DOWNLOADS: (147)

PLAYS: (1292)

Embed

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), who is a Muslim, told Rep. Peter King (R-NY) on Sunday that he was making a mistake with calls to profile the Islamic community in the United States because similar actions in the past had created a "national stain" on the country.

NBC host David Gregory noted in a Sunday interview with both congressmen that King had insisted to the National Review that law enforcement should not be "bound by political correctness" after two Muslim men with a Chechen background were accused of carrying out bombings at the Boston Marathon.

"Absolutely," King agreed. "What the NYPD is doing in New York with a thousand police officers focusing on this issue, knowing where the threat is coming from. Now, most Muslims are outstanding people, but the threat is coming from the Muslim community."

"You're a Muslim," Gregory pointed out to Ellison. "This concerns you on civil libertarian grounds and other areas."

"Well, I'm an American," Ellison replied. "And I'm concerned about national safety -- public safety -- just like everyone is. But I think it's ineffective law enforcement to go after a particular community. I think that what we need to do is look at behavior and follow those needs where they would lead."

"Once you start saying, we're going to dragnet or surveil a community, what you do is you ignore dangerous threats that are not in that community, and you go after people who don't have anything to do with it," he added, noting that the recent poison ricin letters sent to President Barack Obama and other elected officials were terrorist attacks that had not come from the Muslim community.

"And remember, we went after one community in World War II. And the Japanese internment is a nation stain on our country. And we are still apologizing for it."

King interrupted: "No one is talking about internment! We are talking about following the Constitution."

DOWNLOADS: (172)

PLAYS: (953)

Embed

With Fox in full blown Muslim-bashing mode following the Boston Marathon bombing attacks, we all had to know this was coming. Heaven forbid they might ever pass up another opportunity to attack Rep. Keith Ellison.

Fox's Bolling: Rep. Ellison Is "The Muslim Apologist In Congress" And "Very Dangerous":

While calling for profiling of American Muslims, Fox News host Eric Bolling attacked Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), calling him the "Muslim apologist in Congress" and describing him as "very dangerous."

On Fox News' The Five, Bolling called for profiling of Muslims following the attacks of the Boston Marathon. During the segment, Bolling criticized Ellison, asserting that he's "very dangerous" and has been "the Muslim apologist in Congress for a long time." After calling him dangerous, Bolling noted that Ellison "raised his right hand and took the oath of office on the Quran":

Bolling's attack is part of a long line of smears directed at Ellison. Fox host Sean Hannity attempted to link Ellison to Louis Farrakhan, the controversial leader of the Nation of Islam. Hannity also compared Ellison's use of the Quran for his swearing-in ceremony to using "Hitler's Mein Kampf, which is the Nazi bible."

DOWNLOADS: (177)

PLAYS: (1789)

Embed

CNN media critic Howard Kurtz on Sunday said that Fox News host Sean Hannity had "surrendered the high ground" when he followed up an explosive interview with Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) by comparing the African-American congressman to a white supremacist hate group.

In an interview last week, Ellison had appeared on Hannity's show and blasted the Fox News host for being "the worst excuse for a journalist I’ve ever seen.”

Hannity responded two days later by linking Ellison to the controversial Nation of Islam and black militant Khalid Muhammad, whom he said wanted to “kill the women, everything white that’s in sight — kill the women, kill the babies, kill the children, kill the old people.”

The conservative host continued by saying that the Democratic lawmaker was the "equivalent" of the Ku Klux Klan.

“Do we have somebody then in Congress that is the equivalent on one side what the Klan is?” Hannity asked. “Because I view the rabid rantings of Khalid Muhammad as frightening.”

On Sunday, Kurtz noted that Ellison had made a mistake because "Hannity's not a journalist, he's a conservative commentator."

"What was troubling here was Ellison accepted the invitation to come on and then seemed only interested in attacking Hannity," the CNN host argued. "But I do have to deduct points over what Hannity did later in the week: He attacked Ellison, who is Muslim, for having written two papers supporting [Nation of Islam leader] Louis Farrakhan as a law student and suggesting that Ellison might be the -- quote -- 'equivalent' of the Ku Klux Klan."

"Even Hannity had to allude the fact that the congressman apologized a half dozen years ago for once having supported Farrakhan," Kurtz pointed out.

"And with that, Hannity surrendered the high ground."

DOWNLOADS: (177)

PLAYS: (1134)

Embed

If anyone needed any more proof that the butthurt Rep. Keith Ellison administered to Sean Hannity still smarts, here you go. After having his ass handed to him Tuesday evening by Ellison, Hannity decided for the third night in a row to attack Ellison, and for the second night in a row to hide behind black conservatives to go after Ellison for him.

This Friday, Hannity's guests were David Webb, who is one of Fox's favorites that you can read more about here, and another Astroturf "tea partier" Niger Innis, who again attacked Ellison for daring to attend the Million Man March, and played the guilt by association game we saw from his other two black conservative guests the previous evening.

If Hannity had an ounce of courage or integrity, of which he has neither, he'd allow Ellison back on his show so he could respond to these drummed-up allegations. But he's probably afraid of being made to look like an ass if he allowed Ellison to speak freely.

I really thought I'd seen the worst from Hannity when he went on his months-long attack on President Obama for his association with his former preacher Rev. Wright, but I was wrong in that assumption. With his continued attacks on Rep. Keith Ellison, simply because he dared to let Hannity know to his face what he thought of him, is right up there with that same racial hatred and disgusting flame-throwing we saw over and over from him back then.

DOWNLOADS: (237)

PLAYS: (2363)

Embed

It looks like Hannity is still smarting from having his rear end handed to him by Keith Ellison this week, because for the second day in a row after Ellison accused Hannity of "yellow journalism" and being a shill for the Republican party, Hannity's been doing his best to get even.

Hannity brought on Fox regulars, the New York Civil Rights Coalition and ALEC shill Michael Meyers along with FreedomWorks' Deneen Borelli to help launch Hannity's latest Islamophobic attack on Rep. Ellison.

Sean Hannity Launches Islamophobic Attack Against Keith Ellison:

Conservative talk show host Sean Hannity launched an Islampophobic attack against Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) during his Fox News show on Thursday night, implying that the Muslim Congressman is a racist and an anti-Semite. The segment came just days after Ellison and Hannity engaged in a confrontational interview on Tuesday night. “We decided to take a closer look at the man who called me immoral and a liar,” Hannity began. “Now it didn’t take long to prove his hypocrisy, as his past reveals a host of radical connections primarily to Louis Farrakhan and The Nation of Islam.”

The Fox host dug up attacks from Ellison’s 2006 Congressional campaign, criticizing the Minnesota lawmaker for defending Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam in his law school newspaper from charges of anti-Semitism and appearing on stage with Farrakhan aide Khalid Muhammad.

In the late 1990s, Ellison worked with the group to organize the Million Man March, but apologized for failing to “adequately scrutinize the positions and statements” of the Nation of Islam and Farrakhan six years ago in a letter to the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas.

“I wrongly dismissed concerns that they were anti-Semitic,” he wrote, adding, “They were and are anti-Semitic and I should have come to that conclusion earlier than I did.” “I have long since distanced myself from and rejected the Nation of Islam due to its propagation of bigoted and anti-Semitic ideas and statements, as well as other issues.” Read on...

Media Matters has more on how this is nothing new for Hannity: Sean Hannity's Latest Islamophobic Smear Against Rep. Keith Ellison :

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (464)

PLAYS: (6559)

Embed

On this Tuesday evening's edition of Hannity on Fox, Rep. Keith Ellison let Hannity have it when he made an appearance directly following one of Hannity's fearmongering video mashups, with President Obama speaking about the sequester and the damage the spending cuts might do to the economy, with O Fortuna playing in the background. Ellison was shocked by what he just watched, which Hannity asked him to respond to as soon as he came on.

HANNITY: I guess that's what we could describe as "staying on message." Something the Democratic party, I would argue, is very good at. Let me ask you...

ELLISON: You're pretty good at it too.

HANNITY: I... I... well thank you.

ELLISON: Quite frankly, you are the worst excuse for a journalist I’ve ever seen.

HANNITY: I am the what? I didn't hear you.

ELLISON: You heard me.

HANNITY: Say it again. I didn't hear you.

ELLISION: What you just displayed was not journalism. It was yellow journalism. It wasn’t anything close to try to tell the American people what’s really going on. I mean it’s just shocking.

HANNITY: Yellow journalism?

ELLISON: You. Yes.

And everything went downhill (or uphill, depending on your view) from there. Ellison called Hannity a "shill" for the Republican party, which Hannity denied, saying he's a "Registered Conservative.©" (I wasn't aware we had a "Conservative party" other than the Republican party, but whatever.)

Of course, Hannity didn't take too kindly to the fact that he was called out for doing what he does daily on Fox, which is just that -- shilling for Republicans and for lying to his viewers day in and day out.

After several more minutes of the two of them arguing about the sequester and who is responsible for our budget deficit and Hannity still laying that at the feet of President Obama, Hannity finally cut off Ellison's mic, saying that his "audience deserves better."

UPDATE: I did not include Hannity's intro in the segment above. To see the piece of garbage Rep. Ellison was reacting to, here's how Hannity opened up his show:

DOWNLOADS: (238)

PLAYS: (2513)

Embed

DOWNLOADS: (160)

PLAYS: (2316)

Embed

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) on Sunday called out Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) for complaining about drastic cuts in the so-called "sequester" after Republicans forced it by refusing to raise the debt ceiling and risking default for the first time in the nation's history.

"This was a presidential suggestion back in 2011 -- an idea -- and, yet, the president himself hasn't put out any alternative," Cole said during a panel segment on ABC. "Republicans twice in the House have passed legislation to deal with it, once as early as last May, again after the election in December. The Senate has never picked up either of those bills, never offered their own thing."

"Now, we're three weeks out [from the sequester deadline] and folks are worried," he continued. "They ought to be worried. On the other hand, these cuts are going to occur. The real choice here is do you want cuts to be redistributed in other ways, which is the sensible thing to do, or do you want to let this happen?"

Ellison, however, pointed out that Republicans couldn't place all the blame on President Barack Obama after they voted for the sequester created by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

"Well, Tom, the problem with saying that this is the president's idea is you voted for the Budget Control Act, I voted against it," Ellison noted. "We wouldn't ever have been talking about the Budget Control Act but for your party refused to negotiate on the debt ceiling, something that has been routinely increased as the country needed it."

"You used that occasion in 2011 -- August -- to basically say, we're going to default the country's obligations or you're going to give us dramatic spending cuts. That's how we got to the Budget Control Act."

The Minnesota Democrat added that the sequester was projected to increase both unemployment and the deficit.

"It's going to do everything opposite to what your party says they want," he told Cole. "It's going to create uncertainty, it's going to increase the deficit, it's going to increase unemployment, it's going to be a problem."

"We don't have a presidential proposal," Cole opined. "I don't think you speak for the president."

DOWNLOADS: (161)

PLAYS: (749)

Embed

It was nice to hear at least one person in Congress talk about the dangers we're facing with these so-called "fiscal cliff" negotiations and that is this moment of panic being used to ram a bad deal through that includes things like cuts to Social Security. Rep. Keith Ellison appeared on Al Sharpton's show on MSNBC and explained why he could not vote for any deal that doesn't protect the working class and our social safety nets and that "if you're talking about cutting Social Security, I'm not with that program."

I'd feel a lot better if I was hearing the same thing from Harry Reid. It might be a good time to remind him not to give away the store to McConnell and Boehner in the next few days.

Update: Here's more from Digby on these negotiations: Fiscal cliff notes 12/28 and she included some additional contact info for Reid:

So Reid and McConnell are supposed to try to work out some deal that will pass both houses and if they don't the president wants an up or down vote on extending the Bush tax cuts for those making less than 250k a year and Unemployment Insurance. He's pretty much daring the GOP to filibuster in the Senate --- and/or Boehner to take the heat for not allowing a vote on middle class tax cuts. [...]

Keep in mind that if Reid and McConnell come up with something, the likely outcome is that Democrats will have to be the majority in both houses to pass the deal. That means most of the Republicans will be allowed to vote against spending cuts and tax increases while most of the Democrats will be expected to vote for spending cuts and tax increases. Despite the fact that the taxes were scheduled to go up anyway, this will be called a Democratic victory. Why, Villagers might even bestow upon them their greatest accolade and call them "grown-ups."

I think the sequester will be taken care of --- nobody's going to allow the defense industry to lose even a penny. Nobody. Either break off the middle class tax cuts now as the president proposes as his fallback plan or let everyone vote for tax cuts after the first and then allow the debt ceiling games to begin. (It's got to happen some time.) I see no reason to capitulate on spending at this point. If that's what it takes, go over the cliff. Why should Democrats become the tax collectors for the austerity state?

If you are of a mind to call Senator Reid's office and leave him a message, you can do so here. (And be sure tell him to keep Kent Conrad and his big "ideas" off the table. Conrad's the lamest of ducks and has no business involving himself at this point.)

Reid's office:
Phone: 202-224-3542 / Fax: 202-224-7327
Toll Free for Nevadans: 1-866-SEN-REID (736-7343) - Restricted to calls originating from area codes 775 and 702

DOWNLOADS: (226)

PLAYS: (2691)

Embed

Rep. Tom Cole, a Republican from Oklahoma, says that if lawmakers are going to go after U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice over her initial public assessment of the September attack in Benghazi then maybe Congress should also look at how President George W. Bush pushed bad intelligence about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Dan Senor, who worked to spin the Iraq war for the Bush administration as the chief spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), told a Sunday panel on ABC that Rice deserved to be scrutinized because she was "front and center" as the voice of the Obama administration after the Benghazi attack.

"I spoke with one senator who met with her this week," Senor explained. "The consensus is -- this individual conveyed -- is the meetings did not go well. Benghazi was a serious issue. We can debate whether or not Susan Rice should be blamed for it."

"There is a legitimate concern that she was used five days after the fact to propagate a story that we should have known at the time was not the case," Cole agreed, adding that there were also "serious questions about our own intelligence people."

"We saw President Bush out front defending something wasn't true too," the Oklahoma Republican recalled. "Maybe we should ask those guys some questions too."

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) pointed out that 241 Marines were killed in Lebanon in 1982 under President Ronald Reagan and "we came together and said that this is a national tragedy and blame was not parceled out the way that it is now."

Senor, however, insisted that there was "accountability" after the Marines were killed because Reagan appointed a fact-finding committee to investigate.

"Part of the problem here is in the lead up to the election when Benghazi got a lot of attention, the president said, 'Don't talk about Benghazi. If you do, you're politicizing the issue,'" Senor opined. "So you weren't allowed to -- [former GOP nominee Mitt] Romney and others weren't allowed to talk about it in the political context. Here we are after the election and there's no full airing. We still don't know exactly what happened."

DOWNLOADS: (304)

PLAYS: (3885)

Embed

(Jon Stewart mocks wingnut Michele Bachmann for her Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy theories.)

As we noted this week, wingnut and McCarthy wannabe Michele Bachmann went so far as to attack her fellow House member, Keith Ellison, claiming he has a "long record" of association with the Muslim Brotherhood. This following her and fellow Republicans witch hunt against Huma Abedin, aide to Secretary Clinton and wife of former Rep. Anthony Weiner. It seems Bachmann has finally crossed the line where the House Intelligence Chair has turned on her.

Chairman Of House Intelligence Committee Drops Support For Bachmann’s Islamophobic Witchunt:

Before facing heat this week for her paranoid quest to root out Muslim Brotherhood influence on the U.S. government, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) got support from the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Mike Rogers. But today, Rogers distanced himself from Bachmann’s allegations about Muslim-Americans.

In an interview with the USA Today, Rogers responded to a wave of criticism about Bachmann’s allegations about Huma Abedin, a top aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Rogers said:

That kind of assertion certainly doesn’t comport with the Intelligence Committee, and I can say that on the record. I have no information in my committee that would indicate that Huma is anything other than an American patriot.

This was not an activity that was sanctioned as any intelligence committee matter.

Rogers was singing a different tune earlier this month when he appeared on a radio show hosted by Islamophobe Frank Gaffney, a sometime Bachmann advisor and source of her attacks.

What kills me is that it took this long for anyone in her own party to finally call out this crazy flame thrower for the rhetoric that comes out of her mouth. After she went on Chris Matthews' show back in 2008 and said that she wanted members of Congress investigated for being "anti-American" we didn't hear a peep out of any of them. And she was rewarded with a spot on the House Intelligence Committee instead of being asked to take a trip to the doctor's office and being put on medication.

Continue reading »