Yet another reason why I don't turn to CNN:
What President Obama said:
"Al Qaeda is still bent on carrying out terrorist activity. It is -- don't fool yourselves -- because some people say, 'Well, you know, if we changed our policies with respect to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or if we were more respectful towards the Muslim world, suddenly these organizations would stop threatening us.' That's just not the case.
"It is true that we have to change our behavior in showing the Muslim world greater respect, and changing our language and changing our tone. It is true that we have to work very hard for Israeli-Palestinian peace. But what is also true is that these organizations are willing to kill innocent people because of a twisted, distorted ideology. And we, as democracies and as people who value human life, can't allow those organizations to operate."
What CNN reported President Obama as saying:
"It is true that we have to change our behavior in showing the Muslim world greater respect."
What the fuck is wrong with these people? Are they taking quote-mine lessons from IDiots? Can they maybe take their lips off the Cons' asses long enough to learn what context means?
The hysteria over Obama's supposedly coded submission to the Muslim world is incredible. One gets the sense the Cons would be moaning over what a wuss Obama is if he'd walked up to King Abdullah and punched him in the face (b-b-but he didn't break his nose!!1!!11!!). And now we start to see just why the Con leaders are whipping up the xenophobic Con base - they need the money:
Do these people not understand the need for civility in world affairs? Do they have any idea what statecraft entails? Did their parents ever teach them basic manners?
It was only a matter of time.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee is exploiting the debate over President Obama's gesture/bow/bent over hand shake with King Abdullah to raise money.
In its fund raising pitch, NRSC Executive Director Rob Jesmer writes:
"Symbolism and leadership are critical in matters of world affairs. So it's stunning that just hours after he apologized to a European audience last week, and said America has been "arrogant" and "dismissive," President Obama paid fealty to Saudi King Abdullah by bowing to him at the G-20 Summit in London."
No, no and no.
We can't expect much in the way of worldly-wisdom from a bunch of reactionary, xenophobic and sheltered idiots. I don't know quite where they get off claiming to understand secret Mooslim codes when they can't even figure out that, as far as names for initiatives go, "2M4M" can be - ah, misconstrued:
Alas, they do not know the power of teh Google yet. Hopefully they'll get that sorted out by next century.
“Ah,” you’re thinking, “How tacky. Box Turtle Bulletin is now trolling for three-way hook-ups”.
But no. We haven’t turned into a sex site and actually 2M4M isn’t “two men for men” at all. It’s the name of the new initiative by the National Organization for Marriage: Two Million for Marriage.
Right on the heels of their much-mocked zombie ad sponsoring their Opus Dei buddy, NOM brings us their latest:
In just a few minutes, NOM President Maggie Gallagher and I will hold a press conference in Trenton, NJ, announcing an ambitious new nationwide “2 Million for Marriage” (2M4M) initiative.
C’mon. You’ve got to be kidding.
Surely her PR people are having a laugh at her expense. Can anyone really be in PR and not have at least done a quick google to see if your new acronym is going to engender giggles?
Considering they're still living in the last century, however, I'm not entirely hopeful:
While touring his district yesterday, Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL), the ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, declared that 17 of his House colleagues “are socialists”, according to the Birmingham News:I'll bet it wasn't. There's not just the McCarthy-esque connotations to consider, there's also the fact that a solid majority of Americans would either think 17 socialists in the House is awesome or wouldn't give two shits about it. Red Scare Fail.Roll Call reports, “An e-mail to Bachus’ spokesman about the names of those 17 Members was not returned.”
But he said he is worried that he is being steered too far by the Congress: “Some of the men and women I work with in Congress are socialists.”
Asked to clarify his comments after the breakfast speech at the Trussville Civic Center, Bachus said 17 members of the U.S. House are socialists.
The Cons, however, can't seem to extract themselves from the Cold War era in many respects. They even have their very own J. Edgar Hoover:
Anne Schroeder Mullins has an interesting item on an exchange that reportedly took place at a popular DC steakhouse last night, between Karl Rove and Jason Roe, who'd served as chief of staff to former Rep. Tom Feeney (R-Fla.). In terms of backstory, Rove recently trashed Feeney, blaming him -- and not the state of the GOP under Bush -- for his own defeat.These two are bloody good evidence that we shouldn't let Cons have power ever again. But then, about everything they've been saying or doing lately proves that.
Apparently, when Roe confronted Rove, it got a little heated, and the two eventually had to be separated. According to Mullins account of their discussion:
Roe walked over to the table, "I'm Jason Roe."
Rove: "Oh, the famous Jason Roe."
Roe: "I don't know that I'm famous but I'm Tom Feeney's former chief of staff and I'm offended by your comments on Fox about Tom. You guys wouldn't be in the White House without Tom. And you made these really degrading comments about him that offended a lot of people."
(Sidenote: Tom Feeney was the Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives during the whole Bush/Gore 2000 recount.)
Rove: "Well, I have a file on the things Tom Feeney said about George Bush."
Roe: "That says more about you than me that you kept a file on Tom Feeney. This guy was so restrained in his desire to criticize the President -- even against this staff's advice."
Rove: "I have a file."
Which is creepier: that the Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives in 2000 thinks he -- and not the voters -- made George W. Bush president? Or that Karl Rove keeps files on those who've been critical of George W. Bush?