You are currently browsing the category archive for the 'Conservatives' category.
Louisiana Representative Anh (Joseph) Cao was the only Republican to vote for the health care bill:
“I have a constitutional duty to make the right decision for my district whether or not the decision was popular. I had to make a decision of conscience based on the needs of the people of my district. A lot of my constituents are uninsured, a lot of them are poor.”
NYT:Louisiana Republican Breaks Ranks on Health Bill
LA Times: Cantor: No retaliation planned against Cao, only Republican to vote for health care bill
CNN: Update: Lone GOP vote came after call from President Obama
Think Progress: GOP Threatens Retribution Against Cao For Health Care Vote
The Washington Independent: The War on Joseph Cao
Fox News: White House Spent ‘Weeks’ Courting Lone GOP Vote on Health Care Bill
Washington Post: A vote to make or break a career
Lone House Republican backed health bill after abortion was limited
Politico: Shenanigans: Get to Know Rep. Anh ‘Joseph’ Cao
Michelle Malkin: What GOP Rep. Joseph Cao got from Obama
TPM: Cao To Steele: Come And Get Me — Just Remember You Need My District
“The rich, giving part of their enormous earnings [to create universities], became known as philanthropists. These educational institutions did not encourage dissent; they trained the middlemen in the American system—the teachers, doctors, lawyers, administrators, engineers, technicians, politicians—those who would be paid to keep the system going, to be loyal buffers against trouble.”
-Howard Zinn
A People’s History of the United States
“Just a reminder that the year is 2009, and white people talking to black people is still a controversial issue in the Republican party.”
Rob Long, at the Wall Street Journal, is concerned that the world may no longer be able to protect itself from terrorist transvestites.
His hilarious fear stems from a UN report notable for its nuance and sensitivity towards people who find themselves marginalized due to their gender expression.
Martin Scheinin, UN Special Rapporteur, wrote a report for the UN General Assembly titled “Protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism”.
In it, he makes ‘controversial’ statements like:
Gender is not synonymous with women but rather encompasses the social constructions that underlie how women’s and men’s roles, functions and responsibilities, including in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity, are defined and understood. This report will therefore identify the gendered impact of counter-terrorism measures both on women and men, as well as the rights of persons of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities. As a social construct, gender is also informed by, and intersects with, various other means by which roles, functions and responsibilities are perceived and practiced, such as race, ethnicity, culture, religion and class. Consequently, gender is not static; it is changeable over time and across contexts. Understanding gender as a social and shifting construct rather than as a biological and fixed category is important because it helps to identify the complex and inter-related gender-based human rights violations caused by counterterrorism measures; to understand the underlying causes of these violations; and to design strategies for countering terrorism that are truly non-discriminatory and inclusive of all actors.
Just another anti-gay hate crime.
From the Queens Chronicle:
[Jack Price] went to a 24-hour deli on College Point Boulevard and 18th Avenue around 3 a.m. to buy cigarettes. He told police two Hispanic men made reference to his homosexuality, calling him “faggot” and other names.
Police said Daniel Aleman, 26, and an accomplice, Daniel Rodriguez, both of College Point, beat Price after he left the store. Price was able to crawl home 10 blocks away and call police.
…[T]he NYPD says he suffered collapsed lungs, all his ribs broken and he underwent surgery on his spleen and had a metal plate placed in his jaw.
Fun drinking game: take a shot of something fruity every time this article uses the phrase “openly gay”.
A beauty pageant that requires plastic surgery.
From Deutsche Welle:
[G]oing under the knife was a requirement for the 50 contestants of Miss Plastic Hungary 2009.
…The competition was the first beauty show requiring substantial plastic surgery in order to qualify.
…The cosmetic surgeons of the top three contestants also received prizes for their work.“I think this competition was long overdue,” photographer and jury member Marton Sizpal told the Associated Press.
“It is time for Hungarian women to care more about their appearance,” he said.
In-f’in-credible. I really don’t know how to respond to news like this. Your response?
Republicans defend Sen. Jim DeMint by saying he’s like Jews who “take care of the pennies.”
From Gawker:
Bamberg County GOP Chairman Edwin Merwin and Orangeburg County GOP Chairman James Ulmer wrote the Orangeburg Times and Democrat to defend DeMint in a newspaper editorial Sunday that said he was not funneling enough funds to local projects.
“There is a saying that the Jews who are wealthy got that way not by watching dollars, but instead by taking care of the pennies and the dollars taking care of themselves. By not using earmarks to fund projects for South Carolina and instead using actual bills, DeMint is watching our nation’s pennies and trying to preserve our country’s wealth and our economy.”
Wow, Jim, you’ve got some great friends. And the votes of antisemites everywhere. Well, at least the ones in South Carolina. Edwin Merwin, huh? For a guy with “win” twice in his name, he’s awful full of fail.
Roger Ebert is so goddamn awesome.
I am naive enough to think that universal care is obviously good.
…The fallacy of the free enterprise argument is that it assumes corporations are motivated to bring about the public good. Corporations are motivated to maximize profits for shareholders.
I highly recommend you read the whole post. Via Kate Harding.
Arguably, Jon McNaughton is more patriotic than I am. Below you can see his latest piece of art, entitled “One Nation Under God”. I urge you to visit McNaughton’s website, because this is no ordinary work of art: it’s interactive! By rolling your mouse of different portions of the painting, you can learn about the significance of each character.
Beneath the painting, the artist responds to “liberal criticisms” he has received for this work.
Can you spot Satan?
Sister painting One Nation Under Cthulhu:
This grand new website contains “the list of thirty legislators who were brave enough to stand up in defense of rape and vote against Senator Al Franken’s anti-rape amendment to the 2009 Defense Appropriations bill. We applaud these courageous men! Roll over the portraits with your mouse to see the Senator’s phone number, or click on a portrait to visit the Senator’s contact page. We encourage you to send your kind words to these gentlemen!”
Good to see my old pal Sam Brownback of Kansas up there, as well as both reps from Oklahoma (see previous post).
H/t to Bint Alshamsa.
Oklahoma has a wretched track record when it comes to women’s bodily autonomy. I have written about the law requiring doctors to show them “the baby” on their ultrasound, the law forcing extra medical penetration on women seeking abortion, and the fact that OK allows health insurance agencies to deny medical coverage to women who have been victims of domestic violence.
Anyways, get ready for more of the same.
As of November 1, doctors in Oklahoma will be compelled — under penalty of criminal prosecution — to post the details of each abortion they perform online. Among the details to be posted for every abortion is the patient’s age, marital status and race; her financial condition; her education; and the total number of her previous pregnancies.
This amazing piece of law-making is called the Statistical Reporting of Abortions Act. Women must answer 37 personal questions about themselves that would, though names won’t be posted, make it easy to identify many of the women who get abortions in Oklahoma.
No reason. Oklahoma just wants to know. Or wait, no, that’s not right, Oklahoma is Just Doing It For Women’s Own Good. Because women benefit by… uh… alright, I can’t find even a facetious reason for Oklahoma to do this.
We have two men to thank for this “common-sense legislation” (their term): Republican Senator Todd Lamb and Republican Representative Dan Sullivan.
You can contact Mr. Lamb here.
You can contact Mr. Sullivan here.
Mike the Mad Biologist has an excellent suggestion: “Why don’t we just tattoo a Scarlett “A” on their foreheads?”
Thank the Lord two women are suing the state, Lora Joyce Davis and former state Rep. Wanda Jo Stapleton, with the help of the Center for Reproductive Rights. I’m sure CRR could use your support right now.
Rachel Maddow recently did a show on this very issue.
Thanks to all the hot tippers out there who brought this item to my attention. Anyone who can read and does so regularly must now know of the idiocy of Mr. Keith Bardwell of Tangipahoa Parish, Louisiana.
Just so’s we all know what we’re dealing with here:
Bardwell, a Republican, has served as justice of peace for 34 years. He said he has run without opposition each time, but had decided earlier not to run again. His current term expires Dec. 31, 2014.
That’s the caliber of the voters in Tangipahoe Parish. Additionally, a local newspaper’s poll shows that 30% of its readers don’t think he should resign. Seems like Blackwell isn’t so unusual for his community.
Blackwell has been media-shy, but he did give an interview to a local newspaper, the Hammond Daily Star. He said:
“I’m not a racist. I do ceremonies for black couples right here in my house. My main concern is for the children.”
Another charming bit further clarifying the “I’m not a racist” statement:
Bardwell said from his experience, “99 percent of the time” the interracial couple consists of a black man and white woman.
“I find that rather confusing,” he said.
He also told a local TV station:
“I don’t regret what I did and if it ever came up again, I’d have to do the same thing. I don’t feel right by putting some innocent person that has nothing to do with the marriage in that position, and that’s my only reason.”
Other bloggers have already whipped out nuanced responses to this farce, so I will just leave you with a quote from one of my personal heroes, Bill Quigley, of the Center for Constitutional Rights and Justice.
“Perhaps he’s worried the kids will grow up and be president.”
If I spent the next week typing “LOL”, and taking only two 15-minute breaks a day and sleeping only three hours a night, I still would not be able to properly express my reaction to this amazing news.
Professors and feminists have emasculated and dumbed-down the Holy Bible, and inserted their socialist agenda, you see. To be precise, “The committee in charge of updating the bestselling version, the NIV, is dominated by professors and higher-educated participants who can be expected to be liberal and feminist in outlook.”
Vomit-worthy, if you ask me. Who wants anyone with higher education, or who holds the opinion that women are people, to be translating ancient Greek and Hebrew texts? Disgusting. Next thing you’ll tell me is that there was a ghey in the translating room.
In response, the Conservative Bible Project has begun to translate the Bible in accordance with conservative principles.
Does it matter to these Bible-rewriters that the Bible was originally written before socialism, feminism, conservatism or liberalism were invented? No it does not. Not one wit. Because emasculating socialist feminist professors can time travel. Satan taught them how.
I mean, are you not troubled to learn that:
Socialistic terminology permeates English translations of the Bible, without justification. This improperly encourages the “social justice” movement among Christians.
For example, the conservative word “volunteer” is mentioned only once in the ESV, yet the socialistic word “comrade” is used three times, “laborer(s)” is used 13 times, “labored” 15 times, and “fellow” (as in “fellow worker”) is used 55 times.
Or that liberals have somehow inserted forgiveness into the Bible in such a way that it sounds desirable:
The earliest, most authentic manuscripts lack this verse set forth at Luke 23:34:
Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”
Is this a liberal corruption of the original? This does not appear in any other Gospel, and the simple fact is that some of the persecutors of Jesus did know what they were doing. This quotation is a favorite of liberals but should not appear in a conservative Bible.
Or that liberals totally made up John 7:53-8:11, where Jesus tells the angry crowd about to stone an adulteress, “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone”:
Amid this scholarship, why is the emphasis on this passage increasing? The answer lies in its liberal message: do not criticize or punish immoral conduct unless you are perfect yourself. Liberals cite this passage to oppose the death penalty, a misuse that has been criticized.
Actually, this part of the Conservative Bible Project gets a bit scary, as the article goes on to say:
The Mosaic laws clearly state death as a punishment for sin. So the argument that an individual must be perfect is not relevant. The God-ordained government has the responsibility for punishment.
My quibbles with the godly rewriters of the Bible on this point:
A) Um, doesn’t “Mosaic” law say something like “Thou shalt not kill”? Or maybe I’m getting the Bible mixed up with something I read in the liberal media, like a NYT article.
B) Are we talking about a theocracy that kills people for sinning against the Conservative Bible?
C) Where do I sign up for that!?
The Conservative Bible will also remove the liberal bias that squelched Jesus’ true message of free-market capitalism, which is explained in Conservative Translation Guideline #7: “Express Free Market Parables; explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning.”
And, just a little FYI, while you off reading the Communist Manifesto or killing babies, a new language has developed, the “conservative language,” and the Bible must be translated into it posthaste.
Additional less important guidelines include… recognizing that Christianity introduced powerful new concepts that even the Greek and Hebrew were inadequate to express, but modern conservative language can express well.
Is this an example of Poe’s Law? I.e. that it is vanishingly impossible to distinguish real fundamentalism from parody.
HAVE YOU HUGGED A CHRISTO-FASCIST TODAY?
Hasn’t the epithet “Socialist!” run out of steam yet? I am so bored of hearing it used to describe anyone left of hard right.
I ask my question rhetorically, of course, because we all know that it isn’t going anywhere. If someone would like to submit to me a history of its use in American political discourse, I’d sure appreciate it.
I believe that we, that is, all of us who are ever tarred with the Socialist! brush, allow it to be an effective weapon against us. It can be used effectively against anything: bank regulation, anti-pollution efforts, public housing, bailouts, universal health care, labor organizing, and now, apparently, being gay. And why? Because as soon as anyone even slightly liberal hears it, and especially if that person identifies as a Democrat, they recoil in horror and emphatically deny the defamatory “accusation”. We try and think of ways to explain beliefs, positions, or policies to avoid accusations of that term. Our reaction to deployment of this term has not gone unnoticed by the opposition. Now that we have invested their weapon with power, they will continue to use it until we take that power away again.
What does the insult “Socialist!” even mean to the person who hurls it? The same people who use it will often simultaneously and without a hint of hesitation add accusations of Communist!, Nazi!, Maoist! and Fascist! to the mix. Apparently many are unaware of the separate meanings of each of them, or the actual definition of socialism. There has been definition creep. Now all these terms seem to mean “any person who advocates government action not approved of by conservatives.”
Really, this headline could sum up much of what Tea Partiers are about. They want “government” to stay away from government programs like Medicaid. They want the government to pave the planet for their cars, to police our borders, to hunt down “illegals”, to provide fire protection, to respond to disasters, to keep paying their SSI, to pay for foreign wars, and etc. Just so long as poor people, “illegals”, non-English speakers, and non-whites don’t accrue any benefits.
In a microcosm of their ideological incoherence, some Tea Partiers (do you see how I use the nice term? I am so big-hearted.) who were in DC for the big 9/12 protest are angry that the government didn’t provide them with enough publicly-funded transit for them to effectively protest publicly-funded health care and the like.
From the Wall Street Journal:
The Texas Republican on Wednesday released a letter he sent to Washington’s Metro system complaining that the taxpayer-funded subway system was unable to properly transport protesters to the rally to protest government spending and expansion.“These individuals came all the way from Southeast Texas to protest the excessive spending and growing government intrusion by the 111th Congress and the new Obama administration,” [Rep. Kevin] Brady [of Texas] wrote.
“These participants, whose tax dollars were used to create and maintain this public
transit system, were frustrated and disappointed that our nation’s capital did not make a great effort to simply provide a basic level of transit for them.”
Just like the government should, um, not make a great effort to provide a basic level of something even more basic to life – health care? I don’t get it.
And here’s a precious kicker. Brady is upset that some of the most vulnerable members of the group, when provided insufficient help by the government, were forced to turn to expensive private market alternatives they could barely afford… i.e. taxis.
Brady says in his letter to Metro that overcrowding forced an 80-year-old woman and elderly veterans in wheelchairs to pay for cabs.
THIS IS KILLING ME! I mean, what is government funding for, if not to fund conservatives’ crusade against government funding?
My brain hurts.
Amazing yet true pictures from the DC Tea Party protest found by googling.
Crap loads of interesting stuff going on in this here world:
Trans Methodist Minister Finds Acceptance from his Congregation. Via Box Turtle Bulletin.
Acting Like Native Americans Is a Cult German Hobby.
Canadian Christianists Oppressed by the Teaching of Religion in Public Schools. Don’t worry, that doesn’t make sense to me either. Essentially, it appears they are angry their children are learning that religious besides Christianity exist.
Baptist Preacher Says of Gays: “I Hope You Get Brain Cancer”.
Actress Openly Discusses Her Schizophrenia. I think it is awesome she wants to be public about her mental condition. Yay!
Islamophobia Claims a Life in London. The elderly Ekram Haque was killed by a gang of whites in front of his 3-year-old granddaughter.
Sudanese Journalist Convicted of Wearing Pants. Lubna Hussein’s subsequent actions show true courage and solidarity. Holla!
The Wall Street Journal kindly reminds us that Christians are terribly, terribly oppressed in America. And are totally not the dominate majority who enjoy state privileges that non-Christians could never dream of.
I did a random and uncharacteristic thing. The context was that I was explaining to a friend how there are plenty of verses in the Bible uplifting the poor, exhorting charity, and condemning wealth that we should use to combat the twisted I-got-mine-screw-you theology of the Religious Right.
Then I sat down and spent my entire Saturday night researching just those kinds of verses in the Bible.
So below you will find some of the gems, which I pulled out because of the incisive or ferocious language or because of their poetic beauty. The Bible can indeed be used for good, as I hope these verses will demonstrate. I grew up Christian, and my first inklings of social justice concepts came from reading Bible verses such as these. Though I am no longer Christian, I still find them inspiring.
Below the fold, you will find a massive compilation of verses that deal with poverty, charity and wealth.
Job 20:15
He hath swallowed down riches, and he shall vomit them up again: God shall cast them out of his belly.
Job 36:19
Will [God] esteem thy riches? no, not gold, nor all the forces of strength.
Psalm 9:17
[T]he needy shall not always be forgotten: the expectation of the poor shall not perish for ever.
Psalm 39:6
Man is a mere phantom as he goes to and fro:
He bustles about, but only in vain;
he heaps up wealth, not knowing who will get it.
Psalm 72:4
He will defend the afflicted among the people
and save the children of the needy;
he will crush the oppressor.
Proverbs 23:5
[R]iches certainly make themselves wings; they fly away as an eagle toward heaven.
Proverbs 30:14
There is a generation, whose teeth are as swords, and their jaw teeth as knives, to devour the poor from off the earth, and the needy from among men.
Proverbs 31:7
Let him drink, and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more.
Ecclesiastes 5:12
The sleep of a laborer is sweet,
whether he eats little or much,
but the abundance of a rich man
permits him no sleep.
Matthew 19:24
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.
James 2:6
Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats?
James 5:1
Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you.
A hella lot more verses below! The majority come from the King James Bible, except where noted. I went with the New International version whenever the language of King James got too obscure for me. Read the rest of this entry »
Thank you soulbrother v.2 for this insightful piece. He explains the connection between whiteness being used to convince poor white farmers to stop protesting against rich landowners alongside poor black farmers in the 1800s, and whiteness being used to play working class white people to protest against health care for the poor. (Almost twice as many white people than black people are impoverished in the USA.)
Looking at the debates through a race lens, things like a town hall participant attacking a poster of Rosa Parks and people comparing health care for the poor to white slavery start to make some sense. Very weird sense, but the trail of bigotry begins to come clear.
And yes, the poster-holder specified white slavery. What do you think that’s supposed to mean?
Monica at TransGriot sez the good white folks at the town halls are protesting…
…at the behest of conservative K Street lobbying firms, Faux News, right wing hate radio, HMO’s who want to stay between you and your doctor and continue to make obscene profits off the current broken system and the GOP who gets paid mad loot to thwart any meaningful legislative reform as they’ve done for decades.
Once again you information challenged people are being played, manipulated, hoodwinked and bamboozled again to vote against your own economic interests because you’re ’scurred’ of the current occupant of the White House.
And Did You Know, “57% of Republicans either believes or is uncertain about the veracity of the “death panel” claim”?
Now, where ever would they get such an idea? Could it in any way be related to the fact that 65% of Republicans believe Fox News is reliable or that:
Even more interesting, perhaps, is how many Republicans only get their info from Fox, as compared to the other cable networks. A surprising 74% of GOPers “never” watch CNN, and an even higher amount, 89%, never watch MSNBC.
?
“Terrorist fist-jab”, “secret lesbian high school gangs”, birther-movement fueling Fox News. Is. Considered. Reliable by these people.
Sooooo…. is this health care “debate” becoming the 21st century elite’s attempt to divide and conquer the disempowered by race like innumerable incidents in the past? If so, they are showing remarkable success. Of course, there always seems to be enough white people who are eager to find a new excuse to be publicly racist, and politicians seem quite willing to dog whistle them to the fore at the slightest indication they may be useful.
The thought that it is “downright evil” to provide health care to the poor?
Linking health care coverage for the poor to Nazism?
“Keep your government hands off my Medicare”?
“True fascism… is happening in this country today”?
“Hitler…called his program the final solution. I kind of wonder what we’re going to call ours”?
And then there’s this, which also leaves me dumbstruck:
During the town hall, one conservative activist turns to his fellow attendees and asks them to raise their hands if they “oppose any form of socialized or government-run health care.” Almost all the hands shot up. Rep Green quickly turned the question on the audience and asked, “How many of you have Medicare?” Nearly half the attendees raised their hands, failing to note the irony.
At another point, a small business owner who supported health reform asks the audience how many people in this room “do not have health insurance of some kind.” Only one hand seemed to be raised. “I think the people who are objecting,” she noted, “are the people who have insurance.”
The New York Times:
Nixon worried that greater access to abortions would foster “permissiveness,” and said that “it breaks the family.” But he also saw a need for abortion in some cases — like interracial pregnancies, he said.
“There are times when an abortion is necessary. I know that. When you have a black and a white,” he told an aide, before adding, “Or a rape.”
That “or a rape” afterthought is the icing on the terrifying cake. What an ass. Not like everyone didn’t already know that.
This picture has conservative pundit Michelle Malkin in a tizzy. She laughs at it as evidence of the failure of the “liberal” value of serving the poor.
Why? Because the homeless man Ms. Obama is serving has a cell phone. Therefore, he is not poor “enough” to deserve a free meal, therefore he is “working the system,” and Michelle Obama is “enabling” him. I find it incredible that conservatives find a First Woman serving the poor to be insult-worthy.
Malkin laughs at the idea that a homeless person could obtain a phone, though there are programs out there for exactly this purpose: “Some folks are wondering where the cell phone bills get sent. The answer is obvious: ACORN headquarters.” She mocks the idea that a homeless person would need a phone to have any hope of finding work: “The liberals’ argument is that they need cell phones to get jobs. Do they need Blackberry Pearls?!” I don’t think that’s a liberal argument. I think it’s an obvious argument. It seems she can’t quite get her mind around the idea of a poor person trying to find a job, because it contradicts her set-in-stone belief that the poor are poor because they are lazy.
Exactly how destitute do you have to be for Malkin to consider you “worthy” of help? She has previously mocked an elderly black woman who lived in her car for saying to Obama that she just wanted a kitchen of her own. What else does Malkin think the poor don’t deserve? More importantly, why?
What the hell is wrong with Malkin? Rarely do we see a person so publicly gloat over their economic privilege, and use their prominent position to further crush the downtrodden. And in a time of terrible recession as well- nice job Malkin. I bet you claim to have “family values.” I bet you tell your readers that liberals have no morals.
Her confident assumption that she deserves a kitchen, a cell phone, a home, regular meals, and a great job, while poor people, by virtue of being poor, do not, makes me think that she must avidly read Ayn Rand before going to bed every night. I would even call her righteous derision of the poor Rand-esque, except that she would probably consider it a compliment.
Who is that American flag in her picture waving for? Her. Because she deserves it. For her job security, for her above-average income, she deserves all the riches, the services, the amenities, the possessions America can offer her.
H/t Womanist Musings
Mayor Dean Grose (R) of Los Alamitos has resigned and stepped down from the city council after forwarding a racist email to coworkers.
Grose claimed he was “unaware of the racial stereotype that black people like watermelons,” though, as many bloggers have pointed out, no one can figure out what the “joke” is supposed to be unless you take that stereotype into account.
Los Alamitos businesswoman and city volunteer Keyanus Price, blew the whistle on this behavior after receiving the email from the mayor, making his action public.
“I have had plenty of my share of chicken and watermelon and all those kinds of jokes,” Price told The Associated Press. “I honestly don’t even understand where he was coming from, sending this to me. As a black person receiving something like this from the city-freakin’-mayor—come on.”
Well, certain conservatives are outraged that a black woman dared to speak up against this racism.
If you just can’t figure out what the deal is with watermelons, PostBourgie will explain it to you. Thoroughly.
Recent Comments