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

DOWNLOADS: (917)

PLAYS: (2654)

Granted, it's hard to hear because the voices speak over each other, but the graphics are pretty clear: this ad for Anderson Cooper 360 was meant to claim that Anderson Cooper challenges the status quo and goes beyond partisan spin. Whether the ad is true or not is arguable, but the fact that it mentions both the right and the left is not.

Which makes this op-ed in Time Magazine by Michael Scherer that much more puzzling:

White House Communications Director Anita Dunn appeared Sunday morning on Howard Kurtz's CNN show Reliable Sources to discuss her comments in my TIME magazine story this week. She continued her criticism of Fox News[..].

The ironic part came later, during the commercial break. All morning, CNN has been intermittently running a promo for Anderson Cooper 360, a show that has long billed itself as a classic straight news program with an investigative front man who digs "beyond the headlines" with "many points of view, so you can make up your own mind." The new promo, by contrast, consists of a woman's voice, pitching Cooper's show as, essentially, a liberal alternative to Fox News: "I'm a lifelong Democrat," she says, "and that's why I watch Anderson Cooper." Hmmm. The voice goes on to say that Cooper is the person she can turn to hold "right wing" conservatives accountable. Cooper is not exactly aiming for the political middle ground here.

But then who is? MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz are committed liberals, increasingly focused on the dual project of holding President Obama to a liberal line and attacking his detractors. Fox News, on the other hand, is, well, Fox News. Dunn, on Kurtz's show, made a point of criticizing Fox News Sunday's Chris Wallace for "fact checking" an Obama administration official but not its other Republican guests. So it goes.

Interesting. So Scherer thinks that Cooper is playing to the left like those other "committed" liberals on MSNBC. And lemming-like, here comes Dan Abrams, tweeting from his new gig at Mediaite:

UPDATE to WH-Fox 'Gloves off' post: CNN promo calls Anderson Cooper left's answer to FNC.

The only problem? There's no there there. Cooper wasn't playing to the left, as Scherer was forced to acknowledge in an update:

CORRECTION: Ahh, the pitfalls of technology. In the post below, I wrote about an ad that kept running Sunday morning on CNN, which I watched in the background as I scribbled away at my office. Several times, I heard an ad for Anderson Cooper's show that included a woman's voice talking about being a "lifelong Democrat" and watching Cooper because he called out the "right wing." But that's not the whole story. I was told Monday by CNN that I only heard half the ad, which was dubbed in stereo. (Apparently my television is mono.) The other half of the ad had a male voice saying he was a Republican who turns to Anderson Cooper because he holds accountable "left wing politicians." The two voices are recorded to be talking over each other, reaffirming CNN's place in the center of the cable news spectrum. This makes my subsequent analysis largely wrong. Cooper was not signaling a shift to cater to a left-wing audience. He was signaling that he wanted both a left-wing and a right-wing audiences at the same time. The CNN dream of post-partisanship, in other words, is still alive.

Actually, Michael, your analysis is not largely wrong, but completely wrong. As polarized as this country is now (a fact for which I hold the media mostly accountable), it is not the desire of the entire country to get their news filtered through ideological lenses, confirming their pre-conceived notions. Fox unapologetically fills a niche for a select few, who cannot stand to have their ideas challenged. But MSNBC, despite shows with Maddow (the only self-professed liberal listed), Olbermann and Schultz does not cater to the left. If they did, would they fill 15 hours every week (the same as Maddow, Olbermann and Schultz put together) with Scarborough?

And for what its worth, I actually watch Maddow not for a liberal slant, but because she strives to actually present the news, not propaganda. But that seems to be a dying breed in your industry, doesn't it?

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

DOWNLOADS: (1109)

PLAYS: (2725)

Nicole Wallace wants us to think that the party of no has not been using scorched earth policy and trying to undermine the President at every turn-- even though she worked for the likes of George Bush and the John McCain campaign which brought us that totally non-scorched earth wonder Sarah Palin. You know... the one who said that Barack Obama was "palling around with terrorists".

How could anyone ever get the idea that the Republicans wanted to resort to a "scorched earth" policy after watching that campaign in action?

Of course, that would be asking too much of Anderson Cooper to possibly bring that up to Ms. Wallace, wouldn't it?

And she thinks Bill Frist and Jeb Bush are people "who could end up on the landscape in a presidential landscape down the road".

Really? Jeb-- who's last name is mud since his brother messed up his chances of ever running-- and the cat killer Bill Frist? Bring 'em on Nicole. Bring your good buddy Palin on with them while you're at it if that's the GOP's hope for the next presidential election. I welcome any one of them as the GOP's next nominee.

COOPER: Nicolle, have -- critics of the Republicans say, basically, look, they have a scorched-earth policy going on right now, that they are opposing anything that President Obama supports.

Is that fair?

WALLACE: That's not fair. And it's not true.

I mean, Jeb Bush has been very complimentary of Obama's Education Department secretary so far. Today, he said he was encouraged. Bill Frist was on, you know, as a very credible voice, as a doctor, talking about the need for health care reform. John McCain is -- is a statesman's statesman. And he is providing a lot of leadership and I think productive and constructive ideas...

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: But you're kind of clutching at straws. I mean, Jeb Bush and Bill Frist?

(LAUGHTER)

WALLACE: These aren't straws. These are certainly people that...

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: Bill Frist is like, you know...

(LAUGHTER)

WALLACE: But these are people who could end up on the landscape in a presidential landscape down the road.

So, I think when you -- you look at Washington, sure, you look at House members. But when you look at the American public at large, you know, not all of what happens in Washington breaks through.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (1290)

PLAYS: (4429)

Argh, there's so much wrong with this clip that it's all I can do to keep typing and not smacking my head against the desktop. First of all, they ask on Krugman to discuss his NY Times column talking about how GOP obstructionism has reached cartoonish levels and they decide to frame the segment on whether Obama lost his "MOJO"? Seriously? A major news organization ignores the absurdity of the GOP overarching need to find things with which to smear Obama and instead frames the issue for the President of the United States as an Austin Powers plot? And no one but a hyper-partisan conservative "party before country" cheerleader thinks that the IOC selecting Rio for the 2016 games has something to do with a failing on any kind on the part of Obama. Cheers to Anderson Cooper for validating what Krugman so aptly described as "bratty 13 year old" behavior and using a Nobel Laureate to do it. Way to keep on top of the issues of the day, Anderson.

And there's that issue of media's bizarre notion of balance again. Sweet Jesus, why on earth would anyone need Mary Matalin's opinion on Obama's "mojo"? The woman has spent years advising Dick Cheney, fer cryin' out loud, what exactly is her expertise in mojo? As would be expected, Matalin never answers anything directly, resorting to the familiar GOP projection and mean-spritied insinuations, saying she's never drunk the kool-aid on the messiah-like qualities of Obama.

Watch as Krugman acknowledges that Obama hasn't done everything perfectly and that there's still far to go, but that the level of discourse from the right prevents any actual adult-level dialog. And Matalin proves him right by devolving into fingerpointing and bringing in one non sequitur after another. Of course, everything that Obama has been hit with has an equivalence in Matalin's mind to that poor, misunderestimated George W. Bush. If you believe Matalin, the Democrats did nothing but screamed "Liar!" and "Loser" to Bush. Constantly. Hmmm....funny that, I don't remember it that way, but maybe that's because I'm part of the reality-based community.

But hey, how much honest analysis can you get from someone who openly admits she reveres the Fat Bastard himself, Rush Limbaugh? For that alone, she should be laughed off camera.

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

DOWNLOADS: (99)

PLAYS: (211)

From AC360, Fran Townsend defends the Bush Whitehouse against the latest allegations made by Tom Ridge, that he felt the administration was using the Department of Homeland Security to scare the bejesus out of everyone for political gain. Of course Townsend feigns innocence and says they'd never do that. Her excuses here sound a whole lot more to me like Alberto's "I can't recall" testimony on the Attorney General scandal than any type of straight answers.

She weighs her words very carefully to make sure she never actually answers Coopers's questions, or when she does, she throws Ridge under the bus. We never wanted to pressure him to repeat our taking points...he asked for them...lol. Yeah, right. I give Cooper a good grade for asking the right questions here, and a bad one for not doing any kind of follow up. Heaven forbid anyone on CNN is going to push a Bushie even when they know full well they're lying to their face. That wouldn't be polite, would it?

Transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (729)

PLAYS: (3046)

Well the news is percolating something very positive about the White House, health care and the obstructionist-teabagging republicans.

Given hardening Republican opposition to Congressional health care proposals, Democrats now say they see little chance of the minority’s cooperation in approving any overhaul, and are increasingly focused on drawing support for a final plan from within their own ranks.Top Democrats said Tuesday that their go-it-alone view was being shaped by what they saw as Republicans’ purposely strident tone against health care legislation during this month’s Congressional recess, as well as remarks by leading Republicans that current proposals were flawed beyond repair.The White House spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said of Republican lawmakers, “Only a handful seem interested in the type of comprehensive reform that so many people believe is necessary to ensure the principles and the goals that the president has laid out.”The Democratic shift may not make producing a final bill much easier.
--
Democratic senators might feel more empowered, for example, to define the authority of the nonprofit insurance cooperatives that are emerging as an alternative to a public insurance plan.Republicans have used the Congressional break to dig in hard against the overhaul outline drawn by Democrats.

The Senate’s No. 2 Republican, Jon Kyl of Arizona, is the latest to weigh in strongly, saying Tuesday that the public response lawmakers were seeing over the summer break should persuade Democrats to scrap their approach and start over.“I think it is safe to say there are a huge number of big issues that people have,” Mr. Kyl told reporters in a conference call from Arizona. “There is no way that Republicans are going to support a trillion-dollar-plus bill.”The White House has also interpreted critical comments by Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the top Republican negotiator in a crucial Finance Committee effort to reach a bipartisan compromise, as a sign that there is little hope of reaching a deal politically acceptable to both parties.”

We don't trust Rahm and for good reason since he's been the ex-Blue Dog recruiting Congressman, but it seems that they are leaking out this information. If this is true then the Netroots should celebrate because of the pressure we've been putting on the Baucus Dogs and other members of Congress to include the public option or there will be hell to pay. And Republicans have acted in bad faith the entire time as every one of their leadership has attacked anything in the reform that doesn't make the insurance companies richer.

Anderson Cooper of CNN did a report last night that echoes the NY Times piece.

Cooper: After negotiating with republicans, conservative democrats and seemingly themselves over parts of a plan CNN has learned that the administration could be getting closer to a very big change. Namely crafting a health care bill and try to ram it through the Senate even if it passes by only a single vote.

Henry: Well Anderson there is no final decision, but Democrats close to the White House are saying that they are now actively considering the possibility of doing a go it alone strategy. It's a budget maneuver, very obscure known as reconciliation where they would only need a simple majority, 51 votes instead of 60 votes to push through health reform. Republicans would scream that this is a power grab, it's an underhanded move but White House officials privately are already laying out the ground work by saying look, we've been working with republicans for months. If they don't get something done in the next weeks we're going to have to take drastic measures...."If we're going to have to push it through no ones going to remember how messy it is, but they'll remember at the end of the day that we got health care reform done," his ad visors have said, "a win is a win."

The Democratic Party won a mandate in the general election so how can it be a power grab, Ed? If the GOP won, there would be no talk like this by the Ed's of the media. Part of me thinks that it's possible some republicans and Baucus Dogs will then come back to the table and weaken the bill more, but make it appear to be stronger. They will probably go on TV instead and reeve up the teabaggers some more and we'll see fifty caliber cannons strapped to their shoulders and scowls on their faces in the coming days. We'll see how it all shakes out. Why does Ed Henry think reconciliation is an obscure procedure? We've been writing about this for months on our blogs and the media has been reporting on it almost as long. It's like Henry is trying to set up the narrative that the White House just discovered reconciliation in a cigar smoked, dark room and are screwing the American people by using it. They should look to their hero George Bush because he used it for his tax cuts and to open the Arctic Wildlife refuge for domestic oil drilling when he was in office.
And as Media Matters noted:

Republicans used the reconciliation process to pass the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, and the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005, among others.

And Ronald Reagan used it to pass his historic tax cuts for the rich.

But when a Republican uses it, that's normal; if Democrats use it, they are being power-hungry dirty f*&king hippies.

I'd also like to thank the teabaggers for acting like complete psychos while Republicans in Congress looked on with glee. They helped the White House accept what we've been saying if it does come down to this. Republicans would never allow true health care reform in any meaningful way and the nuts put an exclamation mark on this big time. Thank you!

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

DOWNLOADS: (4316)

PLAYS: (2975)

[Note: I was interviewed last night for CNN's Anderson Cooper 360 program to discuss lone wolves. My interview didn't air yesterday, but Cooper indicated they'd be reporting more on the "lone wolf" phenomenon tonight, so here's hoping my interview airs this evening. In the meantime, here's a warmup report, featuring the first of Cooper's pieces.]

When the Department of Homeland Security issued that law-enforcement bulletin on right-wing extremists two months ago, the mainstream right's chief shrieking point was that somehow the bulletin had conflated them with the extremist right-wingers.

Some typical headlines: "DHS Report Labels Conservatives as Radical Extremists". "The DHS Declares Everyone In America Is A Domestic Terrorist". "DHS To Target Conservatives." "New DHS Domestic Terrorism Report Targets Millions of Americans". And on and on. The upshot: Homeland Security was labeling conservatives America's chief terrorist threat.

But if you read the actual report, here's what it says is the chief domestic-terror threat America faces:

DHS/I&A assesses that lone wolves and small terrorist cells embracing violent rightwing extremist ideology are the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States. Information from law enforcement and nongovernmental organizations indicates lone wolves and small terrorist cells have shown intent—and, in some cases, the capability—to commit violent acts.

[..] DHS/I&A has concluded that white supremacist lone wolves pose the most significant domestic terrorist threat because of their low profile and autonomy—separate from any formalized group—which hampers warning efforts.

[..] Similarly, recent state and municipal law enforcement reporting has warned of the dangers of rightwing extremists embracing the tactics of “leaderless resistance” and of lone wolves carrying out acts of violence.

Now, here's the odd thing about "lone wolves": Right-wingers like to use the solitary nature of this kind of terrorist act to dismiss them as "isolated incidents." But in reality, the continuing existence of acts of this nature demonstrates primarily that the radical right in America is alive, well, and functioning better than it should. And the continuing -- and as we've seen this week, ultimately futile -- attempts by the right to whitewash their existence from the public consciousness have played no small part in helping that trend continue.

Watch the above video for an instructive comparison in how this is handled by a right-winger like Fox's Bill O'Reilly, and a more rational, rather centrist approach taken by Anderson Cooper and his guests on AC360 last night.

O'Reilly declares the matter over -- move along, move along -- because this was just a "lone nutcase." Meanwhile, Cooper and the SPLC's Mark Potok and anti-racist activist David Gletty have a thorough an rational discussion of what lone wolves are about.

As Potok explains, the "lone wolf" concept was popularized in the late 1980s by an Aryan Nations leader named Louis Beam as an extension of his strategy of "leaderless resistance." One white supremacist, a fellow named Alex Curtis, even went so far as to develop a "point system" for lone wolves.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (96)

PLAYS: (249)

Dr. Warren Hern speaks out on AC360 about Dr. Tiller's death being the inevitable result of the hateful rhetoric that's come out of the anti-abortion movement and on the importance of keeping abortion safe, legal and free from anti-abortion violence and harassment.

COOPER: Dr. Hern, I guess the obvious question, if you -- if you worry about being shot and expect being shot any day at work, at home or elsewhere, why do you continue to do what you do?

DR. WARREN HERN: Well, first of all, thank you for inviting me. It's a very important question. I have thought about it a lot.

HERN: I have to say that it really comes down to the fact that, at one point, I decided that performing abortions was the most important thing I could do in medicine, and that I do it because it matters.

And it matters for the health of the woman, for the health of her family, for health of our society, and now it matters for freedom, because Ronald Reagan tried to make abortion a political crime against the state.

And we have had -- while the -- Dr. Tiller was a very good friend of mine, a wonderful man, a very courageous and dedicated physician. And his -- his -- his assassination is a terrible, terrible, unspeakable loss for his family and friends.

COOPER: When -- when you heard he had been shot, did -- did -- did you...

HERN: But I think that the -- but I think the important point I would like to make is that the assassination of Dr. Tiller was not the act of a lone, deranged gunman acting alone.

This is the result of 35 years of anti-abortion harassment, and terrorism, and hate speech, and rhetoric, and harsh names, and exploitation of the -- of the abortion issue as a political issue to get power. And this is the inevitable result of this kind of hateful behavior by the anti-abortion movement.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (91)

PLAYS: (221)

April 23, 2009 Anderson Cooper 360.

COOPER: Two big stories happening right now, the breaking news, the ACLU saying that we will soon be getting another batch of photos depicting prisoner abuse, not just in Iraq, but also Afghanistan, that and the latest threat to America's vital ally in the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban, Pakistan.

[....]

COOPER: Let's talk about these photos that the ACLU has just said that -- new photos that they say show U.S. personnel abusing prisoners in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

We know that -- that the techniques, the interrogation techniques used in -- in Guantanamo Bay, used in these CIA black sites, we know that they were used at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan. We know they were also obviously used at -- at Abu Ghraib and other sites.

What do you make of this report that new photos are coming out?

ZAKARIA: It's pretty troubling, Anderson.

You know, I tracked the -- the -- public support in Iraq for the U.S. occupation very carefully. And the month before Abu Ghraib, the -- the photographs from Abu Ghraib came out, there were about 60 percent of Iraqis were still supportive of the U.S. occupation.

It dropped almost 25 points over the course of the two months that the -- that the Abu Ghraib photos came out. This stuff really has a major effect on our reputation, on our image abroad. It changes what our allies can do, because they're scared of their publics.

This is one of the reasons why I think this broader issue of whether the United States should engage in practices that are really outside of the pale, this is not just a technical legal issue. It has huge foreign policy implications.

COOPER: Fareed Zakaria, appreciate your joining us tonight. Fareed, thanks very much.

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

DOWNLOADS: (128)

PLAYS: (254)

More not so veiled threats from Republicans with their outrage over the release of the torture memos? I think Bill Bennett is confusing what President Obama did to the way Republicans do business. Slash and burn and if you're going down take as many as possible with you. I also just love the way Cooper introduced this. "We don't take sides". Well that's great Anderson. Heaven forbid one "side" might represent the truth at times and if that's the case, you should take that "side". I don't think truth is what your after when you bring in James Carville and Bill Bennett to debate each other. One corporate Democratic DLC partisan hack vs a Repubican partisan hack. Fair and balanced right?

COOPER: Now the growing political uproar over allegations of torture and enhanced interrogations, breaking down mainly, though by no means exclusively, along party and administration lines. Now, depending on which blog or op-ed page you read, the president is either poisoning the political waters by leaving the door open to investigating torture, or Dick Cheney and company are trying to bury the ugly past and get away with crimes.

We don't take sides on this program. We present you with facts and opposing views, so you can make up your own mind.

COOPER: I'm joined now by political contributors, left and right, James Carville and Bill Bennett.

James, a "Wall Street Journal" editorial today said -- and I quote -- "By inviting the prosecution of Bush officials for their anti-terror legal advice, President Obama has injected a poison into our politics that he and the country will live to regret."

If laws were broken, should there be an investigation?

CARVILLE: Well, first of all, if laws were broken, of course there should be. That's the -- the job is to uphold the laws of the Constitution of the United States.

But it -- it may be that there's a way -- you know, maybe -- we certainly need to find out more about this. It might be through a commission. It might be through congressional hearings. It might be through a trial.

But I think that the public now is going to demand that we have some answers here, and the answers may be favorable to the Bush administration. They may not be favorable. But it's -- it's going to be a pursuit here. I mean, journalism's not going to leave this alone. I -- I doubt if the Congress is. And it appears that the legal system's not going to leave this alone.

COOPER: Bill, is -- by doing that, is the president injecting a poison, Bill?

(CROSSTALK)

BENNETT: Well, I think so, but let put me down a marker here. I think Barack Obama's going to regret that he did this.

He's going to regret that he changed his mind, too, because it looks less, frankly, right now like the rule of law, or a -- you know, saluting the rule of law, and more like bloodlust. The president said let bygones be bygones, we're moving forward, let's put this behind us, and then flipped.

And it looks, from all evidence, that he was pressured into this for political reasons.

Now, can there still be an inquiry that's not politically based? Yes. But just bear this in mind. When you build the gallows, be sure you know who it is you plan to hang, because, when all of this comes out, some of the people who are, you know, yelling the loudest for Dick Cheney's head or for these lawyers' heads -- and this is not going to happen -- may find themselves in trouble as well.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (3619)

PLAYS: (21036)

April 21, 2009 CNN

Dave N: Paul Begala and Ari Fleischer debated the release of the Bush torture memos -- and President Obama's indication that prosecutions of the architects of the torture regime may yet face prosecution -- on Anderson Cooper's 360 yesterday.

The fireworks erupted when Fleischer decided that the best defense was to claim that waterboarding really isn't torture:

FLEISCHER: No, again, Anderson, your premise is that it is torture. And I think the only people who can determine that are people from the Department of Justice.

COOPER: But it's interesting, though...

FLEISCHER: If it is torture, if it is torture...

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: ... when the Khmer Rouge did it, when the Khmer Rouge did it at Tuol Sleng prison, and you can go there, and you can see the instruments they used to water-board people, I mean, we labeled it as torture.

FLEISCHER: And, Anderson, that's why I said the only people who are in a position to make an authoritative judgment on it should be career, independent-minded people at the Department of Justice, without anybody at the White House interfering or anybody else interfering.

And then, if they decide it was, then they have got a very careful decision to make about how far and extensive do you prosecute people. Is it the people who did it? Is it the Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill who were briefed on it and didn't object to it? And who in the administration would you have to apply that standard to?

This is where this whole thing can go.

But, going back to the memo, and going back to bipartisanship, you know, it's not just the Bush people who said it was wrong to release that memo. Bill Clinton's head of the CIA said it was wrong to release those memos, because you're teaching al Qaeda operatives exactly what our techniques are.

And why do we want anybody in al Qaeda to know what the limits of our techniques are, Paul?

BEGALA: The techniques that -- the techniques that we no longer use, the techniques that were in "The New York Review of Books" and half of the newspapers and magazines in North America, Ari. I mean, it is...

FLEISCHER: Paul, it was your administration's head of the CIA who objected to the release of those memos.

BEGALA: It doesn't -- it doesn't make...

FLEISCHER: It's a Clinton official who said that.

BEGALA: It doesn't make him right. Torture is always wrong, Ari. We executed...

FLEISCHER: I agree with you that torture is always wrong.

BEGALA: Excuse me for talking while you're interrupting.

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: Let Paul finish.

BEGALA: We -- our country executed Japanese soldiers who water- boarded American POWs. We executed them for the same crime that we are now committing ourselves. How do you defend that?

The most awkward silence imaginable follows. Finally, Fleischer is able to eke out:

FLEISCHER: Well, again, Paul, I guess you already are the jury, the prosecutor, the judge, and a citizen all rolled into one. You have already pronounced judgment that it is a crime.

Actually, Fleischer could have countered Begala by pointing out that we didn't actually execute the Japanese soldiers convicted of the war crime of waterboarding American prisoners -- we just sentenced them to 15 years' hard labor.

But then, as the New York Times reports this morning, this White House's legal team didn't even bother to research the legal history of waterboarding before issuing their Excuse From Mom.

Waterboarding always was a crime -- until these characters came along. Maybe that's why Ari didn't really try to argue the point any further ...

DOWNLOAD (1687)

PLAY (7630)

From Anderson Cooper 360 April 13, 2008. While discussing Rick Warren's recent statements on Larry King Live, which contradicted what he had previously said about his support for Prop 8, the Rev. Mel White slams Tony Perkins for his bigoted stance on gay marriage. Perkins, like Warren, tries to keep the rhetoric from becoming too heated (unlike the Dobsons and Falwells of the world). But as Rev. White points out, that doesn't make their message any less hateful or harmful to the gay community.

White: It's really important for people to realize that Tony and Dobson and these others have been misleading the public for so many years about sexual orientation and gender identity. It's so important to see through their half truths and their hyperbole. It's really important to realize the damage they're doing by not saying that god created us gay. God loves us gay and we should have all the rights that the American people provide to all of us. So, Tony sounds good like, like Rick but they're really saying things that are horrible and destructive.

Cooper: Tony I'll give you a quick response since it was directed to you.

Perkins: Well, I would just say what we...we..it's not true. Uh..the Bible speaks for itself.

White: The Bible says nothing about homosexuality Tony, and it's really important to quit confusing people..(crosstalk).

Perkins: Hey Mel, nonetheless I love you. Appreciate you as a human being.

White: Don't say that. The things you say about gay people lead to destruction, the breakup of families...

Perkins: No, that's not true, Mel.

White: You continue this..we love you, but we hate you.

Perkins: No, I didn't say that.

White: We love you but we don't want you to have rights.

Perkins: I didn't say that.

White: Tony I've read your material. I've monitored you for ten years. You've got to get off this anti-gay stuff because they are leaving the churches because they've seen through your fundamentalist stuff.

Perkins: Actually, Mel, you're wrong on that point. The surveys, the polling data shows that Christians churches that are preaching the truth are the ones that are gaining members. It's the mainline liberal denominations that are losing membership.

White: That's not true at all either.

So we've got religious organizations tracking polling data like we'd expect from political parties now. Isn't that special? And Rev. White is right: You cannot pretend you love gay people and then do things that inflame hatred towards the gay community or suppress their civil rights.

DOWNLOAD (53)

PLAY (112)

Well they were all circling the wagons around Ed Henry at CNN tonight and talking about how angry President Obama looked when he responded to Ed Henry's gotcha' question. This hackery from Alex Castellanos was some of the worst of it. Obama is going to be a one term President because Castellanos doesn't like the way he treated Ed Henry who's suddenly the tough guy now in the White House press corps along with his buddies Todd, Reid and Tapper now that Bush is gone. The networks apparently decided to let their reporters grow a spine now with their questioning after eight years of being Bush's lapdogs.

Cooper: So Alex Castellanos from the right's perspective was the President accurate when he said I want to know what I talked about before I said it?

Castellanos: Well tonight I think we saw the first hint Anderson, and it's only a small hint of a President who could be a one termer. We saw some impatience beneath the surface ahhh, on this Ed Henry question, which I thought was entirely fair. You evidently our educational system is not in as good of shape as we thought because neither Congress nor Democrats there or the President could actually read the stimulus bill.

This is language that they wrote, that Congress voted for and the President signed and they still seem to be shocked and outraged and angry even that these executives at AIG took the bonuses that the Democrats and the President gave them.

Cooper: So why do you say this makes him a one termer perhaps?

Castellanos: Well there's a short step from self confidence to arrogance and tonight we saw some impatience that lies not very deeply beneath the surface of this President. This is a young President. This is a very confident President. But this is a President that does not really have a lot of economic experience as far as creating prosperity himself. He really doesn't have that much political experience and when tested tonight we saw a little flash just under the surface, again, small hint. I think this is still an incredibly popular guy and a gifted communicator but in advertising there's a saying. Nothing kills a bad product quicker than good advertising.

He then almost gets laughed off the set. Check out the looks on Anderson Cooper, Paul Begala and David Gergen's faces while he's talking. This is the same jerk that said it was okay to call Hillary the B-word and espouses the same sort of Republican dirty tricks as Karl Rove. CNN doing its best to compete with Fox by having someone like him on their shows.

DOWNLOAD (31)

PLAY (68)

The panel on Anderson Cooper trashes Bush for his remarks about Katrina during his final press conference. What amazed me the most watching this was this comment by David Gergen during their conversation.

I also think, Anderson, just more broadly, I said on the air the other night here on this program that I thought maybe that people would have some sense of warmth about George Bush as he leaves office, as we traditionally do about departing presidents. I think I was wrong.

The responses on your Web site and elsewhere are very hostile. I must say I am revising my thinking about this. I don't think we have had a time since Richard Nixon left office -- and Ed Rollins will remember that -- a quarter-of-a-century ago when people were so relieved to see the end of a presidency and to welcome in a new president.

Gee..you're just now figuring that out? Really? And it took comments made just this past week for you to come to the conclusion that George Bush isn't liked so well? What kind of bubble must Gergen be living in if what he says is actually true? I call B.S. on this one. I have a very hard time believing that he didn't know full well before this week what the country as a whole thinks of George Bush and it should not have taken him reading some comments on blogs this late in the game the week Bush is finally leaving office for him to have finally figured that out.

Transcript to follow.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOAD (36)

PLAY (69)

Larry Elder makes a fool of himself defending the GOP distributing the racist CD on Anderson Cooper 360.

ELDER: It's much ado about nothing. Let's remember the genesis of this, there was an article Anderson, in the "L.A. Times" calls "Barack the magic Negro." It was not written by a conservative, in which he made the argument that the reason that people appeal to Barack Obama is that he's not offensive, he's not scary, he's not a criminal, and that's why whites like him.

Limbaugh then did a parody to, as you pointed out, "Puff the Magic Dragon," but the parody really was a Sharpton-like singer. And what the Sharpton-like singer was saying is, I'm unhappy that all these white people like Obama, because if Obama wins, what the hell am I going to do for a living? And so that's what this was. If anybody ought to be offended, it's Al Sharpton.

What bothers me, Anderson, is this whole piece. Democrats say things that are racist or at least racially insensitive about Republicans all the time.

Donna Brazile, who works for your network, once referred to the Republican Party as having a white-boy study.

Howard Dean once said, well, if Republicans were here at this convention, Democrats -- blacks were -- Republicans were here, the only blacks here would be serving tables.

Claire McCaskill running for senate said, George W. Bush let people suffer and die on rooftops in Katrina because they were poor and they were black.

Charlie Rangel, the head of the house and ways committee --

COOPER: You're saying a double standard?

ELDER: -- said that Republicans want taxes. They don't say "N" word or "s" word anymore, they just say, let's cut taxes. They make blatant racist appeals all the time that you let a Republican do a parody, and the fit hits the shan (ph). It's nuts, Anderson.

No Larry what's nuts is calling anyone who points out that the Republican party is full of racists "racially insensitive" or making "blatent racist appeals". I'll say it's becoming increasingly unnecessary to point that out to anyone since the GOP is doing a fine job all on its own of making sure that racism is in your face.

ELDER: It was -- Ms. Rosen, it was satire. And I don't think you want to go over the racist history of the Democratic Party; the party that was opposed to the 13th, the 14th, the 15th amendment, the party that founded the Klan. I'm not defending Republicans' insensitivity in the last two years. They were wrong.

ROSEN: What are you defending?

ELDER: If you want to go over the history of the party, the Democratic Party is a party, historically --

Well Larry you also forgot to point out that those Democrats you're talking about became Republicans.

Full transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »

This is what CNN thinks passes for "news". Let's see...repeat John McCain campaign attack ad that didn't work...check. Pretend you're concerned with Obama's security and that's the reason you're covering this story...check. Ignore important things going on that you should be covering....check. Scrutinize Obama in a way that you never even gave a thought to doing with George Bush before he took office...check. These guys are trying to compete with Fox News for who can make me want to throw a shoe at my TV more frequently.

HILL: Who cares if he smokes? The President-elect, clearly not in Chicago where it's 31 and snowing -- he is in Hawaii at the beach doing the vacationing Presidents do but with a lot less flab. The picture -- and it is everywhere, trust me -- is a reminder that it's really been a while since we've had a camera-ready President-elect and first family.

But the question tonight, just what does glamour and charisma buy you as a President? And how could it hurt?

The "Raw Politics" from Joe Johns.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOE JOHNS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Take a good hard look, a bare-chested photo that made its way around the world hours after it was taken. At first, a big question, did the photographer breach security to get the shot? Turns out, the answer is no.

But there was lots more to talk about. Here's the front page of today's New York Post. "Fit for Office" is the headline and there are plenty more lines about Ab-bama and Beach Barack. Is this just more of the so-called rock star treatment some say Obama had during the election? The celebrity McCain used against him?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He's the biggest celebrity in the world. But is he ready to lead?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JOHNS: And during the campaign, Obama certainly used magazines like "US Weekly" and "People" which regularly features celebrities on the cover to help him win the election.

He appeared on the cover of "Time" magazine 14 times this year. Now the election is over and the questions remain. Is Obama getting great coverage because of his celebrity status?

It's not like he hasn't courted the coverage and generally the star treatment benefits a politician who can handle it.

ALEX CASTELLANOS, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: It's such a great gift. Reagan had it, John F. Kennedy had it. And it's become very valuable to a country when it's uncertain about its future.

How does he use it? Look at the way he's using it now; you inspire, you don't stop campaigning just because the campaign is over.

JOHNS: But on the other hand, right here in the New York Post next to the beach photos is a report that 45 percent of Americans believe either Obama or one of his top campaign aides is tied up in the Illinois governor scandal. That's no political honeymoon.

Being a celebrity President really cuts both ways. When you compare the kind of media Obama's gotten to say, Bill Clinton, his saxophone made for some sexy shots, but you'll probably find that the guy appeared on the front page of the tabloids a lot more than Obama, particularly when Monica Lewinsky surfaced.

So given all that, why did this photo generate so much fascination? Pretty simple, unlike some other Presidents or Presidents-elect, this guy is young, fit, trim, and he looks pretty good in a bathing suit.

Go figure.

Joe Johns, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HILL: Yes, but is it ever really that simple?

More on celebrity and the Presidency when we come back with Ed Henry who as the country is finding out, looks fine in shorts himself, doesn't he? David Gergen and Roland Martin also with us.

Continue reading »