GOP message

Sleaze Ball

This is incredible.  As has been reported, Sen. Tom Colburn knew of Sen Ensign’s affair.  He was there during a confrontation between Ensign and the husband of the woman he was seeing.

Now Colburn says he won’t testify, whether called by a court or the Congressional ethics committee.  The reason he gives is another example of the righteous right’s political bullshit. 

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) on Thursday said he would not testify in court or before the Ethics Committee about any advice he gave Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) on how to handle his affair with a former staffer, citing constitutional protections for communications during religious counseling, as well as the patient confidentiality privilege.

“I was counseling him as a physician and as an ordained deacon. … That is privileged communication that I will never reveal to anybody. Not to the Ethics Committee, not to a court of law, not to anybody,” Coburn said.

These guys who hide behind some flimsy religious facade is one reason many of us think of the religious right as a bunch of sleaze ball political opportunists who use religion to advance a dangerous, treasonous agenda.  They are America’s equivalent of the Taliban.

“Never take an anti-tax pledge, but never increase taxes…

…and don’t vote for anyone who has.”

That seems to be the message of Wyatt Durrette over at Virginia Tomorrow.  He may be doing nothing more than giving cover to Bob McDonnell, who has recently said he won’t take an anti-tax pledge.

McDonnell has been tacking left so fast he’s likely to tip his boat over any day.  Others may be impressed, but this seems just another ploy by McDonnell to mask his true positions and intentions.

Durrette has a confusing post saying pledges are a bad idea.  But…

The simple fact is that transportation needs must be met.  Maybe it can be done without a tax increase at the state level.  I hope so.  And there are options.

…Clearly taxes should not be raised now or in the near term due to the cratered economy.  In fact, some taxes might be reduced to spur job creation.

Gee, does anyone remember anyone in the Repugnant Party (save a few state senators who were nearly run out of the party) voting for a tax increase back a few years ago when we were flush?   With the GOP, there is a never a good time to raise taxes.

But pledges are a bad idea, Durrette says.  Instead voters should look at a candidate’s record.

A record of supporting tax increases is one signal.  One of opposition is another.  Voters need to make judgments on records, not on promises made under circumstances where the unpredictability of the future may require a reversal.

I guess I’m old fashioned.  I want candidates to tell me what vision they have for the county, state or country.  What programs do they want to initiate, expand, contract or cut?  If necessary, what taxes will they raise and which ones might they cut to fulfill their vision?  Leading with a commitment to raise or cut taxes is bassackwards.

That may be what Durrette is saying, but as I wrote in the comments section of his post, given his inferences, “It seems all you are doing here is saying that a candidate should never promise not to raise taxes, but elected officials should never raise them nonetheless. And voters should never vote for one who has.”

Got that?  It’s precisely what McDonnell is trying to say.

Obama and the Stock Market

Remember when every dick of a GOPer was blaming Obama for the stock market’s decline?

On March 3, 2009, the Dow Jones closed at 6,726.02, continuing its drop and, despite his claims, Obamanomics (or at least his plans) have contributed to the evaporation of your retirement accounts. Looking at it in perspective, the Dow Jones is:

  • Down 7,438.51 (or 52.5%) since its all-time high
  • Down 2,899.21 (or 30.1%) since Obama’s election
  • Down 1,223.07 (or 15.4%) since Obama’s inauguration

But there is good news to consider in all this while you down your Tums. In 2010, Republicans have the opportunity to retake Congress and overturn the socialist, stock market destroying policies. Two years later, in 2012, Republicans can recapture the White House and reduce all the taxes Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid raised. The campaign to restore fiscal responsibility (Obama spending trillions upon trillions that we don’t have doesn’t qualify, no matter what he says) begins today!

Well, as of yesterday’s close,

The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index has gained (emphasis added) 15 percent since Obama’s Jan. 20 inauguration, compared with a decline of 9.6 percent in the first five months of the Bush administration and an increase of 3 percent under Clinton.

GOPers, I can’t hear you!

By the way, it was shortly after March 3 when Obama said the stock market was probably then a good investment.  It’s up more than 30% since then.

There You Go Again

From the text of President Obama’s health care speech today to the AMA.

We know the moment is right for health care reform.  We know this is an historic opportunity we’ve never seen before and may not see again.  But we also know that there are those who will try and scuttle this opportunity no matter what – who will use the same scare tactics and fear-mongering that’s worked in the past.  They’ll give dire warnings about socialized medicine and government takeovers; long lines and rationed care; decisions made by bureaucrats and not doctors.  We’ve heard it all before – and because these fear tactics have worked, things have kept getting worse.

And the lede in a story today on Politico.

As President Barack Obama tried to sell the American Medical Association today on his health care overhaul, the top Senate Republicans launched a familiar line of attack.

They warned of rationed medical care, lack of patient control and government bureaucracy.

“The American people will not stand for rationed health care,” Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl said Monday. “We believe that a one size fits all approach is the wrong approach."

I think it smart for Obama to repeat and repeat the GOP scare tactics and label them as such.  Ignoring them gives them credibility.  But because President Bush is so identified with “scare tactics” to gin up support for the Iraq War, it’s a beautiful way of keeping Bush-era Republicanism alive!  In effect, Obama is saying, “There you go again.”

What Would Jesus Do?

A number of evangelical leaders have made opposition to torture without exceptions a moral cause over the past three years, part of a broadening of the movement’s agenda beyond traditional culture war issues.

But others, like my neighbor, think otherwise.

Gary Bauer, a former Republican presidential candidate affiliated with several Christian right groups over the years, said the discussion should not come down to "Would Jesus torture?"

"There are a lot of things Jesus wouldn’t do because he’s the son of God," he said. "I can’t imagine Jesus being a Marine or a policeman or a bank president, for that matter. The more appropriate question is, ‘What is a follower of Jesus permitted to do?’"

Bauer said the answer is "it depends" — but the moral equation changes when the suspect is not a soldier captured on a battlefield but a terrorist who may have knowledge of an impending attack. He said he does not consider water-boarding — a form of interrogation that simulates drowning — to be torture.

"I think if we believe the person we have can give us information to stop thousands of Americans from being killed, it would be morally suspect to not use harsh tactics to get that information," Bauer said.

What are the GOPers Smoking?

As the GOP tries to find its voice, may we suggest they first reverse the Bush administration’s rejection of reality.

In this story about the coming decision to replace Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court, we have Wendy Long of the Judicial Confirmation Network and a former clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas saying,

The current Supreme Court is a liberal, judicial activist court. … If Obama holds to his campaign promise to appoint a Justice who rules based on her own ‘deepest values’ and what’s in her own ‘heart’ – instead of what is in the Constitution and laws — he will be the first American President who has made lawlessness an explicit standard for Supreme Court Justices.”  (emphasis added)

Let’s forget that liberals have been losing most SCOTUS decisions to a 5-4 conservative majority.  But then to suggest that because Obama might consider life experiences, he therefore is looking for lawlessness as a standard for selecting a justice?

Well, reality seems out of reach for GOPers.

The GOP obviously does not have much power in D.C. these days, but just like we helped ourselves by opposing the deficit-busting stimulus, opposing left-wing nominees like her is our path back to the majority,” one Republican source said. (emphasis added)

I’m almost starting to feel sorry for the party of Coolidge, Hoover and Nixon.  It’s not that they’re smoking something; they’re eating their own shit.  That’ll make you sick.