Muppets Attack Fox

The Muppets have responded to attacks from Fox:

Kermit the Frog and Miss Piggy hit back at Fox News during a UK press conference following the London Premiere of their new film. Fox had publically criticized the film for supposedly pushing a ‘dangerous liberal agenda’ at kids.

Kermit mocks their blatant and pointless fear mongering before Miss Piggy offers her own opinion on Fox News.

The Republican Circus Can Get Even Wilder

The Republicans have a real problem. Mitt Romney has been running for the nomination, and sometimes has even led the race, since before Barack Obama became president, but the Republicans just don’t want him. Conservatives have been trying to find an acceptable candidate to promote their beliefs but it is just not possible to find a sane leader for a movement which has become outright bat-shit crazy. To demonstrate my point, at the moment they are stuck with Newt Gingrich.  I’ve speculated in the past that that this could lead to none of the current candidates winning and the race going to the convention. The possibility of someone else winning the nomination received further attention after Nate Silver wrote a post today on this topic.

This possibility exists because of the problems with the candidates and the structure of the primaries. Republican caucuses and primaries held before April 1 cannot be winner-take-all, but afterwards they can. This means that it will be hard for anyone to take an overwhelming lead early, making it possible for a candidate with momentum late to win winner-take-all contests and win a larger number of delegates. Theoretically this could be a candidate entering late, but I wonder if this is really possible as anyone not currently in the race will lack the campaign infrastructure and will miss many of the filing deadlines to enter the contests. I suspect that if some of the other candidates recover it might be possible for different ones to win in different states, preventing anyone from clinching the nomination prior to the convention.

Once caucuses and primaries begin they create a new atmosphere and the previous pecking order might be meaningless. If someone wins convincingly in the early contests they should be able to lock up the nomination. The lack of a conventional campaign infrastructure creates doubt as to whether Newt Gingrich can win despite his current lead in the polls, but if the conservative movement, including the Tea Party, line up behind him this might be enough to beat Romney. It certainly doesn’t look good for Romney to be trailing Gingrich in Michigan as he is at the present. A loss in Michigan would probably be the end for Romney, but on the other hand the Michigan polls, as most other states, will probably shift based upon the results in the early states.

If none of the Republican candidates please conservatives, there are a couple of names being raised as potential independent candidates. Donald Trump, angry that only Gingrich and Rick Santorum are attending his debate says, “I am unwilling to give up my right to run as an independent candidate.”

Trump is particularly angry at Michelle Bachmann:

“She came up to see me four times,” Trump said. “She would call me and ask me for advice. She said if she wins, she would like to think about me for the Vice Presidency.”

As I’ve suggested in the past, it makes more sense for Trump to run as an independent than in the Republican primaries as it allows him to continue on Celebrity Apprentice this season. That said, there is a strong likelihood that Trump is only talking about running to attract more publicity. Ron Paul, who has declined to offer support to any other winner of the Republican nomination, is also increasingly being discussed as a possible independent candidate. Paul has been on an upward trajectory, but there is also a low ceiling for his potential support. He will suffer the same fate as candidates such as Bachmann and Cain when his views and past receive greater scrutiny. Speaking  of Cain, he never had a chance to become president, but one organization is interested him–Fox.

Advice of the Day

Are you hearing crazy voices? Turn off Fox News.

Posted in Humor and Satire. Tags: . No Comments »

Ignorance And The Alternate Reality Of The Right Wing

If you had to pick just one word to characterize the modern conservative movement it would have to be ignorance. To believe the stuff they say it is necessary to be ignorant of history, economics, science, and public policy. The major reason for their ignorance is their rejection of legitimate sources of information while believing the outrageously untrue claims regularly made by Fox, right wing talk-radio, and their chain emails. I’ve pointed out many times that the more you watch Fox, the dumber you are. I had thought that this primarily involved matters related to right wing ideology and policy. This would include the belief that Saddam was responsible for the 9/11 attack, that Saddam had WMD which represented a threat to our national security, that cutting taxes brings in more revenue even during eras of relatively low tax rates, that creationism is a valid alternative to evolution, and that climate change is a hoax. This also includes their bizarre misconceptions about the beliefs of others, the belief that Barack Obama wasn’t born in the United States, or the absurd belief that Barack Obama is a socialist. (Newt Gingrich has now claimed that the Congressional Budget Office is a “reactionary socialist institution,” which conservatives are certain to repeat when the facts contradict their beliefs.)

As bad as all this is, matters are even worse. A Fairleigh Dickinson PublicMind Poll found that readers of newspapers such as The New York Times and USA Today are, as would be expected, more likely to be aware of events which are unrelated to conservative talking points. However, those who watch Fox know less than those who follow no news at all. Taegan Goddard summarized:

A new Fairleigh Dickinson PublicMind Poll finds that the Sunday morning political shows on television “do the most to help people learn about current events, while some outlets, especially Fox News, lead people to be even less informed than those who they don’t watch any news at all.”

“For example, people who watch Fox News, the most popular of the 24-hour cable news networks, are 18-points less likely to know that Egyptians overthrew their government than those who watch no news at all (after controlling for other news sources, partisanship, education and other demographic factors). Fox News watchers are also 6-points less likely to know that Syrians have not yet overthrown their government than those who watch no news.”

These results mirror a University of Maryland study published last year.

The trend towards rejecting reality has led former Bush speech-writer David Frum to write an article asking, “When Did The GOP Lose Touch With Reality?”

The Bush years cannot be repudiated, but the memory of them can be discarded to make way for a new and more radical ideology, assembled from bits of the old GOP platform that were once sublimated by the party elites but now roam the land freely: ultralibertarianism, crank monetary theories, populist fury, and paranoid visions of a Democratic Party controlled by ACORN and the New Black Panthers. For the past three years, the media have praised the enthusiasm and energy the tea party has brought to the GOP. Yet it’s telling that that movement has failed time and again to produce even a remotely credible candidate for president. Sarah Palin, Donald Trump, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich: The list of tea-party candidates reads like the early history of the U.S. space program, a series of humiliating fizzles and explosions that never achieved liftoff. A political movement that never took governing seriously was exploited by a succession of political entrepreneurs uninterested in governing—but all too interested in merchandising. Much as viewers tune in to American Idol to laugh at the inept, borderline dysfunctional early auditions, these tea-party champions provide a ghoulish type of news entertainment each time they reveal that they know nothing about public affairs and have never attempted to learn. But Cain’s gaffe on Libya or Perry’s brain freeze on the Department of Energy are not only indicators of bad leadership. They are indicators of a crisis of followership. The tea party never demanded knowledge or concern for governance, and so of course it never got them.

Frum addressed the alternative reality created by talk radio and Fox:

But the thought leaders on talk radio and Fox do more than shape opinion. Backed by their own wing of the book-publishing industry and supported by think tanks that increasingly function as public-relations agencies, conservatives have built a whole alternative knowledge system, with its own facts, its own history, its own laws of economics. Outside this alternative reality, the United States is a country dominated by a strong Christian religiosity. Within it, Christians are a persecuted minority. Outside the system, President Obama—whatever his policy ­errors—is a figure of imposing intellect and dignity. Within the system, he’s a pitiful nothing, unable to speak without a teleprompter, an affirmative-action ­phony doomed to inevitable defeat. Outside the system, social scientists worry that the U.S. is hardening into one of the most rigid class societies in the Western world, in which the children of the poor have less chance of escape than in France, Germany, or even England. Inside the system, the U.S. remains (to borrow the words of Senator Marco Rubio) “the only place in the world where it doesn’t matter who your parents were or where you came from.”

We used to say “You’re entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.” Now we are all entitled to our own facts, and conservative media use this right to immerse their audience in a total environment of pseudo-facts and pretend information.

One terrifying example of the alternate reality promoted by the far right was seen at the Religious Right’s “Thanksgiving Family Forum” which six candidates for the Republican nomination attended. They support a warped version of the Constitution which exists only in their heads, containing views which are the opposite of what the framers intended. Rob Boston tried to correct a small number of their mistaken beliefs:

I can’t dissect the entire event. I don’t have that much time or patience. But I did take a few notes and want today to explain a few basic things to the Religious Right:

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison don’t agree with you. You hate the separation of church and state; Jefferson and Madison loved it. Jefferson and Madison worked together to end the government-established church in Virginia and guarantee religious liberty for all. Jefferson coined the metaphor of a “wall of separation between church and state.” Madison spoke of the “total separation of the church from the state.” Neither favored an officially Christian government. They are not on your side; stop invoking them.

The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are two different documents designed to do different things.  There’s no doubt that the Declaration of Independence is an important historical document. It was a bold statement of our nation’s desire to be free from British control. But it does not list our rights. The rights of Americans are outlined in the Constitution, not the Declaration. I realize that it bothers you that the Constitution is secular and that you place great stock in the fact that the Declaration contains a deistic reference to the “Creator,” but that does not change this simple fact: The foundational governing document of the nation is the Constitution – and it does not state that we are an official Christian nation.

We have three co-equal branches of government. It’s discouraging to hear you cheer when candidates vow to stop the courts from handing down decisions that you don’t like. Our system grants the president no such powers – and for good reason. We’re not a dictatorship, after all. An independent judiciary is essential to the maintenance of a free society. When you applaud a man who promises to fire, harass and intimidate judges and turn the courts into a rubber-stamp body, you are advocating for autocracy. Aside from the separation of church and state, there is another important type of separation in our Constitution: the separation of powers. You might want to read up on it.

When you advocate denying public office to people on the basis of what they believe (or don’t believe) about God, you are being bigots. Article VI of the Constitution states that there shall be no religious test for federal office. People are free to reject political hopefuls on the basis of their beliefs, of course, but candidates should not promote this type of bigotry. We would have no difficulty labeling a person who says that a Jew is unfit for the presidency an anti-Semite. Likewise, a person who says that an atheist is unfit for that office should be called what he or she is: a bigot. It’s not something to be proud of.

You cannot simultaneously argue that decisions are best left to states and localities and demand federal control when states and localities do something you don’t like. Several candidates attacked Washington, D.C., policy-makers and asserted that states and local governments should have more control, much to the delight of the audience. They talked about how people have the freedom to make decisions on the local level. But apparently that freedom does not extend to making decisions that the Religious Right does not like. Moments later, many of these same candidates vowed to stop states from legalizing same-sex marriage or civil unions and demanded to criminalize abortion in all 50 states by federal writ. When you promote this type of intellectual disconnect, you expose yourself as the giant hypocrites that you are.

The day before the event, Americans United Executive Director Barry W. Lynn said in a statement, “It’s a shame that so many candidates see fit to attend this fundamentalist Christian inquisition masquerading as a debate. Our nation faces many serious problems, but a lack of religion in our political system isn’t one of them. In fact, this election has already become deeply entangled with religion, with four candidates now claiming that God told them to run. Enough is enough.”

 

Occupy Wall Street At A Cross Roads

The forced clearing of Zuccotti Park this week represents a turning point for the Occupy Wall Street movement–one which possibly could be to its advantage. So far Occupy Wall Street has one significant achievement–turning discussion from which government program to cut next to an examination of how the system is rigged to transfer wealth from the middle class to the top one percent. Unlike the Tea Party movement, they show far more understanding of the issues they are discussing. These are important issues to bring to the nation’s attention considering the degree to which the unprecedented level of income inequality, along with the factually incorrect misconceptions upon which conservative economic policies are based, have caused our economy and country to stagnate in recent years.

The question has been where Occupy Wall Street would go from here. It has always been at risk of fading from attention, between a natural diminishing of interest over time and cold winter weather forcing many to return home. If the the movement was based upon a permanent occupation of Zucotti Park and other areas, it would soon become old news, assuming that it would never increase in size to the point where it would become appear even more meaningful. Zucotti Park would never become Tahrir Square in Cairo.

Now that they are being forced out of their around-the-clock encampments, OCS supporters have an important decision to make. They could become either the start of a new progressive movement in this nation, or a brief protest which loses its significance. They could center their activity upon fighting to maintain the protests in their current form, but this would be a Pyrrhic victory even if it could be achieved. Such a victory would do little to  promote the more serious economic message behind the group. This would play into the hands of the dishonest propagandists for the authoritarian right from Fox and talk radio who would be able to exaggerate every episode of misconduct conducted by people in the area who have nothing to do with the actual movement, resulting in a further decline in their support. I wouldn’t be surprised to see end of year “news” summaries at Fox next month claiming that Occupy Wall Street supporters had spent the year molesting children in the showers at Penn State.

I hope that Occupy Wall Street decides to concentrate on promoting their economic message as opposed to fighting to continue their occupations. At this point intermittent political rallies and other events are likely to receive more media coverage than a permanent “occupation” which gradually dwindles in size over the winter. While OCS is quite distinct from the Democratic Party, I have seen multiple interviews in which supporters did acknowledge that the Democrats are far preferable to the Republicans on economic issues. As we face a tough race next year to prevent government control by supporters of the no-nothing polices of the far right, OCS members might devote some energy to getting out the vote, even if they feel compelled to hold their noses when voting Democratic. Perhaps they could even influence some Democratic primaries, as long as they don’t do this to nominate unelectable extremists as the Tea Party has done.

I also wouldn’t mind if they concentrated more on names such as the 99 percent rather than Occupy Wall Street should the occupations no longer become the centerpiece of the movement. Both the concentrating on occupying a location and the concentration on Wall Street alone distract from their central issue of how an unprecedented level of income inequality has been harmful to the nation, leading us to a position where we can no longer afford many basic government services and promoting of a 21st century infrastructure which would promote greater economic development.

The Success of Occupy Wall Street

Occupy Wall Street has concentrated far more on calling attention to the record degree of income inequality in recent years and how the system is rigged to promote the interests of the ultra-wealthy. When viewed from the perspective as to accomplishing this goal, Ben Smith demonstrates that they have been successful:

Whatever the objectives of protesters involved in Occupy Wall Street, they have succeeded in engaging the country in a conversation about income inequality.

A quick search of the news–including print articles, web stories and broadcast transcripts–via Nexis reveals a significant rise in the use of the term “income inequality,” from less than 91 instances in the week before the occupation started to almost 500 instances last week.

The significance of this is enhanced by the fact that a conservative media outlet such as Politico is pointing this out. (This is one of the ways in which the more legitimate conservative media outlets differ from Fox, which goes beyond just having ideological leanings to more consistently distorting the news to promote their ideological goals.)

They have been successful in raising the issue, and changing the economic debate from based solely on spending cuts. It remains to be seen whether Occupy Wall Street will have any impact on promoting policies or influencing elections–goals which so far they have shown no interest in pursuing.

There Really Is A War On Halloween

Right wingers, who love to act as if they are victims, have been whining about an imaginary War on Christmas for years. Fox has also been claiming there is a War on Halloween:

On Monday’s Fox and Friends , Gretchen Carlson and Brian Kilmeade reported on the “all out assault on Halloween.” “Schools across the country are doing everything from banning costumes to even removing the holiday because it may offend immigrants,” Kilmeade exclaimed. Carlson lamented the fact that schools were “cracking down” on Halloween. “I’m sad, I have two little kids and I’m wondering if they’re not going to ever see the American traditions that all of us had.”

It turns out that Fox is right that there is a War on Halloween but it is not being waged by liberals who wish to avoid offending immigrants. The War on Halloween is being waged by religious fundamentalists who wish to replace Halloween with JesusWeen. From their web site:

JesusWeen is a non profit organization also known as JesusWin. We are focused on helping people live better lives through the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. JesusWeen is a God-given vision which was born as an answer to the cry of many every October 31st. The dictionary meaning of Ween is to expect, believe or think. We therefore see October 31st as a day to expect a gift of salvation and re-think receiving Jesus.

Every year, the world and its Every year, the world and its system have a day set aside (October 31st) to celebrate ungodly images and evil characters while Christians all over the world participate, hide or just stay quiet on Halloween day. Being a day that is widely acceptable to solicit and knock on doors, God inspired us to encourage Christians to use this day as an opportunity to spread the gospel. The days of hiding are over and we choose to take a stand for Jesus. “Evil prevails when good people do nothing”. JesusWeen is expected to become the most effective Christian outreach day ever and that is why we also call it” World Evangelism Day”.

Buzzfeed has more links regarding JesusWeen.

Picture of the Day

Posted in Humor and Satire, News Media. Tags: . 3 Comments »

Quote of the Day

Fox News reports: “Events in Libya are unfolding faster than we can make them up.” –Andy Borowitz

Quote of the Day

“I was watching Fox News today. I lost a bet.” –David Letterman