Go Home

karoli's blog

Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (30)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (377)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Fox News just cannot leave this alone. First of all, they loathe American car companies, especially American car companies who were part of the auto industry rescue. Those companies would be General Motors and Chrysler. Never mind that the first piece of the bailout was in December 2008 before Barack Obama took office. It was nevertheless a grievous socialist sin visited upon us by That Guy in the White House.

Fox News', and by extension, Roger Ailes', hate for these two companies is large and consuming. Every Friday, a very large segment of the day is spent trashing the Chevy Volt as much as they possibly can. I don't really know why they chose Friday, but I know they do it. They hate the Volt with a passion and General Motors even more.

Enter Chrysler, with a commercial made by a staunch Republican with a simple message: It's halftime in America, and we've clawed our way back from the brink of collapse. It is not a partisan message. It is a celebration of success and overcoming, something that everyone should celebrate. Unless, of course, your political fortunes might turn on America's decline. There is that.

Continue reading »



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (75)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (688)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

John Boehner actually got out of his chair and gave a speech Wednesday on the House floor, decrying the Obama administration's policy of requiring birth control coverage with no co-payments to employees of church-affiliated organizations. He was vociferous in his claim that it was a clear intrusion into religious liberties, and vowed that Congress would act if the Administration didn't.

“In imposing this requirement, the federal government is violating a First Amendment right that has stood for more than two centuries, and it is doing so in a manner that affects millions of Americans and harms some of our nation’s most vital institutions. If the president does not reverse the Department’s attack on religious freedom, then the Congress, acting on behalf of the American people and the Constitution we are sworn to uphold and defend, must.”

Republicans need an issue like this to unite, because they can't come together on basic conservative principles. This is why there is such a divide among the candidates for a Republican nominee, and why Boehner jumped right on the bandwagon.

However, not all religious organizations agree. Via The Hill:

Continue reading »



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (86)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1006)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Well. This is interesting. Fox News launched a full-scale assault on Susan Rice this morning, calling for her to be fired as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. Former Bushie Richard Grenell led the charge on Megyn Kelly's show this morning after posting an op-ed on the Fox News website calling for her to step down.

As far as I can tell, Grenell's reasons are as follows:

  • She isn't strong enough.
  • She isn't effective enough.
  • She didn't speak out against the violence in Syria soon enough.
  • She (allegedly) skipped Security Council meetings when "Israel needed defending."
  • She didn't show up at first two UN Security Council meetings "on the unfolding Arab revolution."
  • She hasn't passed enough resolutions on Iran.

All of this seems to be a proxy war on President Obama over differences of opinion between the neocons and the President on the subject of Iran. Fox News has been a key player in the "stoke fears over Iran" story unfolding this year, spending a minimum of an hour per day on it across daytime and nighttime TV. Back in November, Grenell launched this shot over the bow, via the Wall Street Journal:

Continue reading »



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (421)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (515)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Tuesday night was big for Rick Santorum. He won the Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri primaries handily, leaving Mitt Romney to pick up second place in two contests and a distant third in Minnesota. You'd think it was possibly an opportunity for Santorum to use his time in the spotlight to highlight his differences with Romney.

Alas, no. Rick deluded himself into thinking he might actually be running against President Obama, and delivered a speech that was full of dog whistles and resentment toward our current President. Here are some select quotes:

He's someone who -- well, let's just go look at the record. If you look at when it came to the -- the Wall Street bailouts, did the president of the United States listen to you when it came to bailing out the big banks?

So here we have the same old tired trope about bank bailouts, with absolutely no acknowledgement that they originated with George W. Bush, who signed TARP into law before Barack Obama was ever elected to the Presidency after the House and Senate voted for it by overwhelming majorities. When have facts ever stopped zealots, though?

But Rick was just getting warmed up.

When it came to the problems that were being confronted on Obamacare, when the health care system in this country, did President Obama, when he was pushing forward his radical health care ideas, listen to the American people?

Why? Because he thinks he knows better how to run your lives and manage your health care.

I imagine that if he and the Congress had listened closer to the American people we might have a public option or better yet, single payer. That fact nothwithstanding, this rather sweeping pronouncement comes from a man who has absolutely no problem looking people in the eye and telling them it's just too bad they don't have access to affordable health care because they were unfortunate enough to be born with a pre-existing condition.

The crowd is being worked into a frenzy -- all 100 of them -- over this rising proclamation of the President's "otherness", however. And so he plays the next card.

Continue reading »



Awww. Wall Street Has to Tighten Their Belts

Everyone get ready to cry a big river for Wall Street fat cats, because their lives have just not been the same since mean old Barack Obama took office and started regulating their playground.

Via New York Magazine, a tale of woe and regret, tinged with more than a little bitterness:

To comply with the looming regulations, banks have begun stripping themselves of the pistons that powered their profits: leverage and proprietary trading. In the wake of the crash, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs converted to bank holding companies to tap the “discount window,” the Fed’s pipeline of cheap funds that gave the banks an emergency source of liquidity. That move seemed smart then, but the stricter standards required of banks have now left them boxed in.

With all the major banks unable to wager their own funds on big bets, there’s a growing sense that the money that was being made during the Bush boom won’t be back. “The government has strangled the financial system,” banking analyst Dick Bove told me recently. “We’ve basically castrated these companies. They can’t borrow as much as they used to borrow.”

Dawwww. Poor babies. Do you have the sense that they still aren't living in reality? You'd be right. They're not.

Continue reading »



Here are some basic facts about Alabama. They have the most draconian immigration laws in the country, forcing people to produce identification proving they have legal status before they can even get water service, much less an education for their children. Under Alabama's horrible law, teachers are required to check the immigration status of their students. These policies are inhuman in a state where there are already far too many poor people, citizen and immigrant alike. Also? Alabama does not currently have charter schools.

Alabama's education system is underfunded and in need of reforms, but not Rhee's flavor of reforms. To get a sense of who she really is, watch the video at the top where she admits she was a bad teacher while selling herself as a reformer.

And now she's sold herself to Alabama as The Great Education Savior, under what can only be described as very strange and odd circumstances.

Gov. Robert Bentley’s office did not notify the State Board of Education or the state school superintendent ahead of a meeting Tuesday between legislators, state officials and that Rhee’s group, StudentsFirst, would be working in Alabama.

Dr. Tommy Bice, state school superintendent, said he was “surprised” to read in a newspaper that the outside group was being brought to Alabama to work on education and that neither he nor members of the State Board of Education had been notified of the meeting.

It would appear that Rhee is playing right into the union-busting strategies formed by ALEC. According to the Birmingham News, there are some specific policy objectives surrounding her "consultancy":

An education reform group headed by Michelle Rhee, the controversial former chancellor of Washington, D.C., public schools, is working in Alabama toward changes in state education laws that would allow charter schools and revise tenure, Birmingham News writer Marie Leech reported.

Tim Melton, vice president of legislative affairs for StudentsFirst, met with lawmakers and state officials in Montgomery Tuesday, and said the group's first priority is getting charter school legislation passed.

Let's have a look at the parallels between Michelle Rhee's priorities and ALEC's.

Continue reading »



Obama Campaign Reverses Course On SuperPAC Donations

Obama campaign manager Jim Messina sent out an email blast to everyone yesterday letting them know that the decision had been made to allow large donors to contribute to PrioritiesUSA, the SuperPAC created by Bill Burton last year.

After the most recent FEC reports, the campaign made the decision not to "unilaterally disarm", despite their continuing disagreement with the Citizens United decision and the impact it has on our politics. From Messina's post:

The President opposed the Citizens United decision. He understood that with the dramatic growth in opportunities to raise and spend unlimited special-interest money, we would see new strategies to hide it from public view. He continues to support a law to force full disclosure of all funding intended to influence our elections, a reform that was blocked in 2010 by a unanimous Republican filibuster in the U.S. Senate. And the President favors action—by constitutional amendment, if necessary—to place reasonable limits on all such spending.

But this cycle, our campaign has to face the reality of the law as it currently stands.

Over the last few months, Super PACs affiliated with Republican presidential candidates have spent more than $40 million on television and radio, almost all of it for negative ads.

Last week, filings showed that the Super PAC affiliated with Mitt Romney's campaign raised $30 million in 2011 from fewer than 200 contributors, most of them from the financial sector. Governor Romney personally helped raise money for this group, which is run by some of his closest allies.

Meanwhile, other Super PACs established for the sole purpose of defeating the President—along with "nonprofits" that also aren't required to disclose the sources of their funding—have raised more than $50 million. In the aggregate, these groups are expected to spend half a billion dollars, above and beyond what the Republican nominee and party are expected to commit to try to defeat the President.

With so much at stake, we can't allow for two sets of rules in this election whereby the Republican nominee is the beneficiary of unlimited spending and Democrats unilaterally disarm.

Some may feel like this is a policy reversal and has the risk of polluting OFA's message that this is a campaign fueled by small donors. I disagree with that, particularly in light of the fact that the Koch brothers have pledged $100 million to defeat President Obama in this cycle.

For me, there are two relevant and important questions which will distinguish large donor funding to the Obama campaign from the Republicans' efforts. First, will PrioritiesUSA disclose who their donors are? Their answer to that is an emphatic "yes."

Therefore, the campaign has decided to do what we can, consistent with the law, to support Priorities USA in its effort to counter the weight of the GOP Super PAC. We will do so only in the knowledge and with the expectation that all of its donations will be fully disclosed as required by law to the Federal Election Commission.

For me, this is a key question. Lack of disclosure harms elections more than unlimited funds. Knowing who the donors are defines and frames the agenda behind the ads or other materials they might pay to distribute.

Continue reading »



The New Moderate and Pragmatic...Ann Coulter?!

Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (133)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1960)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Until now, Ann Coulter has been one of the purity trolls of the Republican Party. It was only a year or so ago that she claimed if Chris Christie didn't run, Romney would get the nomination and Obama would win. Remember that? Not that I'm a huge Ann Coulter fan, but she has at least been consistent about getting her Mittens hate on.

That is, until Saturday evening. One of two things has happened. Either Ann has had an epiphany in the form of a lightning bolt to the brain, or else her evil twin Skippy has taken over her body and is inhabiting it as a moderate.

When the American Spectator wonders who castrated her, you know something is amiss.

Which brings us to the latest evidence that Coulter has been somehow altered. Her inexplicable support for Romney has led her beyond being merely wrong about his chances in the general election to writing things that are either deliberately disingenuous or genuinely ignorant. The latest example of this tragic development is a column titled, "Three Cheers for RomneyCare." As its title suggests, this piece actually defends the Massachusetts "universal" health law. When I first read it, I could hardly believe such horse manure had emanated from Coulter's keyboard. The column opens with this howler: "If only the Democrats had decided to socialize the food industry or housing, RomneyCare would probably still be viewed as a massive triumph for conservative free-market principles -- as it was at the time."

It seems Republicans have a little problem with intellectual honesty. It's either that, or evil twins. You be the judge. In this clip, she throws everyone but the kitchen sink under the bus, and I do mean everyone. Goldwater Republicans, the Tea Party, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich. Everybody. She has thrown them all over for Mittens, or MRMoney, if I switch two letters.

Transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »



Karen Handel Resigns From Komen Foundation

Karen Handel has resigned from the Susan G Komen Foundation, but not with much in the way of regret. Here is her resignation letter.

Dear Ambassador Brinker:

Susan G. Komen for the Cure has been the recognized leader for more 30 years in the fight against breast cancer here in the US – and increasingly around the world.

As you know, I have always kept Komen’s mission and the women we serve as my highest priority – as they have been for the entire organization, the Komen Affiliates, our many supporters and donors, and the entire community of breast cancer survivors. I have carried out my responsibilities faithfully and in line with the Board’s objectives and the direction provided by you and Liz.

We can all agree that this is a challenging and deeply unsettling situation for all involved in the fight against breast cancer. However, Komen’s decision to change its granting strategy and exit the controversy surrounding Planned Parenthood and its grants was fully vetted by every appropriate level within the organization. At the November Board meeting, the Board received a detailed review of the new model and related criteria. As you will recall, the Board specifically discussed various issues, including the need to protect our mission by ensuring we were not distracted or negatively affected by any other organization’s real or perceived challenges. No objections were made to moving forward.

I am deeply disappointed by the gross mischaracterizations of the strategy, its rationale, and my involvement in it. I openly acknowledge my role in the matter and continue to believe our decision was the best one for Komen’s future and the women we serve. However, the decision to update our granting model was made before I joined Komen, and the controversy related to Planned Parenthood has long been a concern to the organization. Neither the decision nor the changes themselves were based on anyone’s political beliefs or ideology. Rather, both were based on Komen’s mission and how to better serve women, as well as a realization of the need to distance Komen from controversy. I believe that Komen, like any other nonprofit organization, has the right and the responsibility to set criteria and highest standards for how and to whom it grants.

What was a thoughtful and thoroughly reviewed decision – one that would have indeed enabled Komen to deliver even greater community impact – has unfortunately been turned into something about politics. This is entirely untrue. This development should sadden us all greatly.

Just as Komen’s best interests and the fight against breast cancer have always been foremost in every aspect of my work, so too are these my priorities in coming to the decision to resign effective immediately. While I appreciate your raising a possible severance package, I respectfully decline. It is my most sincere hope that Komen is allowed to now refocus its attention and energies on its mission.

I'm certain we will be hearing about how Handel's resignation is the result of a witch hunt sparked from the left's outcry. However, I note that there was nothing political about Komen until they chose to rebuke Planned Parenthood based upon an investigation opened for nothing other than political purposes. Mitt Romney's leap onto the bandwagon is evidence of how such a decision played out, as is Komen's decision to involve Ari Fleischer in the planning and execution of their strategy.

When you hear the screams and shrieks from the right wing, just remember that the Komen Foundation had been pressured for years to withdraw their support from Planned Parenthood, but until the arrival of Karen Handel, they hadn't actually done it. At one point, Komen had actually issued a statement in support of their grant decisions to Planned Parenthood. Here is an excerpt:

The grants in question supplied breast health counseling, screening, and treatments to rural women, poor women, Native American women, many women of color who were underserved -- if served at all -- in areas where Planned Parenthood facilities were often the only infrastructure available. Though it meant losing corporate money from Curves, we were not about to turn our backs on these women. Somehow this position translated to the utterly false assertion that SGK funds abortions.

And somehow, when Karen Handel came on the scene, this all flipped around so that those women suddenly didn't seem as important. Who politicized what, again?



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (126)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1456)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Sandy Rios is a Fox Talker and Vice President of Family PAC Federal, a PAC supporting ultra-conservative candidates like Michele Bachmann, Marco Rubio, Jim DeMint and Tom Coburn. Evidently her gifts are limited to her abilities to repeat right wing talking points with alacrity and little more.

Her "discussion" with Fox contributor Jehmu Greene about the Susan G Komen Foundation's announcement to reverse themselves on some level with regard to Planned Parenthood paints a pretty vivid image of the differences between right and left when it comes to women's health.

Rios views the backlash by men and women across the country over the Komen Foundation's decision to withdraw funding for breast cancer screening from Planned Parenthood centers across the country as a mere "shakedown" while arguing that the foundation is a private enterprise which can do what it wants.

Not so fast, there, Ms. Rios. As long as donations to the foundation are tax-deductible, it is not a private enterprise. It is a taxpayer-subsidized enterprise with a stated mission to raise money for and fund breast cancer research and health initiatives to prevent and treat breast cancer. It is not a corporation created with private dollars to pursue private objectives. Not at all.

Rios' protests might actually be interesting if the statement released this morning by the Komen Foundation weren't so full of holes and hedges that you could play croquet on it. On first blush, it appeared to be a concession to the backlash, but upon closer inspection, it appears to be mostly a public relations move to keep a terrible situation from being even more terrible.

Since President and CEO Nancy Brinker has offered two separate and contradictory reasons for the original decision, there's no reason to expect they won't withhold grants from Planned Parenthood because they decide to add requirements, like on-site mammography, which Planned Parenthood contracts with third party providers for.

And as John Aravosis points out, they could show some contrition by approving the grant application from Planned Parenthood they've turned down once already.

But let's not allow facts to distract this wild-eyed woman on Fox from just going on and on about how Senators intimidated Brinker. Here's a question for Sandy Rios: Since abortions represent 3 percent of Planned Parenthood's overall health services delivered to women, then what she is saying is that 97 percent of health services delivered to women is worthless. Did she really mean that?

Continue reading »