About Us
Mission Statement
Rules of Conduct
 
Name:
Pswd:
Remember Me
Register
 

Going Off the Rails on a Crazy Train
Author: BobR    Date: 12/16/2011 13:41:25

I am truly glad that I don't have to do this for a living. If I did, I would've had to watch the circus side-show that called itself a Republican debate last night, instead of watching the Falcons kick the collective ass of the Jacksonville Jaguars. I went to bed happy, albeit a bit ignorant of the craziness that occurred in Des Moines.

Of course - a crazy carnival-like atmosphere has been the overriding impression of this Republican race. None of the contenders seem the least bit presidential (neither did George W. Bush, but that's another story). What has stood out is how Republicans in this race (and those in Congress, plus those that support them) seem to have gone completely off the rails.

President Obama has called them out for their hard-line extremism, saying “But I do think that right now at least, in the Republican Party there are a couple of notions. Number one is that compromise is a dirty word. Number two, anything that Obama’s for, we’re against.” We've seen that with Congress, and this crop of candidates crowing about "Obamacare" like it's the death-knell for America.

Michelle Bachmann (never one to disappoint when looking for insanity disguised as a political stance), has gone so far as to say that she'd repeal it in the interests of being pro-life. That's right - letting people die because they can't get health care is pro-life (it's already saved lives). Why? I can't figure it out, as she seem's to be talking out of both sides of her mouth:
Bachmann also criticized the administration for denying greater access to the morning after pill, despite agreeing with the decision. She warned that if re-elected, the administration would surely make Plan B available “on the grocery store aisles next to bubble gums and next to M&Ms.”

Santorum has decided to avoid being labeled a "compassionate conservative" (because it doesn't poll well with troglodytes?), stating that he'd cut heating assistance and unemployment benefits. He's against LIHEAP, apparently not realizing that laws against cutting off the power to people in the winter make no difference if people can't afford the heating oil. The LIHEAP program has already been cut in half from last year, and people are having to turn their thermostats down to 60 to make their oil last through the winter.

Newt Gingrich has always had a rather healthy self-esteem (bordering on narcissism). It's no wonder then that he sees himself as the 5th head on Mt. Rushmore, comparing himself to Lincoln, Jefferson, Jackson, and FDR. Wait - what?... FDR?? The Republican base HATES FDR and all the "socialist" things he put in place. This is not going to play well in Peoria. That comparison came out of a rant about the courts. Gingrich wants to abolish the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, because (of course) he thinks it's rulings are "too liberal". Bachmann and Paul chimed in on that one:
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said she agreed with Gingrich that the judiciary has become too powerful. She said it was up to Congress and the president to take the power back.

"Because now we have gotten to the point where we think the final arbiter of law is the court system. It isn't. The intention of the founders was that the courts would be the least powerful system of government. And if we give to the courts the right to make law, then the people will have lost their representation. They need to hold onto their representation."

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) also advocated against abolishing courts and allowing Congress to subpoena judges to account for their decisions, as Gingrich suggested, saying it may "open up a can of words."

Um - yes Ms. Bachmann - the courts ARE the final arbiters, and that's the way it was designed. It forces Congress to write laws that are constitutional, and tosses out those that aren't. Sure there's some leeway, but not much.

Mitt Romney - the candidate who flip-flops so often he practically vibrates - has come out with what I am sure he believes is a workable "compromise" to the gay marriage debate... He envisions a "three-tiered system" to address the sticky situation of marriages that have already occurred:
[Romney] expressed support for a constitutional amendment that could create a complex three-tier system of marriage — maintaining marriage rights for straight couples, allowing gays who have already married to remain married, but barring future same-sex marriages.

“I think it would keep intact those marriages which had occurred under the law but maintain future plans based on marriage being between a man and a woman,” Romney said.

Perry compared himself to Tim Tebow, which gives me another reason to dislike him. Did Perry cry or something? He compared himself to Tebow because... um... I forgot why... Oops.

The nuttiness has extended beyond the candidates into the rest of the country as well. In a rare glimpse of the dark heart of FOX News, Chris Wallace gives us a peek behind the curtain:
Wallace, who is moderating a Thursday’s Republican presidential debate, told Fox News’s Neil Cavuto on Wednesday that a Paul win would “discredit” the Iowa caucuses.

“The Ron Paul people are not going to like my saying this,” Wallace began. “But to a certain degree, it will discredit the Iowa caucuses because, rightly or wrongly, I think most of the Republican establishment thinks he’s not going to end up as the nominee.”

“So therefore, Iowa won’t count,” he added. “It would certainly be a knock to Gingrich because, you know, right now he was the frontrunner — or a week ago he was the big frontrunner in this state so it would be missed opportunity for him.”
(bold-face mine...)

You know - I thought the whole reason for primaries was for the people - not the party establishment - to pick the eventual candidate.

Our final "what the hell?" moment comes via "LifeWay Christian Bookstores", a place to buy Bibles and other Christian books. Except - they are no longer selling a particular Bible that is being used to fund the Susan B. Komen For the Cure charity. Why? Because some of that money may be used by Planned Parenthood to perform breast exams:
For every copy of this particular Bible that was sold, $1 dollar from the sale went to the Susan G. Komen Foundation, a breast cancer charity well-known for organizing “Race for the Cure.” The foundation, in turn, donates some of its funds to breast cancer health programs sponsored by Planned Parenthood. Because the religious right views Planned Parenthood as the pinnacle of abortion evil, LifeWay immediately said they had “made a mistake” in selling the Bible and pulled it from the shelves:
“When our leadership discovered the overwhelming concern that some of Komen’s affiliates were giving funds to Planned Parenthood, we began the arduous process of withdrawing this Bible from the market,” stated a release by Thom S. Rainer, president and CEO of LifeWay. “Though we have assurances that Komen’s funds are used only for breast cancer screening and awareness, it is not in keeping with LifeWay’s core values to have even an indirect relationship with Planned Parenthood.”

The Susan G. Komen Foundation explicitly states that “Komen funding is used exclusively to provide breast cancer programs” and that “under no circumstances are Komen funds used to fund abortions or other non-breast services.”

How's that for being pro-life? How is letting women die of breast cancer pro-life (or even remotely Christian)? Maybe the bookstore should start sending money to Michelle Bachmann. Wow.

If this isn't enough for you can click here or here to get more quotes and exchanges from the debate. In the meantime, I will be looking for a car jack to get my jaw up off the floor.
 

63 comments (Latest Comment: 12/17/2011 07:15:28 by livingonli)
   Perma Link

Share This!

Furl it!
Spurl
NewsVine
Reddit
Technorati