Tag Archives: america

Noel Sheppard Live-blogging Troopathon 2010

Today is Move America Forward’s third annual Troopathon. NB’s own Noel Sheppard will be live-blogging the events, which will include talks by Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, Laura Schlessinger. Over its first two years, MAF’s Troopathon has raised over $2 million for our men and women in uniform. According to its website , MAF “is the largest grassroots pro-troop organization in the United States, committed to supporting the brave men and women of our military and their efforts to defeat terrorism.” Please join NewsBusters in saluting all of our men and women in uniform, and check out the live video stream of Troopathon and Noel’s live coverage of the event all below the fold. <a href="http://www.coveritlive.com/mobile.php/option=com_mobile/task=viewaltcast/altcast_code=510cd9ed60" >Noel Sheppard at Troopathon</a>

The rest is here:
Noel Sheppard Live-blogging Troopathon 2010

Mark Halperin Signs On at MSNBC; But Wait, He Used to Bash ‘Irresponsible Partisan Niche Media’

TV Newser and other sites reported yesterday that MSNBC has named Time’s Mark Halperin to be its “senior political analyst,” continuing his regular gigs on the set of Morning Joe, but also adding his observations to other programming. Would that include the hard-core opinion shows like Olbermann and Maddow? Not if those stars read Halperin’s comments about our “irresponsible partisan niche media” from the Jewish newspaper Forward in 2006. ”It’s going to take citizens, whether they have strong ideological views or not, to appreciate the necessity, in a free democracy, of a powerful, responsible, unbiased press,” Halperin continued. “If the country doesn’t care if we have that, if the view of the people of America is, ‘We want irresponsible, partisan, niche media,’ that’s what we’ll have. It’s going to take consumers of news, voting through their subscriptions and their eyeballs, to have an unbiased press. Most of the trend lines are bad.” Halperin was offering one of his occasional admissions of liberal media bias that so frustrate the left-wing blogosphere. (Typical was Salon.com’s Alex Pareene, with the headline “Mark Halperin now paid to be wrong about everything on MSNBC.” He contrasts him as far inferior to MSNBC’s other recent addition, David Weigel.) Halperin argued in 2006 that conservative new media was dominating the discussion (which, er, made Obama’s election impossible?):  “We’ve gone from a system with major national news organizations strong enough to umpire, but who did it in a way that Republicans saw as liberally biased and in important ways was liberally biased,” he said. “That system has been replaced by one that favors conservatives through the new media, which masquerades as a referee but is simply part of the partisan shouting on one side or the other. The old system favored liberals but was a better referee. The new system favors conservatives but is no referee at all. Best would be if we could strengthen national news organizations and eliminate liberal bias.” So perhaps Halperin meant that only conservatives are responsible for creating “irresponsible, partisan niche media.” That would make him a nice match with Bill Press, who thinks only the conservatives engage in “toxic talk.” He may want to avoid Olbermann in the hallway with that talk of how it would be “best” to eliminate liberal bias.

View original post here:
Mark Halperin Signs On at MSNBC; But Wait, He Used to Bash ‘Irresponsible Partisan Niche Media’

Movieline at the Midpoint: 5 Candidates to be the Next Betty White of 2010

Today marks the midpoint of 2010 — and thus the midpoint of our year in movies and TV. Join Movieline in both taking stock and looking ahead. If there was one constant that unified the first six months of 2010, it was that everyone loved Betty White. Seriously — saying something mean about America’s Grandma this year was akin to stealing candy from a baby while kicking a puppy. You just didn’t go there. But now that we’re on the other side of 2010, White has probably peaked — unless someone starts a Facebook campaign to get her become an astronaut or something. So which former icon will return to glory in the next six months? Movieline speculates ahead.

Original post:
Movieline at the Midpoint: 5 Candidates to be the Next Betty White of 2010

Banks Financing Mexico Gangs Admitted in Wells Fargo Deal

Michael Smith Bloomberg June 30, 2010 Just before sunset on April 10, 2006, a DC-9 jet landed at the international airport in the port city of Ciudad del Carmen, 500 miles east of Mexico City. As soldiers on the ground approached the plane, the crew tried to shoo them away, saying there was a dangerous oil leak. So the troops grew suspicious and searched the jet. They found 128 black suitcases, packed with 5.7 tons of cocaine, valued at $100 million. The stash was supposed to have been delivered from Caracas to drug traffickers in Toluca, near Mexico City, Mexican prosecutors later found. Law enforcement officials also discovered something else. The smugglers had bought the DC-9 with laundered funds they transferred through two of the biggest banks in the U.S.: Wachovia Corp. and Bank of America Corp., Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its August 2010 issue. This was no isolated incident. Wachovia, it turns out, had made a habit of helping move money for Mexican drug smugglers. Wells Fargo & Co., which bought Wachovia in 2008, has admitted in court that its unit failed to monitor and report suspected money laundering by narcotics traffickers — including the cash used to buy four planes that shipped a total of 22 tons of cocaine. Full Article Here: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-29/banks-financing-mexico-s-drug-cartels-a… added by: im1mjrpain

Chris Matthews Disgracefully Uses Sen. Byrd’s Death To Bash Bush

It goes without saying that Monday’s media coverage of Sen. Robert Byrd’s (D-W.V.) death was predictably sycophantic on a disturbing number of levels. However, the award for most disgraceful use of a politician’s passing to further one’s agenda has to go to MSNBC’s Chris Matthews who ended last night’s “Hardball” memorializing a senator he had great esteem for by attacking former President George W. Bush. “Let me finish tonight with a tribute to a U.S. senator who shared my deep American objection to the Iraq War,” he began. Readers are cautioned that where Matthews went from here was offensive in the extreme (video follows with transcript and commentary):  CHRIS MATTHEWS: Let me finish tonight with a tribute to a U.S. senator who shared my deep American objection to the Iraq War. I love this country and believe in its historic greatness. I don`t know how those Founding Fathers found themselves in Philadelphia in the late 18th century but they did. And we are incredibly fortunate for that. And I love the symbol of the Gadsden flag that, coiled rattlesnake against a field of yellow. “Don`t Tread on Me` — it warned our enemies, and that included especially the British government and London. This morning, a man died who treasure this country and that flag. For those reasons, Senator Robert Byrd opposed both wars — both wars with Iraq. Here`s what he said in the fall of 2002: “For the first time in the history of the republic, the nation is considering a preemptive strike against a sovereign state. And I will not be silent.” And on the eve of that second Iraq War, he said, quote, “We proclaim a doctrine of preemption which is understood by few and feared by many. We saw that the United States — or we say that the United States has the right to turn its firepower on any corner of the globe which might be suspect in the war on terrorism. There is no credible evidence to connect Saddam Hussein to 9/11.” I was personally stunned and remain in awe that a president of George W. Bush`s abilities was able to take the attack on us of 9/11 and upturn two-plus centuries of American doctrine “Don`t Tread on Me.” We don`t attack but if you attack, we attack back. We oppose aggression. We are not the aggressors. Stop the tape! A president of George W. Bush`s abilities? What kind of nonsense is that? A man you admire dies, and that’s the occasion to mock a former President? How utterly disgraceful. But it got worse:  President Bush and his cohorts in and out of the government were able to construct a new doctrine: If we don`t like you or your policies we attack. If you cause trouble in your region, we attack. If we think you have WMD, we attack. Well, couldn’t that therefore apply to Woodrow Wilson and World War I? America was never attacked. And maybe Franklin Delano Roosevelt should be similarly excoriated for getting involved in Europe during World War II, for Germany never attacked us. Neither did Italy.  As such, using the Matthews Doctrine, we should only have attacked Japan after Pearl Harbor. And we never should have gone into Korea, Vietnam, or Iraq in 1991 for none of those countries attacked us either. Taking this further, Clinton never should have sent troops to Somalia in 1993, or Bosnia in 1995, or Kosovo in 1999. And he certainly shouldn’t have bombed Iraq in 1998. Add it all up, and in the past almost 100 years, Presidents Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, Bush 41, and Clinton have all gone against the Matthews Doctrine. Yet, on the occasion of Sen. Byrd’s death, this so-called journalist chose to once again attack George W. Bush. And he wasn’t finished:  And millions went for it, hook, line and sinker. Senator Byrd did not. That he was so alone out there makes the swooning of America generally Bush`s war so frightening. If someone of Bush`s ability can make America forget its most basic, most time-honored standards, then imagine what a gifted demagogue could do. It`s one thing to send us off to Afghanistan, the base of those who hit us. Bush was able to then drive the entire country off to an altogether different direction. That`s what Bush did. Bush’s war?  Didn’t the Founding Fathers give Congress the sole responsibility to declare war? Why is it that shameless liberals like Matthews forget that in October 2002, both chambers of Congress debated giving Bush the authorization to invade Iraq if Saddam Hussein didn’t accede to various United Nations demands? And why is it that shameless liberals like Matthews forget that on October 10, 2002, the House approved the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution by a vote of 296 to 133? 81 Democrats voted “Yea” including Dick Gephardt, Jane Harmon, Steny Hoyer, John Murtha, and Henry Waxman.   And why is it that shameless liberals like Matthews forget that on October 11, 2002, the Senate approved the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution by a vote of 77 to 23? 29 Democrats voted “Yea” including Max Baucus, Evan Bayh, Joe Biden, John Breaux, Maria Cantwell, Max Cleland, Hillary Clinton, Tom Daschle, Chris Dodd, Byron Dorgan, John Edwards, Dianne Feinstein, Tom Harkin, John Kerry, Mary Landrieu, Joe Lieberman, Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson (Neb.), Bill Nelson (Fla.), Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller, and Chuck Schumer.  As such, quite frankly, Americans like me are SICK AND TIRED of people like Matthews calling this Bush’s war!!!  And to use the occasion of a Senator’s death to do so is disgusting to say the least. The folks at General Electric must be so proud to not only have an employee like this, but a television network that encourages and celebrates such un-American behavior. Yes, I said un-American, because the Iraq War Resolution was passed with overwhelming bipartisan support in both chambers of Congress, and 75 percent of this nation approved of the invasion five months later. As such, WE THE PEOPLE went into this fight TOGETHER no matter how liberal media members like Matthews continue to shamefully depict it now. Will it ever stop? 

See the original post:
Chris Matthews Disgracefully Uses Sen. Byrd’s Death To Bash Bush

Lady Gaga Goes The Distance At Montreal Monster Ball Tour Kickoff

Epic shows runs more than two hours and includes Gaga’s brand-new track ‘You and I.’ By James Montgomery Lady Gaga performs in concert (file) Photo: Ollie Millington/ Redferns MONTREAL — “I’m going to give you the best show of your life tonight. You’re not going to be able to walk in the morning.” That’s what Lady Gaga said Monday night (June 28), right around what could’ve conservatively been called “the midway point” of her marathon set, and she wasn’t kidding. Because by the time she finally wrapped the two-plus hour show at the Bell Centre — a show that was also the kickoff of the North American leg of her revamped (and seemingly unending) Monster Ball Tour — there wasn’t a calf muscle left unquivered. If it wasn’t the best show her “little monsters” had ever seen, it certainly was the longest. An over-the-top (even by her rather lofty standards) m

CBS’s Couric Dutifully Parrots Left-wing Center for American Progress Study

“The last day of school shouldn’t mean last call for lunch.” That’s how CBS’s Katie Couric melodramatically concluded her June 25 “Notebook” item on her CBSNews.com Couric & Co. blog. The “Evening News” anchor pointed to a report by the liberal Center for American Progress — without, of course, noting the group’s leftward bent — that found “that nearly 20 million children get free or reduced-price lunch at school. But only one in six of them will receive subsidized meals this summer.” Couric concluded from this that “[n]early one in four children is at risk for hunger” over the summer and called “essential” a bill before Congress to “improve access to summer meals.” Of course nowhere in her Notebook item did Couric weigh whether this might be a matter better left to state and local governments — especially when the federal government is drowning in red ink — or better yet, to parents themselves. After all, schools provide lunches and breakfasts during the school year for the sake of convenience of students and their parents, not because government has the moral responsibility to feed children. That’s obviously the job of parents and their failure to adequately do so is grounds for the involvement of local child protective services. Parental responsibility and restrained spending of taxpayer dollars are not high on Couric’s list of concerns, apparently. That’s a page from my notebook. 

See the article here:
CBS’s Couric Dutifully Parrots Left-wing Center for American Progress Study

Oliver Stone Lauds Hugo Chavez, Criticizes Action Against Iran on ABC’s GMA

Liberal director Oliver Stone revealed his anti-American bent on Monday’s Good Morning America, praising the rise of mainly left-wing leaders across South America and even went so far to support Brazilian President Lula da Silva for “trying to strike to deal with Iran,” wildly predicting ” it’s going to be like North Vietnam again ” if the U.S. pursued sanctions against the country. Anchor George Stephanopoulos interviewed the Oscar-winning director 44 minutes into the 8 am Eastern hour. Stephanopoulos referenced how Stone has “tackled war, Wall Street, and the Kennedy assassination” and is now “taking on South America. He says our neighbors to the south haven’t gotten a fair shake from the American media, and, armed with a camera, he’s set out on a road trip to try to change that.” Before asking about Chavez, Stephanopoulos played a clip from Stone’s documentary “South of the Border,” which included a sound bite from CNN’s John Roberts that gave the impression that the anchor was condemning the Venezuelan leader: “He’s more dangerous than Bin Laden, and the effects of Chavez, his war against America, could eclipse those of 9/11.” Actually, Roberts, in the January 15, 2009 segment from his American Morning program, actually was reading a quote from a book by his guest, Doug Schoen: “Right off the bat, in the very front of the book, you quote Otto Reich, who was the former ambassador to Venezuela back in the 1980s, as saying that he’s more dangerous than bin Laden and the effects of Chavez, his war against America could eclipse those of 9/11.” Earlier, the ABC anchor asked, “Why take this on?” The director characterized the left-wing trend in leaders in South America as a “march towards reform” and praised these favorite leaders on the continent without naming them: STONE: They have democratically-elected leaders who look like the people who elected them. They have a priest in Paraguay. They have a woman in Argentina. They have an Indian leader- the first Indian- in Bolivia. They have an economist in Ecuador and they have a soldier who’s poor- comes from a poor family- who was elected three times in Venezuela- that’s Hugo Chavez. These are good people. When you look in their eyes, you see it, and you see it on film. That’s why you have to do a  film because on paper, it sometimes it didn’t come across, you know? The leader of Paraguay, Fernando Lugo, is actually a former Catholic bishop who admitted that he fathered a child with a woman in her 20s when he was still a bishop. Lugo led a mainly left-wing coalition into office when he was elected in 2008. Argentina’s president, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, nationalized $30 billion in private pension funds late in 2008. Bolivian President Evo Morales and Ecuador’s executive, Rafael Correa , are both avowed socialists. The ABC anchor later pressed the director on his endorsement of his Venezuelan “soldier:” STEPHANOPOULOS (live): Do you believe Hugo Chavez is a good person? STONE: Yes, I do- absolutely . STEPHANOPOULOS: But even the United Nations has said that Hugo Chavez has not been a paragon of free speech- his crackdown on the media in his own country. STONE: I have not seen that report. I know that- you know, there’s no pattern of censorship in this country . I’ve been there. So, you can see it. You can go down to South America, spend three days, and you’ll see the most vibrant opposition in the world . STEPHANOPOULOS: One of the reasons the United States has put a lot of pressure on Chavez is over oil, you believe, and there was particular opposition from the Bush administration. How do you think the relationship may change, now that President Obama is in office? STONE: Well, I hope it changes because America seems to want to control every oil-producing nation in the world, whether it’s Iraq or Iran or Venezuela. Since Stone named Iran, Stephanopoulos mentioned how “the president of Brazil [is] trying to strike a deal with Iran, counter to what the Obama administration is looking for.” The director replied that this move as a ” good thing .” When the anchor asked why, Stone made his “North Vietnam” comparison: STONE: Because- well, the march to sanctions in Iran. We want sanctions. We want- it seems to me, once they start intercepting their ships, we’re going to be in a- it’s going to be like North Vietnam again. We’re going to get into a position where we’re going to get closer to war. There’s no reason for to us go to war in Iran, any more than there was a reason to go in Iraq – STEPHANOPOULOS: Even if they want to build a nuclear weapon? STONE: Hmm? STEPHANOPOULOS: Even if they want to build a nuclear weapon? STONE: I think that has to be discussed. So the Oscar winner not only acted as a left-wing apologist but also vouched for inaction against a nation who has nuclear ambitions and has made threats against its neighbors. Stephanopoulos and Stone concluded by briefly discussing how the director was also releasing a sequel to his acclaimed 1987 movie, “Wall Street.” After thanking his guest, the ABC anchor noted that “‘South of the Border’ is open in New York now” as a title graphic for the movie flashed on screen. But, in a parallel to Stone’s edit of Roberts, the graphic that ABC used for the movie was actually cropped from its movie poster which emulated left-wing propaganda art . Eagle’s talons represented United States’s power in South America on the poster, which were mounted on top of South America which was appropriately painted red.

See more here:
Oliver Stone Lauds Hugo Chavez, Criticizes Action Against Iran on ABC’s GMA

Supreme Court Rules Against Christian Student Group

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled 5-4 that a Christian student group that bars LGBT members and their allies cannot receive official recognition and funding from a public law school. The case, Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, centered on the Christian Legal Society at the University of California Hastings College of the Law. The student group refused membership to LGBT individuals and those who advocate for them, and sued when the university denied institutional support to the group in response. According to the Associated Press, “The court on Monday turned away an appeal from the Christian Legal Society, which sued to get funding and recognition from the University of California's Hastings College of the Law. added by: TimALoftis

Obama administration announces massive piracy crackdown

While they may never be able to truly defeat piracy and drive it from the lurking depths of the internet, copyright protection attack-dog organizations like the RIAA and MPAA have long dreamed of the day when they would no longer have to pay for their own copyright enforcement. Now that dream is on the verge of coming true, thanks to the Obama administration. After countless lobbyist dollars from the music and film industry and a brief “public review”, the administration rolled out its vision to fight piracy yesterday afternoon. U.S. Vice President Joe Biden — whose blunt speech has sometime left him in trouble — did not mince words. He states, “This is theft, clear and simple. It's smash and grab, no different than a guy walking down Fifth Avenue and smashing the window at Tiffany's and reaching in and grabbing what's in the window.” The sound-byte comparing downloads to stealing jewels from New York City's finest jeweler quickly lit up the web. Bob Pisano, interim chief executive officer at the Motion Picture Association of America praised the VP, “It is especially critical that the United States has an effective framework for protecting creative content online and enforcing intellectual property rights in the digital environment.” According to the Obama administration, the RIAA, and MPAA, the world economy is pretty much doomed if we don't start prosecuting pirates at home and abroad. Without such a crackdown, businesses will go bankrupt the coalition argues. Biden states, “Piracy hurts, it hurts our economy.” Interestingly, the statements seem to fly in the face of a recent Government Accountability Office study released to U.S. Congress earlier this year, which concluded that there is virtually no evidence for the claimed million dollar losses by the entertainment industry. That study suggested that piracy could even benefit the economy. Another noteworthy study from three years back notes that virtually every citizen violates intellectual property laws in some way on a daily basis. The White House press release was full of buzz phrases, but short on details. It did however indicate that the U.S. government may increasingly monitor filesharing networks and BitTorrent sites and assist media groups in their prosecution/threat letter efforts. It speaks of improved “law enforcement efforts at the Federal, state and local level.” The biggest effort, though, will be devoted to cracking down on piracy websites in the U.S. and overseas. The administration was short on details of how exactly it would convince piracy-loving nations like China to change their ways, but it did say it would try to do so by “being as public as we possibly can” about infringement. The press release states, “As we shine the spotlight on foreign governments that have rogue actors doing illicit business within their borders, it's the government's responsibility to respond.” Such efforts have shown mild success. After lots of threats against the Swedish government by the U.S., the European Union nation finally tried admins with the nation's largest torrent site The Pirate Bay last year and found them guilty. The trial was later exposed to be a perversion of the justice system, with the judge who gave the verdict have multiple ties to copyright protection organizations. The verdict — $3M USD in damages and a year of hard prison time for the admins — is currently being appealed. The White House's vision is perhaps a prelude to the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, which will go before Congress later this year. The bill would make P2P or BitTorrent client development a criminal offense if the distributed software was used for infringement. It also implements an interesting provision called “imminent infringement”, which allows the government to charge people who they think might be about to infringe with a civil offense (for example if you searched “torrent daft punk”). This is among the first official “thought crime” provisions to be proposed by the U.S. government. The bill also makes it a criminal offense to bypass DRM. Ultimately, it should be interesting to see how American taxpayers react to President Obama's decision to spend their money on efforts to prosecute them and try to choke out piracy at home and abroad, particularly when the current evidence is inconclusive of its effects. One thing's for sure, though. Top politicians on both sides of the aisle are firmly behind the music and movie industry anti-piracy and money-collection efforts Guess were starting a war on media piracy next? added by: liveroadkill