Steve, one edit - you misspelled Jane Mayer's name.

Koch brothers funded The John Birch Society. As part of the Koch connection, you're directed to this video.

Chad Mitchell Trio tear it up in 1962. You'll laugh, and it's still very appropriate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pG6taS9R1KM

Meanwhile,

BOYCOTT FOX
BOYCOTT the Wall Street Journal

That Onion piece isn't satire, I've had exactly that conversation with several people. One of my husband's friends remarked awhile ago that someone was going to have to prove to him that the Koran didn't mandate the killing of all non-Muslims before he stopped believing that it did. I made the obvious suggestion -- read it yourself. To which he replied that he had more important things to do with his precious time, and that it was up to people who wanted to change his mind to produce the proof that his belief was wrong.

I've been boycotting GEORGIA-PACIFIC paper products since I found out that they're owned by the KOCH brothers. Very simple to do--just look at the back of paper towel and toilet paper packages:

Paper towels: Boycott Brawny, Sparkle, Mardi Gras
Toilet paper: Boycott Quilted Northern, Angel Soft, Soft & Gentle
Also: Dixie paper cups and plates

Gives me some satisfaction that I'm not adding to their coffers, e.g. for "Americans for Prosperity." Please join me in boycotting these products and spread the word.

Congressional expert Norman Ornstein had an Op Ed in the New York Times about the filibuster that is not getting as much attention as it should. In it, he makes two sensible suggestions that put the burden of the filibuster on the filibustering party instead of the way it is now:

...So how can the Senate reform the filibuster to preserve its usefulness but prevent its abuse?

For starters, the Senate could replace the majority’s responsibility to end debate with the minority’s responsibility to keep it going. It would work like this: for the first four weeks of debate, the Senate would operate under the old rules, in which the majority has to find enough senators to vote for cloture. Once that time has elapsed, the debate would automatically end unless the minority could assemble 40 senators to continue it.

An even better step would be to return to the old “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” model — in which a filibuster means that the Senate has to stop everything and debate around the clock — by allowing a motion requiring 40 votes to continue debate every three hours while the chamber is in continuous session. That way it is the minority that has to grab cots and mattresses and be prepared to take to the floor night and day to keep their filibuster alive.

Under such a rule, a sufficiently passionate minority could still preserve the Senate’s traditions and force an extended debate on legislation. But frivolous and obstructionist misuse of the filibuster would be a thing of the past.

Looking at Sept 2nd with a jolly jaundiced eye

The woebegone world could sure use some good news...
How strapped and stressed is this planet?
Put it this way: I'm looking to the Mideast Peace talks for the scent of salvation.
Woe is me...

You know how everything is connected to everything else?
That's actually a fundamental newtonian, quantum, social, ecological truth...
So if the right pressure point gets massaged, it's not impossible:
A little good progress on Thursday could go a long good global way.

All jaunty and jaded eyes on the prize...
Please.

Krauthammer today (in my paper) had a particularly disgusting rant about how liberals despise teaparty folks and:
Blame legit teaparty concern about debt on racism about Obama etc.
Blame legit teaparty concerns about illegal immigration on Nativism.
Blame legit teaparty concerns about the GZM on religious intolerance and generalization.
Blame legit teaparty concerns about preserving traditional marriage on homophobia.

First there is some truth to his complaint, but CK as usual cherry picks and turns it into a broad tar smear. It is true that many people really care about debt, really inherently disapprove of illegal immigration (and progressives should too, since it's a sop to business interests), are very 9/11-sensitive more than being very Muslim-sensitive, believe in local determination of marriage rules (but which works both ways), etc. But Krauthammer implied that was the overwhelming essence of "liberal" complaints. What he forgot, were all the complaints about phoniness of the teaparty movement from it being ginned up by Dick Armey's Freedom Works in collusion with Fox News. Also there's a case for planning and collusion about the instigatory speech on TV by Rick Santelli (who oddly makes many good points otherwise.) See e.g. http://exiledonline.com/exposing-the-familiar-rightwing-pr-machine-is-cnbcs-rick-santelli-sucking-koch/
But part of why CK can get away with that, is that the lame-stream media shies away from stories of corporate intrigue (no surprise) and would rather report on buzz issues like "charges of racism" etc. So the media's slant and laziness make it easier for Krauthammer to spread his distortions.

"Simple thoughts are for simple minds."

So The Onion isn't doing fake news any more?

The Rude Pundit today on his blog coined a new name for the followers of Glenn Beck:

Beckerheads... (rhymes with??)

The Rude One hit that nail right on the Beckerhead.

Tea-baggers are now Koch-suckers. Moving up in the world.

Gee, missing email.. Hmm, gee.. Money talks, the rest of us eat shit and die. America: Epic Fail.. What are we going to do? Blow up the whole damned country? It may be best.

Re: Krauthammer and The Onion

See Stanley Fish in today's NYT, "We’ve Seen This Movie Before" about individual explanations for violence (when white people do it) and cultural explanations for violence (when other than white people do it).

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/30/weve-seen-this-movie-before/?ref=opinion