Run,Run, Run, The Republicans are Com...
ILAL

Bronx, NY

#1493 Feb 1, 2014
ZCs wrote:
Run, Run, Run!!!!!!!!!!
The Ranting Republican Michael Grimm is coming!!!!!!!!!! Run!!!!!!!!!!
Staten Island Rep. Michael Grimm has apologized to NY1 political reporter Michael Scotto a day after physically threatening him at the conclusion of an interview in the Capitol Rotunda following the president's State of the Union address.(Video of the interview can be seen at the bottom of the article.) Washington bureau reporter Geoff Bennett filed the following report for NY1.
After initially saying he did nothing wrong, Republican Rep. Michael Grimm picked up the phone and apologized Wednesday to NY1 Washington bureau reporter Michael Scotto.
"I apologized. I called Michael Scotto. He was very gracious and accepted my apology," Grimm said. "We're going to have lunch sometime next week and just make sure this is all behind us.
Grimm's Wednesday morning apology came after he first characterized Scotto's question about his campaign donations as a "disrespectful" cheap shot.
That tough guy act of his threatening a reporter was pathetic.
ZCs

New York, NY

#1494 Feb 3, 2014
Run, Run, Run The Republicans are Coming!!!!!!!!!!

If you know what's good for America, you will shut your door when the Girl Scouts come a knockin', and you'll "back away from those Girl Scout Cookies," conservative Christian groups are telling their constituents. It has nothing to do with evangelicals adopting gluten-free diets (although there is now a certified gluten-free Chocolate Chip Shortbread cookie), or concerns about eliminating fat from their diets. It's all about right-wingers charging Girl Scouts USA with supporting Planned Parenthood, pro-abortion role models like Hillary Clinton, Gloria Steinem, Betty Friedan, and organizations like Amnesty International, the ACLU, and the National Organization for Women (NOW).

And, now, thanks to the newly formed CookieCott 2014, Texas' Wendy Davis has been dropped into the middle of this year's ruckus.

None of the anti-GSUSA caterwauling is new to leaders of the 2.3 million member GSUSA or to conservative scolds who have been slamming the organization for years.

What is new, however, is a tweeting controversy which conservatives are trying to gin up in their own inimitable manner. CNSNews.com reported in early January, that during a conversation generated by a Huffington Post article and video panel discussion over possible nominees for Woman of the Year, "The Girl Scouts of America tweeted a link ... that praises pro-abortion politician Wendy Davis (D-Texas.)"

According to CookieCott 2014, "The Girl Scouts recently endorsed pro-abortion politicians Wendy Davis and Kathleen Sebelius as worthy role models for our children. In response, we're asking you to boycott Girl Scout cookies in 2014."

The boycott has been endorsed by: LifeNews, the American Life League, the Pro-Life Action League, the Radiance Foundation, blogger Jill Stanek, the National Black Pro-Life Union, the Issues4Life Foundation, and Life Coalition International.

CNSNews.com contacted the Girl Scouts of America (GSUSA) for comment on their tweet and received this response from Kelly M. Parisi, "Our tweet simply asked our followers to share their opinion about what women should be included in a discussion about women in 2013 initiated by HuffPost Live. Girl Scouts has not endorsed any politicians. Additionally, in the page we linked to, included is a second hand link.

"Our Twitter bio states that a retweet does not equal an endorsement. Our sharing a link was not to endorse any of the women featured, but to highlight the source's acknowledgement of women who made a mark in 2013. The title of the article was not created by GSUSA, but by the source.
ZCs

New York, NY

#1495 Feb 3, 2014
Harry Reid is doing it !!!!

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid got into it on Thursday with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell — but it was the Koch brothers who ended up receiving most of the Nevada Democrat’s ire.

It all started with McConnell complaining about the Obama administration’s new attempt to better regulate nonprofit groups who list themselves as devoted to “social welfare” rather than partisan politics. Within politics, these groups are usually referred to as 501(c)(4) nonprofits. The administration — and many outside observers — worry that too many 501(c)(4)s are making a farce of their social welfare designation by effectively advocating for certain politicians or political parties.

Mitch McConnell disagrees.“Democrats think 2014 is shaping up to be a tough year for them politically. So instead of trying to persuade the public that they’ve got the best answers to the problems we face, they try to shut everybody else out of the political process, they try to shut them up,” McConnell said. He went on to accuse the president of wanting “to use the IRS to drive conservatives right off the playing field.”

Reid wasn’t having it, and pointed to the conservative billionaire Koch brothers — who directly and indirectly fund many of these organizations — as a prime example of how the rules are being disregarded or abused by outside political actors.“Because of a United States Supreme Court decisions called Citizens United, there’s been some really untoward stuff going on in the political world,” Reid said.“We have two brothers who are actually trying to buy the country.”
ZCs

New York, NY

#1496 Feb 8, 2014
Run!!!!!!!!!!

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) again called out former President Bill Clinton for the Monica Lewinsky scandal -- which took place 16 years ago -- saying Democrats should return any money raised with his help.

In an interview with C-SPAN set to air Sunday, Paul implied Democrats who claim Republicans are waging a "war on women" are hypocritical if they've worked with Clinton, according to CNN.

"They can't have it both ways. And so I really think that anybody who wants to take money from Bill Clinton or have a fundraiser has a lot of explaining to do," Paul said. "In fact, I think they should give the money back."

"If they want to take position on women's rights, by all means do. But you can't do it and take it from a guy who was using his position of authority to take advantage of young women in the workplace," Paul added.

In January, Paul criticized Clinton for his "predatory behavior" with Lewinsky, later calling the former president a "serial philanderer" in a separate interview. Paul said he was "not so sure" what Clinton's past actions had to do with a potential presidential bid for his wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, but said "it's hard to separate them."
ZCs

New York, NY

#1497 Feb 8, 2014
Run!!!!!!!!!!

Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked Democrats’ third attempt to pass an extension of federal unemployment benefits.

The Senate voted 58-40 Thursday on a proposal that would have continued unemployment insurance for three months, just short of the 60 votes needed to end debate.

“I’m beginning to believe there is nothing that will get Republicans to yes,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said.“It’s a ‘no’ vote because they don’t want to extend unemployment insurance.”

“We’re one Republican vote away from restoring benefits to 1.7 million Americans,” Reid said.“There is one Republican vote standing in the way of a lifeline to these 1.7 million people.”

Republican Sens. Dean Heller (Nev.), Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Kelly Ayotte (N.H.) voted with Democrats to end debate. Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), who was involved in the bipartisan negotiations, said he couldn't support the deal because he believed the pay-for "put taxpayers at risk."

Democrats say they plan to use Republican refusal to pass a short-term extension of the benefits as a weapon in the midterm elections.

Nearly 1.3 million people lost their long-term unemployment benefits at the end of December. The benefits, first put in place during the financial crisis, took effect for people when state-level assistance ran out.

The White House slammed Senate Republcians and accused them of denying a "vital lifeline" to the unemployed.

"We cannot allow one vote to stand in the way of supporting these Americans as they struggle to find work. Both sides of the aisle have worked together to prevent this kind of hardship in the past, and neglecting to do so now is unacceptable — especially given the high long-term unemployment rate," White House press secretary Jay Carney said in a statement.

Democrats tried and failed to pass a three-month extension in January after Republicans demanded that the $6.5 billion cost be offset elsewhere in the budget.

They then tried to pass an 11-month extension that was fully paid for by extending sequestration for an additional year, which would have generated roughly $25 billion for the government. Republicans balked at that plan and demanded an open amendment process.

The latest proposal from Sens. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and Dean Heller (R-Nev.) would have paid for the extension through “pension smoothing”— a budget maneuver used in the 2012 highway bill.

“This is not a controversial pay-for,” Reed said ahead of the vote.“This is something we’ve embraced before.… It’s been used by colleagues on both sides of the aisle.”

ILAL

Bronx, NY

#1498 Feb 8, 2014
ZCs wrote:
Run!!!!!!!!!!
Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked Democrats’ third attempt to pass an extension of federal unemployment benefits.
The Senate voted 58-40 Thursday on a proposal that would have continued unemployment insurance for three months, just short of the 60 votes needed to end debate.
“I’m beginning to believe there is nothing that will get Republicans to yes,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said.“It’s a ‘no’ vote because they don’t want to extend unemployment insurance.”
“We’re one Republican vote away from restoring benefits to 1.7 million Americans,” Reid said.“There is one Republican vote standing in the way of a lifeline to these 1.7 million people.”
Republican Sens. Dean Heller (Nev.), Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Kelly Ayotte (N.H.) voted with Democrats to end debate. Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), who was involved in the bipartisan negotiations, said he couldn't support the deal because he believed the pay-for "put taxpayers at risk."
Democrats say they plan to use Republican refusal to pass a short-term extension of the benefits as a weapon in the midterm elections.
Nearly 1.3 million people lost their long-term unemployment benefits at the end of December. The benefits, first put in place during the financial crisis, took effect for people when state-level assistance ran out.
The White House slammed Senate Republcians and accused them of denying a "vital lifeline" to the unemployed.
"We cannot allow one vote to stand in the way of supporting these Americans as they struggle to find work. Both sides of the aisle have worked together to prevent this kind of hardship in the past, and neglecting to do so now is unacceptable — especially given the high long-term unemployment rate," White House press secretary Jay Carney said in a statement.
Democrats tried and failed to pass a three-month extension in January after Republicans demanded that the $6.5 billion cost be offset elsewhere in the budget.
They then tried to pass an 11-month extension that was fully paid for by extending sequestration for an additional year, which would have generated roughly $25 billion for the government. Republicans balked at that plan and demanded an open amendment process.
The latest proposal from Sens. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and Dean Heller (R-Nev.) would have paid for the extension through “pension smoothing”— a budget maneuver used in the 2012 highway bill.
“This is not a controversial pay-for,” Reed said ahead of the vote.“This is something we’ve embraced before.… It’s been used by colleagues on both sides of the aisle.”
Republicans are the idiocy of American society.
ZCs

New York, NY

#1499 Feb 15, 2014
Run!!!!!!!!!!
And of course O'Reilly does not say a word about it, because it makes Republicans look bad. Now this is real simple, Republicans are having trouble winning elections by getting the most votes, so they are passing these voter suppression laws to get votes the dishonest way, by keeping Democratic voters from voting.
On a party-line vote, a Florida county's Republican majority Board of County Commissioners voted Tuesday to eliminate almost one-third of Manatee County's voting sites. The board accepted a proposal by Supervisor of Elections Mike Bennett (R) by a 6-1 vote to trim the number of precincts, despite unanimous public testimony against the move -- and complaints by the only Democratic Commissioner that it would eliminate half of the polling places in his heavily minority District 2.
Bennett, in his first term as elections supervisor, proposed reducing the number of Manatee County precincts from 99 to 69. Citing decreased Election Day turnout, as more voters switch to in-person early voting and vote-by-mail options.
In the public comment section of the meeting, all ten speeches strongly opposed the move. Representatives of the local NAACP and Southern Christian Leadership Council warned that the cuts would decrease voter turnout because voters would have to travel further to a polling place, especially among the elderly and people without cars, and noted that the cuts disproportionately affected minority-heavy precincts.
Bennett dismissed these concerns, noting that because District 2 had received "preferential treatment in the past," even with the changes, his district will have the smallest number of voters per precinct. "It was overbalanced before, it's overbalanced now."
Bennett assured the commission that if lines are longer in 2014 as a result of these changes, he would ask them to revisit the decision in 2015, before the 2016 elections. But it is unclear whether voter accessibility is a sincere priority for him.
In 2011, while serving in the Florida Senate, he endorsed making it hard to vote: "I wouldn't have any problem making it harder. I would want them to vote as badly as I want to vote. I want the people of the state of Florida to want to vote as bad as that person in Africa who's willing to walk 200 miles...This should not be easy."
He made that comment while supporting a Republican voter suppression bill that reduced the number of days for early voting in Florida and helped create long lines across the state.
And in North Carolina Republican Gov. Pat McCrory Monday signed into law a bill requiring voters to produce a photo ID when they go to the polls, a measure that was hailed by Republicans as a means for heightening ballot security but which was criticized by Democrats as a thinly disguised effort at voter suppression.
The measure signed by McCrory also reduces the early voting period by a week, ends early voting on Sunday, ends same-day voter registration, and does away with pre-registration of 16 and 17-year olds.
"North Carolinians overwhelmingly support a common sense law that requires voters to present photo identification in order to cast a ballot," McCrory said in a statement. "I am proud to sign this legislation into law. Common practices like boarding an airplane and purchasing Sudafed require photo ID and we should expect nothing less for the protection of our right to vote."
In other words, they passed a law to fix a problem they do not have, because actual voter fraud almost never happens, it's less than 1% on average. It's the Republican talking points to justify passing these voter suppression laws to lower the turnout among minorities and the poor, who mostly vote Democrat.
North Carolina becomes one of 34 states with some form of voter ID law. But critics said North Carolina has one of the most severe laws -- not accepting college IDs for example or out-of-state licenses.
ZCs

New York, NY

#1500 Feb 21, 2014
Run, Run, Run!!!!!!!!!!
The Republicans are Coming!!!!!!!!!!
Run!!!!!!!!!!
The defeated unionization vote at a VW plant in Tennessee marked a new right-wing tactic, with state Republicans weighing in with threats of retaliation if the workers joined the UAW, a shocking strategy that drew little criticism from the mainstream U.S. press, notes Stephen Crockett.
By Stephen Crockett
Last week’s Volkswagen worker unionization vote in Tennessee was the dirtiest union election of the 21st Century with all the dirty tactics coming from outside anti-union political forces.
Without the intimidation and lies of elected Tennessee Republicans along with billionaire financed national right-wing groups, the union would almost surely have won the union representation vote.(A slim majority of 53 percent of plant workers opposed unionization.)
ZCs

New York, NY

#1502 Feb 22, 2014
Run, Run, Run!!!!!!!!!!

Scot Walker and the Racist Republicans are COMING!!!!!!!!!!

RUN!!!!!!!!!!

I have never understood why Scott Walker got off politically unscathed after six aides and associates were convicted in a criminal investigation of campaign law violations committed during his 2010 campaign for governor. Not one, but six, including three top aides. Meanwhile, Walker’s office is ensnared in another, ongoing investigation into his 2012 recall campaign. What does all of this say about the judgment of the man at the top?

A day and a half after the release of 27,000 emails obtained in the first completed investigation, the verdict of the national media is in: This Walker scandal is boring, which in Beltway-speak commands that all serious journalists just move along.

This Politico story –“The Scott Walker scandal snoozer”— is laughably typical. With “no crotch shots. No mistress in Argentina. And no political vendettas featuring a bridge,” Elizabeth Titus writes, the Walker emails are “more likely to draw yawns than outrage.” One subhead actually declares:“It’s not that sexy.”

Let’s remember Walker already fired campaign aide Taylor Palmisano, just two months ago, for racist tweets. The first read:“This bus is my worst fucking nightmare Nobody speaks English & these ppl don’t know how 2 control their kids #only3morehours #illegalaliens.” The second:“I will choke that illegal mex cleaning in the library. Stop banging fucking chairs around and turn off your Walkman.” He had already fired two other staffers for racism on social media.

But even a Washington Post piece that took the scandal seriously, breaking down “The six things we learned about Scott Walker today,” left an extremely important “thing” off the list: Scott Walker employed ignorant racists, including his chief of staff and deputy chief of staff.

MSNBC’s Chris Hayes asked the question last night: In what kind of organization does the chief of staff send virulently racist email to his deputy plus a wider undisclosed recipient list (which for all we know included Walker)?
ILAL

Bronx, NY

#1503 Feb 22, 2014
ZCs wrote:
Run, Run, Run!!!!!!!!!!
Scot Walker and the Racist Republicans are COMING!!!!!!!!!!
RUN!!!!!!!!!!
I have never understood why Scott Walker got off politically unscathed after six aides and associates were convicted in a criminal investigation of campaign law violations committed during his 2010 campaign for governor. Not one, but six, including three top aides. Meanwhile, Walker’s office is ensnared in another, ongoing investigation into his 2012 recall campaign. What does all of this say about the judgment of the man at the top?
A day and a half after the release of 27,000 emails obtained in the first completed investigation, the verdict of the national media is in: This Walker scandal is boring, which in Beltway-speak commands that all serious journalists just move along.
This Politico story –“The Scott Walker scandal snoozer”— is laughably typical. With “no crotch shots. No mistress in Argentina. And no political vendettas featuring a bridge,” Elizabeth Titus writes, the Walker emails are “more likely to draw yawns than outrage.” One subhead actually declares:“It’s not that sexy.”
Let’s remember Walker already fired campaign aide Taylor Palmisano, just two months ago, for racist tweets. The first read:“This bus is my worst fucking nightmare Nobody speaks English & these ppl don’t know how 2 control their kids #only3morehours #illegalaliens.” The second:“I will choke that illegal mex cleaning in the library. Stop banging fucking chairs around and turn off your Walkman.” He had already fired two other staffers for racism on social media.
But even a Washington Post piece that took the scandal seriously, breaking down “The six things we learned about Scott Walker today,” left an extremely important “thing” off the list: Scott Walker employed ignorant racists, including his chief of staff and deputy chief of staff.
MSNBC’s Chris Hayes asked the question last night: In what kind of organization does the chief of staff send virulently racist email to his deputy plus a wider undisclosed recipient list (which for all we know included Walker)?
Walker's day is coming.
ZCs

New York, NY

#1504 Feb 22, 2014
ILAL wrote:
<quoted text>
Walker's day is coming.
It will be a great day to see Scot walk
ZCs

New York, NY

#1505 Mar 1, 2014
Run!!!!!!!!!!

Senate Republicans derailed efforts to move forward with a $21 billion bill to enhance health care, education and job benefits for veterans.
Republicans stopped the veterans bill from moving on a procedural vote, which needed 60 votes. The final tally was 56-41.
Republicans and Democrats normally agree on the need to enhance benefits for the nation’s 22 million veterans and their families, but Republican senators wanted to lower the amount of spending in the bill. The GOP senators also wanted to include a measure that would have imposed new sanctions against Iran, which President Obama has warned against doing at this time. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid blocked the amendments from being considered.
“Shame on the Republicans for bringing base politics into a bill to help the veterans,” Reid said on the Senate floor Thursday morning.
The bill would have improved benefits for veterans, including better health care and dental services provided by the VA. It also would have guaranteed post-9/11 veterans access to in-state tuition rates at public colleges and universities in any state.
ZCs

New York, NY

#1506 Mar 1, 2014
Run!!!!!!!!!!

A central feature of the House Republicans' ambitious new tax reform bill would raise taxes disproportionately on residents of blue states -- especially middle-to-upper income people who live in New York and California.

The sweeping proposal released Wednesday by Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI), the House's top tax writer, eliminates the deduction for state and local taxes, which lets taxpayers who itemize deductions subtract general state and local taxes when calculating their federal taxable income. It's currently the seventh most expensive tax break in code, costing the federal government about $1.1 trillion in revenue over a decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Camp's plan wipes out this break for individuals in tax years beginning after December 31, 2014. "The provision would eliminate a tax benefit that effectively subsidizes higher State and local taxes and increased spending at the State and local level," reads a summary of the House Ways & Means Committee chairman's proposal. It pairs the elimination of the tax break with an increase in the standard deduction, which somewhat cushions the financial blow.

The two states that benefit most from the tax break are high-income, high-tax California (whose residents use up 17.2 percent of the cost of the deduction) and New York (13.3 percent). The contrast with low-tax, red states is stark: New Jersey, despite having a third of the population of Texas, eats up more of the deduction than the Lone Star State.
ILAL

Bronx, NY

#1507 Mar 1, 2014
And the idiotic notion of the Republican legislators in Arizona on that foolish "Freedom of religion" bill that was vetoed by Gov. Jan Brewer.
Don't Americans already have freedom of religion( choices) guaranteed by the Constitution?
ILAL

Bronx, NY

#1508 Mar 5, 2014
The definition of insanity : Doing the same things over and over again expecting different results.
Today for the 50TH TIME, Republicans have once again voted to repeal the ACA.
IT IS THE LAW, it's working and to date; 4 MILLION have signed on.
Why don't they just govern instead beating a dead horse and staying out of step with the rest of America?
Vote to raise the minimum wage.
Sign the jobs bill.
Do something about the country's infrastructure.

STOP PLAYING POLITICS simply because this is a mid term election year, do what's right for the country.
ZCs

New York, NY

#1509 Mar 8, 2014
Run!!!!!!!!!!

With the notable exception of a cross-dressing Uncle Sam on stilts, I haven’t really been surprised by anything I’ve seen here at CPAC (the Conservative Political Action Convention, the right’s premiere, annual multi-day confab). For the most part, it’s been what I’d expected to see at a massive gathering of conservative activists, politicians and media members — a lot of khakis; a lot of high heels; a lot of wrinkles; a lot of white hair; and a lot of red, white and blue. I was expecting to see more Rand Paul swag, I suppose, but in terms of visual surprises, that and Uncle Sam in Wonderland is about it.

But when it comes to the sounds of CPAC, that’s a different story. I expected the soundtrack to be a collection of aged radio-rock classics from the glory years of the baby boomer era (AC/DC seems to be especially popular) and I expected to hear a round of applause whenever anything — and I mean anything — negative was said about Obamacare. What I didn’t expect, however, was to hear so much talk about economic inequality. During CPAC’s opening day, in fact, it was referenced, explicitly or implicitly, by one GOP heavyweight after another.

As someone who agrees with the president that (besides global warming) inequality is the “defining issue of our time,” this was encouraging. If both parties are taking inequality seriously, maybe some of the less ideologically charged means to combat it, like increasing the earned-income tax credit or lowering the costs of higher education, might one day become law. Unfortunately, what was also revealed by one CPAC speaker after another is that Republican thinking on inequality is muddled, self-contradictory and, above all else, driven by political necessity rather than actual conviction.

One of the more obvious signs of how unserious Republicans are when it comes to inequality is their seeming inability to decide whether or not it even exists. Rep. Paul Ryan charged that the only reason Democrats were talking about inequality was because “they’re out of ideas” and “cannot talk about economic growth.” But just a few hours later, Gov. Chris Christie — who, like Ryan, is considered a possible future presidential candidate — declared with absolute certainty that “We don’t have an inequality problem.” The real issue is a lack of “opportunity,” said Christie, who had pretended earlier to be speaking directly to President Obama, telling him “no one cares about your opinion on inequality.”
ZCs

New York, NY

#1510 Mar 8, 2014
Run!!!!!!!!!!

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, for his part, seemed to agree with Ryan. Although the powerful Kentucky Republican never actually said the word “inequality,” he assured CPAC’s assembled conservatives that “the greatest con game” in politics is the notion that redistribution “is good for the little guy.” Using language one would expect to hear at an Occupy reunion more than a right-wing confab, McConnell said that, because of liberalism,“the rich have gotten richer, the poor have gotten poorer, and the middle class is being squeezed like never before.” McConnell even went so far as to say that he “can’t stand” the fact that “never before has it been so hard for the rich to become poor or for the poor to become rich.”

Yet for every example of a conservative acknowledging that something is awry with the distribution of wealth in the U.S.— like when Sen. Ted Cruz lamented how “Wall Street prospers while Main Street suffers”— there was another example of a conservative implying that the whole idea of inequality was bunk — like when Sen. Marco Rubio said the Democrat “always tries to divide people” by telling them “the reason why you’re worse off is because someone else is doing too well.” For every Sen. Mike Lee calling to “end cronyist privilege and corporate welfare … and put America’s political and corporate elites back to work for the rest of us,” there was a National Review editor Rich Lowry calling the president’s focus on inequality a “nightmare” that ran contrary to the spirit of Abraham Lincoln, the president with whom Obama is, in Lowry’s telling,“obsessed.”

During Ryan’s speech, one of the convention’s first, the former vice presidential candidate attempted to refashion the GOP’s much-discussed internal strife as an example of an ultimately beneficial “creative tension.” But this Janus-faced response to the inequality question is much too confused and incoherent to be spun as a manifestation of conservatism’s so-called Big Tent. So rather than chalk it up to conservatism’s supposed propensity for intellectual diversity, maybe there’s a simpler and more prosaic explanation: the same-old conflict between political necessity and the tenets of the modern conservative movement.

Take Cruz, for example. Widely believed to be planning a White House run in 2016, the conservative firebrand and Tea Party darling knows he has no reason to worry about keeping the GOP’s activist base on his side. Cruz’s worry will be over whether he can convince enough (relatively) moderate Republicans that he’s able to reach a wider audience. He doesn’t need to convince the conservative rank-and-file that he’s a libertarian on economic policy; they know he is. But he does need to persuade the Republican Party’s donor base, who cares about electability above all else, that he can speak to people who live outside the conservative bubble — people who are upset over America’s grossly unequal distribution of wealth. So he talks about Wall Street and Main Street, giving the impression that he sees something wrong with the financial class’s largesse.
ZCs

New York, NY

#1511 Mar 8, 2014
RUN!!!!!!!!!!

Marco Rubio and Chris Christie, meanwhile, are faced with an inverse of the Cruz dilemma. While the GOP’s moneymen have no doubt that the Cuban-American Rubio and the twice blue-state-approved Christie can appeal to voters who’d never give a true believer like Cruz a second look, the kind of Republicans who make up the CPAC crowd are far less comfortable with the idea of placing their hopes in a one-time supporter of “amnesty” or a Medicaid-expanding, gun-control-supporting and previously Barack-Obama-praising “moderate.” For both men, then, the best move is pandering to the hardcore conservative’s near-religious belief that talking about inequality is the same as promoting “envy” and class warfare. So they castigate the left for its egalitarianism, giving the impression that they’re rigid laissez-faire capitalists who’d never question the socioeconomic sorting of the free-market’s invisible hand.

The same logic holds true for Ryan, who has as of late angered the conservatives who used to love him so by orchestrating the passage of a bipartisan budget and voicing his support for immigration reform; and McConnell, who is facing a tough reelection against a populist Democrat in a state where his Frank Underwood-esque mastery of politics’ darker arts is becoming a hindrance more than a help. In both of these examples, too, we see politicians contorting themselves in an effort to prove that they’re devoted to an economic vision that a majority of voters has rejected in five of the last six presidential elections while, at the same time, capable of persuading a sufficient number of members of the 99 percent that they’ll look out for their interests once given the reins of power.

It’s an awkward and mildly embarrassing sight, really. It’s also as good a representation as you’re likely to find of the discombobulated and schizophrenic nature of today’s GOP. And while it’d be nice to see a Republican Party that takes fighting inequality half as seriously as it does cutting taxes on the rich, writing from CPAC, I can attest — you’ll have better luck finding a gender-bending Uncle Sam ambling through a hotel hallway on stilts, waving and smiling from 15 feet up in the air.
ILAL

Bronx, NY

#1512 Mar 8, 2014
ZCs wrote:
Run!!!!!!!!!!
With the notable exception of a cross-dressing Uncle Sam on stilts, I haven’t really been surprised by anything I’ve seen here at CPAC (the Conservative Political Action Convention, the right’s premiere, annual multi-day confab). For the most part, it’s been what I’d expected to see at a massive gathering of conservative activists, politicians and media members — a lot of khakis; a lot of high heels; a lot of wrinkles; a lot of white hair; and a lot of red, white and blue. I was expecting to see more Rand Paul swag, I suppose, but in terms of visual surprises, that and Uncle Sam in Wonderland is about it.
But when it comes to the sounds of CPAC, that’s a different story. I expected the soundtrack to be a collection of aged radio-rock classics from the glory years of the baby boomer era (AC/DC seems to be especially popular) and I expected to hear a round of applause whenever anything — and I mean anything — negative was said about Obamacare. What I didn’t expect, however, was to hear so much talk about economic inequality. During CPAC’s opening day, in fact, it was referenced, explicitly or implicitly, by one GOP heavyweight after another.
As someone who agrees with the president that (besides global warming) inequality is the “defining issue of our time,” this was encouraging. If both parties are taking inequality seriously, maybe some of the less ideologically charged means to combat it, like increasing the earned-income tax credit or lowering the costs of higher education, might one day become law. Unfortunately, what was also revealed by one CPAC speaker after another is that Republican thinking on inequality is muddled, self-contradictory and, above all else, driven by political necessity rather than actual conviction.
One of the more obvious signs of how unserious Republicans are when it comes to inequality is their seeming inability to decide whether or not it even exists. Rep. Paul Ryan charged that the only reason Democrats were talking about inequality was because “they’re out of ideas” and “cannot talk about economic growth.” But just a few hours later, Gov. Chris Christie — who, like Ryan, is considered a possible future presidential candidate — declared with absolute certainty that “We don’t have an inequality problem.” The real issue is a lack of “opportunity,” said Christie, who had pretended earlier to be speaking directly to President Obama, telling him “no one cares about your opinion on inequality.”
They should be called Stupid PACS.
They're a collection of some of the stupidest people in America.
RUN ILAL RUN

Dover, OH

#1513 Mar 8, 2014
The mods are looking for OT...LMMFAO

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

New York Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Topix Human Sexuality Forum Discontinued (Jun '16) 36 min tiffany 1,142
President Trump's first 100 days - Roadmap to D... 1 hr Bloody Bill Anderson 2,993
Yankee talk back 4, or is it 5 (Aug '08) 1 hr Paul Yanks 335,675
Mets talkback (Dec '07) 1 hr Paul Yanks 43,570
The United Hates of America (Sep '10) 4 hr Buckaroo Banzai 2,835
Review: ARTLOOK GLASS COMPANY NEW YORK 4 hr The Lord Loves a ... 66
I've been living a lie for 20 years 8 hr Count Teleky 1

New York Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

New York Mortgages