Ben Lieberman is also earning his wingnut welfare

Ben Lieberman, Esq., Senior Policy Analyst at The Heritage Foundation's Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies, got ink in today's Anniston Star with his Drilling in the U.S.? Yes, it's time to drill. He also placed the same piece here and here. Back in early May I'd posted on Heritage's Dan Lips earning his Wingnut Welfare on "education reform." Dashing Dan had a background in Politics and Public Relations. Big Ben is an attorney and CPA so he's equally qualified to opine on energy as Dan is in education.

This "specialist in energy and environmental issues" who "opposes unnecessary energy regulation and government mandates while supporting increased access to domestic energy supplies" was formerly "associate counsel and director of air quality policy at The Competitive Enterprise Institute in Washington." That The Heritage Institute expects Ben and his ilk to shill their stuff surprises me not yet I do wish Progressives had as equally well-funded and connected effort to match their work.

Citing " weak excuses" for the failure to drill our way to energy nirvana, Ben does a decent job at tackling various concerns among the Godless, Tree Hugger, Lefty ... set. Ben responds to ideas that "the extra energy would be a drop in the bucket" by claiming "the energy potential is substantial." Actually not Ben yet "new exploration could at least help offset that decline in supply from existing wells." Worries that "environmental risks are too great" are dismissed with "new production would be subject to the strictest environmental and safety standards, something that can't be said of oil imports." Ben's record on environmental standards and the like isn't such that I'd think he'd think that much about strict standards. Those that suggest "big oil is deliberately sitting on potential gushers to boost prices" are told "oil exploration and development is under way" yet it's slow "because of the ... permitting process and other regulatory requirements". Ben sees another chance to go after regulation and he's unable to resist. He claims "some market analysts believe that if America signaled its seriousness about expanding domestic supplies by opening new areas, prices would start dropping before the extra oil hit the market". The "send a message" theme appears to be a straight GOP talking point as Michigan Representative Fred Upton and Tennessee's Jimmy Duncan (damn those elitists in Congress) are using pretty much the same language.

I'd be willing to at least listen to and then engage Big Ben if he weren't on the take from the fat cats and earning his wingnut welfare. The worries he faces off against are likely not motivated by money. So they aren't worth a damn are they Ben? John Gunn

Wingnut Welfare - The Philanthropic Foundations

I'm well into David Brock's The Republican Noise Machine: Right-Wing Media and How It Corrupts Democracy yet for the time being I'll point you to something I just stumbled across today. Media Transparency's The Strategic Philanthropy of Conservative Foundations is a great look at just a brief period from 1992-1994 of 12 core conservative foundations.

The level of wingnut welfare they alone provide is simply staggering. The reality that you've got "writers"and "academics" and ... promoting the free enterprise markets when they are on the dole is supremely ironic. The fact that so much of it is provided via 501(c)(3) "non profits" that in turn provide a nice tax deduction for the already rich is downright disgusting. Peace ... or War!

Earning that Wingnut Welfare defending St. John

Digby has nailed the right's reactions to St. John's rare negative coverage. Crooks and Liars has Keith Olbermann looking at the same angles. Digby writes

... Did anyone really think their animosity for McCain was going to last through November? Please. They are all on wingnut welfare to one degree or another and there's no way in hell that they could continue to do their jobs in opposition to the Republican presidential nominee. It's ridiculous. I'm sure they all felt a huge sense of relief that they had finally found a hook to get back down to business, which is demeaning and destroying liberals on behalf of Republicans. This is not to say that they won't blame McCain for being a heretic and turncoat to conservatism when he loses in November. Their lizard brain logic will be "The liberal Democrat won because McCain wasn't conservative enough." But in the meantime, they had to find a way to earn their paycheck, and now they have their hook. ...

The right will I hope get plenty of exercise for those lizard brains this fall. I'm not so sure the American public will buy their foolishness this time. John Gunn

API's Gary Palmer demonstrates the blame game

The Alabama Policy Institute's Gary Palmer gets ink in the Montgomery Advertiser with ALABAMA VOICES: Self-inflicted pain where he goes after the "socialistic environmental agenda" of politicians who have "sold out to radical environmentalists and liberal social engineers" as he laments the plight of America, "especially lower-income families." Actually Gary I didn't think that side paid as well as Big Oil and other fat cat corporations. He closes with:

"Americans can cuss Congress while they pump their paychecks into their gas tanks, but as long as they keep sending these same liberal politicians back to Congress, they should direct some of the tirade toward themselves."

Where to begin? I was pleased to see pretty much every person dropping comments on the Advertiser's site call BS on Gary yet I expect he still gets paid handsomely and he obviously still gets ink. He's been a frequent target on this blog. There's here, here, here, here, here, here, and ... Clearly, Wingnut Welfare is alive and well in Alabama.

I'll first suggest true liberals are a very, very rare breed in Congress. Way too many Democratic politicians are DLC centrist weenie sorts that are pretty much on corporate retainers. Like many on the right Gary relishes the role of victim and frequently builds his efforts around opposition strategies.

Blaming the left for the current woes we face in energy is apparently a main strategy for the GOP this cycle (Alabama's own Mike Rogers used these talking points just recently) and I fear some DINOs will cave (yup, their timing is priceless) for the demands of their corporate benefactors as they tack toward the extreme right rather than standing courageously for what they might actually believe.

The right gets it when campaigning. They are often on offense. They'll take a weakness and try to turn into a positive. They can't govern worth a damn yet they sure can figure out how to get elected.

I might as well begin with Thomas Geoghegan yet I'll let David Sirota, after all I found these disturbing numbers via his book The Uprising, explain.

"Using Census figures, Geoghegan discovers that the 11 percent of Americans living in the least populated states have enough Senate votes — 41 — to sustain a filibuster. Yes, 89 percent of the population may support a policy, but 11 percent of the population has the senators to block that policy's enactment. When you go further than Geoghegan and consider the election-focused mindset of politicians, you see the situation is even more absurd."

Reckon Gary might agree that these small states, Alabama among them, often tend to elect Conservatives to not only the Senate but also the House? Would he also accept that Gerrymandering often makes House elections often lacking in competition? Would he also accept that small states often have conservative legislatures and governors that could draw some rather creative Congressional districts?

Let's wander through some of Gary's screeds.

"Since the 1970s, liberal politicians in Congress have passed laws that have locked up most of our oil reserves, stopped the construction of refineries and virtually banned the building of nuclear power plants."

Perhaps the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill should be recalled? This and other events motivated Nixon and others in the GOP to embrace, or at least tolerate, environmentalism. Daddy Bush signed an Executive Order in 1990 that placed a moratorium on offshore drilling. If Junior really wanted to press the matter I presume he could issue his own EO yet again I think he and his are more about creating some type of wedge issue, after all gay bashing can only do so much, in hopes to exploit the same this fall.

As to the claim that "liberal politicians ... stopped the construction of refineries and virtually banned the building of nuclear power plants", I'd think he might be familiar with NIMBY (Not in my backyard!") as a powerful barrier to either. Certainly environmentalists, organized or not, would also be concerned about refineries that might not be up to snuff. And nuclear reactors? Don't you watch The Simpsons Gary? And where will the spent fuel waste go? Regulations to attempt to protect the world in which we and our children live hardly seems like something to be ashamed of or attacked by the like of Gary Palmer.

Then again, perhaps those in the oil industry made a business decision on not building new refineries. Free markets work don't they Gary? The Christian Science Monitor's Mark Clayton reported back in 2005 the following:

"The current refinery squeeze has been building for years. For the past two decades, deregulation and low profits have combined to push the industry into consolidation. Partly because of environmental regulations, it was cheaper to expand existing refineries than to build new ones."

I'll mostly skip exploring Senator Schumer's suggestion that pressure be brought against Saudi Arabia to increase their oil production, such as by stopping selling weapons to the kingdom. Gary writes,

"Instead of sending hundreds of billions of dollars to other countries, most of whom hate America, why not put those hundreds of billions of dollars back into our own economy?"

I could ask why if Gary thinks "most hate America" would we be selling them arms. I could also wonder how he'd explain Halliburton relocating to Dubai. The Bu$h family connection with the House of Saud is also worthy of noting yet I'm not sure that fits into Gary's gravy train. Nor do I expect Gary would be wanting to pump those billions of dollars into job training, health care, ... for working families. Gary also I'm thinking wouldn't worry too much about subsidies those liberals in Congress have given to Big Oil.

Neither would Gary likely want to revisit some claims that the neo-conservatives were making at the start of the mis-adventure into Iraq. What a tangled web we weave ... And Gary is all too eager to continue the effort to deceive. That's what he's paid to do by those who have him on the dole.

Gary writes,

"Liberals in Congress have repeatedly rejected legislation that would allow drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, where there is an estimated 10.4 billion barrels of oil. In 1995, the Republican-led Congress approved legislation to allow drilling in ANWR, but President Bill Clinton vetoed it."

Let's take a look at the history of this issue via NPR. It would appears that ANWR is off the table with perhaps another look at offshore oils for some states yet it might be too soon for certainty.

Gary claims,

"Liberals in Congress have also cut off access to 85 percent of the vast oil and natural gas reserves of the Outer Continental Shelf, which contains an estimated 86 billion barrels of oil."

Perhaps "liberals" have seized control of the Energy Information Administration? Their 2007 Impacts of Increased Access to Oil and Natural Gas Resources in the Lower 48 Federal Outer Continental Shelf reveals "[m]ean estimates ... indicate that technically recoverable resources currently off limits in the lower 48 OCS total 18 billion barrels of crude oil and 77 trillion cubic feet of natural gas" and that we'd see no effect until 2030, with that even having an insignificant consequence to wellhead prices.

Gary also wrote,

In addition, the Bureau of Land Management estimates that there are 53 billion barrels of oil on federal lands. But 60 percent of this land cannot be leased at all and another 23 percent can be leased, but oil and gas exploration and development is prohibited or limited in some cases to only a certain time of the year.

I wonder if Bu$hCo's BLM might be willing to manipulate figures? Yup! And its not like they Bu$h administration has been slow in granting drilling permits, with gas permits outstripping available rigs as per this WaPo reporting from 2005. From 2004, MSNBC reports most permits weren't even being used. Does putting the fox in charge of the henhouse come to mind to anyone else? Seriously, even if poor Shrub couldn't do much more than break insider trading laws and lose money with his first mis-adventure in oil, both he and Dead Eye Dick, plus others ranking high in their cabal, are oilmen.

Finally, the idea that "nationalizing our oil refineries" is on the table is a stretch, as I can find only a Faux News effort that openly admits N.Y. Representative Maurice Hinchey has "stepped off the idea". Gary writes while claiming the nationalization plan that "the failed economic philosophies of communism have not been totally discredited" but I expect he'll not include China in that equation since plenty of the fat cats he's looking out for are likely also cashing in via Red China's cheap/docile labor and lax environmental standards. In fact, if Gary's paymasters had their druthers ...

Gary can't help himself I suppose when he writes,

"We haven't built a new refinery in the United States since the global cooling hysteria days of the 1970s, specifically 1976."

The chance to engage in some global warming pushback is I guess too tempting for Gary. Maybe he's paid to shill by the theme? C'mon Gary, you must surely know that dog won't hunt. This wingnut claim of a global cooling scare in the 1970s is yet one more example of a right wing lie that doesn't stand up. As your own Reagan said, "Facts are stubborn things." I know y'all's message machine is powerful so maybe you don't even know the truth. Try the Google every so often Gary.

Gary is carrying on the foolishness like the likes of Richard Viguerie that I mentioned a few days ago. The Vig has made millions off the blame game. Gary's merely getting wingnut welfare. John Gunn

UPDATE ~ Evening of July 29, 2008 - Jenny Dorgan, program coordinator of the Alabama Environmental Council, provides a sensible response to Gary Palmer's Blame Game.

The Anniston Star ~ Calls BS on API's Ed "study"

John Hill is pictured to the left. Scripted answers: Twisted look at state's schools is a gem from The Anniston Star. The Huntsville Times pretty much fell for the Alabama Policy Institute's foolishness and even claimed "Hill and the Alabama Policy Institute have done the public a major service by bringing up issues others haven't been discussing." Although they are the least right of the "East Cost elites" Newhouse Triad the HT is surely right wing in orientation. After taking on the many flaws and admittedly "skewed" results, The Star however asks "So, why would the API use a model for its study that it knows will produce "skewed" results? Could it be because the results are "skewed" in the direction that the API wanted the results to go?

Yup! The Alabama Policy Institute is "in the tank". They are on Wingnut Welfare! Their Michael Ciamarra is. Bob McKee does his part. Gary Palmer surely is. And John Hill Ph. D. is as well. I can't find his qualifications yet The Google has this "John Hill is Director of Research for the Alabama Policy Institute, which he joined in 1995. He holds bachelors' degrees in Broadcasting and Bible from ..." before sending me to API's Newsletter page on their site.

Follow the money and you'll see these rascals are bought and paid for. Dobsonites that are tied to Regenry Publishing, API is openly hostile to real science yet will bend and twist statistics to suit their Corporatist and/or Christianist agendas. They have no shame. That they apparently make a living doing this on donations that are likely tax write offs makes it all the worse. John Gunn

D'oh ~ Media Research Center's Tim Graham

Media Matters exposes Tim Graham, the Media Research Center's director of media analysis, who recently wrote in a NewsBusters piece of Nancy Pelosi being "more of a shallow politician than a devout Christian" for referring to both the Dalai Lama and Pope Benedict as "His/Your Holiness". Yup, Dear Leader did the same thing just recently. Reckon he'll question Dubyah's devotion? What a talent has L. Brent Bozell, Jr. unleashed upon our earth. "Wingnut welfare" demands little indeed. John Gunn

Chuck Hagel once again does the right thing

Above we have a 1968 photo of Chuck Hagel while he's in Vietnam. Note the blue infantry cords! This infantry squad leader earned two Purple Hearts. I've long been a fan of Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska. His actions often confirm my affinity yet he and Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine surely did the right thing today by joining with their Democratic colleagues on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Jonathan S. Landay of McClatchy Newspapers reports Senate committee: Bush knew Iraq claims weren't true with news that Republicans Orrin Hatch of Utah, Christopher Bond of Missouri, Richard Burr of North Carolina and Saxby Chambliss of Georgia (who got out of Vietnam by claiming he had a bad knee yet was healthy enough to try out for UGA's baseball team when he was playing fratboy in Athens) carried the Bu$hCo water. The only charge Saxby ever led was at every fraternity party! Orrin Hatch even defended Abu Gonzales so obviously he'll cover for Bu$hCo whenever he's needed. Kit Bond compared waterboarding to swimming! Richard Burr's name is even being floated in the GOP Veepstakes yet I admit to knowing little of his record.

Let us also not forget how Kansas Senator Pat Roberts delayed this portion of the investigation for YEARS! Other reliable Bu$hCo defenders like Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III immediately turned to defending John "Huggy Bear" McSame. Jeffy B. said, “If John McCain were president and the nation was considering a military operation, we couldn’t have a better person in the country cross-examining the intelligence officers". Cross-examining? Could there be a more bizarre way to try to throw the blame onto the help?

CNN also covers the report with news that although she's not read the report Press Secretary Dana Perino didn't "know of anything that's particularly new in it". Considering Dana's struggles with basic American history I'm hardly surprised. Then again for her to try to get Dubyah off the hook via a "he was kept in the dark" defense shows how low this administration has fallen.

The Weekly Standard's Stephen F. Hayes is reduced to cobbling together some of Senator Rockerfeller's past statements in an effort to try to limit the damage to the neo-cons and Bu$hCo. Indeed as the Chairman of the Intelligence Committee his past statements might be relevant yet Senator Rockerfeller is hardly with true Progressives on many issues. Then again, Mr. Hayes admitted he'd "leave it to someone more industrious to correct the numerous errors in the report." What errors? Give me details please. Human Events' Peter Huessy at least tries yet I've not the time this evening to dig about and see how their case stands up. Given that Jed Babbin is the online editor I'll not expect much.

And given Mr. Hayes many, many, many ... failures to deliver accurate reporting and his standing as "Conservatives' favorite authority on 'The Connection'" one might ask if in fact Senator Rockerfeller was relying on Mr. Hayes and his ilk? Mr. Hayes not only got to shill the neo-conservatives foolishness back in the day but now he also gets to go back and use quotes from those that might have relied on his work that have now had the scales lifted from their eyes. Once again I can't help but be somewhat impressed by wingnut welfare and the right's message machine.

I'd like just one right winger to explain away Chuck Hagel's vote. I bet they can't. John Gunn

Why stop with churches on 501(c)(3) abuse?

It turns out that I can get wireless out here in Yakima for a reasonable fee. I can't promise I'll blog and yet if I can carve out some time I just might. I think I've mentioned The Strategic Philanthropy of Conservative Foundations before yet today's Montgomery Advertiser "'Pulpit Initiative' distorts reality" set me to thinking on the subject once again. Also, I found an older piece from Time that I'd previously missed. The Advertiser correctly tells us the following:

The federal tax code is quite clear on this; a tax-exempt entity may not "participate in, or intervene in ... any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office."

Amen! Yet what about the tax exempt status of outfits like the Alabama Policy Institute? They, like some churches on various sides of the political divide, certainly have an agenda. And theirs is even more explicitly political! They not only provide "wingnut welfare" for young folks like Tiffany Bradley (a George Mason Mercatus alumni) plus more seasoned soldiers like Dr. Lawrence Lovik. He's actually willing to list "Wal-Mart Fellow" on his CV? He is associated with the Association of Private Enterprise Education (I can't resist sharing this link to Texas A&M's Private Enterprise Research Center as an example of how the "free enterprise" set has managed to at least get a foothold at a fair number of campuses as well) also. Dr. Lovik has also done some studying with Hillsdale College to boot.

I'm all for a fair debate and yet those supporting the "free enterprise" set that often rail against taxation are getting a write off to support "research" and "advocacy" that advance their interests! The poor and simple regular folks have a natural disadvantage here. I'm not necessarily suggesting we modify the Infernal Revenue Code but I'd at least like to think the average Bubba and Bubbette in Alabama and beyond understand the irony in how the wealthy talk one game and then walk another. John Gunn

Alabama Policy Institute's Gary Palmer ~ Educator

That I use essentially the same post title for Gary as I do for Reverend Al Sharpton might haunt Gary's dreams. Alabama Policy Institute's Gary Palmer gets space in the Mobile Press-Register to rightly lament the dreadful state of civic education in today's youth. Of course, Gary can't help but bring his own right wing views to his writing. Earning his keep at the Wingnut Welfare table, Mr. Palmer provides the obligatory reference to The Nation at Risk, manufacturing at least in part our current "crisis" in education.

Gary also cites the work of Dr. William Damon of Stanford University yet leaves off the fact he's a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. They provide the work of Dr. Jay Greene, the AJC's conservative tool's favorite source for education "policy". I expect Dr. Damon's work is being twisted and yet I'll not chase that rabbit. Here goes Gary ...

One is knowledge of ideas behind the governing system given to us by our Founding Fathers and how this constitutional republic is supposed to work. The other is a renewed sense of national pride in the great foundational principles which can inspire people to be involved citizens.

Past generations were unashamed to call this patriotism.

Damon identifies the problem in a lot of public education today: "When American history is taught and when the nature of American history is taught, it is taught from a critical perspective."

He adds, "Unfortunately, our students are learning more about our society's mistakes than its successes."

In other words, we are graduating students from our high schools and colleges with an inadequate knowledge of our history and principles, with the problem being compounded by the fact that many of these graduates have been indoctrinated with a very negative view of our nation.

The evidence of this can be seen in the current state of politics in America. Today, millions of Americans are nearly devoid of a deep understanding and appreciation for the principles on which our nation was founded and which are essential to its future.
As others have noted, American politics is no longer guided by civic-minded people engaged in an intelligent debate about the best means of achieving the common good. It is now the domain of angry activists of all types with axes to grind or whose own self-interests supersede the best interests of the nation.

Essential knowledge about America's history, our founding principles and the institutions that were created to uphold those principles, has been widely displaced by an emphasis on politically correct indoctrination that produces misinformed activists instead of educated citizens.

As the Intercollegiate Studies Institute and Common Core studies show, when it comes to ensuring that future generations have a solid knowledge and appreciation of the history and processes of the American republic, we are still a nation at risk

Let's check out Gary's last sources ... The Intercollegiate Studies Institute and Common Core are part of Gary's authority. ISI might be "non-profit" yet they are barely if all non-partisan in that their agenda is certain. Alfred S. Regnery is even the "Vice Chairman" at ISI!

The American Enterprise Institute offers the "research" of Common Core so that tells you what they are selling. Donors include the usual suspects like the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, the Louis Calder Foundation, and the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, geared in large part these days to provide grist for the mill of "school choice".

Gary's basic concerns about the sorry state of civic education somewhat echo what former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor indicated motivated her to help promote "our Courts" yet I'm sure he'd break with Justice O'Connor over her frustrations with lack of time to teach civics and critical thinking.

Gary's rant is classic wingnuttery. I'd suggest "knowledge of ideas behind the governing system given to us by our Founding Fathers and how this constitutional republic is supposed to work" would be a tremendous idea and yet I think our full grown "leaders" ought to brush up on this actually. Gary dares lash out at "angry activists of all types with axes to grind"?

Does Gary not accept that it might be wise to teach "a very negative view of our nation" when " our society's mistakes" are in fact undeniable? Where's the line Gary? Is there a ratio? To get wise voters for our future shouldn't kids learn about the times their government has behaved less than honorably?

Finally, Gary's call to "patriotism" is noted. I've written on Gary here, here, here, .. He's a shill, as would likely be anyone affiliated with the Alabama Policy Institute. "Paid to pander!" applies I'd argue. John Gunn

Outlander of the Day ~ Peggy Noonan

Peggy Noonan is a classic in today's GOP. She first rose to fame providing the script to The Gipper. She later helped Bu$h the Elder package his "kinder, gentler nation" of a "thousand points of light" to soothe conservatism's lack of compassion. She set Daddy Bu$h up for failure however when he told the faithful to "read my lips" on his no taxes pledge. She actively campaigned for Shrub in 2004 yet turned on him somewhat later.

These days, between wailing over Hillary and ... she's also weeping and gnashing her teeth over the GOP now being held hostage by the fundamentalists. She laments:

The Republican race looks--at the moment--to be determined primarily by one thing, the question of religious faith. In my lifetime faith has been a significant issue in presidential politics, but not the sole determinative one. Is that changing? If it is, it is not progress.

Blue Texan is right to point out that you loved this reality when it was working. Perhaps a bit of jealousy yet she writes for The Wall Street Journal's Opinion Journal and a wide variety of others in the GOP's arsenal. Her husband is involved with the Cato Institute and ... Miss Peggy is on the board of The Manhattan Institute and I'm sure plenty of other organization. She's talented (If only she'd use her gifts for good!) enough so that this isn't exactly Wingnut Welfare but talk about some tangled webs. Peggy is producing product. She's writing. She's doing her part. Contrary to what Blue Texan wrote she's not whining. Peace .. or War!

Back in the saddle and here's API shilling slop

I'm back for less than half an hour and I find this? John R. Graham, Director of Health Care Studies at the Pacific Research Institute, is pictured to the left. I've mentioned the shilling of Pacific Research Institute previously yet that related to "tort reform". Mr. Grant has teamed up with Michael Ciamarra, vice president of the Alabama Policy Institute, to get ink in today's Anniston Star to write A winning diagnosis. Working off Mr. Graham's 2008 Index of Health Care Ownership, 2nd Edition, Alabama is praised for having a health care system that doesn't burden insurance companies with "onerous intervention by the government" yet slightly scolded for not allowing nurse practitioners to hand out pills.

Is this a first salvo in the upcoming health care reform battle? Given the economic troubles we have, I fear even the limited progress put forth by Team Obama will have to be scaled back. Not taking anything for chance, Graham and Ciamarri are likely but two ready for the task of pushing back against the silliness of solution rather than settling. Then again, they've been in the tank for many years. I love how these two right wing warriors cite the work of The Council for Affordable Health Insurance with no shame. CAHI is an industry group of course with a name that makes them seem relatively legit. Do they not know of The Google?

I also noted the 2008 Index of Health Care Ownership had a forward from Dr. Glenn Hubbard. Heck of a job Glennie! Hope that Met Life work pays off for you. An American Enterprise Institute connection? I'm shocked, shocked!

I, hair challenged for many years, can't help but note Graham and Cimarri have hair. And remarkably similar photographers.

Wingnut welfare continues to provide sustenance to all sorts of talent. For folks loving the magic of the markets the right wingers surely seem to love to subsidize their "thinkers". John Gunn

The Alabama Policy Institute is connected with James Dobson and Regnery Publishing and ...

The above is an interview of the Alabama Policy Institute's Gary Palmer by Dobsonite Stuart Shepard of Focus on the Family/Citizen Link. Among the gems are Gary's fretting over "the right to life" yet also "the encroachment of government into everybody's life." Tort reform is a family issue per Gary. There's a lament over the bad science behind global warming but the interview is rather vanilla. Gary and Shepard are playing their role as weary warriors possibly with more than is required

I'm not sure what "Fully Associated" means as to API and Focus on the Family yet I presume Dr. Dobson and his minions approve of the work of Gary and API in their "Family Policy Council".

I also wasn't aware of their environmental book for children. Here's what API claims ...

In 1996 we helped change environmental education in America with our commercially successful publication, Facts Not Fear: Teaching our Children about the Environment. The book, which has been translated into two other languages, was born out of the need for a user-friendly resource to help parents give their kids a common-sense approach to understanding and appreciating our environment. The work has been praised as a valuable and important tool that helps put media hype and hysteria into a more honest and responsible perspective.

That Regnery Publishing put out Facts, Not Fear: Teaching Children About the Environment surprises me not. PR Watch notes both authors "are committed, paid activists in the conservative anti-environmental movement."

That one author Michael Sanera is a policy hack that has worked in both conservative administrations and think tanks was no shocker. His Ph. D. in political science and background as an Army Intelligence Officer I suppose qualifies him on both education and science. I'd briefly looked into the John Locke Foundation in covering Mary Katherine Ham and the Goldwater Institute while covering the efforts of Jeb Bu$h in "school reform". I've noted Gary Palmer's connection to Regnery before as well.

The book's other author Jane Shaw has also made a living at least partially on wingnut welfare. Her B.S. in English Literature from Wellesley College is impressive but hardly would make her a scientist or educator either.

The entanglements between these right wing policy shops, message machines, family councils, and the like is admittedly impressive on some levels. That they often provide a tax deduction for the fat cats while then turning around and influencing policies that benefit these same wealthy and powerful people does frustrate me. That they do their work under the cover of looking out for regular folks is however intolerable. John Gunn

UPDATE ~ I was also unaware that Whacky Tacky Tom Parker was the founding Executive Director of the Alabama Family Alliance (now the Alabama Policy Institute). And I thought he was just an unreconstructed rebel.

Would Gary Palmer shill for sustenance?

In response to Gary Palmer's ALABAMA VOICES: Don't blame system a reader on the Montgomery Advertiser's site listed as LHess wrote, "Having someone such as Gary Palmer talking about morals and ethics is akin to hearing a prostitute talk about virtue." At least Gary will always have RebelMan on his side.

I often don't know where to begin with Gary Palmer of the Alabama Policy Institute. This latest effort rivals Jim "The Tool" Wooten on an effort to win Simultaneous Shilling gold. With the Olympics here I suppose Gary would have to be a favorite. If it were a pair event then he's got a partner down the hall I bet given API's Michael Ciamarra simultaneous shilling of "lawsuit abuse" while defending Bu$hCo past effort.

Then again, maybe this is another illustration of the "blame game"? Gary just recently saw rising gas prices and huge profits for Big Oil as a chance to attack the "socialistic environmental agenda" of politicians who have "sold out to radical environmentalists and liberal social engineers" for instance. In a similar effort, dreadful understanding of civics by our young people was due to insufficient patriotism being taught in favor of "an emphasis on politically correct indoctrination that produces misinformed activists instead of educated citizens."

In his latest rant earning his Wingnut Welfare Gary writes:

We are witnessing the consequences of the loss of values that were the substance of our culture, not the failure of capitalism.

Values? Gary, you really need to read a f'ing book every so often. Or just watch some high end TV. Gary goes on to write:

Capitalism is an economic system that depends on the virtues of the people engaged in the system ... As with any system, capitalism is subject to human fallibility, or what Christians would refer to as fallen human nature.

Huh? "Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under Communism, it's just the opposite." was what John Kenneth Galbraith claimed. I'd stack his brainpower up any day against poor Gary's. Gary next writes:

Therefore, in order for a capitalist -- or free market -- economic system to function properly, the culture must place a high value on personal virtue and undergird it with reasonable laws and regulations that provide additional restraints and protections against inevitable human failings.

Of course Gary has been eager to argue that reasonable laws and regulations that might reduce the number of cancer deaths among our citizenry must be based on only what must be proved. Stoking fears of lost jobs and making the obligatory ""class warfare" attack, Gary is all about dismissing "restraints and protections" as based on "false fears". He has no shame!

Gary then writes:

In a less progressive time, there were certain expectations within American society that were based on our commonly held ideas of what was right and wrong as derived from a Judeo-Christian worldview. In those times, there were social restraints that constrained individuals in what they did and said and how they conducted their public and private lives.

Gary, would going back to those good old days before such a progressive time include times of slavery? When women couldn't vote? The Jim Crow South? Gary continues:

But the progressives saw these social restraints, especially religion, as shackles and thought it would improve society to free it from the old suffocating religious and moral constraints. As it turns out, liberation from the old morals has not brought us more freedom; it has brought more constraint and more uncertainty which has undermined trust in practically all of our nation's institutions.

Huh? So would the "old morals" or the "new morals" apply to the "unfair and immoral death tax"? The estate tax, a Progressive reform in fact, is so immoral that Alabama's own Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III found it necessary after Katrina to look for a victim for an illustration of its evil. I'm sure Gary's smart enough to show us how the Crash of 1929, segregation, and Nixon's Watergate can be blamed on "liberation from the old morals".

Gary suggests:

What is missing today are the presuppositions, or accepted standards of morality and ethics, that are valued individually and in our communities and that establish a solid foundation for functioning in our society. Laws are not enough.

A foundation of moral law? Haven't I read something about such an effort? Gary then writes:

As we are witnessing with the current crisis in our financial institutions, the threat of punishment is often not enough to stop wrongdoing. All too often, punishment consists only of fines that can be viewed as just another cost of doing business. Unfortunately, many decisions are based on a "risk vs. reward" formula that is based solely on self-interests, with little regard for others.

So is Gary deviating from API's stand on "tort reform"? We are learning these white collar prosecutions are surely difficult. And with Alabama's Supreme Court in place they'll just cut the civil verdicts here in Bama won't they Hoss. Corporations Gone Wild? Gary goes on to claim:

In many respects, the breakdown of many of our financial institutions clearly reveals the consequences of rejecting what were once commonly held traditional values. As the "old" traditional values and virtues have been pushed out, they have been replaced with politically correct secular values.

He's kidding isn't he? If a piece begins with "LIKE THE EXHORTATIONS OF JEREMIAH TO THE NATION OF Israel before the first temple's destruction, the warnings of economist Nouriel Roubini fell on deaf ears." would that suit Gary's call for traditional values and virtues? We can only hope this brilliant seeker of truth and decency will seek out such wisdom. Gary continues with:

Consequently, living in a society that has rejected traditional values means that we live in a constant state of uncertainty -- leaving the government to try to impose honesty and integrity through increasingly more stringent laws and regulations.

The predictable result of the abandonment of traditional values, particularly by the boomer generation, is a public and private sector increasingly marked by lies, deception, fraud and malfeasance.

He's loony. Maybe the Taliban would take Gary? He closes with:

... we are now spending millions of dollars trying to instill ethics in current and future leaders whose entire education, from kindergarten through college, has been based on the moral relativism that taught them there are no absolute truths, there are no eternal standards. ...

In that regard, our culture has been stripped of the absolute values that are essential to a healthy free market economy, a trustworthy government and a healthy society.

With so many of our nation's leaders in both the public and private sector disconnected from absolute truths, it should not surprise anyone that our economic and governing systems are floundering and that our laws have done little to prevent it.

As I pointed out earlier, those who claim capitalism has failed are mistaken. What we are witnessing is not the failure of capitalism, but the consequences of moral relativism.

What exactly this rascal is suggesting once again remains a mystery to me. Has anyone of any substance truly claimed capitalism has failed Gary? Many are simply saying that the de-regulation push led by those on the right has consequences. From Enron to this mess, pretty much everybody accepts the fact. And I'd argue the bailout suggest some capitalist want to pocket the profits but socialize the risks. Plenty are figuring crony capitalism has failed us but that's not what Gary has attacked. What would Uncle Milton have to say?

That API's Gary Palmer manages to make his argument based on some type of lament for paradise lost and values vanquished by the Godless Progressives is really precious. John Gunn

UPDATE ~ Morning of August 5, 2008 - I've been thinking of Gary's latest effort all morning. I was reflecting back on a prior post I titled Mobile Press-Register~ Just let the lawyers decide where the P-R wrote an Editorial accepting the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and their Institute for Legal Reform's flawed study to suggest we need to listen more to corporate counsel in formulating public policy. The Failure of Corporate Law: Fundamental Flaws and Progressive Possibilities by Kent Greenfield was also noted in that post. The book's description, and I'll close here, at least for now, contained the following:

Anyone can purchase shares of stock, but public corporations themselves are uninhibited by a sense of societal obligation or strict public oversight. In fact, managers of most large firms are prohibited by law from taking into account the interests of the public in decision making, if doing so hurts shareholders. But this has not always been the case, as until the beginning of the twentieth century, public corporations were deemed to have important civic responsibilities.

The Care and Feeding of Smelly Bloggers!

Beccah Golubock Watson of The Nation examines the reality that for most Progressive bloggers their work, which is at times genuine service, is a labor of love. On the right, wingnut welfare often seems rather abundant. Peace ... or War!

Is Dan Lips earning his Wingnut Welfare?

Mr. (not Dr. please note) Dan Lips of The Heritage Foundation got space in The Anniston Star for "The nation's risk: Improving how our children learn" to praise The Gipper, "high standards", school vouchers, ... Dashing Dan left off the fact that The National Commission on Excellence in Education was a Reagan appointed group made up of such ideologues as Diane Ravitch and Chester Finn. George Will seemed to leave all that off as well when he whined about "coersive federalism" in education when I scolded him in December of 2007. Reckon if Dan's omission has anything to do with his being in politics and PR rather than education?

His bio reads in part, "Before joining Heritage in 2005, Lips was a Senior Policy Adviser at Americans for Prosperity Foundation, a nationwide organization dedicated to advancing every individual's right to economic freedom and opportunity. ... Before that, Lips was an education research associate at the Cato Institute. In addition, he co-wrote the 2004 book, The Reagan Vision, published by the Goldwater Institute."

Mr. Lips is advancing a right wing agenda rather than looking for true solutions. I'm sure he's paid well to do all of this while those on the left barely can get by as they work to find the best method by which to educate our young people and thus transform our society. John Gunn

Alabama Eagle Forum's "wisdom" on energy issues

Brooklyn Burgess, the Executive Director of Eagle Forum of Alabama, gets ink in the Montgomery Advertiser today with ALABAMA VOICES: Push domestic production. They really prayed for "for the stability of domestic oil production in the Gulf?" Phyllis Schlafly would be proud Brooklyn of your lack of understanding yet superb efforts on behalf of movement conservatism. Although experts agree that "drill, drill, drill" is no solution, and that anybody with a lick of understanding about the modern world knows the Saudis (and others from that neck of the woods) have not only bought up all the debt your team has once again ran up, this occurring despite of, or perhaps because of the relationship between the House of Saud and the House of Bu$h, you sell your schemes. Also, oil shale (or tar sands for that matter) is a losing proposition. Brooklyn Burgess is of course dialed in with the Heritage Foundation (reckon she is quoting Ben Lieberman?) and likely others out there earning their wingnut welfare. She's lost. Or perhaps just a liar? Maybe a little of both? John Gunn

Mobile P-R ~ Higher education is like health care

The Mobile Press-Register opines Time for relief from rising college costs citing "Going Broke By Degree: Why College Costs Too Much" of Ohio University's Richard Vedder. They didn't mention his The Wal-Mart Revolution: How Big-Box Stores Benefit Consumers, Workers, and the Economy. Dr. Vedder is earning his wingnut welfare at The Independent Institute as well as AEI. He is the Executive Director of The Center for College Affordability and Productivity (CCAP) as well. His scholarship has been bought and paid for via The Searle Freedom Trust, at least in part. They also didn't reference his work for Big Tobacco or how taxation affects migration as recognized by The Heartland Institute.

The Mobile Press-Register writes

"Higher education is like health care: Costs are driven up by third-party payment, lack of price competition and inefficiencies that inevitably develop when high prices don't affect the bottom line."

So is the Mobile P-R suggesting we need a better health care arrangement? Would that they were! Although they write, "The state's heavy reliance on sales tax revenues, which fluctuate with the economy, also takes a toll on education." don't count on them to advocate for tax reform. A universal, single payer health care system (like pretty much every other modern society offers) or a fair tax arrangement simply doesn't fit their conservative world view. Nor does either fit the interests of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which has picked up their propaganda on higher education rather quickly. Their Vote for Business effort is just too transparent. The right's "counterintelligentsia" surely gets plenty of ink, especially in Alabama and even more so from the Mobile Press-Register. The "magic markets" are all that matters to this bunch.

I'm hardly a fan of the DLC centrist weenie set yet even their concerns and suggestions on the issue aren't full of foolishness. I've posted before on Michael Ciamarra's "thinking" on higher education yet it would appear that the Alabama Policy Institute ought not even bother with the Mobile P-R as they are seemingly already in the tank. They are movement conservatives at best as they advance their agenda and merely pretend to be motivated by the concerns of average citizens from Alabama to beyond. John Gunn

UPDATE ~ I mentioned the Chamber's Vote for Business effort yet spending some time there makes me think those doing the work did it coming off their recent $8000 grand slobbery drunk episode. Typos are plentiful. Then again, they perhaps offshored to save a few dollars on labor. Also, the Mobile P-R is hardly looking for a Progressive solution to health care and was merely using the obligatory references to "lack of price competition and inefficiencies" like what the Chamber describes as "market-driven health reforms."

Another example of markets working for wingers

Is there some kind of conservative eugenics effort? On the left Kurt and Nancy Pfotenhauer are an attractive pair. Her first hubby (there on the right), Heritage Foundation economist Daniel Mitchell isn't an ogre either. Kurt is neck deep in the mortgage industry and Miss Nancy is a professional indeed. Via Daily Kos, joesgarage wrote, "Pfotenhauer's career is a blueprint for advancement through the interconnected world of private equity, right-wing think tanks, and the Republican power elite." I've never seen as muckety a Muckety map as hers. She's frequently the McCain spokesperson on the economy and I'd surely like some host to rip the bark off her given her reliance on wingnut welfare. Following the money to and from the funding fathers like the Koch family is a rewarding process and an endeavor that continues to amaze me. John Gunn

UPDATE ~ Afternoon of September 29, 2008 - Nancy demonstrates pre-emptive working of the refs on the upcoming Biden-Palin debate.

Damn Editors

I'd taken the time (I gain respect for those limited by space whenever I try the format!) to craft a Letter to the Editor to my hometown paper just recently in a response to a Column from Gary Palmer of the Alabama Policy Institute. This was in addition to a previous post on Palmer's Alabama Policy Institute effort to discredit public education.

The Leader chose a title for the LTE, namely "Conservatism seeks to end public education", that I think goes too far. Surely plenty of opportunists do. Profiteers for privatization added to movement conservatives to libertarians working with bible thumpers wanting vouchers who then find like cause with ... makes that at least partially true. however, some conservatives don't want to end public education.

The Leader leave off the following from what I sent them:

Palmer is on “Wingnut Welfare”. API gets ink into papers across Alabama rather often. API is “dedicated to the preservation of free markets, limited government and strong families.” They symbolize the right’s "think tank" or "policy shop" efforts to create seemingly legitimate information and then get the message to the masses. To gather a tax deduction while promoting their glorious cause of movement conservatism is doubly useful for wealthy true believers.

API is funded by some of the usual suspects like Bradley Foundation money. The Jaquelin Hume Foundation also helps pays the bills.. The Humes are so "free" market oriented that their “Foundation for Teaching Economics” will twist the Civil Rights Movement so that “economic incentives” become celebrated. The Hume family took Reagan from a b-list actor and paid GE shill to Sacramento and DC.

I was under five hundred words. Why'd they need to drop these words? I think people reading The Leader ought to know what is being passed off from a partisan outfit as legitimate is actually bought and paid for. That The Leader runs Palmer's words of wisdom as a "Column" is bad enough yet to now silence me on a LTE bothers me greatly. Any suggestions? P/W

Are Jed Babbin's guns for Radical Islam, China, Old Europe, the UN, or ... ?

Jed Babbin got space in The Montgomery Advertiser recently to simultaneously shill various themes of the right wing. Distancing Bu$hCo from St. John McCain was attempted. Jed also managed to stoke fears of terrorism. He even opines that "the left" is getting away with straw men arguments that he claims are "guns vs. butter" retreads because President Bu$h "has never defined the war, the enemy, or what victory would be comprised of." He praised General Petraeus and "The Surge". He does the obligatory comparison of terrorism to Communism and Nazism. He also gets in a lick on Congress in the early 1970s merely looking by at South Vietnam as their people and millions of others suffered.

He also remarkably writes:

Which brings the inevitable conclusion: regardless of what happens to Iraq's nascent democracy, a war must be fought to defeat the terrorist ideology, and to compel the nations that sponsor terrorism against us and our allies to cease doing so. Unless and until that occurs, the war goes on.

Thanks Jed for confirming that you and yours see "war" as pretty much the only answer. The fact that military options are but one piece of the long, hard process of dealing with threats that face our world seems to escape you. And once again, how does war defeat an ideology? Can war compel? I understand war destroys. War doesn't however build squat. Also, since you've pretty much rejected Old Europe and the United Nations I don't suppose cooperation amongst law enforcement and intelligence communities gives you much hope. But I'd really like to know how to respond to the threat from China? Reckon we ought to be getting ready for the "showdown"? You claim China wants war don't you? It looks like you're now rather worried about the words of Islamists, China, Hugo Chavez and Russia and ... as well. Newt Gingrich wrote the foreword so surely it will be a blockbuster.

Surely being ready to fight a possible enemy possessing serious modern weapons and the like rather than trying to fight an ideology makes some sense. I agree we ought to be aware of words from nations or groups or persons that might wish us harm or merely have contrary interests or perspectives.

I also know that Regnery Publishing and their Human Events and ... not to mention Jed Babbin might not be the best sources to turn for serious thinking. Earning that keep Jed on the wingnut welfare? Being on the dole for the glorious cause of movement conservatism must be a nice way to earn a living since so many are doing it. John Gunn