Jeremy Scahill is interviewed by Chris Hayes on the Rachel Maddow Show. added by: treewolf39
Comments Off on Taliban Imposter
Posted in Celebrities, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged bennyhollywood, Breaking News, content, Education, Hollywood, jeremy-scahill, rachel, rachel-maddow, scahill, TMZ
Ed Schultz: secret NewsBusters fan? You have to wonder. This column has twice— here and here —taken the un-svelte Schultz to task for his hypocrisy in making repeated fat jokes at the expense of Chris Christie, culminating in calling the NJ guv a “fat slob.” On his MSNBC show this evening, an apparently contrite Ed admitted that he too was fat and would understand if others also considered him a “fat slob.” I began to suspect something was afoot early in the show. On the one hand, Schultz launched into yet another long diatribe against Christie. After taking numerous solo shots at the NJ guv, Schultz brought in a NJ teacher of the year, who was happy to be described as “strongly against Gov. Christie.” The pair proceeded to rake Christie over the coals, paying scant attention to the brutal budgetary problems facing the Garden State that have forced Christie to make reforms. But—in stark contrast with previous shows—the fat jokes had demonstrably disappeared. And sure enough, in the tease for a subsequent segment, Schultz said “I admit that I’m fat.” Then came this show-closer . . . ED SCHULTZ: Before I say “that’s the Ed Show, I’m Ed Schultz” I want to say this: there was a time in my life when I was 263 pounds but I’ve really worked at it and I’m down now to 247. But I want all of you to know that I’m not only fat, I have red hair. And growing up they really picked on red heads where I came from, and I’m not offended by any of you who think I’m a fat slob.
Excerpt from:
Schultz Sorry About Christie Cracks? Says OK To Call Him ‘Fat Slob,’ Too
Comments Off on Schultz Sorry About Christie Cracks? Says OK To Call Him ‘Fat Slob,’ Too
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged chris-christie, considered-him, country, Hollywood, msnbc, over-the-coals, professor-obama, rachel-maddow, the ed show, white, White House
CNN’s John King on Wednesday mocked Barack Obama for calling Fox News a “destructive” force in our society while at practically the same time a White House spokesman was saying MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow provide “an invaluable service” to the country. As NewsBusters reported Tuesday, the President bashed FNC in a just-published interview with Rolling Stone magazine shortly before his Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton was praising MSNBC during a gaggle held on Air Force One. With this in mind, on Wednesday’s “John King USA,” the host surprisingly derided the White House’s inconsistency (video follows with partial transcript and commentary): JOHN KING, HOST: Sometimes you feel sad to be left out of a big debate. This is not one of those sometimes. In an interview with “Rolling Stone,” President Obama voiced the opinion that Fox News is a “destructive” force in our society. On the other hand, the left hand in this case, Obama spokesman Bill Burton said the President believes MSNBC commentators Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow provide “an invaluable service” to that same society and democracy. So, according to the President this is “destructive.” King then played clips from “The Glenn Beck Show” and “Hannity.” After they concluded, King said, “And, according to the White House, this is ‘an invaluable service.'” He then showed clips from “The Ed Show” and “Countdown.” After getting some opinions from his panel, he turned to CNN contributor Gloria Borger and asked, “What happened to this? This is the President of the United States, it’s May 1st, it’s the University of Michigan, he’s giving the commencement speech, and Professor Obama is trying to tell Americans of all political persuasions, ‘Listen to each other.'” BARACK OBAMA: For if we choose only to expose ourselves to opinions and viewpoints that are in line with our own, studies suggest that we become more polarized, more set in our ways. After the clip ended, King said to his guests, “I think he’s right. In that commencement speech, he’s right.” Indeed, but as NewsBusters reported at the time, Obama didn’t mean those words. Quite the contrary, what has come out of this White House in the past week is exactly how he feels, and that commencement address in May was just another in a never ending litany of campaign speeches Americans should take with a grain of salt. Somewhat surprisingly, King not only seems to be feeling that way, but he’s also willing to point out the hypocrisy on the air. Bravo, John. Bravo.
Link:
John King Bashes Obama for Calling Fox ‘Destructive’ and MSNBC ‘Invaluable’
Comments Off on John King Bashes Obama for Calling Fox ‘Destructive’ and MSNBC ‘Invaluable’
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged Cnn, countdown, country, ed schultz, hannity, Obama, professor-obama, rachel-maddow, society, stars, the ed show, white, White House
Wow, I didn’t realize this until watching radical left MSNBC host Rachel Maddow’s September 16 rant bemoaning the “great, unacknowledged, big honking policy issue of this year’s elections nationwide.” That is, at least 5 Republican , Tea Party -backed US Senate pro-life candidates oppose aborting innocent babies whose fathers are sexual criminals. With Christine O’Donnell of Delaware newly added to the list, the roster includes Sharron Angle of Nevada, Ken Buck of Colorado, Joe Miller of Alaska, and Rand Paul of Kentucky. This is as it should be, which I’m thrilled to know. This must have pro-aborts quaking. They have managed for decades to get Americans to go along with 100% of abortions by appealing to their compassion for mothers impregnated by rapists and family members, whose abortions account for no more than 1.5% of all, according to Guttmacher . Many pro-life politicians, including President Bush , have caved on this point, which is contradictory. Either all preborns are human beings, or they’re not. If they are, they must all be protected. In fact, abortion protects rapists, particularly friends and family. A prime example would be the imaginary victim Maddow described, a “14-yr-old girl who is raped by your uncle, or by your father.” Even Joycelyn Elders , President Clinton’s pro-abort attorney general, stated pregnancy is evidence of sexual abuse. Abortion destroys the evidence. Who doesn’t think the 1st thing a victimizing uncle or father would do is take the pregnant 14-yr-old for an abortion? Click to enlarge… Almost every time I write on the topic of rape and pregnancy I refer to this excellent article pointing to the only study ever done on this topic. It found first that 75-85% of mothers impregnated by rape do not abort. Abortion should not be presumed in these cases. It concluded that mothers who abort their babies following rape are psychologically worse off than those who did not. One reason is abortion is also a violent act; many rape victims reported they felt like it was “medical rape.” Mothers who did not abort felt they were helping good come from evil and in a sense conquering their rape. Themselves having been victimized, they did not want to victimize their baby. This is yet another great political development in a year full of great political developments in our fight to protect innocent preborn life.
Link:
Maddow Laments That Five Pro-Life GOP US Senate Candidates Have No Rape/Incest Exception
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged celeb news, compassion, democrat, glenn-beck, joycelyn-elders, lost, president-bush, rachel maddow show, rachel-maddow
Not how I’d mark an anniversary, but MSNBC is flexible in its alleged standards. On Sept. 8, Rachel Maddow told viewers it was two years since her cable show started on MSNBC. And what better way to enter her third year of televised liberal polemics than with Maddow’s trademark melding of smarm and deceit. The following night, Maddow railed at Newt Gingrich and Citizens United for producing and marketing a documentary warning Americans of the threat from radical Islam, after she complained about Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck charging admission to a meet-and-greet on Saturday, the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks (first of four parts in embedded video) — Do you want to know who else has realized the merchandising potential of the 9/11 anniversary this year? In partnership with Citizens United — yes, the same Citizens United that won the Supreme Court case that says corporations can pour limitless cash into American elections — former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has put together a very scary new movie. It’s called ‘America At Risk’ and they have decided to give ‘America at Risk’ its national launch date on (pause) 9/11, whereupon it can be yours for the low, low price of $19.95 plus $4 shipping and handling. Act now, operators are standing by. The trailer for the new launched-on-/9/11 movie is already up online. Here’s an excerpt and I actually should tell you up front that I admit to modifying this excerpt to be able to put it on this TV show in a way that allows me to live with myself. For the first few seconds of this video, I’m not actually going to show you the video part of what Newt Gingrich decided to put on screen while making the argument you will hear him making here. Because the video in the original, the video that he shows while making this argument, the images he chooses to use to sell this stuff, what he is showing is graphic video, graphic video from the real 9/11. And I am not going to help him market that. So, I will show you this clip so you know what this is, you will hear what he says, but I am not going to show the 9/11 ‘sploitation video that he shows while he says it. Ah, how noble. And the “graphic” images Maddow couldn’t bear to share with viewers? There were two, blurred out of focus by Maddow (and both can be seen at the trailer here , starting at 1:01) — the towers from a distance of about a half-mile, the north tower burning, the south tower not yet hit. The second image is of a man giving his coat to a female traffic cop at a dust-clogged Ground Zero and the woman quickly putting the coat to her face to help her breathe or cover an injury. The fleeting images are seen for all of three seconds, if that. One could make the argument that every image from 9/11 is graphic and painful to witness. What Maddow claims here as especially graphic is a stretch, to put it kindly.The first of the two images is smoke billowing from one of the towers, from a distance, with not a single person visible in the frame. Given the brevity of the footage of that follows, of the woman holding a coat to her face, it is difficult to determine if she had been burned or otherwise injured or was gasping for breath. What Maddow does here is a version of what liberals have done for nearly a decade — airbrushing 9/11 from our history. Toward that end, they stake a proprietary claim to any and all images from the atrocity, at least when cited by conservatives, and proceed to deem the images too graphic for public consumption. Why? To avoid the most awkward question of all — why did it happen? Such discourse leads inevitably to Iraq, as liberals are keenly aware. Not to Iraq as complicit in the planning and execution of the attack, of which there is no evidence. No, Iraq as the rationale for al Qaeda attacking to begin with, due to the jihadists’ towering twin grievances of infidel troops in the Peninsula of Muhammad and UN sanctions on Iraq for flouting Security Council resolutions to disarm in good faith. Maddow also talked on Sept. 9 about the controversy surrounding Dove World Outreach Center pastor Terry Jones’s vow to burn copies of the Koran on the 9/11 anniversary. Members of the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan., notorious for their obnoxious protests outside the funerals of American soldiers, claimed to have burned a Koran in public in Washington, D.C., in 2007, and garnered scant attention. Here’s Maddow’s take on then and now (second clip in embedded video, starting at 2:24) — What’s different now, the reason no one paid attention to crazy Fred Phelps’ Koran-burning antics and almost literally everyone in the country is paying attention to the Koran-burning antics of this equally crazy Florida guy, is because today the sentiment behind I’m-a-crazy-guy-who’s-gonna-burn-me-some-Korans-on-9/11 is being carried into the mainstream by a current of extreme anti-Muslim, we’re-at-war-with-Islam rhetoric. You really want to know why we’re all suddenly paying attention to one lunatic in Florida who’s been threatening to burn copies of the Koran? This is why — … whereupon Maddow shows an excerpt from the “America at Risk” trailer again, starting with remarks by Newt and Callista Gingrich — as if the Gingriches and this documentary warning of radical Islam motivated Jones in his vow to burn copies of the Koran. For anyone not in a coma over the last month, a more obvious explanation comes to mind — Jones was responding to Imam Rauf’s proposal to build an “Islamic community center” near Ground Zero, and doing so in an equally odious, constitutionally protected provocation. After the “America at Risk” trailer is shown again, Maddow says this (starting at 3:24 in video) — Not just crazy guys who scream at house plants, like the Florida pastor, but supposedly serious political figures like Newt Gingrich have been banging this drum on the right that we in America are at war with Islam. Not with terrorists, with Islam, with an entire religion, with anybody who is a Muslim. And that’s why we’re all talking about the Koran-burning kook in Florida. Sorry, no. The actual reason “we’re all talking” about this is due to allegedly moderate Imam Rauf, the one who describes America as “sharia compliant,” and who humbly seeks to build a Muslim shrine — in a building damaged on 9/11. (In other words, at Ground Zero) That’s the context here, Ms. Maddow, your grasping contortions to the contrary. For Maddow to say Gingrich claims America is at war with “Islam”, with “an entire religion,” isn’t just a stretch, it’s dishonest. Gingrich — as he has since well before 9/11 — is warning of the peril from radical, militant Islam, not Islam itself. It’s not just in the trailer to “America at Risk” where Gingrich makes this distinction. While the documentary was being made, Gingrich spoke at the American Enterprise Institute in late July on the same subject and said this (link to transcript here ; first quote on page 10) — Let me just say I believe that it is very important to draw a distinction between radical jihadis, which I define simply (as) those people who seek to impose sharia, and those Muslims who seek to practice their religion within a framework of the modern world. I would allow each Muslim to define themselves in that sense, but I would be unequivocal about the fact that radical Islamists are not compatible with the modern world and not compatible with civilization as we know it and therefore we are engaged in a long struggle. To Maddow and her ilk, any criticism of radical Islam becomes condemnation of all Muslims, just as any criticism of a (liberal) person of color is immediately deemed racist. Later in her show Sept. 9, while talking with New York Times columnist Gail Collins, Maddow make this telling remark (third part of video, starting at 3:50) — MADDOW: I made the case in the opening segment, in which I yelled and I’m sorry but I feel a little emotional about it, that the reason that this is getting driven the way it is, and sort of why this kook guy without a congregation who otherwise would be very happily ignored by everybody involved in the creation of news in this country … … which is how Maddow sees her role, “happily” involved in the “creation of news” — as opposed to “coverage” of news. You know, the sort of thing done by actual journalists. “Creation of news,” for example, taking the form of ignoring actual threats to this country — from jihadists — while manufacturing alleged threats, from those warning of jihad. Maddow revisited the “America at Risk” documentary the following night after showing remarks from President Obama at his press conference that day, juxtaposed with those from President George W. Bush after 9/11 (final clip in video, starting at 4:11) — MADDOW: It sounds like all-American rhetoric when a president, any president, makes the case that Muslim-Americans are Americans too, that we are at war with terrorists, we’re not at war with Islam, that religious freedom wasn’t just a founding principle of this country, it is a living principle of this country. Yes, you heard right — “we are at war with terrorists.” Mark your calendar, it’s not often you hear a left winger acknowledge this. And hitting high above her average, Maddow gets it two-thirds’ correct. Yes, we’re at war. Yes, it’s with terrorists. What she can’t bear to point out is that we’re not at war with Basque or Tamil Tigers or any of dozens of other terrorist groups around the world — it’s with Islamic terrorists. Such is the practice of useful idiocy. As Gingrich also said at the American Enterprise Institute in July (transcript here , page 10 for following quote) — The left’s refusal to tell the truth about the Islamist threat is a natural parallel to the 70-year pattern of left-wing intellectuals refusing to tell the truth about communism and the Soviet Union. If you go back and look at all the years of disinformation, all the years of denial, that were the left’s response to communism, why would you think that the next threat to Western civilization will be more accurately studied? This is why the secular-socialist system is itself such a threat. It is the natural pattern of secular-socialist intellectuals to prefer our opponents to us and to accept their lies over our truths. If you doubt that, go look at any study of the 70-year pattern in which the left consistently apologized for the Soviet empire, and look at the shock of the left when Ronald Reagan described the evil empire. Or the pattern of the last decade in which the left demanded that jihadists were spared from harsh interrogation, and condemned Bush and Cheney as greater war criminals than bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.
Visit link:
Rachel Maddow Hits Two-Year Mark at MSNBC With Signature Dishonesty
Here is how the Wall Street Journal began its lead editorial, “Victory in Iraq,” on Aug. 20 — When the men and women of Fourth Brigade, Second Infantry Division deployed to Iraq in April 2007 as part of President Bush’s surge, American soldiers were being killed or wounded at a rate of about 750 a month, the country was falling into sectarian mayhem, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had declared that the war was ‘lost.’ On Wednesday, the ‘Raiders’ became the last combat brigade to leave Iraq, having helped to defeat an insurgency, secure a democracy and uphold the honor of American arms. For viewers of NBC and MSNBC earlier that week, the title of Fourth Brigade, Second Infantry Division would likely have struck a chord — on Aug. 18, both networks interrupted their scheduled broadcasts with exclusive live coverage of the brigade crossing the border into Kuwait, the last US combat brigade to leave Iraq. The two networks’ coverage went far beyond that, however. NBC’s chief foreign correspondent, Richard Engel, was embedded with the brigade as it left Iraq while MSNBC cable show host Rachel Maddow weighed in from Baghdad. Maddow remained in Iraq for the rest of the week, broadcasting four hours of her show from there, an hour more than usual. Yet through all that coverage, much of it focused on this specific combat brigade’s departure from Iraq, at no time did Maddow (nor any of her NBC/MSNBC colleagues appearing on her show) mention when the brigade went to Iraq — in April 2007, at the start of the much-maligned surge that was surely doomed to fail. Or so we were repeatedly told. Not that Maddow was obligated to mention the surge in her lede, as it were, as did the Wall Street Journal (on the opposite side of the political divide) in its editorial. But surely she could have cited it even once during her three days in Baghdad. Then there was Maddow’s arch retelling of recent Iraqi history (first part of embedded video) — The history of Iraq for the last generation is, Saddam taking power, a decade of the war with Iran, where we took Iraq’s side, then the first American war, then a decade of sanctions, then the second American war, toppling Saddam, presiding over a civil war, and now there’s us leaving. After all that, good luck! Hope it all works out for you guys! I was reminded of this specific Maddow revisionism while watching her show on Wednesday, when she began a segment claiming this (second part of video) — I am a crier. Some people cry at the sound of Harry Chapin’s ‘Cat’s in the Cradle,’ others at ‘Old Yeller’ or the end of ‘Where the Red Fern Grows’ where Billy visits his dogs’ graves. I cry at those things too. But the one surefire way to see tears streaming down these cheeks is a live rendition of our nation’s national anthem. It doesn’t matter if it’s a baseball game or an ad for a pickup truck or, God forbid, a busker on the subway, it’s just one of those things, some people like me are hard-wired to sob by the time the broad stripes and bright stars are so gallantly streaming. How noble indeed. More people might believe this if Maddow were not so willing to imply moral equivalence between the butchery of Saddam’s totalitarian regime and American efforts to thwart his lawlessness after Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990. At the end of her stint in Baghdad, Maddow reported from the home of a “working class, poor Shiite family” (third and final part of video) — … and they’ve agreed to talk with me a little bit about, you know, what everybody likes to talk about over dinner — politics, war and George Bush. … followed by Bush not coming up in the discussion, as can be seen in the segment in its entirety on Maddow’s MSNBC site. Here was an infrequent example of something on Maddow’s show that piqued my interest — what would a “working class, poor Shiite family” in Baghdad say about George W. Bush? One safely assumes from the fact Maddow is teasing this that the Iraqis will excoriate Bush. But if they did, it somehow didn’t make it into the segment that ran. Most likely scenario — Maddow said this before the interview when she intended to ask her Iraqi hosts about Bush, followed by her forgetting to do so and them not mentioning him. Another scenario that can’t be ruled out — any of the Iraqis praising Bush, thereby ensuring that such blasphemy would not be heard by Americans watching MSNBC.
Originally posted here:
Rachel Maddow’s Shabby Reportage on Iraq Extends to Iraq Itself
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged Breaking News, country, Dogs, fourth-brigade, Hollywood, interview, iraq, iraqis, News, president, rachel-maddow, richard-engel, street-journal, subway, time
Rachel Maddow on Wednesday mocked the math skills of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie only seconds before she made the exact same arithmetic mistake she bashed him for. In a short segment about the state of New Jersey losing some education funding as a result of errors made during the application process, the MSNBC host placed all the blame on the new Republican governor. To put a fine point on what Maddow claimed was Christie’s incompetence, she played a video of the Governor on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” earlier in the day misstating the number of points Ohio edged out New Jersey for this award. Hysterically, when the clip ended, Maddow made the very same subtraction error (video follows with transcript and commentary): RACHEL MADDOW, HOST: Even while talking about the application process, Governor Christie has still been making some basic mistakes as evidenced by his appearance on this network this morning. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) GOVERNOR CHRIS CHRISTIE, (R-NEW JERSEY): We came in eleventh, ten people won, and we lost by 2.2 points… UNKNOWN MALE: Next year. CHRISTIE: …to Ohio. UNKNOWN MALE: Next year. CHRISTIE: If there’s more money. I doubt there will be. (END VIDEOTAPE) MADDOW: 2.2? According to the Department of Education, Ohio got 440.8 points in the final phase, and New Jersey got 437.8 points which is not three points. It’s 2.2 points. I don’t know if there was a math section, but if there is, I bet that’s Obama’s fault, too. Nice job, Rach. You really are the smartest gal in the class. Maybe more hysterically, the story doesn’t end there, for someone must have noticed Maddow’s error and decided to re-film this final section for the video to be posted at MSNBC’s website and possibly the reruns. See if you notice a little difference: MADDOW: 2.2 points Governor Christie? According to the Department of Education, Ohio got 440.8 points in the final phase and New Jersey got 437.8 points which using math – using my powers of math comprehension that’s three points not 2.2. I wonder if there’s a math component to the test. If there is, I bet that’s Obama’s fault, too. Makes you wonder how many takes they needed for Maddow to finally get it right.
Excerpt from:
Maddow Mocks Gov. Christie’s Math Skills Before Making Same Subtraction Error
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged Barack Obama, chris-christie, Education, final, governor, Hollywood, jersey-governor, msnbc, News, politics, rachel maddow show, rachel-maddow
Alas, it wasn’t supposed to end this way, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow lamented to NBC foreign correspondent Richard Engel in Baghdad last week after the departure of the last American combat brigade from Iraq. Engel recounted his experiences covering the war, getting into Iraq on false pretenses just before the US-led invasion in 2003 and spending considerable time in the country thereafter (first part of embedded video) — MADDOW: So you were here throughout for the first five, six years of the war? ENGEL: Yes. I took little breaks but, straight, I was here 10, 11 months a year. MADDOW: So when you, thinking now in August 2010, this is ending. I mean, Operation Iraqi Freedom ends now and did you have any idea this is the way that it would end? ENGEL: It’s ending with a little bit of a whisper. MADDOW (plaintively): Yeah. … and not with that Saigon-style rout I so anticipated … ENGEL: I mean, if you remember back, the huge media coverage, there were cameras everywhere, there were hundreds of embeds. Well, look at the media circus now? (turns around, arms raised for emphasis) This is it. There’s nobody here. (turning to face Maddow directly) I mean, we’re on a big base. When the war began there were cameras and cameras (repeating himself) and embeds and hundreds of reporters (ditto) fighting with each other to be part of this. … unlike those who parachute in long after the dust has settled … MADDOW: Hmm hmm. ENGEL (apologetically, arms extended to Maddow, damage control instinct kicking in): I’m really glad that you came … … why would you think otherwise …? ENGEL: … and I’m glad we’re covering it, but there’s nobody here. MADDOW (wanly): Yeah. ENGEL: So it’s ending so quietly. So I didn’t expect that it would end like that. At the start of the next segment of her show on Aug. 19, Maddow lobbed a shot back across Engel’s bow (second part of clip) — MADDOW: We’re at the Palestine Hotel with (gesturing toward Engel) some jerk who we picked up on the street … …. “nobody” here, huh …? The following night, on Aug. 20, Engel walked with Maddow through a Baghdad marketplace and stressed once more how he was really, really happy she was there (third part of clip) — MADDOW: Can we walk? ENGEL: Yeah, please do. … whatever … MADDOW: So when you, when you’re out in Baghdad, making this decision to take me here and do these things today … ENGEL (interrupting): I’m delighted that you are here … … again, why on earth would you think otherwise …? ENGEL: … I really am, we haven’t done this and we don’t do this enough … … Let’s mark our calendars and do it again, same time next decade …
Read more here:
Forced Bonhomie Between Rachel Maddow and NBC Colleague Richard Engel Results in Cringe-Inducing TV
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged after-the-dust, baghdad, country, engel, maddow, open thread, operation-iraqi, palestine-hotel, rachel maddow show, rachel-maddow, TMZ, video
Rachel Maddow has nothing but contempt for the so-called Southern strategy by which Republicans have allegedly courted the votes of Southern white males through veiled or overt race-baiting. Which makes it all the more peculiar for Maddow to engage in a Southwestern strategy of slandering Republicans as racist toward Latinos in order for her to garner votes for Democrats. Here is the most recent example of Maddow doing this, on her MSNBC show Aug. 12 and 13. On both nights, reporter Morgan Loew of the CBS affiliate KPHO in Phoenix was one of her guests. On her Aug. 12 show, Maddow described how three inmates escaped from Arizona State Prison in Kingman, the latest in a string of break-outs from privatized prisons in Arizona stretching back to 1996. Maddow then segued to saying this (first part of embedded video) — MADDOW: After this incredible record of achievement, after all of these prison escapes from private prisons, how did the state of Arizona decide to proceed with the issue of prison privatization? Even as prison privatization declines around the country, even as state budget cuts make it so that many states are closing facilities or reducing their sentencing guidelines so that fewer people are in prison altogether, how did the state of Arizona decide to proceed? As Maddow says this, the graphics on screen show a photo of Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, a map of Arizona and the capitalized word “INCARCERATION,” with “INC” set off in red font. MADDOW: Last year Arizona state officials moved legislation to try to privatize the whole state prison system! Arizona planned to seek bids from private companies for nine of the state’s 10 prison complexes. It was the first effort by a state to put its entire prison system under private control. Great news for the private prison companies, right? Great news in particular for Corrections Corporation of America, which is the single largest private prison company in the country. CCA already runs six detention facilities in Arizona. They hold prisoners from other states at their facilities in Arizona. They also hold the federal contract to hold federal detainees in the state. Here’s where Maddow makes her shabby insinuation, one that backfired after what Loew would soon reveal — MADDOW: So, you know what would be awesome for a company like that? You know what would be awesome, it would be really awesome for the shareholders and everybody? If the state of Arizona started producing a whole lot more federal detainees, people detained on federal issues. Federal issues like, I don’t know, say, immigration violations? Footage is then shown of Brewer signing SB 1070, Arizona’s anti-illegals law, as Maddow says … — MADDOW: Imagine the boon to the private for-profit prison company that has the contract to house federal detainees in Arizona if Arizona came up with a wacky plan to arrest a lot more people for suspected immigration violations. Imagine how awesome a law like SB 1070 would be for an industry like the for-profit private prison industry in Arizona. Maddow proceeded to air a report by Loew for KPHO in Phoenix, detailing how Brewer’s deputy chief of staff, Paul Senseman, is a former CCA lobbyist whose wife still lobbies for the company; and Brewer policy advisor Chuck Coughlin owns High Ground Public Affairs consulting, which represents CCA. (To see the Maddow segment in its entirety, link here ). In Loew’s report, Brewer was quoted as saying that Senseman “does not advise the governor on these issues”; CCA stated that it “did not lobby at any time … anyone in Arizona on the immigration law.” To remind viewers of her insinuation about Brewer’s rationale for signing SB 1070, Maddow added this — MADDOW: Then again, why would you need to lobby when two of the governor’s top people are your lobbyist, your former lobbyist, and/or married to your lobbyist? But after Maddow introduced Loew, and Loew rehashed the details of his reporting on Senseman, Coughlin and CCA, Loew mentioned this awkward fact right at the end of his interview with Maddow (second part of embedded video, starting at 1:56) — LOEW: In addition, in Arizona we have a mindset among a couple of key legislators that privatizing the prison industry is a good thing. As you mentioned, they tried to privatize the entire system last year. The governor did veto that after the state corrections director sent her a letter saying, look, we can’t imagine having death row inmates in private prison systems and having death row inmates being taken care of by the lowest common bidder. Excuse me, did you say “the governor” — by whom you mean Jan Brewer, correct? — vetoed the bill to privatize nearly all of Arizona’s state prisons? Shortly before she signed SB 1070, the law that would create vast penal colonies of suspected illegal immigrants? Apparently Brewer missed the memo on this fine-tuned, lucrative conspiracy. Maddow’s flimsy premise having been demolished before her eyes — by a simpatico guest, no less — she invited Loew back the next night to harrumph about links between Republican state senator Russell Pearce, a major backer of SB 1070, and the private prison industry. (full segment from Maddow show linked here ). Once again, Loew served up an inconvenient fact right at the end of his discussion with Maddow (third part of embedded video, starting at 2:28) — MADDOW: Morgan, am I also right that in thinking that Russell Pearce was the man behind the effort last year to privatize all of Arizona’s state prisons? LOEW: He was. He sponsored that legislation and we looked through his legislative record and it looks like as far back as 2003 he was pushing legislation that was calling for the privatization of state prison beds, I think 1,000 beds back in 2003, another 1,400 before that. But the biggest one is the bill that you just referred to, which would have handed over our entire prison system to the private prison industry. Now, that bill was vetoed but another bill passed that essentially did the same thing. Last year, our prison system would have, in a sense, most of it, would have been handed over to the private prison industry, but none of those companies would come forward to bid on them. Once again, this fine-tuned, lucrative conspiracy — thwarted by the alleged conspirators.
See the rest here:
Crash! Inconvenient Facts Demolish Rachel Maddow’s Premise on Rationale for Arizona’s Anti-Illegals Law
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged arizona, arizona law, bennyhollywood, jan brewer, Phoenix, politics, private, rachel maddow show, rachel-maddow
Breaking Sports Video
Pac-12 NCAA Sports
Justin Bieber Fan Site Breaking News
