DOWNLOADS: (203)

PLAYS: (1447)

Embed

Rep. John Tierney (D-MA), the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee's National Security Subcommittee, slammed Republicans on Thursday for conducting a hearing that he said was driven by Internet conspiracy theories suggesting that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was buying a billion rounds of ammunition to use against the American people.

In his opening statement on Thursday, subcommittee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) cited "recent news reports" about the "federal government's massive procurement of ammunition."

"The question is, what is an appropriate use of this ammunition, where is it stored, how much are they paying for it and what are they doing with it?" the Utah Republican asked.

Although Chaffetz mentioned media outlets like The Associated Press and USA Today, much of the hype about DHS ammunition purchases have been driven by conservative websites like Alex Jones' Infowars and Glenn Beck's The Blaze. And the theories have been kept alive by the Fox News Channel, the Fox Business Network and even televangelist Pat Robertson.

"To the extent that we're responding to conspiracy theories or whatever, I think we're really wasting everybody's time on that," Tierney said in his opening statement. "It might have been predictable that Sarah Palin would have taken opportunity to feed these conspiracy theories with statements that the government was preparing for civil unrest, but it was a little more disturbing that Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) would seize the opportunity to accuse the government cornering the market on ammunition to drive up prices."

"Unsubstantiated false conspiracy theories have no place in this committee room -- hopefully," he continued. "Federal ammunition purchases are a fraction of the total ammunition market and they've been decreasing in recent years. Even the National Rifle Association distances itself from these conspiracy theories."

DOWNLOADS: (57)

PLAYS: (266)

Embed

CNN media critic Howard Kurtz on Sunday pushed back against a Fox News pundit who slammed the "deafening silence of too much of the media" over coverage of a Philadelphia doctor accused of killing seven babies and one woman while performing late-term abortions.

In a USA Today column last week, Fox News political analyst Kirsten Powers pointed to former Pennsylvania abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell as evidence that Planned Parenthood has been wrong to claim that it's "highly unusual" that infants survive late-term abortions.

Powers said that there was a double standard because conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh had received front page coverage after he called Sandra Fluke a "slut" over her advocacy of contraception coverage for students, but Gosnell had not gotten the same attention.

"You don't have to oppose abortion rights to find late-term abortion abhorrent or to find the Gosnell trial eminently newsworthy," the Fox News pundit wrote. "The deafening silence of too much of the media, once a force for justice in America, is a disgrace."

In his "Media Monitor" segment on Sunday, Kurtz agreed that the Gosnell case had not gotten enough national coverage, but suggested that conservatives had oversimplified the argument to attack the "liberal media."

"Some conservatives are saying this amounts to blackout by the so-called liberal media, but it's more complicated that that," he explained. "First, the Gosnell case has drawn some coverage since the FBI first raided that clinic back in 2010, in such outlets as Time, NPR, the AP, The New York Times, Slate and The Daily Beast. Now since Gosnell's trial began, CNN has done a half dozen segments, including one by Jake Tapper back on March 21 and Fox News did a story that same day."

"MSNBC, like Fox, has done a few stories," Kurtz continued. "CBS and ABC carried evening news segments back in January, but there hasn't been nearly enough on the trial. Almost nothing in The Washington Post, not enough in The New York Times. Perhaps the mainstream press is less attuned to a story that cast a shadow on abortion, but the conservative media didn't do much either."

"And it's not like even the staunchest pro-choice advocate would defend what Gosnell is alleged to have done. This is a gruesome case that journalists on both sides of the abortion question have told me is hard to stomach."

The Philly Post's Simon van Zuylen-Wood wrote last week that the media should cover the Gosnell case, but it was wrong to use it as a tool to fight against abortion rights.

"Powers is a liberal and an evangelical Christian; she criticizes the right on women’s rights, the left on abortion," he observed. "Powers’s aim is to draw attention to the fact that the Gosnell murder charges should make us consider whether there’s really a difference between killing a baby inside the womb, or outside, as he so horrifically did. But this is misleading."

"The moral to be drawn from the Gosnell trial is not that current abortion laws are screwed up. Indeed, Gosnell broke them, which is why he’s on trial. Rather, it’s that as individual states increasingly restrict abortion rights, more and more illegal clinics, like Gosnell’s may crop up."

DOWNLOADS: (162)

PLAYS: (800)

Embed

Following last week's slaughter of 20 children in Connecticut, President Barack Obama on Wednesday held his first-ever press conference about gun control, but the press corps insisted on asking at least the first six questions about the so-called fiscal cliff.

The president took to the podium in the the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room -- which was named after a staffer who was shot during an assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan -- to say that he had tasked Vice President Joe Biden with spearheading an effort to recommend policy changes like banning assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips.

"It won't be easy, but that can't be an excuse not to try," Obama told reporters. "And I'm not going to be able to do it by myself. Ultimately, if this effort is to succeed, it's going to require the help of the American people. It's going to require all of you."

With that, the president invited the press corps to ask questions, beginning with The Associated Press' Ben Feller, who wanted to know, "Are we likely to go over the cliff?"

In fact, reporters ignored the Connecticut shootings for at least the first six questions, until White House staff insisted that the next question be about the topic at hand and USA Today's David Jackson asked why Biden's effort would be any different than other ineffective Washington, D.C. commissions.

"The idea that we would say, 'This is terrible, this is a tragedy, never again,' and we don't have the sustained attention span to be able to get this done over the next several months doesn't make sense," the president insisted. "I have more confidence in the American people than that."

In the final question of the press conference, ABC's Jake Tapper noted that the president had done little about gun violence during his first term.

"This is not the first issue of horrific gun violence of your four years," Tapper said. "Where have you been?"

"I've been president of the United States, dealing with the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, an auto industry on the verge of collapse, two wars," Obama explained. "I don't think I've been on vacation. And so, I think all of us have to do some reflection."

DOWNLOADS: (260)

PLAYS: (4155)

Embed

Top Obama campaign adviser David Axelrod on Sunday called out Fox News host Chris Wallace after he repeated a claim made by presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney that President Barack Obama was trying to block military voters in Ohio.

In a statement last week, Romney accused Obama of launching a lawsuit to strip military voters of early voting rights in Ohio -- a claim that both USA Today and the Obama campaign have said is false.

"Your campaign is suing the state of Ohio for giving members of the military extra time to vote early, to the Monday before the election while other voters are going to have only until Friday," Wallace told Axelrod on Sunday. "You don't think that members of the military who are serving this country deserve special consideration to vote?"

"I absolutely do and the way you stated it and the way, frankly, Gov. Romney has stated it is completely false and misleading," Axelrod shot back. "What that lawsuit calls for is not to deprive the military of the right to vote on the final weekend of the campaign -- of course they should have that right. What that suit is about is whether the rest of Ohio should have the same right."

"And I think it's shameful that Gov. Romney would hide behind our servicemen and women to try and win a lawsuit to try and deprive other Ohioans of their right to vote," he added.

Ohio's Republican-controlled legislature last year enacted new voting restrictions that prevented most voters from casting early ballots after the Friday before the election. Members of the military, however, had their rights preserved, giving them until Monday to vote.

DOWNLOADS: (178)

PLAYS: (402)

Embed

As The Young Turks' Cenk Uygur rightfully pointed out in the segment above, here's another glaring example of just what's wrong with our society, where the rich rig the system to their benefit and leave the 99 percent with nothing in return.

Newspaper Giant Gives CEO $32 Million Severance Package After Laying Off 20,000 Workers In Six Years:

When Craig Dubow resigned as CEO of the nation’s largest newspaper conglomerate amid health problems last year, he ended a six-year stint that “was, by most accounts, a disaster.” Gannett, the parent company of the USA Today and 80 other American newspapers, had seen its revenue plummet $1.7 billion and its stock price fall 86 percent, from $72 a share to just over $10.

To counter those losses, Gannett shed jobs, and a lot of them. Industry estimates say the company has laid off at least 20,000 workers since 2005, reducing its workforce from 52,000 to roughly 32,000. Despite those losses, Gannett awarded Dubow a severance package worth $32 million, NPR reports:

Dubow’s final compensation package includes $12.8 million in retirement benefits, $6.2 million in disability benefits and a $5.9 million severance payment, according to the filing. Gannett stock options and restricted stock, which Dubow had accrued during his years of employment with the company, were also part of the package. Those stock awards are valued at nearly $7 million.

Separately, Gannett will pay $25,000 to $50,000 annually for a $6.2 million life insurance policy covering Dubow and another $70,000 annually for benefits such as health insurance, home computer and secretarial assistance and financial counseling. He will receive most of these benefits for three years unless he goes to work for a competitor, according to the filing.

The lavish severance package Gannett is giving Dubow stands in stark contrast with how it treated many of the 20,000 employees it let go. Read on...