Author Archives: Unstable Isotope

About Unstable Isotope

Opinionated chemist, troublemaker, blogger on national and Delaware politics.

This One Is For The O’Donnell Fans

Jason330 and commenter orestes pointed me over to this post on Delaware Politics about Christine O’Donnell. O’Donnell has been stretching the truth a bit a lot:

Christine O’Donnell:

“I was the 2008 endorsed Republican Candidate in 2008 and I won 2 counties.” (Delaware only has 3. Christine also holds up 2 fingers to emphasize the point.)

Now for the uninformed Christine O’Donnell won Zero, Zip, Nada Delaware Counties in 2008. Here are the numbers:

NCC Kent Sussex

Biden 177,070 37,094 43,495

O’Donnell 69,491 27,981 43,123

First comment on the thread:

Makes no difference, Castle is still a liberal and will vote with the current regime if elected.
O’Donnell is still a conservative and will vote and enact legislation for the good of the Republic if elected.
You and SF are still Castle sycophants and sodomites and will remain so until you are beaten on Sept 14.

Later…

I’m still going to vote for her.

Heh.

Imagine that…a political candidate stretching the truth.

Wonder of wonders.

In the spirit of El Somnabulo – I dedicate this song to all those Christine O’Donnell supporters out there.

O’Donnell Gets Another Endorsement

Talking Points Memo has the scoop on the latest group to endorse Christine O’Donnell. It’s another Tea Party group and they have dire warnings about Mike Castle.

To the Tea Party, a vote for Delaware Senate hopeful Mike Castle (R) is a vote for a Democrat. Literally. Conservatives there are warning fellow tea partiers that if Castle gets elected, he’ll pull an Arlen Specter and switch parties when the going gets tough. So they’re endorsing his primary rival, Christine O’Donnell, instead.

“We are confident Christine O’Donnell will beat Mike Castle in the upcoming primary,” , Delaware Vice President of the Independence Hall Tea Party PAC. “Christine is a strong grassroots favorite. While her opponent has the support of establishment types, Christine has the support of the people.”

The group’s president, Don Adams, took things even further, explicitly comparing Castle to Republican-turned-Democrat-turned-lame duck Arlen Specter.

“Our PAC Board endorses the most viable conservative candidates,” said Adams. “Unfortunately, Mike Castle is not a conservative–in fact, he’s a potential Arlen Specter.”

I feel like I’m watching “The Life of Brian” with the Judean People’s Front and the People’s Front of Judea. Just how many of these Tea Party groups are there anyway? I’m sure O’Donnell is thrilled with the latest endorsement – so when’s the Mama Grizzly herself going to step in?

Thursday Open Thread

Welcome to your Thursday open thread. The week’s close to coming to a close but our threads are always open.

OMFG…John McCain

I think an easy memory trick for Republican rhetoric: all good things come from Republicans, all bad things are Obama’s (or Clinton’s) fault.

The response of the world community to the humanitarian crisis in Pakistan has been less than other recent disasters.

During the last few weeks, monsoon rains have caused the worst flooding in Pakistan’s history. About 1,500 people are dead, and 20 million have been affected.

…

Sixteen days after the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004, aid commitments totaled $1.4 billion. Sixteen days after Pakistan’s floods began, promises added up to just $200 million.

Yet relief agencies say the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Pakistan is even greater than this year’s earthquake in Haiti.

I think it’s one of these disasters that’s fairly abstract in most people’s minds. We’re not seeing many pictures of the devastation and suffering caused by the flooding yet.

Here’s so resources if you want to help:
Oxfam
Pictures of Oxfam’s flood response
Doctors Without Borders
International Red Cross

Happy 90th 19th Amendment

Yesterday was the 90th anniversary of the 19th amendment which guaranteed women the right to vote. To celebrate the U.S. Chamber of Commerce published a blog post titled “Equality, Suffrage and a Fetish For Money.”

There is much that was good in this article — for instance the acknowledgment that most of the current “pay gap” is the result of individual choice rather than discrimination; but I believe that the overall tone is one of those cultural changes we need to make — the idea that giving up “pay and promotions” is a “terribly steep price” to pay for time away from work. These are only two of the many things that people value and depending on the weight that you assign to each of your values giving up a little might gain you a lot. Equality is a matter of ensuring equal access to opportunity, not ensuring identical outcomes in some areas depending on which opportunities you choose to take.

On a similar note around the same time the NY Times article appeared, Don Boudreaux wrote on income inequality in general noting: “Not only does achievement of such “equality” require the state to treat people unequally, obsession with income equality also reflects a Scrooge-like fetish for money.” More from Boudreaux:

Consider a man who spends long hours at the gym. He does so for the same reasons that another man spends long hours at work: to gain an advantage and a sense of achievement. Are gym-man’s broad shoulders, bulging biceps, and ripped torso appropriate objects of envy by couch-potato man? Is this envy a social problem demanding government action? Should gym-man be scorned as greedy for working extra-hard to improve his physique – extra-hard work that likely wins gym-man disproportionate access to attractive mates? Should government force gym-man to share his beautiful babes with couch-potato man? Should gym-man’s muscles, or natural good looks, be taxed?

If we recognize that envy of other persons’ physiques is a sentiment deserving only ridicule, why do so many “Progressives” excuse – or even positively approve of – envy of other persons’ monetary assets?

So did the U.S. Chamber of Commerce state that the pay gap is no big deal and compare women to someone who doesn’t work out? Why yes, yes they did. Really ladies, you should just expect that you deserve less money because you don’t have time to work unpaid overtime. Of course, the Chamber has good advice for those pesky, greedy women who just don’t understand why being a mother should disqualify them from having a good career.

It is true that culturally speaking women are more likely to have to make the tough choices about work-life balance. But as we all seek to fit our values into a dynamic 24/7 economy, let’s not overlook the obvious, immediate, power-of-the-individual solution: choosing the right place to work and choosing the right partner at home.

Hey, Brad Peck knows it’s tough out there for women. That’s why he’s advising not to work at a place like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce or to marry a man like Brad Peck. Brad Peck and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce should read up on Lily Ledbetter. I’ll bet you’re not surprised to learn that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposed the legislation, along with almost all civil rights legislation:

Given all this, it will not shock you that they also opposed what would become the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which it said represented a potential wind-fall against employers by employees trying to dredge up stale pay claims.” Via Firedoglake, we learn that they have a sterling record on women’s rights:

* 1977: US Chamber opposes amendment to Civil Rights Act that would ban discrimination against pregnant women.
* 1978: US Chamber says pregnancy is a “voluntary” condition in its opposition to Pregnancy Discrimination Act.
* 1987: Family Medical Leave Act “sets a dangerous precedent,” according to the US Chamber.
* 1998: US Chamber opposes Equal Pay Act because “work experience does tend to create greater wage gaps.”
* 2007: US Chamber opposes Lilly Ledbetter’s court case for equal pay because “tear-stained testimony” prejudices against a defendant. Opposed the bill in Congress to right the wrongs against Ledbetter in 2008 and 2009 as well.
* 2007: Chamber official pledges “all out war” against Family Medical Leave Act, and in 2010 made it a “priority” to fight in Congress.
* Monday: US Chamber again cites pregnancy as a “voluntary choice.”

And, yes, the pay gap really exists and it can’t be explained away by motherhood.

Bonus: read the comments on the post of the Chamber of Commerce’s blog.

Wednesday Open Thread

It’s time again for your Wednesday open thread. Can you believe it’s Wednesday already? The weeks keep getting faster

Oh goody. We can spend more money prosecuting Rod Blagojevich. He was found guilty on just 1 of 24 charges – lying to investigators.

Former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich has been found guilty of only one of the 24 counts in his corruption trial. After deliberating for 14 days, the jury found him guilty only of making false statements to the FBI. The jury is deadlocked on the other 23 counts.

The Chicago Tribune reports that Blagojevich faces up to five years in prison. Judge James B. Zagel intends to declare a mistrial on the other counts.

The verdict is a huge defeat for U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, but the Associated Press reports that prosecutors said they plan to retry the case as soon as possible, and that Zagel set a hearing for August 26 to decide on the manner and timing.

Apparently the jury vote was 11-1 in favor of conviction. I’m sure the government will want to retry him but I really think it works in Blagojevich’s favor to look at plea deal.

You know who the real victim is? Dr. Laura, 1st amendment martyr:

She said on “Larry King Live” Tuesday night she won’t re-up when her contract runs out at the end of the year.

While Schlessinger told King she was still “regretful” over the incident, she said she feels her freedom of speech rights “have been usurped by angry, hateful groups who don’t want to debate – they want to eliminate.”

“I want to be able to say what’s on my mind and in my heart and what I think is helpful and useful without somebody getting angry, some special interest group deciding this is the time to silence a voice of dissent and attack affiliates, attack sponsors,” she said. “I’m sort of done with that.”

Schlessinger adamantly denied she was retiring, saying “I’m too young for that. I will be stronger and freer to say my mind through my books, my YouTube Channel, my blog and my website. And I’ll be on TV more, because I’ll have the freedom to speak my mind.”

“I decided it was time to move on to other venues where I could say my peace and not have to live in fear anymore,” she said.

I didn’t realize the 1st amendment contained a clause that you shouldn’t face consequences for your free speech if people don’t like what you say. Obviously I need to study the Constitution more because apparently there’s a bunch of modifying clauses I never noticed before.

The Real Feminists

I swear I think the Republican Party has become a party of all id. All I hear from them anymore is what they’re afraid of (Muslims, immigrants), who they don’t like (liberals) and now what they want to hump. This video came from the Minnesota Republican party (watch the whole thing if you can, it’s about 5 min. long).

Funny thing, to me it doesn’t show what they want it to show. Some of the supposed “hot” GOP women are pretty scarily botoxed and plastic surgeried. Democrats are represented mostly by unflattering pictures of women over 60. I guess the new feminist sensibilities of the GOP lasted about 5 minutes, until they got bored.

For a palate cleanser, go read Amanda Marcotte’s “A short history of ‘feminist’ anti-feminists.”

Suggestions On What To Wear

Glen Urquhart and Michele Rollins will be debating on August 31. What should I wear? Should I wear a Miss Jamaica crown or my Nazi uniform? Decisions, decisions…

Republican congressional candidates Michele Rollins and Glen Urquhart will debate Aug. 31 on WDEL radio. Peter MacArthur will moderate the debate, which starts at 8 a.m. in Widener Law School’s Ruby R. Vale Moot Courtroom and will be broadcast live on WDEL (1150 AM) and streamed live on WDEL’s web site. The public is welcome to attend.

Anyone interested in a meet-up before/during/after the debate?

Tuesday Open Thread

Welcome to your Tuesday open thread. Try not to hurt someone.

Good for New Jersey.

Gov. Chris Christie today made it illegal for state laws or rules to identify anyone with a developmental or intellectual disability as “mentally retarded” by signing legislation sought by people who have felt belittled by the term.

…

Christie said he regretted people had to wait so long to get the bill passed, and said he was proud to have signed it. “This is making sure each citizen in our state is treated with the respect they deserve … It’s their government, too,’’ he said.
The 81-page bill includes the citations in state law and regulations that have to be changed, including: “mentally retarded,” “physically handicapped,” “feeble-minded,’’ and “physically or mentally defective.” The law also applies to language involving people with mental illness, such as “the insane,” the “mentally deficient,” and “the mentally ill.”

“Words matter – it’s that simple,’’ said Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester), one of the bill’s sponsors and the father of a daughter with a developmental disability. “We have a community of productive, hard-working citizens…The ‘R’ word should mean respect.”

The legislation (S1982) passed in June.

This is a bill that’s long past due as far as I’m concerned. This is one issue where I agree with Sarah Palin (before she undermined herself by not criticizing Rush Limbaugh’s use of the word as “satire” anyway) – let’s not belittle developmentally disabled people.

Yesterday the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted a stay of the Prop 8 decision in California pending an expedited appeal (until at least December 6). Significantly, cited in the court orders was that the appellants must show they have standing to ask for appeal of the decision:

Three things:

First, and drastically most importantly, the Court granted the stay. Consequently the thousands of couples who were waiting for the day of equality will have to wait at least a few more months until December.

Second, the Court wants this case to be resolved quickly. Appellants’ opening brief is due in just a month and the hearing will happen on December 6th. This is lightning quick for a Federal Court of Appeals, and it’s a very good sign. The Court understands that this case is important, and it doesn’t want it to linger.

Third, the Court specifically orders the Prop 8 proponents to show why this case should not be dismissed for lack of standing. Here’s a discussion of the standing issue. This is very good news for us. It shows that the Court has serious doubts about whether the Appellants have standing. Even better, the Court is expressing an opinion that its inclination is that the case should be dismissed. That being said, the panel that issued this Order (the motions panel) is not the same panel that will hear that case on the merits. The merits panel will be selected shortly before December 6th and we don’t know the three judges who will be on the merits panel. But this is a very good sign that the appeal could be dismissed on the ground of standing alone.

Unfortunately that means some couples in California will still have to wait. You can go to the Prop 8 Trial Tracker for up to the minute information on the case.

Urquhart Claims To Lead Rollins

Heh, several days after I posted my analysis of the PPP numbers for Republicans the NJ jumps on board (of course ignoring DL):

Glen Urquhart, billing himself as the choice of true conservatives, found comfort in a poll released last week on a liberal blog — the Daily Kos. That poll, done by the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling, showed that Urquhart would fare just about as well as Michele Rollins — the GOP’s endorsed candidate — against Carney.

The article says Rollins doubts this poll. That’s probably why she’s unleashing her campaign ads now. I missed this one, Urquhart has an internal poll giving him a 5-7 point lead over Rollins.

So last Thursday, in his New Castle County campaign headquarters — the Newark home of John Stabley — he released results of a survey his campaign paid for that showed him leading Rollins by 5 to 7 percentage points in the primary. It showed, he said, that he can beat Rollins statewide, not just in Sussex County, by appealing to the Judeo-Christian values he says most Americans share.

Apparently Urquhart’s poll was a push poll.

Urquhart’s pollster — ccAdvertising — said it sent its questions by a voice-activated phone system to more than 16,000 Republican households. The full results of the survey were not released — much of it was meant for marketing purposes only, campaign staffers said — but several pointed questions were asked depending on whether the respondent favored Urquhart or Rollins.

The questions referred to donations Rollins made to now-Vice President Joe Biden during one of his re-election campaigns for the U.S. Senate and another to a political action committee (The Wish List) supporting female Republican candidates who would defend abortion as a woman’s choice. Calling her pro-abortion and “Heiress Rollins,” the questions linked Rollins to millions in bank bailout money while she was a director for Wilmington Trust Co., and said she made millions in the gambling industry.

Rollins response is also pretty amusing.

The questions made many people hang up the phone, Rollins said Monday.

Of course, Rollins hasn’t released any kind of internal polling showing she’s ahead. I find it hard to believe that with her warchest she doesn’t have any polling numbers. Rollins also seems pretty defensive in the article (go read to see her answers about donating to Joe Biden and her position on abortion), which still leaves the impression that Rollins is on the ropes and the Urquhart is surging.

Over on Glen Urquhart’s campaign website (LOL, Michele Rollins’s website is the first Google hit when you look for Urquhart on Google) he has a press release on the poll.

The statewide survey of registered Delaware Republican voters assessed the views of Republicans planning to vote in the September 14th Primary Election and had 16,803 participants.

You have to be kidding, 16K participants? Wow. I’d say that’s statistically significant if true. Anyway…

Brian McAllister of ccAdvertising stated, “In the race for Congress in Delaware, among registered Republicans, Glen Urquhart polls at 38.96%, a 7.01% lead over establishment candidate Michele Rollins, who polls at 31.95%. The undecided’s, who will determine the winner of this race, stand at 29.09%.”

In further exploration of the issues, the survey determined that 69.11% of respondents who do not intend to vote for Glen Urquhart would be more likely to trust Glen Urquhart over Michele Rollins on the issue of life; 65.61% would be more likely to trust Glen Urquhart over Michele Rollins to cut taxes and spending in Washington; and 73.54% would be more likely to vote for Glen Urquhart over Michele Rollins knowing that he is political outsider, small businessman and champion of Delaware’s family values.

Urquharts press release cites 2 polls, the other poll is none other than the PPP Poll:

The second poll by the Democrat polling company Public Policy Polling shows Rollins and Urquhart in a virtual tie when considering the opinion of a cross-section of Democrat, Republican and Independent Delaware voters at 32% – 30% respectively, with a margin of error of 4%.

*raised eyebrow* I’d like to see how that analysis was done.

Anyway, this sure does bring up some interesting dynamics for the general election. Until now Rollins-Castle and Urquhart-O’Donnell have been seen as “teams.” I had always assumed that Urquhart was trying to ride a bit on O’Donnell’s coattails since she’s better known because of her previous runs for office. That situation may be reversed. O’Donnell may be better known still, but she definitely wants his voters to come out and vote for her as well.

Castle, on the other hand, has to be a little nervous about sharing the top of the ticket with Glen “liberals are Nazis” Urquhart since Castle needs Democratic support to win his election. I’ll bet Urquhart has said critical things of Castle in the past as well. Would Castle and Urquhart be able to campaign together in a unity ticket?

Pallin’ Around With Chavez

Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez is one the rightwing’s favorite boogiemen. So, guess who dumped a bunch of Venezuelan oil stock before announcing their political run? If you guessed multi-millionaire government welfare queen Michele Rollins, you’d be right!

A wealthy Republican running for Delaware’s at-large House seat dumped a large investment in Venezuela’s state-run oil company as she was readying paperwork during her run for Congress.

Michele Rollins owned a bond worth between $250,000 and $500,000 in Petroleos de Venezuela SA, the megalithic oil entity controlled by Hugo Chavez’s government. She sold the asset, earning between $50,000 and $100,000, as she was preparing financial disclosure forms to run for Congress, according to her campaign.

I’m so glad Michele Rollins is dedicated to her core principles – making as much money for herself as possible.

Monday Open Thread

Welcome to your Monday open thread. The floor is yours, be sure to sweep and mop.

This is such a strange story. The Virology Journal published, then retracted an article that postulated the Bible documented the first case of human influenza.

When such studies appear in peer-reviewed medical journals, they are expected to be grounded in good evidence, science, and valid research methodologies. Yet the Virology Journal recently published a paper, ”Influenza or not influenza: Analysis of a case of high fever that happened 2000 years ago in Biblical time,” which examines a Biblical miracle attributed to Jesus.

It begins with the following abstract: “The Bible describes the case of a woman with high fever cured by our Lord Jesus Christ. Based on the information provided by the gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke, the diagnosis and the possible etiology of the febrile illness is discussed. If the postulation is indeed correct, the woman with fever in the Bible is among one of the very early description of human influenza disease….”

That is, the study’s authors diagnosed the woman Jesus treated as having had influenza. Had the researchers examined some newly found document, mummified body, or other forensic evidence, that would be one thing. But using the gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke in the New King James version of the Bible as the entire data set made “Virology Journal” look like “Mad” magazine or “The Onion.”

Just three weeks later, the journal retracted the paper and apologized for publishing it.

It’s a complete breakdown of the peer review system in this case. This type of incident is something that can kill a journal.

Some Republicans are breaking with the Gingrich/Palin wing of the party to denounce the fear-mongering over the Islamic center in New York:

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has claimed that the new Islamic center project “would be like putting a Nazi sign next to the Holocaust Museum.” Referencing that quote, Scarborough expressed angry disdain at Gingrich’s intolerance. “I don’t know where to begin,” Scarborough said. “To suggest that someone trying to build a tolerance center for moderate Muslims in New York is the equivalent of killing six million Jews is stunning to me.”

McKinnon then chimed in, arguing that the debate surrounding the Cordoba House project is contrary to his party’s principles. “We may get our membership [by the GOP] revoked,” McKinnon joked. “Screw ‘em,” Scarborough responded. McKinnon then said that the GOP’s stance is “reinforcing al Qaeda’s message”:

McKINNON: Usually Republicans are forthright in defending the Constitution. And here we are, reinforcing al Qaeda’s message that we’re at war with Muslims. So we’ve got this issue; then we’ve got the 14th Amendment issue, where Republicans are saying you’re not welcome here, when we were the architects of the 14th Amendment. So, I see a bad pattern where we’re headed as a Republican Party.

McKinnon said he believed President Obama has “done the right thing in stepping forward at this time on this issue.” He added, “Tolerance means tolerating things you don’t like, especially when you don’t like them. … I respect the President for making this move.”

I wish some Republicans that are actually in office right now would speak up. Shall I continue to hold my breath?

The Logic of the Delaware GOP Purge

I don’t know how many of you have been following Delaware Tomorrow but there’s been a bout of nastiness there. The blogger who goes by the pseudonym “Wanda Maximoff” has left to form her own blog.

A few weeks back, Wanda asked me if he/she could come on the blog as a contributor. Knowing him/her from a past life, I agreed. Wanda then brought up the work he/she was doing on Christine O’Donnell. I reviewed it and said that it was fine to post so long as Wanda documented his/her claims. If he/she would do that, I’d stand behind it. And I’m confident that Wanda has met that burden, so I continue to support that effort 100%. Especially since no proof whatsoever has been offered to refute the documented claims in Wanda’s posts.

You can find all the posts about Christine O’Donnell at the new site called Delaware Republican Record. Wanda Maximoff has done some really excellent work exposing Christine O’Donnell and I hope she continues to do so.

Someone explain to me the logic of purging voices on the right by other voices on the right? I know the national GOP is turning from the big tent to the pup tent by why do they think it’s going to work in Delaware? Turning themselves into a small, irrelevant socially conservative party in the state gains them what exactly? Why is shutting down longtime Republicans Dave Burris and Michael Stafford because of perennial loser Christine O’Donnell a good idea in their minds?

Also, hahahahahahaha (link from Delaware Republican Record):

When Republican candidate Christine O’Donnell’s office was contacted for a comment on the proposals, her press aide, Yates Walker, hung up the phone.

re: lobbying proposals from both Mike Castle and Chris Coons