Last night's speech wasn't nearly as adorable. Shadegg spoke from the House floor to rail against a criminal trial for alleged 9/11 conspirators in New York City. In particular, the far-right Arizonan was incensed that NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) believes, "It is fitting that 9/11 suspects face justice near the World Trade Center site where so many New Yorkers were murdered."
As Matt Finkelstein reported, Shadegg doesn't see it quite the same way. "I saw the Mayor of New York said today, 'We're tough. We can do it,'" the Republican congressman said. "Well, Mayor, how are you going to feel when it's your daughter that's kidnapped at school by a terrorist? How are you going to feel when it's some clerk -- some innocent clerk of the court -- whose daughter or son is kidnapped? Or the jailer's little brother or little sister?"
As a matter of decency, Shadegg's little tantrum was vile and unnecessary. If Shadegg has a policy argument to make, fine. But openly speculating on the House floor about imaginary kidnappings of the mayor's daughter is loathsome, even by the standards of congressional Republicans.
You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (987)
PLAYS: (808)
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told NBC's David Gregory that a trial for the alleged 9/11 mastermind in New York City was "appropriate."
Clinton said New York City residents shouldn't fear the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. "All believe that New York City not only can handle this, but that it is appropriate to go forward in the very area where these people launched this horrific attack against us," Clinton said Sunday.
Not everyone is convinced that a trial so near the 9/11 attack is the best decision. Appearing on CNN Sunday, former mayor Rudy Giuliani said that the trial would put residents at risk.
Beck: On 9/11, we experienced a feeling we had never had before -- when the buildings and our markets and the economy came falling down around our ears, we realized -- 'Oh my gosh. Our country isn't unsinkable.'
We came, on that day, to the understanding that this Republic is fragile. Here we are now, a decade later. I'm on the air again, warning you that our government cannot sustain our massive spending. The system will collapse if we continue down this progressive path.
Ten years ago, I could have shouted every single day about Osama bin Laden and his wacky, crazy threats to kill Americans in New York. And no one would have been willing to stand in line two hours while some security officers made grandma take her shoes off. No one would have done it.
But don't you see -- while the government is still not willing to do these things, today, America is different. America has changed. Washington, we're not going to let you get away with it anymore.
Look, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Conservatives are awake. 912ers are willing to do the hard things. We know what this means. We're taking time out of our busy lives, taking time away from their families, they're attending town-hall meetings -- you think they wanna do that? They are calling their representatives -- how many times do we have to be yelled at by your people in Washington? to work against the enactment of health care reform.
They are reading 2,000-page health-care bills on the weekend. They 912ers are willing to stand in line and take our shoes off before the plane actually hits the tower.
Glenn Beck has a long history of exploiting the 9/11 tragedy for the sake of ratings and rantings. (Who could forget his encomium to the widows? "It took me about a year to start hating the 9/11 victims' families.")
Indeed, you could make the case that his current stellar rise was built on such exploitation. Beck was a nobody until he started making incendiary remarks about Muslims on air and attacking liberals for their insufficient patriotism after 9/11 and cheerleading the Iraq invasion as a post-9/11 necessity. It's what made him famous in the first place.
And now he's springboarding from that to leading an open revolt against the liberal policies Americans just voted to implement, throwing a tantrum because no one believes in disproven and discredited conservative dogma anymore. No one, that is, except Glenn Beck and his hapless followers.
crossposted from Driftglass at the request of Crooks and Liars editors
“...they turned to prayer, beseeching
that the sin which had been committed
might be wholly blotted out.”
-- 2 Maccabees. 12:42
Once upon a time, there was a President named Bill Clinton, who was, by most historical standards, a typical Centrist Republican, although by a fluke of geography and circumstances he ran for public office with a "(D)" after his name.
Under his Administration, many Conservative ideas which had long gathered dust on the shelf -- ideas such as welfare reform, a balanced budget, debt reduction, a strict “Pay as You Go” fiscal regime, a boom in technology jobs, budget surpluses, NAFTA, GATT, official bans on gay marriage, etc. -- were finally realized.
And for all of his good work on behalf of their ideology, Conservatives spent eight, long years treating Bill Clinton -- a Southern, White, Christian man -- as if he were a case of flesh eating nuclear syphilis.
Because he did not run for office with an "(R)" after his name.
And because he did not run for office with an "(R)" after his name, according to the leading voices in the Republican Party and the Conservative Movement, Bill Clinton was, in no particular order, Hitler, a Socialist, a rapist, a warmonger, a serial murderer, and a drug dealer, whose Presidency was somehow vaguely illegitimate.
And counterpointing the 24/7 slime campaign, there were those endless, endless hearings. Whitewater. Travel office. Christmas Card lists. Lincoln bedroom. Etc ad nauseum.
Consortiumnews: On the eighth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, it’s worth reflecting on how even a mildly competent U.S. President might have prevented the terror attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people and drove the United States into a spasm of revenge that has wasted untold blood and treasure.
The Reid Report: The next target for the red-baiting right: Valerie Jarret ( and the REAL Frank Marshall Davis)
Pensito Review: Because Joe Wilson is your pre-existing condition
On the eve of the eight year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, an FBI informant who infiltrated alleged terrorist cells in the U.S. tells ABC News the FBI missed a chance to stop the al Qaeda plot because they focused more on undercover stings than on the man who would later become known as 9/11 ringleader Mohammed Atta.
In an exclusive interview to be broadcast tonight on ABC World News with Charles Gibson and Nightline, former undercover operative Elie Assaad says he spotted and became suspicious of Atta in early 2001, when he was sent by the FBI to infiltrate a small mosque outside Miami. Atta was there with Adnan Shukrujuman, an al Qaeda fugitive who now has a $5 million U.S. reward on his head.
"There was something wrong with these guys," Assaad, a 36-year-old Catholic native of Lebanon who pretended to be an Islamic extremist, says.
The FBI initially declined to comment but released a statement following the ABC News report, saying: "The 9/11 investigation, the most extensive ever conducted by the FBI, has been reviewed in its totality by the 9/11 Commission, Congress and others. The claims made in the news report and the factual conclusions contained in the story are not supported by the evidence."
The FBI did not specify which claims or conclusions it referred to.
Asaad said he told ABC News the truth and stands by his story.
I was in my then-doctor's office in Yardley, Pennsylvania, home to several of the pilots and crew members who died in the attacks. None of us knew that at the time, of course. We were just there to see the doctor.
When I walked in for my 9 a.m. appointment, they had the radio on. "A plane crashed into the World Trade Center," the receptionist told me. Weird - that's an awfully big building to miss. I assumed it was a small plane, sat down and picked up a magazine. (I think I was there for a sinus infection.)
And as we sat there half-listening, a few minutes later the weirdness replayed itself: Another plane crashed into the other building.
At this point, dread set in and we knew something really, really bad was happening.
I remember the drive home, heading south on I-95. It was completely empty, except for one state trooper I'd passed. I'd never seen that. I remember thinking it looked like the end of the world.
On the ride home, I kept trying to call the people I cared about - not to see that they were physically safe, but as an emotional touchstone. The phone lines were busy everywhere and it was hard to get through. (I remember my then-boyfriend was not all that interested in hearing from me, so something else died that day.)
My grown son was staying with me while he looked for a job and was sleeping on the couch when I came home. I flipped on the TV and it woke him up. We watched as they showed the planes crashing into the building, again and again and again.
"Turn it off," he said after an hour or so. "This is pornography, war pornography. Turn it off."
So I did.
When we have our limbic brain punched over and over again by horrific images, and those images are then used to justify more horror, there is only one solution: Turn off your TV.
My son was right: The 9/11 images were war pornography, something watched over and over as we stroked ourselves into wargasm.
In honor of the victims of the 9/11 attacks, comments are closed to this post. We offer this opportunity for our readers to take a moment of silence in deep respect to those whose lives were lost, both here and in Iraq.
You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (843)
PLAYS: (1322)
September 03, 2009 News Corp
(Heather): News Hounds has a nice run down of this segment for anyone that would rather listen to fingernails on a chalkboard than the sound of Sean Hannity's voice.
Hannity began the segment by trumpeting the “new and disturbing information” about Jones that, according to Hannity shows "he is not fit for office.” Apparently, the new and disturbing information was that Jones had signed a letter by the “infamous 9/11 Trust organization” asking for an “immediate inquiry into evidence that suggests high-level government officials may have deliberately allowed the September 11th attacks to occur.” Hannity forgot to mention that the letter was very lengthy and called for investigations into many other aspects of 9/11. Jones now says he did not carefully review the letter before signing it and has issued a statement saying that the letter “certainly does not reflect my views now or ever.” He has also apologized for calling Republicans "assholes" in a remark made before he joined the Obama administration. But of course, while an apology from Duane "Dog" Chapman for his n-word rant was enough to garner a full hour of image rehab from Hannity, the apology from Jones was barely considered.
Hannity continued, “The fact that the president would not only allow but appoint a man who harbors these conspiratorial beliefs to serve the United States should provoke not only concern but outrage among all Americans.”
Really? Then where’s the concern and outrage for the birther conspiracy theorists which Hannity not only did not condemn but promoted and legitimized on his show?
News Hounds has much more on this segment and I encourage everyone to go read the entire post.
You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (1257)
PLAYS: (4897)
President Obama is pushing to make our 9/11 remembrances part of a national "Day of Service" -- and Laura Ingraham, filling in on The O'Reilly Factor on Thursday, says this is causing a controversy:
Ingraham: A controversy is brewing over President Obama's decision to remember 9/11 as a "National Day of Service." Some critics believe that marking 9/11 as a day for volunteerism demeans the memory of the thousands who were killed by Muslim extremists on that fateful September morning.
Ingraham then tells Alan Colmes that the idea sounded all warm and fuzzy until she looked at the organizations helping to make it happen: ACORN, the AFL-CIO, Color of Change, etc. etc. -- what she calls "a bunch of left-wing crazy groups".
Colmes then proceeds to pin Ingraham's ears to the wall over this nonsense: The "Day of Service" is being promoted by a broad range of organizations, including the families of the victims, all of them perfectly mainstream. And he adds:
Colmes: But the fact of the matter is, that to remember 9/11, and to make it a national day of service to your country -- I can't think of a better way to honor 9/11. What is your problem, Laura, with making it a day of service and remembrance? What is your problem with that?
Ingraham makes it clear she thinks 9/11 should be a right-wing holiday. Fortunately, the rest of us think it's a day that belongs to all of us.
And here's the funny part: The majority of Republicans disagree with her. As Media Matters points out:
The Senate passed the Serve America Act on March 26, 2009, by a 79-19 vote. Twenty-one Republican senators, including then-Republican Sen. Arlen Specter, voted in favor of the legislation. Nineteen Republican senators voted against the bill. The House voted to agree to the Senate amendments on March 31, by a 275-149 vote. Twenty-six Republican House members voted in favor of the bill.
Among those who promoted the idea of dedicating 9/11 remembrances to the cause of volunteerism: George W. Bush.
"Volunteerism is strong in the country. But the truth of the matter is, the farther we've gotten away from 9-11, that memory has begun to fade," the President said. "And my call to people is, there's always a need. You should be volunteering not because of 9-11, but you should be volunteering because our country needs you on a regular basis. And so today I call upon our fellow citizens to devote 4,000 hours over your lifetime in service to your country. You'll become a better person for it, and our society will be more healthy as a result of it."
Visit the 9/11 Day of Service website to see how you can pitch in. If for no other reason than that it will annoy Laura Ingraham.
