatedly for months on end," said Becca Glenn with international ocean conservation group Oceana.  "It would be like dynamite going off in your neighborhood over and over.  Air gun surveys can cause behavioral changes, hearing loss, injury, and death in marine mammals like dolphins, seals, and whales.  Just a single air gun array in the North Atlantic caused endangered fin and humpback whales to abandon 100,000 square miles of habitat.  It's incredibly destructive to the marine ecosystem.""Air guns have been shown to displace commercial species on a vast scale - over thousands of square kilometers.  The result has been to dramatically depress catch rates of species such as cod, haddock, and rockfish," said Deborah Murray with the Southern Environmental Law Center.  "This dangerous activity risks Virginia's $1.7 billion fishing industry and the over 24,000 people it employs." "Offshore seismic studies for oil and gas are clearly the first step toward drilling, which will only prolong our dependence on fossil fuels and cause more climate pollution," said Hannah Wiegard with Chesapeake Climate Action Network.  "To stop global warming and slow sea level rise, we need to develop renewable energy now."

Terrible Ideas & Pathological Lying: Why I Don't Like Mitt Romney

by TheGreenMiles While The Green Miles consumes politics like a grizzly bear consumes salmon, my girlfriend is a normal human being who pays attention to politics only occasionally. When one day she asked why I don't like Mitt Romney, I didn't want to come off as only hating Romney because he's on the Red Team and I'm on the Blue Team. Here's a bit of what I said, and I'd be curious to hear your take - and what you're saying in similar casual conversations - in the comments section.First, the substance, which is pretty straightforward. Romney would raise taxes on the poor, slash taxes on the wealthy, do nothing for the middle class, and dramatically increase the national debt - and claims that would magically create jobs, an underpants gnome scheme if there ever was one. On energy, Romney's plan would be Bush-Cheney on steroids, giving even more control to polluting oil & coal companies and making even lower investments in clean energy. from the poor to give to the rich. What was harder to convey is just how much Romney & his campaign are built on lies. Steve Benen has been chronicling how often Romney lies and the list runs into the double digits every single week - lies about himself, lies about his past positions, lies about President Obama. "At this point, the pattern here is obvious, and it's clearly not an accident," wrote Greg Sargent. "And Romney and his team will remain secure in the knowledge that most of the media will politely look the other way as the Big Lies keep flowing, and will continue to treat them as just part of the game." I also shared this Rachel Maddow segment, an in-depth look at Romney's lies and how they define his candidacy:

TheGreenMiles :: Terrible Ideas & Pathological Lying: Why I Don't Like Mitt Romney

(If you don't want to watch the Etch A Sketch intro, skip ahead to 6:25.)

The Virginia Way is Dead

by Dan Sullivan


McDonnell and the Republicans assassinated it. Jeff Shapiro eulogizes it. Tucker Martin tried to resurrect it in a tweet, hailing Colgan’s surrender. But in the end, Governor McDonnell’s singular focus on self-promotion has turned our legislature into a congressional clone. Governor McDonnell yells rather than leads; just another wannabe bully.

Virginia has received quite a few headlines these last few months. And it’s not been about the best state to do business; it’s not been about the best place to raise a child. It’s been about ultrasound and the socially conservative overreach agenda that the Republicans pursued in the General Assembly session. –Toscano

Two things have become characteristic of Virginia Republicans. They confuse power with leadership and they are more interested in their own ambitions than the welfare of the Commonwealth. This is distinct and different than the Democrats who have been in power and that is clear in both the Jeff Shapiro piece and the descriptions of this session by state Senator Creigh Deeds (D-25th) and Democratic Minority Whip, Delegate David Toscano (D-57th). Contrast the eras of Gilmore and McDonnell with that of Warner and Kaine.

We have a bill that requires a medically unnecessary procedure; that requires doctors to listen to us who have the great ability to be doctors, and prescribe for them how they should treat their patients by requiring them to have this procedure. It totally unmasks the ultrasound bill for what it was: an effort to intimidate women and nothing else. – Toscano

As Delegate Toscano points out, McDonnell warned his colleagues against overreach before the session, but overreach is all we got in a variety of areas. The ultrasound bill is only the tip of the iceberg. It is indicative of the way business is being done in Richmond. Deliberation is a lost art; Republicans have drunk the kool-aid; Democrats have little leverage. The McDonnell budget presented at the beginning of the session reveals his disdain for the role of government and an effort to score fiscal conservative points. The cuts he proposed affected the most vulnerable citizens and underfunded education to redirect revenues to transportation. In Toscano’s estimation, despite the way the battle ended, the budget we got was much better than the one that McDonnell originally presented and could have been forced upon us. However, McDonnell’s desperation for success and his lack of leadership is clearly demonstrated by Toscano’s description of McDonnell’s reaction to the defeat of a pet bill. The Virginia Way is not the McDonnell way, no way: my way or the highway. A footnote: Before this final week of deliberations, state Senator Jeff McWaters (R-8th) told a Republican audience that there was a Democrat who would cross the aisle. So while the Democrats may have exacted concessions successfully prior to this past week, if it is true that Senator Colgan had already tipped that he would concede, this left Democrats with no leverage during the last three votes. The evidence is in the final outcome.

DPVA Chair Brian Moran's Group Has George W. Bush Speaking at Its Upcoming Convention

Man, do we ever need a change in "leadership" at the Democratic Party of Virginia. Check this out: In one life, Brian Moran leads the Democratic Party of Virginia, and will be at the DPVA State Convention in June. Two weeks later, he will flip to his other life as an executive for the for-profit college industry at their convention- and check out who he will be hanging out with there...Not a big surprise given the Politico article that said Brian was taking instructions on legislative strategy from Eric Cantor's office. That's right, Brian Moran will be hanging out with George W. Bush, whose "Administration's deliberate actions made it easier for bad actors among for-profit schools to engage in a decade of waste, fraud, and abuse that has earned them billions in profits but has left many former students deep in debt and without job prospects." As I've said before, just imagine the head of the Republican Party of Virginia simultaneously leading the AFL-CIO, Greenpeace, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, or NARAL? Right, it's impossible to imagine, because it would never happen. But Democrats? Sure, we're fine with our chair simultaneously heading up - now he's back to being "only" Executive Vice President, Government Relations and General Counsel - a group that systematically scams the taxpayer, rips off the government, and harms the lives of veterans, minorities and poor people. Yeah, sure, it works for me! (snark) How about you?

Study: Sunday Talk Shows Overwhelmingly White, Male, Republican

The graphic is by Think Progress, the numbers are from Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting, and the conclusion is clear: not only is the media NOT - in any way, shape or form - "liberal" (which the teahadists' tshirts and signs tell you not to believe, it's actually biased heavily to the right, at least on the influential Sunday talk shows. Even when the networks DO have Democrats on their shows, FAIR points out that they "tend to be of a more moderate variety than the Republicans" (people like conservadem Harold Ford and whatever-he-is Juan Williams). What about progressive voices to balance out the deluge of (far)right-wing voices on the Sunday talk shows? Ha, you MUST be kidding!Meanwhile, as if the wild ideological imbalance towards the (far) right isn't bad enough, the major networks also don't seem to like having women or non-white faces (unless they're super entertaining, "controversial" and conservative like Herman Cain) on their shows. In sum, FAIR concludes: "It's likely that the other networks would never say that they aim to provide a very narrow, very white and male, overwhelmingly conservative view of the world to their viewers every Sunday morning. But that's precisely what they do."