Searching for that New Brand of Crazy that will Sell
Posted: October 10, 2011 Filed under: just because, Republican politics, Republican presidential politics, right wing hate grouups | Tags: Herman Cain 11 Comments
You have to hand it to today’s Republican Party. They still want the crazy and they’re just looking for it in all the right places. Much of it has been on display at the values (sic) voters hatefest, the recent presidential debates, and Sunday news talk shows. The problem is that when it gets exposed to daylight there’s so much crazy that the mainstream runs. They’ve got to find a brand of crazy that sells.
Every time one of these folks burbles up towards Mitt Romney we get to see the new crazy flavor of the month. They’ve already been there done that with Bachmann and Perry. The Bachmann-in-your-face-kind-of-crazy has led to a complete implosion of a campaign that went surprisingly well until Iowa. Perry has been wilting under the spotlight. His debate performances have been terrible and all kinds of his nutjob supporters have been doing a great job horrifying the country by speaking out for him and introducing him proudly. Let’s not forget Ron Paul. He’s the perpetual nutty nut flavor of each campaign season. The Republican presidential contenders have been just one big bowl of Granola full of fruits, flakes and nuts.
So, the deal is that they really really don’t want Mitt Romney who they don’t trust for a variety of reasons. Hence, we’re seeing product testing. So, the next nutty goodness to rise to the top of the taste test is Herman Cain. He’s been a perfect tool for a party trying to prove that it’s not racist. That’s been hard to do given the presence of Ron Paul and Rick Perry. Then there was Haley Barbour who spent part of his time inkling a presidential run by defending a hate group. Well, let’s not be coy. Those last three are the loci of hate group central.
Ron Paul has a long history of being supported by Storm Front and using state’s rights to argue that the Jim Crow laws really shouldn’t have been removed. He’s got a long line of writing racist memes in his news letters and has a well stated position on getting rid of the 1964 civil rights act. Here’s just one recent example of his toe-dipping into the realm of white supremacists group. He actually invited a long time activist in the League of the South to testify to his subcommittee overseeing the Fed.
One of the witnesses invited to testify was Thomas DiLorenzo, a longtime activist in the neo-Confederate hate group, League of the South (LOS). The LOS advocates for a second Southern secession and a society dominated by “Anglo-Celts” – that is, white people. LOS leaders have called slavery “God-ordained” and described segregation as necessary to the racial “integrity” of black and white alike. DiLorenzo also is an economics professor at Baltimore’s Loyola College.
According to the Washington Post, “when Paul opened up the hearing to questions from committee members, Rep. Lacy Clay (D-Mo.) directly took on DiLorenzo for his membership in the League of the South,” pointing to the designation of the LOS as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Clay also cited DiLorenzo’s many revisionist works about the Civil War and Lincoln, including “More Lies about the Civil War,” “In Defense of Sedition,” and “The First Dictator-President,” which examines “how Lincoln’s myth has corrupted America.
I suppose we don’t need to go into Perry since stuff is coming out on him more and more all the time. The ranch name thing is just the latest of the dirty laundry hitting the light of day. He’s often been heard touting secession for Texas and supports the Sons of Confederate Veterans in their search to put Confederate symbols on everything.
So, it’s only convenient that the next great Republican crazy flavor is Herman Cain. Maybe he can prove that the Republicans have left Nixon’s Southern Strategy in the History Books. He’s being used to inoculate racists in the party. Notice that I’m not saying all Republicans support institutional racism or are personally racist. Cain can get away with saying things like black people are “brainwashed” and racism isn’t a problem. He does this all while ginning up fear of sharia’h law and Muslims. Oh, and he’s not too friendly on immigration either. Can we please extend the racism conversation to include a few more folks of color so we can add him into the Republican’s mix of homophobia, gynophobia, islamophobia, and xenophobia? Let’s just show a few of his recent hits via Susie Madrak at C&L and the Christine Amanpour interview. Here’s example one.
AMANPOUR: Let me move on to some things that you’ve said. Right after the debate in Florida, you told Wolf Blitzer of CNN that, basically, African-Americans, blacks in this country had been brainwashed over the years into supporting Democrats.
CAIN: Yes.
AMANPOUR: I mean, isn’t that really an inflammatory thing to say? I mean, do you really believe that African-Americans, blacks, are so easily manipulated?
CAIN: I also said in that same interview…
AMANPOUR: No, but let me you ask about that. That word is very inflammatory.
CAIN: It is. I’m going to answer your question. I also said the good news is a large percentage of black people are thinking for themselves. Now, I think that — if the word is inflammatory, that’s too bad. It is true. And here’s why: because some black people won’t even listen to someone who appears to be a conservative or a Republican. I call that brainwashing.
Here’s example two.
CAIN: Some people would infuse Sharia law in our court system if we allow it. I honestly believe that. So even if he calls me crazy, I am going to make sure that they don’t infuse it little by little by little. It’s not going to be some grand scheme, little by little. So I don’t mind if he calls me crazy. I’m simply saying…
AMANPOUR: You’re sticking to it?
CAIN: I’m sticking to it. American laws in American courts, period.
Any one who insists that “judeo-christian” traditions be put into law would essentially be arguing for sharia law too given that things like prohibition against usury is based in shared Abrahamic traditions. That’s just one example. I doubt Cain or most of his friends even know the huge tenets implied in sharia. They only assume it’s not “American” when their pet religious traditions are acceptable. This wreaks of the same kinds of arguments they used to use on Jewish and Catholic faiths. Right now, Cain and all his Republican pals are trying to avoid the attacks by their base on Mormons.
Perhaps most astounding to me is Herman Cain’s joke that our immigration policies should consist of a great wall of china and an alligator moat. This was as telling to me as Bobby Jindal’s pedophilia joke. There’s jokes and then there’s tasteless jokes at other people’s expense.
Transcript: “I just got back from China. Ever heard of the Great Wall of China? It looks pretty sturdy. And that sucker is real high. I think we can build one if we want to! We have put a man on the moon, we can build a fence! Now, my fence might be part Great Wall and part electrical technology…It will be a twenty foot wall, barbed wire, electrified on the top, and on this side of the fence, I’ll have that moat that President Obama talked about. And I would put those alligators in that moat!”
So, here’s the statement on his policy outside the context of that strange joke in terms of a slap in the face to Rick Perry. Oh, btw, we’re supposed to get a sense of humor to understand the joke. Isn’t that what they all say? This isn’t an immigration policy per se, it’s more like a paramilitary strategy.
Cain’s suggestion that immigration law enforcement should simply be turned over to the states is just another example of his naive understanding of both foreign policy and the Constitution.
As the Supreme Court established almost 70 years ago, the states have very little business weighing into immigration policy because “[e]xperience has shown that international controversies of the gravest moment, sometimes even leading to war, may arise from real or imagined wrongs to another’s subjects inflicted, or permitted, by a government.” If a single state mangles an immigration prosecution, for example, or directs disparate resources against the citizens of one nationality, it will impact the foreign relations of the entire United States — potentially even thrusting America into a needless war. The Constitution leaves these kinds of decisions up to a leader who has actually been elected by the whole nation, and not to the governor of just one state.
Nevertheless, Cain’s weak understanding of law and policy is apparently quite appealing to the kind of voters who cheer death and boo U.S. servicemembers. A new Fox News poll shows previous frontrunner Rick Perry hemorrhaging support — more than one third of his previous supporters ditched his candidacy in the wake of Perry’s defense of humane treatment for immigrants — while Cain has surged 11 points to third place in the GOP primary.
Perry, like the Chamber of Commerce, loves him some cheap labor. Cain’s strategy is to let states use law enforcement to “repel the invader”. I think we can safely say that the invader is still that age old use of “other” as tribe enemy.
At this point, you should be asking yourself why Herman Cain talks so much about race if it’s not such a big deal in this country. Aren’t an awful lot of Cain’s comments aimed at race and continually saying it’s no big deal? So what I want to know is why is it okay for Herman Cain to play the race card? Is Cain seeing that this is some kind of trump card that Republicans can use against the Obama campaign’s prior use? What does this buy him? Do I have to give my mom’s lecture on two wrongs not making a right?
Saturday Morning Reads: Our Future. Our Selves.
Posted: October 8, 2011 Filed under: black women's reproductive health, children, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Feminists, Foreign Affairs, GLBT Rights, Hillary Clinton, morning reads, Planned Parenthood, PLUB Pro-Life-Until-Birth, religion, religious extremists, Reproductive Health, Reproductive Rights, Republican politics, Republican presidential politics, right wing hate grouups | Tags: Abigail Disney, Bobby Jindal, CEDAW, Creationism, Hillary Clinton, Kathleen Sebelius, Leymah Gbowee, Liberia, Rick Perry, teaching religious myth over science, Values Voter Hatefest, women on boards of directors in the US 13 CommentsGood Morning!
I admit to a growing fascination with Leymah Gbowee since hearing several interviews with her after the announcement that she is one of three women sharing the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize. She is just one of those take charge and get it done women if there ever was one! I am now itching to see “Pray the Devil Back to Hell”. This is a documentary by filmmaker Abigail Disney. Here is a link to a 2009 report from Bill Moyers Journal on the 2008 film. Yes, Abigail Disney comes from THAT family but the movie is a long ways away from animated princesses and singing animals. You can watch the Moyers piece here to get a feel for Gbowee’s commitment to social justice in Liberia.
Women’s News Network updated their recent interview with Gbowee on her work to secure reproductive and sexual rights of African women as well as her efforts to assure peace in Liberia. She also addresses the needs of American women in the interview. Yes. We can learn many things from the struggles of women in developing nations for basic rights as we see the daily erosion of our own. Did you ever believe you would live a country where the whims of a druggist can dictate your access to prescribed medicine?
In Gbowee’s estimation, American women also have challenges that need to be addressed. This topic came up in response to our conversation about CEDAW, and the inability for the agreement to get national traction. She referenced the disadvantages that come from not signing the international treaty. Totally frank in her assessment questioning America’s ability to provide cogent leadership on women’s issues, Gbowee pointed to matters that leaders “don’t want to tackle.”
She said, “If a President or Secretary of State is standing up and making statements about the rapes in Congo, and that same country has not signed a document that is so important to the lives of their women —what other name do you give it but hypocrisy?”
Part of our exchange included how important it was for those working to help women under siege, to truly engage in an equal dialogue. “There is a need to speak to the women of these countries,” Gbowee said. She told me a story about a trip she had taken to Congo where she had spoken with women on the ground, and learned that for them “rape was at the bottom of the list.”
At the top — was “political participation.” For those women, “rape is a symptom of an actual issue.” She continued, “We want to help. But we need to step out of our donor driven issues and step into what it is that these communities actually want.”
Yes. Gbowee’s got me thinking on how United States women are losing ground daily. She is right. Our country has not signed on to CEDAW. What does this say about a President that MS magazine labelled a feminist? This link takes you to the Text of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. Why is our country not a signatory? Why are our rights not a priority?
The Convention defines discrimination against women as “…any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field.”
By accepting the Convention, States commit themselves to undertake a series of measures to end discrimination against women in all forms, including:
- to incorporate the principle of equality of men and women in their legal system, abolish all discriminatory laws and adopt appropriate ones prohibiting discrimination against women;
- to establish tribunals and other public institutions to ensure the effective protection of women against discrimination; and
- to ensure elimination of all acts of discrimination against women by persons, organizations or enterprises.
The Convention provides the basis for realizing equality between women and men through ensuring women’s equal access to, and equal opportunities in, political and public life — including the right to vote and to stand for election — as well as education, health and employment. States parties agree to take all appropriate measures, including legislation and temporary special measures, so that women can enjoy all their human rights and fundamental freedoms.
It seems that a country as advanced as ours would consider the rights of half of its citizens to be extremely important, wouldn’t it? However, that doesn’t appear to be the priority of many folks in government outside of the US State Department. Here is a youtube of SOS Clinton saying that the treaty is a priority of the Obama administration. Why haven’t we signed it?
American women are experiencing an incredible set back in rights. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius spoke at an abortion rights fundraiser on Wednesday where she issued a strong warning against moves by Republicans to roll back women’s health gains by 50 years. Women are being sent back to chattel status in state after state.
“We’ve come a long way in women’s health over the last few decades, but we are in a war,” Sebelius said at a NARAL Pro-Choice America luncheon attended by about 300 people, who gave some of their loudest applause at her mention of the Obama administration’s support for requiring insurance plans to cover birth control without copays.
Sebelius said women have suffered discrimination by insurance companies that considered “Viagra an essential medication and birth control a lifestyle choice.”
Her message resonated with some at the event who acknowledged doubts about Obama’s leadership on a variety of liberal issues.
“I’m a little disappointed with his force, his forcefulness, pretty much across the board,” Chicagoan Bamboo Solzman said of Obama. Sebelius’ remarks at Wednesday’s event solidified Solzman’s support of Obama’s re-election, she said. “He was forward enough to choose her, so that does help,” Solzman said.
We are clearly losing ground. While women in the administration are being sent out to do heartfelt speeches, nothing is being done to protect our rights. Speeches do not protect women and children from the brutalities of fundamentalist religions and the economic realities of sex-based discrimination. Neoconfederate Ron Paul is just one among many Republican presidential contenders that wants to eliminate access to something as simple as basic birth control. The fight is not just for our right to abortion. It is for our right to birth control and self determination.
“I am deeply troubled by the flippancy with which President Obama recently discussed regulations that are alarming and troublesome for many Americans,” Paul said. “Not all Americans are comfortable with the Obama administration’s decision to mandate coverage of birth control and morning-after pills, and the considerations of these people, many of them Christian conservatives, are worthy of careful consideration – not mockery.”
“Many, like me, view this rigid regulatory overstep from which there is inadequate opportunity to self-exempt as payback to Planned Parenthood and big pharmaceutical companies for their support of Obamacare,” Paul added. “Many others oppose it out of strict moral conviction and their voices should be heard at least to the extent that an authentic opportunity to exempt be provided. That is, until Obamacare is repealed in its entirety.”
“As this mandate violates the conscience of millions of pro-life Americans, I have introduced in Congress H.R. 1099, the Taxpayer Freedom of Conscience Act, which removes all federal funding for domestic and international family planning,” Paul continued. “As President, I plan to defund Obamacare and all federal programs that use tax money taken from the American people to promote abortion and provide abortion services domestically and globally. I pledge also to veto any bill with funding for Planned Parenthood or any other international family planning regimes.”
Any of us can have deeply felt beliefs against the death penalty, against invasions of nations, and against assassination without due process of American citizens, yet none of our concerns are met with similar angst and pearl clutching. Only the fetus fetishists get to object to using their puny tax dollars for every one. If they don’t want abortions or birth control, they just shouldn’t get them. That should have nothing to do with our access Their views preclude the findings of modern science and medicine and they are ruling the day.
Most Republican presidential wannabes spent their week pandering to so called “values voters” at a summit cum hatefest. Clearly, this political movement is out to define every one’s personal choices to meet their maxims. They have declared an open war on women’s rights. Rick Perry’s Endorser called Mitt Romney’s faith a “cult” and referred to Planned Parenthood as “a slaughterhouse for the unborn”. This is nothing more than hate speech dressed up in a pastor’s robe.
It was no ordinary opener from the prominent Southern Baptist Convention leader, Pastor Robert Jeffress, who endorsed Perry on Friday. Jeffress praised Perry for defunding Planned Parenthood in Texas, calling the provider of women’s health and abortion services, “that slaughterhouse for the unborn.”
He also lauded Perry’s “strong commitment to biblical values.”
“Do we want a candidate who is skilled in rhetoric or one who is skilled in leadership? Do we want a candidate who is a conservative out of convenience or one who is a conservative out of deep conviction?” Jeffress said. “Do we want a candidate who is a good, moral person — or one who is a born-again follower of the lord Jesus Christ?”
Jeffress called Perry a “genuine follower of Jesus Christ.” The pastor did not mention Perry’s rival Mitt Romney by name, but he told reporters after his remarks on Friday that Mormonism was a “cult.”
Jeffress’ comments and his endorsement of Perry threatened to inject some tension into what has been a relatively quiet year for religion on the campaign trail and the Perry campaign sought to quiet the uproar.
The campaign’s official comment on Jeffress evolved quickly on Friday afternoon. When initially asked by ABC News whether Gov. Perry agreed that Mormonism is a cult, Perry spokesman Mark Miner said: “The governor doesn’t judge what is in the heart and soul of others. He leaves that to God.”
My horrible governor Bobby Jindal joked about pedophilia at this same hub of hatred. What an inappropriate topic for jokes! Since so many folks were herded out of New Orleans and Southern Louisiana after Katrina, we can no longer even find a decent field of candidates to run against a man that’s trying to bring back the plantation system of government and economics. He has spent tremendous amounts of money courting chicken evisceration plants to our state for a few horrible paying jobs while decimating our already fragile public health and education systems.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) knows just how to crack up the audience at the Values Voter Summit: just make a joke about former Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) being a pedophile.
After a long winded speech about all his accomplishments protecting children from sex offenders, Jindal brought it home.
“What I can do as governor is this: I can make Louisiana the last place that anyone who wants to in any way harm a child by exposing children to inappropriate material,” Jindal said. “I can make Louisiana a dangerous place for Congressman Weiner to relocate to.”
Louisiana is a dangerous place for teachers, nurses, and public employees right now because of this man and that clearly makes it a dangerous place for children. After all, this is the same governor that foisted a creationist law on them. He clearly doesn’t value children enough to educate them in science, protect their health, and provide them decent teachers and classrooms. Our children need protection from our Governor.
The scientific community has long advocated that allowing anything but science in the teaching of evolution will be intellectually harmful. In an e-mail sent to the Associated Press, Harold Kroto, a Nobel Prize winner for chemistry in 1996, said voting against the repeal creates a situation that “should be likened to requiring Louisiana school texts to include the claim that the Sun goes round the Earth.”
While evolutionary biology is based in the work of Charles Darwin, which shows how humans evolved through natural selection, creationism is rooted in a fundamental reading of Biblical texts that say mankind is the product of a divine maker.
With the law intact, Louisiana is the state that has gone the furthest in approving legislation that opens the door to allowing alternatives to science taught in its schools.
American women are also not making much headway to influence corporate culture and business decisions through board appointments. America’s top business women attended Fortune Most Powerful Women Summit in Laguna Niguel, California. Board positions are key to efforts to break the glass ceiling because boards approve CEO pay and appointments. One of the questions raised at the meeting was dealing with requests to become a board’s token woman. The topic was raised by Anne Mulcahy–former Xerox CEO and board member–who questioned if it was worth the effort to become the lone female on what has been an all boy board.
At the same time, female representation on boards is still a major issue. The percentage of female directors, which hovers around 20 percent, has been at a standstill over the past decade—Spencer Stuart finds that there has been no increase in that ratio since 2000. The research firm Catalyst reports an even lower number, 16 percent, putting the United States behind Finland, Sweden and Norway, which actually has a law requiring 40 percent of all board members at Norwegian companies to be women. Those low percentages persist despite the fact that study after study has shown that more diverse boards are associated with greater company performance.
I get what Mulcahy is saying. Why should women in positions of power join a club, as she puts it, that they may not want to be a part of? At that level, most women have multiple commitments, and joining a board where they’re treated like tokens rather than assets may not be the best use of their time. In addition, they may be able to have more of an impact on a board that is already forward thinking and receptive to diversity.
So, at a time when we are celebrating the progress made by women who have reached presidencies in countries in South America, Africa, Australia, and the East, we are seeing tremendous setbacks in women’s rights here in the United States. Who are the Leymah Gbowee’s of North America? Let us do more than just pray a few of our own devils back to hell. Let’s be in their faces and all in their business just like Ms. Gbowee! (See youtube below.) Let’s be an entire population of women that won’t shut up!!!
Friday Morning Reads
Posted: September 23, 2011 Filed under: 2012 presidential campaign, Gulf Oil Spill, morning reads, religious extremists, Republican politics, Republican presidential politics, right wing hate grouups | Tags: Bill Clinton, Clinton Inititative, Michelle Bacman and What NOT to Wear, Republican Debate, Republicans boo active duty soldier at debate, Republicans boo gay service man, state murder 22 CommentsI’ve been working on a lot of research recently to get ready for the big job market event for finance professors in October in Denver. As a result, I’m enviously reading that a lot of you are already reading the Suskind book and kind enough to comment here. Keep it up so I can live vicariously through your ability to read it and get a little fix and distraction while I work!
I found a few interesting links this morning to share. Bill Clinton offered his opinions on the death penalty and the Troy Davis execution which was based solely on notoriously bad eye witness accounts that were later found to be coerced. He believes that hard evidence is the essential to making our justice system do what its supposed to do.
While in office, Clinton signed into law the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which, according to Time, “reduced new trials for convicted criminals and sped up their sentences by restricting a federal court’s ability to judge whether a state court had correctly interpreted the U.S. Constitution.” The law has been cited as one of the major obstacles that prevented Davis from being granted a new trial.
Clinton’s comments on Thursday seemed to suggest that he believes some of these cases should be slowed down in light of advances in technology.
He added that increased reliance on DNA evidence and its ability to decisively prove the innocence or guilt of a defendant is the “the most important thing that’s happened in criminal justice in the last 30 years.”
“When there’s any chance a DNA test can resolve this, then there should be no proceeding with the [death] penalty until that’s resolved,” he said.
“I actually spent some time yesterday on this appeals case, just listening to the news coverage,” he continued. “The thing I found strange was that even though there were some people who apparently wanted to change their testimony when there was a hearing before the court — the lawyers for the defendant didn’t bring them on to say what they had to say. So it’s an unusual case.”
Davis’ attorney did not immediately return a request for comment.
Clinton supported the death penalty as president and oversaw four executions while serving as governor of Arkansas, including the controversial case of Ricky Ray Rector.
In 2000, Clinton stayed the execution of Juan Raul Garza, who was just five days away from being the first federal prisoner executed since 1963. He ordered the Justice Department to examine “racial and geographic disparities in the federal death penalty system.” Garza was eventually executed in 2001.
Clinton held a round table with bloggers in a side conversation during his Global Initiative being held in NYC. He also addressed the Middle East situation mourning the losses of Rabin to assassination and Sharon to illness. He did not have the same kind words for current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu whom Clinton blames for the current problems in the peace process. He also blames Arafat for being unreasonable during the peace process when he was directly involved with negotiations.
“The two great tragedies in modern Middle Eastern politics, which make you wonder if God wants Middle East peace or not, were [Yitzhak] Rabin‘s assassination and [Ariel] Sharon‘s stroke,” Clinton said.
Sharon had decided he needed to build a new centrist coalition, so he created the Kadima party and gained the support of leaders like Tzipi Livni and Ehud Olmert. He was working toward a consensus for a peace deal before he fell ill, Clinton said. But that effort was scuttled when the Likud party returned to power.
“The Israelis always wanted two things that once it turned out they had, it didn’t seem so appealing to Mr. Netanyahu. They wanted to believe they had a partner for peace in a Palestinian government, and there’s no question — and the Netanyahu government has said — that this is the finest Palestinian government they’ve ever had in the West Bank,” Clinton said.
“[Palestinian leaders] have explicitly said on more than one occasion that if [Netanyahu] put up the deal that was offered to them before — my deal — that they would take it,” Clinton said, referring to the 2000 Camp David deal that Yasser Arafat rejected.
But the Israeli government has drifted a long way from the Ehud Barak-led government that came so close to peace in 2000, Clinton said, and any new negotiations with the Netanyahu government are now on starkly different terms — terms that the Palestinians are unlikely to accept.
“For reasons that even after all these years I still don’t know for sure, Arafat turned down the deal I put together that Barak accepted,” he said. “But they also had an Israeli government that was willing to give them East Jerusalem as the capital of the new state of Palestine.”
Republicans attending the debates for presidential candidates continue to set lows for hateful, angry, bigoted, nasty behavior. First, they scream loud approving hoorays at Perry’s horrible record of state murder in Texas, then then screamed “let him die” in response to a question to Ron Paul on people with no health insurance. This time they boo’d an active duty soldier serving our country in the Iraq War in the second Fox News Hater Fest. These are people that are sick sick sick and I wonder who invited them to the shindig and how we can export them all to Devil’s Island where they can create a hell realm all to themselves.
Planet Michele was in full alignment last night with the alternate universe. She thinks taxpayers should keep all the money they earn. I guess the government will have to hold bake sales to run the war in Afghanistan. What ever happened to those t shirts? We’ll have to redo them for her bits of policy wisdom, I guess.
Former IRS lawyer Michele Bachmann has an interesting approach to taxation: she thinks Americans should get to keep “every dollar” they earn, though she says the government needs to get money somehow.
Fox News host Megyn Kelly asked Bachmann about a question at a previous Republican debate on how much of every dollar taxpayers should get to keep. Bachmann said that she talked to the young man who asked the question at the last debate.
“I said ‘I wish I could have answered that question, because I want to tell you what my answer is. I think you earned every dollar, you should get to keep every dollar that you earned,’” Bachmann said. “That’s your money, that’s not the government’s money, that’s the whole point.”
Some one needs to check when the jeebus cult love bombs that just keep going off in her mind for expiration dates. Also, her campaign staff
needs to send her to TLC and What to Wear where: “Stacy London and Clinton Kelly help the frumpy by giving them life-changing fashion makeovers and fashion advice.” She looks and acts like the Manchurian candidate for Wonderland. Michele, when you are standing as the only woman in a line up of men and want to be taken seriously, you cannot wear ghost white panty hose and tacky tacky sandals. Isn’t the styler for Quitterella available? She always looked terrific! It almost made you forget the insanity that spewed from her mouth. I really think Marcus HAS to be dressing Michele from his secret wardrobe.
I found the picture on the left to be just as bad as it gets. Look at those shoes!!! If you want to be a power player, you freaking have to dress like one! Notice that none of the men are ever out of their traditional corporate monkey suits! Bachmann’s a total ditz and I wouldn’t want her in charge of anything, but I really think women in positions that should command respect have to go out of their way dress themselves to avoid looking trivial unless they want to be treated that way! It’s still a power suit world in politics and business. Strappy sandals are for cocktail parties given by lobbyists!
The Villagers are obsessed with the nonperformance of Perry who appeared to have left the Texas part of his personality at home. That didn’t leave much. Frank Luntz was trying to convince every one that would listen that Perry was yesterday’s plate of grilling beans and that Romney was becoming more Reaganesque every debate and waking moment. He was even seen directing his post debate ‘focus group’ to mimic his talking points. His eyes kept pleading “Romney can beat the one! Please LIKE HIM DAMMIT!” The group describe Perry as a waffler and that Romney held himself accountable for all those ‘mistakes’ that seemed a lot like complete flip flops to the rest of us. There were some fireworks between the two on Social Security among other issues. Oh, and the newbie to the crowd, some governor whose name I forget from New Mexico ripped a joke off from Rush Limbaugh. Every one thought it was great until they discovered the source. Hint to yahoo politicians from New Mexico: don’t plagiarize any one on your first major TV appearance. You may think that ripping off Rush gives you creds with the ditto heads but it really brings out the worst in the media.
Face to face in confrontational debate, Republican presidential hopefuls Mitt Romney and Rick Perry sarcastically accused each other Thursday night of flip-flopping on Social Security and health care, flashpoints in their early struggle for the party nomination.
Romney accused Perry of having said the federal government “shouldn’t be in the pension business, that it’s unconstitutional,” a reference to Social Security benefits.
The Texas governor disputed the charge, saying it “wasn’t the first time Mitt’s been wrong on some issue before.” But Romney mocked his rival’s denial, adding crisply, “You better find that Rick Perry and get him to stop saying that.”
Perry soon returned the favor, saying that Romney switched his position on health care between editions of a book he had published. In one edition, Perry said, Romney advocated expanding the health care program he signed in Massachusetts to the rest of the country. “Then in your paperback you took that line out, so speaking of not getting it straight in your book, Sir.”
“It’s like badminton,” said Perry.
WTF is it with men and really stupid sports metaphors? Sheesh! They’re always like two small steps away from being those little boys on the little league team that can’t do anything right. Oh, and the joke rip off has already gone to Rush’s big fat lying head …
Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson brought down the house at Thursday night’s Fox News/ Google debatewhen he joked about how his “next-door neighbor’s two dogs have created more shovel-ready jobs than this current administration.”
The joke killed among the GOP faithful. But was Johnson the first to use it?
Just today, talk radio host Rush Limbaugh delivered a similar joke on air.
“My dogs have created more shovel-ready work than Obama has just this week alone,” Limbaugh said. “The new puppy. Honest to God. More shovel-ready work for me this week than Obama has created all two and a half years.”
So what does Limbaugh think of the similarity?
“I guess I’ve become show prep for the GOP debates now, too,” Limbaugh told The Huffington Post in an email. Limbaugh said he thought he used the line yesterday, “but the days run together, so I’m not really sure.”
Well, the guy’s name is Gary Johnson–how could I forget that!–and he used to be the Governor of New Mexico. His one chance to be remembered and he’ll be known as the guy that plagiarized Rush Limbaugh! Alrighty then … I’m continuing my policy of making sure we don’t forget the BP Oil spill. Here’s one from my local rag that’s worth your reading time about the silencing of Gulf oil spill Investigators.
A U.S. House committee was forced to postpone a hearing on the findings of a federal investigation into the causes of the BP oil spill because the Obama administration suddenly refused to let investigators testify, the committee chairman said.
The alleged silencing of the members of the joint Coast Guard and Interior Department investigative team comes in the wake of the sudden resignation of Interior’s lead investigator, Hammond resident David Dykes.
In a news release late Thursday afternoon, Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., the chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, blasted the Obama administration.
“It took far too long for the final report to be issued and the Obama administration is now further delaying proper oversight by suddenly refusing to allow members of the investigation team to testify,” Hastings said in a statement.
Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement and the Coast Guard said they never wanted “line investigators” to testify. They are seeking to clarify that with Hastings at a meeting Friday, apparently to offer more senior agency officials to testify.
“BOEMRE and the Coast Guard were responsive to Chairman Hastings and his Committee’s request late last week for a hearing. However, we felt strongly from the beginning it was inappropriate for BOEMRE and Coast Guard line investigators to testify, and presented alternative options,” a joint statement from the two agencies said.
Wow! I just think I made it through an entire morning news post without mentioning ONE economics story. Must be a record! What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
The Financial Crisis Explained
Posted: September 21, 2011 Filed under: Economy, Republican politics, Republican presidential politics, right wing hate grouups | Tags: Elizabeth Warren, Robert Reich, The people Obama doesn't listen to and won't appoint 34 Comments
Who says Elizabeth Warren doesn’t have fire in her belly?
We already knew Robert Reich does.
Why do we buy lies based on unsubstantiated wishful thinking over what we know from theory based on on empirical data.
This is all just common sense and it’s backed by data.
These are people that know the facts over the ideology. This is real economics over voodoo economics.









Recent Comments