I read it as a joke. Others read it as a vile sexist attack. Your thoughts?

30 Comments
"She's brilliant and she's dedicated, she's tough. She also happens to be, by far, the best looking attorney general." -- President Obama, quoted by the Washington Post, on California Attorney General Kamala Harris (D). Yes, it was a comment, and yes, a compliment, on Harris' appearance. But it is also a joke. He said it to get a laugh and a cheer. He obviously did not say it to belittle her, as some who are yelling sexism are saying. To the contrary, he said as a joke, or a bonus, after he listed Harris' true and most relevant characteristics.

Thursday Open Thread [4.4.13]

6 Comments
Here are two stories with somewhat of a similar theme to them, and that is, "if people know the truth, they wouldn't like us," with us being the Republican Party and organized religion. First, the good old GOP. Gary Bauer, a former Republican presidential candidate and religious right stalwart, told some truth about the varied and now disperate factions of the GOP:
"If we gave our voters an accurate portrayal of our ideas, that we want to cut the rate of growth on Social Security, give tax cuts to billionaires and then the values issues, the values issues would be more popular than the economic agenda of the current Republican Party.”
It is always refreshing when a Republican tells the truth, if only because it is so rare.

Thursday Daily Delawhere [4.4.13]

1 Comment
The Vice President, also known here are Papa Joe or Uncle Joe, with what I can only describe as a "I will destroy you" look at a Delaware Lady Blue Hens game recently. Normally we present pictures of Delaware places and landscapes here at Daily Delawhere and not of Delaware people, but I liked this picture.

Wednesday Open Thread [4.3.13]

11 Comments
Republican Congressman Louie Gohmert of Texas opposes gun control because gay marriage leads to bestiality.
In fact, I had this discussion with some wonderful, caring Democrats earlier this week on the issue of, well, they said "surely you could agree to limit the number of rounds in a magazine, couldn't you? How would that be problematic?" [...] And I pointed out, well, once you make it ten, then why would you draw the line at ten? What's wrong with nine? Or eleven? And the problem is once you draw that limit ; it's kind of like marriage when you say it's not a man and a woman any more, then why not have three men and one woman, or four women and one man, or why not somebody has a love for an animal? There is no clear place to draw the line once you eliminate the traditional marriage and it's the same once you start putting limits on what guns can be used, then it's just really easy to have laws that make them all illegal.
You know, I get that conservatives, by their very nature and by definition, are supposed to fight change. That's their role. And I understand that opposing these very popular, very sane and very reasonable changes in our society can be very difficult, especially when you have no logical or understandable reason for it, which is why these insane conservatives often sound insane and delusional. It is because they have no logical or rational reason to oppose these changes. But they must oppose them, because they are conservatives, and so they have to come up with a reason. The problem for today's conservatives is that they let the very dim bulbs of their movement speak too often. Gohmert. Steven King. Sarah Palin. Michele Bachmann. They speak way too often. Probably because the smart and intelligent conservatives are way too embarrassed to be speaking out against change anymore.

Thank you to John Carney and Tom Carper

12 Comments
Pandora mentioned this in the open thread yesterday, but I think it deserves more attention. For we here at Delaware Liberal are ready to criticize the both Congressman John Carney and Senator Tom Carper for their centrist corporatist tendencies on any given day, we should at least recognize them when they do what we want. But first, allow me to put on my cynical and analytical hat and note that both waited until it was absolutely clear that there would be no negative political and electoral ramifications for coming out (pun intended) in support of marriage equality. Indeed, I suspect they both acted this week because it became clear that there would be negative political and electoral ramifications for not supporting marriage equality in this deeply blue state. While I do respect an 'evolution' of position on this issue since I myself was once a "yes civil unions no gay marriage" kind of guy, I also admire someone who just came out and said he was for marriage equality, period. That was Chris Coons in 2010. I am glad Carney and Carper saw fit to join him.

Wednesday Daily Delawhere [4.3.13]

1 Comment
Here is one of the sites that was recently declared as a National Monument by President Obama, the old New Castle County Courthouse and former state house in New Castle, along with the Woodlawn Preserve in Chateau Country and the Green in Dover.

Friday Open Thread [3.29.13]

39 Comments
Does ... any of the idiot conservatives who repeat this nonsense ad infinitum [that families have to balance their budgets] have any clue how people manage their budgets? They use credit cards, which is debt. They get mortgages, which is debt. They get student loans, which is debt. They get car loans, which is debt. And let's not get started on businesses and their leveraged debts. So if Republicans want Washington to act like American families do, then we're already there!
And now lets put numbers to this story to show you how ridiculous this GOP talking point is:
U.S. household consumer debt profile: Average credit card debt: $15,266 Average mortgage debt: $149,667 Average student loan debt: $32,559 vs Income: $44,389 So, if we balanced the budget the same way households do, the federal debt to income ratio would be: 78/22 = 3.5/1 But it's currently approximately 1.7/1 So, if the Republicans actually meant what they said, we should be on a debt spending spree like never seen before in the history of the nation.

The Ridiculous Reasons Republicans Give….

11 Comments
The following is the reason Republican Senator Greg Lavelle gave for voting against the repeal of the death penalty:
"15 years from now, there will be a group, undoubtedly, that will come and say, 'Isn't it cruel and unusual, isn't it horrific, that as as society that we put somebody in jail that committed a murder when they're 21, 22-years-old, an adult, and they're in there for 30, 40, 50 years, isn't that cruel and unusual, and shouldn't we allow them out?'" asks Lavelle.
This is quite an assine statement, even from Lavelle. First, no one here in Delaware or anywhere as far as I can tell has ever said life sentences for adults who commit murder is cruel and unusual. So Lavelle is lying to create a straw man that he can fight against, which gives him a reason for his vote. So let's concede that point for the moment. Let's concede that Lavelle is really concerned that there is this movement out there that in 15 years will seek to repeal life sentences without the possibility of parole because somehow it is cruel and unusual. Ok. So Lavelle's answer to this concern is we must kill the convict? In order to prevent the the forces waving the cruel and unusual punishment banner from going down a slippery slope, we must keep a cruel and unusual punishment on the books? It seems to me that Lavelle, through his attempt at mockery, is conceding that the death penalty is cruel and unusual and we need to keep that cruel and unusual punishment on the books so that non-cruel and unusual punishments like life imprisonment are never challenged as cruel and unusual. Well, that makes sense!