|
Operation Chaos - A Reminder
|
Mar 5, 2012 3:18 pm
452 Views
|
Source: Wes Bishop @ Addicting Info
It is often heard in political discussions that there is very little difference between America’s two political parties. The declarations are common that they both are corrupt, that they both lie, that they both represent what is wrong with the country. These statements are usually given in the hopes that the speaker will appear nuanced, impartial, and “fair and balanced.” But, for anyone actually following politics, the idea that both the Democratic and Republican parties are two sides of the same coin is a position nearly impossible to defend. Instead of being two sides of the same coin, the two parties are increasingly becoming completely separate currencies.
To illustrate this point one need look no further than the historic case of “Operation Chaos.” In late February, 2008 conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh began what he called an “operation chaos,” where he encouraged conservative Republicans to cross over and vote for Hillary Clinton in the presidential primaries. The call to vote was not motivated by support of Clinton’s ideas, nor was Limbaugh encouraging people to respectfully do their civic duty. Instead, what Limbaugh and the conservatives that participated hoped to achieve, was civil discord by denying then Senator Barack Obama a decisive victory. In short it was an attempt to create an inaccurate reflection of what U.S. citizens wanted in the upcoming presidential elections.
It is important to note that in several states, namely Ohio and Indiana, what Limbaugh was encouraging was a felony. In both the Buckeye and Hoosier state it is illegal to interfere in a political party’s nomination process for the purposes of disrupting that party.
Of course anyone who follows Limbaugh’s show knows that outlandish, inflammatory remarks are his trademark. Whether it be calling a civically active young woman a “slut,” or mocking an actor who is raising awareness of a deadly disease, Limbaugh has periodically displayed a talent for illustrating the darker nature of humanity.
However, what is important to note is that this kind of ignorant vitriol does only largely exist on the Republican side of American politics.
Take for example the current Republican primary. Whereas Rush Limbaugh and his followers would openly and proudly interfere in the democratic process of another party, the Democrats do not behave this way.
The recent Michigan primary has drawn some attention, not only because of Mitt Romney’s near-defeat, but also because a number of Democrats were reported to have crossed over to vote for Rick Santorum. Proof, the ever “fair-minded” commentator will note, that the Democratic Party is just as immature as the GOP.
But is this an accurate statement? On closer inspection one finds that it is not. The call for Democratic voters did not come from Rachel Maddow, or Thomas Hartman. Ed Schultz is not, day after day, encouraging people to commit a felony in several states. Instead, the call for Democratic voters came from no one other than Rick Santorum himself.
Campaigning directly towards Democrats, Santorum is reported to have said that voters should prevent Romney from winning the nomination because he did not support the auto-bailout.
Therefore, not only was the support sought but it can be argued that it was genuine, since one of the frontrunners of the race was personally denouncing the hard-line position of the GOP. It will be interesting to see if Santorum continues with his support of the auto bailout in the primaries to come.
Open mindedness and fairness in judgment are virtues, but impartiality is not. The truth is that the GOP is continually moving further from reality, all the while embracing a more hateful fantasy that marks anyone they disagree with as an “undesirable.” It is not the aim of this column to encourage voters to pick between Santorum and Romney in the primary, instead the goal should be an outright rejection of politicians that find it impossible to stand up to, or criticize the ranting of an AM radio tyrant.
|
|
|
0
Comments
, 4 Pending
|
|
|
Sharon Fluke's Congressional Testimony - Attn: Big B, Sleek B, Saucy P and Az,
|
Mar 4, 2012 9:15 pm
772 Views
|
Several members of this site including Azag, Slk B, Big B, Saucy P, and several others apparently choose to believe Rush Limbaugh when he made a claim about Ms Sharon Fluke on his show on three separate occasions. These people have argued vigorously and apparently believed that Limbaugh was correct in his statements. I have responded to these misstatements and suggested that they should review the actual testimony. Apparently these individuals either lack the where-with-all or the willingness to do so. Therefore I spent two minutes in locating and copying the congressional record that follows.
Limbaugh stated and the foregoing members related that Ms Fluke had testified before congress that she was having so much sex that she was unable to pay for her own contraceptives. In fact Az went so far as to elaborate on the actual costs of what this amounted to. Apparently Limbaugh's tirade gave Azag an opportunity to vent his misogynism and he went on to say the following:
"I believe Ms Fluke wants enough money so that she can have sex 3 times a day, every day of the year. Calculated at a rate of $1 per condom (if that is the choice), that's about $3/day or somewhere near $1,000 a year. What does this mean? Is she being paid $1 per trick, and getting laid 3,000 times per year for her benefit? Since paying for sex is prostitution, I believe that makes her a prostitute at best, a slut at worst.
I'm sure her phone is ringing off the hook. What normal guy wouldn't pay $1 for a roll in the hay, assuming a regular prostitute would cost around $200 per trick for a safe one, or $25 for a roadside pickup."
Apparently Azag has experience with prostitutes since he has knowledge about how much they charge. I am sure that his wife would be shocked if she were to know this...but then again she may not be shocked at all.
People like this that express themselves in this way without knowledge or apparent forethought, in my opinion, deserve to inhabit the same sewer that Limbaugh resides in. For to spread a lie of this type makes one nothing but a cheap misogynistic liar.
Big Bl, Sleek B, Saucy P and Azag, Take a moment if you will and read the actual transcript of Ms Flukes congressional testimony as I have presented it here. Where does Ms Fluke say anything remotely related to your venomous misogynistic statements? I have read the congressional transcript and I don't find anything remotely related to what you have said. Therefore, in fairness, the adult thing to do would be to offer an apology for your words stated on this site and related to Ms. Fluke. Do I expect that any of you will do so? No but then you will show all here what and who you truly are.
|
|
|
12
Comments
, 1 Pending
|
|
|
Timeless
|
Mar 3, 2012 11:45 pm
473 Views
|
Brought to you by your friends at:
Americans Against The Tea Party
|
|
|
5
Comments
|
|
|
Georgetown University Responds To Rush Limbaugh
|
Mar 3, 2012 8:37 pm
567 Views
|
My comments in blue.
There has been a great deal of misrepresentation of the basis for Rush Limbaugh's abusive attack on Georgetown University student Sharon Fluke by members of the right wing and especially by several members of this site. Included among them are BB, AZ, Saucy, Ms J, S Beauty to name a few. This mischaracterization is probably due to the fact that most of these people have a very limited exposure to the facts of this matter and choose to further a biased interpretation rather than seeking to inform themselves fully on the facts at hand. This evening it was also reported that Carbonite (a Limbaugh sponsor) has clearly stated that they will not ever advertise on Limbaugh again in spite of the fact that he offered a very disengenuous apology for his language today. Due to public outrage over Limbaugh's sexual attack on Ms. Fluke, a number of his sponsors in addition to that of Carbonite have also pulled their ads from the Limbaugh show. His apology of this afternoon does not merit consideration because in his statement of apology he continued to lie about the basis of this matter. The following is the University's response to Limbaugh.
John DeGioia, president of Georgetown, sent a letter to students and faculty praising Fluke's congressional testimony. "She was respectful, sincere, and spoke with conviction," he wrote. "She provided a model of civil discourse. This expression of conscience was in the tradition of the deepest values we share as a people."
In contrast, DeGioia had harsh words for Limbaugh's attacks on Fluke, saying they "can only be described as misogynistic, vitriolic, and a misrepresentation of the position of our student."
At Georgetown Law, 137 professors and staff members have signed a letter in support of Fluke. "As scholars and teachers who aim to train public-spirited lawyers, no matter what their politics, to engage intelligently and meaningfully with the world, we abhor these attacks on Ms. Fluke and applaud her strength and grace in the face of them," the letter says.
On Wednesday during his radio show, Limbaugh attacked Fluke for attempting to testify at a controversial House hearing in favor of the Obama administration's ruling on coverage of contraception by insurance plans. Limbaugh claimed that "she's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex."
After his initial comments sparked outrage, Limbaugh doubled down by offering to buy aspirin for all female students at Georgetown Law to place between their knees. That remark, a sarcastic encouragement not to have sex, echoed comments made by major Rick Santorum donor Foster Friess earlier in February.
Fluke responded to the controversy on Thursday in a press statement. "No woman deserves to be disrespected in this manner. This language is an attack on all women, and has been used throughout history to silence our voices," she said. "The millions of American women who have and will continue to speak out in support of women's health care and access to contraception prove that we will not be silenced."
|
|
|
13
Comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why Are Gasoline Prices Increasing?
|
Feb 26, 2012 9:43 am
563 Views
|
Why are gas prices surging to levels unseen since the 2008 oil spike while the oil companies reporting record profits? Much of the problem is actually created by Wall Street traders here in the USA who gamble on oil prices and powerful multinational companies that manipulate the supply and demand by stockpiling oil when the price is low and expected to rise in the near future. And yes, so far this practice is perfectly legal.
Bart Chilton, a commissioner at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the federal agency that regulates commodity futures and option trading in the United States, says a very few number of players control too much of the market, allowing them to push the price of gas higher and higher. The American public knows very little about the oil speculation industry because a conservative majority on the CFTC has refused to implement the mandates from the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act to curb abuses and provide transparency.
One of those players is the petrochemical multinational Koch Industries. Although oil extraction is a small part of the Koch’s oil business the company has major control over every other part of the market as its core venture is shipping crude oil, refining it, distributing it to retailers, then speculating on the future price. The company actively trades about 50 types of crude oil around the world and has trading operations in London, Geneva, Singapore, Houston, New York, Wichita, Rotterdam, and Mumbai.
When future oil prices are expected to rise–which means when demand is expected to exceed supply–big banks and companies like Koch start buying up oil and storing it in massive containers both on land and offshore to lock in the oil for sale later at a set price.
In 2008, Fortune magazine reported that Koch Supply & Trading leased the 2-million-barrel-capacity Dubai Titan that year, the third supertanker the company has leased, because the demand for oil storage was so high that Koch and other big investors who could not secure storage on land have resorted to leasing supertankers and using them as floating oil tanks.
Koch was one of the companies that lobbied aggressively against President’s financial reform bill-–mentioned above–particularly on provisions related to transparency in the energy trading market. Representatives from the company’s lobbying firm even argued that moderate levels of the toxic chemical dioxin should not be designated as a cancer risk for humans at an EPA hearing last summer.
When we look at the money Koch has spent on lobbying to influence laws and regulations in Washington in recent years–from $857,000 in 2004 to $20 million in 2008–it is not surprising that Koch’s lobbyists and officials have successfully fought to preserve the industry’s tax breaks and credits, and defeated all attempts by Congress to regulate environmental hazards and transparency requirements.
At the beginning of February 2012, Koch and about 300 other-–invitation only–individuals pledged approximately $100 million to defeat President Obama in the 2012 elections at a private meeting in California. And now at the end of February 2012 we are seeing a distinctive rise in the oil prices at the pump. I will not speculate any further as I have the utmost trust in the intelligence of our readers to connect the dots and fill in the blanks.
|
|
|
7
Comments
, 1 Pending
|
|
|
|
|
Voter Fraud?? By the GOP??? Really!!!
|
Feb 23, 2012 7:51 pm
500 Views
|
My comments in Blue.
I think that the following is really rich considering it has been the GOP that has sought to disenfranchise legal and registered voters by their attempts to suppress voting through claims of voter fraud. It seems that the GOP knows a thing or two about voter fraud considering that one of their elected officials was found guilty of six felonies related to voter fraud.
Republican Charlie White, Secretary of State of Indiana was sentenced to one year of home detention, a $1,000 fine and 30 hours of community service for 6 felony convictions. His defense attorney proclaimed this was a victimless crime and asked for the felony charges to be reduced to misdemeanors so that Mr. White could continue to serve the state of Indiana as Secretary of State.
What the hell is going on in the state of Indiana? Victimless crime? This is the same Mr. White that had shouted from the rooftops that voter IDs were necessary to stamp out voter fraud, the same voter fraud that he, himself, was convicted of committing. It was a case arising out of the state of Indiana in 2008 where the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a voter-identification law in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board finding that photo identification was not unconstitutional and affirmed that states have a “valid interest” in improving election procedures and deterring fraud. And this guy wants his job back protecting the citizens of Indiana from whom? Charlie White?
White took the stand today for the first time since being indicted on 7 felony counts of voter fraud including false registrations, voting in another precinct, filing a false ballot, theft and two counts of perjury. In fact, no witnesses were called to testify on his behalf during his trial which resulted in 6 felony convictions by a Hamilton County jury on February 4, 2012.
Testimony began with his wife, Michelle Quigley White, who let the court know that her husband was at “risk” of losing his job, losing his law license, and then explained while wiping away tears:
“I just want my husband back because we have a family to raise and I can’t do it alone.”
This author is already sobbing—who could possibly top that? Mr. Charlie White, of course. According to the IndyChannel.com, White read a statement to the court:
“I never intentionally meant to do anything I was convicted of,” he told the judge, crying at times. “All I wanted to do was to vote. I was not trying to influence any race… Even though I have been politically active, I am human.”
White gave a laundry list of his contributions to the state of Indiana, his plans for improving the state and summarized his work on the Town Council of the City of Fishers.
“I’m sad that these works are not what I will be remembered by,” he said.
Soon thereafter, tears flowing, he spoke of his grandmother, the fact that he would “likely” lose his job and have trouble finding another because of the publicity over his case. Damn–this is a tragedy! He might be unemployed? Join the rest of the unemployed, Mr. White–the non-felonious unemployed.
Pending appeal, Superior Court Judge Steven Nation stayed White’s home detention. Really? Home detention and a fine? What if Mr. White had been Mr. Black? Mr. Elderly? Mr. Student? Mr. Poor? Mr. Minority? Still victimless? Still home detention for 6 felonies?
Something to think about while Mr. White is walking around, free as a bird waiting for the next political battle in Indiana—who will be the next Secretary of State of Indiana. The Democrats have declared that since White was not properly registered to vote, he was never eligible to run and his Democratic opponent, Vop Osili, should be named to the job. The Indiana Supreme Court will hear arguments next week.
|
|
|
4
Comments
|
|
|
|
To link to this blog (Skipper_too) use [blog Skipper_too] in your messages.
|
|
|
| Sun |
Mon |
Tue |
Wed |
Thu |
Fri |
Sat |
| |
|
|
|
1
|
21
|
32
|
|
41
|
51
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
