Life is simple if you're a hardcore conservative. All you need to know is that everything wrong in the world (even things that aren't true) is due to evil liberals. You don't actually have to know how things work. You don't have to know their history. Heck, you don't even have to know how to act....
I can't for the life of me figure out why those "D.C. handlers" wouldn't let her air the ad. If only they'd butted out and let take a good whack at Goliath with this ad....
The scary thing is when you realize that Angle actually did better, relatively, than Rand Paul:
President 2008 Dem Rep Dem Margin
Kentucky: 41.15% 57.37% -16.22%
Nevada: 55.15% 42.65% 12.50%
Senate 2010 Dem Rep Dem Margin
Kentucky: 44.23% 55.77% -11.54%
Nevada: 50.39% 44.72% 5.67%
Swing 2008-2010 Dem Rep Dem Margin
Kentucky: 3.08% -1.60% 4.68%
Nevada: -4.76% 2.07% -6.83%
The Republicans gained ground in last night's midterm elections, recapturing the House and gaining seats in the Senate. The future House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) wasted no time in affirming that the GOP will try to repeal health care reform.
A full-scale repeal is unlikely in the next two years because the Democrats have retained control of the White House and the Senate. However, Republicans are already making noises about shutting down the government to force the issue. The House controls the nation's purse strings, which confers significant leverage if the majority is willing to bring the government to a screeching halt to make a point.
Don't assume they'll blink. The GOP shut down government in 1995, albeit to its own political detriment. Rep. Steve King (R-IA) and his allies have sworn a "blood oath" to shut down the government, regardless of the consequences. The Republicans may actually succeed in modifying minor aspects of the Affordable Care Act, such as the controversial 1099 reporting requirement for small business.
The most significant threat to the implementation of health care reform may be at the state level. Republicans picked up several governorships, and the Affordable Care Act requires the cooperation of states to set up their own insurance exchanges. Hostile governors could seriously impede things.
Mixed results for radical, anti-choice senate candidates
As a group, the eight ultra-radical, anti-choice Republican Senate candidates had mixed results last night. Three wins, two sure losses, and three likely losses that haven't been definitively called. Voters didn't seem thrilled about electing senators who oppose a woman's right to abortion, even in cases of rape and incest.
Two cruised to victory: Rand Paul easily defeated Democrat Jack Conway in Kentucky. Paul is one of the most extreme the of a radical cohort. As Amie Newman reported in RH Reality Check, Paul doesn't even believe in a woman's right to abort to save her own life. In Florida, anti-choice standard bearer Marco Rubio defeated Independent Charlie Christ.
Another radical anti-choicer, Pat Toomey, who favors jailing abortion providers, narrowly edged out Joe Sestak in Pennsylvania.
Two were soundly defeated. Evangelical code-talker Sharron Angle lost to Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), and anti-masturbation crusader Christine O'Donnell lost to Chris Coons in Delaware.
The last three radical anti-choice senate candidates were down, but not, out as of this morning. Democrat Sen. Michael Bennett leads Republican Ken Buck by just 15,000 votes out of over 1.5 million ballots cast, according to TPMDC. Planned Parenthood launched an 11th hour offensive against Buck because of his retrograde stances on abortion, sexual assault, and other women's issues, as Joseph Boven reports for the Colorado Independent.
This morning, Tea Party Republican Joe Miller was trailing behind incumbent Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), who challenged him as an Independent, but no winner had been declared. In Washington State, Democrat Sen. Patti Murray maintains a 1% lead over radical anti-choicer Republican Dino Rossi.
Are fertilized eggs people in Colorado?
Coloradans won a decisive victory for reproductive rights last night. Fertilized eggs are still not people in Colorado, as Jodi Jacobson reports for RH Reality Check.
Amendment 62, which would have conferred full person status from the moment of conception, thereby outlawing abortion and in vitro fertilization. It also called into question the legality of many forms of birth control, including an array of medical procedures for pregnant women that might harm their fetuses. The proposed amendment was resoundingly defeated: 72% against to 28% in favor. This is the second time Colorado voters have rejected an egg-as-person amendment.
Blue Dogs and anti-choice Dems feel the pain
Last night was brutal for corporatist Democrats who fought the more progressive options for health care reform and Democrats who put their anti-choice ideology ahead passing health care. In AlterNet, Sarah Seltzer reports only 12 of the 34 Democrats who voted against health care reform hung on to their seats. The Blue Dog caucus was halved overnight from 56 to 24. Nick Baumann of Mother Jones speculated that the midterms would mark the end of the Stupak bloc, the coalition of anti-choice Democrats whose last-minute brinksmanship could have derailed health care reform.
Did foot-dragging on health care hurt Democrats?
Jamelle Bouie suggests at TAPPED that Democrats shot themselves in the foot by passing a health care reform bill that won't provide tangible benefits to most people for years. The exchanges that are supposed to provide affordable insurance for millions of Americans won't be up and running until 2014.
In Summer 2009, Former DNC chair Howard Dean predicted that the Democrats would be penalized at the polls if they failed to deliver tangible benefits from health care reform before the midterm elections. That's why Dean suggested expanding the public health insurance programs we already have, rather than creating insurance exchanges from scratch.
Sink, sunk by Scott
Andy Kroll of Mother Jones profiles Rick Scott, the billionaire health clinic mogul, corporate fraudster, and enemy of health care reform who spent over $50 million of his own money to eke out a very narrow victory over Democrat Alex Sink in the Florida governor's race.
Apparently, many Floridians were willing to overlook the fact that Scott had to pay a $1.7 billion fine for defrauding Medicare, the largest fine of its kind in history. Scott also spent $5 million of his own money to found Conservatives for Patients' Rights, one of the leading independent groups opposing health care reform.
Pot isn't legalized in California
California defeated Proposition 19, which would have legalized marijuana for personal use. David Borden of DRCnet, a pro-legalization group, writes in AlterNet that the fight over Prop 19 brought legalization into the political mainstream, even if the measure didn't prevail at the polls. The initiative won the backing of the California NAACP, SEIU California, the National Black Police Association, and the National Latino Officers Association and other established groups.
So, what's next for health care reform? The question everyone is asking is whether John Boehner will cave to the extremists in his own party and attempt a full-scale government shutdown, or whether the Republicans will content themselves with extracting piecemeal modifications of the health care law.
This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about health care by members of The Media Consortium. It is free to reprint. Visit the Pulse for a complete list of articles on health care reform, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, environment, health care and immigration issues, check out The Audit, The Mulch, and The Diaspora. This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of leading independent media outlets.
Sometime after Tuesday we'll be reevaluating our Government and a new area of conflict will likely be established...
I am curious as to what the results of the Election 2010 will leave us with. It seems likely now that the Republicans will take control of the House, likely putting John Boehner (R-OH) into the Speaker's chair. As to the Senate, the majority of pollsters have the Democrats keeping control by at least 1 seat... but there are odds that Harry Reid (D - NV) won't be in one of them. This makes the Majority Leader position a "what if" situation... and it looks like Charles Schumer (D - NY) might get it.
It's ironic, but when I debate back and forth across today's political divide, the one thing that members of the Tea Party Movement consistently love to point out is that their candidates stand or fall on principles. Thus it is alleged that the movement's quasi-heroic candidates prefer to go down to defeat rather than compromise or deviate from those very deeply held, almost solemnly enumerated principles. Well for one Tea Party star in particular, Alaska's Joe Miller, the principle of honesty seems to be missing from his litany of deeply held, immutable beliefs. You see Miller, as per recently released records was: "disciplined for using three co-workers' computers for political purposes and initially lying about it when he worked as a part-time lawyer for the Fairbanks North Star Borough in 2008" And what was the purpose of this unauthorized use of other people's workstations? Nothing less than an attempt to influence an online opinion poll for the Alaska State Republican Party Chairmanship. Miller eventually admitted, "he was using the computers to vote with "different URLs" in an online poll about the state's Republican Party chairman, Randy Ruedrich, whom Mr. Miller wanted removed. Mr. Miller cleared Internet cache files from each of the computers. He also used his own computer to participate in the poll and then cleared his cache. After initially lying about the computer use, he eventually admitted to it in a letter to his supervisor, Rene Broker, the lead borough attorney." Joe Miller eventually resigned from his position at the Boro in the wake of disciplinary action, but only after denying the charges while having deleted years of e-mail that would have included public records.
While we're on the topic of Joe Miller, how about his hypocritical stance on the constitutionality of unemployment insurance. Miller believes that there are no enumerated powers within the Constitution that provide for this benefit. From his interview on Fox News:"Why are unemployment benefits unconstitutional?" asked Fox News' Chris Wallace? "The Constitution provides enumerated powers, answered Miller. I guess my challenge is to anybody that asks, show me the enumerated power. And then look at the 10th amendment that says if it's not done in the Constitution, it's a power that belongs to the state and the people...When pressed on what he would do for the poor if elected, Miller struggled to provide details." However, the controversy does not end there. If Miller has such an aversion to the social benefit that is unemployment insurance than why did he abide his wife's reciept of unemployment compensation after she lost her job for violating nepotism rules?
Another area of federal spending that Miller publicly opposes is farm subsidies. But privately he was more than happy to be a recipient of the very benefits that he is now opposes. How you say? Well as it turns out Miller had received an agricultural subsidy on farmland he once owned in Kansas. Yet, true to form as with the situation surrounding his unauthorized computer use, Miller tried to dance around the farm subsidy issue until he gave up and came clean on this as well. To wit: "Until Monday night, the campaign had also dodged questions as to whether Miller had received federal farm subsidies for land in Kansas, where he once lived. After Alaska Dispatch received Miller's farm subsidy records under the Freedom of Information Act and told the Miller campaign about them on Monday, Miller's staff confirmed he received federal payments for 140 acres of cropland he owned in Kansas between 1990 and 1998. Like the vast majority of farmers in that region, Joe received payment from the USDA in exchange for managing his crops according to government standards," said campaign spokesman Randy DeSoto in an e-mail Monday night."
So, once again, what are the voters supposed to believe? They consistently hear Tea Party candidates preaching the virtues of fiscal rectitude, personal responsibility, smaller government, low taxes, ad infinitum while some of these same candidates are engaging in or have engaged in the very behaviours and activities that they so routinely oppose in their rhetoric. Miller is not the first member of the Tea Party Movement, nor is he likely the last, to be swept up in this type of controversy. The question that begs asking now is how many more of these revelations are going to surface after next Tuesday and then what are all of those who worked so hard for the movement supposed to do when they are stuck with having elected these political charlatans who where supposed to help them take their country back and make it a better place? We've already seen charges of hypocrisy levelled at Sharron Angle and Michele Bachmann related to their positions on government provided health care and their own families benefiting from these programs. That said, who should be surprised by the fact that Joe Miller is now revealed to be a serial hypocrite? The only remaining questions are who will be the next Tea Party personality found to be in the same quandary and just how many of these ticking time bombs presently exist within the movement?
Joe Miller's Wife Collected Unemployment Benefits; http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-50...
Alaska's Joe Miller states opposition to federal minimum wagehttp://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20101004/el_yblog_upshot/alaskas-joe-miller-states-opposition-to-federal-minimum-wage
Senate candidate Joe Miller admits taking farm subsidies; http://alaskadispatch.com/disp...
Remember that horrible 2004 Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ad that helped derail John Kerry's 2004 presidential bid? Well, Bob Perry, the billionaire tycoon who financed that smear campaign is back, and he's underwriting a barrage of dirty ads that target politicians he doesn't like.
...a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.
Then laying out its development, which started thus:
In the first stage, a mature industrial state facing some kind of crisis breeds a new, rural movement that's based on nationalist renewal. This movement invariably rejects reason and glorifies raw emotion, promises to restore lost national pride, co-opts the nation's traditional myths for its own purposes, and insists that the country must be purged of the toxic influence of outsiders and intellectuals who are blamed for their current misery.
(Sound familiar yet?)
In the second stage, the movement takes root, turns into a real political party, and seizes a seat at the table.
I also featured a clip from Countdown of Sharron Angle's latest attack ad on Harry Reid, all about the threat of illegal immigration and crime:
This ad is, in fact, a perfect embodiment of what Paxton was writing about. We already saw this in Arizona with Jan Brewer and SB-1070. The immigrant/crime narrative was a very big part of that, with Brewer making outlandish claims about beheaded bodies in the desert that obviously had no basis in fact, In fact, the entire attempt to link crime and immigration is driven almost entirely by the anti-immigrant logic of proto-fascism, with a sprinkling of a few annecdotal incidents that in turn are highlighted in the media precisely because they fit this narrative so well.
But when one looks at statistics, one discovers that the immigrant/crime connection is precisely the opposite of that alleged: immigrants are far less likely to be perpetrators of crime. If anything, they're more likely to be victimized--particularly undocumented ones who are afraid of turning to the police. That was the reason for LA's Special Order 40, instituted by the very conservative Chief Daryl Gates, precisely to encourage all immigrants to cooperate with police, to enable them to do their job. This not only protected immigrant communities, it protected everyone, since crime allowed to fester in one sub-community may eventually produce threats to others as well.
I recently pointed out in two articles that I wrote, referenced below, that several Tea Party backed candidates are presently running into some strong headwinds as Election Day approaches. Some have tried to dismiss these facts as "progressive desperation". However, for one candidate in particular, Nevada's Sharron Angle, there seems to be some serious desperation within her own campaign. In fact that desperation became so evident that she tried to get a Tea Party fellow traveler to drop out of the race so she could "win." Well that just begs the question: If Angle is such a strong candidate and the Tea Party behind her is so much a force to be reckoned with, then why the need to desperately plead with Scott Ashjian to drop out of the race?
In a meeting held with Nevada Tea Party Chairman Sid James and other movement operatives, Angle tried to make a deal with Ashjian to drop out in order to give her a chance to win. The Party chairman showed a fair degree of desperation himself when he abandoned his support of Ashjian, insisting that Angle will lose unless he withdraws and that there was still time to get his name off the ballot. Angle herself went on to promise just about everything but the Moon, Sun and the Stars to get Ashjian to quit the race. Angle was quoted on tape as saying: "I believe you (Ashjian) can do some real harm, not to Harry Reid but to me...I'm not sure you can win and I'm not sure I can win if you're hurting my chance and that's the part that scares me." She went on to say:" Says the grass roots movement "gives me juice. That's really all I can offer to you (Ashjian) is whatever juice I have, you have as well..."
So there you have it, in the case of Sharron Angle there is no need for "progressive desperation" as there seems to be more than enough of it within the Angle camp. Perhaps this is what was behind the recent major flip flop on Ms. Angle's previous positions on privatizing Social Security and her attitude that unemployment compensation was akin to welfare. Then again, with her race with Harry Reid being a statistical dead heat, there is reason enough for her to be so desperate in trying to get Scott Ashjian out of the race and likewise there is no cause for any desperation on the part of the progressive electorate. As of today, RealClear Politics' average of all polls shows a 0.2-point spread in favor of Harry Reid. I guess that's enough to make any politician desperate with November 2nd just over the horizon.
Tea Party darling, Sharron Angle has apparently decided that politics as usual suits her better than sticking to her previously held Tea Party Movement principles. In an development that has been reported on both the left and the right, Angle has abandoned her previous positions on privatizing both Social Security and the Veterans Administration. Likewise, her attitude that unemployment insurance is welfare has been abondoned for the latest spin du jour. Think I'm putting you on? Well here it is from the conservative organ NewsMax:" In a dramatic shift, Republican U.S. Senate candidate Sharron Angle said Saturday she wouldn't work to privatize Veterans Affairs, dismantle Social Security or dismiss unemployment benefits as welfare... Angle on Saturday denied she had called for the end of the VA...In another slight change Saturday, Angle said of unemployment: "We pay into it, so in some respects, it is an insurance policy that we bought into with our paychecks." She described it previously as a "system of entitlement."
At the same time, another prominent Nevada Republican has decided against Angle and thrown her support to Harry Reid. As reported in yesterday's New York Times: "Harry Reid can now boast a second Republican feather in his cap, of sorts. Less than 24-hours after earning the endorsement of Bill Raggio, a highly influential Republican and Nevada state senator, the Senate majority leader on Friday landed the support of Dema Guinn, the wife of the former governor who died unexpectedly this year."
All of this fits into what I have said in previous posts and that is, that as we get closer to November 2nd, the scrutiny put on the Tea Party Candidates will cause people to have serious second doubts about their positions and the viability of those candidates if they are actually elected. Secondly, that many of the movements leading contenders are nothing more than professional politicians in Tea Party clothing who have jumped on the wave of voter discontent so as to get themselves elected.
Steve Gulitti
10/10/10
Sources:
Nevada's Angle Recasts Position on Public Benefits; http://www.newsmax.com/InsideC...
A funny thing seems to be happening, as we get closer to November 2nd, the level of controversy surrounding the candidacy of several prominent Tea Party candidates seems to be either emerging or increasing. The list spans a who's who of some of the most prominent Tea Party candidates now running on the platform of bringing meaningful change to American politics.
First there's Rick Scott running for Governor in Florida. Scott has been a vociferous opponent of health care reform, having spent millions to oppose reform. However, his former company was the beneficiary of Medicare and Medicaid monies totally in the millions if not billions. In fact even the conservative magazine "The American Spectator" called Scott's company's actions into question: " His business record is also likely to draw fire. Scott was pushed out from Columbia/HCA in 1997 in the midst of a fraud investigation that led to a $1.7 billion settlement on charges that the company overbilled state and federal health care programs. While he was never charged with any wrongdoing himself, Scott was the head of the company - and thus the situation will garner more scrutiny now that he's a political candidate." Then there is an amplifying article that appeared a month later in the Florida paper; The Sun Sentinel, by Sally Kestin: "Rick Scott, who ran a company involved in the nation's largest Medicare fraud case, wants to be Florida's governor...Rick Scott was co-founder and CEO of Columbia/HCA in the 1990s, when the FBI launched a massive, multi-state investigation that led to the company pleading guilty to criminal charges of overbilling the government....Scott considers himself a health care pioneer who significantly cut costs and improved patient care. But his decision to enter the race and his explanation of what occurred at Columbia/HCA is rankling some of those familiar with the fraud scandal."
Next there is Rand Paul, who has called for restraint in health care spending so long as it does not go so far as to impact his own income. Paul's hypocrisy is so obvious that even the Murdoch owned Wall Street Journal could not bear to ignore this fact and reported on it in a mid-May article appearing in it's Washington Wire: "Tea Party favorite Rand Paul has rocketed to the lead ahead of Tuesday's Republican Senate primary here on a resolute pledge to balance the federal budget and slash the size of government. But on Thursday evening, the ophthalmologist from Bowling Green said there was one thing he would not cut: Medicare physician payments In fact, Paul - who says 50% of his patients are on Medicare - wants to end cuts to physician payments under a program now in place called the sustained growth rate, or SGR. "Physicians should be allowed to make a comfortable living," he told a gathering of neighbors in the back yard of Chris and Linda Wakild, just behind the 10th hole of a golf course." So there you have it, doctors are free to run on reforming federal spending so long as their income stream is held harmless. Well if that does not sound a bit hypocritical then what does?
Next on the hit parade of hypocrisy is New York's Gubernatorial candidate, Carl Paladino whom Greg Smith of the New York Daily News says has grown rich thanks to government handouts and favors. According to Smith's research: "In a last-minute bid to keep that lucrative government subsidy, records show he overstated the worth of the company that got the break by including properties he'd already sold off. The millionaire Buffalo businessman, who last week became his party's candidate for governor, has shaped much of his Tea Party message by railing against government spending and vowing Draconian bureaucratic bloodletting. At the same time, he's received millions of dollars in tax breaks over the years, mostly as payback for investing in distressed properties in and around his native Buffalo, where manufacturing jobs have disappeared and the economy has long been in a free fall." Thus what we have in New York State is a Tea Party candidate who seems to have filled his pockets at the public trough but who has now "seen the light" on the excesses of government spending and wants to end it, that is, after he more than got his fill from that very trough.
In addition to these issues, the trials and tribulations of Senate candidate Sharron Angle just seem to keep on coming. Today it was reported that Republican Nevada State Senator Bill Raggio has done something he has never done before, endorsed a Democrat. Raggio is throwing his support behind the embattled incumbent, Harry Reid (D-NV) due to what he considers Angle's glaring shortcomings as a state level politico. In Raggio's own words: "What is difficult to overlook is her record of being totally ineffective as a four-term assemblywomen, her inability or unwillingness to work with others, even within her own party, and her extreme positions on issues such as Medicare, social security, education, veterans affairs and many others," Raggio said of Angle...He also challenged his Republican colleagues who have lined up behind Angle's campaign."Some supporters tell me we need to support her because we need her vote in the U.S. Senate as a Republican and she 'can't do much harm as a junior back bencher,'" said Raggio. "Since when should this be the criteria on how we select and vote for a U.S. Senator to represent our State?"
So what are the voters to believe and how are they to vote for the likes of Paladino, Paul, Scott and Angle among others come election day. Isn't the Tea Party Movement supposed to represent some sort of catharsis in American politics, a movement to cleanse the system of rot and decay? Is it not supposed to be a citizens revolt against business and politcs as usual, both in Washington and at the state and local level? If so, how is it that individuals of such questionable qualities and backgrounds became some of it's leading candidates? Has the movement been hijacked by the very political slicksters that it's supposed to oppose? Are these accomplished political operatives and savy businessmen in the process of taking the rank and file Tea Partiers for the political ride of their lives? Have professional politicians on the right jumped on the bandwagon of reform and revolt all the while hoping to just harness this energy for their own political ends? Or is it the case that the aforementioned candidates, like Paul of Tarsus, have "seen the light" on their own personal road to Damascus. Are they like Constantine at the Battle of Milivan Bridge who looked into the sky, saw a cross, and then went on to win the battle and spread Christianity, the new and revolutionary religon,across the Roman Empire? My educated guess is that it's the former not the latter.
Steven J. Gulitti
10/8/10
Sources:
"Obamacare Opponent Rick Scott Launches Bid for Governor of Florida"; http://spectator.org/blog/2010...
"Rick Scott, who ran a company involved in the nation's largest Medicare fraud case, wants to be Florida's governor"; http://articles.sun-sentinel.c...
"WSJ: Washington Wire; May 14, 2010, 9:22 AM ET Rand Paul: Cut Spending But Not Medicare Doctor Payments"; http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/...
Tea Party-backed GOP governor hopeful Carl Paladino fighting for $1.4 million tax break
:http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/09/20/2010-09-20_huge_tax_break_fits_carl_to_a_tea_big_govt_foe_fights_for_14m_windfall.html#ixzz11ouPpyw6:
The woman gunning for Sen. Harry Reid's (D-NV) job doesn't believe that autism exists.
Yes, you heard right. Sharron Angle believes that the neurodevelopmental disorder know to medical science as "autism" is actually a government-backed hoax to redistribute wealth from hardworking health insurers to pesky kids and their greedy parents.
Angle was caught on tape promising to abolish mandatory insurance coverage for autism. "Everything that they want to throw at us is covered under 'autism'," Angle told the American Association of Underwriters this summer, tracing scare quotes with her fingers as she said "autism."
Care2's Kristina Chew, the mother of a 13-year-old boy with autism, responds to Angle's airy dismissal:
...By saying that you don't think there should be health care for autism, I take it that you don't think that children, and individuals, with disabilities are in need of such things-living with their families and in their communities, healthy and safe, being loved and cared for? Being treated as we would all like to be?
The fact that Angle opposes mandated coverage for private insurers should concern voters, especially since she wants to privatize all government health care programs. In other words, Angle wants to turn health care over to the private sector and stamp out public competition. And yet, Angle's campaign admits that the candidate and her husband receive both government health care and a Civil Service pension, according to Eric Kleefeld of TPM. If Angle is so morally opposed to government health care, she should set an example by declining the coverage.
Andy Kroll of Mother Jones has more on Angle's record: She once told impregnated rape victims to buck up and make "lemons out of lemonade" by bearing their attacker's child. Angle also denounced people on unemployment insurance as "spoiled."
Food vs. health care
It may soon get even harder for poor families to make ends meet. The Senate is poised to slash the extra food stamp benefits in the stimulus before they expire. The Senate already raided $6.7 billion from the the so-called "food stamp cookie jar" to bail out Medicaid and save teachers' jobs at the state level. Now they want to take even more money to fund the child nutrition bill.
The cuts would fund a marginal improvement in school lunches, notes Monica Potts of TAPPED. That's all well and good, but why provide slightly better weekday lunches if the poorest children get less at every other meal?
Annie Lowery of the Washington Independent interviews anti-hunger activist Joel Berg about the cuts. Berg says that if the cuts go through, families will have to make do with considerably less than the current $4.50 per person per day. He notes that Congress wants to cut food stamp benefits in the face of rising food prices.
When families make do with less, healthy foods like fruits and vegetables will be the first casualty. Berg argues that it is economically short-sighted to prematurely terminate one of the most efficient economic stimuli in the entire stimulus package:
And we know that we aren't only feeding people. We come at this from a moral position, a nutritional position, and an economic recovery position. This cut is so insane from an economic position as well - we know food stamps are the most effect form of stimulus. The jury is still out on parts of the stimulus - but the jury isn't out on food stamps. It was a 1,000 percent, beyond home run grand slam success, if you'll excuse me mixing metaphors. The money went to people who needed it, rapidly, and without a lot of bureaucracy.
In the Progressive, Ruth Conniff has a personal take on the politics of improving school lunches. Her kids' school got a USDA Fresh Fruits and Vegetables grant to introduce more local produce into school meals.
"Bridalplasty"
The laws of Reality TV: 1) The most important thing in life is to be very beautiful so that a man will want to marry you; 2) You have until your wedding day to make yourself look like someone else.
The E! network is launching a new reality show in which brides-to-be receive free cosmetic surgery to make them look acceptable for their Special Day, as Stephanie Hallett reports at Ms. blog. Hallett notes that armchair psychiatrists are already diagnosing the contestants with Body Dysmorphic Disorder, a condition that causes sufferers to become obsessed with imagined physical imperfections.
Hallett also argues that competitive plastic surgery shows like Bridalplasty and The Swan are dramatic exaggerations. Labeling the contestants as "sick" or "crazy" implies that they are limited-edition freaks, not individuals on the extreme end of a continuum of self-loathing that affects most women.
Ectopic pregnancy
Anti-choicers have already attacked hormonal birth control as crypto-abortion. Their next target may be lifesaving surgery for a deadly complication of pregnancy. At RH Reality Check, Lon Newman writes about a young woman that survived a life threatening ectopic pregnancy.
An ectopic pregnancy occurs when a fertilized egg takes root outside the uterus, nearly always in a fallopian tube. Tubal pregnancies are among the deadliest gynecological emergencies because the woman can rapidly bleed to death if the tube ruptures. Obviously, once a fertilized egg takes root outside the uterus, there is no chance that it will survive. However, some anti-choice extremists still maintain that treating ectopic pregnancies is a kind of abortion.
One of the ectopic pregnancy survivor's friends actually told her that she should have respected "God's will" and refused lifesaving surgery. "I have had friends who said that I should have 'gone with God's will,' imposing their beliefs on my will to live," the woman said.
Some friend.
This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about health care by members of The Media Consortium. It is free to reprint. Visit the Pulse for a complete list of articles on health care reform, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, environment, health care and immigration issues, check out The Audit, The Mulch, and The Diaspora. This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of leading independent media outlets.
What word would you use to describe a candidate for the U.S. Senate, who just happens to be a Tea Party favorite, that publically advocates repealing health care reform, opposes the regulation of health care insurers while at the same time benefits from health care provided by a federal government agency? If the word hypocrite comes to mind, you just hit the jackpot. Not necessarily intended to be a tongue in cheek quip, but our winner of the hypocrite of the day award goes to Nevada's Sharron Angle, who just happens to hail from the land of slot machines and crap tables.
Yeah, you read me correctly, this morning's "Politico's Morning Score" blew the cover off of Ms. Angle's dirty little secret and possibly a hole in her campaign to be the next U.S. Senator from Nevada. Needless to say, this isn't exactly the kind of publicity that the Tea Party Movement is looking for either. Its one thing for the Tea Party Movement to be lampooned by the political highbrows on MSNBC and the Daily Show who can be dismissed as elitist by the party faithful. It's quite yet another for one of its premier candidates to so seriously stumble just weeks before an election that is supposed to be the movement's coming out party in the big leagues of electoral politics. Politico's Morning Score reports: "Angle's campaign acknowledged to Nevada journalist Jon Ralston Monday that both the candidate and her husband receive health care from the federal government. Spokeswoman Ciara Matthews said in a statement: "Mr. Ted Angle receives his pension through the (federal) Civil Service Retirement System. While it is not supplemented by the federal government, current civil servants pay into the program to pay the schedule of those already retired - much like how the Social Security Program works today." But there's more to it than just the machinations of the Angle family, another prominent mouthpiece of the Tea Party Movement, Michelle Bachmann, a regular critic of government health care is also a beneficiary of the very programs she rails against. According to MediaMatters.com:" Angle isn't the only right-wing Republican to bash government involvement in health care while benefiting from it. Back in May, the Minnesota Independent reported that Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), a frequent critic of "socialized medicine," was profiting from a government-run health program in Minnesota through her husband's Christian mental health clinic." A Christian clinic?, What became of the values of honesty and truthfulness, or are they to be convienently ignored when politics is what's on the menu?
So there you have it, some of the leading lights of the movement that is supposed to "take back our country" and bring us back to "the values and wisdom of our Founding Fathers", have found it in their best interest to talk you out of the need for health care reform and insurance company oversight while they and their families are more than happy to benefit from programs they publically oppose. These Tea Party elites, who regularly blast the established Washington elites, have seen fit to insulate themselves and their families from life's vicissitudes while admonishing the rest of us to" work hard, be frugal and trust in the markets and what made America great in the past." The hypocrisy in all of this is obvious and undeniable. What is not immediately obvious is to what extent these revelations just weeks before the mid-term elections will give the independent voter cause for concern as it regards supporting candidates like Sharron Angle or re-electing a Michelle Bachmann. I doubt it will do much to dissuade the rank and file Tea Party foot soldier, but it may. That said, what the rank and file intend to do really is of secondary import, it's the independent voter who holds the key to both this election and the next.
If you close your eyes and listen to Sharron Angle, you might think she is deliberately channeling Sarah Palin. The Tea Party has pinned its hopes on Angle to defeat Harry Reid in the Nevada Senate race and thus far like Palin, when it comes to public misstatements, Angle is a serial offender. Consider the following quote from: "This Tea Party Candidate is No Jefferson": " The strange inconsistency of the Tea Partiers reached new depths recently when Nevada's Sharron Angle, running against Harry Reid for the US Senate, sat for an interview with Fox News on Monday. She told her interviewer, when asked about her relationship with the press, "We needed the press to be our friend. We wanted them to ask the questions we want to answer, so that they report the news the way we want it to be reported.... The Tea Partiers love to claim that they represent the "Real America." Yet, here is their favorite candidate in the Nevada Senate race advocating for some sort of docile, captive press. What would a "real American" like Thomas Jefferson think?" Well suffice it to say that Jefferson or any other true Jeffersonian would find Angle's remarks anything but in keeping with our deeply held democratic values of a free press. So much for the "true patriotism" of the Tea Party in Nevada. The real question for the Tea Party and Angle is, what is the actual effect of such statements on the rank and file Nevada voter?
Angle's views on the press are just the latest in a continuing series of public pratfalls. So much so that even Fox News' Carl Cameron had to point out the following: "What precisely she's advocated; phasing out Social Security and Medicare, withdrawing from the United Nations, abolishing the EPA and much of the tax code and banning all abortions. But it's not just the positions that Angle has taken, it's how she's defended them. She suggested that entitlement programs "spoiled our citizenry", that it may be part of God's plan that rape victims get pregnant and to some she even seems to sanction armed insurrection, a "Second Amendment remedy" is what she called it, if Harry Reid isn't beaten at the ballot box." So, according to Angle, if Harry Reid is legally reelected, it's legitimate for the citizens of Nevada to holster up and do something about it. That's a strangely undemocratic and thus unpatriotic line of reasoning in my political playbook.
What does this all mean for one of the Tea Party's rising stars? Well if poll results are any guide the bottom line is bad news for Angle, the Tea Party and the Nevada G.O.P. The latest findings from the conservative Rasmussen Reports show Reid has now jumped ahead of Angle for the first time. The poll showed 45 percent of likely voters favored Reid, while 43 percent supported Angle. Earlier polls had Angle ahead of Reid 46 percent to 43 percent. Once considered a sure loser, Reid has seen his poll numbers climb and he now has a new lease on political life, thanks to Sharron Angle's continuing gaffes. Likewise his own attack ads painting her as too extreme are starting to pay off with the voters because his claims have started to make sense. The public perception of Angle as to extreme has now cost her support even among women and Republican voters. Polling conducted for the Las Vegas Review Journal by Mason-Dixon Polling and Research Inc., primarily conducted to measure the effects of Angle's opposition to extending unemployment benefits showed: "Angle is also known for her other radical views, like her interest in phasing out Social Security and Medicare, to doing away with federal agencies such as the Education Department to cut spending and developing Yucca Mountain into a nuclear reprocessing facility...These same radical views are also cited as the cause for Angle's declining support among Republicans and women voters. The poll showed that her Republican support has dropped from 81% to 70%, and her support among women dropped from 38% to 33%."
I would predict that as we get closer to November 2010 and people begin to pay more attention to the upcoming election, the candidates that espouse the more radical platforms will see their political fortunes fade with each passing day. On the eve of election day, their radically wild statements will come home to haunt them and when voters go into the voting booth they will ask themselves: "Do I really want to elect someone who wants to phase out Social Security or Medicare?
Steven J. Gulitti
N.Y.C. 8/6/10
Sources:
This Tea Party Candidate is No Jefferson
Even Fox News Can't Hide Sharron Angle's Wingnuttery in Their Special on the Mid-Term Elections
