CJSD: Top Ten Reasons We Should Reject Our Nobel Peace Prize
Skippy: Self-Described Troublemaker Whines because People think he's a Troublemaker
PourMeCoffee: Michael Steele Accuses Democrats of Treason, in Writing, and No One Even Blinks Anymore
Ben Varkentine: Looking for something serious to read this weekend?
As Jillian subtly points out, GOP chairman Michael Steele is not 13-years-old and, therefore, should not have a blog entitled "What Up?"
But along with the chairman's new blog, a new GOP site has been unveiled as the party attempts to re-brand itself. "Something is happening at GOP.com," booms the voice of Steele as the page loads. No joke: a digital Michael Steele struts across the computer monitor to explain the new website and how "that something new -- is you!" Sure this tiny Michael Steele and cheesy line is enough to make you roll your eyes, but it gets worse. Much worse.
And even worse, the new website violates one of the cardinal rules of web design: web pages should never make sound without the visitor’s consent. The GOP home page has a little Javascript-animated Michael Steele who comes walking out and starts talking, like one of those incredibly annoying advertisements you see on cheesy websites.
It’s the political party with a website that’s not safe for work.
Red State loves it, but it must be discouraging that the "Future Leaders" page doesn't actually have any names on it. As I looked around the site, I noticed that each time I changed or refreshed pages, a new face would pop up on the page, just like my screen cap above. Strangely, a disproportionate number of those photos were of African-Americans and there were plenty of fresh, young faces too. You know, people who don't belong to the Republican Party, and never will? They even have the nerve to try to claim the ghost of Jackie Robinson!
You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (55)
PLAYS: (272)
Michael Steele on the new GOP.com: "It's not even really a website." That's what we heard too Mike.
Smith: Alright, before you go. You have a new website--the Democrats kind of making fun of you for it on their blogs this morning that part of it didn't work. What is this new website for the RNC?
Steele: Well, it's a new platform for us and it's not even really a website, it's a platform for folks to come on and get engaged with the GOP. I said when I ran for chairman that I wanted to take this party to the streets. I wanted to put it out there in the neighborhoods. I want it to be a part of the vibrant communities that are America.
And so we've done that I think in a very creative way. We've launched it at www.GOP.com. It's a beta site meaning that they're, we're working out a lot of the kinks and bugs, so the Dems can have their fun. Go play with, have some fun with it. But the reality of it is it is a new tool to communicate the new GOP.
You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (955)
PLAYS: (7420)
You all remember how the wingnuts exploded in joy at the news that Chicago had been denied its bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics. Rather typically, our RedState pal Erick Erickson crowed:
So much for improving America’s standing in the world, Barry O. Maybe now perhaps we can hope he will mature a bit on the issues of foreign affairs. But I doubt it.
Well, now their heads are exploding at the news that President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Here's what Erickson tweeted in response:
Then there was Fox News. As you can see from the video above, it was like Scanners on steroids on Fox & Friends this morning, with Brian Kilmeade noting that this was the third honoree whose name was not George W. Bush. (Maybe those Swedes' "pure genes" got the better of them, eh?)
Even Michael Steele and the Republican National Committee got into the act:
“The real question Americans are asking is, ‘What has President Obama actually accomplished?’ It is unfortunate that the president’s star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working towards peace and human rights. One thing is certain – President Obama won’t be receiving any awards from Americans for job creation, fiscal responsibility, or backing up rhetoric with concrete action.”
Michael Steele has been nothing short of an embarrassment to the Republican Party. (That's just fine with me, he can stay as long as he likes) He fits right in with today's feckless GOP, but it appears there is trouble in paradise, as some party leaders are finally growing tired of his buffoonery:
GOP leaders, in a private meeting last month, delivered a blunt and at times heated message to RNC Chairman Michael Steele: quit meddling in policy.
The plea was made during what was supposed to be a routine discussion about polling matters and other priorities in House Minority Leader John Boehner’s office. But the session devolved into a heated discussion about the roles of congressional leadership and Steele, according to multiple people familiar with the meeting.
The congressional leaders were particularly miffed that Steele had in late August unveiled a seniors’ “health care bill of rights” without consulting with them. The statement of health care principles, outlined in a Washington Post op-ed, began with a robust defense of Medicare that puzzled some in a party not known for its attachment to entitlements.
It's no secret that the Republican Party is a rudderless ship, devoid of leadership, but this incident shows a deeper divide between Steele and party lawmakers:
There are larger issues at hand, though, beyond a tense exchange over strategy. Since Steele took over the party earlier this year, congressional leaders and their staff have often cringed at the voluble chairman’s gaffes and rolled their eyes at his unambiguous view that he alone leads the party.
“He’s on a short leash here,” said one top House GOP leadership aide.Read on...
Steele's very existence as RNC chairman (and subsequent failure) is merely a symptom of the party's short sighted strategy of throwing out generic personalities to match Democratic front runners. He was supposed to be a counter-balance to then Senator Obama, to try and attract black voters, and of course, there's no denying that the party made a fatal error in shoving Sarah Palin onto the 2008 presidential ticket in an attempt to counter Hillary Clinton. You get what you pay for, and the GOP is definitely suffering from buyers remorse.
That the elderly of all groups of Americans most strongly oppose President Obama on health care reform shows the success of Republican fear-mongering over supposed Medicare cuts and "death panels". And on Monday, the Washington Post did the GOP a great service in a piece titled, "On Medicare Spending, a Role Reversal." While exploring the impact of projected savings in the program that serves 46 million Americans, the Post left unchallenged the Republicans' laughable claim to be the new protectors of Medicare after decades of war against it.
Readers who stopped after the first two paragraphs could be forgiven for wrongly assuming that the party that brought you Medicare would now kill it but for the stalwart defense of the Republican Party. After the subhead declaring, "Republicans, Not Interest Groups, Fight Plans to Cut $400 Billion Over 10 Years," the Post's Lori Montgomery concluded:
After years of trying to cut Medicare spending, Republican lawmakers have emerged as champions of the program, accusing Democrats of trying to steal from the elderly to cover the cost of health reform.
It's a lonely battle. The hospital associations, AARP and other powerful interest groups that usually howl over Medicare cuts have also switched sides.
Why is it so hard for the media to discuss the obvious racial overtones of so much of President Obama's opposition? The right-wing fanatics are not even trying to cover it up and still the media try to avoid the obvious by framing it as a pundit problem.
I understand that calling someone a racist is no small thing, but facts are facts, and I can't deny what I see with my own two eyes. Can you? Can the media? (John Aravosis had a great post last week with plenty of visual examples.)
Instead of Howard Kurtz really taking a look at the racist underbelly that has risen to new heights at the town halls, he frames it like this:
Kurtz: So are the pundits and the press inflaming this debate about race?
To the media, the debate isn't about the racism that is actually happening on the ground and in front of our eyes, but whether it's the media's fault for actually covering the racist a-holes that have taken over the Republican Party.
When a Michael Steele tries to say that it's only one in a hundred who carry around racist signs about Obama at the psycho town halls, that's a LIE. All you had to do is look at the teabagger protests in DC. Even Andrea Mitchell was stunned.
Kurtz: Eric Deggans, should the media be devoting all of this time and energy to explaining or examining or exploring whether some of Obama's critics are, in fact, motivated by racism?
ERIC DEGGANS, ST. PETERSBURG TIMES: I think it's an appropriate subject just because for a long time people who have been covering these rallies, covering these protests, have an sense that there's an undercurrent of something that goes beyond just opposing the president politically.
And there's been an effort to try and explain that. Why is there such visceral hatred for what Obama's trying to do among the certain core, a certain percentage of people who are at these rallies and then we found that these weird e-mails pop up of photos of Obama looking like a tribesman, you know, weird racial jokes that seem to be passed along by e-mail by some people who oppose him. So we're trying to explain that, and I think it makes sense to try.
KURTZ: Some of that, of course, may come from the fringes. Amy Holmes, is there a danger that journalists are perhaps insinuating or suggesting or implying that many of Obama's critics must be motivated by racism?
Spellman:...we saw handguns from time to time, but running through this subculture that's developed around these tea parties is a bit of a dark undercurrent. The bulk of the people are for lower taxes and less government control, but there really is an element that's got these kind of outlandish conspiracy theories about death camps and about this take over, people comparing President Obama to Hitler. It really is a sizable...It's not just a couple of people around the edges. One of the big questions will be if this movement go forward while maintaining this kind of element on the edges...
You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (60)
PLAYS: (84)
RNC chair Michael Steele doesn't think the White House is asking New York governor David Paterson not to run for reelection because he's black -- but Steele is injecting the question of race into the discussion. The White House asked Patterson to drop out, according to a report in The New York Times.
"I found that to be stunning, that the White House would send word to one of only two black governors in the country not to run for reelection," Steele told CBS' Bob Schieffer.
You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (90)
PLAYS: (181)
Michael Steele seems to have a problem recognizing racism. Steele does the apples to oranges game and tries to compare what was done to President Bush when those silly lefties were calling him names for dropping bombs on a bunch of people's heads that were never a threat to the United States and lying to the country about that non-existent threat, to what's going on now with President Obama.
Steele says that the "adults in the room need to step up, and I think the adults are myself and President Obama, two African American men at the top of the political structure of this country who can say with some degree of experience and clarity that this is not the context in which we need to have a debate on health care or any issue facing America".
Michael Steele knows full well that President Obama cannot say what Jimmy Carter just said because if he did, the wingnuts would go into full attack mode just as they are right now with President Carter. And of course this is not the context that we need to be having a debate on health care. It is the context the GOP wants us to be having a debate on to "blacken" up President Obama or they wouldn't have put someone with a track record like Joe Wilson up to his stunt on the House floor during President Obama's address to Congress.
So people go out to town halls, they go to the community, and they’re like this. (SHAKES ARMS) It makes for great TV. You’ll probably make it tonight. Enjoy it.
First, there's the insanity of the head of the RNC criticizing anyone for disrupting a town hall meeting. Second, you have a woman whose mother died, ostensibly because of a lack of insurance, basically being insulted for daring to try to call attention to herself.
And this is not the only example. I can think of a dozen instances of Republican officials dismissing people trying to explain how the current system is broken. There was Tom Coburn telling the crying woman whose insurance refused to cover her husband that she should go to her neighbors for help. There was "Great White Hope" Republican Lynn Jenkins telling an uninsured constituent to be a grown-up and get insurance. The callousness on display at these things is palpable. And it could easily be turned into a powerful force for change.
That is, if there was one Democratic strategist interested in making a moral case anymore instead of a bunch of functionaries squandering a progressive agenda in favor of pleasing elites and talking about "bending the cost curve."
Gee, I hope not. But normal people are reluctant to call someone a liar, so liars always get the benefit of the doubt. Here's what Michael Steele claims the Democrats are trying to do to seniors:
President Obama and Congressional Democrats are promoting a government-run health care experiment that will cut over $500 billion from Medicare to be used to pay for their plan. Medicare should not be raided to pay for another entitlement.
On the contrary, the bill includes several key provisions that improve Medicare benefits for seniors, including the following:
Phases in completely filling in the “donut hole” in the Medicare prescription drug benefit (where drug costs are not reimbursed at certain levels), potentially savings seniors thousands of dollars a year.
Eliminates co-payments and deductibles for preventive services under Medicare.
Limits cost-sharing requirements in Medicare Advantage plans to the amount charged for the same services in traditional Medicare coverage.
Improves the low-income subsidy programs in Medicare, such as by increasing asset limits for programs that help Medicare beneficiaries pay premiums and cost-sharing.
Let me remind them what the Republicans have tried to do to the popular senior citizen healthcare program through the years.
In the 1960s, they said things like this:
Ronald Reagan: “[I]f you don’t [stop Medicare] and I don’t do it, one of these days you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it once was like in America when men were free.” [1961]
George H.W. Bush: Described Medicare in 1964 as “socialized medicine.” [1964]
Barry Goldwater: “Having given our pensioners their medical care in kind, why not food baskets, why not public housing accommodations, why not vacation resorts, why not a ration of cigarettes for those who smoke and of beer for those who drink.”
Bob Dole: In 1996, while running for the Presidency, Dole openly bragged that he was one of 12 House members who voted against creating Medicare in 1965. “I was there, fighting the fight, voting against Medicare . . . because we knew it wouldn’t work in 1965.” [1965]
Now, ask yourself this question: Have you seen any sign whatsoever that the Republicans have mellowed in the past six months? Of course not. Watch what they do, not what they say.
If Michael Steele is the best the Republicans can do in explaining their somewhat maladroit attempts at shooting down Health Care reform - they're in much more trouble than anyone thought.
On NPR's Morning Edition today, Steele was asked by host Steve Inskeep about where the Republicans stood on the question of Medicare. It didn't take anytime for that particular train to skid off the tracks.
Steve Inskeep: “You warn that some of the health care proposals out there would , quote ‘create government boards that would decide what treatments would and would not be funded’, and you ‘want that decision to be between the doctor and the patient’. When a private insurance company pays now, what is your impression of who decides what that private insurance company is going to cover? Is that purely between the doctor and the patient now . . ?
Steele: “Sometimes it is and sometimes it isn’t. It depends on the type of treatement and the medicines that are at stake and I’ve had this same experience my own self, where I needed a certain type of . .you know, medication and . .you know, the insurance company is like well, you can have it, but we’ll only pay for this amount or this portion. I don’t like that anymore than I like the government doing it. And my point is . . you know the governments gonna do it, they’ll do it ten times worse and it’s gonna be more pronounced than the private insurers. And I think that’s a feature we can fix right now. And sure, there are issues in the insurance market that we can regulate a little bit better and we can control better to maximize the benefits to the consumers. That’s something we can rightly reform and fix.
Inskeep: “ wait a minute . .you would trust the government to look into that?”
Steele: “No . .I’m talkin’ about the . . .talking about . . .
Inskeep: “Who . . .you said that’s something to be looked into. Who should look into that?
Steele: “Well . . who regulates the insurance markets?
Inskeep: “The government . . .”
Steele: “Wait a minute – hold up . . You’re doing a wonderful little dance here – you’re trying to be cute. But the reality of this is very simple; I’m not saying the government doesn’t have a role to play. I’ve never said that . . . the government has a role to play, the government has a very limited role to play . .
Iskeep: “Mister Chairman, I respect that you feel I’m doing a dance here, I just want you to know, as a citizen I’m a little confused by the positions you take, because you’re giving me a very nice, nuanced position here . .”
Steele: “It’s not nice and nuanced. I’m being very clear”.
It's pretty clear to everyone but the Republicans that the Republicans don't have a leg to stand on in the Health Care debate. But rather than attempt any kind of . . .dare I say it, bi-partisan approach, they are trotting out confusion, fear, hysteria and arrogance in rapid succession, hoping some words stick and no one will notice the others.
