DeadElephant.ORG -- the blog

Dick Armey Admits the "Death Panels" Are a Lie

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:21:00 +0000

I did not think it was possible for me to feel this pissed about politics anymore.

from the New York Times:

Armey prides himself on his intellect and rationality, but his years in Washington have taught him the political uses of irrationality and even outright fantasy. He told me he does not believe some of the most extreme charges that emerged in the debate over health care reform — for example, that “death panels” will tell elderly people when it’s time to die — but he welcomes the energy and passion that such beliefs bring to his side. “You know that expression: The enemy of my enemy is my friend?” he asked. “Are their fears exaggerated? Yeah, probably. But are Obama’s promises exaggerated? I may think it’s silly, but if people want to believe that,” he said, referring to death panels, “it’s O.K. with me.”

This is the main guy behind FreedomWorks - instigators of the Town Hall Hooligans of August. He's just launched a new website called DontKillGrandma.com!

So, Mr. Armey, how exactly does "their fears (are) exaggerated" square with "Dont Kill Grandma . com"?

--------

----------

DARE them - state-by-state - to "opt out".

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 04:09:00 +0000

Pass the Public Option with an "opt out" - and DARE the Republicans state-by-state...to turn down what will quickly become a very popular program. It's one thing to be "the party of no" before insurance reform is passed. It's something else again to refuse, on principle, to participate after reform is the fact. Any Republican governor or state assembly person who refuses to let their constituents have access to government health insurance which most Americans enjoy will be severely punished for their righteousness.

"Opt-out" is much more than just a compromise to get more Democrats on board. It's the ultimate hammer on those who would "just say 'no'".

-----------------------------------------------

LoveHerLiberally.com

Bigots for Equality!

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 22:46:00 +0000

Last week I posted the comments of a friend, a psychotherapist and reverend, who argued that statements like "Justice Sotomayor is a reverse racist", or that Obama-care will favor blacks over whites, or will give-away medical treatment to “illegals”, or that, as Glenn Beck proclaims, Obama has "a deep-seated hatred for white people", are all demonstrations of psychological projection. “Projection is never conscious”, she wrote, “and so is not deliberate. The person who projects sincerely believes that what they say about the other person applies.” Many here agreed. I believe the opposite.

The most virulent white supremacists have always hailed from the extreme Right, and the from the reddest states, like South Carolina, which Joe (you lie!) Wilson represents. Yet today hordes of politicians of Wilson’s ilk, and right-wing shock-jocks are holding themselves out to be defenders of equal rights!

This is the same conservative movement that instituted slavery and waged the Civil War to defend it. Then they brought us the Klu Klux Klan and Jim Crow, and fought tooth-and-nail against the Civil Rights Act, integration, affirmative action, and Dr. Martin Luther King. Now they itch for a global war against Arabs and demand a wall to keep out Mexicans.

There is nothing remotely subtle about their racism. Here’s Rush Limbaugh on Obama: “We are being told that we have to hope he succeeds, that we have to bend over, grab the ankles … because his father was black, because this is the first black president." During the campaign he called Obama a “halfrican-American” who’s "only chance of winning… is that he's black", and that he’s "an affirmative action candidate". (citations and more quotes. 13 million Americans listen to Rush religiously.)

But now we should believe that they sincerely believe they are defending racial equality? Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity all warned that white males would be excluded from jobs created by the economic stimulus package. Why? Because Obama’s Labor Secretary said the plan should "include women and minorities ". (citation)

One thing – and only one thing - is absolutely consistent with conservative attitudes about race: they have always fought for white male power and prestige against any perceived threat. To believe that their recent warnings of reverse racism are anything but conscious and cynical lies would be foolish. And I’m not buying it.

In honor of their new-found love of equal rights DeadElephant.ORG offers a new slogan:

Click here to print this bumper-strip instantly - free. (opens a printable PDF!)

Wearing Sandals to a Brawl

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 09:14:00 +0000

by their footwear shall ye know them.

Conservatism is an approach to life in which one’s securityis re maintained through dominance. Conservatives fetishize dominance in every form: of parents over children, men over women,
whites over non-whites, our nation over other nations, humans over animals, over wilderness, over the earth.

Consider the iconic footwear of the conservative: cowboy boots – otherwise known as “shit kickers”.

Cowboy boots were specifically invented for “giving the spurs”
to horses and for “punching cattle”.

In contrast, Liberalism is an approach to life in which
one’s security is maintained through peaceful coexistence.
Liberals believe in strength through peace, and preach
“conflict resolution”, cooperation, and bipartisanship.

The iconic footwear of the liberal is the sandal.

Relaxation is the raison d'etre of the sandal. Sandals are
designed for inaction, for passivity. We wear them when
we want to “kick back” and be “mellow”.

A conflict between boot-wearers and sandal-wearers is like a conflict between wolves and bunnies – more of a massacre than a fight.

(Note the predator’s narrow set eyes, for focusing on the attack, and the prey’s eyes on the sides of its head, so it can watch the attack arrive. Looking over my shoulder just now, my 11-year-old joked that the bunny looks like a “demi-cat”.)

Republicans today do not acknowledge our nation's duly-elected President. They scream that he’s not even a citizen, much less our President. They’re outraged that he would dare speak to our children in school, although Reagan and Bush-senior both did so. And they don’t even accord him the courtesy due any President, to address Congress without being heckled and hollered at.

Do not mistake this for mere criticism, however harsh, nor outrage, however intense. By their actions, today’s Republicans have broken the most essential covenant of any democracy: the consent of every citizen to be governed in accordance with elections.

Remember Al Gore, after the last appeal to the Supreme Court was rejected, gracefully conceded the Presidency to George Bush. Despite election fraud. And a margin of just 600 votes.

Democrats don’t GET IT. Politically speaking, this is a fight to the death.

And we wore sandals to the brawl.

"a deep-seated hatred for white people"

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 04:27:00 +0000

Do you wonder what on earth makes paunchy old white guys like Glen Beck accuse our sharp, Harvard-educated consensus-building, moderate President of "reverse" racism against whites. There is NOTHING in his history or his policies that would give evidence for that. In psycho-jargon it's called “projection”. When you have feelings that you can't admit to, you project those feelings onto someone else – most often onto the very person who stirred the unacceptable feelings in you.

Projection is a common dysfunction, and can be observed often in family feuds, such as when an abusive husband accuses his wife of disrespect. What, after all, could be more disrespectful than his own abuse? Projection is not conscious, and so is not deliberate. The person who projects sincerely believes that what they say about the other person applies.

So these old white men have been unconsciously thinking, "Man, if my family and I had been treated the way we've treated Black folks for centuries, I sure would hate us. So here is this black guy with all this power, and well, of course he’s gonna use it for revenge. I would.” Hence the projection: Obama hates white people, because I would hate white people if I were Black.

But Obama is a better man than that, and, I might add, a truer Christian. He has more useful things to do than try to get revenge on anyone today for the injustices of the past. He would rather right past wrongs than continue them. If that sounds more like the Gospel message to you than anything Rush Limbaugh is promoting, take heed. Obama doesn’t hate any group. And neither does God.

---Hunter Roberts

A Close Election Could Open the Gates of HELL

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 03:21:00 +0000

This article origonally posted October 22, 2008

Three forces are driving a fast-approaching political fire-storm:

1) a contested election
2) a wide-spread lynch-mob mentality, and
3) economic collapse

If this election is anything less than a landslide for Obama, if it is not decisive – in fact, if the outcome is contestable to any degree – those three forces will become chaos multipliers, each feeding the others in a rapidly escalating fire-storm.

Contested Election
False hysteria over ACORN is part of a broader Republican effort to invalidate, in advance, an election they now realize they are likely to lose. So this election is already being contested. The Republican strategy abruptly shifted the week following the first debate, when polls of the limited number of remaining independents moved sharply towards Obama. Their new goal is to make the upcoming election as contestable as possible, to widen the margin of victory that can be called “a tie”, and to delegitimize Obama.

Lynch-mob Mentality
McCain and Palin stoke the rage - and calls to violence - that we’ve witnessed at Republican rallies, by their relentless focus on the non-issue of Ayers. Let’s be clear: their charge, that Obama “sees America as imperfect enough to pal around with terrorists who would bomb their own country” flatly insinuates that Obama is an enemy to the United States - not that Obama is a poor choice for President, or wrong for America, or even that he is insufficiently patriotic, but that he is bent on doing grievous harm to our country. For those who accept McCain and Palin’s insinuations, to block Obama’s assumption of power by any means - including violence - is a patriotic duty. “Country First”, remember. McCain puts his personal anger, and his disdain for Obama, on public display. The crowds he gathers follow McCain’s example.

Economic Collapse
But McCain supporters aren’t the only angry Americans right now. Not by a long shot. Anybody who has a house, or a life-savings, has recently been robbed of half their net worth. On top of that, they’ve been bilked for a Wall Street bailout. People everywhere are pissed.

Our economy is on life-support. If we don’t know who’s going to be our President by, say, three days after the election, the patient will go into cardiac arrest. No one can say how much anger would arise at such a catastrophe. But Rightwing pundits like Rush Limbaugh are already telling us who to blame: black people.

Escalating Fire-storm
Blame black people, like those sub-prime mortgage deadbeats whom Democrats supposedly forced Fannie Mae to lend to. Blame black people who vote overwhelmingly for Obama. Blame black people, like Colin Powell, who’s endorsement of Obama was “obviously racist”. Blame black people in those southern swing states where the angry conservative whites have lots of practice at whipping up lynch mobs.

In the days after the hung-2000-election, Republican mobs descended on Florida to stop any re-count. Picture those mobs in the alarming context of 2008. How could anybody re-count the vote in the middle of a race riot?

Palin’s wistful ode to “the pro-America parts of this country” made clear her belief that those who oppose conservative values and conservative power are, by definition, anti-American. Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, Savage, and all the other rock-stars of the Right, repeatedly make the same equation: Liberal = Traitor. So it’s not only Obama that’s an enemy. If you’re not a Republican, then YOU are an enemy. So expect the right-wing lynch mobs to treat you, and your vote, accordingly.

And of course, the Left will rise to the bait. As in 2000, and 2004, there will be loads of dirty Republican tricks on Election Day: caging, non-existent voting machines, extremely long lines for Democrats only, and electronic election theft on a massive scale. We won’t sit by while Republican mobs take control of the State Houses and County Seats where our votes are stored and counted. We’ll rise up to defend the integrity of elections, and to defend our President-elect.

In so doing, we will give George Bush the justification he needs to declare Martial Law. He has the sole authority to do so. He has recently stationed battle-hardened troops inside the US for this purpose. And - as a war criminal - he has every incentive. Indeed, if there were mass riots in multiple US cities during a contested election and an economic catastrophe, Bush would be be irresponsible if he did NOT to declare Martial Law. And, given that situation, the military, and law enforcement would back him up.

McCain’s Personal Responsibility
Losing to a handsome rookie is proving hard on the famously ill-tempered and hard-fighting old man McCain. Obama's race seems to make it harder still. So the recent uptick in “enthusiasm” (otherwise known as rage) at McCain rallies must be intoxicating to him. But McCain seems to have no concept of the conflagration that he is courting. He’s playing with fire, in a parched field of tall grass, on a hot day.

A firestorm, once set in motion, feeds itself. It generates its own fanning winds at hurricane force. A firestorm cannot be put out until it has consumed everything burnable within reach.

For the sake of our precious - if never-quite-perfect - freedom, let's make this election a landslide.

DeadElephant.ORG main site

Just CLICK to PRINT these bumperstrips. Instant and FREE!

Copy and paste this HTML into your webpag
<a href="http://www.deadelephant.org" title="DeadElephant.ORG web badge"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3077/2758725425_37cc0af8ab_o.gif" width="240" height="72" alt="web-badge" border="3" /></a>

Saks 5th Ave to introduce new designer clothing line: "Hocky Mom"

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 17:57:00 +0000

psych!

Orgasms for Obama - an only-in-San-Francisco public event

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:08:00 +0000

Cum one. Cum all. It's tonight.

This is for real, people. Here's link to the event.

But be sure to bring your new "Head-O-State" dildo featuring Barack's face on the head.

And warm up before you go with some Sarah Palin porn.

What wonderful world!

A Close Election Could Open the Gates of HELL

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 06:40:00 +0000

Three forces are driving a fast-approaching political fire-storm:

1) a contested election
2) a wide-spread lynch-mob mentality, and
3) economic collapse

If this election is anything less than a landslide for Obama, if it is not decisive – in fact, if the outcome is contestable to any degree – those three forces will become chaos multipliers, each feeding the others in a rapidly escalating fire-storm.

Contested Election
False hysteria over ACORN is part of a broader Republican effort to invalidate, in advance, an election they now realize they are likely to lose. So this election is already being contested. The Republican strategy abruptly shifted the week following the first debate, when polls of the limited number of remaining independents moved sharply towards Obama. Their new goal is to make the upcoming election as contestable as possible, to widen the margin of victory that can be called “a tie”, and to delegitimize Obama.

Lynch-mob Mentality
McCain and Palin stoke the rage - and calls to violence - that we’ve witnessed at Republican rallies, by their relentless focus on the non-issue of Ayers. Let’s be clear: their charge, that Obama “sees America as imperfect enough to pal around with terrorists who would bomb their own country” flatly insinuates that Obama is an enemy to the United States - not that Obama is a poor choice for President, or wrong for America, or even that he is insufficiently patriotic, but that he is bent on doing grievous harm to our country. For those who accept McCain and Palin’s insinuations, to block Obama’s assumption of power by any means - including violence - is a patriotic duty. “Country First”, remember. McCain puts his personal anger, and his disdain for Obama, on public display. The crowds he gathers follow McCain’s example.

Economic Collapse
But McCain supporters aren’t the only angry Americans right now. Not by a long shot. Anybody who has a house, or a life-savings, has recently been robbed of half their net worth. On top of that, they’ve been bilked for a Wall Street bailout. People everywhere are pissed.

Our economy is on life-support. If we don’t know who’s going to be our President by, say, three days after the election, the patient will go into cardiac arrest. No one can say how much anger would arise at such a catastrophe. But Rightwing pundits like Rush Limbaugh are already telling us who to blame: black people.

Escalating Fire-storm
Blame black people, like those sub-prime mortgage deadbeats whom Democrats supposedly forced Fannie Mae to lend to. Blame black people who vote overwhelmingly for Obama. Blame black people, like Colin Powell, who’s endorsement of Obama was “obviously racist”. Blame black people in those southern swing states where the angry conservative whites have lots of practice at whipping up lynch mobs.

In the days after the hung-2000-election, Republican mobs descended on Florida to stop any re-count. Picture those mobs in the alarming context of 2008. How could anybody re-count the vote in the middle of a race riot?

Palin’s wistful ode to “the pro-America parts of this country” made clear her belief that those who oppose conservative values and conservative power are, by definition, anti-American. Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, Savage, and all the other rock-stars of the Right, repeatedly make the same equation: Liberal = Traitor. So it’s not only Obama that’s an enemy. If you’re not a Republican, then YOU are an enemy. So expect the right-wing lynch mobs to treat you, and your vote, accordingly.

And of course, the Left will rise to the bait. As in 2000, and 2004, there will be loads of dirty Republican tricks on Election Day: caging, non-existent voting machines, extremely long lines for Democrats only, and electronic election theft on a massive scale. We won’t sit by while Republican mobs take control of the State Houses and County Seats where our votes are stored and counted. We’ll rise up to defend the integrity of elections, and to defend our President-elect.

In so doing, we will give George Bush the justification he needs to declare Martial Law. He has the sole authority to do so. He has recently stationed battle-hardened troops inside the US for this purpose. And - as a war criminal - he has every incentive. Indeed, if there were mass riots in multiple US cities during a contested election and an economic catastrophe, Bush would be be irresponsible if he did NOT to declare Martial Law. And, given that situation, the military, and law enforcement would back him up.

McCain’s Personal Responsibility
Losing to a handsome rookie is proving hard on the famously ill-tempered and hard-fighting old man McCain. Obama's race seems to make it harder still. So the recent uptick in “enthusiasm” (otherwise known as rage) at McCain rallies must be intoxicating to him. But McCain seems to have no concept of the conflagration that he is courting. He’s playing with fire, in a parched field of tall grass, on a hot day.

A firestorm, once set in motion, feeds itself. It generates its own fanning winds at hurricane force. A firestorm cannot be put out until it has consumed everything burnable within reach.

For the sake of our precious - if never-quite-perfect - freedom, let's make this election a landslide.

DeadElephant.ORG main site

Just CLICK to PRINT these bumperstrips. Instant and FREE!

20 Years of Hateful Talk Radio Finally Comes a Cropper

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 21:37:00 +0000

The blatant hostility and contempt that John McCain displayed for his opponent in all three debates - and the rapid movement away from McCain in the polls afterwords – reveal a sea-change in our political culture. After 20 years of listening to non-stop rage and hate on the radio, it has suddenly become obvious that Republicans can no longer recognize the intensity of their own anger. More significantly, Republicans can no longer gauge how their over-boiling fury is experienced by fellow citizens who have not inured themselves to hate speech. They no longer appreciate that hate is socially inappropriate.

As with a growing addiction to porn or drugs, the effect of listening to milder forms of outrage wear off, and the addict craves ever-stronger doses of hate to "get off". Predictably, eventually, the hate addict becomes inured to all but the most violent rhetoric.

20 years of Rush, and Hannity, and Savage have brought us to the point that when a nut-case at a McCain/Palin rally boils over and bellows "TERRORIST!" or "KILL HIM!", many of the Republicans around that nut-case cheer and chant "USA! USA! USA!" And John McCain himself can't see the connection between claiming that the his opponent "pals around with terrorists", and the lynch-mob mentality that such statements have unleashed.

Just look at his face in this picture from the 3rd debate.

What would be said about Barack Obama if he ever allowed such a look to cross his face?

For decades Democrats and independents have been codependents to our hate-radio-addicted fellow citizens. But in these last weeks before the election our denial has at last broken. Americans are turning away from McCain, and his hate-filled ilk, in revulsion.

DeadElephant.ORG main site

Just CLICK to PRINT these bumperstrips. Instant and FREE!

Palin tries to FLIRT her way to the top!

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 08:50:00 +0000

She winked. She batted her eyes. She licked her teeth. She waggled her head, and then checked to see if we were watching. She opened her eyelids extra wide and then followed the gesture with a goofy little-girl smile, like "ooh... I'm so naughty".

I'm a man. I know when a woman is flirting.

Is Sarah Palin going to get away with this cheap-tart-type behavior? Is there anything that the first woman in 27 years to be nominated for the office could possibly do to be MORE DEMEANING TO WOMEN?! Women have got to come down on Palin HARD. Playing the seductress gives physically attractive women a very limited - and very limiting - power. And it undermines the rightful and legitimate REAL POWER for which women have long struggled.

DeadElephant.ORG main site

Just CLICK to PRINT these bumperstrips. Instant and FREE!

Queen Quota

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 18:31:00 +0000

I thought that conservatives were all about individual responsibility, and rewards for hard work - that each person earns their fate. That's their rational for eliminating social services (anybody remember the "welfare queens"?), eliminating taxes, privatizing Social Security, and - most relevant here - ending Affirmative Action. They argue that Affirmative Action promotes those who are unprepared and undeserving. Clarence Thomas wrote that by "lowering the bar", Affirmative Action denies those who strive for excellence on their own merit the sense of real achievement.

So... is there anybody - and I mean ANYBODY, on either side of the political divide - who would claim that McCain would have put Sarah Palin on the ticket if she were not a woman? Even if we grant that her vast experience "commanding the Alaska National Guard" exceeds Obama's experience, not even the most facile Republican could plausibly claim that Sarah Palin has earned the honor and the opportunity that she's been handed. She met a quota of one. Sarah Palin is the mother of all tokens.

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both walked through fire for our nomination. They survived the longest, hardest, most visible, and most ruthlessly scrutinized primary campaign in history. One woman. One African American. And through that test they earned the esteem of the nation. Palin, by contrast, was hastily picked, was not even vetted properly, and was parachuted into the Republican nomination just 60 days before the American people must decide whether to let her lead us. Apart from her own shortcomings, McCain's shotgun-ticket should be an embarrassment to every conservative.

But, strange to see, they're not embarrassed. They're all gung-ho for "Palin", "Palin", "Palin".

Facts stopped mattering to hard-core Republicans a long time ago. They still believe that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, and that he masterminded 9/11. But with Palin's nomination it is plain that reason and even self-consistency have now been thrown by the way-side. So, Democrats have nominated a black man for President who fought every obstacle, economic and social, to earn that honor. And Republicans have Sarah Palin, the Affirmative Action candidate.

All hail to Queen Quota.

Some liberals miss the sarcasm of DeadElephant.ORG

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 19:55:00 +0000

"...the last thing a TRUE liberal would put on their car is a rethuglican, 'let's just lynch liberals' bumper sticker...You call that a Dem website? I don't buy it... You must think people are as dumb as rocks."

Our response:
First of all, let me say that you are NOT the first person ever to have missed the sarcasm of the DeadElephant.ORG campaign. I get an outraged email or post like yours about once per month. That's more than a trickle, if you think about all those who never bothered to write.

On the other hand, I've been gratified - and surprised - at how infrequently the slogans, and the campaign as a whole, are mis-understood. I say "surprised" because the campaign intentionally walks a very fine line. That's what is meant when it is described as "edgy". Interestingly I've never yet heard from a CONSERVATIVE who missed the point. Conservatives immediately recognize that they're being lampooned, and the comments from them are invariably extremely hostile - which I take to mean we're doing something right. You can read real quotes from outraged conservatives on our home page.

So, why push that edge? Because it works. The campaign was created by a small horde of volunteers: creative writers, and professionals in social media and viral marketing. Our purpose is to expose the actual "Rethuglican" ideology to independent voters who aren't paying close attention to the full implications of what conservative pundits and politicians are seriously advocating. Our budget is essentially zero. That means we depend entirely on viral distribution to get that message out. Specifically, it is the ambiguity of the slogans - the "is that guy REALLY advocating THAT" factor - that makes them so arresting, and so much more likely to be forwarded on to others.

I've had DeadElephant stickers on my car, and frequently worn the shirts in public, since the campaign began two years ago (a couple months prior to the last mid-term elections.) I've also, in my life, displayed many other political bumper-stickers and shirts. I live in ultra-liberal Berkeley, California, and I can tell you that I have never received so many compliments as the DeadElephant slogans draw. People walk up to my car in parking lots to laugh and compliment the slogans. And the shirts draw a positive remark nearly every single day that I have one on!

Now, you specifically called out the slogan "Let's just lynch liberals". Of the roughly 100 slogans in the campaign, that one is both the scariest, and most important, in my opinion. I personally monitor ultra-conservative talk radio daily, and I can tell you that the number of conservative callers and hosts who call liberals "traitors" who are out to "destroy America" and who should be "kicked out of the country" is growing rapidly. This hateful, hyper-entitled, and profoundly anti-democratic attitude represents the major threat to freedom in our century. If you take their attitude to the logical extreme, what they conservatives advocate today is LYNCHING anybody who disagrees with them.

Forget Elizabeth - John Edwards betrayed all of us

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 21:02:00 +0000

I backed John Edwards through to the end of his campaign. When the Right-wing pundits ridiculed his hair, his apparent self-infatuation, his "narcissism", I was outraged.

Now we discover that the Right was right about John - and that even John agrees. That idiotic son-of-a-bitch knew that his effort to become President was doomed, and would cost the world another eight years of neoFacist destruction of democracy, another eight years of environmental destruction, another eight years of holy war for Armageddon.

Poor Elizabeth? She knowingly went along with the game of chicken that John played with all of our lives. To hell with her, and her feelings! And to hell with John and his continuing narcissistic personality disorder: "I've been stripped naked", "You can't hurt me any worse than I've hurt myself". Oh for God's sake, just nail me to fucking cross and worship me.

I can't believe that I backed that little bastard.

We are sooooooo lucky that the Edwards campaign failed. It's as if an asteroid just narrowly missed our planet.

DeadElephant.ORG main site

Copy and paste this HTML into your webpage:
<a href="http://www.deadelephant.org" title="DeadElephant.ORG web badge"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2147/2285533866_630e4b4ba5_o.gif" width="240" height="200" alt="web-badge" /></a>

an earth to inherit

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 02:52:00 +0000

This speech,

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6Sb6RmRMbBY

by a 12-year-old girl to the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, is something I've waited a long time to see: children demanding that us living adults pass down to them a habitable globe in which to have a future. Her articulateness, and forthright insistence upon inter-generational responsibility, opens the door to a movement. And, as we have just seen the end of the first-ever campaign for President by a woman , this girl's achievement, of giving voice before an eminent audience to the rightful demand of her generation, is especially poignant.

You are too smart to understand this code word ...

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Sun, 04 May 2008 21:05:00 +0000

"Elitist"

The use of the term "elitist" is brilliant "dog-whistle politics": It's a diss on intelligent people put in a way that only stupid people get. If you think that being "elite" corresponds to high social and economic class, you didn't hear the whistle. If that were correct, it would be impossible for Hillary to call Barack elitist, and George W. would surely be the paragon of elitism. For such a bright person, you are being really f-cking dense about this!

It has often been remarked about George W. that he is markedly "incurious". That's a euphemism for his determined idiocy - for his refusal to use his considerable intelligence. His incuriosity makes him acceptable to those who are not bright - he's a "good guy to have a beer with" because he won't make the voters feel self-conscious about how stupid they are.

So, what's the true meaning of "elitist"? A person who regards themselves as reasonably bright. If you think you're bright, you will want other bright people to respect your opinions and beliefs as based on facts and sound reasoning. That makes you "elitist".

But if you think that you are NOT bright, you will avoid reasoned discussions that are likely to expose your incapacity. You will not like people who are smarter than you. You will not respect facts over beliefs - science over religious faith. You will dismiss global warming and the age of the earth as theories no better than your own guesses, or what your preacher, or your radio talk-show host tells you. You will be ripe for manipulation, and transparent pandering. You'll know what "elitist" means, and you'll resent the elitist candidate. You'll hear the whistle.

Of course democracy is supposed to be government of, by, and for the people. That means ALL the people, without regard to race, gender, or intelligence. But that doesn't mean that our nation will best be served by unintelligent - or by anti-intelligent - leadership. Whether they can bring themselves to acknowlege it or not, stupid people will be better off if they elect a leader who is as smart as possible - certainly smarter than they are.

If we are ever to put the Bush years behind us, we will have to break the taboo against calling stupidity stupid.

DeadElephant.ORG main site

The "holiday" is NOT just a political gimmick. It's THEFT

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Sun, 04 May 2008 21:01:00 +0000

Basic economics: The price of any commodity, such as gas, is determined by supply relative to demand. The "holiday" does nothing to affect supply, and will INCREASE demand. Gas will suddenly be 18 cents cheaper, and in the spirit of a "holiday", people will buy more gas. The price will immediately rebound. The only thing that will have changed is that the 18 cents will go into the oil company pockets rather than into our treasury.

The "holiday" is NOT just a political gimmick. It is yet another proposal to raid the national treasury for BIG OIL by two corporatist politicians.

Why can't I avert my eyes from this F---ing TRAIN WRECK...?

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Sun, 04 May 2008 20:58:00 +0000

Is it just me...?

For two years I've focused my activism entirely on unhorsing the neoCons. I even wrote on this board about how stupid and insipid the "cat-fighting cliques" of Obamites and Hillarians appeared to anybody who cared about anything larger. But the drama of the cat-fight built and built, and then Hillary said that shit about "I know McCain will bring a lifetime of experience to the White House...", and I became so furious that I lost sight of ...everything.

Who told what lie. Who's staffer played a dirty trick. Who's ex-pastor went off his meds. Intellectually I know there are a hell of a lot of issues that really do matter, that are existential to freedom, and to peace. World survival is at stake. But I can't even remember what those issues are anymore.

My neck is rubber, and I'm transfixed.

Can somebody please remind me of some real issues?

who will then dare...?

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 06:48:00 +0000

Reverend Wright said that it is the black church - not himself - that is under attack. And he's been accused of egotism for suggesting so. But I would go further than he did. The right-wing-controlled media are attacking Wright as the means to silence ALL DISSENT. After Wright is media-lynched, who will then dare to comment in public about our genocide of millions of native Americans, as Wright did yesterday? Who will dare to note that those chemical weapons that Saddam was supposed to have were the chemical weapons that we sold to him, as Wright did? Who will speak up for the native peoples of El Salvador and Nicaragua that we paid to have butchered for us, as Wright did? Who will point out that the very people who sent us to war on lies, and who now question the patriotism of our likely nominee, avoided military service - and he called Cheney out by name - as Wright did?

Superficially, the purpose of a lynching is vengeance. There is one or a few direct victims, but at root lynching is a crime committed against the entire community of which the victim is part. Wright spoke fearlessly of our nation's long, sordid, and continuing history of violent oppression. Is he accurate in all particulars? No. But in the main, Wright is speaking out for the values that you and I most cherish. And he is performing a moral service - one among many. I'd bet he's done more to fight oppression over the course of his life, and more to lift the oppressed, than YOU, dear reader. You and I are just armchair Democrats.

At stake is whether progressives will let the Right dictate what does, and does not, constitute “crazy speech”. Is it politically inconvenient for this to arise now? Maybe. Maybe not. But since when is it pragmatic to sell-out our principals? Now, with a Democrat poised to be President, now is the time for progressives to take the political initiative.

And to defend our own.

DeadElephant.ORG main site

This "sniper fire" thing is Senator Clinton's golden opportunity.

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 05:08:00 +0000

All she has to do is make a speech, and create a "teaching moment" for our nation about the rarely-discussed tensions between two communities: the community of plain-speaking, honest people, and the community of self-aggrandizing liars. Now these groups may not speak about their mutual animosity in polite company. But in the back rooms of the Senate you'll hear the liars damning those "goodie-two-shoes, decent Americans". And around any water-cooler in America you can hear decent people talk about lying politicians like Senator Clinton, ...and Bill Clinton, ...and George Bush, ...and John McCain. It's sad, but so true. And if Americans don't come together and face these differences in our levels of honesty, well, NOTHING WILL CHANGE.

I'm sure Senator Clinton can turn all this terrible press she's received about "sniper fire" right around. She can turn it to her favor, and help to heal our nation besides. All she has to do is make a speech. And how hard could that be? I mean, a speech...? It's just a bunch of words!

Right?

Petition: “Super Delegates: Stop the Damage, Pledge for Obama”.

DeadElephant.ORG main site

This White House is MINE

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:06:00 +0000

George W., Hillary, and McCain, and the Last Gasp of "The Me Generation".

March 17, 2008 by Jeff Goldsmith

Many Democrats feel dismayed, even betrayed at the unwillingness of Hillary Clinton and her supporters to step aside for the good of the party, and to better our chances of beating McCain. Clinton and her supporters, on the other hand, feel dismayed and betrayed by the lack of deference that Obama and his supporters have shown towards what they regard as Clinton's long-and-hard-earned right to lead our party. This intra-party death match is a classic generational succession struggle, akin to countless others through history. The fight is not about gender or race. At stake is a new "Generation Gap", this one coming on the trailing edge of the Baby Boomers.

The boomers are arguably the most idealistic and innovative generation since the founding of our nation. They brought us Civil Rights, Women’s Rights, Sexual Freedom, a revolutionary love for the planet as a whole - the Environmental Movement - and an entire culture of caring. These are profound contributions to the destiny of humanity.

As the boomers aged, America aged. When they were young and horny, America got "free love". When they were seeking their fortune, America got "yuppies" and gentrification. And when they were old and rich, and worried about staying that way, America got "welfare reform", and tax breaks for the wealthy.

Their massive influence upon, and dominance of American life is enabled by a single, simple fact: sheer numbers. Regardless of ideology, Americans born during the Boom share one trait in common - throughout their whole lives there have always been more of them than of their parents, or children. Thus they are in all things self-ratified.

Self-ratification has led to many, many excesses, including violent rioting, mass drug addiction, sex in the streets in some cities, rampant divorce, Rovian politics, and above any and all particulars, a culture suffused in a powerful sense of personal entitlement. They are "The Me Generation”. They’re not embarrassed at this because they feel entitled to their entitlement. Not surprisingly, the central ethic of a self-ratifying generation turns out to be greed. The Me’s turned a nation of citizens into a nation of "consumers".

Their ambitions have been hampered only by their own incessant sibling rivalry: between their Young Republicans, and their Vietnam War protesters. That in-focused hostility has mounted as they have aged. The Me's are fixated on their Me siblings, and are impervious to the claims of other generations.

The oft commented upon “Bush/Clinton dynasty” has an important asymmetry to it that is always brushed over. The two Bush presidents are cross-generational in the most explicit terms possible – George Sr. and George Jr. – whereas (if Hillary is elected) the two Clinton presidents will be intra-generational, again in the most explicit terms possible – husband and wife. There is no better definition of a generation than those examples provide.

So despite ideological differences, Bill, Hillary, George Jr., and John McCain, are generational “siblings” - the “Me Dynasty” – and they pushed the generation of Bush Sr. to the side.

Recall, if you can, the televised debate between George H. Bush, the father, and Bill Clinton – then at his prime at age 46 – in which the candidates were deprived of podiums, and given tall stools on which to sit. Bush, in his stiff, straight, presidential suit was obviously horribly ill at ease. Clinton, in contrast, slouched on his stool like he was at a bar, and frequently rose up deftly and reached out to individuals in the near-at-hand audience. He moved like he owned the place. When Bill was elected, much was made of the ascendency to power of the baby boomers. He was our third youngest president, knew nothing about foreign policy, but he was smart, and sexy, played sax on Saturday Night Live, and had a gift with words.

And if that sounds almost like a description of Barack, it should not surprise us. As Bill was then, Barack Obama is 46 now.

That was 1992. Eight years later, in 2000, when George W., the son, became President, W. was 54; exactly eight years older than Bill was when Bill became President. And eight years after that, in 2008, if Hillary becomes president, she will be 61; exactly 7 years older than W. was when W. became President. In short, the age at which a politician may be elected President has, miraculously, perfectly tracked with the aging of the Me Generation.

Until Obama.

Observing this, we can now more fully understand what Hillary meant by her infamous remarks that “I bring a lifetime of experience to the White House. I know Senator McCain will bring a lifetime of experience to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he made in 2004.”

George W.’s invasion of Iraq - with it’s unutterable rational, “God damit, that’s our oil” - was the penultimate criminal excess of Me-ism. Which is why it is significant that Hillary and McCain both signed on to Bush’s war, with it’s incomprehensible toll of lives, damage to our economy, and lost international good will. And why it is significant that Obama did not. Obama staked his political future to oppose that war - yes, by making “a speech in 2004”.

Hillary comments amount to a summary dismissal the claims of any generation but her own. It appears that she would prefer any Me-Generation President, rather than cede power to Obama.

All of which explains why Hillary’s supporters have sought to demean, rather than to embrace the younger voters whom Obama has brought into the Democratic Party in such large numbers. They deride Obama supporters as “cult” members and “Kool-aid drinkers” who mindlessly follow their “rock-star super-guru” candidate. This critique is particularly rich, coming from the generation which invented the concepts of rock star and super guru. Remember them screaming non-stop all the way through the Beatles’ concerts?

Hillary’s supporters complain that younger voters, who are engaged in the electoral process in numbers never before seen, cannot be relied upon to vote in the fall. So the Me’s have turned on it’s head that old maxim which they coined to justify themselves, and now we must never trust anybody under 30. How convenient. And the only demographic group among which Hillary consistently polls ahead is those over 60.

In contrast, inclusivity, rather than identity, marks the generation that followed the Me’s. Obama’s generation rejected both bigotry and identity politics, and chose instead to “celebrate diversity.” Who cares if we have a black President, or a woman President ? We just want a great President. Part white, part black, Christian with Muslim roots, Obama physically embodies multiculturalism. Inclusivity is also reflected in Obama’s extraordinarily broad base of small donors.

Moreover, the two campaigns are each rallied by directly contrary ideas regarding the proper locus of political action. Hillary promises “I’ll fight for you”, which casts both herself and the citizenry in the singular form: “I” and “you”. For it’s lack of inclusiveness, this stands in marked contrast to Barack’s assurance to us that “Yes we can”.

In Hillary’s refusal to step aside, despite the impossible math, despite the destruction of our party, despite risk to our country, we see again the exemplar of Me-ism. Let’s face it. The Me Generation has never had to concede anything. So they are not likely to cede control of the body politic before their physical bodies give way to decrepitude.

Petition: “Super Delegates: Stop the Damage, Pledge for Obama”.

DeadElephant.ORG main site

Consensus is building FAST ---> Train Hillary has jumped the tracks.

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 21:29:00 +0000

Hillary got such a bump from Ohio that even I took a second look at her: I said, "Man, that woman is a fighter."

Then she encouraged Americans to elect Republican McCain over our Democratic front runner. Her remark was carefully calculated, and she repeated it four times in four venues.

"I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience that he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002."

Here's video of all four repetitions so you can get the feel of this for yourself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMVOT-IH8sg

Many of her most ardent supporters are shocked, and momentarily paralyzed as the enormity of what their candidate has done sinks in. Her tone of disparagement, "...Obama has a speech...", by itself was enough to make the entire Democratic Party blanch. Did her "experience" teach her to behave this way? Certainly she has experience enough to have known that she was crossing the line.

Over the past two days many leading progressive commentators have moved off of the neutrality they've tried to maintain to date: Kieth Olberman, Arianna Huffington, Richard Wolf and Dana Millbank, Randi Rhodes, Ed Schultz, Rachael Maddow, Thom Hartmann, Stephanie Miller have all spoken out on this. Gary Hart wrote a article for the Huffington Post entitled "Breaking the Final Rule": http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-hart/breaking-the-final-rule_b_90420.html Hart's piece was reposted on the very high-traffic DemocraticUnderground forum, a bastion of Clinton supporters, where it recieved more views, comments, and recommendations than any post I've ever seen there. It appears that Hillary has far fewer defenders than she did even just a few hours ago.

Hillary's catastrophic misstep here exemplifies Obama's argument that good judgment matters more than experience.

I know who I want to answer that 3am phone call.

www.DeadElephant.ORG main site

Sign the petition to ask the Super Delegates to rebuke Clinton and publicly pledge to Obama.

"terrorist sympathizers"

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 09:55:00 +0000

Since 9/11 it has become increasingly common on the Right to call us Democrats and liberals "terrorist sympathizers" and "traitors". We've become the "hate America crowd". Talk radio hosts and their callers, pundits on TV, in slug-fest "news" shows, in blogs and online forums, radical "conservatives" now regularly call us the enemy. They mean it literally. And in so doing they break the most fundimental covenent of our nation.

As example, here's a comment I recieved today:

"Typical of the Democrat mentality, prosecute anyone who disagrees with you. Meanwhile, never try to stop foreign terrorist from killing Americans. Oh I forgot, they are the Democrats allies, why would they try to stop them."

My response follows:

When you become so in the thrall of your own worldview that you publicly declare half your fellow Americans to be traitors - presumed to deserve a traitor's fate - you've reduced yourself to the level of a tatooed neo-nazi skin-head, or a Klansman in a bedsheet - in short, an absolute fucking nut case. You serve the function the brownshirts served for Hitler. You bully. And you try terrify us.

But even still, though you are delusional and a sociciopath, I grant that you are an AMERICAN sociopath, and I would never presume to question your patriotism, or your love of OUR country. And I will never stand for you to question mine.

That's the difference between the Left and the Right: You deny our humanity - our right even to be alive.

I want you to know that you're the inspiration of the DeadElephant campaign. We're preaching your message for you. You should take pride of ownership.

"fiscal conservatives...?"

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 19:27:00 +0000

Jesus H CHRIST! Congress has to haggle for weeks over an F---ing "stimulus package" worth a hundred-fifty billion dollars when THE WAR has cost us TRILLIONS! How can people NOT get that there's a relationship between Bush's war for oil, and $100 per barrel oil?! Conservatives talk and talk about letting us keep more of our tax dollars. Well, which would you rather have? Your tax rate under Bill Clinton, and the prices for food, energy, health insurance from back then? Or your tax rate under "W", with all our basic needs priced triple what they were under Clinton? Notice where the money lands in the two scenarios: in the national treasury (our collective wallet), or in the coffers of multi-national corporations - owned by the world's Super-Rich. The stupidity of so-called "fiscal conservatives" astounds me.

There's a 'perfect storm' brewing.

noreply@blogger.com (DeadElephant.ORG) — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:20:00 +0000

We won't be able to ride it out by hiding.

The torture issue is quickly gathering to a head. The evident contradictions between what our leaders have said in the past, and what we now know to be true, can't be sustained more than a few days longer. The growing demand for honest answers will not relent.

The Democratic candidate who "gets out in front" of the issue of torture will earn national respect and win the White House. The candidate who tries to duck and weave will be blown apart when the storm hits. The Republican Party is already tearing. It will be ripped in two, with McCain on one side, and Cheney and the neoCons on the other. McCain's presidential bid is doomed without avid Far Right support. Once he's forced to repeat what he has said in the past - that water-boarding is torture - he won't get that support. And already, he's starting to lose primaries to Huckabee.

But Barack and Hillary are in danger too if they continue to play coy with such an emotionally-charged issue. Torture is an issue that defines our national character beyond any other. Nobody can admire a politician who is so politically cunning that he or she lacks basic moral clarity. This is too simple: Torture is evil.

Want your candidate to win? Then demand that they hold these admitted criminals to account.

Copy and paste this HTML into your webpage: