Showing posts with label Rush Limbaugh. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rush Limbaugh. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 20, 2022

Service was far more important than performative nonsense

My Sunday video was Young Royals episodes 5 and 6 on Netflix. As I said last week I’m not going to go into a lot of detail so there won’t be any spoilers. I’ll only say there were a couple good plot twists and that the ending I thought I heard about (which prompted me to watch the show) wasn’t how it ended – and season two has been announced. According to a quick internet search if COVID doesn’t interfere much with shooting and post production work that second season may be available this summer. I see Netflix doesn’t show how much of the show I’ve seen, they show how much is left to see. At one time I checked and saw there was 20 minutes left. I thought there was a lot to be packed into those 20 minutes. They’ll be packed into season two instead. The more I thought about it the more I see didn’t get resolved in season one. The story is about the love between Prince Wilhelm and commoner Simon. There will be more about that, of course. But there are other things not resolved. Why did Wilhelm’s cousin August have trouble paying his tuition? Are Simon’s sister Sara and her friend Felice both in love with August or are they both using him and in love with each other? Will we see the ending I thought I heard about? I will probably watch season two when it is released. If the story drags into season three I doubt I’ll watch it. It is interesting enough to hold me through six episodes of 40-50 minutes and maybe through twelve episodes of that length. But not eighteen. In the news today was Netflix reporting a big drop in subscribers that prompted a big drop in the stock price. Along with that came talk of Netflix cracking down on password sharing. If they do season 2 of the Young Royals or likely anything else on Netflix in my to-watch list would not be enough to prompt me to actually pay. In response to comment in Twitter that the military aid promised to Ukraine isn’t getting there with enough urgency prompted Kos of Daily Kos to discuss such things take time. A deployment of Pennsylvania National Guard soldiers with related howitzers took five weeks. Kos talked about the number of tons all this equipment weighs – just the ammo is 2,000 tons. And the airport in Poland all this stuff is going to already has a parade of planes from several countries delivering goodies. Kos wrote:
Meanwhile, NATO is rubbing Russia’s nose in these shipments. Those planes could turn off their transponders and arrive in secret, but they’re actively broadcasting their presence, their source, and their destination. They want Russia to know what they’re up to, repeatedly reminding them of Western resolve, perhaps hoping it erodes Russia’s own. Russia is certainly helpless to do anything about it.
Getting armaments to Ukraine is not like clicking a button on your phone app and Amazon delivering it tomorrow. There is a difference between “could more be done?” and “nothing is being done.” The history of this war will include the massive international logistical effort to help Ukraine win. Mark Sumner of Kos told the story of two villages in Donbas with about a mile between them. Since 2014 one has been held by Ukraine, the other by pro-Russian separatists. In satellite imagery Sumner pointed out the open fields and two military trenches between the villages, plus the heavily mined road with lots of wrecks and car-sized potholes. When the war comes here it will be deadly, with one side or the other trying to cross an open field to get at an enemy protected by trenches. David Neiwert of Kos wrote about Putin claiming his goal was to de-Nazify Ukraine. Neiwert discussed the numbers of neo-Nazis in the Russian army – some of them flying flags of Russian fascist movements. Hunter of Kos reported Ukrainian President Zelenskyy again vowed he won’t negotiate away any territory in exchange for ending the war. The reason is simple: He doesn’t trust the Russian military and leadership. It is quite likely that if he concedes territory in Donbas Russia will set up a base there and, ignoring any peace deal, use it to launch an attack on Kyiv. The likely outcomes of the war are a stalemate or a Russian loss. And the economic sanctions against Russia will last a long time – likely until after Putin retires or dies. And the country faces a long isolation. Kos described the various battles and tactics around Izyum – Russia doing this and Ukraine countering with that. However, what caught my attention was the discussion in the comments. Mainstream media appears to be discussing only Russian successes and not their setbacks. Which makes several of them glad for the clarity and accuracy of Kos reporting. There was also a quote of a tweet from the Kyiv Independent. April 16 was the first time more people entered Ukraine than left. The border guard said over a million people have returned to Ukraine. Kos reported that Russia has started attacking at various places as the start of the Battle of Donbas. But the attacks have been so light the Pentagon thinks something bigger must be yet to come. But Kos thinks what we see now is about as good as Russia can do. Chef José Andrés and his World Central Kitchen has set up several kitchens in Poland and other countries and in Ukraine. They’re busy feeding those they can in 30 cities and towns across Ukraine. Gabe Ortiz of Kos reported that one of those sites in eastern Ukraine (I don’t know how close to Donbas) was leveled by a Russian missile. One person died, a few others went to a hospital. The operation quickly shifted to a new location and those in the hospital have been released. Commenters suggest a Nobel Peace Prize be shared between Andrés and Zelenskyy. Rebekah Sager of Kos got me thinking of the joke that circulated about 20 years ago about the Al Gebra gang and their Weapons of Math Instruction. She started her post with:
In a statement released Friday, the Florida Department of Education (FDOE) announced it had rejected 41% of K-12 math books for not meeting Common Core standards and/or for “indoctrination” or “exposure to dangerous and divisive concepts,” aka critical race theory (CRT).
Math books teaching CRT? Are Florida officials afraid that anti-racist themes would be hidden in the story problems like Nazis used to hide racist themes? It looks like the math books were rejected for not meeting the Common Core standards (or maybe meeting them and shouldn’t). Even so, math is now a part of the politicization of education, a serious thing – or Gov. DeSantis is looking for campaign donations from book publishers. Hunter discussed the latest chapter in a long story, this one in Llano, Texas. Someone with a huge grievance got a judge to order the halt of the library purchasing new books and the county commissioners purging the library board and replacing them with the loudest advocates of removing pornographic books. Strange that “pornographic” means anything having to do with racism or LGBTQ issues whether or not sex or body parts are described. Hunter wrote:
So to sum up: A single angry conservative of the sort who believes they have a direct line to God, who shares all their own gut instincts on everything, popped up with a list of books to be disputed that she had not read herself but had simply cribbed from some other conservative group milking the same cow. They convinced a local judge to march into the library to seize books about The Pornographies. The growing movement convinced the county commission to purge local libraries of anyone with experience or who argued against one-party censorship, got themselves put into those now-empty positions of minor power, got freaked out when other members of their local community started taking notes about what they themselves were doing—after they had literally shouted and bullied the previous appointees out of their positions, which was according to them just fine because when Jesus is behind you you're allowed to be as cruel and tell as many lies as you want—and are now holed up in secret non-public meetings where they hold seances with Jesus to make decisions about rote library management that they can't figure out how to handle themselves. Because they got here by being loud, outraged know-nothing theocratic bulls***-shrieking paranoid bullies and don't have any other skillset that would apply here.
Neiwert started a post with:
The long-running gradual consumption of the Republican Party by the authoritarian QAnon conspiracy cult is nearing the terminal takeover phase: A recent survey by Grid found 72 Republican candidates with varying levels of QAnon affiliation. The most salient fact, however, is not only is the cult presence growing, but not a single Republican in any capacity can be found who either denounces the trend or works in any other way than in concert with it. That reality is terrifying not just because QAnon has a long record of inspiring unhinged, violent behavior with its fantastically vile beliefs and rhetoric. Most of all, QAnon at its core is deeply eliminationist, with an agenda calling for the mass imprisonment and execution of mainstream Democrats for ostensibly running a global child-trafficking/pedophilia cult—which seamlessly fits the people being targeted by Fox News and mainstream Republicans as “groomers” for opposing the right-wing attacks on the LGTBQ community.
And ended it with:
What all this tells us is that Democrats this fall will be facing a multipronged attack by Republicans, all based on hysterical fantasy: Democrats are soft on crime, they want to push critical race theory and “transgender ideology” on your kids, and they’re pro-pedophile. All three are designed to appeal to the lizard-brained lowest common denominators: the people inclined to violent eliminationism. Candidates should come prepared.
Lauren Sue of Kos reported on one who is prepared. Michigan state Sen. Lana Theis, a Republican, in a fundraising attempt, called Democratic state Sen. Mallory McMorrow a “groomer” and accused her of being a snowflake “outraged they can't teach can't groom and sexualize kindergarteners or that 8-year olds are responsible for slavery.” After a moment of marveling how much over the top lying and fear mongering is in that charge, enjoy a bit of McMorrow’s response, starting with why her priest declared her mother wasn’t meeting church expectations:
So where was my mom on Sundays? She was at the soup kitchen with me. My mom taught me at a very young age that Christianity and faith was about being part of a community; about recognizing our privilege and blessings; and doing what we can to be of service to others, especially people who are marginalized, targeted, and who had less often unfairly. I learned that service was far more important than performative nonsense, like being seen in the same pew every Sunday or writing Christian in your Twitter bio and using that as a shield to target and marginalize already marginalized people. ... So who am I? I am a straight, white, Christian, married, suburban mom who knows that the very notion that learning about slave slavery or redlining or systemic racism somehow means that children are being taught to feel bad or hate themselves because they are white is absolute nonsense. No child alive today is responsible for slavery. No one in this room is responsible for slavery, but each and every single one of us bears responsibility for writing the next chapter of history. Each and every single one of us decides what happens next and how we respond to history and the world around us. ... People who are different are not the reason that our roads are in bad shape after decades of disinvestment or that healthcare costs are too high or that teachers are leaving the profession. I want every child in this state to feel seen, heard, and supported, not marginalized and targeted because they are not straight white and Christian. We cannot let hateful people tell you otherwise to scapegoat and deflect from the fact that they are not doing anything to fix the real issues that impact people's lives.
SemDem of the Kos community wrote on the first anniversary of the death of Rush Limbaugh that the loud voice on the right left behind nothing. No one quotes or references him. He never said anything profound or meaningful – just racist. He wasn’t all that meaningful in life because he merely repeated the same conservative talking points and his jokes were to make fun of those not like him. A lot of people do that same thing – and they’ll be forgotten too. Greg Dworkin, in a pundit roundup for Kos, ha a couple interesting quotes. One is a thread from Dan Lavoie referring to a poll conducted by the AP:
The AP poll found a majority of REPUBLICANS think schools are teaching about race and sexuality the right amount or not enough! How do we end up with a brainless "America divided" headline off this legitimately surprising and newsworthy result?! What to do when your polling results don't fit The Narrative? Just say Americans are "divided" -- a meaningless, amorphous term that you could've asserted even without a poll! Overall, 71 percent of Americans think schools are teaching about race and sexuality the right amount or want more. That's a shocking level of social agreement on any issue -- and more than twice as many people as think schools should teach about race and sexuality less. More independents want schools to teach MORE about racism and sexuality than less. But some very loud people at a school board meeting say otherwise so therefor: America Divided™️
Dworkin quoted Lawrence Freedman, writing on Substack, who quoted an essay by Hannah Arendt that was written 50 years ago. Arendt wrote:
Oddly enough, the only person likely to be an ideal victim of complete manipulation is the President of the United States. Because of the immensity of his job, he must surround himself with advisers, the “National Security Managers” as they have recently been called by Richard J. Barnet, who “exercise their power chiefly by filtering the information that reaches the President and by interpreting the outside world for him.” The President, one is tempted to argue, allegedly the most powerful man of the most powerful country, is the only person in this country whose range of choices can be predetermined.
Added Freedman:
The key insight was that someone so powerful could also be so badly informed. That was the case with Lyndon Johnson in the mid-1960s. Could it also be the case for Putin in 2022?

Saturday, March 21, 2009

Poking into dark corners and kicking over pillars

So Limbaugh wants Obama to fail. Let's take that ugly statement and peek at what's behind it. One of the defining concepts of the GOP is individualism. What one does as an individual is what makes the world good. What one does collectively is counterproductive, ineffective, or corrupt. Individual retirement accounts -- good. Social Security -- bad. Never mind that it takes more than one person to design a car at GM. And though I'll write my symphonies all by myself, thank you very much, I'll need a whole orchestra to perform them in a way that does them justice.

Even so, the GOP has long and successfully peddled the idea that government is inefficient (more inefficient that GM?) and burdensome to the point that even progressives believe it. Who do you have more control over -- your state legislator or your HMO executive?

If Obama succeeds he proves that government can work, that us is better than me, and we are better off when government does work for the common good. It is useful and necessary. And a major pillar of the GOP will crumble. That makes this a vital topic of political discourse. So take Limbaugh (or at least the ideas he is fronting) seriously and refute it. It's the GOP's worst fear.

While we're on the topic of Limbaugh and the GOP (before I get tired of an easy target) there are other monsters dancing in the conservative psyche. We've long noted their authoritarian streak. From Glenn Greenwald at Salon:

The Coulter/Hannity/Limbaugh-led right wing is basically the Abu Ghraib rituals finding full expression in an authoritarian political movement. The reason people like Rush Limbaugh not only were unbothered, but actually delighted and even tickled by, Abu Ghraib is because that is the full-blooded manifestation of the impulses underlying this movement - feelings of power and strength from the most depraved spectacles of force.

Greenwald continues that this gang loves Ann Coulter so much because her words so openly emasculates Democratic men. GOP men will act from power and strength, Dem men are wimps.

As for Limbaugh himself, it seems not only has he become the head of the GOP, he is working to be God. From Deepak Chopra:

Limbaugh has been plowing the field of moral outrage for decades, but unlike Billy Sunday and the other hot-headed radio preachers who cashed in on social resentment in the Great Depression, Limbaugh threw out God. With no religious tradition to anchor himself, he can swing wider. Anything Limbaugh judges against is condemned, not by scripture, but simply by him being pissed off. Whatever Limbaugh hates -- however petty, personal, and arbitrary his animus -- is ipso facto wrong.

So, though the Right wants to trumpet how they stand for family morals, they adore a guy who defines morality by what he's pissed off at? Has that been fueling the lack of morality shown by many on the Right over the last 8 years? Alas, that doesn't help in crafting a pragmatic solution to anything.

Alas, it isn't just Limbaugh. He's just the public front at the moment.

One last poke into the psyche of the GOP: It is from a comment, which appeared about a week or so ago when Dick Cheney spouted off about how Obama dare not refuse to use torture because that would leave our country defenseless. Amazing how secretive Cheney was when he was VP and now he refuses to stay in his underground lair. I can't find the quote I read, but more than one person has come up with the same idea. Cheney's words made several people wonder if Cheney was incompetent and was able to cover it up by being a sadist.

Cheney's harsh criticism of Obama brought a mild joke-rebuke from Obama's press secretary Robert Gibbs. That set off a teapot tempest by the mainstream media -- Cheney is a former vice president of the United States! Have you no decency? That prompts Glenn Greenwald (again) to note that our journalistic watchdogs are too loyal to the political establishment (or at least the GOP). But back up a second… While the press jumped all over Gibbs (representing Obama), they did not jump over Cheney. Obama is the president of the United States! Has Cheney no decency?

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

Might have been taken seriously

This week's Newsweek cover story is an article by David Frum of the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative organization. It is Frum's analysis of why Rush Limbaugh is wrong. It's rather simple: Limbaugh is a radio personality in it for the ratings. The more listeners he has and the more he makes headlines the better for his paycheck. 20 million listeners make for a good paycheck and he has to keep them listening. So what if another 100 million refuse to listen? Those disgusted with Limbaugh, however, vote against GOP candidates. He is a convenient target for Obama and progressives and the GOP gets the blame. If anyone in the GOP crosses him, he demands an apology (and usually gets it) or declares they aren't a true conservative. He and his listeners have become a cult.

Alas, for the GOP, Limbaugh declares his brand of conservatism is as old as the constitution (like the current definition of marriage is as old as civilization), when it is only as old as Reagan. The ideas that were important then are no longer what the middle class is interested in. The party has to change with the times to survive.

Frum ends with this:

Should conservatives be trying to provoke or persuade? To narrow the coalition or enlarge it? To enflame or govern? And finally (and above all): to profit -- or to serve?

Frum says the state of conservatism is such that Obama and the Dems proposed a huge expansion in all things conservatives are against and the GOP essentially rolled over and played dead. That's not quite true, there was a spirited rebuttal of the stimulus package but in ways that were easily dismissed.

There are a large number of things in the stimulus package that were not there for stimulus (money to be spent in 2011, not 2009). There were many other things that Dems put into the bill simply because they could and it was a chance to make up for 8 years of GOP spending priorities. Newsweek columnist Robert Samuelson did a story about that a few weeks ago.

But the GOP didn't list legitimate complaints about the bill. They attacked things like condoms (we're tired of the GOP view of sex ed), mice (merely a publicity stunt), and how the bill would bloat the federal deficit and debt.

While that last point is true, the GOP would have been taken seriously if they hadn't let Bush run up the debt over the last 8 years. They might be taken seriously in other issues if they offered serious criticisms instead of insisting more deregulation was necessary when it is obvious that deregulation played a big part in today's financial mess, if their compassionate conservatism was actually compassionate, if their view of science wasn't so obviously tainted by ideology, if their reasons for positions on social issues weren't so filled with cruelty and racism. I'm sure the list is much longer.

In short, we didn't get the debate the stimulus package needed.