Maybe Penn hired her because she's hot??

Why not, Matt? That's why Hillary hired Penn.

I also wonder why Mark Penn would hire Dana Perino

Mark Penn cares nothing for ideology and even less about the Democratic party. All he cares about is getting paid to run a campaign. Everything is tactics to him. He probably thinks Perino will give him an in with some Republican candidates to expand his business.

When I said "hot" I was not referring to her temper, which is the only logical way "hot" and "Mark Penn" could ever be used in the same sentence.

It was a joke, Matt.

Ah, ok. It is sometimes hard to tell...

I hope Bernie helps those other Senators find the courage to come out and show their true selves to the world. Out of the chambers and into the street! We're pink (we think), get used to it!

* Ordinarily, "under budget" is a good thing. Right now, in the context of the stimulus package, perhaps not -- Steve Benen

Sure it is; even Krugman admits it in his last sentence. As long as the money gets spent, plowed back into economy, it doesn't matter that individual projects are coming in under budget. All that's needed is *more projects* and a way of re-directing the excess money to them.

Vis Penn/Perino alliance, my reaction was, pretty much, the same as Matt's, @17:58; the old lard-tub needed a prettier cover for his accounts book. A sugar-coating for his spiderweb. Send her out scouting and she'll bring all those South American magnates panting...

you all just misunderstand poor Mr. Penn. We should be encouraging him: Perino is a step up from hiring Karen Hughes, who did much more damage than Perino ever had time to do!

Speaking of taxes, will one of the right-wing assholes who insists I don't "really" pay income tax because I make under $40,000 a year explain why there's a box on my W-2 that says "Income Tax Withheld"? This is, you will notice, separate from my Social Security tax, which appears in a different box.

* I wonder why a "journalist" at Fox News would tell a national television audience, "It's now my great duty to promote the tea parties. Here we go!"

Republicans being out of power has stripped off what little veneer FOX News had of being "fair and balanced". Little more now than a direct pipeline connecting the RNC to the dittoheads.

FOX, Where the South gets its news!

Go Bernie! Start the Socialist Caucus and smash those worthless Blue Dogs.

* The Republican National Committee has officially endorsed the "Tea Party" rallies.

Wow. They've actually come out and told the truth about something---twice in less than a week's time. First, it was the admission that they "own" FoxNoise---and now this? What's next---the Rapture?!?

A Mark Pencil sighting! And me without my phone to record this joyous event!

"Ken Starr has joined Ted Olson in supporting Harold Koh's nomination to the State Department. That's bound to help against Glenn Beck and right-wing bloggers, right?"

Wrong. Starr was unable to bring down the Clinton administration. He's an incompetent who deserves to be ignored.

What's next---the Rapture?!?

I don't think we're lucky enough to rid ourselves of that many idiots in one fell swoop. But hey, we can always dream.

Ordinarily, "under budget" is a good thing. Right now, in the context of the stimulus package, perhaps not.

Nor is it a good economic indicator. However, it is severe proof that the economic stimulus is critically needed, as if such proof were still necessary.

You see, the reason the projects are under budget is that the bids the state and local governments are receiving are pathetically low. And the reason for that is that there are a lot of firms in the construction and related industries that are teetering on the edge of bankruptcy.

So, in a situation where 3 bids might have been received a few years ago, 30 bids might be received now. All the usual suspects, plus all the other local firms that have idle time so can bid on stuff outside their area of expertise. Then on top of that, their bids are designed to merely cover operating costs. The winning bidders will actually lose money on the deal, when you consider things like equipment depreciation and deferred maintenance, but it buys them time.

So, what the government has here is a great opportunity. Now is the time to take advantage of the low bidding costs to address even more of the deferred infrastructure projects that the U.S. needs.

You know, it's really not THAT bad that the RNC and a major media sponsor is sponsoring the Tea-Parties - the thing that's lame is that the teabaggers insist that's not the case. I mean - fine, if they want to sponsor it, then at least own up to it.

These things are similar to "street-team" marketing efforts lots of corporations use. Sometimes it's very effective.

But to play games and pretend it's somehow spontaneous and non-partisan, is just a joke.

And "non-partisan." Right. Because the RNC always endorses non-partisan things.....

I am trying to think of an example where a major political party and a major media sponsor endorsed any left-wing protest or anti-war rally for weeks, no - MONTHS ahead, and I can't think of a single one. Certainly no ads on TeeVee promoting the celebrity anchors who would be appearing at them.

It's so transparent that it's laughable. I mean, good for them if it makes them feel good, but puh-lease, don't think you're fooling anyone.

This is as "spontaneous" as the crowd outside the window for the Today Show.

Dana Perino is the ultimate shiksa Mark Penn couldn't get under normal circumstances. Now she's working for him.

Here's a photo of Mark Penn welcoming Dana Perino to Burson-Marsteller.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gbernabe/981968488/

At the risk of making an inapt comparison between the "Tea Parties" and the anti-war protests, did the Democratic Party ever officially endorse those events? Or any direct action?

BTW, it's not just Fox News. Clear Channel is promoting "Tax Revolt Day."

What a revolting development.

Clear Channel is promoting "Tax Revolt Day." -- Grumpy, @21:40

revolt -> revolve -> evolve (yikes!) -> Volvo -> vulva (now you're talking!) The creation-denying Volvo-liberals want to tax sex! Say NO!

Second shortstop; a sighting of Mark Pencil (@18:28) is a rare pleasure. Though I'm acquiring a taste for Al (@19:31) too and am sorry he (?) never deigned to grace the Carpetbagger.

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/04/taxpayer-funded-gs-profits/

meanwhile steve benen is busy mocking tea parties and crafting his next michael steel post.

I'd hire Perino. HARD.

Steve B.: "I also wonder why Mark Penn would hire Dana Perino."

After what I saw of his work product last year, I'm wondering why anyone with any common sense would hire Mark Penn. Far better if they'd just stick one of their own limbs into Lake Michigan, and let a lamprey attach itself.

“For all the talk about encouraging economic indicators, retail sales took an unexpected downturn in March�

Unexpected ?

* New Home Sales are accelerating downward

* Existing Home Sales are accelerating downward.

* House Prices are accelerating downward.

* Job losses are accelerating upwards.

* Deflation is just plain accelerating.

* Auto sales are down more than 50%.

* The stock market is down by more than 50%.

* The national economy is contracting by more than 6%.

Just who was surprised ?

The Republican National Committee has officially endorsed the "Tea Party" rallies.
===================

Really, all that's left to complete the teabagging story -- already shown up as astroturf -- is for someone to leak RNC memos written to their pet corporations and to Fox showing that the RNC came up with the whole thing and now it's endorsing itself.

Wankers.

HAPPY TEABAG DAY! - April 15, 2009

Gay marriage again. Recent legislation and court decisions upholding same-sex marriages in Vermont and Iowa (yes, Iowa) have brought this issue into political contention again. So I'm posting again the view I noted many years ago. One positive development is that I recently heard one politician voicing the same thought.

The solution - take marriage off the table. Get the word "marriage" off the statuate books.

Let marriage be the private commitment that it really is. Those who wish can choose marriage, and label it as such, in accordance with their faith, spiritual values, ethics, or other personal beliefs. It may or may not be church or religion related; that depends of the tenets of the church and the wishes of the couple.

On the other hand, the state should have nothing to do with the institution of marriage. Its concern should only be civil union and the regulation of the legalities of formation and dissolution, basic rights and obligations of the parties, and economic benefits attendant to the union. The state's role as protector of children remains unchanged.

homer www.altara.blogspot.com

Well, since this is open here's a post I made to http://newportnewsteaparty.wordpress.com/2009/04/14/what-are-you-bringing-to-wednesday-tea/#comment-39, a local "TEA party" site:

I sympathize with those who are concerned about often unfair and too-complicated tax policy, the large amount of money the government collects, and the increasing national deficit and debt. There's plenty to complain about and it's our right to do so. However, it would be a mistake to pretend this is essentially President Obama's fault (he just took over an economic mess on January 20.) Republican and Democratic policy has been building up trouble for years. Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill tried to warn the Bush administration about ever increasing debt, but Dick Cheney said "You know, Paul, Reagan proved deficits don't matter."

Also, Republicans pushed cuts in capital gains tax rates relative to income earned by doing work. First, there is no benefit from most capital gains since they come from trading and not actual start-up capital etc. The CG rate cut had two bad effects: First it meant that working people (all of them including managers, not to divide supervisory from production here) are subsidizing traders, house-flippers and the like. Second, it stimulated the trading bubble which led (among other things) to the current financial crisis. It is hypocritical the way some conservatives promote "flat rates" and yet indulge this fallacious distinction between types of income. Sure, index for inflation to make fair in light of changing "value of money" but no basic rate distinction. (REM also, with no FICA charged to CG, payers of CG tax already get a 7.65% differential anyway even with the same base rates! That is enough ...)

Also, there are child deductions and tax credits for people earning up to about 80k: why are childless people making only 30k subsidizing the kids of people making 80k, over and above public education? (the latter is OK IMHO.) Finally, I want to see the cap taken off FICA income so everyone pays the same 7.65% all the way through - that's a true "flat rate." If we charge FICA to higher incomes, Social Security will be solvent for years to come.

This is a bipartisan issue, so don't let this tax protest be spun into supporting traditional Republican interest groups like investors over the rest of us.