Tag Archives: Barack Obama

National Reviewer Schools Chris Matthews and Joe Klein on Beck, Limbaugh, Tea Party and Islamophobia

Posted on August 29, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

Chris Matthews this weekend actually invited a real conservative on to the syndicated program bearing his name, and what transpired was a thing of beauty. National Review’s Rehain Salam did such a fabulous job of educating Matthews and his guests – especially Time’s Joe Klein – that I imagine him quickly becoming a NewsBusters favorite. The initial topic of discussion was Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally scheduled to occur after this was taped. Between Matthews’ disrespectful introduction, and Klein calling the conservative talk show host “a paranoid lunatic,” one had the feeling this would have devolved into a full on hate-fest if not for Salam’s presence. Fortunately, the National Reviewer was there to set the record straight (videos follow with transcripts and commentary):  JOE KLEIN, TIME: Newt Gingrich should be embarrassed by the way. He’s much smarter than this. Glenn Beck something different. The guy’s obviously a paranoid lunatic who is a great entertainer. And He is exploiting something that always happens in our country when the economy is bad and when we’re at war. During World War I, if people were caught speaking German in the street, other people would beat them up. During World War II, we interned the Japanese. And now there, the combination of bad, bad economic times over the last couple of years and, and, you know. the terrorism, has, has led to this wave that Glenn Beck and his puppet master Rupert Murdoch are exploiting. Amazing. So geniuses like Klein actually think folks going to Tea Party rallies are akin to people that beat up Germans during World War I or had anti-Japanese tendencies during World War II. Is this really what qualifies as enlightened thinking from so-called journalists today? Regardless of the answer, after opinions from the BBC’s Katty Kay and NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell, Matthews turned to his lone conservative guest (readers are strongly encouraged to watch the videos to see just how well Salam takes control of the panel and the discussion): CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Reihan Salam, this, this whole thing I think it gets ethnic, I think it gets tribal. I listened to Rush Limbaugh this week saying, you know, “We’re not Islamophobic. We elected Barack Obama. That proves we’re not Islamophobic.” That’s saying he’s Islamic again when the guy’s a Christian. REIHAN SALAM, NATIONAL REVIEW: I don’t that’s quite what it’s saying. MATTHEWS: What is it saying? SALAM: I think what it’s saying is that Barack Obama is someone who comes from a very different kind of background and America has embraced him in large numbers. I also think the idea, respectfully, that Glenn Beck is being controlled by Rupert Murdoch as a puppet master gets things wrong. KLEIN: He hired him. He hired him. SALAM: When you look at Glenn Beck, when you see someone, for example, remember Louis Farrakhan the Million Man March? What was the Million Man March about? A lot of people were terrified about it. It caused a lot of consternation from liberals and conservatives. But ultimately what you saw was an event where tons of African-American men got together and it was really about identity and pride. And I think that when you’re looking at our politics right now, it’s true that in an economic downturn, you see a lot of confusion. You see a lot of uncertainty. And there is a decent number of people who feel not like have-nots, but they feel like are-knots. They feel that they’re not being respected in their public life and they want to assert themselves. For those interested, Salam wrote an article about this on Sunday. But I digress:   MATTHEWS: Who are the Glenn Beck constituency? SALAM: I think that it’s a lot of folks. It’s a lot of people from smaller cities, rural areas, small towns, tend to be white, tend to be Christian-identified. MATTHEWS: Okay, who is their villain? SALAM: I don’t think they necessarily have a villain so much as there’s a lot of confusion… KLEIN: Oh, come on. SALAM: …and anger and resentment. KLEIN: No, listen, the anger is the key here. The one thing that the Million Man March has in common with the Glenn Beck march is anger. And, this is the greatest Democracy and the most prosperous country in the history of the world. Sooner or later you got to ask people, “What are you so damned angry about?” Stop the tape! Isn’t that what Republicans could have asked unhappy voters in 2006? The economy was still booming. Unemployment was under five percent. Yet Democrats had an historic midterm election transfer of power. Now, with unemployment at 9.5 percent and likelihood heading higher, this pathetic liberal “journalist” doesn’t understand what people are “so damned angry about”: SALAM: Anger is what united those men who gathered during the Million Man march. I think it goes back to… KLEIN: Anger at white people, yes! Yes, that’s not an error in transcription. Klein really said the Million Man March was about African-Americans angry at white people:  SALAM: I’m pretty sure that’s not true. KATTY KAY, BBC: When you say, when you say that they’re not have-nots, they feel they are-nots, they are not what? They are not what they see represented in Washington? SALAM: That’s, that’s certainly a part of it. Also, a lot of these people felt disaffected during the Bush years as well. There’s a large number of voters… KAY: But they weren’t angry and they weren’t speaking out against Washington. SALAM: Oh, they certainly were angry, but that anger, that anger wasn’t part of the narrative. Right now that anger fits a media narrative, if I may, that’s very compelling and exciting for people to talk about, and it fits a lot of preconceived notions. KLEIN: And where is that coming narrative coming from? SALAM: It’s coming from a lot of folks, including some of the folks around this roundtable not intentionally, but I think it’s the prism through which we see the world. Ouch! Talk about your shot to the heart! Of course, what Salam was saying was 100 percent true. The disaffected conservative voters have been showing their displeasure since Ross Perot began educating people about the perils of fiscal indiscipline in 1992.  More recently, this anger manifested itself when conservatives didn’t show up to vote in 2006 due to their disgust with the out of control spending by a Republican-controlled Congress. Not that shills like Klein would ever want to admit it, but conservative anger at Republicans had just as much to do with the Democrats’ victory in 2006 as did liberal anger at Republicans. But this lesson wasn’t over, for Matthews asked Salam another great question: MATTHEWS: Here’s my question: There’s a big differential between Republicans attitudes towards Islam and Democratic attitudes. There’s some animus from both parties. But only 27 percent of Democrats say they have a problem with Islam. 54 percent of Republicans do. Explain the differential. As a little background, Matthews has been harping on this issue since the Pew Research Center released these numbers on August 19. Now, the liberal host was finally going to understand the data:  SALAM: I will happily explain it. 25 percent of Americans identify as Republicans. 42 percent identify as conservatives. When you look at those conservatives who don’t identify with the Republican Party, they have different views on a whole host of issues including gay marriage and what have you. And I think that when you’re looking at that 25 percent, that smaller group, then it stands to reason that they’re going to have somewhat different views. Another thing is… MATTHEWS: Why are they anti-islamic. SALAM: One way of saying “I have an unfavorable view of Islam” is to say that “I devoutly believe my own religious views, and I do not accept those views as true.” The view that a lot of Americans have, you know, Buddhists and Hindus and Christians are all going toward the same God, that is the eccentric view in the history of Abrahamic religion. MATTHEWS: Right. SALAM: And I think that, you know, if you asked this several years ago, you would have gotten a pretty similar answer. It’s just that it didn’t connect with the political narrative. Exactly, for the narrative today is that anyone that doesn’t agree with Barack Obama is racist and anybody that doesn’t support the Ground Zero mosque is anti-Islamic. As such, people like Matthews, Klein, and all the Left’s media minions are using any polling data that arises to further this narrative in the hopes the electorate will buy into it before Election Day. Nicely played, Reihan. Bravo!  Readers are encouraged to also review Brad Wilmouth’s ” Joe Klein & Matthews Link Anti-Muslim ‘Attitude’ to ‘Deranged Muslim’ Violence, Small-Town Whites Miss ‘Ethnic Purity’ of Past .”

Follow this link:
National Reviewer Schools Chris Matthews and Joe Klein on Beck, Limbaugh, Tea Party and Islamophobia

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

AP Outrageously Asserts that Beck ‘Borrowed’ Obama’s Lines

Posted on August 29, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

It would appear that the development of persuasive rhetoric began and ended during the 2007-2008 presidential campaign of now-President Barack Obama. That’s the nearly inevitable conclusion one must reach based on a breathtakingly absurd contention in a (I can’t believe I’m typing this) “Breaking News Update” that appeared at the Associated Press at 3:40 p.m. yesterday. When Glenn Beck spoke yesterday at his “Restoring Honor” rally in Washington, he told his audience: “One man can change the world. That man or woman is you. You make the difference.” The AP’s reaction was to assert that “Beck is borrowing some lines from President Barack Obama.” By using the word “borrowing,” AP in essence arrogantly, ignorantly and insultingly contended that Beck couldn’t possibly have come up with those sixteen words on his own, and that Barack Obama is the only historical repository of such profundity. From here, it looks like the wire service might be accusing Beck of plagiarism. My goodness, “The Essential Global News Network” should be thoroughly embarrassed. When you take a look at the full AP item, you further realize that whoever prepared the unbylined story didn’t even bother to try to prove that Barack Obama has ever used the words Beck allegedly “borrowed”: Contrary to the story’s barely disguised contention, there are plenty of other people who have previously strung together the three sentences Beck used. Putting aside the likely countless references one could compile if all the religious sermons, meeting orations, political speeches, and mealtime discussions in human history were assembled, Google Web searches on the three exact sentences the AP quoted return the following results: “One man can change the world” — about 65,600 results . “That man or woman is you” — about 184,000 . “You make the difference” — about 32,800 . As hard as it may be for the AP to believe, I can confidently contend that not every one of the results cited originated from the mind of Barack Obama. Though readers will have to forgive me for not being in the mood to go through the over 280,000 results found to prove it, the possibility exists that that Barack Obama has rarely if ever exactly said any of them. AP’s rendition of Obama’s thought pattern, if one is to believe it, is vastly different from that of Beck, whose message is far more empowering. Under Obama’s logic as AP has laid it out, one person can’t make a difference on their own. They need a room to be able to change a city. One room on its own can’t change a state; only a city can. A city can’t change a country; only  a state can. The logic is that of the collective; one person really can’t make a big difference without a host of others assembled into ever larger formally organized entities. Beck skips all of the intermediate steps. One person, by himself or herself, can change the world. Sure, people can and do work together in groups to make change happen, but unlike what is strongly implied in Obama’s logic, they don’t have to submit themselves to the will of a collective entity to accomplish great things. The difference between Obama as AP explains him and Beck in his own words could not be more profound. Finally, a Google Web search on this exact phrase — “One man can change the world. That man or woman is you. You make the difference.” — returns 51 results without “similar” ones . Beck is the source of all 51. P.S. Yes, I also noticed the complete-crock reference to a crowd of “tens of thousands.” Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

Original post:
AP Outrageously Asserts that Beck ‘Borrowed’ Obama’s Lines

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , ,

Stewart RIPS Glenn Beck’s Civil Rights Rally: ‘I Have A Scheme’ (VIDEO)

Posted on August 27, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

“The Daily Show” has a knack for going on vacation when important things happen, so it's nice to see Jon Stewart proactively “report” on Glenn Beck's Aug. 28 civil rights rally on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. In a segment dubbed “I Have A Scheme,” Stewart picked apart Beck's plan to “restore honor” to the republic on the same day and in the same place as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. did exactly 47 years ago. Beck claims not to have realized the coincidence when planning his “Beckapalooza” and Stewart honestly believed him. “Wow, so Glenn Beck didn't realize that was an important day in African-American history?” he asked. “I find that… Totally plausible. I find that totally plausible.” While Beck will not be standing in the same EXACT spot as Dr. King did on that historic day (he'll be standing two flights down) Stewart did take issue with Beck's plan to “reclaim the civil rights movement.” Beck argued that white people can't praise or support the mission of Dr. King without criticism. “Who acts like white people can't praise Martin Luther King?” Stewart said in disbelief. “Or is it that they don't want people who called Barack Obama, the first black president, a racist to praise Martin Luther King?” added by: TimALoftis

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Celebrities, Hot Stuff

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday Night Fights: Laura Ingraham vs. Ground Zero Mosque Supporter

Posted on August 26, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

As the summer of 2010 comes to a close, American tempers are dramatically rising over the Ground Zero mosque. A fine example of the heat this issue is generating occurred on Wednesday’s “O’Reilly Factor” on Fox News. In the left corner was Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer. On the right filling in for the usual host was Laura Ingraham. What ensued was an ideological battle that likely pleased folks on both sides of this contentious debate (video follows with transcript and commentary, h/t our friends at the Right Scoop ):  LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: Scott, let’s talk about this controversy in New York that’s made some people say a slow news month of August, quite chaotic. Mayor Bloomberg has now staked his ground. He’s doubled down. He made that comment about it’s un-American. Just to throw the word un-American out seems to be a little odd. I don’t know anyone who’s conflating law abiding Muslims in the United states with al Qaeda. It’s about the sensitivity of the place at Ground Zero. SCOTT STRINGER, MANHATTAN BOROUGH PRESIDENT: There’s no doubt about it. As someone who was in Manhattan on that terrible day when the terrorists attacked, we will never forget that. And we will always honor the families and the people in that community, who didn’t walk away from New York. They actually stayed and rebuilt the community. Having said that, a few very well orchestrated agitators have created a situation where we have now seen Tea Party people going after Jewish American elected officials, Mayor Bloomberg, myself, the speaker of our state assembly Shelly Silver. They’re using this as a national political wedge issue. And I have to tell you something, today we now have a report that a cab driver was stabbed when he told a passenger that he was Muslim. INGRAHAM: Right, well, we don’t know the details. STRINGER: But– INGRAHAM: I mean, throwing out examples like that, we don’t know the details of that, Scott. STRINGER: –I have to tell you something. It’s building– INGRAHAM: Well, let me tell you– STRINGER: –and we should tone this down. INGRAHAM: You want to do an anecdote like that? STRINGER: Let’s tone it down. INGRAHAM: I’m going to throw down to doing anecdote. No, I’m going to keep the temperature up because I think this is important. STRINGER: Well, you’re keeping the temperature up because you’re just– INGRAHAM: No, no, no– STRINGER: –you’re creating something that doesn’t exist. INGRAHAM: I’m not creating anything. STRINGER: Well, of course you are. INGRAHAM: You know what happened down at Ground Zero? STRINGER: And the reason I’m on the show is because we have to fight back to let America know that we’re not like this. INGRAHAM: Do you know what happened at Ground Zero? America disagrees with you vehemently. STRINGER: America does not disagree. INGRAHAM: 77 percent of the country disagrees with you. STRINGER: They do not disagree– INGRAHAM: They’re not Islamophobic. STRINGER: –that we should use anti-Semitic slurs– INGRAHAM: They’re not nasty people. They’re good people. STRINGER: –that we should go after Muslim– INGRAHAM: Do you want to know what anti-Semitic was? Let me get in here. STRINGER: This is your Tea Party friends– INGRAHAM: –what happened at Ground Zero. STRINGER: –trying to create an election (INAUDIBLE) when we all know it. INGRAHAM: And I mean, you dismissed the Tea Parties, but they’re obviously having huge and positive influence in the United States. What happened at Ground Zero– STRINGER: You don’t believe that. INGRAHAM: –in these dueling protests, and I think the more protests the better on both sides. STRINGER: Well, constructive debate is good. INGRAHAM: I think people should have their — well, it’s not up to you to determine what’s constructive. That’s the elite’s little trick. STRINGER: No, but I have– INGRAHAM: That’s the elites trick here. STRINGER: –an opinion, too. You can call me– INGRAHAM: You have an opinion, but let me just tell you what else happened, because you raised the issue– STRINGER: Sure. INGRAHAM: –of Judaism in this debate. There was also an exchange. And Andrew Breitbart has this posted on his website. You should see it because a pro-mosque protester got in the face of an 83-year-old man, who said he was a Holocaust survivor. He got in his face and he said you don’t know what you’re talking about. You don’t know what the con — I mean, he’s in the face of this old man, who survived the Holocaust who doesn’t want this mosque there. STRINGER: That is terrible. But I have to tell you something. I’m talking about– INGRAHAM: How’s that for an example? STRINGER: –Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich, people trying to divide this country and divide this city of New York. INGRAHAM: Trying to divide this country? STRINGER: It’s not going to work because– INGRAHAM: Do you agree with this imam that America has more blood on its hands than al Qaeda? Do you agree with the imam? STRINGER: I believe that we should have an opportunity for everybody to come together. INGRAHAM: How about an opportunity to hear from him? STRINGER: We don’t go and take away people’s property. We don’t raid people. INGRAHAM: I’m not saying we have a right to do any of that, no, no, no. STRINGER: Of course you are. You’re doing that every day. INGRAHAM: No, no, no, no, no. STRINGER: You’re doing that every day. INGRAHAM: They have a right to build this mosque. We have a right– STRINGER: You– INGRAHAM: –to raise questions about funding. And you as an elected official– STRINGER: You started this. INGRAHAM: You as an elected official should have an obligation to ask this imam– STRINGER: You told Daisy Khan, you told them on this show in December of 2009, you said you’re doing the right thing. INGRAHAM: Assimilating, absolutely. STRINGER: You’re doing great work. INGRAHAM: Assimilating. STRINGER: Rabbis support it. You actually– INGRAHAM: Blood — do you believe America has blood on her hands? STRINGER: You supported this and then you– INGRAHAM: You won’t answer the question, will you? STRINGER: that you left the studio. Well, let me just make point and– INGRAHAM: No, no, you want — blood on her hands? STRINGER: You (INAUDIBLE). What did I do? INGRAHAM: Why don’t you want these questions? STRINGER: What did I do? I didn’t stick to the talking points. I have to now go back and reverse myself because I need ratings. INGRAHAM: No, no, no. That’s what I heard. I heard what you don’t want to hear. STRINGER: You agreed with them. INGRAHAM: Pipe down. You know what I heard? STRINGER: Yes. INGRAHAM: I heard– STRINGER: I saw you on the show. INGRAHAM: –blood on our hands. I heard Americans are mean and they’re Islamophobic and they hate Muslims if they disagree. Is that building bridges? STRINGER: But why did you support the cultural center in December 2009? INGRAHAM: I absolutely support assimilation. STRINGER: Okay. So that’s great. INGRAHAM: I don’t support founders of an organization– STRINGER: So that’s great. INGRAHAM: –who actually believe that America is the equivalent of al Qaeda when destroying Muslim lives.. STRINGER: Then you know what? Let’s go to the FBI and Homeland Security. If you have information I don’t know, we should hear. But in the meantime– INGRAHAM: Read the 2005– STRINGER: –December 2009– INGRAHAM: You apparently don’t care what he says. You just don’t care. STRINGER: You supported this before Michael Bloomberg, before anybody else. INGRAHAM: I supported assimilation. You better believe it. STRINGER: You said what they were doing was the right thing. INGRAHAM: And professor, you got short shrift here. Do what you need to do and ask the questions. Ask questions. STRINGER: I’m just endorsing what you said what should happen. INGRAHAM: That’s so weak. Do you actually get elected with that kind of line? Ask questions. Yikes. Someone throw some water on the contestants. That said, Stringer like so many on his side of this debate greatly misrepresented Ingraham’s interview with Daisy Khan last December. It’s been characterized by most liberal media members that Ingraham on that occasion agreed with the location of this mosque. Here’s the video of that segment along with a full transcript. You decide if that’s what actually happened:  INGRAHAM: In the “Impact” segment tonight, some controversy surrounding Islamic mosque and cultural center in the works at Ground Zero. The imam responsible for this project, Feisal Abdul Rauf, has conducted some post-9/11 sensitivity training for the FBI, but he’s also made some questionable remarks about America’s behavior towards Muslims. Joining us now from New York, the imam’s wife, Daisy Khan, the executive director of the American Society for Muslim Advancement. And Daisy, before we get into this, I know you were listening to our previous segment about the culture war with the — the war against Christmas and these ads, and you wanted to comment. DAISY KHAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR MUSLIM ADVANCEMENTS: Yes. I was most intrigued, because I don’t think that there is a war between people who are believers. I think our real issue is bringing people who disbelieve and, you know, have absolutely no notion of what God is and believe in the existence of God. And this is what our faith community should be doing together to work on a common platform to remove this kind of ignorance against God. INGRAHAM: All right. I like the — I like the backup you’re giving me on that. Let’s talk about the Islamic center at Ground Zero. Questions, I can’t find many people who really have a problem with it. Bloomberg for it. Rabbis in New York saying they don’t have a problem with it. Why near Ground Zero? Why did you choose that space? KHAN: Well, I think the closeness of the center to Ground Zero, first and foremost, is a blow to the extremists. And you know, we Muslims are really fed up, Laura, of having to be defined by the actions of the extremists. You know, we are law-abiding citizens. We are faithful people. We are very good Americans. And we need to project a different message of Islam, one of tolerance, love and the kind of commonalities we have with different faith communities. And the center will be dedicated to promoting what it needs to be Muslim and what it also means to be Americans, and that is the real message that needs to get out. INGRAHAM: When you see surveys, and I know your group takes a moderate approach to Americanizing people, assimilating people, which I applaud. I think that’s fantastic. But when you see — when you see Pew’s survey, the global survey that came out — what is that, 18 months ago or so — global opinions of Muslims, especially younger male Muslims on a number of issues, including whether jihad is morally justifiable, the figures are disturbing to me. And I was wondering what your thoughts were. KHAN: Well, once again, our faith has been defined by people who have political agendas. And what they do is they use religion as a veneer to mobilize people. And what we have to do is talk about what is the central core of all faiths, which is the love of God. And this is a message, and this is why we want to create a center so close to Ground Zero: to promote a different message, one that most majority of Muslims live. I mean, the extremists are a fraction of a fraction of a fraction. And they don’t represent the majority view. And what we are afraid of is that they become the center and the majority. And we have to stop that. INGRAHAM: The problem is — we’re going to get to your husband’s comment from back in 2004 in a minute. But Pope Benedict has asked for parity, kind of a reciprocity. Look, we’ll have a mosque in Rome. Absolutely, a mosque in Rome, freedom of religion. But let’s have a cathedral or a Catholic church in Saudi Arabia. How far do you think he got with that? I mean, or Lebanon today. Try to build a new church in Lebanon. You know, previously a hot bed of Christianity. And you don’t get anywhere. So that’s what kind of upsets Christians, especially with what’s happening to Christians in Iraq and Iran and places like that. KHAN: Well, I completely agree with you. Because if you look at the history of Muslims and you look at, you know, the pluralism that existed within Islamic history over the last 1,400 years, there used to be great mosques and great cathedrals and churches and synagogues in every place. What has happened is there is a new interpretation that has crept in: one of intolerance and one of non-acceptance. And this, we have to push back against that and bring back what, you know, our religion says: there is no compulsion in religion. Which means you can disbelieve and believe, and believe in other faith communities, because… INGRAHAM: Daisy… KHAN: Yes. INGRAHAM: … let’s get into what your husband said in 2004, because this is a sticking point with a lot of people. Sydney Morning Herald interview, he was quoted as saying it was Christians in World War II who bombed civilians in Dresden and Hiroshima, neither of which were military targets. He placed some blame on Christians for starting mass attacks on civilians. That disturbs a lot of people. A lot of American soldiers died liberating Muslims around the world in Kuwait and Bosnia, and they didn’t appreciate that. KHAN: Well, I don’t think he meant it that way. I think what was trying to say is that, you know, when we take — when we have a small crime, and then there is such a huge response to that, where there’s a calamity on such a large scale, that, you know, we have to look at what the law says. And Christians — Christianity is defined by love. When things are done in the name of Christianity like, you know… INGRAHAM: Well, we didn’t — we didn’t wage World War II in the name of Christianity. KHAN: No, I’m not… INGRAHAM: That’s a difference. I mean, our fighter pilots weren’t screaming, “Allah Akbar,” you know, or the equivalent in English, “Praise be to God.” KHAN: Yes. INGRAHAM: I think — I’d amend that if I were he. I’d kind of go back and re-do that statement. But I like what you’re trying to do, and Ms. Khan, we appreciate it. And come on my radio show sometime. KHAN: Yes. We need the support of people like you, seriously. So we… INGRAHAM: OK, take care. All right, Daisy. Take care.

Continue reading here:
Wednesday Night Fights: Laura Ingraham vs. Ground Zero Mosque Supporter

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

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

Networks Skim Over White House Oil Claim: ‘Vast Majority’ of Spill is Gone

Posted on August 26, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

A president with close ties to an oil company helping hide the magnitude and damage of an oil spill would be big news, if he were a conservative. But it seems even when the environmentalists and the left are upset over President Obama’s handling of the Gulf oil spill, the national news media barely notice. On Aug. 4, Obama administration energy adviser Carol Browner said, “The vast majority of the oil has been contained, it’s been burned, it’s been cleaned.” Officials said that 75 percent of the oil had been “captured, burned off, evaporated or broken down in the Gulf of Mexico,” according to CBSNews.com. That night two of the three network evening shows reported the widely disputed claim without question. Only NBC “Nightly News” included any people skeptical of the White House claim. The networks have only aired a few reports about scientists disputing the claim, and have ignored liberal outrage. “[T]onight on these beaches some good news and relief,” Matt Gutman told “World News” viewers. “A new government report says that 75 percent of that oil has been cleaned up either by man or Mother Nature. And it now seems this war against this oil is coming to an end.” Gutman’s report on the success of the oil cleanup included President Obama and Browner, but not a single person who disagreed with the White House claim. The Boston Globe reported Aug. 20, that Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution mapped a 22-mile-long underwater oil plume back in June. Other scientists at University of Georgia estimate that 70 to 79 percent of the oil from the leak remains, contrary to the White House assertion. Even if 75 percent of the oil had disappeared, the White House comments made it sound like the remaining problem is a small one – but one-fourth of the total spill would still be 53.5 million gallons of oil. CBSNews.com said that is more than four times greater than the Exxon Valdez spill. But rather than criticize Obama, CBS “Evening News” took the opportunity to subtly attack the previous president. On Aug. 4, Katie Couric teased Mark Strassmann’s report saying, “The White House made it clear today it is not declaring ‘Mission Accomplished’ yet in the Gulf of Mexico.” Strassmann followed her remarks with his story about the static kill operation to seal the well and cited the government report that “most of what has leaked, an estimated 205 million gallons, has vanished.” CBS included two Coast Guard official quotes including Admiral Thad Allen’s. Networks Ignore Left-Wing Anger over Oil Spill, Barely Include Skeptics Many people – even those on the left – have criticized the administration for its handling of the Gulf disaster. And now some of them are calling the White House’s 75 percent oil cleanup claim untrue. Left-wing news blog, The Huffington Post, called it a ” public relations coup ” for the White House, and characterized it as spin. Liberal filmmaker Spike Lee called the oil cleanup claim a “lie” and called for journalists to find the real story in an Aug. 7 meeting of the Television Critics Association. Politicians on both sides of the aisle argued the announcement came too early. On Aug. 19, Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., called Obama’s announcement premature and warned that it could be wrong. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., also criticized the administration for “another in a long line of examples where the White House’s pre-occupation with the public relations of the oil spill has superseded the realities on the ground.” A Yahoo News blog reported that the White House and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) haven’t released the data that supposedly proves their claim. “Two weeks after it touted a report painting a rosy picture in the Gulf of Mexico in the wake of the BP oil disaster, the federal government has yet to release any of the supporting data used to reach its conclusions,” Brett Michael Dykes wrote for Yahoo. Dykes also mentioned a new scientific study from researchers at the University of Georgia who found almost the opposite: that up to 79 percent of the oil is still in the Gulf. Those researchers warned that massive plumes of oil remain in deep water. In fact, scientists at the prestigious Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution published a peer-reviewed study in Science describing their June discovery of a hydrocarbon plume roughly the size of Manhattan , more than 3,000 feet below the surface of the Gulf of Mexico. On Aug. 19, CBS “Evening News” and NBC “Nightly News” used a meager 180 words combined to mention Woods Hole’s findings of that huge plume. According to Nexis, since the White House made its claim on Aug. 4, the network morning and evening shows have aired 61 stories mentioning the oil spill. But only six reports on the broadcast morning and evening news shows included anyone skeptical of the assertion (Gulf fishermen, scientists or others). A couple of additional stories mentioned doubt about the numbers, but without quoting sources. Obama Claims to be Running Oil Cleanup, Media Blame BP for Lack of Press Freedom From beginning to end, networks coverage of the oil spill has been more like cover for the Obama administration than serious reporting. ABC, CBS and NBC started by failing to scrutinize the administration’s response to the BP spill for four weeks . Then they ignored the federal fingerprints on the lack of press access to the oil spill area, even when CBS reporters were ordered away from a soiled beach by Coast Guard and BP contractors. After the oil spill, many news outlets complained about lack of access for reporting the oil spill CBS, Associated Press, Mother Jones and The Times-Picayune all claimed that local and federal authorities and British Petroleum workers inhibited their reporting. But even with Obama’s history of managing the press, the media blamed BP almost entirely. Mother Jones, a left-wing magazine, called it a “corporate blockade at Louisiana’s crude-covered beaches.” “It’s a running joke among the journalists covering the story that the words ‘Coast Guard’ affixed to any vehicle, vessel, or plane should be prefixed with ‘BP,'” Charlie Varley told Newsweek. “It would be funny if it were not so serious.” It’s also not funny that many in the news media and on the left would rather blame BP for controlling federal agencies like the U.S. Coast Guard and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) than recognize the similarities between limited media access in the Gulf and Obama’s previous actions controlling the press. Obama also has a long-standing pattern of micromanaging press coverage, sometimes to the point of blocking access. So when many reporters were complaining of access problems, it was surprising how little blame had been directed at the administration. During the campaign, Obama had three reporters from publications that had endorsed John McCain kicked off his plane. Since then he has openly attacked his detractors (including Rush Limbaugh) and was once criticized by a couple reporters (Chip Reid and Helen Thomas) for stage managing a town hall meeting. Another reason to think the White House was blocking the press is that they claimed to be calling the shots for the Gulf clean up. Browner said on “Meet the Press” May 30, “the government’s been in control from the beginning … don’t make any mistake here, the government is in charge.” ( Watch video ) Obama told AP the same thing, saying that BP had to get permission from Washington for all the clean up. So it stands to reason that the White House wouldn’t have trouble telling BP to allow the media unfettered access to report on the oil spill if it wanted to. Like this article? Then sign up for our newsletter, The Balance Sheet .

Original post:
Networks Skim Over White House Oil Claim: ‘Vast Majority’ of Spill is Gone

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Maddow Mocks Gov. Christie’s Math Skills Before Making Same Subtraction Error

Posted on August 25, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

Rachel Maddow on Wednesday mocked the math skills of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie only seconds before she made the exact same arithmetic mistake she bashed him for. In a short segment about the state of New Jersey losing some education funding as a result of errors made during the application process, the MSNBC host placed all the blame on the new Republican governor. To put a fine point on what Maddow claimed was Christie’s incompetence, she played a video of the Governor on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” earlier in the day misstating the number of points Ohio edged out New Jersey for this award. Hysterically, when the clip ended, Maddow made the very same subtraction error (video follows with transcript and commentary):  RACHEL MADDOW, HOST: Even while talking about the application process, Governor Christie has still been making some basic mistakes as evidenced by his appearance on this network this morning. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) GOVERNOR CHRIS CHRISTIE, (R-NEW JERSEY): We came in eleventh, ten people won, and we lost by 2.2 points… UNKNOWN MALE: Next year. CHRISTIE: …to Ohio. UNKNOWN MALE: Next year. CHRISTIE: If there’s more money. I doubt there will be. (END VIDEOTAPE) MADDOW: 2.2? According to the Department of Education, Ohio got 440.8 points in the final phase, and New Jersey got 437.8 points which is not three points. It’s 2.2 points. I don’t know if there was a math section, but if there is, I bet that’s Obama’s fault, too. Nice job, Rach. You really are the smartest gal in the class. Maybe more hysterically, the story doesn’t end there, for someone must have noticed Maddow’s error and decided to re-film this final section for the video to be posted at MSNBC’s website and possibly the reruns. See if you notice a little difference: MADDOW: 2.2 points Governor Christie? According to the Department of Education, Ohio got 440.8 points in the final phase and New Jersey got 437.8 points which using math – using my powers of math comprehension that’s three points not 2.2. I wonder if there’s a math component to the test. If there is, I bet that’s Obama’s fault, too.   Makes you wonder how many takes they needed for Maddow to finally get it right. 

Excerpt from:
Maddow Mocks Gov. Christie’s Math Skills Before Making Same Subtraction Error

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

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

NBC Chief Jeff Zucker Open to Political Run, Bringing Couric Back to Network

Posted on August 25, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

We’ve heard the knocks on NBC and the institutional bias that exists in its network – from the subtle spin in its flagship network’s news coverage at NBC to the over-the-top bias at its cable news channel MSNBC. So maybe the man behind the curtains at NBC Universal would like to be more overt with his opinions – as a politician? On MSNBC’s Aug. 25 “Morning Joe,” Jeff Zucker, president and CEO of NBC Universal, addressed both his possible political aspirations and bringing back one of the network’s former star personalities. Host Joe Scarborough asked Zucker where his political interests were at this stage. “You know Joe – look, politics is something I’ve always had an interest in,” Zucker said. “It is something I’ve always thought about. It is not something that is on my current radar. It’s not something I’m thinking about in the next few years, but it is something that I would always consider. I think – I love politics. I would love to give back. I would love to serve. I would love to do something, but it is not imminent. It’s nothing now.”  That set Zucker up for a question from Scarborough – if he was holding out to bring Couric back to the peacock network where she was a fixture at NBC’s “Today” from 1991 until 2006. “You are going to wait until you get Katie Couric back at NBC then you’re going to get into politics?” Scarborough asked.  It’s been no secret the Katie Couric project at the “CBS Evening News” has not produced the results that were anticipated. Couric’s broadcast just tied its all-time low in total viewers with an average of 4.89 million tuning in during the five days. Zucker dodged Scarborough’s inquiry, but Scarborough continued to press him on the topic.  ZUCKER: I think those are two separate issues there. SCARBOROUGH: Is Katie coming back to NBC? ZUCKER: Well I think she is fully ensconced in a job today and she’s happy where she is. SCARBOROUGH: No, she’s not. Come on. You’re talking like a politician. She hates it over there. ZUCKER: Oh, I don’t know that’s the case. SCARBOROUGH: No, it’s the case. MIKA BRZEZINSKI: That’s not politically correct. SCARBOROUGH: Since she doesn’t like it where she is — ZUCKER: I thought we were talking politics here for a second. BRZEZINSKI: I was going to ask you about the mosque. SCARBOROUGH: This is your first press conference here buddy. So since she doesn’t like where she is, since you have a great relationship with Katie, would you like Katie Couric back at NBC? Zucker relented, saying he would be open to the possibility of Couric returning to NBC in some capacity. “I always said that, look Katie would be a great addition wherever she is,” Zucker said. “If the time were right, I think that’s something we would look at. But she’s under contract now, and I think she’s happy where she is, whether you believe it or not, so I’m not going to wade into that controversy.”

Original post:
NBC Chief Jeff Zucker Open to Political Run, Bringing Couric Back to Network

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

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

A Day After ABC Highlighted Sarah Palin’s Political ‘Losing Streak,’ Her Candidate Closes in on Stunning Win

Posted on August 25, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

A day after highlighting Sarah Palin’s political “losing streak,” Good Morning America’s Jon Karl on Wednesday  acknowledged the stunning turn in Alaska’s Senatorial primary race: “But Joe Miller is a Tea Party candidate who had Sarah Palin’s support. He, now, is ahead.” Karl on Wednedsay didn’t mention anything about the former governor’s “losing streak” ending. Instead, co-host Robin Roberts spun the results as a “GOP family feud.” She also questioned the effectiveness of the grass roots organization, wondering, ” So, is the Tea Party getting stronger?Weaker? ” (Roberts’ evidence was John McCain’s victory in Arizona. However, he, too, was supported by Palin.) On Tuesday, Karl highlighted: “But, lately, Palin’s been on a losing streak. Over the last five weeks, Palin-endorsed candidates have lost in Georgia, Tennessee, Kansas, Colorado and Washington State. Palin’s candidate in Alaska is a hard-line Tea Party conservative.” He also made sure to point out, “Miller has also been known to attract assault weapon-baring weapon supporters at his political rallies.” On Wednesday, Karl acknowledged, “And look at what Sarah Palin tweeted just a little while ago. Clearly giddy about the results so far, she said, ‘Keeping fingers crossed, powder dry, prayers upward.'” A transcript of the August 25 segment, which aired at 7:02am EDT, follows: DAVID MUIR: And this morning, primary shakeup. Sarah Palin and the tea party rally in Alaska. Threatening a long-time senator. But the establishment prevails in Arizona as John McCain cinches another nomination. We have overnight results coming in. 7:01 MUIR: Just coming in, these results from overnight. And a real split decision for the voters. ROBIN ROBERTS: Yeah. And we’re also seeing that it’s being described as a GOP family feud , looking at the results. As Republicans fight over Sarah Palin’s Tea Party candidates. And nothing highlights the internal battle more than Tuesday’s primary in Alaska where the Tea Party support led to a stunningly tight race. But, in Arizona, you see, anti-Tea Party sentiment led to a sweeping loss. So, is the Tea Party getting stronger? Weaker? We’re going to take a closer look. 7:02 ROBERTS: But, we begin with results in Tuesday’s key primaries. In Alaska, Lisa Murkowski struggled to keep her job in a tight race with Tea Party candidate Joe Miller. Backed by Sarah Palin, he was. In Arizona, Senator John McCain easily won renomination against another tea party candidate, J.D. Hayworth. And in a Democratic race in Florida, Representative Kendrick Meek beat newcomer Jeff Greene. So, what does it all mean? Well, senior congressional correspondent Jonathan Karl joins us now with more from Washington. And, Jon, a lot of eyes still on that race in Alaska this morning. Very tight. KARL: Robin, this is the story of the day. It’s still way too close to call. But we may be witnessing a colossal upset in the making. Lisa Murkowski is a member of the Republican leadership in the Senate. She was supported by virtually the entire Republican establishment. Had way more money. But Joe Miller is a Tea Party candidate who had Sarah Palin’s support. He, now, is ahead. But this may take weeks to actually count. And look at what Sarah Palin tweeted just a little while ago. Clearly giddy about the results so far, she said, “Keeping fingers crossed, powder dry, prayers upward. But Joe Miller just tweeted, ‘What’s moose hunting like inside the beltway?'” ROBERTS: Stay tuned. All right. That’s the situation right now in Alaska. In Arizona, no real surprise that John McCain was renominated. Though he had to spend $21 million in this campaign, which is more than all of his previous Senate races combined, going back to 1986. But the real surprise here is Ben Quayle, the son of Dan Quayle, going for a congressional seat. And he was very aggressive in his ad campaign. Take a look, Jon. BEN QUAYLE: Barack Obama is the worst president in history. ROBERTS: Very strong tactics that seemed to work, Jon. KARL: It sure did. He was really behind going into this. And he was attacked for allegedly contributing to a pornographic website. But the other thing in that race, Robin, is that his parents, Dan and Marilyn Quayle, in the home stretch, came to his aid. Sending out letters to supporters. Defending his honor. Defending his integrity. ROBERTS: Yeah. They were hot under the collar about that. All right. One more race to talk about. Down in Florida, surprises there, too, Jon. KARL: Yeah. And the big thing there is you had Kendrick Meek, Democratic congressman, decisively win the nomination to run for Senate, beating back a multimillionaire named Jeff Greene, who had vastly outspent him. But, now, you’re going to see one of the marquee, most important, toughest, expensive Senate races in the country, in Florida, that will pit Meek, against Republican Marco Rubio, and former Republican, now independent, Governor Charlie Crist. That’s going to be a big race.

See the original post here:
A Day After ABC Highlighted Sarah Palin’s Political ‘Losing Streak,’ Her Candidate Closes in on Stunning Win

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

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

Letterman: Obama Will Have Plenty of Time for Vacations When His One Term Is Up

Posted on August 25, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

David Letterman on Tuesday took quite a swipe at Barack Obama. During the opening monologue of CBS’s “Late Show,” the host asked the audience, “You know who else is on vacation?” Letterman answered, “President Barack Obama. And this is his, since he’s been in office, this is his sixth vacation.” Then came the marvelous and surprising punch line (video follows with transcript and commentary, file photo):  DAVID LETTERMAN: You know who else is on vacation? President Barack Obama. And this is his, since he’s been in office, this is his sixth vacation. Yep, he’ll have plenty of time for vacations when his one term is up. (LAUGHTER) He’ll have plenty of time. But they’re, they’re vacationing at the beach. He’s down there with Snookie, JWoww, and the Situations. (LAUGHTER) I’m 63, I never thought I’d have to say Snookie, JWoww, and the Situations.  Wow. If Obama is losing Letterman, the end must be near. 

Follow this link:
Letterman: Obama Will Have Plenty of Time for Vacations When His One Term Is Up

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

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

NBC’s Chuck Todd Projects ‘Democrats Are In Deep, Deep Trouble’

Posted on August 24, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

If Democrats weren’t nervous about November’s midterm elections yet, they could soon be, especially when you consider that even their allies in the liberal media are starting to forecast doom for them, as NBC’s Chuck Todd did on Tuesday’s Today show, going as far to predict “Democrats are in deep, deep trouble.” Todd, appearing in the 7am half hour of this morning’s Today show explained to viewers that ” The Tea Party has provided an enthusiasm boost to the Republican Party,” however he reminded Democrats that they still had “six weeks to turn this around” but then added that “if they don’t, they are headed for an historical defeat in November.” Interestingly though Todd and his NBC colleague Kelly O’Donnell, in her set up piece, didn’t exactly paint a big Republican win as a defeat for liberals, as they couldn’t even bring themselves to attach that label to any Democrats running in 2010. While Todd and O’Donnell used the “conservative” label a total of four times between them, neither of them used the “liberal” label even when they discussed Florida Representative Kendrick Meek who has a lifetime ACU rating of 7 and a lifetime ADA rating of 92 percent.  The following O’Donnell set-up piece and Todd segment were aired on the August 24 Today show: ANN CURRY: Now to politics. Voters are heading to the polls in five states today headlined by primaries in Florida and Arizona that pit the political establishment against Washington outsiders. NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell is in Phoenix this morning, with details on this. Kelly, good morning. [On screen headline: “Primary Day, Incumbents Battle Outsiders In November Preview”] KELLY O’DONNELL: Good morning, Ann. That’s right. From Phoenix to Florida to Fairbanks voters are deciding some of the most talked about races this year. They include well-known incumbents and some very interesting outsiders and including is John McCain, who will start right here. He has spent more than $20 million in campaign cash and some of that was left over from his presidential run in 2008. Senator John McCain says he has something to prove. JOHN MCCAIN TO VOTER: Thank you very much. O’DONNELL: Going for a fifth term in this anti-incumbent year. (Begin ad clip) MCCAIN: I appreciate your support. I ask for your vote. (End clip) O’DONNELL: Means fighting off a conservative challenger and that requires fighting against Barack Obama once again. MCCAIN: I’m running against his policies and what he and his administration have done to this country, but at the same time I’m running for Arizona. I’m running for jobs. I’m running for keeping people in their homes. J.D. HAYWORTH: I’d really be honored to have your support in the primary. O’DONNELL: Opponent J.D. Hayworth, a former congressman, accuses McCain of supporting amnesty for illegal immigrants. HAYWORTH: This is really true. O’DONNELL: McCain exposed a 2007 TV show where Hayworth was a pitch man on how to get free government money, hardly the Tea Party conservatism he talks about today. HAYWORTH: Even if they have some concerns about me and even shocking for me to feel that my personality may rub people the wrong way, the fact is they know I will vote against amnesty. O’DONNELL: Turning to Florida’s crowded senate race, Democrats are caught in a class struggle. KENDRICK MEEK: I’m the true candidate for the middle class. O’DONNELL: Miami Congressman Kendrick Meek has moved from long shot to leader in the polls up against self-made billionaire Jeff Greene, who’s glitzy social life gets him attention. The winning Florida Democrat will be in a three-man race in November against Tea Party conservative Marco Rubio and Governor Charlie Crist, who quit the Republican Party to run as an independent. And there’s a cold snap in Alaska’s Republican Senate primary. UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Hi, Senator. How are you? O’DONNELL: Incumbent Lisa Murkowski. LISA MURKOWSKI: I’m not working for the party. I’m working for Alaska. O’DONNELL: And Sarah Palin is working against Murkowski with a Facebook page endorsement of challenger Joe Miller. Palin writes, “Alaskans can trust Joe to not shed his conservative antlers in D.C.” And there’s some history there. Palin defeated Senator Lisa Murkowski’s father when Palin became governor. So there’s been a long rivalry there. And of course it all ties back here. Palin, of course, was here in the spring trying to help out her former running mate, at a time when he looked very vulnerable as one of the incumbents who was being targeted this year. But a lot has changed. Today McCain is the frontrunner with a double-digit lead. Ann? ANN CURRY: Alright Kelly O’Donnell this morning. Kelly thanks. Chuck Todd is NBC’s political director and the chief White House correspondent for NBC News. Chuck, good morning. CHUCK TODD: Good morning, Ann. CURRY: We just heard from Kelly that John McCain is ahead, at least according to the polls, by double digits. But he had to spend like $20 million while his opponent spent just about $3 million. So what does that tell us about what’s going on in Arizona, Chuck? TODD: Well look, John McCain had to do this the old-fashioned way in politics, he’s winning ugly. The $20 million was necessary. He always had about 35 to 40 percent of the Republican conservative electorate down there that wasn’t crazy about him, was upset about him on immigration, on taxes, on a number of issues. And so McCain had to disqualify J.D. Hayworth. And here is what we found out, Ann. As upset as voters are these days about Washington politicians, infomercial hucksters are even worse and that’s what McCain did. He completely disqualified J.D. Hayworth. The big question, Ann, that a lot of people in Washington have is, which John McCain comes back to Washington? Is it this new consistent conservative and is a consistent thorn in the side of President Obama or is it the guy from the early part of this decade who was unpredictable and he didn’t know which side of the aisle he’d come down on a different issue? CURRY: Let’s, let’s talk, move on to Florida. Why should the whole country be paying attention to what’s happening there? TODD: Well look this Democratic Senate primary, it’s kind of nuts, it’s kind of this, but a Kendrick Meek win, by the Miami congressman, means the Democratic establishment cannot flee the Democratic nominee there. They can’t go over to Charlie Crist. And the big picture is this. Florida held up the country on who was gonna be president in 2000. Because we don’t know which way Charlie Crist is gonna vote, if he’s gonna be with the Democrats or the Republicans, on election night if he wins – and there’s no guarantee he’s gonna win, this is gonna be a nutty three-way race, maybe the best campaign in this state since Claude Pepper lost because his sister was a thespian. But what we won’t know is whether, is whether, who’s gonna control the Senate? Charlie Crist could hold that up for weeks. CURRY: On the question of who is gonna control the Senate and actually Washington, are incumbents as weak as we thought they were going to be, Chuck? And what, what is what you’re looking at in terms of these races telling us about the true party of the Tea Party, true power of the Tea Party? TODD: Well look, here’s, here’s what we know. Look incumbents are not getting defeated in these primaries at a clip that a lot of people expected. There’s been a few high-profile exceptions. But the bigger picture is this. Democrats are in deep, deep trouble. The Tea Party has provided an enthusiasm boost to the Republican Party. They are as excited about voting as the Republicans have been since 1994. Democrats have about six weeks to turn this around because if they don’t, they are headed for an historical defeat in November. Losses that could not just include control of the House but also the Senate with or without this, the, what happens with Charlie Crist in Florida. It is that bad right now for Democrats, Ann. CURRY: Alright, on that note we’ve got leave it. Chuck Todd, always a pleasure. Thanks. TODD: You got it.

Here is the original post:
NBC’s Chuck Todd Projects ‘Democrats Are In Deep, Deep Trouble’

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,