Subscribe via RSS Feed

Today In Republican Identity Politics

[ 129 ] November 15, 2012 |

Ramblin’, Gamblin’ Bill Bennett:

This was the drumbeat of the Obama campaign. To women they said: Republicans are waging a “war on women,” trying to outlaw abortion and contraception and would take them back to their rights in the 1950s. To minorities they said: Republicans are anti-government services, cold-blooded individualists, and cannot represent minority communities. To middle and low income Americans they said: Republicans are the party of the rich, who will slash taxes for only the richest Americans and cut social safety nets for the poor.

The thing is, with a little strawman-adjustment this is a perfectly accurate summary of the Republican platform and the positions House Republicans have voted for. The official Republican position would pass a constitutional amendment making abortion first degree murder in all 50 states, and would limit access to (although perhaps not ban) contraception. The Ryan budget would savage the safety net and slash taxes for the rich, although they might accept some tax cuts for the non-rich to accept this. (My qualifications, as far as I can tell, don’t respond to anything Democrats actually argued.) So what’s Bennett’s response to this?

Rather than offer a broad sweeping vision for the country, Democrats played identity politics.

Ah yes, “identity politics,” the new “politically correct.” It’s dirty pool for Democrats to accurately describe how Republican policies would affect people. Despite the fact that Bennett has no actual rebuttal — his strategy is to assume that the Republican platform is so unattractive nobody could believe that it’s real — he proceeds to argue that people believe the truth only because they’ve been brainwashed. Sure.

Relatedly, Mitt Romney think it’s dirty politics to actually help people.

[Bennett link via.]

Share with Sociable

Comments (129)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Dollared says:

    Bill Bennett gives me faith in America. I absolutely agree with his characterization. Morevoer, I think 85+ percent of all voters understood those things, and of that 85% who accurately perceived the Republican platform, 60% voted against it, and 40% for it.

    The system works!

    • Malaclypse says:

      Yea, Scott Brown kept running what he thought was a negative ad about Elizabeth Warren’s positions, and every time I saw it, my only thought was that if you phrase those positions using language like a normal person would, I agree with all of them.

      • anonymous says:

        From one Brown ad: “Elizabeth Warren is fiercely partisan!”

        Good. I don’t want another Blue Dog or some feckless type who plays nice with the Rethugs. I want someone with a spine.

  2. M. Bouffant says:

    The non-stop hypocrisy of these bastards is what really gets to me.

  3. howard says:

    of course i’ll be damned if i’m going to give bill bennett a set of eyeballs, but i read your highlighted paragraph and said “is he actually denying any of this is true?”

  4. Fighting Words says:

    Wasn’t there a chapter in “the Book of Virtues” on not being a total a$$hole?

  5. Vance Maverick says:

    “Salvage” is suffering from an extra “l”.

  6. CD says:

    I always vote for the last person who gave me some free condoms.

  7. herr doktor bimler says:

    Rather than offer a broad sweeping vision for the country,
    Where the “broad sweeping” interests of the country are identical, by definition, to the interests of affluent white males.

    Democrats played identity politics.

    This is why affluent white males must cling together in their time of persecution. If only they had a political party to represent them!

    • cpinva says:

      if only.

      If only they had a political party to represent them!

      i’ve been hiding in my lair, since the election, waiting for someone, anyone, to come to my rescue. a “white knight” as it were. i had hoped it might be chris christie, by i fear the entrance would have to be significantly enlarged.

  8. brinx says:

    There are obviously downsides to identity politics but winning elections is not one. When was the last election when Republicans were not the party of the rich?

    • John says:

      Outside the South, at least, the Republicans have more or less always been the party of the rich, a status they inherited from the Whigs.

      • Murc says:

        Outside the South, at least, the Republicans have more or less always been the party of the rich

        Isn’t this only true to the extent that both our major parties have usually served powerful, rich interests?

        If I recall correctly, during their ascendance the Republican Party was in favor of massive internal improvement programs, which Democrats at the time opposed vociferously. They granted land to homesteaders rather than privatizing it and selling it to the highest bidders. Land grant universities were a Republican idea. There was a big wing of the Republican Party that was pretty okay for a very long time.

        Not saying that modern Republicans are attached to this ancient strain. But saying they were “always” the party of the rich is rather inaccurate.

        • laslo says:

          Not the party of the rich? How about the party of the grift? Like the massive public land giveaway and bond guarantees for the railroads all sponsored by the party of Abe.

    • DrDick says:

      Not in my lifetime, and I am 60.

  9. Book says:

    After all the dust has settled, I think we are finally realizing that Romney was just another crazy loon the GOP primary had to offer.

    It’s just that we hadn’t seen his plutocratic variant until now.

    He obviously is doubling down on his 47% comment here, even when his political epitaph is being written.

    • NonyNony says:

      I’ve always assumed that the rabid base of the Republican party was being cynically manipulated by the rich elites in order to get policies favorable to rich Republicans. And that these rich guys knew what they were doing was harmful long term to the country but didn’t care because it was good for them personally in the short and long term.

      I realize now that that’s all wrong – the whole party is nuts and out of touch with how the real world operates.

      • RedSquareBear says:

        I’m not sure which of those options is more scary. Or more depressing.

      • witless chum says:

        Yeah, people are really, really good at rationalizing things like that and even on the left there’s sort of an unconscious persuasion to believe that the rich are smart. So, we tend toward the evil genius narrative.

        But Mitt Romney doesn’t seem like a genius of any kind. I thing being self-aware and thoughtful are probably negatively correlated with wealth.

      • Cheap Wino says:

        What you said was probably true when St. Ron took office. But the Fairness Doctrine was nixed followed closely by Rush Limbaugh’s radio show going national. Twenty-five years later what used to be bullshit for the dupes is now internalized truths for all. Lies eventually have consequences, the GOP is is beginning to feel the effects.

      • Murc says:

        I’ve always assumed that the rabid base of the Republican party was being cynically manipulated by the rich elites in order to get policies favorable to rich Republicans.

        I’ve never understood why people thought that.

        The rich elites in charge of the Republican may not have cared about culture war issues to a great extent, but that means exactly what it says; don’t care means don’t care.

        And if you don’t care about something either way, endorsing, either passively or actively, others positions on it in order to get their support isn’t cynical manipulation; it’s good politics. I have no doubt that many Democratic politicians don’t give a rats ass about many policies I personally care about, but they endorse and vote for them anyway. And I don’t feel cynically manipulated by them.

      • Joshua says:

        I once read an article that summed it up this way: these Republican voters are being screwed, they know they are being screwed, but they are also very spiteful. They have crappy jobs and less opportunities.

        Vote for a Dem and a bunch of Hollywood hippies that just screw and party happy. The Kochs may be a bunch of miserable old rich jerks but the key word is miserable. All the money in the world doesn’t make them happy. Give them what they want and they aren’t happy, but “those other guys” aren’t either.

  10. the salamander hordes says:

    Up here in Canada, some of us salamanders is taking notice that our so called politicians have taken notice that there is zero penalty for outright lies, complete reversals, obstruction of justice, imaginary friends up above, outstanding performances in the name of hypocrisy, fraud, complete lack of interest in democracy.. self indulgent heroism in the field of situational ethics.. adoration of a fracker gawd.. or encouraging The Rapture to giddyup and get here soon

    Our salamander interest is to determine who the leaders are in this new ‘brand’ of slimy politicking, talk radio, and screwing women’s rights.. Are your bigot scumbags learning tricks from our evangelical scumbags,, or are our sanctimonious scumbags learning from your elitist scumbags ?

    We suppose at some point .. those old folk songs. a la ‘land of the free and the home of the brave’ – ‘the true north strong and free’ .. may need updated verses.. You know.. to include our mutual pride in The Tar Sands of Utah and Alberta.. vote suppression/fraud, poverty, fracking chemicals .. pipelines .. highest paid bigots, cluster bombs .. torture.. Chinese investment

    From our close to the ground position (where we hear everything).. its clear that the drones we really need to worry about most.. are the remote controlled ones.. in your House of Reps.. our Parliament .. in the back rooms and cockasses of political parties ‘open for business’.

    Both of our higher education systems – aka Universities – have been selling their virgin asses off to the highest bidder. You think there’s a stink at Penn State..? Chesapeake Energy is fracking the faculty there horizontally. We’ve got a China Studies faculty at University of Calgary giving out degrees in resource sellout ..

    Back at y’all later .. G’day and Good Luck

    • Red_cted says:

      I think what you are saying is that the Harper coalition is Republican by another name, and I think that’s right. Currently there is an obvious effort going on to gerrymander NDP MP Alex Atamanenko out of his riding in southeast BC.

      My question is how, considering the low voter participation in Canada, can the penalty for their fraud be brought to a number greater than zero?

      • Murc says:

        I think what you are saying is that the Harper coalition is Republican by another name, and I think that’s right.

        This isn’t just a hypothesis; the Canadian Tories openly admit that this is true. Harper and other leaders have said point-blank a number of times that the Republican Party is their model, and that their strategy is to stealth into power by pretending to be just acceptable enough to the Canadian public to get elected, and then govern as far right as possible.

        This is part of the reason Stockwell Day was quietly pushed to the side after the right-wing in Canada re-unified. He wasn’t as good at pretending to abide by the political consensus in Canada as others were.

        • the salamander hordes says:

          Stockwell Day committed political suicide by publicly suggesting man walked with the dinosaurs.. and that he had imaginary friends up in heaven.. Canadians are OK with creationism.. but not in politicians..

        • Rhino says:

          Can you cite any of this because I would love to rub it some Harper-fanboy faces…

        • Tybalt says:

          I would point out, though, that unlike in the USA, our own social conservatives are only being used. They get nothing from the Tories and are expected to shut up, like it, and soldier.

          Although I am not a fan of the Harper crew, at least they are not even trying to buy off that crew.

  11. barry says:

    GOOPERs say that there is no right to contraception in the Constitution so it can be banned at both the state and federal level. GOOPER judges say that Griswold was one of the worst decisions of the Warren Court.

    Besides Bill Bennett is fat.

  12. NonyNony says:

    Can I say that I’m liking the framing that the Republican Party is providing on this one? In the past it would have been about Democrats pandering to “strapping young bucks buying T-bone steaks with their welfare dollars” to get votes. Now the Republicans are openly complaining that Democrats want to do stuff for everyone to get votes. Which is kind of how popular governments have operated since the Greeks, so it isn’t something that most people find objectionable.

    Living in their bubble really doesn’t help these guys with messaging. It’s like the campaign advertising I got from a conservative group that was showing the differences between Romney and Obama – Obama was “pro-choice” and “liberal” and “pro-gay marriage” and a whole swath of other things like that. Romney was the opposite on everything. I had to look up the group sending out the advertising to see who they were because they made a pretty damn solid case for Obama in my mind (I was 99.999% sure they were a conservative group because they said Obama was “pro tax” and “pro big government spending” – which is a strawman that Republicans like to paint liberals with that liberals tend not to claim for themselves).

    • thebewilderness says:

      I like the way they framed themselves too. Frank Luntz was not able to figure out a way for Republicans to say that people are not entitled to get what they pay for in such a way that people didn’t recognize that they were being told they were not entitled to get what they paid for.

  13. Rarely Posts says:

    The Republican candidate was caught, on tape, explaining that he was never going to win 47% of voters, expressing his disdain and disrespect for them, and saying that he wasn’t going to worry about them.

    And it’s Democrats who failed to provide a broad, inclusive vision of America? Does this guy’s lips move when he reads?

  14. Kurzleg says:

    Liberals: You thought that you could just hide the Republican platform in plain sight, and no one would notice. You could use “identity politics” trope as an way to make the platform disappear. All you needed was a willing “both sides do it” media! You’d just been on FOX News! You human … paraquat! You figured “oh, the media’s full of suckers”, you know? A bunch of empty-headed nodding fools, people who don’t really give a shit about anything but their paychecks.
    Bennett: Well, aren’t they?
    Liberals: Well, yeah.

  15. R. Porrofatto says:

    Bennett: We must counter the discourse and speak and educate in terms of family, faith, freedom, principle, values, work, country, community, improvement, growth, and equality of opportunity. No longer can the Republican Party be solely the party of business. Who controls the terms of discussion, dialogue, and education controls the country and, therefore, the election.

    In other words, Republicans don’t actually have to do things that might benefit community or equality of opportunity, they just have to control how the these things are discussed, e.g., rich people are job creators, teachers are moocher union thugs. Yeah, that’ll work.

    Also, since when is “middle income” an identity?

    • Vance Maverick says:

      “Control” is hyperbole, obvs, but this remark actually captures a truth. This year, Democrats successfully induced many people to talk about the 47%, and that mattered. And to give Bennett far more credit than he deserves, framing your policies the way you want matters even if you care about them substantively.

  16. Observer says:

    The official Republican position would pass a constitutional amendment making abortion first degree murder in all 50 states, and would limit access to (although perhaps not ban) contraception.

    And the Democrats want unlimited abortion without limits…for convenience…even underage…unlimited times…and funded by taxpayers.

    Where do the moderates go? Those who see a middle ground? One is just as radical and crazy as the other.

    • rea says:

      The moderate position is to be found half-way between the Irish and the Chinese–abortions neither forbidden nor mandatory. Choice, in other words.

    • “One is just as radical and crazy as the other.”

      Um, no it’s not. As rea says, the radical equivalent to making abortion first degree murder would be making them mandatory, at least in some cases. Your framing just gives away the game that you’re not really a moderate, or at least that you’re someone who thinks you have an innate right to control women, but are just generous to carve out some circumstances where they can make their own choice. Until they’ve used up their allotted amount of not having to seek your approval.

    • mds says:

      And the Democrats want unlimited abortion without limits…for convenience…even underage…unlimited times…and funded by taxpayers.

      I hear where you’re coming from on the “unlimited abortion without limits that aren’t limited in any way by limitations.” Perhaps we could reach a compromise position between the Democratic and Republican views? How about: Abortion is readily available with minimal restrictions in the first trimester, but as the pregnancy advances, the restrictions become more stringent? I wouldn’t be delighted at having to abandon abortion on demand, but surely if we adopted the legal framework I outlined, most Republicans wouldn’t have a problem with it.

      • anonymous says:

        Abortion is readily available with minimal restrictions in the first trimester, but as the pregnancy advances, the restrictions become more stringent?

        That’s called Roe v. Wade. And, no, the Rethugs aren’t content with that, because it doesn’t punish the Slutty McSluttersons for being women and being sexual.

      • MosesZD says:

        We have that now, the Republicans aren’t happy. You lose.

        • mds says:

          Joshua ben Joseph raising irony from the dead just so it can be killed again. Do I really have to put sarcasm tags around everything? Wow, it turns out I was describing Roe v. Wade almost exactly! What are the odds?

          The above is my usual canned response to “reasonable” wingnuts who condemn the taxpayer-funded “abortion on demand” status quo, as if the actual status quo weren’t light years away from that, especially in Talibornagain territory.

          • Holden Pattern says:

            I think most people have no idea what the RvW regime actually is because of all of the propaganda.

            I remember explaining the situation to a generally smart and well educated personally-opposed, reluctantly-OK-with-choice-for-others friend, and he was surprised — he thought it was all abortion on demand all the time.

          • rea says:

            Joshua ben Joseph raising irony from the dead just so it can be killed again. Do I really have to put sarcasm tags around everything?

            Poe’s law, I’m afraid.

      • Anonymous says:

        Nothing more blood-curdling than men calmly discussing the compromises they’re willing to make over the territory of women’s bodies. Even if you’re right, dude, you’re so fucking wrong.

    • Sly says:

      Learn to telegraph your punches less. Anyone who characterizes an abortion, no matter the particular circumstances, as a matter of “convenience” is not a moderate. And they damn sure aren’t someone who has had an abortion, or knows someone who has and actually heard them recount the experience.

    • anonymous says:

      Oooh, how radical, letting women decide what’s best for our own bodies, instead of having smart xtian men “limit” what we do with them.

    • anonymous says:

      Also, “even underage” – yep, sure, let’s ruin the lives of teenage girls by making them give birth, so they can either descend into poverty if they keep the baby or suffer grief and depression after giving the baby up.

      As for “convenience,” you sound like yet another misogynist asshole who has no idea what pregnancy does to a woman’s body. Google “Savita Halappanavar,” shitstain – that scenario is a lot more common than you think, and she WANTED to give birth.

      • Observer says:

        How does one reconcile the inherent legal incompetence of minors with the desire to allow them to choose abortion?

        Even a dentist can’t fill a cavity without parental consent of a minor nor can a tanning salon allow a minor to tan, but somehow abortion assumes that minors have competency.

        So, are they legal competents or not?

        Pick one.

        • Lyanna says:

          A cavity doesn’t result in a minor becoming responsible for another human being.

          Either a teen girl is too incompetent to be a mother, in which case she should be not just allowed but encouraged to have an abortion, or she’s perfectly competent, in which case she can make the choice for herself. Pick one.

          • spencer says:

            Funny how that works – a teenage girl isn’t competent to choose to have an abortion, but is totally competent to be a mother!

            Can conservatives get any dumber?

        • Jim says:

          I dunno, maybe with language like this:
          (1) The physician may perform the abortion, without notice to a parent or guardian of a minor if, in the professional judgment of the physician:

          (ii) The minor is mature and capable of giving informed consent to an abortion; or

        • Jim says:

          In addition to which, your argument is flimsy flimsy flimsy, as you reveal below. Minors in fact have the power to consent to multiple treatments. I’m going to use Maryland law, because that’s what I know, but I’m sure many states have similar provisions that allow minors to consent to:
          Treatment for or advice about drug abuse,
          alcoholism,
          venereal disease,
          pregnancy and
          contraception;
          Physical examination and treatment of injuries from an alleged rape or sexual offense or
          to obtain evidence of an alleged rape or sexual offense; and
          to medical treatment if, in the judgment of the attending physician, the life or health of the minor would be affected adversely by delaying treatment to obtain the consent of another individual.

          As a result, in many many circumstances, the minor is presumed to be competent to provide informed consent. You are correct that tanning beds require adult consent, and there are no exceptions to that. The counter to that is that there are almost no reasons why the use of tanning beds would be required for medical purposes.

          The real counter is that, by citing tanning beds, you’ve tipped your hand – the only reason to know about and cite tanning beds, while ignoring the raft of circumstances when minors are capable of consent, is because it’s anti-abortion boilerplate.

    • John says:

      Beyond what everyone else is saying, do Democrats even actually want taxpayer-funded abortions? My sense is that the Hyde Amendment isn’t going anywhere.

      • Holden Pattern says:

        Well I do, for people who can’t afford to pay for them. If they can’t afford an abortion, they sure as shit can’t afford a kid.

        And one is compelled to ask how many abortions a given bomb dropped on Iraqi or Afghan children would cover. I don’t see the fetus-worshippers worrying about taxpayer-funded killing of actual innocent children.

      • witless chum says:

        It’s not in the party platform, which is the standard under dicussion by Nathan Detroit Bennett.

        Personally, I do, but I’m a leftist who votes Democrat as the lesser (and likely to get even lesser-er if Bill Bennett has his way) of two evils. And thinks all medical care should pretty much be taxpayer funded.

        • witless chum says:

          Actually, maybe you could argue it is in the party platform?

          Protecting A Woman’s Right to Choose. The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right. Abortion is an intensely personal decision between a woman, her family, her doctor, and her clergy; there is no place for politicians or government to get in the way. We also recognize that health care and education help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions. We strongly and unequivocally support a woman’s decision to have a child by providing affordable health care and ensuring the availability of and access to programs that help women during pregnancy and after the birth of a child, including caring adoption programs.

          Saying without regard to the ability to pay does sorta suggest that abortions should be taxpayer-funded.

          Here’s the Republicans

          Faithful to the “self-evident” truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion or fund organizations which perform or advocate it and will not fund or subsidize health care which includes abortion coverage. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life. We oppose the non-consensual withholding or withdrawal of care or treatment, including food and water, from people with disabilities, including newborns, as well as the elderly and infirm, just as we oppose active and passive euthanasia and assisted suicide.

          Republican leadership has led the effort to prohibit the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion and permitted States to extend health care coverage to children before birth. We urge Congress to strengthen the Born Alive Infant Protection Act by enacting appropriate civil and criminal penalties on healthcare providers who fail to provide treatment and care to an infant who survives an abortion, including early induction delivery where the death of the infant is intended. We call for legislation to ban sex-selective abortions – gender discrimination in its most lethal form – and to protect from abortion unborn children who are capable of feeling pain; and we applaud U.S. House Republicans for leading the effort to protect the lives of pain-capable unborn children in the District of Columbia. We call for a ban on the use of body parts from aborted fetuses for research. We support and applaud adult stem cell research to develop lifesaving therapies, and we oppose the killing of embryos for their stem cells. We oppose federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.

          We also salute the many States that have passed laws for informed consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health-protective clinic regulation. We seek to protect young girls from exploitation through a parental consent requirement; and we affirm our moral obligation to assist, rather than penalize, women challenged by an unplanned pregnancy. We salute those who provide them with counseling and adoption alternatives and empower them to choose life, and we take comfort in the tremendous increase in adoptions that has followed Republican legislative initiatives.

    • MosesZD says:

      That would be a lie. Which is why it sounds so ‘radical’ and ‘crazy.’

    • sharculese says:

      And the Democrats want unlimited abortion without limits

      That’s not true. I’m staunchly opposed to abortions for people who aren’t pregnant.

      for convenience

      this is stupid. I won’t address it.

      even underage

      well, now you’ve got me. I’m totally on board with the notion that the human reproductive doesn’t recognize arbitrary age limits.

      unlimited times

      In the event that someone had infinity pregnancies, I guess I would be? If one abortion is acceptable, how could it be possible that more aren’t? That doesn’t make sense in the slightest.

      and funded by taxpayers

      Weeeeeeeeeelllllll, in the magical alternate reality where we had a functioning health care system, yeah, but under the current system, I’d settle for paying for them when people need but can’t afford them, the same as we do for any other basic medical procedure, because it turns out that in reality, where normal people live, abortion isn’t voodoo withcraft.

      • Observer says:

        “…the same as we do for any other basic medical procedure…”

        Not true.

        There are many medical procedures that are not paid for with public funds. Cosmetic surgery, dental, procedures that really don’t cure much.

        And abortion is a choice (you remember the choice argument, don’t you?) and is not necessary in almost all cases for the health of the mother.

        So, you can have your viewpoint, but please don’t try to hand us the ol’ line that abortion is just healthcare….cuz it ain’t.

        It’s abortion. It’s the right to choose.

        • Malaclypse says:

          There are many medical procedures that are not paid for with public funds. Cosmetic surgery, dental, procedures that really don’t cure much.

          See? This sort of dumb is JenBob. It takes a special sort of mouthbreather to be that stupid, yet still manage to turn on a computer.

          cuz it ain’t.

          So is the grammar, or lack thereof. The dumbprint matches.

        • Lyanna says:

          The right to choose not to go through an excruciatingly painful and physically transformative physical ordeal. In other words, healthcare.

        • DrDick says:

          please don’t try to hand us the ol’ line that abortion is just healthcare….cuz it ain’t.

          Given the multitude of physical and emotional complications that can arise from pregnancy, yes it is and you are a loon and an idiot.

        • herr doktor bimler says:

          the ol’ line that abortion is just healthcare….cuz it ain’t.

          My medical textbooks trump your vernacular avowals.

        • sharculese says:

          And abortion is a choice (you remember the choice argument, don’t you?) and is not necessary in almost all cases for the health of the mother.

          Uh… hrmmh…?

          Is this like a dadaist take on Karl Rove? Identify your opponent’s strength and then act like a raving loon about it?

          Whatever it is, I’m super creeped out and not at all impressed by your passive-aggressive gibberish! So… sorry, pretend moderate duder.

    • Dan says:

      So it’s radical to not want underage pregnancies? Weird.

    • CD says:

      Yep, an Abortionplex in every mall. Coupons. Promotions. Loyal customer programs. That’s the program.

    • spencer says:

      Stupid, or trolling?

  17. Sly says:

    Shorter Every Conservative for the Past Week: Lying to the various constituent groups of your coalition about your vision for the country for 50 years in order to bamboozle them into supporting you is perfectly fine. But actually promising to make people’s lives better and being accountable in your pursuit of that effort? Never before has there been such a massive breech of ethics in our politics.

  18. David Mathias says:

    Here is a blog post by Paul Krugman about identity politics, or at least ethnic identity politics compared to class identity politics. It turns out that southern whites are much more anti-Obama than their income would suggest, to the extent that they are a mirror image of ethnic minorities who are more pro-Obama than their income would suggest. Not really surprising, but still interesting.

  19. cpinva says:

    if i understand mr. bennet’s characterization correctly, i’d have to agree with it. and his point would be?

    well, actually, his point would be, those dirty democrats are committing politics, just like we’ve been doing, how dare they!

    maybe i’m just not very bright (a possibility i fully accept), but i’m not having a real problem with this, conceptually.

    • Njorl says:

      I was almost expecting a concession of sorts, like some Republicans are discussing on the topic of immigration. But it’s Bill Bennett, so no. His point seems to be that Republicans need to do a better job distracting people from their true agenda. His “virtues” are too important to abandon or even compromise. Instead, people must be deceived about the nature of these “virtues”.

  20. MosesZD says:

    1. It’s all true.

    2. Considering the ‘Southern (white racist) strategy’ permeates the entire Republican party, they are the last ones to cry ‘identity’ politics, especially when,

    3. Less than 30% of the Southern White Male population voted for Obama compared to the 47% he received in other parts of the country.

  21. DrDick says:

    Accurately portraying Republican policies and their consequences has always been considered the lowest form of political chicanery,

  22. synykyl says:

    For a party that believes acting in your own self interest is the highest moral principle, all this whining about people voting in their own self interest seems a bit hypocritical.

  23. olexicon says:

    Ramblin’ Gamblin’ is a good description but I always call him “Bill Bennett: Degenerate Gambler”

  24. Malaclypse says:

    Question for our gracious hosts: is Observer’s IP address by any chance the same as JenBob’s? Or has the election brought us a shiny new troll, at exactly the moment Jenny vanished?

  25. Joshua says:

    Throughout the election, everybody – including Obama, Mitt, and the ZEGS – made it clear that this election was a clear choice between ideologies. So, basically, Americans made their choice, and now it is identity politics? Convenient.

  26. olexicon says:

    ” Democrats want unlimited abortion without limits”

    I’m sorry but this is saying the same thing twice

    ti that I respond

    “Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others”

  27. zloy says:

    1) To criticize others

    Only when they deserve criticism. This site is devoted to exposing scam writers/companies, after all.
    Twig:

    2) To make unsubstantiated claims

    Not at all. i substantiate my claims as much as possible, and clearly acknowledge when I am voicing suspicions rather than facts.
    Twig:

    3) To trade insults

    I’d rather not, and actually “insult” other posters a lot less than they attempt to insult me. The fact that you take criticism of your language skills as an insult does not mean that it was my intent to insult; it is more evidence of your emotional state than of mine.
    Twig:

    4) To write crap

    Like what, exactly? Is this the kind of lucid and well-thought-out statement you provide your clients with?
    Twig:

    5) To show off that you are the most talented writer in the world.

    Not even close. I have never claimed to be the most talented anything in the world, and am certainly not the most talented writer. I am very good at what I do and I take pride in that, but that isn’t the same thing as arrogance. That’s something a lot of the Kenyan writers that have appeared on this forum seem to have a problem with.
    Twig:

    Do they really help anyone?

    Yes. There are many customers that have thanked me quite openly on this forum and via PM for my information and assistance.
    craftywriter:

    never argue with a fool (pheelyks), he will lower you to his level, and then beat you with experience.

    Ahh, arguing with other people’s words. What a crafty plagiarizing writer, indeed.

    Twig Jun 26, 11, 10:21AM | #15
    Joined: May 10, 11
    Threads: 2
    Posts: 141
    pheelyks:

    Wow. 20. They must all be really pleased at the barely passing grades you are able to earn with those ESL skills.

    Showing off as usual. Did you grade those papers?
    pheelyks:

    That’s something a lot of the Kenyan writers that have appeared on this forum seem to have a problem with.

    Making unsubstantiated claim as usual. Are you always a fool or you simply repeat some mistakes to amuse us? Who told you I am a Kenyan Writer? Your degree of madness is extremely high.

    pheelyks Jun 26, 11, 10:59AM | #16

    Twig:

    Did you grade those papers?

    No. Did you?
    Twig:

    Making unsubstantiated claim as usual

    What unsubstantiated claim? There have been numerous posters on this site claiming to be from Kenya (something the mods occasionally verified using IP information) and insisting that other writers must recognize their superiority, that Kenyans are the kings of the world and we should bow down before them, etc. I do not know whether you’re from Kenya or somewhere else, but your tone is similar to that of these Kenyan writers, if toned down somewhat. The fact that you misinterpreted a fairly simple sentence is still more evidence of your lack of English fluency.

    Twig Jun 26, 11, 11:15AM | #17
    Joined: May 10, 11
    Threads: 2
    Posts: 141
    pheelyks:

    The fact that you misinterpreted a fairly simple sentence is still more evidence of your lack of English fluency.

    Which sentence? You claim they score “passing grades” and yet you have no evidence. Is this not unsubstantiated claim? You are not my professor to question whether I “lack English Fluency”. Also, have I ever indicated anywhere on this forum that I am the “King of the world”?

    3dinfo Jun 29, 11, 12:59AM | #18
    Joined: Jun 23, 11
    Threads: 1
    Posts: 7

    Oh WritersBeware Twig

    pwerer limited not scamming

    pheelyks Jun 29, 11, 07:18AM | #19

    3dinfo:

    pwerer limited not scamming

    With such a lucid, confident, and well-supported statement, who could possibly disagree?

    Oh, yeah…anyone that’s had any real world experience with company. Damn. If only the facts didn’t get in the way of your blithe assertion.

    Twig Jun 30, 11, 02:07PM | #20
    Joined: May 10, 11
    Threads: 2
    Posts: 141
    3dinfo:

    pwerer limited not scamming

    Ha ha ha..

    pheelyks Jun 30, 11, 03:03PM | #21

    Twig:

    3dinfo:
    pwerer limited not scamming

    Ha ha ha..

    You add absolutely nothing of value to this forum. Unless you can change that, please leave.

    Twig Jun 30, 11, 10:11PM | #22
    Joined: May 10, 11
    Threads: 2
    Posts: 141
    pheelyks:

    please leave.

    Keep on dreaming.

    pheelyks Jun 30, 11, 11:00PM | #23

    Twig:

    Keep on dreaming.

    You do realize this doesn’t actually make sense in context, right?

    Twig Edited by: Twig Jul 1, 11, 04:45AM | #24
    Joined: May 10, 11
    Threads: 2
    Posts: 141
    pheelyks:

    ou do realize this doesn’t actually make sense in context, right

    I am sick of your constant attacks. They are seemingly insane. But you know what? You have no right to persist with them since you confessed you are not the Modulator.

    pheelyks Jul 1, 11, 09:19AM | #25

    Twig:

    I am sick of your constant attacks.

    Stop making useless posts here and I’ll stop “attacking.”
    Twig:

    You have no right to persist with them since you confessed you are not the Modulator.

    This sentence is ridiculous on several levels. Anyone has a right to post anything they want here that isn’t in conflict with the TOS. The site also doesn’t have Modulators, to my knowledge. Try looking up words when you don’t know what they mean–there’s no shame n trying to learn a new language, and the sense of accomplishment you’ll have when you’ve actually mastered English will be worth the effort.

    Twig Jul 1, 11, 09:25AM | #26
    Joined: May 10, 11
    Threads: 2
    Posts: 141
    pheelyks:

    This sentence is ridiculous on several levels. Anyone has a right to post anything they want here that isn’t in conflict with the TOS. The site also doesn’t have Modulators, to my knowledge. Try looking up words when you don’t know what they mean–there’s no shame n trying to learn a new language, and the sense of accomplishment you’ll have when you’ve actually mastered English will be worth the effort.

    Shut the hell up, housefly.

    pheelyks Jul 1, 11, 09:34AM | #27

    Twig:

    Shut the hell up, housefly.

    Is housefly a big insult in Kenya?

    WritersBeware Edited by: WritersBeware Jul 1, 11, 10:31AM | #28

    Twig:

    you are not the Modulator

    modulator

    Illudium PU-36 Explosive Space Modulator

    craftywriter Jul 2, 11, 01:50AM | #29
    Joined: Jun 25, 11
    Posts: 3 Pheelyks, what happened here

    MeoKhan Writer Jul 2, 11, 01:01PM | #30
    Joined: Jan 9, 11
    Threads: 5
    Posts: 1,410
    craftywriter:

    First, page 3 is full of posts made by numerous visitors. Secondly, I wonder why you are discussing a different forum here. It has different rules from those of EssayScam. Hope you get my point.

    dunno214 Writer Dec 3, 11, 07:24PM | #31
    Joined: Dec 3, 11
    Posts: 2 I think with every company it depends. The customer’s need to give specific instructions to the writer. I currently write for them and what I have noticed (revisions and sometimes customer’s reassign the writer) is that some are really good and some are really bad. However, they use quite a few ESL writers and that is something that you may need to be careful with. It’s technically ‘hot season’ (meaning that students are submitting orders like crazy). Being someone who only speaks English you would think business would be booming. Yet on the login screen it shows close to 200 orders but once you log in (if you are an English speaker) it gets cut down to like 15. From that I can understand why there are so many negative reviews on this company. But like I said its a two way street. From a writers perspective (who only speaks English) I wouldn’t recommend other any native speakers to work for this company at this point.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.