Surprise, surprise, surprise...

What,  fear mongering? No way. (Original post here)

Exclusive: RNC document mocks donors,  plays on 'fear' By: Ben Smith March 3, 2010 04:23 PM EST

The Republican National Committee plans to raise money this  election cycle through an aggressive campaign capitalizing  on “fear” of President Barack Obama and a promise to "save the  country from trending toward socialism." The strategy was detailed in a confidential party fundraising  presentation, obtained by POLITICO, which also outlines how  “ego-driven” wealthy donors can be tapped with offers of access  and “tchochkes.” The presentation was delivered by RNC Finance Director Rob  Bickhart to top donors and fundraisers at a party retreat in Boca  Grande, Florida on February 18, a source at the gathering said. In neat PowerPoint pages, it lifts the curtain on the often-cynical  terms of political marketing, displaying an air of disdain for the  party’s donors that is usually confined to the barroom conversations  of political operatives. The presentation explains the Republican fundraising in simple  terms. "What can you sell when you do not have the White House, the  House, or the Senate...?" it asks. The answer: "Save the country from trending toward Socialism!” Manipulating donors with crude caricatures and playing on their  fears is hardly unique to Republicans or to the RNC – Democrats  raised millions off George W. Bush in similar terms – but rarely is  it practiced in such cartoonish terms. One page, headed “The Evil Empire,” pictures Obama as the  Joker from Batman, while House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and  Senate Majority Leaders Harry Reid are depicted as Cruella  DeVille and Scooby Doo, respectively. The document, which two Republican sources said was prepared  by the party’s finance staff, comes as Chairman Michael Steele  struggles to retain the trust and allegiance of major donors, who  can give as much as $30,400 a year to the party. Under Steele, the RNC has shifted toward a reliance on small donors,  but the document reveals extensive, confidential details of the strategy  for luring wealthy checkwriters, which range from luxury retreats in  California wine country to tickets to a professional fight in Las Vegas. The 72-page document was provided to POLITICO by a Democrat,  who said a hard copy had been left in the hotel hosting the  $2,500-a-head retreat, the Gasparilla Inn & Club. Sources at  the event said the presentation was delivered by Bickhart and by  the RNC Finance Chairman, Peter Terpeluk, a former ambassador to  Luxembourg under President George W. Bush. The RNC reacted with alarm to a question about it Thursday, emailing  major donors to warn them of a reporter’s question, and distancing  Steele from its contents.  “The document was used for a fundraising  presentation Chairman Steele did not attend, nor had he seen the  document,” RNC Communications Director Doug Heye said in an  email. “Fundraising documents are often controversial. “Obviously, the Chairman disagrees with the language and finds  the use of such imagery to be unacceptable. It will not be used by  the Republican National Committee – in any capacity – in the future,”  Heye said. The most unusual section of the presentation is a set of six slides  headed “RNC Marketing 101.” The presentation divides fundraising  into two traditional categories, direct marketing and major donors, and  lays out the details of how to approach each group. The small donors who are the targets of direct marketing are described  under the heading “Visceral Giving.” Their motivations are listed as “ fear;” “Extreme negative feelings toward existing Administration;” and  “Reactionary.” Major donors, by contrast, are treated in a column headed “Calculated Giving.”  Their motivations include: “Peer to Peer Pressure”; “access”;  and “Ego-Driven.” The slide also allows that donors may have more honorable motives,  including “Patriotic Duty.” A major Republican donor described the state of the RNC’s relationship  with major donors as “disastrous,” with veteran givers beginning to  abandon the committee, which is becoming increasingly reliant on  small donors. The party’s average contribution in 2009, according to the document,  was just $40, and the shift toward a financial reliance on the grassroots  may help explain Steele’s increasingly strident tone toward the  Obama Administration. While the crude portrayal of Obama may be - as Steele ‘s spokesman  put it - “unacceptable,” other elements of the presentation may be of  equal interest to close political observers. The RNC plans to raise $8.6 million from major donors alone in 2010,  an ambitious goal totaling more than it raised from all donors combined  in 2009. The center of that plan is an extensive, and colorful, schedule of events.  Along with traditional fundraisers with conservative luminaries including  Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol and former presidential candidate Steve  Forbes, the party plans to raise $80,000 for a trip to London to meet David  Cameron, the British Conservative Party leader, on September 17. The RNC’s “Young Eagles” – younger major donors and the only group,  according to a major donor, continuing to pull its weight financially – are  invited to a “professional bull riding event” in October, expected to raise  $50,000, and to a no-holds-barred Ultimate Fighting Championship fight  in Las Vegas the same month, expected to raise $60,000. The RNC’s aim, according to one section of the document: “Putting the  Fun Back in FUNdraising.”

© 2010 Capitol News Company, LLC

Clarity on healthcare reform...

The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation has produced a detailed "Side By Side Comparison of Major Health Care Reform Proposals."  Although this is certainly not pleasure reading, per se... it will be invaluable for your C-span journey on Thursday.  You are going to be there on Thursday, right??? :) 

To view the report: click here

Taxes and stuff...

The rich got richer, and paid less taxes

What George W. Bush didn't want you to know about the wealthiest 400 Americans

Andrew Leonard

Feb. 18, 2010 |

I can't say that I was surprised to learn, from a new report by former New York Times tax reporter David Cay Johnston, that "the incomes of the top 400 American households soared to a new record high... in 2007, while the income tax rates they paid fell to a record low..."

Nor was I shocked to learn that those 400 taxpayers, who boasted an average income of $344.8 million, paid an effective tax rate of 16.2 percent, which is "lower than the typical effective income tax rate paid by Americans with incomes in the low six figures."

This is America, right? We've come to expect shocking statistics on income inequality. They're practically our birth right.

But then came the kicker:

The annual top 400 report was first made public by the Clinton administration, but the George W. Bush administration shut down access to the report. Its release was resumed a year ago when President Obama took office.

Because you know, if you are going to reward the richest Americans with tax cuts, it's best if you keep the rest of us in the dark as to just how much money they're making, and how little they are paying Uncle Sam.

-- Andrew Leonard

Original article here

On the way?

Human trafficking... it exists

German authorities say they have searched around 600 brothels across the country in an effort to track down women who may have been smuggled from West Africa as part of an international human trafficking ring.

The Federal Criminal Police Office said Wednesday that Tuesday evening's raids turned up more than 100 women from West Africa and that there were indications that some were victims of human trafficking.

German investigators say the nationwide crackdown follows investigations that suggest a network of West Africans active in Germany and other European countries is involved in prostitution, human trafficking, passport forgery and other illegal activity.

About 63 per cent of the roughly 400,000 sex workers in Germany are migrants, the majority arriving from central and eastern Europe, according to 2008 figures from the European Network for HIV/STI Prevention and Health Promotion among Migrant Sex Workers, known by the acronym Tampep.

While prostitution in Germany is not illegal, migrants cannot obtain entry into Germany as a sex worker, meaning many who enter the country do so illegally.

This makes them more vulnerable to exploitation, Tampep said in their latest report on working conditions in the country.

Africa is the source of about 12 per cent of all migrant sex workers in Europe and accounts for about six per cent in Germany, according to Tampep.

Nigeria, Morocco, Cameroon, Sierra Leone and Algeria are the African countries most often cited by European officials as the countries of origin of migrant sex workers, some of whom are believed to have been brought into the countries through illegal means.

With files from the Associated Press

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/02/03/germany-trafficking.html#ixzz0ebItDdaL

A Christianity Today must read...

Strong on Zeal, Thin in Knowledge (link here)

Lessons from Haiti's arrest of American Christians trying to take children out of the country.

Jedd Medefind | posted 2/03/2010 09:56AM

Newswires buzzed recently with reports that a group of ten Americans from an Idaho-based Christian charity were arrested trying to transport 33 Haitian children into the Dominican Republic contrary to the rules of Haiti's government. Although details are still emerging, the story thus far suggests a potent mingling of good intentions with ill-advised plans. Fellow Christians embarrassed by the incident should have the grace to withhold the abuse many observers are now piling on the group, but we can still take a strong lesson on the need to match zeal with knowledge in every effort to "care for orphans in their distress."

According to their website, the group's goal was to "rescue Haitian orphans abandoned on the streets … and bring them to New Life Children's Refuge in Cabarete, Dominican Republic." This "Refuge" is at present a 45-room hotel the ministry leased to house the children as an interim measure. Ultimately, they planned to construct an orphanage that would provide long-term care, and also the potential of adoption for children that could not be reunited with relatives.

These rickety plans, along with the decision to remove the children from Haiti without approval, were a recipe for trouble. Adding further to the impression of sloppy do-goodism, it now appears that some of the children had living parents and were not in need of rescue at all.

Appropriately, many relief organizations have voiced strong concern over the incident. Meanwhile, others in the foreign aid world—which often tends to be dismissive of volunteer efforts and highly critical of international adoption—have sought to make the situation a cause célèbre. Private blogs and even some nonprofit websites now venture beyond the known facts, implying gross neglect of the children by the Christian group and even worse. No doubt some hope to harness the situation to foster broader criticism of adoption, and to emphasize the superiority of large-scale, government-centered models of aid to smaller acts of private charity.

Even as we apply strong words to the group's actions—"reckless" and "irresponsible" come to mind—we should first be reminded what this debacle does not tell us:

First, it does not tell us that Christians have the market cornered on well-intentioned but poorly-devised attempts at aid.

Far from it. As writers like William Easterly and Dambisa Moyo lay out in disturbing detail, the history of efforts to help the needy—both government and private, religious and secular—is rife with failed largesse. A brief survey of public welfare programs in the U.S. alone would dwarf this situation in both size and foolishness for examples of benevolence gone awry.

Second, it does not tell us that compassion motivated by Christian faith is somehow peripheral to "real" disaster aid. Thousands of committed Christian organizations, churches and individuals—both foreign and indigenous—were effectively meeting deep needs in Haiti even before the earthquake. Today, these entities and recently arrived allies are central to relief efforts on the ground in Haiti, as are Christians in every catastrophe. The actions of a single small group certainly don't define the Christian response, nor should we feel embarrassed of our faith-inspired efforts in response to future disasters.

Finally, it does not tell us that the significance of adoption in caring for orphans should be marginalized. Although the press played up reports that the group had mentioned adoption to the U.S. as one potential way to eventually help some of the children, this was clearly not the group's primary focus. Nor could such adoptions have happened on any scale without massive amounts of U.S. and local paperwork, as any adoptive family knows. The group's errors to date were actually examples of on-the-ground orphan care gone wrong, not of mishandled adoptions. Yet no one is suggesting we should now shun orphan care, nor should they. The Christian community should stand strongly behind a full spectrum of in-country orphan care efforts, as well as the option of international adoption for children who'd otherwise grow up without families.

Amidst all this, what this situation does tell us is much more straightforward.

Passion alone is simply not sufficient; it must be consistently paired with wisdom. Zeal without knowledge can be a destructive force. A compassionate impulse may indeed be God's nudging, and certainly should not be ignored. But the hard work of education, preparation, and planning most always stands between us and a job well done.

For those freshly woken to the needs of orphans, one other reminder will be helpful as well. Prior to the earthquake, Haiti had an estimated 380,000 children who had lost at least one parent. Tens of thousands lived in orphanages, on Haiti's streets, and as household slaves. These tragic situations are mirrored in many developing countries worldwide. So while the current crisis adds urgency to the biblical call to "defend the cause of the fatherless," the need to respond did not start with Haiti's latest anguish. Nor will it end when the television cameras no longer bring their images to mind.

Thus, in this moment—stirred as we are by Haiti's pain, and freshly reminded of the hazards of poorly-directed zeal—the most significant reminder is that

knowledge-guided love is always needful. The emotion we're feeling is one that can be acted upon for the rest of our lives. Amidst the current crisis, we must help as best we can: giving generously, praying seriously, and even working on the ground alongside trustworthy organizations and local churches. Meanwhile, it's never too early to begin readying ourselves for a longer journey, joining passion with preparedness, and compassion with commitment, to serve wisely and well for the distance.

Jedd Medefind is President of the Christian Alliance for Orphans, which will host Summit VI in April 2010 to help churches and organizations seeking to engage in adoption and orphan ministry. He previously served as a Special Assistant to President George W. Bush and led the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.

"Speaking Out" is Christianity Today's guest opinion column and (unlike an editorial) does not necessarily represent the opinion of the magazine.

Really... more from Fox News???

Just a few things to mention about this Huffington vs. Beck issue-

Regarding the audio section (specifically):

1) Making fun of someone because they speak differently? Is this really reporting?  Really?  It wasn't cool in 1st grade, it it only makes you look like a complete fool when your supposed to be a "news-caster" now.  Yeah, and because she "sounds like Zsa Zsa Gabor," that makes her questions invalid, right?  Nice diversion.  It must works for the ignorant masses who love you, but even in the high school debate club, we all know the coach would have called you out and told you your tactics were invalid.

Seriously, I hate what reporting has become (no, it's not just you Beck... don't be so vain).

By the way, this (I know, heaven forbid I bring it up because America clearly doesn't have race issues still lingering) is a simple reminder of the many comments and philosophies used to propitiate racist and discriminatory actions... except its sorta' cute and funny when Beck laughs (and encourages you to laugh) about it.  

Regarding the video (the 'slaughtered' section is after 9:30... unless you are a glutton for punishment)


1) Fear-mongering.  Fear-mongering.  Fear-mongering.  Fear-mongering. Fear-mongering.  Fear-mongering. Fear-mongering.  Fear-mongering. Fear-mongering.  Fear-mongering. Fear-mongering.  Fear-mongering.  Any question?

2) Liar liar, pants on fire?  Any response Mr. Beck?

3)  Beck's tirade regarding Obama's guilt by association (you know, him talking to Andy Stern) is so awesome... maybe we should revolt before the President of the United States (by himself) passes all of this in Congress (the same Congress you have accused Obama of doing nothing in over the past year).  But I have yet to see Obama the Marxist present the Marxist paperwork to prove this Marxist-laden accusation and refer you to point 1 (which is of course, not Marxist).  

I shouldn't be so irritated, but I am.
Recently I watched Fox news cut Obama's retort to the GOP (which I felt was excellent) almost 1/3 short, and was told by some that this was no big deal (among other things).  Ideology at work I said, but I was shouted down by various distracting arguments (seeing a pattern anyone?).

So what's the problem?

Well, when people like Arianna Huffington (forgive her apparent foreign stupidity) cannot be heard when she is asking sensible questions, and is openly mocked by a well known faux-journalist, I begin to wonder.

How many people watch this news unreflectively?   And how many to their own detriment hear not only news, but ridiculously slanted commentary and start to worry about "those people," yeah, the ones who are coming to get us, and believe the crap they hear, and start their journey toward backward, discriminatory, illogical and just plain poor thinking.

This my friends is sad.  and it it makes me mad.
It should make us all mad.

And we should stop this backward thinking not reward it with money, fame, and political prosperity... much less a highly watched television program.