Click to see the beacon journal online
Homes   Jobs   Cars   Shopping
Blog of Mass Destruction -- Community Blog

Republican Pre-Conditions

by The Reverend on February 9, 2010

in Barack Obama, GOP, Rush Limbaugh, fearmongering, health care, iran, neo-conservatives

Remember all the noise from neo-conservatives over the thought of President Obama sitting down with….gasp….Iranian leaders?

Remember all those ignorant Villager gotcha questions Obama fielded during the presidential election campaign over…gasp….sitting down with Iranian leaders?

Would pre-conditions have to be met before an American president could….gasp…talk to Iranian leaders? Shouldn't Iranian leaders first meltdown all their nuclear fuel and hand it over to the IAEA before Obama should even consider….gasp….talking to Iranian leaders?

Good times.

Now the pre-conditions for meetings of detente with "foreign" leaders are being set by Congressional Republicans. The "foreign" leader this time…..is the U.S. President. The "meetings of detente" are the proposed bipartisan talks Obama has offered to hold with Congressional members over health care reform.

And here are the Republicans' pre-conditions before they will sit down to….gasp…talks with the U.S. "foreign" leader……

Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward on health care in a bipartisan way, does that mean he will agree to start over so that we can develop a bill that is truly worthy of the support and confidence of the American people?
….
Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward in a bipartisan way, does that mean he has taken off the table the idea of relying solely on Democratic votes and jamming through health care reform by way of reconciliation?
….
If the President intends to present any kind of legislative proposal at this discussion, will he make it available to members of Congress and the American people at least 72 hours beforehand?

Having been beaten worse than a rented mule by President Obama recently when House Republicans met with America's "foreign" leader for a Q & A session……John Boehner(R-OH) and Eric Cantor(R-VA) have now insisted, in a letter to Rahm, that Obama must meet certain pre-conditions before they step into the ring again with this dangerous, incalcitrant "foreign" leader.

Obama, as most "foreign" leaders do, responded to the Republicans through his diplomat, Robert Gibbs….

The President looks forward to reviewing Republican proposals that meet the goals he laid out at the beginning of this process, and as recently as the State of the Union Address. He’s open to including any good ideas that stand up to objective scrutiny. What he will not do, however, is walk away from reform and the millions of American families and small business counting on it.

Change a few words around……and you have the same discussion that neo-conservatives nuts tried to force on us over talks with Iran's Ahmadinajab. It's uncanny.

But that's where we are now in the U.S. political process. One political party's objective is regime change. Isn't that so? From the beginning of 2009, hasn't the Republican's only goal been the same as Rushbo's…….regime change in the U.S?

Now, with an obstructionistic war-like strategy that places demands on it's political opponent before direct communications can even be opened…….aren't the Republicans telling Americans, just as they did with Ahmadinajab, that the U.S. "foreign" leader can't be trusted?

Boehner and Cantor, through a communique to the U.S. "foreign" leader's diplomat, are telling voters, that America's "foreign" leader is not just dangerous…..but SO dangerous and untrustworthy that a groundfloor of pre-conditions must be met before diplomatic talks can begin.

What else can Republicans do at this point?

GOP'ers have spent over a year trying to diminish Obama's popularity, delegitimize him as they did with the evil fellatio recipient, William Clinton. GOP'ers have done everything imaginable to brand Obama as an "enemy of America." Obama is a "socialist", "Muslim", "coddles Islamic extremists", is "not a U.S. citizen", and "wants to pull the plug on your grandma."

Hell, you can't blame the Republicans for setting pre-conditions before sitting down with such an obviously evil "foreign" leader.

Finally….just think what could happen if America's "foreign" leader doesn't meet those GOP pre-conditions over health care reform. Obama's rogue "mullahs" in Congress just might pass reform with the….gasp…..reconciliation process, requiring only 51 Senate votes. And wouldn't that be just like Ahmadinajab handing out nukes to Bin Laden?

No question….to Republicans, there's little distinction between Ahmadinajab and Obama. Both are dangerous "foreign" leaders where the only solution is regime change. Both are untrustworthy enemies of America who must meet certain pre-conditions before talks of negotiation can be opened. While Republicans claimed that Ahmandinajab's largest threat was the chance he might Fed-Ex a truck full of nuclear fuel to Bin Laden's cave…..the 'foreign" leader, Obama, just might give health insurance to all Americans.

And that's something we should really be afraid of.

Tagged as: , , , , ,

{ 1 comment }

Telling The Baggers What They Want To Hear

by The Reverend on February 8, 2010

in 2008 election, Barack Obama, disinformation, fearmongering, immigration, intolerance, media, moral values, rule of law, sarah palin, tea parties

As we have witnessed in real time…..ex 1/2 term governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, is an opportunist. Sarah is in it for the money, and perhaps the fame. That's why she quit the governor's job. Palin's brief stint as McCain's VP running mate gave her just the right amount of exposure to make leaving the governor's job profitable….so that's what she did. The report so far is that her book "Going Rogue" has made Sarah and the First Dude millionaires….so it's all working out the way Sarah had imagined. Good for her.

What Sarah Palin is not…..is a serious political candidate. Sarah, as we all witnessed during the 2008 campaign, has little, if any, understanding of…well….much of anything. When it comes to national and international policies, history, America's system of law,….or stuff like "war"….Sarah Palin is little more than a female version of Fox's Sean Hannity…..clueless, disingenuous, or both.

Here's what she said Saturday night in Tennessee in an attempt to criticize the Obama administration, as she addressed the "we don't like Obama" T-Party crowd ….

"New terms used like “overseas contingency operation” instead of the word “war.” That reflects a worldview that is out of touch with the enemy that we face. We can’t spin our way out of this threat. It’s one thing to call a pay raise a job created or saved. It’s quite another to call the devastation that a homicide bomber can inflict a “manmade disaster.” And I just say, come on, Washington. If nowhere else—national security—that’s one place where you got to call it like it is."

But…..see…..America is not at "war"……

…strictly speaking, we're not really "at war," as Congress has merely authorized the use of military force but has not formally or Constitutionally declared war. Even the Bush administration conceded that this is a vital difference when it comes to legal rights. In 2006, the Bush DOJ insisted that the wartime provision of FISA — allowing the Government to eavesdrop for up to 15 days without a warrant — didn't apply because Congress only enacted an AUMF, not a declaration of war.

The voting constituency Sarah Palin was addressing Saturday night in Nashville doesn't much care to hear about the Constitution…..they don't want to hear about how the U.S. hasn't officially declared war since WW2…..they don't want to admit that U.S. military adventures since WW2 have all been, basically, authorizations to use military force with a specific purpose intended.

The Tea Party Nation doesn't want to hear about the laws of America that require law enforcement to Mirandize anyone committing a crime, or suspected of committing a crime inside the U.S. No, The Tea Party gathering wanted to hear "rogue" talk, lawless talk.

The voting contingency Sarah Palin spoke to Saturday night would rather hear that Obama is America's enemy…..someone who, according to the 1/2 term ex-governor, is purposely "spinning" words and lingo to, somehow, camouflage his larger-picture intent to aid Islamic extremists. And Sarah provided.

Tea Party Nation came into being in Feb-March, 2009…..before the new Obama administration had even got settled into office. What the hopeless corporate media is today calling a serious grassroots movement is, in actuality, the leftovers of a bitter bunch of excitable Palin campaign followers angry because Democrats took over the presidency and extended their majorities in Congress.

The Tea Party group is made up of still-angry-and-bitter anti-immigration advocates…..those who still today trumpet their "no amnesty" message of intolerance. Tom Tancredo (R-CO), the most bitter and outspoken Republican who wears his "no amnesty" emotions on his shirtsleeve……..was one of the Nashville Tea Party Convention's keynote Friday evening speakers. To rousing Tea Partier applause….Tancredo shared the love…..

"people who could not even spell the word 'vote', or say it in English, put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House."

"His name," Tancredo said, "is Barack Hussein Obama."

That's what Tea Partiers came to hear. Tancredo did not disappoint.

The Tea Party group is made up of many citizens who don't want to hear the "liberal spin" that Barack Obama is…no, really…..an American citizen. What the Partiers want to hear is that Obama's American citizenship is still a 'controversy.' What the Partiers want to hear is that there is still a question about Obama's birthplace……at Tea Party Nation, the wishes of bitter, sore-losers were fulfilled…..

WorldNetDaily Editor-in-Chief Joseph Farah’s Friday night dinner speech, ….. spent around 10 of its forty minutes on questions about Barack Obama’s citizenship…..

Starting at the 4:30 mark….

So there we have it. Tea Party Nation is made up primarily of sore-loser conservative and libertarian-types who paid over $500 a seat to hear what they wanted to hear. They didn't care to hear the truth…..and they didn't hear it this past weekend in Nashville.

Instead, folks like Palin, Tancredo and WND editor Joseph Farah spouted erroneous sound bytes of intolerance, ignorance and conspiracy-theory nuttiness.

None of this is the least bit surprising after having witnessed all the hateful, bigoted and…well…stupid…Tea Party signs from last summer.

In spite of all this….is there any question in anyone's mind that our rotted and hapless Villager-driven media will remind us over and over again just how very Serious the Tea Party Nation is?

UPDATE: This should also be of interest….

[Palin] had on three opera-length strands of pearls, two white and one multi-colored. [O]n her lapel, a small pin with two flags — for Israel and the United States.

And this from Palin….

"The Republican Party would be very smart to try and absorb as much of the tea-party movement as possible," she told the crowd. "Because the tea-party movement is the future of politics."

I've been told the Baggers were, you know, independent of political party affiliation.

Tagged as: , , , , ,

{ 15 comments }

Anti-Catholic Bigotry? Really?

by The Reverend on February 6, 2010

in 2008 election, Barack Obama, Rush Limbaugh, disinformation, intolerance, moral values, religion

Because I am a hellbound, critic of religion…..and an unapologetic athiest unafraid to point out hypocrisy, lies, or anti-scientific, supernaturalistic rhetoric wherever I see it…..I have often been labeled an anti-Catholic, anti-Christian, anti-Jewish bigot.

That's fine, of course,…I'm not bigoted towards any specific religion or denomination, let alone the folks who sit in the pews…..but this is America, and people have every right to say whatever they want to.

Just like these guys….

Setting aside for now Tucker's introductory statement that Obama's appointee to the Faith Based Initiative Counsel was a, "continuation in a long list of radical appointees by this president…"

What did Obama's appointee, Harry Knox, appointed back in March, actually say about the Pope's comprehension of the connection between condom-use and HIV-AIDS prevention?

In the video clip, Knox was responding to a question over a previous comment he made concerning condom-use and HIV-AIDS prevention. Knox had said something like this…..Pope Benedict is "hurting people in the name of Jesus" because the Pope did not support the promotion of condom-use as a method of controlling the spread of HIV-AIDS.

Q: "Do you believe the Pope's position on condoms is still 'hurting people in the name of Jesus?.

Knox: "I do."

Q: "And so, even in light of every (garbled) Harvard researcher in AIDS prevention who said that the Pope was correct and that condom use aggravates HIV….the spread of it in Africa? So..in light of that, do you still stand by your statement about the Pope?"

Knox: "He is simply incorrect in his assertion. All the other evidence of science shows otherwise."

Tucker Carlson's immediate comment was…."Many Catholics, understandably, are outraged at Knox's comments. In particular, the assertion you just heard, that the Pope is hurting people in the name of Jesus.

A coallition of Catholic leaders have signed an open letter to the president demanding he fire Knox."

Excerpt from the letter….

"The self-proclaimed anti-Catholic bigot you appointed to head up faith-based partnerships has reiterated his deep seeded prejudice against the Pope and the teachings of the Catholic Church, and your failure to remove him from office speaks volumes about how much you really value respect for diversity and religious differencs."

Well now……who is correct here?

Here's the original statement about HIV-AIDS from Pope Benedict, made during a trip to Africa….

…. "a tragedy that cannot be overcome by money alone, that cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which can even increase the problem".

"the traditional teaching of the Church has proven to be the only failsafe way to prevent the spread of HIV/Aids".

Naturally, scientists, disagree…..

One of the world's most prestigious medical journals, the Lancet, has accused Pope Benedict XVI of distorting science in his remarks on condom use.

Lancet said the Pope had "publicly distorted scientific evidence to promote Catholic doctrine on this issue".

It said the male latex condom was the single most efficient way to reduce the sexual transmission of HIV/Aids.

"Whether the Pope's error was due to ignorance or a deliberate attempt to manipulate science to support Catholic ideology is unclear," said the journal.

"When any influential person, be it a religious or political figure, makes a false scientific statement that could be devastating to the health of millions of people, they should retract or correct the public record," it said.

"Anything less from Pope Benedict would be an immense disservice to the public and health advocates, including many thousands of Catholics, who work tirelessly to try and prevent the spread of HIV/Aids worldwide."

First…..this so-called argument is the very reason why religion, and the leaders of religion, should be kept out of governmental affairs. America does not have a religion-based governmental framework.

Second…..as Galileo, and other science-based Catholics have demonstrated over centuries…..the Catholic Church has ALWAYS been miles behind scientific advancement and modern solutions to complex modern science-based problems. The Church is, after all, faith-based…..not science-based.

Third…..and this one is my biggest beef…..everything Harry Knox said, all of it, was true.

Like any other terrible disease….the spread of HIV-AIDS undoubtedly "hurts people." The Pope is, according to Catholic doctrine, the representative of Jesus on earth. The Pope……and I don't think this is arguable…..speaks for Jesus here on earth. When the Pope speaks ex-cathedra…..he is regarded as the vessel of Jesus, himself,…..as if Jesus is actually speaking through the Pope.

Therefore, even though Catholics don't much like what Harry Knox said….Knox was correct in saying that the Pope's anti-scientific assertion that condom-use actually makes the spreading of HIV-AIDS worse….."hurts people in the name of Jesus."

The Pope, representing a supernaturalism-believing, religious enterprise….. can speak to his flock anyway he wants to. And, of course, Harry Knox, representing a scientific-based U.S. government, is entitled to point out the Pope's non-comprehension of scientific findings.

Finally, disingenuous Fox lackeys, like Tucker Carlson,….have every right to try to fulfil Rush Limbaugh's ex-cathedra decree…. "Obama should fail." That's little Tucky's perogative. Naturally, this foolish, trumped up attack on Knox is but another bullet-shot at damaging, discrediting, impeding, or dismantling the Obama presidency….something Fox and Fiends began believing in, religiously, back in 2008.

Tagged as: , , , , ,

{ 20 comments }

The Long Awaited GOP Ideas

by The Reverend on February 5, 2010

in Barack Obama, GOP, economy, health care, social security

During the health care "debate", many Republicans rose to their feet, grabbed the nearest megaphone, and shouted that Democrats were threatening Medicare. Those collectivist Democrats, if one was to believe Republicans, were going to "eliminate services" for seniors on Medicare. At least that's what "real Americans" like ex-governor Sarah Palin and Iowa Senator Charles Grassley told us. The nation was warned repeatedly of the upcoming "death panels" that Medicare beneficiaries would face under a Democratic "takeover" of everyone's health care. The "Democrat" health care reform plan would wind up….well you remember…."pulling the plug on grandma."

On Monday, I heard Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) tell a Hardball audience that Social Security should be privatized in the same fashion G.W. Bush had proposed in 2005. Working Americans would have "personal" or "private" funds, replacing traditional Social Security, and those funds would be available for placement in the stock market. Hensarling said that Americans under 55 should have their future SS checks reduced.

That's what he said.

Paul Ryan (R-WI) released the working GOP plan to reduce SS and initiate a brand new system relying primarily on the "reliable" free market stock exchanges.

I would mention here that Bush's privatization scheme for Social Security would have cost the American taxpayers $1 trillion to set up. One trillion.

Ryan's Republican plan includes…"gradual, modest increase in the retirement age,"

From Ryan's plan….

"All other workers will have a choice to stay in the current system or begin contributing to personal accounts. Those who choose the personal account option will have the opportunity to begin investing a significant portion of their payroll taxes into a series of funds managed by the U.S. government."

But Social Security reductions and privatization schemes are only part of how Paul Ryan and the Republicans would confront the Tea Partiers biggest boogeyman……too much national debt.

Medicare, in the Republican plan, is also on the chopping block. Yep, who would have thunk it, right? GOP'ers wrung their hands and moaned (Elvis lyric) about Obamacare possibly setting up "death panels" for, you know, old people on Medicare. The Baggers at Grassley's functions were oh-so-concerned about on-Medicare grandma having the plug pulled on her breathing machine.

Nevertheless, Paul Ryan's Republican plan for Medicare would …..
"starting in 2021, new enrollees would be given vouchers to purchase private health insurance."

Honestly, while daring and a bit breathtaking……the facts of the GOP plan for "reforming" Medicare involve eliminating Medicare as we know it and offering voichers to seniors. Voichers that would be used to buy health care insurance from FOR PROFIT insurance companies.

Ryan's Republican plan would end income and payroll tax breaks for employers who now provide health care to employees…..which would discourage employers from providing health care benefits to their employees. Also in Ryan's plan is the Holy GOP Grail…limiting malpractice award settlements. The remainder of Obama's stimulus plan fund, several hundred billion, would be rescinded under the Republican plan to deal with deficits.

Interestingly, Ryan's Republican plan freezes discretionary government spending for 10 years…..a source of GOP mockery when President Obama proposed it just the other day.

The GOP plan is a veritable tsunami washing away half-century old domestic programs…..the most popular government programs to date.

When would the GOP tsunami of privatizing SS and Medicare wind up lowering deficits and the debt down to reasonable levels?

"..the Ryan budget plan dubbed the "Roadmap for America's Future" would take the deficit from 11 percent of gross domestic product in 2009 to 4.8 percent in 2030 and 2.6 percent in 2050. The Congressional Budget Office shows the GOP plan would end the deficit around 2060 and they would produce a surplus of 6 percent of gross domestic product by 2083."

Republicans would have Americans accept a plan which would open up Social Security and Medicare to the Banksters and Big Insurance. In so doing, benefits would be reduced, requirement ages raised and tax dollars placed into the hands of for-profit money schemers. The same schemers who have destroyed the American economy by gambling recklessly, the same schemers who have helped to make health care coverage beyond the reach of average Americans.

With all of that…..the GOP plan would finally get the federal budget defcits under control by…..2080.

GOP weasel, John Boehner (R-OH), nervous about connecting his political futures to such a radically regressive plan, had this to say about Ryan's plan……

"Paul Ryan, who's the ranking member on our budget committee, has done an awful lot of work in putting together his roadmap," Boehner said. "But it's his. And I know the Democrats are trying to say that it's the Republican leadership. But they know that's not the case."

Unfortunately for Boehner….Paul Ryan is the GOP House guy responsible for putting together GOP budget plans.

What does all this tell us? I think it demonstrates what the GOP priorities are. GOP ideas for "reform", whether it be deficits or health care, always contain huge windfalls for profiteers……while severely cutting into popular, government-run, domestic safety net programs for average Americans.

I agree with many liberal bloggers. Democrats should make a HUGE deal of this radical Republican proposal.

Tagged as: , , , , , ,

{ 20 comments }

Desperately Seeking Attention

by The Reverend on February 4, 2010

in 2008 election, Barack Obama, GOP, Winger-mindedness, disinformation, executive powers, fearmongering, rule of law

It started during the 2008 presidential campaign. Republicans exclusively appealing to the radical-right base. Sarah Palin was front and center leading the effort, spewing nonsensical contradictions, ignorant and mistaken sound bites, and wild-eyed wingnut-pleasing mockery of Democrats, specifically Obama.

After the GOP's crushing defeat in that election cycle, I appealed to Republicans to quit talking, you know, crazy stuff. Quit lying and acting like a bunch of unhinged nuts…..admit conservative and GOP failures…and rebuild their disgraced political party. Simply appealing to a small minority of excitable and angry wingers was not the path back to respectability or trustworthiness.

It's over a year later and….sadly…..Republicans still aren't listening.

Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) last Saturday responding like a crazy person to the Obama administration's handling of the underwear bomber guy….vital part is the first minute….


ABC's Jake Tapper…..

The Bush administration used the criminal justice system to convict more than 300 terrorists, the official noted, adding that accused shoe-bomber Richard Reid was Mirandized within 5 minutes.

It's kind of odd, isn't it, that the most vocal GOP critics of President Obama's method of dealing with "terrorists", don't recognize their own hypocrisy over the GOP Bush having dealt the same exact way with "terrorists?"

Well….it really isn't odd….not really….Instead, it's a strategy. Act like you have amnesia, speak to your audience as if they are morons….like you apparently are, then, blame this Democratic president for the same stuff the previous GOP president did on a routine basis….and try to score some wingnut brownie points by repeating, wrongly, that "terrorists" don't have any rights at all when arrested or detained on U.S. soil.

Cosmo-boy, the Village's new man-crush object, the male Sarah Palin, Scott Brown (R-MA) laid down the rhetorical wingnuttery the night he was elected……

"And let me say this, with respect to those who wish to harm us, I believe that our Constitution and laws exist to protect this nation – they do not grant rights and privileges to enemies in wartime. In dealing with terrorists, our tax dollars should pay for weapons to stop them, not lawyers to defend them."

See?…..Republicans are out of political ammunition. As I like to say….they ain't got nothin'. So, along comes Cosmo-boy…..spouting some stupid and phony sh*t about denying "terrorists" any rights to an attorney, even when they are arrested or detained inside the U.S.

Cosmo-boy wins election……Republicans, out of ammunition, grasp at whatever straws Cosmo-boy had spun into electoral gold up in Massachusetts. Desperate moronic copy-cats. I'm not sure if the brilliant Michael Steele issued a memo, or not….but Susan Collins, obviously without doing any thinking or fact checking….goes ahead and repeats Cosmo-boy's totally incorrect nonsense.

Collins, for all intents and purposes….comes across as a Jean Schmidt-like nut. Remember….Collins is a senator, not some local township trustee. No offense meant towards township trustees…..Collins is supposed to know this stuff.

AG Eric Holder sent Mitch McConnell (R-KY) a multi-page letter pointing out that what he, Susan Collins, and Cosmo-boy Wonder were saying was simply a bunch of made-up winger-baloney…..and then Susan Collins responded…digging herself a deeper hole….

"I remain concerned that there was no consultation with intelligence officials before the Department of Justice unilaterally decided to treat Abdulmutallab as if he were an ordinary criminal."

See the strategy? When stupid wingnut talking point sh*t is called out for what it is…..refuse to acknowledge it…..and then make up some new wingnut stupid-sh*t…..

From Holder's letter…

"…no agency objected to this course of action. In the days following December 25 – including during a meeting with the President and other senior members of his national security team on January 5 – high-level discussions ensued within the Administration in which the possibility of detaining Mr. Abdulmutallab under the law of war was explicitly discussed. No agency supported the use of law of war detention for Abdulmutallab, and no agency has since advised the Department of Justice that an alternative course of action should have been, or should now be, pursued."

Jumping from one base-baiting piece of stupidity to another….Collins said the administration "undoubtedly prevented the collection of valuable intelligence about future terrorist threats to our country."

Also not true….

"It is also my understanding that Mr. Abdulmutallab has provided valuable information. Is that correct?" Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., asked.

"Yes," Mueller replied.

"Thank you," Feinstein said, "and that the interrogation continues despite the fact that he has been Mirandized?"

"Yes," Mueller said again.

Same old stuff, different day.

Once again I would encourage Republicans to quit exclusively baiting their radical-right base. To continue to do so will result in the eventual disintegration of the GOP. Eventually there simply won't be ANY credibility left, except with these dead-enders….

Politico reports on the most recent Research 2000 poll…..

The poll of 2,000 Republicans — sponsored by the liberal website but conducted by independent pollster Research2000 — paints a picture of a Republican base that’s angry, disaffected and acutely hostile to President Barack Obama. Thirty-nine percent of Republicans polled think Obama should be impeached, 36 percent say he wasn’t born in the United States and one in four say they aren’t even sure he’s a U.S. citizen. Another 63 percent labeled the president a “socialist.”

UPDATE:
Just as I posted this, I saw this…..really, now…..it's simply mind-boggling.

Tagged as: , , , , ,

{ 16 comments }

Cold, Calculated, Cash-Rewarded Lying

by The Reverend on February 3, 2010

in GOP, corruption, disinformation, economy, media


Frank Luntz, GOP "word consultant", looking like he's squeezing out another loaf of deception.

For many years now, Republicans haven't had any new policy ideas to offer to the American people. By definition, conservatism is against change…unless it's regressive (good old days and all that)…..so no new ideas coming from Republicans is to be expected. It's in the GOP DNA.

How can Republicans get away with politically battling without any new policy ideas Americans might embrace?

Deception and disinformation…..and when even that's not enough…..Republicans are encouraged to just lie about stuff.

We witnessed this dynamic during the health care reform "debate."

Here's the repellent Frank Luntz, GOP word-guru…..explaining how GOP deception and disinformation would play out in the health care back and forth….

Q: Is it a correct description of the president’s plans for reform?

Luntz: We don’t know what he is proposing. We want to avoid “a Washington takeover.”

Q: But that’s not at issue. What the Democrats want is for everyone to be able to choose between their old, private health-insurance plan and an all-new, public health-insurance option.

Luntz: I’m not a policy person. I’m a language person.

Translation: It doesn't matter what Obama or congressional Democrats proposed to reform health care…..the reform would be labeled by Republicans as "a Washington takeover".

And so it was. Luntz's "language" lesson worked it's way through the rotted and decomposed corpse we still call the American mainstream media. Tea Partiers, unhinged and incoherent…yet passionate about disliking Obama as president…..carried the "language" forward. Result? No health care reform has been passed. Luntz, Republicans, Big Insurance, Big Pharma win again…..by deception and lies….Americans lose.

But what of the veracity of the GOP talking point that Obama and the Democrats were proposing a "Washington takeover"?

Doesn't matter, policy is not my concern, said Luntz…..I'm hired to deceive people with "language."

I bring this up because fat-Frank is at it again, working with Republicans and the Banksters-Who-Ate-America to deceive voters into believing the lie that if Washington regulates Banksters, Armeggedon (or something bad) will result. Why? Because….yep, you guessed it…..government was responsible for America's financial collapse.

Huffington Post…

"If there is one thing we can all agree on, it's that the bad decisions and harmful policies by Washington bureaucrats that in many ways led to the economic crash must never be repeated," Luntz wrote. "This is your critical advantage. Washington's incompetence is the common ground on which you can build support."

"Public outrage about the bailout of banks and Wall Street is a simmering time bomb set to go off on Election Day," Luntz wrote. "Frankly, the single best way to kill any legislation is to link it to the Big Bank Bailout."

Think about what Luntz is saying. New legislation to rein in some of Wall Street's unregulated gambling schemes, the vortex of why the economy fell apart….or a new federal agency to protect consumers from the same types of trick loans which helped inflate a housing bubble…..can be defeated by Republicans by repeatedly chanting the words "Big Bank Bailout." Not because new government regulation of the Banksters wouldn't help prevent another future government bailout of same…..but because Americans recoil negatively at the words "Bank Bailout."

Luntz's deception business treats the American people like plantlife who automatically and mindlessly respond to sunlight….or in this case, lack of sunlight. Cattle easily fooled into going into the slaughter yard pen.

Personally, I dislike Frank Luntz, and have for years. He represents everything that is wrong with American politics.

But there's method and purpose in Luntz's word madness….

Think Progress

Luntz, who gained national recognition for his role in shaping the buzzword-heavy Contract for America with Newt Gingrich in 1994, has built a sizable business selling his messaging advice to both corporations and Republican campaigns.

Who might some of those "corporations" be that Luntz works for….

– Luntz client Ameriquest Mortgages: The proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) would eliminate predatory mortgages. Ameriquest, America’s “sub-prime leader,” has been prosecuted by Attorney General Richard Blumenthal for inflating property values so borrowers could get bigger loans, imposing upfront fees without reducing interest rates as promised, and intentionally deceiving lenders with hidden penalties and interest rates on final loan documents.

– Luntz clients Merrill Lynch and Bear Stearns: Under proposed financial reform, big banks, like Luntz clients Merrill Lynch and Bear Stearns, would face a new structure designed to police financial products, prohibit predatory ones, and require clear forms and disclosures. The CFPA would also help regulate hidden bank fees and other bank abuses.

– Luntz client American Express: The CFPA would regulate the credit card industry, preventing predatory interest rates and fees.

Just as Betsy McCoy deceived and lied about health care reform because she was being paid by Big Insurance and Big Pharma…..so too Frank Luntz with the Banksters.

The crucial question now for Americans is….can corporate and GOP-paid "language" deceivers and liars fool most of the people most of the time?

I'm thinking, and especially so since the Rogue Supremes went down on Big Corporations, that the answer is….yes.

Tagged as: , , , ,

{ 17 comments }

Was Jesus An Immature Dissenter?

by The Reverend on February 2, 2010

in intolerance, moral values, religion

Pope Benedict announced yesterday that he would be traveling to the United Kingdom this September for a visit. Benedict also said a few other things as he spoke to English and Wales Catholic Bishops visiting the Vatican yesterday. The 'few other things' should make for some interesting fireworks when the Pope arrives in Britain this September…..

Your country is well known for its firm commitment to equality of opportunity for all members of society. Yet as you have rightly pointed out, the effect of some of the legislation designed to achieve this goal has been to impose unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs. In some respects it actually violates the natural law upon which the equality of all human beings is grounded and by which it is guaranteed.

…..

In a social milieu that encourages the expression of a variety of opinions on every question that arises, it is important to recognise dissent for what it is, and not to mistake it for a mature contribution to a balanced and wide-ranging debate.

Some context for Benedict's first paragraph…..

The pope's broadside appeared to be aimed squarely at recent (English) legislation that prevents Catholic adoption agencies from discriminating against gay couples, and the proposed equality bill, which would make it harder for churches to exclude job applications from homosexuals or people who have changed their gender.

The error in papal thinking here is obvious, I think. One could very easily insert "discriminating against mixed-race married couples", "black couples", "Jewish couples", "Muslim couples", etc. where Benedict inserts "gay couples." Discrimination, no matter the flavor, is discrimination. Equality in a free society is a radical thing.

It's interesting to note here that Jesus, himself, refused to go along with establishment-religion's discrimination practices in his day. He, unlike Benedict, welcomed the outcasts, the marginalized, those being discriminated against by religious leaders. What Jesus did not do was tell those outcasts, those marginalized that their status violated "natural law." Benedict, apparently, understands the deep and mysterious ways of God better than Jesus did. Perhaps Jesus was simply immature.

Along those same lines…..why is it that the Catholic hierarchy believes that the Catholic Church is entitled to discriminate in their hiring practices? I wonder if Benedict thinks it is perfectly fine for other "faiths" to discriminate in their hiring practices, say, against Catholics?

But the Pope's second paragraph above is so full of dripping arrogance and condescension….non-self-aware triumphalism, really…..that it made me nauseous when I first read it.

"….it is important to recognise dissent for what it is, and not to mistake it for a mature contribution to a balanced and wide-ranging debate."

Re-read that sentence to capture the Pope's mindset.

During the time that the Christian, you know, Christ, was alleged to have lived as a man on earth…..where did the most threatening "dissent" come from? Wasn't it Jesus, himself? Didn't the Jewish "high-priests" turn Jesus over to Roman authorities because he was causing too much trouble with his rabble-rousing "dissent" of the majority-religious authorities?

Was Jesus not acting maturely when he often spoke his "dissent?" Would the Pope argue that Jewish leaders didn't make a "mistake" in not "recognizing" the "dissent" coming from Jesus as a "mature contribution" to the religious debate of his time? Would Benedict agree with the "mature" rejection of Jesus' "dissent?"

What did the Pope mean when he said that Catholics must "recognize dissent for what it is?" What is "dissent?" Is "dissent" evil? Can it be that simple for Benedict and his worldwide flock?

Did the religious establishment of Jesus' day "recognize" the "dissent" of Jesus for what it was? And what did the Jewish establishment leaders do when they "recognized" the "dissent" from Jesus was not, in their opinion, a "mature contribution to a balanced and wide-ranging debate?"

Correct me if I'm mistaken…..but didn't those "dissent" rejecting Jewish leaders, didn't those in the 1st century Jewish Sanhedrin do exactly what Benedict encourages today? Did Jewish authorities, then, really make a "mistake" after all, when they rejected Jesus and his message of "dissent?"

Is Benedict saying that 1st century Jewish leaders did the right thing when they recognized dissent from Jesus for what it was…..not a "mature contribution" to 1st century Jewish debate?

If Jesus were here today, wouldn't he be recognized by this Pope as simply a dissenter from Church authority? Wouldn't this Pope tell his modern-day disciples that it would be a "mistake" to consider Jesus' dissent as a "mature contribution?"

Or am I misunderstanding the Vicar of the Son of God on Earth?

Tagged as: , , ,

{ 35 comments }

Boxing Oneself In

by The Reverend on February 1, 2010

in Uncategorized

Intro: Today's Republicans often refer to Ronald Reagan as their great mentor. The Republican word made flesh, so to speak. Reagan, while campaigning, would say, provocatively, that government, itself, is America's problem, and not part of any solution. Today's Republicans, no longer capable of differentiating between rhetoric and reason, have become Reagan literalists.

Reagan, though rhetorically separating himself from those tax and spending Democrats, worked with both sides to create a big compromise on Social Security. Reagan worked with both sides signing into law a Convention against torture. Reagan signed dozens of pieces of "government" legislation into law, much of it bipartisan in nature.

Point being…..political rhetoric is one thing, reality another.

Continuing my comments on Obama's Thursday meeting with House Republicans….

Obama, brilliantly, described the political situation today's elected Republicans find themselves in…

"So all I'm saying is we've got to close the gap a little bit between the rhetoric and the reality.

…..the way these issues are being presented by the Republicans is that this is some wild-eyed plot to impose huge government in every aspect of our lives, what happens is you guys then don't have a lot of room to negotiate with me.

I mean, the fact of the matter is is that many of you, if you voted with the administration on something, are politically vulnerable in your own base, in your own party. You've given yourselves very little room to work in a bipartisan fashion because what you've been telling your constituents is, "This guy's doing all kinds of crazy stuff that's going to destroy America."

Not sure if Republicans did….but I really appreciated Obama's candidness. This is an example of what I called Obama's "honesty" the other day. On the flip side….Obama's honesty exposes Republican dishonesty, disingenuousness in what has been their approach to fulfilling their roles as the people's representatives while a Democrat is president.

In the age of Rovian politics, which began in earnest in the 90's, Republican rhetoric no longer became a means to an end. The rhetoric became the end in itself.

Fast forward to 2009 and we find Republicans relying exclusively on slash-and-burn rhetoric as the solution to all political problems. Republican celebrity talk-show "water carriers" set the tone, "we want Obama to fail", and the Palin's, Bachmann's, Virginia Fox's, and Joe Wilson's on the right proceeded to inflame even harsher rhetoric by the emerging TeaPartiers and Town-Hallers.

Fox "news" became a clearing house for every piece of outrageous rhetoric imaginable…."socialist", "Hitler", "communist", "America's enemy", "not one of us", etc. Many elected Republicans worked to persuade voters that their rhetoric was not rhetoric at all, but instead the facts, the truth.

Now the TeaPartiers, majoring on the rhetoric and dismissing reality altogether in a very un-Reagan-like manner, have taken over the Republican Party and are now threatening a nationwide effort to remove any Republican who is even thinking about working with this Democratic president.

Compromise, like communism was to Reagan, has become the new enemy of 21st century Republicans.

The conservatives who still solemnly kneel before Father Ronnie, yet ignore all examples of the bipartisan Reagan, are not Footsoldiers in Reagan's Army at all…..but instead, members of Karl's Krazies…..fully, and only, embracing the wildest, craziest, and harshest political rhetoric imaginable….without the slightest evidence of being reasonable.

The "Us" is now never even considered, contrary to how Reagan governed. It's 24/7 "Us v Them." Today's boxed-in Republicans, a direct result of focusing exclusively on Rove style rhetoric, the crazier, the better,…..now face a GOP primary challenge if they even hint at being reasonable.

Example: Fla. Governor Charlie Crist. Crist is facing a TeaParty challenger in Fla.'s primary election to the U.S Senate this fall because Charlie made the "mistake" of appearing on stage with President Obama.

That's what happens when Rovian politics, (divisive rhetoric only), instead of Reagan's reasonableness, is the end instead of the means of all Republican politics.

While seeking to dialogue with House Republicans last Thursday, President Obama painted an accurate picture of the situation Republicans find themselves in. House Republicans mouth the words that they want to 'work with this president,' but by their reliance all of last year on the wildest, craziest rhetoric imaginable, they have created a base of Fox-viewing, Palin-loving, voters who will remove them in a GOP primary if they even think about doing so.

Finally, what would a Reverend post be without, at least, a bit of snark?

Republicans have self-Cheney-ized. What do I mean? Republicans have either placed themselves, or been placed, into an "enhanced interrogation" GOP political-rhetoric coffin-box. Conservative media-screechers, weekly, drive nails into the coffin lid. The coffin is tight, there's no room to move, and TeaParty-types keep telling those elected Republicans inside that they will put the scary insect of primary removal inside the coffin if they even think of co-operating with the Democratic "enemy."

{ 16 comments }

Barack, The Wingnut Slayer

by The Reverend on January 30, 2010

in Barack Obama, GOP, Winger-mindedness, disinformation, economy, media

And I thought Obama's SOTU address was impressive…

Yesterday, President Obama spoke and answered questions at a House Republican retreat in Baltimore. Entire transcript here. It's going to be a cold weekend…..so stay in and take the time to read the transcript or go here to watch the entire event. It's that good.

President Obama spent a total of 82 minutes talking to and answering questions by some of his most…..I don't know….colorful….GOP House opponents.

How did it go?

As some unnamed GOP spokesperson said afterwards, "we won't be doing that again."

Conservative wingnuts, as I lovingly call them, live in a bubble. Politically speaking. As many know, The Reverend is a veteran of dialoguing with wingnuts. I've learned quite a bit about the species over the many years I've been engaging them. I've been grateful for the experience and have personally benefited greatly. From my experience I've come to learn how to speak fluent wingnut as well as accurately predict wingnut political manuevers before they take place.

Nowhere is the wingnut political bubble on display more than on Fox "News." Wingnut watchers of Fox insist that because Fox draws the largest "news" audiences…..they are the most trustworthy deliverer of "news" and information. What President Obama did yesterday was expose the truth about Fox and it's audience.

Even though Fox, and others, repeat mistakes and lies continuously…even though a few million Americans take in those mistakes and lies on a regular basis….and even though all wingnuts concerned will swear under oath that Fox is as honest as Old Abe…..outside the wingnut bubble, none of it will hold water.

It was interesting to watch GOP House member after GOP House member run off at the mouth using numerous wingnut bubble talking points…before they asked the President a question. I suppose the GOP House wingers thought they were still operating under the Fox protocol, where they can spout off unchallenged and unrebutted winger bubble talking points with relative ease.

Bill-o…this wasn't.

One typical example…

Mike Pence (R-IN)….

"Now, last year, about the time you met with us, unemployment was 7.5 percent in this country. Your administration and your party in Congress told us that we'd have to borrow more than $700 billion to pay for a so-called stimulus bill that was a piecemeal list of projects and boutique tax cuts, all of which we were told had to be passed or unemployment would go to 8 percent, as your administration said.

Well, unemployment is 10 percent now,….

Republicans offered a stimulus bill at the same time. It cost half as much as the Democratic proposal in Congress. And using your economic analyst models, it would have created twice the jobs at half the cost. It essentially was across-the-board tax relief, Mr. President.

…..you've raised this — a tax credit which was last promoted by President Jimmy Carter.

….would you be willing to consider embracing,…. the kind of across-the-board tax relief that Republicans have advocated, that President Kennedy advocated, that President Reagan advocated, and that has always been the means of stimulating broad-based economic growth?"

What Pence was doing was repeating standard issue Fox wingnut bubble talking points. Pence's "question" was actually a rehearsal of a bogus, yet often repeated, narrative which has become all too familiar to Wingnut Bubble Residents.

According to the Fox Bubble Points,….Obama promised 8% unemployment and has failed miserably because unemployment is at 10%. In the Bubble narrative, Obama's "so-called" stimulus and "boutique" tax cuts, strongarmed into law by Democrats, has been a total and corrupt failure…..only making America's dire economic and unemployment situation, worse. Now, as the Fox Bubble Points go, Obama, like "Jimmy Carter", has proposed a tax credit for new hires….but when will Obama join Fathers, Kennedy and Reagan, and propose "across the board", "broad based", "stimulating",….wait for it…."tax relief?"

Obama, who doesn't live in the Fox Bubble, took no prisoners….

"…the hope was that unemployment would remain around 8 — or in the 8 percent range. That was just based on the estimates made by both conservative and liberal economists because at that point not all the data had trickled in.

We had lost 650,000 jobs in December. I'm assuming you're not faulting my policies for that. We had lost, it turns out, 700,000 jobs in January, the month I was sworn in. I'm assuming it wasn't my administration policies that accounted for that. We lost another 650,000 jobs the subsequent month, before any of my policies had gone in to effect. So I'm assuming that wasn't as a consequence of our policies. That doesn't reflect the failure of the Recovery Act."

Mike Pence had to go to a neutral corner after that series of rapid-fire blows…..but the Wingnut Slayer was relentless…

"…we can score political points on the basis of the fact that we underestimated how severe the job losses were going to be, but those job losses took place before any stimulus, whether it was the ones that you guys have proposed or the ones that we proposed, could have ever taken to effect.

Now, that's just the fact, Mike, and I don't think anybody would dispute that. I — you could not find an economist who would dispute that."

On the "so-called" stimulus and those "boutique" tax cuts,…..

"This notion that this was a radical package is just not true. A third of them were tax cuts. And they weren't — when you say they were boutique tax cuts, Mike, 95 percent of working Americans got tax cuts. Small businesses got tax cuts. Large businesses got help in terms of their depreciation schedules.

I mean, it was a pretty conventional list of tax cuts."

The stimulus was, in reality, a moderate-to-conservative action….

"….the component parts of the Recovery Act are consistent with what many of you say are important things to do: rebuilding our infrastructure, tax cuts for families and businesses, and making sure that we were providing states and individuals some support when the roof was caving in."

President Obama finished up with Mike Pence by shredding, embarassingly for Bubble Residents, the idea that Obama had rejected a better GOP economic proposal that would have "produce(d) twice as many jobs"……

"….. the notion that I would somehow resist doing something that cost half as much but would produce twice as many jobs — why would I resist that? I wouldn't. I mean, that's my point, is that — I am not an ideologue. I'm not. It doesn't make sense if somebody could tell me, "You could do this cheaper and get increased results," that I wouldn't say, "Great."

The problem is, I couldn't find credible economists who would back up the claims that you just made."

That's what a wingnut slaying looks like……and that was only one of many slayings Obama carried out yesterday.

Summarizing: Right-Wingers, Fox viewers, Wingnut Bubble Residents…are not used to having their Bubble Points destroyed in front of their eyes, not used to their Faux-Narratives being deconstructed so skillfully and honestly. But that's what happened yesterday….and that's why conservative Republicans won't be volunteering to do it again.

Tomorrow, I will post on the other very important point Obama made about how Wingnut Republicans have "boxed" themselves in.

{ 17 comments }

Bipartisanship Breaks Out In The Senate

by The Reverend on January 29, 2010

in GOP, economy, tea parties

Here is fresh proof from a vote in the Senate yesterday that Republicans really took Obama's SOTU message to heart. Republican Senators, after reflecting Soberly and Seriously on what Obama had to say Wednesday night about Democrats and Republicans working together for the sake of the American people…..broke through their bipartisan funk and voted on Pay-Go Thursday morning.

Pay-Go is basically an agreement assuring that legislation is paid for as it's passed.

Pay-Go, it would seem, would be right up the Republicans' fiscal responsibility and fiscal accountability alley. Since Obama took office, Republicans have been very, very loud and vocal criticizing the Big Democratic Spenders….who, they say, are socializing everything that moves and not paying for any of it.

Trillions of ones and zeroes have been expended in the conservative blogosphere railing against Obama and the Democrat's profligate spending…it's always profligate…always. To hear conservatives and Republicans…..overspending, deficit spending, the national debt….are our worst enemies as a country….and they alone, conservatives and Republicans….are the only folks who have the courage and "common sense" to rein in government spending.

So, yesterday, fically responsible, adult Republican Senators had a chance to put their best Fiscal Serious foot forward and vote along with a Democratic proposal for the Congress to pay for legislation as it's passed. Pay-Go.

How did those GOP Senators vote on Pay-Go? Not a trick question. I mean, surely, the Fiscally Serious and Responsible, Non-Big Gub'mint Spenders would want to assure that no more is added to the deficit and national debt….I mean right? Republicans have to now satisfy the TeaBagger movement to get re-elected….and the Baggers are nothing if they aren't opposed to Big Profligate Democratic Government Spending.

So how did those Serious Republican Senators vote yesterday on Pay-Go?

All 40 Republican Senators voted AGAINST Pay-Go. 40 GOP Senators voted "no"….to paying for legislation as it's passed in Congress. 60 Democrats and Independents voted for Pay-Go.

Please…..some Republican, some conservative…..explain to me the brilliant thinking by Republican Senators here. If there is an explanation…..other than, "we want Democrats and Obama to fail at everything"…..I sure would like to know what it is.

On a side note, the Akron Beacon Journal editorial page writers still have a crush on Ohio's own Republican Senator George Voinovich….who is retiring this year. The ABJ editorial writers often attribute fiscal common sense to Voinovich. To ABJ editorial writers, Voinovich is Serious, a Protector of Fiscal Responsibility, a champion for lowering deficits and lowering our national debt. A Sober and Serious Republican Senator.

George Voinovich, as Serious and as Fiscally responsible as he is, joined with the other 39 Very Serious Protectors of America's Treasury….and voted NO against Pay-Go.

Remind me again why it is that Republicans are the Party of fiscal responsibility……cause, you know, I can't remember.

Tagged as: , ,

{ 25 comments }

← Previous Entries

 

© The Akron Beacon Journal • 44 E. Exchange Street, Akron, Ohio 44308

Powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).