Taking on a Big Question: Why Embrace Plutocracy over Working Class Heroes?
Posted: June 9, 2012 Filed under: religious extremists, right wing hate grouups, Voter Ignorance | Tags: fear, Reagan Democrats, the conservative brain, voting against your interests 66 Comments
The UK Guardian has always been one of my favorite papers. One of my high school social science teachers–Steve Wiitala–introduced me to the paper when I was taking an honors world history seminar class. I’ve been reading it ever since. Jonathan Haidt–a psychology prof–asks a question that I’ve been wondering for years. Why on earth would any working class person support some one like Ronald Reagan or Mitt Romney? Why would they even consider voting for reactionaries funded by the likes of the Koch Brothers? Why would they vote against their own interests?
I’ve always looked to the slave plantation model for answers. White overseers for rich masters were given just enough special favors and made to feel above the plantations’ slaves that they felt better thinking “well, at least I’m not one of them”. White working class people have a history of indentured servitude and sharecropping. Why go back to people that really would like to re-institute these things? Haidt says that fear of the collapse of society sends them look for order and anything national greatness. I wanted to explore his arguments here. (You can also watch this interview with Haidt by Bill Moyers. ht/ to EcoCatWoman.)
Many commentators on the left have embraced some version of the duping hypothesis: the Republican party dupes people into voting against their economic interests by triggering outrage on cultural issues. “Vote for us and we’ll protect the American flag!” say the Republicans. “We’ll make English the official language of the United States! And most importantly, we’ll prevent gay people from threatening your marriage when they … marry! Along the way we’ll cut taxes on the rich, cut benefits for the poor, and allow industries to dump their waste into your drinking water, but never mind that. Only we can protect you from gay, Spanish-speaking flag-burners!”
One of the most robust findings in socialpsychology is that people find ways to believe whatever they want to believe. And the left really want to believe the duping hypothesis. It absolves them from blame and protects them from the need to look in the mirror or figure out what they stand for in the 21st century.
Here’s a more painful but ultimately constructive diagnosis, from the point of view of moral psychology: politics at the national level is more like religion than it is like shopping. It’s more about a moral vision that unifies a nation and calls it to greatness than it is about self-interest or specific policies. In most countries, the right tends to see that more clearly than the left. In America the Republicans did the hard work of drafting their moral vision in the 1970s, and Ronald Reagan was their eloquent spokesman. Patriotism, social order, strong families, personal responsibility (not government safety nets) and free enterprise. Those are values, not government programs.
Brain research is beginning to find that folks that tend to call themselves “conservative” tend to be more fearful. Chris Mooney–Author of The Conservative Brain–explains it like this.
Looking at MRIs of a large sample of young adults last year, researchers at University College London discovered that “greater conservatism was associated with increased volume of the right amygdala” ($$). The amygdala is an ancient brain structure that’s activated during states of fear and anxiety. (The researchers also found that “greater liberalism was associated with increased gray matter volume in the anterior cingulate cortex” – a region in the brain that is believed to help people manage complexity.)
That has implications for our political world. In a recent interview, Chris Mooney, author of The Republican Brain, explained, “The amygdala plays the same role in every species that has an amygdala. It basically takes over to save your life. It does other things too, but in a situation of threat, you cease to process information rationally and you’re moving automatically to protect yourself.”
Haidt says that this kind of thinking has some disturbing impact on people that tend to obsess on fear. Group loyalty can drive people who want to feel safe. Does this explain the effectiveness of Willie Horton ads and all those Rovian tricks that seem paranoid and some what zombieland-like to us?
But on matters relating to group loyalty, respect for authority and sanctity (treating things as sacred and untouchable, not only in the context of religion), it sometimes seems that liberals lack the moral taste buds, or at least, their moral “cuisine” makes less use of them. For example, according to our data, if you want to hire someone to criticize your nation on a radio show in another nation (loyalty), give the finger to his boss (authority), or sign a piece of paper stating one’s willingness to sell his soul (sanctity), you can save a lot of money by posting a sign: “Conservatives need not apply.”
In America, it is these three moral foundations that underlie most of the “cultural” issues that, according to duping theorists, are used to distract voters from their self-interest. But are voters really voting against their self-interest when they vote for candidates who share their values? Loyalty, respect for authority and some degree of sanctification create a more binding social order that places some limits on individualism and egoism. As marriage rates plummet, and globalization and rising diversity erodes the sense of common heritage within each nation, a lot of voters in many western nations find themselves hungering for conservative moral cuisine.
Does our place in Maslow’s hierarchy really determine our susceptibility, vulnerability, and motivation at the voting booth? Haidt says yes and sums his thesis up this way.
When working-class people vote conservative, as most do in the US, they are not voting against their self-interest; they are voting for their moral interest. They are voting for the party that serves to them a more satisfying moral cuisine.
So, these are the same motivators that drive people to guns, bibles, and tribal thinking that demonizes the ‘other’. Is the angry right just a bunch of folks that are scared shitless? It’s an interesting theses. Dr. Bostonboomer probably has more information on some of this than me. I am interested in hearing your thoughts. What is the appeal of voting for your own servitude?
Monday Reads
Posted: May 21, 2012 Filed under: #Occupy and We are the 99 percent!, morning reads, religious extremists, right wing hate grouups | Tags: acquired savants, chicago terrorists/protestors, police plant evidence, right wing hysteria and bigotry, Terry Gilliam 15 CommentsI am exhausted and I’m not even in Colorado yet. It’s a good thing I’m getting some limited exposure to the news these days because it’s full of things like this. Here’s the five most offensive sexist and homophobic offerings by conservatives for the month from Sarah Seltzer at Alternet. I picked a few for you so this is a spew alert!
Rejecting Virginia judicial candidate because he’s gay, then saying “Sodomy is not a civil right.” In Virginia, members of the House of Delegates failed to confirm Tracy Thorne-Begland, an openly gay formal Navy officer raising children with his partner, as a judicial candidate.
His nomination had been seen as a given, with bipartisan support, until lobbying from “both the Family Foundation, a powerful conservative group that opposed his candidacy, and conservative lawmakers, who argued that his past indicated that he would press an activist agenda from the bench ” according to the New York Times.
Even worse? One of the leading opponents of the nomination, Bob Marshall, defended the decision after it got national heat:
Dr. Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks never took an oath of office that they broke. Sodomy is not a civil right. It’s not the same as the Civil Rights Movement.
…
Bills allows pharmacists to deny care to women they think “may” be having abortions.
Kansas Governor Sam Brownback expanded the state “conscience clauses” to allow religious employees at pharmacies and medical facilities to refuse service to women they think “may” be having an abortion. As Robin Marty writes, he’s “legally blessed a virtually open-ended number of situations in which ‘religious’ workers can refuse to assist women under the guise that they believe they ‘may be’ terminating a pregnancy.”
So one consequence is simply refusing to dispense contraception and emergency contraception pills, neither of which terminate pregnancies. But there are other implications, as Marty notes, including that, “The law could also allow refusal of even more medically necessary drugs simply because they may relate to abortions…” like drugs that stop bleeding, for instance.
There’s more evidence that arrests in Chicago for protestors cum terrorists were the result of Cops Gone Wild. Naturally, you have to rely on the foreign press to get the story. Are we getting repeats of 1968?
Deutsch, the attorney representing the suspects, said at the hearing that police had planted weapons at the scene of the arrests. “This is a way to stir up prejudice against a people who are exercising their First Amendment rights,” Deutsch said. “There were undercover police officers that ingratiated themselves with people who come from out of town.”
In a case earlier this month five self-described anarchists were charged with plotting to blow up a bridge near Cleveland after planting fake explosives underneath that federal agents had sold them.
Natalie Wahlberg, a member of the Occupy Chicago movement protesting against income inequality, said: “The charges are utterly ridiculous. CPD [Chicago police department] doesn’t know the difference between home beer-making supplies and Molotov cocktails.”
The National Lawyers Guild, a group of volunteer lawyers representing the protesters, said on Facebook that police “broke down doors with guns drawn and searched residences without a warrant or consent”.
I am a long standing Monty Python fan as well as a big fan of the art of animation. That’s why I was thrilled to learn what Terry Gilliam’s been up to in this week’s The Economist. Here’s Gilliam discussing the difficulties of being non-formula in Hollywood.
To what extent does your reputation as a maverick contribute to the problems you experience?
Hollywood still sees me as someone who won’t be controlled as easily as a young guy straight out of making commercials. They don’t want some ageing hippie who still hasn’t learned to play the game after all these years. And that goes against me sometimes. But it’s not just me. Hollywood has been afraid to take risks for a long time now. All the studios want is a safe pair of hands.
Can you give an example of a studio choosing a “safe pair of hands” over you?
The first Harry Potter film. I was the perfect guy for that movie. They all knew it. J.K. Rowling wanted me to do it; David Heyman, the producer, wanted me to do it. But one guy from Warner’s overruled everyone and Chris Columbus got the gig. I was furious at the time but in hindsight, the level of studio interference on a project that size would have driven me insane.
What effect is Hollywood’s “safe” approach having on audiences?
The longer you keep churning out this production-line crap, the more audiences are going to like it—and need it. There’s an element of security provided by re-makes and re-hashes. We’re at the stage where audiences just want to know that everything will be the same. Maybe it’s because the world has become so diffused and unclear that people just want to go back to what they know over and over again. People need to reassure themselves that Spider-Man can still do the things he’s always done.
I’ve developed a fascination with brain injuries while listening to a NPR series on all the problems that Football players appear to develop midlife. Then there’s the the huge number of brain trauma patients coming out of our military these days. Here’s an interesting article at The Atlantic on how a blow to the head some times creates a genius. Warning! Do not try this at HOME!
For a long time, it was a mystery as to how horses galloped. Did all four hooves at some point leave the ground? Or was one hoof always planted? It wasn’t until the 1880s when a British photographer named Eadweard Muybridge settled the debate with a series of photographs of a horse in midstride. Muybridge took a great interest in capturing the minute details of bodies in motion. The images made him famous.
Muybridge could be obsessive — and eccentric, too. His erratic behavior was blamed on a head injury he’d sustained in a serious stagecoach accident that killed one passenger and wounded all the rest. Now, researchers believe that the crash, which gave Muybridge a permanent brain injury, may actually have been partially responsible for endowing him with his artistic brilliance.
Muybridge may have been what psychiatrists call an acquired savant, somebody with extraordinary talent but who wasn’t born with it and who didn’t learn the skills from someplace else later. In fact, Muybridge’s savant abilities had evidently been buried deep in the recesses of his mind the whole time, and the stagecoach incident had simply unlocked them.
So, that should give you a few interesting things to think about! I’m headed to Colorado on Wednesday so I’ll be a little scarce this week. What’s on your blogging and reading list today?
Red State Menace
Posted: April 27, 2012 Filed under: 2012 elections, Republican politics, right wing hate grouups | Tags: red menance, right wing canards, witchhunt 20 Comments
We’ve known for some time that the new politics involves a good deal of Newspeak. That would be the Orwellian term for creating words or recreating existing words that mean exactly the opposite of what they do or should mean. We’ve had “peacekeeping” missiles, “clean” coal, and a bunch of other nonsense terms that find their way into the political lexicon via endless repetition by partisan media hacks with ideological agendas. No monsters seem as selectively reconstructed in modern history as the term “socialism” which actually has a distinct definition in economics and political science and “communism” which is another unique and utopian (i.e. imaginary) system altogether.
Just when you think we are way past the idea of the red menace, right wingers reinvent the threat. If you read much stuff coming from the Tea Party movement, you would think that the USSR is still in existence, no market reforms occurred in the PRC, and every libRUL is a secret commie. Well, reality and data-based thinkers know there is no such thing as a Soviet-style system in place in Russia or China any more. But then, when has this ever been a problem for the folks who prefer magical thinking to reality?
Let’s review the evidence starting with Michelle Bachmann. Remember this one from last year?
Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann said Thursday that Americans are alarmed that President Barack Obama may cut defense spending at a time when the Soviet Union is becoming a power in the world.
“When you are traveling — I know you are in South Carolina now, you’re obviously in Iowa, you’re up in New Hampshire — are you hearing different things in these states?” Christian radio host Jay Sekulow asked the candidate.
“I would say it’s a unified message,” Bachmann explained. “It really is about jobs and the economy. That doesn’t mean people haven’t [sic] forgotten about protecting life and marriage and the sanctity of the family. People are very concerned about that as well.”
“But what people recognize is that there’s a fear that the United States is in an unstoppable decline. They see the rise of China, the rise of India, the rise of the Soviet Union and our loss militarily going forward. And especially with this very bad debt ceiling bill, what we have done is given a favor to President Obama and the first thing he’ll whack is five hundred billion out of the military defense at a time when we’re fighting three wars. People recognize that.”
BTW, India is the world’s largest democracy with a rule of law and economic system based on English common law. How did they get lumped in with Russia and China? It’s very interesting to see that so many elected officials seem oblivious to history and reality. There is–of course–no such thing as the Soviet Union. But, lo and behold, just last week we learned that Romney has advisers on foreign policy that also have forgotten there is NO SUCH THING AS THE SOVIET UNION.
Attacking the Obama administration for “withdrawing in leading the free world,” former Navy Secretary John Lehman argued on the call that the president’s policies open the nation up to “huge new vulnerabilities.”
An example?
“We are seeing the Soviets pushing into the Arctic with no response from us. In fact the only response from us is to announce the early retirement of the last remaining ice breaker,” Lehman said.
Also, in a discussion on the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) with Russia, former U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Pierre Prosper mistakenly referred to a country that no longer exists.
“You know, Russia is another example where we give and Russia gets, and we get nothing in return,” he said. “The United States abandoned its missile defense sites in Poland and Czechoslovakia, yet Russia does nothing but obstruct us, or efforts in Iran and Syria.”
Czechoslovakia split into two countries–the Czech Republic and Slovakia–in 1993.
Neither country served as a site for the proposed U.S. missile defense system. The U.S. wanted to put part of the system in the Czech Republic, but the country’s prime minister canceled a vote in 2009 that would allow the move to take place.
Later that year, the Obama administration decided to scrap the plan in Eastern Europe, which was first proposed by the Bush administration.
The advisers’ remarks came after Romney’s campaign has had to beat back consistent attacks targeting the candidate as out of touch on matters of foreign policy. The criticism largely stemmed from Romney labeling Russia as the United States’ “number one geopolitical foe” last month.
Of course, the biggest example of Republican baseless fears has been Representative Allen (I see communist democrats) West from Florida. Evidently, he believes liberals, progressives, socialists, and communists are everywhere and basically interchangeable. One would think we learned nothing from our past lives of red baiting. We had two major periods of them. One occurred in the 1920s. The other was the infamous McCarthy version of the 1950s that led to loss of people’s livelihoods, rampant paranoia, and trampling of civil rights. Is this the America that the Tea Party and other right wingers envision?
Bill Moyers resurrects “The Ghost of Joe McCarthy” for those of us that didn’t get a front row seat to the atrocities. He also begins with a reference to 1984–although not the Newspeak one–where we see “amnesia that sets in when we flush events down the memory hole, leaving us at the mercy of only what we know today”. Is this sudden rebirth of the red menace from amnesia or dishonest thinking and belligerence? Scaring people with fully baked lies seems to be the hobgoblin of Republican minds.
Sometimes, though, the past comes back to haunt, like a ghost. It happened recently when we saw Congressman Allen West of Florida on the news.
A Republican and Tea Party favorite, he was asked at a local gathering how many of his fellow members of Congress are “card-carrying Marxists or International Socialists.”
He replied, “I believe there’s about 78 to 81 members of the Democrat Party who are members of the Communist Party. It’s called the Congressional Progressive Caucus.”
By now, little of what Allen West says ever surprises. He has called President Obama “a low level Socialist agitator,” said anyone with an Obama bumper sticker on their car is “a threat to the gene pool” and told liberals like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to “get the hell out of the United States of America.” Apparently, he gets his talking points from Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, or the discredited right wing rocker Ted Nugent.
But this time, we shook our heads in disbelief: “78 to 81 Democrats… members of the Communist Party?” That’s the moment the memory hole opened
up and a ghost slithered into the room. The specter stood there, watching the screen, a snickering smile on its stubbled face. Sure enough, it was the ghost of Senator Joseph McCarthy, the Wisconsin farm boy who grew up to become one of the most contemptible thugs in American politics.
There are a number of ways to disagree with a person’s politics. Goodness knows you can comb through the posts here and find a good long list of all the problems I have with Obama and the Democratic Party. I don’t need to resort to things like “show me your Birth Certificate” or names like “Kenyan Muslim Usurper” to get a point across. Why are we going back to these tactics of our ugly past?
Like McCarthy, the more Allen West is challenged about his comments, the more he doubles down on them. Now he’s blaming the “corrupt liberal media” for stirring the pot against him – a trick for which McCarthy taught the master class. And the congressman’s latest fusillades continue to distort the beliefs and policies of those he smears – no surprise there, either.
To help him continue his fight for “the heart and soul” of America he’s asking his supporters for a contribution of ten dollars or more. There could even be a super PAC in this – with McCarthy’s ghost as its honorary chairman.
Plenty of kindred spirits are there to sign on. Like the author of the book The Grand Jihad, who wrote that whether Obama is Christian or not, “The faith to which Obama actually clings is neocommunism.” Or the blogger who claims Obama is running the country into the ground “by way of the same type of race-baiting and class warfare Communism cannot exist without,” and that his policies are “unbecoming to an American president.”
From there it’s only a short hop to the kind of column that popped up on the right wing website Newsmax hinting of a possible coup “as a last resort to resolve the ‘Obama problem.’” Military intervention, the author wrote, “is what Obama’s exponentially accelerating agenda for ‘fundamental change’ toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America.” The column was quickly withdrawn but not before the website Talking Points Memo exposed it.
The closer we draw to national elections, the more the “silly season” starts. We look to the media and to interviews and debates to separate the good from the bad and the ugly. We need a lot more than that these days. We need folks that are willing to separate the fact from the fiction, the dystopian fiction, and the science fiction. How can any one take any one seriously that still believes there’s a Soviet Union and a communist under every bed? How can a presidential candidate who has no experience in the foreign policy area be taking lessons from people that can’t even get their history right?
At the time, the media had Edward R. Murrow who famously said:
This is no time for men who oppose Senator McCarthy’s methods to keep silent. We can deny our heritage and our history, but we cannot escape responsibility for the result. There is no way for a citizen of a Republic to abdicate his responsibilities.”
There was also Boston Lawyer Joseph Welch who defended the US Army when McCarthy was trying to witch hunt there.
“You’ve done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency? … If there is a God in heaven it will do neither you nor your cause any good.”
I wonder where our modern counterparts to these two brave men are these days?
Partisan Rules and the Agonizing Death of a Functional Republic
Posted: April 26, 2012 Filed under: 2012 elections, 2012 presidential campaign, 2012 primaries, Republican politics, right wing hate grouups 10 CommentsMy very Republican father and I were talking about the high levels of unemployment and the impact that was having on the deficit and the current problems with Social Security and Medicare. He was trying to reconcile how long this thing has drug on and why he wasn’t seeing any efforts being made that were similar to what happened during the Great Depression. He’s no FDR fan either. Even he had the sense that there were forces that were at work that were preventing a recovery. I muttered something about partisan politics and he had to agree. It’s gotten so that beating your opponent takes precedence over what you’re supposed to do once elected. We’re electing people that don’t want our government to work. They only want to win and spin.
You’ll undoubtedly hear a lot in the upcoming days about Robert Draper’s new book ‘Do Not Ask What Good We Do.’ It’s a book about the Republicans in Congress and their political agenda. There’s a focus on Tea Party politicians as well as the gang of stubborn white patriarchs. We knew from the very beginning–as announced almost immediately by Mitch McConnell–that the Republicans were intent on making Obama a one term president. The book details some very ugly things about the effort. It also details how elected Republican pols have begin to act like an angry mob at times because many have come with their own brand of “kill the beast” that is our Constitutional Republic. Still, the Draper book does not appear to be about one vast monolithic, stereotypical Republican right winger as it profiles some of the most controversial members. The anger binds them and divides them in intriguing ways.
At what point does ugly partisanship and sour grapes become such an issue that voters will wake up and vote their own interests for a change? Why are we such a nation of Angry Birds these days?
As President Barack Obama was celebrating his inauguration at various balls, top Republican lawmakers and strategists were conjuring up ways to submarine his presidency at a private dinner in Washington.
The event — which provides a telling revelation for how quickly the post-election climate soured — serves as the prologue of Robert Draper’s much-discussed and heavily-reported new book, “Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives.”
According to Draper, the guest list that night (which was just over 15 people in total) included Republican Reps. Eric Cantor (Va.), Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), Paul Ryan (Wis.), Pete Sessions (Texas), Jeb Hensarling (Texas), Pete Hoekstra (Mich.) and Dan Lungren (Calif.), along with Republican Sens. Jim DeMint (S.C.), Jon Kyl (Ariz.), Tom Coburn (Okla.), John Ensign (Nev.) and Bob Corker (Tenn.). The non-lawmakers present included Newt Gingrich, several years removed from his presidential campaign, and Frank Luntz, the long-time Republican wordsmith. Notably absent were Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) — who, Draper writes, had an acrimonious relationship with Luntz.
For several hours in the Caucus Room (a high-end D.C. establishment), the book says they plotted out ways to not just win back political power, but to also put the brakes on Obama’s legislative platform.
“If you act like you’re the minority, you’re going to stay in the minority,” Draper quotes McCarthy as saying. “We’ve gotta challenge them on every single bill and challenge them on every single campaign.”
The conversation got only more specific from there, Draper reports. Kyl suggested going after incoming Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner for failing to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes while at the International Monetary Fund. Gingrich noted that House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) had a similar tax problem. McCarthy chimed in to declare “there’s a web” before arguing that Republicans could put pressure on any Democrat who accepted campaign money from Rangel to give it back.
As most of you know, I was not a supporter of candidate Obama. However, there are no words to express how I feel about the idea of a group of elected officials planning a political coup during some of the worst days of our Republic over what seems like a bunch of partisan sour grapes. In this tale, there is little care or thought given to the suffering of the country in the grips of a recession and endless, worthless wars. There is only plotting for personal power. There are a lot of details about how the election of the Tea Party candidates has led to more problems that make our country look ungovernable and our differences irreconcilable. In some ways, the Republican take over of the House sandbagged the very people that plotted to make it so.
The anti-big-government zealotry that swept the Republicans into power turned out to be a major obstacle in the debt-ceiling negotiations with the White House. As Eric Cantor told Joe Biden in the talks, the best compromise House Republicans could offer was “giving you a vote on the debt ceiling. You may not think that’s a big deal. But you’ve got to understand, I’ve got a lot of guys that think that not raising the debt ceiling may not be such a bad thing—that in fact it may be just what we need.” Cantor then added wistfully “We’re working hard to educate our guys.”
The House Majority Leader didn’t want to wind up suffering the same fate during the debt ceiling negotiations as the No. 2 House Republican, Roy Blunt, who became a pariah among conservatives for his role in negotiating the details of TARP in 2008. When Cantor saw that he couldn’t bridge the differences between the Republicans and the White House on revenue increases, he backed out of the talks. To avoid blame, Cantor claimed that the Democrats were intending to do the same and he just wanted to preempt them. This “had no basis in fact,” Draper wrote.
Draper profiles many of the strongest Republican Tea Party characters in the book. This includes Allen West who appears to be completely out of touch with any form of reality as we know it.
Draper profiles firebrands like Florida’s Allen West, a former Army lieutenant colonel who attempts to induce his draconian brand of military discipline on America’s finances and security apparatus. West is also the only Republican member of the Congressional Black Caucus. West comes across as someone whose mouth gets him in trouble (he recently nabbed coverage for labeling 81 of his House colleagues communists, and then got more coverage for refusing to back down from the accusation); his hand-wringing paranoia would have more bite if it weren’t so nostalgic. But in Draper’s reporting, he becomes a surprisingly nuanced person who isn’t afraid to defy the more conservative elements of his base (including a vote clearing the way for that Republican whipping-horse, the Environmental Protection Agency, to clean Florida’s waterways after farmers in his district encouraged him to vote that way).
This may not be one of those books that stands the test of time. But, we need this kind of hand book right now. Here’s a headline that will give you some pause: “Dick Lugar trails by 5, poll says”.
Indiana Sen. Dick Lugar has fallen behind state Treasurer Richard Mourdock by five points, according to a new poll released Thursday.
The survey, taken Tuesday and Wednesday by Wenzel Strategies on behalf of Citizens United, places Mourdock at 44 percent and Lugar at 39 percent. Nearly 17 percent remain undecided with just 12 days to go until the Indiana Senate primary.Citizens United is backing Mourdock in the May 8 contest.
Wenzel found that Mourdock’s lead is powered by self-described tea party conservatives, who comprise 36 percent of the GOP electorate.
Among that group of voters, Mourdock holds a commanding 63 percent to 24 percent lead. Lugar’s ability to keep the race close is due to moderates and traditional conservatives, which both favor the incumbent, according to Wenzel.
It seems like we had the birth of our nation in the Age of Reason and we may experience our death throes in the Age of the Angry Mob.
Monday Morning Reads
Posted: April 23, 2012 Filed under: morning reads, Newt Gingrich, right wing hate grouups, War on Women, Women's Rights | Tags: ALEC, BIshop Daniel Jenky, GOA, Newt Gingrich and the Secret Service, Willard's whacky advisers 22 Comments
Good Morning!
I have a little this and that from the crazy grab bag for you today.
One of the gun advocates associated with writing gun rights boiler plate laws for ALEC is way beyond fringe. He has ties to a white supremacist group.
As the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) works to distance itself from the NRA-bill it backed as a “model” adopted in dozens of states, it may be hoping that people will not continue to dig into the damage done by its long love affair with gun groups, like the gun-industry funded NRA and fringe groups with ties to white supremacists like Gun Owners of America (GOA).
GOA’s Executive Director is Larry Pratt. In the early 1980s, Pratt and the GOA were outspoken supporters of the white rulers in South Africa during apartheid, calling a press conference in 1984 to present “evidence” that allegedly tied Bishop Desmond Tutu to an effort to violently overthrow the white minority regime in the country. In 1990, Pratt wrote a book titled “Armed People Victorious” based on his study of death squads in Guatemala and the Philippines, and advocated for similar “citizen defense patrols” in the United States. The idea reportedly caught on in 1992, when Pratt addressed a three-day meeting of neo-Nazis and Christian Adherents organized by white supremacist Pete Peters. He shared the stage with a former Ku Klux Klan leader and an Aryan Nation official.
Pratt also held leadership roles in ALEC for many years. His relationship with ALEC began in 1978, when ALEC began an effort to oppose a constitutional amendment giving the District of Columbia full voting rights in Congress. When Pratt was elected to the Virginia State Legislature in 1981, he took a leadership position in ALEC. He sat on ALEC’s board even after he left the legislature, serving as its treasurer into the 1990s.
More examples of today’s nuts that get political platforms from the right wing include a Tea Party Congressman that says the President will “commit treason” if he gets another term and a Catholic Bishop that compares the President to Hitler. What is in people’s breakfast cereal these days? Nuts, flakes, and whacky weed?
Let’s deal with the Bishop first. Of course, this has to do with granting women access to contraception. Rev Wright has nothing on this red beanie dude.
Last Saturday, Catholic Bishop Daniel Jenky delivered a homily in which he claimed that President Obama “now seems intent on following a similar path” to Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin.
Now, the Tea Party Congressmen from Pennslyvania who evidently doesn’t like the START treaties. He thinks Obama will sell state secrets too.
At a campaign fundraiser last week, Tea Party Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R-PA) warned attendees that President Obama would commit treason if reelected in November.
Fitzpatrick was listing the reasons why voters should not support the President, and for reason number three, he told the audience that President Obama would have no qualms auctioning off state secrets to foreign countries.
The Huffington Post flagged Fitzpatrick’s comments, which were distributed by the progressive advocacy group Credo SuperPAC:
“When he left the microphone on in Russia, we all heard what he said … left unrestrained, without the inhibitions of the next election — he’d have flexibility, he said, flexibility to do what he wants to do. Whether it’s trade away … the secrets of our national intelligence, to, what he could do to the United States Supreme Court in the next four years.”
Here’s a little Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy for those of you that like to follow the CIA. The CIA is afraid of High Tech Border Iris Scans.
Busy spy crossroads such as Dubai, Jordan, India and many E.U. points of entry are employing iris scanners to link eyeballs irrevocably to a particular name. Likewise, the increasing use of biometric passports, which are embedded with microchips containing a person’s face, sex, fingerprints, date and place of birth, and other personal data, are increasingly replacing the old paper ones. For a clandestine field operative, flying under a false name could be a one-way ticket to a headquarters desk, since they’re irrevocably chained to whatever name and passport they used.
“If you go to one of those countries under an alias, you can’t go again under another name,” explains a career spook, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he remains an agency consultant. “So it’s a one-time thing – one and done. The biometric data on your passport, and maybe your iris, too, has been linked forever to whatever name was on your passport the first time. You can’t show up again under a different name with the same data.”
The issue is exceedingly sensitive to agency operatives and intelligence officials, past and present. “I think you have finally found a topic I can’t talk about,” said Charles Faddis, a CIA operations officer who retired in 2008.
“I can’t help you with this,” added a former intelligence agency chief. “I do think this is a significant issue with great implications for the safety and security of our people, so I recommend you not publish anything on this. You can do a lot of harm and no good.”
Romney spokesman Richard Grennell seems a little too interested in the wives of pols. His twitter stream is so catty that I can’t imagine why women’s groups aren’t
demanding his resignation. And they wonder why they have a woman problem with this sophomoric dude on board … topless beer pong and groping cut-outs of women up next folks!
Grennell’s not the only oddball on board. Robert Bork–you remember him– is advising Romney on the Supreme Court and the Kansas Secretary of State–rabidly anti-immigrant–is one of those guys that makes Hispanics crazy-go-nuts is the big adviser on immigration law. However, the Romeny camp is walking the title back a bit.
Kobach himself has continued to insist that he is not only advising the campaign but fully expects Romney to support the use of Arizona’s draconian SB-1070 anti-immigration law as a national model.
Nothing up my sleeve, Rocky!
Okay, so this is kewl. Former GOP Presidential candidate Jon Huntsman is comparing the GOP to the Chinese Communist Party. Excuse the link to Buzz Feed … but it was funny enough I had to use it.
Former Republican candidate Jon Huntsman took a battle axe to his own party, comparing it to China’s Communist Party and criticizing it’s standard bearer in a wide-ranging interview at the 92nd Street Y Sunday night.
Recounting his first experience on the presidential debate stage in Iowa last August, Huntsman says he was struck by the question “Is this the best we could do?”
Huntsman, the former Utah governor and once President Barack Obama’s Ambassador to China, expressed disappointment that the Republican Party disinvited him from a Florida fundraiser in March after he publicly called for a third party.
“This is what they do in China on party matters if you talk off script,” he said.
Meanwhile, Moonbeam Gingrich is wasting up to possibly $40,000 a day of US Tax payer money by keeping his secret service detail. Maybe it’s because they know the location of the best little whore houses near Tranquility Base?
Gingrich, who has had secret service for about a month, has vowed to stay in the race until presumptive nominee Mitt Romney reaches the 1,144 delegates needed to secure the nomination. Gingrich has the “Camp David” package of Secret Service, which includes but is not limited to six cars, six federal agents, four state troopers at a campaign stop, four local agents when the candidate arrives and a press agent if there is a press bus, a person with knowledge of the Gingrich campaign said.
Although the cost to keep the Secret Service detail on the Gingrich campaign couldn’t be determined, it includes agents’ meals, hotel stays, transportation and salary. The person with knowledge of the Secret Service and the campaign said Gingrich’s protection might be helping him stay in race because the cost is borne by taxpayers.
The campaign has no intention of changing course, however. “Where does he not qualify for secret service? Has Mitt Romney secured the nomination?” Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond asked.
Well, that’s a little bit of the weird and whacky things I’ve found in the news. What’s on your blogging and reading list today?








Recent Comments