Michigan Town Rejects Liz Cheney’s ‘Fearmongering’ And Welcomes Guantanamo Detainees
Michigan Town Rejects Liz Cheney’s ‘Fearmongering’ And Welcomes Guantanamo Detainees
Recently, the Liz Cheney-founded right-wing advocacy group Keep America Safe released a mini-documentary that features several residents of Standish, Michigan, speaking out against a possible transfer of detainees from Guantanamo Bay to a prison in the city. The video ominously warns that the transfer would turn the town into “Guantanamo North” and claims that Standish residents are dead set against moving Guantanamo detainees to their city. Watch it:
Yet, as the Plum Line’s Greg Sargent reports, the video poorly represents the views of the residents of Standish. He interviewed Standish City Manager Michael Moran, who dismissed Liz Cheney’s “fearmongering” and said the documentary was “off base“:
Standish’s City Manager tells us that local leaders and residents want the facility, and dismissed Cheney’s efforts as “fearmongering.” Cheney is “certainly not representing the views of our community,” the City Manager, Michael Moran, told our reporter, Amanda Erickson.
While some local residents do appear to have expressed mixed feelings or opposition to the plan, Moran says that they’re an isolated minority that Ms. Cheney’s video elevates out of proportion in a way that’s “off base.”
The truth is, the residents of Standish — like the residents of Thomson, Illinois — aren’t afraid of housing terrorism suspects on U.S. soil. Last month, the Standish City Council voted 6-0 in support of a resolution asking the federal government to relocate Guantanamo prisoners to their city. Moving detainees to the city would help keep their prison facility open, which would guard against “the loss of the 350 jobs provided by the [jail].”
- Comments
- 111
Utah lawmaker claims he doesn’t ‘mind’ gays, but ‘I don’t want ‘em stuffing it down my throat all the time.’
Utah lawmaker claims he doesn’t ‘mind’ gays, but ‘I don’t want ‘em stuffing it down my throat all the time.’
Earlier this month, the Church of Latter Day Saints made headlines when it threw its support behind a measure in Salt Lake City that barred “landlords and employers from discriminating based on sexuality,” making it the first city in Utah to adopt the gay rights measure. Now, the Mormon Church is backing a similar statewide bill, enlisting the help of a variety of lawmakers to help get it passed. One such lawmaker is Sen. Chris Buttars (R), who, despite his adamant support for an earlier proposition that banned same-sex marriage, does believe that sexual orientation deserves protection from employer and landlord abuse. However, while explaining his opposition to allowing same-sex couples to adopt children, he told the press that while he doesn’t “mind” gays, he doesn’t want them “stuffing it down [his] throat all the time“:
BUTTARS: I meet with the gays here and there. They were in my house two weeks ago. I don’t mind gays. But I don’t want ‘em stuffing it down my throat all the time. Certainly not in my kid’s face.
Watch it:
In the past, Buttars has said that gay men and women are “the greatest threat to America going down.” “I believe they will destroy the foundation of the American society,” he said in February. “In my mind, it’s the beginning of the end. … Sodom and Gomorrah was localized. This is worldwide.” Last year, the NAACP called for his resignation because of his comments about a controversial bill: “This baby is black, I’ll tell you,” said Buttars. “This is a dark and ugly thing.”
Six-Year-Old Girl ‘On Verge Of Never Hearing Again’ Due To Insurance Company Denial
Six-Year-Old Girl ‘On Verge Of Never Hearing Again’ Due To Insurance Company Denial
One of the worst abuses of the private health insurance industry is its practice of denying claims to pay for necessary care for patients. This practice has become so rampant in the industry that a recent study by the California Nurses Association found that a whopping 21 percent of all insurance claims filed in the first half of 2009 in the state of California were denied by insurers.
As the story of six-year-old Madison Leuchtmann of Franklin County, MO, demonstrates, even children are victims of this insurance company abuse. Madison was born with bilateral atresia, which means she lacks ear canals in both ears. In order to hear, she wears a special device on a headband that allows her to make out sounds. Despite her disability, Madison is at the top of her kindergarten class and is slowly learning to read.
Yet Madison, due to her growth, will soon require a new hearing implant to be able to recognize sounds. Her hearing and speech therapist warns that “if she doesn’t get her implants by age seven, she’s not going to be able to blend her words. … She won’t be able to hear herself [talk].” Madison’s pediatrician, Dr. Randall Clary, also insists that without the implant, the girl may never be able to hear again.
Unfortunately, the Leuchtmann’s family insurer, Cigna, has issued “one denial after another,” flatly refusing to cover the $20,000 bill for the implant. In a written statement to the local news station Fox 2, Cigna explained, “It is not unusual for commercial benefit plans to exclude hearing assisted devices,” prompting Dr. Clary to angrily respond, “This is obviously medically necessary. You have a child that has no ear canals!” Dr. Clary also told Fox 2 that he sees these sort of denials “on a weekly basis.” Watch Fox 2’s report:
The United States is the only developed country without a universal, cradle-to-the-grave health care system. In no other developed country would a girl be on “the verge of never hearing again” because a for-profit insurance company decided that its bottom line was more important than keeping a child from going deaf.
Virginia Governor-elect Bob McDonnell refuses to disavow Pat Robertson’s anti-Islam comments.
Virginia Governor-elect Bob McDonnell refuses to disavow Pat Robertson’s anti-Islam comments.
Last week, while discussing the Fort Hood massacre on his program The 700 Club, notorious right-wing evangelist Pat Robertson told his audience that Islam is “not a religion, it’s a political system. It’s a violent political system bent on the overthrow of the governments of the world and world domination.” Yesterday, a reporter asked Virginia Governor-elect Bob McDonnell (R) — who took thousands of dollars from Robertson for his campaign and frequently appeared on The 700 Club — if he thought the evangelist’s comments were “appropriate.” While stressing that he wants “people of all faiths” to part of his administration, McDonnell refused to condemn Robertson specifically, citing the First Amendment:
MCDONNELL: You know, I’ve got probably 15,000 donors to the campaign, and I can’t stand to defend or support every comment that every donor might make …. I think people are entitled under the First Amendment to express whatever opinions they may have.
Watch it:
“[McDonnell's] sending the message that he wants it both ways–he wants the support of a Muslim-basher. And he wants to work with Virginia Muslims. I think those two things are incompatible,” said Council on American-Islamic Relations spokesman Ibrahim Hooper.
When a prominent Virginian chooses to engage in hate-filled rhetoric that divides us and has the potential to fuel real discord in our polity, leaders cannot remain silent. That is why I am calling on Mr. Robertson to apologize to my constituents – Muslim and non-Muslim – for the hurt he has caused and the damage he has done. It is a week overdue.
Rep. Louie Gohmert: Democrats want another terrorist attack so they can pass a new jobs bill.
Rep. Louie Gohmert: Democrats want another terrorist attack so they can pass a new jobs bill.
Recently, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed and four other terrorism suspects will be tried in U.S. courts in New York City, which has prompted outrageous reactions from conservative politicians and pundits. One of the most extreme reactions came last night during an exchange between Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) and Fox News Host Neil Cavuto. When Cavuto questioned Gohmert about whether we should try 9/11 terror suspects in New York City, the Texas congressman “joked” that Democrats who support bringing the alleged terror conspirators there for trial are hoping for another terrorist attack so they can “create a new jobs bill” to rebuild the city:
GOHMERT: You’ve got millions of New Yorkers that would be put at risk [by trying Khalid Sheik Mohammed in New York City] … Unless they’re trying to create a new jobs bill by allowing terrorism back in New York, this is insane. And even that would be insane.
Watch it:
(HT: Media Matters Action)
As Conservatives Fear-Monger Over Gitmo Closure, Illinois Town Says It Would Welcome Detainees
As Conservatives Fear-Monger Over Gitmo Closure, Illinois Town Says It Would Welcome Detainees
As part of the new administration’s efforts to shut down the “lawless enclave” at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, there is discussion of possibly moving detainees from the island prison to be incarcerated stateside (just like many other terrorism suspects). One possible site being considered to house these detainees is the mostly-empty Thomson Correctional Center in the rural town of Thomson, Illinois.
The right has exploited this possible move by fear-mongering to score political points. Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) started circulating a letter among state officials telling President Obama, “If your Administration brings Al Qaeda terrorists to Illinois, our state and the Chicago Metropolitan Area will become ground zero for Jihadist terrorist plots, recruitment and radicalization.” Rep. Don Manzullo (R-IL) claimed that moving detainees to Thomson would make the city a “target for future terrorist activity.”
One group of people, however, that is not afraid of bringing detainees to Thomson is the residents of the city themselves. As the Chicago Tribune reports, a transfer of Guantanamo detainees to Thomson Correctional Center would be “greeted warmly” by the city’s residents, who would welcome the jobs created by such a move:
News that the federal government seems interested in transferring detainees from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the Thomson Correctional Center was greeted warmly in this small, rural farm town along the Iowa border.
After holding out hope that the sprawling $145 million prison might improve the economic conditions in this remote area of the state, residents say any prisoners would be a welcomed sight.
“It would help the businesses here, and God knows we could use that,” said Kay Lawton, 59, a Thomson resident. “It doesn’t matter to me who they bring here.”
“A murderer is a murderer no matter where he’s from,” [Thomson Village President Jerry] Hebeler said. “That’s the way I look at it.” [...]
“As long as it’s safe and we’re protected, I’m comfortable with it,” Hebeler said. “Maybe this is something that will put us on the map.”
CNN’s Gary Tuchman traveled to Thomson and interviewed its residents about their feelings about a possible transfer of Guantanamo detainees. He concluded that “for economic reasons, people are very much in support” of the transfer. Watch it:
In opposing the transfer of detainees to Thomson, Kirk and Manzullo are putting themselves at odds not only with job-seeking residents, but also fellow conservatives. In a joint statement prepared by the Constitution Project, David Keene, founder of American Conservative Union, Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, and former representative and presidential candidate Bob Barr write, “We are confident that the government can preserve national security without resorting to sweeping and radical departures from an American constitutional tradition that has served us effectively for over two centuries. … The scare-mongering about these issues should stop.”
Why Are Hawkish Lawmakers Willing To Pay For An Escalation Of The War But Not For Health Care?
Why Are Hawkish Lawmakers Willing To Pay For An Escalation Of The War But Not For Health Care?
In recent days, heated policy discussions in Washington have largely focused on two topics: a possible escalation of the war in Afghanistan and health care legislation. Both a troop escalation and health care legislation carry significant price tags: roughly $100 billion and $80-$100 billion a year respectively. (It should be noted that health care reform, unlike a troop surge, would cut the deficit.)
In his New York Times column today, columnist Nicholas Kristof asks why hawks claim health reform is “fiscally irresponsible” while enthusiastically supporting a troop surge in Afghanistan, given the fact that fixing our broken health care system is, unlike a troop surge, essential to the health and well-being of Americans:
The health care legislation pays for itself, according to the Congressional Budget Office, while the deployment in Afghanistan is unfinanced and will raise our budget deficits and undermine our long-term economic security.
So doesn’t it seem odd to hear hawks say that health reform is fiscally irresponsible, while in the next breath they cheer a larger deployment of troops in Afghanistan?
Meanwhile, lack of health insurance kills about 45,000 Americans a year, according to a Harvard study released in September. So which is the greater danger to our homeland security, the Taliban or our dysfunctional insurance system?
Indeed, hawkish legislators have lined up to both demand a costly surge in U.S. troops in Afghanistan while at the same time claiming that deficit-cutting health care legislation would simply be too expensive:
– Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) has called for providing the “resources [needed]” for a “significant increase in U.S. forces” while warning that he is “really worried about what [health care reform] would do to the deficit.” [9/13/09, 10/26/09]
– Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has complained that passing health care legislation would “expand government spending even more,” while also boasting of his Republican caucus’s “broad support” for any troop increase in Afghanistan. [10/21/09, 10/11/09]
– Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) wrote a letter to President Obama stating that we “urgently need more resources” in Afghanistan, “including more combat troops,” while at the same time claiming that passing health care legislation would be tantamount to “generational theft” that would run up “unconscionable and unsustainable deficits.” [11/10/09, 8/27/09]
Kristof’s question bears answering. Why is it that hawkish lawmakers are so willing to spend such enormous resources in both lives and treasure on a troop surge in Afghanistan that is increasingly opposed by Americans and Afghans, but are so quick to bark at the price tag of health care legislation that could save the lives of the 45,000 Americans who die every year because they don’t have access to health care? As Glenn Greenwald notes, “Urging that more Americans be sent into endless war paid for with endless debt, while yawning and lazily waving away with boredom the hordes outside dying for lack of health care coverage, is one of the most repugnant images one can imagine.”
Business Groups ‘Worried’ About The Effects Of Banning The Importation Of Goods Made With Child Labor
Business Groups ‘Worried’ About The Effects Of Banning The Importation Of Goods Made With Child Labor
One of the worst abuses in the international labor markets is the use of child labor. The most recent report on the issue by the International Labor Organization found that as of 2004 more than 218 million children were engaged in illegal work, as defined by international treaties. It’s estimated that 126 million of these children were engaged in hazardous work such as “mining or handling chemicals.”
In order to combat the issue, the Senate Finance Committee has included sections in S.1631, the Customs Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Reauthorization Act of 2009, that would ban the importation of goods made “with convict labor, forced labor, or indentured labor under penal sanctions.” Such a measure by the world’s largest importer would strike a crucial blow against the use of child and slave labor.
Business groups and their lobbyists, however, are not taking kindly to the measures. The D.C.-based business newsletter “Inside U.S. Trade” reports that business groups are “worried” about the effects of such a provision, and they expect to see industry lobbyists and foreign governments profiting from child labor to form an “ad hoc” coalition to oppose it:
Business groups are worried by the potential effects of provisions banning the import of all goods made with convict labor, forced labor, or forced or indentured child labor that were included in a customs bill sponsored by Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) and Ranking Member Charles Grassley (R-IA)
Business sources say this reporting requirement could cause DHS to more actively seek out imported products made with child labor, forced labor or convict labor. [...]
Sources conceded that this was a sensitive issue because industry groups do not want to be seen as opposing strict measures guarding against human rights abuses. However, one source did expect a push from lobbyists closer to the finance committee mark-up of the bill, and speculated that U.S. industry groups and foreign governments could form ad hoc coalitions to help send a united message.
MSNBC host Rachel Maddow covered the story last night. Addressing the business interests opposing the measure directly, she said, “You think that child labor and slave labor and forced convict labor are cheap and therefore cool with you? Go ahead, make your case. I would love to hear it …. you child labor-endorsing, pro-slavery freaks.” Watch it:
(HT: Openleft)
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: ‘It’s a just and noble cause to make health care available to everyone.’
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: ‘It’s a just and noble cause to make health care available to everyone.’
Hall of Famer and basketball legend Kareem Abdul-Jabbar revealed this morning that he has been battling leukemia, a form of cancer that develops in blood tissue. Abdul-Jabbar appeared on CNN’s American Morning and fielded questions about his battle with the disease. During the conversation, CNN co-host Kiran Chetry asked Abdul-Jabbar if he was following the health care debate, prompting the basketball star to offer his endorsement for reform. He explained that he believes that it is a “just and noble cause” to guarantee access to health care to Americans:
CHETRY: I’m sure you’ve been paying attention to the ongoing debate about health care. Have you taken a stand on that? Do you have an opinion on what we need to do as a nation to ensure more people can have access to health care?
ABDUL-JABBAR: I’m all for that. We have the best technology in the world. We’re supposed to be the ‘can-do’ nation. And our health care system really fails so many people. Especially poor people, people who don’t have the means to go to private doctors. I think we should change that. I think it’s absolutely crucial. Certainly it’s a just and noble cause to make health care available to everyone.
Watch it:
Senators call on Coburn to lift his hold on veterans benefits bill.
Senators call on Coburn to lift his hold on veterans benefits bill.
Earlier this month, it was revealed that Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) has placed a hold on a major veterans benefits bill because he wants to use unspent stimulus dollars to fund it. Today, Democratic senators who are advocates of the bill will hold a press conference to highlight Coburn’s obstructionism and call on him to lift his hold:
Democratic Senators are calling on Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) to lift his hold on a veterans’ health bill that Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) hopes to clear before the chamber adjourns this week for a three-day recess.
Sens. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii), Jon Tester (D-Mont.) and Mark Begich (D-Alaska) will hold a press conference Monday to rally support for the measure. [...]
In a floor statement Friday, Begich called on Coburn to lift his hold. Other Democratic Senators made similar appeals, but Begich took the rare step of naming Coburn on the Senate floor.
“I am disappointed that my Senate colleague does not feel this same sense of duty and responsibility to our nation’s heroes, who have sacrificed so much for our very right to stand in this body and debate this matter,” Begich said. “There is no good reason or rationale for a hold to be placed on this legislation and I call on my colleague to remove his hold.”
Unfortunately, using holds to obstruct progress is nothing new for “Dr. No.” He has previously used holds on legislation such as an HIV/AIDS prevention bill and a public lands bill. VoteVets.org, a leading veterans advocacy group, has put together an online petition to call on Coburn to lift his hold.
Former Blue Cross Blue Shield ‘Spokesjerk’ Cuts Ad In Favor Of Health Reform
Former Blue Cross Blue Shield ‘Spokesjerk’ Cuts Ad In Favor Of Health Reform
The House is nearing a vote on health care legislation that is expected to be very close. At this critical juncture, a former Blue Cross Blue Shield spokesperson is doing what he can to help pass reform.
Actor and comedian Andy Cobb, who used to be the spokesman for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida, has teamed up with Robert Greenwald’s Brave New Films project “Sick for Profit” to produce a new ad in favor of health care reform. In the ad, Cobb calls himself a former “spokesjerk” for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida, and says that his job was to “sell you the worst product in American history: private health insurance.” Cobb calls attention to Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) for his significant contributions from the health care industry, and asks him to vote in favor of health care legislation with a public option. Watch it:
This morning, Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman interviewed Cobb. He told her, echoing remarks from Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), “This is the time when we have to say, ‘Which side are you on? The insurance companies or the American people?’ And for too long I’ve been on the wrong side of that.”
Is Glenn Beck Being Treated By SEIU Nurses?
Is Glenn Beck Being Treated By SEIU Nurses?
One of right-wing TV host Glenn Beck’s most frequent targets is the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Beck has in the past repeatedly referred to SEIU members as “thugs” involved in radical leftist conspiracies, even going as far as to say that SEIU president Andy Stern is trying to re-create the Bolshevik Revolution. “When you start to figure out who SEIU is and what they want, you’re not really comfortable,” Beck said last month.
In recent days, Beck has been hospitalized for appendicitis. As Alternet’s Alexander Zaitchik points out, the staff treating the ailing pundit is likely under the auspices of SEIU nurses:
The security-conscious Beck has not disclosed the name of the facility, but it’s a safe bet that it is staffed by proud members of a storied union: New York’s Local 1199, aka United Healthcare Workers East, which belongs to the Service Employees International Union. The SEIU has organized all of Manhattan’s major hospitals, including every facility to which Beck could have conceivably been sent.
Beck certainly isn’t complaining about being treated by nurses who were organized by the union he regularly demonizes. On his Twitter account, he praised the staff that is attending to him:
If it does turn out that Beck’s “amazing” nurses happen to be members of the SEIU, will he retract the statements he has made condemning the union or will he continue on his McCarthyite tirade?
Coburn places hold on veterans benefits bill.
Coburn places hold on veterans benefits bill.
One of the Senate’s most vociferous opponents of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) has been Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), who called the stimulus “the worst act of generational theft in our nation’s history.” Today, The Marine Corp Times revealed exactly how far Coburn was willing to go to undermine ARRA. It turns out Coburn has been the senator who has placed holds on several veterans benefits bills because he wanted to divert money from unspent ARRA funds on them:
Thirteen major military and veterans groups have joined forces to try to force one senator — Republican Tom Coburn of Oklahoma — to release a hold that he has placed on a major veterans benefits bill.
Coburn has been identified by Senate aides as the lawmaker preventing consideration of S 1963, the Veterans’ Caregiver and Omnibus Health Benefits Act of 2009, by using an informal but legal practice of putting a hold on a bill. [...]
In a letter sent Monday night to the Senate majority leader, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., the 13 military and veterans groups ask the Senate to get on with it.
“It is essential that Congress act on this comprehensive measure without further delay,” the letter reads. “Thousands of disabled veterans with serious medical conditions and the family members who care for them are counting on this additional support.”
Steve Robertson, the legislative director for the veterans advocacy group The American Legion, met with Coburn’s staff about the holds on the bills and came away disappointed with their refusal to budge on the issue. “For a lot of family caregivers, delay is costing them their jobs and their savings. It’s having a big impact,” Robertson told the press. “They made it clear that Sen. Coburn sees this as using his rights as a senator to place a hold on a bill…I agree with that, but that doesn’t mean it makes sense to hold up a bill that would do a lot of good things for veterans that has cleared a committee and is ready for a vote.”
As The Media Obsesses Over New York Special Election, It Ignores Leftward Lurch In California Special Election
As The Media Obsesses Over New York Special Election, It Ignores Leftward Lurch In California Special Election
In the past few weeks, conservatives and their allies in the press have obsessed over the special election in New York’s 23rd congressional district. Pundits have claimed that the rise of Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman as the likely winner in that race is a “referendum on the Obama-Biden spending agenda” and evidence of a rightward shift in the nation’s politics, despite the fact that this particular district in New York hasn’t elected a Democrat in a century.
While pundits have obsessed over the special election in New York, they’ve completely ignored another race that evidences a progressive resurgence. Today, voters in California’s 10th congressional district will go to the polls to elect a member of congress to replace former Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA), who was brought into the Obama Administration to serve as the Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security.
As The Nation’s John Nichols notes, CA-10 is a far more competitive district than NY-23:
If [NY-23] elects a Republican Tuesday – and, though Hoffman is running on the Conservative Party line, he is now backed by local, state and national GOP leaders and organizations – the district will hold to the pattern it has been on since Ulysses Grant was president. On the other hand, California 10 was represented by a Republican until Tauscher beat him in 1996 – and in the past century, Republicans have represented the core counties of the district more frequently than Democrats. In other words, California 10 is the more historically competitive turf.
Despite the competitiveness of his district, Democrat John Garamendi leads Republican David Harmer by ten points in the latest polling.
What makes Garamendi’s lead all the more impressive is his progressive stances. While CA-10 was previously held by a Democrat, Tauscher legislated as a centrist. A member of the business-friendly “New Democrat Coalition,” Tauscher was a supporter of rolling back the estate tax, tightening bankruptcy rules, and expanding free trade agreements. Following the Democratic takeover of the House of Representatives in 2006, she famously warned her colleagues to not run “over the left cliff” by passing too much progressive legislation.
Garamendi, on the other hand, is an unabashed liberal. He is a strong supporter not only of a public option, but of a single-payer Medicare-for-all health care system, supports the creation of an exit strategy from Afghanistan, and actually defeated the hand-picked candidate for the Democratic endorsement.
If he is elected, and he likely will be, it will mark a dramatic leftward shift in CA-10. But with all the media coverage of NY-23, most Americans may never know that.
Matthew Hoh: ‘I Firmly Believe That We Are Taking Part In A Civil War’ In Afghanistan
Matthew Hoh: ‘I Firmly Believe That We Are Taking Part In A Civil War’ In Afghanistan
Last week, former Marine captain and State Department employee Matthew Hoh made headlines when he went public with his resignation from the administration over his opposition to the continuation of the war in Afghanistan. In a four-page letter he sent to the State Department, he explained his resignation by writing that the U.S. presence in Afghanistan serves to “bolster a failing state, while encouraging an ideology and system of government unknown and unwanted by [the Afghan] people.”
This past Sunday, CNN’s Fareed Zakaria interviewed Hoh about his views on the war. During one segment of the interview, Zakaria asked Hoh why he feels the U.S. should begin to draw down its troops from the country. Hoh replied that he doesn’t see the Afghan conflict as one between the U.S. and the Taliban, but rather as a 35-year long “civil war” between rural Pashtuns “who want to be left alone” and an urban government the U.S. is backing:
HOH: I firmly believe that we are taking part in a civil war. We are on the same side of the civil war that the Soviets intervened on.
ZAKARIA: So, you have a divide among the Pashtuns. There’s the urban middle class. And Karzai, presumably, who is a Pashtun, comes from this urban middle class.
HOH: Correct.
ZAKARIA: Many of them left the country after the — during the years of the civil war. And the ones who have stayed to fight, who fought the Soviet Union and who are now fighting us, are the rural, mountain tribe Pashtuns who resent the central government and its intrusions.
HOH: Who want to be left alone.
Watch it:
Hoh also told Zakaria that he thinks keeping 60,000 troops in Afghanistan is detrimental to U.S. security. “Occupying a location only provides justification and only lends credence to the goals of that organization,” he said. “It only inspires young Muslim men to defend their culture against an occupying army, which is what we are.”
When the CNN host asked Hoh why he was speaking out, the former State Department employee cited support from two groups: Afghan Americans and U.S. soldiers serving in Afghanistan. “I’ve had a lot of Afghan-Americans contact me and say, ‘Matt, you get it,’” Hoh told Zakaria. “I’ve gotten many e-mails from guys [serving] in Afghanistan…men and women who are saying, ‘Matt, thanks for doing this.’”
Lieberman in 1994: Filibuster is ‘unfair’ and it isn’t ‘right’ to use it to obstruct major legislation.
Lieberman in 1994: Filibuster is ‘unfair’ and it isn’t ‘right’ to use it to obstruct major legislation.
In recent days, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) has raised the ire of health care advocates by threatening to filibuster Senate health care legislation unless the public option is removed from it, a move that was a boon to the stock prices of major health insurance companies. Lieberman was singing a different tune in 1994, however. At that time Lieberman, a freshman senator, was working with Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) to introduce legislation that would drastically weaken the power of the filiibuster. HuffPost’s Sam Stein recalls that the Connecticut senator said it was “unfair” to use the filibuster to threaten major legislation and argued it isn’t “right” to use it to obstruct progress:
“The whole process of individual senators being able to hold up legislation, which in a sense is an extension of the filibuster because the hold has been understood in one way to be a threat to filibuster — it’s just unfair.”
“I’m very proud to be standing here with Tom [Harkin] as two Democrats saying that we’re going to begin this fight, because we’ve just been stung by the filibuster for a period of years, and even though the tables have now turned, it doesn’t make it right for us to use this instrument that we so vilified.”
Daily Show Heckled, Attacked For Airing Interview With Leader Of Palestinian Nonviolent Democratic Movement
Daily Show Heckled, Attacked For Airing Interview With Leader Of Palestinian Nonviolent Democratic Movement
This past Wednesday, The Daily Show aired an interview with Anna Baltzer, a Jewish American peace activist and author of Witness in Palestine: A Jewish American Woman in the Occupied Territories, and Dr. Mustafa Barghouti, a leading figure in the Palestinian democratic and nonviolent movement for peace.
At the beginning of the interview, Barghouti told Stewart that he thinks the “Jewish people have been in the avante garde of struggling for justice…and democracy,” and concluded that it was “natural” for Palestinians like himself and Jewish activitists like Baltzer to work together for a just resolution of the conflict.
Barghouti explained his experience as a Palestinian growing up under occupation. “It’s Palestinians who have been subjected to the longest occupation in modern history and a system of segregation that is totally unjust,” he said. This prompted a heckler from the crowd to yell, “Liar!” — the first heckling in The Daily Show’s 11-year existence. Stewart responded by joking, “Apparently Joe Wilson is with us tonight.” Watch it:
Following their joint appearance, Baltzer revealed in an open letter that “the show was overwhelmed with angry emails and phone calls prior to the appearance, and up until the last minute it seemed like they might cancel. … The entire staff were very nervous and may come to regret the monumental decision (and not make it again) as they will surely be inundated now that the show has aired.”
While some may feel that views like those of Barghouti should not be aired, the truth is Barghouti represents a Palestinian voice for nonviolence and democracy that is valuable to voice on U.S. airwaves. Despite the suffering he has endured living under occupation — he has been imprisoned and beaten several times for taking part in demonstrations and sit-ins — he has been a leading voice for nonviolent resistance and democratic reform, crafting his philosophy after that of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Barghouti’s many accomplishments include founding a leading health relief NGO, removing anti-Semitic programs from the Palestinian airwaves, and running as an independent presidential candidate offering a “democratic and independent ‘third way’ for the large majority of silent and unrepresented Palestinian voters, who favour neither the autocracy and corruption of the governing Fatah party, nor the fundamentalism of Hamas.”
Baltzer is urging viewers who appreciate Stewart’s fortitude in bringing them on to thank him and the producers of The Daily Show by using the show’s contact form here.
FLASHBACK: Lieberman Voted Yes On Cloture For Legislation He Ultimately Opposed
FLASHBACK: Lieberman Voted Yes On Cloture For Legislation He Ultimately Opposed
Yesterday, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), who caucuses with the Democrats, made headlines when he vowed to join the Republican filibuster the Senate health care bill unless the public option is removed from it.
As Rachel Maddow pointed out last night, “A member of the majority has never before crossed party lines to filibuster with the minority. And that is exactly what Joe Lieberman is threatening to do to kill health care reform.” In fact, according to research dug up by Maddow and her staff, Lieberman has voted for cloture and allowed up-or-down floor votes on a number of major bills he opposed in the past:
– Lieberman joined 55 Republicans and 13 Democrats to back cloture for a bill that made it more difficult for people to declare bankruptcy. [5/8/05] He voted with the minority in opposing final passage. [5/10/05]
– Lieberman joined 93 other senators in voting for cloture on the Secure Fence Act, which beefed up the use of technology for border security. [9/20/06] He voted with the minority in opposing final passage. [9/29/06]
– Lieberman joined 96 other senators in backing cloture for an Iraq funding bill that included a timeline for withdrawal. [3/28/07] He voted with the minority in opposing final passage. [4/26/07]
One of the most glaring examples of Lieberman’s past flexibility on filibusters was during the nomination of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito. Lieberman, who was part of the notorious “Gang of 14” that ended the chances of a filibuster of Alito’s nomination, explained his rationale to Fox News host Sean Hannity: “I did vote against the filibuster cause I thought that, you know, it was time to move on.”
Indeed, the same argument can now be made for health care.
Insurance Stocks Plunged As Reid Announced Public Option, Spiked After Lieberman Vowed To Filibuster It
Insurance Stocks Plunged As Reid Announced Public Option, Spiked After Lieberman Vowed To Filibuster It
Yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced that he would be including a version of the public option (with a state opt-out provision) in the Senate’s final health care bill. Although all of the details of the public plan are yet to be determined, progressives cheered the move. As Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) admitted, without all the pressure that progressives in and out of Congress put on legislators, it is unlikely there would have been a public option included in Reid’s final bill.
Yet this afternoon, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) broke with the Democratic caucus that he is a member of and vowed to join a Republican-led filibuster if the public option is not removed from the bill. In response, insurance company stocks — which plummeted Monday as Reid made his announcement — shot up after Lieberman made his announcement around 1:30 pm:
Lieberman’s opposition to the public option puts him completely out of step with Connecticut voters. As this polling from 538.com’s Nate Silver shows, voters in every single one of Connecticut’s congressional districts favor the inclusion of a public option in health care legislation by wide margins. The stated reason for Lieberman’s opposition to the public option — that it would increase the debt and create another entitlement — is misplaced. As ThinkProgress has noted before, the public option would be self-sustaining and would cut the deficit.
Insurance giant Aetna, represented by the blue line above, fared the best among all of the health insurance companies. Aetna is based in Hartford, CT. It is also the tenth largest single private contributor to Lieberman’s re-election committee.
Far-Right Activist Launches Nancy Pelosi And Harry Reid ‘Burn In Hell!’ Contest
Far-Right Activist Launches Nancy Pelosi And Harry Reid ‘Burn In Hell!’ Contest
One of the most notorious far-right activists is Randall Terry, who founded the organization Operation Rescue, a radical anti-choice group. In the past, Terry has warned that he and his followers would engage in terrorism unless Congress excludes funding for abortions in health care legislation, launched a “Defeat Sotomayor” campaign that depicted the Supreme Court judge as a skull-faced killer, and used the occasion of the assassination of George Tiller to declare that the doctor, who performed abortions, was a mass murderer.
In his latest attempt to drive attention to his hate-filled agenda, Terry has launched a contest to encourage people to make videos burning House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) in effigy. Randall Terry’s press release states:
Join a Contest! Win Prizes!
Who Can make the best “Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid BURN IN HELL!” video?
First prize: Expenses paid for weekend here in DC during Roe vs Wade anniversary, Jan 22-24, including pro-life training seminar (Includes travel stipend!), and full Insurrecta Nex television series. [...]
Send link of your video by NOVEMBER 15, 2009 to: Burninhell@overturnroe.com
Legal Mumbo Jumbo: Obey local laws on open flames; be careful; if under 18, do not burn Nancy Pelosi in effigy unless your mom or dad is with you, and gives you permission, and strikes the match; do not burn yourself; do not burn another human being; do not burn small animals; do not burn large animals; do not burn anyone from PETA; and remember: this is not a threat to Nancy Pelosi’s or Harry Reid’s person…it is a prophetic witness of what awaits them when they die if they do not repent for this horrific sin.
Randall also recorded a video demonstrating how to burn an effigy of Pelosi and Reid, telling the audience that “Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will be waiting in Hell!” Watch it:
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll