Tag Archives: president

George Stephanopoulos Fawns Over Obama’s Handling of McChrystal Controversy: A ‘Political Masterstroke’

Good Morning America’s George Stephanopoulos on Thursday hyped Barack Obama’s handling of the decision to fire General Stanley McChrystal and replace him with David Petraeus, lauding the action as a ” political masterstroke .” His comments built on extensive media praise on Wednesday, including many reporters who called the move “brilliant.” Stephanopoulos seemed particularly pleased. The former Democratic aide turned journalist extolled, “…That pick really seems to have been the political masterstroke that got President Obama out of the tight box he was in. It’s being welcomed both by Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill.” Reporter Martha Raddatz agreed with Stephanopoulos, enthusing, “Sending Petraeus to Afghanistan is, by all accounts, a great save, for exactly the reasons the President described.” A transcript of the June 24 segment, which aired at 7:04am, follows: ROBIN ROBERTS: But, it, as you know, is a new day, under new leadership for U.S. troops in Afghanistan. After a high-stakes meeting with General Stanley McChrystal, President Obama announced his resignation, the general’s resignation. And named his replacement, the architect of the surge in Iraq, General David Petraeus. GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: And, Robin, that pick really seems to have been the political masterstroke that got President Obama out of the tight box he was in. It’s being welcomed both by Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill. Petraeus is expected to be confirmed quickly by the Senate and to be on the ground in Afghanistan next week. The big question, now, can General Petraeus fix a war effort that has been proceeding in fits and starts? President Obama said he was changing personnel, not policy. But, many wondering if a change in strategy is needed. We have Senator John McCain standing by live to talk about that. But, we’re going to begin with Martha Raddatz and the high drama in the high change of command. And, Martha, it was pretty stunning. 30 minutes with the President and a 30-year career is over. MARTHA RADDATZ: That’s exactly right, George. General McChrystal and his top aide will not be returning to Afghanistan and say good-bye. Their personal effects are being packed up right now for shipping back to the U.S. As an official in Kabul told me this morning, it feels like a death in the family. It all happened so fast. And in retrospect, was so obvious. Cameras trained on a White House entrance, caught Stanley McChrystal leaving his tense and final meeting with President Obama. And a short time later, David Petraeus arrived. He had come for a scheduled national security council meeting about Afghanistan. But we now know that just 45 minutes after McChrystal was ousted, the President called Petraeus to the oval office and asked him to take McChrystal’s job. BARACK OBAMA: He has worked closely with our forces in Afghanistan. He has worked closely with Congress. He has my full confidence. RADDATZ: Sending Petraeus to Afghanistan is, by all accounts, a great save, for exactly the reasons the President described. Petraeus is jokingly referred to by some in the military as a water walker, who seems to turn even the worst situations around. He received enormous credit for that in Iraq, where he served three, different tours, the last overseeing the surge. Ironically, he took over central command in 2008 because the man who was then holding the job, Admiral William Fallon, was ousted, after an Esquire magazine profile put him at odds with the Bush administration. The central command job, headquartered in Tampa, put Petraeus in charge of a swath of global hot spots, from Yemen, to Iran, to Pakistan. A senior administration official joked that sending Petraeus from Tampa to Kabul, was not exactly on the Better Homes tour. But clearly, the President is hoping that the magic touch Petraeus has had in the past, will help him in one of the toughest wars ever. And this may well be the hardest challenge Petraeus has faced. We also don’t know how long he will be in Afghanistan. He has already spent nearly half of the last ten years in a war zone. George?

See the original post:
George Stephanopoulos Fawns Over Obama’s Handling of McChrystal Controversy: A ‘Political Masterstroke’

MRC’s Dan Gainor Responds to Gay Parenting TV on CNN

If you’ve noticed more gay characters with children on television and in movies, you’re not alone. CNN has noticed too, and they’re calling it “the new normal.” In a June 24 segment, Corinne Water reported that homosexuals “hope TV shows like ‘Modern Family,’ ‘Glee’ and the new film ‘The Kids are Alright’ represent a growing trend in Hollywood storylines: gay parents.” The segment featured one opponent to Hollywood ’s normalization of gay parenting: Media Research Center Vice President for Business & Culture Dan Gainor. “ Hollywood has done a great deal of work causing acceptance in American culture for homosexuality,” Gainor said. He added later, “Again, what they’re trying to do is normalize something that a lot of people, certainly in those states, don’t want to normalize.” But Winter’s segment presented Gainor’s view as the abnormal one (even showing his picture in black-and-white for an unexplained reason). Actress Julianne Moore, who stars in “The Kids are Alright,” argued that “the entertainment world reflects popular culture. I think that this was happening in the world. So what you’re seeing in television and in film is what’s going on in our society at large, which is a great thing.” Winter closed the segment by asking a gay couple if they thought they were normal. To absolutely no one’s surprise, they said they were normal parents, and Winter left it at that. However, Winter didn’t mention statistics that suggest Hollywood is not reflecting what’s going on in society, or that gay parenting is not normal. According to Colage , an “national movement of children, youth, and adults with one or more” gay parent, Census data found that that “more than 250,000 people under the age of 18 [were] living with unmarried same-sex couples” in 2000.   Colage argues the number of children with gay parents is higher, but acknowledges that other estimates are speculative. Assume for a moment that a full 250,000 children live with gay parents. They would represent 0.003 percent of the 72.4 million children counted in the 2000 Census. The number itself is extremely small, and it’s not even close to proportionate. Commonly cited estimates guess 10 percent of the population is homosexual. (The Centers for Disease Control found the number was closer to 4.1 percent for each gender in 2002.) CNN anchor Kyra Phillips used the segment to tease an upcoming special, “ Gary and Tony Have a Baby .” Soledad O’Brien’s one-hour special highlights what Phillips called the “struggle” of two gay man trying to have a biological child of their own.

Originally posted here:
MRC’s Dan Gainor Responds to Gay Parenting TV on CNN

NBC: Obama’s ‘Commander-in-Chief’ Moment with McChrystal a Hidden Blessing

On Wednesday’s Today show, NBC’s Chuck Todd touted President Obama’s “swiftness” in dealing with the controversy surrounding General Stanley McChrystal comments in Rolling Stone magazine as a ” commander-in-chief moment ,” and hinted that it was a blessing in disguise, given the executive’s tanking approval ratings. Todd led the 7 am Eastern hour with his report on the President appointing General David Petraeus to replace General McChrystal, who was relieved of command following the Rolling Stone interview. The NBC White House correspondent remarked that with the Petraeus appointment, “the President signaled to his team, no more firestorms like this one will be tolerated.” After playing a clip of Mr. Obama stating that he “won’t tolerate division,” he continued that “the President’s aides don’t expect there will be much division in the Senate, either, where some are predicting Petraeus will have the fastest confirmation in history, and the praise is bipartisan.” Later in the report, Todd used his “swiftness” term as he emphasized the apparent good timing of the controversy and detailed the public’s decreasing confidence in the President, according to NBC’s own poll: TODD: Still, the swiftness of the President’s action is a commander-in-chief moment, at a time when the public is having doubts about his ability . According to a new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, just 45 percent approve of the job he’s doing as president. Forty-four percent believe he’s firm and decisive in his decision making. That’s down from 63 percent 18 months ago. And just under half the country, 49 percent, believe he has strong leadership qualities. That’s down a whopping 21 points from the month he took office. And as the list of domestic problems, like unemployment and the oil spill, pile up on the President’s desk, some say it was vitally important the President buy time on Afghanistan. An on-screen graphic further described that President Obama’s disapproval rating was at 48%, though the correspondent didn’t specifically mention this statistic. Almost a day earlier, Todd lauded the chief executive just as the Petraeus appointment was being made: “Politically, in this town, it’s going to be seen as a brilliant choice by the President.” The full transcript of Chuck Todd’s report from Thursday’s Today show: MEREDITH VIEIRA: Let us begin with the change in command in Afghanistan. Chuck Todd is NBC’s chief White House correspondent. Good morning, Chuck. CHUCK TODD: Good morning, Meredith. Well, after a rare swift set of personnel moves by this White House, the President is now back focused on trying to make his complicated Afghanistan strategy work, rather than fixated on who’s going to implement it. PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: This is a change in personnel, but it is not a change in policy. TODD (voice-over): With General Petraeus by his side, and General McChrystal headed out a side door, the President signaled to his team, no more firestorms like this one will be tolerated. OBAMA: I’ve just told my national security team that now is the time for all of us to come together. I welcome debate among my team, but I won’t tolerate division. TODD: The President’s aides don’t expect there will be much division in the Senate, either, where some are predicting Petraeus will have the fastest confirmation in history, and the praise is bipartisan. SENATOR CARL LEVIN: I admire him and others that respond to that kind of a call from the President. I don’t think he even had a chance to talk to his wife. SENATOR LINDSAY GRAHAM: Dave Petraeus is our best hope. If things don’t change, nobody can pull it out in Afghanistan. TODD: But the hearings are expected to re-ignite the very divisive debate among the two parties about the question of a timetable for withdrawing troops from Afghanistan, scheduled to begin next July. SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN: Whether that is, quote- etched in stone, as the President’s spokesperson, Mr. Gibbs, stated, or whether it will be conditions-based. TODD: Still, the swiftness of the President’s action is a commander-in-chief moment, at a time when the public is having doubts about his ability. According to a new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, just 45% approve of the job he’s doing as president. Forty-four percent believe he’s firm and decisive in his decision making. That’s down from 63% 18 months ago. And just under half the country, 49%, believe he has strong leadership qualities. That’s down a whopping 21 points from the month he took office. And as the list of domestic problems, like unemployment and the oil spill, pile up on the President’s desk, some say it was vitally important the President buy time on Afghanistan. RETIRED GENERAL BARRY MCCAFFREY: It does give the President cover and a strategy, and it does buy him time. He’s putting a leader out there that will not be questioned. TODD (live) Today, the focus stays on foreign affairs, as the President meets with the president of another country who’s familiar with a quagmire-like situation in Afghanistan. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev visits the White House today. The two will hold a joint press conference, and Afghanistan is likely to come up, Matt. MATT LAUER: All right. Chuck Todd at the White House this morning. Chuck, thank you very much.

Read more here:
NBC: Obama’s ‘Commander-in-Chief’ Moment with McChrystal a Hidden Blessing

Ed Schultz Tries to Blame McChrystal, Appointed by Obama, on Bush

Far-left MSNBC ranter Ed Schultz just can’t let facts get in the way of his rank partisanship and liberal propagandizing. His latest whopper, that Gen. Stanley McChrystal was “another problem [President Obama] inherited from the Bush administration,” was blatantly untrue, and just earned him a ” pants on fire ” rating from Politifact.com. Politifact, which has busted up other untruths propagated by media liberals, noted a valuable lesson for liberals and Democrats: “not everything can be blamed on President Bush.” Indeed. Not only did President Obama not “inherit” McChrystal’s command from the previous administration, he “effectively sacked the general in charge to create a vacancy that he then proceeded to fill with McChrystal as his fix-it man,” notes Politifact. We applaud the folks at Politifact for checking Schultz’s inane rantings. Welcome to our world!

More here:
Ed Schultz Tries to Blame McChrystal, Appointed by Obama, on Bush

Comedian Janeane Garofalo talks about her new standup special If You Will, along with Obama, Religion and the controversy her words stirred up on The View (with audio)

Janeane Garofalo returned to the stage in May and recorded an all-new standup special, entitled Janeane Garofalo: If You Will, that airs this weekend on the EpixHD channel. The actress/comedian/activist joined me this morning to talk about If You Will, her avoidance of the Internet, and why she’s so bummed about Obama. Plus, I got her reaction to the recent kerfuffle on The View between Elisabeth Hasselbeck and Joy Behar over comments Garofalo made about prayer and the president. Listen to the full interview (and check out the juicy clip from The View) by clicking here: http://blogs.creativeloafing.com/dailyloaf/2010/06/24/comedian-janeane-garofalo-… added by: joebardi

Scarborough Justifies Decision Not to Talk about Gore Sexual Allegation on ‘Morning Joe’; Calls Topic ‘Unfair’

It’s already been documented that the media have, at least initially, ignored the allegation the global warming alarmist-in-chief and former Vice President Al Gore faced a sexual assault charge in 2006. But why? Although not know for its enlightening commentary, ABC’s June 24 broadcast of “The View” offered an answer for that question. Subbing a moderator for the show’s panel was MSNBC “Morning Joe” host Joe Scarborough, who explained their decision to ignore it was based on “insufficient evidence” despite the police report documenting the allegation. “This is an interesting story,” Scarborough said. “A 2006 police report surfaced of a masseuse claiming former Vice President Al Gore repeatedly attempted, quote, ‘unwanted sexual contact with her during a hotel room massage which lasted for three hours.’ Detectives found insufficient evidence to support the allegations, which leads to my question first, Joy. Should we be talking about it at all? This was in The Oregonian. We decided this morning not to talk about it on ‘Morning Joe’ because there was insufficient evidence. The Oregonian picked it up, then the National Enquirer. Everybody’s going to be talking about it. Should we?” Panelist Joy Behar, who also hosts a HLN primetime show said she suspected there was more to Al Gore’s marital problems than was initially let on. “I’ve been saying all along, though that there is something more to the breakup,” Behar said. “This is the ‘Tipper’ of the iceberg because I think that in fact the guy has a history now. I’m beginning to believe it.” But that wasn’t fair to Gore, who now apparently has a friend in Joe Scarborough. He disagreed with Behar’s assertion. “But we don’t know that,” Scarborough protested. “We’re piling on.” A little later, Scarborough labeled the entire story – that a former sitting vice president would be the subject of such “unfair” media scrutiny. “Let’s get back to Al Gore,” Scarborough said. “Really quickly though, I want to get back to what I think is the unfairness to Al Gore because those of us in New York know that there was a rumor on the front page of the New York Post last week – an unfounded, but a rumor that everybody in New York talked about. Now we’ve got another story out there in The Oregonian. Where there’s smoke, there’s not always fire.” Behar relented and conceded there was a degree of unfairness. “It’s not really fair to the guy,” Behar said. “I’m a comedian. I’m going to go for the joke no matter who it is. It’s not fair.”

See the article here:
Scarborough Justifies Decision Not to Talk about Gore Sexual Allegation on ‘Morning Joe’; Calls Topic ‘Unfair’

Al Gore Won’t Be Charged in Alleged Sexual Assault; Mistress Describes V.P.’s Nasty Moves Anyway

An Oregon massage therapist’s claim of “unwanted sexual contact” by former Vice President Al Gore has been dismissed by authorities, citing lack of evidence. The Multnomah County District Attorney’s office said it would not pursue the Al Gore sexual assault claim, but not before the police report was leaked online. The woman originally claimed Gore “moaned, groaned and moved” like a “crazed sex poodle” and delivered a “come hither” stare … you may vomit on cue. The alleged victim told detectives Gore attempted a “big tongue kiss,” “caressed” her “back and buttocks and breasts” and “shoved” her hand … you know. Gore, who recently split from wife Tipper after 40 years of marriage, fed her chocolate and attempted to coerce her to the bedroom to listen to a Pink song. The National Enquirer broke the story of the woman’s alleged Al Gore sex attack, which she reported four years ago and police revisited last year. He was not charged. But police, for reasons unknown, investigated the case further in 2009. According to the masseuse, it began as Gore booked a massage, saying “Call me Al.” On her arrival at Portland’s up-market Hotel Lucia, Al stretched out his arms to wrap her into an embrace before purposefully dimming the lights, she said. “It was apparent from the beginning he had been drinking,” she claimed. “The hug went on a bit too long and I was a bit taken aback by it. If it weren’t Al Gore I would have seriously questioned the situation right there.” In police documents, which identify “Mr. Stone aka Gore, Al” as the person of interest, the woman claims Gore said he wanted his inner thigh worked on. “I was taught that a massage of the adductors could cause an involuntary erection,” she said, later, for some reason, adding, “I even voted for him in the last election, although in truth I was more accurately voting against Bush.” She said, “When I began doing the requested abdominal area he became vocal with muffled moans, etc. He began demanding that I go lower and massaging on the abdominal area. I was shocked. He further insisted and acted angry.” Describing herself as a Licensed Massage Therapist, the woman said she “went into much deeper shock as it appeared he was demanding sexual favors.” The woman recounted a harrowning story of Gore progressing from moaning loudly during a massage, to launching a crazed attack, before breaking it off. He lured her into the bedroom where he threw himself on top of her, it was also alleged: “He was moaning, groaning, moving in a very suggestive way.” When the session was over, the woman said she left the room to wash her hands. But Gore came over and “caressed my back, and buttocks and breasts.” She said, “I squirmed to try to get out of his grasp telling him to stop.” She told the former V.P. that he was a “crazy sex poodle,” to which he giggled. “He then forced an open mouth kiss on me. I pushed back and said, ‘Stop it. You’re being way too frisky.’ I was distressed and shocked and terrified.” She managed to throw Gore off her body, she claimed, until he grabbed her hand and then started singing along to Pink’s song “Dear Mr. President.” She then asked him, “Just how long where you whacked out after the election? “He replied ‘six-and-a-half years so far,’ just giggling his head off.” As Gore, who has also been accused of having an affair with Laurie David , kept trying to have sex with her, the woman says she responded as such: “I told him he would just have to take matters into his own hands.” Not to be denied, the ex-Veep “pleaded, grabbed me… tongue kissed me… rubbed himself against my crotch saying, ‘You know you want to do it.’” She claimed she managed to break away from Gore and leave the hotel, and at home “took a long, long warm shower and brushed my teeth for a long time to get out the Grand Marnier and Al Gore’s tongue and germs out of my mouth.” In a moment Bill Clinton could probably sympathize with, the woman said she also noticed stains on the front of her pants, at which point “I wondered if it was soap or bodily fluids from Gore pushing up against me repeatedly,” she said. Those pants were saved in a bank safe deposit box, along with a chocolate bar with his fingerprints as evidence, she says. But her story is full of holes. She also described why she didn’t run out the room, claiming she was scared that if she did she would be shot or tased by the politician’s security detail. However, when Detective Cheryl Daul, of Portland Police, questioned the masseuse, she later admitted she saw no security in or near the hotel suite. The woman told investigators she did not want to make money from this, but the National Enquirer says she is trying to sell the story for $1 million. The interview transcript revealed police appeared to trip her up when asking about payment, after she claimed Gore reached for a pocket to pay her. When the police persisted in this line of questioning, the woman realized that in the version of the story she had just told, Gore was in a bathrobe. The case was not pursued “because detectives concluded there was insufficient evidence to support the allegation. Gore has not yet commented.

Go here to see the original:
Al Gore Won’t Be Charged in Alleged Sexual Assault; Mistress Describes V.P.’s Nasty Moves Anyway

Morning Shows Skip Sexual Assault Charge Against Al Gore

All three morning shows on Thursday ignored allegations of “unwanted sexual contact” by Al Gore against a woman in 2006. This is despite the fact that the claim was reported by the AP, the New York Times and the Washington Post . CBS’s Early Show, NBC’s Today and ABC’s Good Morning America all failed to mention the charges made by the Oregon massage therapist that Gore tried to have sex with her. Yet, on June 2, after Al and Tipper Gore announced their divorce, ABC reporter Claire Shipman wondered if the separation meant that “storybook endings” aren’t possible. Logically, wouldn’t the morning show want to follow up with this new development? When Republican Nikki Haley was accused of having an affair with two different men, GMA had no trouble covering the story. On June 9 , host George Stephanopoulos interviewed the South Carolina gubernatorial candidate about the allegations and demanded, “Can you assure South Carolina voters that they’re not going to be embarrassed if they elect you?” On June 7 , he marveled, “And down in South Carolina, they can’t just seem to get enough of it. In the gubernatorial primary, the leading candidate embroiled in a bit of a sex scandal.” The program noted the story again on June 10 . Now, obviously, there are differences. Gore is a private citizen. Haley is running for office. However, there is an actual police report in the Gore case. Additionally, journalists were quite taken with the then-Vice President when he famously kissed his wife at the 2000 Democratic National Convention. Those same reporters have a responsibility to cover unflattering allegation’s about Gore. ABC, although unable to mention the charges on GMA, did note them on the network’s website . A sympathetic headline proclaimed, “Al Gore Sex Abuse Allegations Lack Sufficient Evidence, Say Portland Police.”

See the original post here:
Morning Shows Skip Sexual Assault Charge Against Al Gore

Did Ed Schultz’s Construction Company Get Stimulus Money?

While defending the Obama administration as a champion for small business owners, MSNBC host Ed Schultz revealed that his construction company more than doubled its number of employees in the past year – thanks to the stimulus bill. “We’ve gone from eight employees to twenty employees in the past year, because of the stimulus package,” he said of his construction company. “We’ve put some people back to work. There is some growth.” Schultz made that revelation as a guest on C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal” Wednesday morning. In a segment of the show where he was discussing corporations shipping jobs overseas and skimping on benefits to regular workers and labor union members, Schultz stepped up and defended President Obama. “This President, and this administration, has done more for small business than any other President has in the last thirty years,” he claimed. “There’s more tax incentives on the table right now, there’s more incentives for small businesses to go out and do things, to hire – we never saw this under any other President.” Schultz whined that tax incentives for big corporations hurt the American middle class by providing opportunities for them to send jobs overseas. He credited President Obama with providing opportunities for small businesses to thrive in the United States. However, Schultz also lamented that certain Obama administration policies, such as increasing taxes on foreign earnings, ending secret ballots in union elections, EPA regulation of greenhouse gasses and restrictions on oil are “pro-corporate and anti-worker.” With corporations attacking labor, cutting wages, and going after pensions, Schultz claimed that age discrimination is taking place in the business world, and that “we’ve now developed this culture that it’s not good to pay anybody.”         The transcript of the segment, which aired on June 23 at 9:30 a.m. EDT, is as follows: ED SCHULTZ: Now we’re at a crossroads in this country. We have to make a determination if we believe that having 10 percent unemployment for a long period of time is the direction that we want to go. Do we understand that the social pressure and the economic pressure that that’s going to put on the country? I don’t think that’s where Americans want to go. And I think that we’re going to see a real surge of buy American, a loyalty to American products, because I think the middle class folks in this country have seen exactly what has happened, this attack on labor that has taken place, that all of a sudden it’s okay to reduce wages, or attack people’s pensions. And we’re also seeing in this country right now age discrimination. Because there’s a race to the bottom line. We’ve now developed this culture that it’s not good to pay anybody. And we have to have somewhat of a push for economic patriotism, in reinvestment in people. We have to understand that people make the difference. And if we don’t value that at every level, we’re not going to be the country that we can be. We’re not going to be the country that we were at one time. We still can achieve greatness, but we gotta get the big money out of politics, we’ve gotta get what is destroying the middle class in this country, and reinvigorate this country with breaks for the middle class, and a real focus on job creation. And I think the President’s trying to do that, but — of course the way the Congress is right now, all the bickering that’s going on, and there’s really no bipartisanship to speak of that addresses any of this — I think we’re in for a long struggle here, a real long struggle. (…) HOST: Mr. Schultz, the Wall Street Journal echoes that caller’s sentiment. They have a headline that echoes the caller’s sentiment that business groups say the Obama administration is hostile toward jobs. And they have a list of grievances: Increased taxes on foreign earnings, stalled free trade agreements, shareholder rights to nominate directors, end to secret ballots in union elections, expanded damages for pay discrimination, EPA regulation of greenhouse gasses, and restrictions on oil. ED SCHULTZ: Those were all pro-corporate, and anti-worker. This President, and this administration, has done more for small business than any other President has in the last thirty years. There’s more tax incentives on the table right now, there’s more incentives for small businesses to go out and do things, to hire – we never saw this under any other President. He’s doing anything he possibly can. But the money is tight. The money is very tight. And until we loosen up the lending practices in this country, we’re not going to have – and until small businesses have access to capital, we’re not going to see this turn around. The President is doing everything he possibly can. In fact, the Republicans aren’t even matching him on any of this stuff. They think it’s all about the corporations and all about the top two percent. In the book, I document – and I want this lady to read this book, and come back and tell me if I’m wrong. The number of foreign countries that are operating in this country that don’t pay tax – does she think that’s a good thing? Is it a good thing for corporations not to pay their fair share? Now I’m not here to say that all corporations are bad. They do hire people. But they’ve also shipped a lot of jobs overseas, because we have set the table for them to do that with tax incentives that have come back to hurt the great American middle class which built this country. So when does the little guy get a break? Now I’m a small businessman. I have my own broadcast company, and I also have a construction company. I can tell you about all the things that you have to put together to make a construction company work. We’ve gone from eight employees to twenty employees in the past year, because of the stimulus package. We’ve put some people back to work. There is some growth. There’s incentives on the table for my employees. And so, you know, I don’t have to do this. I could just go fishing at the lake. But we’ve got to have some type of leadership at every level of the economy, and those who have lived the good life, and those who have had the fortune of making a few dollars to put it back into the kids, to put it back into the youth of the country, to care about the infrastructure again. And I don’t see corporations doing that. I see them caring about the foreign countries and getting cheap labor. Well you know what cheap labor’s going to do? Cheap labor’s going to take this country down. And the disposable income is starting to rot away for Americans.   

Read the original here:
Did Ed Schultz’s Construction Company Get Stimulus Money?

Open Thread: An Oily Rebuke of Big Government

The Washington Examiner’s Mark Tapscott argues that ” Big Government is dying in the Gulf oil spill .” It’s not just millions of gallons of black gold spilling into the Gulf of Mexico that are being lost. Also disappearing into watery despair are the last shreds of credibility for progressive Big Government. It’s Day 65 of the Deepwater Horizon spill and the only hope of stopping the flow of thick, gooey crude remains the relief well being drilled by the private sector. None of the ass-kicking political speeches by President Obama, bureaucratic edicts by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar or EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, or hypocritical posturing for the cameras in Congress has plugged the hole to stop the flow of suffocating oil headed to the beaches. We see this week a remarkable confluence of events signaling the eventual end of Big Government: The bureaucrats and politicians can spend trillions but they can’t plug the Gulf oil spill, agree on a budget in Congress or end the Great Recession’s foreclosures and unemployment. Is Tapscott reading too much into the spill, or will the spill be the straw that breaks the big government camel’s back?

Read the rest here:
Open Thread: An Oily Rebuke of Big Government