NRA Board Member Ted Nugent: "Because our legislative, judicial and executive branches of government hold the 10th Amendment in contempt, I'm beginning to wonder if it would have been best had the South won the Civil War. Our Founding Fathers' concept of limited government is dead."That's a bit like saying that it would have been best had Hitler won WWII because of his keen sense of limited government, and then trying to deny that you in any way just condoned the Holocaust. Uh, yeah you did. And worse, you clearly knew you did.
Oh, and Mussolini did get the trains to run on time.
I'm damn curious about how the Democrats who voted to hold Holder in contempt, and who are funded by the NRA - i.e., who basically did the NRA's bidding in voting against Holder - feel about slavery? Heck, how about all members of Congress, Democrat and Republican, who take money from the NRA. Do those Members agree that the US would be a better place if blacks remained slaves? Because that is what the NRA board member just said - he said that America would be better off if the South won the civil war, which means blacks would still be slaves. He clearly knows that that would be the result of the South winning the war. So a prominent NRA board member thinks slavery would have been a worthwhile price to pay.
It's interesting that when Trent Lott said something similar - something somewhat less offensive than what Nugent said - he lost his leadership post in the Republican party. Yet when an NRA board member comes out and suggests that slavery would have been an okay price to pay, the NRA does nothing to address the matter.
Those Democrats who take NRA money should be ashamed of themselves.
Yes, that's ground bacon with bacon dressing, bacon cheese, and slices of bacon. Bacon bacon bacon. (via Gawker)
Stating the obvious, but with the utmost importance:
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano this week linked climate change with the wildfires hitting Colorado. Napolitano said 'there's a pattern here' as she noted the summer wildfires as well as the East Coast heat wave and the high-velocity winds that whipped through the mid-Atlantic late last week.
Couple that with record temperatures across the continent and the fact that Washington, DC was without power for days due to a freakish inland hurricane. Yeah, we're in it. The Climate Crisis is on.
We already knew about Romney's offshore wealth in the Cayman Islands and parts of Europe, but now we can add Bermuda to the list.
(AP) WASHINGTON – For nearly 15 years, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's financial portfolio has included an offshore company that remained invisible to voters as his political star rose. Based in Bermuda, Sankaty High Yield Asset Investors Ltd. was not listed on any of Romney's state or federal financial reports. The company is among several Romney holdings that have not been fully disclosed, including one that recently posted a $1.9 million earning suggesting he could be wealthier than the nearly $250 million estimated by his campaign. [...]
Sankaty was transferred to a trust owned by Romney's wife, Ann, one day before he was sworn in as Massachusetts governor in 2003, according to Bermuda records obtained by The Associated Press. The Romneys' ownership of the offshore firm did not appear on any state or federal financial reports during Romney's two presidential campaigns. Only the Romneys' 2010 tax records, released under political pressure earlier this year, confirmed their continuing control of the company.
Romney's Bermuda money was not disclosed during his gubernatorial campaign, during his time serving as governor, or during the five years he's been running for president, for Pete's sake.
Worst candidate ever?
The Obama campaign is wasting no time jumping on this.
Axelrod said Romney's portfolio of offshore investments — which include a Bermuda-based company, funds in the Cayman Islands and a Swiss bank account — raises what he called a "Bermuda Triangle" of financial questions.
"Just what were the benefits there? Did he actually pay taxes in some years? We don't know," he said.
"Why would you transfer your Bermuda business…to your wife the day before you became governor? Why did you not want that on your disclosure form?" Axelrod said later, referring to reports by The Associated Press and Vanity Fair.
"A Bermuda Triangle of financial questions."
So easy yet so effective. This just gets better and better.
Via Grist, the new CEO of Duke Energy resigned today after only one day on the job, but according to the Wall Street Journal, he will retain his full severance package and relocation expenses for that one grueling day of sitting in a high-rise office.
Despite his short-lived tenure, Mr. Johnson will receive exit payments worth as much as $44.4 million, according to Duke. That includes $7.4 million in severance, a nearly $1.4 million cash bonus, a special lump-sum payment worth up to $1.5 million and accelerated vesting of his stock awards, according to a Duke regulatory filing Tuesday night. Mr. Johnson gets the lump-sum payment as long as he cooperates with Duke and doesn't disparage his former employer, the filing said.
Under his exit package, Mr. Johnson also will receive approximately $30,000 to reimburse him for relocation expenses.
Philip Bump of Grist did the math
So assuming that he worked for a full eight hours on Monday, that comes out to a nice $5.5 million an hour — some 765,000 times the national minimum wage. His relocation alone is over half the average annual salary for an American worker.
Johnson's resignation was apparently a forced resignation, meaning he was fired, but I assume Duke Energy shareholders will not be very happy regardless. And funneling this kind of money to the top has nothing to do with your high utility bills, right?