When Race Is Just A Four-Letter Word

Good response to a tweet from the Obama Administration's ethics chief:

Don’t be distracted by this diversionary tactic. Focus on the fact that Putin put a bounty on our soldiers and A) the President didn’t know or B) he knew and did nothing about it. Either is damning and what we should stay laser focused on.

— Wallis S. Traylor (@WallisST) June 28, 2020

Trump long ago took off his hood... and put it back on, took it off and put it back on. He is impulsive and as he faces a daunting deficit against Joe Biden, he will continue to try one idea after another until he lands on what the believes is a winning theme. 

Call it "racist" or call it "racially tinged"; most voters already knew that Donald Trump is racist, racially tinged, bigoted, or whatever we might call it. Even many of his fans know that. The only controversy should be whether, as the media generally implies, he maintains considerable support despite that realization or because of it. I vote the latter.

Consequently, we shouldn't fall for any of his diversionary tactics. Nor should we believe the GOP is about nothing other than white power and corruption, though the former, and especially the latter, are involved.

Discussing with fellow Young Turk (no longer as young as they once were) Carly Fiorina's assertion that she will not vote to re-elect Donald Trump, Ana Kasparian can be seen beginning at approximately 5:34 of the video below going on a worthy rant about Fiorina and her Republican Party. She ends by stating, somewhat inconsistent with her message, "I really think Carly Fiorina needs to take a step back and really re-evaluate her own political ideology and whether she's in the right party."

Recognizing when he has been helpfully set up, Uygur responds

Yea, she's full of crap.... when she talks about corporate control, are you kidding me? So, Fiorina, do you disagree with the rule now? So this is, what they're doing is they're saying you're allowed to do derivative gambling again with customer money and without keeping enough reserves.

It is the riskiest gambling there is on the planet, they wind up gambling with trillions of dollars that isn't theirs and that they don't actually have the money to back up. That's how we collapsed the last time, in 2008. So Fiorina, are you in favor of that or against that?

I know, I don't even have to ask you,. Of course, you're in favor of (here the video is garbled, perhaps something about killing the Volcker Rule) and build more mansions and yachts until we collapse. And is any Republican against it?

.....Mitch McConnell, the dude's middle name is corporate control. What does Mitch McConnell stand for if he doesn't stand for corporate control? Lower taxes for corporations, more deregulation, crush the workers. That's Mitch McConnell, the Republican Party 101. So please spare me this about you're against Republicans, against corporate control. They're more for corporate control then they are racist and it's not even close. where as racist as they are, they would much, much rather have their corporate overloads rule over us all. They're their water boys.

So, yes, Walter Shaub, we can say that Republicans are about more than white power and corruption. They're about corporate control and corruption- but I repeat myself.

Share |

Not Often True At All

Responding to President Obama's announcement of sanctions against Russia, Kellyanne Fitzpatrick Conway, counselor to incoming president Donald Trump, stated

“I will tell you that even those who are sympathetic to President Obama on most issues are saying that part of the reason he did this today was to quote ‘box in’ President-elect Trump,That would be very unfortunate if politics were the motivating factor here. We can’t help but think that’s often true.”

Evidently, she is referring to the likes of Rudy Giuliani, who when asked if Obama was attempting to “box in” Trump, replied "of course he is.” That would be the Rudy Giuliani who once remarked "I do not believe, and I know this is a horrible thing to say, but I do not believe that the president loves America." Otherwise, Conway might argue, Giuliani is just fine with Obama.

Or she may be referring to John Bolton, US amabassador to the United Nations under Bush 43. He did maintain on Fox and Friends "what this last burst of activity has to do is hard to say. I do think it's intended to try and box the Trump administration in. I think it will fail." At the same time the Obama-sympathetic Bolton contended "The Russians have walked all over the Obama administration for eight years. It's really been a pathetic performance."

Three days earlier, before the President's announcement but after the U.N. vote,  he had charged "Obama dislikes American exceptionalism; he dislikes Israeli exceptionalism." Seven months earlier, Bolton had written "Obama’s narcissism, his zeal for photo opportunities with him at the center, whether in Havana or Hiroshima, too often overcomes lesser concerns—like the best interests of the country. He puts his vanity before our nation’s pride,”  Big fan.

Giuliani and Bolton, unlike Conway, stressed that Obama's actions have come late and may be insufficient.   There was no such principled (if misguided) argument from Conway, who would  be loathe to admit that the Administration didn't release much information about the Russians in October when it

was probably afraid of looking like it was tipping the scale in Hillary Clinton’s favor, especially in an election that her opponent repeatedly described as rigged. Though Obama stumped for Clinton around the country, the administration didn’t want to open him up to attacks that he unfairly used intelligence to undermine Trump’s campaign, the Post reported.

Instead, top White House officials gathered key lawmakers—leadership from the House and Senate, plus the top Democrats and Republicans from both houses’ intelligence and homeland security committees—to ask for a bipartisan condemnation of Russia’s meddling. The effort was stymied by several Republicans who weren’t willing to cooperate, including, reportedly, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

President Obama hesitated in order not to swing the election on the basis of a finding by a consensus of intelligence officials that Putin's allies were trying to move American public opinion toward Trump. Yet, Conway remarks "we can't help think that's often true" that the "motivating factor" is "politics."

As a master propagandist, Kellyanne Conway may currently have no equal.  As a truly loathsome individual, she has a few- and  oops- here she is (was) with one:












Share |

After Mitt, Carly

GOP  presidential candidate Carly Fiorina was ready to pounce when Jake Tapper asked at a debate on September 16, 2015 the inevitable question:

In an interview last week in Rolling Stone magazine, Donald Trump said the following about you. Quote, "Look at that face. Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?" Mr. Trump later said he was talking about your persona, not your appearance. Please feel free to respond what you think about his persona.

Following laughter, Fiorina replied "You know, it's interesting to me, Mr. Trump said that he heard Mr. Bush very clearly and what Mr. Bush said. I think women all over this country heard very clearly what Mr. Trump said."






She might have added "what women everywhere heard was 'that is the face of the next Director of National  Intelligence.'"

Presumably, Fiorina won't be tapped for the job, with Trump adding her to the list including Mitt Romney of  People I Really Want to Humiliate.

And so we have Fiorina, having descended from on high at Trump Tower, telling (as she stated it, video below) a group of reporters

First thing is he has really cool stuff in his  office.  All thee athletes have given him incredible memorabilia. I was particularly taken by Shock O'Neal's shoe, which is huge.I guess it takes a champion to know a champion.

Cool! But note to Carly: No one believes you spontaneously came up with "I guess it takes a champion to know a champion." If you're going to be fed your lines, the least you can remember is that "Shaquille O'Neal" is pronounced as "shack," not "shock."








After the Access Hollywood tape was revealed in October, Fiorina wrote "Donald Trump does not represent me or my party,.  I understand the responsibility of Republicans to support their nominee. Our nominee has weighty responsibilities as well. Donald Trump has manifestly failed in these responsibilities.”  Now she says "people recognize the opportunity our new president-elect has to really make a huge impact on peoples' lives in this country..."

No more accurate statement can be made about the guy who has bragged about not paying taxes, has encouraged violence at rallies, and once commented "You know, it doesn’t really matter what [the media] write as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of ass.” That huge impact awaits as the march of the deplorables continues, a group well represented by Mrs. Fiorina.






Share |

No Similarity Whatsoever

In November, 1922, when Adolf Hitler had been Nazi party chairman for a little more than a year but had not yet gained much political power, the New York Times published an article which was re-released in February, 2015. It reported

But several reliable, well-informed sources confirmed the idea that Hitler's anti-Semitism was not so genuine or violent as it sounded, and that he was merely using anti-Semitic propaganda as a bait to catch masses of followers and keep them aroused, enthusiastic, and in line for the time when his organization is perfected and sufficiently powerful to be employed effectively for political purposes.

A sophisticated politician credited Hitler with peculiar political cleverness for laying emphasis and over-emphasis on anti-Semitism, saying: "You can't expect the masses to understand or appreciate your finer real aims. You must feed the masses with cruder morsels and ideas like anti-Semitism. It would be politically all wrong to tell them the truth about where you really are leading them."

Noting that Snopes has confirmed publication of the story, Digby snarked "He (Donald Trump) was just playing a part, right? And even if wants to do the things he says he wants to do, he can't really do them. So relax folks. He's no worse than anyone else."

Really, though, there is little reason to accuse Donald Trump of being another Hitler, especially because his anti-Semitism is quite limited.   In July, his campaign re-tweeted an image of Hillary Clinton awash in dollar bills with the words "most corrupt candidate ever" within a Star of David. However, when it was identified as anti-Semitic, the campaign substituted a tweet with the same message inside a circle instead of within a Jewish star. Further, he does have a Jewish son-in-law married to a daughter who has converted to Judaism, which means little but which at least provides window dressing.

Moreover, Trump has attacked a Judge born in Indiana for being a "Mexican," suggested the possibility of shutting down mosques, maintained the Federal government must "secure and patrol" Muslim neighborhoods (as first proposed by Ted Cruz), falsely contended he saw thousands of Muslims in New Jersey celebrating the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks, repeatedly raised the possibility of the President being a Muslim, suggested the possibility of detention camps for Muslim citizens as were used during World War II for Japanese-Americans, and of course, The Wall.  By contrast, the Nazis and Arab Muslims often collaborated with each other and there is no record of Adolf Hitler being particularly anti-hispanic.

Donald Trump was the most fervent birther, even claiming that he "would be revealing some interesting things," having sent an investigator to Kenya to research Barack Obama's birth. He re-tweeted inaccurate and scurrilous statistics wildly inflating the incidence of black-on-white crime, all the while aiming to stir up the emotions of supporters.  Similarly, he charged "our great African-American President hasn't exactly had a positive impact on the thugs who are so happily and destroying Baltimore," as if there aren't white and hispanic thugs, street crimes elsewhere, and is not- as worded decades ago- "a credit to his race."







Mr. Trump at one time reportedly maintained "laziness is a trait in blacks" and during the campaign channeled slaveholders by pointing out "my African-American over here."  By contrast, Hitler's animus toward blacks was eclipsed by his hostility toward Jews.

The President-elect has criticized veterans with PTSD and demeaned American prisoners of war- such as John McCain- because "I like people who weren't captured." (Later, he bragged about the statement.)   This does not remind anyone of Adolf Hitler.

And women, of who he has said "you have to treat 'em like s_ _ _."   Megyn Kelly had "blood coming out of her whereever" and for Carly Fiorina "look at that face, would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next President?"    There were not four women who accused Adolf Hitler of assault or attempted assault, nor did he ever advise wealthy men to "grab them by the pussy. You can do anything." No, sir- there is no such record and no evidence Hitler ever did such things.

Some people have noted the similarity between Trump's "we're going to win so much" and Hitler's "Sieg Heil," translated as "hail victory." Nonetheless, the President-elect has never said "heil" anything.

The amateur anthropologist and head of the Third Reich branched out from genocide of Jews to oppression of other minorities, anyone he did not consider the "Aryan" ideal.  Donald Trump's anti-Semitism, though, is minimal compared to bias against other groups. He is no Hitler, and any such comparison is fallacious. Say that over and over again, and you may be as convinced as I that the President-elect doesn't believe any of the things he has said and done.







Share |

Gaming The System

Politico on Wednesday reported that Carly Fiorina told MSNBC

He has spent his life taking advantage of that system, and so has Hillary Clinton. So if you think that system isn't working for you, and it isn't working for the vast majority of Americans, as you point out, then don't vote for Donald Trump and don't vote for Hillary Clinton as well. And now you have a clear choice. You can vote Cruz/Fiorina or you can vote for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. And they are two sides of the same coin

There may be no one who knows more about making the system work for her than does Carly Fiorina.  In September, soon after the former business executive declared for President, the Daily Beast's Michael Daly explained that Fiorina's Hewlett-Packard took the lead in lobbying intensely for the Homeland Investment Act of 2004, part of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004. "The purported aim of the legislation," Daly added

was to generate economic growth and therefore jobs at home by according corporations a one year “tax holiday” on billions in overseas profits they had stashed offshore.

The result was a $265 billion corporate giveaway.

The windfall was supposed to go toward research and development, and other job-creating endeavors.

Instead, almost all of it was put into stock buybacks as a way of funneling cash to stockholders, these prominently including CEOs.

Never mind that the bill prohibited such buybacks.

And all that talk about putting more Americans to work did not stop the corporations from cutting as many as 100,000 American jobs in the name of even greater profits.

Hewlett-Packard saved more than $4.3 billion and put more than $4 billion into stock buybacks. It laid off 14,500 workers.

To make it all even uglier, Hewlett-Packard lobbied for the Homeland Investment Act as a member of something called the Homeland Investment Coalition—this at a time when the “war on terror” was intensifying and the word “Homeland” made everyone think of national security.

The Department of Homeland Security had been founded in 2002. We had invaded Iraq in March 2003. And there was Fiorina sixteen months later, party to using “Homeland” to hustle the government out of billions with false promises of new jobs.

And there she was the following year, following the disastrous merger with Compaq she engineered, being asked to step down as HP CEO, with the incentive of $21 million plus $19 million in pension benefits and stock, quite a severance package for someone who would never consider working the system.
A few years later, Firorina felt her business experience qualified her challenge an incumbent United States Senator.  However, we learn from Politico

after her 2010 loss to Barbara Boxer, the former Hewlett-Packard chief executive quickly dismantled her political machinery, moved across the country to Virginia and didn’t pay off all her debts to vendors and strategists for more than four years, even as she made sure to quickly reimburse herself $1.25 million she loaned the campaign.

Fiorina reportedly paid off her debts shortly before she announced for president in 2015. But "after she lost to Boxer, she moved to Virginia, notwithstanding approximately $500,000 in unpaid bills, including money owed to the widow of a consultant who died during the campaign."

She's a real sweetheart, not someone who would ever take advantage of the system like the scoundrels Trump and Clinton.

And have I mentioned how loathsome Carly Fiorina is?















Share |

Another Reason To Prefer Trump

Ted Cruz has come in for some criticism- all of it deserved- for selecting Carly Fiorina as the individual who would run with him were he to gain the Republican nomination for President.

One thing, however, which Carly Fiorina has mastered is the ability to fake sincerity. Donald Trump the previous day had claimed Hillary Clinton was exploiting her gender for political advantage. Fiorina seemed so earnest when promptly after her campaign rally with Cruz, she was asked about Trump's remarks by NBC News' Hallie Jackson and contended

You know, I think Donald Trump clearly has a problem with women. Clearly. I mean, the week we had a terrorist attack in Brussels, he attacked Heidi Cruz. So I think Hillary Clinton sometimes says to people vote for me because I'm a woman. I would never say to somebody vote for me because I'm a woman. I would say vote for me, vote for Ted, because you think we're qualified and principled. 

I'm offended, frankly, when Democrats talk about women's issues. Because we're the majority of the nation, and every issue that faces this nation is a woman's issue.









When in September Sean Hannity noted Fiorina "took great offense" at the suggestion that "people (are) claiming that you're just in this to run for vice-president," the candidate responded

Well, you know, it would be different, Sean, if all of the candidates were asked that same question with the same regularity, but they're not. I'm the person who's asked that question over and over again. And so one can only conclude that I'm getting asked that question because I'm a woman. which is disappointing because I don't sense that with voters at all.

Claiming that she would never, ever play the gender card would be at least a little more credible if she were asked about the vice-presidency only because she's a woman. However, noting also that earlier that day Fiorina had labeled "sexist" the charge that she was in the race to be vice-president, conservative partial-libertarian Matt Miller observed

Perhaps Fiorina missed all the times that Scott Walker dropped Marco Rubio’s name as his possible running mate.

Or maybe she missed this MSNBC segment, titled: “Is Rubio really running for vice president?” (is this a case of anti-Cuban bigotry?). What about the time CNN asked Ben Carson if he would consider running on a ticket led by Donald Trump (obviously a racist question)? Or how about this HotAir.com headline, “Bobby Jindal to announce he’s running for (vice) president” (anti-Indian American?).

I could go on — but what’s the point? Fiorina’s statement that “No one talks about the men being in to be veep” is provably false.







In fairness, it is less dishonest than Fiorina's repeated claim to have seen a Planned Parenthood video which no one else has seen.









That may be both the Achilles heel- or at least one of them- and the beauty of Carly Fiorina the politician. She will lie and swear to it and not blink even once.  She may be an awful executive, but as a liar she has few equals.

And have I mentioned how loathsome Carly Fiorina is?









Share |

Looking For Something For Nothing

NBC News reports

A former Mexican president had some tough words when asked about GOP candidate Donald Trump's much-touted plan to build a border wall that he says will be paid for by Mexico.

"We are not going to pay any single cent for such a stupid wall! And it's going to be completely useless," said former Mexican president Felipe Calderón when asked about this at the AmCham Egypt for Business Conference on Sunday.

Calderón had harsh words about the Republican presidential race during his conversation with CNBC's Hadley Gamble, saying it was "incredible" that quite an "admirable society" like the U.S. had candidates like Trump.

"No offense, no offense to America. So Donald Trump … is ambitious but not exactly very well-informed man, I don't want to say ignorant, but he is not very well informed," said Calderón.







Donald Trump is ignorant? Calderon ought to check out a few of the other GOP candidates, including Ben Carson, who believes the Affordable Care Act is "the worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery" and "we're living in a Gestapo age.'"   And then there is Carly Fiorina, still trying to produce that tape of Planned Parenthood no one has yet found. We not only have candidates like Trump, we have ones more reprehensible (Fiorina) than him and more divorced from reality (Carson) .
Mexican politicians such as Calderon have to speak out, not only because Trump's vow is a swipe against Mexicans, but the suggestion that the government of Mexico would pay to have its residents blocked from entering the USA is silly.

Except that it's not, because it was a spectacular tactic on the part of the real estate mogul. It combines fear of The Other with the principle most securely binding the Republican popular base with the donor base: not paying for anything that doesn't involve weapons.

Imagine that- we keep Mexicans out and do it for free!( In previous decades, it was "cut taxes and balance the budget..)  As Bill Maher has pointed out endlessly, we simply will not pay for anything anymore. We send our youth off to war, but then refuse to devote sufficient resources to treat them when they come back wounded, broken physically and emotionally. President Obama proposes a $10 per barrel tax on oil to be phased in over five years, creating jobs, promoting clean vehicle research and deployment, replenishing the Highway Trust Fund, and providing improved public transportation. House Speaker Paul Ryan declares it "dead on arrival"... until the next bridge collapses- and maybe even then.

Increasingly, Trump and other GOP candidates, intimidated by attention to their Hispanic phobia while aware that terrorism sells, have cleverly framed their opposition to immigration reform in the context of terrorism.  Fail to secure the (southern) border, they suggest, and ISIS will practically be in our bedrooms.

"As someone who has access to very sensitive information, I can tell you for a fact that ISIS understands our legal immigration system and is seeking to exploit it," claims one GOP presidential aspirant, one somewhat acquainted with reality, if somewhat repetitive and frightened of the governor of New Jersey. So it's not only Donald Trump who is irrational, and not only Mexicans Republicans dislike. They won't pay for anything worth paying for, and Donald Trump is only the loudest voice among them.








Share |

Pander "Girl"

She has done it again. Last month, Abby Johnston of Bustle observed

When Carly Fiorina entered the race for the Republican nomination, it seemed that the only platform she had was not playing the "gender card" and despising the other woman gunning for the highest office in the land. Her major talking points included hating Hillary Clinton and criticizing her for daring to mention that she is a woman. Admittedly, the former Hewlett-Packard CEO has developed a few other positions since then. But during the fifth GOP debate, Fiorina pulled the dreaded gender card, betraying her previous claim that she never would. Rather than making her relatable to female voters, this exposed her blatant hypocrisy to liberals who have been taking note and conservatives who trusted her to deliver on her promise.

As recently as last month, Fiorina was ripping Clinton on The View for what she perceived as using her gender as a basis for her candidacy:

"I think Hillary Clinton has made a case for her candidacy based on being the first woman president. On the other hand, I would never ask people to vote for me just because I’m a woman."

This is a talking point that Fiorina has parroted repeatedly throughout her campaign — that Clinton's recognition of the fact that she is a woman is somehow indicative of her running on her vagina. So it was surprising, then, that Fiorina's debate strategy seemed to have turned right from her opening statement:

"I have been tested. I have beaten breast cancer. I have buried a child. I have started as a secretary. I fought my way to the top of corporate America while being called every B-word in the book. I fought my way into this election."

Only one of those things is truly gendered, and I'd give you two guesses if I thought you actually needed them. I'm honestly scratching my head on how you could fill a whole book full of B-words, but there are two that come to mind fairly immediately which would certainly never be used to describe a male. Fiorina knows that, and bringing it up is putting an inherently feminine spin on herself.

But that wasn't the last time that Fiorina would allude to her lady bits. After listening to her male counterparts stumble over strategies to stop international terrorism, Fiorina offered a Margaret Thatcher quote as her qualification for stopping ISIS and the like: "If you want something talked about, ask a man. If you want something done, ask a woman."

That's a good burn as the only woman on a stage full of men. But it's also a pretty telling as to what you want everyone else to recognize sets you apart from the crowd.

None of this would actually be a problem if Fiorina hadn't vehemently sworn up, down, and sideways that she would never even think about being a woman whilst running for president. Rejecting femininity completely is saying that the unique perspective a woman holds has no value in the Oval Office. But that spark of newness, of possibility, is certainly something which people appreciate about Clinton (even though it's certainly not the limit of her qualifications, as Fiorina alleges). Assuming that a woman running for president is no different than a man is also assuming that sexism doesn't exist.

So Fiorina already had demonstrated hypocrisy reaching nearly the level of Donald Trump when he tries to make hay out of past WJ Clnton sexual practices.  Then on New Years Day, prior to the Rose Bowl matchup between Iowa and the Stanford Cardinal, Fiorina tweeted "Love my alma mater, but rooting for a Hawkeyes win today."










Two days after Stanford, at which Fiorina received a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1976, defeated the University of Iowa 45-16, Fiorina appeared on CNN's State of the Union and complained

Oh, for heaven's sakes, Dana- for heaven's sakes, can't a girl ever have a little bit of fun? That was a tongue-in-cheek tweet, which the people of Iowa understand, because I was asked over and over again in Iowa, having attended a Hawkeye tailgate. I  was asked. They knew that my heart was torn.

Then she blamed Barack Obama. And the media.

Can't a girl ever have a little bit of fun was classic Fiorina, who denies playing the "gender card," then uses it whenever she sees an opening.  It's the give me a break, I'm the weaker sex card.  It's no more qualifying for the office of the Presidency to be one of "us girls" than it is to be one of "us boys."

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, a tweet is just a tweet, and Fiorina is just being Fiorina.

And have I mentioned how loathsome Carly Fiorina is?

Share |

Just One Of The Boys

Slate's Fred Kaplan looks at the GOP presidential debate in Las Vegas and describes how "most of the nine major candidates proved they knew nothing, a fact that some tried to conceal by making stuff up."

John Ellis Bush and Rand Paul, Kaplan argues, each had something constructive to contribute; not so Chris Christie, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, and Carly Fiorina.   He notes

You might think that Carly Fiorina, former denizen of Silicon Valley, would know this topic cold. If so, you would be wrong. She said that digital technology has moved on, and so have the terrorists, but that the “bureaucracy” hasn’t. Intelligence agencies need the private sector to help them intercept new communications, but Obama and Clinton never asked for help.

In truth, the NSA and other intelligence agencies have been quite adept at keeping up with the new technologies. To the extent they haven’t (for instance, with Apple’s new encryption programs, which block even Apple from cracking codes), the Obama administration has reached out to Silicon Valley for assistance on a regular basis—to no avail. It’s unclear why these executives would cooperate with Fiorina.

She didn't stop there, however, for

Fiorina’s plan to win the war: “Bring back the warrior class”—by which she means Gens. David Petraeus, Jack Keane, and Stanley McChrystal, who were all “retired early because they told Obama things he didn’t want to hear.” First, Keane retired during the Bush administration. McChrystal had to go because he insulted NATO allies—with whom he was supposed to be forming a coalition in Afghanistan—in the presence of a Rolling Stone reporter. Petraeus—well, we all know what happened there. Does Fiorina really think there are no other warriors among the U.S. Army’s generals?

What happened there is that the married Petraeus started carrying on with the woman who served as his biographer. Exposed, he submitted his resignation to President Obama and later was found to have given his gal pal some classified information, including names of covert officials. He was allowed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, presumably because his name is not Eric Snowden, but General Petraeus. A real sweetheart and Carly Fiorina's kind of guy.

In his takedown of most of the candidates on the main stage, Kaplan generously did not quote Fiorina blustering

And I will not speak to him personally until we’ve rebuilt the 6th Fleet a little bit right under his nose; rebuilt the missile defense program in Poland right under his nose; and conducted a few military exercises in the Baltic states.

When Fiorina made nearly the identical argument in September, Stars and Stripes responded

... the U.S. 6th Fleet is less a collection of ships than a command structure for operating American warships in the Atlantic and Mediterranean. Moreover, the fleet is one of the few growing military commands in Europe. It is building land-based missile interceptor sites in Romania and Poland, and in the coming days it will welcome the last of four guided-missile destroyers to arrive for permanent stationing in Rota, Spain.

Although the status of the missile defense program in Poland is unclear, in June The Guardian had reported

Dozens of Nato landing craft churned through the Baltic’s grey waters. Further out at sea, huge warships – the US’s San Antonio, Britain’s Ocean and Poland’s Lublin – filled the horizon. On the beach, DVs – short for distinguished visitors – including the UK defence secretary, Michael Fallon, were watching.

The landing craft, especially the mega hovercraft of the Americans, were monstrous, on a scale that would have awed D-day veterans. Eurofighter Typhoons flew overhead. Marines raced out to disappear into the woods. A reminder that even the most carefully planned operations can go wrong came when a Polish transport vessel sank, ignominiously, about 100ft from shore.

The mock landing at Ustka, Poland, on Wednesday was the climax of a two-week Nato exercise called Baltops. Forty-nine naval vessels from 17 countries and 5,900 personnel were involved in this major show of strength.

Fiorina now refuses to acknowledge she was wrong about Gemeral Keane. On the upside, she went one whole, entire debate without lying (videos below, which are here and here) again about Planned Parenthood. So, progress.

Share |

Faith, Like God, Works In Mysterious Ways

Members of Rutgers Presbyterian Church in New York City, "horrified by Mr. Trump's call to deny people entry to our country based solely on their religion," have approved a resolution asking that the appropriate bodies of the Presbyterian Church, U.S.A. "review" the Republican's "standing/membership in our denomination." (Registering American citizens on the basis of their religion evidently is O.K., but never mind.)

Trump identifies as "a Presbyterian" (by which he means the PCUSA rather than the Presbyterian Church in America or the Orthodox Presbyterian Church) but no longer attends the church in which he was baptized nor any other in the denomination.  Hence, the PCUSA- which has definitively and publicly supported immigrants and refugees- has determined there is nothing it can do.

That's probably fortunate because individual churches in sects based on the divinity of Jesus Christ already read too many people out of their congregations. Still, Rutgers Presbyterian Church is not alone in believing Jesus would have been far more welcoming than Trump of the strangers in our midst.

Carly Fiorina, too, has criticized Trump because he wants "to use a religious test and ban people from coming into this country," though it's understandable she would knock anyon who has called her ugly. But Fiorina, a nominal Episcopalian, has more in common with the GOP's leading presidential candidate than either she or Trump ever would acknowledge.

The Art of the Deal, Trump contended in August, of one of his books, is "my second favorite book of all-time. Do you know what my first is? The Bible! Nothing beats the Bible." (Also, "Nobody Beats The Wiz.")  It didn't take his befuddlement at being asked what his favorite verse is to figure out that Trump was blowing smoke up our posterior.  Similarly, Fiorina was posturing- or hopefully, she was- when at The Faith and Freedom Conference last month she maintained (video below)

I do think it's worth saying that people of faith make better leaders because faith gives us humility, faith teaches us that on one of us is greater than any other one of us, that each of us are gifted by God. Faith gives us empathy, we know that all of us can fall and every one of us can be redeemed.  And faith gives us optimism, it gives us the belief that there is something better,that there is someone bigger than all of us. And so I think it's important that we elect a leader of faith and that we elect a leader, as well, who knows that more prayer,not less, is necessary in public life and in all our lives.







Faith gives us humility, empathy, and optimism. It appears faith also gave us Syed

Farook, an American citizen, (who) worked for the San Bernardino County Department of Health for the past few years and had a young daughter, his shocked father told the Daily News.

“I haven’t heard anything,” the elder Syed Farook told The News before his son’s name became public. “He was very religious. He would go to work, come back, go to pray, come back. He’s Muslim.”

And while apparently still very religious and filled with faith, Syed Farook went out and murdered 14 people at a Christmas/Chanukah/New Year's party in San Bernardino, California.

There is an obvious superficiality, as well as hostility and economic self-interest, enervating Donald Trump.   However, Donald Trump is not the only candidate in the GOP race making things up, nor is immigration/refugee policy the prime topic for dishonesty. Consider the feces being tossed around by Fiorina, Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio about Planned Parenthood.

"Faith" may be the only issue more abused than abortion. Faith can be confidence that the New England Traitors will be in the NFL playoffs this season, that snow will fall in upstate New York this winter, or that ISIL will not be obliterated in the next month or two.  It is what also motivates many terrorists, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, and innumerable politicans for whom it's a convenient catchword meant to please some and offend none.








Share |

The Religious Test The Right Likes

Representative Steve King, who has charged that immigrants from the Middle East do not want to assimilate into American culture, has told Talking Points Memo

Sharia law is incompatible with the United States Constitution and so if they want to demonstrate that they are open to being Americanized, the first thing they should do is renounce Sharia law. You won't get Keith Ellison or Andre Carson in this Congress to renounce Sharia law,let alone somebody that's just come out of the Middle East that is someone who has been steeped in Islam for a lifetime.

Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN) with Andre Carson (D-IN) one of the two Muslim members of the US Congress, called King's comment "an incredibly ignorant statement. And when I say ignorant I don't mean it as an insult, I meanit as it is incredibly uninformed. That is all I can really say."

He could say more, but it would be extremely dangerous, all the more so because Ellison is not a Christian.  He could, of course, defend King's inference that American law should not be based on religious creed.

We already apply a religious test, as the US Supreme Court has endorsed.  Lest we forget, sixteen months ago the Court reprehensibly ruled 

that requiring family-owned corporations to pay for insurance coverage for contraception under the Affordable Care Act violated a federal law protecting religious freedom. It was, a dissent said, “a decision of startling breadth.”

The 5-to-4 ruling, which applied to two companies owned by Christian families, opened the door to many challenges from corporations over laws that they claim violate their religious liberty.

As Justice Ginsburg noted in her dissent

Would the exemption…extend to employers with religiously grounded objections to blood transfusions (Jehovah's Witnesses); antidepressants (Scientologists); medications derived from pigs, including anesthesia, intravenous fluids, and pills coated with gelatin (certain Muslims, Jews, and Hindus); and vaccinations[?]…Not much help there for the lower courts bound by today's decision.

If the courts were to rule against such plaintiffs, it would become clear the Hobby Lobby case was an unconstitutional establishment of religion.  If courts were to side with the plaintiffs, they would reinforce the idea that sectarian law trumps civil law, not unlike in nations abiding by Sharia Law.

Not surprisingly, though, King applauded the majority opinion, which he wrote "concluded the Constitution means what it says and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 also means what it says."  He added "I congratulate Hobby Lobby for standing on both their religious convictions and on Constitutional principles." The religious convictions were the corporation's particular interpretation of their religion, and the Constitutional principles were that discrimination is permissible when that interpretation is claimed as the basis for discrimination.

Keith Ellison should offer his colleague this deal: King renounces and denounces anti-choice harassment and terrorism and all favoritism shown to corporations and others on the basis of their claimed, alleged religious beliefs. In return, Ellison will denounce Sharia law.  That's the last he'd hear from Steve King.


And have I mentioned how loathsome Carly Fiorina (below) is?













Share |

The Actions Which Don't Match The Rhetoric

It has been two days since the convention of the Republican Jewish Coalition, thus two days since Donald Trump was asked whether Jerusalem should remain undivided and the capital of Israel. He is said to have remarked "I don't know that Israel has the commitment to make it," spurring Zeke Miller to observe "you can hear a pin drop."

Context is everything, or at least a lot, so it's difficult to determine whether the crowd believed that Trump wanted Israel's confidence to flag or that he merely expected it to occur.  However, the thought process was clearer and less complicated when, as Scott Eric Kaufman wrote

Trump spoke about the infamous $43 million gas station in Afghanistan, asking the crowd, “How many of you think you could have done it for less?” His question was greeted with silence, so he moved on. “I’m a negotiator, like you folks,” he said while discussing what he considers to be the failures of the recent nuclear deal struck with Iran.






Rarely does a politician so explicitly reveal anti-Semitism (video, above), but then part of Trump's appeal always has been that of someone not a career politician.  Further, Jews in the USA do not face the constant danger that the State of Israel does, nor do they- unlike Israel- confront forces determined to annihilate them.

The GOP candidates have kept silent about Trump's lukewarm remarks about Israel before the RJC., odd given that their comments about President Obama's policy in the region have included (from the first, second, and fourth debates respectively):



The president can’t tell you what we got. I’ll tell you what the world got. The world has a burgeoning nuclear power that didn’t, as the Soviets, say “we might defend ourselves in a war.”

What the Iranians have said is, “we will wipe Israel off the face of the map, and we will bring death to America.” When someone points a gun at your head and loads it, by God, you ought to take them seriously, and we need to take that seriously. (M. Huckabee)

You know, we turned our back on Israel, our ally. You know, and a situation like that, of course Obama’s not going to be able to do anything. I would shore up our military first, because if you don’t get the military right, nothing else is going to work. (B. Carson)

The next thing I intend to do is instruct the Department of Justice and the IRS to start (sic) persecuting religious liberty, and then intend to cancel the Iran deal, and finally move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. (T. Cruz)

***********

As it relates to Iran, it’s not a strategy to tear up an agreement. A strategy would be how do we confront Iran? And, the first thing that we need to do is to establish our commitment to Israel which has been altered by this administration. And, make sure that they have the most sophisticated weapons to send a signal to Iran that we have Israel’s back. (JEB!)

If they don’t go with us, we slap the sanctions on anyway. If they fund these radical groups that threaten Israel and all of the West, then we should rip up the deal and put the sanctions back on. (J. Kasich)

On day one in the Oval Office, I will make two phone calls, the first to my good friend to Bibi Netanyahu to reassure him we will stand with the state of Israel. (C. Fiorina)

***********

In the groups — in the countries of the Gulf states of Bahrain, the Cleveland Clinic is opening an operation. Clearly we see the same with them. And in Israel, we have no better ally in the world, and no more criticizing them in public, we should support them. (J. Kasich)

His calculation in the Middle East is that he has seen what this president has done, which is nothing, the president has no strategy, our allies in the region do not trust us. For goodness sake, there is only one pro-American free enterprise democracy in the Middle East, it is the state of Israel.

And we have a president that treats the prime minister of Israel with less respect than what he gives the ayatollah in Iran. And so our allies in the region don’t trust us. (M. Rubio)



However, it seems that when it comes to action, support for the tiny nation flags, inasmuch as

Democrats say there’s only one reason that pro-Israel language is not included in the revival of the Export-Import Bank: Mitch McConnell.

The Senate majority leader has been wary of Democratic maneuvering around Israeli politics, and he's recently warned that the minority party might attempt to “get well” with the Jewish community after they backed the nuclear accord with Iran.

Now, senators and Democratic leadership sources say McConnell is taking out his frustrations by rejecting a popular provision that would express the Senate’s support for Israel’s economy and undercut the pro-Palestine Boycott, Divestiture and Sanctions campaign. The provision, which has bipartisan support, had been targeted for inclusion in a larger transportation bill.

The news was delivered to Reid in a meeting with McConnell on Monday to game out the end of the year. Reid was furious upon learning that the pro-Israel language was being jettisoned, people close to him said.

The McConnell camp denies the accusation but

Two other Democratic senators blamed McConnell for blocking the language, which would require the Ex-Im Bank to consider whether applicants for loans oppose “policies and actions that are politically motivated" and meant to inhibit "commercial relations specifically with citizens or residents of Israel."

GOP candidates frequently use questions about Iran, Syria, or ISIL to declare their undying love for Israel.  Of course, the uncompromising prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself probably is the object of their affection but the nation itself also garners their unequivocal support in public. That is, until Republican leadership has the opportunity to erode support for a rabidly anti-Zionist, (barely) arguably anti-Semitic, movement.   They then go silent, demonstrating yet again there is little substantial difference between Donald Trump and the rest of the pathetic GOP presidential field.








Share |

"Republican" Means Never Having To Say You're Sorry

There have been weaker and worse responses to the apparent terrorist act of last Friday in Colorado Springs than that of Mike Huckabee. Appearing on CNN's State of the Union on Sunday, he conceded "there's no excuse for killing other people." Of course, he then went on to compare Robert Lewis Dear and Planned Parenthood, even suggesting the latter is worse: "whether it's happening inside the Planned Parent headquarters, inside their clinics, where many millions of babies die,or whether it's people attacking Planned Parenthood."

See what the Slick Man of Hope did there? "Many millions of babies die" at Planned Parenthood compared to various unnamed people who are merely attacking Planned Parenthood.

More significantly, however, the former governor went on to maintain "I know of nobody who has ever suggested that Planned Parenthood be the target of some type of violent attack."

That technically is true, in the same way another slick guy from Hope once was asked by Jim Lehrer "You had no sexual relationship with this young woman?" (i.e., Monica Lewinsky) and the President responded "There is not a sexual relationship- that is accurate."

The sexual relationship had occurred- it was not occurring, in much the same way that nobody has said "go out and start shooting people at a Planned Parenthood clinic." A critic could argue that one or more Republicans has suggested such an action, given that Merriam-Webster gives as one definition of suggest as "to mention or imply as a possibility." Yet, that is not the main definition, so we give Huckabee the benefit of the doubt.

Nevertheless, one GOP candidate, at least, came awfully close to advocating a murderous attack upon Planned Parenthood.  At the September 16, 2015 debate hosted by CNN, Carly Fiorina declared (video below)

As regards to Planned parenthood, anyone who has watched this vdeo tape,I dare Hillary Clnton, Barack Obama to watch these tapes. To watch a fully formed fetus on the table. Its heart beating. Its legs kicking while someone says "We have to keep it alive to harvest its brain."








We're still waiting to see that video tape Fiorina swore exists, but seems not to.  We're waiting, also, to hear anyone say "we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain"  and are anxious to see the fetus with its heart beating and leg kicking (questioned by Chris Wallace, below). But never mind.  A presidential candidate and former CEO accuses Planned Parenthood of putting a fully formed fetus, with its heart beating and legs kicking, on a table to "keep it alive to harvest its brain,"   Then in a remarkable suspension of thought, she labels any linkage of incendiary remarks and violent behavior "typical left-wing politics."










And have I mentioned how loathsome Carly Fiorina is?







Share |

Checking In On Carly

At the presidential debate in Milwaukee, Carly Fiorina slipped up, neglecting to insert into her responses any whoppers even approaching the order of magnitude of her Planned Parenthood whopper.

Still, the failed businesswoman managed in one response to contribute two truly awful recommendations, one picked up by the Center for American Progress and the other traveling under the radar.

Oh, she did actually avoid answering "If you win the nomination, you’ll probably be facing a Democrat named Clinton. How are you going to respond to the claim that Democratic presidents are better at creating jobs than Republicans?" However, most responses of the other candidates (Rand Paul often an exception), as well as of Fiorina, focused on a variation of their stump speech.

The question posed is a particularly knotty one for Republicans because, as this comparison to January, 2015 indicates (chart below from the Bureau of Labor Statistics)

An overall gain of 6.4 million more non-farm payroll jobs last month than in January 2009, which represents a 4.8% increase. All of that growth came from the private sector, while the public sector shrunk: Private payrolls have added 7 million jobs over Obama’s presidency, while government payrolls (federal, state and local) have contracted by a combined 634,000 jobs.

Since then, private sector employment has only grown. but Fiorina can be forgiven for claiming "this government has been growing bigger and bigger, more corrupt, less effective." "Less effective" is merely an unsubstantiated, subjective judgement and "more corrupt" is also subjective, albeit ludicrous.  And whatever the facts, Republicans also typically charge Democrats with creating "bigger" government, facts be damned, not unlike the portrayal (one, below) in TV commercials.







Fiorina's prescription for business de-regulation, however, is terrible, as explained by ThinkProgress' Todd Legum:

“We need to pass the REINS Act so Congress is in charge of regulation,” Fiorina told the debate audience, referring to an obscure bill intended to hobble federal agency action. Though it is unlikely that many people in the audience know what the REINS Act is, this bill has long been one of the top priorities of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — the primary lobbying group representing big business as a whole. Moreover, the bill has a fairly high chance of becoming law if Republicans gain control over both houses of Congress and the presidency. The bill passed the GOP-controlled House on multiple occasions.

REINS is a general attack on federal regulatory system. Congress often passes laws that delegate authority to federal agencies to work out the details of relatively broad policy objectives set by federal statutes. The Clean Air Act, for example, requires the Environmental Protection Agency to set “standards applicable to the emission of any air pollutant from any class or classes of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines” if the EPA determines that those emissions “cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.”

There are many reasons why Congress may wish to delegate authority in this way. The EPA employs scientists and policy experts who have far more expertise in motor vehicle emissions than members of Congress, so the EPA is more likely to make educated judgments about the details of environmental policy. New studies may reveal that a particular emission that was previously viewed as benign is actually far more dangerous — or they may reveal the opposite, that a chemical once viewed as dangerous is actually much less so. The Clean Air Act permits the EPA to respond relatively nimbly to these developments rather than having to push through new legislation every time a researcher publishes new data that should inform regulators. Similarly, EPA regulators can adapt to new technological developments, encouraging the use of certain technologies while relaxing standards related to others as new ways of reducing emissions are discovered.

REINS, however, would effectively lock much of the federal regulatory system in place. Under this bill, any new regulation that has an “annual economic impact of $100 million or more,” an amount that seems large, but that actually amounts to less than 0.0006 percent of the U.S. economy, must be approved by Congress or else it does not go into effect. Moreover, the bill provides that if Congress does not act “by the end of 70 session days or legislative days . . . then the rule described in that resolution shall be deemed not to be approved and such rule shall not take effect.”

The United States, of course, has a Congress that can barely decide whether to fund the government or avoid a catastrophic debt default. So it’s easy to imagine what would happen if Congress were given a tight deadline to approve dozens of tweaks to America’s regulatory structure every year. Changes to that structure would, for the most part, cease to exist.

As part of the same response, and immediately presenting the REINS idea, Fiorina maintained "we need to actually reform the tax code. Go to a three-page tax code. Yes, there are plans that would reform our tax code to three pages."

Usually when this zombie concept is presented, it is as "go to a single-page" (or two pages, it really doesn't matter) "tax return" with the proviso that all deductions are eliminated.  In general circulation, this idea wouldn't fly, if only that removing the deduction for interest paid on a home mortagage would prove rather disconcerting.

Two months ago, a highly skeptical Forbes contributor, explaining the inevitable complexity of tax law, remarked "I’m really looking forward to the Fiorina campaign releasing the three-page tax code that the candidate is proposing."  However, even in the extremely unlikely event all deductions were eliminated in the new code, Politics 201 would demand that they return. Neither Comcast, FedEx, Goldman Sachs, AT&T, Exxon Mobil, the NRA or (virtually) any other corporation would accomodate the public by firing all its lobbyists and accept an inhospitable tax code.  Not going to happen.

The beauty of Carly Fiorina, however, is that she was too slick to go there. She said merely "go to a three-page tax code," one which could easily include something like "Nothing in this legislation shall be construed to eliminate, repeal, or modify any existing preference."

Kudos to Todd Legum for focusing on the danger in the candidate's dream of eliminating consumer and worker protections.  But she is so shifty and shameless, it would take the classic infinite number of monkeys typing for an infinite amount of time to come up with her next harebrained scheme. And have I mentioned how loathsome Carly Fiorina is?

Share |

There's Something About Ben

"Unless," The Daily Show's Trevor Noah says (video below), "slow,languid pace, dead eyes. loves brains. Oh my God, this explains everything. Ben Carson is a zombie!" Though meant primarily in humor, that was no less insightful, no less likely, than Noah's notion "It's just shocking that such a smart man, a brain surgeon, could have this kind of perspective- rushing a gunman" or that "a body with bullet holes" is no "more devastating than taking the right to arm ourselves away."

It's not that Carson's various commenting about firearms are so ridiculous.  He says people should charge a gunman threatening them because at least not all the individuals would be shot and killed ("after you, Dr."). When he himself was faced with a robber at a Popeyes restaurant, Carson claimed, he "directed him, he went to the cashier, the cashier gave him the money, and he ran out of the store."

It seems a little strange that a presidential candidate would voluntarily remark that he offered up someone else in his place to be possibly killed. The incident itself  has been called into question, with one blogger (or headline writer) remarking "Ben Carson should produce his long-form Popeyes receipt" (which, oddly, is funnier than anything Noah's writers could come up with).

Arguing also that Jews in Nazi Germany would have been better off armed, Carson contended “I think the likelihood of Hitler being able to accomplish his goals would have been greatly diminished if the people had been armed … I’m telling you that there is a reason that these dictatorial people take the guns first."   Carson's fantasy aside, there were at least ten major instances of Jewish resistance during the Holocaust.   It took, further, powerful nations and one heck of a winter in Russia before the Nazi regime was defeated. Oh, and comparing something to Nazi Germany is never a good thing.

But Carson's bizarre statements are no less ridiculous than Marco Rubio claiming he can create a budget surplus by cutting taxes by trillions of dollars. They are less arrogant than John Ellis Bush almost casually stating that his brother kept the nation safe from terrorism. Nor are they more appalling than Carly Fiorina lying about Planned Parenthood- repeatedly- or her record at Hewlett-Packard, or imagining a hardscrabble background. (Give her enough time and Fiorina would vehemently deny she ever worked at HP.)  And then there is Donald Trump- where would we begin?

Unlike with Rubio, Bush, Fiorina, and Trump, Carson appears actually to believe what he is saying. He's probably not an actual zombie, though the odds of him being so are roughly equal to those of Carly Fiorina getting through the next GOP debate without fabrication.

Perhaps Dr. Carson simply is an evil genius, offending Jews, victims of violence, and other people in some nefarious scheme to obtain the GOP nomination.   "The key to success is sincerity. Once you can fake that, you've got it made," a famous talk-show host once quipped, and maybe that's Carson's M.O.

But it's more likely that Trevor Noah is naive to believe that such an esteemed, successful individual in the highly-technical field of brain surgery could be so devoid of intellectual heft in another subject area.  Ben Carson might be the brilliant doctor we always hear he is and may have made greater contributions to mankind than the vast majority of human beings. Knowledge and understanding are not always transferrable to another field of study.

Politics, foreign affairs, economics, history, and everything else not labeled "medical science" are not medical science. And when it comes to most of those subject areas in which a president must exhibit some rudimentary knowledge and have the ability to acquire further understanding, the good doctor may be out to lunch.













Share |

Making It Up About Foreign Policy, Marijuana, Herself. Worse Is This.

This could be about foreign policy.   Carly Fiorina vows to build a missile defense system in Poland and to rebuild the Sixth Fleet, which Stars and Stripes reports already is building a land-based missile interceptor site in, as luck would have it, Poland.  She wants to "conduct regular, aggressive military exercises in the Baltic states," which the US military already is doing, and to "send a few thousand more troops into Germany" because there is nothing that says efficient use of tax money better than sending more soldiers into Germany, in imminent danger of conquest by Russia.

Of course, as Gary Legum points out, that wasn't the real message of the candidate who never really means any of it, except for the style, which is supposed to strike fear into the hearts of the bad guys. Salon's Gary Legum (emphasis his) points out

if you are a conservative voter in America, you’re thinking, Carly won’t be a chump like that wimp Obama, who has let Putin walk all over him. That swelling in your chest is a jingoistic pride that you haven’t felt during the long, dark years that the Kenyan Usurper has been destroying America from within.

Or this could be about drugs, given that as Fiorina was diplomatically advised she was not up to date with her facts about marijuana, she decided to lecture the interviewer with "So I will also tell you something else. We lost a daughter to addiction."   What this has to do with marijuana (especially given her daughter died from a combination of alcohol, prescription drugs, and bulimia)  the publicly-truthless (thank you, Charlie Pierce) candidate didn't mention. But when the point is"I'm right, you're wrong, shut up," it doesn't really matter.

There is, however, at least one more insidious, and potentially more damaging, distortion coming from Fiorina, as illustrated by her exchange with the host on Sunday's Meet The Press:


CHUCK TODD:

Do you believe any of the money Planned Parenthood uses is for good, from the federal government?

CARLY FIORINA:

I'm sure it is. I'm sure it is. But you know what I find amazing? The hypocrisy of Democrats who stand up and oppose every time taxpayer funding for, say, pregnancy centers, that are also very much focused on women's health, but no, Democrats don't want taxpayer funding for pregnancy centers.

I just visited one in South Carolina. They are all privately funded. This is hypocrisy on Democrats' part. This is about a political slush fund. It is about the character of our nation. And yes, we should stand up and fight on this issue.

Thus is the impression left that Planned Parenthood can be eviscerated and centers also "very much focused on women's health"  left intact. But it's unlikely Fiorina is talking about outfits whose main focus is on women's health but rather about crisis pregnancy centers, unregulated and unlicensed, which help pregnant women, though primarily try to talk them out of abortions.

Law school student and NARAL Pro-Choice (chart below from NARAL Pro-Choice America) legal intern Caitlin Bancroft went undercover in Virginia and found

After checking in, I was introduced to my "counselor," a conservatively dressed middle-aged woman who led me to one of the back rooms. She sat across from me with some forms on a clipboard I was not permitted to see. Much like the décor, the set-up reinforced the sense of professionalism and expertise. The consultation began with the standard questions: name, address, age, date of last period?

Right as I began to relax, the Q&A took a turn for the personal and invasive. "What is your relationship with your parents like?" "How is your financial situation?" "Have you told the father?" "What is his religion?" "Are his parents religious?" "How many people have you slept with?" "Would your parents be excited about a grandchild?"

As I sat there having my life probed, the purpose of the questions dawned on me. In case the test was positive, my "counselor" wanted to know which tactic to use to persuade me to continue the pregnancy -- exactly where my resolve was the weakest. Was there a loving Christian boyfriend who would make a great dad? Did I have kind supportive parents who would be excited by the idea of a grandchild? I knew I wasn't pregnant -- knew exactly what she was doing -- knew she wasn't a doctor. But my body reacted instinctively to her questions with guilt and shame. It felt like a kick in the gut when she asked if I had told my brother about the baby, and I felt a creeping sense of selfishness as I imagined the door slamming on my shared apartment, my twenties, my life. Would my parents want me to have this child? Would it matter?

The woman stopped between questions to comment on my answers and lie. "Oh, you've taken birth control. Let me tell you how that causes cancer and is the same a medication abortion." I was told abortion would scar me for the rest of my life -- would damage all of my future relationships and leave me "haunted." I was told the pill could cause breast cancer, that condoms are "naturally porous" and don't protect against STIs, and that IUDs could kill me. She lectured and lied to me for over an hourbefore I even received the results of my pregnancy test.

Also interspersed in the deception were subtle judgments of my life decisions. "So you do have some scruples about you," she said at one point, referring to my low number of sexual partners. One of the most disturbing comments came when I was pressed about the sexual experience leading to my visit, the reason I supposedly needed a pregnancy test in the first place. I told her an all too common story of acquaintance rape. I had been at a party, I said, severely intoxicated and unable to consent, "I didn't remember anything... I just wished it hadn't happened." Her response made it clear that the situation was my fault, "Oh so he took advantage of you. Well just don't do it again sweetie; just don't do it again." It made me sick.

It only got worse after a positive pregnancy test. At another CPC (the deceptively named "A Woman's Choice" in Falls Church, Virginia) I could hear two employees whispering before entering my room, plotting strategies to reveal the test results and best manipulate my reaction. When they did finally clue me in, my concerns were casually brushed aside and used as ammunition for their agenda: I could care for a baby with no job, my parents would certainly help, and I could absolutely handle the stress. They even argued that I could be a law student while pregnant: "It will probably be good for the baby," the woman said, "because you will be sitting down all of the time."

At this center and elsewhere, the conversations were always the same. It didn't matter how many times I said that l didn't want to be pregnant or be a mother the CPC staffer would continue to bully me. Their tactics were so blatantly manipulative that I should have been able to fight back. I wanted to have a response, some kind of self-defense. But I couldn't find anything to say. I am pro-choice feminist activist and I often discuss these kinds of difficult and emotionally sensitive topics at work and in school. Yet these women's so-called concern left me defenseless, struggling to find a response that didn't play right into their hands.

 "There are," Bancroft writes, "over 58 CPCs, more than double the number of comprehensive reproductive healthcare centers in the state."  Across the nation- in which they outnumber abortion clinics approximately 3-to-1-  they are not all "privately funded," as the publicly-truthless candidate implies.   NPR explains the Guttmacher Institute

an abortion rights think-tank, cites seven states with line items in their budget for alternatives to abortion. Texas gives the most — more than $5 million over two fiscal years. Ohio budgeted $250,000 in 2013, and this year abortion opponents plan to boost their request to $1 million. Ohio and nearly two dozen other states also send smaller amounts to pregnancy centers through the sale of "Choose Life" license plates.

Fiorina is not alone in this deception.  In the last GOP debate, John Ellis Bush contended

There are 13,000 community-based organizations that provide health services to women, 13,000 in this country. I don’t believe that Planned Parenthood should get a penny from the federal government. Those organizations should get funding, just as I increased funding when I was governor of the state.

To be sure, Fiorina (as outlined by Legum) is the master demagogue. It must be difficult for Republicans and wayward independents to recognize as excrement anything stated so resolutely and confidently, sometimes with warped statistics. In light of the effort of congressional right-wing extremists to shut down the government over contraception and women's health care, its most dangerous expression probably is the growing myth that there is an extensive array of viable alternatives to Planned Parenthood.

Share |