Showing posts with label American Right-wing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label American Right-wing. Show all posts

Sunday, May 23, 2010

Right Likes To Mix Oil With Their Tea


Capitol Idea:

By Scott Nance

The massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico threatens to damage the environment, the livelihoods of local commercial fishermen and others, as well as affect the region's residents for months, if not years, into the future. But the response from the Right to the disaster so far also threatens for the long-term any credibility that the so-called tea party movement claims in representing such bedrock conservative principles of limited government, controlled federal spending, or strong national security.

If they truly cared about these core notions of what conservatism at least used to be about, the tea party activists would have been already been plenty angry about the relationship between big oil companies like BP and the federal government. And the disaster now unfolding off the coast of Louisiana only would have increased their outrage. That the tea partyers seem so unconcerned — and in the case of Kentucky Senate candidate Rand Paul, outright hostile, who went as far as calling President Obama "un-American" for holding BP's feet to the fire — indicates either a profound ignorance of the situation, or more likely, just further unmasks the truth that conservatives today are motivated by unfettered corporatism, not the supposedly high-minded ideals to which they pay lip service.
Were a supposedly limited role for the federal government and spending restraint truly motivations for conservatives, they would be trying to pass legislation to make sure BP pays to clean up its own mess. Instead, it's the conservatives who are blocking such a bill in the Senate, leaving the American taxpayers to pick up the check.
Make no mistake, BP ain't hurting. As the fourth-largest corporation on the planet, BP reported $5.5 billion in profit — not revenue, but take-home profit — in the last three months.

It doesn't need a bailout, but by obstructing legislation to hold the company accountable for paying for its cleanup, the conservatives are offering BP just that.

In so doing, conservatives are talking out of both sides of their mouths. On the one hand, they wail about deficits and debts, but when push comes to shove, it is the right who needlessly adds to the nation's red ink.

BP's bosses aren't even the only Big Oil executives to be reaching into our wallets to take our money. All five of the largest oil companies are reporting huge profits, but they each are taking $20 billion in taxpayer-funded subsidies over the next five years.

Are conservatives outraged over this federal corporate welfare, which even George W. Bush has described as an unnecessary for oil production? Nope, quite the opposite: they are complicit in it. When President Obama proposed eliminating these wasteful tax giveaways — which truly represent an unwarranted federal hand in the private sector — it was a top conservative who howled.

Sen. John Cornyn is the Texas conservative who heads up his party's campaign to elect more Republican senators. He pounds Democrats on the one hand for deficit spending, but the moment someone tried to pull his oil buddies' hands out of your back pockets, Cornyn screamed bloody murder.

Where were the tea party folks during all this? Nowhere that I could see. Apparently, it's easier for the tea-party crowd to talk the limited government talk than it is to walk the walk.
Meanwhile, many conservatives and tea partyers are also busy betraying American national security. By shilling for Big Oil, they are helping to prop up a number of regimes and groups known to be unfriendly toward the United States. Specifically, it's known that each $1 increase in the price of oil provides an additional $1.5 billion to Iran annually. In this way, conservatives who side with Big Oil are giving direct aid and comfort to Iranian strongman Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Fortunately, conservatives can turn this around and start helping, not hurting, their fellow Americans. One way that they can do this is by supporting the Senate's new American Power Act. The American Power Act aims to contain greenhouse gas emissions, while simultaneously reducing U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

Even if you're one who thinks global climate change is bunk, you should still support the American Power Act. Many serious conservatives for years have recognized that the things they need to do to ensure strong U.S. energy security and national security are the exact same things others want to do to mitigate climate change. This includes such things as government mandates on automakers to manufacture increasingly fuel-efficient vehicles. That means everyone needs to be doing all of the same things in energy policy, even while they may disagree on why they are doing them.

The choice conservative activists face today is as big as the Gulf oil spill itself. They can either live up to what their ideals demand of them, or they can just keep spouting the same empty, angry platitudes in the defense of corporate greed.

The publisher of On The Hill, Scott Nance has covered government and Washington for more than a decade. Capitol Idea is his regular column from Washington. The article was first published as "Right Likes To Mix Oil With Their Tea," on Blogcritics.org.

Let The Sun Shine In......

Sunday, December 27, 2009

Right-wing Freakout......

Just part of the Christmas season, anymore....like decorated trees, houses and such.

O Tannen-Mao? The right-wing's White House Christmas tree freak-out

http://mediamatters.org/items/200912230023

Taking a cue from Andrew Breitbart's BigGovernment.com, several conservative media outlets have reported on three ornaments on the White House Christmas tree depicting President Obama's face superimposed on Mount Rushmore, Mao Zedong, and Hedda Lettuce. Despite the suggestion that those three Christmas tree ornaments (out of hundreds) indicated a "political statement" by the White House, according to the first lady's office, the tree was decorated by community groups, and the White House was unaware of those specific ornaments.

Breitbart's BigGovernment.com posts WH Christmas tree "exlcusive"


BigGovernment.com: "Transvestites, Mao And Obama Ornaments Decorate White House Christmas Tree." In a December 22 BigGovernment.com entry, "Capitol Confidential" posted photos of the three ornaments, writing:

Why let a holiday season come between the White House and making some political statements? The White House pegged controversial designer Simon Doonan to oversee the Christmas decorations for the White House. Mr. Doonan, who is creative director of Barney's New York has often caused a stir with his design choices. Like his naughty yuletide window display of Margaret Thatcher as a dowdy dominatrix and Dan Quayle as a ventriloquist's dummy. For this year's White House, he didn't disappoint.

Fox News, conservative blogs pick up the story.......

Fox News' Special Report highlights "interesting ornaments." As documented by Media Matters for America's Jeremy Holden and Jeremy Schulman, the December 22 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Bret Baier featured a "Political Grapevine" segment on the ornaments, during which Baier reported:
BAIER: They include the communist leader Mao; drag queen -- celebrity queen -- Hedda Lettuce, who boasts on her Web site about her ornament being featured in the White House; and Mount Rushmore with a familiar face [President Obama] added.
Washington Times blog: "Chairman Mao adorns White House Christmas tree..." A December 23 entry to The Washington Times' Water Cooler blog linked to and quoted a December 23 entry on David Horowitz's NewsReal blog attacking the White House for choosing "a lovely ornament featuring China's mass murderer, Chairman Mao, to adorn our national Christmas tree at the White House."

NewsReal: White House "denigrating our Christian traditions." The December 23 NewsReal blog post to which The Washington Times linked further asserted:

Considering Obama's hostility to Christianity, as shown by his celebration of every religion except Christianity, Americans shouldn't be surprised. After all, the first thing any successful dictator must do is banish God from the public square and make fealty to the state primary.

Undoubtedly, Obama and Michelle are just expressing themselves, as is their right. That they choose to do so by denigrating our Christian traditions in such a disrespectful fashion however, is akin to a dog peeing on a Bible. And that's just not very presidential.

Gateway Pundit: "What a complete shock. A real stunner." From a December 22 GatewayPundit.com post, linking to BigGovernment.com's "Exclusive":

Barack Obama's White House Christmas Tree this year includes mass murderer Mao Tse-Tung ornaments.
[...]
You've gotta hand it to the Obamas. At least they're consistent.
Maybe they have yuletide tapes by G-D AmeriKKKa Reverend Wright playing in the background?
Steyn: Ornaments are "the new Democrat Holy Trinity." Guest-hosting Rush Limbaugh's radio show on December 23, Mark Steyn cited BigGovernment.com's story and commented: "I don't know what this is, the new Democrat Holy Trinity. And lo, the angel Gabriel appeared to the drag queen and said, 'Thou shalt conceive a child from Chairman Mao, and his name shall be Barack, and the star -- and he shall shimmer like a star in the west, blotting out Teddy Roosevelt on Mount Rushmore.' "

BigGovernment.com's "exclusive" undermined by facts, common sense

White House: Tree was decorated by community groups. As Media Matters noted, Baier, in his Fox News report highlighting the ornaments, undermined BigGovernment.com's reporting by noting that the "first lady's office says local community groups were asked to decorate hundreds of ornaments but that they are unaware of these specific decorations."

Conservative blogger: "most likely explanation" that "they really didn't know what was on the ornaments." In a December 22 entry, HotAir.com blogger "Allahpundit" dismissed BigGovernment.com's "exclusive" as nonsensical, writing:

Laying aside the fact that spotting a right-wing dictator on ornaments in the Bush White House would have had Media Matters stumbling towards its fainting couch, isn't the most likely explanation here that they really didn't know what was on the ornaments? Why court PR trouble with a deliberate provocation via something this trivial?

Contact:
Bret Baier
http://twitter.com/specialreport

Contact:
The Washington Times
Washington Times
Washington Times
3600 New York Ave NE
Washington, DC 20002-1947
(202) 636-3000
http://twitter.com/washtimes

Contact:
Special Report with Bret Baier
http://twitter.com/specialreport

Contact:
Fox News Channel
FOX News Channel
1-888-369-4762
1211 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
http://twitter.com/foxnews

Contact:
Mark Steyn
E-mail: mailbox@steynonline.com



IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.


"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Rush Limbaugh Farts Out Loud, Again.......

Old Rush sure is bouncing to the surface a lot these days. I've heard much more about him. I doubt I have ever listened to him. I haven't listened to the radio since C.D.s came out. The radio is never a place I choose to receive any but emergency news and weather reports  when driving and I know that Rush makes racial remarks all the time. People I know often tell me things he says. Usually these are people who are actually shocked and a little concerned about something he has said. I used to hear more about something funny he said.

I guess my style is too pay attention to anything that flies above the 'dar so to speak, unless the subject is     

How can anyone defend this man? He has shown, over and over again, that he either is a racist or, even worse,  he makes big bucks off the racist leanings of others. Don't tell me that racism doesn't exist. I know it does. It exists all over the country.

O'Reilly has every bit as much a crack team of researchers as Media Matters does. Yet, he and his staff could find only one example of Rush having anything to say about blacks on Teevee or Radio or anywhere else he influences masses of Americans, according to his own polls.

I do not believe Mr. Limbaugh's civil rights have been violated here. Certainly they are not being violated  anymore than the Dixie Chicks' were. The commentators on the Rght were saying that the The Dixie Chicks could well be hurt by the outrage of the people, because no one was saying that they could not have free speech. The markets would fix their uppity little butts. Did it? I don't remember. I don't believe it did over the long haul, because they are still very much around.

Limbaugh has not been fired. He is still free to spew his venom on the radio. The rest of us have a right of association. If we do not wish to associate ourselves with him, we don't have to. If the men bidding on the L.A. Rams do not wish to associate with him, they should not have to. If the players find him offensive they have a right to say that they will not play for a team owned, even in part, by him.

We make our choices in life. Limbaugh made his choice to get rich off hate speech. If the broader society finds that choice as disgusting as I do and refuses to openly associate with him or support him in any way, he has to live with that.




"The only thing we can find about Rush Limbaugh [saying racist remarks] is that he thinks quarterback Donovan McNabb is overrated by some people who want black quarterbacks to succeed."-- Fox News' Bill O'Reilly, 10/15/09

VERSUS

"Media Matters has documented at least 28 examples of Limbaugh making racially charged remarks."
-- Media Matters, 10/16/09
 


IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.


"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......