Republican Party

NeoCon Heads Are Exploding

Who recently said:

“I want Hillary to win. Even though I admire two of the current potential Republican nominees, I have no interest in seeing either of them lead this country.”

If you guess Nancy Reagan, you win! Hahahahaha. What does this mean for those who worship at the altar of Saint Ronnie? Oh, I hope this gets lots of press coverage. Please, let’s make it so.

The whole quote from The National Report:

Last week, during a promotional press conference for The History Channel’s upcoming series “First Ladies in Their Own Words,” series’ host Ron Reagan shared clips of his interviews with all living former First Ladies of the United States. In a brief video clip with his mother Nancy Reagan, she offered her endorsement of Hillary Clinton as President saying, “The time for a woman to serve as our President has come – really, now is the time – and I think the idea of having a former First Lady as the leader of the free world is really quite a marvelous notion. I want Hillary to win. Even though I admire two of the current potential Republican nominees, I have no interest in seeing either of them lead this country.”

But wait — it gets even better!

Asked about his mother’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton, [Ron] Reagan thought it showed how little America actually knew about the woman behind the Republican icon. “She wants people to know that the First Ladies are tight. They get together once a year to support each other. In fact, Hillary had no interest in running until both Laura and Barbara Bush cornered her at their get-together in May 2013 and talked her into at least thinking about it! So, in a sense, if Mrs. Clinton does run and win, you can blame the Bush family.”

Have a great weekend, JelloHeads!

Advertisements

There’s Too Much To Write About, People!

When I decided to start writing at this blog again I was a little worried that I would be able to find enough topics to write about. What was I thinking?! Rand Paul is running for President, guys! And so is Ted Cruz! The material will be endless! I mean, just look at some of the information already out there:

From ThinkProgress:

To Rand Paul, Abortion Access for Rape Victims Isn’t Worth Talking About

And the man mansplains how to interview here (silly woman!):

And Ted Cruz, well, just go to http://www.tedcruz.com/ to see how his well-oiled political machine is making out these days.

Jeb Bush? Do you really want someone running the country who is unable to correctly fill out a voter registration form?

No, it’s going to be a very interesting run up to the Presidential election in 2016. The Republican side has a dozen candidates (or more) whose beliefs are all over the place. The Democrats seem to only have Hillary Clinton, but personally I think she would be better off if there was a challenger.  The worst thing for her is to be pegged as “the anointed one” from the Democratic party (although given the way she was treated by many in the Dem party in 2008 that title is a little hard to swallow).

Yes, there will be lots to write about leading up to November 2016. And I haven’t even started on telling you about my City Councilman who has only shown up for 55% of the votes!

Gun fight at the not OK corral

I went to visit my 98-year old aunt yesterday at the retirement home where she lives in West Virginia. And there on the front door of the building was a sign on the door that read “No guns allowed.”  Which struck me as (A) very good, and (B) a ridiculous thing to have to tell people. And this is why I am for gun control: If you have to tell the public not to bring their guns into a retirement home, then clearly we do not feel the public is responsible enough to know this on their own. I am sorry if you are reading this and you feel you are a responsible gun owner. I know, it’s complicated. I’ve never held a gun, obviously never shot one, and have never ever felt the need to do either act.

Am I really the exception in America?

I get that people like or need to hunt. I can kind of understand the desire to have a gun for that purpose. As a carnivore who does not kill my own food, it would be dishonest for me to judge hunters. (Although I mean just hunters for food — people who shoot lions and tigers and rhinos have a special circle in hell.) But for all the people who think they need a gun for protection, and who then use that to justify bigger and bigger toys — I have no patience for you. Sorry. Maybe I’m lucky — I’ve never known anyone who has been the victim of a gun crime at the hand of another. On the other hand, I have known several people who took their own lives with a gun.

Am I the exception in America?

Today’s Washington Post carries an article on where each of the potential Republican candidates for President stands on gun control, and it’s pretty alarming. (And yes, they should do the same for the potential Democratic candidates: and Hillary Clinton is mentioned in the article.) For example:

And in the Senate, Rubio, Graham, Cruz and Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.) all helped torpedo Senate bills that would have expanded background checks on gun sales and limited the size of ammunition magazines. The measures had been proposed in the wake of the 2012 massacre in Newtown, Conn.

Because god knows it will take more than a bunch of little kids being massacred before we make any meaningful changes to the way guns and ammunition is available to the average citizen in this country.

I know that people feel strongly about this issue. I’ve told you where I stand. If you don’t understand why, take a look at the website or Facebook page for the group “Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America.” It’s not about control, it’s about bringing some sense back into this idea: “Pro-gun activists are worried about losing their guns, and moms are worried about losing their children. You tell me who’s going to win.”

It’s an uphill battle, but my money’s on the moms.

Am I the exception?

Well THIS is embarrassing

Has it really been more than two months since I’ve posted anything here?  Um, I’m sorry? There’s been kind of a lot going on around here, most of it good, some a little sad, some of it stressful, but in short, I have been very, very busy. Also, I was without a laptop for a little while, and that was more limiting on my writing than I like to admit.

Reader’s Digest version:  new job (for both me and Unnamed Partner), new (used) car, that’s the good. The sad included losing Isaac, our 19-year old cat who lived a good long life and brought much joy to our lives. The stressful includes the question of whether my new job was a good idea after all, but time will tell, and I’m embracing the “Quilt Theory” of life right now:  this is merely one patch in the big quilt of life.

Besides which, when I read the news each day I cannot help but think that any troubles  I have are a pittance compared to others here and around the world. When I started writing this blog several years ago, I still felt the youthful energy of outrage at the wrongs of the world, as well as the feeling that things would get better. The whole Hillary thing really took the air out of those sails. Taylor Marsh has written a book called The Hillary Effect, of which I have read excerpts, and I’m looking foward to digging into it completely.  Seeing Hillary Clinton taken down in the public circus that was the 2008 primary season was difficult and demoralizing for many of us.  I hope this book will explain that to many of my friends and acquaintances who still like to tease “get over it already!”

I’ve been a political junky my entire life.  Next year we will be electing the President, and this is the first time  I can recall being so disinterested in the process. When I was in the sixth grade we held a mock election, and I rabidly campaigned for George McGovern. My mom took me down to the local campaign headquarters, where they gladly handed me posters, buttons, and bumper stickers. It’s taken 40 years, but that optimistic little girl who thought the American democratic system worked for the average person, and that the average person could indeed effect change, well, she’s MIA.

I am trying, really trying to get behind Barack Obama’s re-election, if nothing else because the cast of characters over on the Republican side would be comical if they weren’t downright scary. The idea of any of them (save, perhaps, Huntsman, who of course has no shot at the nomination) running this country should be enough to get me out in the streets drumming up votes for Obama.  But the little girl in me still wants to work “for” something, not “against” someone. Or in this case, against a team of bumbling, lightweight, neocon, hypocrites.

So, yes. Apparently I am back to my rambling posts here, but I hope you’ll give me another chance. Together, we’ll see what the future brings. I have a feeling we should put our seat belts on. It is indeed going to be a bumpy ride.

Are you with me?

I’m still debating what to title this post. So far I’ve considered “Oh, hell to the no!”  “WWHD?” and “Bend over, America!”  See, reading the details of the midnight budget agreement between the Obama Administration and the Republican House Leader has me at times speechless, and at times ranting.

The media has framed this as an epic event, as though we were watching the Olympics of politics. Details of the budget? We don’t need no stinking’ details! Who won? That’s all the media wants to talk about. Look at the words used in headlines across the country: “gamesmanship,” “power play,” “who won, who lost.”  I’d be fine with that last one if the article in fact spoke of which Americans won and lost, rather than which politicians won and lost. This is not a game. This is the reality of people’s lives, people who are struggling to get by despite working hard and living honestly. How can that be? I mean, it was long ago established in this country that to prosper as a nation we must support those among us who are the most vulnerable: the children, the impoverished, the elderly.  From the earliest days in our nation’s history, when these groups were supported by the states, to the landmark legislation of the 1930’s when the federal government became involved, it has always been an acknowledged fact by the majority that this support is a function of government. Yet those very programs are under attack by right-wing ideologues and President Obama is bargaining them away for political gain.

This “game” that occurred over the weekend took some important policies with very serious ramifications and made them a bargaining chip between three wealthy men. The fact that all three weren’t white is an odd advancement of our society. Apparently, however, power is color-blind. And power, as we know, corrupts. Would things be different if Hillary Clinton were President? Or if Nancy Pelosi was Speaker of the House? Or both were in those positions? Who knows; certainly the thirst for power is not limited to men — women can fall prey to it as well.

But I’m a lifelong Democrat who’s mad as hell and I’m not gonna take it anymore. I didn’t campaign for Obama in the primaries because I thought he was too inexperienced and too much of a blank slate. I campaigned for Hillary Clinton because although I didn’t agree with all of her polices, I felt I knew where she stood based on her public record. I was told by others that because she didn’t have more experience in office than did Mr Obama, her public record didn’t count. I maintain today that we knew where she stood. Obama’s public record consisted only of his brief time in the Senate and his many campaign speeches. Hardly text to depend on. And now we see where he stands.

President Obama has sold out the middle class and the Democrats who elected him. Yeah, I said it. You can argue that I strengthen the Republicans who might run in 2012 when I speak this way, and I say, in the words of Cee Lo, “F*** You!”  He took my money, he took my vote, and he sold me down the river in order  win in a pissing contest with other rich, entitled men.

Let’s get one thing straight: None of these politicians are serious about reducing the deficit. If they were, they would certainly look to end the Bush-era tax cuts for the rich last December when they were set to expire. Instead, Obama and his Wall Street pals decided to extend them, instead putting the burden of righting this wayward ship that is our economy onto the shoulders of the weakest of Americans. As Jeffrey Sachs wrote:

In the end, we have gotten from President Obama what we feared from Senator McCain: an expanded war in Afghanistan, an extension of the Bush-era tax cuts, sharp cuts in spending for communities and programs for the poor, a continuation of Guantanamo and military tribunals, unchecked bankers’ pay and bonuses, and enough loopholes to reduce corporate taxes to less than 2 percent of GDP this year, despite a boom in corporate profits.

So, yeah, I said it. And he said it. And you need to say it too.  President Obama has become a tool and the threat of a Republican winning the presidential election in 2012 because I utter these words holds no power over me. In my opinion, we’ve already got one. When the actual details of this budget agreement come out this week, all Americans who voted for President Obama need to write to him, call their Senators and Representative, and respond to every fundraising request with the same message: Oh, hell to the no!

“And then I said, ‘Of course we won’t play politics with healthcare, Mr President'”

I heard an NPR interview with Rep. John Boehner recently, where he said basically, “Sure we want bipartisanship. We will meet and talk with the President and if the compromise tilts our way, we will compromise.

D’oh! Because coming out on top is totally the way to compromise!

The excellent group over at Sunlight Foundation has a live stream of the Summit, with a running tally of the speaker’s top donors. Not surprising that most of the Republicans top donors are insurance groups and medical professionals ….

Who is Funding the “Anti- Health Care Reform” Campaign?

Most of the mainstream media seems to be merely amused by the flaming rhetoric being spewed by those who are determined to defeat the efforts to reform our broken health care system. Outright lies are being promoted by high-profile Republican politicians, pundits, and leaders — and no one is calling them on it. People are waving swastikas and images of Obama-as-Hitler, and the press makes no mention of it? The best explanation of who is behind this Republican effort to derail change by scaring senior citizens and others is given by (of course) Rachel Maddow.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

I also recommend a visit over to the blog BAGNewsNotes, specifically the post on media coverage of the people who are disrupting the town hall discussion about health care reform, Wingers “Speaking Out”.

Judge Sotomayor and the Boys in the Bubble

white_boys_in_the_SenateI’ll be honest, I still have some concerns about Sonia Sotomayor, the nominee for Supreme Court Justice. Although the right-wingers would have you believe she’s a leftist-liberal-progressive-activist — eh, I’m no so sure about that. Her stands on reproductive choice and on separation of church and state leaves a little to be desired. But of course, her actual opinions on such things have received very little air time, because all we’re subjected to is this tripe from the Republicans:

Buchanan: Sotomayor Must Have Been An ‘Affirmative Action’ Nominee Since No White Men Were Finalists

Gingrich Calls On Sotomayor To Withdraw Because She’s A ‘Latina Woman Racist’

And my personal fave:

Inhofe worries that Sotomayor may allow ‘undue influence from her own personal race, gender.’

That last one is so revealing as the voice of white man’s privilege. (Here come the shrieks, but hold on — I have a point here.) I have lived a life of privilege, too. I am a white middle class woman. I have had advantages in my life in the schools I attended, neighborhoods where I grew up; opportunities were practically handed to me.

Not everyone in America is that lucky.

But whatever your life experiences may be, they form who you are and what you believe. Sen. Imhofe did not grow up in a bubble, free from the influences around him. His road in life — like mine, I would hazzard a guess — was pretty fortunate. But he is not genderless. He is not without a race.  His opinions, however screwed up they may be, are the result of his experiences. But like so many powerful white men, he is unable to see that he has had advantages in life because of his race and his gender. He is unable to empathize the experience of a large portion of this country’s citizens.

Lest anyone think electing a President of color has solved the issues of sexism and racism in America, think again.

UPDATE: Christy Hardin Smith has an excellent analysis on these Republican attacks on Sotomayor, along with commentary from Rachel Maddow. Check it out here: SCOTUS: Smear and Loathing in the GOP.

image credit: Time magazine

Michael Steele: When I say “G-O”, you say “P”!

steelead_puppiesJust when I was feeling all mopey (see post below), along comes Michael Steele, the new head of the Republican National Committee, with an interview in the Washington Times that totally makes me laugh. And laughter is …. well, you know.

So what did Michael Steele — the most un-hip person of any color, race, gender or nationality — say that was so funny? Oh, the interview is full of priceless lines. In talking about the need for outreach, Steels said:

“We want to convey that the modern-day GOP looks like the conservative party that stands on principles. But we want to apply them to urban-surburban hip-hop settings.”

And how inclusive will this “new” GOP be?

“we need to uptick our image with everyone, including one-armed midgets.”

I guess at the 2012 Republican Convention, we will see an increase from the 12 or so minorities in attendance, plus some one-armed midgets.

He’s astute, this Steele:

“Where we have fallen down in delivering a message is in having something to say….”

And he’s the only Republican who seems to be willing to admit to their current state:

“We missed the mark in the past, which is why we are in the crapper now ….”

They may be in the crapper, but Steele’s plan for a new GOP  will blow the Democrats’ minds. Worthy of Dr. Evil, he says:

“I don’t do ‘cutting-edge.’  That’s what Democrats are doing. We’re going beyond cutting-edge.”

Take that, Democrats!  Cutting-edge, plus infinity!

I think we are going to start following the antics of the RNC Chairman more regularly here. We have a special “place” in our hearts for him. You see, when he ran for the US Senate (and lost, obviously), he ran commercials that said we should vote for him because “Michael Steele does not hate puppies.”  Apparently, we are a state of puppy haters, because we elected Ben Cardin  instead. But now we have that fun picture of Michael Steele and his bling Boston terrier that we can keep posting.