The local hard right always has been an incorrigible bunch — full of venom if you dare to question their rigid, inflexible and myopic views. They used to have some local political clout too, polarizing our community over NH2020 and other issues.
They are not exactly mainstream thinkers: global warming denialism and Agenda 21 conspiracies dance in their heads, and they go so far as to defend pejorative terms such as “rag heads” and “anchor babies.”
In a small town, many conservatives prefer to look the other way and ignore their rants — easier now that their relevancy has vastly decreased. Signs of political moderation appear in our community everyday, as regular readers know.
The “right wing nuts” latest political whipping boy is county Supervisor Nate Beason, handily re-elected to a third term over their tea-party candidate Sue McGuire earlier this summer.
Beason is a respected, educated and well-liked conservative. But the hard right can’t control him, as they have with many conservative “electeds” in the past. This bugs them to no end.
Beason joined Supervisor Ed Scofield in voting against a land-use plan at the airport (part of a Federal Aviation Administration directive), and some vociferous developers sued the County (and persuaded the City of Grass Valley to go along). The case has since been settled out of court.
I’ve read the settlement, and there’s nothing significant that was sacrificed on the Airport Land-Use Commission’s end, including the developers’ attorney’s fees.
But election results and court settlements don’t stop the hard-right ideologues, many of whom remind me of the cartoon character Baby Huey, a giant baby.
This week, Beason went out of his way to seek the community’s views on Proposition 31 — including theirs — at a Supervisors meeting. Prop. 31 seeks to improve government accountability, though it is imperfect — at best.
Beason was going to take the views back to the Regional Council of Rural Counties, where he’d vote on the community’s behalf. A majority of the board, with progressive Terry Lamphier abstaining, voted to state their opposition to the proposition.
But that still wasn’t good enough for the hard right to needle Beason, because he dared to question their specious, partisan theory that the proposition was tied to Agenda 21. A parade of speakers showed up at the meeting to speak out against the proposition and Agenda 21.
“These apparently are the dots that Supes Beason and Lamphier were not able/willing to connect,” hard-right blogger George Rebane ranted on KVMR.
Lumping Beason and Lamphier into the same sentence is like mixing oil and vinegar (at least politically) — and it is misleading.
Once again, the hard right has shown the rest of us that even when you side with them, you still lose.
As Republicans, they are eating their own. They act like big babies — apt for a Saturday morning TV cartoon.
Filed under: Uncategorized
Well said, a good take on the heart and soul of the hard right. Evident in every policy emanating from Rove to Bush to the designated targets, American or Foreign. Now a new generation of mean-spirited, too much is not enough thinking people, don’t even care about their lies; they know the mood of about 50% of the voters and that 50% is willing to go along. Much easier to believe in short sound bites from rwo white guys that to check Ryan’s budget to see where his priorities are. And Romney’s record as an equity management player: another business that once was reserved for the likes of Meyer Lansky it seems to me.
Actually, this is a classic example of how belief in a conspiracy theory can impede good public policy and government reform.
Proposition 31, if passed, would do the following:
1) Establishes two-year state budget cycle.
2) Prohibits Legislature from creating expenditures of more than $25 million unless offsetting revenues or spending cuts are identified.
3) Permits Governor to cut budget unilaterally during declared fiscal emergencies if Legislature fails to act.
4) Requires performance reviews of all state programs.
5) Requires performance goals in state and local budgets.
6) Requires publication of bills at least three days prior to legislative vote.
7) Allows local governments to alter how laws governing state-funded programs apply to them, unless Legislature or state agency vetoes change within 60 days.
In short, this Proposition increases local control, state government accountability, and impedes last minute legislative shenanigans. That is why the California Republican Party supports this Proposition.
But, what our local right wing activists oppose is the point that in places in the bill it discusses a process to address compliance with state mandates on a regional basis. And it uses words that appear to have some similarity to A 21. Of course the word police will oppose anything that uses the words “sustainable”, “prosperous economy” or “social equity”, just because the words were used more than 20 years ago in a UN document.
The same UN document more than 20 years ago used the words, “economic development”, “improved living standards”, “new and additional financial resources”, “growing investment capital and wealth”, and “trade liberalization”. Does this mean that we are now required to be against these things as well?
Never mind that we use the words “sustainable” “prosperous” and “equitable” every day, and it has nothing to do with A 21; that community members who seek to design their communities so they are more pedestrian friendly and safer for kids walking to school use them, they are socialists; or that local governments, seeking to reduce the cost of providing services and thus reduce local tax burdens use them, they are socialists; or that community members seeking to reduce the amount of time they spend in their cars by planning more efficient street networks use them, they are socialists; or that groups of local governments trying to deal with big issues like wastewater treatment, accessible housing and providing necessary infrastructure use them, they are socialists too.
Which really just illustrates that what these local activists are really against is not A 21; opposition to A 21 is just an ORGANIZING TOOL to build a constituency to oppose what they are really against; zoning, planning, data driven public processes and cooperating with our neighbors to solve problems. What they are really against is empowered citizens who think differently from them taking responsibility to build their community of choice. And by painting everyone one who uses these words, or proposes local policies to zone, plan, and cooperate as “socialists”, “communists”, “nazis” and “UN stooges”, all phrases used in front of our Board of Supervisors in the last year, they are seeking to intimidate citizens into dropping out of their own community processes to solve problems.
Ironically, the local “property rights” and Tea Party activists using A 21 are opposing the very thing they say they want, local control. They do not want local control, they want to control the local processes; and people like Nate Beason are standing up to them, and speaking out for democracy.
Good for Nate: he can oppose Prop 31 for his own set of reasons, and oppose the craziness of the anti-A 21 folks at the same time.
To illustrate just how far these people are willing to go to lie to the public in order to control our local processes consider the post currently up on George Rebane’s web site, which is a text of his commentary on Proposition 31 he delivered on KVMR on August 31st.
Next to the post where George claims “Prop31 calls for state approved and eventually mandated plans for regional coordination” he posted a map. That map is not included in the Proposition. That map has nothing to do with the Proposition. The origin of that map came from an effort in 2006 by a panel convened by the state to look at locally focused economic development strategies.
http://www.cvc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/california_economic_strategy_panel_regions.pdf
But any reader of George’s comments, or listener on KVMR going there after his commentary, would assume that the map is attached to the legislation. This is intentionally misleading and a bold faced lie.
The reality is that Proposition 31 would allow local governments to define their own regional solutions, to self identify their regions, and in doing so develop their own policy to solve problems. What the Proposition really offers is a chance for local governments to solve those problems better than state solutions can, and be rewarded for doing so.
Isn’t this the very same local control conservatives and even Tea Party activists (who I would argue are not true conservatives) have been asking for?
In short this Proposition limits the power of state government, expands the solutions local governments can consider, and rewards them for taking responsibility for solving their own problems.
But our local right wing activists are not interested in solving problems; instead they are interested in using lies, innuendo, intimidation, and the power of the bully pulpit to gain power. And in doing so they seek to overwhelm those of us who want to work in our own communities to provide solutions by calling us “socialists”.
I am a proud, bold faced capitalist. I believe in small business. I believe that citizens. empowered to act in their own behalf have the solutions to our problems, and can build a stronger, safer and more livable communities.
Once again, good for Nate: he can stand up to bullying and stand on his principles at the same time. This is exactly the type of local leadership we should be proud of, and that we should be supporting when attacked by irrational extremists.
Great analysis, Steve. The idea of the unnatural intrusion of government is a huge sore point for the right. It has almost become the “Jesus in the toast” for them. Their fundamental concept that we must experience the genuine consequences of our actions has merit. I think the problem is that because we are unable to have a civil debate about this point, their belief has festered into an obsession.
I wonder if anyone on the right agrees with me.
Remember ‘doublespeak’ from Orwells ’1984′. The tea party and right wing conservatives are making it a new art form. The thanks for you history and POV.
I find their obsession on global warming/ climate change very odd. As for behavior towards those who don’t agree with them, they are a bunch of bullies who get off on intimidating others. There is nothing more pathetic than to see guys well into their senior years of life still acting like bully adolescent boys.
What I find amazing is the vehemence with which they feel they must deny the truth of any new info supporting global warming and then the launching of their personal attacks as part of accepted, substantial proof that their understanding of this issue is far superior to any believer. Of course the intellectual bullies are so full of toxic gases, every word they utter causes the death of another flower.
Please take your charts to the islands in the Artic circle and use them to explain to the natives that the sea isn’t rising.
Nothing to do but stand up to bullies. Put a brown shirt on them and one would think they were back in the 30′s.
Totally agree with your tactic, Steve, as this Know Nothing right wing, eight cylinder ignorance machine has a radio blaring tripe from Todd, Russ–ours and Florida’s, Rebane, and the army of idolizers of non-facts, unreason, superstition, science denialism, whose intellects are essentially as curious, creative, productive and imaginative as an 11th century monk toiling away copying another Bible or holy text in the fortress like Scritorium– brilliantly depicted in Inquisitional hues by the maker Of the Name Of the Rose.
But the Inquisition wasn’t successfully countered by playing nice. Unfortunately, the Know Nothings have the same mind set and one must be prepared to, as our dear, departed Clemenza commands in the Godfather, “Go to the mattresses.” The know nothings have guns lots of them. And there are plenty of that mob that would just love touse them on some Yankee liberal, commie, Mother fu++=
Ed,
Stand strong, be proud, and use facts to make your arguments. Let them have the monopoly on the nonsense, bigotry, racism, and selfishness. When it comes down to it we can’t eat guns. At one point the realization that we are hardwired to depend on each other and we are communal creatures we will have a chance at moving forward as a species and a codependent animal at every level in our global ecosystem. Unfortunately until selfish people have a major personal challenge they cannot meet by themselves do they ever seem to see the light. I hope your health is getting better, you opinions are really enjoyed by many here.
I certainly understand how important facts once were in debates. As I’ve said and Leonard Pitts, facts don’t matter–anymore. Ignorance rules. Finally started Jacoby’s, The Age of American Unreason, much like Idiot Ameria, I think. Just don’t think we can survive much more Republican rule.
Thanks for the good health wishes; will have a lung biopsy 9/12 then fly to Boston when able to have the mass of muck removed, be it cancer or whatever. After my first fall May 28 and 7 hrs on the floor and several E.R. trips by car and ambulance to S.N., then hospitalization, critically ill with pneumonia, now home on oxygen, I don’t know how you all put up with S.N. a for profit hospital. I argued with one E.R. crew their diagnosis was wrong. Turns out I was right and they were wrong. One doesn’t beat two terminal cancer diagnosises, beat another serious cancer, have a fourth, plus many other operations and wtch three family members die young and not learn a thing or two. Like I told Todd the always wrong hard right guy, “I am a source,” and to many people I am on the health list serve I co-own and run and my curiosity about so many countries histories, not just ours.
Anyway, the cancer center Dr. flat out told me I have lung cancer, but I take it in stride, as I’ve been through a litter full of cat’s lives. And were I healthy and those candy as+ right wingers who love to call people commies just because their smarter, well, I’ll just rub the Buddha hanging from my neck
Well Ed,
I love your fighting spirit and seemingly very accepting attitude towards life. I will keep you in my thoughts.
Ben
Can you tell that I am a little incensed at the propaganda coming out of our community?
Here is another piece: the key target of their ire is Nicolas Bergguen, who is a major funder of Proposition 31. Like the xenophobes they are, they seek to paint Mr. Bergguen as some sort of european, socialist, interloper in California policy. He is a United States Citizen, who lives in California and Florida, and choose to bring his life and his capital (in the billions in investments) to the United States. We just watched an entire stage managed Republican National Convention where just such people were held up as true American heroes. You could not turn around in Tamps without hearing the story of immigrants coming to America because it is the land of opportunity.
But where did the idea for Proposition 31 come from? It was not Mr. Berggruen’s idea; It came from California Forward, a bipartisan think tank, and the Think Long Committee of California. And who is [was] on the Think Long Committee:
David Bonderman, CEO of TPG Capital
Eli Broad, of the Eli Broad Companies and the Broad Foundation
Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google
Willie Brown, former Speaker of the Assembly
Gerald Parsky, of Aurora Capital Group
Condoleeza Rice, former US Secretary of State under George Bush and Hoover Institution Fellow
Bob Hertzberg, former California Assembly Speaker
Matt Fong, former Republican Senate Candidate and Treasurer
George Schultz, former Secretary of State under Ronald Reagan
Gray Davis, former California Governor
Laura Tyson, former chair of the Presidents Council of Economic Advisors
Maria Dulzura, LA AFL-CIO
Terry Semel, Windsor Media
http://berggruen.org/files/thinklong/2011/blueprint_appendix_1_presenters.pdf
The recommendations came out of thousands of hours of work interviewing business leaders, investors, small businesses, economic development professionals, local governments, and community leaders.
These people are not “socialists”, “communists”, “Nazi’s” and “UN stooges”.
If every effort at bipartisanship in our society is taken down by our new “Know-Nothing” Party, aka the Tea Party, then we can kiss our country goodbye.
These Know-Nothings are not the patriots. The patriots are the ones who care enough about their country to work to find solutions.
Lets have some fun with this one:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#48867552
Steve,
I posted this on FB. It is the speakers of the RNC backstage smoking cigars, snifter of brandy and talking of the old days. They even have the palm trees.
Steve,
“These Know-Nothings are not the patriots. The patriots are the ones who care enough about their country to work to find solutions.”
Is so correct. Unfortunately those who seek solutions are the people attacked by the know nothings and the low information followers follow those who appear the strongest. Seeking solutions is a smart position but not a strong position.
In the end I think that seeking rational solutions, working across artificial divides, and promoting rational governance is the strong position. What the “Know-Nothings” are counting on is that if they create conflict people will stay away. But in the end, eventually, everyone has some reason to get involved; and the people who call them names, intimidate them, and act like bullies, are rejected.
I think it is also foolish to give our local “Know-Nothings” more attention than they really deserve (which I am way guilty of). The reality is that the Rebane’s, Steel’s, Juvinall’s, Shea’s, and Caler’s, of our community are in a distinct minority, as demonstrated by our election results. One see’s it every time they show up at the BOS to speak. Even if certain board members agree with them on a specific issue, as they did on Prop 31, their body language reveals the truth; that the BOS is sick of hearing the same unsourced, irrelevant, nonsense testimony on every barely connected issue. It just wastes their time while adding nothing to the actual information they need to make responsible, informed decisions.
Steve,
I too am guilty of feeding the beast but my theory is to get them to expose their beliefs publicly. Also it allows me to try and understand the logic behind their views. Even though I disagree there is logic to their beliefs. Below the Todd Snider song is pretty funny, I’m a fan of him.
I think Todd Snider is making fun of all of us, Ben.
Ben, I do appreciate the positives you have said re. my posts but am a bit confused about the “stand proud be strong and use facts to make your arguements,” as, in part, it sounds too much like a Todd reply, which I don’t find flattering nor justified by any posts I’ve read.
But having been a teacher and having had a novel published, presenting dry facts and nothing else, IMO, is a quick way to lose one’s audience. Sometimes the format requires just the facts, but most of the time, I don’t believe our chatter should be taken so seriously.
But even more importantly, and as I have stated here, I use a line from Leonard Pitts quite often: Facts don’t matter. In today’s discourse, examples abound supporting his short truism.
Any time one chooses to jump into challenge Todd’s uninformed essays, thy jumper, of course is accused of being stupid, ignorant. etc., you know the drill, when in fact real facts and scholarship are as scarce on his website as they were amoung the Soviet citizens when I was there in the summer of 1972. Nor is there any knowledge of the methodology of historiography or proper sourcing, which is why, I suppose, questions are never answer with facts, only insults and other derogatory statements. As for the others of his ilk, they aren’t much better outside their areas of expetise.
Often, I’ll spend more time than is justified to check a fact, but I haven’t sppecialized just in American history. In fact, Soviet history and Asian history kept me busy before I really turned serious attention to American history. So please don’t bet agin me, because just because I throw in pop culture references doesn’t diminish the strength of an arguement. That’s the Ruminator’s big problem; language is meant to communicate with and usually with as many people as possible.
And you should have noticed, when issues are “debated” in the dragon’s lair, I’ll cover anybody’s back under attack from the presiding smelly, fire breath of Smaug.
Didya Hear They Have A New, Spooky Documentary Coming Out About The Tea Party? Yeah, It’s Called:
2012: Every Which Way But Lucid
I’ll have to remember that one!
I think Todd Snider captures the stereotypical view of George Reabane’s “Great Divide” the best in his song….