DOWNLOADS: (385)

PLAYS: (9569)

Embed

Two anchors who have worked at Maine sister television stations, ABC affiliate WVII and Fox affiliate WFVX, for a combined 12 years cited "unbalanced news" after they surprised staff on Tuesday by tendering their resignations on the air.

At the end of the 6 p.m. newscast, Cindy Michaels and Tony Consiglio thanked viewers and said that departing together was the best alternative because of some "recent developments."

Consiglio told the Bangor Daily News that he quit because "I just wanted to know that I was doing the best job I could and was being honest and ethical as a journalist, and I thought there were times when I wasn’t able to do that."

Michaels, who also served as the station's news director, said that there was a "regular undoing of decisions" that she made.

"There was a constant disrespecting and belittling of staff and we both felt there was a lack of knowledge from ownership and upper management in running a newsroom to the extent that I was not allowed to structure and direct them professionally," she explained.

“It’s a culmination of ongoing occurrences that took place the last several years and basically involved upper management practices that we both strongly disagreed with,” Michaels continued. “It’s a little complicated, but we were expected to do somewhat unbalanced news, politically, in general.”

WVII/WFVX vice president and general manager Mike Palmer, however, insisted that management did not interfere with decisions in the news room.

"Upper management is not involved in the daily production of the news. Period," he told the paper. "We’ve made great changes over the last few months and are not slowing down."

While neither of the former anchors would go on record to detail how they were being pressured to slant the news, some bloggers have speculated that Fox affiliate WFVX had been moving to emulate conservative bias at Fox News.

The WFVX 10 p.m. newscast is simulcasted on talk radio station WNZS-AM 1340, which also airs shows hosted by conservative personalities Laura Ingraham, Bill Bennett, Mike Gallagher and Michael Medved.

(h/t: Mediaite)

DOWNLOADS: (245)

PLAYS: (1309)

Embed

At the so-called Values Voters Summit, which should have been called the lying-liars' wingnut summit, hypocrite and former gambling addict, Bill Bennett, came to Mitt Romney's defense and attempted to do some rehab for him after his disastrous response to the attacks on our embassies.

Bennett: The Press Attacked Romney on Libya and Tried to 'Kill This Truth in the Womb':

During his astonishingly smug introduction of Paul Ryan at the Values Voter Summit, self-styled "values czar" Bill Bennett blasted the Obama administration's response to the attacks in Libya and Egypt while hailing Mitt Romney's crass attempt to exploit them for political gain as a bold stand for truth.

After falsely claiming that the administration responded to the attacks "by shuddering and shaking and wondering at the consequences of our First Amendment," Bennett then declared that the fact that Romney's response was so widely pilloried as tactless and inappropriate by the media was itself proof that what he sad was true because the press sought to "kill this truth in the womb; something it is well-practiced at":

And as the Washington Post pointed out after noting this about his speech: Bill Bennett proposes new fact-checking, media-bashing formula. "Now there’s a fresh fact-checking model for you."

BENNETT: Whatever timing, wording or parsing one may want to bring up, one may want to suggest as an improvement on his remarks, his words had a shock effect, didn't they? They had a shock effect because they were true. When they are condemned so broadly, so almost universally, among the establishment press, it is likely that they are true.

Sorry Bill, but they were shocking because they were so easily disprovable, completely brazen and crass in how ill-timed they were, but hey, heaven forbid that should get in the way of your talking points here. Bennett had the feigned victimhood and the "liberal media bias" nonsense all wrapped up in one nice steaming sack of lies with this one. Nice "values" you've got there pal.

DOWNLOADS: (227)

PLAYS: (210)

Embed

From this Sunday's Meet the Press, apparently someone has a bad case of amnesia when it comes to vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan's voting record -- Bill Bennett: Iraq War-Supporting, Tax Cut-Defending Paul Ryan Will "Separate" Romney From Bush:

This morning's Meet the Press featured a panel discussion on moderator David Gregory's interview with Mitt Romney, and the discussion turned to whether Romney will be able to separate himself from the policies of George W. Bush, given their persistent unpopularity. The panelists were near unanimous in their agreement that Romney was being hampered by the Bush legacy; the only dissenter was Reagan education secretary Bill Bennett, who argued that "Bush did a lot of fine things," but Romney already has separated himself from Bush "by having Paul Ryan there. Paul Ryan was a critic of Bush spending and he's a critic of Obama spending."

I'm not sure how many times I'll have to write this, but I'll keep writing it for as long as I have to: Paul Ryan voted for every high-cost, deficit-exploding, debt-ballooning policy the Bush White House put in place. He voted for Bush's tax cuts on income and capital gains. He voted for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He voted for the unfunded Medicare prescription drug benefit. He voted for TARP. That's a whole lot of spending (plus a whole lot of revenue reduction), and those policies tell almost the entire story of the current deficits and public debt.

Transcript via:

BENNETT: Let’s this become unanimous. Let me just say. I don’t think we throw out the whole Bush whole eight years. We won the war in Iraq. Bush did a lot of fine things. He can separate himself from Bush policy particularly in the last couple of years. And he’s already done so by having Paul Ryan there. Paul Ryan was a critic of Bush spending and he’s a critic of Obama spending. There’s a recent survey, I just want to note, and that is they asked people would you prefer a bigger government with more services or a bigger economy with more jobs? 75 to 15, bigger economy with more jobs. Conservatives have families, they believe in families, they work. And by the way this wrap that we lack compassion, you know, for people who are suffering. Why in every survey and every study, conservatives-- self-identified conservatives give more of their time, their money, their blood and their treasures to helping people than do liberals.

DOWNLOADS: (174)

PLAYS: (2399)

Embed

Only hours after noted author Christopher Hitchens died of cancer, several of his famous Christian friends were declaring that the atheist would finally know that God is real.

"He was left, I was right, but we had great debates, great drinking bouts," conservative radio host Bill Bennett said on CBS Thursday. "And I hope as the big atheist that he was, he's in for a big surprise."

Pastor Rick Warren called Hitchens a "friend" in a post on Twitter.

"I loved & prayed for him constantly & grieve his loss," Warren wrote. "He knows the Truth now."

But not all of Hitchens friends used the occasion of his death to trumpet the existence of God.

"Christopher Hitchens, finest orator of our time, fellow horseman, valiant fighter against all tyrants including God," fellow atheist and author Richard Dawkins tweeted.

DOWNLOADS: (448)

PLAYS: (1850)

Embed

After Republicans just insisted on blowing another huge hole in the budget with the extension of these Bush tax cuts, CNN's Suzanne Malveaux asks Bill Bennett what "tough choices" Americans are going to be willing to make in order to reduce the deficit. Of course, that sacrifice is only going to be asked of the working class and not the rich.

Bennett pretends this is going to go over better with the public if there's a bipartisan effort to put the screws to the most vulnerable citizens in the country. I've got news for you, pal: It's not.

I wonder what "shared sacrifice" Bill Bennett is willing to make for his country to keep the deficit under control?

MALVEAUX: Let's start with the CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll.

You've got two-thirds of folks who say, look, we're very concerned about the federal deficit, cutting this, and we've got eight out of 10 who say we don't approve of earmarks. But put it up against some of the tough choices that Americans are willing to make here and it doesn't look like they're willing to make those tough choices.

Up against Social Security. When it comes to which is more important, reducing the deficit or preventing cuts in Social Security, 19 percent to 78 percent. Medicare, the same kind of numbers, reducing deficit, 19 percent. Preventing cuts in Medicare, 79 percent. And then taxes, when you take a look at the taxes, increase the federal deficit to pay for tax changes and unemployment benefits, 41 percent favor, 57 percent opposed.

So what do Republicans do? Ho do you square this when Americans themselves are not willing to make those tough choices to reduce the deficit.

BENNETT: A couple of points, Suzanne.

I think this is pretty typical. You ask people, do you want to cut the deficit? Yes. Is the deficit problem serious? Yes.

Well, how about cutting this program? No, don't want to cut that one. Well, how about cutting this program? Don't want to cut that one. So that's been the case historically in most surveys.

The second point, the argument hasn't really been made yet, I don't think. Look, Barack Obama has spent a lot of money. Whether you agree with that spending or not, this has been a big spending administration.

George Bush spent a lot of money too. So we haven't had a president come forward with a Congress and say, look, these deficits get further out of control, we're going to go bankrupt as a country. I don't think the argument has been made yet, so I think it's premature.

Third, most of the plans I've seen, like Paul Ryan's roadmap and some of the other plans, the deficit commission, the bipartisan deficit commission plan, talks about cuts in the future. You announce the Social Security people, for example, they're not going to be cut now, but if you're below 50 or 55, we are going to raise the age and cut benefits based on means testing.

MALVEAUX: And you would support that?

BENNETT: I would, but I would also support other reforms as well. It depends -- a lot depends on next spring, how the arguments are made, whether Democrats and Republicans can make them together. I think they can. I hope they do.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (759)

PLAYS: (1264)

Embed

While discussing the overblown "ground zero mosque" fake controversy on CNN's The Situation Room over the Cordoba House which as John noted started with wingnut extremist Pam "Atlas Shrugs" Geller, Bill Bennett decided to let America know that he thinks our illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq is "going nifty" and a "blessing for the people of Iraq". On what planet is having your country which was not a threat to us illegally invaded, millions of people displaced, your infrastructure blown to hell, being poisoned by DU, and another country occupying you so they can have military bases permanently set up on your soil something going "nifty" or "a blessing".

Someone should tell Bill Bennett that he really needs to lay off of Rush Limbaugh's drugs or whatever the hell he's taking. Un-friggin' believable... "a blessing". Hey Bennett, why don't we drop a few bombs on your neighborhood and then you can tell us how "blessed" you feel. Better yet, how about going over to Iraq yourself for a year or two to live and you can come back later and let us all know how wonderful it is there.

I recently posted Jeremy Scahill's speech talking about how terrible our "mainstream media" is and the need for more real journalists and especially those willing to go overseas and report on what's happening un-embedded from the U.S. military. Here's example 101 of the need for that... Bill Bennett, history revisionist who wants to tell us how wonderful things are going with our military occupation when I'm fairly sure he's never stepped foot in that country himself. I've never seen any reporting from Bennett from Iraq, just bloviating on the politics of our invasion as he did here.

BLITZER: So, Bill, is this going to be a huge political issue between now and November 2nd?

BENNETT: I think it will be big but it looks like Democrats are lining up against the president. 54 percent of Democrats the most recent poll don't agree with the president. I understand Harry Reid issued a statement he issued a statement saying he doesn't agree with the president. I don't know where his support is. Schumer and Gilibrand so far have been silent. This is a losing issue. He shouldn't have gotten into it. Gibbs said, the white house spokesman said for two weeks, this is a local issue. We're not going to get involve the in it, but they stepped in and now they're going to have to live in it. They're wrong on all counts and it will be an issue because you can not talk about 9/11 in this way as if you're instructing the American people as if they have it wrong. They don't have it wrong.

CARVILLE: Well, you know, I think that it's not a good idea. I didn't think it was a good idea, these wars. I don't think it's a good idea to try to change the way $1.2 billion people live.

BENNETT: I don't know what that means.

CARVILLE: That's what Donald Rumsfeld says. We're going to change the way they live.

BENNETT: What does have that to do --

CARVILLE: You're telling people you can't build a mosque at the old Burlington Coat Factory. I think the whole world is watching us.

BENNETT: That's -- that's right. We are saying it is wrong to build a mosque there because this thing was done in the name of Islam. And even though you may not have approved it, this guy Ralph's credentials are questionable. You should have the sensitivity to realize this is going to go down the wrong way for very rational reasons.

CARVILLE: I'll make the distinction. Islam did not attack us. Al Qaeda did. And we ought to be at war with al Qaeda and not Islamists.

BENNETT: Islamists did.

CARVILLE: I see the distinction clearly. We ought to be at war with al Qaeda.

BENNETT: The federal republic of Germany did not build Trablica but the federal republic of Germany should have the decency not to have a federal republic of Germany monument at the site of Trablica or Auschwitz.

CARVILLE: Again, I have many many Muslim friends that I hold their friendship dearly. They did not attack us.

BENNETT: Fine.

CARVILLE: And I see the distinction clearly. We ought to be at war with al Qaeda.

BENNETT: Have they condemned the attack?

CARVILLE: Plenty of people have.

BENNETT: Your Muslim friends? Would they come on my radio show and tell --

CARVILLE: We're nine years into changing the way they live. I don't think it's going too nifty out there, but that's me. Maybe I'm missing something.

BENNETT: Oh, you mean Iraq? Well, that is going nifty, as a matter of fact. That is a blessing for the people of Iraq.

BLITZER: On that note, we're going to continue this discussion. I'm sure in the days to come. Because I think both of you are right politically this issue is not going to go away. It's going to dog a lot of the candidates between now and November 2, and maybe even longer than that. Thanks very much, James Carville and Bill Bennett.

DOWNLOADS: (169)

PLAYS: (587)

Embed

It would be nice to see a few more segments like this one where gasbag Bill Bennett gets some push back on his empty rhetoric for once instead of steam rolling over Donna Brazile or whoever they have him up against. From CNN's State of the Union, the panel is asked what went wrong in the Massachusetts Senate race and Martha Coakley's pollster Celinda Lake says the Democrats need to produce on jobs and Wall Street reform and get some things done or the Republicans are going to continue to seize on their "change" message.

When Bill Bennett tries to claim that the voters of Massachusetts didn't like what was in the health care bill and that the President has moved too far to the left, Lake and Brazile do a pretty good job of knocking down his talking points.

KING: He's not a rhetorical dynamo, but Mitch McConnell has been pretty disciplined in keeping the Republicans together, has he not? I know you're a Democrat, but as somebody who has to organize, he get points?

BRAZILE: For being an obstructionist? Absolutely. For not giving the American people any alternatives? When President Obama took the oath of office, we were hemorrhaging 20,000 jobs a day. Now no one is satisfied with 85 -- losing 85,000 jobs and now -- in the past month. But the truth is, s that the president inherited an economy that was on the brink. And with the policies that he has put forward, this economy is now moving along.

I agree that the president needs to go back to the basics. He needs to go back to the campaigning mode, not the campaign itself, but he promised the American people change. He promised to bring us together, to heal this country, and to move us forward.

And what we have seen from the Republicans is no agenda, no alternative. Yes, you benefited from a political environment that is anti-incumbent. It is bad out there. But I do believe at the end of the day that the Republicans need to put up. We need to vet the Republican policies once they put them forward. And they need to be held accountable for those policies. They had a free pass in 2009.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (234)

PLAYS: (559)

Embed

Donna Brazile takes the rest of the CNN panel to task for their concern for the deficit at a time when our main concern should be putting people back to work. Of course Bill Bennett continues to claim we need more tax cuts and thinks the Democrats are going to "go off the cliff" if they increase the deficit. Brazile reminds him "we've been off the cliff".

Transcript via CNN.

KING: And, Donna, on that point, I want you to listen to Larry Summers because Gloria notes they're starting to talk about the deficit because they're going to raise the federal debt ceiling this week and the numbers get incredibly high. Republicans are starting to say, you know, where's the fiscal discipline here?

And yet, if the you listen to Larry Summers, he seems convinced that they have a little more political space to make the case, that, in the short term, spending to help the economy is more important than reducing the deficit.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SUMMERS: We've got to do a lot more. There's no more important issue facing the country than job growth because, if we don't create jobs, we've got no prospect that the kind of budget deficits we want. If unemployment stays high, we're not going to have the strength in the world that we want, if unemployment stays high.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: They get away with that a bit longer?

BRAZILE: All the politics aside, the administration is walking a real tightrope between creating the jobs that the American people clearly want and trying to focus on the long-term fiscal health of the nation, the debt.

The Republicans raised the debt ceiling 2002, 2003, 2004, 2007. SO this is customary sometimes during a budget process, to raise it that way. But because of the additional spending that we have on the wars and other issues, we have to raise it again. That's a responsible thing that Congress needs to do.

On the other hand, I think the president is absolutely right to use some of the additional TARP money that will be utilized to pay down the deficit, but to use some of it to create jobs.

Now, hopefully, the private sector -- the president will be able to put some fire under the bankers tomorrow for them to start lending to small businesses so we don't have to continue this rate of government spending.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (1296)

PLAYS: (7148)

Embed

Here's another prime example of those wonderful compassionate conservatives for you. Bill Bennett on CNN's State of the Union just can't seem to get himself to endorse extending unemployment benefits right now, not because he doesn't care about the unemployed, of course. That would sound uncaring, now wouldn't it? He's just concerned that "they have already spent so doggone much money". When Donna Brazile points out that you didn't hear these complaints from Republicans when Bush was giving away the bank with tax cuts for the rich, war spending and giveaways to the drug companies, check out the look on Bennett's face. He doesn't have to say a word. That expression says it all.

They end up on a hard break, so we never do get to hear just what Bennett's compassionate conservative reply would have been, but I'm sure sure it would have been more of the same similar to his earlier remarks. I just wonder if Bill Bennett has ever had to want for anything in his entire lifetime? From the condescending look on his face while she was talking, I would guess not.

YELLIN: Let me ask you about that today because there are indications that there could be, at least the Treasury secretary is not ruling out the possibility of middle class tax increase. How would that play, politically, for President Obama, if that had to happen?

BRAZILE: Well as we know, that 95 percent of the tax relief that was offered in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act went to middle class Americans. So I would hope at a time when middle class Americans and others are feeling the squeeze from the state governments and the local governments and now the federal government with the debt, I would hope that this would not be an issue right now. But if he's talking about putting this in the mix in terms of how we pay for health care reform, we need to take a look at it.

YELLIN: Bill, does that make you think, oh, this is going to look good in 2012 for the elections?

BENNETT: I'm really not thinking about that, but the interesting thing is, it's not so much President Obama and the Democrats versus the Republicans at this point. In many ways, it's President Obama and the American people. And the more they're hearing, the more skeptical they're becoming. Thus you see his polls going down. I don't want to be gloomy, I want to be upbeat. It's always morning in America as far as I'm concerned.

But the problem is, when people look at these various proposals, like health care or like cap and trade, what they're getting is, they may have additional burdens on them, additional taxes or additional costs. And that doesn't, A, encourage them, B, it doesn't encourage a long-term recovery.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (296)

PLAYS: (346)

Embed

While watching this week's State of the Union with John King, I've got to tell you, I wondered what planet CNN's Bill Bennett and Alex Castellanos are living on. Bennett thinks arresting someone "cool(s) down" a situation. And Castellanos says if the police don't have our respect, all they have left is their gun. So Alex, deadly force is now alright if someone isn't respectful to a police officer, and in their own home to boot?

It's always amazing to hear these people who believe that the public should be heavily armed and able to shoot anyone who comes near their property now staunchly defend the right of the police to arrest you for having the nerve to smart off to them, in your own home. Sorry guys, but being stupid still isn't a crime in this country. It wasn't smart for Gates to mouth off to the officer, but it wasn't illegal either.

KING: Bill, you have been waiting patiently. Go ahead.

BENNETT: Yes, John, look, there was no racial profiling here, OK? They were called to this house. They went into the house because of a reported break in. But if you want to talk about the relationship between police and community, then I hope Professor Gates has -- examines his conscience, because the abusive and bigoted things that were said in this case, were said by Professor Gates to this police officer.

When you say, do you know who you're messing with, this is not the cry of a victim. When you say, go outside and see your mama, if the police officer had said something like that to Gates, the police officer would be hanging by his toes.

That kind of arrogant, class-based superiority is what needs to be examined here as well.

(CROSSTALK)

BENNETT: And they backed off -- the White House backed off completely on this because they were getting shelled. The opinion polls were coming in and they knew that they were on the wrong side of this.

CASTELLANOS: And wouldn't it have been better, John, if the president said first what he said second, which is, let's all have a beer together? Wouldn't it have been better if the president of the United States had said, you know, maybe there's a silver lining in this and that is that we may have come to the great day where someone can be arrested for being a jerk regardless of your race.

Maybe that's where we are. Now, maybe whether he should have or shouldn't have been...

Continue reading »