Tag Archives: 2010 congressional

‘Civil War’ Apparently Only a Problem for GOP Squabbling

Posted on August 12, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

There’s a phrase that has been conspicuously absent the media’s coverage of the recent flap between White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and those he dubbed the “professional left”: civil war. In contrast, media coverage of Republican infighting consistently pushes the term. Gibbs is under fire from the left for sharply criticizing liberal critics of President Obama saying that “they need to be drug-tested” and “will be satisfied when we have Canadian healthcare and we’ve eliminated the Pentagon. That’s not reality.” His comments have drawn heated criticism from the left. Democratic firebrand Rep. Alan Grayson, Fla., wants “Bozo the Spokesman” fired . Prominent activist and blogger Jane Hamsher claimed Obama is “having trouble across the board” with liberals. Lefties at the Daily Kos and Democratic Underground were frantic. Yet almost no “civil war” labels from the media, in contrast to coverage of other instances of intra-party squabbling. The ouster of Dede Scozzafava in the special election in New York’s 23rd District earned the “civil war” label 23 times from major media players, according to a Nexis search. The GOP “civil war” was invariably painted as a “Stalinist” (to use Frank Rich’s term) purge of moderates from the party in favor of more conservative, Tea Party-backed candidates. Of course all it was was run-of-the-mill intra-party politics. There was no purge – it was just Republican voters choosing the more conservative candidate in a year when conservatives’ electoral prospects seem bright. Or, as liberal Newsweek columnist Howard Fineman put it, “I`ve been a little skeptical of this Republican ‘civil war’ story. I mean, all major parties have conflicts and fissures within them.” Don’t tell that to Rich. Or George Stephanopoulos, Wolf Blitzer Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, E.J. Dionne, Eugene Robinson, Donna Brazile, Roland Martin, David Gergen, or John King. They all labeled Scozzafava’s ouster a sign of a Republican “civil war”. Of course none of these A-list media personalities have used the term in reference to the battle currently ongoing between the White House and the Democratic base. And this is a fight that is not part of the squabbling that takes place whenever two candidates of the same party vie for a nomination. Gibbs’s comments represent an ideological chasm between the governing left and the liberal commentariat. The latter believe that the White House has elevated pragmatism above principle, while the White HOuse believes its far-left critics are too divorced from political reality. That is a more meaningful split than political differences among two candidates for office. Consider what Congressman Grayson had to say about Gibbs: No, I don’t think he should resign. I think he should be fired. He’s done a miserable job. People I know, refer to him as Bozo the Spokesman. He’s not conveying the value of the President’s strategies, or his plans or his programs. He’s doing a miserable job, it’s that simple. He’s so far in over his head he’d have to reach up to touch his shoes…. If I wanted Fox talking points I’d change the channel to Fox, not listen to the White House. He needs to get his head on straight and do his job… He’s doing a miserable job because his heart isn’t in it. He belongs on Fox. Not as the White House spokesman. The folks at major liberal blogs were more than a bit upset as well. Consider this excerpt from far-left blogger Glenn Greenwald: You may think that the reason you’re dissatisfied with the Obama administration is because of substantive objections to their policies: that they’ve done so little about crisis-level unemployment, foreclosures and widespread economic misery. Or because of the White House’s apparently endless devotion to Wall Street. Or because the President has escalated a miserable, pointless and unwinnable war that is entering its ninth year. Or because he has claimed the power to imprison people for life with no charges and to assassinate American citizens without due process, intensified the secrecy weapons and immunity instruments abused by his predecessor, and found all new ways of denying habeas corpus. Or because he granted full-scale legal immunity to those who committed serious crimes in the last administration. Or because he’s failed to fulfill — or affirmatively broken — promises ranging from transparency to gay rights. But Robert Gibbs — in one of the most petulant, self-pitying outbursts seen from a top political official in recent memory, half derived from a paranoid Richard Nixon rant and the other half from a Sean Hannity/Sarah Palin caricature of The Far Left — is here to tell you that the real reason you’re dissatisfied with the President is because you’re a fringe, ideological, Leftist extremist ingrate who needs drug counseling. Or this entry from Daily Kos’s Jesse LaGreca AKA MinistryofTruth: Turns out calling me “F$#^ing retarded” or “On Drugs” doesn’t make me FIRED UP, it makes me think you think I’m an asshole, and that doesn’t exactly win my vote, now does it?… The fact is, Mr. Gibbs, If you’re trying to convince us NOT TO VOTE FOR YOU in 2010 or 2012, Mission Accomplished! And if not, and you are this inept at messaging, maybe it’s time you stepped down from your post, Mr. Gibbs. Or these comments from deranged users at the Democratic Underground: they absolutely never learn and this should tell you the temperature of the white house, the ease with which they say things like this. Obama is no liberal, no leftie, he has contempt for us to allow this culture of thought to exist. and what a masterstroke of timing, to say something like this to an already apparently tepid base before elections. bravo, you b*st*rds. *you* should be drug tested. the folks that helped get them elected, they want to insult. Two words come to mind one starts with an “F” and the next one starts with a “Y”. Dump Gibbs and bring back Van Jones There is clearly a battle going in inside the Democratic Party between pragmatists and ideologues. But despite the relatively high level of media coverage if Gibbs’s events, the apocalyptic “civil war” rhetoric the media touted so often with regard to Republican infighting is noticeably absent. Yet again, the media are avoiding proclaiming dire straits for Democrats, despite deep divisions within that party.

More here:
‘Civil War’ Apparently Only a Problem for GOP Squabbling

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

ABC’s George Stephanopoulos Hits Michelle Malkin With White House Spin on Dem Corruption

Posted on August 11, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

Conservative pundit Michelle Malkin made a rare appearance on Wednesday’s Good Morning America and highlighted the issue of Democratic corruption. Co-host George Stephanopoulos responded to criticisms of a Colorado Democrat by touting White House talking points. Malkin made the point, almost entirely ignored on GMA, that now-defeated candidate Andrew Romanoff was apparently offered administration jobs in order to not challenge the incumbent senator. Stephanopoulos promptly defended, ” Which I should say, [the allegations] were denied by Romanoff and by the White House about whether or not he was offered a job to get him out of the way. ” [MP3 audio here .] Malkin then mentioned e-mails released by the Denver Post backing up the claim of job offers. This prompted the former Democratic operative turned journalist to weakly protest, “Well, except he had been going for the job before the campaign began.” Of course, Stephanopoulos and GMA have showed little interest in the subject of Andrew Romanoff’s troubles. Other than a brief mention by Jake Tapper on June 3, 2010, the morning show has ignored the allegations of job offers from the White House. Even though Malkin was on the program to promote the paperback edition of Culture of Corruption, Stephanopoulos focused on potential Republican problems: “[Democrats] believe that when tea party candidates like Ken Buck in Colorado, like Sharron Angle in Nevada, like Rand Paul in Kentucky win, they actually give the Democrats a better chance of winning in November.” It should also be noted that the Malkin segment aired at the very end of the show, at 8:48am EDT. A transcript of the August 11 segment follows: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Last night’s primary results have set the political landscape for the fall campaign. What did we learn about President Obama, Sarah Palin and what may happen come November? Here with her always provocative point of view, Fox News contributor and author of the New York Times number one best-seller Culture of Corruption, Michelle Malkin. Good to see you. MICHELLE MALKIN: You too, George. STEPHANOPOULOS: Let’s start out. Quick take on last night. MALKIN: You know, there’s no inevitabilities in politics. And I live in Colorado now which, of course, had a bunch of very high-profile primaries. And the White House is patting itself on the back but probably more exhaling with ultimate relief that its candidate in the Senate race, the appointed incumbent Michael Bennet eked through and he faced a very scary challenge from a far left progressive candidate, Andrew Romanoff. And you’ll recall that there is a culture of corruption angle to this because this was the race where allegations of attempted bribery, in essence, came up because- STEPHANOPOULOS: Which I should say, they were denied by Romanoff and by the White House about whether or not he was offered a job to get him out of the way. MALKIN: Of course. The Denver Post had reported last fall that White House chief of- the deputy chief of staff Jim Messina had approached Romanoff and offered a plethora of White House administration jobs to get him to drop out and Romanoff released E-mails that essentially confirmed that. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, except he had been going for the job before the campaign began . But, let’s talk about Colorado- MALKIN: Well, I think the point there though is it’s not just conservatives and people on my side of the aisle that are talking about this stench, this culture of corruption that seems to stick to the Chicago team and Obama. This was a Democrat who blew the whistle and he blew the whistle after Joe Sestak came forward and made similar allegations. STEPHANOPOULOS: You talk about the stench. And there is just no question that all across the country there is a real anger at Washington. But in some ways, you can say it’s kind of bipartisan . You talk about Colorado last night, the President’s candidate survived. On the Republican side, you had the tea party candidate win the primary against the more establishment Republican figure. I know you’re deep in the middle of the Tea Party, Tea party supporter. B ut how do you respond to what a lot of Democrats believe? They believe that when tea party candidates like Ken Buck in Colorado, like Sharron Angle in Nevada, like Rand Paul in Kentucky win, they actually give the Democrats a better chance of winning in November. MALKIN: Look, you can look at this as purely from the electoral standpoint or you can look at it if you’re a grassroots conservative like I am, and I live out in the west now, I live in Colorado. And we have a longer view about moving the party to where we think it should be. Committed to conservative principles and we were very dispirited during the Bush administration at seeing beltway Republicans capitulate and essentially become big government versions of the people that they say they opposed. And that’s what’s making 2010 such an interesting period because no establishment Republican is safe. STEPHANOPOULOS: That’s clear. MALKIN: We saw it in Utah. Bob Bennett is no longer in office because grassroots conservatives kicked him out. STEPHANOPOULOS: So, are you saying it’s better to be pure than to compromise for victory? MALKIN: Well, that’s always been my position as a grassroots conservative. And I think that’s what the Tea Party has always tried to say. I was covering the Tea Party movement before it was called a Tea Party movement. And this was in the days around the stimulus debate when it was getting shoved down the American taxpayers’ throat and something unfortunately the mainstream media refused to acknowledge that it was a bottom-up movement that could never have been coordinated by beltway Republicans, that they were tired of a lack of corruption. That they were tired of a lack of transparency and the trampling over the deliberative process. And, of course, Obama and the Chicago team and the Democrat majority have been at the center of that. But nobody is immune to that kind of criticism and revolt and that’s why these beltway Republicans have been under fire. STEPHANOPOULOS: So, given that and you say you take the long-term view. Let’s jump ahead then to 2012. Who is the potential Republican candidate for 2012 that most embodies the Tea Party principles? Is it Sarah Palin? MALKIN: Well, certainly she is a favorite and she’s spoken at tea party conventions and she embodies this outside the beltway mentality. She gets it. She has an authenticity that I think that a lot of these beltway Republicans and old tired names have been lacking. But, just getting back to the culture of corruption for a moment, we didn’t talk about Connecticut where you have this outsider Republican Linda McMahon who easily won against the more establishment candidate Rob Simmons. I think people need to be reminded that the reason that race is happening in the first place is because voters were sick of corruptocrat Chris Dodd. STEPHANOPOULOS: You know, the computer’s going to cut us off. I could talk to you all morning. But, thank you very much. The book is called Culture of Corruption. The paperback is in book stores now. You can read an excerpt on ABCNews.com/GMA.

Continue reading here:
ABC’s George Stephanopoulos Hits Michelle Malkin With White House Spin on Dem Corruption

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sarah Palin Signs On to RNC Fundraising Letter

Posted on August 8, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

So  Allah has a couple of theories  about why Sarah Palin would sign a fundraising letter for the RNC: Fast-forward to today and suddenly she’s  signing letters  on their behalf. What gives? Two theories. One: She’s turned out to be such a good soldier and is so favorably disposed  to Michael Steele  that she’s willing to do a fundraising favor for an organization that desperately needs one right now to prepare for the midterms. Two: She really is eyeing a presidential run and wants to build a line of political credit with establishment types who aren’t big fans of hers at the moment. How about this? Sarah Palin has finally recognized her friends in D.C. They ain’t the NRSC or the NRCC, that’s for dang sure. Palin’s endorsements have been in direct odds with the NRSC’s and NRCC’s more often than not. Moreover, the NRSC and NRCC have worked overtime to undercut Michael Steele both publicly and privately and then gone to donors and asked them to donate there. This insanity is self-destructive, of course, because the RNC has the mechanism to get the vote out. The leadership in the House and Senate, though, are more about accumulating power and rewarding buddies than transforming the party. In fact, party transformation and reinvigoration, would probably hurt their incumbent arses, so what’s the motivation to change? Michael Steele has worked at reaching out everywhere. He’s open to bringing new energy from youth, minorities, etc, while also addressing the horrendous state of the technological infrastructure of the RNC. For his lack of money, he’s done a decent job given his circumstances. He also cleaned house when he took over the RNC, something that was much needed, even if some very good folks got caught in the outgoing tide. It’s impossible to overstate how entrenched certain consultancies and power brokers were with the RNC. That needed to change. But cutting ties with that many fat cats is bound to make enemies. [These consultants tell people where to send money, right? They wouldn’t want to help the RNC if the RNC isn’t spending enormous fees paying said consultants.] In short, Sarah Palin has far more in common with Chairman Michael Steele than she has with the leadership on the Hill, and, I might add, more to gain, personally, by befriending the RNC. Should the RNC start raking in some money, it may well help some of the grassroots races the Tea Party folks so passionately care about. This, of course, runs counter to conventional wisdom. Hating on Michael Steele has become a sport these days. And he has not gracefully made the transition from punditry to the more behind-the-scenes money making job of Chairman. Still, no RNC chairman has been harassed and undercut so nastily as Michael Steele. It’s ridiculous and unfair. Not to mention, those doing the criticizing have all had something to personally gain. Sour grapes because their Chairman candidate lost? Yes! Fear at losing control? Yes! Anxiety with a more open, bottom-up approach, rather than a top-down tight-fisted operation? Yes! Anyway, a partnership between Sarah Palin and Michael Steele could be a win-win. It seems they have both made a decision-really, neither one have anything to lose. Both are pretty much loathed by establishment Republicans. Why not unite her fund raising and star power with the RNC’s network and ability to organize? Crossposted at Liberty Pundits  

Read the original:
Sarah Palin Signs On to RNC Fundraising Letter

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Chris Matthews: Do Republicans Oppose Obama Because of His Race?

Posted on August 6, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

Chris Matthews on Friday actually asked a GOP Congressman if Republicans oppose President Obama because of his race. On the 5PM installment of MSNBC’s “Hardball,” Matthews brought on Rep. Bob Inglis, the Congressman from South Carolina who easily lost his primary fight in June to Tea Party candidate Trey Gowdy and has been badmouthing his Party ever since. Early in the conversation, Matthews asked, “What is it that`s gotten into your Party`s water supply, the Republican Party`s water supply, that makes them strangely hostile to the president, not just against his policies, but personally? Is it race?” Fixated on racial conspiracy theories, the “Hardball” host later in the interview asked, “If we had about a million Heide Klums trying to cross the border, the Mexican border of the United States, you know, the gorgeous blond from Germany or whatever, do you think that would be a problem with immigration right now, or is it really just ethnic?” (video follows with partial transcript and commentary): CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Welcome back to HARDBALL. After voting for TARP and telling voters not to listen to Glenn Beck too much, South Carolina Republican Congressman Bob Inglis was outvoted in his primary this year. Now he`s offering up some very honest advice for his party and some very scary stories from his time on the trail. Here`s how Mr. Inglis described one campaign donor meeting to David Corn at “Mother Jones” — quote — “They say, `Bob, what don`t you get? Barack Obama is a socialist, communist, Marxist, who wants to destroy the American economy, so he can take over as dictator. Health care is part of that, and he wants to open up the Mexican border and turn the United States into a Muslim nation.`” Congressman Inglis joins us tonight from Greenville, South Carolina. Well, that was a funny conversation. Somebody actually thought that the Muslims would be pouring over the Mexican border. The Rio Grande protects us from Islam. These people have got a problem. (LAUGHTER) REP. BOB INGLIS (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: I guess so. It`s — I think it`s generally not seen as a Muslim nation, but — Mexico isn`t. MATTHEWS: Well, what is — what is — let`s talk about the conspiracy theories. What is it that`s gotten into your party`s water supply, the Republican Party`s water supply, that makes them strangely hostile to the president, not just against his policies, but personally? Is it race? Later in the conversation, Matthews actually said the following: MATTHEWS: I can`t resist asking this. I got to ask this question. If we had about a million Heide Klums trying to cross the border, the Mexican border of the United States, you know, the gorgeous blond from Germany or whatever, do you think that would be a problem with immigration right now, or is it really just ethnic? The people from a different ethnic background. If Heidi Klum, by the million, was trying to cross the border, I figure a lot of guys would be down there welcoming her personally. What`s your view? I want to make this a little ludicrous because I think it`s obvious it`s ethnic. And I want people just to admit it. So, in Matthews’ distorted view, Republicans oppose Obama’s policies because of his race, and Americans that are against illegal immigration only feel this way because those coming across the border are Mexican. And this guy has his own show on a cable news network. Tough to believe, isn’t it?

Read more from the original source:
Chris Matthews: Do Republicans Oppose Obama Because of His Race?

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

CNN’s Rick Sanchez: Obsessed With Fox News, Beck, and Limbaugh

Posted on August 5, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

CNN anchor Rick Sanchez revisited his vendetta against Fox News, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh on Thursday’s Rick’s List. Sanchez brought on outgoing Representative Bob Inglis, who lost a primary challenge to a Tea Party-backed Republican candidate, and when he harped about “flamethrowers” on TV and radio, the anchor pressed him on whether he meant the two radio hosts and his network’s competitor . Sanchez interviewed Rep. Inglis just before the top of the 4 pm Eastern hour. He introduced the politician by emphasizing the South Carolina Republican’s overall conservative record and his recent defeat in the primary: ” My next guest is a conservative firebrand . He is a veteran conservative congressman. In fact, he’s maintained a 93 percent conservative voting record….Pro-choice liberals have called him a ‘zero.’… He was a Ronald Reagan Republican, if there ever one was, and suddenly, he wakes up one day, and he simply is not conservative enough, not for South Carolina Republicans . He lost the recent primary. No- he got killed in the recent primary, 29-71 [percent].” However, what the CNN anchor left out is how Inglis was one of the few House Republicans who voted for a 2007 Democratic-sponsored resolution opposing the troop surge in Iraq , and has criticized skeptics of man-made global warming, as well as opposed offshore drilling . Most prominently, he voted for the 2008 bailout of the financial system . The Republican’s primary opponent used these votes and stances to defeat him. Sanchez first asked the outgoing congressman about an excerpt from his recent interview with the left-wing magazine Mother Jones, where he highlighted a constituent’s conspiracy theory about President Obama: SANCHEZ: [reading from the constituent’s letter] ‘Bob, what don’t you get? Barack Obama is a socialist, communist, Marxist, who wants to destroy the American economy so that he can take over as dictator. Health care is part of that, and he wants to open up the Mexican border and turn the U.S. into a Muslim nation .’…When I read that, I was just struck by the language. You vouch for that, right? That- who was telling you that? Later in the interview, Rep. Inglis criticized “this scapegoating that’s keeping us from the solutions” to issues like Social Security and Medicare. The anchor asked him to explain what he meant and borrowed from a recent argument by CNN contributor John Avlon , that the Tea Party would reject former President Reagan: “What do you mean, ‘scapegoating’? Where is this coming from? Because I said this or asked this of one of my guests yesterday- you know, if Ronald Reagan were running today, he would likely be in the same boat you’re in .” Sanchez pounced when the South Carolina congressman placed the blame on conservative media and grassroots activists, specifically ” Beck, Limbaugh, and the Tea Party wing ,” and took the opportunity to ask about his other favorite target, Fox News: INGLIS: I think that’s true, really. I mean, Reagan would have had a hard time on Tuesday, the 22nd of June, in the Fourth District of South Carolina, because he’s too optimistic. You know, he’s always- morning in America, the best days are still ahead. Way too many of these hot microphones on TV and radio are telling us that- no, our- the best days are behind us. It’s all going to pot. We’re done for, and way too many people are believing that stuff. I mean, the people that sell that are making millions off their books . SANCHEZ: Well, that’s interesting…. Here’s another quote. This is you on outside influences in the Republican Party. It’s what you were just getting at. You say, ‘It’s hard for Republicans in Congress to summon the courage to say no to Beck, Limbaugh, and the Tea Party wing.’ Amplify that thought process, if you would, for us, sir. INGLIS: Well, it’s very important that we basically say to these hot microphones, put down those flame-throwers. Stop running people- forcing people to this cliff that you want us to go over like lemmings. What we need to do to is say to them, stop- America’s best days are not behind us. They are in front of us, if we realize that we’re in this together, and we can solve these challenges of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security. That’s where the big dollars are. That’s the crisis we’re facing. But, if we come together, we can actually solve that. It won’t be a 100 percent Republican solution. It won’t be a 100 percent Democrat solution, but it’s got to be an American solution that gets us to balance. So, but what we’re wasting time with is scapegoats. SANCHEZ: It almost you sounds like you’re saying that honorable people in the Republican Party are allowing themselves to be led, rather than leading. INGLIS: Well, I think there’s a big fear of these people with the hot microphones, because they have got powerful flamethrowers, and they throw that flame at you, and they say, get moving, and they get the crowd moving, and, meanwhile, you stop- SANCHEZ: You’re talking about Beck and Limbaugh and people like that? INGLIS: The people that make millions by selling soap and by selling books- SANCHEZ: Fox News? INGLIS: And by selling fear. SANCHEZ: Fox News? INGLIS: Well, they’re the competitor for you. But the idea here is to- SANCHEZ: Well, no. Look, I don’t care . I- I’m asking. I mean, you’re- I don’t know what it’s like to be a Republican congressman getting so much heat from what I believed was my side of the aisle, that it makes me start to wonder if people are pushing me in a direction I don’t want to go to. You’re in a unique position to tell his story to Americans, so I- you know, I’m not putting words in your mouth. I just know who are the people who drive that message out there, and I know that it’s Beck, and I know that it’s Limbaugh, and I know, that in many ways, you could argue it’s Fox News. Is it- do you feel it’s that way? INGLIS: Well, I think that there are a lot of people that are making a lot of money off of selling fear at this point. And there are networks that do that. There are individual talk show hosts that do that, and the sad thing is that an awful lot of Americans are running in fear in front of those folks, and especially, politicians are running in fear in front of those folks. But, really, if you’re going to lead, you need to face those hot microphones, and you need to say, put down the flame-throwers. We’re going to talk facts. The fact is, the President was born in America. The fact is, he is not a socialist. Now, let’s get rid of those non-sensical kind of commentaries and get to the real issues, which are, how do you cope with Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid? How do you put those on solid footing? On August 2, the CNN anchor hinted that Fox News wasn’t a legitimate news organization after the outlet received a front-row seat at White House press briefings. He did the same on the September 21, 2009 edition of his program.  Earlier that year, on April 8, Sanchez blamed Fox News and “right-wing radio” for the murder of three police officers in Pittsburgh. The anchor has also specifically targeted Beck and Limbaugh on a few occasions. Three weeks earlier, on July 14, Sanchez and CNN contributor Roland Martin slammed the two and their listeners : ” Well, unfortunately, there’s a lot of people in this country that look at legitimate news organizations like The Washington Post and scoff, and actually think that Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh are legitimate news organizations .” Five days before that, the CNN personality belittled conservative talks show hosts as he made a plausible reference to Limbaugh and Sean Hannity: ” The people who are really leading the charge in this country are the guys on the radio and- many of which don’t even have a college degree .” Most egregiously, he had to apologize in October 2009 after reading a dubious quote attributed to Limbaugh.

Read more:
CNN’s Rick Sanchez: Obsessed With Fox News, Beck, and Limbaugh

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Mika Rips Crist For Switch, Scarborough Sees Him As Role Model

Posted on August 5, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

Odd bit of role reversal on today’s Morning Joe . . .  There was Mika Brzezinski, ripping Charlie Crist as unprincipled for his mid-campaign ditching of the Republican party.  Joe Scarborough, the quondam GOP congressman from the Sunshine State, was in a much more forgiving mood, going so far as to predict that, following in Crist’s footsteps, many others would successfully go the independent route. Mika and Joe’s exchange was triggered by the news that Crist’s own Lieutenant Governor, Jeff Kottkamp, has endorsed Marco Rubio for Senate. MIKA BRZEZINSKI: The party switch, I’m telling you, it has consequences. People may still fall for it, but — JOE SCARBOROUGH: Why are you so cynical? Just because Charlie Crist loves America, doesn’t mean you have to kick sand in his face. BRZEZINSKI: Charlie Crist is one of several politicians that we’ve seen in our careers who didn’t win in his party, and who thought: I still want to win, so now I’m going to switch parties even though I have no convictions, I’m just going to switch, I’m just going to change this coat. SCARBOROUGH: The Republican party left Charlie Crist: that’s what he’d tell you. BRZEZINSKI: Really? Why did he run with the Republican party half-way through the election process? SCARBOROUGH: They changed, right after the election. BRZEZINSKI: It was a dipsy-doodle. SCARBOROUGH: You know what?  I will guarantee you, more and more people are going to go independent, and they’re going to win elections, because of it. In much of his commentary, Scarborough was surely being facetious.  But the bottom line was that while Mika was condemning Crist for his unprincipled flip, Joe saw Charlie’s cynical move as a model for others. 

Continue reading here:
Mika Rips Crist For Switch, Scarborough Sees Him As Role Model

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Chris Matthews Accuses Fox of Being GOP Shills Then Attacks Sarah Palin

Posted on August 4, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

In today’s “People In Glass Houses” segment, Chris Matthews accused Fox News of being shills for the Republican Party just minutes before he said “the scariest three words in the English language are: President Sarah Palin.” MSNBC’s “Hardball” on Tuesday began with a lengthy segment in which Matthews, with the help of co-conspirators from the Huffington Post and Media Matters for America, made the case that the Fox News Channel was a platform to assist Republican candidates to get elected. Obviously missing the irony, the very next piece dealt with why President Obama ought to replace Vice President Biden with Hillary Clinton to not only assist him in getting reelected in 2012, but also set her up to win in 2016. Still oblivious to the hypocrisy, Matthews ended the program with his take on why the thought of Palin becoming president is scaring “tens of millions of Americans, and not just Democrats.” To give you an idea of the absurdity of this hour of television, let’s start with quotes from the first segment (videos and partial transcripts follow with commentary): CHRIS MATTHEWS: I want to ask you a larger thing, Eric, now that I have you on, and also Ryan. We just looked at the Gallup poll, the highest favorabilities among Republican potential candidates — potential candidates — for 2012 — I mean, potentially. We don`t know who`s going to run. Palin, Newt and Mike Huckabee — that`s the top three. ERIC BOEHLERT, MEDIA MATTER FOR AMERICA: Right. MATTHEWS: All three are on the payroll of Fox — BOEHLERT: Absolutely! MATTHEWS: — as commentators. But you have to ask yourself — these people have a lot of options. Are they on there as candidates? Are they using Fox as a platform, the way that Sharron [Angle] thinks she can use it as a candidate — BOEHLERT: Right. MATTHEWS: — for 2010? In other words, is she a little ahead of schedule? They`re looking towards 2012 using Fox, she`s trying to use it openly and flagrantly — BOEHLERT: Right. Right. MATTHEWS: — as a vehicle for reelection — or for election to the United States Senate. BOEHLERT: Right. The Fox Green Room is now sort of the GOP convention in waiting for 2012. They`re all on the payroll. I think they`re all — they want to use it to make a lot of money either on Fox News or with books or appearances. And then they`re just going to sort of wait and see how it — see how it plays out. In the meantime, they`ve got this national audience whenever they want it. They`ve got a paycheck, and they`ve got the Fox News, you know, recommendation or seal of approval. MATTHEWS: Yes. BOEHLERT: It`s perfect for them as they wait.  As a little background, the segment began with a video clip of Nevada senatorial candidate Sharron Angle telling Fox News’s Carl Cameron how she needs the press to be her friend and how her campaign “wanted them to ask the questions we want to answer so that they report the news the way we want it to be reported.” From this, Matthews, Boehlert, and Huffington Post’s Ryan Grim – notice the absence of any conservatives to go against the consensus! – divined that this meant Fox was actively assisting Republican candidates. And that’s where the fun really began, for after a commercial break, Matthews brought on exclusively left-leaning guests to make the case that Obama should replace Biden with Clinton so as to assure his reelection in 2012 and position her to be president the following eight years. Assisting him to put forward this strategy was former Virginia governor Doug Wilder – who wrote a piece about this for Politico Monday – followed by New York magazine’s John Heilemann: JOHN HEILEMANN, “NEW YORK”: The thing that Governor Wilder is right about and I know that you see is that it`s possible that, in 2012, what President Obama will need most of all is to be able to connect to a set of voters, particularly white working-class and rural voters, that he has trouble with. MATTHEWS: Yes. HEILEMANN: And there would be no bigger asset for him than not just Hillary Clinton Enhanced Coverage LinkingHillary Clinton on the ticket, but having both Clintons out full force on his side in 2012. MATTHEWS: Even if it means — even if it means laying the groundwork for a Clinton ascendancy? HEILEMANN: I think she`s going to run in 2016, no matter what. MATTHEWS: OK. MATTHEWS: An interesting thought from you. HEILEMANN: And she`s going to — and she`s going to run in 2016. And she`s going to — right now, the schedule, I think, for her is, she will do four years and four years only as secretary of state. And if she is an outgoing secretary of state, a lame-duck secretary of state in 2012, she won`t be in the political position to really help Obama. She will do thinking about doing something like going and becoming the chancellor of the University of Iowa to set herself up to run for 2016. MATTHEWS: I agree. HEILEMANN: So, Obama is faced with the notion of Clinton following him anyway. So, why not make the best of that situation and put it to his advantage? MATTHEWS: I don`t know. I had never heard this before. All her people deny that, of course, right? HEILEMANN: Well, of course they do. (CROSSTALK) MATTHEWS: I think it`s fascinating. I think she`s done a great job. (CROSSTALK) HEILEMANN: I don`t think there`s almost anybody who believes them. MATTHEWS: And I agree with you. I think she would help him in Pennsylvania, help in Ohio. And, by the way, I think the general election of 2012 now looks like a nail-biter, closely run. It will have to be. You`re right. And they are not going to win much south of the Mason-Dixon Line. They have got to win those old Democratic states that the Clintons are dominant in, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, et cetera, et cetera, New York. She would ground him up. I just think it has to be handled the way you say if it ever does come to pass. HEILEMANN: Well — MATTHEWS: Joe Biden has got to be happy with this. HEILEMANN: Yes. MATTHEWS: He`s got to have a smile on his face. And he`s got to say, I can`t wait to get to Foggy Bottom and be secretary of state, convincingly, if this ever happens. (CROSSTALK) HEILEMANN: And I think he could say that, Chris, because, as you know, before Obama urged him to become vice president, picked him, that was what Biden had his eye on. He wanted to be secretary of state. MATTHEWS: Well, it`s a great job. HEILEMANN: He`s wanted to be secretary of state his whole life. And on the question of what has to happen in 2012, I think you`re exactly right. I think it`s going to be a nail-biter. You remember, Barack Obama won, what, 42 or 43 percent of the white vote, a really high percentage of the white vote, better than John Kerry — MATTHEWS: Yes. HEILEMANN: — better than Al Gore in 2000. He`s right now running at about 35 percent approval rating with the white vote. And if he`s going to — you can`t win the presidency with 35 percent of the white vote. MATTHEWS: No. HEILEMANN: He needs to do something to solve that problem. Joe Biden is good with those people — MATTHEWS: OK. HEILEMANN: — but Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton are better. MATTHEWS: Well, this will be the ultimate example of President Obama being a transactional politician. I`ll tell you, it looks a little cold on the outside. You may be able to warm it up, John Heilemann. (LAUGHTER) MATTHEWS: You would have another “Game Change.” Here’s maybe the best part of this sequence – when Matthews says his guest is a liberal writer:  Thank you. Congratulations, the best book on politics. Nancy Reagan — I was just out there at the Reagan Library — she loves your book. And I know this will offend you as somewhat of a liberal writer, but she says, Ronnie would have loved it, too. There`s a — he`s a pol, too.  How nice. So, what we’ve had so far were too liberal guests talking to an admittedly liberal host about how Fox News is a shill network promoting Republican candidates. Next, we had a Democrat introduce an idea specifically designed to assist Obama in his reelection efforts whilst also putting Hillary Clinton in position to win the White House in 2016 thereby ushering in another twelve years of Democrat control of the executive branch of our government. Then, a so-called journalist that Matthews admits is liberal discusses with the host why Wilder’s idea makes sense – all this happening immediately after a segment accusing Fox of being shills for Republicans. Really makes you wonder how everybody involved in the production of this show completely missed the glaring hypocrisy on display.   But don’t leave your seats for the concession stand or the restroom just yet, for really putting the icing on the cake the host concluded the show with a monologue about why the scariest three words in the English language are “President Sarah Palin”: MATTHEWS: Let me finish tonight with the fact that for tens of millions of Americans, and not just Democrats, the scariest three words in the English language are: President Sarah Palin. Those words could, if events go a certain way, get a hell of a lot scarier. I`ve noticed how Palin has been positioning herself as the Christian woman in national Republican politics. This gives her incredible leg up in the first in the country Iowa Republican caucuses where the Reverend Pat Robertson once triumphed. The shape of the 2012 Republican presidential field in the Iowa caucuses would be Sarah Palin against a field of Republican men. And with the possible exception of Mike Huckabee, all more secular than she is. The results, the Christian woman beats out the four or five men running somewhere to her left. No one gets to her right — and as long as nobody does, this lone woman in the Republican field, the one openly running as a religious fundamentalist beats the competition, hands down. Get this number into your head. Sarah Palin`s latest Gallup Poll favorable rating among Republican voters nationwide is 76 percent, by far the highest of any contender. So she wins Iowa. Next, New Hampshire. Even if Mitt Romney outpolls Palin in the Granite State, it will be a fact dismissed by the national political press. Why? Because New Hampshire is the Boston media market. It`s right in it and therefore seen as home base for the former Massachusetts governor. Next, Palin trucks down to South Carolina where she made Nikki Haley governor and wins among fellow religious fundamentalists. Another win in Palin country, an increasingly wide expansion in Republican politics. Now for the knockout. Palin has said that Michigan where Romney`s father was governor was overlooked by Republicans last time. She started her book tour there. Republican women who lined up to buy “Going Rogue” are her first round of investors. With two or three men besides Romney still appearing on the ballot, she pulls it out in Michigan. Now, anything is possible at this point. Nominated in Tampa, Florida, and the Republican National Convention in an economy that might still be shaky, the political situation of this country becomes frighteningly dicey. All can I say is that I remember how liberals thought Ronald Reagan could never do it. As we learned in 1980, tough times yield surprising — yes, scary election prospects. That`s HARDBALL for now. Thanks for being with us.  And this guy has the nerve to accuse Fox of being shills. 

Follow this link:
Chris Matthews Accuses Fox of Being GOP Shills Then Attacks Sarah Palin

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Time vs Politico: Halperin Rebukes VandeHei for Characterizing GOP Group as ‘Shadowy’

Posted on July 21, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

In the “secret” underworld of Republican fundraising, Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie use “cloaked” donor lists to “dig up dirt” on Democrats and funnel campaign contributions to Republican candidates. At least that’s the impression left by Politico’s Jim VandeHei. On the June 21 “Morning Joe,” Time magazine’s Mark Halperin challenged VandeHei’s characterization of American Crossroads GPS, a Republican political organization that finances issue ads designed to promote conservative positions on policy issues. “With all due respect to Jim and the folks at Politico, you know, they make this these shadowy donors, this shadowy group, I mean, these are citizens who, under the law, are able to give anonymously to a group like this and to fund political activity to help them win races,” complained Halperin. Highlighting the fact that American Crossroads, classified as a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization, is not required to disclose its donor list, the Politico piece lead Halperin, who is no champion of conservative causes , to conclude that VandeHei and his colleagues believe the Rove – Gillespie operation is a “shadowy” organization. Halperin also accused VandeHei of promoting a double standard: “I’m not sure if this were a Democratic group people would look at this as something sinister but rather an attempt to fight for what they believe in the marketplace of political ideas.” “I think there’s been a big push of late to try to get at least more disclosure of donors I think from both sides,” countered VandeHei. It’s hard to believe Politico’s executive editor would paint other 501(c)4 organizations like the Center for American Progress, MoveOn.org, or the Natural Resources Defense Council as clandestine operations. But when it comes to a non-profit organization run by prominent Republicans, Politico cast a menacing shadow over the organization. The transcript of the program can be found below: MSNBC Morning Joe July 21, 2010 8:23 A.M. E.S.T. WILLIE GEIST: With us now, Executive Editor of Politico, Jim VandeHei, he’s back with a look at the Playbook. Hey, Jim. JIM VANDEHEI, Politico executive editor: Hey, how you doing? GEIST: Good. Let’s pick up on something we were talking about earlier in the show and that’s Karl Rove, had been having trouble apparently raising cash from donors because they don’t want to get their names out there so he did something about it. VANDEHEI: Karl Rove, Ed Gillespie, some other prominent Republicans have put together a group they were trying to get a bunch money to run attack ads and go after Democrats. They weren’t having much luck because the way they set it up donors had to disclose their names. Now they’ve created a new organization that allows them to cloak the identity of donor names. Money is pouring in and they’re saying they’re going to put that money in to some dirt-digging against Democrats and also painting what’s happened in the Gulf as Obama’s Katrina. GEIST: Hey Mark Halperin, is this a new concept? Has Karl Rove tapped into a new idea here? We’re going to give him a mic too, it’ll be great. MARK HALPERIN, Time magazine: There are new groups based on this Supreme Court decision from January but I have to say, with all due respect to Jim and the folks at Politico, you know, they make this these shadowy donors, this shadowy group, I mean, these are citizens who, under the law, are able  to give anonymously to a group like this and to fund political activity to help them win races. I’m not sure if this were a Democratic group people would look at this as something sinister but rather an attempt to fight for what they believe in the marketplace of political ideas. VANDEHEI: I disagree with you, Mark. I think there was a tremendous amount of coverage back when George Soros and others were starting to do this for Democrats if you recall back in 2006, which helped them take back control of power and I think there’s been a big push of late to try to get at least more disclosure of donors I think from both sides. And there still exists this caveat in tax law – 501(c)3 or 4 – which allows you to do some of this activity anonymously. So I think certainly both sides do it. I think it’s most interesting right now for Republicans because they desperately need this infusion of cash to be able to win back the House and Senate because they’re suffering when it comes to money. HALPERIN: I agree, I just like to get under Jim’s skin when I can. VANDEHEI: You sound better when you didn’t have a mic, Mark. GEIST: The page and Politico in a smack down. Judge Buchanan would you like to render your ruling? Who’s right in this case? –Alex Fitzsimmons is a News Analysis intern at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.

Follow this link:
Time vs Politico: Halperin Rebukes VandeHei for Characterizing GOP Group as ‘Shadowy’

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Cooking With Gallup, Per RedState: Generic Congressional Poll Changes Sample Base, Improves Dems’ Standing

Posted on July 21, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

There are lots of creative ways to generate an artificial sense of momentum for a foundering political party. Based on information provided at its own report, it appears that the Gallup polling organization may have come up with a new one. Gallup didn’t merely play with percentage of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents between poll dates. In the case of a generic Congressional poll done on July 12-18, the organization switched to a significantly different sampling base. Whereas previous efforts on the topic sample registered voters, the July 12-18 poll sampled all adults. RedState’s Neil Stevens notes that in the transition, what was a one-point generic ballot lead for Democrats a week earlier using registered voters  zoomed to six points in the July 12-18 tabulation of “all adults.” Stevens posted on this yesterday (HT HyScience ), and benchmarked the latest poll to one done from May 24-30 (bolds are mine): Remember on June 2 when Republicans took a big lead in the Gallup generic ballot? I used it to project conservatively a 45 seat Republican gain in the House. This was a poll of registered voters, according to Gallup’s Survey Methods notes: Results are based on telephone interviews conducted May 24-30, 2010, with a random sample of 1,594 registered voters , aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, selected using a random-digit-dial sampling technique. But now on July 19 that Democrats are showing a big lead, despite the fact that Gallup’s pretty graph now is titled Candidate Preferences in 2010 Congressional Elections, Among Registered Voters, the sampling is different: Results are based on telephone interviews conducted as part of Gallup Daily tracking July 12-18, 2010, with a random sample of 1,535 adults , aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, selected using random-digit-dial sampling. Catch the difference? The Republicans lead with a sample of Registered Voters, but the Democrats lead with a sample of Adults. Someone who trusted Gallup’s pretty, but lying, picture would never have noticed. It is terribly dishonest for Gallup to string together two different polls as one series, as Gallup does not only in their graphs, but in their write-ups as well. Assuming all is as Stevens details, poll cooking doesn’t get much more blatant than this. I suppose it’s conceivable that Gallup’s disclosure is in error, but in the current political and economic environment, it’s more than a little hard to take that Democrats have achieved significant generic Congressional ballot gains in the past week. Gallup’s post implies that the improvement occurred because “the U.S. Senate passed a major financial reform bill touted as reining in Wall Street.” Paraphrasing tennis great John McEnroe in one of his less than perfect moments : They cannot be serious. It will be interesting, and telling, to see if Gallup sticks with the much less predictive “all adults” metric in future reports on the topic, switches back to registered voters, and/or quietly flushes its latest effort down the memory hole at some future point. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

See the original post here:
Cooking With Gallup, Per RedState: Generic Congressional Poll Changes Sample Base, Improves Dems’ Standing

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Is All This ‘Conservatives Are Racist’ Talk Designed to Save Dems in November?

Posted on July 15, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

Have you noticed that you can’t swing a dead cat these days without hitting some television host claiming the Tea Party or a conservative is racist? Turn on ABC and there it is. Ditto CBS , CNN , and MSNBC . Can’t get away from it, can you? Think it’s just a coincidence, or could this be a response to President Obama’s plummeting poll numbers and the panic in the liberal media that November could be a realigning election that results in a massive Republican sweep of Congress? Before you answer, consider the following written Wednesday by Gina Loudon, the founder of Buycott Arizona: With no way to win on the issues, Democrats would need some way to energize their base. So in 2010, they began playing the race card as hard as they could. In a very rare move, the president of the United States rushed out to tell the world that he had a racist state that had gone rogue and needed to be punished. Adding to the narrative, Democratic congressional leaders invited a foreign leader to excoriate millions of Americans from the floor of Congress…While assailing white voters in Arizona, the Obama administration got caught in an Orwellian scenario that makes it appear the policy of this Chicago machine administration is that some people really are “more equal” than others.   On Tuesday, the Los Angeles Times reported : Democratic strategists looking to stave off major losses in the upcoming midterm election have devised a precise and targeted role for President Obama: recapturing the enthusiasm he generated as a fresh-faced candidate vying to become the nation’s first black president.  This seems crucial for Democrat success, as according to a recent survey by the Pew Research Center, Republicans are far more energized: Fully 56% of Republican voters say they are more enthusiastic about voting this year than in previous elections – the highest percentage of GOP voters expressing increased enthusiasm about voting in midterms dating back to 1994. While enthusiasm among Democratic voters overall is on par with levels in 2006, fewer liberal Democrats say they are more enthusiastic about voting than did so four years ago (52% then, 37% today). The Republican Party now holds about the same advantage in enthusiasm among its party’s voters that the Democratic Party held in June 2006 and the GOP had late in the 1994 campaign. Moreover, more Republicans than Democrats are now paying close attention to election news (64% vs. 50%). Coincidentally as the Times noted, the President is changing his approach:  More and more, Obama is taking on a partisan tone. He is weaving a story line peopled with villains and heroes, fools and leaders. In a speech Thursday in Las Vegas, he mocked Sen. Harry Reid’s election opponent, Republican Sharron Angle, saying she “favors an approach that’s even more extreme than the Republicans we got in Washington. That’s saying something.”  It sure is saying something: Obama and Company, realizing November looks like a disaster, are beginning to demonize the opposition. And, as midterm elections are often about turnout, the key right now for the Left is to figure out a way to energize those that helped Obama get elected in the first place. The solution: play the race card. Nothing gets the ire up in liberals more than racism.  After all, you might still be unemployed, and this administration may not have brought about all the Hope and Change they campaigned on, but Republicans are all racists. This includes many of their elected officials, their surrogates at Fox News, the radio personalities they love like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, and, of course, those awful Teabaggers. The NAACP just put that red letter on THEIR backs, don’t you know? With the strategy in place, all that’s needed is a compliant media stoking the fire of discontent. Just try swinging a dead cat without hitting someone that fits THAT bill. 

Read more:
Is All This ‘Conservatives Are Racist’ Talk Designed to Save Dems in November?

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,