Friday Funday: Thanks To Those Who Really Built It

While there is some desire to talk about the poor choice of Clint Eastwood, or Mitt Romney's policy-free acceptance speech, we're going to stick to our Friday tradition today, of stepping a bit away from direct political discussion to concentrate on something positive.

Frankly, that's easy to do today. There are a huge number of things we're thankful for, as our staff begins a three day weekend.

To start with, we're thankful for a well-funded and well prepared Federal Emergency Management Agency. We know a few people in Louisiana and Mississippi, and while many there are living through scenes reminiscent of the floods in Nebraska and Iowa in 2011, there have been no mass fatalities, and very few problems, relatively speaking.

We're also thankful that the Republican National Convention is over, though we're certain the event center and service industry workers in Tampa will be cleaning up for a few more days.

This is also the first weekend of college football, specifically Husker Football. The NFL is also gearing up for its regular season, as evidenced by star players finally coming off the bench and getting into the pre-season games. From fan pages and blogs, to Facebook and Twitter, it's obvious that millions of football fans are thankful the semi-official start of Fall is here.

We're also thankful for all those who are still working this weekend, while we enjoy three days off to rest and recharge.

What we're most thankful for, however, are those individuals who came together to build the system of workers rights in America. The very concept of having "time off" is one that was fought for - that some even died for - by Americans who joined together with workers in unions for the better good.

If your pay, or your work schedule is based (even loosely) on the idea of a 40 hour work week, big business bosses didn't do that for you - and you certainly didn't do that yourself. Organized labor and collective bargaining did that. Corporations have fought the 40-hour work week for generations, and they have a long history of trying to get around that rule whenever they can.

Unions also gave us all the eight hour day, and the 40 hour work week with corresponding weekend. Labor unions helped all Americans to get the minimum wage too.

No matter what slogan or out-of-context quote some political hack gins up, the fact remains that there are very few things in America that individuals built completely one-hundred percent on their own, without help from others.

That convention center in Tampa where the GOP faithful gathered? That was built largely with the help of public funds. The one in South Carolina where the Democrats will meet to re-nominate President Obama is no different in that respect. The electricity and communications that flow to both of those buildings wasn't built by a single individual either.

No matter what your current economic status is, or what you think of labor unions and the American working class, without private businesses working together with state, local, and federal government, your life and the lives of millions of people would be drastically different - and likely MUCH worse.

Like it or not, we're all in this together.

Thankfully, there were those who came before us who were willing to work together, who labored to give Americans the kind of modern nation where we can all watch the game together this weekend, even when our staff is scattered around the country.

To those who truly understand none of this is possible by oneself - thank you, and happy Labor Day.

Mitt Romney, Stand-Up

After two days filled with lies - including almost every word from Paul Ryan's mouth last night -  that have been fact-checked to death by those concerned with the truth - and ignored by Mr. Romney and most of the GOP - tonight's the night Mitt Romney has to stop being more than just a cardboard cutout at the RNC.

Frankly, we don't expect anything much from Romney tonight. We're not sure his subroutines are programmed to truly excite people.

If you think we're hinting that Romney is robotic, we are - and he is. If you think Mitt Romney seems unusually stiff, uncomfortable, and plastic for someone running for president, we think you're right - he does.

That doesn't necessarily mean he might not make a decent political leader. After all, the press blasted Al Gore for a similarly wooden nature a dozen years ago. Yet there's little question in our minds, and the minds of most of those in the legitimate political media, that Gore would have made a better President than George W. Bush. Mitt Romney is not Al Gore, though.

In fact, anyone who has actually been paying attention - and who isn't lying to themselves - should have a pretty good idea of who Mitt Romney is. He's been campaigning for president for most of the last six years.

We've had an incredible number of chances to see who Mitt Romney is, and to see who he says he is. That the two don't automatically match up should tell you something already: the REAL Mitt just isn't there. That's been fairly obvious on multiple occasions as Mitt has been both for and against virtually every major topic of importance.

As the late Senator Ted Kennedy once said of Mitt, "Mitt Romney isn't pro-choice or anti-choice, he's multiple choice."

That lack of conviction has been evident for most of Romney's political career.

When Mitt governed, he did it with a center-left state legislature in Massachusetts - and he did what they wanted, just as he's done what everyone else has told him to do, all along. When his father told him he should go into business, he did. When his family said he should become a leader in his church, he did.

When the political winds have shifted over the years, no matter what Mr. Romney's personal beliefs have been, he's changed positions for everyone from interest groups and political consultants to - recently - the racist, ignorant faction of the GOP. Mitt has effectively become a political standup cutout for the Republican Party, something that potential voters are happy to pose next to for a picture - but in whom they have no real solid faith.

As Ezra Klein of The Washington Post noted this week, that Mitt got this far at all is a major achievement in itself.

For us, however, it's not enough.

It's always been obvious that more than anything, Mitt has wanted to win the race to be President. But being President isn't about winning.

It's about governing.

Real Debate, Fake Debate

As you may have guessed, we're barely covering the Republican National Convention this week and we don't really plan on covering much of the Democratic National Convention next week, either. In a world of twenty-four news cycles and a hyper-partisan electorate, the last thing most Americans need is a three or four day infomercial, with a fake internal debate, for a political brand they've already made their final decisions about.

Political polling over the next two weeks won't serve as an escape for political media folks either. The last polls taken before the conventions were released yesterday and held no serious surprises. Most polls for the next two weeks will be effectively worthless, as each major event temporarily convinces the most wishy-washy and emotionally needy people to cheer for their side.

That leaves those of us involved in politics and media who wish to remain ethical to focus on something worthy of being called "news."

For Nebraskans - both current residents and state-level expats - as well as other political junkies, the kind of news we're tackling today is something you might have missed in the run up to the RNC; the recent Kerrey-Fischer debate for U.S. Senate.

Unlike the RNC on Tuesday, where some participants were not allowed to debate and others were treated with serious disrespect, both the former U.S. Senator from Nebraska Bob Kerrey, and the current state Senator Deb Fischer, acted with a general sense of decorum at their debate.

The first debate of their U.S. Senate contest - still the only debate that Fischer has officially agreed to and finalized details for - had its share of jabs from both candidates, though only one of them gave many details.

Kerrey, consistent as he's always been, promoted his ability to find compromise, pledging to "put country first, always." Kerrey also promised the crowd he'd, "shake up Washington, D.C., and challenge Harry Reid as often as I annoy Mitch McConnell."

Fischer, for her part, attempted to sell herself as a staunch conservative. Unfortunately for her, she came off more than a bit hollow to those who know her record in the Nebraska Legislature. In a pleasant surprise, even though Fischer's false attempt to paint Kerrey as an outsider has been a hallmark of her campaign, she refused to discuss that issue at the debate.

Kerrey didn't. He went headlong at the false "carpetbagger" issue ginned up by GOP strategists, and knocked that issue into the dirt where it belongs.

Fischer consistently spouted answers that seemed as though they were written by producers from Fox, with lots of sloganeering, but no details. As you can see on the replay, Kerrey had plenty of details, both about his own plans and about the plans and history of his opponent.

From immigration to climate change, from debt and taxes, to Medicare and healthcare, Kerrey consistently showed a depth of knowledge and thoughtful answers that showed he'd weighed all the facts and chose his own approach - one that doesn't fall along strict Democratic Party lines. Fischer simply towed the Republican Party line, somewhat uncomfortably.

We'd love to see another debate between the two candidates to see if Fischer can relax and be a bit more honest and natural. Chances are, though, like most modern Republican politicians, she'll hide and cower, avoiding another chance to potentially make a mistake in a debate with the more experienced Kerrey.

It's a shame, really, since there's nothing of any real significance importance going on in politics right now, nationally or in Nebraska.

How 'Bout Them Apples?

One of the uniquely American quirks that's developed as part of our nation's character over the last century or so has been an increasing reliance on technology to save Americans from some of the most onerous parts of our own lives.

From washing machines to video recorders, Americans have invented and developed much of the best new technology in the world over the last century - even if more recently, American corporations have been shipping the jobs building those gadgets and gizmos overseas.

It would seem appropriate, then, that when a uniquely American problem sprouts up - say the desire to throw a brick or stone through our televisions, computers, or radios because of all the damn political advertisements - that a uniquely American technology solution would be following right behind.

Thanks to Apple, Americans may soon be able to push a button on their technology that will skip right over those annoying political ads.

Last week, Apple not only won a massive lawsuit against Samsung, who was charged with infringing on the patents - the intellectual forbidden fruit - of the world's largest technology company. Apple also was granted another patent for a new system of technology last week that would allow "seamless switching between radio and local media."

For non-tech people, that means that if you were listening to a radio station - or watching TV - on your iPhone or iPad, and a commercial popped up that you dislaked, Apple's technology would be able to automatically replace the commercial with something you already own. For example, a snippet of your favorite song or favorite movie could pop up for thirty seconds while the ad you do not wish to see is playing. Then, when the offending ad is over, the Apple product can return you to the same station you were watching or listening to - all while you touch nothing on your device to make this happen. American consumers are already clamoring for this type of technology for everything from their radios and televisions, to their computers and iPads.

Imagine - no more political ads!

The danger we run in living our lives without any disagreeable input is the risk of all Americans becoming like miniature versions of Missouri Congressman Todd Akin - or the latest Tea Party Republican candidate to make an ass of himself, Pennsylvania Republican nominee for U.S. Senate, Tom Smith. Like Akin, Smith appears to have said out loud the kinds of things that previously had only been uttered in the company of other extreme conservatives. Smith's particular idiocy was stating that his daughter's out-of-wedlock pregnancy from consensual sex was similar to rape.

The kinds of ideas Akin and Smith support seem loopy to most Americans, in large part because we're all forced on a daily basis to deal with one another - a broad range of people, with a diverse set of beliefs. We have the opportunity to be diverse, but we still must find common ground with each other. That broad diversity is one reason it's hard to say America, as a nation, has just a single culture.

If over-homogenizing our lives gets to be as easy as pushing a button on our phones, America itself could - more easily than ever - become a country in name only. We'd be hundreds of millions of people, each living in our own little worlds, only associating with people just like us, and only taking in the kinds of media and information that already support and reinforce exactly what we already believe.

After looking at the RNC Convention in Tampa, maybe America doesn't need the latest technology from Apple after all.

Planks, Platforms, And Prayers

If we were the kind of people the Republican Party appear to be catering to in their official platform this year, we might be having a very different reaction to the weather hitting Florida right now. In fact, if we'd been the knuckle-dragging types the 2012 GOP Platform Committee seems to cater to, and it had been the Democratic National Convention that was delayed and curtailed by hurricanes twice in a row, you can bet we'd be crowing about how the wrath of God had brought the storms to plague Florida because the Liberals were in town.

Of course, we're not those people and it's actually been the Republican Party - the party that doesn't believe in climate change - that's had its big national shindig clipped by weather twice in a row, back in 2008 and again this year. We could have told the GOP that scheduling their presidential nominating convention in Florida during hurricane season wasn't exactly a bright idea. [Vacationing at an all-expenses paid resort during hurricane season, however, will net you 20% off regular rates, at least.]

When it comes to bright ideas, the entire 2012 Republican Party platform - the official document that is supposed to state the core values of what ALL Republicans believe - isn't exactly made of modern thoughtful planks. Their platform this year is more like a few pieces of rejected scrap ideas, tied to a female sacrifice, carried by insane Neanderthals, who are running at top speed off the thin end of the ideological wedge.

We wish we were joking when we say this - but we're not.

Take the plank on women's rights, the one brought to light by last week's Freudian slip by Missouri Republican Todd Akin. On the issue of abortion, the GOP's platform states there will be NO exceptions for rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. Mitt Romney, the party's presidential nominee, disagrees with this position. At least that was his most recent position… subject to change. According to the head of the RNC, Reince Prebius, Mitt can basically ignore what he doesn't like on the platform. So much for party unity.

The hypocrisy gets worse.

For a party that claims to be all about tax cuts, the Republican platform now says they're no longer standing behind the Mortgage Tax Deduction. As MSN Money reporter James Rowley noted, "Republican platform drafters refused to put their party on record for preserving the mortgage-interest deduction, giving Mitt Romney more flexibility to promote his plan to lower tax rates paid by corporations and the wealthiest Americans..."

In short, you should give up your mortgage tax deduction so corporations and the wealthiest Americans can keep theirs. After all, only the little people need to make sacrifices - a technique GOP star Chris Christie has perfected as Governor of New Jersey.

The GOP even wants to put a constitutional ban on tax increases, except for war and national emergencies. We all know how well that kind of economic straitjacket has devastated government's ability to do its job in California.

From the insane idea to return to the gold standard, to letting a racist write the immigration rules, to letting a hate group leader write the LGBT rights plank, the Republican Party Leadership truly appears to be running headlong off the end of the ideological wedge.

We can only hope most of the sane, moderate conservatives take a good hard look at those crazies and realize that's what everyone else thinks of anyone who calls themselves a Republican.

It is our hope that the rational Republicans step up to reclaim the Grand Old Party at the last minute this year. We're not betting the farm on it though.

Friday Funday: There But For Grace...

It's been another long week for us, and there are a dozen more of them ahead this year, between now and the election - something most of our colleagues in politics and the media are also looking at with a mixture of excitement and dread.

The daylight has begun to be noticeably shorter, college and pro football have begun to ramp up, and other signs of the end of summer have also appeared. School's back in session, with all the standard worries and joys that implies, and "Fair season" is back in much of the country too.

It doesn't happen every time there's a change in seasons, but once in a blue moon - one of which happens later this month - the seasonal changeover hits us like a senior tackle who's been itching to give a solid hit all summer long.

Admittedly, we may be feeling the change more this year because of the very job we're doing for you right now.

Just look at what's going on in the news.

A new book by investigative journalist Michael Grunwald proves what many Americans have believed all along - that Republicans in Congress planned from President Obama's very first day in office to obstruct him and drive our federal government to a grinding halt.

Republicans and right-wingers have become dangerously paranoid, including threats of violence and revolution if they don't win this fall - an adult version of a three-year old's temper tantrum. Extremists on the right have not only ramped up voter intimidation techniques, they outright admit they want to prevent some Americans from voting.

Racism seems to be back with a vengeance, and misogyny too - even in the very document that spells out the deepest held beliefs of the Republican Party. None of that even touches on the insanity of some policy proposals promoted by leaders in the current GOP - or as it used to be called, the extreme right.

When the ridiculous nature of things in America right now drags down our spirits, we try to talk a walk, talk with some friends, and count our blessings.

Things could be so much worse. Instead of working longer hours than ever, we could be without jobs. Or we could be living in Syria right now, where a real civil war, being fought with guns and bombs and tanks, is killing real people every day.

We could be one of the 400,000 people still living in tent cities in Haiti, thanks to the earthquake back in 2010. Those people are directly in the path of Hurricane Issac - but most of them didn't even realize there was a hurricane on the way until yesterday.

There are piles and piles of reasons that most of us - and probably most of you too - could look at our lives and be less than thrilled with the challenges facing us over the next few weeks and months.

There's just one reason we shouldn't complain.

Things could be so much worse.
And yet, they're not.

We don't live in Haiti or Syria. We have enough money to pay the bills, keep roofs over our heads, clothes on our backs, and food in our bellies. Our loved ones are generally in good health, and we're not getting sacked by massive college or mortgage debt.

Plus? It's Friday, and we have the weekend to relax and recharge.

Count your blessings and breathe, folks. Eleven weeks to the election.

Character And Cowardice

It's always a sign of a person's character when we see how they react when faced with a difficult or personally embarrassing task.

A staff acquaintance and one of our regular readers, Randy Moody, showed exactly the kind of mettle this week that we expect to see in those we respect. A former lobbyist for the National Education Association, Moody also happens to be an old-fashioned Nebraska Republican - one with sense. What Moody did that was newsworthy was simple: he stood up for his principles.

Moody submitted a women's health care plank to the platform committee of the national Republican Party in Tampa. His proposal called for women to have the choice to control all their own health care needs - including abortion. As anyone who has been paying attention to American politics and the media must be aware, that plank was immediately tossed out of the debate in Tampa - no surprise to anyone familiar with the current GOP.

Even if the platform debates for either party are little more than a formality, at least the national Republican Party membership showed they know how to debate topics in public.

That's a trick Republicans should show their craven U.S. Senate nominee, Deb Fischer.

In case you've missed the news in the midst of the political firestorms caused by others in the Republican Party, the upcoming debate for the open U.S. Senate seat from Nebraska is the only debate scheduled for that contest so far.

It's not that Bob Kerrey has been avoiding debates. In fact, since Deb Fischer surprised everyone with her May primary win, Kerrey's camp has been attempting to schedule as many as seven faceoffs. He's even agreed to debate Fischer on Fox News, nationally - a hostile climate for any politician who isn't already bought and paid for by the billionaire masters of the far right, let alone a moderate Democrat like Kerrey.

Fischer, on the other hand, has deftly avoided debate - and also most media coverage. That would include many news organizations in the third district, according to our contacts and observation. Apparently, Fischer doesn't trust herself enough to correctly spout the kind of right-wing extremist nonsense that the fanatics of the GOP base love, but that scare the hell out of normal, sane Nebraskans.

In contrast, Bob Kerrey has been more than ready to face the tough questions, both in debates and in person. In fact, Kerrey's readiness to take on the tough questions, from whomever, wherever, whenever, earned him an unusual writeup by journalist Frank Bruni this week.  Bruni made the point that Kerrey is more than willing to address his consistent stands on gay rights, women's rights, debt and taxes - a bold stance dating back decades that many in both politics and the media seem to be stunned to see. Kerrey's more than willing to take a stand on his on ag policies too.

Sadly, since Fischer has been avoiding much of the Nebraska media, few unbiased critiques and interviews of her have been available to the voters of Nebraska. Apparently, she'd rather send out press releases and have her campaign flacks take calls and claim conflicts so she just can't appear at more than one debate.

This Saturday, at the Nebraska State Fair, Fischer will have to face the only debate crowd she's agreed to, so far. We hope neither candidate tries to hide from what we hope are brutally tough questions. We're fairly certain, from Bob Kerrey's actions, record, and history, that he will be ready to show everyone who he is, for better or worse.

As we've said previously, when they show you who they are, believe them. We hope Nebraskans are paying attention this Saturday.

Boom Goes The Dynamite

There's little surprise, for us, that most of the national media is still focused on the issue that blew up in the face of the Republican Party over the last few days, courtesy of Missouri Republican Representative Todd Akin. We've been saying for years now that someday the extremism and lunatic tendencies of the modern Republican party were going to explode at the worst possible time and burn the GOP politically.

What was more interesting for us was the Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll that came out late on Tuesday. In short, the numbers confirm what we've been saying for some time - that the current Republican Party leadership is at war with America, even if large numbers of Republicans are not.

Before we dig too deeply into the numbers, we want to preface today's commentary by noting a couple things. As the general election campaign expands to a full-on race, our general attitude about polls remains the same: we don't generally trust any single poll or pollster entirely. We do have a significant amount of trust in Nate Silver's research, and some polls have proven themselves over time to be more trustworthy - so we'll likely be quoting more of the trustworthy polls over the next dozen weeks.

According to one of those instruments, the new WSJ/NBC poll, the introduction of GOP House member Paul Ryan to the Republican Presidential ticket got no real bounce from voters. Outside polling confirms that. Nearly half of voters said Ryan was a fair or poor choice.

The overall national race between President Obama and Mr. Romney has tightened very slightly - but not because voters like the Romney/Ryan Plan. Fifty percent of all voters polled pick Obama on the issue of Medicare. Only 34 percent pick Romney.

That's not where the most explosive numbers showed up, however.

Mitt Romney only really leads the President in the polls with old, white, rural, male voters. Midwesterners, suburbanites, and independents are all split evenly.

President Obama leads Mitt Romney solidly in virtually every other major subcategory of voters. African American voters choose President Obama 94-0. That's 94 percent to 0 percent. Latinos pick Obama by a 2-to-1 margin, voters under 35 choose Obama by 52-41, and all women pick the current President by a 51-41 margin.

That last set of numbers, as well as the numbers on Medicare are key.

What they mean, collectively, is that President Obama has massive support from the most powerful blocks of voting minorities, and from women, and now - thanks to the detail-lacking "fairy dust" Romney/Ryan Plan - more seniors than ever.

In the midst of these kinds of numbers, the actions of Tea Party Republican Congressman like Todd Akin merely light the fuse that now has the GOP in a potentially devastating war with itself. It will only highlight the serious divisions in the Republican Party just in time for them to be displayed on prime time TV for all of America to see.

Frankly, the Republican Party may have sent a less explosive clue about their internal troubles if they'd invited the country to a nitroglycerine cookout.

Not Clowning Around

As kids get back to school this week and a few more personal milestones happen to our staff members and their families, it seems like the perfect time to stop and take a moment, and look around at the political landscape around us.

Yes, we're well aware of the circus that's blown up around Missouri Republican Rep. Todd Akin. Before the general election in Missouri has even begun, Akin appears to have soundly defeated himself, thanks to his misogynistic and ignorant comments about "legitimate rape" this past weekend.

A sane person would think that virtually every American, from almost every political background would have chastised Akin, and driven him out of politics and into another line of work. That would be where sane, logical people go wrong though, as clowns like Akin continue to prove their political careers are not yet over.

The fact is, there are a surprising number of influential members of the Republican Party who continue to support Akin. While not the majority of the modern Republican Party, those who think Akin did nothing seriously wrong include such notable figures as Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council, and syndicated media talent Dana Loesch.

If you're wondering how we got to this point, where the current Republican Party isn't even a macabre, clownish vestige of its better days, we can show you the answer with ease. In fact, we've been saying this in words and cartoons for several years now.

The current Republican party leaders don't care about governing. They only care about winning. If they truly cared about governing, they would never have installed a clown like Akin into a position where he could cause them such serious grief. Even after the National Republican Party and Karl Rove's SuperPAC both yanked their ads and financial support abruptly from Akin's campaign, those on the far right of the party insist Akin said nothing wrong. They continue to push for him to stay in the race, and say those like Rove and the RNC are merely cowards.

Frankly, we can't disagree with that characterization.

So now we have the makings of one doozy of an intra-party Republican battle. For those of us who watch these kinds of things closely, this fight has been brewing for years.

It's a battle between several kinds of Republicans. There are those few who are left from the old days, rational Republicans who understand what it really means to govern effectively and to find compromise. Then there are those like the extremists on the far right, who insist that any compromise with those who disagree with them is treason. Finally, there are those who only care about being on the winning side, whatever side that is - in other words, mercenaries.

Regardless of whether Akin resigns from the U.S. House of Representatives, and from the U.S. Senate race against Democratic incumbent Claire McCaskill, the Republican intra-party circus battle will continue.

We're not rooting for the clowns to win this one.

A Swift Punch In The Teeth

As the media ramps up for the two major parties' political conventions, the first of which starts a week from today, the 2012 campaign season is truly beginning in earnest. That means that the media - including us - truly needs to begin looking at how each major party and it's candidates plan to govern if they win.

A perfect example of the Republican governing philosophy towards women and rape was on display this weekend at a local TV station in St. Louis, Missouri.

According to Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in Missouri, Rep. Todd Akin, "From what I understand from doctors [pregnancy from rape], is really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down," Akin said. “But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something. I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.”

If, after hearing what that Republican politician said, you feel like someone punched you in the head with a horseshoe-laden glove, you're not alone  -  Rep. Akin's statement has also sent shockwaves through the political atmosphere.

Here's another punch to the head: Back in 2011, Rep. Paul Ryan, the Republican Vice-Presidential nominee, co-sponsored a proposed amendment in the U.S. House of Representatives with Rep. Akin that would have redefined the legal definition of rape.

The "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act" would have only given legal protections to women who had been raped if they had experienced "forcible rape" - meaning assault with rape. Victims of statutory rape, rape by being drugged (including alcohol), rape by coercion, or virtually any other kind of rape would no longer have had the same options for help from authorities if it were up to Representatives Akin and Ryan, and many other Tea Party members of the GOP-led House.

This kind of anti-woman position is nothing new from the Republican Party. Both Ron Paul and Rick Santorum displayed their beliefs, earlier this year, that rape was something other than a violent attack. In fact, those who currently lead the GOP actually think ideas like these are something to be proud of. Paul Ryan even hailed Rep. Akin's leadership during the recent three-way Republican primary in Missouri.

While Akin had apologized for his comments by 5 PM Sunday, the fact remains that Akin - and in fact MANY of those in the current Republican Party leadership - believe that some forms of rape are "legitimate."

There are those conservatives who repudiated Akin's comments, and who might have thought for a moment that maybe Mitt Romney might use Akin's comment as a "Sista Souljah moment" - a chance for Romney to repudiate some of the most extremist anti-woman views of the current Republican Party.

We remind them that if Mitt Romney were going to have a more evolved view of women's rights, it's unlikely that he would have chosen the co-sponsor of a bill that rolled back the definition of rape half a century. All that the Romney/Ryan camp said Sunday night was that they "disagree with Mr. Akin's statement, and a Romney-Ryan administration would not oppose abortion in instances of rape."

That meek assurance gives us no real confidence at all.

Know that if you align yourself with the current version of the Republican Party, and you plan to vote for politicians like Mr. Ryan and Mr. Akin, this is the kind of legislation Republican lawmakers plan on enacting, should they win.

We sincerely hope that America's women and men remember this as they head to the polls this autumn - and hand those who believe in ideas like "legitimate rape" a swift and painful defeat.

Friday Funday: Integrity

For a time of the year when the news is expected to be slow, it's been quite a busy week for our staff. Travel, meetings, guest interviews, and communication issues have only been part of our burden. The sheer speed at which the news has been changing direction this week has only added to the load.

Still, as usual, we're proud of our efforts and proud of the products we've provided you this week. Even in the midst of a challenging week, our regular internal workflow has still included all the required elements of quality journalism. From news gathering and editing, to discussion, checking and re-checking of sources, and decision making - none of the steps that make this a quality product have been skipped.

It's not as though we're worried that our parents are sitting outside our office windows, waiting to pounce on us if we're not following proper journalistic procedures. We'll leave that kind of crazy behavior to the parents of freshman who are beginning college this week, in schools across the United States.

While we were proud to note the journalistic integrity of two of our colleagues in the professional media, it was a group of those returning students that really gave us a true moment of pride this week.

The student editors, design staff, photo staff, and reporters at the University of Georgia in Athens left en masse this week as they prepared to return to their regular publishing schedule, and returned to their classes.

Unlike many college newspapers, The Red & Black is not an organization run by the university itself. Rather, the newspaper is an independent organization, supervised by a publisher and an editorial advisor, and overseen by a board of directors. Since 1980, the student newspaper has been run this way with considerable success.

Recently, however, that changed, as the resigning editor-in-chief Polina Marinova wrote this week. "For years, students have had final approval of the paper followed by a critique by the adviser only after articles were published. However, from now on, that will not be the case."

Over the summer, the board of directors changed the policies of the newspaper and hired "outside marketing and product managers, a multimedia director, a business manager and new creative director." Further, the board's new policies directed the kind of content the students were supposed to write.

As the memo from the board stated, "GOOD" content was defined as "Content that is ABOUT our audience doing something unique, helpful, outstanding, new, dramatic, i.e.(sic),  scholarships for Freshman (sic)." "BAD" content was defined as "Content that catches people or organizations doing bad things. I guess this is 'journalism.'"

The student journalists were also told a list of errors that would not be tolerated including "Liable" - or, as journalists who actually understand their craft call it, "libel."

In short, the student journalists at The Red & Black were no longer going to be allowed to make mistakes, or create things that might be considered pushing the envelope. Or, in other words, they weren't going to be allowed to have journalistic integrity.

So the staff left - and it doesn't look like they're coming back. In fact, it appears they may be planning on setting up their own, secondary operation.

To that, we give a hearty round of applause, long and loud, with whistles, stomps of our feet, and hoots - the kind of display of emotion that might rock the boat of the small-minded board of directors of the now-defunct newspaper.

Whatever your challenges, integrity is key in all aspects of life.

If that's the only lesson those students at the University of Georgia learned, we'd say their education is better than many - and it's only the first week of school.

Poison & Truth

As our longtime readers know, we like to occasionally take the time to call politicians and public figures of all stripes on the lies and distortions they perpetrate, just as we like to give them kudos when they do something well.

Especially over the last week, you may have noticed a lot of crying in the media by the Romney/Ryan campaign and its surrogates that everyone is being mean to them. More than a few of our journalistic colleagues who fake their impartiality poorly have attempted to claim that this year's Presidential campaign is pouring more poison and meanness into the campaign than ever, with equal offenses being committed on both sides.

To borrow a turn of phrase from Mr. Romney, that's a load of baloney.

The people we're calling out today - and the people to whom we are awarding kudos - are some of our own fellow members of the media.

Far too many surrogates from both campaigns have stuck their heads in front of cameras and microphones and said things this year that were less than perfectly honest. It's politics, not beanbag, so we expect a least a good dose of that from all sides.

What we rarely see, however, is the kind of in-interview insistence on holding a candidate or surrogate responsible that we saw from both CNN's Soledad O'Brien and MSNBC's Chuck Todd over the last two days.

O'Brien had invited former New Hampshire governor and Romney surrogate John Sununu onto her show Tuesday to talk about the campaign. Sununu attempted to bully, bluster, talk over, and push talking points on O'Brien, as he often does with members of the media. This time, however, O'Brien stood her ground and did what real journalists should do: she called him on it. This only served to make the bully Sununu even more angry.

To which our response is, "If you can't stand the heat, Mr. Sununu, stay out of the kitchen."

On Wednesday, Chuck Todd invited Iowa Governor Terry Branstad onto his show to discuss several issues.

However, the Governor got stuck on a single talking point that was a blatant lie: that the work requirement of 'Workfare' had been removed by President Obama. Much as O'Brien did on Tuesday, Todd stood his ground, and refused to let the Iowa governor bake his right-wing lie into the interview.

To both O'Brien and Todd we give our most profound respect today - which means a good deal, as we have previously excoriated both hosts for ducking this most difficult part of journalism.

As Steve Benen noted on Wednesday, letting candidates and their surrogates lie, "...is infinitely more serious and consequential than whether one candidate hurt another candidate's feelings in a spate of rhetorical excesses. Millions of people will elect a president in 12 weeks based on faulty understandings of basic truths because they ended up falling for a con -- a con made possible because media professionals let it happen."

If you represent a candidate, and you lie to our faces, you SHOULD be called on it, right there, on the spot. No, both sides will NOT do everything equally - so it's also long past time all members of the media stopped that kind of false equivalency.

When one side lies more - and there will always be one side that lies more than the other - we need to call it for what it is.

Members of the media - especially those in news and news-related products -  simply don't have the luxury of time to beat around the bushes anymore.

Asleep At The Wheel

It should be no surprise to anyone that most of the political establishment - including the media - is still freaking out about the choice of Paul Ryan for the Vice Presidential slot on the Republican ticket.

For our e-mail edition, in the last two days alone, we've collected almost double the number of stories about Paul Ryan that we've published. We've also published nearly twice as many links relating to Rep. Ryan as we have of all other categories of story combined.

In short, there are a huge number of stories in the media about V.P. Nominee Ryan. However, it isn't just because he stands out as a fit, trim, unusually friendly member of a Congress that's still made up mostly of fat, doughy, old white men. If his looks honestly translated to action, Mr. Ryan would be the younger man sparking the engine of Congress to get as many common goals accomplished as possible.

In reality, Ryan's extremist, rigidly partisan ideologies have been a driving factor for Congress remaining asleep at the wheel.

The Farm Bill is a perfect example of this.

As President Obama noted at his campaign stop in Council Bluffs this week, Paul Ryan - who was a major player with serious clout in the House, even before becoming the VP nominee - caused a serious problem with the passage of the Farm Bill this past spring.

When Republicans chose to introduce the most recent version of the Ryan Budget as their official budget proposal in March, other members of the House immediately noted that a Farm Bill would not pass before the fall election cycle. The reason was simple: the cuts proposed in the Ryan budget were so draconian, even Republicans could not agree on whose metaphorical ox would be gored.

Tea Party conservatives were pitted against moderates, while rural and urban republicans saw the commodity programs and subsidies to each other's favored programs as fat, and their own favored programs and subsidies as meat. Even farmers of different kinds of crops were fighting amongst themselves. As ag consultant and writer Burleigh Leonard said in The Hill back in July, "The Speaker’s caucus is split six ways from Sunday on the farm bill."

If Paul Ryan had been the kind of House Republican leader many Americans remember from the "old days", Ryan might have been able to twist arms, make deals, and bend his GOP colleagues to a compromise Farm Bill like that achieved in the Senate in June.

The Senate's bill had some serious cuts, and even saved $23 billion over the next decade - but House Republican leaders like Paul Ryan could not rouse their colleagues to action. So the deadline for passing a Farm Bill came and went, and the farmers continue to suffer.

The House Republicans could have done their jobs. They could have been LEADERS.

Instead, President Obama once again was forced to take executive action and put together a $170 million dollar emergency aid package for drought affected farmers and ranchers, as he did in Council Bluffs on Monday.

Congress has been asleep at the wheel since the Tea Party Republicans took over - and their record low approval rating proves it. Representative - now Vice Presidential Nominee - Paul Ryan should have wakened them from their slumber to generate some true bipartisan success.

If he was a real leader, he would have already done so. But alas, he's only Mitt Romney's running mate.

Shiny Distrations & Smoke Signals

After a flood of records and documents about Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan filled the media on Monday, inevitably, some pants-on-fire lies from both ends of the standard political spectrum were sure to surface. Both the liberal rumor that Paul Ryan had engaged in insider trading, and the conservative lie that Ryan was ever a bipartisan leader were swiftly debunked.

The flood of new stories about Paul Ryan had another effect too. The stories that focused on Mitt Romney still refusing to show his tax returns to the American people got put to the back of the proverbial stack, as so many media lapdogs chased the shiny new V.P. stories.

This is exactly why we're turning our attention back to the pants-on-fire lies the Romney campaign still hasn't answered about Mitt's tax returns. Contrary to the fearful whining of right-wing partisans, Mr. Romney's tax returns ARE a substantive issue, for multiple reasons - primarily credibility.

Candidate Romney has insisted since nearly the beginning of 2012 that he hadn't ever paid an income tax rate of less than 14%. However, during an interview at the end of July, Romney told ABC News' David Muir that he was unsure if he'd ever paid less than "13.9%". Romney promised to get back to Muir - but has yet to do so.

When Mr. Romney picked Paul Ryan as a running mate, the Ryan budget that Romney has said - more than once - that he would sign, became another key piece of this burning credibility question.

To answer the question, economics and business reporter Matthew O'Brian sat down with the only tax return the Romney campaign has released so far, and the Ryan budget plan, to figure out what Mitt would pay under his running mate's proposal. Under the Ryan budget plan, Romney and wealthy Americans like him would pay way less than 14%. Try 0.82 percent. That's less than one percent - a perfect allegory for Romney, Ryan and company.

For the record, we - and millions of other Americans - would be very interested not only to see Mr. Romney's more recent tax returns. We'd also love to see how Mitt's returns compared to the accounting records from Bain Capitol for the years 1999 through 2002.

The goal isn't to see the exact numbers from Romney's taxes. The goal is to find out how honest Mr. Romney is and has been about a subject like taxes - and whether or not Romney truly shows, through his actions, that he believes that "all men are created equal."

We're willing to blow off as a miscommunication the Romney campaign's claim their candidate had to skip a planned event in Florida Monday night due to exhaustion - even though Mitt was caught exercising at his hotel later that same evening.

However, when the Romney campaign asked those it was considering as a potential Vice Presidential running mate for more than two years of their tax returns? Yet he still refuses to give Americans the same documents so that we can consider whether we want to hire him?

That kind of double standard causes us to seriously question Mr. Romney's credibility, as it should for any honest American.

Sadly, many of our media colleagues won't be chasing this story today. They've already been distracted by the actions of the Romney campaign bringing Rep. Ryan on board.

We still smell smoke, however.
And where there's smoke, there's usually fire.

The Point Of Decision

Over the weekend, amid the din of kids and parents preparing for school, and the 2012 Summer Olympics winding down, Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney announced his choice for a Vice Presidential running mate: Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin.

We agree with those who say choosing Ryan was not a bold or courageous choice by Romney. It was a choice, however, that tells us a great deal about Mitt Romney.

The Romney/Ryan ticket is the end result of a Republican Party that has given on up functional governing for pure ideology. Ryan, in fact, has long been known as an ideological devotee of the extremist right-wing author Ayn Rand - a woman who blasted government assistance, but took Medicare and Social Security when she did not need to. Ryan's ideology seems to mesh perfectly with Romney's: One set of rules for us, and another for "those people."

Of course, as columnist E.J. Dionne noted over the weekend, we all know how well sticking to ideology at the expense of progress worked out for the Democratic Party in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

To put it bluntly, for seniors, the working class, the middle class - basically anyone who enjoys Medicare, Social Security, and a fair day's wage - the Romney/Ryan combo is a ticket straight to Screw U. That isn't an educational institution and it's nowhere any sane American wants to be.

As we discussed in one of our most widely read commentaries ever, "Barrel Full' O Stupid", the Ryan budget plan would raise medical costs for the elderly and poor significantly. It would also destroy Medicare as we know it, and would replace it with a coupon/voucher system. If you ran out of voucher coupons and needed medical care? Too bad for you. The wealthiest American people and corporations would be fine, though, as they'd be receiving a multi-trillion dollar tax cut. The Ryan plan would blow also a massive hole in the deficit, as we noted back in March, and would continue racking up massive debt. At best, it might balance the Federal budget sometime between 2030 and 2040 if everything went perfectly - which, in the real world, never happens.

Not surprisingly, you heard none of these facts from the Romney/Ryan camp over the weekend. In fact, the full range of both Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan's twisting the truth was on display multiple times over the weekend - notably in a "60 Minutes" interview that was full of baloney, and not much else.

Most tellingly, Mr. Romney insisted over the weekend that while he respected Paul Ryan's ideas, Romney would not run on the Ryan budget plan. By the end of the weekend, however, the Romney campaign was telling everyone that if Mitt were President, he'd happily sign the Ryan budget plan into law.

On top of all this, the Romney campaign also was caught insisting on seeing multiple years of tax returns from those people they considered for VP choices. Meanwhile, the Romney camp steadfastly refuses to show more than one full year of his tax returns to the American people.

This dual standard of rules and positions is guaranteed to be a hallmark of the Romney/Ryan campaign. One set of rules for Romney, Ryan, and those they are pandering to that day, and another set of rules and proposals that will put the screws to "those people".

In America, however, the great majority of us are "those people" at some point in our lives. Which means that if America picks Romney and Ryan, almost everyone will get screwed.

Friday Funday: A Great Ending

There's no end to the problems the GOP is having right now. A presidential campaign that's growing more desperate every day, a faction of the party that's actively campaigning against Mr. Romney, and a former behind the scenes Republican power family that seems to be switching to the Democrats - all right before the big GOP convention. Don't forget the Tea Party is still tearing the Republican party new hindquarters, while the Ron Paulites continue their battle against the Republican Party elite. No, we don't think there's any reason today to add further insult to the GOP's own self-injury.

So since it's Friday, and as it's the final weekend of the 2012 Summer Olympics games, we're going to put politics aside for the rest of the day in favor of national unity.

To be honest, we've seen some great action in London the last two weeks. Yes, we'll admit - the seven-hour delay tactic by NBC still annoys us and many other Americans. Thanks to the wonder of the internet though, the BBC - and sometimes, NBC - have been providing millions of Americans with a different chance to see most of the events at the Olympics live.

In fact, thanks to the internet, the delay has turned the nightly NBC prime-time showing into more of a highlights reel of the Olympics, where viewers often know exactly who's going to win.

There have been some amazing firsts, like the participation and performance of double amputee Oscar Pistorius in the able-bodied games. There was also the first women's gold medal in Boxing, won by seventeen-year-old Claressa Shields, a poor kid from the "wrong side" of Flint, Michigan. There have also been some incredible repeat performances at these games, like the now- three-time gold medal winners Misty May-Treanor and Kerri Walsh Jennings, the three-time gold medal U.S. women's soccer team and the worlds fastest man, Jamaica's Usain Bolt.

As usual, watching the Olympic Games has been a pleasant surprise in so many ways. Athletes and fans from all over the world - 204 nations this time - have been able to put aside their disagreements, and move forward as one, toward a single goal of fair play, and opportunities for all.

It hasn't always been easy. The Saudi Arabian delegation had to fight with the International Olympic Committee to allow their female judo athlete to compete. America's own Mitt Romney also made some international gaffes before the games began. Maybe he was right, though, that London wasn't 100% ready, as the scoreboard operators mixed up the the North and South Korean flags on the first day of competition.

Still, after a shaky start, the London Olympic Committee worked out all the kinks - and even found a middle ground solution that allowed the female Saudi athlete to compete, for the first time ever.

It's heartening to see that even if only for a couple weeks, the world can indeed agree to disagree, find solutions, and work together - successfully.

Maybe there's hope for America yet.

The Big Catch

As we warned several years ago before the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling - and many more times since - the 2012 election is proving to be everything ugly we thought it would be.

Both money and lies are flooding the airwaves, with an astoundingly small number of wealthy donors having far more control than they should. At both the national level in the Presidential race, and at state levels around the country, those with the most money have been displaying their prizes when they win, like anglers display their prized catches on the pier.

As we've also said for a long time, just because some idiot somewhere has a ton of money, doesn't make them an expert on anything. Sadly, on both sides of the left-right political divide, that lack of expertise with a major surplus of money has reared it's head like a sea monster lately.

We focused on the Romney welfare lie on Wednesday, and the ad that displays the truly gutless and craven nature of the Romney campaign. Meanwhile, a major outside big money group aligned with the Obama campaign made its own ugly gaffe this week.

Priorities USA, the SuperPAC that supports President Obama's campaign, released an ad that features a victim of Mitt Romney's vulture corporatist days with Bain Capital. The ad is sad and disheartening; While it does not outright say that Romney’s Bain Capital layoffs led to the death of a former employee’s wife after the worker lost his health care, the ad definitely makes it clear that those who run the SuperPAC believe Romney is responsible.

The Priorities USA SuperPAC, however, is not the Obama campaign - and the President's campaign has definitely distanced themselves from that ad.

On the Romney side, his campaign's money trouble isn't bringing in the dollars - it's accounting for where they came from.

Stories in both the Wall Street Journal and L.A. Times pointed out Romney's money problem this week. Sheldon Adelson, one of Mitt Romney's largest donors, through the Sands Corporation that he owns, is now under investigation from the U.S. Department of Justice, for the possible violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

Long and short, it appears possible that Mr. Adelson may have been funneling and laundering money from China into political campaigns across the U.S. That money has gone almost exclusively to Republican candidates.

Ever wonder why a multi-billionaire like Sheldon Adelson has been pouring millions and millions of dollars of his own money into these political campaigns? Adelson's reason for doing so may now be coming very clear.

First of all, much of Mr. Adelson's money that he's giving to Republican candidates may not have come from his own pockets. Secondly, we'd be willing to bet that Mr. Adelson would very much like to stay out of prison. That task that would likely be much easier in an administration led by Mitt Romney - a candidate that Mr. Adelson has heavily financed - than one led by Barack Obama.

We'd like to say there's a great ending to this story, a whopper of an ending, a hook that leaves you more hopeful in our American electoral system.

Right now though, the only thing that seems to be hooked is our politicians, on all sides, on the unlimited funds of the super rich, and highly unethical.

Oooh, That Smell

Not surprisingly, when looking for honesty in both the media and politics, some of the most trustworthy sources for truth today are in high-quality entertainment. There's a reason shows like 'The Daily Show' and 'The Colbert Report', as well as certain fictional movies, TV programs, and Broadway-style shows are doing so well these days - because the best among them have a heaping helping of truth.

Sadly, that's exactly the opposite of what TV viewers in so-called swing state media markets - like those in Florida, Virginia, and the Iowa-influenced Omaha/Lincoln market - will be getting hit with. Those states will be experiencing another helping of fibs, lies, and untruths, thanks to the latest load of baloney from Mitt Romney about the welfare system.

In case you missed it, earlier this summer several governors, especially the conservative Republican governors of Utah and Nevada asked the Obama Administration for some flexibility on certain parts of the federally backed welfare-to-work program. 'Workfare', as it was called when President Clinton put the program into effect in 1996, requires that individuals getting certain types of public assistance also should be working or prove they are actively looking for work. Yet, it's also a fact that even though President Obama's policies (like the stimulus plan) have grown or recovered half of the jobs lost due to the Bush recession, there are still millions of Americans out of work.

Knowing this fact, and hearing the pleas from governors, President Obama allowed some governors to begin to experiment with the flexibility they asked for in achieving the goals of 'Workfare' - though the White House insisted the existing work requirements would stay in place.

So Obama gave these Republican governors the proverbial inch. Now Mitt Romney has decided to turn the President's willingness to work together with Republicans for the best interests of the American people, into a blatantly false new ad. The ad, filled with pants-on-fire lies, is probably the most craven attempt at reviving the politics of race and class resentment that any of us has seen since the days of outright race-baiting in political campaigns.

Romney's ad leaves out the fact that as governor of Massachusetts, Romney himself supported the very flexibility he's now painting as 'gutting welfare'.

Thankfully, multiple legitimate media organizations are blasting Romney's ad as 'blatantly dishonest', a risky gambit, 'the politics of resentment', and even outright calling it what it is: a lie.

We've mentioned before the many lists of Romney lies that have been complied by some in the media - but this latest ad is probably the biggest load of garbage we've seen dumped on anyone, in either the news or entertainment fields.

There's usually a very telling scent when a campaign like Romney's begins throwing out buckets of smelly trash like their latest effort.

It's called 'desperation'.

Again.

On Sunday morning, as peaceful worshipers gathered together in a Sikh house of worship near Milwaukee, another mass shooting happened in the United States. For the second time in two weeks, there was another act of domestic terrorism - and for fourth time in the last four months, mothers, fathers, siblings and friends had to mourn the death of loved ones, while others recovered.

Anyone who thinks the attack in Oak Creek, Wisconsin or the mass shooting in Aurora, Colorado or the cafe shooting in Seattle, or the other 58 mass murders carried out by firearms in the United States since 1982 could not have had their body counts reduced or eliminated is either a fool or an idiot.

"All of us recognize that these kinds of terrible, tragic events are happening with too much regularity for us not to do some soul searching to examine additional ways that we can reduce violence," President Obama said on Monday. So that is what we are doing today - starting with the terminally stupid defense that the Second Amendment always and forever allows Americans unrestricted rights to guns.

Every right, from those explicitly written in the U.S. Constitution, to the unwritten "Laws of Nature" referred to in the Declaration of Independence, has a corresponding responsibility in our world. Basic logic says that if a person or a society cannot handle any one of those responsibilities, they should also not be allowed to exercise those rights.

Yet even in the face of basic logic, one of the largest lobbying organizations in the world, the National Rifle Association, continues to pour millions into its twisted idea that all Americans should have the right to carry virtually any type of gun, anywhere, at any time, with virtually no legal responsibility.

Gun regulation groups, and those aligned with the NRA, can site statistics from their respective positions until both sides are nearly breathless. Arguing with those who have become so fused to their ideology as the core members of either group is like arguing with flat-Earth fanatics. They are adamant that their Earth is flat, that there be monsters out there beyond the horizon, and it is hopeless to argue anything different with them.

Hopeless, that is, unless the statistics and proof comes from their own people. For gun-loving Americans, for example, that means statistics from a pollster from their own side, like well-known conservative pollster Frank Luntz.

Which is why we find it intersting that in a recent poll by Luntz, American gun owners overwhelmingly agreed with those on the other side of the traditional pro/anti gun regulation line.

Which means there ARE things that can be done to lessen the body count of episodes like those we've continue to witness, through what Luntz termed as common-sense gun control.

These proposed controls include everything from requiring criminal background checks on ALL gun owners and gun shop employees, to mandating that gun-owners tell the police when their weapon is stolen, to restricting permits (or in some cases, ownership) to those Americans who have not committed violent misdemeanors, domestic violence, or who have a history of mental illness. Many gun owners would even be fine with restoring major portions of the Assault Weapons Ban.

Such common sense laws would have likely prevented the Oak Creek shooter from easily obtaining a gun. Such laws would have made things more difficult - if not impossible - for the shooter in Colorado too. Yet our lawmakers still offer words, with no actions every time another mass shooting happens. That is no longer acceptable.

If owning a gun in our nation is to continue be a right, then it must logically correspond to both an individual and a national responsibility. If we cannot handle the responsibility - by passing common sense laws and regulating ourselves - then we should not be allowed to wield that right.