Skip to content

Digby's Hullabaloo Posts

Respectful

by digby

Chris Matthews just allowed Tom Delay to call Barack Obama a radical, militant Marxist who wants to pack the Supreme Court with communists and is far to the left of Barney Frank — and then chided Debbie Wasserman Schultz when she said that one should consider the source when it’s someone who was forced to leave Washington in disgrace after presiding over the most corrupt congress in history. Apparently what she said was disrespectful.

The right wing is working itself up into an epic frenzy of hate about Obama. And guys like Matthews aren’t exactly drawing any lines by allowing these guys to spew this disgusting swill on national TV which doesn’t bode well for the future. Cable news and talk radio are easily turned into cauldrons of hate for high ratings and big advertising dollars. The right wing noise machine is already working them.

And by the way — if there has ever been a more transparent effort to bully a new president into doing your bidding than declaring that he will never cut taxes on anyone and instead wants to raise them to 90%, I can’t think of one. Luckily Obama doesn’t appear to be subject to schoolyard dares, but it’s pretty clear that the conservatives are staking out ground way way over to the far right so they can keep the goal posts firmly right of center. And knowing the way the village operates, I expect they will have some success. See, there’s Colin Powell on the left and Tom Delay on the right. If Obama stays somewhere in between, he’ll be a great bipartisan president who gets things done.

.

Socialist Republicans

by digby

Hendrick Herzberg’s column in the New Yorker is all about this “socialism” nonsense and he does a particularly good job of explaining Alaska’s special brand of it:

Sarah Palin, who has lately taken to calling Obama “Barack the Wealth Spreader,” seems to be something of a suspect character herself. She is, at the very least, a fellow-traveller of what might be called socialism with an Alaskan face. The state that she governs has no income or sales tax. Instead, it imposes huge levies on the oil companies that lease its oil fields. The proceeds finance the government’s activities and enable it to issue a four-figure annual check to every man, woman, and child in the state. One of the reasons Palin has been a popular governor is that she added an extra twelve hundred dollars to this year’s check, bringing the per-person total to $3,269.

But lord how they hate the government. Alaskan Republicans will be the first in line to cash the check, while telling each other how much they resent paying taxes and want the government out of their lives.

Last night, slimy Ari Fleischer was on Larry King lying as easily as he breathes (claiming, among other things, that Obama hates Israel.) And here’s what he had to say about this:

L. KING: We have a blog question for Ari Fleischer. It’s from Dawn, “How does Sarah Palin’s policy in Alaska of taxing the oil companies and distributing $3,269 to each citizen differ from distributing the wealth?”

FLEISCHER: Well, that’s because there is no state income tax in Alaska. Nobody has to pay because Alaska has such an abundance of natural resources. The state actually gets the royalties and passes it back to its citizens.

I wish that was the case for everybody in every state. That would be a real big growing private enterprise. I’d have no problem with that.

Golly, that sure sound like some sort of redistributional scheme to me, but what do I know? (And here I thought I heard McCain and Palin railing against corporate taxes …)

So, how does Palin explain it? Here’s Hertzberg again:

A few weeks before she was nominated for Vice-President, she told a visiting journalist—Philip Gourevitch, of this magazine—that “we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs.”

Oh fergawdsake…

.

Voter Suppression Watch

by dday

I’m still a little stunned that it isn’t a bigger story that a sitting US President is ordering his Attorney General to intervene in a voting-rights case in Ohio – a case already decided by the US Supreme Court – just a week away from the election to pick his successor. This is attempted voter suppression at the highest levels, with the President essentially aiding an abetting the nominee from his own party. And if it’s so much as hit page D-38, I’d be surprised. Only the ACLU appears the least bit worked up about this:

With the election one week away, this kind of intrusion represents partisan politics at its worst. In addition, challenging — or purging — lawfully registered voters in the days before the election invites chaos and undermines the integrity of the democratic process.

The whole letter is here.

Why is this not the talk of Democratic circles? Ohio may not hold the key to the election the way it has in years past, but injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, as the saying goes. My biggest fear is that after the election, if Democrats win there will be a strong pull to say “Oh well, the system worked” and not to enact the structural reforms that are needed at so many levels, whether that means instituting the National Popular Vote or same-day registration or automatic registration through Social Security numbers or a ban on e-voting machines and a paper ballot requirement or instant runoff voting or a federal voting standard or making Election Day a holiday. The catch-22 is that a win breeds inertia and a loss means the loser has no access to the levers of power.

But when people like this have a large bearing on how elections are run, there is a serious problem afoot and it doesn’t matter if the eventual conclusion seems correct.

Yesterday we told you about an effort by Indiana’s Republican secretary of state, Todd Rokita, to press federal and state authorities to prosecute ACORN for voter fraud. Rokita had said a review by his office of forms submitted by ACORN found “multiple criminal violations.”

But it turns out that Rokita hardly has a reputation as a non-partisan public official. In October 2002, the South Bend Tribune reported (via nexis):

Working on his own time, [Rokita] also assisted George W. Bush’s campaign during the infamous Florida election recount in 2000. Rokita is proud of that, especially because the U.S. Supreme Court cited Indiana election law when it decided the election in Bush’s favor.

In other words, Rokita was part of the team of ambitious young Republican operatives who flew down to Florida to help out on a bid to stymie the recount effort — remember the “Brooks Brothers riot”? — and ultimately put George Bush in the White House.

This is a partisan operative, one of Roger Stone’s freshly scrubbed protégés, and a McCain campaign co-chair, using his office to attempt to pervert the election process. At some point, this must be fought, regardless of who wins and who loses on November 4.

.

What Have We Learned?

by tristero

On August 31, 2008, I wrote, in re: Sarah Palin:

How refreshing and bold! Yet another ignorant far right nut who abuses government power for personal reasons!

I’m curious. In the past couple of months, have we learned anything new about Sarah Palin?

Impolite Servants

by digby

So everybody in Hollywood hates MSNBC. (Michael Reagan gets death threats from sissy liberals every time he appears!) Whatever. But this common piece of right wing victimology is worth examining:

Actress Patricia Heaton noted that Hollywood workers too often just assume everyone they work with is a like-minded liberal. When those around her belittle John McCain or Palin, she politely reminds them that she’s a Republican.

“That’s what you have to do in our town,” she said.

The humanity. How can she bear up under it all?

She says “Hollywood workers” which would indicate to me that she’s talking about crew as well as fellow actors. And it’s true that there are more liberal “workers” in Hollywood — a lot of them are union, after all. I can easily see Patricia Heaton telling them to stop expressing their opinions around her and them having to do so since she’s a (washed up) TV star. I’ve had many a boss do the same thing. Everybody knows the score.

But poor Heaton still feels put upon because in her mind her beautiful ears should never have to hear liberals being mean to Republicans. It’s impolite. Meanwhile, liberals in this country have been subjected to conservatives slinging crap like this for years every time we turn on the radio:

LIMBAUGH: I mean, if there is a party that’s soulless, it’s the Democratic Party. If there are people by definition who are soulless, it is liberals — by definition. You know, souls come from God. You know? No. No. You can’t go there.

That guy is given awards and treated like a king among the conservative set — which includes the entire Republican establishment. Just a couple of months ago both Bush presidents called the show to shoot the breeze with its “polite” host.

For the last thirty years I have been listening to politicians run as “proud conservatives” without even the slightest acknowledgment that more than half the country identifies themselves differently. (Even the Democrats go to great lengths to assure the country they aren’t “latte sipping, New York times reading” liberals.) Conservatives have been shoving their philosophy down Americans’ throats for decades as if it were the one true American faith and anyone who doesn’t agree is a traitor.

Nonetheless, get ready to hear more of these stories of victimization, as Republicans begin to realize that conservatism is as out of fashion as mullets and padded shoulders. If they thought they were being victimized when they ran the whole government and were feted as the personification of Real America you know they are going to wallow in victimhood as if being a conservative is akin to living in the Warsaw ghetto, once they are out of power. For reasons that probably have to do with guilt and projection they seem to need to see themselves as an aggrieved minority. I say let them follow their bliss.


Update:
Here’s another one right out of the Limbaugh files — this time used by Liddy Dole.

.

Holy Crap, Obama Went There

by dday

I don’t think he needed to, but will anybody watch this and not understand implicitly?

Maybe this is the first ad of the 2012 campaign.

But for the current one, it’s a devastating comment on John McCain’s poor judgment. He tried to win a news cycle, but Barack Obama just won the war.

.

Taken For A Ride

by tristero

Don’t miss Maeve Reston’s revolting hurl in the LA Times recalling the halcyon days when McCain pampered, flattered, and even healed his media entourage. It really can’t be excerpted, you need to experience the lurching contractions of the whole retch.

Many of you may be embarrassed, or even repelled, at Reston’s avid enthusiasm for exposing, for no reason whatsoever, her truly limitless narcissism and negative self-esteem. It really is quite remarkable: It’s all her fault, she informs us, that the Straight Talk Express derailed because she asked an awkward question of St. John McCain on video tape. It’s like reading the confession of one of those cultists in the homemade skirts married to that polygamist. Memo to Maeve: It’s not your fault. Trust me.

Reston’s personality type is ripe for exploitation by trained manipulators like politicians. Sure enough, during her embed with Papa John, me-obsessed Maeve regressed to the psychological state of a helpless child, clingingly dependent upon the good Daddy – the “other man” in her life – not to mention his generous supply of solicitious aides who provided her with band-aids for her boo-boos. (Think I”m making this up? Read the article.)

Even though you and I may perceive Reston’s “journalism” as shoddy to the point of corruption, I’m sure neither her nor her editors think of it that way. Her needy personality and ambition assured her access to one of the most powerful people in the world. And that provided her paper with close=up portraits of the Maverick straight-shooterer. Where’s the problem?

The problem is that this isn’t reporting as it is commonly understood, but merely rank publicity flacking. Those of us who couldn’t care less about McCain’s holiday jaunts in the rainforests of Costa Rica are being fed hagiographic bromides rather than facts. It is impossible to get a sense either of the issues or the temperament of the politician.

One can’t blame McCain for trying, I suppose, to seduce the press rather than answer questions; it is what powerful people do when questioned. And Reston herself comes across as so pitifully insecure it’s hard for me to get too angry at her, either. However, her bosses, who aided and abetted this abusive relationship – abusive, that is, to the readers of the Times who are looking to be informed about the powerful – have a heckuva lot to answer for.

UPDATE: Glenn has more.

Vote Flipping

by tristero

It’s not an urban myth:

Notice that after the machine gets calibrated, it still flipped a vote.

As I’ve mentioned several times, my elderly parents were victims of the infamous butterfly ballot down in Florida. We’re pretty sure that my mom ended up voting accidentally for Buchanan while my father probably voted for Gore. Both intended to vote for Gore but got confused. While both my parents were in full possession of their mental faculties, this was a highly disorienting experience for them.

The gadget in this video is no better. The out-of-calibration machine demonstrated on this video would, if used in the election, surely confuse many voters who wouldn’t think to inform an official, or might be too embarrassed to do so. Proofreading a long printout of voter choices also adds needless redundancy and complication. I don’t know what the solution is, but I do know that these machines are not it.

Meanwhile, it is important to stress what may seem obvious to many of us. Everyone who votes should check, and doublecheck, their ballot to make sure that the machine has properly registered their vote. And needless to say, clear, accurate voting technology should have a place of priority on all progressives’ long, long list of issues to address.

Together

by digby

…we did better

Acorn’s Bertha Lewis thanked the progressive movement for its help today:

That may be the first time that I’ve really felt that our budding progressive movement is real. Very, very nice.

*I do have to add another shout out to Brad Friedman, who is our resident blogospheric expert on all aspects of electoral integrity and is the ultimate repository of useful information on the subject.

.

Saddleback Wanker

by digby

Now that we’ve invited everyone into the big tent, it looks like some people aren’t going to be welcome anymore. At least if they want to get married.

Pastor Dan reports:

Rick Warren Endorses Proposition 8

I thought about giving Warren the nod for the coveted Wanker Of The Day Award. But then I realized that he’s just doing what comes naturally to him, even if, as Randall Balmer points out, it’s not true to his Baptist roots. The real problem here is the endless parade of Religious-Industrial Complex consultants and activists who tell us that Rick Warren is the epitome of the “moderate Evangelical” that Democrats should be working to attract. The only problem is, it doesn’t work. Cameron Strang – who was supposed to pray at the Democratic Convention in Denver – is now on the board of Oral Roberts University. Randy Brinson worked for Mike Huckabee this spring and runs what’s left of Alabama’s chapter of the Christian Coalition. Joel Hunter endorsed Huckabee in the primaries, and has pledged himself to “maintaining a socially conservative platform”. Even the venerable Jim Wallis won’t describe himself as part of a “religious left.” Moving away from strictly Evangelicals, Doug Kmiec is still an authoritarian Catholic.

You just wait. On the morning after the election we will see all these so-called Christians and their lobbyists rushing to take credit for the election and telling everyone that it proves America is basically socially conservative. That’s what they always do, whether Democrats or Republicans win the thing. All these alleged Republican apostates will make the case that they are right there with Obama on everything — except, you know,stuff like civil liberties and civil rights (Nobody wants any more of that, obviously.)

Pastor Dan gives the correct analysis of the problem:

So: while Rick Warren may be a useful ally on issues such as poverty, he is nothing like a progressive. Seeking to bring him or members of his congregation into the Democratic party only serves to drag the party rightward on social issues. Coalitions are fun and all, but sometimes they need to be built around issues, rather than elections.

Of course Democrats and liberals can work with these people on issues of common interest. What they cannot do is keep whittling away at their fundamental principles in a quixotic quest to bring these people into their electoral coalition. It won’t work.

Besides, it’s not like there aren’t plenty of religious leaders who are actually tolerant and compassionate toward their fellow man for the Democratic party to work with:

.