RSS

Monthly Archives: July 2011

“America in Flames: The Light Opera”…

“America in Flames: The Light Opera”…

As debt-ceiling crisis grows, McConnell warns default could ‘destroy’ GOP – latimes.com.

As negotiators reconvened at the White House on Wednesday for another round of debt talks, House Republicans appeared to dig in even deeper in their resistance to any sort of deal to raise the federal debt ceiling even as one party leader foretold disaster for the GOP if its members failed to act.

Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader who has proposed a fallback plan that would likely ensure the $14.3-trillion debt limit would be raised, said in a radio interview that a default by the United States could critically damage his party heading into the 2012 elections.

A default, McConnell told talk show host Laura Ingraham, “destroys your brand.”

Is this what it’s come to now? Political parties are “brands”? Does this make McConnell SVP of Product Development and Cat Juggling? Meanwhile, Harry Reid is EVP of Branded Integration and Mixed Martial Arts.

McConnell sounds like the coach of a sports team prior to the game that will determine whether they enter the playoffs. However, in that instance, if his team loses, it’s still just a game and the players can go home to their mansions, fancy cars, and dog fights. McConnell is presumably talking about the economic health of the country he was elected to serve. Unfortunately, he’s more concerned about his constituents voting him out of office rather than whether they can afford even the generic brand ramen noodles.

The Kentucky senator said the economic consequences of a default would give President Obama an opportunity to blame the GOP for the country’s economic straits. “Look, he owns the economy,” McConnell said. “He’s been in office for three years. We refuse to let him entice him into co-ownership of a bad economy.”

Really? That’s what he prioritizes as a negative of the economic collapse? Obama might blame the GOP for it? True, Obama has been president for three years and not only do I not have my Oompa Loompa but I somehow aged three years under his watch. Who knows what further aging might occur if he remains in office?

It does occur to me that McConnell has been in the Senate for 27 years. How does he manage to play hot potato with the economy? If he doesn’t co-own it, surely he’s a stakeholder. But I’ll take him at his word: He’s feckless. He shows up at work each day, has some bad coffee, and looks at photos of his grandkids on Facebook (“Why is her hair that color?” “What is that thing in his ear?”). He’s in no position to have any influence over the economy. Obama owns it completely. If that’s true, then it logically follows that it was Bush, the previous president under whose watch there was literally flood and arguably famine, who got us into this mess. Yet the GOP wants to repeat his policies.

This is best expressed as a light opera I’ve written called “America in Flames” (I have not yet composed music for it, so for now, just sing the words to the tune of “Largo al factotum” from “Barber of Seville”)

Obama discovers America, represented as a U.S. flag wrapped around a dingy futon, in flames and the GOP attempting to put it out with gasoline.

GOP: Quick, you fool! Hand us more gasoline so we can put out this fire.

Obama: Are you insane? That’s just going to make it worse.

GOP: What’s wrong with you? Don’t you want to stop this fire?

Obama: Of course, but we should use water instead.

GOP: Oh, you’d love that wouldn’t you? Wasn’t Clinton pro water? And look where that got us. Our country’s in flames! That’s why we don’t dare stop using gasoline!

Obama: You can’t claim that Clinton’s policies failed based on what happened once we abandoned them!

GOP: More gasoline!

Obama: Oh, the hell with it.

Obama dives into the flames.

The GOP has a legitimate point that the U.S. spends more money than it earns. What would an average person do in the government’s place if your expenses exceeded your income? You could ask your boss for a raise (e.g. a tax increase) but he would rightly fire you for daring to suggest he part with even a fraction of his millions. He is, after all, a job creator. Granted, most of those jobs were created overseas and eliminated here… and come to think of it, he’s actually paying you less than he did in the ’90s but why punish him for his success?

If your income remains static, you need to evaluate your expenses. You could cut back on Starbucks, boozy dinners out, or an overextended military presence abroad, including two costly wars. Eh. Better to pull your oldest out of college. He’s handsome. He’ll marry well, especially now that it’s legal in New York. Your sister was staying with you temporarily because of health issues. That deadbeat can hit the bricks. And you can really balance the books if you stop burning money on your parents’ assisted living facility — the fancy one with the three staring windows and registered nurses. There’s a perfectly good hostel down the street.

Now, excuse me while I dive into the flames.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on July 14, 2011 in Political Theatre

 

Tags: , ,

What would Jay-Z do?…

From USA Today:

Sarah Palin’s daughter Bristol, touring to promote her book “Not Afraid of Life,” tells “Christianity Today” that mom gets no respect from the media …

…because they’re envious of her. She’s got a good family, she’s got a good husband, she’s got awesome support, she’s got God on her side, and I think people are envious of that. They’re envious that she carries herself so well, that she’s smart. There are lots of vicious people out there.

Why does the title of Bristol Palin’s book have the swagger and defiance of a rap album that was “dropped” after the artist was released from prison?

Even her comments about her mother reek of the extreme paranoia and megalomaniacal disconnect from reality that is usually accompanied by clouds of pot smoke in the recording studio.

The media’s issue with Sarah Palin is envy and not just some responsibility to ask tough questions of public figures who choose to be public of their own volition? OK, envy it is. Let’s go with that.

Palin also has “God on her side” despite her being “too busy to go to church most Sundays.” I was under the impression that Palin was unemployed. One would think that the profession of being Sarah Palin would allow for Sundays off but there probably are not enough cameras at her local church to justify it.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on July 13, 2011 in Political Theatre

 

Tags: , , ,

Why your children will have English accents…

Conservative group backtracks on marriage pledge slavery language – Maggie Haberman – POLITICO.com.

It’s becoming a bit of an exhausting proposition to keep up with every idiotic statement or action Michele Bachmann makes during her campaign to insult every group to which she does not belong and to embarrass the ones to which she does.

The GOP has made it clear that our imploding financial situation is the most critical problem facing the United States so it seems appropriate in a Bizarro World manner that the party’s most high-profile candidates for president are focusing on private social issues, such as marriage equality, and the apparent pornography epidemic (I shudder to think what would happen to our economy if that were ever banned) and outbreak of Sharia law.

In her almost fanatical zeal to offend, Bachmann rushed to sign a “marriage vow” from the conservative Family Leader group without realizing that the only other person to do so was Rick Santorum. This is like showing up to a party and the only other guest is the host’s maiden aunt.

The pledge itself was mostly a pro forma effort with the expected anti-gay, anti-any-social-progress-from-the past-100 years sentiments. Sort of the right-wing version of a “Best of the ’80s” CD. There’s “Come On, Eileen,” “Take On Me,” and “Don’t You Want Me,” the lyrics to which (“You were working as a waitress at a cocktail bar”) most accurately describe what Bachmann should be doing with her time.

However, it turns out there was a surprise, “hidden track” to this pledge. Let me slow it down and play it backwards for you:

“Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-American President.”

I would dispute the use of the word “household” to describe a one-room shack on a plantation, but I’m more surprised by the blatant racism of tying Obama’s ethnicity into this. I presume the Family Leader believes the white family situation has declined in the 21st Century, as well. No one blames Bush for “The Bachelor.”

A young Michele Bachmann (l) with a family friend.

This statement is mired in the faulty logic that “traditional values” trumps everything else. So, a child born in slavery right before one of the most volatile periods in U.S. history is in a better situation because he is in a two-parent household with a mother and a father (not a husband and wife, as that was not legal — the United States has a long history of depriving individuals of the right to marry who they choose.).

This historical myopia extends beyond race. There was also less divorce in the 19th Century, which is expected when you remove any need to compromise from the husband or any real independence from the wife. This is a social clockwork orange — looks nice on the outside but it’s not ideal upon examination.

The Family Leader appears to have derived its knowledge of black families during slavery from bootleg copies of “Song of the South.” There was some attempt to preserve a family unit but that was to prevent slaves from trying to escape. I tend to view that as encouraging the creation of hostages rather than building a strong, traditional family. The ultimate goal was to produce more slaves and the slave owners were not the Dr. Neil Warren of their day. If it were ever in their financial interest to divide up the families, they would do so with arguably less consideration than someone sells off a litter of puppies.

Bachmann has since claimed this “hidden track” wasn’t in the pledge she signed. She is proudly a post-modern bigot, not a more antiquated bigot found in a vintage store.

Meanwhile, she continues to surge in the polls. The upside is that this could be a replay, viewed through a fun house mirror, of Howard Dean’s candidacy in 2004. She’ll flame out quickly as conservative primary voters realize they actually want to win this thing. Republicans, though, tend not to settle as quickly as Democrats, so she could wind up with the nomination. The colossal blunder of her actually winning the presidency would trigger a little-known clause in the Treaty of Paris, which would revert ownership of the United States back to the British, which is probably for the best.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on July 13, 2011 in Political Theatre

 

Tags: ,

So, where’s Otisburg?

Politician Campaigns to Make ‘South California’ Into Our 51st State – TIME NewsFeed.

A California politician is proposing that his state split in half as a way to address political and logistical issues – marking yet another instance someone has proposed this idea in the Golden State.

OK, this is dumb and most likely nothing will come of it. It would benefit the GOP on the national level because California’s 55 electoral votes, pretty much guaranteed for Democrats since 1992, would be fractured.

But what an unappealing state Stone wishes to create. His proposed South California would include Riverside, Fresno, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Mono, Orange, San Bernardino, San Diego and Tulare. I have no plans to visit any of these places. I did however enjoy the “Fresno” miniseries from 1986 starring Carol Burnett, Charles Grodin, and Teri Garr.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on July 12, 2011 in Political Theatre

 

Tags: ,

Impeach Obama…

From CBS News:

The Senate’s top Republican said Tuesday that he did not see a way for Republicans and Democrats to come to agreement on meaningful deficit reduction as long as President Obama remains in office.

“After years of discussions and months of negotiations, I have little question that as long as this president is in the Oval Office, a real solution is probably unattainable,” Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said in remarks on the Senate floor.

OK, Obama is the problem. He’s what’s preventing us from going bankrupt by not concentrating more of the country’s wealth in a small percentage of Americans for whom we cannot consider raising taxes.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and many economists have warned of economic catastrophe if the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling is not raised before August 2.

Now my math might be as bad as the elected officials in charge of our economy but isn’t August 2, 2011 sometime before Nov. 6, 2012? So, we can’t fix things while Obama is in office but the next presidential election is well after the point when our economy will resemble Spencer Tracy’s bank account after Liz Taylor’s wedding in “Father of the Bride.”

So, I suppose the responsible action McConnell is promoting is to impeach Obama. What choice do we have given what’s at stake? The GOP did detect weakness when Biden interrupted Obama to ask Speaker Boehner if the “Tattaglias guarantee our investment.” I think they’re confident that once Obama is out of the way, Biden will cooperate.

After strenuous debate, House Speaker Boehner and President Obama agree that DC stands for "District of Columbia."

And once Obama is out of office, he can concentrate on his career as an illusionist, at least based on what Speaker Boehner says:

“The president has presented us with three choices: smoke and mirrors, tax hikes, or default. Republicans choose none of the above.”

They’re stronger than I am. I definitely would have chosen smoke and mirrors, especially if it was like David Copperfield’s “Crystal Smoke Chamber”:

According to a source in the room, Boehner said he initially sought a larger deal that included reform to entitlement programs. Mr. Obama agreed, he said — on the condition that the deal include revenue increases.

Whenever I read about “reform” to entitlement programs, I think about how convicts are “reformed” by their cellmates in prison.

In Boehner’s telling, he refused to consider tax increases but said he would discuss tax reform — lowering tax rates while closing tax loopholes in a way that was revenue neutral. Mr. Obama countered that he would consider corporate tax reform but not personal tax reform.

Boehner, the source said, told his caucus he wanted both, arguing that such an approach is necessary because some small business owners claim earnings as personal income. Mr. Obama agreed, on the condition that the Bush-era tax cuts for low earners be made permanent — presumably while the tax cuts for high earners are allowed to expire. In Boehner’s telling, that’s when talks began to break down.

Boehner might not fully grasp what “negotiation” means. I am impressed that he is able to hold the line on refusing tax increases for the smallest and wealthiest percent of the country. People are heading over to Casey Anthony’s house with pitchforks and torches but the entire economic system as they know it is held hostage over a fraction of the population who would most likely find ways to beat any tax increase anyway.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on July 12, 2011 in Political Theatre

 

Tags: , , ,

Stop… or my senator will shoot…

From the Arizona Republic:

Why do they make raspberry-pink guns? Are they sold alongside Barbie dream houses? A gun is not “cute.” It is designed to kill people. I appreciate the beauty of lions but I don’t want some crazy lady opening the enclosure so I can get a closer look at them.

This is a photo of Sen. Klein up close and personal with her “little friend.”

I presume the bullets are equally child friendly. Perhaps they look and smell like Pez.

Apparently, the Arizona state Capitol has problems with grizzly bears roaming the halls. Why else would she need to bring a gun to work when visitors are not allowed to enter with weapons? Are things that tense with her fellow lawmakers?

Perhaps this is why many conservatives oppose abortion and drug legalization. Unless it’s illegal, Americans will engage in the activity non-stop and without rhyme or reason. Sen. Klein brings a gun to work although there is no valid threat to her safety in the Capitol building, so maybe her constituents will have abortions while high on crystal meth… and that’s just the men. Who knows what women will do.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on July 12, 2011 in Political Theatre

 

Tags: