Santorum On Resourcing Afghanistan War: ‘That Was Not Done By The Prior Administration’
Santorum On Resourcing Afghanistan War: ‘That Was Not Done By The Prior Administration’
Last week, Vice President Dick Cheney attacked President Obama, saying he is “afraid to make a decision” on the war in Afghanistan and that he’s “dithering.” A number of conservatives, including Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and columnist George Will, disagreed with Cheney’s language. “I would never want to call my president ‘dithering,’” Hatch said.
But many on the right have failed to mention the more substantive point, namely that Cheney and the Bush administration itself “dithered” on Afghanistan and diverted valuable resources to invade Iraq. But last night on Fox News, former Republican senator Rick Santorum stepped up to the plate:
SANTORUM: My sense is that we have an obligation to support our generals in the field, to give them the resources they need to accomplish the mission. That was not done by the prior administration. Let’s be very clear about that. They put their own political imprint on the Afghan strategy.
Watch it:
Of course, Santorum is right. In 2008, Gen. David McKiernan, then the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, asked the Bush administration for more troops, a request that was denied.
Indeed, as McClatchy’s Jonathan Landay — one of the few Washington journalists whose reporting matched the facts in the run-up to the Iraq war — asked of Cheney’s recent attacks: “Do we smell a campaign of historic revisionism by those widely seen as primarily responsible for the disaster in Afghanistan that has prompted Army Gen. Stanley A. McCrystal’s request for up to 80,000 more soldiers?”:
As late as December 2005, despite official warnings about the Taliban resurgence and a lack of U.S. resources for critical reconstruction programs, the Bush administration planned to reduce the 19,000 U.S. troops then in Afghanistan by 2,500 soldiers in order to bolster hard-pressed U.S. forces in Iraq.
And even after seven years of war _ and the deaths of 630 U.S. service members, more than 400 other coalition soldiers and thousands of Afghans _ the Bush administration lacked strategies for dealing with the al Qaida and Taliban safe haven in the tribal areas of Pakistan, where it backed a military dictatorship, or building Afghan security forces, according to the Government Accountability Office.
It’s nice to see Santorum recognize reality.
- Comments
- 85
Forbes Bows To Beck After He Complains About Being Named One Of Magazine’s ‘Scariest People’
Forbes Bows To Beck After He Complains About Being Named One Of Magazine’s ‘Scariest People’
To commemorate Halloween, Forbes magazine announced its picks “for the scariest people of 2009” and included caricatured masks of the honorees, which included Rod Blagojevich, Bernie Madoff, Michael Moore, Kanye West, Roman Polanki and radical Fox News’ host Glenn Beck. “This cable-news demagogue commands big ratings, an army of fans and crocodile tears on demand,” Forbes magazine said of Beck.
Beck hosted the magazine’s Editor-in-Chief — and one-time GOP presidential candidate — Steve Forbes on his radio show Wednesday and complained about the award. “[You're] making me the number one scariest man in America?” Beck asked. “People always want to be at the top of our list,” Forbes replied. “Not this one,” Beck bemoaned. Forbes then started sucking up to Beck:
FORBES: It was a mis — it was a miscommunication. We were going to put you on the most admired, most beloved, most reasonable, most enlightened list.
BECK: Right, right.
FORBES: But we figured if we did that, it would yeah, we wanted to put a mask on you so you wouldn’t get killed by the liberals.
BECK: I mean, here’s the competition: Rod Blagojevich, Bernie Madoff, Michael Jackson, David Letterman, Michael Moore, Roman Polanski. You’ve got a rapist who is nine slots lower than I am ….
FORBES: We normally would put you on the 400 list but we respect your privacy.
In fact, after the show, Forbes went back and amended the original article to be more flattering of Beck:
By Steve Forbes
I hereby amend Halloween Masks — The Scariest People Of 2009“Glenn Beck is the scariest person to big tax; big government; big spend; and weak defense liberals.”
Salon’s Alex Koppelman observes, “The idea that your outlet’s owner could decide he disagreed with something you wrote — something that had already been published — and then just blithely go in and change it is pretty scary. There’s an ethical problem involved, certainly.”
Beck’s power within the GOP establishment is far and wide. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) once brought a copy of Beck’s book to a town hall meeting this summer to “pass it on.” (He ended up giving ThinkProgress his copy, which we did not pass on.) Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) said “the American people are smart” to listen to right wing radio hosts such as Beck and Limbaugh. And RNC chair Michael Steele recently passed up an opportunity to distance himself from Beck’s “racist” attack on President Obama. “That’s one man’s opinion,” Steele said.
(HT: The War Room)
Specter Would Support Using Reconciliation To Pass Health Care As A ‘Last, Last, Last Resort’
Specter Would Support Using Reconciliation To Pass Health Care As A ‘Last, Last, Last Resort’
Yesterday, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) said that he would consider joining a GOP filibuster of the Senate’s health care reform bill if it contains a public option. “If the bill remains what it is now, I will not be able to support a cloture motion before final passage,” Lieberman said.
Later, during a conference call with progressive bloggers, Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) was asked if, given Lieberman’s position, he would support using the reconciliation process to pass health care reform with a public option, which would require a mere simple majority for passage. Specter said that he might eventually but added that he thinks the Democratic caucus will get 60 votes:
SPECTER: Well as I have said I would consider that as a last, last, last, resort. I think that the institutional safeguard of 60 votes is a very important one. … [M]oving away from that institutional 60 votes is something I think would be a last, last, last resort. You might have to fight fire with fire when there are so many filibusters. The number is now 81. And a lot of nominations are being blocked and action is being blocked. …
On the issue of fighting fire with fire, maybe so, but I think that we are not going to come to this. I think we can muster the 60 votes and not have to face the reconciliation.
Q: Senator if I have this correctly, as a last resort, you would not oppose using reconciliation…
SPECTER: As a last, last, last, resort I would consider it, yeah.
Specter later said that Lieberman is “not going to want to see reconciliation used,” adding, “I think it’s gonna work out.” Listen here:
In fact, the top two Democrats in the Senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), have not taken reconciliation off the table in order to pass health care reform. “Sure, it’s always an option,” Reid said on Monday. “The failsafe on this is reconciliation,” Durbin said, but added, “I hope we don’t reach it because you can only do a limited amount of things on reconciliation.”
Gingrich Strikes Back At Beck: His Agenda Is A ‘Very Destructive Model For The Republican Party’
Gingrich Strikes Back At Beck: His Agenda Is A ‘Very Destructive Model For The Republican Party’
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has been taking fire from conservative activists and far-right Republican leaders for endorsing Dede Scozzafava, the moderate GOP candidate running in the special election in New York’s 23rd district. These “purists” — including Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty, Dick Armey, and Bill Kristol — are backing Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman, revealing a wider rift within the conservative movement: the tea-party activist base versus “Big Tent” Republicans.
Gingrich explained his support for Scozzafava at a book signing event yesterday: “She is the nominee of the local party, my bias is to be for the nominee of the local party, and I don’t second guess the local party.” On his Fox News program yesterday, Glenn Beck attacked Gingrich. “I couldn’t disagree more with you on this one,” Beck said, arguing, “You vote with a person you agree with most…and it doesn’t matter what party they’re in.”
Last night on Fox News’ On the Record, host Greta Van Susteren asked Gingrich about the “heat” he’s been getting for endorsing Scozzafava, especially from Beck. Gingrich fired back, saying the right-wing support for Hoffman is based on “misinformation” and an abandonment of conservative values:
GINGRICH: I just find it fascinating that my many friends who claim to be against Washington having too much power, they claim to be in favor of the 10th Amendment giving states back their rights, they claim to favor local control and local authority, now they suddenly get local control and local authority in upstate New York, they don’t like the outcome. [...]
So I say to my many conservative friends who suddenly decided that whether they’re from Minnesota or Alaska or Texas, they know more than the upstate New York Republicans? I don’t think so. And I don’t think it’s a good precedent. [...]
And so this idea that we’re suddenly going to establish litmus tests, and all across the country, we’re going to purge the party of anybody who doesn’t agree with us 100 percent — that guarantees Obama’s reelection. That guarantees Pelosi is Speaker for life. I mean, I think that is a very destructive model for the Republican Party.
Watch it:
Conservative bloggers are now going after Gingrich for lashing out at his critics, with the Other McCain writing, “I was disgusted just now to see Newt Gingrich’s appearance on Greta Van Susteren’s Fox News show tonight.” “Newt Gingrich disappointed national conservatives again tonight,” Gateway Pundit added.
Webb Says He’ll Vote For Cloture On Health Care Reform Bill
Webb Says He’ll Vote For Cloture On Health Care Reform Bill
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) will announce this afternoon that he plans to include a public option in the Senate health care reform bill and that it will allow states to opt out, “even though he’s currently short several votes” of the 60 needed to overcome a filibuster.
Yesterday on CNN, Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) called the public option with an opt out provision “an interesting concept” but pointedly refused to endorse it. He said the “best approach” would be “to have not-for-profit insurance companies.” However, Webb also said that he will not let his personal views get in the way of the Senate having an up or down vote on the public option:
WEBB: One thing that I did say to the leader is that I will vote to proceed forward to debate. That doesn’t mean that I will necessarily at this time commit myself to voting for the result of that debate.
HOST JOHN KING: If [Reid] needs 60, he has your vote?
WEBB: We need to have the debate.
Watch it:
Last week, an aide to Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) said that Lieberman — who opposes a public option — is also “inclined” to vote for a motion to proceed. Similarly, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) recently said, “I’m not right now inclined to support any filibuster.”
But other Democratic Senators are on the fence. Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) — who has gone back and forth on hints of support for the opt out provision — said on CNN yesterday, “I can’t decide about the procedural vote until I see the underlying bill.” A spokesperson for Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) said “she will have to see the legislative language and cost first” before voting for cloture. Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) has not indicated what his intentions are.
But when asked recently if he would support a GOP filibuster of health care reform, Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) replied, “I don’t think you’ll see me or any other Democrats do that.”
McCain dodges when asked if Cheney is ‘helping or hurting’ the GOP.
McCain dodges when asked if Cheney is ‘helping or hurting’ the GOP.
Yesterday on CBS’ Face the Nation, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) — a frequent face on the Sunday show circuit — joined conservatives George Will and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) in denouncing former Vice President Cheney’s recent statement that President Obama is “dithering” on Afghanistan. “I wouldn’t use that language,” McCain said. But later in the segment, host Bob Schieffer asked if Cheney is “helping or hurting” the Republican Party with such comments. While noting that the former Vice President has the right to speak out, McCain dodged the question:
McCAIN: I think we should as much as possible say — and our message is, we want this strategy and we want to support the president and unite the country behind it. Let’s face it. The president, when he makes his decision — and again, I believe that he will– will have trouble with the base of his own party. And so the more united we can be behind him, I think the more the chances are of success and American public support.
“I don’t believe I heard you say whether you thought that was helpful or unhelpful,” Schieffer noted. “I don’t know. I would leave that to others to judge, really,” McCain again dodged. Watch it:
On ABC’s This Week, Center for American Progress President and CEO John Podesta said, “I think if Cheney is the voice of the opposition, that’s fine. I think he has the least credibility. Almost every strategic piece of advice he gave the president was wrong. I think President Bush stopped listening to him by the end of the administration. So if that’s what the Republican Party has decided — that they want to have him as their most outspoken critic of the administration — I think President Obama ought to welcome that.”
Hatch bucks Cheney: ‘I would never want to call my president dithering.’
Hatch bucks Cheney: ‘I would never want to call my president dithering.’
Despite his own failures in Afghanistan (namely turning valuable resources away from the war and invading Iraq), former Vice President Dick Cheney attacked President Obama this week, saying he is “afraid to make a decision” on the war in Afghanistan and that he’s “dithering.” Today on CNN, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) disagreed with Cheney’s assessment. “Well, I would never want to call my president ‘dithering,’” Hatch said, adding, “And I know it’s a tough position that he’s in.” Later, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) was far more blunt in criticizing Cheney’s remarks:
BROWN: Look, to listen to Dick Cheney who was the mastermind of the most failed decade of foreign policy that this country has had, at least in my political lifetime, perhaps my whole lifetime, perhaps my parents’ lifetime too. I mean to listen to him when he talked about dithering when their mistake was to attack Iraq and lose sight of Afghanistan as President Abdullah, sorry as Dr. Abdullah, presidential candidate Abdullah said that eight years of failure of Karzai implicitly is also eight years of failure of dithering by that administration, so just take Dick Cheney’s advice off the table.
Watch it:
CNN Edits Out Dobbs Criticism From Taped Interview
CNN Edits Out Dobbs Criticism From Taped Interview
This week, CNN aired a new four-hour documentary called “Latino in America,” exploring how Latinos are reshaping American communities and culture. The broadcast sparked protests in cities around the country, including outside CNN’s headquarters in Atlanta, with minority groups calling on the network to fire anti-immigration crusader and serial misinformer Lou Dobbs.
The New York Times reports that CNN “has not commented on the protests or covered them on its news programs.” But not only has CNN ignored the Dobbs protests, the network edited out criticism of Dobbs from civil rights lawyer Isabel Garcia during a taped interview with controversial Arizona Sheriff Joe Arapaio that aired on Anderson Cooper 360 this week:
[Garcia] who was featured in “Latino in America” and organized an anti-Dobbs protest in Tucson on Wednesday, said that CNN edited her comments about the anchor out of an interview. [...]
She said she called Mr. Arpaio and Mr. Dobbs “the two most dangerous men to our communities,” and said that “because of them, our communities are being terrorized in a real way.” She also asserted that CNN was “promoting lies and hate about our community” by broadcasting Mr. Dobbs’s program. The comments were not included when the interview was shown Wednesday night. “They heavily deleted what I did get to say,” she said.
This isn’t the first time CNN has circled the wagons around Dobbs. Earlier this year, Dobbs was one of the most prominent mainstream media figures pushing the conspiracy theory that President Obama may not have been born in the U.S. Dobbs repeatedly called on Obama to “produce a birth certificate” and said it’s “unfortunate” that the birthers have been “dismissed.” Despite Dobbs’ hysteria and playing on “escalating white fear,” CNN president Jonathan Klein downplayed Dobbs’ antics, claiming the CNN anchor was merely reporting on the birther “phenomenon” and had simply asked why “some people doubt” Obama’s citizenship.
Moreover, while discussing race issues last year on the air, Dobbs became agitated, and it appeared that he was about to say “cotton picking” (often used as a racially charged slur) in reference to then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. But he caught himself, only uttering the word “cotton.” In the official transcript of the show, CNN omitted “cotton” from Dobbs’ remarks.
While Dobbs has been quick to jump on right-wing conspiracy theories targeting Obama (including recently peddling a fake thesis purportedly written by Obama that trashes the Constitution, the Founding Fathers and free markets), his hateful anti-immigrant rhetoric has been ongoing for years. Now, Latino and pro-immigrant activists have launched two campaigns, Drop Dobbs and Basta Dobbs, which are aimed at pressuring CNN to “hold Mr. Dobbs to journalistic standards” or dump him altogether.
Pawlenty Says He Would Lead A Campaign To Opt Out Of The Public Option In Minnesota
Pawlenty Says He Would Lead A Campaign To Opt Out Of The Public Option In Minnesota
Reports surfaced today that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is considering a proposal to include the public option that would allow states to “opt-out” of the program.
Today on ABC’s Top Line, co-host David Chalian asked Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) if he would “opt-out” of the public option for his state if the measure passed. Pawlenty dodged: “Well, I don’t know if we would opt out but I personally would like to opt out because I don’t like government run health care.” But Chalian persisted, and ultimately, Pawlenty said that he would oppose the public option for Minnesota:
CHALIAN: But you would lead a charge in your state to opt out if that was an option available?
PAWLENTY: I think so because I don’t like government run health care.
Watch it:
However, Pawlenty has said that he supports “government run health care” in the past — in fact, just as recently as last September. “I support Medicare and Medicaid,” Pawlenty declared.
Regardless, the Wonk Room’s Igor Voskly notes that the opt out provision won’t lower costs like a stong public option will:
But a state-based approach won’t have the ability to significantly lower health care costs or change delivery patterns. Progressives point to existing state-based employee public options or Medicaid programs that contract out to private insurers and thus don’t provide a meaningful alternative or competition. A state triggered public option, would lead to the same outcome, they argue.
To avoid this scenario, the White House needs to stop sending clarification statements to Sargent and stake out a firm position — they will never find the votes if they don’t whip them. Why not start on higher negotiating ground and embrace the HELP bill’s (relativley) strong public plan.
Pawlenty’s not alone. Unfortunately, Democratic candidate for governor in Virginia, Creigh Deeds, said this week that that as governor, he would “certainly consider opting out” of the public option “if that were available to Virginia.”
McCain To Make His 15th Appearance On A Sunday Show This Year
McCain To Make His 15th Appearance On A Sunday Show This Year
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has been booked for yet another Sunday talk show appearance this weekend — this time on CBS’ Face The Nation. Despite a “wildly unsuccessful presidential campaign” last year and his comparative irrelevancy in the U.S. Senate, this will mark the 15th time McCain has appeared on a Sunday talk show since January.
The Washington Monthly’s Steve Benen and Media Matters’ Jamison Foser have previously expressed confusion about McCain’s popularity on the Sunday show circuit:
Foser: “John McCain is not president, he chairs no Senate committees, he represents two percent of the U.S. population, he lacks a strong constituency even among his own party — a party that is pretty widely disliked and has taken a thumpin’ in two straight elections. He is not playing a central, or even peripheral role in the health care debate. And yet he’s on television all the time.”
Benen: “But it’s the Sunday shows’ obsession with McCain that continues to be so absurd. … McCain isn’t playing a role in any important negotiations; he hasn’t unveiled any significant pieces of legislation; he isn’t being targeted as a swing vote on any major bills; and he’s not a member of the GOP leadership. He’s just another far-right senator, with precious little to say that couldn’t have been predicted in advance. Indeed, we already know exactly what he’s going to say this week.”
Two weeks ago, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos justified booking McCain on This Week arguing that he “is the leading GOP voice on Afghanistan.” Yet McCain has consistently been off the mark when in comes to the war there. In fact, during McCain’s last Sunday appearance discussing Afghanistan, he dodged questions of the role the war in Iraq — a war he fervently supported and much of which he was also wrong about — in the deteriorating situation there.
Foser has noted that when Al Gore and John Kerry lost their presidential bids, “the media had a clear message for them: Get out of the way and let George W. Bush govern.” In fact, Kerry appeared on just three Sunday talk shows in the first eight months of President Bush’s second term.
It appears that the Beltway media are just still in love with their maverick pal John McCain.
Media Matters: Fox News’ attacks on the Obama White House ‘have been occurring since January 20.’
Media Matters: Fox News’ attacks on the Obama White House ‘have been occurring since January 20.’
Soon after White House communications director Anita Dunn called out Fox News for being the “communications arm of the Republican Party,” Fox News senior vice president Michael Clemente said that “[i]t’s astounding the White House cannot distinguish between news and opinion programming.” But a subsequent Media Matters item demonstrated just how much Fox’s “news” mirrors its right-wing opinion. Now, a new Media Matters video documents the fact that Fox News “declared ‘war’ on the White House long before Dunn’s comments.” Watch it:
Michael Clemente, senior vice president for news and editorial programming at Fox, said the White House was conflating the network’s commentary with its news coverage. That, Mr. Clemente said, “would be like Fox News blaming the White House senior staff for the Washington Redskins’ losing record.” “I think we’re doing the job we’re supposed to be doing,” he said, “and we do it as well as anyone.”
Rep. Weiner Identifies 55 Republicans On Medicare Who ‘Steadfastly Oppose’ The Public Option
Rep. Weiner Identifies 55 Republicans On Medicare Who ‘Steadfastly Oppose’ The Public Option
Rep. Anthony Weiner’s (D-NY) office today released an internal study showing that 151 members of Congress “currently receive government-funded; government-administered single-payer health care — Medicare.” Of those 151 members, 55 are Republicans who also happen to be “steadfastly opposed [to] other Americans getting the public option, like the one they have chosen.” Included on Weiner’s list are anti-public option crusaders Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), Sen. Orin Hatch (R-UT), Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY), Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC), and Rep. Peter King (R-NY).
This morning on C-Span, Weiner explained the idea behind the project:
WEINER: It’s more another way of looking at this debate, this discussion about the public option, to put it in focus. We went, just out of curiosity, looked at how many members of Congress get the public option. And I know a lot of people have said, “Well under the new bill, how many of you members of Congress would choose the public option?”
Well there already is one; it’s called Medicare. And we found 55 Republicans and 151 members of Congress are on Medicare right now. So they’re already getting the same type of public option that we’d like people who are without insurance to be able to get. And I guess the purpose of this list was to kind of point out some of the hypocrisy of this debate.
“You have members of Congress thumping their chest how they’re against government health care,” Weiner noted, adding, “and yet when it’s time for them to accept Medicare, they’re like, ‘Sign me up!’” Watch it:
Back in July, Weiner offered an amendment that would eliminate Medicare, saying at the time that it was “put-up or shut-up time for the phonies who deride the so-called ‘public option.’” Of course, no one voted for the measure.
“Even in a town known for hypocrisy,” Weiner said in a statement today releasing his study, “this list of 55 Members of Congress deserve some sort of prize. They apparently think the public option is ok for them, but not anyone else.”
Buchanan on GOP and Fox linking Obama to Nixon: ‘It is the most idiotic comparison I’ve ever seen.’
Buchanan on GOP and Fox linking Obama to Nixon: ‘It is the most idiotic comparison I’ve ever seen.’
Taking cues from their communications shop over at Fox News, GOP Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Judd Gregg (R-NH) yesterday attacked the White House’s campaign against Fox’s unethical journalistic practices by comparing President Obama to President Nixon. “Let’s not start calling people out and compiling an enemies list,” Alexander said, touting his days as a junior staffer in the Nixon White House as credentials for his charge. Gregg said he was “fascinated” by Alexander’s criticism and wondered if Obama is “Nixon-fying” the White House. But yesterday on MSNBC, top Nixon aide Pat Buchanan dismissed out-of-hand any comparison of Obama to Nixon:
BUCHANAN: It is the most idiotic comparison I’ve ever seen. Barack Obama won 95 percent of Washington DC, he comes in with both houses Congress behind him, the media love him, the country loves him. Nixon came in with both houses of Congress against him, he probably got 8 percent of the vote in Washington DC, the media loathed him. … I don’t see any comparison between Obama and Nixon whatsoever. … [T]here’s no comparison. Barack Obama’s got enormous press support, he’s got problems with Fox News but for heaven’s sakes there is no comparison here.
Watch it:
“I also have to laugh,” liberal talk radio host Bill Press said during the segment. “When two Republicans want to hurt a Democrat, what do they do? They compare him to another Republican. It’s crazy.”
Liberal Analyst Found Out Through ‘Google Alert’ That Fox News Fired Him
Liberal Analyst Found Out Through ‘Google Alert’ That Fox News Fired Him
Last Friday, during a News Corp. shareholders meeting, Chairman Rupert Murdoch was asked why Fox News would hire liberal analyst Marc Lamont Hill, who, the questioner said, has a “reputation of defending cop killers and racists.” Murdoch reportedly replied that Hill had already been fired. While both Fox and Hill were initially tight-lipped about Murdoch’s reported comment, Mediaite later confirmed that Hill had indeed been fired by the network.
When asked “what happened” during a recent interview with conservative radio host Steve Malzberg, Hill said that he has no idea why he was fired. “I don’t have a lot of information because I wasn’t given a lot of information.” In fact, Hill said he found out from a “Google alert” that Fox let him go:
HILL: Yeah I mean it’s an interesting thing. I wish I could give you a great deal of information that I don’t have a lot of information because I wasn’t given a lot of information. To date, Fox News Channel hasn’t given me any information as to why. … I’m just a little puzzled. [...]
MALZBERG: First of all, you told me you found out when you got a Google alert, so I mean, did anybody eventually call you from Fox and tell you that you were fired?
HILL: Yeah I eventually – I got a Google alert at 11 o’clock [a.m.] that it had been announced that I’d been fired. After that, I guess someone followed up later in the day, you know because I was sort of trying to figure out what was going on. … I found out that it was true but other than that I don’t have any other information. … I haven’t had any thorough conversation with anyone.
Listen here:
Indeed, shortly after reports surfaced of Hill’s dismissal, he tweeted (which has since been deleted), “You ever had anyone break up with you by text?” So why did Fox News fire Hill? While Fox never responded to inquiries from ThinkProgress, Hill told Malzberg that “people can certainly look on the internet and Google and see all sorts of stories and information” as to why he was fired.
Right-wing propagandist Cliff Kincaid, who works for “Accuracy in Media,” has been on a crusade to try to get Hill fired from the network because, as Kincaid has said, Hill is a “left wing cop-killer apologist.” In a celebratory note after Murdoch’s announcement, Kincaid noted that he had in fact asked about Hill during last week’s News Corp. meeting and criticized Fox for not doing “elementary analysis” of Hill before they hired him. During his interview with Malzberg, Hill called Kincaid’s charges “unfair misrepresentations.”
In the segment, Hill also commented about the recent spat between the White House and Fox News. “Is Fox News a right-leaning organization? No doubt about it,” Hill said. But he later added that he doesn’t yet “feel comfortable” commenting on whether Fox News is an “arm” of the Republican Party.
Rove: ‘People Would Go Nuts’ If Bush Had Campaigned Against NBC, New York Times
Rove: ‘People Would Go Nuts’ If Bush Had Campaigned Against NBC, New York Times
Last weekend, top White House officials escalated its campaign to distance Fox News from the ethical standards of journalism. “It’s not really a news organization,” senior adviser David Axelrod said. Yesterday during the White House press gaggle, ABC’s Jake Tapper came to Fox’s defense, asking, “Why is that appropriate for the White House to say?” “You and I should watch sometime around 9 o’clock tonight. Or 5 o’clock this afternoon,” press secretary Robert Gibbs said, referring to Fox programs hosted by Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck.
Last night, Fox host Greta Van Susteren seemed pleased that Gibbs narrowed down the criticism. “I’m grateful that now they’ve at least refined it to two hours,” she said. But former top Bush adviser Karl Rove was incensed, complaining that “people would go nuts” if President Bush attacked NBC or the New York Times:
ROVE: I mean, imagine what would have happened if President Bush had said, “You know what, I’m not going to — I’m going to call NBC not a news organization because, well, MSNBC has some ugly left- wing opinion programming”? I mean, people would go nuts.
What would happen if somebody said, “You know what, the people who are working for The New York Times are not journalists because on the opinion page of The New York Times there are very liberal journalists and very liberal editorials?” I mean, people would be up in arms.
Watch it:
Rove must have a short memory. The Bush administration’s war with the New York Times started even before Bush assumed office. As a candidate, Bush called a Times reporter “a major league asshole,” and never apologized. In fact, President Bush never gave the New York Times a single interview throughout his presidency. (Update: Bush gave the New York Times interviews in 2001, 2004, and 2005.)
The Bush White House’s war with NBC News is more well known. In May 2008, then-White House counselor Ed Gillespie publicly sent a scathing letter to NBC News President Steve Capus, accusing them of deceptive editing and blurring the lines between “news” and “opinion.” Soon after, then-White House press secretary Dana Perino expounded upon the campaign against NBC from the White House podium:
PERINO: The reason that we sent the letter yesterday is because we had gotten fed up with the way that the President’s policies are being mischaracterized, or the situations on the ground weren’t being accurately reflected in the reporting. We had complained before. And it just reached a boiling point.
And indeed, Fox News did “go nuts”…in support of the White House.
Gingrich Calls On The Country To ‘Rise Up’ To ‘Repeal’ Health Care Reform If It Passes
Gingrich Calls On The Country To ‘Rise Up’ To ‘Repeal’ Health Care Reform If It Passes
Last night on Fox News, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich joined some of his colleagues on the fringe right and urged the GOP to make repealing health reform the “number one” campaign issue in 2010 and 2012:
GINGRICH: Let me make a straightforward promise. These bills can’t be implemented before 2013. If they pass a bill which is a disaster the number one campaign issue in 2010 and 2012 is going to be repeal the bill.
We repealed the catastrophic health legislation that was a disaster. We can repeal this monstrosity. If they’re determined to put something bad in the country, the country can rise up, defeat the people who do it and repeal it.
Watch it:
Gingrich is referring to the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988 which was repealed a year after it passed because it raised seniors’ Medicare premiums disproportionately to pay for benefit expansions.
But the former House Speaker may have a tough time getting the “repeal” theme on current reform measures to stick. A new ABC/Washington Post poll out today finds that 57 percent of Americans support reform proposals currently before Congress that would include a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurance to bring costs down — part of health care reform that Gingrich presumably feels would be a “disaster.” In fact, more Americans would rather have a bill with a public option that one “that is approved with support from Republicans in Congress.”
Gingrich has signed onto the right’s fringe movement, led by Reps. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Tom Price (R-GA), and Joe Barton (R-TX), to repeal health care reform if it ultimately becomes law. “[A]fter we defund the left, we pass repealer bill after repealer bill after repealler bill,” Bachmann recently boasted.
Fox News Reportedly Fires Liberal Analyst Marc Lamont Hill
Fox News Reportedly Fires Liberal Analyst Marc Lamont Hill
Yesterday, Accuracy in Media’s Cliff Kincaid announced that at today’s annual News Corp. meeting, he would urge Chairman Rupert Murdoch to fire Fox News analyst Marc Lamont Hill, whom he called a “left-wing cop-killer apologist.” Hill appears as an on-air contributor on shows such as The O’Reilly Factor.
The Live Feed reports that when Murdoch was asked this question (presumably by Kincaid), he replied that Hill had already been fired:
Rupert Murdoch continued Fox News Channel’s duel with the White House on Friday while also announcing the termination of the network’s left-leaning analyst Marc Lamont Hill. [...]
Murdoch also said that Hill has been fired. He revealed the move after a shareholder had raised the question of how Hill was hired, citing his “reputation of defending cop killers and racists.”
According to the report, Murdoch did not say why Hill had been fired. On his twitter feed, Hill seemed to acknowledge news of the report — saying, “Relax, y’all. Don’t believe the internet rumors” — but he didn’t directly deny that he had been fired. Neither Hill, nor Fox News have responded yet to inquiries from ThinkProgress.
But Hill appeared on the Fox Business Network just yesterday. In fact, just after radical Fox host Glenn Beck led a crusade to oust Van Jones from his position as White House clean jobs adviser, Hill defended Jones on the network:
HOST: We now know that he was involved in signing a petition that asked the question of whether or not the Bush administration had involvement in 9/11. He admits he signed it. He says…he didn’t know what he was signing. Would that have come up if he had been required to fill out this form?
HILL: Probably not, actually, because he — if we believe in good faith that he didn’t do it on purpose — and I believe that he didn’t do it on purpose — then he probably wouldn’t have put that down. And I’ll tell you why I believe he didn’t do it on purpose because he’s been very straightforward.
Hill also criticized the White House for not defending Jones. “[Obama] could have dispensed surrogates on the Sunday shows to defend Van Jones. Instead, they did nothing,” Hill complained.
Also during today’s News Corp. meeting, when asked about recent criticism from White House communications director Anita Dunn that Fox News is the “communications arm of the Republican Party,” Murdoch didn’t exactly deny it, saying her comments have “tremendously increased their ratings.”
We’ll update this post as we learn more.
Romney: Public Option ‘Is Absolutely Death, I Think, Across This Country’
Romney: Public Option ‘Is Absolutely Death, I Think, Across This Country’
Last night on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney propagated a fearmongering claim that a public health insurance option would bring death to the country:
ROMNEY: The right way to have proceeded was to let each state create their own plan, to learn from the laboratories that the states were meant to be, and then adopted the very best in the federal system. But that hasn’t been done. And as a result, you’re seeing Democrats fighting Democrats. And the idea that we’d have — the government get into a — if you will, the public or government option is absolutely death, I think, across this country.
Watch it:
Romney’s hysterical scare tactic has sadly become the norm in the health care debate. Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin issued the absurd statement that the House health reform bill would create “death panels” for the nation’s elderly — a claim conservatives advanced with glee despite the fact that it had been thoroughly debunked. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) similarly claimed that reform would “pull the plug on grandma.”
During last night’s segment, Romney touted Massachusetts’ health care system that he helped enact as governor (despite downplaying the plan during his 2008 presidential bid). Romney boasted that the Massachusetts plan is “on budget,” but what he omitted is the fact that when approving the plan, he “deferr[ed] until another day any serious effort to control the state’s runaway health costs” and now “the plan will not be sustainable over the next 5 to 10 years if they do not take significant steps to arrest the growth of health spending.”
The public option of course won’t cause “death” across the country, as Romney claimed, but rather, it would be a key component of bringing down the cost of health care.
Limbaugh dropped from bid to purchase St. Louis Rams.
Limbaugh dropped from bid to purchase St. Louis Rams.
After nearly a week of controversy surrounding Rush Limbaugh’s involvement in a bid to purchase the NFL’s St. Louis Rams franchise, ESPN reports today that that the hate radio host has suffered a major defeat. Dave Checketts, chairman of the National Hockey League’s St. Louis Blues and “point man in the Limbaugh group attempting to buy the Rams,” will drop Limbaugh from the bid:
[Checketts] realizes he must remove the controversial conservative radio host from his potential role as a minority member in the group in order to get approval from other NFL owners, the sources said.
Three-quarters of the league’s 32 owners would have to approve any sale to Limbaugh and his group. Earlier this week, Indianapolis Colts owner Jim Irsay predicted that Limbaugh’s potential bid would be met by significant opposition. Several players have also voiced their displeasure with Limbaugh’s potential ownership position, and NFL Players Association head DeMaurice Smith, who is black, urged players to speak out against Limbaugh’s bid.
Limbaugh would not comment on Checkett’s reported move. However, on his radio show today, he remained defiant and defensive, saying criticism of his bid is “all about smearing mainstream, traditional conservatism” and accusing his critics of “spread[ing] lies.”
After Previously Blaming Obama For Slumping Markets, Boehner Now Downplays Surging Dow
After Previously Blaming Obama For Slumping Markets, Boehner Now Downplays Surging Dow
Today on Wall Street, the Dow Jones Industrial Average climbed above 10,000 for the first time this year as “U.S. stocks approached their highest levels since Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.’s bankruptcy sent the global economy into a tailspin.” In fact, the index is up 13 percent since the start of the year.
When asked about the surging markets, House Minority Leader John Boehner grumbled at the news. “[You're] certainly not talking to the American people,” if you’re placing any significance on the 10,000 mark, Boehner contended:
“The American people understand that unemployment is almost at 10 percent, they understand that they might be next so there are concerns about the economy,” Boehner said. [...]
Boehner said the stock market’s rebound is a reaction to the extreme shock from earlier this year, but it says little more than that.
“At the end of the day, the American people aren’t looking at the stock market in terms of putting food on the table,” Boehner said. “They want jobs, and they want them now.”
But Boehner hasn’t always been so dismissive of the stock market’s significance. In search of an attack line on the newly-inaugurated President Obama back in March, the GOP leader thought that the dismal numbers coming from Wall Street represented the public’s dissatisfaction with Obama’s policies:
“The president certainly remains popular, but his policies are becoming less and less popular,” Boehner said, citing the continuing slide in the financial markets. “Certainly the stock market hasn’t acted very well” since Obama’s inauguration.
As the markets continue to falter, Republicans are becoming more confident in their criticisms of the president — some have already taken to using the phrase “the Obama economy.”
But Boehner has also used the markets to tout the leadership of the Republican Party. At a rally just before the GOP got its “thumpin’” in the 2006 mid-term elections, then Majority Leader Boehner argued that his party would best handle the economy reportedly by “point[ing] to a hot stock market.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll