Archive for conservatives

Newt Loves Drug War, Wants Expansion

Posted in Politics with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 29, 2011 by rottenart

Obviously, since the deficit is the only thing anyone in DC wants to talk about, it makes sense for the new Republican frontrunner to come out in favor of expanding one of the biggest wastes of money in American history. And, since it is Newt after all, he’s also thrown in some hypocrisy on the issue, just for good measure.

Not only does he now think medical marijuana is a “joke” despite having supported it in 1981, he’d like to see more drug testing of citizens requesting unemployment compensation or food stamps.  He also supports the death penalty for high-level drug smugglers, noting the “successful” and “draconian” drug policies of Singapore. However, despite getting “more aggressive about drug policy” and emulating Singapore’s mandatory executions, he doesn’t want us to throw anyone in jail either.

Remember, folks, Gingrich is supposed to be the “ideas man” of the GOP

Big Government is Bad, Right?

Posted in Politics with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 21, 2011 by rottenart

An interesting catch over at digby’s blog: did you know that Alabama has its own Dept. of Homeland Security? Not just a couple of officers, mind you, but a cabinet level agency on top of their state and local police forces, FBI offices, and Federal DHS offices. As digby notes, it’s not surprising that everyone went a little nuts in 2001, creating an entirely new government bureaucracy from whole cloth (with a 2010 budget of nearly $100 billion, by the by) but the extent to which this federal system was mimicked by the  states is staggering. As this WaPo special report lays out, this is a very lucrative and extremely comprehensive network that essentially does the work that the federal agency already does and still manages to find very little to do.

What’s even more striking is how little attention this receives and how it explains things like this:

Continue reading

Failure is a Pretty ‘Super’ Option

Posted in Politics with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 18, 2011 by rottenart

It’s been clear for a while now that Republicans on the so-called “Super-committee” to oversee deficit reduction weren’t going to budge in the slightest. The media, for their part, have continued to advance a ridiculous narrative in which the GOP’s offer of $300 million in raised revenue (read: taxes) while making the Bush Tax Cuts permanent is somehow serious. Democrats on the panel, surprisingly, have refused to go along with such an inane proposal. So, here we are, less than a week until their deadline and they appear to be headed for complete failure.

Good.

First of all, the whole idea was stupid in the first place. It’s already congress’ job to come up with a budget. To put in the hands of an extra-super-secret congress is just political theater. More important, however, is what happens when they do fail. The whole idea was to make this committee accountable by building a doomsday scenario into their work:  if they can’t come to an agreement, automatic budget cuts (or sequestration, to use the word of the day) are triggered. Entitlements take a hit, defense takes a big hit, everyone’s pissed off and everyone can brag about reducing the deficit, right? Well, yes, but there’s one other huge piece of the puzzle that would have more of an effect than anything else: letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire.

We faced this same scenario earlier this year in the debt limit fiasco and last year when the cuts were supposed to expire originally: Republicans are too busy licking Grover Norquist’s boots (no matter how much John Boehner tries to pretend otherwise) to actually get serious and admit to fiscal reality. The fact that the GOP has become radicalized to the point of self-parody doesn’t help either. Tax rises, no matter the context or practical use, are anathema to the modern Republican party.

Regardless, the super-committee’s failure to reach an agreement, for all the bitching and moaning that Republicans will undoubtedly do, will actually lower the deficit. They won’t admit it, but it’s hard to deny facts. In fact, it looks to be as much as $7.1 trillion over the next decade. That’s a lot of scratch and it should be cause for celebration for those who feel the deficit is the end-all, be-all of American political discussion. Yet it’s clear that if the panel fails to deliver, the blame game is going to shift into overdrive with an election year looming. At the end of the day, however, the Bush Tax Cuts are the major driver for the deficit and letting them expire at the end of 2012 would put us back on track, with virtually no other actions to be taken.

It seems like those on the GOP side who are accusing the Obama administration of cheering for the super-committee’s failure should be doing a little cheering themselves if they truly care about the deficit. Anyone believe that’s the case?

How Many Can the Clown Car Hold?

Posted in Funny with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 31, 2011 by rottenart

Evidently, there’s still room in the GOP primary for the Koran-roasting sideburns vote!

What If They Accidentally Polled the Truth?

Posted in Politics with tags , , , , , , , on October 27, 2011 by rottenart

Well, it’s happened. A new CBS News/New York Times poll found that nearly 7 in 10 Americans think the GOP supports the wealthy. That’s compared to only 2% who think they care about the poor.

I know, I know, shocking, right? I’m going to assume the very best of my readers when I say that all of you are probably saying “DUH!” right about now. Unfortunately, good sirs and madams, we’re not the norm. Indeed, the most shocking part of that result is that so many people in this country actually get it.  Despite the corporate media churning out pabulum masquerading as journalism, despite well-paid propagandists manufacturing anger and sowing hatred, despite a major political party being fully consumed by mendacity and willful ignorance… 70% of the country can see through the bullshit!

Personally, I’m pleasantly surprised. Who knew the truth could be so stubborn?

The GOP “Debates”

Posted in Politics with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 19, 2011 by rottenart

I’ll start with a confession: I didn’t watch last night’s debate. Mostly because this is, what, the 27th in a  row now? Secondly, I already know about all the excitement. Lastly (and most importantly), I didn’t watch because there’s absolutely nothing more I could learn about the candidates to convince me that any of them is worth worrying about. Remember, we’re talking about the nomination of the 2011 Republican party. In a nutshell, that means no taxes, no regulations, no gays, no Mexicans and no poors. There, I just saved you having to watch the next one.

In fact, the only real reason to keep watching these things is to see which candidate flames out next. From Perry’s narcoleptic swagger to Bachmann’s twangy platitudes from outer space to Herman Cain’s SimCity tax plan, it’s hard to see how anyone takes them seriously. Romney, far and away the most electable, also comes off as just a clueless buffoon. Who doesn’t understand why expanding your manse while calling for foreclosures to continue (so they can be scooped up by investors, naturally!) is tone-deaf at best and utterly callous as worst?

The real takeaway is that the GOP field is populated much like a clown car. None of these candidates offers any real plans for American progress. Their messages are all predicated on ideas that have been tried for the last 30 years and have failed miserably. Their best hope is a chameleon who would be a staunch liberal if he had any core principles whatsoever. I’m not naive enough to believe that Obama will have an easy time next year but with this current crop of Republican jokers, it’s hard to see how he won’t.

Yeah, Buddy!!

Posted in Politics with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on October 15, 2011 by loudmouthliberal

With the extreme , wide range of choices for the Republican nomination, the candidates are a subject I have stayed as far away from as possible.  It is not probable , to me, for any of the front-runners to earn the nomination (okay, maybe the nomination) as they are all far right Christian conservatives with little grasp of the average American, have little stability of view-point, offer scandalous voting records as opposed to their current views, and are environmental science denying, corporate puppets.  I know this can be said about many politicians, but with where we are as a nation right now, I don’t see us handing one of these thugs the White House.  Except for two… maybe. And while these two’s views on issues aren’t exactly my own on a lot, listening to them is like a breath of fresh air across the wild, overgrown Republican field.

Now, neither are probable candidates, mind you. They’re not even showing in the polls.  One has not even been allowed to debate. But what a mistake that is for the right! I really think that one of them is probably their only real chance at beating Obama. Now don’t get me wrong.  I’m Obama 2012 all the way.  However, I would like for the two best men for the job to be running in November. Actually, the four best

That being said, my first pick for a reasonable candidate is Jon Huntsman. Unfortunately, too many Americans are unaware of the fact that America is not, in fact,  a Christian nation and that it is actually unconstitutional to use one’s religion against them to deny them the presidency. In short, I’m afraid, the fact that he is a Mormon will not help his cause in the least. If you combine that with the fact that he doesn’t get much media coverage and has little name recognition compared to other candidates… fat chance.

Now comes the real disappointment… the lack of presidential nomination promise for the Roemer campaign!! I’m telling you, what he is selling is right where the people are headed and what the country needs right now if we’re talking about getting the money out of politics and holding corporations and banks accountable. The problem with Buddy is his very message is to his own detriment with the way our electorate process works right now.

No PAC money. No corporate sponsors. $100 donations from the public. That’s it. Both a blessing and a curse, as it’s impossible to win an election against the kind of money the others have without having that kind of money yourself; Which is pretty impossible to get without a corporate sponsor. It’s a vicious cycle. Also, he’s the only candidate so far to make an appearance and spend time with the protestors at the Occupation. Pretty impressive, if you ask me.

We have several major issues we need to be working on as a people and will need to do so indefinitely. Unfortunately, we can only get there if we correctly express our voices at the polls, as much as we can in our daily lives, and whenever the opportunity forces itself into our consciousness, such as OWS.  Since Citizens United, corporate money in politics has been at the top of that list. It also expresses the necessity of taking a good look at the SCOTUS, and working to reform that and other corrupt branches/agencies/policies that work against the will and prosperity of the people. The 99%.

It really is a  shame how we got here. It is a tragedy where we are. And it’s gonna be a hell of a  journey where we’re headed.  Giving in is not an option. Giving up is not a choice. It’s a long, hard road ahead and we are only just beginning. If everyone, everyday, makes a conscious effort to make a difference, we’ll be there in no time.