Job Creation Over Deficit Reduction - Traditional
Media Keeps Missing The Point

post from Crooks and Liars on 18 May 2011 09:00:44 PM. © Crooks and Liars

enlarge Credit: Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi's WebsiteDerek Thompson from the Atlantic is pushing back a bit against recent series of posts from Greg Sargent at the Plumline arguing that the political media establishment in the Beltway bubble are trapped in a ?Beltway Deficit Feedback Loop.? Sargent?s case was bolstered yesterday when the National Journal offered up datapoints that supported contentions that increased traditional media obsession with deficit is lurching our national conversations on economic issues to extreme right.

Thompson essentially offers the argument that the traditional media should get a pass for not covering unemployment issues because no one is trying to fix it. There are number of problems with Thompson?s argument.

First, his argument that no one is trying to fix the job issues is just of base. Congressional Democrats for their part have remained focus on the jobs. He should specifically look through the ?Make it in America? section of Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi?s website and learn more about the Democratic agenda which is all about jobs. The ?People?s Budget? presented by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which was described as a ?courageous? by the Economist, also focuses how to ?put America back to work.? He should pay close attention to leaders such as Representative Anthony Weiner (D-NY) one of the most effective spokesperson for progressive vision in U.S. Congress have been hammering away on how to make ?job creation? the ?number 1 focus? for our Congress. And just days ago President Barack Obama tied trade pacts to aid for US workers who lose jobs. So the insinuation that our elected officials ? specifically Democrats in Congress ? have not focused on how to fix jobs issues does not fly. More after the split.

Second, he fails to note Americans are more concerned about jobs than anything else. This is not some kind of convenient Democratic and progressive talking point. This is backed up by recent poll numbers. As noted by the Pew Research Center on May 4, while most Americans ?see addressing the deficit as a top priority, concern about jobs and prices remains more widespread among the general public.? PEW specifically noted the following:

In fact, only among Staunch Conservatives and Libertarians do even half rate the budget deficit as the economic issue that worries them most (50% and 49%, respectively). While 34% of Main Street Republicans rate the deficit as their top concern ? which is higher than the national average ? about half cite either jobs (24%) or rising prices (26%) as their top concern.
Not surprisingly, given how hard they were hit by the recession, Disaffecteds are mostly concerned about the job situation (43%) and rising prices (36%) ? just 9% cite the deficit as their top concern. Similarly, nearly as many Hard-Pressed Democrats say the job situation (33%) worries them most as say rising prices (42%). New Coalition Democrats and Solid Liberals are more worried about the job situation than other national economic issues (42% and 46%, respectively).

Get that ? even a sizeable chunk of ?Main Street Republicans? are more concerned about jobs as their top concern. Yet somehow we don?t see these concerns being fleshed in today?s traditional media coverage which is completely obsessed with deficit reduction.

Third, Thompson forgets that it has been his colleagues from the traditional media, who have a track record of building their coverage based on right wing frame that has never been really concerned about the jobs. Many of us remember the right wing traditional slanted media coverage from two years ago when despite warnings from many economists that stimulus package being debated on the Hill was too small, the networks rarely raised the issue.

So I don?t think the excuse that traditional media should get a pass for not covering unemployment issues because no one is trying to fix it has a lot of merit. I hope for the sake of majority of Americans who are concerned about getting back to work and keeping our country?s economy moving in the right direction, the beltway media wake up and cut through the their echo chamber all framed within extreme right wing talking points.

Read The Full Article:
http://crooksandliars.com/murshedz/caught-their-obsession-deficit-traditiona

Digg this

Job Creation Over Deficit Reduction - Traditional
Media Keep Missing The Point

post from Crooks and Liars on 18 May 2011 09:00:44 PM. © Crooks and Liars

Sargent?s case was bolstered yesterday when the National Journal offered up datapoints that supported contentions that increased traditional media obsession with deficit is lurching our national conversations on economic issues to the extreme right.

Thompson essentially counters that the traditional media should get a pass for not covering unemployment issues because no one is trying to fix it. There are number of problems with Thompson?s argument.

First, his argument that no one is trying to fix the job issues is just off base. Congressional Democrats for their part have remained focus on the jobs. He should specifically look through the ?Make it in America? section of Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi?s website and learn more about the Democratic agenda, which is all about jobs. The ?People?s Budget? presented by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which was described as a ?courageous? by the Economist, also focuses how to ?put America back to work.?

He should pay close attention to leaders such as Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY), one of the most effective spokespersons for a progressive vision in the U.S. Congress, who has been hammering away on how to make ?job creation? the ?number 1 focus? for our Congress. And just days ago President Barack Obama tied trade pacts to aid for U.S. workers who lose jobs. So the insinuation that our elected officials ? specifically Democrats in Congress ? have not focused on how to fix jobs issues does not fly. Unless, of course, you're talking about Republicans. More after the split.

In fact, only among Staunch Conservatives and Libertarians do even half rate the budget deficit as the economic issue that worries them most (50% and 49%, respectively). While 34% of Main Street Republicans rate the deficit as their top concern ? which is higher than the national average ? about half cite either jobs (24%) or rising prices (26%) as their top concern.
Not surprisingly, given how hard they were hit by the recession, Disaffecteds are mostly concerned about the job situation (43%) and rising prices (36%) ? just 9% cite the deficit as their top concern. Similarly, nearly as many Hard-Pressed Democrats say the job situation (33%) worries them most as say rising prices (42%). New Coalition Democrats and Solid Liberals are more worried about the job situation than other national economic issues (42% and 46%, respectively).

So I don?t think Thompson's excuse -- that traditional media should get a pass for not covering unemployment issues because no one is trying to fix it -- has a lot of merit. I hope for the sake of majority of Americans who are concerned about getting back to work and keeping our country?s economy moving in the right direction, the Beltway media wake up and cut through their echo chamber, which for now is all framed within extreme right-wing talking points.

Read The Full Article:
http://crooksandliars.com/murshedz/caught-their-obsession-deficit-traditiona

Digg this

Fox's "Straight News" Anchor Martha MacCallum
Regularly Advocates GOP Positions

post from Media Matters for America - Latest Items on 18 May 2011 09:00:39 PM. © Media Matters for America - Latest Items

Fox News defends its credibility as a legitimate news outlet by claiming that there is a dividing line between its news and opinion programming. Purported "straight news" anchor Martha MacCallum, however, has a long record of echoing GOP talking points to advocate for conservative policies.

MacCallumSays Flat Tax Is "A Better Idea"

MacCallumDecides "A Flat Tax Is A Better Idea." From the December 8 edition of Fox NewsRadio's Kilmeade & Friends:

KILMEADE: All right. Heidi, you're inMaryland.
CALLER: Hi there.
KILMEADE: Hi, Heidi.
CALLER: One part of the discussion that Obamakeeps on talking about, the salary being $250,000, that the tax -- is whereeverybody's going to be taxed. I'm wondering why we haven't discussed takingsalary as well as cost of living index. You could make $250,000 in ruralIllinois and live like a king, but if you live in the D.C. area and make$250,000 -- $250,000 a year, your housing is ridiculous.
KILMEADE: Oh, yeah. I mean, they are talking-- these economists, these economic minds are looking at the cost of livingindex, but what if you move?
MacCALLUM: That's why a flat tax is a betteridea.
CALLER: Well, I agree with a flat tax. But Ijust think that -- I mean, I haven't heard a lot of talk about the cost ofliving index. And I think that plays a huge role, in terms of, you know, howyou live.
MacCALLUM: Absolutely. One town's rich isanother town's, you know, just -- studio apartment, you know what I'm saying?[Fox News Radio, Kilmeade & Friends, 12/8/10]

AsFar Back As 1996, Then-GOP Presidential Candidate Steve Forbes Backed A FlatTax.From the Associated Press:

House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) took aswipe Thursday at the flat-tax proposal touted by GOP presidential hopefulSteve Forbes.
The multimillionaire publisher backs a 17%flat tax that would eliminate deductions for mortgage interest and charitablegiving. [Associated Press, 2/9/96]

TheHill:"House Republicans Last Week Introduced The First Flat Tax Legislation Of The112th Congress, The Freedom Flat Tax Act." From a March 14 blog post for TheHill:

House Republicans last week introduced thefirst flat tax legislation of the 112th Congress, the Freedom Flat Tax Act.
The bill, memorably numbered H.R. 1040, wouldgive individuals and companies the choice to make an "irrevocableelection" to be subject to the flat tax instead of the current system.Choosing the flat tax would result in a 19 percent tax for the first two yearsof election, followed by a 17 percent tax after that. [The Hill, 3/14/11]

MacCallumSays We "Need" To Raise Retirement Age

MacCallum:"We Need To Raise The Age At Which You Can Get" Social Security. From the November 15edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom:

MacCALLUM: We've been talking circles around[Social Security reform], Bob, for so many years. I mean, you know, we need todo something. We need to raise the age at which you can get it -- the proposalis 69 at 2075. You know, the length of life that people are living is gettinghigher and higher, and it was supposed to be a widows and orphans fund, not aretirement plan. [Fox News, America's Newsroom, 11/15/10]

TheHill:Boehner Said Raising Retirement Age "Is A Step That Needs To Be Taken." From The Hill:

A Republican-held Congress might look toraise the retirement age to 70, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio)suggested Monday.
Boehner, the top Republican lawmaker in theHouse, said raising the retirement age by five years, indexing benefits to therate of inflation and means-testing benefits would make the massive entitlementprogram more solvent.
"We're all living a lot longer thananyone ever expected," Boehner said in a meeting with the editors of thePittsburgh Tribune-Review. "And I think that raising the retirement age --going out 20 years, so you're not affecting anyone close to retirement -- andeventually getting the retirement age to 70 is a step that needs to betaken." [The Hill, 6/29/10]

MacCallumSays Obama Should Call For Consideration Of Social Security "InvestmentAccounts"

MacCallum:Shouldn't Obama "Take This On Himself" And Say, "Let's Consider InvestmentAccounts For Younger People"? From the November 15 edition of America'sNewsroom:

MacCALLUM: You know what? All you hear frompoliticians, Bob, is, "Oh, we're going to protect Social Security." I mean,shouldn't President Obama take this on himself and stand up and say, "Look,let's consider investment accounts for younger people who would like to putsome of their money that they're putting away in an investment account. Let'sconsider the options. Let's raise the age." Where's the president on this? [FoxNews, America's Newsroom, 11/15/10]

BushAdministration Unsuccessfully Attempted To Create Private Social SecurityAccounts.From a March 31, 2005, Slate.com article by Jacob Weisberg:

George W. Bush's plan to remake the SocialSecurity system is kaput. This is not a value judgment. It's a statement ofpolitical fact. In the months since the president first presented the idea ashis top domestic priority, Democrats in Congress have unexpectedly unified inopposition to any reform based on private accounts. Several Republican senatorswhose votes would be needed for passage are resisting private accounts as well.And public opinion, which has never favored any form of privatization, istrending even more strongly against Bush's scheme. At this point, there's justno way that the president can finagle enough votes to win. [Slate.com, 3/31/05]

MacCallumTells Muslim Spokesman He "Should Be Supportive" Of GOP Hearings On MuslimExtremism

MacCallumTo CAIR Spokesman: "I Believe You Should Be Supportive Of Hearings" On MuslimExtremism.From the March 8 edition of America's Newsroom:

COREY SAYLOR (Council on American-IslamicRelations spokesman): [Homegrown terrorism] is a huge concern for our communitythat we've been doing a lot about, and CAIR has submitted testimony to thehearing that will prove that conclusively. But what's not happening here iswhen you have the Southern Poverty Law Center reporting that white extremistgroups are on the rise in this country, that movement produced the OklahomaCity bomber, and Congressman [Peter] King doesn't want to talk about that.
MacCALLUM: That was a long time ago. Theseinstances -- there's 22 instances since May of 2009 that have people veryconcerned.
SAYLOR: They are on the rise right nowMartha, and that frightens me.
MacCALLUM: I think that to deny that this isa problem and to deny that it needs to be looked at is to just turn away fromsomething that -- you know, I think most Americans -- if you say, "What's yourtop concern in terms of terrorism in this country?" do you think they're goingto say white extremists like Tim McVeigh?
SAYLOR: But Martha, I'm not denying it. Ijust said my testimony completely contradicts that and shows the work that CAIRis doing. Again, I already said to you, I'm the one who made the phone callthat got the FBI involved --
MacCALLUM: Then I believe you should besupportive of hearings that would continue to look into this problem in thiscountry.
SAYLOR: So how is that me denying theproblem? What I'm saying is that it's a more widespread problem. [Fox News, America'sNewsroom, 3/8/11]

MacCallumEquates Government Spending With Drug And Alcohol Abuse

Recalling "Just Say No" To Drugs Pins, MacCallum Suggests " 'Just Say No' ToMore Spending."From the December 15 edition of America's Newsroom:

MacCALLUM: You can go to our homepage at FoxNews.com at -- slash America's Newsroom and tell us what youthink about this, folks. And you are weighing in hugenumbers. It's critical to keep our government going and our economy, or is thewhole thing completely out of control? Do youwant to see them sort of just say no? We should have,like, those little symbols, those pins, you know, "Just SayNo" to drugs?"Just Say No"to more spending, right? [Fox News, America'sNewsroom, 12/15/10]

MacCallum:On Budget Deficits, Maybe America Is Like "A Drunk Who Finally Hits Bottom." From the January 27edition of Fox News' America Live:

MacCALLUM: Even down to an individual level,you know, when you're running out of money asa person, right, you havea couple of options. You can either, you know, basically go to the loan shark,right? Pay way up for your interest rates. I mean, that's one way to look atit. You know, or you just have a situation where you say, "I'm going intobankruptcy," and you have to try to work something out.
You know, why are we closer to that now thanwe were before? You know, I mean, as the economy slowly but surely starts tokind of pull itself out of the hole a little bit, why is this problem gettingso much worse now?
[...]
MacCALLUM: Well, maybe we're like, you know,a drunk who finally hits bottom. Maybe it takes a [deficit] number that big tostart to see some real spending cuts, which I know you're a big proponent of, Stuart [Varney]. [Fox News, America Live, 1/27/11]

Sen.Hatch On Fiscal Discipline: "We're Worse Than Addicts." The Daily Callerquoted Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT):

Senate Republicans said Wednesday thatwithout a rule requiring them to balance the budget, they would never be ableto bring themselves to do it on their own.
"If you don't have this kind of fiscaldiscipline, you'll never get there," Hatch said. "We're worse than addicts."[The Daily Caller, 1/27/11]

MacCallumAnd Bachmann Agree: Obama's Proposals Are A "Lurch Towards Socialism"

MacCallumTells Bachmann: "I Think You're Absolutely Right About That." From the March 24,2009, edition of Fox News' The Live Desk:

REP. MICHELE BACHMANN (R-MN): But I'm veryconcerned about the Obama administration wanting now to tell private companieswhat they can pay their management and their employees. This is all aboutcentralized government planning. This is not the road to go down.
The veryfirst question I asked is, "Are we jettisoning free-market capitalism in favorof economic centralized planning?" And I don't -- I think we're getting the answer inactions of the Obama administration. This is a lurch towards socialism.
MacCALLUM: Well, hey. I mean, it was said by theadministration that only government can help in this situation, so I thinkyou're absolutely right about that. [The Live Desk, Fox News, 3/24/09]

MacCallumAnd Bachmann Agree: Markets Don't Want Debt Ceiling Raised

MacCallum:"If We Refuse To Raise The Debt Ceiling, Our Creditors Will Look Upon ThatFavorably."From the May 13 edition of Fox News' America Live:

MacCALLUM: You know, my gut feeling and my,you know, background studying the markets tells me that if you -- if we refuseto raise the debt ceiling, our creditors will look upon that favorably. They'llsay, "Finally, the United States is actually getting serious about theirfinancial issues." And I think just -- you know, as a corporation, any companythat borrows money is under that same kind of scrutiny. When they tighten theirbelt, Wall Street responds very favorably.
BERNARD WHITMAN (Democratic strategist): Butyou know, here's what I support: I support a deficit cap. A deficit cap wouldsay if the national debt as a percentage of the entire economy does not startto go down in the next few years, it would trigger automatic spending cuts,automatic tax hikes. That's what would trigger -- that's what would say to themarkets, "We're getting serious," rather than playing chicken.
MacCALLUM: Yeah, but our -- but, just thelanguage of what you just said. If, if, if. "If this doesn't happen in the nextfew years, then we'll do this." It's too late for that. People are past thatpoint. They want to see it now. They want to see it now.
WHITMAN: They don't want to see ourgovernment default. That is breaking a bond that we have with our creditorsthat would be outrageous.
MacCALLUM: We've already broken those bondswith everybody.
WHITMAN: It would be unacceptable.
MacCALLUM: We've broken those bonds. [FoxNews, America Live, 5/13/11]

Bachmann:"Don't Let Anyone Tell You" That Raising Debt Ceiling Is "Going To Show TheWorld That We're Even More Credit-Worthy." From Fox Broadcasting Co.'s FoxNews Sunday:

BACHMANN: If we continue on the trajectorythat we're going right now of borrowing money that we don't have, because 41cents of every dollar the federal government spends today is borrowed money.So, every hour, we are borrowing $188 million. So, about a fifth of $1 billionin the hour you're on today, we will borrow.
We can't do that. This -- the music is aboutto end. The game is going to be over.
So, don't let anyone tell you that byincreasing the debt limit, the ability for the federal government to keepborrowing, that somehow that's going to show the world that we're even morecredit-worthy because we're borrowing? Very soon, Chris, we are going to be atthe point where we're going to be -- we're going to be borrowing more money sothat we're essentially having a $4 trillion budget and $2 trillion of it willbe borrowed money. We can't live that way. [Fox News Sunday, FoxBroadcasting, 5/1/11, accessed via Nexis]

FoxTouts Division Between Its Reporting And Opinion Programming

LATimes:Fox Executives Argue "The Channel Plays It Straight With Its Daytime NewsProgramming."From the Los Angeles Times:

Network executives vigorously dispute thenotion that the channel has a conservative slant.
Although its popular prime-time commentatorsmay be largely on the political right, the channel plays it straight with itsdaytime news programming, they argue. [Los Angeles Times, 3/6/09]

NY Times: "Fox Argues That ItsNews Hours ... Are Objective." From The New York Times:

In an interview, Mr. [senior vice presidentfor news Michael] Clemente suggested that there was an element of "shootthe messenger" in the back and forth. "Sometimes it's actuallyhelpful to have an organization or a person that you can go up against for whateverreason," he said.
Fox argues that its news hours -- 9 a.m. to 4p.m. and 6 to 8 p.m. on weekdays -- are objective. The channel has taken painsrecently to highlight its news programs, including the two hours led by ShepardSmith, its chief news anchor. And its daytime newscasts draw more viewers thanCNN or MSNBC's prime-time programs.
"The average consumer certainly knowsthe difference between the A section of the newspaper and the editorialpage," Mr. Clemente said. [The New York Times, 10/11/09]

FoxNews VP Compares Fox's Reporting/Editorial Division To "The A-Section Of TheNewspaper And The Editorial Page." From TVNewser:

[A] statement from Fox News SVP MichaelClemente: "An increasing number of viewers are relying on FOX News for bothnews and opinion. And the average news consumer can certainly distinguishbetween the A-section of the newspaper and the editorial page, which is whatour programming represents. So, with all due respect to anyone who might stillbe confused about the difference between news reporting and vibrant opinion, mysuggestion would be to talk about the stories and the facts, rather than attackthe messenger...which over time, has never worked." [TVNewser, 10/11/09]

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.mediamatters.org/~r/mediamatters/latest/~3/8xGhIRrSo_4/201105180043

Digg this

My Little Town 20110518: Jack Meyers

post from Docudharma - Front Page on 18 May 2011 08:59:02 PM. © Docudharma - Front Page

Those of you that read this regular series know that I am from Hackett, Arkansas, just a mile of so from the Oklahoma border, and just about 10 miles south of the Arkansas River. It was a redneck sort of place, and just zoom onto my previous posts[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Docudharma/~3/9zPMp2LburI/my-little-town-20110518-
jack-meyers

Digg this

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): A question. Do you think
it was unintentional irony

post from They gave us a republic... - Front Page on 18 May 2011 08:47:36 PM. © They gave us a republic... - Front Page

In rummaging around Representative Vicky Hartzler's (r) congressional website I happened upon a section on personal financial disclosure:

Financial disclosure statements for Representatives are available on the Internet on or about June 15 of the year they are filed. I took office on January 5, 2011. My first financial disclosure statement will be filed with the Clerk of the House on May 15, 2011, and will be available on the Internet through the Clerk's Financial Disclosure Reports Database...

We'll be looking forward to perusing that personal financial disclosure sometime around June 15th. Meanwhile, there are other interesting documents available from the Clerk of the House.

In this instance, a packet of disclosure forms concerning Representative Hartzler's (r) trip [pdf] to California from January 27 through 29, 2011 (twenty-two days after taking office) for a Heritage Foundation conservative love fest. From Representative Hartzler's (r) disclosure:

...Briefings on Congressional authority, federalism, regulation, welfare reform, entitlement reform, cutting spending, & national security challenges were attended. Also, the Reagan Library was toured and guest speakers...were heard...

Also, too.

...The Heritage Foundation is organizing all aspects of this conference. This is an educational conference with the purpose of discussing policy issues...

...Participation in this trip will give me background information and helpful policy materials important for conducting legislative business...

Maybe, like, you know, a Bill of Attainder?

There was this item in the attached program:

Really? It must be nice work if you can get it.

So, the question for Representative Hartzler is, does she think that Andrew Breitbart's well-documented propensity for posting misleading videos qualifies him to be an expert on being a "great communicator"? Just asking. Especially since the latest hack job maligned instructors at two Missouri university campuses:

Everything You Need To Know About UMSL, UMKC Fake Video Debacle In One Easy Sitting
By Chad Garrison, Wed., May 18 2011 @ 11:39AM
Amy Goodman, host of Democracy Now!, had University of Missouri - Kansas City professor Judy Ancel on her show yesterday.
As you likely know by now, Ancel and Don Giljum, a professor at University of Missouri - St. Louis, were targeted last month in a highly edited video appearing on the website of right-wing blogger Andrew Breitbart....

And what does this tell us about the quality of the content for the entire event if they let in any old hack as a presenter? Just asking.

Head smack. I was going to make a crack about John Yoo. It turns out he was a presenter [pdf] (at breakfast on January 29, 2011), too.

Who else attended from the Missouri Congressional delegation? Listed on the program: Todd Akin, Sam Graves, Billy Long, and Blaine Luetkemeyer.

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheyGaveUsARepublic-FrontPage/~3/Ow0ub2G01zU/rep-v
icky-hartzler-r-a-question-do-you-think-it-was-unintentional-irony

Digg this

Constitutional Rights a Casualty of Endless War

post from Firedoglake on 18 May 2011 08:38:01 PM. © Firedoglake

When facing endless "war," be it a war on drugs or a war on terror, such niceties as constitutional rights always end up a causality of these nebulous conflicts. After all, when eternally battling with a generalized evil that will never cease to exist,[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/firedoglake/fdl/~3/bNeOKlMi7a0/

Digg this

Details Of King Street Patriots Tea Party HQ
OpeningThe Tea Party Sure Does Like To Hang Out With Political Insiders

post from Texas Liberal on 18 May 2011 08:35:53 PM. © Texas Liberal

This past Monday, a local Tea Party cell known as the King Street Patriots opened a new headquarters in Houston. Governor Rick Perry and many other Republican elected officials attended this event. Top Texas political blogger Stace Medellin attended a protest outside this opening ceremony. Below is a picture that Stace took of freedom-loving Americans participating [...]

Read The Full Article:
http://texasliberal.wordpress.com/2011/05/19/details-of-king-street-patriots-tea-
party-hq-opening-the-tea-party-sure-does-like-to-hang-out-with-political-insiders/

Digg this

Money for nothing, and checks for free

post from Daily Kos on 18 May 2011 08:20:02 PM. © Daily Kos

Newt Gingrich. Photo by Gage SkidmoreNewt Of-Three-Wives Gingrich is getting dismembered across the cable news and info bohn networks today. Forcing him to do the quick-step GOP walkback on recent comments about Paul Ryan's radical budget:

Newt Gingrich's walk back tour reached its zenith Tuesday night, as Gingrich personally apologized to Paul Ryan for dismissing his Medicare plan as "right wing social engineering." In an added twist, Gingrich claims that the merest mention of his extensive condemnation of Ryan's budget from Sunday's Meet The Press by Democrats is now out of bounds as a result.

Newt's stuck defending a wildly unpopular idea, among most voters anyway, but that's inexplicably popular among conservatives. After the super rich got truckloads of free money in subsidies, tax cuts, and the bailouts, they want more. So Newt and company want to serve that desire by raiding trillions of dollars worth of our middle class collective savings and borrow trillions more, and then give the tax cuts and sweet subsidy checks to a handful of super weatlhy conservative billionaires and corporations, and they want to hand it over for absolutely nothing in return but vague promises of jobs someday trickling back down to we the vested millions like crumbs. Never mentioned is the fact that the present value of Social Security and Medicare to millions of fully vested or near vested Americans at or near middle age -- including millions of us comfortably below age 55 -- is similar to the cost of a modest home in most communities across the nation. Or that we have faithfully paid into these programs for years with every single paycheck ever earned, starting as teenagers working partime jobs for minimum wage.

Not very many people are going to choose to give that away for free, because it's a terrible deal. So, the same folks who bleat on endlessly about free trade and the sacred value of investment and ownership rights when it's their money, not only want millions of us to give our precious pension and medical insurance away to super rich people for nothing, they are doing everything possible to bring the power of The State to bear in stealing it from those of us unwilling to give it away. This isn't capitalism or free trade, it sure as hell isn't small government. You'd think a legit conservative free marketeer would be fondling their musket and tri-corner hat at the mere thought of it.

What's notable isn't that Newt is getting skewered for going along with one version of that shitty something-for-nothing deal. What's chilling is the ruthless message being sent to the Republican Party by the wealthy GOP funding base: if you are not 100% down with ripping off the medical insurance and pension of millions of middle class vested beneficiaries, no matter how dangerous it may be to your political well being, you will be taken behind the proverbial barn and shot.

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/wm-Yn6JAI6A/-Money-for-nothing,-an
d-checks-for-free

Digg this

I hope all those parole meetings don't interfere
with Pawlenty's campaign

GOP presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty has a soft spot for hiring staff with criminal records. Well, the police video of the DUI arrest of his campaign manager just hit YouTube. Not pretty.

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Americablog/~3/2vpPPxsWiS8/i-hope-all-those-parole
-meetings-dont.html

Digg this

In a sane world, WND's Farah would be pulping
Corsi's Birther book in embarrassment -- not in a satire

Joseph Farah at the National Tea Party Convention: "Where's the birth certificate?"

Click here to view this media

See, this is why they say that satire is dead. In a sane and normal world, this would be a real news story, and not a satire:

In a stunning development one day after the release of Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Obama is not Eligible to be President, by Dr. Jerome Corsi, World Net Daily Editor and Chief Executive Officer Joseph Farah has announced plans to recall and pulp the entire 200,000 first printing run of the book, as well as announcing an offer to refund the purchase price to anyone who has already bought either a hard copy or electronic download of the book.
In an exclusive interview, a reflective Farah, who wrote the book's foreword and also published Corsi's earlier best-selling work, Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak out Against John Kerry and Capricorn One: NASA, JFK, and the Great "Moon Landing" Cover-Up, said that after much serious reflection, he could not go forward with the project. "I believe with all my heart that Barack Obama is destroying this country, and I will continue to stand against his administration at every turn, but in light of recent events, this book has become problematic, and contains what I now believe to be factual inaccuracies," he said this morning. "I cannot in good conscience publish it and expect anyone to believe it."
When asked if he had any plans to publish a corrected version of the book, he said cryptically, "There is no book." Farah declined to comment on his discussions of the matter with Corsi.
A source at WND, who requested that his name be withheld, said that Farah was "rip-shit" when, on April 27, President Obama took the extraordinary step of personally releasing his "long-form" birth certificate, thus resolving the matter of Obama's legitimacy for "anybody with a brain."
"He called up Corsi and really tore him a new one," says the source. "I mean, we'll do anything to hurt Obama, and erase his memory, but we don't want to look like fucking idiots, you know? Look, at the end of the day, bullshit is bullshit."

But of course, it is a satire:

UPDATE, 12:25 p.m., for those who didn't figure it out yet, and the many on Twitter for whom it took a while: We committed satire this morning to point out the problems with selling and marketing a book that has had its core premise and reason to exist gutted by the news cycle, several weeks in advance of publication. Are its author and publisher chastened? Well, no. They double down, and accuse the President of the United States of perpetrating a fraud on the world by having released a forged birth certificate. Not because this claim is in any way based on reality, but to hold their terribly gullible audience captive to their lies, and to sell books. This is despicable, and deserves only ridicule. That's why we committed satire in the matter of the Corsi book. Hell, even the president has a sense of humor about it all. Some more serious reporting from us on this whole "birther" phenomenon here, here, and here.

Apparently, Farah is taking it about as well as you'd expect a paranoid right-wing crank to: He's threatening to sue:

Joseph Farah, editor and chief executive officer of World Net Daily Books, which published Corsi?s work, said he never spoke to the magazine and that the book is ?selling briskly.?
?I have never spoken to anyone from Esquire. Never uttered these words or anything remotely resembling them to anyone. It is a complete fabrication,? Farah told The Daily Caller. ?The book is selling briskly. I am 100 percent behind it.?
...
Farah said he is considering ?legal options? against the magazine for posting the story .
?Let me say this very clearly: There is not a single word of that report that is true. I assume it is a very poorly executed parody. In any case, I have begun exploring our legal options, since this report has all the earmarkings of a deliberate attempt at restraint of trade, not to mention libel.?

Of course he's sticking to his guns. Farah -- who advised Donald Trump to jump aboard the Birther bandwagon and who devoted his National Tea Party Convention speech to a defense of Birtherism, -- is deeply invested in the story. And it's in the nature of conspiracy theorists never to give up in the face of devastating evidence, but rather to transform that evidence into further proof of their conspiracy theory.

Gee, I wonder if Sean Hannity will ask Corsi about this the next time he has him on his Fox show.

All this is coming on the heels of the news that Corsi's book was written with the help of far-right white nationalists. Just yesterday, as Eric Hananoki at Media Matters reported, one of the nation's most prominent white nationalists popped up and claimed credit for having helped assemble portions of the book:

The host of a self-described "pro-white" radio program has claimed that he helped WorldNetDaily reporter Jerome Corsi with a story related to Corsi's new book, Where's the Birth Certificate?: The Case that Barack Obama is not Eligible to be President.
James Edwards writes today that Corsi "personally e-mailed me a few months ago for some assistance on a story closely related to the contents of this book. I was happy to oblige and work behind-the-scenes with both Dr. Corsi and World Net Daily on this matter."
Edwards is the host of the "pro-white" radio program The Political Cesspool. The show's website states: "We represent a philosophy that is pro-White ... We wish to revive the White birthrate above replacement level fertility and beyond to grow the percentage of Whites in the world relative to other races." The show regularly features a guest roster of "pro-white" figures like David Duke and "neo-Nazi activist April Gaede."

Here's a sampling of Edwards' work:

'Political Cesspool' host James Edwards promotes white nationalists, including Jared Taylor, David Duke, and Richard Spencer

Click here to view this media

As the SPLC's David Holthouse reported back in 2007:

"The Political Cesspool" in the past two years has become the primary radio nexus of hate in America. Its sponsors include the CCC and the Institute for Historical Review, a leading Holocaust denial organization. Its guest roster for 2007 reads like a "Who's Who" of the radical racist right. CCC leader Gordon Lee Baum, Holocaust denier Mark Weber, Canadian white supremacist Paul Fromm, American Renaissance editor Jared Taylor, neo-Nazi activist April Gaede, anti-Semitic professor Kevin MacDonald, Stormfront webmaster Jamie Kelso and League of the South president Michael Hill have all been favorably interviewed on the "Political Cesspool" this year, along with former Klan leader and neo-Nazi David Duke, the show's most frequent celebrity racist guest, who has logged three appearances.

Edwards is one of those slick young racists who knows to stay away from over race-baiting language in public as a way to buttress his claim that all he wants to do is promote the white race. But inevitably, as it always does with such folks, the cover eventually slips:

The "Cesspool" host is a rising star of the white nationalist movement because he's articulate, charming and equally at ease in a television studio, behind a radio microphone and standing in front of a crowd. He was a specially invited guest speaker at the CCC conference. His topic: "Creating Your Own Media." CCC National Field Coordinator Bill Lord told a "Martin Luther Coon" joke in his introduction of Edwards. Lord and other longtime CCC members casually dropped racial epithets at the conference, but Edwards carefully avoided using such crudely derogatory language, as he always does when speaking in public, on the airwaves or to the media. Edwards allies himself with hate group leaders who call black people "niggers," but he doesn't drop the N-bomb himself. Instead he speaks in the more or less polished code of a suit-and-tie racist, calling blacks "heathen savages," "subhumans," and "black animals," exclusively in the context of discussing violent black-on-white crime.
His audience of about 150 at the CCC conference included Jared Taylor, whose magazine specializes in race "studies," and Don Black, the former Alabama grand dragon of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan and founder of Stormfront, the largest racist forum on the Internet.

Guys like Farah would never try to run and hide now that their mendacious ruse has been exposed -- they always double down, proceeding as if their credibility was every bit as sound as ever. Which, really, it is. As I explained long ago, Farah never pays for having his conspiracy theories fall apart -- he just picks up and keeps moving. When the big "Y2K Apocalypse" he and his magazine ranted about for much of 1999 (a sample is here), Farah simply cleared his throat and pretended that it had all been a valuable lesson -- and then never raised it again.

That's because, underneath the conspiracy theory facade, these guys really are committed to a radical far-right agenda, and the theories they promote are really just a way of conditioning people to buy into that agenda. That's what they're about.

Most of all, it's an extremely clear example of what I call the Transmission Belt -- the way ideas and agendas move seamlessly from the fringes of the far right directly into the mainstream, thanks to characters like Farah and Corsi, and by extension to guys like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.

But of course, it's very uncivil of us to be pointing this out.

Meanwhile, Ben Dimiero and Simon Maloy at Media Matters have the complete rundown on the Corsi book.