Tag Archives: zuckerman

Daily Kos: Exposing Our Dumbest Quotes Ensures There’s ‘No Meaningful Dialogue’ of Right and Left

It’s bad enough that the Daily Kos posts outrageous claims like “the 9/11 attacks were horrific, but they were more about optics than actual harm .” When bizarre sentences like these are exposed, then the exposers are accused of being enemies of “meaningful dialogue.” What is meaningful in telling the families of the victims of 9/11 that their losses were more “optics” than “actual harm”? But that’s how the blogger “Something the Dog Said” tried to defend himself against my post on NewsBusters: Mr. Graham is using the quotes from my posts that are most likely to confirm his readers prejudice against the Left and Daily Kos. By doing so he makes sure there can be no meaningful dialog between the Right and Left. The Radical Right has been told [told us?] for 9 years that we, their fellow citizens, are the enemy along with Islam. We are somehow less American because we don’t agree with the jingoistic “Clashes of Civilizations” crap. The very crap that Osama Bin Laden has been purveying; they fail to realize that by giving credence to this terrorist asshat’s idea we help him build up his forces and make it more likely that some city, here or in Europe or Asia sees another horrific attack. It’s also puzzling how this Kosmonaut thinks he or she is conducting a “meaningful dialogue” by accusing his critics of purveying the same propaganda lines as Osama bin Laden. It’s never a good idea for someone at the Daily Kos to suggest someone else has been more uncivil than they have been. This person says conservatives make the bone-headed error of blurring them together with the terrorists — and then blurs conservatives together with the terrorists. But there was more attempts at self-defense against right-wing radicals: Those on the Radical Right are making a big deal about the fact that polls are finding that majorities of Americans are not in favor of the community center being built two blocks from the site of a terrorist attack that was nine years ago. To me that is a sad fact, one which until I saw the polling I would not have believed. Still it does not matter. You do not have rights in this country because the majority says so. You have rights because we all have them and they are written into our Constitution and supported by 200 years of case law. I expect that I am in for some interesting times. I will not back down from my position that the mosque associated with the community center has ever right to build where they please, just as a Catholic church or a Buddhist temple would. I will also not back down from calling out the hysterical fear the Radical Right is stoking against our fellow citizens who are practitioners of Islam. In the end I find this really kind of sad. I had a five e-mail back and forth with TJ [a conservative commenter] and we could not find a smidge of common ground. I listened to his points, but they were based on fear and skewed news sources, like National Review Online, Fox and Newsbusters. They were based on false memes that the Radical Right has been pushing all along and the macho attitude that we are going to kick some ass. Now one of the asses they want to kick is mine. I wish I had any confidence that the folks who commented on these posts read all of both of my articles. There’s several mistakes here: first, that anyone would find the Dog-Said articles more persuasive by reading them from beginning to end. Second, that my post in any way encouraged brutality against Dog-Said. My point in replaying these quotes is the same point we at NewsBusters continue to make when he highlight the Daily Kos. We don’t expect them to be anything less than full-throated leftists. But we do think that liberal pundits (like Bill Press) who claim that liberals don’t say vicious and hateful things need don’t seem to be reading or listening to the arguments of their friends and colleagues.

After Rare Lapse Into Lucidity, Ed Schultz Reverts to Inane Conspiracy Mongering on Economy

Why does Ed Schultz think Wall Street and “big business” are sitting on $1 trillion in assets? Depends on what week you ask him. Here’s what Schultz said about that during a contentious discussion on July 26 with publisher Mort Zuckerman on MSNBC’s “The Ed Show,” as rebroadcast the following day on Schultz’s radio show ( click here for audio) — ZUCKERMAN: And if you don’t think that the business community doesn’t feel that they’re being, you know, attacked, I’m just telling you, that isn’t the case. They do believe it. SCHULTZ: OK, they may believe that, Mr. Zuckerman … ZUCKERMAN: ‘Cause they are! SCHULTZ: …but credit is tight, money is tight, small businesses getting money is a huge issue, and Wall Street, in my opinion, the bankers, tight with a dollar because they want to see this president fail. ZUCKERMAN: That’s absolute nonsense. SCHULTZ: Well, that’s not nonsense … ZUCKERMAN: That may be your view … Earlier in the interview, Zuckerman said this about hesitancy among business owners to hire more workers after Schultz cited “big time” higher profits for J.P. Morgan and insurance companies ( audio here ) — SCHULTZ: I’m curious, with all of the Wall Street numbers that are out there, J.P. Morgan, their profits up big time, insurance companies are reporting, you know, profits big time again this year. How is that bad for business? How do you see this? ZUCKERMAN: Nobody says that that’s bad for business. Of course it’s not bad for business. And what’s happened to all big companies of America is that they’ve been in a position to significantly reduce their costs. And that, amongst other things, means cutting a lot of jobs in order to do that because they really were very concerned about what was going to happen and what was happening in the economy. A week later, when he was interviewed during his radio show by MSNBC daytime anchor Tamron Hall on Aug. 3, Schultz sang a different tune about “big business” holding tight on $1 trillion in assets — a tune eerily similar to that coming from Zuckerman on July 26 ( audio ) — HALL: I know the president says jobs saved and he says things would have been worse, but still, you’ve got millions of folks out of work who thought that perhaps they would get a boost from the stimulus that they may not see. SCHULTZ: Well, you’ve got a trillion dollars on the sideline right now from big business because they’re afraid of what might happen in the economy , they won’t invest in workers … Alas, the lucidity couldn’t last. Earlier this week, Schultz was interviewed again by Hall during his radio show on Aug. 9 ( audio ) — SCHULTZ:  No one can make the case better than President Obama when he talks about what he has been up against when it comes to Boehner and McConnell and this crowd that has just fought him at every way you possibly can. HALL: But the Republicans say all you need to do is ask, where are the jobs, and that shuts down Democrats on the spot. What do you say to that? SCHULTZ: Well, I don’t agree with that. We’re not peeling off 750,000 jobs a month any more, interest rates are great, the table is set for this economy to come roaring back. We’ve got Wall Street that’s sitting on $1.8 trillion worth of assets because they want to see this president fail. …. which Mort Zuckerman ridiculed as “absolute nonsense” — followed a week later by Schultz parroting Zuckerman.

Read the original here:
After Rare Lapse Into Lucidity, Ed Schultz Reverts to Inane Conspiracy Mongering on Economy

Zuckerman, Beckel Reveal Previously Undisclosed Ties to Obama WH

The confluence between the Obama administration and the journalists who cover it can leave news consumers wondering if they’re getting the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Two prominent media personalities — liberal Fox News Channel commentator Bob Beckel and media mogul Mort Zuckerman, owner of the New York Daily News — have recently let slip that they have worked closely with the Obama administration. Neither disclose this fact with regularity. Indeed, their recent admissions were revelatory. Zuckerman, a self-described Obama supporter, has written at least one speech for the President. Beckel, who worked with David Axelrod during the campaign, is now an adviser in some capacity to the White House.

Harwood To ‘Whining’ Obama Business Critics: ‘Man Up!’

When it comes to picking a moderator for a game of ¿Quien Es Mas Macho?, somehow John Harwood doesn’t spring to mind.  But there was CNBC’s chief Washington correspondent on The Ed Show this evening, twice accusing Pres. Obama’s businessmen critics of “whining,” and instructing them to “man up.” Schultz set the stage, playing a clip of Mort Zuckerman describing Obama’s White House as “the most anti-business administration.”  Trying to tar Mort with the R-word, Schultz spoke of Zuckerman as having considered a run for Senate from New York “as a Republican.”  In fact, the Zuck man is a lifelong Dem known for supporting liberal causes.  He briefly flirted with an independent or Republican run for Senate as a means of avoiding a Dem primary, but is as much of a Republican as Mike Bloomberg. Then came Harwood, who wrote off Obama business critics as a bunch of selfish, whining wusses . . . ED SCHULTZ: This narrative that is developing against the Obama administration that they are, quote, bad for business: what’s the game plan for the White House to fight back on this? JOHN HARWOOD: Well look, part of the White House argument is that these businessmen are really upset because of what’s going to happen with their personal income tax rates when the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of 2010. I was talking to a senior White House official today who was saying that a lot of this whining is cover for that very personal effect. I got to tell you, you mention what’s happened to the Dow. Nobody doubt that the financial system is more stable and better-functioning now than it was when Pres. Obama took office. I find it a little beyond belief the whining that you hear from some of these people who ought to man up. John Harwood: macho man.

Visit link:
Harwood To ‘Whining’ Obama Business Critics: ‘Man Up!’

MSNBC Panel Members Aghast at Proposition that Obama Administration is Hostile to Business

Appearing on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” publisher Mort Zuckerman called the Obama administration out for being “without a doubt the most hostile administration to business and to the role of business that we’ve had in decades.” Panel members Mika Brzezinski and John Heilmann seemed shocked at the severity of the criticism, however. “Where is the hostility?” John Heilmann, columnist for New York Magazine, asked with incredulity. When Zuckerman responded that the administration deals with businessmen as shady characters trying to rip off the middle class, Heilmann simply called it rhetoric. “I don’t know if that’s a good use of words,” show host Mika Brzezinski remarked about Zuckerman’s claim of hostility. Heilmann claimed that the administration could definitely have been tougher on Wall Street. Its policy ended up “in a modest, moderate place,” he stated. “It ended up in the center, nowhere near as far to the left or the populist right as it could have,” remarked Heilmann on Obama’s dealings with Wall Street. Zuckerman is no Republican cheerleader, either, as his campaign donations would make it seem. The transcript of the segment, which aired on July 9 at 8:22 a.m. EDT, is as follows: JOHN HARRIS, Editor-in-Chief, Politico: The White House is concerned about the perception that it’s anti-business. I had an interview yesterday with Rahm Emanuel, who really underscores just how seriously they’re taking this. He responded with real heat to the perception that Obama is anti-business. He didn’t say this directly, but the clear message was “Would you guys just stop your whining? And don’t listen so much to the rhetoric about BP, or about Wall Street. Look at our policies.” He’s saying business should love us. The money and the stimulus package, most of that went to private sector companies to spend, so that was good. He said we didn’t take the more liberal positions on health care, went with an incrementalist plan. That’s good for business. Even the financial regulation, he says, gives business the sort of regulatory, clear expectations,.takes away uncertainty, the markets hate uncertainty, gives them the stability they need. He says business should love us. Of course, business does not love Obama. And incidentally, some of the things Rahm is saying, his own Democratic Party activists wouldn’t love. Because he’s talking about how Obama is free trade, and tough on teachers unions. (…) MORT ZUCKERMAN, Editor-in-Chief, U.S. News & World Report: I mean, I don’t know how [Rahm Emanuel] can make those allegations about the business world. It’s without question the most hostile administration to business and to the role of business that we’ve had in decades, and he’s saying it’s not hostile to business. It’s totally hostile to business. MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Hostile? JOHN HEILMANN: Where is the hostility? (Crosstalk) ZUCKERMAN: Where is the hostility? What are you talking about? Every time they make a reference – he just came out with a program for the expansion of exports. And you read, it says “we are not supporting those people, those unscrupulous, dishonest businessmen who are trying to rip off the middle class. No, no, no, we are going to help the other business people.” What is he talking about? JOHN HEILMANN: That’s rhetoric! That’s rhetoric! ZUCKERMAN: You let me tell you, rhetoric is damn important when you want to make a long-term investment. You want to have a sense of confidence. This has been the most anti-business administration. And the whole business community feels it. BRZEZINSKI: Did you feel that at the job summit, when you went there? ZUCKERMAN: You’re darn right I did. BRZEZINSKI: Wow. Okay. I don’t know if that’s a good use of words. HEILMANN: I’ve thought about this. I wrote a piece about this a while ago, about Wall Street and Obama. If you think about the existing political climate in the country, what the country would like to see done to Wall Street, what the Obama administration could have done politically, if it had wanted to, in terms of the populism out there in the country, it ended up in a modest, moderate place. It ended up in the center, nowhere near as far to the left or the populist right as it could have. PAT BUCHANAN: Oh it sounds like they got the worst of both worlds. If the business community thinks they’re hostile, and they didn’t get the populist community, who did they get? Ken Shepherd contributed to this report.

See the article here:
MSNBC Panel Members Aghast at Proposition that Obama Administration is Hostile to Business

Jason Priestley Is 40

Filed under: Hot Vegas Everyone is now officially old.

See the article here:
Jason Priestley Is 40