Posts Tagged ‘right wing’

Rise of ‘tea party’ could bring the moderates front and center

Evans Liberal Politics
September 26, 2010

 

Rise of ‘tea party’ could bring
the moderates front and center


Tired of ‘tea party’ sniping, moderates organize, The Los Angeles Times, September 26, 2010, by James Oliphant, excerpt quoted verbatim:

In Washington, a new advocacy group decries ‘the tyranny of hyperpartisanship.’ And powerful New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg throws his support behind candidates willing to reach across the aisle.

Reporting from Washington — Galvanized by the lightning-in-a-bottle success of conservative “tea party” candidates, moderate Republicans and others in the political center are looking for ways to push back against what they see as an advancing tide of ideological extremism.

Why Pay More? $7.49.COM Domains from GoDaddy.com - 336x280

The efforts are loosely organized and embryonic, but politicians, advocacy groups and others are piecing together a framework to promote moderate candidates and advance positions they say have been eclipsed by partisan sniping on the right and left.

“Middle America is being ignored by Washington and the media. Centrists are desperate for a voice today; they feel entirely unrepresented,” said Mark McKinnon, a political strategist and former advisor to President George W. Bush.

“The tea party has tapped into voter frustration and anger,” he said, “but does not represent millions of Americans in the vast middle.”

The moves reflect political divisions that have only grown deeper as tea-party-backed insurgents have toppled candidates supported by the GOP establishment around the country.

Michael R. Bloomberg, the billionaire mayor of New York and possible future presidential candidate, has labeled the tea party movement a “fad” and a “boomlet.” He has vowed to use his personal popularity, his reputation as a pragmatic voice, and his wealth to promote Democratic and Republican moderates as candidates this fall.

At the same time, once-solid Republicans left behind as their party tacked rightward have launched independent bids in several states — including Alaska, Florida, Rhode Island and Minnesota — appealing to moderate voters.

Underscoring those efforts is a newfound drive by advocacy groups to give moderate voters a louder voice. In Washington, a nonprofit group called No Labels is forming with the goal of bringing Republicans and Democrats together; echoing tea party rhetoric, it terms itself a “citizens movement” and decries “the tyranny of hyperpartisanship.”

Bloomberg began to campaign on behalf of others after tea party activist Christine O’Donnell beat moderate Republican Rep. Michael N. Castle, a Bloomberg favorite, in Delaware’s Republican Senate primary this month.

Bloomberg first traveled to Rhode Island, to promote former Republican Sen. Lincoln Chafee’s independent campaign for governor. He followed up with a fundraiser at his New York home for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who is running against tea party Republican Sharron Angle. Bloomberg also plans to fly to California soon to campaign for gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman, a Republican.

Bloomberg, a Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-independent, has more plans to support moderates who fit his model. He’s expected to back Rep. Mark Steven Kirk (R-Ill.), chasing an open Senate seat in Illinois, as well as Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), who faces a challenge from tea-party-supported candidate Ken Buck.

Howard Wolfson, a Bloomberg advisor, said the mayor would support candidates who are “willing, able, and interested in reaching across the aisle and working in a bipartisan way, whether they are Democrats or Republicans or independents.”

“The two parties aren’t even talking to each other,” Wolfson said. “He believes it’s critical to restore some degree of bipartisanship. ….

Read the full article, here.

Visit No Labels, a nonprofit “citizen’s movement” formed with the idea of bringing Republicans and Democrats together in a less partisan, cooperative environment: “Put the Labels Aside. Do What’s Best for America.”

Read How’s That Citizens United Thing Working Out?, Mother Jones, September 24, 2010, by Kevin Drum.

We Now Have a Google Translation Button at the bottom of every post and page: just choose your language. ~ Paul Evans

Check out Paul’s Playlist of 193 Rock and Pop Hits, and have fun with all the artists you love while you surf the web.


Love classic rock? Check out our new Only Classic Rock Playlist page!


Follow Evans Liberal Politics and Paul Evans on
Twitter logo link for Evans Liberal Politics on Twitter

Follow Paul Evans on
Facebook logo link to follow Paul Evans on Facebook

We’re Counting on YOU! Please share Evans Liberal Politics with friends! While we enjoy a certain level of popularity on the web, in order for us to keep bringing you the latest in liberal news and politics, we really need you to SHARE Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Can you help us today? If you value liberal and progressive ideas and politics, please simply share Evans Liberal Politics with friends and contacts to keep free, independent and liberal journalism alive. Thanks in advance.

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

Why Elections Are Not a Waste of Progressives’ Time

Evans Liberal Politics
September 16, 2010

 

Why Elections Are Not a Waste of Progressives’ Time

 

Why Elections Are Not a Waste of Progressives’ Time, Common Dreams.org, September 16, 2010, by Norman Solomon, quoted verbatim:

A pithy idea — now going around in some progressive circles — is that elections are a waste of time.

OCInkjet.com 250x250 banner,<br /> image is updated by season.

The idea can be catchy. It all depends on some tacit assumptions.

For instance: elections are a waste of time if you figure the U.S. government is so far gone that it can’t get much worse.

Elections are a waste of time if you’ve given up on grassroots organizing to sway voters before they cast ballots.

Elections are a waste of time if you think there’s not much difference on the Supreme Court between Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia, or Sonia Sotomayor and Samuel Alito.

Elections are a waste of time if you’re so disgusted with Speaker Pelosi that you wouldn’t lift a finger to prevent Speaker Boehner.

Elections are a waste of time if you don’t see much value in reducing — even slightly — the extent of injustice and deprivation imposed on vulnerable people.

Or, if you see the organizing of protests, community groups, unions and the like as “either/or” in relation to working for the election of better candidates.

Or, if you think the goal of those who struggled and suffered for the right to vote — seeing the ballot as an essential component of democracy — is outdated and rendered moot by present-day frustrations and outrages.

Elections are a waste of time if you think corporate power has grown so immense that state power has become irrelevant.

Or, if you still believe it was smart when some of us progressives figured we had no stake in efforts to defeat Ronald Reagan in 1980 or George W. Bush in 2000.

Or, if you think it doesn’t much matter whether Californians elect to make possible Senator Carly Fiorina and Governor Meg Whitman, or whether Wisconsin voters remove Russ Feingold from the Senate.

Or, if you’d just as soon bypass any plausible path for electing more genuine progressives like Dennis Kucinich or Barbara Lee to government positions.

Or, if you see the raising of political awareness as an alternative to — rather than intertwined with — the building of progressive electoral power to challenge corporate power.

Elections are a waste of time if you don’t realize or care that the powerful forces behind Wall Street and the warfare state are thrilled if progressives retreat from electoral battles.

Elections are a waste of time if you conclude — due to chronic suppression of electoral democracy — that the ideal of electoral democracy should be discarded rather than pursued.

Elections are a waste of time if you think progressives should opt out of electoral struggles for government power, leaving it to uncontested dominance by the heartless and the spineless.

Tea Party, Not Progressives Make a Statement:


Real News Network coverage of elections to the effect that it is the Tea Party and not progressive who have made a statement by their enthusiasm and voter turnout "Tea Party, Not Progressives, Make Statement:" Real News Network audio to the effect that it is the right wing conservatives and not progressives who have made a statement with their enthusiasm and voter turnout. — 10:57

Watch the Real News Network video here.

Norman Solomon is a journalist, historian, and progressive activist. His book “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death” has been adapted into a documentary film of the same name. His most recent book is “Made Love, Got War.” He is a national co-chair of the Healthcare NOT Warfare campaign. In California, he is co-chair of the Commission on a Green New Deal for the North Bay; www.GreenNewDeal.info.

More on the Tea Party and elections: The misguided reaction to Tea Party candidates, Salon, September 16, 2010, by Glenn Greewald, a scathing indictment of Tea Party values, excerpt quoted verbatim:

The “tea party” movement is, in my view, a mirror image of the Republican Party generally. There are some diverse, heterodox factions which compose a small, inconsequential minority of it (various libertarian, independent, and Reagan Democrat types), but it is dominated — in terms of leadership, ideology, and the vast majority of adherents — by the same set of beliefs which have long shaped the American Right: Reagan-era domestic policies, blinding American exceptionalism and nativism, fetishizing American wars, total disregard for civil liberties, social and religious conservatism, hatred of the minority-Enemy du Jour (currently: Muslims), allegiance to self-interested demagogic leaders, hidden exploitation by corporatist masters, and divisive cultural tribalism. Other than the fact that (1) it is driven (at least in part) by genuine citizen passion and engagement, and (2) represents a justifiable rebellion against the Washington and GOP establishments, I see little good in it and much potential for bad. To me, it’s little more than the same extremely discredited faction which drove the country into the ground for the last decade, merely re-branded under a new name.

Concerned about the Tea Party’s strength? Read Women of the Tea Party: Who Are You, and What Do You Want?, The Huffington Post, September 16, 2010, by Peggy Drexler.

Recommended: Enthusiasm Gap Haunts Democrats as November Nears, Open Salon, September 13, 2010, by Kevin Gosztola.

See The Enthusiasm Gap: How Dispassionate Dems And Fired-Up GOPers Are Defining 2010, Talking Points Memo DC, September 13, 2010, by Evan McMorris-Santoro.

InformIT (Pearson Education)

Check out Paul’s Playlist of 187 Rock and Pop Hits, and have fun with all the artists you love while you surf the web.


Follow Evans Liberal Politics and Paul Evans on
Twitter logo link for Evans Liberal Politics on Twitter

Follow Paul Evans on
Facebook logo link to follow Paul Evans on Facebook

We’re Counting on YOU! Please share Evans Liberal Politics with friends! While we enjoy a certain level of popularity on the web, in order for us to keep bringing you the latest in liberal news and politics, we really need you to SHARE Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Can you help us today? If you value liberal and progressive ideas and politics, please simply share Evans Liberal Politics with friends and contacts to keep free, independent and liberal journalism alive. Thanks in advance.

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

Palin at Beck rally: ‘I hope Dr. King would be so proud’

Evans Liberal Politics
August 27, 2010

 

Palin at Beck rally:
‘I hope Dr. King would be so proud’

 

Palin at Beck rally: ‘I hope Dr. King would be so proud’, The Raw Story, August 28, 2010, by Raw Story, photo © NY Times/Nicholas Roberts, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

Tens of thousands of people gathered Saturday at the site of Martin Luther King Jr’s 1963, “I Have a Dream Speech” to hear right-wing icons call on them to “restore America.”

photo of Fox News host Glenn Beck acting insanely screwey and looking pretty nuts

In wide-ranging and often religious terms, Fox News talk show host Glenn Beck told Americans that their country was “at a crossroads” and urged them to return to “faith, hope and charity,” while former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin told the crowd that “we must not fundamentally transform America as some would want.”

“Today we must decide, who are we? What is it we believe? We must advance or perish. I choose advance,” he said to a cheering crowd that stretched from the Lincoln Memorial to the Washington Monument.

Beck, who hosted the event to “restore America’s honor,” estimated that between 300,000 and 500,000 people attended the event. But a crowd estimate commissioned by CBS put the audience at around 87,000.

The rally drew criticism because it was staged at the very same location where King made his call for racial equality nearly half a century ago.

Critics said Beck and fellow conservative icon Sarah Palin’s political stances were sharply at odds with King’s civil rights legacy.

Asked by ABC’s Tahman Bradley how she thought the legendary civil rights leader would feel about the rally, Palin responded: “I hope that Dr. King would be so proud of us, as his niece Dr. Alveda King is very proud as a participant in this rally. This is sacred ground where we feel his spirit and can appreciate all of his efforts.”

Critics said Beck and fellow conservative icon Sarah Palin’s political stances were sharply at odds with King’s civil rights legacy.

Black leaders, including the Reverend Al Sharpton, held a competing march and accused Beck of misrepresenting the slain civil rights leader’s message of equality among all races.

“The folks who criticize our marches are now trying to march themselves,” Sharpton said. “They may have the Mall, but we have the message. They may have the platform, but we have the dream. The dream was not states’ rights.”

Beck said the timing was coincidental, and argued he had every right to commemorate King’s struggle.

“Whites don’t own Abraham Lincoln. Blacks don’t own Martin Luther King,” he said earlier this month.

– With a report from AFP

See Sharpton: Beck’s followers want ‘structural breakdown of strong national government’, Associated Press on The Raw Story, August 28, 2010, by AP, excerpt quoted verbatim:

CompUSA Best Sellers

The Rev. Al Sharpton, leading the civil rights march, said Beck’s demonstration was an anti-government rally that advocated states’ rights — counter to the message in King’s speech, in which the civil right leader appealed to the federal government to ensure equality.

“The structural breakdown of a strong national government, which is what they’re calling for, is something that does not serve the interests of the nation and it’s something that Dr. King and others fought against,” Sharpton told C-SPAN on Saturday.

See At Lincoln Memorial, a Call for Religious Rebirth, © The New York Times, August 28, 2010, by Kate Zernike and Carl Hulse, excerpt quoted verbatim:

WASHINGTON — An enormous and impassioned crowd rallied at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on Saturday, summoned by Glenn Beck, a conservative broadcaster who called for a religious rebirth in America at the site where the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his famous “I Have a Dream” speech 47 years ago to the day.

“Something that is beyond man is happening,” Mr. Beck said in opening the event as the crowd thronged near the memorial grounds. “America today begins to turn back to God.”

It was part religious revival, part history lecture, as Mr. Beck invoked the founding fathers and the “black-robed regiment” of pastors of the Revolutionary War and spoke of American exceptionalism.

The crowd was a mix of groups that have come together under the Tea Party umbrella. Some wore T-shirts from the Campaign for Liberty, the libertarian group that came out of the presidential campaign of Representative Ron Paul, while others wore the gear of their local Tea Party group, or of 9/12 groups, which were founded after a special broadcast Mr. Beck did in March 2009.

But the program was distinctly different from most Tea Party rallies. While Tea Party groups have said they want to focus on fiscal conservatism and not risk alienating people by talking about religion or social issues, the rally on Saturday was overtly religious, filled with gospel music and speeches that were more like sermons.

See Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin’s unholy alliance, Salon, August 28, 2010, by Joan Walsh: Abramoff ally Rabbi Daniel Lapin and bigot John Hagee help “restore honor” at the Lincoln Memorial

QUOTE from the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr’s final speech: “Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land!”

InformIT (Pearson Education)

Follow Evans Liberal Politics and Paul Evans on
Twitter logo link for Evans Liberal Politics on Twitter

Follow Paul Evans on
Facebook logo link to follow Paul Evans on Facebook

We’re Counting on YOU! Please share Evans Liberal Politics with friends! While we enjoy a certain level of popularity on the web, in order for us to keep bringing you the latest in liberal news and politics, we really need you to SHARE Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Please help us out — we bring you the latest in liberal and progressive news and politics just to share the truth and promote liberalism. Can you help us today?
Please consider making a $5 or $10 donation to Evans Liberal Politics. We bring you the news and all things liberal for free out of love of people and liberalism, but a fellow has to eat! See Help a Christian Family in Need. The button to donate via PayPal is located at the top right of every page (or use this handy link), and your kind help is greatly appreciated.

*****

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

We’re Counting on You!
Tell Your Friends About Evans Liberal Politics!

Listen to 183 Rock and Pop Hits!


Paul's Playlist of the best streaming rock, pop and electronic music

Our Playlist is #1 Rated by Google

Israel has ’3 days’ to hit Iran nuclear site: Bolton

Evans Liberal Politics
August 18, 2010

 

Israel has ’3 days’
to hit Iran nuclear site: Bolton

 

Israel has ’8 days’ to hit Iran nuclear site: Bolton, Agence France-Presse on The Raw Story, , August 17, 2010, by AFP, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

Update: Former US envoy to UN tells Israel Radio deadline has slipped to 3 days

Click the Peace Sign
to visit Paul’s Playlist of
180 Rock and Pop Hits
* Rated #1 by Google *


a beautiful and artful peace sign serves as a link to Paul's Playlist of 180 rock, pop and electronic hits

“Bolton claimed Israel has only three days to strike before Russia ‘begins the fueling process for the Bushehr reactor this Friday,’ after which any attack would cause radioactive fallout that could reach as far as the waters of the Persian Gulf,” The Jerusalem Post reports.

In an interview with Fox Business Network earlier Tuesday Bolton had said the deadline was eight days, but he revised it to three in the Israel Radio interview, saying Iran and Russia had announced they would begin fueling on Friday.

“It has always been optimal that military force is used before the fuel rods are inserted,” Bolton explained. “That’s what Israel did in Osirak in 1991, and when they attacked the North Korean reactor built in Syria.” Israel bombed the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq in 1981, and a Syrian reactor in 2007.

However Bolton didn’t see any indication that an Israeli strike was going to happen. “Obviously if Israel were going to do something it wouldn’t exactly be advertising it. But time is short.”

Fox News adds:

Earlier Tuesday, Bolton told Fox Business Network the Israelis will have to move in the “next eight days” if they want to attack the Bushehr facility — a reference to the window between when the start-up was announced last week and the loading date. Bolton said Tuesday that the date has fluctuated, but he described the start-up as the ultimate deadline.

MarketRange, Inc.- Couples_Blue_300x250

Original article follows

Israel has “eight days” to launch a military strike against Iran’s Bushehr nuclear facility and stop Tehran from acquiring a functioning atomic plant, a former US envoy to the UN has said.

Iran is to bring online its first nuclear power reactor, built with Russia’s help, next week, when a shipment of nuclear fuel will be loaded into the plant’s core.

At that point, former John Bolton warned Monday, it will be too late for Israel to launch a military strike against the facility because any attack would spread radiation and affect Iranian civilians.

“Once that uranium, once those fuel rods are very close to the reactor, certainly once they’re in the reactor, attacking it means a release of radiation, no question about it,” Bolton told Fox Business Network.

“So if Israel is going to do anything against Bushehr it has to move in the next eight days.”

Absent an Israeli strike, Bolton said, “Iran will achieve something that no other opponent of Israel, no other enemy of the United States in the Middle East really has and that is a functioning nuclear reactor.”

But when asked whether he expected Israel to actually launch strikes against Iran within the next eight days, Bolton was skeptical.

“I don’t think so, I’m afraid that they’ve lost this opportunity,” he said.

The controversial former envoy to the United Nations criticized Russia’s role in the development of the plant, saying “the Russians are, as they often do, playing both sides against the middle.”

“The idea of being able to stick a thumb in America’s eye always figures prominently in Moscow,” he added.

Iran dismissed the possibilities of such an attack from its archfoes.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said Tuesday that “these threats of attacks had become repetitive and lost their meaning.”

“According to international law, installations which have real fuel cannot be attacked because of the humanitarian consequences,” he told reporters at a news conference in Tehran.

Iranian officials say Iran has stepped up defensive measures at the Bushehr plant to protect it from any attacks.

Russia has been building the Bushehr plant since the mid-1990s but the project was marred by delays, and the issue is hugely sensitive amid Tehran’s standoff with the West and Israel over its nuclear ambitions.

The UN Security Council hit Tehran with a fourth set of sanctions on June 9 over its nuclear programme, and the United States and European Union followed up with tougher punitive measures targeting Iran’s banking and energy sectors.

The Bushehr project was first launched by the late shah in the 1970s using contractors from German firm Siemens. But it was shelved when he was deposed in the 1979 Islamic revolution.

It was revived after the death of revolutionary founder Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1989, as Iran’s new supreme leader Ali Khamenei and his first president, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, backed the project.

In 1995, Iran won the support of Russia which agreed to finish building the plant and fuel it.

Follow Evans Liberal Politics and Paul Evans on
Twitter logo link for Evans Liberal Politics on Twitter

Follow Paul Evans on
Facebook logo link to follow Paul Evans on Facebook

We’re Counting on YOU! Please share Evans Liberal Politics with friends! While we enjoy a certain level of popularity on the web, in order for us to keep bringing you the latest in liberal news and politics, we really need you to SHARE Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Please help us out — we bring you the latest in liberal and progressive news and politics just to share the truth and promote liberalism. Can you help us today?
Please consider making a $5 or $10 donation to Evans Liberal Politics. We bring you the news and all things liberal for free out of love of people and liberalism, but a fellow has to eat! See Help a Christian Family in Need. The button to donate via PayPal is located at the top right of every page (or use this handy link), and your kind help is greatly appreciated.

*****

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

We’re Counting on You!
Tell Your Friends About Evans Liberal Politics!

Listen to 180 Rock and Pop Hits!


Paul's Playlist of the best streaming rock, pop and electronic music

#1 Rated by Google

“Ground Zero Mosque” Is the New “Death Panels” (Updated)

Evans Liberal Politics
August 17, 2010

 

“Ground Zero Mosque”
Is the New “Death Panels” (Updated)

 

“Ground Zero Mosque” Is the New “Death Panels”, The Huffington Post, August 16, 2010, by Jeffrey Feldman, excerpt quoted verbatim:

By now, the right-wing political chop-shop has convinced an embarrassingly large chunk of the country that a “YMCA”-type project planned for lower Manhattan is the equivalent of Osama bin Laden landing on the shores of the Potomac.

OCInkjet.com 250x250 banner,<br /> image is updated by season.

Mayor Bloomberg, to his credit, scoffed at this right-wing idiocy in an eloquent speech about religious freedom. President Obama followed suit.

But while Mayor and President had their hearts in the right place, the very idea that the Cordoba House hysteria is about “religion” is not really accurate. The fact that the public debate has been framed around a “Ground Zero mosque” flows not from the facts of the project, but from a cynical right-wing effort to turn a benign and welcome addition to lower Manhattan into something that could be viewed as threatening and sinister (a.k.a., a wedge issue).

“Ground Zero Mosque” is the new “death panels.” Or is it the new “gay marriage”? Take your pick — there’s plenty of right-wing wedge issues to go around and they all have one thing in common: their goal is to whip up enough fear to keep people from working together to solve the real problems we all face together.

The large issue at stake here, in other words is not freedom of religion, but mass hysteria. Rather than just wrap Cordoba House in the First Amendment, President Obama and Mayor Bloomberg might have done better if they had dusted off their dog-eared copies of Arthur Miller’s The Crucible.

Familiar Themes


Cordoba House is not some sudden and new issue, but the latest attempt by the Republican Party to displace meaningful political debate with pitch-fork-and-torches style mass hysteria.

The themes of these newest wave of delirium are familiar: Muslim conspiracy; infiltration by foreign terrorists; Liberal collusion.

Are we a nation ruled by mass hysteria — a nation that sees conspiracy behind every unfamiliar face? Or are we a nation that raises above the tyranny of the mob roused to rid the village of those in league with the Devil? Those are the questions that the Mayor and President should have asked, but nobody seems to be asking them.

When mass hysteria has been allowed in the past to drive public policy it lead inexorably to shameful results that destroyed lives and weakened democratic society.

Read the full article here.

Obama Reframes Mosque Debate


Obama Reframes Mosque Debate, The Huffington Post, August 16, 2010, by Chris Weigant, excerpt quoted verbatim:

By now, the right-wing political chop-shop has convinced an embarrassingly large chunk of the country that a “YMCA”-type project planned for lower Manhattan is the equivalent of Osama bin Laden landing on the shores of the Potomac.

Mayor Bloomberg, to his credit, scoffed at this right-wing idiocy in an eloquent speech about religious freedom. President Obama followed suit.

But while Mayor and President had their hearts in the right place, the very idea that the Cordoba House hysteria is about “religion” is not really accurate. The fact that the public debate has been framed around a “Ground Zero mosque” flows not from the facts of the project, but from a cynical right-wing effort to turn a benign and welcome addition to lower Manhattan into something that could be viewed as threatening and sinister (a.k.a., a wedge issue).

“Ground Zero Mosque” is the new “death panels.” Or is it the new “gay marriage”? Take your pick — there’s plenty of right-wing wedge issues to go around and they all have one thing in common: their goal is to whip up enough fear to keep people from working together to solve the real problems we all face together.

Lesser noticed narrative: the mosque debate is dividing the right


UPDATE: See Hate Radio Host Mark Levin Attacks Gov. Chris Christie Over Mosque Comments: ‘Absolutely Dead Wrong’, Think Progress, August 17, 2010, 5:50 p.m., by George Zornick, excerpt quoted verbatim:

Yesterday, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) warned fellow Republicans to stop “overreacting” to the proposed Islamic cultural center near Ground Zero. He said that while some degree of “deference” must be shown to some 9/11 families who don’t want the center nearby, “it would be wrong to so overreact to that, that we paint Islam with a brush of radical Muslim extremists that just want to kill Americans because we are Americans.”

Even though Christie included obligatory digs at Democrats and President Obama for somehow “playing political football” with the issue, his comments were still apparently too much for right-wing hate radio host Mark Levin. He unleashed on Christie last night during his radio show, and called the governor “absolutely dead wrong” and questioned Christie’s conservative credentials.

See Mosque Debate is a Red Herring, The Washington Examiner, August 16, 2010, by Gene Healy.

Spiritual Cinema Circle

Follow Evans Liberal Politics and Paul Evans on
Twitter logo link for Evans Liberal Politics on Twitter

Follow Paul Evans on
Facebook logo link to follow Paul Evans on Facebook

We’re Counting on YOU! Please share Evans Liberal Politics with friends! While we enjoy a certain level of popularity on the web, in order for us to keep bringing you the latest in liberal news and politics, we really need you to SHARE Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Please help us out — we bring you the latest in liberal and progressive news and politics just to share the truth and promote liberalism. Can you help us today?
Please consider making a $5 or $10 donation to Evans Liberal Politics. We bring you the news and all things liberal for free out of love of people and liberalism, but a fellow has to eat! See Help a Christian Family in Need. The button to donate via PayPal is located at the top right of every page (or use this handy link), and your kind help is greatly appreciated.

*****

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

We’re Counting on You!
Tell Your Friends About Evans Liberal Politics!

Listen to 177 Rock and Pop Hits!


Paul's Playlist of the best streaming rock, pop and electronic music

#1 Rated by Google

‘Peculiar’ Tea Party happenings blamed on ‘dirty’ Dem tricksters

Evans Liberal Politics
August 9, 2010

 

‘Peculiar’ Tea Party happenings
blamed on ‘dirty’ Dem tricksters

 

‘Peculiar’ Tea Party happenings blamed on ‘dirty’ Dem tricksters, The Raw Story, August 9, 2010, by Ron Brynaert, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

Could paranoia end up being the self-destroyer of the Tea Party movement?

Or, as the tagline for the new AMC series Rubicon puts it, perhaps it’s true that “not every conspiracy is a theory.” Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you.

funny photo of an Elephant headed into an archway which is too small for him highlights this article of Tea Party dirty tricks

A Fox News article claims,

In New Jersey, a “Tea Party” candidate surfaces but local activists haven’t heard of him. In Michigan, a Democratic operative appears closely tied to a slate of candidates running under the Tea Party banner. In Florida, conservative activists are locked in court over the right to use the Tea Party name.

The list of peculiar Tea Party happenings goes on and on.

As the midterm election nears, allegations are surfacing across the country that Democrats are exploiting conservatives’ faith in the Tea Party name by putting up bogus candidates in November — the claim is that those “Tea Party” candidates will split the GOP vote and clear the way for Democratic victories.

The theories may prove to be more than just conspiracy talk. Some of the allegations are coming directly from local Tea Party activists who are trying to flag the media and election officials as soon as they smell something fishy on the ballot. And they say they’ve got proof.

Last Friday, Politico reported, “Nationally, Democrats say they intend to campaign against the tea party movement. But locally, Democratic officials and activists in at least four states now stand accused of collaborating with tea party candidates in an attempt to sabotage Republican challengers in some of the closest House races in the nation.”

“The Democrats have come to the realization that they can’t win on issues, and with their flawed candidates, so they are forced to skirt the rules by running candidates who they hope can split the vote with Republicans,” said Paul Lindsey, a National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman.

Democratic officials deny there is any grand conspiracy.

“The DCCC has nothing to do with this,” said Ryan Rudominer, a spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee

Politico’s Jeane Cummings reports, “But the evidence of campaign tampering in at least two states is hard to dismiss. In Michigan, the party chairman in suburban Detroit’s Oakland County now concedes that one of his top aides played a role in helping nine tea party candidates get onto the ballot for various offices across the state — including the open 1st Congressional District and the 7th Congressional District, held by vulnerable freshman Democratic Rep. Mark Schauer.”

At US News & World Report, Robert Schlesinger argues, “Shouldn’t the sturm und the drang be directed against the Tea Partyers here?”

Even Fox News concedes, “Tea Party activists since the beginning of the year have been trying to get a judge to declare that candidates running under the “Florida Tea Party” have nothing to do with other Tea Party activists in the state. They’ve accused local lawyer Fred O’Neal and former radio host Doug Guetzloe of trying to ‘hijack’ the movement by creating the Tea Party group. They claim the defendants are trying to leverage the Tea Party group to make money but also cite alleged ties between the founders and Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson.”

This is the problem with mentality that’s driving a lot of Tea Party activists (and a disturbing number of progressives, including, apparently, Rep. Henry Waxman who recently suggested he wouldn’t miss some conservative Democrats likely not to be returning): an emphasis on ideological purity that makes losing nobly preferable to winning but achieving less than 100 percent of one’s objectives. When you get into that mind-set, sabotaging a party nominee in order to “send a message” seems pretty reasonable. And by extension it’s better to be a pure minority in Congress than a broad majority.

So don’t blame the Democrats for handing over bullets when conservatives are forming up into the proverbial circular firing squad.

Dean Chambers, blogging at the Examiner, believes, “What can and should be done in every instance of the fakers, is for the Real Tea Party groups to out them as the fakes they are and inform their supporters to NOT be fooled by the imposters. And in addition to and while doing that, they should educate the public on the trickery Democrats are willing to use to FOOL the public into electing their candidates again. It’s more than time for the public to learn their lesson. Knowing this, are you still going to vote for the Democrats again?”

Follow Evans Liberal Politics and Paul Evans on
Twitter logo link for Evans Liberal Politics on Twitter

Follow Paul Evans on
Facebook logo link to follow Paul Evans on Facebook

We’re Counting on YOU! Please share Evans Liberal Politics with friends! While we enjoy a certain level of popularity on the web, in order for us to keep bringing you the latest in liberal news and politics, we really need you to SHARE Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Please help us out — we bring you the latest in liberal and progressive news and politics just to share the truth and promote liberalism. Can you help us today?
Please consider making a $5 or $10 donation to Evans Liberal Politics. We bring you the news and all things liberal for free out of love of people and liberalism, but a fellow has to eat! See Help a Christian Family in Need. The button to donate via PayPal is located at the top right of every page (or use this handy link), and your kind help is greatly appreciated.

*****

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

We’re Counting on You!
Tell Your Friends About Evans Liberal Politics!

Listen to 164 Rock and Pop Hits!


Paul's Playlist of the best streaming rock, pop and electronic music

#1 Rated by Google

Going Back In Time, With Rand Paul

Evans Liberal Politics
August 8, 2010

 

Going Back In Time, With Rand Paul

 

Going Back In Time, With Rand Paul, Campaign for America’s Future, August 6, 2010, by Terrance Heath, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

Hey, everyone in the Rand Paul pile-on, make room for one more. I’m coming in for a landing!

I shouldn’t pick on the good doctor, though he makes it too easy. After all, his latest media train wrecks gave me a chance to resurrect a timeline of industrial disasters I started researching after the Deepwater Horizon event, in response to a lot of conservatives (Rand Paul included) defending BP and blaming everyone from unions to environmentalists for the disaster.

My aim was to illustrate what Rand Paul exemplified in his most recent remarks on mine safety: the right-wing defenders of BP, Massey, and just about every other corporate polluter or regulation-dodger don’t know much about the history of industrial disasters, the negligence that caused them, or the regulations and reforms they sparked.

Spark. It’s an apt word choice, given the subject matter, and how many times in our history a mere spark here and there has led to conflagration and carnage on record-making scales, and grief for working Americans and their families.

Paul sparked quite a fiery controversy with his stand that government has no business protecting mine workers.

Click the Democratic
Donkey to Listen to
162 Rock & Pop Hits
#1 Rated by Google


striking graphic of a red white and blue Democratic donkey against a black background used as a link to launch Paul's Playlist of 162 rock pop and electronic hits

The Republican running to replace outgoing Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) in the coal-mining hub of Kentucky said recently that Washington has no business formulating mine safety rules.

“The bottom line is: I’m not an expert, so don’t give me the power in Washington to be making rules,” Paul said at a recent campaign stop in response to questions about April’s deadly mining explosion in West Virginia, according to a profile in Details magazine. “You live here, and you have to work in the mines. You’d try to make good rules to protect your people here. If you don’t, I’m thinking that no one will apply for those jobs.”

“I know that doesn’t sound … I want to be compassionate, and I’m sorry for what happened, but I wonder: Was it just an accident?”

Presumably, Paul thinks that protecting miners will distract the government from its number one job of protecting the private property rights of mine owners.

Paul sparked quite another kind of conflagration with his support of mountain top removal mining.

Paul believes mountaintop removal just needs a little rebranding. “I think they should name it something better,” he says. “The top ends up flatter, but we’re not talking about Mount Everest. We’re talking about these little knobby hills that are everywhere out here. And I’ve seen the reclaimed lands. One of them is 800 acres, with a sports complex on it, elk roaming, covered in grass.” Most people, he continues, “would say the land is of enhanced value, because now you can build on it.”

“Let’s let you decide what to do with your land,” he says. “Really, it’s a private-property issue.” This is a gentler, more academic variation on a line he used the evening before, during his speech at the Harlan Center: “If you don’t live here, it’s none of your business.” It’s the kind of catchphrase that may serve him well in Kentucky, where he has remained steadily ahead of Jack Conway in polls, even after the Rachel Maddow incident. (The small size of Kentucky’s African-American population—just seven percent—may have softened his comments’ impact back home.) Barring, or maybe not barring, any further philosophical tangents, Rand Paul seems poised to enter the United States Senate, where he’ll bring the ideological zeal inherent in that mantra—”If you don’t live here, it’s none of your business”—to 99-to-1 votes, as well as 51-to-49 ones.

Perhaps if they called it Mountaintop enhancement mining, people wouldn’t make such a fuss about it.

Clearly Paul thinks that mine owners should be able to do what they want with their private property. (Paul’s politics on property sometimes seem easily summed up by one of the favorite exclamations of our two-year-old: “Mine!”) But what about the consequences for those living downstream and their property?

In the meantime, in the hollows and along the creeks in the Appalachian coalfields, people continue to bathe their children in clean water trucked in to their churches because their own wells have been contaminated by coal slurry, to take down their pictures and knick knacks so they won’t be shattered by blasts, to power-wash the blasting dirt and coal dust from their houses, to stand vigil by flash-flood prone streams when it rains. Those residents who actually work on a mountaintop removal site-who hold one of the very few decent paying jobs in the region-have been riled to near hysteria by coal company propaganda shrieking about how the EPA is trying to shut down every coal mine — mountaintop, contour, and underground-in Appalachia.

Maybe it’s a question of whose property rights have primacy? Probably whoever has the most property, so…..

I couldn’t begin to cover the 700+ mining disasters in U.S. history, In fact, I had to stop cataloging mining and other industrial disasters before I even reached 100. (Though I’m still updating it as I come across some I missed before.) But I’d love to share with Dr. Paul what I managed to dig up (no pun intended) about the days before mining and other industrial regulations.

photo thumbnail of the Pullman Strike in this article about Rand Paul and his disdain for workers rights "Fight for Your Rights:" — The Pullman Strike of 1894 — 9:32

View the YouTube video about Pullman Strike of 1894.

Paul is one of a brand of what Mike Lux aptly dubbed “19th Century Conservatives” who want to turn back time to an era when the government only bothered itself with protected those the founders “originally intended” to have any say in government, and those people had “more freedom.” (Again as “originally intended.”)

It is a sign of how radical conservatives in the last couple of years have become that they are raising issues that have seemed settled for so many decades. Republican nominees and elected officials for major offices have, over the last few months, made open arguments for:

-the privatization or outright phasing out of Social Security and Medicare

-the repeal of the 1964 Civil Rights Act

-the secession of states from the union

-the nullification of laws passed by the Congress and signed by the President

-the repeal of the 17th amendment to the Constitution, passed in 1914, allowing people to vote directly for their Senator rather than have them appointed by the state legislature

Now comes the most radically extreme proposal yet: Senate Majority Leader McConnell and other Republicans are now calling for amending or even outright repeal of the 14th amendment to the Constitution.

So, I’d like to take Dr. Paul back in time, to meet some of the people who lived during those days of greater freedom, and have him tell them how much better they have it than the workers do today, before the Occupational Safety & Health Administration and the Mine Safety and Health Administration began their meddling insistence that workers have the right to a safe workplace.

But, we’d have a lot of ground to cover, just to get to the more than 15,000 miners killed in more than 700 separate mining disasters. He couldn’t talk to the miners themselves about how much better were the times they lived in than ours. But I’m sure their families would be comforted to know that Dr. Paul want to take the country back to those days.

Check Out the Best Guide to Politics on the Web!
The Guide to Liberal News and Politics on the Web


Evans Liberal Politics Guide to Liberal News and Politics on the Web

Find Out Where to find the Truth!


Maybe we’d at least have time to get to the worst mining disasters.Maybe he could visit the more than 1,000 families, widows and children of the 367 men (and boys) who were killed when methane gas ignited coal dust in the Monongah Mine Disaster of 1907, which

The No. 6 and No. 8 Mines were slope openings about 1¼ miles apart. The mines were ventilated separately but were connected so that each mine could be ventilated from eith opening in case of necessity.

The workings were wired for electricity, and the coal was undercut by electric cutting machines. Black powder was used for blasting; the tamping composed largely of coal dust. No shot firers were employed. Open lights were used by all workmen.

Traces of gas were found in the advance workings, and firebosses made daily examinations before the men entered. The mines were dusty and haulways were dampened by water cars.

On that Friday morning, 367 men were in the mine and work progressed as usual until 10:28 a.m. when the explosion killed nearly all the men, wrecked the ventilation system, smashed motors and cars, and destroyed the No. 8 openings, together with the boilerhouse and fan, but did little damage to the No. 6 slope.

Four men escaped through an outcrop opening and 1 man was rescued.

Dr. Paul could even shake the hand of the sole survivor — Peter Urban, who found a hole to crawl in before the toxic gas that would cause the death of his twin brother, Stanley, in the same mining disaster. Paul could tell the miner how fortunate he was to live in a time when he was free to work without the protection of unions and government regulations. I’m sure

Never mind that mine disasters declined dramatically, thanks in large part to the kind of oversight and regulation Paul denounces.

chart showing the number of U.S. mine disasters from before 1875 to the present in 25 year increments

The term “mine disaster” historically has been applied to mine accidents claiming five or more lives. Mine disasters, in this sense, once were appallingly common. For instance, the single year of 1907 saw 18 coal mine disasters, plus two more disasters in the metal and nonmetal mining industry. Among the disasters in 1907 was history’s worst – the Monongah coal mine explosion, which claimed 362 lives and impelled Congress to create the Bureau of Mines.

Mine accidents have declined dramatically in number and severity through decades of research, technology, and preventive programs. Today, mine accidents resulting in five or more deaths are no longer common. However, preventing recurrence of disasters like those of the past remains a top priority requiring constant vigilance by management, labor, and government.

And apparently, it’s a damn shame. Sure, mining disasters have declined since the de-regulated days to which Paul wishes to return, but in protecting the lives of miners.

Can Paul possibly think that the folks lucky enough to live downstream from mountaintop removal operations shouldn’t tell mine owners what to do with their property — or that the government should stand up for them, when mining operations have disastrous consequences for them and their property — yet at the same time believe that mine owners are going to let miners tell them what to do with their property, where safety regulations are concerned? That seems to be the gist of his comments in Details.

“You live here, and you have to work in the mines. You’d try to make good rules to protect your people here. If you don’t, I’m thinking that no one will apply for those jobs.”

As Kos points out, it’s not like people risk injury, death, or black lung disease because mining is a glamorous gig, or because it pays better than anything else. It’s a matter of economic necessity, and where mines are the biggest employers in town, mine owners can easily have workers over a barrel. Either work in their mines on their terms or don’t. And good luck finding work somewhere else in town. Or the next town over. Or the one after that. If you don’t have the resources to pick up and move your family elsewhere — out of mining country, specifically — you do what they say, if you want to get a paycheck, feed your family, and keep a roof over your head.

Of course, mine owners have an incentive to look out for the safety of their employees? Right? It’s more likely that, in an economy where high unemployment is becoming the new normal, that someone like Don Blankenship wouldn’t say to a miner concerned about safety, “If you don’t like it here, you can leave. I can find ten other men to work for less than what you make now, before you even hit the gate.”

The safety record of Massey Energy certainly bears that out. Federal records show that in the last seven years miners at the Upper Big Branch Mine — site of the April 5th explosion that killed 29 of the 31 miners on the site — lost more work time due to work-site accidents than other miners anywhere in the country. According to the MSHA, Massey had 500 safety violations issued against them last year, 200 of which were labeled “significant,” and 50 of which were called “unwarrantable failure” to comply with safety requirements. Many, 61, were orders to close parts or all of Upper Big Branch and pull miners out. Twelve concerned ventilation problems that led to the buildup of methane gas. So much, in fact, that methane gas and carbon dioxide kept rescuers from entering the mine for a time, and kept investigators out until it was safe for them to enter. To top it all off, Massey Energy denied miners time off to attend the funerals of the 29 who died in Upper Big Branch.

Why would miners expect a company consistently that puts profits over principle to look out for their safety?

If he could turn back time, if I could take Rand Paul back in time, I’d have him ask the miners, widows and children if they would like to have the protections miners and other workers are supposed to have today? What would they tell him? Would he listen?

But I don’t need to take him back in time. Today’s coal miners are speaking.

Kentucky coal miners are criticizing Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul for suggesting that Congress shouldn’t be making mine safety rules.

United Mine Workers members told reporters Tuesday that miners depend on federal regulations to prevent injuries and deaths.

Miner Bernie Alvey says mining catastrophes “always bring on new laws that keep the rest of us safe later on.”

It’s doubtful Rand Paul will listen. But the miners hear him loud and clear.

See Elizabeth Warren: My Mission Is to Restore America’s Great Middle Class, AlterNet, August 1, 2010, by Elizabeth Warren. At Netroots Nation, Elizabeth Warren spoke about how to make the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau help protect the U.S. economy.

See A Libertarian Golden Age, Evans Liberal Politics, April 20, 2010, by devilstower.

Terrance Heath is the Online Producer at Campaign for America’s Future. Prior to his current position he worked as a Blogging and Social Media Consultant for a number of organizations and agencies, as an outgrowth of his work as Blogmaster for EchoDitto, Inc. He stumbled into blogging and social media after starting his own blog, The Republic of T., but cut his teeth as an activist working on LGBT equality and HIV/AIDS issues. In that capacity he worked for the Human Rights Campaign and the National Minority AIDS Council. Terrance has kindly allowed Evans Liberal Politics to publish his works on an ongoing basis. He sums himself up: Black. Gay. Father. Vegetarian. Buddhist. Liberal.

We’re Counting on YOU! Please share Evans Liberal Politics with friends! While we enjoy a certain level of popularity on the web, in order for us to keep bringing you the latest in liberal news and politics, we really need you to SHARE Evans Liberal Politics with your friends and contacts. Please help us out — we bring you the latest in liberal and progressive news and politics just to share the truth and promote liberalism. Can you help us today?
Please consider making a $5 or $10 donation to Evans Liberal Politics. We bring you the news and all things liberal for free out of love of people and liberalism, but a fellow has to eat! The button to donate via PayPal is located at the top right of every page (or use this handy link), and your kind help is greatly appreciated.

*****

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

We’re Counting on You!
Tell Your Friends About Evans Liberal Politics!

Listen to 162 Rock and Pop Hits!


Paul's Playlist of the best streaming rock, pop and electronic music

Nation editor: Obama ‘feeding zealots’ by not standing up to right-wing media

Evans Liberal Politics
July 24, 2010

 

Nation editor: Obama ‘feeding zealots’
by not standing up to right-wing media

 

Nation editor: Obama ‘feeding zealots’ by not standing up to right-wing media, The Raw Story, July 23, 2010, by David Edwards and Daniel Tencer, used with permission, quoted verbatim:

The Shirley Sherrod controversy has shown that the White House needs to stand up to conservative media attacks, or risk “feeding the zealots” in America’s political debate, says the editor and publisher of a leading progressive magazine.

Click the Obama’s
Dog Bo to Visit Paul’s
Playlist for Great
Rock & Pop Hits!
* #1 Rated by Google *

photo of a very The Obama dog Bo serves as a link to Paul's Playlist of great streaming electronic rock and pop music

The Nation editor Katrina vanden Heuvel told NBC’s Today Show Friday that the Obama administration needs to “get a spine.”

“This White House needs to institute procedures, as President Obama said, and get a spine because it is feeding the zealots of our system by not standing tall and confronting the forces of hate and fear in a country that has a lot of economic pain,” vanden Heuvel said.

She described the controversy as “a testing moment for America … Are we going to be an America that learns from Shirley Sherrod’s tale of reconciliation, overcoming prejudice? … Are we going to be a media system which is vetting and upholding standards, or are we going to be bullied as a country by a right wing media which peddles fears and slanders to, really, destroy President Obama’s presidency?”

Host Matt Lauer interrupted vanden Heuvel to point out that “in the past it’s worked in both directions. Biased media is nothing new.”

Vanden Heuvel responded by saying the issue wasn’t about media bias, but media credibility. It’s about “the mainstream media — with a few exceptions in this case — accepting Andrew Breitbart, a journalist who’s known to have no credibility.”

Watch a relevant video is from NBC’s Today Show, broadcast July 23, 2010, here.

*****

To make a Word or .pdf document of an article, or share or email it, simply load the individual article by clicking the dark blue title at the very top, or use the icons beneath the article.

We’re Counting on You!
Tell Your Friends About Evans Liberal Politics!

Listen to 150 Rock and Pop Hits!


Paul's Playlist of the best streaming rock, pop and electronic music

#1 Rated by Google