You Might Be a Republican If....

A nice list that I found on DailyKos. It also has the top 10 stupidest things Bush said. Anyway, here's the list.


You think "proletariat" is a type of cheese.

You've named your kids "Deduction one" and Deduction two"

You've tried to argue that poverty could be abolished if people were just allowed to keep more of their minimum wage.

You've ever referred to someone as "my (insert racial or ethnic minority here) friend"

You've ever tried to prove Jesus was a capitalist and opposed to welfare.

You're a pro-lifer, but support the death penalty.

You think Huey Newton is a cookie.

The only union you support is the Baseball Players, because heck, they're richer than you.

You think you might remember laughing once as a kid.

You once broke loose at a party and removed your neck tie.

You call mall rent-a-cops "jack-booted thugs."

You've ever referred to the moral fiber of something.

You've ever uttered the phrase, "Why don't we just bomb the sons of bitches."

You've ever said, "I can't wait to get into business school."

You've ever called a secretary or waitress "Tootsie."

You answer to "The Man."

You don't think "The Simpsons" is all that funny, but you watch it because that Flanders fellow makes a lot of sense.

You fax the FBI a list of "Commies in my Neighborhood."

You don't let your kids watch Sesame Street because you accuse Bert and Ernie of "sexual deviance."

You use any of these terms to describe your wife: Old ball and chain, little woman, old lady, tax credit...

You scream "Dit-dit-ditto" while making love.

You've argued that art has a "moral foundation set in Western values."

When people say "Marx," you think "Groucho."

You've ever yelled, "Hey hippie, get a haircut."

You think Birkenstock was that radical rock concert in 1969.

You argue that you need 300 handguns, in case a bear ever attacks your home.

Vietnam makes a lot of sense to you.

You point to Hootie and the Blowfish as evidence of the end of racism in America.

You've ever said civil liberties, schmivil schmiberties.

You've ever said "Clean air? Looks clean to me."

You've ever referred to Anita Hill as a "lying bitch" while attending a Bob Packwood fund-raiser.

You spent MLK Day reading "The Bell Curve."

You've ever called education a luxury.

You look down through a glass ceiling and chuckle.

You wonder if donations to the Pentagon are tax-deductable.

You came of age in the '60s and don't remember Bob Dylan.

You own a vehicle with an "Ollie North: American Hero" sticker.

You're afraid of the "liberal media."

You ever based an argument on the phrase, "Well, tradition dictates...."

You've ever called the National Endowment for the Arts a bunch of pornographers.

You think all artists are gay.

You ever told a child that Oscar the Grouch "lives in a trash can because he is lazy and doesn't want to contribute to society."

You've ever urged someone to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, when they don't even have shoes.

You confuse Lenin with Lennon.

SCHIP and GOP stupidity

In writing my part 2b, there was a big chunk I was leaving out when it came to health care, which the NYT article touched upon.

That economic populism extends, for many candidates, to a new emphasis on expanding health coverage. Congressional Democrats who lived through the Clinton administration’s failed effort to create a national health insurance plan, which many believe was a crucial factor in the Democrats’ losses in 1994, have been wary of broad health legislation for years. (And being in the minority, they were unable to do much about it, regardless.) But the class of ’06 is adamant that something major can, and will, be done.

As noted in the NYT article, expanding health care is an economic populist issue. The battle over SCHIP was a prime example of that. Even some Republicans admitted that Bush vetoing the SCHIP expansion and House Republicans helping him sustain the veto was going to hurt the GOP in a major way in 2008.

Other Republicans are concerned about the political cost the debate over SCHIP could have in November 2008. “What will happen is they’ll lose the override. They’ll make cosmetic changes and our guys will cave,” Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.) said Tuesday during an appearance at the National Press Club. “And at what cost? Our guys will get beaten up ... SCHIP is a dumb fight.”

And denying children health insurance just sounds so... cruel.

It was back in 1993, as the Clintons prepared to roll out their new universal healthcare plan, that Bill Kristol wrote a memo to fellow conservatives and Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill warning them that their goal must be to "kill," not amend, the Clinton plan. "Healthcare," Kristol wrote, "is not, in fact, just another Democratic initiative ... . It will revive the reputation of the ... Democrats, as the generous protector of middle-class interests."

That's why bloggers call him William "The Bloody" Kristol. Of course, it'll be the GOP that gets bloodied up when ads like this really start running all over the country, say, in October 2008.



But how effective will those kinds of emotional ads be? Is the public really behind this effort to expand children's health insurance, even if it means paying higher taxes? Why, yes. I did a detailed diary on this very issue back in July, focusing on the New York Times/CBS News poll (.pdf). Check out these numbers to see what Americans really think.

Should government guarantee health insurance for all?

      Yes    No
Now   64%   27%
2000  62%   29%
1996  56%   38%

Would you favor or oppose expanding this program to include ALL uninsured children?

      Total  Rep  Dem  Ind
Favor    84   72   93   82
Oppose   11   21    5   11
DK/NA     5    7    2    7


Yes, even 72% of Republicans favor expanding SCHIP. But the nail in the coffin is the final question that completely destroys the GOP's talking point about higher taxes, which is absolutely fundamental to their core ideology. Of the 84% of Americans that said they'd favor expanding the SCHIP program, they asked this question on taxes.

What if that meant you would have to pay more in taxes? Then, would you favor or oppose expanding the government program to include all uninsured children?

      Total  Rep  Dem  Ind
Favor    80   79   82   80
Oppose   15   17   14   15
DK/NA     5    4    4    5

80% of 84% is 67.2%. So over two-thirds of all Americans would favor personally paying more taxes in order to insure the uninsured children in this country. There was basically no difference in the partisan breakdowns for this question. (This is also assuming exactly 0% of that 11% that would oppose expanding the program in the first place, and that 5% who weren't sure, would want their own taxes raised to pay for it; otherwise the 67.2% would be even higher.)

Now, that poll was from July. And it's only one poll. Any given poll can be an outlier. Well, in October, the Washington Post/ABC News poll basically verified everything in the NYT/CBS News poll.

Bush and the Republicans may also be headed for a political setback from the fight over the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), even if Congress does not override Bush's threatened veto.

More than seven in 10 in the poll support the planned $35 billion spending increase, and 25 percent are opposed. About half of all Americans "strongly" support the increased spending; 17 percent are firmly against the additional funds. Eighty-one percent of Democrats, 69 percent of independents and 61 percent of Republicans are in favor.

Scroll down to Question #9 for the SCHIP question. The respondent was informed that the expansion would be paid for via an increase in cigarette taxes. Given that information, along with quick pro and con statements, a whopping 72% of Americans supported the SCHIP expansion that Bush vetoed last month, including a supermajority of 61% of Republicans.

Enough House Republicans stuck with Bush in helping him sustain the veto, even though 44 Republicans did cross the aisle to join Democrats on the veto override vote. For that, they should suffer the consequences at the ballot box in a major way next November. We're just gonna have to help remind voters of this, over and over again. :-)

One less Rrrrrrrrr

The Dallas Morning News is reporting a state legislator is leaving the GOP and becoming a Democrat, the first time in quite a while in Texas.

State Rep. Kirk England, R-Grand Prairie, has scheduled a news conference at 10 a.m. Thursday to announce that he's switching to the Democratic Party.

"In December of 2005, when I filed to run for office, I made a promise to the hardworking families in our community to fight for our public schools, fight for affordable health care and to fight for them on pocketbook issues," Mr. England said in a statement. "After one session in the House, I found that the Republican leadership in Austin had no tolerance for the values and priorities of the folks I represent. That is why... I will announce my intention to seek re-election to the Texas House as a Democrat."

By late Wednesday afternoon, Democrats were already welcoming him to the party.

"Kirk will bring a different perspective," said state Sen. Royce West, D-Dallas. "... He's trying to represent the views of his district."

The news of Mr. England's departure stunned Republican leaders.

Dallas County Republican Party Chairman Kenn George said Wednesday that Mr. England's move caught him by surprise.

"I hadn't heard about it at all," he said. "Needless to say, I'm disappointed."

....

Mr. England becomes the first Republican lawmaker in recent memory to become a Democrat. And his departure illustrates the changing political face of urban Texas counties where demographic shifts are creating opportunities for Democrats.

And though Mr. England's defection only mildly dents the Republican majority in the Texas House – it's currently 81-69 GOP – it signals that the Democratic strategy of targeting swing districts with vulnerable Republican incumbents is working.

"In the south, all the shifts have been in the other direction, said Southern Methodist University political scientist Matthew Wilson. "Ten or 15 years ago, Democrats were switching to the Republican Party and now there's a move back to parity or beyond parity.

"We're not going to see in the near future Democratic dominance like Republican dominance in the last 10 years, but certainly Democrats are becoming a lot more competitive in urban Texas areas. These are the building blocks of statewide competitiveness down the road."

Just this past year, we've seen several legislators switch to the Democratic Party in Kansas, Missouri, and Kentucky, and now Texas. More and more of the moderate Republicans are rejecting the Religious Right's agenda of forcing creationism down our throats in science classes, while neglecting people struggling to make ends meet.

Also, note that the current GOP advantage in the Texas state house is 81-69, soon to be 80-70 come tomorrow. After the Republicans won control of the state legislature in 2002 for the first time in 130 years, thanks to Tom DeLay's TRMPAC, they had a 88-62 advantage.

Burnt Orange Report has more on the significance of this switch. Welcome, Mr. England. :-)


Reminder: Today is Talk Like a Pirate Day.

Republican Culture of Corruption

Does it seem like there's a new scandal involving the GOP just about every week? Maybe because... there is! Here's a video compilation of just SOME of the scandals that have surfaced in just 2007 alone.



Check out the posting that inspired this video. It's got even more scandals that couldn't fit in the video.

And they even left out all the stuff involving the GSA's Lurita Doan violating the Hatch Act and the bizarre murder-suicide of a key GOP operative in Florida, which may have involved a gay escort business and yet another murder in Pennsylvania. No, I'm not kidding.

More Republican Contradiction

It seems like these guys can't catch a break. Just recently, David Vitter (who championed family values) turned out to be one of the clients of the DC Madame. It was revealed today that republican Larry Craig of Idaho, known for voting party-line on gay rights issues (aka, against them) plead guilty to a homosexual solicitation in a Minneapolis airport restroom.

Click here to read more.

When will the contradictions end? While I respectfully disagree with politicians who fight elections over "family values" and the like because I can tell they really believe it is best for the country, I have a huge problem with those who contradict themselves on such issues. It is one thing to be a "sneaky politician" and accept bribes or something along those lines (and that is wrong too, of course), but quite another to fight against an entire group of the population even if you are part of that group of the population. For shame.

Is Liberalism on the Upswing?

The Economist has some excellent commentary on the state of the battle of ideas in America. Here are some highlights:

"The issues that people care about are also tipping the Democrats' way. A Pew Research poll in March discovered growing worry about income inequality combined with growing support for the social safety net. The proportion of Americans who believe that “the government should help the needy even if it means greater debt” has risen from 41% in 1994, at the height of the Republican revolution, to 54% today. The poll also revealed a decline in support for the things that drove the Republican resurgence in the mid-1990s, such as traditional moral values."

" The proportion of 18-25-year-olds who identify with the Republican Party has declined from 55% in 1991 to 35% in 2006, according to Pew."

" The damage is not limited to the Bush administration: a Rasmussen poll on July 25th-26th found that Mrs Clinton outscores Mr Giuliani as the candidate voters trust most on national security. "

BUT...

"The Democrats' good fortune is much more the result of a Republican collapse than a Democratic revival. The March Pew poll shows that the proportion of people who express a positive view of the Democratic Party has actually declined by six points since January 2001."

"The Democratic-controlled Congress is even more unpopular than the Bush White House, with the lowest approval rating in 35 years."