Obama Is DOOMED Next Year... Or Is He?

Whenever one flips on the TV and looks at the headlines, we see crap. We see the media obsessing over nonsense while ignoring the stories that legitimate news outlets in other parts of the world would consider "real news".

A good example of the problem with America's corporate media is with the latest obsession over "Obama FAIL!!!" They scream about a poll proclaiming, "55% believe Obama will LOSE!!!", but they don't ask any questions as to why those results came out when the actual head to head polls against leading Republicans tell a completely different story. When the Republicans can't even carry a quintessential swing state like Florida or pummel Obama nationally during what's supposed to be his "WORST. MONTH. EVER!!!", why isn't anyone asking why so many Americans believe Obama is certain to lose next year when all relevant data point otherwise?

I think we know the reason why. This is the narrative the media want. They know nothing drives up ratings and campaign ad buys like a knock-down, drag-out, neck-n-neck horse race. And they know President Obama is no longer the "sexy" "new guy", so they continue to search desperately for someone, ANYONE!, in the Republican Party who they can crown as "THE Next HOT Political Commodity!" as Republican primary voters still can't figure out which flavor of "TEA" they dislike the least.

Yet while the media keep asking stupid questions and providing even more asinine answers about Campaign 2012, they continue to ignore the real story of the year that they're too afraid to publicize. This is what most of the media won't talk about:





These were Ronald Reagan's own words in 1985:

We’re going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying ten percent of his salary, and that’s crazy. [...] Do you think the millionaire ought to pay more in taxes than the bus driver or less?

See how effortlessly they fit into what Barack Obama is saying in 2011:

Now, when I point this out, some of the Republicans in Congress say, ‘oh you’re engaging in class warfare.’ Let me tell you something. Years ago, one great American had a different view. I’m going to get the quote, just so you know I’m not making this up. A great American said that he thought it was ‘crazy’ that certain tax loopholes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying ten percent of his salary.

Alright. You know who this guy was? It wasn’t a Democrat. It wasn’t some crazy socialist. It was Ronald Reagan. It was Ronald Reagan. Last time I checked, Republicans all thought Reagan made some sense. So next time you hear one of those Republicans in Congress accusing you of class warfare, you just tell them I’m with Ronald Reagan. I agree with Ronald Reagan that it’s crazy that a bus driver pays a higher tax rate than some millionaire because of a loophole in the tax code. And by the way, I don’t mind being called a warrior for the working class. You guys need someone working for you.

When today's Republican Party is even attacking long time conservative icon Ronald Reagan as "SOE-SHUL-IST!!!", why won't the media notice? And when more and more "ordinary people" "occupy Wall Street" and ask more questions about America's entire political system and why it has to be corrupted with so much corporate money, why won't the media notice? Well, I can definitely answer that last question. It's easier, cheaper, and less threatening to corporate media owners to just "pin the blame on Obama" and craft the 2012 narrative around "Obama FAIL!!!" than dig deeper in Washington and notice the bigger problem with American politics today.

In case you missed this now viral video featuring one blogger challenging an international media empire, watch:



Right there, we have a quick summary of what's wrong with our politics, the media's coverage of it, today. It's easy to just look at the angst and frustration now commonplace throughout America and make snapshot judgments on President Obama's reelection campaign. It takes much harder work to dig deeper and tackle the more serious questions of why Congress has taken no action this year to curb unemployment and address the deepening poverty crisis, and why the Republican Party has fallen off the deep end in celebrating extremely regressive and ineffective economic policy. And of course, that kind of work by reporters may not be appreciated by their corporate overlords. So instead, we continued to be subjected to more mindless "Obama FAIL!!!" drivel as media pundits keep searching for the perfect Republican candidate of their dreams and more "ordinary people" just get more frustrated.

Surprise! Nevada Supremes Asked to Take on Redistricting

Sooner or later, this was bound to happen... However, it is happening in a funny way. Take it way, Mr. Secretary...

Secretary of State Ross Miller has asked the Nevada Supreme Court to enter the legal battle over redistricting, arguing that the Carson City judge in charge of the lawsuit over how the state should redraw its political boundaries has “impermissibly abdicated” his duty to decide legal issues critical to the case.

In an emergency writ filed with the supreme court this afternoon, Miller accused Carson District Judge James Todd Russell of failing to “resolve many of the critical legal issues that will directly impact how the maps must be drawn.”

After a lengthy hearing last month, Russell ordered three special masters to redraw the state’s congressional, assembly and senate boundaries. While Russell set the legal perimeters the masters must use to redraw the lines, he failed to rule on any of the questions brought up by both Republicans and Democrats.

Many pundits had expected one or the other of the major parties to appeal a map that overly favored the other side, but this is quite the curveball. However, it's certainly a justified one. I still can't wrap my head around Judge Russell punting pretty much everything from the Voting Rights Act to proper population divisions to this panel of special masters he's hellbent on creating. There's a reason why this case is in his court, yet Judge Russell doesn't seem all that interested in deciding anything.

So perhaps it's a blessing in disguise to get the Nevada Supremes to intervene sooner rather than later. And it really is refreshing to see them intervene due to legitimate legal issues brought up by our Secretary of State rather than another instance of ridiculous partisan political whining.

Another Reminder of Why Marriage Matters

[Joe] Edson said that, as a couple, [he and registered domestic partner Mike Hardie] have "jumped through all the legal hoops backwards" to get many of the same rights and protections that come to opposite-sex couples. That includes legal powers of attorney for health issues and revocable trusts. Edson said he had to be treated for colon cancer in 2004 and that helped propel the decision to get family rights.

"Any drunk heterosexual couple can wander into an Elvis chapel in Las Vegas and get all of these rights automatically," Edson said. "We have the education and the financial wherewithal to get those kinds of rights documented. A lot of our friends do not."

I've yet to see truer words printed on the front page of The Reno Gazette-Journal. It actually had an interesting story today on the long and tortuous journey to equality that Nevada's LGBTQ families are still making. And yes, we still have more to do.

But again, we must stress that DPs under SB 283 are not marriage and will not be treated by the federal government as such. Even if you and your partner file for a DP this fall, you will still not be able to file a joint federal tax return. You won't be able to receive any spousal benefits from the military or the VA. You won't be able to sponsor your partner for US citizenship or permanent residency if he/she is a foreign national. Unfortunately, DOMA still applies here as it does across the nation. This is why it's crucial that not only Nevada law change to give our families full equality, but that federal law change as well.

And that's our dilemma. Now DP couples get all the federal burdens of marriage without any of the federal benefits.

Hardie and Edson registered as a domestic couple in Nevada. But that led to an unexpected legal entanglement. The Internal Revenue Service ruled that in community property states like Nevada, California and Washington, people who are registered as domestic partners have to file under community property laws, so they got those tax liabilities. But the federal Defense of Marriage Act prohibits them from filing joint returns, so they do not get any of the benefits of filing as a married couple.

There are at least 1,138 federal marriage benefits that Nevada domestic partners can not access. And until Nevada allows for full civil marriage equality and federal law recognizes all civil marriages as equal, we won't have full legal equality in our relationships. Hopefully as more Nevadans see more of their fellow LGBTQ Nevadans being a vital part in their communities, we'll see change happen in our lifetime.

Nevada's Turn... For What, Exactly?

Perusing Nevada Appeal this morning, I noticed this AP story explaining how "Nevada is preparing for its Cinderella moment". Oh yes, that's right. They went there.

Of course, the big news over the weekend was over how Nevada and the other officially approved early caucus/primary states reacted to Florida jumping the gun in moving its primary to January 31 (violating both RNC and DNC rules, just as Florida did in 2008). Funny enough, the RNC is now threatening to not just punish Florida, but also punish all the officially approved early caucus/primary states for playing leap frog and simply catching up with Florida's latest move.

So last Saturday night, Nevada Republicans voted to move the caucus to January. So now, "we matter again"... Or do we?

Well, we'll certainly matter in the general election. But when it comes to the Presidential Caucus, Nevada Republicans look to bungle the opportunities being provided to them. After all, the same "tea party" faithful that botched Republican plans for a full Nevada takeover last year are now preventing the party from using same day voter registration at their caucus. The TEA-nuts are crying the usual cries of "VOTER FRAUD!!!", "ACORN!!!", and "LIB'RUL CONSPIRACY!!!", and all I have to say is more power to them (for now, so they can botch GOP plans for a full national takeover next year!).

And looking more broadly at the national Republican scene, do they really expect people to get excited about this?



Or this?



Is this a joke? Just another day in "TEA Party" Crazy Wonderland? Or maybe yet another episode of teabagger follies set to backfire on their GOP lovers quite miserably?

I'm Back!

Thanks for hanging in there with me after a VERY difficult week! In case you didn't notice last week, our friends at The Nevada View were hacked and infected with a virus. That, in turn, caused a chain reaction that nearly shut down this blog. After 48 hours of begging and pleading with Google to take down the false "MALWARE!!! VIRUS!!!" warning, along with nonstop work on The Nevada View's end to root out the virus and retake control of the blog, everything seems to be working again.

So with this done, I'll be resuming my regular blogging schedule tomorrow.

Landra Reid Has Breast Cancer

The last couple years have been really painful for the Reid family. And now, this...

Landra Reid, the wife of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, has been diagnosed with Stage 2 breast cancer and is being treated in Washington, DC.

Reid’s office confirmed the diagnosis this morning when I called. Landra Reid is receiving treatment, including chemotherapy. Reid’s folks emphasized that he is by her side but that his work as majority leader will not be compromised.

"Senator and Mrs. Reid appreciate the thoughts and concerns expressed during this time.” Reid spokesman Zac Petkanas said in response to my inquiry. “They ask that they be afforded the respect and privacy that any family would want.”

You may recall Landra Reid was in a terrible car accident in March of 2010, but she had fully recovered. The Reids have been married for 52 years.

Our thoughts, prayers, and best wishes go out to them. Hopefully, they can weather this next storm.

test

Joe Heck Lied About Medicare... AND President Obama!

Joe Heck finally held a town hall meeting in his district. At least we got that... Even though it was at the very edge of civilization, and even though Heck tried his hardest not to directly answer "difficult" questions. Here he is dancing around his own vote to kill Medicare...



And not only couldn't he muster up the "courage" to mention Paul Ryan and his plan to kill Medicare by name, but he even LIED about what President Obama said! Here are Obama's own words on Medicare...



Go back to 1:20 on the first video to catch Heck's whopper on Obama and Medicare. Again, here is President Obama describing his own proposal to make health care more efficient.



This is what the Presdient proposed:

Many of these proposals build on the savings in the Affordable Care Act and most have already been introduced by the administration in the President’s April deficit reduction proposal. He’s offering $248 billion in Medicare savings and $72 billion in savings from Medicaid and other health care programs. Raising the Medicare eligibility age — which the administration had flirted with in the past — is off the table and instead the President is focusing on finding savings on the provider end, while also asking wealthier beneficiaries to pay more for coverage. [...]

Bottom line is — if what’s driving health care costs at the federal level is national health expenditures, modernization that addresses costs and pays for more efficient care is really the only way of producing long-term savings. Proposals like expanding IPAB and changing payment rates to promote greater efficiency and reduce hospital readmissions are initiatives that will begin to move us in that direction.

And this is Paul Ryan's plan that Joe Heck voted for:

Ryan’s “premium support” proposal for Medicare wouldn’t do anything to actually lower the nation’s health care spending. Rather, it reduces government expenditures by asking future enrollees to pay more for their health care coverage. Future seniors would be taken out of the traditional Medicare program and given a “premium support” to purchase more expensive private coverage. As the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) concluded in its analysis of the Ryan proposal, “a typical beneficiary would spend more for health care…[because] private plans would cost more than traditional Medicare.” ”This would more than double out-of-pocket health-care spending by a typical senior to $12,500 per year.”

See the difference? Paul Ryan's Kill Medicare Plan forces all future seniors to give up traditional Medicare in favor of vouchers, and it would even increase health care costs for current seniors on Medicare.

“This analysis shows the immediate and long-term impacts of these changes in the 3rd Congressional District in Nevada, which is represented by Rep. Joseph J. Heck.

The Republican proposal would have adverse impacts on seniors and disabled individuals in the district who are currently enrolled in Medicare. It would:

• Increase prescription drug costs for 9,500 Medicare beneficiaries in the district who enter the Part D do-nut hole, forcing them to pay an extra $94 million for drugs over the next decade.

• Eliminate new preventive care benefits for 120,000 Medicare beneficiaries in the district.

The Republican proposal would have even greater impacts on individuals in the district age 54 and younger who are not currently enrolled in Medicare. It would:

• Deny 780,000 individuals age 54 and younger in the district access to Medicare’s guaranteed benefits.

• Increase the out-of-pocket costs of health coverage by over $6,000 per year in 2022 and by almost $12,000 per year in 2032 for the 155,000 individuals in the district who are between the ages of 44 and 54.

• Require the 155,000 individuals in the district between the ages of 44 and 54 to save an additional $36.2 billion for their retirement – an average of $182,000 to $287,000 per individual – to pay for the increased cost of health coverage over their lifetimes. Younger residents of the district will have to save even higher amounts to cover their additional medical costs.

• Raise the Medicare eligibility age by at least one year to age 66 or more for 89,000 individuals in the district who are age 44 to 49 and by two years to age 67 for 624,000 individuals in the district who are age 43 or younger. “

President Obama has stated he supports none of this, and would rather see costs controlled by making wealthier seniors pay what they can afford while cutting provider costs and ending insurance industry giveaways. We've already seen this in the Affordable Care Act, and that's what we will continue to see if this proposal is implemented.

Studies have shown that Medicare is far better at controlling costs than private insurers, yet Ryan and Heck continue to mislead on this.



So now, all of a sudden, they're claiming President Obama agrees with them. The fact of the matter is that he doesn't, and that Democratic proposals to enact savings in Medicare and Medicaid are far different than what the "G-O-TEA" has offered. And if Heck is serious about "ending the scare tactics", he can start himself by declining to repeat the lie that "Medicare is going broke", and the only way to "fix" it is by implementing full privatization.

Coming Soon...

I'll have an update on our favorite Congressman. Perhaps we'll have more discussion on the media spin on "class warfare". Oh yes. and I guess we will also have to talk about that election coming soon.

Oh, and let me give you this heads up now. In just over a week, I'll be in Orange County to take care of family matters. So don't be surprised if you don't see as much blogging from me later in October. But don't worry, I will soon be back.

What the Media Won't Tell You About "Class Warfare"

While the corporate media keep obsessing over how "wrong" Shelley Berkley was in saving Nevada's only kidney transplant facility, crying for a "moderate third party" that sounds way too eerily like today's Democratic Party, and misinterpreting poll numbers in trying to predict election results that are still over a year away, we still often see them ignore the biggest stories staring them in the face.

Here it is... Staring them in the face. No really, it's right here!

Many on the right were incensed by the exchange. Why? Well, obviously because the guy who asked the question wants higher taxes on the rich and conservatives disagree. But as it turns out, there’s more to it than that — some are arguing that if this individual wants to voluntarily contribute more to the treasury, he should do so, but people like him and Warren Buffett should leave other wealthy people out of it.

It’s worth pausing to appreciate how ridiculous the argument really is. We’re a massive, modern nation with a vast economy. We face real challenges, and they’re not the kind of challenges individuals can hope to resolve on their own — we need cooperative solutions built around shared action.

Making taxes voluntarily — asking for a little more only from those willing to pay a little more — is absurd.

The GOP’s nonsensical talking points notwithstanding, it’s good to see wealthy individuals stepping up and making the case for more tax fairness. I don’t imagine that will persuade congressional Republicans — nothing seems to persuade congressional Republicans — but it’s a sentiment the public benefits from hearing anyway.

But oh noezzz, he was a LIB'RUL!!!! He was from Teh Googlez!!!

No really, that's all the TEA-nuts have in trying to "refudiate" former Google executive Doug Edwards begging President Obama to raise his taxes in order to invest in the infrastructure we need for more and better jobs for America. And in doing so, they're sloppily glossing over the glaring fact that Edwards pays less in taxes than the vast majority of the rest of us because the capital gains (investment) tax rate is much lower than middle and lower income tax rates.

This is what scares the radical right. When Americans realize how little the super-rich, especially those super-rich that primarily make a living off the financial markets rather than traditional "jobs", actually pay in taxes, they will most certainly be more than willing to send "the tax man" in their direction. Improving tax equity by making the rich pay their fair share is incredibly popular among Americans.

Pay close attention to this recent rant by Elizabeth Warren.



Republicans have been crowing for decades about "class warfare", but they have refused to utter any truth about it. The fact of the matter is that we have indeed seen class warfare in the last forty years, but only the super-rich and largest corporations have been winning this war. Once Americans realize why the rich keep getting richer while they seem stuck in Po'-Town-USA, they may very well redirect their anger in a way that "Tea Party, Inc." fears the most.

And the media fear this as well. They would prefer that we all believe next year's election will be another "neck-n-neck horse race" so they can yet again rake in the millions in ad revenue. That's why we see politics today portrayed as one of those unreal "reality shows" often seen on Bravo or TLC rather than the frustrating growth of inequality and poverty that America's "class warfare" has truly become. So on that note, I should probably get back to browsing through the headlines to see more obsessing over someone pushing to keep open a kidney transplant center, crying for a mythical "moderate third party", and misinterpreting even more poll numbers.

While Sandoval & G-O-TEA Play Political Games, President Obama Wants Us to "Get Going"

As we've learned more about President Obama's American Jobs Act, we see all sorts of desperately needed aid that can give our economy a badly needed boost. Just read the plan yourself and see what's in there.

But you know who isn't even interested in reading the plan? Do I even have to remind you who calls the shots over there?

President Barack Obama’s recently proposed jobs bill puts Gov. Brian Sandoval in a bit of a pickle.

The $447 billion package, which has been likened to a mini-stimulus, includes significant funding for cash-strapped states; much of it is targeted for Nevada’s economic trouble spots: unemployment benefits, construction jobs and education funding.

But Sandoval, a darling of the national Republicans who is expected to dabble in presidential politics this cycle, has generally supported the GOP line of creating jobs through deregulation, not spending.

Perhaps that’s why Sandoval has taken his typically careful path of declining to voice an opinion on the bill that has yet to make an appearance in Congress.

Of course. Brian Sandoval is being "careful" by "declining to voice an opinion" on a bill that would help Nevada's schools stay open and functioning while improving our aging and insufficient infrastructure and providing real jobs for those who need them. How again is that being "careful"?

According to a fact sheet put out by the White House, Nevada could see:

• $258 million to pay for teachers and emergency responders, jobs that have been put at risk by budget shortfalls at the state and local levels.

• $168 million to refurbish old schools and $251 million in infrastructure funding, which could be a significant boost to Nevada’s decimated construction industry.

• Funding to continue emergency unemployment benefits being collected by 44,000 Nevadans who will lose their unemployment checks if Congress doesn’t extend the program.

I'm still missing it. What's so "careful" about denying Nevada these benefits?

And really, what's so "careful" about staying mum on both the American Jobs Act and the G-O-TEA double standard of piling on more federal debt to rebuild Iraq's schools while demanding that we must force ourselves to kill more jobs and harm our own economy before we can rebuild America's schools?

"It's embarrassing," Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) said. "The Senate is saying ... in effect why should we rebuild schools in Iraq on the credit card but expect that schools in Joplin, Missouri, at this moment in time have to be paid for in a way that in any of the previous disaster assistance we've put out paid for."

Even Republicans, like Presidential Candidate and Florida P5 Straw Poll winner Herman Cain, are telling their fellow Republicans in Congress to cut the crap and pass a budget with appropriate disaster relief. As usual, House Republicans are holding everything up and threatening government shutdown yet again if they don't get everything they want. I really don't see anything "careful" about this.

This is what irks me. Slick politicians like Brian Sandoval claim to be "careful" by saying nothing about something which could really help our people, but at the same time they're also saying nothing about bad behavior by folks in their own party which may very well harm our people (again). How is this madness reflective of who we are?

“Some of you here may be folks who actually used to be Republicans but are puzzled by what’s happened to that party, are puzzled by what’s happening to that party. I mean, has anybody been watching the debates lately? You’ve got a governor whose state is on fire denying climate change,” [President Obama] said, to applause. “It’s true. You’ve got audiences cheering at the prospect of somebody dying because they don’t have health care and booing a service member in Iraq because they’re gay.” “That’s not reflective of who we are,” he added. “This is a choice about the fundamental direction of our country. 2008 was an important direction. 2012 is a more important election.”

I'm glad Obama is now taking a stand on Republicans' dysfunction junction. Now, it's our turn. We need to make sure Congress actually passes a sensible budget this time... And does something to help our economy for a change.

Why Is Equality So "Controversial" for Republicans?

Last week, I was here in Las Vegas to celebrate the end of DADT. Once (and hopefully future) Congresswoman Dina Titus discussed what happened in the last session of Congress to make this happen, and representatives from Harry Reid's office and Shelley Berkley's office were also on hand to share their congratulations on this win and continued support for LGBTQ equality.



One would think this would be a nationwide celebration. After all, repealing DADT has broad national support. It was the end of a stupid, discriminatory policy that kept our military from keeping the best and brightest on the job protecting our country. But during the event, I was thinking about who was NOT present as much as I was noticing who was there.

At our event in Las Vegas last week, no one from Dean Heller's office even bothered to show up. Hell, no one from GOProud or Log Cabin Republicans even bothered to show up. Why is that? For a party that seems to love to talk about "personal liberty" and "military strength" so much, why wouldn't we see stronger Republican support for ending a policy that restricted personal liberty while simultaneously endangering our military's strength and our national security?

Well, I guess we all had to learn the hard way later in the week.



Who would have guessed that a decade after 9/11 and less than a decade after the start of the Iraq War, Republicans would be the ones booing an active duty soldier in Iraq? Were their promises to "support the troops" really that hollow? Does "support the troops" mean nothing if those troops happen to be gay?

Believe it or not, Andrew Sullivan really nailed it on the "support the troops... But not really" hypocrisy coming out of today's Republican Party.

But somehow the fact that these indignities were heaped on a man risking his life to serve this country, a man ballsy enough to make that video, a man in the uniform of the United States ... well, it tells me a couple of things. It tells me that these Republicans don't actually deep down care for the troops, if that means gay troops. Their constant posturing military patriotism has its limits.

The shocking silence on the stage - the fact that no one challenged this outrage - also tells me that this kind of slur is not regarded as a big deal. When it came to it, even Santorum couldn't sanction firing all those servicemembers who are now proudly out. But that's because he was forced to focus not on his own Thomist abstractions, but on an actual person. Throughout Republican debates, gays are discussed as if we are never in the audience, never actually part of the society, never fully part of families, never worthy of even a scintilla of respect. When you boo a servicemember solely because he's gay, you are saying he is beneath contempt, that nothing he does or has done can counterweigh the vileness of his sexual orientation.

I've had discussions with LGBTQ equality activists before when they have bemoaned matters of equality morphing into partisan political flash points. And I genuinely understand their disappointment and frustration. But honestly, can any of us ignore Republicans' tolerance of bigotry any longer?

And can we ignore the stark differences between President Obama and the Republicans hoping to unseat him? President Obama fulfilled his promise to repeal DADT, and has not ignored the plight of LGBTQ Americans during his Presidency. The Republican candidates, on the other hand... Well, you get the picture.

I just hope Senator Chris Coons (D-Delaware) is right that one day, this too shall pass.



And I hope Senator Mark Udall (D-Colorado) is also proven right.

We’ve got campaigns across the board making the case that every American deserves to have the promise of the Declaration of Independence made real. We’re created equal. We have an equal opportunity — equal rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Republican party candidates are going to be proven wrong, I think not only in the long run, but also in the short run, because these are backwards policies. These are policies that don’t fit in the 21st Century. It’s disturbing, but again, the voters are going to weigh in and they’re going to weigh in for a progressive 21st Century approach to sexual orientation. [...]

If Americans of all backgrounds, all regions speak up and draw attention to those discriminatory thoughts and policies, they’re going to fall through their own weight. They’re not going to last. They never do.

Bigotry, discrimination, and hatred should have no place in today's America. And equality should not be a partisan political issue. However, that's not the reality of contemporary American politics. And it will not be reality as long as Republicans continue to allow so much bigotry to flourish in their party.

UFC in Trouble? And Why?

Over the years, UFC has become the biggest (and more lucrative!) sport in Las Vegas... And the fastest growing sport in the world. More and more fans are tuning into games, attending games, buying merchandise, and even aspiring to become MMA fighters themselves.

However, UFC's rise hasn't been without controversy.



And now, there's a new challenger in the ring ready to take on (the owners of) UFC.

Culinary Union Local 226 set up a website recently at unfitforchildren.org that details the foul-mouthed tirades of Dana White, president of Ultimate Fighting Championship.

Here’s unfitforchildren.org quoting White berating some poor schoolyard schlub: “Whoever gave you that quote is a (anatomical expletive) and a (homophobic slur with a modifying expletive).”

Culinary asks, “Can you imagine NBA Commissioner David Stern or NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell talking like this?”

I like UFC and realize it’s a nice amphetaminic boost for our deathbed economy. But the question put to White is a reasonable one, especially given UFC’s desire for mainstream legitimacy. The Vince McMahon shtick is juvenile.

Another reasonable question, though, from UFC fans: What union? In case you don’t know the history here: It’s no surprise that the big hotel union that represents more than 50,000 workers on the Strip would be sticking the shiv in the side of UFC, which is owned by Frank and Lorenzo Fertitta, who in turn own a controlling stake in Station Casinos.

Culinary has unsuccessfully been trying to unionize Station’s many valley casinos for years, with the fight intensifying in recent years, to include high-stakes federal litigation.

Especially in the last three years, players, coaches, and team owners in other sports have faced a whole lot of heat for allowing homophobia, misogyny, racism, and other forms of discrimination in their respective sports. Has UFC really faced that kind of scrutiny yet, especially considering what Dana White seems to get away with saying?

Of course, this isn't the real reason why Culinary 226 is now going after UFC. This is.



Culinary has been working on this aggressive campaign to unionize Station Casinos for decades, yet until recently it seemed like it was failing to gain any traction. But when Station went bankrupt, Culinary saw opportunity. And as Station continues to pile up the federal charges of workers' rights violations, Culinary has made some hard kicks. And now that the Fertittas have a new billion dollar empire with UFC, which is part of a sport that's already been swirling around plenty of controversy, Culinary is aiming for the ultimate knockout punch.

Of course, Dana White is now complaining that Culinary is "just trying to make this thing look bad and trying to hurt the Fertittas by lobbying against the UFC and mixed martial arts". Well, duh! Both Culinary and the Fertittas have long used this tactic against each other, and against other adversaries. When Station went bankrupt, the Fertittas pressured creditors into allowing them (and a posse of banks, such as Deutsche Bank and JP Morgan Chase) a leveraged buyout of Station, even though a more credible (pun intended?) suitor had emerged in Boyd Gaming. Station pummeled those creditors that opposed the leveraged buyout and/or supported the Boyd deal and used all the legal tricks in the book to get the Nevada bankruptcy courts to agree to something that probably no other court in America would green light.

And most recently, Station joined forces with the Nevada Resort Association to convince the Clark County Commission that Dotty's somehow became the greatest threat ever seen to Nevada's way of life. Why? Well, Dotty's had grown exponentially all over the valley as locals were coming to enjoy the smoky, intimate, slot experience that seemed to lure customers away from Station Casinos. And of course, it helped that Dotty's had earned very little sympathy by local lawmakers by operating in such a dark gray legal cloud that allowed Dotty's to straddle the fence between "casino" and "bar", and prey after gambling addicts. It was becoming increasingly obvious that the Clark County Commission had to do something about "The Dotty's Loophole", but what ultimately emerged smelled rotten in that it looked less like a fair solution to legal discrepancies over "incidental gaming licenses", and more like yet another political wet kiss to the Nevada Resort Association and Station.

So do Dana White and the Fertittas really want to criticize Culinary for engaging in activities that the Fertittas themselves have mastered to get their way whenever Station is in trouble?

I'll be honest. I like MMA, and UFC really fascinates me. I see the intense skill involved, and I realize there's more to it than the brutality that first meets the eye. However, I also believe it's more than fair for Culinary to hit the Fertittas on UFC's more controversial aspects to shame them into improving Station Casinos' workplace. As we've seen above, the Fertittas have never shied away from hitting below the belt to preserve their precious assets. So what gives them the right to change the rules of the fight when they face a more experienced opponent in Culinary 226?

Coming This Weekend...

I'll have more on the end of DADT (and the Republican reactions to it at that shocking Florida GOP debate). I'm sure we'll also have to discuss some very important people coming to town next month, as well as why the media have so much trouble focusing on the stories that really matter (while obsessing about crap that doesn't).

So please stay tuned...

Have They No Shame?

Is this for real? Really?



Really?

The audience at tonight’s GOP presidential debate in Orlando, Florida commemorated this week’s repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell [DADT] by booing Stephen Hill, a gay soldier, as he asked Sen. Rick [Santorum] (R-PA) about open service in the military. Without condemning the audience reaction, Santorum responded to Hill’s question by proclaiming that “any type of sexual activity has absolutely no place in the military” and promising to reinstate the 1993 policy. He also characterized open service as a “special privilege”[.]

Wow. Has the Republican Party really sunk that low? Apparently so. Remember, a bunch of Florida Republicans attending last night's debate in Orlando booed an active duty soldier, and did so simply because he's gay and he wanted to ask the Republican Presidential Candidates about reviving DADT.

And you know what makes this even more disgusting? Only two Republican candidates (neither of them with any real chance of getting the nomination), Former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman and Former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson, rose to defend Stephen Hill and the end of DADT. Apparently, the rest of the GOP "clown car candidates" think discrimination is fabulous.

What really makes this appalling is that the Florida Republican audience at that debate last night showed complete and utter disrespect for an active duty soldier. They essentially booed our military and showed contempt for our country. Think about it. For as long as I can remember, the Republican Party has tried to position itself as "the patriotic party", the party that believes in the sanctity of the flag and everything it represents. Yet last night, we didn't see that party. Rather, we saw the continuation of a trend in the unveiling of a "new Republican Party" that's been hijacked by "TEA Party" extremists who care more about radical ideology than even the well being of our military and our very national security.

The "TEA Party" has really led today's Republican Party to turn a corner... But certainly not in a good way. This downright scares me.