What I Hope the President Will Say in the Next Debate

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Friday October 05, 2012 · 1:09 PM PDT

2012/10/05 · 13:09

At some point, Mitt Romney well tell a major lie during the next debate. He may repeat his claim that he can pay for military increases because he is not going to cut taxes, or he may talk about the President's apology tour, or maybe both of those and lots more. And when he does, I hope the President will say something like this:

Akronborn

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday September 17, 2012 · 9:24 PM PDT

2012/09/17 · 21:24

So Rick Santorum said over the weekend that "elite smart people" will never support the Republican Party, and we all had a good laugh, because for probably the only time ever, we all agreed with him about something. But Santorum wasn't going off script, didn't mis-speak or commit a great gaffe. In fact, he was just spouting the party line that Republicans have been using for a long time now -- that the academic snobs at our liberal/radical universities hate the Republican Party, because blah blah blah something.

This is all part of a bigger strategy Republicans have to control the message and reassure their base. Consider the following:

•    Republicans insist that the mainstream, “lame-stream” media are all rooting for the Democratic Party, and their reporting is consistently biased.
•    Faced with criticism from our allies and the UN about the war in Iraq, George Bush says he won’t allow foreign countries to make US national security decisions.
•    Republicans decry “activist” judges who “legislate from the bench.”
•    Republican leaders and pundits insist that climate scientists are frauds trying to get funding.
•    Romney campaign says they “are not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.”
•    Rick Santorum is just the latest Republican to claim that the intellectually elite are on the side of Democrats, not because that’s the smart thing of course, but because they want to tell us all what to do, or something…

There is a consistent theme there, a message to the faithful: You don't have to believe anyone who disagrees with us, no matter how smart, no matter their profession or expertise, no matter what facts or reasoning, because they all hate us. And we are not even going to try to respond with evidence or logic, because we can can just fall back on They Hate Us, for our freedoms maybe.

And this leads inevitably to another conclusion: The Republican leadership realizes that the things they say and the things they do cannot stand up to scrutiny. Our allies are going to condemn their abuses. Judges are going to overturn their unconstitutional laws. Economists will point out that their policies don't work. Scientists will say that they are destroying the environment. Reporters will expose their hypocrisies. Fact-checkers will call them liars. So they have devised a strategy up front to be able to tell their base, "It's OK. You don't have to believe the experts. You can just believe us and Fox and Rush." Everyone else is out to get you.

And it makes it so much easier to just say whatever you want.

The Dubious Patriotism of Republicans

Akronborn

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Sunday September 09, 2012 · 9:28 PM PDT

2012/09/09 · 21:28

If you were to ask Americans whether Democrats or Republicans are the most patriotic, I'm pretty sure Republicans would come out on top. Most of us who read Daily Kos would question that, but I think we all sort of know that patriotism is part of the Republican brand. Yes, Romney forgot to thank the troops at the RNC and then said it wasn't important, but usually they are the ones waving flags and chanting USA!, USA!, whining about lapel pins, and so on.

Now I'm not big on the whole concept of patriotism; I am not convinced that our country is truly better than every other one, or that we should even see ourselves in that sort of competition, let alone that we ought to be bragging to the rest of the world that we're number one. But if Republicans want to think that they are so patriotic, whatever they think it means, there are a couple of things (besides Swiss bank accounts) that I would like to see thrown back at them.

First one is taxes. If you want to shrink the government, fine. But if you want to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq at the same time, and you aren't willing to pony up the money to pay for that, well that's just unpatriotic! Come on, your country needs you! We're fighting the terrorists over there so that we don't have to fight them over here and end up with a smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud, and you can't be bothered to make a small sacrifice for your country by paying a little extra in taxes? You must hate America. How can you call yourself a patriot?

I can honestly say that even during the Iraq war, even though it made me furious to see my money wasted that way, I wished, and said so often, that they would raise our taxes. Since we had chosen, as a country, to start the war whether I liked it or not, I felt that as a American I should be willing to pay for it. But Republicans didn't think so.

The second point is probably more controversial, because it has to do with military service. Of course we should respect our troops, particularly during a time of war, and I would not try to downplay their service and sacrifice. However, I think their is a contradiction if you want to drown government in a bathtub but then think it's such a noble pursuit to go into the military. Because let's not forget, military personnel are government employees, and we pay their salaries. And talk about a bloated, wasteful, government program! Yes, we need to keep this country safe, but my tax dollars are paying for way more military power than I will ever need, and more than I ever wanted to pay for. So when I see all those fine people in uniform, I appreciate them , but I also see my tax dollars going to the ultimate government make-work program. I think that should be part of the discussion when people say they support more military spending and think they are being patriotic.

Anyway, just a couple of thoughts to knock Republicans off their pedestals when they start talking about how much they love America.

Tough Choices

Akronborn

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Friday August 31, 2012 · 7:21 PM PDT

2012/08/31 · 19:21

In the aftermath of the Republican National Convention, I'm seeing one of those stupid things the media prints without thinking, so that in time it becomes part of the accepted narrative -- that Republicans are proposing to make the "tough choices" that need to be made to restore fiscal sanity to Washington.

There are a few of problems with this notion. For one thing, it has been pointed out by many that reducing the debt is not what the country needs right now. Also, Romney/Ryan's prescription for reducing the debt goes something like this: lower taxes, increase defense spending, rob from the poor, sprinkle a little trickle-down fairy dust, and presto! Actually, they are going to need a dump truck full of fairy dust, but that's basically how it works. Those are the kinds of tough choices that Bush II used to run up record deficits.

But what bugs me about the media narrative is the "tough choices" phrase. The tough choices Republicans are offering up amount to "You have to give us everything we want, or else!" Their choices will be tough for many Americans, but for Republican politicians, it's everything they could ask for. There is nothing "tough" about giving tax breaks to their wealthiest benefactors, who will turn around and reward them generously. It isn't difficult for them to take money away from Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, or to spend more and more on the military. Those aren't hard things for a Republican politician to support. It's their Christmas list.

What would actually be a tough choice would be to stand up to Grover Norquist, admit the Bush tax cuts didn't exactly work out, and vote to raise taxes. What would be tough, for Republicans, would be to work with Democrats, give some consideration to constituents who disagree with them, compromise, give up some of their wish list in order to govern, or put military spending on the table. That would require a little toughness. I don't see any Republicans these days making those kinds of choices, the actual tough ones. That would take actual courage. That would require leadership.

There is nothing challenging about sticking rigidly to ideology and insisting that you either get everything you want or you will hold the country hostage, or hold your breath until you turn blue. Any four-year-old can make that sort of tough choice. Someone should call them on that.

Question for Kossacks - How to Help?

Akronborn

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Sunday January 15, 2012 · 9:09 PM PST

2012/01/15 · 21:09

As someone who relatively recently developed an active interest in politics, I have some basic questions for the very engaged group that frequents Daily Kos. What is the best way to make a difference? What works for you? What makes you feel that you are helping the cause?

Akronborn

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Wednesday January 11, 2012 · 6:14 AM PST

2012/01/11 · 06:14

Dear Republicans,

I will confess that I generally believe that the best thing for the US would be for your party to disappear altogether -- to be so thoroughly crushed at the polls that they become irrelevant, maybe something like the United States Marijuana Party in terms of their influence. I have in fact been predicting this demise since 2004, and...maybe someday soon. It just gets very frustrating listening to you and yours and the crazy things you say, and at times bipartisanship seems an awful lot like a fool's errand.

But, with some reflection, I realize that we should be able to have reasonable discussions. I am willing to admit that some conservative ideas may have merit. Maybe sometimes we need less government. Is the Keystone XL Pipeline a good idea? I'm at least willing to discuss it. Maybe even charter schools.

The problem is, some of the things a lot of Republicans say and believe are just ludicrous, so irrational that no reasonable person is going to discuss them with you. I don't want to have a holocaust-denier type of discussion with you -- you understand that, right? Those people are very frustrating to listen to, because they just choose not to believe facts and evidence, which means they have no basis for their beliefs, but they will argue for them anyway. Logic just won't work with someone who chooses to dismiss overwhelming evidence while promoting speculative garbage. So we can't have that.

A few ground rules then. I have a relatively short (definitely not all-inclusive) list of issues for you to consider. Some members of the Republican Party have taken nonsensical positions on these issues. You're not like that, right? If you are, sorry, we can't have a productive discussion, because if we don't share a common ground of reason, logic, and evidence, we don't share any common ground at all.

So let's agree at least to these things:

•George Bush and members of his administration lied about WMD in the build-up to the Iraq War. They said they knew. They said there was no doubt. They didn't know. There was doubt. They lied. I know, it's tough to admit this, but you know they lied.
•The Swiftboating of John Kerry was an unpatriotic attack on a decorated soldier, and if Democrats had done anything remotely similar to a Republican, you would have screamed at the TV and called them traitors. Justifiably so.
•Your party's stance on gays is simply open bigotry.
•Although there is always a chance that global warming is not caused by human activity, the clear consensus of actual scientists with advanced degrees who study climate science for a living is that humans are causing global warming, and members of your party are denying the evidence in favor of politics, or maybe just because they hate Al Gore. And speaking of hating, it's really pathetic that some conservatives want to see the Chevy Volt fail, isn't it? You want to see an American car company suffer because their product is good for the planet? That's sad.
•Although there is always a (really tiny!) chance that Barack Obama was not born in this country, there has never been any reason to think that, and anyone who does or ever did believe that is just a ridiculous idiot.
•The Bush Administration inherited a balanced budget, then turned it into huge deficits, and never lifted a finger to do anything about them. Republicans left huge entrenched deficits for the Obama administration, then suddenly developed a great concern for fiscal responsibility on the day Barack Obama was inaugurated. And they blame President Obama for the mess they left behind. Come on, we all saw it happen.
•Health care is extremely expensive in this country, and millions of people are uninsured. Nearly every industrialized country has a much better, much fairer, much cheaper system than we do. Democrats tried to do something to fix this. Republicans never have, and they have in fact opposed any solution.
•Voter ID laws address an almost non-existent problem. (I am even willing to consider whether their true purpose is to disenfranchise Democrats, but barely.)

Also, let's agree on this: The following issues (and one chant) are of idiots, by idiots, and especially for idiots:

•The Ground Zero mosque
•President Obama is a Muslim
•President Obama was educated in a madrassa
•The stimulus didn't create any jobs
•President Obama is always apologizing for the US
•President Obama is going to brainwash our school children!
•Drill, baby, drill
•Death panels
•The whole Black Panther story
•Fox News is fair and balanced. (This is a pet peeve. Really, if you don't understand that Fox News is a relentlessly right-wing organization, I don't see how you have the brains to feed yourself.)
•The founders wanted the US to be a Christian nation
•Sarah Palin was qualified to be Vice-President, and by extension President of the United States. Ha ha, you guys screwed that one up so badly.

Now, Republican person, I have to tell you that rational, reasonably intelligent people are not going to debate the items above. They just won't. There's nothing to debate. But I'm feeling generous; everyone has their irrational beliefs, and there is always some room for interpretation, so I'll grant you two items out of the above, as long as one of them isn't President Obama's birthplace. If you will agree that all of the above are true, with at most two exceptions, and you're not a birther, then we can have a nice bipartisan discussion. More than two, or you are or ever were a birther, and I'm sorry, but I have grave doubts about your fitness as a discussion partner.

Now I only have two problems:

•First, my guess is that all of the Republicans nationwide who are still with me could fit in the local Super 8 Motel breakfast room.
•And second, if you agree with most or all of my points, why are you still a Republican? What the hell is wrong with you?

OK. If you're still on board somehow, let's talk.

In Which I Question Rob McKenna

Akronborn

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday January 09, 2012 · 9:50 PM PST

2012/01/09 · 21:50

Today is the first day I can write a diary at DK, and by chance it is the day I got to question Attorney General Rob McKenna, Republican candidate for governor of Washington state.

Mr. McKenna spoke to a group at my workplace today, making the case for us to support him for governor. This being Washington, a fairly blue state, McKenna does not come off as an intolerable social conservative or an ignoramus. That just wouldn't work here, not in a statewide election. The guy seems fairly sharp, a pleasant alternative to some of the nationally prominent Republicans we've been watching. However, he is also one of the attorney generals who joined in a lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act, so I was hoping for a chance to question him on health care.

His agenda for the economy was a lot of what you would expect from any Republican: Competition is The Answer. Washington needs to be more attractive for businesses; not a word about it being a good place to be employed. Unions are getting in the way. We need to invest in our schools, longer hours, more preschools -- not sure how you will pay for that without ever ever ever raising taxes, but still, nothing too controversial.

But he pointed out that health care in this country is about twice as expensive in the US as it is in other countries, and not necessarily more effective. His solution is to change incentives so that people have more reason to consider the cost of care before they decide on treatment -- use market forces to control costs. And since I believe that he personally is one of the most prominent people opposing a better solution, I had the opening I wanted. He finished his remarks, and someone asked if we had questions. My hand went right up, first question to me.

I was nice. I asked if he was really "General McKenna", as he had been introduced. (He said he grew up an Army kid and knew what a General was, and he wasn't really.) I thanked him for being there. Then a question that went something like this:

"I want to challenge you a bit on health care. You said that our health care costs twice what it costs in other countries, and the level of care is not much better. But most of those countries cover all their citizens at a much lower cost than the US, and they use nationally managed systems that are very different from what you propose, where they have removed the profit incentive. Rather than tinker with our broken system, why not borrow ideas that are working in other countries?"

And then I sat back and let him answer. He knows a lot about health care, and it's safe to say he had heard the question before. It wasn't a debate; I wasn't going to challenge his answer, although I thought it fell short. And then other people asked questions, and I don't think any of them challenged him at all.

And that was that, but I was exhilarated. Several people mentioned afterward that it was a good question, including one who engaged me for about five minutes, talking about how other countries see health care as a moral issue, an issue of fairness. Most importantly, I got the opportunity to plant an idea in the minds of everyone there, that maybe those socialist/communist/whatever countries in Europe, or Japan, or Canada, have better solutions than we do. Maybe a national health care system works. Maybe our current system is really inefficient, and the reason we spend so much isn't that consumers want expensive tests, but because some corporation is making money off of every MRI, every CAT scan.

Maybe I changed the dialogue a little. It was certainly fun to try.

Newer
Older

RSS

What I Hope the President Will Say in the Next Debate

Rick Santorum and the Party of Ignorance

The Dubious Patriotism of Republicans

Tough Choices

Question for Kossacks - How to Help?

Seeking a Reasonable Discussion With Republicans

In Which I Question Rob McKenna