Tag Archives: crisis

MSNBC Declares Barton’s Comments a Big Victory for Dems; Bring on Van Jones Afterwards

If you take MSNBC’s Luke Russert’s words at face value, you would think the Democrats are going to win big this November–all thanks to Rep. Joe Barton’s (R-Texas) comments on the Obama administration’s treatment of BP, and their “shakedown” of the company via the escrow fund. “A lot of Democrats see this as the ammunition they need to directly tie the Republican Party with that of big oil,” Russert summarized. Barton expressed his disapproval at the hearing for the White House’s treatment of BP in forcing them to agree to the $20 billion escrow fund, calling it a “shakedown.” MSNBC anchor Contessa Brewer was visibly irritated during her news hour with the statement, and Russert called it a “really big blunder.” However, as NewsBusters reported , MSNBC’s own Ed Schultz was ecstatic yesterday over the very actions of the White House, and spoke positively of the “shakedown.” Russert mentioned comments from multiple Republicans distancing themselves from Rep. Barton’s comments, including House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio). “One Republican I spoke to said ‘This was absolutely one of the worst things that could have ever happened to us. We essentially gave the Democrats an early Christmas gift with this one’,” Russert reported. ‘This is great news for the White House,” Russert continued. “They’ve been coming under attack for not taking an authoritative leadership position–they can now spin this as a political issue.” Russert also mentioned Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) who called the escrow fund a “redistribution of wealth” fund, and essentially put her in the same camp with Barton. “A really big political victory today for Democrats on Mr. Barton’s slip-up,” Russert concluded. MSNBC then brought on Gov. Haley Barbour (R-Miss.), but lost him in the middle of his segment. The network then switched to liberal guest Van Jones, who defended the Obama administration’s response to the disaster. “There is a whole ideology at play here that says ‘We hate the federal government. The federal government is a problem’,” Van Jones added. “The last time I checked, the federal government was America’s government. America’s government does not need to be weakened and undermined.” The transcript of the segment, which aired on June 17, at 3:42 p.m. EDT, is as follows: MSNBC anchor CHRIS JANSING: BP’s CEO Tony Hayward, since 10:00 this morning, with a couple of breaks, maybe an hour and forty-five–he has been on the hot seat for four hours, give or take, and one huge piece of controversial statements that came out of this didn’t come from him but came from a Congressman Joe Barton who called the agreement to set off fund to pay the people who have been hurt by this a “$20 billion slush fund.” He accused the White House of a shakedown and he apologized to BP for what happened in setting that up. Now he came back in just about the last half hour. He said in case anything was misconstrued, he is fully behind this investigation of BP’s actions and that there is no doubt in his mind that BP is responsible for this spill. Let’s go to our Capitol Hill correspondent Luke Russert, and this has set off a storm of controversy, Luke. LUKE RUSSERT: It absolutely has, Chris. A really amazing subplot within the hearing. Mr. Barton saying that he is apologizing to BP for the White House making them set up this escrow fund. A lot of Democrats see this as the ammunition they need to directly tie the Republican party with that of big oil.  Mr. Barton’s comments have not just upset Democrats, they have upset a lot of his fellow Republicans. One Republican from Florida, Jeff Miller, someone who’s from the area that’s directly affected by this spill, calling on Mr. Barton to resign as chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Also John Boehner, the Republican Majority Leader of the Republican party, the Minority Leader of the Republican party saying, quote, that he does not agree with the characterization that Mr. Barton made. He himself tried to distance himself from those comments. Really quite extraordinary, party leaders trying to keep Joe Barton away. Barton is from Texas. Records have shown that he is a friend of big oil. Since 1989, he has gotten well over a million dollars in donations from the folks attached to the oil industry, or the oil companies themselves. So it’s not too shocking he would probably make a statement like that. That being said, a huge political firestorm up here on Capitol Hill, one that is so big that even the Vice President had this to say at a press conference at the White House this afternoon. (Video Clip) Vice President JOE BIDEN: And I find it outrageous to suggest that if in fact we insisted that BP demonstrate their preparedness to put aside billions of dollars–in this case $20 billion–to take care of the immediate needs of people who are drowning. These guys don’t have deep pockets. The guy who runs the local marina, the guy who has one shrimping boat, the guy who has one small business–he can’t afford to lose ten, twelve, fifteen thirty thousand dollars a.month. RUSSERT: There you have Vice President Biden speaking out very forcefully about Mr. Barton’s comments. Now we should say that Mr. Barton just apologized at the committee hearing, saying that he was sorry if anyone misconstrued his comments earlier, and that he does–that BP is in fact responsible for this spill. But the damage has really been done. One Republican I spoke to said this was absolutely one of the worst things that could have ever happened to us. We essentially gave the Democrats an early Christmas gift with this one. A really big blunder on Mr. Barton’s part, Chris. Now Michelle Bachmann from Minnesota has also dived into this, saying that this escrow fund was a “redistribution of wealth fund.” You’re going to see Democrats in the next few days really trying to paint Republicans as the party of big oil, something they have desperately wanted to do. This is great news for the White House. They’ve been coming under attack for not taking an authoritative leadership position–they can now spin this as a political issue. They were very quick to release a statement against Mr. Barton. As you saw, the Vice President speaking out forcefully right there, this will now become “Republicans are with big oil, we’re with the residents of the Gulf, who are on the Democratic side.” A really big political victory today for Democrats on Mr. Barton’s slipup. JANSING: Thanks very much, we appreciate it, Luke.We want to talk now to Gov. Haley Barbour, he is at a new Toyota plant that is opening in Blue Springs, Mississippi. Something interesting here, because one of the groups of people we’ve seen in the past will probably have a little understanding of what the BP execs have gone through with these hearings are some of the Toyota execs who have been in the hot seat before. And I do, governor, want to ask you, of course, about what’s going on there with the Toyota plant. But let me ask you first if you have had a chance to watch any of these hearings today, and if so , what do you think about them? Gov. HALEY BARBOUR: We have had the pleasure in Mississippi of announcing that Toyota decided this morning, and announced this morning, that they will go forward with the start of operations for their new facility in Blue Springs, Mississippi, and begin it in February of 2011, just over a near from now. They will have Corollas coming off the assembly line here, 2,000 jobs for us in this plant plus more than that in supplier facilities around North Mississippi. It’s a big day for us, we have been celebrating, I haven’t been paying attention to Congress. JANSING: Well let me tell you a little bit about what was said there, maybe you had a chance to hear a little bit of what Luke Russert said. Because I think it certainly is relevant to your constituents who may have claims against BP. He said he thought this $20 billion in escrow was in fact a shakedown by the White House, that it’s a $20 billion slush fund, and he apologized to BP. What do you think about that? BARBOUR: Well first of all, it’s not $20 billion. I mean, when I heard this announced by the President, it concerned me that BP was going to have $20 billion taken and put into an escrow account. BP owes the people of Mississippi every bit of damage that’s been done. It’s BP’s responsibility to pay, we expect them to pay, we’re going to demand that they pay. But if the government had taken $20 billion of working capital from them, we were worried they couldn’t drill wells. Now we found out what the facts are, that it’s not $20 billion now, it’s $3 billion in the next quarter, $2 billion in the following quarter and then $5 billion in 12, $5 billion in 13, $45 billion at 14. That makes me feel much better, it makes me know that BP is going to be able to operate so they can generate the revenue to pay the people of Mississippi what BP owes them. Because BP is responsible for paying all the claims for all the legitimate damages that’s been done. JANSING: So in other words you think that what the White House has arranged, that this escrow fund– BARBOUR: She must not have liked my answer, I lost her. JANSING: Well, that was not the case, I want to make sure that he understands that it was nothing about his answer, I’m not quite sure why his ability to listen dropped out. I’m sorry, tell me again where we’re going? JANSING: We’re going to go now to Van Jones, who joins us live. Thanks very much for joining us, I’m sorry for the little bit of confusion, apparently our previous guest had some IFP problems. Have you had an opportunity to be listening to these hearings? JONES: I have. JANSING: You’ve been sitting there listening. So tell me what you think about this controversy, real controversy, false controversy, about the $20 billion fund? JONES: I think a real controversy, I mean, I was stunned and shocked. I don’t think any American official should be apologizing to this corporation that you saw all day long, here’s the head of this corporation, a multinational corporation that’s come to our country. As best we can tell, they corrupted our government. They slagged up our coastline. The criminal negligence has resulted in the death of innocent workers. America’s beauty, environment, workers, economy, all at risk. And the first thing out of the Republican leader’s mouth is to say “I’m sorry” to you? I think he has to apologize for the apology. But I think this is not just an accident. Night and day to hear the governor of Mississippi, who yesterday was attacking the first victory for America in this fight–getting this escrow fund is the first victory–you heard the governor of Mississippi who was just on this show yesterday attacking that. You have Michelle Bachmann calling it a redistribution of wealth fund. This is outrageous. This is the first glimmer of hope for the people in that region, there will be money on the table to help them get through this tough time. You have one party who is consistently, not just this official, but consistently, attacking this result. On the one hand, you’ve got the President of the United States who says he wants to kick some ass, and now you’ve got the other side saying apparently they want to kiss some ass. A pparently they believe there’s nothing a multinational corporation can do that’s wrong and nothing that the American government can do that’s right in this catastrophe. JANSING: Let me tell you what Senator John Cornyn had to say. Because he kind of gave a little bit of a defense of that statement. He said he believes that the president has made this a political issue. And he’s trying to deal with it by showing how tough he’s being against BP. He’s gone from being Commander in Chief to Claims Adjustor in Chief.  JONES: First of all, in this situation, one of the biggest catastrophes to ever hit our country, we should be proud that our President has stood up. With his address to the country, he said, “I’m going after BP. I’m going to make sure they’re responsible. The next day he brought them into the office. He said “Listen, you’re going to have put $20 billion on the table to make sure that this is going to be handled the right way. They said, “Yes, sir.” He said $100 million to make sure that our workers are going to be taken care of. Yes sir. $500 million to make sure that the help is assessed properly. Yes sir. He is getting this corporation to finally step up and do the things that they should do. Now, I cannot understand why we have people in our government who want American government to be weaker in the face of this crisis. We need America’s government to be stronger. This is not an accident. There is a whole ideology at play here that says “We hate the federal government, the federal government is a problem.” The last time I checked the federal government was America’s government. America’s government does not need to be weakened and undermined. America’s government needs to be strong enough to protect us from these kinds of predatory multinational corporations coming over here hurting the American people. JANSING: Well I’m curious about how you think, then, that these kinds of hearings play into that. I was checking out the British newspapers to see how they were covering this. And one of them said this was a public flogging of Tony Hayward. And I guess there are two general schools of thought. One is that this is nothing more than a chance for all the members of this committee to grand stand, to get their names in the local paper. Nobody thought we were going to get anything new out of Tony Hayward. Nothing is accomplished here, and they could be better, their time could be better spent working on the very real problems that have come out of this. On the other end of the spectrum is the idea that, you know what, this is an example for other CEOs. You do what BP did, and this is what’s going to happen. You, you’re going to end up sitting there and have all the nation watching you. Where do you come down on that?  JONES: Well, first of all let’s be clear. We did not know that this CEO was going to sit there and stone wall and stonewall. And he went to talk to the President and came out of that with real victories for the American people. The first glimmer of hope, the first victory for America in the past 60 days was yesterday. So there’s no reason to think he wouldn’t sit down and be forthright. He made a decision to sit there and look like he’s at the principal’s office, just waiting for for bell to ring and mom to come and get him. That was his choice. But he could have actually given the American people some comfort, some answers. We are 60 days into this process. He knows more than he said. And I think that what we’ve got to understand is that going forward, you’re going to see a big contrast. You’re going to have some people in American politics, who I hope they keep talking, that are going to make it clear. In the choice between standing with this multinational corporation, this oil company, or standing with the American people, they’re going to find every excuse to defend and apologize for–literally apologize for this corporation’s egregious, disgusting behavior. And you’re going to have other people who stand with the American people. That’s going to be the contrast going forth. It turned into theater because, again, this corporation refused, once again refused, to do the minimum, the minimum that would have been decent and respectful to the American people.

Excerpt from:
MSNBC Declares Barton’s Comments a Big Victory for Dems; Bring on Van Jones Afterwards

Scarborough Mocks Conservative Message: ‘Freedom Has Died Tonight! Get Your Muskets Out!’

The oil is out of the well. Once again, MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” host Joe Scarborough’s Republican viewpoint is anti-Republican. One could even say the host is hostile and abusive to any Republicans left in his audience. On the June 17th show, the panel was discussing the President’s new escrow account for the victims of the BP oil spill and how criticism has come out from both sides. Scarborough briefly commented that on hand, the “far left” does not think that the administration is allocating enough money to the victims. However, when he mentions critics on the “far right,” he arrogantly mocked them at length. He practically accused them of preparing for a violent insurrection: “I mean seriously how many times can freedom die, in one quarter? Because if you listen to the Republicans, they send out press releases every day, saying freedom has died tonight! Get your muskets out!”[MP3 Audio available here ] This indictment doesn’t sound like the “conservative” Joe claims to be. It sounds a lot like an echo of Chris Matthews in his documentary “The Rise of the New Right,” which characterizes all Republicans as supporting, provoking, or partaking in violence. The former Republican Congressman is taking the position that if you don’t agree with this administration you should just keep your mouth shut right now because, “it allows you to criticize later and have more authority, but these Republicans don’t have that nimble touch, to say the least.” The guy who says, “once in a while I may say some negative things about Barack Obama,” thinks he is the one who the Republican Party should take advice from. Scarborough must have the “nimble touch” because his idea of being tough on the administration is to put the kid gloves on.

Rudy Giuliani, MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan Eviscerate Joe Scarborough for Blaming Bush for Oil Spill

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) and MSNBC anchor Dylan Ratigan on June 17 joined forces to lambaste “Morning Joe” co-host Joe Scarborough for continuing to defend President Barack Obama’s handling of the BP oil spill. Scarborough presented a litany of arguments in Obama’s defense, but Giuliani and Ratigan countered with specific examples of the president’s failed leadership. Regurgitating liberal talking points, Scarborough blamed the crisis on George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. “We hear that we had the technology to stop this,” Scarborough claimed. “In 2002, though, Dick Cheney and his energy task force said, ‘No, we’re not going to take an extra step.'” Giuliani responded with an eviscerating counter punch: “It’s important to know as part of the history of this but the reality is, he’s been president now for 18 months. It’s about time we stopped blaming Bush.” Scarborough thought that the former New York City Mayor would credit Obama for securing from BP a $20 billion victim compensation fund, but instead Giuliani criticized the president. “I say it was a good deal for BP,” retorted Giuliani. “If I can put even a tentative limit on the liabilities, I’ve helped save my company.” “Democrats only wanted $10 billion,” claimed Scarborough. “You can’t say something nice about the president?” “The president has so mishandled this that it will be impossible for me to even describe how horribly handled this was,” argued Giuliani. “BP would be more than willing to give $20 billion to get themselves somewhat off the hook.” When pressed by Scarborough, Giuliani gave a detailed explanation for how he would have handled the crisis differently: First of all, the first thing I would have done is to bring in experts from the industry who are independent source of advice for me…If your father or mother were sick, you would go get a second opinion from an expert doctor. Not from an academician which is what he did. Go ask the question. Has anyone done remediation before? Has anyone done it better than BP? Bring them in. Make them your eyes and ears. Have them watching everything. Maybe they could have gotten the estimate right of the amount of oil that was coming out. It was horrendous. This is a horrible case of malpractice, negligence, gross negligence. They were off by 60 times. That had to infect every wrong judgment you make. Instead of crediting Giuliani for articulating a coherent plan, Scarborough attempted to deflect and politicize the issue, wondering whether the “malpractice” was “shared by both political parties and the entire Washington establishment over 15 years that has allowed oil companies to drill in areas where they have no backup plan if something goes wrong?” Ratigan rushed to Giuliani’s defense, railing against Obama for failing to consult independent industry experts at the beginning of the crisis: I actually completely agree with the mayor which is we can talk all day about the problems but until you actually address the matter of the fact that oil continues to go into the Gulf of Mexico, and there are other ways to deal with it that have not been brought in, or have been brought in too late–that is shameful. When Giuliani took aim at Obama for addressing the oil spill as a political problem, Scarborough jumped to the president’s defense. “It is a political problem,” exclaimed Scarborough. “It’s a substantive problem, but it’s a political problem!” “He’s just dealing with it as a political problem,” countered Giuliani. “That’s why he went down there only a couple of times at the very beginning. Didn’t take charge. We had Gibbs saying for three weeks that BP was in charge. The speech last night, Obama said the federal government’s been in charge from the beginning. Well, nobody ever told anybody that for the first four weeks. Maybe they were in charge in secret.” Scarborough then claimed that Obama took charge early on, making the oil spill the “top priority for this government,” but Ratigan disagreed, proclaiming, “My biggest criticism of this administration which is why I agree with the mayor when it comes to the response is the incredibly incompetent appearance of the containment strategy.” The transcript of the segment can be found below: MSNBC Morning Joe 6/17/10 8:04 a.m. JOE SCARBOROUGH: $20 billion. MIKA BRZEZINSKI: That’s pretty good. RUDY GIULIANI, former New York City mayor: Even nowadays that’s real money. That’s real money. SCARBOROUGH: Let’s give the president– DYLAN RATIGAN: Unless you get it from the Federal Reserve, in which case it’s not real money. SCARBOROUGH: Mr. Mayor, let’s make headlines, let’s give the president credit right now for being able to get $20 billion from BP without a single lawsuit being filed. What do you say? BRZEZINSKI: Come on. SCARBOROUGH: That’s pretty good. GIULIANI: I say it was a good deal for BP. BRZEZINSKI: Why? GIULIANI: Divide it by four or five years. What do they make per year? Jim would know this. JIM CRAMER, CNBC anchor: They make $6 billion per quarter. GIULIANI: If I can put even a tentative limit on the liabilities, I’ve helped save my company. SCARBOROUGH: But they haven’t done that yet. They did not waive liability. GIULIANI: But that’s a pretty good indication of it’s going to be hard to get above that $20 billion. It gets them– SCARBOROUGH: Democrats only wanted $10 billion. You can’t say something nice about the president? BRZEZINSKI: There’s nothing nice here? SCARBOROUGH: You can’t say, “Mr. President, good job of getting $20 billion?” GIULIANI: The president has so mishandled this that it will be impossible for me to even describe how horribly handled this was. SCARBOROUGH: He got $20 billion from people in my backyard. That’s pretty good, isn’t it? GIULIANI: He would have gotten with the same leverage in a second. BP would be more than willing to give $20 billion to get themselves somewhat off the hook. Unfortunately, they stepped all over it with a comment that the CEO made. SCARBOROUGH: What would you have done differently as far as substance goes? GIULIANI: Every single thing from day one. First of all, the first thing I would have done is to bring in experts from the industry who are independent source of advice for me. I met with some of the– SCARBOROUGH: The president didn’t do that? GIULIANI: Two days ago I had dinner in Houston, with several people who were top people in the industry. Never reached out. Never, never asked, gee, has Shell done this before? Has Exxon done this before? If your father or mother were sick, you would go get a second opinion from an expert doctor. Not from an academician which is what he did. Go ask the question. Has anyone done remediation before? Has anyone done it better than BP? Bring them in. Make them your eyes and ears. Have them watching everything. Maybe they could have gotten the estimate right of the amount of oil that was coming out. It was horrendous. This is a horrible case of malpractice, negligence, gross negligence. They were off by 60 times. That had to infect every wrong judgment you make. SCARBOROUGH: Isn’t that malpractice, though, shared by both political parties and entire Washington establishment over 15 years that has allowed oil companies to drill in areas where they have no backup plan if something goes wrong? DYLAN RATIGAN, MSNBC anchor: I’ll do you one better. The American people consume four gallons of gasoline for every gallon of gasoline that exists on the Earth. We have the biggest subsidized cost of energy. We have a false price for energy in our country to this day. The cost of the wars is not in the cost of energy. The environmental liability is not in the cost of the energy. None of the liability associated with our lifestyle is actually priced in. For capitalism to work, you actually have to be paying the actual price that represents the actual cost. So if we were actually paying the real cost of energy, we would be incentivized, believe me, to come up with something else. But because of the government and the culture of political expedience subsidies of energy costs everybody’s happy to take it so we hire BP to the tune of $6 billion a quarter to figure out–which is not easy, by the way–the technology to drop 18,000 feet beneath the ocean surface to suck oil out so we can continue to enjoy our lifestyle. If you ask me whether it’s the obvious failure in the government–MMS is obviously conflicted. Whether it’s the obvious fact that we built a sports car that could basically do anything. They had the technology to go to the bottom of the sea but they didn’t have a braking system, no way to turn it off which is incredibly reckless. And you put it all together. You find yourself in a situation where everybody’s pointing fingers but no one is containing the spill. So I actually completely agree with the mayor which is we can talk all day about the problems but until you actually address the matter of the fact that oil continues to go into the Gulf of Mexico, and there are other ways to deal with it that have not been brought in, or have been brought in too late–that is shameful. SCARBOROUGH: Do you agree that there are because we have been are defending this White House saying on substance for the most part they’ve gotten it right, do you agree with the mayor that actually they haven’t gotten it right? CRAMER: I think the mayor is dead on when he says that if they had known that the spill could be 60,000 barrels, which was available if you talk to the former heads of Exxon or if you talk to Boone Pickens, which you asked me to do. (Inaudible) GIULIANI: And the people in the industry believe that he hasn’t talked to the industry because they’re bad guys. (Inaudible) GILUIANI: A bunch of bad guys. CRAMER: They’re all bad actors. GIULIANI: And from the point of view of crisis management, this is an F. You couldn’t have done it worse. Some day Harvard will do a study on if you have a crisis like this, these are the things that Obama did wrong. Here are the things to do right. I could go on and on; that was the first mistake that he made. The second mistake that he made was to kind of treat this as a political problem. Which he was doing right up until the speech the other night. Treat it as a political problem. SCARBOROUGH: It is a political problem. It’s a substantive problem, but it’s a political problem! GIULIANI: He’s just dealing with it as a political problem. That’s why he went down there only a couple of times at the very beginning. Didn’t take charge. We had Gibbs saying for three weeks that BP was in charge. The speech last night, Obama said the federal government’s been in charge from the beginning. Well, nobody ever told anybody that for the first four weeks. Maybe they were in charge in secret. SCARBOROUGH: Well, the president said himself though on April 22nd. BRZEZINSKI: Yes. I just pulled up that. SCARBOROUGH: On April 22nd he called all the agency heads in and he said, “Okay, listen. This is going to be very bad.” It’s before–it’s before the thing blew out of the water and said this is the top priority for this government. We have to focus on it. This is job number one. RATIGAN: Where is the containment strategy? GIULIANI: That’s worse because if this was job number one look at the horrible–if this is job number one which I don’t think it was because the president was off on vacation twice during all of this, if this were job number one– SCARBOROUGH: Did you go on vacation Mr. Mayor? GIULIANI: Did I go on vacation as mayor? No. SCARBOROUGH: Isn’t that a cheap shot? You never went on vacation? GIULIANI: Not in the middle of a crisis. SCARBOROUGH:  Ronald Reagan went on vacation. George W. Bush went on vacation. GIULIANI: Not in the middle of a crisis. This is the second time the president has done that, and I resent it. On Christmas day when we had Christmas bombing, he was on vacation. Remained on vacation for 11 days. SCARBOROUGH: It was Christmas! GIULIANI: He is the President of the United States of America. SCARBOROUGH: They got microphones in Chicago. GIULIANI: On Christmas evening, the first year that I was the mayor, I left my house and went to the hospital and I spent five hours there because I was the mayor of New York City and I should be on the spot taking charge of something from the very beginning. This has been a gross failure in crisis management. Could not have done it worse. SCARBOROUGH: Okay. I’m sorry. Didn’t mean to–   GIULIANI: : And you shouldn’t be on vacation when a crisis is affecting the country. RATIGAN: There are two problems here. One is the capping of the well which I think is BP’s problem. BP obviously was negligent in the construction of dealing the well. There’s a totally unrelated problem, which is the containment problem. And in order to deal with the containment problem, that is the government’s problem and you have to know what the flow rate is accurately and early in order to have a containment strategy. So my biggest criticism of this administration which is why I agree with the mayor when comes to the response is incredibly incompetent appearance of the containment strategy. SCARBOROUGH: That’s not monday morning quarterbacking? I mean, who knew? RATIGAN: The oil is still coming out, Joe. They could still bring–Matt Simmons knew. T. Boone Pickens knew. Booms, put booms around it. Drop a curtain. Put super tankers in the middle and start sucking the oil out. (Inaudible) RATIGAN: Booms, curtain, super tanker. Super suck technology. Next question. GIULIANI: And actually, Joe, it is worse if you’re right and they were in charge from the beginning because if they were in charge at the beginning they really didn’t know what they were doing. I actually don’t think they were in charge. I think their real failure was they trusted BP. And they shouldn’t have trusted BP but they trusted BP. SCARBOROUGH: And let’s just say that has been our one critique on substance that perhaps they–two things. One, they trusted BP too much from the beginning. Two, they made a political calculation that if “we go down there, we own the story. It’s not BP’s story. It’s our story.” That is a critique I think we’ll hear for some time. And can we go right now? Because this is a fascinating conversation. You’re actually the first person that’s come on this show and when I’ve challenged them give me substance. Actually you three guys, you’re talking specifics about what the president should have done. Let’s go to the barni-cam right now. Mike Barnicle. Is he wearing the white sox right now? Are you listening to this? MIKE BARNICLE, MSNBC contributor: Yeah I am. SCARBOROUGH: We’ve got three guys here that are loaded for bear. And they’ve got some specifics. What do you think?                          BRZEZINSKI: Taking shots. BARNICLE: Let’s place all of our faith in BP because they’ve done such a great job. They’re still using the same instruments on oil spills that they were using in California in 1969. If British Petroleum, which they used to call themselves, or any of these oil companies were in charge of technological advancements in our society we would still be using a rotary phone and looking at a 12-inch Bendix TV set. (Inaudible) SCARBOROUGH: Do we have the cameraman from “24” now? Mike Barnicle brings up a point but let me ask you again in the role of devil’s advocate. We hear that we had the technology to stop this. In 2002, though, Dick Cheney and his energy task force said, “No, we’re not going to take an extra step.” GIULIANI: I have no idea what Dick Cheney did, you know, five or six years ago. SCARBOROUGH: Isn’t that important to know? It’s part of the story. GIULIANI: It’s important to know as part of the history of this but the reality is, he’s been president now for 18 months. It’s about time we stopped blaming Bush. RATIGAN: Hang on, Mr. Mayor. I don’t mean to interrupt you but the North Sea has a totally different set of safety standards–totally different governmental standards. These standards have to be taken into consideration. –Alex Fitzsimmons is a News Analysis intern at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.

Read the rest here:
Rudy Giuliani, MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan Eviscerate Joe Scarborough for Blaming Bush for Oil Spill

AP: June Private-Sector Employment May Contract

It seems that when they saw today’s today’s disappointing unemployment claims report from Uncle Sam, the Associated Press’s Alan Zibel, perhaps with the help of contributors Jeannine Aversa, Martin Crutsinger, and Tali Arbel, decided to start playing the expectations game with June’s Employment Situation Report, which isn’t due to arrive from the Bureau of Labor Statistics until July 2. If so, from a propagandist’s perspective, it’s a pretty slick strategy, given that the BLS’s report will probably be the last significant piece of economic news before the July 4 weekend, making it a larger than usual topic of conversation among the American people in the days that follow. Private sector job growth shrank to a seasonally adjusted 20,000 in May. Maybe if the AP and others make us think that June will go negative and the actual result comes in barely positive, it won’t seem so bad. The worse possibility is that they’re aware of more information than the rest of us have, and that things really are heading south in this “Rebound? What Rebound?” recovery . Here are key paragraphs of Zibel’s report (link is probably dynamic and subject to revision; bolds are mine): The number of people filing new claims for jobless benefits jumped last week after three straight declines, another sign that the pace of layoffs has not slowed. Initial claims for jobless benefits rose by 12,000 to a seasonally adjusted 472,000, the Labor Department said Thursday. It was the highest level in a month and overshadowed a report that showed consumer prices remain essentially flat. The rise in jobless claims highlighted concerns about the economic rebound — especially after a report earlier this week said home construction plunged in May after government tax credits expired. If layoffs persist, there’s a concern that the June employment numbers may show a decline in private-sector jobs after five straight months of gains , said Jennifer Lee, an economist with BMO Capital Markets. “We’ve definitely seen the economic recovery hit a wall,” Lee said. … Kevin Logan, an economist with HSBC Securities, said many economists have been expecting claims to fall below 450,000 for several weeks now. “The wait is getting longer and longer,” said Logan. “As each week goes by, doubts about the underlying strength of the economic expansion grow.” It seems suspiciously early for the press to be putting out a jobs-will-be-lost vibe fifteen days out from the actual news. If things really are getting as potentially rough as indicated, the administration’s plan to celebrate a summer of recovery, as detailed today by Politico’s Mike Allen , could turn in to an object of abject ridicule: Vice President Biden today will kick off “Recovery Summer,” a six-week-long push designed to highlight the jobs accompanying a surge in stimulus-funded projects to improve highways, parks, drinking water and other public works. Biden will present President Obama with a report laying out a spike in stimulus activity this summer, and how it will contribute to a steady climb to a total of 3.5 million Recovery Act jobs by the end of the year. Biden, Obama and other administration officials will travel to more than two dozen Recovery Act project sites in coming weeks. Tomorrow, the president will travel to Columbus, Ohio, to mark the groundbreaking of the 10,000th Recovery Act road project, around Nationwide Children’s Hospital. On Monday, Biden will travel to Midland, Mich., for the groundbreaking of the new Dow Kokam advanced battery manufacturing facility. –David Axelrod said: “This summer will be the most active Recovery Act season yet, with thousands of highly-visible road, bridge, water and other infrastructure projects breaking ground across the country, giving the American people a first-hand look at the Recovery Act in their own backyards and making it crystal clear what the cost would have been of doing nothing. … In the face of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression, Republicans in Congress chose to play politics with economic recovery and declared the Recovery Act a failure before it even began. They made a cynical bet that if the President fails, they win. Democrats chose to act by tackling the crisis head-on. Just over a year later, the Recovery Act is putting millions of Americans to work and helping the economy grow again. But our work is far from over.” In her perceptive column last week (“The Alien in the White House”), the Wall Street Journal’s Dorothy Rabinowitz wrote the following about Barack Obama and his apparatchiks: The president’s appointees, transmitters of policy, go forth with singular passion week after week, delivering the latest inversion of reality. Their work is not easy … The drivel Politico’s Allen relays proves that Rabinowitz was clearly not exaggerating. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

See original here:
AP: June Private-Sector Employment May Contract

Joe Scarborough Defends Obama’s Speech, Gives Soft Interview to Axelrod

MSNBC “Hardball” host Chris Matthews felt a “thrill” up his leg when Obama spoke at the Democratic National Convention in 2008. Keith Olbermann’s leftist bias was great enough to merit a Saturday Night Live parody of his show “Countdown With Keith Olbermann.” And yet both trashed President Obama’s Oval Office speech on Tuesday. “Maybe I missed something. I thought it was a great speech if you’ve been on another planet for the last 57 days,” Olbermann remarked. Matthews said that he didn’t “sense executive command.” But Joe Scarborough, who has repeatedly thrown his support behind President Obama’s handling of the crisis, thought the speech “struck all the right notes,” and was in disbelief on his morning show over the media’s general distaste for the speech. Scarborough then hosted David Axelrod for an interview that can only be described as a barrage of softballs. “I just wonder if this is a season, that, no matter what the President’s doing, he is going to get hit by both sides right now?” Scarborough asked Axelrod, senior advisor to President Obama. “He gives a speech that you guys thought struck all the right notes, as did we,” he said to Axelrod. “Gets hammered. What’s the next step? What is the knitting process? What do you do now?” Donny Deutsch, advertising executive and chairman of Deutsch, Inc., chimed in later to pledge his affection for Obama’s speech. “I thought it was a great speech, by the way,” he assured Axelrod. “I don’t know what I would have done different.” He then decided to give the administration some advice, in the form of a question. “If I was in your inner circle, I would say the 20 minutes today with BP is the opportunity,” he told Axelrod. “There is a clear bad guy here. With everything that goes wrong in the world, we need the perp-walk. I would say he can’t spank them hard enough.” Axelrod delivered his answer. But Deutsch wasn’t satisfied. “David, even your answer to me was very methodical. I want to see anger in your eyes. That’s what the American public wants.” The overall interview lasted eight minutes. The segments including Joe Scarborough and Donny Deutsch are included below. The transcripts of the segments, which aired June 16 at 7:21a.m. and 7:26a.m., EDT, are as follows: JOE SCARBOROUGH: David, I just wondered–you’ve been in politics a long time. This happens to every politician. I just wonder if this is a season, that, no matter what the President’s doing, he is going to get hit by both sides right now. DAVID AXELROD: Yeah, I think that that’s probably true, Joe. And you know, one of the things that we’ve learned over a long period of time through a very long campaign and in this building, is that you just got to stick to your knitting. You got to keep doing your work, you got to keep moving forward. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Keep your head down, yeah, keep your head down. So what does the president do? He follows up on a speech. He follows up, as I was saying last bloc, on the very successful Gulf Coast tour where a lot of conservatives were very pleased with the President, liked what he was doing. He gives a speech that you guys thought struck all the right notes, as did we. Gets hammered. What’s the next step? What is the knitting process? What do you do now? DAVID AXELROD: Well, first of all, I think as to the speech, I think he imparted the information that needed to be imparted to the American people about where we are, what we are going to do to make the people in the Gulf whole and hold BP accountable, how we are going to clean this thing up and how we are going to deal with the problems that led to it. And he made a strong pitch for a new energy policy. It was an important presentation. In terms of what we’re–I mean, we have a meeting with BP today to deal with the issue of claims and putting money in an escrow account so that–independently administered–so that people have some confidence that they can–down there who have been hurt by this–that they can get some recompense for the money that they’ve lost. We’re going to  talk to them about some of the containment strategies, and what we need to do to make that–to accelerate that process. Obviously, he’s going to follow up with members of the senate on the Energy–on the Energy bill. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Okay. DAVID AXELROD: So we’ve got a lot of work ahead of us. And then there’s the day-to-day work of trying to intercept this oil and protect the coast and protect the people as best that we can. (…) (7:26 a.m. EDT) DONNY DEUTSCH, chairman of Deutsch, Inc.: David, you know, I’m one of the–I thought it was a great speech, by the way. I don’t know what I would have done different. If I was whispering in your ear, and tell me if you’d say ‘Donny, I agree with you’– DAVID AXELROD: You are whispering in my ear! DONNY DEUTSCH: If I was in your inner circle, I would say the 20 minutes today with BP is the opportunity. There is a clear bad guy here. With everything that goes wrong in the world, we need the perp-walk. I would say he can’t spank them enough. Wherever you’re going to kick them–he’s going to kick ass–kick harder. I’d say, “David, tell them to do that.” What would your response be to that? DAVID AXELROD: Well my response is we have one mission, and one mission–and that mission is to make sure that the people of the Gulf are made whole, that BP pays every dime they owe, that this–that there’s an independent administrator to make sure that that happens, that they do everything they need to to collect as much oil as they can. And it’ll be clear, I think, to them and to the country that that is–that that is not a negotiable–those are not negotiable issues. DONNY DEUTSCH: David, even your answer to me was very methodical. I want to see anger in your eyes. That’s what the American public wants. (Crosstalk) DONNY DEUTSCH: Everything you said is right. It’s like, “There’s a bad guy out there. There’s a bad–there’s somebody with a black hat out there. This oil company– (Crosstalk) DAVID AXELROD: You’re a–I know you’re not just a creative genius but you’re a great businessman. And you understand that the best way to express yourself is to take from the company what they owe and put it away, and make sure that people are taken care of. That is–you know, that is much more important, I think, to the people of the Gulf than sort of contrived expressions. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Kicking ass. DAVID AXELROD: I think that everybody down there–everybody down there who met with the President understood his sense of connection, his sense of advocacy. But they weren’t asking him to get angry, they were asking him to get results. They were asking him to get the money from BP that they are owed, and to restore the Gulf.

Follow this link:
Joe Scarborough Defends Obama’s Speech, Gives Soft Interview to Axelrod

Double Shock: ABC Shows Gulf Residents Panning Obama’s Oil Spill Speech; ABC’s Katrina Focus Group Praised Bush in 2005

A tale of two disasters: On ABC’s Good Morning America this morning, weatherman Sam Champion’s piece included reaction from several residents of Florida, Alabama and Louisiana to President Obama’s oil spill speech, and found three outright critics and no defenders of the administration’s handling of the disaster. One woman exclaimed: “ What I would have liked to heard from him – that he actually had a plan .” The kindest review came from a man in Alabama who merely hoped the federal response would improve: “I think we’re seeing a change in how he’s handling the situation. And I hope it’s for the better.” Five years ago, after President Bush spoke in New Orleans a few weeks after Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf coast, ABC assembled a focus group of six people displaced by the storm, and taking refuge in Houston’s Astrodome. But to the evident astonishment of ABC’s correspondent, not one member of that group would denounce President Bush, but instead leveled their criticism at local officials who failed to prepare the city ahead of time. As NewsBuster’s Brent Baker reported at the time : ABC News producers probably didn’t hear what they expected when they sent Dean Reynolds to the Houston Astrodome’s parking lot to get reaction to President Bush’s speech from black evacuees from New Orleans. Instead of denouncing Bush and blaming him for their plight, they praised Bush and blamed local officials. Reynolds asked Connie London: “Did you harbor any anger toward the President because of the slow federal response?” She rejected the premise: “No, none whatsoever, because I feel like our city and our state government should have been there before the federal government was called in.” She pointed out: “They had RTA buses, Greyhound buses, school buses, that was just sitting there going under water when they could have been evacuating people.” Not one of the six people interviewed on camera had a bad word for Bush — despite Reynolds’ best efforts. Reynolds goaded: “Was there anything that you found hard to believe that he said, that you thought, well, that’s nice rhetoric, but, you know, the proof is in the pudding?” Brenda Marshall answered, “No, I didn’t,” prompting Reynolds to marvel to anchor Ted Koppel: “Very little skepticism here.” You can read Brent Baker’s full item from 2005 here . (It’s also worth noting, ABC devoted a full hour of prime time to Bush’s 2005 speech, but — perhaps trying to help downplay expectations — provided only two minutes of analysis following Obama’s speech last night.) Coincidentally, a new poll released yesterday found Louisiana voters giving President Obama lower marks for his response to the oil spill than Bush’s response to Katrina. According to a report posted yesterday at FoxNews.com : Louisiana voters think President George W. Bush did a better job handling the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina than President Obama has done in the wake of the BP oil spill, according to a new poll. The Public Policy Polling survey showed 50 percent of state voters rated Bush’s performance in 2005 as better than Obama’s. Just 35 percent picked Obama…. Louisiana voters by no means are happy with the way the Bush administration handled the flooding in 2005. But while the PPP poll showed just a third of voters approved of the way Bush handled Katrina, the numbers were generally worse for Obama. Sixty-two percent said they disapproved of Obama’s handling of the crisis, compared with 58 percent for Bush. MRC intern Alex Fitzsimmons caught Sam Champion’s report from the Gulf this morning. Co-anchor Robin Roberts framed the reaction as one of “cautious optimism,” but the soundbites from the residents are much more negative than the reporters’ script: CO-ANCHOR ROBIN ROBERTS: People on the front lines of this spill, residents on the Gulf coast, watched President Obama’s address to the nation with cautious optimism. Sam Champion is in Pensacola, Florida and got some of their reactions. Good morning, Sam. WEATHERMAN SAM CHAMPION: Hey, good morning, Robin. Welcome back. We’ve spent a lot of time walking and talking with the people who live in this area. They’ve spent some time watching and waiting. And they really only have one course. You said it at the top of the show: action. Folks in Pensacola Beach usually come to the Flounder’s Chowder House to forget their worries. PRESIDENT OBAMA, HEARD ON THE RESTAURANT’S TV: Tonight, I’d like to lay out for you what the battle plan is going forward. CHAMPION: Tuesday, they faced him in wide-screen. UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: What I would have liked to heard from him – that he actually had a plan. UNIDENTIFIED MAN: If we’re in a war, as he says we are, then why aren’t we bringing everybody into the picture that’s offered their help? CHAMPION: On Alabama’s Orange beach, a sense that seeing things firsthand may have made a difference for the president. UNIDENTIFIED MAN: I think we’re seeing a change in how he’s handling the situation. And I hope it’s for the better. CHAMPION: On New Orleans’ Bourbon Street, more skepticism. UNIDENTIFIED MAN: I think it’s lacking. I don’t think he’s responded to what we’re going to do about the cleanup issues. OBAMA IN SPEECH: Our top priority is to – CHAMPION: But even before the President spoke, frustration had already given way to anger. ED Valmont (sp?), Gulf coast resident: They said the inner waters were safe. We thought they were protected. CHAMPION: Ed Valmont usually harvests blue crabs off his back yard. On Tuesday, he only harvested oil. VALMONT: I mean that stuff’s like glue. All you got to do is just touch it and it’s on you forever. CHAMPION: But for people who live here, forever is too long. ALLEN PRIEST, Gulf coast resident: We’re not waiting on the government to really take over. CHAMPION: When little Sabine Bay faced a different kind of pollution ten years ago, Allen Priest’s neighbors cleaned it up themselves. Give them the tools and they say they will do it again. (To Priest) The President keeps saying that they want to leave the Gulf coast better than it is right now, after the spill. What does that mean to you? PRIEST: I don’t really think that’s totally our president’s job. I think it’s our responsibility as citizens to do that, if we care about this place. CHAMPION: I’ll tell you, Allen Priest said it. But a lot of other people said it, too. They trust the people they know. He believes his area won’t be polluted because there’s someone he knows watching the water. George. STEPHANOPOULOS: Okay, Sam.

Read the original:
Double Shock: ABC Shows Gulf Residents Panning Obama’s Oil Spill Speech; ABC’s Katrina Focus Group Praised Bush in 2005

Pakistan and The Taliban, Sitting In A Tree

A new report issued by the London School of Economics has claimed that Pakistan’s intelligence agency is not only funding and training Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan, but also that it also holds sway in the insurgency’s leadership council. The assertion that Pakistan’s “Inter-Services Intelligence” has ties to the Taliban is not new, but the scope of the relationship, the report’s author claims, could be damaging as the U.S. continues to court Pakitsan’s support. —JCL The LA Times: Pakistan’s powerful intelligence agency not only funds and trains Taliban insurgents fighting U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan, but also maintains its own representation on the insurgency’s leadership council, claims a new report issued by the London School of Economics. Assertions that Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence, continues to nurture links with the Afghan Taliban are not new. But the scope of that relationship claimed by the report’s author, Matt Waldman, is startling and could prove damaging to the fragile alliance Washington is trying to foster with Pakistan, its military establishment, and its weak civilian government led by President Asif Ali Zardari. Waldman, a fellow at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, based his assertions on interviews with nine Afghan Taliban commanders as well as with Afghan and Western security officials. The report claims that it is official Pakistan governmental policy to support the Taliban’s insurgency in Afghanistan, and that the ISI has a strong voice on the Quetta Shura, the Afghan Taliban’s leadership council, named after the southern Pakistani city believed to serve as the council’s haven. Read more Related Entries June 13, 2010 Obama Will Demand a BP Escrow Fund for Victims June 12, 2010 Turning the Crisis Corner

Here is the original post:
Pakistan and The Taliban, Sitting In A Tree

Obama Wants $50 Billion For Teachers, Cops and Firemen

With a relative drop in the bailout bucket, the president thinks he can save 300,000 teachers who would otherwise be kept by economic calamity from annoying America’s children. The money would go to state and local governments struggling to make ends meet. Christian Science Monitor: Mr. Obama has intimated in the past that the federal government’s job of propping up the economy was not yet done. Last week, he sent a letter to Congress supporting efforts to pass two separate measures totaling as much as $50 billion in aid for states and cities. With states still facing large budget shortfalls, Obama wants to minimize the potential loss of teachers, law-enforcement officers, and firefighters. He estimates that as many as 300,000 teachers could be laid off. In this way, the money would largely pick up with the $787 billion federal stimulus bill left off. Read more Related Entries June 13, 2010 Obama Will Demand a BP Escrow Fund for Victims June 12, 2010 Turning the Crisis Corner

Original post:
Obama Wants $50 Billion For Teachers, Cops and Firemen

BREAKING: NKorea cuts ties with South, raises war rhetoric!

UPDATE: Tue. 05/25 By HYUNG-JIN KIM, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 36 mins ago NKorea cuts ties with South, raises war rhetoric! “SEOUL, South Korea – Relations on the divided Korean peninsula plunged to their lowest point in a decade Tuesday when the North declared it was cutting all ties to Seoul as punishment for blaming the communists for the sinking of a South Korean warship. The announcement came a day after South Korea took steps that were seen as among the strongest it could take short of military action. Seoul said it would slash trade with the North and deny permission to its cargo ships to pass through South Korean waters. It also resumed a propaganda offensive — including blaring Western music into the North and dropping leaflets by balloon. North Korea said it was cutting all ties with the South until President Lee Myung-bak leaves office in early 2013, the official Korean Central News Agency said in a dispatch monitored in Seoul late Tuesday. The North's Committee for the Peaceful Reunification said it would expel all South Korean government officials working at a joint industrial park in the northern border town of Kaesong, and South Korean ships and airliners would be banned from passing through its territory. The North's committee said it would start “all-out counterattacks” against the South's psychological warfare, and called its moves “the first phase” of punitive measures against Seoul, suggesting more action could follow.” http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100525/ap_on_re_as/as_skorea_ship_sinks ————————————————————————————————————– WASHINGTON — The Obama administration on Monday announced plans for two major military exercises off the Korean peninsula in a show of force aimed at North Korea, which has been blamed by investigators for a deadly torpedo attack on a South Korean warship. The White House called U.S. support for South Korea “unequivocal” and said in a statement that President Obama had directed military commanders to work with the South “to ensure readiness and to deter future aggression.” North Korean leaders have denied responsibility and warned against any retaliation, but Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday blamed the North for the crisis. “We are working hard to avoid an escalation of belligerence and provocation,” Clinton told reporters in Beijing, where she was to press China to support diplomatic action against its neighbor and ally, North Korea. “This is a highly precarious situation that the North Koreans have caused in the region.” U.S. officials hope a united international response, coupled with a display of military might, will deter North Korea's neo-Stalinist regime from ratcheting up tensions. An international team of investigators last week blamed the North for the March 26 sinking of the South Korean corvette, the Cheonan. Forty-six South Koreans died aboard the ship, which investigators say was ripped in two by a torpedo. The sinking was South Korea's worst military disaster since the Korean War, which started 60 years ago and ended in a cease-fire in 1953. But no formal peace treaty was ever signed, and more than 28,000 U.S. troops remain stationed in the south, a critical regional ally. Until Monday, the Obama administration had been intentionally vague on how it might respond to the report blaming North Korea for the attack, out of a reluctance to stoke tensions. But on Tuesday, the Obama administration shifted gears, taking its cue from South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, who announced Monday that he would cut all trade with the impoverished North. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100524/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_korea added by: onemalefla

Mike Shanklin On Rand Paul & Civil Rights Act/Financial Reform Bill – Anarchy Time Radio

5/23/2010 Mike Shanklin made a special appearance on Anarchy Time Radio to discuss the recent Rand Paul/Maddow Interview concerning the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and racism as a whole. The discussion then leads into the Financial Reform Bill that Congress is currently trying to pass. added by: shanklinmike