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

DOWNLOADS: (2581)

PLAYS: (6163)

Rachel Maddow wins my semi-famous "Don't Sugarcoat It" award for her talented muckraking in this segment. It's becoming abundantly clear to everyone in the left-wing activist community that without loophole-free campaign finance reform we are unlikely to change anything in Washington lobby/legislator love-fest. With an assist from blogger David Sirota, Maddow exposes the business lobby that would attempt to hide their desire to continue to import products made from child, slave, and prison labor. Given the American public's unending appetite for cheap plastic junk, it's easy to see why those profiting from that hunger would want their gravy train to continue. Sadly, Maddow must remind us, all of us, that, um, slavery is wrong, even when it occurs across the oceans.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (121)

PLAYS: (389)

David Sirota takes on Florida GOP Chairman and Obama school speech fear monger Jim Greer on Don Lemon's weekend show on CNN. This time the topic is the collective freak out by people at these Tea Bag protests now that the scary black man has been elected.

Sirota asks Greer where the protests were when Bush was trampling all over our constitution and running up the deficit and you've just got to love Greer's response here -- deflect and denial.

First Greer cites Bush's terrible poll numbers and tries to conflate the protests going on now to the people protesting the Iraq War, who as Sirota correctly points out were completely different protesters and not the people taking to the streets now.

After admitting that they are different people Greer tries to paint the Tea Baggers as just every day Americans from all political walks of life, and not the fringe right of the conservative movement.

Then Greer tries to pretend that race isn't part of the problem with these protesters, which Don Lemon calls him out for.

LEMON: David, what's happening here?

SIROTA: Well, again, I think that there's a segment of the population that does not want to accept President Obama as a legitimate president. And I think that you can tell that this is really a partisan lynch mob by understanding that these people were not out making the exact same criticism of President Bush. Where were the people who were worried about the constitution when President Bush trampled the constitution with the Patriot Act? Where were these people talking about government spending when President Bush inflated the deficit to record proportions?

LEMON: Jim, that's a good question.

SIROTA: Where were they?

GREER: Well, I think you saw where they were when the polls showed that unfortunately from a Republican standpoint, President Bush was down in the 20s. I mean, the American public -

SIROTA: Where were the protests?

GREER: Well, you know, there were people protesting President Bush because I saw them quite often as I traveled the country.

SIROTA: Do you think conservative tea partiers are protesting --

LEMON: I do have to say no that people did protest the Iraq war. I saw a lot of that. I covered a lot of it.

GREER: A lot of that.

LEMON: People said they had pictures of President Bush. They hung things of him in effigy. They put it in on fire, lit them on fire. So there were things, but they were protesting a war, and that they were looking for evidence that never turned up. So it's kind of a different thing, but he was protested.

SIROTA: Those are different protesters.

GREER: Where we are today --

Well, they may be different protesters, but you asked me, where were they? And there were people protesting President Bush. Where we are today, Don, David, is that this administration has tried to radically change the role of government in our daily lives and the role of government in major industries that have made this country great. And that is why Americans, not just Republicans, but Americans are frustrated. They can't get answers to their questions. They're concerned about President Obama's views of what America should look like today and what it will look like in the future. And they just reject that. And they're angry. They're frustrated because it's not the America that they brought up to have great respect for, and they're concerned.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (112)

PLAYS: (261)

Rachel Maddow talks to David Sirota about why including a "trigger" in the health care bill is a poison pill that assures we won't have any real reform. David reiterates what he wrote in his op-ed The Trigger Mechanism:

Recall that over the last decade, a maverick group of progressive and conservative lawmakers pushed bills to let Americans purchase cheaper, FDA-approved prescription drugs from other industrialized nations. It was (and is) a commonsense idea - other countries allow importation, and the practice helps lower health costs by permitting consumers to buy medicines at the lowest world market price, not just at an artificially inflated domestic premium.

As with today's public option surveys, polls on importation showed strong national support for the concept. So rather than murder the drug legislation outright, congressional leaders joined the Clinton and Bush administrations in backing a "compromise": Importation bills were passed, but only those that gave the secretary of Health and Human Services the power to trigger - or not trigger - final implementation.

Specifically, the secretary would have to first certify that imported medicines were "safe" (drug companies promote the lie that Canadian medicine is mortally dangerous - prompting Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty, an importation proponent, to ask, "Where are the dead Canadians"?).

This trigger provision, of course, was lobbyists' poison pill - and it worked as they planned. Importation has never been implemented, as no HHS secretary has pulled the trigger. Hence, Americans are still barred from wholesale importation of lower-priced medicine - and pharmaceutical industry profiteering continues.

The moral of the story is that triggers are just another version of the old Blue Ribbon Commission trick. They are designed not as good public policy, but as devious political tactics to help dishonest lawmakers look like they support popular measures - all while guaranteeing those measures never become reality.

On importation, triggers gave corporatist politicians a way to seem like they were remaining true to their pro-consumer platitudes and "free trade" dogma at the same time they were strengthening an extreme form of anti-consumer protectionism for pharmaceutical companies.

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

DOWNLOADS: (98)

PLAYS: (311)

David Sirota on CNN's American Morning explaining why the White House throwing Van Jones under the bus was such a terrible idea. They've done nothing but show the right wing that they will cave if they decide to attack a progressive working in the White House.

ROBERTS: The president hired Van Jones to find more green jobs, putting more Americans back to work and helping the environment. Now, Jones is looking for a job himself. He has been under fire for some pointed comments about Republicans and a petition that he signed back in 2004 questioning what the Bush White House knew about 9/11. He has now resigned.

To talk more about that, let's bring in syndicated columnist David Sirota and David Frum, the editor of newmajority.com and former speech writer for the Bush White House.

David Sirota, let's start with you, because you wrote quite a scathing column that appeared on the newleft.org and as well on the huffingtonpost.com, saying you're absolutely outraged by the way the White House handled this.

SIROTA: Van Jones is a national hero for his work on green jobs. He's known as an expert on energy policy, on economic policy. He's somebody who made a mistake, who acknowledged that he made a mistake a long time ago, and he was tossed out by this White House.

And I think what we can learn from what happened is what this White House values and what this White House doesn't value. The White House stuck by Tim Geithner as Tim Geithner was involved, the treasury secretary, in a tax scandal. He's accepted gifts from the banking industry. The White House stood by him.

The White House has stood by other people, like Ben Bernanke, who has really been at the heart of our economic problems. And they're basically putting Van Jones out to pasture because of something Van Jones said was a mistake.

And I think what's going on here is that the White House is listening to the white right wing's political terrorists, people like Glenn Beck, people like conservative activists who have targeted Van Jones because Van Jones is an African-American with a progressive movement background working on behalf of social justice.

That's something, unfortunately, that is apparently, according to the right wing, not allowed in this country.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (120)

PLAYS: (342)

I would like to see more stories like this please.

Maddow: But, first, it‘s time for a couple of holy mackerel stories in the news today.

If there is a benefit to the maddening Democratic Party failure on the issue of the public health insurance option, it could be the revival of the once believed to be extinct hard line liberal base. The AFL-CIO yesterday drew its own line in the sand by saying it would not support Democratic candidates who do not support the public option in health reform. And as David Sirota notes at “Huffington Post” today, threats from the left have shifted the rhetoric of incumbent Democratic Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado.

Here‘s where Senator Bennet started. At a town hall meeting in Pueblo on Saturday, Senator Bennet gave flimsy support to the idea of the public option. He said then that he favored the option, but, quote, “As I stand here today, I think it‘s very unlikely that the public option part of this will pass.” In other words, he was saying he would probably vote for health reform without the public option.

Then, reports circulated that Senator Bennet will likely face a primary challenge from Democratic House Speaker Andrew Romanoff. And now, look at what Senator Bennet has posted at his Web site.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MICHAEL BENNET (D), COLORADO: I do support a public option as part of this.

(APPLAUSE)

BENNET: I have said I support a public option. I‘ve supported a public option. I support a public option. I‘ve supported a public option. Why? I also support having a public plan.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW: So, the senator supports the public option after all. Yes.

You know, having been taken for granted and triangulated and on occasion just stomped on during decades of Democratic Party policy decisions, the left may be learning its lesson. If you don‘t lie down in front of the door, you‘re less likely to get used as a door mat.

David Sirota with a really insightful piece on the forces opposing progressive reform. Please note: as he points out, Blue Dogs are not actually constrained by their constituents. It's all about the money!

The health care debate has reminded us that there really are three separate but coordinated armies that defend the status quo in Washington - and will defend that status quo, whether on health care or any other economic issue. In my newspaper column today, I look at who these factions are, and what their motives are. You can read the column here.

In a nutshell, you have the Land Rover Liberals, many coming from the 14 out of 25 wealthiest congressional districts that Democrats now represent. Right now, their opposition to health care and tax reform is being led by Boulder, Colorado Rep. Jared Polis (D).

You also have the Corrupt Cowboys - those lawmakers from very poor, mostly Southern and Western parts of the country. These people give themselves Americana sounding nicknames like "Blue Dog Democrats" or "Main Street Republicans" so as to pretend their opposition to health care comes from their being down home guys "representin' the folks back home." Of course, these same lawmakers are among the most rapacious corporate fundraisers and lobbyist-connected insiders in Congress. And as I pointed out yesterday, there's no evidence that the districts and states the Corrupt Cowboys represent despise health reform by virtue of the fact that they are culturally conservative bastions. In fact, Nate Silver says there's exactly the opposite evidence:

There's not really any evidence that health care reform is unpopular in the Blue Dog districts. Although there are exceptions, most of the Blue Dog districts are fairly poor. A Quinnipiac poll released earlier this month suggested that while 53 percent of voters overall think "think it's the government's responsibility to make sure that everyone in the United States has adequate health care", 61 percent of voters making under $50,000 do. Also, while Quinnipaic did not break out the results for moderate and conservative Democrats, which are plentiful in these Districts, one can reasonably infer them. In this poll, 79 percent of liberals agreed with the statement as did 77 percent of Democrats -- not a very big difference. Since almost all liberals are Democrats and about half of all Democrats are liberals, that suggests that support for health care reform among non-liberal Democrats is something like 75 percent.

Thus, the story about the honest, god-fearing, good ol' boy cowboys opposing health care reform out of representational obligation has only been able to become conventional wisdom through the Millionaire Media - the elite national press corps, chock full of very wealthy people, that disseminates the most pernicious kind of anti-reform propaganda. These are the same people who insisted we should immediately rush $12 trillion in bailout cash out to Wall Street speculators, and who now insist that 64 years of debates over a $1 trillion health care proposal is inappropriately "rushing" health care reform. They are also the voices who are actually deriding health care reform as an inhumane proposal to legislatively waterboard the poor, persecuted richest one percent.

In the column, I look at the motives of all these groups, and give President Obama huge props for taking them on. As a sometime critic of Obama, I really think he's doing a fantastic job right now, and the news this morning from the New York Times that "the president planning trips across the country" to campaign for health care reform is just fantastic. He's going to have to take on the three groups I discuss in my column - and if he can beat them, we're going to get universal health care.

Obama will appear on the teevee tonight, further ramping up his push for healthcare reform. In the meantime, the Blue Dogs are sharpening their teeth in hopes of further weakening the bill. I'm trying to remember if they ever expressed similar concerns over funding Mr. Bush's little Middle East adventure, but I seem to be drawing a blank. Hmm.

(CNN) -- As President Obama prepares to address the nation in a primetime news conference, some sources say Democratic grumbling about his plan for health care is growing louder.

One Democratic senator told CNN that some congressional Democrats are "baffled," and another senior Democratic source told CNN that those members are frustrated that that they're not getting more specific direction from him on health care.

"We appreciate the rhetoric and his willingness to ratchet up the pressure but what most Democrats on the Hill are looking for is for the president to weigh in and make decisions on outstanding issues," the senior Democratic congressional source said.

"Instead of sending out his people and saying the president isn't ruling anything out, members would like a little bit of clarity on what he would support -- especially on how to pay for his health reform bill," the source added.

Yeah, I talked to one of the reform staffers last night, who told me the real battle now is over how to pay for it. My source tells me a lot of these "reasonable" proposals being floated in this phase have the potential to inflict long-term damage on the bill, that the work being done on the bill is so arcane and complicated that showboating congressmen don't have a clue - and don't bother to inform themselves.

The Democratic leadership had hoped the work going on behind closed doors for months could bear fruit in time for the president's news conference Wednesday night.

But multiple Democratic sources told CNN that's looking very unlikely, and one senior Democratic source said some Democratic leaders are frustrated that Senate negotiators have, "repeatedly missed deadlines."

The fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition of Democrats said Tuesday night that they reached one breakthrough on controlling the cost of health care at a meeting with Obama, House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman and other House Democrats.

Blue Dog Rep. Mike Ross, D-Arkansas, told reporters after the meeting that the group came to a "verbal agreement," to add a "some type of hybrid of an independent Medicare advisory council " that would set reimbursement rates for health care providers to the House Democrats' bill. He referred to the agreement as a "breakthrough."

But Ross cautioned it was only one of 10 items that the Blue Dogs wanted changed.

I read this really interesting piece on Blue Dogs by David Sirota that pretty much sums up the problem:

Continue reading »

April 20, 2009 CNN

Heather:
David Sirota hits Republican strategist Cheri Jacobus for her Bush kept us safe from a terrorist attack talking points. I almost fell out my chair when I heard her say this in response:

Jacobus: We have president -- our last president who went out as an unpopular president, but when he was taking very strong measures against the terrorists, he was the most popular president in history. He kept us safe for nine years. And when I -- for many years it was since 9/11. And now we have a very popular president whose popular personally going in and sort of riding that wave of optimism.

DOWNLOAD (40)

PLAY (102)

Rachel Maddow talks to David Sirota about whether the Obama administration is being tougher on the auto makers than they are on Wall Street. They also take Sen. Bob Corker to task for complaining about the CEO being forced out of GM but having no problem saying that it's perfectly fine to tear up the union contracts of the workers and slash their wages.

DOWNLOAD (98)

PLAY (212)

CNN's Don Lemon talked to David Sirota and Leonard Pitts about the decline of the newspaper industry in the United States. While I think it was a good discussion and agree with the majority of what was said in it, I'd have to take Don Lemon to task for this statement:

LEMON: If you look at blogs and all of the things, most of the stuff is gotten from newspapers anyway. The other things that -- usually the things that don't come from newspapers turn out not to be on the factual side once it's on the Internet.

While it is true there's a lot of junk out there, that's a pretty broad statement from Lemon and simply not based on facts. For instance, TPM is doing original reporting online, including some real investigative journalism, and Bradblog has been investigating voter fraud and doing original reporting and digging into matters the mainstream media won't cover for some time now. That's just two that immediately come to mind. While I agree that we won't see anything on the Internet that can take the place of the local investigative journalism that our newspapers provide, you can't say that everything that's not from a newspaper online isn't factual.

Full transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »

Rachel reminds the Democrats that they won the election mainly because the public did not trust the Republicans to run the economy and so they should fight against the GOP obstructing the stimulus bill. From Think Progress, it looks like they already caved on the family planning provision in the bill.

Rachel also takes the editorial staff at the Wall Street Journal to task for their article citing the debunked, nonexistent CBO report which the media has cited 81 times in the last six days. Talk about marching in lock step.

Rachel followed with David Sirota, who opined over why the Democrats are so worried about getting bipartisan support for the bill and what the costs are when appeasing Republicans.