Right Wing Entitlement Culture: Pt. V - We Own This Day

As it's been a rather rough week at the Airon Later compound, I figured that since it's the July 4th Holiday weekend we should jump right into part five of my continuing series on Right Wing Entitlement Culture.

The Modern American Right have seized on a variety of July 4th narratives to show that they hold sway over the entire day and that anyone with even modest Left-leaning thoughts is decidedly anti-American.

The problem with this is that the Modern American Right see July 4th through the lens of "marketing" rather than a day of honest reflection on how America came to the point where she is today. And this should be readily apparent to anyone with the most minimal of socio-political reflection.

The most popular of these narratives is from a study done by Harvard that shows the marketing vs. pure patriotism standpoint of Modern American Right regarding July 4th parades is a reality. Too bad that those within the Right that are reporting on this completely missed the point that they have been called out on their "faux-patriotic" machinations and that flashy marketing tactics do work on the very impressionable.

The political right has been more successful in appropriating American patriotism and its symbols during the 20th century. Survey evidence also confirms that Republicans consider themselves more patriotic than Democrats. According to this interpretation, there is a political congruence between the patriotism promoted on Fourth of July and the values associated with the Republican party. Fourth of July celebrations in Republican dominated counties may thus be more politically biased events that socialize children into Republicans

The three key findings of those attending July 4th celebrations:

- When done before the age of 18, it increases the likelihood of a youth identifying as a Republican by at least 2 percent.

- It raises the likelihood that parade watchers will vote for a Republican candidate by 4 percent.

- It boosts the likelihood a reveler will vote by about 1 percent and increases the chances they'll make a political contribution by 3 percent.

What's more, the impact isn't fleeting. "Surprisingly, the estimates show that the impact on political preferences is permanent, with no evidence of the effects depreciating as individuals become older,"said the Harvard report.

And while these "key findings" are not guarantees for gains within the roles of the Modern American Right, the study is quite clear that these "likelihoods" increase in more Republican-leaning towns. Also, being from a VERY Republican country in Western Kentucky, the final statement that effects are "permanent" makes me want to take a look at the raw data of the study, as this was certainly not the case for myself and many of my close acquaintances that still live here.

Was is true regarding the minds of the younger generation is that they formulate their opinions of the world early on based on their parents actions/statements. Just going to a parade on the 4th of July at age 17 isn't going to turn you into a fan of Sarah Palin when you reach voting age. Neither is it going to make you "hate" your country if you happen to have a (D) next to your name on your voter registration card.

No one "owns" the 4th of July or patriotism. Just don't expect anyone within the Modern American Right to admit or even understand that concept. But considering the Harvard study and how the Right are embracing it as some "smoking gun" that if they take a look at their birth certificates, stock papers, or even a receipt from Wal-Mart that they will know exactly what percentage of the day or the ideal that they can call their property.

No Narrative Too Ridiculous

Really?

Scooting around Hawaii last week, President Obama broke one more historic barrier by setting a new benchmark for the limits of presidential casual wear.

He was wearing flip-flops.

Historians agreed it was the first time they could remember seeing the leader of the free world snapped in a public setting, wearing nothing more than a flimsy strip of rubber on his feet.

While Ronald Reagan was famously snapped strutting on his way to Camp David in his cowboy boots and John F. Kennedy was no stranger to sailing in his deck shoes, the picture of Obama tooling around an ice-cream shop with his toes on full display seems be a first for the presidency.

Holy Shit!!! You can actually see a black man's toes!!!!

Now while I will freely admit that there have been some pointless jabs at modern conservative politicos like Sarah Palin, but doesn't it tell you something about the state of widely circulated conservative media ( and the upper tier reactionary bloggers that repeat it ) that think this is "newsworthy"?

This does, however, continue the easily debunked and laughably ignorant claims that all Obama does is go on "vacation". While Bush spent the majority of his time in actually "recreational" settings prior to this country being confronted with the worst domestic attack since Pearl Harbor, conservatives have gone full tilt in doing any and everything they could - including bending the very rules of reality - to insist that Obama has spent little to no time acting as President.

Their laughably sophomoric antics have, in recent months, been no better than this.

The Art Of Misdirection

Conservatives love a good "flag issue". It's been their new gig since Obama won the White House and Democrats took control of both Houses of Congress. You know, that moment where every registered Republican in America had all their synapses firing simultaneously due to overt stimulation from Fox"News", conservative talk radio, and the likes of Freedomworks and Koch Industries. That moment where the noise overpowered reality.

But do conservatives really want to get into a argument like this?

What’s wrong with this picture?

That's Michelle Malkin's blog partner and fellow reactionary prattler Doug Powers attempting to show that the man that legally rented a house next to the Palin's while writing a book about them is somehow "less of an American" than Palin and other conservatives.

If you’re going to put out a flag because you know you’re going to be filmed and want to prove that you’re just as patriotic as the neighbor you’re spying on, don’t hang it backwards. If the same rules apply for hanging the Alaska state flag vertically, that one’s backwards too.

And while the average conservative that supports Palin, at least the ones that haven't printed out the "Flag Code" out of a desperate attempt to feel politically relevant with their Tea Bagging brethren, and have it dangling from their refrigerator door with those tacky little magnets like you find at flea markets because, it should be pointed out that their "holy mother" doesn't seem to understand that same code.



But make no mistake, this isn't the first time that Palin has used the American Flag in an "inappropriate" fashion as determined by the Flag Code.

Anyone recall this picture?



That's Palin using the flag in an "inappropriate" fashion as determined by the US Flag Code. And while these "improper posturings" that utilize the iconography and tools of the modern conservative movement are shown to be in complete contrast with that which they claim to hold sacrosanct, one has to wonder how Palin would present herself in her Presidential campaign which is obviously ramping up as I type this out.

The broader point - don't pretend to show reverence to the Flag Code while your "messiah" is trashing it at every turn.

Courting A Different Mistress

While this may be an over-simplification of how conservatives are viewing the prosecution of captured "terrorists", I still have to wonder why they have absolutely no faith in the American justice system.

With the recent civilian court trial of Ahmed Ghailani resulting in successfully rendering a sentence of no less than 20 years, conservatives are not pleased - at all.

And while all this noise from conservatives that Holder is an abject failure and is putting the country in danger each and every day, one has to wonder why military tribunals a) aren't used more often - even dating back to Bush's tenure in office and b) why conservatives would favor them over open trial in civilian court.

The first reason is one that is at the heart of every argument against Holder, the Obama DOJ, and civil trials in general

in the very few cases of captured terrorists being tried in tribunals, the defendants were given lighter sentences than comparable cases in the criminal justice system.

And that's exactly what conservatives are upset with - they feel that all charges against terrorists should stand without question and the maximum sentence be imposed. So if military tribunals often result in lighter sentences, if those on trial there have the right to an appeal - much like in civilian courts - why all the fuss?

I think this all comes down to a concept that I have spoken of at length before - perception vs. perspective.

Conservatives feel comfortable with the "perception" that military tribunals are something akin to this, when that's not even remotely the case. They believe that a tribunal, in general, is nothing more than a sentencing phase in which the prisoner is going to be given the harshest sentence possible. And that, most certainly, is NOT the case.

Despite the successes of civilian trials in relation to terrorism charges, the American legal system - despite the distractionary noise from conservatives - has been a success. Then again, success is measured quite differently dependent on where you sit on any given day. But, conservatives demand instant gratification to the fullest extent possible - and that is why they will never be pleased with the outcome of anything they don't have a hand in engineering.

And here's a final thought in regards to the complete disconnect in how conservatives want to fight terrorism and how they are approaching the prosecution of terrorists. After the rhetoric, the flag waving, and shouts of "smoke 'em out of their caves", "stay the course", and "no retreat, no surrender", conservatives are more than willing to hand those same people they are fighting a victory - and one that is none to small. Conservatives, with all their love of country and all that makes it so great, are simply afraid of bringing the terrorists to face trial in American because they might "say something nasty" or might "make a mockery of our legal process". That's the thinking here.

That's the crux of it - conservatives are simply afraid.

Keeping Up Appearances

Michelle Malkin's blogging partner Doug Powers and conservative disinformation center First Things are peddling what appears to be a photo-shopped picture in order to attack those that attended the wildly successful Stewart/Colbert rally.

You be the judge:



This will work for conservatives looking to defend their authentically documented instances of signage that not only displays a complete lack of grammar skills but how they are more than willing to go Full Godwin at the drop of a hat.

Attack Everything

I'm guessing had Michelle Obama wrote each spouse of the delegates of the UN a personal letter that conservatives would concoct yet another conspiracy about how the Obamas are out to create a "one world government". But they've only got vegetables and a gift basket to work with this time.

A special recipe of pickled, hand-picked ingredients from the White House Kitchen Garden, including sun gold tomatoes, okra, cucumbers, chocolate bell peppers, carrots, lemon verbena, and fresh herbs are presented in jars with the First Lady's signature. The jars are topped with original artwork done by California artists, Michael Cronan and Karin Hibma, who were inspired by a photo of Mrs. Obama tending to the garden with children and a wheelbarrow.

That's right, a gift based around the idea of healthy eating, promoting American small-business, and the very ideals that make up the American spirit of creativity and exceptionalism.

Naturally conservatives want nothing to do with that at all.

As the world leaders were back in the City scheming to divvy up money that doesn’t belong to them, the spouses hung around with FLOTUS and received a basket that I’m predicting will come to be known as “the re-gifting heard ’round the world”

Because all Republicans have been taught since Obama started his bid for the Presidency that you can't eat vegetables anymore, as only "liberal elites" do that.
This actually fits in quite nicely with Glenn Becks tirades about his french fries. Wait, are they still calling them "Freedom Fries"?

Oh, and for an added bonus, check out how quickly the racial invective starts up at Fox"Nation" in their comments section about this story. Yeah, no racists in the conservative movement - none at all.

Context Is Everything

In which we find Michelle Malkin's new blog-partner Doug Powers completely losing the plot on the "Burn The Kuran" story by concern trolling. Too bad he didn't really pay attention to the article that he linked.

From Doug Power's - who apparently can't comprehend what the word "context" means:

Hot off the press from the AP’s Department of Double Standards we find this:

Should the event happen on Saturday, the AP will not distribute images or audio that specifically show Qurans being burned, and will not provide detailed text descriptions of the burning. With the exception of these specific images and descriptions, we expect to cover the Gainesville event, in all media, placing the actions of this group of about 50 people in a clear and balanced context

Last year, the AP didn’t appear to think twice before showing pictures of burned Christian bibles:

Here's what little Dougie didn't bother to do - check out exactly who burned the Bibles. From the AP article:

The US military burned bibles sent to Afghanistan by an American church, reports CNN. Officials feared the bibles, sent last year, would cause problems if they were used in a campaign to convert Muslims to Christianity. The unsolicited bibles were printed in the two most popular Afghani languages. Ironically, Taliban supporters burned bibles in an attack on a Pakistani village just last month.

If the American bibles "did get out, it could be perceived by Afghans that the US government or the US military was trying to convert Muslims," a Defense Department spokesman said yesterday. Officials considered returning the bibles to the church, but were concerned they would only be sent back to Afghanistan. War zone troops are required to burn all trash, according to the Defense Department.

And while the Associated Press clearly wrote up the piece to show that the Bibles were burnt by American troops to prevent people in Afghanistan from thinking they were being forcibly converted to Christianity, the article also clearly shows that it was American soldiers who burned what the Defense Department deemed trash.

I'm guessing I'm not the only one missing the obvious brain stem disconnect that Doug Powers has.

UPDATE

While the caption included with the picture at the bottom of Powers' blog piece shows that the American military admitted to torching the holy Christian text, it is the very idea behind what Powers is proposing, what he is equating, that I and many others find preposterous. Seems that Powers didn't bother to read the caption when he posted it.

Palin Protection

A quick one before I get into more substance tonight.

The reactionary Right are all twitching with abject rage at the fact that someone is calm and rational when confronting "Quitty McHalf-Gov" ( sorry, I had to steal a bit of how my dear Twitter/Blogger friend Laffy refers to her ).

It seems that Michelle Malkin's fill-in is trying to one-up "The Purse-Lipped One" in how they use energy better spent in helping society to kowtow to the blitheringly ignorant in society.

Over at the Daily Caller, Jim Treacher comments about how Think Progress is “scrutinizing yesterday’s clip of Palin talking to the angry lady with a sign like it’s the Zapruder film.”

Newsweek wrote, “Palin gets snarky on a school teacher.” The school district’s website lists Kathleen Gustafson as a “Theater Tech,” but why expect Newsweek to get curious and check for themselves whether or not her claim is literally true? (had Gustafson been with the Tea Party the school district would have no doubt heard from a Newsweek fact checker by now)

When Palin asked Gustafson what she did for a living, and she said she was a teacher, that’s where eyeroll-gate started.

Oh, I don’t know, maybe Sarah somehow knew that Gustafson is also the director/singer in a drag queen band, that it was possibly a radio stunt or that Gustafson is (or at least was) president of the Kachemak Bay Family Planning Clinic — you know how the pro-abortion folks love Sarah

Just check the links that Powers provides and you'll see not only how far reaching this argument is, but how quickly the fringe-right ( that is usually parroted by most modern conservative media outlets ) delves into ad hominem attacks that they all too quickly claim their opposition uses.

I have but one word..............

Typical.

Late To The Party - Again

So, after mulling it over for a few hours last night and this morning, I'm actually going to give my few cents on Rep. Weiner's best impersonation of a British Parliamentarian for the CSPAN audience.



But it didn't stop there, as King and Weiner were on Hannity's radio program not long after the two were interviewed on Fox"News".



And while conservatives - from Limbaugh's specious theories to Michelle Malkin's sidekick invoking former Soviet rulers on down to Allahpundit's all too predictable, faux-intellectual, analysis of the moment - are more than willing to spin any direction they can to get away from the very simple fact that they refused to help those they they claim to idolize, it shouldn't come as a surprise that these are the same people that invoke the deaths of nearly 3000 people as often as most of them brush their teeth.

It's become reflexive nature for conservative Republicans to block any and everything a Democrat does - be they liberal, progressive, moderate, or even one of the alleged "Blue Dogs". This, to me at least, is the moment where it's really turned around on them and shown them for who they really are.

If you take a look at what Limbaugh and Allahpundit had to say about this, you'll notice that they are framing this episode as Democrats trying to shove in amendments regarding immigration when, in point of fact, this was about preventing Republicans from larding up the bill with what Karoli at Crooks And Liars calls "poison pill amendments". And that's precisely what they would have done. Democrats tossed up what should have been an easy ball for Republicans to hit out of the park and since they didn't get to manipulate the outcome, they opted to hurl the bat into the stands and run off to the dugout and cry.

The various aspects of this legislation and how conservatives screwed it up ( again ) aside, I think that it's high time that Weiner let his passion be shown. Conservatives can't handle the fact that Democrats have that fire for their country burning inside them, so their only option is to paint their opposition as completely unhinged lunatics. Sure, it works for their base, but it doesn't extend beyond that. Unfortunately, that's far too often all the traction that the meme du jour needs - the right conservative parroting something that ultimately amounts to nothing. How do you think Andrew Breitbart has made it as far as he has?

It's a shame that not more Democratic Representatives don't have Mr. Weiner's passion.

Brainstem Removal

Michelle Malkin has recently ceded much of her blog space to conservative hack Doug Powers, and he keeps up the right-wing blatherings with a short piece and comment section about Ashley Judd that is long of sophistry and schoolyard rhetoric and predictably short on realistic assessment.

Last month, in a speech to the National Press Club, actress Ashley Judd took a break from taking on Sarah Palin and set her sights on business practices in her home state.

Judd referred to the mountain top removal of coal in Kentucky as “environmental genocide,” called the process “the state-sanctioned, federal government supported, coal industry operated, rape of Appalachia,” and said the miners should be retrained to take “better jobs” (unfortunately the “vacuous actor” career field is full up at the moment).

On Wednesday, the coal industry sponsored a golf tournament at StoneCrest Golf Course in Prestonsburg, Kentucky, and launched a return salvo by way of a poster displayed at the tourney:

Here's the poster being referenced:



And while equating showing your boobs on film with the ecologically dangerous practice of quite literally blowing the tops off of mountains isn't anywhere near a realistic comparison, it showcases exactly how conservatives refuse to take an honest look the issue at hand. To put it another way, it's easy for conservative men to make a sexist joke because they know they'll not be chastised for it.

There are three types of mines in Kentucky: Strip, Underground, and Mountaintop Removal. While the first is the less dangerous practice - though almost on an equal playing field in regards to environmental damage, the later has a rich and storied past of destroying ecosystems and poisoning the waters of the region.

If conservatives were as passionate about how the ecological rape of our lands - not just here in Kentucky, mind you - as they were about deficits and taxation, then perhaps Powers would exercise a little intellectual honesty and find out exactly why Ashley Judd is describing mountaintop removal as she does.

The Wedding Singer

So Michelle Malkin's understudy is claiming that since Elton John is performing at Rush Limbaugh's fourth wedding that capitalism is the one thing that can fix every problem in the world, even bringing a racist-drug-abuser and a gay-activist-singer together in a big warm hug. Really?

Without capitalism, Elton wouldn’t have performed at Rush Limbaugh’s wedding and Rush wouldn’t have been in the position to pay that much for the evening’s entertainment. Capitalism: It can bring people from all walks of life together.

I congratulate Rush and Kathryn, and also tip my Detroit Tigers cap to Elton John for performing at the wedding, because he’s got to know he’s going to take some heat for this in his left-leaning, artsy, environmentalist, gay-activist circle of pals — most of whom would gladly accept a million bucks from George W. Bush to tap dance on a floor made of California Redwood and elephant tusk or take whacks at a piñata in the likeness of Harvey Milk that Roger Ailes stuffed with cash. But they’d never admit it.

I'm calling bullshit on the whole idea that Limbaugh actually wanted Elton John to play at his wedding - it's clearly a calculated move in order for Rush to have some peripheral material for his show after his honeymoon is over. Also, I have to scold Elton a bit for actually accepting this offer. Is he really that hard up for cash that he's going to be associated with this clown? And to Doug Powers' insistence that anyone would accept money to do the things that he's describing, he's fooling himself if he thinks that everyone on the Left would accept such an offer - it's called integrity. And, as much as I hate to say it, it appears that Elton John wasn't able to exercise enough of it to say "hell no" to the man that is likely to besmirch his name as soon as he gets back on the microphone.

Moral And Righteous Indignation Over A Film

Conservatives don’t understand film.

This has become all the more evident over the last 10 years or so. From mocumentaries about President Bush being assassinated, to films about actual events happening in Iraq, on down to absurdist, exploitational fare, conservatives just don't get it. The later is the focus of much conservative ire and outrage – Robert Rodriguez’s latest “grindhouse” feature “Machete”.

Machete: Coming in September, it’s sure to be the best anti-Arizona immigration law movie — and anti-law movie for that matter — that your tax dollars can subsidize.

The MOST anti-law ever? Really? What about something like the Godfather films? They were about gangsters that broke the law and killed people on a daily basis? It’s easy to fall into the trap of “the most _____ ever” meme when you really don’t have much of a cogent point to make to begin with. It plays into the fringe’s most base instincts. And, in that regard, it works well in these situations.

The part that really bothers me when conservatives try to read messages into films is that they often don’t see the film itself, rely on other people’s reporting, or look at the trailer as the entirety of the film itself. While the later is done far too often by people of all stripes, and can be somewhat of a fair signifier of what is to come when the picture is actually released, it’s the former avenues of approach that show pure laziness and an inability to be intellectually honest when approaching any material.

I will offer this aside when discussing a film purely on the merits of the trailer – too often those are farmed out to alternate studios to make a film look bigger, flashier, and more intriguing than the finished product. This isn’t to say that Machete is the exception or the rule, as the final cut hasn’t been screened yet. So for conservatives to make such bold accusations regarding the film, I say they should stop prejudging a product they haven’t consumed yet.

But, some may ask, what of the fact that the script was leaked? This is not surprising in the least, as many scripts from many genre films end up being available online due to some production hand stealing a copy ( or what they think is a real copy ) of the source material. But who’s to say it all made the final cut? Certainly not the one stealing intellectual property and most certainly not the one’s reporting it.

Another aspect of the film ( it’s production more specifically ) that conservatives are highlight ( since it’s all about taxpayer money now that Democrats are in power ) is that a portion of the production costs were funded by the Texas Film Commission. To those not familiar with how films are produced around the country, this would more than likely outrage the average conservative. However, since just about every state in the US has a film commission that is designed to help bring in productions, this should come as no surprise. The fact that people are only citing the TFC as a player in this films production is not only dishonest but completely predictable.

Worst of all, Robert Rodriguez’ incendiary race film ‘Machete’ was made, in part, with help from tax incentives and location access provided by the Texas Film Commission, a division of Governor Rick Perry’s Office. A spokesperson from the organization confirmed that Rodriguez had indeed applied for funding.

That information came from lunatic-fringe conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and was highlighted as a portion of the article on Malkin’s website. Odd that someone on Malkin’s site would link to Alex Jones, considering their troubled history. But hey, it’s all about being as inflammatory and as possible these days – right?

And while Jones and Malkin's fill-in Powers are far too quick to castigate the TFC, it should be pointed out that most states have film commissions and they bring in a large amount of revenue for each location used. The rate of return on taxpayers modest contribution to each commission has been shown to be upwards of 1000 fold. Of course, this is dependant upon the feature being shot, but I think it's safe to assume that when people in Texas know that Robert Rodriguez is shooting a new film that there's going to be a nice amount of money flowing into the area.

But let's be clear about something - this film was based off a spoof trailer that appeared before the Grindhouse feature "Planet Terror" from 2007. Also, Machete was in production before the Arizona law was even proposed, so to claim that this feature film is a direct response to that is completely preposterous.

However, while some will claim that Danny Trejo's comments at the head of the trailer invalidate any claims that this film was expressly produced in order to protest Arizona's draconian law, I would offer this response - he has a right to his freedom of speech.

But let's look at some of the aspects of how this film is being released. After all, not all films that are made get put out in theatres. Guess who the distributor for Machete is? Newscorps film division 20th Century Fox. Why is it important to reveal this? One would think that the company that also owns Fox"News" wouldn't touch this material. After all Fox"News" went after Marc Cuban, the distributor of Brian De Palma's film Redatected. Are we going to see the same standard applied here? You're fooling yourself if you say yes.

But Fox didn't just make an offer to Troublemaker Studios and then Rodriguez accept. There was an all out bidding war for this feature. Fox likely knew what they were getting, so Rupert Murdock is to be held responsible for seeing that this movie was released. And when one thinks about it, as this will most assuredly be a hot topic of discussion on Fox"News", Rupert Murdoch will actually be funding both sides of the debate on this. It's a win/win for him regardless.

Here's the trailer conservatives are all twitching about, complete with Trejo's message to Arizona.



Let's look at Trejo's statement ( and likely Rodriguez's endorsement of it ) from a marketing standpoint. You have to admit, it's a pretty good idea, as now more people will be drawn to the theatre to see it, buy merchandise, and by the DVD later on. Not only that, but if conservatives decided to exercise a little integrity and go out and see the film rather than wildly speculate on it's intended meaning, I'm sure that there will be more than a few disappointed souls out there that will have the feeling they should admit they were wrong about the film - just don't expect to hear it directly from them. After all, part of being a conservative is never admitting you were wrong, just jumping to the next conclusion.