Robert Bennett's Fate Kills The "Both Sides Do It" Meme

I know that the mainstream media has been trying like hell to frame everything the far right GOP does as a false equivalency with the Democratic Party but even they won't be able to successfully spin away Senator Robert Bennett's defeat yesterday. In the last few decades nobody can point to a Democrat who was as reliably liberal as Bennett was reliably conservative in voting records who was ousted as an incumbent before even having the opportunity to run against an opponent in a primary. And what exactly was Bennett's great offense? One vote. The vote for the bank bailout that while hugely unpopular probably did in fact keep our banking and financial industry from totally crashing.

Unfortunately in this case rather than trying to draw a false equivalence, the MSM will just ignore it and act as if it never happened. Its sad that unless they can try to paint a story as something both sides do the media would rather just look away than actually have to report the facts. It is what it is...

Yelling Fire In A Crowded Theater

At what point will the mainstream media start calling out Glenn Beck and his dangerous rhetoric? Are they really going to stand on the sidelines and wait for people to get killed after he gins some crazy asshole up enough to have them go out and commit murder because they are living in the fearful bubble he is creating? We already have several incidents which are likely linked to him but I guess that isn't enough huh? Somebody is going to have to explicitly say Glenn Beck told them to kill somebody before our media wakes up and points out that the son of a bitch is inciting violence with his listeners.

This shit makes my stomach turn and our media can't fucking die soon enough for me.

On Harry Reid's Comments

I am not about to go into a long ass post about Harry Reid's comments describing President Obama as a "light skinned" black person who doesn't speak with a "negro dialect" unless he wants to. For one, what he said is true. For two its all been said before, just with "nicer" words. Every time a political pundit last year said President Obama was "non threatening" because of his background and demeanor or anything close, they were saying the exact same thing that Harry Reid said in 2006. Want to take issue with "negro dialect"? Ok then explain to me what the hell ebonics is. I know some of us black folks don't like to admit that many of our people don't speak the King's English well, but its true and trying to act like it isn't is pretty damned disengenuous.

Was it racist? I guess the question I would have in response is who would it have been racist against? Every racist term or sentence or phrase that I know of is meant to demean a person based on their race. Harry Reid was actually speaking favorably of President Obama and talking about why he had a chance to be our first black President. And what do you know, he was right. I guess MAYBE you could try to make the case that it was racist against all black folks not named Barack Obama, bu then of course you would still have to show how its demeaning. As I pointed out before, just the existence of the word "ebonics" in our culture speaks to the fact that many people belive black folks and other minorities speak a different language. Is that a negative? Most of the time it is, especially if you are applying for a job. And wasn't there a story not too long ago about business not bringing people who "sounded black" over the phone in for interviews? But hey why let facts like that get in the way of a hysterical over reaction right?

In closing I will say this, if you ever have had the occasion to praise and or promote Rush Limbaugh or Pat Buchannan, you shouldn't have a got damn thing to say about any of this. And if the mainstream media types were doing their job they would point this out at every turn.

P.S. One more thing, was I the only one who read Reid's comments and immediately thought, "Damn, I guess that means Michael Steele could never be President" lmaooooo

P.S. 2: This still doesn't change my position that Harry Reid is doing a shitty job as Majority Leader. Thanks, that is all.

Please Give Me Some Of Whatever Giuliani Is Smoking!

Lets, for a moment, leave aside the fact that 9/11 happened under Bush. If Giuliani's point is that we had a terrorist attack under President Obama because of he underpants bomber, doesn't that mean we also had a terrorist attack under Bush with the shoe bomber? I mean, c'mon man, how fucking idiotic can you get?

But worse than that, why isn't the guy interviewing him pouncing all over his dumbass when he spouts this bullshit? I don't think anybody bought it, but got dammit why do we even HAVE a media anymore if they are unwilling or unable to call bullshit on such a blatant ass lie?

President Obama Can't Rebuke Janet Napolitano When He Is Busy Agreeing With Her

Yesterday afternoon Chris Good had a post over at Marc Ambinder's spot entitled
"Systemic Failure": A Full Rebuke Of "The System Worked" in which he used the right wing out of context framing of Janet Napolitano's words on CNN over the weekend to profer that President Obama was rebuking what she had said.

It was also a complete 180 from what Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said on CNN's "State of the Union" two days after the attempted attack was foiled--that "the system worked"--a direct and total rebuke of that initial assertion.

Except, that is not what Napolitano said on CNN's "State of the Union" AND he evidently missed the part of President Obama's speech where in fact he agreed with and endorsed what she actually DID say, in context, on Sunday as is evidenced in this Rachel Maddow clip from last night.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

See when her whole quote is allowed in context and you can see that she was speaking of the RESPONSE to the attempted terrorist attack and not the events leading up to it that allowed the attempt to take place at all she sounds perfectly reasonable and in this case perfectly right. But that never stopped wingnuts from shrieking of course and so they took it out of context and ran with it for the last few days. And unsurprisingly they found someone in the quasi mainstream media realm to validate their shrieking in Chris Good who obviously didn't hear the part in the speech where President Obama agreed with her lest his whole post lose its relevance. Thankfully a commenter pointed this out to him and today he posted a retraction. But notice how he is still unwilling or unable to fully call bullshit.

Obama, as I failed to mention in that post, cast Napolitano's analysis as correct, saying that "once the suspect attempted to take down Flight 253, after his attempt, it's clear that passengers and crew, our homeland security systems and our aviation security took all appropriate actions."

Obama's "systemic failure" spoke to a different part of the security process than what Napolitano had originally addressed. When Napolitano said that the "system worked," she was talking about the response to the incident, not the cause.

"Everybody played an important role here," Napolitano said on CNN's "State of the Union." "The passengers and crew of the flight took appropriate action, within literally an hour to 90 minutes of the incident occurring all 128 flights in the air had been notified to take some special measures in light of what had occurred on the Northwest Airlines flight."

snip

I still feel that Obama's remarks in Hawaii were a response to criticism of Napolitano--to the notion that the system didn't, in fact, work to prevent the attack from almost occurring--which is something Napolitano had already said. After the protestations against Napolitano's comment, whether or not they were merited, it became somewhat necessary for the president to come out and say that the system had failed.

But to call this a "rebuke" of Napolitano was misguided.

Whether or not they were merited? Its pretty fucking simple, THEY WEREN'T MERITED. And the proof is in the fact that he had to post a retraction in the first place. But you just can't call wingnuts liars in this day and age I guess. You have to give them "the benefit of the doubt". Funny, but it didn't seem like Good gave Napolitano the same benefit of the doubt though, did he? If anything was rebuked it was the right wing framing of what she had said, but you won't get that post title anytime soon I am sure.

I guess I should just be glad he posted a retraction, because you can best believe if this was the Washinton Post no such retraction would be forthcoming. But you still have to marvel and despair at how the right wing can frame any story even in the face of evidence easily accessed to the contrary.

Wired for Republicans, Washington still is...

The 45 Minute Lie

If only we were having a public investigation into how George Bush and Dick Cheney lied and their ideological allies in the media lied us into the war the way the British are over Tony Blair.

I wonder what public sentiment would be about those two jackasses then.

The Truth Should Matter

Yeah, the stimulus bill failed....




Steve Benen goes in on Dana Perino and her bullshit theory about how the stimulus failed because people THINK it failed. Really, if anything, that's just proof positive that it doesn't matter what reality is most of the time in this country, its all about perception. And of course its also points to the failure of our mainstream media to report the truth rather than employing horse race coverage.

Its very very depressing.

Why Most People Are Cheering On The Death Of the Mainstream Media

Its because while we have serious issues in this country, people covering up murder by death penalty, health care reform, climate change, unemployment, etc, our mainstream media would rather run stories about whether the President is playing golf or basketball enough with women. What makes it so bad is that they KNOW this isn't a real story. Take Jake Tapper for example.

On one level, this is much ado about nothing.

That is the first sentence in the 6th graph of his posting. Unfortunately he writes 19 or so grafs after that to prove how much this admittedly non story is still a story if you really stretch it far enough.

I swear I can't wait for some of these idiots in the media to lose their jobs and have to find something else to do because right now they are making their profession into a joke.

Oh and by the way fucktards, suck on this...

Cut The Bullshit!

Why in the hell is Spencer Ackerman seemingly the only journalist pointing out the fact that General Stanley McChrystal did not try to call out President Obama in London which has now become conventional wisdom in the Village?!

For goodness sake PLEASE spread this link around so people aren't fooled by the mainstream media promoting a civilian/military split!

Crist Can't Handle The Scrutiny

Today in the St Petersburg Times Steve Bousquet has a column up about the media coverage of Charlie Crist and how it has changed. One line in the column however didn't line up with the rest of it in my opinion.

There has been a clear shift in the mainstream media's portrayal of Crist in the past few months.

I am not sure how I am even supposed to take that line but it seems to infer that the reason why the media coverage of Crist has changed has come from a change in how the media wants to cover him. But consider some of the nuggets included in the column.

A glance at the record suggests things went south in June when Crist signed a bill weakening growth management controls, which editorial boards agreed was a terrible decision.

Things got worse in August after the governor picked his friend and campaign adviser, George LeMieux, to warm the Senate seat Crist covets.

By the columnist's own admission the shift, if in fact their was one, occured over two legislative decisions that Crist made which were both highly unpopular. Its not like editorial boards suddenly decided they didn't like the way Crist combed his hair, his media coverage has taken a hit because he has started running to the right for his primary and running from his own record, as limited as it already is.

Now to be sure some of the criticism of Crist isn't credible, like that of climate change denier George Will, but the overwhelming amount of hits he is taking, especially those here in Florida, are legitimate.

• The Palm Beach Post's Frank Cerabino wrote that it was "embarrassing" to see Crist on TV touting his Cover Florida program and its 4,000 subscribers at a time when nearly 4 million people in Florida have no coverage. "Charlie's Hooey," read the headline.

Is there any Floridian among us who wouldn't agree with that statement? Is there anybody in this state who thinks what we do here should be taken nationally? I sure don't.

But at the end of his column Bousquet actually gets at what we are seeing now with Crist.

Crist used to be able to talk over the heads of the Florida press corps by using softball encounters on cable chat shows to recite his favorite talking points. But this is changing, too.

As he made the rounds on Tuesday, the reception was noticeably frostier (except on the reliably charitable Fox).

CNN's John Roberts juxtaposed Crist's opposition to a government-run national health care program with his support for Florida KidCare, which uses government money to subsidize health care for low-income Floridians.

"Are you trying to have it both ways here?" Roberts asked Crist.

"Well, that's for children. You know, it's a program I inherited," Crist answered.

As it turns out its not that the media has decided to turn on Crist, instead its more that the media has decided to do their job. Now that they have started peeling away the layers they are starting to see there isn't much there. When Crist was "just" a governor it was much easier to paint himself as a moderate. Basically all he had to do, as Bousquet pointed out, was to read the local papers each morning. If he saw a lot of coverage going against any of his decisions he would just change course and keep it moving. That was good for his public appearance, but ultimately bad for the people of Florida. But how many people really even know the impact of a Governor's decisions? I would guess probably not all that many.

Now that he is engaged in a campaign for national office the stakes have changed for Crist. He actually has to try to find a way to be both consistent in his ideology AND loyal to his out of the mainstream base. That means running to the right of his own record, and claiming accomplishments that do not even exist. That means simultaneously promoting a government run healthcare plan that we have here in Florida for kids, while decrying government run healthcare for the nation. It means actually having members of the media asking him tough questions and expecting a straight answer, instead of allowing him to "talk over the heads of the Florida press corps by using softball encounters on cable chat shows to recite his favorite talking points".

The most encouraging thing about this for liberals and progressives in Florida is that Crist hasn't even really had to go full wingnut yet to compete against Marco Rubio in the primary. Once that happens and the bloom is off the rose it will be clear who the best choice for Florida will be. Kendrick Meek will be able to run on a record of consistency working for Florida's families and businesses while Crist will be stuck bobbing and weaving, running away from his record as Governor or Florida. All we have to do is keep peeling away those layers so our fellow Floridians get to see the truth about Crist and who he really is and who he really isn't.

GOPolitico And Their Rampant False Equivalency

I don't agree with Glenzilla in this post about whether what Joe Wilson was egregious or not, but thats about the only thing I can find a quibble with and he accurately portrays how Politico and other mainstream media outlets create a bizarro world when it comes to politics all in the name of false equivalency.

The Sad State Of Our Media

A dailykos diarist predicts the media's evolution of the story on Joe Wilson's "You Lie" scream last night. Unfortunately its not all that funny because it really could happen.

Give Us The Truth

I highly recommend this op-ed from Neal Gabler in the LA Times entitled 'Truth' vs. 'facts' from America's media

I am just going to excerpt the ending:

Why don't we get the truth? Part of it, as I've said, is fear -- fear that if journalists dispel the rumors they will be bashed by the right, which is implacably against the president's reforms no matter how much sense they make. Part of it is a lack of expertise. Most reporters are not equipped to quickly and authoritatively tell truth from spin on an issue such as healthcare. And part of it, frankly, is sheer laziness.

Telling the truth requires shoe leather. It requires digging up facts that aren't being handed to you, talking to experts, thinking hard about what you find. This isn't easy. It takes time and energy as well as guts, especially when there are conflicting studies, as there are on healthcare. But finally, we may not have a journalism of truth because we haven't demanded one. Many of us are invested in one side of the story; we are for Obama or against him, for healthcare reform or against it. These are a priori positions. Truth won't change them.

Yet the danger of not insisting on the truth in a brave new world of constant lies is that it subjects our policies to whichever side shouts the loudest or has the most money to spend to mislead us. That is likely to lead to disastrous governance: a needless war, a great recession, a continuation of a failing healthcare system.

What it comes down to is that sometimes the media have to tell the truth not because anyone really wants them to but because it is the right thing to do -- the essential thing to do -- for the sake of our democracy.

Irony Alerty

Chuck Todd is on MSNBC right now talking about all of the false things about health care reform people believe according to a new NBC poll without taking even a second to reflect journalism's role in that.

We should demand better.

Clarification

Turns our rumors of the demise of the public option have been (greatly) exaggerated.

An administration official said tonight that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius "misspoke" when she told CNN this morning that a government run health insurance option "is not an essential part" of reform. This official asked not to be identified in exchange for providing clarity about the intentions of the President. The official said that the White House did not intend to change its messaging and that Sebelius simply meant to echo the president, who has acknowledged that the public option is a tough sell in the Senate and is, at the same time, a must-pass for House Democrats, and is not, in the president's view, the most important element of the reform package.

A second official, Linda Douglass, director of health reform communications for the administration, said that President Obama believed that a public option was the best way to reduce costs and promote competition among insurance companies, that he had not backed away from that belief, and that he still wanted to see a public option in the final bill.

"Nothing has changed.," she said. "The President has always said that what is essential that health insurance reform lower costs, ensure that there are affordable options for all Americans and increase choice and competition in the health insurance market. He believes that the public option is the best way to achieve these goals."


A third White House official, via e-mail, said that Sebelius didn't misspeak. "The media misplayed it," the third official said.

Misplayed indeed.

This is the kind of thing you can bet will happen until health care reform gets passed. The GOP and the drive by media will announce certain platforms dead just to see if the WhiteHouse will let the meme linger out there and rile up liberals and progressives. I am really happy that the Obama administration jumped all over this right away. I am really interested to see if the end of life provisions make it into the final bill too for that matter.

For now we just have to wait and see. And pray.

Rachel Maddow Shines Sunlight On The Opposition

If Rachel Maddow can find all this information why can't the rest of the bums in the mainstream media? We are being failed over and over in this fight and it is sickening. At least one person is taking on the responsibility of providing transparency on those who are opposing health care reform.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

What They Didn't Show You

Many of you by now saw the scene from Senator Claire McCaskill's townhall where two black women are escorted out to boos and catcalls. But what you haven't seen probably is how it all happened. It turns out they were provoked by someone coming over and snatching away their Rosa Parks poster and tearing it up.




Please pass this on so people can see the truth about what happened. These two women who were escorted out deserve an apology if you ask me.

Who's Who

Rachel Maddow is doing an excellent job of exposing the people behind all these teabagging disruptions of Congressional Democrats' townhalls. She put a few more of them up on the summer jam screen tonight.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Now what sucks is that hardly any other news organizations are reporting this kind of stuff. As a matter of fact even other personalities on MSNBC aren't even reporting just how bogus these people are. But bigger than that there are even some ConservaDems who are convinced that these people aren't astroturfed at all. Take Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill for instance. Normally I am a fan of hers but at times she just doesn't get it. Here is her tweet from earlier this evening.

I disagree that the people showing concern over some healthcare proposals are "manufactured" Real folks, strong opinions.

Many people on twitter tried to change her mind but she seems to be brainwashed herself. I wonder what she will say when she finds herself on a youtube clip.

Well what it comes down to is what Rachel said at the end of the segment. This whole movement is totally bogus and the rest fo the mainstream media needs to be reporting it as such.

Update: It looks like these outbursts are starting to back fire.

From the conservative paper Napa Valley Register

Monday night’s health care forum in Napa grew unruly and wild, with some critics of the current health care proposals seeking to derail the event, harming their cause and nearly destroying a meaningful forum on a critical topic for Napa and the nation.

The display was unwelcome — and unsuccessful if it was meant to move health care reform supporters toward considering the concerns of the critics. Several callers to the Register on Tuesday reported they were repulsed by the aggressive tactics of some members of the crowd.
To the degree the catcalls, chants and shouts were organized — and it appears from events around the country that they were — we strongly suggest that the organizers find more constructive ways to get their message out.

snip

But it seems that some of the demonstrators were primed for action no matter the viewpoints the speakers expressed.

It is to the moderator’s and the speakers’ credit that they kept the conversation focused and answered the questions posed.

snip

Monday’s event was out of character for Napa County political clashes, even hotly contested ones. In our view, most politically active people here have better sense than to debase the debate that way.

Unbridled anger is not a substitute for intelligent discussion. Catcalls are not replacements for hard questions and criticism.

(h/t TPM)

And from ABCNews' Political Punch:

In talking to a few attendees afterward, one man said he now admires and respects his representative.

“He stood up, he took his shots, and did it like a man,” a man named Bill told me.

Two elderly women said they were embarrassed by their neighbors.

"They were rude! Oh, they were behaving terribly," one said, calling it a "disgrace to our community."

Said another of the anger, which sounded very much to her like what she hears on Fox News and conservative talk radio, "If it's not manufactured, they're brainwashed."

Rachel Maddow Ties It All Together

Rachel Maddow took the opportunity last night to take an indepth look at the orchestrated and unAmerican townhall teabagger revolts. But bigger than that she pointed out how many in the mainstream media are trying to keep their head in the sand to the fact that these are not honest brokers. These aren't people who come to these townhalls just to ask questions because they are mad. They don't want answers. They only want to shut down dialogue whether its from other members of the audience or from the Democratic member of Congress themselves. In their neverending quest to try to be balanced the media is refusing to report the facts. They can not be allowed to get away with this! Pass this clip along to your friends and family members who might actually be buying the "grassroots" frame.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Rachel also took the opportunity to tie the current tactics by the GOP to hurt health care reform efforts into the so called "Brooks Brothers" fake riots that occurred during the recount down here in Florida after the 2000 elections.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The Flip Side

Most of what you will be hearing for the next couple of days is about how President Obama's poll numbers have fallen especially when it comes to health care. And for the most part that will be true. But what you probably won't be hearing is that the Republicans' in Congress have seen their numbers fall off a cliff, especially on health care.

From The Plum Line

But the flipside of the story, which isn’t getting any real attention today, is that today’s polls also paint a dire picture for Republicans, and suggest they’re really taking it on the chin for blocking health care reform. The internals of today’s New York Times poll say this:

* Only 28% view the GOP favorably, the lowest since at least 2005.

* A huge majority wants major changes to the health care system, and a plurality says Obama is reforming health care at “the right pace.” The public wants change now, meaning voters will probably extract a major price if it doesn’t get done.

* Voters blame Republicans, and not Obama, for obstructionism: Fifty nine percent say Obama is working with the GOP on health care reform, versus only 33% who say Republicans are working with the president.

* Fifty five percent says Obama has the right ideas for health care reform, versus only 26% — barely more than one-fourth — who say the GOP does.

If President Obama is in trouble, what the hell exactly are the GOOpers in? Seems to me that this time if healthcare reform doesn't get done, the people are going to extract their pound of flesh from the Republican Party.