Heartland Institute: Osama Bin Laden Was Pro-Life. Are You?

In the annals of advertising, there are some notorious chapters wherein misguided persons or organizations justified displaying disgusting and hateful images and messages on billboards. However, it will be a long time (I hope) before anyone comes close to sinking as low as the Heartland Institute has done with its new series of advertisements promoting its upcoming anti-environment conference in Chicago.

Heartland Billboard

The Heartland Institute is a far-right think tank that denies the scientific reality of climate change. It is notoriously anti-science and has previously taken positions that rejected claims that tobacco was bad for your health. The reason for their advocacy of the absurd is that they are funded by corporations with vested interests in deceiving the public (i.e. Phillip Morris, ExxonMobil, Pfizer, etc). Additionally, they receive grants from ultra-conservative zealots like the Kochs, Scaifes, Waltons, etc.

This billboard campaign is particularly repulsive in that it associates honest and clear thinking advocates for the environment with some of the most horrific creatures of crimes and atrocities. In addition to the Unabomber, the Heartland’s campaign features Charles Manson and Osama Bin Laden. The argument they are making is that these monsters believed in climate change and therefore you are also a monster if you believe in it. That is not an implied interpretation. It is what they say explicitly in their own justification:

“These rogues and villains were chosen because they made public statements about how man-made global warming is a crisis and how mankind must take immediate and drastic actions to stop it.” […]

“Because what these murderers and madmen have said differs very little from what spokespersons for the United Nations, journalists for the ‘mainstream’ media, and liberal politicians say about global warming. […]

“The point is that believing in global warming is not ‘mainstream,’ smart, or sophisticated. In fact, it is just the opposite of those things. […]

“The people who still believe in man-made global warming are mostly on the radical fringe of society. This is why the most prominent advocates of global warming aren’t scientists. They are murderers, tyrants, and madmen.”

Aside from being grossly insulting, the Heartlanders are 100% wrong. The vast majority of scientists, climatologists, and other experts agree that climate change is occurring and that human activity is at the very least a significant contributor. There is no dispute among reputable scientists. The only dispute comes from conservative politicians, pundits, and researchers working for the corporations profiting from the destruction of the planet’s ecosystem.

The tactic of recruiting murderers and madmen for this campaign disparages all of the sincere people who are fighting for a better, cleaner, healthier world. But it also opens the door to reciprocal attacks on the Heartlanders. For instance:

Heartland Billboard

That’s right. Osama Bin Laden, Timothy McVeigh, Scott Roeder, Eric Rudolph, and others, were all anti-abortion extremists and terrorists. Does that mean that all pro-life activists can be lumped together with these despicable characters just because…

“…what these murderers and madmen have said differs very little from what spokespersons for the [National Right to Life Committee], journalists for the ‘mainstream’ media, and [conservative] politicians say about [abortion]?”

See how easy this is? Hitler was anti-union. Stalin opposed gay marriage. Anders Breivik hated Marxism. I could go on. The obvious conclusion is that conservative principles inspire mass murderers, right?

The propaganda purveyors at the Heartland Institute have demonstrated that they are not a serious organization whose opinion matters to people who truly care about this issue. The media ought not to provide a platform for their views and politicians who associate themselves with this group should be asked whether they endorse the hate mongering that flows from these phony Heartlanders. There is simply no room in the debate for this sort of irresponsible rhetoric. Especially when it comes from an enterprise that has been lying about the substance of the matter for years.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Fox Nation vs. Reality: Quoting Castro Quoting Obama

After a week of Fox News fabulists going bonkers over President Obama’s use of the word “Forward” and declaring that he was a socialist because of it (never mind that Fox also used it their promos), we now have Fox Nation publishing a piece that aligns Obama with Fidel Castro:

Fox Nation - Castro

Not surprisingly, there is very little in that headline that is true. Obama did not “rip” the United States, he did not “compliment” Cuba, and there is no evidence that he ever said anything remotely similar to that “quote” to any visitor. The one thing that the Fox Nationalists got right is that Castro said something.

What happened is that Fox Nation’s editors found an article by Kyle Olson of the Education Action Group. EAG is a far-right, Koch-funded cell of anti-unionists in Michigan. Olson pulled a quote from a column by Castro that was published on Counterpunch.org. In that article Castro bragged about Cuba’s beneficial relationship with allies like Venezuela, and added…

“President Obama knows this only too well and has talked about it with some of his visitors. He candidly told one of them: ‘The problem is that the United States sends soldiers while Cuba, however, sends doctors.’

Castro doesn’t say when, where, or to whom, Obama allegedly said this. There is no record of any visitor that was ever told any such thing, or how Castro would have heard about it. Did some mysterious visitor rush back to his hotel, get Cuba on the line and beam “Hey Fidel, guess what Barack just told me?” However, it is certainly a useful and self-serving tale for Castro to weave.

But let’s set aside all of those points, that suggest that this whole thing is a hoax, and just examine the substance of the quote. There have been plenty of discussions about foreign policy strategies that weigh the benefits of military aid and humanitarian aid. The question of whether the U.S. should seek to strengthen it’s relations with other countries by sending doctors or soldiers is one that is reasonable and proper. It is neither a rip nor a compliment. It is simply good diplomacy to analyze and arrive at an effective balance.

Clearly the editors at Fox Nation have bought into the story as they posted Castro’s quote as if it were fact. It’s ironic, and more than a little unpatriotic, that they put more faith in what Castro says than their own president. If one didn’t know better it would appear that the Fox Nationalists are cozying up to the communist dictator who they obviously regard as a truthful source. Perhaps Rep. Allen West, who is so anxious about the possibility of communists in congress, should look into whether Fox is secretly harboring traitors in their newsroom.

It is also interesting to note the graphic that the Fox Nationalists chose to accompany their article. I’m sure they innocently selected a photo of Obama applauding in front of a banner that says “CUBA.” Certainly they would have had no intention of conveying any message that the President supported the communist state. And it’s surely not relevant that another angle of the same event reveals that Obama was speaking at a conference of the Cuban American National Foundation, an anti-Castro group based in Miami:

Obama Cuban American


Fox News Hypocritically Attacks Obama’s Fundraisers While Ignoring Romney’s

On Monday fox News published a report that purported to unveil “a veritable army” of fundraisers working on behalf of President Obama’s reelection. The focus of the article was a practice known as bundling where supporters solicit their family, friends, and colleagues, to make a contribution to a candidate’s campaign. Bundlers can accumulate large amounts of total donations but each of the contributors is bound by the standard contribution limit of $2,500.

The article on Fox was headlined “Meet the bundlers: Obama’s fundraising team a who’s who of Hollywood, media,” and began by saying…

“Bundlers are the original movers and shakers in the world of high-dollar campaign fundraising. And President Obama’s reelection machine has enlisted a veritable army of them — a roster that includes some of the biggest names in media and show business.

“Among them are entertainment magnate Tyler Perry, actress Eva Longoria, DreamWorks CEO Jeffrey Katzenberg and Vogue editor Anna Wintour. It’s just not Hollywood backing the president — Comcast executive David Cohen, as well as lawyers and finance titans from Goldman Sachs, Barclays Capital and other firms help complete the list of hundreds.”

It should be noted that every contributor who donates $250 or more is subject to disclosure rules. The bundlers themselves are not. We know who is bundling for Obama because his campaign discloses their names, which Mitt Romney refuses to do. The only Romney bundlers who are known are registered lobbyists whom the law requires be disclosed. That’s why the OpenSecrets listing of Obama Bundlers shows 532 names while the list of Romney’s bundlers shows only 22. And, of course, all of Romney’s bundlers on his list are lobbyists. We have no idea how many other bundlers are working in Romney’s behalf. Obama has no lobbyists bundling for his campaign.

The primary point of the Fox News article is that Obama has a large number of bundlers, many of whom are in the entertainment industry. Had Fox bothered to do just a modicum of research they would have discovered that only 25 (6%) of Obama’s bundlers are from Hollywood. What’s more, the implied criticism of bundling ignores the fact that the donors are actually disclosed, while contributions from corporations and billionaires to SuperPACs are are not. So there is transparency of bundling donations that does not exist with the SuperPACs that are a much bigger part of Romney’s operations.

The problem with Fox’s analysis is that they can’t compare Obama’s fundraising to Romney’s because of Romney’s obsessive secrecy. Romney may have many more bundlers than Obama, we just don’t know. He may also have an army of Hollywood elitists bundling for him, we just don’t know that either. The only thing we know is that Romeny does rely heavily on lobbyists while Obama has none acting as bundlers. So Fox is being overtly hypocritical by criticizing Obama while letting Romney off the hook.

If Fox had conducted the necessary research to be able to make appropriate comparisons, this might have been an interesting article. But since Romney’s campaign keeps everyone in the dark, perhaps that should have been the lede. What this article tells us about Obama is useless without comparative data for Romney, but the fact that Obama is forthcoming about his finances and Romney is not would have been the real story for any legitimate news enterprise. Of course the qualification of “legitimate news enterprise” automatically rules out Fox.

Another aspect of the hypocrisy of Fox is that just a few days ago they were complaining bitterly about an Obama web site that identified a few of Romney’s big money backers. Fox characterized this as akin to the Nixon enemies list or McCarthyism. The comparison was ludicrous and utterly detached from reality. But it’s interesting that now Fox thinks it’s perfectly alright to disclose the names of Obama supporters without raising questions about Nixonian or McCarthyite paranoia. Just another example of the doubly standardized hypocrisy that Fox has developed into an art form.


Mitt Romney’s Campaign Slogan: We’re Not Stupid

This week there has been a swirling mini-controversy surrounding the use of the word “Forward” in a new web video posted on Barack Obama’s campaign site. The Right-Wing Noise Machine sprung into action to assert that there was some sort of connection between that word and its use by socialist groups over a hundred years ago.

Of course the word has been used by innumerable organizations that sought only to convey a sense of progress and a positive vision of the future. It is the official slogan of the state of Wisconsin. It is part of the registered servicemark (Reagan Forward) of the Ronald Reagan Society at his alma mater, Eureka College. It was even used by Fox News in on-air promos that shouted “Move Forward.”

What has been ignored in this discussion is what the campaign of Mitt Romney was using for their slogan. Well, I went to his web site and found this:

Mitt Romney - We're Not Stupid

So there you have it. Romney’s campaign slogan is “We’re Not Stupid.” It’s safe to say that this slogan is not in use by any other organization. How many other organizations actually need to remind their supporters that they aren’t idiots?

Tea PartyThe Romney strategists are wisely tackling head-on a serious concern within their constituency. After all, the Tea Party is a major part of the GOP base. Remember the Tea Party? They were the ones disrupting town halls. They were the ones carrying signs that said “Keep government’s hands off my Medicare.” They were the ones who revered the intellectual prowess of Glenn Beck, Herman Cain, and Sarah Palin.

But this is no time to dwell on your flaws. This is the time to proudly display your declaration of non-stupidity. It’s a call to arms that will reverberate throughout the campaign season. Chant this slogan at your rallies. The more you say it, the more people will be forced to consider the message of your insistent affirmation. And while Obama’s supporters are mumbling their Marxist mantras about moving the nation forward, you can stay focused on the one thing that your candidate thinks should be highlighted in these troubled times.

It’s a bold strategy, to be sure. By so forcefully rejecting the stupid, Romney risks alienating one of the biggest and most reliable segments of his GOP base. But apparently the Romney campaign is convinced that it’s a worthwhile risk.

So march forward, I mean ahead, Romneyites. And be sure to ask everyone you know, for the next six months “Are ya votin for Romney?” But don’t be surprised if all they say in response is “We’re not stupid.”


The Swiftboating Of Obama Begins

In 2004 the campaign for president was tarnished by a band buttheads who thought that it would be appropriate to smear the military record of a decorated veteran who risked his life in Vietnam (John Kerry), in order to support a frat boy who evaded combat by leaning on the connections of his famous family (George W. Bush).

The Swiftboat Veterans for Truth launched a well-financed campaign of distortions and lies in order to prevent Kerry from gaining any popular support for his service to the country. And now a similar campaign has begun by a shadowy group called “Veterans for a Strong America” to deny President Obama any credit for his role in finding and killing Osama Bin Laden.

This video is brazenly dishonest in its portrayal of Obama as negligent in praising the efforts of all of those who had a role in Bin Laden’s demise. Obama has repeatedly and effusively honored everyone from foot soldiers to intelligence operatives to diplomats to civilians to the Navy SEALs, etc. There is abundant evidence of that praise had the liars responsible for this video cared to review it. Instead they chose slap together some deliberately deceitful soundbites of the President speaking in the first person.

As usual, it took the Daily Show’s Jon Stewart to set the record straight. He not only shames the producers of the video above by demonstrating how easy it is to be honest, he also makes the undeniable point that any politician would seek and expect some credit for having orchestrated this sort of dangerous mission and seeing it through to success.

Part One:

Part Two:

Republicans would like to steal every speck of gratitude that the President deserves for having been in charge of this operation. They seem to think that the SEALS planned, executed, and gave themselves the order to proceed without any intervention from the Commander-in-Chief. They also seem to believe that the order was a foregone conclusion that anyone would have made in similar circumstances. However, we know that that is untrue because Mitt Romney said specifically that he would not have chased Bin Laden into Pakistan and he criticized Obama for proposing it.

In 2004 there were, unfortunately, way too many gullible people who fell for the fallacies of the Swiftboat Liars. Hopefully that will not be the case today. President Obama was not solely responsible for determining Bin Laden’s fate. He knows that and says so frequently. But he did play an important role and is entitled to list it on his resume.


Bill O’Reilly And Jesse Watters Lie About Van Jones

Bill O'ReillyLast week Bill O’Reilly interviewed his Fox News colleague Jesse Watters about a video Watters had produced wherein he ambushed Van Jones at a green energy convention. The video itself was a frivolous exercise that succeeded mainly in demonstrating how easy it was for Jones to make Watters look foolish.

More interesting was a part of the exchange between O’Reilly and Watters that included a wholly unfounded attribution by Watters that even O’Reilly found unbelievable:

Watters: He [Van Jones] actually said that the EPA has saved more lives than the department of defense and that Republicans want to poison children.
O’Reilly: Jones said that Republicans want to poison children?
Watters: Yes, he did.
O’Reilly: Was there any reason that the GOP wants to commit homicide?
Watters: Jobs. Poisoning children creates jobs.
O’Reilly: Now wait a minute. This guy was working in the Obama administration. He actually said that the GOP wants to poison children?
Watters: We have it on tape.
O’Reilly: Alright. I want to see that tape on Reality Check on Monday.
Watters: OK.

Well, Monday came and went and there was no video. O’Reilly broadcast his Reality Check segment on Tuesday and there was no video. It should come as no surprise that O’Reilly failed to air the video and didn’t even bother to address the fact that he was breaking his promise to do so. The reason for that is simple: There is no video of Jones saying what Watters alleged he said.

The truth is that Jones never said that Republicans “want to poison children.” He responded to accusations that the EPA kills jobs by noting that the EPA actually saves tens of thousands of lives every year by controlling toxic emissions and pollution. Jones suggested that critics be asked “How many American children are you willing to poison per job?” It was a speculative question meant to stimulate discussion about the relative merits of environmental regulation, not an indictment of the GOP as wannabe children poisoners.

This is yet another example of Fox News making irresponsible and dishonest allegations and failing to back them up with evidence. These phony “journalists” have no problem shamelessly making false statements publicly and then simply letting the whole matter drop and hoping their glassy-eyed audience forgets the part where they promised to provide proof. And judging from the non-reaction from the Fox audience, forgetting is something they do willingly.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Romney Derangement Syndrome Introduced By Fox News

Today fox News added Mitt Romney to the list of “Derangement” syndromes that have entered the vernacular. That in itself is not particularly noteworthy. The syndrome meme has been gaining popularity and has been attached to virtually every major political figure at one time or another.

What’s of note here is that this decidedly partisan expression was not coined by a Fox News opinion commentator and it did not appear on Fox Nation. It was authored by Chris Stirewalt, the politics editor for Fox News Digital: “Obama Suffers From Early Onset Romney Derangement Syndrome.”

Fox News Romney Derangement

The article addresses the phony controversy stirred up by Fox over whether Obama had politicized the killing of Osama Bin Laden by referencing it in a web video that enumerated some of the President’s accomplishments in office. It would be impossible to draw up such a list without including the Bin Laden episode, but the right wants to forbid the President from getting any credit for his role in accomplishing something his predecessor failed to do for seven years. Here is an excerpt from the article that Fox News considers to be “fair and balanced:”

“[M]aking a nakedly partisan attack surrounding the best military moment in a long time looks grubby and un-presidential. It makes the other things Obama is doing to capitalize on the killing – nuzzling Brian Williams in the Situation Room, etc. – go from eyebrow raising to just plain yucky.”

Does that sound like a hard news treatment of current events? To be clear, Fox News has an opinion section on their web site, but this article was not in it. They presented this brazenly biased screed as actual news. And what’s worse, Fox is completely wrong on the facts of the matter. Romney actually did criticize Obama for saying that he would pursue Bin Laden, even into Pakistan, and that if Pakistan would not act, he would. Romney responded by saying that he disagreed with Obama’s remarks and that he (Romney) would not violate the sovereignty of our Pakistani allies. Therefore, Romney would not have killed Bin Laden under the circumstances that Obama was faced with, despite the fact that he now says he would have done so.

If anyone is politicizing this affair it’s Romney. He is twisting the President’s representation of events and misquoting himself. It’s a classic case of Monday morning Commander-in-Chiefing.


Fox News And Conservatives Have Totally Lost Their Friggin Minds

Obama Derangement Syndrome has spread to infect every cell of the conservative brain. The depth of their sickness has finally become so severe that it negates any hope of recovery.

The “Moonie” Washington Times published an article with the headline: “New Obama slogan has long ties to Marxism, socialism.” There is nothing new about the rabid right’s delusional assertions that President Obama is a Marxist, socialist, Kenyan, Muslim, Anti-Christ, who is conspiring with communists, Al Qaeda, the New Black Panthers (all four of them), and Sesame Street to subvert democracy, indoctrinate our children, and deflower our women. But this particular incident is rooted so firmly in dementia that it deserves closer attention and merciless ridicule.

The problem cited by the Washington Times, and picked up by Fox Nation and Breitbart among others, is that the word “Forward,” used prominently in a new Obama campaign video (posted below), is inherently wicked and representative of dastardly evildoers seeking to establish a tyrannical, Islamic, atheist, caliphate throughout the world – or something. The article states that…

“The Obama campaign apparently didn’t look backwards into history when selecting its new campaign slogan, ‘Forward’ — a word with a long and rich association with European Marxism. Many Communist and radical publications and entities throughout the 19th and 20th centuries had the name ‘Forward!'”

So there you have it. By using a word in the English dictionary that means “ahead, onward,” the Obama camp has revealed their commitment to worldwide socialist rebellion. Never mind that the associations cited in the conservative press are a hundred years old, or that the word has been used in innumerable other contexts before and after those associations. For instance, the pinko Ronald Reagan Society at his alma mater, Eureka College, uses the phrase “Reagan Forward.” Even Fox News used it in their on-air promos:

Fox News Forward

Initially, when the Obama video was released, the cry from the right was that the campaign had lifted the slogan from MSNBC which uses the phrase “Lean Forward.” That allegation was carried by conservatives from Fox News contributor Michele Malkin to the New York Post to Glenn Beck’s TheBlaze, and others. Apparently that didn’t stir up enough bile among the right-wing faithful, so they had to escalate the attack to suggest this affiliation with ancient enemies.

Ironically, it was Fox News who took great offense to an allegation by John Aravosis of AmericaBlog late last year, that Mitt Romney’s campaign had adopted a slogan previously used by the Ku Klux Klan:

Romney KKK

On several occasions Romney included a phrase in his stump speech that closely resembled one that the KKK used frequently in the 1920s: “Keep America American.” Subsequently there was some debate as to whether Romney actually said “Keep America America,” a small difference of the single letter “n” at the end. The outrage from the right was immediate and fierce. How could those awful liberals insinuate that Romney was a Klan member? Fox News was all over the story with even their top program, The O’Reilly Factor, devoting segments to it.

Of course, nobody ever implied that Romney was a Klan member. They merely noted that his campaign had not sufficiently researched the language that they were making such a prominent part of their strategy. And they made the additional point that, if it were a Democrat whose slogan could be tied to some past perceived ignominy, Republicans would have feasted on the gaffe. Aravosis seems prescient in retrospect for having facetiously said…

“In an era in which it’s apparently okay for Republicans to accuse President Obama of being a socialist, I guess we now need to ask if Mitt Romney is a Ku Klux Klansman. Not whether Romney inadvertently is using the KKK’s number one slogan from the 1920s on the stump, no, the Republicans would say, if this were a Democrat, that clearly the candidate was a closet member of the KKK.”

Now that speculation has been made real by a conservative effort to advance their smear campaign against Obama. And their is nothing facetious about the right’s belief that the President is a socialist. When an anchor on MSNBC reported the story about Romney’s slogan, the right swung back hard in retaliation. MSNBC then issued a quick and thorough apology on the air. And that’s where the comparison ends. The right proudly and obstinately clings to their abhorrent missteps – probably because they aren’t missteps, but deliberate slander.

Conservatives have been making unfounded claims that the President is a socialist since before his inauguration. These were not merely observations about similarities in rhetoric, but outright accusations that they assert as fact. And now they are engaging in the exact same tactic that just last December they condemned as character assassination.

This is about as good an example of the ethical vacancy of the modern right as there will ever be. Their fixation on inventing new methods of tarnishing the President has devolved to condemning him for using the English language. So today the word “forward” is off-limits. Tomorrow will it be “progress” or “justice” or “the” or [fill in the blank].

Seriously…these people have totally lost their friggin minds.

[Update] Fox Business Network joins the club castigating forwardness. Tonight Lou Dobbs jumped in with the added attraction of one of Glenn Beck’s surplus blackboards.


Fox News ‘Word Doctor’ Frank Luntz Admits That Conservatives Have Lost The Debate

Frank LuntzIn an op-ed in the Washington Post, pollster and Fox News fabulist, Frank Luntz, has virtually surrendered in the battle for the hearts and minds of the American voters. His opinion piece lays out what he calls the “Five myths about conservative voters,” and in the process reveals the reality that Americans are more closely aligned with the values of progressives than those of conservatives. And much of this is thanks to the Occupy movement.

The first myth that Luntz seeks to debunk is that “Conservatives care most about the size of government.” It’s clear that Luntz is referring only to conservative voters, rather than to the conservative politicians that represent them in office. The Republican Party is still just as fixated on shrinking government as it has been since the spawn of Ronald Reagan. However, Luntz has discovered that average Americans, even those who identify as conservatives, realize that…

“…it’s not the 1980s anymore. Today, conservatives don’t want a reduced government so much as one that works better and wastes less. […] For conservatives, this debate is less about size than about results, along with a demand that elected officials demonstrate accountability and respect for the taxpayer, regardless of whether they’re spending $1 million or $1 trillion.”

That’s a fairly good summary of what the Occupy movement has been advocating for the past year. And it is an abandonment of the extremist rhetoric of conservative icons like Grover Norquist, Sarah Palin, and the Tea Party contingent.

Luntz then moves on to the delicate issue of immigration and denies that “Conservatives want to deport all illegal immigrants.” Once again, he is reporting his research of people, not politicos, and he asserts that they…

“…don’t want to round up all the illegal immigrants and deport them. They believe in the American dream and understand that immigrants built our country. That’s why conservatives embrace legal immigration. A solid majority believe that there should be an eventual path to earned legal status.”

That is the precise policy of Democrats who are sponsoring the DREAM Act to provide a path to residency for undocumented immigrants who came to this country as children and who commit to service in the armed forces or completing a college curriculum. Yet Republicans are fiercely opposed to this plan, that they derisively refer to as amnesty, even though it puts them at odds with their own constituents.

The third “myth” Luntz cites about conservatives is that “They worship Wall Street.” There is no doubt that the Republican hierarchy genuflects at the feet of Goldman Sachs. Mitt Romney has raised more money from Wall Street than any other candidate. And his GOP colleagues in congress are the first place Wall Streeters go to secure their special treatment in the form of legislation and regulation that enhances their prospects for ever greater wealth and power at the expense of 99% of the rest of the population. Luntz, however, observes that most conservatives…

“…agree with moderates and liberals that things on Wall Street have gotten out of hand. They believe that those who abuse the system should be held accountable and that those who work hard and play by the rules should be free to advance.”

Didn’t I hear that in an Obama speech about a hundred times over the past six months?

Number four on the Luntz list is a perennial: “Conservatives want to slash Social Security and Medicare.” It’s worth noting that while Luntz labels these items myths, there is abundant evidence that they are in fact the positions taken by conservative Republicans and have formed the basis of their platform for decades. This one is a good example of that. And it is also another example of where conservatives in Luntz’s research agree with liberals, as Luntz notes…

“70 percent of them oppose cuts to Medicare. They want the program strengthened, not dismantled.”

Finally, Luntz attacks the notion that “Conservatives don’t care about inequality.” The wealth gap has been a primary objective of the Occupy movement. Republican politicians, beginning with multimillionaire Mitt Romney, desperately try to portray this as class warfare. However, when actual people are consulted about their opinions, even right-wing pollsters like Luntz discover that…

“Fully 66 percent of conservatives consider the growing gap between the rich and the poor a ‘problem.’ […] Like all Americans, they are outraged that there hasn’t been a single prosecution by the Obama administration for the corporate abuses that led to the economic meltdown.”

Unfortunately, even with regard to Obama and the Democrats, much of the discussion about this has been no more than lip service and much more needs to be done.

When conservative pundits talk about this country being a center-right nation, they are describing a situation that may be decades out of alignment with reality. The American people consistently side with liberal values in most polls, and now even the research conducted by the right’s most reliable propagandist has published findings that affirm this. And this isn’t the first time Luntz has had to concede ideological defeat. Last December he said this to a select audience at the Republican Governors Association:

“I’m so scared of this anti-Wall Street effort. I’m frightened to death. They’re having an impact on what the American people think of capitalism.”

At that time Luntz advised Republicans to avoid certain words and replace them with others that he had focus-group tested. For instance: “Out: Capitalism / In: Economic Freedom.” When conservative PR flacks tell Republicans not to talk about capitalism, a significant shift is taking place (see this InfoGraphic of the other words that Luntz highlighted).

The bottom line is that the American people fully recognize who their advocates are, and now conservative strategists recognize it as well. Consequently they are spinning furiously to try to avoid losing an even bigger percentage of the populace and a blowout in November. But it’s going to be a difficult sell if the GOP has to persuade voters to support them by advocating policies long-held by Democrats. Luntz knows that and that is why he is frightened to death.


Allen West Trashes The White House Correspondent’s Dinner That He Attended

I just couldn’t pass up this bit of puerile nonsense from Nazi-baiting, commie-phobic, congressman Allen West:

West via Facebook: “On Saturday night I was honored to be invited to the White House Correspondents Association dinner. There was much glam, glamour, and humor flowing. However, as I walked from the Washington Hilton in the rain to catch the METRO back to the Batcave, I pondered life outside that ballroom and the pomp. While the President laughs and dines, our Constitutional Republic is eroding and my countrymen are suffering. In this election year, it is sad to think that some of those who were sitting in that ballroom Saturday night laughing and living it up, are helping to perpetuate the manipulation and deception of our country.”

Really? Gee, I couldn’t help but notice that Mr. West himself was “living it up” at the affair that he was “honored” to have been invited to. He was the guest of CBS (presumably because Fox News had already promised their tickets to more important guests, Lindsay Lohan and Kim Kardashian). And after dining on the gourmet cuisine and enjoying the celebrity-studded entertainment, West expects us believe that he ambled home with deep sorrow for all the little people he pretends to care so much about.

West knew precisely what the event was when he donned his tuxedo and headed off to walk the red carpet into the Washington Hilton with the rest of the elites. He knew it was a party where there would be drinking and dining and laughter, and the sort of wanton joyfulness that his Puritan renunciation forbids, at least until the Bush recession is over. It is the pinnacle of arrogance to feign empathy only after spending hours rubbing elbows with the “A” listers at the party. Who does he think he is kidding?

Maybe the evening went south for West when Jimmy Kimmel reminded the crowd of the time that Obama called Kanye West a jackass. “No offense sir,” Kimmel said, “but I think you got the wrong West. I think you meant Allen.” I’m inclined to agree with Kimmel.

West continues to betray his cynical and dishonest nature every time he opens his mouth. And Republican leaders like Romney and Boehner are still too chickenshit to repudiate his inane public statements accusing Democrats of being Nazis and communists. So don’t forget to help out Patrick Murphy’s campaign against West in Florida’s 18th district. It’s time for the people to send West packing.