Why are Republicans Wrong about Everything?

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 40921 - 40940 of total 52588 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
philo

Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
Feb 2, 2013 - 09:55pm PT
This is better than dessert.


http://www.politicususa.com/98-advertisers-pull-ads-from-sean-hannity-glenn-beck-and-rush-limbaugh-2.html

98 Advertisers Pull Ads from Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh

By: Jason EasleyMar. 10th, 2012more from Jason Easley

The toxic environment that right wing talk radio has created is now destroying it as Premiere Networks is circulating a list of 98 advertisers who don’t want their ads to appear on Hannity, Beck, or Limbaugh.

Taylor on Radio-Info had this note that Premiere Networks is circulating:

To all Traffic Managers: The information below applies to your Premiere Radio Networks commercial inventory. More than 350 different advertisers sponsor the programs and services provided to your station on a barter basis. Like advertisers that purchase commercials on your radio station from your sales staff, our sponsors communicate specific rotations, daypart preferences and advertising environments they prefer. . .They’ve specifically asked that you schedule their commercials in dayparts or programs free of content that you know are deemed to be offensive or controversial (for example, Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Tom Leykis, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity). Those are defined as environments likely to stir negative sentiment from a very small percentage of the listening public.
The advertisers who no longer want any part of right wing talk radio include major corporate heavyweights like Ford, GM, Toyota, Allstate, Geico, Prudential, State Farm, McDonald’s, and Subway. Radio industry experts are already speculating that the advertiser flight from controversial shows could change the talk radio business.

Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, and Beck are four of the top seven rated shows on talk radio. Combined they have an average weekly listenership of 46.5 million +, but without big time corporate advertisers these shows are in jeopardy. Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Beck and all the other right wing talkers may be confronted with the choice of either toning it down, or facing extinction.

Advertisers are risk adverse. They won’t advertise their products or services on programs that have the potential to damage their reputation and brand. It wasn’t until the Color of Change boycott against Glenn Beck that advertisers had to worry about this issue. Now that advertisers are realizing that they will be held accountable for their decision to associate themselves with hate speech, they are fleeing those conservative talk radio hosts who court controversy.



The fact that the names on the Premiere list are conservative talkers once again illustrates the fact that both sides do not do this.

Defenders of Limbaugh and his ilk often scream about free speech, but the reality is that when a Limbaugh or Hannity or Beck says something controversial the American people have the right as consumers to choose not purchase products and services from companies that financially support these hosts.

This isn’t a suppression of speech. It is the free market at work. If the advertiser demand for extremist conservative talk radio vanishes, those programs will eventually leave the air. Glenn Beck still had millions of people watching his program when Fox News canned him. FNC got rid of Beck because they couldn’t make any money on his show.

After decades of unchecked dominance, activists have finally found the key to holding talk radio accountable. The fact that the boycott success achieved against Glenn Beck is being replicated against Rush Limbaugh provides more evidence that advertiser boycotts work.

The irony is that the same free market that Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and the others claim to be championing is sowing the seeds of their demise.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Feb 2, 2013 - 10:23pm PT
If you think that is delicious you'll dig this too. A nicely done retrospective of the life and times of Ronny Raygun. I demolishes him on his Voodoo economics and suggests the evidence supports impeachment over the Iran arms for hostage and financing the Contras. It also give a good glimpse of the evolution of the culture wars from 1950 to present.

I hope you guys can figure out how to view it in the repressive socialist republic of Americastan. Its totally worth watching.

http://www.cbc.ca/passionateeye/episode/reagan-the-myth-the-legacy.html
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 3, 2013 - 08:30am PT

The leades of the Republican Party are PAID to LIE

We are exposing those lies and corrupt power for the good of all Humanity!
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Feb 3, 2013 - 08:46am PT
Philo..Maybe those 98 advertisers are catching on to the fact , like the American voters , that the nazi , shock-jock attacks are aimed at the very people who consume the adverisers products...? No...?
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Feb 3, 2013 - 09:47am PT
Oh boy! Now we could have a health care system that works just as well as MediCal!

John

Which is why, under Obamacare, the rates for Medicaid will increase to the Medicare rate. In Ca, that is a 130% increase.

This will largely eliminate the access issue....
Nohea

Trad climber
Living Outside the Statist Quo
Feb 3, 2013 - 09:51am PT
The Republican and Democratic parties, or, to be more exact, the Republican-Democratic party, represent the capitalist class in the class struggle. They are the political wings of the capitalist system and such differences as arise between them relate to spoils and not to principles.

Nice quote Gary but the economic system is not capitalism but some form of perverted crony capitalism. The vocal minority has called for the State to act, to violate others property, to make wars, to control the economy, and to devalue the currency. What we have is the result.

Every economic system can get perverted, unless maybe we think Hugo Chavez or Kim Jong un are inviolable?

Have a great Sunday all, will it be the 49ers or ravens? I don't know, I just hope that at any quarter or end of game my pair of numbers line up with the score. Hey I got 1 in 50 chance!
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Feb 3, 2013 - 11:29am PT
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Feb 3, 2013 - 12:00pm PT
Every economic system can get perverted,


very true and your examples are dificult to dispute. Would you agree that Laissez faire capitalism is an extremely dangerous perversion of capitalism?

Also I believe the best discription of our economic system is a "Mixed economy" which generally speaking strike the historically best balance for the most successful nations world wide.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Feb 4, 2013 - 07:30am PT
In a bold attempt to push the limits of both irony and decency, Israel has been secretly giving women birth control both without their knowledge and without their consent!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-gave-birth-control-to-ethiopian-jews-without-their-consent-8468800.html

Israel gave birth control to Ethiopian Jews without their consent

Israel has admitted for the first time that it has been giving Ethiopian Jewish immigrants birth-control injections, often without their knowledge or consent.

The government had previously denied the practice but the Israeli Health Ministry’s director-general has now ordered gynaecologists to stop administering the drugs. According a report in Haaretz, suspicions were first raised by an investigative journalist, Gal Gabbay, who interviewed more than 30 women from Ethiopia in an attempt to discover why birth rates in the community had fallen dramatically.

One of the Ethiopian women who was interviewed is quoted as saying: “They [medical staff] told us they are inoculations. We took it every three months. We said we didn’t want to.” It is alleged that some of the women were forced or coerced to take the drug while in transit camps in Ethiopia.

The drug in question is thought to be Depo-Provera, which is injected every three months and is considered to be a highly effective, long-lasting contraceptive.

Nearly 100,000 Ethiopian Jews have moved to Israel under the Law of Return since the 1980s, but their Jewishness has been questioned by some rabbis. Last year, the Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who also holds the health portfolio, warned that illegal immigrants from Africa “threaten our existence as a Jewish and democratic state”.

Haaretz published an extract from a letter sent by the Ministry of Health to units administering the drug. Doctors were told “not to renew prescriptions for Depo Provera for women of Ethiopian origin if for any reason there is concern that they might not understand the ramifications of the treatment”.

Sharona Eliahu Chai, a lawyer for the Association of Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), said: “Findings from investigations into the use of Depo Provera are extremely worrisome, raising concerns of harmful health policies with racist implications in violation of medical ethics. The Ministry of Health’s director-general was right to act quickly and put forth new guidelines.”
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 4, 2013 - 09:09am PT
Why do Republicans hate Democracy?
Because it means they lose power. So what do they do, lie and cheat so they can remain in power. There were 1.4 million more votes for Democratic House candidates, yet the Republicans won a majority by Gerrymandering the Vote.


The Great Gerrymander of 2012
By SAM WANG
February 2, 2013
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/opinion/sunday/the-great-gerrymander-of-2012.html?ref=reapportionment&_r=0

HAVING the first modern democracy comes with bugs. Normally we would expect more seats in Congress to go to the political party that receives more votes, but the last election confounded expectations. Democrats received 1.4 million more votes for the House of Representatives, yet Republicans won control of the House by a 234 to 201 margin. This is only the second such reversal since World War II.

Using statistical tools that are common in fields like my own, neuroscience, I have found strong evidence that this historic aberration arises from partisan disenfranchisement. Although gerrymandering is usually thought of as a bipartisan offense, the rather asymmetrical results may surprise you.

Through artful drawing of district boundaries, it is possible to put large groups of voters on the losing side of every election. The Republican State Leadership Committee, a Washington-based political group dedicated to electing state officeholders, recently issued a progress report on Redmap, its multiyear plan to influence redistricting. The $30 million strategy consists of two steps for tilting the playing field: take over state legislatures before the decennial Census, then redraw state and Congressional districts to lock in partisan advantages. The plan was highly successful.

I have developed approaches to detect such shenanigans by looking only at election returns. To see how the sleuthing works, start with the naďve standard that the party that wins more than half the votes should get at least half the seats. In November, five states failed to clear even this low bar: Arizona, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Now let’s do something more subtle. We can calculate each state’s appropriate seat breakdown — in other words, how a Congressional delegation would be constituted if its districts were not contorted to protect a political party or an incumbent. We do this by randomly picking combinations of districts from around the United States that add up to the same statewide vote total. Like a fantasy baseball team, a delegation put together this way is not constrained by the limits of geography. On a computer, it is possible to create millions of such unbiased delegations in short order. In this way, we can ask what would happen if a state had districts that were typical of the rest of the nation.

In North Carolina, where the two-party House vote was 51 percent Democratic, 49 percent Republican, the average simulated delegation was seven Democrats and six Republicans. The actual outcome? Four Democrats, nine Republicans — a split that occurred in less than 1 percent of simulations. If districts were drawn fairly, this lopsided discrepancy would hardly ever occur.

Confounding conventional wisdom, partisan redistricting is not symmetrical between the political parties. By my seat-discrepancy criterion, 10 states are out of whack: the five I have mentioned, plus Virginia, Ohio, Florida, Illinois and Texas. Arizona was redistricted by an independent commission, Texas was a combination of Republican and federal court efforts, and Illinois was controlled by Democrats. Republicans designed the other seven maps. Both sides may do it, but one side does it more often.

Surprisingly absent from the guilty list is California, where 62 percent of the two-party vote went to Democrats and the average mock delegation of 38 Democrats and 15 Republicans exactly matched the newly elected delegation. Notably, California voters took redistricting out of legislators’ hands by creating the California Citizens Redistricting Commission.

Gerrymandering is not hard. The core technique is to jam voters likely to favor your opponents into a few throwaway districts where the other side will win lopsided victories, a strategy known as “packing.” Arrange other boundaries to win close victories, “cracking” opposition groups into many districts. Professionals use proprietary software to draw districts, but free software like Dave’s Redistricting App lets you do it from your couch.

Political scientists have identified other factors that have influenced the relationship between votes and seats in the past. Concentration of voters in urban areas can, for example, limit how districts are drawn, creating a natural packing effect. But in 2012 the net effect of intentional gerrymandering was far larger than any one factor.

We can quantify this effect using three different methods. First, Democrats would have had to win the popular vote by 7 percentage points to take control of the House the way that districts are now (assuming that votes shifted by a similar percentage across all districts). That’s an 8-point increase over what they would have had to do in 2010, and a margin that happens in only about one-third of Congressional elections.

Second, if we replace the eight partisan gerrymanders with the mock delegations from my simulations, this would lead to a seat count of 215 Democrats, 220 Republicans, give or take a few.

Third, gerrymandering is a major form of disenfranchisement. In the seven states where Republicans redrew the districts, 16.7 million votes were cast for Republicans and 16.4 million votes were cast for Democrats. This elected 73 Republicans and 34 Democrats. Given the average percentage of the vote it takes to elect representatives elsewhere in the country, that combination would normally require only 14.7 million Democratic votes. Or put another way, 1.7 million votes (16.4 minus 14.7) were effectively packed into Democratic districts and wasted.

Compared with a national total House vote of 121 million, this number is considerable. In Illinois, Democrats did the converse, wasting about 70,000 Republican votes. In both cases, the number of wasted votes dwarfs the likely effect of voter-ID laws, a Democratic concern, or of voter fraud, a Republican concern.

SOME legislators have flirted with the idea of gerrymandering the presidency itself under the guise of Electoral College reform. In one short-lived plan, Virginia State Senator Charles Carrico sponsored legislation to allocate electoral votes by Congressional district. In contrast to the current winner-take-all system, which usually elects the popular vote winner, Mr. Carrico’s proposal applied nationwide would have elected Mitt Romney, despite the fact that he won five million fewer votes than Mr. Obama. This is basically an admission of defeat by Republicans in swing states. Mr. Carrico’s constituents might well ask whether these changes serve their interests or those of the Republican National Committee.

To preserve majority rule and minority representation, redistricting must be brought into fairer balance. I propose two plans. First, let’s establish nonpartisan redistricting commissions in all 50 states. In Ohio, one such ballot measure failed in November, in part because of a poorly financed campaign. Maybe those who prodded voters to turn out could support future initiatives.

Second, we need to adopt a statistically robust judicial standard for partisan gerrymandering. In the Supreme Court’s Vieth v. Jubelirer case, in 2004, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy voted against intervention in chicanery in Pennsylvania, but left the door open for future remedies elsewhere if a clear standard could be established.

The great gerrymander of 2012 came 200 years after the first use of this curious word, which comes from the salamander-shaped districts signed into law by Governor Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts. Gov. Gerry’s party engineered its electoral coup using paper maps and ink. But the advent of inexpensive computing and free software has placed the tools for fighting politicians who draw absurd districts into the hands of citizens like you and me.

Politicians, especially Republicans facing demographic and ideological changes in the electorate, use redistricting to cling to power. It’s up to us to take control of the process, slay the gerrymander, and put the people back in charge of what is, after all, our House.

healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Feb 4, 2013 - 10:38am PT
Conservative Victory Project, Karl Rove-Backed Anti-Tea Party Effort, Sets Stage For Intra-GOP Savagery

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/04/conservative-victory-project_n_2616240.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Feb 5, 2013 - 08:46am PT
Because the repugs totally understand that the electorate didn't support them in the last election because they were not effective in getting their message across.....particularly with women, the largest voting block.

So, they embark on a campaign of criticizing popular democratic women's body parts.

Oh, THAT is going to really win women over. In droves.

So, if you don't agree with a woman's policy positions, attack her body. Publically. Women of all parties will be supportive of that.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/michelle-obamas-posterior-again-the-subject-of-a-public-rant/2013/02/04/c119c9a8-6efb-11e2-aa58-243de81040ba_story.html?hpid=z2

By the way, something to consider by the "boob thread" supporters:

The focus on this first lady’s posterior has historical antecedents. It reaches back to the imagery of Hottentot Venus, a woman from what is now South Africa whose naked body and pronounced posterior were paraded in shows throughout 19th-century Europe. On to the selling and trading of black women’s bodies through slavery. In modern times, black women’s figures continue to be up for public discussion in ways that are celebratory (see: “Brick House” by The Commodores) and insulting (see above).


Her presence as first lady challenges the historic view of a black woman’s place and notions of beauty, says Michaela Angela Davis, a fashion expert who has campaigned for more positive images of black women in the media. “Michelle is black from a distance. She’s a real black girl,” Davis says. “A lot of people have tried to make diversity into this weird beige thing. Her presence is just really powerful to interject into the global consciousness.”

The first lady’s critics “are reacting to the culture in which they’ve grown up or they are using it as a code to racialize Michelle Obama and remind people that she’s black,” says Andra Gillespie, an associate professor of political science at Emory University.

Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Feb 5, 2013 - 09:20am PT
Chris Kyle's death seems to confirm that "he who lives by the sword dies by the sword." Treating PTSD at a firing range doesn't make sense
---Ron Paul


And just like that, the three-time Republican presidential candidate's tenuous coalition of pro-gun libertarians, anti–Federal Reserve goldbugs, and foreign policy non-interventionists crumbled. Paul is an opponent of gun control — saying after December's Newtown, Conn., grade school massacre that "more guns equals less crime" and that "private gun ownership prevents many shootings" — but also of U.S. military adventurism. Kyle, also an outspoken gun-rights advocate, earned a reputation in Iraq as one of the deadliest snipers in U.S. military history. With Twitter erupting in outrage over his comment, Paul took to Facebook to explain himself:

As a veteran, I certainly recognize that this weekend's violence and killing of Chris Kyle were a tragic and sad event. My condolences and prayers go out to Mr. Kyle's family. Unconstitutional and unnecessary wars have endless unintended consequences. A policy of non-violence, as Christ preached, would have prevented this and similar tragedies. -REP

That not-quite-apology didn't quell the anger or the virtual yelling. "You really are vile," tweeted GOP strategist Rick Wilson; Commentary's John Podhoretz said Paul's tweet was "appalling." The newly liberated Paul "is more callous than ever, with an extra helping of sanctimony and a healthy dollop of anti-military sentiment," say the editors of Michelle Malkin's Twitchy. Not content with just "dancing on the grave of a military hero," Paul poured fuel on the fire by invoking Jesus to justify his "ghoulish" views.
jghedge

climber
Feb 5, 2013 - 09:39am PT
"Chris Kyle's death seems to confirm that "he who lives by the sword dies by the sword." Treating PTSD at a firing range doesn't make sense" - Ron Paul

Wow, talk about committing political suicide...he just joined GW Bush as persona non grata in the repub (or any) party

That's an astonishingly ill-considered comment
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Feb 5, 2013 - 10:39am PT
The US can target a US citizen if they believe a threat to be “imminent” even when no threat of attack is immediately present. The target must have recently been involved in activities, with no real definition of “activities” or “recently.” And rather than prove that the US citizen plans to continue these “activities,” it’s up to the citizen to prove to a single US official that no one knows that he’s renounced and/or abandoned such “activities” — activities that the government won’t define, to an official the government won’t name.

http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/04/16843014-exclusive-justice-department-memo-reveals-legal-case-for-drone-strikes-on-americans?lite


the liberal moral compass: detaining known terrorists = bad; killing americans suspected of associating with terrorists = good

winston smith is dead
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Feb 5, 2013 - 10:47am PT
no change from your beloved Republican Bush's policy, Booky

why don't you find and post your party's authorization memo?

and another thing, booky

President Obama WILL kill anyone he or his CIA suspects of wanting to harm this country


It's called National Security, something the "liberals" take seriously, you dumb fuk
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Feb 5, 2013 - 11:03am PT
As long as we seem to care more about the rights of an American citizen plotting terrorism than the rights of the innocent non-Americans in the house next door, we'll never win many hearts and minds. Either you believe its okay to kill someone, or you don't, where they were born shouldn't matter.

TE
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Feb 5, 2013 - 11:39am PT
Excellent point, TE.

John
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Feb 5, 2013 - 11:58am PT
President Obama's health care law will push 7 million people out of their job-based insurance coverage — nearly twice the previous estimate, according to the latest estimates from the Congressional Budget Office released Tuesday.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/feb/5/obama-health-law-will-cost-7-million/

We need to pass the bill to find out what's in it

Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Feb 5, 2013 - 12:15pm PT
President Obama's health care law will push 7 million people out of their job-based insurance coverage — nearly twice the previous estimate, according to the latest estimates from the Congressional Budget Office released Tuesday.

Demonstrating why Obamacare should merely be a temporary bridge to a universal single payer healthcare system in the US.

Curt
Messages 40921 - 40940 of total 52588 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews