President Matt Damon? Five Celebrities Who’ve Been Called To Run For Office
August 12, 2011 No Comment
Everyone’s just looking for the next Ronald Reagan.
Continue reading …
Russian PM ‘discovers’ two amphorae in shallow waters on the floor of the Black Sea in latest stage of televised heroics When a scuba-diving Vladimir Putin found two ancient Greek urns on the floor of the Black Sea this week, it seemed a startling discovery. In his latest spurt of televised heroics, the Russian prime minister raised a triumphant thumb as he circled the pair of amphorae in shallow waters off the Taman peninsula near Ukraine. The find came to “everyone’s utter surprise”, claimed the slavishly devotional Russia Today and other state-controlled TV channels. Once on dry land, Putin posed in his wetsuit with a jug in each hand. But independent media and Russia’s lively blogosphere are now ridiculing the incident, in a sign of increasing weariness of Putin’s macho photo ops – such as bare-chested fishing, piloting a “water bomber” over forest fires and diving to the bottom of lake Baikal in a mini-submarine. Critics said Putin’s pots were suspiciously unmossy and were probably planted specially for him to discover. “Diving in the Taman gulf, the Russian prime minister immediately found two amphorae that had been waiting for him since the 6th century AD at a depth of two metres,” wrote the Novaya Gazeta newspaper in an editorial dripping with sarcasm. “He was lucky: in the same place, over the last two years archaeologists and divers of the Russian Academy of Sciences managed to find only a few pottery shards.” Putin’s visit was meant to highlight the work of Russian scientists exploring the remains of an ancient Greek city, Phanagoria, sometimes called “Russia’s Atlantis”. The site is not far from Sochi, the Black Sea resort that will host the 2014 Winter Olympic Games, and authorities hope to develop its tourism potential. Yet critics saw the dive as another farcical stunt designed to boost Putin’s image before elections in December and March. “We have become witnesses of a remake of The Brilliant Hand and the famous fishing scene at the white cliff,” said radio host Anton Orekh, referring to a scene from a Soviet film in which a diver attaches fish to an angler’s hook in order to simulate a plentiful catch. Russia Vladimir Putin Tom Parfitt guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Two people killed as government forces launch raid on country’s second-largest city Syria’s uprising spread into the country’s commercial hub of Aleppo today, where two people died during rare government raids, which also saw at least 13 protesters killed in other towns and cities. The foray into Aleppo, which remains a stronghold of the regime, came as observers outside Syria began to question whether five months of violence and implacable defiance had now reached a tipping point for Bashar al-Assad and the ruling Ba’ath party. The mood in the country’s second-largest city has long been considered a key barometer of the regime’s standing inside the country it has ruled with ruthless control for more than four decades. “If [Aleppo] turns, the Assads have lost Damascus,” said one western official. “It is very important to them. It is the only part of the country where the economy has remained relatively resolute.” Across the country, security forces today were widely reported to have opened fire near people as they emerged from mosques and public gathering places, in a bid to deny them a chance to organise after weekly prayers. The Muslim prayer day of Friday has become the most volatile day of each week, since the uprising began in March – and this was no different, with demonstrators turning out in large numbers in many cities. “In many places they started to shoot and use teargas the moment prayer ended,” said Razan Zeitouneh, a lawyer and activist based in Damascus, from where she monitors the protest movement. “We noticed they used gunfire everywhere, as well as thugs with batons in many places.” Deir Ezzor, in the north-east of the country, was under siege for a third consecutive day, as were the battered cities of Homs and Hama along the western border with Lebanon. The regime regards all three predominantly Sunni Muslim towns as hostile and continues to claim that foreign-backed extremists inside them are driving ever-escalating violence. Aleppo is also a largely Sunni city, with a sizeable Christian minority, but its residents are mainly middle-class, with strong links to Turkey and considered to be more invested in the ruling Allawite sect. “There were protests today in the rural areas but also in at least three central neighbourhoods, which is new,” said one man who lives near the Aleppo district of Sakhour. “The one in Sakhour was 1,000 people at most but there is lots of security in Aleppo so this is a good size.” “Unrest has been growing in Aleppo during Ramadan because more people are going to prayers and can gather to protest,” said a second activist in Aleppo. “Then the increased violence here and in other cities has made people angrier, too. Opposition is slowly increasing here.” At least 257 people have been killed nationwide during the past 11 days, which has seen a renewed push by the military to crush anti-regime protests. Dissent also continues to mount in the international community, which has struggled to counter a regime that shows little sign of withdrawing its military from civilian areas, despite months of increasingly vehement criticism. US secretary of state Hillary Clinton intensified calls for an economic boycott of Syria, urging countries to “get on the right side of history” and stop buying oil from and selling weapons to regime figures. Russia and China have continued to stand alongside their ally, but the Arab League this week rounded on Damascus and tensions sharply increased with Saudi Arabia and Turkey. One western official in Beirut said a point of no return for Mr Assad had drawn nearer this week, with the embattled autocrat unable to convince friend or foe that he had a solution for the instability that threatens to end the uncontested four-decade rule of the Assad clan. During that time, Syria has become entrenched as a strategic key to the region’s fortunes and regional and western observers increasingly fear a drastic increase in volatility throughout the Middle East if Mr Assad were to fall. “Syria has networks and influence on all of its borders,” said a second diplomat in Beirut. “This is where they have leverage – in uncertainty. As the regime continues down this misguided path, things have a very real risk of going badly for many of its neighbours.” Nour Ali is the pseudonym of a journalist based in Damascus Syria Middle East Arab and Middle East unrest Nour Ali guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
That all six of the Republicans selected to the Congressional debt reduction “Super Committee” are signers of Grover Norquist’s anti-tax pledge is hardly surprising. But the choice of Arizona Senator Jon Kyl , is an especially fitting one for the GOP. After all, Kyl didn’t merely define a generation of Republican talking points when he explained earlier this year that his was ” not intended to be a factual statement .” As it turns out, from regurgitating bogus claims that “tax cuts pay for themselves” and spur “job creators” to his war on the estate tax, Jon Kyl has long been a leading fabricator of GOP tax cut myths . And when it comes to super lies on taxes, his fellow Republican super committeemen are not far behind. In June, the second ranking Senate Republican joined House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in walking out of debt reduction talks led by Vice President Biden because of their refusal to accept even a dime of new tax revenue. As Jon Kyl explained last summer (starting around the 1:20 mark above), tax cuts don’t increase the national debt: “You do need to offset the cost of increased spending, and that’s what Republicans object to. But you should never have to offset cost of a deliberate decision to reduce tax rates on Americans.” Kyl’s was just the latest repackaging of President Bush’s long ago debunked claim that “you cut taxes and the tax revenues increase.” Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison parroted that line, “Every major tax cut we’ve had in history has created more revenue.” Then House Minority Leader John Boehner agreed, insisting last June that the Bush tax cuts had nothing to do with the depleted U.S. Treasury, “It’s not the marginal tax rates … that’s not what led to the budget deficit. The revenue problem we have today is a result of what happened in the economic collapse some 18 months ago.” For his part, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell rushed to defend Kyl’s fuzzy math: “There’s no evidence whatsoever that the Bush tax cuts actually diminished revenue. They increased revenue because of the vibrancy of these tax cuts in the economy. So I think what Senator Kyl was expressing was the view of virtually every Republican on that subject.” That view may be Republican orthodoxy, but it also happens to be untrue. It’s not just that Uncle Sam’s cash flow from individual income taxes did not return to its pre-Bush tax cut level until 2006: As the Washington Post summed up the CBO’s conclusions regarding the causes of the nation’s mounting debt earlier this year, “The biggest culprit, by far, has been an erosion of tax revenue triggered largely by two recessions and multiple rounds of tax cuts.” A recent analysis by the New York Times echoed that finding: With President Obama and Republican leaders calling for cutting the budget by trillions over the next 10 years, it is worth asking how we got here — from healthy surpluses at the end of the Clinton era, and the promise of future surpluses, to nine straight years of deficits, including the $1.3 trillion shortfall in 2010. The answer is largely the Bush-era tax cuts, war spending in Iraq and Afghanistan, and recessions. But as Ezra Klein explained in the Washington Post , the revealing Times chart doesn’t tell the full story of the impact of Bush-era policies on future debt facing Barack Obama: What’s also important, but not evident, on this chart is that Obama’s major expenses were temporary — the stimulus is over now — while Bush’s were, effectively, recurring. The Bush tax cuts didn’t just lower revenue for 10 years. It’s clear now that they lowered it indefinitely, which means this chart is understating their true cost. Similarly, the Medicare drug benefit is costing money on perpetuity, not just for two or three years. And Boehner, Ryan and others voted for these laws and, in some cases, helped to craft and pass them. These two graphs from the Washington Post and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities make that point crystal clear. Analyses by CBPP showed that the Bush tax cuts accounted for half of the deficits during his tenure, and if made permanent , over the next decade would cost the U.S. Treasury more than Iraq, Afghanistan, the recession, TARP and the stimulus – combined . Utah Senator Orrin Hatch was telling the truth when he described Republican fiscal mismanagement during the Bush years by acknowledging, “It was standard practice not to pay for things.” Jon Kyl’s tax fraud hardly ends there. Two weeks ago, he used the Republican weekly radio address to restate the GOP’s “job creators” myth (“job-killing tax increases are the wrong medicine”). But it was Speaker Boehner who in May articulated that tried and untrue GOP talking point in its purest form: “The top one percent of wage earners in the United States…pay forty percent of the income taxes…The people he’s [President Obama] is talking about taxing are the very people that we expect to reinvest in our economy.” If so, the Republicans’ so-called “Job Creators” failed to meet those expectations under George W. Bush. After all, the last time the top tax rate was 39.6 percent during the Clinton administration , the United States enjoyed rising incomes, 23 million new jobs and budget surpluses. Under Bush? Not so much. On January 9, 2009, the Republican-friendly Wall Street Journal summed it up with an article titled simply, ” Bush on Jobs: the Worst Track Record on Record .” (The Journal’s interactive table quantifies his staggering failure relative to every post-World War II president.) The meager one million jobs created under President Bush didn’t merely pale in comparison to the 23 million produced during Bill Clinton’s tenure. In September 2009, the Congressional Joint Economic Committee charted Bush’s job creation disaster, the worst since Hoover: As David Leonhardt of the New York Times aptly concluded last year: Those tax cuts passed in 2001 amid big promises about what they would do for the economy. What followed? The decade with the slowest average annual growth since World War II. Amazingly, that statement is true even if you forget about the Great Recession and simply look at 2001-7. The data are clear: lower taxes for America’s so called job-creators don’t mean either faster economic growth or more jobs for Americans . In the decade since receiving the massive tax cut windfall, Jon Kyl’s job creators didn’t create any jobs. But they did see their tax rates plummet even as income inequality hit the highest level record since 1929. Nevertheless, Jon Kyl needed to make sure winners of the class war won even more. Which is why Kyl played a pivotal role in slashing the federal estate tax . The Republican scam over the so-called ” death tax ” is as bogus now as it was when President Bush first perpetrated it ten years ago. As John Boehner put it: “People who aren’t wealthy, who may have built up value in land over generations and many family farms find themselves in situations where they’ve got to sell the farm in order the pay the taxes.” The Bush tax cuts passed in 2001 raised the estate tax threshold from $1 million to $3.5 million ($7 million for a couple), while slashing the rate from 55 percent to 45 percent. But facing the “sunset” provision that would eliminate the estate tax for one year in 2010 before returning to the pre-2001 levels the following year, the House voted 225-200 in early December 2009 for an extension to maintain 2009′s 45 percent rate. But in the Senate Jon Kyl stopped that compromise cold : “It’s a problem that doesn’t have to exist if they’ll just leave the existing law alone and let the rate go to zero, which is where everyone wants it to be.” By everyone, Jon Kyl meant the handful of the wealthiest families in America paying the estate tax each year. In April 2009, the Tax Policy Center quantified just how few family farms or small businesses are actually impacted by the estate tax proposals under consideration: We estimate that under the Obama proposal, 100 family farms and businesses would owe tax. (We define such estates as those where farm or business assets are valued at under $5 million and comprise the majority of estate assets.) The Lincoln-Kyl proposal would cut the number to 40. Even under current law, fewer than 2,700 family farms and businesses would owe tax. In the two-year extension of the Bush tax cuts extorted by Republicans in December 2010, Jon Kyl (aided and abetted the former Senator from Wal-Mart, Blanche Lincoln ) succeeded in raising the asset cap while lowering the estate tax rate to 35 percent. The result, as Ezra Klein lamented, was a “noxious” tax cut for the richest 0.11% of Americans, one draining an additional $7 billion from the Treasury every year. Of course, Jon Kyl has plenty of company when it comes to the tax cut super liars of the new debt super committee. Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey , the former Club for Growth president who emerged as one of the leading ” default deniers ” during the just concluded debt ceiling crisis, told Fox News last fall that “it’s not clear” that extending the Bush tax cuts and cutting corporate taxes would decrease revenues. As ThinkProgress reported, Michigan Rep. Dave Camp argued for making the Bush tax cuts permanent by pretending “I don’t think you have to pay for extensions of current law” and insisting he’d rather have a bigger deficit than see taxes go up on “rich people.” That was reflected in Camp’s proposal in March to slash the top personal income and corporate tax rates to 25 percent , which as even the Wall Street Journal admitted, “might require Congress to find $2 trillion in new revenue over a decade if Mr. Camp wants to offset the entire cost.” Then there’s Texas Congressman Jeb Hansarling . Hensarling, who in the spring of 2009 brushed off the deepening Bush recession as just ” part of freedom ,” claimed two weeks ago that for Republicans raising the debt ceiling is ” contrary to our DNA .” Which means Jeb Hensarling is as bad at genetics as he is at history and math. Leave aside for the moment that small government icon Ronald Reagan tripled the national debt and signed 17 debt ceiling increases into law. (That might explain why the Gipper repeatedly demanded Congress boost his borrowing authority and called the oceans of red ink he bequeathed to America his greatest regret .) As it turns out, Republican majorities voted seven times to raise the debt ceiling – and double the national debt – under President Bush. The current GOP leadership team voted a combined 19 times to bump the debt limit $4 trillion during his tenure. That vote tally included a “clean” debt ceiling increase in 2004, backed by 31 sitting GOP Senators and 98 current House Republicans. Including, it turns out, Jeb Hensarling. A particularly telling moment for the GOP’s debt super committee super liars during a January 2010 gathering of the House Republican caucus with President Obama. When Jeb Hensarling declared “the old annual deficits under Republicans have now become the monthly deficits under Democrats,” President Obama set him straight: “Now, look, let’s talk about the budget once again, because I’ll go through it with you line by line. The fact of the matter is, is that when we came into office, the deficit was $1.3 trillion. — $1.3 [trillion.] So when you say that suddenly I’ve got a monthly budget that is higher than the — a monthly deficit that’s higher than the annual deficit left by the Republicans, that’s factually just not true, and you know it’s not true.” The same could be said for all of the super lies the Republican debt supermen have to say about taxes. (This piece also appears at Perrspectives .)
Continue reading …On CNN’s American Morning , anchor Carol Costello asked their the poll question: “Do the poor share responsibility for our economic woes?” Costello then goes on to quote a viewer comment that slams welfare programs for the poor. She then cites a Heritage Foundation report that says that poor people in the United States live better off than the middle class does, because they live in houses and have microwaves, televisions and refrigerators. The clear implications are that welfare is a key cause of the economic crisis, that welfare programs should be cut, and that the poor should quit whining because they are “lucky duckies.” Costello is clearly not doing her job here, and CNN should reprimand her for it and implement policies that require basic journalistic standards and limitations on anchors editorializing during news segments. No legitimate news organization should uncritically report anything from a group like the Heritage Foundation. When they receive information from groups like this, they should immediately reject the conclusions of the reports — not because they are conservative, but because they are faulty science . There is no responsibility in any journalistic ethics course I’ve ever heard of that places giving both sides an equal say on every issue when one of those sides is lying. Journalists have a responsibility to check out what their sources are saying for accuracy before reporting it. Otherwise they are failing to serve their purpose in a democratic society, where there job is to give citizens accurate information so they can properly participate in the society. CNN is failing to live up to that responsibility.
Continue reading …Russell Brand: Don’t Let People In Power Tear Apart The Values That Hold Communities Together
August 12, 2011 No CommentI always thought of British comedian-actor Russell Brand as an amusing, mindless twit, but between this and the recent eulogy he penned for Amy Winehouse, I see he’s actually a thoughtful writer. This is part of the piece he just wrote for the Guardian about the London riots: Politicians don’t represent the interests of people who don’t vote. They barely care about the people who do vote . They look after the corporations who get them elected. Cameron only spoke out against News International when it became evident to us, US, the people, not to him (like Rose West, “He must’ve known”) that the newspapers Murdoch controlled were happy to desecrate the dead in the pursuit of another exploitative, distracting story. Why am I surprised that these young people behave destructively, “mindlessly”, motivated only by self-interest? How should we describe the actions of the city bankers who brought our economy to its knees in 2010? Altruistic? Mindful? Kind? But then again, they do wear suits, so they deserve to be bailed out, perhaps that’s why not one of them has been imprisoned. And they got away with a lot more than a few f**king pairs of trainers. These young people have no sense of community because they haven’t been given one. They have no stake in society because Cameron’s mentor Margaret Thatcher told us there’s no such thing. If we don’t want our young people to tear apart our communities then don’t let people in power tear apart the values that hold our communities together. As you have by now surely noticed, I don’t know enough about politics to ponder a solution and my hands are sticky with blood money from representing corporate interests through film, television and commercials, venerating, through my endorsements and celebrity, products and a lifestyle that contributes to the alienation of an increasingly dissatisfied underclass. But I know, as we all intuitively know, the solution is all around us and it isn’t political, it is spiritual. Gandhi said: “Be the change you want to see in the world.” In this simple sentiment we can find hope, as we can in the efforts of those cleaning up the debris and ash in bonhomous, broom-wielding posses. If we want to live in a society where people feel included, we must include them, where they feel represented, we must represent them and where they feel love and compassion for their communities then we, the members of that community, must find love and compassion for them. As we sweep away the mistakes made in the selfish, nocturnal darkness we must ensure that, amidst the broken glass and sadness, we don’t sweep away the youth lost amongst the shards in the shadows cast by the new dawn.
Continue reading …
Rick Perry is to join former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney in seeking the nomination to take on Barack Obama The Republican White House race is shaping up as a contest between two of the party’s heavyweights, Texas governor Rick Perry and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. Perry, who has been labelled “Bush on steroids”, is to formally announce he is standing on Saturday at a conservative conference in Charleston, while Romney emerged unscathed from a debate of the presidential candidates in Iowa on Thursday night. The two are likely to leave the rest of the crowded field behind. The debate, which was lacklustre apart from a series of personal jibes early on, confirmed the status as stragglers of candidates such as businessman Herman Cain, former senator Rick Santorum, and former governor of Utah Jon Huntsman. Perry’s announcement comes in the middle of the busiest four days in the Republican calendar so far, with all the candidates concentrated in Iowa, where the first of the party caucuses is scheduled for February. The eight declared candidates, plus Perry, are seeking the Republican nomination to take on Barack Obama as he looks for a second White House term next November. Perry did not take part in the debate in Ames, Iowa, on Thursday because he is not yet officially a candidate, but he is scheduled to visit the state on Sunday. With the skirmishing almost over and the contest becoming serious, the only major question left is whether former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin will join the race. Palin kept speculation alive with an email to supporters saying she would put in an appearance at the Iowa state fair, an agricultural show where the candidates were scheduled to make stump speeches throughout Friday. Republicans in Iowa expressed resentment about the timing of Perry’s announcement, which threatens to overshadow party events in the state this weekend. A straw poll of candidates, described by the organisers as the most important event in the Republican nomination calendar outside of an election year, is to be held on Saturday night. But Perry supporters in Iowa insisted the timing was not deliberately disruptive and that Saturday was the earliest he could have made the announcement. Bob Schuman, a Perry supporter speaking on his behalf in the spin room after the debate, said Perry had said he would not make his announcement until after an evangelical prayer rally in Houston last Saturday and had stuck to that promise. Although Perry was not in the debate, Schuman, in the spin room under a placard “Americans for Rick Perry”, attracted as much media attention as representatives of the other candidates and even some of the candidates themselves. Asked how Perry, who makes much of a record of job growth in Texas compared with the national unemployment rate of 9.1%, would campaign against Obama if he won the Republican nomination, he said: “Jobs versus no jobs.” But Obama’s campaign adviser, David Axelrod, interviewed by ABC, challenged Perry’s performance as governor. “When you examine the entire record, what’s happened to education in that state, what’s happened to health care in that state, it’s a record of decimation not of progress,” Axelrod said. Reviewing the debate, Schuman said: “No one really jumped out. Romney has made a decision to play safe but he can’t keep doing that.” He looked forward to the next debate, in California in September, when Perry will be on the stage with the other candidates. “It will be very different next time,” Schuman said. Robert Haus, a veteran political campaigner in Iowa, who helped run the failed campaign of actor and Republican Fred Thompson in 2008, has to remain neutral until after this weekend because he is organising the straw poll. But, asked about Perry, he was enthusiastic. “Perry is a candidate that can bridge the differences in the Republican party. He has a strong record on jobs in Texas and is deeply religious,” Haus said, after a meeting of the right-wing Heritage group in Ames. “He can calm any angry room inside the Republican party.” Iowa, though a small state whose demographics, mainly white, are not typical of the US as a whole, plays a pivotal role in US politics as traditionally the first state to vote in either caucuses or primaries. A good showing can sink a campaign or propel a candidate from obscurity to frontrunner status. The straw poll tonight, though invested with huge importance by some of the candidates, has with hindsight proved to be a poor indicator of the eventual result in Iowa. The liveliest parts of the two-hour debate in Ames were feisty exchanges between Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, who is close to the Tea Party movement, and the former governor of Minnesota, Tim Pawlenty, a dull campaigner who has so far failed to make much of an impression. Needing to win or at least achieve a second or third place in the straw poll, Pawlenty denigrated the record in Congress of Bachmann, who is the frontrunner in polls in Iowa. Adopting a patronising tone, he said Bachmann had done little in her five years in Congress. “She has done some wonderful things in her life but it is an indisputable fact that her record of accomplishment and results is non-existent,” he said. But he picked on the wrong candidate. Bachmann came back recalling his record in office as governor on health, energy and trade. “That sounds a lot more like Barack Obama’s record,” she said. Although Bachmann appeared flustered and at one point even disappeared briefly from the stage, with the television anchor telling viewers that one of the debate candidates was missing, Pawlenty repeatedly fluffed his prepared lines. Afterwards, in the spin-room, Nick Ayers, Pawlenty’s campaign manager, accused Bachmann of starting the fight, claiming she had gone along to the debate with “a pre-planned assault full of misstatements and factual inaccuracies”. Former governor of Utah Huntsman made his debate debut. He has struggled in the polls, too close to the centre for many conservatives and also, unforgivable for many Republicans, he worked in the Obama administration as ambassador to China. But his opening answer was poor. Asked for a detailed plan for tackling the economy, he said limply: “It is coming.” Rick Perry Mitt Romney Republican presidential nomination 2012 United States Republicans Ewen MacAskill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Debates are fun, but post-debate spins are even more fun especially with Sean Hannity’s tiny pea-brain memory. During last night’s debate, Chris Wallace asked Newt about his campaign staff quitting en masse. Newt was not very happy about the question. Wallace pointed out to Gingrich that, in June, he suffered a huge staff exodus. “How do you respond to people who say that your campaign has been a mess so far?” he asked. Gingrich was highly displeased by the question, and he turned on Wallace. “I took seriously Bret’s injunction to put aside the talking points,” he said, referring to a request Wallace’s co-host Bret Baier had made at the outset of the debate. “And I wish you would put aside the gotcha questions…I’d love to see the rest of tonight’s debate asking us about what we would do to lead America…instead of playing Mickey Mouse games.” [h/t Huffington Post ] And of course, Sean Hannity was appropriately concerned for poor Newt, but evidently that concern obliterated his short-term memory. HANNITY: You know, I don’t mind hard questions. I think they’re important. As I was watching tonight’s debate, you know what ran through my mind? In all the time that President Obama ran, he didn’t experience one of these moments that I can really think of. So the double standard is clear. Sean, Sean, Sean. Obviously you can’t really think of these moments because you don’t think. Or pay attention. So let’s take a walk down memory lane to April 15, 2008 and the debate between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in Philadelphia. And let me refresh your memory, courtesy of the divine Ms. Heather who made this wonderful mashup at the time. Click here to view this media [h/t Heather] Here are just a few of the questions directed to then-Senator Obama. You should watch the whole mashup for the full impact. It’s five full minutes of fail. Five full minutes of fail in ONE debate. Do you think Rev. Wright loves America as much as you do? Voters don’t believe you’re honest or trustworthy. Are you? Why don’t you wear a flag pin? It was so bad everyone forgot the debate and just went full-tilt after ABC. Here on Crooks and Liars, we had Steve Benen’s roundup of journalists’ horror, and Nicole Belle pointed out that George Stephanopoulis got debate tips and marching orders from — wait for it — Sean Hannity . Seems Sean gave George a few question suggestions on his radio show earlier that day. Like these: 1) Ask Obama about his relationship with Ayers and WeatherUnderground and Axelrod’s comments, “They’re friendly” 2) Ask Obama why he attended the Million Man March There’s a double standard, all right. Hannity’s.
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Debates are fun, but post-debate spins are even more fun especially with Sean Hannity’s tiny pea-brain memory. During last night’s debate, Chris Wallace asked Newt about his campaign staff quitting en masse. Newt was not very happy about the question. Wallace pointed out to Gingrich that, in June, he suffered a huge staff exodus. “How do you respond to people who say that your campaign has been a mess so far?” he asked. Gingrich was highly displeased by the question, and he turned on Wallace. “I took seriously Bret’s injunction to put aside the talking points,” he said, referring to a request Wallace’s co-host Bret Baier had made at the outset of the debate. “And I wish you would put aside the gotcha questions…I’d love to see the rest of tonight’s debate asking us about what we would do to lead America…instead of playing Mickey Mouse games.” [h/t Huffington Post ] And of course, Sean Hannity was appropriately concerned for poor Newt, but evidently that concern obliterated his short-term memory. HANNITY: You know, I don’t mind hard questions. I think they’re important. As I was watching tonight’s debate, you know what ran through my mind? In all the time that President Obama ran, he didn’t experience one of these moments that I can really think of. So the double standard is clear. Sean, Sean, Sean. Obviously you can’t really think of these moments because you don’t think. Or pay attention. So let’s take a walk down memory lane to April 15, 2008 and the debate between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in Philadelphia. And let me refresh your memory, courtesy of the divine Ms. Heather who made this wonderful mashup at the time. Click here to view this media [h/t Heather] Here are just a few of the questions directed to then-Senator Obama. You should watch the whole mashup for the full impact. It’s five full minutes of fail. Five full minutes of fail in ONE debate. Do you think Rev. Wright loves America as much as you do? Voters don’t believe you’re honest or trustworthy. Are you? Why don’t you wear a flag pin? It was so bad everyone forgot the debate and just went full-tilt after ABC. Here on Crooks and Liars, we had Steve Benen’s roundup of journalists’ horror, and Nicole Belle pointed out that George Stephanopoulis got debate tips and marching orders from — wait for it — Sean Hannity . Seems Sean gave George a few question suggestions on his radio show earlier that day. Like these: 1) Ask Obama about his relationship with Ayers and WeatherUnderground and Axelrod’s comments, “They’re friendly” 2) Ask Obama why he attended the Million Man March There’s a double standard, all right. Hannity’s.
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Debates are fun, but post-debate spins are even more fun especially with Sean Hannity’s tiny pea-brain memory. During last night’s debate, Chris Wallace asked Newt about his campaign staff quitting en masse. Newt was not very happy about the question. Wallace pointed out to Gingrich that, in June, he suffered a huge staff exodus. “How do you respond to people who say that your campaign has been a mess so far?” he asked. Gingrich was highly displeased by the question, and he turned on Wallace. “I took seriously Bret’s injunction to put aside the talking points,” he said, referring to a request Wallace’s co-host Bret Baier had made at the outset of the debate. “And I wish you would put aside the gotcha questions…I’d love to see the rest of tonight’s debate asking us about what we would do to lead America…instead of playing Mickey Mouse games.” [h/t Huffington Post ] And of course, Sean Hannity was appropriately concerned for poor Newt, but evidently that concern obliterated his short-term memory. HANNITY: You know, I don’t mind hard questions. I think they’re important. As I was watching tonight’s debate, you know what ran through my mind? In all the time that President Obama ran, he didn’t experience one of these moments that I can really think of. So the double standard is clear. Sean, Sean, Sean. Obviously you can’t really think of these moments because you don’t think. Or pay attention. So let’s take a walk down memory lane to April 15, 2008 and the debate between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in Philadelphia. And let me refresh your memory, courtesy of the divine Ms. Heather who made this wonderful mashup at the time. Click here to view this media [h/t Heather] Here are just a few of the questions directed to then-Senator Obama. You should watch the whole mashup for the full impact. It’s five full minutes of fail. Five full minutes of fail in ONE debate. Do you think Rev. Wright loves America as much as you do? Voters don’t believe you’re honest or trustworthy. Are you? Why don’t you wear a flag pin? It was so bad everyone forgot the debate and just went full-tilt after ABC. Here on Crooks and Liars, we had Steve Benen’s roundup of journalists’ horror, and Nicole Belle pointed out that George Stephanopoulis got debate tips and marching orders from — wait for it — Sean Hannity . Seems Sean gave George a few question suggestions on his radio show earlier that day. Like these: 1) Ask Obama about his relationship with Ayers and WeatherUnderground and Axelrod’s comments, “They’re friendly” 2) Ask Obama why he attended the Million Man March There’s a double standard, all right. Hannity’s.
Continue reading …