Donal: Is Occupy Over?
Ramona's Piece de la Resistance (Including Pics of Obama, Romney, FDR)
dagblog To Give Away Logoed Hairshirt To Most Effective Lamenter Of Left's Ineptitude
|
Donal: Is Occupy Over? Ramona's Piece de la Resistance (Including Pics of Obama, Romney, FDR) dagblog To Give Away Logoed Hairshirt To Most Effective Lamenter Of Left's Ineptitude |
Read |
Republicans seem only half there. In the three states where Santorum finally pierced the winner's circle, the overall effect was marred by low levels of participation. Rather than engage in a caucus with such a lackluster slate of candidates, Republican voters preferred to stay home and simply withdraw from the process. Republicans are making a classic mistake in military tactics which may result in further low turnout and other problems. They are fighting the last war. The public has moved beyond many of the culture wars which Republicans have been able to exploit to their advantage for the last several decades.
Anti-gay rhetoric is back firing. "Personhood" amendments have failed in several states, including the most conservative one, Mississippi. And Santorum's penchant for out-of-touch sexual mores is as removed from the common place as a Medieval Knight fitting out his wife with a chastity belt before galloping off to the Crusades.
Aside from fighting last year's culture wars, the G.O.P is unabashedly behind the curve relative to the public's perceptions about tax policy, crony capitalism and the deficit. By large numbers the public supports the Buffett rule, a minimum tax on the super wealthy. Also, eighty per cent of the populace feels that big business and big government are in bed together and gaming the system. As far as the deficit fight goes, the polls indicate that most voters, including Republicans, put the deficit issue at the bottom of their list of immediate concerns.
Yesterday Boehner appeared to be in his cups as he announced an act of Congress to restore freedom of religion following Obama's supposed assault on the Catholic Church over the funding of contraceptives in Catholic affiliated institutions like hospitals. In the last few days polling shows very little actual concern about this issue among the electorate. But Boehner and the Presidential candidates are still attempting to re-create the culture wars of yesteryear.
The contraceptive/Catholic Church/religious freedom flap is a red herring. Under the current healthcare program, churches and stand-alone religious institutions are already exempted, it's only the affiliated institutions which hire secular employees that would be affected---and in many states these institutions are already required to offer everyone the standard slate of benefits. No one is forcing anyone to have sex, use a birth control pill, pee into a cup (the Republican favorite),or submit to an examination. Odd, a picture just came to mind of Ron Paul as Merlin in a black robe stirring his cauldron, under threat of immediate death from returning Crusaders to find a remedy for yeast infections.
Isn't it revealing that Republicans are withdrawing into last year's culture wars just now, when the economy is improving and Obama's approval ratings are rising correspondingly. And instead of focusing on the decay of our aging infrastructure they can't wait to start a war with Iran.. Santorum does not want to engage in recreational sex at home but will at the drop of a hat send young men and women off to die in a new war. That would certainly reduce sexual relations.
Romney wants to withdraw from programs which help the poor and feed hungry children---all of this reduction in size for the needy because we can't afford it. But at the same time Romney will give generously to a private "charity" which expends the money trying to convince gay people that there is a cure for their "gayness". As far as Gingrich is concerned, all the metaphors which come to mind are unprintable.
There was a Revolutionary War General whose strategy was to skirmish with the British and then withdraw. The British would follow. After repeated skirmishes the British had been lured into indefensible terrain and were successfully attacked. Republicans apparently are trying to imitate this strategy. They have successfully retreated from the economic field of battle but have quite possibly underestimated the degree of backlash from indignant women whose healthcare is being used as a pawn in a trumped up war about religious freedom.
The old white male pundits inside the beltway are positing the contraceptive ruling as a mistake on Obama's part. Perhaps so, but I rather think it's the other way around. In fighting last year's culture wars the Republicans, and particularly the candidates, are indelibly defining themselves as extremists---they are attempting to take away from women something regarded as a given, paid for contraception in the context of women's health. Even most Catholic women are against such an intrusion. As far as Romney and Santorum are concerned ,they have withdrawn from common sense as well as the general populace. I think the 2012 election will be payback time. Come the election in November, women in this country are simply not going to show up in the Republicans' camp.
Perceptive Dagblog readers know the difference between Obama, Romney and Bush:
Obama NYT today: .how President Obama’s thinking about what he once called “a war of necessity” began to radically change less than a year after he took up residency in the White House....The aide told Mr. Obama that he believed military leaders had agreed to the tight schedule to begin withdrawing those troops just 18 months later only because they thought they could persuade an inexperienced president to grant more time if they demanded it. “Well,” Mr. Obama responded that day, “I’m not going to give them more time.”...Mr. Obama concluded in his first year that the Bush-era dream of remaking Afghanistan was a fantasy...
Mitt Romney, Feb. 2012 : LAS VEGAS -- LAS VEGAS -- Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Wednesday night blasted President Obama and his administration for “putting in jeopardy” the nation’s military mission by signaling it hopes to end its combat mission in Afghanistan by the middle of 2013.
Appearing at a campaign rally here shortly after landing in Nevada, Romney said Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta’s statement Wednesday that U.S. forces would transition from a combat mission in Afghanistan next year “makes absolutely no sense.”....
George W. Bush, from May, 2003: BBC - "We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide... Free nations will press on to victory,"
Bush Afghanistan strategy : Gen. Douglas E. Lute, who had spent the last two years of the Bush administration trying to manage the many trade-offs necessary as the Iraq war consumed troop and intelligence resources needed in Afghanistan, arrived with a PowerPoint presentation. The first slide that General Lute threw onto the screen caught the eye of Thomas E. Donilon, later President Obama’s national security adviser. “It said we do not have a strategy in Afghanistan that you can articulate or achieve,” Mr. Donilon recalled three years later. “We had been at war for eight years, and no one could explain the strategy.”
Mitt Romney isn’t very far into the vice presidential selection process. But according to a dedicated band of conspiracy theorists, the pick is all but a lock: Sen. Marco Rubio.
That’s the current thinking among a worldwide collection of activists who are obsessed with the secretive Bilderberg Group, an alternating roster of global power players who loom as large — if not larger — in the online fever swamps of the fringe as the Trilateral Commission or the Council on Foreign Relations.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76518.html#ixzz1vN5egowz
Aristotle and Plato didn’t agree on much, but they were united in identifying wonder as the origin of their profession. As Aristotle said, “It is owing to their wonder that men . . . first began to philosophise.” This idea appeals to scientists, who frequently enlist wonder as a goad to inquiry. “I think everyone in every culture has felt a sense of awe and wonder looking at the sky,” wrote Carl Sagan in 1985, locating in this response the stirrings of a Copernican desire to know who and where we are.
Yet that is not the only direction in which wonder may take us. To Thomas Carlyle, wonder sits at the beginning not of science, but of religion. That is the central tension in forging an alliance of wonder with science: will it make us curious, or induce us to prostrate ourselves in pitiful ignorance? We had better get to grips with this question before we too hastily appropriate wonder to sell science. That is surely what is going on when pictures from the Hubble Space Telescope are (unconsciously?) cropped and coloured to recall the sublime iconography of Romantic landscape painting, or the Human Genome Project is wrapped in biblical rhetoric, or the Large Hadron Collider’s proton-smashing is depicted as “replaying the moment of creation”. The point is not that such things are deceitful or improper, but that if we want to take that path, we should first consider the complex evolution of the relation between science and wonder.
[....]
Pretending that science is performed by people who have undergone a Baconian purification of the emotions only deepens the danger that it will seem alien and odd to outsiders, something carried out by people who do not think as they do. Daston believes that we have inherited a “view of intelligence as neatly detached from emotional, moral and aesthetic impulses, and a related and coeval view of scientific objectivity that brand[s] such impulses as contaminants”. It is easy to understand the historical origins of this attitude: the need to distinguish science from credulous “enthusiasm”, to develop an authoritative voice, to strip away the pretensions of the mystical Renaissance magus who acquired knowledge through personal revelation. We no longer need these defences, however; worse, they become a defensive reflex that exposes scientists to the caricature of the emotionally constipated boffin, hiding within thickets of jargon.
... We’re trying to harness photosynthesis. A key part of photosynthesis is what happens when the sun goes down. Cells convert CO2 into sugar and fat molecules. And they store the fat to burn as energy to get them through the night ... We’re trying to coax our synthetic cells to ... store far more fat than they actually were designed to do, so that we can harness it all as an energy source and use it to create gasoline, diesel fuel, and jet fuel straight from carbon dioxide and sunlight. This would shift the carbon equation so we’re recycling CO2 instead of taking new carbon out of the ground and creating still more CO2. But it has to be done on a massive scale to have any real impact on the amount of CO2 we’re putting into the atmosphere, let alone recovering from the atmosphere.
... We envision facilities the size of San Francisco. And 10 or 15 of those in this country. We need sunlight, seawater, and non-agricultural land, but you need a lot of photons to drive this. You need a lot of surface area of sunlight to do that. It’s a great use for Arizona. Lots of sunlight there.
... If we can’t get some key scientific breakthroughs within the next couple of years, it probably won’t happen in 10 years. So it’s something that’s really dependent on fundamental science. But we’re already able to do things that were once seen as impossible.
... I think the new anti-intellectualism that’s showing up in politics today is a symptom of our not discussing these issues enough. We don’t discuss how our society is now 100 percent dependent on science for its future. We need new scientific breakthroughs—sometimes to overcome the scientific breakthroughs of the past. A hundred years ago oil sounded like a great discovery. You could burn it and run engines off it. I don’t think anybody anticipated that it would actually change the atmosphere of our planet. Because of that we have to come up with new approaches. We just passed the 7 billion population mark. In 12 years, we’re going to reach 8 billion. If we let things run their natural course, we’ll have massive pandemics, people starving. Without science I don’t see much hope for humanity.
Well I cannot find anything to disagree with here.
I did read an argument that the ennui of the repubs mean nothing as far as the general election because the repubs hate our President with such vehemence and vitriol that nothing will keep them from the November ballot boxes.
This birth control 'issue' (as if women are going to jump on the bandwagon on this one!) and the 9th Circuit decision only give repubs something to yell about during their town meetings and reality plays.
Santorum is undersexed and uber-conservative.
Mitt has a terrible voice.
And Paul will always get 10% of the vote. hahahah
There has been good news though.
I mean Newt has been humiliated.
the end
Thanks, Richard. I think all the emphasis on yesterday's cultural wars is dead on arrival with most voters. Of course Romney is falling all over himself to be a real conservative, the whole group moving right. I think Romney's approval of the Konnen Foundation's decision not to fund Planned Parenthood is one of his biggest mistakes.
Boehner seemed drunk or totally embarrassed, or both, to be elevating this faux fight about religious liberty. Or maybe it reflects the fact that Cantor is ready to stick the knife in if he doesn't do what he's told by the social conservatives who took over the party in 2010.
Ah, while I am anti-war in the traditional sense, now that it seems important socio-economic/culture issues have been tethered with misnomers (IMO) of WAR in efforts to rally their troops, I'll gladly put my 'boots on the ground' and even engage in non-physical combat to help dismantle their weapons/blather/intent to create societal mass destruction.
Sadly Oxy, too many women subscribe to the perverted processes birthed by males of their species. Begs the query, which of these two groups are the most disturbing?
Excellent blog. Appreciate.
Thanks, Aunt Sam. You would think the younger women, particularly independents, would be appalled by the culture war talk of the Republicans, especially women's health care. Many of the moderate Republican women I know actually support organizations like Planned Parenthood.
Pundits like Chris Matthews tonight, continue to question why Obama's people didn't see this backlash coming and prevent it through some kind of mediation. I think Republicans are getting desperate to gin up their base, seeing their enthusiasm numbers stagnate while the Democrats' are rising. The low turnout in the Caucasus and primaries must be alarming to them.
In revisiting this debacle, I am of the assumption that all of their entities that have employees are non-profit. If this is erroneous, please advise.
By the current controversy arguments, wouldn't the same exemption to the rules apply to the Mormons or any other religious organization's holdings that have employees apply?
I'm not sure what the current law states about if the secular religious exemptions apply to what is termed a subsidiary of a church's organization that conducts business open to the general public and employing individuals who are not members and participants of the sect.
However, it was reported earlier that a 'fix' may be for the government to reimburse the church for any expenses incurred for those employees (of course not catholics, because it's a certainty that no catholic would ever violate the Pope's mandate) who utilize the contraception coverage provision.
I say
bull shitno way.This is a slippery slope. And I believe with every fiber of my being (dramatic emphasis) that if the Obama administration capitulates on this, there will be a tidal wave of negativity that will be far problematic for all than the current hoopla. This, (IMHO) would be an action that would empower the far right conservatives to power on!
This is a perfect example of why there needs/has to be adherence to separation of church and state, for sure when dealing with commercial business practices.
I think the dividing line is whether the employees are already subject to such things as requirements for workers compensation insurance. I think most are non-profits, not sure whether C corps would make a difference.
As to the fix, I think there will be a token accommodation to the Bishops, without denying coverage to the women employees. In the process I think Republicans are further branded as extremists and against women's healthcare. But of course, I could be all wet on that.
I think the fix is an excellent idea. As Oxy and others have pointed out, those extra expenses would actually be negative, so that would just mean more money for the government coffers!
O'Donnell has had a couple of good segments on this. Apparently, the requirements in some of those states, 28 not 40, have "exemptions" of a kind---the institution has to provide this drug benefit if they offer an overall drug benefit. The "out" is they can simply drop the overall drug benefit. So the O team based their rationale of blanket requirements in these states without understanding that exemptions did exist---if they dropped the drug benefit itself.
The low turnout in the Caucasus
I dunno--true, the Chechens stayed home, but the numbers from Ingushettya weren't that bad.
And, of course, the Georgians voted twice each.
Thanks, very funny. If only we could relocate Missouri over there. But we do need a new term for "red states".
Dinosaurs didn't use birth control and they died off anyway when things changed.
Of course, republicans don't believe in dinosaurs.
Ps excellent piece, oxy.
Thanks, Erica. I'm never sure when I've crossed the line. But writing is about risk taking.
They are behind on everything. The government, society, the economy and foreign policy. Everything.
They really do believe they can bring back those glorious days of yore. The cold war 1950s if only they just tried hard enough to get their message across.
Good diary.
Thanks. Watching some of the snippets coming out of the CPAC I don't even recognize this country.
There is a terrific article by Andrew Sullivan on the Daily Beast site, "How Obama set a Contraception Trap for the Far Right".