Tag Archives: party

Top Bush Aide Denounces Mark Levin, Malkin, Others as ‘Unhinged…Bolshevik’ Party-Line Enforcers

Former top Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson is a Washington Post columnist, and there is never a better time for right-leaning columnists to lean left than in the last weeks of an election season. (See George Will trashing Sen. George Allen in the last weeks of 2006.) His rant also may have granted Gerson a seat on CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday. Gerson not only denounced Christine O’Donnell as a wacky candidate like Alan Keyes, he denounced “the childish political thought of the Tea Party.” He insisted conservatives were like Bolsheviks. Bloggers like Michelle Malkin and talk show hosts like Mark Levin were “unhinged” against Karl Rove: While Rove’s critique was tough, the reaction in parts of the conservative blogosphere has been unhinged. Michelle Malkin wrote that it “might as well have been Olbermann on MSNBC.” Mark Levin pronounced Rove at “war against the Tea Party movement and conservatives.” “In terms of the conservative movement,” wrote Dan Riehl, “we should not simply ignore him, but proactively work to undermine Rove in whatever ways we can, given his obvious willingness to undermine us.” Gerson didn’t explain in this short blog how it was “unhinged” to see Karl Rove’s fierce attack on O’Donnell as like an Olbermann moment. (In fact, it was: Olbermann reran large chunks of it on MSNBC.) He didn’t explain how it was “unhinged” to say Rove was at war with the Tea Party when they won a surprise victory, and he denounced the winner in the strongest terms. But the attacks were just getting started: This reaction is revealing — and disturbing — for a number of reasons. First, it shows how some conservatives view the business of political commentary. Rove obviously has strong views on O’Donnell, based on personal experience with the candidate. But deviations from the party line are not permitted . It is not enough to dispute Rove’s critique; Rove himself must be punished. The message is clear: The facts do not matter. Politics is war carried on by other means. Anyone who doesn’t consistently take one side is a traitor. Gerson doesn’t consider that the anger on the Mike Castle side of this election — the losing side — is based on the view that  the Tea Party deviated from the party line that Castle should march to the general election undisturbed. They implied only traitors would throw a “slam dunk” election in doubt. This attitude can be found on right and left. But a serious commentator cannot think this way. He owes his readers or viewers his best judgment — which means he cannot simply be a tool of someone else’s ideological agenda. Some conservatives have adopted the Bolshevik approach to information and the media : Every personal feeling, every independent thought, every inconvenient fact, must be subordinated to the party line — the Tea Party line. Gerson wants to suggest that the Tea Party people are unhinged in their rhetoric, and then he compares them to murderous Russian communists. Remember this the next time Gerson agrees with a liberal that Obama shouldn’t be smeared with foreign associations. 60,000 is Delaware does not make the Tea Party movement predominant in the Republican Party, or even in the conservative movement. If Tea Party activists believe they can win in a political coalition so pure that it doesn’t include strong, mainstream conservatives such as Karl Rove, they are delusional. And they are hurting their own cause. Third, some conservatives seem to display special venom for those who are “compromised” by the experience of actually winning and governing . Rove, according to Malkin, is an “establishment Beltway strategist.” Actually, he is a former high-level policy aid to the president of the United States and the primary author of two presidential victories. This does not make him always right. But it means he has had responsibilities bigger than running a Web site. This is an advantage for a commentator, not a drawback. Here is Gerson’s arrogance on display, for it’s very easy to remind the Bush people that “winning” wasn’t what happened in 2006 and 2008. Rove and Gerson and their team drove the GOP into a deep hole. This is the spot where the liberals secretly point fingers and laugh — before they invite these Bushies in front of the cameras to denounce the conservatives. The ending was just as petulant: In Tea Party theory, inexperience is itself seen as a kind of qualification. People like O’Donnell are actually preferable to people like Rove, because they haven’t been tainted by public trust or actual achievement. This is the attitude of the adolescent — the belief that the world began on their thirteenth birthday. It is also a sign of childish political thought.

Read more here:
Top Bush Aide Denounces Mark Levin, Malkin, Others as ‘Unhinged…Bolshevik’ Party-Line Enforcers

Fmr MSNBC Analyst Crawford: Media ‘Playing into Dem Message’ That Tea Party Candidates Are ‘Insane’

Appearing as a guest on Sunday’s Reliable Sources on CNN, the Congressional Quarterly’s Craig Crawford – formerly an MSNBC political analyst – admitted that the mainstream media have “listen[ed] too much to the Democratic message” that the Tea Party movement will harm Republicans rather than Democrats in this year’s congressional elections. He further charged that the media are “playing into that Democratic message that these candidates are insane.” Crawford: Sometimes we’re wrong when we listen too much to the Democratic message. That’s the Democratic party message, that the Tea Party is bad for them [Republicans]. I think we should scrutinize that a bit more, be a little more skeptical of it. The other is that they’re all crazy. And that’s the trouble with focusing on all these statements and everything. We’re playing into that Democratic message that these candidates are insane. A bit earlier, after host Kurtz observed that the media do not “respect” Tea Party candidates and “some of us seem to be looking down our noses at these insurgents,” Crawford lamented: “Yeah, and I hate to see the mainstream media doing that because I certainly respect them and their politics. They have been very successful.” Crawford notably has a history of criticizing Republicans for charging that the media are biased against them in his book, “Attack the Messenger: How Politicians Turn You Against the Media.” Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Sunday, September 19, Reliable Sources on CNN: HOWARD KURTZ: Craig Crawford, let’s look at the political fallout. Whether we’re talking about Christine O’Donnell in Delaware or Joe Miller in Alaska or Sharron Angle in Nevada, these people went out and beat establishment candidates, often with not a lot of money. Shouldn’t journalists respect that? Instead there seems to be, well, this is mutual antagonism, we seem to be, some of us, I don’t want to include everybody, some of us seem to be looking down our noses at these insurgents and they don’t seem to be big fans of the mainstream media. CRAIG CRAWFORD, CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY: Yeah, and I hate to see the mainstream media doing that because I certainly respect them and they’re politics. They have been very successful. The thing about the Tea Party that strikes me is it’s very similar in particular 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 at least they’re inside the Republican party. The Perot people were outside the party and much more damaging to Republicans. KURTZ: Craig, just briefly, what about this instant journalistic wisdom when these candidates, Christine O’Donnell being the latest, well, of course it hurts Republicans because they’re all going to lose in november, they’re too extreme, it’s one thing to win, you know, 30,000 votes in Delaware, another thing to win in state election. We’ve been wrong all year on some of these races. Could we be wrong again. CRAWFORD: Sometimes we’re wrong when we listen too much to the Democratic message. That’s the Democratic party message, that the Tea Party is bad for them [Republicans]. I think we should scrutinize that a bit more, be a little more skeptical of it. The other is that they’re all crazy. And that’s the trouble with focusing on all these statements and everything. We’re playing into that Democratic message that these candidates are insane. KURTZ, LAUGHING: Journalists, of course, are perfectly sane. We all know that.

Read more from the original source:
Fmr MSNBC Analyst Crawford: Media ‘Playing into Dem Message’ That Tea Party Candidates Are ‘Insane’

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

Evan Thomas on Ending Bush Tax Rates: ‘God Knows the Federal Government Desperately Needs that Revenue’

Newsweek veteran Evan Thomas, who announced a few weeks ago his intention to leave the financially-failing magazine and teach journalism at Princeton , issued a ringing call – in defense of federal spending – for why he hopes Congress and President Obama cannot agree on extending any of the Bush tax cuts, so income tax rates rise next year: God knows the federal government desperately needs that revenue, so this is one case where I think gridlock is a good thing. Not exactly in line with the thinking of Tea Party voters. (Audio: MP3 clip ) On this weekend’s Inside Washington, the magazine’s former Washington bureau chief, Assistant Managing Editor and, most-recently, editor-at-large, encapsulated the political/media class’s priority – keeping government spending safe – as he argued: A couple of weeks ago, Fareed Zakaria wrote a column in which he said Congress should do what it does best, nothing. And what he means by that is if Congress does nothing, those tax cuts go away. We need the revenue, we need the revenue. I know it’s not great for the economy right now to be having a tax hike, but you’re just returning rates to where they were in the 1990s, when the economy was doing pretty well. God knows the federal government desperately needs that revenue, so this is one case where I think gridlock is a good thing. ( Inside Washington is a weekly show produced by ABC’s Washington, DC affiliate, which airs it Sunday morning after it runs Friday night on DC’s PBS affiliate, WETA-TV channel 26, and Saturday on local cable’s TBD TV .)

See the rest here:
Evan Thomas on Ending Bush Tax Rates: ‘God Knows the Federal Government Desperately Needs that Revenue’

Inappropriate Photoshop: Lady Gaga Stoops

Lady Gaga “stoops” in to Super Frat! added by: TonyDiGerolamo

Sarah Palin: "It’s Time to Take Our Country Back"

The Iowa Republican Party freely admitted that this year's Reagan Day Dinner would not have been quite the same without Sarah Palin. “We anticipate that it will be the largest and best attended Reagan Dinner that the party has had in recent years,” state Republican chairman Matt Strawn said in an interview. As it was, 50 news organizations and some 1,000 dinner guests came to the auditorium in downtown Des Moines to hear from the woman who is more than the belle of the Republican ball these days. “She is a formidable force and may be the most formidable force in the Republican Party,” White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said on Friday. Of course, the Democrats may have a vested interest in promoting the former Alaska governor whose poll numbers have been declining this summer and whose electability, at this point, is an open question. Former Obama campaign manager David Plouffe scoffed the other day that Palin is the best organizer and fundraiser the Democrats in Iowa could have. But Democrats have belittled opponents in the past who turned their grins into frowns on election day. Ronald Reagan comes quickly to mind as an “un-electable” former actor who nonetheless ousted a sitting president in the first of two landslide elections. Palin was greeted warmly by the Republicans here. And she said what they wanted to hear. “We don't need to fundamentally transform America,” said said. “We need to restore America.” added by: TimALoftis

PBS Ombudsman Bizarrely Claims Pitting Dick Armey vs. Arianna Huffington is Right vs. Center

The PBS NewsHour tried to balance a conservative Republican with a liberal Democrat when it interviewed (on two different Thursdays) Dick Armey and Arianna Huffington . Left-wingers complained to PBS ombudsman Michael Getler that NewsHour anchor Judy Woodruff failed to press Armey about the Tea Party’s funding from corporate billionaires. The far-left media monitors at FAIR wanted Woodruff to bash Armey as a hypocrite who benefits from government entitlements, like Bill Moyers did.  Getler’s response was jaw-dropping. He claimed that PBS had failed to achieve balance, since Armey is conservative and Arianna Huffington is a centrist “and her widely viewed website strike me, as a reader, as an equal-opportunity critic. Armey is not. There are plenty of sharp, critical assessments of the Democratic Party and administration on her site.” Doesn’t it matter that those critics are banging away that Obama isn’t socialist enough? Worse yet, Getler said this should be “remedied” by bringing on another leftist, author Will Bunch of Media Matters for America, because Arianna was clearly not left-wing enough or critical enough of the Tea Party. Getler lamented that PBS has lost left-wing shows like Now and Bill Moyers Journal that are “not in the safe comfortable center.” Getler has granted points to conservative letter writers on occasion (and it seems apparent from his report that he didn’t get conservative letter writers in his latest batch). But Getler holds the liberal opinion that was mandtory for his hiring: that public television is not a forum that should be balanced because it’s taxpayer-funded. Instead, because it is “public,” it should rip on conservatives from the left, because the “safe comfortable center” is already represented by ABC, CBS, and NBC. “Public” television should be anti-corporate and anti-militarist and be so boldly. Arguing that Arianna Huffington’s “beyond left and right” palaver makes her a centrist is truly unsophisticated. In her media criticism like in her less-than-centrist-sounding book Right Is Wrong, that has meant the conservatives should be dumped, since the left is correct and it’s unfair (and dangerous) to “balance” that with inaccurate conservatism, like on global warming. In her PBS interview with Gwen Ifill, it’s quite clear that while Huffington may have posed rhetorically as going beyond ideology, she is not a centrist. She’s lamenting that Team Obama is pandering to centrists instead of being fully progressive when Democrats have total control of Washington: [T]his has been obviously a failure of the Bush years that put their faith in free market economics and deregulation, but also the Democrats during the Obama years, when they had control of the White House, the House, and the Senate, but, instead of going forward with bold proposals that would address the fundamental problems in the country, they tried to basically do what they can to bring everybody along, sort of flirt with Olympia Snowe, and bring Larry Summers to head the economic team in a way that put Wall Street ahead of Main Street. Getler is only correct in that when Ifill asked Huffington to critique or attack the Tea Party movement, she declined and used “beyond left and right” palaver to pose as above ideology (like, well, Obama). NewsHour tried to balance the segments. It was Huffington who failed the leftists’ desire to have someone accuse the Tea Party of being the toy soldiers of billionaires.   But while Woodruff gently pressed Armey that liberals say his proposals to make Social Security and Medicare voluntary would destroy these entitlement programs, Ifill offered no critique of Huffington’s left-wing viewpoint from conservatives, that her proposed solutions would kill chances for a recovery (or that conservatives would say she’s a phony for her pose, or question her funding from left-wing billionaires). Both interviews were gentle, in the Jim Lehrer tradition. It seems as if Getler wants NewsHour to be anchored by Bill Moyers. Here’s the gist of Getler’s mystifying complaint: In the segment with Armey, NewsHour correspondent Judy Woodruff told viewers that this was the first of a two-part series of book conversations with thinkers on both sides of the political spectrum and that “a very different perspective … a conversation with liberal Democrat Arianna Huffington” about her new book would be coming soon. The Huffington interview with correspondent Gwen Ifill aired Sept. 16. One of the benefits of the NewsHour is that it has the time for this kind of series, allowing more in-depth exploration of supposedly opposing views, and I’ve always advocated that viewers judge a news program or publication on the continuity of its coverage of a subject rather than on an individual segment. But this time it didn’t work, in my view. Woodruff is a good interviewer and managed to get in some brief but telling questions, although there was no discussion of Tea Party funding that was the focus of most of the e-mail to me. The “series” turned out, it seemed to me, to be a big public relations win for Armey as mostly a platform for his views, while Huffington’s main point was that “the solutions are beyond left and right” and spent as much or more time bashing the Obama administration, aside from noting that the problems grew from “obviously a failure of the Bush years.” One is that Huffington may be labeled as “a liberal Democrat,” but she and her widely viewed website strike me, as a reader, as an equal-opportunity critic. Armey is not. There are plenty of sharp, critical assessments of the Democratic Party and administration on her site. For me, this fits into a purely anecdotal sense that I have that much of mainstream television coverage for some time now is more from a center-right starting point than left-center-right, where far more talking heads and pundits that are described as liberal or left-of-center, actually are closer to the center and just as likely to criticize the left as the right. That is usually not the case, at least as it seems to me, with conservative or right-of-center guests and pundits. Another point goes to something I posted back in May in the aftermath of the shutting down of two major PBS public affairs programs — Bill Moyers Journal and NOW on PBS. I said: “Both provided an outlet for people and subjects that are not in the safe, comfortable center of what passes for most public affairs programming on television. Rather, they often presented guests and topics that rarely get an airing, although what they have to say is of interest to many people who live and think outside that safe comfort-zone.” Both Armey and Huffington, even though controversial, are in what I’d consider that comfortable, or familiar face, zone. Both have many friendly TV and web platforms where their views and books can be, and are, promoted. Coincidentally, between the Sept. 9 and 16 programs, The New York Times featured a review of a probing new book about the Tea Party by Will Bunch, a senior writer at The Philadelphia Daily News and a senior fellow at the left-leaning research group Media Matters for America. Why not have him, or someone else who has spent time looking into this movement, as a guest who clearly seems apt to present a different view? The Tea Party is important and detailed arguments that challenge it need to be heard and answered. Feel free to contact Getler online here or call 703-739-5920. Be calm and polite, as he is.

Read the original here:
PBS Ombudsman Bizarrely Claims Pitting Dick Armey vs. Arianna Huffington is Right vs. Center

MSNBC’s Brewer Scoffs at Values Voters Despite History of Gay Rights Advocacy

MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer mocked attendees of the Values Voter Summit today, directing her ire at former vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, Delaware Republican Senate nominee Christine O’Donnell, and the entire conservative movement. “So, they’re calling themselves values voters, but isn’t this election really about the economy and not so much what we think of as values?” sniveled Brewer, who put air quotes around the term “values.” Brewer’s dismissive attitude toward values voters must not extend to homosexual rights activists like herself who frequently turn their anchor chairs into liberal soapboxes. The champion of same-sex marriage revealed her disdain for Palin by noting that although the former Alaska governor was not present at the event, “her doppleganger, Christine O’Donnell is there and she is stealing the show.” Manufacturing controversy by imagining a Wild West “showdown at the Values Voter Summit,” the paladin of homosexual equality scornfully described the annual summit as the “conservative Shangri- La,” referring, apparently, to the fictional location in James Hilton’s Lost Horizon which represents a sort of heaven on earth. Setting aside the inherent hypocrisy in eschewing voters who focus on values issues like gay rights while exploiting her perch as a cable news anchor to advocate for the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the fact that, as Brewer accurately reported, the top issue for voters this election cycle is the economy should compel the media to focus more on the lagging economic numbers than on a peaceful gathering of social conservatives. A transcript of the relevant portions of the segment can be found below ( H/T News Analyst Scott Whitlock for transcript assistance ): MSNBC News Live 09/17/10 12 P.M. E.S.T.   CONTESSA BREWER: It’s showdown at the Values Voter Summit. The Grand Old Party. The established, traditional candidates caught in the cross fire of conservatives who want something different. And right now both sides are under the same big tent, so to speak, today at this conservative Shangri-La, the Values Voters Summit. Let’s show it to you. The Republicans recognize the split between the factions in their own party, but their most famous faces are focusing on a common enemy. MITT ROMNEY: It’s- I guess it is welcome to the Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, President Obama farewell party. BREWER: And those in attendance are just starting to vote in a straw poll giving people a glimpse into who wants to run for president in 2012. Sarah Palin is up for the vote even though not physically present at the summit. Her doppleganger, Christine O’Donnell is there and she is stealing the show. CHRISTINE O’DONNELL: It’s no secret that there’s been a rather unflattering portrait of me painted these days. I’m not counting on the national media to vote for me on November 2nd. I’m asking all of you to vote for me. BREWER: That splinter may give Democrats an opportunity here. Alaska’s Senator Lisa Murkowski decides today whether to compete as a write-in candidate against the Tea Partier and Republican primary winner Joe Miller. That would definitely split the conservative vote and give Democrat a real chance to take away the seat. Domenico Montanaro is a political guru, a producer and off-air reporter extraordinaire for NBC News. Good to see you. When we’re talking about the value voters is that code for Tea Partiers or a whole different group of people? DOMENICO MONTANARO: Well, there’s certainly overlap. I mean, there’s a lot of folks here who certainly identify with the Tea Party as well. But, you know, Values Voters traditionally has been a summit here that’s taken place in Washington every year focuses on you know, social issues. Things like gay marriage. You know, the- abortion. Things you would normally associate with social issues. That’s bled over somewhat, though, this year with the Tea Party, and they’re focused a little bit more on fiscal issues. Fiscal responsibility. Talking about making that a moral issue. We heard Jim DeMint talk about it. We even heard Mike Huckabee talk about it who has won here the straw poll the last few years. And, you know, we saw Mitt Romney gave his speech, you know, talking about pushing carts down Walmart. You know, talking about some terrorism issues and, you know, this is more of what you’re hearing from somebody who’s potentially running for president in 2012 as opposed to somebody who’s necessarily just talking to a social issues group. BREWER: So, they’re calling themselves values voters, but isn’t this election really about the economy and not so much what we think of as values? [Makes quotes marks] MONTANARO: Right. Well, you know, the election certainly is about the economy. It’s what’s given people in the Tea Party movement, Republican, the upper hand. Now, the folks here, like I said, are also focused on that fiscal issue and want to take that and make that part of their platform. But, look, this is important for people running in 2012 because you need activists who vote on social issues. Especially in places like Iowa. Remember, Mitt Romney lost Iowa, despite the amount of money he spent, because Mike Huckabee, in a closed primary, with Christian activists liked his message and folksiness and the fact he was a Baptist preacher and delivered several one-liners, able to rally some of those folks. Someone to watch what a potential 1212 Mike Huckabee, watch Mike Pence. Stirs the crowd. Unapologetic about social issues and took that home to this audience here.

Continue reading here:
MSNBC’s Brewer Scoffs at Values Voters Despite History of Gay Rights Advocacy

Kelly Arrow Tan picture

Second runner-up Kelly Arrow Tan, 22, took home S$3,000 in prize money. The Winner of the Exclusive 2010 SingTel Grid Girl Party Mabel Lau (centre), flanked by first runner-up Shahnaz Nazimuddeen (left) and second runner-up Kelly Arrow Tan. Mabel will carry the Singapore flag at the Sept 26 race. Winner of the Exclusive 2010 SingTel Grid Girl Party Mabel Lau (centre), flanked by first runner-up Shahnaz Nazimuddeen (left) and second runner-up Kelly Arrow Tan. Mabel will carry the Singapore fla

More:
Kelly Arrow Tan picture

Shahnaz Nazimuddeen picture

Runner-up Shahnaz Nazimuddeen, 19, received a S$5,000 cash prize. Winner of the Exclusive 2010 SingTel Grid Girl Party Mabel Lau (centre), flanked by first runner-up Shahnaz Nazimuddeen (left) and second runner-up Kelly Arrow Tan. Mabel will carry the Singapore flag at the Sept 26 race. The Winner of the Exclusive 2010 SingTel Grid Girl Party Mabel Lau (centre), flanked by first runner-up Shahnaz Nazimuddeen (left) and second runner-up Kelly Arrow Tan. Mabel will carry the Singapore flag at th

Go here to see the original:
Shahnaz Nazimuddeen picture