PoliticusUSA (Politics)

GOP Convention: Tuesday Night Drinking Games (August 28, 2012)

Becky SarwateLeave a comment

Whether anyone is ready for it or not, the Republican National Convention is in full swing. Though it is likely to be one of the dullest affairs in recent memory, hurricane warnings and the mutiny threats of Ron Paul supporters aside, conservative media outlets certainly can’t be accused of understatement. This morning’s online edition of The Washington Post did its level best to drum up the kind of hype typically reserved for community sporting events like the Super Bowl or the recently-concluded Summer Olympics. The paper’s TV section published a piece entitled, “Today in RNC TV: Where to watch the Republican National Convention.”

Can you picture it? Viewing parties at restaurants, bars and taverns across the nation! Drinking games! Take a shot every time a speaker calls President Obama a socialist! Do a keg stand for each each personality present who represents an assault on women’s rights! Can you imagine the drunkenness? Ah yes, these parties would outdo Prince Harry’s recent bout of Vegas revelry, and the naughty monarch and Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan boast roughly the same percentage of body fat.

Barring any last-minute interference from Tropical Storm Isaac, The Post reports that “At least 13 networks are covering the Republican National Convention in Tampa this week. Tuesday night, primetime events include a speech from Ann Romney, and Gov. Chris Christie with the keynote address.” Tampa, land of lot lizards and strip clubs, does seem like a fitting locale for the revelry. After all the city is nearly 63 percent Caucasian, Florida at large contains a disproportionate number of senior citizens and the State boasts an absence of individual income tax liability. If only there wasn’t that pesky business to avoid about Ryan’s plan to demolish Medicare as we know it, the site of the convention would be a mutual admiration society unparalleled.

While the GOP establishment celebrates its whitewashed, wealthy male homogeny, Ron Paul loyalists did threaten to make things interesting for a moment. However a last minute bargain deprived excited liberals and centrists from an anticipated burst of schadenfreude, the still-inevitable showdown between the Tea Party crackpots who have hijacked the conservative movement and the dwindling number of rational party members fighting for survival. Instead, ABC News reported “a compromise on Republican Party rules will likely prevent a convention floor fight on Tuesday. Republican National Committeeman James Bopp…explained the impetus for the proposed change, in the first place, as fear that Ron Paul supporters bound to Mitt Romney would break party rules and instead vote for Paul.”

Some events are just too delicious a prospect to actually occur. Imagine the embarrassment. Pundits and writers have been saying for years now that Mittens is the candidate so divisive and boring that even his own party is conflicted. Conventions are supposed to be about unity, no matter how forced. Too see this illusion crumble to pieces on national television…well it was a nice idea.

Instead we’ll be treated to inspiring words from ultimate Stepford wife Ann Romney, she of the tearful tithes, and Chris Christie, the popular Governor of New Jersey, considered a rising star of the Republican party. Supposedly the poster boy for responsible fiscal austerity, which may influence the content of his remarks, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman had a go at Christie’s pretension yesterday when he observed, “The Governor was willing to cancel the desperately needed project to build another rail tunnel linking the state to Manhattan, but has invested state funds in a megamall in the Meadowlands and a casino in Atlantic City.”

It may be wise to plan ahead and take the day off of work tomorrow (provided that eight years of the Bush regime left you with a job) if you plan to indulge in the Convention drinking game that I favor: a sip for every hypocritical utterance. Cheers!

Paul Ryan: Walking the Party Line Against Women (August 14, 2012)

Becky SarwateLeave a comment

By now we’ve all had a few days to absorb Mitt Romney’s latest head scratching campaign move: the selection of Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan as his Vice-Presidential running mate. It’s certainly a step that will unite the far right Republican base, a voting bloc that never would have pulled a lever for President Obama anyway yet has still struggled to summon proper enthusiasm for its presumptive nominee.

Folks, Mittens has taken to pandering to fish in a barrel. Somewhere in there lies good news for Team Obama/Biden. I watched top Democratic strategist David Axelrod discuss the opposition’s pick on last Sunday’s edition of “Meet the Press” and he could barely contain his glee. It’s hard to imagine a choice more alienating to the middle class than the old right wing social engineer himself. Were I Romney I might have gone Rubio or Jindal to at least try to appear palatable to minorities, or perhaps cozied up with a female GOP leader of the non-crazy variety (possibly an oxymoron), but hey! I suppose if you have enough problems shoring up those who are supposed to be reflexively in your corner, you don’t have much time to consider the bigger picture. Game on!

Speaking of females, 2012 witnessed a Spring Awakening of sorts for the half of the electorate who came to realize anew that the “compassionate conservatives” amongst them don’t appear to have a lot of respect for individual liberty when it comes to reproductive decision-making. But Ryan is a relatively young, new breed of Republican right? He’s only 42 years old and the father of an adolescent daughter. Surely he doesn’t want the government placing his child’s rights in a secondary class? That would stand in direct opposition to the principles of a Tea Party darling.

Ahem…

Per Democracy Now, in a post dated August 13, 2012: “Ryan opposes abortion in all situations, including cases of rape and incest, and opposes abortion in cases that endanger an expectant mother’s health. Planned Parenthood has also criticized his endorsement of a so-called ‘Personhood Amendment,’ which supports defining a fertilized egg as a human being. Ryan was a co-sponsor of the Sanctity of Human Life Act, which even the conservative state of Mississippi rejected last November, and is in favor of defunding Planned Parenthood.”

But ok, women are about more than just the question of whether or not to procreate. We care about jobs, equal pay, a stable and thriving economy and oh, oops…

What’s that you say votesmart.org? Representative Ryan voted against equal pay for women, the enforcement of hate crime legislation and adjustments to employment discrimination law a total of six times during his tenure in the House? Well that is um, concerning.

In short, Ryan is for tax cuts, deregulation, cynical deficit hawking that starves the social safety net while fattening the pockets of big business and the one percent. Corporate entities are to be treated with more esteem and consideration than the bodies and minds of female Americans and even Romney doesn’t appear to want to associate himself with Ryan’s plans to reinvent Medicare as a voucher program that exposes seniors to the whims of the private sector.

Why was he selected for the ticket again? If I didn’t know better I would think Romney really wanted to lose.

Revenge: It’s What Female Voters Have in Store for the GOP (August 7, 2012)

Becky SarwateLeave a comment

Data published late last year by the Pew Research Center indicated that the marriage rate amongst U.S. adults stands at an all-time low. “In 1960, 72% of all adults ages 18 and older were married; today just 51% are.” And within the 49% that remain unattached, more than half of the unmarried Americans are women. For every 100 single women, there are 88 bachelors available.

What does this mean beyond a favorable dating pool imbalance for the nation’s single men? Well for the tone tone-deaf Republican party one implication is that when the polls open this November to elect the next President of the United States, there will be an awful lot of single women casting votes. The party continues to cater to its target base of wealthy, older white men at its own peril.

The New York Times highlighted the predicament facing Republican candidates this morning in an article published as part of the paper’s “Campaign 2012″ series. Viewing the female vote through the prism of the country’s weak fiscal performance, the piece by writer Shaila Dewan entitled, “Weak Economy Puts Spotlight on Votes of Single Women,” argues “Single women are one of the country’s fastest-growing demographic groups — there are 1.8 million more now than just two years ago. They make up a quarter of the voting-age population nationally, and even more in several swing states, including Nevada.”

The article presents examples of women, small-business owners and urban singles among others, who feel a conflict between government regulation and intrusion but have suffered personally in an anemic job market with soaring health care costs. This brand of savvy singleton is not so quick to swallow the GOP party directive of laying blame for the nation’s troubles at the feet of Obama. Remembering the unpaid for Bush tax cuts, the deregulation of Wall Street and bristling at the very recent assault on women’s reproductive health does not require the lengthy-tenured cognizance of an elephant. As one woman quoted in Dewan’s piece claims, “I am definitely a swing vote…I have no idea.”

It is more than proper, it is fact common sense, to wonder how Republicans view a path to victory that excludes single women, not to mention the Hispanic vote they have also devoted ample time to alienating. For every crazy like Palin or Bachmann who puts a pretty face on outdated feminist doubletalk, there are literally millions of women struggling to keep a roof over their head and food on the table while GOP standard bearers presume to tell them what they might be able to do with their bodies. Meanwhile, as the title of the Times article suggests, they have bigger fish to fry. As one of those single female voters in abundance, I can tell you we are tired of not being taken seriously.

Keep patting us on the head, calling us sluts and shuffling us aside as statistics like this go ignored: “While the jobless rate for married women has stayed relatively low, at 5.6 percent compared with 2.6 percent before the recession, the rate for unmarried women has risen to 11 percent, from a prerecession level of 6 percent.”

There are more single women than single men in the country yet our ability to provide for ourselves is reflected in an unemployment rate that exceeds the national average. Those of us who do have jobs can expect to earn less than our male counterparts while fending off presumptuous debates regarding our reproductive health. It’s enough to drive a madwoman to the attic.

But we’ll have our revenge at the ballot box this Fall. And we’ll enjoy the spectacle of the GOP’s mystified Wednesday morning quarterbacking when it’s all over. It’s sort of like ignoring half the chess pieces on the board then wondering how you found yourself checkmated.

Dick Cheney Reminds Us That Romney Still Has Stateside Messes to Clean (July 31, 2012)

Becky SarwateLeave a comment

Last week was a big week for Mittens and the damage control is in full swing. Remember back in 2008 when one of the biggest criticisms leveled against then-candidate Obama was that the junior Senator was light on foreign policy experience? The last three and a half years have generated many criticisms from the right but the POTUS’ deft handling of a variety of thorny issues such as last year’s Arab Spring Awakening and his wise choice of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State (not to mention the killing of public enemy #1 Osama bin Laden) has gone a long way toward establishing the President as a reasoned and thoughtful statesmen.

Mitt Romney has been a part of the American political canvas for nearly 30 years and yet to witness him committing unforced errors last week, like his offensive comments directed at London’s level of Olympic preparedness, was to experience a sense of Palinesque deja vu. Is there any weigh station between Mittens brain and his mouth? Wouldn’t you think he and his handlers might develop one after three decades? Even Pavlov’s dog was capable of learning. But after that mess, Romney wasn’t satisfied with just one pile of international dog doo. He also managed to wade into the long-running Israel/Iran conflict in a a manner that made him appear like a trigger-happy ignoramus while paying Palestine’s socialized health care system a backhanded compliment, oblivious to its implications again his “war” on Obamacare.

If it weren’t such an embarrassing week for America, I suspect those of us rooting for an Obama re-election would be engaging in a much-deserved happy dance. And yet today, the Crypt Keeper himself, former Vice-President Dick Cheney, popped out of his cryogenic chamber to remind the voting public that there are still plenty of Stateside imbroglios to which candidate Romney must attend. Truly it’s getting difficult to account for all of the issues to which the former Governor refuses or simply cannot respond with a satisfying answer.

In an interview with writer Jonathan Karl for Yahoo News, the topic of Romney’s cloak and dagger intrigue regarding the release of his tax returns was broached. When Bush and Cheney occupied the Republican ticket in 2000, both candidates saw the wisdom is releasing 10 years worth of returns. Romney as we know, will not budge on releasing above two years worth of information. The Cheneybot’s predictable response?

“If he had two years out, they’d want four. If he had four years out, they’d want six. If he had six years out, they’d want ten,” said Cheney. “It’s a distraction,” he added. “I’d say do what he feels like doing. If this is his decision, fine. Let’s get on with it.”

Dick Cheney was always a great believer in the Jedi Mind Trick. Just tell Americans that the Patriot Act, a revocation of their basic liberties, is necessary for national security and they’ll go along with it, the sheep. 9/11 is a great excuse to foment a war of choice in Iraq! And since the wealthy can be painted a job creators, let’s pass some unaffordable tax cuts while we’re at it. The American people won’t know the half of it. They’re too busy watching American Idol! It’s genius. Bwa ha ha!

Nope, not this time Cheney. The post-2008 electorate, better informed and inspired by a candidate who is not overrun by internal cynicism, won’t have it. For the last time, wanting to understand a man’s personal finances as a litmus test for predicting his handling of the country’s budget is not a distraction.

But thanks for reminding us that Romney can be every bit as disingenuous here as he can overseas.

Mitt Romney Tells America His Finances are None of Our Damned Business (July 10, 2012)

Becky SarwateLeave a comment

On Monday, New York Times Op-Ed columnist and economic guru Paul Krugman observed that “the contrast between George Romney and his son Mitt — a contrast both in their business careers and in their willingness to come clean about their financial affairs — dramatically illustrates how America has changed.”

George Romney unsuccessfully ran for President in 1968. At that time, the candidate got in front of questions related to his finances by releasing 12 full years of tax returns, a demonstration of transparency that ought to make those of us in 2012 nostalgic for a simpler time when the people who sought our vote actually treated us like adults. Instead this year, we have another Romney – Mittens – with a far more convoluted financial back story involving blind trusts, mysterious portfolios and offshore accounts, seeking to spoon feed the voting public a bunch of bull. Apparently if he tells America that “there’s nothing hidden there,” we should all act like the hypersensitized lemmings he believes us to be and take his word for it.

Romney has adopted the typical tactic employed by candidates who wish to dodge questions, calling repeated requests for information a mere attempt to distract voters.

Mittens, come on now: how could your refusal to come clean possibly be none of the voting public’s business? You are asking us to entrust you with our very nation and all its resources: military, financial, social and otherwise. Do we need to explain to you that in order to make the best judgment of your potential for stewardship, we need to understand your personal history in depth? If this is something your father understood, why can’t you?

And while we’re on the topic: can we talk about that blind trust? According to a report this morning from Yahoo! News, the “Republican nominee insisted he has little to do with his personal investments because they are managed by a blind trust.

‘I don’t manage them,’ Romney said. ‘I don’t even know where they are.’”

Can I see a show of hands from folks who find this credible? A man who has built a business empire and a Presidential campaign predicated upon his financial savvy, a quality that he claims is powerful enough to warrant the unseating of the highly-competent current Commander-in-Chief, would just love to have it both ways. He is both a wizard and a naive foundling, witlessly trusting those whose job it is to count his millions.

The Yahoo! Report goes on: “Responding to reports that some of his investments have been overseas, Romney insisted his ‘trustee follows all U.S. Laws.’ He added: ‘All the taxes are paid, as appropriate. All of them have been reported to the government. There’s nothing hidden there.’”

The double talk here is literally mind-bending. He is ignorant of his investments, can’t understand why we’re even interested, but rest assured, he hasn’t dodged any taxes. How do we know this? Because he says so. Stop it Mittens. Enough of this. Be a man and release ALL of your financial records and let us make decisions for ourselves, as we have been politically trained to do since we were old enough to vote. No one believes what you’re saying anyway – even the members of your own party. The best way to convince your constituents that you are not hiding anything is to stop hiding. It’s an idea that your father comprehended.

But what else should we expect from a man who has changed his tune on just about every issue before him? The Romney cynicism appears to know no limits.