TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Taylor Marsh has been writing on line since 1996, with the archives provided here a representation of that work.

Tag Archives | racism

Newt Gingrich Can’t Beat Barack Obama

By on 21 January 2012

NEWT GINGRICH WINS SOUTH CAROLINA

Memo to GOP Star Chamber. RE: Not Losing the *(&#! House and Senate GOP Majority w/ Newt Disaster. Time for a Secret Meeting. – Mike Murphy tweet

UPDATE (10:00 p.m.): Once again I want to make it very clear, I do not have a candidate in the race in 2012. I will not support any candidate this year. The headline is simply a statement based firmly in reality.

Romney got clocked in South Carolina. Gingrich was in full grandiosity swoon that doesn’t lend itself to synopsis. But his characterization of Pres. Obama is unrecognizable & loopy. GOTV jet engine for Democrats. If Newt doesn’t implode it’s a first. The graph on CNN with women & men listening in Florida went sky high for males, plus for women, but lower. Earlier, priceless Chris Matthews on Gingrich in Florida: “vibraphone of erogenous zones,” referring to playing all the ethnic richness of the state.

A great mentor of mine used to say you can’t win until you’ve lost the fear of failure. Mitt Romney as underdog, could he turn into a force? Republicans sure hope so.

Rick Santorum serves up working class red meat, making the pitch for vice president.

Ron Paul seems to be talking not just about 2012, but addressing what he hopes will be a revolutionary movement that will be passed, I believe, to his son Rand Paul.

_____original post below_____

America does not love Romney, but boy do they hate Newt. – Washington Examiner



The polling compilation from the Washington Examiner article linked above won’t surprise many, especially the girls around here.

Fox News, 1/12-1/14:
Obama, fav/unfav, 51%/46%, +5
Romney, fav/unfav, 45%/38%, +7
Gingrich, fav/unfav, 27%/56%, -29

CBS/NYT, 1/12-1/17:
Obama, fav/unfav, 38%/45%, -7
Romney, fav/unfav, 21%/35%, -14
Gingrich, fav/unfav, 17%/49%, -32

PPP, 1/13-1/17:
Obama, app/dis, 47%/50%, -3
Romney, fav/unfav, 35%/53%, -18
Gingrich, fav/unfav, 26%/60%, -34

Mr. Cool versus Mr. Ice Mitt Romney, who’s now trying to hold on instead of trying to win, at the very least represents the corporate Wall Street decay in both parties for all to see. There’s some educational benefits to this contest.

Mr. Cool versus Mr. Ick Newt Gingrich reveals the rot of Republicans, but it also lets Pres. Obama off the hook on any substantive challenge that won’t be reduced to race baiting “food stamp presidency” invective.

Maybe that’s what the America people have earned for their laziness and lack of involved citizenship. People don’t seem to care that indefinite detention is real and that we continue to hold people at Gitmo without trial, because we’re too squeamish to incarcerate them with murderers in maximum security prisons. The ideals on which this country was founded are less important than the fear factor pushed by both Democrats and Republicans, with Pres. Obama’s refusal to lead continually revealing what ails us.

Leading from behind didn’t start with the bombing of Libya, though it is the first time our sleepy national press picked up on it. Pres. Obama’s entire leadership style is to lead from behind so as not to put himself too far out in front on any issue. With a majority in Congress his first two years he negotiated with himself on the stimulus, while bargaining with private insurance and drug companies, never stepping out on health care, until he sided with Stupak for optics. Leading up to the 2010 midterms, Obama hung back on offering an economic message, then extended the Bush tax cuts when he got shellacked. On the Keystone Pipeline decision this week, it wasn’t made boldly on the side of principle and the potentially dangerous environmental impact; instead it was no for now, blaming his decision on Republicans who wouldn’t give him more time, with the win more to do with activists raising a ruckus than anything. On contraception, which could have easily been embedded earlier in ACA, the decision came down just yesterday on the heels of a report that had an Obama official warning that the budget to come wouldn’t be liked by the left. This requires warning? Pres. Obama works through delivering carrot (contraceptive coverage) and stick (scuttling Plan B) tactics that depend on his political needs (the coming budget to woo independents) and have a foundation in austerity, choosing conservatism as his guide.

However, up against Newt Gingrich little would matter beyond the ick factor of this despicable man.

When it comes to women, Mr. Ick, who’s always had a problem with female voters and for very good reasons, doesn’t stand a chance against Mr. Cool.

Oh, and the video above has gone viral. …as well it should. Did you hear those squeals?

Read full story · Comments { 102 }

Newt’s ride on race meets Marianne

By on 19 January 2012



Just when you thought Newt Gingrich couldn’t sink any lower.

He’s even allowing his daughters to fight his fights.

If the abysmal parade of performers in the Republican primary hasn’t sufficiently embarrassed rank and file conservatives across the country the culmination of the nomination fight in South Carolina should have by now. However, before it’s over, Newt and his supporters could be forced to face his former wife, whom he cheated on with his current wife Callista.

Drudge broke the story earlier, teasing all sorts of drama inside ABC corporate, complete with “suits,” hand-wringing and “ethical” considerations over whether to air the interview with Marianne Gingrich.

Unless it’s a national security issue they should unload the interview and let Newt Gingrich fend for himself. Presuming it’s truthful, there’s no reason not to air it, certainly the vote on Saturday shouldn’t sway anyone. People shouldn’t start holding stories because of an outcome you can’t predict, especially when the circumstances are outside what you should consider. It’s either news or it’s not; you break it when you get it.

There is something perfect about Newt’s campaign releasing the above ad now, which they title “the moment,” right as the South Carolina crescendo begins to resolve. Rick Perry had one of his own moments during Monday’s debate, conjuring up Civil War memories, as he tries to resurrect his sorry campaign over the stench of a new 21st century southern strategy, led by Newt.

As everyone knows by now, Juan Williams helped set the fire on the current lame war when he called Gingrich out on labeling Pres. Obama the “food stamp president,” which had only one meaning.

“Can’t you see that this is viewed at a minimum as insulting to all Americans, but particularly to black Americans?” – Juan Williams

One of Gingrich’s supporters caught on tape, played on “Hardball,” at an event after debate day said she was glad Newt put Williams in his place.

They’re not even trying to hide it and Pres. Obama isn’t even on the trail yet. Mitt Romney’s got his own whispered version, “Let’s fight for the American we love.”

Newt shifted on his feet from the weight of the answer that came next and what it implied, simply saying “no.” It was just the latest in a contagion of Newtism race baiting bravado.

Enter Marianne Gingrich as reports of her ex-husband closing a bit on Romney are dropping, with insider political analysts claiming that Newt may still be able to come back. It would be to no avail eventually.

Whatever Donald Trump started with his birtherism, Newt Gingrich has decided needs to be stripped of artifice.

Maybe Marianne Gingrich can do what none of his opponents have been able to accomplish. Finally rid us of this ugly American.

Read full story · Comments { 12 }

Ron Paul Newsletter Scandal, Iowa, and Trump’s Revenge

By on 23 December 2011

Can Ron Paul’s “rock solid” caucus strategy save him from the negative incoming?

Paul’s PR troubles are real and the criticism deserved, but these types of things also can make die hard supporters of a candidate double down. Andrew Sullivan, who endorsed Paul, ended up spinning himself senseless today.

But could Paul’s troubles help Mitt Romney? Who knows, it could even give Newt a respite from the onslaught.

The New Republic has posted a compilation of his greatest worst hits on racism, bigotry and general wingnuttery.

Race

“A Special Issue on Racial Terrorism” analyzes the Los Angeles riots of 1992: “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began. … What if the checks had never arrived? No doubt the blacks would have fully privatized the welfare state through continued looting. But they were paid off and the violence subsided.”

The November 1990 issue of the Political Report had kind words for David Duke.

This December 1990 newsletter describes Martin Luther King Jr. as “a world-class adulterer” who “seduced underage girls and boys” and “replaced the evil of forced segregation with the evil of forced integration.”

A February 1991 newsletter attacks “The X-Rated Martin Luther King.”

This is Ron Paul’s last stand and the godfather of the Tea Party movement is going out in a blaze. It’s been all the rage for Republican presidential candidates this year.

In other political news, in an early Christmas president to comedians everywhere, Donald Trump is now officially an independent. CNN’s headline is priceless: “Trump Dumps GOP.”

More like revenge, because there was no way Donald Trump was going to take the Newsmax Apprentice debate humiliation, delivered at the hands of the Republican establishment, without a rejoinder or giving them some time to sweat.

So, if Santa is listening I have one last wish for Christmas. You know what it is. I’ve been very good. Please.

ps-Enjoy the Usher video of Christmas music, because everything this time of year goes better with a seasonal soundtrack.

Read full story · Comments { 6 }

BARNES & NOBLE Chooses THE HILLARY EFFECT in ‘NOOK First’ Featured Authors Campaign

By on 14 November 2011

It’s incredibly exciting to announce that The Hillary Effect has been selected as one of two non-fiction e-books in the Barnes and Noble “NOOK First” featured authors campaign, just launched.

Being selected as part of this “NOOK First” Barnes and Noble project was an incredible honor and opportunity. Now you know why we waited until this week to publish.

This is a tremendously exciting moment for the entire team that made this happen, beginning with Thomas Ellison and Hutch Morton of Premier Digital Publishing.

What a stunning send off they’ve given my e-book.

So, Barnes and Noble is the only place you can buy The Hillary Effect until December 15th.

Pop the champagne! …just don’t spill it on your NOOK.

NOTE: Aps for your pc, MAC and iPad are available for free at Barnes and Noble.

Read full story · Comments { 38 }

Update on the The Hillary Effect

By on 08 November 2011

Today’s not going to be the day we publish, but I promise we’ll have a big send off for the publication next week! It will be worth the wait.

Some book PR to give you a little more on what it’s all about.


Spanning nearly two decades of American politics, The Hillary Effect is the provocative and insightful story of the first viable female presidential candidate in history to win a primary and do so in spite of her campaign team’s mistakes. And the galvanizing impact that her loss represented for both women and men, in and out of Washington. It revolves around media coverage that treated her differently as first lady, senator and then presidential candidate – not only because she was a woman, but because she was Hillary Clinton.

Candidly written by veteran political analyst, Taylor Marsh, it is the view from a recovering partisan, someone who the Washington Post called a “die hard Clintonite” in their profile of her in 2008.

The Hillary Effect began when Hillary, as first lady, dared to challenge China’s treatment of women. A countless number of women have and will benefit from her presidential loss, the most famous being Sarah Palin (the Tea Party queen of 2010 and first female on a national Republican presidential ticket), who weaves throughout this story as the anti-Hillary. The Hillary Effect also sees Michele Bachman as a player, as the first Republican female to win a straw poll, primary or caucus.

The male leads in this stunning tale are Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama (someone who turned out to be very different from candidate Obama), with David Plouffe and Mark Penn making appearances. The story includes a host of media personalities and their outlets, but also new media and progressive voices, and famous names like Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Sally Quinn, the late Tim Russert, Richard Wolffe, Laura Ingraham, Liz Cheney, Peggy Noonan, Maureen Dowd, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and even Bill O’Reilly, who offered Hillary the best interview she would do during the 2008 season.

All of this is seen through the economic and political crises of today, health care, women’s individual freedoms being challenged by the right, Afghanistan, women’s rise around the world, the debt ceiling debate, tax cuts for the wealthy, Occupy Wall Street and an American public disenchanted with Republicans and Democrats, just as the race for 2012 revs up.


Read full story · Comments are closed

Occupy and “isms,” banks and unions

By on 04 November 2011

Joyce L. Arnold, Liberally Independent, Queer Talk, equality activist, writer.

This is stating the obvious, but I, at least, need “obvious” reminders periodically. The Occupy movement is made up of people. And any time you have even a few people, much less hundreds or thousands gathered, especially in public spaces, there will frequently be some who will cause trouble.

Add to that the fact that we still live in a society where there are significant numbers of people who think inequality based on race, gender, orientation, ability, income and more are acceptable, and it isn’t surprising that various Occupations are having to deal with the consequences of such thinking and acting. There have been reported incidents of racism, of homophobia, of transphobia, of verbal and physical assaults on women, of some white guys assuming they should be in charge. There are also ongoing efforts to address these concerns.

Sexism existed in the Civil Rights Movement, the Anti-VietnamWar movement. It exists today, to a lesser but still significant degree in organizations that work for human / civil rights. Same for racism, for classism, etc. So it isn’t unusual that Occupy, as a whole and in specific situations, has to deal with such things. It’s still disappointing, and for the targets, much more than that – it can be terrifying, and it’s always demeaning.

Another “obvious”: every incident of harassment, much less assault, should be taken seriously. Reports range from expressed concerns that some men are attempting to dominate General Assemblies, to verbal harassment of women, to the physical – from unwanted hugs to rape. There are also reports of prostitution, including by at least one young woman who is a minor. Some women, as well as others who feel threatened, have organized to create “safe spaces.”

As it’s essential to address these incidents, it’s vital not to brand the entire Occupy movement as “sexist” or “racist” or any other label. I realize all of this sounds quite “obvious,” but then, a part of ongoing societal problems is how easy it is not to see what’s in front of us. Occupy, the movement, is successfully putting the naked emperors on stages around the world … and that spotlight is also revealing the systemic realities of race, class, gender and more that help keep the oligarchy on top.

I’m working on compiling a list of Occupy sites related to addressing racism, immigration, etc. For now, the Black Agenda Report is always a good place to start. Any suggestions you may have will be very much appreciated.

For some very interesting reading about the focus on gender, check out these sites. As always, this list is far from inclusive, but it’s a start.

One article that’s received a lot of attention since it was posted on October 29 is Sarah Seltzer’s Where Are the Women at Occupy Wall Street?, to which she responds, “Everywhere – and they’re not going away.” Also see:

Code Pink: Women Occupy.

WOW (Women Occupying Wall Street).

Women Occupy.

Occupy Patriarchy.

Now, a short Occupy round-up, and my yet again mentioning the relatively new The Occupation Report:

REQUEST FOR UPDATES FROM READERS: … We are currently putting together a list of cities that have been supportive of local Occupy groups and those that have been less than supportive (i.e.: police crackdowns and evictions). Please send your stories and updates to monique@rebuildthedream.com or lizbutlerdc@gmail.com.

This report includes updates from Occupy sites and related efforts across the country and the globe. It includes big wins, local organizing efforts, protests/events, police activity reports and calls to action where additional support from allies/general public may be needed.

A “be prepared” posting at OWS:

Eviction Defense!

Today rumors are rampant that the city is again considering action to end the occupation. Labor leaders, local elected officials, and news outlets are hearing the rumblings of eviction. We know that when the next eviction attempt comes, we will not get advanced warning. NYPD could move in as early as tonight, or it could be next week.

Via Occupy Together:

Bank Transfer Day, November 5, 2011

Tens of thousands of people around the nation and world have vowed to move their money from corporate banks such as Wells Fargo & Bank of America into credit unions or local banks. Many have been using the Move Your Money Project website as a resource for learning about credit unions and how to transfer your account. This isn’t an action that has been formed by any specific GA, it is a mass day of global action that people have individually decided to participate in.

Finally, efforts from the Left to use if not co-opt the Occupy movement continue. Here’s one (be sure and check out Taylor’s post on this earlier today), related to the Keystone / Tar Sands project – the “jobsforthe99.com” website. The way they identify the “1%” is interesting, as much for whose left out as the one “elite” group they identify.

Hollywood’s elite 1% should stop flying to DC and speaking out against jobs that help the other 99% of America!

But you CAN make your voice heard.

Tell the White House to support Keystone XL …

Paid for by: ‘America’s Building Trades Unions’ and ‘Oil and Natural Gas Industry, Labor Management Committee.’

For another take on Keystone / Tar Sands, check out Tar Sands Action:

November 6th: Tar Sands Action Returns to DC

One year from the next election, we will return to DC to try to encircle the White House to ask President Obama to reject the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. The action begins at 2 pm in Lafayette Park.

About unions, not everyone agrees with “jobsforthe99.com.” Or, perhaps some are playing both sides of the fence? There is an understandable caution by Occupiers about outside support, but there are also several instances now of unions marching with the Occupiers, and I don’t doubt there are those who are sincere in their Occupy support. Whatever, check out Occupy Wall St. Unions:

OccupyWallSt-Unions.org is a movement clearinghouse for unions and union members supportive of the uprising against Wall Street and corporate greed. …

Unions listed as “Supporting Occupy Wall Street” include: AFL-CIO, American Assn. of University Professors, Assn. of Flight Attendants / CWA, Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), National Nurses United, SEIU, Teamsters, United Auto Workers.

“Allied Organizations” include: AFL-CIO Baltimore / California / Missouri / New York / Texas / West Central Illinois and Building Trades and the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists.

I notice in the “Allied” listing, there is one “Building Trades” union that apparently doesn’t agree with the “Hollywood elite” framing.

(Photo via Occupy Coeur D’Alene)

Read full story · Comments { 13 }

About the Book Cover

By on 25 October 2011

The party’s over.
The view from a recovering partisan.

My e-book is scheduled to be published two weeks from today, November 8th. It will be available on Amazon, to download on Kindle, or on Barnes and Noble, as well as your iPad. It’s a busy, exciting time in my world.

Since I announced my book two weeks ago, I’ve had a lot of feedback on the cover. Continue Reading →

Read full story · Comments { 28 }

Trump Meeting with Perry Results in Birther Confession

By on 23 October 2011

Rick Perry is so desperate to prop up his flagging presidential bid he’s listening to the birther king. That Donald Trump is a powerful guy, because he evidently convinced Perry there’s something to his madness.

From the transcript of Parade magazine (h/t Think Progress):

You don’t believe what’s been released?

I don’t know. I had dinner with Donald Trump the other night.

And?

That came up.

And he said?

He doesn’t think it’s real.

And you said?

I don’t have any idea. It doesn’t matter. He’s the President of the United States. He’s elected. It’s a distractive issue.

Perry makes no sense here, because if he really has doubts about Barack Obama’s legitimacy, that his birth certificate doesn’t prove he’s an American citizen, why is it just “a distractive issue”? It’s the minimum requirement to prove eligibility.

That’s the problem with these birther crazies. They try to diminish Barack Obama’s Americanism through vile swipes hinting illegitimacy. But they won’t go all the way. They simply float the slur out there to hook the wackiest Tea Party types, then say it’s a distraction and doesn’t matter.

Republicans can’t have it both ways.

When Donald Trump had his very first interview with Rush Limbaugh, talking about China, he sounded sane and knowledgeable. Now the guy seems to be running a one-man consultancy that first tried to help Michele Bachmann, now Rick Perry.

Karl Rove was no charmer and his tactics were pure dirty ops, but what Donald Trump is running on the side isn’t going to end up with anyone he talks to making it to the White House.

Rick Perry’s debate performances proved he’s not national candidate material. His birther confession drives it home. It also proves how desperate he is to get back into the race, though thinking that birtherism will get him there makes me want to ask Who’s advising this guy?

Read full story · Comments { 12 }

Taylor Marsh Authors The Hillary Effect – Politics, Sexism and the Destiny of Loss

By on 11 October 2011

Due out in November. Available on Amazon.com, on your Kindle, Barnes & Noble, Nook, and iPad.

Spanning nearly two decades of American politics, The Hillary Effect is the provocative and insightful story of the first viable female presidential candidate in history to win a primary and do so in spite of her campaign team’s mistakes. And the galvanizing impact that her loss represented for both women and men, in and out of Washington. It revolves around media coverage that treated her differently as first lady, senator and then presidential candidate – not only because she was a woman, but because she was Hillary Clinton.

Candidly written by veteran political analyst, Taylor Marsh, it is the view from a recovering partisan, someone who the Washington Post called a “die hard Clintonite” in their profile of her in 2008.
The Hillary Effect began when Hillary, as first lady, dared to challenge China’s treatment of women. A countless number of women have and will benefit from her presidential loss, the most famous being Sarah Palin (the Tea Party queen of 2010 and first female on a national Republican presidential ticket), who weaves throughout this story as the anti-Hillary. The Hillary Effect also sees Michele Bachman as a player, as the first Republican female to win a straw poll, primary or caucus.

The male leads in this stunning tale are Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama (someone who turned out to be very different from candidate Obama), with David Plouffe and Mark Penn making appearances. The story includes a host of media personalities and their outlets, but also new media and progressive voices, and famous names like Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Sally Quinn, the late Tim Russert, Richard Wolffe, Laura Ingraham, Liz Cheney, Peggy Noonan, Maureen Dowd, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and even Bill O’Reilly, who offered Hillary the best interview she would do during the 2008 season.

All of this is seen through the economic and political crises of today, health care, women’s individual freedoms being challenged by the right, Afghanistan, women’s rise around the world, the debt ceiling debate, tax cuts for the wealthy, Occupy Wall Street and an American public disenchanted with Republicans and Democrats, just as the race for 2012 revs up.

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

ESPN Dumps Hank Williams, Jr.

By on 06 October 2011

“We have decided to part ways with Hank Williams, Jr. We appreciate his contributions over the past years,” the company said in a statement. “The success of Monday Night Football has always been about the games and that will continue.” – Hank Williams Jr. Ditched By ESPN Over Obama Hitler Comments

As you probably guessed, Mr. Williams tells a different tale:

AFTER ESPN SUSPENDS HANK JR. FOR ONE-WEEK, HANK JR. DECIDES TO PULL HIS SONG FROM BEING USED ON ESPN FOR REMAINDER OF SEASON!

“After reading hundreds of e-mails, I have made MY decision. By pulling my opening Oct 3rd, You (ESPN) stepped on the Toes of The First Amendment Freedom of Speech, so therefore Me, My Song, and All My Rowdy Friends are OUT OF HERE. It’s been a great run.”

The response from Williams reveals a lot and I don’t think any of it is good.

That the demise of the relationship between ESPN and Hank Williams, Jr. played out on Fox News channel over Barack Obama, race, and Hitler talking points underscores the reasons why Roger Ailes has begun a “course correction,” changing the trajectory of Fox, first by sacking Glenn Beck. I’m wondering if Fox & Friend’s “circuitous” broadside at Sarah Palin, which was preceding by Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter telling Mrs. Palin to fish or cut bait, is another sign of the changing skies of Fox.

Perhaps cable TV has gone as far as it can go and sanity will creep back in? Considering even Rachel Maddow’s ratings are down, I’m not too sure. Ms. Maddow gets a terrific write up in Hollywood Reporter, with these types of article, no matter how well earned, often appearing when sagging ratings require a marketing boost.

I’m glad ESPN canned Williams. There is nothing worse than sports mixed with politics.

Read full story · Comments { 15 }

Conservatives Just Can’t Decide if ‘Niggerhead’ is Racist

By on 04 October 2011

As you no doubt know by now, it began with a Washington Post piece this past Sunday. I’ve been incredibly busy, plus I’ve been traveling since late last week, but as I caught up with what’s happened the last few days I found this latest development incredible.

Conservatives blaming the Washington Post don’t seem to have read the entire piece, which is very detailed, contains eyewitness accounts, plus history of the now infamous Perry “Niggerhead” rock. Instead, they went on full tilt damage control for fear the entire Republican Party would be swallowed whole by Rick Perry’s latest problem.

Herman Cain called the slur on a rock “insensitive,” only to have conservatives jump all over him for uttering the obvious. But what’s really rather stunning is Mr. Cain’s immediate cave to the clamoring wingnuts who are accusing him of playing the race card.

Romney seems to understand there’s a problem here.

“I’ve followed it from afar,” Romney said. “I think it’s offensive. I think most people think it’s offensive.” – Romney says the name of Rick Perry’s hunting camp is ‘offensive’

It is offensive.

However, Matt Lewis disagrees, citing damage control from the Perry camp:

In a prepared release, Perry Campaign Communications Director Ray Sullivan responded to Cain’s attack, saying: “Mr. Cain is wrong about the Perry family’s quick action to eliminate the word on the rock, but is right the word written by others long ago is insensitive and offensive. That is why the Perrys took quick action to cover and obscure it.”

Now conservatives are circling the wagons, because they’re afraid that Perry’s “Niggerhead” camp name could end up hurting the Republican Party in 2012. What ever would give them that idea?

First we had Nixon’s southern strategy, now it’s Perry’s “niggerhead” controversy. There seems to be a pattern here.

TM Note: “N-head” has been replaced by the full Perry camp epithet.

Read full story · Comments { 27 }

They’re Playing the Race Card Again

By on 26 September 2011

Official White House Photo by Pete Souza

It was bound to happen.

It’s just sad coming from Melissa Harris-Perry. In a piece she did for The Nation recently, the purpose of which was to throw a lighted match into the Democratic base camp, she goes straight to the race card and doesn’t prove her case.

Black President, Double Standard: Why White Liberals Are Abandoning Obama

President Obama has experienced a swift and steep decline in support among white Americans—from 61 percent in 2009 to 33 percent now. I believe much of that decline can be attributed to their disappointment that choosing a black man for president did not prove to be salvific for them or the nation. His record is, at the very least, comparable to that of President Clinton, who was enthusiastically re-elected. The 2012 election is a test of whether Obama will be held to standards never before imposed on an incumbent. If he is, it may be possible to read that result as the triumph of a more subtle form of racism.

Pres. Clinton “enthusiastically” re-elected? Is she kidding? Between NAFTA and welfare reform, not to mention the debacle of DADT, not to mention the blow back from the failed raid in Somalia (aka Black Hawk Down), Clinton was creamed by so called “liberals” back in the ’90s for his policies. …and turn out in ’96 was abysmal.

I also don’t relate to Joan Walsh on the one point of agreement she admits to with Harris-Perry. That any disappointment, which I’ve always called uninformed voting, is due to the fact that “a black man for president did not prove to be salvific for them or the nation.” I didn’t expect Mr. Obama to be anything close to Martin Luther King, Jr. It never occurred to me. Nobody is King.

Barack Obama is a brilliant political performer, with no experience when he first ran for president, but a lot of savvy, who saw a perfect moment and took it. I voted for Barack Obama and Joe Biden because I knew they’d be better on foreign policy than McCain-Palin, not because Obama was black. Though it was a thrilling moment in American history to see Barack, Michelle and their children standing together when he won.

The other problem with Harris-Perry’s case is the lessening of enthusiasm that reaches across segments of the Democratic Party. From Joan’s piece:

As long as we’re looking at the president’s racial support, let’s look broadly. While white liberal support for Obama has almost certainly dropped, so has his support within every group. Why are Latinos abandoning Obama? Two thirds of Latinos voted for the president in 2008; the Gallup tracking poll showed Latino support dropping to 44% at the end of August, though it jumped up above 50 percent this week. Overall, the president is polling in the 40s among Latinos since the end of June. And while black support remains strong, it’s declined, too. Obama won 95 percent of black voters in 2008, and his approval rating hovered in the 90s for most of his first two years. This week, it’s at 82 percent, and it’s been steadily in the 80s since February. That’s still high, but it’s not the enthusiastic, near-unanimous support that elected him.

The president himself acknowledged the rising volume of African American discontent in his speech to the (increasingly critical) Congressional Black Caucus Saturday night.

But that’s not the worst of Ms. Harris-Perry’s argument.

If old-fashioned electoral racism is the absolute unwillingness to vote for a black candidate, then liberal electoral racism is the willingness to abandon a black candidate when he is just as competent as his white predecessors.

I’ll let David Sirota school Ms. Harris-Perry, because you’ve likely already read the pieces I wrote warning about Barack Obama’s policy prescriptions starting back in January 2007. A snippet of Sirota, with the original filled with embedded links and sources to prove the case he makes below.

This is a president who as a candidate railed on adventurist wars and promised to seek congressional authorization for new wars — and then turned around and initiated new adventurist wars without congressional authorization.

Obama is also a man who criticized Bush-era civil liberties policies as a candidate and then as president not only extended those policies — but, in many cases, actually made them worse. Among other things, he has pressed for longer Patriot Act extensions than congressional Republicans, added bipartisan legitimacy to warrantless wiretapping (which he explicitly promised to end) and claimed autocratic powers that even the extremist Bush administration never dared to claim (for example, the power to assassinate American citizens without charge).

And let’s not forget trade and healthcare. Candidate Obama promised to renegotiate NAFTA and reform the corresponding free-trade template that has cost Americans so many jobs. He also repeatedly pledged to champion a public option to compete with private health insurers and promised to push for legislation allowing Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices with pharmaceutical companies. Now, President Obama is pushing a new series of NAFTA-like deals in Panama, South Korea and Colombia. And, as we now know, he didn’t merely try but fail to pass a public option or the Medicare drug-negotiation provisions — he actively used his power to eliminate those provisions from the final healthcare bill.

Taken together, we see that Obama — as opposed to Clinton, who at least paid (often empty) rhetorical homage to liberalism — has proudly and publicly stomped on the very progressive promises that got him elected.

I also don’t remember Clinton ever touting Ronald Reagan as Barack Obama has done. Clinton also gave hell to Republicans regularly, on camera and with feeling. I don’t remember Clinton selling out women’s reproductive healthcare by codifying Hyde in legislation. Oh right, Hillary wouldn’t have let him.

But I’m not surprised to read a piece from a strong Obama supporter blaming white liberal disaffection with Pres. Obama on racism.

Read full story · Comments { 49 }

Tea Party Politics is Crazy, But They Won

By on 01 August 2011

“The “hobbits” won.” – Mark Thiessen

This is what happens when the man in the White House doesn’t have the leadership character for the job.

As for all those analysts, including a lot of progressives and new media sites, who tried to stuff the Tea Party in the racist bin thinking that would be enough, you have been humiliated by the small government crew that was at the foundation of what became an astroturf movement the media glommed on to, while Democrats actually believed they weren’t for real.

Corporate wingnut titans can funnel money into a movement, but if they don’t have front men and women with principle who’ll go down for the cause it hardly matters. Yes, there are racists in the Tea Party, no doubt about it, but by overplaying the theme while amateurs railed against Washington, Democrats and progressives missed the movement’s power by a mile. The carnage left today is the result.

It all began with Sarah Palin, which progressives and new media sites ignored or vilified. Her power has risen and she’s finally fallen, but through health care and the 2010 election, no person was more powerful or impacted the Tea Party presence more than Sarah, allowing them to take center stage in Washington and accomplish the defeat of progressive economics, because their opponent, Pres. Obama, wasn’t up to the job.

Having a pretty spokes model has worked before and the Democrats were no more prepared for Palin and the Tea Party than they were for Ronald Reagan. Democrats and progressives should just count their lucky stars that Palin is gone and Michele Bachmann’s lack of maleness makes her an untenable choice for the GOP boys’ club who seem to be hoping the televangelist huckster Rick Perry can do it for them, as Mitt Romney faces a whole new set of very real challenges to his candidacy. Pres. Obama may be the Democratic poison political pill, but he’d beat Perry in a walk.

With Fox News Channel behind the Tea Party, just like they did during the Bush era, Republicans and the mighty Right, however wrong their policies, have pummeled the Democratic party and progressives into submission, at least for the moment, through the rise of Obamanomics.

So, it’s time to give credit where it’s due and it’s not to political analysts like Lawrence O’Donnell who not only blew the McConnell call, but also his analysis on Obama, while huffing and puffing for 20 minutes every night in his opener and saying absolutely nothing worth remembering today.

Obamanomics is here and the country is stuck with it; an orphaned idea hollowly culled from Republicanism that ignores jobs and growth for cuts, cuts, cuts, while discounting that it’s the middle class and “working stiffs” who fuel demand that inspires corporations to create jobs in the first place.

The Tea Party played Pres. Obama and the Democratic party for the craven, purposeless, unmotivated political class they are; a group of individuals who stand for nothing but promoting celebrity over philosophical muscle that may not be perfect, but has at its heart the welfare of the people above all.

While the details of the debt ceiling deal remain fuzzy, this much is clear: Barack Obama may be president, but the Tea Party is now running Washington. – Peter Beinert

Read full story · Comments { 19 }

The Event that Binds Democrats Closer to Obama

By on 28 April 2011

“Trump and the rest have played a very divisive card from the fact of his birth to now implying that he got into two Ivy League schools … by affirmative action, which clearly brings race into the matter,” said the Rev. Al Sharpton. “It certainly enrages a lot of African-American voters, Latino voters and progressive whites that feel that this is the most divisive, polarizing tactic.” – President Obama takes on the birther political circus

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Orly Taitz got thrown off Lawrence O’Donnell’s show last night, after a screaming match that was as much of a circus as anything that went on yesterday.

Before that happened, Lawrence O’Donnell attacked his own employer’s involvement for their silence over Donald Trump using “Celebrity Apprentice” as cover, but this morning there is collective silence. That should tell you all you need to know about the media power and the story we’re watching on Pres. Obama’s long form birth certificate. O’Donnell claims, which you can see in the video above, that NBC executives already know if Trump is coming back as a paid NBC employer next year and they should announce it now, otherwise they are complicit in Trump’s crazy.

Today there is a lot of spin out of the White House on why they released the long form birth certificate, including that allowing Donald Trump to go on and on would help Obama’s Republican opponent, whoever he or she may be.

The White House thinks you’re stupid, but knows the media covering him is. At present, though Americans are disgruntled with the direction of the country, with gas and the economy making Pres. Obama very beatable in 2012, there is no Republican yet who can accomplish the act.

The White House excuse is not only nonsense, but over exercised political righteousness that is trying to hide the problem. You also had an anonymous Democrat saying that the party had learned that swiftboat lies take hold and can be dangerous, explaining why Pres. Obama finally petitioned Hawaii to release his long form birth certificate. Unfortunately, the reason for the release is that Obama and his people had already let this happen, let the birther insanity take root.

What was revealed in polling is that Independents and Republicans were glomming on to the birther issue as true. This is why Obama and his team did what they did, because they had to.

Question is, are these Independents and Republicans racist or is it about something else? The consensus is that Trump and others are racist. What do you think?

Whatever it is you can bet that the charges coming from Trump are going to bind many Democrats closer to Obama than they were before. Rally ’round the President is a powerful call. If the whole birther event is seen as racist instead of just crazy it will also cause a shunning of Republicans, which is why David Frum wrote what he did yesterday.

I wish it were otherwise, but it does seem that these racialized attacks on Obama have exacted a toll on him. But they also have exacted a toll on the opposition to Obama. The too-faint repudiation of birtherism by regular Republicans has shaped not only the Obama brand, but also the Republican brand. It was not only white people who heard the implied message about who counts and who does not count as a “real American.” – The Birther Disgrace

Read full story · Comments { 25 }

Geraldine Ferraro, First Woman on Major Ticket Passes

By on 26 March 2011

Geraldine Ferraro was a first for the United States. First woman to break the presidential ticket glass ceiling; first Italian-American to do so as well.

The next time a woman would grace a national ticket would be in 2008, when John McCain chose Sarah Palin.

In the late ’90s Ms. Ferraro was given 3 years to live, five at the most, but in 2007 she was given a clean bill of health. But as anyone who has ever seen someone battle cancer, it’s rarely forever. She succumbed today after her valiant battle with blood cancer.

Back during the 1984 election cycle when Geraldine Ferraro was picked as the vice presidential nominee on the Democratic presidential ticket with Walter Mondale, many young women shrugged, just like many young women of another generation shrugged when Hillary Rodham Clinton took center stage in the 2008 cycle, this time attempting to crack the ultimate glass ceiling.

Ferraro broke the mold for women in politics, something for which she never received much credit, something Hillary experienced as well until she earned her own recognition at the State Dept.

In 2008, Ms. Ferraro was on Hillary’s 2008 presidential campaign finance committee. She was known for many things, but she went out of the political arena with a bang when she blasted candidate Barack Obama in a sequence of statements that caused a furor, got her called a racist, forced her resignation from Clinton’s campaign, which precipitated her being ensconced on Fox News channel as the spoiler to a U.S. press under the thrall of candidate Obama’s unique political gifts.

The modern political audience will likely remember her most for her outspoken, some would say outrageous, candor.

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.”

This statement was as unfortunate as it was incorrect. Having seen Obama in action during the primaries I can tell you the man’s talent was unmistakable and had nothing to do with color.

There is, however, a good case to make that a woman of equal talent would not have been vaulted to the presidential slot, but instead would have been made to take the vice presidency instead. A woman having Barack Obama’s slim resume back in 2007 simply wouldn’t have made it through the DNC and Senate’s old boys’ club.

Ferraro on Obama as the great “reconciler”:

“I was reading an article that said young Republicans are out there campaigning for Obama because they believe he’s going to be able to put an end to partisanship. Dear God! Anyone that has worked in the Congress knows that for over 200 years this country has had partisanship – that’s the way our country is.”

It was always a fantasy that Obama would usher in a “new kind of politics,” especially since he used an old kind of politics to beat Clinton. Nothing wrong with that, because all’s fair in presidential politics, but Ferraro was correct when she levied the “Dear God!” exclamation, because the notion was laughable.

The right-wing would never let it happen, which has now been proven. That’s especially true now that Donald Trump is out as the front man for birtherism, which will certainly be only angle the Right will use to come at Obama in 2012.

During the Clinton administration Ferraro was ambassador to the United Nations Committee on Human Rights, and also did a stint as host on the old “Crossfire.”

Her rise to politics came through a career as a teacher and lawyer, including the D.A.’s office in Queens, N.Y., then she landed as a congresswoman from New York’s 9th District. Ferraro had her own scandals when the press got a hold of stories about her husband, which raised a ruckus and caused a lot of embarrassing defense. She tried twice for the Senate, 1992 and 1998, both of which ended unsuccessfully.

The Mondale-Ferraro ticket was creamed by Ronald Reagan in a landslide in ’84. Reagan went on to a very mixed legacy, including the Iran-Contra affair for which he should have been impeached.

This post has been bumped.

Read full story · Comments { 14 }

Queer Talk: Homophobes Disrobe

By on 19 March 2011

Dan Ramos

Anyone aware of Romanovsky & Phillips’ classic, Homophobes in Robes, (1994) will recognize my take-off on that song with “Homophobes Disrobe.” In their song, the “homophobes in robes” are 1) the Pope; 2) the KKK; and 3) the U.S. Supreme Court.

More broadly, “homophobes” have a tendency to “disrobe” themselves in the sense of revealing the negativity which is hidden beneath their figurative robes of respectability.

Before proceeding to examples, three things. First, “homophobia” is defined ( Merriam-Webster ) as “irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals.” Second, with no attempt to provide cover for them, not everyone who thinks or believes homosexuality is “wrong” is homophobic.

And third: not everyone who condemns “homosexuality” is talking out of internalized homophobia. I concede that if we look to political and religious figures in the news, we could draw the conclusion that it might seem as if the politician or preacher who makes the most noise about the “bad” homosexuals turns out to be homosexual. But a bit of caution is appropriate here, too.

Homophobia is best understood within the context of systemic, prejudicial framing. Coretta Scott King, well-known for her strong statements in support of LGBT rights, makes this point. In 1998 she said (via AmericaBlog ):

Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood. This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spread all too easily to victimize the next minority group.

Literal or figurative robes of respectability are often removed, if unconsciously, by the words and actions of the people wearing them. A few recent examples follow.

Bexar County, Texas, Democratic Party Chair Dan Ramos does not employ subtlety. In an interview with the San Antonio Current, Ramos basically just ripped off the robe.

I liken [Stonewall Democrats] to the Tea Party — the Tea Party and the fucking Nazi Party — because they’re 90 percent white, blue-eyed, and Anglo, and I don’t give a shit who knows that. That’s the truth. Just like the blacks, they’re strong. And there’s nothing wrong — they’re Americans — but you can’t get your way just because you’re black.

The Current continues:

When asked if race or sexual orientation were more a cause of concern for him, Ramos responded: ‘I go back to an old very well-used slogan: blacks wanted to get their way because they were black. What it is, is we have a very, very sinister movement in which you don’t know, at the end of the day, you didn’t even know that your next door buddy, your bosom fishing buddy was gay. That, I guess, goes to my belief in the religious thing. Look: this is not natural. This is like a kid who was born with a polio leg, you can’t kill him and you can’t sweep him under the rug.’

At a press conference on Friday, March 17, a few days after the initial comments, Ramos seemed intent on removing another protective layer. Via Dallas Voice:

Sam Sanchez of QSanAntonio.com was at the press conference and reports that rather than resigning, Ramos said BOLD gays are like ‘white termites who have infiltrated the party much like termites infiltrate your house’.

You know, I don’t remember ever being called a “termite” before, so points for originality.

Meanwhile, in Kansas, a disrobing, revealing movement came when the state legislators recognized that their law “banning homosexual acts” (that’s a polite, robed sort of way to refer to “having sex,” which is how the “homosexuals” are defined) is a bit outdated, but couldn’t bring themselves to part with the protective covering. Tim Beauchamp writes:

The House Judiciary Committee was considering a bill to clean up Kansas’ criminal code when a pair of lawmakers, Jan Pauls from Hutchinson and Lance Kinzer from Olathe, removed an amendment from the bill that would have repealed the law banning homosexual acts.

Laws banning homosexual acts have been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. But Lanzer says it doesn’t need to be repealed because it isn’t being enforced, saying ‘It’s a tempest in a teapot. I don’t think it would make any difference. The statute is unenforceable.

Sometimes instead of removing their concealing robes, they tie them in knots.

From politics to religion, Focus on the Family labels anti-bullying programs and policies “pro-homosexual.” Right Wing Watch reports:

“Leaders and groups continue to describe anti-bullying policies as attempts to ‘homosexualize their children’ and ‘promote homosexuality in kids’ through ‘homosexual indoctrination.’” One big rainbow flag of warning about homophobe disrobing action is when they use the word “homosexual” as often as possible.

So is the use of a string of other scary words. Right Wing adds this, from The Protect Kids Foundation (by opposing anti-bullying programs): “ … gay-rights advocates are ‘obsessed with power’ and ‘are determined to transform schools, kids, and culture into their hedonistic vision of a new utopian America radically transforming society by using our children as pawns for social change.’” A hedonistic utopia, huh? PKF unabashedly rips off the concealing robes and lets homophobia shine forth.

Finally, at America Blog, Sudbay headlines a recent piece, “Meet the 97 biggest homophobes in the US House,” writing about “the haters” supporting a “resolution demanding that the President defend DOMA.” He provides the list of the 97, all Republican. In a related piece, “So much for fiscal issues, half of House Teabaggers are blatant homophobes,” he says that the 97 total includes 26 of the 52 House Tea Party Caucus.

This kind of derobing action is sort of a quick flash, accompanied by a knowing wink and smirk, though sometimes they do trip over their robes, distracted by the need to check out responses to their courageous votes, to be sure they got it Right.

Mostly homophobia reveals itself, even by bosom fishing buddies. And just so you know, homophobe robe removal is another Gay Agenda item for all us queer, hedonistic, sinister termites who use kids as pawns toward realization of our utopian dreams.

Read full story · Comments { 9 }

Outgoing NPR S.V.P. of Fundraising Caught on Tape Telling the Truth about Tea Party

By on 08 March 2011

They shoot, they score.

Leaving aside that Mr. Schiller is an idiot for talking so transparently to people he didn’t know, let’s get serious, shall we?

Anyone looked around the American Right today?

This part of the transcript reveals the reality:

SCHILLER: The current Republican Party, particularly the Tea Party, is fanatically involved in people’s personal lives and very fundamental Christian — and I wouldn’t even call it Christian. It’s this weird evangelical kind of move… it’s been hijacked by this group that…

“MUSLIM”: The radical, racist, Islamophobic, Tea Party people?

SCHILLER: It’s not just Islamophobic, but really xenophobic. Basically, they believe in white, middle America, gun-toting — it’s pretty scary. They’re seriously racist, racist people.

Many are focusing on NPR’s outrage over Schiller via their statement after the sting was publicized. That Schiller agrees NPR should not take federal funding because of independence simply further sets up the Right. It also likely dooms NPR to losing their funding eventually.

“As we continue to identify ways to cut spending and save valuable resources, this disturbing video makes clear that taxpayer dollars should no longer be appropriated to NPR.” – Rep. Eric Cantor, via The Hill

But really, isn’t the fact that right-wing conservatives were posing as “scary” Muslim Brotherhood fundraisers trying to catch NPR taking $5 million from this organization, which they declined, enough evidence of the Right’s underlying philosophy and motive regarding Muslims?

What do you call what Rep. Peter King is doing in his scheduled 21st century McCarthy hearings on “radical Islam” targeting Muslims? It’s not just Islamophobic, when you look at the Right’s anti-immigrant stance it’s really xenophobic.

Rep. Eric Cantor has decided to back King, so there can be little doubt of just how Islamophobic leading conservatives are today, because King is purposely targeting an entire group, because of a few fanatical terrorists.

Where does legislation like “fetal heartbeat” bills targeting women’s freedom come from, not to mention the mandatory sonogram legislation? A very fundamentalist, weird kind of person fanatically involved in people’s personal lives.

What kind of people concoct “justifiable homicide” legislation, which is meant to prevent harm to a fetus, ignoring the right’s of women won in the Supreme Court? The radical Right evangelical agenda that has hijacked the Republican Party.

It’s clear the Republican radical Right is engaged in a war against women. It’s been proven.

This isn’t news or at least shouldn’t be.

Former Sen. Jack Danforth went so far to say that if Sen. Dick Lugar is challenged by the Tea Party it means Republicans “have gone so far overboard that we are beyond redemption.” That this comes from an Episcopalian priest should weigh deeply. In 2006, Danforth even asked “Why do traditional Republicans put up with this?”, referring to the “religious” right-wing that’s trying to take our entire country off the cliff. That the Right began titling their articles against people like Mr. Danforth, “Time for a RINO hunt?”, drives home the scary gun-toting language that aided the atmosphere leading to the Tucson domestic terrorism tragedy.

As for racist, did you see the disgusting pictures of Pres. Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama from Tea Party-backed Carl Paladino?

The stupidity of Mr. Schiller, who previously announced he’s leaving NPR for the Aspen Institute, getting caught on tape by a sting operation featuring fake wingnut Muslims speaks for itself.

The talk about Israel and Zionism, as well as “Palestinian Public Radio,” simply reveals our country is not mature enough for these discussions, let alone acting as an arbiter of peace, in which we’ve failed time and again.

But if you want to know why Al Jazeera is the most feared media network by the Right this little NPR sting episode, complete with fake, meant to be scary, Muslim Brotherhood played by wingnuts, gives you a clue.

As for the anti-intellectualism of the Tea Party Right, see Sarah Palin’s rise to vice president, with John McCain and his team not even vetting her first, because she looked so fine. Or look at the vilification of former V.P. Al Gore, who was a much smarter man than George W. Bush, the hero of the wingnut evangelical Right. And if you look into “Dr.” Rand Paul’s credentials you’ll find nothing there.

Read full story · Comments { 14 }

This Week in Crazy: Beck’s New Jew Woes, Graham Uses Our Troops’ Name to Cut SS, & More

By on 28 January 2011

TM NOTE: Texan4Hillary offers his perspective as a movement progressive activist.

This week in crazy is full of stuff.

As folks in the media look at Glenn Beck and his comments post Rep. Giffords, one popped up that is really nuts. Ok, say it with me: The Jews did NOT kill Jesus. Got it Beck? Here is what he said on air back in July that is now making the rounds:

This is kind of complex, because Jesus did identify with the victims. But Jesus wasn’t a victim, he was a conqueror. Jesus conquered death. He chose to give his life. Jesus didn’t come back from the dead and make the Jews pay for what they did. That would have been an abomination.

Oy vay.

Four-hundred rabbis, infuriated with Beck’s frequent use of the term “Nazi” and constant twisting of Holocaust survivor Soros’ experiences during the war, went right for the Right’s throat. They took out a ad in the Wall Street Journal blasting Fox News, Beck and Ailes for allowing such offensive crap to go on the air. See their awesome ad here.

Rush is blowing heavy as usual and his words sent one of his listeners to allegedly do something potentially criminal.

Last week, California State Sen. Leland Yee (D) called on right-wing hate radio host Rush Limbaugh to apologize for mocking Chinese President Hu Jintao and the Chinese language by speaking gibberish “ching chong chang” Chinese on his radio program. Yee, who is Chinese-American and chairs the state Senate Select Committee on Asian and Pacific Islander Affairs, said Limbaugh owes the Chinese-American community an apology for his “pointless and ugly offense.” Naturally, Limbaugh did not apologize, and instead railed against Yee the following day on his radio, calling him out repeatedly by name.

Yee’s call for civility did not sit well with one Limbaugh fan, who responded by sending several racist death threats to Yee’s office this week. “Rush Limbaugh will kick your chink ass and expose you for the fool you are,” the faxes read, threatening him with “death”...

Blood libel I say.

We get news that the GOP in the Senate has slotted newly elected Tea Party nut Senator Lee of Utah to sit on the Judiciary Committee. One problem: Senator Lee thinks that child labor laws, the FDA, FEMA, food stamps, Medicare and Medicaid are unconstitutional. He will be a real help in the days ahead.

In Colorado the newly elected Right wing state house is trying to kill free school breakfasts and lunches for kids. In committee they succeeded in killing the funding, but the Dem guv plans to fight against the move. Here is what one of the key GOP state senators had to say. The move would make poor kids pay 30 cents per meal and save 100,000 bucks since the federal government subsidizes most of it anyway. But no. Starve these kids we must! After all those poverty ridden shlubs do not work hard to feed their kids right?

Denver Post:

“As a family guy myself with children and grandchildren, I take a very strong responsibility to earn money to feed my own family,” said Sen. Kent Lambert, R-Colorado Springs, who voted against the request. He said charities could step up if some families have difficulty paying the fees.

“I think if that need is out there, there are charitable groups that are out there that go way, way beyond that to take care of families in need,” Lambert said. “Out here in El Paso County, for example, we have churches all over the place.”

Um, yeah buddy. One last one. Senator Graham of South Carolina has been inspired by the bravery of our troops dying every day overseas. So inspired is he that he is using their name to destroy Social Security.

Link here.

GRAHAM: I would give anything if the United States Congress for one month could act in accordance with the way our men and women are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. We know what to do on Social Security. I’ve put on the table adjusting the age from 67 to 69. …

…by introducing legislation soon that would adjust the age the way Reagan and O’Neill did — 67 to 69 — over decades and a reasonable means test on benefits as a down payment to getting our entitlement house in order. And they can run all the commercials they want. It does not matter…I know what I need to do to help my country. And these young men and women know what they need to do in Iraq to make us safe.

Why is Graham using the troops name to defend his proposal? Because progressives are running ads like this against him:

That’s your week in crazy.

Read full story · Comments { 6 }

Is Rick Santorum the Dumbest White Man on the Right?

By on 20 January 2011



Former Senator Rick Santorum: “The question is — and this is what Barack Obama didn’t want to answer — is that human life a person under the Constitution? And Barack Obama says no. Well if that person, human life is not a person, then, I find it almost remarkable for a black man to say, ‘we are going to decide who are people and who are not people.’”

What the purpose of Santorum invoking “black man” is you can decipher for yourself, but being brought up in racially charged St. Louis, Missouri it’s obvious to me.

Segue to a story that sickens everyone who reads it to the core, but will surely be used by wingnuts like Rick Santorum. The story of the Philadelphia clinic of Kermit Goswell that is detailed in a 261-page grand-jury report released yesterday and getting covered today, which is too murderously reprehensible and morally criminal to even quote here. What Goswell let happen at his abortion mill is the stuff of horror movies, not what any reputable woman’s clinic would do.

The question needs to be asked just why women were resorting to going to Kermit Goswell? For the same reason women rose up to make abortion legal and safe, but also affordable and accessible. People like Rick Santorum and others who rail against women’s freedoms, but also the murder of Dr. Tiller, has caused an atmosphere of fear to develop around women’s reproductive health issues, which even had an impact on the Democratic health care bill recently passed. By letting people like Bart Stupak win, Speaker Pelosi, of all people, and Pres. Obama helped conservatives, in whatever party they exist, push women into a situation on health care even in the face of what we’ve won in the courts. Making abortion coverage a separate entity to full reproductive health care that requires separate coverage and payment simply shrinks the pool so small that pretty soon the coverage and the care will be non-existent. This is the type of situation that makes places like Goswell’s develop in the first place. The other issue is regulations and having enough people to enforce them so that untrained hacks aren’t utilized during a serious operation requiring anesthesia.

But you can be sure that Pennsylvania’s alleged multiple murder horror will launch the nuts like Santorum and the Right into a campaign that will only make matters worse for women.

Perhaps he’s on Randall Terry’s bandwagon, the guy who wants to run against Obama on the “Freedom is Only for Men Ticket,” aka “The Bible Is Literal Platform,” trying to out Tebow Tebow by running an offensive ad during the Super Bowl.

Seriously, can we all agree that politics and sports slammed together is just plain un-American?

So, the answer to the headline is no, Santorum has lots of company on crazy.

Read full story · Comments { 6 }

Democrats are Stuck with Obama

By on 13 December 2010

–bumped–

When these progressives refer to themselves as Mr. Obama’s base, all they see is themselves. They ignore polls showing steadfast support for the president among blacks and Latinos. And now they are whispering about a primary challenge against the president. Brilliant! The kind of suicidal gesture that destroyed Jimmy Carter — and a way to lose the black vote forever. – Ishmael Reed

Is this guy kidding?

No one wants to primary Barack Obama, but considering he’s sold the Democratic Party principles out to the Right someone should ask Mr. Reed what he thinks will happen if Democrats and progressive activists lay down because of polling that scares the crap out of them.

Everyone knows if Obama is dared challenge he, she or the group backing the challenger will be called racist, with race baiting the easiest avenue to travel for scoundrels. How ’bout an African American woman with principle, will that pass Reed’s test? Doubtful, because he’s not so much serious as freaked. It’s going around Democatic circles right now.

Ignoring the obvious case to hold Pres. Obama accountable won’t make people think he’s any less weak, with Independents uninspired and the working class in PA., Ohio and the wider industrial Midwest quite possibly gone for good due.

More Reed:

And I’ve thought about them as I’ve listened in the last week to progressives criticize President Obama for keeping his cool.

Progressives have been urging the president to “man up” in the face of the Republicans. Some want him to be like John Wayne. On horseback. Slapping people left and right.

How ironic that Mr. Reed actually uses a Sarah Palinism, “man up,” then puts it in your mouth. As for “slapping people,” this guy confuses taking a stand moored in Democratic principles with college freshman frat hazings.

There is no progressive monolith, but many simply want Obama to stand up for Democratic Party values, but also for what he said when he was trying to win votes. Instead, he’s sounding as rattled as Bush Sr. did when he flip flopped on “no new taxes,” with Obama caving on giving the super wealthy tax cuts, but also protecting people who don’t need the extra help, because they’ve got all the advantages.

Unlike white progressives, blacks and Latinos are not used to getting it all.

This is either grossly uninformed or just stupid. The people “getting it all” in Obama’s latest rightward lurch are the super wealthy earning over $1 million and Wall Street honchos.

Chief executives from Google Inc., Cisco Systems Inc., International Business Machines Corp., American Express Co., Dow Chemical Co. and Pepsico Inc. have been invited to the meeting at Blair House, next to the White House, to discuss trade, tax, regulatory issues and the deficit.

Did white working class have a beef with Obama during the midterms because they are used to “getting it all”? Did seniors? Did women? Hardly, because each of the groups who tilted to the Right with their midterm vote all believe Pres. Obama doesn’t understand their plight, is ignoring it or selling them out.

I’m not sure why the New York Times saw fit to publish this offensive op-ed, but the race-baiting targeting critics of Barack Obama is nothing new.

As for the angry black man caricature, Mr. Reed missed that Pres. Obama has no trouble getting really pissed off at progressives, while delivering indignant self-serving kudos to himself for all he’s done for everyone. In Washington insider terms, the “angry black man” roll in this instance is seen as good, because conventional wisdom always supports the idea that if Obama is attacking fellow Democrats it’s good politics.

There are most assuredly “whispers” and conversations about Barack Obama being weak, politically incompetent and hopelessly flailing for direction, but it’s nothing compared to the defensive, inartful and desperate push from Obama’s fan boys and girls that he can’t be challenged because he’s the first African American president.

The truly alarming reality of Mr. Reed’s op-ed is that someone can write this drivel out loud expecting to convince anyone but also be taken seriously for such gibberish. The entire piece is an indictment of just how paralyzed Democrats are in the face of Barack Obama’s obvious failure of leadership and political flailing.

The Democrats are drowning during a time of unparalleled financial challenge and middle class collapse, but the only consideration is to be saving Obama’s presidency.

Race may be why no one will stand up and challenge Mr. Obama in 2012, but he’s earned the challenge for his collapse on principle and his failure to lead the Democratic Party in any manner recognizeable to Democrats and progressives.

But whitey’s been warned. Go down with the Obama ship or else.

Hoping Pres. Obama can turn it all around is all Democrats have got.

Read full story · Comments { 132 }