Tag Archives: polls

Rachel Maddow Edits ‘Factor’ Video to Make Bill O’Reilly Look Racist

Rachel Maddow on Friday highly-edited a video from the previous evening’s “O’Reilly Factor” in order to make the Fox News host look racist. For some background, Bill O’Reilly wrote a syndicated column Friday in which he chastized Maddow and David Letterman for “without a shred of evidence” claiming on CBS’s “Late Show” Tuesday that FNC intentionally runs stories about “scary black people” in order to frighten white folks into voting for conservatives. Maddow responded by calling this “bullpucky,” and presented video “evidence” from “Factor” programs to prove that this indeed is what Fox does. Unfortunately, in the most damning clip, Maddow’s minions conveniently edited out that O’Reilly was referring to a recent Gallup poll about how blacks and whites have differing views of President Obama. Ironically, this came moments after Maddow scolded O’Reilly for airing the edited version of former USDA official Shirley Sherrod on his July 19 program (videos follow with transcripts and commentary): RACHEL MADDOW, HOST: This time, the case against me is in his nationally syndicated column which I`m sure is read by millions and millions and millions and millions and millions of people. The headline is, quote, “Only far-left loons scared of Fox News.” Guess who the loon is? Yes. Talking about me on David Letterman`s show this week, Mr. O`Reilly says, quote, “Speaking with far-left MSNBC news commentator, Rachel Maddow on his program, Dave listened as she put forth the preposterous theory that wants to frighten white Americans by reporting negatively about black Americans.” “In the past, paranoid, dishonest rants like that would have been dismissed as fringe-speak. But not anymore. Without a shred of evidence, a guest on Letterman`s “Late Show,” which by the way, gets trounced in the ratings by Fox News Channel every night, defines an entire news organization as a racist enterprise and Letterman goes along.” Mr. O`Reilly`s repeated insistence that must be right because Fox has high ratings is a many-splendored thing particularly because this week – if you believe Mr. O`Reilly, this week means we`re all wrong and only sharksploitation(ph) is right. But there is something else going on here that isn`t just an ad populum fallacy about ratings or an ad hominem collateral swipe at the lovely creature that is the loon. It is something stupid, something stupid enough that it doesn`t even get dressed up in Latin phrasing. It`s him saying that there`s no evidence to back up my claim that Fox News consistently runs stories it says are news, but that nobody else really covers, stories that are ginned-up, exaggerated, caricatured, in some cases, just flat-out made-up scare stories designed to make white people feel afraid of black people, designed to make it seem like black people, or in some cases, immigrants are threatening white people and taking what is rightfully theirs. You may not like that diagnosis of what Fox has been up to, but to say there`s no evidence, not a shred of evidence, as he said, that`s bullpucky. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) O`REILLY: Speaking at an NAACP event in March, Department of Agriculture official Shirley Sherrod was caught on tape saying something very disturbing. Seems a white farmer in Georgia had requested government assistance from Ms. Sherrod. Wow. Well, that is simply unacceptable and Ms. Sherrod must resign immediately. (END VIDEO CLIP) MADDOW: Of course, the Shirley Sherrod story ended up being exposed as total bullpucky, manufactured by nifty video editing. Mr. O`Reilly had to apologize for that statement. But it`s not like the Shirley Sherrod story stands alone. Readers are encouraged to remember her comment “exposed as total bullpucky, manufactured by nifty video editing.” Also, if this was an example of Fox trying to scare white people, why did O’Reilly apologize the next day? Not every member of the news media that broadcast the original Sherrod video clip issued an on air apology like O’Reilly, but I digress: (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) O`REILLY: The collapse of ACORN – that is the subject of this evening`s “Talking Points Memo.” Here`s the latest scandal. You`re not going to believe it. Because federal authorities have not done much policing of ACORN, two private citizens, James O`Keefe and Hannah Giles, launch an undercover sting investigation themselves. The two pose as a prostitute and a pimp and asked a number of ACORN officials to help them get housing for a prostitution enterprise. The latest sting was in California, where an ACORN employee engaged the young woman posing as a prostitute. ACORN is a tax-exempt organization that should immediately lose that status. And Attorney General Holder should begin an intense investigation. (END VIDEO CLIP) MADDOW: Of course, the ACORN story ended up being exposed as total bullpucky, too, also manufactured by nifty video editing. Remember after the California attorney general looked into the full tapes and then arrested all those ACORN folks for those crimes that Bill O`Reilly showed them committing on tape? Yes, you don`t remember that? Me, neither, because it never happened. Bullpucky again. But still, very scary. Readers are encouraged to once again remember Maddow’s phrase here “total bullpucky, too, also manufactured by nifty video editing.” Secondly, that the far-left Jerry Brown chose not to prosecute ACORN employees by no means invalidates the corruption that was exposed at this organization or vindicates it. A Democrat-controlled Congress and a Democrat President have still not lifted the government ban on ACORN funding. Beyond this, the notion that O’Reilly reporting this matter was racially motivated is in itself racist. But Maddow and her ilk seem to miss this irony when they point such fingers at others: (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) O`REILLY: A guy like Van Jones who is a friend of the president, and he comes in and he`s a hardcore Marxist. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He`s not a hardcore Marxist. O`REILLY: He is. He admits it. All I keep hearing is from people like Eugene Robinson who traffics in racism every time you turn around. Once again, the idea that reporting on Van Jones was to scare white people is pathetic. Are all reports concerning black people involved in wrong-doing racist? As such, this was another tremendously weak point by Maddow in no way proving O’Reilly was trying to scare white people. But here’s the best part: O’REILLY: White Americans don`t like the huge expansion of the federal government. They also oppose the big spending increases that the president has imposed. It`s simple. White Americans fear government control. They don`t want the feds telling them what to do and they don`t want a bankrupt nation. For decades, African-Americans have supported a bigger federal government so it can impose social justice. The vast majority of blacks want money spent to level the playing field, to redistribute income from the white establishment to their precincts. (END VIDEO CLIP) MADDOW: Black people want white people`s money. They want to redistribute income from the white establishment to their precincts. But remember, Mr. O`Reilly says there is not a shred of evidence that Fox News hypes stories about scary black people taking white people`s stuff. I am not interested in playing cable news insult ping pong with Mr. O`Reilly. But as much as he keeps insisting that I`m no one worth arguing with, that I`m an uber-leftist – he called me that in his column, and a loon twice now. And a slightly larger percentage of one percent of the population watches his show than the proportion of one percent of the population that watches my show, for all he complains about how unimportant I am, my criticism scares white people on purpose to politically benefit conservatives, damn the consequences for the country, that criticism appears to have struck a nerve over at Fox. It appears to have gotten under Mr. O`Reilly`s skin. Good. Well, not so fast, Rach, for why didn’t you provide the full context of that last report by O’Reilly? Here is the unedited “Talking Points Memo” from Thursday. Notice just how much different this really is from the highly-edited version Maddow dishonestly showed her viewers: O’REILLY: Hi, I’m Bill O’Reilly. Thanks for watching us tonight. Black and white Americans differ over President Obama. That is the subject of this evening’s “Talking Points Memo”. A new Gallup poll says 88 percent of African-Americans continue to support President Obama, but just 38 percent of white Americans feel the president is doing a good job. That is a 50 point differential in the president’s job approval rating, which is stunning. So what is going on? Let’s take the white situation first. According to the polls, most white Americans don’t like the huge expansion of the federal government. They also oppose the big spending increases that the president has imposed. It’s simple. White Americans fear government control. They don’t want the Feds telling them what to do. And they don’t want a bankrupt nation. That attitude was on display in Missouri this week when 71 percent of the voters approved a state statute blocking the federal government from forcing them to buy health insurance. 71 percent said no to that. Since Obamacare is the centerpiece of the president’s domestic strategy so far, you can see he’s in some trouble. But black America has a totally different view. For decades, African- Americans have supported a bigger federal government, so it can impose social justice. A vast majority of blacks want money spent to level the playing field, to redistribute income from the white establishment to their precincts, and to provide better education and health care at government expense. So the African-American voter generally loves what President Obama is doing. As for Hispanic-Americans, 54 percent now support Mr. Obama but that is down nine points since April. The social justice component is there as well. There’s no question that there are now two Americas. The minority community continues to believe that society is not completely fair to them. And they want a huge government apparatus to change that. And while the white community may sympathize with the minority situation, they apparently believe that more harm than good is being done to the country with the cost of social justice programs. My own belief is that President Obama is well intentioned, but if the wild spending continues, this country will be gravely damaged. As far as social justice is concerned, strict oversight on fair rules, but not the imposition of expensive entitlements is the answer. The USA is the strongest country on earth because of self reliance and the industry of honest, hard working people, who don’t want to be told how to live. Independence and self-reliance is what has made this country great, powerful and generous. And that’s the Memo. As such, O’Reilly was commenting about a Gallup survey just released Tuesday with the title, “Blacks and Whites Continue to Differ Sharply on Obama.” By the end of his “Memo,” he was even crediting Obama with being “well intentioned.” Sound “scary” to you? As for Gallup, here’s what it reported: President Obama’s job approval rating averaged 88% among blacks and 38% among whites in July, a 50-percentage-point difference that has been consistent in recent months but is much larger than in the initial months of the Obama presidency. Obama’s job approval ratings among blacks, whites, and Hispanics in July are all at their lowest levels to date, although the overwhelming majority of blacks still approve. Maybe Maddow should call the Gallup folks racist, too. Regardless, Maddow and her minions completely removed this context from the video they edited thereby dramatically altering what O’Reilly said.  Isn’t that just as bad as what the anonymous person that sent the excerpted Sherrod video to Andrew Breitbart did? Maybe more importantly, isn’t this actually worse than what Fox and every other news outlet did with the Sherrod video, for none of them were involved in the editing. In Maddow’s case, her own staff edited out major portions of O’Reilly’s opening remarks on Thursday completely changing the meaning of his words. This MSNBC host should certainly not be pointing fingers at others for bullpucky manufactured by nifty video editing when she and her staff are doing the very same thing.  With this in mind, maybe Maddow on Monday should play the entire video for her audience and apologize to O’Reilly. Readers are advised to not hold their breath. 

Read more:
Rachel Maddow Edits ‘Factor’ Video to Make Bill O’Reilly Look Racist

‘Media Mash’: Networks Celebrate Obama’s Birthday, CBS’s Smith Lobs Softball in Interview

After watching a highlight reel of network news reporters lamenting how President Obama was spending his 49th birthday alone and that the office is discernibly graying his hair, NewsBusters publisher Brent Bozell told Fox News viewers last night that the same media outlets ignored how, the day before Obama’s birthday, “The voters of Missouri absolutely crushed, clobbered, masaquered his ObamaCare program by 71 to 29 percent.” Bozell appeared on the August 5 edition of Sean Hannity’s program for the latest installment of “Media Mash,” a look at the media’s most egregious bias of the past week. The second topic in last night’s segment was this doozy from CBS’s Harry Smith: HARRY SMITH to President Obama:  Do you feel sometimes that your administration is not given the credit it deserves? President OBAMA: Yes. “You know, this wah-wah whining has got to stop. What they’re saying is that the media aren’t pro-Obama enough,” Bozell observed, adding: Look, the Obama people have got the political defibrillators out. He’s at 41 percent [approval] in the polls. George Bush didn’t get this low until the second term after Katrina…. They’re in an absolute free-fall. So what do they doing?  First they go to “The View,” and then they go to Harry Smith. It’s a likely progression.  For the full segment, click here for MP3 audio . To watch the video, click the play button on the embed above or click here to download the WMV video file . 

The rest is here:
‘Media Mash’: Networks Celebrate Obama’s Birthday, CBS’s Smith Lobs Softball in Interview

‘I Feel Like I Don’t Live In America:’ The Best Worst Prop 8 Reactions

Yesterday, a federal judge ruled that Proposition 8 — the voter initiative that amended the California Constitution to define marriage as heterosexual — is unconstitutional. The usual pro-Prop 8, anti-gay marriage suspects began hollering almost immediately. Here, the best of the best (or worst, depending on how you look at it): The Founding Fathers Would Be Shocked From the chairman of National Organization for Marriage, or NOM: Here we have an openly gay (according to the San Francisco Chronicle) federal judge substituting his views for those of the American people and of our Founding Fathers who I promise you would be shocked by courts that imagine they have the right to put gay marriage in our Constitution. Shocked, probably. But $10 says the Founding Fathers would also be shocked by women wearing pants, a black man becoming president and cable news. But The Judge Is Gay From the president of the American Family Association: It's also extremely problematic that Judge Walker is a practicing homosexual himself. He should have recused himself from this case, because his judgment is clearly compromised by his own sexual proclivity. The fundamental issue here is whether homosexual conduct, with all its physical and psychological risks, should be promoted and endorsed by society. That's why the people and elected officials accountable to the people should be setting marriage policy, not a black-robed tyrant whose own lifestyle choices make it impossible to believe he could be impartial. His situation is no different than a judge who owns a porn studio being asked to rule on an anti-pornography statute. He'd have to recuse himself on conflict of interest grounds, and Judge Walker should have done that. This Will Be Dangerous When We Have A Lesbian On The Supreme Court From former House Speaker Newt Gingrich: Today's notorious decision also underscores the importance of the Senate vote tomorrow on the nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court because judges who oppose the American people are a growing threat to our society. In other words, “cough cough Kagan's totally gay cough.” What Next? Is Jesus Unconstitutional? From Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC): Today's wrongful court decision is another attempt to impose a secular immorality on the American people who keep voting to preserve traditional marriage. added by: TimALoftis

Watch: What a Legal Pot Economy Would Look Like

Sometimes a cartoon can be worth a thousand words. … or even more than 100,000. Haik Hoisington's 'Flower' video has hit a nerve and has gone viral on the internet. The Flower was released by the online news service AlterNet on July 29 – and in just five days has been viewed more than 175,000 times. This fall Californians will go the polls with a chance to make history. They will be able to cast a vote to tax and regulate marijuana like alcohol or cigarettes. California's Proposition 19 is one of many similar initiatives cropping up on state ballots across the country. Whether it's calls for decriminalization or medical marijuana the end of cannabis prohibition has never seemed closer. In this short animated parable, “The Flower,” award winning artist Haik Hoisington contrasts a legal marijuana economy with an illegal one, to show how everyone stands to benefit from ending the war on weed. “The Flower” contrasts a utopian society that freely farms and consumes a pleasure giving flower with a society where the same flower is illegal and its consumption is prohibited. The animation is a meditation on the social and economic costs of marijuana prohibition. added by: Stoneyroad

Chris Matthews Calls George W. Bush and Sarah Palin ‘Know-Nothings’

Chris Matthews on Friday called George W. Bush and Sarah Palin know-nothings.  Chatting with California gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown on “Hardball,” the MSNBC host also called the Republican candidate for governor in that state Meg Whitman a know-nothing. “What is it in the American psyche or character that says, if you don`t know anything, you`re somehow an average person or average guy and you have horse sense?” asked Matthews. “What is it about people that keep picking people like George W. Bush to be president? And you see these people like Sarah Palin out there with fans.”  It seems in Matthews’ view, governing Texas, Alaska, or running one of America’s leading Internet companies requires zero intellectual capacity (video follows with transcript and commentary, h/t Weekly Political Review via Twitter’s @ndgc12dx): CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Former California governor Jerry Brown is currently the state`s attorney general. Governor Brown, it`s great to have you on. I just want to ask you, do you think the last seven years have been good for California with Schwarzenegger? Here`s a business guy and movie star, a business guy, who said, I can take business sense, like Meg Whitman, and make government work. It hasn`t — well, has it worked? I`ll leave it as an open question. Has he been a net plus or a net negative? JERRY BROWN (D-CA), ATTORNEY GENERAL, FMR. GOV., CANDIDATE FOR GOV.: Well, certainly in terms of the budget, blowing up the boxes, reorganizing government, it hasn`t. Now, Arnold Schwarzenegger has pioneered the environment and climate change legislation that is really path-breaking, so I give him full credit for that. But in terms of the crisis we`re in now, the idea that not knowing anything, not even caring enough to vote for 28 years, gives you the equipment, the skill, to wrestle those 120 legislators to the ground, get them on your team and deal with this deepening crisis — I doubt that. And if these surveys are any indication, Ms. Whitman has hit a wall for the last — probably since March, not moved forward. And I think we`re in a very strong position to win the confidence of the people and get down to brass tacks here of solving the problem.  MATTHEWS: What is it in the American psyche or character that says, if you don`t know anything, you`re somehow an average person or average guy and you have horse sense? What is it about people that keep picking people like George W. Bush to be president? And you see these people like Sarah Palin out there with fans. Why would anybody like somebody who the campaign manager for John McCain said, “She doesn`t know anything?” Why is not knowing anything — why does the know-nothing candidate, like Meg Whitman, a person who doesn`t have any government experience, have the appeal to be even with you in the polls? The know — the person that doesn`t know anything about government! How disgusting. It’s one thing to make such comments about a former President and a former governor, but to similarly disparage the Republican gubernatorial candidate while interviewing her Democrat opponent demonstrates absolutely NO journalistic impartiality by Matthew. Maybe he should just endorse Brown so that his few viewers would fully understand why he’s so hostile to Whitman. Come to think of it, that could be the next step in MSNBC’s activism. Stay tuned. 

Read the original post:
Chris Matthews Calls George W. Bush and Sarah Palin ‘Know-Nothings’

Chris Matthews: ‘Is Sarah Palin The Most Important Republican In The Country?’

A truly extraordinary thing happened on this weekend’s “The Chris Matthews Show”: the host asked his panel if former Alaska governor Sarah is the most important Republican in the country right now. What made this even more surprising was how his guests — CNN’s Gloria Borger, Politico’s John Harris, the BBC’s Katty Kay, and former “CBS Evening News” host Dan Rather — seemed to feel she was. Most bullish on Palin was Rather who said, “I wouldn’t underestimate her…If she decides to run, it would be hard to bet against her for the nomination.” For his part, Matthews played a little bit of a misdirection with his viewers by predictably bashing Palin during the program’s introduction (multiple videos follow with highlights and commentary):  CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: She was a governor that couldn’t take it anymore. Ridiculed as a Bozo, all she could do was cash in get what she could on the way off the stage. But a year later, with zillions in her pocket, she’s an even better bet to run. As the opening segment about President Obama and Generals McChrystal and Petraeus came to an end, Matthews told his viewers:  MATTHEWS: Before we break, it was a year ago that Sarah Palin called that surprise news conference out there in the lawn in Wasilla to announce she was quitting as Alaska governor. David Letterman had a lot of fun with that. What followed was one of Letterman’s typically derogatory “Top Tens” about Palin: After the commercial, Matthews played a clip from Palin’s resignation speech last July: SARAH PALIN: With this announcement that I’m not seeking re-election, I determined it is best to transfer the authority of governor, to Lieutenant Governor Parnell. MATTHEWS: Transfer the authority? Well, she quit. A lot of people thought that was a short-sighted move, that quitting would end her career as an elected politician. Well, a year since then Palin’s made well over $12 million. Her first book “Going Rogue” was the year’s number one best-seller, made her $7 million in the advance. She gets $100,000 a speech, and Fox signed her to a TV deal. Besides getting to be rich, has she become, I would ask you open-ended, is she the most important Republican right now in the country? Kay was the first to answer, making some surprisingly positive comments about the former Governor and her success assisting Republican candidates in recent primaries.  When Matthews commented that Palin seems to be only backing winners, Borger countered that maybe they’re winning BECAUSE of her support.  For his part, Harris was a little less enthusiastic, but also gave an uncharacteristically upbeat view of the former vice presidential candidate. But the best was yet to come when Rather got his turn: DAN RATHER: Well, she’s not running at the moment for President. But I wouldn’t underestimate her. She’s a version now of a Deacon with four aces. She can go a lot of different ways. She is playing an almost perfect hand. If she wants to stay a power in the Party, make a lot of money and not run, she can do that. I wouldn’t underestimate her even for 2012 for one second. If she decides to run, it would be hard to bet against her for the nomination. MATTHEWS: Good point. Is she Richard Nixon? Is she going around and picking up chits, proving that she can deliver, carefully selecting winners, avoiding losers when they’re on the right, so that day after this election, like Nixon did in ’66, “Look what I did for the party, I should be the nominee?” RATHER: And goes into the convention with maybe thirty percent of the votes. Imagine that. For approaching two years, America’s press have been mercilessly eviscerating this woman with every opportunity. Now, with Obama plummeting in the polls, and Democrats looking like they’re in a lot of trouble in the upcoming midterm elections, suddenly Palin is not only possibly the most important Republican in the country, but is also a legitimate candidate for President. Is hell freezing over, or is something else at play here? 

View post:
Chris Matthews: ‘Is Sarah Palin The Most Important Republican In The Country?’

Australian PM to fight shock leadership challenge

SYDNEY (AFP) – Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announced a shock ballot Wednesday to fight a challenge from his deputy Julia Gillard, raising the prospect of the country's first female head of government. Rudd, who has slumped in the polls as elections loom, emerged from marathon late-night talks with Gillard and other ministers to tell a hastily convened press conference the vote would be held early Thursday. “I was elected by the people of Australia as prime minister of Australia,” Rudd said. “I was elected to do a job, I intend to continue doing that job. I intend to continue doing it to the best of my ability.” Deputy Prime Minister Gillard confirmed she would be a candidate in the vote, which follows a dizzying turn of events for Rudd's government ahead of elections expected this year. “I confirm I will be a candidate in tomorrow's ballot,” Gillard told reporters in a brief statement. Rudd was in pugnacious mood as he faced journalists in Canberra and detailed his achievements in office since the landslide defeat of conservative prime minister John Howard in November 2007. The centre-left leader is facing down Labor Party factions who have become convinced he is a liability for the upcoming elections following a steep drop in personal support. “I was elected by the people of Australia to do a job. I was not elected by the factional leaders of the Australian Labor Party to do a job — but they may be seeking to do a job on me,” he said. Local media said Labor's factions have swung behind Gillard, who also gained the backing of the powerful Australian Workers' Union late Wednesday and is considered favourite in the vote. Rudd has consistently enjoyed strong popularity until recent months, but his support has suddenly fallen away after a series of missteps and a reinvigorated opposition under conservative leader Tony Abbott. The highly rated Gillard has been playing down prospects of a leadership challenge for several weeks after a poll showed her breathing down Rudd's neck as preferred party leader. “There's more chance of me becoming the full-forward for the Dogs (Western Bulldogs Australian Rules football team) than there is any chance of a change in the Labor Party,” she said last month. Rudd's support has crumbled since he shelved a flagship carbon-trading scheme and a free home-insulation scheme, and unveiled a 40 percent tax on the mining industry, which is heavily invested by shareholders and pension funds. The steep and unexpected fall has left the government in danger of becoming the first since before World War II not to secure a second term. Elections are expected later this year. Last week, top officials including Foreign Minister Stephen Smith were forced to scotch rumours of a leadership challenge. In recent days, the opposition targeted Rudd with attack ads portraying him as a cartoon lemon. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100623/ts_afp/australiapoliticsrudd_20100623145555 added by: Stoneyroad

Who Do You Hate More: BP or Goldman Sachs? [Polls]

This oil spill thing has people heated! And BP CEO Tony Hayward … what a dickhead. Oh, but remember Goldman Sachs ? That filthy rich, monolithic investment banking monster that basically destroyed the global economy? Yeah. Who do you hate more? More

Naoto Kan:Japan PM frontrunner

Japanese Finance Minister Naoto Kan holds a news conference in Tokyo in this April 30, 2010 file photo. Kan is a possible successor to Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama after Hatoyama said on June 2, 2010, he and his powerful party No. 2, Ichiro Ozawa, would resign after a slide in the polls threatened their party#39;s chances in an election expected next month. Japanese Finance Minister Naoto Kan is viewed by many in the markets as frontrunner to succeed Yukio Hatoyama as prime minister,

Read the original post:
Naoto Kan:Japan PM frontrunner

Twin Brother of Poland’s Former President To Run As Country’s Next President

The twin brother of the former president of Poland Lech Kaczynski, who died in a plane crash in Russia just this month together with many Polish dignitaries, says that he will run to be elected as president of Poland. Jaroslaw Kaczynski released a statement that he would stand in the June 20 presidential election despite his “personal pain” after he lost his brother. He wanted to run in order to continue his brother’s mission. The twin founded the Law and Justice party together in 2001. Leck Kaczynski was expected to run for re-election later in the year even though the polls anticipated that he would lose. The Polish analysts pointed out that it is not an assurance whether his tragic death would lead to sympathy vote for his twin brother Jaroslaw Kaczynski. Twin Brother of Poland’s Former President To Run As Country’s Next President is a post from: Daily World Buzz Continue reading