Tag Archives: clinton

AP Orders Staff: ‘Stop Using the Phrase “Ground Zero Mosque”’

Posted on August 19, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

In an unusual move, the Associated Press has publicly released an advisory memo to its reporters on how to cover of the Ground Zero mosque story – and the first rule is that journalists must immediately stop calling it the “Ground Zero mosque” story. “We should continue to avoid the phrase ‘Ground zero mosque’ or ‘mosque at ground zero’ on all platforms,” reads the advisory, which was issued by the AP’s Standards Center. Instead of the “Ground Zero mosque,” AP recommends that reporters use the terms “mosque 2 blocks from WTC site,” “Muslim (or Islamic) center near WTC site,” “mosque near ground zero,” or “mosque near WTC site.” The AP suggests that it might “useful in some stories to note that Muslim prayer services have been held since 2009 in the building that the new project will replace.” In addition, the news service offers a “succinct summary of President Obama’s position” on the mosque, but doesn’t include the positions of any other politicians. Also included in the advisory is a “Fact Check” to provide “additional background” for reporters. “A New York imam and his proposed mosque near ground zero are being demonized by political candidates – mostly Republicans – despite the fact that Islam is already very much a part of the World Trade Center neighborhood,” reads the first paragraph of the Fact Check. “And that Muslims pray inside the Pentagon, too, less than 80 feet from where terrorists attacked. And that the imam who’s being branded an extremist has been valued by both Republican and Democratic administrations as a moderate face of the faith.” One of the “facts” that the AP feels the need to “clarify” is that Ground Zero mosque organizer Feisal Abdul Rauf is a moderate Muslim. “Rauf counts former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright from the Clinton administration as a friend and appeared at events overseas or meetings in Washington with former President George W. Bush’s secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, and Bush adviser Karen Hughes,” says the article, though it does also mention briefly Rauf’s comments about America being an “accessory” to the Sept. 11 attacks. The advisory also “fact checks” pure opinion statements made by conservatives, like former House Speaker Newt Gringrich’s assertion that “America is experiencing an Islamist cultural-political offensive designed to undermine and destroy our civilization.” “Such opinions are shared by some Americans, while others are more reluctant to paint the religion with a broad brush and more welcoming of the faith in this country,” reads the Fact Check. “Bush, himself, while criticized at the time for stirring suspicions about American Muslims, traveled to a Washington mosque less than a week after the attacks to declare that terrorism is ‘not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace.'” AP is arguable the most influential news organization in the country, and many media outlets adhere to its guidelines in their reporting.

See the original post:
AP Orders Staff: ‘Stop Using the Phrase “Ground Zero Mosque”’

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

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

Andrea Mitchell Blames American ‘Prejudice’ For Paucity Of Donations To Pakistan

Posted on August 19, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

You ee-vil Americans.  You haven’t contributed enough to Pakistani flood relief.  And now you’ve been busted by Andrea Mitchell, who knows why you’ve been so miserly.  It’s prejudice.  Prejudice I tell ya! View video here if not visible at right. Mitchell teased her prejudiced-Americans theory at the top of her MSNBC show this afternoon, then trotted it out while talking with Ann Curry, who is in Pakistan.  How over the top was Andrea?  Even fellow lib Curry had to gently talk Mitchell down, suggesting there was another very good reason why Americans would be cautious about sending money to Pakistan . . . ANDREA MITCHELL: Even before the president waded into that mosque controversy, a new poll shows a growing number of Americans wrongly believe that President Obama is a Muslim.  This as prejudice against Muslims in America might be contributing to a charity gap toward flood victims in Pakistan. And a bit later, while speaking with Ann Curry . . . MITCHELL: We’ve been looking at incredible pictures, Ann, while you’ve been talking about this, of this flooding. Secretary Clinton, the State Department, has announced, is going to be announcing a Pakistan relief fund, and the hope I’m told is that that will somehow validate it for Americans.  The incredible numbers are, in the early days of this disaster, only $50,000 was texted in for the Red Cross and other relief organizations to the State Department in answer to their appeal, in comparison to $34 million after the disaster in Haiti,  which tells you that the prejudice against Pakistan is pretty profound. ANN CURRY: Well, I think that’s right. I think that part of that may also be that Americans, and people all around the world, given the state of the world today, are concerned that money given to these flood victims in Pakistan could end up in the hands of extremists , like the Taliban. Getting schooled on hard-nosed realpolitik by Ann Curry? Ouch!   Let’s summarize Andrea’s view of her compatriots: Americans are a prejudiced lot, as proved by the fact that we haven’t donated nearly as much to Pakistan as we did to . . . the overwhelmingly black population of Haiti. Got it.

See the rest here:
Andrea Mitchell Blames American ‘Prejudice’ For Paucity Of Donations To Pakistan

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

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

Tom DeLay Cleared — N.Y. Times Puts the Story on Page A-18 (Behind Organic Golf Courses)

Posted on August 17, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

When former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay announced that the Justice Department was dropping its six-year investigation of his relationship with convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, The Washington Post put the news on the front page Tuesday. The New York Times decided that this story was best put on page A-18. The front page of the Times covered flooding in Pakistan, Team Obama’s tough evaluation of offshore drilling permits, and a chilling Rod Nordland story on new public executions by the Taliban in northern Afghanistan. But the front page also offered “Walking in New York? Beware Men Turning Left” and “Exclusive Golf Course Is Also Organic, So a Weed or Two Get In.” At least the Times covered the DeLay story. To date, the newspaper “of record” has not mentioned Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s exclamation last Tuesday that “I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican.” The Times was quick to note that DeLay still faces the indictment of Democratic Travis County prosecutor Ronnie Earle from 2005. The caption under DeLay’s picture read “Tom DeLay still faces a trial in Texas on unrelated charges of money laundering and conspiracy.” Reporter Charlie Savage elaborated: Mr. DeLay’s legal troubles are not yet over. He still faces a trial in Texas on unrelated state charges of money laundering and conspiracy in connection with campaign donations during the 2002 election. A trial on those charges, for which he was indicted in 2005, was delayed for years because of an appeal by co-defendants, but a hearing on pretrial motions is scheduled for next week. Savage made no attempt to calculate how much money the federal government has spent investigating DeLay, which was standard operating procedure for the media during Clinton investigations. Instead, Savage reminded the reader of all the prosecutors’ successes: The scandal, which helped Democrats win majorities in Congress in the 2006 election, led to convictions or guilty pleas by two of Mr. DeLay’s former aides; former Representative Bob Ney, Republican of Ohio; two former White House officials; Mr. Abramoff himself; and several other former Congressional aides and lobbyists. Mr. Abramoff was released from prison in June. There were no conservative groups to complain about the partisanship of the process, but Savage did bring in a liberal group (without a label) to lament how it was a malodorous outrage that DeLay hadn’t been jailed: Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a government watchdog group, sharply criticized the Justice Department’s decision to close the investigation into Mr. DeLay’s role without charges. “It’s a sad day for America when one of the most corrupt members to ever walk the halls of Congress gets a free pass,” Ms. Sloan said. “The Justice Department’s decision not to prosecute Mr. DeLay for his actions sends exactly the wrong message to current and future members.” The only supporter of DeLay in the Times piece was DeLay: But Mr. DeLay said that he had done nothing wrong and that his political enemies had spent more than  “criminalization of politics and the politics of personal destruction” that he contended his case exemplified. “The new politics — it’s a decade coming up with “frivolous” ethics charges against him. He denounced the “criminalization of politics and the politics of personal destruction” that he contended his case exemplified. “The new politics — it’s no longer good enough to beat you on policy,” he said. “They have to completely drown you and put you in prison and destroy your family and your reputation and finances, then dance on your grave.”

Read more:
Tom DeLay Cleared — N.Y. Times Puts the Story on Page A-18 (Behind Organic Golf Courses)

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

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

Clinton Denies WH Claim That He Intervened in U.S. Senate Race in Pennsylvania

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

Reigniting a political controversy, former President Bill Clinton this week contradicted the Obama White House, telling a Pennsylvania TV station that he never encouraged U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak to drop out of Pennsylvania’s U.S. Senate race – as the White House claimed in May.   On Tuesday, Aug. 10, as Clinton campaigned for Sestak in Scranton, Pa., a reporter with the NBC affiliate in Wilkes-Barre asked Clinton why he was in Pennsylvania campaigning for Sestak if he had once tried to get him to drop out of the Senate race. “I never tried to get him out of the race,” Clinton  replied . “I’ve never even been accused of that,” he added in response to a follow-up question.   Clinton’s denial on Tuesday represents a third version of events, said Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which has been looking into the matter.    “You know the saying there’s three sides to every story — well, now we have it,” Issa said.    In the first version of events, Sestak repeated for months that the White House had offered him an administration job in exchange for dropping his Democratic primary challenge to Sen. Arlen Specter. Specter said such an offer would legally constitute a bribe.    In version two, the White House — after months of refusing to answer questions about what happened — issued a memo in May saying the White House had asked Bill Clinton to talk to Sestak about serving on an unpaid advisory panel while continuing to serve in the House. The memo, written by White House Counsel Robert Bauer, referred to discussions in “June and July of 2009” and said that nothing improper had happened.   Version three came with Clinton’s denial on Tuesday.   “Admiral Sestak has repeatedly said he was offered a ‘job’ in an effort to obtain his withdrawal from the Senate primary,” Issa said on Thursday. “The White House has said ‘efforts were made in June and July’ in said job as well as the admission that they ‘enlisted’ former President Clinton to make the overture. President Clinton says he ‘never tried to get Sestak out of the race.’ Who’s telling the truth?”   As CNSNews.com has  reported , White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs would not say what position Sestak was offered.    After Bauer’s memo was issued in May, Sestak said he believed he was offered a spot on the president’s intelligence advisory board. Regarding his conversation with former President Bill Clinton, Sestak told reporters, “I heard presidential board and I think it was intel.”    Bauer’s one-and-a-half memo explained that former President Bill Clinton, acting on behalf of the Obama administration, had offered Sestak an unpaid role on a presidential advisory board.    According to the Bauer memo, “efforts (plural) were made in June and July of 2009 to determine whether Congressman Sestak would be interested in service on a presidential or other Senior Executive Branch Advisory Board, which would avoid a divisive Senate primary, allow him to retain his seat in the House, and provide him with an opportunity for additional service to the public in a high-level advisory capacity.”   However, the memo mentions only one conversation between Clinton and Sestak.    The Bauer memo said that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel recruited Bill Clinton to offer Sestak an unpaid position on a presidential advisory board while remaining a U.S. congressman.    But as a House member, Sestak could not serve on an executive branch board. As the White House Web site  notes , the president’s intelligence advisory board “consists of not more than 16 members appointed by the President from among individuals  who are not employed by the Federal Government .”   (emphasis added)   Sestak faces Republican Pat Toomey, a former congressman, in November. Crossposted at NB sister site CNSNews.com

See original here:
Clinton Denies WH Claim That He Intervened in U.S. Senate Race in Pennsylvania

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Maureen Dowd Hysterically Claims MSNBC Is Tearing Down Obama

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

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd said Sunday MSNBC is tearing down President Obama. More amazing than that, she was actually serious. In her ” No Love From The Lefties ,” Dowd bashed “progressives” for not staying on the President’s bandwagon. This includes MSNBC who she hysterically claimed “is trying to make its reputation by tearing down [Obama]”: One of the most disgusting things about Mitch McConnell and Jon Kyl, and now the former maverick John McCain, is that they are happy to be co-opted by the radicals in their party to form one movement against President Obama. On the Republican side, the crazies often end up helping the Republican leadership. On the Democratic side, the radicals are constantly sniping at Obama, expressing their feelings of betrayal. Fox built up a Republican president; MSNBC is trying to make its reputation by tearing down a Democratic one. Assuming you haven’t passed out from lack of oxygen during an uncontrollable fit of laughter, there’s more: The lefties came to the defense of the centrist Clinton during impeachment. Now that Obama is under attack, however, they are not coming to his defense, even though he has given more to the liberal cause than the scandal-stunted Clinton ultimately achieved. He has shepherded the biggest expansion of social programs since the Great Society and spearheaded the biggest spending program with the stimulus. But for the left (and for some economists), it was not as big as it ought to have been. Most telling was that Dowd earlier in the piece mentioned “Michael Kinsley’s maxim that a gaffe is just truth slipping out” for the Times columnist was certainly letting her readers in on just how far she’s willing to shill for the President she helped get elected. More importantly, she will publicly scold her colleagues if necessary. After all, MSNBC is still a devout Obama and Democrat supporter along with a unabashed conservative basher. That some of its hosts have on occasion in the past year expressed disappointment with the President by no means qualifies the network as tearing him down. Dowd herself has surprisingly addressed her own concerns for the current White House resident. In June, she wrote about him being “thin-skinned and controlling.” She even scolded, “Like many Democrats, he thinks the press is supposed to be on his side.” Is she the only liberal media member allowed to do so in her view, or are his plummeting poll numbers and a dismal midterm election cycle ahead changing Dowd’s mind about she and her ilk ever being honest when it comes to this President? 

See the rest here:
Maureen Dowd Hysterically Claims MSNBC Is Tearing Down Obama

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , ,

CNN’s Blitzer Presses Crist on Party Preference, ‘You Just Can’t Caucus with Yourself’

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

During on interview on Saturday’s The Situation Room with independent Florida Senate candidate and Governor Charlie Crist, CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer pressed the former Republican to announce which party he would choose to caucus with if he is elected to the Senate, and brought up his current associations with Democrats and flip-flops toward more liberal positions. As Crist repeatedly tried to evade acknowledging the importance of being aligned with one of the two major parties to have influence, and the likelihood that he would ultimately choose to ally with one of the parties, Blitzer was persistent in pressing for an answer, at one point quipping: “You just can’t caucus with yourself, if you will, if you want to have some influence.” Crist eventually seemed to hint that his decision would depend on which party holds the majority after November: “And you’ve just hit on the pivotal issue really: What is in the best interests of the people of Florida? We don’t know who’s going to be in the majority November 2 nd after the general election. And so I think it’s important to keep an open mind, to stay committed only to one thing, and that’s the people of my state.” After playing a clip of Republican Senate candidate Marco Rubio accusing Crist of moving toward President Obama politically, Blitzer noted: “But are you increasingly embracing the Obama agenda? Because he’s saying you flip-flopped on a whole lot of issues where you were a Republican, but now you’re siding with the Democrats, including President Obama.” Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Saturday, August 14, The Situation Room on CNN: WOLF BLITZER: All right, let’s talk a little bit about why you’re here in Washington. Among other reasons, obviously, you want to be in the Situation Room, our Situation Room- GOVERNOR CHARLIE CRIST (I-FL), LAUGHING: I came here to see you. BLITZER: -but tonight you’re going to a fundraiser and some prominent Democrats are hosting this fundraiser for you, including someone very close to the former President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton. What does that mean? Are you now a Democrat for all practical purposes? CRIST: I think it means we have broad support, and I’m very pleased by that. I mean, from Republicans, Democrats, independents. I think everybody has the notion and the idea that they would like an independent voice in the United States Senate fighting for Floridians first. And that’s what this is really all about – being independent, putting people above the party, and making sure that they have a voice in the Senate that’s an honest broker, looks out for their interests first. And Democrats and Republicans and independents want it. BLITZER: Are you getting more support now from Republicans or Democrats? CRIST: I’d say it’s pretty evenly split. I mean, you know, a lot of friends from the Republican party have stayed with us, continued to help, and God bless them for that. New Democrats who have become very good friends and some Democrats have been friend for a long time are just stepping up in a much more significant way now. BLITZER: The fundraiser tonight’s going to be basically Democrats, though? CRIST: That’s correct, it is. BLITZER: There are two independent U.S. Senators, as you know – Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman. But they both caucus with the Democrats and the Democrats are in the majority. They have chairmanship committees and committee rankings and all of that. If you’re elected to the United States Senate, will you caucus with the Democrats or the Republicans? CRIST: I’ve always said that I’ll caucus with the people of Florida. And what I mean by that is, issue by issue, whatever’s in the best interests of the people of my state, my fellow Floridians, I want to be able to be with those that are going to help Florida. BLITZER: But you got to make a decision because, if you’re not going to be caucusing with one party or the other party, you’re not going to have any committee ranking, you’re not going to have any influence in the United States Senate. You’re going to have to make a major decision. CRIST: Well, if I have the honor of winning, I’ll have a vote in the United States Senate. BLITZER: You’ll have one vote, but if you’re chairman of the committee, if you caucus with the Democrats, chairman of a subcommittee, you could have some influence, so you’re going to have to decide whether to caucus with the Democrats or the Republicans. You just can’t caucus with yourself, if you will, if you want to have some influence. CRIST: Well, I got to keep my eye on the ball, and the eye on the ball for me means looking at November 2 nd. I’m not going to be a chairman of anything if I don’t get elected to the Senate first. So I have to continue to work hard, campaign hard, continue to strive to earn the trust and confidence of my fellow Floridians. BLITZER: So when the Democrats at the fundraiser tonight ask you, Charlie Crist, we’re going to give you money, they’ll say. Are you promising us you’ll be with Harry Reid and the Democrats assuming he gets re-elected in the United States Senate, you won’t go with Mitch McConnell and the Republicans? CRIST: I’m not going to commit to either one because I’m only committed to the people of Florida. BLITZER: So you’ll commit after, if you’re elected. Is that what you’re saying? CRIST: Probably. BLITZER: Because you’ll have to caucus, you’ll have to make that decision down the road. CRIST: Well, I don’t know that Wayne Morris did. I think he literally took a seat in the middle of the aisle, right? BLITZER: He didn’t. You’re right. You’re right on that. He didn’t. He took a seat in the middle, but, you know, then the people of Florida could suffer if you don’t have the influence that you would like to have. CRIST: And you’ve just hit on the pivotal issue really: What is in the best interests of the people of Florida? We don’t know who’s going to be in the majority November 2 nd after the general election. And so I think it’s important to keep an open mind, to stay committed only to one thing, and that’s the people of my state. BLITZER: Your Republican challenger, Marco Rubio, was here. He was sitting in that seat in the Situation Room just a little while ago on July 20. He said this: MARCO RUBIO, FLORIDA REPUBLICAN SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: I don’t believe he’s really an independent. I think there’s increasing evidence that he now is embracing the Obama agenda. BLITZER: You heard what he said. CRIST: I heard what he said. BLITZER: You’re smiling. CRIST: Well, why wouldn’t I smile? BLITZER: But are you increasingly embracing the Obama agenda? Because he’s saying you flip-flopped on a whole lot of issues where you were a Republican, but now you’re siding with the Democrats, including President Obama. CRIST: Well, that’s what you’d expect him to say. He’s my opponent after all, one of them. And we don’t know who the other one’s gong to be yet until the primary concludes on August 24. So I look forward to that. I really do. And there will be distinctions between us on a lot of issues. But that’s the kind of thing you hear from a lot of the, you know, party candidates, if you will. They like to take shots at people. I’m not here to really do that today. I’m here to offer myself to the people of Florida as an independent voice who wants to rise above that kind of back-and-forth stuff that’s driving them crazy all over the country.

View original post here:
CNN’s Blitzer Presses Crist on Party Preference, ‘You Just Can’t Caucus with Yourself’

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

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

Time Wrings Hands Over Question, ‘Can a Child Be Tried for Jihadist Crimes?’

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

With his August 12 post, “Can a Child be Tried for Jihadist Crimes?” , Time magazine’s Tim McGirk hit the Obama administration from the left on the military tribunal prosecution of jihadist Omar Khadr. Khadr was captured on a battlefield in Afghanistan in 2002, when he was just 15 years old. He’s charged with the murder of a U.S. soldier, a crime he’s already confessed to, although he now claims his confession was coerced. Although 15-year-olds in the United States are frequently tried as adults for murder and although Khadr is in 23 years old now, McGirk presented the case as the potential first conviction of a “child” for war crimes since World War II. What’s more, McGirk presented the case as a potential travesty of justice in an ill-conceived war on terror, a term he dismissively used in quote marks: Khadr’s trial got underway just as another military tribunal sentenced Osama Bin Laden’s former chef and driver, Ibrahim a-Qosi, to 14 years in prison. The first prosecution of a Gitmo prisoner since Obama took office promising to close down an offshore prison that had become a symbol of the Bush Administration’s riding roughshod over the rule of law in the course of its “war on terror”. Have we no decency! Putting poor cooks, chauffeurs, and children in prison and throwing away the key! At no point did McGirk indict al Qaeda terrorists, particularly Khadr’s late father Ahmed Said —  “an imposing, grey-bearded patriarch” who was “a close friend” of bin Laden’s — as monsters for allowing teenagers to join in suicidal jihad against the world’s most advanced military, even as he closed with this familiar critique of U.S. anti-terrorism policy (emphasis mine): Jury selection for Khadr’s trial is supposed to end on Wednesday and the trial will begin immediately afterwards. It is expected to run until mid September. But r egardless of its finding, the trial is unlikely to reflect positively on the Obama Administration in the eyes of many of its allies in the fight against al-Qaeda. Photo of Omar Khadr via Time magazine .

Link:
Time Wrings Hands Over Question, ‘Can a Child Be Tried for Jihadist Crimes?’

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Jon Stewart Vulgarly Attacks GOP Concerns for Rising Taxes and Deficits

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

Comedian Jon Stewart on Wednesday joined the growing liberal chorus attacking Republicans for their concerns about rising taxes and exploding budget deficits. The only thing different about the “Daily Show” host’s approach was that he needed vulgarity to make his point. Potentially even worse, Stewart in his opening segment Wednesday actually used CNN’s Fareed Zakaria to support his view that letting the Bush tax cuts expire would be a good thing for the nation. Ironically, that was the only thing remotely funny about this sketch (video follows with partial transcript and commentary, extreme vulgarity warning, see BMI’s coverage as well ): The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c Deductible Me www.thedailyshow.com Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party “Let’s begin tonight in D.C.,” Stewart said. “It’s our nation’s capital. For the last 18 or so months Barack Obama’s been the President and Democrats have controlled both houses of Congress. Purely by coincidence, that’s the exact same amount of time that Republicans have expressed a newfound concern for our nation’s financial stability.” To set-up this “Republicans are hypocrites skit,” Stewart played clips of Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio and former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich warning against the budget deficit. At that point, Stewart said, “The deficit wants to skullf–k your mother. It wants to eat your children after it shows your wife a level of physical passion you’ve never been able to provide.” But here was the real punchline: Stewart played a clip from the August 1 installment of CNN’s “Fareed Zakaria GPS” when the host of that show told his viewers that letting the Bush tax cuts expire would instantly shrink our nation’s deficit by 30 percent. After the clip ended, Stewart said Zakaria was right. That would have elicited uproarious laughter from a well-informed audience, for as NewsBusters reported shortly after Zakaria made this pathetic claim, nothing could be further from the truth. Supporting our view, the Heritage Foundation’s Brian Riedl has research that indicates these tax cuts were just a drop in the bucket of the overall federal budget deficit, and the real culprit is the explosion in spending – not the trotted out liberal misnomer that these tax cuts are responsible. Riedl explains the budget surplus forecasted at the end of the Clinton presidency was set to shift to a $6.1 trillion deficit and that the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts were responsible for a mere 14 percent of this shift. The true culprit: the liberal sacred cow of entitlement spending. “Instead of closing the long-term deficit by splitting the difference between tax hikes and spending cuts, lawmakers should address the source-rising entitlement costs,” Riedl wrote. Indeed. In fact, even if the tax cuts were extended, revenues are projected to rise above the historical average by 2017. Contrary to Zakaria and Stewart’s view, this leaves surging spending responsible for the entire increase in long-term deficits. Business & Media Institute adviser and Cato Institute fellow Daniel Mitchell agrees, and refuted Zakaria’s claim on his Aug. 4 podcast . “Our real problem isn’t that deficits are large,” he said. “It is that the government is far, far too big. That’s what we should focus on, so he’s looking at a symptom rather than the underlying disease and then if we have to look at the issue of federal spending and federal revenue – even under the Obama budget projections – while low now because of the economic downturn – are going to climb to their historical post-World War average. We do not have, in other words, a shortage of revenue in the United States or in Washington, D.C. We have too much government spending.” On top of this, as NewsBusters reported a few hours before Stewart made his foolish comments, a new study published by the liberal Brookings Institution found the savings associated with just letting the Bush tax cuts expire on upper-income wage earners – what President Obama is advocating – to be minimal when compared to the current deficit totals. But facts weren’t getting in the way of Stewart’s populist rant as he next asked a truly absurd question: “How exactly can you be for deficit reduction and extending tax cuts? How do those two diametrically opposed thoughts exist in the same Party platform?” Well, Jon, here’s how: the last time Republicans cut taxes while controlling spending in the mid-1990s, the nation produced budget surpluses for four straight years while adding 12 million jobs to non-farm payrolls. Alas, this is an inconvenient truth Stewart and his ilk have chosen to ignore for over ten years, and Wednesday was no exception as the “Daily Show” host then played a clip of Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) saying the following on “Meet the Press” Sunday: REP. MIKE PENCE (R-INDIANA): They talk about tax cuts the same way they talk about spending increases as though the government owned all of the money. They say, “Are they paid for?” Well, I think, I think deciding on a government spending increase is very different on whether or not we allow the American people to keep more of their hard-earned tax dollars. Makes sense, right? After all, it is OUR money! Obviously not according to Stewart, for he not only seemed totally perplexed by Pence’s logic, he mocked it by asking, “So, you’re saying money the government gets is different than money the government spends?” Well YEAH, Jon! When the government is spending $1.5 trillion MORE than what it takes in, there is a difference! A HUGE difference! Clearly missing this indisputable fact, Stewart said the deficit’s opinion on this matter can be summed up with a clip from the movie “Goodfellas”: ACTOR RAY LIOTTA: Business is bad? F–k you, pay me! Oh, you had a fire? F–k you, pay me! Place got hit by lightning, huh? F–k you, pay me!” In reality, although he clearly didn’t know it, Stewart was making the conservative point about the current administration and Party in power: regardless of how the economy and the American citizens are doing financially, today’s government acts like a Mafioso thug demanding to be paid. Thank you, Jon – we couldn’t have said it any better.

View post:
Jon Stewart Vulgarly Attacks GOP Concerns for Rising Taxes and Deficits

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

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

Tea Party Infiltrator Busted

Posted on August 10, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

A videographer at this weekend’s Fancy Farm political celebration in Kentucky hounded a man pretending to be part of the Tea Party Movement, wearing Rand Paul swag and holding up a racist anti-immigrant sign, badgering him to reveal who he was. The cameraman caught back up with him when, later, the man walked with supporters Paul’s Democrat opponent, Jack Conway. added by: CarlosBobthe3rd

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Celebrities, Hot Stuff

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

Fox News and its ‘Summer Of Fear’

Posted on August 10, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

Networks cater to all kinds of demographics. But overlooked amid recent hand-wringing over racial politics and the separate debate over whether Fox News merited a front-row White House briefing room upgrade is the main ingredient in the channel's stew: fear. With Barack Obama's election, Fox has carved out a near-exclusive TV niche, while having plenty of company in radio: catering to those agitated (consciously or otherwise) by having an African-American in the White House. Yet a broader secret of its success — preying upon anxiety in general — hasn't really changed since the Sept. 11 terror attacks. As the original home of the “news alerts” (which usually aren't alerting us to breaking news), Fox News under CEO Roger Ailes has been adept at tapping into deep-seated concerns. And in order to powerfully connect with core viewers, it's not enough to disagree with President Obama's policies; rather, they must be couched as an existential threat to U.S. society. In this context, accusing FNC of race-baiting is an oversimplification. Yes, there has been a good deal of coded language to stoke misgivings about Obama being a “radical” and “socialist” — terms meant to resonate among those old enough to associate their use with extreme elements of the 1960s antiwar movement. But that's merely part of the fear factor that's become crack cocaine to TV news, and FNC in particular. Whether Fox planned this or stumbled onto it — in the way programmers in the movie “Network” realized they had a hit on their hands after Howard Beale began shouting — is, at this point, immaterial to the discussion. Is Glenn Beck a true believer or showman, a “rodeo clown,” as he once called himself? Either way, his voice has become the rallying cry around which Fox News is organized. And that drumbeat sounds like a slogan popularized by “The Fly” remake: Be afraid. Be very afraid. Thoughtful conservative commentators have cited the dangers in such overheated rhetoric. Former Bush speechwriter David Frum has become one of the most articulate, writing after passage of healthcare reform, “Conservative talkers on Fox and talkradiohad whipped the Republican voting base into such a frenzy that deal-making was rendered impossible. How do you negotiate with somebody who wants to murder your grandmother? Or — more exactly — with somebody whom your voters have been persuaded to believe wants to murder their grandmother?” Frum added that talk hosts operate “responsibility-free” — playing a different game than Republican politicians, since perpetuating frustration and outrage boosts their ratings. Beck premiered on FNC the month Obama was inaugurated, and it has been an ideal marriage. As talkradio host and Fox contributor Laura Ingraham recently conceded on “The Colbert Report,” the Obama administration has “been great” for her medium and for Fox News. As threats go, terrorism isn't in the headlines every day. On the other hand, transforming the President into America's potential undoing — a kind of Manchurian candidate (maybe foreign-born?), determined to punish whites for past transgressions — has made fear an ever-present part of the daily menu. For all the invectives hurled at Bill Clinton and George W. Bush in the three-cable-news-network era (which didn't begin, unbelievably, until halfway through Clinton's presidency), the most egregious attempts to delegitimize Obama are both distinct and not particularly subtle. The latest theme — illustrated by Fox's crusade regarding the New Black Panther Party — hinges on fear of racial bias where whites are the aggrieved party. As the Washington Post's Greg Sargent noted, Fox's eagerness to “drive the media narrative … simply has no equivalent on the left.” Still, the most ruthless liberals — those more committed to partisan advantage than accuracy — have inevitably drawn lessons by observing, and will retaliate whenever Republicans regain power. Since its inception, Fox has emulated the “If it bleeds, it leads” mindset of local news, garnishing its presentation with snazzier graphics and more urgent production values. The canny post-Sept. 11 adaptation has been, “If it scares, it airs.” Race is just the latest and perhaps ugliest aspect of that equation. And despite debate over whether FNC deserved preferred positioning in the press room, in today's media climate, it seems appropriate for the house that fear built to command a front-row seat. added by: TimALoftis

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Celebrities, Hot Stuff

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