Slimy and Dark Arts: Texas GOP State Chairman Munisteri's Desperate Database Deception

by Nomad
The Wall Street Journal reported last week about a fundraising letter by the Texas GOP state chairman, Steve Munisteri.

Although you might not have heard of him, as an activist for conservative grassroots movements, Munisteri has been around forever. According to his bio:

As State Chairman of the Texas chapter of Young Americans for Freedom, Munisteri begun the practice of issuing legislative rankings for members of the Texas House of Representatives and State Senate. In 1980, Munisteri founded Young Conservatives of Texas, a group which continues to produce the future generations of our conservative leaders and elected officials in college campuses across the State.

Most recently he was elected to chair the Republican Party of Texas in 2010. For a conservative in Texas, the future looks rather grim. 

Texas is slowly but surely turning from a conservative red to a decidedly liberal blue. Apparently, as Texas slips from the Republican fingers, Munisteri is ready to pull out all stops; hence the letter. 

That letter, aimed at poaching the last dollar from the Texas rich, was full of the predictable fear-mongering about Democrats “ coming to take away your guns,” and more than that, “they’re coming to hijack your rights and freedoms.” 

He called the new Democratic voter-mobilization effort, Battleground Texas, “a clear and present threat to you and your family.” 

It’s the kind of rhetoric that doesn’t hold up to too much analysis or critical thinking but, to a certain type of Texas Republican, it really tends to stir the blood. To outsiders, it just smells like the sour BO of desperation. (At least the Texas Democrats behind Battleground thought so.)

However, there was another detail in the article about the letter that caught my eye.

To fight back, the GOP letter urges Republicans to give anywhere from $15 to $5,000 so the party can “immediately undertake our own effort to identify thousands of Texas conservatives.”

The letter warns that the former Obama operatives “have become masters of the slimy ‘dark arts’ of campaigning: creating massive databases; collecting information on every voter and non-voter; and then using that information to do whatever it takes to drive these voters away from Republican candidates and principles.”

That’s a rather interesting claim for Munisteri to make against the Democratic Party. While there is nothing illegal about collecting information in “massive databases,” Munisteri is playing on the ignorance of his constituents about modern political campaigning. As Mr. Munisteri well knows, these so-called dark and slimy arts have become a long feature of the Republican campaigns since the Bush administration. 

Why African Americans Should be Skeptical of Rand Paul’s New and Improved Republican Party

K
entucky Senator and rising star in the GOP, Rand Paul recently spoke at Howard University, a mostly black campus in Washington DC. He came to the campus to ask black Americans to give conservatism a second look. He appears to be banking on African Americans ignoring decades of controversial stands on racial issues. 

Now that it is clear that the Republican party can no longer win elections by appealing to white prejudices, Paul is trying to re-write history, his own, his father’s and the the Republican conservative movement. African American voters have every reason to be skeptical of Paul’s hollow overture.

Gun-Toting Nelson, Georgia: Where Conservatives Fell in Love with Mandates

By Nomad

When the town of Nelson, Georgia (all 626 people, 254 households, and 188 families of it) decided to mandate the ownership of at least one firearm for all of the town's households, it opened up a lot of interesting questions.

But the most important one was: 
Where are all those conservatives and Tea Party radicals who protested so loudly and for long about Big Government mandates when it came to affordable health care?

Divorced Michael Reagan: Casting the First Stone at Same-Sex Marriage

Before Michael Reagan launches into a diatribe about the evils of same-sex marriage, he might want to review the Bible's view on divorce. He might not be able to look at himself in the mirror.

Michael Reagan was on Piers Morgan the other night giving (free of charge) his opinions on gay marriage. He said he didn't believe in it. Piers also called upon Reagan to explain his recent op-ed piece in which he equates same-sex marriage to “polygamy, bestiality, and perhaps even murder.”

It's not an original argument, of course. Limbaugh and Beck and Bachmann and so many other lunatics have trotted it out time after time.

In that article, Reagan called upon churches of all denominations to "fight back" unless they were cowards who were "afraid to lose their 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status by engaging in political activity." (A taunt that could prove costly to many violating organizations if the IRS could ever be roused from its slumber.) 

Are Republicans Finally Waking Up to the Realities of the Sequester?

With so many insightful investigative report s and op-ed articles appearing online all the time, it's no wonder that so many of us are turning their backs on cable news sources. With so much out there,  scattered hither and thither, it's next to impossible to catch them all.
That's where I come in! Here's an op-ed article that I thought you might find interesting.

President of the United Steel Workers, Leo Gerard has written an excellent piece at In These Times called:

The GOP’s Big Yellow Taxi Syndrome

The same Republicans who thought Norquist's infamous comment about "shrinking government small enough to drown it in the bathtub" was witty and wise are now having second thoughts about the idea. Especially when it comes to cuts that affect their own districts.

Republicans bellyached for years that government must shrink. It had to be smaller. Cut the budget come hell or high water, they yammered. Well, darn if the sequester hasn’t brought hell and high water to Republican districts across America.....

Now that it’s here, now that it’s affecting their constituents, Republicans contend the $1 trillion in indiscriminate, across-the-board budget cuts they demanded should have been specifically targeted to eliminate only “waste, fraud and abuse.”

"Waste, fraud and abuse" is apparently a stock phrase that that been on the lips of the Republicans-especially the Tea Party radicals. And yet, when called upon to explain where they would have cut, (note the past tense) the GOP remained vague and tended to change the subject. It was a phrase that played well in sound-bites on Fox News and back home but, without any specifics, it was about as hollow as Satan's heart.

The Right Wing's Strange Love-Hate Relationship with Mr. Darwin

There’s always been a vexing paradox about the marriage of the Neo-conservatives with the Christian Right. Certain key principles endorsed by either group just do not seem to fit together. One of those mismatches involves the respective attitudes of these groups toward the ideas of Charles Darwin. 

From the moment, Darwin published his major works in the middle of the 19th century, it was clear that the strict adherents of the Biblical view would find much to despise. Any blurring of the line between Man as a divine creation of God, and Man as a creepy-crawly evolutionary product of thoughtless Nature was bound to cause a bit of a fuss. 

The argument between the strict believers in the unchallengeable word of God and the evolutionists committed to the peculiar notions of Mr. Darwin was, in many ways, part of the larger war between science and religion. 

All very interesting, you say, but what of it? 

The problem lies in one of the key principles of evolution, namely, the survival of the fittest. Unfortunately for the Christian Right, it just happens to form the basis of the neo-conservative social platform. It’s called Social Darwinism. 

Talking Goat Claims Sarah Palin is Actually the Anti-Christ

(reprinted from Nomadic View for the special April Fools post) HEILONGJIANG PROVINCE, CHINA- The news of Kah-Kah, a five-year-old Hailun breed of domesticated goat, has astounded scientists around the world in what seems to be the first true and verifiable case of intelligent animal speech. And apparently, the goat had an important announcement. Hao Wei Yuan, his owner, told reporters, "I was in the rice field and I heard somebody calling my name. There was nobody. Only Kah-Kah. Then I understood that it was goat's voice." After Wei Yuan brought the goat to his home, his wife and children refused to have any thing to with the animal. "They were frightened and told me to kill it. She say You go and kill it. Kill it.' But I could not do." And yet the strangest part was yet to come. US biology professor Emery Bohred from Stanford University heard of the strange phenomenon, while on a tour of farms in late 2008. Naturally he decided to make the long journey to the isolated region to see for himself. "I admit, I didn't believe it. I thought it was all a wild goat chase. I mean, seriously, a talking goat? At best, I thought it would be making random sounds that could possibly sound like words. I was not prepared for this." When Bohred arrived, what he discovered astounded him. "It was actually speaking English. Not merely sounds but full words strung together as sentences. That's something I hadn't heard before. I couldn't believe what I was hearing. " The goat would spend hours chatting with local villagers under the Yam-yam tree in a variety of dialects but even the owners were stunned to hear the goat address the American strangers in their own language. "Initially, the goat refused to answer any direct questions and kept changing the subject. For a Capra aegagrus hircus, it was quite obtuse." Even today, whenever Professor Bohred talks about Kah-Kah, his face still lights up with child-like wonder. "You can't imagine my reaction. Kah-Kah actually asked me questions about where I was from, if I was married and my age. The goat even translated Chinese jokes into English, but I didn't quite see the humor. " (Bohred attributes this to a cultural, rather than any inter-species, gap. ) After recovering from the shock, Bohred asked Wei Yuan for permission to examine the goat more intensively. In the following three months, Bohred conducted a wide variety of experiments to determine how Kah-Kah might have developed such a capacity. "I suspect it is genetic." speculated Bohred, "I am still uncertain." There was one thing that Kah-Kah kept repeating. At first, Bohred noted, it was only a name. "Sarah Palin. " (Oddly the goat's accent seemed to have an artificial Minnesota dialect.) "When I showed that I recognized the name, the goat clearly stated, 'Sarah Palin is the Anti-Christ.' For three days in March 2009, Kah-Kah continued to repeat that same sentence over and over. "From morning until night, like a broken record. I thought I would lose my mind. " "And then, suddenly without any explanation, the goat was silent." Bohred explained to reporters at a press conference. Wei Yuan, at his family insistence, finally slaughtered Kah-Kah in November 2010. Yuan told reporters: "My wife, she very angry with me. She say me ancient Chinese proverb. 'Just because an ass can speak. it doesn't mean you have to listen.' " There was, unfortunately, no record of the goat's last words. However, according to village sources, Kah-Kah was broiled with liberal amounts of ginger and garlic and made a splendid dinner for nine.

Talking Goat Claims #sarahpalin is actually the ANTI-CHRIST
https://t.co/X8UVkxVFYY pic.twitter.com/ZhjmcJE4cr

— Ed Goff- Nomad (@ANomadicView) February 19, 2016

Last Stand: Newspapers, Paywalls and George Orwell

Last year saw many in the beleaguered newspaper industry finally committing to restrict general online access to both their current editions to their archives behind so-called paywalls. 
 Even after years of declining revenues, there were plenty of concerns about the whole idea. From now on, if anybody wishes to read news content of these newspapers will have to become a subscriber. That includes not merely current news but the archives as well.

But can paywalls really save the print media or will it just squeeze the last drop of advertising dollar from another dying industry? Although the jury is still out on that, a more critical question might be: How will the paywall business model change journalism, or the freedom of information? What are the long term consequences for democracy when essential information is available only to people who can afford to view it?

Iraq Invasion: What it Feels like to be Ahead of Your Time

This is what it feels like to be a decade ahead of your time. 

Look at that crowd; all those smug looks, smirking at the loudmouth fat guy. Listen to all that booing. Wasn't Hollywood supposed to the bastion of bleeding heart liberals?

The real question is: how many of us could have stood there on that stage and said the same things at that time? Keep in mind, Michael Moore was receiving death threats for voicing his opinions on the war. Wouldn't it have been easier and safer to remain silent?

Ironic Warnings from Pat Robertson and Donald Trump

by Nomad

To have a sense of irony it requires the ability to reflect, to understand that not everything is as it seems or as we expected them to be. It also requires us to see things from another's person's eyes. In that respect, I suppose irony is one of the more intellectual forms of humor. (As opposed to, say, a cream pie in the face or seltzer water sprayed down your pants.)

One of the most remarkable things about the conservatives of the Republican party is their stunning lack of ironic sense. It's like they can't actually hear what they are saying. It doesn't register. 
For instance, when Speaker of the House, John Boehner said days after the president's reelection that Obama needed to stop this "nonsense" of acting like he won the election, the irony was completely lost on him. 

When Sarah Palin said:

“Leaders are expected to give good speeches, but leadership is so much more than oratory. Real leadership requires deeds even more than words.”

It was clear that the ironic humor of her remark went right over her head. (But then what doesn't?)

Perhaps the problem of this lack of ironic sense lies in the fact that so many of these people are only half as smart as they think they are. They think that whatever they say will never be critically considered or questioned. It is also clear that they do not think that most people cannot remember what was said before last week, (That's why they hate the Internet, I assume. It keeps records.) Knowing the reality is, of course, what makes things ironic.

Sadly too often, these politicians have been proven correct in thinking people will accept whatever they say without muttering to themselves. "Say what?" It often seems as though, if something is said with enough conviction, in a serious setting, with a lot of familiar faces nodding and applauding, these conservative voters will believe just about anything, no matter how ironic, or hypocritical or stupid it may be.  

(However, Romney, very early on in one of his less scripted moments came face to face with a snorting guffawing crowd in Iowa when he tried to tell them that corporation were people.)

Whatever the reason for it, irony abounds when it comes to the conservatives. Here are some two examples of what I am referring to, one comes from Pat Robertson and the other from none other than Donald Trump.  

Failed GOP Solutions: Is Marriage Really the Answer to Poverty in Oklahoma? 2/2

by Nomad

In PART ONE of this two-part series, we investigated a bit of curious legislation in Oklahoma. The House Speaker there decided to that that federal funds which were supposed to be used to find employment for needy families, should instead be used for statewide public service announcements promoting marriage as a solution to poverty. The idea, highly supported by organizations like The Heritage Foundation and the Christian Right, has been used in many other Red States.

The Heritage Foundation promotes marriage
as a solution to poverty in ads like these. 

The Practicalities of Marriage

When it comes to the Marriage Initiative as a way of reducing poverty, what so wrong about it? 
First of all, it hasn’t worked.

Despite the more than a decade of the Marriage Initiative efforts in Oklahoma, the single-parent problem is not going away. 

According to the latest US Census Bureau, about 28 percent of Oklahoma's families are led by a single parent, with that figure increasing to more than 40 percent in some rural counties. In some counties, the number has climbed to around 45.5 percent of all  households. 

Unlike many states where poverty is a feature of urban life, in many states like Oklahoma, poverty is a way of life in the more rural zones. (That's just like any third world country, as a matter of fact.)

So what can account for the rise of single parent households in the state? 

For one thing, divorce is much more of a problem than unwed mothers. As NBCNews reported in 2011,

Oklahoma has extraordinarily high rates of divorce among both men and women compared to the rest of the country. According to the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative, 32 percent of Oklahoma adults who have ever been married have been divorced. The association lists financial troubles as one of the leading causes of divorce in the state.

The sponsors of the Marriage Initiative don't like to talk about divorce. for very obvious reasons. The truth about divorce and its causes refuses to fit into framework of their marriage agenda.

In any case, let's ignore the divorce rate and just concentrate on marriage as a solution to poverty. Even then, their logic doesn't hold up against reality.

Failed GOP Solutions: Is Marriage Really the Right Answer to Poverty in Oklahoma? 1/2

by Nomad

In another example of failed Republican logic, one Oklahoma congressman thinks he might have solved the problem of poverty. Draft legislation, HB1908, authored by House Speaker T.W. Shannon, will set aside funding from Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Program for statewide public service announcements. 

The message?

Marriage is the best tool to fight poverty. Get married, stayed marriage and you won’t be poor.

The government program, TANF, (from which funding the public service ads would be drawn), is a federal-assistance program aimed at reforming past welfare programs. This Clinton era legislation was supposed to replace welfare payments with creating of employment opportunities. 

Importantly TANF allowed states greater discretion on how the federal dollars were to be spent. And the faith-based idea of encouraging people to marry is one major way Oklahoma decided to use the funding. In fact, Oklahoma is one of only two states that uses less than 10 percent of their grant for basic cash assistance. (In any case, the average TANF benefit is a mere $205 a month, hardly a sustainable income even considering Oklahoma’s relatively low cost of living.) 

Instead, the focus has been more on reducing out-of-wedlock births and increasing the rates and stability of marriages. That direction undoubtedly pleased the highly-active, highly-vocal Christian Right which plays an important role in local politics in the state. For example, in the past, members of one Christian Right group took the last Speaker of the House to task on such issues as not offering more support on banning Islamic law, immigration restrictions, for any discussion of gun control and for possible implementation of Affordable Health Care.

Romney’s Million Dollar Campaign Contributor Considers Tax Escape to Puerto Rico

by Nomad

At the beginning of last year, before the presidential campaign had really gotten underway, Nomadic Politics reported that one of Mitt Romney’s high- dollar contributors to his Restore Our Future SuperPAC was hedge fund billionaire, John Paulson. Now it seems as though, Paulson might be considering leaving the country altogether. Bloomberg last week mentioned Puerto Rico as a possible new home. (His hedge fund, however, issued a denial of the story.)

Paulson belonged to an exclusive club of uber-wealthy Romney backers who, even before the Republican nomination, were willing to write a cool million check for Romney’s bid for the White House. What's a million between friends?
Why, that's chicken feed for a man like Paulson, whose net worth, according to Forbes was almost $16 billion. (The year prior to the SuperPAC contribution he reportedly earned staggering 5 billion.)

But it was all for naught, in the end. Investing in Romney proved to be an expensive proposition with very limited returns. However, the opposite can be said of Paulson's investments during the economic crisis. Wall Street analysts say that Paulson became outrageously successful by betting on failure, from the collapse of banks to the mortgage crisis. 

Suggestion for the 2014 Republican Party Advertising

by Nomad

I thought I would offer this early suggestion for campaign advertising for the 2014 mid-terms. Looks like the Republican Party is going to need every bit of help it can get.

Feel free to copy and paste or link this image wherever you like.

Consider this post and open thread.

Riding the Rails and Ryan's Return to Failed Policies of the Past

by Nomad

While scouring the Internet for anything and everything, I found this extraordinary PBS documentary online called Riding the Rails. Here's a description of this independently produced feature length film.

At the height of the Great Depression, more than a quarter million teenagers were living on the road in America, many criss-crossing the country by illegally hopping freight trains. This film tells the story of ten of these teenage hobos -- from the reasons they left home to what they experienced -- all within the context of depression-era America.

If you have some free time, I invite you to watch. I haven't finished the whole thing yet but just listening to these stories of people at their lowest points (but who somehow survived) is truly inspiring.

Privacy Laws and Citizen Journalism: ACORN and Romney's 47% Speech

by Nomad

I wanted to take a moment to follow up on a post I recently wrote on James O'Keefe III and the ACORN scandal.

In a somewhat related story, CBS has reported details about that notorious secret recording of Mitt Romney last year. The controversial video became known as the "47%" speech.

As it turns out, the recorder of that video was not a reporter (even self-designated like O'Keefe) but a bartender who worked at the site in Florida where the speech was given. 

In the speech he told his audience of wealthy campaign contributors that 47% of the population would never vote for him. That percentage of the population was politically unimportant to him. 

"My job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

On the surface, he had a point. And the results of the election confirmed it. The problem was the background to those remarks, who spoke them and to whom they were addressed. These factors behind his speech accounted for in the decline in his popularity of the candidate. He was none to popular in the first place.

I saw one comment that interested me since I had recently investigated the James O'Keefe case in which he was sued by a former ACORN employee for recording him without permission.

The comment  points out that since O'Keefe was arrested on Invasion of Privacy Laws, the law should apply to the bartender as well. The comment reads:

This guy should be brought up on charges for filming someone without there knowledge. If the Acorn fiasco taught us anything, it was that it was illegal to film anyone without there knowledge. Then the people in power get a video that was to there advantage and the rule dosnt [sic] apply. Figure that. Illegal is only illegal when? The line is getting pretty blurry.

It's a valid argument and something that troubled me when I wrote the post. 

The Truth Behind Palin's Soon-to-Be Released Book on Christmas

by Nomad

Decries the commercialization of Christmas
by peddling her book just in time for the holidays 

Rumor has it that Sarah Palin has another book in the works. Hurrah! According to USAToday, the book is "focused on putting faith and values back into Christmas."

The book, reportedly entitled "A Happy Holiday IS a Merry Christmas", is supposed to come out in November, right in time for the holidays. All carefully calculated to be a "hot" seller during the holiday season. (And who wouldn't want the a Sarah Palin book as a Christmas gift?)

No doubt Sarah hopes the book will be a money-maker for her. The timing of the release is wonderfully ironic. According to the publisher the book, a well-beaten dead horse if ever there was one, will deal with the commercialization of Christmas. Ho-humbug.

We can be assured it will take to task all those baddies who don't share her view that America is a Christian nation. No doubt the book will list every perceived offense, such as endangered nativity scenes on public property, etc. etc..  Anybody of you who dare to use the term "happy holidays" had better run for cover. Having failed in taking back America, Palin is now apparently planning to take back Christmas. 

In typical Palin-speak, Palin issued this statement through her publisher, HarperCollins.

"Amidst the fragility of this politically correct era, it is imperative that we stand up for our beliefs before the element of faith in a glorious and traditional holiday like Christmas is marginalized and ignored."

Fragility? How is a politically-correct era fragile? Could she have meant frigidity?  

She said the book will be "fun, festive" and "thought provoking." It will "encourage all to see what is possible when we unite in defense of our faith and ignore the politically correct Scrooges who would rather take Christ out of Christmas."

It's hard to imagine what she means by a politically-correct Scrooge. (Scrooge always sounded like a conservative to me.) But then it's generally hard to imagine what she means whenever she speaks. We will deal with the last part of her statement (Christ out of Christmas) in a moment.

ACORN and James O’Keefe III: The Tiny Crumb of Justice

by Nomad

Mr. James O’Keefe III has always been a useful tool for the conservatives. 

The right wing  can distantly applaud his antics under the pretense of social good works, and at the same time, they can disapprove of his controversial techniques. He can do things that no respectable journalist would dream of doing and, best of all, he can be painted as hero to naive but politically-mind young conservatives. 
By friends and foes, O'Keefe has been called many things: a hero, a prankster, a provocateur, guerilla reporter, a film-maker, an activist, a douchebag, even- though more rarely- a journalist.

Last week, 28-year- old O’Keefe was back in the news, but this time he was not in control of the spotlight. 

In the past, we have examined O’Keefe’s pivotal role in bringing down the community action organization, ACORN. Here’s a follow-up to that story.

Aaron Swartz: Was the DOJ Prosecution Political or Something More?

by Nomad

In what might seem as "stating the obvious" Huffington Post has an article about the prosecution / persecution by the Justice Department of Aaron Swartz. 

In a past post, we looked at the case in which Swartz, who committed suicide in January, had been indicted and faced prison time for downloading millions of academic articles from an online archive. 

According to the article:

A Justice Department representative told congressional staffers during a recent briefing on the computer fraud prosecution of Internet activist Aaron Swartz that Swartz’s “Guerilla Open Access Manifesto” played a role in the prosecution.

The manifesto said sharing information was a “moral imperative” and advocated for “civil disobedience” against copyright laws pushed by corporations “blinded by greed” that led to the “privatization of knowledge.”

“We need to take information, wherever it is stored, make our copies and share them with the world,” Swartz wrote in the manifesto.

Open Thread: Speak the Truth....

by Nomad

I thought I would offer this open thread. To kick things off, here are some items making news:

Hugo Chavez, the left wing dictator of Venezuela, has finally died after a two year struggle against cancer. The citizens of the nation are in mourning for their national hero. However as one reporter notes, there's an ugly truth behind Chavez's rule:

The crime rate is Caracas is staggering. The capital metropolitan area notched no fewer than 3,218 homicides in the first ten months of 2012. Numerous government officials have well established ties to narco-trafficking groups. Human rights abuses have been selective but deeply cruel (just look at what they have done to Maria Lourdes Afiuni). Price controls and artificial exchange rates have barely kept a lid on soaring inflation and rising food costs, while a steep currency devaluation and increase in the price of fuel are long overdue. The last time that a Venezuelan government attempted to dramatically change the fuel subsidy, we had the Caracazo riots of 1989 and some 3,000 deaths, which is credited in part for laying down the social conditions that led to the rise of Chávez. No matter who clings to power after the president is gone, they will have to face the reality of some form of these difficult policies.

That's really not much of a legacy to leave behind.

*    *    *    *

The Dow Jones has closed at an all-time high, erasing all of the losses from the 2008 recession. Analysts suggest that the boom is a result of deep skepticism about the predicted damage that the Sequester fiasco will do to the economy. In any case, the people who will benefit from a bear market are very unlikely to feel the direct impact of the budget cuts. The question,  before we celebrate, is whether anything has really been learned by the economic meltdown or whether it's business as usual. If so, we should all be prepared for yet another bubble followed by yet another market crash. 

*    *    *    *

One story that I found quite shocking but seems to have flown under the radar (pun intended) is this one from PopSci:

A Drone Flew Within 200 Feet Of A Commercial Jet. How Legal Was It?

Yesterday morning, an Alitalia pilot reported seeing a remote-controlled aircraft near New York's JFK airport, where he was landing. The drone was flying about 4 to 5 miles west of the airport at an altitude of about 1,750 feet, and it came within just 200 feet of the Alitalia plane, the pilot said. The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating the incident, and the FBI announced that it is looking for information leading to the drone operator. But was it legal?

Eventually the issue of drones will have to be discussed. Hopefully before one of them brings down an airliner. 

South Carolina's Lee Bright: A Closer Look at Lindsey Graham's Possible Tea Party Challenger

by Nomad

When you listen to South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, it’s hard to remember that according to his own consultant, he is “a thinking person's conservative.” 

Lately that's been a contradiction in terms.

Even if true, the question might be whether conservative voters in South Carolina would actually vote for a representative that thinks. It's a bit of a high standard.

They seem to prefer a politician that fights, that rants, that issues bold but essentially meaningless proclamations while refraining from any unwarranted brain activity.

These days Graham has been giving his constituents exactly what they crave. His recent embarrassing displays on the highly-politicized Benghazi investigation and his even more inept attempt to block the vote on the Hagel confirmation was a calculated strategy to establish his conservative credentials with his home state voters. So the crazier Graham appears on the national stage, the more votes he believes he can get back home. 

And this is the key problem with Republican party today. Insanity is the flavor of the month. And it is happening in many Red states, not just South Carolina.

VAWA: A Closer Look at Five Republicans who Said No

by Nomad

Let's take a closer look at five Republicans who voted against the renewal of a bill which gives legal protections to women who are victims of violence.  

After the vote on the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), the prospect of taking control of the Senate just became a little more remote. 

As The Daily Caller noted, many of the Republicans who have considered or who have announced plans to run for the Senate decided to vote against the bill. 

That legislation provides 

"$1.6 billion toward investigation and prosecution of violent crimes against women, imposes automatic and mandatory restitution on those convicted, and allows civil redress in cases prosecutors chose to leave unprosecuted. The Act also establishes the Office on Violence Against Women within the Department of Justice."

The bill covered many important topics such as human trafficking, domestic violence (including during pregnancy) sexual slavery, forced abortion, sexual violence, marital rape and many other crimes that tend to target women. Any no vote would logically require some kind of explanation to the public. 

In this post I would like to shine a spotlight on five Congressmen and women who have dreams  of a revered Senate seat but who also decided to deny women suitable protections against violence.

Newsweek Fumbles the Truth about Obama NASA Initiatives

by Nomad

They used to teach children that "reading is fundamental." In a democracy, for the voting public to keep informed, reading might be more than fundamental- it could be a matter of life or death. Naturally this assumes that an interested citizen can find accurate, honest writing by reporters actually bothering to check the facts. As any Fox News critic could tell you, repeating inaccurate statements lends a sense of authenticity to them.

Newsweek's "Chicken Little" cover story last week about asteroids and the (yawn) threat they pose to Earth. It has everything the editors of a magazine in decline might think is catchy. An opportunity for some nifty graphics, loads colorful prose, and with that recent Russian meteor, timeliness masking as relevance. And nothing collects random eyeballs like fear-mongering. 

It's not that it can't happen. It's not that extinction by falling sky-rock isn't possible. Ask the dinosaurs. (Actually you can't ask them, which just goes to show you.) But that story just been done unto death and even a real-life example in Russia can't breathe new life into the subject. (Witnesses to the actual asteroid's pass-over seemed discerningly calm. We are all lucky it didn't set off a pesky nuclear war.)

When it comes to rehashing subjects like this, the general rule of thumb is: a subject is pronounced DOA whenever Hollywood has made two films about it. A television film? and it becomes a joke at the office. 

Despite that, the story caught my attention. But halfway through the article I was stunned by one line.

"President Obama, canceling the shuttle and the manned mission to the moon and Mars, left open the possibility of one day landing on an asteroid."

That clause buried in the middle of the matter-of fact statement caught my eye. Any writer worth his/her mettle should have double-checked it instead of repeating the conventional- but wrong-wisdom. Any editor should have caught the mistake. Beside telling writers that it's "'I' before "C" except after "E," editors are supposed to check things. (And I am not referring to the failure to capitalize "moon.")

Inside Grover Norquist: The Jonas Savimbi Connection

by Nomad

The name, Grover Norquist, made a name for himself by crusading against taxes. Though he has never been elected to political office, his influence in the Republican party has made him a fixture in every election.

Yet, most people are unaware that the man has a long and colorful history in conservative circles. 

The Advocate of Bad ideas

Michael Grunwald of Time’s Swampland once called Grover Norquist “an idealistic advocate of bad ideas." His ideas, however, haven't always been confined to thoughts alone. When Norquist's principles led to action, the results, at least, for one African country led to the carnage of war and misery of the innocent.  

Most of us are familiar with his bad idea of “Taxpayer Protection Pledge" to oppose all tax increases and under all circumstances. We all know how he has bullied Republicans after they foolishly committed themselves to the poorly conceived notion.

However, there’s another less publicized bad idea hidden in Norquist’s background that has failed to get a lot of attention in the mainstream media. Actually, that’s a shame because his famous war against tax cuts represents a small part of the colorful Norquist biography. In this post, we will take a closer look at his Angolan connections. 

What sparked my interest was this remark. Norquist once told an interviewer: 

"During the eighties, l was very active with the Afghan resistance, and in Mozambique and Angola.” 

That intriguing remark, (confirmed by his own mother), is worth a closer look. 

Two by Mike Luckovich

Mike Luckovich, awarded the Pulitzer Prize for Editorial Cartooning in 1995 and 2006, is a cartoonist for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Some News for Nomadic Politics Readers: Free App for Android!

I've been working on an Android app for Nomadic Politics for telephones and tablets. (The app looks like the picture on the left.)

Ok. I confess. I am still pretty green around the gills at Android but you are more than welcome to give it a try. To download the free app, go to: 

http://www.appsgeyser.com/379064

If you are unfamiliar with the process, after you download the apk file, you will  store the app in your download folder on your tablet/telephone and then use your Apk installer to finish up.

 It's not difficult. If I didn't have any problems, anyway. 

Alternatively, to simplify things even further, you can scan this QR code.  

Let me know what you think. Feedback is always welcome. I expect this will be NomadicPolitics App 1.0 

As always, thanks so much for all your support.

_______________________________

Between Texas and Nebraska: Two Cases of Sex Abuse and Justice Denied

by Nomad

Lone Star State Justice

I saw this news from deep in the heart of Texas about Stanley Marsh III of Amarillo, Texas. It's a pathetic story of the public disgrace of a millionaire and the warping of the justice system. 

The New York Times reports:

Stanley Marsh III, an eccentric millionaire artist best known for his Cadillac Ranch art display along an interstate highway in the Texas Panhandle, has settled lawsuits from 10 teenagers who said he paid them for sex acts, lawyers for both sides announced Saturday.

(Photo: AP Photo/
Michael Schumache, 

Amarillo Globe-News)

In 2011, Marsh suffered a massive stroke, which left him legally incapacitated. His wife, Gwendolyn, his family and legal team have rallied to his defense. 
If one didn't look too closely at the charges, the images of the besieged family might arouse some sympathy. 

There's no question that the once- flamboyant Marsh presently makes a pathetic figure, and certainly, it's not the kind of happy ending any family would wish for. 

His online supporters- and there will be some- would argue that what Marsh did was a comparatively minor crime. It wasn't, they'd say, rape, or sadistic murder or abuse. 
The so-called victims weren't actually children, they could say. And, worst of all, you might hear somebody say, it wasn't such a big deal. At least, the victims were rewarded. (I actually read similar things about female teachers who sexually abused their under-aged male students.)    

According to the lawsuits, Mr. Marsh is accused "of giving the teenagers cash, alcohol, drugs  [Viagra] and, in one case, two BMWs [he crashed the first one], to perform sex acts with him at his office. One of the teenagers said he had more than 100 sexual encounters with Mr. Marsh in his office and at his home in Amarillo."

Not quite as horrendous as the Sandusky case, but pretty dreadful nevertheless.

American Homelessness and the Issue of Entitlements

This poster makes a good point. Something is clearly wrong when you treat your enemy prisoners worse than your own citizens. When enemies are entitled to better conditions than your average homeless person, it's worth a closer look.

To add insult to injury, while prisoners of war (pardon, enemy combatants) had, at the very least, free medical care, a roof over their heads and warm meals, past studies have indicated that up to a third of all of adult homeless men were US veterans and as such are, without the protections guaranteed by the Geneva Convention. 

(One bright spot: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) reported that the number of homeless ex-service men and women has declined by 7% in 2012- far better than the national rate. ) 

This informational poster, however, did its job. It got me thinking about the issue of homelessness and entitlements.

To Be Without a Home, Like a Complete Unknown
First of all, even before the worst effects of the recession rippled through the country, homelessness was a shame for the nation with aspirations of greatness. Back in 2009, it was estimated the number of homeless Americans at between 2.3 and 3.5 million.
Surprisingly (given the present state of the economy) the rate of homelessness actually decreased from 2009 to 2012. (A one-percent drop isn't much for a superpower to brag about, of course.) There is a good reason for this modest decrease in the number of people living on the street or in community shelters. Blame Obama's Big Government boogeyman.
I'll explain in a moment.

But, even with that tiny glimmer of hope, that statistical decrease is misleading. The number of individuals in homeless families might have decreased by 1 percent nationally, but the numbers actually increased by 20 percent or more in 11 states. Altogether the rates increased in 24 states and the District of Columbia.

A Book Review of "Destiny of the Republic: A Tale of Madness, Medicine and the Murder of a President"

by Nomad

The presidency of James Garfield is one of those chapters of American history that historians just tend to overlook. It's no surprise. It lasted only about seven months before ending with a ghastly assassination. And even that sensational aspect gets little attention, compared to the murders of Lincoln or Kennedy. 
Yet, as I soon discovered, it is a tale worth telling.

Historian Candice Millard takes up that challenge in her book, Destiny of the Republic: A Tale of Madness, Medicine and the Murder of a President, which deals with this national tragedy, exploring both the colorful players and the events that led up to the murder and its dreadful aftermath.

How James Garfield got to be president at all is quite an extraordinary story in itself. In a search for a suitable nominee, the 1880 Republican convention in Chicago had become hopelessly deadlocked. The Stalwarts, a rebellious faction within the Republican party (much like the Tea Party conservatives of today) refused to budge. Their candidate of choice was Ulysses S. Grant who had already served two two terms as the eighteenth President of the United States (1869–1877).

Many at the convention thought two terms were quite enough for president Grant. During his administration, there were financial corruption charges or scandals in all federal departments; eleven scandals altogether One author, C. Vann Woodward in his article, The Lowest Ebb, observes (rather understatedly) that Grant had "difficulty in spotting corrupt individuals." 

In the eyes of corrupt individuals, Grant's blindness made him a perfect candidate to run for an unprecedented third term.

The Conservative Victory Fund Project: Has Karl Rove's SuperPAC Declared War on Tea Party Nuttery?

by Nomad

Recently Karl Rove’s American Crossroads group officially fired the first shot in the battle for the soul (such as it is) of the Republican party when he announced the creation of a new super-PAC, the Conservative Victory Fund Project.  
The mission of the SuperPAC is 

"to “recruit seasoned candidates and protect Senate incumbents from challenges by far-right conservatives and Tea Party enthusiasts who Republican leaders worry could complicate the party’s efforts to win control of the Senate.”

Take that, Tea Party Express.

According to the New York Times:

The group, the Conservative Victory Project,[CVF] is intended to counter other organizations that have helped defeat establishment Republican candidates over the last two election cycles. It is the most robust attempt yet by Republicans to impose a new sense of discipline on the party, particularly in primary races.

As Insane as it might sound, it appears that the Rove Republicans are now playing the role of the old guard of the Republican Party. And apparently, the defenders of the empire have had enough of the Tea Party rebels. After all that wooing and courting, and skillful manipulation of least intelligent and most rabid right wing voters in ;last two election cycles, the GOP has finally come to the conclusion (a bit late) that maybe stitching together this pouty, disobedient Frankenstein was not such a bright idea after all. 
We, on the sidelines, stuffing popcorn in our greasy-lipped mouths, have seen this coming, of course. Look at how they treated Tea Party queen Sarah Palin at the Republican Convention in Florida last year. It was "Sarah who?" For the GOP, Sarah became their own  political form of  "Fatal Attraction." She was the drunken tryst in the backseat of the Republican Oldsmobile nobody wants to remember.