The Irony Of Right Wing Posturing

Jim Hoft ( also known as GatewayPundit - or the "Dumbest Man On The Internet" ) has a problem with Community Organizing. That is, until it presents an opportunity for him to pretend like he has a soul:

A St. Louis Facebook group was able to organize and deliver 4 semi trailer full of goods to the Joplin, Missouri tornado victims today.

St. Louis for Joplin Missouri Facebook group organized and sent 4 semis full of goods to the Joplin tornado victims today.

The semis left St. Louis this evening for Joplin, Missouri after the charity drive was organized a day earlier on Facebook. They collected 4 semi trucks full of household goods, diapers, sheets, cleaners, water, etc. for the people of Joplin.

So now he's for community organizing? After all, it's not solely about politics. But I guess it's alright for little Jimmy provided they aren't organizing to find affordable housing for low income families who happen to be primarily black.

Typical.

Persons In Time

I was actually expecting Jullian Assange to win Time's annual "Person Of The Year", as he seems to have actually earned it, but that would have lead to the Right to engage in a collective reenactment of that scene from Scanners because surely that would have meant Time was aiding and abetting a "terrorist", or something.

Naturally, conservatives are more than willing to complain about things they are left out of, regardless if their arguments have merit or not.

...color me underwhelmed by their choice this year of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.

Is there more to this story? Well … no. Their in-depth profile of Zuckerberg shows that he has a “weird calm,” and their in-depth interviews with people who depend on Zuckerberg for a paycheck finds that they “really like him.” What a shock! Truly, this is the most potent force of the year.

Apparently, Time didn’t know that Facebook launched in February 2004, and had achieved the status of most trafficked social network by the end of 2008. If the issue was impact, it seems as though Time is two years too late in awarding this.

Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange cleaned up in the online voting but even far left TIME Magazine couldn’t quite give him the award.
Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg won the Person of the Year award instead.

The Tea Party Nation did not make the list even though they were able to stop the onslaught of socialism dead in its tracks this year with the historic wave election in November.

What Ed Morrissey and Gateway Pundit - whom the quotes above belong to respectively - don't seem to understand that they could easily say that Sarah Palin is clearly the one responsible for Zuckerberg's win. Why didn't they opt for that avenue I can only speculate, but that's precisely how transparently laughable their sort of rationalizations are when they want to feel intellectually and morally superior to others.

The real reason that Zuckerberg won is likely two-fold:

1 - Time didn't want to give the "honor" to Assange simply because they didn't want to have to deal with what would quite literally be wall to wall coverage and smearing of them from conservative talk radio and Fox"News". For that, I would call them cowards and hardly a "far left rag", like they are so often called. If they were even fractionally as "liberally biased" as conservatives claim they are, they would have given it to George Soros, Keith Olbermann, or Stewart/Colbert.

2 - It is possible that Time was hoping that Sarah Palin and her mouth agape followers would latch onto this story and show how they helped elevate internet sites like Facebook to such prestigious status and allow someone as young and Zuckerberg to finally achieve that all to often unattainable "American Dream". Then again, that option is predicated on the fact that Palin and her media masters would have in all likelihood say something "nice" about Time. Yeah, that's not going to happen.

Regardless of whom on the Right says that this is a poor choice, it does make small amount of sense, seeing as how Facebook is now one of the "go to" social networking sites for socio-political action. Congrats to Mark on his win.

Now, let's sit back and wait to see what Palin's ghostwriter has to say about this.

The Unhinged

It's just this sort of incident that allows conservatives to continually cast themselves in the role of "victim", question the integrity of media outlets that aren't Fox"News", and provide specious claims that it's actually The Left that is to blame for moments like this:



A look at Duke's Facebook page - which has been taken down, naturally - reveals this about the man.

Duke's "Favorite Quotes" section contains a number of links to political websites—mostly pretty out-there 9/11-truther-here-comes-the-new-world-order stuff, but also the mainstream liberal Media Matters and, of course, a Wikileaks mirror. (Expect these sites to be the ball in the exciting "Clay Duke Was a Dangerous Liberal" vs. "Clay Duke Was a Nutcase Conservative" game we'll all get to watch over the next few days.) His "Religious Views" are "Humanism" and his "Political Views" are "Freedom Fighter."

And Glenn Beck is already launched into this game, albeit with a half-hearted caveat that Media Matters really wasn't responsible for the shooting.

Considering that Duke's Facebook page is gone, we really don't know what he had to say about Media Matters, but Beck certainly continues to paint a dark and venomous picture of who runs MM. Look for Beck's writers to fold this story into a new chalkboard meme in the coming days.

Other conservatives are even framing this from the angle that Media Matters and liberals/progressives aren't even going to be remotely curious as to why Duke read, watched, and listened to the information sources he listed on his page. Naturally, the "truther" aspects of Duke's digital footprint get no mention from conservatives. Typical.

But looking at Duke's "suicide note", you get a clear picture that this man was pretty screwed up, and is more on par with an Alex Jones fan than a liberal or progressive.

My Testament: Some people (the government sponsored media) will say I was evil, a monster (V)… no… I was just born poor in a country where the Wealthy manipulate, use, abuse, and economically enslave 95% of the population. Rich Republicans, Rich Democrats… same-same… rich… they take turns fleecing us… our few dollars… pyramiding the wealth for themselves. The 95%… the us, in US of A, are the neo slaves of the Global South. Our Masters, the Wealthy, do, as they like to us…

As far as the "V" symbol, this will likely become part of the Beckian analysis of this story, though it just appears to be yet another example of how plain-old batshit crazy this guy was.

Open Mic Legislature

Conservative voters and prominent Tea Bagger pontificators are glossing over the fact that the incoming Freshman class of "patriots" are actually being considered for "leadership" positions.

In a nod to the strength of their newest constituency, House Republican leaders will grant incoming freshmen more say in the party’s direction than most first-term lawmakers receive.

House Republican Leader John Boehner and his No. 2, party Whip Eric Cantor, will notify newly elected Republicans Tuesday that one member of their class will get a seat at the leadership table and another two will be given spots on the Steering Committee, which decides committee assignments and chairmanships in the new Congress.

Members of the class will run for these positions, along with those of class president and freshman representative to the policy committee, on Nov. 17 after the entire Republican caucus selects its leaders for the next two years, according to the letter.

I, and many others, actually expected this to happen. However, it seems that Boehner is looking for a political angle to play, considering this idea is likely to backfire. Not in the sense that the Tea Bagger class will attempt to push legislation that makes them look even more unqualified to lead, but that when the inevitable investigations and lack of forward momentum take center stage, Boehner is going to have the sacrificial lambs to offer up to the masses.

Allahpundit hints at this idea, but it is overshadowed by the gimmick that is Kristi Noem:

Kristi Noem, who’s frequently compared to Palin, is reportedly interested in the leadership position and has the support of Boehner, Cantor, et al. Makes sense for the GOP brain trust: She has tea party cred, knocked off a high profile Democratic up-and-comer in Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin, and is plenty telegenic and well-spoken enough to serve as a spokesman for the new Republican class in TV interviews. More importantly, though, as the Times puts it, Boehner wants to ensure that the new crop is “not tempted into immediate acts of rebellion.” That is to say, they don’t want freshmen tea partiers wandering off and becoming a thorn in the leadership’s side, either by forming their own caucus or joining Bachmann’s tea-party caucus; giving them a voice in the top group is a way to reduce that pressure, and of course to purchase some political cover on tough votes. If they end up bringing something to the floor that makes tea partiers howl, now they can point to Noem or whoever and say, “Hey, she’s partly responsible too.”

So who is Noem?

Here's a clip that Hot Air highlights in an apparent attempt to show that she has the skills and ideas to be an effective representative.



She certainly has her "Palinese" down pat. I didn't hear any specifics, though.

Considering that Sarah Palin's favorability rating is down to roughly 40% as of last week, I'm wondering if conservatives' desire to deify Pailin are backfiring on them. Sarah Gallup results were also the subject of a piece at Hot Air where Allahpundit seemed to infer that Gallup was "cooking" their numbers to reflect badly on Palin. After all, it surely wouldn't have anything to do with her inability to vet those that she endorsed - and those that lost big - in the recent midterms.

But as we all know, "Sister Sarah" can do no wrong.

Let's get back to the incoming Tea Bagger class.

Rand Paul is already starting to look like a complete flop, considering his backpedaling on key fiscal issues that he championed on the campaign trail. From the perspective of the big names that were in play before election day, it's looking like Rand is going to have all the light shining on him. With the losses of Angle, O'Donnell, and Miller, the quartet of unhinged voices is now reduced to a solo performance. Rand, most likely, is well aware of this and likely isn't going to be too comfortable being what his easily lead voting block expects him to be - a game changer.

I think it's fair to say that the spin coming from conservatives in the media and across the country is going to be quite dizzying after January gets under way. Have your Dramamine ready, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

Exit Question: Is Sarah's Facebook Syllabus" for incoming Freshman on Capital Hill going to be seen as a positive or negative for her? Despite the fact that Palin likely has these posts ghost-written, I would have to say that this is more of a preemptive dose of damage control rather than actual encouragement. After all, when things don't pan out exactly the way Palin and her handlers want this to, they are now going to be able to fall back on the "why didn't you do what mommy told you to" narrative.

The Company You Keep And Unintended Irony

This story is being pushed by Fox"News" and their sister site ( you know, the place that doesn't even pretend to be either fair or balanced ) Fox"Nation", but I don't think they are fully thinking this through.

The world’s largest pro-pedophilia advocacy group uses Facebook to connect with its members throughout the world; to find and exchange photos of children; to hone its members' predatory behavior; and to identify, target and reel in child victims, an investigation by FoxNews.com reveals.

Facebook says it has a strict policy against the posting of content that supports groups engaged in child exploitation, yet a simple, five-second search on Facebook, conducted on Sept. 23, yielded dozens of pages devoted to the infamous North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). Many of those pages featured numerous photos of unnamed boys, some of whom appeared to be too young for kindergarten.

And while I am in full agreement that NAMBLA should have no place on Facebook and certainly no place anywhere, the headline at Fox"Nation" took it one step further:

If You Are on Facebook, Is This a Good Reason to Leave?

So, Palin fanatics, are you going to be calling for Sarah ( excuse me, her ghost-writer Rebecca Manour's Facebook page )to stop using Facebook since your media masters are asking you to do the same?

Exit question: Is this going to be the catalyst that causes Palin to admit that she doesn't write those posts herself?

As for me, I realize that the internet has lots of places where people I don't agree with will post images, video, audio, and text. This isn't stopping me from using the internet, but I do think there needs to be swift action by Facebook to remove all NAMBLA and NAMBLA related material from their service. I'm sure that when and if Palin is ever questioned about this - will she be? - that she would say the same. But it seems just a little ironic that a news organization that, on the one hand, condemns the organizations use of Facebook and the services seemingly unwillingness to remove it also champions Sarah Palin's use of that exact same service.

Palin: Pwned!!!

If I actually believed in God I would say "God bless this woman who took it to Sarah straight on!"

But first, some conservative spin from one of Palin's mouth-agape fame-suckers: Allahpundit.

Late afternoon traffic bait via Breitbart. I assume this was posted by a Sarah-hater, but I’m not sure why: She acquits herself well, as even certain lefties are fair enough to admit, and it’s fun to watch her confront a hostile protester given her rap for hiding inside the Fox News bubble. Even Bristol, newly liberated from 165 lbs. or so of fame-whore dead weight, gets in a shot. Faced with the fact that there’s nothing here that’s actually damning, the lefty spin du jour is that Palin seems to rolls her eyes when the woman tells her she’s a teacher. Which, I guess, is smoking-gun proof that Sarahcuda, the daughter of a science teacher … hates teachers? Or books, or something? Whatever.

You'll notice that while Palin claims that she's all for fighting for "free speech" that her guards with the nice little ear-pieces really don't want this to be featured on tape.

And I like how Bristol gets in her jab that "she's representing *circular hand jesture* United State". Guess her media head-fake that her and Levi were getting back together isn't playing out like she hoped so she has to make sure she's protecting "Mama Grizzly".

And yeah, Palin clearly "rolls her eyes" at the 1:50 mark as the woman declares that she's a teacher. I'm not going to overly-speculate about why Palin would or wouldn't care about teachers in America, but considering that this woman confronting her has called her a quitter and a "money-hungry celebrity", it's clear that Palin was not just annoyed with the confrontation with someone that she used to represent, but didn't have anything to offer once a "real American" slapped her in the face with the reality of who and what she is.

For a good laugh, check out the comments on Breitbart TV and you'll see how easily Palin fanatics are bowled over with not only her lack of candor but her inability to face reality.

Jesus Will Help Her, Or Something

And while it's not beyond the pale for a conservative Republican to have an extra-marital affair and lie about it, the accuser's statements really don't shine a great light of credibility on him either.

A political blogger and former aide to Gov. Mark Sanford claims to have had a past romantic relationship with Republican gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley. Haley, who is married and has two children, "emphatically" denied the claim Monday morning.

"Several years ago, prior to my marriage, I had an inappropriate physical relationship with Nikki," Will Folks announced Monday morning on his political blog, FITSNews. Folks said political opponents of Haley and himself were leaking evidence of the affair to the press, and claimed the story would've come out this week no matter what.

"I will not be discussing the details of that relationship, nor will I be granting any additional interviews about it to members of the media beyond what I have already been compelled to confirm," Folks continued. The blogger gave no proof of the relationship, which he claims took place when he worked for Haley in 2007.

This, of course, gives Sarah Palin the perfect opportunity to shelter Haley as she has just recently endorsed her.

Palin ( or her ghost-writer ) took to the hallowed confines of Facebook to discuss the "convenience" of Folk's claims and the fact that he is unwilling to expound on them. For once, and only once, I find myself in an agreement of sorts with Palin. After all, if he's got the goods on Haley I say let them out. But would it really matter if she had cheated on her husband? I'm sure that this will be good for a few news cycles on O'Reilly and Hannity for Palin to talk about "god", "faith", and those nasty liberals.

But here's the catch - what if it's true?

Endorsing The Opposition

Remember Tea Baggers, she said you have to pick a side.

I’d like to tell you about a Commonsense Conservative running for office in California this year. She grew up in a modest home with a school teacher dad, worked her way through several colleges, and then entered an arena where few women had tread. Through a combination of hard work, perseverance, and common sense, she proved the naysayers wrong to reach the top of her field, where she led with distinction – facing hard truths, making tough decisions, and showing real leadership through a rocky transition period. Where others had failed, her company had weathered the storm and settled on a stronger new foundation.

Her name is Carly Fiorina, and I’m proud to endorse her for U.S. Senate.

That's right, she's not endorsing the Tea Bagger candidate. You're shocked, I'm sure. But her support isn't without it's detractors.

After Palin announced the endorsement on her Facebook page, a number of her followers questioned why she would side with Fiorina instead of the more conservative candidate in the race, Assemblyman Chuck DeVore.

DeVore has the backing of several leading voices in the conservative movement, including Sen. Jim DeMint, RedState.com editor Erick Erickson and the Tea Party Express.

Though a handful of readers agreed with Palin's decision, most were upset.

Ultimately, Palin can do no wrong with a majority of conservatives. It's their lemming nature to blindly follow a person like her. Again, the "pretty popular girl" image translates into unflinching adoration within the Tea Bagger movement. The Tea Baggers will never admit this, but it is the establishment Republicans that they will ultimately end up voting for - this whole "we hate both parties" meme is just a poorly constructed distraction.

Ghostwriters On Reform

I still don't think Palin writes these things.

In the wake of the recent financial meltdown, Americans know that we need reform. Not only have many individuals learned lessons about personal responsibility through this, but we’ve been able to engage in a discussion about government’s appropriate role.

The current debate over financial reform demonstrates what happens when political leaders react to a crisis with a raft of new regulations. First off, the people involved in writing government regulations are often lobbyists from the very industry that the new laws are supposed to regulate, and that’s been the case here. It should surprise no one that financial lobbyists are flocking to DC this week. Of course, the big players who can afford lobbyists work the regulations in their favor, while their smaller competitors are left out in the cold. The result here are regulations that institutionalize the “too big to fail” mentality.

Moreover, the financial reform bill gives regulators the power to pick winners and losers, institutionalizing their ability to decide “which firms to rescue or close, and which creditors to reward and how.” Does anyone doubt that firms with the most lobbyists and the biggest campaign donations will be the ones who get seats in the lifeboat? The president is trying to convince us that he’s taking on the Wall Street “fat cats,” but firms like Goldman Sachs are happy with federal regulation because, as one of their lobbyists recently stated, “We partner with regulators.”

Whether Palin has a hand in the initial "brainstorming" process for her Facebook screeds or not, let's take a look at what she's saying and then put the relevant context to it.

But first, a video.....



You see, this is where Palin utilizes a something called "projection". She's trying to paint this picture of malevolent Democrats cavorting with banking lobbyists in order to distract you from what you just saw in the clip above.

The invitation to the fundraiser, obtained by the Party Time blog of the Sunlight Foundation, shows that the it was hosted by lobbyists Wendy Grubb, Kirsten Chadwick, Scott Reed, and a variety of corporate PACs. Grubb is a top lobbyist for Citigroup, a bank that took taxpayer TARP funds and has yet to repay them. Chadwick, a former staffer to Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO), is a lobbyist for Zurich Financial Group, a financial services conglomerate.

ThinkProgress, along with several other journalists, waited outside of the fundraiser at the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) building. Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) walked quickly past reporters into his car, refusing to take questions. Both Sens. Cornyn and George Lemieux (R-FL) dodged reporters by driving into the NRSC’s underground lot. Although ThinkProgress tried to ask both GOP lawmakers and the other attendees of the fundraiser about regulation reform legislation, only Charlie Black spoke to us. Black is a longtime corporate lobbyist who now represents a variety of investment banks, including Goldman Sachs, within a trade group called the “Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association.”

Conservatives can't have their constituencies realizing that they care more for the corporation than the average American. Then again, these voters could very likely know this to be true but simply don't care. But I have to ask myself from time to time, are these people so blinded by ideological ignorance that they don't see that corporate lobbyists are more important than they are? I can recall multiple conversations with people in my town who will defend these corporations, Republican politicians, and conservativism with more vigor and passion than they would defend their own children. It's truly an amazing time to be living in when you have people completely disinterested in looking out for their better interests in the name of political alignment.

And Sarah, if Republicans think there should be reform, then why did all 41 Republicans Senators oppose the Obama administration's plan?

It's a fairly simple answer, really. They are opposing everything simply because the Democrats are in power. The only problem is that the Dems aren't being aggressive enough. Not just with Financial reform, but with virtually every initiative that they have tried to implement. From the Stimulus on down to Wall Street reform, Democrats have continually tried to be bipartisan and Republicans have just turned up the volume and screamed like the sky was falling. It's time that stopped.

A pity, though, that conservatives see Palin's Facebook page as a reliable news source and lack the capacity to not only fact check but to see the glaring reality right in front of them.

Hypocrisy, Thy Name Is Sarah: Pt II

Shannyn Moore has a piece up at Huffington Post highlighting another in a long line of hypocritical standpoints from none other than Caribou Barbie.

Recently released documents from the custody battle show clearly Tripp Palin Johnston has socialized health care through Indian Health Services and the Alaska Native Medical Center.

The documents show Tripp has been receiving "socialized healthcare" though the Indian Services. But why is that? Turns out ALL the Palin family gets it because "First Dude" Todd fractionally Native American.

Really, does this even surprise anyone anymore?

Check out the Palin-Hypocrisy Facebook page.

Because It's Always About Sarah

Palin's ghostwriter took to her Facebook page in response to allegations that Rahm Emanuel used the phrase "fucking retarded" in reference to the healthcare debate - Senate Liberals to be precise.

Granted, the word "retard" is a slur against those with mental disabilities, but it wasn't used in that light and Palin provided even more "context" and threw in a little mystery as to how she became aware of Rahm's visceral attack on Senators and NOT perons that are mentally disabled.

Just as we’d be appalled if any public figure of Rahm’s stature ever used the “N-word” or other such inappropriate language, Rahm’s slur on all God’s children with cognitive and developmental disabilities – and the people who love them – is unacceptable, and it’s heartbreaking.

A patriot in North Andover, Massachusetts, notified me of Rahm’s “retarded” slam. I join this gentleman, who is the father of a beautiful child born with Down Syndrome, in asking why the Special Olympics, National Down Syndrome Society and other groups condemning Rahm’s degrading scolding have been completely ignored by the White House. No comment from his boss, the president?

Ah, the mysterious "patriot". And when was the N-bomb even part of what was said. Oh, that's right - it wasn't. No matter though, I'm sure that President Obama will get right on this Rahm issue and have him sacked immediately.

So let me get this straight - Palin thinks that Rahm's acidic tongue and his language ( once again, directed at liberal Senators ) was meant as a slight against her child and that this alleged statement made in private demands that the President fire Rahm?

Sarah, that's Fucking Retarded.

They Know A Lot About A Little Of Nothing

In another Facebook proclamation, Palin goes chasing her favorite windmill, the ever illusive "death panel". But there's one problem, she's now changing her story:

...Democrats are protecting this rationing “death panel” from future change with a procedural hurdle. You have to ask why they’re so concerned about protecting this particular provision. Could it be because bureaucratic rationing is one important way Democrats want to “bend the cost curve” and keep health care spending down?
The Congressional Budget Office seems to think that such rationing has something to do with cost. In a letter to Harry Reid last week, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf noted (with a number of caveats) that the bill’s calculations call for a reduction in Medicare’s spending rate by about 2 percent in the next two decades, but then he writes the kicker:
“It is unclear whether such a reduction in the growth rate could be achieved, and if so, whether it would be accomplished through greater efficiencies in the delivery of health care or would reduce access to care or diminish the quality of care.”

Though Nancy Pelosi and friends have tried to call “death panels” the “lie of the year,” this type of rationing – what the CBO calls “reduc[ed] access to care” and “diminish[ed] quality of care” – is precisely what I meant when I used that metaphor.

That's not precisely a lie that this is what she initially meant, but it's far from the solid truth as Palin's initial "death-panel" meme was spoon fed to her by her handlers. The phrase "death panel" was initially coined by Betsy McCaughey in relation to "end of life" or "hospice" care that was mentioned back in the early stages of the legislation. And while rationing was essentially an ancillary character within the overall "death-panel" fear-tactic, it's primary focus was on a person(s) visiting an elderly or invalid person's home and helping them die. Aside from that, the CBO never stated that rationing had to be done, just that there was enough gray-area there to make rank speculation. And that's precisely what is being done.

Never-the-less, Palin feels that she can celebrate as if she has discovered this evil secret that Obama is out to destroy the entire country via "rationing". But she's not alone in her imagined victory. Ed Morrissey, who fancies himself an expert in all things, not only proceeded to suckle at the metaphorical teet of Sarah Palin, but to decry then excuse rationing within the same paragraph.

All health care gets rationed in one manner or another, as does every commodity (except air, although with cap-and-trade, that would change). Insurers ration, and so do consumers in a fully free-market system such as the Lasik or cosmetic-surgery industries. The difference is that those systems involve free choice, especially the latter. With insurers as third-party payers, there is less free choice, but the solution to that is more competition and better ability to be completely portable — or better yet, the removal of third-party payers for normal health care services.

At first blush, Morrissey seems to think that rationing is by insurance companies is just fine, as it is part of his precious "free-market capitalism". But outside this invisible and poorly defined system that Morrissey and Palin claim to know so much about, what would they quantify as "rationing"? Would they consider it rationing that there is only one MRI machine in a three county area in rural Western Kentucky? Could it be rationing is non-essential services like cosmetic surgeries be moved from one area of a state to another? How about a reduction of a surplus of medicines or services in order to assist another region of a state? There's lots of things that would be considered rationing but are nothing more than improved business practices that will, in the end, reduce cost and waste.

But beyond all this, one has to ask the question - if people like Palin and Morrissey continually tell people that no one has read the bill, then where are they getting this information? Virtually every Republican Senator and Congressman has said the same, that no one knows what's in the bill. So how can they make such outlandish claims. By and large, these are nothing more than speculative statements that serve no greater purpose than to inflame, confuse, and distort.

Palin and Morrissey may think they have been vindicated, but the truth is that "death panels" don't exist.

Does She Still Think She's Governor?

Sarah Palin* took to her facebook her press-conference recently and responded to statements from the Governoator regarding climate-change and Palin’s new-found stance as a Global-Warming denier.

Why is Governor Schwarzenegger pushing for the same sorts of policies in Copenhagen that have helped drive his state into record deficits and unemployment? Perhaps he will recall that I live in our nation’s only Arctic state and that I was among the first governors to create a sub-cabinet to deal specifically with climate change. While I and all Alaskans witness the impacts of changes in weather patterns firsthand, I have repeatedly said that we can’t primarily blame man’s activities for those changes. And while I did look for practical responses to those changes, what I didn’t do was hamstring Alaska’s job creators with burdensome regulations so that I could act “greener than thou” when talking to reporters

But while she and her ardent defenders will, at a moments notice, jump to her defense and claim that she is what she isn't or isn't what she is - depending on the arrangement of the talking points and who's holding the camera at the time - there is one thing that not only her fans, but Palin herself seems to have forgotten: she quit her job as Governor of Alaska.

Why are people still standing up for her?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

*there's still no proof she writes these statements herself

Opposition Editorialized

In many respects, Sarah Palin is a lot like John McCain. Where McCain will get all "mavericky" and be against his party with one breath and then be very status-quo with the other ( dependant on who's holding the camera at the time ) Sarah Palin will apparently speak truth to power until she sees a moment where she can try and grab the spotlight from someone - facts be damned.

In Palin's* op-ed published in the Washington Post, she took the opportunity to go after Al Gore simply because he's Al Gore. The problem with that is that Palin's* piece was pretty much free of facts. And when called on these specious claims by Al Gore, she took to her safe zone at Facebook to retort.

Think Progress reports on Palin's* statement:

However, he’s wrong in calling me a ‘denier.’ As I noted in my op-ed above and in my original Facebook post on Climategate, I have never denied the existence of climate change. I just don’t think we can primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes.

But her statements both in the op-ed and on Facebook were patently false. You may remember this:



It's almost a certainty that conservatives will see this clip and immediately respond that this was some form of "gotcha" question from Charlie Gibson. Even though this interview was done last year and Palin's piece just appeared in the Washington Post, it has to be some elabortate plot between the evil liberal media, climate change scientists, Al Gore, AND the Washington Post. Facebook might even be in on it. No one can be trusted Sarah ----- NO ONE!

----------------------------------------------

* there is no proof that Palin actually writes these things.

Adventures In Tweeting Pt I : Black Like Me

The racial component in socio-political discourse has been amplified or minimized for a number of reasons. For the most part, liberals/progressives find themselves speaking about race in politics and society as a direct result of statements made by conservatives. A good example would be O'Reilly's shock and awe that a black restaurant in Harlem was just as pleasant as any other eatery that he may find himself in. Though he continues to deny that he ever said this, insisting his context had been distorted, it is a perfect example of conservatives using race as a quantifier for their belief structure.

Conservatives too often use race in socio-political discourse in order to show that those within a minority are often inferior, that they have a hidden agenda that is ultimately anti-American, or to bait those with whom they disagree with. It’s become more prevalent because of the fact that Obama is black. In their minds they think that because we now have a black President that they are free to use racially charged language. They seem to be operating under the assumption that racial animus no longer exists, so their words – no matter how harmful – are validated.

Recently I responded to a tweet posted by someone using the AlinskyDefeater name:



And even though this “connection” between Ayers and Obama was completely overblown from the jump, our intrepid AlinskyDefeater was hell-bent on convince his followers that there was some secret plot that Obama was about to unfold upon us all.

After responding that this link between Ayers and Obama had been seriously distorted, that a few context-shredded lines from a fire-and-brimstone preacher don’t reveal to us that Obama is some evil force that is out to destroy America, I was labeled a racist:






But it apparently wasn’t enough to show that there was absolutely no rationale that could be used to validate this claim being leveled against me. Ultimately, I was no longer just a racist, but a “black racist”:



This is where we come back to the way in which reactionary conservatives use race/racism as a central theme in many of their arguments against Obama and for conservative policies. But there was one problem that our intrepid AlinskyDefeater didn’t bank on – I’m not black.



All one has to do is take a look at my Facebook profile and it becomes quite clear that I am not black at all. So why was this person so eager to label me “black”? The answer is quite obvious.

I was defending Obama against a specious and fact free attack, so in the mind of a fringe conservative that HAS to mean that I am black. To them, this is the only possible reason that someone, that anyone, would stand up against claims that they feel are grounded in reality when all they are are poorly constructed conspiracies designed to divide along racial lines. By and large, reactionary conservatives like this person, like Limbaugh, like Beck, Hannity, and O'Reilly can't seem to grasp that being black isn't a disorder, isn't a state of being that means that you HAVE to act in a certain way. Conversely, simply because a person is white it doesn't mean they have to act a certain way. The problem comes in when people like AlinskyDefeator make assumptions.

Of course, this is not to say that our intrepid AlinskyDefeater is racist, but that they are sorely misinformed and should exercise at least an ounce of intellectual honesty when attempting to debate someone. However, seeing as how this person wants to “defeat” Alinsky while praising Glenn Beck for utilizing his “tactics”, I'm afraid that that’s going to be a little too much to ask.

Formatting The Palin Effect

In a recent article featured on the Huffington Post, Sarah Palin posted on her Facebook page a letter from a man named Harold Estes. The headline seemed to suggest that Palin was somehow advocating language within the letter that could be considered racial divisive.

I realize you never served in the military and never had to defend your country with your life, but you're the Commander-in-Chief now, son...Do your job. When your battle-hardened field General asks you for 40,000 more troops to complete the mission, give them to him. But if you're not in this fight to win, then get out...I don't think you like America nor do I see an ounce of gratefulness in anything you do for the obvious gifts this country has given you. ... Shape up and start acting like an American. ... I sure as hell don't want to think my president is the enemy in this final battle

For any of you that grew up in the South, you'll likely understand that "son" was not used as a term of endearment toward blacks. But the headline really missed the point of this letter and Palin's use of it.

More often than one can count, Sarah Palin loves to feature some of the most hateful, ignorant, and inflammaroty rhetoric directed toward President Obama. You'll likely not see many people within the mainstream media, save Racheal Maddow and possibly Olbermann, speak about this connection and admiration that Palin has with some of the most fringe members within the conservative movement. But when you do, the standard response is the cry of "Palin Derangement Syndrome"!

With each passing day, especially since her book-tour has taken off to such safe havens as The Villages, conservative media outlets have elevated Palin to deified status the like of which Ronald Reagan would be jealous of.

Some Thoughts For Your Day

- I love how language has become so malleable, especially in the last 10 years. With the advent of the internet, communication has taken on whole new forms and functions. Couple that with widely recognized forms of pop-culture language and words that you wouldn't expect have become verbs. Teabagger has recently become a finalist for Word Of The Year - and this has some people rather displeased. More on this later today

- I was on Twitter recently and saw a message from Meghan McCain. I find her particular brand of conservative Republican thought interesting and confusing at the same time. Her tweet that evening was in relation to the Newsweek cover that Palin herself is now calling sexist. And what made Meghan's statement just as peculiar is that she thought it was sexist as well. Here's what is so odd about both these statements - how can the cover be construed as even remotely sexist? There is no denying that Palin does pose quite the problem for the GOP, as has been discussed ad infinitum. Her rhetoric is both inflammatory and bizarre while not really serving to show that the modern conservative movement aren't the reactionary obstructionist that they have become since Jan 20th. But this is to be expected from conservatives. When they are backed into a corner and confronted for their actions and words, they claim they are victim to vicious attacks.

- And here's another reminder that healthcare reform is just not necessary and a waste of time for the American people. Nothing to see here, move along.

Some Thoughts For Your Day

- You mean she actually DOES have a book coming out? Yep, Sarah Palin's book is called Going Rogue and clocks in at a whoping 400 pages. Yeah, 400. And talk about fast. Seriously, unless this woman was writing this instead of doing her duties as governor, then that might explain why she decided to quit. But I'm not buying that she wrote this all by herself. It's difficult to write even a modest book at around 250 pages, but the size of Palin's book makes the average piece of conservative drivel look like a pamplet. I'll bet there's plenty of "winking" pics in it though.

- She just isn't even trying anymore. Michelle Malkin has pretty much dove headfirst into the shallow end of the pool once she realized that Republicans were getting their collective asses spanked in the last election. Now, she's all twitching with rage that Barack Obama is going to try to bring The Olympics to America. That's massive amounts of revenue for the city of Chicago, should they get the event. Oh, Michelle, why do you hate America so much? And speaking of The Olympics, I wonder what her toughts are on Mitt Romney, as he claims to have "ran" the Winter Olympics the year they were in Salt Lake City.

- Conservatives are a strange lot. They whine, cringe, and shriek that they want to hear from Democrats on their positions, but once those Democrats do - whether it be in any media form - the conservatives think the Democrats aren't doing their jobs; that they're campaigning. Such is true with Obama. For months, conservatives have shouted that they want Obama to articulate this position, to explain what he wants, to speak directly to the American people. Well now that he has, conservatives just want him to stop. You see, you can't please these people. That's why Obama hasn't spoken directly to them. It's a waste of time.

- It's not suprising in the least that threats against the President have risen by approximately 400%. After all, with people like Glenn Beck, Michelle Bachman, Limbaugh, Hannity, and others within the fringe of the conservative movement stoking the fires of ignorance - and yes, racism - it won't be long until someone tries something remarkably stupid. It's even spreading to Facebook. I'm sure that the Secret Service will have their hands quite full for the next 3 years or more.

- The continuing meme that "Obama is Hitler" is becoming a standard issue talking-point for conservatives all across America. Whether spoken outright or inferred through the inane babblings of talk-show hosts and television personalities, it's still as pointless as ever, but is a shining truth for some. The message really works well at conservative conferences in conjunction with hints that armed revolution is necessary.

- Those "conservative/moderate" Democrats known affectionately as "Blue Dogs" seems to be coming to their senses more. It appears that at least 24 of them support a "public option" in healthcare reform. But all that aside, this isn't about what members of Congress and the Senate want, this is about what Americans want. A plurality of people in this country want affordable healthcare with the public option. And it's interesting to hear what some conservatives say about what the American people want. It's been told to me that most people haven't the slightest clue what is good for them. And to think people actually ascribe to such nonsensical thought.

Misleading The Letter Of The Law

As is to be expected, Fox"News" and various conservative blogs, message boards, and "news" sites are pushing the story of the White House gathering your "data" or your "info". And while the Presidential Records Act requires that all correspondance with the White House be archived, the way the story is being framed is that your "personal information" - not just your name and your comments that were posted - is somehow in danger.

The White House is collecting and storing comments and videos placed on its social-networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube without notifying or asking the consent of the site users, a failure that appears to run counter to President Obama's promise of a transparent government and his pledge to protect privacy on the Internet.

Marc Rotenberg, president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said the White House signaled that it would insist on open dealings with Internet users and, in fact, should feel obliged to disclose that it is collecting such information.

"The White House has not been adequately transparent, particularly on how it makes use of new social media techniques, such as this example," he said.

If one were to simply read the lead-in, you would come away with the impression that ALL of the social networking sites are being monitored even if there is no direct correspondance with the White House.

Even the Washington Times article explains this rather poorly. The average reader might not catch the word "its" in the opening paragraph which is the only signifier that it's not the entirity of Facebook or Twitter that is being archived, but the White House's personal sections. Trust me, your MySpace pic folder where you put your emo pics and videos of that drunk kid from the party last weekend, as well as your home address, phone and social security number, are safe.

And while the spectre of identity theft is real, it is these fears within people that conservatives are hoping to stoke to a boiling point. People should worry about their own use of personal information on social networking sites rather than respond to the fearmongering of conservatives.

Of Christianity, The Healthcare Debate, And The Spectre Of Palin

In a discussion with an friend from college this weekend, the subject of the rank dishonesty and lie being distributed by the conservative Right and how their alleged christianity doesn't seem to dovetail with what they are offering up to the American public.

As a person that was brought up in an extremely conservative family, it was continually instilled within me that we should care for the less fortunate, that we should always speak truth to the world, and that we follow the bible without question.

My friend brought up several bible versus that many conservatives don't seem to remember from their days in Sunday School

Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me

Matthew 25:34-36

I will speak against those who cheat employees of their wages, who oppress widows and orphans, who deprive the foreigners living amongst you of justice, for these people do not fear me,” says the LORD Almighty.

Malachi 3:5

Vindicate the weak and fatherless; Do justice to the afflicted and destitute.

Psalm 82:3

And there are many more.

But this is all obvious. Conservativism and Christianity in inextricably linked in one form or another. And with those links come many instances of hypocrisy. I often find that those that continually espouse the tried and true Christian talking-point "What Would Jesus Do" are the last ones that should be asking that question. Much in the same way that buying the biggest flag and waving it higher and faster doesn't make you a better patriot, shouting loudest and thumping your grandmother's bible the hardest doesn't make you a better Christian.

So how are conservatives completely disobeying the book that they claim to hold dear to them? One has to but read the versus put forward and listen to the inflammatory rhetoric of the "tea-bagger" set to see.

One of the original keypoints of the anti-healthcare reform movement is that conservative Republicans took the standpoint of "why should I have to pay for your healthcare". These are the same people that claim to donate millions each year to charities, and will expound on their virtue and honor because of doing so. Perhaps it is from my particular point of view, but the charitable giving of conservative Republicans is more than likely directly related to the tax deductable figure attached to it.

The verse from Malachi has roots in immigration as well as conservatives viewpoints on "small-business" as well as healthcare. Considering the very real aspect that there may be some undocumented workers in America that will be able to benefit from healthcare reform, this would be a golden opportunity for the Obama administration to reform immigration as well. This, however, never sits well with conservative Repbulicans. And in terms of workers in a "small business" environment, one begins to wonder why conservative Republicans continually champion Tort reform rather than the rights of individual workers. Since this very tactic of right-wing ideology continually flies the face of not just "small business workers" but ALL workers - as it will completely erode your ability to have your day in court, should that time arise - to hear conservative Republicans talk about the needs of the working class in America makes one realize that this is just something that sounds good and is nothing more than a political stunt during a time when Republicans are out of power and hope for a big comeback.

In all, truly championing the weak, the afflicted, and the needy in America is not in the interest of conservative Repulicans. That is, unless your spending what little political capital you have left.

Enter Sarah Palin.

In her continued charge forward, usuing social networking media to get out her message ( can we even call it a message anymore? More like incoherent rambling. ) Palin doubles down on the "euthanasia" meme to include her son Trig

The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's "death panel" so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their "level of productivity in society," whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.

One can still hear the echoed chanting of the conservative Right when Democrats, liberals, and progressives talk about how their children can benefit from proper and affordable healthcare - stop using children as sheilds!!!

And the utter hypocrisy in Palin's statement is made even clearer as we remember that every other time she opens her prattle maw, it's about how unfair it is that people talk about her children, that the media examine Plain's family. The other times she speaks are when she uses her family to validate her own ignorance and promote her political ambitions.

As the veritable poster-girl of Christian conservativism, Palin often sets the high mark for completely disobeying the bible and her man Jesus.

It is becoming more and more apparent that conservative Republicans will do and say anything to prevent any form of meaningful healthcare reform from taking shape in this country. And what is paramount is that they use divisive, fear-laden, tactics that not only reveal their complete and utter failure as a party, but their ignorance to the religion that they cling to.