Tag Archives: Weekly Standard

Enough!

Sullivan’s admonition to the GOP is simply put…on point.  You’ll agree when you read it.

Andrew Sullivan

Between the humiliating and chaotic collapse of Speaker Boehner’s already ludicrously extreme Plan B and Wayne La Pierre’s deranged proposal to put government agents in schools with guns, the Republican slide into total epistemic closure and political marginalization has now become a free-fall. This party, not to mince words, is unfit for government. There is no conservative party in the West – except for minor anti-immigrant neo-fascist ones in Europe – anywhere close to this level of far right extremism. And now the damage these fanatics can do is not just to their own country – was the debt ceiling debacle of 2011 not enough for them? – but to the entire world.

Those of us who have warned for years about this disturbing trend toward ever more extreme measures – backing torture, pre-emptive un-budgeted wars, out-of-control spending followed, like a frantic mood swing, by anti-spending absolutism of the most insane variety in a steep recession, vicious hostility to illegal immigrants, contempt for gay couples, hostility even to contraception, let alone a middle ground on abortion … well, you know it all by now.

But the current constitutional and economic vandalism removes any shred of doubt that this party and its lucrative media bubble is in any way conservative. They aren’t. They’re ideological zealots, indifferent to the consequences of their actions, contemptuous of the very to-and-fro essential for the American system to work, gerry-mandering to thwart the popular will, filibustering in a way that all but wrecks the core mechanics of American democracy, and now willing to acquiesce to the biggest tax increase imaginable because they cannot even accept Obama’s compromise from his clear campaign promise to raise rates for those earning over $250,000 to $400,000 a year.

And this is not the exception. It is the rule. On abortion, the party proposes that it be made illegal in every state by amending the Constitution. Torture? More, please. Iran? It should be attacked if it merely develops the technological skill to make a nuclear bomb, let alone actually make one. Israel? Leading Republicans don’t just support new settlements on the West Bank. They show up for the opening ceremonies!

Gun control? A massacre of children leads to a proposal for more guns in elementary schools and no concession on assault weapons. Immigration? Romney represented the party base – favoring a brutal regime of persecution of illegal immigrants until they are forced to “self-deport” – or rounding as many up as they can. Climate change? It’s a hoax – and we should respond by shrieking “Drill, Baby, Drill!” Gay marriage? The federal constitution should be amended to bar any legal recognition of any gay relationships, including civil partnerships. Their legislative agenda in this Congress? To “make Obama a one-term president.” Not saving the economy, not pursuing new policies, not cooperating to make Democratic legislation better. Just destroying a president of the opposite party. And, of course, failing.

Then there is the rhetoric. In just the last fortnight, House Republicans have asserted that secretary of state Clinton faked her recent fall and concussion at home in order to get out of testifying on the Benghazi consulate attack. And then the Weekly Standard quotes a Senate Republican staffer saying: “Send us Hagel and we will make sure every American knows he is an anti-Semite.”

Enough. This faction and its unhinged fanaticism has no place in any advanced democracy. They must be broken. But the current irony is that no one has managed to expose their extremism more clearly than their own Speaker. His career is over. As is the current Republican party. We need a new governing coalition in the House – Democrats and those few sane Republicans willing to put country before ideology. But even that may be impossible.

4 Comments

Filed under GOP Bubble, GOP Extremism

Conservatives Feign Outrage Over MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski’s Pay Disparity

Politicus USA

Conservatives are hoping to save Mitt Romney from his failed attempt to avoid a policy discussion about equal pay by feigning outrage over Mika Brzezinski’s pay.

The conservative Weekly Standard, founded by William Kristol, is allegedly making a case about pay disparity out of MSNBC’s Morning Joe, where Mika Brzezinski is paid half of what her male co-host is paid. They write, as if shocked, “Brzezinski’s colleague Andrea Mitchell made this point on air yesterday–that pay disparity exists at MSNBC.” Really? As if it doesn’t exist at every other network? We were unaware that Republicans cared about pay disparity. This is most unusual.

We can only assume this is intended to suggest that liberals are no better at women’s pay issues than conservatives, but if that is indeed the underlying point, it’s an utter fail.

The entertainment business is just that – a business. It’s run by men, it’s a huge industry as far as American exports go. Entertainment/media is a top dog in the business world. MSNBC is not a liberal entity- it’s a corporation under NBC Universal run by parent companies GE and Comcast, and as such, it doesn’t embrace liberal values but rather is guided by the amoral profit motive conjoined to the patriarchal system.

MSNBC saw an untapped market in liberal slanted news after Fox News so successfully absorbed the conservative market, and they jumped on it. They didn’t do it because they have a liberal agenda – they did it for money. And Morning Joe is not a liberal show; it’s named after the Republican host Joe Scarborough.

Women have always been paid less in entertainment. Julia Roberts fought to change that, and made huge strides for female stars, but women still make less than a man of similar star power.

Continue reading after the fold…

 

Comments Off

Filed under Equal Pay for Women, Mika Brzezinski

It’s Paul Ryan!

Could President Obama have gotten any luckier with Mitt Romney’s VP pick?

Did Romney give in to the pressure from the Right?  You betcha!

The Huffington Post

Mitt Romney will announce Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) as his running mate on Saturday, according to two sources with knowledge of the decision.

Ryan is a bold pick who will energize the Republican Party, but putting him on the ticket is fraught with risk and instantly puts Ryan’s budget plan front and center in the 2012 campaign.

Romney will announce his choice in Norfolk on Saturday morning at the beginning of a four-day bus tour through key battleground states, the campaign said Friday night. The Weekly Standard reported earlier Friday that Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has been asked to be ready to make the case for Ryan beginning Saturday.

Romney’s alliance with the 42-year old Ryan has become the most dramatic development of the 2012 presidential campaign. Romney had been presumed for much of the last few months to be set on a safe pick, such as Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), or former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty.

But now, Romney, who is 23 years older than Ryan, will signal that he is willing to roll the dice. President Barack Obama’s reelection campaign and Democratic political groups have been eager for Romney to pick Ryan, the architect of plans to slash government spending and overhaul entitlement programs that Democrats believe are political losers.

Both liberals and conservatives will be thrilled with Romney’s choice.

Conservatives believe Ryan is one of the brightest, best young faces and minds who can cheerfully articulate a case for limited government while simultaneously arguing that a less expansive bureaucracy and a revamped entitlement system is the best way to preserve government aid and benefits for the poor, indigent and elderly.

Continue reading here…

4 Comments

Filed under Paul Ryan GOP VP Pick

Bill Kristol concedes 2012 presidential race to Democrats

After viewing the GOP candidates, I can understand why Bill Kristol laments a likely loss to President Barack Obama.  He waxes nostalgic over what was (Ronald Reagan’s election) and what could be, in his column.  However, he concedes that 2012 will not be the year of the GOP.

But…Bill Kristol has rarely been right on his predictions.  Here’s hoping he knocks this one out of the park!

The Raw Story

In a column at the Weekly Standard website, former New York Times columnist Bill Kristol opines that “assuming that presidential field remains as it is” for the GOP, “2012 won’t be a repeat of 1980″. He is referring to the election of Ronald Reagan after Jimmy Carter’s single term in the White House.

The column itself is a semi-rhapsodic invocation of what is apparently to Kristol a sacred date, “November 4, 1980, the instant when we knew Ronald Reagan, the man who gave the speech in the lost cause of 1964, leader of the movement since 1966, derided by liberal elites and despised by the Republican establishment, the moment when we knew—he’d won, we’d won, the impossible dream was possible, the desperate gamble of modern conservatism might pay off, conservatism had a chance, America had a chance”.

Kristol quotes a passage from William Faulkner’s 1948 novel, Intruder in the Dust which says for a certain species of Southern teenager, it is permanently the eve of the battle of Gettysburg, the high-water mark of the Confederate effort in the Civil War. Kristol casts the Southern struggle in 1863 as that of the American conservative, the victory in 1980 forming a kind of bulwark in their ongoing war to win out “over decadent liberalism”.

Many on the right are dreaming that the next presidential election will return the country to Republican rule, but Kristol’s column appears to pour cold water on those hopes. “(W)e’re not going to have a chance to replay that election,” he says, with the current crop of candidates, in spite of the fact that he refers to President Obama as “an icompetent incumbet”.

These candidates are going to be the only ones the Republicans have, however. The filing deadlines for the primary elections in Florida and South Carolina were October 31 and November 1, respectively.

Related articles

1 Comment

Filed under U.S. Politics

Kochs lash out at ‘dangerous’ critics, ‘radical’ Obama

That’s like the proverbial pot calling the kettle black…

Politico

In lengthy interviews with a conservative magazine, the billionaire Koch brothers mounted an aggressive defense of their business and political interests, describing their liberal critics as “very, very extreme” and “very dangerous” and President Barack Obama as a “radical” with “Marxist” ideas whose success is owed largely to his “silver tongue.”

Obama is “the most radical president we’ve ever had as a nation … and has done more damage to the free enterprise system and long-term prosperity than any president we’ve ever had,” David Koch is quoted saying in a story posted late Friday on the website of the Weekly Standard.

In a grudging reference to Obama’s rhetorical skills, he added: “It just shows you what a person with a silver tongue can achieve.”

David’s brother Charles Koch said of Obama: “I’m not saying he’s a Marxist, but he’s internalized some Marxist models — that is, that business tends to be successful by exploiting its customers and workers.”

The Weekly Standard story comes after months of intensifying scrutiny of the Kochs’ funding of conservative causes  including the fights to limit carbon emissions and block last year’s Democratic healthcare overhaul, as well as this year’s showdown with public employee unions in Wisconsin. 

The Kochs’ new notoriety as targets of the left was capped by the wide coverage of a prank in which a liberal blogger posing as David Koch recorded a 20-minute telephone call about the labor standoff with Wisconsin’s Republican Gov. Scott Walker.      Read more…

5 Comments

Filed under Koch Brothers, Koch Industries

Barbour: Segregationist Citizens Councils That I Praised Were ‘Totally Indefensible’

Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi plans on running for President of the United States next year.  It appears he had no choice but to backtrack his endearing assessment of the “White Citizens’ Council”…

TPMDC

Gov. Haley Barbour (R-MS), the potential presidential candidate who has come under fire for comments praising the segregationist Citizen Councils that operated during his youth in the South, has now released a statement fully condemning the organizations:

“When asked why my hometown in Mississippi did not suffer the same racial violence when I was a young man that accompanied other towns’ integration efforts, I accurately said the community leadership wouldn’t tolerate it and helped prevent violence there. My point was my town rejected the Ku Klux Klan, but nobody should construe that to mean I think the town leadership were saints, either. Their vehicle, called the ‘Citizens Council,’ is totally indefensible, as is segregation. It was a difficult and painful era for Mississippi, the rest of the country, and especially African Americans who were persecuted in that time.”

In a profile in the Weekly Standard, Barbour recalled the group in positive terms:

“You heard of the Citizens Councils? Up north they think it was like the KKK. Where I come from it was an organization of town leaders. In Yazoo City they passed a resolution that said anybody who started a chapter of the Klan would get their ass run out of town. If you had a job, you’d lose it. If you had a store, they’d see nobody shopped there. We didn’t have a problem with the Klan in Yazoo City.”

More…

Comments Off

Filed under Haley Barbour

Haley Barbour Under Fire for Revisionist History

"At his press conference today, Governor ...

Image via Wikipedia

Gov. Haley Barbour, the so-called power broker of the GOP is merely doing what every right-wing politician who has hidden his racial prejudices over the years has done because of political correctness…”come out of the racist closet”.  

In the last two years the politicians who hate that a Black man is in the White House  and who have spoken out en masse against Blacks, Muslims, Gays, Immigration and every other issue that involves race, religion or gender which they find contrary to their core beliefs.

So, it comes as no surprise that Haley Barbour, et al have finally exposed their bigotry fully, instead of the innuendos and coded language  that they usually offer.

The Daily Beast

Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi is drawing a chorus of boos in the blogosphere over his praise for an historically racist organization in an interview with the Weekly Standard. Reminiscing about his days growing up in Yazoo City, Barbour said that struggles over race weren’t as bad in his area as others thanks to the efforts of the Citizens Council:  

“You heard of the Citizens Councils? Up North they think it was like the KKK. Where I come from it was an organization of town leaders. In Yazoo City they passed a resolution that said anybody who started a chapter of the Klan would get their ass run out of town. If you had a job, you’d lose it. If you had a store, they’d see nobody shopped there. We didn’t have a problem with the Klan in Yazoo City.”  

But the trouble is historians don’t remember the group with quite the same fondness, generally regarding it as a less violent descendant of the Ku Klux Klan. I called up Charles Payne, a professor at the University of Chicago and co-author of Time Longer than Rope: A Century of African American Activism, 1850-1950 to get his reaction to Barbour’s recollection.   More…

Comments Off

Filed under Haley Barbour

Bush V. Gore’s Disgrace Deepens

The current United States Supreme Court, the h...
Image via Wikipedia

Almost everyone agrees that the Supreme Court’s decision in Bush v Gore was a disasterous one.  The Court even placed a caveat in the decision telling the world that the decision can never be used as precedent in any other case.   In my opinion it’s because they knew they were essentially committing an injustice on the American people.

The Daily Beast

The Supreme Court’s granting Bush the victory looks even worse today than it did 10 years ago, says Eric Alterman—even if historians weren’t debating whether George W. Bush was the worst president ever or just since Grant.

Passions are supposed to recede with time as wisdom and maturity, but the Supreme Court’s willingness to hand the presidency to George W. Bush looks even worse than it did 10 years ago, when passions flared and pundits feared for the future of the republic. The obvious problem with making Bush president was the fact of the Bush presidency, a catastrophe in so many directions at once that presidential historians argue today about whether Bush was the worst president in American history or merely the worst since Grant, Buchanan, or Johnson (Andrew, not Lyndon).

[...]

The court did not really even try to hide its partisan agenda. It insisted that its decision not be employed as precedent and released it a mere two hours before Florida’s “safe harbor” deadline of Dec. 12, thereby making it impossible for the Gore team to contest. (It would take longer than two hours just to read the decision and its many dissents.) Writing bravely in The Weekly Standard, John DiIulio Jr. warned that “the arguments that ended the battle and ‘gave’ Bush the presidency are constitutionally disingenuous at best. They will come back to haunt conservatives and confuse, if they do not cripple, the principled case for limited government, universal civic deference to legitimate, duly constituted state and local public authority.”

The court has not cited Bush v. Gore in a single decision over the past decade. (Justice Antonin Scalia frequently urges audiences to just “get over it.”)

DiIulio’s predictions have failed to come true only because conservatives have proved unembarrassable. As Elspeth Reeve, writing in The Atlantic Wire, points out, the court has not cited Bush v. Gore in a single decision over the past decade. (Justice Antonin Scalia frequently urges audiences to just “get over it.”) Meanwhile, Jeff Toobin, notes in The New Yorker that since Bush v. Gore, the court has pretty much abandoned judicial conservatism entirely. The “signature of the Roberts Court has been its willingness, even its eagerness, to overturn the work of legislatures.” The Roberts Court has struck down gun control laws across the country, gutted campaign-finance law, and will likely tackle Obama’s health care law with “a similar lack of humility,” Toobin writes.

Continue reading here…

Comments Off

Filed under Justice Antonin Scalia, Supreme Court Of The United States, Uncategorized

Todd Palin Confirms Angry Emails

One can actually draw an impression about the Palins…that they are rather vindictive to people who they perceive have crossed them in some way…

The Weekly Standard

Yesterday, the anti-Palin blog Mudflats leaked an email that Todd Palin had sent to several people, in which he complained about something Alaska Republican senatorial candidate Joe Miller had (not) said about Sarah Palin’s qualifications for the presidency. Predictably, a media frenzy ensued.

Here’s Mr. Palin’s response, in a statement released to THE WEEKLY STANDARD:

My family has worked hard in supporting Joe Miller, so when I heard he’d said something less than supportive of my wife’s efforts, I responded. But it turns out we’d gotten our wires crossed and Joe hadn’t said anything like what I’d been told. So there’s no story here except the fact that the press put our personal emails online again, and again couldn’t even be bothered to conceal our email addresses or take any steps to protect our privacy.

We don’t know who leaked the email. In 2008, by way of background, Sarah Palin’s personal email account was hacked by the son of a Democratic lawmaker in Tennessee. The hacker was found guilty on two counts of obstruction of justice and unauthorized access to a computer last spring. He awaits sentencing.

Comments Off

Filed under Joe Miller, Todd Palin