ThinkProgress Logo

Politics

Tea Partiers Rally Against Sign Bans — Except At Glenn Beck Rally

glenn-beckAmong the many regulations that Glenn Beck demanded for this morning’s “Restoring Honor” rally was a ban on any signs, political or otherwise. “Leave your signs at home guys,” a young woman tells us in an official promo video, “we really don’t want anything to deter from the peaceful message we’re trying to bring to Washington, okay?”

Beck’s no-sign demand drew little to no ire from those planning to attend the rally, including many Tea Party chapters and other political groups. However, conservative groups were not nearly as submissive when Rep. Tom Perriello (D-VA) made the same request for his town hall meetings earlier this month. Perriello’s attempt to keep out signs in order to “encourage an atmosphere of civility” was met with cries of censorship by the Rutherford Institute, acting on a complaint by the Jefferson Area Tea Party:

“Your sign ban amounts to an act of outright censorship that raises grave Constitutional concerns,” wrote Rutherford Institute founder and President John W. Whitehead in a letter to Perriello.

Perriello backed down after the outcry and decided to permit signs at future town halls.

For Beck and Tea Party groups — who persistently tout the wisdom of the Framers and the infallibility of the Constitution — the irony is palpable. A sign ban at an opponent’s town hall is a major threat to freedom of speech; a sign ban at a Beck rally is an important rule in order to keep the event on message.

Update

A few of the rally participants today didn’t follow Beck’s admonition against bringing signs:

Becksignage


Update

,Gawker offers its pic of the day.

Yglesias

History’s Greatest Monsters

Portland Press-Herald picks up an AP story with a local angle:

A Maine man who was injured after police say he leaped from the upper deck at Long Island’s Jones Beach Theater has pleaded not guilty to reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct charges. Luke Duplessis was released without bail following his arraignment today in Hempstead, N.Y. Dan Russo, a Long Island-based attorney for the 30-year-old Old Town, Maine, resident, disputed allegations that his client jumped, saying he accidentally fell.

Duplessis landed in a seating area about 25 feet below during intermission of an Aug. 18 concert by the jam-band Phish.

Isn’t attending Phish shows the real crime here?

Politics

Political Rally Or Not? We Report, You Decide

For months, Glenn Beck has breathlessly insisted that today’s “Restoring Honor” rally was a completely non-political event. ThinkProgress attended the event and documented what we saw. Decide for yourself if Beck’s rally was non-political:

Tea party bus2

College Republican National Committee recruiting at the rally

College Republican National Committee recruiting at the rally

Obama is destroying America

AFP shirt back

Spay liberals

FreedomWorks

Handout from Refounding America

Handout from Refounding America

Handout from the 1789 Project

Handout from The 1789 Project

Media Matters, Crooks and Liars, TPM, and the NAACP have more coverage of today’s rally.

Yglesias

The Deadliest Occupations

Looks like the great state of Maine has a high proportion of people employed in the two deadliest lines of work:

Bureau of Labor Statistics 1

Specific Maine numbers for 2009 are still being reviewed by the state Department of Labor, but department spokesman Adam Fisher said the fishing industry accounted for approximately half of the 16 workplace fatalities in Maine in 2009. A final state report for last year is expected late next month.

I think it’s relatively easy for people to overlook the extent to which the long-term transition of employment into the service sector is good for public health and worker safety.

Politics

Beck Rephrases His Claim President Is ‘Racist’: Meant To Say Obama Believes ‘America Is An Oppressor’

glenn-becksterYesterday, “rodeo clown” Glenn Beck appeared on XM radio with African-American host Joe Madison. Beck seemed to be visiting the studio when Madison spotted him and asked him to come into the radio booth for an impromptu interview.

Immediately, Madison told Beck “I am so angry with you.” “Oh boy,” Beck responded, “Did I just walk into something I shouldn’t have walked into?” “Yes,” Madison said, pressing him on why he called Obama a racist:

MADISON: He’s not a racist?

BECK: What is he? [...] I’ve talked about this at length, and so I’m going to rehash it all. I’ve already said stupid comment, off the top of head. And I said just the other day, an ignorant comment. Now that I really understand how he grew up, where he grew up, what his influences were — it’s more of a liberation theology, a kind of attitude he has. That I immediately interpreted — because I didn’t understand him. His attitude is more of, like Bill Ayers — that America is an oppressor. And I just disagree with that.

[...]

MADISON: You do not believe President Obama is a racist?

BECK: I’ve said this before.

MADISON: A mistake? Was that a mistake?

BECK: Absolutely it was. And I’ve said that before. I misunderstood — this I just said the other day — I misunderstood his philosophy and his theology, which is liberation theology.

MADISON: Which was King’s philosophy. Big time.

BECK: Didn’t know that. I’ll talk to Alveda today about it.

MADISON: Oh, talk to his father. You know who you should talk to? Talk to Walter Fauntroy. Rev. Walter Fauntroy, who grew up with King. That was his philosophy — it was the theological philosophy of social justice.

BECK: Right. I am not a fan of social justice.

MADISON: That’s where we really part. I’m a big fan of social justice.

Listen here:

On July 28, 2009, Beck called Obama a “racist” with a “deep-seated hatred of white people.” The following day, Beck stood by the remarks: “I think the president is a racist.” In an interview with Katie Couric in September 2009, he said he was “sorry” for the way he “phrased” the claim, but he said it was a still a “tough question” that needed answering. Again in June 2010, Beck accused Obama of being racist, claiming Obama had not yet spoken directly to BP CEO Tony Hayward because he’s a “white CEO.”

In his address on race in March 2008 in Philadelphia, Obama said, “I chose to run for the presidency at this moment in history because I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together. … This belief comes from my unyielding faith in the decency and generosity of the American people. But it also comes from my own American story. … I will never forget that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible.”

Update

The NAACP has launched a website to track today’s activities at the Glenn Beck rally. Check it out here.

Yglesias

Heavy Metal

Not-so-scenic sign in the Holbrook Island Sanctuary:

Scenic Pollution

The park is very nice, however, if a bit weird. The Goose Falls Trail was lovely and quite easy, but the Beaver Flowage Trail is considerably less scenic.

Yglesias

El El Frijoles

At the suggestion of a Twitter follower, I went with Kate yesterday to have lunch at El El Frijoles in Sargentville, the Blue Hill Peninsula’s first taqueria:

El El Frijoles, Sargentville ME

I had some lobster tacos that make an interesting alternative to the traditional lobster roll. Great chips and salsa and some excellent beans as well. Kate had a pollo asado burrito that she liked a lot. The name is a joke—LL Bean, get it?—part of the trend in which 50 percent of Maine businesses have a lame pun as their name.

Yglesias

Scandal-Free Stimulus

An important observation from Time’s Michael Grunwald:

So far, despite furor over cash it supposedly funneled to contraception (deleted from the bill) and phantom congressional districts (simply typos), the earmark-free Recovery Act has produced surprisingly few scandals. Prosecutors are investigating a few fraud allegations, and critics have found some goofy expenditures, like $51,500 for water-safety-mascot costumes or a $50,000 arts grant to a kinky-film house. But those are minor warts, given that unprecedented scrutiny. Biden knows it’s early — “I ain’t saying mission accomplished!” — but he calls waste and fraud “the dogs that haven’t barked.”

I think that’s true and it’s crackerjack politics. At the same time, rapid economic recovery and employment growth are better politics. And it’s worth noting that the Obama administration’s obsession with avoiding waste and fraud in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act spending has arguably been counterproductive policy.

After all, what you’re ideally trying to do with stimulus funds is mobilize genuinely idle resources to go do something useful. But that can be a bit tricky. And as a second-best alternative, as long as the resources you’re mobilizing are genuinely idle then you’re helping to fight the recession even if your initiative isn’t all that useful in a conventional sense. Almost nothing is totally useless, and the mobilizing of resources will raise incomes and therefore demand for whatever it is that the market determines the income-earners want. But this can easily look like “waste.”

The other thing is that it’s obvious to everyone in a private sector context that the costs of fraud-prevention sometimes exceed the costs of fraud. At CAP, for example, there’s no system in place to prevent people from using the office printer for personal activities. Similarly, you can just walz into the copy room and poach some envelops. And, indeed, fraud and abuse of this sort do take place. But while it wouldn’t be beyond the intellectual capacity of CAP’s senior leadership to design a system to prevent this, preventing the fraud and abuse wouldn’t actually be worthwhile. If you try to do 100 projects well and quickly, you might find out that only 90 of them actually get done well. That might be ten instances of waste. But if the alternative is to avoid all the waste but only get 70 projects done at medium speed, that might be worse.

Politics

Five Years Later, Bush Efforts To Block Medicaid Relief Have A Lasting Impact On The Gulf Coast

hurricane-katrina-childrenThis week, on the eve of the five-year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, a new study was released documenting the shocking psychological toll the storm had on children in the Gulf Coast. Researchers at Columbia’s Mailman School of Public Health found that more than 37 percent of children displaced by Katrina have been diagnosed with depression, anxiety, or behavioral and conduct disorders. These children were also five times more likely to experience emotional disturbances than kids not affected by the hurricane. “From the perspective of the Gulf’s most vulnerable children and families, the recovery from Katrina and the flooding of New Orleans has been a dismal failure,” said study researcher Dr. Irwin Redlener. Earlier studies that examined mental illness in adult survivors found very similar results: just under a third of respondents reported mental problems.

One way that many people could have received mental health care following the storm was through Medicaid. According to the National Alliance on Mental Illness, Medicaid is the dominant source of funding for both children and adults with mental illness, comprising more than 50 percent of public mental health spending. However, the Bush administration — even after being roundly pilloried for the initial logistical response to Katrina — neutered emergency Medicaid relief for Gulf Coast residents in the months following the storm.

After Katrina, Senators from both parties wanted to enact a “Disaster Relief Medicaid” program, which would have temporarily extended Medicaid benefits to all low-income residents affected by the storm, even if they were above the minimum income requirements for enrollment. The same type of program was enacted after the September 11 terror attacks, but this time around, it met stiff resistance from the Bush administration.

The Journal of the American Medical Association outlined the battle in a 2006 article (subscription only):

[T]he pathway to assistance has proven to be bitterly contentious, reflecting a deep philosophical divide rather than party differences… The legislation met with immediate and fierce resistance on the part of the Bush Administration and its supporters, who sought to halt structural Medicaid improvements, at the very time that Congress, as part of the fiscal year 2006 budget process, was preparing to enact Medicaid spending reductions… Seeking to avert legislative establishment of a Medicaid disaster relief program, the Bush Administration devised an alternative that lacked the central elements of the Grassley-Baucus legislation. Predicated on the Health and Human Services Secretary’s powers under the demonstration provisions of the Social Security Act, the Bush Administration’s plan limited aid to 5 months, retained Medicaid’s exclusion of more than half of all poor adults (relying instead on establishing an uncompensated care fund for use by designated states, who in turn would be under no obligation to pay any specific physician or other health care provider), eliminated national coverage portability, and assumed continued financial contribution from affected states.

As one would expect, researchers looking into this issue have found that “having insurance was associated with continuing in mental health treatment.” The Bush administration’s cruel efforts to limit Medicaid assistance in the wake of the storm is having a lasting toll in the Gulf Coast today.

But even the optimal Medicaid Relief program, as was used after September 11, would only have been temporary, and a stronger safety net is needed for victims of this and future disasters. “Hurricane Katrina exposed a health care system incapable of withstanding the long-term impact of a major disaster,” the JAMA article says. “Through destruction and permanent displacement, Katrina illuminated the fundamental weaknesses inherent in the national approach to health care financing, as well as the extent to which these weaknesses can threaten recovery.”

Economy

Kirk Scares Farmers Into Believing They’ll Lose Their Farm Because Of A Tax Almost No Farmers Pay

One of the more enduring myths regarding the estate tax is that it forces family farmers to sell their entire farm when the owner dies, thus depriving them of their sole way to make a living. And Illinois’ Republican Senate candidate Mark Kirk took full advantage of this fear during an appearance before the Illinois Agricultural Legislative Roundtable this week:

We do not want it to be a catastrophic event in the economy of that family’s life, so that the kids who worked on that farm or in that business their whole life suddenly lose it because they can’t meet a 55 percent estate tax that’s just jumped back to life.

Regarding the estate tax, Kirk has said “my preferred rate is zero.”

Before we even get to the unfounded fears that Kirk is playing up to score political points, it should be noted that Kirk is suggesting the currently expired estate tax will come back next year at 55 percent, as current law stipulates. But President Obama and congressional Democrats have proposed permanently reinstating the tax at the 2009 level (45 percent with a $3.5 million exemption), only to be stymied by Republicans in the Senate. If the 55 percent rate does come back, it’ll be due to GOP obstruction.

But back to Kirk’s insistence on scaring farmers. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, only 1.6 percent of all farm estates in the country would be subject to the estate tax at the 2009 level. And a Congressional Budget Office study found that “all but a handful of the farm estates that would owe any tax under the 2009 parameters would have sufficient liquid assets on hand (such as bank accounts, stocks, and bonds) to pay the tax without having to touch the farm or business.”

Those exceedingly few farms that might have a cash-crunch problem “would have other options — such as spreading their payments over a 14-year period — that would allow them to pay the tax without selling off any of the business or farm assets.” In fact, in 2001 — when the estate tax actually was at 55 percent — the American Farm Bureau “could not cite a single example of a farm lost because of estate taxes.”

Iowa State University Economist Neil Harl “said he had searched far and wide but had never found a case in which a farm was lost because of estate taxes.” “It’s a myth,” he said. But it’s a myth that persists, and Kirk is exploiting it to push repealing a tax that overwhelmingly affects the super-rich. Incidentally, repealing the estate tax would cost $784 billion over ten years.

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up