Tag Archives: rush limbaugh

Howard Dean: Limbaugh, Beck and Ingraham Part of ‘Hate Wing of GOP’

Howard Dean on Tuesday accused Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Laura Ingraham of being part of a “significant hate wing of the Republican Party.” Chatting with Keith Olbermann on MSNBC’s “Countdown” about the Florida pastor that wants to burn Korans on the upcoming ninth anniversary of 9/11, Dean said, “I think the Republican Party has become the party, this really started back with Richard Nixon’s Southern strategy, that appeals to hatred.” He continued, “I don’t think the majority of Republicans are haters, but there is a significant hate wing of the Republican Party, including the talk show hosts like Glenn Beck and Laura Ingraham and Rush Limbaugh and people like that and they don’t dare cross them” (video follows with transcript and commentary):  KEITH OLBERMANN, HOST: Governor, good evening. HOWARD DEAN: And the guy with the longest introduction on television. OLBERMANN: General Petraeus wants this Pastor Jones to cancel the Koran burning. Why aren’t people like Sarah Palin and John Boehner and McConnell and company helping to cut to the nut of this, General Petraeus protect our men and women in uniform? DEAN: Unfortunately, I think the Republican Party has become the party, this really started back with Richard Nixon’s Southern strategy, that appeals to hatred. And I don’t think the majority of Republicans are haters, but there is a significant hate wing of the Republican Party, including the talk show hosts like Glenn Beck and Laura Ingraham and Rush Limbaugh and people like that and they don’t dare cross them. For a long time we’ve thought that Fox worked for the Republican Party. Now we know that Fox really runs the Republican Party. Exit question: when people like Dean, Olbermann, and their ilk spew hate, do they have the slightest understanding of how hypocritical it is to accuse others of being haters, or does their seemingly limitless antipathy for their opponents make this impossible?

Continue reading here:
Howard Dean: Limbaugh, Beck and Ingraham Part of ‘Hate Wing of GOP’

Obama Campaign Manager: Limbaugh, Beck and Palin a Problem for GOP

Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign manager on Sunday said Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Sarah Palin are currently the leaders of the Republican Party, and this represents a long-term problem for the GOP. Appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” David Plouffe was asked about a number of questions facing the nation as well as the President he helped get elected. Apparently feeling the need to do some conservative bashing, host Gregory asked Plouffe about a section from his book “Audacity to Win” dealing with Limbaugh, Beck, and Palin. This set the Obama adviser up nicely to go after targets liberals just love to hate (video follows with transcript and commentary):  DAVID GREGORY, HOST: Finally, a quote from your book, handicapping the Republican field, this is what you write in the new part of “Audacity to Win.” “This is the Republican Party of 2010, and I think it will be the Republican Party for a long time. It is hard to see how a Republican gets the presidential nomination without winning the plurality of the Palin-Limbaugh-Beck base of the Republican Party. Without a drastic change in orientation, they will probably nominate someone a good bit out of the mainstream.” Who do you have in mind? Who do you think is the most formidable Republican likely to challenge President Obama? DAVID PLOUFFE: Oh, I have no idea. I mean, this time four years ago there was very few of us talking about Barack Obama running for president, including me. So I think some of the people that we think are going to run may not run. There’ll be other people who’ll run. We’ll see. I wish I could just sit back with a tub of popcorn and, and enjoy it because I think it’s going to be quite an adventure. MR. GREGORY: But who is the leader of the Republican Party, would you say? MR. PLOUFFE: I think the–I think right now–and this is a problem for them long term–I do think that Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, they are the leaders of the party. And you see whenever–I was struck by–Senator Coburn from Oklahoma, I think, was at a town hall meeting and said, “I don’t agree with anything the Democrats are doing, and I don’t agree with Speaker Pelosi, but she’s a nice person,” and got attacked for that. There, there is an intolerance in that party and an extremism that I think is where the real energy is. And so I think, as you see in ’11 and ’12, as that presidential primary, those are the people that are going to come out to vote. So I think that’s where the real energy is, and I think particularly in, in elections where more people vote, in presidential elections where you have a lot more younger people, minorities, independent voters who skew a little bit more moderate, that’s going to be a big problem. So we’ll just have to wait and see. But let’s get this–through this election first, and then we’ll be right on to the next one. It truly is fascinating the left and their media minions continue to bash Limbaugh, Beck, and Palin. After all, with the possible exceptions of Obama and the Clintons, there aren’t any other liberal political figures in this nation that come close to the popularity and visibility of these three conservatives. As such, suggesting that they represent a problem for Republicans is like saying ground beef and potatoes are bad for McDonalds. Regardless, Gregory just couldn’t resist giving his guest the opportunity to attack three of the nation’s most well-known conservatives. As the jingle goes, “If it’s Sunday…” 

Read the original:
Obama Campaign Manager: Limbaugh, Beck and Palin a Problem for GOP

Ebert: To Not Publicly Declare Obama Is Not a Muslim Is a ‘Crime Against America’

When you think of crimes against America, crimes so dangerous they strike out against the very existence of the country, what comes to mind? Espionage, terrorism, and treason perhaps top the list. But what about not publicly declaring that Barack Obama is in fact not a Muslim? Liberal Chicago Sun-Times film critic Roger “Save the Republic from Palin” Ebert made a federal case out of the latter in a September 1 blog post entitled “Put up or shut up” (emphasis mine): The time is here for responsible Americans to put up or shut up. I refer specifically to those who have credibility among the guileless and credulous citizens who have been infected with notions so carefully nurtured. We cannot afford to allow the next election to proceed under a cloud of falsehood and delusion. We know, because they’ve said so publicly, that George W. Bush, his father and Sen. John McCain do not believe Obama is a Muslim. This is the time — now, not later — for them to repeat that belief in a joint statement. Other prominent Republicans such as Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul also certainly do not believe it. They have a responsibility to make that clear by subscribing to the statement. Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh must join, or let their silence indict them. Limbaugh in particular must cease his innuendos and say, flat out, whether he believes the President is a Muslim or not. Yes or no. Does he have evidence, or does he have none? Yes or no. To do anything less at this troubled time in our history would be a crime against America.

Read this article:
Ebert: To Not Publicly Declare Obama Is Not a Muslim Is a ‘Crime Against America’

Matthews Attacks! McConnell and Limbaugh Trying to ‘De-Americanize Obama’

When Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, on Sunday’s Meet the Press, in response to a David Gregory question about whether Barack Obama was a Christian, told the NBC host that “I take him at his word” Chris Matthews thought that was McConnell using some sort of code language to play to the Birther crowd, as the MSNBC host, on Monday’s Hardball, claimed McConnell’s phrasing was a “Pitch perfect, dog whistle to the haters.” Matthews devoted much of his show to  “The right wing’s attempt to de-Americanize the President” as he invited on Newsweek’s Howard Fineman and the Huffington Post’s Sam Stein to dissect what they thought was some sort of nefarious strategy on the parts of McConnell, Reverend Franklin Graham, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck to ride a “message of fear”  to victory in November. Matthews started the opening segment attacking McConnell for failing to denounce any sort of conspiracy theories as he claimed: “The Republican leader of the Senate played Birther politics with abandon.” He even brought on Fineman — who proudly claimed that since he used to work in McConnell’s home state of Kentucky and therefore “understands it” –to explain to viewers that the Republican senator was trying to get Rand Paul elected by playing to a “nativist appeal” that “really works big time” in that state. However McConnell wasn’t the only target of Matthews’ ire as the conversation soon turned towards Rush Limbaugh: MATTHEWS: Okay let’s go, we gotta get to, we gotta get to Rush Limbaugh, just to complete the hat trick here. Here’s, here’s Mitch McConnell, Reverend Franklin Graham and now Rush Limbaugh today on this topic. Is Barack Obama of the relig-, everybody watching right now, by the way, gets credit for being of the religion you say you are. You go to the church, you go to the synagogue, the mosque, whatever? That’s the one you’re a member of. That’s the one you are. We accept that in America. It’s called freedom of religion and respect for religion. Apparently the new rule is “Oh I take him at his word.” Which means “I really don’t, really have any reason to believe he’s telling the truth.” SAM STEIN, HUFFINGTON POST: There’s a debate, yes. MATTHEWS: Here he is. Here’s Rush Limbaugh on this topic. (Begin clip) RUSH LIMBAUGH: What is the only proof we have that Obama is a Christian? Well, okay. His, his word. His word. But Jeremiah Wright is the only proof that we have that he’s a Christian. Obama described Wright as his spiritual mentor. Well we, sorry, media. We’ve heard Jeremiah Wright. We know what Jeremiah Wright said. We know what he thinks of America. (End clip) MATTHEWS: Does everybody watching know what was going on right there? Smearing this guy? I mean, does everybody know what’s happening here? He didn’t answer the question. Rush Limbaugh has an IQ as high as anybody’s around. He’s a smart guy. He knows exactly what he’s doing here. He switched the topic from what a man says his religion is to “How much do we hate Jeremiah Wright?” FINEMAN: Yeah well, everybody who watches this show knows exactly what’s going on because we’re explaining it to them. And this has a deep history of fearing the other, of fearing the outsider. Look Barack Obama came in as a president representing something new, big change- MATTHEWS: Right. FINEMAN: He kind of came out of nowhere. This scares the heck out of these people. And they’ll use any element of fear they can. The following is the a full transcript of the entire first segment as it was aired on the August 23 edition of Hardball: CHRIS MATTHEWS: Good evening, I’m Chris Matthews back in Washington. Leading off, tonight “Who is Mitch McConnell and why is he saying those terrible things about me?” Yesterday the Republican leader of the Senate played Birther politics with abandon. What did he say when asked whether President Obama is of the religion he says he is, quote, “I take him at his word.” And there you have it. Why do 34 percent of Republicans say Obama is a Muslim? Why do only 27 percent of Republicans say he’s a Christian? Only 23 percent say he was born in America. One reason might be that people like Republican leader Mitch McConnell go on Meet the Press, as he did yesterday, and say things like, “I take him at his word,” when asked if the President is, as he says, a Christian. Pitch perfect, dog whistle to the haters. “Yeah sure, whatever he says, right.” This is not about belief. It’s an accusation that President Obama is not one of us. The right wing’s attempt to de-Americanize the President is our top story tonight. … MATTHEWS: We’ll start with the attempt to de-Americanize President Obama. Newsweek’s Howard Fineman is an MSNBC political analyst and Sam Stein is a political reporter for the Huffington Post. I want you gentlemen to watch what happened on Meet the Press yesterday. Here’s Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell on Meet the Press. Let’s listen to the give and take between he and moderator, David Gregory. (Begin clip) MITCH MCCONNELL: The President’s faith in the government to stimulate the economy is what people are questioning. DAVID GREGORY: That, that, that certainly is a sidestep to this particular question. Again- MCCONNELL: Well no I…. GREGORY: As a leader of the country sir, as one of the most powerful Republicans in the country, do think you have an obligation to say to 34 percent of Republicans, in the country rather, 31 percent who believe the President of the United States is a Muslim. That’s misinformation! MCCONNELL: The President says, the President says he’s a Christian. I take him at his word. I don’t think that’s in dispute. GREGORY: And do you think, how do you think it comes to be that this kind of misinformation gets spread around and prevails? MCCONNELL: I have no idea. But I take the President at his word. (End clip) MATTHEWS: Well, there you have it, Howard. In politics I think we call that “trimming.” When it’s apparent, apparent to the person listening to you, you’re not really believing the person, but you’re just voicing something that undermines him. HOWARD FINEMAN, NEWSWEEK: Yeah, and that’s what Mitch McConnell was doing there. I’ve covered him ever since he was county judge in Louisville, Kentucky, over the years. He knows how to play the cultural fault lines and divides here. And he does it in a very low key, kind of syrupy, Kentucky way. But that’s, that’s what he’s doing, that’s clearly what he’s doing. MATTHEWS: Parsing his words in a way that says he is not lying but- FINEMAN: Okay now I e-mailed Karl Rove. I said, Karl Rove, what do you think? Do you think, do you have any doubt that, that Barack Obama is a Christian? Karl Rove e-mailed back, “None whatsoever.” On the other hand, I contacted the RNC’s office, the Republican National Committee’s office here in Washington. I said what is Michael Steele, the chairman, saying about this? Nothing. Here’s what Michael Steele, here’s what the answer was. “That’s not an issue the committee has discussed.” MATTHEWS: Ha! FINEMAN: “We’re focused on how the Obama-Pelosi-Reid agenda is blah, blah.” That’s the same approach here. MATTHEWS: By the way, you’re always great. This is one thing I like about you. The reporting is up to the minute. FINEMAN: I’m just trying to keep up with Sam. MATTHEWS: No but I mean, I mean, I want to get to Sam, but the fact of the matter is the Republican National Committee knows this is a hot issue, today. FINEMAN: Yes. MATTHEWS: They’re prepared to answer it, and their answer is “We’re not talking.” FINEMAN: The answer is “We’re not talking.” Which allows Mitch McConnell to be the spokesperson. MATTHEWS: Okay, look Sam, there’s no accident out there. The American people are all listening to this conversation. This conversation here is like it is at a bar room somewhere, in a car pool somewhere. And somehow this delves down to the following. That 27 percent of the American people who knows this guy says he’s a Christian, believe he is. SAM STEIN, HUFFINGTON POST: Yeah. MATTHEWS: I’m not talking about what the right religion is. Nobody actually knows what the right religions is. Everybody says what theirs is, obviously. But 27 percent of the people believe him. STEIN: Yeah. MATTHEWS: On the fact of what his religion is, only 23 percent believe, hard fact, he was born here – of the Republican party. This is a highly prejudicial issue. Republicans have a very different issue, position on this than most Americans do. STEIN: Sure. MATTHEWS: Why? STEIN: Well- MATTHEWS: Is Mitch McConnell to blame because of this pussyfooting or whatever the right word is, yesterday? STEIN: Well first off I want to up my reporting chops here. I reached out… MATTHEWS: What’s the latest? STEIN: I reached out to McConnell’s office after this happened. And they were insisting that he wasn’t trying to do anything of the sort. That he was being straight forward in saying he believes the President. Now to borrow their phrase, I guess I’ll take him at his word, the spokesman for Mitch McConnell. What I think’s going on here is you have a dichotomy. You have the Republican establishment that is perfectly willing and fine to let the commentariat, predominately, spread this stuff. MATTHEWS: Mitch McConnell says he’s a Republican. I take him at his word. STEIN: I take him at his word as well. But listen, you have Glenn Beck, you have the Rush Limbaughs. MATTHEWS: And what are they all saying? STEIN: You have Franklin Graham, who actually was out there, saying very, you know, authoritatively that… MATTHEWS: Let’s take a look at Franklin Graham. Let’s talk about Franklin Graham who is a man who has played this politics. Not the son of Billy Graham, he is the son of Billy Graham. He’s speaking here as Franklin Graham. A guy who’s engaged in this kind of anti-Muslim comments before. Here he is on CNN this past Thursday. Let’s listen. (Begin clip) FRANKLIN GRAHAM: The President’s problem is that he was born a Muslim. His father was a Muslim. The seed of Islam is passed through the father. Like the seed of Judaism is passed through the mother. He was born in a Muslim. His father gave him an Islamic name. Now it’s obvious that the President has renounced the prophet Muhammad and he has renounced Islam. And he has accepted Jesus Christ. That’s what he say he has done. I cannot say that he hasn’t. So I just have to believe the President is what he has said. (End clip) MATTHEWS: What is this precious bodily fluids crap we’re getting from this guy? The seed of Islam. If he’s a Christian, of course, Billy Graham’s son is a Christian. I take him at his word. STEIN: Yeah, yeah. MATTHEWS: But the fact is he’s out there saying that Islam believes the seed the seed comes from the father. What is this talk about? STEIN: Well this is my point here. And that is… FINEMAN: There’s a person in Iowa that… MATTHEWS: What is he talking about? STEIN: Yeah well this is my point, is that you have a commentary, you have a section of the Republican Party that’s talking like this. And now we’re seeing it start to filter into the actual Republican officials. We, we reported today that an RNC member in Iowa, a woman out there, actually firmly believes that Republican, that sorry, that Barack Obama is a Muslim. And she’s out there publicly saying… MATTHEWS: And who is she? FINEMAN: This is some RNC committee woman. MATTHEWS: So she’s official. FINEMAN: She’s a member, she’s a member of the Republican National Committee, in Iowa, in Iowa- STEIN: Yeah. FINEMAN: -the state that has the first caucuses. MATTHEWS: Okay let’s go, we gotta get to, we gotta get to Rush Limbaugh, just to complete the hat trick here. Here’s, here’s’ Mitch McConnell, Reverend Franklin Graham and now Rush Limbaugh today on this topic. Is Barack Obama of the relig-, everybody watching right now, by the way, gets credit for being of the religion you say you are. You go to the church, you go to the synagogue, the mosque, whatever? That’s the one you’re a member of. That’s the one you are. We accept that in America. It’s called freedom of religion and respect for religion. Apparently the new rule is “Oh I take him at his word.” Which means “I really don’t, really have any reason to believe he’s telling the truth.” STEIN: There’s a debate, yes. MATTHEWS: Here he is. Here’s Rush Limbaugh on this topic. (Begin clip) RUSH LIMBAUGH: What is the only proof we have that Obama is a Christian? Well, okay. His, his word. His word. But Jeremiah Wright is the only proof that we have that he’s a Christian. Obama described Wright as his spiritual mentor. Well we, sorry, media. We’ve heard Jeremiah Wright. We know what Jeremiah Wright said. We know what he thinks of America. (End clip) MATTHEWS: Does everybody watching know what was going on right there? Smearing this guy? I mean, does everybody know what’s happening here? He didn’t answer the question. Rush Limbaugh has an IQ as high as anybody’s around. He’s a smart guy. He knows exactly what he’s doing here. He switched the topic from what a man says his religion is to “How much do we hate Jeremiah Wright?” FINEMAN: Yeah well, everybody who watches this show knows exactly what’s going on because we’re explaining it to them. And this has a deep history of fearing the other, of fearing the outsider. Look Barack Obama came in as a president representing something new, big change- MATTHEWS: Right. FINEMAN: He kind of came out of nowhere. This scares the heck out of these people. And they’ll use any element of fear they can. Sometimes I think Rush Limbaugh is amusing. Sometimes I think he’s useful in the conversation. This is wrong, because ministers such as Joel Hunter, who’s a conservative Republican of Florida, is one of the people- MATTHEWS: Right. Approved putting- FINEMAN: -is one of the people that, whom Obama consults with- MATTHEWS: Making your point- FINEMAN: -who he talks to all the time. There, there are- MATTHEWS: We got the new Pew poll out says 34 percent say he’s a Christian. One in three, even though he says he is. You’d think most people would get credit for what they say. That’s down from 48 percent in March of 2009. Eighteen percent say he’s Muslim, 43 percent say they don’t know. This “don’t know” thing is getting out of hand. That’s the game that Mitch McConnell is playing – “I don’t know.” STEIN: Yeah see… MATTHEWS: “I don’t know” is a character assault. If somebody says, “I’m Jewish” and [somebody] says “No way, you’re not.” That’s a character assault. You are, who you say you are in this country. And if somebody says you’re not who you say you are, they’re calling you a liar. STEIN: Yeah. MATTHEWS: It’s basically what you’re saying. It’s worst than any religion, to call a guy a liar. STEIN: Well the whole, the whole idea is to seed doubt. I mean there’s so many conflicting, contradiction labels that they’re putting on this man. It went from a black liberation theologist, to a communis, to a Marxist to a Muslim sympathizer, to a Muslim himself. MATTHEWS: Okay here’s a question. Pure politics. They got the economy in bad shape, most people are hurt. Middle aged people are getting hurt. People are losing jobs. Companies are dropping people they’ve had for years. Right? It’s not the usual unemployed. All kinds of people are facing unemployment right now. They got high debt that doesn’t sell. They got taxes maybe about to be back raised again, back to Clinton levels, at least. They have all of the things going for them. Why are the Republicans playing the dirt ball game when they don’t need it? This is like Nixon when he could have won an election easily, he still reverted to this. I don’t know why people do this. Why are they using this? STEIN: We were talking about, we were talking about this and trying to put it in historical context, in looking back at the Great Depression when there were smears against Franklin Roosevelt for being a supposed Jew. And I think a lot of it has to- MATTHEWS: Well that was Coughlin. Pretty far out. STEIN: Yeah I mean driven by… MATTHEWS: Did actual, did actual Republicans say that stuff? FINEMAN: But millions and millions of people listened to Father Coughlin back in the day. MATTHEWS: Yeah. FINEMAN: But the answer to your question is right now there are two tracks. There’s the economic track and there’s this track involving immigration, race and religion. MATTHEWS: Right. FINEMAN: What I foresee happening is the two of them coming together at some point. MATTHEWS: November election then? FINEMAN: Sam was making the point earlier, when people are worried about the economic status that they have, they’re more open to- MATTHEWS: To a scapegoat. FINEMAN: -these kinds of appeals of fear. MATTHEWS: Hey we’ve seen this! FINEMAN: And we’ve seen it with immigration and you may see it with the Islam issue as well. MATTHEWS: Okay here’s the question. Sam, hard question and then back to Howard. STEIN: Sure. MATTHEWS: Could it be that Mitch McConnell as a politician? Just guessing? STEIN: Shocking, yes. MATTHEWS: I take him at his word. He’s a politician. Okay, he knows he’s got a very good chance of picking up four or five Senate seats, but still being at the short end of that thing. Still having to face whoever the Democrats have. Whether it’s Harry Reid or it’s Chuck [Schumer] or it’s Dick Durbin or somebody running the party. But he may well be on the short end, probably. I looked at the numbers. We all, it’s very hard for him to run 11 to 1 which he would have to do among the top 12 races to get the 10 point, 10 seat pick up. Could it be that he figures this is gonna be the winning cap? “We’ll win on the economy, win five or six seats on the economy and then we’ll take it away on culture and ethnicity and, and, and Americanism. That we can really knock the Democrats out of the batting box on this and grab the Senate.” STEIN: If that is- MATTHEWS: With this, with this stuff. STEIN: If that is his philosophy, the he is actually going against some people in the Republican Party who insist that’s the wrong way to go about it. They look back at the impeachment trial- MATTHEWS: How do they get hurt? STEIN: They go back to the impeachment trial of Clinton and say that, that, that detracted from the idea that it should have been all about the economy. MATTHEWS: Yeah but Clinton was popular. STEIN: True. FINEMAN: I think, I think and, most of the time, Karl Rove thinks that the economy is the way to do it. Okay? So he sort of agrees… MATTHEWS: That’s how Reagan got elected. FINEMAN: Okay and Karl goes back to George W. etcetera and don’t forget George W. was rather benign on some of these issues related to culture and so forth. MATTHEWS: Back in 2000 he was! FINEMAN: Okay, he was. But Mitch McConnell is looking at it through the lens of Kentucky. And since I used to work there, I understand it. MATTHEWS: He wants Rand to win. FINEMAN: And that’s a native, that’s a state where the nativist appeal outside of Louisville really works big time. He’s trying to defend this guy, Rand Paul. And they’re gonna use whatever fear message they can. MATTHEWS: So the nativism is aimed at the center of the country? FINEMAN: Well it’s aimed at Kentucky, for sure. MATTHEWS: Yeah okay, well that’s what we’re looking at. And I like doing this, on this show. Understand why people do what they do. These guys like Mitch McConnell know exactly what they’re doing. When he says “I take him at his word,” those words are crafted. Thank you. As always, you won on the reporting, by the way. FINEMAN: No I didn’t. MATTHEWS: Howard Fineman, Sam Stein. This guy working his reporter’s notebook to the last minute. He’s the best this the business. Later on this show I’m going to tell you what I really think about some of this sleazy and dangerous stuff, I’ve begun to. It’s smart, if you’re evil.

Link:
Matthews Attacks! McConnell and Limbaugh Trying to ‘De-Americanize Obama’

Schultz Mocks Rove Radio Work, But Can’t Pronounce ‘Cousteau’

From the Department Of People In Glass Houses . . . Early in his MSNBC show this evening, Ed Schultz mocked Karl Rove’s performance in filling in for Rush Limbaugh today.  In particular, Schultz slammed Rove for his brief problem in providing the show’s call-in number.   But later in the show, Ed himself ran head-first into a rhetorical roadblock, stumbling badly when it came to pronouncing the most famous name in the world of ocean studies: Cousteau. ED SCHULTZ: And in Psycho Talk tonight, Karl Rove filled in for the Drugster [Schultz’s nasty nickname for Rush] on his radio show today, and I think old Turd Blossom should probably stick to his day job across the street over at Fox . . . Rove’s debut as a radio host was a total disaster. Right off the bat he had a hell of a time finding the call-in number, even though it was right on the screen in front of him. But later, it was Ed’s turn to pronounce a name so famous it’s the first one that comes up in Google search when you type in Jacques.  Here was Ed’s heroic struggle as he sought to introduce Phillipe, grandson of the famous oceanographer. SCHULTZ:  Coming up . . . world-renowned environmental expert Philippe Castoo, Cas–, Coh-stow will join us, coming up here in just a moment.  Give Phillipe credit for his French sang froid in–just–managing to suppress a smirk at poor Ed’s problems. Note: Ed also let some professional jealousy creep into his roasting of Rove/Limbaugh. Schultz spoke sarcastically [longingly?] of “that high-impact, totally-entertaining, right-wing radio on five million stations across America that we just can’t live without.”

Read more:
Schultz Mocks Rove Radio Work, But Can’t Pronounce ‘Cousteau’

NPR Publicizes Apology of Sarah Spitz for Limbaugh Death Wishes, Insists She’s Not on Their Payroll

NPR’s blog The Two-Way is running the apology of public-radio producer Sarah Spitz, who claimed to her fellow liberals on JournoList she would “Laugh loudly like a maniac and watch his eyes bug out” if Rush Limbaugh were dying in front of her. But they also wanted to insist that her ties with NPR were few: In fact, Spitz has never been an NPR employee. For many years, she has worked for  KCRW , a public radio station in Santa Monica, California, as a producer and publicist. KCRW is one of some 900 independently-operated public radio stations across the country that air NPR’s news, talk and entertainment programming. Like network TV affiliates, they air national programming but act autonomously. At 2:10 p.m. ET, Spitz issued this statement: I made poorly considered remarks about Rush Limbaugh to what I believed was a private email discussion group from my personal email account. As a publicist, I realize more than anyone that is no excuse for irresponsible behavior. I apologize to anyone I may have offended and I regret these comments greatly; they do not reflect the values by which I conduct my life. NPR also wanted to relay that their Santa Monica affliate offered regrets:  And in an email to NPR, Jennifer Ferro, KCRW’s general manager, said “the private comments made by one of our employees, Sarah Spitz, are regrettable for all of us at KCRW.” Sarah is a longtime employee of KCRW. Please note that she is not affiliated or employed by NPR, nor does she work as a journalist, as has been incorrectly reported in the media. Sarah was not acting in her position as KCRW Publicity Director when she wrote these comments. She spoke in the heat of the moment without consideration to the impact her words would have. We’ve all said things we didn’t mean and don’t reflect our core values. We believe that was the situation in this case. KCRW has, and always will be, dedicated to civil discourse and the free exchange of ideas. Since 1991, Spitz has contributed  six pieces to NPR’s flagship magazine programs,  Morning Edition and  All Things Considered , about arts and culture in the greater Los Angeles area, on a freelance basis. Her most-recent story , about an art exhibit at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA), aired in 2006. Three pieces — profiles of writer Ariel Dorfman and choreographer David Rusev, and a report on a literary conference — predate NPR’s Internet archive. Anna Christopher, NPR’s senior manager of media relations, says that, since The Daily Caller posted its piece this morning, just after midnight, she has been in touch with organizations that have misidentified Spitz. Many of them, including The Daily Caller, have corrected the error. As the Spitz story shows, there is a bit of blur inside the public-radio system when it comes to the programming and the payroll. Spitz worked for KCRW, but she offered freelance reports for NPR. KCRW gets taxpayer money from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and sends some of it back to NPR in fees for its news programming. Spitz’s show Left Right & Center is on the NPR Podcast directory and airs across the country on almost 40 NPR affiliates .  By the way, Spitz also produces a show called The Politics of Culture, with such recent topics as “Homophobia in Sports” and “Alt-Econ: A Radical Approach.”

Read more:
NPR Publicizes Apology of Sarah Spitz for Limbaugh Death Wishes, Insists She’s Not on Their Payroll

WaPo Obit Tones Down Climate Scientist’s Recent Attack on ‘Hitlerian Lies’ and ‘Gun-Toting Rightwingers’

The Washington Post obituary for liberal climate scientist Stephen Schneider, a media favorite over the years to promote the allegedly ironclad certainty of global warming, replayed a very recent jeremiad against “Hitlerian lies” by conservatives in the wake of Climategate. But the Post’s version of his remarks toned him down and excised his attacks on “gun-toting rightwingers” who are Limbaugh and Beck fans. T. Rees Shapiro reported: His passionate views on the climate debate occasionally attracted vitriol from extremist groups. An FBI investigation recently found he was named on a neo-Nazi “death list,” and Dr. Schneider said he received hundreds of hate e-mails a day. “What do I do? Learn to shoot a magnum? Wear a bulletproof jacket?” Dr. Schneider said. “I have now had extra alarms fitted at my home, and my address is unlisted. I get scared that we’re now in a new Weimar Republic where people are prepared to listen to what amounts to Hitlerian lies about climate scientists.” Nonetheless, Dr. Schneider said he believed it was important for scientists to communicate with the public and spread their understanding of climate data and findings. “If we do not do the due diligence of letting people understand the relative credibility of claimants of truth, then all we do is have a confused public who hears claim and counterclaim,” Dr. Schneider said in a recent interview with Climate Science Watch. “When somebody says ‘I don’t believe in global warming,’ I ask, ‘Do you believe in evidence? Do you believe in a preponderance of evidence?’ ” For a fuller version of Schneider’s remarks, we turn to the leftist British newspaper The Guardian  on July 5, in which correspondent Leo Hickman warned “Climate scientists in the US say police inaction has left them defenceless in the face of a torrent of death threats and hate mail.” Schneider sounds less like a scientist and more like an activist:   Schneider described his attackers as “cowards” and said he had observed an “immediate, noticeable rise” in emails whenever climate scientists were attacked by prominent right-wing US commentators, such as Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh . “[The senders] are not courageous people,” said Schneider. “Where are they getting their information from? They just listen to assertions made on blogs and rightwing talkshows. It’s pathetic .” Schneider said the FBI had taken an interest earlier this year when his name appeared on a “death list” on a neo-Nazi website alongside other climate scientists with apparent Jewish ancestry. But, to date, no action has been taken. “The effect on me has been tremendous,” said Schneider. ” Some of these people are mentally imbalanced. They are invariably gun-toting rightwingers. What do I do? Learn to shoot a Magnum? Wear a bullet-proof jacket? I have now had extra alarms fitted at my home and my address is unlisted. I get scared that we’re now in a new Weimar republic where people are prepared to listen to what amounts to Hitlerian lies about climate scientists.” The Post obituary made no reference whatsoever to Schneider’s arguments in the 1970s that the real peril was global cooling . That apparently would have been too much of a concession to the gun-toting rightwingers.

Here is the original post:
WaPo Obit Tones Down Climate Scientist’s Recent Attack on ‘Hitlerian Lies’ and ‘Gun-Toting Rightwingers’

Biden Tells Leno He Wanted To Send Rush Limbaugh to Russia in Spy Swap

Vice President Joe Biden on Friday told Jay Leno that he wanted to send Rush Limbaugh to Russia as part of last week’s spy swap. As a special guest of the “Tonight Show,” Biden was asked why we traded ten of their spies for four of ours.  “Well, we got back four really good ones,” joked Biden. Leno then showed a picture of Anna Chapman and asked, “Do we have any spies that hot?” Biden stammered, “Let me make it clear, it wasn’t my idea to send her back…I thought maybe they’d take Rush Limbaugh or something” (video follows with transcript and commentary, relevant section at 0:55):  JAY LENO, HOST: I want to ask about this Russian spy swap. We traded ten for four. Now, I know our math skills are not as good as they should be, but that doesn’t seem fair. Why, why did we trade ten for four? VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: Well, we got back four really good ones. LENO: Yeah. [ Laughter ] BIDEN: And the ten, they’ve been here a long time, but they hadn’t done much. LENO: Are they just sort of like moles, they just sort of plant people here and say, “See what you can find out?” Or do they come with a specific mission, “You’re going to go work for Lockheed” or “You’re going to work for…” BIDEN: The former. LENO: Yeah. Okay. Now, show him, this Russian woman here, let me ask you something. And you would know this, Mr. Vice President. Do we have any spies that hot? [ Laughter ] BIDEN: Let me make it clear, it wasn’t my idea to send her back. [ Laughter ] Wasn’t mine. [ Cheers and applause ] I wanted, anyway. [ Laughter ] I thought maybe they’d take Rush Limbaugh or something. LENO: There you go. BIDEN: You know what I mean? That would have been a good — a good move. This would be a great joke if it didn’t have such underlying truth to it. After all, the way this administration has treated its adversaries in the media, you think they would ship all their detractors to foreign lands if they could. 

Read the original:
Biden Tells Leno He Wanted To Send Rush Limbaugh to Russia in Spy Swap

Olbermann Mangles Another Fact, Claims Abe Lincoln Only Lost One Election

In today’s “What Fact Did Keith Olbermann Mangle Now” segment, the host of MSNBC’s “Countdown” on Tuesday hysterically mocked Arizona senatorial candidate Sharron Angle for claiming Abraham Lincoln lost “quite a few” elections. “Just for the record, do you know how many elections Abraham Lincoln lost in his lifetime?” Olbermann arrogantly asked. “Seven of eight he won,” answered MSNBC’s hottest property. Just for the record, Olbermann wasn’t even close to being right (video follows with transcript and commentary, h/t The Corner ): KEITH OLBERMANN, HOST: It`s Tea Time. If I asked you which Tea Partier was likeliest to compare themselves to Abraham Lincoln, could you guess? Yes, it`s Sharon obtuse Angle from Nevada, in the middle of a fawning interview with a supporter who confessed to once predicting she would not win the nomination. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BILL MANDERS, SHARRON ANGLE SUPPORTER: I said you`ve lost; how are you going to win this? I don`t possibly think that you`re going to win it. SHARRON ANGLE (R), TEA PARTY CANDIDATE FOR SENATE: That`s right. MANDERS: And then you surprised everybody and won this nomination. ANGLE: That`s right. MANDERS: This opportunity to run against the beast, Harry Reid. ANGLE: Well, you know, it`s just like Abraham Lincoln. He lost quite a few. But he won the big one. He won the one that mattered for this country. And really that`s what we`re in. MANDERS: Do you think you`re too — (END VIDEO CLIP) OLBERMANN: Oh, now you`re Abraham Lincoln? I`m beginning to doubt you`re even Sue Lowden. Just for the record, do you know how many elections Abraham Lincoln lost in his lifetime? The Illinois state assembly in 1832. He prevailed in four elections for state assembly, one for Congress, two for president. Seven of eight he won. Sharron Angle, I knew Abraham Lincoln`s won-loss record, and you`re no Abraham Lincoln. For those that didn’t catch it, Olbermann was spoofing that infamous moment in the 1988 vice presidential debate between Lloyd Bentsen and Dan Quayle. Deliciously, it is the “Countdown” host that was no Jack Kennedy in this instance, for as Jeffrey Lord reported at the American Spectator Friday, Olbermann was 100 percent wrong: Here’s Abraham Lincoln’s actual score with elections. He did indeed win four state assembly elections, and lose in 1832, just as Olbermann says. In fact, Abe ran 8th in a field of 13 candidates back there in 1832. Here’s Lincoln’s record with voters, per [Pulitzer Prize winning Lincoln biographer Carl] Sandburg: 1832 — Lost his first race for the state assembly 1834 — Won a seat in the state assembly 1836 — Won re-election 1838 — Won re-election 1840 — Won re-election 1842 — Lost a race for Congress to John Hardin (per biographer Sandburg. Lincoln actually came in behind a friend, Edward D. Baker — losing his own Sangamon County delegates to Baker. Later, he would name one of his sons for Baker). Lincoln structures deal that Hardin, Baker and finally himself would each serve back-to-back single terms in Congress. 1846 — Wins congressional seat, succeeding his friend Baker, who had succeeded Hardin. As per the Lincoln deal. 1854 — Elected again to the Illinois legislature, but loses a race for the United States Senate to Lyman Trumbull. Writes to a friend: “I regret my defeat moderately, but I am not nervous about it.” Mary Lincoln was so enraged at this loss that she never again spoke to Trumbull’s wife Julia — who had been a bridesmaid at Mary and Abe’s wedding. 1856 — Loses the vice-presidential nomination of the new Republican Party to William L. Dayton, a former U.S. Senator from New Jersey. Dayton received 259 votes to Lincoln’s 115, becoming the running mate of John Charles Fremont. Hearing of his defeat, Lincoln laughs and says, “It must be some other Lincoln.” 1858 — Lincoln loses a race for the United States Senate to legendary rival Senator Stephen A. Douglas. In the course of the campaign, the two travel Illinois in what are known to history as the “Lincoln-Douglas” debates. The debates help make Lincoln — and his pro-union, anti-slavery argument — famous. 1860 and 1864 — Elected and re-elected president. In other words, Keith Olbermann was not only wrong but so wide of the truth and the facts as to give Bill Clinton on Monica a good reputation. Sharron Angle, on the other hand, was right. Making her remark 100 percent factually correct. Lincoln ran 13 times, according to biographer Sandburg, not eight as Olbermann said with such assured smugness. Lincoln lost not once, as Mr. Drama Queen asserted, but, again according to the Pulitzer winning biographer, five times. Once for the state assembly, once for Congress, once for vice-president and twice for U.S. Senator. The latter Senate race famous to this day.  So, on Tuesday evening, Olbermann selectively edited and cherry picked from a Rush Limbaugh radio transcript to make the conservative talk show host look like a racist AND completely misrepresented history to smear a Republican senatorial candidate. All in a day’s work for a liberal shill at MSNBC I guess.  Adding insult to injury, the “Countdown” host Wednesday called former Alaska governor Sarah Palin an idiot. You were saying, Keith? 

Go here to see the original:
Olbermann Mangles Another Fact, Claims Abe Lincoln Only Lost One Election

Keith Olbermann Cherry Picks Rush Limbaugh to Make Him Look Racist

The lengths Keith Olbermann will go to attack his adversaries knows no bounds. On Tuesday, he selectively edited and cherry picked from a Rush Limbaugh radio transcript in order to make the talk show personality look racist. Most disgracefully, the “Countdown” host completely avoided telling his few viewers that Limbaugh was referring to truly disgusting statements the Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s Cynthia Tucker made on ABC’s “This Week” Sunday. With total disregard for the truth or any sense of journalistic integrity, here’s what Olbermann said during his “Worst Person in the World” segment Tuesday (h/t Meredith Jessup ): KEITH OLBERMANN, HOST: Speaking of which, there‘s tonight’s hands down winner, Boss Limbaugh. These quotes speak for themselves and for a diseased and failing mind. “If Obama weren’t black, he’d be a tour guide in Honolulu or he‘d be teaching Saul Alinsky Constitutional law or lecturing on it in Chicago,” said the college dropout, Rush Limbaugh. “He wouldn’t have been voted president if he weren‘t black. Somebody asked me over the-oh, I need to remember. Somebody asked me over the weekend, why does somebody earn a lot of money, have a lot of money. I said it‘s because he’s black.” This the guy who once said the media was conspiring to make Donovan McNabb of the Eagles to be a better quarterback than he actually was because he was black. “It,” Limbaugh said, “was Oprah,” said the guy who doesn‘t have half Oprah Winfrey’s talent, or income. “No, it can’t be,” he continued. “Yes, it is. There’s a lot of guilt out there. To show we’re not racist, we‘ll make this person wealthy and big and famous and so forth.” Stop the tape. Actually, that’s NOT what Limbaugh said. Here’s the real version from RushLimbaugh.com: RUSH LIMBAUGH, HOST: Cynthia Tucker, ABC’s This Week, Sunday, roundtable, they discussed Michael Steele. And, by the way, this woman is the editorial director of the Atlanta Urinal and Constipation, and she has been for a long, long time. “Cynthia you once called Michael Steele an affirmative action hire gone bad.” By the way, she can say this because she’s African-American. Here’s what she said. CYNTHIA TUCKER, ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION: Michael Steele is a self-aggrandizing gaffe-prone incompetent who would have been fired a long time ago were he not black. Of course the irony is that he never would have been voted in as chairman of the Republican Party were he not black. LIMBAUGH: Same with Obama. TUCKER: It is very ironic since the Republican — LIMBAUGH: Stop the tape a second. That’s exactly the same thing you could say about Obama. He wouldn’t have been voted president if he weren’t black. Somebody asked me over the weekend why does somebody earn a lot of money have a lot of money, because she’s black. It was Oprah. No, it can’t be. Yes, it is. There’s a lot of guilt out there, show we’re not racists, we’ll make this person wealthy and big and famous and so forth. The Chicago Sun-Times today has this story, it’s amazing, “How did we get conned, how did we get fooled? My God we’ve elected an empty suit. We elected somebody who had no experience, no idea what he was doing, the empty suit cost $5,000.” I thought my God, they finally woke up, they’re talking about Obama, but no, they’re talking about Blago. They’re asking themselves in Chicago how they got conned by Blagojevich! And you read this, and I will share it with you as the program unfolds, it could be written about Obama. So Cynthia Tucker says, yeah, he wouldn’t be hired by the GOP if he weren’t black. BREAK TRANSCRIPT RUSH: Washington awaits my fatwa on Michael Steele. Washington is paralyzed today until I issue my findings on this. The first thing I have to say about this: Cynthia Tucker said Steele would only have the gig if he was black. If Obama weren’t black he’d be a tour guide in Honolulu or he’d be teaching Saul Alinsky constitutional law or lecturing on it in Chicago, and if somebody’s “entitled to a couple of gaffes,” why do we still have Senator Bite Me running around as Vice President Bite Me, who is a walking gaffe every time he opens his mouth and he’s not even black! So what’s the Democrats’ excuse for having Joe Bite Me around as vice president? As such, Limbaugh was commenting about what Tucker said on “This Week” two days earlier. For those that missed it, here it is:  JAKE TAPPER, HOST: Cynthia, you once called, let me underline “You” once called Michael Steele an affirmative action hire gone bad. What’s your take on this? CYNTHIA TUCKER, ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION: Well, Michael Steele is a self-aggrandizing, gaffe-prone incompetent who would have been fired a long time ago were he not black. Of course, the irony is that he never would have been voted in as Chairman of the Republican Party were he not black. Let’s remember how the Party wound up with Michael Steele. In November 2008, the Party was devastated that the Democrats had elected the nation’s first black president while the Republican Party was stuck with being seen as largely the party of aging white people, with good reason. A party that was hostile to people of color, especially blacks and Latinos. So the Party needed a new face, preferably a face of color, and they didn’t have very many officials to choose from. So, they came up with Michael Steele. And it is very ironic since the Republicans have been so critical of affirmative action, to watch them stuck with their affirmative action hire that they dare not get rid of because that would generate even more controversy.  Not surprisingly, Olbermann NEVER told his audience this:  OLBERMANN: There it is. See, the United States is tilted in favor of black people. That‘s the premise. We have made it so easy that human beings inferior to the great Rush Limbaugh, the fired by ESPN one month into his dream job, Rush Limbaugh-inferior creatures like Obama and Oprah Winfrey have been made wealthy and big and famous and so forth. They have not earned it. They aren‘t actually talented. They haven‘t actually done the job. Oprah Winfrey and Barack Obama and presumably every other black person in this country has not succeed despite the fact that they‘re black, when this country is still filled with racists like this homunculus Limbaugh. They‘ve succeeded because they‘re black, and only because they‘re black. Well, you heard it. It‘s naked, ugly racism. It‘s the distillation of Rush Limbaugh‘s view of our country. The only other thing I can say is, Oprah, please, crush this schmuck, huh? Rush Limbaugh, overt racist, today‘s worst person in the world.   Also not surprisingly, the shills at Huffington Post on Wednesday reported Olbermann’s claim word for word without checking to see if he had accurately quoted the target of his disaffection. Maybe the fact-check-loving Arianna should get her staff to fact-check Olbermann’s screeds before they parrot them – or would that be too much journalism for Ms. Huffington?  As for Olbermann, the idea that MSNBC tolerates this kind of misreporting should be offensive to Americans on both sides of the aisle. Sadly, it seems unlikely to stop, doesn’t it? 

Link:
Keith Olbermann Cherry Picks Rush Limbaugh to Make Him Look Racist