Will Repugs Choose Practical or Palin?

Turn your eyes for a moment from the catastrophic wreckage of Democratic Party hopes and dreams here in Kentucky and contemplate the stinking, bloated corpse of the national Republican Party.

Right-wing ideologues are suffering from massive cognitive dissonance (not to mention a healthy helping of denial). They can't grasp why their party imploded because the vast majority of them always supported Bush and his policies and still do. A few conservative critics have blasted him for lacking fiscal discipline, but most right-wing pundits liked Bush's policies just fine -- until the public turned on him and on McCain.

SNIP

When you add all these things up, there is nowhere for the GOP in its current form to go. Any action it takes to shore up one group will hurt it more with another. If the right continues to make the culture war its main strategy, it will shore up its base with working-class white men in rural areas. But this "Deliverance" strategy, in which the GOP lets the Democrats have every part of the country where large numbers of people live together and targets lone white men surrounded by vast open spaces, is only a ticket to dominance in places like Utah, Arkansas, Idaho and Oklahoma, with their rich treasure trove of 22 electoral votes. The post-election map already shows a weird correlation between unpopulated areas and Republican votes -- not a trend the GOP should be encouraging.

In the coming years we will witness a war between conservatism's pragmatists and its true believers. If the pragmatists win, America will have finally arrived at the era of broad political consensus that pundits erroneously forecast after Lyndon Johnson's demolition of Barry Goldwater in 1964. If the true believers win, we may witness a Palin candidacy in 2012 -- and a likely electoral landslide that will bury the GOP so deeply it may never dig out.

Read the whole thing.

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

There's more: "Will Repugs Choose Practical or Palin?" >>

What Else?

Other than incompetence, bloodlust and fear, what does the Republican party stand for at this point?

There's more: "What Else?" >>

It's Friday September 28, 2007 -- Has Rush Apologized Yet?

Yesterday we saw a firestorm over Rush Limbaugh's defamatory statements about our troops. John Stolz of VoteVets.org made some great comments right here. Democratic politicians across the country rose in indignation. Nancy Pelosi's blog The Gavel featured comments by Representatives Frank Pallone , and Jan Schakowsky. Hurray for our side.

The question is what will happen today. Will Democrats, feeling good about themselves for jumping on Rush, simply take the weekend off letting the issue fade away, or will the fight be renewed?

We know what Republicans would do, they would keep on the topic until they achieved the total and public humiliation of Rush and any Republican Presidential Candidate who didn't condemn his comments. What are we going to do? I want to see the Republican candidates questioned on the issue. I want to see an ad in the New York Times and the Washington Post calling shame on Limbaugh. Don't you?

There's more: "It's Friday September 28, 2007 -- Has Rush Apologized Yet?" >>

Surprise! Another Republican Real Estate Deal

Imagine my surprise when I checked in at the Chicago Tribune today and saw the story on Congressman Jerry Weller (R-I11) and his questionable actions on foreign real estate transactions:

Weller, a southwest suburban congressman with a fondness for Latin America, has sunk a large share of his investment capital into a land development in Nicaragua. But he didn't declare the extent of his holdings on his required congressional disclosures, and he indicated dramatically different purchase prices for the land in American and Nicaraguan records.

This wasn't just an ommission. The Tribune reports that he underreported the number of properties he owned in 2005 and that he overreported the purchase prices of several properties:

In his 2004 disclosure, Weller listed the sale of a Capitol Hill condo for between $250,001 and $500,000 on April 8 and three days later reported buying Lot 2 in San Juan for between $50,001 and $100,000.

Property records in Rivas show Weller bought the 2.6-acre parcel at Playa Coco for 50,000 cordobas, or about $2,777.

That's a $47,323 discrepency on the low end. And, Weller did the same thing repeatedly, in 2002 and 2005. In one case, he bought a property for $4,333, reported the purchase at $50,000 to $100,000 and then sold the property for $95,000. I don't know enough about taxation of foreign investments but that seems to me to be a significant capital gain that was underreported.

Now why would he hide his land investments and the extent of them. The answer looks like he wanted to influence the CAFTA vote. Apparently, Weller was a staunch advocate leading the debate in favor of the narrowly passed agreement:

His investment got a boost from the narrowly passed Central America Free Trade Agreement, which Weller pitched in 2005 as a tool to enable businesses in his hard-pressed district to sell tractors and food to Latin America. CAFTA also includes additional legal protection for American investors, including those who have purchased lots from Weller.

What he didn't say was that, while he publicly pushed CAFTA, Weller privately was pursuing his land development, some 2,000 miles away. The House approved the trade pact in July 2005 by only two votes, 217-215.

So, in 2005 when he was publically supporting legislation that would directly benefit him, Weller disclosed none of this. Perhaps he didn't want his buddies to know that he could care less about tractors and far more about his own pockets? Because, in 2006, once the CAFTA deal was sealed, he did make more substantial disclosures.

Further in, the story reports that Weller doesn't disclose anything about his wife's holdings, feigning complete ignorance about what she owns and what her finances are. Yeah, I have no idea how much money my husband makes or what real estate he owns.

The theme of all of this is familiar. We have Congressman after Congressman - most often Republicans - who use real estate transactions to hide payoffs or to hide profits from votes for self-interests.

Do they send these people to a school for this or is it Republican tribal communication - you know, passed on verbally from one generation of corruption to another?

There's more: "Surprise! Another Republican Real Estate Deal" >>

Hawkeye State Shakedown

Today marks the quadrennial shakedown in Ames, Iowa of GOP Presidential hopefuls, the Iowa Straw Poll.

[I]t's a quadrennial effort by the state Republican Party to bring the GOP candidates into the state to compete in a poll that has nothing to do with delegates but a lot to do with headlines and publicity. It also says something about a candidate's organizational ability to get his or her supporters to turn out and take part in the poll. But in addition to all that, it's a fundraising gimmick by the Iowa GOP. To participate, each person must pay $35. It makes a lot of money for the Iowa Republican Party.

As much of a boondoggle it would seem to be on the surface, it at least allows candidates a chance to preen a bit, and to be dealt a bit of free publicity should they win (whether or not that free publicity offsets all the damn pork sandwiches they had to buy is another matter), but as a precursor as to who'll actually win the nomination or the presidency....well, not so much. But anytime GOPers get the shakedown, I'm cool with that.

There's more: "Hawkeye State Shakedown" >>

Is There an Anti-War GOP Voting Bloc?

"All We Are Saying, is Give War a Chance!"

The short answer is, "No." Which will ultimately be bad news for GOP presidential contender Ron Paul. At last night's debate at Drake University, his once again was the lonely anti-war voice, drowned out by the pro-war chorus provided by the other seven candidates participating.

"Just come home," dissented Texas Rep. Ron Paul, the lone advocate of a quick troop withdrawal from Iraq on a presidential campaign debate stage. He said there had never been a good reason to go to war in the first place.

"Has he forgotten about 9/11?" interjected former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, referring to the 2001 terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center.

Amazing; even to other Republicans, whatever the question, that answer is always, "9/11." Still, this iconoclastic view of the Iraq War and his Libertarian views on a variety of issues has endeared Paul to a very vocal, bipartisan fanbase, on the Web at least. But, one need only ask Howard Dean how a rabid netroots campaign can whither against the onslaught of an establishment candidate. And Dean was polling at much higher than 2% when his campaign derailed.

The complex calculus of the 2008 Presidential election all boils down to one simple answer: Iraq. Iraq is and will be the defining issue of this campaign, for Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Greens and even the International Reformed Sober Brotherhood of Rastafarians of Greater Metropolitan Hartford, Connecticut. (Okay, I made up that last one). And, unfortunately for Paul, there simply is no anti-war voting bloc to be had in the Republican Party.

Most Americans think the Iraq war is going badly — two-thirds say so in the latest CBS News/New York Times Poll — and for most, the bad results they see now also
mean the decision to go war was wrong in the first place.

That connection doesn't hold for Republicans, though: They tend to call the war the right thing no matter how they see it going. That's not just loyalty to President Bush — many in his party do in fact question how he is handling Iraq now — but it's also because of their views on how best to fight terrorism; their still-salient memories of Saddam Hussein; and their willingness to give the administration credit for going after perceived threats, past and present.

Republicans' views of how the war is going are mixed — just under half say things are bad and just over half, 53 percent, say they're going well. But a far greater number, 73 percent, nonetheless support the war by calling it the right thing to have done. [Emphasis mine]

Arguments could be made Ron Paul's campaign has many obstacles having nothing to do with his view upon the war. Regardless, since he is so obviously out of sync with the tune to which the GOP voter is marching, the tune that is leading the party and the other candidates right off the cliffs of sanity, he simply has no chance of garnering the party's nomination. Libertarian Party, maybe; Republican Party, not a chance.

There's more: "Is There an Anti-War GOP Voting Bloc?" >>

The Crumbling Republican Party

Karl Rove's dream of turning the United States into a GOP monopoly has become a nightmare for his once seemingly all-powerful party. Signs of weakness are everywhere. Today's case in point has popped up in Kansas, which was once the reddest of red states, where the GOP has just created a loyalty committee.

I'm not kidding, although any sane person would think this was a joke.

At a mid-year convention this weekend, the state party changed it's constitution, no less, to create the committee. The body will strip GOP officials of their party titles if they help a Democrat get elected. New Republican Party Chairman Kris Kobach sought the change and will chair the committee.

Kobach is best known as a failed Congressional candidate of far, far right, anti-abortion, anti-immigrant views.

I have to agree with Andy Wollen, chairman of the Kansas Traditional Republican Majority, an organization of moderate Republicans.

“I don’t know whether to laugh or cry,” Wollen said. “It’s just the latest demonstration that these people just flat don’t understand people.”

It's also the latest demonstration of why the Republican Party is in trouble. If you have to keep people in line by clubbing them, you've already lost.

What Kobach and gang can't seem to realize is that people are running from the Republican Party because of the radical right's ideas and their love of bullying. I suspect the new loyalty committee will do nothing than drive more people from the state GOP.

Kobach and gang and the rest of the radical right are the best thing that have ever happened to Democrats.

[cross post from In This Moment]

There's more: "The Crumbling Republican Party" >>

Mitt Romney Will Do Anything To Win The Dittohead Vote

Here we see him holding a sign demonstrating he is a divider, not a uniter.




Thanks to TMZ who obtained these

photos of presidential candidate Mitt Romney trying to win over grammatically challenged South Carolinians Thursday by holding a sign that said, "No to Obama, Osama and Chelsea's Moma."

You have to be a really desperate candidate to hold a sign linking two of your political opponents with the world's most wanted terrorist. It speaks volumes about the level of hate the dittohead wing of the Republican party has for America and the lengths Republican candidates will go to suck up to them.

Hey Mitt, I hear you might win the KKK vote with a photo op of you sporting a white power tattoo.

There's more: "Mitt Romney Will Do Anything To Win The Dittohead Vote" >>

The Very Models of the Modern Republican Party

Scarecrow over at FireDogLake makes some really pertinent comments about the modern Republican party. Mostly he reviews the apparently cogent comments of Paul Krugman, comments that remain hidden behind the New York Times firewall (defeated here) but in doing so he says something revealing about the Republican party of George W. Bush.

Bush is no longer the aberration, but rather the model for most of the current crop of Republican Presidential candidates.

That explains why Fox News is doing everything it can to destroy Ron Paul, the one Republican candidate who reflects the views of traditional, thoughtful Republicans as opposed to the other nine who all seem to be bloodthirsty, thuggish imperialists.

Watch this from Fox News. Are they fair and balanced? I report, you decide.

There's more: "The Very Models of the Modern Republican Party" >>

Welcome Pete McClosky

Former Congressman Pete McClosky has left the Republican party. He is now a registered Democrat. For those who followed last year's elections, that isn't surprising. After attempting to lead a "Revolt of the Elders" against Richard Pombo in the last election, he ultimately endorsed Jerry McNerney (D-Cal). The reason I am posting is that his announcement is something every American should read. It gives me hope.

McCloskeys have been Republicans in California since 1859, the year before Lincoln's election. My great grandfather, John Henry McCloskey, orphaned in the great Irish potato famine of 1843, came to California in 1853 as a boy of 16, and joined the party just before the Civil War.

By 1890 he and my grandfather, both farmers, made up two of the twelve members of the Republican Central Committee of Merced County. My father's most memorable expletive came when I was a boy of 10 or 11: "That damn Roosevelt is trying to pack the Supreme Court!"

I registered Republican in 1948 after reaching the age of 21. We were the party of civil rights, of free choice for women and fiscal responsibility. Since Teddy Roosevelt, we had favored environmental protection, and most of all we stood for fiscal responsibility, honesty, ethics and limited government intrusion into our personal lives and choices. We accepted that one the duties of wealth was to pay a higher rate of income tax, and that the estates of the wealthy should contribute to the national treasury in reasonable measure.

I was proud to serve with Republicans like Gerry Ford, the first George Bush and Bob Dole.

In 1994, however, Newt Gingrich brought a new kind of Republicanism to power, and the election of George W. Bush in 2000 has led to wholly new concept of governance. The bureaucracy has mushroomed in size and power. The budget deficits have become astronomical. Our historical separation of church and state has been blurred. We have seen a succession of ethical scandals, congressmen taking bribes, and abuse of power by both the Republican House leadership and the highest appointees of the White House.

The single cardinal principle of political science, that power corrupts, has come to apply not only to Republican leaders like Tom DeLay, Duke Cunningham, Bob Ney and John Doolittle, but to a succession of White House officials and appointees. The stench of Jack Abramoff has permeated much of the Washington Republican establishment.

The Justice Department, guardian of of our rule of law, has been compromised. It's third ranking official, a graduate of Pat Robertson's dubious law school, has taken the 5th Amendment.

Men who have never felt the fear of combat, and who largely dodged military service in their youth, have led us into grievous wars in far off places with no thought of the diplomacy, grace and respect for other peoples and their cultures which has been an American trademark for at least the last two thirds of a century. We have lost the respect and affection of most of the world outside our borders. My son, Peter, one of the U.S. prosecutors at The Hague of the war crimes in Serbia and elsewhere, tells me that people of other countries no longer look at the country which countenances torture as a beacon for the world and the rule of law.

Earth Day, that bi-partisan concept of Gaylord Nelson in 1970, has become the focus of almost hatred by today's Republican leadership. Many still argue that global warming is a hoax, and that Bush has been right to demean and suppress the arguments of scientists at the E.P.A., Fish & Wildlife and U.S.Geological Survey.

I say a pox on them and their values.

Until the past few weeks, I had hoped that the party could right itself, returning to the values of the Eisenhowers, Fords and George H. W. Bush.

What finally turned me to despair, however, was listening to the reports, or watching on C-Span, a whole series of congressional oversight hearings on C-Span, held by old friends and colleagues like Pat Leahy, Henry Waxman, Norm Dicks, Nick Rahall, Danny Akaka and others, trying to learn the truth on the misdeeds and incompetence of the Bush Administration. Time after time I saw Republican Members of the House and Senate. speak out in scorn or derision about these exercises of Congress oversight responsibility being "witch-hunts" or partisan attempts to distort the actions of people like the head of the General Service Administration and the top political appointees in the Justice and Interior Departments. Disagreement turned into disgust.

I finally concluded that it was a fraud for me to remain a member of this modern Republican Party, that there were only a few like Chuck Hegel, Jack Warner, Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins I could respect.

Two of the best, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, and Jim Leach of Iowa, after years of battling for balance and sanity, were defeated last November, and it seems that every Republican presidential candidate is now vying for the support of the Pat Robertsons and Jerry Falwells rather than talking about a return to the values of the party I joined nearly 59 years ago. My favorite spokesmen have become Senators Jim Webb and Barack Obama.

And so it was, that while at the Woodland courthouse the other day, passing by the registrar's office, I filled out the form to re-register as a Democrat.

The issues Helen (McCloskey) and I care about most, public financing of elections, a reliable paper ballot trail, independent re-districting to replace gerrymandering, the right of a woman to choose not to bring a child into the world, a reversal of the old Proposition 13 and term limits which have so hurt California's once superb education system and the competence of our Legislature, are now almost universally opposed by California's elected Republicans, and the occasional attempts at reform by our Governor are looked on with grim disdain by most of them.

From Helen's and my standpoint, being farmers in Yolo County gives us the opportunity to work for purposes which were once Republican, but can no longer be found at Republican conventions and discussions.

I hope this answers your questions about the party and a government I have served in either civil or military service under ten presidents, five Republican and five Democrat ... I doubt it will be of much interest other than to our friends, but it has been a decision not easily taken.

Respectfully, Pete McCloskey,

It's of great interest to me Pete. I hope everybody reads your message. It is dead on. I will do everything I can to encourage Democrats to make you proud of your decision.

I wish I had a 100 t-shirts with Pete McClosky's pictures on them!

There's more: "Welcome Pete McClosky" >>