Is it just me, or does anyone else think James O'Keefe has some real issues with liking to play dress up a bit too much? I'm not sure when we're finally going to see the last of James O'Keefe and his brand of ambush "journalism", but yesterday could not be too soon for me.

From TPM -- James O'Keefe's Latest 'Terrorist' Medicaid Sting Goes After Woman For Following Law:

Stop me if you've heard this one. A man goes into a public assistance office in Charleston, South Carolina in a kilt, tells them he's a member of the Irish Republican Army and asks for help for 25 fellow Irishmen in a hospital who need Medicaid.

A government employee follows the rules and explains the process for filling out a Medicaid paperwork and the qualifications they'd need to meet. She informs them that a federal law intended to protect patient privacy requires her not to divulge any information he's told her.

So what happens next? James O'Keefe's Project Veritas releases a deceptively edited video that makes the woman look like a terrorist sympathizer, though it isn't even clear if she knows the background of the IRA.

In the edited version, the woman says it would not be in her best interest to divulge anything because she could not afford it and she doesn't want to go to jail. As it turns out, that's what she's supposed to do under the law.

To his credit, O'Keefe posted the full unedited video of the "sting" directly after the edited version. Which makes it all the more curious that Project Veritas edited the tape in a way that paints the government employee in a bad light. Read on...

DOWNLOADS: (256)

PLAYS: (594)

Embed

I generally get aggravated with Chris Matthews for being overly aggressive with his guests and talking over them. This time wasn't one of them. Matthews took New York Republican gubernatorial candidate Rick Lazio to task for his fear mongering over the Cordoba House Islamic center near ground zero or wrongly named "ground zero mosque" and for playing politics to help himself given his lagging poll numbers.

I'm frankly getting really tired of seeing this story continue to gain traction in the press other than the fact that it's putting front and center that the GOP doesn't mind painting itself as extreme as Pam Geller. When the Atlas Shrugs wingnut is driving the political debate of the day I don't see how that's good for them with any moderate voters who aren't anxious to start another race war in this country.

MATTHEWS: We start with the planned Islamic center near Ground Zero. Joining us right now is former New York congressman Rick Lazio, who’s running for governor of New York. Here’s your new TV ad. I want to show it, first of all, Rick to everybody. Let’s watch it. Caused a lot of stir.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RICK LAZIO (R), NEW YORK GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE: New Yorkers have been through enough. Now a terrorist-sympathizing imam wants to build a $100 million mosque near Ground Zero. Where’s this money coming from? Who’s really behind it? Incredibly, Andrew Cuomo defends it, even though this imam said America was an accessory to 9/11. Andrew Cuomo is very, very wrong.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Call Andrew Cuomo and tell him a Ground Zero mosque is very wrong.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTHEWS: A lot of people watching this ad would say it’s really a political ad. It has nothing to do with religion or 9/11 or anything else. It has to do with the fact that you’re down about 30 points in what looks to be your upcoming general election fight with Andrew Cuomo for governor. Your reaction to that.

LAZIO: My reaction to that, Chris, is that this is an issue that two thirds of Americans, two thirds of New Yorkers care deeply about. This is certainly not about religion. This is about the security and safety of the people of New York. And in my mind, some of the points that are made in this commercial are very valid points. Listen, the imam who -- Rauf -- who is spearheading this effort did, in fact, say that American policies were an accessory to the crime of 9/11, this the very same month as the attacks on 9/11 2001.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (336)

PLAYS: (246)

Embed

March 01, 2010 FOX News

DOWNLOADS: (1105)

PLAYS: (7323)

Embed

Like I said, if MSNBC cared about their ratings, Rachel Maddow would be hosting Meet the Press. Here she does David Gregory's job for him and corrects Rep. Aaron Schock for repeating the talking point that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab quit talking after he was read his Miranda rights and she points out that this was not an issue until a Democratic administration took office.

MR. GREGORY: Are Republicans and Republican attacks against this administration helping al-Qaeda?

REP. SCHOCK: Absolutely not. And I think it's insult to most Americans to suggest that their elected representatives who are carrying their views and the message of, of the majority of Americans to Washington and to this debate are somehow helping al-Qaeda. Mind you, these are the--many of these Democrats, including Mr. Brennan who served in the last administration, faced many of these same attacks under then-President Bush from, from the left. So the idea that we can't challenge the administration and their view on the fight on terrorism is completely bogus.

MR. GREGORY: What happened to Democrats when they challenged President Bush in the same way?

REP. SCHOCK: Well, some of the same, some of the same claims were made against them.

MR. GREGORY: Right.

REP. SCHOCK: But at the end of the day, we're representing mainstream America and the majority of views. And, and whether it's closing Guantanamo Bay and moving it to the heartland of America, whether it's the, the--trying these folks in downtown New York, whether it's Mirandizing terrorists who come to this country to attack us, the majority of Americans have not bought, do not believe that Obama and his administration is right on these policies.

MR. GREGORY: So you don't support the way the president is prosecuting the war on terror?

REP. SCHOCK: No.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (972)

PLAYS: (2008)

Embed

December 28, 2009 FOX and Friends

Dave N.: Well, that certainly didn't take long. And as usual, the chief turds -- in this case, the execrable Mike Gallagher -- have come floating to the surface of the punch bowl:

Gallagher: But guys, let's look at the inevitable, the 800-pound gorilla in the room. How about we scrutinize young Middle Eastern men to stop this.

What happens when El Al Airlines, the airline run and operated by the state of Israel, if a Palestinian tries to board that plane? Do you think he goes through an extra degree of security? Well, let's do that with Muslims, let's do that with anybody named Abdul or Mohammad or Ahmed, let's take them and put them in a room and make sure they don't have explosives sewn into their underwear.

...

Brian Kilmeade: Do you think we ought to profile any Muslim?

Gallagher: Yes! I think we ought to do what El Al does. Ask anybody who knows El Al what they do with Palestinians who attempt to board El Al. We should anybody who is a known Muslim and put them in a separate line. Call it the VIP line! Treat them with respect!

Christine Fair: That is so preposterous. One-third of the world's population is Muslim. Trying to treat every single Muslim as a terrorist is simply untenable, it's fearmongering.

Gallagher: Who are you afraid of offending Christine? Al Qaeda?

Memo to Gallagher: Nigeria is not in "the Middle East," and the suspect in this case was not "Middle Eastern" -- he was African.

If you want to profile every "known Muslim," you're going to have a hell of a time in countries like Indonesia and the Philippines, considering that their populations are a mix of the world's religions, and any Muslim who wanted to pose as a member of, say, a Christian church in order to fool authorities could do so with ease.

This just underscores how foolish the whole notion of racial profiling actually is, because when you embark on such policies, they actually make you more vulnerable, not less.

That's because terrorists are not that stupid. If you begin profiling for Middle Eastern men, they will find Indonesian or African or European operatives to perform the same task. If you begin profiling for Muslims, they will find ways to conceal their religious preferences.

We know two things about profiling, especially ethnic, religious, or racial profiling: 1) These policies expose the profilers to being gamed by terrorists; and 2) They are always a tremendous waste of resources and inevitably are counter-productive.

Sounds like your classic conservative solution: Hey, let's just make matters worse!

DOWNLOADS: (235)

PLAYS: (272)

Embed

November 17, 2009 FOX News

NY Congressman Peter King talking to FOX and Friends about the 9/11 terrorist going on trial in New York.

DOWNLOADS: (1394)

PLAYS: (3205)

Embed

Lawrence O'Donnell reports on the expected right wing freak-out over Eric Holder’s announcement that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed among others will be tried in New York rather than military tribunals. Jonathan Turley weighs in and notes that this is a return to the rule of law after the disgrace that was the Bush administration.

Turley has more at his blog-- 9-11 Defendants to be Given Real Trials as Holder Stands on Principle — Sort Of:

Attorney General Eric Holder has ordered actual trials for five 9/11 suspects rather than military tribunals. The decision places the United States squarely back on the road of the rule of law in giving due process even to our most hated defendants. The five defendants include 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The other four are Waleed bin Attash, Ramzi Binalshibh, Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi and Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali. However, this courageous act was diminished by an inexplicable decision of Holder to order five other defendants — including USS Cole suspect Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri — be tried in a military tribunal. I will be discussing this decision tonight on MSNBC Countdown.

Texas GOP Sen. John Cornyn condemned the move as putting “political ideology ahead of the safety of the American people just to fulfill an ill-conceived campaign promise.” I am not sure what ideology means but I assume it is a reference to the Constitution. What makes us safer is to offer the world an alternative to these men; to show that we are not the hypocrites that we appeared during the Bush Administration.

The decision to send some detainees to military tribunals, however, is a baffling contradiction. Holder has denied the Administration the high ground in the debate by trying to appease both sides and deny due process to some of these accused individuals. It is a case of snatching hypocrisy out of the jaws of principle.

The right is going crazy over this of course since they don't want the Bush administration exposed for the treatment of these terrorism suspects. Limbaugh admits as much in the rant they play in the beginning of the segment whether he meant to or not.

DOWNLOADS: (614)

PLAYS: (439)

Embed

September 11, 2009 News Corp

DOWNLOADS: (574)

PLAYS: (494)

Embed

August 12, 2009 News Corp

DOWNLOADS: (216)

PLAYS: (653)

Embed

June 15, 2009 News Corp

Fox News--be afraid. The "terrorist ambulance chasers" are coming.