The Parties Aren't the Same As much as conservatives defend their bigotry and corruption by arguing that "both sides do it", and disgruntled "libertarians" rant about the parties being the same, sometimes the problem with that claim is quite clear. Consider President Obama's housing speech in Arizona. Some liberals turned out to remind the president to block the Keystone Pipeline. Some citizens turned out to simply complain about the failure of HAMP. But the loudest voices greeting the president were the conservative racists, which probably shouldn't surprise anyone, since this is Arizona we're talking about. Racially-charged sentiment infused the protests and split the crowd both politically and physically. Obama supporters congregated on the west side of the road in front of the high school and his critics lined up across the street. Obama foes at one point sang, "Bye Bye Black Sheep," a derogatory reference to the president's skin color, while protesters like Deanne Bartram raised a sign saying, "Impeach the Half-White Muslim!" Many on both sides wore red, white and blue and carried small flags. “It just kind of happened naturally,” said Michael Pomales of how the opposing sides separated. Pomales, an 18-year-old Ahwatukee Foothills resident who graduated in the spring from Desert Vista High, said he decided to join the protesters side “to spread a little love” as the crowds began shouting at each other. Pomales said his response to people yelling for Obama to go back from where he came from is simple: “He’s a great man. He cares about what I care about, education, jobs. He’s our president. He’s an American.” Deanna Bartram, a 17-year-old University of Arizona student from Black Canyon City, lashed out at people who call her racist for not supporting Obama. She believes Obama supporters use the “race card” against her because they disagree with her political message. “Obama is ruining American values. He is ruining the Constitution. He needs to go back to where he came from because obviously, he is a liar,” she said. “I am not racist. I am part Indian. Obama’s half Black, half White.” “He’s 47 percent Negro,” shouted Ron Enderle, a 77-year-old Chandler resident who said that he and his son served as Marines and his grandson is currently serving in the Marines. Enderle criticized the president mishandling security at the U.S. Benghazi Embassy. “My grandson is third generation Marine, and it bothers me to have this man as our commander in chief. I’m ashamed,” Enderle said. Judy Burris said that she blames Obama for racism in America reaching heights not seen since the 1960s Civil-Rights Era. “We have gone back so many years,” she said. “He’s divided all the races. I hate him for that.” She said that she brought her 12-year-old grandson Christian Cabrera to the protests because she thought it would be educational. “He’s Mexican,” she said of her grandson. Cabrera said he wanted to accompany his grandma “so I could protest about impeaching Obama.” (Merrill et al.) It's times like these that I'm reminded of an associate's words nearly four years ago: "Race is absolutely not the motivation for opposition to Obama, but it is used by some as a tool in the fight against him." Arizona. Republicans. Racism. There really isn't anything surprising, here. But the next time you hear someone whining that there is no difference between the parties, you're perfectly welcome to laugh in their face. ____________________ Notes: Merrill, Laurie, Dianna Nanez and Linnea Bennett. "Hundreds protest Obama outside Phoenix high school". Arizona Republic. August 6, 2013. AZCentral.com. August 7, 2013. http://www.azcentral.com/news/politics/articles/20130806obama-phoenix-protests-outside-school.html
Tiassa I live in North Carolina and I just went out and bought an AK-47, I suggest all sane people do the same, the crazies already have theirs and they carry them openly here. The racists are desperately trying to take as much as they can before the end of the Republican Party. Between the Gomerts and the McCarthys(oops, I mean Cruzs)and their Koch(does NOT rhyme with Pope)head owners the Republican Party is on life support and they have become what the greatest of their party(Lincoln)gave his life fighting against. Racists, Misogynists, Luddites, Greedheads, Elitists, Homophobes and Fundamentalist religious fanatics are as close to gaining power as they have ever been, they are now sounding crazier than the Germans in the thirties and over a third of all Americans would be perfectly happy to see them succeed. Our people have forgotten what Freedom means, it's not the freedom to tell other people what to believe, practice or do, it is the freedom to chose those things for yourself(and tolerate the choices of others so they will tolerate yours), so telling women(for example)that they have no choice about whether they bear children is as UN-American as anything could possibly be. These Tbaggers talk of the Constitution, but are completely ignorant of it's contents(with the exception of their distorted understanding of the Second Amendment). WE ACTUALLY HAVE A RACIST ON OUR SUPREME COURT, I don't even have to say which one, but here's a hint...he's the one with his hand stuck up in "Justice" Thomas's...er, backside. And, unfortunately, at the same time the Dems have lost their backbones or succumbed to the dreaded disease of "Bipartisanship". Folks, the "conservatives" are INSANE, compromising with the insane is only half sane at best, probably less. Rather, we should take the attitude of the blind guy in "Scent of a Woman", and take a flame thrower to the place, we need more Alan Graysons, Al Frankens and Elizabeth Warrens, not less. They are trying to restrict voting nationwide when actual voter fraud(their "justification")is extremely rare and most likely perpetrated by themselves(that was true in the last THREE elections for President). I'm going to go down there and...... EXCUSE THE DELAY, GRUMPY NEEDS HIS MEDS NOW... This "Both Sides" meme must die, no, it is not both sides, there are not always two sides to a story and not every political party in America has our country's or our people's interest formost in mind. The Republicans have become the wholly owned subsidiary of the one percent and they did so by appealing to the lowest intellectual rungs of our people and their prejudices. They have succeeded in causing our country's near demise, wage slavery is still slavery, the rich have taken all the cream leaving only skim at best and the patients are in charge of the asylum. I hope it doesn't, but such situations often come to violence before they get resolved. Thus my first sentence in this post. Now I must go increase my dosage... Grumpy:mufc:
There's a lot of difference between a member of the Gestapo and a member of Al Qaeda. But the difference isn't very important.
Good Lord, Grumpy. Are you still Grumpy that Beverly is out of power? What a joke she was, eh? At least WE have a real governor now. You make it sound like it's dangerous to come to NC without an AK-47. You like spreading propaganda or what??? What a load of crap! Hurry up and get those meds in your system!!!! IMMEDIATELY! RUN!!!
They're not the same thing, any more than AIDS and cancer are the same thing. But they're still both pretty unpleasant - and in the end cause similar kinds of problems.
These are just pedantic arguments, of little worth. Both sides are the same, big gov is with both. Both parties in uk or usa are just administrators for the big gov. The arguments op claims separate them are nothing but fluff.
Motor Daddy Not too worried about chicken legs, but did we have to replace her with Art Pope's American Taliban? Enjoy it while it lasts, you've only succeeded in pissing off the majority of those who live here and making North Carolina a low brow, racist redneck mecca racing with Mississippi to the bottom of the scale of civilization. Good job. Have you seen his polls? He lied, but we've come to expect lying from Republitards. It's getting dangerous to be unable to protect yourself from right wing loonies, yes. I live within 20 miles of 4 "militia" camps of various degrees of ...er, a Klanish nature, shall we say. They go around in camoed jeeps with arms slung over their shoulder in the middle of town. And that isn't even delving in to the Snake handlers and inbred backwoods Bible-believing tyrants. Robert Eric Rudolph lived in the next county over. As I said, the Second Amendment abusers are already armed, those who care for the rest of the Constitution should be ready to stop them, if cooler Republican heads don't take back their party from them. Rince Prebus is not a step in the right direction. No, I don't watch Fox at all. GrumpyPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image! .
Contrary to the liberal media's depiction of the alphabet, the letter "R" stands for Republican, not Racist. You know, the one's that protect the Constitution as opposed to the party that represents their sheep population with the pic of a Jack Ass (and rightfully so!)? Best Governor we've had, period! Bev was the the final straw. The people in this state just couldn't take anymore of the Jack Ass party (D). If the majority are pissed off at the Republicans, then why did the majority oust the lead Jack Ass herself and elect a real Governor that has integrity, and courage, and intelligence, unlike, uh...what's her sorry ass name, again??
Hmmm I thought you said he had integrity, courage and intelligence? Because in just about any political system, what he did is usually known as political corruption. So you think the politically corrupt have integrity? Interesting.
The Important Question (...?) To McCrory's defense, appointing donors is kind of an open corruption in the U.S. In this case, it's more about the fact that McCrory has shown himself unreliable. There is an important question in all that: "If the majority are pissed off at the Republicans, then why did the majority oust the lead Jack Ass herself"? Well, part of that would be campaign promises against right-wing extremism that McCrory made and then broke. The big ones are the donors promise and the abortion legislation promise. Additionally, he just signed a vote bill in the name of preserving election integrity, when he didn't kow what was actually in it. It is also worth noting that McCrory was elected in a race against Lt. Gov. Walter Dalton. When he ran against Beverly Perdue, Pat McCrory lost.
No matter which party is elected they all are corrupt. That's why they all are the same, they all are bought and paid for by those with the MONEY.
The notion that "they" are all the same bad, or the notion that "both sides" are equivalently bad in their own way, is a lazy canard. What we have just seen, last thirty years or so in the US, has been a demonstration of the consequences of allowing actual incompetence, ignorance, ideological obliviousness, corrupt heedlessness, to get its hands on real power. There is not now, and has not been, any US governing equivalent in ugly meanness and shallow venality and executive incompetence to the Reagan/Bush/Cheney axis of fuckup. And the people trying to make it seem as if this degrading ratpile is par for the course, a reality we cannot avoid in politics, are for the most part former supporters of W and Reagan and their local minions. Everybody isn't doing it. You guys have been revealed to be not merely wrong, but completely clueless; patsies; suckers; ankle grabbing feebs, people whose own memory has become an enemy of sorts.
No but enough of them are to keep the corruption going. There might be a few who want to do right but they are not winning as we can see, perhaps you just want to see it.
Surrender as a Weapon You know that silly parlor game where people talk about how they would rather die? Well, okay, to be honest, it gets really complicated when you play it in a roomful of healthcare practitioners. But did you ever notice how people want to go in their sleep, or a quick accident, or something like that? I mean, sure, there are the the oncologists who move the debate into how much time to say goodbye versus how much suffering and early exits, but, well how many people ever say they want a slow death after falling into a giant rock washer full of broken glass and rubbing alcohol? Their flesh slowly burned off by demon ants with a giant magnifying glass? Okay, okay, but you know what I mean. Burned in a fire. Watching bears eat one's own body. Nobody ever wants to imagine being the poster child for emergency euthanasia. However, many people willingly vote Republican.
And What's With That Hair? Connect the Dots It's always fun to see who can't count to two, right? Well, okay, no, it's not. In fact, it's sad. Still, every once in a while, we must try. Nebraska Republican Jeff Fortenberry was pressed at a town hall in his district this week about the many votes the House GOP has taken to repeal or dismantle parts of Obamacare. Fortenberry called the 40 votes the House has taken on the health care law “theatrics,” the Columbus Telegram reported on Thursday. “Some people are beginning to ridicule us for that. To be honest, some of it is theatrics. You keep doing this over and over and over again and it doesn’t get anywhere. It is theatrics,” Fortenberry said according to the paper. (Nocera) Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Dot (•) #1: Rep. Fortenberry (R-NE) explained that House votes against Obamacare are theatrics ... but could not explain his haircut. It's worth noting that Fortenberry's comments came back in early August; House Obamacare Defunding Vote number forty-one also occurred last week. And Republicans are getting all frothy about number forty-two. But Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kansas) is amped up about attempt number 42. He and other Tea Party lawmakers in the House are pushing GOP leaders to tie a vote to defund the Affordable Care Act to a must-pass, temporary spending bill aimed at keeping the government funded past Oct. 1, when current funding runs out. The effort has been a serious headache for GOP leaders, who want to appease their Tea Party flank but don't want to risk a government shutdown. Huelskamp was excited this week as he talked to reporters about the latest strategy for killing Obamacare. "None of the other votes were on must-pass bills. They were on individual bills," he told The Huffington Post, comparing the House's past attempts to sink Obamacare to baseball. "We've had 42 different swings at the bat. Forty-two different exhibition games. But we've never actually had a regular season." Huelskamp told HuffPost things will be different this time because the legislative vehicle being used gives repeal proponents more leverage. "We haven't had it on the C.R. yet," he said, referring to the temporary spending measure, known as a continuing resolution. "We have 85 who say they want a vote on this." (Bendery) Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Dot (•) #2: Rep. Huelskamp (R-KS) explained why vote #42 will go better: They haven't officially threatened to kill the hostage, yet. So, for what one Republican admits is nothing more than theatrical purposes, the next step, according to another, is to highjack a "must-pass" bill. And yet, as shocking as this notion might seem like it is supposed to sound, there really isn't any surprise, as we've been hearing talk like this for a while. But, you know, it's forty-two. A mystical number full of promise and riddle alike. Or ... well, you know. Theatrics. Perhaps it's not a matter of shock, but a weariness with disbelief. I mean, really, this can't actually be happening, can it? I mean, since any honest description makes it sound like Republicans have declared themselves enemies of the Republic? But, yes, it's worth noting that anyone who tells you the parties are somehow the same either— —is trying to swindle you, or— —is such an egomaniac that his or her own broad valences of commonality must be elevated exponentially, or— —is, quite simply, not paying attention, and therefore woefully ignorant.____________________ Notes: Nocera, Kate. "Nebraska Republican Calls 40 Obamacare Repeal Votes 'Theatrics'". BuzzFeed. August 8, 2013. BuzzFeed.com. September 16, 2013. http://www.buzzfeed.com/katenocera/nebraska-republican-calls-40-obamacare-repeal-votes-theatric Bendery, Jennifer. "Tim Huelskamp Explains Why 42nd House Vote To Repeal Obamacare Will Be Better Than The Previous 41". The Huffington Post. Septembe 13,2013. HuffingtonPost.com. September 16, 2013. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/13/tim-huelskamp-obamacare-repeal_n_3921960.html
Didn't the members of congress and the senate and their staffs all ask for and get exemption from ObamaCare. citing excessive financial hardship due to the law. The pay for these financially strapped government workers range from $100K to $200K per year. But they all force it on the middle class who make less then them. Why are the con artists exempting themselves from the affordable care act if it is affordable? Should those who voted for this law, such as all the Democrats, be forced to drink the nasty medicine since they brought it to the table for everyone to drink? Or is lying and scamming acceptable in the Democratic party, as long as the lawmakers have a way around the laws they impose on the populous? Do you think those who voted against the law, citing it would be too expensive, should get the exemption?
It Involves Vitter ... Which Ought To Say Plenty Yes, no, and not really. The short version: A Republican Senator put up a bluff, arguing that memberes of Congress and their staffs should be sent to the exchanges for their health insurance. The Democrats wondered how their colleague could ever think that bluff would work, and adopted the measure. This is where things get sticky, but only sort of, and in truth, not really. In markup, part of this provision was omitted; the Republican sponsor never intended to both move the employees to the marketplace and strip their employer contribution to health care. In other words, some Republicans are upset that they have to treat their employees with the same regard as if they were private sector employees. The "exemption" is a talking point. Basically, well ... I had decided earlier to not run with the story. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! No, really. I tried to not invoke this sordid tale. See, the thing is that the "exemption" is a question of whether or not one thinks being a federal employee, such as a low-paid staffer for a congressman, should be treated differently from their private sector equivalents. If you think they should be treated differently, then you would oppose the "exemption". If you think they should be treated like their private sector equivalents, then you would support the "exemption". In other words, the people complaining about the "exemption" want Congressional employees to be "exempted from an exemption from an exemption". That is, they are protesting the "exemption from an exemption", and demanding that their employees be exempted from that exemption. See how that works? There's a reason Senate Democrats are getting ready to shoot a salvo across Diaper Dave's bow. ____________________ Notes: Cohn, Jonathan. "The Latest Obamacare Lie That Just Won't Die". The New Republic. August 13, 2013. NewRepublic.com. September 16, 2013. http://www.newrepublic.com/article/114284/congress-exempt-obamacare-latest-lie-wont-die Raju, Manu and John Bresnahan. "Will Democrats haul out hookers in David Vitter fight?" Politico. September 12, 2013. Politico.com. September 16, 2013. http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/david-vitter-obamacare-democrats-secret-weapon-96744.html
File Under: "No Way!" (Way!) How Dare You Make Me Treat My Staff Like Regular Employees! Following up on an earlier point, Republicans are really pissed off about the OPM ruling that Obamacare includes the employer contribution to employee health care. Last month, Roll Call reported: House Republicans still don't like Obamacare — or Obama, for that matter. But at least some of them conceded Friday the president did the right thing in making sure they and their staff wouldn't lose their health care subsidies under the law. "There's no question it was the right thing to do," said freshmen Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah. "Not just for me, but for my staff. Heavens, I have staff who don't make much money. This would be a really big bite for them." Another Republican congressman described the White House's intervention as a "relief," as one aide in his office made around just $30,000 a year and had a child with many health issues. The member wanted to remain anonymous in sensitivity to his staffer's privacy. "I don't know what she would have done," he said. CQ Roll Call broke the news on Thursday night that the Office of Personnel Management will issue a new regulation next week clarifying that the government will continue to help defray the cost of premiums for congressional employees in the new health insurance exchanges, which are set to go into effect later this year under the 2010 health care law. There had been considerable anxiety that the provision of the law forcing members and staff into the exchanges did not provide for the government to continue subsidizing their insurance — potentially costing each of them thousands of dollars out of pocket a year at a time when paychecks in many House members' offices have been frozen or cut in the past three and a half years because of budget cuts. Members of both parties had been privately clamoring for the White House to resolve the situation — and passing a legislative fix would have been a dicey proposition given the partisan dispute over the law. Of course, those are only a few Republicans. Others are more inclined toward screwing their employees. To wit, this month, Roll Call brings us this astounding scuttlebutt: Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., said Thursday he is laying groundwork for a court challenge to an Office of Personnel Management decision that will permit congressional staffers to continue receiving employer contributions for their health care. The OPM's August ruling was intended to remedy a drafting error in the 2010 health care law that would require all Congressional staffers to pay for the full cost of their insurance without employer contributions. Johnson, who last week filed a formal comment to OPM urging the agency reconsider its rule, said he and his staff did so in order to create a legal case against the administration. "I really do believe that it was the pretty clear intent of the people who voted for Obamacare that members of Congress and their staffs should not be able to maintain their ... insurance through the Federal Employee Health Benefits plan, and they also made it pretty clear through multiple votes that they didn't think the federal government ought to make contributions into the exchanges where they had to get it," Johnson said. "I can't tell you how OPM's really going to conduct themselves ... but you know, I did put in a comment into OPM, and the purpose behind that is I don't think they're going to follow ... my advice, but I just wanted to make sure I certainly did everything I could do ... through the normal channels so that I could then do a court challenge," Johnson continued. "That helped me create standing." Currently, the Senate is stalled over an amendment from Republican David Vitter of Louisiana that would reverse the OPM rule. Vitter is trying to get the amendment voted on in conjunction with an energy efficiency bill. Yes, that is correct; Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson is preparing to file a lawsuit in order to strip his employees of their employer contribution to health care. But here's the thing: He's lying. He believes it was the clear intent of Congress? Ask the Republican who called for the provision; ask the Democrats who helped fashion it; actually ask the people who voted for the bill: The open secret of the Vitter amendment fight is that few members of either party really want to vote on it. Even most Republicans concede that the original intent of the provision at hand was not to make staffers pay out of pocket completely for their health coverage, just to force them into exchanges set up by the law for the uninsured or self-insured. I mean, there really isn't any room for error here; the only reason Johnson isn't lying is because he prefaced himself with the words, "I believe", but as that belief is insupportable, come on, give us a break. The thing is, though, it's not like this is surprising. As Kevin Drum noted of this issue back in April: No big law is ever perfect. But what normally happens is that it gets tweaked over time. Sometimes this is done via agency rules, other times via minor amendments in Congress. It's routine. But Obamacare has become such a political bomb that it's not clear that Congress will be willing to fix the minor problems that crop up over time. There's simply too big a contingent of Republicans who are eager to see Obamacare fail and are actively delighted whenever a problem crops up. This has the potential to be a problem that no other big law has ever had to face. We'll see how this works out. Maybe after 2014 things will cool down a bit and normal horse trading will start up again. But I'm not so sure anymore. After all, I figured that might happen after the November election, and when John Boehner acknowledged that "Obamacare is the law of the land," it seemed like a good sign even with all the hedging he put around it. But nothing has changed. Republicans are still fervently determined to destroy Obamacare any way they can, and this means that tweaks and fixes are unlikely. Instead, they're going to dig in their heels and gleefully watch as people suffer because of minor implementation glitches that could be easily avoided. And that's the thing. That Obamacare is the law of the land simply means that the Republicans are going to refuse to fix any problems that come up with the law. This technical problem was resolved by OPM at the request of Congress; now some Republicans are just angry because their hopes of hurting their own employees—intentionally, at that—in order to bawl about Obamacare have been dashed. This really is among the sleaziest of sleaze. Anyone suggesting this sort of behavior is common to both sides of the aisle is ... oh, right. We've been over that already. ____________________ Notes: Dumain, Emma. "Some in GOP Applaud Obama Decision on Congressional Health Care Subsidies". 218. August 2, 2013. Blogs.RollCall.com. September 20, 2013. http://blogs.rollcall.com/218/some-gop-members-applaud-obama-on-health-care-for-staff-members/ Shiner, Meridith. "Ron Johnson May Sue Over Obamacare Ruling for Congressional Staff". #WGDB. September 19, 2013. RollCall.com. September 20, 2013. http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/ron-johnson-may-sue-over-obamacare-ruling-for-congressional-staff/ Drum, Kevin. "The Real Problem With Obamacare". Mother Jones. April 25, 2013. MotherJones.com. September 20, 2013. http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/04/real-problem-obamacare
