Case studies in wingnuttery- Savage edition

So, I thought I was having a pretty horrific day yesterday until a friend alerted me to this NPR segment that is just breathtaking. Let me explain. On Tuesday, right-wing bigot Michael Savage was inexplicably invited to appear on Talk of the Nation after it was revealed that Savage had been banned from entering the United Kingdom. Yeah, just take a moment to savor the hilarity of this. Savage is in good company since included on this no-entry list were two leaders of a Russian skinhead gang, ex-KKK Grand Wizard Stephen ‘Don’ Black, the Phelps Church and Hamas terrorists. In making this decision, UK Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said the following-

Coming to this country is a privilege. We won’t allow people into this country who are going to propagate the sort of views… that fundamentally go against our values.

Can we give her a medal already? Predictably, Savage’s NPR appearance was absolute mayhem with his rants about those crazy Britons and their bad food and even worse teeth and of course, those intolerant liberals. Coz you know, the real tragedy here isn’t that Savage is a hate-filled bigot who spews racist/homophobic garbage to millions of listeners and actually gets paid a shit ton of money to do it. Yeah, we crazy liberals with our la-la views about tolerance and respect. The best part of the interview comes at 6:44 when a listener calls in and what follows is just….well, spectacular. Here’s a rough transcript-

Caller: Uhh, if you listen to Michael Savage, if every time he says Islam or Muslim, you insert either Jew or Christian, he would be off the air in one day. I’ve had Muslim…

Savage: Wait a minute, I don’t want to listen to this foaming lunatic. I came on the air to give you an opinion, not to listen to someone in pajamas in a mental asylum in Iowa…

(Crosstalk)

Savage: No no, you listen to me, you’re a nobody and I’m not gonna talk to you. Now, Neal, if you’d like to continue the discussion, I’ll do so. Otherwise I have more important things to do than talk to someone in pajamas in an institution in Iowa. 

Neal Conan: Then go do them. 

Savage: Thank you (hangs up). 

Umm, wow? Now, the irony here is that while Savage blathers on about free speech, he reveals his own intolerance of speech that may differ from his, like with the poor caller. But yeah, you aren’t a real conservative unless you’re a total hypocrite. See, what Savage means is that free speech is protected only if it’s his nonsense. Everyone else can just shove it. Now, instead of retreating to the cave he apparently dragged himself out from, Savage is doing what any rational right winger would do- sue Britain, of course. Yeah, that’ll show them! You know, just this once, I would like to see narcissists like Savage expend the energy they commit to feign outrage at alleged indignities like these and actually give a shit about something legitimate, like you know, the war in Iraq or poverty. But this means that Savage would have to display some intellectual honesty and we all know that’s a losing proposition.      

-Indira

Fuck Bill O’Reilly

Seriously, the dude’s a petty and vicious man but his latest drama is just crossing the line. Here’s the story. A few days ago, ThinkProgress (my favorite site, fyi) blogger Amanda Terkel wrote about O’Reilly speaking at a fundraiser for the Alexa Foundation, an organization that benefits rape survivors and raises support for such issues. As Terkel wrote, O’Reilly’s presence at the event was problematic given his endorsement of victim-blaming, most notably on his radio show when he made some vile comments about Jennifer Moore, an 18-year old woman who was raped and murdered. Here’s the beacon of social consciousness on Moore’s tragic death-

Now Moore, Jennifer Moore, 18, on her way to college. She was 5-foot-2, 105 pounds, wearing a miniskirt and a halter top with a bare midriff. Now, again, there you go. So every predator in the world is gonna pick that up at two in the morning.

But, of course, the helpless men! Enraged that his comments had been picked up by various media outlets, he did what any sensible person would do- Send your producer to stalk Terkel for 2 hours, all while harassing her and demanding an apology for “causing pain and suffering to rape victims and their families.” Are you kidding me, O’Reilly? Just so we’re on the same page, you sexually harassed a coworker and pretty much had to settle after it was revealed that your victim recorded many of your explicit conversations. So yeah, as a vic myself, I can safely state that the absolute last person I want to see an event about sexual violence, rape or abuse is a misogynistic asshat like you.

See, when I write/talk about the evil ways of the far- right wing machine, I’m not exaggerating. These people are vicious and their bullying ways have just gotten worse with Obama’s win. Much of it is their way of lashing out, particularly due to the realization that their ideology is deeply unpopular and marginalized around the country. Others like Limbaugh and O’Reilly are just evil people who can only be bothered with demonizing those unlike them. These people deserve no more publicity but I simply can’t help it.

-Indira

The future of the Republican Party…

…is a 13-year old kid named Jonathan Krohn. Krohn, author of “Define Conservatism,” was in the news recently due to his short appearance at the just-concluded Conservative Political Action Conference.

Krohn’s ideological hero, is wait for it…Bill Bennett, who as you may recall had some serious issues with gambling while he was acting as the moral police for the rest of this country.

So, considering that the Republican party usually acts like a petulant bunch of 13 year olds, it is very fitting that they would look upto a 13 year old! And the sad part here is that Republicans thirty years his senior sound exactly like Krohn. What does that tell you?

h/t: crooks and liars

-Indira

Q: Why do women hate El Rushbo?

A: Hmm, maybe it’s because he’s a misogynistic ass.

Seriously. Very few Republican dudes have spent this much time hating on women so I’m speechless at Rush Limbaugh’s convening of a “female summit.” The idea of a summit comes after a new public opinion poll found a huge gender gap in the radio talk show host’s favorability ratings.

46% [of American voters] have a positive perception of him with 43% viewing him negatively. There is a massive gender gap in those numbers, with 56% of men but only 37% of women holding a favorable opinion of him.

My question is, who are these 37% of women and what medication are they on? Limbaugh, however, feigned concern for the ladies.

Be ready at any moment for me to declare the summit officially underway, and we will take calls only from women who want to seriously discuss the proposition of this giant gender gap that I have, and what I could do to close it. In other words: What could I do to attract a higher favorability rating among more women in America? I own the men, and what must I do now to own women? And who better to ask than women?

Now, granted I’m not the target audience for tripe like his but nevertheless, I would humbly suggest the following. Stop calling women ugly and mocking their appearances, referring to rape survivors as “hos” and claiming that we “ask” for sexual harassment and of course, treating us like inanimate objects.

Tune in for next month’s summit- why do minorities hate Rush Limbaugh?

h/t- feministe

-Indira

Bobby, Be Thankful for the Government, Please

Politicians like to tell folksy stories that illustrate a moral or a larger point.  Telling stories about Margie who lost her health insurance in Virginia or, you know, about  Sheriff Lee who discovered that bureaucracy interferes with saving lives, is  a convenient rhetorical device to use when pressed for time, as it can reduce a whole slew of ideas into a neat little package, and cause an emotional reaction to boot. No politician is above this device, and nor should they be.

Bobby Jindal mentioned Sheriff Lee and bureaucracy the other night when responding to Pres Obama’s plan to turn our nation into a Communist regime. (JK.) As salon.com and others have now reported, Jindal’s story was exaggerated.

Who cares if it’s true or not? Okay, well, I care a little bit. But the point is, why the hell does a governor denounce government? And furthermore, why is a partisan for the economic ideology that ruined our economy making a speech promoting said ideology?

Most importantly, why aren’t we talking about how the idea behind his exaggerated story is untrue and harmful?

I’ve got a lot of problems, as you can see.

But nothing gets my goat more than that particular Republican idea, invoked by Jindal the other night, and also notably by Sarah Palin in her one glorious debate, that being anti-government is actually patriotic. Call me crazy, but that makes no sense. Being anti-government is being loyal to a deluded vision of America, the America of the Wild West, vigilantes and rebels.

I too have a “niche” view of America, but it’s not that different from Barack Obama’s or even Bobby Jindal’s view, in that I think this is really a land of some opportunity, a place that is a hodge-podge of cultures tumbling, melting, breaking, punching, and eventually finding some peace together (or at least hoping that we find peace in the future). And you know what? I like to think that the government bureaucracy helped this land become what it is, from immigration laws to civil rights laws. Places like France who choose to be officially color blind still do not have the legal or cultural vocabulary to deal with discrimination; it will be a long time until a person of, say, North African descent is elected to a high office there.

So Bobby Jindal contradicts himself when he decries the evils of bureaucracy while simultaneously praising America as a land of opportunity. Those opportunities might not exist without bureaucracy stepping in somewhere along the line.

SO BE HAPPY THAT WE HAVE A GOVERNMENT!

–Anna

The Grand White Party

Last week, the Republican Party picked former Maryland Lt. Governor Michael Steele as the new GOP Chairman, making him the first black person to fill the role. Admittedly, it was slim pickings. Steele’s major competitor, South Carolina GOP Chairman Katon Dawson belonged to a whites-only club and only resigned after he learned that a local newspaper was planning to reveal his deep association with the country club. Another candidate, former Tennessee GOP Chairman Chip Saltsman, sent a CD titled “Barack the Magic Negro” to his supporters. The song originally appeared on the beacon of intellectual vigor and tolerance otherwise known as The Rush Limbaugh show.

Although Steele certainly seems the most competent of the lot, that’s not saying much. Consider this ringing endorsement of Steele by the WaPo when he ran against Ben Cardin for the U.S. Senate in Maryland-

Despite his efforts to construct an image as an independent-minded newcomer, there is nothing in Mr. Steele’s past — no achievement, no record, no evidence and certainly no command of the issues — to support it. Pressed on energy or the environment, health care or North Korea, he tells reporters that he would get “all the players in the room.” That sounds fine but means nothing; he’s running to be a senator, not a meetings coordinator.

While I doubt that Steele’s race was a primary factor in his win, I can’t help but think that it did matter. Emerging from the 2008 Presidential elections, there was a sense that the GOP was relegated to a Southern regional power. At the party’s convention, less than 2% of delegates were black compared to 24.5% at the Democratic National Convention. Can Steele fix this image problem? To answer that, just take a look at Mel Martinez (R-FL) who served as RNC Chairman from 2006-07. Martinez was picked in order to appeal to the Hispanic vote in the 2008 elections but the strategy didn’t work. Hispanics ended up voting for Democrats 67% to 31%, up from 60% in 2004.

The problem here is that no matter the number of cosmetic changes, the Republican party’s interests have never been aligned with that of minorities. Indeed, on issues like welfare, poverty, taxes, education, immigration and women’s rights, the differences couldn’t be any more stark. It also doesn’t help that Republicans are the first to blame minorities for the country’s ills, whether it be the current financial crisis or decrease in quality of living or better yet, increased abortion rates. While this is not to say that Democrats are particularly great in this regard, they are marginally better. And in politics, sometimes, that’s all that matters.

-Indira