Archives for posts with tag: Republicans

Here it is, if you can stand to read it: the report showed how the Bushistas, PNAC types, and “Republicans” in general shat themselves in terror after 9/11, resulting in idiot wars of choice and manifold panic-driven decisions, including the ones that involved torture.

Cowards they are, as has frequently been written on this very blog. But the Torture Report gives a horrifying view into the consequences of that cowardice, that fear, that wimpiness-concealed-by-bravado that characterizes modern Repubs. In their panic-stricken, fear-blinded, gutless, craven states of “mind”, the Bush/Cheney regime lashed out in a manner that was far beyond normal evil:
* People were tortured.
* People were tortured to death.
* The torture was completely f***ing useless, and in fact caused a lot of damage.
* Innocent people were dragooned and tortured.
* “Republicans” proposed, created and implemented these programs.
* “Republicans” STILL think we should be torturing people.

Since then, the GOP has continued to show its yellow bellies on repeated occasion: by making the Prexy keep Gitmo open (said Gitmo being full of tortured people); by not allowing the tortured people to have fair trials; and by trying to cover the whole sickening mess up, even after the world already knows what we did. Cowards, poltroons, pusillanimous dastards, faint-hearted, lily-livered scaredy-cats: that, friends, is what the GOP is composed of.

And the fact that the majority of American voters recently opted to bring in even more GOP “representatives” means that those voters are, what, themselves, exactly? Ponder that one, peeps.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Wingnuts are in high gear of late, proclaiming their usual canard about there “being little or no difference between the parties”. Bull-f***ing-s***. Today’s debunking: women’s rights.

Huge differences abound: look at the current Teapubbie and Democratic platforms:

Number A: Repubs think women should allowed to die rather than allow them to have a life-saving abortion. Dems do NOT believe this.

Letter 2: Repubs think women should not be allowed to use birth control, or at least be deprived of insurance coverage if they need it. Oh, and that applies even if the pills are being used for other medical reasons than birth control. Dems do NOT believe this, either.

Thirdly: Repubs believe women should be made to work harder and be paid less. Once again: Democrats do NOT share this belief.

Ignore the lunatics of the fringe: the parties are VERY different. A vote for a Dem IS a vote against Repubs. Get on out and vote Dem.

Unless, of course, you hates you some women. If so, sit out the election or vote Republican. If not, get out and vote AGAINST the party that hates your mothers, sisters, and every woman on Earth. Any electoral action  OTHER  than a vote for a Dem is an attack on women. Period.

“No difference”, my Cranky A**. Tomorrow: Repubs’ love affair with terrorists.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

It might seem obvious to you, but it isn’t obvious to the Republican party of Benton County: their April newsletter includes the following from Chris Nogy (husband of the party secretary) :

“We need to let those who will come in the future to represent us [know] that we are serious. The 2nd amendment means nothing unless those in power believe you would have no problem simply walking up and shooting them if they got too far out of line and stopped responding as representatives.

Gentle Reader, you surely know that walking up to government officials and shooting them is assassination.That is what people did to Ronald Reagan, MLK, RFK, and many others throughout history. The writer of that editorial is saying that the 2nd Amendment is a license to commit such crimes. And why does he think he should start assassinating people?

Again from the website, referring to a recent vote in the Arkansas legislature regarding health care financing: “The legislature approved the ‘private option’ health plan with 75 percent majorities in both the Senate and House. It’s called the ‘private option’ because it takes Medicaid dollars and uses them to purchase private health insurance for people whose yearly income is less than138 percent of the federal poverty level. The goal was to not simply expand a government program, as the federal government had initially directed, but instead to provide health coverage through the private sector and thus allow the free market to hold down costs.

Got that? The Repubs voted to take public money and give it to the private sector. “Conservatives” tend to approve of such arrangements. But evidently it has sent Mr. Nogy (among others) over the edge: indeed, he is now advocating the murder of elected officials. All because Arkansas is taking Federal money???? That is crazy.

Now, other members of the Benton County GOP have disavowed Mr. Nogy’s remarks, but as of this writing have not removed them from the webpage: http://talkbusiness.net/2013/04/benton-county-gop-newsletter-suggests-shooting-legislators/ This would seem to indicate at least a certain level of tacit agreement on the part of the Republican Party.

Here’s the link to the party site: http://www.nogy.net/bcgop/Apr_2013/index.html Oh, and this writer took screen shots of the page, in case they decide to delete it. He will add them to this post if need be.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

There has been a wee bit of a kerfuffle in the media on the difference between “outsourcing” and “offshoring”, said kerfuffle obscuring the basic point.  So Mr. Blunt and Cranky will attempt to de-kerfufflify the terminology:

Outsourcing is when you used to do the job, and then gave it someone else’s company to do for you.  Outsourcing can send a job overseas, to another state, or even keep it in the same building.  It does not necessarily involve international job migration. (Mr. B & C works as a consultant, and has had jobs “outsourced” to him for years now, for instance. Almost always in the U.S.)

Offshoring is the actual migration of jobs from your country to another: call center jobs going to Ireland or India, manufacturing jobs going to Mexico or China, etc. This is what people get arsed about, rightly or wrongly. (Note that offshoring is not always a bad thing. Sometimes it can actually preserve American jobs, strange though that may seem.) Offshoring is what happened after NAFTA and other TAs (and various tax policies) were imposed that made it profitable to de-job Americans.

This is the basic point behind the word games: American jobs were taken away, and sent to people in other countries to do.

There is a difference between the two candidates for Prexy in their views of offshoring: Romney favors it, and Obama kinda sorta doesn’t, mostly maybe. We can see their views expressed in their tax policy proposals: Romney and his party promote tax benefits to companies that send jobs to other counties (Romney also showed his support for offshoring via his company’s private-sector activities). Obama and some of his party are beginning to feel that we should not be doing so, and are shifting some of their policies to encourage the return of jobs to the United States.

If we want jobs to be created in America (“inshoring” is the new buzzword: and no, this blogger is not making that up), we should adjust tax policy so as to encourage it. This is largely the role of Congress, which of late is so busy with inter-party squabbling that they can’t even do the few things that they agree on. The President can set a tone and encourage such policy, and even take some limited action via the Executive Branch, of course, so it does matter which schmuck you vote for. Romney and his party will try to send more jobs away, while Obama and his party will try to keep some of them here. How you vote will to some extent determine which way the jobs will flow. Note, however, that where jobs go is mostly dictated by market conditions.

Mr. B & C