If we hired like we vote...

Dear GOP: Watch Your AstroTurf, We're On To You

Dear GOP: Watch Your AstroTurf, We're On To You

By Kase Wickman

Dear Republicans: It's awesome that you've caught up to this whole newfangled Internet craze, but what's with the fixation on that late-60s invention that we all know and have skinned our knees on? That's right: AstroTurf. AstroTurfing is the plastic sensation that's sweeping the GOP nation, and, trust us, it's getting pretty old, not to mention transparent.

Dissent is essential to democracy, and freedom of speech and the right to assemble are vital not reserved for one party or the other. The problem is this: you're doing it wrong.

How to do it right: A few guys clustered in New England got their acts together and rallied their neighbors for a cause they believed in. They made a country. They made change. It was organic. It was natural. It was grassroots.

No, no, don't run, we know Obama said that word a lot when he was campaigning. Don't get scared. We're not talking about him, we're talking about the Sons of Liberty. They even had strong opinions about taxes! Republicans, don't shy away! Stay with us! Calling yourselves teabaggers is a good first step for you.

We understand that you want attention. We understand that you need to stay in the limelight and look like the do-stuff guys if you want to take back any seats in 2010. The problem, however, is that you are the pay-to-do-stuff guys right now. Actually, you're just paying. You're not actually doing anything. It's really a dirty business, this contrived fake protest thing.

While Democrats have been arguing amongst themselves about health care reform, a concept the GOP appears to have completely abandoned except to remind us not to kill babies or grandmas, you've been sending fake letters opposing the climate change bill to members of Congress ("you" here being lobbyists hired by the big-money coal industry). You're ("you" is oil companies and oil industry lobbyists here, keep up!) giving employees the afternoon off and busing them out to protests, protests of the bill that would mean a cleaner environment but maybe -- oh no! -- a smaller bonus for them. You're (this one's just the general "you" of the GOP, psych!!) taking a counter-conference of right wing bloggers and calling it a protest, when it is, in fact, a petty group of me-too mommy bloggers trying to get a slice of the hipster lefty political bloggers' media coverage.

In other words, you're trying to throw the game by throwing money. Remember the 1919 Chicago White Sox? It's sort of like that, in that you're eventually going to lose. In your case, probably not while wearing stirrups.

See, the problem with AstroTurfing is that it buys media coverage, but not public opinion. The people who are showing up to your fake protests have some kind of financial stake in being there, whether it's because they work for Big Oil and were bused there, or if it's because they are paid lobbyists, hired guns, and it's their job to be there. No one new is being won over by a crazy waving a sign and saying that they're going to forcibly change the climate of the House.

And, just like public opinion, media coverage does not take the place of actual legislation. Climate change is the focus of the current AstroTurfing craze (ironic, right? Since AstroTurf is fake grass?), and while the House vote was close, the bill still passed. It appears to be set to pass in the Senate as well. Anyone who takes more than a cursory look at Congress news and these so-called protests can see: climate change is where the money is, not the lawmaking. Congress is wrapped up in the health care debate, why not muck that up? That's right, because the people paying you to read their scripts are more interested in the evergreen (see what we did there?) issue of the earth and its natural resources, an issue that will long outlast our bodies and their health.

So, congratulations: A reporter covered your fake protest. Too bad they, like the rest of us, have figured out by now just how synthetic and plastic it really is, and you can't pay them off to say otherwise. Sooner or later, you'll start to understand that the majority of us vote with our heart, not with our wallets. Oh, and that when you're running on AstroTurf, it hurts really, really bad when you fall.

Tales from the Lobotomy Ward: The Stupidest Republican Talking Point I've Heard In a Long Time

Yep, another non-podcast related blog post. I'm getting better at this blogging thing. ;-)
Tales from the Lobotomy Ward: The Stupidest Republican Talking Point I've Heard In a Long Time

by: David Sirota

Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 10:00

I happened to have tuned into Hardball two nights ago. This is a very rare experience for me (I was really waiting to see Olbermann's show), as I avoid Hardball like the plague, realizing a few years ago that every minute I am forced to look at Chris Matthews and his typically braindead guests is a minute I become more despondent about the apocalyptic state of journalism, politics, America and, really, the universe. This episode was no exception.

For the three minutes I tuned in, I caught right-wing lobotomy case Michael Smerconish stumbling through the latest Republican talking point against universal health care. Here's what he said:

[Voters] are very nervous about what's going to come out of this debate concerning national health care. And, Chris, if I have heard once in the last couple of days, I have heard it 50 times, if they can't get cash for clunkers straight, what in the world are they going to do with my national health insurance?

Um...let me get this straight: This right-wing lobotomy case is appearing on television insisting Americans don't want a health care system that's like the cash for clunkers program - a program that has been so wildly successful and popular that the public is demanding it be expanded. Really? I mean...really?

Look, it's arguably a smart conservative tactic to try to liken a universal health care program to the DMV - it's dishonest, of course, but at least that tactic tries to link universal health care to something people generally hate.

But it's decidedly moronic for conservatives to believe that they will derail a proposed universal health care system by likening it to a program whose only problem (if you can call it that) is that the public loves it far more than anyone expected.

Indeed, this is the stupidest Republican talking point I've heard in a very long time - and maybe ever. As I said, only a lobotomy case like Smerconish would think this kind of idiocy is helping his cause. And only a lobotomy case like Chris Matthews wouldn't bother to make that very simple point.

Teh stupid...it burns.

GOP Harassment Strategy Against Dems Detailed In Memo

This morning, Politico reported that Democratic members of Congress are increasingly being harassed by “angry, sign-carrying mobs and disruptive behavior” at local town halls. For example, in one incident, right-wing protesters surrounded Rep. Tim Bishop (D-NY) and forced police officers to have to escort him to his car for safety.

This growing phenomenon is often marked by violence and absurdity. Recently, right-wing demonstrators hung Rep. Frank Kratovil (D-MD) in effigy outside of his office. Missing from the reporting of these stories is the fact that much of these protests are coordinated by public relations firms and lobbyists who have a stake in opposing President Obama’s reforms.

The lobbyist-run groups Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks, which orchestrated the anti-Obama tea parties earlier this year, are now pursuing an aggressive strategy to create an image of mass public opposition to health care and clean energy reform. A leaked memo from Bob MacGuffie, a volunteer with the FreedomWorks website Tea Party Patriots, details how members should be infiltrating town halls and harassing Democratic members of Congress:

– Artificially Inflate Your Numbers: “Spread out in the hall and try to be in the front half. The objective is to put the Rep on the defensive with your questions and follow-up. The Rep should be made to feel that a majority, and if not, a significant portion of at least the audience, opposes the socialist agenda of Washington.”

– Be Disruptive Early And Often: “You need to rock-the-boat early in the Rep’s presentation, Watch for an opportunity to yell out and challenge the Rep’s statements early.”

– Try To “Rattle Him,” Not Have An Intelligent Debate: “The goal is to rattle him, get him off his prepared script and agenda. If he says something outrageous, stand up and shout out and sit right back down. Look for these opportunities before he even takes questions.”

The memo above also resembles the talking points being distributed by FreedomWorks for pushing an anti-health reform assault all summer. Patients United, a front group maintained by Americans for Prosperity, is currently busing people all over the country for more protests against Democratic members. Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX), chairman of the NRCC, has endorsed the strategy, telling the Politico the days of civil town halls are now “over.”

Meanwhile, AHIP, the trade group and lobbying juggernaut representing the health insurance industry is sending staffers to monitor town halls and other right-wing front groups are stepping up their ad campaign to smear reform efforts. The strategy for defeating reform — recently outlined by an influential lobbyist to the Hill newspaper as “delay” then “kill” — is becoming apparent. By delaying a vote until after the August recess, lobbyists are now seizing upon recess town halls as opportunities to ambush lawmakers and fool them into believing there is wide opposition to reform.

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/31/recess-harassment-memo/#comments

Please spread this around

Why is the so-called "Liberal" media not covering this?

I was going to discuss this on the upcoming episode of Geek of all Trades, but during the process of putting it together I realized the show was already going to run long, so I'm posting it here instead. In lighter new expect a review of Terminator Salvation coming soon.

-

Abuse Photos Include Images Of Rape And Sexual Assault: Report

The Pentagon on Thursday denied the Daily Telegraph report that photographs of Iraqi prisoner abuse, whose release U.S. President Obama wants to block, include images of apparent rape and sexual abuse.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the newspaper had shown "an inability to get the facts right."

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs also dismissed the report.

"I want to speak generally about some reports I've witnessed over the past few years in the British media. And in some ways, I'm surprised it filtered down," Gibbs said. "Let's just say if I wanted to look up -- if I wanted to read a writeup today of how Manchester United fared last night in the Champion's League cup, I might open up a British newspaper. If I was looking for something that bordered on truthful news, I'm not entirely sure it'd be in the first pack of clips I'd pick up."

* * * * *

LONDON (AP) -- A former U.S. general said graphic images of rape and torture are among the photos of Iraqi prisoner abuse that President Obama's administration does not want released.

Retired Major Gen. Antonio Taguba, who oversaw the U.S. investigation into the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison, told Britain's Daily Telegraph in an article published Wednesday that he agreed with Obama's decision not to release the pictures.

"I am not sure what purpose their release would serve other than a legal one and the consequence would be to imperil our troops, the only protectors of our foreign policy, when we most need them," Taguba was quoted by the Daily Telegraph. "The mere description of these pictures is horrendous enough, take my word for it."

Two Obama administration officials didn't immediately respond to e-mail requests for comment Wednesday night.

The prisoner abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib exploded after photos taken by soldiers appeared in 2004.

According to the Telegraph, the new photos depicted much more serious abuses than previously documented.

One photo reportedly showed an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner and another was said to show a male translator raping a male detainee, the Telegraph reported.

It was not immediately clear from the report who had seen the photos or how they might have been obtained.

The Telegraph said the photos relate to 400 cases of alleged abuse between 2001 and 2005 at Abu Ghraib and six other prisons.

The newspaper said the images in the photos were backed up by statements from Taguba's report into prisoner abuses at Abu Ghraib obtained under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act.

Melissa Etheridge Confronts Elisabeth Hasselbeck (video)

I have a list like Cenk's, but Patricia Heaton is at the top of mine. Hasselrack is on there too, but I have one problem with his list. Paris Hilton was on it? Dude, if I was rip-roaring drunk and she was hanging off me at a party, I still would say no. Ick.

This was awesome news!

I got this in my e-mail inbox today.

-






Dear Podcast Owner

Your podcast feed, [ http://mevio.com/feeds/masterofnone.xml ] was successfully added and is now under review.


Sincerely,

The iTunes Store Team

-

How fucking awesome is that? If I make it up there guys, please oh please write some 5 star reviews for me. :-)

Another great one from the Kos.

Guilt By Imagination

by BarbinMD

Thu Dec 11, 2008 at 10:35:05 AM PST

It was clear from the start:

...ROD BLAGOJEVICH said he knows that the President-elect wants Senate Candidate 1 for the open seat but "they're not willing to give me anything except appreciation. Fuck them."

...that President-elect Obama wasn't playing ball with the corrupt governor of Illinois, but that hasn't stopped various media hacks from trying to turn the Rod Blagojevich scandal into Obamagate.

For example, from Politico, we get:

At first blush, Barack Obama comes out of the Rod Blagojevich scandal smelling like a rose. The prosecutor at a news conference seemed to give the president-elect a seal of approval, and the Illinois governor himself was caught on tape complaining that Obama was not interested in crooked schemes.

But make no mistake: For Obama and his team, the Blagojevich scandal is a stink bomb tossed at close range.

And Politico's reason for thinking that? Easy. Because Republicans will express pseudo-outrage, draw false connections, and Politico will report it.

And then there's this from Liz "Sprinkles" Sidoti of the Associated Press:

President-elect Barack Obama hasn't even stepped into office and already a scandal — not of his own making — is threatening to dog him.

Obama isn't accused of anything. But the fact that Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, a fellow Democrat, has been charged with trying to sell Obama's now-vacant Senate post gives political opponents an opening to criticize him. A slew of questions remain. The investigation is still under way. And the ultimate impact on Obama is far from certain.

While a bit more dramatic than the Politico opening, the message is the same: Yeah, sure, I know Obama isn't involved, but as long as I can find a Republican to talk about it, I've got a story.

The Washington Times went the inflammatory headline route:

Scandal casts cloud over Obama presidency

...while Chris Matthews opted for the incoherent:

But Fitzgerald made clear that Obama was not implicated today. Here he is, quote, "The complaint makes no allegations about the president-elect whatsoever." Obama said this afternoon that he had no contact with Governor Blagojevich over who was gonna fill that Senate seat.

Still, there are many unanswered questions, including that one.

The unifying theme throughout this coverage is, when you have a corrupt politician, caught on tape peddling influence and cursing like a sailor, guilt by imaginary association trumps boring issues like the economy and health care any day of the week.

From Daily Kos: When Conservatives Heart Clinton...America Has Moved Left

I loved this one, and I may make a habit of it. This blog should be more than just my podcast related stuff.

-

When Conservatives Heart Clinton...America Has Moved Left

by Jed L

Tue Dec 02, 2008 at 01:30:03 PM PST

There's a whole lot of stupid coming from the right these days. Take, for example, conservative radio host Michael Reagan with CNN anchor Kiran Chetry on Tuesday morning. Reagan echoed Rush Limbugh's argument that President-elect Obama's selection of Hillary Clinton is a bow to the right, and that it has "liberal websites" like Daily Kos up in arms.

Of course, anyone who bothers to check the facts knows that claim is simply not true. Moreover, underscoring his ignorance, Reagan can't even pronounce 'Daily Kos' (Kos rhymes with dose, not sauce):

Here's the deal: we won, and they are declaring victory.

In the same breath that they are saying that this is a center-right nation, conservatives like Limbaugh and Reagan are highlighting the appointment of Hillary Clinton as a victory for the right.

In 1998, they were impeaching Bill Clinton. Now they are claiming Hillary as one of their own.

The center has shifted....to the left.

Seperation of Church and State is in dire straits.

This was just too big to put in my Dogma Alert segment this week.







"With respect to public acknowledgment of religious belief, it is entirely clear from our Nation's historical practices that the Establishment Clause permits this disregard of polytheists and believers in unconcerned deities, just as it permits the disregard of devout atheists." (McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky, 545 U.S. 844 (2005) (Justice Anton Scalia dissenting).

"Quite simply, the Establishment Clause is best understood as a federalism provision — it protects state establishments from federal interference but does not protect any individual rights. . . . .[E]ven assuming that the Establishment Clause precludes the Federal Government from establishing a national religion, it does not follow that the Clause created or protects any individual right. . . . it is more likely that States and only States were the direct beneficiaries. Moreover, incorporation of this putative individual right leads to a particular outcome: It would prohibit precisely what the Establishment Clause was intended to protect — state establishments of religion." (Justice Clarence Thomas, concurring opinion, Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow).

According to the lifetime appointees of the U.S. Supreme Court, at best only monotheists have religious freedom and states can establish their own religion or church. These are the same sort of justices that John McCain has promised.

9-11: How a tragedy became a tactic

Thanks to Ralphy from MySpace for the vid.

The Long List of McCain Flip-Flops

(cross-posted at my MySpace page)

Steve Benen of the Carpetbagger Report has compiled a long (and growing) list of McCain flip-flops:

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/TheCarpetbaggerReport/~3/315443325/15924.html

Here's the full list (along with Benen's closing commentary...)

* McCain supported the drilling moratorium; now he’s against it.

* McCain strongly opposes a windfall-tax on oil company profits. Three weeks earlier, he was perfectly comfortable with the idea.

* McCain thought Bush’s warrantless-wiretap program circumvented the law; now he believes the opposite.

* McCain defended “privatizing” Social Security. Now he says he’s against privatization (though he actually still supports it.)

Wait, I’m not done with the last two weeks yet….

* McCain wanted to change the Republican Party platform to protect abortion rights in cases of rape and incest. Now he doesn’t.

* McCain thought the estate tax was perfectly fair. Now he believes the opposite.

* He opposed indefinite detention of terrorist suspects. When the Supreme Court reached the same conclusion, he called it “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.”

* McCain said he would “not impose a litmus test on any nominee.” He used to promise the opposite.

And these come after these other reversals from April and May:

* McCain believes the telecoms should be forced to explain their role in the administration’s warrantless surveillance program as a condition for retroactive immunity. He used to believe the opposite.

* McCain supported storing spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Now he believes the opposite.

* McCain supported moving “towards normalization of relations” with Cuba. Now he believes the opposite.

* McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Hamas. Now he believes the opposite.

* McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Syria. Now he believes the opposite.

* He argued the NRA should not have a role in the Republican Party’s policy making. Now he believes the opposite.

* McCain supported his own lobbying-reform legislation from 1997. Now he doesn’t.

* He wanted political support from radical televangelists like John Hagee and Rod Parsley. Now he doesn’t.

* McCain supported the Lieberman/Warner legislation to combat global warming. Now he doesn’t.

And these are the flip-flops I’ve noticed earlier:

* McCain pledged in February 2008 that he would not, under any circumstances, raise taxes. Specifically, McCain was asked if he is a “‘read my lips’ candidate, no new taxes, no matter what?” referring to George H.W. Bush’s 1988 pledge. “No new taxes,” McCain responded. Two weeks later, McCain said, “I’m not making a ‘read my lips’ statement, in that I will not raise taxes.”

* McCain is both for and against a “rogue state rollback” as a focus of his foreign policy vision.

* McCain says he considered and did not consider joining John Kerry’s Democratic ticket in 2004.

* In 1998, he championed raising cigarette taxes to fund programs to cut underage smoking, insisting that it would prevent illnesses and provide resources for public health programs. Now, McCain opposes a $0.61-per-pack tax increase, won’t commit to supporting a regulation bill he’s co-sponsoring, and has hired Philip Morris’ former lobbyist as his senior campaign adviser.

* McCain has changed his economic worldview on multiple occasions.

* McCain has changed his mind about a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq on multiple occasions.

* McCain is both for and against attacking Barack Obama over his former pastor at his former church.

* McCain believes Americans are both better and worse off than they were before Bush took office.

* McCain is both for and against earmarks for Arizona.

* McCain believes his endorsement from radical televangelist John Hagee was both a good and bad idea.

* McCain’s first mortgage plan was premised on the notion that homeowners facing foreclosure shouldn’t be “rewarded” for acting “irresponsibly.” His second mortgage plan took largely the opposite position.

* McCain vowed, if elected, to balance the federal budget by the end of his first term. Soon after, he decided he would no longer even try to reach that goal.

* In February 2008, McCain reversed course on prohibiting waterboarding.

* McCain used to champion the Law of the Sea convention, even volunteering to testify on the treaty’s behalf before a Senate committee. Now he opposes it.

* McCain was a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, which would grant legal status to illegal immigrants’ kids who graduate from high school. Now he’s against it.

* On immigration policy in general, McCain announced in February 2008 that he would vote against his own legislation.

* In 2006, McCain sponsored legislation to require grassroots lobbying coalitions to reveal their financial donors. In 2007, after receiving “feedback” on the proposal, McCain told far-right activist groups that he opposes his own measure.

* McCain said before the war in Iraq, “We will win this conflict. We will win it easily.” Four years later, McCain said he knew all along that the war in Iraq war was “probably going to be long and hard and tough.”

* McCain said he was the “greatest critic” of Rumsfeld’s failed Iraq policy. In December 2003, McCain praised the same strategy as “a mission accomplished.” In March 2004, he said, “I’m confident we’re on the right course.” In December 2005, he said, “Overall, I think a year from now, we will have made a fair amount of progress if we stay the course.”

* McCain went from saying he would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade to saying the exact opposite.

* McCain went from saying gay marriage should be allowed, to saying gay marriage shouldn’t be allowed.

* McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as “an agent of intolerance” in 2002, but then decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans “deserved” the 9/11 attacks.

* McCain used to oppose Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy, but he reversed course in February.

* On a related note, he said 2005 that he opposed the tax cuts because they were “too tilted to the wealthy.” By 2007, he denied ever having said this, and insisted he opposed the cuts because of increased government spending.

* In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending “dirty money” to help finance Bush’s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.

* McCain supported a major campaign-finance reform measure that bore his name. In June 2007, he abandoned his own legislation.

* McCain opposed a holiday to honor Martin Luther King, Jr., before he supported it.

* McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.

* McCain was anti-ethanol. Now he’s pro-ethanol.

* McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.

* McCain decided in 2000 that he didn’t want anything to do with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, believing he “would taint the image of the ‘Straight Talk Express.’” Kissinger is now the Honorary Co-Chair for his presidential campaign in New York.

Confronted with the inconsistencies in McCain’s record in March, the senator’s aides told the New York Times that the senator “has evolved rather than switched positions in his 25-year career.” That’s a perfectly sensible spin — when a politician holds one position, and then, for apparently political reasons, decides to embrace the polar opposite position, it’s only natural for his or her aides to say the politician’s position has “evolved.”

But in McCain’s case, the spin is wholly unfulfilling. First, McCain sells himself as a pol who never sways with the wind, and whose willingness to be consistent in the face of pressure is proof of his character. Second, Republicans have spent the last four years or so making policy reversals the single most serious political crime in presidential politics. The dreaded “flip-flop” is, according to the GOP, the latest cardinal sin for someone seeking national office.

And if we’re playing by Republican rules, McCain’s “evolutions” should be a fairly serious problem. I’m beginning to think they might be.