Year: 2008

Your Chance to Mess With Republican Florida Women

Trish

We at Pensito Review love polls. We love taking them, we love analyzing them, but more than anything, we love throwing them off.

Here’s one to really mess with. The Florida Federation of Republican Women wants to know which Republican you’re supporting in the primaries. A loose coalition of Florida bloggers has pledged, just for purposes of this poll, to support Duncan Hunter, the candidate who most recently dropped out.

As of this writing, Duncan is in third place after John McCain in second and Mitt Romney in the lead. We know Duncan can do better. Help a brother out and take a minute to register your vote.

Update! Our man has moved into second place! Who says your vote doesn’t count?

Updated update! The word is that Republican women have gotten wind of our little plot and are throwing off their own poll by voting repeatedly (which you can do by deleting your cookies — just sayin’) for Mitt Romney. Who would have ever thought Republicans could cheat at voting? Land’s sake.

From Sin City to Redneck Heaven, God Smites Huck Again

Jon Ponder

In November, Mike Huckabee told a crowd of Christian college students that his poll numbers were rising because God was performing a miracle. “It’s the same power that helped the little boy with two fish and five loaves feed a crowd of 5,000 people,” he said.

Yesterday Huckabee came in fourth in the Nevada caucuses, behind Ron Paul, and second in South Carolina, a place so riven with holy rollers that the Christian Exodus movement chose it as the target for its treasonous plan to occupy a U.S. state in order to secede and form a theocratic nation.

Add these to his losses in New Hampshire primary and Wyoming.

With Iowa as his only win, the arc of Huckabee’s campaign is starting to look eerily similar the 1988 campaign of TV preacher Pat Robertson, who came in second in the Iowa caucuses behind Bob Dole but a head of the first George Bush. Robertson lost big in New Hampshire and never recoverd. He dropped out before the primaries ended.

If Huckabee does better than that now, it really will be a miracle.

Last week I said, “You can’t go wrong preaching hate to South Carolina Republicans. But Huckabee tried it, and it didn’t work this time. I’m glad I was wrong.

Rightwing Funder Scaife: ‘Yes I Do!’ Believe Gay Marriage Should Be Legal

Jon Ponder

An article in the current issue of Vanity Fair looks at the messy, incredibly expensive divorce of rightwing billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife, whose current wife (and former mistress) discovered he was having an ongoing affair with a much-younger woman (he’s 75, she’s in her 40s) who was once caught up in a prostitution sting.

“I don’t want people throwing rocks at me in the street. But I believe in open marriage.”
– Scaife

Scaife’s best known political activity was spending over $2 million to fund the “Arkansas Project,” the investigation into the Clintons’ personal life that Hillary Clinton called a “vast rightwing conspiracy.” (She was wrong of course, the rightwing conspiracy was not “vast.” It was just a handful of clueless Yankees who used Scaife’s millions to pay Arkansas liars to tell lies they would have gladly told for free.)

But it turns out Scaife’s conservatism is purely economic, and even though he funds the rightwing lunatic fringe, he actually holds many views that moralists abhor — in particular on gay marriage:

Does he think his best gay friends should be able to get married? Scaife throws his hand in the air and exclaims, “Yes, I do!” A moment later he adds, “I haven’t really thought about it. But if they want to get married, that’s their business. I couldn’t care less.”

Ironically, “couldn’t care less” about personal matters was the rightwing’s default position until Scaife and others helped give rise to the moralists who have dominated American politics since the Reagan era.

Here’s Scaife’s position on infidelity:

Asked whether his infidelity is hypocritical, in light of his political commitments, he refers not to a moral principle but to his own personal history. “My first marriage ended with an affair,” he says, amused. And monogamy is not, he continues, an essential part of a good marriage. “I don’t want people throwing rocks at me in the street. But I believe in open marriage.” Philandering, Scaife says with a laugh, “is something that Bill Clinton and I have in common.”

Scaife is worth billions, all of which he inherited. Because there was no prenup, his soon-to-be ex-wife is already set for life:

[…]

According to the Bible, Illegal Immigrants Must Be Welcomed

Jon Ponder

If you believe the Bible is the word of God — and especially if you believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God — you must believe this:

Why doesn’t Mexico have [the] drive toward technology and math/science education that has virtually transformed India?

Leviticus (19:33-4):”And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him. But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself.”

It would be interesting to know how the “God said it-I believe it-that settles it” crowd would square this admonition with their blood lust to round up 12 million people and send them back to Mexico.

Speaking of fantastical thinking, has anybody calculated the cost of deporting 12 million people, housing them (in concentration camps, assumedly), processing them and then shipping them across the border? If it is, say, $5,000 per person (which is low), then the cost to U.S. taxpayers would be $60 billion. (If we outsource it to Halliburton, multiply that by a thousand.)

So is there a solution?

What Americans see as a domestic illegal immigration crisis is, in reality, an economic diaspora of unskilled workers fleeing structural flaws in the Mexican political and economic system that are centuries old — and which are compounded by a religious abhorrence for birth control among the people of the exodus. (If the Republicans really wanted a sustainable majority, they would be courting these Bible-believing, hard-working, family-centric people instead of demonizing them. Their vicious rhetoric is sending the illegal immigrants’ naturalized relatives and culturally Latino sympathizers, many of whom were Republicans for generations, into the Democratic Party throughout the Southwest by the millions.)

Mexico is, in effect, the sort of oligarchy Republican economic and social policies are designed to create in the United States: A tiny elite group of people and corporations who control the country’s vast reserves of wealth and resources sits on top of a weak and struggling middle class, which in turn rests on a population of tens of millions of people who are poor, uneducated and easily manipulated.

The Mexican oligarchy profits from the exodus, as does the Bush oligarch-in-waiting: The influx of millions of unskilled laborers, combined with the defenestrating of U.S. jobs overseas, weakens the American labor movement, which, in turn, strengthens domestic corporations and oligarchs.

A question from a conservative published in a recent edition of the popular column, “Ask a Mexican,” points to an aspect of the crisis that is rarely discussed:

Why doesn’t Mexico have [the] drive toward technology and math/science education that has virtually transformed India? India doesn’t even have the mass economy like China, but they have billions and billions of dollars because of their brains. Mexico doesn’t produce labor other than the kind that will scrub, wash, press and cut grass.

Leaving aside the rightwing cultural bias, the larger question is on target. Why won’t the Mexican government do as the Indian government has done and educate its underclasses?

Why should they?

For one thing, the Mexican government does not view the U.S. illegal immigration crisis as a crisis because, from their point of view, it isn’t a problem, it is a solution. They have shifted the burden of caring for millions of their poor, unskilled people to the United States.

For another, educating its masses would actually weaken the Mexican regime because, unlike India’s democratic government, the Mexican oligarchy (rightly) views a strong middle class as a threat.

If this illegal immigration crisis is ever going to end, it won’t be resolved by the political parties in the United States playing rope-a-dope with each other — although Republicans will try to use it for their short-term political gain in the general election this year. The crisis will only be settled when the United States government forces the Mexican government to take responsibility for its people by feeding, clothing and, especially, educating them.

Until that happens, if it ever does, we have no other practicable option but to follow the biblical injunction and treat these people as our own. Restricting them from healthcare and education, as rightwing Christians insist on doing, will only exacerbate the problem by creating the ideal conditions for crime, domestic terrorism, deadly epidemics that spread like wildfire into the general population and worse.

Quote du Jour

Buck Banks

Well, for those who like that sort of thing, I should think that is just about the sort of thing they would like.

— Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865), 16th President of the United States, on being asked to endorse a book on communicating with spirits of the deceased

Huckabee Panders to S.C. GOP – Again Equates Homosexuality with Pedophilia, Bestiality

Jon Ponder

You Can Never Go Wrong Preaching Hate to South Carolina Republicans

When Mike Huckabee’s poll numbers began to rise in late November, he claimed that his success was equivalent to the New Testament miracle of the loaves and the fishes. (In fact, it was because the Christian nationalist base of the GOP had nowhere else to go.)

“I think the radical view is to say that we’re going to change the definition of marriage so that it can mean two men, two women, a man and three women, a man and a child, a man and animal.”
– Huckabee

The Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby tracking poll of voters in Saturday’s South Carolina GOP primary has shown Huckabee stuck behind John McCain 29 percent to 22 percent for the last three days. The combined factors of troubling poll numbers and three straight primary losses appear to have caused Huckabee to lose faith in the strategy of depending on God to deliver his voters to the polls on Saturday. So today he tossed red meat to South Carolina Talibanis by ramping up his hate speech toward gays:

INTERVIEWER: Is it your goal to bring the Constitution into strict conformity with the Bible? Some people would consider that a kind of dangerous undertaking, particularly given the variety of biblical interpretations.

HUCKABEE: Well, I don’t think that’s a radical view to say we’re going to affirm marriage. I think the radical view is to say that we’re going to change the definition of marriage so that it can mean two men, two women, a man and three women, a man and a child, a man and animal. Again, once we change the definition, the door is open to change it again. I think the radical position is to make a change in what’s been historic.

He also clarified the extent to which he would rewrite the Constitution to bring it into conformity with biblical law:

INTERVIEWER: Do you think that on issues other than marriage and the life of the unborn that the Constitution should be brought into conformity with the Bible, which is what that quote seemed to suggest?

HUCKABEE:No, I was specifically talking about those two issues. Those were the only two issues I spoke about in the speech, and that was the point. I’m not suggesting that we say, “Okay, the Bible says you should tithe, so now in the Constitution we’re going to amend it to say everyone tithes.”

At least we know now that he wouldn’t also outlaw other mortal sins like adultery, premarital sex, working on Sunday, children sassing their parents and saying “God damn.”

Or do we?

Huckabee’s position today on the equivalence of gay relationships, which are consensual, and pedophilia and bestiality, which are not, is a 180-degree flipflop from the position he took on “Meet the Press” about two weeks ago:

RUSSERT: …And, and this is what you wrote in your book, “Kids Who Kill,” in 1998: “It is now difficult to keep track of the vast array of publicly endorsed and institutionally supported aberrations–from homosexuality and pedophilia to sadomasochism and necrophilia.” Why would you link homosexuality with sadomasochism, pedophilia and necrophilia?

HUCKABEE: Well, what I was pointing out is all of these are deviations from what has been the traditional concept of sexual behavior and men and women having children, raising those children in the context of a, of a traditional marriage and family. And, again, taken out of the larger context of that book, speaking about how so many of our social institutions have been broken down.

RUSSERT: But do you think homosexuality is equivalent to pedophilia…

HUCKABEE: Oh, of course not.

RUSSERT: …or sadomasochism?

HUCKABEE: No, of course not. I didn’t say…

It bears repeating that pedophilia, sadomasochism and necrophilia are not “publicly endorsed and institutionally supported” aberrations.

The record should also reflect rightwing Christians do not practice what they preach about “traditional marriage.” Born-agains have a slightly higher divorce rate than normal Americans.

Politico Deals from the Bottom of the Race Card Deck

Buck Banks

As if the current tempest in a teacup over who played the race card first in the Democratic primary weren’t stupid enough, The Politico ran an article today that sought to characterize the Congressional Black Caucus as fractured over whom to endorse. This is a clear example of the media (not sure Politico qualifies as MSM or not) going to some lengths to create a story ex nihilo.

The headline screeches “Obama Splits Black Caucus.” The lede breathlessly jumps in with:

Even though Barack Obama may become the first African-American ever to represent a major party as the nominee for president, many black lawmakers on Capitol Hill are not supporting him. And that’s creating tensions within the Congressional Black Caucus.

The way Hearn presents the information makes it seem like there’s a big problem here.

The writer, Josephine Hearn, goes on to note:

More than a third of the black members of Congress are backing Hillary Rodham Clinton or John Edwards in the presidential primary, a stance that puts them at odds with many of their African-American constituents, who, recent polls show, are beginning to shift to Obama’s camp.

Sounds pretty fractured, don’t it? Until you read down to the actual numbers:

Of the 42 black members of the House, 17 are behind Obama, 16 are with Clinton, two are with Edwards and seven remain uncommitted.

Ms. Hearn’s math is correct — 16 + 2 = 18, which works out to 42 percent of the Caucus is backing Clinton or Edwards. Heck, in the Pensito Review executive suite, what we call PR math (which we use to count readers) would have changed that to “nearly half of the Caucus.” But the way Hearn presents the information makes it seem like there’s a big problem here, with black congressional members who endorsed Clinton now being criticized by their peers and constituents for not backing Obama.

[…]

Missing White House E-Mails – Incompetence or Deliberate Law-Breaking?

Buck Banks

In a well-established pattern of the Bush presidency, the controversy over a missing 5 million to 10 million White House e-mails seems to be the result of either incompetence or a deliberate attempt to destroy potentially incriminating evidence. Sound familiar? You bet.

At the heart of the controversy is whether mixed in among those millions of messages were some regarding the exposure of Valerie Plame as an undercover CIA operative.

‘We still do not know what was lost, why it was lost, and what steps we have to take to recover it — assuming it is still recoverable.’
– Meredith Fuchs, general counsel for the National Security Archive

The White House has been typically reluctant to comply with requests for information about how it handles and stores what are in effect presidential records, which are required by law to be preserved. But if it was a cover-up and the tapes were destroyed, then criminal charges could be laid. However, if it was just incompetence — seems the White House was in the habit of reusing the record tapes, meaning that while not purposefully destroyed, the e-mails were taped over, effectively making it impossible to retrieve them.

Finally, Tuesday the White House complied with a magistrate’s order to do some ‘splaining:

In their lawsuits, the National Security Archive and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington suggest the e-mails were improperly deleted from White House computer servers. Over 5 million White House e-mails are missing, CREW alleged. Recently, the group said it has been told by reliable sources that the actual figure of missing e-mail is over 10 million.

Typically, the Bush administration takes the position that it is above the law:

In asking that the complaints be dismissed, the Bush administration says the president’s record keeping practices under the Presidential Records Act are not reviewable by the courts. Also, the Federal Records Act does not allow the far-reaching action the two private groups are demanding, the administration contends.

[…]