You are currently browsing the monthly archive for April, 2008.
(With apologies to Mike Royko… and, apparently, Pat “anti-copy and paste” Hickey…)
A few weeks back Arch posted an old Mike Royko column which, at the time, attempted to burst the balloon of racism swirling around a Chicago mayoral race which included then-candidate Harold Washington. Arch’s celebration yesterday of the 25th anniversary of the late Harold Washington’s swearing-in as the first black mayor of Chicago reminded me again of that Royko piece.
In light of the issues some Americans are saying they have and other Americans are pretending they don’t have with a certain 2008 presidential candidate, it seemed like it would be interesting to adapt the Royko column for the modern day. What would Royko have written if he were writing about the 2008 presidential election. One can only imagine…
So I told Uncle Chester: Don’t worry, Barack Obama doesn’t want to marry your sister.
How does Cong. Peter Roskam “support” our troops? By insinuating they’re a bunch of sex-crazed horndogs who must be nannied over lest they give in to temptations of the X-rated variety.
And there’s something in it for you too, dear taxpayers: a complete waste of the Pentagon’s time and our tax dollars as military brass are commanded to search and destroy pin-ups and videos instead of, oh say, our enemies.
What’s next? Banning government-issue condoms? Mandating abstinence for unmarried troops and the calendar method for those who are married?
What’s the difference between Cong. “Porno Pete” Roskam’s nanny-state attitude and the House of Saud’s regulations for US troops manning bases in Saudi Arabia in the 90s? At least King Saud let the guys have Victoria Secret catalogs (though not much else).
Can you imagine Rep. Roskam walking in to give a pep talk at the local armory before the next National Guard deployment? …”Don’t go fight yon terrorists, men. Fight the nudie rags instead. It’s not Hezbollah we’re after — it’s Hollywood! You just might get warts on your hands if you don’t listen to my dire warnings to avoid the girlie magazines.”
Perhaps instead of being so worried about oversexed troops, Porno Pete Roskam ought to be quite a bit more concerned about the rapists staffing the war profiteering contractors hired by the White House. So much for any Republican claims of “family values” given that they continue to let those atrocities go on.
Say, aren’t there more important things going on? Something about a recession? And exorbitant gas costs? And what’s this war thingy we keep hearing about? And healthcare for uninsured kids? And the White House spying on Americans … what’s that all about?
Oh, wait. Raunchy Roskam apparently couldn’t give two shakes about work-a-day folks, agrees in principle with Sen. McCain on keeping our troops in Iraq for 100 years in spite of reality on the ground, has voted against our children multiple times (and lied about why), and he favors shredding our Constitution’s Bill of Rights. Nevermind.
Then again, the media seems to have recently discovered that black folks have … preachers! Maybe Rep. Roskam will take care of that “problem” too.
Oops. DeSmog blogger Richard Littlemore reports that nearly 10% (and counting…) of the Heartland Institute’s list of “500 scientists” who supposedly dispute climate change are quite surprised and shocked to find themselves on such a list considering their scientific research has led them to conclude the opposite — that the climate is changing and that it is due, at least in part, to human activity.
The Heartland Institute is fairly well-known as a conservative- and corporate-funded ‘think tank’ designed to promote conservative partisan platforms (in other words, propagandize ‘conservative’ views). To the point, among other backers, Exxon had funded Heartland to the tune of nearly $800,000 in recent years and execs with Amoco and Exxon have also served on the Heartland Institute Board of Directors.
Mr. Littlemore had a hunch that Heartland’s “list” of 500 scientists wasn’t on the up and up so he started emailing the people listed. He’s been getting plenty of feedback about Heartland’s use of so many people’s names with at least 45 telling him directly they’re name was used without permission and falsely since they actually disagree with the Dorothys chirping ‘there’s no such thing as climate change, there’s no such thing as climate change…’
Here is just one note Mr. Littlemore was cc’ed on:
I have NO doubts ..the recent changes in global climate ARE man-induced. I insist that you immediately remove my name from this list since I did not give you permission to put it there.
Dr. Gregory Cutter, Professor, Department of Ocean, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Old Dominion University
Why did the conservatives at Heartland feel a need to lie and, in so doing, mock these scientists? Disgraceful.
The only people who ought to be doubtful here? The folks on the receiving end of Heartland’s propagandist fallacies.
The pioneering late Mayor Harold Washington is a political hero to ArchPundit and as such he has been respectfully recognizing the 25th anniversary of his swearing in as Chicago’s first black mayor.
His most recent post on the topic reveals his own personal experiences growing up in a variety of American locales — some with overt and systemic racism prevalent, some with it more subdued and hidden — and also plays off the famous Molly Ivins quote:
Once you figure out they are lying to you about race, you start to question everything.
True enough today as it was when first she wrote it.
Arch’s other posts on the topic include:
I’ll be “copying and pasting” more later on a related note…
Some folks need to grow up. This is a publicity stunt, nothing more. If these pictures covering up most of the celebrity’s body are somehow “nude photos” we’ve got a heckuvalot more nude beaches in this country than anyone apparently realized — one-piece swimsuits are more “revealing” for the pervs out there concerned about such things.
Say, isn’t there some trouble brewing with the economy? And what’s this I hear about some war going on?
And how about all those war-profiteering generals who were paid to propagandize in favor of the war on national TV for years, even though they personally and privately saw the war going fubar almost from the get-go?
Shh, there’s some underage club-hopping rich girl celebrity showing off her spine: Priorities.
How f’ing sick do you have to be to tie in Chicago’s recent rash of gun violence and murdered children to the Presidential campaign???
Congrats, Anne Leary and Gang… You’ve gleefully skipped right over trying to actually find a solution to the problem and instead dove headfirst right into that disgusting cesspool of partisan politicking; a sewage pond you’re now choosing to fill with the still fresh blood of those children whose souls you’re now abusing.
Ms. Leary is promoting yet another trite guilt-by-association smear — a low-budget YouTube ad, hoping to be picked up and endlessly replayed for free on the boob tube — from yet another con partisan who has no interest in actual, honest conservative principles but rather a near-prurient need to score evermore partisan chits. Ms. Leary finds herself applauding the news that ABC’s Jake Tapper will be promoting the video as well as the alphabet network apparently continues down its path of turning the news division into just another version of their soaps.
While Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain are actually trying to have an issues-based campaign debated on high standards, Ms. Leary and her con comrades would rather try to smear Obama with any shred of “violence” or “radicalism” by playing Six Degrees of Bullshit. (Then again, Ms. Leary, you’re admonishing your own nominee because he doesn’t see a place for the unprincipled uber-partisanship you espouse … just so we know where you’re coming from.)
Say, who’s behind this propaganda effort to try and overtly connect Obama to the concept of “violence” as a means to tarnish him through the use of the common propaganda technique of “transferance”?
None other than Floyd Brown, a low-brow GOP operative known for producing vitriolic guilt-by-association ads that do absolutely nothing to actually prevent the violent crimes he exploits for his partisan gain.
I don’t know of a word in the English language that accurately describe just how pathetic, amoral and debasing such partisans who would use the murders of children for purely partisan gain really are. But Ms. Leary, you’re right there with Mr. Floyd in whatever ring of hell that peccant place is.
Those kids are dead — and you’re using their murders to channel your hatred for Sen. Obama?
Again, a strong enough word does not exist, though loathsome comes close.
(PS: Contrary to popular belief, the death penalty has been proven time and again to not deter murder and other violent crimes as it is … so what on earth are Ms. Leary and Mr. Brown trying to accomplish?)
–
As an aside, Rep. John Fritchey makes several very good points in his discussion of the actual topic — gun violence. Ms. Leary and her cohorts would do well to stop shooting up with their partisan syringes for a time and think about practical means to prevent such violence instead…
If you’re easily offended — Fran Eaton 
— by unintentionally hilarious, x-rated graphic designers gone wild don’t click through….
Not a good way to start a campaign, before the campaign really even gets started…
And this after all but stealing the Obama’08 look for Ozinga’08. No wonder this candidate hyped as a “self-funder” wants to cut his losses to just $350k.
The 11th district is currently open as incumbent Republican Jerry “Most Corrupt Politicians” Weller is retiring at the end of his term. The GOP nomination is also open after primary winner Tim Baldermann decided he didn’t want to raise any money. Conservative partisans have been peeing in their pants fretting that Democratic State Senator Debbie Halvorson may have a free pass at the Congressional seat.
–
Update: Rich Miller posts from his secret location that the comments to ArchPundit blog which came from “ozmail.ozinga.com” were from Mr. Ozinga’s business. A quick Google search did not find any official “Ozinga’08″ webite yet.
Federal regulations, as I understand them, do not allow a business to provide in-kind help to candidates so “Brian,” the commenter at ArchPundit, ought to be careful about those FEC laws. (I’m not a lawyer so I could be wrong on the rules regarding in-kind donations from businesses.)
The way I read “Brian’s” comment, he may simply be interested in defending the business’ reputation against the allegations of shenanigans the media has been reporting.
But if his intent was to promote or defend Ozinga the presumptive candidate … well, another Republican candidate, dairy and ice cream magnate Jim Oberweis in his US Senate run, found out the hard way all about the FEC’s strict rules barring use of corporate assets to assist a Federal campaign.
As my poodle pal Archpundit and several others noted many moons ago, there are plenty of reasonable items on which the State House could move to impeach Gov. Rod Blagojevich — not the least of which were the guv’s direct circumventions of the Legislature to implement his programs, without Lege approval for the fund moves he made.
Fast forward to this month, and Prairie State denizens are being treated to new allegations of corruption regarding Public Official A, his campaign fund, and pay-to-play politics whereby large donors were rewarded with state jobs.
We’ve also been unwilling audience members for a legislative kabuki theater between the House and Senate over a recall amendment which would allow voters to “recall” a sitting statewide officer. The House passed such a bill but the Senate put a hostile sponsor on it and bottled it up.
I’ve said over and over that I’m no fan of recall. For one thing, the California example turned into a circus fueled by partisan funding (it doesn’t matter which partisan side of the aisle — it was still an expensive, distracting, debilitating circus). For another, our state has a more formal recall measure: It’s called impeachment. And some independent Dem House members are in fact moving toward that option.
Whatever the personality politics involved, the main intent of the House recall bill that is now tabled in the Senate is to allow citizens to have a say in removing a Constitutional officer. Fair enough.
But why not work on a bill that would allow regular citizens vote to force the House and Senate to hold
impeachment proceedings? Or put a matter of impeachment directly to the State Supreme Court?
That would give citizens the right to have a direct say in the process, but uses an already existing Constitutional measure to do so.
Want an additional filter on it? Make it dependent on receiving a majority or supermajority of lege districts instead of just a straight-up popular vote…
But enough of the reactionary “recall” stuff. That’s a Pandora’s Box that our state has lived without since 1818 and as bad as our current governor is he’s no reason to open it up now.
Want to give the people a say?
Let us vote to have the lege debate Articles of Impeachment.
The Ol’ North State’s primary is coming up in a few weeks and Sen. Obama has had a solid lead there over Sen. Clinton for some time.
Polls are showing that Sen. Obama even makes North Carolina a toss-up for November should he be the Dem nominee…
Perhaps this is why conservative Tar Heels can’t figure out whether to lie about him being a Muslim (dear Pastor Byrd: the answer is no) or lie that he’s some kind of radical Christian. It’s still a long way to go to November for we Americans to have to keep putting up with these falsehoods from partisan conservatives.
And again… do the cons even stop to think that he can’t be both a Muslim and a Christian before they start their tirades of lunacy? Duh.
Welcome to kindergarten…
- John “Poopy Head” Ruskin compares a journalist — Rich Miller — who covers Springfield and other Illinois political matters to Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber. Why? Because Miller posted a few facts that put the lie to the spin being promoted by a comrade of Ruskin’s. In his role as a reporter, Miller has gone after Dems, GOPs and even Greens with equal aplomb when they fib, flop or go flakey, as Sen. Steve Rauschenberger has been doing of late in his anti-Obama zeal. This isn’t the first time the pseudonymous Ruskin has flailed around spewing crap instead of keeping his bizarre inanities to himself… (What’s that? There’s a financial stake for the denizens of Illinois Review to prop up the head of the United Republican Fund, an organization that so many of them also help operate? Go figure…)
- Jill “Likes Sex Ed” Stanek once compared an incumbent, duly elected State Senator to a porn star and, when called out for her depravity, upped the ante by continuing to make a fool of herself. Why? Because said State Senator was advocating for a vaccine that former nurse Stanek didn’t like. Instead of rational debate, are porn references really how Jill would rather get her jollies?
- Lee “Wets His Pants” Newcom recently claimed a Democratic candidate for Congress was “aiding terrorists” even though she’s not even in Congress. Why? Because he has nothing better to do at his day job working for the citizens of McLean County, apparently. Or perhaps it’s because he has no valid explanation for why he would choose to trample on our Constitution instead of upholding our rights.
And an honorable dunce cap mention must go to ilgopnet.com’s Warner Todd “Has a Problem Alright” Huston, for comparing a duly elected, incumbent Congresswoman to a brutal African dictator simply because she wants folks to be able to eat their dinner in peace.
Someone calling out your comrades on their lies? Call ‘em a Unabomber!
Upset that a legislator is advocating potentially life-saving medicine? Compare her to a porn star and ask about her sex life.
A legislator running for Congress from the party you oppose? Squeal like a stuck pig that they’re “aiding terrorists” even though they’re not even in office (yet) and they don’t even know any terrorists in the first place … all while trying to hide from the fact that you want to literally rip out parts of the Bill of Rights.
Crabby because a Democratic Congresswoman is sitting in a seat you thought should go to a Republican? Claim that some innocuous legislative proposal is akin to the dictatorial policies of a madman.
Congrats conservative partisans, with each passing day you seem wont to gleefully dig your own vacuous holes of irrelevance that much deeper. It used to be that the conservative philosophy had some meaning. Now that Pres. Bush has implemented many conservative policies and they’re failing miseable, those scales are falling from people’s eyes and all the con partisans have left are their insults and self-pity.
At least you guys are good at comedy, even if unintentionally so.
(And, Ruskin, if it’s Miller time it’s MGD for me — though lately I’ve been reaching for a nice cold Berghoff. …Woof.)
Update: “A Republican Committeeman in Aurora, IL” makes the same points in a much more forgiving manner…
If we spent a lot less time on this sort of stuff and more time on facts and logical arguments I think we would be in better shape. You don’t save too many people preaching the same message to choir.
If you think his facts or analysis is wrong provide reasons not cute little things about ’secret locations’.
By spending “a lot less time on this sort of stuff” I take it to mean OneMan isn’t a fan of calling people “poodles”. I tend to find that sort of dysfunctionally juvenile crap hysterically funny, however, and (obviously) enjoy going toe to toe with that sticks-and-stones crowd. Somebody’s gotta do it or “Ruskin” might get an ego as big as his (poopy) head.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the thin-skinned “Ruskin” up and calls OneMan a Nazi just for pointing out the obvious.
Rich Miller posts a “this just in” covering some goings on with “Public Official A“:
In or about July 2003, Rezko asked the defendant to make an additional $50,000 contribution to the campaign of Public Official A. The defendant agreed to contribute the same amount as he had previously, namely $25,000. The defendant made this contribution on or about July 25, 2005 by check payable to Public Official A’s campaign. The defendant gave this check to Rezko. Thereafter, the defendant had a conversation with Public Official A at a large fund-raising event at Navy Pier.
During this conversation, Public Official A told defendant that he had been a good supporter, indicated that Public Official A was aware that the defendant had made another substantial donation to Public Official A’s campaign, and told the defendant that Public Official A understood that the defendant would be joining Public Official A’s administration. The defendant responded that he was considering taking a position, and Public Official A stated that it had better be a job where the defendant could make some money.
(emphasis original to Rich)
Holy crap what a selfish, maniacal prick “Public Official A” is.
The implications are obvious: US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald now has at least one piece of very direct, very compelling evidence that “Public Official A” was literally providing state jobs in recognition of campaign contributions.
With the guilty plea of Ali Ata, a significant donor to POA’s campaign fund and subsequently the recipient of a job in POA’s administration, US Atty Fitzgerald has 1 of the 3 players involved in just that one case.
The other players are Antoin Rezko, on trial now, and Public Official A.
Should Rezko be found guilty, US Atty Fitzgerald will very likely offer a reduced jail sentence in exchange for testimony against Public Official A — and Fitz will have 2 of the 3 players involved as he puts the 3rd, Public Official A, on trial.
Ladies and gentlemen, your so-not-liberal-they-look-like-conservative-propagandists media in action…
To the public, these men [retired military brass] are members of a familiar fraternity, presented thousands of times on television and radio as “military analysts” whose long service has equipped them to give authoritative and unfettered judgments about the post-Sept. 11 world.
Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance, an examination by The New York Times has found.
The effort, which began with the buildup to the Iraq war and continues, has sought to exploit ideological and military allegiances and a powerful financial dynamic: Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air.
Those business relationships are hardly ever disclosed to the viewers, and sometimes not even to the networks. But collectively, the men on the plane and several dozen other military analysts represent more than 150 military contractors either as lobbyists, executives, board members or consultants.
The companies include defense heavyweights but also scores of smaller companies, all part of a vast assemblage of contractors scrambling for billions in military business generated by the administration’s war on terror.
Records and interviews show how the Bush administration has used its control over access and information in an effort to transform the analysts into a kind of media Trojan horse — an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major networks.
Hmmm… Billions of dollars for the military-industrial complex dangled like cheese on a trap? Check. Feigning objectivity while manipulating the media for positive political points and potential self-indulgent profits? Check. Controlling access to information rather than being open and honest? Check.
Heckuva job, disinformation services. Heckuva job.
It’s not like the Bush administration has ever played the media for tools or wasted billions on unethical war profiteers, have they?
Are those crickets I hear chirping instead of media conglomerates owning up to their ineptitude?
Thought so.
Steve Rauschenberger may be gearing up for another run for statewide office, or a midling spot in a hypothetical McCain administration…
Rauschenberger, the man who helped bring the Alan Keyes Flying Circus to Illinois, has been making the rounds of any ol’ conservative wurlitzer that will have him and our friends at Illinois Review have been dutifully following his trail of breadcrumbs as if he’s actually saying something of note.
His latest quips were printed by the conservative Wall Street Journal, and reveal the sublime irony that is Rauschy, post-State Senate:
“Barack was one of the smartest people I ever worked with, but he was more interested in moving up,” says Republican Steven Rauschenberger, who served with Mr. Obama in the state senate. “I never thought he was very engaged in the state senate, because he didn’t think that much of it.”
First off, that doesn’t explain why State Sen. Barack Obama has so much legislation under his belt and a stint as a committee chair. If he wasn’t “very engaged” why’d he work so hard at it?
Second, this quote is coming from a guy who was otherwise preoccupied in 2004 and 2006 doing … what was it? … ah, yes … running for higher office. Then-State Sen. Rauschenberger ran for that same US Senate seat opening that then-State Sen. Obama ran for and won. (Rauschy lost in the primary, pretty soundly too.) Two years later, Rauschy hadn’t lost that fever and ran for governor. When that was going nowhere, he joined the Ron Gidwitz campaign as the lt. governor add-on. That couple still lost in the primary to Judy Baar Topinka and another fellow who seems to perennially be seeking higher office, Joe Birkett.
Did Rauschy not think that much of the Senate Chambers himself?
What a bunch of hot air.
Update: Rich Miller describes the rantings of Rauschy in more detail, debunking spin after spin. Mr. Miller concludes: “Again, Rauschenberger makes a few very good points, but overall his message seems, well, ‘bitter.’”
That’s right, Obama will help you with whatever you need. (In fact, I’m almost 100% positive Obama has been helping people since at least kindergarten.)
Con partisans are positively giddy claiming that Sen. Obama is somehow “whining” about Wednesday night’s True Hollywood Story - “On Stage” … “debate”. (Methinks they need to get their mock-o-meters checked. Making fun of how odious that Reality TV programming was is not the same as “whining”.)
Would conservative complainers like Anne Leary, John Ruberry and Dan Curry be saying the “hard questions” needed to be answered had it been Sen. John McCain … and if he had been asked a litany of Heathers fodder such as:
- McCain’s role in Keating 5
- when the violence will end in Iraq in order for the proposed 100 (or million, take your pick) years of American deployment to begin
- “Bomb-bomb-bomb-Iran“
- the blonde lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, riding on McCain’s “straight talk” bus
- McCain’s divorce from his injured first wife (who remained true to him as he was held as a POW) and affair before his divorce
- why would John McCain’s Florida co-chair offer $20 to perform oral sex on another man
- Keating 5
- Pastors Parsley and Hagee and their anti-Catholic, pro-Armageddon preaching and why McCain would specifically seek out endorsements from such men
- why did he wear a bulletproof vest and require a large military escort (replete with gunship helos) while declaring a Baghdadi market that has seen many horrific bombings (including within days of his visit) was just jim dandy
- the blonde lobbyist riding on his bus
- Keating 5
- tax cuts for the wealthy while mainstream Americans (the other 90% of us) are struggling
- the blonde lobbyist riding on his bus
- why McCain caved on unAmerican torture
- is McCain Episcopalian or Baptist and why switch if switch he did
- the blonde lobbyist riding on his bus vis a vis McCain’s reputation as a skirt-chaser
- McCain’s record of coziness to lobbyists in contrast to his media persona as a straight talker
- McCain’s relationship with conservative pastors who blamed 9/11 and Katrina on Americans, thus making them anti-America conservatives
- the patriotism of conservative pastors who blamed 9/11 and Katrina on Americans
- is McCain an elitist because he married into a $100 million fortune
- his current wife’s past drug habit
- why Americans should vote for someone like McCain who admits he doesn’t know much about economics and, of all people to advise him, turned to the architect of much of the nation’s current credit woes, especially during a widespread downturn
- would John McCain consider Florida State Rep. Bob Allen for VP
- the blonde lobbyist riding on his bus
My hunch is conservative partisans would be hopping mad. In fact, we’d likely be hearing weeks’ worth of “Woe is me, the mean media is soooo snively and (gasp) lib’rul…”
Their concern would likely be especially acute if some of the questions were initially raised a day or two before in an interview the supposedly neutral moderator had with, say, Sam Seder or Rachel Maddow. Seeing as how former Clinton White House staffer George Stephanopolous apparently got some of his “debate” questions in his interviews with conservative pundits Sean Hannity and Steve Malzberg I’m sure Curry, Ruberry and Leary would be fine with a debate moderator using questions verbatim from Rachel Maddow.
Then again, as Mr. Ruberry’s excuse-making declares, those lines of questions also get to a more fundamental query, “Does he have good judgment?” … at least in a push-polling, rumor-mongering kind of way.
If the media is going to buy into these conservative partisans’ character-assassination-as-legit-campaign-tool efforts (and, indeed, further that cause by chewing up and regurgitating opponents’ tired and old attacks for half of a debate) then Sen. McCain ought to answer “tough questions” that have little or nothing to do with what the American people actually care about.
–
As an aside… I wonder how long it’ll be before we’re back to being told by these same con partisans that the media is too soft on Sen. Obama.
–
(adapted from a shorter DKos comment; h/t to smintheus and georgia10 for their ABC sideshow “debate” synopsis as reference)
First this week we had McLean County Recorder and myopic hyperpartisan Lee Newcom ranting and wailing over at the increasingly shrill (if that’s possible) Illinois Review about terrorism related to Republican County Chairs in the 11th district who have yet to slate an opponent for the open seat against Dem State Senator Debbie Halvorson. Mr. Newcom’s worry was that if Sen. Halvorson gets a free pass to the seat then there will be one less vote in favor of shredding the Constitution (Mr. Newcom is apparently appalled by our Constitution’s 4th Amendment).
His screed was literally oozing with outright lies about Sen. Halvorson and excuse-making for actions our conservative President took to compel telephone companies to break the law. Of Mr. Newcom I wrote, “Whereas Mr. Newcom odiously and otiosely yelps that candidate Halvorson ‘aids the terrorists’ with absolutely no evidence that this person who isn’t even in Congress yet actually is somehow helping terrorists, it’s telling that his rant (and the rants of those like him) actually does in fact help our conservative president trample our own Constitution just that much more.”
Today, we have another screeching rant from a different conservative partisan. This time it’s Warner Todd Huston writing at ilgopnet.com that Congresswoman Melissa Bean is somehow “against free speech” because she is advocating for regulation of those contemptible and annoying political robocalls. Rep. Bean’s legislation is likely in response to the allegedly illegal massive robocalling operation that the failed Republican National Congressional Campaign put into practice in 2006 in an effort to bamboozle millions of voters across the country.
All Rep. Bean wants to do is regulate the hours those calls can be made, limit how many times in a row the automated calls can be made to the same phone number and try to ensure veracity and honesty in what is said in those calls by having the callers be clearly identitified on both caller id and also at the start of the message. Hers is simply an effort at instilling some modicum of decency to political robocalling discourse.
This is what irks an uber-partisan like Mr. Huston?
Why would Mr. Huston be against common courtesy, truth and openness? What is he afraid of?
But, like Mr. Newcom’s non sequitor filled waterworks about terrorists, Mr. Huston’s vacuous claptrap compares Rep. Bean’s efforts to — get this — brutal Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe.
And he’s proud of his idiocy: “Yes, you heard me right. I just said that US Congressman Melissa Bean is beginning to act like the murdering tyrant, Robert Mugabe.”
Whether or not her legislation will be effective (if it’s even passed and signed) remains to be seen — but there’s hardly anything sinister about wanting to raise the bar of political debate in this country. And, if anything, Mr. Huston’s nonsensical BS provides spot-on evidence of the need to take a national chill pill, robocalls and unhinged comparisons to dictators included.
Review this front-page, top-of-the-fold headline in today’s Tribu carefully:
Democrat
debate is
a slugfest
Now, I could see “Democrats’ debate…” or “Democratic debate” but unless the Dai Tribu is going to start dropping all its derivational suffixes as some sort of funky new standard, there’s a headline writer that needs to retake 3rd grade English. I understand their editorial page is staunchly and historically conservative (even endorsing George W. Bush not once, but twice), but there’s no need to start taking writing style tips from the RNC.
For that matter, I’m not sure which debate Tribu reporters Mike Dorning and Christi Parsons watched but most of the rest of America — including a healthy sampling of their fellow journalists (Washington Post, Phila. Daily News, Editor & Publisher, and more) — were rather disgusted when they tuned in thinking they would see a debate but instead were treated to a weak display of Reality TV meets All My Children, with a dash of True Hollywood Story for good measure.
Lee Newcom wails that Republican County Chairs in the 11th District are complicit in aiding and abetting terrorists because they’ve neglected to replace dropout Tim Balderman for the seat Rep. “Most Corrupt Politicians” Weller is vacating.
Apparently in Mr. Newcom’s bizarro mind, giving 11th District Democratic candidate and current State Senator Debbie Halvorson a free pass is akin to funding al Quaida (something Ronald Reagan did all through the 80s as it was, so perhaps aiding and abetting terrorists really is par for the GOP course).
But what on earth does the lack of candidate slating from Republican County Chairs in north-central Illinois have to do with … terrorists?!
According to Mr. Newcom, if State Sen. Halvorson is elected to Congress, she may be one more vote for Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s progressive agenda.
That agenda currently includes not giving the likes of AT&T and other big telcos a free pass since we now know they broke the law and allowed Pres. George “Peeping Tom” to illegally wiretap domestic phones without warrants and without so much as even probable cause. They literally scooped up every single phone call they could without regard to your privacy or mine (or Mr. Newcom’s, for that matter).
This is what’s become known as the FISA Fight in Washington. FISA stands for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the key word being “foreign”. FISA has many parts, but in the main it (1) allows US spy agencies to tap into foreign phones, data, etc. but (2) forbids US spy agencies from tapping into domestic phones, data, etc. unless they obtain specific warrants based on probable cause (remember that underlined phrase, it’s an oldy but a goody from the year 1791).
You may have heard of a panel of judges in DC called the FISA Court. This is the court that decides whether or not there is probable cause to wiretap domestic calls for suspected terrorist activity, etc. Over the 30 or so years this court has been in existence, it had been approving warrants at an incredibly high rate (99%) and spies even had the opportunity to retroactively seek a warrant within a few days if the need was urgent (libertarians can’t stand the FISA Court).
Why the Bush Administration felt a need to ignore this Constitutionally-based court, which clearly bends over backwards to give great latitude to our spies, is unclear. And why Mr. Newcom and other Republican partisans are churning out so many excuses, apologies, and distractions in this fight for the very integrity of our Constitution is really unclear.
The Republican partisans, instead of actually being worried about our country and her citizens, are up in arms because they want to give AT&T and the like retroactive immunity because they broke the law (because Pres. Bush told them to). Republicans are throwing the kitchen sink into this fight squealing that Dems are in league with terrorists, trial lawyers, etc. It’s really quite bizarre to see them flail around so. (I previously wrote on FISA a few weeks ago, so consider that post a bit of a primer if you are unfamiliar.)
Now, Mr. Newcom is the elected Recorder in McLean County, Illinois. I’d venture to guess that when he was sworn into office he raised his right hand and swore (or affirmed) to uphold, among other things, the Constitution of the United States of America.
One of the parts of that Constitution is the 4th Amendment. It’s a short amendment, written over 200 years ago as part of the Bill of Rights, so maybe — just maybe — Mr. Newcom overlooked it.
Let me repeat it for him:
Amendment IV (1791)
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
(emphasis added)
It’s not too difficult to understand, but apparently those partisan blinders Mr. Newcom is wearing have kept him from actually reading that sentence in our Constitution.
If he had, he’d know what an ass he’s making of himself by complaining that Republicans are giving comfort to terrorists because they’re possibly giving a Dem candidate a free pass which might give the Congressional Democratic majority one more vote toward … upholding our Constitution (gasp!).
Upholding our Constitution? Yes, by not allowing this current conservative administration or any future administration to continue to violate the 4th Amendment’s demand for probable cause and warrants based on such.
I will say that if Mr. Newcom is truly concerned about terrorists, the US Government can still tap terrorists that are overseas. That never changed.
I wonder if Mr. Newcom knows how to tie his shoes… or if instead he blames velcro on, say, Pinochet perhaps. Makes as much sense as his latest spin-cycle rant against … well, against, something.
Get a grip, Mr. Newcom.
PS: Whereas Mr. Newcom odiously and otiosely yelps that candidate Halvorson “aids the terrorists” with absolutely no evidence that this person who isn’t even in Congress yet actually is somehow helping terrorists, it’s telling that his rant (and the rants of those like him) actually does in fact help our conservative president trample our own Constitution just that much more.
It has famously been said that liberty in exchange for security offers neither…. Placing partisan fealty ahead of citizenship to nation and loyalty to our Constitution, as Mr. Newcom does, is even worse.
Shame on you, Lee “Constitution Shredder” Newcom. Try pledging allegiance to our flag instead of a herd of elephants.
Dave Smith of strident gay-hatin’ fame has a post over at Illinois Review whining about tax dollars that are given to Planned Parenthood for women’s health services… In his frothy zest to get his screed against women online, he spins himself into a pretzel:
While Planned Parenthood claims that these funds are not used for abortion, obviously having this constant supply of tax dollars coming in as part of your budget makes all other areas of operation much easier to sustain.
Yes, obviously having this “constant supply of tax dollars” coming to provide the women’s health services for which those tax dollars are being granted would make one’s operation easier to sustain… That’s the point, Mr. “anti-family” Smith.
Not every woman can afford health care for herself — thus as the compassionate society we are we “care for our neighbors as we do ourselves.”
Does Mr. Smith complain about other doctors that receive grants in order to perform routine medical care?
(Yes, some — not all — Planned Parenthood clinics provide abortion services. Such medical procedures, as Planned Parenthood has stated, are funded through a combination of donations and direct fees to medical patients. But as most rational folks know, Planned Parenthood provides many more medical services than just the one Mr. Smith finds offensive including counseling, regular exams, disease treatment and prevention, etc.)
And how about those trillions of Mr. Smith’s tax dollars being spent on “collateral damage” for our president’s lies? Is Mr. Smith just as forcefully seeking to cut off that spigot of money and bring our intrepid, loyal troops home? Or does Mr. Smith somehow excuse and apologize for all that?
M’mm, M’mm. Toasty:
It took less than 12 hours from the time the media caught wind of Cindy McCain’s recipe theft for John McCain’s campaign website to scrub away the offending pages…
Personally, I’m not sure how an intern can be responsible for messing up the McCain “family” recipes. Did the intern lose Cindy’s recipe box only to haphazardly try to replace them with Food Network recipes? If only we could all steal and lie and lay it off on the unpaid help.
Of course, it’s not like the McCains were paraphrasing their friends’ family recipes to prove a similar point during a speech. That’d be a horror of horrors.
Can you pass the rib sauce, please? Say, what kind of “elitist” serves up passion fruit mousse anyway?
While you’re up, can we have a dinnertime discussion about some real issues instead of silly nonsense that just goes to prove our candidates and their wives are … wait for it … actually human beings (and that, for all the complaining conservative partisans do about the media’s coverage of Sen. Obama, the traditional media tends to give Sen. McCain an even bigger pass).
Most folks call this “Tax Day” and, let’s face it, no one enjoys paying their dues for living in this country. But when you realize all the incredible freedoms and securities and opportunities this nation of ours provides for so many of us, in the main the investment looks to be worth it as we secure our common good and general welfare.
Is there room for improvement? Sure there is. That’s why we have these elections and the freedom to voice our opinions on what should or should not be national priorities.
Some interesting tidbits related to our tax investments — Tax Freedom Day is coming earlier this year and — according to the same sets of standards (which, admittedly, are goofy) used to declare Illinois state grants for diabetes research are “pork” — the Federal Pork Rolls for spending that tax money are again well below where they were prior to 2006 and the second-lowest during Bush’s two terms (the lowest was last year, 2007).
The commonality there? Dems are back in charge in the halls of Congress.
Nice.
OK, “boys” and girls… time to compare and contrast.
Post-racial politics is neither and both. Discuss.
(And here we thought the Good Ol’ Party wanted to move away from its image as being racially divisive and intolerant.)
Say… why was Rep. Geoff Davis (R, KY-4) publicly discussing a classified national security exercise in the first place? Must be ok, seeing as how he’s got Top Secret, Commander-in-Chief level clearance a Republican and can decide to declassify such things on a whim when politics are involved.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. Conservative icon and former worker for Alan Keyes for Senate (Illinois edition) Fran Eaton is now posting ads for Hillary Clinton…
In other news, cats and dogs are having love-ins and oil and water have suddenly begun completely dissolving together.
Oh, wait. The two women are ardently anti-Obama-at-all-costs?
That ’splains it. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Update: Oops. Turns out one of the “Pennsylvanians” in that ad about Pennsylvanians saying they’re not bitter is actually a Jersey boy by Somerville, NJ.
Enough wallowing in the “talk” about talking about doing something already… Time to do something about bittergate and orangejuicegate and myopic-partisans-and-reporters-missing-the-point-gate.
(Earlier, I wrote more about Sen. Obama’s accurate assessment that hard-working mainstream Americans are at times bitter about our country’s economic situation… I agree with Robert Reich’s assessment here.)
They apparently enjoy playing Rhetorical Twister™ by Milton Bradley.
By now most folks have heard what Sen. Obama said about folks being bitter because they are frustrated by the lack of progress in this country as more and more jobs get shipped overseas and the jobs that remain cover relatively less and less (all while the true elitists, fat cat CEOs, engorge themselves on ever larger “compensation packages”).
Now, that would leave most people “bitter”, especially after so many years (and presidencies) with it continuously happening.
But apparently, for both conservative Marathon Pundit and Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, calling a spade a spade somehow means you’re “elitist.”
What don’t they get? Obama is clearly saying that people are ticked off at not being listened to by Washington … and so instead folks give up on economic issues (because they’re being overlooked and ignored) and turn to other issues where they think they may be heard.
Of course, far be it from a conservative partisan like Marathon Pundit to actually even try to understand that — not when his guy in the Oval Office runs around telling moms who work three jobs just to make ends meet for their kids that that situation is “fantastic.”
By the way, this whole Sideshow Bob act by all the reactionaries from Marathon Pundit to Senators ‘Four More Years’ McCain and Clinton is exactly why the economic plight of middle America gets overlooked. These partisans would rather make up some BS about elitism to try and score cheap political points instead of actually talking about strategies to alleviate the burden on parents who are forced to work three jobs just to take care of the kids they hardly ever see because they’re constantly working….
In order to rust over the Democrats’ image as the party of the working guys and gals, conservative partisans take to calling them names like “effete elitists” and “latte liberals” or whatever silly alliteration they can come up with to pull the wool over folks’ eyes. By the way, those “conservative partisans”? They’d be the gated community fat cats earning those $60 million compensation packages and their sweep-under-rug artists like Marathon Pundit, in other words, the actual “elitists” in this scenario.
When did stating the obvious become “elitist” and ignoring suffering become “fantastic”?
Must be something in the coffee, because apparently it’s not in the orange juice.
UPDATE: Hugo notes in comments I’ve neglected to post or link Sen. Obama’s original remarks from the April 6th funder. Here they are via Huffington Post (audio is available at that HuffPo link):
OBAMA: So, it depends on where you are, but I think it’s fair to say that the places where we are going to have to do the most work are the places where people feel most cynical about government. The people are mis-appre…I think they’re misunderstanding why the demographics in our, in this contest have broken out as they are. Because everybody just ascribes it to ‘white working-class don’t wanna work — don’t wanna vote for the black guy.’ That’s…there were intimations of that in an article in the Sunday New York Times today - kind of implies that it’s sort of a race thing.
Here’s how it is: in a lot of these communities in big industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, people have been beaten down so long, and they feel so betrayed by government, and when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn’t buy it. And when it’s delivered by — it’s true that when it’s delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama (laugher), then that adds another layer of skepticism (laughter).But — so the questions you’re most likely to get about me, ‘Well, what is this guy going to do for me? What’s the concrete thing?’ What they wanna hear is — so, we’ll give you talking points about what we’re proposing — close tax loopholes, roll back, you know, the tax cuts for the top 1 percent. Obama’s gonna give tax breaks to middle-class folks and we’re gonna provide health care for every American. So we’ll go down a series of talking points.
But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there’s not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
Um, now these are in some communities, you know. I think what you’ll find is, is that people of every background — there are gonna be a mix of people, you can go in the toughest neighborhoods, you know working-class lunch-pail folks, you’ll find Obama enthusiasts. And you can go into places where you think I’d be very strong and people will just be skeptical. The important thing is that you show up and you’re doing what you’re doing.
I’ve emphasized the portions that get clipped for the soundbites. The bold portion is the full paragraph from which the most oft used quote is taken. The underline is the small portion that gets replayed over and over.
Perhaps someone who thinks these comments reflect an “elitist” attitude could explain the “elitism” in these words. Perhaps they could also explain why they don’t understand that Sen. Obama was talking about the pain many folks in middle America are going through in this latest economic downturn…
UPDATE 2: Former Secretary of Labor (under Pres. Bill Clinton no less) Robert Reich crystallizes what Obama (and I) are trying to say. So why is the media more focused on the hackneyed he-said-she-said instead of the root causes of the problem?
Apparently, two of the three presidential candidates don’t think times are tough out here in these United States.
Unfortunately, only one actually gets it that there are some problems…
Anyone want to bet a penny against how long it’ll take before the next “Jeremiah Wright non-story” pops up?
Hard to imagine why Republicans would be worried about a thing like class warfare.
(TA’s post was originally in response to the failed attempt in Springfield at a standard progressive tax system, like the Federal Government uses, instead of Illinois’ currently broken flat tax system.)
The new Illinois State Board of Elections site sucks it big time.
Trash this new design and go back to the old one.
Seriously.
In a moment of clarity, CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer notes that the Iraqi government has billions in savings thanks to Baghdad budget surpluses.
Meanwhile, we Americans are spending $340 billion million a day to fight the Iraqis’ battles and build the Iraqis’ roads and schools and police stations — all while running up such huge debts that the formerly Republican-controlled Congresses had to keep raising our national debt ceiling for their trillion-dollar shell games.
From Mr. Blitzer’s blogpost:
Just before and immediately after the U.S. launched its invasion of Iraq, Bush administration officials optimistically predicted that Iraqi oil exports would soon finance the reconstruction of the country. That didn’t happen. U.S. taxpayers were stuck with the literally tens of billions of dollars in bills.
Now, five years later and with the price of oil reaching more than $100 a barrel, Iraqi oil exports are generating huge sums [...]
[Democratic Sen. Carl] Levin notes that the Iraqis by and large are still not using their money to build new roads, bridges, schools and hospitals. Why should they? Uncle Sam is still doing that for them.
One clarification - Uncle Sam is not doing that for them. George Bush is (through his veto of reasonable plans for strategic withdrawal and other hijinks).
The conservative Illinois Policy Institute apparently think keeping our fellow Illinoisans healthy is a waste of money. Their “2008 Piglet Book” complains of what they slam as “$686 million in pork.”
Yet the numbers they cite include things like research for juvenile diabetes and healthcare assistance in rural areas.
These crabby cons even complain about “$45,000 for the summer food inspection program”… After all the e. coli, salmonella and other contaminants that have been found in everything from salad to cereal, I’d think we’d want to spend more than just 45k on inspecting food but even that amount doesn’t sound unreasonable
Sure, in the $686 mil they cite there’s bound to be some fat that could stand to be trimmed. But to complain about things as fundamental as our health? Somebody’s clearly taking their job as a propagandist to an extreme.
Giving a crap about your fellow human beings? It’s what’s not for dinner for these heartless John Birch types.