Friday, January 31, 2014

Republican Party Dying?


Our series on the apparent struggle of Fox News and the GOP continues with a few short pieces, first a story from  at News.Yahoo.com titled, "Veteran gay conservative activist: 'No Hope For The Republican Party,' and a second piece by Jason Easely at Politicususa.com, "Fox in Freefall as Rachel Maddow Beats Fox News For an Entire Week In the Ratings."

First the story about "No Hope For The Republican Party:"

"Top Line

"Gay political activist Jimmy LaSalvia is having a loud and public breakup with the GOP.

LaSalvia and friend...
"Before announcing last week that he is leaving the Republican Party to become an independent –pointing to 'tolerance of bigotry' within the GOP in his parting blog post – LaSalvia was a veteran GOP operative and activist, known for co-founding the conservative gay rights group GOProud.

"LaSalvia sat down with 'Top Line' to discuss his dramatic departure and explained that he has 'no hope for the Republican Party.'

"'No matter how good your autopsy … the changes the Republican Party is implementing really amount to nothing more than lipstick on a pig,' he said. 'It was the Romney campaign that really got me to understand just how severe the problem is. … It's a culture of intolerance that I don't think any amount of messaging or policy changes can fix.'

"Though LaSalvia still identifies as a conservative, he said he believes that the GOP is 'out of touch with life in America today' and has consequently been rendered useless as a political party.


"'The object of political parties is to win elections, and I've determined that the Republicans can never win a national election again, and so at that point, what's the point?' he said.

"'Forty-two percent of Americans are independents, because they don't feel like either party represents their values or principles,' he continued. 'I'm like everybody else, and I think that 42 percent of Americans who aren't represented by a party represent the new majority.'

"He said that he held out hope for many years that the Republican Party would evolve in step with the American public on its view of gay marriage. But he said the change has come too slowly and now 'it’s just too late.'

"'There is a segment of the party who seems to be anti-everybody who's not like them,' he said. 'You have such fear that they might lose a small sliver of intolerant voters that they're not willing to say to those people you either need to modernize and get with the program, or you can't come on our journey to help our country.'

"LaSalvia said he’s not sure what his next step is in defining his place with 'the new majority' but said he’s received an outpouring of support across the political spectrum since announcing his political shift last week.

"For more on LaSalvia’s split from the GOP, check out this episode of "Top Line.'"


(ABC News’ Alexandra Dukakis, Tom Thornton, Melissa Young, and Bob Bramson contributed to this episode.)

And on to the second story on Fox News's ratings:

"Fox News is hemorrhaging young viewers, but last week, things hit a new low for Fox. Rachel Maddow beat Fox News for the entire week with viewers age 25-54.


"According to TVNewser, 'The Rachel Maddow Show' averaged 325,000 A25-54 viewers for the week, topping Fox News’ 'The Kelly File,' which drew 305,000, and 'Piers Morgan Tonight,' which had 159,000. It was MSNBC’s best 9pmET performance since the week of the Boston Marathon bombing (4/15/13). MSNBC’s coverage of the Chris Christie bridge scandal propelled MSNBC to#1 in the primetime demo on both Thursday and Friday of last week. Maddow won the 9pmET timeslot among younger viewers both nights.

"Moving Megyn Kelly to 9 PM was supposed to lure young viewers to Fox News. That move has failed as Kelly isn’t drawing the younger demographic that Fox News desperately needs for the future. The Maddow victory comes on the heels of Fox News seeing a 30% drop in young viewership in 2013. These numbers are also a huge victory for Maddow. She broke the Bridgegate story, and it is nice to see her being rewarded for some excellent reporting.


"Rachel Maddow’s ratings have plummeted since Chris Hayes came aboard, and singlehandedly destroyed MSNBC’s primetime ratings. Despite her big week, Maddow still drew less than half of the total audience of Megyn Kelly (2.156 million to 1.034 million). Her program still has a long way to go before it is strong enough to overcome the weak All In lead in and challenge for number one, but this is real progress.

"Maddow’s ability to defeat Fox News for a week demonstrates how dire the problem with attracting younger viewers has become for the Roger Ailes. Fox News is television’s senior citizens center for Republicans. If Maddow had a decent lead in at 8 PM, the kind that Keith Olbermann and Ed Schultz used to provide, she could be beating Fox News with younger viewers on a regular basis.

"Fox News needs younger viewers in order to guarantee its long term health, and those viewers have consistently demonstrated that they have no interest in what Fox is selling. Putting a younger face in front of the same Republican propaganda isn’t going to draw younger viewers. Fox News doesn’t get that the problem is the message, not the messenger.

"Rachel Maddow has an extremely appealing program, and if MSNBC could ever get its act together, Fox News would be in real trouble."

********************


If Fox News is dying along with the GOP, and presumably Conservatism, then there will be no need for this site, but we suspect that this is not the case even though LaSalvia said that the "...GOP is 'out of touch with life in America today' and has consequently been rendered useless as a political party," as well as his opinion that he's "...determined that the Republicans can never win a national election again."

Conservatism will continue as long as the Elites fund Conservatism, and the Elites will always continue funding Conservatism in the form of any factional political party that they can control as a front group - the GOP, the Republican Party, the National Socialists, etc., etc.

Conservatism is the means for the elevating of the upper classes over the 98 percent of us, they are the most greediest and power hungry among us, and the only way to rid ourselves of the vast rightwing criminal conspiracy called Conservatism is to outlaw it.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


“America was established not to create wealth but to realize a vision, to realize an
ideal – to discover and maintain liberty among men.”

Woodrow Wilson.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thursday, January 30, 2014

Why Frank Rich Is Wrong To Tell Liberals, "Stop Beating A Dead Fox"


We continue with the same theme with a short piece by "Ellen" at Newshounds.us titled, "Why Frank Rich Is Wrong To Tell Liberals, a rebuttal of yesterday's posting, "Half of Fox News' Viewers Are 68 and Older."


You'll remember from yesterday's piece, "A key data point from Frank Rich's profile of Fox News:
"Fox News is losing younger viewers at an even faster rate than its competitors. With a median viewer age now at 68 according to Nielsen data through mid-January (compared with 60 for MSNBC and CNN, and 62 to 64 for the broadcast networks), Fox is in essence a retirement community...If it is actually possible, its median viewer age will keep creeping upward. (It rose by two years over the course of 2013.)"
"Ellen" objects:

"Frank Rich has written a lengthy, important and fascinating article in which he argues that Fox News is dying and that liberals play into its hands by paying attention to it. As much as I respect and admire Rich, I think he is dead wrong in his prescription. Let's discuss!

"Rich's article is called: Stop Beating a Dead Fox The conservative news channel’s only real power is in riling up liberals, who by this point should know better. The title pretty well sums up his thoughtful piece.

"I certainly agree with the first part of his premise, that Fox is dying. Rich writes:
"'Fox News is losing younger viewers at an even faster rate than its competitors. With a median viewer age now at 68 according to Nielsen data through mid-January (compared with 60 for MSNBC and CNN, and 62 to 64 for the broadcast networks), Fox is in essence a retirement community.'
"'The million or so viewers who remain fiercely loyal to the network are not, for the most part, and as some liberals still imagine, naïve swing voters who stumble onto Fox News under the delusion it’s a bona fide news channel and then are brainwashed by Ailes’s talking points into becoming climate-change deniers. They arrive at the channel as proud, self-selected citizens of Fox Nation and are unlikely to defect from the channel or its politics until death do them part. (As Sherman writes, "Ailes’s audience seldom watches anything" on television but Fox News.) Hard as it may be to fathom, Fox Nation is even more monochromatically white than the GOP is, let alone the American nation.'
"But Rich seems to think that Fox's power is as frail as its audience:
"'Rather than waste time bemoaning Fox’s bogus journalism, liberals should encourage it. The more that Fox News viewers are duped into believing that the misinformation they are fed by Ailes is fair and balanced, the more easily they can be ambushed by reality as they were on Election Night 2012. We are all fond of quoting the Daniel Patrick Moynihan dictum that “everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” But we should start considering the possibility that it now works to the Democrats’ advantage that Fox News does manufacture its own facts. Much as it lulled its audience in 2012 into believing that Romney’s "47 percent" tape was just a passing storm, so it is now peddling similar assurances about Chris Christie’s travails.'
"Rich also seems to think that Fox will just self-destruct if liberals will just get out of the way and let it do its thing. Rich cites the uproar over Megyn Kelly's 'white Santa' comments as a case in point:
"'When this supposed "national firestorm" (as Al Sharpton inflated it on his MSNBC show) finally died down, only two things had been accomplished beyond the waste of everyone’s time. Liberals had played right into Fox’s stereotype of them—as killjoy p.c. police. And Fox News could once again brag about its power to set an agenda for its adversaries even as it also played the woebegone ­victim. "Because they can’t defeat us on the media battlefield, the far left seeks to demonize Fox News as a right-wing propaganda machine and a racist enterprise," said O’Reilly when sermonizing about the episode on his show. "That’s why Miss Megyn got headlines about a Santa Claus remark that was totally harmless." Fox News is a right-wing propaganda machine and at times (if not this one) a racist enterprise (witness, among other examples, its fruitless effort to drum up a "New Black Panther Party" scandal over some 95 segments in the summer of 2010). But O’Reilly was half-right. Kelly’s inane remark was harmless and unworthy of headlines. Without the left’s overreaction, there wouldn’t have been any pseudo "national firestorm."'
"Those latter two parts are where Rich and I part ways. While Rich makes a legitimate argument that Kelly's 'white Santa' comment did not merit the backlash it engendered (though I disagree), the fact of the matter is that "white Santa" is an easy-to-grasp soundbite that stands in for a larger picture.


"For one thing, Fox is not just some lone, Voice of Aging Conservatives niche television channel. It's part of a very large echo chamber that includes other News Corp. properties such as the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal. Fox is symbiotic with conservative talk radio giant Rush Limbaugh and his ilk and, of course, the Republican Party. The GOP may be on its way out but just look at the way that they have stymied President Obama's agenda in the meanwhile. Gun control, for example, is overwhelmingly popular with most Americans. But Congress has been unable to pass a ban on assault weapons, even in the wake of the Sandy Hook school massacre. Guess which side Fox News has hyped?

"If Fox didn't still have the power to reach beyond its insular group of diehards, would we still be talking about Benghazi nearly a year and a half later, when there is still no real there there?

"In my view, the most dangerous aspect of Fox is its 24/7 regimen of hate mongering. Hate doesn't just sell to Fox's select believers, it has pernicious side effects for society and for those who may not have a cadre of followers to back them up. Just ask Ward Churchill (fired from his job after being targeted by Fox). Or Van Jones (he resigned from the Obama administration after being targeted by Fox). Or Dr. George Tiller's family (he was murdered after being targeted by Fox).


"The sad truth is that Fox has power disproportionate to its small audience. I'd argue that the solution is for liberals to respond in an educated, forceful and strategic way, as opposed to getting 'riled up.' But whatever the answer, I think the worst thing for liberals to do is to turn their backs and tell themselves not to worry because it will all be over soon.

********************


We suspect we'll see the phrase, "The GOP may be on its way out but..." more than once for the next few years, and one of the points in "Ellen's" rebuttal, that Fox Snooze has directly contributed to the lack of gun control in the U.S. is a major one.

And her final rebuttal, that "...the most dangerous aspect of Fox is its 24/7 regimen of hate mongering," is also a major argument.  Hate is the offspring of Fear, and from the murder of Dr. Tiller to the deaths resulting from the absence of a weapons ban in Congress, we see that Fox is as guilty of murder as their bosses - the greediest and most power-hungry among us.

The criminalization of Conservatism will be accompanied by a ban on Faux News and any other front for Conservative "ideology."  Remember, Conservatism is a phony political philosophy that hides the true aim of Conservative leaders and their propagandists like Fox: The rule of America by its Elites, an anti-American belief that uses any and all criminal methods to achieve their New American Age of Feudalism.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


“When the President does it, that means that it’s not illegal.”

Richard M. Nixon.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Half of Fox News' Viewers Are 68 and Older


"Half of Fox News' Viewers Are 68 and Older," is a story by Derek Thompson at TheAtlantic.com that you won't want to miss if Schadenfreude is your thing.  Subtitled, "Here's what that means for cable TV," the story by Mr. Thompson hopefully starts us on the dying breath of the GOP House Organ that has dealt in Conservative lies and "controversies" since its inception (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel_controversies):

"A key data point from Frank Rich's profile of Fox News:
"Fox News is losing younger viewers at an even faster rate than its competitors.  With a median viewer age now at 68 according to Nielsen data through mid-January (compared with 60 for MSNBC and CNN, and 62 to 64 for the broadcast networks), Fox is in essence a retirement community...If it is actually possible, its median viewer age will keep creeping upward. (It rose by two years over the course of 2013.)
"It's satisfying for liberals to call Fox News 'a retirement community,' and, surely, it is.  But the entire cable news industry relies on building a product for ages 60 and up, MSNBC isn't exactly a nursery.

"Various media critics (both professionals of the trade and those who critique for free) like to mock CNN for its poop-ships and long decline, and we chastise MSNBC for trying to play Fox's game from the left with longer words and fewer viewers. But, fundamentally, Fox News is at an unassailable advantage on its turf because it's selling a conservative political product to an older audience, which tends to be more politically conservative, anyway. Over the last three general-election cycles, the 65+ group voted for the GOP presidential candidate by an average of 9 percentage points.

"Roger Ailes is some kind of genius, and Fox News gets many things right when it comes to building telegenic politico-entertainment. But maybe Fox's secret sauce isn't TV. It's demographics."



This story resulted in Frank Rich's provocative piece at Nymag.com, "Stop Beating a Dead FoxThe conservative news channel’s only real power is in riling up liberals, who by this point should know better," and we'll reprint a portion here:

"'There ain’t no sanity clause,' Chico Marx told Groucho. There is also no Santa Claus. And there was no sanity in the Santa fracas that became an embarrassing liberal-media fixation just before Christmas. For those who missed it, what happened was this: A Fox News anchor, Megyn Kelly, came upon a tongue-in-cheek blog post at Slate in which a black writer, Aisha Harris, proposed that Santa be recast as a penguin for the sake of racial inclusiveness. After tossing this scrap of red meat to her all-white panel of prime-time guests, Kelly reassured any 'kids watching' (this was nearing 10 p.m.) that 'Santa just is white.' (For good measure, she added, 'Jesus was a white man, too.') Soon and sure enough, Kelly’s sound bites were being masticated in op-ed pieces, online, and especially on cable, where a passing wisecrack best left to the satirical stylings of Stewart and Colbert became a call to arms. At CNN, one anchor brought on Santas of four races to debunk Kelly. BuzzFeed reported that MSNBC ­programs hopped on the story fourteen times in a single week.

"Of course what Kelly said was dumb. But the reaction was even dumber. Every year, Fox News whips up some phantom “war on Christmas” plotted by what the network’s blowhard-in-chief Bill O’Reilly calls 'secular progressives.' This seasonal stunt has long been old news, yet many in the liberal media still can’t resist the bait. You had to feel for the NBC News White House correspondent Kristen Welker, who was drafted into filing a Kelly-Santa story on the Today show for no ­discernible reason other than that she is not white.


"When this supposed 'national firestorm' (as Al Sharpton inflated it on his MSNBC show) finally died down, only two things had been accomplished beyond the waste of everyone’s time. Liberals had played right into Fox’s stereotype of them—as killjoy p.c. police. And Fox News could once again brag about its power to set an agenda for its adversaries even as it also played the woebegone ­victim. 'Because they can’t defeat us on the media battlefield, the far left seeks to demonize Fox News as a right-wing propaganda machine and a racist enterprise,' said O’Reilly when sermonizing about the episode on his show. 'That’s why Miss Megyn got headlines about a Santa Claus remark that was totally harmless.' Fox News is a right-wing propaganda machine and at times (if not this one) a racist enterprise (witness, among other examples, its fruitless effort to drum up a 'New Black Panther Party' scandal over some 95 segments in the summer of 2010). But O’Reilly was half-right. Kelly’s inane remark was harmless and unworthy of headlines. Without the left’s overreaction, there wouldn’t have been any pseudo 'national firestorm.'

"Still, O’Reilly’s summation was predicated on an erroneous underlying assumption that few bother to question: In truth, Fox News has been defeated on the media battlefield—and on the political battlefield as well. Even the 73-year-old wizard of Fox, Roger Ailes, now in full Lear-raging-on-the-heath mode as ­portrayed in my colleague Gabriel ­Sherman’s definitive new biography, The Loudest Voice in the Room, seems to sense the waning of his power. The only people who seem not to know or accept Fox’s decline, besides its own audience, are ­liberals, including Barack Obama, whose White House mounted a short-lived, pointless freeze-out of Fox News in 2009, and who convinced himself that the network has shaved five points off his approval rating.

"Ailes would like the president and everyone else to keep believing he has that clout. But these days Fox News is the loudest voice in the room only in the sense that a bawling baby is the loudest voice in the room. In being so easily bullied by Fox’s childish provocations, the left gives the network the attention on which it thrives and hands it power that it otherwise has lost. As the post-Obama era approaches, the energy spent combating Ailes might be better devoted to real political battles against more powerful adversaries—not to mention questioning the ideological slant of legitimate news operations like, say, 60 Minutes, which has recently given airtime to a fraudulent account of the murders at Benghazi and to a credulous puff piece on the NSA’s domestic surveillance.


"The most interesting news about Fox News is that for some years now it has been damaging the right far more than the left. As a pair of political analysts wrote at Reuters last year, 'When the mainstream media reigned supreme, between 1952 and 1988, Republicans won seven out of the ten presidential elections,' but since 1992, when 'conservative media began to flourish' (first with Rush Limbaugh’s ascendancy, then with Fox), Democrats have won the popular vote five out of six times. You’d think they’d be well advised to leave Fox News to its own devices so that it can continue to shoot its own party in the foot."

********************


Has Fox News "been defeated on the media battlefield—and on the political battlefield as well?" And has it "...been damaging the right far more than the left" in recent years?

For those weaned on talk radio since 1992, "when 'conservative media began to flourish (first with Rush Limbaugh's ascendancy, then with Fox," may find this a dubious premise.

Next: More of The Same



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“Ground Zero Mosque supporters: doesn’t it stab you in the heart, as it
does ours
throughout the heartland? Peaceful Muslims, pls refudiate.”

Sarah Palin.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tuesday, January 28, 2014

Rush Limbaugh and Fox News: Dying Along With Aging White Men


Today's post is a two-fer, first an article by Greg Miller at Addictinginfo.org, "Rush Limbaugh: Republicans Are Not Criminals. Democrats Make Them Look That Way," followed by a piece by Jack Mirkinson at Huffingtonpost.com, "Frank Rich: Fox News Is Dying."

While both pieces look dissimilar, they follow a trend started by yesterday's piece, "Aging White Radicals: The Real Reason the Republicans Are Completely Stuck," and will continue for several days...but on with the first story by Miller:

Rush Limbaugh goes off on Democrats, complaining that they are unfairly targeting Republicans and conservatives for criminal enterprise. Illustration cc 2011 Donkey Hotey via Flickr.
"Rush Limbaugh pointed out on his radio broadcast that Republicans and conservatives are the targets of criminal investigations. It’s true. Republicans and conservatives are being arrested, indicted, investigated and in some cases convicted and jailed at an alarming rate in the public spectrum.

"As Rush was broadcasting today the word came down that a once rising star, Ryan Loskarn, aide to Lamar Alexander, was found dead due from an apparent suicide. This following an arrest and grand jury indictment for child porn possession and distribution.

"Rush didn’t bother to mention that one. But he did bring up Dinesh D’Souza. Who is in hot water over illegal campaign finance fraud. And, Bob McDonnell who was indicted for illegal money being funneled into the Governor’s mansion through inappropriate, unethical gifts that exceed triple the average working class citizen’s annual income. Oh, and Rush Limbaugh tiraded against subpoenas for Gov. Christie’s staff for 'traffic jams.'
"Today, I warmly quote Rush Limbaugh.

"I couldn’t help but laugh at Rush Limbaugh’s misplaced quote. For a constitutional patriot and voice of the American public you would think he would have a better idea of how the justice system works. These conservative colleagues of Rush Limbaugh aren’t being painted with a scarlet letter with no more than speculation. Nope. These folks got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. It just so happens that this time someone other than one of their own is counting the cookies.
Rush Limbaugh. 

"High road or low road?

"Rush Limbaugh could point out the hypocrisy of Republicans campaigning for a straight and narrow conservatism while breaking rules and laws. Or, Rush Limbaugh could point out that conservatives often use scripture and coddle to the faith based for support. And those same right wingers are subsequently caught breaking 'God’s' law at the expense of the masses for short term personal gain. He could demand that Republicans walk their talk. And that the real problem with the Republican Party is both the message and the messenger. But he didn’t.

"Rush Limbaugh blamed the system rather than the criminal. And was it because the system is broken? Hell no. He whined and complained because he sees this as a witch hunt. Rush Limbaugh didn’t stand up for truth, justice and the American way. Rush Limbaugh pointed the finger of blame at the prosecutors instead of those being prosecuted. And it has nothing to do with justice. It has everything to do with partisan politics. Republicans are great at politics. Rush Limbaugh is a master of rhetoric. But their policies suck and the runaround from Rush is as transparent as the accused’s crimes

"Republicans. It’s the message AND the messengers.

"Reince Preibus said today,
"'I’ve said many times before that the policies and principles of our party are sound. However, as we look to grow the ranks of our party, we must all be very conscious of the tone and choice of words we use to communicate those policies effectively.'
"You would think that the talking heads would shut up long enough to hear what each other are actually saying. The message is flawed. The messengers are scum bags. The whole thing is coming apart like the seams of Rush Limbaugh’s pants. Its hysterical.

"The way we know nothing has changed within the party is that no one within the conservative movement takes responsibility for a damned thing. This isn’t Christie’s fault. This isn’t D’Souza’s fault. And it sure isn’t McDonnell’s fault. NO! This is Obama’s fault. Eric Holder is the evil right hand of an oppressive dictator. Just listen to the link above.

"Forget that whole thing about winning elections or the due process that all accused are sharing. NO WAY! Rush Limbaugh said it, so it must be true. Democrats are ruining America. Regardless of those stupid fact things and evidence that lead to the accused like a trail of electronic bread crumbs. Forget all that.

"Just the facts. By Rush Limbaugh.



"The fact as Rush Limbaugh sees it is simple. Democrats are trying to make Republicans look like dishonorable criminals. Well, Rush, here’s the thing. You ARE dishonorable criminals. We don’t have to make you look that way. All we have to do is get the hell out of the way and let the people finally see it for themselves. Over and over again as Republicans lose their grasp on positions of power the curtain begins to fall on the once great and powerful Oz. Want to see more of it? I sure do. And you can rest assured that when it happens that Rush Limbaugh will be there to whine about it from his own little broadcasting cubicle.

Which takes us to the second article:


"Fox News may be the dominant cable news channel by far. Its executives may be the subject of intense scrutiny whose every move is watched carefully and who inspire massive biographies. Its on-air talent may dominate headlines for days on end merely by discussing Santa Claus.

"Despite all that, New York magazine columnist Frank Rich posited a provocative theory in the title's latest issue. Fox News, he wrote, is in terminal decline:
"'In truth, Fox News has been defeated on the media battlefield—and on the political battlefield as well. Even the 73-year-old wizard of Fox, Roger Ailes, now in full Lear-raging-on-the-heath mode as ­portrayed in my colleague Gabriel ­Sherman’s definitive new biography, "The Loudest Voice in the Room," seems to sense the waning of his power. The only people who seem not to know or accept Fox’s decline, besides its own audience, are ­liberals, including Barack Obama, whose White House mounted a short-lived, pointless freeze-out of Fox News in 2009, and who convinced himself that the network has shaved five points off his approval rating.'
"Fox News has certainly seemed attuned to some of its problems. Last year, the network underwent its biggest schedule overhaul in recent memory, with the centerpiece being the the replacement of the more doctrinaire conservative Sean Hannity with Megyn Kelly at 9 PM. Fox News has maintained its huge ratings lead over CNN and MSNBC; in one sense, it faces no mortal threat for the time being.

"But Rich opined that the network's ratings mask more existential problems, including a rapidly aging, overwhelmingly white, politically cocooned audience, the rise of the Internet as a dominant form of communication, and what he called Fox News's 'inability to navigate the conflict between the [Republican] party Establishment and the radical base that is dividing the conservative ranks.' That theory becomes more persuasive if you accept the narrative that many, including Sherman and CNN chief Jeff Zucker, posit: that Fox News exists more as a political operation than a news channel.


Read the full piece here.

*********************


The demographics are killing the ratings for Limbaugh and over at Fox News, and the Civil War raging between the establishment GOP and the Tea Party Conservatives is also a problem as we see the Conservative media's "...inability to navigate the conflict between the [Republican] party Establishment and the radical base that is dividing the conservative ranks."

We warned the GOP about this before, and the next few articles will be devoted to the future of the Republican Party and Conservatism amidst the craziness of the Tea Partiers, the inmates who have taken over the asylum.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


"People who claw their way to the top are not likely to find very much wrong with
the system that enabled them to rise."

Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Monday, January 27, 2014

Aging White Radicals: The Real Reason the Republicans Are Completely Stuck

Old white radicals like Ron Paul (and his son Rand, who is effectively an old white radical. Photo Credit: Christopher Halloran/Shutterstock.com
"Aging White Radicals: The Real Reason the Republicans Are Completely Stuck," by Brian Beutler at Alternet.org, is a piece that requires reading from anyone who thinks the GOP and Conservatism are ending the road:


"The right continues to exhibit a complete inability to evolve or moderate.

"The Republican Party’s total failure to make even cosmetic changes to its image and policy agenda last year has at this point become the kind of cliché-cum-running joke that often attaches itself to accepted truisms in American politics. Like chucking about Bill Clinton’s inability to contain himself in the company of women, or noting that Dick Cheney actually ran the show during George W. Bush’s first term, observing that Republicans have failed to moderate or reinvent themselves after losing badly in 2012 is the kind of thing even sympathetic political wise men can say to signal that they get it. That in what was a tough year for President Obama, Republicans screwed up too.

"But the observation of these symptoms is less crucial than the diagnosis. Why are Republicans so stuck?

"When it became clear about a year ago that Republican leaders would have a much harder time advancing immigration reform than they realized — that GOP activists and conservatives were livid about the idea that Republicans were going to help illegal immigrants gain citizenship — it started to look like the party had an insoluble problem on its hands. Watching Republicans attempt to broaden their appeal to growing, traditionally Democratic constituencies has been like watching someone try to cover a bedroom floor with a poorly cut carpet, fastening it into one corner but pulling it out of the others in the process.

"They can’t connect with traditionally Democratic constituencies without breaking connection with their reliable supporters. They can tug in every possible direction, but at some point they need to acknowledge that the carpet’s too small.

"For a long time now, people have argued that the solution to the GOP’s problems will resemble the slow, painful, but steady moderation process Democrats went through in the 1980s and through the Clinton presidency. The adherents to this theory include Barack Obama himself, as he told the New Yorker’s David Remnick during an interview for a new profile:
"'There were times in our history where Democrats didn’t seem to be paying enough attention to the concerns of middle-class folks or working-class folks, black or white. And this was one of the great gifts of Bill Clinton to the Party—to say, you know what, it’s entirely legitimate for folks to be concerned about getting mugged, and you can’t just talk about police abuse. How about folks not feeling safe outside their homes? It’s all fine and good for you to want to do something about poverty, but if the only mechanism you have is raising taxes on folks who are already feeling strapped, then maybe you need to widen your lens a little bit. And I think that the Democratic Party is better for it. But that was a process. And I am confident that the Republicans will go through that same process.'
"If the theory were correct, you’d think repeated election defeats would have set the process in motion already. Maybe a third defeat, in 2016, will catalyze a more rapid transition. But over time, I think the important differences between the Democrats’ old challenge and the challenge Republicans now face have started to show.

"Democrats didn’t have an easy go of it, exactly, but they were able to modify their positions across a range of issues without, for instance, creating a left-wing-primary perpetual motion machine, or giving rise to a permanent population of resentful protest voters. Maybe Republicans can do the same. But the 2013 experience suggests they are so in hock to aging, white, conservative reactionaries that taking on new debts with minorities, gay people, single women and so on entails the risk of defaulting on the old ones.


"Another way of saying this is that Republicans have depleted most of their crossover potential. And that’s a pretty novel problem for a modern American political party. It’s manifest in the GOP establishment’s pusillanimous relationship with conservatives. They didn’t cry 'Hallelujah' when 'Duck Dynasty’s' Phil Robertson preached a bigoted sermon about gay people and the Jim Crow South, but they also notably didn’t treat his remarks as an opportunity to instigate a Sister Souljah-style confrontation with the right. To the contrary, they rallied to Robertson’s defense and to a defense of conservative revanchism in general. And when they have mustered the courage to confront the extreme elements in their party, it’s been over tactics, money, campaigns, rhetoric and other shades of window dressing. John Boehner and Mitch McConnell will (finally!) criticize moneyed pressure groups for misleading voters and attacking Republicans, and they’ll dump on unrepentant hard-liners when they say insensitive but revealing things about gay people, poor people and ethnic minorities. But they haven’t cut the Gordian knot by admitting that these people’s motivating beliefs have failed or been rejected by the public. It’s a consultant-class conflict, not the deeper turbulence that would accompany an ideological course correction.

"An undertone in Obama’s comments to Remnick is the idea that Republicans will adopt new economic, as well as social, positions. If the Republican transformation is to genuinely mirror the one Democrats underwent, then the implication is straightforward. And if being more welcoming to women and minorities is too difficult, then Republicans can try embracing ideas to help the poor and middle class first.

"But that just proves political memories are short-lived. Republican leaders settled on immigration reform as their one big overture precisely because they thought it would be the easiest gesture to make to the voters who rejected them without antagonizing the ones who didn’t. The GOP donor class hates taxing wealthy people to subsidize takers, but supports immigration reform uniquely among social issues for opportunistic reasons; and of all the Republican Party’s potential growth constituencies, working immigrants are the most sympathetic to conservative voters who oppose abortion and marriage equality out of religious principle.

"So immigration reform is the greatest common factor — and it has been on a breathing machine for half a year and counting.

"Meanwhile tax increases and new social spending are completely out of the question. House Republicans have basically admitted they won’t hold a vote on Senate-passed legislation to prohibit workplace discrimination against gay people. And as for women?

"'A faction of conservatives will introduce a resolution at this week’s meeting of the Republican National Committee urging GOP candidates to speak up about abortion and respond forcefully against Democratic efforts to paint them as anti-woman extremists,' CNN reported Tuesday.

"Conservatives are everywhere actively preempting phantom Republican moderates. Unless that problem begins to resolve itself organically, from the grass roots up, I don’t think there’s any process Republicans can undertake to fix it.


"And to my eye, Obama remains a little bit credulous about why all these things are happening. Here’s how he condensed what ultimately amounts to the same dynamic.
"'There is a historic connection between some of the arguments that we have politically and the history of race in our country, and sometimes it’s hard to disentangle those issues. You can be somebody who, for very legitimate reasons, worries about the power of the federal government—that it’s distant, that it’s bureaucratic, that it’s not accountable—and as a consequence you think that more power should reside in the hands of state governments. But what’s also true, obviously, is that philosophy is wrapped up in the history of states’ rights in the context of the civil-rights movement and the Civil War and Calhoun. There’s a pretty long history there. And so I think it’s important for progressives not to dismiss out of hand arguments against my Presidency or the Democratic Party or Bill Clinton or anybody just because there’s some overlap between those criticisms and the criticisms that traditionally were directed against those who were trying to bring about greater equality for African-Americans. The flip side is I think it’s important for conservatives to recognize and answer some of the problems that are posed by that history, so that they understand if I am concerned about leaving it up to states to expand Medicaid that it may not simply be because I am this power-hungry guy in Washington who wants to crush states’ rights but, rather, because we are one country and I think it is going to be important for the entire country to make sure that poor folks in Mississippi and not just Massachusetts are healthy.'
"I get that he sometimes has to be a little pollyannaish about divisive issues. But I think he has this backward in both directions, and his invocation of the Medicaid expansion is extremely revealing. By and large, the Republicans who have rejected the Medicaid expansion didn’t do so because it’s too bureaucratic or centralized or expensive — the growing number of GOP governors who have opted in can attest that it’s a cheap and easy way to insure hundreds of thousands of poor constituents. No, they rejected it because embracing it is a cardinal sin to those Calhounists, who in many ways dictate dogma to the GOP; and the progressives who dismiss Republican arguments against the Medicaid expansion aren’t doing so because they reflexively reject legitimate debate about the bureaucratic nature of the welfare state, but because they detect the misdirection at the center of the GOP’s position on this and many other issues."

********************


If "(t)he right continues to exhibit a complete inability to evolve or moderate," it comes to no surprise to those who know what the real basis for Conservative politics: it is the factional vehicle for the elites in our society, and this has "started to show."

It's great to be able to laugh at the old white people who watch Fox News or the antics of the Tea Party Conservatives who are dying out on the political scene as fast as they appeared, but the cream of the Conservative heirarchy hasn't disappeared.

But once the Tea Partiers are booted out of the power structure it's back to business: Republicans pretending to be moderates, when they are really radicals who will relentlessly pursue their dream of a New American Feudal Society.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


“If we took away the minimum wage-if conceivably it was gone-we could
potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely because we would be able
to offer jobs at whatever level.”

Congresswoman (R) Michele Bachmann.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sunday, January 26, 2014

10 Most Absurd Right-Wing Lunacies This Week: Pity the 1% Edition


It's time again for Janet Allon's weekly piece on Conservative craziness and stupidity, this time titled, "10 Most Absurd Right-Wing Lunacies This Week: Pity the 1% Edition."

Subtitled, "A super-wealthy venture capitalist complains that the 1 percent are being treated like the Nazis treated Jews. And more!, the article provide us with even more insanity this week from the Wrong side of the aisle:

"So much right-wing craziness this week, it's difficult to know where to start. So, we'll just dive in.

"1. Thomas Perkins: The 1% are treated the way Nazis treated Jews.

"If you’ve been spending your time worrying about the plight of the very poor, the long-term unemployed, low-wage workers or even the strapped middle class, stop it! You need to get some sensitivity training about the persecuted 1%. You know, it is just not easy being mega-wealthy. People are mean to you, In fact, it’s like the Nazis.

"Wait. Whoa. What?

"Thomas Perkins, the super-wealthy venture capitalist who once owned the largest private yacht in the world as well as multiple mansions, penned a letter to the editor to the Wall Street Journal this week about how scary it is to be part of the 1%, so scary it brings to mind how the Jews must have felt in Nazi Germany.

"'Writing from the epicenter of progressive thought, San Francisco, I would call attention to the parallels of fascist Nazi Germany to its war on its "one percent," namely its Jews, to the progressive war on the American one percent, namely the "rich."'

"From there he talked about the ongoing 'demonization of the rich,' in the San Francisco Chronicle, the resentment about the Google buses, and rising real estate prices, and the 'cruel attacks' on his ex-wife, author Danielle Steel, calling her a 'snob' despite all she’s done for the less fortunate.

"Here’s the kicker: 'This is a very dangerous drift in our American thinking,' he wrote. 'Kristallnacht was unthinkable in 1930; is its descendent "progressive" radicalism unthinkable now?'

"Bet you didn’t know that progressive radicalism, with its desire to see the ultra-rich kick in higher taxes, was descended from Kristallnacht, a night of murder and mayhem directed against members of an ethnic group for reason other than their ethnicity.

"Seriously inflammatory, irresponsible stuff, and of course, WSJ printed it.

"2. We heart Huckabee, and so will you, once you get that libido under control.


"Mike Huckabee is nothing if not a creative thinker. Just when you thought you had heard everything, this week he made one of the most convoluted, crazy arguments against providing women with birth control we have ever heard.

"It’s an insult, he said! It’s an insult propagated by the Democrats because it suggests women are interested in sex. That they have libidos. Libidos they can’t control. And that might cause them to get pregnant without birth control.

"We’re not exaggerating. Here he is in his own oh-so-colorful words, speaking to a meeting of the Republican National Committee: 'If the Democrats want to insult women by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government, then so be it.'

"Then he added: 'Our party stands for the recognition of the equality of women and the capacity of women. That’s not a war on them, it’s a war for them.'

"We just have one question. Has Mike Huckabee ever met a woman?

"3. Laura Ingraham does not think Sarah Silverman is funny. Sarah Silverman is crying about this.

"Comedian Sarah Silverman has made a hilarious five-minute video featuring Jesus Christ himself which utterly destroys right-wing arguments against giving women access to reproductive healthcare and abortions. It is fantastic. Silverman hangs out with Jesus, who jokes that life begins 'at 40,' and watches NCIS with her. At one point, Silverman points out that sperm has been found to have a sense of smell, which means that sperm is alive, which means that men should have to undergo painful procedures with things stuck up their penises, all of which might make them think twice about masturbating.

"We should warn you that Laura Ingraham, whom Katie McDonough at Salon calls that 'famous comedy expert,' does not think it is funny. It actually makes her hopping mad. She went after Silverman in her radio show this week, calling her 'unfunny' (ouch!), and 'out of touch.'

"McDonough writes: 'Comedy Expert Ingraham also called Silverman "a Nobel Prize winner" (sarcastically, of course) and a "degenerate, foul-mouthed, slob of a person." Take that, Sarah "Unfunny" Silverman. Case closed on your un-funniness.'

"4. Iowa Republican Party posts incredibly stupid chart on racism.


"The Republican Party is proving almost as adept at courting 'minority' voters as it is at courting women. (Also, the LGBT vote, what with longtime gay Republican activist Jimmy LaSalvia loudly leaving the GOP and calling them "hopeless")

"It almost stretches credulity how completely out-of-touch these wankers are, and how unembarrassed they are to parade their ignorance. The Iowa Republican Party posted a flowchart defining 'racist' on Friday, which was fairly easy to follow. Someone is racist if they are white and you don’t like what they are saying. 'If you think this flowchart isn’t funny, then this flowchart is racist,' it noted at the bottom.

"Boy, they have some clever people working there. This is just too funny. They must have been in stitches when they thought it up.

"At some point it must have become less funny to them because they took it down, and the chairman of the party apologized for it, saying it was in bad taste, and blaming some mysterious 'contractor' for the post.

"All in all, a great way to celebrate the one-year anniversary of the Republican Party stating its intention to appeal to non-white voters.

"Anyway, racism is dead. Fox News’ Eric Bolling says so, you know, because we have a black president, black senators and black entertainment channels. He’s tired of it already.

"Read more of his ridiculousness here. If you want to get a gander at that deleted flowchart, click here.

"5. Chicago GOP hopeful: Autism and dementia are God’s punishment for LGBT rights.

"God is one wrathful, spoiled dude. And he hates gays. Haaaaates them. Hates anyone who likes them, accepts them, tolerates them, or doesn’t fight tooth and nail against them having equal rights. So, to punish us, he sent autism and dementia. He is nothing if not inventive with his scourges.

"So says a most-enlightened, oh-so-charming Republican candidate running for Congress in Illinois. Her name is Susanne Atanus, and she has a personal, direct line to God, so she knows.

"'I am a conservative Republican and I believe in God first,' Atanus told the Chicago Daily Herald this week. 'God is angry. We are provoking him with abortions and same-sex marriage and civil unions.'

"And here we thought God was just sending a lot of bad weather to retaliate for LGBT rights and abortions.

"6. Oklahoma lawmaker: If gay people can get married, then no one should get married.


"A Republican lawmaker in Oklahoma has proposed the legislative equivalent of destroying all his own toys so no one else can play with them.

"If same-sex couples are allowed to get married, says state Rep. Mike Turner, then maybe no one should be allowed to get married.

"'[My constituents are] willing to have that discussion about whether marriage needs to be regulated by the state at all,' Turner told a local TV station.

"So there.

"That’ll teach all you would-be monogamists in committed relationships.

"7. Montana GOP rep: Force women to have babies because abortion robs men.

"No one talks about men when they talk about women’s reproductive health. That’s just not fair. Men, like fetuses, are people too.

"One brave Montana Republican legislator, Vicky Hartzler, has spoken out, telling conservative audiences that women should be forced to go through with unwanted pregnancies, because abortion 'robs men' of their right to be fathers.

"They should be forced to carry those babies to term, no matter what. If they don’t comply, they can be put in restraints, or perhaps induced into a coma.

"Why? Because abortion hurts everyone. 'It ends a beating heart, it leaves emotional wounds with women that they carry for life and it robs men of the privilege of fatherhood,' she said. 'That’s why we must do everything in our power to end this devastating practice.'

"It also makes God mad, creates storms, and brought us autism and dementia. Oh wait, that’s the other Republican lawmaker. No, but Hartzler says that if abortion wasn’t legal, 'perhaps we would have had a cure for cancer now.'

"No, she did not explain that. Must be that old magical thinking again.

"8. GOP congressman: A wife should submit to her husband.


"Say what you will, those Republicans sure do have a way with the ladies. As a sideline, Rep. Steve Pearce of New Mexico, specializes in giving people advice on how to have happy, fulfilling marriages. In his recent memoir, he said both parties have a role to play, and the wife’s role is obedience.

"'The husband’s part is to show up during the times of deep stress, take the leadership role and be accountable for the outcome, blaming no one else,' Pearce says in the book. 'The wife’s submission is not a matter of superior versus inferior; rather, it is self-imposed as a matter of obedience to the Lord and of love for her husband.'

"Now, he knows this is not going to be popular with everyone, he just has to call it as he—and the Bible—see it.

"Ladies, are you ready to submit?

"9. South Carolina Sen. candidate: Teachers should carry machine guns.

"As every good gunnie and the NRA know, the solution to gun violence is always more guns. In a year that has already horrifyingly averaged a school shooting every other day, South Carolina State Senator Lee Bright—yeupp, a Republican—says it’s time to pull out the big guns and give them to teachers. Preferably machine guns.

"Bright had already proposed a bill to create high school courses on how to use a firearm. He expanded on this notion on Fox News Radio’s Alan Colmes Show this week.

"Colmes gave him every opportunity to back away from this crazy idea, but Bright would not take the bait.
COLMES: So [teachers] shouldn’t have machine guns?
BRIGHT: I would think a teacher protecting a school grounds should be able to carry whatever she can carry legally.
COLMES: So should machine guns be legal to carry?
BRIGHT: The Second Amendment is pretty clear. It says the right to carry arms should not be infringed. [...]
COLMES: So you should be able to have any gun you want?
BRIGHT: Well, I don’t see how the government can regulate it.
"This is madness, clear and simple.

"10. Victoria Jackson: Change First Amendment to ban Islam.


"By now it’s become abundantly clear that Victoria Jackson’s whole dingbat act on 'Saturday Night Live' years ago was no make-believe. Actually, Victoria Jackson gives dingbats a bad name. This week the idiotic right-winger proposed amending the First Amendment to ban Islam, because mosques are actually terrorist training camps.

"Here is her 'reasoning,' and we use the term loosely: 'I believe in freedom of religion except for those religions that want to kill other religions.'

"On the subject of the First Amendment, she said 'I’d like to make an amendment to the First Amendment.'

"Oh, that’s funny. See how she repeated the word amendment to make her racist, Islamophobia sound kind of ditzy at the same time? Read more here, if you care to."
********************


When Conservative lies get stale, their only recourse is insanity.

Here is the difference between your grandparents' GOP and today's Republican Party: When Conservatives used to lie about their beliefs, say in the fifties when Republicans used to pretend to love unions - even while eviscerating them - the GOP appeared "normal," a real political party instead of the vast criminal cartel that it always has been.

Now that the GOP intelligensia has allowed the Tea Party idiots to take over the asylum,  the Conservatives just pull their stuff out of their...well, hats, with statements like: "Force women to have babies because abortion robs men" and "The 1% are treated the way Nazis treated Jews.

Conservatives and their fellow travelers are anti-American, and Conservative  leaders and their propagandists are racketeeers who relentlessly push the tax policies that their rich masters tell them to.  Our only relief from these monsters is criminalize Conservatism.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


“Well, I learned a lot….I went down to (Latin America) to find out from them and
(learn) their views. You’d be surprised. They’re all individual countries.”

Ronald Reagan.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Saturday, January 25, 2014

What Is The Psychological Difference Between Liberals and Conservatives?


"What Is The Psychological Difference Between Liberals and Conservatives?," a short article by Red Stewart at Youngprogressivevoices.net, takes another look at the reason Conservatives and Liberals are so different where it counts - in the mind.:

"What Is The Psychological Difference Between Liberals and Conservatives?

"This is a topic that has personally fascinated me, because I find it strange that two completely unrelated issues can be associated purely by political ideology. For example, if I question a liberal and a conservative on political topics such as climate change and abortion, both are likely to give predictable answers, despite the unrelated nature of the questions. Why are political demographics so homogenous in response?

"Well, to be honest, a brilliant professor by the name of George Lakoff already beat me to the punch. Also intrigued by this question about the relationships between intrinsically different issues, he conducted a large research project wherein he interviewed many members of the left and right. To make a long story short, here’s what he came up with; it all stems from one’s childhood. If this is sounding Freudian to you, then you would be correct in assuming that.



"The psychological difference

"Lakoff stated that there were two different parental models that conservative and liberal children fell under depending on their parents’ own political beliefs. Conservatives fall under what he called the 'strict father' model while liberals are raised by the 'nurturant parent' model. Before I go on, note that these labels aren’t gender specific. In other words, a strict father could very well just mean a strict household or strict mother or strict grandfather. It doesn’t matter who raised the child.

"Going from that, let’s look at the strict father first (which I’ll be referring to as SFM for now. Once again, this doesn’t mean a male parent). In the SFM, children are brought into a world full of competition. As a result, they need a guardian with harsh discipline who’ll tell them the difference between right and wrong, as they have experienced the world and know the best way to achieve success. This discipline can come from various sources, though what appears to be the most common method these days is religion and prayer.


"Greed comes in Two Colors; Society and Economics

"As a result of this strict discipline, morality comes to be seen as obedience to a higher authority since the higher authority, as I said, knows the way to success. This type of operant conditioning results in the child associating morality with prosperity, and it’s from here that we split into the two defining stances of any ideology: social issues and economics. Let’s start with social issues, especially welfare, because it’s very simple to understand; if someone isn’t prosperous, this means that they aren’t moral; and if they aren’t moral, it means they aren’t disciplined; and if they aren’t disciplined than they deserve their situation.

"Economics is also easy to understand from a conservative’s point of view if you’re familiar with Adam Smith. The Father of Modern Economics, Smith, to put it very generally, stated that if everyone works for their own self-interests, the 'Invisible Hand' of economics will maximize the final profits of everyone. Of course, anyone who’s seen A Beautiful Mind will know that this was disproved by John Nash, but that’s getting off topic. Back to the point, in an SFM, the child has been raised with this strong discipline. Now they are ready to go out into the world and pursue their self-interests in the face of all this competition. The way to ensure that Adam Smith’s theory works is to apply the Darwinian principle of 'survival of the fittest." Tying back to the social issues, those who are the most disciplined will be the most successful.

"One small thing I want to touch base on here is the idea of free competition. If you (and by you I mean the government) starts imposing regulations on people, then Smith’s theory is corrupted and some competitors get an unfair advantage over the others. This is where anti-global warming comes in, as it’s all about regulation.


"All quiet on the liberal front

"That basically summarizes how conservatives are raised. Let’s look at the other side of the coin, the nurturant parent model (NPM) that governs liberals. With this come two important aspects: caring about you and caring about others. The nurturing parents want their kids to have happy and fulfilled lives. Why? Because you can’t take care of others if you haven’t taken care of yourself. I.e. if you’re not happy, then you’re not going to want to make others happy. As such, parents following the NPM raise their kids, not out of strict obedience as is done in the SFM, but with compassion and respect. This change is significant because it leaves children more open-minded to develop their own thoughts since they aren’t 'inheriting' their father’s version of morality. Now, that’s not to say that the NPM teaches there isn’t competition in the world, but it advocates that, while there is competition, there is also cooperation. And the best way to achieve this cooperation is by showing respect and compassion to your fellow competitors.

"This ties together the socioeconomic aspects of the NPM; wanting everyone to work together means showing respect and trying to take care/protect one another. Again, welfare comes into play in this regard most obviously, but then we have other issues such as environmental protection and animal rights arising from this empathetic look on the world.

"And that concludes my answer to the question of what the difference is between a liberal and a conservative. It’s not about what we think 'on the issues,' but how we were raised. I touched upon a few specific examples, but I’m hoping that you all can get an idea of where conservative/liberal stances on other issues arise from. For example, accepting obedience from religion has led to a variety of archaic religious ideas to seep into our modern-day setting, such as anti-LGBT rights and anti-abortion. That’s just one of many things to think about.


"Don’t worry if you’re neither a liberal nor conservative

"For those who of you who don’t consider yourself either a liberal or a conservative, know that the SFM and NPM aren’t absolute ideas for each household to fall under. Many parents raise their kids with a mix of these two. Nor are they absolute rules; more of general indications of the most likely course of events.

"As a liberal/progressive, I obviously find faults in the conservative SFM, but we have to accept that they think the same way about our model. If you want to run with bipartisan support, you’ll have to learn to integrate both these models into your character. That’s what Ronald Reagan so successfully did, and it allowed him to pursue his conservative agenda under the falseness of a bipartisan angle. If you want to loosen conservatism in this country, then you’ll have to appeal to the young and dismantle their views under the SFM before they become permanently integrated.

********************


The difference between the "Nurturant Parent Model" (NPM) and the "Strict Father Model (SFM) is, of course, Bad Toilet Training.

And it seems so simple to make a Liberal out of the malleable clay that a toddler really is, just tell it, "Make for Daddy," not, "Dammit, you little bastard, go NOW!"

Child raising is more complicated than this but when we hear someone say, "My daddy beat me all the time and I turned out all right," five will get you ten that this idiot voted the straight Republican ticket.

So, parents: "...(R)aise (your kids), not out of strict obedience as is done in the SFM, but with compassion and respect," or you'll find yourselves the parents of another Alex B. Keaton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_P._Keaton) - or worse, a Rick Santorum (http://politicalhumor.about.com/b/2012/02/16/rick-santorum-quotes.htm).

When Conservatism is made illegal, all children of Conservatives and their Sheeplets will have to be raised in communes to make sure Bad Toilet Training (BTF) doesn't  turn their innocent children into Conservative monsters.

Mothers, don't let your children grow up to be Conservatives.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


“As yesterday’s positive report card shows, childrens do learn when standards
are high and results are measured.”

George W. Bush.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Friday, January 24, 2014

Jesus Was A Liberal: 15 Quotes The ‘Christian’ Right Doesn’t Want You To See

The Christian Right goes on and on about how much they love Jesus Christ. When will they get the memo? Jesus was a liberal. Image by Elisabeth Parker for Addicting Info.
Today's post is a reprint of an article by Elisabeth Parker at Addictinginfo.org, "Jesus Was A Liberal: 15 Quotes The ‘Christian’ Right Doesn’t Want You To See," and it contains plenty of ammunition for online debaters who love to see the Conservatives Sheeplets' hair catch on fire, neatly categorized, with a few relevant memes, and with citations:

"Have you ever wondered why right-wing Christians keep saying they love Jesus Christ, even though their toxic beliefs have nothing to do with what Jesus said, taught, or stood for? Whether you believe He was our savior, or just a great teacher in history, have you ever suspected that if Jesus Christ lived today, he would have been a liberal? Well, you were right all along. Jesus was a liberal. And we’ve got 15 quotes to prove it.
“'But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.”
– Like many liberals, Jesus Christ scorned phony displays of religion.'
"(1) Religion: Right-wingers claim to love Jesus, and are known for loudly shouting their faith from atop their soap boxes. But, like many liberals, the real Jesus Christ scorned these showy – and often phony – displays of piety. He said: 'But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.' [Matthew 6-7 KJV]


"(2) The 10 Commandments: As far as we can tell, the leaders of the Christian Right don’t obey the laws inscribed on the tablets Moses brought down from Mt. Sinai, let alone the ones Jesus valued most. When crowds asked Jesus Christ what He saw as the most important of the 10 Commandments, His reply reflects the values of today’s liberal Christians. Jesus clearly sees a pure love of God and for our fellow human beings as the bottom line for being a Christian: 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.' And: 'Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.' [Matthew 36-40 KJV].

"(3) The 'War on Christmas': We’ll never know what Jesus would have thought about Christmas décor and baby-in-the-manger scenes at City Hall. But He probably would have found conservatives’ rantings about 'The War On Christmas' puzzling. As many savior-savvy liberals would quickly point out, Jesus Christ didn’t celebrate Christmas: He was Jewish, and would have observed Hanukkah (if Hanukkah had existed then, which it didn’t).
“'Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.'
– Jesus Christ agreed with liberals when it comes to paying taxes and keeping Church and State separate.
"(4) Paying taxes: Right-wingers keep whining about taxes and saying that paying our national debt and having a social safety net is like slavery. When they don’t get their way, they shut down the government, or threaten to secede from the US. But when it comes to taxes, Jesus Christ is more like a liberal. He said we should pay our taxes even when we don’t agree with what they’re used for. 'Then saith he unto them, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s."' [Matthew 22:21 KJV]


"(5) Separation of Church and State: The Christian Right keeps trying to force their beliefs into our legal system, and to fund their churches and schools with taxpayers’ dollars. Like modern folks in the USA, Jesus Christ lived in a huge empire with diverse religions and ethnic groups. Many of Rome’s laws and customs were against his people’s customs and beliefs. But – like most liberals – Jesus Christ clearly believed that Church and State should be separate, as shown in the above quote.
"'And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.'
– Jesus Christ’s views on income inequality and capitalism were very similar to those of liberals.
"(6) Income inequality: Have any of you liberals out there wondered what Jesus Christ would have thought about today’s rampant income inequality? Right-wing Christians love to ignore the fact that Jesus made his views about the one percent abundantly clear: 'And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.'[Matthew 19:24 KJV]

"(7) Capitalism: Right-wingers are ever in search of ways to promote and justify the unfettered capitalism Pope Francis rails against. But they won’t find any help from their Savior, Jesus Christ. He loathes capitalism, even more than most of today’s liberals here in the US. Pretty much the only time we ever see Jesus lose his temper is when he returns to Jerusalem with his disciples and finds the Temple full of bankers and vendors. He doesn’t just yell at them, he destroys their booths and drives them out with a whip that he makes on the fly. One can only imagine how Jesus would feel about Black Friday.

"'And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting: And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables; And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise.' [John 2:14-16 KJV]
"'But whoever has this world’s goods, and sees his brother in need, and shuts up his heart from him, how does the love of God abide in him?'
– Jesus Christ believed we should help each other, as liberals do today.


"(8) Welfare and the social safety net: The Christian Right keeps ranting about how raising taxes to pay for programs that help the poor is somehow like forcing us into slavery. But Jesus Christ’s views on feeding, clothing, and helping people in need was more in line with how liberals think. Jesus flat-out told his followers that when they help people in need, He sees that as directly serving Him:
"'Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.' [Matthew 25:34-36 KJV]
"(9) Healthcare: The right-wing Christians who oppose evil, “liberal” Obamacare have failed to notice something that seems crazy-obvious to the rest of us. Their Savior, Jesus Christ, was always out and about doling out free healthcare — the horror! — to his fellow human beings. The New Testamentabounds with stories of Jesus healing blind people, lepers, crippled people, paralytics, a bleeding woman, a young girl in a coma, and pretty much anyone who asked (or had someone ask for them). His disciple, Matthew, wrote: 'Then Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people.'


"(10) Social justice: Unlike the right-wing Christians who pay only lip service to Him, Jesus Christ was a strong advocate for social justice. Martin Luther King Jr. and other much-loved liberal icons were inspired by His life and teachings. Jesus not only demands that the rich share with the less fortunate, but insists that if they don’t, they are heartless. 'But whoever has this world’s goods, and sees his brother in need, and shuts up his heart from him, how does the love of God abide in him?' [1 John 3:17 KJV] Take THAT, Koch brothers.
"'He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.'
– Like today’s liberals, Jesus Christ rejected the double standard for women and preached tolerance.
"(11) The War on Women: Jesus Christ lived in a highly patriarchal society, but rose above the customs of his time. Like today’s liberals (and unlike today’s right-wing Christians), Jesus clearlyvalued women and treated them as equals. His parables abound with women who serve as role models to follow. At least four women — his mother, Mary Madgelene, and the sisters Mary and Martha — were in his inner circle. This may explain why women played a big role in the early days of the Christian church, and may have even served as leaders. Nor did Jesus respect the double standard that holds men and women to different rules. When a crowd gathered to stone a women to death for the 'crime' of adultery, Jesus stopped them, demanding: 'He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.' [John 8:7 KJV]


"(12) Abortion: Unlike the Christian Right, which won’t shut up about a fetus’ 'right to life,' Jesus Christ never talks about abortion. But in the tale of the bleeding woman (Luke 8:43-48 KJV), Jesus clearly rejects irrational taboos and religious rules against women. While walking through a crowd, a woman who had been bleeding for 12 years, touched the hem of Jesus’ garment and it healed her. She then cringed away in fear (the 'issue of blood' seems to have been coming from down there, which meant that touching a man would give him 'unclean' woman cooties). Instead of casting her away, Jesus did the liberal thing and said, 'Daughter, be of good comfort: thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace.' It’s too bad the 'Christian' folks who run this country — and some hospitals — think their weird religious rules are more important than a woman’s health.

"(13) Marriage equality: Strange, but even though our right-wing Christian friends are all in a lather over gays getting married and LGBT folks’ having the nerve to simply exist, Jesus Christ never uttered a single word about gays and other non-gender conforming people. He was too busy spreading his love, healing, loaves and fishes, and miracle wine around to bother with hating … kind of like one of those liberal hippies from the 1960′s.
"'Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.'
Like many liberals, Jesus Christ preferred peace to war.
"(12) War: During his famous Sermon on the Mount, Jesus Christ said, 'Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.' [Matthew 5:9 KJV] This event took place shortly after Jesus Christ was baptized by John the Baptist, and is considered to be central to his teachings. The Sermon on the Mount was radical because of its ideals of peace, love for one’s neighbor, love of God, and striving for purity of heart. Liberals share most of these ideals, even if they don’t believe in the same god (or goddess) … or any god(dess) at all.


"(13) The death penalty: The right-wing is all-out for the death penalty, all while they screech about being “pro-life” and rolling back a woman’s right to choose. But, like most liberals, Jesus Christ clearly did not believe humans had the right to take life from one another. 'There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?' [James 4:12 KJV]

"(14) Crime and punishment: Conservatives don’t just love the death penalty, they love meting out harsh punishments for even the least of crimes (unless you’re a Wall Street Banker). Our useless 'war on drugs' — and large private prisons industry — explains why the US has the highest rate of people living behind bars in the world. Most liberals object to this, and so would Jesus Christ, who said, 'Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.' [Matthew 7:1-2 KJV]

"(15) On race: Although Jesus Christ lived in the remote region of Galilee for most of his life, He was born in Bethlehem and had traveled to Egypt and Jerusalem as a boy. He was probably more well-traveled than many people of his time, and had come across people of many cultures, colors, and nations. Jesus clearly shows that he sees no person as above another one when he said, 'Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him.' [John 13:16 KJV] Also, he was known to consort with all sorts of people who would have seemed scandalous to proper Jews of his time, including women, lepers, Roman tax collectors, his motley crew of fishermen-turned-apostles, and even — gasp — Mary Magdalene, who had a bad (and likely untrue) rep as a loose woman. It is unlikely that Jesus would have thought one race or skin color to be better than another.


"NOTE: It is doubtful that Jesus Christ even would have been what we now call 'white.' The Bible does not describe how He looked (other than things like 'shining' and 'radiant'). But, since Jesus and His family came from the Middle East, He is likely to have looked like today’s people from that region: Olive-skinned, dark-haired, and dark-eyed.

********************



For more of the same, be sure to visit "Jesus Was A Liberal" for more (http://www.jesusisaliberal.org/).

It's a never ending source of amusement to atheists and agnostics that logic and history aside, Conservative Sheeplets in their guise as Good Christians haven't read the Bible in its entirety, relying on their pastors and who knows whom to provide them with passages that fit the Conservative ecumenical agenda.

Cherry picking isn't confined to non-ecumenicals, it's the way of life for all Conservatives, and the few that do know their Bible will cherry pick everything they quote.

And if that doesn't work, they'll make up a quote OR say that the offending passage is "symbolic."

There oughta be a law.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“I know of no safe repository of the ultimate power of society but people. And if 
we think them not enlightened enough, the remedy is not to take the power from
them, but to inform them by education.”

Thomas Jefferson.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------