It’s fun brainstorming how to describe today’s Republican Party: dumb, silly, heads-in-the-sand, regressive, really dumb, mean, pandering, allergic to facts and logic, really really dumb. The list can go on and on. I look at Scut Walker and his pals in Wisconsin and “mean-spirited” comes to mind. Let’s micromanage the diet of food stamp recipients even if it costs money and puts the state further in the red. Thom Hartmann says
It’s actually more expensive to stop poor people from eating shellfish than to just let the food stamp program go on as normal, but Republicans are all on board because it punishes and stigmatizes low-income people. (See the whole post)
The Republicans base their world view on anecdotes. A woman with an iPhone was spotted using food stamps thus all food stamps users are abusing their stamps.
Too bad that the true picture is lost – to Republicans – beneath such anecdotes.
If they would bother to look a bit deeper they would see that:
We need a new name for conservatives. Many of their proposals are actually reactionary and dangerous. They are nineteenth century. They are supported by Fox TV. They are the Nineteenth Century Fox movement.
We need something funny yet descriptive. One idea is to change the symbol of the GOP from an elephant to an ostrich. After all, they are the head-in-sand party. How else to explain their refusal to accept facts, logic, reason except that they consciously refuse to listen? Instead of referring to the states that vote Republican as red states, how about we call them yellow states. Yellow because Republican politicians are terrified of offending their tea-party base and their deep-pockets donors like the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson and the Menard dude in Wisconsin who secretly funded Scott Walker with over a million dollars. (By the way, I am now boycotting Menards in addition to Wal-Mart.)
The editors at The Daily Kos posted a diary today that has this to say:
Julian Sanchez, a CATO Institute [a conservative think tank] fellow who specializes in the areas of privacy and surveillance, was perhaps the first to concisely distill the alternate reality that has been created by the continuously cross-referencing circle of conservative media outlets. Conservatives live in a bubble of epistemic closure in which narratives and ideas that feed a particular narrative are introduced, reinforced and then judged to be accurate simply by virtue of having been presented by the correct media authorities. It doesn’t matter if whatever is being claimed has an actual basis in objective reality: once an idea that pleases the conservative id has taken root, it is mighty hard for truth to pierce the bubble of fantasy.
This is why President Obama can in the conservative mind be a Kenyan, a Muslim, a socialist, and a black liberation theologist all at the same time. It’s why no amount of evidence can ever convince conservatism the climate change is real. It’s why they view it as a fact that Obama is killing jobs and exploding the deficit, even as the facts are exactly the opposite on both counts. And it’s also why the Affordable Care Act is simply known to be a disaster that is ruining lives, damaging employers, and constraining freedom, even as in reality it is reducing costs, saving lives, and making health insurance affordable for people who have gone far too long without it.
Read the diary in full if you want to find out what happens
when conservatives are forced to venture outside the circle of epistemic closure and actually confront the world outside the bubble, the results are hilarious. . .
What can we use as a substitute for Grand Old Party (GOP)? How about God Awful Party (GAP)? Party of Idiots (POI) seems too obvious and not especially clever. How about the POOL Party – Party Of Obstruction, Obfuscation, and Lies?
If I think too much about what I’m trying to do with this post, I get sad. It’s hard to be funny about something that has brought our country to ruin. Where else to turn but to humor? Perhaps humor is the best defense against today’s GOP. They do so many laughable things. How can one take them seriously? Let’s use the humor that the GOP seems so willing to deliver while remaining oblivious to how they open themselves to ridicule. When Senator Jim Inhofe, a Republican from Oklahoma, produced a snowball on the Senate floor as evidence that climate change is a hoax he actually seemed serious. Why didn’t Senate Democrats simply laugh him off the floor? Their laughter would have been justified.
Let’s all join in and start laughing at these fools. Laughing is much better than despairing or crying.
I’ve seen quoted a number of different estimates of how much the US plans to spend fighting the Ebola epidemic in west Africa. The highest I’ve seen is $100 million.
The cost of the fight against ISIS?
Gordon Adams, the go-to guy in Washington on DOD’s budget, previously told The Fiscal Timesthat the mission to stop ISIS would cost between $10 billion and $15 billion each year. Now that more details of the plan are known, Adams has revised his estimate — up. “I estimate $15-20 [billion] for the operation, on an annual basis,”
This doesn’t make sense. Why are we spending so much more on the war against ISIS than we are on fighting the Ebola epidemic that rages unabated? Why does America fear ISIS much? Why do not Americans fear Ebola as much? I don’t know. Perhaps it is because of the brutal videos of the beheadings by ISIS of American journalists? The pictures I see coming out of Africa are of people who are obviously sick. But a video of a beheading trumps a picture of a sick person or videos of people walking about in moon suits.
House Republicans indicated Tuesday that they will provide less than half of the White House’s funding request to fight Ebola in the next government spending bill.
According to a source familiar with the negotiations, House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) agreed as of Tuesday morning to spend a total of $40 million to fight the epidemic in the 2015 spending bill. [thehill.com]
Is that not shameful? The Gates Foundation has pledged $50 million. Republicans don’t even want to spend as much on Ebola as does a private foundation. They sure are willing to spend money on endless wars in the Mideast, but not much on impoverished, black Africans.