Showing posts with label 2012 presidential elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2012 presidential elections. Show all posts

Friday, November 25, 2011

Right Wing Nuts Still Wrong, Still Extreme, Still Harping on the Turkey Thing


This turkey of a story has more legs than ......well, than a real turkey has drumsticks!  Right wing watch caught this from the American Family's Bryan Fischer (he's also afraid of Mormons as well as Muslims) who was prominent in Rick Perry's political evangelism event earlier this year. 


This is not a passing aberration; this turkey story.  Rather this is part if a larger issue, a core theme, a central topic in the 2012 GOP political debate.

To correct the inaccuracies that Fischer is pushing - all turkeys are slaughtered the SAME. There is NO PRAYER said over them, and they are not labeled as being different, because they are NOT different from the way non-religious designated meat iss always slaughtaered - (and not just turkeys) . Any turkeys tht are subsequently labeled Halal - OR KOSHER - have the pertinent religious requirements satisfied for such labeling at the retail distribution source, where the labeling is then, appropriately, noted.

In the case of Butterball turkeys, Butterball indicates this occurs primarily in other countries to which they sell turkeys; there are more than 20 other countries to which Butterball exports this American ag product.

Fischer was a prominent speaker at the Rick Perry Prayer event; he was a prominent speaker at the Values Voter Summit, where every political candidate in the GOP Presidential contest spoke, along with the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, and Majority Leader Eric Cantor.  Islamophobia is a key part of a number of our would-be candidates, notably Gingrich, Cain, Bachmann, Santorum.  The only consistent exception has been Ron Paul, and he is highly unlikely to be the next GOP presidential candidate.










These candidates have a fundamentalist approach that would make Christianity and secular law identical.  They would make a Christian version of our secular law which given NO religion a preference something different than what it is NOW.  Frightening people over Sharia law and pseudo-Halal turkey is not different than some of the similar anti-Semitic tactics which used to target Jews.

This Halal turkey story is NOT going away, it is not merely a minor embarassment of a lone extremist.  It IS part of a larger facet of conservative politics.  It is a dog whistle; it is fear mongering, a straw man bogey man of hatred.  In that sense, it is no different than the straw man effigy that conservative students burned in Scotland.  This is just a different Islamic strawman, thrown on a different bonfire, a U.S. conservative bonfire.

These people throw around the word Freedoms constantly.  But what they want to do is to take away freedom - freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, rule of non-partisan unbiased law.

We don't need religious crazy fundamentalists in the White House. We don't need race and ethnic or religious hatred in our politics.


I found this quote from Reuters about the crosses case in question, which pertains ONLY so far as I understand this, to the installation of a religious symbol on public property.  In the past there have also been controversies about putting up crosses to honor someone who was not Christian but another religion - notably Jewish, which boiled down to the issue of are crosses specifically Christian or not (it was determined they were) so a further issue here may have been the respective religions, or atheism, of the fallen officers.

"The challenge to the Utah crosses was brought by a Texas-based group called American Atheists, which sued to remove the memorials from state property."
I haven't gone looking for any studies yet, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a close correlation between being pro-gun, and anti-muslim/anti-sharia law, and those who are also pro-Christian dominionism/christian political evangelism. That excludes Jews, Muslims, and Mormons, and in some cases Roman Catholics. I'm not saying ALL pro-gunners are fundamentalist crazy haters and bigots, but there IS a significant overlap.


Fischer would ban Muslims from joining our armed forces, and has also lobbied for Muslims to be allowed to immigrate to this country ONLY if they converted to Christianity, as well as demanded that Native Americans convert to Christianity 'in order to be full U.S. citizens'. Fischer has had extensive support from the candidates, some even before they were running for President, including during their campaigns for other offices.

The sham historian David Barton has also been prominently promoted by a number of the Republican candidates, especially Michele Bachmann who has invited this pseudo-scholar to address 'classes' on the U.S. Constitution - which he is emphatically NOT qualified to do by any legitimtate standard of knowledge - specifically to promote the idea that this is an exclusively Christian nation, and that other religions should at best be tolerated, but that U.S. laws must conform to "Biblical Christianity".

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Obama Burned in Effigy - Prank or Legitimate Method of Protest?

Is this a legitimate expression of opinion, or does it cross the line of symbolic advocating harm or violence to a real, living person who is a public figure?  I don't know how much this translates as simple expression of dissatisfaction, versus other interpretations of the action.

I don't know what the answer is, but I'd be open to hear their explanation before getting too upset.  I'd also be curious to know what the effigy itself looked like, and if it was a reasonable representational likeness, or something more along the lines of some of the racist images on tea party signs and emails that have come from the right here in the U.S.

But mostly, I remember all of the UK anti-Bush images, particularly the ones that morphed him into looking like a chimpanzee.  I'm inclined to put this in the category of bad taste and unpleasantness, but short of hate speech, without a more clear explanation being expressed by those who did the burning. Given our shameful history of lynching blacks in this country in the 19th and 20th centuries, I would be much more concerned and offended had Obama been hanged in effigy.


From MSNBC.com:
msnbc.com
updated 1 hour 56 minutes ago
An effigy of Barack Obama was burned by members of a Conservative party college student association in Scotland, according to reports Wednesday. BBC News reported that the incident took place on a beach in St. Andrews on Friday evening.
Matthew Marshall, president of the St. Andrews Conservative Association, told the station that he was sorry that the incident had happened. It is unclear exactly who was responsible.
"President Obama is an important ally to the British government. It was a stupid thing to do and we apologize for any offence caused," he told the BBC.
James Mills, former chairman of the university's Labour party student society, told the station that the burning was "disgraceful."
Mills' effigy has been burned in the past along with those of former South African President Nelson Mandela and former U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
"I can't imagine any other student activists of a major political party would behave in this manner," Mills told the BBC.
'Obscene act' "It's disgusting and I hope the Conservative Party and the prime minister completely come out and condemn this obscene act," he added. "The last thing a truly modern party should be doing is burning an effigy of anyone let alone the first black president of the USA, one of our closest allies."
The BBC quoted an unnamed person who was present at the burning who said that members of the associated were "surprised" that the Obama effigy had been put on the bonfire.
St. Andrews University, which was founded in 1413 and says it is the third oldest in the English-speaking world, told the BBC that university officials had asked to speak to Marshall about the "very understandable concerns."
John Park, a Scottish Labour party lawmaker, whose constituency includes the university, told the U.K.'s Press Association that the burning was "gravely offensive and way beyond a student prank."
"Thousands of young people yearn for the chance to study at such a prestigious institution, and they will be amazed to see that those who have been given that opportunity behave like this," he added.
"Burning an effigy of anyone is offensive, let alone the first black President of the United States. The overtones are deeply unpleasant," he said.

Saturday, November 19, 2011

A New Development in Libya

I wonder if this is something that 'we need a leader, not a reader' anti-intellect candidate Herman Cain will notice?  Or is it yet another instance where he will be caught unprepared and inadequate when faced with a challenging (rather than softball) question?  I'm betting that if he hasn't yet, Cain will be paying someone soon to read for him.  Or to him.

From MSNBC news and news services:

Libyan commander: Gadhafi's son Seif al-Islam arrested

Younger Gadhafi captured with two aides while trying to cross into Niger, commander says 

NBC, msnbc.com and news services
updated 2 hours 28 minutes ago
 breaking news
Moammar Gadhafi's son Seif al-Islam was captured in a southern Libyan city along with two of his aides who were trying to smuggle him out of the country, a militia commander said on Saturday.
Bashir al-Tlayeb of the Zintan brigades said that Seif al-Islam was caught in the desert town of Obari, near the southern city of Sabha about 400 miles south of Tripoli. He didn't elaborate on how Seif al-Islam was captured, but said that he was brought to the city of Zintan, the home of one of the largest revolutionary brigades in Libya.
Al-Tlayeb said that it would be up to the Libya's ruling National Transitional Council to decide on where the former Libyan leader would be tried.
However, NBC News reported that according to sources, al-Islam would be tried in Libya, not handed over to the International Criminal Court.
Al-Tlayeb also said that there was still no information about wanted former intelligence director Abdullah Senoussi or where he is located.
Libya's interim justice minister told Reuters that the younger Gadhafi was in good health.
Interactive: Gadhafi's children (on this page) Seif al-Islam is the last of Moammar Gadhafi's sons to remain unaccounted for.
Secret negotiations over a surrender?
Born in 1972, Seif al-Islam Gadhafi is the oldest of seven children of Moammar and Safiya Gadhafi.
He drew Western favor in previous years by touting himself as a liberalizing reformer but then staunchly backed his father in his brutal crackdown on rebels in the regime's final days.
Seif had gone underground after Tripoli fell to revolutionary forces.
Story: Libya: Gadhafi son offers to surrender to Hague The International Criminal Court had earlier said that it was in indirect negotiations with a son of the late Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi about his possible surrender for trial.
This is a breaking news story. Please check again for more updates.
NBC News, msnbc.com staff, The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.
 

Friday, November 11, 2011

Jon Stewart Nails the Republican Debate... and So Does Stephen Colbert

Cross posted from penigma.blogspot.com:



The Daily Show With Jon Stewart
Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Indecision 2012 - Mercy Rule Edition
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full EpisodesPolitical Humor & Satire BlogThe Daily Show on Facebook


followed on Comedy Central by this:

The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Indecision 2012 - Sorry, Oops
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full EpisodesPolitical Humor & Satire BlogVideo Archive


Just an observation, but I don't think Rick Perry can afford to get rid of the Department of Education just yet; he clearly still needs some serious education himself.

I don't find 'oops' to be presidential, but then most of what he proposes lacks merit or depth of thought or a legitimate factual basis.  All he represents is right wing ignorance.

Friday, October 21, 2011

Bye Bye Quadaffi, RIP and Good Riddance
And How the Right Was Wrong
AGAIN



HARRIS: Congresswoman Bachmann, on the same theme, you opposed the U.S. intervention in Libya. If President Obama had taken the same view, Gadhafi would, in all likelihood, still be in power today.
Moderator,
Reagan Library Republican Debate,
September 2011
quote courtesy of The Political Guide.com

Michele Bachmann is an embarrassment to Minnesota, because she is so damned ignorant, and so bigoted.

She will say anything, without understanding anything, much less everything that is necessary. If there were any more proof needed that this woman is not equipped to be a Congresswoman - not an effective, informed representative certainly - much less President, or even to be elected dog catcher, the following videos exemplify her failures of intelligence and education. Yet, she raised the money in the last election from the right to run a campaign that was more costly than any other member of Congress. Why is the right so willing to support stupid? Why does the right exalt ideology over substance? When will the right stop conflating idiot and ideology? The other candidates running for office on the right, especially for the nomination for the presidential race in 2012 are not much of an improvement over Bachmann.


Remember, this woman sits on the Intelligence Committee.  You'd think she would know as much as oh, the L.A. Times when they report the findings of the Intelligence community, but NO.  Maybe the Republicans had some vain hope that she would absorb some, by exposure. Apparently they were unaware of her dismal attendance record, if that was their hope. But hey! The Tea Party loves her!  She's pro-ignorance, and anti-science (apparently also anti-geography).


But it gets better.  Want to bet that Bachmann doesn't actually KNOW where Libya is?  Not that her ignorance would ever stop her from criticizing Obama or anyone else not on the far right.  There is this footage from the Republican debate-of-ignorance in Las Vegas.  The following is from the HuffPo:

 

The next time someone tells you the Republicans - or worse, the nut jobs in the Tea Party - are the party of ideas, point out that they aren't the party of ideas, and they certainly are not the party of FACTS.  They are, if anything, fact-aversive.

For example, on the demise of Quadaffi (which is a phonetic spelling, and therefore occurs in many variations) we have this from Michele Bachmann, from Politico:

"For more than 40 years, we lived with the Muammar al-Qaddafi regime and the atrocities he orchestrated. The world is a better place without Qaddafi. It is my hope that Qaddafi's reign of terror will be replaced with a government that respects the people of Libya and one that will be a good partner with the United States. Hopefully, today will also bring to an end our military involvement there, something I opposed from its beginning."
Michele Bachmann is a flip-flopper.  She doesn't know where key locations are, she doesn't understand the politics of these countries or movements, and she will say anything - apparently forgetting that her statements are on the record.   The web site, Political Guide.com however, does a meticulous job of tracking these flip flops, and has done so with Bachmann, tracking her statements while campaigning, which can be viewed at their site, but more importantly tracking her voting record on Libya :
Voting Record Restricting Funds for Use in Libya
On June 24, 2011 the House voted on a measure to prohibit funds for the Department of Defense (DOD) from being used for U.S. Armed Forces in support of the NATA Operation Unified Protector with respect to Libya, except for: (1) search and rescue; (2) intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; (3) aerial refueling; and (4) operational planning. The vote failed 180-238. Michele Bachmann voted against preventing funds from being used for military actions in support of the NATO mission in Libya.


Michele Bachmann voted against preventing funds from being used for military actions in support of the NATO mission in Libya.


Authorizing the limited use of US Forces in support of the NATO mission in Libya


On June 24, 2011 the House voted on a resolution to authorize the President to continue the limited use of U.S. Armed Forces in Libya in support of U.S. security policy interests as part of the NATO mission to enforce U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973. The resolution states that Congress does not support deploying, establishing, or maintaining the presence of units and members of U.S. Armed Forces on the ground in Libya unless the purpose of the presence is limited to the immediate personal defense of U.S. government officials or to rescuing members of NATO forces from imminent danger. The resolution failed 123-495. Michele Bachmann voted against the resolution to limit the use of forces in Libya.


Michele Bachmann voted against the resolution to limit the use of forces in Libya.


Removing Troops from Libya


On June 3, 2011 the House voted to direct the President to remove troops from Libya. The vote was bipartisan for and against, but failed 262-148. Michele Bachmann voted in favor of forcing President Obama to remove troops from Libya.


Michele Bachmann voted in favor of forcing President Obama to remove troops from Libya.


Resolution Against Troop Deployment


On June 3, 2011 the House voted on a resolution declaring that President Obama could not deploy, establish, or maintain the presence of units and members of the United States Armed Forces on the ground in Libya. The vote passed 266-144. Michele Bachmann voted in favor of the resolution to declare that the President could not deploy troops.


Michele Bachmann voted in favor of the resolution to declare that the President could not deploy troops.
Clearly, President Obama in cooperation with our allies in NATO, had a clear vision of what was occurring on the ground in Libya as events unfolded.  He engaged us in a very limited involvement which lasted some eight months, and did not result in significant loss of life to the United States military, and which has been crucial in developing relationships with the new governments in Muslim countries in Africa.  Michele Bachmann doesn't give a damn about Libya; she is simply annoyed that once again, President Obama has been successful, and she has been caught being both stupid, and on the wrong side of history.

All of which qualifies her to go to work at the Faux Propaganda and Disinformation cable network after she is finished in Congress in 2012, but not for much else.

Friday, October 7, 2011

Gross Understatement
"I don't have the facts to back this up": Herman Cain

Mr. Cain, you don't have the facts to back up a lot of what you believe.

You are speaking in every media venue that will have you, and you are running not just for any office, but for the most powerful office in the country, possibly in the world.  You have a duty, if you wish to be considered for candidacy to FIND THE DAMN FACTS before you form or express an opinion.  Shame on you and on those who stupidly and ignorantly support you without those facts.


Being Gay is a choice?

No.  Here is the response from gays within your own party, Herman, the Log Cabin Republicans (my emphasis added- DG):




For Immediate Release
Log Cabin Republicans to Herman Cain: We Can Show You the Science


“If Herman Cain truly wants to see the science proving that sexual
orientation is not a choice, Log Cabin Republicans would be happy to
show it to him,” said Log Cabin Republicans Executive Director R. Clarke
Cooper.
“The claim that a person chooses to be gay or lesbian has been
discredited by every major professional medical organization, starting
with the American Psychological Association and the American Medical
Association. An individual’s orientation is no more a choice than the
color of his skin or whether he is left-handed, and too many people have
been hurt because of failed attempts to change the way they were born.”



“I would also be happy to discuss my experiences as a current Army
reserve officer and combat veteran, and the testimony of military
leadership that the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ strengthens our
armed forces and furthers America’s national security interests. It is
unfortunate that Mr. Cain chose to divert attention away from a solid
platform of greater liberty and smaller government by indulging in
anti-gay rhetoric. Log Cabin Republicans sincerely hope that Herman Cain
is open to hearing the evidence and changing his mind on these issues.”
But better than I could point out Cain's other inconsistencies and hypocrisies and failures to base his position on facts (or reason), and there are MANY of them is.......who else, but the inimitable satirists on the Daily Show:
The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Indecision 2012 - Rising Cain
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full EpisodesPolitical Humor & Satire BlogThe Daily Show on Facebook
Oh, well - at least Herman Cain (or Herbert Cain, as 'Sandra'/ Sarah Palin likes to call him - another person who doesn't have much acquaintance with facts - has replaced both Palin and Bachmann as the token Right Wing minority first tier candidate. Because with statements like this, we can hardly take him as anything but a token.  These are not the statements of a serious person.

I think this one might be my favorite though, of all of the many inconsistencies and fact-free  claims of Herman Cain:



I was particularly struck by Cain's observations, about 6 minutes into the interview, that tries to argue that Hank Williams Jr. did not intend to make a comparison between Obama and Hitler because he did not name Obama specifically. Williams in the interview makes it very clear that he is referring to a specific event and specific people, including Obama. Further, he references Obama by name in other parts of that same interview as the person to whom he refers. This is not just being disconnected from fact and reality, it is intellectually dishonest.

Don't even get me started on all the problems with his 9-9-9 economic proposals for which Cain is reluctant to provide any names for consultants.  That is a joke, and not a very funny one.  It is not a seroius economic proposal, except perhaps in the mind of Herman Cain.  Or.......Herbert Cain.

Because it IS FUNNY!

A second high five to Microdot for posting this on his blog the brain police.

As a Minnesotan who has lived in her district, I can aver that she makes more sense HERE than she does in her real speaking events -- and it's a lot funnier.



Encore, merci Microdot!  C'est deux aujourd'hui.

Tuesday, October 4, 2011

Jon Stewart and the Daily Show on the Perry Niggerhead Controversy
- Part 1

What I found interesting in the original story was that the reference to the hunting camp/ranch was not unique to that location or to Perry and his family and friends.  It was part of a larger area, and common parlance among everyone who lived in and around that part of Texas.

Part 2 of the Daily Show expands on that further, but to begin from the beginning:


The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
The Amazing Racism
www.thedailyshow.com

I'm offering blog bonus points (no, they don't win or earn you anything) to commenters who can provide other examples from your own experience of similar place names, either from your own area or places you have visited.

Join in!

Daily Show Full EpisodesPolitical Humor & Satire BlogThe Daily Show on Facebook