Why Most Folks Do Not Care About Obama “Scandals”

Just over a week ago a trifecta of “scandals” broke upon the Obama administration.  It started when congressional Republicans hoodwinked ABC into reporting on fabricated emails.  Things got worse when news broke that IRS agents had given more scrutiny to right leaning organizations while considering tax exempt status.  The crescendo was the revelation that the Justice Department had cast a very wide net in subpoenaing the AP’s phone records.

The past week is widely accepted as one of the worst for this administration, but what has happened to Obama’s approval ratings?   Despite the misleading headlines from the right wing echo chamber,  Obama has gotten a bump.   On the Gallup daily tracking poll ending the 14th of May, his approve - disapprove numbers were 47/47.  The numbers as of the 18th of May are 51/42 approve – disapprove.

The tendency of Obama’s political opponents to overplay their hand when they think they have an advantage does not serve them well when real issues that may actually reflect badly upon the administration hit the news.  The far right have been cartoonishly obsessed with Barack Obama since the 2008 campaign, and it only seems to be getting worse as time goes by.  Who can blame regular folks who witness the spectacle from the right over the last five years essentially ignoring the caterwauling from that side of the aisle, no matter how important the issue seems to be to those of us who are news junkies.  To wit…

IMHO, the widespread perception of the Republican hatred of Obama started with Sarah Palin’s speech to the 2008 Republican convention.  She threw all sorts of red meat and the right positively loved it.  In between lipstick on a pig jokes and folksy recollections of life in the wilds of Elleskeh, she decried Obama as soft on terrorism and not fit for the presidency.  Palin maintained that attack style on the campaign trail, reminding audiences that Obama “palled around with terrorists” and accusing him of being a socialist.  The introduction for the American people of the right wing opinion on President Obama was that his opponents were ferociously hostile, blindly attacking any perceived weakness  and outlandish in their approach.

While the nation celebrated Obama’s election conservatives could not hide their contempt.  The very night of his inauguration Republican power brokers met and determined to  do everything in their power to subvert the new president.   At that very moment the nation was in the depths of an economic crisis not experienced since the Great Depression.  America lost 524,000 jobs in December of 08.  2.9 million jobs were lost in 2008.  Yet, rather than meeting to determine the best way to work with the new administration to pull the nation from the brink of economic collapse Republicans determined to do all in their power to cause political harm to the new president.

Republicans set about obstructing at historic levels, decimating the previous record for Senate filibusters.  The obstructionism was so bad that Republicans found themselves voting against bills they had sponsored, simply because the president expressed support for the issue.

The overt hostility of congressional Republicans to President Obama was demonstrated early in his term when Rep. Joe Wilson shouted “you lie” from the floor during a presidential address to a joint session of congress.   While most of the nation was appalled at that breach of decorum, Wilson quickly became a hero to conservatives.

These are all very early examples of the unhinged behavior of the right to President Obama.  Orly Taitz and the birthers, death panels, the blatherings of Donald Trump, Obama the secret Muslim, racist Obama images, Obama hates white people… these and many other examples introduced the nation towards the absolute hatred of Obama by the right.   Each one is cartoonishly silly and the accumulated effect of this unreasoned vitriol for the president must have an effect on the average American.  Not the effect of convincing the audience that Obama is a socialist Islamist despot who wants to kill your family because they are white.   The impression is that his opposition are a bunch of unreasonable clowns.

The drumbeat of righty Obama hatred has not subsided as time passed, it has only grown stronger.   Which leads us to the answer as to why a sudden outbreak of Obama scandal has not brought his poll numbers lower, as many expected.   In fact the progress of the past week provides a case study on why Obama has developed a coat of Teflon:  for while the mainstream media pondered the damage being caused by the big 3 scandals the right wing media echo chamber ESSPLODED with outrage because a Marine held an umbrella over Obama during a rain shower.  No one ever foresaw the obscure permutations of “Marine umbrella protocol” being used to ruthlessly attack the president, but the right wing freaks did their best when they saw the chance!   Wouldn’t most folks who have any sense of self awareness just sort of know how silly that sort of attack makes one look?

If you are a normal citizen who does not follow the news on a regular basis, every time you hear anything from conservatives about Obama it is some completely overblown crazy eyed conspiracy theory which automatically casts the president in the worst light possible.  And now we are supposed to get all high dudgeon-ed about the IRS, The AP, and Benghazi?

Maybe if conservatives weren’t such clowns when it came to President Obama they would be taken more seriously when it might actually count.

Print Friendly
Posted in Barack Obama, Campaigns, Congress, Conservatives, Conspiracy Theories, Sarah Palin, Stars of the GOP, The Economy, The Media | Tagged , ,
sign-in options Join the discussion at All Things Democrat, sign-in with disqus, facebook, twitter and googleplus

Secret Service Looking Into Right Wing Radio Host Pete Santilli for Threats Against Hillary Clinton

You may have already heard reports on the obscene death threats made by far-far right, lunatic fringe radio host Pete Santilli. There are a lot of statements in his rant that one could explain-away as hyperbole – Obama “should” be killed, the Bush family, including Bush Sr., Dubya and Jeb “should” be killed (guess they’re not conservative enough), and crazy stuff about Hillary killing our troops, etc. But at one point he goes clearly over the Nugent line on Hillary (while simultaneously losing the independent women’s vote for the GOP):

I want to shoot her right in the vagina and I don’t want her to die right away; I want her to feel the pain and I want to look her in the eyes and I want to say, on behalf of all Americans that you’ve killed, on behalf of the Navy SEALS, the families of Navy SEAL Team Six who were involved in the fake hunt down of this Obama, Obama bin Laden thing, that whole fake scenario, because these Navy SEALS know the truth, they killed them all. On behalf of all of those people, I’m supporting our troops by saying we need to try, convict, and shoot Hillary Clinton in the vagina.

Listen to the entire rant for yourself:

You’re probably wondering, shouldn’t the Secret Service be alerted? Hillary Clinton, former First Lady, is a Secret Service “protectee”, afterall. Well, tonight I reached out to the Washington D.C. Public Affairs office of the U.S. Secret Service and found that there have been several reports on this threat and an investigation is already underway.

What could this nutjob hope to gain by this? More listeners? When does hyperbole cross the line into an actionable threat? Is the line drawn between “We should have her shot” and “I want to shoot her”?

Print Friendly
Posted in Barack Obama, Conspiracy Theories, George HW Bush, George W Bush, Hillary Clinton, Republican Scandals, Republicans, Secret Service | Tagged , , , , , , , ,
sign-in options Join the discussion at All Things Democrat, sign-in with disqus, facebook, twitter and googleplus

Finally, a Phone App that Will Hit Vulture Capitalists Where it Hurts

Buycott, a new phone app that can be used both to boycott and support companies, is available for IPhone now and coming soon to Android. [Hat-tip to blogenfreude at Stinque]

Simply scan any product’s bar code and it will tell you who makes the product and, most importantly, it will cross-check against boycott campaigns you have joined (or started yourself) and alert you to buy or boycott the product. Finally, an easy way to boycott companies like Koch Industries and others that use your hard-earned dollars to defeat Democrats and pass legislation against reproductive rights, minority rights, voting rights – you name it.

Download it now and stop supporting companies owned by the lunatic fringe. If you have Android, bookmark Buycott’s page and check back often.

buycott

Print Friendly
Posted in Boycotts, Corporate Greed | Tagged , ,
sign-in options Join the discussion at All Things Democrat, sign-in with disqus, facebook, twitter and googleplus

The Black Hole Theory of the Minimum Wage

Physicists theorize that inside a black hole the laws of physics breakdown. When the minimum wage falls far enough below what the market would bear the laws of supply and demand breakdown. Doubling today’s federal minimum wage should lead to a disproportionate explosion of demand for the goods of minimum to median wage paying employers.

If we cut today’s minimum to median wages in half that wouldn’t help McDonald’s or Wal-Mart, would it? This wage cut must already have taken place when we would need to triple today’s minimum wage to catch up with doubled productivity since 1968 (almost quadruple the early 2007 minimum wage — the median wage stagnated as productivity doubled too).

Elizabeth Warren: Minimum Wage Would Be $22 An Hour If It Had Kept Up With Productivity.

Doubling today’s minimum wage to $15 an hour would add 50% to Wal-Mart’s wages but only 5% to Wal-Mart’s prices – 100% to McDonald’s wages but 33% to McDonald’s prices. $15 an hour being today’s median wage, half the workforce would get raises percentage multiples of pass through price increases.

This win-win effect could not go on forever. At $30,000 a year consumers would buy a lot more fast food and retail items than they will at $15,000 a year – hugely pent-up demand. Going from a $30,000 year minimum wage to $40,000 would raise prices (3% at Wal-Mart; 11% at McDonald’s) but not add much to demand – though some people would
have more money to spend — a wash? Somewhere in between is the edge of the black hole.

Guest submission by Denis Drew of On Today’s Page blog.

Print Friendly
Posted in Income Inequality | Tagged , ,
sign-in options Join the discussion at All Things Democrat, sign-in with disqus, facebook, twitter and googleplus

Latest Righty Poutrage!!11!Eleventy!1!!: Of Marines And Umbrellas

The Daily Beast has the latest example of President Barack Obama flouting the law and making a mockery of the American military all while being President while Black!

When the prime minister of Turkey and Obama gave an outdoor press conference they were rained upon.  This picture is the cause of latest of wingnut manic whine fest.

President Obama forces a Marine to hold an umbrella which some say will lead to the dishonorable discharge of the unfortunate Marine.

According to the rightwing freaks this picture shows President Obama willfully and with malice of forethought ordering Marines to break “Marine Umbrella Protocol” (seriously!  I swear I did not make that up) which evidently prohibits a male marine from holding an umbrella while in dress uniform.   The reason for the prohibition is in order to allow the Marine to salute properly.

Of course President Obama is hardly the only president to have an umbrella held by a military member during a rainy day.   But the other men who were afforded the courtesy were all President while white.

This is ok, because it happened while President Bush Sr. was president while white.
The difference between Obama and Bush Sr. in these two pictures could not be more obvious. One is an outrage and an insult to our military, while the other passed without notice. The obvious difference is that President Obama committed his outrage during the act of being President while black, but Bush Sr. was afforded his service in the act of being President while white.

This is ok, but when a military member holds an umbrella for Pres. Obama, it's outrageous! Yet another example two white Presidents who had umbrella’s held by military members, which no one seemed to mind. That sure did change when the first black President was afforded the same courtesy.

Honestly, I think the righties are off their game on this one.  While the difference in attitude when Obama is given the same treatment as former presidents is obvious they are missing what would usually be their go-to in this circumstance.  The real scandal here would normally be that a Marine had been forced to hold an umbrella for a Muslim.  The leader of Turkey is named Abdullah Gul!  Freaking ABDULLAH Gul… That Marine should have been giving him a pat-down to make sure he wasn’t wearing a suicide vest, not servicing Abdullah with an umbrella.

Of course the righties believe Obama is a secret Muslim anyway, so what is the difference at the end of the day…   Come to think of it, maybe I should stop trying to feed the trolls their newest poutrage talking points.  You have to admit, that take on a Marine holding an umbrella for Abdullah could have come straight from the fevered ramblings of Beck/Limbaugh etc etc etc…

I’ll wrap this post by linking to a blog written by someone who probably does not agree with me on most political issues.  Cpl Bill Feidler writes a blog titled One Marines View.  He wrote a post in June of 2012 describing a Marine at a memorial who picked up an umbrella to shade an old veteran.  He was not asked to take the umbrella, and he stood in the blazing sun selflessly giving the veteran shade.  WhenCpl. Feidler thanked him for the service he just nodded as though it was simply his duty to do so.marine
Anyone who thinks that Marine should be given some sort of reprimand or had in some manner violated his duty is a complete and utter lunatic.

Update for correction: President Obama appeared in the rain with Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the Turkish Prime Minister. The business about him being a Muslim is actually more pertinent to Recep than to Abdullah however.  Recep was first noticed for his fiery Islamist rhetoric and has spent time in jail for “inciting religious hatred”.

Print Friendly
Posted in Barack Obama, Conservatives, Military Matters, Politics, Racial Issues, Republican Propaganda Machine, Republicans | Tagged , ,
sign-in options Join the discussion at All Things Democrat, sign-in with disqus, facebook, twitter and googleplus

Darrell Issa – Coward, Thief, Insurance Fraud, Arsonist, Typical Republican

Darrell Issa, House Oversight Overreach Chairman, continues to be the greatest fundraiser for Democrats. Remember when he refused to let Sandra Fluke speak against his all-male panel? Now his mission is to thwart the RNC’s outreach to minorities by impeaching the first African American president over his fabricated Benghazi scandal. Issa’s real problem is his guilt over his extremely shady past. Or, he’s still pissed at the world because he sank millions of his own money into a bid for Governor of California, just to have Arnold steal it from him at the last minute. Keep an eye on Issa; its always the loudest mouth in the GOP that ends up brought down by his own scandal.

Darrell Issa devil
issaactofterror
Continue reading

Print Friendly
Posted in Barack Obama, Darrel Issa, Politics, Republican Scandals |
sign-in options Join the discussion at All Things Democrat, sign-in with disqus, facebook, twitter and googleplus

IF (A Big IF) This CBS Report Is True, Obama Needs To Fire Someone Else

Bopping about the intertubes today I read a story on CBS that I initially thought must be an Onion type satire.  Headlined Officials on Benghazi: “We made mistakes, but without malice”, the article contains one of the most nonsensical quotes ever attributed to an anonymous administration source:

“We’re portrayed by Republicans as either being lying or idiots,” said one Obama administration official who was part of the Benghazi response. “It’s actually closer to us being idiots.”

I just can not believe someone in the administration would really say such a thing, even anonymously.  If this is an accurate quote I would hope whoever said it to the CBS reporter would have the good sense to publicly apologize and tender their resignation.   The only proven idiot in the administration is the anonymous CBS source for proving Republican talking points, and right now that is the last thing this administration needs to deal with. 

Just perusing the comment section of the article shows how damaging the quote is: 

 Well, at least he’s admitting they’re idiots. THAT’S a refreshing change.

Lying or Idiots?
I say lying idiots.

So it’s the old, “We didn’t do it on purpose we’re just stupid” defense.

He says more like idiots. Do you want an idiot running your country?

It is an iron clad guarantee that this quote is going to be featured by Republicans looking to do the maximum damage possible to the Obama administration.  If an administration official actually said of the Benghazi followup that it was the administration being “idiots” that person simply has to go.   

The last week has been a lousy one for the administration but I think they have done alright in the grand scheme of things.  They had 3 big events occur in a two day time span at the end of last week.  The Benghazi affair in particular has proven a huge bust.  To have an administration official buttressing Republican talking points on Benghazi, in any manner what so ever, is just not acceptable.  The Republican case on Benghazi is non existent, they have paid a heavy political price time and time again for being such dunderheads about the issue, and they should find no relief from anonymous administration members.

I really hate to be a conspiracy theorist, but why not?   Immediately after Republicans have been caught red handed tampering with administration emails to score cheap political points on Banghazi there is a distinct possibility that the “administration official who was part of the Benghazi response” is not really an administration official at all.   It sounds like a Republican “quoting” (insert the famed McCain air quote gesture here please) what the official said to them.

Print Friendly
Posted in Barack Obama, Democrats, Republican Propaganda Machine, Republicans | Tagged , ,
sign-in options Join the discussion at All Things Democrat, sign-in with disqus, facebook, twitter and googleplus

Republicans Fabricated Evidence on Benghazi to Win a Political Battle with that Black Man in the White House

RacistObamaPic27I’ll be frank – most Republicans that I’ve had the displeasure of meeting quickly prove to be hateful, racist, homophobic, sexist, dishonest, unpatriotic, America-hating pricks. It drives them crazy to have a black man in the White House. Every time a state passes marriage equality, they talk like its the end of civilization. Even working-class Republicans would sell their souls to align with rich bastards like the Kock brothers, their idols, and they would eagerly help the Kocks to lower their own wages, eliminate their benefits, and say “thank you Kock brothers” while they and their loved ones continue down the path of financial ruin. But hey, at least they stuck it to that black man in the White House.

With the help of the lunatic fringe, Republican leaders tried for months to gain politically from the tragedy in Benghazi. They worked tirelessly to inflate the “embassy attack” into a full-blown scandal and impeachable event, even though they knew all along that the so-called “embassy” was no embassy at all, but a CIA operation that was attacked, with special-ops trained CIA agents responding. They claimed to be outraged that jets were not scrambled to thwart the attack, even though military officials said it was an impossibility. They dissected the statements released from the Administration a thousand different ways looking for the slightest bit of damaging info, but still left most reporters asking the question, “What’s the scandal? I still don’t know what the scandal is!”

One of their primary talking points was that the ambassador of the Benghazi “embassy” asked for additional security numerous times but the White House refused to give it to them, which, in their minds, was the leading cause of the deaths at the embassy. The GOP refused to discuss the fact that House Republicans gutted embassy security in their newly-found crusade against debt and deficits. Yesterday we learned that the late Ambassador Stevens actually turned down offers by military personnel for additional security, twice.

Then there’s the huge blunder by ABC News that leads us back to Republican dishonesty. ABC ran a completely false story last Friday based on an anonymous source that supposedly saw emails proving that the White House doctored statements for purely political reasons. The smoking-gun in the scandal. Except not only did this source NOT see any emails, the actual emails were edited to make the White House appear to have lied and feed the GOP’s scandal/impeachment agenda. Guess who edited and leaked the doctored emails? You guessed it – dishonest, racist REPUBLICANS. How long do you think we’ll have to wait until that cowardly little arsonist and car thief Darrell Issa has a hearing on this? Until eternity, is my guess.

Instead of following Rush Limbaugh’s lead and his hatred for that “negro in the White House”, Republicans should try embracing diversity, stop the obstructionism, and get back to work. President Obama is not that “Kenyan, socialist, secret Muslim, dictator” in the White House. He’s our President, elected by a majority of us Americans; one of only 6 presidents to have been elected twice with at least 51% of the popular vote. Its the will of the American people. Its time to accept it and move on. Or, you could continue down your wrong-headed path and be the best fundraisers the Democratic Party ever had. By the time you’re through, the 2014 election will look like 2006.

See the next fabricated scandal by the lunatic fringe – umbrellagate!

Print Friendly
Posted in Barack Obama, Republican Scandals, Republicans | Tagged , ,
sign-in options Join the discussion at All Things Democrat, sign-in with disqus, facebook, twitter and googleplus

Not a Single Tea Party Group Denied Tax Exempt Status

I’ve strongly disagreed with the corporate media (being lead by the nose by teapublicans) labeling the need for the IRS to monitor tea party groups for possible violations as a “scandal”. The tea party can waste time twisting logic into a pretzel to get beyond the truth but they are not, and have never been, non-partisanThe law clearly states:

RC § 501(c)(3) organizations are allowed to conduct certain election-related activities so long as the activities are non-partisan and do not indicate a preference for any candidate.

The IRS should have simply announced, “We must constantly be on the lookout (bolo) for fraud in the tax system. We focused on these groups because there was a disproportionate number of them applying for tax exempt status after the Citizen’s United ruling. We will be sure to look into all groups for political activity going forward and revoke their status if found in violation of the law.” And as much I can appreciate the politics of the situation, I believe the President should have said the same.

Now we learn that, for all of the hand-wringing on the right and capitulation on the left, the truth is that the IRS was not exclusively targeting the tea party groups. Fact is, not a single tea party group was denied tax exempt status. EVER. However, one progressive group, Maine chapter of Emerge America, was denied.

From Salon:

But so far no one has identified a single conservative group that was denied status in the controversial review, though some faced bureaucratic hurdles and had their tax-exempt status delayed.

In fact, the only known 501(c)(4) applicant to have its status denied happens to be a progressive group: the Maine chapter of Emerge America, which trains Democratic women to run for office. Although the group did no electoral work, and didn’t participate in independent expenditure campaign activity either, its partisan status apparently disqualified it from being categorized as working for the “common good.”

That actually triggered a review of Emerge America’s other programs that had been previously granted tax-exempt status under the Bush Administration. So based on the facts, teapublicans have nothing to bitch about.

Print Friendly
Posted in Republican Propaganda Machine, Republican Scandals, Taxes | Tagged , ,
sign-in options Join the discussion at All Things Democrat, sign-in with disqus, facebook, twitter and googleplus

That dick Cheney – Can He Still Be Prosecuted for War Crimes?

Dick Cheney, the brains behind the administration that doctored phoney intelligence as an excuse to remove his long-time nemesis, Saddam Hussein. The same administration that rushed us into an illegal war in Iraq based on the existence of WMDs while the weapons inspectors were telling us to wait, they could not find any WMDs. A move that killed more Americans than on 9/11, and over 100,000 Iraqis. Followed by the torture of countless, innocent Iraqis. A move that nearly ruined our reputation in the world. Cheney is surely the most hated man in the world. He should be in prison for his war crimes. So, is it still possible to have him prosecuted? On the 10 year anniversary of the war, a CNN legal analyst explained why the U.S. should submit to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court to prosecute Bush, Cheney and others.

The International Criminal Court went into effect on July 1, 2002. It can prosecute all crimes that took place after that date, which would cover Cheney’s crimes. However, Israel, Sudan and the United States informed the U.N. Secretary General that they no longer intend to be states parties. This lets the U.S. off the hook for war crimes in Iraq (as well as Israeli war crimes against the Palestinians). So Cheney’s war crimes cannot be prosecuted by the International Criminal Court. But where can they be prosecuted?

A UK attorney writing for CNN (also in March) made the case for adding Blair to the list of those who should be prosecuted for war crimes. But he remarks on the near impossible task of prosecuting Blair, Bush and Cheney:

Whilst the act of aggression cannot be prosecuted, war crimes committed thereafter can be. So for example to launch an attack, like the invasion of Iraq, with the knowledge that its effect is likely to cause incidental death or injury to civilians or the natural environment (Article 8) will render the perpetrator liable to prosecution. The use of cluster bombs and depleted uranium in Iraq by coalition forces (euphemistically called collateral damage) upon vulnerable civilians falls within this definition. As a result, a legal consortium of which I was a part, and other groups in Europe, petitioned the ICC for action against UK politicians over their involvement in the war. Nothing has happened.

Getting U.S leaders hauled before the court is even more problematic — the Security Council could refer Americans to the court, but the U.S. is a permanent Council member and can veto any potential referral.

So, is that the end of options? Cheney, one of the worst war criminals of our time, gets a free pass. Perhaps not.

The nation of Kuala Lumpur actually prosecuted Bush, Cheney and the rest of the neocon advisors for war crimes. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and their legal advisers Alberto Gonzales, David Addington, William Haynes, Jay Bybee and John Yoo were convicted by a war crimes tribunal. From Bush to the Hague (with my emphasis).

The trial held in Kuala Lumpur heard harrowing witness accounts from victims of torture who suffered at the hands of US soldiers and contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan.

They included testimony from British man Moazzam Begg, an ex-Guantanamo detainee and Iraqi woman Jameelah Abbas Hameedi who was tortured in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison.

At the end of the week-long hearing, the five-panel tribunal unanimously delivered guilty verdicts against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and their key legal advisors who were all convicted as war criminals for torture and cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment.

Full transcripts of the charges, witness statements and other relevant material will now be sent to the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, as well as the United Nations and the Security Council.

The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission is also asking that the names of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzales, Yoo, Bybee, Addington and Haynes be entered and included in the Commission’s Register of War Criminals for public record.

It appears that this would be the one option that dick Cheney and his partners in crime cannot avoid – prosecution and conviction for war crimes by sovereign nations. If any of these convicted criminals were to set foot in the nation where they were prosecuted, they would be arrested and go to prison. Lets hope that more nations take the time to prosecute Cheney before he’s allowed to R.I.P. [Frankly, if there is a God, I hope its a woman with no tolerance for Cheney's reign of mass murder and torture. And it would be funny, in Cheney's case, if she was a Muslim.]

YouTube Preview Image
Print Friendly
Posted in Armed Contractors, Dick Cheney, George W Bush, Iraq, Politics, Rumsfeld, Torture, War Crimes | Tagged , , , , ,
sign-in options Join the discussion at All Things Democrat, sign-in with disqus, facebook, twitter and googleplus