Via Patrick Gavin at Politico, we learn longtime Chicago Sun-Times film critic Roger Ebert is slamming Sarah Palin on Twitter again. But Ebert, famously known as the rotund partner of slimmer Gene Siskel, actually mocks Palin for “sticking up for little fatsos” when she slammed Michelle Obama's remarks on school nutrition. Palin showin' her vote-gettin' genius by stickin' up for the little fatsos. Patriots have a right to pig out. read more
Continue reading …Click here to view this media Mike Huckabee featured a canned interview with Sean Hannity on his show this weekend as part of a year-end retrospective in which they discussed the Tea Party. The amusing part came when they discussed Teh Awesome Power of the Tea Parties, which Hannity identified with the American people themselves. Both of them argued vehemently against the notion that the Tea Parties were mere corporate Astroturf. Completely absent from the discussion, naturally, was any mention whatsoever of the role played by Fox News. And while the role of astroturfers like FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity in fact was indispensable, none of them came close wielding the sheer energizing and organizing power that having a national “news” network openly propagandize for a movement can bring. As John and I explain in Over the Cliff: How Obama’s Election Drove the American Right Insane (pp. 121-127): It costs advertisers thousands of dollars to air a single thirty-second commercial on a few cable stations for a week, even in relatively cheap rural markets. To advertise nationally on Fox News – the ratings leader in cable news – costs hundreds of thousands of dollars, even millions if the ads air often enough and in prime-time programs. So what Fox News offered up the organizers of the tea parties — and the conservative movement opposing Obama’s presidency — was something you couldn’t measure in dollars and cents, because not only did Fox air a steady onslaught of “tea party” promotional ads, they embraced the outright promotion of the events in their news broadcasts and on their “opinion shows.” Their on-air personalities as well as their websites took an active role day after day and night after night promoting and urging the Fox audience to join in the tea party protests. Media Matters, a non-profit organization that tracks the conservative media documented 63 instances where Fox News anchors and guests openly promoted the tea parties and discussed them as a legitimate news event. Initially, there was a lull; there was only passing mention of the tea parties on Fox again for the two weeks after Van Susteren’s show. Then, on March 16, three Fox anchors – Glenn Beck, Bret Baier, and Bill O’Reilly – featured segments discussing the tea parties, again in glowing terms. O’Reilly told his audience that “big government spending protests are taking place all over the country. The latest in Cincinnati, where about 5,000 folks showed up, showed their displeasure with the Obama’s administration money strategy. These gatherings are being dubbed tea parties.” But it was Beck in particular who most avidly embraced the tea parties, making them his own pet cause. Some of this had to do with the ease with which the tea-party themes – an embrace of small-government philosophy, with an anti-tax and pro-gun fervor thrown in for emphasis – melded with the populist themes Beck was already exploring in depth on his show. On March 13, he had hosted a special one-hour program themed “You Are Not Alone” that was most notable for some of Beck’s most maudlin crying jags, including his oft-lampooned sob, “I just love my country – and I fear for it!” The show – like Beck’s later Tea Party promotions – featured broadcasts from specially gathered audiences in locations around the country who wanted to join Beck’s cause of “standing up to big government”. Its purpose was to launch Beck’s “912 Project” – named dually after Beck’s wish to bring the country back to “where we all were on the day after 9/11,” as well as the “9 Principles and 12 Values” Beck espoused, drawn from a 1972 book titled The 5,000-Year Leap, by far-right conspiracy theorist W. Cleon Skousen, which Beck promoted on his show and website. After March 16 – when Beck noted the tea parties mostly in passing – the tea-party themes began to meld seamlessly with Beck’s “912 Project”. On March 18, Beck remarked: “People are starting to get angry. These tea parties are starting to really take off.” On March 20, Beck began making the connection explicit. Once again denouncing the Missouri law-enforcement report on right-wing extremism, he connected the “extremists” described therein to the tea partiers: But if you’re concerned about the government, you’re considered dangerous now in America. More than 160,000 Americans have already signed up to be part of our 9/12 Project, “912project.com,” since we launched it a week ago — 163,000 people have signed up. Who are these people? They’re people just like you that are just concerned about our government and they’re concerned about our country. You know, are they militia members? Yes. Yes, sure they are, along with all the other people that are now on the tea parties nationwide. There is one here in Orlando, Florida. Tomorrow is supposed to be huge. He mentioned the Orlando tea party warmly on March 23 as well, and then on March 24, Beck hosted two of the event’s tea-party organizers, Lisa Feroli and Shelley Ferguson, saying: “I have been telling you for weeks that you’ve got to stand up. And a lot of people around the country are doing these tea party things. But please, make them about principles, not about the parties. Make them about the principles.” Beck continued promoting the show each night through the rest of March. On his April 2 program, he announced that he would be hosting a special tea-party broadcast on April 15: “Tax Day, two weeks away. All right. More Americans are fed up with the nonsense in Washington both left and right. They are holding tea parties on April 15th. In this show, I can now announce that we’re going to have our program live from the only place in America where I think it really, really makes sense – the Alamo. Plant your flag, America. It’s in San Antonio, Texas. We will see you there on Tax Day!” Beck was only leading the way for the other Fox anchors. A few days later, on April 6, he announced that not only would he be hosting his San Antonio “Tax Day tea party” on the 15th, but so would Neil Cavuto, Sean Hannity, and Greta Van Susteren, who planned to do similar broadcasts from respective tea parties in Sacramento, Atlanta, and Washington the same day. Fox was planning to flood the airwaves with tea-party protests. Beck was prolific in promoting the tea parties. Between March 16 and April 14, Beck urgently implored his audiences to take part in the Tax Day protests a total of 17 times (out of a total of 21 shows). One of the more piquant episodes came when he hired a motivational speaker and sometime actor named Bob Basso to dress up in colonial costume and pretend to be Thomas Paine, embarking on a tea-party-loving rant: The time for talk is over. Enough is enough. Your democracy has deteriorated to government of the government, by the government, and for the government. On April 15, that despicable arrogance will be soundly challenged for the whole world to see. Our friends will applaud it. Our enemies will fear it. In an unprecedented moment of citizen response not seen since December 7, 1941, millions of your fellow Americans will bring their anger and determination into the streets. … Your complacency will only aid and abet our national suicide. Remember, they wouldn’t dare bomb Pearl Harbor, but they did. They wouldn’t dare drive two planes into the World Trade Center, but they did. They wouldn’t dare pilot a plane through the most sophisticated air defenses in the world and crash into the Pentagon, but they did. They wouldn’t dare pass the largest spending bill in history, in open defiance of the will of the people, but they did! Beck’s fellow Fox hosts did their best to keep pace. Sean Hannity featured segments on the tea parties a total of 13 times between March 12 and April 14, while Neil Cavuto’s afternoon business-oriented show featured a total of ten segments devoted to the protests during that same time. Nor were the “opinion shows” the only ones to do so: Another 15 or so tea-party promotional segments ran those weeks on such “news” shows as Fox and Friends, America’s Newsroom , and Special Report with Bret Baier. Fairly typical was a March 23 broadcast in which America’s Newsroom anchor Bill Hemmer directed people to a list of tea party events on FoxNews.com and promised to “add to [the list] when we get more information from the New American Tea Party.” Likewise, on the March 25 edition of Special Report, host Bret Baier said that the tea parties are “protests of wasteful government spending in general and of President Obama’s stimulus package and his budget in particular.” Another America’s Newsroom broadcast on April 6, Fox contributor Andrea Tantaros described the protests: “People are fighting against Barack Obama’s radical shift to turn us into Europe.” Fox News also aired on-screen text stating that the “Tea Parties Are Anti-Stimulus Demonstrations.” Despite the obvious anti-Obama bent of all these protests, Beck and other Fox hosts worked hard to present the tea parties as “non-partisan,” bringing on guests who were either disappointed Democrats or conservatives still angry with the Republican Party too. Yet the nonstop drumbeat around the protests made clear that they were primarily in response to Obama administration policies. The March 24 segment of America’s Newsroom promoting the tea parties was a classic instance of this. In it, Hemmer interviewed a man named Lloyd Marcus who was president of the National Association for the Advancement of Conservative People of Color, who told Hemmer that he previously “was on a 40-city ‘Stop Obama’ tour”. Marcus’ wrote a song, posted on FoxNews.com, which made clear that this was about Obama: Mr. President! Your stimulus is sure to bust. It’s just a socialistic scheme, The only thing it will do Is kill the American Dream. You wanna take from achievers Somehow you think that’s fair. And redistribute to those folks Who won’t get out of their easy chair. We’re havin’ a tea party across this land. If you love this country, Come on and join our band. We’re standin’ up for freedom and liberty, ‘Cause patriots have shown us freedom ain’t free. So when they call you a racist cause you disagree, It’s just another of their dirty tricks to silence you and me. Indeed, Fox News’ website was rich with tea-party promotion, as were its affiliated sites like the new FoxNation site, which tried to act as a sort of “information central” for the tea parties, with numerous links discussing and promoting the protests. One link, titled “Find a Tea Party!”, directed readers to a Google Maps page for “2009 Tea Parties.” Another link to you to a YouTube video headlined, “The Trillion Dollar Tea Party Video!”, which featured Tampa Bay Area Tea Party organizers explaining why viewers should “join your local tea party.” For those who couldn’t make it, Fox News announced that viewers could also attend “a virtual tax day tea party” at FoxNation instead. Sean Hannity’s website at Fox featured a graphic with links to a message board discussion: “This thread is for the sole purpose of getting the word out about organized tea party events around the country. If you know of a planned event, please post the information here.” Hannity’s producers wrote a blog post on his site proclaiming, “Get your Tea Party Tees at CAFE PRESS and wear them on April 15!” There were also “some helpful links” to AtlantaTeaParty.net and TaxDayTeaParty.com. Then there were the promotional ads. In the 10 days leading up to the April 15 protests, Media Matters reported that Fox News aired 107 ads promoting them. At times, Fox tried to deny that this deluge of glowingly sympathetic “reports” and barrage of commercials on the tea parties actually constituted promotion of the event. On the morning of the protests April 15, Fox and Friends broadcast, host Steve Doocy told his audience that “Fox is not sponsoring any of them, but we have been covering them.” This was a peculiar (not to mention disingenuous) remark, considering that Fox had repeatedly run onscreen graphics describing the events at which its anchors were to appear as “FNC Tax Day Tea Parties.” Of course, this history will never be aired on Fox — especially now that Rupert Murdoch denies promoting the Tea Parties.
Continue reading …Click here to view this media Here’s what we get to look forward to with this next wave of supposed tea partiers, or in other words the extreme right of the Republican base coming into power this year. As Think Progress noted, newly elected Mike Lee defended his hiring of a corporate lobbyist as his Chief of Staff. New Sen. Mike Lee Defends Hiring Energy Lobbyist As Chief Of Staff : Incoming Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) ran as a tea party candidate, who claimed to be determined to change how business was done in Washington. Yet on Fox News Sunday this morning, Lee was asked by Chris Wallace why if his goal was to “drain the swamp” would he pick to have an energy lobbyist as his Chief of Staff? Lee responded that he wasn’t “scared” of lobbyists and that his lobbyist was “brilliant”. Lee joins many other incoming Republicans, such as incoming Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Rand Paul (R-KY) who, despite rhetoric of cleaning up Washington, have all hired lobbyists. As the Washington Post reported last month, “ Many incoming GOP lawmakers have hired registered lobbyists as senior aides . Several of the candidates won with strong support from the anti-establishment tea party movement… these cases illustrate the endurance of Washington’s traditional power structure, even in the wake of an election dominated by insurgent rhetoric.” Allen West also continued to defend his former choice of wingnut radio hate talker Joyce Kaufman as his first pick for chief of staff who he later ditched that Dave wrote about here. Threats inspired by Allen West’s fave radio ranter force Florida school lockdown : It was already pretty weird when newly elected Tea Partier Allen West engaged in a brief and bizarre mini-drama when he announced he was hiring hate-radio talker Joyce Kaufman to be his new chief of staff . Today he let her walk away after a furor erupted over the hire. Wallace did actually ask Lee about his lobbyist ties but made up for it completely giving him a pass with no follow up and letting West white wash his crazy ass staffer’s history as well. Transcript via Nexis Lexis below the fold. WALLACE: You both, even in the short time since the election have run in to some criticism for your choices of chiefs of staff. And I want to ask you about that starting with you, Senator Lee. You have chosen an energy lobbyist as your chief of staff. Is that the right person to drain the swamp here in Washington? Incidentally, that’s not the right person. But are you — is that the right person to drain the swamp in Washington, an energy lobbyist? LEE: I’ve hired the brightest political mind, political consultant and lobbyist in Utah, Manning Spencer Stokes. He is a brilliant man. He understands Utah politics and he understands Washington politics. And I need a man like that to help me in Washington. WALLACE: And you’re not scared off by the fact he’s a lobbyist? LEE: No. He’s a lobbyist and he’s a political consultant. And I’m not scared off by that. He and I share a common vision, which is more constitutionally limited federal government. He’s willing to fight with me to achieve that objective. And that’s exactly the kind of person we need in Washington, D.C. right now is someone who has that goal in mind. WALLACE: Congressman West, you chose and we can now put her picture up on the screen, a radio talk show host, Joyce Kauffman, as your chief of staff, but when it came out that she called Nancy Pelosi “garbage” and told a Tea Party rally “if balance don’t work, bullets will” she stepped down. What did you learn from that whole experience? WEST: Well, I think first of all what you saw was an attack from the left against Joyce Kauffman and there are some other issues with that, but they didn’t play the full clip of her speech when she gave that, I think it was the 4th of July. So once again, it was the editing sound bite. And I didn’t learn anything from it, because you just adjust and you continue on. So Joyce Kauffman was a very instrumental and helpful person in our campaign and she was the one who interviewed my current chief of staff because she knows it’s a good match.
Continue reading …Dear, dear Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the incoming subpoena-wielding chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, was on Faux News this weekend, attacking ACORN and Attorney General Eric Holder, talking about how “corrupt” the Obama administration is . I thought I’d take the opportunity to remind people just who’s lecturing us on morality. Via Wikipeda: A retired Army sergeant claimed that Issa stole a Dodge sedan from an Army post near Pittsburgh in 1971. The sergeant said he recovered the car after confronting and threatening him. Issa denied the allegation and no charges were filed. In 1972, Issa and his brother allegedly stole a red Maserati sports ca r from a car dealership in Cleveland. He and his brother were indicted for car theft, but the case was dropped. That same year, Issa was convicted in Michigan for possession of an unregistered gun. He received three months probation and paid a $204 fine. On December 28, 1979, Issa and his brother allegedly faked the theft of Issa’s Mercedes Benz sedan . Issa and his brother were charged for grand theft auto, but the case was dropped by prosecutors for lack of evidence. Later, Issa and his brother were charged for misdemeanors, but that case was not pursued by prosecutors. Issa accused his brother of stealing the car, and said that the experience with his brother was the reason he went into the car alarm business. A day after a court order was issued, giving Issa control of automotive alarm company A.C. Custom over an unpaid $60,000 debt, Issa allegedly carried a cardboard box containing a handgun into the office of A.C. Custom executive, Jack Frantz, and told Frantz he was fired. In a 1998 newspaper article, Frantz said Issa had invited him to hold the gun and claimed extensive knowledge of guns and explosives from his Army service. In response, Issa said, “Shots were never fired. … I don’t recall having a gun. I really don’t. I don’t think I ever pulled a gun on anyone in my life.” Of course not. Bill Maher will continue to invite him onto his show, and the ladies and gentlemen of our corporate media will assume that none of this even happened. It’s so much easier that way!
Continue reading …Filling in for Bob Schieffer on Sunday's Face the Nation, CBS's Harry Smith grilled Minnesota Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann on Republican efforts to repeal ObamaCare: “One of the things the Tea Party has talked about is dismantling health care. And we're wondering if, in the end of the day, that ends up being a fool's errand…it will face a certain veto. Is it worth the effort to try to do?” Bachmann defended the move and pointed out popular support for repeal: “ObamaCare will bankrupt the country. And so you've seen that the more the people learn about ObamaCare the less they like it. It's very costly, it's unwieldy. So we will put forth a clean repeal bill of ObamaCare. And you'll continue to see us make that fight because that's what the American people want us to do.”
Continue reading …Click here to view this media Memo to NBC: If your top DC pundit guy can’t be bothered with facts , perhaps you should replace him with someone who can. Rachel Maddow would never have let Lindsey Graham get away with the fiction in this clip from Meet the Press yesterday without correcting him. But Gregory just lets Graham go on with the nonsense and never once corrects him. Not even a small offer to clear the record: DAVID GREGORY: Okay. Lemme move on to health care, which you also raised. Is there a chance for actual health care repeal? Or do you see room for compromise? All this talk about the individual mandate, making individuals buy insurance. SENATOR GRAHAM: Right. DAVID GREGORY: You had talked about compromise on that– SENATOR GRAHAM: Right. DAVID GREGORY: –early on. Do you disagree that it’s unconstitutional? A lot of Republicans believe that. SENATOR GRAHAM: I think the problem with the individual mandate is that everybody’s gonna be in a government-run plan. I was with several Republicans and seven Democrats that required everybody to be covered. You did away with employer deductions, and you allowed individuals to buy health care in the private sector across state lines. And it was revenue-neutral. I think you’re gonna see the fight on Obama-Care across the board in the House and the Senate to try to de-fund the Obama-Care bill and to start over. One thing I’m gonna do with Senator Barrasso is allow states to opt out of the individual mandate, the employer mandate, in expansion of Medicaid. The expansion of Medicare under the Obama Health Care bill is gonna bankrupt South Carolina. So I think this fight’s gonna continue to 2012, and it’s gonna move from Washington to the states. It will be one big fight over the role of health care and should Obama Health Care be– be in existence in 2012 the way it is today. Lie #1: Everybody’s gonna be in a government-run plan There’s only one scenario where this would be true. If Republicans succeed in bankrupting the middle class and throwing us all under the poverty line making them Medicaid-eligible, while rich people are all over age 65 and eligible for Medicare. In any other reality-based scenario, it’s just a lie. We all know this. Listen up, David and Lindsey: Private insurers are NOT in any way, shape or form government-run. In fact, some of us argue they run over government routinely. Lie #2: Buying health insurance across state lines is revenue-neutral and therefore good. Sure, if you think that Premiere credit card you got with 79.9% interest is a deal. Then yeah, it’s just grand. Otherwise it’s a fancy way of saying they’d push insurers to the state with the least regulation and everyone could buy their health insurance there. Of course, it wouldn’t insure anything, and it certainly wouldn’t solve the problem of access to health care, or rationing like Arizona’s experiencing now (under THEIR government-run health plan, by the way). It’s also not revenue-neutral. It sounds pretty to say that, but when more people declare bankruptcy because of medical bills it simply vaults the economy into another recession and possibly depression, which means the government then has to spend in order to stabilize it and re-start it. Lie #3: The expansion of Medicare (Medicaid) will bankrupt the states Again, just simply not true, because at the same time Medicaid is expanded, federal Medicaid subsidies increase to states so that the federal government is covering 90% of Medicaid costs. Of course, I’m assuming Senator Graham mistakenly referred to Medicare instead of Medicaid, since the states do not contribute to Medicare.But it IS a Federal government-run health care plan that everyone loves, at least. We can argue about whether or not changes should be made to the Affordable Care Act that make it more efficient, but let’s at least get the facts right before undertaking the argument. I noticed today that all the new Republicans are chafing at the bit to have their “ObamaCare” repeal vote, and they’re all very, very serious about that “entitlement reform” as proposed by the Catfood …um…Deficit Commission, but only to the extent that cuts are involved. If they were really serious, they’d take the whole package of reforms proposed which included a public option. And as much as I respect Rep. Dennis Kucinich, I think he’s dreaming if he thinks repealing the Affordable Care Act would somehow advance the cause for single payer health care , because the truth is as plain as the sh*t-eating grin on Graham’s face: They don’t care if we die. They’re totally ok with large groups of us dying and “decreasing the surplus population.” Death, bankruptcy, begging in the streets. None of it bothers these douchebags one bit. All hail the power of commerce and the almighty market, while David Gregory stands by the lies, smiling all the while.
Continue reading …Click here to view this media During the panel discussion on This Week, George Will calls Republican opposition to raising the debt limit “suicidal” and Amy Walter gives us some insight into just what game Lindsey Graham is probably playing. TAPPER: Speaking of — of the tension between Speaker Boehner and the Tea Party Republicans coming in, I want to read you this quote from an interview Boehner gave to the New Yorker magazine. He was referring to the vote to raise the ceiling on the debt limit, which is currently $14.3 trillion. Boehner says, “This is going to be probably the first really big adult moment for the new Republican majority. You can underline adult. And for people who’ve never been in politics, it’s going to be one of those growing moments. It’s going to be difficult. I’m certainly well aware of that. But we’ll have to find a way to help educate members and help people understand the serious problem that would exist if we didn’t do it.” Speaker Boehner suggesting that if you do not vote to raise the debt ceiling, you are not being an adult. George? WILL: I know of no other developed nation that has a debt ceiling. This is a purely recurring symbolic vote to make people feel good by voting against it. The trouble is, it’s suicidal if you should happen to miscalculate and have all kinds of people voting against it as a symbolic vote and turn out to be a majority, because if the United States defaults on its sovereign debt, the markets — well, it will be stimulating. TAPPER: Well, you heard — and you heard Austan Goolsbee earlier today talk about — the word “insanity” was what he used to describe it. GARRETT: Let me give a sense of the anxiety that John Boehner, the Republican leadership in the House feels about this. At orientation conferences with incoming house Republicans, both at Harvard and at Heritage Foundation, this topic came up again and again and again. No matter what the policy conversation was, they wanted to know, why do we have to increase the debt ceiling? What are the economic consequences? There was deep-seated, A, curiosity and skepticism about the need to do this. So internally House Republicans are going to have to sit down and — and conduct what will amount to speed education courses on this matter. Now, two other significant things. This will be a clean vote, a visible vote that will be separate from everything else. You can’t tuck it into another legislative maneuver, as Democrats did under the Gephardt rule. Secondly, what you will also see is the House Republican Appropriations Committee will move spending cuts through alongside these, so those who have to vote for the debt ceiling will say, “I’ve raided the debt ceiling, but I’ve also voted to cut spending.” You’ll see that happen much more rapidly because of the pressure applied politically on this debt ceiling vote. TAPPER: Amy, last word on the debt ceiling? WALTER: No, I think that Major is right. This is going to be a very interesting test, sort of a game of chicken. And I think there are a lot of Republicans out there right now hoping that they can take a symbolic vote because somebody else is going to be the adult and do that. And you may see it based on when you’re up for re-election — the House obviously every two years, but in the Senate, you know, who is most worried about a Tea Party challenge, maybe the folks that can take a pass on that.
Continue reading …Click here to view this media [h/t David ] On This Week with Christiane Amanpour, Jake Tapper interviews Obama economic advisor Austan Goolsbee about the upcoming vote on the national debt ceiling, and wonders what will happen if the new Republican extremists successfully keep it from being approved. TAPPER: There’s a big crisis point coming up potentially, and that is the nation is only about $400 billion away right now from reaching the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling, meaning this spring Congress will have to vote on whether or not to lift that ceiling. A number of Republicans, especially Tea Party candidates, have said that they will not vote to do so. What economic effects would people see immediately if Congress does not raise the debt ceiling? And does the administration have a contingency plan if that happens? GOOLSBEE: Well, look, it pains me that we would even be talking about this. This is not — this is not a game. You know, the debt ceiling is not — is not something to toy with. That’s the — the — if we hit the debt ceiling, that’s the — essentially defaulting on our obligations, which is totally unprecedented in American history. The impact on the economy would be catastrophic. I mean, that would be a worse financial economic crisis than anything we saw in 2008. As I say, that’s not a game. I don’t see why anybody’s talking about playing chicken with the — with the debt ceiling. If — if we get to the point where you’ve damaged the full faith and credit of the United States, that would — that would be the first default in history caused purely by insanity. I mean, that would — there would be no reason for us to default, other than that would be some kind of game. As our Jon Perr points out, Republican support for raising the debt ceiling ended with Obama’s election! I mean, I hope we don’t — we shouldn’t even be discussing that. People will get the wrong idea. The United States is — is — is not in danger of default. We — we do not have — we do not have problems such as that. This would be lumping us in with a series of countries through history that I don’t think we would want to be lumped in with. TAPPER: Well, Republicans are talking about — some Republicans are talking about making an issue out of the debt ceiling to force the administration and the Congress to cut spending. President Obama himself has talked about the need to tackle the debt and the deficit and the need to cut spending. Where specifically does President Obama want to cut spending? Where is there fat to cut from the budget? GOOLSBEE: Well, you know, the — as you know, the president’s going to release his budget. He’s — we’re going to have — we are going to have to make in the medium run a series of tough choices, and the president’s not afraid to do that, and I think you will see in his budget that he’s willing to…[do that]. Of course, Jake Tapper doesn’t consider the idea that deficit fears are overblown even worth discussing. And Goolsbee assures him that Obama is ready to make “tough choices.” Get ready for the run against Social Security!
Continue reading …Click here to view this media The panelists on The Chris Matthews Show were all in agreement this week. President Obama needs to throw Congressional Democrats under the bus, punch down the hippies in his base a few times, preach some austerity during his State of the Union address and work with those nice reasonable Republicans. If he does that, all will be well with his chances for re-election. MATTHEWS: John I guess that’s the question. What’s his biggest challenge though? Holding the center as he began to do at the end of last year with this deal or keep the left which is a bit unhappy with him lately? HEILEMANN: Uh, well that’s the easiest question you’ve asked me in a long time Chris. I mean he needs the… MATTHEWS: Thank you. HEILEMANN: He already, forget the… Congressional Democrats are already mad at him for various reasons. Who cares about those people. He has a huge support among the actual members of his base, African American voters, Latino voters, self described liberals, actual people in the country, they like the president and he’s got a very high approval rating with them. The base is not his problem. The problem is winning back all those independent voters who shifted to the Republicans in the 2010 election and he can do that. The unemployment rate is obviously important over the course of the first year… this next year. But he’s got a bunch of big agenda items that are perfectly tailored to getting back independents. He wants to do deficit reduction, he wants to do education, he wants to do trade, he wants to do tax reform. Those are all things he can get Republicans to work with him on and in the process do himself a world of good politically… MATTHEWS: So… HEILEMANN: …and get himself well set for the next election. MATTHEWS: …you’re saying one of the advantages of cutting deals with Republicans is they can’t call you a Socialist any more? BORGER: Right, they can’t call you a Socialist any more although there will be some Republicans in the new Congress who are not going to like the deals that the other Republicans cut so he’s still going to have those problems but they will make him look good by the way. And he will be able to triangulate and look like the grown up which is by and large what people want. (crosstalk) MATTHEWS: Kelly? O”DONNELL: I definitely think he’s got to go for the center and that industrial heartland where I grew up and spent a lot of time back in the 2010 mid-term campaign season… MATTHEWS: Uh. Where is that exactly? The industrial heartland? O’DONNELL: For me it’s Cleveland Ohio. MATTHEWS: It’s somewhere between Scranton and Oshkosh. O’DONNELL: Exactly. And when I met a lot of voters there there was a sense of disappointment and frustration and he can really go after them, more than just the campaign visits which he’s done a lot of but things like working with Republicans in attacking these issues like debt and trying to deal with jobs. That’s the kind of thing that he can at least be on the high ground. MATTHEWS: Andrew you’re quiet. (crosstalk) Left or center? Where’s the action for him? (crosstalk) His third year is the critical year. We’ve seen it with Reagan. We’ve seen it with Carter. Carter didn’t have a good third year. He couldn’t put it together. What adjustments does he have to make to hold the center? SULLIVAN: I think he has to remain the president that he has always been. Unfortunately the left kept projecting stuff onto him that he wasn’t and the right kept projecting stuff onto him that he wasn’t. The great thing about having the Republican House is that you see Obama’s greatest strength which has always been from Harvard Law review on, talking reasonably with conservatives. He’s actually temperamentally… he likes that. MATTHEWS: Yeah. SULLIVAN: He’s actually very good at that. He exudes reasoning. The tax deal he cut at the end of last year was the new Obama and it was the old Obama, but it was the new one because finally he was liberated it seemed to me in being the president he wants to be. Remember he didn’t really want the stimulus package. He didn’t expect when he ran for president he’d have the worst depression in the world. He had to spend that money. The health care reform, in that context has been skewed as a big spending liberal. But he’s not a big spending liberal, never was and he wants tax reform and debt for the reasons that he always said. Now the key thing is that he owns it. The State of the Union will be his moment. BORGER: Oh… huge. SULLIVAN: If he puts debt first and tax reform second, simplify your taxes and reduce the debt and has Republican support, he diffuses all the demonization of him from the right and he knocks out the left. Just more of the notion that the Very. Serious. (and Reasonable) People. are all in the center. Funny how all those “centrist” concerns sound awfully conservative. And after their little hippie-punching exercise, they finally managed to dance around the real reason Obama might end up looking good after a couple of years of the Republicans running the House: he’ll look reasoned and sane in comparison. But they don’t just come out and admit the fact that the Republican Party is completely bats**t crazy and has no one left in their party that cares one iota about governing any more. They also didn’t bring up the fact that after a couple of years of endless witch hunts by Darrell Issa and some of the other committees in the House, the public may have had a belly-full of Republicans as well.
Continue reading …John Lindsay might have been the worst mayor in NYC history. Epitome of the limousine liberal, Lindsay nearly bankrupted the Big Apple. But that hasn't stopped Jon Meacham from lauding Lindsay as
Continue reading …