Political Theatre category archive

Reg Henry considers the current state of American political discourse. His observations worth a read, though they are flawed by a gesture towards “both sides do it.”

Volume matters. Comparing a roar from one side to a whisper from the other is blatant false equivalence. When what is mainstream on one side is rare and isolated on the other, both sides are not doing it.

A nugget:

No wonder the nation is in such a ridiculous state, when people on each side think those who disagree with them are psychologically disturbed. Worse yet, this view has been encouraged from on high in the culture.

How many times are we told that “liberalism is a mental disorder”? The ones who email me this clearly think they are being so darned witty. Of course, they would never have come up with this, if talk show host Michael Savage hadn’t written a book with the same name as his contribution to the debasement of humanity.

Zandar explains how to spot a terrorist.

PoliticalProf. Read it.

Warning: Tasteless, just like the original.

Read more »

Steven M. captures the wingnut belief system. Read it.

Via Job’s Anger.

Via C&L.

This should be interesting.

A judge threw out Florida’s congressional redistricting map Thursday, ruling that the Legislature allowed for a “secret, organized campaign” by partisan operatives to subvert the redistricting process in violation of the state Constitution.

Leon County Circuit Court Judge Terry Lewis ruled that two of the state’s 27 districts are invalid and must be redrawn, along with any other districts affected by them, to bring the map into compliance with the state’s new Fair District amendments.

Much more at the link. You can read the ruling, including the judge’s reasoning, here (PDF).

Read more »

Via Juanita Jean, who’s on a roll this week.

Juanita Jean explains why the Republican Party chose to convene in Cleveland, rather than Dallas. A nugget:

Seriously, think about it. Texas Republicans are so flatass crazy that other Republicans don’t want to be seen around them.

(snip)

7. Ted Cruz wants to declare war against Mexico, and just to be safe, New Mexico.

8. Sarah Palin once described Texas as, “where the dumb people live.”

Follow the link for her other examples. You’ll be glad you did.

One more time: a Libertarian is a Republican who’s ashamed to admit it.

Via PoliticalProf.

Steven M. blasts the establishment media’s pretense that “both sides do it.” A nugget:

For years, the mainstream press has been in denial about the true extent of the Republican Party’s insanity. When the insanity is acknowledged, it’s ascribed to just one particular faction of the party, or assumed to be a waning phenomenon.

He goes on to explain how the insanity is neither limited to a faction nor temporary, but, rather, a modus operandi. Do please read the rest.

.

More numbers (gasp!):

Via the Bob and Chez After-Party.

Dan Casey explains how George the Worst poisoned the Post Office and wonders why Congress doesn’t care. A nugget:

It (The U. S. Postal Service–ed.) is indeed facing a financial crisis. But almost the entire reason for the crisis is that insane 2006 law.

It requires the self-supporting U.S. Postal Service, which receives not one dime in taxpayer subsidies, to fully fund its retirees’ health benefits for 75 years into the future. It also requires that money be set aside over a 10-year period, at a rate of more than $5 billion per year.

(snip)

Somewhat ironically, the bill was intended to help the Postal Service be more competitive for the future, Davis said. But late in the game, the Bush White House threatened to veto it unless Congress added the future-funding-for-retirees provision.

Congress went along because at the time it seemed like it was a better option than having the entire bill defeated, Davis said.

I wonder how many persons will get the reference to the Maynard G. Krebs Congress?

John Nichols points out that the “civil war” between teabaggers and “establishment” Republicans is but a rumor, a fuss over appearances, a big nothing.

(It is a–ed.) fabulous imagining that there is a meaningful difference between “establishment Republicans” and “Tea Party Republicans.”

(snip)

For the most part, this year’s supposedly significant Senate contests between the establishment and the “Tea Party” have explored the range of opinion from what would historically have been understood as the right wing of the Republican Party to what is now understood as the right wing of the Republican Party.

Some very wealthy people take these distinctions very seriously. They have money to burn, and they are burning it up this year on political purity tests that pit those who like their economic and social conservatism straight against those who want it with a twist of Ted Cruz.

Via the Progressive Populist.