Politics

« Previous Entries
Next Page »

Tea Party Scores Its First Upset

Monday, September 6th, 2010
The message in Alaska Tuesday evening was loud and clear: Tea Partiers are in it to win it. Sen. Lisa Murkowski conceded to Joe Miller, her Tea-Party backed Republican primary competitor Tuesday evening in one of the most surprising upsets of the midterm elections thus far.

According to Prof. Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, however, Murkowski’s loss does not necessarily mark the start of a trend.

In fact, the Center for Responsive Politics reports that incumbents generally face very favorable odds. “U.S. Senate incumbents have enjoyed re-election rates of between 75 percent and 96 percent during every two-year every election cycle” since 1982. Murkowski didn’t even make it to the general election.

But while her loss may not become a pattern, it is a clear indication of the consequences of complacency.

Sabato told CBS, “Murkowski has no one to blame but herself … She didn’t take Miller seriously and refused to spend her gobs of money. She could have swamped Miller, and this election wouldn’t even have been close.”
This does not bode well for any Democrats who continue to consider the Tea Party and the mainstream Republican Party as “one and the same.” Though the temptation may be great to dismiss the growing political force as an insignificant threat, Tea Party-affiliated candidates have now defeated two Republican incumbents (the other being Sen. Robert Bennett of Utah).
Tea Party candidates’ success has mostly been based on painting their more mainstream Republican opponents as “liberal.” One can only imagine what they’ll be saying when they face Democrats in the general election.
With 15 Senate seats completely up for grabs, due to incumbent losses as well as a number of retirements, the general election promises to be a fierce battle. Here’s hoping Democrat candidates receive the message: Learn from Murkowski’s mistakes. Do not underestimate the Tea Party’s influence and give the races all you’ve got. —Shea Connelly

Posted in Politics | No Comments »

Politicians’ Fear Mongering

Friday, August 20th, 2010

As November 2 draws closer, both Democrats and Republicans are gearing up for a bitter battle on midterm election day. Unfortunately, both parties seem to believe that using underhanded smear tactics is the best way to prepare.

Democrats have recently claimed that Republicans as a whole support the privatization of Social Security.
“It’s right up there on their to-do list with repealing some of the Medicare benefits and reforms that are adding at least a dozen years to the fiscal health of Medicare,” President Obama said recently. “…I’ll fight with everything I’ve got to stop those who would gamble your Social Security on Wall Street….”
This would, indeed, be troubling—that is, if it were true. But nonpartisan group FactCheck.org reports, “We find the president’s claim to be mostly false.”

Furthermore, “only one Republican ‘leader’ is currently pushing publicly for Bush-style private accounts, as part of an overall budget plan. He is Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the senior GOP member of the House Budget Committee.” This is a far cry from pushing to “make privatizing Social Security a key part of their legislative agenda,” as Obama claimed.

This Social Security argument is reminiscent of Republicans’ hysterics over ”death panels,” so it’s ironic that a Republican National Committee spokeswoman said, “Rather than working with Republicans to solve this issue, Democrats have resorted to fear-mongering in an attempt to divert voters’ attention away from their failed economic record.” Talk about pot calling the kettle black.

Meanwhile, GOP members are choosing to engage in their own form of fear-mongering by continuing to complain about the so-called “Ground Zero mosque.”
Newt Gingrich said Monday, “We would never accept the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbor.” An interesting metaphor, though unfortunately it’s entirely untrue. A quick Google Maps search shows that there are several Shinto shrines in the general vicinity of Pearl Harbor.
Sure, there aren’t any two blocks away, but Gingrich and his cohorts haven’t been all that clear about how close is too close. Two blocks? Two miles? Twenty miles?
Each party may be hurting the other with these inflammatory statements, but at the same time neither is improving its own standing. Congressional approval ratings continue to be at an all-time low. It would be refreshing for either party to speak up about any constructive policy plans they have, but in this climate of hypocrisy, lies, and cynicism that’s apparently too much to ask. —Shea Connelly

Posted in Politics | 1 Comment »

What’s The Problem With the “Ground Zero Mosque?”

Wednesday, July 21st, 2010

Just when I thought political ads couldn’t get any worse, someone decides to prove me wrong. This ad from National Republican Trust is sickening, disturbing, disrespectful, manipulative … there aren’t enough words to describe it.

The ad is protesting a mosque to be built in the general vicinity of Ground Zero in Manhattan. A number of Republicans, including queen of malapropisms Sarah Palin, have been speaking out against what they call the “Ground Zero Mosque.” Never mind the fact that it’s at least two blocks away from Ground Zero. Never mind the fact that the mosque is actually a small part of a community center that will also host exercise classes, educational classes, a swimming pool, and other amenities.
Clearly unconcerned with facts, such as the fact that peaceful American Muslims have the same right as all citizens to create a gathering place for their community (YMCA, anyone?), protesters argue that the presence of a mosque relatively near Ground Zero somehow defiles the site.
The amount of concern over a local issue that should concern only New Yorkers is puzzling, but the ad, called “awesome” by Conservatives4Palin.com, takes the argument to unprecedented levels of disgusting.
There is much that is offensive about this ad, but the worst part has to be the use of video footage of someone falling from the World Trade Center, literally plunging to their death. The idea that someone would ever think using that footage in a political ad is appropriate is both horrifying and heartbreaking.
Of course the Republicans who paid for this ad also couldn’t stop themselves from bringing President Obama
 into the mix. The beginning phrase, “the audacity of jihad,” is an obvious reference to the president—the attempts to connect him to the violence of extremist Muslims (many are, after all, still convinced Obama is Muslim) are transparent and pathetic.
Those who created this ad are unable to recognize that they are the only ones bringing violence and hatred into this project. Muslim New Yorkers simply want to build a community center. They’re not going to be holding rallies glorifying jihad on the Ground Zero site. They can’t even see the site from the building.
Furthermore, for all the Muslims who participated in the 9/11 attacks, undoubtedly more were injured or killed as a result of them. Why don’t those victims have any claim over the ground surrounding Ground Zero? If anyone is defiling the memory of September 11 victims it’s the people who chose to use footage and images of the tragedy to make a political statement. —Shea Connelly

Posted in Politics | 1 Comment »

Bush: The Worst President Ever?

Monday, July 5th, 2010

George W. Bush worried extensively about his legacy, but apparently, it didn’t do much good—238 presidential scholars voted Bush the worst president in modern history, and the fifth worst overall.

He lost out based on his lack of intelligence, his shortcomings on foreign policy, and his lack of economic prowess. Even with just two years under his belt, Barack Obama scored more highly.

My guess: All of the Bush supporters who felt that history would be kind to him are going to be sorely disappointed. —Lisa Milbrand

Posted in Politics, Uncategorized | No Comments »

The Republicans Defend BP—and Give Democrats Ammunition

Thursday, June 24th, 2010
Expressing sympathy towards a corporation responsible for a large-scale environmental disaster seems like the last thing a politician would want to do—unless he’s Texas Representative Joe Barton, that is.
Last week, Barton somehow came to the conclusion that apologizing to BP would not be political suicide and would be an appropriate response to the oil spill that has destroyed the lives and livelihoods of thousands.
After the White House demanded that BP pay $20 billion for damage done by the oil spill, Barton issued the following apology to Tony Hayward, the bumbling BP CEO who has since been relieved of his public spill response duties:

“I think it is a tragedy in the first proportion that a private corporation can be subjected to what I would characterize as a shakedown … I’m not speaking for anyone else, but I apologize. I do not want to live in a country where anytime a citizen or a corporation does something that is legitimately wrong, [it is] subject to some sort of political pressure that, again, in my words, amounts to a shakedown.”

That last sentence is so absurd, I hardly know what to make of it. Barton appears to be saying that making people suffer any consequences after they do something wrong is somehow un-American. If he does not want to “live in a country” that punishes wrongdoing, where exactly does he expect to live? I could be wrong, but I believe most industrialized nations expect people to pay for their crimes.
Furthermore, Barton seems to have forgotten he is from Texas, a portion of which borders the Gulf. I can think of no quicker way for him to alienate any Gulf Coast supporters than to stand up for the big corporation rather than the small businesses and fishermen who could be threatened by the spill.
Unbelievably, Barton is not the only member of Congress who felt the need to apologize to BP. Rep. Michele Bachmann called the $20 billion dollar demand “extortion” and Rand Paul called it “un-American.”
This ill-advised alliance with BP could have serious consequences for Republicans. As the midterm elections draw closer, there is much speculation over whether the slow economic recovery combined with political anger stirred by the growing “tea party” will give Republicans an opening to snatch congressional seats from the Democrats.
As long as they continue to stand up for the corporation responsible for one of the worst environmental disasters in recent memory, however, they’re unlikely to be victorious in November. Barton and company have given their Democrat adversaries some serious ammunition, and you can bet they’re going to use it.
–Shea Connelly

Posted in Politics | No Comments »

« Previous Entries
Next Page »