GOP Debate: Moderators as the main event; debaters ZZZZZZZZ

The one and only thing I like about the abundance of GOP debates is after the debate FactChecking.  Wow!

It seems after Michelle Bachmann left the arena the number of fact checks may have dropped, but still the remaining 6 candidates offer enough fodder for a full night of checking.

Another thing I like about the FactChecking post debate email; I often simply link to their website without the need for additional analysis.  If you want to read something interesting, but not surprising… Click the link below.  

First, how about a does of Santorum B/S regarding the words “Middle Class”?  His remark about Romney’s use of the word Middle class was as silly as his body of comments since joining the race.  Everyone in America refers to middle income earners as the “Middle Class”.  How trite, but then the source is also trite.

Santorum’s ‘Middle Class’ Inconsistency

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum chastised Romney for using the term “middle class,” even though Santorum’s own campaign uses it currently and he has used it himself not so long ago.

Here’s what Santorum said during the debate:
Santorum, Jan. 7: The Governor [Mitt Romney] used a term earlier that I shrink from, and it’s one that I don’t think we should be using as Republicans: “Middle class.” There are no classes in America. We’re a country that don’t allow for titles. We don’t put people in classes. Maybe middle income people. But the idea, somehow or another, that we’re going to buy into the class warfare arguments of Barack Obama is something that should not be part of the Republican lexicon. That’s their job. Divide. Separate. Put one group against another. That’s not the language I’ll use as president. I’ll use the language of bringing people together.

Someone in Santorum’s campaign apparently did not get the memo. A flyer circulated by the campaign in Iowa boasts that “Rick Santorum has called for significant tax rate cuts for middle-class Americans and will cut wasteful spending to pay for it.”

We couldn’t find any recent instances of Santorum uttering the term “middle class,” but he used it at least three times in public statements in 2005 and 2006. (See here, here and here.) And while Santorum says “middle class” is a phrase that ought to be wiped from the Republican lexicon, it has been used repeatedly during the Republican debates by Romney, Gingrich and Michele Bachmann.  

FactCheck Linked

If you really want a little more insight into why I love ‘fact-checking‘ take a quick look. Politifacts 2011.

Constitution, God and Bigotry

Separation of church and state is doctrine written into the First Amendment of the US Constitution.  The precautionary doctrine in the Constitution speaks  volumes about the dangers of religion as it relates to the governance of people. The “Crafters” of the Constitution were wise in many ways and equally selfish and self perpetuating in other ways.  While I refuse to refer to the men as “Founding Father”, our Constitution  recognizes the downsides of interlacing religion with governance.  They seem to have recognized both the failings of religion and the non-governing benefits of a person’s beliefs in a higher spiritual order. R.P. Nettelhorst Wrote an interesting article abut the ‘Crafters’ of the Constitution and existential concerns about religion. 

 A ‘higher spiritual order’ existentially connects to foibles in people that place the factual basis for government in a ‘polar opposite’ realm.  

I am not anti-higher spiritual order, in any sense, as I recognize the wonderful place it holds in the souls and minds of billions across the globe. Nor am I of a belief in the ‘enlightened ‘deity”, of a “Deist”.  My beliefs are in a higher order regarding a Creation forces which provided life for evolution across billions of years and millions of millenniums.  It is easy to see and recognize the downsides of religious dogma; I feel the Crafters of the Constitution saw same.

Is it possible the Crafters of the Constitution were religious or non-religious people?  The answer: they were religious men. Men wise enough to caution, and create, with the foresight which has manifest via prolific association of religion and the state. A manifestation that has metastasized across the nation.  The poli/social Right has contributed to the mestastasization of religion in federal governance as effectively it has established itself as the conduit for political representation of the  nation’s 1 per cent.  In most cases religion permeates through dangerous dogma inherent in far-right devotion and, or, evangelism. 

My curiosity overwhelmed me for a minute.  I sought a quick readout on the “Crafters” as religious or non-religious men.

Wiki Answer (An open-edit document, misspells have been left as copied)

Were any of the founding fathers atheists? 

None of them were atheists, they were however all secualrists (meaning they believed that church and state should be seperate, to each his own.) but the personal beliefs of the founding fathers fell into three religious categories: first, the smallest group, founders who had left their Judeo-Christian heritages and become advocates of the enlightenment religion of nature and reason called “Deism” like Thomas Paine and Ethan Allen who believed in a supreme being who laid the foundations of the universe but doesn’t intervene to break its’ laws (meaning in the Deist’ point of view it is unreasonable to believe in a personal god or believe in the existence of miracles which defy natural laws) The second largest group consisted of the founders who remained practicing Christians. They retained a supernaturalist world view, a belief in the divinity of Jesus Christ, and an adherence to the teachings of their denomination. These founders included Patrick Henry, John Jay, and Samuel Adams. The largest group , consisted of founders who retained Christian loyalties and practice but were influenced by Deism. Like John Adams, George Washington, James Monroe and Benjamin Franklin. 

—————————————————————————————

Here are quotes from several seminal founding fathers.

Read more: 

OK, my curiosity was somewhat satisfied, and when accompanied with a  self-commitment to continued study of the question, I will move back on-point.

Everyday, I read articles or hear commentary about religion.  By any definition and by any standard, I posit that it is impossible to separate religion from dogma that is doing great harm to our nation.   As with any dogma, people avail themselves to people who can either help them (via connecting somehow to that heavenly body they chose to hold in the highers of esteem) or people who can, and will manipulate them. I will avoid comment to the level of Bill Maher with his screeds on  religion and war, but I will remind that many of our nations ills have been cloaked in religion.  I will avoid discussion of the sins of far too many priest and pastors who have abused the innocent for sake of their physical needs.  I will also avoid discussion of the material trappings and greed of some mega-ministers who soak-up revenues (not tithes) from their congregations and viewers (et. al. television mega-preachers).  My will not avoid the evasive and insidiousness of the extent to which religion as an influencing dynamic for electing or rejecting our political leaders.  

Evangelicals want a “tag-team” to push forward the bigoted Santorum.

Another are of real consternation is the proliferation of religious figures who openly attack segments of the population.  And, they do so for no other purpose beyond their personal bigotry.

The purpose of this piece was not in any way to demean religion in the minds of believers.  My purpose is the dangers pf ever-increasing religious rhetoric and overt religious visuals from the Right as they pursue political agendas.  I will remind of the bigoted horrors by some Right-wing ministers as candidates for political office  who suckle-up to the ministers for endorsement of visual ops.  Of particular importance is  campaign rhetoric from Rick Santorum who is obviously diseased the flawed mental state called “bigotry” (and in his cases verges on racism).  Newt Gingrich also wallows in the filth of bigotry and racism, but Gingrich is not running around the country using “GOD” as an applause apparatus. Despite his billboard-like advertisements of his conversion to Catholicism and his implied remarks of a diminished libido,  Gingrich knows that pandering with “GOD” as a campaign strategy would not work considering his history.

I really should not expect much better as the Southern Baptist Church and most white churches in the  South found ’cause’ for rationalization of slavery in the region.

The Ghost of Ronald Reagan

As I watched and listened to the GOP Debate, I was nothing shy of amazed at the  complete desperation of the GOP.  While I missed the first half of the debate, the more than frequent use of Ronald Reagan as the prototypical model of a United States Commander-in-Chief  left me with questions.  Is the GOP so desperate for  presidential role  models that it can only place Reagan on the praise pedestal?  Or, was it a plan to throw the Reagan name around to appeal to his ‘feel good’ legacy?  I actually suspect both  as indicated by the choice of the Reagan Library.







Yes, Reagan was ‘the feel good’ president of the 20th Century.   He was  “The Great Communicator”.  He would joke,  smile, walk like a cowboy,  ride like a cowboy with white hat et al, and he would joust with Gorbachev.  Oh, we should never forget,“Mr. Gorbachev, Tear down this wall”.  And, the dying Soviet Union obliged.  Thus, the birth of an eternal moniker for the GOP.



Maybe the use of Ronald Reagan by the GOP is a winner.  In fact that is a real  possibility based on the fact that most voters do not contemplate beyond the  television set. The very reason that the GOP has such great campaign success and the basis on which Fox News (evening shows) exist and garner high ratings.


If one looks at the flip side of Ronald Reagan, it is not a picture that balances with his ‘feel good legacy” and his reputation for ‘killing’ the Soviet Union. Personally, I have looked a lot closer.  The following link navigates to a piece that I wrote this past February.  It is very lengthy and jumps around a bit.  The article is written as such for a reason.


As something of a preamble, the article started like this:

 As we approach President’s Day, I want to delve into the legacy of the man some call the  “Great Communicator”, “the Feel Good President”,  the father of modern-day conservatism, and who some call “Mr. Republican”.  While I do not in any way share an affinity for Ronald Reagan, I will agree that he is probably ‘Mr. Republican’ if there was ever such a title. From my liberal perspective, the title includes a crown of the worst of our society and Mr. Reagan wore it well.

After honestly posting a link and a few accompanying words in support of Mr. Reagan, ‘the wonderful communicator’ and a model president for the Right, I moved to a deeper look which includes archives that dulls that bright light of  praise.   If you follow the segments as I list them from this point forward, a real picture of  Reagan clearly comes to the forefront.

Ronald Reagan’s legacy has clearly benefited from the very same level of cognitive minutia that has propelled a former (half-term) governor to celebrity and riches. The very same shallowness that has right-wing pundits mentioning the name of South Dakota’s Thune because he is an “attractive candidate”.
Despite my compliments for appointing Sandra Day O’Connor to the SCOTUS, I join many writers and historians who are not painting Mr. Republican as a sterling example of truly American Values. I assert American Values should not and are not represented by the following sets of information garnered from a quick set of Google and World Web queries. I do agree with the former (half-term) governor that Reagan’s Values are sterling examples of conservative values, as those values manifest in our society.

On Matters of Civil Rights
Aaron Krager (Liberal Writer)
A 100 year old icon and fallacy

These ten things show the truths conservatives try to hide about the Conservative Icon.
1. Reagan was a serial tax raiser.
2. Reagan nearly tripled the federal budget deficit.
3. Unemployment soared after Reagan’s 1981 tax cuts.
4. Reagan grew the size of the federal government tremendously.
5. Reagan did little to fight a woman’s right to choose.
6. Reagan was a “bellicose peacenik.”
7. Reagan gave amnesty to 3 million undocumented immigrants.
8. Reagan illegally funneled weapons to Iran.
9. Reagan vetoed a comprehensive anti-Apartheid act.
10. Reagan helped create the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden.

Krager goes one while quoting from a book by Kyle Longley and Jeremy D. Meyer.
http://aaronkrager.com/2011/02…

He was a flip-flopper on civil rights legislation by first stating – “If an individual wants to discriminate against Negroes or others in selling or renting his house, it is his right to do so” and then reversed course. Sounds like Rand Paul of today.

Deconstructing Reagan: Conservative mythology and America’s fortieth president: by Kyle Longley
Chapter 3 Reagan and Race Prophet of Color Blindness, Baiter of Backlash  By Jeremy D. Meyer

Reagan was avowed supporter of Bob Jones University throughout his two-terms as President of the United States. If my memory does not fail me, I believe that Bob Jones prohibited racial  intermixing in any way. Imagine being prohibited from dating a friend who happens to be African-American, Hispanic or Asian? The university is also known for harboring anti-Catholic beliefs and doctrine.

Apartheid!!!!

http://www.democracynow.org/20…

Throughout his presidency, Reagan supported the apartheid government in South Africa and even labeled Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress a notorious terrorist organization.

In 1981, Reagan explained to CBS that he was loyal to the South African regime because it was “a country that has stood by us in every war we’ve ever fought, a country that, strategically, is essential to the free world in its production of minerals.”

Reagan actually vetoed U.S. Congressional Anti-Apartheid Legislation.
On Matters of  Federal Governance
IRAQGATE: Chemical Weapons Technology for Saddam Hussein

Green Left Weekly
http://www.greenleft.org.au/no…
By NORM DIXON

NYT “revealed” that in the 1980s, the administration of US President Ronald Reagan covertly provided “critical battle planning assistance at a time when American intelligence knew that Iraqi commanders would employ chemical weapons in waging the decisive battles of the Iran-Iraq war”.

IRAN/CONTRA (Sold Arms to Iran for release of hostages and to fund the RIGHT-wing Contras in Nicaragua)
This link provides information related to convictions related to the following Reagan Administration officials and  criminal acts.

Iran Contra Affair
The most well known and politically damaging of the scandals came to light in November 1986, when Ronald Reagan conceded that the United States had sold weapons to the revolutionary government of the Shah of Iran, Ruhollah Khomeini, as part of a largely unsuccessful effort to secure the release of 52 Americans being held hostage. It was also disclosed that some of the money from the arms deal with Iran had been covertly and illegally funneled into a fund to aid the right wing Contras revolutionary groups seeking to overthrow the socialist Sandinista government of Nicaragua. The Iran-contra scandal as it became known, did serious damage to the Reagan presidency. The investigations were effectively halted when President George H. W. Bush (Reagan’s vice president) pardoned Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger before his trial began.[2]

Reagan Administration was wrought with scandal and cronyism

I. Department of Housing and Urban Development grant rigging

The HUD rigging scandal consisted of Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Samuel Pierce and his associates rigging low income housing bids to favor Republican contributors to Reagan’s campaign as well as rewarding Republican lobbyists such as James G. Watt a former Secretary of the Interior.[11] Sixteen convictions were eventually handed down. 

II. EPA scandals

A number of scandals occurred at the Environmental Protection Agency during the Reagan Administration. Over twenty high-level EPA employees were removed from office during Reagan’s first three years as president.[20] Additionally, several Agency officials resigned amidst a variety of charges, ranging from being unduly influenced by industry groups to rewarding or punishing employees based on their political beliefs.[21] Sewergate, the most prominent EPA scandal during this period, involved the targeted release of Superfund grants to enhance the election prospects of local officials aligned with the Republican Party.

III. Inslaw Affair

Inslaw Affair (1985-1994+); a protracted legal case that alleged that top-level officials of President Ronald Reagan’s (R) Department of Justice were involved in software piracy of the Promis program from Inslaw Inc. forcing it into bankruptcy and then failed to appoint an independent counsel to investigate it.[24]

IV. Savings & Loan Crisis

Savings and loan crisis in which 747 institutions failed and had to be rescued with $160 billion of taxpayer monies.[28] Reagan’s “elimination of loopholes” in the tax code included the elimination of the “passive loss” provisions that subsidized rental housing. Because this was removed retroactively, it bankrupted many real estate developments which used this tax break as a premise, which in turn bankrupted 747 Savings and Loans, many of whom were operating, more or less, as banks, thus requiring the FDIC to cover their debts and losses with tax payer money. This with some other “deregulation” policies, ultimately led to the largest political and financial scandal in U.S. history to that date. The Savings and Loan crisis. The ultimate cost of the crisis is estimated to have totaled around USD $150 billion, about $125 billion of which was directly subsidized by the U.S. government, which further increased the large budget deficits of the early 1990s. See Keating Five.

Reagan Killed the Soviet Union

I will bring the Quondam View to a close after the next two linked articles.  The issue of Reagan’s impact on the collapse of the Soviet Union is probably the single most notable reason that some may feel he was the greatest president ever. The following links provide a thorough examination of the collapse of the Soviet Union.  The authors postulate that Reagan benefited based on  the timing of his
administration. The Soviet Union had eaten itself alive from the inside out and economic collapse was imminent. Leaders of the Soviet Union may very well have worked closely with any American President to facilitate peace treaties and concessions prior to the inevitable downfall.
Death of the Soviet Union 

Death of the Soviet Union II

REAGAN CUT TAXES  (cut taxes early in first term then raised taxes 11 times)
Actually raised taxes
The information and links related to Ronald Reagan and his eight years in office do not include a couple of additional points of consideration.


Ronald Reagan was in office during the period in which the United States suffered one of four market crashes and major downturns in the U.S. world economies.


Since the Black Monday Crash was not the single result of the U.S. Economy, as was the case in 2008 (under Bush), it is noteworthy that another no regulation republican was in the White House.

The last points relate to Ronald Reagan’s unfortunate battle with dementia. The last two years of his president was arguably flawed with symptoms of the on setting disease. Some say that he showed signs much earlier, but as a personal witness, the signs started to show after six years in the White House.  His son Ron states that he saw symptoms of the disease much earlier other in his family vehemently disagree.


My point in this work was not to disparage the former president as a person an as a U.S. Citizen. He did, in fact, serve eight years as president without a major war overseas.  However, I think it a major fallacy to hold him up as the prototypical conservative because he was the single most contributor to our current national debt and deficit with George W. Bush as a close runner-up in deficit spending. The two are responsible for over 70 percent the nation’s current deficit/national debt problems.


As I opened this piece,  I should probably have considered why the GOP held the debate at the Reagan Presidential Library and I should also have considered,  that Reagan is the only model the GOP has as a moniker, maybe I should have been more patient with their shortcomings.

Choose Your Nutjob!

I plan to write about last nights debate in a few days.  I must first get over it and contemplate the interchange. Of most importance to me is getting over the applause after the moderator mentioned executions in the  State of Texas.


The following is cross posted from the Leftake.com.  I believe that it will make it rounds on the Internet over the next few days.

A Tragedy in the Making…How Can It Be?

The poignant needs little dialogue.

After three GOP presidential debates….someone has accomplished a masterful job of analyzing the debaters ‘populace’ utterances and rants. The developer of the image below has proven that people can say what the person wishes (potentially laced with misleading words) but their actions truly speak volumes.

You have to look closely at the entire image. Bottom-line is ….Of the 53,025 plus words from the GOP debates the Magnificent Eight have yet to mention the words “middle class“.

There is one omission that does not seem to have garnered attention from the developer: JOBS.  I do find it interesting that the image (chart) developer did not include the word jobs.

As you and I are aware, the FOX News debate format, the image also points to the effectiveness and the tendencies of the debate moderator and panel.  I suspect that may have been no questions that would take the debaters to “jobs’.

 If true, that is a doubled-down tragedy.