DOWNLOADS: (170)

PLAYS: (1805)

Embed

I hate to break it to Mr. Axis-of-Evil David Frum -- who was more than happy to be one of those conservative flame throwers when he was still in the club -- but Fox finally getting rid of Palin doesn't represent any kind of sea change for the network. They've still got a long, long list of others who are just as bad as Palin and Beck still working at that network and so unless we see some mass firings there, it's business as usual with or without Palin.

And CNN TeaNN doesn't have much room to talk about giving extremists air time after watching them work every bit as hard as Fox to promote the AstroTurf "tea party" and giving these flame throwing politicians endless interviews with little to no push back. I don't expect we'll see Howard Kurtz talking about that on his Sunday show any time soon though.

KURTZ: For three years now the former governor of Alaska has been one of the most prominent voices on Fox News.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SARAH PALIN, FORMER GOVERNOR OF ALASKA: Barack Obama is a socialist. He believes in socialism, in redistributing wealth and confiscating hard-earned dollars of our small business men and women.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: On Friday we learned that Sarah Palin's contract will not be renewed. Sarah Palin was a very hot property when Fox hired in her 2009. What happened?

PAGE: That's showbiz. You know, she has really kind of played out now I guess as far as is Fox is concerned and her appeal. But it's been said Roger Ailes was not happy with the Palin arrangement. He wants to get away from that sort of showbiz punditry on the right, unless she's going to it clear her candidacy, I suppose.

KURTZ: Is it the political climate has changed since Palin's VP run, rise in the Tea Party or is it Sarah Palin's star has simply faded?

FRUM: I think both are true. Watch this in tandem when Glenn Beck was taken off the air. There was this period from 2009 to 2011 where there was nothing to wild too put on Fox News. Beck began to frighten his programmers. This man was capable of saying anything, including things that could wreck his show, damage the network.

And as they backed away from him, as they have backed away from other characters who went, the whole exercise is, the whole network is an exercise in going too far, but as they retreated from those who went farthest, I think this is a milestone, as well.

KURTZ: My reporting shows that Fox News did offer Sarah Palin a new contract, but what I would call low ball offer, significantly less, a fraction of the million dollars a year she had been paid.

If you didn't already see it, here's Keith's Special Comment on the "Tea Party" and a reminder for this upcoming election of why everyone needs to get out there and vote.

It's almost twenty minutes long and you can read the entire transcript here.

David Gregory did his part to help Gen. David Petraeus start the first leg of his media blitz to try to sell the public on continuing our occupation in Afghanistan past the 2011 deadline for troop withdrawal. From the HuffPo:

Gen. David Petraeus Cites Progress In Afghanistan, Hedges On July 2011 Troop Withdrawal:

Progress in Afghanistan only began this spring and needs time to take root, Army Gen. David Petraeus said in comments broadcast Sunday that were aimed at shoring up American support for the war.

Petraeus, who's been credited with a successful war strategy in Iraq and who took charge of U.S. and NATO military operations in Afghanistan in July, described an "up and down process" of seizing Taliban-controlled territory and creating "small pockets of progress" that he hoped will expand.

The goal, he told NBC's "Meet the Press," is to keep al-Qaida and other extremist groups at bay while the Afghan government has a chance to take control and earn the trust of the local population.

"We're here so that Afghanistan does not once again become a sanctuary for transnational extremists the way it was when al-Qaida planned the 9/11 attacks in the Kandahar area," Petraeus said in an interview taped in Kabul, the Afghan capital.

The general also stressed that the withdrawl of U.S. troops scheduled to begin in July 2011 would be based on conditions on the ground, and that he could advise President Obama to keep U.S. forces in Afghanistan if he felt it was not the right time for a drawdown. [...]

On Sunday, Rethink Afghanistan released a video hammering Petraeus' comments as just spin. Read on...

And from Firedoglake:

Sunday Late Night: Stretch Talks Progress with TMCP:

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (629)

PLAYS: (471)

Embed

While discussing Chris Matthews' documentary on Hardball and some of the extreme rhetoric coming from the Tea Party, Ohio Gubernatorial candidate and former Congressman John Kasich tells Matthews that although there some people you could paint as extreme in the movement, "it's not the thrust of the movement" and describes them as "blue collar Democrats", people who are worried about the government's debt, their economic future and their children. Kasich points to the elections of Chris Christie and Scott Brown and says that no one could call them extremists.

Joan Walsh reminds Kasich that Scott Brown is now running away from the Tea Party and lays waste to the talking point that the Tea Party or Republicans are representing the working class. She got Kasich a bit riled up by daring to point out that he went from being a member of Congress to working for Lehman Brothers and how those sorts of issues are being ignored because we're focused on the craziness coming from the likes of the birthers instead.

WALSH: I think -- you know, Scott Brown has run away from the Tea Party.

KASICH: He hasn’t run away from anything.

WALSH: He refused to go to their rally; he refused to go to their Tea Party day. Congressman Kasich, you know, you sound like a wonderful guy compared to a lot of republicans. You are a moderate, but, you know, I think this is garbage that they represent the Underdog. They represent the Overdog, and you know in your own race, you went to work for Lehman Brothers, God bless you, that was your right. That’s become an issue. You know, how do you get to be the champion of the little guy when you went to work for the firm that helped bring about the collapse of the economy? These are the issues that we’re not talking about because we’re talking about where the president was born.

KASICH: First of all.

(CROSSTALK)

MATTHEWS: Well, equal time here. Go ahead.

KASICH: I mean, look, my father was a postman, I ran a two-man office in Columbus, Ohio, OK?

WALSH: Great.

KASICH: And one thing that people in this country want to recognize is if you work hard you ought to be able to get ahead. You play by the rules, you can be successful. This is what the Tea Party wants, not some left wing rhetoric from you. That’s not what they are interested in.

WALSH: That’s not left wing record rhetoric.

KASICH: Yes, it is.

WALSH: I’m talking about fairness.

KASICH: It’s smear.

(CROSSTALK)

KASICH: I didn’t pick on you. I didn’t pick on you, ma'am. If you want to punish success, that’s the opposite of what the Tea Party wants.

WALSH: That’s not the point.

KASICH: They want to reward success and that may be a little bit difficult but I would recommend to you to read every other Monday, so that you don’t start picking on people.

WALSH: Thank you, sir.

So pointing out that someone went from Congress to working for Lehman Brothers is a "smear" now huh? Tweety made sure Joan Walsh never got another word in and and spent the rest of the segment kissing Kasich's butt and telling him how much he looks forward to reading his book. Heaven forbid Matthews could allow the mean liberal woman to "smear" Kasich by pointing out the revolving door between Congress and big business without soothing the poor, horribly injured man a bit after his feelings were hurt so badly. We couldn't have that, now could we?

DOWNLOADS: (204)

PLAYS: (326)

Embed

Sean Hannity plays concern troll for Michele Bachmann after Rep. Betty McCollum said this on the House floor.

With hate groups and violent anti-government militias on the rise in this country elected leaders must be mindful of the potential of their words to inspire violence. Constructive, passionate political debate is expected in our democracy, but harsh, dangerous name-calling that vilifies the President or Members of Congress is irresponsible. We must not ignore that the Oklahoma City bombing was an act of political violence perpetrated by deranged, anti-government extremists. It’s much too late after a bomb goes off to start condemning hate-inspired, violent rhetoric.

Even though she wasn't called out by name, both Hannity and Bachmann know who she's talking about. That's pretty telling in itself. Bachmann's response is to say this.

Bachmann: Well apparently it's hate speech when it's on the right and it's not hate speech when it's on the left, so you know, go figure where that comes from.

Both of these dangerous propagandists need to quit polluting our airways and yesterday.

Bachmann goes to lie and fear monger about “the government takeover of private industry”, the dangers of federal regulation of our banking industries, calls the government “thugs”, refers to the Democrats as having a “government control base” and saying when it’s attacked “that’s what they equate violence with”.

She goes on about First Amendment “freedoms” under attack, lies about tax rates being higher now than they ever were, rails on about the government “taking over the student loan industry” when all that did is cut out a middle man fleecing the government, and says “of course the people are reacting”.

Michele, the ones that watch ClusterFox are reacting to the crap that you and Hannity are spewing here. I’m sure neither of you are shocked by this.

Hannity then pulls out the Bill Ayers card again which he literally beat to death during the campaign season, and asks if there is a coordinated attack by “all people on the left” and if they’re “all singing from the same hymnal at this point”.

Of course Bachmann agrees that that evil “librul” media has colluded to attack Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and that anyone they see as an “affective voice” is who they go after and attack right now.

Oh my… those poor crazy ass wingnuts who are being unfairly attacked by you know, pointing out their words. They’re so abused. Bachmann and Hannity finish up the segment with playing the victim card. Something the conservatives have learned to do very well to deflect from the hateful bulls**t that comes out of their mouths.

As bad as most of our media is these days with not actually acting as "news" organizations as they should and as bad as a lot of the rhetoric coming from our politicians is these days with their hate speech and fear mongering, these two take the cake for the worst of all of it. I really look forward to the day when Sean Hannity is no longer drawing a huge paycheck to lie to gullible Americans who watch his show because they actually think he's telling them the truth, and when Michele Bachmann no longer is embarrassing the good people of Minnesota.

DOWNLOADS: (161)

PLAYS: (593)

Embed

While I can’t disagree with all of John Avalon’s points such as the fact that yes, there have been violent extremist groups on all sides of the political spectrum throughout the years in American history and that yes, the Internet has allowed groups of people who share common beliefs to form a sort of group-think, reinforcing the stereotypes they share, but Avalon’s problem is as we’ve already noted, is making false equivalencies time and time again. He had to go back to Huey Long and some of the uprisings of the sixties to give any legitimate and specific examples of what would be considered comparable to what we’re seeing from the right today.

Earlier in this interview on C-SPAN’s BookTV, Avlon tries to paint those that were upset with George Bush as being the same as those out there calling Obama Hitler and a Socialist and saying they “want their country back” and the type of violent rhetoric we’re seeing out of these teabaggers and Republican members of Congress. First of all, there is very little similarity between “Bush derangement syndrome” and “Obama derangement syndrome”. In case Mr. Avlon slept through the last ten years, he should have noticed that what angered a lot of people about George Bush becoming President is that the Republicans did actually steal that election.

You have to discount the anger over what Katherine Harris did in Florida and the Supreme Court installing George Bush as president. You have to discount that there were plenty of things George Bush did after the election that also had those on the left legitimately upset like oh say… torture, invading countries that were not a threat to us, spying on everyone, giving tax cuts to the richest among us, taking every department of government and putting industry hacks in charge of departments that they’re supposed to safe guard, using our Department of Justice for political purposes, stealing another election, outing a CIA agent who's husband dared to call you out on your WMD lies, the failure to react properly to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and on and on and on again.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (3916)

PLAYS: (24905)

Embed

It appears Chuck Todd didn't take too kindly to Jeremy Scahill's drubbing he received on Real Time the other night. From Glenn Greenwald:

According to Scahill (via email), Todd approached him after the Maher show and the following occurred:

Right as we walked off stage, he said to me "that was a cheap shot." I said "what are you talking about?" and he said "you know it." I then said that I monitor msm coverage very closely and asked him what was not true that I said on the show. He then replied: "that's not the point. You sullied my reputation on TV."

Media stars are so unaccustomed to being held accountable for the impact of their behavior -- especially when they're on television -- that they consider it a grievous assault on their entitlement when it happens.

Check out the entire post where Glenn's got much more on some similar events going on lately besides just his own dust up with Chuck Todd. Joe Klein got into it with Aimai of NoMoreMisterNiceBlog who happens to be I.F. Stone's granddaughter. Glenn and Marcy Wheeler had an ongoing feud with Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic. And now we've got Scahill and Todd's back and forth on Real Time.

Glenn summed all of this up much better than I could ever hope to:

Todd's condescending responses illustrate the same point as the above episodes with Klein and Ambinder: in the eyes of Beltway mavens, those who warned about and worked against the radicalism and lawbreaking of the Bush administration are the fringe, crazed, out-of-touch radicals. While Todd was fiddling around with pretty colored maps and fun polling games, Scahill was courageously investigating one of the most corrupt, dangerous and lethal private corporations in the world, yet it's Todd who understands and must solemnly explain the hardened realities of politics to Scahill, the confused and silly Leftist.

There's little question that when people look back at this period in American history, it will be difficult to comprehend what happened in the Bush era -- and especially how we blithely started a devastating war over complete fiction, while simultaneously instituting a criminal torture regime and breaking whatever laws we wanted. But far more remarkable still will be the fact that, other than a handful of low-level sacrificial lambs, those responsible -- both in politics and the establishment media -- not only suffered no consequences, but continued to wield exactly the same power, with exactly the same level of pompous self-regard, as they did before all of that happened. Looking back several decades or more from now, who will possibly be able to understand how that happened: the almost perfect inverse relationship between one's culpability and the price they paid for what they unleashed?

In fairness to Chuck Todd, he was not one of the ones out there cheerleading for the war and I really liked him when I'd see him on C-SPAN's Washington Journal about every morning when he was working for The Hotline. He's a numbers guy. He was one of the best in the business at reading and sorting through the numbers on how our elections were going to turn out. I don't think coming to MSNBC however, has been good for Chuck Todd.

And now he's on there with the rest of them repeating the narrative of how terrible for the Democrats it would be if any investigations are allowed to happen, and if anyone from the Bush administration is held accountable. It's all politics to Chuck.

Here are my thoughts on that. One of the reasons it would be turned into a game of politics is because Chuck Todd and the rest of the beltway media would report it as such, instead of a legal matter. What Chuck Todd is relaying is what the Republican Party would like to see happen if the Democrats or this Department of Justice goes after the law breaking. It would be the choice of those in the media to validate the Republicans' sniping, which would inevitably follow (and already has for that matter), or to dismiss them as playing partisan politics in order to cover up law breaking for political gain.

Of course since the media was part and parcel in allowing the atrocities of the last eight or nine years, that's never going to happen.