I'm with Jon Stewart (and
Gregg) on this one. Have Republicans hit rock bottom? I doubt it. I've been wondering that for a long time, but they keep sinking lower and lower.
This is why insanity is dangerous in a political party. It's not so much that Republican leaders are all insane - although I'll point out that Rick Santorum spoke against this vote - but that they've filled the party with delusional paranoids.
And then they've encouraged that paranoia, for partisan political advantage, on Fox 'News' and other Republican propaganda outlets. The GOP thought to
use those people, but these days, the inmates have taken over the asylum.
Posts
4 comments:
The UN passes a non-binding resolution that recommends giving drowning people a glass of water.
Republican object, claiming "these moochers don't need any more handouts."
The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) has been a wonderful thing for this country. I remember when it was passed - I was working in manufacturing, and other managers thought it was the end of the world. "We'll have to hire blind assemblers, and have a deaf receptionist". The reality was, the only thing it changed was to force companies to make REASONABLE accomodations - things our company was already doing as a matter for course.
This vote was entirely about politics - Republican senators are scared spitless about facing a tea party opponent in the primary. You wouldn't think it would take much courage to stand up and make a largly symbolic gesture for people with disabilities.
I'm not a big Ben Nelson fan, but our other senator, Mike Johanns, is a POS.
I can take the normal, run-of-the-mill crazy, but the evil cowardice of this just sends me up the wall.
I disagree, Jeff. I'm sure Republicans would happily give drowning people buckets of water. :)
Yup. And I remember Johanns jumping on the bandwagon about ACORN, too, since that was such a popular stance among Republicans. He didn't care that the video had been faked, because he's too much of a coward to stand up to the crazies.
But you bring up another point, Gregg. I'd like to see a provision in all legislation where both proponents and opponents would register their intent/concern (and sign their name to it).
Then, after ten years, there'd be an independent evaluation of the legislation. Did it accomplish, or help accomplish, what proponents had claimed it would? Or were the concerns of opponents justified?
Of course, that independent evaluation would have to be sheltered from political manipulation, which wouldn't be easy. But if we did this, maybe we wouldn't keep spending money on such things as 'abstinence-only' sex education, that's been shown to be completely ineffective.
And maybe we'd see that the hysterical claims of right-wing opponents, when it comes to such issues as pollution-control requirements or the ADA, among others, isn't borne out in reality.
Post a Comment