Category Archive

Ralf Seiffe has a shrill post up over Illinois Review denouncing the President’s half-hearted plan to stave off the coming mortgage/foreclosure crisis. Writes he:

The Bush Administration continues to amaze its friends and thrill its enemies with news that it is considering bailing-out sub-prime mortgagors which market conditions have now embarrassed.  Should this come about, regular folks who manage to pay their own mortgage will be rewarded with the obligations their neighbors are unable to meet.  This is a bad idea but if the Administration abandons principle and frustrates the market, it should extract a price from those it bails because no deliverance comes without some strings involved.

I agree that folks need to take responsibility for their actions, but curiously the conservative Mr. Seiffe blames his fellow Americans rather than considering the fact that many of these folks appear to have been swindled by unscrupulous mortgage cos who simply wanted to make a buck, whether folks could afford the payments or not.

Why is Mr. Seiffe blaming people who got snookered instead of the ethically-challenged fat cat businesses that gave them the untenable loans? (Need I ask? Mr. Seiffe is a conservative, after all.)

He even mentions, “An aggravating factor in the sub-prime ordeal is that many borrowers closed their loans with very little proof of their ability to pay even the initial payments, let alone the reset, higher interest rates those teaser rates always imply.” But, he doesn’t make the logical conclusion that the creditors should have never agreed to loan these folks money in the first place. If these businesses had gotten control of their greed (say, where’d Mr. Seiffe’s claims of personal responsibility go???) then folks wouldn’t be in the position they’re in.

No wonder cons are often considered heartless and mean-spirited. Mr. Seiffe could’ve saved a few pixels and just written “Bah humbug!” instead.

I posted earlier today about Ralf Seiffe’s bizarre and vitriolic ad hominem attack against a former President of the United States.

ReallyRightGuy already posted at Illinois Review exactly how the rest of us back here on earth feel about such temper tantrums. But I wanted to point out another of the more egregious Seiffeisms.

First and foremost is Mr. Seiffe’s completely myopic statement:

Carter’s remarks [about Palestine, Israel and the US] have been widely reported and are breathtakingly foolish. They show that the international sponsor of Ayatollah Khomeini and Yassir Arafat’s partner in peace still does not understand the dangers to the United States and to western values a religious-based political movement engenders. (emphasis added)

I wonder if Mr. Seiffe has ever heard of such religious-based political movements as:

• Culture Campaign, Sandy Rios forgot to add the word “War” in the middle of her alliterative title
• Illinois Family Institute, which strangely advocates against family structures it doesn’t like (based on the directors’ interpretation of their translation of the Bible)
• Americans for Truth, which seems to be more about one guy’s particular brand of truthism rather than any sort of mutually agreeable (and honest) truth
• Battle Cry, which glorifies militantism and explosions, and despises certain people based on their leader’s interpretation of that religious text known as the Bible
  
• American Family Association, another of those groups which curiously chooses to advocate against family types it deems unholy (AFA also doesn’t like Ford and Disney for the same reason)
• Focus on the Family, see the aforementioned anti-family institute and association

There are of course a great many other religious-based political movements all across Illinois and America. Pander bear candidate Mitt Romney found some of them in order to ask them what he should think about religioney stuff. I would’ve thought that perhaps, floating in the conservative circles as he does, Mr. Seiffe might have heard of a few of them.

And here Mr. Seiffe attacks Pres. Carter with the ol’ Alzheimer’s smear. (Too bad Pres. Bush just vetoed stem cell research again. Might’ve helped Mr. Seiffe’s own memory.)

Amazing what a little bit of reason will do. ReallyRightGuy over at Illinois Review chastises Ralf Seiffe for calling on folks to “Denounce Carter” because of Pres. Carter’s recent statements about the Bush Administration’s propensity to exacerbate problems by ignoring them. RRG in effect says instead, ‘Denounce Ralf Seiffe (and his ad hominem attacks)‘:

Good journalism would provide the URL of the complete Carter statement, so we can reach our own conclusions, instead of a one-word snippet.

It does not befit a principled conservative to question the mental competence of individuals who disagree with us. Its fine to call a policy nutz or counterproductive, but ad homonims [sic] are pointless.

Hear! Hear! More please…

Isn’t it refreshing to catch a little whiff of fresh rationality in the midst of so much conserva-partisan vitriol and loathing?

You don’t like it that Pres. Carter pointed out how the conservative policy of letting an open wound fester only makes things worse? Fine. Say so and explain yourself in so doing. But simply railing on a former president because he happens to hold other worldviews and has different ideas than you … well that’s childish.

Mr. Seiffe takes it several steps further though. Says he: “Republicans have the chance to take the kind of jab at Democrats that the Democrats have served up to our side forever. The question is whether the Republicans will recognize the opportunity and have the sang froid to exploit it.”

In other words, Mr. Seiffe wants to gain political chits by calling on his comrades to “exploit” someone’s remarks about a bloody coup (in which many were murdered).

Exploiting people’s murder?

The only word for that is disgusting. Well, maybe disgusting and sick. Twisted would work too.

And isn’t it odd that he considers speaking up and pointing out errors that cost people their lives to be a “jab”? Maybe the reason such truth-telling has been served up for “forever” is because what the conservatives are doing isn’t working. Pres. Reagan was elected, in part, in the wake of the Iran hostage crisis… And where are we with Iran now, nearly three decades on (with most of that time under Republican presidents)?