Tag Archives: Obama

Malveaux Hates Fourth of July – Reminds Her of Slavery and Economic Inequality

If you were African-American living in the era of President Barack Obama, would you hate the Fourth of July because it reminded you of slavery and economic inequality? You would if your name was Julianne Malveaux and you were the syndicated columnist that also serves as the president of Bennett College, the historically black women’s school in Greensboro, North Carolina. So disdainful of America’s most-revered national holiday is Malveaux that she admitted in her July 2 USA Today op-ed , “I have never been big on the Fourth of July. Most years, I took great pleasure in reading the powerful Frederick Douglass speech, ‘The Meaning of July Fourth for the Negro.'” Though written in 1852, this college president actually sees relevance to modern day America in these words: “What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July,” he thundered to a crowd in Rochester, N.Y. “I answer, a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity … your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery.”  Imagine that. A black man is now the most powerful elected leader on the face of the planet. Another black man is the most powerful law enforcement official in the country, and under the previous administration, the Secretaries of State were black, one of them also being a woman. Regardless, the president of a mostly black women’s college sees nothing but racial injustice and economic inequality around her:  Our nation has come a long way since 1852, but for many African Americans, shouts of liberty are still hollow mockery. Unemployment is a scourge on all Americans, but the black unemployment rate, at 15.3% in May, is nearly twice the white rate. Every economic indicator – income, wealth, homeownership – screams inequality. Despite his scathing commentary, Douglass said, “I do not despair of this country.” Nor do I. But progress has been so slowed, optimism so dimmed, and some criticisms of our president so blatantly racial that I’m returning to my ritual of reading Frederick Douglass, if only as a reminder that the struggle for justice and equality must continue. So, in Malveaux’s mind like so many of her ilk, equal opportunity isn’t enough. Until all Americans possess the same things, the nation is unjust. Which means this is not about equal opportunity but equal outcome, an inconvenient truth her kind refuses to admit as they shout “racist” at any white person more successful than them. Of course, what should one expect from a serial-hater that in 1994 actually wished — on national television — for Clarence Thomas to die: I guess for folks like Malveaux, racial and economic equality need only apply to black liberals. Sadly, this is a racial hypocrisy quite common amongst so-called journalists today. Doesn’t make sense, does it?  On the other hand, Malveaux has contributed to The Progressive, a magazine whose editor also hates the Fourth of July. Like peas in a progressive pod. 

More:
Malveaux Hates Fourth of July – Reminds Her of Slavery and Economic Inequality

MUST SEE: Documentary shows hazards of oil contamination on Humans

If anyone has not yet seen the documentary “Crude” I highly suggest you do so. The film highlights the plight of the Equadorian people and their fight against big oil for the contamination of their land and water. Most of the indigenous peoples are suffering and dying due to oil conamination, a possible parallell to the future of our gulf states. http://www.crudethemovie.com/ added by: iloveme_tatertot

Obama’s The Biggest Political Recipient of BP Cash

BP and its employees have given more than $3.5 million to federal candidates over the past 20 years, with the largest chunk of their money going to Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Donations come from a mix of employees and the company's political action committees – $2.89 million flowed to campaigns from BP-related PACs and about $638,000 came from individuals. On top of that, the oil giant has spent millions each year on lobbying — including $15.9 million last year alone — as it has tried to influence energy policy. During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of $77,051 from the oil giant and is the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records….. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64420A20100505 added by: shanklinmike

Fact Checking ABC’s This Week: Most Statements PolitiFact Sees as ‘False’ Uttered by Democrats

Back in April, as ABC’s Jake Tapper took over as interim host of This Week (pending the arrival of ex-CNNer Christiane Amanpour in August), the show asked the fact-checkers at PolitiFact to evaluate the truthfulness of statements made on the show . After nearly three months, the results show far more Democrats and liberals earning a “False” rating, with most of the “True” ratings going to Republicans and conservatives. The discrepency remains even if you take into account that about two-thirds of the evaluated statements came from Democrats in the first place. From April 11 through June 20, PolitiFact has handed out seven “False” statements — six to Democrats/liberals, one to a Republican. During that same time, seven “True” labels were handed out — four for Republicans/conservatives, just two for Democrats (one, ironically, going to former President Bill Clinton). Retired General Colin Powell also picked up a “True” for a statement about the number of troops President Obama has deployed to Afghanistan, but it’s hard to say which side Powell represents these days. PolitiFact is a project of St. Petersburg Times Washington bureau chief Bill Adair, who is a frequent “fact check” guest during election years. Some of the statements hardly seem worthy of a fact-check (such as Clinton’s assertion that he never had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate; who ever said that he did?), but here are the 14 instances of “True” and “False” labeling of statements made on This Week, along with a short quote from PolitiFact’s verdict: Democrats/Liberals : Charles Schumer, April 11: “No one questioned that she (Judge Sotomayor) was out of the mainstream.” FALSE : “We recalled that phrase came up a lot during the Sotomayor confirmation debate, so we did some checking. To start, we direct your attention to a July 13, 2009, AP story under the headline, ‘Sessions: Sonia Sotomayor “out of mainstream.”‘…And Sessions wasn’t the only Republican to invoke the ‘out of the mainstream’ claim….We understand that ‘out of the mainstream’ is a subjective term, but the fact is that a number of Republican senators used that exact phrase.” Former President Bill Clinton, April 18: “I never had a filibuster-proof Senate.” TRUE : “Senate records show Republicans held 43 seats when Clinton came into office, and they added another seat in June of that year with the election of Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas….Republicans won a majority of seats in the Senate in the 1994 elections and retained control of both houses throughout the remainder of Clinton’s presidency.” Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown, April 25: “Fifteen years ago, the assets of the six largest banks in this country totaled 17 percent of GDP … The assets of the six largest banks in the United States today total 63 percent of GDP.” TRUE : “Independent sources and experts confirm that, so we rate his statement True.” HBO Host Bill Maher, May 2: “Brazil got off oil in the last 30 years.” FALSE : “In 2008, Brazil ranked No. 7 on the list of the world’s countries that consume the most oil, using about 2.5 million barrels per day….It’s also embarking on more offshore drilling in some of the deepest waters for exploration. Brazil is hardly ‘off oil.'” Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, June 6: “Every major study that has been done by a legitimate group … shows that there are hundreds of thousands of jobs to be created if you pass our (cap-and-trade) legislation. And if you wind up pricing carbon.” FALSE : “The fact is that other ‘legitimate groups’ have performed studies and reached different conclusions. Kerry’s statement suggests there is some unanimity of opinion among legitimate organizations about cap-and-trade’s effect on jobs. And that’s just not so.” Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas, June 6: Turkey is an Arab country. FALSE : “The one thing that Turkey has in common with the Arab world is religion: An estimated 99.8 percent of the Turkish population is Muslim….Moulitsas has graciously copped to his error (and even invited us to ding him), but the Truth-O-Meter doesn’t cut any slack for confessions.” Democratic strategist Donna Brazile, June 13: The Obama administration “has been constrained by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, which basically gives the responsible party the lead role in trying to not only fix the problem, but contain the problem.” FALSE : “In fact, the Oil Pollution Act specifcially gives the federal government the authority to decide who’s in charge of the clean-up — the polluter or the government. The company, in this case BP, will pay for the clean-up response. But the federal government can give the orders if it chooses.” White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, June 20: “In the case of General Motors, the (Bush) administration wrote a check without asking for any conditions of change.” FALSE : “The Bush administration did put specific requirements on the auto companies that included paying down debt, limits on executive compensation, and negotiated reductions in wages and benefits for autoworkers. It also required the companies to submit detailed restructuring plans by Feb. 17, 2009, that would show how the company planned to achieve and sustain ‘long-term viability, international competitiveness and energy efficiency.'” Republicans/Conservatives : Arizona Senator Jon Kyl, April 11: “President Obama himself attempted to filibuster Justice Alito, who now sits on the Supreme Court.” TRUE : “We found that Obama did join a broader Democratic effort to filibuster Alito. Democrats said Alito opposed abortion and was too deferential to executive power. But in what’s become Obama’s trademark on-the-one-hand, on-the-other-hand style, he joined the filibuster while at the same time saying he thought it was a bad idea.” Jon Kyl, April 11: Says he did not say Republicans would filibuster immigration reform. FALSE : “Kyl’s staff provided us with a transcript and video; they said it showed more context for Kyl’s statement. We reviewed the material; here’s an extended version of Kyl remarks: ‘My guess is, neither (card check and immigration reform) will have the votes to pass. But because political promises have been made to key constituency of the party that is in power, that they’re going to do something about these problems, they will bring up very partisan legislation. Republicans will, primarily Republicans, will vote it down, that is to say we will prevent it from coming up through the filibuster….'” GOP Chairman Michael Steele, May 23: In Hawaii, “they don’t have a history of throwing incumbents out of office.” TRUE : “Depending how you count it, that puts the re-election rate in Hawaii between 98 percent and 100 percent, which is higher than the national average over the same period….No incumbent has ever lost a November congressional election in Hawaii.” Michael Steele, May 23: The Republican Party “fought very hard in the ’60s to get the civil rights bill passed, as well as the voting rights bill.” TRUE : “The degree of Republican support for the two bills actually exceeded the degree of Democratic support, and it’s also fair to say that Republicans took leading roles in both measures, even though they had far fewer seats, and thus less power, at the time.” House Minority Leader John Boehner, June 13: “The House has never failed to pass a budget in the modern era.” TRUE : “According to the Congressional Research Service, the nonpartisan research arm of Congress, the House has indeed passed a budget every year since the Congressional Budget Act first took effect for fiscal year 1976.” Goes Both Ways : Retired General Colin Powell, May 30: “The president has added close to 68,000 troops in the last year, since he came into office, not just the 30,000 you hear, but the others that were added before that.” TRUE : “Obama took office with about 34,000 troops. There are now 94,000 troops and closing in on 98,000 troops by summer. When you count small additions by NATO, that gets us close to 68,000.” As with many political statements, there were many “Mostly True” (5 Dem vs. 2 GOP, plus Joe Lieberman), “Barely True” (2 Dem vs. 1 GOP, plus a BP official), and “Half True” assertions (9 Dem/Lib vs. 2 GOP/Con) catalogued over the past three months. You can see the whole list at PolitiFact.com .

See the original post here:
Fact Checking ABC’s This Week: Most Statements PolitiFact Sees as ‘False’ Uttered by Democrats

First Amendment suspended in the Gulf of Mexico as spill cover-up goes Orwellian

As CNN is now reporting, the U.S. government has issued a new rule that would make it a felony crime for any journalist, reporter, blogger or photographer to approach any oil cleanup operation, equipment or vessel in the Gulf of Mexico. Anyone caught is subject to arrest, a $40,000 fine and prosecution for a federal felony crime. CNN reporter Anderson Cooper says, “A new law passed today, and back by the force of law and the threat of fines and felony charges, … will prevent reporters and photographers from getting anywhere close to booms and oil-soaked wildlife just about any place we need to be. By now you’re probably familiar with cleanup crews stiff-arming the media, private security blocking cameras, ordinary workers clamming up, some not even saying who they’re working for because they’re afraid of losing their jobs.” See the video yourself at: http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=203 Welcome to the (censored) club All I can say to CNN is: Welcome to the club! This kind of censorship, intimidation and tyranny has been going on for decades in the field of health, where the Orwellian FDA has treated the entire U.S. public to a nationwide blackout on truthful health information about healing foods and nutritional supplements. CNN has never covered that story, by the way. Most of the mainstream media has, in fact, gone right along with censorship of truthful health information by the FDA and FTC. Now they’re suddenly crying wolf. But where was the media when the FDA was raiding nutritional supplement companies and arresting people who dared to sell healing foods with honest descriptions about how they might help protect your health? The media went right along with the cover-up and never bothered to even tell its viewers a cover-up was taking place. You see, even CNN is willing to tolerate some Orwellian censorship, as long as its advertisers are okay with it. The only reason they’re talking about censorship in the Gulf of Mexico right now is because oil companies don’t influence enough of their advertising budget to yank the story. Censorship is not okay in a free society I like the fact that CNN is finding the courage to speak up now about this censorship in the Gulf, but I wish they wouldn’t stay silent on the other media blackouts in which they have long participated. Media censorship is bad for any nation, and it should be challenged regardless of the topic at hand. When the media is not allowed to report the truth on a subject — any subject! — the nation suffers some loss as a result. Without the light of media scrutiny, corporations and government will get away with unimaginable crimes against both humanity and nature. That’s what’s happening right now in the Gulf of Mexico: A crime against nature. Obama doesn’t want you to see that crime. He’s covering it up to the benefit of BP. He’s keeping you in the dark by threatening reporters and photographers with arrest. How’s that for “total transparency?” The only thing transparent here is that President Barack Obama has violated his own oath of office by refusing to defend the Constitution.(cont) http://bizgov.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/adm-allen-22.jpg added by: samantha420

MSM Wall Protecting Obama Gulf Oil Spill Response Cracks With Latest AP Report

Perhaps it is frustration, as expressed by Anderson Cooper , with the new White House rules inhibiting reports about the Gulf of Mexico oil spill that is now causing a big crack in the Mainstream Media wall which until recently mostly avoided direct criticism of the Obama administration response. However that crack has now turned into a flood of surprising criticism coming from formerly friendly outlets such as the Associated Press. Read this amazing AP report and keep in mind that it is no longer just conservative sources that are harsh in their criticisms of the Obama Gulf oil containment efforts: NEW ORLEANS — BP and the Obama administration face mounting complaints that they are ignoring foreign offers of equipment and making little use of the fishing boats and volunteers available to help clean up what may now be the biggest spill ever in the Gulf of Mexico. The Coast Guard said there have been 107 offers of help from 44 nations, ranging from technical advice to skimmer boats and booms. But many of those offers are weeks old, and only a small number have been accepted. The vast majority are still under review, according to a list kept by the State Department. Ouch! But the criticism of the poor reponse of the Obama administration response to this crises becomes even more heated: A report prepared by investigators with the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform for Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., detailed one case in which the Dutch government offered April 30 to provide four oil skimmers that collectively could process more than 6 million gallons of oily water a day. It took seven weeks for the U.S. to approve the offer. Even the credibility of the Coast Guard is being called into question: Billy Nungesser, president of Louisiana’s hard-hit Plaquemines Parish, said BP and the Coast Guard provided a map of the exact locations of 140 skimmers that were supposedly cleaning up the oil. But he said that after he repeatedly asked to be flown over the area so he could see them at work, officials told him only 31 skimmers were on the job. Something seems to have shifted dramatically in the past few days in MSM coverage of this crises.  And was this the reason for the “transparent” Obama administration attempting to inhibit coverage of the Gulf oil spill?

See original here:
MSM Wall Protecting Obama Gulf Oil Spill Response Cracks With Latest AP Report

White House Enacts Rules Inhibiting Media From Covering Oil Spill

The White House Thursday enacted stronger rules to prevent the media from showing what’s happening with the oil spill in the Gulf Coast. CNN’s Anderson Cooper reported that evening, “The Coast Guard today announced new rules keeping photographers and reporters and anyone else from coming within 65 feet of any response vessel or booms out on the water or on beaches — 65 feet.” He elaborated, “Now, in order to get closer, you have to get direct permission from the Coast Guard captain of the Port of New Orleans. You have to call up the guy. What this means is that oil-soaked birds on islands surrounded by boom, you can’t get close enough to take that picture.” As the segment continued, Cooper expressed disgust with this rule repeating several times, “We are not the enemy here” (video follows with transcript and commentary, h/t Cubachi via Hot Air ): ANDERSON COOPER, HOST: But we begin, as we do every night, “Keeping Them Honest”. This time, however, we’re not talking about BP. We’re talking about the government, a new a rule announced today backed by the force of law and the threat of fines and felony charges, a rule that will prevent reporters and photographers and anyone else from getting anywhere close to booms and oil-soaked wildlife and just about any place we need to be. By now, you’re probably familiar with cleanup crews stiff-arming the media, private security blocking cameras, ordinary workers clamming up, some not even saying who they’re working for because they’re afraid of losing their jobs. BP has said again and again that’s not their policy. Yet, again and again, it has happened. And we have seen it. But that’s BP. And now the government apparently is getting in on the act, despite what Admiral Thad Allen promised about transparency just nearly a month ago. Here is what he said back then. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) ADMIRAL THAD ALLEN (RET.), NATIONAL INCIDENT COMMANDER: I have put out a written directive — and I can provide it for the record — that says the media will have uninhibited access anywhere we’re doing operations, except for two things, if it’s a security or a safety problem. That is my policy. (END VIDEO CLIP) COOPER: Uninhibited access, unless it’s a security or safety problem. Well, the Coast Guard today announced new rules keeping photographers and reporters and anyone else from coming within 65 feet of any response vessel or booms out on the water or on beaches — 65 feet. Now, in order to get closer, you have to get direct permission from the Coast Guard captain of the Port of New Orleans. You have to call up the guy. What this means is that oil-soaked birds on islands surrounded by boom, you can’t get close enough to take that picture. Shots of oil on beaches with booms, stay 65 feet away. Pictures of oil-soaked booms uselessly laying in the water because they haven’t been collected like they should, you can’t get close enough to see that. And, believe me, that is out there. But you only know that if you get close to it, and now you can’t without permission. Violators could face a fine of $40,000 and Class D felony charges. What’s even more extraordinary is that the Coast Guard tried to make the exclusion zone 300 feet, before scaling it back to 65 feet. Here is how Admiral Allen defends it. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) ALLEN: Well, it’s not unusual at all for the Coast Guard to establish either safety or security zones around any number of facilities or activities for public safety or for the safety of the equipment itself. We would do this for marine events, fireworks demonstrations, cruise ships going in and out of port. (END VIDEO CLIP) COOPER: So, this is the exact same logic that federal wildlife officials used to prevent CNN on two occasions from getting pictures of oiled birds that have been collected, pictures like — like the — well, that we’re about to show you which are obviously deeply disturbing, pictures of oiled gulls that we just happened to catch. Suddenly, we were told after — after that day we couldn’t catch it anymore. So, keeping prying eyes out of marshes, away from booms, off the beaches is now government policy. When asked why now, after all this time, Thad Allen said he had gotten some complaints from local officials worried people might get hurt. Now, we don’t know who these officials are. We would like to. But transparency is apparently not a high priority with Thad Allen either these days. Maybe he is accurate and some officials are concerned. And that’s their right. But we’ve heard far more from local officials about not being able to get a straight story from the government or BP. I have met countless local officials desperate for pictures to be taken and stories written about what is happening in their communities. We’re not the enemy here. Those of us down here trying to accurately show what’s happening, we are not the enemy. I have not heard about any journalist who has disrupted relief efforts. No journalist wants to be seen as having slowed down the cleanup or made things worse. If a Coast Guard official asked me to move, I would move. But to create a blanket rule that everyone has to stay 65 feet away boom and boats, that doesn’t sound like transparency. Frankly, it’s a lot like in Katrina when they tried to make it impossible to see recovery efforts of people who died in their homes. If we can’t show what is happening, warts and all, no one will see what’s happening. And that makes it very easy to hide failure and hide incompetence and makes it very hard to highlight the hard work of cleanup crews and the Coast Guard. We are not the enemy here. We found out today two public broadcasting journalists reporting on health issues say they have been blocked again and again from visiting a federal mobile medical unit in Venice, a trailer where cleanup workers are being treated. It’s known locally as the BP compound. And these two reporters say everyone they have talked to, from BP to the Coast Guard, to Health and Human Services in Washington has been giving them the runaround. We’re not talking about a CIA station here. We’re talking about a medical trailer that falls under the authority of, guess who, Thad Allen, the same Thad Allen who promised transparency all those weeks ago. We are not the enemy here. Actually, Anderson, to this administration, anyone trying to tell the truth to the American people is the enemy. Maybe if folks like you would have accurately reported the background of Barack Obama when he was running for president he wouldn’t have assumed you were going to continue to misrepresent and ignore facts for his benefit after if he got elected. To anyone with even a lukewarm intelligence quotient, this was an eminently foreseeable consequence of the media treating candidate Obama like a rock star. If they had acted like journalists back then instead of groupies, maybe they’d be treated with more respect today.  Now that some press members actually want to act like reporters again and aggressively try to cover what’s going on in the Gulf Coast, the White House must feel somewhat spurned by his previously complicit press thereby necessitating rules to keep them from getting close to the truth now that they mysteriously seem interested in reporting it. Of course, those on the other side of the aisle are not at all surprised, for like so many of the promises this man made during the campaign, we didn’t believe his most transparent administration in history pledge either. Maybe in the future media won’t allow their love for a candidate to make them so gullible and compliant, but I wouldn’t count on it.

See the original post:
White House Enacts Rules Inhibiting Media From Covering Oil Spill

Michael Steele: Mentally Deficient

Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele has segregated himself from any and all party’s once again. Michale Steele seems to have either forgotten that there was a President before Obama, or that Bush was never President. Steele was caught on video spewing republicanism’s, saying that Afghanistan is “a war of Obama’s choosing”; I didn’t know Obama had the power to send troops while being on the Illinois senate. Steele is also quoted saying “If he’s such a student of history,” Steele said, referring to President Obama, “has he not understood that, you know, that’s the one thing you don’t do, is engage in a land war in Afghanistan? Everyone who has tried, over 1,000 years of history, has failed.” I again am astonished that this man is ignoring the fact that, Republican former President George W. Bush invaded Afghanistan in 2001 after September 11( I had to explain this just in-case there are more people who forget the past like Steele). Now the Democrats are jumping all over his words as they should, but shockingly even very prominent conservatives are demanding his immediate resignation. William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard, called Steele’s remarks “an affront, both to the honor of the Republican Party and to the commitment of the soldiers fighting to accomplish the mission they’ve been asked to take on by our elected leaders.” Fellow conservative Erick Erickson had this to say, Steele had “lost all moral authority to lead the GOP.” Steele is now in full damage control, coming out re-explaining his statements. If you have to re-explain your political standings and true beliefs then your just trying to save face. A party spokesman said that Steele’s comments were in the context of speaking to future candidates and questions on the campaign trail. Steele however separated himself even further from his comments by saying this, Steele called winning the war in Afghanistan “a difficult task,” but “a necessary one.” While also backing it up with this statement, “The stakes are too high for us to accept anything but success in Afghanistan.” The Director of the RNC has been saying that Steele’s job is intact and that Democrats are misinterpreting his statements. This is just yet another example of the Republican foot in mouth that seems to be running rampant lately. While most Republicans surly believe what Steele has said, they cannot get elected by saying what they truly believe. Of course Republicans are going to back away from him, because they want to get elected off of the less conservative ideals they preach, and once in office force the more extreme views on the public. Source: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-rnc-steele-20100703,0,44924… added by: Colin_McCabe

CNN’s Sanchez on Mel Gibson: ‘Very Politically Involved’

Today on CNN, Rick’s List host Rick Sanchez was, as he likes to say, all over and drilling down on a story of major import.  No, nothing about the dismal unemployment numbers we’re seeing this recovery summer.  Despite repeated teases on the topic, he didn’t get around to it. Sanchez was all over and drilling down on the latest Mel Gibson antics, despite pushback from his audience: SANCHEZ: Some of you are tweeting me, in fact I’m reading these as I go telling me, why are you covering the Mel Gibson story? That’s not really news. I’m thinking, it’s not? Mel Gibson, one of the most renowned actors, who is very politically involved, caught on tape in the past saying things about Jews and about women? When did Mel Gibson become very politically involved?  In a 2006 Entertainment Weekly interview Gibson said , “Everyone always presumes I’m a Republican. I’m not.” A check of Federal Election Commission records shows no political contributions from Mel Gibson.  Years ago, he wrote a letter endorsing a candidate in the California GOP lieutenant gubernatorial race, but even then noted : “I don’t often support political candidates.” Does Sanchez automatically presume that someone who says nasty things about women and minorities must be very politically involved?  Or does he assume that a Hollywood personality not routinely spouting liberal lunacies has to be a Republican? Viewers might be interested in seeing the evidence Rick has that Gibson is very politically involved.  At any rate, his devoting so much time to the story kept Sanchez from reporting on the most recent Obama economic failures.                

Excerpt from:
CNN’s Sanchez on Mel Gibson: ‘Very Politically Involved’

More Washington Post Ethics Issues: Blogger’s Employment by White House Goes Unmentioned

You would think in the wake of the problems with   former Washington Post blogger Dave Weigel   in addition to   abandoned plans by the Post’s publisher Katharine Weymouth   to charge lobbyists and trade groups thousands of dollars for access “to top congressional and administration officials for $25,000 a plate” at a dinner party her home, the folks at the Post would be a little more careful with their ever-expanding empire of new media. But that’s not the case. According to   a July 2 article posted on RawStory.com by Ron Brynaer t, there is an undisclosed connection between the Obama White House and the Post. Brynaert notes   in the Post’s July 2 report from Ed O’Keefe , the whopping $38.7-million payroll of the Obama administration reveals there are three people that aren’t taking a salary, which O’Keefe fails to name. One of those is Patricia G. McGinnis, “Advisor to the Obama White House on leadership programs for Presidential Appointees.” But there is more to McGinnis, which Brynaert pointed out. ” McGinnis’ Georgetown biography notes   that she “is the former President and CEO of the Council for Excellence in Government, where she created and led a number of innovative programs to improve the performance of government, during her 14 year tenure” and also   ‘serves [as] a panelist and blogger for the Washington Post ‘On Leadership’ website.’ ” McGinnis was also listed as an unpaid adviser in 2009. Now this might have been nice to know because it violates the Post’s ethics policy, as Brynaert explained. “McGinnis was also listed as an unpaid adviser in the   White House payroll statistics released in 2009 ,” Brynaert wrote. “According to the Post’s   media ethics policy , ‘This newspaper is pledged to avoid conflict of interest or the appearance of conflict of interest, wherever and whenever possible. We have adopted stringent policies on these issues, conscious that they may be more restrictive than is customary in the world of private business.'” As for McGinnis’ content – there are indeed some glowing accounts of Obama,   which Brynaert has compiled , including one in January: “The first year of Obama’s presidency has produced an ambitious agenda for change, which congressional Republicans have resisted at every turn with chilling partisanship.”

Go here to read the rest:
More Washington Post Ethics Issues: Blogger’s Employment by White House Goes Unmentioned