Blog Archives

Out Of All The Reasons African-Americans Don’t Trust Mitt Romney, Here’s The Very Best One…

 

This is from MoveOn.org:

Forget for a second that he just gave a speech for the NAACP and vowed to repeal Obamacare. And then insinuated to his rich, white friends later that the NAACP audience just “wants free stuff.”

Forget, momentarily, that he once tried to relate to a group of black teens by asking them, “Who let the dogs out?”

Forget all that for just a moment, and focus on this:

So now that you know, what’s your best reason not to trust the Mittster?

 

Elizabeth Warren only takes 52 seconds to make it clear that Romney is out of step concerning economic regulations.

First, watch this segment from Rachel Maddow‘s show:

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-rachel-maddow-show/47422131#47422131

Elizabeth Warren‘s key statement on Dimon’s excuse for the J.P. Morgan fiasco and how Romney’s claim that economic regulations are stifling growth:

“You know, you really want to say did he hear what Jamie Dimon just said? Jamie Dimon’s own words were that this was stupid. This was sloppy, so stupid, and so sloppy that it wasn’t even picked up by a regulator. There was no one to say hey, wait a minute; I want to review your risk practices. I want to see the kind of risk that this huge financial institution is taking on, because we’re just about three and a half years past the time when you took on so much risk that you brought this economy almost to its knees. So the idea that Mitt Romney thinks that the banks are over regulated. It’s an alternative reality. It’s simply not true. The problem right now is that there’s not adequate regulation.”

Got it? Regulation (which we used to have in adequate amounts due to the abandoned  Glass-Steagall Act) used to keep our economy safe. Romney supports big banks over small Americans. And which of these hold the majority vote (provided they are not conned by Tea Bag Republicans)?

It’s up to all of us to get educated and get the word out.

Romney’s 18 Lies of the Week…

Steve Benen, over at the Rachel Maddow Blog, has been documenting Romney’s lies for 16 weeks. You can see this week’s list HERE.

My 2 favorites:

9. In New Hampshire, Romney said Obama is “focused on taking away from those who have the least.”

That’s blatantly untrue in an ironic sort of way. Romney’s tax plan calls for higher taxes on those at the lowest end of the income scale. He also intends to cut food stamps, Medicaid, and educational spending, which benefit those who have the least.

10. Romney also vowed, “I want to help the poor.”

First, see #9. Second, he specifically said earlier this year, “I’m not very concerned about the poor.”

I know the poor are thrilled that Romney wants to help them…help them right out of society.

Liar, Liar, Pants (not) On Fire

Thanks to The Smirking Chimp for this one:

I thought my head was going to explode last night when I saw this on Rachel Maddow‘s show. (Kudos Ms. R.)

So I want to share and hope you will share it as well.

So here we go. BTW… not a word of what you are about to read is true. Not one word of it. All easily verified. But you wouldn’t even know it happened if your only source of news is your morning paper. Okay .. first what Father Rick Santorum said:

“In the Netherlands, people wear different bracelets if they are elderly. And the bracelet is: ‘Do not euthanize me.’ Because they have voluntary euthanasia in the Netherlands but half of the people who are euthanized – ten percent of all deaths in the Netherlands – half of those people are u involuntarily at hospitals because they are older and sick. And so elderly people in the Netherlands don’t go to the hospital. They go to another country, because they are afraid, because of budget purposes, they will not come out of that hospital if they go in there with sickness.”
— Former senator Rick Santorum, at the American Heartland Forum in Columbia, Missouri, Feb. 3, 2012

Needless to say folks in the Netherlands are appalled. The person saying it wants to run the biggest country on the planet. And finally, that no one over here seems to care.

Here’s the actual cut from Maddow’s show:

Is there nothing this asshole won’t say?

A quote for the Day re: the Downgrade to AA+

This morning we heard the debunking of the  GOP talking point that the S&P downgrade was due to debt:

“We know the hole we have been digging out of is deeper than we thought. The question is whether or not the stock market dropping 500 points in a day and as much as it did in two weeks, the downgrade is going to be a wake-up call. What is feasible in Washington? The downgrade message, whatever you think of S&P, they mentioned the need for increased revenues and revenues being on the table three separate times. They indicted the Republican Party right now in Washington. It’s a question about whether or not there will be a change in fashion and whether or not it will be a wake-up call that the parties need to work together rather than the Republicans fashion right now, which is any deal is a bad deal.”

– Rachel Maddow on Meet The Press this morning.

Looks like Harry Reid is going to make Senate Republicans commit themselves to Ryan’s Budget on the Senate floor…

I don’t know if you saw Rachel Maddow last night, but Sen. Bernie Sanders (I – Vermont) made a statement that picked my ears up.

Harry Reid (D-NV), United States Senator from ...

Sen. Harry Reid (D - Nevada)

After commenting on the devastating results the Ryan Budget would have on the lower and middle classes (destruction of Head Start, dismanteling of Social Security, turning Medicare into Coupon Care giving seniors an $8,000.00 coupon instead of coverage – something a senior diagnosed with cancer can spend in the first week), he announced that Harry Reid has a strategy which will benefit Democrats in the upcoming election… He’s going to bring the Ryan Budget to the Senate floor for an up-or-down vote. Then all the Republicans who vote for it can be held to it (like the House Republicans) and take the loss in 2012.

In the House, Boehner appears to be wobbling and, perhaps, pulling back on the Ryan fiasco… especially after several local Town hall meetings have attacked Ryan and others about the cutting of Medicare and other problems with his budget – like giving more advantages to corporations and the richest 1% of our population:

Boehner’s recent statement:

“It’s Paul’s idea. Other people have other ideas. I’m not wedded to one single idea, but I think it’s — we have a plan. Where’s the president’s plan to deal with the nightmare that’s facing Americans?”

Organizations like Americans United for Change have another view of Boehner’s being unwedded to Ryan:

“Sorry Speaker Boehner, there’s no ‘take-backs’ or distancing from this one — you and the 224 other House Republicans that voted for the Ryan plan for turning Medicare into Coupon Care now own it.”

So let’s keep an eye on the Senate when they come back (When do these guys actually WORK?), I guess next week. Let’s see if Harry Reid actually pulls it off.

Rachel Maddow’s comments last night on Scott Walker

You go Rachel!

Quote of the Day – So, after Olbermann are we next?

“The loss of Keith Olbermann is a bad omen for America. We should be aware of this loss, and do what we can to let others know its impact — how much of democracy we have lost. I’m sure if George Orwell were alive today, he would weep at this atrocity. Just as we should, but we must also stand strong against these oligarchs. We must realize that they are in control; we must support our alternative media sites so long as we can — because soon they will be taking our websites down by raising prices and by other underhanded means to silence all dissent — even on the Internet.”

– Sam Hamod, Ph.D., at http://www.todaysalternativenews.com

Rachel Maddow: Bring Back Olbermann…

Here’s Rachel’s comment in full from her show last night (which, I’ll admit, I didn’t watch since I won’t watch MSNBC until Keith is reinstated… I picked this up on Mediaite.com):

You may have heard today that my friend and colleague Keith Olbermann was temporarily suspended from his job hosting Countdown on this network, because he made three personal political donations to candidates in this last election cycle. The reason that resulted in Keith’s suspension is that, here at MSNBC, there is an explicit employee rule against hosts making contributions like that. You can do it if you ask in advance, and if management tells you ‘okay.’ That’s what I understand happened with our morning show host’s political donations in 2006 under previous management. But if you don’t ask in advance for an exemption from the rule, you are more bound by the rule. For the record, the rule applies to us hosts here at MSNBC and NBC News staff. CNBC is not under NBC News, so CNBC staffers are not bound by the same thing.

I understand this rule. I understand what it means to break this rule. I believe that everyone should face the same treatment under this rule. I also personally believe that the point has been made and that we should have Keith back hosting Countdown. Here’s the larger point though. That’s going mysteriously missing, from all the right-wing cackling and the beltway, old-media cluck cluck clucking about this. This is what I think is missing.

Let this incident lay to rest forever the facile, never true, bullpucky, lazy conflation of Fox News and what the rest of us do for a living. I know everyone likes to say ‘Oh, that’s cable news, that’s all the same, Fox and MSNBC, mirror images of each other. Let this lay that to rest forever. Hosts on Fox raise money on the air for Republican candidates. They endorse them explicitly, they use their Fox News profile to headline fundraisers; heck, there are multiple people being paid by Fox News to essentially run for office as Republican candidates, If you count not just their hosts but their contributors, you are looking at a significant portion of the whole line up of Republican presidential contenders for 2012, they can do that because there is no rule against that as Fox, they run as a political operation, we’re not.

Yes, Keith’’s a liberal and so am I, and there are other people on this network and their political views are shared with you, our beloved viewers. But we are not a political operation, Fox is. We are a news operation. And the rules around here are how you know that. Before it was politically safe to do it, Keith Olbermann attracted the ire of the right wing and a lot of others besides when he brought to light and raged against what he saw as the errors and sins of the previous presidential administration. Keith was also the one who brought to light Fox News’ water carrying role for the Bush administration, he was one who point-of-view journalism posed and put exclamation points on the problems in the political operation disguised as a news network model embraced by the guys across the street at Fox.

Now weirdly, it is Keith who is illustrating the difference between what he does on TV, what we do here at MSNBC and what goes on across the street. Good night.

Sen. Sanders blasts Olbermann suspension, cites Fox News contributions

clipped from mediamatters.org
Sen. Bernie Sanders issued a statement on the suspension of MSNBC‘s Keith Olbermann:
“It is outrageous that General Electric/MSNBC would suspend
Keith Olbermann for exercising his constitutional rights to contribute to a
candidate of his choice. This is a real threat to political discourse in America
and will have a chilling impact on every commentator for MSNBC.
“We live in a time when 90 percent of talk radio is dominated by
right-wing extremists, when the Republican Party has its own cable network (Fox)
and when progressive voices are few and far between.
“At a time when the ownership of Fox news contributed millions
of dollars to the Republican Party, when a number of Fox commentators are using
the network as a launching pad for their presidential campaigns and are raising
money right off the air, it is absolutely unacceptable that MSNBC suspended one
of the most popular progressive commentators in the country.

“Is Rachel Maddow or Ed Schultz next? Is this simply a ‘personality conflict’ within MSNBC or is one of America’s major corporations cracking down on a viewpoint they may not like? Whatever the answer may be, Keith Olbermann should be reinstated immediately and allowed to present his point of view.”

blog it

Quote for the Day – Heard this from our President:

“I will say that the damage that the filibuster I think has done to the workings of our democracy are at this point pretty profound. The rate at which it’s used just to delay and obstruct is unprecedented…

If we do not fix how the filibuster is used in the Senate, then it is going to be very difficult for us over the long term to compete in a very fast moving global environment.”

President Barack Obama

He also brought this up on Jon Stewart‘s show last night (if you missed it, they rerun it a couple of times a day starting at 10:00 AM on Comedy Central – neat interview). Harry Reid brought this up in his interview with Rachel Maddow as well. Instead of calling it a Filibuster (or referring to it as “needing 60 votes”), I’m going to start calling it the Mitch McConnell Muck.

Rand Paul has final debate with Conway in Kentucky…

Last night, in the final Rand Paul – Jack Conway debate for the Kentucky Senate seat, Paul decided to act like a real politician and ignore the actual questions that he didn’t want to answer, and changed the subject on some of the most important ones.

This from Salon:

Take, for instance, the subject of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Unless you’ve been in a coma for the past six months, you remember Paul’s notorious interview with Rachel Maddow back in May, when he objected to Title II of the act, which outlawed discrimination in restaurants, hotels, motels and other establishments that engage in interstate commerce. “Had I been around,” Paul told Maddow, “I would have tried to change that.” Only later, after a torrent of criticism rained down upon him, did Paul publicly state that he would have supported the entire ’64 Act.

When he was asked at Monday’s debate to calm any concerns voters might have on the issue, Paul played dumb. “I never said that I believed anything remotely regarding segregated lunch counters,” he said. “I never said I was for a repeal of the Civil Rights Act.” Then, without elaborating any further, he claimed that the entire controversy was manufactured by his Democratic opponent, Jack Conway, who “doesn’t want to talk about a balanced budget and term limits and reading the bills.” Before you knew it, Paul was praising the Tea Party movement and bragging that he’d drawn 1,000 supporters at a recent rally in Paducah.

Steve Kornacki in Salon’s War Room

And outside of the debate, Paul’s supporters were acting like stormtroopers… which one woman from MoveOn.com (which is one of the most Ghandi-like non-violence movements I know) found out in a most unpleasant way:

I think what Harry Shearer said about Rand Paul is true:

The political spin on Paul is that he’s worrisome because he’s not within the standard lines of the modern political debate. I’d suggest he’s worrisome because he is.

– Harry Shearer

So now we have the rest of the week to watch this campaign where Paul is still favored in the polls (but Conway has been inching up). This will be quite an indication of the intelligence of the Nation.

And the Lester Maddox Award for Lunch Counter Maintenance goes to…

…Rand Paul, winner of the Kentucky Republican Senate Primary.

In an interview last night, Paul told Maddow that he agrees with most parts of the Civil Rights Act, except for one (Title II), that made it a crime for private businesses to discriminate against customers on the basis of race. Paul explained that had he been in office during debate of bill, he would have tried to change the legislation. He said that it stifled first amendment rights.

Rachel pushed for specifics:

Maddow:… How about desegregating lunch counters?

Paul: Well what it gets into then is if you decide that restaurants are publicly owned and not privately owned, then do you say that you should have the right to bring your gun into a restaurant even though the owner of the restaurant says ‘well no, we don’t want to have guns in here’ the bar says ‘we don’t want to have guns in here because people might drink and start fighting and shoot each-other.’ Does the owner of the restaurant own his restaurant? Or does the government own his restaurant? These are important philosophical debates but not a very practical discussion…

Maddow: Well, it was pretty practical to the people who had the life nearly beaten out of them trying to desegregate Walgreen’s lunch counters despite these esoteric debates about what it means about ownership. This is not a hypothetical Dr. Paul.

Oh Boy… this is going to make Kentucky a real fight. Paul faces Democratic Senate candidate and Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway in the general election to replace Republican Sen. Jim Bunning on November 2, 2010…

Here’s a big chunk of the Maddow show if you think you haven’t heard enough:

F@#K The Filibuster

Rachel Maddow did a great summary of the recent history of the Filibuster and why it has to be taken on… NOW!

… and a Last Quote for the Day

“The American President has just won the Nobel Peace Prize. By any measure, all Americans should be proud.”

– Rachel Maddow

Quote of the Day

“Why is the public option dying now? It’s dying because of a lack of political ambition. The Democrats are too scared of their own shadow to use the majority the American people elected them to in November to actually pass something they said they favored.”

– Rachel Maddow