Conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh on Friday exposed Rachel Maddow for lying about him on her MSNBC program. On Thursday, during a lengthy segment about Barack Obama's birth certificate, Maddow said (video follows with transcript and commentary): RACHEL MADDOW, HOST: I will say — I thought at the time when President Obama released the second form of the birth certificate that that would not put this thing to rest, that it wasn’t fact-based, and giving more facts wouldn’t help, but it did put it to rest. I was wrong. It put it to rest. On the president’s 50th birthday today, it is now just the dead-enders and the profiteers at this point who is plugging this thing. There is nobody who has any pull at all in conservative politics or Republican politics at all who has — seriously? Are you sure? Are you sure this is not from last — this is this week? This is from yesterday? OK. Play it. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Tomorrow is Obama’s birthday. Not that we’ve seen any proof of that. We haven’t seen any proof of that. They tell us August 4th is the birthday. But we haven’t seen any proof of it. Sorry. (END VIDEO CLIP) MADDOW: Sorry. Apparently, it’s not over. Problem is, the clip Maddow played was from last year. Here's what Limbaugh had to say about that Friday: LIMBAUGH: It's fun time now. Now, I've told Cookie, just so you people know this, that we have a moratorium on any audio sound bites from hosts at MSNBC, for a host of reasons, but every moratorium is lifted occasionally now and then, even if temporarily. Today is one of those days. Last night on the Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC, she talked about me and President Obama's birthday, and she played an audio clip of me. MADDOW: On the president's 50th birthday today, it is now just the dead-enders and the profiteers at this point still flogging this thing. There is nobody who has any pull at all in conservative politics or in Republican politics at all who has (pause) — seriously? Are you sure? Are you sure this is not from last — this is this week? This is from yesterday? Okay. Play it. (BEGIN AUDIO CLIP) LIMBAUGH: Tomorrow is Obama's birthday. Not that we’ve seen any proof of that. We haven’t seen any proof of that. They tell us August 4th is the birthday. But we haven't seen any proof of it. Sorry. MADDOW: Sorry. Apparently, it’s not over. Rush Limbaugh is still a birther? I mean, isn’t birtherism over now? (END AUDIO CLIP) LIMBAUGH: So she played a clip of me from a year ago that they said I said yesterday. And I think they've gotta be called on that. This is no different than these people making up all those phony quotes during the NFL, St. Louis Rams business. Plus taking it out of context. All of that has always been in the context of a joke. Here's the transcript from August 3, 2010: LIMBAUGH: Tomorrow is Obama's birthday. Not that we've seen any proof of that, but tomorrow is Obama's birthday, and they're trying to rally Obama's base by sending out fundraising letters — (interruption) what? What, Snerdley, what? We haven't seen any proof of that. They tell us August 4th is the birthday. We haven't seen any proof of it. Sorry. It is what it is. This is some really pathetic nonsense from Maddow and the folks at MSNBC. Is this really what passes for journalism at this disgrace of a so-called “news” network? In any profession, such negligence would be met with the harshest consequences. Why are media members today allowed to lie with total impunity? (H/T Right Scoop )
Continue reading …
MSNBC anchor Thomas Roberts harangued Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage on today's “MSNBC Live”. “Why do you feel [gays] are less than you and don't deserve equal rights?” asked Roberts. [VIDEO BELOW THE FOLD] The openly gay daytime news anchor also touted a recent article in US News & World Report showing lower divorce rates in states recognizing same-sex marriages. The raw data Roberts provided do not appear to be in question; divorce rates in states recognizing same-sex marriage average at 41.2%, as opposed to 50.3% in states that do not. He also appears to be correct that the divorce rate in Massachusetts dropped 20.7% from 2003 to 2008. But as any social scientist would tell you, correlation doesn't imply causation. What Roberts conveniently ignored are the intervening variables that correlate both with same-sex marriage and with divorce rates. US News notes that states that have legalized same-sex marriage also tend to have more highly-educated populations. These populations tend to marry later, and late marriage also appears to be correlated with support for same-sex marriage: Of the 10 states with the highest median age for males at their first marriage, eight recognize or perform gay marriages, with median ages between 29.3 (Maryland) and 31.5 (D.C.). Iowa is the outlier here, with a median age of 26.9. Altogether, these statistics point to a relationship between older marriage age, low divorce rates, and liberal views on same-sex marriage. The important variable is thus not whether a state recognizes same-sex marriage, but other factors that act on both same-sex marriage and divorce. MSNBC viewers would have to either read the article Roberts referenced, or have some basic knowledge of research methods not to get taken in by what is either sloppy or biased reporting. A transcript follows MSNBC “MSNBC Live” 08/05/2011 11:46 a.m. EDT THOMAS ROBERTS: In an article in US News & World Report suggesting the correlation between legalizing same-sex marriage and lower divorce rates for states that recognize or perform gay marriages, the rate is 41.2%. But for states that don't, it's 50.3%. In Massachusetts where same-sex marriage was legalized in '04 the, the divorce rate went down almost 21%. What does that tell you? JOHN LEWIS: It tells us that this movement for marriage equality is truly about our common humanity, and the common instinct to love another human being and to want to have kin and family and to have your family recognized fully with a legal marriage, and I can say from a personal perspective as an example, my husband, Stewart and I, have been together for 24 years. And for many of those years, we didn't have any rights and recognition for our relationship. But in 2008, we were able to legally marry in California, surrounded by friends, family, all of our living parents who were then in their 80s, and it was just a tremendous time for us. And I think as Americans are seeing their friends and neighbors and ordinary folks just like Stewart and me getting married and having happy relationships, it's showing that it's good- it's good
Continue reading …
CNBC's Rick Santelli had to explain the economy to MSNBC contributor Ezra Klein on today's Morning Joe (h/t Hot Air ). Klein argued that another recession would “move money around in ways that are unfair.”
Continue reading …
Chris Matthews on Thursday claimed Franklin Delano Roosevelt saved capitalism in the 1930s. This deliciously came during a “Hardball” segment wherein he mocked the intelligence of Tea Party members saying they “need to read history, and especially Michele Bachmann” (video follows with transcript and commentary): CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: By the way, who saved capitalism in the 1930s? CLARENCE PAGE, CHICAGO TRIBUNE: Oh yeah, socialism comes in… MATTHEWS: FDR. PAGE: …and saves capitalism. MATTHEWS: FDR. FDR. Hoover wasn’t doing a very good saving capitalism. It was Roosevelt that I thought did it, and the war. PAGE: Oh yeah. MATTHEWS: But Roosevelt really kept it on its feet till the war came. PAGE: It doesn’t hurt to put more money into the economy when you got a recession. It’s very simple. MATTHEWS: Yeah, I think the Tea Party people need to read history, and especially Michele Bachmann take a look into… PAGE: I’ll read it to them. MATTHEWS: …the founding of our country first. The idiocy and/or dishonesty on display here was staggering, for FDR's New Deal marked the beginning of socialism in this country and the deterioration of capitalism. Highlights were the Wagner Act which promoted labor unions, the Works Progress Administration which used tax dollars to hire employees for public works programs, and of course Social Security. Roosevelt was also responsible for numerous pieces of legislation that regulated industry which irrespective of their success or failure were by no means pro-capitalism. As for FDR keeping capitalism “on its feet till the war came,” despite all the billions of dollars he threw at the problem, unemployment was still at 17.2 percent at the end of 1939. That's hardly capitalism “on its feet.” Yet this guy has the nerve to criticize Michele Bachmann and the Tea Party for their understanding of history.
Continue reading …
ScumBagSteve_ says: http://on.msnbc.com/obMEAc – #tfb – Swedish man caught trying to split atoms in his home
Continue reading …
cabletvkiller says: RT @ hulu : @ Hulu ‘s first long-form, original show “A Day in the Life” w/ @ MorganSpurlock ! Blog http://t.co/vcVPqFy , Press release http://t.co/hZLc6Q8
Continue reading …
If you noticed something different on Wednesday's “Morning Joe,” it was shamed MSNBC contributor Mark Halperin back from roughly a one month suspension after he called the President a D-word back on June 30. Not everyone was happy about this judging from Alex Pareene's piece at the Obama-loving Salon: Oh, happy day! Mark Halperin was back on “Morning Joe” this morning, and MSNBC's master political analyst didn't lose a step during his month-long forced vacation. During a discussion of the economy and the national debt, Halperin masterfully said a bunch of inane, contradictory nonsense. Maybe it's unfair to say Mark Halperin is wrong about everything, because it's impossible to be wrong when you're saying absolutely nothing. Welcome back to TV, Mark! I kind of prefer you calling people “dicks” to you actually “analyzing politics.” Nice manners, Alex. As for MSNBC, we now know the penalty at this so-called news outlet for calling this President a D-word is a month's suspension. By contrast, as we've seen the past few weeks, calling Tea Party members addicts , secessionists who want to politically kill Obama , or thugs and muggers who want to assault Obama won't get you in any trouble with this division of NBC. Interesting double standard, dontcha think?
Continue reading …
The more I watch Bill Maher, the more I think he's either a complete idiot or just says moronic, inflammatory things to get attention. His most recent absurdity, said on MSNBC's “The Ed Show” Wednesday, was that Mormonism is closer to Islam than it is to Christianity (video follows with transcript and commentary): MICHAEL ERIC DYSON, SUBSTITUTE HOST: Mitt Romney is the frontrunner. Do you think Republicans, the base that is, are ever really, truly going to place their faith in a guy who’s a Mormon? BILL MAHER: No. That’s what’s going to be so interesting is when Rick Perry in sly and underhanded and no fingerprints methods starts putting out the idea, which is a true idea by the way, that Mormons are not really Christians. You know, once America, which is a very Christian nation, finds that out, I think they’ll have a, certainly in the Evangelical part of the country, those folks, they will not be very fond of Mitt Romney. Once they find out that Jesus Christ is like third in the hierarchy there. Really was about Joseph Smith. Actually, Mormonism is closer to Islam because in Islam Jesus is also a revered figure. He’s a wonderful prophet. He’s just not the ultimate prophet. You know, he’s like the middle act. He’s certainly not the headliner. Let's begin with a little logic. Mormonism is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Seem to you that Jesus Christ is “third in the hierarchy?” Consider, too, what the official Mormon website says on the subject: About Us Mormons, for all the other things that set us apart, believe first and foremost that Jesus Christ is our Savior and Redeemer. We believe that through Him, all mankind may enjoy eternal life with their families in Heavenly Father’s kingdom (John 3:16). Let's repeat that: “Mormons, for all the other things that set us apart, believe first and foremost that Jesus Christ is our Savior and Redeemer.” Seems pretty clear, doesn't it? Here's more: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the official name of the religion commonly called the Mormon Church. It was established April 6, 1830 by Joseph Smith, the first president of the Church. We believe he was called by God to be a prophet in the modern era, like Moses and Abraham in biblical times. Joseph Smith saw God and Jesus Christ in a vision after praying to know which church to join. They called on him to restore the church Christ organized when He was on earth, with the proper organization and priesthood authority that had been lost shortly after the Savior’s death. Seem to you that this religion puts Jesus Christ “third in the hierarchy” and is therefore closer to Islam than it is to Christianity? Or is this just another absurd line from a highly-revered liberal comedian who rarely if ever knows what he's talking about?
Continue reading …Chris Matthews: Southern ‘Secessionists’ Want to ‘Kill’ Obama…’Politically’
August 3, 2011 No Comment
MSNBC's Chris Matthews took his hateful attacks on conservatives to a new level Wednesday, smearing “southern” “secessionists” as wanting to “kill” Obama. The Hardball host quickly amended, “politically.”
Continue reading …Disappointed Andrea Mitchell Hits Pelosi from the Left: Where Are the Tax Increases in Debt Deal?
August 3, 2011 No CommentNBC's Andrea Mitchell, in an exclusive Wednesday interview with Nancy Pelosi aired on her MSNBC show, hit the Democratic House Minority Leader from the left on the debt agreement as she pronounced it “a bad deal” because “there's no taxes in it” and whined: ” Was the President a bad negotiator? Did he give away too much?” For her part, Pelosi agreed that it was a “bad deal” but rationalized that at least it was “a done deal” and “it's time for us to move on.” Throughout the interview Mitchell played up liberal talking points as she pressed Pelosi to criticize Obama, even asking “Did the Tea Party win?” because, as Mitchell put it “the President and your hands are really tied in terms of new spending. It's going to all be on the downside in terms of cutting and perhaps raising taxes.” The following is the relevant exchange with Pelosi as it was aired on the August 3 edition of Andrea Mitchell Reports: ANDREA MITCHELL: The American people want to see jobs. They want to see the economy improve. But a lot of Democrats, your members, the leader of the Congressional Black Caucus feel that this deal is a bad deal and it will lead to a slowing of the economy. Congressman [Emanuel] Cleaver called it a “Satan sandwich.” You added on that it's “a Satan sandwich with a side of Satan fries.” It's a bad deal. REP. NANCY PELOSI: It's a bad deal, but it's a done deal, as my colleague Steve Israel says. It's a bad deal but it's a done deal and it's time for us to move on. It's the basis on which we are going to proceed and we have to get on with it. We've got to go to the table, do the best we can, in a balanced bipartisan way to create jobs, reduce the deficit and takes us into the future. Just talking about how we got here and, and our complaints about this bill – don't get me started. But that's not – MITCHELL: Well let me get you started a little bit. Was the President a bad negotiator? Did he give away too much? PELOSI: This is not – I don't think so. MITCHELL: Why not? PELOSI: I think the President was great. But again, what is the point of talking about what is finished? On every, on anything that happens around here anyone one of us could have done it better. Right? We could have written it better. We could have, whatever it is. But the fact is the president wanted a balanced bipartisan agreement… MITCHELL: But he didn't get a balance. There's no taxes in it. PELOSI: That's right. And nobody knows that better than I or perhaps some do. But I fully appreciate that. But the – again, this is about how we go to the next step. Jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs. We get sort of like it's a cottage industry here in Washington, D.C. that we have to talk about what we did, why we did it. It's horrible in the, in, in realtime. And now we're gonna continue to talk about it. MITCHELL: But it was a turning point many people feel. I've covered Congress many years and have never seen it quite as poisonous. … MITCHELL: Did the Tea Party win? Because they have redefined the debate and now the President and your hands are really tied in terms of new spending. It's going to all be on the downside in terms of cutting and perhaps raising taxes?
Continue reading …