Tag Archives: florida

MRC’s Notable Quotables: Watch Out, GOP — It’s 1964 All Over Again!

Just posted this morning over at MRC.org, our latest edition of Notable Quotables , a bi-weekly compilation of the latest outrageous, sometimes humorous, quotes in the liberal media. Topics this week include: CBS’s Bob Schieffer absurdly suggesting Republicans could face a landslide defeat this year, “very much like 1964,” while Katie Couric frets (again) how “moderate Republicans are becoming an endangered species.” Also in this issue, NBC’s Meredith Vieira declares that the Bush tax cuts “didn’t succeed, so what’s so good about them,” while CBS’s Harry Smith lobbies for “a second stimulus” or even “something like a new WPA.” Oh, and Chris Matthews gets another “thrill” from hearing Obama speak — this time, it’s “all over me.” Video of that confession, plus three other clips after the jump. [Click here to view/download the three-page, fully-formatted, full-color PDF ] Now the quotes from recent weeks, as featured in the September 20 Notable Quotables : Watch Out, Republicans: This Is 1964 All Over Again “It is very much like 1964. In 1960, Republicans lost narrowly with an establishment candidate, Richard Nixon. They got to 1964, they threw out all the establishment candidates, they threw out their party leaders and they nominated Barry Goldwater who — fine man — but he was far to the right of most of the people in his party, and they lost in a landslide. And that’s why you have establishment Republicans worried about what’s going to happen now in November.” — CBS’s Bob Schieffer on the September 15 Evening News . Liberal Media-Speak for “Congratulations, You’ve Won” “You are going to have to answer some questions. We saw that the Republican Party chairman in Jon Karl’s piece there, he went on to say that you’re ‘not a viable candidate,’ that you ‘cannot be elected dog catcher in Delaware.’ He went on to say that you’re either a liar or mentally unhinged.” — ABC’s George Stephanopoulos to Senate primary winner Christine O’Donnell on Good Morning America , Sept. 15. “Tea Party nutbag/Senate nominee from Del. was on CNN w/me in ’96. Forget her ignorant nonsense until I saw this.” — Former CNN anchor Miles O’Brien in a September 15 Twitter posting, referring readers to an anti-O’Donnell article posted on the left-wing Talking Points Memo blog site. Correspondent Nancy Cordes: “Polls show O’Donnell’s ultraconservative social views-” Old clip of Christine O’Donnell: “Lust in your heart is committing adultery.” Cordes: “-make her a decided underdog in this blue-leaning state.” — CBS Evening News , September 15. “She needs to watch some porn and get some tips, is what she needs.” — Host Joy Behar on CNN’s Headline News Joy Behar Show , September 15. Are Republicans “Miscalculating At Their Own Peril”? “You’ve got Delaware, you’ve got Kentucky, you’ve got Alaska, you’ve got Utah, one after another after another. Are all of these Tea Party victories good for the Republican Party?…Even Karl Rove came out and said last night this is — that’s not going to help us get the seat in the long run….I wonder if you’re making a miscalculation at your own peril at, you know, this perceived enthusiasm gap, these people are literally changing the face of a party.” — CBS Early Show co-host Harry Smith to GOP consultant Dan Bartlett, Sept. 15. Katie Frets: Are “Moderate Republicans…an Endangered Species”? “The party crashers. Big primary victories by fringe candidates open a rift in the GOP….Does this mean moderate Republicans are becoming an endangered species?” — Anchor Katie Couric on the CBS Evening News , September 16. Flashback : “[Senator Arlen] Specter’s a Republican who favors abortion rights, is against a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, and is a vocal supporter of embryonic stem cell research. [to Specter] Do you feel like an endangered species these days?” — Couric to then-Republican Senator Arlen Specter on NBC’s Today , May 13, 2005. “What’s So Good About” Bush’s Failed Tax Cuts? “One of the key issues also heading into the midterm elections, is this expiration of the tax cuts, Bush’s tax cuts….These tax cuts have been in existence for quite a while, these Bush tax cuts. If they were designed to stimulate the economy and to create jobs, they didn’t succeed. So what’s so good about them?” — Co-host Meredith Vieira to GOP Representatives Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan and Kevin McCarthy on NBC’s Today , September 14. In the five years after the full tax cut package was passed in 2003, the economy added more than 8.3 million new jobs. Sawyer: Not Raising Tax Rates = “Tax Cut” “Good evening. It will be the big battle to the finish line in November, and this is the question: How big a tax cut will you get next year?” — ABC’s Diane Sawyer opening World News , September 8, talking about the debate over whether to maintain current tax rates or let them rise to Clinton-era levels. Was $862 Billion Stimulus “Big Enough?” How About “a New WPA?” “Gretchen Morgenson, I want to go back to the stimulus….People complain about the size of government, they’re complaining about the deficit, they’re complaining about TARP and who knows what all else. As we’re standing here looking at it right now, just if you can step away, was the stimulus big enough?” “There are plenty of economists out there, Mark Zandi, who say what’s really needed is is a second stimulus.” “Laura Tyson, what about a more significant stimulus, beyond the things, these, you know, a block here, a block here, a block here, but another say couple hundred billion dollars, what about, say, something like a new WPA?” — Fill-in host Harry Smith interviewing a panel of economists on CBS’s Face the Nation , September 5. Applauding Obama’s Four-Star Attorney General Correspondent Rita Braver: “Ignoring political pressure is Holder’s constant message as he talks to Justice Department lawyers in places like Mobile, Alabama….When he took office last February, [cheering crowd] he got a hero’s welcome. It was in part, he believes, a reaction to cronyism and questionable policies advocated in the Bush-era Justice Department….[to Holder] Because you’re the first African American Attorney General, do you put any extra pressure on yourself?” Attorney General Eric Holder: “Yeah, I certainly feel that. I feel there’s a certain responsibility I have….” — CBS’s Sunday Morning , September 12. George’s “Tough Questions” for President Obama “Now, in his first post-summer interview, President Obama takes on George Stephanopoulos and the tough questions.” — ABC promo aired during the September 8 Nightline , touting Stephanopoulos’ interview with Obama. vs . “I wonder what this must feel like from behind your desk. You’re President of the United States. You have to deal with the fallout. And he’s a pastor who’s got 30 followers in his church. Does it make you feel helpless or angry?” — ABC’s George Stephanopoulos asking President Obama about the Florida pastor who threatened to burn Korans, in an interview segment shown on Good Morning America , September 9. The GOP = “The Party of Hate” “Tonight, we start with the party of hate. The Republican Party in this country has been running on hate and division for the last 50 years….What black person, gay guy or girl, immigrant or Muslim American in their right mind would vote for the Republican Party? They might as well hang a sign around their neck saying, ‘I hate myself.'” — Fill-in host Cenk Uygur on MSNBC’s The Ed Show, August 26. Is America’s Islamophobia Suppressing Muslims’ Freedom? “The plans to build an Islamic center close to Ground Zero have whipped up anti-Muslim sentiment….Not since 9/11 has the country seen such anti-Muslim fervor….[to Feisal Abdul Rauf] In the latest poll that ABC’s conducted, only 37 percent of those who were asked expressed a positive feeling about Islam. Do you think that Muslims, people such as yourself, others here, can actually have a place to practice their religion freely, to live freely as Americans, given that figure?” — Host Christiane Amanpour interviewing the imam organizing the Ground Zero mosque on ABC’s This Week , September 12. Columnist Mimics Jennings’ 1994 Tirade Slamming Voters’ “Temper Tantrum” “According to polls, Americans are in a mood to hold their breath until they turn blue. Voters appear to be so fed up with the Democrats that they’re ready to toss them out in favor of the Republicans — for whom, according to those same polls, the nation has even greater contempt. This isn’t an ‘electoral wave,’ it’s a temper tantrum….The American people are acting like a bunch of spoiled brats.” — Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, September 3. Flashback : “Imagine a nation full of uncontrolled two-year-old rage. The voters had a temper tantrum last week….Parenting and governing don’t have to be dirty words: the nation can’t be run by an angry two-year-old.” — ABC’s Peter Jennings in a November 14, 1994 radio commentary after the GOP congressional victories that year. “Well-Meaning” Hostage Taker “May” Have Gone Too Far “He’s an activist, may be very well-meaning, but he’s now put himself in a situation where he, the police officers and his hostages’ lives are endangered….He’s a bit of an activist, a guy who truly believes, seemingly, in his heart that he needs to do all he can to save the planet. Most watching this would argue he may have taken it way too far on this day….” — CNN’s Rick Sanchez during live coverage of the Sept. 1 stand-off at the Discovery Channel. The hostage-taker claimed human beings were “parasites” and demanded the network shows programs talking about “ways to disassemble civilization.” Incoming CNN Host Will Fit Right In “I’d love to do President Obama. I like what he’s done for the reputation of America abroad, which I’m not sure many Americans fully understand.” — British journalist Piers Morgan, who has been hired to replace Larry King as host of CNN’s 9pm ET hour starting in January, on the September 9 CBS Early Show talking about people he would like to interview. Now, Chris Admits to Thrills “All Over” Clip of Barack Obama from 2008: “My family gave me love. They give me an education. And most of all, they gave me hope. Hope, hope that in America, no dream is beyond our grasp if we reach for it, and fight for it, and work for it.” MSNBC’s Chris Matthews: “I get the same thrill up my leg, all over me, every time I hear those words. I’m sorry, ladies and gentlemen, that’s me. He’s talking about my country and nobody does it better. Can President Obama stir us again and help his party keep power this November?” — Setting up a segment on MSNBC’s Hardball , September 7.

George Will Smacks Down Beinart’s Claim Sarah Palin Is GOP’s George McGovern

George Will on Sunday refuted Peter Beinart’s claim that former governor Sarah Palin is the Republicans’ George McGovern. As NewsBusters previously reported , Beinart appearing on ABC’s “This Week” claimed the GOP today resembles the Democrat Party between 1968 and 1972 when McGovern took it over and moved it so far to the left that it no longer represented the views of average Americans. This ended up harming the Democrats in the long run leading Beinart to conclude, “The Republicans will do great in 2010, but I think Sarah Palin is really the Republicans’ George McGovern.” Will smartly responded (video follows with partial transcript and commentary): GEORGE WILL: But eight months ago, the worry was the worst case analysis for Republicans was that the Tea Party energies would be diverted in a third party candidacy splitting the conservative vote in this country. Sarah Palin, think of her what you will, has brought them into the Republican Party, and they are one of the main reasons for what is going to be probably decisive in November and that is the enormous enthusiasm and intensity gap that favors the Republicans this year.  Indeed. The fear of the conventional wisdom punditry months ago was that the Tea Party would be so divisive it would result in third party candidates splintering the conservative vote. So far the only such “insurgents” have been sore losers within the GOP establishment like Florida’s Charlie Crist and Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski who refuse to be good Party members and get on board the winner’s bandwagon.   Congressional Quarterly’s Craig Crawford made a similar point on Sunday’s “Reliable Sources”: The thing about the Tea Party that strikes me is it’s very similar in particularly their fiscal conservative views to the Perot movement. And this argument that they’re bad for Republicans doesn’t wash as much with me because as least they’re inside the Republican Party. The Perot people were outside the party and much more damaging to Republicans.   Exactly, which means that liberal media members like Beinart continue to either misunderstand what’s going on with this movement or just choose to dishonestly misrepresent it in order to assist the Party they really  support.  Readers are encouraged to review Brent Baker’s ” Tea Parties Will Lead to 1964-Like Goldwater Debacle…No, Make that a 1972-Like McGovern Drubbing .”  

See the article here:
George Will Smacks Down Beinart’s Claim Sarah Palin Is GOP’s George McGovern

Krauthammer Smacks Down WaPo’s King Over Palin and Tea Party Agenda

Charles Krauthammer on Friday had a heated debate with the Washington Post’s Colby King over what the Tea Party stands for as well as who its leader is. As the panel on PBS’s “Inside Washington” discussed Delaware Republican senatorial nominee Christine O’Donnell’s surprising victory Tuesday, the conversation naturally gravitated towards the conservative movement reshaping the face of politics.   “They [the Tea Party] have a litmus test that goes into being right to life, social conservative issues that they’re strong on,” said King. Krauthammer pounced, “Look, I hate to say this, but I think that is completely wrong.” The battle was on (video follows with transcript and commentary):  COLBY KING, WASHINGTON POST: They [the Tea Party] have a litmus test that goes into being right to life, social conservative issues that they’re strong on. No, they would get rid of the IRS if they could. There is no room, there is no room for compromise because compromise is a bad word as far as they’re concerned. CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: Look, I hate to say this, but I think that is completely wrong. The Tea Party has distinguished itself in being almost exclusively about governance, the reach of governance, taxation, economic issues. It is not the social conservatives. In fact, that is what distinguishes it. And I think the other element that is being missed here is it arose spontaneously as a reaction to an extremely aggressive, extremely ambitious left liberal administration that instead of, for example, attacking tax reform – which had it tried that at the beginning of its administration would have had bipartisan agreement and great success, as Reagan in ’86 – it decided it wants a reform of health care which nobody at the time thought was the major issue in the time of economic recession. KING: You just can’t rewrite the rules. I mean, Sarah Palin didn’t even come to the state of Maryland but endorsed the Republican opponent of Governor Ehrlich only on the basis of a checklist. KRAUTHAMMER: Palin is not Tea Party. She is not Tea Party the titular head or at all. KING: She is a major… KRAUTHAMMER: The Tea Party is a spontaneous, leaderless movement which is economic and not social conservative. KING: I get mail all the time from the Tea Party of Florida for example there, Tea Party spokesman from around the country, they, they exist as a unit. As readers can see, Krauthammer might think the Republican Party would have been better suited if Mike Castle won Tuesday evening, but he still is an outspoken conservative ready to smack down media members when they’re wrong. Despite many Tea Party supporters’ disappointment over his views on O’Donnell, America would be far better off with more straight-shooting commentators like Krauthammer.

Visit link:
Krauthammer Smacks Down WaPo’s King Over Palin and Tea Party Agenda

Donnis To Join Matt & Kim On Tour

‘They’re like the king and queen of hipster music,’ upstart Atlanta MC says of hitting the road with dance/punk duo for a few October dates. By Jayson Rodriguez Donnis Photo: MTV News Donnis is a busy man these days, he recently put out two mixtapes: The Invitation, hosted by DJ Holiday and Infamous, and Fashionably Late helmed by Clinton Sparks, DJ Ill Will and Rockstar. Now the Atlanta rapper has just put the finishing touches on his first EP, also titled Fashionably Late and due September 28. Donnis shot a video with BBGun (the Roots, J.Cole) for “Tonight,” the first offering from the EP, in Tokyo. The location is significant because Donnis was once stationed in the region while serving in the military. And now the upstart is gearing up to head out on tour with dance/punk duo Matt & Kim. “We’re about to do the East Coast and the whole southern region,” Donnis told MTV News. “It’s something a little different for me. A lot of people are like, ‘Why are Matt & Kim and Donnis going on tour?’ But I’m a huge fan of theirs and they’re a huge fan of mine. At first I was like, ‘I don’t know.’ But we have a great relationship and I’m a huge fan of their music. I think a lot of people are a huge fan of their music . A lot of people talk about hipster music, and they’re like the king and queen of hipster music, so it’s awesome to be rolling with them. I’m excited.” The tour is a promo run for the release of Matt & Kim’s Sidewalks album and it kicked off this week landing in Columbus Ohio on Friday (September 17). Donnis will join the bill on October 14 in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and stay on through the October 31 date in New York. Tour dates, according to Matt & Kim’s label:

Rachel Maddow Hits Two-Year Mark at MSNBC With Signature Dishonesty

Not how I’d mark an anniversary, but MSNBC is flexible in its alleged standards. On Sept. 8, Rachel Maddow told viewers it was two years since her cable show started on MSNBC. And what better way to enter her third year of televised liberal polemics than with Maddow’s trademark melding of smarm and deceit.  The following night, Maddow railed at Newt Gingrich and Citizens United for producing and marketing a documentary warning Americans of the threat from radical Islam, after she complained about Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck charging admission to a meet-and-greet on Saturday, the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks (first of four parts in embedded video) — Do you want to know who else has realized the merchandising potential of the 9/11 anniversary this year? In partnership with Citizens United — yes, the same Citizens United that won the Supreme Court case that says corporations can pour limitless cash into American elections — former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has put together a very scary new movie. It’s called ‘America At Risk’ and they have decided to give ‘America at Risk’ its national launch date on (pause) 9/11, whereupon it can be yours for the low, low price of $19.95 plus $4 shipping and handling. Act now, operators are standing by. The trailer for the new launched-on-/9/11 movie is already up online. Here’s an excerpt and I actually should tell you up front that I admit to modifying this excerpt to be able to put it on this TV show in a way that allows me to live with myself. For the first few seconds of this video, I’m not actually going to show you the video part of what Newt Gingrich decided to put on screen while making the argument you will hear him making here. Because the video in the original, the video that he shows while making this argument, the images he chooses to use to sell this stuff, what he is showing is graphic video, graphic video from the real 9/11. And I am not going to help him market that. So, I will show you this clip so you know what this is, you will hear what he says, but I am not going to show the 9/11 ‘sploitation video that he shows while he says it. Ah, how noble. And the “graphic” images Maddow couldn’t bear to share with viewers? There were two, blurred out of focus by Maddow (and both can be seen at the trailer here , starting at 1:01) — the towers from a distance of about a half-mile, the north tower burning, the south tower not yet hit. The second image is of a man giving his coat to a female traffic cop at a dust-clogged Ground Zero and the woman quickly putting the coat to her face to help her breathe or cover an injury. The fleeting images are seen for all of three seconds, if that. One could make the argument that every image from 9/11 is graphic and painful to witness. What Maddow claims here as especially graphic is a stretch, to put it kindly.The first of the two images is smoke billowing from one of the towers, from a distance, with not a single person visible in the frame. Given the brevity of the footage of that follows, of the woman holding a coat to her face, it is difficult to determine if she had been burned or otherwise injured or was gasping for breath.  What Maddow does here is a version of what liberals have done for nearly a decade — airbrushing 9/11 from our history. Toward that end, they stake a proprietary claim to any and all images from the atrocity, at least when cited by conservatives, and proceed to deem the images too graphic for public consumption. Why? To avoid the most awkward question of all — why did it happen? Such discourse leads inevitably to Iraq, as liberals are keenly aware. Not to Iraq as complicit in the planning and execution of the attack, of which there is no evidence. No, Iraq as the rationale for al Qaeda attacking to begin with, due to the jihadists’ towering twin grievances of infidel troops in the Peninsula of Muhammad and UN sanctions on Iraq for flouting Security Council resolutions to disarm in good faith. Maddow also talked on Sept. 9 about the controversy surrounding Dove World Outreach Center pastor Terry Jones’s vow to burn copies of the Koran on the 9/11 anniversary. Members of the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan., notorious for their obnoxious protests outside the funerals of American soldiers, claimed to have burned a Koran in public in Washington, D.C., in 2007, and garnered scant attention. Here’s Maddow’s take on then and now (second clip in embedded video, starting at 2:24) — What’s different now, the reason no one paid attention to crazy Fred Phelps’ Koran-burning antics and almost literally everyone in the country is paying attention to the Koran-burning antics of this equally crazy Florida guy, is because today the sentiment behind I’m-a-crazy-guy-who’s-gonna-burn-me-some-Korans-on-9/11 is being carried into the mainstream by a current of extreme anti-Muslim, we’re-at-war-with-Islam rhetoric. You really want to know why we’re all suddenly paying attention to one lunatic in Florida who’s been threatening to burn copies of the Koran? This is why — … whereupon Maddow shows an excerpt from the “America at Risk” trailer again, starting with remarks by Newt and Callista Gingrich — as if the Gingriches and this documentary warning of radical Islam motivated Jones in his vow to burn copies of the Koran. For anyone not in a coma over the last month, a more obvious explanation comes to mind — Jones was responding to Imam Rauf’s proposal to build an “Islamic community center” near Ground Zero, and doing so in an equally odious, constitutionally protected provocation. After the “America at Risk” trailer is shown again, Maddow says this (starting at 3:24 in video) — Not just crazy guys who scream at house plants, like the Florida pastor, but supposedly serious political figures like Newt Gingrich have been banging this drum on the right that we in America are at war with Islam. Not with terrorists, with Islam, with an entire religion, with anybody who is a Muslim. And that’s why we’re all talking about the Koran-burning kook in Florida. Sorry, no. The actual reason “we’re all talking” about this is due to allegedly moderate Imam Rauf, the one who describes America as “sharia compliant,” and who humbly seeks to build a Muslim shrine — in a building damaged on 9/11. (In other words, at Ground Zero) That’s the context here, Ms. Maddow, your grasping contortions to the contrary. For Maddow to say Gingrich claims America is at war with “Islam”, with “an entire religion,” isn’t just a stretch, it’s dishonest. Gingrich — as he has since well before 9/11 — is warning of the peril from radical, militant Islam, not Islam itself. It’s not just in the trailer to “America at Risk” where Gingrich makes this distinction. While the documentary was being made, Gingrich spoke at the American Enterprise Institute in late July on the same subject and said this (link to transcript here ; first quote on page 10) — Let me just say I believe that it is very important to draw a distinction between radical jihadis, which I define simply (as) those people who seek to impose sharia, and those Muslims who seek to practice their religion within a framework of the modern world. I would allow each Muslim to define themselves in that sense, but I would be unequivocal about the fact that radical Islamists are not compatible with the modern world and not compatible with civilization as we know it and therefore we are engaged in a long struggle. To Maddow and her ilk, any criticism of radical Islam becomes condemnation of all Muslims, just as any criticism of a (liberal) person of color is immediately deemed racist.  Later in her show Sept. 9, while talking with New York Times columnist Gail Collins, Maddow make this telling remark (third part of video, starting at 3:50) — MADDOW: I made the case in the opening segment, in which I yelled and I’m sorry but I feel a little emotional about it, that the reason that this is getting driven the way it is, and sort of why this kook guy without a congregation who otherwise would be very happily ignored by everybody involved in the creation of news in this country … … which is how Maddow sees her role, “happily” involved in the “creation of news” — as opposed to “coverage” of news. You know, the sort of thing done by actual journalists. “Creation of news,” for example, taking the form of ignoring actual threats to this country — from jihadists — while manufacturing alleged threats, from those warning of jihad.  Maddow revisited the “America at Risk” documentary the following night after showing remarks from President Obama at his press conference that day, juxtaposed with those from President George W. Bush after 9/11 (final clip in video, starting at 4:11) — MADDOW: It sounds like all-American rhetoric when a president, any president, makes the case that Muslim-Americans are Americans too, that we are at war with terrorists, we’re not at war with Islam, that religious freedom wasn’t just a founding principle of this country, it is a living principle of this country. Yes, you heard right — “we are at war with terrorists.” Mark your calendar, it’s not often you hear a left winger acknowledge this. And hitting high above her average, Maddow gets it two-thirds’ correct. Yes, we’re at war. Yes, it’s with terrorists. What she can’t bear to point out is that we’re not at war with Basque or Tamil Tigers or any of dozens of other terrorist groups around the world — it’s with Islamic terrorists. Such is the practice of useful idiocy. As Gingrich also said at the American Enterprise Institute in July (transcript here , page 10 for following quote) — The left’s refusal to tell the truth about the Islamist threat is a natural parallel to the 70-year pattern of left-wing intellectuals refusing to tell the truth about communism and the Soviet Union. If you go back and look at all the years of disinformation, all the years of denial, that were the left’s response to communism, why would you think that the next threat to Western civilization will be more accurately studied? This is why the secular-socialist system is itself such a threat. It is the natural pattern of secular-socialist intellectuals to prefer our opponents to us and to accept their lies over our truths. If you doubt that, go look at any study of the 70-year pattern in which the left consistently apologized for the Soviet empire, and look at the shock of the left when Ronald Reagan described the evil empire. Or the pattern of the last decade in which the left demanded that jihadists were spared from harsh interrogation, and condemned Bush and Cheney as greater war criminals than bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.

Visit link:
Rachel Maddow Hits Two-Year Mark at MSNBC With Signature Dishonesty

George Stephanopoulos: Should Threat of Koran Burning Make Us Rethink First Amendment?

ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on Tuesday wondered if a Florida pastor’s threat to burn a Koran could “change” and “challenge” the meaning of the First Amendment. [MP3 audio here .] Talking to Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, the Good Morning America host speculated, “When you think about the internet and when you think about the possibility that, you know, a pastor in Florida with a flock of 30, can threaten to burn the Koran and that leads to riots and killings in Afghanistan, does that pose a challenge to the First Amendment, to how you interpret it?” Stephanopoulos followed-up, ” Does [the threat of the Koran burning] change the nature of what we can allow and protect?” The ABC host didn’t explain expand on how the First Amendment “changes” in light of an unpopular action such as a Koran burning. Stephanopoulos, a former top aide to Bill Clinton, fawned over Breyer, a judge selected for the Supreme Court by the same Democratic President. The justice was appearing on the show to promote his new book on democracy. Stephanopoulos gushed, “I love the title of this new book, Making Our Democracy Work. And that’s not only the title of the book, but it’s also your mission. And you believe for that to happen, people have to understand our institutions and be engaged with them.” A transcript of the segment, which aired at 8:41am EDT, follows: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: The national and international debate over that Florida pastor who threatened to burn the Koran hit a boiling point last week. And for now, the issue is being batted around the court of public opinion. But it could end up in a court of law. Perhaps, even, the Supreme Court. That’s one of the topics I discussed with Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, when he stopped by to discuss his new book, Making our Democracy Work. I love the title of this new book, Making Our Democracy Work. And that’s not only the title of the book, but it’s also your mission. And you believe for that to happen, people have to understand our institutions and be engaged with them. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE STEPHEN BREYER: Yes. STEPHANOPOULOS: How do they do it? BREYER: Well, the first step is to know what it is that we do, know how your legislature works, how your governor works, how your mayors work, how your courts work. STEPHANOPOULOS: You also in this book plumb, I guess what you call something of a mystery, because it didn’t have to turn out that way, that we built up in our tradition, the norm that when the Supreme Court decides something, the public tends to follow. BREYER: There’s a history in this country, of bad events and marvelous events. And over time, it’s led to a general acceptance of the court, of having the last word on most constitutional issues, even when they are wrong. STEPHANOPOULOS: That was really tested that idea, when you were sitting on Bush V. Gore, the 2000 election, you wrote at the time, you were against it. BREYER: Yes, I was. STEPHANOPOULOS: You said it was a self-inflicted wound that hurt the court. BREYER: Yes. STEPHANOPOULOS: But, you also point out, and you’re write about this in your book, that one of the most remarkable things about this divisive case that decided, in many ways, a presidential election, was that the people accepted that. BREYER: I heard Senator Reid say that. STEPHANOPOULOS: The Democratic leader in the Senate. BREYER: Yes. He said one of the most remarkable about that case is one of the things least remarked. Nobody remarks it because it’s so natural. Here is a case that’s very unpopular, that in my opinion, as a dissenter, was wrong . And yet, the public did not start shooting each other. STEPHANOPOULOS: How do you explain that? BREYER: I explain that. That’s a really good question. You have to learn about history in the United States. We had a Civil War. We’ve had 80 years of legal segregation. We’ve had many ups and downs. But over time, the public has come to accept the need to have an institution that will protect minority rights. STEPHANOPOULOS: One of the tangible symbols that expresses this idea that the institutions have to work together, is the idea that every year, you all, members of the court, go to the President’s State of the Union address. It became a remarkable moment, when President Obama criticized the Citizens United case, where you were actually on the same side as President Obama. You were in the minority. But, he criticized the case. And Justice Alito got visibly upset. It provoked this reaction from chief Justice Roberts. I want to show you this. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS: The image of having the members of one branch of government, standing up, literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering, while the court, according to the requirements of protocol, has to sit there expressionless, I find troubling. STEPHANOPOULOS: Did you find it troubling? BREYER: I’ve been there for a while. [Laughs] As you have in your job, people say all kinds of things about someone in public life. Sometimes they agree. Sometimes they disagree. My job is not to say things that criticize me or others on our court. My job is to do it as best I can. STEPHANOPOULOS: But, he’s walked away from that saying, perhaps he won’t go in the future. Justice O’Connor when I talked to her about it in the future says she would rethink her attendance. Does it make you rethink your tradition of going? BREYER: No, no. STEPHANOPOULOS: Why not? BREYER: Because I think the reason that I want to go, and I think that the reason we should be there, is because, particularly today, where for better or for worse, people get lots of their information visually. It shows in that room, this is your federal government. The President is there. The cabinet is there. The, the Congress is there. The Joint Chiefs are there. And I’d like some of the judges to be there, too, because the judges have a role in this government. STEPHANOPOULOS: Even if you’re the only one there. BREYER: Even if I’m the only one, I’ll be the only one. But, I’ll do that because I believe very, very strongly in this. STEPHANOPOULOS: You know, when we spoke several years ago, you talked about how the process of globalization was changing our understanding of the law. When you think about the internet and when you think about the possibility that, you know, a pastor in Florida with a flock of 30, can threaten to burn the Koran and that leads to riots and killings in Afghanistan, does that pose a challenge to the First Amendment, to how you interpret it? Does it change the nature of what we can allow and protect? BREYER: Well, in a sense, yes. In a sense, no. People can express their views in debate. No matter how awful those views are. In debate. A conversation. People exchanging ideas. That’s the model. So that, in fact, we are better informed when we cast that ballot. Those core values remain. How they apply can- STEPHANOPOULOS: The conversation is now global. BREYER: Indeed. And you can say, with the internet, you can say this. Holmes said, it doesn’t mean you can shout fire in a crowded theater. Well, what is it? Why? Well people will be trampled to death. What is the crowded theater today? What is- STEPHANOPOULOS: That’s exactly my question. BREYER: Yes. Well, perhaps that will be answered by- if it’s answered, by our court. It will be answered over time, in a series of cases, which force people to think carefully. That’s the virtue of cases. STEPHANOPOULOS: When we last spoke, when you wrote your last book, you had been on the court for about ten years. Yet, you were still the junior justice. BREYER: I was. STEPHANOPOULOS: That’s no longer true. You now have Justice Sotomayor. Soon, Justice Kagan is going to be joining you as well. You talked about how before your first session of court, you were nervous. I was just wondering if you have advice for Justice Kagan as she prepares for that. BREYER: She will be nervous. But, don’t worry about it. There’s no way not to be nervous. For quite a while, the cases- now, they will be final. There’s no one to appeal to. And there is an instinct of everyone to be a little uncertain. To be a little unsure about whether my views, in my case, will I be able to answer these decently? Will I make some terrible mistake? I surely hope not. And that lasts for a while. It takes a while to adjust. STEPHANOPOULOS: Justice Breyer, thanks very much.

View original post here:
George Stephanopoulos: Should Threat of Koran Burning Make Us Rethink First Amendment?

CBS Analyst Marks 9/11 By Hoping For ‘Backlash’ Against Ground Zero Mosque Opponents

On the September 11th Saturday Early Show, CBS News Middle East analyst Reza Aslan slammed opponents of the Ground Zero mosque as having “unapologetically politicized” 9/11 and being part of a “whole wave of anti-Muslim sentiment.” While he denounced others for trying to “take advantage of this symbol for their own political purposes,” Aslan made his comments only seconds after live coverage of the first moment of silence for victims of the 2001 terrorist attacks. Co-host Chris Wragge accepted Aslan’s characterization of the controversy and responded: “…this is not an opportunity to add controversy into the mix. If there’s one day, you know what, to keep our mouths quiet and let’s just reflect on the lives lost, today is it, you don’t mess with that.” Aslan followed up by admitting: “I’ll be honest with you, I hope that there is kind of a backlash against what’s going on right now. As you know, at 1pm today there’ll be a rally in support of the so-called Park 51 project, at 3pm there’ll be this international rally against it. So, I’m hoping that Americans all over the country see these images and think we’ve gone too far.” He later specifically condemned mosque opponents: “…particularly in the case of this sort of international anti-Islam rally that’s being brought by this group called Stop Islamization of America. And they’re inviting all these European anti-Muslim politicians in to speak. I mean, that’s really now taking this to a whole other level.”    Wragge also brought up Florida Pastor Terry Jones’s initial plans to burn the Koran on Saturday which were later cancelled: “It just seems as though we’re kind of, I don’t know, exacerbating some negative stereotypes that exist out there. I mean, can Muslims look at what’s going on here and say we can take – we can maybe hopefully take a positive away from this at some point?” Aslan replied: “I think Muslims in the United States can….Now, if you’re in Egypt or Syria, you don’t see that part. As far as you’re concerned, this isn’t about a crazy pastor, this is about America and anti-Islam fervor in the United States.” At the top of the broadcast, Wragge interviewed Dr. Zuhdi Jassar, a Muslim scholar opposed to the Ground Zero mosque. Jasser proposed a very different course of action from Aslan: “…it’s time for Muslims to look less about promoting ourselves, less about victimology, and more about feeling the pain of the families of 9/11 and understanding what we have to do to repair the house of Islam.” Wragge still attempted to mischaracterize mosque opposition: “Do you feel that – that since 9/11 America has become Islamophobic, so to speak?” Jasser replied: “I have to tell you absolutely not. I do think that we’re becoming – we’re getting a crash course on Islam and I we think we Muslims have to do more work to separate spiritual Islam of the faith that we love from political Islam that creates the Nidal Hasans, the Faisal Shahzads and has a continuum from moderate to radical…. It’s a fight within the house of Islam that we need to focus in and not just focus on victimology.” Here is a full transcript of Aslan’s rant: 8:46AM SEGMENT: CHRIS WRAGGE: You’re looking at live pictures of Ground Zero. Nine years ago today, American Airlines Flight 11 crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center right there. Every year on September 11th at this time we pause to reflect those who lost their lives at Ground Zero, this is the first of four moments of silence. The next will be at 9:03, when the second tower was struck and then again, the two later moments of silence will correspond with the times that the towers fell. Reza Aslan is with us right now, our Middle East expert here at CBS, to talk a bit about the way the world has changed here the last nine years with what’s been going on, especially here the last few weeks, with this controversy of the Islamic center downtown. And let’s begin with that. Your thoughts on what’s transpired and how now, you know, with this Pastor Jones, how it’s really kind of taken on a life of its own here. REZA ASLAN: Well, I think the thing that’s most surprising to a lot of Americans is the way in which 9/11, and particularly Ground Zero, has become so unapologetically politicized in a way that, I think, is surprising to a lot of Americans. That would have been surprising even a year ago. Now, what is the cause for that? Some might say that the Islamic community center, you know, sparked this whole wave of anti-Muslim sentiment but I think maybe we’re far enough away, nine years now, where people do feel like they can take advantage of this symbol for their own political purposes. WRAGGE: You think, though, that’s a big chance to take? Because the one thing that I’m hearing, especially talking from a lot of people not only down in the area, living here in the city, but also family members that say, you know, this is a day of remembrance, reflection, this is a day that changed the world as we know it now, this is not an opportunity to add controversy into the mix. If there’s one day, you know what, to keep our mouths quiet and let’s just reflect on the lives lost, today is it, you don’t mess with that.   ASLAN: And you know I’ll be honest with you, I hope that there is kind of a backlash against what’s going on right now. As you know, at 1pm today there’ll be a rally in support of the so-called Park 51 project, at 3pm there’ll be this international rally against it. So, I’m hoping that Americans all over the country see these images and think we’ve gone too far. This is just too far now. No matter where you fit on this controversy. REBECCA JARVIS: And what’s the end game, then? ASLAN: Well, I think, you know, people are just going to continue to use this to fuel their own political or economic, you know, ideologies, as it is. And I do believe that Mayor Bloomberg said something very interesting. He said that by this time next year, we’ll have the memorial finished. And I do think that once that’s done, then there will no longer be this void, this vacuum, this space that can be filled up with other people’s notions and other people’s ideas. Let’s hope so, anyway. WRAGGE: Today, with these protests that will be going on, those in support, those that are not in favor of this Islamic center downtown at 51 Park, do you think it takes away from what we’re really supposed to be focusing our attention on here? ASLAN: Most definitely. And, you know, particularly in the case of this sort of international anti-Islam rally that’s being brought by this group called Stop Islamization of America. And they’re inviting all these European anti-Muslim politicians in to speak. I mean, that’s really now taking this to a whole other level. The point of this is remembrance, mourning, if anything, we should be coming together as different religions and different ethnicities. JARVIS: I- WRAGGE: I’m sorry. It just seems as though we’re kind of, I don’t know, exacerbating some negative stereotypes that exist out there. I mean, can Muslims look at what’s going on here and say we can take – we can maybe hopefully take a positive away from this at some point? ASLAN: I think Muslims in the United States can. In fact, one of the things that’s most remarkable about this stunt with the Koran burning in Florida, is the enormous response of Muslim, Jewish, and Christian leaders that have come together and really wanted to use this as a way of promoting interfaith cooperation. Now, if you’re in Egypt or Syria, you don’t see that part. As far as you’re concerned, this isn’t about a crazy pastor, this is about America and anti-Islam fervor in the United States. That’s a real problem, we’re engaged in two wars. JARVIS: Reza, thank you. We appreciate you being with us and we will be right back. Here is a full transcript of Wragge’s interview with Jasser: 7:06AM ET SEGMENT: CHRIS WRAGGE: One Muslim scholar is sharply critical of the planned Islamic Community Center and prayer room near Ground Zero. Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser is president of the Islamic Forum for Democracy in Phoenix. Dr. Jasser, thank you for joining us this morning. We appreciate it. ZUHDI JASSER [PRESIDENT, AMERICAN ISLAMIC FORUM FOR DEMOCRACY]: Thanks for having me. It’s a pleasure. WRAGGE: Let me ask you if you heard a second ago, in Elaine Quijano’s piece, there are two competing rallies at Ground Zero today adding controversy to this – this sacred day. How do you feel that this situation can be calmed, if at all? [ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Ground Zero Divided; Rallies Planned For And Against Islamic Center] JASSER: Yeah, I think today is – especially a day as we remember and reflect upon 9/11 and –  and looking over that pit of devastation there and feeling that – and today, we look through that lens as Americans, not as a Muslim, not as of any faith. I – I don’t look through this lens of trying to repair my – trying to promote Islam. It’s about fighting the forces that caused this. And I think if we’re able to unite under that. That’s why 71% of Americans are against this. It’s not because they don’t want mosques there, there’s even other mosques closer. Many of us have built over 2,000 mosques in the United States with very little problem. And – but I think what unites us is the freedoms and liberties that our Constitution gives us and it’s time for Muslims to look less about promoting ourselves, less about victimology, and more about feeling the pain of the families of 9/11 and understanding what we have to do to repair the house of Islam. WRAGGE: You’re a Muslim. You’ve seen this controversy. Do you feel that – that since 9/11 America has become Islamophobic, so to speak? JASSER: I have to tell you absolutely not. I do think that we’re becoming – we’re getting a crash course on Islam and I we think we Muslims have to do more work to separate spiritual Islam of the faith that we love from political Islam that creates the Nidal Hasans, the Faisal Shahzads and has a continuum from moderate to radical. That’s what we have to do to separate them. And there’s some confusion there, understandably, because it’s not a binary equation of good Muslim non-violent, bad Muslim violent. There’s a continuum that’s confusing. But that is some part of the educational process, part of the war of ideas that we have to fight within. This isn’t a fight between Islam and Christianity or Islam and the West. It’s a fight within the house of Islam that we need to focus in and not just focus on victimology. WRAGGE: Can I ask you your – your thoughts on why there was such a visceral reaction to – to Pastor Jones? JASSER: Well, because, book burning has never been anything that’s been followed by anything good in history. Book burning is something that is clearly against the Constitution and the First Amendment and shows a complete disrespect and he’s a speck of humanity of just thirty congregants and doesn’t represent America. But yet, he feeds into the Islamist narrative overseas, across the world, that America is against Islam, America is against Muslims. So he used it to have his fifteen minutes of fame- WRAGGE: Yeah. JASSER: -and it fed into that narrative. WRAGGE: Alright. Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, thank you very much for taking the time. We appreciate it. JASSER: Thank you for having me. WRAGGE: Alright.

See the original post here:
CBS Analyst Marks 9/11 By Hoping For ‘Backlash’ Against Ground Zero Mosque Opponents

A123 Systems Opens North-America’s Largest Lithium-Ion Battery Plant (600MWh/Year)

Image: A123 Systems A Shiny New 291,000-Square-Foot Factory A123 Systems, the makers of advanced lithium-ion batteries, have just opened a new battery factory in Livonia, Michigan. They claim that “based on available data” it is the largest battery plant in North-America (some manufacturer might be keeping their capacity secret). This new facility should increase A123’s manufacturing capabilities by “up to 600MW hours per year when fully operational, contributing to the company’s plan to expand global final cell assembly capacity to more than 760MW hours annually by the end of 2011. ” That’s a lot of… Read the full story on TreeHugger

See the article here:
A123 Systems Opens North-America’s Largest Lithium-Ion Battery Plant (600MWh/Year)

Unlucky Animal Lover Nearly Loses Another Arm

Photo: Tony Tanoury While it’s often commendable when a passerby goes out of their way to help an animal in need — still, sometimes it’s best to let others handle it. Case in point, meet Alexander Alcantare. This South Florida man loves animals so much that when he offers them a helping hand, there’s a pretty good chance he won’t be getting it back, a lesson he’s learned once before. A while ago, he burned his arm so badly while trying to save a nest of

Continued here:
Unlucky Animal Lover Nearly Loses Another Arm

One Day After Rev. Jones Hits NBC, David Gregory Said No One Should Give Jones a Platform

Rev. Terry Jones may have announced on Saturday’s Today that he wouldn’t be burning any Korans, but on Sunday Today, NBC Meet the Press host David Gregory was suggesting Jones wasn’t worthy of anyone’s airtime: “I don’t see why this pastor Jones has any sort of forum or any platform that’s worthy of discussion.” Did Gregory lose that debate inside NBC? When asked by anchor Jenna Wolfe about the Koran-burning controversy, Gregory insisted that President Obama’s opposition will have a “big impact,” and yet, when asked if this incident would hurt America abroad, he didn’t think so (after all, Obama has been so effective at that outreach to the Muslim world):  WOLFE: So let’s get right to it. So the president said in that speech in DC yesterday, he said, quote, “We are not and never will be at war with Islam.” Again, a message he’s been trying to convey all week. What kind of impact is that going to have? GREGORY: Well, I think it has a big impact. I think the president at the end of the week was able successfully to wade into this controversy about this Florida pastor, get him to stand down, the Quran will not be burned, and what would have been, you know, a small group of hate-mongers, but nevertheless the fear was it could have much wider international implications. I think it is striking nine years later that our leaders are confronted with anti-Muslim sentiment in the country as a primary legacy of 9/11. Yes, the war on terror is still being fought in a robust way around the world, yet even the president on Friday made the point of saying it cannot dominate America’s foreign policy in the way that it has over the past decade. WOLFE: David, Reverend Terry Jones said yesterday on the show here, he will not burn Qurans not this weekend, not any time in the future, but has the damage already been done, both here and potentially abroad as well? GREGORY: I don’t know that it has. I mean, I think it’s been, you know, a big story here and the issue of anti-Muslim sentiment is one that as Americans we have to confront, that our leadership has to confront , and we are doing that in a very, you know, in a varied set of ways, both here and what’s happening overseas. I think the real concern was the image that could have come from those threats of the actual burning of the holy Quran. That’s something that the administration felt would have actually had a direct impact on our troops fighting in places like Afghanistan. WOLFE: Well, let’s talk about what the White House’s role is here. Terry Jones came here to potentially meet with the imam; as far as we know, there has no meeting that’s been set as of yet. Is it the White House’s responsibility to facilitate a meeting between the two at any point? GREGORY: I can’t see any reason why there should be a meeting between the two. I think one doesn’t have anything to do with the other. I mean, it can be sort of conflated neatly. I don’t see why this pastor Jones has any sort of forum or any platform that’s worthy of discussion. You know, he seems rather ignorant about even what his complaints about Islam are. So I don’t think that’s where the discourse ought to be. If there’s going to be discourse, it would seem to me it would make sense that it happens in New York, as a community that’s dealing with what should go where and how that should move forward. I don’t think the pastor has any role in that, and I certainly don’t think the White House wants to broker anything. Despite this toeing of the liberal line, on the last question from Wolfe, Gregory was not sanguine about Obama’s chances of avoiding a big Republican electoral tide.

View original post here:
One Day After Rev. Jones Hits NBC, David Gregory Said No One Should Give Jones a Platform