Crackpot Casserole

Like many distinctive recipes, the Crackpot Casserole has a back story. It’s not particularly interesting. But unlike the typical recipe that features ingredients available in your local mega-mart, you’ll need to know the back story to find the ingredients for Crackpot Casserole.

INGREDIENTS:

1. 1 obscure, ethically challenged lefty blogger
2. 1 pearl clutching wingnut drama queen with an advanced persecution complex
3. 1 ridiculous conspiracy theory
4. 3-?? innocent bystanders
5. Several handfuls of absurdly credulous wingnut blogs and media outlets

STEP-BY-STEP DIRECTIONS:

This is a unique casserole in that the ingredients interact with each other to produce various actions -- some deliberately and some as passive elements. Here's how it works:

1. The first ingredient initiates contact with the second, which produces a chemical reaction in the second ingredient caused by greed and a desperate need for attention. That in turn produces the third ingredient.
2. The second ingredient then adds liberal (heh!) sprinklings of the fourth ingredient to the third to form the basic casserole.
3. Then, like a mom hiding Brussels sprouts in a bowl of Spaghetti-O’s, the second ingredient cleverly disguises the fourth ingredient as red meat to make it attractive to the fifth ingredient.
4. To complete the casserole, the fifth ingredient has to swallow the concoction described in Step 3.

Since the fifth ingredient thrives on red meat -- regardless of the source -- silly stuff like fact-checking and regular old common sense go straight down the garbage disposal, and -- voila! -- Crackpot Casserole!

YIELD:

Albee-esque levels of absurdity, aided and abetted by irresponsible "anchors" such as Breitbart TV's Scott Baker and Liz Stephens, who fail to do even the most rudimentary fact-checking, such as reading or contacting the owners of the blogs they display on their "program" to check if the outlandish claims made by their "guest" are true.

It seems fake pimp James O'Keefe sets the journalistic standards at Breitbart's joint. But anyway, the fully baked Crackpot Casserole can be sampled here starting at around the 27-minute mark. Bon appétit!

Attn: Crazy People

The loopy huckster at Hillbuzz.org is attempting to shake down the simple-minded cranks who read his blog for donations by pretending to be the target of a vast leftwing conspiracy. Since he’s using little ol’ me (among others) as a boogie(wo)man to scare up donations, I thought I‘d respond here for any delusional Hilldos or train-wreck rubberneckers who drop by to have a look around.

[If you don’t know what I’m talking about, do yourself a favor and go read War and Peace or something instead of this long-ass post. It’s about the dumbest controversy in the history of the internet, and that’s saying something. You’ve been warned!]

Anyway, it appears one of the Hillbuzzard nutsacks (if indeed there are more than one – “they” generally employ the royal “we,” but maybe it’s a multiple personality disorder thing…) was targeted by an obscure blogger (BigotBasher) who looked up publicly available whois data on Hillbuzz.org and published the personal information it contained on his obscure blog, along with accusations that the Hillbuzzard dude is a racist and a GOP ratfucker.

Although whois data is freely available, I don’t approve of “outing” people who blog pseudonymously and have neither done so nor tolerated anyone else doing so on any blog over which I have administrative control. I have zero connection with this BigotBasher guy, aside from the fact that he has commented on some blogs I write for and / or comment on. That’s it.

Vast leftwing conspiracy or the fevered imagination of a pearl clutching drama queen?

But on the strength of that flimsy connection, the Hillbuzzard dude has concocted and continues to embellish an absurd conspiracy theory, claiming that I (and other people whose “connection” to BigotBasher is as tangential as mine) are all part of an organized global plot to defame him. Here’s an excerpt from a breathless broadside published shortly after the whole mess broke out earlier this week:

Almost IMMEDIATELY after BigotBasher launched his attack on us, that post was picked up by The Daily Kos and DemocraticUnderground. A host of other Leftist, Obama-supporting sites followed suit, repeating TheBigotBasher story as fact.

Actually, it looks like what happened was that BigotBasher published the same diatribe he published on his own blog to diaries he maintains at DailyKos and DU – diaries that anyone with a computer connection can set up. For free. Without personally knowing Markos Moulitsas.

BigotBasher got very little traffic on it until the Hillbuzzard frootloop started bellowing like ruptured cow about the incident. Google it yourself and see if it looks anything like BigotBasher’s post was “distributed to millions of people” as the Hillbuzzard claims prior to his own efforts to publicize it.

Anyhoo, as the week went by, the Hillbuzzard published ever-loopier claims that the Leftist web he imagines goes all the way up to the DNC and Obama himself. He offers no evidence of this, nor of the claims that he’s been harassed and threatened aside from insults and personal info published by a single, obscure blogger.

Hilldos engage in the behavior they decry against innocent bystanders

Why do I care what this deranged loon says? Well, I don’t really, despite the fact that he has repeatedly encouraged his equally nutty readers to scour the internet for clues to my real name and personal information. But by using the “vast leftwing conspiracy” angle as bait, the Hillbuzzard has garnered attention for his outlandish claims from some irresponsible, high-profile wingnuts (including Glenn Reynolds, among others).

Apparently my humble little blog was mentioned and displayed briefly on Breitbart TV today, along with speculation about my obsession with casseroles! Honest to god, these people’s brains are as fried as Durkee French Onion bits left too long in a 450-degree oven.

The whole thing is pretty funny, really, except for one thing. In the numerous, interminable sob-story posts he’s put up on this topic to generate donations and sympathy, the Hillbuzzard whines about the unfairness of being outed online and decries the hideous consequences of said outing – including alleged loss of employment and even being dumped by a boyfriend who ran away in panic at the specter of the Leftist Horde arrayed against the ‘Buzzard. But even as he publicly sobs about his own fate, he encourages the most irresponsible speculation and allows his commenters to publish personal information about completely innocent bystanders.

For example, one of the geniuses in his comments section leapt to the conclusion that since I use the internet handle “Betty Cracker,” I must be the owner of the bettycracker.com domain name. Well, I’m not. But that didn’t stop the fool from publishing the name, address, business site, etc., of the poor dude who actually does own that domain name (to advertise a band that went by that name, from what I can gather).

One of the commenters suggested visiting this totally innocent bystander with a baseball bat. Now, I’m pretty sure that cowardly bunch of blowhards wouldn’t follow through on such a threat – they’d scatter at the sight of a broom-wielding kindergartner, I bet. But still, given the level of derangement on display among the Hilldos, it’s irresponsible as hell to encourage them.

And it’s hypocritical as hell for the person who is presiding over it all to wallow in self pity (and collect donations) for the consequences of his own outing and the alleged threats he's endured (for which he offers no evidence) while simultaneously encouraging the drooling morons who infest his comments section to post information on uninvolved people and tolerate threats against them right on his own blog.

I don’t know whether or not the Hillbuzzard is a racist. But he’s definitely a feckless jerk. And anyone who helps him peddle his foolish story is an irresponsible ass.

Pardon our dustbunnies...

I don't have enough time to post at two blogs these days, so I'm mostly confining my blogular activities to Rumproast. Please catch me over there. I can also be reached via email at the link on this page, though to be honest, I don't check it as often as I should. Cheers!

Fox, meet henhouse

Holy god, did Obama ever shit in his hat when he called out Fox News! Per NewsBusters:

If the Obama administration's attack on Fox News was designed to diminish the cable network's influence, the White House has failed miserably.

In fact, since Anita Dunn's now infamous appearance on CNN's "Reliable Sources" when she claimed Fox isn't a real news network, the cabler has seen HUGE gains in overall viewing AND in the important demographic aged 25 to 54.

If this is Obama's effectiveness attacking a cable network, we should all be concerned about his ability to protect our nation from REAL enemies.

Ooookay. We know that, unlike any other cable news network or the American public in general, the majority of Fox News viewers are Republicans. So what are these majority-Republican viewers hearing on Fox News?

I took a look, and I thought for a moment I had been whisked away in Chic Bob’s time machine, where the dial is always stuck on 2000:

They’re hearing the same shit we pinkos heard in 2000! Just exchange phrases like “the poor,” “the drug war,” and “climate change” with stuff like “the unborn,”“ACORN” and “war on terra,” and the language is practically indistinguishable. I say it’s time to deputize Fox to guard that particular henhouse 24/7.

[Cross-posted at Rumproast]

I smell a rat

So an industry flak organization, America's Health Insurance Plans, releases a report two days before the Baucus bill is expected to pass the Finance Committee. The report says if the bill is enacted, insurers will be forced to dramatically increase premiums so that annual family health insurance costs will equal more than half of the current median household income within 10 years:

The report said selected provisions of a bill from the Senate Finance Committee could increase premiums 18 percent more than they would otherwise rise in the next decade, to an average of nearly $26,000 for families and $9,700 for individuals in 2019.

If the committee approves the bill on Tuesday, as Democrats expect, Senate leaders plan to combine it with another Senate bill and take the package to the Senate floor, for a debate that could begin this month.

Democratic leaders and reform supporters were quick to denounce the industry-funded report, calling it "distorted and flawed" and "fundamentally dishonest." On the MSNBC yappy heads programs yesterday, some, including the estimable Rep. Anthony Wiener, cited the report's conclusions as further evidence that there needs to be a strong public option to keep the private insurers honest.

Others (Ed Schultz, for example, and a senate finance aide) went so far as to insinuate that issuing the report now was a huge tactical blunder on the part of the insurance industry -- that by showing their hand so brazenly, the industry has given the Dems the opportunity to frame the terms of the coming congressional debate:

"Instead of creating doubts, the report is actually having the opposite effect and has drawn a lot of ire from those who support reforms," the aide said. "Frankly, it will create a lot of momentum in the Senate to pass reform."

Don't be so sure. The insurance industry is greedy, heartless and rapacious. But it's not stupid. I think they have a two-level strategy here: First, to re-arm the GOP naysayers with fresh ammo they can use to scare the shit out of people who already have insurance. In 10 years, half your income will go towards supporting lazy, shiftless bottom-feeders!

The second level of the strategy is to rally the Dems around Baucus' crappy plan as it stands now.. It's a briar-patch strategy that could pay off -- if the Baucus plan passes substantially intact instead of being used as a framework on which to add meaningful cost-control measures like a strong public option, the insurance industry gets millions of new customers, permission to keep screwing those of us who have insurance with skyrocketing premiums and escapes the modicum of accountability a public option would create.

Don't fall for it, Dems.

[Cross-posted at Rumproast]

It takes a village, people

This strategy could actually work:



Ginning up outrage against health care reform efforts that would benefit most Fox viewers is more complicated than sending them into gay panic. Not that the GOP is incapable of it, as we've seen this summer. But convincing even dolts to agitate against their own interests involves some effort: It entails telling and sustaining lies and partnerships with corporations to fund the scare-mongering, with the object being to move the uninformed middle toward one side via sheer volume.

The teabag demo is already prejudiced against LGBT equality and will eagerly pounce on any moves toward advancing it. But there's no real corporate motivation to massively fund an effort to stymie LGBT equality initiatives. As Maher points out, a well-timed repeal of DADT could suck all the oxygen out of the anti-health reform movement by giving the lemmings who underpin it a shinier object on which to focus. And it's the right thing to do into the bargain.

[Cross-posted at Rumproast]

"Pop" goes the weasel

Another monumentally dumb idea from National Review’s Augean stable of bloggers -- John J. Miller highlights a reader’s objection to the proposed soft drink tax and suggests dubbing wingnut “tea parties” “pop parties” instead:

These people don’t know shit about branding or regional language differences. The whole “tea party” thing is supposed to invoke the Boston Tea Party, taxation without representation, coiled snake flags, etc., right?

If you call it a “pop party,” not only do you junk the historical references, none of the repressed drag queens in Glenn Beck’s 9/12 Patriot Clubs get to dress up in tights and tri-cornered hats. Total buzz-kill.

Also, unlike Miller’s self-admittedly smelly correspondent, many people in the country don’t even call soft drinks “pop.” According to this unimpeachable source, “soda” edges out “pop” in many places, and “coke” (used in the generic sense) dominates Dixie:

[Click here for better look at detailed map.]

As someone who might say I’m going to the store to buy “cokes” when I actually intend to purchase Mountain Dew, I can tell you that “pop” grates on my ears like a buzz-saw on a banjo. Judging from the amount of ridicule I encountered for calling generic soft drinks “cokes” during my brief time living in Boston (where they call soft drinks “tonics,” of all things), I think the feeling is heartily mutual.

So go ahead, call it a “pop party.” We non-teabaggers will sit on the sidelines laughing our asses off as the regional soft drink terminology gap causes you to explode into internecine civil war like so many Mentos in a two-liter bottle of Diet Coke.

[Cross-posted at Rumproast]