LET HIM DIE: The True Tea Party Values Exposed

Posted by on September 15, 2011 at 11:56 am. 23 Comments :

At the Tea Party/Republican debate earlier this week, there was a moment that revealed the true nature of the Tea Party’s values and compassion for their fellow citizens. It unfolded in this exchange between the CNN moderator, Wolf Blitzer, and Rep. Ron Paul. But it was the audience response to the question that merits more attention.

Wolf Blitzer: Let me ask you this hypothetical question: A healthy, thirty year old young man, has a good job, makes a good living, but decides, “You know what…I’m not gonna spend two hundred or three hundred dollars a month for health insurance because I’m healthy, I don’t need it.” But something terrible happens and all of a sudden he needs it. Who’s gonna pay for it if he goes into a coma? […] Are you saying that society should just let him die?

Tea Party Audience: (shouting) Yes! Yeah!

That pretty much sums up the Randian philosophy of self-interest that permeates the Tea Party and the right in general. It illustrates their detachment from society and the conviction that we are all on our own, that we have no moral obligation to anyone else, and that if some unfortunate person is suffering – even dying – that’s their problem.

It is notable that Blitzer’s framing of the question slanted the issue to focus on someone with a job and good pay who declined insurance by choice. However, in reality, a working person probably already has health insurance from their employer. The question completely avoids the more likely scenario wherein a person is uninsured due to unemployment or underemployment, not by their own choosing. People falling into this category can include housewives, students, and retirees, along with ordinary folks who just happen to have been laid off or had some other misfortune.

The Tea Party is now out of the closet with regard to their overt insensitivity and uncaring attitude toward those in need. They seem oblivious to the notion that the needy may include their neighbors, their family, or even themselves. What’s worse is that they have exposed themselves as hypocrites to the values they profess to hold. Do they have any recollection of the words of their Lord regarding His criteria for entry into the Kingdom of Heaven? He spoke of the treatment of the hungry and the sick saying…

“Whatever you neglected to do unto one of the least of these, you neglected to do unto Me!”

Jesus At A Tea Party
Click to view larger and share on Facebook

Much is revealed of us by our treatment of others. And much is revealed of our society by its compassion for all of its citizens. The Republican audience in the previous debate demonstrated their aversion to compassion by cheering for executions. Now the Tea Party has assumed the role of the biblical Romans and, like Pontius Pilate, have washed their hands of it.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Cocaine And Infidelity? The Silence Of Sarah Palin

Posted by on September 14, 2011 at 9:37 am. 10 Comments :

Sarah PalinThe National Enquirer is teasing a story in their upcoming issue about excerpts it claims to have received from a new book about Sarah Palin: “The Rogue: Searching for the Real Sarah Palin,” by Joe McGinniss. The details are sordid and potentially shattering for the Alaskan Prima Dona.

According to the Enquirer, McGinniss has uncovered evidence that Palin had a one-night stand with NBA star Glen Rice, who was playing for Michigan University at the time. That’s no big deal. She was young and single and how often would she have the chance to nail a 6’8″ athletic hunk in Alaska?

The more troubling reports concern her alleged cocaine use and an affair with her husband’s business partner that eventually resulted in the dissolution of the business.

Joe McGinniss has a pretty good reputation for accuracy in his books and he spent considerable time in Alaska researching this one. He rented a house next door to the Palins, whose paranoia drove them to erect a wall to keep him from peering in (Palin even accused him of being a Peeping Tom).

But what is most curious in the wake of this leak by the Enquirer is that Palin has not responded at all. In the past she has aggressively defended herself when attacked by taking to Twitter or Facebook and denouncing the fiend who would tarnish her virtue. However, she has been conspicuously silent on these matters.

Silence, of course, is not an admission of guilt. But it is inconsistent with her pattern of behavior and there must be some reason for that. We will know before too long. The book is being released next week and there is no way that Palin, as she continues her charade that she is considering a run for the Republican nomination for president (she isn’t), can evade questions about these allegations.


GOP Debates Confirm That Fox Is More Cult Than News

Posted by on September 13, 2011 at 2:35 pm. 3 Comments :

In May of 2007 I did an analysis of the ratings of the GOP 2008 presidential primaries broadcast on cable news. The conclusion showed that Fox News viewers remained glued to Fox regardless of what else on the air. I wrote at the time that…

“Fox viewers are married to the channel and couldn’t care less what’s playing down the dial. Their hypnotic attachment filters out all other sensory stimulation, even if it’s something that would ordinarily excite them. […] Fox viewers appear to be more loyal to Fox than to Republicans or conservatism. This misdirected allegiance bestows a far more influential authority onto a media entity than ought ever to be considered. It suggests that the bombastic demagogues that Fox has shaped into celebrity anchors truly do weigh down their transfixed disciples.”

The Cult of Foxonality™ was affirmed when Fox acquired Glenn Beck and saw his ratings (temporarily) skyrocket. Fox viewers were wholly uninterested in the conservative schlock-jock when he was on CNN. Switching channels, even to see someone they would later slobber over, was too much trouble. But when he moved to Fox their slobbering could begin in earnest.

Now the Republican primary debates for 2012 demonstrate that little has changed in four years. Fox viewers are simply not inclined to stray from their electronic hearth no matter the attraction. The GOP debate on MSNBC was watched by more than 5.4 million viewers. CNN’s Gop/Tea Party debate drew 3.6 million [Note: It was competing against Monday Night Football and the U.S. Tennis Open Finals]. However, the ratings for Fox News hardly budged. The primetime average for Fox News in the second quarter of 2011 was 2.184 million viewers. On September 7, during MSNBC’s debate coverage, Fox’s primetime average was actually a little higher at 2.253 million. On September 12, during CNN’s debate coverage, Fox’s primetime average dipped to 1.791 million.

Clearly Fox News viewers can’t be bothered to dig the remote out from under the cushions in order to see what the next Republican nominee for president might say if it’s on another channel. That’s too bad because they missed Rick Perry complaining that Michele Bachmann underestimated the price for which he could be bought.

Perry: “I raise about thirty million dollars, and if you’re saying I can be bought for five thousand, I’m offended.”

That’s telling her. Perry knows how important it is to defend your brand, or else cronies and lobbyists will start to lowball you. And that can really cut into your profit margin. So the question is – How much can he be bought for?

Fox viewers also missed the Tea Party audience at the debate express their compassion for their fellow Americans. In a discussion about access to health care, moderator Wolf Blitzer presented Ron Paul with a hypothetical patient who required intensive care but had no insurance. “Are you saying that society should just let him die?” Blitzer asked. Paul’s answer in the negative was nearly drowned out by numerous audience members shouting “Yeah!” It looks like Republicans owe former (and perhaps future) Florida representative Alan Grayson an apology for vilifying him when he said that the GOP health care plan was “Don’t get sick! And if you do get sick, die quickly!”

The next GOP debate will be carried by Fox News so the FoxPods won’t have to worry about what’s on opposite O’Reilly. They can lean back and scarf down their Happy Meal without missing anything important. Or, at least, anything that Fox thinks is important.


Fox Nation Plays To The Stupidity Of Their Audience By Mocking Bill Maher

Posted by on September 13, 2011 at 9:05 am. 15 Comments :

You can tell a lot about an enterprise by the way it engages their own audience. For Fox News it is imperative that they talk down to the morons who watch in order to perpetuate the lies and disinformation. And their web site, Fox Nation, is no less bound by a confederacy of dunces. Here is how they routinely portray comedian Bill Maher:

Fox Nation on Bill Maher

Repeatedly calling him Pig Maher is the Fox Nationalist’s way of demonstrating their maturity and devotion to ethical journalism. It’s all you can expect from an organization whose audience was obsessed with idiotic notions about death panels and birth certificates.

This isn’t the first time Fox Nation has plumbed these depths of daftness. A couple of years ago the Foxies thought they were hilarious as they skewered Senator Al Franken as Stuart Smalley (the name of a character he played on Saturday Night Live ten years prior). At that time I wrote…

“I suppose that, in order for Fox Nation (and Fox News) to be successful, they have to cater to the diminished mental capacity of their audience. And after reading some of the comments posted on their site, I’d say they still have some ways down to go. Remember, this is a community that reveres ignorance, as illustrated by their adoration of Sarah Palin, and college dropout Glenn Beck. They proudly display their overt disdain for people with demonstrated intelligence.”

We can now add to the list of Fox’s idols the current front-runner in the GOP presidential primary, Rick Perry. His college transcripts reveal that he barely graduated with a 2.2 grade-point average. This presidential hopeful received C’s in U.S. History; D’s in Principles of Economics; and for someone who doesn’t believe in evolution and discounts the peer-reviewed research of hundreds of scientists affirming Climate Change, Perry failed Organic Chemistry.

Still, Perry and Fox may be too advanced for the Fox audience and Tea Partyers. It is, nevertheless, comforting to see them at least trying to communicate at a level their audience can understand.


Rudy Giuliani vs Paul Krugman On The Lessons Of 9/11

Posted by on September 12, 2011 at 6:39 pm. 5 Comments :

New York Times columnist, and Nobel-winning economist, Paul Krugman has been getting grilled today for a post on his blog that expressed his dismay at how the aftermath of 9/11 resulted in a flurry of cynical, greedy, and dishonest politicians who exploited the atrocity for their own political or financial gain. He said in part…

The atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue. Fake heroes like Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and, yes, George W. Bush raced to cash in on the horror. And then the attack was used to justify an unrelated war the neocons wanted to fight, for all the wrong reasons.

Krugman correctly labeled these people and policies “shameful,” This set off a resounding assault from arrogant pseudo-patriots, on Fox News and elsewhere, trying to misrepresent Krugman’s thoughts as being somehow disrespectful to the victims and survivors of 9/11. Of course, the opposite is true. It is those who took advantage of the attacks to enrich themselves or advance their agenda who were so despicably disrespectful.

Contrast this with remarks by former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani who was asked by CBS anchor Bob Schieffer, “Do you think [9/11] changed the country?” Giuliani replied:

“Sure it changed the country. Mostly in good ways. It made us more realistic about the threat that we faced, I think we have much better intelligence today. I think spiritually we’re stronger.”

Mostly in good ways? Does Giuliani really believe that a renewed sense of unity forged by tragedy is “good” when it cost the lives of 3,000 innocent people on American soil and more than 8,000 American troops (nearly twice the number lost on 9/11), as well as hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians overseas? Is it really “good” that we ran up more than a trillion dollars in debt due to what are now the longest wars in American history? Is it “good” that our Constitution has been violated by legislation like the Patriot Act and repugnant policies that justify torture and other extra-legal acts of war? Does Giuliani really believe that better intelligence and whatever it is that he regards as stronger spirituality is worth all the suffering we’ve endured?

Giuliani is one of those to whom Krugman referred who benefited from the 9/11 attacks. He shaped his whole post-mayoral persona on the tragedy, embarked on expensive political campaigns, published books, and launched a security consulting firm. He is a one-man 9/11 profiteering conglomerate. And he has managed this while bringing nothing useful to table to promote healing. In the same interview with Schieffer, Giuliani bragged that New York City…

“…is bigger, stronger, you know, twice as many people live down here now as before September 11th.”

The stupidity of that comment is all too apparent. If the population of New York City doubled it would bring the city to a standstill. The truth is that the city’s population grew from 8,008,278 in 2000 to 8,175,133 in 2010, according to the Census Department. That’s an increase of only 2.1%. So Giuliani was only off by 97.9%.

The wonder of all of this is how the conservative media can get its feathers all ruffled by Krugman’s perfectly reasonably comments, but have nothing to say about the ignorant and revolting comments by Giuliani. There is no comparison as to which were the more offensive and removed from reality. Giuliani deserves a firm rebuke, and hopefully the media will soon regain consciousness and start doing its job.


Remember This While Watching The CNN/Tea Party GOP Debate

Posted by on September 12, 2011 at 10:35 am. 3 Comments :

CNN Tea PartyWhen the Republican debate tonight airs it is important to put into context the venue in which the candidates will appear. This debate is being broadcast on CNN along with their co-hosts, the Tea Party Express (TPE).

From the start, the notion of elevating any Tea Party group to the position of national debate sponsor was ludicrous. The Tea Party is nothing but a fringe element of the Republican Party. It has very little support, even amongst Republicans, and its approval ratings have been on a path of rapid descent. It’s most recent nationwide bus tour, which is scheduled to conclude today at the Tampa site of the debate, has been an utter failure with record low attendance.

Contrary to the general practice of engaging impartial partners for debate presentations, TPE is hardly impartial. It is a political action committee that has actively engaged in campaigning on behalf of specific candidates. They supported senate candidates Sharron Angle in Nevada, Christine O’Donnell in Delaware, and Joe Miller in Alaska (all lost). They have also been vocal proponents of Sarah Palin who has appeared as a sort of mascot for the group. Palin is supposedly still considering joining the race president herself (although I submit that she is perpetrating something of a hoax in conjunction with Fox News), so TPE cannot now be reasonably be portrayed as fair presenters. They have far too many obvious conflicts of interest.

What makes matters worse is that TPE is a corrupt organization that has even been rebuked by the rest of the so-called Tea Party movement. They were created by Sal Russo and his Republican PR firm, Russo Marsh, and their brief history is fraught with scandal. Rival Tea Party groups were harshly critical of them for directing nearly half of the money they raised from citizen supporters to Russo’s firm. Their former spokesman, Mark Williams, was forced to resign after publishing a racially offensive article on his web site. TPE was booted from the National Tea Party Federation for these and other ethical lapses.

What might have have prompted CNN to make this unholy alliance with a discredited and over-hyped entity? Undoubtedly CNN’s new president Ken Jautz had something to do with it. Jautz, who took the reins at CNN last September, was previously in charge of their sister network HLN. It was there that he made history by giving Glenn Beck his first job in television. At CNN he has already distinguished himself by hiring Andrew Breitbart’s Editor-in-Chief, Dana Loesch, as a political analyst and being alone in airing Michele Bachmann’s embarrassing Tea Party response to President Obama’s State of the Union message.

The CNN/Tea Party Express alliance is an unprecedented partnership between a news organization and an active political action committee that has already taken sides in the debate. Would CNN ever consider partnering with MoveOn.org for a Democratic debate? Ironically, the American Dream Movement (of which MoveOn is a part) is now asking for equal time in the form of a post-debate response. Since CNN gave Tea Partier Michele Bachmann just such an opportunity, it would be only fair to grant the same courtesy to a legitimate enterprise with far more popular support. And what’s more, CNN should partner with the American Dreamers to co-host a debate in the upcoming election.

CNN is embarrassing themselves with this association with Tea Party Express. This debate is a farce that lacks the sort of credibility that an honest news enterprise would set as a goal. They ought to take measures to try to redeem what’s left of their tattered reputation – if it isn’t too late already.

[Addendum] CNN has posted an article today about how an “Angry electorate helps sustain tea party.” In it they assert that the Tea Party has “moved toward the mainstream.” CNN’s evidence for this is that CNN chose the Tea Party to co-host a debate that is airing on CNN. And this absurdly circular logic was the work of – you guessed it – a CNN political producer. So CNN is validating their own choice for debate partner by having a CNN analyst write an article for CNN praising the partnership with CNN. How convenient.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

IDIOT FOX: Bill O’Reilly Doesn’t Know What Income Taxes Are

Posted by on September 9, 2011 at 12:59 pm. 3 Comments :

In an analysis of Barack Obama’s speech before congress last night, Bill O’Reilly invited Obama’s press secretary, Jay Carney, to the program to discuss the speech and its proposals. As usual, O’Reilly demonstrated his immense capacity for misunderstanding even the simplest concepts. He also reminded us of why no Democrat should EVER appear on his show. Here is how Fox Nation is reporting the exchange:

Fox Nation

Technically, if Carney has been knocked into next week, then he’s ahead of the rest of us. Which is far better than living in the past like O’Reilly whose crusty and outdated approach to issues has proven to have failed unambiguously.

Much of the conservative media is disseminating the same absurd and false argument that O’Reilly made. The part of the interview that is making the rounds amongst the right-wingers this morning revolves around the example Obama gave of the inherent unfairness in the tax code:

“Right now Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary — an outrage he has asked us to fix.”

That is an objectively true statement. But that didn’t stop O’Reilly from pouncing on it with a fierce conviction of his righteousness as he demanded that…

“You’ve got to stop with Warren, OK? Warren is 88 years old or something. He says his secretary pays more tax. It’s not true. He’s talking about two different things. […] He’s talking about capital gains, Warren Buffett. The secretary pays federal income taxes, it’s two different taxes. But Warren and the president are trying to fool us. Stop it.”

Actually, the difference between earnings derived from capital gains and those derived from labor is immaterial with regard to reporting income. They are both subject to income taxes, (albeit at different rates) and are both reported as income on an income tax return. As can be clearly seen here:

Income Taxes

So contrary to O’Reilly’s lunk-headed theories, anyone who receives income, whether from capital gains or wages, pays federal income taxes. For O’Reilly and the rest of the right-wingnuts to deny it is foolish and/or dishonest. The points that both Obama and Buffett are making is that different types of income are being taxed at different rates and that the result is one that favors the rich.

The tax benefits enjoyed by wealthy folks like O’Reilly were put in place by legislators who respond to big donations from the very people who will receive the benefit. It is not surprising to hear O’Reilly and other elitist media pundits defend that system of reward. What is surprising (and sad) is that there are so many deluded, middle-class citizens who have allowed themselves to become lackeys of the master-class. The Tea Party is a pathetic example of the doctrine of the “useful idiot” who can be exploited to work on behalf of policies that are demonstrably harmful to their own interests.

Hopefully the ever more transparent greed of the 1% of the population that is hoarding most of the nation’s wealth will motivate the majority to rise up in opposition to the unfairness of the current situation. This is the time to make your voice heard. Your representatives and your local media need to know what the people are thinking. They can’t read minds. So do them and yourselves a favor and speak up – NOW!


Fox Nation vs. Reality: On Obama’s Stock Market Voodoo

Posted by on September 9, 2011 at 11:16 am. 2 Comments :

It’s hard to believe that the Fox Nation web site is published by an organization that considers itself a news enterprise. Anyone who takes the site seriously is gravely in danger of becoming irreversibly idiotized. For example, this morning the Fox Nationalists posted this item declaring that “Stocks Tumble Worldwide After Obama Speech.”

Fox Nation

The implication, of course, is that Obama’s speech had something to do with the stocks tumbling. However, despite the deceptive headline, the article states that it is actually the “speculation congress won’t pass” the President’s proposals that contributed to the market decline. In other words, the markets favor Obama’s plan and want it to be implemented. So a more honest headline would have read “Stocks Tumble Worldwide Due To Republican Obstructionism.” But then again, if you’re looking for a more honest headline then you probably wouldn’t be reading Fox Nation in the first place.


Lowlights From The Republican Debate

Posted by on September 8, 2011 at 3:13 am. 2 Comments :

Thank goodness the President’s speech before congress was put off until Thursday. I would not have wanted America to miss this spectacle of GOP brilliance.

Setting aside the predictable skirmishes and automatic spewing of stump speech sound bites, there were some classic moments of insight that can only be attributed to the chronic psychosis of Republicanism. So without further ado…

Biggest Whopper of the Night:

Rick Perry on Obama saying that the border is safer than ever: “Either he has some of the poorest intel in the history of this country or he is an abject liar.”
However, violent crime rates along the U.S.-Mexico border have been falling for years and border cities of all sizes have maintained crime rates below the national average.

Comic Relief (which is pretty much everything else):

Perry flubbed his grasp of border security by calling for patrols with unmanned drones, apparently unaware that such patrols have been in use since 2009, including in Texas.

Michele Bachmann wants to make sure that immigrants seeking citizenship have a basic knowledge of American history. I assume that’s so she’ll have someone to teach her.

To illustrate how unreliable science is with regard to Global Warming, Perry cited Galileo as an example of a scientist who was disputed by fellow scientists. The problem with that is that Galileo was disputed by fundamentalist Christian authorities, not other scientists. You know, the kind of non-scientist, fundamentalists Perry hangs out with.

Ron Paul expressed his dismay with border fences because, instead of keeping foreigners out, they could be used to keep Americans in. He may be the only candidate speaking out in support of expatriates fleeing to Mexico.

Newt Gingrich complained that the debate moderators were trying to foment disagreement between the participants. And as we know, political debates are supposed to be completely free of any disagreements between the candidates.

Herman Cain advocates for the Chilean model of retirement programs. Chile essentially has a program wherein people pay in to private accounts. In other words, Cain wants to privatize Social Security. Which is marginally better than Perry’s plan to abolish the whole Ponzi scheme.

Perry praised Michael Dukakis’ job creation record as governor of Massachusetts saying that he “created jobs three times faster than” Mitt Romney. Romney didn’t disagree.

Bachmann again spoke of her five biological children and 23 foster kids. This time it was to shore up the child labor vote by asserting that what kids need today are jobs. Makes you wonder what she was doing with all those foster kids.

This was great television. I can’t wait for the next debate. We have a couple of promising events on the schedule. One with CNN and their co-host, Tea Party Express. And another by Fox News with questions submitted via Google. What I wouldn’t give for a debate co-sponsored by Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment and the National Rifle Association, with their moderators Ted Nugent and Victoria Jackson. And a special half-time tribute to Ann Coulter.


The GOP Agenda Becomes Fox News Programming

Posted by on September 7, 2011 at 12:02 pm. 6 Comments :

Long ago it was established that Fox News is not a legitimate journalistic enterprise. It is the PR division of the Republican Party. Fox bristles at that characterization despite the fact that they have admitted that they approach the news from “the other side” of what they consider the liberal media. They have even been caught reading “news” items straight from Republican press releases.

Now Fox News is promoting a special slate of programming for next week that they are calling “Regulation Nation.” The promotion shows Fox bragging that “We expose how excessive laws are drowning American business.”

I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that next weeks special programming, on both Fox News and Fox Business, was scheduled at precisely the same time as the Republican Party’s announcement that they will be pursuing an anti-regulation agenda for the remainder of this year. The GOP’s House Majority Leader, Eric Cantor, just published his list of the “Top 10 Job-Destroying Regulations.” Cantor describes the list as a memo on the jobs agenda, but the list is nothing more than a collection of health, safety, and environmental regulations that he and the GOP oppose (and one anti-union bill for good measure).

The effects of these proposals will serve only to produce dirtier air and water, more hazardous working conditions, and astronomical leaps in costs related to health care. And that isn’t even addressing the human toll of disease, disability, and death. Jonathan Cohn at the New Republic summed up the fallacy embraced by the GOP plan with an example taken from Sen. John Barrasso’s (R-WY) analysis of the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (which is included in Cantor’s Top 10 list).

“By 2014, the agency predicts, the new rule will reduce sulfur dioxide emissions by 71 percent and nitrogen oxide emissions by 52 percent.

“Of course, the companies that still maintain plants with high emissions will have to spend money to comply with the new rule. And, according to the Barrasso memo, the bill for that compliance (including, as far as I can tell, higher prices the companies might pass along to customers) comes to $2.4 billion a year. But the source of that figure is the EPA’s own assessment, which notes that $1.6 billion of that represent a one-time-only capital investment, already underway – and that even the $2.4 billion pales next to the $120 to $280 billion in annual benefits that the regulation will generate. Those benefits include reduced emergency room visits, missed days at work, and mortality.”

The entire Republican deregulation campaign is fraught with similar examples of proposals that oppose measures that may require modest investments, but will produce far more in savings and new revenue, not to mention a higher quality of life. And despite the Republican deceit of calling these anti-regulation proposals a jobs agenda, there is no evidence that any part of it would create a single job. As pretty much every credible economic expert has affirmed, the current employment situation is not the result of taxes and regulations. It is due to lack of demand. And demand increases when middle-income consumers have more money to spend, not when wealthy people and corporations are taxed less.

What the Republicans are seeking, by their own admission, is competitiveness in global markets, and their deregulation plan is certain to achieve that. It will finally make the United States competitive with nations like China for having the lowest wages and the highest levels of pollution, and the worst standard of living.

And isn’t it convenient that Fox News would choose this time to produce programming that adopts the very same positions on the economy and the agenda going forward as the leaders of the Republican Party?

[Update 9/12/11] Media Matters has posted an excellent article with additional research affirming that taxes and regulations have little impact on job creation.