Category Archives: Teapublicans

Liberal Media, Huh?

Posted on by

If you’re a media observer, as I am, you may have noticed a change in the political coverage over the past several weeks.  The majority of stories are now about Mitt Romney’s rallies and statements.  The few stories about President Obama have been largely negative – showing his decline in the polls or supposed “gaffes” by his campaign.

Another more subtle trend is to refer to President Obama as Mr. Obama.

It seems that the narrative has become “Mr. Obama is a nice man, but he has failed to live up to his campaign promises.”  Never mind that he has faced the most obstructionist Congress in history.  Never mind that the right wing media has blathered endlessly about his “socialist” policies.  Never mind that the Teapublicans have rallied the nation’s racists into a hateful fever over the birther “controversy.”

The “liberal” media seems to have accepted the right wing propaganda that, since the economy has not rebounded quickly, we may as well let Mitt Romney have an opportunity to lead.  They don’t even discuss the fact that Romney’s policies are nearly identical to those of the presidential predecessor who drove our economy off a cliff.

The “lamestream” media seem too partisan, too lazy or too brainwashed to do their jobs.  Wouldn’t it be refreshing to see a network news reporter ask a question that’s as insightful and penetrating as Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert?

It’s a sad fact that our comedians are now better reporters than most of our journalists.

President Obama Can Recapture His Popularity With Men.

Posted on by

Recent polls have shown that President Obama’s popularity with white men has declined.  As a result, some Democratic “strategists” have suggested that the president should focus his attention on minorities, women and educated, successful men.  They reason that trying to reach blue collar white men would be a waste of time and money.

That only shows how little these overpaid “strategists” really know.  Dismissing the committed Teapublicans and racists, President Obama has a strong record to sell to men.  His American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and loans to the American auto industry saved millions of construction and factory jobs.  If the president’s case is properly stated, many of these men will understand that they owe their jobs to him.

Moreover, the “strategists” miss what is probably the real reason that the president’s popularity among male voters has declined.  Until recently, he has shown a lack of cajones.  Men – all men – respect another man who stands up for what he believes in.  They need to be reminded that President Obama ordered the killing of Osama bin Laden.  And they need to see the president continue to stand up and speak out strongly against the obstructionist Teapublicans.

The Teapublican Book of Lies.

Posted on by

You know those things Teapublicans present as facts that just never quite make sense?  The ones that are repeated day after day on Fox News Channel and right wing radio?  The conservative ideas that have been tried and failed, but keep coming back?

I’ve taken 50 of those so-called “facts,” researched them, and presented my findings in a new book:  The Teapublican Book of Lies.  It’s a sort of handbook for debates with your conservative friends and family members.

Pardon the shameless self-promotion, but you can buy the book from Amazon.

The Real Freeloaders.

Posted on by

For the past year Teapublicans, cheered on by Fox News Channel, have complained that the poor pay no federal income taxes.  They have insulted those who are down on their luck by calling them the “Freeloader Class.”  Yet, at the same time, they decry tax increases for the wealthy as “Class Warfare.”

Well, Teapublicans, you now have another group of freeloaders worthy of your disdain and venomous attacks:  According to a report by the Internal Revenue Service, more than 35,000 people with incomes of $200,000 or more paid no federal income taxes in 2009.

These are people who, by any standard, must be considered wealthy, but through a variety of tax credits and deductions were able to zero out their federal income tax bill.

Tell me, Teapublicans, which is worse?  The working poor and the elderly who make so little they are not required to pay federal income taxes?  Or those fortunate enough to earn substantial incomes and use a combination of write-offs and accounting tricks to avoid their responsibilities?

The answer is clear, even if you are unlikely to admit it.

For Sale: USA, Highest Bidder Takes All.

Posted on by

This past week, it was announced that Teapublican Super Pacs will spend more than $3 billion on attack ads.  Likely, there will be nearly a billion more spent by the campaigns for Teapublican candidates.

Also in the news this week, was the John Edwards verdict and mistrial over the alleged misspending of money for a 2008 campaign at a time when contributions were limited to $2,500 from any single contributor.

The juxtaposition of the two stories should tell you everything you need to know about the impact of the Supreme Court’s misguided decisions equating money with free speech and corporations with individuals.

Thanks to the Court’s five conservative justices, this election may very well go to the highest bidders.  The Koch brothers, John Paulson, Bill Marriott, Richard Marriott, Julian Robertson, Ken Griffin, and Jim Davis each have donated $1,000,000 or more to Mitt Romney’s campaign.  In addition, the Koch Brothers and Sheldon Adelson have donated untold millions to Super Pacs dedicated to attacking President Obama.

Of course, they don’t expect anything in return…nooooo!  Why would anyone think that?

If, like me, you believe individual voters should decide elections.  Not corporations and billionaires.  If you think that elections should be determined by the quality of ideas.  Not the quantity of contributions.  Then let’s overrule the Court.  Help restore our democracy by signing the petition at www.MoveToAmend.org.

Cutting Defense Spending Does Not Have To Compromise Military Readiness.

Posted on by

Although Teapublicans insist on cutting government spending despite our fragile economic recovery, they categorically refuse to consider cuts to our defense budget.  They claim such cuts will leave the US vulnerable to attack.  So, when they passed the Ryan budget plan in the House, they included significant budget increases for the Pentagon.

In doing so, they disregarded a Pentagon report requested by Senator Bernie Sanders that shows, over the past decade, the government has awarded contracts totaling $1.1 trillion to defense contractors and their parent companies found guilty of defrauding the government.  In other words, when a military contractor is found guilty of defrauding the government, we demand a settlement.  Then we give them an opportunity to do it again!

If Teapublicans are serious about cutting deficits, the military/industrial complex is the very first place they should look.  Not the last.  The military budget is so bloated the Pentagon can’t even determine what happened to the $60 billion or so that has gone missing in Iraq and Afghanistan!

The money that can be saved by cutting Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security pales by comparison to the money that could be saved just by increasing oversight of military spending.  Moreover, the money spent on safety nets tends to go right back into our economy, while much of the money wasted on military fraud tends to line the pockets of CEOs and foreign dictators.

Of course, Teapublicans don’t want to stop with cuts to safety nets.  They want to hack away money from education, too; money that is truly an investment in our future.  Money that will pay us back in innovation and future increased tax revenues, as opposed to excess military spending that will result in more fraud and waste.

Both parties say this election will determine the future of our nation for generations.  The question is what future do you want?  More military and more wars?  Or a better standard of living for our youth and our seniors?

It seems like an easy choice for me.

This Is A Reason To Vote For Romney?

Posted on by

Teapublican presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, has said that anything more than 4 percent unemployment is a failure for the Obama administration.  (It should be noted that the US has rarely achieved such a low unemployment figure.)  Now Mitt says that by the end of the first term of a Romney presidency, unemployment should be somewhere around 6 percent!

Hmmm…so Romney is already predicting that his first term will be a failure?

Even more puzzling is the fact that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that continuing the policies of President Obama will result in an unemployment rate of 6 percent by 2015 – a year before the end of President Obama’s second term!  So, if this election is all about jobs as Mitt Romney has said, tell us again Mitt:  Why is it we should vote for you?

The Party of Hate.

Posted on by

Teapublicans love to say incendiary things about their political opponents.  In just the past few weeks, Teapublican candidates and representatives have called President Obama a socialist, communist and fascist.  A Teapublican Senator called President Obama the most divisive figure in politics.  A Teapublican stated that gays should be rounded up, surrounded by an electric fence and killed.  And the Teapublican Secretary of State in Arizona has stated that he won’t allow the president on the state ballot unless the State of Hawaii will send documentation of his birth.

And that’s not to mention the usual drone of really hateful rhetoric on conservative talk radio.

Yet whenever Teapublicans are accused of fomenting hate, they ridicule the accusers.  They claim Democrats are manufacturing a straw dog for political purposes.  They claim that their remarks do not stir up violence.

Unfortunately, the facts don’t support them.

Just consider this:  According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (the organization that tracks domestic hate groups), the number of radical “anti-government” militia groups has increased from 150 to 1,274 during the years of the Obama presidency. The SPLC also reports that there have been more homegrown domestic terrorism attacks by right-wing groups than by international terrorists during his presidency.

Of course, Teapublicans say that has nothing to do with their constant drumbeat of hatred aimed at the nation’s first president of African-American ancestory.  Nooooo!  It’s only because of Obama’s policies, they say.

The last time hate groups were so prominent was during the Clinton administration when the SLPC identified 858 such groups.  So when a Democrat is in the White House, hate groups increase.  When a Republican is in the White House, the number of hate groups is diminished.  And when a black Democrat is in the White House, the number of hate groups explodes!

If you think that’s simply a coincidence, you haven’t been listening.

Undisciplined Democratic Candidates vs Monolithic Republican Zombies.

Posted on by

When Newark Mayor Cory Booker went on Meet The Press and attacked the Obama campaign strategy, he did more than expose himself as a disloyal “surrogate.”  He pointed to the greatest difference between Democrats and Republicans.

Had he been a Republican attacking Mitt Romney’s campaign, he would have been quickly dismissed as a RINO (Republican In Name Only).  He would have been challenged in the next primary, defeated by the Teapublican base, and his political career would be done.

On the other hand, there is no such thing as a DINO.  A Democrat can go on national television and say anything he or she wants with few repercussions from the Democratic Party.  It’s frustrating for the Democratic base.  We have enough of a battle on our hands fending off Teapublican lies.  We don’t need cannibals devouring the party from within.

Mayor Booker is an impressive young man who seems to be a good mayor. He has shown personal courage by rescuing a neighbor from a fire.  And he seems to have a great future as long as he remembers who politically supports him.  But based on his statements on Meet The Press, he needs the equivalent of a time out.