The Trump, Walker, Cultists war against the Ghost of Communism!

My Trump cultist friend in Milwaukee claimed Elizabeth Warren "wasn't just incompetent, the bitch was a F**KING liar." So I texted him and said he was afraid of Elizabeth Warren. He admitted he was afraid...:

"...of communism, yes, of anti-American Socialist policy. That('s) what this election is all about John. CAPITALISM VS socialism."

McCarthyism/Cold War did not end in 1991 for Trump Republicans: PolitiFact rated "manipulator and no-genius" Scott Walker's claim Bernie Sanders was a "communist:"

Blame this on your typical "right-wing knowledge and curiosity" vacuum. But if you're going to repeat something this ridiculous so often, wouldn't you likely check to see if your claim is accurate? PolitiFact:

-Walker offers no hard evidence of his claim, which one expert calls "scare-mongering."

-Sanders' policies line up with democratic socialism — which focuses on democratically achieved expansion of social welfare programs — not communist hallmarks like authoritarian rule, government ownership of all private property or an end to capitalism.

Honeymoon Trip to Soviet Union? Or a mayoral business trip?

It wasn’t exactly a traditional honeymoon, but Sanders and his wife left the day after their wedding to be part of a 12-person delegation for a sister city program between Burlington, Vt. — where Sanders was mayor — and the city of Yaroslavl.

Walker's total lack of self awareness shined through with this tweet, somehow forgetting Trump's love for authoritarian strong men dictators:

Compare that to Trump's authoritarian love affair. Not even close:



Walker's blind spot for dictators might have something to with his own mastery of authoritarian power when he was governor. Walker's angry final comment to a reporters question in the video below is chilling.  It was during a ceremonial signing that gutted the incoming Democratic governors powers. Note: Take a look at Walker's now infamously laughable Venn diagram debacle. He really is a dumb man:



This is also true of democratic socialism...

Russell Muirhead, a professor of political science at Dartmouth College, said:

"Democratic socialists are committed in the first case to persuading citizens of their particular policies and views, and if they can’t persuade, they refuse to try to implement those policies. Democracy comes first. Communists are so sure that they have the whole truth that they’re willing to impose their policies even if they can’t persuade other people, even if it requires a sustained and brutal application of violence. That’s why we associate communism with tyranny."

Trump keeping Dossiers on some reporters and opponents.

While Republicans try to avoid the tag "authoritarian," they keep proving it everyday, like there's some urgency to make it so:

Omarosa Manigault, a communications official in the Trump administration and the reality TV personality who has entered the White House thanks to her close relationship with Donald Trump, allegedly bullied a journalist during an altercation, and said that the Trump administration has “dossiers” on some reporters.

The argument, according to The Washington Post, was a result of accusations that the reporter, American Urban Radio Networks White House correspondent April D. Ryan, was “manipulated” by the Hillary Clinton campaign. According to Ryan, Manigault “stood right in my face like she was going to hit me,” Ryan said. “I said, ‘You better back up.’ . . . She thought I would be bullied. I won’t be.” Post reporter Abby Phillip, who was near the argument, said the law enforcement intervention was requested by Ryan, who felt Manigault’s “behavior was so threatening.”

MUST WATCH: But I've saved the best for last. You won't believe just how obvious this whole authoritarian movement is...get ready to bow down before the great Trump. As the most powerful man in the universe, he has achieved the ultimate revenge against his opponents, according to Manigualt:

Victimized Trump "we won" thugs pushing around Starbucks employees with "Trumpcup" Protest.

The bizarre nationwide in-your-face Starbucks "Trumpcup" protest isn't just petty, but it's another mindless distraction that tells you all you need to know about Trump supporters and the conservative movement in general.

I also recognized this one during the campaign; Republicans wanted Trump to win so they could shove it in our faces. Period. These bad winners are everywhere; from standing on top of school lunch room tables declaring "we won" (my kids school), to calling up their life long friends saying Trump won and that they don't count anymore (that's what happened to me).

Watch the Starbucks "Trumpcup" campaign in action below, instigated by some of the biggest "victimized" as**oles the world will ever see:



Just hearing these Trumpian "victims" demand the names of Starbucks employees and managers like they would be added to some kind of database is frightening enough, but the fact that Trump himself has done nothing to tamp down these attacks is par for the course.

Here's one of the Starbucks "Trumpcup" instigators from Twitter, victimized "Baked Alaska," promoting the maniacal plan that includes posting more breathtakingly stupid videos like the ones above.

Baked Alaska: "They're going to freak out. They can't even write the name Trump on a Starbucks cup. How insane is this? Fascist scum, exactly. What's up fam."

Baked Alaska: "Come on, we have to stand up. The more people that do this, you know the more it normalizes people supporting Trump." 

Gee, I hope we can normalize those people supporting Trump.
    


Baked Alaska got a few things wrong. Trump won the election (we know, we know) but not the popular vote and did not win in a landslide:

Hillary Clinton’s popular vote lead over president-elect Donald Trump has grown to more than 1.67 million votes, and it’s smashing records ... number 3 in all-time presidential popular vote totals in United States history, and her tally is still growing...

"Over half of the population?" That's if everybody old enough in America voted, which has never happened:

Baked Alaska said "They keep trying to call us white supremacists...!" Here's the picture on his Twitter page featuring the Alaskan landscape and...oh, look there's Pepe the Frog....:

Baked Alaska said "they have to write Trump on the cup." Nope:

Starbucks has responded to the protest by clarifying that it doesn't require its partners to write or call out names. "Over the years, writing customer names on cups and calling out their names has been a fun ritual in our stores," a Starbucks spokesperson said. "Rarely has it been abused or taken advantage of. We hope and trust that our customers will continue to honor that tradition."

 And what is it about Starbucks cups anyway? 

This all comes after the controversy that plagued Starbucks last year as it introduced a plain red holiday cup that was markedly different from Christmas cups in the past. Joshua Feuerstein, a former pastor, called the new cups a "war on Christmas" in a video posted to Facebook.

And this goes without saying:

Starbucks’ CEO Howard Schultz was a vocal supporter of Hillary Clinton, but the #TrumpCup campaign against Starbucks is unusual in that it requires Trump supporters to go into the establishment they are protesting—and make a purchase.

Conservatives apparently found their voice in the "Trumpcup" protest, after unsuccessfully stirring up outrage over the green unity cup celebrating diversity:

RNC's Reince Priebus Tantrum, Suspends 1st Amendment's Free Speech & Free Press at Future Debates.

The GOP's mind-numbing tantrum over the CNBC debate that dissented into onstage bickering and wise-asses pot shots has gone nuclear.

Like everything else the Republicans touch and destroy, it's always somebody else's fault. They're already blaming their onstage cat fight criticisms of each other on the moderators, so why not everything else?

Threaten the media's economic interest: Our great defenders of "free speech" and the 1st Amendment are firing a shot over the bow at CNBC,  threatening the networks bottom line if they don't fall in line, back off away from controversy, ask easy questions and don't challenge the candidates. After all, who gave the Fourth Estate the idea the Bill of Rights applied to them...oh, wait it does: "prohibit... infringing on the freedom of the press." Who cares...

...we already know our authoritarian dictatorial party owns that document too:

Change the rules if they make you look bad: How long before Americans have had enough of this almost despotic party behavior? I mean it is pretty obvious.

We just saw this in Wisconsin. As I recently blogged:

All of Scott Walker's legal problems wiped away!!! Coincidence? Think about it for a second:

1. Are we really supposed to believe that Scott Walker wasn't behind the elimination of the John Doe investigations after they nearly jailed him? Coincidence?

2. Are we really supposed to believe that Scott Walker wasn't behind the legalization of campaign coordination with issue advocacy groups after he was caught doing just that, illegally? Coincidence?

3. Did he fail only for the moment to do away with out open records laws for the same reasons he's given for withholding open records requests? Coincidence?

The Democratic candidates didn't seem to have the same problem, but then, they were supposedly lobbed softballs all night by the fawning media. Another often repeated myth. Like I said, why not have opposition debate moderators firing off questions to the candidates that are tough and test their ability to think on their feet?

Change in the Rules Bizarre: Just before the RNC's Reince Priebus made the announcement, the candidates decided to get together. The scariest candidate, Ben Carson, described their ridiculous plan. MSNBC:

Republican Rep. Sanfelippo wants Politically controlled education by party appointment of State Superintendent, and lied about Tony Evers qualifications.

Starting with the Republican Party narrative that Wisconsin schools are bad, isn't it time we stop and ask these snake oil salesmen how the hell we're still in 2nd place nationally on the ACT's? 

And if we're failing so bad under the guidance of (Democratic) State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Evers, why did he just win reelection with 61% of the vote in our deep red state? 

Perhaps you'll want to believe hook-line-and-sinker for this twisted line of BS from Republican Rep. Joe Sanfelippo: 

“For too many years DPI has been able to deflect blame for its failures and rebuff desperately needed reforms by hiding behind the fact that its superintendent is an elected official. The state’s school system needs to be improved and the only way we can do that is by holding DPI more accountable, and with an appointed superintendent, we can do exactly that.”

Wait a minute, elections do hold public officials accountable, unless I'm missing something. Note to Sanfelippo, that's why we have elections? Oh, I forgot, Republicans now have gerrymandered safe seats, so who needs elections anymore.

In another example where absolute power corrupts:

After an appeals court overruled Republican attempts to weaken the powers of the state's elected schools superintendent, a GOP lawmaker wants to let the governor choose the superintendent rather than voters.

Even the Journal Sentinel's Jason Stein had to finally admit to the tactic:

It's one of several changes that Republicans have made to weaken the powers of state and local officials aligned with Democrats, moves that GOP lawmakers say are needed to make government work more smoothly.  

Uh oh, "More Smoothly" = Big Government Republicans! Under the false belief that centralized power makes everything run "more smoothly," Sanfelippo apparently wants to marginalize voters. 

In 2011 Gov. Scott Walker and lawmakers attempted to give the governor the power to halt administrative rules issued by Evers. But in February 2015 a state appeals court upheld a lower court decision striking down that move as unconstitutional given that the state's charter says that "the supervision of public instruction shall be vested in a state superintendent" elected to four-year terms in officially non-partisan spring elections. That case is now before the state Supreme Court. 

Sanfelippo is proposing a constitutional amendment to stop electing superintendents ... "Wisconsin is one of only 12 states in the country that elects its state superintendent ... under the measure the Legislature could act to replace the governor's choice.

Complicated and "smoother," all at the same time.

I had to laugh at this unintentional argument against actually having any kind of elections at all from the right wing propagandists at The Wisconsin Watchdog:

As the lawmaker notes (Sanfelippo), elected superintendents like DPI chief Tony Evers are elected to four-year terms. They generally remain in the position even if their performance is considered inadequate.

Under that reasoning, who needs to keep in place our faulty elections process, because they rely so heavily on voter intent. And forget about those horrifying recalls. Funny too how this all coincides with the addition of more restrictive hurdles to vote. 

One more laughable quote from Sanfelippo: 

“The students of our state should not be held hostage just because special interest groups can get someone without the proper qualifications to win a popularity contest every four years. Our children and teachers deserve much better.”

"Someone without the proper qualifications?" Really? This is where the Journal Sentinel didn't set the record straight, leaving the reader with the impression Sanfelippo was telling the truth. Far from it. Wikipedia:

Evers received his bachelors (1974), masters (1978), and doctorate degrees (1986) from the University of Wisconsin–Madison. Evers began his professional career as a teacher and media coordinator in the Tomah school district. In 1979 to 1980 he was principal of the Tomah elementary school, and from 1980 to 1984 he was principal at the high school. From 1984-1988 he was superintendent of the Oakfield school district, and from 1988-1992 he was superintendent of the Verona school district. From 1992 to 2001 he was administrator of Cooperative Education Service Agency in Oshkosh.

To get an idea of who Republicans might have named superintendent, lets look at Evers last opponent, GOP State Rep. Don Pridemore. Be amazed. From WKOW:

Blind loyalty and obedience to one Authority renders Open Records unnecessary.

What's the difference...constituents, big business, special interests, money, freedom, money, liberty, monied constituents...

Trust but don't verify...?

Republicans Push One-Size-Fits-All Party Dominance.

Republicans hate one-size-fits-all laws that take local control away, right?

Nope! Remember when Republican Sen. Tom Tiffany tried to take away local control from communities effected by sand mining? It follows a pattern; they did that with billboards, cell towers, water quality in Dane County, and paid sick leave. So why not mines? Despite being tabled, it'll come back and become law, count on it.

Like our rental laws and lowered statewide building code standards, shoreline development is next on the list of one-size-fits-all laws trashing local control.

jsonline: The Legislature's Joint Finance Committee wants to weaken provisions in state law that have allowed counties to adopt stricter regulations to protect lakes, rivers and streams ... county officials also say the restrictions would limit counties' ability to tailor zoning laws to fit local situations. Instead of county-by-county limits, the committee changes adopt a one-size-fits-all approach. Supporters say limits on the counties would give uniformity to what they see as a hodgepodge of rules governing shoreland development.

Surprise, look who's in the middle of destroying Wisconsin's environment...again and again and again...:

Sen. Tom Tiffany (R-Hazelhurst) emphasized ... balance competing goals of environmental protection and property rights. "We are returning property rights to people."

...at the expense of the public. This is also an example of the GOP's growing disdain for science and research:

In 2009, the Natural Resources Board rewrote shoreland zoning regulations for the first time in 40 years ... after seven years of study ... a compromise between environmentalists and builders and the real estate industry ... updated in 2013. "Everyone was ambushed by these major changes without public input," said Helen Sarakinos of the River Alliance of Wisconsin. "Everything has been working well. People are used to it and we are keeping our water clean," said Dawn Schmidt, zoning administrator in Vilas County, which has more than 1,300 lakes — one of the largest concentrations of lakes in the world.

Even Republican stronghold Waukesha County, who all but destroyed their own water table with over-development, is having a problem with this:

Waukesha County is planning to write new zoning regulations later this year. "I'm a little nervous that the action might have taken away some of our options," Dale Shaver, director of parks and land use said.

The Republican agenda ignores the cost savings of the large statewide pool of taxpayer money funding our public services and environmental protections. Minus group buying power, the GOP model simply puts a higher financial burden on individual users, like we'll see soon at our public universities and state parks.

Republicans have made a conscious effort to make sure their kind of government is free to serve the individual. I think the next comment says it all:

But Rep. Adam Jarchow, a first-term lawmaker, said the focus should be on those who live next to water. "There are a lot of property owners who really get the shaft, frankly, from counties," he said.

Check out the list of destructive environmental actions taken by Walker and the Republicans. It will boggle your mind. And Democrats, bookmark the page and repeal everything in the list when these cockroaches are finally removed from the Capitol. Visit the Political Environment.

Watch Out!!! Republicans push Big Government Punishments on perceived Citizen Freeloaders and Enemies.

Democrats haven't sounded the alarm over what a possible Republican one party system would look like? Like we have all the time in the world guys?

Republican Despotism; Republicans have redefine the constitution, rewritten history, and doled out punishment to those who don't fit within their narrowly defined parameters of behavior and religion. They have plans to do even more. They have successfully made the opposition party commies and socialists, a repressive enemy to be feared, blacklisted and discounted as social pariahs.

After hundreds of thousands of people turn out to protest in the middle of winter, and one million put pen to paper to sign a recall petition, Governor Scott Walker actually saw this exercise in democracy as form of "intimidation." He even made that the title of his book, "Unintimidated," where he denigrated unapologetically our 1st Amendment right.

I thought I'd feature a quick list of examples that honeslty, just barely scratch the surface. Despite the frightening possibilities and unintended consequences of their iron fisted policies, conservatives will blindly rationalize away this list as another "liberal" partisan attack. It's authoritarian behavior that will only intensify with even more power, taking the presidency:

1. Overruling the peoples Referendums and Initiatives: Milwaukee voters overwhelmingly passed paid sick leave. State Republicans repealed and regulated against local government control.

Repealing a Constitutional Amendment: In Nevada, state Sen. Joe Hardy (R) introduced legislation that would repeal the state’s minimum wage, $8.25 for those who don’t get health benefits … In 2006, state’s voters approved a constitutional amendment that sets a standard minimum wage, but Hardy’s resolution would repeal it and give the legislature the ability to control the wage ... a South Dakota state committee approved a proposal that would allow its minimum wage to decrease, erasing a provision of a wage hike approved by voters that bars it from falling. 

2. Democratic Representation and Voter suppression: Finding fraud fails, suggesting error free perfect system possible:

Ohio’s Huge Voter Fraud Investigation Turns Up Nearly Nothing: Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted has been on a mission to weed out voter fraud … 44 non-citizens may have voted illegally in Ohio since 2000. Conservatives have long tried to tie immigration reform to potential voter fraud.

3. Voting Rights a Rube Goldberg maze of Regulations before Disappearing Completely: Sen. John Cornyn offered this "I know you are but what am I" bit of projection: restoring the Voting Rights Act would “drive divisions and create phony narratives.” He just defined voter fraud:

Wisconsin Republican Jim Sensenbrenner is nobody’s idea of a pussycat … he vowed more than a year ago to restore the Voting Rights Act after the Supreme Court in 2013 overturned a key section monitoring states that had been past offenders. Republicans have a disincentive … Their conservative supporters wouldn't like it if the Justice Department ruled against all the new voter ID laws. No vote is expected in the House, and in the Senate, Mitch McConnell won’t bring up anything that could put his members on the spot. 

4.  Block Grants allow Oppressive State Punishments: If there's one thing Republicans are good at, it's punishing citizens they've vilified as non-conforming Americans. Federal "strings" have prevented unconstitutional drug testing and/or cancellation of funding. Then throw in cuts to the program itself:

GOP Looks at Medicaid and Food Stamps for Overhaul: the federal government would pay the states a lump sum instead of a portion of the programs cost. The states would then have more control over setting standards. Paul Ryan would have cut federal Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program funding by 31 percent by 2023 ... the funding would no longer keep pace with health care costs or with expected Medicaid enrollment growth as the population ages. Those cuts would have come on top of repealing the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion.

No Strings: Gov. Doug Ducey (R) approved a measure to tighten the state requirements for Medicaid eligibility, requiring recipients to be employed and kicking them out of the program (after) five years. An identical bill was vetoed last year by former Gov. Jan Brewer (R) … Ducey’s office (said) the new legislation will “ensure that we have a responsible Medicaid program that protect taxpayers and provide care to those who need it the most.” Scott Walker (R) once said that denying Medicaid coverage to low-income people helps them “live the American Dream” because they won’t be “dependent on the American government.” 

Under the Iron Fist of Scott Walker: "He’s slick: Fast-talking, confident, and dishonest" - Author and Republican John Dean

Since the media has decided not to make the miserable record of Republican governors an issue in their run for president, then how about their rightwing authoritarian driven policies? Come on, isn't becoming a dictatorship scary enough to garner a few headlines? 

Since Scott Walker is in the spotlight, I thought a little primer on his authoritarian style of governing is in order. Walker's shocking vilification of teachers and protesting Wisconsinites is only just scratching the surface. He detests protesters so much that he decided to require a fee and license to exercise their 1st Amendment right, arresting and fining those speaking out against his policies in the Capitol rotunda without permission. A court just struct that down as unconstitutional. 

Here's a compilation of video clips and audio that together, painted a frightening picture of an America under Scott Walker. The massive crowds filling the streets...ignored. Below the video, Republican and author John Dean's actual analysis of Scott Walker, who he couldn't help but notice him way back in 2012. 

Politico just wrote about this not to be forgotten moment:

One of his low points came in 2011 when he carried on a phone conversation with a liberal blogger impersonating one of the billionaire Koch brothers. When the blogger suggested infiltrating the anti-Walker crowd with “troublemakers,” the governor nonchalantly responded: “We thought about that.”

Here's John Dean's jaw dropping look and warning about Scott Walker, from April 6, 2012:

My focus here is on Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, who strikes some who have written to me as a distinctively prototypical authoritarian politician; what social science has labeled as a “double high” authoritarian; and the type of person which I described in my book as a conservative without conscience. There is another type of authoritarian. Social scientists labeled these people “Double Highs.” They simply see the world as a place where they are always in charge.  I worked for and with a number of Double Highs at the Nixon White House, from the president on down through his senior staff.  But based on what I found, there is little doubt in my mind that Scott Walker is a classic authoritarian.

Opposition To Equality … There are many examples of Walker’s harsh and uncaring treatment of those whom he does not believe to be entitled to equality.  None is more glaring than his intolerance of gays and lesbians … as Governor, he has worked to end Wisconsin’s recognition of the rights of same-sex couples. He fired the law firm defending the state’s domestic-partnership law.  And he appointed a woman to the state’s Labor and Industry Review Commission who believes that gays can be harassed in the workplace.

One attorney familiar with Walker’s thinking states, “Everything that Governor Walker is doing is ideological; I don’t see that his administration has any particular respect for the law per se.”

Desirous Of Personal Power. Scott Walker has been seeking personal power his entire life, and has never stopped reaching for it.  By age 7, Walker had formed a “Jesus USA” club, which was a mix of his father’s Baptist ministry and his attraction to patriotism.  By age 8, he had undertaken a door-to-door fundraising campaign to take charge of purchasing a flag for the village hall of his small Iowa town. At Marquette, he was elected to the student senate, and twice sought but failed to get elected president of the student body.  He ran for the Wisconsin State Assembly the same year that he lost his bid to be student president at Marquette, losing the Assembly race as well.

As governor, Walker sought to remove civil service jobs, in order to make them political appointments, and thus subject to his control.  Most strikingly, he has sought to undercut the public-employee unions so that he would not have to deal with them, thus increasing his power. He has increased his personal power over some fifteen state agencies … move to break public employee unions is his most notorious personal power play.  Walker’s push … was done in about as authoritarian a fashion as you will ever see, outside of a dictatorship. Part of Act 10 has already been struck down by a federal judge.

Walker’s amorality is conspicuous.  It is found in his history of ethics violations and the record of his lying … his Marquette University days, when the college newspaper called him “unfit” for student office. Later, in the Assembly (in 2005), Walker would earn the distinction of receiving the second-highest fine for an ethics violation in Wisconsin history. With respect to 44 statements that Politifacts examined, Walker was found to have been truthful only on six occasions.  The fact that 38 statements were pants-on-fire false, false, mostly false, or half-truths is stark evidence of amorality.

I watched a video of a Walker speech at the Goldwater Institute.  He’s slick: Fast-talking, confident, and dishonest—I watched him distort facts with which I was familiar.  And indeed, the most striking … his views on crime and punishment. As a member of the Wisconsin Assembly, in 1996 Walker was the moving force behind the building of a 500-bed “Supermax” prison, which he claimed worked better than normal facilities; others had doubts.  Also, when state officials sought a 200-bed unit, Walker insisted on more than doubling the request. Another instance of Walker’s punitive aggressiveness can be found in an example from 1997, when Walker pushed legislation that eliminated all parole, while increasing maximum criminal sentences by fifty percent.  Walker also pushed for draconian legislation that would send juvenile offenders to adult prisons at age 15, although his colleagues in the Assembly rejected this excessively harsh approach. These, too, are examples of classic authoritarian behavior at work.

Scott Walker is Mr. Conventional.  He has long been an active member of a fundamentalist church. He wears conservative, off-the-rack clothing. His hair is always closely trimmed, and his manner polite and pleasant. (I cannot find a single radical right-wing position that Walker rejects.)

I have only sketched in digest terms the reporting I found on Scott Walker’s political career.  To me, it is clear that Wisconsin has a double high authoritarian governor, a conservative without conscience.  If I lived in Wisconsin, I would be uncomfortable with this man, whom I find more Nixonian than even Richard Nixon himself (the authoritarian leader with whom I was, and am, so very familiar).

Please understand that these authoritarian leaders and their followers are not necessarily bad people.  To the contrary, I have many friends who fall into this group, who are wonderful people. But none of my double high authoritarian friends are suited to serve as governor of any state … Democracy and democratic institutions do not function well with dogmatic, unbending authoritarian leaders … and as Bob Altemeyer’s work has shown, they can be dangerous to democracy.

Hopefully, one or more social scientists or political psychologists in Wisconsin, where there are many, will step forward and tell the people of Wisconsin more about what they have on their hands, with Scott Walker as their governor. The June 5, 2012 election is a true opportunity to discourage another leader who is a conservative without conscience.  Altemeyer estimates that about twenty-five percent of the population has, in varying degrees, the disposition to follow a double high authoritarian, many blindly or simply because it assuages their fears.  And, of course, these are aggressive followers who can attract others who are unaware of the nature of the person they are electing, thus enabling an authoritarian leader like Walker to gain ever-growing control. Good luck, Wisconsin.

Republicans may not invite tyrant Obama to State-of-the-Union!

I'm not sure how long it will be before Democrats begin to notice that the Republicans are playing for keeps. They want a one party authoritarian system of government, with dictatorial leaders and a national religion. They will stop at nothing to do it, even refuse Obama's State-of-the-Union speech. 

This is a full frontal assault. Surprisingly, there are no plans to develop a Democratic offensive of their own. This whack job party of rugged small government individuals can't wait to install their own "leaders," ideologues promising to make unpopular decisions that may not represent the people's will, but what the heck, it's for their own good. If it sounds dictatorial, it is. Here's what they're "thinking:"

Bloomberg: A series of political commenters, led by the editor of the National Review, have a new idea for Speaker John Boehner: refuse to invite President Obama from the State of the Union address. 

The thinking behind this proposal is that it would aptly demonstrate the level of GOP discontentment with the president, in case he doesn’t already know. Rich Lowry, the editor of the National Review, told The New York Times Tuesday night that if he were John Boehner “I’d say to the president: ‘Send us your State of the Union in writing. You’re not welcome in our chamber.’”

Last week, the conservative website Breitbart suggested suggested Boehner do the same “so that the elected representatives of the people do not have to listen to, or applaud, a man who is violating his oath of office and governing as a tyrant.” Meanwhile, unnamed congressional Republicans are privately considering yanking the State of the Union welcome mat, according to Politico.

Scott Walker's no Leader, and he's not saying what you think he is...

I was fascinated by Scott Walker's arrogant authoritarian advice to the Republican congress. Here's my interpretation. jsonline:

"It's put up or shut up time. Your election is a message from the American people that they want change. So go big and bold."

The Republicans benefit from gerrymandered districts and low midterm turnout. And the change the American people want are all things in the Democratic column, like minimum wage, immigration, gay marriage...heck look at the chart to the right. Guess what, this is the change Americans want.  

"The message Wisconsin holds for national Republicans is clear: Don’t be afraid to lead … (don’t) nibble around the edges. Push common-sense, conservative ideas.  Lead."

Walker has always looked at "leading" as an excuse to ignore voters. And they fell for it.

"Send funds for Medicaid and similar programs back to the states in the form of block grands to encourage innovation. Reform welfare programs to restore the dignity that comes from work."

"Restore the dignity that comes from work" is a cute way to say, "I can't create jobs, but I can boot you off assistance." How about restoring dignity with a decent wage? 

And Walker's way of "encouraging innovation" with block grants...I once describe it this way: No federal strings attached to the block granted money ... means the GOP can require any test they’d like to penalize and choke off benefits. Federal strings have prevented that.

Walker has ruled with a super Republican majority, how hard is that:

"And they will keep leaders who do what they say they will do. If the president does not lead as he was elected to do, this is an opportunity for Republicans in Congress to show the American people what they would do with a president who will lead."

Another Walker reference to one party rule, something he's now drooling over. I hope the Republicans do offer up a tangible plan. Paul Ryan is supposedly doing that right now on health care. I can't wait to see how the CBO grades it.

When Ryan sees a threat, he won't care what you think...the move toward Right Wing Authoritarianism.

There's a reason why I think Paul Ryan is one of the most dangerous politicians out there right now, and it's not because he ideologically conservative. 

It's because Ryan is a rightwing authoritarian, and has clearly told us just that over the last few years. You wouldn't want one as your president. He's repeatedly warned us about what he'd do if he were in charge. Do a "roll call" search of this blog and you'll see what I mean.

In the slide show below, from Upfront with Mike Gousha, Ryan used key words and phrases that should scare the daylights out of anyone who truly believes in what Ryan calls the American "idea." Here are 5 examples from our arrogant egotist in the clip below:

- "This is what requires leadership."

- "It is hard to lead when your saying things people may not want to hear, but leaders nevertheless if they see a threat to their country need to do something about it." 

- "...so we can win the kinds of elections we're going to have to win, to get the moral authority and mandate to fix this countries problems on our own terms as nation before it's too late." 

- "What I'm trying to do here is to build a majoritarian movement to fix America's problems..."

- "The kinds of elections we're going to have to win in my judgement, if we're going to save the American idea, are the kind of elections the American people give us the mandate and the authority to fix our countries problems before their outside of our control...we need to lead..." 

Ryan isn't hiding anything. Here's my slide show of that interview:



Check out right wing authoritarianism here, here, here, here, and here.

This is the Republican Party today....

Is Gary Kiehne, a hotel owner and Arizona candidate for congress, just another outlier? Hardly:

Take no Prisoners GOP seek one-party Government through Vilification of Left and Impeachment!!!

The GOP's quest for a one-party, authoritarian government is starting to become more obvious...

Republicans are very serious about “leading,” that is, taking control of everything despite public opinion or the existence of the Democratic Party.

Gov. Scott Walker ignored hundreds of thousands of protesters and will only run for president if the U.S. Senate flips Republican. He doesn't want a dissenting party getting in the way of his agenda. Ideological purity and principles must be maintained.

The same goes for impeaching Obama for doing what presidents do, basically. Now state GOP politicians want to try impeaching their Democratic governors. While Democrats long for a multiparty government, Republicans see only one party:

MSNBC: Missouri GOP lawmakers’ recent efforts: voting restrictions, nullification efforts, anti-union schemes, anti-evolution measures, an anti-health care push, and on and on … these efforts have fallen short, thanks in part to Missouri’s Democratic governor, Jay Nixon. 
Missouri’s GOP lawmakers have responded to the governor’s objections to their agenda by raising the specter of impeachment … Republicans say (Nixon) has committed offenses worthy of being removed from office. The rationale … Reid Wilson’s report highlights the case against Nixon:

One legislator has lodged a complaint over Nixon’s executive order last year that directed state tax officials to accept joint tax returns from same-sex couples who were legally married in other states. 
Another legislator said Nixon hadn’t moved fast enough to call special elections in three state House districts and a Senate district left vacant by resignations.

And a third legislator says Nixon deserves the boot for insufficiently punishing officials at the state Department of Public Safety for releasing a database of Missourians with permits to carry concealed weapons.

Meanwhile, Democrats are trapped in their own fantasy world, where they continue to miss the GOP's clear one-party message. Liberals cling to the hope Republicans will work with them and come to their senses...blah, blah, blah.

The Walker Authority up close!!!

Thanks to a nice piece at MAL Contends, I was able to finish reading John Dean's great analysis of Scott Walker's authoritarian behavior, and the frightening implications of putting even more power into this guys hands. I forgot all about it back in March, 2012.

Below, I've gathered what I thought were the essential points of Dean's scorching but fair research into what I've called the Walker Authority. Interestingly, Dean assumed other "social scientists or political psychologists in Wisconsin" would do what he did, and tip voters off to the potential consequences of putting Walker power again. Well, that didn't happen thanks to political pressure (censorship) on our state university. This was written before the recall election for Verdict/Justia.com:

John Dean: My focus here is on Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, who strikes some who have written to me as a distinctively prototypical authoritarian politician; what social science has labeled as a “double high” authoritarian; and the type of person which I described in my book as a conservative without conscience.

They occasionally found persons who garnered high scores for their cold, calculating dominance, yet also gained high scores on the tests for submissive followers … these Double Highs relate to the questions regarding submission not by considering how they themselves submit to others, but rather how others submit to them.  They simply see the world as a place where they are always in charge.

Domination: Authoritarian leaders seek to control others; in short, they are social dominators. This is the story of Scott Walker’s life. At Marquette, he was elected to the student senate, and twice sought but failed to get elected president of the student body.  He ran for the Wisconsin State Assembly the same year that he lost his bid to be student president at Marquette, losing the Assembly race as well. Since then, Walker has never stopped running.  In 1993, he was elected to the State Assembly … In 2002, he sought the post of Milwaukee County Executive, and he held that post until he was elected Governor in 2010.  This is the behavior, writ large, of a dominator.

Opposition To Equality: There are many examples of Walker’s harsh and uncaring treatment of those whom he does not believe to be entitled to equality.  None is more glaring than his intolerance of gays and lesbians … as Governor, he has worked to end Wisconsin’s recognition of the rights of same-sex couples. He fired the law firm defending the state’s domestic-partnership law.  And he appointed a woman to the state’s Labor and Industry Review Commission who believes that gays can be harassed in the workplace.

Desirous Of Personal Power: As governor, Walker sought to remove civil service jobs, in order to make them political appointments, and thus subject to his control.  Most strikingly, he has sought to undercut the public-employee unions so that he would not have to deal with them, thus increasing his power. Often overlooked is the power grab to fill three dozen civil-service jobs with political appointees.  For instance, the “budget repair bill” politicized and placed under Walker’s control functions like open-records requests, the selection of general counsels for key agencies, and the selection of communications spokespeople in key departments.  He has increased his personal power over some fifteen state agencies, and I suspect that he is just getting started. Walker’s push to get Act 10 passed into law was done in about as authoritarian a fashion as you will ever see, outside of a dictatorship.

Amorality: It is found in his history of ethics violations and the record of his lying … ethics problems go back to his Marquette University days, when the college newspaper called him “unfit” for student office. Later, in the Assembly (in 2005), Walker would earn the distinction of receiving the second-highest fine for an ethics violation in Wisconsin history.  His lying is notorious. Politifacts Wisconsin finds Walker to be an accomplished falsifier. I watched a video of a Walker speech at the Goldwater Institute.  He’s slick: Fast-talking, confident, and dishonest—I watched him distort facts with which I was familiar.  He spoke in mostly half-truths.

Submissive To Authority: While Scott Walker plays by the rules of the authorities he accepts, because he is a dominator.

Aggressiveness On Behalf Of Authority:  The aggression in authoritarian followers is largely fueled by fear, but it is also emboldened by the abundance of self-righteousness that such people possess. As a member of the Wisconsin Assembly, in 1996 Walker was the moving force behind the building of a 500-bed “Supermax” prison, which he claimed worked better than normal facilities; others had doubts.  Also, when state officials sought a 200-bed unit, Walker insisted on more than doubling the request.

Another instance … can be found in an example from 1997, when Walker pushed legislation that eliminated all parole, while increasing maximum criminal sentences by fifty percent.  Walker also pushed for draconian legislation that would send juvenile offenders to adult prisons at age 15, although his colleagues in the Assembly rejected this excessively harsh approach. These, too, are examples of classic authoritarian behavior at work.

Wisconsin’s Double High Authoritarian Governor: To me, it is clear that Wisconsin has a double high authoritarian governor, a conservative without conscience.  If I lived in Wisconsin, I would be uncomfortable with this man, whom I find more Nixonian than even Richard Nixon himself … have many friends who fall into this group, who are wonderful people.  But none of my double high authoritarian friends are suited to serve as President of the United States, or as governor of any state … they are failures as presidents and governors, and as Bob Altemeyer’s work has shown, they can be dangerous to democracy.

Hopefully, one or more social scientists or political psychologists in Wisconsin, where there are many, will step forward and tell the people of Wisconsin more about what they have on their hands, with Scott Walker as their governor. Altemeyer estimates that about twenty-five percent of the population has, in varying degrees, the disposition to follow a double high authoritarian, many blindly or simply because it assuages their fears.  And, of course, these are aggressive followers who can attract others who are unaware of the nature of the person they are electing, thus enabling an authoritarian leader like Walker to gain ever-growing control. Good luck, Wisconsin.

State Rep. Chris Kapenga joins Tea Party's Wisconsin Grandsons of Liberty, to reshape Country in their own image by Convening Constitutional Convention.

Want to know how "neo-confederate red" Wisconsin has become? Our own state Republican Representative Chris Kapenga is a major organizer and backer of convening a constitutional convention.

On board with the likes of radio hosts Mark Levin and Glenn Beck, who spearheaded this ridiculous idea, Kapenga's embarrassing participation in this effort should be a wake-up call to voters. 

So after breaking the government with radicalized legislation and a record number of filibusters, our do nothing tea party Republican Party wants to fix what they just undermined and smashed? How convenient:  

RWWatch: A Convention Of States: The Right's Latest Plan To Amend The Constitution: For the last several months, spurred on by the publication of Mark Levin's "The Liberty Amendments," right-wing activists have been floating the idea of convening a "Convention of States" through which representatives of the individuals states would gather together for a convention to amend the Constitution and reign in the federal government.

Under Article V of the Constitution, "legislatures of two thirds of the several states" have the power to "call a convention for proposing amendments" … The Blaze website reported that nearly 100 right-wing legislators from 32 states met in Virginia over the weekend as the first steps toward turning this fringe fantasy into reality … Saturday’s Mount Vernon meeting was organized by Indiana state Sen. David Long and Wisconsin Rep. Chris Kapenga. 

Republican Rep. Dale Kooyenga: “There are certain values that the state upholds. If the values aren’t consistent at the local level, there is an opportunity for the state to come in and say these are our principles and they are good.”

The conservative Wisconsin State Journal is again trying to alert fellow Republicans something is dangerously wrong at the Capitol. While Republicans vilified Madison for forcing liberalism on everyone else, ramming conservatism down our throats is A-Okay? Didn’t think so.

The line that stood out for me is this breathtaking rightwing authoritarian philosophical statement:

Rep. Dale Kooyenga, R-Brookfield: “There are certain values that the state upholds. If the values aren’t consistent at the local level, there is an opportunity for the state to come in and say these are our principles and they are good.”

Gulp! Sound frighteningly familiar? Sounds a lot like what we heard from so many despotic foreign leaders.

Reporter Matthew DeFour wrote this nice summary:

Since consolidating control of state government in 2011, Gov. Scott Walker and the Republican Legislature have enacted a series of laws that upend a bedrock of their party’s conservatism: the principle of local control. The GOP has wrested from local government’s control of cellphone tower siting, shoreland zoning restrictions, landlord-tenant regulations, public employee residency requirements, family medical leave rules for private companies and large soft drink bans, among other things. It instituted a statewide voucher program opposed by many school boards and has kept tight property tax caps on school districts and municipalities. The latest and perhaps most disconcerting example for many local officials is a bill introduced by Sen. Tom Tiffany, R-Hazelhurst, that would limit a municipality’s ability to regulate certain aspects of frac sand mining operations, such as blasting, damage to highways, and air and water quality.

“Many (municipal leaders) will tell you how terrible it is and how it’s the worst they’ve ever seen,” said Dan Thompson, executive director of the League of Wisconsin Municipalities.

But of course denial helps Republicans disconnect from their own hypocrisy:

Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, R-Juneau, said “legislators always take into account local feedback when developing bills,” including specific bill language. “The concerns of municipalities are carefully considered…

When Republicans are whining about there being too much local control, well.....

Walker spokesman Tom Evenson said other changes, such as ending residency requirements and the soft drink provision, are meant to protect individual freedoms, Evenson said.

Nice to know our state GOP is protecting our freedom to shop:

Republicans have long promoted themselves as the party of decentralized government and local control. UW-Madison political science professor emeritus Dennis Dresang. “But boy, recently, that’s really going out the door. What we see from the tea party types and the radical right types is, ‘I've got an idea, I've got an agenda, and it really ought to apply across the board."

How do Republicans rationalize their authoritarian behavior?

Republicans ... say many of the recent moves to limit local control derive from a different party plank than local control — deregulation.

If you want to know what the guiding philosophy of our rightwing authoritarian one party government is right now, Rep. Dale Kooyenga made it perfectly clear:

“There are certain values that the state upholds. If the values aren’t consistent at the local level, there is an opportunity for the state to come in and say these are our principles and they are good.”

"Rightwing Authoritarian" is a term defined in this recent blog post. Check it out.  

Walker, Ryan march to Rightwing Authoritarianism.

Conservatives probably won't like the following analysis of their movement, the one that just shutdown the government for no apparent reason, but it sure makes understanding them easier for the rest of us. See John Dean's writing as well. Here's what is happening:

Rightwing authoritarianism (RWA) is one of two attitudinal constructs (along with social dominance orientation--SDO) that combine to account for a majority of group prejudice, which in turn is a major aspect of group identity politics. RWA is defined as the convergence of three attitudinal clusters:

Authoritarian submission: A high degree of submission to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives.

Authoritarian aggression: A general aggressiveness, directed against various persons, that is perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities. 

Conventionalism: A high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities.

As might be guessed, RWA is associated with a high degree of hostility toward outgroups, hard core conservatism correlates with a strong resistance to power-sharing with various outgroups--blacks, Jews, Catholics, unions and women.

The construct was developed empirically by Canadian researcher Robert Altemeyer, who started by examining the more elaborate, Freudian-based construct presented in The Authoritarian Personality

Altemeyer explains that "right-wing'" means a "psychological sense of submitting to perceived authorities in one's life," and is not identified with a specific political ideology.

The Rise of the Authoritarian Republicans.

Bartlett: "But what I think we're really seeing here is a crisis of democracy, where one party believes its principles are so correct so strong and the other party's principles are so evil, that we're essentially talking about God compromising with Satin. And you can't do that, and therefore they're justified in using means necessary, perhaps revolutionary or military means, to get their way. Despite the fact that the majority disagrees with them. They don't think that matters in the slightest. The truth of their principles is the only thing that matters to them."-Bruce Bartlett

Here's are a few standout clips that fit the description above. Intro'd by former economic adviser to George H.W. Bush, Bruce Bartlett.

Mike Lofgren on Republicans: "...we have an insurrectionist, neo-confederate party that seems to be dedicated to all kinds of apocalyptic outcomes."

This is a must see. Two Republicans dissect and tell the whole truth about their party's politics now.

Mike Lofgren, author of "The Party's Over" and former Senior Policy Adviser under Reagan, along with former George H.W. Bush economic advisor, Bruce Bartlett, are brutally honest about their crazy party. For instance:

Lofgren: "Now what we have is an insurrectionist, neo-confederate party that seems to be dedicated to all kinds of apocalyptic outcomes...but they are no longer a normal political party, they are an insurrectionist party  that is bringing down the government." 

Bartlett: "But what I think we're really seeing here is a crisis of democracy, where one party believes its principles are so correct so strong and the other party's principles are so evil, that we're essentially talking about God compromising with Satin. And you can't do that, and therefore they're justified in using means necessary, perhaps revolutionary or military means, to get their way. Despite the fact that the majority disagrees with them. They don't think that matters in the slightest. The truth of their principles is the only thing that matters to them."

That's just a sample, check it out and you'll feel better knowing you're not just only ones who think like this. All In with Chris Hayes :



Randi Rhodes wrote this today on her front page:

Christian TV host Rick Joyner says that for America “the only hope is a military takeover, martial law.” That’s how far Obama derangement has gone. They prefer a military dictatorship to man America elected. Twice.

Here's a compilation of GOP inaction at its most ridiculous:



Finally, our own Joan Walsh wrote this about the neo-confederate party of racists. The Atlantic:

Joan Walsh at Salon says the fight against Obamacare boils down to racism. In a post that's been slammed by some conservatives, Walsh argues that the government shutdown is the "culmination of 50 years of evolving yet consistent Republican strategy to depict government as the enemy, an oppressor that works primarily as the protector of and provider for African-Americans, to the detriment of everyone else." She points to Reagan's success at equating the government with welfare, and welfare with lazy people (mostly African-Americans). Walsh says that "Defund Obamacare" is a campaign to hurt black people, though she concedes that "not [every Republican] is or was comfortable with this strategy."

Today "the entire government has been taken hostage by leaders elected by this crazed minority [the Tea Party], who see in the face of Barack Obama everything they’ve been taught to fear for 50 years." Christina Wilkie, a D.C. reporter at The Huffington Post, calls it a "fiery, important essay," and Dan Froomkin, former liberal Washington Post columnist, tweets, "brutal." Conservatives have been sarcastic in their response: Brit Hume, a senior political analyst for Fox News, tweets, "This is truly remarkable. A columnist for Salon says the shutdown is ultimately about.... Race!" Walsh responds, "Wow. Guess I touched a nerve."