Featured Stories
CD 2 Democratic candidate forum on Arizona Illustrated
August 22, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Congressman Ron Barber and state Rep. Matt Heinz faced off in a Democratic candidate forum on Arizona Illustrated on Monday.
Video below the fold.
Willard ‘Mittens’ Romney wants to ‘open up’ about his faith
August 22, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Media villagers are terrified of asking questions about a candidate's religious beliefs. The reason for this is that there is always a knee-jerk reaction from the candidate and his or her supporters accusing them of "religious bigotry" and attacking "religious liberty." It is a way to silence any legitimate inquiry.
This is a problem for media villagers because so many candidates run for office citing their religious beliefs as a source of their moral character and a qualification for office. (The U.S. Constitution and Arizona Constitution prohibit a religious test for political office). If a candidate is going to cite his or her religious beliefs and piety as a source of their moral character and a qualification for office, then they ought to be questioned about their religious beliefs. They injected their religious beliefs into the race, they cannot deflect questions.
I read today that Willard "Mittens" Romney begins to open up, just a little, about his Mormonism. The Romney campaign recenty released a series of commercials that ask "Who shares your values?," as the start of a broader Romney effort to emphasize values and religion as he courts undecided voters.
Philip Barlow, a Mormon historian at Utah State University who worked with Romney when he was bishop in Belmont, Mass., said that trying to understand Romney without Mormonism would be like "watching a football game with half the players invisible."
His decades of involvement in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has shaped every aspect of Romney's life, from his family to his decades in private business and his political career. Romney has donated millions to his church and its charities, and has volunteered countless hours to the Mormon community and others.
Yet Romney has spoken only in the broadest terms about religion.
OK then, here is a subject that Romney had to address during his 2008 presidential run, but has not been questioned about, to my knowledge, during his 2012 presidential run. Sally Denton at Salon, back in January of this year, wrote Romney and the White Horse Prophecy – Salon.com (excerpts):
Upon completion of his foreign mission, [Romney] immersed himself in the 1970 senatorial campaign of his mother, Lenore Romney, who was running against Phillip Hart in the Michigan general election. That same year, the Cougar Club — the all male, all white social club at Brigham Young University in Salt Lake City (blacks were excluded from full membership in the Mormon church until 1978) — was humming with talk that its president, Mitt Romney, would become the first Mormon president of the United States. “If not Mitt, then who?” was the ubiquitous slogan within the elite organization. The pious world of BYU was expected to spawn the man who would lead the Mormons into the White House and fulfill the prophecies of the church’s founder, Joseph Smith Jr., which Romney has avidly sought to realize.
Gun regulations in Israel (and some shameless self promotion)
August 22, 2012
by
by David Safier In my column in the Explorer, I decided to take a different tack in discussing gun regulations. Rather than diving into the debate head on, I wrote about the way Israel regulates personal gun ownership. Israel's gun policies surprised me when I read about them recently. Gun regulations are strict, gun ownership … Read more
Rep. Todd Akin should be the keynote speaker at the GOP convention
August 22, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie: As I posted the other day in The GOP war on women: define 'legitimate' rape, "Rep. Todd Akin's comment reflects the mainstream view of the majority of the Tea-Publican Caucus in Congress. Akin's ignorant comment is not the product of the lunatic ravings of a madman. But that is what the GOP would have you believe today … Read more
‘Galt – Gekko 2012’ campaign wants to avoid a ‘great debate’
August 21, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Great post today from Greg Sargent on the "Galt – Gekko 2012" Big Lie propaganda campaign. No Romney and Ryan really don't want a great debate:
Ever since Mitt Romney picked Paul Ryan, it’s been widely claimed that this ensures a “great debate” pitting two starkly different ideological visions over the future against one another. But it’s now clear that the GOP ticket doesn’t want a great debate at all. Their entire strategy is designed to obscure the true ideological differences between both sides.
Many media figures have pointed out that Romney has refused to detail his positions on issue after issue. What’s less appreciated is the real reason he’s doing this. The GOP candidates don’t really want that much-ballyhooed “great debate.” If they did want a contest between two grand visions, they wouldn’t be shying away from discussing the true nature and implications of their own vision. Yet they are doing just that.
This explains why the Romney campaign has been campaigning so heavily on two falsehoods about Obama’s policies: That he gutted welfare reform’s work requirement and raided Medicare to pay for Obamacare. The former claim is a distraction; the latter is about muddying the two sides’ actual differences over what to do about the popular entitlement. The muddying is necessary because the actual Ryan vision for Medicare’s future is deeply unpopular. Same on taxes: Romney won’t detail how he’d pay for his deep tax cuts — which would disproportionately benefit the rich — because paying for them with middle class tax hikes would be politically unacceptable. Must-read from Mike Tomasky:
These guys may not be able to count, but they can read polls, and so they know very well that if they gave the county the honest debate we were told we were going to have about Medicare, and for that matter about taxation, they’d wake up Nov. 7 with about 120 electoral votes in their pockets and conservatism in tatters.
They know this. They know that the truth would crush them electorally. And so it follows that they know they must lie. They must lie about their Medicare plans. They must lie about the effects of their tax plans on average people and rich people. And they must tell a number of lies about Obama, all the better if they involve race, as the welfare lie does.
So this will be the entire point of the Romney-Ryan campaign. Lie lie lie. Muddy the waters. Turn day to night, fire to water, champagne to piss. Peddle themselves as the precise opposite of what they actually are. That is clearly the m.o.
This really explains everything. It explains what Ezra Klein has called the “policy gap” between the campaigns, in which only one side is proposing actual policies. . .
Obama campaign ad on Romney education plan
August 21, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Via Steve Benen, Education policy comes into sharper focus:
On education, Romney's stump speech tells voters, "We're going to make sure our kids and our adults have the skills they need to succeed. We need to make sure our schools are the best in the world. They are not now. They will be. We'll make them the best."
How? The answer is one of Romney's biggest vulnerabilities.
The Democratic National Committee unveiled this video this morning, noting Romney's education plan and the details of the Republican agenda: slash Pell Grants, cut college tax credits, reintroduce the loan-system middleman that rewards banks instead of students, and encourage young people to choose wealthy parents when thinking about higher education.
And what about students who've worked hard, been accepted to the school of their choice, but don't have parents with large amounts of disposable income? Under Romney's vision, these people are simply out of luck. Higher education isn't an option — young people who can't afford to go to their college of their choice should "shop around" for some other institution, because a Romney administration doesn't intend to help with Pell Grants or student loans.
Video below the fold.
Romney’s Neocon foreign policy advisers want a war with Iran ‘on day one’
August 21, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
I posted back in May, An Inexperienced Romney and his Neocon Bush Foreign Policy Advisers:
One of the things that ought to give anyone pause about Willard
"Mittens" Romney is that he has surrounded himself with the
Neoconservative war mongers from George W. Bush's presidency who gave us
the bogus intelligence for an unnecessary war in Iraq that cost us so
much in American lives and treasure. Not to mention set this country on a
dark course to illegal torture and rendition as if we are the old
Soviet Union.
These guys ought to be on trial for war crimes before a Nuremberg Tribunal-style court, not walking around free to peddle their "American Century" Pax Americana Empire wet dreams to Tea-Publican candidates for president.
Twenty three of Romney's senior advisers served under Bush in some capacity, several serving in key roles in the administration. Here is the full list of Mitt Romney's national security team.
Today, Neocon war monger Elliott Abrams asked that Congress enact another Authorization for Use of Military Force resolution, this time against Iran, so that the Neocon war mongers may immediately continue their "American Century" Pax Americana Empire wet dream should Americans be foolish enough to elect Romney. These Neocon war mongers want a war with Iran "on day one." Ryan Adviser Calls On Congress To Authorize War With Iran:
Elliott Abrams, a former Bush Administration official who focuses on the Middle East, took to the pages of [bloody Bill Kristol's] Weekly Standard to argue that neither Iranians nor Israelis think the Obama administration is “serious” about attacking Iran, and that the only real way to convince them is having Congress vote for war:
In any event, the debate over a joint resolution will clarify who stands where. At the moment, no one is persuaded that the United States will use force to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. That situation worries Israelis and emboldens Iranians, not the outcome we want. A clear statement now that is backed by the nominees of both parties and elicits widespread support in Congress would demonstrate that, whatever the election results, American policy is set. That is the best (and may be the only) way to avoid an Israeli strike in the near future and the best (and may be the only) way to persuade Iran to negotiate seriously. And if we are unwilling as a nation to state that we will act to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, that conclusion should solidify support for what would then become the inevitable Israeli strike. A refusal by the White House to seek such a joint resolution would itself suggest that, while “all options are on the table,” the likelihood is that that is precisely where they will remain.
Going on the Buckmaster Show Wednesday
August 21, 2012
by
by David Safier I'll be doing another Blogger Beat segment on the Buckmaster Show Wednesday. The show starts at noon on KVOI (1030 AM). I should be on around 12:30. We'll be talking about — we'll see when I get there. Plenty of topics to choose from.
