“You lie!” Wilson blurted out during President Barack Obama’s health care address to a joint session Wednesday night, an outburst that made some supporters shudder even as others believed it could give Wilson a political boost in his conservative hometown.

“He’s the only one who has guts in that whole place. He’ll get re-elected in a landslide,” said John Roper, an insurance agent, as he sat among patrons at a diner near Columbia.

Click here to read the entire AP article.

Move over Sarah Palin. Step aside Joe the Plumber. The new darling of the Perpetually Angry Neo-Fruitcake Wing of the GOP is Joe Wilson, who claims his outburst was spontaneous.

Well, I have my doubts that Wilson is telling the truth. It could easily have been predicted in advance that if a rightwing congressman shouted, “You lie!” at Obama during his speech on live television — under the Capitol dome! — that with the help of the media the PAN-FWotGOP would instantly make a hero out that same rude congressman.

Two days ago who knew this Wilson cat? Now he’s the story. The nation’s news junkies are learning all about his history. Well, I think the guy went there last night to make himself into the lowbrow celebrity he has suddenly become.

Sorry, Joe, I don’t believe there’s much truth in your saying it ain’t so, either. What this former protégé of the flinty Strom Thurmond did was an obvious stunt to draw attention to himself.

This was a career move for Mr. Wilson, who’s now in the process of becoming the face of the shameless Town Hall sabotage strategy of the rightwing fringe that seeks to do everything it can to block health care reform.

It’s no wonder the Grand Old Party is shriveling like a wicked witch caught in a cloudburst.

Since the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963, with each Kennedy death that followed, we’ve seen the family marshal its strength and gather its dignity for an ordeal millions of us watched on television.

Each time we’ve been drawn deeply into the moment’s intensity to share the grief of the Kennedys. We’ve witnessed the endurance of their spirit to carry on. Each time the youngest of his generation was there to lead the way for his family — especially, all the nieces and nephews.

“The baby of the family who became the patriarch,” said President Barack Obama.

Forty years ago (July 18, 1969), Teddy Kennedy’s car plunged off the Dike Bridge on Chappaquiddick Island into a tidal pond. Although he swam away, his passenger, Mary Jo Kopechne, drowned.

What happened in the crucial seconds and minutes after the car went into the drink was never made entirely clear. It is an understatement to say the official explanation of what exactly the last of the Kennedy brothers did in the minutes and hours after he saved himself wasn’t entirely satisfying.

Following the veritable canonization of his two slain brothers, by comparison, Teddy seemed more than ever to be the disappointment of his generation. He had long been seen as the most affable but least intelligent of the Kennedy brothers. After Chappaquiddick millions of Americans saw him as a cad, perhaps even criminally so. To this day, some of them have never forgiven him for being the least gallant Kennedy.

“My father believed in redemption,” said Teddy’s namesake, Edward M. Kennedy, Jr.

Since Chappaquiddick, Sen. Kennedy has lived four decades in the public eye, never knowing when another assassin’s bullet might put out his light. Through tireless public service and by taking care of his family, properly, the man has done what he could to atone for his transgressions.

In the Senate he set an example of how to get things accomplished that is unparalleled in modern times. Gridlock was his enemy, much more than any particular Senator. Consistently, his goal has been to improve the lot of ordinary people who weren’t born with the blessing of power or influence.

In recent years Kennedy worked across the aisle like nobody else in DeeCee. While rightwing commentators have loved to demonize him, many of his conservative colleagues in the Senate spoke well of his ability to compromise and build a consensus.

Still, there are people who will never forgive Teddy Kennedy for being a rich kid who made a mistake and wasn’t punished in the way they saw fit. Hey, what about his most ardent detractors, who seem to believe they are better Christians for hating a man who was happy to be called a liberal?

So, even today (Saturday, Aug. 29), of all days, it’s been easy to hear/read crude comments about Teddy Kennedy.

Well, this nonbeliever feels sorry for sanctimonious knuckleheads of any political persuasion or religious sect who find it easier to hate than forgive.

Watching that traditional yet passionate celebration of his life, it was abundantly obvious to anyone who truly admires courage, generosity and a strong sense of duty in a person, exactly why Uncle Teddy was such a beloved man.

Rest in peace, Teddy…

From AP:

While Souter was appointed by a Republican, President George H.W. Bush, he frequently sided with the court’s liberal bloc on controversial issues such as abortion and affirmative action. As a result, if confirmed, Sotomayor appears unlikely to alter the court’s balance of power on those issues.

Click here to read the entire article.

What happens every time is that too many politicians assume that whatever shade of politics they think they see inside the head of the nominee will be the platform on which their decisions will stand. And, they say so over and over again.

Which is tantamount to saying to prospective justices that you don’t believe they will be able to be fair and objective when they are hearing and deciding cases before the Supreme Court.

Perhaps that’s because so many of the politicians, themselves, seem incapable of escaping their prejudices, or acting in a way that clashes with the perceived interests of their important financial backers. It seems the cynical pols believe everyone smart enough to get through law school has to be just as willing to twist the truth for the sake of political gain as they are.

Insert your favorite lawyer joke here _______.

Yet, there’s a long list of justices who surprised nearly everyone with the tilt of their decisions after they got confirmed. Chief Justice Earl Warren, who served from 1953-69, is the first who comes to mind. In fact, Souter, who Sotomayor is hoping to replace, turned out to disappoint many a conservative Republican.

In truth, America’s entire system of justice depends on judges being able to make sound decisions that might go against their own personal opinions. If we all start believing that no one is capable of being fair, when they are called upon to do so, there isn’t much hope for our society.

What I see in all that posturing and bluster is politicians playing to their base. Grandstanding is a more polite word for it than some others. And, it seems to happen every time, regardless of which party is in power.

Now my question to our gentle readers here is this:  In this outburst in defense of the Fourth Estate, are we finally witnessing a split between liberals and progressives?

Some folks might argue, “What’s the difference?”  Some of the more cynical or reactive (read: progressive) But that would probably be the wrong take on this. Just as much as Republicans have fissures underneath the surface, I am quite certain the Democrats have the same. In that light, there really are two differing philosophies at work.

I’ve often commented on how liberalism and conservativism in the United States are really just two ends of the same political philosophy — that of classical liberalism. The neo-conservative or progressive flavors are something much more different; the former smacking of empire, the latter smacking of socialism.

What Chip Reid and Helen Thomas did yesterday was highly unprecedented.  What’s more though, they are entirely in concert with the principles behind free speech, open government, and everything — at least in rhetoric — that liberals purport to believe.

Contrast this with the narrowly controlled PR machine that has been Obama’s image since the Democratic primary.  Prepackaged questions, fake online presence, staged shots, teleprompters… openness and sunshine, this President is not.

Progressives have been keen to continue to polish and shine Obama into something which old Roman emperors would have marvelled.  Liberals, that old left arm of classical liberalism, seem to be instinctively revolting against a movement more keen to treat Americans as more attuned to appetites and soundbites rather than citizens uniquely aware that their elected officials should be conserving the public trust.  In as much as this is an American maxim, good people no matter what their political persuasion would like to know their unvarnished questions are being answered… not prescreened.

It’s good to see a little rebellion amidst the WH Press Corps from time to time.  Though I will probably never agree with or share the same sentimentalities as many of the left-leaning journalists at the top of the food chain, every once in awhile it’s worth noting that reason exists on the other side of the aisle.

From the time it was announced Jackson had died through the end of the day Friday—a little more than 28 hours—60% of the news coverage studied across 55 different news outlets was devoted to Jackson’s death. And that does not include the broadcast network prime time specials devoted to the singer’s demise—two of them for two hours Thursday night and one for a single—the extra hours of morning news and more.

All media sectors covered Jackson heavily, but it was cable news channels that led the way. Fully 93% of cable coverage studied on the Thursday and Friday following his death was about the King of Pop. On the front pages of Friday morning newspapers, 37% of their coverage was Jackson-related compared to 55% of the leading online coverage.

If anyone needed proof of how much the media culture has changed it might be this. When Elvis Presley died in 1977, CBS News was criticized for choosing not to lead its newscast with it.

By comparison, the story about legislation that will most seriously affect the daily lives of American citizens was virtually ignored:

Breaking late in the week, Friday, the House passage of historic legislation to impose limits on global warming received relatively marginal coverage, roughly 2%.

I’m not sure if this misplaced sense of priorities reflects more badly on the news media or on news consumers, the American people.

H/T: TVNewser.  Crossposted from RickSincere.com.

The bill … has 204 co-sponsors, including 16 Republicans. Ninety lawmakers have backed the bill since June 1.

The bill seeks to fund evidence- and research-based crime-prevention programs and would allocate $1.2 billion over five years to bring together law enforcement, schools and community organizations in an effort to prevent gang crime. The focus on prevention rather than the traditional “three-strikes-and-you’re-out” approach would represent a dramatic shift in dealing with crime and the costs associated with it.

Companion legislation introduced in the upper chamber by Sens. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) has eight co-sponsors.

In the House, the Republican supporters include Reps. Steven LaTourette (Ohio), Chris Smith (N.J.), Brian Bilbray (Calif.), Tim Murphy, (Pa.), Sue Myrick (N.C.), Fred Upton (Mich.), Mark Souder (Ind.), Todd Platts (Pa.), Randy Forbes (Va.) and Walter Jones (N.C.).

And you can count among the co-sponsors Republican Rep. Rob Wittman, who announced his support in this tweet a couple of days ago.

Crime is neither Democratic nor Republican. It is good to see that some of the 435 recognize that.