DOWNLOADS: (313)

PLAYS: (3889)

Embed

From this Saturday's Up With Chris Hayes, Chris' Story of the Week and the Republicans who have been living in their own alternative universe these days as they refuse to accept the reality that the poll numbers in the presidential race really are not looking good for Mitt Romney.

The Republican bubble trap:

If you follow politics, you probably noticed that polling of the presidential election has swung quite decidedly in the president's favor over the last few weeks. The Real Clear Politics polling average now has Obama up 4.1 points over Mitt Romney in national polls and Nate Silver's prediction model at his FiveThirtyEight blog put Barack Obama's odds of winning the election above 80% for the first time ever. Swing state polling out just this week seems to confirm the trend.

A new Quinnipiac University/New York Times/CBS poll of swing states of Ohio and Florida, show surprisingly strong leads for Obama. And the Gallup tracking poll, which has showed a near dead heat for almost the entirety of the campaign now shows Obama up 6 points. It's pretty hard to survey the polling data and not come to the conclusion that Barack Obama is beating Mitt Romney, that if the election were held today Barack Obama would win, and that Romney has a relatively steep, though certainly not insurmountable, uphill climb to victory. That is, of course, unless you operate in the alternate epistemic universe of right-wing media.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (351)

PLAYS: (4411)

Embed

From this Sunday's Up With Chris Hayes, his Story of the Week where he discusses the disconnect between the ultra-wealthy campaign donors who we saw asking painfully ridiculous questions to Mitt Romney during that secretly recorded fundraiser of his from earlier this year, and the lives of the rest of us. As Chris asked, how different would our politics look if the Romney's of the world were forced to sit down with and listen to rooms full or ordinary workers day after day instead of these out of touch, wealthy plutocrats who do not share the same concerns as most of the country.

Hayes: This is what plutocracy looks like:

The video of Mitt Romney talking to donors that Mother Jones posted last week is an incredible artifact from an entire culture and civilization that exists in our midst, but which we hardly ever get to see: the world of the high-end donor. And, whoo boy it is not pretty. The first thing that jumps out is that a lot of the questions are really inane.

In fact, I almost feel sorry for Mitt Romney having to sit there and politely smile and nod as donors pick through their salad and tell him that what he really needs to do to win is "take the gloves off" or "show your face more on tv"—something he's been doing more or less non-stop.

The folks in the room all but advise Romney to simply tour around the country reading passages of Ayn Rand novels out loud at his campaign rallies and hectoring the idiotic masses to bow before their obvious superior. Romney, who is many things, but not a total fool, gently explains that that probably is not the best way to go about attempting to win over the Obama voters he needs to be elected. Almost none of the advice Romney gets during the tape is very good, some of it's terrible.

That's not novel, of course, everyone who watches politics closely thinks they have the secret insight that will win the election. Unlike the millions of other political junkies and backseat drivers, this small coterie of folks, by sole virtue of their wealth, gets to impose their invaluable insights on the actual candidate. It would be like the head coach of the Giants, Tom Coughlin, having to spend most of the week between games meeting with the opinionated fans who call into sports talk radio with their theories about how the Giants should be blitzing on every down, or lining up two quarterbacks under center.

This is the power of money not just in politics, but in society more broadly: the power to make people listen to your ideas no matter how dumb or uninformed. The other thing that stood out to me was just how under siege, persecuted, and victimized these extremely wealthy people appear to feel.

Keep in mind we're talking about a fundraiser that cost $50,000 a plate. Fifty thousand dollars also happens to be the median household income in the U.S. So the kind of wealth you need to have to be in the room with Romney is the kind of wealth that means you can just pony up as much money as many Americans make in a year to listen to Mitt Romney trash talk the very people who make in a year the same amount you just ponied up for dinner. Read on...

From this Saturday's Up With Chris Hayes, Chris takes a look at the message we saw coming out of this year's Republican National Convention and as he concluded "It's an ugly message, but in a time of anxiety and diminished expectations, not a stupid one." It may not be stupid but it's extremely cynical.

The RNC’s backward-looking tour of nostalgia:

This week the Republican party gathered in Tampa to tell a terrible and tragic tale of American decline. They couldn't quite say that, explicitly, of course. This is the party of Reagan and sunny optimism, or so they'd like to present themselves, but you couldn't help notice that the three days of speeches on the convention floor were an orgy of imagined persecution, grievance and doleful recollections of halcyon days gone by.

But the packaging for this message was insistent invocation of American greatness. As Rachel Maddow's team documented in a montage for MSNBC's convention coverage, almost every single speaker told a story of upward mobility, usually taken from their own family's past: tracing the arc of the American dream that had brought them to the podium.

Part of this is just standard political treacle, a way for, say, an extremely wealthy prep school graduate like Ann Romney, to seem relatable. But the larger reason this was such a dominant theme at the RNC is that the Republican Party's platform and tribal identity are zealously committed to the notion of American exceptionalism, and when people talk about American exceptionalism, this is usually what they mean. [...]

Somewhat oddly almost every single one of the stories of "we-built-it," plucky American success didn't revolve around the speakers own experience of social mobility but rather that of their hardworking relatives and ancestors. It struck me, listening to these invocations of the labors of previous generations as a slightly odd note, a backward looking tour of nostalgia for an America that we are losing. But of course, that's precisely the message of the Republican party this year and its a potent one because it's based on a core reality.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (75)

PLAYS: (426)

Embed

After Clint Eastwood's bizarre performance at the Republican National Convention this Thursday night, Rachel Maddow read the Romney campaign's response to his speech:

Judging an American icon like Clint Eastwood through a typical political lens doesn't work. His ad libbing was a break from all the political speeches, and the crowd enjoyed it. He rightly pointed out that 23 million Americans out of work or underemployed is a national disgrace and it's time for a change.

Following some of the other pundits reactions as to why the Romney campaign thought putting Eastwood on stage was a good idea and what the fallout might be, former McCain adviser Steve Schmidt added this:

I'm just saying, he's an 82 year old man, we should give him a break.

The problem is not Eastwood. It's whoever made the decision from the Romney campaign to bring him out there.

DOWNLOADS: (303)

PLAYS: (2492)

Embed

It appears that Buzzfeed's Andrew Kaczynski isn't the only one digging through C-SPAN's archives for old footage. Kudos to the crew at Up With Chris Hayes for this find which puts on full display Rep. Paul Ryan's complete hypocrisy when it comes to stimulus spending and whether it helps the economy. It appears Etch-A-Sketch Mittens has found himself the perfect running mate, since he's just like him when it comes to flip flopping.

VIDEO: Paul Ryan defended stimulus in 2002, when George W. Bush wanted it:

Long before he became one of the right’s most vocal critics of the idea that government spending could help boost the flagging economy, Rep. Paul Ryan offered a forceful, full-throated defense of stimulus spending — when then-President George W. Bush wanted it in 2002.

Ryan has denounced the 2009 Recovery Act signed by President Obama as “a wasteful spending spree” and “failed neo-Keynesian experiment,” and – as The Huffington Post pointed out this morning — dismissed as “sugar-high economics” the idea that government spending, through measures like payroll tax cuts and unemployment benefits, can help shore up a faltering economy.

But in 2002, when then-President Bush was seeking a roughly $120 billion package of tax cuts, tax incentives for business and unemployment benefits to jump-start the economy, Ryan offered a vigorous defense of the plan. “What we're trying to accomplish today with the passage of this third stimulus package is to create jobs and help the unemployed,” Ryan said in video that aired today on Up w/ Chris Hayes. The remarks came during a House debate on the measure on Feb. 14, 2002.

Ryan’s comments reveal a strikingly different economic analysis than the one he has become known for in recent years as the “intellectual leader” of the Republican Party and, now, Mitt Romney’s running mate. In 2002, Ryan argued that unemployment would remain at elevated levels even after the economy began to recover, and that aggressive stimulus would be a necessary and effective antidote.

“What we're trying to accomplish here is the recognition of the fact that in recessions, unemployment lags on well after a recovery has taken place,” Ryan said at the time. “We have a lot of laid-off workers, and more layoffs are occurring. And we know, as a historical fact, that even if our economy begins to slowly recover, unemployment is going to linger on and on well after that recovery takes place.”

Ryan’s advocacy of stimulus spending wasn’t limited to Washington, either. When he returned home to face constituents, he used similar language to make the case for the Bush stimulus bill. “You have to spend a little to grow a little,” Ryan told constituents at a town hall in Wisconsin in January 2002, according to the Journal-Times, a local newspaper. “What we're trying to do is stimulate that part of the economy that's on its back." [...]

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (92)

PLAYS: (406)

Embed

Chris Hayes opened up his show this Saturday with his "Story of the Week" on Rep. Paul Ryan and the difference between his belief system and worship of Ayn Rand his biography. As Hayes rightfully noted, sadly, this blatant hypocrisy from those who have benefited from our society while telling others to "sink or swim on their own" is a problem much bigger than just Paul Ryan.

Hayes: Is Paul Ryan a hypocrite?:

Since Paul Ryan was announced as the Republican Vice Presidential candidate, many progressives and even mainstream media outlets have noted that there's a fundamental tension between Ryan's belief system and his biography. Ryan is beloved by the conservative base because he is, by all accounts, a true believer, deeply influenced by the hyper-individualistic philosophy of romance novelist Ayn Rand. His speeches and talking points and the lengthy preamble to one of his first big budget documents paint a picture of a world divided into makers and takers, those who produce and those who mooch. To Rand, the ultimate good is freedom and all attempts to weave together a social safety net, to alleviate misery caused by misfortune are incursions on that freedom and thus suspect, even contemptible.

And for Ryan, there's a biographical dimension to this philosophy. Ryan suffered through a horrible tragedy in his teenage years when he discovered his father dead of a heart attack in his house. The death shook Ryan and he, says, changed his outlook. It changed the finances of the household: his mother went back to school and they took in his grandmother. Ryan says he concluded that "I've got to either sink or swim in life."

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (111)

PLAYS: (762)

Embed

For anyone like myself who is really missing the fact that we don't have Up With Chris Hayes on again this weekend due to MSNBC preempting the show for their Olympics coverage, here is his interview on The Colbert Report from Thursday night, talking about his new book, Twilight of the Elites: America after Meritocracy.

DOWNLOADS: (198)

PLAYS: (3027)

Embed

Who else thinks there's a high chance the "anonymous conservative blogger" here is one of the Breitbart stooges? This sounds like something right up their alley with their brand of ambush "journalism."

Sherrod Brown Fundraises Off Conservative Blogger’s Misfire Against His Wife:

Sen. Sherrod Brown’s (D-OH) campaign is fundraising off an anonymous conservative blogger’s failed attempt to sandbag his wife, Pulitzer Prize-winning syndicated columnist and author Connie Schultz.

The freshman senator is fending off a challenge from Ohio State Treasurer Josh Mandel, who he leads by a 46-41 point margin, according to the TPM PollTracker Average. The gap has recently narrowed.

In an email to supporters titled “Our family scandal” from the Brown campaign, Schultz’s 25-year-old daughter, Caitlin Schultz Gard, recounted the tale of the blogger’s recent email to her mother, who formerly wrote for the Cleveland Plain Dealer, inquiring why she appeared to be hugging the senator in a photo, apparently for a story on reporters getting too close to the politicians they cover.

Connie Schultz’s response to the blogger, who she preferred not to name when contacted by TPM: “I am surprised you did not find a photo of me kissing U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown so hard he passes out from lack of oxygen. He’s really cute. He’s also my husband. You know that, right?” Read on...

DOWNLOADS: (209)

PLAYS: (3018)

Embed

Kudos to Up with Chris Hayes for having not one but TWO actual Syrians on his show to talk about Syria. Like hurricanes in Hartford, Hereford, and Hampshire, that hardly ever happens.

But watch the body language on the former Syrian Brigadier General Akil Hashem as Amy Goodman interrupts him. Yes, she's making a well-informed point about international negotiations and eliminating a military option.

But one could hardly notice what she was saying given the general's eye rolls and folded arms. This isn't an Arab problem. John McCain makes the exact same face. :D

On topic, I have to wonder: what is a former Brigadier General doing meeting with John McCain about Syria and what real-world results might come from such a meeting? Given Senator McCain's perpetual presence on the other Sunday shows, I expect it's all about pushing the interventionist narrative that has failed us so many times before.

DOWNLOADS: (190)

PLAYS: (1899)

Embed

We've seen the Obama campaign going after Mitt Romney for his time at Bain Capital. I think with the Olympics approaching we're about to hear more about this story from them very soon. From Up With Chris Hayes: Mitt Romney and federal money for the Olympics:

Up host Chris Hayes and his guests talk to former Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson about the federal assistance Mitt Romney sought as head of the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics.

I clipped the interview down to the portions with Anderson. You can watch the entire segment at the link above. Here's more from the Daily KOS on Romney's time running the Olympic games: Romney's Olympics:

Much has been made recently about Mitt Romney's involvement with Bain while he was heading the Salt Lake Olympics Organizing Committee, but what about his actual involvement with the Olympics themselves? Romney has made his "turnaround" of the Olympics that had been tainted by an international bribery scandal a point of his campaign. He regards it as proof of his amazing leadership ability and patriotism. So, how did Romney bail out the Olympics. Well, he didn't. We did.

A September 2000 report from the United States General Accounting Office tells us that tax payers paid nearly $1.3 billion for the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics. The majority of that, 80% of that, in fact, $1 billion of that, was spent not on the game themselves, but on infrastructure upgrades. With 51% going to improving highways and 28% to improve mass transit. [...]

To put that into perspective, we, the taxpayers, spent roughly $75 million on the Los Angeles Olympics and $609 million on the Atlanta Olympics.

This prompted Senator John McCain to call the Salt Lake game a "pork-barrel" project.

“I think it is a disgrace,” said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who, along with U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., asked the government agency to investigate the escalating expenditures for hosting the Olympic games in American cities.“But this is a logical extension of what you get when you start pork-barrel spending.”

So, here is the question. Did any of that $1.3 billion of taxpayer's money go to benefit Romney or Bain? Read on...

As they noted, there are more questions which might be answered by Mitt Romney releasing his tax returns, which it seems more obvious day by day that he is never going to release. Romney seems to love that government "free stuff" when it benefits himself and his business buddies, but not so much for the working class and the poor.