Cognitive Dissonance

"Democracy! Bah! When I hear that I reach for my feather boa!" - Allen Ginsberg

Posts tagged Massachusetts

68 notes

After Watering Down Financial Reform, Ex-Senator Scott Brown Joins Goldman Sachs’ Lobbying Firm

OMG, I’m just so shocked y’all! </sarcasm>:

During his nearly three years in the U.S. Senate, Scott Brown (R-MA) frequently came to the aid of the financial sector — watering down the Dodd-Frank bill and working to weaken it after its passage — and accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign cash from the industry. Now, the man Forbes Magazine called one of “Wall Street’s Favorite Congressmen” will use those connections as counsel for Nixon Peabody, an international law and lobbying firm.

As for Brown, bqhatevwr. Because now, we have Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. Bless her. May she continue to irk Brown and his cronies.

Filed under Scott Brown Goldman Sachs Politics financial reform economy lobbying Nixon Peabody Massachusetts

80 notes

bullmittartist:

I’m glad I got to catch up on the third debate between Elizabeth Warren and Scott Brown. And if I were on President Obama’s campaign staff, I’d send this to him and recommend he take some notes on Warren’s performance. She massacred Brown resoundingly in this one, while thoroughly maintaining her class.

EDIT: Except concerning Iran and Israel. Every politician seems to repeat the same damn line on that one, no matter what “side” they’re on. Ugh. But other than that, bravo Warren.

This, right here ^^

(Source: commodifiedsouls)

Filed under elizabeth warren scott brown massachusetts masen debate

44 notes

Anonymous asked: OBAMACARE = DEATH OF FREEDOM. Congradulations liberals, you just won the white house for Romney.

Uh-huh.

Check this out: How Romneycare is like Obamacare on taxes

An excerpt:

The problem here for Romney is that his health care law in Massachusetts did the exact same thing as the Roberts-tweaked version of Obamacare will do. The individual mandate Romney installed uses the same tax scheme to penalize free riders as the Affordable Care Act will, charging people who choose to not purchase health insurance a penalty through the tax code. And Romney himself has acknowledged as much — many times.

In 2008, when Romney was running for president for the first time, ABC News host Charlie Gibson asked him during a New Hampshire debate, “Governor, you imposed tax penalties in Massachusetts?” Romney replied, “Yes, we said, look, if people can afford to buy it, either buy the insurance or pay your own way; don’t be free riders.” It was the same debate in which he infamously declared, “I like mandates.”

Mitt Romney laughs his ass off every single time one of you folks insists his health care plan is somehow different.

Seriously.

And there’s the whole thing about Ruth Bader Ginsberg citing Massachusetts’ bill in her opinion, which partially concurred and dissented with the majority:

By requiring most residents to obtain insurance, see Mass. Gen. Laws, ch. 111M, §2 (West 2011), the Commonwealth ensured that insurers would not be left with only the sick as customers. As a result, federal lawmakers observed, Massachusetts succeeded where other States had failed. See Brief for Commonwealth of Massachusetts as Amicus Curiae in No. 11–398, p. 3 (noting that the Commonwealth’s reforms reduced the number of uninsured residents to less than 2%, the lowest rate in the Nation, and cut the amount of uncompensated care by a third); 42 U. S. C. §18091(2)(D) (2006 ed., Supp. IV) (noting the success of Massachusetts’ reforms). In coupling the minimum coverage provision with guaranteed issue and community-rating prescriptions, Congress followed Massachusetts’ lead. [Emphasis added]

Huh. So the Affordable Care Act/Obamacare is nothing like Romneycare until it is like Romneycare. 

Keep whining. It’s hilarious!

Cheers,

Meg

P.S. Drink up, bro.

Filed under Anonymous ask ask box Obamacare politics ACA Affordable Care Act seriously Mitt Romney Romneycare Massachusetts SCOTUS

22 notes

From Jim Hoft on The Gateway Pundit, continuing the pseudo-birther claptrap following Elizabeth Warren. A short explanation:

The New England Historic Genealogical Society quickly put out a statement standing by its research suggesting that Ms. Warren is 1/32 Native American.
The society said that particularly with Native American history, history is often passed down orally, and that full paper evidence and documents were often not kept or are incomplete. The society said its research had found records of &#8220;several family members who noted Cherokee Indian lineage via Elizabeth Warren’s 3rd great-grandmother.&#8221;

Well, Scott Brown is claiming Elizabeth Warren is 1.) not Native American or 2.) only pulls it out to advance her career. As far as career advancement, here&#8217;s an answer: Doesn&#8217;t look like it. 
Kevin Noble Maillard explains it well:

This tactic is straight from the Republican cookbook of fake controversy. First, you need a rarefied elected office typically occupied by a certain breed of privileged men. Both the Presidency and the Senate fit this bill. Second, add a bit of interracial intrigue. It could be Kenyan economists eloping with Midwestern anthropologists, or white frontiersmen pairing with indigenous women. Third, throw in some suspicion about their qualifications and ambitions. Last but not least, demand documentation of ancestry and be dissatisfied upon its receipt. Voila! You have a genuine birther movement.
The Republican approach to race is to feign that it is irrelevant — until it becomes politically advantageous to bring it up. Birthers question Obama&#8217;s state of origin (and implicitly his multiracial heritage) in efforts to disqualify him from the presidency. They characterize him as &#8220;other.&#8221; For Warren, Massachusetts Republicans place doubts on her racial claims to portray her as an opportunistic academic seeking special treatment. In both birther camps, opponents look to ancestral origins as the smoking gun, and ride the ambiguity for the duration.

Hence, the image above. It&#8217;s okay to use racist, photoshopped imagery to mock Elizabeth Warren BECAUSE SHE&#8217;S NOT REALLY AN INDIAN, YOU GUISE!! &lt;/sarcasm&gt;   Jim Wrenn goes further in the name of satire. Really:

Wrenn writes:

In response to polling surges by her opponent (Republican incumbent Scott Brown) in the 2012 race for the Senate in Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren-Tonto, noted Native American, Harvard Faculty Member, and Senate Candidate, said to her Lone Ranger sidekick: &#8220;It looks like they&#8217;ve got us,&#8221; to which her sidekick replied, &#8220;What you mean &#8216;us&#8217; White-Eyes?&#8221; She replied, &#8220;You mean all 1/32nds?&#8221;

Why is this particularly terrible? Wrenn is using the 1/32nd Cherokee blood quantum as justification for racist &#8220;satire&#8221; &#8212; however, Warren has the same blood quantum as Bill John Baker, the principal chief of the Cherokee nation.
The perpetuation of slurs by commentators is the saddest part of all this non-troversy. As writer Navajo said on Native American Netroots:

The right-wing&#8217;s instant response regarding Warren&#8217;s claims of a Native heritage was to make fun of her by slurring Indians with a flurry of insults using stereotypes and calling her &#8220;Pinocchio-hontas,&#8221; &#8220;Faux-hontas,&#8221; &#8220;Chief Full-of-Lies,&#8221; &#8220;Running Joke&#8221; &#8220;Sacaja-whiner&#8221; and &#8220;Spreading Bull.&#8221; A name like Sitting Bull should be treated with respect. Why is this the first thing people think to do when they want to make fun of Indians?
The slurs reminded me of the same sad treatment I received as I was growing up.

When those on the right smear Elizabeth Warren, they smear more people than just Elizabeth Warren. It&#8217;s cheap, it&#8217;s racist, it&#8217;s not satire, and it&#8217;s an old, unoriginal canard from the days of slamming women and minorities for benefiting from affirmative action.
Wait&#8230; It&#8217;s NOT an old canard?
Exactly.

From Jim Hoft on The Gateway Pundit, continuing the pseudo-birther claptrap following Elizabeth Warren. A short explanation:

The New England Historic Genealogical Society quickly put out a statement standing by its research suggesting that Ms. Warren is 1/32 Native American.

The society said that particularly with Native American history, history is often passed down orally, and that full paper evidence and documents were often not kept or are incomplete. The society said its research had found records of “several family members who noted Cherokee Indian lineage via Elizabeth Warren’s 3rd great-grandmother.”

Well, Scott Brown is claiming Elizabeth Warren is 1.) not Native American or 2.) only pulls it out to advance her career. As far as career advancement, here’s an answer: Doesn’t look like it

Kevin Noble Maillard explains it well:

This tactic is straight from the Republican cookbook of fake controversy. First, you need a rarefied elected office typically occupied by a certain breed of privileged men. Both the Presidency and the Senate fit this bill. Second, add a bit of interracial intrigue. It could be Kenyan economists eloping with Midwestern anthropologists, or white frontiersmen pairing with indigenous women. Third, throw in some suspicion about their qualifications and ambitions. Last but not least, demand documentation of ancestry and be dissatisfied upon its receipt. Voila! You have a genuine birther movement.

The Republican approach to race is to feign that it is irrelevant — until it becomes politically advantageous to bring it up. Birthers question Obama’s state of origin (and implicitly his multiracial heritage) in efforts to disqualify him from the presidency. They characterize him as “other.” For Warren, Massachusetts Republicans place doubts on her racial claims to portray her as an opportunistic academic seeking special treatment. In both birther camps, opponents look to ancestral origins as the smoking gun, and ride the ambiguity for the duration.

Hence, the image above. It’s okay to use racist, photoshopped imagery to mock Elizabeth Warren BECAUSE SHE’S NOT REALLY AN INDIAN, YOU GUISE!! </sarcasm>   Jim Wrenn goes further in the name of satire. Really:

Wrenn writes:

In response to polling surges by her opponent (Republican incumbent Scott Brown) in the 2012 race for the Senate in Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren-Tonto, noted Native American, Harvard Faculty Member, and Senate Candidate, said to her Lone Ranger sidekick: “It looks like they’ve got us,” to which her sidekick replied, “What you mean ‘us’ White-Eyes?” She replied, “You mean all 1/32nds?”

Why is this particularly terrible? Wrenn is using the 1/32nd Cherokee blood quantum as justification for racist “satire” — however, Warren has the same blood quantum as Bill John Baker, the principal chief of the Cherokee nation.

The perpetuation of slurs by commentators is the saddest part of all this non-troversy. As writer Navajo said on Native American Netroots:

The right-wing’s instant response regarding Warren’s claims of a Native heritage was to make fun of her by slurring Indians with a flurry of insults using stereotypes and calling her “Pinocchio-hontas,” “Faux-hontas,” “Chief Full-of-Lies,” “Running Joke” “Sacaja-whiner” and “Spreading Bull.” A name like Sitting Bull should be treated with respect. Why is this the first thing people think to do when they want to make fun of Indians?

The slurs reminded me of the same sad treatment I received as I was growing up.

When those on the right smear Elizabeth Warren, they smear more people than just Elizabeth Warren. It’s cheap, it’s racist, it’s not satire, and it’s an old, unoriginal canard from the days of slamming women and minorities for benefiting from affirmative action.

Wait… It’s NOT an old canard?

Exactly.

Filed under Scott Brown Elizabeth Warren Gateway Pundit Jim Hoft Jim Wrenn Native American American Indian racism politics Massachusetts U.S. Senate Election 2012 stereotypes things that aren't satire Cherokee blood quantum

4,221 notes

Rep. Barney Frank is a total BAMF

His latest interview with The New York Times is fantastic. An excerpt:

Interviewer: You’ve long argued for the decriminalization of marijuana. Do you smoke weed?

Barney Frank: No.

Interviewer: Why not?

Barney Frank: Why do you ask a question, then act surprised when I give an answer? Do you think I lie to people?

Interviewer: I thought you might explain why you support decriminalizing it but don’t smoke it. 

Barney Frank: Do you think I’ve ever had an abortion?

(Source: cognitivedissonance)

Filed under Barney Frank Politics abortion Democrat Massachusetts BAMF awesome

40 notes

Warren makes first steps on potential Senate bid

Consumer advocate Elizabeth Warren is taking the first steps toward launching a possible challenge against Republican Scott Brown, the U.S. senator from Massachusetts and a top Democratic target in 2012.

The 62-year-old Harvard law professor began contacting top Massachusetts Democrats on Thursday, including party Chairman John Walsh, about a potential candidacy.

Warren plans to make a decision after Labor Day and will spend the next few weeks talking with voters and party activists, a Democrat close to the national leadership told The Associated Press. 

Oh, please… don’t get my hopes up just to crush them. We need more progressive champions like her.

Filed under Elizabeth Warren politics Senate progressive 2012 Maybe? Scott Brown Massachusetts EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE