"I do not know of any good data that can tell us what percentage of those 8 million families fall into the class of irresponsible greedy losers. This is, after all, the United States of America, where, until very recently, greed was considered the grease that kept the cogs of capitalism moving smoothly."

We still love greed, and the irresponsible part? Who cares? Certainly not the GOP, who decided one war wasn't enough, and who, under the guise of fiscal responsibility, ran up the biggest deficits of all time.

No, what we love is irresponsible greedy winners. And that means everybody who got a bonus and a government bailout at the same time.

I mean, what's left to laugh at if you can't make weak racist jokes?

If we can't laugh at denigrating stereotypes of black people, or Jews, or Hispanics, or Asians, how are we supposed to find anything to laugh at?

You've taken away all our humor, politically correct America. You won't let us use the n-word anymore (heck, we would even agree not to use it amongst, you know, those people), we can't talk about other groups like we used, even our thinly veiled references aren't allowed to get by!

What's a redneck supposed to laugh at? Where is a bigot supposed to find fun in this world? Crackers can't even crack a joke about uppity, um, women? What has this world come to?

Signed,

White Trash Of All Classes Everywhere

/sarcasm (in case you were wondering....)

You want to talk about cowards there has been next to nothing written on these leftist websites about Muzzammil Hassan beheading his wife in Buffalo because she dared file for divorce from an Arab husband.

Ah, the classic rightwing, "But you haven't denounced X" argument! We haven't seen this particular ugly debating tactician awhile! Thanks for bringing back a golden oldie.

It's hard to take the opinion of balding, fat, impotent drug addicts seriously.

I've bought three houses in my time. Each time, I filled out reams of paperwork. I had to provide proof of income, paid for credit reports, showed my credit card balances.

I thought that was standard procedure. I thought that if I didn't make enough, I wouldn't get the loan. If my credit load was too high, I wouldn't get the loan. If my credit report was bad, I wouldn't get the loan.

This changed at some point. The people who were supposed to deny you if you didn't have the income or a bad credit record or whatever, stopped denying people. Why? Because they made more money that way. They didn't care if they approved people who they knew that, if something went wrong, they'd go belly-up.

So now the kinds of people who approved those loans--the financial people, the traders, the analysts, the financial class--now they appear on TV and rant about the losers who signed those loans in the first place.

Anything to shift the burden of responsibility away from the people who sold those "losers" a bill of goods.

These are the same people who thought we'd be greeted as liberators in Iraq. The same people who make racist jokes in the locker rooms of their exclusive country clubs. The same people who hand out bonuses supported by government bailouts.

So let's focus on the losers. It's safer. Many of them are low income; a fair number of them are even black. Don't they really really deserve what's happening to them?

I talked to a woman today. She lost her job--manager of a real estate office, quel ironic, eh?--last year. Her husband is in construction, and will lose his job in a couple of weeks, if things continue on. She was crying as she talked. "The house will go next."

But they're just greedy losers, right, who went for the extra bathroom, right? Why should our tax dollars go to them?

Right? Right.

Look, the truth, as they see it, that the wingnuts like something stinks won't say is simple:

The man is black. Therefore, for the conservatives, he's not an American.

For the rest of us, he's a welcome relief from the deranged dry-drunk and his corporate overseer who have been haunting the office for the last eight years.

What kind of a question is that?

Is it "fair" to question a president?

Of course it is. It's not only "fair," it's necessary. It's part of how this thing we call a democracy works.

Is the site fair? Time will tell in that regard. What does it mean to be "fair"? Fox News claims it is "fair and balanced;" it's clearly not the latter, and if by "fair" we mean reporting as clearly and truthfully as possible, then it's clearly not that, either.

Define your terms. For many on the right, "fair" can be taken to mean "it doesn't matter what the truth is, all that matters is that it supports my position."

Were they afraid they wouldn't be allowed to leave the District?

The GOP playing racist politics? WTF! Who would believe it! I mean, they've never done anything like this before, right?

And for all of you who just never thought about this--it's all rainbow and unicorns in your world, isn't it?

this is a win for the Republicans.

Then let's raise our glasses high and hope for many, many, many more such "wins" for the GOP, thus sending them back to "permanent minority status." Out of touch, out of hope, and out of their minds.