Karl Leuba: There was enough anti Obama hype in that debate to reach a near criminal level of HYPocricy.
Grung_e_Gene: Elect Me and Yadda, Yadda, Yadda Freedom Prosperity and Jobs!
Lawrence: Once Again, Ron Paul’s Views Would Promote Conservati sm and Even Authoritar ianism, Not Liberty http://t.c o/YZogW7Nn #p2 #p21 #ows
hardknoxfirst: Once Again, Ron Paul’s Views Would Promote Conservati sm and Even Authoritar ianism, Not Liberty http://t.c o/YZogW7Nn #p2 #p21 #ows
Ron Chusid: Which do you think most people want to see?
mike lovecraft: Good contrastin g stories but it’s still the pretty topless girls you show, not the paunchy old gents with beards and varicose veins̷ 0;
Leslie Parsley: I highly recommend male chastity belts for Santorum and his ilk. Even posted a photo of one on FB.
sharon: I think MItt should be straped to the top of a car and sent on that same ride. See how he feels about it. Animal cruelty at its best !!!
Ron Chusid: Primarily to preserve individual choice. Eating involves more than meeting nutritiona l standards. Giving extra food to make up for deficienci es solves the problem of children not...
John Sonntag: RT @ronchusid : Santorum Upset That Obama Agenda Not Based On Bible #p2 #p21 #topprog http://t.c o/fwMJeJZR
Gaius Sempronius Gracchus: Why surrender the principle? A lunch from home could certainly be inadequate . A school replacing it with something better would not be bad in such a case.
MemotoConservatives: Once Again, Ron Paul’s Views Would Promote Conservati sm and Even Authoritar ianism, Not Liberty http://t.c o/YZogW7Nn #p2 #p21 #ows
Mugwumpie: Santorum Upset That Obama Agenda Not Based On Bible #p2 #p21 #topprog http://t.c o/hwUTYlrH
Jim Z.: Ron, good observatio ns here. One has to wonder (a) how deeply this idiocy really runs in the American population , and (b) what is driving the regressive ness of our political dialogue.
A Real Marine: Santorum Upset That Obama Agenda Not Based On Bible #p2 #p21 #topprog http://t.c o/hwUTYlrH
Charles F: Santorum Upset That Obama Agenda Not Based On Bible #p2 #p21 #topprog http://t.c o/hwUTYlrH
John Sonntag: RT @ronchusid : Racist, Ant-Semiti c, Homophobic Commentato r Pat Buchanan Dumped By MSNBC #p2 #p21 #topprog http://t.c o/iogoTE1D
stan chaz: n this Holy War on Religion, of Religion, and by Religion, I SURRENDER! I’ve had ENOUGH! I’m a lover, not a fighter. Instead 230; I’m gonna start my OWN religion, and get in on the...
Ron Chusid: Most people who make the type of bigoted argument you made do so based upon religious grounds. The fact remains that you have no right use government to impose your prejudices upon...
The Republican debate last night was another amazing display of people who are out of touch with reality. When I have patients who are as out of touch with reality as the four guys on CNN last night, diagnoses are made and medications are prescribed. These guys sprout total nonsense which is rarely challenged. Wouldn’t it be great if debate moderators spoke out when candidates say things which are just totally off the wall?
Some of the misinformation spread has been reviewed by the media today, including Newt Gingrich’s false claim that Barack Obama voted for infanticide (although the media did seem more concerned with debunking his incorrect claim that the media never asked Obama about his vote than the fact that calling it support for infanticide is untrue). Romney’s recent attempts to rewrite the history of the auto bailout, repeated during the debate, have also been debunked. Unfortunately the media has not bothered to point out the vast differences between the fictitious president discussed during the debate and the real record of Barack Obama. That might be a matter better handed when one of these light weights faces the real Barack Obama in a debate.
While I noticed repeated false statements during the debates, I didn’t think to question one remark from Mitt Romney at the time, but on review of media reports I find yet another serious error on Romney’s part. He misquoted George Costanza according to Buzzfeed:
Romney, tonight at the Arizona debate (one he’s used before:
“What’s the George Costanza line? When they’re applauding, you sit down…”
The actual quote (from “Seinfeld” episode 172, “The Burning”):
JERRY: Showmanship, George. When you hit that high note, you say goodnight and walk off.
The line wasn’t even from George, but Jason Alexander had a great response on Twitter: Thrilled Gov. Romney enjoys my old character. I enjoyed the character he used 2 b 2. If he’d embrace that again, he’d b a great candidate.
If you want to evaluate the actual policies of each party as opposed to the rhetoric, just take everything which Republicans say and reverse it. National Security–which party blocked attempts to fight al Qaeda during the Clinton years and then ignored intelligence reports leading up to the 9/11 attack? In contrast, which party successfully stopped the planned Millennium terrorist plot, and which party killed bin Laden (along with other al Qaeda leaders)? Ronald Reagan might have talked about getting government off our backs, but it is the Republican Party which has been attempting to impose the beliefs of the religious right on the country while Democrats (not entirely consistently) have defended civil liberties. Republicans promote a revisionist view of the Constitution which exists only in their heads, ignoring key elements such as the creation of a secular government to protect freedom of religion for all, while Democrats support the Constitution as intended by its framers. Republicans support tax cuts–but only for the very wealthy, while Democrats have repeatedly pushed for tax cuts for the middle class. Want to make lots of money–then definitely vote Democratic.
There have been many analyses over the years as to how the economy and stock market have done over the years. As I’ve noted in the past, the economy has done much better under Democrats. Bloomberg has repeated the analysis, again showing that the stock market does better under Democrats:
While Republicans promote themselves as the friendliest party for Wall Street, stock investors do better when Democrats occupy the White House. From a dollars- and-cents standpoint, it’s not even close.
The BGOV Barometer shows that, over the five decades since John F. Kennedy was inaugurated, $1,000 invested in a hypothetical fund that tracks the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (SPX) only when Democrats are in the White House would have been worth $10,920 at the close of trading yesterday.
That’s more than nine times the dollar return an investor would have realized from following a similar strategy during Republican administrations. A $1,000 stake invested in a fund that followed the S&P 500 under Republican presidents, starting with Richard Nixon, would have grown to $2,087 on the day George W. Bush left office.
These differences are likely to be even greater in the future with Republicans increasingly creating huge deficits while in office while hindering attempts at economic recovery for political gain while in the opposition.
There are other variables in play, primarily religious views, but in general the Democrats have become the party of the more educated, affluent, upper middle class voters. Demographically Obama receives his greatest degree of support from those making $100.000 to $250,000. Wealthier voters tend to be easily conned into voting Republican because of a lower marginal tax rate, even if the higher amount paid in taxes (often very small unless extremely wealthy) would be offset by higher business and investment income under Democrats. Less educated voters tend to be more easily conned by the entire Republican line.
The quote is taken out of context in the title from an interview with Donald Hayes, owner of Chastity Belts USA:
VF Daily: Have you noticed an uptick in sales given the recent debate about contraception?
Donald Hayes, owner, Chastity Belts USA: We’ve had a bit of a boost in sales, but that’s typical this time of year, at tax time. I think [tax refunds] drive sales of any kind of non-essential items. People have some extra money, they say, Okay, I’ll buy some toys.
From this, it sounds that the boost in sales has nothing to do with Rick Santorum.
The article does provide information which I bet many were not aware of regarding the current market for chastity belts:
A quick, eye-opening search revealed that Amazon offers a couple dozen different models in its Health & Personal Care store, while eBay offers more than 200. It should be noted that many are models for men, and that the design and packaging of many belts made for men and women alike imply they are used for role-playing and bondage activities rather than strictly for ensuring continence. (Certainly a “ chastity belt G-string thong” sends a mixed message.) But many other chastity-belt models look as if they will do the old trick.
David Letterman: Top Ten Questions on the Application to Become a Mitt Romney Look-Alike
10. Do you look like Mitt Romney?
9. Does Mitt Romney look like you?
8. True or False: You look like Mitt Romney
7. Do you not look like someone who doesn’t look like Mitt Romney?
6. If you wore a sombrero, would you look like Mitt Romney wearing a sombrero?
5. What do you feel is your main qualification, other than a strong resemblance to Mitt Romney?
4. During sex, does your wife ever yell out “Mitt Romney!”?
3. Do you know any fat, doughy guys who look like Newt Gingrich?
2. Can you smile while driving with a dog strapped to the roof of your car?
1. Do you mind being unemployed after November?
Filming is starting this week for the upcoming season of Doctor Who and it is well known that Amy Pond will be leaving some time in the next season. In previous stories on her planned departure, it was often unclear as to whether this was Karen Gillan or Steven Moffat’s idea. In an interview with IGN TV, Karen described it as her idea:
IGN TV: How did you come to the decision that this coming season of Doctor Who would be your last?
Karen Gillan: Actually, I called Steven Moffat and arranged the dinner and then basically told him roughly when I wanted to go. He told me where the story was at and where it was going and then we kind of together came up with it. So it was really pleasant, actually. We had a lovely dinner and just kind of discussed what we both want and what’s going to happen and then came to the decision. That was ages ago, so I’ve known for ages!
IGN: Why did you think it was getting to be the right time?
Gillan: I wanted to go on a high. Also, Steven Moffat comes up with endless, amazing ideas anyway, but I wanted to make sure that I went on a high when the character was at her prime. There’s just something quite nice and appealing about that to me. I don’t know… It just felt right! I like to go on instinct.
IGN: You can’t say how many more episodes you’ll be in…
Gillan: I’m not allowed to say! But I know they’re going to be damn good. It’s so exciting.
IGN: So Steven’s told you how she’s going to leave?
Gillan: I think it’s the best ever. I can’t say anything, but oh god, I’m dying to say something!
IGN: Are there certain things you’d like to see happen, as far as closure for her?
Gillan: I want to see her go with everything that she wants, because initially, when we met her, she was just seeking what she wants, you know what I mean? And she was kind of in this lost, transitional period, where she didn’t have a stable life. So I just want to see her get what she wants.
IGN: We’ve seen some Doctor Who companions in the past leave and then make guest appearances. Would you be up for that if the door was open?
Gillan: I really, really want to have a final exit and then be able to look back on that as a final exit. I don’t know… I just don’t want to take away from that exit by making cameos in the future. I’d quite like it to be final and for people just to remember it fondly.
IGN: Are you hoping for a happy ending for her and Rory?
Gillan: I don’t even know what I’m hoping for. I just know that whatever I hope for, I read it and it’s always better!
More information is out regarding the planned comic crossover between Star Trek and Doctor Who. The series will be called Assimilation, featuring the Borg and the Cybermen.
Catherine Tate (Donna Noble) returned to The Office last week.
Earlier in the week I posted a second annual set of Doctor Who Valentine’s Day cards. This resulted in a jump in traffic from Google searches which generally is only seen with pictures of nude or scantily clad actresses. (A old picture of Kaley Cuoco of The Big Bang Theory from Maxim has been popular lately.)
Last year Jonny Lee Miller and Benedict Cumberbatch alternated in the the lead role in a West End production of Frankenstein. Now they are going to play the same role as Sherlock Holmes. Cumberbatch has stared for two seasons (with a third planned) in Steven Moffat’s updated version of Sherlock for the BBC. Miller has been signed to star in Elementary, a present-day version of the Sherlock Holmes stories for CBS. The similarity in ideas could lead to legal action:
Elementary has already been threatened with legal action by the producers of the BBC’s Sherlock, amid concerns that its modern-day scenario appears to borrow elements from the hugely-successful series starring Cumberbatch.
Sherlock producer Sue Vertue hinted that CBS are now sniffing around her team for casting clues. She told The Independent: “Johnny is a very fine actor, who I saw recently in the theatre when he and Benedict played alternating roles in Frankenstein. Let’s hope their pilot script has stayed further away from our Sherlock than their casting choice.”
As I’ve said before, my guess is that they have nothing to worry about. It is very doubtful that a weekly American network television series could compete with Sherlock in terms of quality. If the CBS show is a success, it very well might generate more buzz, encouraging people to watch the far superior BBC version which they stole the idea from.
The use of Rock, Papers, Scissors, Lizard, Spock to settle disagreements returned to The Big Ban Theory this week. Video above, which includes additional Star Trek references. The original scene from 2009, along with the rules and a t-shirt, can be seen here.
Ever since Homeland began, I wondered where the series would go if the plot lines from the first season were resolved and the show went on to a second season. Some aspects were left open in the first season finale, and casting news provides a further clue. Navid Negahban, who played the terrorist leader Abu Nazir, will be a series regular. The role of Carrie’s snoop Virgil, played by David Marciano, has also been upgraded to a regular role. Claire Danes won a Golden Globe for Best Actress in a TV Drama for her role as Carrie Matheson.
In a post yesterday I contrasted the false conservative narrative that liberals support a big government to impose their views upon others with the actual fact that a large segment of the conservative movement actually does see the role of government as imposing their religious views on the country. Rick Santorum repeatedly demonstrates this, doing so again yesterday in attacking Obama for having an agenda which is not “based on Bible.”
Newt Gingrich has made similar arguments with his attacks on Obama as a “secular socialist.” (Besides being wrong in seeing secular as undesirable, he is wrong in calling Obama a socialist. Gingrich is using the new conservative definition of socialism as supporting a few percentage point increase in the marginal tax rate of multimillionaires and lower tax rates on the middle class, which has nothing to do with any conventional definition of the term.) Ron Paul has also shown a preference for theocracy, while Mitt Romney is willing to take multiple positions on the issue.
Contrast Santorum and Gingrich with a previous Catholic candidate for president, John F. Kennedy:
I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish, where no public official either requests or accept instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source; where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials, and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.
John Kennedy and Barack Obama are both following in the tradition of the Founding Fathers who understood the importance of creating a secular republic with separation of church and state. Nobody should be able to use the powers of government to impose their religious views upon others.
The modern American conservative movement is an unique example of authoritarianism based upon propaganda and misinformation coming from sources which, while technically outside of the government, are closely aligned with the Republican Party. They attempt to achieve their control by promoting an alternative reality in which liberals, who actually are promoting an increase in liberty, are falsely portrayed as attempting to impose a wide variety of controls on the population while ignoring the real restrictions on liberty coming from the right wing. We saw an example of this last week in a story about a lunch room in North Carolina which does provide some insight into how the right wing operates.
A story from The Carolina Journal (a right wing site which promotes conservative false narratives about liberals) reported a story last week claiming that a child had her lunch from home replaced because it didn’t meet government nutritional standards. Conservatives, who have no concept of fact checking, not only reported this as fact but also added unsubstantiated claims that this was a policy promoted by Democrats. Never mind that liberal sites were also arguing that the action was wrong if the story reported was true.
Initially this appeared at worst to be a case of a worker in a school misinterpreting North Carolina law, but the actual facts turned out to be quite different from those reported. There was certainly no federal agent imposing Democratic policies as many conservative blogs and commentators were claiming. Over the course of the week the actual facts came out and were reported by blogs which didn’t stick mindlessly to the conservative narrative, such as The League of Ordinary Gentlemen. Among the key facts that came out was that this was a voluntary program which parents must make a decision to opt-into. The program is to provide food to children who do not receive meals from home with sufficient nutritional value by giving additional food–not taking away the food they brought in. In this case, a worker at the school noticed the child did not have any dairy products and advised her to go back through the line and receive a free milk. Hardly tyranny from Big Brother as conservatives described the case.
It appears there were misunderstandings between the pre-school student, a school employee, and later the student’s mother. This led to some misunderstandings in the original story, and most likely considerable distortions from conservative sites. Reading conservative accounts, it is clear that they had no interest in finding the truth but instead were interested in finding ways to portray Democrats as imposing their rules upon innocent pre-school children. In some cases the distortion was probably intentional. In other cases, conservatives believed what they read and repeated this as it reinforced their view of Democrats. Of course this story had nothing to do with Democrats, and it was reinforcing not an accurate view but a view they held due to multiple other episodes of misinformation.
Conservatives have been misled to believe that liberals support big government to impose their will upon them. In reality the situation is reversed. Speaking simply of big government is misleading as, if we are to look at size alone, government is primarily the military, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. Of course conservatives typically ignore the parts of government they support, such as the military, when complaining about big government. Going to war in Iraq based upon lies was the largest expansion of big government in quite a while. We see the same phenomenon when members of the Tea Party carry signs demanding that government keeps its hands off their Medicare. Even for more consistent conservatives who seek to eliminate or greatly reduce Medicare and Social Security, taking away someone’s Medicare might lead to smaller government, but it won’t make them more free.
What really matters is not the total size of government, which will vary little regardless of whether Democrats or Republicans are in office, but how intrusive government is in the lives of individuals. Once again, conservatives ignore the policies they support. It is conservatives who repeatedly have supported the use of government to impose their desires upon others, frequently as part of imposing the agenda of the religious right. This includes restrictions on reproductive rights, along with government intervening in personal end of life decisions in the Terry Schiavo case. Not only do conservatives fail to see this as the real problems of big government imposing its will on individuals, many actually misunderstand freedom to mean the freedom to spread their religious beliefs, and impose them upon others.
Pat Buchanan thinks he was forced out of MSNBC by the Jews, Gays, and other conspirators working in the dark. Let him think that. I find a little justice in knowing that Pat Buchanan will spend the rest of his life thinking that the Jews got him. That’s what he gets for spending so many years defending Nazi war criminals, and Hitler himself. Buchanan’s racism and anti-Semitism are well known. He doesn’t even seem to understand why people might object when he goes on the radio and claims homosexual acts are “unnatural and immoral.”He doesn’t seem to believe that he is homophobic, as he doesn’t understand that the views he has expressed for years are racist and anti-Semitic.
Pat then goes on to blame loudmouthed Obama supporters, homosexuals, Jews, and I don’t know, maybe werewolves. Yeah, let’s say werewolves.
Buchanan’s recent book may have been MSNBC’s excuse for finally taking him off the air for good, but it seems mostly to be a “final straw” sort of thing. Buchanan has been mourning the downfall of white America for a considerable time now, so this latest book was hardly new ground for him. He has been accused of anti-Semitism even by such conservative stalwarts as William F. Buckley, and got in hot water a few years ago for a bizarre column proposing that Hitler was misunderstood. No, his pissy statement sells himself rather short on the number of ridiculously bigoted things that would regularly come from his mouth. No matter what he said on air or off, though, the network would always prop him up in front of the television cameras.
“Donald Trump is criticizing the Scottish government for trying to build a wind farm near his golf resort. That makes sense — I mean, if you look at Trump’s hair, wind is clearly his worst enemy.” –Jimmy Fallon
Lisa Chan, the actress who appeared in Pete Hoekstra’s racist Superbowl ad, has apologized for her role on Facebook:
“I am deeply sorry for any pain that the character I portrayed brought to my communities. As a recent college grad who has spent time working to improve communities and empower those without a voice, this role is not in any way representative of who I am. It was absolutely a mistake on my part and one that, over time, I hope can be forgiven. I feel horrible about my participation and I am determined to resolve my actions.”Lisa Chan
–
CEO/ President, The Strive
Vice President, Sparxo Inc.
Check out the weather in Hell and be on the look out for flying pigs. Jennifer Rubin has a column I agree with. She points out that Rick Santorum is going to have a tough time getting votes with his anti-contraception views. She also writes, “The impression that Santorum finds the prevalent practice of birth control ‘harmful to women’ is, frankly, mind-numbing.”
Santorum’s archaic views make it difficult to determine which way the Republican nomination battle is going. Republicans are still looking for a non-Romney, but with all the people in the world who are not named Romney, so far they have been stuck with losers named Cain, Bachmann, Perry, and now Santorum. Romney remains unable to convince conservatives that he is one of them, having held both liberal and conservative views on so many issues over the years. I’m happily married, have a family, and run a business. Applying Mitt Romney’s argument, this makes me a conservative who other conservatives should support for the GOP nomination. No wonder he is having trouble sealing the deal.
At the moment Santorum looks strong in the polls, leading nationally and leading Romney in Michigan, where a loss for Romney could be devastating. Around Michigan the talk is that Romney would make an excellent candidate, if only it was George and not his son. Apparently George H. W. Bush was not the only Republican who wound up with an idiot son. There is even speculation that Romney could have to self-finance his campaign if his big donors give up on him as he has not been able to get the large numbers of small donors who have kept other campaigns going.
So far the Republicans have had eleven front-runners as they go through the list of potential not-Romneys. Each time Romney remained on top as information on each opponent turned out to be so bad that even conservative Republicans couldn’t stomach them. Newt Gingrich has now become the most dis-liked politician in America according to two polls. We knew that there was no way that even the Republicans would nominate Herman Cain, Donald Trump, or Michele Bachmann. Will Rick Santorum also suffer the same fate, or will social conservatives prevail and make him the GOP candidate? With Rick Santorum surging (and in the case of Rick Santorum, no double entendre is intended with surging), this must mean that conservative “small government” means government small enough to fit through the key hole into your bedroom.
Santorum’s views on contraception would be opposed by strong majorities in a general election, and even most Republicans don’t agree with Santorum. Virtually all women (more than 99%) aged 15–44 who have ever had sexual intercourse have used at least one contraceptive method. Overall, 62% of the 62 million women aged 15–44 are currently using a method according to information from the Guttmacher Institute. These numbers don’t trail by very much even among Catholics. A Pew Research Center survey found that 85 percent of the country believes that contraception is either “not a moral issue” or “morally acceptable.” Eight percent agree with Santorum in viewing contraception as “morally wrong.”
The contraception issue is not only hurting Santorum. It is a wedge issue that can hurt the entire Republican Party. Greg Sargent reviewed some of the pertinent numbers from a New York Times/CBS News poll on whether people support Obama’s policy on mandating contraception. The poll shows that 66 percent are in support and only 26 percent oppose it. He then reviewed a partisan breakdown of answers:
* Even Republicans support this policy, 50-44.
* Independents support it by 64-26.
* Moderates support it by 68-22.
* Women support it by 72-20.
* Catholics support it by 67-25.
* And even Catholics who attend church every week or almost every week support it by 48-43
We all know that this debate is really over one’s view on contraception, despite Republican efforts to disguise this as an issue over requiring funding by religious institutions. Sargent also looked at the question, “what about for religiously affiliated employers, such as a hospital or university — do you support or oppose a recent federal requirement that their health insurance plans cover the full cost of birth control for their female employees?” The response still was not helpful for the Republicans: “Registered voters say Yes, 61-31; independents say Yes, 59-31; moderates say Yes, 64-29; and even 41 percent of Republicans say Yes, with 53 percent opposed.”
“Santorum and Romney, they don’t like condoms because sex should all be about making babies. And Newt Gingrich doesn’t like them because
they’re hard for a fat guy to put on in a car.” –Bill Maher
