DOWNLOADS: (179)

PLAYS: (1558)

Embed

Ah yes... somebody's got to look out for those poor, oppressed millionaires and billionaires and stand up to those evil union thugs and Occupy protesters: Malkin Reacts to Union Protests: ‘People Need to Understand That Big Labor Thugs Don’t Have Workers Best Interests at Heart’:

Unions are now flexing their muscle, targeting ports, airlines, and stores just as holiday travel and the shopping season kick into high gear. Adding to that, billionaire George Soros is reportedly urging people to join anti-Walmart protests on Black Friday, even if they don’t work for Walmart. Critics claim it’s all part of a massive effort to unionize Walmart’s 1.4 million employees nationwide, which could bring in billions in union dues.

According to Michelle Malkin, these strikes aren’t about protecting workers, but are about protecting entrenched big labor power. During an appearance on Your World, Malkin called the protests a “toxic combination of these left-wing activist groups funded by George Soros … along with a rag tag group of Occupiers across the country who’ve been fomenting this kind of agitation for agitation’s sake for more than a year now.”

She stressed, “People really need to understand that these big labor thugs do not have workers interests at heart.”

How many people think this hateful woman would ever put up with the conditions or the wages of those who are working these jobs at Walmart? She's got that wingnut welfare coming in which pays quite a bit more than those minimum wage workers make and she's more than happy to help Fox attack them in yet another day in upside down land on GOPTV.

Media Matters has more on their latest Soros conspiracy theory -- Fox Brings Soros Paranoia To Walmart Labor Protests:

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (105)

PLAYS: (220)

Embed

As Current TV's John Fugelsang, filling in for Eliot Spitzer this week reminded us, when average citizens break the law we have to pay fines that might actually act as a deterrent or face jail time and when these bankers and Wall Street commit crimes, they get a slap on the wrist compared to the profit they already extracted and give up their bonuses.

As John noted, you don't go to prison for Wall Street crimes, but you can't say the same for those protesting Wall Street. And he's right, if they cracked down on these bankers stealing the same way they have park zoning laws, there would be no need for an Occupy Wall Street movement.

Barclays to pay more than $450 million in interest-rate settlement:

Barclays Bank PLC has agreed to pay more than $450 million to settle charges it attempted to manipulate key interest rates.

The London-based investment bank announced settlements with the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Commodities Futures Trading Commission and the British Financial Services Authority.

Investigators found the bank manipulated the London InterBank Offered Rate, or LIBOR, and the Euro Interbank Offered Rate, or EURIBOR, benchmark interest rates used in the world's financial markets. [...]

Under the settlements, Barclays would pay the Justice Department a $160-million penalty and cooperate with its ongoing investigation to avoid prosecution. The bank would pay the U.S. Commodities Futures Trading Commission $200 million, with the rest going to the British Financial Services Authority.

In a statement, Barclays Chief Executive Bob Diamond said he and other top executives would forgo bonuses this year.

“The events which gave rise to today’s resolutions relate to past actions which fell well short of the standards to which Barclays aspires in the conduct of its business," Diamond said. "When we identified those issues, we took prompt action to fix them and cooperated extensively and proactively with the authorities. Nothing is more important to me than having a strong culture at Barclays; I am sorry that some people acted in a manner not consistent with our culture and values."

DOWNLOADS: (380)

PLAYS: (697)

Embed

Bill O'Reilly's been on a hell of a tear this week attacking the Occupy Wall Street movement. On this Monday's show, he was calling them "terrorists" because a protester was giving him a hard time while watching a show on Broadway. Our friends over at News Hounds have more on that and O'Reilly's double standard when it comes to what sort of protesters he likes.

And never mind the hypocrisy of someone like Bill O'Reilly having the nerve to call protesters "terrorists" when he's done his best to inspire a few actual terrorists of his own as Dave Neiwert wrote about here: Bill O'Reilly has Dr. George Tiller's blood on his well-stained hands.

This Tuesday, he followed up as promised and here's how Fox's blog, Fox Nation promoted the piece tonight: The O'Reilly Factor: The Architects of The Occupy Movement:

Bill O’Reilly Asks: Who is Backing the Occupy Protesters and Why Won’t President Obama Repudiate the Movement?

Thousands of protesters and members of the Occupy movement hit the streets of Chicago during the NATO summit. 90 people were arrested and dozens were injured including a police officer who was stabbed. Tonight on The O’Reilly Factor, host Bill O’Reilly looked further into who is really behind the movement, which he notes is now very well organized. He called it a “hardcore, far-left movement designed to cause as much trouble as possible.”

He found that the movement is being run out of Washington, D.C. in offices belonging to the Institute for Policy Studies. The director of the Institute is John Cavanagh, a longtime liberal activist and his nonprofit accepts money from George Soros through the Tides Foundation. O’Reilly also reported that the Service Employees International Union headed by Mary Kay Henry is paying rent for the OWS crew in D.C. at about $4,000 month.

O’Reilly stated, “It is long past time for President Obama to condemn the anarchistic element of the occupiers, which is now dominant. Instead, the president falls back on protecting freedom of speech platitudes. Sure, tell that to the Chicago cop who got stabbed, Mr. President.”

The Institute for Policy Studies' John Cavanagh responded to O'Reilly's attacks on their organization and Occupy Wall Street later that same evening here: The Nonsense Zone:

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (359)

PLAYS: (2325)

Embed

From this Tuesday evening's The Young Turks, Cenk Uygur discusses why we're finally seeing many Americans angry enough to be taking to the streets, with details on some recent reports about the growing income disparity in the United States.

Here's more on the stats Cenk was highlighting in the clip above from Think Progress -- As The Richest Americans Get Richer, The Rest Are Drowning In Debt:

That inequality has crushed the middle class and has perilous consequences for the American economy. It is also contributing to another problem: rising debt inequality. As income inequality has risen, the bottom 95 percent of Americans have fallen deeper into debt over the last three decades, according to a new report from the International Monetary Fund. The top five percent, meanwhile, have seen their personal debt reduced, CNN Money reports:

In 1983, the bottom 95% had 62 cents of debt for every dollar they earned, according to research by two International Monetary Fund economists. But by 2007, the ratio had soared to $1.48 of debt for every $1 in earnings.

The bottom 95% had incomes of roughly $160,000 or less in 2007, including capital gains.

And then there’s the top 5%. Their debt-to-income level actually fell during the same period, from 76 cents of debt for every dollar earned in 1983, to just 64 cents in 2007.

The contributors to rising income and debt inequality are clear — for the richest Americans, incomes are rising rapidly while tax rates have fallen to historic lows. The rest, however, are increasingly burdened by student loan debt as the cost of college soars, mortgage debt as the prices on their homes have plummeted, and credit card debt as they’ve tried to keep their head above water despite stagnant wages and rising unemployment.

And from The Economic Policy Institute Blog -- It’s executives and the finance sector that did it!:

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (292)

PLAYS: (645)

Embed

Chuck Todd and Chris Matthews apparently have a little bit of a problem reading poll numbers. On this Thursday's edition of Hardball, both of them claimed that President Obama had better not be talking too much about the issue of "class warfare" and ever repeating his statement, heaven forbid, that he "was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth" because heaven forbid that might not poll well with some of the voters out there.

I took a look at the survey linked to Chuck Todd's First Read and either I missed it, or Chuck Todd and Chris Matthews completely misrepresented what the polling data there said.

I would love for someone to explain for me how these numbers and the question asked about the "ultra-rich" are harmful to President Obama and why anyone who is not an idiot on the Democratic side of the aisle should be telling him to shut up about it.

Here's the question from the survey that I believe Todd was talking about:

Now, I’m going to read you some statements you could hear about government and the economy from candidates running for president. After I read each statement, please tell me if you would be more or less likely to vote for that candidate, or if it would make no difference in whether you would vote for that candidate.

Says what drags down our entire economy is an everwidening gap between the ultra-rich and everybody else.

Here are the responses:

Total More likely 45 -- includes *

Much more likely 23*

Somewhat more likely 22*

Less likely 29

No difference 24

Not sure 2

Someone please explain to me how that equals bad polling numbers for Obama on that question. Either Todd is citing a completely different poll that his blog didn't choose to link today that has the name NBC attached to it, or he's lying to the Hardball audience here and assuming they'll never actually read the poll.

If Todd is going to carry water for the Romey campaign and try to pretend that the Occupy Wall Street argument about income disparity, and class warfare being waged on the poor and middle class is not a valid one that might resonate with voters, maybe he ought to try to find a poll that doesn't prove just the opposite of the points he was trying to make.

UPDATE: For clarification, the "more likely" number of 45 percent is a combination of the following two numbers labeled "much more likely" which was 23 percent and "somewhat more likely" which was 22 percent. I missed the word "total" when I copied the stats out of the poll. The correction has been made above. And as I said, I do not see how these are bad numbers for Obama or something to be running from which is the way Todd was characterizing them in the Hardball segment.

Transcript of the Hardball segment below the fold.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (112)

PLAYS: (252)

Embed

As Diane reported at our Occupy site, this week, sadly we got another example of police officers getting out of hand in their response to a protest by students -- 30 Pepper-Sprayed at Santa Monica College Protest Included 4-Year-Old:

Thirty Santa Monica College students and one 4-year-old were treated for injuries and as many as 5 were hospitalized on Tuesday after being pepper-sprayed during a protest against a plan to possibly quadruple fees to $180 per unit or more for the most popular classes, which are already hard to get into. Students protested outside at board of trustees meeting.

Of course the talking heads over at Fox couldn't pass up the opportunity to attack the students with Neil Cavuto bringing on resident fearmonger David Horowitz to go after them as a bunch of lazy moochers that just want a "free education" to go along with that "free birth control." Horowitz really is a nasty piece of work so his comments here weren't going to be a surprise to Cavuto or his show's producers. I'm sure they got exactly what they wanted out of him.

Here's more on the interview above from Mediaite -- Neil Cavuto Guest Argues That Pepper Sprayed Santa Monica Students Deserve To Be ‘Expelled’:

So far, much of the media coverage has focused on the campus police’s actions (the school has instigated a probe into the incident), but a segment on Your World with Neil Cavuto took it another way. Whereas some people watch the video and wonder how we can stop the growing trend of people being viciously pepper sprayed by authority figures, Your World guest David Horowitz watched it and wondered how we can stop all these darn kids.

“This is mob rule. This is a mob and all these students should be put on probation or expelled for their behavior. The Board of Trustees had a plan, it was aired. There’s a way to complain about a plan. Barging into a Trustees meeting as a mob isn’t the way to do it.”

Cavuto compared the video to those taken in Greece and made the point that it’s not like the Trustees “weren’t altering this to charge you what they do at Harvard.” Right. As we all know, there’s a minimum amount that a tuition hike can be before Americans are allowed to complain.

Meanwhile, Horowitz continued to explain why the students represented the worst of America.

“They want free education! ‘We’re gonna have free contraceptives so why not free education, free food, free shelter?’ That’s where this is going and what’s driving it is the anarchist, communist left, the Occupy movement across the country which was involved also in the UC Davis incident where there was pepper spray. You can’t have mobs running around like that. You can’t have that kind of disrespect for other people’s opinions and other people’s property.”

DOWNLOADS: (121)

PLAYS: (238)

Embed

Former governors Howard Dean and Haley Barbour appeared on Fox News Sunday for what host Chris Wallace described as preview for what a debate in the general election between President Obama and Mitt Romney might look like. Amazingly the subject of Barbour's lobby shop being linked to Iranian nuclear efforts didn't come up during the segment. Imagine that.

For his part, Howard Dean did a fairly good job of explaining towards the end of the segment just what kind of trouble Mitt Romney is going to have during the general election, given the fact that's he's rightfully perceived as out of touch with everyday Americans and only cares about helping the 1 percent, of which he's a member.

Republicans keep pretending this long primary season was somehow good for Mitt Romney, but without is we wouldn't have the list of gaffs Dean was able to rattle off here. The more the man talks, the more he continues to stick his foot in his mouth.

Transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (464)

PLAYS: (3257)

Embed

Keith Olbermann takes apart one of Andrew Breitbart's latest smears of the Occupy movement that we all sadly got a dose of the other night when he was screaming at the protesters outside of CPAC; that the movement is full of rapists.

Debunking Breitbart's "Occupy Rape List":

What you have not seen are the facts behind the transparently dishonest "list" with which Breitbart is trying to smear Occupy as rapists. Sadly, it appears his people's efforts consisted of finding stories in which both the word "Occupy" and some report of sexual misconduct.

It doesn't look like anybody bothered to read the links. Nearly every one of the stories shows Occupy participants were the victims and not the alleged perpetrators, or the incidents had nothing to do with Occupy.

You can read the entire list and the details in Keith's post at KOS, but here's the summation:

So. Seventeen stories Breitbart claims are cases of Rape at Occupy. Just reading the stories, googling the names of those identified, following up - this only took me about 70 minutes. The final result:

-- Two stories on the list were duplicates.
-- One story turns out to have been about consensual sex.
-- One case, in Scotland, led the Occupy group to disband for the sake of safety.
-- One case of an arrest for child porn, with Occupy immediately banning the alleged perpetrator.
-- One case of a girl disappearing -- ignoring the fact that she was home and unharmed a month later.
-- Four cases in which police said neither the victim nor the assailant were apparently even associated with Occupy.

That leaves seven others stories, all of which show police identifying Occupy participants as the victims, six of which show police identifying the alleged assailants as not being Occupy participants.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (175)

PLAYS: (1202)

Embed

Our managing editor, Tina Dupuy, discusses the violence in Oakland this weekend and the harm it does to the Occupy movement as a whole with Thom Hartmann. As she pointed out in her column earlier this week and again on the show, the actions of a few cast a pall on the entire movement at a time where they're influencing the national dialogue and direction of our country.

What do you think? How do you think the Occupy movement should address acts by people claiming to be associated with the movement who do illegal things?

DOWNLOADS: (411)

PLAYS: (2782)

Embed

From this Wednesday night's The O'Reilly Factor, Monica Crowley is pretty desperate here with this ridiculous bit of hackery, claiming that it's actually President Obama that started the Occupy Wall Street movement in a coy move to help him beat Mr. One Percent Mitt Romney during the upcoming presidential election, because they were aware he was going to be the candidate all along and now they can use the issue of income inequality to run on.

I hate to break it to Monica Crowley, but with Romney's background at Bain Capital as a vulture capitalist, they weren't going to need any help to frame the debate that way should he become the Republican nominee. And if she's silly enough to think that the Occupy movement is supportive of President Obama as a whole and isn't as upset about a lot of his policies as a lot of conservatives are, or that a lot of liberals and Libertarians that are members of the movement are as well, then she obviously hasn't been following them. Or what's more likely is she knows they're not fully supportive of the President, much less some AstroTurf movement like those teabaggers they like to pretend are grass roots, and she's just lying and doesn't care because she knows the Fox-bots who watch O'Reilly's show won't know the difference.

Here's more from our friends at News Hounds -- Today In Monica Crowley Conspiracy Theories: Occupy Wall Street An Obama Re-Election Technique To Attack Romney:

Leave it to Monica Crowley to find a way to find some hidden evil in the scrutiny of Mitt Romney’s Bain Capital. The same Monica Crowley who thought CBS’ Bob Schieffer gave secretly coded campaign suggestions to David Axelrod, who saw attacks on Rush Limbaugh as a stealth way to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine and – my personal favorite – blamed the Obama administration for her decision not to eat a cheeseburger – that Monica Crowley has a new conspiracy theory, that the Occupy Wall Street movement was set up in advance to help President Obama attack Mitt Romney, his likely opponent.

Seems to be a habit with Ms. Crowley, doesn't it?