New GOP Rules for Discussing the President

We're still trying to get used to the idea of Democratic nominee Barack Obama actually being President of the United States.

To help us get acclimated, the wingnut freakazoids have kindly provided criticism that follows the new GOP Rules for Discussing the President. Steve Benen explains.

DEPT. OF POTS AND KETTLES.... Either the president's conservative critics have very short memories, or they assume we do.

SNIP

The irony is almost overwhelming. A loyal Bushie, who heard his boss spend years engaging in shameless demagoguery (see "clouds, mushroom" and "uranium, from Africa") based on nothing but neocon fantasies, believes presidents have to keep their rhetoric in check and never forget to be "truthful." Sure, Blakeman, tell us another one.

Keep in mind, Obama's dire warnings about the economy are well grounded in reality. It's not "insane" to fear an economic collapse given the situation we're in. The president has a choice -- pretend the news isn't scary, or give honest assessments while vowing to act. Bush preferred the prior approach; Obama prefers the latter.

What's more, have you noticed the bizarre double-standards we've seen emerge in recent weeks?

When Bush uses over-the-top language to convince Americans about perceived security threat, he's being "presidential." When Obama issues dire warnings about the economy, he's being "pessimistic."

When Bush ignores the congressional minority, he's being "principled." When Obama engages the congressional minority but declines to give them what they want, he's being "partisan."

When Bush trashes constitutional norms, it's evidence of "seriousness." When Obama is in the Oval Office without a jacket, he's being "disrespectful to the presidency."

When liberals criticize Bush during a crisis, they're traitors who are aiding and abetting the enemy. When conservatives criticize Obama during a crisis, they are doing their patriotic duty.

Good to know.

There's more: "New GOP Rules for Discussing the President" >>

"It's Not A Game!"

As Josh says, this is "Exactly the case he needs to be making on TV and in some events around the country."



Here's the full speech.

Here's the transcript.

There's more: ""It's Not A Game!"" >>

"Are These Folks Serious?"

From the Huffington Post, "President Barack Obama says the time for talk on an economic recovery package is over and "the time for action is now." "

Speaking at the Energy Department, Obama made a fresh plea for the stimulus plan that the Senate is debating. He cited the latest bad economic news of jobless claims as another reason for quick action.

He said: "The time for talk is over, the time for action is now."

He also launched a shot at critics while talking about energy, questioning, "are these folks serious?"

Now, I read the other day that critics of this plan ridiculed our notion that we should use part of the money to modernize the entire fleet of federal vehicles to take advantage of state of the art fuel efficiency. This is what they call pork. You know the truth. It will not only save the government significant money over time, it will not only create manufacturing jobs for folks who are making these cars, it will set a standard for private industry to match. And so when you hear these attacks deriding something of such obvious importance as this, you have to ask yourself -- are these folks serious? Is it any wonder that we haven't had a real energy policy in this country?

For the last few years, I've talked about these issues with Americans from one end of this country to another. And Washington may not be ready to get serious about energy independence, but I am. And so are you. And so are the American people.

During his speech Obama also issued a strong critique of the GOP's economic policies, even though he didn't utter the party's name. He told the audience that:

In the last few days, we've seen proposals arise from some in Congress that you may not have read but you'd be very familiar with because you've been hearing them for the last 10 years, maybe longer. They're rooted in the idea that tax cuts alone can solve all our problems; that government doesn't have a role to play; that half-measures and tinkering are somehow enough; that we can afford to ignore our most fundamental economic challenges -- the crushing cost of health care, the inadequate state of so many of our schools, our dangerous dependence on foreign oil.

So let me be clear: Those ideas have been tested, and they have failed. They've taken us from surpluses to an annual deficit of over a trillion dollars, and they've brought our economy to a halt. And that's precisely what the election we just had was all about. The American people have rendered their judgment. And now is the time to move forward, not back. Now is the time for action.

There's more: ""Are These Folks Serious?"" >>

Why Obama Can Never Please the Repugs

Because, as the Rude Pundit explains so clearly, the repugs are motherfuckers, and it's ridiculous to expect them to do any other than fuck their mothers.

We don't know what Barack Obama actually said to Republican members of Congress in his closed-door meetings with them yesterday regarding his stimulus plan. But we do know one thing for sure: it accomplished nothing. This is the way it's gonna go, and if you've paid attention at all, you know the steps: Obama will concede shit and Republicans will ask for more (even though they already got more tax cuts than anyone fucking needs), Obama will concede more shit and Republicans will ask for more (even though they're gonna get the family planning funding taken out), Obama will concede more shit and Republicans will ask for more, and then when the vote comes, Republicans will vote against it, saying that no one listened to them and fuck that Obama for lying about bipartisanship. Yet the legislation will have passed in a watered down form from the deep infrastructure and other spending so desperately needed to, you know, create jobs, which will, you know, create taxable income, which will, you know, help actually pay for shit some day.

Obama better know a simple fact: they fucking hate him. Right now, Obama represents the fact that everything they believed was a complete failure. For making that clear to the American people, they fucking despise him. They hate his majority, they hate his coattails, they hate that all over the country people are supporting his ideas. Republicans have nothing right now, which means they have nothing to lose by trying to drag Obama into their pit of shit. They'll smile and say it was a good conversation, but they're waiting in the back halls of the Capitol to fuckin' shiv Obama and laugh while he bleeds. And try to force Americans back into their crooked arms.

That's the thing about motherfuckers. You can tell them, "Okay, you can fuck your mothers, but only for an hour a day." They might agree, but sure as you're reading this, the second they walk away, they will...well, by now, you know.

Obama's damn near the smartest sumbitch in the country right now, and a hell of a poker player. So I still hold out hope that Obama does know this, and that he is giving the repugs rope so that at the last minute, after they reject even his most generous overtures, he can whip the real stimulus legislation out, get it passed by the dems, sign it and tell the repugs to fuck off and die.

There's more: "Why Obama Can Never Please the Repugs" >>

Real Bipartisanship

The indispensable Rude Pundit explains how bipartisanship should work in the Obama era. (Warning: X-rated)

Well, of course Barack Obama took the oath of office again. The man knows who he's dealing with: the petulant little fucks of the right who will do anything they can to invalidate his presidency.

SNIP

Here’s what bipartisanship meant to Republicans: let’s say a Republican and a Democrat are stuck on a desert island. The Republican knows how to survive in the wild, the Democrat knows how to build a raft. They need each other, right? They’re stuck there, and while they may hate each other, they gotta work together or they’re gonna die on the island. While the Democrat is, you know, building the raft, the Republican is gathering coconuts, keeping the fire lit, you know, that kind of shit. It’s all nice and cooperative. And then, when the raft is done, the Republican slits the throat of the Democrat, eats his flesh, drinks his blood, and uses his bones and his clothes for a sail. Bye-bye, island.

Here’s the Rude Pundit's deal: we’ll be bipartisan if you apologize. Not just an eye-rolling “We’re sorry.” Not good enough. We each need to come up with a way for Republicans to apologize. For the Rude Pundit, it’s simple. Blow jobs. He wants to get blow jobs from Republicans. Every time he meets a Republican, he wants to just point at his cock and have them nod, get on their knees. And blow him.

I'll take public professions of belief in and support for evolution, gay marriage, secular humanism, abortion on demand, drastic measures to reverse global warming, and the prosecution of George W. Bush for Desertion of his Military Post in a Time of War.

How do you want repugs to demonstrate bipartisanship?

Read the whole thing.

Cross-posted at They Gave Us A Republic ....

There's more: "Real Bipartisanship" >>

The AARP is going to roll over the republicans like a Mack truck this fall

In what has to be absolutely the most utterly stupid political move of the modern era, the Senate republicans have used their penchant for obstructionism and obstreperation to cut Medicare payments to physicians. (It passed the House in a bipartisan landslide.) I first posted about this a week ago, and at that time I said "I'll be keeping an eye on the AARP website after the recess. If they get in on the act and start calling out Senators by name, Katy bar the door."

Well, they didn't even wait until Congress is back next week. The AARP has already taken after Arlen Specter.

"We are deeply troubled that Senator Specter voted to block a bill with bipartisan support that would have preserved patients’ access to their doctors and improved Medicare for the 44 million Americans who depend o­n it,” said Estella Hyde, AARP Pennsylvania State President. “For the sake of older Americans, people with disabilities and military families, we urge Senator Specter to listen to his constituents and reconsider his vote when the bill comes up again after the congressional recess.”

In addition to preventing a 10 percent cut to payments to doctors, the Medicare bill would have: helped keep premiums fair; strengthened protections for lower income beneficiaries; improved Medicare’s coverage of preventive services, and made Medicare more efficient through electronic prescribing. The Senate is currently scheduled to reconsider H.R. 6331 immediately following the July 4th recess.

“Because of this vote, the Senate went home for July 4th recess leaving care for our nation’s seniors, disabled individuals, and military families hanging in the balance,” said Peter Lund, M.D., president of the Pennsylvania Medical Society. “We call o­n Senator Specter to reconsider his vote and return to Washington to do what’s right – vote to ensure patient access to care and improve health security for 44 million Americans.”

Throughout the debate o­n Medicare legislation, AARP, AMA, and the Pennsylvania Medical Society have engaged their members in the fight to keep Medicare fair and protect access to doctors.

Hundreds of thousands of AARP supporters, including 36,826 in Pennsylvania, called and emailed Congress, signed petitions, wrote letters to their local papers, and participated in Keep Medicare Fair events around the country over the last several weeks.

In addition, more than 41,000 patients and physicians called Congress in June through the AMA grassroots hotline, and the AMA is airing new radio and television ads that urge opponents of H.R. 6331 to put patients’ access to care before insurance profits by voting for the bill as soon as they return to Washington from their holiday recess.

Now I am not one to look a gift horse in the mouth - and the republicans have delivered us a fine filly with this latest bit of wingnutty goodness. But how unbelievably out of touch are the Senate republicans that they would pull this stunt?

At least the Democrats don't seem to be pissing away this opportunity. Dick Durbin went on the attack today, using a national radio address to call out republicans for failing to back the bill to stave off the Medicare cuts. "It's time for the Republican senators who are filibustering this measure to put our seniors and our military families ahead of private insurance companies and let the Senate pass this bill as soon as possible," Durbin said.

The current occupant and the obstructionist pricks on the right side of the aisle in the upper chamber don't like the bill because it includes offsetting cuts to insurance companies that use Medicare money to offer private health care coverage to about 20 percent of seniors.

I find the whole spectacle surreal. I am loving the show, but that doesn't mean I understand thing one about the thinking that went into this idiotic move.

Seniors vote. They never miss a chance to cast a ballot. They are also more likely to live on a fixed income and to rely on "safety net" programs, so the prices of food and fuel have already taken a toll on Seniors and affected the chances of Seniors voting for republicans in November. The same costs that are squeezing the budgets of Seniors are squeezing the estimated 20,000 senior nutrition programs across the country that serve millions of elderly and frail Americans. Most needs are still being met, but advocates for the elderly and the disabled are worried that the ability to continue meeting those needs is in peril, and Seniors could end up going hungry. The worries are compounded by spiraling prices coupled with the flat funding, and donations are off thanks to an ailing economy.

"All of that is generating a lot of anxiety," said Bob Anderson, associate director of the Metropolitan Area Agency on Aging in Minneapolis-St. Paul.

Across the country, nearly 60 percent of the estimated 5,000 programs that belong to the Meals on Wheels Association of America have lost volunteers who can't afford gas, said Enid A. Borden, president and CEO of the program that has been providing meals to Americans in need since 1954.

Nearly half the programs have eliminated routes or consolidated meal services. Some 38 percent have switched to delivering frozen rather than hot meals, while about 30 percent are cutting personal visits from five days a week to one.

"We're in a crisis and it's just getting worse and worse," said Borden, who is urging Congress to increase money for senior nutrition programs by at least 10 percent.

Two pending bills don't come close to that amount, said Peggy Ingraham, the association's senior vice president for public policy. A House subcommittee is considering a 6.5 percent increase for senior nutrition programs for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, while a Senate subcommittee is considering a 5.7 percent increase. The federal earmark for the current fiscal year is $758 million.

Cuts are already inevitable in New York City, said Marcia Stein, executive director of Citymeals on Wheels, where meetings are under way this week to work out details such as who will no longer receive meals.

"We have no choice," she said. "It's like trying to take a size 10 foot and putting it into a size 7 shoe."

Meals on Wheels volunteers have already started dropping out of the program, unable to afford the gasoline to deliver the hot meals to the seniors they serve. Other agencies have altered routes and schedules and changed the way they deliver the necessary nutrition and transportation services that allow seniors to stay in their own homes.

And all of this is going to impact how the demographic with the highest turnout of all votes this fall. Mitch McConnell, you magnificent bastard, don't you never die...

There's more: "The AARP is going to roll over the republicans like a Mack truck this fall" >>