Right Wing Watch notes that Tea Party clowns have begun to promote a massive demonstration ominously called Operation American Spring, scheduled for May 16 at the Mall in D.C. But Operation American Spring's organizers have openly called for a military coup against our center-right President, which no liberal did in the aftermath of Mr. Bush's 2004 re-election, or of any of the subsequent humiliations Mr. Bush visited upon our great land. I say if these clowns want the Democrats to win back the House and expand their Senate majority, then they ought to go ahead and throw their little pity party. (Yes, even if they're all armed, it's still a pity party.)
The Los Angeles Times notices the right-wing war on solar power users. "If you are using the grid and benefiting from the grid, you should pay for it," says one right-wing spokeshack. You mean like solar power users already do when they have to draw energy from the grid? And don't other users benefit from the power solar users put into the grid, which utilities can presumably resell? Why does any "liberal" media outlet even quote such offensively stupid crap? And how, ultimately, is it somehow evil for people, and not corporations, to create electricity?
Robert Reich describes a California bill, SB 1372, which would hike state taxes on corporations that have a high CEO-to-worker-pay ratio (and cut taxes for corporations with a low CEO-to-worker-pay ratio, bet the "liberal" media doesn't report that part). I think the bill's a bit roundabout for my taste -- why not just hike taxes on millionaire income? But the Chamber of Commerce naturally calls it a "job-killer" (are those the only two words of English their spokeshacks know?), though we might more accurately describe the Chamber of Commerce a "job-killer" when it sinks tens of millions of dollars into political ads instead of, you know, hiring people to make stuff, like our grandparents did.
Right-wing "Christian" Ralph Reed can't say for sure whether a kid is better off in an orphanage or being adopted by a same-sex couple. "I think the social science is just simply not in yet on same-sex couples," he said. He had just said the "social science" was in to say one-man-one-woman families were better, but never mind -- "the social science is just simply not in yet" is pretty weak tea, and only reminds us that he's the guy who invented compassionate bigotry. He even makes Cokie Roberts look good. Indeed, you have to wonder if that was the idea.
Finally, both of South Carolina's U.S. Senators and the local U.S. House Rep. skipped the unveiling of a statue of an anti-segregationist U.S. District Judge in Charleston. They all claimed scheduling conflicts -- the U.S. House Rep in question, Mark Sanford, said he was in Virginia, leading one to ask if Virginia is the new "Appalachian trail." I suppose they could also all claim they have re-election battles to fight this year, but then you'd have to ask why they would all think honoring an anti-segregation judge would cost them votes.