Also, I am pretty sure the folks at Downton Abbey never spent an episode arguing about earmarks. Republicans, why are we still discussing earmarks? If the American people cared passionately about earmarks, wouldn’t they have elected John McCain?

My personal favorite debate moment on Wednesday night was when the candidates were asked to describe themselves in one word and Newt Gingrich said “cheerful.” Not an adjective you frequently hear when Newt is the topic, but you do appreciate the aspiration, particularly when Mitt Romney went for “resolute.”

Remember Newt Gingrich? Won the South Carolina primary? Now he’s an also-ran, and his latest solution to his dwindling poll numbers has been to buy time for an infomercial in which he sits behind a desk and talks about energy for 30 minutes. Newt has always had a touching faith in the attention span of the average voter.

Over on the other end of the table — exciting breakthrough, that table — was Ron Paul. He, too, has a new TV ad, directed at the youth of America, which begins with a picture of Rick Santorum. “Is this dude serious?” the announcer demands. “Fiscal conservative? Really?”

The ad then goes on to say that Santorum’s votes to raise the debt ceiling were “not groovy.” I am not an absolute expert on the speech patterns of young people, but I am feeling pretty confident that they do not use the word “groovy.”

Still, welcome back, Ron Paul! Good luck with that recount of the Maine caucus vote!

The prime seats at the center of the table went to Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum, one of whom is going to be the nominee for president of the United States.

Take your pick, Republicans. On one hand, the guy who once drove to Canada with the family dog strapped to the roof of the car. On the other, the guy who won his first Congressional race by criticizing his opponent for moving his family to Washington. And then later moved his own family to Washington, but said it didn’t count because the Senate was different from the House.

via Four Dudes and a Table – NYTimes.com.

This striking wealth among politicians goes beyond the GOP. One of these four men will face off against the now wealthy Barack Obama, whose book royalties alone ran to $2.5 million in 2008. Beyond the Oval Office, there’s Congress, whose members have a median net worth of $913,000, compared with $100,000 for the rest of us, according to a recent New York Times report. (Massachusetts’ own John Kerry is one leader of the pack, with a fortune that in 2009 was estimated at $167 million.)

Politicians would like us to believe that all this money doesn’t matter in a deeper sense—that what matters is ideas, skills, and leadership ability. Aside from a little extra business savvy, they’re regular people just like the rest of us: They just happen to have more money.

But is that true? In fact, a number of new studies suggest that, in certain key ways, people with that much money are not like the rest of us at all. As a mounting body of research is showing, wealth can actually change how we think and behave—and not for the better. Rich people have a harder time connecting with others, showing less empathy to the extent of dehumanizing those who are different from them. They are less charitable and generous. They are less likely to help someone in trouble. And they are more likely to defend an unfair status quo. If you think you’d behave differently in their place, meanwhile, you’re probably wrong: These aren’t just inherited traits, but developed ones. Money, in other words, changes who you are.

via Why it matters that our politicians are rich – Boston.com.

Sunshine State News reports:

The conservative group Americans for Prosperity is signing up Florida tea party leaders to serve as regional coordinators, and paying groups $2 per signature to recruit Election Day volunteers.

“It’s an opportunity for tea parties to raise dollars for their organizations by helping AFP with an awareness and membership drive on Tuesday,” said Slade O’Brien, AFP’s Florida director.

Americans for Prosperity is a right-wing group that was founded by the billionaire Koch brothers to help build grassroots support for conservative policies.

The issue of potential election fraud has been a big issue among tea party groups all over the country. Many right-wing activist have decried possible voter fraud and questionable election practices, building hysteria around one particular group of community organizers called ACORN, which they argue helped carry out vast voter fraud in the 2008 election. ACORN is now defunct.

According to Sunshine State News, a former leader of Americans for Prosperity in Florida said that the group’s current plans are not different from the activities carried out by ACORN.

“Incentivizing people with money is no different than what ACORN or other groups are doing,” Apryl Marie Fogel told Sunshine State.

Hysteria over alleged voter fraud led to the state passing an elections law that has been denounced by many groups all over the state.

via Koch-affiliated group to pay tea party leaders to recruit volunteers | The American Independent.

The Republican Party has evolved into a proto-fascist party. Here is the proof:

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism 

From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.

→ Speaks for itself, especially in the wake of 9/11.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights 

The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.

→ Guantanamo Bay; Abu Ghraib; war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause 

The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.

→ Illegal immigrants; Muslims; atheists; abortion doctors; liberals.

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism 

Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.

→ Refusal to cut the defense budget; refusal to criticize Bush’s wars for fear of criticizing the troops as happened in Vietnam.

5. Rampant sexism 

Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.

→ The current birth control debate within the Republican Party.

6. A controlled mass media 

Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.

→ Fox “News”. Most other networks are controlled by corporations who present an idealized view of the “American Dream” and distract us with nonsense like “Jersey Shore” and “The Real Housewives of Whoreville.”

7. Obsession with national security 

Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.

→ Patriot Act; SOPA; PIPA; the TSA.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together 

Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.

→ Rick Santorum is an example of this. It began with Reagan et al in the late 70s. Televangelists (all frauds) have pushed Republican politics for almost 40 years.

9. Power of corporations protected 

Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.

→ Refusal to raise taxes on the wealthy & corporations; politicians owned outright by most corporations.

(source)

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated 

Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.

→Recently, state governments controlled by Republicans have tried to dismantle unions, worker protection laws, etc.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts 

Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.

→ Republicans often attack PBS and the “Hollywood Elites”.

12. Obsession with crime and punishment 

Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.

→ The United States has 5% of the world’s population, and 25% of the world’s prison population. (source)

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption 

Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.

→ One word: lobbyists.

14. Fraudulent elections 

Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.

→ Florida, 2000. Ohio, 2004. There are other examples of state Republicans rigging elections.

Judge Jeffrey White, who was appointed by George W. Bush, ruled that “tradition alone” wasn’t sufficient justification to deprive gays and lesbians of their 14th Amendment right to equal protection of the law. “The obligation of the court is to define the liberty of all, not to mandate our own moral code,” he wrote. “The ‘ancient lineage’ of a classification does not render it legitimate.” The ruling mirrors a 2010 decision that is now before the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals.

via Judge Strikes Down Defense of Marriage Act – He says it’s unconstitutional, orders administration to cease enforcing it.

Former Republican Senator Alan Simpson (R-WY) recently called Rick Santorum “rigid and homophobic” during  an interview with CBS News’ Bob Schieffer. Simpson, no stranger to taking ultra-conservative stances and making controversial comments, castigated the republican presidential contenders for constantly exploiting same-sex marriage and reproductive issues. The crotchety conservative admonished them for doing so and warned that the Republican Party will see its members disappear if it keeps up.

“I am convinced that if you get into these social issues and just stay in there about abortion and homosexuality and even mental health they bring up, somehow they’re going to take us all to Alaska and float us out in the Bering Sea or something,” said Simpson, from the Huffington Post. “We won’t have a prayer.”

via Republican Alan Simpson Calls Rick Santorum “Rigid and Homphobic” (VIDEO) | Addicting Info.

Santorum and Gingrich would slash taxes, but don’t balance that with enough spending cuts. Santorum’s plan would prompt an extra $4.5 trillion in debt by 2021, while Gingrich’s would run up a $7 trillion tab in the same time. While Romney’s initial plan would have kept the debt rising at around its current rate, he recently floated tax cuts that could slash revenues by some $3.5 trillion over the next 10 years, says an expert. Paul, however, would shrink tax revenues to the tune of $5 trillion over the same period, but his $7 trillion in proposed cuts would easily cover that.

via GOP Hopefuls Would Pile on US Debt – …except for Ron Paul’s plan.

Frauds, liars, and crooks. Except for Ron Paul, but he’s also crazy in his way.

The letters, mailed from Portland, Oregon, were signed: “The MIB,” and bore a phony return address. The sender calls for “an end to corporate money and lobbying,” and an end to corporate “personhood.” Lawmakers and their aides have been warned to be on the alert. “So far, none of the letters have contained a hazardous substance,” an FBI special agent says. “We are working with those law enforcement agencies affected to determine if the mailings are related. We take these matters seriously, and will investigate fully.”

via Media, Lawmakers Get ‘Pathogen’ Mail Threats – Powder found in letters threatening Congressmen, Jon Stewart.

I know, I know. You think Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney are running. They are – but only because the people listed in the first paragraph have given them huge sums of money to do so. In a sense, Santorum, Gingrich, Paul and Romney are the fronts. Dore et al. are the real investors.

According to January’s Federal Election Commission report, William Dore and Foster Friess supplied more than three-fourths of the $2.1 million raked in by Rick Santorum’s super PAC in January. Dore, president of the Dore Energy Corp. in Lake Charles, La., gave $1 million; Freiss, a fund manager based in Jackson Hole, Wyo., gave $669,000 (he had given the Santorum super PAC $331,000 last year, bringing Freiss’ total to $1 million).

Sheldon Adelson and his wife, Miriam, provided $10 million of the $11 million that went into Gingrich’s super PAC in January. Adelson is chairman of the Las Vegas Sands Corp. Texas billionaire Harold Simmons donated $500,000.

via The men who own the GOP – 2012 Elections – Salon.com.