Return of the Right-Wing Rent-A-Mob (and Another Example of How FOX Plays Their Viewers For Fools)

Anyone with a decent memory of the ugly side of American politics will recall the manufactured mob during the recount of the 2000 presidential election. Essentially right-wing operatives were bussed in to act as normal citizens from the surrounding community who were demanding a halt to the recount.

Well it appears we are going to return to that over the next month as Democrats attempt to hold town hall meetings about healthcare during the August recess. Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks who created the tea parties have circulated a memo about how to interrupt and rattle Democrats. Here are some parts of it:

“Spread out in the hall and try to be in the front half. The objective is to put the Rep on the defensive...The Rep should be made to feel that a majority, and if not, a significant portion of at least the audience, opposes the socialist agenda of Washington. Watch for an opportunity to yell out and challenge the Rep’s statements early...The goal is to rattle him, get him off his prepared script and agenda. If he says something outrageous, stand up and shout out and sit right back down. Look for these opportunities before he even takes questions.”

After finding out about this I go to TheFOXNation.com and see the following story at the top of the page: “Town Hall’s Gone Wild!” With the following summary: "Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops, congressmen fearful for their safety — welcome to the new town-hall-style meeting, the once-staid forum that is rapidly turning into a house of horrors for members of Congress." Yep...just as spontaneous as the tea parties -- the right-wing is very coordinated and good about staying on message, and meanwhile they think their supporters are the biggest fools in the world.

http://carloz.newsvine.com/_news/2009/07/31/3100375-right-wing-harassment-strategy-against-dems-detailed-in-memo-yell-stand-up-and-shout-out-rattle-him

Which Is Worse; Smokers or Perfume-Wearers?

Smelling perfume or cologne has a 75% chance of giving me an instant headache that can last for hours. It can be just walking by someone who has a lot on them, walking through the perfume section of a mall or sometimes just opening a magazine with the free samples in it which themselves aren't even opened. I get a headache immediately. It's virtually guaranteed if I come in contact with an idiot who has bathed in the stuff; and if I had to be around them for any amount of time my headache would develop into a migraine.

On the other hand smelling a cigarette probably has a 25% chance or less of doing this -- and I generally have to be around it longer and perhaps even in an enclosed space with it. One whiff isn't enough, and I know because I go to bars and rarely get a headache there. I think it’s because almost all of the chemicals in perfume are synthetic toxins. The National Academy of Sciences reports that 95% of the chemicals used in fragrances today are synthetic compounds derived from petroleum, including known toxins capable of causing cancer, birth defects, central nervous system disorders and allergic reactions.[1] Cigarettes may have some synthetic materials in them and are unhealthy, but in terms of chemicals it's not even close.

I'd like to know why we are so quick to ban smoking from public places and there's nothing said at all about people wearing perfume, especially excessive amounts of it. What I and other people experience is an allergic reaction that instantaneously causes us a health problem ranging from a headache to nausea in some people. Given the choice I’d rather smell a cigarette.


FOOTNOTES
1. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/9682.php

Healthcare Bill REQUIRES You To Buy Coverage or Pay a $1,000 Fine?

I have one concern about the bill; it REQUIRES you to buy coverage. This was one reason I liked Obama instead of Hillary, she was for requiring people to buy coverage, even docking their paycheck if they refuse to do so -- same as if they are paying child support. During the election Obama said he just wanted to require parents to cover their children. Now, I am sure most people want healthcare, but what if you don't? According to some stories I have read online you will be fined $1,000 for not purchasing healthcare. What if you don't have a job? How can someone pay $1,000 if they can't afford to buy healthcare in the first place? Forcing people to purchase healthcare and fining them is a terrible idea -- issues of personal freedom aside, this would be a GIFT to the health insurance companies if we don't have a extremely cheap public option included.

I don't consider myself much of a policy wonk, I am more fascinated with how people think politically...but the truth is I don't know a lot about this bill myself, and that's the problem for most people. Everyone wants reform, but even I, a person who consumes a lot of news, I don't have a clear idea of what this bill contains so I don't know if I want it to pass or not!

This appears to be the week that will decide whether a healthcare bill is passed, or at least the direction of it. The Republicans are united and channeling the spirit of Machiavelli a little more than usual when Jim DeMint of South Carolina says, "If we can stop him on this it will be his Waterloo...it will break him." Neo-Con Bill Kristol said this is the week to "go for the kill." This all started when we suddenly started to hear about how the healthcare bill was "on the ropes" -- suddenly it was in crisis. I remember hearing that and I wondered in the back of my mind if that was the set up for another part of the fight against it, and it was.

The Re-Direction and Deflection of America's Confused Anger

We all know there's an anger that has shown itself in various forms for the past year or so. It started when the economy went south -- people were angry at the big banks and the government for bailing them out. Meanwhile average people watched as the stock market made their 401k into a 101k. The AIG bonuses infuriated people, right-wingers eventually defended them. People openly criticized greed as a philosophy, especially when unregulated, and the public wanted government to act, they even trusted government. But the anger element was never very focused.

Then came the tea parties which FOX News essentially took over on tax day in April, but gave little mention to them this past July 4th. Keen observers saw that what was going on was a shifting of the general, confused anger out there away from the corporations and toward the government. Never was the message totally coherent; Obama is a socialist/fascist, Obama is raiding my child's piggy bank, a raise in taxes is equivalent to the end of America as we know it. There were conspiracy theories about Obama's birth certificate, the Federal Reserve, etc. But it didn't matter, so long as where blame was placed wasn't at the feet of corporations and unregulated capitalism.

Now as the economy slowly improves it appears that we will climb out of this recession without learning our lesson as we did during the 1930s. Some new rules will go into effect regarding leverage; some easily broken laws regarding CEO compensation will be instated. Bernie Madoff -- more a symbol than a man -- has been sent to prison; a total distraction if there ever was one.

I am talking more about social consciousness and consensus, and perhaps this hasn't been fully decided yet. It feels that there is a war going on about not who we ought to blame, but who we should be most angry toward. It's very possible we will only become more cynical about both government and business, something that will only help the regressive forces in society. Once people are cynical they will yet again vote based on petty nonsense rather than their own interests. The problem is, if the recession drags on Obama and the government will receive more pressure from the public who thinks the economic stimulus is failing -- but if we recover too quick we will have learned nothing from the experience and can expect it to revisit us later.

ACLU Sues to Help Westboro Baptist Church

This is why I tend to like the ACLU, they are about free speech. They have defended street preachers, and now they are defending the controversial "God Hates Fags" Westboro Baptist Church against a ban at funeral protests. If you want to read more on the specifics see the link at the bottom of this entry.

I only discovered this story by going to TheFOXNation.com. But I wonder; why wasn't this on the liberal news websites I went to? Two reasons, first the conservatives love to point out something they consider bad about the ACLU. And why do they consider this bad? Because Christians are ashamed of the Westboro Baptist Church because they hold a mirror up to Christians’ faces and force them to see what their Bible really says in its most raw, unfiltered form. I am glad they are around, if you ask me, they're the only Christians who really interpret their Bible correctly.

Too many people think religion is OK because they know a watered-down version of it, the Westboro Baptist Church gives it straight, no chaser. I don’t like wishy-washiness – let 'em find out how shit really smells. Furthermore, unlike them, I support their right to free speech that might offend me personally.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/A0A89306243B2894862575EC0075A6A0?OpenDocument

The Palin Drama Continues -- Caribou Barbie Leaves Government

I forget who it was exactly, but I believe it was Shannyn Moore, radio talk shot host from Alaska who said that Sarah Palin's big political ambitions combined with her intelligence level is like putting a rocket engine on a golf cart; you're never sure where it's going to end up.

Today is another chapter in her ever-unfolding drama, resigning as governor later this month. I have to think, doing this on a Friday, the day everyone uses to "dump" news and on a holiday weekend, it would seem she doesn't want to attract a lot of attention...for once. Maybe there's something else going on yet to be revealed.

Now that she's outside of government, one wonders how she will cater the attention she loves so much. Supposedly she's writing a book, is she going to tour the country and rile up the gas-huffing, knuckle-draggers in "real America" who love her so much?

Is she looking to run for president? Of course, but Jesus, has 24-hour cable news really made politics a perpetual campaign? The election isn't until 2012, that’s a long time. She didn't even finish one term as governor – easy fodder for any political opponent. What other than her ego alone makes Caribou Barbie think she's qualified?

In her brief speech about stepping down she spoke in a tone of victimhood of the "new political environment" and “blood sport” -- one she has sought to attract and encourage, whether it's accusing David Letterman of being a pedophile, using her children as political props or accusing Obama of palling around with terrorists and doing nothing when crowds call for his head, literally. She gets what she deserves as any attention and power-hungry individual would in her position, I hope the media continues to chew her up and spit her out.