Tuesday, October 14, 2014

Dissecting Mitch McConnell and Alison Grimes Debate via Michael LaRosa



 

Because I wanted to shout at the computer screen while reading Michael LaRosa's article, titled Grimes doubles down on the "Obama" question, dated 10/14/14, same as I do at the television screen if I accidentally forget how much I dislike Chris Matthews and turn to MSNBC while he's on, I decided to have a little fun with it here. And since McConnell (who will never get a title from me again until he starts using President in front of Obama) doesn't respond to my letters anymore, giving me a chance to do my line-by-line dissections, this will have to satisfy my sick need to parse and snark. LaRosa's words will be in black and mine will be in green.

 

Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes doubled down on her refusal to say who she voted for in 2008 and 2012 for President, citing her role as the chief elections officer in the state and privacy at the ballot box as her reason. Thanks for reminding everyone that her job as Secretary of State does make her refusal to answer relevant. Although I think it was a ridiculous question to ask, I was disappointed in her response. I wished she had said, "I care about my country, my world, people, and survival so of course I wouldn't vote for McCain or Romney, whose party has consistently proven they will destroy everything that is dear to every living being on the planet." But, you remind me to see this from her position as Secretary of State and that eases my disappointment a bit.

 

"This is a matter of principle," Grimes said. "Our Constitution grants, here in Kentucky, the constitutional right for privacy at the ballot box for a secret ballot." She is correct. And, regardless of my disappointment in her answer, she still gets my vote. However, I believe that protection is meant to assist people who might lose a job or be harmed in some way by exposing their vote. If she is asking to represent me, and vote for me on things that matter greatly in my life, I think I deserve to know how she votes. (I would never vote for anyone I was ashamed to admit I had voted for.)

 

"You have the right, Senator McConnell has that right, every Kentuckian has that right," Grimes continued. "As Secretary of State, the chief election official, I'm tasked with overseeing and enforcing all of our election laws." Just realized LaRosa still uses two spaces between sentences. I didn't know anyone did that anymore. I wish everyone did. Okay, my emotions have swung a little closer to agreeing with Secretary Grimes.

 

Grimes tried (tried? I think she was successful.) to paint herself as a senator of the future versus a senator of the past, casting Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell as the master of partisan gridlock who has lost his effectiveness in Washington. Grimes doesn't get a title but McConnell does? Grimes didn't cast McConnell in that role; he did that all by himself. So, she 'tried' to do what she has effectively done, and 'cast' him in the position that he has bragged about being in? Biased much, LaRosa?

 

Sen. McConnell accused Grimes of trying to deceive the people of Kentucky about who she is. Again, McConnell gets a title but Grimes doesn't.

 

"My opponent has spent most of her time trying to deceive Kentuckians about her own views," he said. Where's the McConnell 'tried' to 'cast' Grimes as being as deceptive as he is?

 

When Grimes was asked about the difference between a "Clinton Democrat" and an "Obama Democrat", Grimes explained that it was about growing and expanding the middle class… which drew a sharp response from McConnell. Darn. You didn't need those erroneous periods. We already knew your target audience was right-winged.

 

"There's not a dimes worth of difference between a Clinton Democrat and an Obama Democrat," he said. Just like McConnell to skirt depth and go with money, even if it's only a dime.

 

McConnell (Finally, he is on the same level, as far as titles are concerned.) answered, without hesitation, that he had supported Trey Grayson over Rand Paul in the 2010 Kentucky Republican Senate Primary. (Same as Grimes stated, without hesitation, that she supported Hillary Clinton in the primary?) He was also asked about the difference between a Tea Party Republican and an establishment Republican. McConnell acknowledging [sic] that the Tea Party movement was spawned from a popular uprising motivated by the tax and spend policies of the Obama administration,[which is total bushit because they were around before President Obama was elected] producing enthusiasm in the Republican Party
(read: racists and haters). McConnell also said that intra-party contests have led to a stronger Republican Party in the general election. (Please, don't remind me that I had to root for McConnell for a few months.)



"I had a primary myself this season," he said. "I don't own this seat, I have to earn it." He hasn't earned the seat but he has earned the ugly, nasty, horrid legacy that his children and grandchildren will have to live with.

 

When the subject turned to health care, McConnell said the Affordable Care Act is the worst piece of legislation passed in over half a century and that "the best interest of the country would be achieved by pulling out Obamacare root and branch." There you go. The feeble fossil is clueless.

 

The moderator pressed the Senate Republican leader on whether he would like to see Kentucky's statewide exchange called KY-Connect, (It's actually called Kynect.) "Well it's fine, yeah, I think it's fine to have a website," he conceded. Worse than clueless – deceptive.

 

"Well, it also insured over 580,00 people," the moderator responded. The comma is where it belongs. There should be another zero on the end. 580,000.

 

Grimes said there is work to do to improve the Affordable Care Act but doesn't want to rip insurance out the hands of people who now have access to it.Thank you, Alison Grimes!

 

"Governor Beshear has demonstrated great courage, and over half a million Kentuckian's lives are better because of the expansion of Medicaid and KY-Connect," Grimes said.

p.s. If anyone were to ask Chris Matthews who he voted for in 2008 and 2012, I'm sure the answer would be that he wrote in Ronald Reagan.

 

Watch the debate here

Saturday, October 11, 2014

First-name Basis Now, Senator McConnell?

Dear McConnell:

I've noticed in your television commercials that the stupid female doctor with the diabetic son and absolutely no idea what the ACA means, and your black female friend
(Three birds with one stone? Way to go Team Mitch.) whose husband obviously didn't have a right to take his son to his home country both call you Mitch. Never, in my wildest nightmares, did I think that when you make your last minute photo-op tour, hoping we'll be fooled into thinking maybe you do care a teeny tiny bit about Kentucky and the people in it, you would welcome us to call you by your first name. Yet, not only are you standing in front of placards that contain the word friend (nice use of subliminal staging although a bit too overt and over-the-top to be anything more than silly and desperate), people who would generally be more respectful are calling you Mitch.

Does that mean the two women who made the ads for your campaign are close, personal friends of yours? If so, that would make most people decide that they aren't exactly objective, or that they might say whatever you want them to say for political reasons. Or, are you trying to give the appearance of being an approachable guy?

Not going to happen.

Ever.

If you look back over this collection of correspondence and the many comments I leave on your Facebook page (at your urging, which is also verified on this blog) you'll see that, even though I have no respect for you, I usually address you as Senator McConnell, out of respect for the office you hold. I have, at times, called you Ofkock and Ofturdblossom, hoping it would prompt people to give The Handmaid's Tale a second look. I cringe every time I see people call you turtle or Miss McConnell because I wish people would stick to your actions instead of your appearance or sexual orientation.

These Mitch ads sorta made my head spin. I considered addressing this to Dear Mitch but remembered the many times that you and your allies, hand-puppets, and assorted uneducated fans refer to our President by his last name only and decided to go with Dear McConnell. On second thought, I deleted the dear.

Knauer

Thursday, October 2, 2014

Mitch McConnell In a Nutshell

If you haven't read Get Mitch, by Jason Zengerte, it's too good to miss. Please read and share.

Mitch McConnell's Promises In the Dark (note: I do not like that the author lumped all politicians into the liars category but do agree with him that Senator McConnell--as well as most in his party--is a liar and not good for Kentucky.)

If you are working to defeat Mitch McConnell in November, and would like to mix with others who are doing the same to share information and links, keep the momentum going, etc., join No More Life With Mitch McConnell (closed group) on Facebook.

Donate to the Alison Grimes campaign here.

Want to watch what Senator McConnell shares on Facebook, clear up the misinformation, see how desperately his fans need education? Follow his FB page here.

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

How Do You Soften the Image of a Stone-cold Liar Like Senator McConnell?






My question, after thirty years of living with him as my senator, was: how do you soften a stone-cold, heartless, liar who should have been a one-term senator? Of course, I was curious enough to read the article. 

Usually, I consider it my civic duty to dissect Senator McConnell’s words for his supporters since they willingly relinquished critical thinking skills years ago. This time, I am gong to dissect Alan Rappeport’s words about Senator McConnell. 


The rhetorical gunfight in Kentucky’s Senate race seems to have been holstered, for the moment.

Nice. Sadly, Alison Grimes set herself up to be the butt of this joke with her ridiculous ad in which she uses a gun to shoot the enthusiasm out of this supporter. It’s very hard to keep the momentum going when I have to apologize for my candidate’s position, or for what I consider a dangerous decision. I hate guns, the NRA, and most people who support them. However, even though this would have been a game changer for me in the primary, she is still the much better choice. So much so that I don’t even have to consider this voting for the lesser of two evils. 


With midterm elections a little more than a month away, Senator Mitch McConnell is going positive.

Not quite true, Mr. Rappeport. Senator McConnell is putting out ads that might appear positive to you. The truth is, they are packed with lies. You would know this if you had checked his record. And there is nothing positive about lies. 


A new one-minute ad features how a grandfatherly Mr. McConnell, the Republican facing the Democratic challenger Alison Lundergan Grimes, helped to retrieve a young girl who had been abducted by her father and taken to Mali.

Picking nits here but this is one kinda-sorta-positive ad. That doesn't qualify going positive in my book. 

Grandfatherly is a strange way to see him. Have you ever tried to Google information about his actual grandchildren? If so, you probably ended up on my blog, and left disappointed. Grounds for Divorce   and On Behalf of My Grandchildren,Senator McConnell, I Share My Pain With You are two of the most popular entries on my McConnell blog and, sadly for those Googling to find out about his family, neither has anything to do with his divorce or grandchildren. If there is anything out there about his daughters or their children, I haven’t seen it. If they have ever stood on the stage to support him, I missed it. If they acknowledge him, it will be a surprise to me. 

There’s a young man in my community who says he was once an officer in a local young Republican group. He was excited to see Senator McConnell on an airplane and approached to introduce himself as an officer of the group. Senator McConnell didn’t bother to look up from his newspaper.
So, anyone who has done their homework knows there is nothing warm and fuzzy or grandfatherly about Senator McConnell. He doesn’t even appear sincere in the photo-ops that are supposed to make him seem like a nice guy.
 

The girl’s mother, Noelle Hunter, said that Mr. McConnell worked with the State Department and the government of Mali to secure her daughter’s safety.


It was his job to do that. Any examples where he helped people when it wasn’t his job? 


“He cared about me and my children when other people didn’t,” Ms. Hunter said, recalling that Mr. McConnell even met them at the airport upon her daughter’s return. “Mitch never stopped fighting for us.”


I’m very happy for Ms. Hunter and her family. This is a wonderful story. But, I don’t believe, and I doubt anyone else believes, that other people didn’t care. The difference might be that Senator McConnell was in a position to pick up a phone and direct others to get this done. I would have done the same in that position as I’m sure most people reading this would have. Alison Grimes will do the same. The fact that a senator did this is not unusual. What matters here is that Senator McConnell has proven, repeatedly, that he cares very little about his constituents, about veterans nationwide, about unemployed and underemployed nationwide, about the middle class nationwide, about poverty nationwide, about education nationwide . . .   


The upbeat ad, which makes no mention of Ms. Grimes, follows a summer of sparring between the candidates on everything from President Obama’s health law to how to hold a gun.


Senator McConnell has made no mention of Secretary Grimes ever. He habitually lets his POTUS envy show by only talks about President Obama, as though he is running against him. He is an embarrassment when he says that Secretary Grimes will be a rubber stamp for President Obama, since President Obama will only be in office two of the six years of her first term, and especially since he was a rubber stamp for George Bush. 


Mr. McConnell’s poll numbers appear to have stabilized in recent weeks, and the Senate minority leader looks ready to show his softer side.


Sure. If you call circling the drain stable. He’s ready to show off, though. I’ll give Mr. Rappeport that much.


Sunday, September 28, 2014

Let's Talk About Legacy, Senator McConnell

Dear Senator McConnell:

Legacy:  something transmitted by or received from an ancestor or predecessor or from the past legacy of the ancient philosophers>

Thirty years is a long enough pattern to become legacy. When looking at your thirty years in office and focusing, as most people will, on the years since 2007 when you became the Minority Leader in the Senate, your legacy should not make you (or your children and grandchildren who will have to live with it) proud. You will be remembered mostly for your vow to make President Obama a one-term President, with no concern for how badly your attempts to do that harmed the residents of Kentucky, the nation, and the world. You will also be remembered for your pork, which you bragged about for years until your party decided it was a terrible, horrible, must-be-stopped-and-criticized-forever activity. Your filibuster record, including the fact that you are the only Senator to filibuster his own bill, will most surely brighten up a few history classes.

Regardless of the something a voter considers important, you have left the majority of us with less than we had before – exactly like the parent who dies and leaves his children with more overdue bills than assets.

We have fewer jobs. People work harder for lower wages, and each dollar buys less than it did when you came into office. Many people lost their homes and their health care, and are unable to feed themselves and their families. When given an opportunity to vote for something that helps, you consistently refuse to help. Even if it were true that the majority were doing better (and that is not true), ignoring the people who are hurting the worst is inexcusable. Inhumane disregard for those in need will be your legacy. I will help keep that legacy alive for you as long as I can and then ask my grandchildren to continue for me.

Unfortunately for you, regardless of party affiliation/registration, most of us would say we have lost rights during your leadership. Your side screams about being persecuted Christians who are no longer able to pray in school and plaster the commandments they can’t remember on every public space so they’ll never forget to ignore them in public. They mourn the fact that their party has not delivered the theocracy they want, that big brother is watching over home-grown terrorist groups/militias, that they might possibly be close to losing the right to be armed and ready to kill in the grocery and daycare. They are fearful that they might be forced to work somewhere that won’t cause them to have black lung, and that a same-sex couple will get married and cause their spouses to abandon them. Both sides are angry about feeling spied on. Failure to protect our rights will be your legacy (Remember
which you introduced but tried to squirrel away from?).

You are in a no-win legacy position, Senator. Your destruction makes you a loser from my proud liberal perspective. The fact that you didn’t destroy this country quite enough makes you unpopular on your own side. If I were you, I’d wish I had been a one-term Senator.

You still have a month to change all of this. You could admit the truth, apologize, and resign. I would remember you quite differently and bet others would, too.

If not for yourself, you might want to consider your party. If, by chance, you care about anything other than yourself. In the thirty years that you have been in office, your party has been circling the bowl. Making that last-ditch-effort change might encourage others in your party to do the same before the final flush. (Food for thought doesn’t really work here, but you get the idea.)

This is what a winning legacy looks like: Ted Kennedy   
Sandy

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

Who Donated All That Money to the National Association of Realtors Congressional Fund?

I keep seeing the disgustingly dishonest Mitch McConnell campaign ad in which someone must think there are people ignorant enough to believe that Senator McConnell cares a single bit about the middle class. No one, not even the people who continue to support him, could possibly believe anything that ridiculous but the ad continues to run. Shameful.

Since my gut tied into knots the first time I saw the ad, and my gut has seldom been wrong in my sixty years of living with it, and Senator McConnell didn't appear at the end to say he approved these lies, I decided to look into the group that sponsored the ad: The National Association of Realtors Congressional Fund. Huh?

Per Center for Responsive Politics, this is a super PAC that contributes to both the Democratic and Republican Parties (or Democrat Party if you ask a Republican and Republic Party if you ask me, because I'm just that silly), usually favoring Democrats. So, why, in 2014, are they spending a small fortune on Mitch McConnell? This makes no sense to me. 

The association spent more than $22 million on lobbying last year, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP). Guess that's a project for later, or for someone else (hint hint)
 
They don't disclose their donors because they don't have toThis is all I was able to find on the Center for Responsive (why not responsible?) Politics site.









Turns out they also spent a great deal ($709,000) on a primary race in California , to defend an incumbent Republican (Miller), who decided to run in a different district with less competition, and who sat on the House Financial Services Committee, which oversees real estate and insurance. (Thanks, Citizens United, for making it impossible for regular people like me to have a voice in this housing mess.)

--Gut doing somersaults so I kept looking-- 

*Just heard the dishonest ad for the third time while putting this together. Somersaults and cramps getting worse.

Sunlight Foundation Reporting Group had this to add:












Interesting side note and snark - This organization has a Code of Ethics, which I find totally meaningless.


I end up with more questions and no answers. Where are they going to spend the $6million they have on hand? And, does this mean they want to make sure nothing changes in housing? I sure want to see changes. Big changes.


Me