Archive for the 'Republican Party' category

TLC’s Sarah Palin’s Alaska Jumps the Shark by Attacking Critical Blogger

Dec 31 2010 Published by under Featured News, Republican Party

TLC’s “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” website has a Broadsheet section written by David Murray. Last night, Mr Murray actually attacked a Texas blogger who had the temerity to correct Ms Palin over her inaccurate claim that environmentalists were “limiting deforestation” in Alaska. Mr Murray adds to the spice of this late night musing by actually suggesting that this show isn’t political as he says, “once or twice per episode, Sarah does make a quick aside with some political content.”

Yes, that’s right, Mr Murray. Once or twice an episode Sarah Palin makes a dig at Michelle Obama or the President or the feds or some other evil liberal target. The rest of the time she’s busy rehabbing her image with narratives about “working hard” and “not quitting” and being a “tough” female. Why, in one episode she ran around looking like Rambo for the Ronnnie Reagan vote. Then she takes her petty attacks at her critics, like suggesting that “refudiate” was a typing error because the “d and the f are right next to each other”. A pause while we realize that if she had used the d, she would have made an even worse mess of the word. Image rehab, fighting critics and sending political messages all wrapped up in the neat flagship of a “reality” TV show.

At any rate, I wouldn’t say that was political either if I were working for a network that was engaging in paid political advertising for a very divisive candidate and receiving tax credits from the state of Alaska (for the star’s salary if nothing else), because you see, that would be propaganda for profit at the tax payers’ expense and on public airwaves and that would be uncool on many fronts.

And that wouldn’t be good for TLC to admit.

Only TLC gave Sarah Palin Executive Producer credit and control over editing (per her own tweets), so this is her message and everyone in America knows that Palin politicizes everything she touches. So TLC has to defend her from suggestions that she is making political attacks and we all know how Palin loves to be defended, so this is another cozy relationship of money, power and elite media congloms working to sell Palin, Inc to America. Nice work, TLC.

Let’s not forget that TLC “disinvited” media critic Jennifer Pozner from TLC’s “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” podcast because they claimed she was “too political” for the show. In the past, Jennifer Pozner has criticized “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” as nothing more than a paid political commercial wherein the politician is getting paid by the network. Too political, you say? Gee, I’m flummoxed.

Now, on to the specifics of this particular fight.

Malia Litman, author of “Rebuttal to the Rogue”, who blogs on “Malia Litman’s blog” was watching last week’s episode of “Sarah Palin runs for President” (oops, I mean, “Sarah Palin’s America”…no, “Sarah Palin’s Alaska”) and she became offended that Sarah Palin claimed conservationists were somehow stopping logging and deforestation of Alaska. God forbid we should limit deforestation of our resources. However, let’s not get bogged down in that fight.

This is pure vintage Palin. She can make an enemy out of thin air. Because, see, no one is stopping loggers in Alaska. No evil environmentalists are stopping “progress” in Alaska. This is another Palin v No One fight, where the viewer gets to plug in the evil guy (who is always a liberal and usually in the White House).

Watch here. The rant against no one starts at 8:22:

Then Malia Litman does due diligence and corrects Palin:

“In the same episode, Palin criticized environmentalists for their opposition to logging and deforestation. Although nothing about Obama was mentioned by Palin, the viewer certainly assumed that Palin was critical of the Obama administration for any efforts to limit deforestation in Alaska. In this instance it was Palin’s total absence of acknowledgement of the attempt by the Obama administration to allow the expansion of logging in Alaska, that was so offensive. Just this year the Obama administration has come under harsh criticism for its approval of the sale of timber from the Tongass National Forest in Alaska. The Obama administration has approved the sale of timber from the Tongass National Forest in Alaska. The 17-million acre forest is the largest stand of continuous temperate rain forest in the U.S. and contains a lot of old-growth trees. This first sale will come after seven miles of roads are built for the 381-acre clear-cut. Either Palin didn’t know or purposefully failed to mention that the Obama administration had worked to limit the laws regulating the limited removal of trees in Alaska. The Obama administration allowed the cutting down of trees, in spite of the knowledge that deforestation now accounts for nearly ¼ of global CO2 emissions in the world.”

Do we all know whom she means? This is the woman who can’t stop making petty jabs at Michelle Obama’s healthy eating initiative, after all. Yes, if you live in America, you’re aware of whom Palin thinks of as her mortal enemy; he who stole her crown. Or as they call him on her heavily moderated Facebook page, the “usurper” President. He whom Palin can not, will not, stop criticizing at every turn until the Russian newspaper Pravda called her out as a traitor to her country. But Mr Murray wants us to pretend that we don’t have any idea whom she means. I mean, we can’t prove she meant that! She never said it. So there. That get’s TLC off the hook for Palin’s misinformation.

Wait, see how that worked? That’s called moving the goal post. Because you see, Palin did misinform her viewers and one would like to think that as former Governor she knows what goes on with logging and deforestation laws in her state. But perhaps I give her too much credit. I hear she gets her information from Fox, so maybe we should give her the benefit of the doubt.

Here comes TLC’s “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” Broadsheet to rebut the rebuttal! December 30, 2010 by Broadsheet:

….Here’s the excerpt, with the weaker assumption in bolded text:
…” Palin criticized environmentalists for their opposition to logging and deforestation. Although nothing about Obama was mentioned by Palin, the viewer certainly assumed that Palin was critical of the Obama administration for any efforts to limit deforestation in Alaska. In this instance it was Palin’s total absence of acknowledgement (sic) of the attempt by the Obama administration to allow the expansion of logging in Alaska, that was so offensive.”

Now, Palin has of course been critical of Barack Obama in the past; that’s not the part of that statement that seems (to me) to be unreasonable. It’s that, even though Sarah said nothing of Obama, the viewer would immediately think “she’s talking trash about Obama!” And if she’s not talking about Obama (which we really don’t have very much reason to believe she is, her not mentioning him at all), then why would it be offensive not to bring up his track record on logging in Alaska? She didn’t mention a lot of people’s track records. Is that offensive? I don’t think it is…

No, see, what’s so offensive is that Ms Palin attacks outward over false issues and implies that enemies like evil liberal environmentalists are out to get hard-working loggers, while Mr Murray, Malia and I know this isn’t true. That is the issue. Let’s stop moving goal posts, shall we?

I wonder why Mr Murray left that part out of his quote from Malia’s blog? I wonder why Mr Murray didn’t even have the courtesy to link to Malia’s blog so people could make up their own minds about what she meant. Maybe he didn’t want people to see the truth. After all, that would look like TLC was funding baseless attacks on the Left and we all know they aren’t doing that. They certainly aren’t funding a misinformation campaign or a political ad.

Now if only the rest of America would kindly swallow this lump of coal so TLC could collect it’s monies and move on before things get too dicey. Oh, and maybe TLC should supply us with the information about exactly how much money they get from the film tax credits and incentives if they qualify for them. We already know that the people of Alaska are paying 44% of Sarah Palin’s salary per the film incentive. After all, TLC is using public airwaves and they’re using tax-payer money, so this is our business.

76 responses so far

The Ten Commandments Resurface as the Personhood Amendment

Dec 31 2010 Published by under Featured News, Issues, Republican Party

Take a good look: this is the Constitution of the future

Okay, I admit this is really not news. The entire Christian fundamentalist movement(s) has as its goal “restoring” a Biblical society that never existed and basically turning back the clock to the “good old days” when the Church could punish with fiery death anyone who disagreed with it.

What the AFA has done is to promote a comprehensive agenda for this return. Supporters call it a “Personhood Amendment” which is a very positive-sounding name for something that is positively medieval in construction and intent. After all, these Christofascists aren’t really all that interested in persons if they’re gay, or Muslim, or pagan, or feminist. A lot of people, if the AFA and its cohorts on the religious right had its way, would lose their personhood.

The personhood amendment was already tried in Colorado. Amendment 62, “would have banned abortion, many forms of birth control and embryonic stem cell research in the state.”

They have managed to get the Personhood Amendment on the ballot in Mississippi for 2011 to coincide with the gubernatorial elections. According to realitycheck.org, “two prior efforts in 2005 and 2007 failed to win enough support to get the question before voters.” It reads as follows:

Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Mississippi: SECTION 1. Article III of the constitution of the state of Mississippi is hearby amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION TO READ: Section 33. Person defined. As used in this Article III of the state constitution, “The term ‘person’ or ‘persons’ shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.” This initiative shall not require any additional revenue for implementation.

One problem is that the state’s Constitution doesn’t allow voter referendums to alter the Bill of Rights (maybe they should start calling it the Bill of Restrictions – or better, the Ten Commandments). Not at all certain how they intend to get through that except by pulling a “Dubya” and simply ignoring the Constitution. One happy coincidence for these medieval advocates: the American Family Association (AFA) is headquartered in Mississippi.

Matt Friedeman of the AFA’s American Family Radio said that if the proposal succeeds in 2011, he hopes it would lead the way to the criminalization of abortion across the country:

“So what we’re hoping for here is that one of these initiatives will be taken all the way to the Supreme Court and they’ll have to decide at that point what to do with it. And hopefully at that juncture we have a pro-life majority, and you never know from year to year to year what’s gonna happen there, but we hope we have a pro-life majority and we hope the day comes when Roe v. Wade is wiped off the books and we can go back to the states. Maybe even, if God would allow, to get a pro-life amendment for the whole country.”


Bryan Fischer used the opportunity to push his usual violations of the Constitution and his vision of a medieval-style theocracy:

“One of the things we look for from our political leaders is we want to see them work to align the public policy of our country with the standards of the word of God, that’s what we want, we want an alignment. We’re not talking about a theocracy where the clergy rules this country; we’re talking about statesmen, both men and women, who are committed as a matter of moral conviction to align the public policy of the United States with the word of God.”


This is not just a move to ban abortion and overturn Roe vs. Wade but an attack on science and on the Constitution. It is also a violation of the Constitution because it promotes the viewpoint of a specific religion. It is the insistence at the heart of these amendments that a Christian viewpoint be the only relevant viewpoint that is the most objectionable. Most of these people, if polled, would likely react violently to any suggestion that Islamic principles govern the process; so why should Christian principles be seen as any less objectionable?
If you go to a site like personhood.net you find the following rationale:

Throughout the history of the Church the doctrinal teaching of the “Sanctity of Life” (Genesis 1:26-27) has been the belief that Man is created Imago Dei (Latin: in the image of God) and therefore has worth at all stages of life. This is the bedrock of Western civilization’s understanding and practice of human dignity.

Besides being misleading (human life was valued before Christianity) the statement is also demonstrably false. Christians slaughtered human beings of all ages with happy abandon for nearly 2000 years before the European Enlightenment freed the Western World of some of the Church’s darker practices – big killers too, like crusades, inquisitions, and witch-burnings – you know,  real pro-life activities.

Les Riely, sponsor of the Mississippi amendment, revealingly says,

Isaiah 59 tells us that ,’ the LORD’S hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear’ so we first give all praise and honor to our Lord Jesus Christ for hearing our prayers and giving us the victory in this round.

It’s Jesus this, Jesus that. Jesus isn’t in the Constitution. Neither is Christianity, neither are the Ten Commandments.

It’s a little late now to try to convince us you really do value life. Did you really have to kill millions to make that point? If all life is sacred, why do women have to die to save a fetus if her life is endangered by her pregnancy? That would have been the effect of the “life-loving” Colorado amendment.

There is no reason at all once you cast aside Christian insistence on being considered “True Religion” and the concomitant assertion that only their viewpoint is valid, which is exactly the determination government is not permitted to make according to the Constitution.

It is not as if Christians are being told they cannot be Christians, or hold firm to their religious convictions. No one is forcing Christians to have sex outside of marriage, or to have abortions, or to marry a person of the same sex, or to accept stem cell treatment. If you don’t believe it’s right, don’t do it. You have that right. But you positively do not have the right to force these beliefs on others by legislating them into law. The Constitution forbids this. The Constitution is about granting and defending rights; the Ten Commandments are about restricting them. Let’s not confuse them.

19 responses so far

Federal Court Says Murkowski In, Miller Out

Dec 30 2010 Published by under Featured News, Issues, Republican Party

I wrote the other day about Joe Miller’s refusal to accept defeat in his race against Lisa Murkowski, who was the victim of a Palin-Tea Party Express ambush before the primary. She came back strong in a write-in campaign and edged Joe Miller in the general election.

Murkowski had the grace to accept defeat in the primary. Joe Miller hasn’t been able to demonstrate he even knows what grace is, let alone intends to demonstrate it. It’s not for lack of opportunity:

Joe just lost out on his federal case – the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out his lawsuit on Tuesday, just a week after the Alaska Supreme Court did the same. The federal judge said Miller hadn’t raised any federal issues and that he would not second guess the Alaska Supreme Court. Take that, Sarah Palin! You brought in out-of-state money to beat Lisa Murkowski but the much-hated federal government won’t interfere in what is the state’s business.

How that must hurt.

Miller of course, is still whining:

“I am disappointed with the federal court’s ruling today. The U.S. Constitution’s Elections Clause presented the most significant constitutional issue. Specifically, should the courts be required to follow the legislature’s standard for the selection of U.S. senators or create their own? My legal team believes that the clear language of the Election Clause as well as precedent support our claims. Thus, we are evaluating the ruling and determining what our next step should be.”

Miller can always appeal. But that won’t stop Lisa Murkowski from taking her seat in the 112th Congress on January 5 because the federal judge lifted the hold on the certification of the election.

It’s a done deal. Only Joe Miller seems unaware of it.

Miller beat Murkowski in the August GOP primary but lost to her in the November election. The Alaska Supreme Court ruled against him. A federal judge has ruled against him. More importantly, the people of Alaska ruled against him by casting more ballots for Lisa Murkowski.

Murkowski told the Anchorage Daily News

“This is pretty great news. It means that I can breathe a sigh of relief knowing that next week Alaska will have two senators in the United States Senate and there would not be any lapse that could have happened had certification been held up very much longer.”

She has reason to be happy.

“I have had a bottle of champagne in just about every refrigerator where I have visited over this Christmas holiday, and I haven’t been able to release that cork yet.”

What Miller will do is anyone’s guess. Unlike one of Palin’s other favorites, he’s an employable individual, being an attorney and all, and won’t have to steal from his campaign funds to get by, or form a pac to give himself a paycheck. Even so, he really wanted that seat and he shows no signs of giving up trying to find a way to weasel it out of the winner’s hands.

I suggested last time Miller hold man up. I won’t suggest any of us hold our breaths.

16 responses so far

The GOP’s Anti-Constitutional Amendment

Dec 28 2010 Published by under Featured News, Issues, Republican Party

What does the Republican Party stand for? They claim fiscal conservatism but this is demonstrably untrue, as the history of the past half-century demonstrates. They talk a lot about social conservatism but sex, drug, and prostitution scandals are no more a stranger to Republicans than to Democrats. They claim to represent the voice of the people but seem unconcerned about what the people want. They talk about the evils of pork but embrace earmarks with both hands, or want to “re-define” them so they can have them while speaking out against them. They talk about the sanctity of the Constitution but when they know anything about it at all (which is seldom enough) they oppose it at every turn. They talk about America right or wrong but if they oppose the Constitution, can they really claim to support America?

The GOP has become increasingly parasitical over the past decade and it has done a better job of enriching its individual members than running the country. Two wars, the economy in the tank, and no answers but more of the same.

Then there is the little issue of secessionism. Cloaked in talk of the Tenth Amendment, we could still hear the seditious talk of “Second Amendment” remedies and an extreme interpretation of States Rights that can only mean secessionism – though the word itself has been mentioned a time or two. Secession: how American is that?

The federal government established by the Constitution has become the Great Satan in Republican terminology. The federal government is out to get us; it is taking away our rights. But the Constitution was written to curb the rights-stealing behavior of local government, those same state legislatures now complaining most stridently about it. Any surprise there?

The problem is the Constitution itself. It says something Republicans don’t want it to say. It says everyone is equal before the law. In an age of reactionary white Christian privilege, this is most inconvenient. The Constitutionally established federal government is there to protect our rights – and to protect us from ourselves – the “excesses of democracy” to use an 18th century term for the problem.

That leaves the GOP in a bit of a bind, trying to seem pro-America while being anti-America. The Constitution as it exists has to go. Some have proposed repeal of all amendments, which is of course an absurdity since the first ten (the Bill of Rights) were attached to the Constitution by the same people who wrote and ratified the Constitution. It was, of course, understood that other amendments were likely and indeed, would prove necessary. The Founding Fathers knew they could not look far enough into the future to make a static document.

Yet Republicans insist on reinterpreting history to mean that the original Constitution should stand as written – though of course, they like the Second Amendment and the Tenth. How those are somehow holy and others profane – the 16th, for example, which authorized a federal income tax, or the 17th, which allowed for direct election of senators, taking it away from the states, or even the 19th, which gave women the vote) is unclear. We don’t all get what we want. The framers of the Constitution did not. James Madison, who right or wrongly came to be known as the Father of the Constitution, did not.

Now some Republicans are proposing a constitutional amendment like none we have ever seen, a sort of anti-constitutional amendment, one that would permit the states the Constitution was intended to curb and force into line, to ignore the Constitution by voting to overturn any act of Congress.

It was first proposed by a Georgetown law professor, Randy E. Barnett, in 2009 as a means of “redressing the imbalance of power between state and federal power.” Legislative leaders in 12 states support it (Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, South Carolina, Texas and Utah, and Virginia); Eric Cantor, the incoming House Majority Leader, backs it.

There are two ways this can be made to happen:

  1. Both houses of Congress must pass it;
  2. It can be proposed at a convention called by Congress if 2/3 of the states petition for it.

If either of these conditions obtain, three-quarters (thirty eight) of the states must then approve the amendment.

Eric Cantor puts the case for the amendment thusly:

“Washington has grown far too large and has become far too intrusive, reaching into nearly every aspect of our lives. Massive expenditures like the stimulus, unconstitutional mandates like the takeover of health care and intrusions into the private sector like the auto bailouts have threatened the very core of the American free market. The repeal amendment would provide a check on the ever-expanding federal government, protect against Congressional overreach and get the government working for the people again, not the other way around.”

What Cantor chooses to ignore is the danger of those local “excesses of democracy” feared by the Constitution’s framers, notably, James Madison. A local government can be as intrusive as a federal and can trample rights just as thoroughly. The Constitution is designed to secure our rights even if local majorities favor stripping us of them. Look, for example, at Proposition 8 in California. The State of California might vote to take away the constitutionally-guaranteed rights of a particular group (usually a minority of course, ethnic, religious, gender, etc) but the Constitution says that you can’t do that.

The Constitution is not the enemy and therefore, the federal government is not the enemy. True, any government can be oppressive, but Republican rhetoric does not recognize this possibility. They have made the federal government the enemy when the real threat to our liberty comes from the same source feared by the framers of the Constitution. They recognized the need for a strong central government, the same strong central government the GOP now wants to dismantle in order to apparently return to the days of the Articles of Confederation when the states functioned as independent nations as separated divided by conflicting local interests.

Our government functions on a system of checks and balances. The states already have a check on excesses of the federal government: it’s called Congress, the members of which are all elected by the people of the individual states to represent their interests.

When States get to chose which laws they will obey and not obey, the United States will have come to an end. They already get a say in the process when they elect their representatives to Congress. That is how it was meant to be, and it has worked for over two-hundred years. Ironically, groups that support this “repeal amendment” (Barnett calls it a “federalism amendment”) claim to want to “restore the Constitution” when what they are proposing is exactly the opposite. It is time to recognize the GOP for what it is: the forces of anarchy, the same that nearly destroyed us from 1861-65, threatening to tear our nation apart.

7 responses so far

Republican Support for Sarah Palin Plunging in Polls

Dec 28 2010 Published by under Featured News, Issues, Republican Party, White House

Sarah Palin fares badly in latest poll

Happy New Year, America. Your country is recovering its sanity.

Yes, it’s true. After a rough two years of Palinitis stained by winning Politifacts’ Lie of Year award among other ignoble distinctions, it appears that even Republicans are mournfully unclenching their stubborn fists from around Palin’s star bursts. A new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll was conducted December 17-19 and it turns out that support for Ms Palin is nose-diving among Republicans. She has, in fact, lost 18% of her support since 2008 among Republicans. Sigh. Our country may be spared a civil war in 2012. Finally, the Republicans are doing something for America!

CNN Political Ticker reports:

“Among liberal Democrats, 85 percent say they want to see the party re-nominate Obama in 2012,” says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “Among moderate Democrats, his support is almost that high.”

In the battle for the GOP presidential nomination, the survey suggests Palin may have some work to do if she throws her hat in the ring. Only 49 percent of Republicans say that they are likely to support Sen. John McCain’s running mate in 2008 for the Republican nomination in 2012.

“That’s a huge 18-point drop since December of 2008, when two-thirds of GOPers said they were likely to support Palin. It also puts her well behind potential rivals Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney, and a bit behind Newt Gingrich as well,” adds Holland.”

Republicans’ dreams that Ronnie had come back to them in a skirt are dying a tedious, painful death, during which we are all being subjected to Palin’s media blitz until even the sight of her makes us weary. Palin refused to do the work necessary to be taken seriously and cashed in on her fame to make money and in doing so, she mismanaged her star power if she has political ambitions.

Oh, that’s right. I left out that OTHER part of the poll. President Obama enjoys a comfy 85% support from liberal Democrats and 78% of Democrats questioned in the poll want the President to run in 2012. Only 19% would like another nominee to replace the President.

Oh, dear. I’m glad I’m not anywhere near Wasilla right now. I’m afraid I can hear tin cans hitting a refrigerator from my kitchen window. And here the Conservatives for Palin were working so hard on their talking points about how Ms Palin had held elected office longer than President Obama (if you discounted his Presidency and included the City Council for Palin), because we all know how well the talking point of “executive experience” went over in 2008, why not try it again, even after the President has been…well…like the President for two years. Yes, this makes sense.

If you have any Republican friends with a Palin 2012 bumper sticker on their car, remember to be kind today. Dreams of the faithful die hard and Palin was hailed as the God chosen candidate for the evangelical right, so this has to hurt. I just can’t imagine how God can be so wrong, can you?

However, just because Republicans don’t like her doesn’t mean she can’t utilize the Tea Party to her advantage in the primaries and Ms Palin is known for working best with strong opposition from within her own Party, so there may be some hope to cling to here for the die hard Palin fans. I do hope someone assists them in their talking points, though, as re-litigating 2008 is not bound to be effective with any but the Kool-Aid drinkers.

Happy New Year, America. Looks like you might have managed to “take your country back” after all.

39 responses so far

Joe Miller Says He’ll Hold His Breath Until They Let Him Win

Dec 28 2010 Published by under Featured News, Issues, Republican Party

Joe Miller and Lisa Murkowski

Fairbanks attorney and would-be totalitarian strongman Joe Miller apparently will not try to perform a citizens arrest on Lisa Murkowski. He will, however, take her to federal court for having the audacity to defeat him in the general election after losing the August 24 primary in a write-in campaign.

Never mind that it was the Tea Party that originally came in to steal Murkowski’s seat out from under her.

We all remember Karl Rove’s judgment:

“Absolutely no she can’t win. Under the law, you have to carefully spell the name exactly correct, now everyone go to your pencil and paper and write the name ‘Murkowski’ and see if you got it right.”

“No, she’s going to lose,” he said.

And Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) used a Tea Party fundraiser to call her a “big-tent hypocrite” and said she had betrayed the conservative cause.

Republican cannibalism at its best – or worst.

But she didn’t lose. She outraged the Tea Party by actually winning.

And what neither Karl Rove nor Joe Miller (nor, most certainly, Sarah Palin) reckoned on was the innate fairness of the process. The state Division of Elections established guidelines before counting even began that the voter’s intent had to count when writing-in a vote.

God forbid fairness should enter into the democratic process. “We can’t have that!” the Tea Party says.

So Miller lost fair and square. That’s not just a liberal writer saying that, it’s the Alaska Supreme Court, the law of the land. But that is Joe Miler’s whining lament: she cheated! Egads, people misspelled her name. Has she no shame claiming the victory?

The Alaskan Supreme Court ruled against him. The message from the voters was “You lost, Joe.” The message from the highest court in the state was the same: “You lost, Joe.”

“There are no remaining issues raised by Miller that prevent this election from being certified.”

But Joe claims that the sanctity of the election process is at stake. Meaning, he can’t possibly have lost. Perhaps God promised him a victory or something. After all, he promised one to Sarah Palin too on the eve of the ’08 Election Day.

Apparently, those nasty feds aren’t so nasty when Joe’s victory is at stake. To hell with the State of Alaska. What do the feds say? Does the Tea Party have no shame, throwing the state under the bus and trying to trump with the federal courts?

Did the world just turn upside down?

I’m unclear as to how losing an election fair and square violates the sanctity of the democratic process but then, I’ve never performed a citizens arrest on somebody who asked me a question.

For the record, this is Joe’s reasoning:

“After careful consideration and seeking the counsel of people whose opinion I respect and trust, I have decided that the federal case must go forward. The integrity of the election is vital and ultimately the rule of law must be our standard. Nevertheless, I have also decided to withdraw our opposition to the certification of the election, ensuring that Alaska will have its full delegation seated when the 112th Congress convenes next month.”

What a guy. Such a gesture of magnanimity!

There really wasn’t much magnanimity evident in Joe’s official protest. As his spokesman Randy DeSota said on Wednesday,

“We are disappointed the Alaska Supreme Court has ignored the plain text of Alaska law and allowed the Division of Elections to effectively amend the state election code without even giving the public an opportunity for notice and comment.”

Of course, the Alaskan Supreme Court made just that ruling, that state law had not been violated. End of story.

Not so, says Joe.

Of course, none of this surprises Lisa Murkowski, who has already been exposed to the limitless, mindless hate and nihilism of Tea Party politics. Her campaign fully expected Joe Miller to be a big crybaby.

Perhaps the most amusing aspect of this whole situation is that with or without the contested votes, Joe Miller has lost. Lisa Murkowski ended up with a lead of 10,328 votes.  Joe says 8,159 of those votes can’t count. Even without them, however, Lisa Murkowski still has a 2,169 vote lead.

There is a great deal wrong with this picture. There is the Republican betrayal of Lisa Murkowski later reinterpreted as a betrayal by Lisa Murkowski, another Sarah Palin demagogue who like Christine O’Donnell showed himself completely unequal to the office to which he sought election (a real chip off the old block), and then, when the people had spoken, when the State of Alaska had spoken, these Tea Party tenthers turn around and appeal to the hated feds to overturn the state. We’ll leave aside for the moment the sheer childishness of Miller’s position on this. What does he do for an encore? Hold his breath?

No, take your medicine Joe. In Palin-speak, find your cojones and man up. Vox populi: The people have spoken. Isn’t that supposed to be what the Tea Party is all about? But it isn’t, is it Joe? It’s not about what the people want: it’s about what you want, what Sarah Palin wants, what Christine O’Donnell wants – a free lunch.

13 responses so far

Why Working Class Conservatives Should Leave The GOP

Dec 21 2010 Published by under Featured News, Republican Party

Main Street conservatives need to wake up to the fact that the Republican politicians do not fight for you.  They fight for Wall Street and Big Corporations who throw your neighbors onto the street.

Wall Street has a plan to make working class Americans, whether you’re liberal, conservative, Democrat or Republican, economically irrelevant.  The point is, if you’re working class, Wall Street doesn’t need you or better yet DOESN’T WANT YOU and neither does Corporate America.

I have laid out some of the information from CITIGROUP’S equity strategy memo, re-visiting Plutonomy, the rich getting richer.

You remember CITIGROUP?  The working class bailed them out, right? 

Citigroup Oct 16, 2005 Plutonomy Report Part 1

THE UNITED STATES PLUTONOMY – THE GILDED AGE, THE ROARING TWENTIES, AND THE NEW MANAGERIAL  ARISTOCRACY

I HOPE EVERYONE CAUGHT THAT LAST WORD!

In a plutonomy there is no such animal as“the U.S. consumer” or“the UK consumer”, or indeed the “Russian consumer”

There are rich consumers, few in number, but disproportionate in the gigantic slice of income and consumption they take.

There are the rest, the“non-rich”, the multitudinous many, but only accounting for surprisingly small bites of the national pie.”

No such animal?  Not needed?  We are being cast aside by the Wall St. elites and the corporations.  

“focus on the“average” consumer are flawed from the start. It is easy to drown in a lake with an average depth of 4 feet, if one steps into its deeper extremes.”

These Aristocrats are who the GOP is siding with, not you, not me.  Just the people who are the very wealthy.

To continue with the U.S., the top 1% of households also account for 33% of net worth, greater than the bottom 90% of households put together. It gets better (or worse, depending on your political stripe)

the top 1% of households account for 40% of financial net worth, more than the bottom 95% of households put together.

This is data for 2000, from the Survey of Consumer Finances (and adjusted by academic Edward Wolff)

If the American working class continues to buy into the GOP rhetoric of tax breaks for the wealthy,  this aristocratic future is just around the corner.  The GOP has repeatedly told us, don’t tax the wealthy, they are the ones who create the jobs.

It is the tax breaks that are making this ARISTOCRACY possible,  they are keeping most of their money.  They believe that once they control the wealth, they will control the economy and thus YOU, the working class of America, are no longer needed. 

They will outsource your jobs, whether you are blue collar or white collar.  They will not sell you stuff because economic demand will be concentrated into the hands of the top 2%.

We will become a third world country, like Mexico in no time.

15 responses so far

Christofascist Group CADC Threatens Divine Wrath for America

Dec 21 2010 Published by under Featured News, Issues, Republican Party

“destroy all that they have, and spare them not, but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass” – God, The Bible 1 Samuel 15:3

In the wake of the repeal of DADT the level of hatred unleashed by Republicans and Christofascists has been as shrill as we would have expected. As previously reported here by Rmuse, Bible-based bigotry did not carry the day and you’d think the world had come to an end. And according to some of these crazies, it will. Peter LaBarbara of the ironically-named “Americans For Truth About Homosexuality” (because they’re really about lies) talked about the “gaying down” of our military. But it was perennial bigot of the week Bryan Fischer’s words that stood out:

“The new Marine motto: ‘The Few, the Proud, the Sexually Twisted.’ Good luck selling that to strong young males who would otherwise love to defend their country. What virile young man wants to serve in a military like that?”

I dunno, Mr. Fischer. I know of at least one ancient Greek military unit that would have mopped the floor with any comparable force of heterosexuals you can care to name. The Sacred Band’s accomplishments show them to have been pretty damn virile.

You have to remember the lesson of the Old Testament, that those who turn away from God are vomited forth from the land. Everyone remembers what happened to those islands of tolerance and diversity known as Sodom and Gomorrah, whose only sin was to not toe the extremist religious line of the day. (Actually, it was because they were a bunch of selfish rich people that they were struck down by God, not because they engaged in sodomy – read it yourself. Ironic isn’t it? Turns out it was a bunch of Republicans…)

The ironically-named (they all seem to be ironically-named – for example, the Freedom Federation is about taking freedoms away, not protecting them) “Christian Anti-Defamation Commission” (CADC), which claims it is Christians who are the victims of bigotry (not the actual victims of Christian bigotry who are deprived of constitutionally-guaranteed rights), is now talking divine vengeance. Gary Cass’ secure line with God must have been ringing off the hook because he is telling us that God is about to unleash the “mighty sickle of His wrath” on America for “drinking from the dregs of civic debauchery.” Let Sarah Palin try to spell that!

This is serious Old Testament stuff here.

After a long and difficult fight, the struggle for maintaining the military policy of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” was lost for now. There are some hard truths for those who uphold traditional biblical morality to face. Being able to admit we have a problem is the first step towards making the changes we need to reverse this and other gains made by sexual anarchists and secularists.

“Sexual anarchists” he says.  It is clear that Mr. Cass has a very negative view of the modern liberal democracy, which has as its strong spine an adherence to tolerance and diversity.

The last thing we need to do is surrender biblical moral standards to sexual libertines, as if God’s holy nature has somehow changed with public opinion polls.

It’s appropriate here to suggest to Mr. Cass that there is no need (nor indeed any suggestion) that he surrender his biblical standards. Nobody is asking him to do anything he is not personally comfortable with. That is, after all, the essence of the modern liberal democracy. Nobody has suggested that Christians surrender their beliefs. They are merely asking that Christians tolerate the beliefs of others. This task is, apparently, too difficult for the CADC’s bigotry expert.

Homosexual behavior is intrinsically sinful and we cannot renegotiate God’s moral law. No apologies are necessary for agreeing with Jesus, the Apostles, the Law and the Prophets. History, science, scripture and eternity concur.

No apologies, but loads and loads of apologetics (For the record, an “apology” in this sense is “a defense of” so Christian apologetic works are a defense of Christianity – the bookshelves at your local bookstore probably sag under the weight of these tomes).

Homosexual sin, like every other kind of sin, always results in some kind of death. But sexual sin in general, and homosexual sin in particular, is singled out in the Old and New Testament as particularly deadly. Because of this, the unrepentant person trapped in homosexuality, just like all other sinners, is to be pitied and the object of our compassion.

I don’t know…most things result in death, including life. It’s the one thing none of us can escape. But to address Mr. Cass’ point about “sin” the Old Testament doesn’t really say what he says it does. Lesbianism, for example, isn’t outlawed in the Bible. No seed is wasted, you see.

IMPORTANT: And there is more ambiguity in the texts than he suggests. For one thing (and this is important) seed is the issue here, because the ancient Jews thought the seed contained ALL OF LIFE. No egg in the woman – just the man’s seed putting life in her womb. But modern science knows otherwise. Turns out God didn’t fully understand his own creation – or – God didn’t write those words so often quoted, or even say them. Jews who did not have the benefit of modern science wrote them. On the basis upon which they’re written, the injunctions against homosexuality, being a admonition against what amounted to basically murder, is now seen to be without merit.

Spiritually, they are dead to God’s mercy and transforming grace in Christ. Sadly, it was unrepentant homosexual Ellen DeGeneres who emceed the Christmas in Washington TV Show this year with President Obama and family smiling as they blindly celebrated the birth of the Savior. They never saw the incongruence of it all.

As I said, Mr. Cass, lesbianism, deplorable as it was seen, isn’t addressed in the Old Testament as a sin. You should really consider reading your own scriptures before you start “quoting” from them. Even unrepentant bigots – perhaps especially – should read before they talk.

Ultimately, we must resolve that Providence has ordained the repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” for now. It could not have happened if God had willed otherwise. But why?

Amusingly, perhaps, it was not God who repealed DADT but mortal men and women, duly and constitutionally elected. According to the Constitution, God does not get a vote. No god does.

In times like these when our nation defies the moral law of the living God, we must ask, “Is God hardening our heart like he did the defiant Pharaoh?” God did it to show His mighty power in the outpouring of ten plagues on the gods of Egypt and by destroying Pharaoh and his army.

I hate to break this to Mr. Cass given that he is on a roll here, but there is no evidence whatsoever that the whole Israel in captivity thing ever happened. The pyramids were built by Egyptians. Archaeologists have found their houses. What they have not found is any evidence that thousands of people wandered in the Sinai for decades. We have a lot of records from that period and no Egyptian sentry seems to have been aware of all those people crossing the border, coming or going.

And you thought the United States had trouble with illegal immigrants!

Is God letting America ripen in her rebellion before He wields the mighty sickle of His wrath? It’s worth considering as our nation’s military now serves under a shameful, pink flag.

Who is going to rebel, Mr. Cass? You? Polls demonstrate that some 75% of Americans supported repeal of DADT. If there is a rebellion, it will be a very small one. I almost hope that you will lead it. Or are you suggesting that America is rebelling against your God? Because I will happily remind you here again that God doesn’t enter into the picture. He’s not in the Constitution. We owe our fealty to the Constitution, not a deity, no matter how pissed off he may or may not be (and really, how can a perfect being even be pissed off? Such human frailties ought technically to be a logical impossibility).

In the meantime Christian, humbly pray, boldly preach and persevere by the power of the Holy Spirit knowing that God is not mocked and one day His righteousness will prevail.

God is not mocked here, Mr. Cass, but the Constitution, which was ratified by every state in this great nation, the Constitution written by our Founding Fathers. That is being mocked – by you.

Nobody is asking you to act against your beliefs. We are merely expecting you to respect our rights – according to the Constitution, the same Constitution which has protected yours for over 200 years.

7 responses so far

Busted! Sarah Palin Exposed as a Teleprompter Using Fraud

Dec 20 2010 Published by under Featured News, Republican Party

Sarah Palin and Her Teleprompter

Sometimes our life experiences come in handy. This is one of those times.

Who can forget Ms Palin’s endless mocking of President Obama for using a teleprompter and her cutesy way of referring to her hand notes (her three ideas for America were apparently hard enough to recall that they had to be written down for her) as the “poor man’s teleprompter”. And on every forum where some brave fool dares to write about Palin in a less than salivating manner, regardless of the actual issue at hand, a Palin fan comes to mock teleprompters.

At a Tea Party speech, Ms Palin mocked the President by saying, “This is about the people, and it’s bigger than any one king or queen of a Tea Party, and it’s a lot bigger than any charismatic guy with a teleprompter.” You must fill in the requisite sneer for full effect. The implication is that the President is a moron for using a teleprompter. This is made clear by the Right’s gleeful picking up of this meme and running with it at every turn, especially when they have nothing relevant over which to criticize the President.

Before we get any further into this story, I need to preface it by referring to my own work experience in film and TV. Some of that experience was behind an anchor’s desk, so I share Obama’s great sin in having used a teleprompter though I don’t recall turning into a Commie directly after it. Perhaps it’s too soon to tell.

So anyway, last week while watching “Sarah Palin’s Alaska”, I could have sworn I saw a teleprompter on her home studio camera, but I didn’t care enough to do a screen grab. After all, there are so many lies to deconstruct and so little time. But then last night, as I was watching the latest episode (which I must confess is now a fun distraction from her tweets), she was showing us her studio in the house she built next door to her home on Lake Lucille. Sarah and Todd were making a show of how it was just the two of them putting on her little show. And while she made cute and Todd told her her hair was above his pay grade, I saw the evil socialist machine staring me down, clear as day. So clear that I could read the logo. Yes, a teleprompter.

Close up of Sarah Palin's teleprompter

Who makes Ms Palin’s teleprompter? Autoscript. The number one selling teleprompter. The gold standard in teleprompters. The elite, if you will, of teleprompters. The farthest cry from the “poor man’s teleprompter” as you can get. You know, the one that the evil lame stream media use at no less than NBC studios:

“Autoscript is currently facilitating NBC with studio and portable on-camera teleprompter systems with high-bright LED backlit monitors, as well as WinPlus-NX news-prompter software, during the network’s coverage of the Vancouver Winter Games….

Autoscript also designs all of the different software packages that drive its teleprompter systems. Autoscript teleprompting software features multi-tasking functions, including the ability to simultaneously prompt and edit, run multiple scripts, change the run-order, mix fonts, and change the font size. Autoscript’s WinPlus-NX news-prompter software provides seamless integration to all major newsroom-computer systems.

WinPlus NX software can operate in a number of modes, depending on the design of the newsroom-computer system it’s being used with. Autoscript’s software also works with a variety of control devices, enabling prompter operators to control the system using a desktop control, foot control, wireless hand control, or Autoscript’s unique Voice-Plus voice-activated software to pace the script. WinPlus NX software can also send the prompted text to a Closed Caption encoder.”

Now what in heaven’s name can a paid contributor who is only on the air for a scant few minutes and who’s been given the questions in advance need a teleprompter for? Yes, Ms Palin requires that all questions be given in advance. And of course, the teleprompter kinda gives that away because it would be impossible to load it up with a script if Ms Palin didn’t know what she was going to be asked in advance. Um, well, here’s what happens when Sarah Palin doesn’t have a teleprompter. Notice how she can’t remember her three ideas for America so she has to check her hand:

And her hands reads: “Energy, Budget Tax Cuts, Lift American spirits.”

Or perhaps because one is attempting to avoid another embarrassing moment like the Couric interview or the Gibson interview, during which Ms Palin froze and the flop sweat broke out on her upper lip as she stammered for a non-answer. A teleprompter covers the sputtering non-answer and allows Ms Palin to converse about topics she knows little about.

Palin flop sweat:

And for those who don’t know, when using a teleprompter there are all kinds of neat tricks to help the talent: you can have the names of Iraqi officials phonetically spelled out, you can have smiley faces put in when you’re supposed to be happy, you can have text bolded to place emphasis on it. In fact, there are so many tricks that you can almost read the script for the first time on the air if you choose. If you’re good at it, that is. Although most professionals will at least do a cursory glance to get the flow of the piece before taking to the air and those with a work ethic will want to understand the topics they’re speaking to their audience about.

This might be a good time to take a walk down memory lane to the 2008 RNC convention.

US News & World Report reported:


“ST. PAUL—Interesting bit of myth-making, mistaken reporting or both. Did Sarah Palin’s TelePrompTer malfunction? A very little bit, but not much.

RedState is reporting that Sarah Palin’s TelePrompTer broke last night, scrolling “significantly from where Governor Palin was in the speech.” Politico’s Jonathan Martin disputes the report. “Perhaps there were moments where it scrolled slightly past her exact point in the speech,” Martin writes. “But I was sitting in the press section next to the stage, within easy eyeshot of the Teleprompter. I frequently looked up at the machine, and there was no serious malfunction. A top convention planner confirms this morning that there were no major problems.””

Myth making indeed. That is a talent Ms Palin has developed to a finely honed skill. Like the myth that little poor Ms Palin, the hockey mama, doesn’t use a teleprompter. She’s too “real” for that.

As for the RNC teleprompter myth, little hiccups are normal — especially because on the older systems, whoever is running prompter had to anticipate the speaker’s rhythm, so if the speaker changes or pauses, the prompter operator might need a second or two to catch up or slow down. I’ve also been responsible for running a teleprompter; and I can attest that things don’t always go smoothly. Software can malfunction or the computer can just pause for a second. But of course this happens to everyone who uses it, not just Ms Palin – and so far, no one else has been hailed as a mythical warrior for managing to ride it out.

This is one reason why it helps if the person is somewhat familiar with their script, and why it helps if the person can talk freely about the subject at hand. The teleprompter can help a speaker who’s under a lot of pressure remember words, key phrases, and jog their memory or it can be used as a complete crutch when you don’t know your script. It’s simply a tool, and a ridiculous criticism to hurl at someone. Only people who aren’t in the business would even buy this as a criticism. But of course, that’s Ms Palin’s audience.

Not only does this put a wee dent in Ms Palin’s constant mocking of Obama for using a teleprompter, but it should also be noted that the myth she sold on her show of just she and Todd doing her little show is simply not possible. Here’s the deal (and probably one reason why she didn’t want Joe McGinness to see over that fence): It takes at least three professionals to run the small set-up they have: A camera operator (who will also adjust lights even if the lights are pre-set as they are in most studios), a prompter op, and someone in the control room (like a producer) to watch the monitors for problems, monitor the sound, and make sure the talent doesn’t go off script.

And this doesn’t cover the professional make up artist and hair stylist, or the wardrobe stylist. Or the production assistants. And it is very obvious that Palin is getting her hair and make up done, at the very least. And there’s nothing wrong with that, but it’s simply another thing she’s not being authentic about. Even the ex First Dude can’t do all of those jobs simultaneously, assuming he could magically learn all there is to learn about running a camera and loading the prompter and getting it to flow with the speech patterns of the speaker (lord help whoever is running hers).

Frankly I couldn’t care less if she uses a teleprompter. It’s a good tool for on air talent and politicians and there’s nothing wrong with it. What I have a problem with is that once again, Ms Palin is selling a myth that simply isn’t true and in the process she mercilessly mocks a good man, who has every reason to use a teleprompter because he’s a bit too busy running the country to memorize speeches, although I deeply suspect he spends more actual time writing and editing his speeches than does Palin. And goodness knows, Palin has free time on her hands now since she quit her job as governor to pursue her TV career.

The unveiling of this lie goes to the content of her character. And once again, Ms Palin flops when it comes to accuracy, integrity and honesty.

169 responses so far

Joe Scarborough Squeals Over Trickle-Down Con Man Chris Christie

Dec 20 2010 Published by under Featured News, Issues, Republican Party

Chris Christie the reverse Robinhood

Joe Scarborough has a man-crush on Chris Christie. And who can blame him?

“The day of reckoning is here!” Announces New Jersey Governor Chris Christie in a theatrical voice dripping with doom. Joe Scarborough loves him for it, squealing that Chris Christie makes him feel like a 14 year old girl at a Beatles concert. Ah, Republicans. You gotta love them. Against gay rights but very pro man crushes especially for the dooms-dayers because nothing spells GOP recovery like a suffering American economy. And nothing says desperate party like pushing Chris Christie as the next great white hope.

Today on “Morning Joe”, Scarborough jumped the Chris Matthews “Thrill up my leg” shark when reacting to a clip of Republican Governor Chris Christie dramatically suggesting that the day of reckoning was here, that he had no more money, that no one has any more money and that they just can’t spend anymore. Joe “loves this guy” because he’s the only guy “telling the truth”. And sure when you listen to Chris Christie he sounds reasonable. He’s saying we spent too much. We sure did. Notice I said when you listen to him, because if you look under the hood, things are not rosy for the middle class under Christie. But one wonders if Joe Scarborough doesn’t “love this guy” because Chris Christie is the Alan Grayson of the Right and Joe is desperate to find a Presidential candidate for Republicans who isn’t crazy and/or boring?

Watch Joe squeak words of love about Chris Christie courtesy of Media Matters:

See, Christie is busy making a national name for himself as a true “fiscal conservative,” which in modern day Republican parlance means keeping taxes on the rich very, very low and saying you’re going to fix the budget problem with spending cuts. But as we all know, sayin’ ain’t doin’.

What Joe doesn’t tell you is the cost of Christie’s playing fiscal conservative while making a show of refusing to raise tax rates. Because it turns out some people in his state will have their taxes raised. Guess who? Think really hard now. Who do the Republicans represent and what do they care about? That’s right, at this delicate time in our economy, we can’t have the rich paying taxes or businesses paying taxes, but you know who can pay for this fiscal conservative show? The working poor, homeowners, university students, and the state pension fund because nothing says Republican like hitting the working poor, struggling homeowners, education, and of course pension funds.

Stateline.org reports:

“A close look at the $28.3 billion budget Christie signed to much fanfare in June, however, finds a more complicated storyline than the one the governor and his acolytes have articulated since Christie took office in January.

Some of Christie’s budget fixes look a lot like tax hikes to the people on the receiving end of them. They include the working poor who will pay higher income taxes due to reductions in the state earned-income tax credit; homeowners who didn’t get their customary rebates on property taxes this year; transit riders who are paying substantially higher fares; and university students who must pay higher tuition. And although Christie promised in March to “not shove today’s problems under the rug only to be discovered again tomorrow,” his plan leaned heavily on the familiar Trenton budget trick of skipping a required payment to the state’s pension fund, which is already $48 billion underfunded.

What’s more, some of Christie’s spending reductions aren’t as clear-cut as they might seem. As Stateline reported last week, Christie’s budget assumes tens of millions of dollars in savings from privatization that has yet to occur.
The budget cuts he has ordered for municipalities and school districts have muddied the waters further. Many local jurisdictions, faced with the sudden evaporation of state aid that propped up their own budgets, say they will raise property taxes in response. Christie’s budget cuts to municipalities amount to “de facto tax increases,” says Sharon Schulman, executive director of the William J. Hughes Center for Public Policy at Stockton College.”

Does this surprise anyone? His plans are no different than what the Republicans have been doing for years now – refusing to pay for things by increasing our main source of revenue. This is the equivalent of suggesting that instead of getting a job, people should stop buying things like food. But this failed strategy allows the Republicans to kill every social safety net necessity they can get their grubby hands on which is a win win in the long term for them, because the more people suffer the less engaged they are in politics and the less education they have the more likely they are to vote Republican.

And the best part is that while robbing the public, they win the war of perception. After all, it takes years to see the effect of such approaches and the public is much too misinformed to understand why they are less well off than before. I imagine Fox News will find a way to blame the central government for the inevitable property tax hikes resulting from Christie’s showy budget slashing. It should be noted that Christie did not keep taxes low. He kept them low for the rich. The working will have a tax increase under Christie.

But aside from the fiscal shell games these boys play, we mustn’t forget that this scenario of doomsday is something the Republicans are working very hard to maintain for Americans. After all, if the economy recovers the GOP won’t have a snowball’s chance in Hell of taking 2012 and at the rate they’re going according to recent polls, they’ll lose the House too. Yes, contrary to what the Republicans tell Americans they want, Americans actually tell us in polls that they didn’t want the rich to continue to get the lowest tax rates in history.

Americans thought it might be nice if the rich paid their share and helped get us out of this mess that the Republicans and their wealthy corporate friends got us into by playing fast and loose with regulation and then coming crying to us for a bailout when their big spending ways and borrowing didn’t work out so well. But boys like Christie want the working poor to foot this bill too. After all, if we’re going to climb outta this mess someone has to pay and it can’t be the “job creators”! I mean, look where that trickle down theory got us. Why not beat our head into that brick wall a bit longer, just to make sure it really did fail.

Joe obviously sees in Christie a man who can sell this crap and come off like a populist but not an embarrassment like Palin because poor Joe is so desperate to take back his party from the nutjobs who’ve hi-jacked it that he has obviously decided to use his show to push any relatively reasonable (I say relatively because if you compare Chris Christie with Sarah Palin, well, he looks reasonable) Republican he can. But what Joe isn’t saying is that Christie has only been in office for a year. A year into Palin’s term, she was the state’s most popular governor. She quit two and a half years into her term when she couldn’t cope with the mess she’d made and the fame that came a-callin’ looked like it would be so much more fun.

“As Christie’s budget cuts force tax hikes at the local level and many residents begin to recognize that they are paying more for less state government, Christie’s next three years in office could be more challenging than the first.” Maybe Scarborough is hoping that if Chritie pulls a Palin and runs for President just two years into his term, the full effects of his huge budget slashes and tax hikes on the middle class will remain hidden and allow Christie to run a populist campaign of fiscal conservatism that appeals to the very rich corporate donors he’ll be needing.

Gee, I feel like a 14 year old girl at a Beatles concert who just got told that as a result of “spending being out of control” (translation, the Republicans don’t want their corporate multi-millionaire friends to have to pay taxes) my school just got hit with a 64% reduction in aid, my parents can no longer afford their home, I can’t afford to go to college and by the way, that pension is gone. Chris Christie is the conservative reverse Robinhood, stealing from the middle class to subsidize the rich.

Sure the day of reckoning is here. But for whom, that’s the question.

5 responses so far

Older posts »