Home » Archives by category » News » Politics (Page 1912)

Lee Fang of Think Progress was able to surprise David Koch after the swearing-in of his newly-minted House of Representatives last week for this impromptu man-on-the-street interview . The interview is posted in three parts, but Part One captures just how arrogant, uppity, and callous this man is. The other guy is Tim Phillips, who desperately tries to become a human shield for that most dangerous thing of all: the interview. You have to watch the video to really catch the ebullience Koch has for his new Congress. He’s nearly beside himself with joy. TP: Hi sir, I’m Lee Fang. I’m with the blog ThinkProgress. I’m just asking what you’re expecting from the new Congress under Speaker Boehner? KOCH: Well, cut the hell out of spending, balance the budget, reduce regulations, and uh, support business . PHILLIPS: Hey David, Lee here is a good blogger on the left, we’re glad to have him–TP: Just a quick interview. Are you proud of what Americans for Prosperity has achieved this year? KOCH: You bet I am, man oh’ man. We’re going to do more too in the next couple of years, you know. TP: What are you planning on doing. What are your goals? KOCH: I just told you what we hope the Congress will do and AFP is going to support that. TP: I’m curious to know, Mr. Koch, are you proud of what the Tea Party movement and what they’ve achieved in the past years– KOCH: Yeah. There are some extremists there, but the rank and file are just normal people like us. And I admire them. It’s probably the best grassroots uprising since 1776 in my opinion. This interview was done long before the events of Saturday unfolded. But Koch’s casual toss-off of the “extremists” in the Tea Party is telling, particularly given the strenuous denials we’re all hearing now. Like the way his ‘grass roots’ characterization seems to affirm astroturf as an organic thing, at least in the mind of David Koch? And hey — it’s totally fine with Koch to have an extremist or two in the mix as long as the whole thing is dag-gone grassrootsy and populated with “normal people like [him].” Funny thing. I haven’t met even one single normal person in my entire life who is also a billionaire who spends millions and millions trying to defeat political opponents. But that’s just me, I guess. Let’s consider those few “extremists”. We have extremist Sharron Angle, with her ” 2nd Amendment remedies .” Then there’s “extremist” Sarah Palin, loading and reloading. Then there’s lower-profile but still destructive extremists like Dana Loesch and Bill Hennessy . If this video isn’t bone-chilling and visceral evidence of extreme speech and views, I’m not sure what is. Maybe David Koch wants to rethink his characterization of them as grass roots. I’m more inclined to think of them as “dry brush”. The kind that ignites and destroys everything in its path. The rest of Fang’s interview can be viewed here and here .

Continue reading …
CBS Admits Tucson Shooting ‘Not Partisan,’ Reveals Poll That Most Americans Agree

On Tuesday's Early Show, correspondent Ben Tracy acknowledged that the facts in the Tuscon shooting do not support media spin that the tragedy was incited by right-wing political rhetoric: “Authorities tell CBS News that Loughner's attack on Congresswoman Giffords' was not partisan , but more likely because he was anti-government in general and she was a symbol of it.” Minutes later, co-host Erica Hill reported on a new CBS News poll on the shooting: “The Sheriff [Clarence Dupnik] investigating the shootings in Arizona has publicly blamed the extreme political rhetoric across this country for the tragedy….A majority of Americans, however, don't necessarily agree that's the case…. 57% of respondents don't believe the harsh tone had anything to do with the shootings. Just 32% say it did.” At the top of the 8:00AM ET hour, news reader Jeff Glor again touted the new poll: “…there's more debate over whether a heated political atmosphere played a role….most Americans reject that idea.” read more

Continue reading …

According to Good Morning America's George Stephanopoulos, there's “no evidence” that the Arizona shooter was motivated by political ideology. But, that didn't stop the ABC host from speculating during a discussion with possible Republican presidential

Continue reading …
Bill O’Reilly’s ‘Bloody Shirt’ Factor: How to turn perpetrators into victims

Click here to view this media Bill O’Reilly was in rare form last night as he was simply outraged from all the criticism that was heaped on the RWNM after the Giffords shootings. And the extreme right wing rhetoric tha t Paul Krugman talked about in his piece was directed at poor l’il BillO. So Paul, be afraid — you’ll never be forgiven for writing this: And there’s a huge contrast in the media. Listen to Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann, and you’ll hear a lot of caustic remarks and mockery aimed at Republicans. But you won’t hear jokes about shooting government officials or beheading a journalist at The Washington Post. Listen to Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly, and you will. Of course, the likes of Mr. Beck and Mr. O’Reilly are responding to popular demand. Citizens of other democracies may marvel at the American psyche, at the way efforts by mildly liberal presidents to expand health coverage are met with cries of tyranny and talk of armed resistance. Still, that’s what happens whenever a Democrat occupies the White House, and there’s a market for anyone willing to stoke that anger. But even if hate is what many want to hear, that doesn’t excuse those who pander to that desire. They should be shunned by all decent people. This was too much for BillO, who complained last night that Krugman did the most damage of anyone over the weekend, and then devoted almost a full hour standing on his soapbox and whining away. Click here to view this media Paid stooge Juan Williams was there to back him up as were almost every other guest he had on. Bernie Goldberg was furious too. Hey, how many people used Keith Olbermann’s book to go out and murder people, Bernie? None of course, but I guess he forgot about Jim David Adkisson, who murdered two people in a Knoxville church after reading Bernie’s book. The manifesto he composed before his murderous rampage was just released; you can read the whole thing here [pdf file], and it’s worth reading in its entirety for a number of reasons. But I especially took note of Part III: This was a symbolic killing. Who I wanted to kill was every Democrat in the Senate & House, the 100 people in Bernard Goldberg’s book. I’d like to kill everyone in the mainstream media. But I know those people were inaccessible to me. I couldn’t get to the generals & high ranking officers of the Marxist movement so I went after the foot soldiers, the chickenshit liberals that vote in these traitorous people. Someone had to get the ball rolling. I volunteered. I hope others do the same. It’s the only way we can rid America of this cancerous pestilence. That seems to sum up Adkisson’s thinking: He wanted to be the spark in a wave of similar fed-up-niks taking their anger out on liberals. I guess Bernie and BillO simply forgot to mention that violent episode. O’Reilly even went as far as to say that MSNBC is far worse than anything on right wing talk radio even though there are a few kooks and he needs body guards to protect himself from the network because they attack him so much. Fox always uses their ratings to try and prove how right they are about everything. You see, we have good ratings so we can’t be fermenting hate. Riiiight. I was interviewed on Al-JazeeraTV Sunday night and the host asked me how the Right would react on Monday. I said that they would never take any responsibility for their words and in the end blame the Left , just as they have always done. In fact, this was a classic case of the Right complaining that their critics were “waving the bloody shirt” — an act they perfected after the Civil War and have been rinsing and repeating ever since, whenever anyone has tried to hold them accountable for the violence they foster. As Dave explained awhile back : To Bill O’Reilly and Juan Williams and the rest of the Fox crew, the outrage is never the atrocities they actually uttered, only the effrontery of having those atrocities held against them. They all want to make a victim of the bully and a bully of the victim. Their narrative is that the real story is not the atrocities that Rush Limbaugh utters but only the attempt by his political enemies to make political hay out of it. But then, they’re working out of a long and storied tradition when they do.

Continue reading …
Beck claims ‘I don’t use [violent rhetoric] on or off the air’: Oh really?

Click here to view this media It sure seemed that everyone — and I mean EVERYONE — at Fox News was focused yesterday on beating down the horrifying idea that somehow Fox News’ incendiary rhetoric might have played a significant role in fomenting Saturday’s horrifying tragedy in Arizona. Of course, Glenn Beck — being one of the chief purveyors of said incendiary rhetoric — was out there leading the attack, devoting his entire hour to his newfound desire to prevent political violence. Indeed, he iussed a “letter to America” yesterday containing a pledge he wants everyone else to sign decrying any attempt to connect political violence to the rhetoric that precedes it: I hold those responsible for the violence, responsible for the violence. I denounce those who attempt to blame political opponents for the acts of madmen. In other words: I denounce people who would like to blame me for inspiring guys like Byron Williams, who openly credit me for inspiring them! On his show, he responded to the critics — especially those like David Brock at Media Matters, who demanded Rupert Murdoch take responsibility for this outcome: “You have the power to order them to stop using violent rhetoric, on and off of Fox’s air. If they fail to do so, it is incumbent upon you to fire them or be responsible for the climate they create and any consequences thereof.” Beck’s response: Beck: Well, I don’t use it on or off the air, so I guess I’m in compliance, Media Matters. Well, as Eric Boehlert has amply documented, this is simply a brazen lie: Beck has used violent rhetoric since nearly the first day he joined Fox News, and it has built and amplified since then. Indeed, he uses two particular kinds of violent rhetoric in abundance. The first is eliminationist rhetoric , particularly the kind aimed at progressives: Click here to view this media Here you can see Beck call progressives a “cancer” (multiple times), “the disease that’s killing us,” a “virus,” a “parasite,” “vampires” who will “suck the life out” of the Democratic Party, and claim that progressives intend the “destruction of the Constitution” and will strike it a “death blow”. Then there’s the fearmongering rhetoric he uses to demonize his opponents: Click here to view this media This kind of talk even earned him the sobriquet “Fearmonger in Chief” from the ADL . Hey Glenn! Here’s something you could add to your “pledge”: “I choose not to hold my political opponents up for dehumanization and demonization in a way that makes them the object of fear and loathing and a target for violent elimination.” You take that pledge, and we might listen.

Continue reading …

Is it just me, or is this amazingly tacky and tone-deaf? Whether they like it or not, the Tea Party certainly has turned up the heat with inflammatory rhetoric in Arizona, and it’s incredibly tasteless to use the Tucson shootings to say “Oh, poor us!”: The Tea Party Express, a California-based conservative political action committee, sent out a letter to supporters Monday requesting donations in reaction to Saturday’s shooting at a political event in Tucson, Arizona that claimed six lives. “It is quite clear that liberals are trying to exploit this shooting for their own political benefit, and they used deception and dishonesty to try and smear all of us and our beliefs,” the letter reads. “You know what the truth is? The truth is that the shooter, Jared Loughner is the one responsible for this atrocity. But liberals are trying to place the blame on society for embracing the tea party movement.” The letter makes the case that the Tea Party movement has nothing to do with the alleged gunman, 22-year-old Jared Loughner. The weekend shooting sparked accusations from liberal groups and pundits that he was motivated by the rhetoric from Tea Party members, although authorities say Loughner acted alone and was not part of a larger movement. “We have nothing to do with this awful, tragic event in Arizona,” the letter reads. The group, which helped fund the Republican primary campaigns of Joe Miller in Alaska, Christine O’Donnell in Delaware and Sharron Angle in Nevada, ended the letter with a request for donations. “We’re taking our country back through the ballot box and in the public square – through peaceful means,” the letter reads. “And we will prevail, because our ideas and ideals are stronger than the scare/smear/defame tactics of the leftists we face. We ask you to please stand with the Tea Party Express and show your support for our efforts. You can make a contribution online right now to the Tea Party Express – CLICK HERE TO CONTRIBUTE.”

Continue reading …
DU Fraudster Blames Conservatives for AZ Shooting, Has History of Posting Violent Fantasies

Of all the utter hypocrisy currently being displayed by many of those on the left over the tragic Arizona shooting, it would be hard to exceed that of the notorious fraudster of the Democratic Underground best known to the outside world as the perpetrator of the 2006 Karl Rove indictment hoax.. William Rivers Pitt of TruthOut , with enormous chip on his shoulder, has climbed up on his DU soap box and self-righteously pointed his finger of blame directly at conservatives. Ironically, although Pitt blames conservatives for supposed political violence that led to the tragedy in Arizona, it is that same man recently chronicled here in NewsBusters for being caught in an act of plagiarism who himself has a history of posting violent fantasies on the Web. Just weeks prior to posting his “THE WRATH OF FOOLS: An Open Letter To the Far Right,” Pitt posted these Hateful Days violent fantasies: read more

Continue reading …
Can’t We All Just Get Along?

Click here to view this media I would like to know what rock David Gergen has been living under for the last two years if he thinks this tragedy in Arizona is possibly just the beginning of a period of violence. Someone needs to tell him to go read our contributor Jon Perr’s post if he actually hasn’t been paying attention to how many people have already been killed over the last couple of years. We don’t need to know “what part of that culture” of violence led to the actions by the shooter in Arizona to know that it’s long past time to tell the right wing in this country to quit using violent rhetoric as a political tool to terrorize those they disagree with. I’d also like for him to explain who he’s talking about that supposedly “hurled” violent rhetoric at George W. Bush? And if he’s going to start hurling around words himself like “malgovernance” in respect to this astroturf tea party and their list of grievances, let’s hear some specifics and not sweeping generalizations. If anyone’s been guilty of “malgovernance” for the last ten years, it’s the Republicans who have absolutely no interest in governing whatsoever. If Gergen wants us all to get along, maybe we could start with pundits like him promising to quit coming on the television and lying to the viewers week after week, or telling us to have an “adult conversation” about how to dismantle Social Security? How about that for some good will David? GERGEN: Absolutely, we need to cool the rhetoric, we need to cool the accusations John because twenty four hours later, you know this man who is charged remains a complete mystery to us. We don’t know what he was motivated by. We do live in a culture of violence, not just the of politics of violence, but we don’t know what part of that culture contributed in some way to his derangement or possibly sparked him and until we do, accusing each other of being responsible for going off, you know there were a lot of charges coming on the Internet yesterday, right after the shooting, before we even knew basically anything about this man from the left saying that this obviously traces back to Sarah Palin, the tea party, Glenn Beck and all the rest and then the right counters the charge and says wait a minute, what about all the rhetoric that you all hurled at George W. Bush, the violent rhetoric that you had used against him. And what about your malgovernance that has sparked a citizens’ revolt in this country? And the charges and the counter-charges went back and forth and what have they left us with? We still don’t understand what happened and yet we’re… even as we’re deeply saddened tonight, we’re even more divided than we were before this happened, so if we’re going to pull back from the brink on this, we’re not going to have… Matt Bai had I thought a good piece in the New York Times today saying this may not be the single product of what’s going on in our country. It may be the beginning of a period of violence as we saw in the sixties when there were many assassinations as you and I recall so vividly. So this is a time for us to cool the rhetoric, for everyone to take a second look. I think the sheriff… I didn’t agree with everything that sheriff said yesterday, but I do think when he called for soul searching that was wise advice.

Continue reading …
‘Surely Some Revelation Is at Hand’

David Sirota calls this Steve Almond essay the best take he’s seen on the Giffords shooting and it’s hard to disagree. “What happens when a large and well-armed portion of our citizenry can no longer apologize?” Almond asks. “When humility becomes another form of humiliation? Their heroes exhort them: Never retreat. Reload.” We won’t ruin the essay by summarizing it. Just go read the damn thing. Steve Almond on The Rumpus: The more hysterical reactions will come from those who feel themselves implicated, who fear the great con of their professions exposed. They will react with absurd rituals of denial, as if, after all their violent agitation, they are the ones being fired upon, the victims of some vast and unending conspiracy. This operatic indignation is what I meant when I spoke, a few months ago, about the American descent into a shame culture. It has nothing to do with politics. It has to do with the capacity for moral self-reflection. What happens when a large and well-armed portion of our citizenry can no longer apologize? When humility becomes another form of humiliation? Their heroes exhort them: Never retreat. Reload. Read more Related Entries January 6, 2011 Washington Loves a Paradox January 5, 2011 The House of Professors

Continue reading …
NBC’s Mitchell Digs Back to 2005 to Locate Beck’s Hate Speech, But Can’t Find Any on MSNBC

There’s no evidence political vitriol of any kind drove Jared Loughner’s murderous rampage, ABC, CBS and NBC all acknowledged, but that didn’t deter them on Monday night from taking up the left-wing line holding conservatives culpable as NBC, incredibly, managed to castigate Sarah Palin and go back more than five years to find an incendiary quote from Glenn Beck – but couldn’t find anything over the line from its own Keith Olbermann or Ed Schultz. “It was, by all accounts, a lone and very disturbed man who shot that gun on Saturday,” ABC’s Diane Sawyer noted, “but nonetheless, as we all know, a lot of people began asking questions for different reasons. Is this a moment we can talk about what is civility and respect in America?” From Tucson, on CBS Katie Couric set up a story: “We may never know for sure what drove Jared Loughner to open fire here last Saturday, but some, on both ends of the political spectrum, say the vitriolic rhetoric we hear every day was a factor.” NBC anchor Brian Williams intoned: “Has political speech in this country become too charged, too toxic, and did it play a role in this tragedy?” Reporter Andrea Mitchell contended any link to the shooting is irrelevant: “Whether or not there is any connection between Saturday's shooting and angry rhetoric, it has certainly reignited the debate over political speech between right and left.” read more

Continue reading …