Rachel runs down the list of GOP hypocrites who have been willing to go against everything that the Obama administration and the Democrats have proposed but are willing to go home and hold up big checks and take credit for that money coming into their local economies without batting an eye. As Rachel points out, it's not a secret that they've done this, and they don't care. And they are never, never, never going to vote with the Democrats no matter what they do or how much they extend their hand to the Reblicans and try to work with them.

As Rachel pointed out, Think Progress has done a lot of great work on the subject and here are a few examples.

GOP Senate Candidate Rep. Mike Castle Takes Credit For Over $5 Million In Stimulus Funds He Voted To Kill

In KY, McConnell Brags About Stimulus Projects, Requests More Money; In DC, McConnell Says Stimulus Should End

Republicans Who Opposed The Stimulus Continue To Pan It As A ‘Failure,’ While Also Taking Credit For Its Success

Jindal Tours Louisiana Attacking ‘Washington Spending’ While Handing Out Jumbo-Sized Stimulus Checks

Jindal takes credit for stimulus, presents constituents with jumbo-sized stimulus check.

Rep. Shuster Bashes The Stimulus As A Failure While Taking Credit For Its Success

Republicans Who Opposed The Stimulus Line Up To Criticize It Publicly, Request More Money Privately

Kit Bond Touts Effects Of Stimulus Bill He Voted Against

All In A Day’s Work: Rep. Kingston Smears The Stimulus On TV, Takes Credit For Stimulus Jobs In His District

The GOP is not interested in productive policy and instead as Rachel noted sabotaging the President's agenda. I'm not sure what good he thinks this meeting is going to do other than hopefully point out their rank hypocrisy, but so far he's giving way too much deference to the party of "no" that deserves none. The Republicans are more than happy to continue to drive the economy into a ditch if they think it will keep them in office.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (11)

PLAYS: (12)

Chris Hayes is asked to respond to this op-ed from The Wall Street Journal -- Cheney's Revenge The Obama Administration is vindicating Bush antiterror policy:

Dick Cheney is not the most popular of politicians, but when he offered a harsh assessment of the Obama Administration's approach to terrorism last May, his criticism stung—so much that the President gave a speech the same day that was widely seen as a direct response. Though neither man would admit it, eight months later political and security realities are forcing Mr. Obama's antiterror policies ever-closer to the former Vice President's. Read on...

Hayes notes that the Obama administration has followed what the Bush administration has done in regard to terrorism way more than anyone on the left would like and points out that even though there's been very little difference in the policies those on the right are not only trying to maintain the status quo, but move it even further to the right.

From Hayes' publication The Nation:

The hosts of Morning Joe turn to Chris Hayes to debate the merits of a Wall Street Journal editorial called "Cheney's Revenge," which suggests that the American people prefer the way Bush and Cheney dealt with terrorists by skipping over the Miranda rights that are normally afforded to criminals. Hayes and host Joe Scarborough disagree on whether most Americans want Miranda rights to be applied to foreign terrorist suspects.

Hayes argues that no matter what people want, due process of law is in the Constitution and applies to foreign criminals and illegal immigrants. "This is a really important point to hammer home," Hayes says. "The Constitution does not...simply apply to citizens. This is absolutely 1,000 percent settled law and the 14th amendment means that it [applies] to anyone who's picked up and arrested."

Chris Hayes could not have been arguing with a thicker skull than Scarborough who of course didn't want to let a few facts get in the way of his preconceived notions. Zuckerman isn't much better chiming in.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (19)

PLAYS: (83)

For the second night in a row Chris Matthews expresses just how much Sarah Palin scares him to death, this time with the admission that she's just as much of an empty vessel as George Bush.

MATTHEWS: I wouldn`t be afraid if either of those guys were president. I might not vote for them, but I wouldn`t be afraid of them. I`d be afraid of her because I think she`s an empty vessel, ready to be filled by ideology she doesn`t even understand. That is really scary. We saw that with Dan Quayle. We saw that with W. Nothing is more frightening than an empty vessel in power.

Well Mr. Matthews, if this is what you really believe about George Bush, can we get you to quit fawning over him in his flight suit?

Transcript via Nexis Lexis.

MATTHEWS: Well, Chris Wallace asked her how hard President Obama would be to defeat in 2012. Here`s what the governor said. Let`s listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PALIN: Say he played the war card. Say he decided to declare war on Iran or decided to really come out and do whatever he could to support Israel, which I would like him to do. But that changes the dynamics in what we can assume is going to happen between now and three -- I think if the election were today, I do not think Obama would be reelected.

CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: You`re not suggesting he would cynically play the war card.

PALIN: I`m not suggesting that. I`m saying, if he did, things would dramatically change, if he decided to tough it up and do all that he can to secure our nation and our allies.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTHEWS: She`s frightening. Mark, that is frightening stuff. Frightening. First of all, presidents do not declare war. Anybody knows that in high school. Congress has to declare war.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (34)

PLAYS: (106)

February 08, 2010 CNN HLN

Colbert takes Palin to task for her pusillanimous defense of Rush Limbaugh.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (39)

PLAYS: (87)

February 09, 2010 CBS David Letterman

From The Daily Show Feb. 8, 2010:

Barack Obama's teleprompter rhetoric is no match for Sarah Palin's hand-scribbled buzzwords.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (497)

PLAYS: (4686)

I don't agree with Mark Halperin about very much, but I agree with him on this one. After a discussion on Sarah Palin going to speak to the Tea Bag Convention and whether or not this is an independent movement or disgruntled Republican voters, Mark Halperin lists the reasons Sarah Palin will never be President.

Brzezinski: Mark Halerin is there a third party wave brewing? Is it real?

Halperin: It’s real and there for someone who has a lot of money that they could spend tens of millions on a campaign and who had real ideas about how to unite left and right because there is commonality such as going after Wall Street. I see no such person. Can I state three other reasons why to date Sarah Palin will never be president?

Brzezinski: Yeah.

Halperin: One is that Republican elites behind her back think she’d be horrible for the party. Two is, she’s not appealing to anybody but a narrow slice of American life and she’s heading more and more in that direction based on her rhetoric.

And finally and I think it’s best for the country. She has no ideas. She stands for nothing specific. To go into an event like that with the opportunity to say “I hear you disaffected Democrats” and here’s where we need to go. Great opportunity—she wasn’t woken up and kidnapped and flown to this event.

It’s been on her schedule for a long time. To come in so ill prepared for both the event and the interview with no ideas I think forfeits any claim on being a credible national leader right now.

Anyone believe Halperin or the rest of them are just figuring this out now? I sure don't. Don't you just love Peggy Noonan making sure everyone knows what John noted here earlier—that Sarah Palin now owns the tea bag movement which has been co-opted by the Republican Party and Fox News. But that’s been obvious since Dick Armey and Tim Phillips and other astroturfers got in there and started planning rallies. She made sure to let the rest of the cast know that these people will be voting for Republicans even though she and Mike Barnicle tried to act like there were a bunch of disaffected Democrats in that crowd. I doubt there were very many of them if any.

Noonan also claims there were a thousand people watching her. I thought they were only trying to sell 600 tickets and they couldn’t get those to sell out? Nothing like over-hyping the crowd size and calling it a movement when we had quite a few more show up for events like Netroots Nation. They weren’t giving that prime time live coverage on all the cable news stations and saying that the Democrats had better listen to the netroots or they were going to be in trouble the next election.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (557)

PLAYS: (3968)

On Morning Joe, Andrea Mitchell mocks Sarah Palin's crib notes during the National Tea Party Convention by holding up her own hand with notes written on it. When you've finally got Andrea Mitchell and Chuck Todd throwing you under the bus, you've got problems with ever being taken seriously as a future presidential candidate. They make some comparisons to how Ronald Reagan was treated and not taken seriously and Todd points out that unlike Sarah the quitter, Ronald Reagan didn't quit being the Governor of California just because he thought the job was too hard and if she would run, the other presidential candidates are going to beat her up for this.

Why it's taking this long for some of the media to finally start admitting what's been obvious for a very long time is another story. I guess the crib notes and her partisan, know-nothing attack speech were too much even for them to continue to ignore since they know full well if they don't finally admit how bad she is, the late night comedians, the blogs and the other candidates will tear her up even if they weren't ever going to be willing to do it.

Keith Olbermann calls out Richard Shelby for the blanket hold he put on 70 of President Obama's nominees unless he gets the earmarks he wants for his state. Anyone else notice the near silence on this issue during the bobble head shows this past Sunday? Very little mention of this happening. If a Democrat did something like this the Republicans would be screaming like banshees.

OLBERMANN: And now the second of tonight`s quick comments. I`ll handle this one. Once again, your Senate to the high bidder. "Inaction on these nominees," the senator said, "is a disservice to the American people exacted by members of the opposing party who," quote, "choose to block the process for political gain."

The complaining senator was Richard Shelby of Alabama. The year was 2005. The nominees were President Bush`s. The opposition senators choosing to block the process for political gain were Democrats. But now another senator is holding up President Obama`s nominees, choosing to block the process for political gain. This other senator has put a blanket hold on 70 to 80 of them, from appointees at Homeland Security to appointees to the Department of Justice Intel division, because he wants, of all things, an earmark.

A 35 billion dollar contract for tankers is going to the American firm Boeing. This senator is delaying counter-terrorism appointees because he wants the contract taken from Boeing and given instead to the makers of Airbus, a firm based in France. Airbus just happens to have assembly plants in the senator`s state. It just happens to have given that senator at least 34,000 dollars in personal and PAC donations since 2000. It just happens to use the lobbying firm that employs the senator`s former legislative director.

The senator deliberately keeping American intelligence under-staffed so he can get 35 million dollars to go to a foreign company from whose teat he sucks is Senator Shelby of Alabama.

The system of senatorial holds has outlived its usefulness. So have this senator for rent hypocrites, like Richard Shelby.

Chris Matthews talks to former McCain advisor Mark McKinnon and Richard Wolffe about Sister Sarah's flame throwing speech at the National Tea Party Convention this past weekend and her performance there is finally enough to scare the crap out of even Chris Matthews. He blasts her for war mongering on Iran.

MATTHEWS: I don`t know what to make of it. It gets worse, Richard. Let`s look at this. Here she -- asked her about what -- well, should Obama would be -- would it take to defeat Obama in 2012? And here`s what Palin said. This is getting truly scary. This isn`t just not knowing what you`re talking about, or pretending you know what you`re talking about. Here is scary thinking you know what you`re talking about. Let`s listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PALIN: Say he played the war card. Say he decided to declare war on Iran or decided really come out and do whatever he could to support Israel, which I would like him to do. But that changes the dynamics in what we can assume is going to happen between now and three years because I think if the election were today, I do not think Obama would be reelected.

CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS: You`re not suggesting that he would cynically play the war card?

MATTHEWS: I`m not suggesting that. I`m saying if he did, things would dramatically change, if decided to toughen up and do all that he can to secure our nation and our allies.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTHEWS: Is she a balloon head? I mean, Richard, listen to this. I`m asking the question. She said it would be popular in this country to go to war, to declare war on yet another country with 77 million people and a pretty darn modern air force to fight with. To declare war on Iran would be popular in this country. What world does she -- and then she puts the oath up, like to Israel. What was that putting the hand up, kind of an oath there, and bringing in Israel into this? What did that have to do with anything that`s reasonable?

WOLFFE: Well, number one, I think she suffers from living in a pre- Iraq war mentality, which is that, you know, you can go out and prove you`re tough by invading another country. Two problems with that. First of all, it ignores the fact...

MATTHEWS: Declaring war on Iran, she`s talking about.

WOLFFE: First of all -- right. First of all, it ignores the experience that we had in Iraq. Secondly, her brand is that she`s an authentic politician, that she is somehow bringing a sense of reality to the Washington dynamic. And here in this question, she`s engaging in some nakedly political scenario, role playing, as if it`s acceptable. It isn`t! It isn`t to regular voters. It`s not acceptable to foreign policy folks. I -- I -- you know, what can you say except she`s ripping off Pat Buchanan`s column, apparently.

MATTHEWS: Mark, I don`t get it, declaring war on Iran. I mean, everyone knows that Iran is a hell of a lot more sophisticated country than Iraq, a hell of a lot more fierce a war to take on. To go into a ground war of any kind, even -- I would think the most far-right hawk in the country would say drop a few bombs on them, knock out their plant, their nuclear plant. But the idea of declaring war and going to all-out war with -- well, I don`t know what to make of why she`s doing it and saying that would be popular in this country. Where?

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (491)

PLAYS: (765)

I tell you, it's hard to watch this stuff and not want to just beat your head against the wall. After playing some of Sister Sarah's fearmongering and playing the terrorism card during her speech to the Tea Baggers the other night, the panel on CNN's State of the Union discuss how the Democrats have been reacting to the Republicans deciding to try to scare the bejesus out of everyone with the trial of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab possibly being held in New York and with the newly elected Senator Scott Brown deciding to play the fear card as part of his campaign rhetoric.

Jane Mayer who has a new article at the New Yorker out on the subject and the fear mongering over Khalid Sheikh Mohammed being tried in New York as well points out how completely ridiculous all of this is and that that AG Eric Holder is "up against two big myths right now. One myth is that what the Obama administration is doing is any different than what the Bush administration did in terms of prosecuting terrorism".

Of course as Dana Bash points out, having the truth on their side never seems to be enough to keep the Democrats from running like scared sheep instead of standing up to the Republicans since they're afraid the terrorism issue is going to hurt them at the polls. But even Chris Cillizza realizes that they're behind the curve with the public actually caring about terrorism. They're more worried about the economy.

I'm just tired of all of them treating the American people like the scared sheep the Democrats seem to be when it comes to getting reelected and any of them, no matter what party, playing the fear card. It's tiresome. It's extremely tiresome watching the Democrats cave to the likes of Sarah Palin, or Scott Brown or any of them when they go out there throwing flames. Of course sadly our media is happy to carry those torches for them, especially at ClusterFox as they hurl the flames and hope to keep the public as misinformed and afraid as possible.

Transcipt below the fold via CNN.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (27)

PLAYS: (38)

A little blast from the past from Rep. Murtha. His interview on Meet the Press June 11th, 2006 where Rep. Murtha blasts chickenhawk Karl Rove for his "stay the course" rhetoric on Iraq. I've had my issues with Murtha but this appearance on Meet the Press and the day and a half he spent on the House floor taking on the Republicans over their Iraq "war" resolution was something to behold.

MR. RUSSERT: But first, Iraq. Joining us now is Democratic Congressman John Murtha.

Welcome back to MEET THE PRESS.

REP. JOHN MURTHA (D-PA): Nice to be back, Tim.

MR. RUSSERT: The president says, “stay the course,” that within the next six months, Iraq will be secure under the direction of the new prime minister, and to do anything less now would be irresponsible.

REP. MURTHA: Well, “stay the course” is “stay and pay.” This is the thing that has worried me right along. We’re spending $8 billion dollars a month, $300 million dollars a day. And to give you some perspective of what that means, Gates said, “I’m going to quit the corporation, or I’m going to—less time with the corporation.” Well, you weigh $30 billion dollars. That’s four months of the cost of this war. This port security, if you want to spend more money, it’d would take 47 years the way we’re spending it. Education, the No Child Left Behind, a couple months of the war would pay for that. Whose going to, whose going to pay for this down the road? Our children and grandchildren are paying for this war. And then you have the, the, the emotional strain, the, the, the people who are being hurt.

On the floor the other day, you may have heard this, one fellow says, “We’re fighting this war.” We’re not fighting this war. One percent of the American people, these young men and women are fighting this war, with heavy packs, with 70 pounds of equipment, with helmets on in 130 degrees. That’s who’s fighting this war. And they say “stay the course.” There’s no plan. You open up this plan for victory, there’s no plan there. It’s just “stay the course.” That doesn’t solve any problem.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (443)

PLAYS: (1792)

Peggy Noonan thinks that President Obama just discovered bipartisanship now that his poll numbers are going down. Obviously she hasn't paid an ounce of attention to how he's actually governed for the last year. And when confronted with the rank partisanship from the Republicans and even the Senate's newest member, Scott Brown, who said the stimulus bill hasn't created a single job, Noonan dismisses it as just rhetoric he used to get elected. And George Will blames the President for having "an aggressive agenda" for the Republicans' bad behavior.

TAPPER: George, the administration and the president has said specifically that he was hoping for some bipartisanship support for some of the small-business tax cuts and credits he's pushing. There's an elimination of a capital gains tax for investments in small businesses, a tax credit for hiring, hoping for Republican support. I have yet to hear one Republican voice, one level of support for any of that.

If there's not bipartisan support for tax cuts, is there support -- is there possibility for any support for anything bipartisan?

WILL: Well, I'll volunteer. I subscribe to Milton Friedman's view that any tax cut of any shape at any time for any reason is to be supported. So I think probably they'll get some support on this.

But he has a very aggressive agenda from which he has retreated not one bit. I think you'd agree with that. And so when he extends his hand, he says, "I ask only one thing of Republicans, and that is that you quit being Republicans," and they respectfully decline.

If you have an aggressive agenda, you're going to have to push it aggressively in a partisan manner.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (47)

PLAYS: (120)

From C-SPAN's Q&A, Brian Lamb asks Thom Hartmann why he gives an hour to Sen. Bernie Sanders every week on his radio show and why does Sen. Sanders agree to do it. Hartmann explains that he's willing to put Sen. Sanders on because he's one of the only politicians out there willing to take unscreened questions and answer them honestly. He feels Sanders does it because he actually cares about representing the voters in his state and truly believes in his message.

Isn't it amazing that somehow a dirty stinking hippie self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist can manage to win redder than red parts of his state with the W signs formerly posted all over it as Hartmann noted that Bernie somehow managed to do? Gee, I wonder what the Democrats could learn from this if they decided to quit trying to either act like or appease Republicans?

If you want to watch the rest of this hour it is available at C-SPAN's web site.