Go Home

false equivalencies

90 documents found in 0.001 seconds.

Drilldown

Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (229)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (2644)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

During what was for the most part a very intelligent discussion on money in politics, what it costs to get elected and why most Americans don't even like their own members of Congress these days -- we saw something on Current TV's The Young Turks that sadly doesn't happen each and every day in our corporate media -- someone was called out for playing the "both sides" are equally horrible false equivalency game.

Cenk Uygur asked his guest, Politico's Reid Epstein about the recent polling showing that people don't even like their own member of Congress, which is something we haven't seen in the past. The norm has usually been that they like their own member and don't like most of the rest of them. Here was Epstein's respose:

EPSTEIN: That's true, but what those numbers don't tell you is the reasons why they don't like their own member of Congress and almost all of these Congressional districts, the House districts, are drawn so they're either Democratic or Republican districts. And so these members have much more to fear from the extremes on the right and the left than they do from the middle or the other party. And so you have members that... among both Democrats and Republicans who cater to the extreme edges of the party. And the people who don't like them are often the people who are even more extreme on the right and the left than the members are themselves.

After Cenk took exception to what he said and asked him to name anyone on the left that was the equal to these crazy wingnuts we've seen being elected on the right, all Epstein could come up with is voters who are upset with individual members of Congress on the Democratic side of the aisle.

Continue reading »



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (131)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (368)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Sen. Tom Coburn didn't go as far as his cohort, Sen. Lamar Alexander, who accused Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius of acting just like Oliver North during the Iran-Contra scandal -- but he was still willing to accuse her of breaking the law by soliciting private donations to help implement the Affordable Care Act after Congress cut the purse strings.

Coburn appeared on this Monday's Your World With Neil Cavuto to discuss Republicans demands that there be an investigation into whether Sebelius violated any appropriations and ethics rules, and while he was more than willing to imply that the HHS secretary might have broken the law, he was careful to parse his words while doing so:

COBURN: I have no doubt in my mind they have broken US code by augmenting their appropriations. I've had several large insurance executives tell me that they were asked to contribute to this. So we're just beginning on this, but if it's not illegal, it should be and it's for sure unethical and it is definitely a conflict of interest to extort money from the very people that you regulate.

As Think Progress pointed out a few weeks ago, Republicans didn't mind it so much when they did the exact same thing during the last administration: Senator Who Criticized Sebelius For Soliciting Donations Asked For Private Funds While Serving In Bush Administration:

Continue reading »



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (110)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (660)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

I think The Washington Posts' most annoying right-wing, neocon blogger drank one too many shots of revisionist history KoolAid before appearing on Fox News Sunday and pretending that George W. Bush "demanded a level of accountability and candor" during the Plame investigation that President Obama has not during this IRS drummed up "scandal."

Just because no one took the Fifth, doesn't mean that they didn't lie and it hardly equates to anyone who was involved in that fiasco being either candid or held accountable for their actions.

Maybe Rubin could do a little reading here, and here, and here to refresh her memory about the Plame affair and whether Karl Rove told the truth to the grand jury.

And I hate to break it to Rubin, but Lois Lerner, the Bush appointee who took the Fifth when asked to testify before Issa's committee, is not one of President Obama's "people."

Transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (58)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (126)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

One of these things is not like the other, but this is what's passing for political debate on CNN this weekend. Republican strategist and dirty trickster Alex Castellanos did his best to help the network continue on their path to becoming Fox-lite with this false equivalency on the drummed up Benghazi "scandal" they're all having the feeding frenzy over this week.

CROWLEY: Now, while I'm asking you this question I want to put up an NRCC, a Republican campaign committee, an ad they put up asking for funds saying, you know, we're after Benghazi. Is it smart to go after substantive things with Rand Paul in Iowa attacking Hillary, who might run in 2016 and the NRCC raising funds off of it. Isn't that kind of a mixed message?

CASTELLANOS: Well sometimes if you make something too political you undermine your motive that you really want -- a fair investigation.

CROWLEY: Do you think that has happened here?

CASTELLANOS: Not yet. Politics is also how we govern our governors. It's the only control we have. So, when government fails, the political arena is the place that we want to expose something and bring it to people's attention. And this is bad news for Hillary Clinton. This could be what mission accomplished was for George Bush. What difference does it make could be for Hillary Clinton? She -- three bad mistakes here. She didn't look after the people under her care in Benghazi. She either allowed or encouraged or didn't know about a cover up and then she marked it with a YouTube moment and those things last and travel in politics. This is going to make it very tough for her in 2016.

Ah yes, taking part of Hillary Clinton's testimony during the Republicans witch hunt on Benghazi out of context is exactly like Bush declaring that we'd "won" in Iraq right as things were about to go to hell after our illegal invasion of a country that was not a threat to us. Just the same! Jesus this crap makes my head hurt. And not an ounce of push back from host Candy Crowley, of course.

Full transcript from the segment above below the fold.

Continue reading »



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (87)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (230)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

After over-hyping the claims by Bob Woodward on The Situation Room just the day before that the White House supposedly threatened him, CNN's Wolf Blitzer and Jessica Yellin ended up doing some back tracking on this Thursday's show, after the emails released by Politico revealed that he wasn't being threatened after all. Even though they both eventually admitted that the emails were not threatening at all, both of them were desperate to cling to the notion that Woodward might have still have some legitimate reason to feel threatened by the White House.

Blitzer asked Yellin if she thought "maybe this sidebar is being overblown?" which might be the understatement of the day. You think so Wolf? Overblown by whom exactly? Woodward played CNN and the rest of the right like a fiddle and as John already noted here, all of them were missing the forest for the trees when it comes to the substance in Sperling and Woodward's email exchange and the fact that the White House is still willing to throw their base under the bus with these negotiations.

CNN, still doing their best to be Fox-lite. And note to Wolf Blitzer, Bob Woodward quit acting like a "premier journalist" ages ago. Now he's a right wing hack with an axe to grind. The good news out of all of this though, according to Wolf Blitzer, is that Gene Sperling is going to come on the air with Candy Crowley this weekend to talk about this nonsense. I await learning nothing of value during that interview.

Here's more from Gawker on Woodward: Goodbye, Bob



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (67)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (270)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

I have to say that I have been enjoying watching Republicans squirm while they try to figure out what to do about the fact that pandering to the worst elements among their base for decades has put them in the position where they're going to have to decide how to deal with this Frankenstein monster that they've created, or eventually all of the gerrymandering and election rigging in the world isn't going to keep them from going the way of Whigs.

I also thoroughly enjoyed seeing a conversation about their predicament end up leading to Republican history revisionist and head turd-polisher David Brooks inadvertently admitting to something I'm sure he'd rather not talk about at all -- which is the fact that these politicians calling themselves members of the "tea party" are actually just Republicans.

Sadly you're never going to hear Brooks or anyone on PBS admit that there is no "tea party" and that it's just an AstroTurf rebranding effort by the Koch brothers and their allies to get people to forget that George W. Bush ever existed after the damage he did to their party.

And as my fellow C&L contributor Driftglass has reminded his readers on a regular basis, they built this, and what they are finally being forced to confront right now is nothing new by any means: The Fall of the House of Bircher:

They built this.

Yes they did.

A long assembly-line of Conservative miners, smelters, cutters, assemblers, welders and polishers stretching back through Fox and Rove and Bush, through Falwell and Weyrich, through Atwater and Limbaugh, through Reagan and Nixon, though Wallace and Thurmond...all playing with the awful tools of paranoia, rage, white supremacy and faith...all scavenging the barking mad remnants of the Confederacy and the Jesusland dreams of Christopaths to forge for themselves a mighty machine.

A mighty, angry, crazy, bigoted reactionary electoral beast fed on drivel and dung and led by the nose from cause to cause and candidate to candidate, getting a stronger and wilder and more anxious to spit out the bit and run amok every day.

They were warned.

Yes they were.

They were warned -- by Liberals -- as far back as the 1960s that they were tampering with terrible forces (from me, five years ago):

From Rod Serling writing in an editorial in the (then very right-wing) Los Angeles Times in 1964, in response to a series of articles by wingnut-apologist Morrie Ryskind:

What Mr. Ryskind seems constitutionally unable to understand is that there is a vast difference between the criticism of a man or a party, and the setting up of criteria or patriotism which equates differences of opinion with disloyalty.

We have need in the country for an enlightened, watchful and articulate opposition. We have no need for semi-secret societies who are absolutist, dictatorial, and would substitute for a rule of law and reason an indiscriminate assault on the institutions of this republic that should and must be held sacrosanct. …

“[The far right cannot] discount the fact that sitting it their parlor is the Ku Klux Klan, the American Nazi Party, every racist group in the United States and not a few of some Fascist orders that have scrambled their way up from the sewers to a position of new respectability.”

Modern Conservatism was born steeped in original, bigoted sin ever since Lyndon Johnson and the 1964 Civil Rights Act --

In conjunction with the civil rights movement, Johnson overcame southern resistance and convinced Congress to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlawed most forms of racial segregation. Johnson signed it into law on July 2, 1964. Legend has it that, as he put down his pen, Johnson told an aide, "We have lost the South for a generation," anticipating a coming backlash from Southern whites against Johnson's Democratic Party.

-- and the rise of the Southern Strategy --

From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.

-- and has been sliding deeper into the septic tank ever since.

They were warned, but they did it anyway. Kept mollifying thugs. Kept flattering bigots. Kept slaughtering science to appease the theocrats and the garden-variety stoopid. Kept whispering to the stone crazy that their paranoia was patriotic. And, of course, kept on dehumanizing and demonizing patriotic, reality-based Liberals who were trying their damnedest to keep their Pretty Hate Machine from rolling back the whole Enlightenment.

More there so go read the rest. And never mind all that according to David Brooks "the establishment is going to have maybe an easier time of it than some might think" with reigning these people in and there's going to be some "new wing that's going to rise up and change the party from the outside." That's going to be a neat trick without completely alienating their wingnut base they've been pandering to for ages now. Sounds like Brooks is still pushing the same "Third Way," "No Labels" crap we've been hearing from him and his ilk for years now.

Full transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (131)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1016)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

From this Saturday's Weekends with Alex Witt on MSNBC, former Deputy Assistant and Deputy Press Secretary to George W. Bush, Tony Fratto took part in a discussion on Chuck Hagel's confirmation hearing for Secretary of Defense and while I agree on the fact that Hagel's performance during that hearing was less than stellar to put it mildly, I've got to say, sorry Tony, but we don't have anyone on the Democratic side of the aisle that is the equivalent of that nasty piece of work, John McCain.

The media just can't stop giving undue deference to John McCain no matter how badly he behaves. Maybe we'd see less of that sort of nastiness out of him if he weren't continually rewarded for how he acts, but instead we see him given a complete pass and are told it was just payback that was somehow justified -- and no one was really paying attention anyway. Oh, and Democrats do the same thing, so it's no big deal.

Given the Republicans' propensity for feigned victimhood and pearl clutching at every turn for even mild chastising, I wouldn't even want to see their reaction if someone on the Democratic side of the aisle -- or who they perceive as aligned with them like Hagel when he turned against the Iraq war -- acted the way McCain did here:

Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (285)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1544)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (251)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (3891)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

I was very glad to see that Salon's Joan Walsh is about as tired of those in the media playing the "both sides" false equivalency game, where they compare the craziness that's become the mainstream on the right to some either nonexistent, or out of the mainstream entity on the left, for the sake of so-called balance or fairness, as I am.

It was nice to see her call out The Daily Beast's Lauren Ashburn for doing just that on this Wednesday's edition of Hardball with guest host Michael Smerconish filling in for Chris Matthews. Here's more on that from Walsh herself in her column at Salon: The wingnut trifecta:

Right-wing claims that Hillary Clinton faked illness to avoid testifying about the Benghazi tragedy would be funny if they weren’t so ugly. It’s the wingnut trifecta, smearing our most popular past Democratic president, Bill Clinton, along with our current president, Barack Obama, and the current 2016 front-runner, all with one shot. Imagine birtherism crossed with the worst of the hateful anti-Clinton lies, like the “Vince Foster was murdered” claim. That’s Hillary-health trutherism.[...]

I talked about the crazy Benghazi allegations on “Hardball” today and I was surprised to find myself in strong disagreement with the Daily Beast’s Lauren Ashburn. Ashburn acted shocked at the Clinton slurs; I argued they’re just the latest outbreak of Clinton-Obama derangement syndrome. But even more significant, Ashburn tried to declare that both sides are somehow equally to blame for the “incivility” of our current political debate, claiming that someone (she didn’t say who or where) had wished death on former President George Bush when the news broke that he was in the intensive care unit.

I’m on record, often, saying that false equivalence about haters on the right and left is dangerous. To equate Democrats and Republicans on this front, you’d have to imagine, say, Susan Rice suggesting something that crazy, not to mention unethical, about Mitt Romney’s secretary of state, had the 2012 race ended differently. And you can’t equate some random commenter on the HuffPost with people like Krauthammer and Hannity who have regular perches atop Fox News. That would be like Chris Matthews wishing death on the former president; it would never happen.

I agree completely, except I wasn't surprised by what Ashburn said. She's one of Howard Kurtz's favorite guests on his Sunday show on CNN where what she did during the Hardball segment is the norm and not the exception.

h/t Captain Kangaroo



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (100)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (432)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Bill O'Reilly caught a really bad case of selective amnesia on his show this Monday night, when he pretended he didn't have any idea that his fellow host at Fox had gone on the air, not once, but at least three times, blaming the shooting at the elementary school in Newtown, CT on the "removal of god" from our schools.

Bill-O had his regular guest, flame thrower Bernard Goldberg on and the two of them were very quick to attack MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell for supposedly politicizing the shooting because she dared to talk about the fact that maybe we should have some reasonable gun laws in the United States. But when Goldberg actually criticized Fox for doing the same thing and politicizing the attack to suit an agenda, and without calling out Huckabee by name, slammed him for his remarks about school prayer, O'Reilly decided to act like he didn't have a clue as to what Goldberg was talking about.

If O'Reilly needs a refresher as to Huckabee's remarks, someone can tell him to go watch what he said here and here. As much as O'Reilly hates but follows Media Matters, who have had this on their front page for days now, I don't think there's a chance in hell he didn't know about what HuckaJesus said.

Here's your "fair and balanced" discussion on Fox. Goldberg with false equivalencies and Bill-O pretending he doesn't know about the hackery from the religious wingnut on his own network.

And if anyone needed any more proof that Huckabee is a blathering idiot, go read this article from this past April: Gunman Kills 7 in a Rampage at a Northern California University.



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (211)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1687)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

From this Tuesday's The Daily Rundown on MSNBC, Chuck Todd brought in authors Norm Ornstein and Thomas Mann to discuss the thesis of their new book and how the media has completely failed to cover the fact that we've got one party in this country that has gone completely off the rails and that all sides are not equal with who is at fault with our dysfunctional political system right now and in the process, managed to prove their point for them by doing the very thing they were writing about.

Egberto Willies at Addicting Info summed up the interview nicely here: Chuck Todd Argues Relevancy Of Mainstream Media With Authors, Mann and Ornstein (VIDEOS):

The mainstream press is starting to listen. Its fear of irrelevancy was evident in a nine minute segment on MSNBC’s The Daily Rundown where Chuck Todd interviewed Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein on media reaction to their book, It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism and subsequent Washington Post essay, “Let’s just say it: The Republicans are the problem.”

The segment demanded a post mortem. It shows that the mainstream press is actively engaged with what is occurring in the alternate media, but seems unwilling or unable to correct their modus operandi. The introduction to the segment is fascinating. Chuck Todd relays the premise of Mann and Ornstein’s argument with a sarcastic caveat where he implies that their ostracism from the mainstream media was imagined. Their appearance on The Daily Rundown is likely the outcome of the impact the virality of their piece had on the Internet. [...]

Later in the interview Chuck Todd tries to defend the ineptitude of the mainstream media implying that balanced coverage was based on the party really believing the tenets it was espousing. [...]

His defense is a factually inaccurate characterization of how the press has been covering Republicans. One need only revisit the Healthcare debate. Much of the bill, (mandates, private insurance, etc.) was a product of the conservative think tankm “The Heritage Foundation,” yet Republicans opposed the bill on grounds they once stood for. [...]

Immediately after Ornstein talks about false equivalences, Chuck Todd shows that he still does not get why the mainstream press is held in disrepute. He immediately tries to link the past Democratic intransigence with the debt ceiling debate, with the economically damaging scenario perpetrated by the Republicans in 2011.

He just can't stop himself. More there so go read the rest. It was very frustrating to see Todd called out to his face for his terrible reporting and making the false equivalencies and watching it just fall on deaf ears and seeing him continue to do the very same thing they were talking about all throughout the interview.

And as far as Todd pretending he's doing them some big favor by finally having them on his show months and months late, and that they haven't been shunned, as Nicole pointed out back in June when Chris Hayes had them on his show, even though they were regular guests in the past, they weren't getting any phone calls for the Sunday shows shortly after they published their article.