Credit: Life Magazine
1950 Mid-terms. Slinging mud has never gone out of fashion.
Click here to view this media
Since we're gearing up for the final sprint towards the 2010 Mid-Terms, I thought I would start running some documentaries on
past mid-term elections, starting with 1950. It seems then, as now, mud-slinging was an acknowledged art form and one eagerly employed by most candidates. The names have changed, the universal enemy (back then it was Communism) has changed, but the innuendos, sleights and counter-charges are all still there.
This documentary, part of CBS Radio's Report To The Nation series airing on November 9, 1950, is narrated by Edward R. Murrow who gives his usual astute assessment:
Edward R. Murrow: “Those who failed to vote, and deplore the outcome may recall George G. Nathan’s statement that bad officials are elected by good citizens who do not vote.”
Sixty years later that sentiment still applies.
September 05, 2010 02:00 AM
We have a fresh new Toni Home Pundit for you today — meet RenewAmerica’s Robert Meyer. Granted, Mr. Meyer has the look of a high mileage wingnut, and he’s been seeding the Internet with his opinionated emissions since at least 2003, but he’s new to WO’C. Oh, I’ve been tempted by him before, I won’t deny it, but something about his byline makes my back ache; perhaps it’s his headshot, which puts one in mind of a bus bench ad for a louche local chiropractor.
Ground Zero mosque not about religious freedom The Ground Zero mosque controversy has been erroneously portrayed by certain news pundits as being an issue about religious freedom.
It’s about the right of a free people to exercise their sacred liberties in the shadow of Ground Zero, and more specifically in the New York Dolls Gentlemen’s Club, the OTB parlor, or Thunder Lingerie (“come for the slutty nurse costumes and penis-shaped candles, stay for the Taste of Freedom, one of five flavored lubes available at the cash register”), without a bunch of bearded killjoys looking down their bluenoses. For was it not Jefferson in his Letter to the Danbury Baptists who said that, “religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & Strip Club.”
Of course this is another red herring designed to demonize those protesting against locating the mosque at ground zero — as if those opposing it want to deny a segment of Americans equal access to the First Amendment.
Anyway, it’s not a question of flat-out denial so much as it is a matter of competitive pricing. Conservatives think of the Bill of Rights in much the same way that Google and Verizon regard the internet; preferred customers deserve superior access. Muslims have the exact same rights as other Americans, they just have to wait a bit longer for them, and occasionally the First Amendment returns a 404 error.
Is it not ironic that only a few years ago we were told that dissent was the highest form of patriotism.
Now — at least judging by that Glenn Beck rally — it’s the highest form of paleness. If only Bull Connor had lived long enough, he’d be a Constitutional expert on Fox News, or at least have his own show on the National Geographic Channel, The Dog Shouter, (Fridays at 8 P.M.) where he would offer tips on training your Dobermans, Rottweilers, and German Shepherds to detect black racism.
Now that those people are in power we have an Orwellian reversal and dissent is again unpatriotic, with the added feature of being bigoted and phobic.
Bigotry: it’s not a bug, it’s a feature. Anyway, I don’t want to accuse Mr. Meyer of lacking a sense of proportion, but maybe a war of aggression launched on the basis of a counterfeit casus belli is slightly more Orwellian than a pissing match with the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission (although I’ve heard that Community Board 1 is pretty Kafkaesque).
We have a couple of commenters from New York who experienced the horror of 9/11 first hand, and yet don’t seem eager to void the First Amendment, so I’m wondering where Mr. Meyer lives, that he feels entitled to stand athwart Lower Manhattan and shout, “No Paseran!” Let’s check his bio, shall we?
Robert Meyer is a hardy soul who hails from the Cheesehead country of the upper midwest. Robert is known by his opponents as a “clever rhetorician”
Apparently I’m one of his supporters, then.
who often exposes the fallacies of knee-jerk arguments presented in local papers.
So he’s a crank who spends the long winters writing outraged letters to the editor of the Lake Koshkonong Advertiser-Pantagraph.
Seeking to develop precepts for every aspect of life — based on a conservative Christian worldview — Robert often gleans inspiration from looking off his back deck, over the scenic Fox river and recalling the wise counsel of those who mentored him.
Robert was abandoned in the woods as a child, and raised by shrews.
Muslim’s are certainly within their constitutional rights to build a mosque there if they desire. The question is whether they ought to. The issue is one of propriety, not religious freedom. Until pro-mosque apologists get past that fact they have yet to make a legitimate counter argument.
“According to Earl Warren, Negroes are within their constitutional rights to attend the same school as my children if they desire. The question is whether they ought to. The issue is one of propriety, not equal protection. Until integrationists get past that fact they have yet to make a legitimate counter argument. Also, we have William F. Buckley on our side.”
Of course, it’s a community center, not a Crystal Cathedral-like mega-mosque, but Robert makes a good point. For instance, I’m opposed to our apartment building putting a Babylonian Water-goat in the jacuzzi at some point, but so far the management company has never apologized to me.
That we are endowed with certain rights is granted by our national charter. How judiciously we are stewards of those rights will determine whether we can keep them and maintain our freedoms.
Apparently the Declaration of Independence is the law of the land now; no wonder these teabaggers are so desperate to “restore” the Constitution. Maybe we should split the difference and just go back to the Articles of Confederation.
What is the motivation behind placing the mosque there if doing so causes so much public grief, considering that the Imam behind the project, Feisal Abdul Rauf, has indicated he wants to build bridges? Interesting, that in the discussion, the most obvious thing that could be done to facilitate a peaceful resolution is scarcely mentioned. The Imam could just decide to build the mosque elsewhere.
Yes, you rarely hear folks say, “you people can live in the city, it would just be more tasteful and less offensive to us if you lived in your own little special section.” At least, not since the heyday of Venetian Ghetto.
In fact, were I a Muslim, this is what I would be calling on my leadership to do.
Appease your enemies? Too bad the project isn’t being run by Imam Chamberlain.
Some might argue that we must show the world that we are tolerant. Of course, according to the enlightened commentators, allowing the mosque to be built on the designated site is just the medicine we need to establish that impression.
It’s not oppression if people voluntarily give up their rights, and besides, the golf courses at most black country clubs are nicer than Augusta anyway.
But are not Muslim nations the ones suffering from the image problem? When we consider the austerity and human rights abuses within Muslim nations, shouldn’t they be trying to demonstrate that they are tolerant?
Robert will stop beating his wife the second it’s no longer legal in Saudi Arabia. That’ll show ‘em.
There are parallels between this issue and the soldiers’ funeral picketing performed by Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church congregants, a story which has popped up in the news again.
God Hates Fags. And cooking schools, photography classes, and daycare centers.
If those in charge moved the mosque to another location, think of the public relations bonanza it would be for Islam.
If Vivian Malone and James Hood had just paused outside Foster Auditorium, listened for a moment to all the jeering bigots, and thought, “You know what? They make a good point,” and then turned around and walked away, imagine what a PR coup that would have been for the civil rights movement. George Wallace would have been left just standing there in the schoolhouse door with no one to block, and I bet after awhile he would have started feeling kind of self-conscious, and like he didn’t know what to do with his hands.
It would put egg on the face of those who claim Islam is intolerant, it would silence the people who think the mosque construction is an effort to pour salt in the wounds of 9-11 survivors. and it would shut up the people who are claiming that building the mosque at ground zero coincides with the Islamic tradition of triumphalism(building mosques at the locations of great conquests).
I’m sure once American Muslims surrendered to the demands of Pam Geller’s Stop Islamization of America, she would accept it gracefully and move on. She looks like a reasonable person.
But we can offer them good advise and bank on the presumption they will ignore it.
Or at least misspell it.
If you believe that the bombing of the World Trade Center in February of 1993 was a test of Bill Clinton’s resolve, and the 9-11 plane crashes were a test of how George W. Bush would react, then you have to wonder if terrorists don’t view Obama as an absolute pushover. In that case a more violent approach is unnecessary. Of course this is all speculation — but prudent speculation nevertheless if one is to be vigilant.
So in your analysis, Bob, we can either let them build Park51 and live in peace, or prevent them from building it and get bombed? Decisions, decisions…
No doubt we will be told that protesting the mosque only results in a motivating factor for terrorist recruitment. But if the Imam is merely a moderate, how does he have so much influence on militants? That sort of assertion is easily reversible. A lack of resolve might well embolden the terrorists to be more daring. Are we supposed to capitulate to every demand under the threat of reprisals?
Ironically, the Cordoba House people have been asking themselves that same question.
Recall that during the Cold War, we often heard the phrase “by conquest or consent,” indicated there was a stealth method of socializing America without a bloody revolution or all out military conflict, but America’s fall was surely inevitable.
This sinister phrase comes to us by way of James Paul Warburg, who was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. He also wrote the lyrics for the hit 1930 musical, Fine and Dandy.
One should hardly suppose that militant Islam does not likewise countenance both revolutionary and evolutionary strategies in their plans of conquest.
Granted, the Soviet Empire, allied with the subversive influence of the International Communist Conspiracy could achieve neither our conquest nor our consent, but there is an even greater danger than America will be seduced by porklessness. As goes the Carl’s Jr. Western Bacon Cheeseburger, so goes Western Civilization.
Noticeably absent in all the furor are the champions of religious suppression, crying for expanded “separation of church and state.” It seems that some of these secularist organizations are little concerned if the religious persuasion at issue is in conflict with the advancement of Christianity.
That’s the great thing about being a First Amendment absolutist; we don’t have to take sides in your doctrinal mud-wrestling.
If the mosque issue has the result of being politically polarizing, I hope that isn’t the only positive outcome when the dust finally settles at Ground Zero.
A pogrom would be nice too. Just for old time’s sake.
September 05, 2010 01:40 AM
Click here to view this media
Fox's Stuart Varney followed up with one of the GOP's "most prominent members" Tom DeLay on his statement that the Repubicans have to repeal the health-care law if they regain control of the Congress. Just another preview of what we're in for should they regain control; repeal, obstruct and defund everything while holding endless hearings.
DeLay: GOP in 'big trouble' if health law not repealed:
The Republican Party will be in "big trouble" if it does not repeal the healthcare reform law, former House GOP Leader Tom DeLay said Friday.
DeLay (Texas), who was recently dropped as the subject of a federal investigation, threw some sharp elbows at the Obama administration in an interview on MSNBC when asked what new ideas the GOP would put into place if it takes control of Congress this fall.
"They are going to have to reverse everything the Obama administration has done," he said. "If they don't repeal healthcare reform, they are going to be in big trouble."
Debate has swirled over what Republicans will do to block the healthcare law from taking effect.
Many lawmakers in the party now say a full repeal would not work with President Obama in office since he could veto the proposal. Some have argued that stripping the law of its funding would be a wiser strategy.
Still, other candidates and lawmakers want to push ahead with a full repeal measure, at least to show that they are committed to the idea.
DeLay rejected the argument that campaigning on healthcare repeal would hurt the party by drawing attention away from the economy, which is rated by voters as the top issue for the midterms.
"No, all you have to say is healthcare reform is destroying the economy and it will destroy it even more if it is allowed to go into effect," he said.
DeLay, whose pugnacious style earned him the nickname "The Hammer," accused the Obama administration of "trying to bamboozle the American people ever since it took office" and defended the GOP's governing credentials.
"Oh, they're definitely ready to govern," he said. "The leadership is in place" and the candidates are the type people want, he added.
Yeah, great leadership like that brain trust they've got in Boehner, Pence and Cantor. It would be nice if this guy finally gets convicted for money laundering so he's sitting in jail where he belongs instead of appearing on television.
September 05, 2010 01:00 AM
Click here to view this media
Um, do you think maybe someone should point out to Glenn Beck's guest on his show Friday -- Rabbi Daniel Lapin -- that, even though it may feel good to condemn all atheists as "parasites" in a "moral society," it's a profoundly irresponsible thing to do, particularly for someone claiming the title of Rabbi? After all, there is an important historical precedent for what happens when you single out an entire sector of the populace as a "parasitical element."
It's not even worth the time to point out that atheists can propose precisely the reverse claim -- that organized religions are a parasitical element on society -- with probably an even better rationale. Because this kind of rhetoric is a classic example of eliminationism.
Not that Lapin is any stranger to wielding eliminationist rhetoric:
"I am absolutely convinced that God is far from finished with the story of the United States of America," he said by way of summation. "First of all, [there's] the matter of the little battle that must be fought, just as it was in the 19th century." There were, and are, "two incompatible moral visions for this country. We had to settle it then. We're going to have to settle it now. I hope not with blood, not with guns, but we're going to have to settle it nonetheless. The good news is that I think our side is finally ready to settle it. Roll up its sleeves, take off its jacket, and get a little bloody. Spill a little blood. We'll settle it. And we'll win. And then there's no holding us back."
Indeed, this Rabbi Lapin is also known for his long associations with Jack Abramoff, as well as for being the Rabbi who David Duke loves to quote.
Lapin continued:
The sad fact is that through Jewish actors, playwrights, and producers, the Berlin stage of Weimar Germany linked Jews and deviant sexuality in all its sordid manifestations just as surely as Broadway does today. Much of the filth in American entertainment today parallels that of Germany between the wars.
"Indeed, it does," Duke writes glowingly, "It is interesting to note that there a few Jews in America who are concerned about the destructive influence of many powerful Jews. He [Lapin] is concerned not only because he believes that such evil is against his own morality but that it also inevitably brings down Gentile wrath upon Jews. The amazing thing is that there are so few honest voices like that of Rabbi Lapin."
No wonder he now shows up as a "religious authority" on Glenn Beck's show. He fits right in.
September 05, 2010 12:00 AM
Click here to view this media
In case you missed it like I did, here's our own Nicole Belle with Nicole Sandler with their Fools on the Hill Sunday talking heads show roundup from past Monday. Nicole Sandler has more here: Grayson & Tudor – Florida Progressives!
And in hour two, Nicole Belle of Crooks & Liars returns for our weekly Fools on the Hill segment, discussing the Sunday talking head shows. Here’s her take on the Sunday shows:
So I think today’s theme is cluelessness:
Chris Matthews asks his panel if the Tea Party will have veto power over the 2012 GOP nominee. First and foremost, they are using Sarah Palin as some benchmark of influence, which is ludicrous. Her endorsement is by no means a shoo-in for any candidate right now, and there’s nothing that says her influence will strengthen in the intervening years. If anything, if she opts to pursue a national candidacy herself, I suspect that the media scrutiny will result in her having even less credibility.
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/node/39178
It also gives the tea party itself far more credit than they deserve. I think we’ve seen middling electoral success from them in primary races, but they have yet to show themselves successful in full elections and given the polls for Angle, Paul and others, I don’t think they should crow just yet.
Which segues nicely into Howard Dean. He points out to Candy Crowley that although the conventional wisdom is that the party in power suffers electorally in mid-terms, when your alternative is the Party of No, conventional wisdom may be wrong.
http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/howard-dean-name-one-thing-republican
And then we have Dick Armey, the corporate head of the Tea Party, spouting off some truly unbelievable stuff:
http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/dick-armey-medicare-trashes-constitution
He says that Medicare trashes the Constitution. Huh? What does he think those lazy, entitled senior citizens should do? Work to pay for their Alzheimer’s treatment? For proof, he brings up the example of “the” Christian Scientist, whom we apparently should feel bad is being forced to sign up for a doctor to get Social Security. Of course, no one says he has to GO to the doctors, just sign up for Medicare. But again, David Gregory falls down on the job of calling out this crap, and lets Armey filibuster through the segment and not allow Granholm to respond.
And then, in light of the protests on the Cordoba House in NYC over the weekend, Fareed Zakaria wants to remind Americans that we are not in a war with Islam and that al Qaeda hates factions of Islam as bad as they hate us.
http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/fareed-zakaria-gps-al-qaeda-vs-islam
By the way, a commenter made this video of the NYC protests when the haters went after a passerby, who happened to be a construction worker at Ground Zero and not a Muslim.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwaNRWMN-F4&feature=player_embedded
George Will thinks that the Mideast peace process is the biggest obstacle to Mideast peace.
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/node/39185
Amazingly, I actually agree with him if only for this story:
http://crooksandliars.com/ian-welsh/israeli-pm-natanyahu-america-easily-move
I think if we really want to see Mideast peace, then the US needs to come to grips with the dichotomy between what Israel officially tells us and what they say behind closed doors.
And then Fox chooses to use Judith Miller of all people to discuss the study that American people have lost faith in broadcast news
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/node/39175
Really, what can you say about them using the person the Bush White House used to feed propaganda about invading Iraq to?
Our own Howie Klein and Rep. Alan Grayson joined the show this week as well. Go over to Nicole's site to listen to the whole show.
September 04, 2010 11:00 PM
I've recently been writing on applying Open Source Intelligence methods to the problem of Monitoring Right Wing Extremists On Twitter.
People have expressed interest in how to better see what is happening ... and this can be done without engaging the extremists at all.
First, what we're looking for are screen shots with some additional context, and we want them added to the Wingnut Watch pool on Twitter. You can get a Yahoo account, find some interesting stuff, screen shot it, and place it in the pool.
Knowing how to make a report isn't all that much use without being able to find the content. There are a variety of free tools to do this.
Look at the Wingnut Watch pool - see the URL for the Wingnut Watch NetVibes console? This is the root of it all - there are various panels that show certain Twitter users and topics that make a good starting point.
It's interesting to take two of the worst of the worst and one lesser player, then place them into Follower Wonk's Twitter user comparison. Check the overlap between the accounts and you should find an interesting group to examine.
Twitalyzer is another potent package for exploring the discussion space. Get yourself a login and try every little thing, but pay careful attention to the Network Explorer feature under People and Groups. There is no quicker way I know to start with a specific account, figure out when they are active, who their associates are, and what they're talking about.
Followerwonk provides another handy tool in the form of a Twitter bio search that ranks those it finds by their follower counts. Using #wreckingcrew as a search will lead to the command and control communications for a cyberbullying operation run by @GregWHoward.
This is enough information to give you a good starting point. Just be sure the userid you pick for Flickr is in no way associated with anything in the real or virtual world that ties to you and you'll be able to keep an eye on things ... without looking over your shoulder for crazy people incited by this 'WreckingCrew'.
FYI follow on intimidation after this was published.
September 04, 2010 10:00 PM
You know, I don't normally go in for what usually turn out to be empty, symbolic gestures, but I can really get behind the idea of cutting Congressional salaries. In fact, I think 10% is more like it! I also think we should charge them to use the medical clinic in the Capitol building, and they should have to pay for COBRA benefits when they lose their jobs, just like everybody else. It really galls me to think of them getting lifelong medical coverage:
Ann Kirkpatrick wants a pay cut and she’s getting testy about having to wait so long to get it.
Last March, U.S. Rep. Kirkpatrick sponsored legislation to cut congressional salaries a modest 5%, saying it was high time that Congress shared the pain with the rest of America. As U.S. workers have suffered layoffs, pay cuts and furloughs over the past two years, Congress has actually been spending more money than ever. In fact, if it hadn’t been for another bill that Kirkpatrick supported, Kirkpatrick and her colleagues in the U.S. legislature would have gotten automatic pay raises this year, as they did in 2008 and 2009.
The notion of cutting Congressional pay is wildly popular. A recent survey by the Rasmussen Reports found that 75% of Americans think members of Congress should cut their pay until the budget is balanced. And nearly one in eight think members of Congress should not be able to get a raise unless taxpayers vote for it.
As things stand, members of Congress set their own pay and they’ve been quite generous. Rank and file members of congress now earn $174,000 annually — more than about 97% of the rest of the country. That’s up 23% over the past decade.
September 04, 2010 10:00 PM
