PDA

View Full Version : "The Republican Party Is Turning Into A Cult"


Pages : [1] 2

bjkeefe
08-20-2009, 05:02 PM
Here is the beginning of, and some excerpts from, a great column from Johann Hari (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-republican-party-is-t_b_262594.html) that I've already mentioned elsewhere (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=126038#post126038) on this site, but which deserves to be noted again.

The Republican Party Is Turning Into A Cult

Something strange has happened in America in the nine months since Barack Obama was elected. It has best been summarized by the comedian Bill Maher: "The Democrats have moved to the right, and the Republicans have moved to a mental hospital."

The election of Obama -- a center-left black man -- as a successor to George W. Bush has scrambled the core American right's view of their country. In their gut, they saw the US as a white-skinned, right-wing nation forever shaped like Sarah Palin. When this image was repudiated by a majority of Americans in a massive landslide, it simply didn't compute. How could this have happened? How could the cry of "Drill, baby, drill" have been beaten by a supposedly big government black guy? So a streak that has always been there in the American right's world-view -- to deny reality, and argue against a demonic phantasm of their own creation -- has swollen. Now it is all they can see.

Since Obama's rise, the US right has been skipping frantically from one fantasy to another, like a person in the throes of a mental breakdown. It started when they claimed he was a secret Muslim, and -- at the same time -- that he was a member of a black nationalist church that hated white people. Then, once these arguments were rejected and Obama won, they began to argue he was born in Kenya and secretly smuggled into the United States as a baby, and the Hawaiian authorities conspired to fake his US birth certificate. So he is ineligible to rule and the office of President should pass to... the Republican runner-up, John McCain.

These aren't fringe phenomena ...

[...]

These claims have become so detached from reality that they often seem like black comedy. The right-wing magazine US Investors' Daily claimed that if Steven Hawking had been British, he would have been allowed to die at birth by its "socialist" healthcare system. Hawking responded with a polite cough that he is British, and "I wouldn't be here without the NHS." Frank Laffer, the right-wing economist lauded by David Cameron, claimed on CNN that it would be a disaster if the government got its hands on Medicare, the program providing healthcare for the elderly, paid for entirely by... the government.

This tendency to simply deny inconvenient facts and invent a fantasy-world isn't new; it's only becoming more heightened. It ran through the Bush years like a dash of bourbon in water. When it became clear Saddam Hussein had no Weapons of Mass Destruction, the US right simply claimed they had been shipped to Syria. When the scientific evidence for man-made global warming became unanswerable, they claimed, as one Republican congressman put it, that it was "the greatest hoax in human history", and all the world's climatologists were "liars". The American media then presents itself as an umpire between "the rival sides", as if they both had evidence behind them.

It's a shame, because there are some areas in which a conservative philosophy -- reminding us of the limits of grand human schemes, and advising caution -- could be a useful corrective. But that's not these what so-called "conservatives" are providing: instead, they are pumping up a hysterical fantasy, that is only a thin skin covering raw economic interests and base prejudices.

For many of the people at the top, this is mere cynical manipulation: one of Bush's former advisors, David Kuo, has said the President and Karl Rove would mock evangelicals as "nuts" as soon as they left the Oval Office. But the ordinary Republican base believe it. They are being cruelly manipulated into opposing their own interests through false fears and invented demons. Last week, one of the Republicans sent to disrupt a healthcare town hall started a fight and was injured -- and then complained he had no health insurance. I didn't laugh; I wanted to weep.

Indeed, if you spend any time with American right-wingers -- as I have, reporting undercover on events like the National Review cruise (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/ship-of-fools-johann-hari-sets-sail-with-americas-swashbuckling-neocons-457074.html) and the Christian Coalition Solidarity Tour of Israel -- you soon find that your arguments don't center on philosophy. You have to concentrate on correcting basic factual errors about the real world.

There are many substantiating links in the above which I was too lazy to copy over -- please visit the original article (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-republican-party-is-t_b_262594.html) to see them.

The one I did reproduce points to an article I've noted elsewhere (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2008/11/second-ship.html), and merits special attention.

[Added] I am definitely stealing his last line (not quoted here). This notice shall make me immune from any charges of plagiarism.

claymisher
08-20-2009, 05:07 PM
The best part: "Shrill baby shrill."

bjkeefe
08-20-2009, 05:12 PM
The best part: "Shrill baby shrill."

Heh. Yep. That's the one I had in mind when I added the "[Added]" part to the previous post.

bjkeefe
08-23-2009, 06:36 PM
Frank Rich's op-ed in today's NYT, "The Guns of August (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/23/opinion/23rich.html)," touches on some of these same themes. Probably not a lot of new information to most of the visitors to this site, but it's well-written and contains a myriad of links.

Excerpt:

I have been writing about the simmering undertone of violence in our politics since October (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/opinion/12rich.html), when Sarah Palin, the vice-presidential candidate of a major political party, said nothing to condemn Obama haters shrieking “Treason! (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/07/obama-hatred-on-display-a_n_132572.html),” “Terrorist! (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/06/mccain-does-nothing-as-cr_n_132366.html)” and “Off with his head! (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/10/08/1517943.aspx)” at her rallies. As vacation beckons, I’d like to drop the subject, but the atmosphere keeps getting darker.

uncle ebeneezer
08-23-2009, 10:35 PM
Wow that just shows that hell does exist...the National Review Cruise! Funny, and scary. And to think that was BEFORE Obama got elected. That boat is gonna be a mighty scary place this year.

bjkeefe
08-24-2009, 06:42 PM
The Pantload waddles in. He is now a full-fledged deather (http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200908240010) (via (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2009/08/new-voice-column-up-about-new-thing.html)). This circle jerk on Fox is a disgrace.

And did you know Obama is planning to kill veterans with mind control? True story, according to Doughy, Rush Limbaugh (http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200908210027), and the rest of the wingnutosphere (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/08/rightbloggers_e_3.php).

bjkeefe
08-24-2009, 07:14 PM
Michael Bérubé (http://www.michaelberube.com/index.php/weblog/exclusive_interview_exclusively_here/) interviews "the whole entire American mass media!"

bjkeefe
08-24-2009, 07:57 PM
The Pantload waddles in. He is now a full-fledged deather (http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200908240010) (via (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2009/08/new-voice-column-up-about-new-thing.html)). This circle jerk on Fox is a disgrace.

TBogg (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/08/23/irretrievably-gross/) caught it, too.

uncle ebeneezer
08-24-2009, 08:22 PM
Best comment from TBogg:

SandiaBlanca August 23rd, 2009 at 8:35 pm

Did he really say “very, very lame” about a woman WHO LOST HER LEGS??? Wotta jerk.

Why does Jonah hate our Veterans?

bjkeefe
08-24-2009, 08:29 PM
Best comment from TBogg:



Why does Jonah hate our Veterans?

Wow.

If Beinart doesn't call The Pantload on this whole episode the next time they're on Bh.tv together, I'll really lose the last bit of respect I have for him.

claymisher
08-24-2009, 09:12 PM
Wow.

If Beinart doesn't call The Pantload on this whole episode the next time they're on Bh.tv together, I'll really lose the last bit of respect I have for him.

What would Alan Colmes do? There's your answer.

bjkeefe
08-24-2009, 09:17 PM
What would Alan Colmes do? There's your answer.

WIN.

bjkeefe
08-25-2009, 12:17 AM
Here, in this Instaputz post ("Dept. of Here Let Me Google That For You. (http://instaputz.blogspot.com/2009/08/dept-of-here-let-me-google-that-for-you.html),") we get not only to laugh at the Deather movement that represents mainstream Republican thinking, but we also get to enjoy the bonus busting of yet another claim pulled by McMegan from her nether regions.

bjkeefe
08-25-2009, 12:32 AM
Jesse Taylor (http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/numbers_time/) (via (http://instaputz.blogspot.com/2009/08/like-zombies.html)):

38% of Americans don’t think or know if Obama was born in America, and 39% want government out of Medicare. (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/08/19/americans-poll-out-medicare/)

40% have a positive view of Sarah Palin. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/24/politics/washingtonpost/main5185967.shtml)

==========

[Added] Good news from following the second of the above links: the Palin approval rating is headed down. The bad news (http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/08/deeper-look-at-birthers.html), from link-hopping from the first: "6% of poll respondents think that Hawaii is not part of the country and 4% are unsure."

bjkeefe
08-25-2009, 03:23 AM
First Read (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/08/19/2036015.aspx), via Dave Noon (http://lefarkins.blogspot.com/2009/08/big-surprise.html):

Here’s another way to look at the misinformation: In our poll, 72% of self-identified FOX News viewers believe the health-care plan will give coverage to illegal immigrants, 79% of them say it will lead to a government takeover, 69% think that it will use taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions, and 75% believe that it will allow the government to make decisions about when to stop providing care for the elderly.

And, to illustrate why we always say SO-CALLED liberal media:

But it would be incorrect to suggest that this is ONLY coming from conservative viewers who tune in to FOX. In fact, 41% of CNN/MSNBC viewers believe the misinformation about illegal immigrants, 39% believe the government takeover stuff, 40% believe the abortion misperception, and 30% believe the stuff about pulling the plug on grandma. What’s more, a good chunk of folks who get their news from broadcast TV (NBC, ABC, CBS) believe these things, too.

Still, as Dave notes, we're still talking a huge difference: 72% vs 41%, 79% vs 39%, 69% vs 40%, and 75% vs 30%.* Or as he puts it:

There's quite a lot of room, I'd say, between a "good chunk of folks" and -- to describe the FOX numbers more accurately -- the "gigantic motherfucking preponderance of folks" who believe things that are as demonstrably false as the existence of the Abominable Snowman. The gap is most likely a function of the difference between news outlets who (a) amplify factual errors by providing generous bandwidth to those arguing for the existence of Abominable Snowmen; and those who (b) promote, as a matter of editorial policy, the belief that Abominable Snowmen are going to rape and euthanize your grandmother.

==========
* I'd also speculate that the questions where the differences are smaller may represent, in part, some liberals' wishful thinking.

bjkeefe
08-25-2009, 06:55 PM
TPM has a nice photo essay documenting the rise of the Deathers (http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/photofeatures/2009/08/the-evolution-of-the-death-panel-meme.php?img=1), from Betsy McCaughey to the Pantload, with stops at many Republican officials in between.

[Added] More Deather documentation from TPM here (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/death-panels/).

bjkeefe
08-26-2009, 05:02 PM
Roy Edroso: "Rightbloggers Observe Kennedy's Passing Pretty Much the Way You Would Expect (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/08/rightbloggers_o_8.php)."

bjkeefe
08-26-2009, 05:11 PM
Roy Edroso: "Rightbloggers Observe Kennedy's Passing Pretty Much the Way You Would Expect (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/08/rightbloggers_o_8.php)."

Also from Roy: "Holder's CIA Investigation Unleashes Rightblogger Rage Over 9/11, Marc Rich (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/08/holders_cia_inv.php)."

[Added] No Doughy fan should miss the last paragraph.

uncle ebeneezer
08-26-2009, 05:20 PM
But I thought the GOP was the party of family values, setting an example for children, respect for all human life, Christian forgiveness...

bjkeefe
08-26-2009, 05:40 PM
But I thought the GOP was the party of family values, setting an example for children, respect for all human life, Christian forgiveness...

Oh, they are! Just ask them!

Meanwhile, here is some more coverage from Instaputz (http://instaputz.blogspot.com/2009/08/edward-kennedy-dies-wingnuts-cover.html).

TwinSwords
08-26-2009, 05:55 PM
— Audio version. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdTKT2H7DAI)

WARNING: Link contains extreme hate.

bjkeefe
08-26-2009, 05:59 PM
— Audio version. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdTKT2H7DAI)

WARNING: Link contains extreme hate.

Glad to hear Glenn Beck is still not going to be responsible for any wingnut violence.

TwinSwords
08-26-2009, 06:07 PM
Can you imagine what this rage is going to look like after four years of Obama? Can you imagine what the campaign trail is going to look like in 2012?

bjkeefe
08-26-2009, 10:29 PM
Roy Edroso: "Rightbloggers Observe Kennedy's Passing Pretty Much the Way You Would Expect (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/08/rightbloggers_o_8.php)."

Roy follows up (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/08/politico_finds.php), by reading the rePubOLITICO.

JonIrenicus
08-26-2009, 11:39 PM
(massages temples)

bjkeefe
08-27-2009, 05:20 AM
Roy Edroso (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2009/08/hitlermania-megan-mcardle-realizes-she.html), in a post mostly about McMegan, her commenters, and Obama Teh Nazi!!!1! adds this as part of an update:

... Melissa Clouthier pulls a new one, or at least one that is new to me:

The left resisted efforts to get involved in WWII. They didn’t want to see the atrocities of Japan, Germany and Italy, especially, because it didn’t fit their never ending selfish narrative.

Good thing the Republicans were able to defeat FDR and get a real American elected President in time for WWII.

I don't know what the fuck this crackpot is talking about, either, but expect it to be the new conservative talking point within a week.

bjkeefe
08-27-2009, 10:53 AM
... I'm glad he's not my party chairman. What a babbling fool (http://wonkette.com/410750/steve-inskeep-explains-nuance-to-michael-steele).

bjkeefe
08-28-2009, 02:27 AM
Next time you hear health care reform opponents whine, "We don't have enough time to read the bill," point them here (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/08/27/inhofe-without-even-reading/).

Also, can we at least get a motion of censure launched? Yeah, yeah {insert lame-ass metaphor excuse here}, but at what point does a United States Senator standing in a crowd of wingnuts and calling for revolution amount to grotesque irresponsibility?

If this had been a Democratic Senator a few years ago, you'd be going deaf from the furious pounding by the 101st Fighting Keyboarders and the howling by hate radio, condemning Inhofe for treason.

TwinSwords
08-28-2009, 06:57 AM
at what point does a United States Senator standing in a crowd of wingnuts and calling for revolution amount to grotesque irresponsibility?

Exactly.

Did you hear about the guy who stood up in a Town Hall the other day and said in a strong, clear voice "I am a proud right wing terrorist (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIjNqH-Xg50)"? And got loud applause from most of the audience?

And you heard about the guy last week who stood up in a town hall and said that he would get his gun and take it to Washington (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3r0KJm0YlI) "if all of you would go with me" (paraphrasing).

The base of the Republican Party is embracing revolution -- i.e., murder.

I think most of the public remains oblivious to what is happening.


.

bjkeefe
08-28-2009, 02:22 PM
Exactly.

Did you hear about the guy who stood up in a Town Hall the other day and said in a strong, clear voice "I am a proud right wing terrorist (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIjNqH-Xg50)"? And got loud applause from most of the audience?

And you heard about the guy last week who stood up in a town hall and said that he would get his gun and take it to Washington (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3r0KJm0YlI) "if all of you would go with me" (paraphrasing).

The base of the Republican Party is embracing revolution -- i.e., murder.

I think most of the public remains oblivious to what is happening.


.

I did hear about those two, and I just heard about another. Meet the latest Republican to make a death threat against President Obama: Idaho gubernatorial candidate Rex Rammell (http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/2009/08/idaho-gov-candidate-jokes-about-hunting-obama.php).

Rex Rammell, a long-shot in the 2010 Idaho governor's race, made a joke about hunting President Obama at an event Tuesday night.

Rammell was speaking to a local Republican group about the state's wolf hunt, for which hunters must pay for "wolf tags." An audience member shouted out a question about "Obama tags."

"Obama tags? We'd buy some of those," Rammell responded.

Rammell said he won't apologize (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iOmeH2w9CG7tbMZBMOVvbmG3XwKAD9ABHEAG0) for the comments, but insists (http://www.magicvalley.com/articles/2009/08/28/news/local_state/169614.txt) he was just joking.

The story goes on to say he later repeated it was "just a joke," on Twitter, which is where all responsible Republicans responsibly contribute to the discourse. Okay then! No need to apologize! (Why risk alienating the GOP base by apologizing for joking about killing the president?)

(h/t: Jim Newell (http://wonkette.com/410783/this-idaho-governor-candidate-his-buddies-will-hunt-obama))

bjkeefe
08-28-2009, 10:00 PM
It's all conspiracy (http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/glenn-beck-dives-conspiracist-deep-e) theories all the time (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_08/019682.php) now.

But at least he's fully endorsed by Rush Limbaugh.

P.S. Why we should care (http://washingtonindependent.com/56965/the-glenn-beck-effect).

bjkeefe
08-28-2009, 10:57 PM
... the new Republican rallying cry is as follows:

“I’ll be danged if I am going to give up my Social Security because of socialism.”

True story. (http://www.dependablerenegade.com/dependable_renegade/2009/08/stupid-du-jour.html)

Said at a Michele Bachmann rally, unsurprisingly.

TwinSwords
08-28-2009, 11:38 PM
Glenn Beck on the scary black people who surround Barack Obama (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDyDTwP4Ef8) and threaten to turn the United States into a communist country.

If people really believe the crazy things they are being told by Conn Carroll's Heritage Foundation, Fox News, and the Republican Party, it's no wonder they talk about murdering Democrats and taking the country back via violent revolution.

Quite honestly, there's a segment in this country that would vastly prefer bloodshed to spending another minute living under Democratic government. It will get worse and worse as we approach the 2012 elections (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=126766#post126766).

TwinSwords
08-28-2009, 11:39 PM
Can you imagine what this rage is going to look like after four years of Obama? Can you imagine what the campaign trail is going to look like in 2012?

DougJ expects the same (http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=26089):

I just don’t buy the idea that Obama is likely to lose in 2012, regardless of what approval ratings say, with all due respect to the Tim Pawlenty juggernaut. It’s hard for me to see how after 12+ months of full-bore LaRouche style freakosity, the public is going to want to a put a Republican in the White House. Because I could be wrong, but my guess is the 2012 Republican primary is going to make the townhalls look like meetings of the Bloomsbury group.


The 2012 Republican presidential campaign (not merely the primaries) will be a spectacle unlike any in living memory.

JoeK
08-29-2009, 02:08 AM
It's all conspiracy (http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/glenn-beck-dives-conspiracist-deep-e) theories all the time (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_08/019682.php) now.

But at least he's fully endorsed by Rush Limbaugh.

P.S. Why we should care (http://washingtonindependent.com/56965/the-glenn-beck-effect).

It pisses me off that Rep. Steve Buyer (R-Ind.) didn't watch Glenn Beck and didn't know about Apollo Alliance and Van Jones. Who does he think he is?

I am talking about the story behind one of the links provided by bjkeefe: The Glenn Beck Effect (http://washingtonindependent.com/56965/the-glenn-beck-effect)

bjkeefe
08-29-2009, 02:46 AM
It's all conspiracy (http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/glenn-beck-dives-conspiracist-deep-e) theories all the time (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_08/019682.php) now.

But at least he's fully endorsed by Rush Limbaugh.

Minor correction: It appears that Beck went too crazy even for Rushbo (http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2009/08/becks-preemptive-obama-trutherism-too.html). Steve M. has a transcript and video. This, apparently, is what made Rush start to back away slowly:

Rush, tomorrow on this program I'm going to lay out the case of the army they are building right underneath our own, our nose, an army that he spoke about on the campaign trail, and if you watch what could only be called the administration's organ -- anything involved with GE or NBC -- you've got [GE CEO] Jeffrey Immelt on the board of the Federal Reserve, you have him in the Oval Office consulting not only on health care, but the financial situation, and they are an organ.

If you watch MSNBC, I contend that you will see the future because they are laying the ground for a horrible event that will be -- is what they're laying the ground for, anything from the right, there's some awful event and I fear this government, this administration has so much framework already prepared, that they will seize power overnight before anybody even gives it a second thought.

Aside from Steve:

(Immelt, by the way, has been a director of the Fed since January 2006. (http://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/news/aboutthefed/2008/oa081230.html))

The rest. (http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2009/08/becks-preemptive-obama-trutherism-too.html)

Rush Limbaugh as the voice of sanity? Not since John Ashcroft was on hard drugs ...

TwinSwords
08-29-2009, 03:48 AM
It pisses me off that Rep. Steve Buyer (R-Ind.) didn't watch Glenn Beck and didn't know about Apollo Alliance and Van Jones. Who does he think he is?

I am talking about the story behind one of the links provided by bjkeefe: The Glenn Beck Effect (http://washingtonindependent.com/56965/the-glenn-beck-effect)

JoeK,
What's your opinion of Alex Jones?

TwinSwords
08-29-2009, 03:51 AM
The rest. (http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2009/08/becks-preemptive-obama-trutherism-too.html)

Rush Limbaugh as the voice of sanity? Not since John Ashcroft was on hard drugs ...
That's what happens when your country lurches further and further to the right with each election cycle - a vicious cycle of ever increasing madness.

I remember watching Rush at CPAC earlier in 2009, at a time when the teabagging was breaking out and we were hearing the first Republican chatter about "taking the country back" through mass murder of Democrats and liberals (aka "revolution"). But at CPAC, Rush was completely restrained: he never even hinted at violence or revolution, gave no oxygen to the conspiracy theories and never suggested anyone was a Nazi.

Rush, who had always defined the outer-right fringe of the conservative movement, was now, compared to the new right, actually kind of moderate. Compared to the virulent insanity which has grown up to his right, Rush these days seems relatively sane.

Give it five or ten years, and Glenn Beck will be the moderate conservative. I don't want to speculate what will grow up to Beck's right, but I do know that's the direction the country is inexorably headed.

JoeK
08-29-2009, 04:30 AM
JoeK,
What's your opinion of Alex Jones?

You mean the guy attacking a conservative princess Michelle Malkin in this clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJPHyKEQP94)?
Is he some kind of liberal?

When asking this question, are you trying to figure out where I stand or where people who watch Beck stand?
If it's the latter, conservatives make a big difference between Beck and Alex Jones and they certainly make a difference between Limbaugh and Jones. Or, for example, they make a difference between what Katy Abram (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyT_M3aEJKc) said at one of those town halls and what that girl who had that exchange with Barney Frank said. That's a fact, conservatives make a difference between the two. You must know that, so why don't you admit it?

JoeK
08-29-2009, 04:43 AM
we were hearing the first Republican chatter about "taking the country back"
Wasn't taking our country back the leftists' cry during the Bush years? I heard Bill Maher recently making the same statement as you just did, so you must have heard it from him. But even without googling I am pretty sure that was the democrat line.

through mass murder of Democrats and liberals (aka "revolution").
Oooh scary! They should give you a TV show when democrats lose power. You got it in you.

bjkeefe
08-29-2009, 04:50 AM
You mean the guy attacking a conservative princess Michelle Malkin in this clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJPHyKEQP94)?
Is he some kind of liberal?

When asking this question, are you trying to figure out where I stand or where people who watch Beck stand?
If it's the latter, conservatives make a big difference between Beck and Alex Jones and they certainly make a difference between Limbaugh and Jones. Or, for example, they make a difference between what Katy Abram (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyT_M3aEJKc) said at one of those town halls and what that girl who had that exchange with Barney Frank said. That's a fact, conservatives make a difference between the two. You must know that, so why don't you admit it?

Can you say ... duck the question?

bjkeefe
08-29-2009, 05:04 AM
Roy Edroso (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/08/obamas_treasono.php) reports:

Obama's Treasonous 9/11 New York Event Will Feature Gary Sinise

As you may have heard, President Obama wants to commemorate 9/11 this year with a "Day of Service and Remembrance (http://www.citizencorps.gov/news/press/2009/9-11-dayofservice.shtm)" dedicated to good deeds, which rightbloggers and other lunatics have denounced as a "plan to desecrate 9/11 (http://spectator.org/archives/2009/08/24/obamas-plan-to-desecrate-911)" by making it "a day of activism, food banks, and community gardens" rather than a day of talking for the thousandth time about what one would do with Osama Bin Laden if he were standing right here.

Well, plans were announced today for a "United We Serve (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ixdgv0jeTndnj3zAirHPoICEHFFQD9ABA0VG0)" event at the Beacon, honoring "the people who have answered President Barack Obama's call to volunteer," and along with such expected traitors as The Roots and Jimmy Fallon, it will feature Gary Sinise, a rare Hollywood favorite of conservatives ("Not All Hollywood Actors are Anti-American, Gary Sinise Stands Tall (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1329439/posts)," says the definitive Free Republic). Clearly Sinise has been brainwashed by Obama's food-bank agents. Is there no depth to which he will not sink in his mad quest to reward our enemies with canned goods?

The show will be free to "volunteers and members of the 9/11 community," which is code for members of the Inner Party. Traitors who wish to prove their devotion to treason by volunteering for 9/11 service may do so here (http://www.newyorkcares.org/volunteer/mygooddeed/).

JoeK
08-29-2009, 05:11 AM
Can you say ... duck the question?

I don't have opinion on Alex Jones because I don't know about him. I saw some of his shows on youtube some time ago and I don't really remember what his positions are. He is some type of conspiracy theorist, from the Michelle-Malkin clip apparently a truthist. The allegation that I would feel the need to hide my true opinion on Alex Jones is hilarious.

Is this line of questioning, including TwinSwords's mentioning "revolution", because I am a Ron Paul supporter? Well, let me tell you, I am very, very proud of paulbots, of teabaggers, of town-hall crowds. There is an obvious line that connects all of them and I am happy that you liberals see it so clearly because there are some Republicans who pretend the link is not there.

Also, the other day someone on the forum called Ron Paul supporters "ultra conservatives". I don't remember liberals using such a harsh language when talking about the good doctor. How times change. :)

TwinSwords
08-29-2009, 05:20 AM
Wasn't taking our country back the leftists' cry during the Bush years?
Yes, but it never carried the overtones of "we're coming to get you with pitchforks and torches!" that it does coming from the Republican Party.


I heard Bill Maher recently making the same statement as you just did
You're right: the same words were used by me and my friends on the left during the long years of The Bush Dystopia. But when we talked about taking the country back, we meant to do so within the bounds of law, in the manner prescribed by our Founding Fathers in the US Constitution, which we revere. Not by extra-constitutional means, which Republicans fantasize about and openly advocate. Rule of law is the foundation of our Republic and a stable social order, and it is under direct attack by the conservative movement.

bjkeefe
08-29-2009, 05:20 AM
I don't have opinion on Alex Jones because I don't know about him.

Could have said that first thing, last post, amirite?

Also, the other day someone on the forum called Ron Paul supporters "ultra conservatives". I don't remember liberals using such a harsh language when talking about the good doctor. How times change. :)

It does not surprise me that a wingnut takes one comment on one message board somewhere on the Internet, and from it, draws a conclusion about how "liberals" think. By that measure, times haven't changed at all.

JonIrenicus
08-29-2009, 06:45 AM
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=36793375



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0nUSmsMAY8


Yes, that's it, keep it piling on.

claymisher
09-01-2009, 03:07 PM
This made me laugh out loud. It's funny for so many reasons:

http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=26263

bjkeefe
09-02-2009, 11:05 AM
This made me laugh out loud. It's funny for so many reasons:

http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=26263

Almost as funny: "the craziest thing since freedom fries (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/01/patriotic-music/)." (h/t: Attaturk (http://rising-hegemon.blogspot.com/2009/09/yeah-thats-right.html))

If you're a loyal Republican and it's something bad about Pelosi, who cares if it's true? Or microscopically trivial? It's an excuse for OUTRAGE!!!1!

Think no one would fall for this one? Think again. (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=007432832765683203066%3Azj_ist-lct4&ie=UTF-8&q=pelosi+hold+music&sa=Search)

claymisher
09-02-2009, 11:16 AM
Almost as funny: "the craziest thing since freedom fries (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/01/patriotic-music/)." (h/t: Attaturk (http://rising-hegemon.blogspot.com/2009/09/yeah-thats-right.html))

If you're a loyal Republican and it's something bad about Pelosi, who cares if it's true? Or microscopically trivial? It's an excuse for OUTRAGE!!!1!

Think no one would fall for this one? Think again. (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=007432832765683203066%3Azj_ist-lct4&ie=UTF-8&q=pelosi+hold+music&sa=Search)

Mine was better.

bjkeefe
09-03-2009, 11:11 PM
Just noting this one (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/broun-obama-has-everything-he-needs-to-establish-an-authoritarian-government.php) (via (http://wonkette.com/410879/congressional-hearings-make-for-great-baroque-madrigals)) for the record:

Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) is reiterating his dire warnings about President Obama imposing an authoritarian regime in the United States, the Athens Banner-Herald reports.

At a meeting of local Republicans last night, Broun said that Obama already has or will have the three key elements necessary to become a dictator: A national police force, gun control and control of the press.

"He has the three things that are necessary to establish an authoritarian government," Broun said. "And so we need to be ever-vigilant, because freedom is precious."

Have you ever seen Paul Broun (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&channel=s&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=4Gk&q=paul+broun+obama&aq=0&oq=Paul+Broun+o&aqi=g4) and Jon Voight (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/08/jon-voight-now-even-more-of-wingnut.html) together? Well? Have you?

Just sayin'.

==========

[Added] Fortunately for Broun, there's always James Inhofe. Nobody looks crazy next to Inhofe (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/03/inhofe-gitmo-torture/) (also via (http://wonkette.com/410879/congressional-hearings-make-for-great-baroque-madrigals)):

Yesterday, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) held a town hall meeting with his constituents in Grove, Oklahoma, where he unleashed a tirade of hyperbolic remarks against Obama administration policies. At one point he even suggested that Obama is “obsessed” with releasing terrorists into the United States, and claimed that there has “never been a case of torture” at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp:

More bad craziness at the link.

bjkeefe
09-04-2009, 05:18 PM
Steve Benen (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_09/019770.php):

IT'S COME TO THIS.... In 1988, then-President Reagan spoke to students nationwide via C-SPAN telecast. Among other things, he talked about his positions on political issues of the day. Three years later, then-President Bush addressed school kids in a speech broadcast live to school classrooms nationwide. Among other things, he promoted his own administration's education policies (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/9/3/776393/-Another-wingnut-meme-goes-down-the-drain).

President Obama wants to deliver a message to students next week emphasizing hard work, encouraging young people to do their best in school. The temper tantrum the right is throwing in response only helps reinforce how far gone 21st-century conservatives really are.

This is no small, isolated fit, thrown by random nutjobs. The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/04/us/04school.html?_r=1&hp), Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/03/AR2009090300965.html),LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obama-schoolkids4-2009sep04,0,1237265.story), AP (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090904/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_speech_schools;_ylt=AtemXO0RU6N2Fx87ciRM7 A6s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTM1cGwwNnE0BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwO TA0L3VzX29iYW1hX3NwZWVjaF9zY2hvb2xzBGNwb3MDMgRwb3M DNQRwdANob21lX2Nva2UEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDb 2JhbWFzcGVlY2h0), and others all ran stories this morning about the coordinated national effort to either keep children at home so they can't hear their president's pro-education message, or demanding that local schools block the message altogether.

A Republican state lawmaker in Oklahoma said, "As far as I am concerned, this is not civics education -- it gives the appearance of creating a cult of personality. This is something you'd expect to see in North Korea or in Saddam Hussein's Iraq." Fox News personalities have adopted the same line (http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200909030035), calling a stay-in-school message from the president "cultist" and reminiscent of "North Korea and the former Soviet Union."

The rest. (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_09/019770.php) And see an earlier post by Steve (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_09/019743.php) for more quotes from Republican officials, like Jim Greer, the chairman of the Republican Party of Florida, who is '"seen as one of the more sensible, mainstream Republicans," who said about the President's address, among other things, that Obama was using "taxpayer dollars to indoctrinate America's children to his socialist agenda."

But you know what? Indoctrinating schoolchildren is perfectly all right -- if you're a Republican (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/09/texas-edumacation-watch-cont.html).

TwinSwords
09-04-2009, 05:46 PM
One of Josh Marshall's readers (http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/09/times_change_1.php?ref=fpblg):

How long did it take the right to go from: "if you criticize the President you are a traitor" to "School children should not trust the President."

TwinSwords
09-04-2009, 05:53 PM
NBC News (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/09/04/2052774.aspx):

Finally, here’s one more thought about the entire controversy over Obama’s education speech on Tuesday: Since the White House has said the text of the speech will be available for 24 hours before he delivers it and since they altered the lesson plan language, why is this still a controversy? The ability of the conservative media machine to generate a controversy for this White House is amazing. In fact, this is an example of a story that percolates where it becomes harder and harder for some to claim there's some knee-jerk liberal media bias. (Does anyone remember these kinds of controversies in the summer of 2001?) The ability of some conservatives to create media firestorms is still much greater than liberals these days.

(Via (http://d-day.blogspot.com/2009/09/why-do-hissy-fits-succeed.html))

bjkeefe
09-04-2009, 06:46 PM
NBC News (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/09/04/2052774.aspx):



(Via (http://d-day.blogspot.com/2009/09/why-do-hissy-fits-succeed.html))

Nonetheless, this is still ... wait for it ... Obama's fault, according to Villager Jake Tapper (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/09/school-districts-in-six-states-to-refrain-from-showing-presidential-address-next-week.html):

White House officials seemed to be caught flat-footed by the response to what they say was a simple back to school address by President Obama to students across the nation -- and has turned into a firestorm.

That's the lede -- sheer insanity by many in the Republican Party and the way Tapper starts off telling it, totally not anything to do with them.

Makes me sick.

(Link via John Cole (http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=26362), who makes the mistake of praising Tapper, sort of, for something said farther down. JC should learn the importance of the lede to most readers.)

TwinSwords
09-05-2009, 02:36 PM
The question of Obama's legitimacy — the refusal of tens of millions of conservatives to accept his legitimate right to govern — has been a theme for many months. When massive swaths of the population refuse to acknowledge the right of the president to hold office, you have a serious problem, one that manifests itself in countless ways.

The basic conservative belief is that Democratic government itself is illegitimate, a form of tyranny. The result of this belief is not just militias and domestic terrorism. It's not just town hall mobs, birtherism, or people showing up at Obama events with assault weapons. The Republican refusal to grant the legitimacy of Democratic government permeates every aspect of our political process and our culture, and at every turn serves to erode and undermine the ability of the nation's elected leaders to perform and succeed.

We're now at a point where the president speaking to American school children is regarded with identical suspicion and outrage as when Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came to speak to students at Columbia University.

Here is one disturbing account (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/09/obama-talks-to-the-children.html) from a teacher in the Midwest:

You say you are ignoring the furor over Obama's school talk "because it is a fake story".

It is all too real and scary.

I teach in a midwestern, upper-middle class suburban school. Before I was even aware that Obama had announced this speech my principal sent the entire staff an e-mail that in essence said if you plan on airing the speech you are to contact him first and also contact the parents. Since when do I have to contact parents for airing a presidential address?

By the time I got home that night, my own children's district (which is in an adjoining county) had posted to their website how teachers were planning on using the speech and that it would not be mandatory. Unbelievable.

Today there were two more e-mails about the speech from my principal. The first re-affirmed that only two teachers were planning on taping the speech to possibly show later, and if anyone was to do this they were to contact him, contact the parents and be sure it matches standards and not to make it mandatory. Another e-mail was sent to say that the district would be sending a letter home to parents about this.

But the letter was pre-empted by a phone call from our district's automated phone system where a district official notified parents that no teacher would show it live, that only Social Studies teachers might consider showing the video but only if it correlated with state standards and that it would not be mandatory and parents could opt them out of it.

This is our first week of school, and there is the typical nuttiness that goes on in schools during a first week. This was a priority the last 24 hours for administration? Three staff e-mails and an automated phone call home about a presidential speech that is slated to encourage students to stay in school and do well.

Two years ago we had a student bring what looked like an improvised explosive device into school, toss it in a trash can and flee the building. Luckily it was not explosive, but the school went into a lockdown for two hours while the building was secured and the student apprehended. There was one staff e-mail and one automated phone call to the parents.

Two decades as a teacher and I'm absolutely incredulous watching a school cater to a minority of loud, fearful and irrational voices. Sadly, our district has a higher rate of minority students (by far) than the other suburban districts in the region.

This is happening at schools all over the map. There is a furor and it is not a fake story locally at your neighborhood school.


(Source (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/09/obama-talks-to-the-children.html))

bjkeefe
09-05-2009, 10:42 PM
Time for yet another round of IOKIYAR! This time, it's the speaking in classrooms edition (http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=26444).

(And yes, the same Jim Greer (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=128583#post128583).)

bjkeefe
09-05-2009, 11:20 PM
Roy Edroso (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/09/outrage_du_jour_1.php)'s latest look at the right-wing blogosphere:

A teacher principal and PTA leaders at Eagle Bay Elementary School in Farmington, Utah showed students the "I Pledge" video (http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_13249171?_requestid=5883011) created back in January by some celebrities (or, in the customary rightwing usage, "celebutards") like will.i.am and Demi Moore, with such fanciful oaths as "to smile more, to laugh more," "to always find the humor in everything," and "to never give anyone the finger when I'm driving again."

The spin, as regular readers may have guessed already, is that Barack Obama is Hitler.

The results of the poll at the linked story are frickin' hilarious.

Read on. (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/09/outrage_du_jour_1.php)

Bobby G
09-06-2009, 01:04 PM
"There's quite a lot of room, I'd say, between a "good chunk of folks" and -- to describe the FOX numbers more accurately -- the "gigantic motherfucking preponderance of folks" who believe things that are as demonstrably false as the existence of the Abominable Snowman."

Hey, don't knock the Abominable Snowman.

Here's a true story: I had a friend in college whose name was, I kid you not, Adam Bominable. Not being able to miss a good opportunity, my friends and I all called him "A. Bominable" (or sometimes A-Bomb; that was cool too). Well, one day, A. Bominable and the gang were driving outside of Dayton during one of our "Dayton days", when the weather patterns are contemptuous of meteorology. You know what I'm talking about--75 degrees in patch of ground X, and then 41 degrees just five feet away from X. Anyway, while A. Bominable was driving, a patch of snow unexpectedly appeared in front of a traffic light. Naturally, all of screamed, "A. Bominable--the snow, man!" and the name stuck.* From that point on, whenever we talked about Adam, we would always call him "A. Bominable, the Snow-man." Well, you know how titles, especially for people I just made up, have a tendency to mutate. At some point, we changed his name from "A. Bominable, the Snow-man" to "The A. Bominable Snow-man", to "A-Bomb S-man", to "Bombs, man" to "Iraq has WMD". And anyway, that's had the war in Iraq began.

*--I should note that Adam died in the crash.

bjkeefe
09-09-2009, 09:28 AM
Roy Edroso reports on right-blogger reaction to President Obama's planned speech to the nation's school children. Intro (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2009/09/new-voice-column-up-despite-holiday.html):

NEW VOICE (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/09/schools_out_rig.php) COLUMN UP, despite the holiday. Just a quick spin around the Obama school speech issue. Among other things, I notice that accusations of fascism, "Obama Youth," etc. are getting more common. Maybe they're all secret LaRouche supporters. In earlier, simpler times, they might have just called Obama's actions inappropriate or questionable, and explained why. Hitler=Obama removes the necessity of the second step and, better than that, leaves it up to the fevered imagination.

For some the default accusation will always be Communism and Russia (where you came from), of course. Andy McCarthy (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YmFlOTJkZjBlZmU5M2ZjZThmZjc4MDllMzA4MzA5YmE=) at National Review:

Van Jones isn't Alger Hiss. There's nothing covert about him. He didn't snooker Obama into bringing him aboard. He is who he is, and that's why Obama wanted him. Having a communist in that job was perfect since the "green jobs" initiative is an important part of the hard Left's agenda to use environmentalism as an additional justification for usurping command of the economy.

In fact, the death of the Soviet Union has actually been a boon for neocommunists. Now, Obama and his fellow travelers like Jones, Ayers, Wright, Klonsky, and ACORN, can spout all the same totalitarian, anti-American, central-planning ideas the hard Left has always pushed, but in the abstract -- under such mushy labels as "social justice" and "green jobs." That is, they are liberated from having to defend the Soviet Empire, which, until 1991, was a living, breathing, concrete example of how horrific these ideas are when put in practice.

Thus we have a new Evil Empire -- the United States of America under its current, duly-elected leadership. With the folks at National Review talking like this, it's no shock the smaller fry are so free with their use of Mao, Hitler, Stalin etc. They've come a long way from the days when William F. Buckley was arguing for national service (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2008/07/how-mighty-have-fallen.html).

Full column here. (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/09/schools_out_rig.php)

bjkeefe
09-09-2009, 09:52 AM
Roy Edroso reports on right-blogger reaction to President Obama's planned speech to the nation's school children. Intro (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2009/09/new-voice-column-up-despite-holiday.html):



Full column here. (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/09/schools_out_rig.php)

And it's not just Roy. Here's part of a piece titled "Too Many Kooks," by Tunku Varadarajan, that appeared in Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/2009/09/06/obama-school-speech-malkin-rick-perry-opinions-columnists-tunku-varadarajan.html):

The Silly Season ceases to be "silly" when what passes for political debate in America turns not merely stupid or witless, but certifiably demented.

I write of the kooky reaction of many conservatives--politicians, citizens and commentators in the media--to the plan by President Obama to address the nation's schoolchildren tomorrow. (And I write, please note, as a nonlefty libertarian who did not support Barack Obama in the presidential election.)

Obama will, as we all know, address our kids--plenty of whom need a lesson or two on the subject, since they clearly don't get it from their parents--on the virtues of study, education and hard work. According to a White House spokesman, the aim of the speech is "to challenge students to work hard in school, to not drop out and to meet short-term goals like behaving in class, [and] doing their homework ..." If anyone thinks that's unpalatable, subversive, Commie and un-American, I'd like to meet for a duel at dawn by the skating rink at New York's Central Park. (Pick your weapon, Michelle Malkin and Glenn Beck ...)

The source for the above, TBogg, has reaction from Malkin (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/09/07/obamus-the-malkin-project/), which is (unsurprisingly) priceless.

bjkeefe
09-09-2009, 10:09 AM
Roy Edroso reports on right-blogger reaction to President Obama's planned speech to the nation's school children. Intro (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2009/09/new-voice-column-up-despite-holiday.html):



Full column here. (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/09/schools_out_rig.php)

Also worth reminding ourselves how this works: enough wingnut howling, and eventually, the so-called liberal media starts reporting the president's message of "stay in school and work hard" as OMG, CONTROVERSIAL, as Blue Texan documents (http://firedoglake.com/2009/09/08/liberal-media-characterizes-obamas-back-to-school-speech-as-controversial/).

bjkeefe
09-09-2009, 06:09 PM
Roy Edroso reports on right-blogger reaction to President Obama's planned speech to the nation's school children. Intro (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2009/09/new-voice-column-up-despite-holiday.html):



Full column here. (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/09/schools_out_rig.php)

After action report from TBogg. (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/09/09/subtexterfuge/)

claymisher
09-09-2009, 10:11 PM
Watched the speech.

The Republicans seem to still be in full tantrum mode (I'm sure Keefe will have links soon). Their Fox News bubble is killing them.

Whatfur
09-09-2009, 10:29 PM
Watched the speech.

The Republicans seem to still be in full tantrum mode (I'm sure Keefe will have links soon). Their Fox News bubble is killing them.

That's all we get? Are you watching FOX? I could only watch a few minutes...things to do...will read/watch it tomorrow. Tell me its good. Tell me he talked about tort reform. Tell me he talked about opening up states to competition and removal of state mandates. Tell me he said the public option is not going to happen. Tell me he has decided to get the top people from both parties to hammer out those things they can agree on and then the party in the majority can add a little more to save face without dismissing their overreach.

AemJeff
09-09-2009, 10:35 PM
That's all we get? Are you watching FOX? I could only watch a few minutes...things to do...will read/watch it tomorrow. Tell me its good. Tell me he talked about tort reform. Tell me he talked about opening up states to competition and removal of state mandates. Tell me he said the public option is not going to happen. Tell me he has decided to get the top people from both parties to hammer out those things they can agree on and then the party in the majority can add a little more to save face without dismissing their overreach.

Tell you that every ideological button is pushed, in favor of his political opponents? You have an oddly narrow view.

bjkeefe
09-26-2009, 12:17 PM
Meet Dean Allen, Republican of South Carolina (http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20090925/NEWS/909250314): "Candidate to launch campaign with assault rifle giveaway."

The excitement begins at a "machine-gun social."

(via (http://wonkette.com/411291/violent-south-carolina-candidate-giving-away-ak-47-at-campaign-launch))

claymisher
09-26-2009, 03:25 PM
Meet Dean Allen, Republican of South Carolina (http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20090925/NEWS/909250314): "Candidate to launch campaign with assault rifle giveaway."

The excitement begins at a "machine-gun social."

(via (http://wonkette.com/411291/violent-south-carolina-candidate-giving-away-ak-47-at-campaign-launch))

This has got to be an example of the conservatives-are-motivated-by-pissing-off-hypothetical-hippies deal. The only reason to do shit like this is to piss somebody off. Just what the world needs, performance artists with machine guns in politics.

bjkeefe
09-26-2009, 03:42 PM
This has got to be an example of the conservatives-are-motivated-by-pissing-off-hypothetical-hippies deal. The only reason to do shit like this is to piss somebody off. Just what the world needs, performance artists with machine guns in politics.

I'd say that's partly right, but I think there is another piece, too: There is a part of the Republican base that will always truly believe the most insane conspiracy theories whenever their surrogate phalluses are involved -- whether it's "OBAMA IS GOING TO TAKE OUR GUNS" because "THE FIRST THING HITLER AND CASTRO DID WAS CONFISCATE THE GUNS" or "WE NEED THESE GUNS TO PROTECT US FROM THE LOOMING X" (where X is the some nebulous OWG (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=007432832765683203066%3Azj_ist-lct4&ie=UTF-8&q=owg&sa=Search) invasion and/or uprising of various non-white-skinned peoples) or -- and there will always be some Republican politicians eager to cater to this group. For all I know, this clown may actually believe this stuff himself. Given what else I've heard from senior Republican officials the past year or two, I'd say it's about an even money bet.

claymisher
09-26-2009, 04:15 PM
I'd say that's partly right, but I think there is another piece, too: There is a part of the Republican base that will always truly believe the most insane conspiracy theories whenever their surrogate phalluses are involved -- whether it's "OBAMA IS GOING TO TAKE OUR GUNS" because "THE FIRST THING HITLER AND CASTRO DID WAS CONFISCATE THE GUNS" or "WE NEED THESE GUNS TO PROTECT US FROM THE LOOMING X" (where X is the some nebulous OWG (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=007432832765683203066%3Azj_ist-lct4&ie=UTF-8&q=owg&sa=Search) invasion and/or uprising of various non-white-skinned peoples) or -- and there will always be some Republican politicians eager to cater to this group. For all I know, this clown may actually believe this stuff himself. Given what else I've heard from senior Republican officials the past year or two, I'd say it's about an even money bet.

If all it took for liberty to prosper was an armed population Afghanistan and Iraq would be the freest places on Earth.

bjkeefe
09-26-2009, 04:24 PM
If all it took for liberty to prosper was an armed population Afghanistan and Iraq would be the freest places on Earth.

Nice.

kezboard
09-26-2009, 05:30 PM
This has got to be an example of the conservatives-are-motivated-by-pissing-off-hypothetical-hippies deal.

I'm not a hippie, but I'm going to do all the hippies who don't hear about this a favor by getting pissed off for them. You should see me, smoke is really coming out of my ears.

bjkeefe
09-26-2009, 05:36 PM
I'm not a hippie, but I'm going to do all the hippies who don't hear about this a favor by getting pissed off for them. You should see me, smoke is really coming out of my ears.

To the sort of people clay was talking about, "pissing off the hippies" is identical to "pissing off the liberals."

Good on you for being pissed about this, but it is important to realize that some of what motivates these people is as clay points out. So, don't let them get your goat too much. That's letting the terrorists win.

kezboard
09-28-2009, 02:27 AM
Good on you for being pissed about this, but it is important to realize that some of what motivates these people is as clay points out. So, don't let them get your goat too much. That's letting the terrorists win.

Oh, I was kidding. Whoever wins the gun has to pass a background check and fill out all the registration forms, so while I don't understand why anybody outside of Waziristan needs an AK-47, I can't get myself too worked up about it. I really do believe that gun control is the sort of thing that has to be controlled at the local level. I don't really see how it's a great thing for society if everyone walks around packing heat all the time, but if this is the sort of thing they like in South Carolina, whatever.

AemJeff
09-28-2009, 07:20 AM
Oh, I was kidding. Whoever wins the gun has to pass a background check and fill out all the registration forms, so while I don't understand why anybody outside of Waziristan needs an AK-47, I can't get myself too worked up about it. I really do believe that gun control is the sort of thing that has to be controlled at the local level. I don't really see how it's a great thing for society if everyone walks around packing heat all the time, but if this is the sort of thing they like in South Carolina, whatever.

Yeah, but what about the border problem? If South Carolinians can sell guns to Philadelphians, where I can assure you armed citizens in the streets are not a net good, then all that heat in South Carolina isn't so innocuous.

Whatfur
09-28-2009, 10:57 AM
Speaking of cults.

L O L. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdtqtfXdR-c)

bjkeefe
09-28-2009, 06:03 PM
... "just a wacko" and not a card-carrying member of the Republican base: "SCREEN GRAB- Facebook poll: Should Obama be killed? (http://thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com/2009/09/screen-grab-facebook-poll-should-obama.html)"

(WaPo (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/09/28/secret_service_probing_faceboo.html?hpid=topnews), via Wonkette (http://wonkette.com/411321/secret-service-going-after-some-facebook-dingbat))

bjkeefe
09-28-2009, 06:08 PM
... "just a wacko" and not a card-carrying member of the Republican base: "SCREEN GRAB- Facebook poll: Should Obama be killed? (http://thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com/2009/09/screen-grab-facebook-poll-should-obama.html)"

(WaPo (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/09/28/secret_service_probing_faceboo.html?hpid=topnews), via Wonkette (http://wonkette.com/411321/secret-service-going-after-some-facebook-dingbat))

On a related note (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/28/patrick-kennedy-bury-obamacare/) ...

bjkeefe
09-28-2009, 06:46 PM
Mike Huckabee on the United Nations (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/28/huckabee-un-acorn/) (via (http://wonkette.com/411320/what-wingnut-thing-did-mike-huckabee-say-at-that-conference)): "It has become the international equivalent of ACORN."

bjkeefe
09-28-2009, 07:05 PM
Mike Huckabee on the United Nations (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/28/huckabee-un-acorn/) (via (http://wonkette.com/411320/what-wingnut-thing-did-mike-huckabee-say-at-that-conference)): "It has become the international equivalent of ACORN."

Pictures from the conference at which Huckabee spewed this wingnuttery are available from Dave Weigel (http://washingtonindependent.com/61131/in-photos-the-how-to-take-back-america-conference) (via (http://wonkette.com/411318/joe-the-plumber-wins-magical-award-at-latest-wingnut-conference)).

TwinSwords
09-28-2009, 08:04 PM
Pictures from the conference at which Huckabee spewed this wingnuttery are available from Dave Weigel (http://washingtonindependent.com/61131/in-photos-the-how-to-take-back-america-conference) (via (http://wonkette.com/411318/joe-the-plumber-wins-magical-award-at-latest-wingnut-conference)).

Oh, look, Sam Wurzelbacher (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_the_plumber) showed up at the event wearing his "Joe the Plumber" costume:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3420/3963356248_50cac54386.jpg

For a while there they had him going around in preppy clothes and even suits.

bjkeefe
09-28-2009, 08:13 PM
Oh, look, Sam Wurzelbacher (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_the_plumber) showed up at the event wearing his "Joe the Plumber" costume:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3420/3963356248_50cac54386.jpg

For a while there they had him going around preppy clothes in and even suits.

Looking at that picture, I am moved to ask, is he using steroids?

As the old saying (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=007432832765683203066%3Azj_ist-lct4&ie=UTF-8&q=it+would+be+irresponsible+NOT+to+speculate&sa=Search) goes, it would be irresponsible NOT to speculate.

Also, Mike Huckabee looks fat (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=007432832765683203066%3Azj_ist-lct4&ie=UTF-8&q=al+gore+is+fat&sa=Search), don't you think?

;^)

bjkeefe
09-29-2009, 07:59 PM
Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) (http://wonkette.com/411332/self-described-republican-congressman-calls-obama-an-enemy-of-humanity-at-that-wingnut-conference) calls President Obama "an enemy of humanity." [Added: follow-up "clarification (http://wonkette.com/411345/trent-franks-what-i-meant-was-that-obama-likes-to-antagnoize-fetuses-just-fetuses)" from his spokesperson.]

Video here (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/29/gop-rep-trent-franks-call_n_302713.html).

Oh, and yeah. Trent Franks is also a Birther. (http://washingtonindependent.com/61111/rep-trent-franks-obama-should-release-long-form-birth-certificate)

bjkeefe
09-30-2009, 08:54 PM
A new national survey from Public Policy Polling (D) (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_National_819513.pdf) illustrates the profound levels of ignorance that currently interfere with the debate over health care.

[...]

Among Republicans, 62% say the government should stay out of Medicare ...

(source (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/poll-republicans-think-government-should-stay-out-of-medicare.php))

From the same poll, different post (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/poll-on-obamas-birth-if-not-here-where.php?ref=dc1):

Among Republicans, a 44% plurality say he [Obama] was not born in the U.S., to 36% who say he was, and the remaining 20% not sure.

bjkeefe
10-01-2009, 01:20 PM
If it's a pants-on-fire level lie (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/aug/07/liberty-counsel/school-health-clinics-would-not-provide-abortions/) about health care reform, you just know, know, that crazy lady Michele Bachmann (http://wonkette.com/411375/introducting-the-latest-health-care-lie-meme-starring-michele-bachmann) will pick it up and run with it. Even The rePubOLITICO (http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/1009/Bachmann_Dems_would_allow_abortions_for_13yearolds .html?showall) is rolling their eyes at this one.

bjkeefe
10-01-2009, 01:30 PM
If it's a pants-on-fire level lie (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/aug/07/liberty-counsel/school-health-clinics-would-not-provide-abortions/) about health care reform, you just know, know, that crazy lady Michele Bachmann (http://wonkette.com/411375/introducting-the-latest-health-care-lie-meme-starring-michele-bachmann) will pick it up and run with it. Even The rePubOLITICO (http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/1009/Bachmann_Dems_would_allow_abortions_for_13yearolds .html?showall) is rolling their eyes at this one.

Now, if you want to hear two minutes of someone making sense on the HCR issue, check out Rep. Alan Grayson (http://wonkette.com/411370/alan-grayson-for-president-for-life-forever).

bjkeefe
10-01-2009, 01:51 PM
The good people from Stand Up America (http://www.standupamericapac.com/) are running a poll on the Great Orange Satan to determine which is the worst moment of Michele Bachmann crazy ever (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/10/1/123645/261). You can watch video clips and vote for:

1. Bachmann warns of the Census
2. The classic. Bachmann calls for an investigation of "Anti-Americanism" in Congress
3. Barack Obama will watch our calorie intake
4. Thank God for Joe Wilson
5. Carbon Dioxide is just a "natural bioproduct of nature" It is a "harmless" gas

I guess they finalized the nominees before this morning (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=132265#post132265), sadly.

claymisher
10-01-2009, 02:46 PM
Now, if you want to hear two minutes of someone making sense on the HCR issue, check out Rep. Alan Grayson (http://wonkette.com/411370/alan-grayson-for-president-for-life-forever).

Did you see him with Wolf & the villagers? It was sickening. I'm with Yglesias on it:

I think the real issue—and the real import—of Grayson’s statement is that it involved breaking one of the unspoken rules of modern American politics. The rule is that conservatives talk about their causes in stark, moralistic terms and progressives don’t. Instead, progressives talk about our causes in bloodless technocratic terms. This is also one of the reasons that Ted Kennedy’s stark, moralistic attack on Robert Bork’s legal theories are for some reason often cast by the MSM as some kind of illegitimate smear campaign. The reality is that it was just him talking about a conservative the way conservatives relatively talk about liberals. Like Grayson he characterized his opponents’ views polemically, but wasn’t offering any kind of wild factual distortions. But moralism from the left is very unfamiliar to American political debates.

-- http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/10/grayson-breaks-the-rules.php

bjkeefe
10-01-2009, 11:00 PM
Did you see him with Wolf & the villagers? It was sickening. I'm with Yglesias on it:


-- http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/10/grayson-breaks-the-rules.php

Thanks for that. I agree. Nauseating. He should be fired, then impeached.

Did you see what Twin had to say (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=132302#post132302)?

[Added] Also, I forget that I Tweeted (http://twitter.com/bjkeefe/status/4530262231) about a related-to-this thing, just hours ago. A great two-minute clip at that link. (With four (4) hash tags, just to piss off William Beutler.)

TwinSwords
10-01-2009, 11:15 PM
If it's a pants-on-fire level lie (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/aug/07/liberty-counsel/school-health-clinics-would-not-provide-abortions/) about health care reform, you just know, know, that crazy lady Michele Bachmann (http://wonkette.com/411375/introducting-the-latest-health-care-lie-meme-starring-michele-bachmann) will pick it up and run with it. Even The rePubOLITICO (http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/1009/Bachmann_Dems_would_allow_abortions_for_13yearolds .html?showall) is rolling their eyes at this one.

Good lord, there is no lie Republicans will not tell.*

Meanwhile, speaking of school, I saw the leading Republican figurehead Glenn Beck raving through a steady stream of drool yesterday. He was apoplectic about something or whatever that Obama is doing that would keep kids at school for longer hours participating in things like sports and band and chess club and other subversive (really, Marxist) activities. He was howling about how Obama wants to rip children away from their parents and "force" them to spend less time with their families.

Yes, Republican lurkers: this is what has become of your party. You are now militating against education and regard schools as dangerous territory.

If we let you have your way, you will drag this advanced, first world global leader of a nation back to the stone age by 2020.

bjkeefe
10-02-2009, 12:23 AM
For a while there they had him going around in preppy clothes and even suits.

Just noticed your update. Another Republican Wardrobegate!!!1!?

bjkeefe
10-05-2009, 11:00 PM
Please do not forget again, if not.

Very good article by Michelle Cottle in TNR: "No Exit: The never-ending lunacy of Betsy McCaughey (http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/no-exit)."

(h/t: TBogg (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/10/05/dishonesty-narcissism-and-lack-of-shame/))

bjkeefe
10-05-2009, 11:41 PM
Sorry you had to celebrate it in Glenn Beck's America (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/10/05/unjust-desserts/).

AemJeff
10-06-2009, 12:13 AM
Sorry you had to celebrate it in Glenn Beck's America (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/10/05/unjust-desserts/).

I enjoyed this gem among the comments from the above linked TBogg piece:


While racism has much to do with the right wing criticism of the President, as my friend pointed out before the election, there is something about him they hate even more:

He’s smarter then they are.


Who says it's all about racism?

bjkeefe
10-06-2009, 12:47 AM
I enjoyed this gem among the comments from the above linked TBogg piece:

Yes. Thanks for pointing it out. (I rarely see the comments, due to RSS.)

Also good (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/10/05/unjust-desserts/#comment-43183):

Granted, I didn’t troll for stories about Laura Bush and leave nasty comments saying that I hated her because I hated her husband… So, I guess I’m just another one of those squishy liberals who doesn’t know how to fight for my ideals. Or something.

And more seriously (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/10/05/unjust-desserts/#comment-43184):

A very appropriate picture T-Bogg.
Exactly what is happening, in a sense, now.
As far as I can see, not enough of us are sitting at the counter.

bjkeefe
10-08-2009, 12:47 PM
"... As Long As It Reinforces Their Prejudices And Tickles Their Fears," the gullibility of the wingnutosphere concerning the latest AYERS WROTE OBAMA'S BOOKS!!!1! claim is not to be missed.

Start with John Cole's quick post (http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=27936), and see The Sadlys (http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/25758.html) and TBogg (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/10/07/also-bill-ayers-told-me-that-he-killed-adam-walsh-and-that-he-has-a-spaceship/) for some delicious ridicule, and Weigel (http://washingtonindependent.com/62809/jonah-goldberg-flirts-with-the-ayers-wrote-obamas-memoir-theory) and War Room (http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2009/10/07/ayers/) for a more considered take.

Students of the unhinged right may wish to visit Memeorandum (http://www.memeorandum.com/091007/p111#a091007p111) to sample the more approving links to the original BackyardConservative blog post. Hip-waders and spelunking gear are most definitely in order. (E.g., Althouse and the Pantload, to the surprise of no one who knows them, try their best to sustain the claim while making sure to deploy the "hey, I'm just speculating" escape hatches.)

bjkeefe
10-09-2009, 04:01 PM
AP (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gHIEMUyBc6fnDzz_zXJzhO392gKQD9B7KK103): Republican candidate Robert Lowry uses assault rifle to fire at a full-body silhouette of a target with the initials of his opponent, US Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, written on it.

(h/t: Jim Newell (http://wonkette.com/411542/411542))

bjkeefe
10-15-2009, 06:07 PM
And so are Representatives John Shadegg (AZ), Paul Broun (GA), and Trent Franks (AZ), Republicans all.

Even Jim Newell (http://wonkette.com/411645/only-four-republican-members-of-congress-being-overtly-racist-against-brown-people-today) couldn't keep making jokes about this one.

And really, calling for investigations based on a book published by WingNutDaily is not just beyond parody, it's beyond hope.

bjkeefe
10-16-2009, 04:42 PM
... if, of course, by "fringe" you mean "the National Republican Congressional Committee."

The tweet, sent out Tuesday morning on their official Twitter account, read: "Funny Video: Moonbattery: Hitler Reacts to ObamaCare Maneuvers http://bit.ly/2mOvZ7 #Pelosi". It comes the same day the NRCC released a petition on their site to "Fire Nancy Pelosi."

(CNN (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/14/nrcc-removes-tweet-comparing-pelosi-to-hilter/) via Juli Weiner (http://wonkette.com/411614/the-nrccs-hilarious-twitter-was-censored-because-what-is-this-nazi-germany))

bjkeefe
10-18-2009, 12:45 PM
But fortunately, they're still not racists. Nope. Nuh-uh. Nothing to see here (http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/25856.html).

AemJeff
10-18-2009, 01:15 PM
But fortunately, they're still not racists. Nope. Nuh-uh. Nothing to see here (http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/25856.html).

Yeah, but..., but..., it was her pet raccoon that lives on her porch, so it couldn't possibly have been meant to say what it was obviously meant to say. Don't you get it, racebaiter?

bjkeefe
10-18-2009, 01:48 PM
Yeah, but..., but..., it was her pet raccoon that lives on her porch, so it couldn't possibly have been meant to say what it was obviously meant to say. Don't you get it, racebaiter?

Shorter Wingnuttia:

Those people who call us racists when we say racist things? Which they're not? And anyway, they were made up -- we never said them? They're the real racists!!!1!

AemJeff
10-19-2009, 07:24 PM
This might be part of the story: (Banner ad seen on Townhall.com)

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_5Yv6WXb2dFg/Stz0JBQF77I/AAAAAAAAAMk/r27Sx5ZRlio/PalinBook.jpg

TwinSwords
10-19-2009, 08:06 PM
Interesting.

And then there's this (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/10/already-in-bargain-bin.html).

AemJeff
10-19-2009, 08:21 PM
Interesting.

And then there's this (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/10/already-in-bargain-bin.html).

It looks like somebody's glutted the market buying them up in bulk. Funny, considering how much gloating occurred based on the sales numbers.

bjkeefe
10-20-2009, 05:14 PM
A death cult, it appears, and not (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/07/oh-hey-big-laffs.html) for the first time. Here is U.S. Representative Gregg Harper (R-Obvs.) (http://wonkette.com/411715/new-congressman-from-mississippi-is-just-completely-uninteresting-and-terrible), as reported by one of the GOP's house organs:

We hunt liberal, tree-hugging Democrats, although it does seem like a waste of good ammunition.

bjkeefe
10-21-2009, 01:31 PM
@AdamSerwer (http://twitter.com/AdamSerwer/status/5046372262):

Why is it so hard for David Vitter to come out against preventing blacks and whites from getting married? http://bit.ly/im4Hd

(That shortened URL leads here (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/10/21/vitter-interracial/), if you're hesitant to click on such things.)

Of course, this has nothing to do with Vitter catering to any racist element in his base, because as we all know, such a thing does not exist.

bjkeefe
10-21-2009, 03:06 PM
@AdamSerwer (http://twitter.com/AdamSerwer/status/5046372262):



(That shortened URL leads here (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/10/21/vitter-interracial/), if you're hesitant to click on such things.)

Of course, this has nothing to do with Vitter catering to any racist element in his base, because as we all know, such a thing does not exist.

Wonkette has more (http://wonkette.com/411735/watch-david-vitter-look-foolish-in-an-elevator), including a must-see video from times past.

TwinSwords
10-21-2009, 06:07 PM
Of course, this has nothing to do with Vitter catering to any racist element in his base, because as we all know, such a thing does not exist.

Right. In fact, you're a racist for even suggesting that there might be a hint of racism in Vitter's refusal to condemn the judge who refused to marry an interracial couple.

But seriously, as disappointing as this is, and as much as it confirms that the Republican Party is the party of racists, it is not surprising from Louisiana, which has historically been the 3rd (http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?f=1&off=0&year=1968) or 4th (http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?f=1&off=0&year=1948) most racist state in the union.



.

bjkeefe
10-22-2009, 12:27 AM
I was just about to start watching today's Mark Kleiman/Steven Teles diavlog (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/23238) when the first link over in the sidebar -- Steven's piece examining the problems of the GOP (http://www.the-american-interest.com/article.cfm?piece=657) -- caught my eye, and I decided to read it first.

Most definitely a worthwhile read. And not just because of the following bit, but that said, I couldn't help but pass it along, because I think it justifies more eloquently than I have been able why I created, and frequently update, this thread:

Why do parties out of power repeatedly shoot themselves in the foot? First, when their numbers suddenly dwindle, formerly majority parties are left to the mercies of their true believers. The leadership becomes dominated by those most sincerely connected to the party’s core groups, and those with electorates quite distant from the national median. With fewer and fewer leaders drawn from swing states, the party loses its feel for reaching beyond its base.

This is why I keep saying, as do a few others led by TwinSwords, that not all conservatives are wingnuts, but that the wingnuts bear serious watching.

Steven's piece draws numerous comparisons between the GOP today and the Dems in the 1980s. Maybe that will encourage the more open-minded of you on the right to look at it, realize that nothing is permanent, and that not all of us loudmouthed libtards lump every one of you into the same pile.

As I said, well worth a read (http://www.the-american-interest.com/article.cfm?piece=657).

==========

[Added] Okay, must confess: I posted the above before reading the whole thing. So, now, I will offer one criticism.

In his concluding section, in which Steven makes recommendations of possible paths that the Republicans might follow to get out of the wilderness, he pretty much glaringly neglects a, if not the, real problem they currently have: they are the party -- solely -- of angry old white people.

He does mention demographics elsewhere, but until the Republicans come to grips with the reality (or at minimum, the strong perception (as if there's a difference in politics)) that their party is dominated by people who cannot stop running their mouths in the worst way possible about every minority group one can imagine, they are fucked.

I know that makes your blood boil, if you're not a liberal or Democrat, but until you accept that, and act accordingly, that is pretty much the ballgame for the foreseeable future. Latest example: my father was telling me about a Spanish-language newspaper he picked up the bus today. Biggest spread was devoted to Bernie Kerik being sent to jail.

I remind you that the GOP had at least older Hispanics within reach only two or three election cycles ago. And now they are gone. SoSo (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=007432832765683203066%3Azj_ist-lct4&ie=UTF-8&q=soso+sotomayor+&sa=Search&num=100) it goes.

Think about it.

claymisher
10-22-2009, 01:30 AM
I've been reading DeLong's blog since before there were blogs (he was just posting static pages! He was ahead of the technology). Anyway since about 2005 or so he's been saying the Republican is doomed to die. He probably just means "if there was any justice in the world it would die" but since the election I've been wondering if it might just fizzle out completely like the Whigs did. If they keep getting more right-wing as the country moves left I don't see how this ends well for them.

Just look at the Sotomayor hearings. If they keep that up Texas will be a blue state by 2012.

bjkeefe
10-22-2009, 01:38 AM
I've been reading DeLong's blog since before there were blogs (he was just posting static pages! He was ahead of the technology). Anyway since about 2005 or so he's been saying the Republican is doomed to die. He probably just means "if there was any justice in the world it would die" but since the election I've been wondering if it might just fizzle out completely like the Whigs did. If they keep getting more right-wing as the country moves left I don't see how this ends well for them.

Just look at the Sotomayor hearings. If they keep that up Texas will be a blue state by 2012.

Yeah, mostly that's how I feel. But I do worry sometimes (read: every day, for a few hours, at least), especially when I think about the US being in economic doldrums, that there is plenty of historical precedent for a vocal minority taking advantage of uncertain times to move a larger group in a very bad direction (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/10/oh-hey-two-new-books.html).

So, as I said above, I feel it is important to remind people of what the extremists are up to, and I would like most particularly to urge my conservative friends to be aware that they are, in a lot of ways, the linchpins.

Or fulcrums.

Or cruxes.

(FSM stop me before I type "tipping points.")

claymisher
10-22-2009, 01:43 AM
Yeah, mostly that's how I feel. But I do worry sometimes (read: every day, for a few hours, at least), especially when I think about the US being in economic doldrums, that there is plenty of historical precedent for a vocal minority taking advantage of uncertain times to move a larger group in a very bad direction (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/10/oh-hey-two-new-books.html).

So, as I said above, I feel it is important to remind people of what the extremists are up to, and I would like most particularly to urge my conservative friends to be aware that they are, in a lot of ways, the linchpins.

Or fulcrums.

Or cruxes.

(FSM stop me before I type "tipping points.")

Did you see the hilarious bit about Obama being "Nixonian" (http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=28523)? I guess that's the risk of divide and conquer. You reduce the opposition to the Palin wing so they lose elections, but if they get lucky and win one we're boned.

bjkeefe
10-22-2009, 03:19 AM
Did you see the hilarious bit about Obama being "Nixonian" (http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=28523)? I guess that's the risk of divide and conquer. You reduce the opposition to the Palin wing so they lose elections, but if they get lucky and win one we're boned.

Funnily enough, though I'm behind on my Balloon Juice reading, I saw (http://twitter.com/bjkeefe/status/5054680948) Wonkette use this "Nixonian" bit a few hours ago, due to the same motivation. Great minds, and so forth.

I hear your worries, but I do have to say that I am much more happy that Obama is calling out the crazies for what they are. If they're going to "get lucky and win one," it will not be because he called a wingnut a wingnut. Indeed, the principle reason the wingnuts have snaked their way back into power before is, I am convinced, because no prominent Democrat had the stones to point out their insanity in a calm, consistent, ongoing way. (See also (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/10/first-nine-months.html).)

Believe in the common sense of most Americans. Stipulating that you spend enough energy appealing to their common sense, of course.

TwinSwords
10-22-2009, 06:37 AM
This is why I keep saying, as do a few others led by TwinSwords, that not all conservatives are wingnuts ...

I do tend to bash Republicans quite aggressively (because I am convinced they are dangerous to the Ameircan way of life and the aspirations of the American people), but I do need to balance out my bashing with recognition that there are good conservatives. Not conservatives I agree with, but conservatives who are not crazy – conservatives whose motivations are fundamentally decent.*

When the last Frum diavlog went up, I almost left a comment to the effect of "See how reasonable and appealing conservatives can be when they drop the culture war stuff and aren't obviously driven by rage or hate?" And while that, too, sounds hyperbolic, it's really how I divide, in my mind, good conservatives from wingnuts.

One other thing that pains me (somewhat) is that I do think many rank and file Republicans are actually quite decent, far more decent that we would ever gather from following the intensely partisan nature of our national discourse. As I have said many times before, I live in a small, very conservative town and work at a Fortune 40 corporation. Almost all of the Americans I am exposed to in and out of work are conservative Republicans. And the vast majority are extremely good, decent people -- nothing like Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh.**

Unfortunately, the good, decent conservatives I live and work with are not reflected by the people who publicly represent conservatism -- whether the Republican party leadership, or the conservative punditocracy.

I would like to believe (as many do) that the Republicans cannot regain power until the moderate and move towards the American political center. But I'm not at all convinced this is the case. For a variety of reasons, I can easily see the now-more-virulently-conservative-than-even Republicans regain power even as they continue their dramatic shift further to the right.


* I believe I started a thread a while back on this forum that showed that the Republican Party doesn't even represent REPUBLICANS, much less Americans. On many issues, the Republican rank-and-file would be better represented by the Democratic Party.

** My perception of rank-and-file reasonableness may be skewed by the fact that I live in a blue state. If I lived in a very conservative state, I might not think the rank-and-file were so reasonable.

TwinSwords
10-22-2009, 07:17 AM
I started a thread a while back on this forum that showed that the Republican Party doesn't even represent REPUBLICANS, much less Americans. On many issues, the Republican rank-and-file would be better represented by the Democratic Party.

Here's the proof (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=1886).

TwinSwords
10-22-2009, 07:31 AM
Here's why so many of us think the Republican Party is crazy.

The national Republican Party is so driven by their hatred of Democrats and Obama that they are willing to endanger public health and encourage their followers to avoid vaccinations:

— Beck, Limbaugh fomenting fear about H1N1 vaccine (http://mediamatters.org/research/200910070043)
— "Obama's Daughters Should Be H1N1 Vaccinated On TV" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP7YhcKYaNQ)

TwinSwords
10-22-2009, 07:39 AM
I've been reading DeLong's blog since before there were blogs (he was just posting static pages! He was ahead of the technology). Anyway since about 2005 or so he's been saying the Republican is doomed to die. He probably just means "if there was any justice in the world it would die" but since the election I've been wondering if it might just fizzle out completely like the Whigs did. If they keep getting more right-wing as the country moves left I don't see how this ends well for them.

You've said this before and I have been exceedingly skeptical (and still am), but I have to admit, with the party ID dropping now to 20%, and the number of self-identified independents steadily increasing, it does seem as if now would be the time for the emergence of a new 2nd party. Still, I don't see how any party intended to oppose the Democrats can be constituted without the 20% of the public who are foaming-at-the-mouth ultraconservative loons. And if the party includes those loons, I don't know how you keep them from, if not dominating it, at least exerting enormous influence over it.

Still, your political radar have proven over time to be very finely tuned. Can you concieve of any way that the crazy part of the conservative base can be truly marginalized? It seems to me they are too big and powerful to be marginalized. Plus, they are the useful hammer that the oligarchs wield to influence the direction of public debate - a point Brendan has made; the lunatic extremists are kind of the leading edge of the larger conservative movement. I would dig up Brendan's exact quote if I didn't have to be at work in mere minutes.

Cheers.

claymisher
10-22-2009, 12:22 PM
You've said this before and I have been exceedingly skeptical (and still am), but I have to admit, with the party ID dropping now to 20%, and the number of self-identified independents steadily increasing, it does seem as if now would be the time for the emergence of a new 2nd party. Still, I don't see how any party intended to oppose the Democrats can be constituted without the 20% of the public who are foaming-at-the-mouth ultraconservative loons. ...

Marginalized doesn't mean eliminated. It just means pushed to the side. If you can get the FOX News/Palin wing of the party to be at war with the rest of them -- divide -- you frustrate their ability to obstruct your agenda. I'll try to think of some examples of Republican infighting ... Specter in PA, the threats to Snowe on health care, the "Rush is bad"/"Did I say Rush was bad? Rush is good!" routine (http://www.dccc.org/content/sorry), the Chamber of Commerce defections, ... I'm sure there's more.

If is Obama as brilliant as I'm pretty sure he is completely scramble the Republicans over banking reform next year. (Nate Silver has a post on that (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/10/issue-that-could-fracture-both-right.html)).

In the long run the Republicans will be probably just stop being too crazy to win elections and bring back the usual Laffer curve tax cut nonsense. But if you're looking for a scenario where the party does fizzle out, I think what could happen is that conservatives in the northeast get tired of losing every election and start running as "Independent Republican" or "Moderate Republican" candidates. They actually start winning in the NE and the name picks up steam. Some wedge issue comes along and the Moderate Republicans go to war with the FOX/Limbaugh/Palin Republicans. The Moderate Republicans become the Moderate Party and the Republicans stay the party of southern whites. The Moderate party starts winning here and there outside of the south. While this is going on Democrats dominate politics for 10-20 years, get soft the way winners always do, and the Moderates win congress or a presidency. The Republicans become the permanent 3rd party or fizzle out completely.

I'm not saying it will happen, but it's either something like that or the Republicans will have to become the Reihan Salam party.

claymisher
10-22-2009, 12:24 PM
Did you guys watch any of the Republican primaries? It was not pretty. That party is in sad, sad shape.

bjkeefe
10-22-2009, 02:13 PM
[...]If is Obama as brilliant as I'm pretty sure he is completely scramble the Republicans over banking reform next year. (Nate Silver has a post on that (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/10/issue-that-could-fracture-both-right.html)).

Nate goes WAY out on a limb here (emph. added):

How the right will respond is less predictable, but this may become the issue that tests whether the "tea party" movement is ultimately more libertarian or populist in character. [...] I really don't know how they'll come down on this issue (initially, perhaps, they'll take whatever position that the White House doesn't) ...

;^)

On a more serious note, your scenario for the growth of a meaningful third party sounds plausible. Part of me thinks, nah, the party machinery is just too entrenched for this to happen any time soon, but another part of me has vague memories of how successful John Anderson and Ross Perot were at attracting large numbers, with a message that basically amounted to "I am 'None of the Above'."

I guess I think for a third party to really grow to a point where it overshadows the GOP, there would have to be a confluence of even more wingnuttery, plus a long stretch of bad Democratic governance, plus tough times in the country (due to the economy, or something else on the scale of 9/11 or Katrina), plus a charismatic head of the new movement. That last, of course, is the impossible-to-predict one. "Charismatic moderate" is almost an oxymoron, isn't it? Especially when you add in the additional requirement that he or she be sufficiently radical to opt out of the usual path up through either of the existing two parties. Seems to me most CMs (cf. Obama, Barack) would realize the Democratic Party is so free of ideological litmus tests* that anyone interested in moving on up would think it a better bet to stick within the system.

One other scenario could be that a charismatic ultraconservative fulfills Erick Erickson's wet dreams and motivates all Real Conservatives to leave the GOP, at which point, those who are Left Behind, so to speak, could rebuild the GOP brand into something more moderate. As you say, this might well work on a regional basis at the start.

==========

* I suppose there's a good argument to be made that being anti-choice is an unacceptable stance for a Democrat wanting to run for national office, so I'll stipulate to this exception to my larger claim.

bjkeefe
10-22-2009, 02:22 PM
Here's why so many of us think the Republican Party is crazy.

The national Republican Party is so driven by their hatred of Democrats and Obama that they are willing to endanger public health and encourage their followers to avoid vaccinations:

— Beck, Limbaugh fomenting fear about H1N1 vaccine (http://mediamatters.org/research/200910070043)
— "Obama's Daughters Should Be H1N1 Vaccinated On TV" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP7YhcKYaNQ)

Wow. Those clowns are permanently in kitchen sink mode, aren't they?

I wonder if this is having/will have any significant effect. To the extent that I've heard any news chatter about the H1N1 vaccine, it's been all about shortages.

Which, of course, is easily explained as President-for-Life Blackamoor Hussein X creating an artificial shortage and a forbidden fruit aura with His Lies, to trick the bots into wanting the vaccine that much more.

claymisher
10-22-2009, 04:05 PM
Seems to me most CMs (cf. Obama, Barack) would realize the Democratic Party is so free of ideological litmus tests* that anyone interested in moving on up would think it a better bet to stick within the system.



That's another alternative I hadn't thought of -- that the Republicans are wiped out in pockets and the Democrats split into two in the vacuum.

bjkeefe
10-22-2009, 04:21 PM
That's another alternative I hadn't thought of -- that the Republicans are wiped out in pockets and the Democrats split into two in the vacuum.

Yes, I could imagine that happening (and sometimes long for it), especially in light of the clear differences shown in the HCR debate in Congress. However, due to the way that our system is broken into states and even smaller Congressional districts, I don't see much motivation for more conservative or more liberal Democrats who are climbing the ladder to think they have to break away -- you can pretty much use the machinery that's in place and retain most of your core leanings as long as you live in (move to, in some cases) the right place. This is true up until the run for president, pretty much. "What it means to be a Democrat" is so conveniently malleable that I can't see why Democratic Party will ever go further than its ongoing pattern of internecine bickering.

bjkeefe
10-23-2009, 10:21 PM
Indeed. Here is the RedState take on feminism (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2009_10_18_archive.html#3534606302326560753) and all of the problems it causes.

Starwatcher162536
10-24-2009, 12:05 AM
Have there ever been mandatory Flu shots for the general public? Are there any states that make the normal vaccine schedule for children mandatory, without exceptions all over the place (Not including medical exemptions).

Is there any precedent that would make it even remotely possible that there would be mandatory shots, or is this just Glenn playing the clown again?

claymisher
10-24-2009, 02:21 AM
Have there ever been mandatory Flu shots for the general public? Are there any states that make the normal vaccine schedule for children mandatory, without exceptions all over the place (Not including medical exemptions).

Is there any precedent that would make it even remotely possible that there would be mandatory shots, or is this just Glenn playing the clown again?

I think in Japan it's mandatory for kids. The vaccine is most effective in the youngsters and the little snotty buggers are the major vector anyway.

bjkeefe
10-24-2009, 02:50 AM
I think in Japan it's mandatory for kids. The vaccine is most effective in the youngsters and the little snotty buggers are the major vector anyway.

And how close is Japan to Indonesia, hmmm? Plus, aren't they some kind of Muslin over there, too? Shinto ... Shia?

Do the math. Connect the dots. Or somebody else (http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/10/the-atlas-book.html) will.

(via (http://instaputz.blogspot.com/2009/10/most-anticipated-book-since-dog-days.html))

TwinSwords
10-24-2009, 07:12 PM
Republicans are now in full meltdown:

Obama declared Swine Flu a National Emergency (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091024/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_swine_flu), and now the teabaggers are preparing for martial law. They are going to do a live BlogTV meeting tonight at 8:00 pm ET.

Details here:

— Blog TV meeting tonight (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY2iNvx6NW4)

All recorded today, other Republicans respond to the declaration of National Emergency:

— OPERATION "Kill-Shot" In full effect! EMERGENCY!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gycs8xFbCx0)
— YouTube NATIONAL EMERGENCY 10 24 09 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXM3bHmGia0)
— Quarantines, Internment, Reeducation and Martial Law until we take the Republic back (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq-36axoU-4)

Check out how Fox News ratchets up wingnut fear with images taken from the movie "Outbreak" showing the military imposing martial law on an American city:

— Obama declares Martial Law in America with the N1N1 Flu Virus (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U31nt3isapI)

Here's a screenshot from one of the videos above, to give you some sense of the Republican response to losing an election:

http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/9759/jafount.jpg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq-36axoU-4)
"The time is upon us. Get organized, get together, get your people, let's take it back. Godspeed. God Save this Republic."



.

bjkeefe
10-26-2009, 04:25 PM
Good thing they're still not ...

Because, yeah, the Republican National Committee (http://rawstory.com/2009/10/gops-facebook-photos/) leaving up a picture of Obama eating fried chicken, with the caption "Miscegenation is a CRIME against American Values. Repeal Loving v. Virginia" is totally within the bounds and NOT AT ALL RAAAACIST!!!1!. And anyway, the RNC didn't do it, so no need to apologize!

(h/t: Jim Newell (http://wonkette.com/411808/rnc-has-funny-facebook-page-too))

bjkeefe
10-26-2009, 07:38 PM
Roy Edroso rounds up (1) the excitement over the definitive proof that Obama hates America!!!1! and (2) the hilarity that ensues as admission (or in some cases, persistent denial) of the nature of the hoax is forced upon the excitable. Intro here (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2009/10/new-voice-column-up-about-fake-obama.html), full column here (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/10/fake_but_accura.php).

As for how far "out on the fringe" this may be, note this observation from the latter:

Suppose a citizen were sufficiently interested in this conflict to visit the opinion site Fox launched (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/29/AR2009032902102.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns) in March, Fox Nation (http://www.thefoxnation.com/). At this writing he would find an invitation to join the Tea Party Express (http://www.thefoxnation.com/culture/2009/10/24/tea-party-express-ii-leaves-station-sunday-will-you-be-it) ("Are You On It?"), "Teleprompter Declares War on Obama (http://www.thefoxnation.com/politics/2009/10/23/teleprompter-declares-war-obama)" with video from TownHall, and links to American Thinker (http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/obamas_eeoc_nominee_would_rede_1.html), Radio Equalizer (http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/2009/10/lefties-far-from-finished-with-rush.html), and Michelle Malkin (http://michellemalkin.com/2009/10/20/moveon-demands-that-democrats-stay-off-fox-news/).

In other words, he'd be directed into the world of the rightbloggers, the shadowy terrain that is this column's bailiwick, and apparently a major part of Fox Nation.

Lyle
10-26-2009, 09:12 PM
Bet it was a progressive operative that put it up there. Facebook pages are easily abused... just like comment sections are. So big whoop.

bjkeefe
10-26-2009, 09:29 PM
Bet it was a progressive operative that put it up there. Facebook pages are easily abused... just like comment sections are. So big whoop.

Sure, feel free to imagine whatever absolves your side of any responsibility, if it makes you feel better.

That doesn't change the reality that they let it stand for a week, and only took it down when a liberal group took them to task for it.

This is how the GOP operates -- they indulge the racism inherent in parts of their base through a whole variety of means that allow them to protest that "we didn't do it" or "it was a mistake" or "that person was just a low-level staffer" or whatever. But things like this just keep happening, and if the GOP really cared about practicing what they preached, they'd have deleted this thing within minutes of it going up. It's not like you can't set up your Facebook account to notify you of everything that gets posted on your wall, for one thing, and for another, it's not as though they have any shortage of interns who would be happy to pitch in and monitor their site, 24/7. This Facebook site is, after all, a very prominent part of the public face of the Republican Party, especially as they try to do outreach beyond their usual core of angry old white people, and that's according to no end of bright young Republicans.

Sorry, that this was allowed to stand for a week makes the RNC complicit, at minimum, in this latest bit of nastiness.

Whatfur
10-26-2009, 11:06 PM
More from the fringe. (http://www.breitbart.tv/andrew-breitbart-talks-current-events-on-c-spans-washington-journal/)

graz
10-26-2009, 11:31 PM
U said it and kept it clean too. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#33486566)

bjkeefe
10-26-2009, 11:38 PM
U said it and kept it clean too. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#33486566)

Rush, in a nutshell, from that clip:

We stand by the fabricated quote.

Can't make this stuff up.

That's the leader of the Republican Party, ladies and gentlemen. The one before whom all other Real Conservatives grovel.

Whatfur
10-26-2009, 11:48 PM
That's the leader of the Republican Party, ladies and gentlemen. The one before whom all other Real Conservatives grovel.

As portrayed on the show hosted by the leader of the Democratic party, ladies and gentlemen. The sportcaster turned liberal god. The one who dares to say whats on the liberal mind. Actually he IS the liberal mind.

graz
10-26-2009, 11:54 PM
Failed analogy. Where Rush has been proven to be the leader of said party.
You have failed to make the case, other than wishful thinking, that KO occupies the same comparable space. Try again.

bjkeefe
10-27-2009, 12:03 AM
As portrayed ...

No. There was no "as portrayed." What you saw were actual video clips of Rush doing his radio show.

Also, what graz said (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=134725#post134725). Your comparison is ridiculous. I can only dream of a country where KO's voice would carry the weight that El Lardbo's does.

bjkeefe
10-27-2009, 12:26 AM
When not advocating violence (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/10/fat-kid-and-his-metaphors-of-physical.html) to achieve his political goals, or lining his pockets (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=133443#post133443) by selling products to people even dumber and more deranged than he is, The GHEMRotRSTF sometimes likes to put on his intellectualizin' cap.

And when he does, he sees that Obama = Hitler.

And how does he know this? Jonah Goldberg told him so! (http://firedoglake.com/2009/10/26/erick-erickson-reviews-liberal-fascism-hilarity-ensues/)

(title: cf. (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/04/troublemaking-fat-kid-making-trouble.html))

Whatfur
10-27-2009, 12:29 AM
U said it and kept it clean too. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#33486566)

Instead of pretending to watch the clip...how about your really watch it. There is some good stuff there. Might offer you some clarity.

graz
10-27-2009, 12:55 AM
I met your challenge. That's 27 minutes lost for me. I can appreciate why Breitbart might do it for you, as you echo similar complaints (except I never got the sense that you are an apostate - as he claims to be).

He doesn't offer anything more than demonization of the "left." And tell me why he deserves to pat himself on the back for so called daring to be a conservative in Hollywood? Big Hollywood... not, more like big deal and so what. I really tried, but he didn't impress me beyond my recognizing his self-regard and victimhood. Sounds familiar.

bjkeefe
10-27-2009, 12:56 AM
Roy Edroso rounds up (1) the excitement over the definitive proof that Obama hates America!!!1! and (2) the hilarity that ensues as admission (or in some cases, persistent denial) of the nature of the hoax is forced upon the excitable. Intro here (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2009/10/new-voice-column-up-about-fake-obama.html), full column here (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/10/fake_but_accura.php).

Teh Sadlys focus on The Ledeen (http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/26164.html).

Lyle
10-27-2009, 12:57 AM
Or they just believe in free speech and don't take responsibility for who posts what.

bjkeefe
10-27-2009, 12:59 AM
Or they just believe in free speech and don't take responsibility for who posts what.

If that were true, they would have left it up.

Lyle
10-27-2009, 02:20 AM
Not if they wanted to avoid making more of a scene.

bjkeefe
10-27-2009, 02:53 AM
Not if they wanted to avoid making more of a scene.

I don't know why you're standing up for the GOP on this of all things, especially given how you like to pretend to be "independent," but I will say that your attempts to excuse your party's non-stop catering to its racist element have moved from the merely stupid to the utterly nonsensical.

Hey, the RNC got busted, once again. No big surprise. Let it go. Spend your energy trying to convince them to do better from now on, rather than trying to whitewash what's already been done.

Whatfur
10-27-2009, 06:33 AM
Thanks for taking the time. Funny how two people can take away two totally different perceptions. IMHO, Mr. Breitbart shed his victimhood after living it, as you do, for most of his life.

graz
10-27-2009, 11:04 AM
Looks like a Mexican (strikethrough) North American nation standoff.

claymisher
10-27-2009, 12:50 PM
On a more serious note, your scenario for the growth of a meaningful third party sounds plausible. Part of me thinks, nah, the party machinery is just too entrenched for this to happen any time soon, but another part of me has vague memories of how successful John Anderson and Ross Perot were at attracting large numbers, with a message that basically amounted to "I am 'None of the Above'."

I guess I think for a third party to really grow to a point where it overshadows the GOP, there would have to be a confluence of even more wingnuttery, plus a long stretch of bad Democratic governance, plus tough times in the country (due to the economy, or something else on the scale of 9/11 or Katrina), plus a charismatic head of the new movement. That last, of course, is the impossible-to-predict one. "Charismatic moderate" is almost an oxymoron, isn't it? Especially when you add in the additional requirement that he or she be sufficiently radical to opt out of the usual path up through either of the existing two parties. Seems to me most CMs (cf. Obama, Barack) would realize the Democratic Party is so free of ideological litmus tests* that anyone interested in moving on up would think it a better bet to stick within the system.

One other scenario could be that a charismatic ultraconservative fulfills Erick Erickson's wet dreams and motivates all Real Conservatives to leave the GOP, at which point, those who are Left Behind, so to speak, could rebuild the GOP brand into something more moderate. As you say, this might well work on a regional basis at the start.

Have you read about the NY-23 special election? The Republican in the race has been deemed too liberal so the wingnut establishment has lined up*behind the third-party conservative candidate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York's_23rd_congressional_district_special_ele ction,_2009#Endorsements

It's like they're trying kill the Republican party outside of the south. Keep at it guys.

TwinSwords
10-27-2009, 01:44 PM
Have you read about the NY-23 special election? The Republican in the race has been deemed too liberal so the wingnut establishment has lined up*behind the third-party conservative candidate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York's_23rd_congressional_district_special_ele ction,_2009#Endorsements

It's like they're trying kill the Republican party outside of the south. Keep at it guys.

Exactly per the 3rd party scenario you described a few days ago.

If this becomes a trend, and I think it very well may, the split could save some Democratic seats in 2010. Let's hope the Republican civil war lasts a good long time.

bjkeefe
10-27-2009, 02:23 PM
Exactly per the 3rd party scenario you described a few days ago.

If this becomes a trend, and I think it very well may, the split could save some Democratic seats in 2010. Let's hope the Republican civil war lasts a good long time.

Indeed. Pretty funny that a whole Wikipedia page has been devoted to this one election, but I guess a lot of people are attaching a lot of importance to it.

If, as it seems now, the split in the GOP causes the Dem to win, what do you think the establishment Republicans will do? (It's clear that the wingnuts already have their "we sent a message" talking point in place in case of loss, so I don't at all expect them to back off.)

Lyle
10-27-2009, 04:36 PM
Republicans don't really have a race problem though (Alan Keyes, Thomas Sowell, Bobby Jindal, Michael Steele, etc...), its the Democrats that do. You guys want to continue to call Republicans racists for partisan reasons and you jump at any chance you can to label Republicans as racists. So you might ought to take your own advice and clean up your act as well.

claymisher
10-27-2009, 05:25 PM
Exactly per the 3rd party scenario you described a few days ago.

If this becomes a trend, and I think it very well may, the split could save some Democratic seats in 2010. Let's hope the Republican civil war lasts a good long time.

No, I had it backwards. I thought moderate Rs would get tired of losing and start a moderate party. In this case the Republican establishment is backing a more conservative third-party candidate. I guess it's still a schism though.

bjkeefe
10-27-2009, 05:54 PM
Republicans don't really have a race problem though (Alan Keyes, Thomas Sowell, Bobby Jindal, Michael Steele, etc...)

Here, it is clear that "etc." means "uh, I can't think of anyone else besides three black guys and one brown one, one of whom is only a pundit, another of whom was a Democrat until opportunism took hold of his reins, and a third who is so whacked out that were it not for the color of his skin, he would have been banished by the GOP long ago."

bjkeefe
10-27-2009, 06:22 PM
Indeed. Pretty funny that a whole Wikipedia page has been devoted to this one election, but I guess a lot of people are attaching a lot of importance to it.

And let us enjoy the consequent silliness! Did you know that according (http://wonkette.com/411838/dede-scozzafava-also-molests-children-at-acorn-constantly) to prominent conservative gasbag Michael Barone, Dede Scozzafava is an ACORN!!!1!?

[Added] Also, she has lost the endorsement of Undead Fred (http://wonkette.com/411826/fred-thompson-also-likes-that-wingnut-in-ny-23)!

bjkeefe
10-27-2009, 06:42 PM
Bad news! Apparently, Sheldon Silver is! Apparently, because he's a Jew!

At least, according to Republican Chris Collins (http://wonkette.com/411834/ambitious-new-york-rising-political-star-heckles-jew-ruins-everything), who told this to many other Republicans!

(He later said this was only "a joke." Whoops -- should have warned you to sit down first, huh?)

bjkeefe
10-27-2009, 07:13 PM
GOP: Classy as ever (http://hartfordadvocate.com/article.cfm?aid=15188):

Twitter, Inc., shut down 33 fake Twitter accounts created by Republicans using the names of Democratic state representatives. The Republican scheme was to send out posts under the Democrats' names ...

So much for "the new GOP's" plan to win by dominating this Very Important social media thing!

Of course, this is just another case where "the Democrats were successful in stopping free speech," said one wingnut (state Republican Chairman Chris Healy).

(h/t: Jim Newell (http://wonkette.com/411825/connecticut-repubs-foiled-again-by-cretinous-internet-machine-retreat-to-money-castles))

Whatfur
10-27-2009, 09:53 PM
...and where do you stand on this then. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYGcIhNGSIY)

bjkeefe
10-27-2009, 11:30 PM
...and where do you stand on this then. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYGcIhNGSIY)

I see your point and I agree with you completely. Those Republicans look even worse in light of that comparison, for failing to understand why a theatrical group (http://theyesmen.org/) doing pranks to generate publicity is not all like being a bunch of bush-league Nixonian creeps. If the Trickster were alive, he'd slap those GOP Twits right in the face.

Not because he ever got a joke, of course -- humor wasn't the long suit for Republicans back then any more than it is now -- but because they got caught.

Thanks for the link, and for providing a brilliant example of the failure of false equivalence.

claymisher
10-27-2009, 11:38 PM
GOP: Classy as ever (http://hartfordadvocate.com/article.cfm?aid=15188):



So much for "the new GOP's" plan to win by dominating this Very Important social media thing!

Of course, this is just another case where "the Democrats were successful in stopping free speech," said one wingnut (state Republican Chairman Chris Healy).

(h/t: Jim Newell (http://wonkette.com/411825/connecticut-repubs-foiled-again-by-cretinous-internet-machine-retreat-to-money-castles))

You know what, that Nixonland shit can't work anymore. Between thinkprogress, kos, huffpo, etc, that shit gets out and backfires.

Yay internet!

bjkeefe
10-28-2009, 03:36 AM
You know what, that Nixonland shit can't work anymore. Between thinkprogress, kos, huffpo, etc, that shit gets out and backfires.

Yay internet!

Indeed. Power to the people, for realz.

bjkeefe
10-31-2009, 07:44 PM
And the power of the Cult is growing.

At least in NY-23: The Republican Party nominee repeatedly called "radical leftist" by the likes of Michelle Malkkkin (http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Amichellemalkin.com+Scozzafava+radi cal+leftist), Dierdre Scozzafava, has suspended her campaign (http://wonkette.com/411927/411927).

bjkeefe
10-31-2009, 08:16 PM
And since it's Halloween, we can all dress up like these scary cult figures (http://wonkette.com/411915/halloween-ideas-dress-like-a-popular-internet-picture)!

Have a happy one!

bjkeefe
10-31-2009, 09:11 PM
You may have seen the recent good news (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=135634#post135634) mentioned in another thread.

And how did certain of your fellow citizens react?

Roy Edroso (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2009/10/notes-from-compassionate-conservative.html) and Instaputz (http://instaputz.blogspot.com/2009/10/one-in-evry-crowd.html) have samplings.

bjkeefe
10-31-2009, 09:57 PM
And they can't even fact-check (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/10/30/right-wing-fact-check-fail/). Among those on the shame list: B'heads Amanda Carpenter, Ed Morrissey, and Michael Goldfarb. Great reporting, right-wing media! Look out, New York Slimes!!!1!

Hat tip to Roy Edroso (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2009/10/somebody-here-knows-how-to-play-this.html), who has many more details, including the observation that many of these "fact-checkers" also cannot spell the name of their hero.

bjkeefe
10-31-2009, 10:31 PM
And the power of the Cult is growing.

At least in NY-23: The Republican Party nominee repeatedly called "radical leftist" by the likes of Michelle Malkkkin (http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Amichellemalkin.com+Scozzafava+radi cal+leftist), Dierdre Scozzafava, has suspended her campaign (http://wonkette.com/411927/411927).

Good thing we have such astute on-scene reporting from law "professor" Colonel Mustard (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/10/31/all-our-base-are-belong-to-us/)!

TwinSwords
11-01-2009, 08:05 PM
Fascinating short segment on Meet the Press this morning with David Plouffe,on the significance of Palin, NY-23, and the purging of moderates from the Republican Party:

— Plouffe on Palin (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/11/plouffe-on-palin.html)

"I think we should thank John McCain for picking her, in terms of how it helped us win in 2008," -- Obama campaign manager David Plouffe, on Meet the Press, discussing Sarah Palin.

bjkeefe
11-02-2009, 02:56 AM
More on this topic: a good op-ed in Sunday's NYT by Frank Rich (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/01/opinion/01rich.html).

As for what this represents on a larger scale, Rich notes among other tidbits that ...

In the latest Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll (http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/wsjnbc-10272009.pdf), only 17 percent of Americans identify themselves as Republicans ...

... and that the two most prominent Republican gubernatorial candidates this year, Bob McDonnell in Virgina and Chris Christie in New Jersey, are using "Hope" and "Change" as slogans in their respective campaigns.

==========

[Added] Related: Probably you heard about this (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-gop-new-york2-2009nov02,0,1356909.story) already, but for the record:

The gulf between the moderate and conservative factions of the Republican Party appeared to spread Sunday when the Republican former candidate in a contentious congressional race endorsed the Democrat.

New York State Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava's decision was essentially a rebuke of conservative activists who had mounted a wildcat effort to ensure her defeat.

Obviously, the Malkkkin wing (http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Amichellemalkin.com+radical+leftist +Scozzafava)of the party will say SEE??? WE WERE RIGHT ABOUT HER!!!1!

bjkeefe
11-02-2009, 05:37 PM
Comical doings (http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/11/as-palin-robocalls-in-virginia-mcdonnell-keeps-his-distance.html) as the chickens (moose?) come home to roost in Virginia:

Sarah Palin is robocalling in Virginia but the Republican candidate for governor is still not embracing her.

[...]

Republican Bob McDonnell kept his distance from Sarah Palin on Monday even as the former Alaska governor had begun making automated phone calls (http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=8977427) to more than 300,000 Virginia households on behalf of a conservative group, urging them to vote their values in Tuesday's election.

"I don't know anything about them," McDonnell told ABC News on Monday when asked about the Palin robocalls which are paid for by the Virginia chapter of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, a socially conservative group headed at the national level by Ralph Reed, the former head of the Christian Coalition.

(h/t: Jim Newell (http://wonkette.com/411952/palin-campaigns-for-mcdonnell-in-secret-roguish-manner-mcdonnell-terrified), who has additional commentary)

bjkeefe
11-02-2009, 07:45 PM
Roy Edroso has posted a history of the rightbloggers' efforts to take control of the NY-23 special election. Makes for some interesting reading. Intro here (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2009/11/new-voice-column-up.html), full column here: page 1 (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/11/rightbloggers_g.php), page 2 (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/11/rightbloggers_g.php?page=2).

Among other things, I'd observe that the epithets hurled at Dierdre Scozzafava by Malkin and ilk are ... well, you be the judge.

bjkeefe
11-02-2009, 07:50 PM
Appears that Harry Reid is not the only member of the Congressional leadership lacking in fortitude. Apparently, Mr. Orange has no spine (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gP__yBwwR2iuTSohzl5S_Shzm88AD9BNN0SG0).

bjkeefe
11-03-2009, 03:18 PM
Newsmax calls for "extermination," but then silently removes the article from its site. Screen shot here (http://wonkette.com/411962/newsmax-changed-its-mind-about-the-need-to-exterminate-obamas-socialist-pals).

Looks from the link like it was posted by Pat Boone, whose wingnut rhetoric I've noted before (e.g. (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2007/09/how-creepy-is-pat-boone.html), e.g. (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/06/staying-just-ahead-of-chuck-norris-in.html)).

Whatfur
11-03-2009, 03:59 PM
Desperation (http://www.politickernj.com/matt-friedman/34725/democrats-admit-paying-pro-daggett-call-obama-records-robocall-corzine).

Whatfur
11-03-2009, 04:01 PM
Rentathug? (http://www.electionjournal.org/2009/11/03/video-terrified-voter-says-nj-dems-using-gangbangers-for-gotv/)

bjkeefe
11-03-2009, 04:12 PM
Rentathug?

Apparently. (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=135979#post135979)

More wingnut hysteria (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/whats_new_lacking_evidence_conservatives_again_sto .php?ref=fpblg) documented here.

[Added] More on the horror, the horror! of "unauthorized" robocalls (http://wonkette.com/411952/palin-campaigns-for-mcdonnell-in-secret-roguish-manner-mcdonnell-terrified).

[Added2] I'll also note, for the lulz, this classic wingnut way of covering that one bedwetter's hysteria in NJ: Over at Michelle Malkkkin's training camp site for up-and-coming hatemongers, Special Ed (http://hotair.com/archives/2009/11/03/too-bad-to-check-nj-dems-sending-gangbangers-on-gotv-efforts/) (via (http://wonkette.com/411973/new-jersey-molested-by-terrible-mobs-of-political-flyers)) headlines, "Too bad to check," and then composes a lengthy blog post, qualified only in the last paragraph with "If true, ..."

bjkeefe
11-03-2009, 04:35 PM
The alliance (http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=5731) between the Queen of the Birthers and The Quitter-in-Chief grows tighter.

(h/t: Jim Newell (http://wonkette.com/411974/oh-its-not-like-orly-taitz-is-showing-off-or-anything))

bjkeefe
11-03-2009, 04:47 PM
But fortunately, they're still not racists. Nope. Nuh-uh. Nothing to see here (http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/25856.html).

Still not racist (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/11/03/ash-brown-people/)!!1!

(via) (http://wonkette.com/411973/new-jersey-molested-by-terrible-mobs-of-political-flyers)

Whatfur
11-04-2009, 10:46 AM
http://images.politico.com/global/politico44/091021_obama_corzine_ap_522_regular.jpg

bjkeefe
11-04-2009, 03:09 PM
Nice pic. Thanks.

bjkeefe
11-04-2009, 04:18 PM
Joe "You Lie!!!1!" Wilson (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/11/04/wilson-dithering-dictionary/) opened his mouth again. Hilarity, unsurprisingly, ensued.

(via (http://wonkette.com/412010/joe-wilson-goes-all-dictionary-on-obama))

bjkeefe
11-04-2009, 04:27 PM
Sarah Palin is once again demonstrating (http://wonkette.com/412005/sarah-palin-will-let-anyone-interview-her) what "well-rounded" means to her.

bjkeefe
11-04-2009, 06:20 PM
Nothing I like better than seeing the wingnuts double down on their divide and fail (http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=29326) strategy.

Now, let's see ... what else do we know about the Senator from South Carolina, apart from the fact that he's not the one who's John McCain's girlfriend (that's the other one)?

Oh, yeah. That (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/01/when-i-say-wingnuts-i-dont-usually-mean.html). That (http://wonkette.com/404740/senator-calls-new-capitol-visitor-center-a-left-leaning-offense-to-god). That (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2008/11/circular-firing-squad-reaches-highest.html). That (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/09/lie-machine.html). And today, this (http://wonkette.com/412008/412008).

bjkeefe
11-05-2009, 04:46 PM
Or maybe shouty wingnut Rep. Todd Akin (http://wonkette.com/412034/terrible-congressman-comically-screws-up-his-precious-pledge-of-allegiance) was so eager to shout about how Jeebus wrote the plejaleejince that he just forgot about that silly liberal "indivisible" part.

bjkeefe
11-06-2009, 02:33 AM
... without their ever so tasteful signs (http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/11/scenes-from-a-tea-party.php).

Palin/Beck 2012!

(h/t: Riley Waggaman (http://wonkette.com/412028/goldman-sachs-artificially-inflates-the-price-of-h1n1))

bjkeefe
11-08-2009, 04:26 PM
Not at the level of genius of Jon Stewart as Glenn Beck (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/11/who-says-jon-stewart-cant-do.html), of course, but SNL doing Fox News (http://www.rumproast.com/index.php/site/comments/fair_and_balanced/) has some funny moments.

bjkeefe
11-09-2009, 04:21 AM
If you're looking for pedal to the metal winguttery, look no further than this piece (http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/the_left_and_terror.html) by JR Dunn in American "Thinker." The torrents of bed-wetting, the hysteria about Teh Left, and the self-congratulations about how conservatives are always perfect cannot be described (although virtually actual (http://whiskeyfire.typepad.com/whiskey_fire/2009/11/american-thinker-war-on-left-is-coming-soon-no-really-any-time-now-probably-you-never-know.html) takes a good crack over at Whiskey Fire). They must be read in their entirety.

bjkeefe
11-09-2009, 03:54 PM
Instaputz turns up an interesting find (http://instaputz.blogspot.com/2009/11/ca-senate-race-get-yer-popcorn.html) concerning one of the GOP candidates looking to unseat Sen. Barbara Boxer in California.

Looks like it might be NY-23 all over again.

claymisher
11-10-2009, 05:13 PM
In the long run the Republicans will be probably just stop being too crazy to win elections and bring back the usual Laffer curve tax cut nonsense. But if you're looking for a scenario where the party does fizzle out, I think what could happen is that conservatives in the northeast get tired of losing every election and start running as "Independent Republican" or "Moderate Republican" candidates. They actually start winning in the NE and the name picks up steam. Some wedge issue comes along and the Moderate Republicans go to war with the FOX/Limbaugh/Palin Republicans. The Moderate Republicans become the Moderate Party and the Republicans stay the party of southern whites. The Moderate party starts winning here and there outside of the south. While this is going on Democrats dominate politics for 10-20 years, get soft the way winners always do, and the Moderates win congress or a presidency. The Republicans become the permanent 3rd party or fizzle out completely.

Republican Party Schism Watch!

New polling shows Snowe could lose in the next Republican primary. If she tacks right enough to win the primary she'd lose in the general. So it looks like she's headed for a Arlen Specter. Nicholas Beaudrot:

Olympia Snowe isn't going to be a Republican by the time of the 2012 Senate primary. Provided the teabaggers recruit a challenger that motivates the base that challenger will receive the endorsement of every credible 2012 Presidential candidate prior to the primary. They'll have plenty of resources to run a campaign with a Republican-only electorate, which already appears to favor the challenger by substantial margins.

Democrats should seriously consider convincing Snowe (and Susan Collins, while we're at it) to at least become join Joe Lieberman as an independent who caucuses with Democrats. In fact, it might even be useful form a "Mugwump Party" consisting of socially liberal, economically moderate non-Southern Republicans and Democrats: Carper, Specter, Snowe, Collins, Lieberman, Herb Kohl, Jeanne Shaheen, and Dianne Feinstein could all form a little club and get jackets made.


-- http://www.donkeylicious.com/2009/11/sound-of-inevitability.html

bjkeefe
11-10-2009, 06:05 PM
Republican Party Schism Watch!

New polling shows Snowe could lose in the next Republican primary. If she tacks right enough to win the primary she'd lose in the general. So it looks like she's headed for a Arlen Specter. Nicholas Beaudrot:



-- http://www.donkeylicious.com/2009/11/sound-of-inevitability.html

Interesting. Thanks for that. Wow, losing 59-31 against a generic conservative, among likely Republican voters, according the Bowers link the above gives. Some of that could just be hysteria stirred trying to defeat DeathPanelCare, but probably not all of it.

And here's another headline for the Schism Watch:

Conservatives register Tea Party as an official third party in Florida. (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/11/09/florida-tea-party/)

(h/t: watertiger (http://firedoglake.com/2009/11/09/late-night-the-teabag-party-makes-it-official-but-still-needs-a-mascot/))

kezboard
11-10-2009, 06:32 PM
The world is divided into oppressors and victims, with history a dialectical struggle between the two. The oppressor is anyone who holds power, the victim everyone else. By definition, the U.S., as the world's reigning power, is an oppressor-state. In fact, the U.S. is the greatest of all oppressor-states -- worse than Assyria, worse than Rome, worse than Hitler's Germany, because it has craftily convinced much of the world that it is no such thing.

This is the best demonstration of the wingnut's circus mirror view of his opposition I've read. I implore anyone who actually thinks this is an accurate description of the "leftist worldview" to, first, grow a brain, and second, base your idea of leftists on someone other than Ward Churchill.

bjkeefe
11-10-2009, 07:45 PM
The Charleston County Republican Party's executive committee took the unusual step Monday night of censuring U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. because of several positions he has taken that clash with the GOP party line.

(source (http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2009/nov/10/10grahamweb/))


As Jim Newell observes (http://wonkette.com/412120/some-south-carolina-gop-faction-censures-lindsey-graham), two of the three reasons given are old hat. This is really almost entirely about Graham having co-written an op-ed with John Kerry.

bjkeefe
11-10-2009, 09:48 PM
More schism (emph. added):

Scozzafava, who was stripped of her Republican leadership position in the New York State Assembly on Monday, says she has no regrets and even leaves open the possibility of running for the seat again as a Republican. She sees herself as a champion of local expertise over ideological purity.

“How can Sarah Palin come out and endorse someone who can’t answer some basic questions,” Scozzafava asked. “Do these people even know who they are endorsing?”

Those conservative forces now descend on Florida, where former House speaker Marco Rubio, who on Monday received the endorsement of the Club for Growth, might shove aside centrist Gov. Charlie Crist, who was once on John McCain’s short list for running mate. And Scozzafava has a warning.

“There is a lot of us who consider ourselves Republicans, of the Party of Lincoln,” she said, her face now flush. “If they don’t want us with them, we’re going to work against them.”

(WaPo via John Cole (http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=29573))

claymisher
11-11-2009, 04:34 PM
Marginalized doesn't mean eliminated. It just means pushed to the side. If you can get the FOX News/Palin wing of the party to be at war with the rest of them -- divide -- you frustrate their ability to obstruct your agenda. I'll try to think of some examples of Republican infighting ... Specter in PA, the threats to Snowe on health care, the "Rush is bad"/"Did I say Rush was bad? Rush is good!" routine (http://www.dccc.org/content/sorry), the Chamber of Commerce defections, ... I'm sure there's more.

If is Obama as brilliant as I'm pretty sure he is completely scramble the Republicans over banking reform next year. (Nate Silver has a post on that (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/10/issue-that-could-fracture-both-right.html)).

Wedge Issue Watch!

What happens if the Democrats take on the banks? How will the teabaggers react to that? How weird would it be if Obama got out in front of the tea party parade?!

Ezra Klein:
The more I think about Dodd's financial regulation bill, the more I think the politics are going to be surprising. Its biggest surprise, for instance, is how much power it takes from the Federal Reserve, and how much it does to make the central bank more accountable to Congress. But Fed skepticism has been much more prevalent among Ron Paul supporters and Tea Partiers than MoveOn.org members. Indeed, the financial regulation plan developed by Barney Frank was fairly friendly toward the Fed. The financial regulation plan developed by House Republicans was not.

Similarly, the Tea Parties have been, in large part, about how much everybody hates the banks. And what do the banks hate? Well, Dodd's plan. "They're just blowing up everything for the sake of change," moaned Ed Yingling, president of the American Bankers Association. When the Tea Partiers turn their attention to this issue, do they turn against the plan or do they turn against the banks? Will they have a "public option"-level priority in financial regulation reform? If they do, my sense is the ABA won't much like it.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/11/the_populist_politics_of_finan.html

I think cracking down on the banks would be good for America. I'm even happier to see good policies put forward that divide the Republicans.

bjkeefe
11-11-2009, 05:33 PM
Roy Edroso also notes (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/11/gop_purge_conti.php) the Lindsey Graham censure, plus gives updates on other Antics of the Schismatics.

bjkeefe
11-11-2009, 08:43 PM
JMM (http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/11/the_paranoid_style.php?ref=fpblg):

There are many ways in which the political moment (hyper-polarizing) and the technological moment (Twitter, instant news cycles) creates a self-perpetuating arms race of hyperbole. On the other hand, some of these new publishing and communications systems do allow us to get a view into where the head of a big chunk of the country is at.

To that end, we've got the story of the Colorado state senator (http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/colorado-state-senator-lets-roll-against-the-obama-agenda.php?ref=fpb) who represents the hyper-conservative Colorado Springs compared Obama to the al Qaeda terrorists who took over Flight 93 on 9/11 and real patriotic Republican Americans to the passengers who had to retake control of the plane.

On the one hand, this is textbook feverish, eliminationist incitement. On the other hand, I think back to how paranoid and in the thrall of their own victimization these folks were a few years ago when they ran the entire country. So I'm not sure we should be surprised that they go totally crazy when they're largely shut out of power in the country at the national level.

Atrios (http://www.eschatonblog.com/2009/11/no-surprise.html) adds:

I think this is an underappreciated phenomenon of the past 8 years, that even when their team ran everything they still felt marginalized and were perpetually acting as victims. "Some Guy With A Sign Somewhere" was a great threat to their personal liberty, as was anyone who didn't pay appropriate respects to Just How 9/11 Made Them Feel.

bjkeefe
11-11-2009, 09:52 PM
We will have to wait for video before we can decide if it was 1 or 2 million people who showed up to yell at Bill O'Reilly for being part of the cover-up that keeps B Hussein X illegally in the White House, but so far the still pics show (http://gawker.com/5402300/fox-news-is-ready-for-your-update-birther-protest/gallery/?skyline=true&s=x) ... oh, maybe five or ten people, including Orly. Could be as many as thirty, if we count passers-by and gawkers, though!

(h/t: Vic's new favorite blog (http://wonkette.com/412139/orly-taitz-shuts-down-fox-news-with-a-protest))

[Update] The crowd size is now estimated to be 15-20 (http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2009/11/11/taitz_fox) (by the liberal media, of course), and even more hilariously, those numbers appear to have been boosted, such as they were, by the unplanned appearance of another equally sad case. Remember that Reverend "Mack Daddy" guy? Yeah, him.

TwinSwords
11-12-2009, 02:44 AM
Remember that Reverend "Mack Daddy" guy? Yeah, him.
LOL, that guy has a huge following among the birther crowd on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/user/ATLAHWorldwide#g/u).

bjkeefe
11-12-2009, 06:44 AM
LOL, that guy has a huge following among the birther crowd on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/user/ATLAHWorldwide#g/u).

I can well imagine. He's the perfect cover for that bunch -- "Hey, it's a black guy saying these things! Therefore I'm not racist!"

bjkeefe
11-12-2009, 05:50 PM
TPM (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/a-star-is-born-marco-rubio-to-headline-cpac-2010.php) (via (http://wonkette.com/412159/the-naval-academy-wants-diverse-sailors-but-no-gays-please)):

A Star Is Born: Marco Rubio To Headline CPAC 2010

If you don't already know about this guy, this is worth checking out. Unless something comes from out of nowhere, the battle for the Florida Senate seat between Rubio and Charlie Crist will be THE next battleground for the soul of the GOP.

kezboard
11-12-2009, 09:06 PM
This guy was on the Colbert Report awhile ago, wasn't he? So now he thinks Oprah is the antichrist?

TwinSwords
11-12-2009, 11:31 PM
This guy was on the Colbert Report awhile ago, wasn't he? So now he thinks Oprah is the antichrist?

LOL.

There is absolutely no parallel on the left for the kind of widespread ... not just extremism on the right (but that, too), but sheer insanity . I mean, there are just an overwhelming number of people in Republican ranks these days who are clearly out of their minds. It's rather frightening, especially given the fact that ultraconservatism is again ascendant and primed for a (perhaps long term) restoration, thanks to the axis of the media, relatively sane Republicans, and the wingnut/lunatic base of the Republican Party, led by Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, and the lesser loons, like Savage, Levin, Hannity, et al.

As DougJ said at Balloon Juice yesterday (http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=29679), "if this country avoids becoming a Franco-style dictatorship in our lifetime," it will be nothing less than a miracle.

Most days I assume Obama was a major statistical outlier, a freak accident in a country that has consistently been elected extremist Republicans since Nixon and without pause has been moving further and further to the right with every election cycle. Obama won in 2008 due to a perfect storm of a collapsed economy, the utter failure of Bush/Cheney, and weariness with war. None of these things will work to Democrats' advantage in 2010 or 2012, and it would be foolish to expect anything except a resurgence of Republican extremism and a Republican president in 2012.

America ... we had a good run while it lasted.

bjkeefe
11-13-2009, 08:02 AM
[...] As DougJ said at Balloon Juice yesterday (http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=29679), "if this country avoids becoming a Franco-style dictatorship in our lifetime," it will be nothing less than a miracle.

I'm not nearly that discouraged, but I do want to note for the record that one of the links in DougJ's post points to B'head Jim Pinkerton trying to push the meme that "Ft. Hood is Obama's 9/11."

Not that I have any respect for Pinkerton left anymore, but others may wish to make a note -- this guy who seems like a nice enough fellow here on Bh.tv when he's got David Corn to keep him on keel has, in fact, some rather disturbed notions driving his thinking. Or, perhaps, he's a shameless political hack. Either way, be advised.

kezboard
11-13-2009, 12:22 PM
this guy who seems like a nice enough fellow here on Bh.tv when he's got David Corn to keep him on keel has, in fact, some rather disturbed notions driving his thinking.

Yeah, I think I pretty much got that when he called for a policeman outside every mosque.

bjkeefe
11-13-2009, 12:35 PM
A rare story that's even more juicy than its headline.

Party Foul! Tea Partiers Eat Their Own In Bitter Internal Feud (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/party_foul_tea_partiers_eat_their_own_in_bitter_in .php?ref=mp)

bjkeefe
11-13-2009, 01:24 PM
The wing-nuts have taken over the GOP. (http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/11/06/i/)

(via (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2009/11/as-long-as-you-remember-its-not.html))

bjkeefe
11-17-2009, 08:31 PM
But rightbloggers, who rose to similar bait in April when Obama bowed to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, found his gesture in this case as needful of close analysis as the Zapruder film.

Roy Edroso (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/11/rightbloggers_p_2.php) wraps up THE OUTRAGE!!!1!

TwinSwords
11-17-2009, 09:57 PM
This is the Republican Party:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZzsjULXDnA

Get a barf bag before you watch.

bjkeefe
11-18-2009, 04:20 AM
This is the Republican Party:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZzsjULXDnA

Get a barf bag before you watch.

Heh: Schaeffer says, around 4:12: "Most of them are not crazy; they're just deluded."

I would now like all of those who have spent the past week howling about "warning signs" and how "something should have been done" to advise us on a course of action here. Should, for example, Bill O'Reilly's call into Glenn Beck's radio show, in which he made an obvious allusion to the violent death of the Speaker of the House, be investigated? Should, for example, the Secret Service be allowed to demand the sales records of the Psalm 109 paraphernalia people? I mean, this is threats of violence with a clear religious connection, isn't it?

And, as Schaeffer says, why aren't "responsible" leaders from the GOP, conservative movement, and/or Christianity speaking out to denounce such exhortations?

bjkeefe
11-18-2009, 08:15 AM
Roy Edroso (http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/11/rightbloggers_p_2.php) wraps up THE OUTRAGE!!!1!

And James Wolcott has more (http://www.vanityfair.com/online/wolcott/2009/11/such-a-touchy-bunch-the.html), concentrating on the particular strain of wingnuttery (but Not Racist™) featured at Protein "Wisdom."

claymisher
11-18-2009, 01:31 PM
"Yeah, sure, the parties are exactly the same in their craziness"

A new national poll suggests that the Democrats may be the party of pragmatism and Republicans may be the party of ideological purity...

"One reason for the difference between the parties: the Democrats have a relatively even split on ideological grounds. Thirty-four percent of Democrats are liberal, 40 percent are moderates and less than one in four call themselves conservatives," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2009/nov/18/democrats-republicans

bjkeefe
11-18-2009, 06:19 PM
New very long report out from some Muslin group (http://www.adl.org/special_reports/rage-grows-in-America/default.asp), so therefore, it's probably not worth reading. Short version: Glenn Beck is bad for America.

(via (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/report-sees-increasingly-anti-government-climate/), via (http://wonkette.com/412265/sarah-palin-signs-books-erick-ericksons-right-teet))

bjkeefe
11-20-2009, 01:06 PM
Republican Party Schism Watch!

BREAKING: The Teabaggers are "going Lord of the Flies on each other (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/11/20/the-only-people-we-hate-more-than-the-democrats-are-the-teabagging-popular-peoples-front-splitters/)."

Could there be any connection to this (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=139242#post139242)??? It would be irresponsible NOT to speculate!

kezboard
11-20-2009, 01:22 PM
My favorite quote on the bow is from Wesley Pruden at the Washington Times:

It's no fault of the president that he has no natural instinct or blood impulse for what the America of "the 57 states" is about. He was sired by a Kenyan father, born to a mother attracted to men of the Third World and reared by grandparents in Hawaii, a paradise far from the American mainstream.

He no doubt wants to "do the right thing" by his lights, but the lights that illumine the Obama path are not necessarily the lights that illuminate the way for most of the rest of us.

This is why liberals keep suggesting that it's it might perhaps be the case that the insane fury of certain people on the right might just possibly be motivated by something, you know, racial.

bjkeefe
11-20-2009, 05:26 PM
... but the lights that illumine the Obama path are not necessarily the lights that illuminate the way for most of the rest of us.

I wonder if the lights for Wesley Pruden are more focused on the billboard space rented by the Lafayette County Republicans:

http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/revolutionmissouri.jpg

As Fired Up! Missouri (http://www.firedupmissouri.com/content/lafayette-co-gop-celebrates-new-billboard-it-may-be-time-war) notes (via (http://wonkette.com/412337/these-people-and-their-violence-sheesh)):

Apparently, this new message replaces the infamous "They Are Coming For You!" billboard (http://www.firedupmissouri.com/content/lafayette-county-gop-endorses-they-are-coming-you-billboard). Just another day for "mainstream" Missouri Republicans.

bjkeefe
11-20-2009, 05:54 PM
Proof of complete non-racism found! The new Teabagger movie (http://wonkette.com/412330/the-tea-party-the-documentary-film-trailer-libertys-march-has-a-new-generation-of-patriots) has a Black Guy!

bjkeefe
11-20-2009, 08:32 PM
Interesting post (http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2009/11/bush-father-of-teabagism-and-other.html) from the proprietor of No More Mister Nice Blog:

BUSH: THE FATHER OF TEABAGISM?
(and other thoughts on wingnut dissent)

He makes an plausible case for "the right's deep envy of the '60s left."

bjkeefe
11-21-2009, 06:43 AM
New very long report out from some Muslin group (http://www.adl.org/special_reports/rage-grows-in-America/default.asp), so therefore, it's probably not worth reading. Short version: Glenn Beck is bad for America.

(via (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/report-sees-increasingly-anti-government-climate/), via (http://wonkette.com/412265/sarah-palin-signs-books-erick-ericksons-right-teet))

Interesting follow-up, in which Alexander Zaitchik looks at "Glenn Beck's white nationalist fans (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/11/20/glenn_beck_and_stormfront/index.html)." Article begins:

It's been a busy week for Glenn Beck watchers (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/09/21/glenn_beck/index.html). On Monday, the Anti-Defamation League released a report warning of the paranoia and stridency that increasingly define the conservative grass roots. It echoed an April report issued by the Department of Homeland Security, but unlike the DHS report, the ADL named names, and fingered Beck as the figure most responsible for the unhinging of the right.

"Beck has acted as a 'fearmonger-in-chief,' raising anxiety about and distrust towards the government [which] if it continues to grow in intensity and scope, may result in an increase in anti-government extremists and the potential for a rise of violent anti-government acts," the ADL wrote.

Amazingly, just after the ADL report's release, Sarah Palin responded to a question about a possible Palin-Beck ticket (http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joan_walsh/politics/2009/11/18/palin_beck/index.html) by refusing to rule out Beck as a running mate. She praised him effusively, describing him as "bold, clever, and very, very, very effective."

Effective at what, exactly?

Earlier this week, Sam Stein of the Huffington Post detailed several instances (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/16/becks-guest-list-included_n_359120.html) in which Beck has welcomed onto his shows guests with ties to groups that traffic in white supremacy, neo-Confederate secession, and anti-Semitism. Stein's reporting was a good start, but it would take a chalkboard the size of Idaho to fully map out Beck's racially paranoid guest list.

claymisher
03-23-2010, 08:00 PM
Palin encouraging an ultra-rightwing third party:

HANNITY: If it’s a strong conservative that gets the Republican nomination and then a tea party member runs as a third party candidate, do you have any worry about that?

PALIN: I do have a little bit of worry about that but at the same time that can be part of a healthy process, though. A third party candidate can really shore-up a Republican candidate in terms of that Republican candidate having to be very strong and sharp and debate aggressively, regarding the positions that they have taken.

A third party candidate, I think, Sean, can actually help in this process. And if nothing else a third party candidate is going to help keep the Republican Party being held accountable, too.


http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/23/palin-third-party/

I doubt we'll see any schism unless Republicans keep getting blown out like they did in 2006 and 2008. With the economy in the toilet that seems unlikely in 2010.

bjkeefe
03-23-2010, 10:34 PM
Palin encouraging an ultra-rightwing third party:



http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/23/palin-third-party/

I doubt we'll see any schism unless Republicans keep getting blown out like they did in 2006 and 2008. With the economy in the toilet that seems unlikely in 2010.

I agree with the last part. In the political calculus, "It's the economy, stupid" remains one of the truest bumper stickers ever.

However, it is interesting to think about the possibility that the GOP makes no more than typical gains, compared to other similar situations (tough economy, minority party running, in effect, against the president and the status quo), rather than there being a blowout. If that happens, and I think it's not unlikely, this could mean that the argument about whether it's best to {keep moving farther to the right | embrace the teabaggers | remain united as the Party of No} is not easily settled. This, in turn, could add momentum for a schism.

[Added] I think the tension between the fiscal and social conservatives also bears watching, although I suspect in 2010 at least, they'll remain aligned at the ballot box.

TwinSwords
03-23-2010, 10:44 PM
Palin encouraging an ultra-rightwing third party:

Just hilarious. I mean, God, we all knew the woman was incredibly stupid. But this is ridiculous. Is she on the Democratic Party payroll now? How can the woman who could have been a heartbeat away from the presidency not realize that 3rd parties only hurt the party the are closest to? I.e., that if a party of neo-Nazi teabagging lunatics were to emerge, it would only split the Republican vote and help elect Democrats?

She's obviously been compromised by George Soros and International Communism.

And yes, because this is the internet, I must say that the 2nd paragraph is sarcasm.

TwinSwords
03-23-2010, 10:49 PM
However, it is interesting to think about the possibility that the GOP makes no more than typical gains, compared to other similar situations (tough economy, minority party running, in effect, against the president and the status quo), rather than there being a blowout.

Yes. It's quite interesting. With the passage of Health Care Reform, the entire narrative now changes. Everything people expected to happen in November now has to be reconsidered. We'll probably still lose seats, but the Democrats almost certainly dodged a bullet by not letting down their base and by invalidating a year's worth of wingnut / media CW about Obama's "failure" and Democratic incompetence. It's a stunning reversal that will have enormous impact.

bjkeefe
03-23-2010, 11:51 PM
Just hilarious. I mean, God, we all knew the woman was incredibly stupid. But this is ridiculous. Is she on the Democratic Party payroll now? How can the woman who could have been a heartbeat away from the presidency not realize that 3rd parties only hurt the party the are closest to? I.e., that if a party of neo-Nazi teabagging lunatics were to emerge, it would only split the Republican vote and help elect Democrats?

She's obviously been compromised by George Soros and International Communism.

And yes, because this is the internet, I must say that the 2nd paragraph is sarcasm.

I have found it useful to consider her actions and words with the word grifter in mind. In this context, she is not nearly so stupid, but has the con artist's animal sense of what works to separate the rubes from their dollars.

Even without being quite that pejorative about it, I now am starting to see her as looking to fashion herself as something like the far right's version of Oprah. Think about it: a best-selling book, a potentially lucrative "reality" teevee gig in the works, a foot already in the door at Fox, a highly recognizable look and other aspects of brand image -- what would take it to the next level is the Party of Sarah. If this were a couple of generations ago, she would have followed L. Ron Hubbard, and formed the Church of Sarah.

If I had to bet, I think she either realizes she can't actually win nomination, let alone election, to be preznit, or she just plain doesn't want to go that route, what with all the hassles from the biasedliberalgotcha media, and so what she's doing now is raking in the money while the raking is good, and playing the political part as coy as possible -- no commitments, just in case things should start tipping her way, but no real effort, either, except that it helps her stay in the spotlight and in front of adoring crowds.

Oh, and helps her hide some of her money from the IRS.

bjkeefe
03-24-2010, 01:00 AM
... a potentially lucrative "reality" teevee gig in the works ...

More on that here (http://wonkette.com/414398/sarah-palin-finally-gets-her-dream-job-on-a-cable-show). Bonus: historical perspective! Did Sarah Palin cause the global economy to crash, all by herself?

bjkeefe
03-24-2010, 01:05 AM
More on that here (http://wonkette.com/414398/sarah-palin-finally-gets-her-dream-job-on-a-cable-show). Bonus: historical perspective! Did Sarah Palin cause the global economy to crash, all by herself?

Also, too (http://weblogs.variety.com/on_the_air/2010/03/discovery-lands-sarah-palins-alaska.html?ref=ssp):

http://weblogs.variety.com/.a/6a00d8341bfc7553ef01310fce79be970c-pi

Plus! An interesting prediction about Your New Show of Shows (http://www.theawl.com/2010/03/sarah-palins-planet-earth-and-the-end-times).

claymisher
03-24-2010, 01:11 AM
Yes. It's quite interesting. With the passage of Health Care Reform, the entire narrative now changes. Everything people expected to happen in November now has to be reconsidered. We'll probably still lose seats, but the Democrats almost certainly dodged a bullet by not letting down their base and by invalidating a year's worth of wingnut / media CW about Obama's "failure" and Democratic incompetence. It's a stunning reversal that will have enormous impact.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinion/ssi/images/Toles/c_11092006_520.gif

After the 2006 sweep

It's true. I remember back in 2006, when the Democrats clobbered the field (not a single Republican flip in any House, Senate, or gubernatorial race!) and took Congress, it was only a day or two later every tv network finally started using the term "civil war" when talking about Iraq. It was that blatant. We're seeing that effect again. Instead of "death panels" all the time it's "Oh, hey, what's in the law now? Good stuff! Ending pre-existing conditions! No more recission!" and "Obama and Pelosi triumph!"

My hope is that Obama & crew will come up with an issue thats both 1) good for America and 2) something that a tea partier should like. I think cracking down on the banksters would fit that bill. I know, the wingnuts will call that socialism, but you'll peel off some of that populist rage with a good populist bill. Even better, it's a fight you can afford to lose. Let the Republicans kill it and then campaign against Republican support for the banksters.

Mark Kleiman thinks the wedge issue is here already (http://www.samefacts.com/2010/03/uncategorized/cleft-stick/): voting against the HCR patch means voting FOR the dreaded "cornhusker kickback." And if they vote for the patch, that meant they voted against HCR before they voted for it. It's a pickle. Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch.

bjkeefe
03-24-2010, 01:40 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinion/ssi/images/Toles/c_11092006_520.gif

After the 2006 sweep

Man, that is one awesome cartoon. Great find! (Or memory!)

It's rare to find a political cartoon that works so well, again, in a different year.

It's true. I remember back in 2006, when the Democrats clobbered the field (not a single Republican flip in any House, Senate, or gubernatorial race!) and took Congress, it was only a day or two later every tv network finally started using the term "civil war" when talking about Iraq. It was that blatant. We're seeing that effect again. Instead of "death panels" all the time it's "Oh, hey, what's in the law now? Good stuff! Ending pre-existing conditions! No more recission!" and "Obama and Pelosi triumph!"

Props to all those who predicted that as soon as we Passed The Damn Bill, the media's love to cover a winner would appear.

My hope is that Obama & crew will come up with an issue thats both 1) good for America and 2) something that a tea partier should like.

Wow, you don't want much, do you? "And then I'd like the lion to lay down with the lamb, and both of them to learn calculus, while convincing Inara Serra to move in with me."

But seriously ... do you really think such a thing is conceivable? The Tea Partiers may not all be teabaggers, but a lot -- probably most -- are, and if there is one thing that unites them, it is fear/hatred of Obama. He could propose a constitutional amendment tomorrow that would simultaneously require the federal government to have a balanced budget, ban gay marriage, send Teh Blaxx back to Africa, put the Muslins in internment camps, build a giant wall between the US and Mexico staffed with shark-mounted lasers, and give everyone who's white, Protestant, and over 50 coupons for half off for life at Shoney's, and they'd still hate him.

I think cracking down on the banksters would fit that bill. I know, the wingnuts will call that socialism, but you'll peel off some of that populist rage with a good populist bill. Even better, it's a fight you can afford to lose. Let the Republicans kill it and then campaign against Republican support for the banksters.

Nah. They'd like it if it were Beck or Palin going after the banksters, but if it's the Dems, they're just going to believe what Fox and Rush tell them about this being an assault on free enterprise.

Mark Kleiman thinks the wedge issue is here already (http://www.samefacts.com/2010/03/uncategorized/cleft-stick/): voting against the HCR patch means voting FOR the dreaded "cornhusker kickback." And if they vote for the patch, that meant they voted against HCR before they voted for it. It's a pickle. Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch.

That was a pretty good post, though.

Oh, but wait. Pickle??? Is that supposed to be some kind of dog whistle (http://wonkette.com/414405/barack-obama-was-reading-pickles-in-sunday-funnies)?

claymisher
03-24-2010, 01:57 AM
I remembered that cartoon. It's a classic!

I know, Fox & Limbaugh will always make up some outrage for the outraged to be incited by, but the trick is to work it out so they're against something that 70% of the country is for. If you've got Fox & Limbaugh bullying Republicans into unpopular positions it makes it easier to beat them.

bjkeefe
03-24-2010, 02:00 AM
I remembered that cartoon. It's a classic!

Never saw it. Thanks for the great laugh!

I know, Fox & Limbaugh will always make up some outrage for the outraged to be incited by, but the trick is to work it out so they're against something that 70% of the country is for. If you've got Fox & Limbaugh bullying Republicans into unpopular positions it makes it easier to beat them.

Put that way, I completely agree.

So, really then, the strategy is to get the teabaggers even more furious with Obama about something even stupider, and then count on the real centrists and independents to recognize the reality of the Dem/Rep choice.

bjkeefe
03-24-2010, 11:15 PM
... a potentially lucrative "reality" teevee gig in the works ...

I am reminded (http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/03/23/another-reason-not-to-pay-for-cable/) of this, and now I see it's a done deal (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/24/people-palin-discovery-reach-deal-for-tv-show/?fbid=GN2SwaGNIAm). It occurs to me that we should probably change the name to the Discovery Institute Channel.

bjkeefe
03-25-2010, 03:37 AM
Palin encouraging an ultra-rightwing third party:

[...]

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/23/palin-third-party/

I doubt we'll see any schism unless Republicans keep getting blown out like they did in 2006 and 2008. With the economy in the toilet that seems unlikely in 2010.

On the other hand, there's this:

Poll: Tea Party's Effect On 2010 Midterms

A Quinnipiac (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x271.xml) national survey finds that having a Tea Party candidate on a general election congressional race ballot could negatively affect the Republican's chance of winning.

Republicans lead the generic ballot test by a 44%-39% margin over Democrats. However, when a generic Tea Party candidate is thrown in the mix, the Democrat receives 36% and the Republican 25%, with the Tea Partier taking 15%.

[...]

The survey was conducted March 16-21 of 1,907 RV with a MOE of +/- 2.2%, including 253 who said they were Tea Party members.

Note the dates: most, if not all, of the people were surveyed before the HCR bill passed the House. Conceivably, that could make some more people mad at the Republicans, for not stopping the bill when it may have seemed to some of them that they had it Stupaked going into the weekend.

(Real Clear Politics (http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2010/03/24/poll-tea-partys-effect-on-2010-midterms/), via Blue Texan (http://firedoglake.com/2010/03/24/poll-tea-party-could-wreck-2010-midterms-for-republicans/). Full results here (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1436).)

==========

[Added] Some more data and analysis from Zachary Roth/TPM (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/is_there_a_tea_party_movement.php).

bjkeefe
03-26-2010, 10:13 AM
[...] I doubt we'll see any schism unless Republicans keep getting blown out like they did in 2006 and 2008. With the economy in the toilet that seems unlikely in 2010.

Adding to my previous (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=155905#post155905) response, there's an interesting case study in today's NYT on Senator Robert F. Bennett (R-Utah) (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/26/us/politics/26bennett.html?pagewanted=all), up for reelection this year, who is in serious trouble.

Excerpts:

The dissatisfaction with Washington sweeping through politics is not only threatening the Democratic majority in Congress, it is also roiling Republican primaries. The Tea Party movement and advocacy groups on the right are demanding that candidates hew strictly to their ideological standards, and are moving aggressively to cast out those they deem to have strayed, even if only by participating in the compromises of legislating.

There is no bigger quarry in the eyes of many conservative activists than Mr. Bennett, who has drawn seven challengers and will not know for six weeks whether he will even qualify for the ballot. His fate is being watched not only by grass-roots conservatives testing their ability to shape the party, but also by many elected Republicans in Washington who are wondering, If Bob Bennett is not conservative enough, who is?

[...]

His own polling shows him in third place, he said, trailing “Anybody-but-Bennett and Undecided.”

[...]

The rise of the Tea Party movement, along with an investment in the race by the Club for Growth, the antitax Washington-based group that seeks to influence Republican primaries, has turned the race into what the soft-spoken senator calls “the nastiest one I have experienced.”

And how conservative is he?

Conservative advocacy groups have consistently given Mr. Bennett high marks, including an “A” ranking from the National Rifle Association, a 98 percent rating by the United States Chamber of Commerce and an 84 percent rating from the American Conservative Union.

Not conservative enough!!!1!

(In fairness, there are some non-crazy complaints, as well.)

bjkeefe
03-27-2010, 07:26 AM
[...]

Another potential source of division for the GOP, from Max Bergmann/Wonk Room (http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/03/25/start-treaty-will-be-a-fight-over-the-soul-of-the-republican-party/), via Matt Yglesias (http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2010/03/will-the-hard-right-block-start-ratification.php):

The good news:

The new START treaty will reduce the number of nuclear weapons pointed at US cities and will enable the US to continue to be able to monitor Russia’s nuclear stockpiles. It will cut deployed strategic nuclear warheads from 2200 to about 1550 (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/25/world/europe/25start.html?h) and will cut the total number of launchers from 1600 to 800. It will also ensure that the framework of the previous START treaty – a treaty that was the brain-child of Ronald Reagan and was advanced by President George H.W. Bush – is maintained.

In other words, this new START follow-on agreement will maintain the status quo and preserve nuclear stability, while making modest advances in reducing nuclear weapons. The significance of this treaty is that it lays the groundwork for more far-reaching talks between the US and Russia and will lay the groundwork for strengthening the nuclear non-proliferation regime, as this new agreement will allow both countries to show that they are keeping their end of the decades old nuclear bargain.


The bad news:

Despite this treaty having extensive bi-partisan support among senior foreign policy officials (http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/02/05/start-exposes-divide/) – such as George Schultz, Henry Kissinger, Richard Lugar (R-IN), Colin Powell –ratification is far from assured. There are real questions over whether the Senate GOP will seek to obstruct the ratification of the treaty (http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/02/25/new-tactic-to-kill-start-revealed-obstruct-it/). Treaties require a two-thirds majority, therefore eight or nine Republican votes are needed to ratify this treaty. If the Senate GOP wants to kill it they can. Therefore if ratification becomes a fight – it will not be a fight between Republicans and Obama, it will be a fight within the Republican caucus – between moderates and the far right.

In a sign of how extreme the GOP Senate leadership has become, Bloomberg reported, following word the treaty was done, that “Senate Republicans would object to linkages similar to the one in the 1991 treaty (http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-03-24/obama-medvedev-move-to-cut-nuclear-arsenals-in-new-agreement.html).” In other words, what was acceptable to Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, would not be acceptable to Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ).

listener
03-27-2010, 01:52 PM
Another potential source of division for the GOP, from Max Bergmann/Wonk Room (http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/03/25/start-treaty-will-be-a-fight-over-the-soul-of-the-republican-party/), via Matt Yglesias (http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2010/03/will-the-hard-right-block-start-ratification.php):


Another important piece of the picture is the way in which Congress' failure to ratify the treaty with Russia is likely to adversely affect the world's ability to influence Iran's nuclear program (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/26/nuclear-weapons-deal-us-russia-iran). So if the Republicans do block ratification of the treaty, their actions will seriously undermine our collective ability to rein in Iran's potential development of nuclear weapons.

One can only hope and pray that Republicans come to understand this and that this will allow them to see that this vote has ramifications beyond the little sandbox they are pretending to play in.

bjkeefe
03-27-2010, 02:46 PM
Another important piece of the picture is the way in which Congress' failure to ratify the treaty with Russia is likely to adversely affect the world's ability to influence Iran's nuclear program (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/26/nuclear-weapons-deal-us-russia-iran). So if the Republicans do block ratification of the treaty, their actions will seriously undermine our collective ability to rein in Iran's potential development of nuclear weapons.

One can only hope and pray that Republicans come to understand this and that this will allow them to see that this vote has ramifications beyond the little sandbox they are pretending to play in.

Hmm. Hadn't thought of that. Good point.

I know very little about this, but my instinctive response is to say that "seriously undermine" might be overstating it a bit. I have a sense that Iran will not be all that much more inclined to listen to the US even if we do appear a little more in harmony with Russia. But who knows? If we spend the next few years defrosting relations with Russia, and can actually present a united front on this issue, maybe it actually will matter to Iran.

And in any case, incremental progress is better than no progress at all, and that goes for dealing with Iran specifically as well as getting along better with Russia more generally, not to mention, of course, cutting down on the number of nukes in the world.

Or, as the Republicans will likely put it, appeasing. No, surrendering.

bjkeefe
03-28-2010, 06:00 PM
... whether the people who work at the NYT have the greatest senses of deadpan humor in the world. I mean, how else to explain this lede (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/29/us/politics/29recess.html) ...

A leading Republican predicted Sunday that President Obama’s appointment of 15 officials while sidestepping Senate confirmation would make it more difficult to get bipartisan support for future legislation.

... without the appearance of, say, this (http://savasplace.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/laughing_kitten.jpg) afterwards?

http://savasplace.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/laughing_kitten.jpg

uncle ebeneezer
03-29-2010, 12:47 AM
A leading Republican predicted Sunday that President Obama’s appointment of 15 officials while sidestepping Senate confirmation would make it more difficult to get bipartisan support for future legislation.

We have a right to be outraged because this is clearly...

Presidents have the constitutional authority to fill vacancies without the advice and consent of the Senate when Congress is in recess — as they are now for a spring break. Other presidents have used that authority, with George W. Bush making 15 recess appointment by this point in his presidency and a total of 171 by the end, according to Congressional Research Service.

...UNPRECEDENTED!!1!

listener
03-29-2010, 01:38 AM
We have a right to be outraged because this is clearly...



...UNPRECEDENTED!!1!

Nothing like a good specious process argument to get The American People(TM) in a lather.*

*cf. Reconciliation

bjkeefe
03-29-2010, 03:08 PM
Amy Kingsley (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2010/03/27/tea_party_searchlight_showdown/index.html):

"Showdown in Searchlight" doesn't pass the sniff test
It felt more like a slick Republican campaign rally than a genuine grass-roots celebration -- and for good reason

[...]

And an election campaign is exactly what it felt like. The grass roots never looked so slick.

[...]

These days, the Tea Party Express is pretty flashy -- especially for something that’s billed as a grass-roots movement. Skywriters took to the air to scrawl the messages, “No new taxes,” “We the people,” and “Vote Reid Out.”

If anything, Palin’s rock star presence undercut the rally’s anti-Reid purpose, even as it energized the crowd. Republican candidates for U.S. Senate were pushed to the end of the program, after Palin arrived, so the star wouldn’t miss her high-noon slot. By the time the GOP Senate front-runner, Sue Lowden, took her turn, the crowd had dwindled to about 1,000 ...

[...]

Searchlight is just a blip of a town, an old mining camp that barely survived the bust. It doesn’t have a single stoplight. Many residents live in trailers, and most commerce comes from travelers passing through on their way to somewhere else.

And that’s exactly what the tea party people did, almost as soon as Palin stopped speaking. Many of the Nevadans headed to Henderson, a suburb of Las Vegas, where Ann Coulter was scheduled to speak. They didn’t bother to hear from the candidates vying to oppose Reid. It’s probably because most of them have already made up their minds and know which candidate they like: Sarah Palin in 2012.

bjkeefe
03-29-2010, 05:21 PM
But in the meantime, they stay true to their roots as crooks (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/us/30ethics.html):

Nathan Deal, a former congressman who is running for Georgia governor, resigned from the House last week in a move that seemed certain to end an ethics investigation that could have caused him political embarrassment.

But on Monday, the Office of Congressional Ethics released its report anyway, concluding that Mr. Deal appeared to have improperly used his office staff to pressure Georgia officials to continue a state vehicle inspection program that generated hundreds of thousands of dollars a year for his family’s auto salvage business.

The 138-page report details how Mr. Deal and his chief of staff intervened with the officials in 2008 and 2009 on behalf of the company, Recovery Services Inc., also known as Gainesville Salvage & Disposal. The accusations first surfaced in a report published last August in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

The document also said that Mr. Deal improperly failed to include on his financial disclosure report that he was a corporate officer at the company — not a passive investor — and that as a result the $75,000 he earned in 2008 violated a rule limiting outside income for House members.

[...]

After voting against the health care bill, Mr. Deal resigned on March 21, just minutes before a deadline that would have required the House ethics committee to investigate the allegations further or dismiss the case. It must take such a step within 45 days of receiving a preliminary investigative report from the ethics office.

[...]

The ethics office inquiry found that Mr. Deal had described his income from the salvage business in his official financial disclosure report as dividends, indicating that he was a passive investor. But his 2008 tax return showed that this money was paid as wages, according to the report.

Mr. Deal acknowledged to ethics investigators that he had met with state officials after they were contacted by his chief of staff in an effort to persuade them not to open vehicle inspections to more competition. Only his company and a handful of others performed the inspections.

Mr. Deal, a Republican who served in the House since 1993 and a former Georgia state senator, is running for governor in November.

(h/t: Jim Newell (http://wonkette.com/414496/newly-minted-ex-congressman-is-crooked-car-inspection-racket-overlord))

bjkeefe
03-29-2010, 05:38 PM
But in the meantime, they stay true to their roots as crooks (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/us/30ethics.html):

Nathan Deal, a former congressman who is running for Georgia governor, resigned from the House last week in a move that seemed certain to end an ethics investigation that could have caused him political embarrassment.

[...]

Mr. Deal, a Republican who served in the House since 1993 and a former Georgia state senator, is running for governor in November.

But, good news: Nathan Deal is also (http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2009/11/05/nathan-deal-says-hell-ask-for-barack-obamas-birth-certificate/) a Birther (http://washingtonindependent.com/73350/rep-nathan-deal-r-ga-joins-the-birthers).

But NotARacist!!!1! (http://wonkette.com/411493/georgia-congressman-apologizes-for-ghetto-grandmothers-comment)

kezboard
03-29-2010, 07:01 PM
Yeah, that would be nice, but I think it's way too optimistic. Reducing our nuclear arsenal seems fairly sensible and I don't really think that there's much of an argument to be had about the treaty in itself. Still, it fits nicely into a favorite conservative narrative about how Obama spends his time making nice with our enemies (of which Russia is one, apparently) instead of what he really should be doing, which is showing "moral clarity" and talking about how evil Iran is. I heard this argument from Tony Blankley on Left, Right, and Center last night. I think it's pretty dumb, especially when paired with the whining about ending the missile-defense program. We didn't end it -- the reason it's taken so long to get this treaty in the first place is because after deciding not to put it in Poland and the Czech Republic, we turned around and decided to put a similar system in Romania. I think that's stupid, but that's not what they're complaining about.

I think it's debatable how much effect this treaty will have on Iran itself, but reducing the numbers of nukes that we have will certainly make us look less hypocritical when we're asking other countries to get rid of or not develop theirs; also, unlike some apparently, I think it's good for us to cooperate with Russia where we can and not kick them in the face for no reason.

(The only other problem that I have with the treaty is why does it have to be signed in Prague? It seems like Prague has become the backdrop for all important American symbolic actions with regards to Europe. I'm against this, both because Prague is totally overrated and also because every time the presidential motorcade goes there it's a traffic disaster of epic proportions and the Czech press has to print a whole section about what roads are closed and what tram lines won't be operating at specific times.)

ETA: A point of evidence on the appeasement narrative would be this (http://article.nationalreview.com/429621/friend-of-the-enemy/michael-barone) completely out of touch with reality National Review article:

The candidate who spoke in Berlin is now the president with no sympathy for the leaders of peoples freed when the wall fell. They are seen as impediments to his goal of propitiating Vladimir Putin’s Russia, where Joseph Stalin is now an honored hero.

AAAAAAAAAAAAGHHHHH *head in hands*

listener
03-30-2010, 02:00 AM
I think it's debatable how much effect this treaty will have on Iran itself, but reducing the numbers of nukes that we have will certainly make us look less hypocritical when we're asking other countries to get rid of or not develop theirs

I think this was the main point that was being made; the treaty gives the US & Russia more credibility in arguing against Iranian nukes; not ratifying it does the opposite. I agree that we can't predict how much effect the treaty would have on Iran, but why needlessly deprive ourselves of every possible bit of leverage?

ETA: A point of evidence on the appeasement narrative would be this (http://article.nationalreview.com/429621/friend-of-the-enemy/michael-barone) completely out of touch with reality National Review article:

The candidate who spoke in Berlin is now the president with no sympathy for the leaders of peoples freed when the wall fell. They are seen as impediments to his goal of propitiating Vladimir Putin’s Russia, where Joseph Stalin is now an honored hero
AAAAAAAAAAAAGHHHHH *head in hands*

To quote Smokey Robinson, I second that emotion.

kezboard
03-30-2010, 10:14 AM
I think this was the main point that was being made; the treaty gives the US & Russia more credibility in arguing against Iranian nukes; not ratifying it does the opposite. I agree that we can't predict how much effect the treaty would have on Iran, but why needlessly deprive ourselves of every possible bit of leverage?

No, I agree with you. It's possible. And I thought the Wonk Room article was a good one, too -- the Republicans would have to be crazy to try and oppose this. I just don't think they're going to buy the Iran/leverage argument at all, and I don't think the treaty should be sold on those points, because it could be seen as supporting the appeasement narrative.

bjkeefe
03-31-2010, 01:57 PM
We've all noted John McCain's frequent lurches to the right when it comes time to win himself another primary, so it was not too surprising to hear that he sent a sternly-worded letter (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/john-mccain-calls-for-national-guard-to-seal-the-border.php?ref=mp) to Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano demanding that the National Guard be mounted up and sent to protect honest white people everywhere (in Arizona) from the Border-Crossing Brown Menace and their guns. Perhaps he was motivated by Important Republican Policy Person "Joe" the "Plumber," who presented himself at an Arizona teabagger rally to deliver these words (http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/03/30/4092238-pushed-by-tea-party-mccain-calls-for-national-guard-on-border):

I am not politically castrated -- new word for political correctness, by the way. I am not politically castrated. Put a fence in, start shooting. End of story.

(He then fled, before the shooting started, I would hazard to guess.)

Representatives of what we politely call the Republican Party's base aren't falling for the shiny new sheriff's hat on Ol' Johnny's head, however.

Hot Air's Allahpundit (http://hotair.com/archives/2010/03/30/we-must-deploy-troops-to-patrol-the-border-says-john-mccain/) opens with, "I came thisclose to headlining the post 'comedy gold.'" (See what he did there, with that missing space? Thisclever!) He then presents his readers with a fun poll, for them to click on! At the moment, Hot Airians prefer JD Hayworth to the tune of 63%-25%, with 12% voting, "Eh. Stay home."

Perpetual Rage Machine and Internment Camp Proponent Michelle Malkkkin (http://michellemalkin.com/2010/03/30/from-the-front-lines-ranchers-speak-out-on-border-choas/) sneers, "Open-borders Sen. Johnny Come Lately McCain." She then orders her minions, "Don’t read his lips. [Hey, politically resonant! --ed.] Read his border security-undermining, law enforcement-abandoning record." (This was just a brief interruption in an endless screed about some guy who got shot. By who, no one knows, therefore she all but concludes: Messikins. And with as little evidence; i.e., none, Hateway Pundit (http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/03/illegal-aliens-entering-us-suspected-in-murder-of-new-mexico-rancher/) agrees. The American Way!)

RaciSt ("the other") McCain (http://theothermccain.com/2010/03/30/cousin-john-suddenly-decides-to-get-in-touch-with-his-inner-tom-tancredo/) headlines "Cousin John Suddenly Decides to Get in Touch With His Inner Tom Tancredo," which does not quite earn him the full HEHINDEED, but does get him the coveted statist employee (http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/96766/) link.

Dan Reihl (http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2010/03/john-mccain-time-to-get-militaristic-on-your-illegal-alien-azz.html) paraphrases the Rime of the Ancient Senator and sneers in full italics, "I will let no principle stand between me and my hoped for re-election."

Left Coast Rebel (http://www.leftcoastrebel.com/2010/03/other-end-to-joint-that-john-mccain-is.html) attempts to make some sort of point by furiously posting pictures of McCain standing in the same frame as Democrats! The horror!

Jammie Wearing Fool (http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com/2010/03/mcamnesty-wants-national-guard-on.html) concludes: "As far as John 'McAmnesty' McCain trying to act tough on this issue, Bubba, that train has done left the station."

bjkeefe
04-01-2010, 07:39 AM
Another important piece of the picture is the way in which Congress' failure to ratify the treaty with Russia is likely to adversely affect the world's ability to influence Iran's nuclear program (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/26/nuclear-weapons-deal-us-russia-iran). So if the Republicans do block ratification of the treaty, their actions will seriously undermine our collective ability to rein in Iran's potential development of nuclear weapons.

On a closely related note, here's another hopeful sign, from an article (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/02/world/asia/02china.html) mostly about the good news that President Hu Jintao of China will attend an upcoming summit on nuclear security:

Also on Thursday, Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, arrived in Beijing for talks with Chinese officials, Press TV reported from Tehran.

(Of course, Robert Kagan will stop reading at this point, declare this as an alliance forming a new axis of evil, and he will demand that we start bombing Iran and China tomorrow.)

Also:

After months of resisting further United Nations Security Council sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program, the Chinese government has apparently agreed to enter negotiations over a new resolution, according to senior Western diplomats.

That agreement was reached on Wednesday in a conference call among officials from the six-country group that negotiates with Iran: the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany.

“China opposes Iran possessing nuclear weapons, but at the same time we believe that, as a sovereign state, Iran has the right to develop nuclear energy in a peaceful way,” Mr. Qin, the Foreign Ministry spokesman, said Tuesday.

bjkeefe
04-01-2010, 09:02 AM
Or, more precisely, Tea Party Schism Watch (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/tea_party_convention_backer_sues_organizer.php)!

In the latest sign of Tea Party rancor, the key backer of last month's national convention at which Sarah Palin spoke is suing the event's organizer, charging that he reneged on a deal to continue working together on Tea Party business.

Bill Hemrick, the founder of the Upper Deck baseball card company, loaned Tea Party Nation $50,000, which went towards the $100,000 speaking fee given to Palin. He says the money was loaned on the condition that he could remain involved with the conservative political action committee that TPN founder and convention organizer Judson Phillips said he was putting together. Hemrick says that Phillips backed out of the deal, and even barred Hemrick from attending Palin's speech. He also claims that Phillips defamed him by writing an email to supporters saying he was not "reputable" or "trustworthy."

Hemrick is seeking $500,000 in damages, Fox News reported (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/25/wealthy-donor-sues-tea-party-convention-organizer-palins-fee/) last week.

The People's Front of Judea vs. The Judean People's Front, once again!

bjkeefe
04-01-2010, 12:03 PM
But in the meantime, they stay true to their roots as crooks (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/us/30ethics.html):

And here's yet another example (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/fl_gop_our_former_chair_is_under_criminal_investig .php):

FL GOP: Our Former Chair Is Under Criminal Investigation

The former chair of the Florida GOP -- a close ally of Gov. Charlie Crist -- is said to be under criminal investigation for a contract worth around $200,000 that he awarded to himself and his executive director. The news was revealed today by the state party, which says it uncovered the contract in the course of its annual financial audit, and referred the matter to authorities.

Jim Greer was appointed to run the state GOP by Crist in 2007, but was forced out of the job in January, after reports (http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/article1071784.ece) of lavish party spending, much of which went on the credit card of the party's executive director, Delmar Johnson.

Hmmm. Republicans putting lavish parties on credit cards? Lot of that (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=156623#post156623) going around, seems like. Hard to say whether a Republican donor would be more annoyed by that or this ...

According to the audit, which was released by the state party today and examine by TPMmuckraker, the GOP entered into a fundraising agreement with a company co-owned by Greer and Johnson. The agreement called for Greer and Johnson's company to be paid a 10 percent commission on all dollars raised. Ultimately the two pocketed nearly $200,000.

... skim or trim, in other words.

bjkeefe
04-01-2010, 02:18 PM
Another fracture line (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/04/three-congressmen-defy-gop-earmark-ban-face-losing-committee-seats.php)?

Three Congressmen Defy GOP Earmark Ban, Face Losing Committee Seats

Three Republican congressmen have defied their party's decision to ban all earmarks for one year, a move that could cost them their committee posts.

According to the New Orleans Times-Picayune (http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/03/rep_anh_joseph_cao_opts_out_of.html), Reps. Anh "Joseph" Cao of Louisiana and Ron Paul of Texas have joined Rep. Don Young (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/don_young_to_gop_earmark_ban_schmearmark_ban.php) (AK) in requesting earmarks for the 2011 fiscal year, despite a House Republican caucus vote (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/11/house-gop-adopts-complete-earmark-ban/?fbid=8Fx-QqUpUvk) this month to institute a moratorium on earmarks for one year.

Those members' committee assignments could be on the line, according to a spokesman for House Minority Leader John Boehner.

Many more details at the above link.

(h/t: Jim Newell (http://wonkette.com/414585/414585))

bjkeefe
04-02-2010, 02:43 PM
J. Danforth "Dan(e?)" Quayle, US Congressman (1976-1980), US Senator (1980-1989), Vice President of the US (1989-1993), and currently, chairman of Cerberus Global Investments (http://www.google.com/search?q=Cerberus+Global+Investments), expresses solidarity with the teabaggers for being fed up with "the political establishment."

He then encourages them to give up their foolish notions of independence and third-party candidates and ... vote Republican.

Link here (http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/04/02/the-long-goodbye/).

listener
04-03-2010, 11:17 PM
I'd usually avoid linking in this forum to video from a popular cable news/opinion program, but this 8:50-long calling out by Rachel Maddow (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#36155851) of the Republican party's nonstop "bull pucky" campaign is an exception (the segment having been sparked by the recently released California Attorney General's report stating that the charges against ACORN which led to its demise, were partly based upon a willfully fraudulent video (http://baltimorechronicle.com/2010/032210Parry.shtml)). Maddow is not perfect, and sometimes her rah-rah liberalism takes her into territory I'm not entirely comfortable with, but this is Rachel at her finest -- relentlessly marshaling well-researched factual evidence with passion and intensity combined with intellectual rigor.